Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
__^.>»^'*-.* 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.
— 2 Cor. 4:7
521498
BY
PR
^»
Presswork:
Composition, Electroiyping and
U.S.A.
THE UNIVERSITT PRESS, CAMBRIDGE,
TO
THE MEMORY OF
might have stopped. By the time that Dr. James Hope Moulton
announced his new grammar, I was too deep into the enterprise
to draw back. And so I have held to the titanic task somehow
tillthe 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-
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
VIU A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
true scholar only too glad to stand upon the shoulders of his
is
predecessors and give full credit at every turn. Who could make
any progress in human knowledge but for the ceaseless toil of
those 1 who have gone Prof. Paul Shorey,^ of the Uni-
before?
versity of Chicago, has a sharp answer to Prof. Gudemann. He
speaks of "the need of rescuing scholarship itself from the
German yoke." He does not mean "German pedantry and
superfluous accuracy in insignificant research but ... in all —
seriousness from German inaccuracy." He continues about "the
disease of German scholarship" that "insists on 'sweat-boxing'
the evidence and straining after 'vigorous and rigorous' demon-
stration of things that do not admit of proof." There probably
are German scholars guilty of this grammatical vice (are Amer-
ican and British scholars wholly free?). But Iwish to record my
conviction that my own work, such as it is, would have been im-
possible but for the painstaking and scientific investigation of the
4-8 (The 01. Quarterly, Jan., 1914, p. 33), says: "The five chapters
tilian," I,
which Quintilian devotes to Grammatica' are in many ways the most valuable
'
the toil has not been all in vain. Marcus Dods {Later Letters,
p. 248) says: "I admire the grammarians who are content to
add one solid stone to the permanent temple of knowledge in-
stead of twittering round it like so many swallows and only
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. Td prjixara a €70? XeXdXTj/ca v/uv irvevixb. kcTiv koI
sion in the Seminary. All this work has been done for me
freely and gladly. The mere recital of it humbles me very much.
was not circulated till 1522. Erasmus got his edition into circu-
lation in 1516. "The Complutensian edition of 1514 was the first
of more than a thousand editions of the New Testament in Greek"
(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
to the study of the"Book of Humanity." The Freer Gospels
and the Karidethi Gospels show how much we have to expect
in the way of discovery of manuscripts of the New Testament.
I think with pleasure of the preacher or teacher who under
the inspiration of this Grammar may turn afresh to his Greek
New 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
of the ministers of Jesus Christ.
A. T. ROBEETSON.
Louisville, Ky., 1914.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I — INTRODUCTION PAQB
New Material 3
Chapter I.
PART II — ACCIDENCE
Chapter V. Word-Formation 143
" VI. Orthography and Phonetics 177
" VII. The Declensions 246
" VIII. The Conjugation of the Verb 303
l-'09
Additional Notes
Index of Subjects 1223
(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).
Hawkins, Horae Synopticae. 2d ed. (1909).
J. C.,
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).
LIST OF WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO XXIX
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 Op-
tativs und ihre Entwick. im Griech. (1908).
Die Grundlagen der griech. Tempuslehre und des hom.
,
sprache (1910).
, Epigraphisch-grammatische Bemerkungen (Eranos 11,
1912).
,Laute und Formen der magnetischen Inschriften (1903).
Nageli, T., Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus. a e (1905). —
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). '
(1908).
Schleicher, A., Compendium d. vergl. Gr. d. indog. Sprachen.
4. Aufl. (1876).
(1890).
Schmidt, W., De Flavii Josephi elocutione (1894).
ScHMiTT, P., tJber den Ursprung des Substantivsatzes mit Rela-
tivpartikeln 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).
LIST OF WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO XXXV
Ionic (1894).
SoDEN, H. VON, Die Schriften des N. T. in ihrer altesten erreich-
baren Textgestalt. Teil I, Untersuch. (1902-1910) Teil II, ;
(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 mo-
dernen 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).
,
(1899).
Vogrinz, Grammatik d. hom. Dial. (1889).
mann (1867).
Winer-Masson, a Grammar of the N. T. Gk. (1859).
WiNER-MouLTON, A Treatise of the Grammar of N. T. Gk. 3d
ed. (1882). Various eds.
WiNER-ScHMiEDEL, Winer's Grammatik des neutest. Sprach-
idioms. 8. Aufl. (1894—).
Winer-Thayer, a Grammar of the Idiom of the N. T. (1869).
Various eds.
WiTKOWSKi, St., Bericht iiber die Lit. zur Koine aus den Jahren
1898-1902 (Bursian's Jahrb. CXX, 1904, pp. 153-256).
, Bericht iiber die Lit. zur Koine aus den Jahren 1903-1906
(Jahresber. f. Alt., 1912, III. Bd., 159).
Xl A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Lagidarum (1897).
Woch. /. M. Ph., Wochenschrift fiir klassische Philologie.
INTEODUCTION
CHAPTER I
NEW MATERIAL
The Ideal Perhaps the ideal grammar of the New
Grammar?
Testament Greek may never be written.
It is a supremely diffi-
cult task to interpret accurately the forms of human speech, for
they have life and change with the years. But few themes have
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.
of the subject
I. The Pre-Winer Period. It was Winer who in 1822 made a
new epoch in N. T. grammatical study by his Neutestamentliches
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 ex-
plaining one term as used for another, one preposition for an-
other, one case for another, etc. As a university tutor Winer
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 Gram-
matik into English were first made by Prof. Masson of Edin-
burgh, 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.
The various editions of Winer-Thayer and Winer-Moulton have
served nearly two generations of English and American scholars.
(c) ScHMiEDEL. But uow at last Prof. Schmiedel of Ziirich is
thoroughly revising Winer's Grammatik, but it is proceeding
slowly and does not radically change Winer's method, though
use is made of much of the modern knowledge.^ Deissmann,^
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 See Pref to the sixth and last ed. by Winer himself as translated by Dr.
.
p. 63.
^
NEW MATERIAL 5
(d) BuTTMANN.
Buttmann's Grammatik des neutestamentlichen
Sprachgebrauchs had appeared in 1859 and was translated by
Thayer as Buttmann's Grammar ofN.T. Greek (1873), an able work.
(e) Blass. It is not till the Grammatik des neutedamentlichen
Griechisch by Prof. Blass in 1896 that any other adequate gram-
mar appears in this field. And Blass departs a little from tradi-
tional methods and points of view. He 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
^
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 Ge-
Bchichte der griechischen Si)rache zeigen, dafi die Eigontiinilichkeitcn des
'biblischen' Formen- und Wortschatzos (bei don original-griechischon Schrif-
ten auch der Syntax) im groBen und ganzon Eigentiinilichkeiton des spiiteren
und zwar zumeist des unliterarischen Griechisch iiberhaupt sind."
6 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
ogy of the Bible.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
contribution of Deissmann is largely in the field of lexicography.
(b) Thumb. It was in 1901 that A. Thumb published his great
book on the Die griechische Sprache im Zeitalter des Hel-
kolvt],
lenismus, which has done so much to give the true picture of the
KOLvrj. He had already in 1895 produced his Handbuch der neu-
griechischen Volkssprache. In 1912 the second enlarged edition
issued in English dress, by S. Angus, as Handbook of Modern
Greek Vernacular. This book at once took front place for the
study of the modern Greek by English students. It is the only
book in English that confines itself to the vernacular.
(c) MouLTON. In 1895, J. H. Moulton, son of W. F, Moulton,
the translator of Winer, produced his Introduction to N. T.
Greek, in a noble linguistic succession. In 1901 he began to pub-
lish in The Classical Review and in The Expositor, "Grammatical
ment that the Greek language has received in the last two thou-
sand years." By the induction of a wider range of facts we can
eliminate errors arising from false generalizations. a But this is
slow process that Dionysius Thrax,^ one of the
calls for patience.
Alexandrian fathers of the old Greek grammar (circa 100 B.C.),
said: Tpa/xfiariK-f] kaTLV efiireLpia twv irapa TrotTjraTs re /cat avyypa-
4>ev(nv ws krcl to ttoXv Xeyopikvwv. Andrew Lang^ indeed
a dis- is
ciple of Dionysius Thrax in one respect, for he contends that
students are taught too much grammar and too little language.
They know the grammars and not the tongue. A bare outline
can be given of the sources of the new material for such gram-
matical study.
in conversation with me. Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888, p. 18.
^
3 lb., pp. 1 ff. So Oertel, Lect. on the Study of Lang., 1901, p. 42,
"Comparative grammar in Schleicher's sense is in its essence nothing but
historical grammar by the comparative method."
4 Sayce, Prin. of Comp. Philol., 1875, p. 259 f.
6 lb., p. 261. « Op. dt., pp. 629-643.
7See 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 Dysco-
lus (ii/A.D.) and his son Herodian. Dionysius Thrax was born b.c. 166. Dys-
colus WTote a systematic Gk. Syntax of accentuation in 20 books (known to
us only in epitome) about 200 a.d.
NEW MATERIAL 9
1891, p. 179.
3 F. Hoffmann, tjber die Entwickelung des Begriffs der Or. bei den Alien,
1891, p. 1.
* lb., p. 144. grammarians were "ohne richtiges historisches
The early Gk.
BewuBtsein" Sprachw. etc., 1. Tl., 1863, p. 39). Even
(Steinthal, Gesch. der
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.
« See Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, p. 1.
^ See Ivretschmer, op. cit., p. 4.
8 F. Blass, Hermen. und Krit., 1892, p. 157 f.
9 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:
10
phischen 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, de-
clared in 1786, practically Ues at the root of all linguistic science." J. H.
is not necessary to say that until recently use of this science had
not been made by N. T. grammars.^^
(6) Advance in General Greek Grammar. There has been
great advance in the study of general Greek grammar. The
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 vol-
umes by Blass" and Gerth,i" furnishing a magnificent apparatus
for the advanced student. Hirt's handbook ^^ gives the modern
knowledge in briefer form. These make use of comparative
grammar, while G. Meyer ^^ and Brugmann ^^ are professedly on the
son'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,
1 An Hist. Gk. Gr., chiefly of the Att. Dial., 1897. Of. also Wackernagel,
Die griech. Spr. (pp. 291-318), Tl. I, 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. Ivrum-
bacher, 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
of the 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
instinct and a passion." 6
j^^ p 203.
» See Bernhardy, Griech. Lit., Tl. I, II, 1856; Christ, Gesch. der
griech.
Lit. bis auf die Zeit Justinians, 4. revid. Aufl., 1905; 5. Aufl., 1908 fif. Far-
nell,Gk. Lyric Poetry, 1891, etc. A. Croiset and M. Croiset, An Abr. Hist,
of Gk. Lit., transl. by Heffelbower, 1904.
14 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
the reader of the historic past, but he has revealed a great civi-
1 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
studies." Survey of Gk. Civilization, 1897, p. 3.
3 Mycenae and Tiryns, 1878.
NEW MATERIAL 15
^ SeeDieterich DieKo..^unddieheut.kIeinasiat.
Mundarten-Untors. zur
Gesch. etc., pp. 271-310. Cf. Chabert,
Hist, sommaire des ct. d'cpigr. grecque,
' '
* Op cit
« Op cit. and Bd^II, 1S93, Bd. III. 1898. See also various volumes of the
Samml. der griech. Dial.-Inschr.
• Handb. der griech. Dial.,
1909. 7
Qk Dialects
''*'' ^°"'"'' ^^^^' '^- ''''^ ^- ^- ^'"y*'^' '^^^"^ ^''^•" ^'''^1- (I^'^ic
onlyUSgf
« Lingua Greca Antica, 1888. Cf. Lambert, fit. sur le dial, eolicn, 1903.
^
' Die griech. 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.
Pap., 1902 (Univ. of Cal. Publ., pts.
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,
La papjTol. grec, bibliog. raisonn6e, 1905.
NEW MATERIAL 19
1900—.
9 Palajog. of Gk. Pap., 1899; art. Papyri in Hast. D. B. (ext. vol.).
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.
15 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.
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
6 See AoYia 'Iriffov, Sayings of Jesus, by Grenfell and Hunt, 1897. New
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;
Lock and Sanday, Two Lect. on the Sayings of Jesus, 1897.
« Theol. Literaturzeit., 1894, p. .3.38.
its disadvantages; cf. Angus, The Koivq, The Lang, of the N. T. (Prince.
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 cor-
respondents 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.
22 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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,
"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 H. C. Muller, Hist. Gr. der
heU. Spr., 1891.
NEW MATEKIAL 23
^ "Und wenn es mir gelingt, die wissenschaftliche Welt von ihrer wohl-
berechtigten Zuriickhaltung abzubringen und ihr nachzuweisen, daC das
Mittel- und Neugriechische 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." lb., p. x.
'^
1870. One 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 Studien-
gebiet 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
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.
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.
1 See the Migne Lib. and the new Ber. Royal Lib. ed;
* Dieterich, op. cit., p. 10.
' Handb. to Mod. Gk., See also Horae Hellenicae, by Stuart Blaekie,
p. 3.
1874, p. 115: "Byzantine Gk. classical Gk. from beginning to end, with
was
only such insignificant changes as the altered circumstances, combined with
the law of its original genius, naturally produced." Cf. Rangabe, Gr. Abre-
g6e du grec actuel; TewdStos, Tpa/xnaTiK'^ ttjs 'EWeviKrjs VKwffffijs.
^ lb., p. 34. See also Gk. belongs not only to a later period
p. 9: "Biblical
of the history of the language than classical Gk., but also to a different coun-
try." 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, philo-
logically, though not historically, the Hebrew may be regarded as a trans-
lation of the Gk."
2 The Lang, of the N.
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_
^ 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 con-
cordance to the LXX and other Gk. versions of tlie O. T., 1892-189G, 1900.
26 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
holds that Jesus said 'AiS/Sd 6 Trariyp thus, Mark not having trans-
lated it. Thompson, "The Language of Palestine" {Temple D. of
the Bible), 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 Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., 1900.
8 The Larger Camb. LXX, 1906—.
* Ed. of the LXX with Grit. Apparatus, 1880-1887; Sept.-Stud., 1886-
1896; Urtext und Ubersetz. der Bibel, 1897. Nestle died in 1913.
e
6 Sept.-Stud., 1891-1892. lb., 1886. ' lb., 1904.
8 Gesch. der griech. Lit. in der Alexandrinzeit, Bd. I, II, 1891, 1892.
9 Du grec Alexandrin et de ses rapports avec le grec ancien et le grec mo-
derne, 1892. Gf. among the older discussions, Sturz, De dial. Maced. et
Alexan., 1808; Lipsius, Gr. Unters. iiber die bibl. Grac, 1853; Churton, The
Infl. of the LXX upon the Prog, of Ghris., 1861. See also Anz, Subs, ad
cognos. Graec. serm. vulg. e Pent. vers. Alexan., 1894.
1" Disc, on the Gosp., pt. I, On the Lang. Employed by Our Lord and His
Apost., 1864, p. 316; A Short Proof that Greek was the Language of Jesus
(1893).
" On the Dial, of Palestine in the Time of Ch., Stud. Bibl., 1885.
" Stud. Bibl., p. 54.
NEW MATERIAL 27
little the Jews knew Greek." A. Meyer urges that the vernacular
^
of Jesus was Aramaic and shows what })earing this fact has on
the interpretation of the Gospels. A. Jiilicher^ indeed says: "To
suppose, however (as, e.g. G. B. Winer supposes, because of
Mk. 7:24; Jo. 7:25; 12:20) that Jesus used the Greek language
is quite out of the question." But Young, vol. II, Dictionary of
Christ and the Gospels (Hastings), article "Language of Christ,"
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.
5 See also Brockelmann, S>Tische Gr., 1904;
Schwally, Idioticon des christl.-palestinischen Aramiiisch, 1893; Riggs, Man.
of the Chaldean Lang., 18G6; Wilson, Intr. S>Tiac Meth. and Man., 1891;
Strack, Gr. des bibl. Arainiiischen.
6 A Guide through Gk. to Hob., 1904.
Clue,
^ The
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.
28 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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
also 2 Mace. 7:8, Josephus wrote his War first in Aramaic
21.
and then in Greek. The testimony of Papias that Matthew
wrote his Xoyta in Aramaic bears on the question because of the
tradition that Mark was the interpreter of Peter. The brogue
that Peter revealed (Mt. 26 73) was probably due to his Gali-
:
sible that these crowds understood Aramaic. The fact that Mark
NEW MATERIAL 29
See C. Taylor, The Gospel in the Law, 1869; Boehl, Alttestamcntl. Cit.
»
im N. 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,
vol. I, p. 48 f .; Moulton, Prol., p. 7 f.
30 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
"Nun hat man aber die Sprache der heiUgen Biicher mit den Papyrus-
2
1 Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888, p. xxvii. See Von Ulrich's Grundl. und
Gesch. der Philol., 1892, p. 22: "Zu der wissenschaftlichen Grammatik gesellt
p. 6.
* "As a matter of course, I do not presume to have said the last word on
allor 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.
B Wissensch. Synt. der griech. Spr., 1829.
THE HISTORICAL METHOD 33
Mahaffy* is very positive on this point, "I said just now that
the Hellenistic world was more cultivated in argument than we
are nowadays. And if you think this is a strange assertion, ex-
amine, pray you, the intellectual aspects of the epistles of St.
I
Paul, the first Christian writer whom we know to have been thor-
' A Crit. Hist, of the Lang, and Lit. of Anc. Greece, 1850, vol. I, p. 117,
2 Op. cit., 1897, p. 3 f.
3 Die Entst. der griech. Literaturspr., 1890, p. 2: "Denn man liefe Gefahr,
^ 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-
38 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
baues, 1893. For further literature on comparative gi-ammar see ch. I, 2 (j)
of this book. 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-
ture.
1 Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, pp. 7-9.
2 Kurze vergl. Gr., 1. Lief., 1902, p. 3.
3 lb., p. 27.
4 Pop. Sci. Rev., Jan., 1888.
6 Einl. in die Gesch. etc., pp. 7-92.
8 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
^ lb., p. xi. Thumb says: "Wir sind noch sehr weit von einer Geschichte
oder historischen Grammatik der griechischen Sprache entfernt; der Ver-
such von Jannaris, so dankenswert er ist, kann doch nur provisorische Gel-
tung beanspruchen, wobei man mehr die gute Absicht und den FleiB als das
sprachgeschichtliche Verstiindnis des Verfassers loben muB." Die griech.
Spr., etc., 1901, p. 1. Cf. also Krumbacher, Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech.
Spr. (1884, p. 4): "Eine zusammenhangende Darstellung des Entwickelungs-
ganges der griechischen Sprache ist gegenwartig nicht mogUch." But it is
more possible now than in 1884.
THE HISTORICAL METHOD 41
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
It is possible
the N. T. Greek with other Greek and to use all Greek to
all
throw light on the stage of the language under review. If the
Greek itself is not an isolated tongue, no one stage of the lan-
guage can be so regarded. ''Wolffs deprecates the restriction of
grammar to a set of rules abstracted from the writings of a
'golden' period, while in reality it should comprise the whole his-
tory 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,
of
inscriptionsand research in the modern Greek. Muller's owti
book has added no little to our knowledge of the subject. Mean-
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-
tition worth while to emphasize this point. Muller^ is apolo-
it is
getic and eager to show that "the Greek language and hterature
is one organic, coherent whole." The dialectical variations, while
confusing to a certain extent, do not show that the Greek did not
possess originaland continuous unity. As early as 1000 b.c. these
dialectical distinctions probably existed and the speech of Homer
is a literary dialect, not the folk-speech.^ The original sources of
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- in-
fluence.^ The translator of Buttmann's Greek Grammar speaks
of Homer "almost as the work of another language." This was
once a common opinion for all Greek that was not classic Attic.
But Thiersch entitled his great work Griechische Grammatik vor-
ziiglich des homerischen Dialekts, not simply because of the worth
Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, p. 6. On the un-
1
mixed character of 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.
(in Ergeb. und Fortschr. der germanist. Wiss. im letzten Vierteljahrh., 1902,
pp. 89-138, 325-437). The Germans have taught us how to study Enghsh!
THE HISTORICAL METHOD 43
(c) 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
by Schliemann and Evans. The following is a tentative outhne:
The Mycenaan Age, 2000 b.c. to 1000 b.c; the Age of the Dia-
lects, 1000
B.C. to 300 B.C.; the Age of the Koivij, 300
b.c. to 330
A.D.; the
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
and Allen.2 As a matter of fact any division is arbitrary, for
the 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." ^ Ohnefalsch-Richter {Cont. Rev., Dec, 1912,
p. 862) claims Cyprus as the purveyor of culture to the Creto-
Mycenaean 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
of Evans at Knossos, in Crete, make clear.^ The early linear
by 1000 to 800 b.c. The dialects certainly have their roots deep
in the Mycensean age. Roughly, 300 b.c. is the time when the
Greek has become the universal language of the world, a Welt-
sprache. 330 a.d. is the date when the seat of government was re-
moved 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
inscriptions of the folk-speech in Greece.^ We know something
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 pigeon-
Greek, which represents no real pronunciation, either ancient or
modern, the lyrics of Sophocles or Aristophanes are unmistakably
2
lovely."
(d) 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 it is the abiding witness to the perpetuity
of the vernacular Greek as a living organism. It is a witness
also that is at our service always. The modern Greek popular
speech does not differ materially from the vernacular Byzantine,
Jour, of Hell. Stud., xiv, 270-372. See Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 22, for fur-
ther proofs of the antiquity of Gk. as a written tongue. Mosso (Palaces of
Crete, 1907, p. 73 f.) argues that the Mycenaian Unear script was used 1900
B.C. 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.
in Crete, 1910; Baike, Kings of Crete, 1910; Firmen, Zeit und Dauer der
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 45
able that Roger Bacon had some Byzantine manual besides the
old Greek grammars.^ "In England, no less than in the rest of
^ lb., p. xlii.
8 Hell, die internat. Gelehrtenspr. der Zukunft, 18SS. Likewise A. Rose:
"Die griechische Sprache . . . hat . . . cine gliinzcnde Zukunft vor sich."
Die Griechen und ihre Spr., 1890, p. 4. He pleads for it as a "Weltsprache,"
p. 271. But Schwyzer pointedly says: "Die Rollc einer Weltsprache wird
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.
46 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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 one or an-
other of the early dialects. The persistence of early English forms
is easily observed in the vernacular in parts of America or Eng-
land. In the same way the late Latin vernacular isto be compared
with the early Latin vernacular, not with the Latin of elegant
literature. "Speaking generally, we may say that the Greek of a
well-written newspaper [the literary language] is now, as a rule,
far more classical than the Hellenistic of the N. T., but decidedly
less classical than the Greek of Plutarch." 2 What the rela-
tion between the N. T. 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
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 cen-
turies."^ Compare the effect of the King James Version on the
English language and of Luther's translation of the Bible on
German.
V. The Greek Point
of View. It sounds like a truism to
insist that theGreek 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-
latives which, as expressing definite objects, should naturally
have the article, arc in certain cases used without it." That
"should" has the wrong attitude toward Greek. The appel-
to be
lative in Greek does not need to have the article in order
when Winer often admits that one tense is used
definite. So
"for" another, he is really thinking of German and how it would
be expressed in German. Each tongue has its own history and
genius. Parallel idioms may or may not exist in a group
of lan-
did not look at this clause as we do. "One of the commonest and
gravest errors in studying the grammar of foreign languages is
subject which has not yet been recognized by many pBrsoTis in its
full importance. Huge as is the library of books that have been
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 III
THE 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 re-
ceiving a tremendous impress from the Norman-French (and so
Latin), not to mention the indirect literary influence of Latin and
Greek. The early Greek itself was subject to non-Greek influ-
ence 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
strong.^
I. The Term Koivn. The word kolvt], sc. StdXe/cros, means
simply common language or dialect common to all, a world-
speech (Weltsprache). Unfortunately there is not yet uniformity
in the use of a term to describe the Greek that prevailed over
Alexander's empire and became the world-tongue. Kiihner-
Blass^ speak of " kolvt] oder eXXrjVLKri SiaXeKTos." So also Schmie-
rj
49
50 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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,
as Schweizer^ uses it following Hatzidakis. Thumb ^ identifies
"Hellenistic"
Prol., p. 23. It is not necessary to discuss here the use of
"
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
in Asiatic
Ionia the Attic influence was felt. The Attic ver-
nacular, sister
to the Ionic vernacular, was greatly influenced
by the speech of soldiers and merchants from all the Greek
world. Attic became the standard language of the Greek world
in the fifth and the fourth centuries b.c. "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 what it still remains in modern Greek compo-
sition: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
more and more lose touch with the ver-
classic literary Attic did
nacular. " It
one of our misfortunes, whatever be its practical
is
1 Blass indeed contrasts the literature of the Alex, and Rom. periods on
this principle, but wrongly, for it is type, not time, that marks the difference.
" 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.,
p. 410. Dieterich: "Das Sprachgebiet der Koi«^
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. So Audoin says: "Ce n'est point arbitrairement que
les dcrivains grecs ont employ6 tel ou tel dialecte." fit. sommaire des Dial.
Grecs. Litt., 1891, p. 4.
52 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Kal vvi' hvvaljxriv av 'IXtd5a oXrjj' koI 'Obvaatiav airo crxoyuaros elweii'. Cf. Lottich,
De Serm. vulg. Attic, 1881. On the "Growth of the Attic Dialect" see
Rutherford, New Phrynichus, pp. 1-31.
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
an extreme."^ 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
(cf. Buck, p. 160). There was besides a revival here and there of
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 common world-empire. He respected the
.
1 Moulton, Pro!., p. 32. ^ lb., p. 37.
2 Radermacher(N. T. Gr., p. 1) puts it clearly: "Es geniigt zu sagcn, dafJ die
Koivii starksten Zusammenhang mit dem Attischen, in zweitcr Linie mit dem
lonischen, verriit. 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
customs and language of all the conquered nations, but it was in-
evitable 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-
ods. "The first period is that of the separate life of the dialects
and the second that of the speech- unity, the common speech or
KOLVT]" (Kretschmer, Die Entst. d. Kolvt], p. 1).
scriptions 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-
rene, 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
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
(tojv eis 'EavTov) in Greek. It was the language not only of letters,
but of commerce and every-day life. A common lan?,uage for all
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 we
may observe in the case of the Greek kolvt]."^ The late Latin
became a Kotvf] for the West as the old Babylonian had been for
the East, this latter the first world-tongue known to us.^ Xeno-
phon with the retreat of the Ten Thousand'' was a forerunner of
theKOLvrj. Both Xenophon and Aristotle show the wider outlook
of the literary Attic which uses Ionic words very extensively.
There is now the "GroB-Attisch," It already has yipofiaL, eueKev,
—roiaav, elwa and rjve'yKa, e8coKaiJ.€P and eSco/caj', ^aaiXtaaa, btLKVvoi,
^ Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 496. See also Kaerst, Gesch. d. Hel-
lenist. Zeitalt., "Die Weiterentwicklung der Gcschiehte des
1901, p. 420:
Altertums, so weit sie fiir unsere eigene Kultur entschcidende Bedeutung er-
langt 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."
2Schwyzer, 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 state-
ment of the Const, of Athens, 11. .3, that the Athenians spoke a language com-
pounded of all Greek and barbarian tongues besides.
* Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen., etc., p. 40.
56 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
See Ivretschmer, Die griech. Vaseninschr. und ihre Spr., 1894; and Mei-
3
sterhans, Gr. der att. Inschr., 1900. Cf. Lottich, De Serm. vulg. Attic, 1881.
* Schweizer, Gr., p. 27.
5 Thumb, Griech. Spr. im Zeitalter etc., p. 208 f. Lottich in his De Serm.
vulg. Attic, shows from the writings of Aristophanes how the Attic vernacular
varied in a number of points from the Uterary style, as in the frequent use of
diminutives, desiderative verbs, metaphors, etc.
8 Schweizer, Gr., p. 23.
7 Geldart, Mod. Gk. Lang, in its Rela. to Anc. Gk., 1870, p. 73. See also
Thumb, Griech. Spr. etc., p. 10, who calls "die kolvt) weniger ein AbschluC
als der 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.
ment of the vernacular Attic, the literary kolvt] was the normal
evolution of the literary Attic. Thumb well says, "Where there
isno development, there is no and syntax the
life."^ "In style
literary common Greek diverges more widely from the collo-
quial."* This is natural and in harmony with the previous re-
moval of the literary Attic from the language of the people.^ The
growth of the literary kolvt] was parallel with that of the popular
KOLVT] and was, of course, influenced by it. The first prose monu-
ment of literary Attic known to us, according to Schwyzer, is the
Constitution of Athens^ (before 413), falsely ascribed to Xeno-
phon. The forms of the literary kolvt] are much like the Attic, as
in Polybius, for instance, but the chief difference is in the vocab-
ulary and meaning of the same words.^ Polybius followed the
general literary spirit of his time, and hence was rich in new
words, abstract nouns, denominative verbs, new adverbs.^ He
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
also using many common
medical terms natural to a physician
of culture. Writers like Polybius aimed to write without pedan-
try and without vulgarism. In a true sense then the literary KOi.vj]
was a "compromise between the vernacular kolvt] and the literary
Attic," between "life and school." ^^ There is indeed no Chinese
^ 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
griech. Lit., p. 305. See Die pseudoxenophontische 'Adrjvalo:v IloXireia, von
E. Kalinka, 1913.
« Schweizer, Gr., p. 21. ''
Christ, op. cil., p. 5SS.
8 Thumb, Griech. Spr. etc., p. 213. See also Goetzeler, De Polyb. EIoc,
1887, p. 15.
9 Thumb, ib., p. 225 f. See also Krenkel, Josephus und Lukas, 1894,
pp. 283 ff. " Thumb, ib., ji. 8.
58 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
wall between the literary and the vernacular kolvyj, but a constant
inflow from the vernacular to the written style as between prose
and poetry, though Zarncke ^ insists on a thorough-going distinc-
tion between them. The literary KOLvrj would not, of course, use
such dialectical forms as tovs iravTes, toIs TpayfiaroLs, etc., com-
mon 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 cosmopoli-
tan 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 Kunst-
sprache." He applies this rule to Polybius, to Philo, to the N. T.,
to Epictetus. But certainly it does not hold in the same manner
for each of these.
(c) The Atticistic Reaction. Athens was no longer the centre
of Greek That glory passed to Alexandria, to Per-
civilization.
gamum, to Antioch, to Ephesus, to Tarsus. But the great crea-
tive 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
to the pre-Kot^i7 period. The grammarians (Dionysius, Phryni-
the dual was already coming on and so was the limited use of the
superlative, -Twaav instead of -vrwv, and -adwaav instead of -aduiv,
yivofiaL, aa, dira, tLs 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
KOLPT). 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
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 f. For "the Attic ground-
character of the KOLvri" see Mayscr, Gr. dcr griech. Pap. (1906, p. 1).
2 Kaibel, Stil und Text der 'Adr)valu}v UoXiTeia, p. 37.
' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 3. Even in the htorary koivt] the dual is nearly
gone, as in Polybius and Diodorus Siculus; cf. Schmidt, De Duali Grace, et
Emor. et Reviv., 1893, pp. 22, 25.
* Gott. Gel.-Anz., 1895, p. 30 f.; Ilatzidakis, Einl. in die neugr. Gr.,
p. 168 f.; Krumbacher, Byz. Lit., p. 789.
* "Die Erforschung der kolvti hat lange gcnug unter dem Gesichtswinkel des
'Klas-sicismus' gestanden." Thumb, Griech. Spr. etc., p. 10.
* Gesch. der Sprachw., H, p. 37 f.
^ Verhandl. der 32. jihil. Versamml., p. 40.
8 Wochenschr. fiir klass. Philol., 1899, p. 3; Die Entst. der Koivv, 1900.
» Op. cit., pp. 53-101, 202 f.
62 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
erally admitted."
(h) The Other Dialects in the Koivq. But Kretschmer ^ is
clearly wrong
in saying that the KOivq is neither Attic nor decayed
Attic, but a mixture of the dialects. He compares the mixture
of dialects in the kolut] to that of the high, middle and low Ger-
man. The Attic itself is a kolvt] out of Ionic, ^Eolic and Doric.
The mixed character of the vernacular kolvt) is made plain by
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 33 f.
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,
opkoiv, yoyyv^cj, wapaOijKTi, rkaaipts, €K7rTco/ja, etc. On the Ionic and other non-
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.,
p. 33. The caution of Tsichari (Essais de Gr. Hist. Neo-grq., 2*"^°
cxhx) is to be noted, that the vernacular is not necessarily dia-
6d., 1889, p.
but "destin6e au peuple et ven;iit du j)euple." Cf. on .iEolic ele-
lectical,
ments, Mayser, Gr., p. 9. He cites Xi/u6s in the pap.; cf. N. T.
17
» Prol., p. 34.
« Moulton, ib., p. 38, n. 3. For l)ori(! clcincnts in the paj). see Mayser,
Gr., p. 5 f. ^ W. H., Iiitr. to the Gk. N. T., App., p. 150.
64 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
1 Polybius, 28. 8, 9.
2 De 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.
» I, 592 B, 694 C. (Sources of N. T. Gk., p. 17) says: "In any
Kennedy
case, the Macedonian type of Greek, whether or not it is admissible to call it
a special dialect, was so farremoved from ordinary Attic as to make it cer-
tain that the latter on Macedonian hps must soon and inevitably suffer thor-
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."
—
1 Hicks, St. Paul and Hellen., in Stud. Bibl. et Eccl., 1896, p. 5. Mayser
(Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 24-35) gives an interesting list of words that were
chiefly "poetical" in the classic literature, but are common in the papjTi.
The poets often use the vernacular. Some of these words are dXtKTwp, /3i;Spw-
ffKOj, btay.ios, duina, iKTivaaaw, evrpiiroiiai, kiraiTea), eiriaelu), daXiru:, KaraaTtWo),
Koindofxai, Koiros, \aol = people, iJ.kpLfj.va, vqirios, oIktjttipmu, irepf/cei/iot, Trpo<7<{)(jJviu),
' Schlageter (Wortsch. etc., pp. 59-62) gives a good list of words with
another meaning in the kolvt).
2 Cf. Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., pp. 70 f., 147.
bind them into one. The language follows the history of the peo-
ple. But the unification of theGreek was finally so radical that
"the old dialects to-day are merged into the general mass, the
modern folk-language is only a continuation of the united, Hel-
lenistic, common speech." ^ So completely did Alexander do his
gian 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 list of
peculiarities that belong to the KOivi] of Asia Minor, as, for in-
« Bnms, Die att. Bestrebungcn in dor gricch. Lit., 1896, p. 12, says: "Statt
ihrcr (classische attische Sprache) rogicrt ein gemcines Kcbswoih, das aus
irgend ciner phrygischen SjK'lunkc stanmit —
das ist der hellenistische Stil" !
I
68 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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 of a point out of the use of kfxos rather than nov in Asia
Minor in its bearing on the authorship of the Gospel of John
where occurs 41 times, once only in 3 Jo. and Rev. (34 times
it
also 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.,
I, 38.
* Kenyon, ext. vol. of Hast. D. B., art. Papyri, p. 355''. See also iil.,
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 27 f.
rum ut solutae ita poeticae orationis nuUo modo veram nobis imaginem ser-
monis illius aetatis praebeat. Etenim sermo, quem apud auctores hellinisticos
deprehendimus, arti, non vitae, debetur." Witkowski Prodr. gr. pap. Graec,
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.
:
THE KOINH 71
T0/3t 17?'.
I
72 A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(cf. kfjL/jLeao:)
. There is less care for rhythm in general, and the
variable final consonants v and s appear constantly before con-
sonants. The use of -et- for -tet- in forms like relu and ra/jLelou
The N. T. use of expressions like els to ovoixa, 8vo 8vo, once cited
as Hebraisms, is finding illustration in the papyri (cf. Deissmann,
Light, etc., p. 123 f.). M17 begins to encroach on ov, especially
with infinitives and participles. The periphrastic conjugation is
frequently employed. The non-final use of tva is quite marked.
Direct discourse is more frequent than indirect. Clearness is
more desired than elegance. It is the language of nature, not of
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 suprem-
acy in the Grseco-Roman world. That was impossible. The
very victory of the Greek spirit made necessary a modern com-
mon 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 Pan-
hellenic 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
after conquering them.^ Spenserian English would be an af-
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 ver-
nacular Latin broke up into various separate tongues, the modern
Romance languages. The conclusion is irresistible therefore that
the KOLVT] possessed wonderful adaptabihty to the manifold needs
of the 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
more cultivated in the strict sense than they ever have been
since. We have discovered new forces in nature; we have made
new inventions; but we have changed in no way the methods of
thinking laid down by the Greeks . The Hellenistic world was
. .
1 Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., 1905, p. 137. He adds (p. Ill):
"The work of Alexandria was a permanent education to the whole Greek-
speaking world; and we know that in due time Pergamum began to do similar
work."
2 Prol., p. 6. See also Breed, Prep, of the World for Chr., 1904, ch. IX,
The 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
Levantine group" of the Uterary language, but this is a wrong assignment
forboth the LXX and the N. T.
CHAPTER IV
76
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 77
8 Thumb, Griech. Spr. etc., p. 120. It lasted "solange die bibhsche Gra-
citat als etwas isoliertes betrachtet wurde." Thumb attacks the idea of a
N. T. dialect or a pecuhar bibhcal variety of the Koivrj, pp. 162-201. For his-
tory of the Purist controversy see W.-Th. § 1, W.-Sch. § 2.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 79
were not aloof from the life of their time. "It embodied the
Hebrew and Christian faith in a language
lofty conceptions of the
which brought them home to men's business and bosoms."*
Wackernagel understates the matter: "As little as the LXX does
the N. T. need to be isolated linguistically." ^
(b) Proof that N. T. Greek is in the Vernacular Koivq. The
proof is now at hand. We
numerous contemporary
have it in the
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 inscrip-
tions 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
J. Hope Moulton. Deissmann^ indeed insists: "If we are ever in
this matter to reach certainty at 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 artificial Greek of the rhetoricians and litterateurs,
strictly bound as it was by technical rules. This language of or-
dinary life, this cosmopolitan Greek, shows unmistakable traces
of a process of development that going on, and in many
was still
words see Deissmann {Bible Studies, pp. 198-247; Light, etc., pp.
69-107). The recovery of the inscription on the marble slab that
warned the gentiles from the Updv is very impressive, M-qdha
aWoyovrj daTTopeveadaL kvTOS tov irepl to lepov Tpv4>aKT0V Kal -Ktpi^oKov.
IJLOS, dojfia, eau = av, el lurjv, el8os, els, eKTeveia, Utos, eKTivdacroi, ev,
1 Prol., p. 5.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 81
xpovos, ypoiixlov, xl/vxhv aojaai. This seems like a very long list, but
it do more than pages of argument to convince the reader
will
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)
is very incomplete. After compiling this
words I turned to list of
the list in the Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
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 com-
mon in the classic Greek. Thayer's hst is entirely different save
a half-dozen. In his list are comprised such interesting words as
aX\r]yop€0}; aPTo4)da\{jLeo), airoKapadoKia, 5eLaL5aLp.ovia, eyxplo:, kyyl^co,
kmxoprjyeui, evBoKea:, eu/catpeco, dpLa{jLJ3evo), etc. This list can be
largely increased also by the comparison between words that are
common to the N. T. and the comic poets (Aristophanes, Menan-
who used the language of the people. See Kennedy's
der, etc.)
Sources of N. T. Greek (ch. VI).
lists in Many of these, as Ken-
nedy shows, are theological terms, like aladrjTrjpLov, appa^wv, ^a-w-
TL^Q}, €vxo.pL(7Tia, Kvpia, fxvaT-qpLov, ^tXaSeX^ia. The Christians found
in common use in the Roman Empire terms like dSeX^os, cTrt^dj^eta,
eiTLcfiavrjs, Kvpcos, XeLTOvpyla, rapovala, Tpea(3vTepos, Tpoypa(f>o), aojrrjp,
acoTTjpla, vios Qeov. They took these words with the new popular
connotation and gave them "the deeper and more spiritual
1 not meant, of course, that the bullc of the N. T. words are new as
It is
compared with the old Gk. 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,
etc., p. 72 f.). Findlay (Exp. Gk. T., 1 Cor., p. 748) gives 5594 Greek
words in the N. T. (whole number), while Viteau (Syntaxe des Prop., p. xxx)
gives 5420.
82 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
rolHng" for the census (very common in the papyri). But this
is not all, for the modern Greek vernacular will also augment the
The new meanings to old words are well illustrated in the fist
8tr]veKes, Kad<hs yeypawraL, e/c avix^wvov, kiri to avTO, KaT ovap, KaTO. to
1
Thumb, Die sprachgesch. Stell. des bibl. Grioch., Tliool. Runds., 1002,
Cf. also Arnaud, Essai sur le caractcre dc la languo ^rccquc du
N. T.,
p. 93.
Viteau (Et. sur le Grec du N. T., 2 vols., 1893, 1896) insists on the
dis-
1899.
tinction between the lit. and the vernac. elements in the N. T.
2 Gr. of the N. T. Gk., p. 1.
'' Hell. Stud., 1875.
4 Gk. Life and Thought, 1896, p. 530.
84 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Attic Greek; they use forms which shock the purists who examine
for Cambridge scholarships. But did any men ever tell a great
story with more simplicity, with more directness, with more
power? . . . Believe me against all the pedants of the world, the
dialect that tells such a story no poor language, but the out-
is
Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., 1905, p. 114 f. Cf. Schiirer, Jew. Peo.
1
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
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
KOLPr,,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.
2 Cf. Geldart, Mod. Gk. in its Rela. to Anc. Gk., 1870, p. 180. Cf. also
Kennedy, Som*. of N. T. Gk., p. 65; Frankel, Altert. von Perg., 1890, p. xvii.
3 Deissmann, B. S., p. 180. " Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 77.
"I contend, therefore, that the peculiar modernness, the high in-
tellectual standard of Christianity as we find it in the N. T., is
« 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. Ramsay calls attention to the
translated from the Hebrew original and compare it with the cor-
responding portion of Josephus. The Greek of 1 Mace, is, like
the IjXX, translation Greek and intensely Hebraistic, while Jo-
sephus 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}.^
3 lb., p. 76. "What would wc give if we could recover but one papjTus
book with a few leaves containing genuine Aramaic sayings of Jesus! For
those few leaves we would, I think, part willingly with the theological out-
put of a whole century" (Deissmann, Light, p. 57).
* Griech. Spr. etc., p. 121.
6 Hebraisms in the Gk. Test., Pref. « Prol., p. 10.
90 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
» Prol., p. 18.
2
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
(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.
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
formidable. Besides, the list grows continually under the re-
searches of Deissmann, Moulton, Mayser, Thumb, Kalker, Wit-
kowski, Milligan and other scholars. The presumption is now
clearly against a Hebraism. The balance of evidence has gone
over to the other side. But after all one has the conviction that
the joy ofnew discovery has to some extent blurred the vision 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 Greek-
speaking 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 used for literary purposes, either before or after." ^ And yet
1 Deissmann, B. S., p. 67. See also Angus, N. T. Philol., Harv. Theol.
Rev., July, 1909, p. 453. The I.XX, though translation Greek (see above),
92 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
the Hellenistic Jews all over the world could not read continually
the LXX and not to some extent feel the influence of its peculiar
style. No
one to-day speaks the English of the King James Ver-
sion, or ever did for that matter, for, though like Shakespeare, it
is the pure Anglo-Saxon, yet, unlike Shakespeare, it reproduces
is in the vern. KOLvij, and thus the N. T. writers had a double point of contact
with the KOLvi}. 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 influ-
ence 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 Hebra-
istic flavour even in native Greek circles." Cf. also Reuss, Hist, of the N. T.,
1884, vol. I, p. 33.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 93
lation of i3"!*ii, though Moulton (p. 246) has found in the papyri
oivev and x^P^s so used with ttSs.
The use of py)p.a, thing is a Hebraism after
in the sense of "i^l '
'
the LXX. The Greek already has X670S in this sense. IIpo-
classic
aoi-Kov \ap.^a.veiv ^^^^ Si'iJp is a clear Hebraism. YlpoawTroKruxivTko)
continued to be the language of the learned, in which even the legal discus-
sions of the scribes were carried on."
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 95
creased use of avrjp and avdpwTos like Tii''i< rather than tIs, ttSs, eKaaros
= iJ.wpe=T^y2; -7raaxa
^'>?; = 'no*^ (LXX, but same for Aramaic s^v^s);
pai3^i{€l)='^^^; (xa^a6)d=t^-\ii:^'2; ad/SiSaro;/ = nsp o-arams = l^i? crdTr- ; ;
€$ 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.
Wochenschr., Sept. 26, 1908.
« Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 142 f. Cf. Brockehnann, Grundr. der
vergl. Gr. der semit. Spr. (1907).
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINU 97
words are found in the LXX, but there are very few words that
are found in the N. T. and the and nowhere else.^ BothLXX
the LXX
and the N. T. use the current vocabulary. There are
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, fjLOVoyeurjs, Truevfia, auTrjpla, xpiaTos, ktK. (See
longer list in Swetc, Introduction to 0. T. in Greek, p. 454.) So
also many N. T. phrases are found in the LXX, like dKwv
6eov, oajjiri evwdlas, Tvpoao^irov Tpos Trpbauiirov, 'Ka/j.^aveLV irpoauirou,
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 is present, blending of cases, in-
crease of adverbial phrases and prepositions, elpX els, interchange
between kv and els (increase of els), etc. See 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
occurs occasionally in the papyri, the inscriptions and kolvt]
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.
.
6 Hist, of Jew. Peo. in Time of Ch., div. II, vol. Ill, p. 163.
6 lb., vol. I, p. 47 f., and div. II, vol. Ill, p. 159.
7 lb., p. 157.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 99
his Bible Studies and his Philologij of the Greek Bible (1908); to
Helbing for his very useful Grammatik, and especially to Thack-
Pap., 1905) "assimilates such passages as are cited in the N.T., or are capa-
ble of a Christian meaning, as far as possible, to their form in the N. T.
text, or to the sphere of Christian thought." Ileinrici shows the same thing
spoke it." They could not shake off the Hebrew spell in trans-
lation. In free Greek like most of the N. T. the Semitic influence
is far less. Mahaffy was quick to see the likeness between the
papyri and the LXX.'* But one must not assume that a N. T.
word necessarily has the same sense that it has either in the LXX
or the KOLvi]. The N. T. has ideas of its own, a point to be con-
sidered later. We agree with Swete^ that the LXX
is "indispen-
sable to the study of the N. T." Nestle'' justly remarks that the
Greek of the LXX enjoys now a much more favourable judgment
from philologists than some twenty years ago. Conybeare and
Stock {Set. from the LXX, p. 22) observe that, while the vocabu-
lary of the LXX is that of the market-place of Alexandria, the
syntax is much more under the influence of the Hebrew original.
The LXX does, of course, contain a few books like 4 Maccabees,
written in Greek originally and in the Greek spirit, like Philo's
638.
Hell -Gricch., Hauck's Realencyc, p.
1 ^ •. n^
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 also LXX
through the common speech. Cf
out that poetic words are in
vu.
T.insius Gr Unters. tiber die bibl. Griic,. 1863, p.
Lipsius, ur. ume ,
, ,, .
have been what it is. "The Bible whose God is Yahweh is the
Bible of one people, the Bible whose God is Kupios is 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
(p. 27),that the Greek of the LXX
gives "a true picture of the
language of ordinary intercourse between Jewish residents in
the country." He denies also any influence of the Hebrew on the
vernacular Greek of the Jew^s in Alexandria outside of the vocabu-
lary of special Jewish words like aKpo^varia. He thinks (p. 28)
the Book of Tobit the best representative of the vernacular Greek
of the Jews. There are more transliterations like yetupas for Ara-
maic s^'ii'^3 (Heb. 13) in the later books where the early books had
(cf. Lu. 4 : 17). Even Schiirer^ admits that the educated classes
if not as a rule.^ The Aramaic tongue is very old and its use as a
previous Ara-
diplomatic tongue (Is. 36 U) implies perhaps a
:
4>0!}vr]. The two kinds of Jewish Christians are even called (Ac.
6 1) 'EX\r]VLaTal and 'E/3patot, though 'EWrjVLaTai and Supto-rat
:
davd (or probably Heb. "^^Js^^Xet, and the rest Aramaic, Dal-
man, Wcrrds f = ^^^P?".?' s^^i^ ^^)^ ^'^i^; t4><t>oJda.=
of Jesus, p. 53 .)
an old Greek idiom) and the vernacular (kolvt)) Kad' eh. He suggests
also that Aramaic meanings are found in such words as aco^eLu,
TvoieXv Kapirov, avfj-^ovXiov Trotelv (5t56i'at), elpi]vq, eiprjvrjv SidopaL, 686s
* 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,
"Lord, come." Cf. Rev. 22 20. W. 11. give it fiapav iiOa.
:
' Sec Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., ch. XI; Dahiian, Words of Jesus, pp. 17-
78; Wellhausen, Einl. m die drei Evang. (Die aram. Grundl. der Evang., pp.
14-43).
106 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
neat turns of Greek phrase and idiom; Peter's two letters pre-
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 be-
yond the frequent use of /cat like but the tone of the book is
"i,
distinctly that of a noble Jew and the sum total of the impres-
sion 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 in-
deed 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
for this exists), bia. aTonaros (1:70) are due to the LXX, not the
Hebrew. The use with the infinitive and followed by the
of ev tc3
Kal eyhtTo riWe and koX eykuero ehdeZv. The first two^ are common
i"
in the LXX, while kyepero ekSeiv is due to the Greek vernacular
as the papyri testify. The superfluous d<^ets, rip^aro, etc., are
Ara-
maisms, while ei/xt and the participle is Aramaic, Uke the Hebrew,
and also in harmony with the analytic vernacular Koivi]. Nestle"
1
Biesenthal (Das Trostschreiben des Ap. Paulus an d. Heb., 1878)
even
thinks that the Ep. was written in Ai'am. or Heb.
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 fre-
quency in the LXX, 555 times in the O. T., Apoc. and N. T. (Votaw,
Inf.
occurs nearly as often in the LXX as all other prepositions with the infinitive
together.
^ Dalman, Wds. of Jes., p. 3-4.
used ^. The LXX and the Aramaic explain all the Semitisms in
Luke. Dalman^ ventures to call the LXX Hebraisms in Luke
"Septuagint-Grsecisms" and thinks that the same thing is true
of the other Synoptists. Certainly it is proper to investigate ^ the
words of Jesus from the point of view of the peculiarities of style
in each reporter of them. 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
read whole pages in places with little suggestion of Semitic in-
fluencebeyond the general impress of the Jewish genius and point
of view.
and Other Foreign Words. Moulton^ considers
IV. Latinisms
it "hardly worth while" to discuss Latin influence on the kolvt] of
the N. T. Blass ^ describes the Latin element as "clearly trace-
able." Swete^ indeed alleges that the vulgar Greek of the Em-
pire "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 incor-
porated Latin civil and military terms with freedom. Inas-
much 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
or Latinizing the language. Cicero^ himself described Latin as
provincial in comparison ^vith the Greek. Latin words are fairly
common in Latin names were early naturaUzed
the Mishna.^
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,
'EWtjvikwu a.vaTr\T)ue'evTe% (Plut., Cato Maj. 23. 3). Cf. Colin, Rome et la Grece
de 200 h 146 avant Jesus-Christ (1905).
9 Schiirer, Jew. Peo. in Time of Ch., div. II, vol. I, pp. 43 ff. Krausa
(Griech. und lat. Lehnw. im Tal., Tl. I, p. xxi) says: "One speaks of the lan-
guage of the Romans with the greatest respect as the speech of the soldiers."
KOINU 109
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE
2 Gk. Gr., p. 7.
Hist. ^. . ,-ni , •
3 Lang of the N. T., Hast. D. B. Cf. also C. Wessely, Die lat. Elem. in
3 Or. of N. T. Gk., p. 4.
4 Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 1888, pp. 60, 66. Thumb (Griech. Spr., p. 152)
considers the matter .inconclusive, as does Moulton (Prol., p. 21). For the
later Latinisms see Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 13 f. See also W.
Schulze, Graeca
Lat., 1891; Schwyzer, Weltspr. des Altert., p. 20. Cf. Sophocles, Lex., pp.
Souter (Did Paul Speak Latin?, Exp., April, 1911). At Iconium "a certain
Other smaller details are the absence of o: with the vocative, avv
as equal to Kal, 6s = /cat outos {qui=et hie), 7aMeco with dative =nw-
bere alicui, infinitive alone with KeKehw. There is no evidence that
the absence of the article in Latin had any influence on the
ver-
parts of North Africa and the extreme west of Europe. There were
Schools
great hbraries in Alexandria, Pergamum and elsewhere.
were numerous and excellent. But none the less the mass of the
1906, and Our Lat. Bible, ib., July, 1906. "The common dialect, spoken
Africa, saw
with local differences in every part of Italy, in Gaul, Spain and
its happy moment arrive when Christianity spread over those shores" (Dub-
lin Rev., April, 1906, p. 293).
112 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
1 W.-M., p. 36.
2 B. 65 (note).
S., p.
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."
» Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 10 f.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 113
1 W.-M., p. 36, n. 3.
^ Epis. to the Rom., p. x f.
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,
ical exegesis is, it forms only the basis for the spiritual exposition
which should follow.
When one comes to details, he notes that the influence of
Christianity is chiefly lexical, not grammatical.^ But a few points
in syntax are to be observed, as in expressions like kv Xpto-rcS^; h
Kupicp; TTio-reuco^ h with locative, els with accusative, kirl with
the
locative or the accusative, Trtareuco with the dative, with the accu-
TaTreLVOcppoavpt], 6 vios tov deov, 6 vlos rod avOpoiwov, viodeala, X^P^s, Xpt-
"Though Greek words were used they were the symbols of quite other than
Greek ideas." That is, when the distinctively Christian ideas are given.
the influence of Gk. on other languages see Wack., Die Kult. der
Gegenw.,
On
Tl. I, Abt. 8, pp. 311 ff.
.
with 1 Cor. 12 : 1-3. The Christians did not shrink from using
these words in spite of the debased ideas due to the emperor-
cult, 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.
Kennedy. For the stimuli that Christianity derived from popu-
lar notions of law, religion and morality see Deissmann, Light,
this true of theN. T. The new message glorified the current kolvt],
took the words from the street and made them bear a new con-
tent, linked heaven with earth in a new sense. In particular the
N. T. wi'iters took and greatly enriched the religious vocabulary
of the LXX.
VI. Individual Peculiarities. The language of Christianity
was not stereotyped at and there was more play for indi-
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. A. Souter (The Exp., 1904, Some Thoughts
on the Study of the Gk. N. T., p. 145) says: "We must take each writer's
grammar by itself."
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 117
times, in the Pastoral Epistles h iraai five (or six) times, while in
Ph. 4 :
In thus accenting the individuahty of the
12 he has both.
N. T. writers one must not forget that each writer had access to
the common religious terminology of early Christianity. There was
6 Cf. Norden, Die griech. Ku^iiitpr., Bd. I, p. 243. Cf. also Blass, Ilermcn.
of the reality and living interest of the facts; there are 151 his-
Btcllcr. Charakter und Wert des Marcus (Keil and Tzschirncr's Analecta, II,
Sec Hawkins, Hor. Syn.2, pp. 114-153. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp.
2, .3).
has ri ^aacXeia rod Oeov 14 times (Mt. 4; Lu. 32); he uses 6 Trarrip 6
where Mark has Kal about 60 times. Matthew has ort after
verbs of saying 38 times, while Mark has it 50 times. Of
the 151 historic presents in Mark only 21 appear in Matthew,
though Matthew has 93 historic presents in all. See Hawkins,
Horae Syriopt., p. 144 f. Matthew frequently has aorist when
Mark xx f.). The periphras-
has imperfect (see Allen, Matthew, p.
tic tenses are less common in Matthew than in Mark and Luke
(op. cit., p. xxii). Matthew is less fond than Mark of redundant
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
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 quo-
1 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.,
p. xiiif.; Zahn, Einl. in d. N. T., Bd. II, 1898. On Matthew's style see
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Ok., pp. 203, 276, 278, 300, 302, 305.
.
often been
1 •
1-5- 16-34. The preface to his Gospel has
17 :
2
St. Luke the Prophet, 1901, p. 81.
Intr. to ii, p. 17.
N. T.,
3 Davidson,
* Les Evang., pp. 232, 283.
B Plummer, Comm. on Luke, 1896, p. xlvn. , ^ ,,, u •?
Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?,
e Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, 1895;
rVii'^o Credibility of Acts, 1902.
calls attention to differences
fvogel (Zur Charak. d;s Lukas, 1899, p. 19)
in the sDccches of Stephen,
Peter and Paul m the Acts.
8 See the lists of Thayer (Lex., pp.
699 ff.), Plummer (Comm., pp. lu ff.)
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
Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., and Acta Apostol. Bacon (Story of St. Paul,
2
1905, p. 156, note) actually urges Kai kytvtTo in the "we" sections of Acts as a
"pronounced Septuagintism improbable for a Greek"! Cf. Moulton, Prol.,
p. 16 f. On Luke's style see Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 1, 3, 5, 203, 250 f.,
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.
Syii.^, pp. 174-193. On relation of Luke to Josephus, cf. Bebb, Luke's
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
in Luke (4 or 6 times). Luke uses the conjunctions and sub-
ordinate clauses with more literary skill than the other N. T.
writers. He makes choice use of words .and idioms. Cf his report .
The pleonasms are just those seen in the LXX, and the book has
the fondness for assonance so common in the 0. T. Cf. Oester-
ley, Exp. Gk. Test., p. 394. He uses many examples that re-
peculiar in the N. T. to Luke and Paul. On p. 15 of Luke the Physician
(trans., 1907) 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
"^
First series of Stud. Bibl., pp. 144 ff. Cf. Mayor, Comm. on James,
pp. ccv ff.
124 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK 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, though short, are
rhythmical^; he is crisp, vivid, energetic; there is little in the
forms or the syntax to mark it offfrom the current kolvt] or
the N. T. representatives of it, though his idiomatic use of the
pronouns worth mentioning, as is also that of a7€ as an in-
is
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
:
^ See this point well worked out by Mayor, James (Epis. of), Hast. D. B.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 279.
2 Cf. Mayor, Comm., pp. cxcvff., for exx.
' lb., p. cci f. Mayor, ch. viii, has also a luminous discussion of the "Gram-
mar of St. James," which shows conclusively that he has httle that is distinc-
tive in his grammar. Cf. Thayer (Lex., p. 708) for Ust of words pecuhar
to James.
* Cf. Mayor, Comm., p. cxci f. On awaycoyfj cf. Hort, Judaistic Christian-
ity, p. 150.
* Der Zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas, 1885.
6 Comm. on St. Peter and St. Jude, 1901.
» Jude (Epis. of), Hast. D. B.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINII 125
N. T., like a.vacrTpo(}>i], ypvxh, etc.^ Both use 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 pic-
Peter, Plato), TrXatrTos (Her., Eur., Xen., 2 Peter) 3;
1 Cf. Zahn, Einl. in d. N. T., Bd. II, p. 108; B. Weiss, Einl. in d. N. T.,
p. 445.
2 Bigg, Comm., p. 225 f. Cf also Schulze, Der schriftstellcr. Charakter
.
Once 'iva occurs with the future indicative (3:1). The absence
kirei, eireidr], re, dr], ttov, ttcos is notice-
of iiv and the particles apa, ye,
able. 1 Peter makes idiomatic use of fj.ev, while 2 Peter does not
have it. 2 Peter uses the "compact" structure of article, attribu-
tive and noun, Uke 1 Peter (cf. 2 Pet. 2 1, 10, 13, 16), but the :
used of two names for the same object. Cf. also Jude 4.
The
articlewith the infinitive does not occur in 2 Peter (nor Jude).
2 Peter has some unusual uses of the infinitive after exw (2 Pet.
1 15) and as result (2 Pet. 3
:
1 f.). 1 Peter has the article and
:
Peter
2 Pet. (1 :2) have the optative TrXvdvudeiv (Uke Jude). 1
twice (3 14, 17) has ei and the optative. See further Mayor
:
on
"Grammar of Jude and 2 Peter" (Comm., pp. xxvi-lv).
(g) Paul. There was a Christian terminology apart from
their
Paul, but many of the terms most familiar to us received
1
Einl. in d. N. T. Mayor in his Comm. on Jude and 2 Pctor (1007) re-
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
for one's style to be enriched with age. The Church Quart. Rev. (Jan.,
1907) shows that all the new words in the Past. Epis. come from the LXX,
Aristotle, kolvt] writers before or during Paul's time. Cf. Exp. Times, 1907,
p. 245 f.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 129
1 Paul, vol. II, p. 281. Cf. K. L. Bauer, Philol. Thucyd.-Paul., 1773; also
his Rhet. Paul., 1782. Cf. Tzschirner, Observ. Pauli ap. epist., 1800; La-
sonder, De ling. paul. idiom., 1866.
2 Der Apost. Paulus, p. 502.
' Renan, St. Paul, p. 232. Cf. also Jacquier, Hist, des Livres du N. T.,
tome l", 1906, p. 37: "Son grec, nous le verrons, n'est pas le grec 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.
6 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.
130 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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
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.
132 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(cf. Thayer, Lexicon, p. 708). These 168 words are quite char-
acteristic also, like a4)opav, aiadrjT-qpLOV, iravrjyvpLS, irpooTOTOKLa. West-
* Early Chris. Lit., 1906, p. 12. On the lang. of Heb. see the careful re-
marks 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 KOINII 133
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 con-
:
J
Comm. on Heb., p. xlvi. gxp. Times, Nov., 1906, p. 59.
^
' Cf. Drummond, Charac. and Author, Fourth Gosp., 1904; Sanday,
of the
Crit. of the Fourth Gosp., 1905; Bacon, The Fourth Gosp. in Res. and De-
bate, 1910.
* Quoted in Schaff, Comp. to Gk. N. T., p. 67.
5 lb. On
73 Sch;iff puts Jo. 1 18 side by side in Gk. and Heb.
p. : The
Heb. tone of the Gk. is clear.
8 Comm. sur I'Evang. de S. Jean, vol. I, pp. 226, 232.
lb., p. 158.
2 Abbott has luminous remarks on such words as Trto-reuw,
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
interesting points in the Gospel.
* Comm. on Epis. of Jo., pp. xh ff. The absence of ovv, when so character-
istic of the Gospel, shows how precarious mere verbal argument is. Baur,
Die Evang., p. 380, calls the Gospel the Apocalypse "transfigured." Cf.
Blass on John's style, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 261, 276, 278 f., 291, 302.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 135
preferring ^117 ttcos, which John does not have) napTvpkw is more fre- ;
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
:
has encroached upon other cases as with Kar-qyopdv (12 10). The :
" 1 Exp., 1904, p. 71. Cf. also Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 151; Reinhold,
Graec. Patr. etc.,57 f.; Schlatter, Die Spr. und Heimat dea vierten
p.
Evang. Schl. overemphasizes the Aramaic colour of the Gospel.
2 W.-M., p. 671.
' Prol., p. 9. Cf. also Jiilicher, Intr. to N. T.; Bousset, Die Offenb. Joh.,
1896; Lee, Speaker's Comm. on Rev. Swete (Apoc. of St. John, 1906, p.
cxx) thinks that John's "eccentricities of syntax belong to more than one
cause: some to the habit which he may have retained from early years of
thinking in a Semitic language; some to the desire of giving movement and
vivid reality to his visions, which leads him to report them after the maimer
of shorthand notes, jotted down at the time; some to the circumstances in
which the book was wTitten." The Apoc. "stands alone among Gk. hterary
writings in 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.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOI Nil 137
of 2 Peter, may represent John's real style, while the Gospel and
Epistles may have been revised as to Greek idioms by a friend or
friends of John in Ephesus (of. Jo. 21 24). With tliis theory :
has been said one must recall that the Apocalypse was composed
on the Isle of Patmos, in some excitement, and possibly without
careful revision, while the Gospel and First Epistle probably had
care and the assistance of cultured friends. At any rate the ver-
time. The N. T. did indeed have a great effect upon the later
Seeberg, Zur Charak. des Apost. Joh., Neuc Kirch. Zeitschr., 1905, pp. 51-64.
2 Cf. Gregory Naz., II, 13, A; Gregory Nyssa, III, 557 B; Reinhold, De
ej^as avdpwTOS (TTaXixhos clto to Geo' r' bvofxa tov 'Iccavqs. Autos rjpde 7td
Kripvy/Jia, 7id J^d Krjpv^ei to c/xis, irov va Kavei kl oKol va TncFTeif/ovv. Aev
HTav eKelvos to 4>cos, Tapa 7td va Kripv^ei to 0cDs. The literary modern
Greek in these verses differs very httle from the original N. T.
text, only in the use of vTijp^ev, 6vop,a^6iJ.evos, 5td va, dev, rJTo. Moul-
ton* in an interesting note gives some early illustrations of
modern Greek vernacular. In the second century a.d. kaov is
avv rrjs Cf. Mullach, Gr. der griech. Vulgarspr., p. 27. Jean Psichari,
yvvaiKos.
'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-
dom Thumb, Handb., pp. 32 ff.). Prep-
in the use of the genitive case (cf.
ositionshave 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,
etc. The double ace. goes beyond anc. Gk. usages {op. cit., p. 36) as oKa p65iva
TO. /SXtTTw, *I see everything rosy.'
» Sour, of N. T. Gk., pp. 153 ff.
* Cf. Thumb's Handb. der neugr. Volksspr. (1895); V. and D., Handb. to
Mod. Gk. (1887); Thumb-Angus, Handb. of Mod. Gk. Vernac. (1912).
6 ProL, p. 234.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 139
know.'
PART II
ACCIDENCE
CHAPTER V
WORD-FORMATION
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 ff.
Prellwitz, Etym. Worterb. der griech. Spr., 1893; Brug. und Delb., Grundr.
der vergl. Gr., 1897-1901; Skeat, Etym. Diet, of the Eng. Lang., etc.
143
144 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK 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 articu-
late 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 prim-
itive 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 compara-
.
tively 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
old roots by various combinations, or at any rate after the anal-
ogy 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.'
1 Curtius, Gk. Etym., vol. I, p. 16.
2 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
his New Light on the N. T.; to J. H. Moulton's articles in the Ex-p.
(1901, 1903, 1904, 1908); to 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
the LXX phenomena see careful discussion of Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 112-
136. 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 por-
tion 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.
3 Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 181. * lb., p. 187.
6 MS. notes on Gk. Gr.
« Cf. on slang, Wedgwood, Intr. to the Diet, of the Eng. Lang.; Paul,
Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 175.
» GUes, Comp. Philol., p. 235.
WORD-FORMATION ^^^
In-
Latin sal, English sal-t. So mCs (Ac. 27:41), Latin nav-is.
kolvv in using to
stead of aXs the N. T. elsewhere follows the
is only
the root
r6 xXoTov instead of vavs. In
.ohs {.68-s)
aXas, and
of 5 (analogy of ovs or 68ovs). ihe
slightly changed after the loss
Pronouns and numerals
pronoun els (e.-s) is similarly explained.
use the root directly. In verbs
we have many more such roots
endings without the thematic
used directly with the personal
vowel o/e and sometimes without
any tense-suffix for the pres-
ent,Uke 4>vy^ (<^a-MO.The whole subject of verbs is much more
non-thematic forms are rapidly
compUcated, but in general the
the vernacular modern Greek
disappearing in the N. T., while in
the non-thematic or m^ verbs are
no longer used (save in the case
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
Take the thematic
ju-dex; the Gothic teiho; the German
zeigm.
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,
taken place and areK has become
the Greek root metathesis has
oder der andercn W^^^^lasse Mt
X "t)ber das relative Alter der einen
164).
(Vogrinz, Gr. dc8 hom. Dud., ISbO, p.
sich nichts Sicheres ausmac-hcn"
2 Brug., Kurze vergl. Gr., p. 281.
146 A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
('a watch-tower'), oKoir-bs ('a spy,' 'a goal'), ctkco;/' ('owr).^ Cf.
ods of the language. The 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 is not a root, it is called a derivative. Hence
there are primitive and derivative verbs, primitive and deriva-
tive substantives, primitive and derivative adjectives. There
N. T. Greek no "special" formative suffixes,
are, of course, in the
though the does vary naturally in the relative use of these
kolvt]
1 Cf. Rachel White, CI. Rev., 1906, pp. 203 ff., for interesting 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.
8 Next to Sans. Gk. uses more inflections and so more affixes. Cf. Jann.,
rich in new verbs in -vco. Verbs in -dco are common in the N. T.,
as in the kolvt], like tl/jlclo:, bal/aw, fdco, etc. 'Aw-fdco occurs in Artem.,
Sotion, inscriptions, etc. In the modern Greek verbs in -dco have
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 N. T. as in the kolvt] and modern Greek,^
like ayia^cji (ajLOs, ayi^w, LXX), evTa(f)La^oj {ePTacf)ia, Anthol., Plut.),
vriTTLCi^oo (vrj-n-Los) in Hippocrates, arvypa^o) (from aTvypds) in Schol.
on ^sch. and in LXX aiPLa^co {aLpiop, eccl., Byz.). Iluppdfco (Mt.
16 : 2 f.) occurs in LXX and Philo, but W. H. reject this passage.
The majority of the new verbs in -eco are compound, as aaxvi^opew,
!r\r]po(f)op€o) (ir\T]po-(f)6pos, LXX,
pap.), but Sumreoj (only in N. T.)
is to be noticed on the other side.^ 'Aratpeco (from d/catpos) is found
* Thumb, Handb., p. 175; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 21S, 300.
which is not in the N. T., but Winer long ago found a similar
form in kinKexeLpeoo (Papyri Taurin. 7).^ 'EXarroj'eco (Arist., LXX,
pap.) is from eXarTov. 'EXXoyeoi (and -dco) is in inscriptions and
papyri. 'E^o.Kokovdeco (Polyb., Plut., inscriptions) is not "biblical"
as Thayer called it. AWevrecc {aWevrrjs, avros and evTea) is in the
KOLVT], according to Moeris, for the Attic avTohiKkui. (In the late
papyri see Deissmann, Light, p. 85.) No great distinction in
sense exists between -dco and -eco.
Verbs in -eucu are also very conmion and are formed from a
great variety of stems. 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
(1 Cor. 9 25), from kyKparrjs (in Aristotle).
: Tvp.vLTevo3 (not yvp.PT]-
» W.-M., p. 115.
* Cf. dplan^ov daayeiv, triumphuin agere. Goetzeler, Einfl. d. Dion, von
Ital. 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 paral-
lel between the language of the imperial cult and of Christianity.
3 Cf. W.-M., note, p. 114. Mayser (Gr., pp. 415-509) gives a very com-
plete discussion of " Stammbildung " in the Ptol. pap.
WORD-FORMATION 149
80X1.600 (LXX, from 56Xtos); bwanboi (LXX, eccl. and Byz., from
bwanii); k^ovbevboi (often in LXX, but W. H. read k^ovbevkw in
Mk. 9:12, Plutarch even k^ovbtvl^w); deixeXibco (LXX) is from
BefxeKiov; Kavabu (from Kavaos, Disc, Galen); K€</)aXt6co (Lob., ad
Phryn., p. 95, though not in any known Greek author)
/c€(/)aXtfco,
(Jas. 1 6) is found in schol. on Hom. Od. 12, 336, the old form
:
meaning not only of the root, but of this formative suffix also
when possible. The
root has in most cases the strong form, as
in X67(X€7)-o-s. 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 re-
sult, we find aPT-air6-8o-na (LXX, old Greek avT-aTr6-8o-aLs, from
aPT-airo-8i8oj^ii.) ; Sid-CTTj-jua (from 8L-iaTr]iJ.L, Arist., Polyb., Philo);
tv-8v-fj.a (from LXX, Strabo, Jos., Plut.); dk\r]-na
ep-8vo}, (from
^eXco, Arist. and LXX); Kara-Kpi-na (from Kara-Kpivo}, Dion. Hal.,
pap.) Kara-Xv-fxa (from Kara-Kv-co, literary
; kolvt] for old Kar-ajcoyeiov,
and with idea of place); KaTa-aTrj-iia {Kad-laT-q-iiL, Plut. and the
LXX) ; KTla-jjia (from ktI^(j3, Strabo, Dion. Hal.) ; Trp6a-KoiJ.-ixa (from
Tpoa-KOT-Tco, in LXX and Plut.). The suffix -cn-s, meaning action
(abstract), appears in kvb.-^\el/-Lt (Arist., LXX) ; d^d-Sei^-ts (from
ava-8dK-vv-ixi, Plut., Diod., Strabo, Sirach); dkXrj-aLs in Heb. 2 :4
(from deXco, a "vulgarism," according to Pollux); KaT6.-pv^-Ls (from
Kara-vvaa-co, LXX) KariL-KpLcns (from Kara-Kplvw, Vettius Valens,
;
(LXX, Plut., Lucian) has suffix -rivrj (cf. ~opo, -ovq, etc.). Aia-
(TTTop-d {8La-cnreip(ji, LXX, Plut.) and Tpoa-evx-V {n-poa-evx-op-o.i,
LXX, inscriptions) use the suffix -a (-77). Cf. aTro-^pa(p-r] (N. T.,
papyri), olto-Soxv (inscriptions), ^poxi (papyri), kixwXoKr] {kfiTXeKO},
inscriptions), 5ta-Ta7T7 (Sia-Taaaw, papyri, inscriptions, later writ-
ings). The agent is usually -rijs (Blass, Gr., p. 62), not -rojp or
-T7/P as in 5tcb/cT7js (from Slwkui, earliest example) and (from
86-Trjs
ixos (Sap., Polyb., Jos., Plut., Test. XII Patr.); pauna-ixos (LXX);
aa^^aTLCT-fMos (Plut. and eccl. writers); aa:<l)povLa-iJ.6s (Jos., Plut.,
etc.); xf/LdvpL(7-p.6s (from xpidvpi^o}, LXX, Clem. Rom., 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 /Stw-crts (in Sirach, from (3t6co); ava-
Kaiv(j}-(JLS (ava-Kaivo-a), Etym. M. Her7n.); airavTri-aLS {aT-avTa-w,
LXX, Polyb., Diod., papyri); airo-Ka\v\l/Ls (LXX, Plut.); awo-KaTa-
o-Ta-crts (Potyb., Diod., papyri, etc.) ; (LXX)
dTro-o-ra-o-ta ; eK^i]T7]-cn%
epLdevoo, Arist. pol. The verb from eptdos, 'working for hire');
lepareia (from leparevco, Arist. pol., Dion. Hal., LXX, inscriptions);
Xoyela {-ia) is from \oyevco ('collect') and is found in inscrip-
tions, ostraca, papyri (see Deissmann, Light, p. 105); fiedoSeia
(from fxedodevo}, which occurs in the kolvt], from (xWodos, but not
the abstract noun).
vii, 4, 1912). For long list of derivative substantives in the Ptol. pap. see
Mayser, Gr., pp. 416-447.
WORD-FORMATION 153
A few late words in -rrjp-tov (from -rrjp and -lov) occur as aKpoa-
TT)pi.ov (from cLKpodoixai, Plut. and other kolut} writers) where
-TTjpiov means 'place'; iXaa-rripLov (from IXdaKo/jLaL, LXX, inscrip-
tions, papyri, Dio Chrys.) is a substantive in the N. T., made
probably from the adjective IXaarrjpLos (cf. auTrjpLos) and means
'propitiatory gift' or 'means of propitiation' and does not allude
to the mercy seat^ or covering. However, in Heb. 9 5 ikaarrjpLov :
which may
be compared with Koirpuv; (3paj3eLov (from ^pa^evs, Me-
nand. 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- :
* 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 unduly sceptical (Gr., p. 64). Deiss. (B. S., p. 208 f.) finds nine
examples of eXatwi' = ' 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. :
also afxireXcoi' (from d/xTeXos, LXX, Diod., Plut.) which is now found in
the pap.
WORD-FORMATION '
155
' 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.
.
<i)pwv. Greek writers use rapacfipo-avvr], but cf. evdai/jLov-ia from eu-
balfjLWv). So irepiaaeia (from Trepiaads, LXX, inscriptions, Byz.).
W. H. use the ending -la with KaKoirade-ia (from KaKowadris)
With -avvT] several new words occur from adjectives in -os
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] and upo-avvq are both found
in inscriptions or in Glycas.^ Most of thewords in -avvri belong
to the later language.^ 'EXerjuo-avvrj (from k\er]ij.uu, Callim. in Del.,
Diog. Laert., LXX), like other words in -avvt], loses the v. So
TairHvo-4>po-avv7] (Jos., Epict.).
Rather more numerous are the new words in -ttjs,* as 01716-77/5
(from 0,7105, 2 Mace); ayv6-Tr]s (from d7J'6s, inscriptions); dStj'Ko-
WORD-FORMATION 157
yelv, inscriptions) (T(f)ayLOP (o-</)d7tos, -ov, from <T(})ayn, Am., Ezek.), i'tto-
\t]ulov {vTroKr]VLos, -ov, from utto \7]p6v, Demiopr. in Poll., Geop., LXX.
Cf. vTTo-^vyLov). As already seen, ikaa-Tnpiov is probably the neuter
(c) Adjectives.
1. Primary or Primitive Adjectives. These, of course, come
from verbal roots. 'A/xdpr-ojXos (from root afxapr-dvco, Arist.,
* This termination became rather common in the later Gk., as, for instance,
< Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 297. 'V.k<^v also is wholly adjective and ixk\\<^v
passive in meaning.
(0) Those from substantives. Some new words in -lvos occur
as anapavTLVos (from afxdpavTos, Philost., inscriptions); Kadrjidep-Lvos
(from iawepa, from Xen. on) in the minusc. 1, 118, 209 (Lu. 12 : 38);
irpoiLvos (so W. H., from xpcot, for the older Trpcotos, LXX, Plut.,
Athen., etc.); irvp-Lvos (from irvp, Arist., LXX, Polyb., Plut.);
raxt-vos (from rdxa) from Theocritus on (LXX also).
There are several words in -lkos, like Wvlkos (from Wvos, Polyb.,
Diod.); Kepafx-LKos (from Kepafxos, Hipp., Plat, pol., LXX) which
supplanted the earlier KepajXLos, Kepa/jieods; Kvpi-aKos (from Kvptos,
> Deiss., B. S., p. 217 f.; Liget, p. 361; Thieme, Die Inschr. v. M., p. 15.
^ See comm. in loco. W.-M. (p. 123) held that aapKivos was "hardly to be
tolerated" in Heb. 7 : 16, but Schmiedel (p. 139) has modified that statement.
Cf. on -iTOs, Donaldson, New Crat., p. 458.
WORD-FORMATION 159
and ojv {e-irovTLos, kirovaLos, like eKOiv, eKovaLos, etc.), 'bread for the
present,' though the t in ctti is not allowed to remain with a vowel
save when a digamma existed as in tTneLKrjs; from eTr-icoj' (eT-eiixi,
'approach'), like 17 einovaa {wepa), 'the next day' (Ac. 16 : 11), this
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.'
» Cf. Lightfoot, Rev. of the N. T., pp. 234-242, for full discussion of
jrepfouaos.
160 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(5) Those from adverbs. From avw come di/cbrepos (Polyb., LXX,
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^aWov-
Tcos. The neuter accusative singular and plural of adjectives con-
tinue to be used adverbially. Badews occurs also in Theoc. and
iElian. 'Akixtju (Theoc, Polyb., Strabo) is in the inscriptions also
as well as ev d/c/iat (cf. Ditt., Syll. 326, 12). 'E/Jpatart (Sirach) is
properly formed (cf. "EWrjmarL) from Expats. 'lovdaUCos is in Jos.
See also WvuCbs (Apoll. Dysc, Diog. Laert.). Elrtv (correct text
Mk. 4 : 28) is a rare Ionic form for eUa (papyri also) . Kei^ws
is used from Arist. on. 'OXtycos occurs out of the N. T. only in
Anihol. and Aquila. Ilpcbrcos (correct text Ac. 11 26) occurs here
:
creasing role in the Koivrj. Cf. Jannaris, op. cit., p. 310. See in
particular F. Schubert, Zur mehrfachen prdfixalen Zusammen-
setzung im Griechischen, Xenia Austriaca, 1893, pp. 191 ff.
(a) Kinds of Compound Words in Greek : proper composition
(crvvdecns), copulative composition {irapadeais) , derivative composi-
tion (irapaavudeaLs). In the first class the principal idea is ex-
pressed by the second part of the word, while the first and
qualifying part is not inflected, but coalesces with the second,
using merely the stem with connective vowel. As an example
take oiKo-vbuos, 'manager of the house.' The second kind of
composition, paratactic or copulative, is the mere union of two
independent words hke wapa-KXrjTos. It is not common in the
old Greek save in the case of prepositions with verbs, and even
this usage is far more frequent in the later Greek. It is seen in
many latecompound adverbs as in vTep-avco. The third or deriv-
ative composition is a new word made on a compound, whether
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 classes. Modern linguists do not like
1 Cf. Hamilton, The Neg. Comp. in Gk., 1899. "The true sphere of the
negative prefix combination with nouns, adjectives and verbal stems
is its
to form adjective compounds" (p. 17). Cf. also Margarete Heine, Subst.
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-
lein, De aX</)a intense, 1830.
;
WORD-FORMATION 163
(text of W. H. in 6: 17).
164 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
obsolete KaK-ovxos, i.e. KaKov, exw, LXX, Diod., Dio Cass., Plut.);
KaXo-TToteco (Et>Tn. Magn., LXX, Philo); Kara-^apeoo (Polyb.,
Diod., App., Lucian papyri); KaT-ayuvl^oiJLaL (Polyb., Jos., Lucian,
Plut., iElian); Kar-avTaoo (Polyb., Diod., eccl. writers, papyri);
KaTa-Kk-qpo-boTew (LXX); Kara-TTovkw (2 and 3 Macc, Hipp., Polyb.,
Diod., Jos., ^EL, etc.); /car-e^-ouo-tdfoj (only N. T.); Kar-oTTpl^co
WORD-FORMATION 165
WORD-FORMATION 167
WORD-FORMATION 171
god given to a man, though Blass doubts it^; Z-quds (Tit. 3 13) is :
WORD-FORMATION 173
(Ro. 16 14) is: derived from narpo/Stos; 2tXas (Ac. 15:22, etc.) is
Sanskrit skdnddmi, 'to dart/ 'to leap.' The Latin has it in scando,
de-scendo. The termination -ak-qdpov is possibly the suffix —rpov
{-dpov) for instrument and aKav8-a\a{ri). The form (TKavdaXrj occurs
in Alciphro, of which (7Kav8-aXo-v is simply the neuter variation.
XkclvS-oXo-v occurs first in the LXX as a translation for TiJpi^a or
iiiu:p)a, 'a noose,' 'a snare,' as in Ps. 69 (68) : 23. It was the trap-
impediment; then a stumbling-block or any
stick, the trap, the
person who was an 13, So
occasion of stumbling, as in Josh. 23 :
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-d-
mi, '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 pointed out,' 'right' or 'justice'; dUrjv, 'after the way'
or 'like'; SeT^-is, 'a showing'; Sety-pa, 'something shown'; 5t/c-atos,
'a man who seeks to go the right way,' 'righteous'; 5iK-at6w, 'to
1 Hicks, CI. Rev., 1887, p. 43. See also Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk.
N. T., pp. 57-60. ,
WORD-FORMATION 175
declar-
make or declare one to be righteous'; 5tK-atw-(ns, 'the act of
ing one righteous'; diK-a'^-ixa, 'the thing declared to be right';
word. An-
various points of view must be observed with each
not be followed up is Xv-rpov (Mt.
other illustration that will
20 :28), dTTo-Xu-rpco-ots (Ro. 3 :24). The ideas of action, agent,
elXL-Kplv-aa, Kara-KpL-fxa,
&pa-KpL-(TLS, airo-Kpi-ixa, dvro-Kpi-ats, Std-zcpt-cns,
elXi-KpL-v-qs.
1
§ 149, new ed., 1904.
2 Cf. Skeat, Prin. of Eng. Etym., Ist Bcr. (Native Words, 1892); 2d ser.
attempted.
I. The Uncertainty of the Evidence. It is difficult to tell
177
178 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
copyists of the ancient Greek writings and of the N. T. Later
copyists reflect local types, some more conservative, some less so.
The law of life is best here, as always, without artificial impulse or
is the rule elsewhere. This is not mere itacism, but is also indi-
1
Hort, The N. T. in Orig. Gk., App., Notes on Sel. Read., p. 152. But
in the Intr. (p. 304) Hort is not willing to admit 'peculiarities of a local or
nature" in the N. T. Still Hort (Notes on Orth., p. 151)
strictly dialectic
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.,
p. 30G f.
N. T. Gk., p. 6 f.
''
Blass, Gr. of
3
lb., p. 7. Hort (p. 302 f. N. T. in Orig. Gk.) makes a
of the Intr. to the
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 "slov-
enly 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).
180 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
the vernacular kolvt] of the first century a.d. The Syrian class, for
instance, reads Kairepvaovn, not Ka4)apvaoviJ.. But do the MSS.
which give us the pre-Syrian types of text preserve the auto-
graphic orthography? The fourth century is a long time from the
first and the presumption might seem to be to some extent against
ings in the uncials were current in the Apostolic age and were the
most trustworthy even if sometimes doubtful. "Absolute uni-
formity belongs only to artificial times," Hort^ argues, and hence
it is not strange to find this confusion in the MSS. The confusion
existed in fact in the century a.d. and probably the auto-
first
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 LXX MSS. see Swete, O. T. in Gk. p. 300 f.
conclusion can be drawn ipso facto of the LXX, since it was trans-
lated (the Pentateuch certainly) some three centuries earlier than
the N. T. was written.
(d) The Papyri. They strengthen the 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
find almost anything. The case of eav = dv in relative clauses is
1
pp. 202 ff.
B. S., 2 prol.,
pp. 42 ff.
3
pp. 202 ff. On the whole subject of the difficulty of N. T. orthog.
B. S.,
see W.-Sch., pp. 31 ff. Deiss. (B. S., p. 180) is clearly right in denying a
"N. T. orthography" save as individual writers, as now, have their peculiar-
ities. For general remarks about vowel changes in LXX MSS. see Swete,
O. T. in Gk., p. .301 f.; Thack., Gr., vol. I, pp. 71-100; Ilelbing, Gr., Laut- u.
Wortl., pp. 3-14.
••
Nicklin, CI. Rev., 1900, p. 115, in review of Rutherford's A Chap, in
the Hist, of Annotation, 1905. ^ Cf. Bekker, Anec. Gr., vol. II, p. 783.
182 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
tween long and short vowels, as indeed was never done in the
case of t and v. The Ionic invented^ 12 for long o. Before the
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
is very common e thus used as long
in the early inscriptions to see
and o likewise, as in hat and
Indeed e sometimes represented
ros.
Bd. I, pp. 39 ff.; Earle, Names of the Orig. Letters of the Gk. Alph. (Class-
Papers, 1912, pp. 257 ff.); Flin.-Pet., Form, of the Gk. Alph. (1912). But
Sir Arthur Evans gets the Gk. Alph. from Crete.
2 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 10.
* Telfy, Chron. und Topog. d. griech. Ausspr. etc., 1893, p. 39. See also
Larsfeld, Griech. Epig., 1892, pp. 494 ff.; King and Cookson, Sounds and
Inflex. in Gk. and Lat., 1888. « K.-Bl., Tl. I, Bd. I, p. 115 f.
^ Hirt, Handb. der griech. Laut- u. Formenl., pp. 115, 119. Vk is the form
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS 183
in Doric and BcEotian, while ye is found in the Ionic, Attic and Cypriote
(Meister, Griech. Dial., Bd. II, p. 29).
* Deiss., B. S., p. 182, gives ivyapias in a pap. (iv/A.D.).
2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 20. Cf. Note in W.-Sch., p. 50; Thack., pp. 82, 135;
Mays., p. 14.
3 According to Phrynichus (Rutherford, New Phryn., p. 204) both of these
words are eo-xaTcos /3dp/3apa.
^ Moulton, Prol., p. 46.
* Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 20.
6 For assimilation between a and e in modern Gk. dialects see Dictcrich,
lb.
Unters. etc., pp. 272, 274. In mod. Gk. vernacular a frequently displaces
initial e or o. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 14.
' 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.
8
Moulton, Prol., p. 46. For further evidence see Cronert, Mem. Graeca
9
Hercul., 1903, p. 199. In the Apostolic Fathers^ and the N. T. Apoc. rkaatpa
and TtaaepcLKovTa are common as well as 'eKad<iplad-q (Reinhold, De Graicitate
Patr. Apostol. etc., p. 38 f. On the whole subject of a and e in the papjTi see
careful discussion of Mayser, Gr., pp. 54-60, where he mentions tKoLo}, kyyapiUii,
(wtXevcraffOaL (for similar confusion of aorist and fut. inf. see eK(t>ev^acrOai, 2 Mace.
9 : 22 V). Tkaffipa. and TeaaepaKovra are very common also in the LXX MSS.
Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. LXX,
Thack., Gr., p. 62 f. This spelling occurs as
p. 5;
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."
184 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
down,' not 'seized'). Both occur in the LXX. The Attic forms
^tdXTj, vaXos are retained in the N. T. (as in LXX) rather than the
Ionic and vernacular kolvt] forms in e, a mark of the influence of
the literary^ kolvt].
Some 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-
vaovjjL is the Syrian reading for (W. H.). So W. H. read
Kacfjappaov/j,
MaXeXeTyX in Lu. 3 37, not MeX. (Tisch.) and Na^awTjX. SeXa^tiyX (in-
: ,
ToXoyew. ABK and twice 'J»{ and many cursives have vrpos KoXao-o-aeTs
1 Dieterich Unters.etc., p. 70. Cf. Thack., Gr., vol. I, p. 75 f. So AaXfxarla
in 2 Tim. 4 : though C has AeXi^. as Lat. has both. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
10,
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.
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS 185
The N. T., like the LXX, has Kalw and /cXatco, though the Ptole-
maic papyri rarely have Kdco and k\6.w.
d and av. In Lu. 2 1 J<CA have Kyovarov instead of khyohaTov.
: '
Greek we have avros (aftos) and dros (in Pontus) , whence comes
TO (not the article).^ The examples of 'Ayovaros and dros {aroyev-
vrjTou once) in the papyri are very common.-' Thackeray (Gr.,
p. 79) finds no instances in the LXX.
1 Hort (Notes on Orth., p. 152) compares ixkaa^ov, and Blass (Gr., p. 21)
necraffTvXiov. Mero^v {fxera^v) is in 1 Clem, and Barn. (Reinhold, De Graec,
p. 40; . Cf Mayser, Gr., p. GO f ., oXXot for aXXot. Illiterate scribes confused
.
a and o,a and e in the LXX (as ixiTo^v) and in the pap. (Thack., Gr., p. 77).
2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21.
' Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 151. W.-Sch., p. 51, compare KaTa-4>ayas and
Karoi-^ayai as parallel. Cf. Meistcrh., Gr., p. 17.
« Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 31, 1904, p. 107. ^ Gr. etc., p. 91 f.
6 Gr. etc., p. 61. Cf. also Dieterich, Unters. etc., p. 78. ProL, p. 47.
^
» Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 33; 1904, p. 107. He quotes Laurent (B.C.IL,
1903, p. 356) us saying that this phenomenon was very common in the latter
half of i/u.c.
186 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
reads AtXa/xtrat in Ac. 2 9, from fi^"!?, the rest 'EX. The author-
:
1 W.-Sch., p. 47.
2 Notes on Orth., p. 150. Cf. on at and e, Mayser, Gr., p. 107.
»
3 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 9. W.-Sch., p. 47.
5 'Ett' d;'d7Kais "Alexandrian only" according to Hort, Notes on Orth.,
p. 151.
« lb.
^ lb.Cf the Western Kaivo4>o:vlas for Kevfxjxj^via^ in 1 Tim. 6 20. In 1
. :
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.
€ and T|. Numerous examples of long e occur in the inscriptions
like Here (fjLTjTe).^ These changes are probably all analogical and
in eand 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.
4). UXkov is common in the N. T. Apoc. (Reinhold, De Graec. Patr. Apost. etc.,
p. 40). Cf. Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 40 f. On the whole subject of e
and 6t in the pap. see Mayser, Gr., pp. 67-73. They are very numerous indeed,
these changes in the pap., both ways. * Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22.
HeUen.], p. 149).
.
-77jua (Mayser,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
like eirieeixa, Trpoadeixa, etc.^ The interchanges between and et, tjl 77
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
rkpros for tp'ltos, and the Thessalian Olos for Beds. It is a Doric
the papyri,^ especially in the case of XeTtajv, which is also Xeyedov and
even X€7etcb;', not to mention a genitive \eyLOPo:s (o and co having
the same sound). AeyLOiv is the reading of the best N. T. MSS.
1 Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 108. Cf. also Moulton, Prol., p. 46, and
Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., pp. has good discussion of this short-
47 ff.,
etc., have eav, but NBC iiv and accepted by W. H.) 16 23 (BACD, ; :
AD have first eav and NAD second). In Ac. 9 2 only NE have iiu :
papyri save from 100 b.c. to 200 a.d. In the Magnesian inscrip-
tions^ 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.^
under av and eav should be exactly reversed. "Av = ka.v ('if') is rarely found
in the pap. also. Moulton (CI. Rev., 1901, p. 434) gives av fxi) airobun. (AP 43,
ii/B.c). Cf. also CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32; Mayser, Gr., p. 152 f. Mayser gives
exx. of edv= av and of av = tav. ^ Prol., p. 43; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32, etc.
Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 68. See Gregory, Prol. (Nov. Test. Gr.), p.
*
Indeed Attic does not contract ea with exception of kav= ^v.^ But
cdi'= modal av is found in Xen. Mem., w eau apuoTTy, in Lysias,
oOs kav ^ovK-qQdaLv, etc. (see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 421). This
use of kav occurs over sixty times in the N. T. Examples occur in
late Greek of el — eav as well as — ei av, instead of kav. Cf Rein- .
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. tj
* Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 29. Cf. also Thumb, Ilellon., p. 138. In Bcrotia
also 77and i interchange in ii/B.c. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 41). Maj'ser (Gr., p. 82)
cites from a Horn. pap. of i/B.c. ^^iice for WrjKe, and per contra (p. 84) a<j)r)KeTo.
^ Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 47. He gives iwii for iirl from a Byz.
inscr.
' De Grace. Patr. etc., p. 41. C"f. also Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inselir., p. 34 f.
192 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
some cursives have a-qpiKos (like Jos, and others), and still others
avpiKos.^ Indeed in 1 Pet. 2 3 for xPW^os L and many cursives :
5 Perg. Inschr., p. 47. Cf. also p. 56. See numerous exx. of this change in
Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 47 f.
(Notes on Orth., p. 15) shows that aireipos (not airripos) is read in Herod,
i. 32.
^ ProL, p. 46; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 33. See also Thackeray, p. 83.
8
OS av dfxoXoyriaei, 2 Cor. 12 21
fxi) TaireLPuaei, Ro. 3
:
4 (Ps. 51 6) :
:
';
W.-Sch., p. 47. Moulton (Prol., p. 16S) woul.l take indifTerently (nrhy,,
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.
194 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
T] and T). Irrational Iota. The iota subscript was iota adscript
till the twelfth century a.d., but as early as the third century B.C.
\ol yap x^P''^ Tov I ypa^ovai ras Sotikcls, Kal fK/3d\Xoi»(n 8e to Wos 4>^(nKriv airlav
ovK exop. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 29 f. Schweizer (Perg. Inschr., p. 47)
cites T'fiiv evvoiav. ^ Introd. to N. T. Gk., p. 314.
6 Mayser, Gr., p. 121, finds no i with av in the pap. ' Prol., pp. 49, 168, 187.
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS 195
subscript not yet, of course) does not appear in the great uncials
save 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-
pyri,2 as eUrjc or dKrj. Blass^ would also restore t to avTLTrepa(a).
He doubts if t was written in such new optative forms as Scotjj/
KABCL, by K
and most cursives Syr^<=^ Cop. In 1 Pet.
etc., rjfxlv
see under (c). For irrational iota see also Infinitive under Verb.
The papyri show it in queer forms like aXrjdiJL, 'KkycoL, P. Oxy. 37
(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
persistent to the present day. The inscriptions give numerous
examples^ in the fifth century B.C., such as airoKTivt], 'E7ra</)p65etTos.
This was apparently the beginning i" of itacism which was extended
to V, 7], and then to 77, ol, vl. Jannaris" thinks that the introduc-
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 7.
' The LXX phenomena are Bimilar. Cf. Helbing,
Griech. d. LXX, pp. 3 ff.
* Hatz., Einl. in neugr. Gr., p. 304.
* Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 48. « Ilcllen., p. 171.
Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 310. On the subject of -q and v sec Maj^ser,
^
that time et was pronounced hke t, and was taken by many, not
77
1 K.-Bl., p. 131. Mayser (Gr., pp. 87-94) has a full discussion of the prob-
lem in the pap. of the first tliree centuries B.C. and finds that in Egypt the
pronunciation of et closely approached that of t.
* Hellen.,
p. 172. The next most common interchange of vowels in the
N. T. MSS. are ai and e, and t or «, ot and v (Warfield, Text. Crit. of the
77
very common in the best MSS. 'II/xeTj/ and v/jLeXv are rarely seen,
however. 'A^elvr], FaXetXata, 'EXa/jLelTrjs, Aevelr-qs, A€V€ltlk6s, Xelap,
'NLvevdrrjs, IletXaros, '^ap.apelTrjs all arc found, as well as rpaTrefetrT/s,
etc. This word thus illustrates well the common 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
(e) The Changes with o. For changes with a see under (a),
1 lb., p. 84.
^ Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 28 f.
3 Hellen., pp. 139, 193 ff. Cf. Kretschmer, Einl. in d. Gesch. d. griech.
Spr., p. 225 f. Croncrt (Mem. Grace. Hercul., p. 21 f .) gives exx. in Hercul.
pap. Cf Mayser, Gr., pp. 100-103, for exx. like m\os, ^vjiUov,
.
etc., in the pap.
< Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22. In Athens before 403 B.C. o stood for
o, 03, ov (Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 24).
6 Lobeck,
p. 235; The New. Phryn., p. 310. Cf. K.-Bl., I, p. 140 f., for this
change in Old Attic and New Ionic. The N. T. Apoc. (Reinhold, Do Grace,
etc., p. 41) has exx. hke i^oU/jL-nv as the mod. Gk. vernac. (Thumb,
Nougr.
Volksspr., p. 6). Cf. Buresch, Phil. l\, 89. Most common bet. vi/iii u.c. ace.
and (0. Originally o represented both the short and long sounds,
so that it was easy with careless pronunciation for more or less con-
fusion to exist after co came into use. The Boeotian Pindar, for
instance, has Aidowaos instead of Aiowaos.^ The New Ionic ^orj
(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
of these two vowels was indiscriminate in the more ilHterate
vernacular.^ The confusion was earliest in Egypt, but the Attic
inscriptions kept the distinction well 100 a.d. The early un-
till
of o and CO in the Ptol. pap. of iii/s.c, but seventy in the next two.
6 lb. Cf. Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., p. 19 f.
6 Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 64.
» Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 95. Cf. Thumb, Hellen., pp. 143, 172.
108.
8 Reinhold, De Graec. Patr., p. 41, and Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p.
9 Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 309.
.
Trpoi'juos (J as. 5:7), Ztolkos (Ac. 17: 18),^ avKop-opea, not -/xcopea (Lu.
19 :
4), xp^o4)Lh.eTr]s according to W. H. and not xP^o4>eL\eTr]s (Soden)
5t' 6v. In Rev. 4 7 f ex^^v, not exov (Soden), is read by the best
: .
serves that B occasionally divides thus v/i6s at end of a hne and so practically
A and D.
9 K.-Bl., I, p. 135. Common in mod. Gk. (Thumb, Handb., p. 8).
'" Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 70 f
" P. 52. Reinhold (De Grace. Patr. Apost., p. 41) gives similar exx. TIwkv-
pOivra appears in Egyp. pap. (B. M., vol. II, cUv). Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 99 f.
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS 203
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
more likely due to confu-
Rev. 2 17 and A in 2 7, a
:
change :
orthographical problem.
not essentially altered by this incidental
(0and (ou. Lachmann, Tregelles, W. H. all write cou in Moivarjs,
(Fritzsche,
but Thayer urges that the word is a trisyllable Mc^mrjs
Cf.
Gesenius, Tisch., Soden). The Ionic eoovrov is a
trisyllable.
diphthong wu
Mayser, Gr., p. 138. Blass^ indeed says that the
is non-existent in the N. T. as in
the Attic. The Text. Rec.
the Antiquities,
reads Ucoarjs, following Strabo and Josephus in
though in the and Josephus elsewhere we
LXX have McouaTjs.
1
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 10.
- Schwcizor, Perg. Inschr., p. 100.
3 Thumb, Ilollcn., p. 237. C^f. also ih., p. G3. For the mod. Gk. contrac-
tion sec p. 249. Cf. K.-Bl., Bd. I, pp. 201-21S.
Iiisclir., pp. 68
Schwcizor, Perg. Insdir., pp. lOUlT.; Nachiu., Magn.
ff.
*
^ See Deiss., B. S., p. 183, for pap. illustrations of TreTf, irlv, ratietov. Moul-
ton, Prol., p. 45, calls this coalescence of two successive sounds "a universal
i
law of Hellenistic phonology." Cf. for the LXX Thack., Gr., pp. 22, 63 f., 98.
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS 205
unite with the preceding vowel. These marks are found in the
oldest N. T. MSS. with such words as aXXryXouta (Rev. 19 1; :
etc., but cf. Allen, Harvard Studies in Class. Philol., ii, 1891, pp.
Kail'), so W. H. Katj'dj' (not Ka'ivav nor -ol/jl), Aeveir-qs and not AevLTrjs
250 B.C. is the only form in the Attic ^ and Ionic ^ inscriptions.
The augment, however, is always r]. Cronert^ finds e^eXco after
consonants. The kolvti does not follow the Ionic in the use of
Ketvos for eKelvos. Aphseresis is frequent* in the modern Greek
vernacular, KeZ and e/cet, 8ev for ov8ev, etc. But the N. T. has
only kxdks (so LXX) in the best MSS. (cf. Jo. 4 : 52 kVABCD;
Ac. 7:28 NBCD; Heb. 13:8 ^<ACD), the usual Attic form,
though the papyri sometimes have x^« instead of the common
hxOes. The N. T. does not have Svponai, KeXXco, (xeiponaL, where
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 :
€1, ixT)), etc. But the harsher hiatus like kblboTo aurw would be
avoided by the literary kolvt] writers as well as by the Atticists.
The inscriptions and the papyri show far less concern about hia-
tus than do the literary writers of the Koivi]. As might be expected
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
this situation in
of thewords in the later language. Indeed he thinks that only
one^ book in the N. T. (Hebrews) shows the care of an artistic
writer in the avoidance of hiatus. By omitting the O. T. quota-
tions and chapter 13 he finds that hiatus where there is a pause
is a matter of indifference, as also with nal. He finds fifty-two
other instances of hiatus, whereas Romans goes beyond that num-
ber as far as ch. 4 But even then Blass has to admit cases
: 18.
14-8 32 has many non-elisions of dXXd, and the elision varies be-
:
W. H. put 171^1^ 5' av in the margin, text iiv. U kav (so Tisch.,
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 :
Iblav {Kad' I8iap), Kar' oIkov, fxer' e/ioD, Trap' o:v, vcj)' r]ij,oov' (vficou), vir'
likewise blends only occasionally with eav in the sense of and if, '
Mk. 5:28; 6:56; 2 Cor. 11 16.^ Cf. mv Kal 'eav (Jo. 8:14, : —
16). The article suffers crasis very often in the older Greek, but
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,
: : ;
See Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 18, and W.-Sch., p. 38; Von Soden, I, p. 1380.
8
This last, though called double yafx/j-a, perhaps represents the Phoe-
nician vau. On the use of digamma in Homer see Kiihner-Blass.^
It is a half-vowel in fact, as t and v are partly consonant in force,
like Latin u {v) and i (j).^ The dropping of digamma affected
many words, some of which have the rough breathing, though
Thumb and Moulton^ think that this is an accident simply, and
^
and it was even inserted (irrational 7).^ In general in the kolvt] the
1 Gk. Gr., p. 21.
Cf. Jann., Hist. 2 jb. Cf. Mcisterh., Gr. etc., p. 3.
' 24 f. On the whole subj. of changes in the pap. see Mayser, Gr.,
lb., p.
^ ProL, p. 44. But Sommer, Gr. Lauistudien, shows tluit tlie rough
breathing is sometimes due to digamma.
* Thumb, Ilcllen., p. 187 f.; cf. p. 134 f. for mtervocal 7.
210 A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
not apKTov. This form is found also in the and in inscrip- LXX
tions of the first or second century a.d.^ W. H., following B and
J<, also (save in Mk. 3 22) read jSeefe/SouX instead of ^eeX^e^ovX.
:
manson^ states clearly the facts. The Ionic as early as the fifth
century B.C. used the 711^ forms, and the Doric shows the same
situation in the fourth century. Even in Athens the jlv forms
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
and KKavda (Ac. 27 16) represent two different islands near each
:
1 Inschr., p. 108. Cf. also Hoffmann, Griech. Dial., Bd. Ill, p. 173;
Magn.
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.;
Reinhold, De Graec. Patr. etc., pp. 46-48. In the LXX yivoixat and yivuaKOi
are uniform. Cf. Holbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 21. Thack. (Gr., p. Ill f.) finds
6 Thumb, Hellen., pp. 20 ff.; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., pp. 122 ff.;
See
Nachm., Magn. Inschr., pp. 88 ff.; Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., pp. 74 ff.
Cf. Mayser, Gr., pp. 211-219. For the LXX see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp.
14-16. 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
true Pt()l(Mnai(! spelling. A curiously has usually yif-rjtxa and B yffvrii^a.
appear 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,
dvaprjOii'Tts, etc.). Cf. Reinhold, De Graec. etc., p. 42, for exx. of ipixraro, etc.
212 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
that the Syriac versions use S4?3in"i for 'Fufirj, though some Attic
awoplxpavTas, and in Lu. 19 35 all but the Syrian class read ewL-
:
pl\j/avTes and NAB have the same form in 1 Pet. 5:7. In Mt. 9 36 :
the Neutral (and Alexandrian) class has epin/xevoL, the Syrian epp.,
while D
has pepL/j.^.-. In Mt. 15 30 ^^DL read eptxpav, while only :
the Syrian class has lppL\pav, and so in Ac. 27: 19. But in Lu. 17: 2
'ippiTTTai is supported by all MSS. save 11 and p^'=^ In Jo. 19 23 :
2 21 kwipairTH is read by all the best MSS. and the Syrian class
:
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.
:
2 5;
: Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 160), but Winer-Schmiedel
cf. (p. 58)
found only Mvpa in the inscriptions. Uapapvcipev (Heb. 2 1) : is read
by all the pre-Syrian classes. UappTjala, Tapprjcna^ofxat. (from Tav-
priaia), not Tvapt]-, is the usual reading in the N. T. (see Additional
Notes), as occasionally in the inscriptions.^ W. H. read ivvppbs in
yivonai), 'the fruits of the earth/ as k rod yePTjuaros ttjs a/xTeXov (Mk.
14:25). Phrynichus* condemns the use of ykppriiia = Kapirbs (Dio-
dorus, Polybius, etc.). Root of both verbs is yep. This distinction
between yhrjfxa and y'tvvr}pi.a appears in the papyri also, though ytp-q-
dePTa 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. :
1 Tho inscr. show irvpd^ also (Dittcnb., 177. 15; 748. 20).
2 Cninert, Mem.
Graec. ilercul., p. 76. ^ Qr. of N. T. Gk., p. 11.
* Rutherford, New Phryn., p. 348.
s
Dciss., B. S., pp. 109 f., 184. 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.
(6). Thumb, Ilellen., p. 22, argues for (ifi as the correct form from mod. Gk.
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.
214 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Latin grahatarius (CIGII 2114 d i)- {^> however, has 10/11 times
the strange form Kpa^aKTos {-tt- only in Ac. 5 15). Aaaea (Ac.
:
Only the Western class has TX-quvprjs for irXrjiJLiJLvprjs in Lu. 6 48. :
read TpwyvXiou, not -vWtov nor -tXtoj'. Some Latin MSS. read
hysopus for vaawTos in Jo. 19 : 29 and Heb. 9 : 19. ^vyeXos, not
-eXXos, is read in 2 Tim. 1 : 15 by all save A and most cursives.
Cf. ^vyeXios in CIGn 3027.
The Hebrew and Aramaic proper names call for special re-
mark. "Avms = '\-^ (Josephus "Avavos) may be due to the drop-
ping 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
BapaajSas (from s^nri ^?, 'son of Saba').^ The Text. Rec. has Tepr]-
aaper (W. H. Tevvr]aapeT) in Mk. 6 53, elsewhere -vv-.^ V6p.oppa is
:
(Lu. 3 32, etc.) comes from ^"43^. The N. T. and 1 Mace, have
:
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.,
p. 26 f. * Blass,"Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 328, quoting E. Lippett.
6 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 159. ' W.-Sch., p. 57; E. Bibl., p. 2504 f.
ian class reads Meaias in Jo. 1:41 (42); 4:25. Sdppa, Heb.
n-iic (feminine of ^ia), is read by MSS. generally in N. T., though
L has ^apas in Ro. 4:19 (vulg. Sarae). All the MSS. have vv
in Xovaavpa (Lu. 8: 3) after the Heb. nr^^T:; ('a lily')- Xappav is
supported by most MSS., though and a few cursives have D
Xapap in Ac. 7:2 after the Hebrew T)n. The has Xappap LXX
and the Greek writers (Strabo, etc.) have Kdppat, Latin Carrhae.
Doubling of the Aspirate. As a rule the aspirated mutes (0, x,
(f>)
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
'Aix(t)ia. In Mk. 7 34 all MSS. have e(j)cj)ada (or €</)0e0d) save A
:
Hebrew ^"^QP, 'precious stone ').^ The LXX MSS. show the same
variations. Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 121.
Assimilation of Consonants. In the early period of the
(e)
ToK \6yov, Top 'F68lov, eX Aea^co, ea XlSuvi, etc., are very common.
Similar phenomena occur in the kolvtj inscriptions, though the
failure to assimilate is far more noticeable. See list ofexamples
in Nachmanson.^ As a rule the papyri do not assimilate such
cases.^ 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 in-
stance, ky yaarpi in A (Lu. 21 23), ey Kavd in AF (Jo. 2 11), e^i
: :
AE, etc. (Lu. 2 : 5), avfx iraaiv in EG, etc. (Lu. 24 : 21). The earlier
papyri (up to 150 b.c.) show a good deal 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 assimila-
tion 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 ex-
amples 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. :
8 lb. In general see Wecklein, Curae Epigr. ad Gr. Graecae etc., 1869,
p. 47 f.
' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 12. Cf. Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., p. 61.
8 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 149. See for LXX
Thackeray, pp. 132 ff.
^ lb. For the inscr. see Nachm., Magn., p. 104 f. The Coptic shows similar
variation. For the loss of final u in mod. Gk. vernac. see Thumb, Handb., p. 24 f.
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS 217
('lord of the forest'), while the Text. Rec. /SeXtaX is from "2?^^|i
('worthlessness').^ The variation between pa and pp, Moulton^ ob-
serves, runs 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)
prefers aparjv except apprju perhaps 4/4 times in Paul. In the Gos-
pels and Acts dapaos and the two imperatives Oapaei, Oapae'lre are
uniform, but in 2 Cor. (5 :
6, 8; 7: 16; 10 : 1, 2) and Heb. (13 :
6)
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,
inscriptions and N. T. MSS. all unite in using aa as the rule,
though all occasionally have tt. It does not seem possible to
reduce the usage to an intelligent rule.'' 'EKirXrjTTOfxevos is ac-
cepted by W. H. in Ac. 13 12, elsewhere aa. Both eXaaacov :
(Jo. 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 :
(2 Cor. 12 13) on the one hand and riTTrjjxa (1 Cor. 6:7; Ro.
:
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; Thack., Gr.,
pp. 100-124.
2 Cf. Rutherford, New Phyrn., p. 14.
3 Cf. a^^ecTTos in N (Mk. 9 : 43), iyvw^ixhos, etc., in pap. (W.-Sch., p. 59).
* Notes on Orth., p. 148.
6 Deiss., B. S., p. 185. 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.
;
and 2 Pet. 2:21 (doubtful). Cf. arifxepou for the Attic Trjfiepou.
"OpvL^ (Lu. 13:34) Western by Hort, though Moulton^
is called
observes that it has some papyrus support and is like the modern
Greek (Cappadocian) dpvix.
(g) Aspiration of Consonants. There is besides some fluc-
tuation in the aspiration of consonants. See under (d) for the
double aspirates Hke 'k^cfila, etc. This uncertainty of aspiration is
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
Ac. 1:19, ^W
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, :
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
:
:
1 Cor. 13 : 2 (kVABCL) ;
fxrjdh in Ac. 27 : 33 (N*AB). But k^ovdeveo:
in the LXX and the N. T. prevails, though W. H. (after BD) read
e^ov8€P7]drj in and KD read the Attic TravSoKdov, -evs
Mk. 9 : 12. N
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-.
:
sonants also. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 22 ff.; Thack., Gr., pp. 134 ff.
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, else- :
where 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
222 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
IIH.^ But certainly the rough breathing was in early use as the
1 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 63. The marking of the rough breathing was
general in the earlier forms in vii/A.D., ib., p. 65.
2 Cf. Beldcer, Anec, II. 692, and Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 63.
» Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 310. MSS. of the Gk.
Cf. also Sitterley, Praxis in
Test., 1898, p. 32. See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 25 f., for remarks on breath-
ings in the LXX
MSS., where ^olic and Ionic psilosis occur in iw' 65o0
/car' «Va as well as exx. of aspirated consonants like KaO' 6(p0a\novs, Kad' kviavrbv,
k(f)' eUev, not to mention ovk kcopaKaaiu and ovx l5ov. For further remarks on
breathings in the LXX see Swete, O. T. in Gk., p. 302.
* Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., pp. 81, 91. The stop for the opening of the
glottis (lenis) easilybecomes breathed (rough). Cf. also Thumb, Unters.
ijber d. Spir. Asper. im Griech., 1888, p. 63.
^ Cf. Thumb., p. 73 f. The Laconic Gk. used H in interaspiration as well
as at the beginning (ib., p. 8). Dawes (Pronun. of the Gk. Aspirates, 1894,
not able to reach a final decision as to whether the Gk. aspirates are
p. 103) is
genuine aspirates Uke the Sans, according to Brugmann, Curtius, etc.
« Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 91. On the whole subject of the aspirated
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS 223
and the LXX has several similar instances," not to mention one
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.
2 R. Weiss, De Dig. etc., 1889, p. 47. Cf. also Panes, De Dig. Hesiodea
Quest., 1887, p. 48.
' Cf. Sommer, Griech. Lautstudien, 1905, p. 2. On metathesis in aspiration,
aa Ixco {ix'^), see Meistcrh., p. 102, exx. of txw in Attic inscr. v/b.c. See also
article by Pernot in Rev. des fit. Grq., 1906, pp. 10-23, on La Metathese
dans les Dial, de Chio.
* Schweizor, Perg. Inschr. etc., pp. 116 ff. The Attic had only i5ios, but
ioprij (Meistcrh., p. 87). * Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 83.
• Cronert, Mem. Grace. Hercul., p. 152 f.
Lu. 1 25. Gregory* gives many examples of d(/)-, e^-, Kad- with
:
once, inB 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. no-
where accept it, not even when B combines with }< or D. }<B have
it inMt. 24 3. The form Kad' IBlav is common in the kolpt] inscrip-
:
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. :
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 ex-
planation in some eases. * Prol., p. 91.
^ Cf. Intr. to 313 f., where Hort really favours ovx 'lov8. and
Gk. N. T., p.
the rough breathing for all the forms of 'lovdas, 'lovdalos, etc. For the varia-
tions in the LXX MSS. see Thack., p. 125.
6 Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 312.
ical errors, though they are common in the LXX and in the in-
scriptions.^ N.T. MSS. (late cursives) even have atrew, ocrrecbi',
o-x\os, etc. For nrjdels, .oWeis see this chapter iii (/), the Inter-
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. dis-
agree and are not consistent, but Blass calls the result of this
procedure "strange." Hence Hort argues for "A/SeX (,1), 'A/3pad/i
(J>{), "Aya^os (J/), "Ayap (n), 'A/ceXSa/xdx (H), aXkrj'KovLa (H), 'AX^atos
(n), ^Avaulas (il), "Awa (H), 'Aperas (H), 'Apt^a^ata (H), "Ap Ma7ei5ci>j'
(n), 'E^3ep (p), 'E/3paTcs (p), 'E/3pats (;?), 'E^paiari {^),'' 'EXtcraTos (^),
'EXjua5d/i (X), eXcot (J<), 'E/Jixcop (Pi), 'Eudox (H, but 'Evccs, {<),'Epp(i/x
(n, but 'EaXei, N), Eua (H), ijXet (K), but "HXei (H), 'HXetas (X), "Up
(^), i;(r(rco7ros (N),^ o^aavva {r\) , '^o'rje (M). Hort^ gives, moreover,
the smooth breathing to all names beginning with *>
as 'llaalas.
Besides he considers it a "false association"^ to connect 'lepefiias,
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 {av- :
1 Cf. W.-Sch., p. 40 f.
2 On
the whole matter see Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 144 f.; W.-M., p. 183 f.;
accent. The
ancients were interested in Greek accent. Herodian
in his KaOoKiKri Tpoaudla investigated the accent of 60,000 words,
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 Alex-
andrian 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
with the centuries.^ There is the Harris papyrus of Homer in
the first century a.d. which has accents, and clearly the word had
the accent in pronunciation like English long before it was writ-
ten out. After the fourth century a.d. the use of accentual
rhythm in Greek in place of quantitative rhythm had a tendency
' Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 66. Cf. also pp. 507 ff. on the Origin and History
of Accent.
2 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,
of Philol., 1883); Wack., Beitr. zur Lchre vom pjiech. Akzent; Brusmann,
Griech. Gr. (1900), pp. l.Wff.; K.-Bl., I, pp. 317 ff.; for further ht. see Brus-
mann above. On accent changes in mod. Gk. see Ilatz., Einl., pp. 418-440;
Thumb, Hundb., p. 28 f. For the accent in the LXX see llelbing, Gr. d.
Sept., p. 24. Here the same MSS. present the same problems that we have
in the N. T.
« Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 62. ^ Ricm. and Goclzer, Phonet., p. 77.
« Krumb., Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr., Kuhn's Zeitschr. fiir
Sprachl., 1885, p. 521. Cf. also Ilatz., Einl. etc., p. 418; Chandler, Gk. Accen-
tuation, p. v; Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 150.
228 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
to make the accent rather more stable.^ "Of all the phonetic
pecuHarities of a language accent is the most important." ^ The
earlier use of accents 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 prose till the times of
minuscule writing," though Euthahus (a.d. 396) made use of
them in his edition of the N. T.^ The Christian hymns early
show signs of changing from tone (pitch) to stress as is the rule in
modern Greek. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 6.
(6) Significance of Accent in the Kolvij. In Greek it is
pitch, not stress, that is expressed by the accent, though in mod-
ern 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. "Had-
ley 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 ac-
'
'
centus) 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
"incompatibility." The Harris papyrus of Homer even accents
every syllable in each word.^*^ Then again " the accent of a sen-
tence is as much under the influence of a law of some kind as the
accent of the word." ^^ Language without accent or musical va-
the accented syllable was marked by the acute and all the unac-
cented 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 in-
was used for the acute when an oxytone word comes before
flection
another word (not enclitic), though this "grave" accent has the
pitch of the unaccented syllable. Similarly in contraction of two
syllables with acuteand 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
that the circumflex in pitch differed little, if any, from the acute.
The difference, for instance, between the acute in STjXoxrat and the
circumflex in dr]\u>aaL was not perceptible in sound.^ 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 in-
deed 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
dialects 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
' Jaiin., Hist. Gk. (!r., p. 6G. 2 lb., pp. 05, 68.
' Iladloy, Uber Wcscn und Thcorie der griech. Bcton., 1872, pp. 409, 415.
* Giles, Man. of Coinp. Philol., p. 9G. Giles thinks that words like ^tp6Mefla
originally had the accent further back. Cf. Rieni. and Goelzer, Phonet.,
p. 80, for Plato's word of 17 syllables and Aristophanes' word of 7S.
230 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
ing points call for remark, and Gregory ^ can be consulted for the
1 Henry, Comp. Gr. of Gk. and Lat., Elliott's transl., 1890, p. 93 f. Cf.
and XaiXai/' in Mk. 4 37. But eardrnt (Ac. 12 14) is right, though
: :
kirapai (Lu. 18:13), eTVL^avai (Lu. 1:79), TrpS^at (Ac. 26:9), but
TTtdo-at (Jo. 7 30).
: So KaToXvaai (Mt. 5 17), KaTtvOvvaL (Lu. 1 79) :
:
6p^<rKos; Idpcos (Lu. 22:44), not ISpcbs; ipapra (Mk. 1:7), not the
Attic ipapTa; Uos, not the Epic laos^; IxOvs (Mt. 7: 10), not IxOvs;
6<T(l>vs (Mt. 3:4), not dacjivs; laxvs, not iaxvs; KXets in nominative
singular (Rev. 9:1), though /cXeTs (I 18) and KXeldas (Mt. 16 19) : :
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); poyi- :
XdXos (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 : 32), not -koiixpIov, and Tpv^Xiov in Mk. 14 : 20
' Cf. W.-M., p. 58.
2 As shown in W.-M. (p. GO), the N. T. MSS. have la^,, not n<rco, thouf^li tij,
not es.
232 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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; </)Xi)apos
(1 Tim. 5 13), not (pXvapos. The compound adverbs eTrketm, i;7rep-
:
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.
elfii rather than dp-L (not elsewhere used in the N. T. save in com-
position with prepositions airo, els, k^, eirl, avv). In Mk. 13:28
and Mt. 24:32 W, H. have k^vrj (present active subjunctive),
not k'(/)uf] (second aorist passive subjunctive). In Lu. 19:29;
21 : 37 W. H. prefer 'EXatwj', not 'EXatwv (the correct text in Ac.
1 : 12, and possibly in Luke also according to the papyri, though
'EXatcom would be the form expected).'* In Mk. 4 : 8, 20, W. H. put
kv in the text and eV in the margin. "Ei^t, not kvl, occurs with ovk
several times, once (1 Cor. 6 : 5) ok 'hi kv. In Lu. 9 38, : W. H.
read eTL^Xeipai (infinitive), not eirl^XtxpaL (imperative). In 1 Cor.
5 W. H. read
: 11 fj
(subjunctive), not r) (conjunction as Rec). In
Ro. 1 30 W. H. : follow most editors in giving deoarvyels (pas-
sive), not deo(TTvyeLs (active sense of the adjective). In Mk. 5 : 29
all have the perfect iarai, not the present iarat. In Lu.
editors
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
have TLva, not rtm, but in Heb. 3 16 ripes, not Tives, and in 3 17 : :
5:36), Ibov TLves (Mt. 28: 11), 686v elaLv (Lu. 8: 12), aavveToi tare
(Mk. 7 18), yap : kare (Mk. 13 : 11), rat 0r?(7t (Ac. 10 : 31; 25 : 24).
However, plenty of cases call for accent on the enclitic, as^ for
example, in evpelp nvas (Ac. 19: 1) for emphasis, yap, 4)r]aiv (Heb. 8:5
and cf. Mt. 14 : 8; Ac. 25 : 5, 22; 26 : 25; 1 Cor. 6 :16; 2 Cor. 10 : 10)
for clearness in punctuation, Kal elaiv (Mt. 19 : 12 and cf. Ac. 5 25) :
for emphasis, deov eaph (1 Jo. 3:2), bird tlvC^v (Lu. 9 : 8) likewise,
ovK dpi (Jo. 1 : 21). In oTvov dpi (Jo. 7 : 34, 36) the accent is regular,
though some critics wrongly prefer dpi.
The use of eaTlv 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
:
kaxLv (Mt. 13:37, 39), Ka^ojs kariv (1 Jo. 3:2), etc. In some ex-
1 W.-M., p. 62.
234 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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
: : :
4 :3), '6ti (2 Th. 2 :4; Mk. 6 : 55; Heb. 11 6), but on karlv :
Tjxl/aTO }xov TLS, 10 : 29 tLs kariv ixov, Jo. 5 : 14 x^'^pov aoi tl, 8:31
jjiadrjTai nou eare, 12 : 47 kav tls /xov, 14 : 28 ne'i^wv /lov tOTLV, Ac. 2 : 25
8e^Lcov fjLov kcTTLu, 25 : 5 €t TL koTLv, 25 : 14 avi]p TLS kcTTLv, 1 Cor. 10 : 19
dbiSKbdvTOV TL tcxTLV and eiboSKbv t'l earLV, 11 : 24 tovto (xov kcxTLV,
accented, as kv aoi (Jo. 17 21), though ewpoadev ixov and ottio-co jiov :
With the prepositions usually e/ioO, not nov, occurs as 'eveKa eiJ.ov
(Mt. 5 only with irpos that we have much trouble.
: 11). It is
The N. T. have generally printed wpos at, but W. H. have
editors
that only in Mt. 25 39, elsewhere irpos ak as in Mt, 26 18. : :
Jo. 6 : 65; 7 : 37, etc., and where the "me" is emphatic in sense,
1 Cf. W.-Sch., p. 77.
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS 235
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
20). But we have BXdaros (Ac. 12 : 20), Atorpe^Tjs (3 Jo. 9), 'ETrai-
veros (Ro. 16:5), "Epaaros (16:23), 'Eppioykpr]s (2 Tim. 1 : 15),
EvTuxos (Ac. 20:9), KdpTros (2 Tim. 4 : 13), probably ' OviaL(i>opos
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 in-
flected Semitic words often throw the accent back, as "Afwros,
'Id/cw|3os, Adf apoj. Many of the Aramaic words accent the ultima,
as 'AjS^a, ToXyoda, Kop^av, 'EXcot, aajSaxdavei, etc. For further re-
marks on the subject see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 26-31. The
difficulties of the LXX translators are well illustrated here by
Helbing.
VI. Pronunciation in the Koivii. This is indeed a knotty
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 pronunciation as well as their
own spelling. 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
is an effort to represent the sound and is more or less
originally
successful, 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 intro-
duced Greek to the further West, studied in Italy and passed on
the Byzantine pronunciation. Erasmus is indirectly responsible
for the current pronunciation of ancient Greek, for the Byzan-
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
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.
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS 239
Ure, 'l<xa<xLV,
are the true forms which you
he must have said,
1 Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 103. Cf. also Ellis, Early Eng. Pronun.
2 "Gk. Pronun." in Ess. Philol. and Crit., pp. 128-140.
» Hatzidakis, Einl. etc.
' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 6 f.
* Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 34 f.
8 Nicklin, CI. Rev., Mar., 190G, p. 116. This is precisely
the objection that
brings against the ancient grammarians aa
Jannaris (Hist. Gk. p. Gr., 33)
the pro-
"post-Christian scribes" and unable to "speak with authority of
nunciation of classical Greek."
' Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 75. Cf. Oppcnhcim und Lucixs, Byz.
Giles,
Zeitschr., 1905, p. 13, for cxx. of phonetic .spelling.
240 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
would show it somewhat. As a matter
of fact the Boeotian dia-
lect contributed largely to the kolvt]
vernacular pronunciation (and
so the modern Greek) in points where the Boeotian differed radi-
cally from the old Attic.^ Boeotian Greek "modified its vowel-
system more than any other Greek dialect." ^ Thus already in
Boeotian at and e are confused and interchanged (yhrire, for in-
stance), 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-
linians, while Riemann and Goelzer^ the "Erasmians"
according to
are wholly right. 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
pronunciation of the vernacular kolvt] of the first century a.d.,
nor in the N. T. MSS. of the fifth century a.d. The papyri* and
the inscriptions of the time throw light on a good many points,
though not on all. But even here the illiterate papyri do not fur-
nish 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 subjunc-
tive), -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
is not the was done. On the other hand the modern Greek
way it
' On the para^aph soc Thompson, Handb. of Gk. and Lat. PaliroR.,
pp. G7 fT. Occasionally the double point (;) was used to close a paragraph.
2 Cf. Warfield, Text. Crit. of N. T., pp. 40 ff.
Tekda, 'high point') was a full stop; that on the hue (.) (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.^ Parenthetical
clauses were certainly used, which will be discussed elsewhere,
though no signs were used for this structure by the ancient
Greeks. W. H. represent the parenthesis either by the comma
(Ro. 1 13) or the dash with comma (1 Tim. 2:7). Instead of
:
The period (ireplodos) gives very Httle trouble to the modern edi-
tor, for it is obviously necessary for modern needs. Here the
editor has to make his interpretation sometimes when it is doubt-
ful, as W. H. give ev. 5 yeyovep h, not ev 6 yeyoveu. kv (Jo. 1:4). So
W. H. read dav/jLa^ere. 5td tovto Mcouo-tjs in Jo. 7 : 22, not davnai^ere
5id TOVTO. Moivarjs, etc. The colon (kcoXov),^ 'limb of the sentence'
formed a complete clause. See Jo. 3 31 for example of use of :
16, 18, 20, 27, 28) as Paul struggles with several long sentences,
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
: :
1 Thompson, Handb., etc., p. 81. So Suidas. The colon is the main semi-
division of the sentence, but mod. Eng. makes less use of all marks save the
period and comma.
2 W.-M., pp. 63, 07. » Thompson, Handb., etc., p. 07.
244 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
tion doubtful cases like Mk. 9 : 11, 28; Jo. 8:25; Ac. 9:27; 2
Cor. 3 : 14.^ As to the marks of dieeresis (") reference may be had
to the discussion of diphthongs and diaeresis in this chapter under
II (i). W. H., like other modern editors, Use the apostrophe (') (or
smooth breathing) to represent elision, as air' apxrjs (Mt. 24: 21) .^
The coronis is the smooth breathing used also to show
when crasis
has taken place, as in The hyphen, a long Kaixoi (Lu. 1:3).^
straight line, was used in the Harris-Homer MS. to connect com-
pound 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 :
where nrjTOTe), ixi) tov (Ac. 27 : 29), f^i] xws (1 Cor. 9 : 27, etc.), fXT]
Tts (1 Cor. 16 : 11, etc.). So also 8rj\ov 6tl in 1 Cor. 15 : 27, oo-rts
ovv (Mt. 18 : 4). But on the other hand W. H. print Slotl as well
as etre, ovTe, fxriTe, cicrre, Kalirep, ixrjrroTe (once), iJ,r]8eiroTe, jurjSeTrco,
ovSeiroTe, nrjKeTL, oi'KeTC, iirjirco, oviroo, fj.r]TLye, even iiriye (Mt. 6:1),
Kadd, KaQb, Kad6:s, KaBdirep, nadoTL, KadoXou, ihairep, ojael, wairepei (1 Cor.
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.
: : :
very clear principles in this matter can be set forth, and the effort
of Winer-Schmiedel ^ at minute analysis does not throw much light
on the subject.
(d) The Editor's Prerogative. Where there is so much con-
fusion, what is the editor's prerogative? Blass ^ boldly advances
1 W.-Sch., p. 35.
See this ch. ii (k) for discussion of elision. For origin and early use of
2
^ 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
Tisch. ran the particles together as one word. * P. 35.
CHAPTER VII
Space will not be taken for the inflection of the nouns and pro-
nouns, for the student of this grammar may be assumed to know
the normal Attic inflections. Aristotle ^ used the term " inflection "
(TTTcoo-ts) of noun and verb and even adverb, but practically inflec-
tion is appHed to nouns and conjugation (kXIctls priixa.TUiv = av^vyLa)
to verbs. Noun (ovo/jlo) does, of course, include both substan-
tive and adjective without entering the psychological realm and
affirming the connection between name and thing (cf. Plato's
Cratylus)
therefore the ancient Greeks did not have the benefit of our mod-
ern theories and rules, but inflected the substantives according to
now known to us. The various dialects exercised
principles not
great freedom also and exhibited independent development at
many points, not to mention the changes
in time in each dialect.
The threefold divisionpurely a convenience, but with this justi-
is
fication: the first has a stems, the second o stems, the third con-
sonant and close vowel (i, v) stems. There are some differences in
the suffixes also, the third declension having always the genitive
ending in -os. In the third declension especially it is not possible
to give a type to which all the words in all the cases and numbers
conform. Besides, the same word may experience variations.
Much freedom is to be recognized in the whole matter of the de-
clensions within certain wide limits. See metaplasm or the fluc-
tuation between the several declensions.
2. The Number of the Cases (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 Cases. This is called
for before the declensions are discussed. The term "case" (Trrcoo-ts,
' 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.
248 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Hadley, Ess. Philol. and Crit., Gk. Gen. or Abl., p. 52. Cf. also Miles,
1
Comp. Synt. 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
between the dative and the locative, between the locative and the instru-
mental" (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
iK-rds. Cf also ovpavo-de like coeli-tus.
.
* Hadley, Ess. Phil, and Crit.,
p. 52.
THE DECLENSIONS (kaIZEIS) 249
The Greek plural uses for all three cases either "the loca-
tive in -(TL or the instrumental forms in -ots."^ "The forms in
-ats, Latin -4s, from -o stems, are a new formation on the analogy
of forms from -o stems." ^ 'AdT]vr}aL is locative plural. In the
singular of consonant, and t i; stems, the locative ending -t is used
into CO. But a few distinct locative endings survive, like kei,
'ladjxol, o'lkol (cf. oLKcp), TToT, ctc. Thc Homeric infinitive 86ixev and
the infinitive like c{>epeLv are probably locatives also without the t,
6 Griech. Gr., 3. Aufl., p. 220. Cf. K.-Bl., II., pp. 301-307, for examples of
the survival of abl., loc. and in.str. forms in Gk. adverbs. Cf. also Moister,
Griech. Dial., II., p. 295, for survivals of instr. forms in Cypriotic dial, (ipa,
eLlXw^a). See Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., I. 'II., p. 194.
'
^Eolic and the New Ionic, and its use in the Attic was hmited
and
not consistent.^ The dual is nearly gone in the late Attic inscrip-
tions,^ while in the kolvt} it is only 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
occurs in the LXX
and the N. T. is 8vo (not 5uco) for all the cases
(as genitive in 1 Tim. 5: 19), save 8val{v) for the dative-locative-
instrumental, a plural form found in Aristotle, Polybius, etc., and
called a barbarism by Phrynichus.i^ Only in 4 Mace. 1 28 is :
Sept., p. 53. Cf. also C. and S., Scl. from the LXX, p. 25.
252 A GRAMMAR OF 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
of d/i^orepotand "two clear examples of it in NP 67 and 69
(iv/A.D.)."^ 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
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 differ-
ence of sex that grammatical gender^ arose. The idea of sense
gender continued, but was supplemented by the use of endings
for the distinction of gender. This personification of inanimate
objects was probably due to the poetic imagination of early peo-
ples, 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.^ Anal-
ogy 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 ex-
crescence 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,
like 6 7] TOLs, ovos, Beds, while others, applied to each sex, are called
epicene {eirlKOLvov) , like -q dXcoTrr?^, apKTos. In German we actually
have das Weib ('wife')!
(o) Variations in Gender. They are not numerous. 'H
a^vaaos (x^po) is a substantive in the LXX (Gen. 1 : 2, etc.) and
the N. T. (Lu. 8:31, etc.), else where soonly in Diogenes Laertes.
though the Western and Syrian classes give t6v dX. after Herod-
otus, and a few of the late MSS. to dX. In Rev. 8:116 (not 17)
a\J/tvdos is read, though K and some cursives omit the article, be-
etc., the common form in LXX, Luke and Paul) feminine be-
TOP neyav but Ji{ fem. (his) . The feminine is the common construc-
tion, but the masculine is found in LXX in Is. 63 2 only. At^os :
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 Jose-
: :
phus 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
: :
' Moulton, Prol., p. 60, but he adds "is explained by inscriptions." Cf.
Nachmanson, Magn. Inschr., p. 12(), for many exx.
2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 32. Cf. Ilort, Notes on Orth., p. IGO. Mk. and Jo.
have only t6 'lepoaoXvua and Mt. usually.
^ Mei.sterhans, Att. Inschr., p. 129.
* Cf. llort, Moulton (Prol., p. GO) fuuls Xtjuos
Notes on Orth., p. 157.
now masc. and now LXX
MSS. show similar variations. Cf.
fem. in the pap.
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
LXX, p. 27, for further exx.
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 32.
254 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
sio Isaiae ii. 12." ^ But jSdaX occurs "everywhere in the pro-
17
nsir, though the translators may have "interpreted their own Greek
the Attic after 400 b.c. Note also fjLafxwvd (Lu. 16 9). It is fre- :
here
(from -as, so Thayer), "kvva (Lu. 3 2), 'AvrtTras (indeclinable :
ing to NB (so W. H.); 'lohda (person, Lu. 3 : 33; Mk. 6:3; tribe,
(Lu. 3:2; Jo. 18: 13), K#a (1 Cor. 1 : 12), KXcoTra (Jo. 19:25),
Xarava (Mk. 1 13), StXas (dative 2tXa in Ac, and genitive SiXa
•
'E^eKlov (so LXX), 'HXetou (Lu. 4:25), 'Uaaiov (Mt. 3:3, etc.),
'lepetiiov (Mt. 2: 17), Avaaviov (Lu. 3:1), Ohpiov (Mt. 1:6), Zaxa-
piov (Lu. 1 :40). These Hebrew proper names ended in n— but ,
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),
:
: :
and in Jo. 1 :42; 21 : 15, 16, 17, for the father of Simon Peter,
though Baptcora in Mt. 16 :
17.=^ So for John Mark (Acts 12 12). :
Handb., Cf. Thackeray, Gr., pp. IGO-IGG. Ilelbing, Cr. d. Sept., p. 33,
p. 49.
for LXX illustrations.
Cf. also Schweizor, Terg. Iiischr., p. 1:59.
1
Magn. Inschr., p. 120.
2 Cf. W.-Sch., p. 94.
3 Notes on Orth., p. 159. See Naiainumson (Maf^n. Insehr., p.
Cf. Hort,
119) 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
'
Iiojadkpris has accusative in -^i> (Ac. 18 : 17) for the first declension
and is heterochte.^ We have only ^earuv in Mk. 7 : 4. Words like
veavlas have the genitive-ablative in -ov (Ac. 7 58). :
48), irpwpris (Ac. 27 : 30), SaTrc^etpTj (Ac. 5 : 1), (nreiprjs (Ac. 21 : 31;
27 : 1). In Acts B is prone to have -as, -a as with D in Ac. 5 : 1,
-a. See Mayser, Gr. griech. Pap., 1906, p. 250 f. (Laut- u. Wortlehre). For
the contracted forms see p. 252. It is also more frequent in the LXX. Cf.
Thackeray, Gr., p. 161 f.
1 W.-Sch., p. 94. 2 B. S., p. 186.
3 Prol., p. 48; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34. where a number of exx. are given hke
apovprjs, Ka6r]Kvir]s, etc. Cf. Thumb, Hellen., p. 69. Cf. Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept.,
pp. 31-33, and Thack., Gr., p. 140 f., for similar phenomena in the LXX.
4 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 1.56. ^ Deissmann, B. S., p. 186.
6 Gregory, Prol., p. 117. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 81.
7 Moulton, Prol., p. 48.
8 Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 25.
' CI. Rev., 1901, p. 434. For examples in Attic inscriptions see Meister-
hans, p. 119 f. Cf. -ou^dwas in LXX, C. and S., Sel. fr. the LXX, p. 26.
.
(fif)
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-Schmie-
del.^ For practical use one may ignore the distinction and call
all the examples metaplasm. with Blass or heteroclisis with Moul-
pla (supported only by a few cursives). The usual Attic form Oea
(Ac. 19 :deos (Ac. 19 37) are both found.
27) and 17
This variation
:
ToLxbppas (2 Pet. 2:6) and Tofioppoiu (Mt. 10: 15; -ots, Mk. 6: 11
Rec), Amrpav (Ac. 14:6) and AvarpoLs (Ac. 14:8). Moulton^
finds abundant parallel in the Egyptian papyri use of place-names.
In Rev. 1 11 ABC and some cursives read 'QvareLpap instead of
:
8
St.Paul the Traveller, p. 129. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 48. » lb.
'0 lb. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34.
" Notes on Orth., p. 150.
.
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
:
dlipei.. Ni/cT7 (the old form) survives in 1 Jo. 5 4, but elsewhere the :
late form v2kos prevails (as 1 Cor. 15:54 f.). The hkewise LXX
shows TO bbpos, TO vIkos interchangeably with the 17 forms. Helbing,
Gr. d. Sept., p. 49; Thackeray, Gr., p. 157. The dative 'Icodi/ti
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28; K.-Bl., I, 3, 502. Cf. also W.-M., p. 70 f.;
W.-Sch., p. 82; Soden, p. 1387 f. For illustrations from the see W.-M. LXX
Cf. also Nachmanson, Magn. Inschr., p. 121. For numerous pap. examples
of compounds from dpx<^ see Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap. (Laut- u. Wortl.),
p. 256 f. For the LXX see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 37 f. Thack., Gr.,
p. 156, finds -apxv^ ousting -apxos.
2 Notes on Orth., p. 156. ' Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 26. Not in ed. 4.
* Frol., p. 49. Cf. Gregory, Prol., p. 118; W.-M., p. 76; Jann., pp. 119,
542; Psichari, Grec de la Sepf., pp. 165 ff. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p.
34 f., for this "very common" ace. in the pap. See Mayser, Gr. d. griech.
Pap., p. 286 f
THE DECLENSIONS (kaISEIs) 259
and xeipai' in Jo. 20 25. These nouns are treated here rather
:
than under the third declension because in this point they invade
the precincts of the first. The LXX MSS. same phe-
exhibit the
nomena (eXTiSav, fjLovoyeprjv, etc.). See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 50;
Thackeray, Gr., p. 147. The opposite tendency, the dropping of
V in declension accusative, so common in modern Greek,
the first
inflected regularly in the first declension (so -Lav Mk. 11:1, etc.)
save once or twice in B. BrjOaaLdahas accusative B-qdaatdav in
Mk. 6:45; 8:22, but it may be only another alternate inde-
clinable form (Thayer) like Ma7a5dj^. So likewise ToXyoda has
accusative in -au in Mk. 15:22. Hort^ finds "the variations
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 is not necessary to go through all the
details save to observe that as a rule the mother of Jesus and
the sister of Martha are Maptd^u, while Mary of Clopas is always
Mapla. Mary Magdalene is now Maptd/x, now Mapla. In the
Aramaic as in the Hebrew probably all were called Mapia/j..
Mapla merely the Hellenized form of Maptd^t. It is probably
is
' Notes on Orth., p. 158. Kretschmcr (Entst. dcr Koiptj, p. 28) finds this
ace. in -av in various dialect inscriptions. Cf. also Reinliold, Dc Grace, etc.,
p. 24, for xApiToi', etc. * Notes on Orth., p. 156. ^ Jb.
260 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
cur, like 17 656s. But the neuter has a separate inflection. Modern
Greek preserves ver}^ few feminines in -os.^ Thumb (Handb., p. 53 f).
gives none. The main peculiarities in the N. T. are here noted.
(a) The So-Called Attic Second Declension. It is nearly
gone. 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)-
: :
in Mk. 14 15 and Lu. 22 12, not av6)yeoop nor any of the various
: :
The best MSS. have riiv Kw in Ac. 21 1, not KcDi' as Text. Rec. Cf. :
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 (Moul-
ton, 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,
6 48 f. He thinks
Prol., p. it proof that the N. T. writers were not iUiterate,
since the pap. examples are in writers "with other indications of illiteracy."
Cf. also Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34.
THE DECLENSIONS (kAISEIs) 261
(Mt. 27 46). :
found occasionally in the LXX and
This usage is
and even in apposition with Kbpie (Mt. 15 22). : The common use
vocative, chiefly in the
of the article with the nominative form as
third declension, belongs more to syntax. Take as
an instance of
the second declension m^? <i>o^ov,
to (xiKpbv -koijivIov (Lu. 12 : 32).
9 2 and Ph.
: 3:6. In Ac. 5 17 only B has
: tv^ovs, and all read
^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
either decl. Sd/S^aro?/ {-tov, -rw) is the form used in the N. T. al-
ways, as Mk. 6 2, but aa^^aaiv as Mk. 1 21, etc. B has (7al3j3a.TOLs,
: :
MSS. read Selirvos instead of the usual 8e1irvov. Like the old Greek,
SeafjLos has the pluralLu. 8 29; Ac. 16 26; 20 23, but
deafxd in : : :
like the LXX and the Attic. The plural depLeXlovs we have in Heb.
11 Rev. 21 :i 14,
: 10; may be either mascuhne
19. QefxeXiov (ace.)
or neuter. In Ro. 11 used in the quotation from the
: 10 6 vcoros is
vide between to. alra and rd aiTla, and cnTia is the correct text.
2 Notes on Orth., p. 158. 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. Zradtou
has aradiovs rather than the Attic o-rdSta in Lu. 24 : 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. :
MSS. of the LXX have dative 'I-qaol in Deut. 3 21, etc. The :
have 'IcLKw^op in Mt. 4 : 21. Several proper names have only the
plural, as Qvaretpa (Rev. 2 18, but B -prj : and ABC -pav, 1 11), :
Kav8a (Ac. 27 : 16), Mvppa (Ac. 27: 5), Uarapa (Ac. 21 1), "LapeiTTa :
(Lu. 4 : 26), 265o/xa (Jude 7). The Latin words nbhos (Mt. 5 15) :
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28. In the LXX MSS. wc find and -a, ^vyol
Sec^tiol
and -a, Oe/jikXioi and -o, vutoi and -o, arddtov and and aiTa. Cf.
<rrd5ioi, airos
Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 46 f.; Thack., p. 154 f. " Moulton, Prol., p. 49.
' In the LXX
proper names have great liberty in inflection. This is quite
natural in a transl. Cf. Thack., Gr., pp. 160-171.
264 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
long vowel (??) was pronounced short. Why not the rather sup-
pose that the vocative is like the nominative as in the case of la-
bial and guttural stems? The usage is thus extended sometimes
to these liquids. Indeed, in Jo. 17 25 we have iraTrip ayaQ'e, the :
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 inde-
:
clinable form like the accusative (ii, 2 (/)). But these adjectives
show that the usage is possible with substantives. There are in-
deed 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).
:
gether wnth the analog}^ of the first and second declensions, had a
positive influence. See 5 (/) for discussion of the double accusa-
tive ending -a plus v, like avbpav in the papjTi.^ These forms belong
in realit}' to the third declension, though formed after the analogy
of the first, and so were presented when first reached in the dis-
1 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 121. 2 P. 90.
' Notes on Orth., p. 158. Moulton, 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.
THE DECLENSIONS (kAISEI^) 265
KXeTu is read, for this is not a new tendency by any means, but
52 the MSS. have /cXeTSa, though here also D has
in Lu. 11 :
most of the cursives against x^-pi-Tf^ (correct text) and xapti' (N^EL,
etc.). The accusative in -vs has changed into -as with -i; and -ov
from /3o0s (Jo. 2 14 f., cf. LXX), jBdrpvas from ^6-
stems, as /36as :
8 Meisterh., p. 141. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 86. So the LXX. Cf. Thack., Gr.,
Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 43. Wackcrn. (Indogcr. Forsch., 1903,
p 147 f.;
'
p. 371) thinks the ace. in -€is is due not to the nom. but to compensative
lengthening.
^ Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 150.
2 Also early in Phthiotis (J. Wackernagel, Zur Nominahnfl., indoger.
Forsch., 1903, p. 368). Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 119; Mayser, Gr. d. griech.
Pap., 1906, p. 270 f.
XPVfJ-a-TOLs. Cf. Meister, Bd. II, p. 61. The LXX MSS. show rtaaapes as ace.
See Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 54. The ace. in -es rare in MSS. outside of LXX
Ttaaapes. Thack., Gr., p. 148 f. Moulton (Prol., p. 243, ed. 2) suggests that
this tendency started with reaaapes because it is the only early cardinal that
had a separate form for the ace. plural.
THE DECLENSIONS (kaIZEIS) 267
nom. 'EXaiOiv, and the papyri give nearly thirty examples of this
noun.2 Jos. also (Ant. vii, 9, 2) has 'EXaicows. On the other
hand the use of 'EXala is frequent (in Jos. also), as eis to 6pos tCov
'EXaicoj' (Mt. 21 But in Lu. 19:29 we have Trpos to opos rb
: 1).
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 :
(Thayer), though the Doric used the oblique cases opvLxos, etc.^
Elsewhere in all MSS. the usual opvis occurs, as Mt. 23 27, and :
form yrjpet from yfjpas is found, as often in the LXX and Test.
3 B. S., p. 210.
* Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 158. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 93. Moulton (Prol., pp. 69,
235) has a full presentation of the facts.
6 Moulton, Prol., p. 235.
* The form opvi^i ai)i)ears several times in the pap. Moulton, CI. Rev.,
1901, p. 35. Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 149.
7 W.-Sch., p. 89. LXX 6pi'Lduii>.
XII Pat.^ Kepas always in the N. T. (as in LXX) has the Attic
plural Kepara (Rev. 8 times) and repas regularly rkpara (11 times).
The plural Kpka (from Kpkai) is the only form in the N. T. (1 Cor.
8 : 13; Rom. 14 : 21) as in the LXX, though a MSS. or so in each
case has Kpkas (singular).
(e) The Genitive-Ablative Forms. These call for little re-
mark save which see later. ZtmTrecos (from
in the adjective, for
alvain) is uniform in the N. T., as Mt. 17 20. Tlr]xvs has no geni- :
Trr]xeo}v and in Rev. 21:17 onl}^ K.^ For the genitive singular of
'lucrrjs and Mavaaarjs see 6 (e).
Gr., p. 151.
in Ac. 7 44 where the form in -f? is due to the LXX (usual form
:
1W.-Sch., p. 86. So Sir. 2.5 3, etc. The also has the Ionic gen.
: LXX
yr)povs. See Thack., Gr., p. 149; Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 42. Cf. Mayser,
Gr. d. Griech. Pap., p. 276. ^ As Ex. 25 9. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 87. :
' Hort, Notes on Orth. But Xen. and Plut. (often) have ir-qx^v. See
W.-M., p. 75. In LXX note 7n7xeos and Tnyxews, irrixeoji' and TT-qxi^v. Helbing,
Gr., p. 45; Thack., p. 15L
^W.-Sch., p. 88. 5 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 27.
«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 corre-
spond to those in N. T. MSS. UpofjLrjdtvs had an Attic nom. -rjs, gen. -ews,
Thumb, Handb., § 330. 1.
. 4
though a few MSS. have -ojvtos. The Gospels have uniformly the
genitive in -uvos. W. H. accept SoXo/xw^ros (so
But in Ac. 3: 11
also 5 though BD etc. have covos in 5: 12. Cf. Eew^coj/ros
: 12),
(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),
TaXKloiv (Ac. 18: 12), 'EXato^p (Ac. 1 : 12) Kalaap (Mt. 22: 17), Sapcbv
(Ac. 9 : 35), 2t5cbj' (Mt. 11 : 21), Zl^o:v (Mt. 4: 18). There should
be mentioned also SaXa/xts (dative -Tvl, Ac. 13:5). Cf. proper
names in the LXX, Thackeray, Gr., pp. 163 ff
(h) Heteroclisis and Metaplasm. Most of the examples
have already been treated under the first declension 5 (g) or the
second declension 6 (d) The accusative iiXa (Mk. 9 50) is like
. :
•
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 nomi-
: :
native (cf. Lev. 2 13) Hke yaXa. But the best MSS. (k\BDLA)
:
in the third (so W. H.). So also Mt. 5 13 and Lu. 14 34. Cf. : :
^ Thack., Gr., p. 169, suggests that i)laoe-namc3 in -uv are declined or in-
declinable according to rank and distance.
270 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
also LXX).
The use of 6 cop /cat 6 rju Kal 6 epx6n€vos in the nominative after
airo in Rev. 1 : 4, etc., belongs more to syntax than to accidence.
It is evidently on purpose (to express the unchangeableness of
God), just as 6 SidaaKoKos Kal 6 Kvptos is in apposition with ixt (Jo.
13 : 13) in lieu of quotation-marks.
1 Delbriick, Syntakt. Forsch., IV, pp. 65, 259. Cf. Giles, Man. of Comp.
Phik)l., p. 239.
Donaldson, Now Crat., p. 474.
2 * Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 139.
" Brug. (Griooh. Gr., pp. 41.3-417) has no discussion of the adjective save
adjectives with one ending were used only with the mascuUne or
the feminine, and few were ever used with the neuter.^ Jannaris^
considers them rather substantives than adjectives, but they il-
lustrate well the transition from substantive to adjective, like
airaLs, fxamp, 4)vyas. In fact they are used of animated beings.
In the N. T. we have ixpiva^ (Mt. 7 15; 1 Cor. 5 10), irkv-ns (2 Cor.: :
is a later feminine form lilce ehyevls for the usual avyyevrjs (both
(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,
' In the LXXwe see a very slight tendency towards giving a fern, form to
all adjs. Thack., Gr., p. 172.
THE DECLENSIONS (kaISEIs) 273
Mk. 4 28 avToparr] is not entirely new, for classic writers use it.
:
End. in Griech. etc., p. 23; Wilhelm, Der Sprachgebr. der Lukianos etc., p.
23. Cf. llelbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 57 f. On the whole the shows the ex- LXX
tension of the fcni. so that adjs. which in Attic have two or three
terminations
have tliree in the LXX {aypios, ^e^aios, dUaLos, eXeWtpos, /xdraLos). Thack., Gr.,
p. 172.
2 Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 289 f. ' K.-Bl., I, p. 538.
* Cf. Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 141; Schweizer, Terg. Inschr., p. 158;
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 -cos, -via, -~6s. The LXX MSS.
sometimes have irav as indeclinable {tolv t6v totov, etc.) like
Tr\rjpris. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 51. Indeclinable ttXtjpt??
^ Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 157 f. For pap. exx. of vyi^v see Mayser, Gr. d.
* Moulton, Prol., p. 48. Cf. T-qv Itp-qv Kt(t>a\r]v on Rom. tomb (Kaibel, Epi-
gram. Graeca, 1878, p. 269).
6 Notes on Orth., p. 158.
THE DECLENSIONS (kAI2;EI2) 275
is the genitive form, the usual (probably only) form in the pa-
sative v'Yio. {vjLy) in Plato, Phadr. 89 d), the N. T., like the inscrip-
tions, 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
:
8 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 25. " Mayscr, Gr. d. griech. Bap., p. 294.
10 Prol., p. See Croncrt, Mem., p. 179; Turner, Jour. Tlieol. St., I, pp.
.50.
100 ff. Milligan (N. T. Doc. $, p. 05) finds one ex. of indecl. wXripr]s b.c.
276 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
while the later MSS. have mended the grammar with irXeiovs.
He quotes also Cronert^ who has furnished abundant evidence
from the papyri and literature of such a use of these forms just
like irXrjprjs. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Papj/ri, p. 63 f.
3. Comparison of Adjectives. The comparative is a natural
development in the adjective, as the adjective itself is a growth
on the substantive.
(a) The Positive (OercKov ovojxa or ovofia airXovv). This is the
oldest form of the adjective, the most common and the most per-
sistent. It is not always true that the comparative and superla-
tive forms represent an actually higher grade than the positive.
The good is sometimes more absolute than better or even best.
See ayados in Mk. 10 18, for instance. Sometimes indeed the posi-
:
p. 52. It is not till I/a.d. that it is common in the pap. Thack. (Gr., p. 176)
thinks it not genuine in the LXX.
2 lb., p. 435. But see Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 297.
3 Prol., p. 50. 4 Philologus, LXI., pp. 161 ff. W.-M., p. 302.
^
fi
K.-Bl., I, p. 553; Schwab, Die Hist. Synt. d. Comparative, 3.
griech.
Heft, 1895, pp. 152 ff. " Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 290; Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 30.
THE DECLENSIONS (kAISEIs) 277
2 Cf. Ascoli in Curtius' Stud, zur gricch. und lat. Gr., 1876, p. 351.
* Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. griech. Comp., Heft I, 1893, p. 3.
* Mayser, Gr. d. gricch. Pap., p. 298. He mentions ^eKrlwp, iXaaauv,
vaaojif, ir'ktlwv {irXkoiv). For the inscr., Nachm. (Magu. Inschr., p. 143) adds
6.ixtivoiv and ixti^wv.
« The pap. have many exx. of the form without v as in TrXeico (ou$), 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.
278 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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.
280 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Tos p-ov), 15: 18 {irpCirov vpcov), Ac. 1 : 1 {rdv irpLcrov \6yov) we have
merely first of two and in the two first instances the ablative con-
struction as with the comparative. Winer properly saw this usage
of rpwrov to be true to the Greek genius.^ In Mt. 27: 64 we have
both eaxo-Tos and irpooros used of two, earai ri eaxarT] tXclvt] x^tpwj'
TTjs Tpcorr]s. indeed used in the sense of the former in
Uporepos is
Eph. 4 22, whereas irporepov in the sense of the first of two does
:
See also 6 /jLei^uv (Mt. 18:4). But this matter will call for more
comment under Sjmtax (ch. XIV xiii, (i)).
m. NUMERALS ('API0MOI).
Counting one of the first and easiest things that the child
is
' 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.
admit oWels only seven times (all in Luke and Paul, as Ac. 20 33), :
1 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 211; Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 311; Giles, Man., p. 394.
On numerals in the LXX see Thack., Gr., pp. 186-190; C. and S., Sel. fr. the
LXX, p. 30 f. 2 Cf. W.-M., p. 312. So dm eh (Rev. 21 21). :
*'
6 lb. Cf. also Dittenb., 674. 28. « Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 316.
.
as 8eKa oKTio (Lu. 13 :4), though once with Kal (Lu. 13 : 16). But
unlike the papyri the N. T. never has beKabvo} But SeKairevTe (as
Jo. 11 18) and SeKarkaaapes (as Gal. 2 1) occur several times
: :
eiKocrt reaaapes (Rev. .19 :4), eKarov e'UoaL (Ac. 1 15), but recraapa- :
p. 188. The N. T. uses xiXtot often and 5t(Txt>*>tot once (Mk. 5 : 13)
ffLoi 8eKa e^. As a rule in the N. T. MSS. the numbers are spelled
out instead of mere signs being used.
(c) The Ordinals {ovofiara TaKriKo). They describe rank and
raise the question of order, Toaros.^ They are all adjectives of
three endings all have the superlative form -ros save irpo-
and
repos and which are comparative.^ In most cases the
dev-repos
ordinals are made from the same stem as the cardinals.^ But
this is not true of Trpcoros nor indeed of dev-repos (not from 8vo, but
from 5e6o/xat).^ Cf. the EngHsh superlative 'first' (with suffix -4sto).
UpCJTos has driven Tporepos out of use in the N. T. except as an
adverb (or to irpbTepov) save in one instance, irporepau avaaTpo4>r]v
(Eph. 4:22). The disappearance of irpuros before the ordinal
use of els belongs to Syntax. In the N. T. as in the papyri^ the
ordinals up to twelve are regular. From 13 to 19 the N. T., like the
vernacular papyri^ (so Ionic and kolvt} generally), puts the smaller
1 Aka bvo is normal in the pap. of the Ptol. age. Cf. Rec, Ac. 19 7. Cf :
Thack., Gr., p. 188. So also Ska rpels,and even Ska yua^ once. Always
6ka reaaapts, 6ka irivre, dtKa oktw. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.
2 Giles, Man., p. 398.
3 K.-Bl., I, p. 622. Cf. BruM;., Tro^rro^, CI. Pliilol., 1907, p. 208.
* These both have a suporl., as Trpcoros and 5tvraTos (Honi.). Brug., Gk. Gr.,
p. 212.
''
Man., j). 400. C^f. Brug., Grioch. Gr.,
C;ilrs, p. 212; Moulton, Prol., p. 95 f.
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
^
about the eye. AlttXovs appears four times (as 1 Tim. 5:17).
Cf. the Latin sim-plex, du-plex, English simple, diplomatic. The
proportional distributives end in —wXacrioiv. As examples one
may note iKaTOVTaivXaaiova (Lu. 8and TroWaTrXaaiova (Lu. 18
: 8) :
cases. The MSS. vary between nov and enov, etc. Not only do
MSS. give the regular wpos but the papyri* furnish eU ixt,
jue,
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
one use of this intensive in combination with the personal pro-
noun. 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). In 2 Th. 1:4 avrovs rjfxas is obviously inten-
sive, not reflexive. In 1 Cor. 7 35 rnxoiv avraiv
: it is doubtful.^ See
ch. XV, IV, for further discussion. The contracted form aavrov
is not found in the N. T. It is common in the Kingdom books in
the LXX and occurs 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 twenty times
avrov, etc., in W. 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 pos-
sil^le reflexive (or demonstrative?) origin of ov made this usage
natural. It appears in the papyri'' (rd avrov, Pet. I. 15, 15) and the
> Flcnsborg (dbcr Urspr. und Bild. dos Pron. avrd^, 1893, p. 69) denies that
it is from av, but rather from ai, ava. Cf. BruR., Griech. Gr., p. 244.
2 Thumb, Handb., p. 85. ^ q{ ii^rt, Notes on Orth., p. 144.
" K.-Bl., I, p. 596. 6 Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 33.
* Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 62. ^ Mayscr, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 303 f.
288 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
late inscriptions ^ for the first and second person singular. In the
modern Greek the same thing is true.^ But in the N. T. only late
MSS. read d^' eavTov against a-rro aeavrov (NBCL) in Jo. 18 : 34. In
Gal. 5 : 14 and Ro. 13 9 only Syrian uncials have
: eavrov for
aeavTOP.^ This use of eavrojv for all three persons is fairly common
in classical Attic. Indeed the personal pronoun itself was some-
times so used {8oKu} ixoL, for instance).^
(d) Possessive Pronouns {icT-qriKal avToow/xiat). It is some-
what difficult in the discussion of the pronouns to keep off
syntactical ground, and this is especially true of the possessive
adjectives. For the etymology of these adjectives from the cor-
responding personal pronouns one may consult the compara-
tive grammars.^ But it is the rarity of these adjectives in the
N. T. that one notices at once. The third person possessives {6s,
(T(j)€Tepos) have entirely disappeared. 1,6$ is found in only two of
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,
1 and 2 Cor., Gal., Ro. 'H^eT-epos appears only nine times counting
Lu. 16 where W. H. have viikrepov in the margin, and Ac. 24 6
: 12, :
good deal of the fact that in Pontus and Cappadocia the use of
t/x6s, (Tos, common, while elsewhere the genitive per-
etc., is still
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 167. These last two quote Lev. 19 18.
3 :
Cf. Simcox, ib.; Dyroff, Gesch. des Pron. Reflex., 2. Abt., pp. 23 ff. (Hefte 9
und 10 in Schanz's Beitr. etc.).
* Cf. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 63; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 167.
6 Giles, Man., p. 301; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 250; Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 307.
6 Theol. Literaturzeit., 1893, p. 421.
^ Prol., p. 40 f. He admits that the other possessives do not tell the same
Btory.
^ Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 89.
THE DECLENSIONS (kAISEIs) 289
others are rdSe (Ac. 21 : 11), rfide (Lu. 10 : 39), rrivSe (Jas. 4 : 13).^
1 Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 54. Dr. Abbott (Joh. Gr., p. 295) thinks
that John's love of contrast leads him to use ujueTs as often as all the Synoptists.
2 So Iliem. and Goelzcr in their PhonC't., pp. 31G fF. » lb.
* Gildersleeve (Am. Jour, of Phil., liK)7, p. 'I'AFi) con.siders 65€ the pron. of
the first person, ovto^ of the second, eKetvos of the third.
6 Cf. Bla.ss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 35 f. For the etymology of the dem. pron.
see Brug., Cik. Gr., p. 242 f.
5
The inscriptions and the papyri agree with the N. T. in the great
rarity of 65e in the later kolvt].^ But in the LXX it is commoner,
but chiefly here also rdSe Xeja (Thackeray, Gr., p. 191). There
are also many examples of 6s as a demonstrative, as Ro. 14 :
TOLOVTO and -ov) occurs less than sixty times, chiefly in the Gospels
and Paul's earlier Epistles (Gal. 5 21). We find neither rocros
:
left 6s more and more for the true relative use. '0 and 6s have a
' Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 310. ^ Nachm., M:ign. Inschr., p. 145.
« Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 167 f. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 93.
* Mayser, Gr. d. grioch. Pap., p. 311; Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 145.
" K.-Bl., I, p. 013; Hoffmann, Die gr. Dial., Bd. II, p. 558.
« Thumb, Handb., p. 94. ^ lb.
292 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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,
els) and Ka^ets (cf. Kad' eh in N. T.).^ The negative forms juiyrts
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
:
are very common. The old delua meets us only once (Mt. 26 18), :
but hangs on in the modern Greek.^ Oi; ttSs and fxi] was belong
wholly to Syntax.
(i) Distributive and Reciprocal Pronouns. These pro-
nouns have an insecure place in the N. T. with the exception of
dXXos, aX\r]\o:v, eKaaros and erepos. 'E/cdrepos like irbrepos has van-
V. ADVERBS ('EniPPHMATA)
1. Neglect of Adverbs. A 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 ^
the article used with the adjective where the adverbial idea is
is
encroaching, as to \ol-k6v, to. iroWa, and note also rriv apxw (Jo.
1 Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 250 ff. 2 jjirt, Handb. etc., pp. 320 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 (kAISEIS) 295
vvKTos verges toward the adverb.* Cf. also rod XoixoO (Gal. 6 : 17).
The genitive is almost never used adverbially in Sanskrit.^
(4) The Locative. This is a rare use in Sanskrit,^ but more
frequent in Greek. Instance cKeT, kvkXw, o'Uol, irpwl. So also act,
1 Man., p. 240.
Giles, ^ Hirt, Ilandb. etc.,
p. 320.
' Cf 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, .
^ Handb. etc., p. 321. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 252 (dat. ace. to Drug.).
8 Ilirt, Handb., p. 321. » Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 409.
.
—ere. Then -ros appears in eKtos, evros, Finalty -xa is seen in ev-
wxa. The papyri furnish parallels for practically all these N. T.
examples (and many more).^ "Aira^ seems to stand by itself.
(c) Compound Adverbs. Some adverbs are due to the blend-
1 Hirt, Handb., p. 321 f.
* Griech. Gr., p. 252. Cf. also p. 229 f., where he acknowledges the other
point of view as possible. ^ Grundl.,
p. 60 f.
^ In Lat. adv. are partly remnants of case-forms and partly built by anal-
ogy. Draeger, Hist. Synt., p. 109. For Gk. see also Lutz, Die Casus-Adv.
bei att. Rednern (1891).
* Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 456.
9 lb., pp. 455-459. See also Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 253-257. Cf. Donald-
son, New Crat., pp. 449-501, for discussion of these adv. suffixes.
THE DECLENSIONS (kAISEIs) 297
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
verb made by analogy with -cos. So (from vovv ex^) vowexl^'i (Mk.
12:34), used by Aristotle and Poly bins along with another ad-
verb Uke vovvtxovTiMs in Isocrates.^ But in Mark it is used without
2 16) from kcltco, and woppccTepov (Lu. 24 28) from Toppoj. Com-
: :
(only in el-Kws, /xr] xcos) appear.^ Forms like ol, 6tol, ttoI have van-
ished before ov, oirov, wov. Cf. English,^ "where (rather than
'whither') are you going?" Cf. also the accusative H (Mk.
10 : 18) = 'why.'
(e) Verbs. Besides such words as vowexojs (verbal phrase) and
participles like ovtws, bpiokoyovukvois, <f>ei,8oiJLhcjos, virep^aXKovTois one
should note 'E^paiaTi (from 'EjSpat^u), 'EWr]VL(7Tl (from 'E\\r]d^cS)
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 59 f. 2 Green, Handb. to N. T. Gk., p. 137.
THE DECLENSIONS (kAISEIs) 299
etc. In Jas. 4 13; 5:1 a7e is used with the phiral as an adverb,
:
Mt. 25 21, 23; Ac. 15 29; Eph. 6 3 quot.). ESts occurs also in
: : :
pears once (2 Tim. 1 18) and Kpdaaov often (1 Cor. 7: 38). The
:
41). But ket is very common in the sense of 'there' and 'thither'
(here again chiefly in the Gospels) as in Mt. 2 15, 22. 'EKelae :
adverbs of place in the N. T. are avco, €pt6s, kros, ecroo, e^oo, kLtw.
A number adverbs answer to the question "whence." They
of
are usually words in -dev. 'AWaxodev (Jo. 10 1) is found only :
(c) Adverbs of Time. The list is not very great, and yet ap-
preciable. 'Aet (Ac. 7:51)not in the Gospels at all and is
is
and Western 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 ttoXlv amply atone for this scarcity. All the numeral ad-
verbs (ciTra^, irpuiTov, his, ewTciKLs etc.) belong here also.
5. Scope Adverbs. Here again we are retracing ground and
of
crossing our steps, but a brief word will be useful to show how
from adverbs grew other parts of speech. The fact has been
stated before. What is here called for is some of the proof and
illustration.
1 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 59. 2 lb. ^ Jb.
THE DECLENSIONS (kAIZEIs) 301
sitions with verbs not the original one. In Homer they are
is
ye, axpt(s), yap, ye, be. Si], br}irov, ho, bioirep, eav, eavirep, el, elirep, elra,
Uribe, fxrjTe, ixt^tl, val, vr],'6pws, bivore, ottojs, orav, ore, otl, ov, ovx'h ov8e,
ovKovp, ovv, ome, irep with other words, ttXtji^, wplp, re, roi (in Kairoi,
jikvTOi, etc.), TOL-^ap-ovv, Toivvv, COS, uaav, ucrel, ooawep, oiairepei, (hare.
Several of these occur only once {drjirov, eireLb-qirep, vi], oiroTe, ov-
in the LXX, N. T. and Epictetus) has the look of a dative, but one
hesitates. As a substantive 17 oval is probably due to B\l\l/i.s or
TaXatTTOjpta (Thayer). and XVI, v, (e), for use
Cf. chapters XII, v,
of article with adverb, as ro vvv. For the adverb like adjective,
as ovTws xipo. (1 Tim. 5:5), see ch. XII, vi. In Lu. 12:49 tI
17
tive adverb cos is used as an exclamation in cos copatot (Ro. 10: 15)
and cos ave^epevvrjra (Ro. 11 33). The interrogative ttcos is like-
:
wise so employed, as ttcos 8vaKo\6p ean (Mk. 10: 24), ttcos avvexofxai
(Lu. 12: 50), TTCOS e0iXei avrop (Jo. 11 : 36). Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T.
Gk., p. 258. Thus we see many sorts of adverbs and many ways
of making them.
CHAPTER VIII
pp. 10 ff. ' Die Lehre von den Redet. etc., 1864, p. 31.
303
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
since both may express that.- The chief difference lies in the idea
of affirmation. The verb affirms, a thing not done by a noun ex-
cept 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
,
^ 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
endings are more distinct in the Sans. '^
Cf. Garnett, Philol. Ess.
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) Lauten-
;
sach, Verbalflexion der att. Inschr. (1887); Hogue, Irregular Verbs of Attic
Prose (1889).
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ("PIIMa) 305
* Cf. Bru^., r.niiulr., Bil. II, pp. 2, 837. On differciu'c bctwocn finite and
non-finite vcrh.s wee Curtius, Diis Vcrbinn d. f^riecli. Spr., p. 1 f.
2 Hirt, Ilundb., p. 3(j:i f. Cf. also Giles, Man., pp. 425 ff.
nominal suffixes, like -jut, -ai, -n, are not in the nominative, but
an oblique case^ connected with the stem: ne, o-e, tl (cf. demon-
strative to). But the subject of personal endings is a very exten-
sive and obscure one, for treatment of which see the comparative
grammars.^ There is a constant tendency to syncretism in
the use of these personal endings. Homer has fewer than the
Sanskrit, but more than Plato. The dual is gone in the N. T.
and other endings drop away gradually. The nominative pro-
noun has to be expressed more and more, hke modern English.
IV. The Survival of -ijll Verbs.
(a) A
Cross Division. Before we take up modes, voices,
tenses, we are confronted with a double method of inflection that
cuts across the modes, voices and tenses. One is called the -fxi
inflection from the immediate attachment of the personal endings
to the stem. The other is the -co inflection and has the the-
matic vowel added to the stem. But the difference of inflection
is not general throughout any verb, only in the second aorist and
1 Donaldson, New Crat., pp. 570 ff. Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 39.
2 Cf. Hirt, Handb., pp. 355 ff.; Giles, Man., pp. 413 ff.
3 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 232 f.
Cor. 3 : 1, BD).
(d) N. T. Usage as to -^it Verbs. The -/xt verbs in the
N. T. as in the papyri are badly broken, but still in use.
1. The Second Aorists (active and middle). We take first the
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-
times "a reduced root," but this does not show that in the parent
stock the old aorist was not the mere root. Analogy worked here
as elsewhere. Kaegi^ properly calls the old aorists of verbs like
/SctXXco (c-jSXtj-toinstead of the thematic and later e-jSaX-e-ro) "prim-
itive aorists." In the early Epic the root-aorists and strong
thematic aorists outnumber the o- or weak aorists by three to one.^
The important N. T. -/it verbs will now be considered.
BaCvo). Only in composition in N. T. (ava-, irpoa-ava-, aw-
ava-, CLTTO-, 6ta-, e/c-, ejLt-, Kara-, nera-, irapa-, irpo-, avjx-). In the
LXX it is rare in simplex.The papyri use it freely with nine
prepositions.^ Note the common forms like ave^r] (Mt. 5:1). The
"contract" forms are in the imperative as in the Attic poets
(ela^a, Kara^a).^ Mayser^ gives no examples from the papyri, nor
does the LXX have any (LXX only ava^rjOL, Kara^-ndL, -^-nre, -/Sijrco,
-^r}TW(Tav)
.''
So avafia (Rev. 4:1), dm/Sare (Rev. 11 12), Kara^a. :
* Cf.King and Cookson, Prin. of Sound and Inflexion, ISSS, pp. 225 ff.
/3rj0t (Jo. 7:3), irpoaavaQrjdL (Lu. 14 : 10). The forms in -arw, -are,
-cLTooaav are like the Doric.
rivwcrKo). This verb in the Ionic and
kolvti jlv. form is very
(ert-). But the MSS. vary in each passage. In the the LXX
regular yvQi occurs save in Judith 14 : 5, where B has kinyvot.
Ai8(i>|JLL. This very common verb is frequently compounded
{ava—, avT—, airo-, 5ta— , eK—, kwi—, fxera—, irapa—, Trpo-) as in the
papyri.^ The old indicative active appears only in TrapkSoaav in
the literary preface to Luke's Gospel (1 2).^ Elsewhere the first :
aorist forms in -Ka (like rjKa, Wr]Ka) sweep the field for both singu-
lar and plural. These k forms for the plural appear in the Attic
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
proportional analogy {e^kSeTo These : e^e86i.i.r]v — eKvero : kXvo/xrjp) .^
7 9.
: The subjunctive active third singular shows great varia-
tion between dol, 5c3 (cf. yvol above), and durj (especially in
Paul's Epistles).^ The LXX MSS. occasionally give -80I and
5Moulton, 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
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 49. ^ Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 367 f.
8 So W.-H., Notes on Orth., p. 167 f. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 121. For pap. exx.
see Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37. » Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 49.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ('PHMa) 309
14 10 f.) and John one out of three (13 2). Tisch. (not W. H.)
:
:
the text and Scot? in the margin. The opt. 8ccr; appears in the
LXX (Jer. 9 : 2) in the text of Swete. Con. and Stock, Sel. from
LXX, p. 45, give dco-q twenty-nine times in LXX and dolrj three
times as variant. They give an interesting list of other forms of
-
1 Notes on Orth., p. 168. Cf. also W.-Sch., j). 121.
2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 48 f. Prol., p. 55. Cf. Dittcnb., Syll., 462. 17, etc.
=>
fect in -eT/ca does not, however, occur in the N. T. nor in the LXX
(cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 51), though the papyri have it
(Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 331).
"lo-T-nfii. This verb is used freely by itself, especially in the
p. 50). other forms are regular (o-rco, ar^dL, etc.) save that
The
avaara (like ava^a) is read in a few places (Ac. 9 11; 12 7; Eph. : :
airo-, hia-, avTi-ho.-, k-, eTrt-, cvv-ein-, Kara-, avv-KaTa-, pera-, ira-
pa-, irepL-, irpo-, irpoa-, aw-, viro-) vie with those of 'larrjpL and
equal the papyri use.^ The second aorist active in -/ca alone ap-
Tpoades (Lu. 17:5). The middle has the regular second aorist
edero (Ac. 19 : 21 and often).
$T||XL.one is surprised to see this verb put under the list of
If
second aorists, he can turn to Blass,^ who says that it is "at once
doubt," some MSS. read ?5co/ces (Jo. 17 : 7 f.) and (i(^i^«re (Mt. 23 : 23), not to
say «a)paK6s (Jo. 8 : 57), k\v\vee^ (Ac. 21 : 22, B also). Moulton (Prol., p. 52)
* Thack., Gr., p. 254. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 122 f. On iardvai and its compounds
in the LXX see interesting list in C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 43 f., giving
-w forms, transitive taraKa, etc. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 411.
^
6 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 50. The verb is mentioned here to impress the fact
that it is aorist as well as imperfect.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa) 311
vvtis occurs once (Jo. 2 18), -us not at all. AelKwaLv is read by
:
the best MSS. (Mt. 4 8; Jo. 5 20). The middle hdelKPWTaL ap-
: :
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
: :
aav 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 : :
text has participle aTo8i8ovv for -6v (marg. -om), while irapaSi-
8cov is read by N* in Mt. 26 46 and in Mk. 14 42, etc.^ The
: D :
Is. 28 20 (so
:
N in Is. 59 : 15). The papyri« give plenty of illus-
* Mayser, Or. d. griech. Pap., p. 355; Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36. Cf.
"Htw (as 1 Cor. 16: 22) is less common^ than the usual ecrrco (Gal.
1:8). "'EiCTOiaav (never ovtoov nor tGTiiov), as in Lu. 12:35, is a
form found in Attic inscriptions since 200 b.c* Some of the pa-
pyri even have rjTo:aav.^ Mention has already (Orthography) been
made of the irrational v with the subjunctive xi
in the papjTi,^ as
in orav Tjv — 8r]\coao}. The use of evL='eveaTL (as 1 Cor. 6:5; Gal.
3 : 28, etc.) is an old idiom. "EvL=h and in modern Greek has
supplanted karL in the form ehe or etmt (so for elai also).'' Cf.
Sir. ^37 : 2.
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
:
Lu. 8:4. B reads etcn^t in Ac. 9:6, not daeXde. Blass" rather
1 Prol., p. 37.
2 W.-Sch., p. IIV.
' Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 56. Both forms in pap. and inscr. On i^firiv, ^s,
flufOa, fiTco, iarccffap in thc LXX see C.and S., Hel. fr. LXX, p. 31 f. Thack.,
dr., p. 256 f. Beyond this the LXX goes very Httle.
* Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 191.
^ Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436.
« lb., p. 38. Cf. Gen. 6 17 E, according to Moulton, Prol., p. 49.
:
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 :
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-
:
Kadrjuevos that one meets in the N. T. (as Mt. 9:9). The imper-
fect is regularly hKadriro, etc. (as Mt. 13 : 1), the future Kadrjaonai
(as Mt. 19 : 28). No -w forms appear in the present, though Kady
(Ac. 23 : a contract form like dvprj for KaOrjaaL (already in Hy-
3) is
perides).^ The short imperative mdov for Kad-qao (as Jas. 2 3) :
in theN. T.^ and the LXX.^ But Philo^ and the N. T. Apoc-
rypha and early Christian writers^ follow the LXX and the
N. T. 'kvL-qixL indeed has only avLhres (Eph. 6 : 9) in the present
stem. So shows only Kadikixevov {-iikv-qv) in Ac. 10 11;
also Kadi7]fjLL :
11 5, while
: irapl-qtii has no present, but only an aorist (Lu. 11:
42) and a perfect passive (Heb. 12 12). 'A^trj/xi is the form of :
probably a present from d^eco.^ But Blass (p. 51, of A''. T. Gram-
mar) 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
:
"laT-qiii. Cf. also tTT-to-rajuat (see above) and aTi]K03 (from ecr-
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^, €</)-, Trpo-, cfvv-), as KadiararaL (Heb. 5 1), TrepudTaao :
« 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.
(Mt. 26: 20) and twice with aw- (Mt. 9 10 = Mk. 2 15). In : :
Lu. 23 53 : rjv Kelp-evos follows the Attic, but KB have yj^ reOeLixe-
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) 317
for the papyri. The form^ KpenaTai. is read in Mt. 22:40 and the
participle Kpenayievosiy) in Gal. 3 : 13; Ac. 28 4. In Lu. 19 48 NB
: :
(so W. H. and Nestle) read e^e/cpe^tero, an -co form and the only
compound form of the verb in the N. T. The other forms are
aorists which come from an active present KpenawvfXL, -awvoi, -doj
or -afco. They are Kpetxaaavres (Ac. 5 30) and Kpe/jtaadrj (Mt. 18 : :
the N. T.
ni'fnrXT|}xi. No present tense in the N. T., though a good many
aorists, save the compound participle efiinirXoiu, from the -co verb
-dco. Mayser^ gives no papyri examples. LXX has -co form
usually.
^ In the LXX the active goes over to the -w class. Thack., Gr., p. 273.
^ Mayscr, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 403.
' lb., p. 404. And indeed the old Attic avoLyu, Meistcrh., p. 191.
* Thack., Gr., p. 277.
' So the pap. Mayscr, Gr., p. 352; Thackeray, p. 246.
• Mayser, ib., pp. 351 f., 404.
^ lb., p. 406.
318 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
But we have p-qyvvvTaL (Mt. 9 : 17) and prjaaeL (Mk. 9 18). May- :
and vTToaT. (Lu. 19 36). Thus the -pa form is wholly dropped as
:
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 in-
flection far less than is true of 8i8wixi. In the present indicative D
has tIOl {rWeL) for rt^Tjo-t'' (Lu. 8:16). In the imperfect eTldei is read
twice (Ac. 2 : 47; 2 Cor. 3 : 13) from rt^eco, as already in the Attic.
So likewise kridow (as in Attic) twice (Ac. 3 2; 4 35), but the best : :
(eTidoaav) calls for a present rt^co which the papyri supply against
the idea of Winer-Schmiedel,^ as TapariOdpevos (BM 239), irapa-
KaTarWoixai (B.U. 326).^ Good cursives show that the late language
used Tt^eco in the present (Mk. 10 : 16; 15 : 17). Cf. viroTLdovaa in
second century papyrus (B.U.
350). In the LXX -pa forms pre- i**
22). I,vv<f)r]iJLL appears only once (Ro. 7 : 16). The -fxi inflection
is uniform in ^Tj^tt both in the present and the imperfect (aorist).
The only forms in the N. T. are c^rjjut (1 Cor. 7 29), ^tjo-ij/ (Mt. :
13 : 29), (j)aalv (Ro. 3 : 8), and the common €0?? (Mt. 4:7). It is
regular -^t in the LXX.
XpTJ. This impersonal verb had a poetic infinitive xP'j^'cit of the
-fiL but Veitch (p. 627) and L. and S. get it from xpaco.
inflection,
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.
3. Some There are only three verbs that show the
-/jll Perfects.
active perfects without (K)a in 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 :
fect indicative like the papyri^ usually has oUa, oUas, oUe, o'ldafiev,
-are, -aaiv, which was the Ionic inflection and so naturally pre-
vailed in the ^011^17. Three times indeed the literary Attic I'crre ap-
pears (Jas. 1 19; Eph. 5:5; Heb. 12 17). The passage in James
: :
erary Attic also) is read. The imperfect also runs f]5eiv, j/Sets, etc.
(Mk. 1 34; 14 40) is like larr]K€Laav (Rev. 7 11).' The
"EtSeLaav : : :
* Cr. (1. (rricch. Pap., \^. .355. 2 n, >^„ inscr., Nacliin., p. 157
' MayKcr, dr. d. sriccli. iVip., p. ,372.
* Cf. W.-Sch., p. 114 f. Neither olaOa. nor VibuaOa apjx^u-.s in the N. T.
320 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(1 Cor. 7 : 26; 2 Pet. 3 : 5), earos (Mt. 24: 15; Rev. 14 1) although
:
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
well as the late present o-nyKco from the perfect stem. These -fxL
ideas in a verb are action and affirmation. The state of the action
is set forth by the tense, the relation of the action to the subject
by by mode. Tense and voice thus have
voice, the affirmation
to do with action 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 gram-
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
Achaia. For the "strong" perfects, Hke yeyova, see vii, (g), 2.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa) 321
and the one from which the others are derived. Per contra it
may be argued that emotion precedes passionless intellection.
The indicative continues always to be the most frequent and per-
sists when others, like the injunctive and optative, die. It is the
only mode that uses all the tenses in Sanskrit and Greek. In the
Sanskrit, for instance, the future is found only in the indicative (as
in Greek save in the optative in indirect discourse to represent
a future indicative of the direct) and the perfect appears only in
the indicative and participle, barring many examples 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
future barely did so, never in the subjunctive till the Byzantine
* See discussion bet. Profs. Harry and Sonnensrh(Mn in CI. Rev., 1905-6.
Cf. also La Roche, Beitr. zur prioc^h. Gr., 1893; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 197.
2 For contrary view see Burton^ N. T. Moods and Tenses*, p. 1.
' Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 45 f.
junctive and the future indicative) had not been sharply drawn.^
Add to this the fact that iroirjari and Toc-qaeL came to be pronounced
exactly alike and one can see how the confusion would come again.
Cf. tVa SuxreL {8coar]) in the N. T. MSS.^ On the short vocal ending
of the subjunctive and its connection with the indicative one may
recall edo/jLat, iriofxai, (payo/jLat in the N. T., futures which have a
strange likeness to the Homeric subjunctive 'ioiJt.ev. They are really
subjunctives in origin. It is still a mooted question whether the
future indicative is always derived from the aorist subjunctive
or in part corresponds to the Sanskrit sya.^ The only aorist
subjunctives that call for special N. T. are the comment in 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 in-
stance, 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), : :
1 Sterrett, Horn. II., Dial, of Homer, p. 27 (1907). Cf. Moulton, The Suffix
of the Subj. (Am. Jour, of Philol., 10, 185 f.); La Roche, Die conj. und opt.
2 Cf. ah-eady in the Attic inscr. the spelling of the subj. in -et. Meisterh.,
Att. Inscr., p. 166. For this phenomenon in the pap. see Mayser, Or. d.
griech. Pap., p. 324.
3 Cf. Henry, Comp. Or. of Gk. and Lat., Elliott's transl., 1890, p. 115 f. and
note; Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 459.
* Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37, and 1904, p. Ill, for subjs. dTroSoT,
fTnyvol in the pap.
5 Cf. dp^ri<rd€ in Lu. 13 : 25, but dp^^ade (BEG, etc.) and apk-nade («AD, etc.)
in verse 26.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ('I'IIMa) 325
I
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Ck., p. 48. But in 1 Cor. IG : 2 we have resularly evo-
durai (marg. evoSwdfj). Ilort (Notes on Orth., pp. 167, 172) is uncertain whether
(MioTai is perf. ind. or subj. (pres. or perf.). He cites irapa^riXodiiei' (1 Cor.
10 : 22) and ha^tjiaLovvTai. (1 Tim. 1 : 7) as [)ossible pres. subjs.
" Man. of Conip. Philol., p. 458. Cf. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 337, for hst
of works on optative.
» Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 202. Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 503 f.
Mark and Hebrews show it only once each, Jude twice and Peter
four times. The non-thematic aorist appears in the N. T. some-
times, as 54)7? (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
*
Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., p. 461. Cf K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 40 f Brug., Gk.
.
.
;
«
Synt. of BoDot. Dial. Inscr., pp. 77, 81.
^
Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 191.
8 Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 326. ^ K.-BL, Bd. II, p. 99.
>"
Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 327.
;
preferred text in Eph. 1 : 17; 2 Tim. 2 : 25, but in Jo. 15 16; Eph. :
(Ac. 17:27) according to the best Blass« com- MSS. (B, etc.).^
ments 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 opta-
tive is rare in the LXX save for wishes. Thackeray, Gr., p. 193.
(/) The Imperative {irpoaraKTiKr]). The imperative is a later
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
history.
1. The Non-Thematic Stem. An early imperative was just
the non-thematic present stem.^ In the imperative the aorist is
Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. Ill f. Aol also appears in pap. as opt. as well aa
subj.
* Prol., p. 55. Cf. Blass' hesitation, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 49 f.
' Cf. W.-Sch., p. 114. In the LXX the <'orm in -eie very rare. is Cf. Hel-
bing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 68 f. The LXX has also -oiaav, -aiaav for 3d plu. Cf.
Thack., Gr., Opt. is common in 4 Mace.
p. 215.
8 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p 220. « Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 464.
^ K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 41. 9 lb., p. 269.
»» lb., p. 464. Cf. Brug., Grundr., II, §958; Iliem. and Goelzer, Phon^t.,
p. 359. It is coming more and more to be the custom to regard the thematic
vowel as part of the root. Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 415.
" Moulton, Prol., p. 171 f.
:
3. The Suffix -6l. The non-thematic stems also used the suf-
fix -di (cf. Sanskrit dhi, possibly an adverb; cf. "you there!"). So
yvcodi for second aorist active, 'iaOc for present active, <j)avr]di, \v-
6t]tl and first aorist passive.^ In the N. T. sometimes
for second
this -9l is 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
19). But in these cases, except Jo. 5 : 39, we probably have the
ably just the infinitive sigmatic aorist.^ Cf Set^ai. Cf. also Latin .
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 :
" Giles, CoHip. Pliilol., p. 476: "Tiio (listiiiction hctwoon the transitive and
intransitive meanings of the active; voice (lei)(>ncls upon the nature of the root
in 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.
332 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
save sometimes in the aorist. In later Greek the future middle (as
TLfxrjaoixaL) continued to be used occasionally in the passive sense.
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. Giles^
thinks that the causative middle (like dLdaaKOfxai, 'get 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-
:
verbs in some tenses in one and some in the other (like ^abu,
1 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 275; Thumb, Handbuch d. Skt., pp. 394 ff.
2 Sterrett, Horn. II., Diah of Horn., p. 27. * Clyde, Gk. Sjoi., p. 55.
3 Comp. Philol., p. 477. » Moulton, Prol., p. 152.
« Griech. Gr., p. 346. Cf. Kurze vergl. Gr., II, p. 599. Cf. Giles, Comp.
Philol., p. 419.
^ Prol., p. 153. 8 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 200.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ('I'IIMa) 333
(Jo. 10 28), ^Xex^co (Ac. 28 26), yeUaoo (Lu. 6 21), Slu^co (Mt.
: : :
23 : 34), fiycrw (Jo. 5 : 25), kiriopKiiao: (Mt. 5 : 33, LXX), /cXauaco (Lu.
6:25), /cpd^co (Lu. 19 :40), rat^co (Mk. 10 : 34), pehao: (Jo. 7 : 38),
Gm-Kr}(T(i} (Lu. 19 :40), GTrovbacoi (2 Pet. 1 : 15), avvavrrjao} (Lu. 22 :
often, as John, Luke alone having Attic aireKpivaTo also, Ac. 3 : 12),
huKpWy]v (Ro. 4 : 20), avvvirtKpl6y]v (Gal. 2 : 13), dTreXoyr]dr]v (Lu. 21 :
14, but see 12 : 11), riyaWLadr^u (Jo. 5 : 35), kyev-qdrju (Mt. 6 : 10,
but also eyevotJiTjv often, as Ac. 20 : 18) ; cf . yeyopa and yeyemjuai.,
ed(r]dr]v (Lu. 5 : 12) ; riy€pdr]v (Lu. 24 : 34), rjSvvaadTjv (Mk. 7 : 24,
as New Ionic and LXX) and ri^vvrjdriv (Mt. 17 : 16), bLeK'exQw (Mk.
9 : 34), edavjjLaaOrjp (Rev. 13 : 3, but passive sense in 2 Th. 1 10), :
' lb. KoiJ'^ exx. are numerous, Uke fidkaOrjv, kveOvfxrjOriv, eiroptWy^v, e<t>o^T)d-qv, etc.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMA) 335
vav (Ro. 16:7; Rev. 21:6), eyvcoKai' (Jo. 17:7), elprjKav (Rev. 19:
3), dffeXrjXvdav (Jas. 5:4), ewpaKav (Lu. 9:36; Col. 2: 1), Tr'e-KTWKav
(Rev. 18: 3), reriyprj/caj' (Jo. 17: 6). On the other hand the Western
class of documents (KADN Syr. Sin.) read yjKaaLv in Mk. 8:3
instead of dalv. But it is in the LXX (Jer. 4: 16), and Moulton^
finds riKaixev in the papyri. The form of r}Kw is present, but the
sense is perfect and the k lends itself to the perfect ending by an-
alogy.
Another ending that calls for explanation is the use of -€s in-
stead of -as in the present perfect and the first aorist (in -/ca es-
with the second aorist stem and even with the imperfect.
-as, etc.,
This change occurs in the indicative middle as well as active.
This matter more technically belongs to the treatment of the
1 Prol., p. 53. Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 169. Tlio N. T. does not follow
illiterate jjiip. in putting -aai to aorist stems (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36).
2 lb.; Prol., p. 52.
» B. S., p. 192. * Gr. d. griech. Pap., ]). 321.
" Untcrs. etc., p. 239. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 46, citee Apoll., Synt.,
I, 10, p. 37, as saying that dpijKes, iLypa\pes, ypaxpkrw, etc., gave the grannnarians
trouble. o
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Glc, p. 46. ' Cf. W.-Sch., p. 113.
338 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
also with eweaa we have the weak or first aorist inflection in the
indicative and imperative plural Treaare (Lu. 23 30; Rev. 6 16). : :
2 Dieterich, Unters., p. 237 f. For the inscr. see Schweizer, Perg. Inschr.,
3 CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 368 f.
forms Uke fi^ovTo, kfUjatTo, where the sec. aorist endings go with the first aorist
stem (Sterrett, Horn. II., N. 42).
6 Notes on Orth., p. 164 f. See also Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 45; W.-Sch.,
p. Ill f. The LXX MSS.
with the N. T. in the use of -o. Cf. Helbing,
tally
once (Ac. 16 : 37); tTrkfiaXav twice (Mk. 14 46; Ac. 21 27); : : tlbav,
dbaixev in a few places (Mt. 13 : 17; Lu. 10 24; Mt. 25 37, : : etc.);
(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 eX-
: :
dare, eX^droj uniformly, both rjXdav and rj\dov, once a-Krfkda (Rev.
15 22, 24; N* has 'eXeyav in Jo. 9 10; 11 36, etc. There is a dis-
: : :
(?') The Middle Endings. These call for less remark. Bov-
Xet (Lu. 22 42) is the only second singular middle form in -ei, for
:
^ Schweizcr, Perg. Inschr., p. 168. Cf. also Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p.
328. The pap. do not show oUi and 6\pti, but only 0ov\ei.
8Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 47. For oln, 6^v, arid ^o6Xjj in LXX MSS. sec Helbing,
Gr. d. Sept., p. 60 f.; C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 33 f. B in the LXX shows a
fondness for -u forms (itacisni). Cf. Thack., Gr., j). 217.
340 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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
:
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) Passive Endings. As already observed, the passive voice
has no distinctive endings of its own. The second aorist passive,
like k-^avr]-v, is really an active form like l-^-q-v {t-(i)6.vr]-v is the
proper division) .^ So i-xa-p-q-v from xatpeco. The
Cf. Latin tace-re.
first aorist in -d-qv seems to have developed by analogy out of
Note eK(f)vn (Mt. 24 : 32, but Rec. e/c^uf}, though k</)ii27 in Mk.
13 : 28), crvv(l)velaai. (Lu. 8 : 7) and TraptLaehh-qaav (Ju. 4) for Uvv
(Rec. Mk. 1 : 32) which the LXX retains (Thackeray, Gr., p.
235) . In the LXX, when a verb had both first and second aorist
passive forms, the first disappeared {ih., p. 237). But see vii, {d),
for further discussion,
(/v) Contract Verbs. The use of -(rai was mentioned above.
It appears^ in Kavxaaat (1 Cor. 4:7; Ro. 2 : 17, etc.) and oSwaaaL
tinction between -aoj and -ew verbs, but NAB 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 (}<BCD), but :
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 :
6 A) shows 6iTrti,evov<Tai. The only certain instance in the LXX is /cratrat (Sir.
6 7). See Thack., p. 218. Cf. further Hatz., Einl., p. 188.
:
* lb. Moulton (CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36) cites IvLkh and Tinodvres from pnp.
* Pp. 42, 116 note.
^ Prol., p. 54. 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
with N. T. usage here, Mayser, pp. 346 ff. « Moulton, Prol., p. 54.
,
ooPTai (Ac. 21 24) probably come from ^vpkw} Cf. edoj, edcrco.^
:
(so W. H., Jo. 4: 7, 9, etc.) and in some MSS. (N 8/9 times) into
irlv. But TTteiv is the Syrian reading (Mt. 20 : 22, etc.).^» Con-
traction in -aoj, -eoo, -ooi verbs, of course, takes place only in the
present, imperfect and present participle.
VII. The Tenses (xp6voi).
(a) The Term Tense. It is from the French word temps,
'time,' a misnomer and a hindrance to the understanding
and is
Out of these two ideas grew all the tenses. Each language had its
the Greek ecTov. Each tense in the Greek pursued its own way.
It is a complex development as will be seen. The idea of com-
paring the aorist to a point and the present to a line is due to
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
tense-suffixes which came to be used to express the tense-distinc-
tions as they were developed there remains also the meaning of
the verb-root itself. This is never to be left out of sight. Prepo-
sitions also enter into the problem and give a touch much like a
suffix (perfective). So dvr]aKuv is 'to be dying' while airodavetv is 'to
die' and aTOTedvrjKevai is 'to be dead.' Cf. exei, and airexet., Ha'yov
and KaTe4>ayov. But more of this in Syntax. The point here is
this tense was always the oldest or the original form of the verb.
think only of the second aorists of the -jxl form, the oldest aorists.
It is here that we see the rise of the aorist. Henry ^ has put this
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 aorists represent, of course,
imperfects e(t)r]p, eypa(})OP and the aorists eaTrjv, ecfyvyov. The im-
perfect, 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, is supposed to be originally causative.*
Cf. the use of it with inceptive presents like 7t(7)j/djo-/ca;. The
aorist was quite common in the older Sanskrit, but is rare in the
later language.^ Cf. the blending of the aorist and the present
perfect forms in Latin. The strong aorist (both non-thematic
and thematic) is far more common in Homer than in the later
Greek.^ Indeed in the modern Greek the strong aorist has well-
nigh vanished before the weak aorist.'^
8 K.-BL, II, p. 102 f. Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 313; Delbriick, GnindL,
etc., IV, pp. 75 ff. Hartmann (De aoristo secundo, 1881, p. 21) makes too
much distinction between the second and first aorists.
9 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 313. " Sterrett, Horn. IL, N. 42.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (*PHMa) 347
(hva/jLTip, and all the forms of dovpai, elmt and OeLPai. save the indica-
tive active.
' V. and D. Handb., etc., p. 81, but in particular Thumb, Handb., p. 144.
3 Hirt, Ilandb. etc.,
2 Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. 93 f. p. 399 f.
* Storrett, Horn. II., N. 42 f.
'" See Ilelbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 94 f ., for similar exx. in the LXX, and Thack.,
Gr., p. 255.
.
arrjaa (Mt. 13:26; Heb. 9:4; Jas. 5 18) rather than 'i^XaaTov. :
Both (Mt. 5 32) and cT^JMa (Mt. 22 25) occur. Cf. Hel-
eyo-l^woi : :
bing,"Gr. d. Sept., p. 93 f., and Thackeray, Gr., pp. 233 ff., for
LXX illustrations.
"H^a occurs a few times instead of the common ijyayov, as cTrd^as
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 :
these illustrations.
Conversely is to be noted a new strong aorist dvkdakov (Ph. 4 :
i.yayfj(Tai..
verbs have dental stems in Attic, but some have guttural. Hence
the a forms prevail till to-day. The LXX agrees with the N. T.
(Thackeray, GV., p. 222 f.). So hvara^av (Mt. 25:5), k/xTOL^aL
(Mt. 20:19), kireaTTipL^av (Ac. 15:32); but on the other hand
karripKTev (Lu. 9 51), : rjpiraaev (Ac. 8: 39), -qpiJLoaafjLrju (2 Cor. 11 :
2),
aaXiriajis (Mt. 6:2).^ The tendency in the papyri and the in-
scriptions on the whole is towards the use of a and not ^ with
the verbs in -fco.^ Cf. BaTrrtfco, Xoytfo/iat, vofxi^w, etc.
Like KoKeco and reXew^ we have e in €4>opeaapep (1 Cor. 15 : 49) and
eppWrj (Mt. 5 : 21), but ev(t>bpr](Ta (Lu. 12 :
16), p-qdkv (Mt. 1 : 22) and
er(ir6dr]aa (1 Pet. 2:2). Cf. also ijveaa, i]pKeae, e^tecrai. Cf. tTrdvaaa
(Mt. 4:2), but though D has -a- in Jo. 6 35 and {< in Rev.
dLiprjau, :
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-
t
and 18 : 23 note (}>ap7], not (j)aprj. The kolpt] begins to use -dra and
-dpa with all verbs, and it is well-nigh universal in modern Greek.
The LXX agrees A few
with the N. T. (Thackeray, Gr., p. 223).
forms survive in modern Greek (Thumb, Handh., p. 140 f.).
-7]va
rare. Perhaps the increase in the use of --qp forms is partly due
to the general 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;
:
rjpolyrjp (Mk. 7:35, etc.), but iipolxdwo-v also (Rev. 20:12); rip-
irayrjp (2 Cor. 12 : 2, 4), but the Attic i)pTvaad-n (Rev. 12 : 5); ho-
pvyrjpaL is read by some MSS. in Mt. 24:43; dieTaynp (Gal. 3 19), :
VTrerayrip (Ro. 8 : 20, etc.), 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 Toptic and <t>opkw{e) in the LXX. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 105.
* Blass, Gr. of N. T. GIv., p. 43.
Cf. Schniid, Atticismus, IV, p. 594
^ f.
• 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.
350 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
27); Karepvyrju (Ac. 2 :37); tKpv^rjv (Jo. 8 : 59). So also €c})vr]v in-
stead of e(j)vv follows the analogy of kppvrjv (Heb. 2 : 1) and exapw
(Lu. 22 Thus we have kK4>vfj (Mk. 13 28) and avix^yvdaai
: 5) . :
^
(Lu. 8 :6-8). Forms Hke eTrXrjyrjp (Rev., 8 12) and e^dj^T/z/ (Mt. :
the deponent sense have already been noticed under vi, (e).
(e) The Present Tense (6 eVeo-TW"? ;^poVo9). The present
indicative, from the nature of the case, is the most frequent in
actual use and hence shows the greatest diversity of develop-
ment. 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 suf-
ficient.^ Unfortunately the grammars by no means agree on the
simplification. As samples see Giles, Man. of Comp. PhiloL, p.
425 f.; Hadley and Allen, p. 122 f.; Monro, Homeric Grammar,
p. 9; Riemann and Goelzer, Phonetique, pp. 394 ff.; Kiihner-Blass,
II, pp. 88 ff. In simple truth the facts are so varied that they
lend themselves to many combinations more or less artificial.
One of the most satisfactory is that of Monro, who has the his-
torical instinct at least in his arrangement.
1. The Root Class. This is the simple non-thematic present
like 0r?/xt. This is the logical one to put first, as with the aorist
like e-^t]-p. This class is disappearing in the N. T. though 8vpa-
fjLai, tljj.1, elfXL in composition (etcr— , e^), Kad-r]-iJ,aL, Kei-fiaL, Kpefj.a-iJ.aL
appear.
2. The Non-Thematic Reduplicated Present. So bl-bw-fxi, 'i-rj-
1 Cf. W.-Sch., p. 110, for exx. in Jos. and LXX. Cf. also Helbing, Gr. d.
Sept., p. 95 f. MSS. simply read -<f)vrj.
^ Grundr., II, pp. 836-1330. In Horn, the same root wiU form a present in
several ways, as tx^, to^xt^, t^xai'w. Cf. Monro, Hom. Gr., p. 40.
3 Giles, Man. of Comp. PhiloL, p. 423.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa) 351
<x7]Tio, Tr)Ku, Tpooyo:, d\Wc^, TTviyoi, etc., Hadley and Allen's "strong
New verbs were added to this list from nouns and some also from
verb-stems, ypriyopk-oi from the old perfect kypr)yopa (this tense
never in the N. T.),-'^ or-qK-w (Mk. 11:25) from taT-qKo. (modern
Greek o-rkaj)." In Lu. probably imperfect,
1 : 24 -KepieKpv^ev is
not aorist, from Kpv^w {kov-ktw). Cf. eKpv^r]v} The LXX shows
these new presents from perfect stems (Thackeray, Gr., p. 224 f.).
the suffix was -71. It is thought that contract verbs in -aw, -eco,
-oco, etc., originally had this t as j or ?/ which was dropped.''
It
1 Gr. of N.T. Gk.,p.41. The LXX has these new presents. Thack., p.225.
2 Blass, ib. The LXX MSS. illustrate most of these peeuUarities of verbs
in the present tense. Cf. Helbing, Or. d. Sept., pp. 82-84.
3 Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 436.
* Grundr., IV, p. 59. Cf. Brug., Grundr., II, § 669.
« Horn. Gr., p. 34.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMA) 353
always a labial stem like clt-tw, /3d7r-Tco, tvtt-to). The root may end
in j3 as in koKv-k-toi, tv as in tvtt-toj, or (f>
as in jSaTr-rco. It is even
possible that ttt may represent an original x/ (cf. iota class).
(e) The 6 class. Cf. 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 Future Tense (6 fieWojv ;)^poV 09) The origin of this .
(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.
GL, p. 42). Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 88, for LXX illustra-
tions to the same effect. The LXX has the classic 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 o-
aorist.^The frequency of the aorist subjunctive in Homer with
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 Brug-
mann'' 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^ re-
gards aeo/e (Doric) as a combination of the <r future and the e
future (liquid verbs, for instance) and considers it a new Greek
formation. This Doric future therefore may be as old as any,
while 4>€uy(io has 4>ev^oiJLaL (Jo. 10 5). The other forms common :
gular and so neroiKLw (Ac. 7:43) and 7rapop7tai (Ro. 10 : 19), both
quotations. Elsewhere W. H.'* prefer the forms in -io-co, and Blass^
thinks that in the original passages of the N. T. the -laco forms
are genuine. So the forms in -laei (like jSaTTiaeL) are uniform in
the N. T. (Lu. 3 : 16) save Kadapiei (Hel). 9 :and haKadapiel
14)
(Mt. 3 : 12) .^ MSS. vary between cK^opLtt and -lati, <i)WTL€L and
-icret, xpovid and -tcrei. Cf. Blass.'' So in Eph. 6: 8; Col. 3:25,
the MSS. vary between KOfiLelTaL and Koniaerai. Some MSS. read
KonLovfjLevoL in 2 Pet. 2 : 13.^ All editors^ accept Koptttade in 1 Pet.
5 : 4. The active plural W. H.^" print as -lomi always (as pana-
pLovatv, Lu. save in yvojpiaovaiv (Col. 4:9).
1 :48)
Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. 107; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 322; Hirt. Handb., p. 404.
Henry (Comp. Gr. of Gk. and Lat., p. IIG) considers the Doric future to be the
affix of the fviture twice over, as aecro, aeo.
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 149. » Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. lOG f.
" Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 41 f. Brug. (Griech. Gr., p. 321) considers this
a new formation after the aor. subj. suffix. The LXX keeps a. Cf. Helbing,
Gr. d. Sept., p. 86; Thack., Gr., p. 230.
356 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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.
:
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 :
(Ac. 21 : 22, chiefly in the Acts) are found, and ^rjaco (Jo. 5 25) :
above)
The first future passive so-called isupon the distinctively ^
built
Greek aorist in -dr]-. It is unknown to Homer, as stated above,
and, like the second aorist passive, is aorist in origin and idea.
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 avaKXidi)-
mon idiom for this tense, though the active periphrastic future
is less infrequent as already shown.
1 Pro!., p. 150. 7
Gk. Synt., p. 7L
2 Giles, Man., pp. 420, 447. «
Giles, Man., p. 449.
»
3 lb., p. 447. Ilirt, Ilandb. etc., pp. 406, 410.
'"
*
See VI, (r), in this chapter. Giles, Man., p. 449.
6 lilass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 3G. " Ilirt, Ilandb. etc., p. 410.
6 lb., p. 204.
358 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
tions^ and the N. T. They are of two classes: (1) real /xt per-
fects without any perfect suffix, like earavaL (Ac. 12 14) (2) :
;
(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-
:
bing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 103; Thackeray, Gr., p. 252 f. But the kolpt]
three k aorists (UcoKa, W-qKa, rJKo) call for explanation. But per
contra there are some perfects in Homer which have k stems like ok-
8opKa, 'ioLKa, T€TT]Ka, etc. So that after 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
as in the classic Greek, as to need no list. Note earrjKa intransi-
tive and earaKa transitive.
4. The Aspirated Perfects. They are made from labials and
palatals (4>, x) and are absent from Homer. Even in the early
classical period they are confined to xeTro/i^a and rerpocfya.^ Ho-
mer did use this aspirate in the peculiar middle form like rerpd-
</)arat.^ He has indeed Ttrpo^ya from Tpe(f)co^ and probably just here,
we may see the explanation by analogy of rerpoTra from rpcTrco
and so of all the aspirated forms.'* An important factor was the
fact that K, 7, X were not distinguished in the middle perfect
forms. As a N. T. example of this later aspirated perfect take
irpoaevrjvoxo. (Heb. 11 : 17). Cf. also e'C\ri4>a, irkirpaxo., Teraxa..
past tenses of the indicative (aorist and imperf.) and grows less
common also.^ In the Latin, as is well known, the perfect and
the aorist tenses blended. In vidi and dedi we see preserved''
the old perfect and in dixi we see the old aorist. The Greek
of the Byzantine period, shows a great confusion between the per-
fect and the aorist, partly due to the Latin influence.'^ Finally
or with exw and a root similar to the third singular aorist sub-
junctive (ex<^ Seo-et or bkaxi). Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 161. The
only K perfect in modern Greek is evprjKa, "the only certain rem-
nant of the ancient perfect" (ih., p. 148). Cf. exe Ate TraprjT-qfxhov
(Lu. 14 : 18). Cf. also TreTrwpwfxeprjv exere ttjv KapSiav v/jluiv (Mk,
8 : 17). This is much hke the English perfect in reality, not like
the Greek exw and aorist participle (like exw aKovaas). Cf. Sonnen-
schein, Greek Grammar, Syntax, 1894, p. 284. The perfect pas-
sive 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 peri-
phrastic form. How far the perfect and the aorist may have be-
come confused in the N. T. in sense is a matter of syntax to be
discussed later.^
7. The Perfect in the Subjunctive, Optative, Imperative. Here
the perfect is practically^ confined to the indicative. No example
of the perfect optative occurs even in the periphrastic form. The
subjunctive perfect, except the form ap- et5co (elSrjTe, 1 Jo. 5 : 13),
pears only in the periphrastic conjugation, of which a few examples
remain. So the active, as TewoiriKcos fi (Jas. 5 : 15), TrcTrot^ores Cofxev
(2 Cor. 1:9), and the passive, as ooaiv TeTeXecwpevoL (Jo. 17 :
23), ^
KeKXriphos (Lu. 14 : So also Jo. 17
9), ^ ireirXTjpiOfjLevr] (Jo. 16 : 24). :
19, 1 Cor. 1 10, etc. The imperative makes a little better show-
:
ing. We still have tare (Jas. 1 19; Eph. 5:5; Heb. 12 17 all pos- : :
' Thumb., Handb., p. 165. Certainly the aorists in -Ka are very common in
the mod. Gk. (Thumb, Handb., pp. 140, 146 ff.).
' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., jx 200 f. Cf discussion between Prof. Harry and
.
Prof. Sonnenschein in CI. Rev., 1906, and La Roche, Beitr. z. griech. Gr., 1893.
* Sterrett, Hom. II., N. 43.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tiIMa) 361
for the real development of the perfect. Here the perfect was 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-
fect action in the indicative. The Stoics^ called the present perfect
cvvTeKLKos (or reXetos) xpovo% hearoos, the past perfect crvPTeXtKos (re-
Xetos) xpovos Trapcoxw^i'os, the future perfect avvreXiKos (reXetos) xpovo's
(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, II, p. 2f.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 201. Drug, calls the past perf. a "neue Bildung."
3 Handb. etc., p. 415 f.
* in seeing a new stem here db-q-.
So Hirt follows Wackorn. Cf. ib., p. 416.
B Deut. 8 3 has db-qaav like the aorist t'Lbr)ffa from .\rist. onwards. Cf.
in :
^ Mayser, Gr. d. griceh. Pap., p. 377. In the Boeotian inscr. the past perf.
and the fut. perf. are both absent.
362 A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
The present perfect and the past perfect also have the periphrastic
conjugation. So we find with comparative indifference^ ecrrti/
yeypanneva (Jo. 20 30) and in the next verse yeypaTrrai.
: So also
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). :
riKovcFixaL (rjKovadrjv) , etc.^ Others are dental stems like irdd-w, -wk-
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 202 f. Bnig. (Griech. Gr., p. 330 f.) points
out how in prehistoric times the periphrastic form alone existed in the subj.
and opt. middle and passive, as indeed was practically true always for all
the voices.
2 lb., p. 326. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 100 f.; Thack., pp. 219 ff., for
LXX illustr. of both a and v (n).
3 Brug., Comp. Gr. (transl.), vol. IV, p. 10. See note there for books on
Reduplication. Add Lautensach, Gr. Stud. (1899).
4 lb., p. 11. Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. 8.
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 syl-
lable (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) 363
aoriet is much more frequent than in later Greek, but forms like
T]yayov, ^vejKov, dirov, persist in N. T. Greek and the kolvt] gener-
ally. Of. kkpa^a in Ac. 24 : 21. The Greek present shows
reduplication in three classes of presents, viz. the root class
(like 5t-5co/ii, t-ri-in, t-arrjui, etc.), thematic presents
the (like
yi-yvo-ixai, ttI-tto), etc.), inceptive verbs (like yc-yvco-aKo:, etc.).
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. The history is probably as
follows in the main. Originally there were some perfects without
redupHcation,^ a remnant of which we see in oUa. The doubling
of the whole syllable was the next step like a.K-r}Koa, k-ypij-yop-a,
e\-r]\v6a, dTroXcoXa, etc., like the present and aorist usage.^" Then
comes the e with repetition of the initial letter of a consonant-
* See Jann., Hist. Gr., p. 190 f., for exx. like traKTo even in Polyb., and later
ypaufxtuos, etc.
2 lb. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 148 f.
stem like Xe-XotTra. But here some further modifications crept in.
The aspirates did not repeat, but rk-deLKa. we have
Those with a-
did not repeat but instead used the rough breathing as 'icxT-qKa
it,
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 in-
deed 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 : :
9 10). For similar forms in Ionic and late writers see Winer-
:
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
lengthening of the vowel as riKovaixai, or the addition of e alone
with contraction as ddi.ap.kvos, or uncontracted as eot/ca (from e'tKco).
(2 Cor. 2 12). Indeed in this last verb the preposition may re-
:
but oLKodofxrjadai (Lu. 6:48).^ Cf. oiKodofjLrjdr] (Jo. 2:20) for ab-
sence of augment. Reduplication in the perfect has disappeared
from the modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 119) and is showing
signs of decay in the kolptj. For suppression of reduplication in
papyri see Mayser, p. 341.
(i) Augment (av^r]ai<i).
past tenses of the indicative was not exactly uniform, being less
constant with the past perfect than with the aorist and imperfect.
The syllabic augment occurs also with some initial vowel verbs
due to original digamma F, a in the anlaut. So e'laaeu (Ac. 28 4),:
1 Moulton (CI. Rev., Feb., 1901, p. 30) cites airaiTTjaOai, eroiixaKafxtv from the
pap.
2 Brug., Comp. Gr. (transl.), IV, p. 25. Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 1S5) thinks
it is an archaic form of the imperf. of dni (e, ev).
3 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 221. » iii^t_ qj^ c,r., p. 185.
* Sterrctt, Ilom. XL, N. 30 f. « Brug., Comp. Gr. (transl.), IV,
p. 32.
366 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
e\r]\WeL (Jo. 6 : 17), etc. On the other hand the augment does
appear in such examples as eTreToidet (Lu. 11:22), k^ejSXriTo (Lu.
* 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. Al-
ready in the LXX
the movement toward the loss of the temporal augment is
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa) 307
2 20), etc., but ccKobbixriaev (Lu. 7 5), etc.; of et, e'l^afxev (Gal. 2
: : :
uvrjaaro (Ac. 7: 16), and the same thing is true of chdeco, as dTrcb-
aaTo (Ac. 7 : 27), k^cbaev (Ac. 7 :45). 'Ep7dfo/xat has rj, not €t, as
its augment according to W. H. So ripya^ovTo (Ac. 18 :
3), but
always etxov.
Compound Verbs (TapaavvOeTo) The language varied in the
6. .
Bivbov (Mt. 25 : 5), kd^Tjro (Mt. 13 : 1), tKadiaev (Jo. 19 : 13), ka-
ek^tTo (Jo. 4:6). In Mt. 13 : 15 tKap^tivaav (from Is. 6 : 10) is
mented 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
seen (Thack., Gr., pp. 19G, 199 f.). The pap. often have -eipidT]i> for -TipkO-qv
(Mayser, pp. 127, 3:35).
» See W.-Sch., i). 100 f. Cf. llort, Notes on Orth., p. IGi: f.
368 A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
case of riyayov and elirov the augment is added to the aoristic re-
duphcation. But in ecopccu (Jo. 6 2 in Tischendorf s text, W. H.
:
and rjdvvaTo (Mk. 14 5) appear and the MSS. vary much. This
:
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.
2. Fixed Case-Forms. The first stage in the development was
reached when these nouns of action were regarded as fixed case-
forms. That stage was obtained in the Sanskrit. At first the da-
tive was the most common case so used along with the accusative,
genitive, ablative and sometimes the locative. In the later San-
skrit the accusative supplanted the rest {turn or itum). Cf. the
Latin supine.^ But the Sanskrit infinitive, 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 develop-
ment.^ 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 won-
dering.'^ 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
also the distinctive aorist infinitive.
also analogy has played a large part 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 weak-
ening of the future infinitive is general in the kolvtj, even with
AteXXco as well as in indirect discourse. In Jo. 21 25 late MSS.
:
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
represents the time of the direct discourse. The infinitive thus
is like a verb in that it expresses action, governs cases, has voice
and tense.-
4. No Personal Endings. The infinitive never developed per-
sonal endings and remained undefined, unlimited. The infinitive
and the 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 noun
and verb. The terms have no inherent but serve distinction,
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
absolute.^ Cf. the forms </)epe and (f)epeLv, for instance. But the
cases used with the infinitive will be discussed in Syntax.
5. Dative and Locative in Form. The infinitive continued a
substantive after the voice and tense-development. At first the
case-idea of the form was observed, but gradually that disap-
peared, though the form remained. The Greek infinitives are
always either datives or locatives, "dead datives or locatives"
usually.^ All infinitives in -at are datives. Thus all those in -rat,
-trat, -erat, -fxevaL (Homer), -adai (-^at). Those in -adau alone give
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 re-
mains between the two cases in actual usage. ^ In Horner^ the
dative sense as well as form remain extremely common, as in-
deed is true of all Greek where the infinitive remains. The very
common infinitive of purpose, like riKdov ayopaaai, is a true dative.
(Cf. Mt. 2 2.) But the very essence of the infinitive as a com-
:
» Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 38.5. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., Feb., 1901,
p. 36 f Cf Hatz., Einl., p. 190.
. .
The Name.
1. This does not really distinguish this vcrlial ad-
jective from the verljal substantive, the infinitive. Both are par-
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 213 f.
2 Gk. Synt., p. 164.
' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 221. Thumb (Ilandb. of Mod. Gk.) has no
diwoussion of the infinitive.
^ Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 109. Cf. Donaldson, New Cnit., p. 003.
372 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
"it is written" agree. But there was no reason why the -ros
should not have had a further verbal development in Greek. For
the structure of this verbal adjective see the chapter on Forma-
tion of Words, where a list of the chief examples is given. Moul-
ton^" points out the wavering between the active and passive idea
when the true verbal exists in the N. T., by the example of a8v-
varov in Ro. 8:3. Is it 'incapable' as in Ro. 15 : 7 or 'impos-
sible' as is usual? Blass^^ indeed denies the verbal character of the
-ros form in the N. T. to any examples except iradrjTos (Ac. 26 23). :
they are verbal at all, and then, if they are active, middle or pas-
sive. There is no doubt as to the verbal character of the form in
-reos, which expresses the idea of necessity. This is in fact a ge-
rundive and is closely allied to the -ros form.^ It has both a per-
sonal construction 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 ex-
ample, (3\r]Teou (Lu. 5 38), impersonal and governing the accusa-
:
» Hirt, Ilandb., p. 438. Moulton (CI. Rev., Mar., 1904, p. 112) finds one
ex. of -rto^ in the pap. and "the -ros participle is common in neg. forms."
Note that he calls it a participle.
* Brus., Comp. Or., II, p. 457.
* Whitney, Sans. Or., p. 347.
« Indog. Forsch., V, pp. 89 fif. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 221.
">
Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 202.
8 Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 474.
' Hirt, Handb., p. 436 f.
374 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
^ 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.
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).
6 Brug., Comp. Gr., IV, p. 444.
« Whitney, Sans. Gr., 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]-
:
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;
: : :
rjv yey panptvov (Jo. 19 19), but less frequent in the active, as riaav
:
' Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 331. KtKrunai and KeKTynrjv had no followiiifj; in Gk.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 204. I am chiefly indebted to Blasa for the
facta in thia auniinary.
376 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
SYNTAX
CHAPTER IX
THE MEANING OF SYNTAX (STNTAEIS)
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
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, the present, the subjunctive, etc. Monro in his Homeric
Grammar somewhat the same plan, but ^^^th much more
follows
attention to the "uses" of cases and modes. Brugmann^ in his
Griechische Grammatik devotes far more space to Formenlehre,
even in the third edition, which chiefly differs from the second in
the increased attention to syntax. Giles in his Manual of Com-
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
his great treatise on the syntax of the noun. When Brugmann
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 gram-
mar 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 am carried about by every ^\^nd of doctrine."
As to the dialectical inscriptions the situation is still worse.
Dr. Claflin^ as late as 1905 complains that the German mono-
graphs on the inscriptions confine themselves to Laut- und For-
menlehre almost entirel3^ Meisterhans in Schwyzer's revision
(1900) is nearly the sole exception.^ Thieme'' has a few syntactical
remarks, but Nachmanson,'^ Schweizer^ and Valaori^ have noth-
ing about syntax, nor has Dieterich.^" The same thing is true of
Thumb's Hellenismus, though of course, is not a formal
this,
1
See CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, pp. 436 ff.; Apr., 1904, p. 150; Exp., 1904, series
on Charact. of N. T. Gk.; ProL, 190G.
* Synt. dor griech. Pap., I, Der Art., 1903.
2 Pp. 159 ff.
< CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, p. 43G. Debrunner (p. xi of his 4. Aufl. of Blass'
1 W.-M., p. 27.
2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 72; cf. p. 3 also.
3 Notes on N. T. Gr., 1904, p. 22. < B. S., p. 65.
6 Thumb, Die sprachgeschichtl. Stell. des bibl. Griech., Theol. Ru., 1902,
p. 97.
6 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 3. ^ jb., p. 72.
THE MEANING OF SYNTAX (:;TNTAHIS) 383
» P. vii.
^ P. ix. Ho feels "als Schiller unseres Bepxiindcrs uiul Meisters der ver-
gleichenden Syntiix."
384 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Bd. IV). That marked him as the man to do for syntax what
Brugmann would do for forms. Delbriick does not claim all the
credit. Bernhardy had published Wissenschaftliche Syn-
in 1829
tax der griechischen Sprache, but Bopp, Schleicher and the rest
had done much besides. The very progress in the knowledge of
forms called for advance in syntax. In 1883 Hiibner wrote Grund-
It is not a treat-
riB zu Vorlesungen iiber die griechische Syntax.
ment but a systematized bibliography of the great
of syntax,
works up to date on Greek syntax. It is still valuable for that
purpose. One can follow Brugmann and Delbriick, Vergl. Syn-^
tax, Dritter Teil, pp. xvi-xx, for later bibliography. As the foun-
ders of syntax Hiibner ^ points back to Dionysius Thrax and
Apollonius Dyscolus in the Alexandrian epoch. The older Greeks
themselves felt httle concern about syntax. They spoke cor-
rectly,but were not grammatical anatomists. They used the
language instead of inspecting and dissecting it.
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 difficulties.^
Not all the problems have been solved yet.^ Indeed Schanz so
fully appreciates the situation that he is publishing a series of ex-
cellent Beitrdge zur historischen Syntax der griechischen Sprache.
He is gathering fresh material. Many of the American and Euro-
pean universities issue monographs by the new doctors of philos-
ophy on various points of syntax, especially points in individual
writers. Thus we learn more about the facts. But meanwhile
we are grateful to Delbriick for his monumental work and for all
the rest.
IV. The Province of Syntax.
(a) The Word Syntax (o-vvra^L'i). It is from awTaaao: and
means arrangement
'
' (constructio) .^ 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 discussion, but it is
1 Griech. Gr., p. 363. ' Giles, Comp. Philol., pp. 404 f., 475.
2 Grundr. zu Vorles., p. 3. *
Iliem. and Goelzer, Syiit., p. 7.
^ Farrar (Gk. Synt., p. 54) quotes Suetonius as saying that the first Gk. gr.
brought to Rome was by Crates Mallotes after the Second Punic War.
THE MEANING OF SYNTAX (sTNTAHIs) 385
' lb., p. 142 f. Ries calls it a "naive misuse of the word syntax" not to
take it in this sense. But he is not himself wholly consistent.
* Griech. Gr., p. 363 f.; Kurze vcrgl. Gr., Ill, p. vii.
^ Grundr., V, pp. 1 ff.
words, the clauses and sentences, the general style. Clyde makes
two divisions in his Greek Syntax, viz. Words (p. 126) and Sen-
tences (p. 193). But this formal division is artificial. Here, as
usual, Delbriick has perceived that syntax deals not only with
words (both Wortarten and Wortjormen), but also with the
sentence as a whole and all its parts {Vergl. Syntax, Erster Teil,
p. 83). How to keep syntactical remarks out of acci-
hard it is
(c) Form and Function. I would not insist that form antl
function always correspond. One do(^s not know that the two
did so correspond in the beginning in It is hard to
all instances.
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 W.-Th., p. 276. ^ gynt., p. 5.
388 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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.
express design (see Mt. 10 : 41), but it may be so used. When the
grammarian has finished, the theologian steps in, and sometimes
before the grammarian is through.
in syntax.
CHAPTER X
THE SENTENCE
Trpo€x6fj.eda (Ro. 3:9), deXco (Mt. 8:3), ovxl (Lu. 1 60). Com- :
5 1), ea (Lu. 4 34), l8ov (Rev. 14 14), 'I8e (Jo. 1 29), oval (Rev.
: : : :
or with other words, as oval and tSe above. Cf. Martha's Nat,
Kvpie (Jo. 11 : 27), two sentences. Jo. 11 : 35 (kdaKpvaev 6 'Irjaovs)
is the shortest verse, but not the shortest sentence in the N. T.
(e) Only Predicates. The subject may be absent and the
predicate will still constitute a sentence, i.e. express the complex
idea intended. This follows naturally from the preceding para-
graph. The may imply the subject. The subject in
predicate
Greek is involved in the verbal personal ending and often the
context makes it clear what the subject really is. Indeed the
Greek only expressed the personal subject as a rule where clear-
ness, emphasis or contrast demanded it. The N. T., like the
KOLvq in general, uses the pronominal subject more frequently than
B and read 0ao-t. The plural is very common in this sense as orav
oveLblcxwaLV vixas (Mt. 5 : 11), p.r}TL avXKeyovaLv; (Mt. 7 : 16), ws Xe-
yovffLP (Rev. 2 : 24) like German man sagt, French on dit. Cf.
also, not to pile up examples, Mt. 8 : 16; Mk. 10 : 13; Lu. 17 :
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 :
8iepx^<^9aL (Jo. 4 :4), Trpeirou earlu ir'KrjpoJa-at (Mt. 3 : 15), KadrJKev ^fjv
(Ac. 22 : 22), evdex^rai airokeaOat (Lu. 13 : 33), and even avhoeKTOV
kaTLv rov iii] kXQeiv (Lu. 17 : 1) and 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 in-
finitive as subject, as dtairopeveadaL (Lu. 6 : 1) and elaeXdelv (Lu. 6 :
6). Cf. Mk. 2 : 15. But often Kal eyevero or eyhero 8e is used with
a finite verb as a practical, though not the technical, subject.
So Kal kyepero, eXaXovv (Lu. 2 : 15), eyevero 8e, avurjurrjaev (Lu. 9 :
37). So also Kal earaL, k'xtco (Ac. 2 : 17). One is 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] (papyri) usage of the infinitive with ylvop.aL as above, but
I see no adequate reason for denying a Semitic influence on this
point, especially as the LXX also parallels the other idiom, /cat
eyevero /cat rjv didacrKOJv (Lu. 5 : 17, cf. 5 : 1, 12, etc.), a construction
so un-Greek and so like the Hebrew vav. Here /cat almost equals
on and makes the second /cat clause practically the subject of
eyevero. The use of a 6rt or 'iva clause as subject is common
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
: : :
€/c roiv ixadr]ruiv (Jo.a clear case of the ablative with e/c.
16 : 17),
The conclusion of the whole matter is that the subject is either
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. Likewise the predicate may be absent
and only implied in the subject. Yet naturally the examples of
this nature are far fewer 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 :
1 Prol., p. 17.
^ On
the whole matter of subjectless sentences see Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,
3. Tl., pp. 23-37. Cf. Gildersleeve, Gk. Synt., pp. 35-41, for classical illustra-
tions 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.
394 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
slightly changed in form, if expressed, as aKavdakLadrfaonai (Mk.
14 : 29), viroTaaaeado)aav (Eph. 5 : 24), TiOeiJLev (2 Cor. 3 : 13), etc.
Sometimes again the affirmative is to be inferred from a negative
as in 1 Cor. 7: 19; 10 : 24. In Mk. 12 : 5 the principal verb has
to be drawn from the idea of the two participles depopres and dTroK-
Tevpvvres. In particular ^\^th very often el 8e ht] (or /xiy ye) the verb is
absent (as Mt. 6 1), so that the idiom becomes a set phrase (Lu.
:
(g) Verb not the Only Predicate. But the predicate is not
quite so simple a matter as the subject. 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.
8 58) and
: OaXaaaa ovk Icftlp en (Rev. 21 1). Cf. Mt. 23 30.
17 : :
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
predicate may be another substantive, as 6 aypos kcxTip 6 Koafjios
(Mt. 13 :38); an adjective, as to ^peap earl 0a9u (Jo. 4 : 11); a
prepositional phrase, as €771-? aov to pijua taTip (Ro. 10 :
8) ; and
especially the participle, as rjp diSaaKuip (Mt. 7 : 29) . Other verbs,
besides eifil, may be used as a mere copula, as yiponai (Jo. 1 : 14),
KadiffTanaL (Ro. 5 : 19), eaTrjKa (Jas. 5 : 9), /caXoO^at (Mt. 5 :
9), 0at-
vo/jiaL (2 Cor. 13 : 7), vivapxo^ (Ac. 16 : 3).^ Predicative amplifica-
1 W.-Th., p. 587. Cf. also Gildcrslecve, Gk. Synt., pp. 41-44, for class, exx.
of the omission of the pred. The eUipsis of the pred. is common in the Attic
inscr. 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 395
yuKpbv oaov oaov (Heb. 10 : 37), ttSs . . . aTretpos \6yov SiKaLoavprjs (Heb.
5: 13), ojs ol vTvoKpLTai (Mt. 6 : 16). Cf. Ro. 11 : 15 f. for several
further examples, which could be easily multiplied not only for
koTL and dal, but for other forms as well, though the examples for
the absence of elul and et are not very numerous. Forms of the
imp., fut., imper., subj., opt., inf. and part, (often) are absent
also. For djil see 2 Cor, 11 6. For d see Jo. 17 21; Gal. 4 7 : : :
14 : 11 both dixi and ka-Tlv are absent, 6tl kyo^ kv tQ Trarpl Kal 6
irariip kv knot. The imperfect rjv may also be absent as with oj
6pop.a (Lu. 2 : 25), ovofxa avTU) (Jo. 3 , 1), Kal to ovojxa avrrjs (Lu, 1:
5), In 1 Pet. 4 : 17 we find wanting kaTlv and earai. Cf. also
1 Cor. 15 : 21 for rjv and eorai. The other moods, besides indica-
tive, show occasional lapses of this copula. Thus the subjunctive
D after ottws (2 Cor. 8:11) and after 'im (2 Cor, 8 13), The op- :
tative €177 more frequently drops out in wishes, as xo^pts vjjuu Kal
eiprjVT] (Ro. 1:7), 6 8e deos elpijprjs fxera TravTwv v/xQiv (Ro. 15 : 33),
iXecos aoL (Mt. 16 : 22). As Blass^ observes, in the doxologies Hke
evXoyrjTos 6 deos (2 Cor. 1:3; Eph. 1:3) one may supply either
earip or e'lrj or even earco, though Winer^ strongly insists that etri
4:1. In the last example both dbop and Ibob occur and the con-
struction follows, now one now the other, as is seen in verse 4.
{i) The Two Radiating Foci of the Sentence. Thus, as
we have and predicate are the two foci of the
seen, the subject
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. School-
boys 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 (sub-
ject and predicate) and indeed one of them may exist only by im-
(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 :
€70) ITaOXos (Gal. 5:2). Cf. vvu vnels ot i^apLcraloi, (Lu. 11:39).
The word in apposition may vary greatly in the precise result
of the apposition, a matter determined wholly by the word
itself and the context. Thus in 'A/3pad^i 6 vrarptapx??? (Heb. 7 4) :
a descriptive title is given. Cf. also eL €7cb tVti/'a vfxup tovs irbbas,
Hevos Atd/3oXos /cat 6 Zarai'Ss, 6 TrXavcoj/ Tijv olKOVukvrjv 6\i]v (Rev. 12 : 9).
400 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
An infinitive may
be in apposition with the subject, as ov yap 5td
po/xov i] tQ airepfxan avrov, to Kkripovbixov avrov
eTrayyeXia, tco 'AfSpaafx rj
elvai Kbaixov (Ro. 4:13). Cf. 1 Th. 4 3; 1 Pet. 2 15. Once more, : :
a clause with otl or Iva may be in apposition with the subject (or
predicate either), as avrt] karlv r\ ixaprvpia, otl fcoTjj' alcovLov edoiKev 6
Beds rifup (1 Jo. 5 : 11) and avT-q yap €(jtlv rj ayairrj tov deov 'iva rds
kuroXas avTov Ty]pw{xev (1 Jo. 5:3). For many Cf. Jo. 6 : 29, 39, 40.
more or less interesting details of apposition in the N. T. and the
LXX see Viteau, Sujet, Complement et Attribut (1896), pp. 220-
236. On apposition in John see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, pp.
36 ff. On the general subject of apposition see Delbriick, Vergl.
Syntax, Dritter Teil, pp. 195-199; Kiihner-Gerth, I, pp. 281-290.
IV. The Expansion of the Predicate.
Predicate in Wider Sense. Here predicate must be
(a)
taken in its full sense and not merely the verb, but also the other
Jo. 2 :25).
. {d) The Pronoun. It is sometimes the expanded object, as
TOLOVTOVS ^y]Tel Tovs irpoaKuvovPTas avTOV (Jo. 4: 23).
1 Kurze vergl. Gr., Ill, p. 634 f. Cf. K.-G., I, pp. 77-S2; Delbriick, Vergl.
Synt., pp. 154-lSl.
THE SENTENCE 401
(/) The Adverb. The use of the adver!) witli the predicate
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 :
which in turn has its own clause with ixi] as negative and Kapirbv
KoKbv as object. In Jo. 5
36 the predicate exw has naprvpiav as
:
6 oIkos (xov) the speaker merely uses the person and number of
the first and most important member of the group. Cf. Ac. 16 :
31. The subject of person thus easily runs into that of number,
for thesame ending expresses both. Sometimes indeed the first
and second persons are used without any direct reference to the
speaker or the person addressed. Paul in particular is fond of
arguing with an imaginary antagonist. In Ro. 2 1 he calls him :
2. 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 " mod-
ern 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), :
Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., 3. Tl., pp. 230-230; Gildersleevc, Gk. Synt., pp. 52-55.'
404 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
singular hke tX^9os. Cf. also Ac. 21 : 36; 25 : 24; Lu. 2 : 13. It is
not, of course, necessary that a predicate substantive should agree
in number with the subject. So ecrre k-maroki] XpLarov (2 Cor. 3:3).
4. The Pindaric Construction. Another complication is possible
1 Moulton, CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, p. 436.
2 W.-Th., p. 514 f. " Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 78.
THE SENTENCE 405
ample: '0 irXovTOS vjuLoov aearjirev, Kal to. lixaTia v/jtwu arjTolSpwTa yeyo-
v€v, 6 XP^<^os vficou Kal 6 apyvpos KariccTaL. Here KarlwraL is natural
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 avTcp; 1 Cor. 15: 50, otl aap^ Kal alp,a ^aaCkdav 9eod
dhvarai.
K\t]povop.riaaL oh Here the principle of anacoluthon sug-
gested by Moulton^ will hardly apply. It is rather the totality
that is emphasized by the singular verb as in the English exam-
ples. But when the predicate comes first and is followed by sev-
eral subjects, anacoluthon may very well be the explanation, as in
the Shakespearean examples given by Moulton. The simplest
explanation in such cases is that the first subject is alone in mind.
Thus in 1 Cor. 13 : 13 vvvl 8e p.evet TriarLS, eXxts, aydirri, to. rpla
ravra (cf. English 'and now abideth faith, hope, love, these three,'
like the Greek). Tim. 6 4. However, in Mt. 5 18, ecos
Cf. also 1 : :
phasized as above. See Jo. 12 22. In Rev. 9 12, l8ov epxerat en: :
8vo oval ixerd ravra, probably the neuter conception of the interjec-
tion prevails, though just before we have oval /xia. In Lu. 2 17 17 :
33, rjv 6 irarrip avrov Kal p.'fjrTjp davfxd^ovres, the copula follows one
17
plan and the participle another. So also rjv Kadrjfxtvai, (Mt. 27 61). :
Just so aj0077 Mwvarjs Kal 'HXelas avvXaXovvres (Mt. 17 3). Cf. Eph. :
iarlv, the neuter plural adjective and singular copula are regular.
1 lb., p. 79.
^ Prol., p. 58. Sometimes Shakespeare used a sinjiular verb for the sak(> of
metre (Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 65), at otlier times more like our mod. Kiig.: "It
is now a hiiruln'd years since," etc. Cf. Ck. ianr o'l, etc. Cf. also Riem. and
Goclzer, Hynt., p. 18; Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., pp. 263-2C8.
"
fioL, HTjrep yXvKVTCLTr], Kal 4>povTi'^eTe riixcov. Dick^ has made an ex-
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
(Thess., p. 132) cites Tb. P. 58 (ii/B.c.) evpr]Kap.€v evpov ^e^ov- — —
Xeviieda; P. Hib. 44 (iii/B.C.) eypaxpafxev bpC^VTes io'iiirjV, P. Held.
— —
6 (iv/A.D.) TLdTevofiev —
ypacfio} Kal (jAvaprjaw; and an inscription,
with the writer. The author of Hebrews also uses the singular or
plural according to the humour of the moment. Thus 7rei06/xc0a
exofiev (13 : 18) and the next verse Trapa/caXco — cnroKaTaa-Tadoj. Cf.
also 6 : 1, 3, 9, 11, with 13 : 22 f. Now as to Paul. In Ro. 1 : 5
he has 5i' ov kXa^o/xev x^-P'-v nal aTcoaToK-qv. Surely he is talking of no
one else when he mentions aTro(TToKi]v. Blass^ overlooks this word
and calls attention to x^-pi-v as applicable to all. Then again in
Col. 4 : 3 iituv is followed in the same verse by 5e5e/xat. It is
clear also in 1Th. 2 18, rjdeXrjaaiiev €70? /jLev UavXos. But what
:
—
really settles thewhole 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
the plural. Thus TrapaKoXcb (10 : 1), dappco, Xo7tfo/xat (10 :
2), arpa-
T€v6p.eda (10 : 3), ij^teis (10 : 7), Kauxwco/xat, alaxvv6r](ToiJLaL (10 : 8),
86^oj (10 : 9), eafiev (10 : 11), Kaux'jcro^teSa (10 : 13), etc. It is not
credible that here Paul has in mind any one else than himself.
Cf. also 2 Cor. 2 : 14-7 : 16 for a similar change from singular to
plural. The use of the literary plural by Paul sometimes does
not, of course,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
Jo. 3:11, o dibapLev \a\ovpev /cat 6 eccpuKafxev paprvpovpev. In Mk.
4 30 (ttws opoLcoacopev rrju jSacnXeiav rod Oeov;) Christ associates others
:
(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 ovpa-
vos is used in the singular often enough, and always so in the Gos-
20), irpo TTjs dupas (Ac. 12 : 6). The plural of Iixoltlov seems to mean
only IfiCLTLOP (not x^tcoj' also) in Jo. 19 : 23 (cf. 19 2). For the
:
plural alixaTa note Jo. 1 : 13. The names of feasts are often plural,
such as TO. eyKalvta (Jo. 10 22), to. yeveaia (Mk. 6 21), rd a^vfia : :
16 : 3), TO. apyvpia (Mt. 27: 5), rd oi/'w^a (Lu. 3 : 14), SiadrJKaL (Ro.
9:4).
Idiomatic Singular in Nouns.
(e) On the other hand the
singular appears where one would naturally look for a plural. A
neuter singular as an abstract expression may sum up the whole
mass. Thus irav 6 in Jo. 6 : 37 refers to believers. Cf. also
Jo. 17 2. : The same collective use of the neuter singular found
is
14), eSodT] avTols aToXi] \evKr] (Rev. 6 : 11), (ztto TrpoadoTrou tcjp iraTe-
poiv (Ac. 7:45), 5td aTOfxaros iravToov (Ac. 3 : 18), etc ttjs x^'pos avTcov
(Jo. 10 : 39). In 1 Cor. 6 : 5, di^d peaov tov a8e\(t)ov, the difficulty lies
not in p-eaop, but in the singular a8e\(f)ou. The fuller form would
have been the plural or the repetition of the word, dSeX^oO Kal
dSeX^oO. In all these variations in number the N. T. writers
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.^
(/) Special Instances. Two or three other passages of a
more special nature call for comment. In Mt. 21 7 (eireKadLcrev :
by only one parable, but there were douljtless others not recorded.
In Mt. 9 : 8, kdo^aaav top Oeop top boPTa k^ovalav TOLavTtjp rots di'^pcoTrois,
we have a double sense in dopra, for Jesus had the k^ovaLav in a sense
not true of di'^pcoTrots who
40 got the benefit of it. So in Ac. 13 :
1 Cf. also Dclbriick, Vcrfrl. Synt., 1. Tl., pp. 133-172,3. Tl., pp. 240-248;
K.-C, Bd. I, pp. 271 IT.; Brug., Griech. Cir., pp. 3G9-373.
410 A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
found with the same word, e^aXev els ttju \r}v6v rod Ovixov rov 6eov tov
fieyav. Cf. Lu. 4 25 and 15 14. The papyri vary also in the
: :
ouTOL (ovToi elffLV ai 8vo eXatat Kal al dvo \vxviaL al kvoiinov rov Kvplov
TTJs yrjs eaTcoTes). But more al)out the Apocalypse later. In Mk.
12 : 28, TToia karlv evToiXrj TpcoTT) iravTwv, Winer (Winer-Thayer, p.
178) thinks that iraacop would be beside the point as it is rather the
general idea of omnium. Is it not just construction Kara avpeaLv?
In Ph. 2 : 1 el tls airXaxva is difficult after el tl TrapaiJ.Wt.ov and el
pia? In Mt. 21 42 (Mk. 12 11), rapd Kvplov eyeveTo avT-q Kal Icftlv
: :
^ But Moulton
(CI. Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 151) cites from the pap. numerous
false 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.
3 Prol., p. 59. " W.-Sch., p. 255.
THE SENTENCE 411
TovTo would be the Greek idiom for avrr]. It is even possible that
avrr] may refer to KecfjoXriv ycjovlas. So also rfj BdaX in Ro. 11:4
Cf. also TL ovv 6 vofxos; (Gal. 3 19), tL kanv avOpcoiros; (Heb. 2 6), rt : :
av e'ir} ravra; (Lu. 15 26), et 8oKe2 tis elvai tl iir]bev cbv; (Gal. 6:3).
:
But on the other hand note eluai nva (Ac. 5 : 36), avrr] taTiv rj ne-
ya\r] ePToKr] (Mt. 22 : 38), tIs rj irp6<r\i]ijL\pLs; (Ro. 11 : 15), tIs kcmv 17
^epei TIS and el vivop.€veLTe. Cf. also 17 ^/vxh TrXetov kaTLv tt]s Tpo4)r]s
avTTi (2 Cor. 2:6). So also apKeTOV ttj rjnepa Tj KaKLa avTrjs (Mt. 6 34). :
stands without /jlolxoXoI Kai, but none the less may be regarded
as comprehensive.^ Cf. Tei'ed ij.olxo.\'ls (Mt. 12 39) and Hos. 2 : :
Cor. 3 : 17); $tXt7r7roi;s, Tjrts karlv wpdoTyj ttoXis (Ac. 16 : 12); vt6 tojv
avTLKeLfievo^v, ryrts earlp avTols evdet^LS aircciXeias (Ph. 1 : 28) ; kv ratj 6X1-
ypealv p.ov vwep vp.C:v, rjrts earlv 86^a hixuiv (Eph. 3 : 13). The 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
regard to case, number or gender. So 'EXcot tovt' Utlv dee fxov —
(Mt. 27:46); tout' Utlv tovs adeMovs (Heb. 7:5). Cf. Heb. 2 :
14; 9 : 11, etc. See further p. 399, and ch. XV, vii, (d), 10.
res (25 : 24). But on the other hand note avaaTav TrXrjdos (Lu. 23 :
ct>epovTes (Ac. 5 16). Cf. Lu. 19 37.: : So (at eKKXrjaiaL) aKovovTes (Gal.
But ^(^ov —
exwf (Rev. 4 7) may be mere confusion in sound of :
'ixov and ex^^v. See also (puvi] Xeycov (4:1), (jio^val XeyoPTes — —
(11 : 15), XvxviaL — eaTS^Tes (11:4). Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p.
culine and feminine are used together and the plural adjective or
participle occurs, the masculine, of course, prevails over the fem-
inine when persons are considered. Thus r^v 6 iraTrip avTov Kai ly
davfiCi^ovTes (Lu. 2: 33). So also 'A7pt7r7ras /cat Bepvt/c?? aaira-
fjLTjTTjp
of two nouns (one feminine and one neuter), x^Wa ko,' ^rOp ne^iiy-
neva. Cf. also (jidapToh, apyvplcj t) xpv(^i-V (1 P^t. 1: 18), really ap-
position. Ilot/ctXats voaoLS /cat jBaaavots (Mt. 4 : 24), xdcnjs dpx^s nal
1 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 77.
THE SENTENCE 413
k^ovalas (Eph. 1 : 21), etc. But on the other hand note xoXts ^ ol-
Kia ixeptadelaa (Mt. 12 : 25), the same gender. But when different
genders occur, the adjective is usually repeated, as in xoraTroi \i6oL
Kal TTOTairai olKodofiai (Mk. 13 : 1), iraaa doais Kai irav owprjfxa (J as. 1 :
17), ovpavbv aaivov Kal yrjy KaLvijv (Rev. 21 : 1), etc. There is em-
phasis also in the repetition. But one adjective with the gender
of one of the substantives is by no means uncommon. Thus in
Heb. 9 : 9, 8Qipa re Kal OvalaL /jlt] bvvap.evai., the last substantive is
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 irX-npris MSS. of the N. T.,
are abundant in
occurring in mo.st passag(!s of the N. T. See IMass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 81.
The pap. confirm the N. T. MSS. See Moulton, Prol., p. 50. See ch. VII, 2,
(/), of this book, for details.
;
tive with iSov and then the accusative with eUop. Thus 6 fxaprvs
In 5 6 and 17:3 exoov has wrong gender and case. This parti-
:
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-
yovTe^ in the LXX, like l>25<^. Cf. Nestle, Phil. Sacra., p. 7. See
also Thackeray, Gr., p. 23.One must not be a slavish martinet in
such matters at the expense of vigour and directness. The occa-
sion of anacoluthon in a sentence is just the necessity of breaking
off and making a new start. But the Apocalypse demands more
than these general remarks. 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
excitement. 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
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
:
' Exp., J:in., 1901, j). 71; CI. Rov., Apr., 1904, p. 151; Trol., pp. 0, GO.
2 CI. Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 151; Prol., p. 9.
* lb. Merch. of Venice, iii, 2. Cf. also Harrison, Prol. to tlie Study
of Gk. Rcl., p. 1G8. In tlie Attio insor. the noun is found in apposition with
the abl., the loc. and in absolute expressions. Cf. Meisterh., Att. Inschr.,
p. 203 f.
416 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
of his addresses. Now
24 we seem to have the com-
in Jo. 21 :
e7ra77eXta, rju avTos eirrjyyeiXaTO rj/juv, Trjv ^oo-qp Trjv alcovLOV, we have ttju
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
:
thetic nominative is seen in Jo. 1:6, ovopa avT^ 'Iwavrjs, where 'Icoa-
vrjs might have been dative. But here merely the mention of the
fact of the absolute use of the cases is all that is called for.^
1 Prol., p. 9. See also Zahn's Intr., § 74.
2 Cf. Gildersleeve, Gk. Synt., p. 5; Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 373-376.
i
2:1), Kal kiropevovTo (2:3), kvk^y] 8k (2:4), etc. But this is true so
Kai eireTreatu (j)6j3os evl iravras avTovs. Sometimes the words in con-
trast are brought sharply together, as in Jo. 17 : 4, kyw ere eSo^aaa,
and 17: 5, vvi^ bb^aabv /xe ah. So viiC^v eixov Lu. 10 : 16. Note also
the intentional position of 6 Heb. 7:4a) btmTqv iraTpLapxris in
'A/3pad/i ebu>Kev (.k tCov aKpodivluv, 6 TarpLapxr)^- So also in 1 Pet. 2 :
7, vplv ovv TLp-i] Tols TTLaTevovaLu, note the beginning and the end
Tj
dadKoke ayad'e (Mk. 10 17), ^wqv aiwvLov (lb.). But observe oXov
:
avdpcoirov vyirj (Jo. 7 23), both adjs. So also note 8l' avbbpwv towcov
:
(Mt. 12 :43), KoXdv airepfxa (Mt. 13: 27), ex^pos audpuiros (Mt. 13 :
28), where the adj. gives the main idea. With the repeated
article the adj. has increased emphasis in 6 tolijltjv 6 koXos (Jo. 10:
11). With Tvevfxa ajLov this is the usual order (as Mt. 3 : 11), but
also TO ajLov irvevixa (Ac. 1 : 8) or TO irvevfia to ayiov (Jo. 14 : 26). In
Ac. 1 : 5 the verb comes in between the substantive and adjective
(h TTvevfiaTL ^awTLadrjaeade aylw) to give unity to the clause. So
in Mt. 1 : 20, €K irvevpLaros eaTiv aylov. Cf. ^coriv exere alcjOPLOV (1 Jo.
5 : 13). 24 note ae thus, to. toXXo. are ypafifiaTa els fiavlav
In Ac. 26 :
To/jLa. The position of the genitive varies greatly, but the same
general principle applies. The genitive follows as in Tots XoyoLs
TTJs xo-pi-Tos emphatic as in tojv aXXoTplcov ttiv
(Lu. 4 : 22), unless
(}>o}V7]v (Jo. 10 5). There is sharp emphasis in Toiv twircov in
:
in (TV jjiov vLTTTeLs Tovs TTodas (Jo. 13 : 6). But the personal enclitic
THE SENTENCE 419
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 :
Tjj aapKi, the adjunct ep ry aapKL goes in sense with KareKpLpe, not
Note eire<jev avrov trpos tovs woSas (Jo. 11 32) and ovk av jjlov airkdaviv
:
18). The tendency to draw the pronouns toward the first part of
the sentence may account for some of this transposition, as in to.
TToXXa ae ypaixjxaTa ets iJLaviav Treptrpexet (Ac. 26 : 24), but the matter
goes much beyond the personal pronouns, as in h irvevfxaTL ^awTLadr]-
aeaOe ayiu) (Ac. 1:5), ixupav ex^ts bvvap.Lv (Rev. 3:8), etc. But a
large amount of personal liberty was exercised in such trajection
of words.^ Is there any such thing as ryhthm in the N. T.? Deiss-
mann^ scouts the idea. If one thinks of the carefully balanced
sentences of the Attic orators like Isocrates, Lysias and Demos-
thenes, Deissmann is correct, for there is nothing that at all ap-
proaches such artificial rhythm
N. T., not even in Luke,
in the
Paul or Hebrews. Blass^ insists that Paul shows rhythm in
1 Cor. and that the book is full of art. He compares'* Paul with
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 :
* Boldt, De lib. Ling. Grsec. et Lat.' Colloc. Verb. Capita Sel., p. 186.
2 Theol. Literatiirzeit., 1906, p. 4:34; Exp., Jan., 190S, p. 74.
Die Rhythmen der asian. und rcim. Kunstprosa, 1905, pp. 43, 53.
^
there is a good hexameter, koL Tp6xi\as dp\dds ttoI Tjcrare rois iroalpl
|
|
1 The
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.
J.
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
1 : 12) KprjTes a |
el \{/ev \
aral KaKo. Oripla yaaTepes dpycu.
|
\
\
How much
more Paul knew Greek poetry we do not know, but he was
of
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
the careful balancing of ending with ending, beginning with be-
ginning, or ending with beginning. He thinks he sees proof of
it in Heb. 1 : 1 f., 3, 4 f.; 12: 14 f., 24. But here again one is in-
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.
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 am-
424 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
stands over against dXXd (Ro. 2 13). Blass^ has little sympathy :
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 : 16), but even appears in the fifth (1 Jo.
custom. So also apaye (Mt. 7 20) and iipa ovv (Ro. 7:3). Except
:
tence, lolvvv occurs only three times and twice begins the sen-
tence (Lu. 20 25; Heb. 13 13) as Toiyapovv does (Heb. 12 1).
: : :
its case save in x^-pi-v rivos (1 Jo. 3 : 12). Xwpls precedes the word,
but note ov xwpls (Heb. 12 14). The N. T. therefore shows rather
:
the principal clause. There is usually a logical basis for this order.
But in Jo. 19 : 28 the final clause somewhat interrupts the flow
of the sentence. Cf. also Ro. 9:11. In 2 Cor. 8 : 10, o'irLves ov
(jLOVov TO TOLTJaaL dXXd Kal to deXeiv Tpoeviqp^aade airo irepvai, there is no
violent change of order. Logically the willing preceded the doing
and makes the natural climax. Blass^ is undoubtedly right in
refusing to take Xoyw evrjyyeXcaanrjv as dependent on el Ka-
tIvl
' On the whole subject of the position of words in the sentence sec K.-G.,
Rfl. IT, pp. 592-604.
426 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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.
(6) Two Kinds of Compound Sentences {Paratadic and
Hypotadic). In parataxis (xapdra^is) we have co-ordination
of two parallel clauses. Take Mk. 14 37 as an example, Kal
:
epX^Tai Kai evplcFKei avToiis KadevSovTas, Kal Xeyei too Ilerpaj. In hypo-
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
:
even if it be to a limited
d7a7rare, iroielre, evkoyelre, Tpoaevx^c^d^,
extent. Cf. Gal. 5 22. Blass^ points out that that is not a case
:
serve also vTaye irpaJTOV SLaXXayTjOi (Mt. 5:24), U7ra7e eXey^ov (18: 15),
eyeipe apov (Mk. 2 : 11), kydpeade aycofxev (Mt. 26 46), aye, KXavaare :
(Jas. 5:1). This use of 0,76 is common in the old Greek (Gilder-
sleeve, Greek Syntax, p. 29). But in Jo. 1:46 we have epxov Kai
We. In 1 Tim. 3 16 the fragment of an early : hymn is neatly bal-
anced in Hebrew parallelism.
1 Gr. of N. T. Gr., p. 276.
2 Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 134. On the subject of asyndeton in John see Abbott,
pp. 09 ff. 3 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 27G. " W.-Th., p. 538.
THE SENTENCE 429
eKTjpvxdr] kv WveaLV,
eTnaTeWf] kv Kocrfxu},
ave\r]iJ,<pdr].
a.\r]$eia Kai r] ^cor)' ovdels epxerai Trp6s t6v irarepa el pr] 81 kpov (14 : 6).
Cf. 10 11; 15 13, etc. But this sort of asyndeton occurs else-
: :
23; Rev. 22: 13. A common asyndeton in Luke occurs after Kal
kyeveTo without another Kal, as el-n-ev tls (11:1).
2. Hypotactic Sentences. In the nature of the case they usu-
ally have connectives. The subordinating conjunctions are more
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 kind. The use of the correlative accents this point, as olos
6 kirovpavLOS, tolovtol Kal ol kwovpavioL (1 Cor. 15 : 48) ; uxxirep — ourcos
(Mt. 12 :40). But real antithesis may exist without the correla-
tive, as in Mt. 5 48; 6 2. In relative clauses the bond is very
: :
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 :
t6t€, apa, Kal, dXXd, 8e in the apodosis accents the logical connection
of thought. Cf. Mt. 12 : 28; Mk. 13 : 14; Jo. 7 : 10; 20 : 21; 1
Cor. 15 : 54; 2 Cor. 7 But much closer than with tem-
: 12, etc.
poral, comparative, conditional, or even some relative clauses is
the tie between the principal clause and the subordinate objec-
tive, consecutive, final and causal clauses. These are directly de-
430 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
ditional. He cites also 5oDXos tKKi]dr)s, fxi] aoi ^eXerco (1 Cor. 7:21).
The questions in Jas. 2 : 19 f. may be so construed. But more cer-
tain examples exist than these, where either a conjunction has
dropped out or, as is more likely, we have original parataxis.
Thus a0€s €K/3dXco (Mt. 7:4), a^es Uwixev (Mt. 27 49) can :
idiom with aye, (})epe. Cf. Jas. 5:1. In Mk. 15 36 note a.(()eTe :
iSoinev. One verb really supplements the other much as the infin-
itive or participle. Cf. English "let us see." In the modern Greek
as (abbreviation of a^es) is used uniformly as the English and al-
most like Of a similar nature is the asyndeton with
a particle.
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
: :
1 W.-Th., p. 541.
THE SENTENCE 431
opdre iirj tls (xttoSw (1 Th. 5 15) the asyndeton is more doubtful,
:
with the verb as subject (to yap deKeip TapaKeLrai pot, Ro. 7 18) :
1-4 Blass^ notes that the protasis has three clauses and the apod-
osis two, while in Heb. 1 1-3 he finds some ten divisions of the
:
He would show many more than 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 sym-
metry 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
: : .
k<jTLv^ etc., Jo. 1 :41). But see Mk. 7:11. Editors indeed will
the parenthesis in general sec K.-C, Bd. II, i)p. 353, 602.
434 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
v/xlv, ^riTrjcrovaLV (Lu. 13 : 24) and ort /card dvpaiJ.LV, iJiapTvpco, Kal (2
Cor. 8:3). Cf. (t>v(rlv (Mt. 14 : 8), ecj)r] (Ac. 23 : 35), ov ^Pevdo/jiaL (Ro.
9:1), kv a4>po(jvvri \eyoj (2 Cor. 11 : 21), etc. But the insertion of
(j)r]aLv and 6(1)7] between words is rare in the N. T. Cf. Simcox,
Language of the N. T., p. 200. A very interesting parenthesis is
the insertion in the speech of Jesus to the paralytic, of Xe7€t rcS
d-Ktv Tc3 TapaXeXvjjLkvco. The Synoptists all had the same source
here. 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
re. Cf. also (hael i]iikpaL oktw in Lu. 9 28, which can be explained :
look back l^eyond the parenthesis as in Jo. 4:7 ff. (Abbott, Jo-
hannine Grammar, p. 470). See Jo. 10:35 Kal ov BvvaTai XvdrjvaL
7j 7pa(/)T7. Cf. the sharp interruption in Jo. 4 : 1-3. In Gal. 2 5 : f.
36. 2). It is just in writers of the greatest 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 when he is greatly
stirred, as in Gal. and 2 Cor. Such violent changes in the sentence
are common in conversation and public addresses. The dialogues
of Plato have many examples. The anacoluthon may be therefore
either intentional or unintentional. The writer may be led off by
a fresh idea or by a parenthesis, or he may think of a better way of
finishing his sentence, one that will be more effective. The very
jolt that is given by the anacoluthon is often successful in making
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
pp. 588-592.
436 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
in the construction and xept avrov used. In Trds ovv oarts bp.oko'yi}-
aei, —
otxoXoyrjaco Kayo: kv avToo (Mt. 10 32) the same principle holds :
in regard to ttSs and kv avTQi. But in the same verse the regular
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
:
ceraL Trap' avrov). Here two things are true. We not only have the
stranded subject (cf. wap' avrov), but it has been attracted into the
case of the relative (inverse attraction), iravrl, not ttSs. With this
compare tcLs 6s epel — a<j>edi}(Terai avrui (Lu. 12 : 10). In 2 Cor. 12 :
(TTJs ovros — olbap.ev ri eyevero avrw (Ac. 7 : 40; Ex. 32 : 1). Blass"
finds anacoluthon in Mk.
20 {Ibdiv avrov to irvevna crvveaira-
9 :
which reads eUov 6tl instead of Ibd^v otl — oTe (margin of W. H.).
But in 6 : anacoluthon {irav 6 bkbwKh jiol /x-q airoKkcoi
39 there is real
e| avTov) in the change from ttSz' to e^ avrov. It is possible to re-
gard TTciv iiT] here^ as equivalent to ovSels and not like irds in — /jlyj
arevojv els e/xe (cf. avrov further on). But 10 36 : is hardly anacolu-
thon,2 since one has merely to supply the demonstrative tKelvu or
the personal pronoun aLTc3 with Xe7ere to make the sentence run
smoothly. In 15:2 wav KXrjiJLa — avro we have very slight anacolu-
thon, if any, since both may be in the same case (cf. resumptive
use of ovTos). But in 15: 5 the matter is complicated by the in-
sertion of Kayo: ev avrQ (6 ixkvwv kv efxol Kaych kv avTW ovtos </>epet) . In
17:2 (ttSj^ dedwKas aiirc^ 8coaeL avrols) we have the more usual ana-
coluthon. In 1 Jo. 2 : 24 (ij/xets 6 rjKomaTe (xtt' apxvs ev v/juu /jLevercS)
i/yuets may be merely prolepsis, but this seems less likely in verse
27 (v/JieLS TO xplaixa b eXd/3ere air' avTOV fjihei kv vjja.v) where note the
position of u/xets and kv vixtv. In Rev. 2 : 26 the anacoluthon
(6 vLKwv — differ from some of those above.^ So
Scocrco avrco) does not
also as to Rev. 3
but in 2 7, 17 (rw vlkojvtl Swao) avTw)
: 12, 21, :
the case is the same and may be compared with Jo. 15 2, 5. Cf. :
avTobs. Cf. Mt. 10 : 14; Lu. 10 : 8, 10. Cf. this with the very
common use of resumptive ovtos after the article and the participle,
like 6 VTOfxelvas eis reXos ovtos cco^Tytrerat (Mt. 10 : 22).
2. Digression. A somewhat more complicated kind of anacolu-
thon where a digression is caused by an intervening sentence or
is
agrees in case with ovdels and number with nad-qruv. With this
compare the change from I'm /iiy aipcjav in Mk. 6 : 8 to the infini-
elirep avrfj does not fit in exactly after on 'Ewpa/ca tov kvplop. The
added clause the is comment of John, not of Mary. The margin of
Ac. 10 36 (W. H.) with: 6p is a case of anacoluthon, but the text
itself is without 6v. In Ac. 24 6 the repetition of
: 6p /cat leaves evpop-
res from eKpariiaanep In Ac. 27 10 (decopC) ort
cut off neWeip) the
. :
—
oTi clause is changed to the infinitive, a phenomenon noted by
Winer- in Plato, Gorg. 453 b. The anacoluthon in Gal. 2 6 (oltto 5e :
T03V SoKOVVTWP elpal Ti — oTToloi TTore ^crap ovb'ep /jlol Sta^epei — irpdacjoirop 6
where the apodosis to the coairep clause is wanting. The next 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 /cat ravr-qp ttip (})o:prip yip-eis
Lu. 11:11 12:8, 10; 21:6; Jo. 6:39; 17: 18; Ac. 15: 22 ff.
f.;
less certain about areWonevoL in 2 Cor. 8 20, for, skipping the long :
1 lb., p. 571.
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 223. » lb. * lb., p. 225.
s
Bliiss, Cr. of N. '1\ C.k., ]). 2S5.
440 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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 anaco-
ei. This is all oratio variata in reality and is in accord with the
ancient Greek idiom. Blass^ considers Tit. 1 2 f an instance of : .
above. Thus also 2 Jo. 2. In Rev. 7 9 after eUov Kal iSov we find :
(to be parallel with oh wepl rwv r}p.iTkpwv) John has merely -wepl
6\ov TOV Koa/jLov, a somewhat different conception. A similar ex-
amph; is found in Ac. 20 34 as between rats xp^^ats /lov and toTs
:
ouCTt )Lter' kfiov. Heb. 9 7 furnishes the same point in inverse ordrr
:
shown also in Ph. 2 : 22 ljetvve(!n Trarpt TeKPov and avp e^ol wliere
Paul purposely puts in aw to break a too literal carrying out of
the figure. In Rev. 1 : 6 the correct text in th(> i)arenthesis has
1 Gr. of N. T. C.k., p. 2SG. 2 W.-Tli., p. 579. » n,.
.
15 : 5 Kay 6)) and in Lu. 17:31 where the relative and the
(6 nevcav
participle are paired off. So also Ph. 1 23 and 1 Jo. 3 24. Cf : :
old sense nor is 6tl always the sign of indirect quotation. Fre-
quentlyit is merely recitative otl and corresponds to our quotation-
Xeyet. So also v/xeh Xeyere otl /SXao-^Tj^teis (Jo. 10 36). This re- :
reverse process where the writer drops from the direct to the in-
direct statement (aySpaaov wv XP^'-O-^ exo/xev els ttjv eoprrjv, rj rots
ttojxo'ls Lva tl 5(3). So also we see the same thing in Ac. 23 : 23 f.
into the words of Jesus rore Xeyei tc3 TapaXvTLKui, we probably have
anacoluthon rather than cranio fan'af a (see (d), Parenthesis).
(g) Connection between Separate Sentences.So far we
have been considering the matter of connection between the vari-
ous parts of the same sentence, whether simple or complex, and
the various comphcations that arise. But this is not all. The
Greeks, especially in the literary style, felt the propriety of indi-
cating the inner relation of the various independent sentences that
composed a paragraph. This was not merely an artistic device,
but a logical expression of coherence of thought. Particles like
Kai, be, dXXd, yap, ovv, 8r}, etc., were very common in this connec-
tion. Demonstrative pronouns, adverbs, and even relative pro-
nouns were also used for this purpose. I happen to open at Mt.
24 32-51 a paragraph of some length. The first sentence begins
:
(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 (IITHSEIS) 447
in Arcadian the genitive and the locative took the same form^
(of. 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 gen-
itive the "whence-case" and undertakes to explain every usage of
the genitive from that standpoint, a hopeless exercise in grammat-
ical gymnastics. The same 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.
(c) Modern Usage. Some modern grammarians^ help mat-
ters a good deal by saying true genitive, ablatival genitive, true
dative, locatival dative, instrumental dative. This custom recog-
nises the real case-distinctions and the historicaloutcome. But
some confusion remains because the locative and the dative
still
never mean same thing and are not the same thing in
exactly the
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
indiscriminately nominative, vocative or accusative, according to
the facts in the context, not nominatival accusative or accusatival
nominative. So with ^aaiXels or TroXeis. We are used to this in
the grammars, but it seems a shock to say that TroXecos may be
tion and a gentle hint not to be too ready to blur over case-dis-
tinctions 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
one may take so many different standpoints that the border-lines
apLarepq. (loc), eis apiaT^pav (acc.) are all good Greek for 'on the left'
(we have also in English 'at the left/ 'to the left')-^
case was. The isolating languages, like the Chinese, show such
by the order of the words and the tone in pronunciation.
relations
Modern English and French use prepositions chiefly besides the
order of the words. These word-relations concern substantives in
their relations with other substantives, with adjectives, with prep-
ositions and with verbs. So adjectives and pronouns have all
these relations. It is immaterial whether verb or substantive is
the earliest in the use of a case with a substantive. In the old
Sanskrit practically all the word-relations are expressed by the
eight cases. 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
known.^ On Origin of Case-Forms see chapter VII, i, 2, (c).
inative. But Paul does not hesitate to say vwep e7co (2 Cor. 1 1 23) :
the instrumental (a/ia, avi'). Giles ^ denies that the genitive is ever
used with a preposition. Certainly what is called the geni-
tive with prepositions is often the ablative. Probably kwi and
avri are used with the real genitive. Naturally the cases that
are more local in idea hke the locative ('where'), the accusa-
tive ('whither') which is partly local, the instrumental ('where-
with') and the ablative ('whence') are those that are most
frequently supplemented by prepositions.^
(d) Original Use with Local Cases. Originally most of
the prepositions were used with either of these local cases (loc,
instr., abl.). Some fewthem continued to be so used even in
of
the N. T. This matter come up again under the head of
will
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 abla-
tive. Upos has accusative 679 times, locative 6, and ablative 1
(Ac. 27 34, a hterary example).^ The bulk of those that have two
:
are narrowing down to one case^ while dm, clptL, els, h, irpo have
only one, and d/i</)t has disappeared save in composition. If this
» See further Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 376; Brug., Kurze vergl. Gr., II, p. 419.
2 Vergl. Synt., I, p. 193.
3 Prol., p. 60.
* Comp. Gr. of Gk. and Lat., p. 217.
6 Prol., p. 61. 6 C. and S., Sel. from the LXX, p. 82.
THE CASES (nTOSEIs) 453
usage.^ See further Locative Case and also Prepositions (h). In-
deed in the N. T. h outnumbers els three to two.^ 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
also have gone from the modern Greek vernacular and that aro
with the accusative (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 : :
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 61 f.
^ lb., p. 02. Die Propos. boi Hcrodot iind andorn ITistor. (1004),
Hclbinp;,
pp. 8 ff., gives a summary of the uses of tf and ds. Cf also Moultou's re- .
we have an instance of it, for the nominative (lit. plural) means '
as
minister of God I commend myself,' while the accusative {haKovovs)
would be, 'I commend myself as a minister of God.' We are then
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 (da-
tive, locative, instrumental gone) that one cannot look for the old
distinctions.
(c) Vitality of Case-Idea. This independence of the case-
idea is not 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
parts of speech. The context is always to be appealed to in order
to know the case.
(d) The Historical Development of the Cases. This
is always to be considered. The accusative is the oldest of the
cases,may, in fact, be considered the original and normal case.
Other cases are variations from it in course of hnguistic develop-
ment. With verbs in particular which were transitive the accusa-
tive was the obvious case to use unless there was some special
reason to use some other. The other oblique cases with verbs
(gen., abl., loc, instr., dat.) came to be used with one verb or the
other rather than the accusative, because the idea of that verb
and the case coalesced in a sense. Thus the dative with ireWo-
fiaL, 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 cases
since they were concerned little with syntax. Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 37.
THE CASES (nxflSEis) 455
genitive, accusative and els compete for the function of the old
dative {ib., pp. 38 The accusative was always the most
ff.).^
when he says that the ace. alone has preserved its original force. He means
form alone.
456 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
ireirTcoKvIa, a real tttwo-is. All the true cases therefore were oblique.
Indeclinable words are airTcora. When the nominative was con-
sidered a case was still called by the word for noun {ovofxaaTLKr],
it
way. The use of a special case for this purpose was an after-
thought.
(6) Reason for the Case. Why then was the nominative
used? Why was it ever originated? Its earliest use was in apposi-
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 substan-
tive and pronoun are employed as in avros de eyw UavXos Trapa/caXoj
(2 Cor. 10 Other languages can even use other cases for
: 1).
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-
places the explanatory genitive, as airvpl aimwL, 'mustard seed'
(Thumb, Handh., p. 33).
(c) Predicate Nominative. The predicate nominative is in
line 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
:
examples as id mihi honori and the Greek can use one dative, as
est,
6vop.a eaTL fxoL.^ Thus in the N. T. eK\r]dr] TO ovojxa avrov 'Irjaovs (Lu.
2 21),
: avrip KoXov/JLevos Za/cxatos (Lu. 19 2), rjv ovo/xa tCo bovKw MdXxos
:
(Jo. 18 : 10), as well as^ 'Icjo.j't/s kaTiv ovona avrov (Lu. 1 : 63). The
use of the nominative in the predicate with the infinitive in indirect
discourse {<i)a(XKovTts elvai ao4)ol, Ro. 1 : 22) is proper when the sub-
ject of the principal verb is referred to. See Indirect Discourse
(Modes and Infinitive). But the N. T., especially in quotations
from the LXX and passages under Semitic influence, often uses
» lb., p. 302.
2 Cf. Dclbriick, Vorgl. Synt., I, p. 188.
3 Cf. Mcistcrh., Or. d. att. Inschr., p. 203, for exx. of the free use of the
noun in app.
* Monro, Horn. Cr., p. 117.
6 Cf. Delbriick, Vcrgl. Synt., I, p. 393 f.; Monro, Horn. Gk., p. 114 f.
els and the accusative rather than the predicate nom. Moulton^
denies that 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
' '
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 :
kXaxt-cTTov effTLP, the point is not very different. Cf. also 1 Cor.
14 22 (els a-nixelov)
: But observe ixi] els nevov yeur^raL (1 Th. 3:5),
.
els iravras avdpojirovs els KaraKpLfxa (Ro. 5 : 18), eyevero 17 ttoKls els rpla
1 Prol., p. 71 f.
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
:
ovTos — ovK o'lSa/jiev tI eyevero avrc^ (Ac. 7:40), irdv prjua apyov —
airo8uaovaL irepl avTov \6yov (Mt. 12 : 36), Tavra a deccpelre, eXevaovrac
TjiiepaL (Lu. 21 :6). In particular is the participle (cf. Jo. 7 : 38,
6 Tnarevcov ets e/ie) common in such a nominative, about which see
the chapter on the Sentence (anacoluthon). Moulton^ considers
this one of "the easiest of anacolutha." Cf. further ttSs 6s epel
— a(t>edr]aeTaL avrCo (Lu. 12 : 10; cf. verse 8). Cf. Jo. 18 : 11. Some
of the examples, like to abhvn.Tov tov (Ro. 8:3), vo/jlov, h w '))adeveL
* Sec extended discussion in Moulton, Prol., pp. 69, 235. See also note in
this Gr. in ch. on Orthog. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 250 f.
2 Prol., p. 69.
» C. and S., Sel. from the LXX, p. 55.
4 Prol., pp. 09, 225.
460 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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
SiaaTrjua (Ac. 5: 7) and i5oi; SeKa Kai okto: errj (Lu. 13 16). The use :
and the second is kept rather than made accusative. Cf. Kad' els
(Ro. 12 : 5), ava els (Rev. 21 : 21). Brugmann^ indeed considers
the adverbs rpcoTou, devrepov, etc., in 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
(1 Cor. 6:6). But avrb tovto (2 Pet. 1 5) is probably accusative. :
TOP TOTTov Tov LSloitov ttcos cpet) Is uatural. Cf. examples like xpovos
6 auTos in Boeotian inscriptions (Claflin, Syntax, etc., p. 47).
Jo. 20 28. I shall treat therefore this as really the vocative, not
:
the nominative, whatever the form may be, and now pass on to
the consideration of the Vocative Case.
VI. The Vocative (tttcoo-ls k\t]tlktj).
vocative may
be compared to the absolute use of the nomina-
and accusative. The native Sanskrit grammarians
tive, genitive
do not name it in their hst of cases, and Whitney^ merely
treats the singular after the other cases. Indeed the
it in
vocative sometimes as much a sentence as a case, since the
is
between Jesus and Mary. When Thomas said '0 KvpLos Kai
6 deos fxov, he gave Christ full acceptance of his deity and his
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 deos, besides the plurals, neuters and
feminines mentioned under v, (h). Cf. the same practical situation
in the Sanskrit.^ Farrar^ indeed conjectures that originally there
was no difference in form at all between the nominative and voca-
tive 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
:
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. : :
Lu. 12 20 and 1 Cor. 15 36. Cf. also yevea ainaTos in Lu. 9 41.
: : :
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 ac-
:
»
W.-Sch., p. 258 f.; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 86 f.
same form. Thus w avdpoiire Keve (Jas. 2 20), 5oDXe irovt^pk (Mt. :
15 3), and w avOpoiire, iras 6 Kplvwv (Ro. 2:1). In the last instance
:
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., I, p. 50; Giles, Man., p. 302; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 116. Cf. also
C. and S., Sel. from the Sept., p. 55.
THE CASES (llTflSEIs) 465
'you little flock.' But one can hardly see such familiarity in
6 Trariyp (Mt. 11 : 26). But in Mk. 9 : 25 there may be a sort of
insistence in the article, like 'Thou dumb and deaf spirit' (to
aXakov Kal kox^ov Tuevfia). Even here the Aramaic, if Jesus used
it, had the article. Moulton^ considers that ISacnXeu in Ac. 26 7 :
1 Giles, Man., p. 302; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 377. Cf. Dolbrtick, Vcrgl. Synt.,
p. 397 f. 2 Moulton, Prol., p. 70.
» Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 70. Cf. K.-G., II, pp. 46 ff.
dresses Jesus as 6 Kvpibs ixov Kal 6 debs /jlov, the vocative Hke those
above. Yet, strange to say, Winer ^ calls this exclamation rather
than address, apparently to avoid the conclusion that Thomas
was satisfied as to the deity of Jesus by his appearance to him
after the resurrection. Dr. E. A. Abbott^ follows suit also in an
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
:
shows it also, as Krebs' has carefully worked out with many verbs,
(c) The Meaning of the Accusative. It is not so easy to
determine this in the view of many scholars. Delbriick * despairs
of finding a single unifying idea, but only special types of the ac-
cusative. Brugmann^ also admits that the real ground-idea of the
case unknown, though the relation between noun and verb is
is
4>b^ov fxeyav, Mk. 4:41) usage. But the whole case cannot be
discussed on this artificial principle, as Monro ^ rightly sees. He
sees 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 diffi-
culties, defines the accusative as the answer to the question
"How far?" The word extension comes as near as any to ex-
pressing 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
it is naturally the most general in idea. If you ask a child (in
English) "Who is it?" he will reply "It's me." This is, however,
not a German idiom. The accusative measures an idea as to
its content, scope, direction. But the accusative was used in
so many special applications of this principle that various sub-
divisions became necessary for intelligent study.
{d) With Verbs of Motion. It is natural to begin with verbs
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)
7rd/ie o-TTtrt, 'we are going home.' Moulton {ProL, p. 61) notes that
it is just the local cases that first lost their distinctive forms (abla-
tive, locative, associative-instrumental; and the "terminal accusa-
tive" like ire Romam disappeared also. "The surviving Greek
8 See K.-G., I, p. 311 f. for exx.; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 96. Extremely com-
mon in Sanskrit.
THE CASES (nxnsEis) 469
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
:
cbs (TTadlovs e'UoaL irevTe rj TpiaKOvra, Lu. 22 : 4:1 aireairaadri air' avTcov
err] dovXevco <jol (Lu. 15 29). A good example is tiu.eLvai' TTjv rifxepav
:
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 nu-
merous, 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 like-
wise so used, as ras -qpepas — rds vvKTas (Lu. 21 : 37).
Perhaps little difficulty is felt in the accusative in Ac. 24 : 25, to
vvv 'ixov TTopevov. So also as to to \oLTrbv (or XoLTTOp) in Mk. 14:41,
TO irXelaTou (1 Cor. 14: 27), and even kveKowTOix-qv to. vroXXd (Ro. 15:
22). But there are uses of the accusative in expressions of time
that do furnish trouble at first blush. In some of these the accu-
sative seems to be merely adverbial (Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 94)
with little stress on duration. Indeed a point of time may be in-
dicated. Cf. TO irpoTepov (Jo. 6 : 62), irpoTepov (Heb. 10 : 32),
jrpoJTOP (Mt. 5 : 24). It is not hard to sec how the accusative of
general reference came to be used here, although it is a point of
time. Note the article {to Kad' -qpepav, Lu. 19 : 47) in the accusa-
tive. We can now go on to to reXos (1 Pet. 3 : 8) and even ttju apx-qv
(Jo. 8 : 25). But a more difficult example is found in Jo. 4 : 52,
where a point of time is indicated. See also
ex^^s <^po-v ej3o6pr]v,
TToiav copav in Rev. 3 3; iraaav copap (1 Cor. 15:30).
: One may
conjecture that this use of &pav was not regarded as essentially
different from the idea of extension. Either the action was re-
garded as going over the hour or the hour was looked at more
as an adverbial accusative like to Xolttop above. Cf. also T-qp 17/xe-
pap TTJs TrePTtjKoaTrjs yepeaOai eis 'lepoaoXv^a (Ac. 20 16). In Blass- :
rfjs o>pas riixr]v Trju hdrrju Trpoaevxofjiepos we can see an interesting ex-
(Trept ibpav kvarrtv) observe Tvepl, though some MSS. do not have the
^pdaiv (Jo. 6 :27), English 'work for.' Not all Greek verbs are
transitive, as dp.1, for example. The same verb may be used now
transitively, now intransitively, as ep.evov Yificis (Ac. 20 5) and
:
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
:
» N. T. Ck., p. 311.
Blass, Gr. of
Moulton, CI. Rev., 1<)()4, p. 1.52. O.P. 477 (21) tTa is so uso(L Tho arc.
2
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,
Job. Gr., p. 75. » Green, llandb., etc., p. 230.
472 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
But for practical purposes many Greek verbs were used with lib-
erty. In the case of 0o/3eo/zat with accus. (Mt. 10 26, 28) or with :
sents probably the Aramaic original. Cf. opdre Kal (pvXaaaeade airb
(Lu. 12 : 15) and opSre koI irpoaex^re awo (Mt. 16 : 6). Xen. (Cyr.,
11. 3, 9) uses dwo with 4>v\d(X(xco. This matter will call for further
discussion directly.
But we have already observed that transitive verbs in Greek
do not always have the accusative. 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
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, :
(})0)vriv ovK fjKovcav (Ac. 22 : 9). Then again verbs otherwise in-
transitive may
be rendered transitive by the preposition in com-
position. Trjv 'lepeLxo) (Lu. 19
Cf. Sirjpxero 1), but eKeiurjs in 19 4. : :
xoopiov (Ac. 1 : 18), and /jltj oivv 4>o0r]6rjTe avTovs (Mt. 10 : 26) are all
transitive constructions. Cf. Mk. 8 : 38; Ro. 1 : 16; 2 Tim. 1 : 8
for tTraiaxvvo/jLaL (passive) with accusative.
One cannot, of course, mention all the N. T. transitive verbs
that have the accusative. Here is a list of the most frequent verbs
that are not always but sometimes have the accusa-
transitive,
tive} 'ASi/ceco indeed may be either transitive (Mt. 20 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 da-
: :
tive (Mk. 9 22) and w^eXeo; only accusative (Mk. 8 36). In Lu.
: :
» See Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 87-89. Cf. also W.-Th., pp. 221 ff.
THE CASES (nTfiSEIs) 473
(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
:
{•p) as of the English "be afraid of." (Cf. above.) See Jer. 1 8. :
BacTKaivoj in Attic Greek was used with the dative in the sense
has i/yuas (some MSS. vp.7p.\ike Attic) in Lu. 6 : 28. Cf. Mk. 11 : 21;
Jas. 3 : 9. For
with accusative see Jo. 9 28; Ac. 23 4, and
XotSopeco : :
avTovs and avrols (as in Attic) with ixkix^op.ai, but W. H. read ah-
Tovs. 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.
: :
ev (/caXcos) Troteoj, /ca/cws Troteco, etc. In the N. T., however, note av-
TOis ev TTOLetv (Mk. 14 : 7) and /caXoJs iroLelre rots fxiaovaLV (Lu. 6 : 27).
The remaining verbs' that call for discussion in this connection
cannot be grouped very well. They will be treated simply in
alphabetical order. In the LXX yehonai is fairly common with
the accusative, and some examples occur in other later writers in-
stead 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. : :
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, kinOvukcis, tTri.Tvyx6.voi, iinXavOdi'oijLaL,
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.
:
nai occurs only twice, once intransitive (Jas. 4 13), once with ac- :
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
: :
accusative of the person and of the thing (Lu. 3 : 18; Ac. 8 : 25).
In Ac. 13 : 90 note) denies two
32 Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p.
accusatives to evayy., construing ttjv e7ra77eXtaj' with 6tl ravr-qv 6 —
Beds eKireirX-qpcoKev. This is rather forced, but even so the on clause
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:
6, 8, LXX also). Euxapto-rea) in 2 Cor. 1:11 occurs in the passive
(to xcipto-^ia €vxo.pLaTr]9fi) in a construction thatshows that the active
would have had an accusative of the thing and a dative of the
person. Cf., for instance, T'KeoveKT7]9u>iJ.ev in 2 Cor. 2:11 with
kirXeoveKT-qaa vfias (2 Cor. 12 17 f.), only eux- did not go so far as to
:
each passage. 'Iepoi;p7eaj occurs only once (Ro. 15 16) and with :
26 63) has the accusative and Kara also (ere Kara rod Oeov). 'Oijlo-
:
Xoyeoo is common
with the accusative or absolutely, but in Mt.
10 : 32 (two examples) and Lu. 12
8 (two examples) ev is used as :
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.
: :
when not absolute and not meaning 'entrust.' Under the dative
his remarks will be pertinent. UtaTevu is often absolute (Jo. 1 50) :
and often means 'entrust' when it has the accusative (Jo. 2 : 24).
used absolutely (Mt. 19 20), with the ablative (Ro. 3 23) : : and
once with the accusative (ev ere varepeL, Mk. 10 21) as in Ps. 22 : : 1.
Some of the MSS. in Mark have crot, as the LXX usually.^ ^evyo3
occurs absolutely (Mt. 2 13), with airo (Mt. 23 33), with k (Ac.
: :
uior in Latin), as Ac. 27: 3, 17, etc., but in 1 Cor. 7: 31 the ac-
cusative is found (xpcoMf^'ot Tou kogixov) in response to the general
of the verb after the transitive use in the LXX (Ezek. 17: 24).
But most probably this the accusative of general reference.
is
aav TTju daXaaaav (hs did ^rjpds yfjs) Blass^ notes both accusative and
genitive (with 6td). Even kpepyeco has the accusative in 1 Cor.
12 : 6, 11. As examples of /card observe KaTe^aprjaa vp-ds (2 Cor. 12 :
Trjv KplcxLv (Lu. 11 : 42; cf. 15 : 29 and Mk. 6 : 48). Hepi furnishes
several examples like ywoLKa Tepiayetv (1 Cor. 9:5; cf.
o.bi\(l>r]v
Mt. 9 35, etc.), but intransitive in Mt. 4 23. This verb, a7w,
:
:
we find TTdpikbpaixov oK-qv ttjp x^p^^- With irpb one notes irpoayu
(Mt. 14 22, irpodyeLV avrov), irporjpxeTO avTOVS (Lu. 22 47), with
: :
see fxepo) itself), vireirXevaafxep ttjp Kpr]Tr]P (Ac. 27: 7) and prjaiop 5e tl
virodpanopTes (Ac. 27 16). Thus it will be seen that in the N. T.
:
SiKalav KpiaLV Kpivere (Jo. 7: 24), tov 4>ol3ov avToov p.r} (po^yjdrjTe (1 Pet.
3 : 14), av^tL Tr}u av^rjaiv tov deov (Col. 2 : 19), iVa aTparevrj ttjv KoXifV
(XTpaTelav (1 Tim. 1 : 18), ayojvi^ov tov koKov aywva (1 Tim. 6 : 12),
dj/xoX67T?cras Tr}v KaXijv bp.o\oylav {lb.), edaufxaaa l8o:v avT-qv dau/jia fieya
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.'' Thus, Tewoidois
avTO TOVTO (Ph. 1:6), iravTa Icrxvw (Ph. 4 : 13), vrjarevovaLV irvKva (Lu.
5 : 33), iravra eyKpareueTaL (1 Cor. 9 : 25), perhaps even tp'ltov TOVTO
epxofJLat (2 Cor. 13 :
1), fx-qSev dLaKpLVOfievos (Jas. 1:6), oi'dev vare-
P7]aa (2 Cor. 12:11). Cf. the interrogative tI mrepoo (Mt. 19:20),
1 Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436. But note ^-qfidav ki-nfju.waa/iTji', B.U. 146
(ii/iii), irpocrKVPelv to irpocTKvi'rjfxa Letr. 70, 79, 92 (i/s.c.).
2 C. and >S., Scl. from the Sept., p. 56.
3 lb., p. 57. * lb., p. 56.
^ Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 76, finds no instance of such a construction with
dyairu) in anc. Gk.
6 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 91. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 329.
THE CASES (nTfiSEIs) 479
the relative o yap airkdavev and o 5e f^ (Ro. G : 10). Cf. also o j^Dj'
fco kv crapKL (Gal. 2 : 20) which may be equal to 'in that,' adverbial
accusative.^ In 2 Cor. 12 : 13 the accusative relative follows the
nominative interrogative tL kartv 6 riacrudrjTe. This neuter accusa-
tive of the adjective easily glides into the purely adverbial accu-
sative, like iravTa iraaiv dpecr/cco (1 Cor. 10 : 33), iravra fxou fxefxvrjade
(1 Cor. 11 2). :
b8bv (Lu. 2 :44), eiropevero ttju 0861' avTOV (Ac. 8 : 39), av^eL av^rjaLV
(Col. 2 : 19), and the relative also as in opKov 6p &p.oaev (Lu. 1 : 73)
Cf. the instrumental opKco cbfjoaev (Ac. 2 : 30), etc.
{i) Double Accusative. Some verbs may have two accu-
satives. one count space and time, three accusa-
Indeed, if
18) and elirov in Jo. 10 : 35 (eKeivovs dire deovs), etc. Similar to this
is KaXeco (KoXkaeLS to 6voiJ.a avrov 'Iwavrju, Lu. 1 : 13; cf. 'Irjaovv verse
31; eKoXovv auTo — Zaxaplav, 1 : 59). We happen to have the pas-
sive of this very construction in Lu. 2 : 21 (kXij^r; to ovofxa avTov
'Irjaovs). Cf. further Mt. 22 : 43. Observe also 6v nal wvofxacxev
UeTpov (Lu. 6 : 14). 'OixoXoyeco appears with the double accusative
in Jo. 9 : 22; 1 and curiously nowhere else outside
Jo. 4 : 2; 2 Jo. 7
of John's writings. two accusatives as in
'Hyeo^at likewise has
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 dou-
ble 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 :
active, as xotets aeavTov Qeov (Jo. 10 :33). Cf. further for Troteco
virr]peT7]v, Ac. 13 : 5) and note Heb. 12 : 9; Ph. 2 : 29. "Exe fie irapr]-
irpoopl^oj in Ro. 8 29. : For further verbs with two accusatives, not
to weary one, see irepLayo: (1 Cor. 9:5), Uavbo: (2 Cor. 3:6), UXkyo-
indeed the adjective makes three accusatives and with cbs four, 6
Beds riij,ds tovs aToaroXovs eaxo-Tovs aireSa^ev cos eTidavaTiovs (so W. H.).
As an example of the participle see Karkariqaiv avrdu rjyovfjLeuop (Ac.
7 : 10). Cf. 2 Tim. 2 : 8. Sometimes ws occurs with the second
accusative, as in cbs irpo(f)r]Tr]v avrbv elxov (Mt. 14 : 5). Cf. 21 : 26.
In 2 Th. 3 : 15 note jui) cos kxdpdv riyelade, dXXd vovdeTelre cos a8e\-
(t)6v. In 1 Cor. 4 : 1 observe also ijjuas Xoyi^eadco dvdpcjiros cos virr]-
6eov didKovoL is not exactly what cos SiaKopovs would be. Cf. cos with
the predicate nominative in Ro. 8 : 36 (LXX).
Sometimes elvai is used as the copula before such a predicate
accusative where the sense is not greatly altered by its absence or
presence. As a matter of fact with ehau we have indirect dis-
course with the accusative and infinitive. So vwoKptpophovs iauTovs
diKaiovs elpaL (Lu. 20 : 20), where D does not have etmi. Cf. avp-
eaT-qaaTe eavrovs dypovs elpai (2 Cor. 7: 11), Xoyl^eode eavTOvs elvat
to the Hebrew "7 which it so 'often translates.^ Cf. dooaere poL ttip
jralda ravTif}p eh yvpalKa (Gen. 34 : 12). Cf. the similar use of ets and
the accusative instead of the predicate nominative (Xo7ts'o/xat els
Ro. 2 : 26, etc.). Winer^ shows parallels for this predicate accu-
sative; from the late Greek writers. The N. T. exhibits this ac-
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.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. 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.
Gk., p. 93. 2 Prol., p. 72.
» C. and from the Sept., p. 81 f. Cf. also W.-Th., p. 22S.
S., Sol.
* lb. In the mod. Gk. the ace. of the thing to some extent takes the place
of the dat. or abl. (Thumb, llandb., p. 37).
482 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
iavrfj eis viov (Ac. 7 : 21), eXa^ere top vo/jlop as SiaTayas ayykXwv (Ac.
7 : 53), ^yeipev top Aauet5 avTols els ^aaCKka (Ac. 13 : 22), Tc^eiKo, ae
ing to some MSS., b-qaare avra deafxas (Mt. 13 : 30), fjp ijyairrjaas jue
(Jo. 17 Eph. 2:4), both of the outer and the inner ob-
: 26; cf. also
ject. Cf. the passive 6 eyib /SaTrrtfo/iat (Mk. 10 38) which really :
Indeed SMcxkoo is just one of the verbs that can easily have two
accusatives (asking and teaching). Cf. also vnds otSa^et wdpTa (Jo.
14 : 26. In Ac. 21 : 21 we have a normal example, d-n-oaTaalap 5t-
the infinitive, tov diddaKeLP vfxds TLPd to. crrotxeta. Cf. Mt. 15 9 :
15, or the ablative with xapd as in Jo. 4 9, Trap' e/xoD iretp aireXs, and :
tives occur in 1 Cor. 4 : 17, 6s vfxds avaixv-qaeL rots bbohs {J.OV, and in 2
Tim. 1 : G ((Tt both in the accusative). With vTOfufxpr]-
dm^'coTrupctf,
aKOi the genitive occurs once in the passive (Lu. 22 61), the accu- :
42; Rev. 6 : 16). With (pvMaaeaOaL (Ac. 21 : 25) avTovs is the ac-
cusative of general reference (so-called "subject") of the infini-
tive.
But verbs of clothing or unclothing, anointing, etc., do have
two accusatives, though not always. Thus k^khvaav avTov ttjv
xXafxhda (Mt. 27 : 31; cf. Mk. 15 : 17; Lu. 15 : 22), hkSvaap av-
Tov TO. lp.6.TLa avTov (Mt. 27 : 31; cf. Mk. 15 : 22). But diu<pievvvfjLL
N. T., but the passive with accusative in Ph. 1:11 and Col. 1 :
fxijTe fj.r]Te r-qv yrjv yriTe aWov tlvo. opKov) we have two con-
TOP ovpavbv
structions, one "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
(LXX).
Finally some words of doing good or ill have two accusatives.
Thus fjLrjSep ^Xaxpav avrov (Lu. 4 : 35) where the pronoun is really a
cognate accusative, as is the case with u^uas ovbtv co^tXiyo-et (Gal. 5 :
10) with epya^opaL and observes that epya^opac in Attic had some-
times two accusatives. One may compare again the expression H
apa 6 Uerpos e-yevero (Ac. 12 18). Xeytji and elirov indeed have two
:
Cf. Mt. 14 :4; 2 Tim 1 15. To all intents and purposes these :
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 : :
tive in the passive, as in amol viol deov KX-qdyjaovTai (Mt. 5:9). Cf.
Heb. 5 10; 2 Tim. 1:11. :
KOLos Tijp Tkxvqp, but W. H. read aK^vowoiol ttj Tkxvrj- Indeed the
1 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 93. = Giles, Man., etc., p. 309.
' Whitney, Sans. Gr., pp. 91, 93.
« Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 75. So 2 Maco. 8 : 16.
.
KapSia (Lu. 24 : 25), ZvpocjjOLvlKLaaa tc? yeveL (Mk. 7 : 26), KvirpLOS to)
yevH (Ac. 4 : 36), Traj/rt rpoirco (Ph. 1 : 18), rats i^uxats eKXvofxevoL
(Ro. 12 : 5) is nominative in
accusative, even though eh itself is
ovai Tovs KaTOiKovPTas. Cf. oval and nominative (or vocative) in Is.
1 4.
: There is only one instance of an accusative with an adverb
of swearing in the N. T. and that is in 1 Cor. 15 :3l, pv T-qp v/xe-
rather than accusative, but that seems hardly possible with avTd
TOVTO (2 Pet. 1:5), and Kal tovto may be accusative also (Ph. 1 :
29, etc.). Cf. also tovto fxep tovto 8e (Heb. 10 33). In Ac. 15 — :
:
reference. Cf. top irdSap iropets aird aKoXairov, B.U. 380 (ni/A.D.).
the pure adverb. Such, for instance, are to Kad' rip.epap (Lu. 11:3;
19:47; Ac. 17:11), tyip apxvv (Jo. 8:25), to \olt6p (Mk. 14:41;
Ph. 3: 1; Heb. 10: 13, etc.), to wpoTepop (Jo. 6:62, etc.), to irpcoTOP
(Jo. 10 :40; 12 16); to wXelaTOP (1 Cor. 14:27), Ta TroXXa (Ro.
:
15: 22, MSS. TroXXd/cts), rd pvp (Ac. 17 30), t6 pvp exop (Ac. 24 25), : :
»
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 117. Cf. Landgraf, Dor Accus. dcr Beziehung
nach Adj., p. ;37(), An-hiv fiir lat. Lox. und Gr., vol. X.
2 Gricch. Gr., p. 378. » Volkcr, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, pp. 10-13.
4 Giles, Man., etc., p. 309.
488 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
tive were numerous in Horner^ both in the singular and the plural.
They occur in the positive, comparative and occasionally the su-
perlative. 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
:
Tim. 1 18), eXaTTov (1 Tim. 5:9), varepov (Alt. 22 27), tclx^lop (Jo.
: :
13 27), etc. Cf. toXv aTovdaLorepov (2 Cor. 8 22) with ttoXXw /xaX-
: :
1 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 93. Cf. Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 34S f.; Dclbriick,
Vergl. Synt., Ill, p. 625 f.
Gk. Synt., p. 139 f. Cf. also Donaldson's Gk. Gr., § 5S4, and Green's
"^
tive itself). When the accusative is used with the infinitive, it in-
dicates the agent who has to do with the action by the accusative,
since the infinitive can have no subject in the technical sense.
This use of the accusative with the infinitive is common also when
the infinitive is in a prepositional clause like h tQ eiaayayelp tovs
yovels TO iraLblov 'l-quovv (Lu. 2 : 27). Here the matter becomes
clearer for the reason that the article to; cannot be slurred over
and it becomes imperative to explain one of the accusatives as
that of general reference. The context makes it clear that to Trat-
rather than nothing or avTos or kiuavTov. Cf. also Ac. 23 15. The :
we have a verb that is used with two accusatives, and tlvo. is the
accusative of general reference. Cf. the three accusatives in Lu.
11 : 11. This subject will call for further discussion in the chap-
ters on Indirect Discourse and Verbal Nouns. There was a con-
stant 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 ac-
cusative is rare in the N. T. as compared with the earlier
Greek.2 Usually the genitive occurs with the participle and sub-
stantive when used absolutely. In 1 Cor. 16 : 6 tvxou is really the
accusative absolute though used as an adverb. The most certain
example in the N. T. is in Ac. 26 : 3 yv6:(7Tr)v 6vTa ae. In 1 Tim.
2 : 6 TO ixapTvpiov Katpols idioLs is in the accusative without any
1 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 484 f.
* It is rare also in the pap. Volker, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, p. 18.
THE CASES (nTfiSEIs) 491
9 46)
: See further chapter on Verbal Nouns.
.
CIS Ti]v toXlv (Mt. 26 : 18), kirl Tr]i> yrjv (Mt. 15 : 35), KaTCL tov vbixov
(Lu. 2 : 22), /^erd 17/xepas rptts (Lu. 2 : 46), irapa T-qv bbbv (Mt. 20 : 30),
Trept avTbv (Mt. 8 : 18), Trpos avTov (Mt. 3 : 5), virtp bovKov (Phil.
16), vTTo TOV fjibSiou (Mt. 5 : 15). Of these ets is, of course, by far
the most frequent and has only the accusative. Atd, perd, irepi,
* For ace. in apposition with sentence in pap. see Moulton, CI. Rov., 1904,
p. 152, t6 At)) 6y, T.P. 1 (ii/B.c).
^ Green, Handb., etc., p. 234.
» Giles, Man., etc., p. 311. * Moulton, Prul., p. 100.
492 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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 the ablative is the whence-case, but the genitive is
1 Delbriick, Grundl. der gricoh. Synt., IV, p. 37; Giles, Man., p. 319. Cf.
Hadley, Ess. Philol., etc., p. 4G f.
2 W.-Th., p. 184; Moulton, Prol., p. 72. But W.-Sch., p. 259, does not
make this error.
Handb., etc., p. 207.
3 ^ Vergl. Synt., I,
p. 200.
B
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
kretischen Dial.-Inschr. Indoger. Forsch., XVIII, pp. 133-204. Cf. also
Ruttgers, De accus., gen., dat. usu in inscr. archaicis cretensibus. Diss. Bonn,
47 p.
THE CASES (nTf2ZEIs) 493
54), though the adjective and the genitive are not exactly parallel,
for with two substantives each idea, stands out with more sharp-
ness, as in h KaivoT-qTL fco^s (Ro. 6 4) and ert ttXovtov a8r]\6Tr]TL (1
:
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
itself mean all that one finds in translation. The case adheres to
its technical root-idea. The resultant idea will naturally vary
greatly according as the root-conception of the case is applied to
differentwords 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
1 Giles, Man., etc., p. 311. » Hadley, Ess. Philol. and Ciit., p. 48.
2 Cf. W.-Th., p. 236. * Sans. Gr., p. 98 f.
s
Tl. I, p. 331. Cf. Monro, Iloin. Gr., p. 102.
« Vergl. Synt., I, pp. 185 f., 307-380.
^ Griech. Gr., p. 385.
8 Giles,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.
494 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
not seem difficult to believe that he was ready to employ the geni-
tive of place in Acts.
There is another passage in Luke also (Lu. 16 : 24) where the
genitive of place occurs, ha ^a\pn to olkpov too daKTvXov aiirov vdaros.
Here emphasizes the kind of material which the speaker
vdaros
clearly has in mind. ^{ has vdarL. One may note in this connec-
tion the Homeric idiom XoveadaL TroTanoXo, 'to bathe in the river.'
Cf. also the classic ttoO yris. Somewhat similar also is 17 biaairopa
T(hv 'E\\r]vo3v (Jo. 7 : 35) and 656s Wvwv (Mt. 10 : 5), which are ob-
jective genitives but of place also. Cf. kv Tapo-oJ t^s KtXt/cias (Acts
22 3) which
: is 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 if it is of considera-
ble length (cf. e^ eTeaiv, Jo. 2 : 20), while the genitive imphes noth-
ing^ as to duration. In Mt. 24 : 20 this distinction can be seen
in xetMfSws aa^^arw, one the case of genus, the other a point of
/cat
the genitive the time within which (kind of time), the accusative
the time during which (all through). Cf. also vvkt6% to wpuiTov
(Jo. 19 See also tov \oltov (Gal. 6 17) and to Xolttov (Heb.
: 39). :
(1 Cor. 16:21).
2. Attributive Genitive. Like an adjective the genitive may
be either attributive or predicate. This is sometimes called the
genitive of quality. But the name helps little, as all genitives
have this idea. The sense of attribute is indeed the usual
one with the genitive, as IlaOXos 8ov\os 'I-qaov Xpiarov (Ro.
1:1). Thus observe the descriptive genitive in Mt. 18 9 : els
rr]v yeevpav tov Tvpos, Ro. 6 : 6 to acoixa Trjs ap.apTlas, to awjJLa t^s
TaTreti'cocrews (and ttjs So^rys, Ph. 3 : 21), to acopa ttjs aapKos (Col. 1 :
22), (3airTi(Tp.a jitTavolas (Mk. 1:4), rjijepas 686v (Lu. 2 : 44), 6 OLKOvo-
fxos TTJs adiKias (Lu. 16 : 8). And even expressions like viol (t>wT6s
iradrj drt^itas (Ro. 1 : 26), vlos ttjs ayaT7]s (Col. 1 : 13), vo/jlov tt]s
(Heb. 1 : 3), Kapbia dTrtcrrtas (Heb. 3 : 12), pl^a TTLKpias (Heb. 12 : 15),
q ir\7jyrj tov davaTov (Rev. 13 : 3), 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
: : :
the exact shade of the gen. idea is often a matter of theological, not gram-
matical interpretation.
THE CASES (nTfiZEIz) 497
26) and e/c rod o-co/xaros rod davarov tovtov (Ro. 7 24), Besides viol :
TeKPa opjfjs (Eph. 2 : 3), reKva viraKorjs (1 Pet. 1 : 14), t^kvu Karapas
(2 Pet, 2 : 14), viol aireLdlas (Eph. 2 : 2), 6 i^tos rrjs aircoXeias (2 Th.
2:3). Cf. also ol viol rod PVfxcfjoovos (Mt. 9 : 15); 6 vlos rrjs aya-n-qs
avTov (Col. 1 : 13), 6 dudpcoTTOs Trjs avonias (2 Th, 2 : 3),
One may instance further the use of 17/zepa opyrjs (Ro, 2:5),
rifxepa awr-qplas (2 Cor. 6 : 2 quot, from O. T.), rip.kpa kTn.aKOTrrjs (1
Pet, 2 : 12), rifxepa apadel^ecjos (Lu. 1 : 80) where the LXX may be
appealed to for abundant illustration.
The genitive of place or country is descriptive also. Thus Na-
^aper t^s TaKtXaias (M,k, 1:9), TaptrcS Trjs KtXtictas (Ac. 22 3), rfrts
:
karlu irpoiTT] ixepiSos rrjs MaKedovias ttoKls (Ac, 16 : 12), etc. This geni-
tive of quality or descriptive genitive is largely extended in the
LXX by reason of translation (Thackeray, p. 23).
3. The Predicate While having the copula elvai, yi-
Genitive.
veadai, etc., in reality^ it is to be explained as a genitive with sub-
stantives. It is not the copula that affects the case of the genitive
at all. It is just the possessive genitive in the predicate instead
of being an attriljute. Often the substantive or pronoun is re-
peated in sense before the predicate genitive. Thus ovk tanv d/ca-
TacTTacrlas 6 deos (1 Cor. 14 :33). Cf. ^j/xeTs ovk kafxev vttocttoXtjs —
dXXd Tlarecjs (Heb. 10 : 39), irdaa Tacdela ov So/cet x^ipds etvat (Heb.
12 : 11). So v^ yap krC^v 86}8eKa (Mk. 5 : 42). So Lu, 2 : 42, Cf,
also kav TLvas €vp-[i rrjs and indeed kykvero yvdc-
oSov ovras (Ac, 9:2),
nr]s (Ac, 20 : 3) is to be explained the same way. There is as
much latitude in the predicate genitive as in the attributive
possessive genitive. We have viol 4>cot6s eare Kal viol rjjxkpas (1 Th,
5 : 5) and ovk kafxh vvktos ov8e ctkotovs (1 Th. 5 : 6) and fip.epa$ opres
(verse 8),^ We may continue the illustrations like eyoi eifXL Ilai-Xou
(1 Cor, 1 : 12), ovk ka-Ti eavruip (1 Cor, 6 : 19), tov deov ov elfxl (Ac,
27:23), iraPTa v/jLcop karlp (1 Cor, 3:21), ovx vfxcjp karip ypC^pai
(Ac, 1:7), tpa ri/jLcop yeprjrat ri KXrjpopofxla (Lu. 20 : 14), tIpos avroop
IdTai yvpTj (Mk. 12 : 23), reXeioop karlp 17 anpea Tpo4)i] (Ileb, 5 : 14),
XpiaToO dpai (2 Cor. 10 : 7), SiP karlp ^^vyeKos koI 'Ep,uo7tj'7js (2 Tim.
1 : 15), I'm 17 vwep^oXii rfys 8vpanea)$ y rod (2 Cor, 4:7), and finally,
vaov TOV croj/iaTOS avrov (Jo. 2 : 21), tov appa^uiva tov TrveviJ.aTos (2 Cor.
5:5), ar]iJ.elov TepiTO/jirjs (Ro. 4:11, AC TrepLTOfxriu) , to a-qjittov Tr]S
iaaeojs (Ac. 4 : 22), 17 Kol/drjais tov vttvov (Jo. 11 : 13), OojpaKa iriaTeccs
Kal 6.yairr\% (1 Th. 5:8), to epyov ttjs Trtcrrews (1 Th. 1:3), ev
T(Jo Xbycd TTJS oKrjdeias tov evayy eXiov (Col. 1:5), 17 avTairoSoaLS ttjs
(Ro. 8 : 23), tyjv eirayyeXiav tov TvevpiaTOs (Ac. 2 : 33), popos xiarecjs
(Ro. 3 :27). These are by no means all, but they illustrate at
least the freedom of the N. T. in the use of the genitive of defini-
tion or of apposition. It is, of course, possible, as Moulton (ProL,
p. 74) suggests, that the vernacular has preserved the poetical
» Cf. Jann., Hist.Gk. Gr., p. 335.
2 Moulton, Pro!., p. 73 f. 3 u^ p_ 2G4.
* Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 98. Cf also W.-Sch., . p. 2G6 f.
THE CASES (ninsEis) 499
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
fivpov (Mk. 14 3) and Kepafxtov vdaros (Mk. 14
: 13), d7eX7? xo'i-pfj^v :
avvkx^L riixas. Here it is unquestionably the love that Christ has for
sinners and so for Paul that is the constraining influence in his life.
jective, but see Ro. 5:5. In Ph. 4 7 elprjpr] tov deov is probably : 17
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 sub-
: :
(Mt. 4 :23).
6. The Objective Genitive. It is quite frequent in the N. T.,^
especially when it is vanishing in the later Greek.^ The adnominal
genitive preservers a remnant of the old objective genitive in mod-
yeaia avd pcoirov aadevovs, where the good deed is done 'to' a sick
man. In Jo. 7: 13, 5td t6v (})b^ov toov 'lovbalwv, it is fear 'towards'
or 'in reference to' the Jews, while Jo. 17: 2, k^ovala -jraarjs aapKos,
sation 'against' this man, KaTrjyoplav rod avOpdoirov, etc. Each ex-
ample calls for separate treatment. So to <jrip,€iov 'Iwm (Lu. 11 :
29) 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 :
prayer God. '0 i'rJXos tov oIkov aov (Jo. 2 17) is zeal 'con-
'to' :
cerning' thy house. See Ro. 10: 2; cf. also Heb. 11 26, top duet- :
'paid to' angels, while eis Trjv viraKovijv tov XpLaTov (2 Cor. 10: 5) is
obedience 'to' Christ. But see per contra viraKorj rtcrrecos (Ro. 1 : 5)
'by' the sea; ttju diaqiropav tCju 'EXKrivccv (Jo. 7 : 35), dispersion
'among' the Greeks; Trpb^ara a^aYrys (llo. 8:36), 'doomed to'
slaughter; dhpa tcov irpoPaTccv (Jo. 10:7), door 'to' the sheep; /xe-
Trapo^va/iov ayairr]s /cat koXuv epycov there is little cause for com-
ment. The same remark applies to klv^vvol iroraiicov, Xycrroov (2
l3o\ri TOV aireipovTos (Mt. 13 18). Cf. also the genitive of price, :
is more likely that in Lu. 2 : 49, ev rots tov Trarpos, we have the
idea of 'house' rather than that of 'business.' Cf. ets to. Ibta
(Jo. 19 : 27) and ets rd Ibia and ol Ulol in Jo. 1:11. See eu rots
oKrjdovs irapoLnlas (2 Pet. 2 : 22) it is not the genitive that calls for
fieXuiv aov (Mt. 5 : 29), Tipa twu Trpo(f)riTQiv (Acts 7 : 52), tovs tttojxovs
Twv ayiuv (Rom. 15:26), ol Xotxot tuv avOpo^wuv (Lu. 18:11),
p-vpiabes (jLVpLaSciov Kal xt^XtdSes xtXtdScoi' (Rev. 5:11), rd r}p.[(TLa. ixov
Kvpios. If the article is used with both words we may have the
usual order, as Trjv Travoir\lav tov deov (Eph. 6 11), or less often the :
classic idiom, as top ttjs xtorecos apxvyov (Heb. 12: 2). Sometimes
indeed the article may be repeated, as 6 X670S 6 tov aTavpov (1 Cor.
*
1 Green, Handb., etc., p. 213.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 95 f.
THE CASES (nTfiZEIs) 503
TfjvaXupa avTov (Lu. 3 17), but John sometimes puts avTov first^
:
Kal TOV KOTTOV TTjs ayaTrrjs kol ttjs VTOiJ.ovfjs rrjs eXirlSos tov Kvpiov r]fxu)V
Ttjv cnroXvTpuatv tov (Tco/xaTos rjfxccv. Cf. also Jo. 6 : 1; 2 Cor. 4:4;
Eph. 1 : 6; 4 : 13; Col. 1 : 13, etc. In Rev. 16 : 19 we have four
genitives, to TOT-qpLov tov divov tov dvp.ov tijs 6p7^s avTov, and five
occur in Rev. 19 : 15, counting the appositives, Ti}v X-qvov tov divov
TOV dvfxov TYJs opyrjs tov deov tov iravTOKpaTopos . Blass^ calls this "a
really burdensome accumulation but surely the sense
of words,"
isclear enough. The governing genitive comes before the de-
pendent genitive in regular order here. But in 2 Pet. 3 : 2 this
smooth order is not observed, yet all five can be readily under-
stood: viro TU)P ayio)v irpoip-qTUV Kai ttjs t€>v airocrToXcjv vptup ePToXrjs
compass the Greek idiom, ttjp irlcrTip tov KvpLov r]p.wp 'l-qaov XptcrTou
T?7s 56^7?s. Here 'I??. Xp. is in apposition with Kvpiov. Kvplov has
TiiJLcJp and is itself the objective genitive with ttIotlv, while t^s So^tjs
are the same in Latin. Indeed even in the case of the participle
we have the genitive when the participle is regarded no longer as
an adjective, but as a substantive, as to. virapxovTa nov (1 Cor. 13
3). Cf. Lu. 12 : 33; Lu. 2 : 27, to ddtaixhov tov vbixov; and Ph. 3 : 8,
In crvvepyos, Ro. 16: 21, we have the substantive also. The case
with verbals in -ros may be considered genitive, but see the ab-
lative also. Thus ol ayairrjTol deov (Ro. 1:7), yewrjTol yvpaLKcou (Lu.
7 : 28), kXe/cTot deov (Ro. 8 : 33), /cXrjrot 'It](jov (Ro. 1 : 6). In StSa/c-
Tol deov (Jo. 6 : 45), oi'K kv 8i.8aKTols avOpcoir'tpris ao<pias \6yoLS (1 Cor.
2 : 13) one may question if we do not have the ablative. But in
tov Trarpos (Mt. 25
evXoytfiJLevoL : 34) the genitive is hkely the case.
There only one adjective in -lk6s in the N. T. which has the
is
with the genitive in the N. T., as ix^iov Trjs neTavolas (Mt. 3:8). So
also ava^Los (unless abl. because of a- privative), as ava^Lol eoTe kpltt]-
pLcov e\ax'i.<7Twv (1 Cor. 6: 2). Delbriick^ confesses his inability to
explain this genitive, though Blass^ considers it genitive of price.
The figure of weighing or scales seems to be involved in the word.
In 1 Cor. 9 21 (ewoixos XptcrroO) we have a very "bold use" of the
:
In 1 Cor. 11 : 27, epoxos eaTat TOV acxifxaTos, we have the usage of the
pre-Syrian classes in Mk. 3 : 29 and not the idiom in Mt. 26 : 66.
The usual construction appears also as in epoxos eaTai Tfj Kpiaei (Mt.
5: 21 f.) and even epoxos els tw yeeppap (i'6.). In the instance
of KOLvwvbs the construction is also interesting. In 2 Cor. 1 : 7 we
have KOLPupoi tore tuv iradij/jLaTOiv, but it is debatable if the adjec-
tive has not here become a substantive as with kolvcj}v6s e/xos (2 Cor.
8 23 cf avpepybs in same verse)
: ; . Koti'coj'os has also the dative, as .
KOLPwvol TOO '^LfjLCjoPL (Lu. 5 10). Sce avPKOLPO)pds avTov (1 Cor. 9 23) : :
(Mt. 23 : 28) and ifK-qp-qs x^-pi-tos (Jo. 1 : 14).^ The case of /xeroxos
in Heb. 3 : 1 (KK-qaecos eTrovpaviov ixeToxoi) is similar to that of kolvu-
vos above, though more decidedly adjectival. Cf. fiecros vp-dv (Jo.
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 ad-
:
peaop 7e^eas cr/coXtSs (Ph. 2 15), peO' rjpcov (Mt. 1 23), peTa^v aov : :
(Ph. 2 : 27), tXtjc'lov tov x^p'i-ov (Jo, 4 : 5), -wepl tov cf)o)T6s (Jo. 1 :
8),
TOVTOV xdpiJ' (Eph. 3 : 1). "EpirpoaOev, oTTLaOtv, irpo, irpos, virep, etc.,
all have the ablative. Cf. to 'lawOev hpCiv (Lu. 11 39) where eawdev :
may 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).
{%) The Genitive with Verbs. As already remarked, Dcl-
1 Jann. (Hist. CJk. Gr., p. 338), after the aiialofjiy of (he I.at. and the Gk.
Ktvbs, hSeris, etc., considers it the al)l. that \vc have with irXTifirjs.
2 Hhiss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. lOG. " Giles, Man.,
p. 318.
» Jann., Hist. Gk, Gr., p. 337. b
Jb., p. 319.
:
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 :
tTviKavdavbuevos (Ph. 3 :
13); yevaerai ixov tov bdirvov (Lu. 14 : 24),
but eyevaaTo to v8up (Jo. 2 : 9) ;
ykp.ovaiv baTecov (Mt. 23 : 27), but
even yejxovTa opbuaTa ^Xacrcfit] n'las (Rev. 17:3). But it is 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^ :
(Ro. 10 18). And yet the genitive can be used where the sense
:
' 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.
.
:
A tjrpical one is iJKovcrev au^t^coj'tas Kal xopcov (Lu. 15 25). The gen- :
see 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 :
8) we have kiriiKovca aov, but vraKovco uses the dative (Mt. 8 27) :
TTjs acoTrjpias (Heb. 6:9); avreKa^ero 'laparjX TacSos avTov (Lu. 1 : 54)
and ol rrjs evepyeaLas avTCkajj-^avoiievoL (1 Tim. 6:2); kTeka^eTO avTOV
(Mt. 14:31), and kirCKa^biievos rijs x^i-pos rod tv(J)\ov (Mk. 8:23),
TOP TT]s x^i-pbs (Ac. 3:7), where the whole is in the accusative and
the part in the genitive. Blass^ notes that this last (Trtdfw) is a
"vulgar" word. But here, as usual, the N. T. is in harmony with
the vernacular. The papyri ^ show exo/xat with the genitive as
well as aPTLkaix^apojxai. So txbixevbs p.ovj'P. Par. 51 (b.c. 160). Besides
Mk. 8 : 23 (above) the double genitive (whole and part) may be
seen in Lu. 20: 20, I'm eTriXd/Scoj'Tat avTov \6yov (cf. also verse 26),
though here avTov probably dependent on Xoyov.
is
LXX has accusative, Ex. 20 17). 'Opeyo/jLai also has the genitive,
:
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
TovTOjp Tc3 TaXXioopL efieXep (Ac. 18 : 17) the personal construction,
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 101.
2 Moulton, CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, p. 437. » Gr. of N. T, Gk., p. 104.
THE CASES (IITOZEIS) 509
pvriaet avTrjs, though some MSS. read rd eavTTJs. Once again take
Tov Idiov ovK ecf)€iaaTo (Ro. 8 : 32). These all are in regular order.
In Mt. 18 : 27 tov 8ou\ov is more hkely dependent on 6 Kuptos rather
than on Verbs of obtaining are illustrated by
cT'Kayxvt-'ydeis.
eXaxe tov dv/jLLaaau (Lu. 1 9), not mere " appearance," ^ though the
:
11 :33) and tovto ovk eveTvx^v (Ro. 11 7). Moulton {CI. Rev., :
Cf Oxy.
. P. IV, 744, 11 and 12 (I/a.d.). We once also have (KXeXrjade
TTJs TrapaK\r]<T€us (Heb. 12 : 5). Of verbs of enjoying we have only
kyu) (TOV ovaipriv (Phil. 20). N. T., 'AiroXauw does not occur in the
and neither used with the genitive, but only
d7aXXtdco nor xaipco is
(verse 17, clearly ablative) and xo-P'-ri- (verse 30, associative^ in-
strumental by analogy of (rvvKotvuveoi) . Cf. KeKoi.v6}vr}K€v aluaros Kal
aapKos (Heb. 2 : 14), though elsewhere in the N. T. the associative
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 102.
::
29), irewXripooKaTe rrjv 'lepovadXrjfj. ttJs 8t.daxvs vnchv (Ac. 5 : 28), yeniaare
Tas vSpias vdaros (Jo. 2 : 7), wepLaaevovTaL dprwv (Lu. 15 : 17), evkirXn]-
aev a-yadup (Lu. 1 : 53). In Latin words of
use filling {plenus, etc.)
rrjs oaiJLrjs (Jo. 12 : 3) and yeixi^oo, as eykpiaev avTov tK tou irvpos (Rev.
8:5). For the instrumental with the passive see Ro. 1 29, etc. :
have a distinct substantive-affinity like 'be ruler of,' etc. See fur-
ther Lu. 22 25 for : KvpLevoo and e^ovaLa^co, Mt. 16 18 : for Kanaxi'w.
Verbs of Buying, Selling, Being Worthy
7. of. It is not per-
fectly clear what the origin of this usage is. The use of eK
/jLLadov e^exvdrjaav (Ju. 11). Cf. 5td with irepLTroieofxaL (Ac. 20:28).
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-
:
pacrdr}T€ Tt/JiTJs (1 Cor. 6." 20). In Mk. 14: 5, irpadrjvai k-Kavw drjvapicov
(2 Th. 1:5). Cf. also 1 Tim. 5 17; Heb. 3:3; 10 29. On the : :
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), :
pounds use the genitive. Cf. the accusative case and note as illus-
trations of the accusative in the N. T. Karayuivi^oiJLaL, Kara^pa^evca,
yivoocrKTu rjfxcov ij Kapbla (1 Jo. 3 : 20, and note verse 21), though
rinGiv might go with Kapbla), KaraKavxaTai eXeos Kplaeojs (Jas. 2 :
13),
KaraXaXetre ak'K'q'Koov (Jas. 4 : 11), aov KaranaprvpovaLV (Mt. 27 :
13),
KaTevapKr](ja rip,o)v (2 Cor. 12 : 13), KaTacrTprjULaacoaiv tov Xpiarov
(1 Tim. 5 : 11), aiaxvvn^ KaTa4)povr]aas (Heb. 12 2), Karex^ev avTOV :
where /xe is implied with eaitxrep. One even notes the genitive ab-
solute when the nominative is present as in iiprjarevdeia-qs rrjs iJ.t]Tp6s
ciples.
quite appropriate.
(6) The Meaning. The ablative is then the whence '
' case,
the case of origin, source, separation or departure. Some of the
grammars use the expression "ablatival genitive." That imphes
that the case is after all a kind of genitive. That is only true as
to form, not as to sense, 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
probably correct) to regard dLKatoavpr] deov (Ro. 1 : 17) as ablative,
6eov being the source of the righteousness. More likely are the
following examples: rrjp eK^aaiP rrys apaaTpo<l)r]s (Heb. 13 : 7), diaaroXi]
'lovdaiov re Kal "EXXtjpos (Ro. 10 : 12), StaKptats koXov kul KaKov (Heb.
5 : 14). See Monro, Homeric Grammar, p. 146. In 2 Pet. 1 : 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 : 7. One may note also eyepero ypoiixris (Ac. 20 :
1 Prol., p. 74.
2 Delbnick, Vergl. S>Tit., I, p. 193. ^ Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 71.
:
38),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 parti-
:
(Jo. 16 : 17), e/c Tov 6x\ov avpe^l^aaap (Ac. 19 : 33). Cf. Rev. 11
9. Take Mt. 23 34 : as an example of the use as object, t^
3 : 16), a7r6 rrjs wpas (Mt. 9 : 22), '6.Ttp 6xkov (Lu. 22 : 6), k rod
Uaros (Mk. 1 : 10), kros avrov (Mt. 23 : 26; cf. hros in same verse),
•inirpoadev iravTO^v (Mt. 26 : 70), tTre/cetm Ba/SuXcof^os (Ac. 7 : 43), e^co rrj?
oktas (Mt. 10 : 14), i^o^dev rijs TroXecos (Rcv. 14 20), oTViaBev rov 'Ir/croO
:
(Lu. 23: 26), ottio-co ixov (Mt. 4: 19), possibly o^/^e aa^^aruv (Mt. 28:
1), Trap' avToov (Mt. 2:4), irapeKTOS \6yov -iroppeias (Mt. 5:32), Trepai'
ToO 'lopdavov (Mt. 19 : 1), ttXtiv tov ttXoIov (Ac. 27 : 22), irpo rod
Trao-xa (Jo. U : 55), Trpos r^s vfJierepas aoiTrjpias (Ac. 27 34), vrep :
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 :
Ac. 5 : 2), k (cf. Mk. 1 : 10) and irapa (Mt. 2 : 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.
'Atto and €K have only the ablative. The ablative is so conunon
with compound verbs like ix^io-ttjm^ dTroa-repeco, etc., that no effort
is made to separate the simple from the compound
verbs. There
1
Indeed, as Winer (W.-Th., p. 197) remarks, the prep, is most frequently
employed.
518 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(Ac. 16 : 33), XvTpooj airo (Tit. 2 : 14), pboixai airo (Mt. 6 : 13), a63^(t)
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 : :
5. Verbs of Asking and Hearing. These may also use the abla-
tive. 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
:
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 ex-
pressed 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 ap-
: :
Tov iadteTco (1 Cor. 11 28). Thus also irivcou olvov (Lu. 7 33), but
: :
Trfere e^ avTov (Mt. 26 : 27), 6s av irlxi k tov vbaTos (Jo. 4 : 14). Cf.
also kvejKaTe airo twv oxJ/apLou (Jo. 21 : 10). Phrynichus says: einov
OLVOV 'AttlkoL, olvov "EXXrjj/es — eipayov Kpecos
'
(Ac. 27:36). In this last example the MSS. vary a good deal.
MeToXafi^dvo} (see (i), 3) may be abl. or gen. in ptTtkap^avov Tpo<f)T]s
(Ac. 2 :46). Blass^ notes that only Luke, Paul and the author
of Hebrews, the more literary writers in the N. T., use the
ablative (gen.) with neTaXap^avoo and rpoaXap^avco. Examples like
Ro. 9 : 16; Hob. 12 : 11 may be regarded as either ablative or
genitive.
7. Attraction of the Relative. Thus k tov vbaros ov eyoj bdoau)
sense, and each example has its own atmosphere. There is indeed
variation in the resultant idea. Hence, besides in, we come to the
ideas of on, at, amid, among, by, with. This development was not
only in the early Greek ^ but in the still earUer Sanskrit. The use
of the locative without h is much more common in Homer than
in the later Greek. In the modern Greek vernacular indeed the
locative disappears along with the instrumental and dative before
ets and the accusative. As to kv it adds so little to the locative
case that it is not surprising to find it so frequently used, especially
as the locative, instrumental and dative all used the same endings.
Thus we may compare tc3 irXoLaplco rfkdov (Jo. 21 8) with kv TrXotco
:
tween the mere locative rfj ^aaCKda. and kv with locative and ets
with accusative.
(c) Place. This was probably the original locative. Place of
rest was put in the locative without a preposition. As already
indicated, this usage abounds in Horner.^ Some of these distinc-
tively locative forms persisted in the Greek as in the Latin. Thus
o'Lkol, 'laOjj.o'i, MapaOcopi, ' kdrjvxjcn, QvpaaL, hunii, Corinthi, Romae
(ai). Brugmann (Griech. Gr., p. 226) thinks that 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, still occur in
Pindar side by side.^ The orators up to the time of Demosthenes
use the mere locative frequently.^ The ^olic^ has n€aoL = kv /xkcrc^
(cf oUoL . and oIkco) . But the rule in Attic literary prose is to use a
preposition with the locative of place. Thus h 'Ad-qpais (1 Th.
3:1), ev oIkcc (1 Cor. 11 :34)='at home' and usually h too oIkui
the resultant idea is "among" and irepi is used with the verb in
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 con-
sidering the adverb kvkXco (Mk. 3 :34), and possibly xo-P-ai (Jo.
18 6). We have indeed erepa 68co eKJSoKovaa (Jas. 2 25), possibly
: :
1 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 100. Cf. also Delbriick, Vcrgl. Synt., I, p. 221;
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 403; K.-G., I, p. 441.
2 Giles,Man., etc., p. 330.
3 Main, Loc. Expr. in the Attic Orators (1892), p. 231.
« Mcister, Dialcc, Bd. II, p. 193. <*
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 119.
« CI. Rev., 1904, p. 153. Cf. also ib., 1901, p. 438, for 'E^fvcrlvt, Letr. 220
(iv/A.D.).
522 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
both the locative and the genitive. As between the locative and
the genitive the matter is not quite so clear. Brugmann^ indeed
thinks that originally there was little difference. The difference
lies in the essential meaning of the two cases. The locative is a
point and the genitive is the case of genus. Thus in Mt. 24 20 :
we have Iva /x?) yev-qrac r] 4>vyr] vixoov xetM<2"^os /xTjSe aa(3j3aTco. It is not
mere hair-splitting to note that winter is here set over against sum-
mer (time within which) and that Sabbath is the point of time. In
practical result the difference is very slight, but it is hardly just to
regard the two usages as without difference. Cf. wktos (Mt. 25 :
'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 :
Tcov a^vpwv (Mk. 14 : 12), rfj -qpepa ry oydoy (Ac. 7:8), rfj eax^TV
ripepa (Jo. 6 : 40), irola rjpkpa (Mt. 24 :
42), ^ m^a (Lu. 17 : 29 f.),
TaKTTJ "fjpepa (Ac. 12 : 21), rfj r]pepa eKelvj) (Jo. 20 : 19), ttj eTrtoixr^
fjpepa (Ac. 7:26), rfj exophj] rjpepa (Ac. 21:26), and even r]pepq.
€in4)W(jKovar} (Mt. 28 : 1) and rf? e'^Tjs (Ac. 21 : 1).' Cf. also ariptpov
TavTj] TTJ vvkt'l (Mk. 14 : 30) , where the adverb is accusative, but
the substantive locative. With some of these phrases kv is also
found as with ravr'a (Lu. 19 42), eKeby (Lu. 6 23), 6y86ji (Lu. 1 : : :
59), iiLq. (Lu. 20 1), eaxary (Jo. G 44), with fjfj.epa and aa^^aruiv
: :
(Lu. 4 16), rifjiepa and genitive (Lu. 4 25), with e^^s (Lu. 7 11),
: : :
Mk. 2 23). With cipa we have both (hpa (Lu. 2 38) and kv
: :
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
: : :
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
: :
oi>xO- Other locative adverbs of time are dei (2 Cor. 6 10), ket :
TTvev/jiaTL (Mt. 5:3), Kadapol rfj KapSla (5: 8), aduvaros rots irocriv (Ac.
14 : 8), (XTepeol rf) irldTeL (1 Pet. 5:9), voodpoi rats aKoats (Heb. 5 : 11),
jrepLTOjjLfj OKTaripepos (Ph. 3:5), eXeWepoi rrj BLKaioavvrj (Ro. 6 : 20),
TaTei.v6s tj} Kapdla (Mt. 11:29), airep'LTp7]T0L Kapdiats (Ac. 7:51),
ayla Kal crw/xart Kal Trvebp.aTL (1 Cor. 7:34). Cf. Ro. 12 : 10—13.
In Blass-Dcbrunner, p. 118, these examples are treated as instru-
mental.
(/) Locative with Verbs. Cf. 8e8ep.evos rw Trvevixan (Ac. 20 :
1 Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 405; Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., p. 225; Moulton,
Pro!., p. 75.
524 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Tots Weaiv TrepLiraTelv (Ac. 21 : 21), iropevonkvr) tco <}>6^co (Ac. 9 : 31),
orav ireLpaaixols Trepnr'ear)Ti ttolklXois (Jas. 1:2), XjiaTots irepUTrtatv
(Lu. 10 : 30), earepeovvTO rfj irlaTei Kai eireplaaevov tco aptdp-Q (Ac.
16:5), Kapr]Te rats rj/vxcus (Heb. 12:3), efx/jLeveiv rfj xto-ret (Ac.
14 : 22), eirifxho^aLV rrj cnnaTla (Ro. 11 23; : cf. 22), evKevrpLadrjaovTai
rfj idla eXala (Ro. 11 : 24), tw cra5 bvbp.aTL eTrpo4>r]TemaiJL€v (Mt. 7 22; :
cf. e^e^aXopev also), fecov tui TvevparL (Ac. 18 : 25; cf. Lu. 10 21 :
even ^a-rrTiaei. u^tas irvehpaTL ay ice (Mk. 1:8). See Ac. 16 5. For :
/Calebs TO. OLdTpa tov ovpavov tQi wXrjdeL. So in Col. 2 14, to Kad' rjpcbv :
adjective, pi] Traibla yiveade rats (j)p€aiv, dXXd ttj KaKia vqiria^tTe, rats
be 4>p(.(jlv TtXeLOL yiveade.
(Mk. 3 34), the conjunction Kai, etc. There are only four prepo-
:
'lop8av[i (Mt. 3:6), eTTt dvpaLS (]\It. 24 : 33), rapa to; aravpco rod
'Irjaov (Jo. 19 : 25), Trpos ra3 yLvrmelu) (Jo. 20 : 11). But of these
Tcpos has the locative only 6 times, irapa 50, while kirl has it 176
times.^ 'Ei/, of course, having only the locative, is very common.
One may note here hv irpoiiTois (1 Cor. 15 : 3) almost like an
adverb.
(i) The Pregnant Construction of the Locative. It is
ixer epiov r-qv x«tpa ^v (Mt. 26 23). Here Mark (14 :.20)
tc3 rpv^Xlui :
eis TOV 'Iop8avr]v. Cf. ev o'lkcx) ecTTiv, text of Mk. 2 : 1 and marg. ets
OLKov kaTLv. This same pregnant idiom appears with 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 :
locative (Mt. 7 : 22), h and the locative (Mt. 21 9), kirl and loca- :
tive (Mt. 18 : 5), els and accusative (Mt. 10 41; 28 19).^ Cf. also : :
Mt. 12 :41.
XI. The Instrumental (" Instrumental Dative ") Case {r[
XpT|(rTlKTl TTTWO-IS).
(a) The Term Instrumental. As applied to case it is mod-
ern and the adjective itself appears first in the fourteenth century.^
The Hindu grammarians, however, recognised this case* There
are not wanting signs indeed that it survived in the Greek as a sep-
arate case-form. Meister'^ concludes that in the Cyprian dialect
the instrumental was still a separate case-form (a "living" case).
He cites dpS, evx^Xa, besides avv tvxo., Kuhner-Gerth" we
and in
find o'Ikol locative, o'Ikoo instrumental, and Other exam-
o'Ikco dative.
ples are dfia, Sixa, tolxcl in later Greek, not to mention the ninny ad-
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 106. " Whitney, Sans. Cr., p. 89.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 12:} f. <>
Ck. Dial., II, p. 205.
* Riem. and Goclzcr, Synt., j). 207. " I, j). 405.
526 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
verbs in -a and1 -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
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 rfj Se^tq.
Tov deov v\pudeis (Ac. 2 : 33; cf. also 5 : 31). The grammars have
no Greek term for the instrumental case, but I have ventured to
call it xPV'^Ti-KV TTTcoaLs. The increasing use of prepositions (kv, 8ia,
N. .T. as compared with the earher Greek,-* but still it is far from
dead.
Syncretistic? It is a matter of dispute as to whether this
(b)
possil)le.
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.) ttoXXois varepov jxpovois. See also cos tTeai TerpaKoaioLs
Kal TrevTYjKOVTa (Ac. 13 : 20). Cf. also Trao-ats rats rj/jLepais (Lu. 1 : 75),
but marg. of W. H. 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 some-
thing to do with the increasing use of h to make the locative clear
and from instrumental or dative. " Si)eakers of Greek were
distinct
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
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
(aTTo) xP^vj^v LKavwv.
(e) The Associative Idea. The idea of association alone is
responsible for a good many examples, chiefly with verbs, though
adjectives are not wanting. Substantives cut no figure at all
according to Blass,^ for tIs Koivwvia <f)WTl irpos ckotos (2 Cor. 6 : 14)
is an example of the pure dative (cf. also Lu. 5 10; 2 Cor. 6 16), : :
fxed' rifioov. But another example in 2 Cor. 6 14, tIs ixeroxv dLKawcrvpri :
Kal avoyLia, comes much closer to the substantive use of the associa-
and (jvfx4)VTOs. Thus to auixa avfj,fiop4>ou raJ aclofxaTL (Ph. 3 : 21) and
(Ro. 6:5), but avfjfxopcpos has the genitive ttjs
(xvfx(j>vTOL Tt2 6iJ.oLcoiJ.aTi
SieXhero avroh (Ac. 20 7), though rpos (Mk. 9 34) also is used.
: :
KpLdrjvaL (Mt. 5 40), ufilXei avru (Ac. 24 26), which last may have
: :
avTols (Ac. 5 : 13), evTvyxavet rw de^ (Ro. 11 2). : Cf. further avdpi
8e8eTaL (Ro. 7 : 2) and fxep-iy pikvnv irvpi (Rev. 15 2). In Rev. 8 4 : :
15 : 15),2 p.La xl^vxv avvadXovvTes rfj TrlaTu (Ph. 1 : 27, two examples
probalily of the instrumental, the first of manner), avvr]K6Xovda
avairavaojixai vplv (Ro. 15 : 32), avvrjvTrjCTev avTu> (Lu. 9 : 37), poL avv-
(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 : 48),
TTolrjaep tw Xpicrra) (Eph. 2:5), avprjoopai tco vopw (Ro. 7: 22), avv-
Ta4)ePT6s avTco (Col. 2 : 12), avveaTCjTas avTw (Lu. 9 : 32), avyKadrjpepoL
the strict instrumental usually; a rather long list surely, but one
not in vain, ifone gets a just idea of the N. T. usage. Some of
these verbs occur frequently and some have xpos or /xera.
(/) With Words of Likeness and Identity. We find this
usage with several adjectives.Thus o^uotos avdpdoTOi (Lu. 6 48) :
instead of vplv. Cf. our vulgar "the likes of you." So also 'iaovs
ripXv (Mt. 20 : 12) and iaoTifiov rij/iv iriaTLv (2 Pet. 1:1). '0 auros
with the instrumental is found once only, ej' koL to avro rfj k^vpTjuhij
(1 Cor. 11 5). In 1 Th. 2 14 we find to. avra Kadws, and in Ph.
: :
Trefg (Mk. 6 :33), rdxa (Ro. 5:7). But the usage 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) yhei). See also the participle tco ovtl (Ro. 7 : 23). Cf.
also 4>vaeL in Gal. 2 : 15 and tc3 Tpoauiro) in Gal. 1 : 22. Here are
some of the chief examples with verbs: xo-P'-t'- m^^^X'*^ (1 Cor. 10 : 30)
TrpoaevxofJ.€vr) aKaTaKaKvTTUi rfj Ke0aX?7 (1 Cor. 11:5), Trept.TiJLr]6rJTe t(2
Wei (Ac. 15 : 1), rfi Tpodecrei TvpoapikveLV (Ac. 11 : 2.3), on iravrl Tpoiro),
A.D., KovSvKois eXa^ev. Cf. rfj ^ia, B.U. 45 (IH/a.d.). But often fierA
and the genitive (/xerd ^ias, Ac. 5 : 26), h and the locative (h 8eKa
XtXtdaij^, Lu. 14 : 31), Kara and the accusative (Ac. 15 : 11) or
the mere accusative (Mt. 23 : 37) occur rather than the instru-
mental. There is one usage in the N. T. that has caused some
trouble. It is called^ "Hebraic" by some of the grammarians.
The instances are rather numerous in the N. T., though nothing
like so common as in the LXX.^ Conybeare and Stock quote Plato
to show that it is, however, an idiom in accordance with the genius
of the 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
of "translation Greek," but thinks that a phrase like e^oXedpevaa
ovK k^ccXedpevaav (Josh. 17 : 13) is much more like the Hebrew in-
finitive absolute which is reproduced by this Greek instrumental or
participle. Blass'* insists that the classical parallels yanco yaixelv,
cpvyfj (pevyeLv are not true illustrations, but merely accidentally
similar, an overrefinement grammarian, I conceive. in the great
The Latin has the idiom also, like curro curriculo.
Here are some
of the important N. T. instances: aKofj aKovaere (Mt. 13 14), :
TTotw davaru So^aaet tov Oebv (Jo. 21 : 19), where the idiom seems
more normal. Blass'^ observes that this usage "intensifies the
verb in so far as it indicates that the action is to be understood
as taking place in the fullest sense." In Ro. 8 : 24 we more likely
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
by the instr. case, while in the Books of Samuel and Kinfj.s the participle
is the more usual. In the LXX as a whole the two methods are about et]ual.
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 : 29; Ac. 4 : 17; 5 : 28; 23 : 12; Jas. 5 : 17. Sec
also Thack., Gr., p. 48.
i
have the means than the manner. Cf. apKelade rots 6\}/uvIols in
Lu. 3 : 14.
Measure. Closely allied to the idea of manner is that of
(h)
7 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
T<p ^e(3 (Lu. 1 :47), k^eizKijaaovTo eTrt ttj hbaxv (Mt. 7:28), kv aol
1 Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 118. Cf. for the pap. Moulton, CI. Rev.,
1901, p. 438.
THE CASES (nTfiSEIi;) 533
(Ro. 1 : 29), x^P'-'''''- ^o-T6 aeao:(riJ,evoL (Eph. 2:5, 8), /jltj fxedvcxKeade
TTveviiaTi (Eph. 1 : 13), TnfkiKois vfuv y pafxiiaaiv eypa\l/a rfj k^ifj x^'-P'-
(Gal. 6:11, one dative and two instrumental cases). Cf. /cara-
KpLvovcnu avTov OavaTco (Mk. 10 33, but dauarov in D, and in Mt. :
e^epxet v opco, O.P. 112 (iii/iv A.D.). Cf. Jo. 19:39 f., oGovIols
the locative is pretty clearly right here. Then again in Ac. 22:
25, TrpokreLvav tols IfidcxLv, we have either the instrumental or the
dative. But in 2 Pet. 1 : 3 I8la bb^xi '^'<^^ dperfj (marg. in W. H.)
are clearly instrumental, not dative. In Ro. 8 : 24, rfj tkirlbt
^ In Horod. w(! find a <louble instr. with xpv<jOai. Cf. Ilolbinf:;, Dor Instru-
mental in riorocL, 1".)()0, p. 8. 2 Qr. of N. T. Gk., p. 117.
" K.-G., II, p.4r)4f.
4 Moulton, Prol., pp. 76, 104; CI. Rev., 1904, p. 153.
:
pared 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)
: :
ov8ev a^Lov Oavarov earlv TreTvpayp-kvov avrQ. D here reads ku aurco and
Blass* suggests that the right reading is without irewpaypevop as in
Ac. 25 : 5. It is possible also that in 2 Pet. 2 : 19,w ns T/rrTjrat, we
have person, not thing, of whom (Am, St. V), not of what. Cf.
also Jas. 3 : 7. One may mention here also as a possible instru-
mental Kaj(h evpedo) hplv (2 Cor. 12 : avTols (Lu. 24
20), COS kyvdiiaOrj
rrfv ^ovXijv rod Oeov -qOeTrjaav els eavTOvs (Lu. 7:30). So els v/JLois (1
Pet, 1:4). Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 213) is correct in refusing
to consider els with (Mk. 13 10; Lu. 24
Krjpvaaco or evayyeXi^ofxaL : :
22), eWeros (Lu 14 35), evxpwTos (2 Tim. 4 : 11), but cb^eXi^os with :
TTpbs (1 Tim. 4:8). Only in the most illiterate papyri is the decay
of the dative seen, as in tIvl \6yov, N.P. 47 (iii/A.D.), and in the
late inscrs. hke 6 ^or]9cov vp-wv, J. H. S., XIX, 14. Of. Moulton, CI.
Rev., Apr., 1904. Per contra note eTTLpe\r]d[riT]L to) TratStcp, P. OxJ^
744 (i/B.c). Leaving out ej/, the locative, instrumental and da-
tive show a contraction in the N. T. as compared with the earlicM-
Greek.^ 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 tri-
umphed 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
CIS, as 6 03V ds top koKttov (Jo. 1 : 18), 6 els tov aypbv (Mk. 13 : 16). Cf.
Tois eh TOV oLKov (Lu. 9 61). from D kv as equiva-
: Moulton^ cites
lent to els in Acts 7 12; 8 23. One :may compare the disappear-
:
ance of the locative with vird and the use of the accusative for both
motion and rest,^ whereas in Appian and Herodian (Atticists) the
locative is in the lead.^ Cf. the disappearance of the dative forms
in English save in the pronouns him, whom, etc. Even Wyclif
had "believe ye to the gospel" (Mk. 1 15). :
that the dative was used with substantives rather than with
first
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
genitive (Brug., ib.). 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
of the genitive. Not all substantives admit of this idiom, it is
true, but only those that convey distinctly personal relations.
But some of these substantives are allied to verbs that use the
dative. So evxa.pt<TTL(hv rw deoo (2 Cor. 9 : 12), 6\i\pLv rfj aapd (1 Cor.
7: 28), avecFLV rc3 irvevfiaTi p.ov (2 Cor. 2 : 13), (7koKo\}/ ttj aapKL (2 Cor.
12:7), avaTavffLV rals xpvxcus vjjlcov (Mt. 11:29), evudia roS 0eaj
(2 Cor. 2 : 15), eis Tacjjrjv rots ^kvoLS (Mt. 27:7), roTj d7roXXu/iei/ois
jucopta (1 Cor. 1 : 18). Cf. Lu. 5 : 14. With some of these ex-
amples verbs occur, but the dative is not here due to the verb.
Some of them are in the predicate also, as xap« tw 6e(2 (Ro. 7
25), with which compare marg. ei^xapicrrco. See Lu. 10 : 5. Cf.
Tots aadtvkdLv (1 Cor. 8:9). So in 1 Cor. 9:2, d aWois ovk elfil
aTTocTToXos, dXXd ye vfup elfxl, the dative is not due to el/jLl. Cf. in
next verse 17 e/xi) aToXoyla roTs e^e avaKpivovaiv. Cf. also avrots in
Ph. 1 : 28. So v6tio% eavTo7s (Ro. 2 : 14), k/jtol davaros (Ro. 7 :
13),
and, not to multiply examples, tovto hol Kapirds epyov (Ph. 1 : 22),
ri €irl(TTa<xis ixol (2 Cor. 11 : 28). Cf. Ro. 1 : 14; 8 : 12. In 1 Cor.
4 : 3 both the dative and and accusative occur, but properl}^ so, ets
e/iot be eis ekaxt-orbv kcTiv. Cf 1 Cor. 14 22 for the same thing. The . :
hKaioahvri (Ro. 6 : 20), kix4)avrt — r}p.tv (Ac. 10 40), 'hoxo% earac tw awe--
:
VfXLP rots TTLCTTf.vovaLP ky epr]9r] /jLep (1 Th. 2 : 10), oi'at ro) Koafxcp (Mt.
18 and so frequently (but accusative in Rev. 8 13; 12 12).
: 7) : :
Blass' compares Latin vne niihi and vae me. Brugmann- indeed
considers KaTai, irapal, iraXai, xaMat all to be dative forms. But,
while this is true, the dative is not used with prepositions in the
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 112. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901. j,. 1.53, finds &ko\oWcos
with dat. in pap, 2 Gricch. Gr., pp. 22(5, 228.
:
usual case employed. Cf. eyy'i-^'^ with dative, Ac. 9:3; 10 9; Jas. :
cKoKoxp TTj aapKi, the pot is indirect object and (japd may be either
dative of advantage or locative.
2. Dativus Commodi vel Incommodi. The so-called dative of
advantage or disadvantage does not differ very greatly from the
indirect object. A good example is epxopai aoL (Rev. 2 5, 16). :
Moulton (ProL, p. 245) cites .Eschylus (P.V. 358), dXX' ^X^ej^ aura;
Zr]vds aypvTvvov /SeXos. It is indeed rather more loosely connected
at times and varies more in the resultant idea. Thus in papTvpeiTe
eavTols OTL (Mt. 23 : 31) we have to translate 'against yourselves,'
though, of course, the dative does not mean 'against' any more
than means 'for' or 'in behalf of.' The personal relation is
it
Indeed, nowhere does the personal aspect of the dative come out
more clearly than in this usage. Thus -KOLVTa ra yeypafx/jLha rc3 —
vtu) Tov avdpoiirov (Lu. 18 : 31), ypaufxarevs /jLad-qrevdels rg /SacrtXeto.
ypvxv (Mt. 6: 25) aae^kaiv redeuws (2 Pet. 2 6), elVe e^e<XTr]iJ.eu, Oeu)' :
kaOieL (Ro. 14 : 6), eavTU) ffj — eavTW cnrodvrjaKeL (verse 7). Cf. kfjLoi in
Ro. 7 21, vp.lp in 2 Cor. 12 20 and /iot with eyhero in Ac. 22 6.
: : :
Cor. 2 : 1 and ro) irveiifxaTL (2 : 13). Cf. ^aaTa^oov aura) tou aTavpov
(Jo. 19 : 17). In Mk. 10 : 33 note also the other datives, either
the indirect object or the direct object like tfjnrai^ovaiv avTcp.
Cf. also Tracrt}' and toU 'lovSaioLs in 1 Cor. 9 : 19 f. In this con-
nection one may note also tL /jlol to 64)e\os (1 Cor. 15:32),
TL rinlv Kal aol (Lu. 4 : 34). The intense personal relation is also
manifest in the examples in 1 Cor. 1 : 23 f. Cf. also 1 : 18, 30.
Prof. Burkitt {Jour, of Theol. Stud., July, 1912) interprets tL kfiol
cites a papyrus example for epxofxal aoi (Rev. 2 5, 16), though from :
avTOLS (Lu. 24 : 11), kiteLdihv rw utcS (Jo. 3 : 36), eirddovTO aura) (Ac.
5 : 36), vwaKovovffLP avTw (Mk. 1 27). Once we find the dative with
:
We must note other groups with the dative, like verbs of serving.
Thus avTUi (Mt. 4:11), tc3 vot dovXevco vo/jlco deov (Ro.
bLrjKovovv
indirect object.
Another convenient group is verbs to please, to suffice, to be
envious, angry, etc. Thus 6eu> apeaac (Ro. 8:8), eve^piixCiVTo avrfj
(Mk. 14 :
5), ixtTpioTvaOelv rots ayvoovaiv (Heb. 5 : 2), 6 opyL'^o/jLevos roj
avdo) iJ-oKoyelTO tui deco 5:4),(Lu. 2 : 38), ovk e\{/€V(7w apdpooTOLS (Ac.
avrfi (Rev. 21 23). In the later kolptj we find ^orjdkco with accusa-
:
9) one is not sure where to place it. See above. Cf. Lu. 3 14. :
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^ :
5. Possession. The Greek, like the Latin, may use the dative
for the idea of possession. Thus ovk rjp avrols towos (Lu. 2:7), ovk
eaTLP aoL fxepis (Ac. 8 : 21), vfxlp kcFTiP 17 e7ra77eXta (Ac. 2 : 39), tIpl
earai (Lu. 12:20), elalv rj/up Ttcraapes dpdpes (Ac. 21:23), earip
cvprjdeLa vplp (Jo. 18 : 39), kap yeprjTai tlpl apOpwirco iKarop irpo^aTa
eo-rat aot tovto (Mt. 10 : 22), earat x^-PO- ool (Lu. 1 : 14). Cf. Ac.
2 : 43; Lu. 9 : 38. This is a frequent idiom in the ancient Greek
and a perfectly natural one. This i)redicative dative at bottom
is just like the usual dative.
6. Infinitive as Final Dative. Giles^ calls attention to the in-
» So Mt. 10,: 32, but note dfxoXoyS} h aOrv in Lu. 12 : 8. « Man., p. 327.
542 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
finitive as a final dative. This was the original use of the dative
in -at, the expression of purpose. So ijXOofxev irpoaKwijaaL avrc^
(Mt. 2:2). Here we have the dative form and the dative of pur-
pose. Cf the old English " for to worship." This dative form con-
.
xop-ai the dative directly as with opei (Heb. 12 : 18, 22). With
wpoaexere eavrols (Lu. 17: 3) the object vovv has to be supplied, but
this is not the case with Trpo<jKapTepovi>Tes rfj dLdaxv (Ac. 2 : 42), nor
with (S irpoaeKXidr] (Ac. 5 : 36), nor with irpoaereaeu avru) (Mk. 5 : 33)
nor with irpoaecfx^veL avrois (Ac. 22 : 2). With TTpoaKvXiCjO (Mt. 27:
60) the dative is merely the indirect object, but note kiri in Mk.
15 : 46. Compounds of viro likewise generally have the dative, as
» Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 116.
THE CASES (hTQSEIs) 543
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
: :
ADVERBS ('EHIPPHMATA)
before we can do anything with the mere adverb which is not prep-
osition, conjunction, particle nor interjection.a good There is
deal that needs to be said concerning the syntax of the mere ad-
verb, 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.
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}'-
styleand applies to the vernacular kolptj in generaL But he is
wholly right in insisting on the necessity of adverbs for precise
definition in language. The grammarians find offence ^ in the
adverbs of the kolvt) as in other portions of the vocabulary. Some
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
: : :
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) :
a similar predicate use of the adverb. Cf. also ourcos weao^v and
ovTcos 6 Oeos h v/jllv karlv (1 Cor. 14 : 25) and a\r]da)s in Mt. 14 : 33.
In Ph. 4 : 5, 6 Kvpios eyym, the copula earlp is to be supplied and
here the adverb is not far from the adjective idea. Cf. also
TToppco ouTos (Lu. 14 : 32), naKpav (Mk. 12 : 34), IVa (Ph. 2 : 6).
(d) With has some idiomatic constructions with the
"E;^&). It
adverb that are difficult from the English point of view. Thus
TO us Ka/ccos exovras (Mt. 14 : 35), and with the instrumental case
in Mk. 1 : 34. Cf. Lu. 7: 1. In Enghsh we prefer the predicate
adjective with have (He has it bad), whereas the Greek likes the
adverb with ex". So eo-xarws ex^i (Mk. 5 23) and in Jo. 4 52 : :
TToppoj aTrexet (Mk. 7:6). Ilcos exovcnv (Ac. 15 : 3G) needs no com-
ment. It is a common enough Greek idiom. Cf. (Sapews exovaa,
P.Br.M. 42 (B.C. 168).
(e) With Participles. "Ajua e\irl^o:v (Ac. 24 26) belongs to :
the discussion of participles. But one may note here i]8r] TedvrjKora
(Jo. 19 33) and cos p-eWovTas (Ac. 23
: 15). Cf. also the use of :
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. :
The instances are not very numerous in the N. T., since indeed,
especially in the Gospels, the adjective is not excessively abundant.
ADVERBS ("EniPPHMATA) 547
In Ac. 24 : 25, to vvv exov, the participle being both verb and ad-
jective, causes no difficulty. In Ac. 23 : 20, cos fxtWu^v tl aKpi^k-
arepov irvvdaveadaL irepl ahrov, we have the adverbial use of tl as well
as cLKpL^eaTepov. Cf. airepiaTCKTTU^ with evirapedpov in 1 Cor. 7 35. :
Here indeed the adverb has virtually the force of the adjective,
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
gives it a great advantage over the Latin. ^ Cf. also fj 6e 6vtw^
(2 Cor. 1 : 17), to. avw (Col. 3 : 1 f.), rd vvv (Ac. 5 : 38), ews tov vvv
(Mk. 13 : 19), a-Ko TOV vvv (Lu. 1 : 48) and often. Cf. toTs keT (Mt.
26 : 4 9). So TXrjaiov always
71), TO. w8e (Col. : in the N. T. save
once as preposition with genitive (Jo. 4:5). It usually has the
article (Mt. 5 43), but may be used without it
: in the nominative
case (Lu. 10 :29). A striking instance of the adverb treated as
substantive appears in x<^pts twv Trape/cros (2 Cor. 11 : 28). Other
examples of the adverb with the article are axpt^ rod Sevpo (Ro.
1 : 13), k Tuv KOLTCO (Jo. 8 : 23), els to. oirlau (Mk. 13 : 16), tovs e^co
' Ricm. and Goolzcr, Synt., p. 798. " Cf. K.-C, I, p. 551.
548 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(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),
: : :
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 :
Tovs eKetae ovras, the usual word would be e/cet. But e/ceto-e is regu-
lar in Ac. 21 : 3. Winer calls this an "abuse" of language, which
^
It is largely a 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), 'with- : :
in' (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 : :
writer takes. With e/c we have not only the normal idiom like
rots e/c TepLTOfxrjs (Ro. 4 : 12) and ot k rrjs Kaiaapos oUias (Ph. 4 : 22),
but the pregnant use where h could have occurred. Thus dpat rd
k r^s ot/ctas (Mt. 24
17) with which compare 6 ets tov aypop (Mk.
:
13 : 16, h
Mt. 24 18). Cf. 6 7rar?7p 6 e^ oi-pai^oD in Lu. 11 13,
in : :
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 Mat-
thew 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 Luke (Gospel and Acts) Abbott .
fjLovov, the adjective means that 'he did not leave me alone.'
fxovov
As an adverb, if the position allowed it, it would be not only did '
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). :
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 :
X. Adverbial Phrases.
(a) Incipient Adverbs. Some of these are practically ad-
verbs, though they retain the case-inflection and may even have
the article. Thus T-qv apxw (Jo- 8 : 25), to \oit6v (Ph. 3:1),
ToiivavTLov (Gal. 2 : 7), TO irpwTov (Jo. 12 : 16), to irpoTepov (Jo. 6 62),
:
Cor. 11 5), vTepdvo: (Eph. 4 10) and eccs kcltco (Mk. 15 38). Since
: : :
an adverbial phrase like xapa tovto (1 Cor. 12 15). Cf. also kwe- :
(Phil. 14), KaT kviavTov (Heb. 10 : 1), ck SevTepov (Mk. 14 : 72), e/c
xl^vxvs (Col. 3 : 23), k^ apxvs (Jo. 6 : 64), dx' apxvs (2 Th. 2 : 13), els
Kevbv (Ph. 2 : 16), kv aXrjdeia (Mt. 22 : 16), h tp6:tols (1 Cor. 15 :
3),
ev 8LKaLoavvrf (Ac. 17:31), eir' oKrjOeias (Lu. 22:59), Kad' ripLepav
fiepovs (Ro. 11 : 25), k nepovs (1 Cor. 12 : 27. Cf. fikpos Tt, 11 : 18),
KttTd fxepos (Heb. 9:5), aird /xtds (Lu. 14 : 18), els to iravTeXes (Heb.
7 25).
: With fxeaov we have quite a list, like dj'd p-eaop (Mt. 13 : 25),
k peaov (Mt. 13 : 49), eu ixeaco (Mk. 6 : 47), 5td fxeaov (Lu. 4 : 30), 5id
ixeaov (Lu. 17: 11), els to fxeaov (Lu. 5 : 19), eis pkaov (Mk. 14: 60),
mTd ixkaov (Ac. 27: 27), ixeaov (Ph. 2 : 15). In Mk. 14 30 adverb
:
and phrase occur together, a-ljpepou TavTj] tt) pvktL. This is not a
ADVERBS ('EnipPHMATA) 551
ing,' '
he got the start in saying.' Cf. \adpq. elsewhere in N. T. It
is not necessary in Ac. 12 : 16, kirkp.€Ptp Kpovcap, to take the verb as
an adverb in sense. It is simply, 'he continued knocking.' The
infinitive may likewise present the chief idea as in TpoeXalSep ixvplaai
(Mk. 14 8), irpoaWeTo TvepyPai (Lu. 20 11 f.), hke the Heb.
: : :^?i^n
nV^^. But in Mk. 12 4 we have the regular Greek idiom ^
: iroKip
airecTeLKep. Cf. Ac. 12 : 3 wpoaWeTO crvWajSeip. This idiom is ex-
ceedingly common
LXX.^ In Lu. 6 48, eaKa\l/eu Kai el5advpep
in the :
('he dug and went deep'), we have an idiom somewhat like our
English vernacular "he went and dug," "he has gone and done
it," etc.Cf. Ro. 10: 20 airoToXpq. /cat XeyeL, Mt. 18: 3 eap p.ri arpa-
Kai yeprjade.
(jjTJTe 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
do.' So in Jo. 8 : 44, etc. The text is obscure in Col. 2 18 and :
1 W.-Th., p. 4(iS.
2 C. and S., Scl. from the LXX, p. 97.
552 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
theredeXcjov may have an adverbial force. Blass^ conceives that in
Mt. 6 5, <i)L\ov(jLv
: Tpoaevx^adaL, we may translate 'gladly pray.'
. . .
But what advantage has this over 'love to pray,' 'are fond of
praying'?
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 258. Cf. W.-Th., p. 467.
CHAPTER XIII
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIS)
And Giles {Manual, p. 341) thinks that oju/xdrcoj/ ciTro is earlier than
dTTO o/x/xdrcoi'.
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 ad-
verbs that are used, not with verbs, but with cases, and no longer
appear as mere adverbs? Take avev, for instance, with the abla-
tive. It is not found in composition with verbs nor by itself
1
W.-Th., p. 356. 2 Man., etc., p. 341.
But axo is very abundant in the N. T., as are 5td, ets, ex, h, eirl,
Kara, ixera, irpos. But irapa, irtpi, Tpo, avv, inrep, viro are, like ava,
Trapd .07, Trept .12, irpo .018, irpos .25, avv .048, VTrep .054, viro .08.
The three commonest prepositions in Herodotus^" are ets, h and
eTTt, in this order. In Thucydides and Xenophon the order is kv,
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,
els and ewl. But Xenophon varies the order of frequency in his
various books. 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, whereas in the N. T. els is ahead of ev only in Mark and
Hebrews.^ In the vernacular kolvt], ev makes a rather better show-
ing. The large increase of the adverbial prepositions in the N. T.,
as in the kolvt], calls for special treatment a little later. It may be
here remarked that they number 42, counting varjdng forms of the
same word like oinadev, b-wlaw.
(e) In Modern Greek. The varjdng history of the eighteen
prepositions goes still further.^ Thus avTi{s) survives in the ver-
nacular as well as avb (aire), Blo. {yLo), els {es, ere, 's), fj-era (fxe), Kara
{k6.) and <hs. Cf. Thumb, Handb., pp. 100 ff. The bulk 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, but partly also by a wider use of the remaining preposi-
tions, as for ev and Tpos, /xe for avv. Then again all prepositions
els
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.
p. 88, for list. Cf Johannessohn, Der Gebr. d. Casus und der Priip. in der LXX.
.
^ 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 Momm-
most frequently repeated are oltto, k^, els, h, kirl. This is partly
because these prepositions are so common in the N. T. and
partly because they emphasize the local notions of 'from,' 'in,'
or 'upon,' and 'to' or 'into.' Perhaps also the preposition in
composition is a bit worn down. The papyri and inscriptions
show the same repetition of the preposition, though hardly so
frequently, if one may judge by his impressions. See airrjXOev
dro Tuv ffTOLxelo)v (Col. 2 20), air' avTOjf airo^aPTes (Lu. 5:2), cnreireaav
:
a-KO TU)P 6(l)9a\fxQiv (Ac. 9 : 18), dTi:op<t)avLadevTes acj)' vixoiv (1 Th. 2 : 17),
a4)0pl(TeL air' aK\r]\o)v (Mt. 25 : 32), aTreairaadr] air' avTwv (Lu. 22 41), :
aTro(xrpe\l/eL cltto 'laKco^ (Ro. 11 : 26), airoxoop^'LTe air" e/ioO (Mt. 7: 23),
CLTToaT-qTe air' e/xoO (Lu. 13 but not 2 37).
: 27, :
(Ac. 26 : 17), el^eXe^afxrjv k rod Koafiov (Jo. 15 : 19), k rrjs Kara ^vaiv
k^eKOTTTjs (Ro. 11 : 24), e^eireaav k tGjv x^i-P^v (Ac. 12 7), eKiropevoixepov
:
k TOV (XTop-aTos (Mt. 15: 11), eK(t)vyeiv k tov oIkov (Ac. 19 : 16).
(Ac. 17:20).
With k we observe the repetition in some verbs appears, though
often occurs instead both where motion is implied and where
eis
1 W.-Th., p. 427.
560 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
€Tre\ev(7eTaL eirl ae (Lu. 1 : 35), €7rt5e eirl ras kt\. (Ac. 4 : 29), kireKetTO
ctt' avT^ (Jo. 11 : 38), eirej3\€\l/ev eirl ttjv kt\. (Lu. 1 : 48), eweTreaev eir'
avTOV (Lu. 1 : 12), eir' ovSevl avruv eTLTeirrcoKos (Ac. 8 : 16), hwLplxf/avTes
€7r' avTov (1 Pet. 5 : 7), k-KLTLdkaaiv kirl rovs kt\. (Mt. 23 : 4), ewoLKodo-
liel CTTt Tov ktK. (1 Cor. 3 : 12), kTtoLKobop.ridk.VTes kirl to) ktX. (Eph.
2:20).
As to 5td not many verbs have it repeated, but note hairo-
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. 23 : 14), KaraKauxoicrde Kara rrjs
(Mt. 6 26), ejjLTreaoi'TOS els tovs kt\. (Lu. 10 3G), heiTTVcrav els to ktX.
: :
to the fact that one is beside the place or person whence he starts;
airomerely notes the point of departure, while k- distinctly asserts
that one had been within the place or circle before departing. Cf.
therefore Mt. 3 16 : ave^-q airo rod vSaros and Mk. 1 : 10 avajSaipoiv
separate prepositions.
Compounds of ava likewise are followed by els as with ava^aivco
(Mt. 5:1), avayoi (Lu. 2 : 22), ava^Xewoi (Lu. 9 : 16), dmXaM/3a-
vofjLai (Mk. 16 : 19), dmTrtxrco (Lu. 14 : 10), avacpepoi (Lu. 24 : 51),
avepxop.ai (Gal. 1 : 18) ; or by eirl as ava^alvco (Lu. 5 : 19), ava^i^a^o)
(Mt. 13:48), avaKafxiTTCO (Lu. 10:6), avaKKlpofiaL (Mt. 14:19),
avairiiTTO} with accusative (Mt. 15 35) or genitive (Mk. 8 6), : :
sonal relations while and eirl differ in that evl more distinctly
els
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), : :
Ac. 17 23. : On the other hand, irpos may be followed bj'- eirl as
in irpoaTldr)p.L (Mt. 6 : 27) or ev as in irpoaixevu (1 Tim. 1:3). And
even elaeiin has irpos in Ac. 21 18 and
: elacfyepco has ewl (Lu. 12 : 11).
Atd in composition may be followed by els as in Sia^alvu) (Ac. 16
9), irpos (Lu. 16 : 26) or dj^d (1 Cor. 6 : 5), etc.
Compounds with )uerd usually have els, like nera^alvu (Lu. 10 : 7
both k and els), iJLeraXXaaao) (Ro. 1 : 26), nerapoeco (Mt. 12 : 41),
IJ.eTairep.iroiJ.at (Ac. 10 : 22), ijeTaaTpe(f>o} (x\c. 2 : 20), iJeTa(JXf]P-a.TL^<ji
(1 Cor. 4 :
6), neTaTlOr]p.L (Ac. 7: 16), jjeTaTpeiro} (Jas. 4 :
9), jueroi-
/cifco (Ac. 7 :4). But juera5i5cojut (Ro. 12 : 8) and jueraXXdcro-co (Ro.
1 : 25) have h.
562 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
TlepLaycx) is followed by h in Mt. 4 : 23. As to irp6 in Lu. 1 : 17
we have TrpoeXeuo-erat followed by hwinov.
• Verbs compounded with avp may have ixera (cf . the displacing
of (Tvv by fxera in modern Greek) 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 els (Mt. 3 : 12), kirl (27 : 27) and Trpos (Mk. 7: 1),
cvpepxofjiaL Trpos (Ac. 28 : 17), exl (1 Cor. 11 : 20) and ets (11 : 33 f.).
(Jas. 2 16), with which compare ottIgw (Mt. 16 23) and fxera^u
: :
(18 15). Cf. also iiTroo-rpec^co with ets (Lu. 1 56) and ctti (Ac.
: :
Cf. also Mt. 16 18) and of the accusative .in Trjp aXvaiv ravTyjv irepi-
:
pevovTo Tois TToXets (Ac. 16 4) one may either regard the accusative
:
the preposition m
composition. See also ivpoa^m u/xSs in sense
of 'go before' (Mt. 26 : 32). Cf. further airobeKaTovv, neradldo^iJLi,
aTrayofxevot.
'to pursue,' KaTabidoKw 'to hunt down'; rripelv 'to watch,' awr-q-
peiv 'to 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
given verb, but that phase of the matter belongs to the discussion
of the tenses. Indeed, not all of the N. T. verbs by any means show
examples of this "perfective" use of the preposition. Moulton*
notes this absence, as compared with Polyl^ius, in the case of apxo-
fiai, 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 and compound. N. T. illustrations are
interesting. Thus awaofiaL (]\Ik. 14 : 47) is used of Peter's drawing
his sword (note voice), but BLaaTaadfj (Ac. 23 : 10) expresses the
fear that Paul may So kpya^oixai is a common
be drawn in two.
verb for doing work (as Mk. 14 6), but /carep7dj'o/iat accents the
:
gleichende Syntax, I, pp. 660 ff. Cf. also Brugmann, Griech. Gr.,
p. 431 f. XVIII for further remarks.
See also ch.
(j) Double Compounds. It is always interesting to note the
significance of both prepositions. As noted in chapter V, Word
Formation, iv, (c), these double compounds are frequent in the
KOLv-Q and so in the N. T. The point to emphasize here is that each
preposition as a rule adds something to the picture. There are
pictures in prepositions if one has eyes to see them. For instance,
note avTL-irap-rjXdev (Lu. 10 : 31 f.), avv-avTi-ka^rjTaL (10 : 40. Cf.
Ro. 8 : 26. First known in LXX, but now found in papyrus and
inscriptions third century b.c. Cf. Deissmann, Light., p. 83),
virep-ev-Tvyx^^^'- (Ro. 8 26), avT-ava-irXrjpu (Col.
: 1 : 24), cri;i/-7rapa-Xa-
^elv (Ac. 15 : 37), Trpoa-ava-w'KripoJ (2 Cor. 9 : 12), avTi-ha-rldtixai
(2 Tim. 2:25), etc.
6ta T77S yvvaLKos. In Heb. 2 : 10 the whole point turns on the dif-
ference in case, 5t' dv to. iravTa Kai 5t' ov to. ivavTa. In Heb. 11 : 29
the verb with 5td in composition has the accusative while 5id
alone has the genitive, bik^riaav ttjv 'Epvdpav QaKaaaav cos dia ^rjpas
7^s. Cf. 5td ixeaov (Lu. 4 : 30) and 5td fxeaou (Lu. 17: 11). But the
resultant idea is here the same. 'Etti is a pertinent illustration.
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:
:
Mt. 24 2 kirl ytdov, but Xi^os ext Xldu) in Lu. 21:6. Cf. kirl tou
:
similar idea in the phrase h irvevfiaTL Kai a\r]9eiq. as in dTro 06/3oi; Kal
irpoadoKLas in Lu. 21 : 26. Cf. also hv AvarpoLs Kal 'Ikoplco (Ac. 16 : 2),
but in verse 1 observe /cat els Aep^r]v Kal els Avarpav, where perhaps
the doulile conjunction plays some part. Indeed with Kal — Kal
or re — Kai the preposition is commonly repeated. Thus Kal kv
oKlycj: Kal ev fxeyaXco (Ac. 26 : 29), ev re rots Secr/JLols fiov Kal kv rfj aTroXoylq.
ivpo(j)i]TU}v (Lu. 24 : 27), irpos ^ip-aiva Herpou Kal irpos tov aWov (Jo. 20 :
for rhetorical reasons, Trept ap-aprlas Kal Trept 8i.KaLoavvT}s Kal Trept Kpi-
Tcov (hv (Ac. 13 : 39), etc. But the repetition is seen in such ex-
amples as ets Tr]V yrjv ravrrjv, ets i]v (Ac. 7:4); aTro Tpcorrjs ripepas, a(f)'
not expressed and the relative has the preposition of the antece-
dent. So Trepi 5iv in Jo. 17:9 is equal to ivepl tovtcov ovs SeSo^Kas
fiOL. a. els ou (Jo. 6:29).
(d) Condensation by Variation. Once more, the variation
of the preposition is a skilful way of condensing thouglit, each
preposition adding a new idea. Paul is especially fond of this
idiom. Thus in Ro. 3 : 22 we note SiKatoavvr] 8e deov 8i.a Triareus 'Irjaov
XpLffTov els iravras. Cf. verses 25 f. A particularly striking example
is e^ avTOv Kal 5t' avrov /cat eis avTOV to. iravra (Ro. 11 : 36). Cf. also
Col. 1 : 16 ej' aiiTOJ eKTiadr} to. iravra — 5t' avrov /cat ets avrov tKriaraL.
Cf. ert, Eph. 4:6. In Gal. 1 1 Paul covers source and
5td, ev in :
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
: :
' I, p. 44S.
K.-G., "La proposition no fait quo confirmor, qnc invcisor uno
exprimce par un cas cuiploy6 aclverbialcinent." Ricin. ami CiU'U(>l, Syiit.
icld^c
the six oblique cases were used with equal freedom with prep-
ositions. Certainly in the original Indo-Germanic tongues the
dative was not used with prepositions.''' The dative is not origi-
nally 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 hairXa-
yXVicrOr] 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.
J
Delbriick, Grundl., p. 129. Cf. lladley and -Alloii, i)]). 252-2G0.
2 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 449 f.
3 Die Priip. hoi Ilorod., p. S f. Cf. Abbott, Joli. Voc, etc., pp. 357 ff.,
for prep, in the Gospels. *Die Priip. bci Polyb., p. G f.
6 Mullach, Gr. VoIk., pj). 37Gff.; V6lk(«r, Pap. Grace. Syiit., p. 30.
« Cf. Geldart, (Juide to mod. Gk., p. 247; Thumb, Ilandb., pp. 100 ff.
570 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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 com-
mon 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
explained as ablative (from around), while virb seems, like vpkp, to
use the ablative (cf. Latin svb) and possibly the genitive also.
3. Those with Three Cases. Only four prepositions (as against
eight) retain three cases: eiri, and
Kara, wapa, irpbs, unless irepi, virkp
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 influ-
:
(Nestle retains it), while in Rev. 21:21 (aua eh) the word is
eleven instances, four are examples of d^^d fxeaov with the genitive,
a sort of compound prepositional phrase with the idea of "be-
tween" (like Mt. 13 25), similar to the modern Greek ava/xeaa,
:
and found in the LXX, Polybius, etc. One (1 Cor. 14 27, apo. :
fxepos, means 'in turn,'^ while the remaining six are all examples
of the distributive use, like di^d 8vo (Lu. 10 : 1). The distributive
use is in Xenophon. For examples in papyri and inscriptions
see Radermacher, p. 1.5. Cf. our "analogy." In Ac. 8 : 30, yiuu-
(T/cets a avayLvwaKets, the point turns on dm-, l^ut it is not clear
how dm- turns "know" to "read."
20 dmords /card-
See Ac. 10 :
nacular (Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366). In the papyri aua shows
some new compounds not in the N. T., like avairoptvoyLaL (Mayser,
genitive with the adverbs ixpra, clptLop, apria, and the adjective
aPTLos, etc.2 In Homer indeed apri has just begun to be used in
composition with verbs so that it barely escapes the list of the
"improper" prepositions.^ Blass* calls it "one of the preposi-
tions 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 twenty-
two 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). In some of the compounds the original idea
of the preposition comes out finely. Thus in aPT-o(i)da\^eLP t<3
dj^e/icp (Ac. 27: 15) the preposition merely carries on the idea of
the b<i>Qakii6s. The boat could not look at ('eye, face to face') or
face the wind. This root-idea
always present in apri and is the
is
1 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 368. Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 740.
2 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 437; Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. 126, 149 f.
ciples were exchanging words (casting them from one to the other
as they faced each other, aPTi) with one another, an intimate and
vivid picture of conversation. Cf. also the contrast between olptI
and Kara in evds avde^eraL ('cleave to,' 'cUrig to,' 'hold one's self face
to face with') Kal tov erepov KaracjipourjaeL (Mt. 6 : 24). In the double
compound cvv-avTi-Xafi^aveTaL (Rom. 8: 26; cf. Lu.
rfj aadevda rjixoiv
Kpvs Xlov (Ac. 20 15) where in both verb and preposition the idea
:
tion in this sense. The idea of "in the place of " or " instead " comes
where two substantives placed opposite to each other are equiva-
lent and so may be exchanged. The majority of the N. T. ex-
amples 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
: :
aPTL XotSoptas (1 Pet. 3:9). None the less does the idea of exchange
(cf. aPT-aX\ayiJ.a, Mk. 8 37) result when a fish and a snake are
:
placed opposite each other, clptI IxOvos 6<f>ip (Lu. 11: 11) or one's
birthright and a mess of pottage (Heb. 12 : 16). In Mt. 17 27, :
vanished before airo (cf. h before els), but in the modern Greek
airo also supplants to some extent avd, trpos and vtvo. The expla-
nation of aitb is somewhat complicated therefore ^ since the increase
of its use is due partly to the general tendency regarding prepo-
sitions (cf. airb with ablative instead of the "partitive genitive")
and partly to supplanting other prepositions like e/c, irapa, vwo.
its
Uerpos TO (x>TLov (Jo. 18 : 26). Cf. dTro-KaXuTrrw, 'to take the veil off,'
Cf. air-edrjixricrev (Mt. 21:33) for 'a man off from home.' So dx-
k^Xeirev in Heb. 11:26 and acp-opuvres in 12:2. It is needless to
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
vdaros (3 : 16), airo avaroXup (2:1), /3dXe dTro aov (5 : 29), dTro rod
irovripov (6 : 13), dTro rod pvripdov (Lu. 24:2), dTr' epov (Mt. 7: 23),
KaTtiravaev airo TtavTWV (Heb. 4:4), dTro ttjs copas eKelurjs (Mt. 9 : 22),
dTrd Toov apapTLoJv (Mt. 1 : 21), a<j)avT0S eyevero air' avToJv (Lu. 24 31), :
avadepa airo tov Xptaroi) (Rom. 9:3). Here the ablative case and
3 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.
576 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
washed from Paul and Silas and not, as here, Paul and Silas
washed from the stripes. Winer suggests the addition in thought ^
20), fxeTavo-qaov airo (Ac. 8 : 22), etc. Like other prepositions awo
may occur with adverbs, like dTro rore (Mt. 4 : 17).
2. Back J
MeaningWe see it clearly in d7ro-5t5a;/it, 'give
^
back' (Mt. 16 27). But even here the point of view is simply
:
» W.-Th., p. 372.
2 Deiss., B. S., p. 196, for numerous exx.; Moulton, Prol., p. 102. Cf.
Kuhring, De Praep. in Usu, p. 54.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) 577
kxovaLV TOP ijll(x96p avToov (Mt. 6 : 2). Cf. aTr-ex^L (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.
Cf. aireXa^ev to. Oxy. 37 (a.D. 49). Cf. k^tbbii-qv Trjv airo-
rpo^eia, P.
86)8eKa (Lu. 6 : 13), tpkyKare drb toop b^papiwp (Jo. 21 : 10), kKx^(J!} oltto
Tov TrpeviJ.aTOS (Ac. 2 : 17), eadiei airb twp xpLxlo^v (Mt. 15 : 27), ttico
airb TOV yepr]ixaTOS (Lu. 22 : 18), Tlpa airb tcop 8vo (Mt. 27 : 21), etc.
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 airb to help the abla-
tive. Moulton (Prol., p. 246) cites o) airb tojp XpiaTLavoop, Pclagia
(Usener, p. 28) as fairly parallel with oval dTro tojv aKapSaXoop —
(Mt. 18 :7). The partitive use of the ablative with airb does
come nearer to the realm of the genitive (cf English of and the .
genitive), but the ablative idea is still present. One may note
rbp 6.irb KekTu^p ipb^op in Polybius XVII, 11, 2 (Radcrmacher,
A^. T. Gr., p. 116). Cf. evdvfia airb Tpixo^p (Mt. 3 4) with the old :
genitive of material.
Comparison with Ik. But airb needs to be compared more
4.
particularly with 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
U does. Thus in Mk. 1 : 10 we read apajSalvcop eK tov v5aTos when
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 102. » Sol., otc, p. S3.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 126. " Moulton, Prol., p. 102.
—
the assertion is made by e/c that Jesus had been in the water (cf.
Even with the growth in the use of behind k in the oltto it still falls
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 :
home (airo TTJs TaXiXalas k xoXecos Naf aper) Indeed k in this sense .
is clear that 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 :
writers use awo for one's country. So even Luke in Ac. 24 18, :
cLTo TTJS 'Aalas. The MSS. indeed vary in some instances between
dx6 and k as in Ac. 16 39 with rrjs TroXecos. Cf MS. variation be-
: .
tween airo and irapa in Mk. 16; 9. Cf. also Ac. 13 50 for k oltto. :
In a case like ol airo rrjs 'IraXias (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 ostra-
con from Thebes, a.d. 192. Cf. twv air' '0^vpvyx<^^ TroXecos, P. Oxy.
38, A.D. 49. 'At6 is also, hke k (Ac. 10 : 45, etc.), used for mem-
bers of a party in Ac. 12 : 1, rtms tcov airo ttjs eKKXijalas, an un-Attic
usage. But on the whole the two prepositions can be readily dis-
tinguished in the N. T.
5. Comparison with irapa. As to irapa, it suggests that one has
vfiuip (Gal- 3:2), irapeXalSop airo rod Kvplov (1 Cor. 11 : 23). One
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
James,' though they doubtless claimed it. Cf. Mk. 15:45; 1
distinction between wapa rod irarpos (Jo. 10 18) and airo rod Kvplov :
The MSS. often vary where airb is the correct text. The use of
dTTo with the agent is not precisely like virb, though one has only
to compare airb with Latin ah and English of to see how natural
rCiv TTpea^vTepojp, 'at the hands of,' is a free rendering of the idea of
(cf. 17 25). Cf. rtTOLfiaai^epop airb rev deov (Rev. 12 6) and Ac. 2
:
:
:
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,
/. G. XII. 5, 29.
It may also be used for the idea of cause, an old usage of virb.
For instance, take airb ttjs x^pas avTov virayeL (Mt. 13 44), : dTro tov
4)6^ov eKpa^av (14 : 26), oval tw Koaiio) and roov aKavdaXwv (18 :
7),
KOLixufjLevovs airb ttjs XuTrrjs (Lu. 22 : 45), ovKen lax^ov airb rov irXTjOovs
(Jo. 21 : 6), ovK kv'e^XtTTov aro rrjs 56^rjs (Ac. 22 : 11). Cf. further
Lu. 19 : 3; 24 : 41; Ac. 12 : 14; 20 : 9; Heb. 5 : 7, etc. The LXX
gives abundant illustration of the same idiom, the causal use ^ of
airo. As a matter of sound see e^' 6v and d0' ^s in Heb. 7 13. :
(d) Aid. Delbriick^ says: "Of the origin of 5td I know nothing
to say." One remark by the master
hesitates to proceed after that
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)
in the lyric passages of ^Eschylus, not to say the Thessalian 6te.^
But there is no doubt about 5td being kin to 8vo, Sis. Sanskrit
dva, dvi (cf. trmjas, tri), dvis; Latin duo, his (cf. Sanskrit dvis,
Greek 8ls, h =v or v); German zwei; Enghsh two (fem. and neut.),
twain (masc), twi-ce, twi-Ught, be-tween, two-fold, etc.
. 1. The Root-Idea. It is manifest in dLa-KocnoL, Stcr-xtXtot, Si-dpaxfJ-a-,
13. See also 81$ iJ.vpLd8es (Text. Rec, 8vo ix. Rev. 9 : 16), 8'L-\oyos
(1 Tim. 3 : 8), St-o-ro/ios (Heb. 4: 12), 8i-\l/vxos (Jas. 1 : 8), 8L-8paxiJ-ov
(Mt. 17: 24), M-8VIX0S (Jo. 11 : 16). Cf. 4crxic70r? e^s 8vo (Mt. 27: 51).
2. 'By Twos' or 'Between.' But the preposition has advanced a
step further than merely "two" to the idea of by-twain, be-tween,
in two, in twain. This is the ground-meaning in actual usage.
The word St-daXaaaos originally meant 'resembling two seas' (cf.
Euxine Sea, Strabo 2, 5, 22), but in the N. T. (Ac. 27: 41) it ap-
parently means lying between two seas (Thayer). The notion of
interval (be-tween) is 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'
:
5ta-5t5aj;nt (Lu. 11:22) 'divide'; oWh 8i.-'eKpivev txera^v -rjiiuv re /cat avTccv
(Ac. 15 : 9) where fxera^v explains 5td. Cf. Std-zcpio-ts (Heb. 5 :14), 'dis-
8La-(TTo\r] (1 Cor. 14: 7), 'distinction'; 8ta-Tldep.aL (Lu. 22: 29), 'dis-
pose'; 8La.-4>epo) (Ac. 27:27, Mt. 6:26), 'bear apart,' 'differ'; 5ta-
</)opos (Ro. 12: 6), 'different'; 5t-xafw (Mt. 10: 35), 'set at variance'
'after some days,' though surely no one would think that 5td
really means 'after.' Cf. Mt. 26 61, 5td rpicof rjfj.epcbv (cf. h, 27 : :
40); 8l erojv irXeidvuv, Ac. 24 17; Gal. 2:1, 6td deKarecraapuv krwv.
:
here note the genitive after fxeaov. Some MSS. in Jo. 8 : 59 read also
6td neaov. Blass"* wrongly calls 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
riiv a\wva (Mt. 3:12), 'will thoroughly cleanse,' Cf. also dia-jSaivoj
This sense of 5td is used with words of place, time, agent or ab-
stract word. In all of these relations the root-idea of the preposi-
tion is easily perceived. Thus in Mt. 12 : 43, Stepxerai 8l' avvbpwv
TOTTOiv, bia ^r]pas (Heb. 11 : 29), Slo. ttjs 2a/xaptas (Jo. 4:4), 5td
Tvpds (1 Cor. 3 : 15), 8l' kaoirrpov (1 Cor. 13 : 12). Cf. Ac. 13 : 49;
2 Cor. 8 : 18. In Ro. 15 : 28, dTreXeuao^tat 8l' vpLuv els STraj^tav, Winer
(Winer-Thayer, p. 378) takes 5t' vfxcov to be 'through you,' i.e.
'through your city,' 'through the midst of you.' In all these exam-
ples the idiom runs just as in the older Greek. The use of 5td with
expressions of time was never very common and gradually was
transferred^ to els. But some examples occur in the N. T. like 8l'
oKrjs vvKTos (Lu. 5:5), which may be compared with 5td iravros rod
^yjv (Heb. 2 : 15) and the common phrase 5td iravTos (Mk. 5:5).
Here the idea of through is applied to time. Rouffiac (Recherches,
p. 29) cites 5td rod from inscriptions of Priene 112,
xf^i-IJ-^vos oKov
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 com-
monly employed.' Atd is thus used with inanimate and animate
objects. Here, of course, the agent is conceived as coming in be-
tween 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.
HeKavos kol KoXa^ov ctol ypa4>eiv (3 Jo. 13), 5td YXwtrcrrjs (1 Cor. 14: 9),
ra 5td Tov acofiaTOS (2 Cor. 5 : 10), Std tcov oirXccv (2 Cor. 6:7), fJ.r)Te Slo.
TTPevfiaTOS fir)Te 5td \6yov fxrjTe 8l' eTiaroXrjs (2 Th. 2:2). In 2 Pet.
3 : 5 note the difference between e^ v8aTos and 8l' v8aTos. Abstract
ideas are frequently so expressed, as aeac^apLevoc 5td TrlaTews (Eph.
2 : 8), 5td deXrifxaTos deov (Eph. 1 : 1), 5td tov evayyeXiov (1 Cor. 4 : 15),
Sea vofxov (Ro. 3 : 27), 8l' aTOKakwPeois (Gal. 1 : 12). Cf. 1 Cor. 6 : 14.
When 5td occurs with the personal agent, he is regarded as the in-
termediate agent. Sometimes the immediate agent is also ex-
pressed by vTTo. So uTTo Kvplov 5id TOV Trpo4)r]Tov (Mt. 1 : 22, etc.).
Cf. also 5td TTJs yvvaiKos — k tov deov (1 Cor. 11 : 12), where source
and mediate agent are distinguished. In Gal. 1:1, air' avOpoiTruv —
1 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 374. « lb., p. 375.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) 583
^^ ol, _
the first refers to God the Father as the source of all
5t' ou,
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,
: : :
off into one another as 8l' 6pd/xaros (Ac. 18 : 9). Note also 8l'
dydirvs (Gal. 5 : 6), 5t' eTraTTeXias (Gal. 3 : 18), Bid ^paxeccv (Hcb.
13 : 22), 8l oKiyuv (1 Pet. 5 : 12), 8l' v8aTos Kal aifxaTos (1 Jo. 5 : 6),
Sid ypdnnaTOs Kal repLTOixyjs (Ro. 2 : 27), 5td irpoaKOfxpaTos (14 : 20), 8id
86^r]s (2 Cor. 3:11), 8l' virop.oviis (Heb. 12 : 1), 5td ttoXXwj/ BaKpOcov
(2 Cor. 2 :4). Cf. Rom. 2 : 27. But here also the notion of
cases. One may note also 5ta ry]v yvpolKa and 6td rrjs yvvatKos (1
Cor. 11:9, 12). Cf. 5td riiu xo-piv above. In Ro. 8 : 11 the MSS.
vary between 5id to hoiKovv and 5td tov hoLKovvTos (W. H., Nestle).
Note also the difference between 5td irlaTecos and 5td t?71' irapeaLv
in Ro. 3 : 25. Cf. also the common 5td to opo/xa (Mt. 10: 22), 5td
Ti)j' TToWriP aya.Trr]P (Eph. 2:4), 6id rot- \6yop (Jo. 15 : 3), 5td tov
xpoj^oi/ (Heb. 5 : 12). Cf. Heb. 5 : 14; Rev. 12 : 11. The personal
ground is common also as in €70? fw 5td top iraTepa (Jo. 6 : 57), 8l'
CVS (Heb. 6 : 7), etc. Cf. 1 Jo. 4 : 9 'g-qawixep bC avTou. The aim
(usually expressed by epeKo) may be set forth by oia also. So to
crd^jSaTOP Slcl top apOpoowop eyepeTO Kal ovx o apdpcoiros 5td to cra^^aTOP in
Mk. 2 : 5t' k(xk and 8l' i^xas in Jo. 12
27. Cf. also 30. Cf. Mk. :
the use of 5td to and the infinitive in the sense of IVa. It is practi-
cally equivalent in the N. T. to 6tl and the indicative and is fre-
kn-^alvw, 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
:
:
seem more natural. Cf. Lu. 9 46; 1 Cor. 11 18; Ro. 1 25. In
: : :
8l86vtl ev TTJ Kap8la (2 Cor. 8 : 16), SeSwKev ev rrj xeipt (Jo. 3 : 35),
ev 'Ake^avSpela; Epict. (I, 11, 32) avepxv '^v Tcb/ir/; Tob. 5:5 Tropeu-
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
either loc. or ace. Cf. Clanin, Synt. of Boeotian Dial. Inscr., p. 56 f. Pindar
has entirely disappeared before els which uses only the accusa-
tive.^ 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 kolvti generally. There is rarely much doubt as to the
significance of ev, whereas ets has already begun to resume its old
identity with h, if indeed in the vernacular it ever gave it up.^
We may compare h rc3 aypQ in Mt. 24 : 18 with eis top aypSu in
Mk. 13 : 16. Cf. ewecrx^^ xpovov eis rriv 'Aaiav (Ac. 19 : 22), TrjpelcrdaL
eis KaLaapiav (25 4), : eis oIkov e<jTLv (some MSS. in Mk. 2:1). Cf.
Jo. 1 : 18.
In the N. T. ev is so frequent (2698 instances) that it is still
1 V. and D., Mod. Gk., p. 109 f. ^ Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 142.
* Prol., p. 103. On the retreat of iv before ets see Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 380.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) 587
will take place within the period of three days. Cf. rfj tp'ltxi wkpg.
(never with h in the N. T.) in Mt. 16 21. ^ More common ex- :
h T<3 nera^v (Jo. 4 : 31), h rats i7jLtepais ketrats (Mt. 3 : 1), ev rrj
(Mt. 10 15), kv Tfi kaxo^Tji aaXinyyt (1 Cor. 15 52), etc. Cf. Lu.
:
:
Not very different from this idea (cf. Latin apvd) is the use kv
6), kv Txi K\a<reL (Lu. 24 : 35). One may note also kv tc3 'ASAm iravres
5tc3in Col. 3 3. The LXX usage is not quite on a par with this
:
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 <tvv in
» Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 131. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 144, con-
eiders this an "extra-grammatical" point.
2 Prol., p. 103. With this cf. ttouo) eu (Mt. 17 : 12; Lu. 23 : 31), an idiom
paralleled in the LXX. Cf. k^tXe^aro kv iixol (1 Cliron. 28 :
4), fipkriKa iv avr^
(1 Chron. 28 : 6).
3 Prol., p. 103. * Prol., p. 103.
* Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 131. ^ lb.
^ C. and S., Sel., etc., p. 82. Cf Thack., dr., .
p.' 47, for the frequent use
of ip of accompanying circiunstance in the LXX.
8 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130.
PREPOSITIONS (np(X)E2Ei2;) 589
XeaaTO —
ev \pvxous (Ac. 7: 14), elaepx^raL kv atnart (Heb. 9 25),»kv :
Tc3 vdari. Kal ev tco ai/jLarL (1 Jo. 5 6), ev paj38co eXOco (1 Cor. 4 21), : :
ex€L (Mk. 3 30) and the double use in Ro. 8 9, vf^els 8e ovk hare
: , :
ala (Col. 2 : 15), ev rdxet (Lu. 18 : 8, cf. Taxv and raxecos). Cf. Mt.
6 18 and Jo. 18
: : 20.
9. 'Amounting to,' 'Occasion,' 'Sphere.' Moulton- considers
Mk. 4 : 8, ecf)epev eis rpiaKOvra Kal ev e^rjKOVTa Kal ev eKarov (note sim-
ilarity here and ev), as showing that ev sometimes is
between eis
cated by ev. Cf. Ro. 3 25; Ac. 20 28. In a few examples ev gives
: :
second ev suggests 'in the sphere of.' Cf. ev perpcp (Eph. 4 16), :
2 W.-Th., p. 388.
^ Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 144.
* C. and S., p. 82; Thack., p. 47.
6 Moulton, Prol., pp. 12, 61, 104, 234 f. ^ j^^nn., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 379. ^
Cf. vl\paL els (Jo. 9:7). But in Mt. 28:19, /SaTrrtfoj/res ets TO
bvofxa, and Ro. 6 3 : f., ets XpLcrrov and ets t6u davarou, the notion
of sphere is the true one. The same thing may be true of jSctt-
KTipvaffoiv els ras avpayuyas (Mk. 1 : 39) where there is some excuse
for the "pregnant" explanation because of riXOev. So kXdchv KardoKT]-
aev eis -koKlv (Mt. 2 23; 4 13), but note only : : rapcpKrjaep eis yriv
TO opos (Mk. 13 : 3), 6 eis t6v ay p6v (Mk. 13 : 16), rots els tov oIkov
(Lu. 9 : 61), els rr}V kolttjv elaiv (Lu. 11 : 7), eyKaToXei^peLS els a^Tju (Ac.
2 : 27; cf. verse 31), rots eis naKpav (2 : 39), eis xoXw — ovTa (Ac.
8 : 23), eirkax^v xpovov els Trjv 'Aalav (Ac. 19 : 22), awodavelv els
els KaLffapiau (Ac. 25 :4), 6 c!:v els tov koKttou (Jo. 1 : 18), ol rpeis eis
TO ev elaiv (1 Jo. 5 : 8), eis riv aTrjre (1 Pet. 5 : 12). Nor is this quite
TOV eaoo avdpo^irov. Cf. Jo. 20 : 7; Mk. 13 :9. But in ecxTr] els to
necxov (Jo. 20 : 19, 26) we have motion, though eaTrj els tov alyiaXov
(Jo. 21 : 4) is an example of rest. Jo. 17 : 23 is normal. In Mt.
10 : 41 f., eis 6vop.a irpo^i^Tov {p.aQr]Tov, bualov) one can see little dif-
ference between eis and ev. Certainly this is true of Mt. 12 : 41,
neTevorjaav els Krjpvypa 'loova, where it is absurd to take eis as into' or
'
'unto' or even 'to.' See also Gvvr\yp.evoi els to ep.6v 6vopa{},ii. 18 20).
:
With Verbs of Motion. But the usual idiom with eis was
2.
(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), eis tois ayKoKas
(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 :
such as eaxlf^^V ^'^ ^^^ (Mt. 27: 51), avvayetv els ev (Jo. 11 : 52), eis
Trjv ^u>T]v (Mt. 18 : 8), eis KplaLv (Jo. 5 : 24), eis viraKorjv (2 Cor.
594 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
10 : 5), els x^tpas (Mt. 17 : 22), etc. For many interesting exam-
ples of h and ets see Theimer, Die Prdpositionen els, h, U im N. T.,
Beitrdge zur Kenntnis des Sprachgebrauches im N. T., 1896.
3. With Expressions of Time.
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'
:
XpLCTTov. Not quite so sharp a limit is els Tijv avpiov (Mt. 6 : .34).
Cf. 1 Pet. 1:11. There is little that is added by the preposition
to the accusative in such examples as ets to n'eWov (Lu. 13 :
9),
eis Tov aloiva (Mt. 21 : 19), ets 7ej^eds Kal yeveas (Lu. 1 : 50), ets ro
bi-qveKks (Heb. 7 3), : etc. Cf. Lu. 12 : 19. But a more definite
period is set in cases hke ets tov Kaipbv (Lu. 1 : 20), ets to p.eTa^v
ca^l3aTov (Ac. 13 :42).
4. Like a Dative. It
ets used where
is not strange to see
disposition or attitude of Indeed already etsmind is set forth.
and the accusative occur where the dative alone would be suffi-
cient. This is especially true in the LXX, but the papyri show
examples also. Cf. ol els XpiaTov {Mart. Pauli, II). Moulton (Prol,
p. 246) cites Tb.P. 16, ov X-qyovTes TTjt [ets] avTovs aWaSia, "where ets
actually stands for the possessive genitive." One must remember
the complete disappearance of the dative in modern Greek ver- ^
nacular. Note TTJs \oyias ttjs ets to us dyiovs (1 Cor. 16 : 1), tXoutw
ets TrdvTas (Ro. 10 : 12), TrXeomfw ets (Ph. 4 : 17), e\erip.o(yvvas woLrjawv
els TO Wvos (Ac. 24 : 17), XeLTOvpydv els to. Wvr] (Pv,o. 15 : 16), d7ro/3Xe7rcj
ets (Heb. 11 : 26), XeTet ets (Ac. 2
34 f.), to : 25), opvvo: els (Mt. 5 :
(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 :
dvdpwTTOv (cf. Kara in Mt. 12 : 32) and ets to aytov irveviia ^Xaacjy-ri-
HVaavTL, ^\d(T(t)r]iJLa els (Ac. 6:11), eTL^ovXrj els (Ac. 23 : 30), dp.apTaveLV
els (Lu. 15 : 18), etc. As a matter of fact all that ets really accent-
uates here is the accusative case (with reference to) which happens
to be in a hostile atmosphere. But that is not true of such ex-
amples 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, :
€15 does not mean 'for,' though that is clearly the resultant idea.
So with els ixapTvpiov avTols (Mt. 8:4). Take Ro. 11 36, for in- :
stance, where els abrbv is set over against e^ aiiTov. Cf. again els
86^av deov in Ph. 1:11, els (})6^ov in Ro. 8 : 15, els eudeL^LP in Ro.
3 : 25, in Jo. 6 27. One may not doubt also that
els t<^riv alcovLOP :
this is the idea in Mt. 26 28, to irepl toXXojp eKxvvv6p.evov els acpeaiv
:
cts avTO tovto (2 Cor. 5:5), ayopa^cx) els (Jo. 13 29), ets cnraVTTjaiv :
(Mt. 25 : 6), ets viravTriaiv aiiTU) (Jo. 12 : 13).^ Cf. ^v\wv els eXaLcouas
nov (Fay. P., 50 a.d.), 'sticks for my olive-gardens' (Deissmann,
Light, etc., p. 157), ets lttttov evo-xXovixevov (P. Fl.-Pet., ii. XXV, 226
B.C.), 'for a sick horse' (Deissmann, B. S., p. 118). Radermacher
(iV. T. Gr., p. 112) cites uiKoddiJirjaev — ets eavTou (83 N. Chr. Wadd.
Inscr., 2614).
6. Predicative Use. But there remains one more use of ets which,
ecrrat to. crKoXtd ets eWeias (Is. 40 : 4). So eaeade jxol els vlovs Kai Ovya-
Tepas (2 Cor. 6 : 18, LXX); eaovTaL ol dm els crapKa ixlav (Mt. 19 : 5;
cf. Gen. 2 : 24); ri Xvttj v/jlcov els xapdi' yeprjaeTai (Jo. 16: 20). Cf.
Lu. 13 : 19. As already remarked, this predicate use of ets ap-
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,
Prol., p. 14. Cf. tUa.iravrrj(jLv, Tb. P. 43 (ii/B.c). Roufliac (llochorchcs, p. 28)
finds dvaL ets 4>v\aKiiv in inscr. of Prione 50, 39 (ii/B.c). ^ C. and S., p. 81 f.
' Moulton, Prol., p. 71 f. Cf. K.P. 4G (ii/.\.D.) laxov vap' djuwi' 5a (fetoc)
awipfiaTa, 'for a loan.' Cf. our "to wife." Moulton (Prol., p. 67) cites M.
Aurelius, VI, 42.
* C. and S., p. 81. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 143, cites an ex. from
Theogn.
596 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
the frequency that we find it in the LXX. Cf. Lu. 13 : 19. Blass^
credits eis in i;7ra7e els eiprjvrjv (Mk. 5 : 34) to the Hebrew through
the LXX (cf. 1 Sam. 1 : 17). Cf. also els dLarayas ayyeKwv (Ac.
(g) 'Ek (€|). The etymology of this word is simple. Cf. Latin
ex (e), Gallic ex, Old Irish ess, Cymric eh. In the Greek the form
varies thus k (e^ before vowels), ey (assimilation), e (Locrian, cf.
oKOTovs ets TO </)cos (1 Pet. 2 : 9), where the metaphorical follows the
literal usage. In Lu. 6 42 k tov b4>da\p.ov is set in opposition to
:
lish 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), :
boat). One may compare with this eyeipeTat k- tov belTrvov (Jo. 13 :
4), avaXvaji k tcov yap-wv (Lu. 12 : 3G), d'Tro/cuXtetJ' tov \iQov tK t^s dvpas
Xpbvoiv (Lu. 23 : 8), k tov aiojvos (Jo. 9 : 32), k xoXXcov hojv (Ac.
24 : 10), k TovTov (Jo. 6 : 66). In cases where succession is involved
the point of departure is really present. Thus with k- bevTepov
(Jo. 9 24), k tp'ltov (Mt. 26
: 44), ^fxkpav k^ wkpas (2 Pet. 2:8). :
Tov Kocrnov (Jo. 17: 15). Cf. Jo. 17: 6. Abbott^ doubts if in the
LXX and John U always impHes previous existence in the evils
from which one is delivered when used with acbf co and rrjpeco. Cer-
tainly in Jo. 17 k occurs rather frequently, but Tr]pr]aj}s k tov
irovrjpov (17: 15) may
imply that the evil one once had power
still
over them (cf. Jesus' prayer for Peter). Certainly in Jo. 12 27, :
cuaov fxe €k tt]s copas Taurrjs, Jesus had already entered into the hour.
Cf. bvvaixevov aoi'^eLv where U may accentuate
k davdrov (Heb. 5:7)
the power of God though he had not yet entered into
{bwciixevov) ,
^ovcxLv tK Trjs jSacrtXetas the idea is 'out from among,' just as cheat or
cockle grows in among the wheat in the same field. The two
kingdoms coexist in the same sphere (the world). The notion of
veKpunf (Lu. 20: 35), k^e\e^dij,r]v k tov kocthov (Jo. 15 19), etc. This :
idea of origin or source. Thus e^rjXdov k- tov iraTpos (Jo. 16 : 28), ovk
etjut k TOV KoapLOV (17: 14, 16), k TOiv XiBlov tovtoov eyetpac TeKva (Mt.
3 : 9. Naturally this usage has a wide range. Cf . k Nafaper (Jo.
1 : 46 f.), k TToXews (Jo. 1 : 44), k ttJs I,apapias (Jo. 4:7), 'E/3paTos
k^ 'E^paloiv (Ph. 3 : 5), k Tijs yrjs (Jo. 3 : 31), k deov (Ph. 3 9), :
fioova (Lu. 16 :9). Cf. also diredavov k Tciu vbaTWV (Rev. 8 11). :
Perhaps here belongs kirXrjpcodr] k- ttjs dapfjs (Jo. 12 : 3). Cf. yepl^o)
k in Jo. 6 : 13 (Abbott, Johannine Gr., p. 253). At any rate a
1 Joh. Gr., p. 251 f.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) 599
number of verbs use e/c in this general sense like w^eXeco (Mk.
7:11), ^-qixLomdai (2 Cor. 7:9), adLKeladai (Rev. 2:11), irXovTeca
(Rev. 18 : 3), xopra^eadai (Rev. 19 21), Koina^o) (Jo. 4 6), fdw (Ro.
: :
1 : 17), etc. Cf. e^\aa(()r]jjLrjaav top dtov e/c t^s irXrjyrjs (Rev. 16 : 21).
Indeed ck with the notion of price does not differ radically from
this idiom. Thus -qyopaaap e^ auT<xii> Tov ay pop (Mt. 27: 7), eKTYjaaTO
€K piiadov (Ac. 1 : 18), (TviJ.(j)u^pr](xas k br}papLov (Mt. 20 : 2). 'Ek 5ta-
Tayris, 'by order,' was a regular formula in the papyri (Deissmann,
Light, etc., p. 87). Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 248, finds the
idiom k twp reaaapup a.p(.p.wp (Mk. 13 27) in the papyri as well as
:
in Zech. 11:6.
8. The Partitive Use of e/c. It is not infrequent, marking an in-
crease over the earlier idiom. ^ Thus in Jo. 16 17 k tup ixaOrirchv :
See also Jo. 7 40. John is specially fond of the partitive use of
:
deed 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
:
:
examples of 5ta, ev, eis, irpos, e/c. See dx6 and Trapd.
(h) 'E-ni. See Sanskrit dpi (locative case), Zend aipi, Latin ob,
Lithuanian pi.
1. Ground-Meaning. It is 'upon' as opposed to vtto. It differs
from iiTep in that eiri implies a real resting upon, not merely over.^
But the very simplicity of this idea gives 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 it is there. The only safety consists in holding on to the
root-idea and working out from that in each special context. It
idea. Thus sometimes either case with kiri would give substan-
tially the same idea, though technical differences did exist. For
instance, in Ac. 5 9 note eirl rfj dvpa, while in verse 23 we have eirl
:
kirl T-qv dvpav (Rev. 3 Here the notion of rest exists ^nXh. all
: 20) .
three cases, though in Rev. 3 20 koL Kpovco may have some effect :
single verb Xa/xjSdi'et has eTri tov fxerdiTOV avrov fj ewl T-qv x^'^P°- o.vtov
(cf. Ac. 27 : 44). Compare also Xi0os kirl \idov in Mt. 24 : 2 -^dth
Xtdos eirl Xi^co in Lu. 21 : 6. In Ph. 2 : 27 the MSS. vary between
\vinr]v ext Xvirrjv and \vTrrjv eiri Xvirrj. Cf. also kir' oXiya and eirl
(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. As already noted, it is far in excess
of the other cases combined. It is 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
it is very common and very easy to understand. So eXOelv eivl to.
vSara (Mt. 14 : 28), irepiiiraT-qctv kirl to. vdara (14 : 29), dpaireaeip kirl
Trjv yrjv (Mt. 15 : 35), ctkotos eyevero eTC irdaav rrjv yrjp (Mt. 27: 45),
TTOpevov eirl Tr)v bbbv (Ac. 8 : 26), eire^oKov rds x^tpas eirl tou 'Irjaovv
(Mt. 26 : 50), avaireacdv eirl to arrjdos (Jo. 13 : 25). The meta-
phorical use is in harmony with this idiom. Thus </)6/3os kirkireaev
kir' avTov (Lu. 1 : 12), KareaTrjaas avrov eirl ra epya (Heb. 2:7), /3a-
(TiKevaei eirl top oIkov (Lu. 1 : 33), Iva tTnaKrivwarj evr' e/^e 17 bvvap.LS tov
XpLffTov (2 Cor. 12 : 9). Cf. 2 Cor. 1 : 23, eTrtKaXoO^iat kwl ttjp kfiriv
be seen. But that is not true of Mt. 13 2, xas 6 oxXos kirl top :
TPevfxa rjp ayiop tir' avTOP (Lu. 2 : 25), epeipep eir' avTOP (Jo. 1 : 32),
tTrkcTiqaap tirl top irvXccpa (Ac. 10 : 17), ecp' i;/xas apawaveTaL (1 Pet.
4 : 14), KciXvppa CTTt TTjP Kapdlap KeiTat (2 Cor. 3 : 15), iaoPTai aX-qdovaai
eirl TO avTo (Lu. 17: 35). hard to think of any idea of Here it is
one's emotions as with Trtareuco ewl (Ro. 4 24), eXiri^o: ext (1 Pet, :
22 and the general use of eirl in Mk. 9 12 ykypa-wTai eirl top vIop :
verse. Cf. also Mk. 3 26, etc. Abbott^ notes that John shows :
this usage only once (19 :33). For eirt with the idea of degree
or measure see e0' oaop (Ro. 11 13). Cf. eirl to avTo in the sense :
merely fill out the accusative, as with ext cr?? rpta (Lu. 4 25, :
marg. of W. H.), evl rjpepas irXeiovs (Ac. 13 31), k4>' oaop xpovop :
(Lu. 4 : 29), K-qpv^are eirl rdv bwixaTwv (Mt. 10 : 27), kpxo/JLepov eirl
vt4>t\0iv (Mt. 24 : 30), WriKev eirl tov aravpov (Jo. 19 : 19), Kadiaas eirl
Tov ^TinaTOS (Ac. 12 : 21), erl rrjs Ke(j)a\rjs (Jo. 20 : 7), eirl rrjs dakaaaris
(Rev. 5 : 13), eirl ^v\ov (Ac. 5 : 30). In Mk. 12 : 26, eirl tov iSarov,
an thought occurs in the passage about the bush.
ellipsis in
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 :
Cf. Ac. 5 : 23 eirl tup dvpojv. The classic idiom with eirl and the
genitive in the sense of 'towards' is not so common in the N. T.,
though it has not quite disappeared as Simcox^ thinks. Cf. ey'evero
TO -kKoIov eirl rrjs 777s (Jo. 6 21), Kadieixevov eirl ttjs yrjs (Ac. 10
: 11), :
^aXovaa to ixvpov evl tov acoAtaros (Mt. 26 : 12), eiriiTTev eirl Tijs yrjs
(Mk. 14 : 35), yevbiievos eivl tov toitov (Lu. 22 : 40), tov eir' avTrjs
(Heb. 6:7), Teaibv eirl t^s yrjs (Mk. 9 20). In these ex-
epxofievov :
amples we see just the opposite tendency to the use of the accusa-
tive 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
:
(Mk. 13 : 9), Kplveadai eirl tcop adUc^v (1 Cor. 6 : 1), eKTOs el p.i] eirl
while in verse 17 the usual idea 'upon' is alone present (Kadlaas eirl
(1 Pet. 1:20) where erl naturally occurs (cf. Ju. 18). With eirl
"Avva (Lu. 3:2), eirl 'EXtaaiov (4 : 27), eirl 'A^tadap apxi-ipeojs (Mk.
» Joh. Gr., p. 261.
» Lang, of the N. T., p. 147. » Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 137.
004 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
2 : 26). Cf. eir' avrrjs in Heb. 7:11. The idea of basis is a natural
metaphor as in ex' aXrjdelas (Lu. 4 : 25), a eiroieL ctti tcoj' aaQtvovvTwv
(Jo. 6:2), cbs eTTt ToWciv (Gal. 3 16), kwl oTonaTos (Mt. 18 16).
: :
One of the metaphorical uses is with the resultant idea of over,' '
tive occur. Cf. also ^aaCkdav kirl toov jSaaiKeo^v (Rev. 17: 18), 6 c^v
eTTt irdvTuv (Ro. 9:5), etc.
eTTt 77? 4:6), eirl l/JLaTLo: TraXato; (Mt. 9 16), kirl Tavry rrj
7r?777) (Jo. :
KareKeLTo), eirl rols /cpa/Sarrots (Mk. 6 55), evrt tw xoprco (Mk. 6 39), : :
er' epi]jiOLS tottols (Mk. 1:45), eireKeLTO kiv' avrco (Jo. 11:38), eirl
aavldLv (Ac. 27 44;: cf. also evrt tivuv). In Lu. 23 : 38, ewLypacprj kir'
ecf)' c3, like ext tovtco otl, in Ro. 5 12 and 2 Cor. 5 4. Cf. ecj)' (^: :
also kirl Trapopyi(TixQ) vjxwv (Eph. 4 : 26), cf. 2 Cor. 9 : 15. The idea
of aim or purpose seems to come in cases like kirl 'ipyois ayadois
(Eph. 2 : 10), €0' a) Koi KaTe\rjfj.(f)9r]v (Ph. 3 : 12). Note also Gal.
5 : 13, €7r' kXevdeplg.; 1 Th. 4 : 7, ouk err' aKadapala (cf. ev ayiaafXiJo), tirl
kKCiXovv kwl Tc3 bvbp.aTL (Lu. 1 : 59) and €7rt tc3 o/xotw/xart (Ro. 5 :
Ta(n»'(Lu. 3 :20).
7. As we have seen, it was probably some-
The True Dative.
times used with The N. T. examples do not seem to be very
eirl.
numerous, and yet some occur. So I would explain 5td riju virep-
^aXXovaav xo-ptv rod Oeov €0' v/xlv (2 Cor. 9 : 14). This seems a clear
case of the dative with kwi supplementing it. The same thing may
be true of €</>' vij.lv in 1 Th. 3 : 7 and Ro. 16 : 19. Cf. also ireiroLdb-
So Lu. 1 : 47 k-wl tQ deQ. In Lu. 12 : 52 f., rpets kirl 8valv, 8vo kirl
TpLCLP, vlos eirl Tarpi (cf. also eirl OvyaTepa), the resultant sense is
'against.' Cf. also -n-po<i)r}TemaL kvl \aols in Rev. 10 : 11. In
Jo. 12 : 16, rjv eir' avTi2 yey pap.fj.ha, and Ac. 5 35, eirl : toIs avdponroLs
TovTOLs, the idea is rather 'about' or 'in the case of.' Cf. also
T^s yevopevrjs eirl 'LTecf)av(jo (Ac. 11 : 19). Here the personal relation
seems to than the locative. The
suit the dative conception better
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. :
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 preposi-
' .
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,'
3.
"
1 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 178. Horn. Gr., p. 145.
"
2 lb.; Moulton, Prol., p. 105. I, p. 475.
^
3 Cf. ib., pp. 115 ff. Vergl. Synt., I, p. 760.
4 Griech. Gr., p. 443.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) 607
Tov Kprjuvov (cf. Mt. 8 : 32; Lu. 8 : 33) where 'down from the cUff'
iTTwx^la, the idea is 'down to' depth. But with the genitive the
other examples in the N. T. have as resultant meanings either
'against/ 'throughout' or 'by.' These notions come from the
original 'down.' Luke alone uses 'throughout' with the geni-
tive and always with oXos. The earher Greek had Kad' 6\ov
(also alone in Luke in the N. T., Ac. 4 18), though Polybius :
employed Kara in this sense. Cf. in Lu. 4 : 14 Kad' oX-qs tyjs xepi-
xcopov; Ac. 9 :31 Kad' oXrjs ttjs 'lov8aias (so 9 :42; 10 :37). The
older Greek would have used the accusative in such cases. But
cf. Polyb. iii, 19, 7, Kara rijs vrjaov dLeairaprjaau. The notion of
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
:
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
accusative with mrd corresponds pretty closely to the classic
idiom. With a general horizontal plane to work from a number of
metaphorical usages occur. But it appears freely in local expres-
sions like OLTcriKQe Ka6' 6\r]v rrjv toKlv K-qpvaaoov (Lu, 8 : 39), 8i.rjpxovTO
Kara tcLs KUfxas (Lu. 9:6), Kara r-qv 686v (Lu. 10 : 4), eyevero Xljios Kara
T-qp x^po-v (Lu, 15 : 14), Kara rrju KtXiKtav (Ac, 27 :
5), (3\eT0PTa Kara
Xtj8a (Ac. 27 : 12), /card near]iJ.(3plav (Ac, 8 : 26), Kara irpoacowov (Gal.
2 : 11), /car' 6(})daXixovs (Gal, 3:1), /card (jkottov (Ph. 3 14), The no- :
tion of rest may also have this construction as /car' oIkov (Ac, 2 46). :
Cf, TTiv Kar' OLKOV avTrjs eKKK-qalav (Col, 4 : 15), Cf, Ac, 11 : 1. In
Ac, 13:1a rather ambiguous usage occurs, /card rriv ovaav kKKk-qalav
Trpo(f)rjTaL. But this example may be compared with twv Kara 'lov-
Salovs Wwv (Ac, 26 : 3), ol Kad' v/jLcis iroL-qTai (Ac. 17: 28, some MSS.
18 15). This idiom is common
Had' rjidds), vonou rod Kad' uyuas (Ac. :
in the examples above and such as rriv Kad' vjiSis tIcttlv (Eph. 1 15), :
TO /car' e/xe (Ro. 1 : 15), ro /card aapKa (Ro. 9:5), rd KaT e/xe (Eph.
6 : 21; cf. Ac. 25 : 14), avbpaaLv roTs Kar' e^oxvv (Ac. 25 : 23; cf. par
excellence). Kara is used with expressions of time like Kar' eKetvov
Tov Kaipov (Ac. 12 : 1), Kard to ixeaovvKTLOV (Ac. 16 : 25), Kad' haarriv
fiixepav (Heb. 3 : 13), /card irdv aa^^arov (Ac. 13 : 27). The notion
of distribution comes easily with Kard, as in Kard toXlv (Lu. 8:1),
Kard rds avvayooyds (Ac. 22 : 19), Kar' eros (Lu. 2 : 41), Kad' rjpepav
(Ac. 2 : 46), Kad' eva Travres (1 Cor. 14 : 31), Kar' ovo/JLa (Jo. 10 : 3),
etc. See Mt. 27 : 15 = Mk. 15 : 6. Cf. Kard 8vo, P. Oxy. 886
(iii/A.D.). As a standard or rule of measure Kard is very coromon
and Kara ayvoiav (Ac. 3 17) bad Greek. If there is the idea of
:
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 gen-
itive and accusative, and the genitive use greatly predominates
(361 to 100) .5 The idea with the locative was simply between.'
'
ance here between the Baptist's disciples and the Jews to incite
the hostile sense also in legal trials, dSeX^os fxera aSeXcpov Kpl-
verai. Cf. Jo. 16 19. This notion gives no difficulty to English
:
Ttkwvihv (Lu. 5 30), ixera aponwu eXoyladr] (Lu. 22 37), an idiom not
: :
common to avv and found in the classical poets.^ Cf. also aKrjvi] rod
jxtTo. Tcov dvffLuiv (Lu. 13 : 1), olvov jieTa xoXtjs (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),
:
:
cviJL(f)ioveci} (Mt. 20
2), ex^ : 1:3), avvalpi>} 'Koyov
KOLvuvlav (1 Jo.
(Mt. 18 23), etc. : Perhaps the most frequent use of p-eTa is with
the idea of accompaniment. So with aKoXovdeoo (Lu. 9 49), Xaju- :
draxcoptco (Mk. 3:7), etc. Cf. Mt. 27 66. So with dpil (Mk. 3 14), : :
where the idea is rather 'simultaneous with,' but see pera. opKov
(Mt. 14 :7), pera (j^uvijs neyaXTis (Lu. 17: 15). Still in all these
cases accompaniment is the dominant note. See also pr]8ev{a)
cLTToKeXvadaL tcov pera airov ('in the corn service'), B.U. 27 (ii/A.D.).
Certainly it is not a Hebraism in Lu. 1 : 58, for Moulton (ProL, p.
246) can cite A. P. 135 (ii/A.D.) tI 8e ripeiv awelSri p-tTo. TCOV apxdvToiv;
/xerd raOra (cf. Lu. 5 27) is very common.^ Simcox^ treats ov ixera
:
{k) Ilapd.
1. Delbriick^ does not find the etymology of xapd
Significance.
clear 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.),
'^
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), napd- : :
Tap' eavroLs (Ro. 12 : 16). Ilapd with the locative does not occur
in Hebrews.
5. With the Ablative. But
occurs only with persons (like the it
1 40 we have both Trapd and e/c, els Ik twv bvo rcov aKovaavTOiV Tapa
:
ablative,^ ecopa/ca Trapd rtS Tarpi ^Kovaare Tapa rod Tarpos, though —
some MSS. have locative in the latter clause also. But the abla-
tive 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
: :
W. H. have virb. Ilapd occurs with the middle in Mt. 21 42, Trapd :
Kvplov kykvero.In the later Greek vernacular Trapd with the abla-
tive helped supplant vt6 along with dTro, and both Trapd and viro
(and €k) vanished 1 "before the victorious dTro."
6. With the Accusative. It is not found in John's writings at
KaOrifxevoL irapa rrjv d86v (Mt. 20 : 30), earoos irapa TrjV Viixv-qv (Lu.
5:1), k(XTLV oUla irapa daXaaaav (Ac. 10 : 6), dLdaaKHV irapa doKaaaav
(Mk. 4:1), amreOpapixevovs irapa rovs irodas (Ac. 22 3). Cf. Ac. :
merely the positive like dAiaprcoXot (Lu. 13:2; of. 13:4). Indeed
no adjective or participle at all may appear, as in oc^eCkkTai
kyevovTo irapa iraPTas (Lu. 13:4; cf. 13:2). The use of the posi-
avTov kvkKcc KaOrjuhovs, where kvkXcx) explains Trept already t^vice ex-
pressed. Cf. also TrepL-KVK\6)(Tovali' ae (Lu. 19:43). The perfective
idea of irepi in composition is manifest in rept-eXeLv a/jLapTias (Heb.
10 : 11), 'to take away altogether.' Cf. Trepi-axpaPTOiv irvp h jikaw rijs
for 'busybody,' busy about trifles and not about important mat-
ters. In 1 Tim. 6 10 note TrepieTapav in the sense of 'pierced
:
» K.-G., I, p. 491.
2 Brug., Grioch. Gr., p. 447.
» Die Grundl., p. 131 f.; VorRl. Synt., I, p. 711 f.
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
origin of this notion with wepi is not quite clear. On 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
:
In Eph. 6 18 f. we have Se-qaeu Trepi iravTWV tcov ayloov, Kal vivep ep.ov,
:
(see above), vTrep ablKo^v, the distinction is clearer. Cf. Jo. 16 : 26;
17 See Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 152 f
: 9. has virep with . D
kKxvvvbixevov in Mt. 26 28 rather than irepL Cf Blass, Gr. of N. T.
: .
1 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 133; Sterrett, The Dial, of Horn, in Horn. II., N 47.
2 Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 714. Cf. Trepairepo:, Ac. 19 : 39.
3 Griech. Gr., p. 448. Cf. Kurze vergl. Gr., II, p. 476.
« Horn. Gr., p. 133.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOOESEIs) 619
Ilept may occur with almost any verb where the notion of 'about,'
(20 : 24), (leXeL (22 : 16), eXeTxo/xei'os (Lu. 3 : 19), edavfiaaav (Lu. 2 :
18), etc. The list includes verbs like amvco, yLvcoaKw, 8ia\oyi^onaL,
ydvji'toixai, extfryreco, etc. The usage includes both persons, like
irpocrevx^crde irepl rnxwv (1 Th. 5 25), and things, like irepl kvdvuaTOS
:
tI fxeptpu'dTe (Mt. 6 : 28). One neat Greek idiom is to. irepl. Of.
ra irepl ttjs 68ov (Ac. 24 : 22), to. irepl 'Irjaov (18 : 25; Mk. 5 : 27),
TO. irepl eiJLavTov (Ac. 24 : 10). Blass^ considers iroielv irepl avrov
TTjs \oyias (1 Cor. 16 : 1), itepl 'AiroWco (16 : 12). Sometimes Tepl
tiOL (Jo. 17:9). In Lu. 19 37, irepl iraauv S:v elhov 8vva.p.euv, the :
irepl avTTJs (Lu. 4 38). But this is merely due to the context.
:
Kepi is used of place, as in o-Kdi/'co irepl avT-qv (Lu. 13 8), xepl tov :
To-Kov eKetvov (Ac. 28 7). Cf. Mk. 3:8. :So with expressions of
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-
: :
aarpayj/ai irepl eixk (Ac. 22 : 6), eUav irepl avrovs (Mk. 9 : 14). An
ancient Greek idiom occurs in ol irepl IlaDXoj^ (Ac. 13 : 13), hke ol
irepl 'Zevo(i>o:vTa (Xen. Anab. 7, 4, 16), where the idea is 'Paul and
his companions.' ^ But in a case like ol irepl 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 alone, like the vernacular "you all" in the Southern States
for a single person, appears in some MSS. for Jo. 11 19, irpbs rds :
the critical text being xpos Trjv Mapdav. Blass^ notes that only
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 'con-
cerning,' like Plato. Cf. in the Pastoral Epistles, irepl rriv iriarLv
(1 Tim. 1: 19), irepl rw aXrjOeLav (2 Tim. 2: 18). But Luke (10:
40 f.) has it already. Cf. irepl to. roiaCra (Ac. 19:25). But /ckXoj
in the LXX, as in the kolvt], is also taking the place of irepl (Thack-
eray, Gr., p. 25). 'Aju0t could not stand before irepl, and finally
irepl itself went down. The entrance of virep into the field of irepl
grow out of this idea of 'fore,' as irpo-l3alva3 (Mt. 4 21), 'to go on' :
in the wake of the older Greek.^ One may illustrate 7rp6 still
further by the comparative Trpd-repos and the superlative Trpw-ros
TTpd rrjs TToXecos (14 13). Cf. enTpoadeu (Mt. 5 24), which is more
:
:
Handb., p. 98).
5. Time. This is the more common idea with 7rp6
u at
the I\
t-
i m
•
The mscr.
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 149. Cf Dolbrik-k, Die p. 132.
2
Grundl., .
Trpoj 8vo T]p.epdv, F.P. 118 (ii/A.D.). So Moulton proves his point
that it is a parallel growth like the Latin. Rouffiac {Recherches,
p. 29) re-enforces it by three citations from the Priene inscrip-
tions. Cf. also Trpo TToXXaJj' TovTCjip rjnepoov Ada S. Theogn., p. 102.
Moulton thinks that it is a natural development from the abla-
and refers to 6\f/e aajS^aro^v in
tive case with rp6, 'starting from,'
Mt. 28 1 as parallel. May it not be genuine Greek and yet
:
ablative in
The Ablative. There is only one example of the
4.
tovto vnerkpas
the N. T. and this occurs in Ac. 27 34,
irpds ttjs :
the locative in Mk. 5: 11 and Jo. 20: 11, else we should have
only five, and D
reads the accusative in Lu. 19 :37. These seven
examples illustrate well the etymological meaning of -wphs as
'near' or 'facing.' Moulton counts 104 examples of Trpos and the
dative (locative) in the LXX. Four of these seven examples are
in John's writings. Cf. especially Jo. 20 12. Moulton (ProL, :
p. 106) notes "P. Fi. 5 vrpos rc3 irvXcovL, as late as 245 a.d."
6. With the Accusative. It was exceedingly common in Homer
and always in the literal local sense.^ The metaphorical usage with
the accusative developed later. How common the accusative is
with TTpos in the N. T. is seen when one notes that the number is
opos) wath eyyi^o}.In Phil. 5 (W. H.) the margin has both with
persons. Here Lightfoot (in loco) sees a propriety in the faith
which is towards (ttpos) Christ and the love exerted upon (els) men.
Sevre wp6s fie (Mt. 11 : 28), etc. But one_must_not think jhat the
notion of motion is essential to the use o f Trpos an d the accusative
gaXao-Q-av
(cf. els aruTei'). Thus in^M k. 4 : 1, ttSs 6 ox^^o^ -^po^ -ryv
kTrirris j^s v<^au, note both ^ttc and TTpos and the obvious distinc-
tion. Cf. also depnaLVOi^evos Trpos to (/)cos (Mk. 14 54). It IS not :
Jo. 1 : 1, 6 XoTos rji' Trpos rov Oeov with this passage in Mk. and
It is the face-to-face
8, hb-qp-riaai Trpos rbv Kvpiov.
with 2 Cor. 5 :
converse with the Lord that Paul has in mind. So John thus
conceives the fellowship between the Logos and
God. Cf. aropa
Trpos (JTopo. in 2 Jo. 12, 3 Jo.
14 and TrpoawTroi' Trpos ypbaoiirov m
1 Cor. 13 12. But, while
:
this use of Trpos with words of rest
1
Joh. Gr, p. 273 f.
* Joh. Gr., p. 275.
2
lb
6 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 139.
» Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 395.
626 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Cf. Ater' aW-qXuv (ib.). lipos does not of itself mean 'against/
xpos depiffixov (Jo. 4 : 35), etc. Cf. also rd xpos tov debv (Ro. 15 :
17). The phrase tI irpbs was; (Mt. 27:4) has ancient Greek
support.^ The notion of aim or end naturally develops also as
in kypa(f)ri irpos vovBeaiav r\jj.(hv (1 Cor. 10 : 11), xpos rt direv (Jo.
in ovK a^ia to. TradrjixaTa tov vvv /catpoO xpos ttjv jxeXKovaav 56^av dxo-
KoXvcpOrjvai (Ro. 8 : 18). With this may be compared xpos 4)6bvov
(o) Svv. The older form ^vv (old Attic) appears in some MSS.
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.^ Del-
briick^ is indeed in doubt as to the origin of crvv, but see Momm-
sen,^ and some (Giles, Co?np. Pkilol., p. 343) consider ^vv and avv
different.
1. The Meaning. This is in little dispute. It is '
together with.' ^
1 : 56), KaOlaaL (Ac. 8 :31), etc. Cf. also avv 6\r] rfj eKKkrjala (Ac.
Cf. Lu. 5 : 9 and Mk. 2 : 26. Once avv occurs in a context where
the idea is 'besides,' dXXd ye koL aw -Kaaiv tovtols (Lu. 24 :21).
Cf. Neh. 5 So probably also Ph. 1:1. It appears in the
: 18.
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
vir-. The case of Ttjo-oO is associative-instrumental in either in-
stance. MSS. give aw- in other passages. The use of aw rfj
shows also the retreat of aw before aixa. For aw-eTL and Kara see
Ac. 16 22. :
Cf. Sanskrit updri (locative case of upar), Zend wpam, Latin super,
Gothic ufar, German ilber, Anglo-Saxon ofer, English over. The
1 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 396 f.; Jour, of Hell. Stud., XIX, pp. 287-288.
2 Cf. Westcott on Jo. 1 : 2 for discussion of distinction between avi> and
fiera.
2 Cf. the use of avv Kal in the pap. Deiss., B. S., p. 265 f.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOOESEIs) 629
in vTep-cLPo: (Heb. 9 : 5), virep avT-f]v (ih. D), virep-Qov ('upper room,'
Ac. 1 : 13). The notion of 'excess,' 'more than' (comparison),
appears in virep-alpoo (2 Cor. 12 : 7), virep-eKirepLaaou (1 Th. 3 10), :
band, virkp occurs seven times, more than dirt and irp6 together.
Cf Thucydides
. I, 141 and Xenophon Anab. 7 : 4, 9 for the substi-
tutionary use of ifwkp. In the Epistle to Diognetus (p. 84) we note
\vTpov vTvep TjiJLcbv and a few lines further the expression is aPToKXayf].
Paul's combination in 1 Tim. 2 6 is worth noting, avTlXvrpou
:
oKov TO Wvos aTo\r]TaL. 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
:
etc. The Latin super is in line with this idiom also. Cf. Jo. 1 :
irdPTa (Eph. 1 : 22), ovKeTL cos 8ov\op dXXd virep 8ov\op (Phil. 16).
This notion easily gets into that of 'beyond' in harmony with
the accusative case. Thus vir^p d yeypawTox (1 Cor. 4:6), ireipa-
adrjpai virep 6 8vpaade (1 Cor. 10 : 13). Cf. virep 8vpaixip (2 Cor. 1 : 8),
1 Prol., p. 105. " 2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 313.
PREPOSITIONS (npooE:sEi2) 633
virip ToWovs (Gal. 1 14), vir^p rr^v XafxirpoTriTa (Ac. 26 13). Clas-
: :
sical Greek only shows the beginning of the use of vwkp with com-
paratives/ 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 text and virkp in margin after iiaXXov. But virep has the compara-
tive sense of 'more than' after verbs, as 6 4)i.\cop iraTepa ^ firjrepa
virlp kp.k (Mt. 10 37).
: In the LXX the positive adjective occurs
with virkp, as 'ivbo^os virep tovs d5eX0o6s (1 Chron. 4:9). In Ro. 12 3, :
nil virepcfipove'tv Tap' o oel cjipovelv, note the conjunction of virep and
Trapa. Moulton {Prol., p. 237) cites I'Trep iavrov (fspovelv, T.P. 8
(ii/B.c). Blass^ doubts whether virepXlav, virepeKwepccraod can be
properly regarded as compounds. He would separate virep as an
adverb, virep \iav. But the modern editors are against him. It
has disappeared in modern Greek vernacular before jlo. (Thumb,
Handb., p. 105).
the positive of virep. Cf. the Sanskrit upa, Latin sub, Gothic uf,
possibly also German auf, English up, ah-ove. The form viro is of
unknown case, but the Elean dialect* has vira-, and Horner^ has
also virai (dative.)
The Original Meaning.^ This was probably 'upwards' or
1.
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 be- :
Cf. iixo-7rXeco (Ac. 27:4, 7), 'sail close by.' But in vTro-irvko) (Ac.
27:13) the preposition minimizes the force of the verb, 'blow
softly.' Cf. our suspicion, the French soupgon. So with under-
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.
:
(Col. 2 : 14).
3. 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 abla-
tive,2 though Appian and Herodian use the locative more than the
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 instru-
mental case, and he is clear that the ablative, as well as the geni-
tive, was found with it. Delbnick^ agrees to both ablative and
genitive. Thus viro occurred with five cases (loc, instr.,
originally
ace, In
abl., gen.). the N.T. we meet only the accusative and
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
:
the genitive also in the N. T. The use of virb for agency and
cause is ablative like the Latin usage with ah (a).
4. With the Accusative. It is to be the
considered l)y Winer ^
original use of ux6. This indeed would accord with the notion of
'upwards,' 'up from under.' But in the N. T., as in the later
Greek, the accusative occurs with the notion of rest (cf. et$).- The
accusative in the N. T. takes the place of the local use of vivo with
locative and genitive.' Thus we find (motion) TidkaaLv avrov vtto
Tov \ibhiov (Mt. 5 : 15), but also (rest) ovra. h-wb ttju avKrjp (Jo. 1 : 48).
Other examples with verbs of rest are vtto ttip (tkiolp KaTacK-qvolv
(Mk. 4 32), virb top ovpavbv (Ac. 4 12), with
: : €l^ll, we have v-wb to.
XCiXtj (Ro. 3 : 13), i)Trb vo/jlov (Ro. 6 : 14 f.), virb iratdaycjoybv (Gal.
3 : These examples are as freely used as those like I'm
25), etc.
fjLov virb T-qv cTTeyrju elaeXdys (Mt. 8:8). The examples are both
local as with erLavpayco (Lu. 13 34) and figurative as -with TaireLvbo) :
(1 Pet. 5:6). Cf. Ac. 4:12 virb rbv ovpavbv with virb Ala Trjv "IlXtoi'
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 :
12 : 3). In the case of passive verbs the usage follows the tradi-
tional lines. Cf. Mt. 4 : 1 for two examples, avqxOr] virb tov irvtv-
» W.-Th., p. 407. 5
Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 157.
^ Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 398. «
Joh. Gr., p. 279.
» Bla-ss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135. '
Moulton, Prol., p. 156.
* Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 278. «
Simcox, Lang, of the N.T., p. 157.
636 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
viro occur of personal agency like e^awTl^ovTo vtt' avrov (Mt. 3:6),
Cf. 2 15. There is nothing peculiar about the use of vt6 in 2 Pet.
:
not the only way of expressing the agent. Besides 5ta for the in-
direct 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
also be recalled. But 5td with the accusative (motive or cause)
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, :
1 W.-Th., p. 369.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 126. But airo occurs in this sense in Xen, Cf.
W.-Th., p. 369.
3 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 151. * Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 414.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) . 637
Others drop by the way while each age sees a new crop coming on.
But in the late vernacular anumber of these prepositional adverbs
are followed 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
be regarded as a prepositional adverb,^ like a^lcos tov evayyeKlov
(Ph. 1 : 27). Some of these prepositional adverbs, as already
shown, occur both as adverbs, as afxa Kal eXwi^uv (Ac. 24 26), and :
going too far. Cf. to. Kpdaaova Kal kxojxeva cruTripias (Heb. 6:9).
There is more excuse for claiming eaoorepov rrjs KoKviJLjSijdpas (Is.
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,
KVK\60tv, nioop, dniaix), 6\pi, ivapaTtXiiat.ov, TroptKros, virtKuva, vntptKirtpiaaov. This
list by Ivrebs shows the freedom in the Koivq development of adv. prep.
638 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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
: :
(Mt. 20 1). The use of a/xa avv Thayer explains by taking aixa
:
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. :
6 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 337. In Eleatic apevs occurs with the ace.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIi:) G39
with the genitive, and it is common with this case in the LXX^
(cf. Gen. 3 24). In the N. T. it occurs only six times, and in two
:
of these (Mt. 27: 24; Mk. 12 41) W. H. put KarkvavTi in the text :
sight or presence of.' One (Mt. 27 61) has the notion of 'oppo- :
common in Homer and the poets generally. Later prose uses it.
But it occurs only once in the LXX (2 Mace. 12 : 15) and twice
in the N. T. (Lu. 22 6, 35). The case is clearly the ablative,
:
vary between axPh iJ^^Xpt- and eoos (W. H.). The meaning is 'up
to' and the case used is the genitive. It occurs with place (Ac.
13 :6), persons (Ac. 11: 5), time (Ac. 13 11) and a])stract ideas :
dative and all 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 su- :
of the genitive with 6776$ (cf. Jo. 11 :54). Only four times does
6771)5 have the dative (Ac. 9 38; 27:8), counting the indeclin-
:
able '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
genitive (H. Scott). Once (Heb. 6 8) it is postpositive. :
1 Tim. 5 19), which is a pleonasm due first to the use of tKTos el.
:
It is very common in the LXX even after Swete^ has properly re-
placed 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 : :
the LXX. For the papyri see evavrlov avBpojv rpLuiv P. Eleph. 1
3 C. and S., Sel. from LXX, p. 87. The LXX used a number of prep, to
transl. >:2b . Cf. Swete, Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., p. 308.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs) 641
sition ('for the sake of), never as mere adverb. These variations
existed in the earlier Greek also. In the kolvt], 'iveKev is the more
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 : 18, LXX). The case used is the genitive.
The etymology is quite uncertain, but the form e'lveKev is Ionic
and partially in the kolvti supersedes the Attic. ^ The preposition
occurs 26 times in the N. T. Once (2 Cor. 7 : 12) we find it
used with rod and the infinitive. Cf. eveKev and 5td Lu. 21 : 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 :
(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
:
passages above that was noted about kros and hros (Mt. 23 26). :
case. The form eUu (els) docs not occur in the N. T. nor in the
LXX. Indeed the word eaco is found only nine times in the N. T.
and only one, ecrw rijs avXrjs (Mk. 15 : 16), is the prepositional use.
the genitive. This, however, is a gen-
The case used with it is
iadoTtpov 22 11).
TTjs KoKvjx^-qdpa'i (Is. :
verb (from elos, ci'cos).^ Cf. &s and cos. The use of ecos as a prep-
osition appears in Demosthenes, Aristotle, Polybius, etc. In
Northern England and Scotland "while" is used as "till" (Lid-
dell and Scott) and illustrates how ecos as conjunction is used in
the N. T. It is equally common in the N. T. as preposition and
conjunction, if the phrases ecos oh, ecos otov be treated as conjunc-
tions, as indeed they are, though technically composed of the
preposition ecos with the genitive of the relative. It is in the
11:23), ecos ohpavov (Lu. 10: 15), ecos 'Ai^Tioxetas (Ac. 11 : 22); with
persons, like ecos with expressions of time, like
avTov (Lu. 4 : 42) ;
ecos T7JS awepov (Mt. 27: emr?js (27 45); with abstract
8), ecos copas :
Hke ecos viilaovs (Mk. 6 23). See Rom. 3 12 ecos ej^os (LXX).
: :
Cf. dTTo —
ecos in Mt. 1:17; 20:8; 27:51. Seventeen of the ex-
amples are uses of ecos with an adverb, hke ecos koltco (Mt. 27: 51),
ecos apTL (Jo. 2 : 10), while seven instances of ecos irore occur, like
Mt. 17 : 17. Four times ecos occurs with another preposition, hke
?cos TTpos (Lu. 24 : 50), ecos kwl (Ac. 17 : 14), e'cos e^co (21 : 5). In Mk.
14 : 54 note Once (cf. Demosthenes, Aristotle, LXX)
ecos eaco ets.
we find it with the article and the infinitive ecos rod eXdeiv (Ac. 8 :
of relative (u) in the dative to the genitive case of deov, the incor-
porated antecedent (Ro. 4: 17)'.
two with persons (Eph. 1:4; Col. 1 : 22), one with abstract word
(Ju. 24). The case used is the genitive and the word means 'in
the presence of.'
nkdu), k neaov, KaTo, fxkaov. But these will be discussed later. The
adjective fxeaos occurs with the genitive (Lu. 22 : 55; Jo. 1 : 26),
so that not strange to find the adverb with the genitive as
it is
ern Greek vernacular uses neaa 's, jueo-' awo (Thumb, Handbook,
p. 108).
» Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 128.
2 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 374.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOOEZEIs) 645
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.
: :
in Mt. 4 : 19.
31. 'Oi/^e. This word seems to be another variation of 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 '
34. Hepai'. It comes from the root Trep (cf. Trepaco, 'fare,' 'ferry,'
etc.). Ionic Trepr]v. It is an adverb (cf. adv. xepd), probably
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
(Mt. 8 :18). found 13 times as a preposition wnth the abla-
It is
(Mt. 4 15).
tive, chiefly in the expression ir'tpav tov 'lopdavov :
(Ac. 20 :23; Ph. 1 : 18), unless indeed the 6rt clause is in the
ablative. Cf. English "except that." In all the other rather
numerous instances ttXtjj' is an adversative conjunction at the
beginning of a clause (cf. be) as in Mt. 11:22. These three
usages come on down from the older Greek.
36. Ti\r]aiov, Doric ifKaTlov. The word
is allied to reXas and is
neuter adj. from ir\r]alos. In the older Greek the adverb occurs
absolutely or with the art. 6 irXrialov, 'neighbour,' as in the N.T.
(Mt. 5 43) : As a preposition it appears with the associative-
.
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). It is a simple compound that in the late Greek
» Moulton, Prol., p. 72 f. " Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 97.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIs) 647
omitted antecedent).
40. 'T7ro-/cdrco. It is another compound word which in the an-
cient Greek was used both as adverl) and as preposition and es-
pecially in the kocpyi writers (Polyljius, Diodorus, Plutarch). In
the late Greek it gradually ^ displaced vto. In the LXX both virep-
avwdevand 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.
:
1 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 367, 397. » Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366.
2 Cf. Dciss., B. S., p. 283 f. * C. and S., p. 86 f.
^ Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 337. Xdpiv as a prop, is in poetry till 50 n.c, when
it appears first in prose. Cf. Mcisterh., p. 222. lie gives an interesting ex. of
the prep, in Attic inscr.
648 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Ramsay, C. and B., II, 391 (No. 254), cites from the inscriptions
xojpts el idT] TL wddrj (Moulton, Prol., p. 239).
Of these 42 words in the N. T. the following are only used as
prepositions: avev, avTlirepa, a-wkvavri, arep, evavri, eveKa, huinov, kirk-
also adverbs.
IX. Compound Prepositions. A considerable number of these
6vona brings out the notion that one has the name or
character
is like %'sf2, while irp6 irpoawirov aov is Hke ^.r?^, and /cara TpoaccTTOv
UeiXoLTov (Ac. 3 : 13) Blass^ finds like "^^QS. Cf. irpoauTroi' irpds
Ps. 8 : 3. Cf. also aird rod aroparos avTOV (Lu. 22 : 71), ev t(3 aToparl
avTUV (Ac. 15 : 23), 5td toov x^i-P^v avrojv (Ac. 14 : 3), eis xetpas (Lu.
24 : 7), els TTju xeZpa avrov (Lu. 15 : 22), k x^i-pos iravTWV (Lu. 1 : 71),
h ry x^t'Pi- ^^"^ov (Jo. 3 :35), avv x^^pt d77eXoi; (Ac. 7:35). Here
again the Greek idiom follows the Hebrew particularity, but with
this use of x^^P and one may note the English idiom also.^ See
2 Sam. 15 : 2, ava x^'^P^ ^^'^ ^bov rrjs TrvKrjs.
See also e^ evavrlas avrov (Mk. 15 39) and rapeKTOs \6yov : irop-
1 B. S., pp. 146 f., 197. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 100. See also Heitmuller's
proof, Im Namen Jesu, pp. 100 iT.
2 Moulton, Prol., pp. 81, 99; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 129 f. » lb.
* Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130.
6 Cf. for the LXX, Swete, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 308.
CHAPTER XIV
ADJECTIVES ('EniGETA)
Delbruck is the explanation of the numerous Gk. adjectives in o." Giles, Man.,
etc., p. 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
ADJECTIVES ('EniOETA) 651
^Xerruv to ar^pecona rrjs Trto-rews (Col. 2:5), 'Kojols ttjs xotP'Tos (Lu.
4:22), OLKOvojJLOV TTJS dSiKttts (16 : 8), KpLT-qs TTJs adiKias (18 : 6), iradr]
drijutas (Ro. 1 : 26), rep pi]p.aTi rrjs bwap-ews (Heb. 1:3), etc. It was
just the shade of difference between the substantive in the genitive
and the adjective that led to the expressions above. Phrases like
TO. TTvevp-aTLKa TTJS Tovrjpias analogous to the use of
(Eph. 6 : 12) are
the adjective as substantive to be discussed directly. The use of
vlos or TeKuov with the genitive is exactly like the Hebrew idiom
the N. T. Thus vloh aireieias (Eph. 2 : 2), tc/cto (I)0}t6s (Eph. 5 : 8),
Cf. Farrar, C.k. Rynt., p. 88; K.-G., I, p. 272 f.; Brufj., Grioch. Gr., p. 415.
1
On 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
X(^pos (Mt. 3:5), TTjv bptLvr]v (Lu. 1:39), rf? epwv (Mt. 3:2), tijs
oiKovnevqs (Ro. 10 : 18), etc. In e/c rrjs vtto rbv ovpavov (Lu. 17 : 24)
Blass prefers nepiSos to 777s and urges that we do not refine too
sharply over e^ epavrias (Mk. 15 39; Tit. 2:8). As examples of
:
the influence of 656s note eldelas (Lu. 3:5), Tolas (5 : 19), eKelvrjs
(19 : 4). For x^tp observe 17 apLarepa and Se^td (Mt. 6 3), ev Se^iS.
17 :
(Ro. 8 : 34), rf} Se^iS (Ac. 2 : 33). But k Se^coj^ (2 34) may be :
compared with eis to. Se^td /xepr] (Jo. 21 : 6). The ellipsis of rmepa is
noticed by Blass in rfj exop-euy (Lu. 13 : 33), rfj kinovaji (Ac. 16 : 11),
rfi hkpq. (20 : 15), rf} eiravpcov (Mt. 27 62), : rfj tp'ltxi (Lu. 13 32), : rijs
il3d6iJiT]S (Heb. 4 :4), ry HLq. twv o-a/^/Sdrcoi/ (Ac. 20:7), (J-expi- TTJs
(Twepop (Mt. 11 : 23), a(f>' vs (2 Pet. 3 : 4), ttj e^rjs (Ac. 21 : 1). But
Blass rightly supplies upa with d^' rjs in Lu. 7 : 45, as with oxj/ias
(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
: :
16 37). Words like aoorripLos (Tit. 2:11), aicoviov (Jo. 6 47), evwe-
: :
With Tov SioTreroCs (Ac. 19 35) Blass ^ suggests ayaXixaTos, and with
:
4>av€pbv (Mk. 4 : 22), p-tTo. piKpbv (Mt. 26 : 73), kv ixkaco (Mt. 10 : 16),
etc. Cf. ets ay ado. (Jer. 24:6). Very common is the adverbial
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 rela- :
tion to the adverb will receive special treatment. See xi. Cf. tCo
common in this sense like to. iravra (Col. 1 : 16) where the universe
is thus described. Cf. to. ovra and rd /jltj ovra (1 Cor. 1 : 28). B in
the LXX (Helbing, p. 51) frequently has irdLV = iravra (ace. sing,
masc). (Cf. also Ps. of Sol. 3 : 10; 8 : 23 V; Test, xii, Pat. Reub.
1 : 10 rrav aprov, Gad 3 : 1 rav vofxov.) See also the common collec-
tive neuter in the LXX (Thackeray, Grammar, p. 174 f.). Usually
the neuter plural is concrete, however, as in rd opaTa Kal aopara
(Col. 1 : 16), where Travra is thus explained. Cf. rd l^adea (Rev.
2 : 24), apxaia (2 Cor. 5 : 17). In Ro. 1 : 20, as Winer^ points
out, TO. aopara makes more concrete re dtStos 8vvafXLs Kal deibTr\%. r;
not clear what the idea is, whether places, things or relations.
In Jo. 3 12 eirlyeLa and h-wovpavLa seem to refer to truths. In
:
exists, 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
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
: :
22). It is thus frequent with the genitive. Cf. also to Kar' e/xe Trpo-
dvfxov (Ro. 1 : 15). See Heb. 7:8. In Lu. 12 23, r) ^vxv TrXeroi/ :
kaTLv Trjs Tpo(f)r}s, we have irXelov because the abstract idea of thing
is expressed. This also is a frequent Greek idiom. Cf. ovdev
(1 Cor. 7: 19), '6
(1 Cor. 15 : 10), ravra (1 Cor. 6 11). :
are probably due to the Hebrew TiisT, the Hebrew using the fem-
inine 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
one substantive it may agree with the gender of the nearest, as in
Ttaaav t^oKlv kol tottov (Lu. 10 1), be repeated with each, as in iracra
:
86aLs ayadrf Kal ttSj' do^prjixa rekeiov (Jas. 1 : 17) and kv iroia dvpajjiei. rj
kv TTolcp ovbjxaTi, (Ac. 4 : 7), or agree with the masculine rather than
the feminine or neuter, as in yviivol (Jas. 2 15). With the same :
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 :
as in Latin.^ But see erepuv ttoXXwi^ (Ac. 15 : 35) antl the repetition
of the adjective with the article (Rev. 2 : 12).
V. The Attributive Adjective. The adjective (from adjacco)
is a word joined on to another {tirWtTov). The adjective is by no
' Monro, Iloin. Or., p. 118.
» Cf. W.-Th., p. 238; Moulton, Prol., p. 59. » Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 87.
656 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
means the only attribute used with substantives. Thus the attri-
bute may be substantive in apposition with another substantive,
like avdpdoirco oLKobejiroTr, (Mt. 13 52), or a genitive, like tov deov : 17
Cf. TO v8o)p TO ^b)v in verse 11), nouoyevrjs deos (Jo. 1 18). The un- :
(Mt. 13 31), (7coT77ptos (Tit. 2 11), tTotiia (Lu. 14 17), ^adb (Jo.
: : :
18), fJ.eya\ri ttj (fxxivy (Ac. 26 : 24), 6.Trapa(3aTOV ex€L Ti]v Upcoavvrjv
(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
:
(1 Cor. 7:37), bpdbs (Ac. 14 10), ixbvo^ (Lu. 24 18; cf. Mt. 14
: : :
23), etc. Cf. oKov in Lu. 13 21. The distinction between the :
llncov 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 :
fish that came up. Cf. h ei^ol wpcoTco (1 Tim. 1 IG), 'me as chief.' :
The exact idea of Tr/acbrjj in Lu. 2 2 is not certain, but most jorob-:
ably Luke's idea is that there were two enrolments under Cyrenius.
Cf. Ramsay, Was Christ Born at Bethlehem? With p.6vos and
/jiopov a like distinction is to be observed. Take apexo^priaev ttoXlv
ets TO opos avTos p.6vos (Jo. 6 15) and av p-bvos TapoLKets 'lepovffoKrjpL
:
(Lu. 24 18). The difference is much hke that between the Eng-
:
'Jesus was found alone,' and in Mt. 17: 8 (cf. Mk. 9:8), ohh'tva
dhov ei ixi] avrov 'Irjaovv pbvov, it is adjective, not adverb. Cf.
ovK dpi fjibvos (Jo. 16 : 32) with ov pbvov in Ac. 21 : 13. Cf. 2 Jo.
1. Contrast pbvov in Mt. 8 8 with pbvos in Mt. 14 23. There are
: :
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.
:
second-day men' ('on the second day'). Cf. TeTapraios Jo. 11:
39. D has likewise irepivraXoi in Ac. 20 6. So yevbpevat dpdpival :
comes close to it. Cf. Lu. 1 23. We have fewer examples in the :
8), the instrumental with laovs rnjuv (Mt. 20 : 12), the locative with
ppaSels rfi Kapblq, (Lu. 24 : 25). Cf. locative in Col. 2 : 13 f. The
adjective is, of course, used with various prepositions, as to ayadov
Trpos iravTas (Gal. 6 : 10), TTtcrros ev eXaxtcTTO) (Lu. 16 : 10), /3pa5us els
opyrjv (Jas. 1 : 19).
X. Adjectives with the Infinitive and Clauses. If cases can
occur with adjectives, it is natural that the verbal substantive
known as the infinitive should come within that idiom and be in
a case. The case of the infinitive will vary with the adjective.
Thus in a^ios Kkit]drivai (Lu. 15 : 19) the infinitive is probably in
the genitive case. Cf. also a^tos I'm \v(xw (Jo. 1 : 27). With hwaTos
KccXvaaL (Ac. 11: 17) we have the accusative of general reference.
In the case of iKavds jSaaTaaai (Mt. 3:11) we may see either the
accusative of general reference, as above, or the dative, according
to the original idea of the form and the common case with iKavos.
Cf. also IKavos (Mt. 8:8). The instances of both in-
'iva eiaeXdys
finitive and tva are numerous in the N. T. As specimens of the
infinitive and preposition after the adjective, take raxi^s ds to
&Kod(7aL, jSpaSus els to XaXrjaat, (Jas. 1 19). Indeed the genitive :
article tov with the infinitive occurs with adjectives where it would
not naturally be looked for, as in eToiixol kafxeu rod apeXeiv (Ac. 23 : 15),
Cf. eroLnos elfxi iropeveadaL (Lu. 22 : 33). But see further ^padets rod
TnareveLv (Lu. 24:25).
XI. The Adjective as Adverb.This subject has been treated
in the chapter on the Cases as well as in the one on Adverbs.
Hence a few words will suffice here. The border line between ad-
jective 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 ad-
jective in a phrase like aaixevos
eUov. But that is going too farvfxds
even if we call it He
quotes Milton (Par. Lost, vii, 161),
antimeria.
"Meanwhile inhabit lax," and Shakespeare (Taming of Shrew, I,
i, 89), "Thou didst it excellent." We can see the difference be-
tween avaoTiqdL opBos (Ac. 14 : 10) and dpdais tKpLvas (Lu, 7 :43).
But, as already observed, the difference between and nbvco
p.bvov
grows faint in 1 Jo, 5 6 and similar examples.
: Hence it becomes
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. : :
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 ad-
verbs from adjectives, as the ablative in Trpcbrcos above, the geni-
tive as opov (Jo. 4 :36), the associative-instrumental as drjpoaia
(Ac. 16 :37). Cf. ttoXXw (Ro. 5:9). All degrees of comparison
furnish adverbs, thus toXv (Ro. 3 : 2; 2 Cor. 8: 22), TrXeoi' (Jo. 21
15), paXcara (Ac. 20 : 38). The accusative singular of the com-
parative is the common adverb of that degree as irepicraoTepov
(Heb. 7: 15), but see TrepLaaorepcos (2 Cor, 1 12). In the super- :
lative both the singular as irpdrov (Lu. 6 42) and the plural as :
6:15), ToD aiuivos Twp alwvcov (Eph. 3:21). The vernacular kolvt]
See also Mk. 12oxXos and Lu. 7:11 oxXos ttoXus, and in
: 37 6 ttoXus
idiom with the use of cos in Heb. 3 : 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' :
7). Older Greek waiters show this idiom with substantives and
verbs.^ In Mt. 18 8 we have the positive adjective both before
:
and 0k\TL(rToi. Our God, 6 ayaOos debs, is 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."
»
Moulton, Prol., pp. 77 ff. 2 Brug., Grundr. vergl. Gr., II, i, p. 420.
»
lb. Transl. (Comp. Gr.), vol. II, p. 132.
* Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. griech. Comp., Heft i, p. 5.
B lb., pp. 4ff.
6 Moulton, Prol., p. 77 f.; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439; 1903, p. 154.
ADJECTIVES ('EniOETA) 663
curs with one adjective before r; and not with the other after 7).
The Greeks preferred to put both qualities in the comparative
degree when two adjectives were compared.^ But here we have
<l)L\ri8ovoL fxaWov rj (j)LX6deoL. "In Jo. 3 19 ndWov — is used with : ij
(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.
664 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
older Greek used also jueya and ixaKpco to strengthen the comparison.
Cf. Mayer, Verstarkung, Umschreihung und Entwertung der Com-
parationsgrade in der dlteren Grdcitdt, 1891, p. 16 f.
with Clyde ^ that this idiom occurs "through politeness for the
positive." It is not used for the positive. It is true that no ob-
ject of comparison is expressed, but that is because the context
Tol-qaov Taxet-ov (Jo. 13 : 27) may mean more quickly than Judas
would have done but for the exposure. Note that this is a con-
versation and Judas would understand. In Heb. 13 19 irepLaaoTe- :
pcos and Tax^i-ov correspond easily, and in verse 23,€aj' Taxeiov epxriTo-h
tl8w means that Felix more accurately than one would suppose,
and in verse 26 TrvKvorepov shows that he sent for Paul more fre-
quently than he had been doing before. Ac. 25 10 koWiov eTcyL- :
merely the resultant idea. Cf. erkpoLs XoyoLs irXeioaLv (Ac. 2 40). :
cation of Blass' point ^ above, he points out that with two adjec-
tives 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
:
yfj ^oSoiJLwv fj rfj ToXa eKeivrj (Mt. 10 15). These are all pertinent
:
1 Schwab, Hist. Synt. etc., Heft ii, p. 178; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 143.
2 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.
ADJECTIVES ("EniGETA) 667
(1 Cor. 1 : 25), etc. Cf. 1 Jo. 3 : 20; Heb. 7 : 26. Sometimes the
comparison is a little complicated, as in Mt. 5 20, : v/jlCiv ri 5t/cato-
(Tvvrj irXelop tojv ypaixnarecov, where righteousness' '
is dropped in the
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,
: :
nouns after the comp. in mod. Gk. (Thumb, p. 76). * Blass, ib.,
p. 108.
* Einl. in die drei erstcn Evanfj;., p. 28.
Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 23(3.
« N. T. Gk., p. 108.
Blass, Gr. of ^ Thumb, Ilandb.,
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.
668 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
their usual force. Moulton" cites from O.P. 716 (H/a.d.) Ti]v aixd-
vova a'ipeaLv hbbvTi, 'to the highest bidder.' Winer^ indeed finds
similar examples in Demosthenes and Athenagoras. Note the
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
: :
Moulton^ notes the fact that, while KpdTTwv and x«tpw« in the N. T.
are strictly comparative, they have no superlative, but he notes
(p. 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-
ally. Blass^ observes that eo-xaros and irpcoTos are the only excep-
tions to this disappearing tendency. Under the weakening of
dualism wpoTepos goes down. Usually eaxo-Tos refers to more than
two, the last of a series or last of all, Hke h edxaTjj rnxepa (Jo. 11 :
24), 'iaxo-Tov^ iravTwv (1 Cor. 15 : 8). Sometimes first and last are
contrasted, like 17 kaxarr] TXavrj x'^'>-P<^v TTJs irpojTTjs (Mt. 27:64).
Note comparative also. Cf Mt. 19
. : 30. So 6 irpoJTos /cat 6 eaxo-Tos
about Jesus (Rev. 1 17). In the LXX co-xaros occurs as com-
:
* 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 ii, p. 175. 5
prol.^ p. 79.
8 CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439; 1904, p. 154. See ri/v kaoy.kirqi> irXdaT-qv Tinr,v. Tb.P.
105 (ii/B.c).
670 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
lative 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 super- :
the true superlative. Cf. ttj ayiwraTrj vnuv ir'uxTet (Ju. 20) and ttjv
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33. Blass considers ri? dTiwrdrn (Ju. 20)
elative.
* Moulton, Prol., p. 78.
» lb., p. 236. 6 Schwab, Hist. Synt. etc., Heft iii, pp. 70 ff.
Tuv rifxepicv tovtwv (Heb. 1:2), though this passage may be merely
the genitive.
(/) No "Hebraistic" Superlative. It is gratuitous to con-
sider daretos tQi deu) (Ac. 7 : 20) and similar passages superlatives.
XV. Numerals. For the general discussion of the forms see
chapter VII, in. The ordinals are indeed adjectives, as are the
first and all after two hundred. The syntactical
four cardinals
peculiarities of thenumerals 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
Winer,^ we must at least hear what Moulton^ has to say in reply.
To 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
Greek.^ Moulton^ also quotes from papyri of the second and third
centuries a.d. rfj ynq. koI dKah, B.U. 623 (ii/iii a.d.), a construction
like ixiq. /cat HKabi rov nrjvos in The Germans, like the
Haggai 2:1.''
English, can say "page forty." ^ In the N. T. we only find this sub-
stitution 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 par-
allel is found, like els Kal TpiaKoarbs, though even here the case is
essentially different.^ Cf. Latin unus et vicesimus, "a case of the
formation of the ordinal being imperfectly carried out."^ Cer-
tainly then it was possible for this development to have gone on
apart from the Hebrew, especially when one considers that Trpwros
isnot derived from els, though Moulton^" admits that the Hebrew
has the same peculiarity. Moulton^' further objects that if Semitic
had been at work we should have had tt} irkvTt in the
influence
modern Greek, since the Hebrew used the later days of the month
in cardinal numbers.^^ Still, the striking fact remains that in the
LXX (cf. Numb. 1 : 1) and in the N.T. the first day of the month
is expressed by p.[a, not by Tpurrj. This was obviously in harmony
with the KOLVT] of a later time, but the first evidence of its actual
Gospel.^ Cf., on the other hand, els jutav aa^^aTwv (Mt. 28 1), :
Trpcot [ttj] fXLq. rdv aalS^aToov (Mk. 16 2), ttj hlo. to)U ca^^aruv (Lu. :
So the papyri^ usually have 5e/ca rpeis, 5ka e^, and even Ska 8vo
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).
: : :
(c) The Inclusive Ordinal. Cf. ahrbs rplros, 'he and two
others.' It has one illustration in the N. T., 6y8oov Ntoe (2 Pet.
2:5), 'Noah and seven others' or 'Noah an eighth.' The idiom
is classical enough, though the ancient writers usually had avTos
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
:
irpaaial (verse 40). Moulton^ cites also Sea/jLas Seafias, as the read-
ing of Epiphanius for Mt. 13 30. But Winer ^ had himself cited :
» W.-M., p. 312 note. Cf. Jcbb in V. and D.'s llandb., p. 310. Rader-
macher (N. T. Gr., p. 57) cites a4>6bpa a-ipoSpa from the and eWvs «W6s LXX
from the Byz. Gk.
^ Prol., p. 97. 8 HeUen., p. 128.
» Prol., p. 97. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 330, cites from Gosp. of Pet. 35,
dfd dOo bi)o.
674 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
TraiSapiov, but the sense is not materially altered either way. Cf.
riKovaa epos deroO (Rev. 8 : 13), iduv avKrjv p,'iav (Mt. 21 : 19), etc.
with genitive (or ablative), like evl rwv toXitwp (Lu. 15 : 15), kv niq.
T03V ijixepQiv (Lu, 8 22), or the ablative, hke
: els e^ vjjluv (Jo. 13 : 21),
is, of course,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
CHAPTER XV
PRONOUNS ('ANTfiNTMIAI)
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 :
^ Cf. Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten, p. 95 "Die
:
Nomina benennen die Dinge nach ihren Qualitaten, die Pronomina bezeichnen
sie nach ihren Verhaltnissen."
676
PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl) G77
ix<Ji VTTO aov ^aTTLadrjvaL (Mt. 3 : 14), eyco de 'Keyci: (5 : 22), €700 ae
iSo^aaa (Jo. 17 : 4). Cf. eyco and av in Jo. 17 : 23. The amount of
emphasis will vary very greatly according to circumstances and
may sometimes vanish entirely so far as we can determine. Differ-
ent 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 : 18, 20, Xe7co vpXv. Cf. also rts aadevel Kal ovk aaOevco; (2 Cor.
11 : 29) with tIs (TKav8a\l^eTaL Kal ovk kyoj Tcvpoviiai; (ib.) as proof that
the point must not be pressed too Further far in either direction.^
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.
: :
vehonev; (1 Cor. 15 30). Cf. Mt. 6 12. The "editorial" 'we' has
: :
of eyo)." This is not always true in Paul's Epistles (Ro. 1 5), for :
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 :
—
TeTrjpr]Kas, 4 : 9 ttcos (tv 'IovSolos, 4 : 10 ci; clp firrjaas, Ro. 2 3 on av :
eKcjiev^jl, Lu. 1 :76 /cat aii he, etc. Cf. also Mt. 27: 11. Sometimes
av has a very emphatic position, as in ci; tl% el (Ro. 9 : 20; 14 : 4).
In 1 Cor. 15 : 36, a4)pwv, av 6 a-jrelpeLs, it is possible,^ though not
necessary, to take av with a0pcoi' (cf. Ac. 1 : 24). In nal av e^ avrdv
el (Lu. 22 : 58) one is reminded of the Latin Et tu, Brute. See
Lu. 10 15; Ac. 23 3; rj Kai ait
: : tI k^ovdepels (Ro. 14 : 10). As ex-
amples of the plural take eaeade ifxels (Mt. 5 : 48), Sore aurois VjJLels
(j)a'ye7v (Mk. 6 : 37). See Uelvos and vnels contrasted in Jo. 5 : 38;
vnels in verse 39 and also in 44 f. Cf. Ac. 4:7; Lu. 10 : 24, and
in particular v/jLets o^peade (Mt. 27: 24). For vfxets and rjiiels con-
trasted see Jo. 4 In Jo. 4 35, ovx v/xeXs Xeyere, we have the
: 22. :
same inclusive use of the second person that we noticed in the first.
In Ro. 2 : 3, 17, the second person singular occurs in the same repre-
sentative sense that the first has also. Cf. also Ro. 9 20; 11: 17, etc. :
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 em- :
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
: ; : ; : :
then for the first and second persons. ^ The use of the personal
pronoun 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
(Mk. 14:28; Lu. 10:35), /3dXe aird aov (Mt. 5:29). See Ro.
cf.
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 :
aov (5:8), rbv KpajSarrov avrov (5:9). The presence of the personal
pronoun in the genitive is not always emphatic. Thus no undue
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 Sentence. See also krapas rovs ocjidaXfJiOvs avrov els rovs fjLadrjras
avrov (Lu. 6 : 20), h rfj virofxourj vp.oou Krrjaeade ras i^i^x^s vfxojv (Lu. 21:
the KOLPT] (Moulton, ProL, p. 40 f.), has nearly driven the possessive
pronoun out. The 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)
: :
Greek except with irpbs, which uniformly has ne even where em-
phasis is obvious. 1 Thus bevTt wpos p.e (Mt. 11 28), koL av Ipxxi Trpos :
fie (3 : 14). Some editors here and in the LXX print irpds p.k. But
in Jo. 6 : 37 Trpos ink is the true text. Cf. Trpos kixk also in P.Tb.
421 With aov the only difference is one of accent and
(iii/A.D.).
point. On aov and oov see chapter VII, iv, 4, (a). Nestle has
e^onoXoyovixai ooi (Mt. 11 25) and Kayd be <tol Xkyco (16 17).
: Cf. :
€7w ae (Jo. 17: 4) and ixe av (17: 5). Blass (GV. of N. T. Gk., p.
168) says that kixov and (xov, the emphatic forms, occur only with
other genitives like avTov Kal ep-ov (Ro. 16 13). Simcox {Language :
of the N. T., p. 55) argues that the enclitic form occurs always
except when there is emphasis. But the trouble is that the en-
cliticform seems to occur even where there is emphasis. The
genitive of the third person can be used with emphasis. Cf.
avTcou in Lu. 24 : 31. See further chapter VI, v, 4.
(c) The Frequency of the Personal Pronouns. It is at
bottom a from the substantive, though the roots
differentiation
are independent of verb and substantive and antedate historical
evidence.^ This pronoun came into play where the sense required
it. Thus Kal kTcdevres rds x^f^pas avTois aTre\v(Tav(AG. 13 : 3). Cf. Mk.
6 : 5. There is no doubt of the fact that the N. T. uses the pro-
noun in the oblique cases more frequently than is true of the older
Greek.3 What is the explanation of this fact? The Hebrew pro-
nominal once occur to one as the explanation of the
suffixes at
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 y.ov Par.P. 51 (ii/B.c), KajXTruvi pvodajpevTrj eduKa ai'Tcc
of avTov (-ovs). Cf. ae — ae in Jo. 1 : 48. For 01^6= 'it' see Ro. 7
20. In Lu. 1 : 62 abrb and avrov both refer to waidiov.
Redundant. The pronoun was sometimes redundant.
(d)
This was also a Hebrew idiom, but the vernacular kolvt] shows sim-
ilar examples. The two streams flow together as above. With
participles note tQ 6k\ovrL — a(^e% aurcS (Mt. 5: 40), KarajSavTos
avTOV — r}Ko\ovdr}aav avrQ (8:1), efi^avTi avrcp els irXolov rjKoXoWrjaau
avTui (8 :23). There are besides the anacolutha like 6 plkccv kuI
6 rrjpQiv — ddoaoj avT^ (Rev. 2 26) Cf also to ttottjplou
: ov fxi]
. . —
TTLu ai'To (Jo. 18 : which does not differ radically from the
11)
other examples.2 Cf. also the redundant personal pronoun with
the relative like the Hebrew idiom with the indeclinable "im>,
ov — avTov (Mt. 3 : 12), rjs — avTrjs (Mk 7 : 25), ovs — avrovs (Ac.
15 : 17), oh — avTots (Rev. 7:2). But this idiom appeared also
in the older Greek and is not merely Semitic.^ It occurs in
Xenophon and Sophocles. Indeed in Rev. 17: 9, evrrd 6pr] oirov
il yvvri KadrjTat Itt avTwv, we have oirov in sense of relative pronoun
'
much like modern Greek rod. For the redundant antecedent see
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
:
meaning. So with avTov (Lu. 1 : 17), avTols (Mt. 8 : 4), aiJrcoj^ (12 :
9), avTC:v (Mt. 11 1), a{)T6v : (Jo. 20 : 15), avTC>v (1 Pet. 3 : 14).
But this is no peculiarity of N. T. Greek or of the kolvt]. It is
common at all times. In Jo. 8 : 44, xl/evar-qs earlv Kal 6 iraTrip aiiTov,
the avTov refers to \}/ev8os suggested by xJ/evaT-qs. In 2 Cor. 5:19
aiiTots refers to Kbanov, as in Ro. 2 : 20 avrov has in mind aKp6l3varos
' Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 165. 2 Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 281.
I.
» W.-Th., p. 148. Cf. C. and S., p. G5 f.
684 A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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
poss. Who can teU?
PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl) 685
kurjs (Ro. 10 : 1), t6 kfiSv (Mt. 18 : 20), to) aw (Mt. 7:3), etc. When
the article is absent the possessive is usually predicate as in to. e/xd
wavTa aa eariv, Kal ra ad e^ud (Jo. 17: 10; Lu. 15 : 31). In /x?) ex(^v
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
the possessive and genitive together as attributives is well illus-
trated by TO k/jLov TTvev/jLa Kal to v/jluv (1 Cor. 16 : 18). In 1 Cor.
16 :MSS. vary between to v/jlcov mrkpyjixa and to vnerepov
17 the
(BCD) mT. So in 1 Jo. 2 2 we have both Trept toou aixapTLwu i}nC:v
:
and also Trept twv rjneTepcov. Indeed the genitive may be in apposi-
tion with the genitive idea in the possessive pronoun. Thus ttj
kiJifi xetpl UahXov (1 Cor. 16 : 21). Cf. 2 Th. 3 : 17; Col. 4 : 18; Jo.
14 : 24.
TV kpfi x^i-p'i- (Phil. 19). The pronoun i'Stos is possessive, but is best
treated as a reflexive.
III. The Intensive and Identical Pronoun ((t-uvtovos cLvtco-
vi)|JLCa). The use of auros was originally "purely anaphoric."- As
the third personal pronoun it was, of course, anaphoric. The in-
tensive use is more emphatic.
(a) The Nominative Use of Auto'?. As already remarked, it is
not always clear whether we have the emphatic 'he' or the in-
tensive 'self with ai^Tos in the nominative. Cf. aiiTos Kal -fj n-nTrjp
Monro, Horn, dr., p. 170. Jann., Hist. Ok. Gr., p. 351, calls this the
2
"determinative" pronoun. On the whole subject of aitT6s seeK.-G., I, pp. 051 IT.
686 A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
avTov (Jo. 2 : 12). The intensive avros appears in all persons, gen-
ders and numbers. Thus avros kyC-j (Ro. 7: 25; cf. kyui avros, Ac.
10:26), avrol CLKT^Koanev (Jo. 4:42), bvvaaai — avros (Lu. 6:42),
Th. 4 9; cf. Ac. 18 15), avros
avrol vnels (1 : : 6 'Iwavrjs (Mt. 3 :
4),
avrol Trpo^rjrai (Ac. 15 : 32), avro to I3l^\Iov (Heb. 9 : 19), avra to.
kirovpavta (9 : 23), avra ra epya (Jo. 5 : 36). The article is not al-
ways used. Cf. avros Aaveid (Lu. 20 : 42), avrri Sdppa (Heb. 11 :
11), avrol Tpo(f)rjraL (Ac. 15 : 32). Cf. eyu 8e avros, P.Oxy. 294
(a.d. 22). In 2 Cor. 10 : 1 note avros kyu UavXos. There is nothing
particularly essential in the order whether avros eyo: or 'ey<h avros
(see above). not in the N. T.
"E7co7€ is
(c) Avt6<; with Outo?. In Ac. 24 : 15, 20, the classical idiom avrol
ovroi. occurs. Cf. els avro rovro (Ro. 9 : 17), TrewoLdojs avro rovro
(Ph. 1:6), avro rovro (2 Pet. 1 : 5, accusative of gen. reference).
Cf. 2 Cor. 7: 11. The other order is found in eypaxf/a rovro avro (2
Cor. 2:3).
(d) Ayro? ALMOST Demonstrative. In Luke avros 6 is some-
times almost a pure demonstrative as it comes to be in later Greek.
The sense of 'very' or 'self is strengthened to 'that very.'
Thus avrfj rfi copa (Lu. 2 : 38), kv avrco rco /caipw (13 : 1), ev avrfj rfj
rifxepa (23: 12). The modern Greek freely employs this demonstra-
tive sense. Cf. Thumb, p. 90. Moulton (ProL, 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.
:
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 pos-
sible with vnCov avToov in 1 Cor. 7 35 (cf. 11 13). But I think this : :
reflexive. This intensive use of avros with l/zoO and aov is found in
Attic. In avToJv iiixwv and vjxwv only the context can decide which
is intensive and which reflexive. Cf Thompson,
. A Syntax of Attic
Greek, p. 64. Cf. e^ ahrdv tuv veKpoTa4>wv, 'from the grave-diggers
themselves,' P. Grenf. ii, 73 (iii/A.D.).
(g) 'O AuT09. The use of 6 auros for identity ('the same,' 'the
very') is close kin to the original 'self idea. Cf. ipse and idem.
The idiom is frequent in the N. T. Thus 6 avros Kvptos (Ro. 10 : 12),
t) avrri aap^ (1 Cor. 15 39), ras avras dvalas (Heb. 10 11), and with
: :
rljiv Tradr]iJ,aro:v.
these survivals. But see d0t5co ra irepi k^k (Ph. 2 : 23), rb Kar' tnk
-Kpbdvixos (Ro. 1 : 15). For this idiom in Attic see Thompson, Sijn-
J
Cf. DyrofT, Gcsch. d. Pron. Reflex., 1. Abt., p. 16.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. IGG f.
:
tax of Attic Greek, p. 64, This is not indeed the classic Attic
idiom, but the vernacular Attic (as in the not so free from KOLurj) is
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 :
iavTov dXXd rr]u rod erepov (10 : 29). But on, the other hand, note
kyw ev rc3 eiravepxtcrdal {xe axo86:aco <jol (Lu. 10:35), Trapa/caXaJ —
avvayojviaaadal jxoi (Ro. 15 : 30). Cf. 2 Cor. 2 : 13. 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 sep-
arate forms very well. Hence we find regularly efxavrov (Jo. 14
21), aeavrui (Ac. 16 Indeed eavrov never
: 28), eavrc^ (Lu. 18 :4).
stands for For aeavrov or aeavrov some MSS. read eavrov
ejj.avrov.'^
10: 29 eauroO=' one's own' (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 441; Prol,
p. 87). There was some tendency towards this usage in the an-
1 Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 33. » Dyroff, Gesch. etc., Bd. I, 1892, p. 19.
2 lb. « W.-Soh., p. 205.
PRONOUNS ('ANTflNTMIAl) 689
Lu. 1:45. But Moulton {CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, p. 441, April,
1904, p. 154) finds in the papyri several examples of this "un-
educated use of eavTov' for first and second persons singular, avy-
xcopw ixtTo. TTiv eavTov T€\evTr]v, B.U. 86 (U/a.d.). Radermacher
(A^. T. Gr.,p.Gl) cites tir'eypaxpa eavrQ (Petersen-Luschan, Reisen
etc.,. p. 26, n. 32). Thucydides has a few possible examples and
certainly the Latin is is in point (Draeger, Historische Synt. d.
Lat. Spr., p. 84). In early Greek Delbriick finds the reflexive
referring indifferently to either person. Cf. Thompson, Sijnt. of
Attic Greek, p. 64. In the modern Greek the singular iavrov occurs
constantly for first and second persons and even rod eavrov nov,
Tov eavTov aov for emphasis. Cf. "myself," "thyself," "herself"
and vulgar "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,
: :
for the reflexive plural. indeed true for the first and third
This is
7:35; vntv auroTs in 1 Cor. 11 13. But the common idiom for
:
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.
The LXX (Conybeare and Stock, Sel., p. 30) has this use of lavTwv
for first and second persons plural. We even find reflexive and
personal together like viitv eavroh (Ex. 20: 23).
(/) Article with. The reflexive is used with or without the
article and in any position with the article. But curiously enough
atavTov is never so found and e/iauroD only once in sharp contrast,
/zi) ^rjTCOV t6 kfjiavTod <TVfj.(l)opov dXXd to tcov iroWcbv (1 Cor. 10:33).
Instead of this reflexive genitive (possessive) we have the genitive
of the personal pronoun. Cf. ri^tco t6v irarkpa nov (Jo. 8 : 49), a^es
TO bdpbv (Tov (Mt. 5 : 24). The examples of eavrod are, of course,
abundant as in r-qv eavrov avXrjv (Lu. 11 : 21), the common idiom in
the older Greek. But note also the order to epyov eavrov (Gal. 6:4),
iavTOV Toiis TroSas (Ac. 21 : 11), 8ov\ovs eavrov (Lu. 19 : 13), Krjirov
eavrov (Lu. 13 These are all attributive, but the sense is not
: 19).
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 :
the ancient Greek idiom. The papyri show this same blending
of eavrojv with aWr^Xoiv.^ Cf. P.P. 8 (ii/s.c.) three times, O.P. 260
(i/A.D.), C.P.R. 11 (ii/A.D.) twice. Thus we may note on Kplfiara
^bjievoi lavTols (Col. 3 : 13). Cf. also aXKriXuv and avrom in Lu.
23 : 12. In Ph. 2 3 aWrjXovs : ijyovnevoL virepexovras eavroju each word
retains its own idea.
(h) Reflexive with Middle Voice. Sometimes indeed the
reflexive occurs with the middle voice where it is really superflu-
ous, as in 8L€fxeplaavro eavrols (Jo. 19 : 24, LXX), where^ Mt. 27:
35 (free paraphrase of LXX) So also aeavrdv
has only duixeplaavro.
irapexop-evos (Tit. 2:7). But usually such examples occur where
the force of the middle is practically lost, as in r]yrip.aL kp.avr6v
(Ac. 26 : 2), apvriaaadco eavrov (Lu. 9 : 23). On the use of the re-
flexive in Anglo-Saxon see Penny, A History of the Reflexive
Pronoun in the English Language, p. 8. Cf. -KapaXrjjj.ipop.ai xpos
hfiavrbv (Jo. 14 : 3). Moulton {Prol., p. 87) admits that sometimes
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 87. ^ W.-Th., p. 257.
PRONOUNS ('ANTflNTMIAl) 691
In the N. T. we find it, especially (17 times) in /car' lUav (cf. Lu.
9: 10), in the sense of 'private.' So this sense occurs also in Ac.
4 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 par-
ticularity or idiosyncrasy, as 1 Cor. 3:8; 7:7 (cf. the classic
idiom). But in general 6 tSios or tStos without
Cf. our "idiot."
the article means simply 'one's own,' a strong posses-
(cf. lavrov)
4 44, etc. The use of ol Ulol for 'one's own people' (cf. also ol
:
p. 89) refers with point to Ro. 14 : 5, kv rcD Ibiw vot, as showing t5tos
Ulos avTcbv 7rpo</)i7T?7s. Moulton {CI. Rev., 1904, p. 154) cites rifjLOJV
i8iov, Ch. P. 4 (ii/A.D.), idiov avTOV, N.P. 25 (ii/A.D.), and ets I8lav IJLOV
Xpelav, B.U. 363 (Byz., Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 440). In mod-
=
ern Greek 6 i5ios 6 avTos (Thumb, Handb., p. 97) or 'self,' kyoj 6
l8los, 'I myself.' Cf. ttjl avTTJi in the papyrus of Eudoxus (ii/s.c),
but Moulton {Prol., p. 91) observes that it does not occur in the
N. T. in this sense.
V. The Reciprocal Pronoun (t| d}JioLpaLa dvToovu|XLa). The use
of the reflexive in the reciprocal sense has just been discussed (cf.
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 nom-
inative 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 :
for practical purposes the two Greek terms "deictic" and "ana-
phoric" may be placed beside the Latin "demonstrative" and
"relative." See further chapter VII, iv, 4, (e).
1 Synt., p. 763 f.
ular was td-s, td, and the Greek nominative plural oi, at came "in-
stead of Tol, rat" (Brugmann, Comp. Gr., vol. Ill, p. 327). This
form, like der in German and this in English, was used either as
demonstrative, article or relative. See Kiihner-Gerth, I, p. 575.
One is not to trace actual historical connection between 6 and
der (cf. Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 559). Its old use was a sort of
personal demonstrative (cf. aii 8e in Lu. 1 : 76).^ Cf. also o-u 8e rl
Kal TO, TO. Kal TOL. The modern Greek uses tov, t^s, tup, etc., as short
forms of avTov, etc., and Jebb^ pertinently asks if "a
this is not
return to the earliest use of 6, r), to as a pronoun." The demonstra-
tive 6 is frequent in the comic writers. Cf. Fuller, De Articuli
in Antiquis Graecis Comoediis Usu, p. 9. Volker ( Syntax, p. 5)
gives papyri illustrations of demonstrative 6 (6 8e, tov 8e, -wpos tov,
rpd TOV, TO. The oblique cases have only two ex-
fxkv, TO. 8e, etc.).^''
tive. Cf. also TOV air' apxrj^ in 1 Jo. 2 : 13 and ttjv in 1 Cor.
10 : In Mt. 14 2 (Mk. 6 14) at is nearly equivalent to
29. : :
this usage or merely the article. In Acts we often have oi ixh ovv in
this sense, usually with the participle (Ac. 1 :6; 8 :4, 40). But
even in these two examples there is apparently an implied con-
trast. In Mt. 16 14 and Lu. 9 19 the use of ol be merely refers
: :
In Mt. 13 : 23 we most likely have 6 yikv, 6 be, not onev, 6 be. Cf.
6 fjiev (Lu. 8:5). In Ac. 17 Ro. 14 2 os
: 18 note nves, oi be, and in :
fxev, 6 be. (3) The most common use of the demonstrative is where
{koI 6s, ri b' 6s) is the same word as the relative. Brugmann^ in-
deed finds it from an original root, *so-s like Sanskrit sd-s. The
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
:
to the same idea. But this verse furnishes a good example of this
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 — 6s be KplveL (14 : 5). So 1 Cor. 11 : 21.
chapter VII, iv, 4, (e). In Lu. 16:25 &8e is the correct text. In
Ac. 15 : 23 rL8e is not well supported and in 2 Cor. 12 : 19 to, 8k is
right. In one of the remaining examples, rfySe r)v a8eK<f)r] (Lu. 10 :
39), Blass^ bluntly calls it "not even used correctly," a rather curt
judgment. But he cites the LXX (Gen. 25 24; 38 27). In : :
hardly necessary to take r-qvbe as like the classical rriv 8elva or Ty}v
Kal rT]v (cf. Plato), though that is a possible construction. Cf.
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
Greek. Naturally there is much diversity in the context.
1. The Purely This use is not wanting. Thus in Mt.
Deictic.
3 17, OVTOS ea-TLv 6 mos fiov, the demonstrative identifies the one
:
6 :42; 9 :24; 12:34; Ac. 7:40, Jews about Moses; 19:26; 28:
4, about Paul; Lu. 15 30, the elder son at the younger; 18 11,
: :
' lirtiK., r.riccli. Gr., i»i). 242, 428. * Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 170.
' Thoinpaon, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 65. ''
lb.
698 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Kai ovTos is rather deictic. A striking example of the continua-
tive ovTOi occurs in Ac. 7 Here the pro- : 35, 36, 37, 38, 40.
noun repeated as often as is desired. So Jo. 6 42. Cf. the
is :
ovToi eiaiv.One may note a similar use of eKeluos (Jo. 12 48; 16 13) : :
where tovtop refers to 'It]<xovv (verse 22). Cf. also tovtop (2d) in
Ac. 7: 35. In Ac. 4 10 : ei' tovtco is resumptive referring to the pre-
ceding substantive followed by two relative clauses, while ovtos is
deictic. 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 par-
ticiple before ovtos is a very common idiom, as 6 de vwoneivas els reXos
OVTOS (Mt. 10 : 22; 24 : 13) ; 6 kfi^aiPas fxeT' kfxov — ovtos (26 : 23). Cf.
1 Cor. 6 4; Lu. 9 48; Jo. 7 18, etc. The participle, of course,
: : :
Cf. also 1 Cor. 8:3; Ro. 8:9; Jas. 3 2.3 For eau tls see Jo. :
14; 10 : 7, 11; 2 Th. 3 : 10; Ph. 1:6 {avTb tovto), 25; 1 Tim. 1 :
TTotTjo-cj- KadeXco fxov Tas airodriKas, and Jo. 4 : 17. The genitive with
otl appears in wepl tovtov otl (Jo. 16 : 19). The locative appears in
h TOVTO) OTL, 1 Jo. 4 : 9, 10, 13. Cf. ev TovTco OTL (Jo. 16 : 30; 1 Jo.
3 : 19, 24) in a sUghtly different sense where otl is really the accu-
sative. But in general these substantive clauses have the same
case as tovto.
Closely alhed to this use of otl is that of ha. Thus the nom-
inative, -KoQev iioL tovto ha eX0]7, occurs in Lu. 1 : 43. In Jo. 17 : 3,
nd^ova TavTr\s ayaiv-qv ovSels exet, ha. In 3 Jo. 4 the ablative plural
is found, iieL^oTepav tovtwv ha. The apposition in these various —
constructions varies in degree of directness. An example of ottcos
with €ts avTo TOVTO occurs in Ro. 9 : 17 quoted from the LXX (Ex.
9 : 16). Cf. also cTeWo/xevoL tovto ixTj in 2 Cor. 8 : 20.
In 1 Pet. 2 : 19 note also the use of el with tovto (though x^^pi-^
' Cf. W.-Sch., p. 217, where it is observed that elsewhere often 5tA tovto
is predicate), touto yap x^P's el. Here the ei clause is in the same
case as tovto, nominative. So in Jo. 2 3 we have eav in apposition
:
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,: :
* For exx. in earlier Gk. and literary kolvt] see W.-Sch., p. 217.
2 W.-Sch., p. 218.
PRONOUNS ('ANTflNTMIAl) 701
Kaivrj avTT] [77] viro aov XaXovuhrj StSaxi? (Ac. 17: 19).' Even if the
second article be admitted here, the point made still applies. The
position of ovtos with the article, oSros 6 rather than 6 outos, does
not mean simply the predicate idea, though the position is predi-
cate. But not so T-fju e^ovaiau Tavrrjv diraaau in Lu. 4 : 6. Here
the real predicate notion ajipc^ars. In Kiihner-Gerth (I, p. 628)
the explanation is given that it is 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
:
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
ToO deov. Cf. the simple predicate use in 1 Cor. 6 : 11, Kat raOrd Tivts
rjTe. In Lu. 1 : 36, ovtos p.riv e'/cros haTiv, the substantive is predicate.
The same thing is clearly true of Lu. 2:2, avT-r] aTroypa4>r} ttpcott;
hykveTo. Cf. also tovto v/juv (nr]p.eiov in Lu. 2 : 12. Some MSS. have
TO, but in either case the copula is supplied. The remaining exam-
ples are not so simple, but ultimately resolve themselves into the
predicate usage unless one has to except Ac. 24 : 21 (see below). In
Lu. 7 44, : TavTtjp T-qv yvvalKa, the article does not occur in L AV.
Winer^ considers the reading without the article ''unexception-
able," since the woman was present. In Lu. 24 21 the predicate:
tive is again necessary, 'this is a true thing that thou didst say'
or 'thou didst speak this as a true thing.' The translation 'truly'
rather obscures the idea. In Ac. 1 : 5, oi) /lerd xoXXds ravras wepas,
several difficulties appear. The litotes, oii fieTo. xoXXds, does not
have the usual order.^ Cf. Ac. 27 : 14 for /xer' oh iroXv. There is be-
sides a use of ixera somewhat akin to that of 7rp6 in 7rp6 e^ rj/jLepCiv rod
Tvaaxo- (Jo. 12 : 1)} The order would more naturally be oh TroXXds
rifxepas jitTO. ravras or oh ttoXKoop ijfiepwv ixera ravras. However, the
predicate use of ravras without the article permits the condensa-
tion. The free translation 'not many days hence' is essentially cor-
rect. It is literally 'after not many days these' as a starting-point
(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]-
.
Reisen in Lykien, p. 35, n. 54) and ear-qaap rode uprjiia from a Bi-
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 orig-
:
inal 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. The distinction between 68e
for what follows and
what precedes* (not strictly observed
ovros for
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
1 W.-Sch., p. 221.
2 Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 126, 133.
3 lb., p. 172. « Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 66.
PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl) 703
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 :
7r6s Tts riv -kKovglos 6s etx^i' OLKOPOfjiov, /cat ovtos) that ovtos refers to
oIkouo/jlov. In Lu. 18 : 14, KaTej3r] ovtos dedtKaiccfxepos els top oIkop avTov
Trap' eK€LPov, the two pronouns occur in sharp contrast, one point-
ing out the publican, the other the Pharisee. In such contrasts
euros refers to the last mentioned. This one example
is clearly
(besides 2 Jo. 6 f.) in the N, T., which curiously enough Blass
{Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 171) does not recognise. Cf. also Jo.
13 24; eKelpos
: 38, and TavTa eKelvoLs in 1 Cor.
rovTio in Jo. 5 :
10 11. In
: Jo. 1 7 f both ovtos and enelpos are used of John
: .
a case like h tovtco xatpco (Ph. 1 18), the main thought is meant :
does not occur. Cf. raOra rt, Jo. 6 9. In Mt. 21 42 (Mk. 12: 11), : :
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
k(TTe (Teecoa/jihoL dia TrlaTeoos' Kal
like TOLovTOL, but more definite and emphatic. For this use of
oSros see also Jo. 12 34. In Ph. 3 7, artva rjp p.oL Kepdr], Tama
: :
absent.
Sometimes the plural raOra occurs where a single object is really
in mind. The adverbial phrase /lerd raDra (Lu. 12 :
4) can refer
either to one or more incidents. It is not necessary to consider
ravTa as singular in idea in Jo. 19 36 and : 1 Cor. 9 : 15. But the
usage does appear in 3 Jo. 4, ixei^oTepav tovtcov ovk exw xo-pt-v (or
xapav), and the adverbial accusative Kal raOra in Heb. 11 12. :
aSrat 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
: : : :
10. The Adverbial Uses of tovto and Tama. See chapter XII.
1 W.-Sch., p. 219.
PRONOUNS ('ANTiiNTMIAl) 705
Paul has tovto avTo in the adverbial sense, while Peter (2 Pet.
1 5) turns the phrase around /cat avrb tovto 8k.
: Cf. the adverbial
use of Ke({)a\aLov in Heb. 8:1. The case of ovtos in Jo. 21 21 is :
noteworthy.
11. The Phrase tovt' eaTLv. See also chapter X, viii, (c). It is
used without any regard to the number, gender or case of the word
in apposition with it, exactly like the Latin id est. There are
eighteen examples of it given in Moulton and Geden's Concord-
ance, all but three of 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
: :
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
: : :
preceded by ravra. Cf. also Ac. 8 19; 13 37, etc. In Ro. 10 14, : : :
osition with the relative, while in the next verse it illustrates the
example where ev would have been used with both antecedent and
relative. So as to d</)' Siv in 2 Cor. 2 3, etc.^ The same principle :
very material.
{g) 'EK€ivo<i. Cf. Latin ille. The old form (Epic, Pindar, Tragic
poets) was Kelvo^ or ktjvos (Doric and Lesbian).^ Brugmann'* indeed
connects it with the old Indo-Germanic root /co. The locative
adverb e-KeZ (cf. Ket-di, Kel-dev, Doric, Lesbian) is 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 eKelvai eiTLTXeovcn ('ships yonder are sailing ahead'), we must
not confuse it with al vrjes keimt (' those ships'). Cf. the "adver-
bial" use of ovTos. By 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
the Greek N.T. He says: "The ordinary pronoun for the third
person is Wei. In Canton we also use k'ni. Compare eKetvos."
He mentions other accidental similarities, but I dare not venture
into Chinese etymology.
1 W.-Th., p. 158. » Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 242 f. ^ lb., p. 426 f.
(see 1) in Jo. 9 : 28, ai; jua^Tjri)? a eKeivov. It may also exist^ in Jo.
19 : 21. solemn repetition of eKetvos
Cf. the 6 avOpoiiros in with
Mt. 26 24, as well as the change
: from ovtos in verse 23.
3. The Anaphoric. This is the more frequent use of this pro-
fiev —
riiiels 8e. So in 10 11 eKeivoLS i7M<S«', 15 11 etre eyu} e'iTe : — :
pressions of place, Uke 5td Tri% 68ov kKdv-qs (Mt. 8 28), eh oK-qv :
rrjv yrjv kKtlvriv (9 : 26; cf. ei^ 9 : 31), etc. It is frequent also with
general phrases of time, like kv rah mepais e/cetmts (Mt. 3:1). Cf.
Mk. 8:1; Lu. 2:1. It usually occurs at
a transition in the nar-
rative and refers to something previously mentioned. Blass^ notes
that Lu. (1 39) uses also raurais in this phrase and that in 6 12 D
: :
But note Jo. 16 13, eKeluos, to Tuev/xa rrjs aXrjdeias (cf. Jo. 14 26).
:
:
With oXos we find this order, ets oXrjv T-qv yrjv eKelurjv (Mt. 9 26, : etc.)
and Tras the same, irdaap ttjp o(f)€LKr]v eKeivriv (Mt. 18 32, etc.).
:
occurs, orav 8i e\6ji keiws, rd TrvevfJLa ttjs aX-qdelas. Here one has tO
go back six lines to e/ceTws again and seven to TapaKXrjTos. It is
So h avry rfj oLKla (Lu. 10 7), 'in that house.' Moulton^ notes that
:
rfj o)pa). The tendency was not foreign to the ancient Greek and
it is common enough in the modern vernacular* to find avrds 6=
'this.'
* Abbott, ib. For the Joh. use of tKilvo^ Bee Steitz and A. Buttmann,
Stud, in Krit. (1859, p. 497; 1860, p. 505; 1861, p. 267). Cf. Blass, Gr. of N.T.
Gk., p. 172.
2 Prol., p. 91. ' Ib. " Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 320, 351.
710 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
apTOL ToaovTOL (Mt. 15 : 33). It occurs with the article only once,
6 ToaovTos tXovtos (Rev. 18 16). Sometimes it appears without a:
oaov —
Kara, toctovto, and in 10 25 ToaovTc^ oaco. It is worth : —
while at this point to note the correlative adverbs, ourcos w(tt6
(Ac. 14 :
1), ouTcos cos (1 Cor. 4 : 1), ovtojs — owcos (Mt. 5 : 16). Cf.
wore — ovTcos 8e (Ro. 15:20).
VII. Relative Pronouns (dvacjiopiKal dvTci)V\)|xCai).
(a) List in the N. T. The only relatives in the N. T. (not
counting adverbs) are 6s, ocrrts, olos, otto'los, oaos, rjXlKos, and 6 in
the Apocalypse. The others have fallen by the way. Some MSS.
read ovrep in Mk. 15 6, while 6a8r]irep in Jo. 5 4 is not in the
: :
critical text. The LXX has owep (airep) five times,- but lyXkos not
at all. These relative pronouns do not occur with uniform fre-
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.
PRONOUNS ('ANTfiNTMIAl) 711
(d) "O?.
1. In Homer. See discussion of the demonstrative 6s for origin.^
But already in Homer the relative sense, iipdpov viroTaKTiKov, is the
main one, and the demonstrative is on the decline.^
2. Comparison with Other Relatives. Though 6s in the N. T.
far outnumbers all the other relatives, yet the distinction between
person in Ro. 2 23, the third person in Mt. 5 19; Lu. 6 48 f.;
: : :
Gal. 3: 16, tw a-wkpixaTl aov, 6s karw Xpto-ros; Eph. 6: 17, rr]v iJ.6.xo.ipa.v
Tov TvevfxaTOS, 6 kaTiv pr^/xa deov; Rev. 4 : 5, Xa^tTraSes — a eiaiv to. iirra
(jKdvt] eXeous ovs, Col. 2— 19 Ke(f)a\r]u e^ ov, Phil. 10 reKvou 6v, Rev.
:
TtKvla. In 2 Jo. 1, eKXeKTjj KVpla /cat rots reKvois avrrjs, ovs, the gram-
matical gender (feminine and neuter followed by masculine) is
ignored entirely. Cf. Ph. 2 15. :
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 : 22, used twice for the object of worship, God. So in 1 Jo.
(Jo. 17 : 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 :
serve the neuter participle like 6. Cf. Ac, 4 : 36. In Mt. 27 33, :
26 : 10, o Kai eTTOiTjaa; Gal. 2 : 10, 6 /cat kaTovdacra avTO tovto iroLrjffaL
(note here the use of avrd tovto in the relative clause); Col. 1 : 29
ds 6 Kal KOTTLcio (cf. ets 6 in 2 Th. 1 : 11; 2 : 14; 1 Pet. 2:8). Cf. also
Kal vfias dvTLTVTrov vvu o-cbfet fidirTiana (1 Pet. 3 21). Per contra :
the change from the plural to the singular in riiJ.epaL 5a)5eKa d0' rjs
(Ac. 24 : 11), and kv ohpavols — k^ ov (Ph. 3 20).
: For the neuter
plural in the relative (cf. TavTo) to cover a vague general idea
see o)v in 1 Tim. 1 6, df^' wj' Lu. 1 20, h
: : oh Lu. 12 1 (cf. Ac. :
6. Case.
Absence of attraction normal.
(a) 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
1 W.-Sch., p. 233. 2 Mayser, Gr., p. 310.
PRONOUNS (antantmiai) 715
\6'Y<xi 6v (cf. 4 50), Jo. 4:5 x^p'i-ov 6 (CD o5). Tit. 3 5 epywv a,
:
:
in Jo. 2: 22; 4: 50, etc. On the whole attraction seems the more
common. But this "idiomatic attraction of the relative" "occurs
only twice in Matthew (18 : 19; 24 50) and once in Mark (7 13),"
: :
cedent is not unknown in Lat. Cf Draeger, Hist. Synt., Bd. II, p. 507. Horn.
.
(7:17), Wvojv OOP (7:45), irvevfjiaTos ayiov ov (Tit. 3:6). Cf. also
Ac. 9 : 36; 22 : 10; 1 Cor. 6 : 19; 2 Cor. 10 : 8, 13; Eph. 1 : 8; Heb.
6 : 10; 9 :20; Jas. 2:5. In several instances it is the accusa-
tive of the inner object that is attracted. Cf. Eph. 1 : 19 f. So
Trapa/cXiyo-fcos rjs TrapaKoKovneda (2 Cor. 1:4), x^Pi-TOS ^s kxcplTcccrev
(Eph. 1:6), K\r]aecos rjs eKXi'jdrjTe (4:1), 4>o)Prjs -qs e/ce/cpa^a (Ac. 24 : 21),
epyuv There are examples also of
do-e/Setas ojv rjae^yjaav (Ju. 15).^
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),
: : :
€K Tov TTveviJLaTos ov (1 Jo. 3 : 24). Cf. Jo. 7: 31. Then again 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
the N. T. an instance of the relative at-
In 1 Cor. 7 39 there : is
for antecedent and relative), kirl iraaLv oh (Lu. 2 20; 9 43; 24 25), : : :
of 1 Cor. 7 20, h rfj KXrjaeL eKXrjdr], where ijv would have been the
:
fi
but the rest have ^s. A dative has been attracted into the geni-
tive along with incorporation and the preposition in Ro. 4 17, :
(Mt. 24 38; Lu. 1 20; 17 27; Ac. 1 2) really comes from Ulxp'-
: : : :
uses the ordinary attraction very often, seldom has inverse attrac-
tion (Cleef, De Attradionis in Enuntionihus Rel. Vsv Platonico,
pp. 44-46). No inverse attraction is found in Pisidian Greek
(Compernass, De Serm. Gr., p. 13). The examples are not very
numerous in the N. T., 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.
718 A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
6 : 14, idovTes a eToirjaev arjfxela (W. H.); Mt. 7:2, kv ^ yap KpifxaTi
KplveTe KpiQ-qaeade, icai kv co [JLerpui fieTpeire /xeTprid-qaeTaL vplv, Mk. 4 :
24; Lu. 6 : 38; Mt. 24 : 44, y oh bonetTe wpa (but see per contra
24 : 50). For further examples of this simple incorporation see
Mt. 23 : 37=Lu. 13 : 34 (the set phrase, adverbial accusative, 6v
TpoTov), so also Ac. 1 : 11; 7: 28; 15 : 11; 27: 25; Mk. 2 : 19 {6aov
XPovov); Lu. 12 40 (but note 12 46); 17 29 f.; Jo. 6 14; 9 14;
: : : : :
19; 9 24 (ous :
—
was note); 16 2; Ph. 3 18 (but probably only : :
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 :
Treptwv 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
change of case also. The antecedent may be drawn into the case
of the relative (cf . inverse attraction) as in Mk. 6 16, ov eycb : aire-
14; Ac. 8 : 24; 22 : 15; 25 : 11; Ro. 15 18; 2 Cor. 12 17. In Ac. : :
26 : 16, jxapTvpa o}p re eldks fxe o3p re 6(pdr]aoiJ.at ool, it is the second
Siv that gives trouble. The antecedent would be tovtup and the
relative before attraction either a (ace. of general reference) or
ols (locative or instrumental). In Ro. 4 : 7 cov has as its unex-
pressed antecedent ourot. Cf. also Ac. 13 : 25. In Mt. 6 8 (so :
dent like TTOLVTes would have been in the nominative. Cf Lu. 7 43, . :
with the antecedent, but not with the relative, though implied,
as in h iravTl xpbvo^ w tlaifKdev, Ac. 1 : 21. So the margin in Ro.
2 : 16 ei' wepa v- Cf. Lu. 1 : 25. It is possible also so to under-
stand kv rfj 65c3 fj vpxov, Ac. 9 : 17. But it is clearly true of ctTro irav-
prepositions is common in the same way with the relative and its
incorporated antecedent. See ev w Kplp.aTL (Mt. 7:2), axpt h
rifxepas (Lu. 1 : 20), 8l' rjv alTiav (Lu. 8 : 47), Trap' w —
MvaawvL (Ac.
21 : 16), eh ov — TVTov (Ro. 6 : 17), d</)' ^s fjfxepas (Col. 1 :
9), Tepl
^s (To^TTipias (1 Pet. 1 : 10), etc. Cf. Ro. 16 : 2.
like the free use of conjunctions and relatives. Cf. Latin use of
qui. Cf. Draeger, Hist. Syntax, Bd. II, p. 512. So ap9' wv (Lu.
12 : 3), kv oh (12 : 1), hb (Heb. 3 7), Trepl : S)v (1 Cor. 7:1), ov
Xapiv (Lu. 7 47), : 5t' ^v alrlav (2 Tim. 1:6). Cf. Wev (Heb. 3:1).
Indeed (Winer-Schmiedel, p. 228) kv cS may be here equal to kv
TOVTU) OTL, avO' 0}V = aVTl TOVTCOV OTL, kcf)' UI = €Trl TOVTCC OTi (2 Cor. 5:4),
Blotl (1 Th. 2 : 8)=5td tovto 6tl, 10' oh (Ro. G : 21), etc. The tem-
poral and causal use of the relative phrases is common. Cf. kv
u> (Heb. 2 : 18). Indeed naes (Ro. 8 : 26) is ra0' 6, KadoTL (Ac. 2 : 45)
is Kad' oTi, KaOairep (Ro. 4 6) is Kad': airep. Cf. e</)' 6<7ov (Mt. 9 : 15),
Kad' oaov (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=
: :
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
of fact the examples are not very numerous in the N. T. It occurs
several times in Rev. (3:8 fiv avrrjv, 7:2 oh kSodrj avTo7s, 7:9 —
ov — avTov, 13:8 ov — avTov, 20:8 S)v — ai'ToJv). Outside of the
Apocalypse, which so strongly bears the influence of the LXX, the
usage is very rare. See Mt. 3 : 12, ov to tttvov kv rfj x^tpt avrov, an
example hardly parallel as a matter of fact. But a clearer instance
is Mk. 1 : 7 (and Lu. 3 : 16), ou — avrov, and still more so 7 25, ^s :
elx^ t6 dvydrpLOV ai'Trjs. Cf. also ota — TOLavrrj (IVIk. 13 : 19), olos —
1 K.-G., II, p. 433. 3 p. 201. Cf. also W.-M., p. 185.
2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175. " Thack., Gr. of 0. T. in Gk., p. 4G.
PRONOUNS ('ANTfiNTMIAl) 723
TrjXt/coOros (Rev. 16 : 18), ota — ovTus (Mk. 9:3), owov — eKel (Rev.
12 : 6, 14), oTTov — ew' avTOJv (Rev. 17 : 9).^ In Ac. 15 : 17, €<^' ous —
Itt' avTovs, we have a quotation from the LXX (Amos 9 : 12). " The
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
again and in the modern Greek become very common. Psichari*
considers it rather far-fetched in Moulton to appeal to the modem
Greek vernacular, 6 yiarpos ttov top ecxTeCka, 'the doctor whom I
sent for,' since the modern Greek vernacular just as readily uses
TToO without avTov. Psichari complains that Thumb* also has
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 — e^ ahrwv. See also P. Amh. II,
11, 26, oTvep (f)avep6v tovto kyeuero. Moulton*' has given abundant ex-
amples from Old English. So in Chaucer {Knightes Tale, 1851 f .):
avTo TOVTO, we have the intensive use of auro, but tovto is pleonastic.
In 1 Pet. 2 24, 6s avTos,
:
—
we have again intensive avTos.
11. The Repetition of 6s. Winer ^ rightly remarks that it is a
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. : :
1 Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175; Simcox, Lanp. of the N. T., p. 59.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175, cites ov 17 tttoij avrod, from Clem. Cor. i. 21. 9.
* Essai sur le grec de la Sept., p. 182.
* Hellen., p. 128.
6 Cf. also Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 353. « Prol., p. 94.
^ Lans. of the N. T., p. 59. Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 113.
8 W.-M., p. 186.
724 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
10 : 36. The old Greek could, and commonly did/ use ovtos or
Latin.^ Cf. also rts kaTLv ovtos 6s Kat d^iaprtas a4>iriaiv; (Lu. 7:49).
A particularly good example is 1 Cor. 2 : 16, rts 7dp lyvoi vovv
Kvpiov, OS avp^L^aaei avTov; See chapter XIX, Mode.
13. Causal. "Os may also introduce a causal sentence. So 6s
1 Bernhardy, p. 304; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 354; Jelf, 833.2; K.-G., II,
p. 432. 2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.
* "Normal" indeed. Thompson, Synt., p. 70.
* Thack., Gr. of O. T. in Gk., p. 25.
6 Cf. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 369.
PRONOUNS ('ANTSNTMIAl) 725
Greek. For examples see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 473 f. See
further chapter XIX, Mode. This double use of relative pronouns
is on a par with the double use of interrogative stems (cf. indefi-
nacular and rare even there. Blass^ conjectures a slip in the text,
alpe having been changed to eraipe, and Chrysostom had an
imperative in his text. We may suppose "a rather harsh ellipsis"
of the principal verb and treat it as an ordinary 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 interrogatives. It is not im-
possible for OS here to be interrogative. That is as much as one
can at present say. Blass thought it "quite incredible."
15. In Here the matter is much clearer.
Indirect Questions.
Even Blass ^ admits that "relatives and interrogatives become
confused in Greek as in other languages." In the classical lan-
guage 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.
1 Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gr., p. 74.
2 Prol., p. 93. =>
W.-M., p. 208.
* Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 331; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 474.
« Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 68.
6 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. Gk. Gr., p. 473; Moulton,
Prol., p. 93.
" Prol., p. 93; 01. Rev., Dec, 1901, p. 441.
726 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
however, to find Blass^ saying that this usage "is wanting in the
N. T." W. F. Moulton^ in his footnote gives undoubted examples
of OS in indirect questions after verbs of knowing, declaring, etc. So
olSev — COP XP^'-O-V '^X^T^i Mt. 6:8; d7ra77€tXaTe a aKovere, 11:4; eiSvIa
6 ytyopev, Mk. 5 : 33; apeypure 6 eirolrjaep, Lu. 6 : 3 (cf. Mt. 12 : 3
Tt); /X97 etSojs 6 Xeyei, 9 : 33; 5i' t]p alrlap rjiparo avrov aTrr]yyeL\ep, 8 : 47
(cf. Ac. 22 24) 5t5d^ei v^ds a bet direip, 12 12. Cf. also Lu. 9 46.
: ; : :
fiaiowrai. used side by side after ixi} poovpre^. Cf. also Jo. 18: 21.
One may compare^ also Lu. 11 : 6, ovk ex^ o Trapad-qcro) abrQ, with
Mk. 8 : 2 (Mt. 15 : 32), ovk exovacp tL 4>ayo:(jLP. See also cos ladir]
in Lu. 8 : 47, and note cbs in Lu. 23 : 55; 24 : 35, not to mention
6a OS, oTolos.
16. The Idiom ovdeis kaTiv 6s. It occurs in the N. T., as Mk.
9 : 39; 10 : 29; Lu. 1 : 61; 18 : 29; 1 Cor. 6 : 5. For ovSeis eanp ds
ov see Mt. 10 26; Lu. 8 17. Here one is : : reminded of the old
idiom oans. Mayser {Grammatik, p. 310) calls attention to
ovdeis
(e) "OcrTi9.
1. Varied Uses. The form is, of course, merely 6s and rts. But
we have seen a variety of uses of 6s, and rts likewise is not entirely
uniform. Hence the combination cannot be expected to be so.
2. The Distinction between 6s and oans. It was not ironclad
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 convert-
ible 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
also eau H7], Mk. 10 : 30. Has oo-rts is, of course, indefinite also. Thus
Mt. 7 : 24; irav 6 tl eav TroLrjre (Col. 3 : 17), etc. For vaaa ypvxh ^rts av
see Ac. 3 23 (LXX). In P. Par. 574 (iii/A.c.) note oans ttot ovv el.
:
o'iTLves epxovrai. Cf. also Mt. 7 26; 13 52; 21 33, etc. The value : : :
of the pronoun sometimes does not differ greatly from olos and ex-
presses quality. Thus evvovxoi. o'lnves, Mt. 19 12; aXXots yeoipyoZt :
» Quest., p. 245 f
'luiavqv o'LTLPes, 12 : 10 ttjv ttvXtjp 7?rts, 17 : 10. See also Rev. 12 : 13.
Moulton* gives an exact parallel from the papyri for Mt. 27: 62,
Tfj hTravpLOV TjTts ecTTlv jj-eTOL T-qv TrapaaKevr]v {avpLOV rjTLS ecTTLV ti). He
quotes Hort also (Comm., 1 Pet. 2 11) in favour of the position :
with ecos and the genitive, ecos otov, is rather frequent. Cf. Mt.
5 : 50 (Luke three times, Matthew and John once
25; Lu. 12 :
OTL ^u, Jo. 2:5; 14 13; 15 16; 6ri kav, Mk. 6 23; 1 Cor. 16
: : : :
2 f.; Col. 3 : 17; on alone, Jo. 8: 25; Ac. 9 : 6. The other ex-
amples are all in the nominative.
7. Number. In general the number of ocrrts agrees with that
of the antecedent. But in a few instances ogtls agrees with the
predicate. So with 1 Cor. 3 17, vao'i olrives i'^ueTs, Eph. 3 13, :
— :
TaL). So Gal. 4: 24; 5 19. : Cf. the absence of the neuter in the
modern Greek. l^oth singular and
The masculine and feminine,
plural, are very frequent. Cf. Mt. 2 6; 7 15; Lu. 2:4; 23 : : :
55. See further for number, gender and case, chapter X, vii,
VIII, IX.
in AB, OTL where other MSS. have t'l. In Barn. Ep. c. 10 we have
oTi bi Mcouo-tJs eipriKev; Vulgate has quare.^ Jannaris^ gives a
number of instances for the later Greek. And yet Blass'' calls it
tion, Trjv apxw o tl /cat XaXco v/jup; The Latin versions have quod or
quia. It is a very difficult passage at best. Trjv apxw 6 tl may be
oTTov not at all (not even Jo. 14:4), oTos in 1 Th. 1:5, and ottoTos
fashion of bv — avTov.
3. Indirect Question.^ Like 6s we have olos so used. Cf. 1 Th.
1 : In 2 Tim. 3
5, otSare oIol 'eyevr]d7]ij.ev. in- : 11 we may have an
direct question also. The Textus Receptus for Lu. 9 55 (D :
'
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175; W.-Sch., p. 236 f.; Viteau, Prop., pp.
62 ff.
6, ovx olov 5e OTL, where note the absence of re. It does not occur
in exclamations.
(g) 'OTTOio?.
1. It corresponds to the interrogative ttoTos.
Qualitative. It
dant avTo.
3. Correlative. Only one instance is correlative, Ac. 26 : 29,
TOLovTovs oiroios. Cf. qualiscumque. Note here the difference in
number.
{h) "0(709.
1. Quantitative. like olos and oroTos^
It is found in the LXX
and survives in the modem Greek.'^ There are a hundred and
eight instances in the N. T. (W. H. text) which display great
variety of usage. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 63) notes that in
Philo ocros is often equal to o'i.
frequent, as Ro. 8 : 14; Gal. 6 : 12, etc.). Cf. 6(tol — avToXs in Jo.
^ For a different explanation =ov B-q ttou kKwewr. see Blass, Gr. ofN. T. Gk.,
p. 179. ^ Hist.Gk. Gr., p. 167.
3 V. and D., Handb., p. 303. * Moulton, Prol., p. 93.
6 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 318. It is rare in anc. Gk. in this sense. K.-G.,
II, p. 439. Cf Sttws Lu. 24 20.
. :
ocrov i]de\ov, but it does not occur. In Lu. 11:8, Swo-ei aurw oacov
XPU^h the regular construction occurs. In Winer-SchmiedeP it
is stated that attraction is found in the N. T. with 6aos. I find
Lu. 9 : 5; Jo. 11 : 22; Ac. 2 : 39; 3 : 22, etc.) and with kav (Mt.
7: 12; 18 : 18; 23 Mk. 3 28, etc.).
: 3; :
1 P. 224.
^ But pap. Moulton finds LpovpGsv
in the '6<to3v (Prol., p. 93). Aa a matter —
of fact in the N. T. oaos nowhere occurs outside of the nom. and ace. except
in Lu. 11 8 and Heb. 1 4; 8 6; 10 25.
: : : :
' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 179. Blass also cites Aristoph., Vcsp., 213.
* Moulton, Prol., p. 97; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 330.
s
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 1G8. « Mayscr, Gr., p. 311.
734 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
after Uere.
(j)'O AS Relative. The use of the r forms of 6, -q, to as relative
is very old in Greek. It appears in Horner^ and is common in
Herodotus. In Arkadian 6 appears as demonstrative, as article
Of. also South Ach. (Hoffmann, Griech. Dial, pp. 257, 292-300).
Jannaris^ gives examples of it from Ionic (where very common),
Doric and Attic (inscriptions), and sporadically in the later Greek.
In truth this use of 6 /cat with double names was very common in
all comes to the same in the end. It may be a bit artificial, 6 cov
Kal 6 riv Kal 6 kpxofJLevos but the antique and vernacular relative 6
,
1
Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. 182 ff. For hist, of the matter see K.-BL, I, pp.
608 ff.
Gr.,
2
Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 353. Cf. also Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 560; Meisterh.,
1, 198 f. ^ Gr., pp. 310 ff.
p. 156; Dieterich, Byz. Arch., pp.
*
See Schmid, Der Atticismus, III, p. 338; Volker, Synt. d. griech. Pap.,
p. 6; Ramsay, Cities and Bish. of Plirygia, XIX, 429; Deiss., B. S., pp. 313 ff.;
Moulton, Prol., p. 83.
6 Unters., p. 199. Winer (W.-Th., p. 107) rejects 6 Kal as relative.
.
the article is called for here between two articles, but grammar
can do nothing with it. If fiv is treated as a substantive, that
would call for to as m to be 'Ave^-q (Eph. 4:9). Moulton^ finds
several examples in late papyri of 6 as relative, like ttju ayair-qv
TTiv TTOLeXs (B. M., p. 301), TTju x^pa Trjf mwKtv (p. 304). The only
real difficulty in Rev. 1:4, 8, etc., is the nominative use, and
that was not insuperable when the exigencies of the sentence de-
manded it. It is possi])le that this phrase had come to be a set
phrase among the Christians for the eternity and unchangeable-
ness of God. For the possible use of rts as relative see under
VIII.
(a) Ti9. The root of the interrogative rts (Thess. kI%. Cf. Ionic
Mt. 19 : 16.
3. Tts = 7rotos. An opposite tendency is seen in the use of t'ls =
TToTos.^ Hatzidakis'^ has shown examples of this idiom as early as
Euripides. As New Testament illustrations one may note tLs
ovTos h(JTLV OS (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)
: ; . : , :
Cf. Lu. 4 36. Only once'' is ttoTos used with the article (Jas.
:
4 14, and here B omits 17), while we find ris 17 <xo4)ia. (Mk. 6:2),
:
Tts 1? aWla (Ac. 10 21), etc. Sometimes tU and irolov are used to-
:
oIkov—ti t'ls tottos (Ac. 7:49). But tautology seems plain in the
last example and may be true of 1 Pet. 1 : 11, but not certainly
k/xe vTTOPoetTe. The text in Acts is not certain. The kolpt] shows
this development outside of the N. T.^ In the modern Greek "the
neuter rl is used with all 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,
etrat;
ris rjiir]p; cf. Lu. 8:9. In Ac. 21 33 rts and ri are sharply dis- :
9). Cf. Lu. 1 66; Ac. 5: 24. The phrase rl wpds iiixas (Mt. 27:
:
Epict., ii, 17. 14. Tt efxol /cat aol (Jo. 2 : 4, etc.) is in the LXX
(2 Ki. 3 : 13), but it is also a Greek idiom (ellipsis, Kiihner-
Gerth, ib.).
Some MSS. have t'ls t'l also in Lu. 19 15, but not NBDL (W. H. :
makes it clear that in the N.T. t'ls may be relative if the exigencies
call for it. Moulton finds it only in the illiterate papyri, but the
usage is supported by inscriptions^ and by the Pontic dialect to-
day.*^ Moulton^ gives from the papyri, evpop -yeopyov t'ls aurd
ekKvo-r], B.U. 822 (iii/A.D.); t'lpos eav XPi-o^v exvs, B.M. 239 (Iv/a.d.).
From the inscriptions see t'ls av KaKOJs Trotijaet, J.H.S., XIX, 299.
kydi OeXcc, dXX' ws av. But it is not much more so than Mt, 15 32 :
ijaco aoL, B.U. 948 (iv/v A.D.), as quoted by Moulton {CI. Rev., 1904,
p. 155) But even so Xenophon has this idiom, and Sophocles, Oed.
.
Col. 317, has ovk ex« tL 0cD, which looks Hke an indirect question.
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-
: :
Tai — TL XaXiyo-Tjre) may be the relative use. Cf. also Lu. 17:8.
In Ac. 13 : 25 the punctuation can (so Nestle, but not W. H.) be
made so that tI is relative, tI kfxe uiropoelre elvai, ovk dixl kyoi. It is
possible also thus to construe Lu. 19 : 3, Ibetv 'Irjaovv tIs eanv, in-
stead of taking ris kaTLv as an accusative of general reference. Cf
Mk. 1 : 24, ol8a ae ris el (Lu. 4 : 34 also). Cf. the prolepsis av m
el in Jo. 8 : 25. So Ro. 14 : 4, 10. The rhetorical questions in
Lu. 11:5; 15 4, 8; Jas. 3 13 are not, of course, instances of this
: :
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 14). It is better to follow W. H. with two separate
:
Cf. Lu. 1:18. For ^j; Hi't see Mt. 5 13. But 7rp6s ri (Jo. 13 28)= : :
(6) Ho to?.
1. Qualitative. It occurs sixteen times in direct questions. It
is still used in its original qualitative sense. Clearly this is true
in Jo. 12 : 33, arjiialvoiv TTolu) davaru) i]iJ.eXKei> a-KodvriaK.eLV (cf. 18 : 32),
Ro. 3 : 27 {ha toIov v6p.ov; tu)p tpywv;). The same thing is true
of 1 Cor. 15 : 35 {ttoIco o-dj/xan tpxovTai.;), cf. also 1 Pet. 2 : 20. In
1 Pet. 1:11 we find both r'lva and iroiov in apparent contrast.
Other possible instances are Jo. 10 : 32; kc. 7 49 : (LXX); Jas. 4 :
14. The common iv Tola k^ovala (Mt. 21 : 23; Mk. 11 28; Ac.
:
4 7, LXX,
: etc.) seems also to retain the qualitative force. Cf. also
Lu. 24 19. : The qualitative sense is clear in D toIov Tvevnaros eare
(Lu. 9 : 55), a spurious passage, however.
2. Non-qualitative. But some examples clearly have lost the
qualitative sense. In the modern Greek tolos is used regularly^=
Tts, and is the usual interrogative. Note the accent tolos. Indeed
TTola r}fjL€pa 6 Kvpios vfxcbv epx^rai there seems to be merely the force
of Tts, not quality.43 Tola 4>v\aKr\, Lu. 12 39 iroia Cf . also 24 : :
answer.
3. In Indirect Questions. It occurs sixteen times (not counting
Lu. 9 : 55) in this construction against four for ottoTos. Cf. in-
dicative in Mt. 21 : 24; 24 : 42; Jo. 12 : 33; 21 : 19, and the sub-
junctive in Lu. 5 : 19 /ii) Tolas eiaeveyKcoaLv. YloXos is found in the
like an adverb (Mt. 7: 11; 10 25, etc.). The use of Toaos xpovos :
rare also^ in the LXX (cf. Zech. 2:2), and has disappeared from
the modern Greek vernacular,
2. Indirect Questions. Both of the N. T. examples are indirect
questions. The example in Heb. 7 4 describes greatness of Mel- :
(/) Uorepo'?.
As a pronoun it has vanished from the LXX (Thackeray, Gr.,
p. 192) and from the papyri (Moulton, ProL, p. 77). The only
example in the N. T. (cf. LXX, Thackeray, p. 192) is in an alter-
native indirect question as the conjunction irbrepov (Jo. 7:17).
Cf. Latin utrum—an. Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 176) cites Herm.,
Sim., ix, 28. 4.
IX. Indefinite Pronouns (dirro)vi)[JLLaL dopto-Toi).
(a) Th.
1. The Accent. Jannaris'' calls it "irrational" to accent the
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 tIs the interrogative.
2. Relation to tLs. Tlic same connection is seen in the Latin
1 Thackeray, Gr., p. 192. » Moulton, Prol., p. 95.
2 II). * Ui.st. Gk. Gr., p. 1G3.
742 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
kav TLS vjuv eU-Q tl (note both examples like tlvos tl Lu. 19 8; cf. :
Cor. 9 : 22. In Homer tls was sometimes " public opinion, the
man in the street" (Gladstone, quoted in Thompson's Syntax, p.
75). This idiom very nearly represented by elirev 8e tls k tov
is
TOV TLS, the TLS is really quite definite in the writer's mind, though
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 :
rather the substantive use of tl. But in TvcfKos tls, Lu. 18 : 35,
both are adjectives. Cf. oXkos tls (Lu. 22 : 59) and erepos tls
(Ac. 27:1).
7. As Predicate. Here rts may be emphatic = 'somebody in
particular/ as Ac. 5 : 36, Xe7coj^ dvai TLva iavTov (cf. 8:9). See also
Gal. 2 : 6, dTro to^vwhere note difference between
boKovvTwv dvai tl,
senses of tls. But the predicate may have the other meaning of
TL ('anyone,' 'anything'). So 1 Cor. 3 7; 10 19; Gal. 6: 15. In : :
9. As
Antecedent. In Mt. 16 28 TLvti is the antecedent of :
oLTLves, but here o'lTLves is more definite than ot would have been.
1 W.-Sch., p. 242.
2 W.-M., p. 212 f.; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 178.
» Moulton in W.-M., p. 213. * Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 178.
—
diry, 1 Cor. 1:15 (cf. Eph. 2:9), we may not really have /jl-^tls.
uri TLPa (2 Cor. 12 : 17) and fxrjri. in the next verse. The anacolu-
thon with rtra here is noticeable.
12. Indeclinable tl. The use of tls with (xirXa.'yxvo. Kal oIktlpijloI
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 geni-
tives, with substantives, was treated at the close of the chapter on
Adjectives. For els tls see tls. For els els as alternative pro- —
noun see later, and for els — ov
and ov8ds (n-qSeis) see Negative
Pronouns under xi.
(c) Ha?
= any one' no matter who, anything' no matter what.
' '
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
Article.
(d) 'O Aelva. This rare pronoun was current chiefly in colloquial
speech (Jannaris, Hist. Gk. It survives in the modern
Gr., p. 166).
Greek (Thumb, means "Mr. So-and-So." It occurs
p. 98). It
only once in the N. T., -n-pos top Selpa, Mt. 26 18. :
has taken its place. It continues in the later Greek,^ but Thumb
1 Hatz., Einl., p. 207; W.-Sch., p. 243. » Thompson, Synt., p. 77.
2 ProL, p. 97. 6 Moulton, ProL, p. 57.
3 lb. « Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 320.
PRONOUNS ('ANTflNTMIAl) 745
The other four examples have the article before the pronoun,
like ot 6.ix4>bTepoL, Eph. 2 18. It is possible, even probable, that
:
16 the seven sons of Sceva are alluded to. A corruption of the text
is possible (cf. the Bezan text for 19 16), but it is hardly neces-
:
eKarepos in P.Oxy. 905 (a.d. 170), irpos to eKarepov fxepos. But in the
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
: :
(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
fashion. Moulton {CI. Rev., 1901, p. 440) cites p.h — rrjs /jllSls rrjs
8' aXXTjs G. H. 23'' (ii/B.c); 8vo, rbv ixev eva — Kal top aXKov B.U. 456
(iv/A.D.). Moulton** explains the existence of mi ttjv aXX-qv {cnaybva)
in Lu. 6 : 29 as a failure on Luke's part to correct his source, a
like failure appearing in Mt. 5 : 39, unless that was his source.
But the matter goes much further than that. In Mt. 12 : 13
riaWrj refers to the other hand (x^ip). In Jo. 19 : 32 note rod
wpoiTov — KOL Tov oXXov.^ Cf. also Jo. 18 : 16; 20 : 3 f. In Jo. 5 32 :
eyd) and aXXos are contrasted. So Mt. 25 16, to. irevre ToXavra :
—
aXXa TrevTe, for which Blass^ finds "complete illustration in classi-
1 W.-Sch., p. 246 f. * Prol., p. 79.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 179. ^ W.-Sch., p. 245.
3 lb., p. 180. 6 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 180.
PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl) 747
5. The Use o/ctXXos aX\o = 'One One Thing, One Another.' This
is classical and is illustrated in Ac. 19 32; 21 34. In Ac. 2 12, : : :
aXXot) airoaroXoL. Blass^ cites also Ac. 2 : 14, Ilerpos avv tols (sc.
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
be true of 2 Cor. 11 4, aWov 'Irjaovv rvevpa erepov
: ei'a77€Xtoj' — —
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 :
by him.
9. =' Different.' Besides, it is not to be forgotten that in
ancient Greek dXXoj itself was used for 'different kind.' Thomp-
son {Syntax, p. 76) cites dXXa twu btKaloiv from Xen., Mem., IV, 4. 25.
Cf. also ctXXd in the sense of 'but.' Cf. dXXd dXXr? in 1 Cor. 15 : 39.
» lb. - lb., p. 318.
748 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Indeed in 1 Cor. 15 : 39, 41, ciXXtj nh — aXXrj 5e, it is expressly-
stated that the glory is not
In verse 40 hepa occurs.rj avri].
irkpav Kiop.ir]v, Ac. 20 : 15 rf} erepa. Cf. also Mt. 10 : 23. See* also,
Tov 'irepov in Ro. 2:1; 13 :
8= 'neighbour.'
4. =' Different.^ The sense of 'different' grows naturally out
of the notion of duality. The two things happen just to be dif-
ferent. Cf. Latin alius The word itself does not
and alienus.
mean but merely 'one other,' a second of two. It does
'different,'
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. Thomp-
son-* suggests that this sense may
be "an euphemism for /ca/cos."
The N. T. examples are rather numerous.
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. :
in 1 Cor. 12 8-10 erepoj occurs in the third and the eighth places.
:
We are not surprised then to learn that the papyri furnish plenty
of examples wheremore than two.^ Blass indeed
erepos refers to
considers this extension not correct, and Moulton seems surprised
that Luke should change the correct dXXos (Mk. 4 5-8; Mt. :
in this laxity as to erepos. Cf. ttoXXo, /cat erepa in Lu. 3 18. Moul- :
ton (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.
440) is only called for in that case.
6. In Contrast. "Erepos may also be used in contrast for '
the
one,' 'the other.' So 1 Cor. 15:40, erepa p.'ev— erepa be. It is
common in contrasts with other pronouns. Thus with ets in
Mt. 6:24; 6 els in Lu. 7:41; Lu. 17:34 ff.; with rts, Lu. 11:15 f.;
with 6 jx'ev, Lu. 8 5 f.; with ot nkv and aXXot, Mt. 16 14. But
: :
we have oWhepos.
(e) Other Antithetic Pronouns. For els eh (Mk. 10 37), — :
wepa /cat wepa (2 Cor. 4 16; cf. Heb. ?3i'^T ?2ii). Cf. also els Kal
:
els (Mt. 20 : 21; 24 : 40 f.; 27: 38, etc.); els 5e erepos, Lu. 7: 41.
For els — Kal els — Kal ets see Mk. 9:5= Mt. 17 : 4 = Lu. 9 : 33.
This threefold repetition of els is rhetorical.^ The distributive
use of ets with Kara and dj'd (ev Kad' h, els Kad' els, ava els) was
treated under Numeral Adjectives.
XI. Negative Pronouns (dvTo>vu|JL(ai dpvriTiKaC).
(a) OuSet?.
1. History. Note this accent rather than ovdels. Ovdels is sup-
planted in modern Greek vernacular by Kapeis, but ovdev survives
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., p. 170. But see Schwyzer, Perg. Inschr., p. 114, for idea
that the change is due to r and 5 being pronounced aUke.
3 Att. Inschr., p. 259.
* Gr., pp. 58 ff.
B
Thumb, HeUen., p. 14; Mayser, Gr., p. 180 f. « Thack., Gr., p. 60.
PRONOUNS ('ANTflNTMIAl) 751
deed oWeis was a sort of fashion (Moulton, CI. Rev., Mar., 1910,
p. 53) that 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
VII, III, 2.
17, ovbh xpetaj' exo), the neuter is not to be construed with xpetai'.
4. Ovbl tis. This is, of course, more emphatic than ovbds. The
usage appears often in Xenophon, Demosthenes and other clas-
sic writers, the LXX
and the Atticists.^ For examples in the
N. T. see Mt. 27 : 14; Jo. 1 : 3; Ac. 4 32; Ro. 3 10. The same
: :
principle appears in ovk eaTLv ecos ivos, Ro. 3 12 (Ps. 14 1, 3). Cf. : :
in the text of the N. T., Ac. 27 33. The use of fMr]8h cbv, Gal. 6 3, : :
Cf. Jo. 6 : 12, 'iva /JLT] TL aToK-qraL. But note iJLr]Tiye, 1 Cor. 6 : 3.
The use of rts with the conjunction /xt] is not infrequent (Mk. 13 : 5)
and with the negative adverb /xi] also (Jo. 3:3, 5, etc.). So we
have, contrary to the usual classic idiom, ov — ns, fxi] — tls.^ The
» W.-Sch., p. 248; Schmid, Atticismus, II, p. 137 f.
1 Cor. 4:5; 6 12 argues for the same thing where fir] tls and
:
Jesus did not mean to say that 'no one' who thus addressed him
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 :
11. Cf. Ac. 10 :41; Ro. 9:6; 10 : 16. But my friend, Mr. H.
Scott, notes that in Ro. 10 : 16 and 1 Cor. 15 39 ov iras can :
well mean 'no,' and that in 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 : 26.
2. Ou — TTtts. Here we have a different situation. The nega-
tive goes With, the verb, A negative statement is made as to
Tras. The same as if ovbeis had been used with an
result is the
affirmative verb. 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,'
ov8eiroT€ —
irdv. Cf. ov8e irdv Rev. 7 16; 9 4. It is true that this: :
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.
:
1 W.-M., p. 215.
2 Moulton, Pro!., p. 246. Cf. CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, p. 442; Apr., 1904,
p. 155.
PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl) 753
6. nSs —
ixi] falls into the same category. Cf. Jo. 3 16; 6 39; : :
1 W.-M., p. 215.
.
CHAPTER XVI
THE ARTICLE (TO 'APGPON)
8 Cf. Thumb, Handb., pp. 40 ff.; Jebb. in V. and D.'s Handb., p. 193 f.
9 Moulton, Prol., p. 80 f
1" Synt. d. griech. Pap., pp. 5 ff. " Lang, of the N. T., p. 45.
754
THE ARTICLE (tO "APGPOn) 755
is the same form as the demonstrative 6, 17, t6. Indeed the Ger-
man der is used as demonstrative, article, relative. So English
the is related to the demonstrative that (also relative). Clyde
{Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls the article a "mere enfeeblement"
of the demonstrative. 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, how-
ever, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and
the article. The article always retained something of the demon-
strative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). It is an
find the reason for the use of the article. In Mt. 13 : 55, 6 rod
tUtovos vlos, it is the son of the (well known to us) carpenter. In
1 Cor. 4:56 'iiraLuos means the praise due to each one. Cf . 6
Tr\v \vxv'mv, the article singles out the bushel, the lamp-
ixbhiov,
virrjpeTji, the roll was the usual one and the attendant was there at
his place. So in Jo. 13 : 5, /3dXXei vScop eis tov vLTnrjpa, the basin was
there in the room. The article in Jo. 7 : 17, '^voiatrai irepl ttjs
amples the vocative often has the article. .Cf. Col. 3 18ff. A :
(the Beatitudes), ot tttuxoL, etc. Cf. tovs (to4)ovs, to. aaOevij, etc.,
the papyri examples like ywri /cat vloi, fj ywq koI oi vloi, yvuij /cat ot
(j)6(3os is first without the article, then is repeated with the article,
come in and illustrate the three uses of the article. Note also the
neat classic idiom rovs — woLovvras. For the article with abstract
nouns see further Gildersleeve, Sijntax, pp. 257 ff.
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,
we in English do not need the article, even if, as is unlikely, the
angel has the notion of "the special God." Cf. also Jo. 1:1.
In Mt. 23 : 2, ot ypafxnareLs Kai ol 4>aptcratot, the two classes are
THE ARTICLE (tO "APGPOn) 759
der of the word rather than the natural feminine. Cf. also 6 aixrjv
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 a mark of familiar style, but Plato uses it for anaphora
or for contrast. In some sections it is common to use the
article with titles, as The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South
Germany der is used with the name alone."^
It 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
1 W.-Th., p. 113.
::
15 1 f.; Ro. 9 13; Heb. 11 17. The use of t6v Bapa^jSav in Lu.
: : :
1 W.-Th., p. 112.
2 lb. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 153.
» See further W.-Sch., p. 153.
* Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 152.
;
parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr.
Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes 6 here as rela-
d. griech.
tive. See 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
:
long line of genitives have rod including rod Oeov. Among the
ancient writers 6 Oeos was used of the god of absolute religion in
distinction from the mythological 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
:
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. 'les Artik. boi Personenn. in Xen.
Anabasis, p. 6. 2 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 179.
* Cf Schmidt, De Articulo in nominibus propriis apiid Att. scriptorcs (1S90)
.
K.-G., 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.
762 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
apTOVS /cat b\papia, but inverse 11 tov% aprovs /cat €K tuv dx^ap'iMV. —
See Lu. 9 13. Cf. also vScop in 4 10 and to v8cop in verse 11. So
: :
TO. ftfdwa in verse 26. Cf. Ac. 9 :4, 7; 9 : 11, 17; Jas. 2 : 2, 3;
Rev. 15 In Jo. 4 43, rds 8vo wepas, the article refers to
: 1, 6. :
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
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
2.
both numbers. Cf. 6 a7tos (Mk. 1 24), ttj eprifxui (Mt. 3:2), to :
27, at eTOL/jLOL in Mt. 25 : 10, etc. All these examples are obvious
enough. The ellipsis is simple and usually supplied from the con-
text. The three uses of the article occur with the adjective alone.
The individual use appears in such examples as 6 ayios rod deov
(Jo. 6 : 69), 6 dUatos (Ac. 22 : 14), 6 aKtidtvos (1 Jo. 5 : 20), 6 Trovrjpos
(1 Jo. 5 : 18), TO TToXv and to oKlyov (2 Cor. 8 : 15), to ayadov
aov (Phil. 14), to abbvaTOV tov vo^ov (Ro. 8:3), ttiv ^qpav (Mt.
23 : 15), toZs aylots (Ph. 1 : 1), h toXs eTovpavioLs (Eph. 1:3). The
generic or representative (class from class) is very common also,
more frequent indeed. So 6 St/catos (1 Pet. 4 : 18), tov ayadov (Ro.
5:7), TOV TTTCioxov (Jas. 2:6), tovs irTOixovs (2 5), ol ifKovaioL (5:1). :
So rd KaKa and to. ayada (Ro. 3 8), to ayadov (Lu. 6 45). Cf. in
: :
particular Ro. 12 : 21 vtto tov KaKov, kv rcS ayad<^ to KaKov. Cf. also
Ro. 13: 3 f., TO kyadbv (Gal. 6 : 10), to Uavov (Ac. 17: 9), to Ka\6v
(2 13:7), to ayiov (Mt. 7:6), rd opia (Mt. 19:1), tCjv
Cor.
cTToplnoov 23). The use of the neuter singular with the
(Mk. 2 :
TOV KocTfiov — TO. aadevT] tov KoafjLov (1 Cor.'l : 27 f.). See further
Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262.
3. The Article not Necessary with the Adjective. Blass,* who
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 155.
2 Cf. Schmid, Atticismus, IV, p. 608.
» Deiss., B. S., p. 259. " Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 156.
.
(Text. Rec, Mt. 6:4), yet ds (jiavepdv kXdelv prevails (Mk. 4 : 22;
Lu. 8 : 17), since the thing is not yet in existence. But it is a
rather fine point, since both kv kpvttui (Jo. 7 : 4, 10) and els KpvwTrjp
(a subst. Lu. 11 : 33) occur as well as kv re? ^avepw (Mt. 6 :
4,
Text. Rec). In Ro. 2 : 28 ev tc3 4>avepco is genuine. In Jas. 4 :
the predicate use see Jo. 10 : 12. The participle with the article
is common without the substantive, as ol irevdovvTes (Mt. 5:4).
(TTrelpwp (Mt. 13 3). The article with the participle is very com-
:
8 : 33), Ac. 20 : 22 to. avmvTTjaouTa. Cf. Is. 1:31, ovk earai 6 afikaoiv.
More of this when the Participle is reached (ch. XX). For the
repeated article see r^ xo-P'-t'- tv ^odtlcji (1 Cor. 1:4). See further
VI, Position ^^^th Attributives.
(d) With the Infinitive. This idiom is so common that it
(Mt. 20 : 23), the accusative to \a\tiv (1 Cor. 14 : 39; cf. Ac. 25 : 11),
the genitive eXxts xacra tov aw^eadai (Ac. 27 : 20; cf. Lu. 24 : 29),
the ablative kKpaTovvTo tov jiri kinyvuvaL (Lu. 24 : 16; cf. 2 Cor. 1 :
8), the locative h tw aweipeLu (Mt. 13 4), the instrumental to) fx-n :
€vpeiv (2 Cor. 2 : 13). The dative does not occur in the N. T. with
the article, but see deaaaadai (Mt. 11 : 7). For the articular infin-
itive with prepositions see Mk. 5:4; 14:28, etc. The article is
cQtv and to. oiriaco (Ph. 3 13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb. :
There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like 6 eaco av-
dpwiros (Eph. 3: 16), 6 e^w avdpcjoiros (2 Cor. 4 : 16), 6 vvv Kaipos (Ro.
3 : 26). Clyde ^ compares to vvv with Scotch "the noo."
(/) With Prepositional Phrases. ^ Cf. ol kiro ttjs '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; cf. Ro. 1: 15), to rard aapKa (Ro. 9: 5), to e^ v^xu}v (12:
18), TO ava drjvapLov (Mt. 20: 10, W. H. text), ol wepl UavXov (Ac.
13:13, classic idiom), oi (jut' avTov (Mk. 1:36), rots kv Tfj oMa
(Mt. 5 : 15), TO. /card tov vo/jlov (Lu. 2 : 39), to. kv rots ovpavols and
TO. eirl TTJS 7775 (Eph. 1 : 10), T-qv ets TvavTas tovs ayiovs (1 : 15), to
Kad' eh (Ro. 12 : 5), 6 'ev re? (jyavepu, (2 : 28 f.), etc. In Ac. 18 : 15
note vo^ov tov Kad' v/jLCis, where the article occurs with the preposi-
tional phrase, but not with the substantive. On 01 wepl = a man
and his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264.
ifKrialov cbs aeavTov (Gal. 5 14), to yap Oi) fxoLx^vaeis and 'ev rco :
22 : 2 'e^r]Tovv 22 4 (Tvve\a\r]aev to
TO ttcos aveXcoaiv, : ttcos Tvapa8(Jo,
Kaiaapos and rd tov deov (Lu. 20:25), rd ttjs avpiov (marg. W. H.,
Jas. 4:14), rd tov Kbap.ov (1 Cor. 7:33), rd ttjs aapKos and rd tov
TTPevfiaTos (Ro. 8: 5), rd ttjj elprivr]s (14:19), etc. One may note also
here h toIs tov iraTpos fxov (Lu. 2 : 49) for 'house of my Father.'
Cf. h Tots KXav8{iov), P.Oxy. 523 (ii/A.D.). See eis to. Uta and ol
Ulol (Jo. 1: 11). The neuter singular has an abstract use like to
rrjs aXrjdovs irapOLfxias (2 Pet. 2:22), to ttjs avKrjs (Mt. 21:21),
(i) Nouns in the Predicate. These may have the article
also. As already explained, the article is not essential to speech.
It however, "invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g.
is,
deos 6 \6yos."^
Tjv As a rule the predicate is without the article,
even when the subject uses it. Cf. 6700 audpcciros djii (Lu. 7:8).
This is in strict accord with the ancient idiom.^ Gildersleeve {Syn-
tax, p. 324) notes that the predicate is usually something new and
therefore the article is not much used except in convertible prop-
ositions.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.
The then definite and distributed, the predicate indefi-
article is
nite The word with the article is then the
and undistributed.
subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1 1, Oeos rjv 6 \6yos, :
the subject is perfectly clear. Cf. 6 Xoyos aap^ tykvero (Jo. 1 : 14).
It is true also that 6 deb^ rju 6 X670S (convertible terms) would have
been Sabellianism.^ See also 6 9e6s ayair-q eariv (1 Jo. 4 : 16). "God"
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 kaTLv (Jo. 17: 17), 6 po/jlos d/xaprm;
(Ro. 7:7). The absence of the article here ison purpose and
essential to the true idea. Cf. also avdpoiiroKrbvos and ^pevar-qs (Jo. 8 :
44). In Eph. 5 : 23, avi^p karLP KecpaXr], the context makes it clear
(W. H. marg. aprip KecpaXr] eoTLp) that apijp is subject even without the
6X0S is not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the
article is quite frequent with the predicate in the N. T. and in
strict accord with old usage. It is not mere haphazard, however,
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
the noun (as well known or prominent) or to the fact that subject
and predicate are identical.^ The words that are identical are
convertible as in the older idiom.'* If he had added what 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
subject. But even here Moulton's rule of identity and converti-
bility apply. The overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedcl's many sub-
divisions here is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when
the article occurs with subject (or the subject is a personal pro-
noun or proper name) and predicate, both are definite, treated
as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable. The usage
applies to substantives, adjectives and participles indifferently.
Cf. 6 Xvxvos Tov crwp.aTbs earip 6 ocpdakpos (Mt. 6 : 22), vpels ecrre to
aXas TTJs yrjs (Mt. 5 : 13), 6 5e aypos eanp 6 kogjjlos (13 : 38), av el 6
XpicTTOs (16 : 16), els kaTLP 6 ayados (19 : 17), ris apa earlp 6 TrtoTos
5oDXos (24 : 45), tovto earip to aoipa pov, tovto kaTip to alpa pov (26 : 26,
28), (TV el 6 /JacrtXeus (27: 11), av el 6 vlos pov (Mk. 1 : 11), ovx ovtos
kaTLP 6 TeKTWP (6 : 3), ovtos ecTTLP 6 Kk-qpopopos (12 : 7), ov yap eare
vpels oi XaXowres (13 : 11), 17 fcoi) rjv to cf)cos (Jo. 1:4), 6 tv po4>i]Tris
€70? elpi rj 6vpa (10 : 7), eyco elpi. 6 iroLprjp (10 : 11), eych eipi rj apaaTaais
Kol ri fco97 (11 : 25, note both articles), 670; elpi rj d86s Kal rj akqdeia /cat
* See per contra, STmcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 48. ^ W.-M., p. 142.
3 Cf. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 522; Middleton, Gk. Art., p. 54.
^ Thompson, Synt., p. 46. b
p. 159,
THE ARTICLE (tO "APGPON) 769
and TTj eaxaTT] rj/jLepa, Jo. 6 : 39. For the common predicate accu-
sative see chapter XI (Cases), vii, (i). In the N. T. most examples
are anarthrous (Jo. 5:11; 15 : 15), and note 1 Cor. 4 9 rjuds tovs :
Tov eviavTov (Heb. 9:7), bis tov aa^^aTov (Lu. 18 12), eTTciKLs :
TTJs rjnepas (Lu. 17:4). This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom fa-
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.<i)6Tepa to. irXola (Lu. 5 7), and several times ol aiJL<l)6- :
TepoL (Eph. 2 18), to. ap.4)bTepa (2 14). Cf. TOVS bvo in Eph. 2 15.
: :
:
for instance, air€vl\}/aTO rds x^tpas (Mt. 27: 24; cf. Lu. 13: 13). In
Mt. 4 : 20 we have to. dUTva, while in verse 21 we find to. St/crua
avTuv. Cf. KaTeaetae rfj x^tpt (Ac. 21 : 40; cf. Mk. 7 : 32), top vlov tov
fMOVoyevrj (Jo. 3 : 16), toj pol dovKtvo: (Ro. 7: 25), rod irarpos (1 Cor.
5:1), TItov Kal TOP a8e\(j)6p (2 Cor. 12 : 18; cf. also 8 : 18). ^ Cf.
So TO. eiia ircLPTa aa karip Kol to. (xd ejud (Jo. 17 : 10) rjfxeTepos (Ac.
2:11) and i^xkTepos (Jo. 7:6; cf. Lu. 6 : 20). The article is fre-
the article is customary, as in ets r-qp I8iap ttoKlp (Mt. 9:1). This
construction is very common in the N. T. A few times we meet
idios without the article, as in tStots bypuiploLs (1 Cor. 9:7), ycatpoTs
Pronouns.
(0) With Demonstratives. The essential facts have been al-
1 Cf. A. Souter, art. Luke, Hastings' D.C.G., who takes tov = ' his,' i.e.
18 16).
: ToioOtos, on the other hand, usually appears with the
article and in the attributive position, as in tuiv tolovto:v TraL8io)u
(p) With "OXo?, Ha? ("ATra?). "ATras is found chiefly in Luke and
Acts. The MSS. vary greatly between aTras and Tras. The text
of W. H. now has ttSs in the margin (Lu. 9 : 15), now axas (15 : 13).
Blass^ fails to find any satisfactory rule for the use of axas, the
Attic distinction of dTras after a consonant and iras after a vowel
not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general airas does occur (when
used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6 32). "ATras, when used :
where we have either the order 6 Xaos airas (Lu. 19 48) or avavTa :
TOP \a6v (Lu. 3 :21). If ovtos also is used, we have rriv k^ovaiav
avOpwTTcov (2 Cor. 4 :2), irdv bkvbpov (Mt. 3 : 10), etc. Blass^ dis-
tinguishes between cKacrros = ' each individual' and Tras='any one
you please.'
Has 6= all.' So iraaa 17 ttoXis (Mt. 8 34)
'
= all the city' {die game : '
Stadt)^ This is the order and it is very common. Cf. irdaav t^iv
1 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 161. Cf. Diels, Gott. Gel.-Anz., 1894, pp. 298 ff.
yrjv (Mt. 27: 45), Tavrl tQ o'lkco (Ac. 10 2). Even without the ar- :
and irdaav ttjv yvcoatv (1 Cor. 13 2). With the abstract word :
(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 :
See also Col. 1 9 ff. and Trdaav xo-po-v (Jas. 1:2). Other examples
:
separate portions are referred to. Cf. Jo. 19:37, hkpa ypa(f)r}.
^'Xkirwv (5 : 28), Tras 6 airokxiwv (5 : 32), ttSs 6 alTCnv (7:8), etc. But
sometimes we find ttSs without the article as in ttovtos olkovoutos
(Mt. 13 19), iravTl b4>d\ovTL (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read
:
Tc3. See iravTl rw TrLarevovTi (Ro. 1 16). The abstract neuter tSlv :
'the entire law,' 'the whole law.' It was never so common a con-
struction in the ancient Greek ^ as ttSs 6.
(Ac. 17 : 21). Cf. iravTes TouSatot (26 : 4). But the article is absent
elsewhere also, as in TavTes kpyaTaL dSt/ctas (Lu. 13 : 27), Tavras
avdpojTovs (Ac. 22 : 15; cf. Ro. 5: 12, 18), iraaLv ayadols (Gal. 6:6;
cf. iraaLv roTs (Eph. 3:8), iravTes ayyeXoL
in 3 : 10), ttclvtuv aylcov
sical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3 8 and 2 Pet. 3 16, : :
(2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ras TroXets
Trao-as (Mt. 9 35). Cf. 2 Cor. 13 12. Has may be repeated with
: :
separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see
Mt. 8 : 16. A few examples of the attributive position are found,
like ol iravTes avbpes (Ac. 19 7)= 'the total number of the men,' as
:
in the ancient idiom. See, also, at TrScrai 4/vxa.i (Ac. 27 37), roys avv
:
avToXs rraPTas aylovs (Ro. 16 : 15), ot avv ep.ol iraPTes a5eX4)ol (Gal.
1:2), Toys TravTas was (2 Cor. 5 : 10). The last example =' we the
whole number of us.' Cf. Ac. 21 21. :
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.
Still more common is to. raPTa for 'the sum of things,' 'the all.'
dpo^TTov vyLT], whole man sound.' ^ Cf. Lu. 5: 5; Ac. 28: 30. In
'a
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
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 : 10. The word may be
repeated several times (Mt. 22 :37; Mk. 12 30, 33). It occurs :
1 Cor. 10 17), : to. iroWa (Ro. 15 22). With the substantive added
:
note vdcLTuv ToXkuv (Rev. 17: 1), at ap-apTlai at TroXXat (Lu. 7:47),
TO. TToXXd ypdniiaTa (Ac. 26:24). This is all in harmony with
classic idiom^ as well as the frequent use of iroXvs without the ar-
ticle in an indefinite sense. But in 6 oxXos iroXvs (Jo. 12 9, 12) :
37. 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
: : :
repeated in the case of rfjutcrus. Cf. tcos rifxlcrovs ttjs /Jao-tXctas (Mk.
6 : 23), wLav Kaipov (Rev. 12 : 14). Cf. w'-<^v alone (Rev. 11 : 9, 11).
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)
: : :
TrXotof fieaov Ttjs daXaaffrjs (Mt. 14 : 24, marg. W. H.), where fxeaov
Mapta (Mt. 28 : 1). The order 6 pa^Tyri^s 6 aXXos occurs (Jo. 18 : 16).
Cf. also TOV aWov TOV (jvp(XTavpw6epTos (Jo. 19 : 32) where the ar-
ticle is repeated, like rots XoittoTs tois, etc. (Rev. 2 :24). Blass*
says that no Attic writer would have said rats erepaLs iro\e(TLv=
(Lu. 9 36) : . So (jlopo: OeQ (Ro. 16 27 : ; 1 Tim. 1:17). But the pred-
icate use occurs also. So Mt. 12 : 4 tols lepevat ij.6vols; (24 : 36) 6
Trarrip p.bvo% (XBD); }xbvoL ol iJ,adr]Tai (Jo. 6 : 22) ;
p.6vos 6 apxif^p^vs
as in Tov novov deov (Jo. 5 : 44). Cf. Jo. 17: 3; 1 Tim. 6 15 f.; :
being attributive.
1. The Normal Position of the Adjective. It is between the
article and the substantive, as in to koXov opoixa (Jas. 2:7), 6
d7a06s avdpcx)Tos (Mt. 12 : 35), to kjxbv ovofjLa (18: 20). In this normal
attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the
substantive.^ Cf. correct text in Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3; 1 Jo. 5:
20. So TTJ vycaLvovari StSaaKaXia (1 Tim. 1: 10). There must be a
special reason for the other construction.^
2. The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the
order ^ 6irotfiriv 6 koXSs (Jo. 10 11) both substantive and adjective
:
^ In Jas. 3 : 7, rg (pmei rfj dvepoiwifji, the repeated article makes for greater
clearness.
:
17: 5), TTiv yrjp rriv ayadrfV (Lu. 8 : 8), to 0ws to akriOivov (Jo. 1 : 9),
(15 : 1), TO irvtvua to Trovqpbv (Ac. 19 : 15). Cf. also Mt. 6 : G; Lu.
7 :47; Jo. 6 : 13; 1 Cor. 12 Eph. 6 13; Col. : 31; 2 Cor. 6 : 7; :
with 6 b-)(\os iroXvs above (Jo. 12 9).^ Perhaps both ayiop and :
of the article in Heb. 11: 12; Rev. 3: 14; 17: 1; 21:9. In Rev.
1 5 note four articles,
: 6 ixapTvs 6 ttio-tos, 6 ttpcototokos — Kai 6
idiom see Gildersleeve, Sijntax, pp. 328 ff. In Ph.l 29, vplv exa- :
pladr] TO vT^p XpiffTov, the two infinitives following, each with to,
8). But ordinarily the one article is sufficient for any number of
eXetvos /cat tttcoxos Kal TVcjyXos Kal yufxpos (Rev. 3 : 17). In Mt. 24 :
45, 6 TTtcTTos 5oOXos /cat 4)pbvLp.os, the /cat carries over the force of
8 18; 1 Cor. 12 22; 1 Pet. 1 13. On the other hand (cf. 5),
: : :
all else may come between the article and the participle, as in
1 Pet. 1 : 10, ot — Trpo(f)riTevaavTes. A long clause (including a rela-
tive clause) may come between the article and the participle, as in
Ro. 16 : 17, Tovs — iroiovPTas.
Once more, the participle may come
in the midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, 6 dra- —
yevvrjaas, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1 3. Either :
12; 1 Jo. 5:13 (vplp — rots tt.); 1 Cor. 8:10. The pronoun
may not be expressed outside of the verb, as in exc^fiev ol KaTacfiv-
yoPTts (Heb. 6 18; cf. 4 3). Cf., on the other hand, ly/xeTs,
: : 6.Top4>a-
The presence of the article with the participle here would radically
change the sense. The same article may be used with several par-
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 243.
^
(6) With Genitives. From the nature of the case the genitive
as the genus-case is usually attributive. In general the construc-
tion in the N. T. follows the ancient idiom.
1. The Position between the Article and the Substantive. This
is common enough, and especially so in 1 and 2 Peter. So tov 17
peated, TO TTJs So^rys /cat to tov deov irvevixa. See also Jo. 1 : 40,
(Jo. 20 : 19), Ti?s dTttTnjs TOV deov (Ro. 8 : 39). Cf. 2 Cor. 4 :
4; Ro.
8 : 2; 1 Th. 1 : 3. Sometimes the two types are combined, thus
7/ eTrlyeLOS riiJLUP ot/cta tov cktjvovs (2 Cor. 5:1), ttjs tQiv aivoaToKwv
vfiuiv evTo'\7]s TOV Kvpiov /cat ctcottjpos (2 Pet. 3:2). The personal pro-
nouns illustrate either order except that fiov is nearly always out-
side (but see tuv iraTpLKwv ixov irapabbaewv, Gal. 1 : 14, and ev txi
(Jo. 20 : 28) or p-ov tovs 6<t)da\povs (Jo. 9:11). We find rrj avTov
xa.pi.Ti. (Ro. 3 : 24) and tov \abv avTov (Mt. 1 21) and avTov ev Tfj:
aya-K-Q (Jo. 15:10. Cf. 9:6; 11:32), T-qv eavTov avXrjv (Lu. 11 :
21) and ttiv aapKa eavTov (Gal. 6:8), ttiv yeveav Tr\v eavTOV (Lu. 16 :
8) and eavTwv to. lp.aTia (Mt. 21 : 8). Cf. also to ovopa oov (Mt.
6 : 9), 17 be^ib. aov xetp (Mt. 5 : 30; but not 5 : 29. Cf. also 1 Tim.
5:23), (TOV TTIV Ke(t)a\riv (Mt. 6: 17), TOV apTOV rip.oiV (6 : 11), vfiuv
tov epyov (1 Th. 1:3), t^v vijlcov ayairr]v (Col. 1:8), etc. With the
partitive the usual (but see Jo. 6 : 70; 9 : 16, 40) position is this:
article occurs with both or is absent from both.^ But note (H.
Scott) that (1) the genitive may be anarthrous if it 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
:
TTvevfiaTOs ttjs fcorjs (8: 2), ttip eKevdeplav tjjs So^tjs tcov TeKvoiv tov deov
(8 : 21), Tr]v Scopeav tov ayiov Tvev/jtaTOs (Ac. 2 : 38), )3tj8Xos yevecrecos
'Irjaov XpidTov (Mt. 1:1). Cf. 1 Th. 1:3; Rev. 1:1. These ex-
amples 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). Note also deov iraTpds rjixoov (Eph. 1 : 2) and 6 Beds
Kal iroLTTip Tov Kvpiov r)ixQiv (1:3). Cf. also to epyop Kvpiov (Ph. 2 : 30),
phrase kv de^tq. tov dead (Ro. 8 34; cf. Heb. 1:3), but note tv :
de^Lq. TOV deov (Ac. 2 33). In general, where the word without the
:
1, apxh TOV evayyeXlov 'Irjaov XpicfTov, the notion may be the same,
y28a 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. :
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
:
may be either 'the son of man' or 'a son of man.' Cf. a simi-
lar ambiguity in the Aramaic harnasha. The point may become
very fine indeed. 6 XpiaTos and Ke(})aKri
Cf. iravTos av8pds -q /ce-^aX?)
k<TTiP KecpoKij Ttjs 7v;'at/c6s ws Kal d XpicxTds Ke4>akyi rrjs eKKkrjcrias (Eph.
5:23). Hence the matter is not to be stressed here, as another
1 W.-M., footnote, p. 146.
.
rrjs yvvaLKOs, Ke4>a\rj rrjs eKKKrjaias, aooTrip rod crw/xaTos). See "VIII, (j).
Cf. ^kvoL T<Jov hadr]K(j:v r^s e7ra77eXtas (Eph. 2 : 12). So topTr] tcov
1). Cf. Ac. 6:1. Cf. ^aTTTLdixa /JLeraPolas els a(f)eaLv afxapTLuv (Mk.
1:4) and els a4>eaLV Tociv ap-apTLijiV vp-Uiv (Ac. 2:38), els KOivwvlav tov
vlov (1 Cor. 1:9), prepositional phrase. But enough of a some-
what thorny subject.^
(c) With Adjuncts or Adverbs. In general the same usage
appHes to adjuncts as to adjectives.
1. Between the Article and the Noun. Thus ai^co KXijaLs (Ph. 17
3 14), 17 Kar' eKkoyijv irpodeaLs (Ro. 9 11), 17 Trap' epov 8La9r]Kr) (11 27),
: : :
Ph. 3 : 4; Tim.
9; Col. 11 14; Rev. 5 5; 11 2, 19, etc.
: 1 In : : :
Eph. 1 15 we find both constructions tyjv Kad' u/ias wlaTLv Kal ttjv
:
<7ovv TO evwTLov TOV dpovov, thc artlclc is repeated "s\dth both adjec-
Xpiarci (1 Th. 4 : 16), rijs Koivuvlas els avrovs (2 Cor. 9 : 13), tov
SoKL/JLOv kv Xptcrrw (Ro. 16 : 10), oi KOLiJ,r}dkvTes kv Xptcrrw (1 Cor. 15 :
18). Cf. Ph. 1:1. In Col. 1 :4, ttiv tv'kxtlv vp-wv kv Xpto-rc3, and
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^ :
kv Tui 'lovda'iafjLU) (Gal. 1:13). Cf. Ph. 1:5. The article and the
participle readily yield examples like 6 KaTo. iroXv avayevvrjaas eis
k\Tri8a (1 Pet. 1:3), Tovs kv bvvdjxei deov ippovpovfxkvovs Slo, Trtcrrecos
we have eis t6v davarov avrov e^a^rTi(J6r]^xev and in the next verse we
read avveTacf)7]fxev aura) 5td tov ^aivTlayiaTOs els tov Oavarov. It is plain,
XpiaTUi r]\ev9ep<j)aep ae airo tov popov ttjs apapTtas Kal tov Oaparov. Here
it is ep XpuaTui is predicate with riXevdepcjoaep.
reasonably clear that
So Ro. 3:25 probably ep rw avTov atpaTL, as well as els epSei^LP is
in
predicate with irpo'eOeTo. Another example from Romans is found
in 5 8, where els ripas belongs to avplaT-qaLP, not a-yaTry^v.
: So in
Jo. 15 11 ev vplp is construed with fj, not r} ep-q.
: For further
illustration see Ac. 22 18; 1 Cor. 2 :7; 9 18; Eph. 2 7; 3 12;
: : : :
Tols irtaTols Kal eireyvwKoaL. Cf. also Gal. 1 : 7; Eph. 6 : 21; 1 Tim.
Trepl TovTcov Kal 6 ypa\j/as raOra, but they bracket Kal 6. The second
article is very doubtful. A similar superfluity of the second ar-
ticle appears in the second 17 (brackets W. H.) in Ac. 17 : 19,
and in the second to in 1 Pet. 4 : 14, to ttjs 86^-qs Kal to tov deov
only one article is found when several epithets are applied to the
same person. The presence of a genitive with the group of words
does not materially alter the construction. The genitive may occur
with either substantive and apply to both.^ So 6 Beds Kal waTrip
riixojv (1 Th. 3 : 11) and tov Kvpiov rjuccv Kal aooTrjpos (2 Pet. 1:11).
As a matter of fact such genitives (see above) occur either inside
or outside of the regimen of the article. Cf. tc3 Oecp Kal iraTpl riij.cbv
1:3; Eph. 1:3). The presence of rajLui^ with Kvplov does not
affect the construction any more than the use of Kvpiov itself or
fjixoov above. In Ph. 3 : 3 one adjunct comes before one j^articiple,
the other after the other participle, but only one article occurs.
A most important passage is 2 Pet. 1:1, tov deov fincou Kal auTrjpos
TtjctoO XptcTTov. Curiously enough Winer^ endeavours to draw a
distinction between this passage, "where there is not even a pro-
noun with o-wrr/pos" and the 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.
786 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Kal Kvplov 'Irjaov Xptarov, and Eph. 5 : 5, h rfj ^aaCKda rov XptaTov
often occurs without the article). One person
Kal deov (since 6eov
may 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 :
Tit. 2 : 13, Tov fxeyaXov deov Kal awTrjpos r}p.wv XpLarov 'Irjaov, it is
almost certain that one person is again described. Cf. also riiv
Kal Tuv *Iip(X)8t,avoJv, Lu. 11:39 tov iroTrjplov Kal tov irivaKos, 15 :6
Tovs (f>l\ovs Kal Tovs yeiTOvas, 23 : 4 tovs dpxiepets Kal tovs oxXous,
Jo. 4 37
: 6 arelpcov Kal 6 depl^wv, 1 Cor. 3:86 4>VTevcov Kal 6 irori'^ccv,
•
2 Prol., p. 84. Prol., p. 84.
THE ARTICLE (tO "APGPON) 787
they are treated as separate. Even with the scribes and Pharisees
they did not quite coincide. Cf. Mt. 21 :45; Ac. 11 : 6. The use
of another attributive may sometimes be partly responsible for
two articles. So Lu. 8 : 24 t(^ av'eiiw Kal rcS kKv8(jovl tov vdaros, Mk.
2 : 18 ot nadrjral 'Iccavov Kal oi ^apiaatoL, 11:15 rds Tpaire^as toov
KoXkv^Larciv Kal ras KaOedpas tcov iroiKohvTWV . Cf. also Lu. 20 : 20j
Ac. 25 : 15; 1 Cor. 11 : 27; Rev. 13 : 10.
Groups Treated as One. Sometimes groups more or less dis-
3.
tinct are treated as one for the purpose in hand, and hence use
only one article. Cf. rds <^tXas /cat yelropas (Lu. 15 9), tovs vop.iKovs :
Kal 4>apt(ratous (14 : 3), rds TrXaretas /cat pv/ias (14 : 21), twp ivpea^vTkpwv
Kal jpap.p.arkwv (Mk. 15 :
1), rdv 'EinKOVplaiv Kal Srcot/ccoi' (Ac. 17 :
18), Tcov ^apLaaloJV Kal 'Za88ovKaicov (Ac. 23 : 7), rcov aTroaToKcov Kal
Trpo(j)r]Ta}V (Eph. 2 : 20), rfj airoXoyia Kal /Se/Satwcret rod evayy e\lov
(Ph. 1:7), TO tXcltos Kal iJLrJKOs Kal (3ados Kal v\{/os (Eph. 3 : 18), ttjv
K\r](nv Kal eKXayrju (2 Pet. 1 : 10). Cf. ttju in Tit. 2 : 13. So in Mt.
17: 1 (W. H. text) we have rov Uerpov Kal 'IaKO)j3ov Kal 'Iccavr]v, where
the three are one group. is probably more frequent in ex- This
amples 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.
4. Point of View. Obviously, therefore, whether one or more
articles are to be used depends on the point of view of the speaker
or writer. In geographical terms the matter of freedom is well
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 :
8), TTJs 'lovSaias Kal FaXtXatas /cat Sa/xaptas (9 31), where these sec- :
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
not. So in Ac. 13 : 50 we have top UavXov Kal B., while in 15 :
evKbyricrev Taad/c tov TaKw/3 Kal tov 'HtraO. The articles here empha-
size the distinction between subject and object as in Mt. 1 2-16. :
Cf. also Twv air. Kal twv rrp. (Ac. 15 4) and oi air. Kal oi wp. (15 6)
: :
aak^tiav Kal rds KocrpLLKas kiTLdvplas (Tit. 2 : 12). But one article may
also be found, as inrc3 Koapc^ Kal ayyeXois Kal avdpcoTots (1 Cor. 4:9).
Heb. 3:6 ttip Trapprjaiav Kal to Kavxvi^oi. Though usual, the re-
peated article is not necessary.^ Sec rds d8ovs Kal ^pa-yp-obs (Lu.
14 : 23), Tdv okoKavTWiJ.6.TWV Kal dvaiGiv (Mk. 12 : 33), to, (.VToKp-aTa Kal
yvvalKa Kal to. TtKva Kal tovs abeK(t>ovs Kal rds a8e\(f)as. So also Ac.
15 : 4, 20; 26 : 30; Col. 2 : 13; 1 Tim. 5 : 23; Rev. 2 : 19. The
papyri illustrate the N. T. usage of the article with several sub-
stantives (cf. Volker, Syntax, p. 20). So 6 rJXtos Kal aeXrjvr], Pap. L,
Dieterich, Abraxas, p. 195. 9.
7. With Disjunctive Particle. If a disjunctive preposition be
used, there will naturally be separate articles (even when Kal is
iiTTO Tov p.bhov Tj VTO TTju K\lvr]v (Mk. 4 : 21), Tc3 Xac3 ri toIs Weat. (Ac.
28 : 17). Blass^ makes the point that outside of Ac. 14:5, TOiv
WvQiv re Kal 'lovbalwv, we generally find the repeated article with
re Kal. Even here 'lovbalwv as a proper name does not need the
article. Cf. 'lovbaiwv re Kal "EWrjvoov in 14 1, but 6 re aTpaT-qyos
:
that is here before us. 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) (f)o)vfj (Ac. 14 : 10) and i>iovfj ij.eya\ri (7 : 57) =
'with a loud voice,' with iieyaKri tt} 4>wvy (26: 24)= 'with the voice
elevated.' See also avaKeKoXvpfxepco -Kpoauiirw (2 Cor. 3 : 18)
= 'with
unveiled face' and aKaTaKoXvirTw ttj /ce^aXj? (1 Cor. 11 : 5)
= 'with
the head unveiled.' Cf. Mk. 3:1, h^rjpafxneprjp exoip Trju xeipa.
Other examples are TfKUipwix'tprip ttip Kapblap (Mk. 8: 17), T-qp p.apTv-
plav nel^oo (Jo. 5: 36), T-fjp aydrrfv eKTevrj (1 Pet. 4 8), : ttjp apa<jTpo(l)r]p
KaXrjp (2 12), awapa^aTOP ttjp lep(a(7Vvr]P (Heb. 7: 24), to. aiadr]Tr] pea
:
'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
of the phrase in question must decide. The translation of the
expression into English or German is not determined by the mere
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315.
2 ProL, p. 83. 3 lb.
THE ARTICLE (tO "APePON) 791
but Tov Havkov in verse 15. apparent in these three The reason is
pronouns in the genitive were not always felt to need the article.
Cf. KTJirov eavTov (Lu. 13 : 19). See further v, (h). The LXX uses
this idiom freely (Blass-Debrunner, p. 151). English can show the
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.
(c) These were also often consid-
Prepositional Phrases.
ered definite enough without the article. So ku o'Uu} (1 Cor. 11 34. :
Cf. h Tu> oIklo, 'in the house,' Jo. 11 20)= 'at home.' So we say :
Thus with avk observe di'd /xepos (1 Cor. 14 27). With aivb note :
dr' irfpov (Mk. 15 :21), dvr' a'yopas (Mk. 7:4), dx' ovpavov (Lu.
17: 29), air' ovpavQiv (Heb. 12 : 25), dTro amroXrjs (Rev. 21 : 13), dTro
amToKccv (Mt. 2:1), dr' dpx^s (1 Jo. 1:1), dTro /cara/SoXrjs (Mt. 13 :
35), aird fxepovs (Ro. 11:25), dxo veKpCjv (Lu. 16 : 30). Cf. Rev.
21 13, : dTTO jioppa, invb votov, aird 8vanu>v. So axpi- Katpov (Lu. 4 : 13).
For 5td note 5td vvktos (Ac. 5 : 19), i5td fxeaov (Lu. 4:30), 6td iJ,eaov
(17:11).
1 See on the whole subject K.-G., I, pp. 598 ff. ^ Pp. 1(52 ff.
»
» See extensive Ust in W.-Sch., p. 166 f. Prol., p. 82.
792 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
For
€ts see els q.dr]v (Ac. 2 27), els ohpavov (1 Pet. 3 22), : :
CIS 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
: :
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 eTri are errl 7775 (Lu. 2 : 14), eirl dbpais (Mt. 24 : 33),
€7rt irpoawTTOV (Lu. 5 : 12).
For Kara see Kar' ocjidaXfxovs (Gal. 3,: 1), Kara Xt/3a /cat mrd x^pov
(Ac. 27 : 12), /card i^ea7]iJil3piav (Ac. 8 : 26), Kar' dpxds (Heb. 1 : 10),
/caTo, TrpoacoTTOV (Ac. 25 : 16), Kara jxepos (Heb. 9:5), /card adp/ca (2 Cor.
10 : 3), Kara, avdpwirovs (1 Pet. 4:6).
For fiexpi observe liexpi- neaouvKrlov (Ac. 20 :
7), p-expi. reXovs
(Heb. 3:6).
For xapd note Trapd daXaaaav (Ac. 10 : 32), Trapd 7rora/x6v (Ac.
16 : 13).
For irepi see irepl fjLearjiijSplav (Ac. 22 : 6).
For irpo see -n-pd /catpoD (Mt. 8 : 29).
For Trpos observe 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
It will all is confined to a rather
narrow range of words, some of which, like ohpavbs and 7^, repre-
sent single objects. More of this a little later. Most of these
examples have articular parallels. See also v, (/). For classic
examples see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 259 f. The papyri furnish
abundant parallels (Volker, Syntax, pp. 15-17) as
do the inscrip-
tions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 92).
{d) With Both Preposition and Genitive. It is not sur-
prising to find no article with phrases which use both preposition
THE ARTICLE (tO "APOPGn) 793
and genitive like els tvayytKiov 6eov (Ro. 1:1), awo b^aKixdv 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.
(e) These may be without
Titles of Books or Sections.
the article, So EuayyeXiov Kara
being already specific enough.
MdpKov before the Gospel in many MSS., apxri rod evayyeXlov (Mk.
Very often, of course, the article is used. Words for day and night
(as in Enghsh) frequently occur together. Cf. wktos mt rifxepas
(Mk. 5:5), wepas /cat wktos (Rev. 4:8). They occur singly also
CTTi yfjs (1 Cor. 8 : 5; cf. 2 Pet. 3 : 5), Trarepa ^ fiyjTepa (Mk. 7: 10),
definite together) see Ro. 8 35; 1 Cor. 3 22; 12 13, 28; 2 Cor. : : :
16.i
11 : 25 f.; 1 Pet. 1:2; Heb. 12 : 18, 23; 1 Tim. 3 : Cf. also
Cor. 12 : 2), dTro rerdpTTjs wkpas (Ac. 10 : 30), Trept Ihpav eKT-qv
(Ac. 10 :9), ep eret Trej^re/catSe/cdrw (Lu. 3:1), ecos chpas epaTrjs (Mk.
15 : 33), etc. Cf. Ac. 23 : 23. The same construction occurs also
7: 10), xapaScocret a.8e\4>ds a8e\(t>6v eis davarov Kal irarrip reKvov — reKva
kirl yovels (13 : 12), cos fxovoyovov^ irapa. Trarpos (Jo. 1 : 14), yovevaiv
CLTeLdels (Ro. 1:30). Cf. also Eph. 5:23, avrjp kariv K€(pakri ttjs
yvvauos, 6 Xpicros /ce^aXi) rrjs eKKKrjaias and avTOs aoorrip rod aooiiaros.
In at yvvoLKes rots avbpaaLv (verse 24) note the generic article, class
and class. See utos — xaxTjp (Heb. 12 : 1)}
(k) Only Object of Kind. These partake of the nature of
proper names and often occur without the article. They also
often have the article. Some of these anarthrous examples ap-
pear in prepositional phrases like e^ apLarepcou (Lu. 23 : 33), k
8e^tcov (ib.), etc. These may be passed by (already discussed) . The
point is by such words as yrj and ohpavol (2 Pet.
best illustrated
3:5). "heaven and earth." Cf. (/), Words in Pairs.
Cf. English
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
: :
article in contrast with yrj.^ See also Lu. 21 : 25 kp lyXiw Kat creXTjvr] Kal
5 8. : The word 0e6s, like a proper name, is freely used with and
without the article. But it is "beyond comparison the most fre-
quently 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
genitive, yvuaeojs deov (Ro. 11:33); with prepositions, h dew (Jo.
3 : 21); ^vith adjectives, 9e6s evXoyrjrds (Ro. 9with participles :
5);
also, deQ ^uiVTL Kal ak-qdivia (1 Th. 1:9); in conjunction with Trariyp
(Gal. 1:1). These illustrations can be greatly multipHed. So
also wvev/uLa and Truevfxa ay lov may occur with and without the ar-
ticle. Garvie^ quotes Bartlett on Acts as saying that when irvevna
iiyiov is anarthrous it describes the human condition, not the divine
In his earlier Epistles the former is the rule (cf. 1 Th. 1:1), while
in the later Epistles he prefers Xpiaros 'Irjaovs (2 Tim. 1:1).
Other examples of this idiom are seen in Koa/xos, which even in the
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 :
(Lu. 11 50), etc. No^tos is a word that is used with a deal of free-
:
(Ro. 6 : 14). In iTepov vo/jlov (7: 23) v6yuos= 'principle,' and is here
indeterminate. In 2 : 14, Wpt] to. /jlyj vo/jlov exovra, the Mosaic law
ismeant, 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 al-
ready 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
the process is complete,"^ i.e. els drives out rts in this sense.
This use of els is seen in the papyri and need not be denied in the
N. T.^ 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
:
1 For a full and detailed discussion of the whole matter see W.-Sch., pp.
174 ff.
matter might have been well reserved for syntax, but it seemed
worth while to set forth at once the fundamental facts about
voice. assumed, therefore, that one understands that
It is here
voice per se does not deal with the question of transitive or in-
transitive action. That point concerns the verb itself, not the
voice. Active and middle verbs may be either transitive or in-
transitive. Passive verbs may even be transitive, though usually
intransitive, in one sense of "transitive." But Gildersleeve^ holds
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. Ter-
minology in syntax is open to dispute at many points, but I see
only hopeless confusion here unless voice is kept to its real mean-
ing. In 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.
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 (cf. iterative, intensive, inchoative, de-
follow the French voix (Latin vox), found first in this sense in the
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.
(e) Help from the Sanskrit. The verb development in the
Indo-Germanic languages has been more independent than that
of nouns. Latin, for instance, has recast its verb-system, and it
is quite difficult to compare the Greek and Latin voices. Sanskrit
p. 275.
6 Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 233.
c
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 San-
skrit 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
this principle (those 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 differ-
entiating the voices, and the same "arbitrariness" in the use of
individual verbs. But much of this difficulty is due to coming at
the matter with preconceived rules. Blass' treatment of the voices
is quite unsatisfactory. Cf. further for this matter, cliapter VIII,
VI, {d).
vavp). Cf. also av^auoo in Mt. 6:28 and 2 Cor. 9:10. BaXXw is
usually transitive, even in Jo. 13:2 (cf. Ac. 22:23), but it is
intransitive in Ac. 27: 14 (ejSa'Keu, 'rushed'). Cf. BXaaravco in Jas.
5:18 (tr.) and in Mt. 13 26 : (intr.). So iSpexw is transitive in
Lu. 7 38, but intransitive in Mt. 5 45.
: : 'Eyelpco is usually tran-
sitive (Mt. 10:8), but see Mt. 26:46. EvayyeXi^o: is transitive
in 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.
5 : 23), T]8r) exovra (Jo. 11: 17), ourcos ex^L (Ac. 7: 1), TO vvu txov
(Ac. 24 : 25). KXti^oj is transitive in Mt. 8
but intransitive in
: 20,
Lu. 9 In Ac. 7 42 arpk4>o} is
: 12. : intransitive, though also transi-
tive elsewhere. In the N.T. dpLafx^evoo is transitive and the same
is true of ixadr]T€vw. But in Text. Rec. kfjLadijTevae is intransitive in
Mt. 27 57. Cf 8vvo: intransitive in Lu. 4 40 and <f)vo) in Heb.
: . :
substantive has dropped out in most cases and the verb comes to
stand alone (cf. irpoakxoi vovv). Cf. avamfiivTOi (Mt. 2 : 12), iKK\ivoi
surpasses even the kolpt] in its facility for making all sorts of com-
pound verbs (tr. and intr.) and in particular verbs compounded
with nouns, like kTeKvoTp64)T]aev and t^evobbxw^^ (1 Tim. 5:10). Cf.
Thumb, Handh., p. 112.
'
(d) Different Tenses Vary. Thus where both second and
first aorists occur, the second is intransitive and the first transitive.
Cf. eaTT] (Lu. 6:8), but laT-qaev avTo (Mk. 9 : 36). This distinction
applies to all the compounds of 'iarqpn. Acts 27 28 : (Stao-rTjcrai'Tes)
does happen that yeyova (Jo. 1 : 4) is found with ylvoixai and k\rfKvda
that future middles are the rule with a few verbs which have
this primitive, but not always intransitive, perfect. So it is with
cLK-qKoa (trans., Ac. 6 11), etXr^^a (trans..
: Rev. 11 17), ireirovda :
(intr. as the verb itself is, Lu. 13 2), reruxa (trans., Heb. 8 6). : :
tXa/Sev 6 IltXdros tov 'It^crovv Kal kixaurlywaev, the other kind of causa-
tive occurs. So also with TepLheixev (Ac. 16 3). There was in- :
the middle. It is true that reipdfco in the kolvt] supplants the Attic
TeLpaofjLaL, but this is not due to a confusion of voice. With xotew
the N. T. does show a number of examples of the active where
the middle was more common in the Attic, though the N. T. gen-
erally has TTOLetadaL ava^oKrjv, X670J', wopeiav, aT0v8r]v. And the
MSS. vary greatly between active and middle of Toteco with eKdlKr]-
(TLv (Lu. 18 : 7 f.), eXeos (Lu. 10: 37), KOTverbv (Ac. 8:2), kp'lglv (Jo.
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
:
5 : 17).
{h) Infinitives. These do not alwaj^s reflect the force of the
voice, especially in the "epexegetic" use,^ Hke our' English "fair
to see," "good to eat." Cf. KpLdrjvai and Xa^elv, Mt. 5 : 40. The
infinitive has no voice in Sanskrit. See further under Infinitive
(ch. XX, Verbal Nouns).
Active Verbs as Passives of Other Verbs.^ Thus awo-
(i)
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 inter-
loper that finally drove the middle out of use.
(&) Meaning of the Middle. It is urged that the term
"middle" is good because the voice in meaning stands between
the active and the passive.^ But, unfortunately for that idea,
the middle is older than the passive. It is true that the passive
arose out of the middle and that the middle marks a step towards
the passive. The passive idea existed before there was a sepa-
rate passive form, a thing never true of all tenses and all verbs.
The Hebrew Hithpael conjugation is somewhat parallel/ but not
wholly so. The only difference between the active and middle
voices is that the middle calls especial attention to the subject.
In the active voice the subject is merely acting; in the middle the
subject is acting in relation to himself somehow. What this pre-
cise relation isthe middle voice does not say. That must come out
of the context or from the significance of the verb itself. Gilder-
sleeve ^ is clearly right in holding that the interpretation of the
difference between active and middle is in many cases more
lexical than grammatical. "The middle adds a subjective ele-
ment." ^ Sometimes the variation from the active is too minute
for translation into Enghsh. This "word for one's self" is often
very difficult of translation, and we must not fall into the error
of explaining the force of the middle by the Enghsh translation.
(c) Often Difference from Active Acute. As examples
note: alpeoi, 'I take'; alpkofxat, T take to myself ('choose'); avanLfivrj-
o-Kco, 'I remind'; aua/jLinvnaKOfxai, 'I remind myself ('remember');
ctTrexw, 'I hold off; airexomi-, 'I bold myself off ('abstain');
'i(xro.p.ai, 'I stand'; 'Kavdavu, '1 escape notice'; \avdavoixai, 'I forget';
fxiffdou, 'I let,' fj.Lad6oiJ.aL, 'I hire'; Trauw, 'I make to cease'; Tavofiai,
*I cease'; reido}, 'I persuade'; ireidoixaL, 'I obey'; ^atj'w, 'I show';
(f)aivonaL, 'I appear'; 4>o(^eo^, 'I frighten'; (j)ol3eonaL, 'I fear.' These
examples in the N. T. illustrate the difference between the two
voices.^
(d) The Use of the Middle not Obligatory.^ This remark
may sound a truism, but it is justified when one can read
like
this: "As the active is used in place of the middle, so the middle
1 Ewald, Heb. Gr., § 243. " Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 277.
3 Viteau, Essai sur la Synt. des Voix, p. 17. Cf. Moulton, ProL, p. 153.
4 Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 360; Clyde Gk. Synt., p. 58 f.; Farrar, Gr.
Synt., p. 117 f.; Thompson, Synt., pp. 168 ff.
^
often stands for the active which would naturally be expected."
" interchangeably."
Winer^ also speaks of the two voices being used
But Winer loses, one of his examples, for W. H. have avyKokei in
Lu. 15 : 9, Winer correctly says that "it depended
as in verse 6.
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/x- :
'assist,' not 'ward off from one's self,' but the force of the
middle
is present. So in Col. 2 15, a-ireKdvaaixevos rds apxas, it is not
:
'undress,' but 'throw off from one's self.' Cf. also ir\r]f)ovadac in
ra.% (Mk. 7:3) and rj^/avTO avrov (6:56), but e^iaraPTO (6:
xt'/'as
' Prol., p. 158 f. He cites also awapai Xoyop, B.U. 775 (ii/A.D.). But the
pap. use the middle also.
2 Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 117; Drug., Griech. Gr., pp. 459 ff.; K.-G.,
Bd. I,pp. 100 fT.; Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., pp. 49 ff.
» Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 278. * Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 7.
^
not a large one, but the idiom is clearly not obsolete in the N. T.
The causative middle has a wider use also, as will be shown
directly.
(/) above. In Lu. 14 18, : 19, exe ^le -KaprtTtitikvov, we have a con-
struction more Uke modern English. The causative idea in dm-
Ke4>a\aLCoaaadaL to. *lravTa kv toj Xpl(XtQ> (Eph. 1 : 10) is not due to
the voice, but to the verb itself (-oco).
this was by far the most frequent use, but it finally faded before
the active and the intensive (reflexive) pronoun or the passive.^ In
1 Cor. 15 28, viroraynaeTaL, the passive may bear the middle
:
force
eKOTTTOPTo avT-qv, the word has really changed meaning, 'they beat
themselves for grief as to her' ('bewailed her'), actually a direct
middle. "We have, in fact, to vary the exact relation of the re-
flexive perpetually if we are to represent the middle in the form ap-
propriate to the particular example." ^ That is precisely the case.
So Trpo(TKa\e<Tafjievos (Mt. 10 : 1) represents Jesus as calling the dis-
ciples to himself. Cf. elaKoXovnaL (Ac. 10 : 23). So irpocrXan^aveade
fiaL (Ph. 1 : 22) is 'I take for myself ('choose'), while KTrja-nade (Mt.
10 :
9), though only in the middle, means 'provide for yourselves'
('procure'). In airaaaixtvo^ Trjv ixaxaipav (Mk. 14 : 47), the possessive
is probably sufficient, 'drawing his own sword' (cf. aireaTaaev
avTOV in Mt. 26 : 51).6) is rather 'E/crtm^a/iews ra ifxana (Ac. 18 :
'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 :
own Son whom he set forth. This free indirect reflexive use came
to be the typical middle in the flourishing period of the Greek
language. No fixed rule can be laid down for the translation of
this or any other use of the middle. Even "deponents" like
Xpa.op.aL may be indirect middles. This word from xpn ('neces-
sity') means 'I make for myself what is necessary with something'
(Moulton, Prol., p. 158). An interesting group of middles occurs
in Ac. 24 : 22—25, ave^akeTO, biaypooaopai, bLaTa^afxevos, irapayevonevos,
/xeTeirep\l/aTO, bLaXeyop-hov, wopevov, peraKoXeaopat. These are not all
" indirect" middles, as is obvious. Cf. also k/5aXX6yuewt (Ac. 27 : 38)
and TpoaeXaPero (Ro. 14 3). It is interesting to note the difference :
Prol, p. 158).
(i) Reciprocal Middle. Since eavTuv was used in the recip-
rocal sense, it was natural for the middle to fall in with this idiom.
:
dirWei'To TO. ijudna avroov, the personal pronoun is added, not the
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. :
See also avedpbl/aTO avTov eavT^ ets vlop (Ac. 7 21) and 1 Tim. 3 13 : :
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 clearly right in his contention that the term in reality-
applies as well to active verbs that have no middle as to middle
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
a reflexive idea.But "deponent" is a very poor definition. Nor
is the word "dynamic" much better. Winer's remark^ is not
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 dis-
tinctive 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,
p. 158) thinks that in these verbs "it is useless to exercise our
in-
that the Greeks were more sensitive to the exact force of this
middle than we are, just as they used the intensive particles so
freely. Where guessing is all that we can do, is it not clear that
these "dynamic" middles represent the original verb before the
distinction was drawn between active and middle? The French
says je m'apergois, I perceive.' The intensive force of this middle
'
yeXaacj, KXavao}, Kpa^w, -rral^w, pemoo, etc. Some verbs, like aKovw,
fdco, Some of these middle futures
use either voice in the future.
create 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,
1 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 7. So the other poets. Thompson, Synt., p. 165.
2 Synt., p. 105. » Gk. Synt., p. GO. « Moultou, Prol., p. 154.
814 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
It is simply that all the distinctions of earlier times did not sur-
vive with all the verbs. On the whole, in the N. T., atrcD is
used colloquially and alTovfiai for 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
:
5 lb., p. 159.
6 Lang, of the N. T., p. 95. ' Cf. K.-G., Bd. I, pp. 121 ff.
VOICE (aiagesis) 815
voice atall in form as compared with the active and middle. Of.
French je me trouve and the use of reflexive pronouns in English.
(6) Significance of the Passive. The subject is represented
as the recipient of the action. He is acted upon. The name
"passive" comes from patior (cf. Taax(^ vto in Mt. 17:12).
' ATTOKTavdfjvaL (Mk. 9:31) occurs as well as cnrodurjaKeLv. The use
of irepiKeLixai as the transitive passive (Ac. 28 : 20) of TrepLTldrfUL is
passives are usually verbs that in the active have two accusatives
or an accusative of the thing \vith the person in the dative or ab-
lative. This accusative of the thing is retained in the passive.
Cf. eiTLaTevdrjaav to. \6yLa tov Oeov (Ro. 3:2), irepL^e^X-qu'evovs aroXas
Xeu/cds (Rev. 7:9). For"Accusative" in chapter XI,
full list see
Cases. Cf. also T-qv akvcnv ravT-qv Trepket/xat (Ac. 28 20). The :
10). Indeed, as already said, in all the Greek tenses save the
aorist 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. :
7: 21) and xo-pi-<^^vaL (Ac. 3 : 14). One may note also wapjiTrjaapTo
(Heb. 12 : 19) and exe /xe KapriTrip.kpop (Lu. 14 : 19, perfect passive)
k^ekk^aTO (Mk. 13 : 20), but 6 eKXeXeypepos (Lu. 9 :35); Kopeadkpres
Tpo4)ris (Ac. 27:38) and tjSt; KeKopeafxhoi kare (1 Cor. 4:8). It is
possible to see a difference also between eyepero (Jo. 1 : 14) and
yePTjdrjToo (Mt. 6 : 10). ' AireKpidr]p (Mt. 25 : 9) steadily drove out
aireKplpaTo (Ac. 3 : 12), though both are used transitively with no
difference in sense. The papyri more frequently have aireKpLPaprjp, ^
though both forms continue in the kolpt]. Cf. also aToXoyrjdrjpaL (Lu.
21 14), heUxBwo-p (Mk. 9 34), kdavpaadr} (Rev. 13 4), though
: : :
for thetwo 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, De-
mosthenes).^ In the LXX Conybeare and Stock {Selections, p.
75 f.) find the same idiom. Cf. Ex. 12 : 10, om airoXeirl/eTai. air'
avTOV ecos Trpcot, /cat oaTOvv oh avvTpbpiTai oltt' ahrov. 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
dividing-line between middle and passive. Is xept/SaXetrat (Rev.
verbs'* that 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
future middle. Thus aTrapvfiaonai (Mk. 14 : 31), but aTrapvrjdifaofxat
(Lu. 12 :
9); laaofxaL (Ac. 28 : 27), but laOrjaeTaL (Mt. 8:8); and in
Ro. 2 26 \oyLa6rjaeTai is passive in sense.
:
But the future passive
form was destined, like the other futures, to disappear as a dis-
tinct 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 : 6), ixerafieX-qdriaeTaL (Heb. 7 : 21),
for the true passive. But the future passive may also be devoid
of the passive idea and even transitive just like the aorist passive.
Cf. aTTOKpidiqaoixaL (Mt. 25 : 37), kvTpa-wqdovTai rov vibv (Mt. 21 37), :
has the usual sense, but one wonders if in uv re b4)dr]<Top.a'i col (Ac.
26 16) the passive voice is transitive and even causative (cf.
:
(Conybeare and Stock, Sel, p. 76), like o^^rjn = show thyself (1 '
* Gildersleeve, ib., p. 73 f. Cf. Hartel, Abrifi der Gr. d. hom. und herod.
Dial., 1888, p. 40.
2 Brus., Griech. Gr., p. 463 f. » Moulton, Prol., p. 162.
* Clyde, Gk. 8ynt., p. 61; Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 171.
5 Cf. Thumb, Handb., pp. 115, 125.
8 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
4), irapa (Jo. 17:7). See also discussion under Instrumental Case
(chapter XI, Cases) for discussion of avTui vnth earlv Teirpayfj.kvov
(Lu. 23 whether dative or instrumental. In the N. T., as
: 15),
in ancient Greek (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 72), the instrument
is sometimes personified and treated as an agent. Cf KoXa/xov vird .
would be possible. Cf. away ova lv Kat ^oXXovaLV /cat KaieraL (Jo. 15 :
TENSE (XPONOS)
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 com-
monest 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 justi-
fies 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
ToX^tdco, €T\r]v. With other verbs the distinction was not drawn
sharply, the root could be used either way (cf. (prj-ixl, 'i-cfyrj-v;
Xky-co, e-Xey-o-v). All this was before there was any idea of the
later tense. So e-^ay-ov is punctiliar, while kadiM is linear or
durative. Moulton^ rightly observes that this is the explanation
of "defective" verbs. Moulton notes exw as a 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
:
hind the three tenses (aorist, present, perfect) that run through
allthe moods. The forms of these tenses are meant to accentu-
ate these ideas.^ 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
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 why Zeitart instead oi Aktionsartf
It is better to keep "time" for its natural use of past, present and
future,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 explain-
ing 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
time relations to the fore.^ Even Paul {Principles of the History
to trace the history of the verb than of the noun, but as many
mistakes lie along the way.
7. Time Element in Tense. But for the indicative the Greek
tenses would have had a simple history. There are no past
tenses in the subjunctive. The future subjunctive is an anomaly
action, not the time of the action, that is expressed in these forms.^
But in the indicative the three grades of time had tenses of their
own. The Greeks evidently felt that there was no need for time
in the othermodes except in a relative sense. As a matter of fact,
the real time of subjunctive, optative, and imperative is future
forms in the present and practically only one in the future. But
both punctiliar and hnear action are expressed, but not differen-
tiated, in the present time by the same tense, as is true also of
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,
future).^ Because of this difference between the indicative and
the other moods 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
element subordinate to the kind of action expressed. A double
is
sistency in the names given the tenses, as has already been ex-
plained. Cf. chapter VIII, vii, (6). The terms aorist, imperfect
and perfect (past, present, future) are properly named from the
point of view of the state of the action, but present and future
are named from the standpoint of the time element. There is
was not unknown to the older Greek and was very frequent in
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
present, imperfect and aorist. These are "simple." The rest
are "compound" (Thumb, Handb., p. 115).^ This analytic ten-
dency affected the durative and perfect kinds of action. It did
not suit the purely punctiliar idea.
10. The Effect of Prepositions on the Verb. This is
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
ing "the sense of an inevitable doom." Cf. also <t>evyo} (Mt. 2 13), :
'to with Sia^e^Tco (Ac. 27:42), and kKcf)€vyo3 (Heb. 2:3), 'to
flee,'
'to watch,' with Siariypeco, 'to keep continually' (Lu. 2 51), and :
avvT-qpeoi (Lu. 2 : 19), 'to keep together (safely)'; o-Trdco (Mk. 14 : 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),
: :
lost its original force that the "perfective" idea is the only one
that survives. Dr. Eleanor Purdie (Indog. Forsch., IX, pp. 63-153,
1898) argues that the usage of Polybius as compared with Homer
shows that the was increasingly confined to the
aorist simplex
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 natu-
rally blend with the "perfective" compounds. But it remains
true that the Aktionsart of the verb-root is often modified by the
preposition in composition.
11. "Aktionsart" with each Tense. It is not merely true
that three separate kinds of action are developed (punctiliar, dura-
the normal method of doing so. The Greek in truth is "an aorist-
loving language" (Broadus).* In the kolvt] the aorist is even more
frequent than in the classic Greek (Thumb, Handh., p. 120),
especially is this true of the N. T.
Gildersleeve^ does not hke the name and prefers "apobatic,"
but that term suits only the "effective" aorist. The same thing
is true of " culminative." The name aorist does very well on the
whole. I doubt if the aorist is a sort of " residuary legatee," taking
what is left of the other tenses. The rather, as I see it, the aorist
preserved the simple action and the other tenses grew up around
it. It is true that in the expression of past time in the indicative
and with all the tense used as a
the other moods, the aorist is
matter of course, unless there was special reason for using some
other tense. It gives the action "an und fiir sich." The conmion
use of the "imperfect" with verbs of speaking (ee^T;, eXe7e) may
be aorist in fact.
(a) Aktionsart in the Aorist.
(a) Constative Aorist. There is still a good deal of confusion
in the use of terms. Gildersleeve (Syntax of Attic Ch\, p. 105)
prefers"complexive" to "constative." Moulton^ connnents on
Miss Purdie's use of "perfective" in the sense of "punctihar.'-.
that the tense makes on the verb-root. All aorists are punctiliar
in statement (cf. Moulton, Prol, p. 109). The "constative" aorist
the moods. But verbs that are naturally durative may have the
aorist. 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
'assumed rule,' Rev. 11: 17, though true here of God only in a
dramatic sense). Thus ealyrjaev (Ac. 15 : 12) is 'kept silence'
(constative), but aiyrjaaL (verse 13) is ingressive as is kaiyqaav
(Lu. 9 :3G). Cf. Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 21. In
Gal. 5 : 16, ov ixi] reXearjTe, we have the constative aorist, while
7rXr?pcoo-at is effective in Mt. 5 : 17. In line with what has already
been said, /SaXeTi/ may mean 'throw' (constative), 'let fly' (ingres-
(Ac. 27: 16), tuar^ao^aiv (Lu. 6 : 22), i]yaiTi](jev (Mk. 10 : 21), eXuTTTj-
come to his throne he shall rest,' Agraphon, O.P. 654. See also
eXaiSa fiiaTiKov irapa Kalaapos, Moulton {Prol, B.G.U. 423 (ii/A.D.).
p. 248) cites Jo. 4:52, KoiJ.\p6Tepov eax^v, 'got better,' and com-
pares it with eau KOfiipus ax<i, Tb.P. 414 (ii/A.D.). Another in-
stance is 7)77to-aj' Mt. 21 1.^ Cf. eKTrjaaro (Ac. 1 18). : :
ffTTjae (Ac. 5 : 37), TrXr^pcbo-ajres (12 : 25), eireaev (20 : 9), kirahaavro
the mode, has nothing to do with the fact of the action, but only
with the way it is stated. Sometimes it will not be clear
from the context what the Aktionsart is. The "perfective" force
of prepositions applies to all the tenses. It must be said also that
mental idea.
(a) The Narrative or Historical Tense.^ It is the tense in which
^ J.Schmid, tjbcr den gnomischen Aorist der Griech., 1894, p. 15. Cf.
Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 278.
4 Mom-o, Horn. Gr., p. 48 f. « W.-Th., p. 277.
k^e-jreaev (1 Pet. 1 : 24; LXX, Is. 40 : 7). It is true that the time-
less Hebrew perfect is much like this gnomic aorist, but it
is a common enough Greek idiom also. Cf. further Lu. 1 51- :
53. It is not certain that evdoK-qaa (Mt. 3 17; 17: 5; Mk. 1 11; : :
timeless aorist used in the present, but not gnomic. See under
(f). Burton {N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 29) finds it difficult and
thinks it originally "inceptive" (ingressive)
(7) Relation to the Imperfect. The aorist is not used "instead
of" the imperfect.^ But the aorist is often used in the midst of
imperfects. The Old Bulgarian does not distinguish between
the aorist and the imperfect. In modern Greek, aorists and
imperfects have the same endings (Thumb, Handh., p. 119),
but the two tenses are distinct in meaning. Radermacher
(A''. T. Gr., p. 122) thinks that in the kolvt] he finds the im-
perfect 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 pas-
sages the imperfects make perfectly good sense. Radermacher
urges the common use of krekevTa, but that
be merely de- may
scriptive 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
or imperfect. 2 W.-Th., p. 27G.
;
to look around because of the touch.' See also k\W-n 6 Seands rijs
yXcoaarjs avrov, Kai eXdXet op^cos (7:35). A similar distinction ap-
pears in ayyeXoL TrpoarjXdop Kai Si-qKOPOvv avTu (Mt. 4 : 11); eweaev /cat
edidov (13 : 8); Kare^r] XatXai/' — Kai avi>e7r\r]povPTO (Lu. 8 23); : rjpe tov
Kpa^arrov ainov Kai TrepteTrdret (Jo. 5:9); ave^r] — Kai kblbauKiv (7 : 14)
k^rjXdov Kai tKpavyaiov (12 : 13). In Lu. 8 : 53 note KaTeyekwv and
airkOavtv. Once again note eUafxev — Kai eKooXvofxev in 9 : 49 and
Karevoovv Kai eUov (Ac. 11 : 6). Cf. further Ac. 14 : 10; 1 Cor. 3 :
6;
Mt. 21 : 8; Mk. 11 : 18; Jo. 20 : 3 f . In 1 Cor. 10 : 4 note Imov
— 'iwLvov; in 11:23, irapedcoKa, Tape8i8eTo. The same sort of event
will be recorded now with the aorist, as ttoXu ttXtjOos rjKoXoWriaeu
(Mk. 3:7), now with the imperfect, as rjKoXoWeL oxXos toXvs (5 :
24). Cf. Lu. 2 18 and 4: 22.^ But the changing mood of the
:
writer does not mean that the tenses are equivalent to each
other. A word further is necessary concerning the relative fre-
quency of aorists and imperfects. Statistical syntax is interesting,
»
Stat. Unters. iiber den Gebr. der Temp, und Modi bei einzelnen griech.
Schriftst., 1908.
2 Am. Jour. of. Philol., 1876, pp. 158-1G5.
» Der Gcbr. der erziihlenden Zeitf. bei Polyb. (1898).
* Am. .Jour, of Philol., XVI, pp. 139 ff. Cf. also L. Lange, Andeut. iiber
krex^lprjo-av (Lu. 1 : 1), cos kreKeaav (2 : 39), CTretSi) kirXripwatv (7: 1),
(11 : 30 and note eXrjXu^tt), ore ivi\pev (13 : 12), cos airk^riaav (21 : 9),
was one of the original tenses, much older than the perfects or
the future. In wishes about the past (unattainable wishes) the
N. T. uses o(l)€\ov (shortened form of &(j)e\ov) with the aorist indi-
cative (1 Cor. 4:8) 6(f>e\6v ye e^aaCKevaaTe. A similar remark ap-
plies to use of the aorist indicative in conditions of the second
class (past time), without av in apodosis (Gal. 4 15) or with av :
possibly the oldest use of the tense. In Sanskrit this is the com-
mon use of the tense to express what has just taken place.^ One
wonders if the gnomic or timeless aorist indicative is not still
older. The absence of a specific tense for punctiliar action in the
present made 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 in Homer« and is
4 Prol., p. 134.
TENSE (XPONOS) 843
4 :20); i^KOvaas (11 :42); a.Trj\dev (12 :19); ri\dov els ttjv (hpav ravrrjp
(12 :27); ^X^ei/ (13 : 1); vvu e^o^aaOr] (13 :31), Imt kdo^aaa (17:4)
points backward, 'I did glorify thee,' while eoo^aaOr] in 15 : 8 is
possibly gnomic; eTrtdaare vvu (21 : 10); k8ov\ojaa, eyevojjLrjv (1 Cor.
9 : 19, 20, 22. Cf. ttoiw in verse 23); eireaev, eweaeu (Rev. 14 :
8;
18 : 2).^ With this use of the aorist adverbs of time are common
to make clear the present relation of time. Cf. tovto tJStj tp'ltov
k(t>avep(^d-q (Jo. 21 : 14) where tovto has the effect of bringing the
action forward. For a sharp contrast between the aorist and
present see ecrxes, Kai vvv ov ex^Ls (Jo. 4: 18). So Wvaa Kai d^t[(i],
B.G.U. 287 (a.d. 250). Cf. also Lu. 10:24. See in particular
eyvco, eyvoiv and eyvwaav in Jo. 17 : 25. The timeless aorist is well
illustrated in the participle in Lu. 10 : 18, ededopovp t6v I,aTavav
TctabvTa.
lation of the aorist into English will call for special discussion a
little later. What is true is that the action in such cases "is re-
garded 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
(12 : 3); ewaxi'vOrj /cat yjKovaav /cat emp-p-vaav (13 : 15, LXX, Is. 6 : 10.
36. Cf. aXXd Kadevdn); eldafxeu (Lu. 5 : 26); irapeSoOr] (10 : 22); rjpapTOV
(15 : 21); eyvc^aav (Jo. 7 : 26); d0^/c6j/ (8 : 29); IXa^ov (10 : 18); Uu^a
(10 : 32); kbo^aaa (12 : 28. Cf. So^dcrco); 'h^a (13 : 14); e^eXe^d^Tji'
(13 : 18); riyairrjaa (13 : 34); eyvcopiaa (15 : 15); ovk tyvwaav (16 :
3);
^pav — Wr]Kau (20 : 2) ; cTLaaare (21
Abbott : 10) .^ Cf. Mk. 14 : 8.
remarks, that the Greek perfect does not lay the same stress on
what is recently completed as does the English "have." Cf. also ovk
€yvi>i (1 Jo. 4 : 8. Cf. 1 Cor. 8:3); e(f)avepu:dr] (1 Jo. 4 : 9. Contrast
airecrToKKev in verse 9 and riyaTrrjKafxev, rjyaTrjaafxep in margin, in
verse 10 with rjyaTTjaep and aweareLXev in verse 10) ; eXa^op (Ph.
3 12): ; efxaOov (4 : 11) ; kKadiaev (Heb. 1:3); k^karw^v (2 Cor. 5 : 13).
The same event in Mk. 15:44 is first mentioned by rjb-q redvriKev
and is then referred to by rjdr} (or TrdXat) aTedavev. The distinction
is not here very great, but each tense is pertinent. However,
TfBvrjKiv means practically 'to be dead,' while dTre^aj/ei/^'died,'
'has died.' Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 108.
(r?) Epistolary Aorist. This idiom is merely a matter of stand-
point. The 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 €Tvep.^a w^as
also common. The aorist has its normal meaning. 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,
:
' Most of these exx. from Mt. come from Moulton, Prol., p. 140.
2 Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 324.
8 Jann., Hist. Ck. Gr., p. 437. * W.-Th., p. 278.
846 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
mented 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
'
and eoTco in verse 17); tav Kal ya/jLTjays, ovx riixaprt^ (1 Cor. 7 :
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 194. < Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 437.
2 Synt., p. 128. ^ gynt. of Attic Gk., p. 114.
3 Giles, Manual, p. 499. « N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 23.
TENSE (XPONOS) 847
this may
be merely gnomic, as already stated. Cf. the use of
efxepiadt] and e(t>da(rev in Mt. 12 26, 28 in a condition of the
:
Joh. Gr., p. 370 f. But there is little point in these exceptions. Abbott
8
rightly notes the variations in the major uncials between -lari and -l^v in
Mk. 9 : 43-47. Mr. H. Scott finds kdv with pres. subj. also (W. H.) in ]\Ik.
1 : 40; 9 : 47 (4 in aU). In Lu. he adds 5 12 (=Mk. 1 40); 10 G, 8, 10
: : :
{tav to be supplied); 13 : 3; 20 2S
: (8 in all). In Mt. he notes .5 : 23; 6 : 22,
23; 8 : 4 (= Mk. 1 : 40); 10 : 13 bis; 1.5 : 14; 17 : 20; 21 : 21 ; 24 49
: bis; 2(3 : 35
(12 in aU). But he makes 78 aor. subjs. with iav in the Synoptics.
850 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
with kav in Mk. (9 45; 14 31) and two in Lu. (6 33; 19 31),
: : : :
apart from /ii? and except changes with exw and dk\w. The
aorist subj. in the Synoptics is well-nigh universal with kav.
(13 17), where the pres. is again used purposely. Note also John's
:
low all the details of Abbott,^ but he has made it perfectly clear
that John makes the sharp distinction between the aor. and pres.
subj. that is common between the aor. and imperf. ind. Cf. kav tls
Tr)pr]crri (Jo. 8 : 51) and kav Trjpoofiev (1 Jo. 2:3); oTi av alrriai^Te (Jo.
14 : 13) and 6 av andixev (1 Jo. 3 : 22). But Paul also knows the
punctihar force of the aor. subj. Cf. dyuapTTjo-co/xe?' (Ro. 6 15) with :
one already writing) and fxri ypaypus (to one who has not begun).
1 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 240.
2 Prol., p. 122. » lb., p. 122 f.
852 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
'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 ex-
amples 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
aorist subj. 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 :
question arises with a verb without a repeated kav or iva, etc. It seems to
me that these are merely abbreviated or condensed sentences and should be
coxmted as if printed in extenso — as separate sentences. In that case Mt.
10 9 : f. would count seven instances of mi? with subj. aor."
* lb. 6 Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 244.
' Gildersl., Justin MartjT, p. 137.
TENSE (XPONOZ) 853
here that in the N. T., as a rule, the idiom gives little difficulty.
Cf. fxri voiilarjTe (Mt. 5 : 17); fxr] datv'eyKxis rf/jids (Mt. 6 : 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.
7: 6) and m'7 Kplvere (7: 1). With Mt. 3 9 ^i) 86^riTe Xeyeiv com-
:
pare Lu. 3:S fJLT] ap^r]<jde Xeynv. But in Lu. 3 14, p.y}btva dLaaeiarjTe :
fxepLfjivare, implying that they were anxious; m 6 34, yui) ovv nept- :
11: 16) and nv e^ovdevqaji (1 Cor. 16 11) the normal use of /jly] :
with the aorist subj. occurs with the third person. A good
double example occurs in Lu. 10 :
4, ^177 /Jaardf ere ^aWavnov
('don't keep carrying'), and in txr]8eva aairaarjade ('don't stop to
salute'). In Col. 2:21 p.r] cop-Q is a warning to the Colossian
Christians not to be led astray by the Ingnostic asceticism.
2 Cor. 6 p.ri
: 17, aKaOaprov aiTTeade, the prophet assumes (Is. 52 : 11)
Another, like 6pa with iJLT]8ed etirns (Mt. 8 4), is almost hke a "sort :
for comment here, not the mode nor the negative. The present
subj,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
action is distinctly punctiliar. Of the 100 examples of oh nij in
the W. H. text, 86 are with the aorist subj., 14 arc future inds.''
Cf. ou fxri ei(7eX07jre (Mt. 5:20); oMrc ov p.7] ttIco (Mk. 14:25).
The other aspects of the subject will be discussed elsewhere
(chapters on Modes and Particles).
yhoLTo (cf. Gal. 6 : 14) and the rarity of the optative itself. The
distinction of tense is preserved. Cf . /xrjSeis cttayoL (ingressive, Mk.
11:14); Tr\r]dvvBdi] (effective, 1 Pet. 1:2); Karevdvvai — irXeovaaai
Kal TrepLcraemaL (constative, 1 Th. 3: 11 f.). Cf. 8ur] (2 Tim. 1 16, :
that Homer uses the potential opt. with ai' a few times of the
past. The opt. in indirect questions has to be noted.
(d) The Aorist Imperative. In Homer the aorist imperative,
as already stated, is not so common as the present, while in the
N. T. it is remarkably frequent. ^ This frequency of the imper.
is characteristic of the kolvt] generally,- though in the end the
subj. came to be used in positive commands 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-
tiliar (aorist) and the durative (present) is quite marked.^ In-
deed Moulton {Prol, "the essential
p. 129) holds that to get at
character of aorist action, therefore, we must start with the other
moods" than ind. It is easier, for the time element is absent.
Cf. xeptjSaXoO to InaTLov aov Kal aKoXoWei /jlol (Ac. 12 8). It is ex- :
actly the distinction between the aorist and imperf. ind. (cf.
e^eXewj/ rjKoXovdeL in verse 9). The constative aorist, xept/SaXoO, is
like the precedmg, ^coaai. Kal virbb'qcfai. to. aavBaXLo. aov. In Jo. 5 : 8
note apov Tov Kpa^aTTov aov /cat TreptTrdret (the ingressive aorist and
the durative, 'walking,' Svent on walking'), and the same tense-
distinction is preserved in verse 9, rjpe — Kal irepu-KaTiL (cf .
further
(cf. cTetpe Ipov in 5:8). Cf. Mk. 2 : 9, 11. In the midst of the
aorists in Jo. 2 : 5-8 (the effective TroL-qaare, yefxiaare, avrXriaaTe vvp)
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, /X17 Troietre (Jo. 2 : 16, a
very fine illustration). In Ro. 6 : 13 a pointed distinction in
the tenses is drawn, nr]8e irapiaTaveTe rd /xeXrj vp-dv oirXa a8iKias tjj
the other the instant surrender to God enjoined). Cf. also vvv
1 Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 214 f.; Apr., 1909, p. 235.
2 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 451.
I
lb., p. 449. 6 Thomson, The Gk. Tenses in (lie N. T., p. 29.
* Moulton, Prol., p. 173. « Moulton, Prol., p. 129.
856 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Most of them call for little comment. Cf. Jo. 4 16, 35. Ab- :
The real force of the effective aorist is seen in Xvaare tov vabv rov-
Tov (Jo. 2 : 19). In Mk. 15 : 32, KarajSaTca vvv, the "perfective"
force of the preposition is added. 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 of phraseology accounts for
the differences in a way which shows how delicately the distinc-
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. oc-
curs in prohibitions of the third person, like m'? yvoirw (Mt. 6:3);
KaTa^aToo (24:17); All? eTL(XTpe\PaTco (24:18).
/X17
This construction
occurs in ancient Greek, as nrjde ae KLvrjaaTw tls, Soph. Ai. 1180.
But fjLT] and the aorist subj. was preferred. In the N. T. this is
perfectly natural for the proposed journey. But see the outcome,
IlaOXos be rj^iov — p.ri (Jvvirapakap.^aveLv tovtou. Paul was keenly
conscious of the discomfort of Mark's previous desertion. He
was not going to subject himself again to that continual peril
(durative). Cf. also Mt. 14 : 22, rjuajKaae tovs p.adt]Tas e/jL^ijuai (in-
gressive aorist), mt irpoayeLv avrov (durative, 'go on ahead of him').
An interesting example occurs in Jo. 13 : 36 f., oh bvvaaai fxoL vvv
cLKoXovdrjaaL (ingressive aorist for a new act); bta tL oh bvpafxaL aoi
oLKoXovdeLP dprt (durative, 'keep on following,' is Peter's idea).^
The aorist inf. is the predominant construction with bvpafiai, 8v-
paTos, 0eXaj, KeXevu, etc.^ The distinction in tenses is well observed.
For bvpap.aL see 27) and Xa^elp (14 17);
further \ap.^apeLP (Jo. 3 : :
^aard^eLP (16 : 12) and ^aardaai (Rev. 2:2); TrtcrreDcrat (Jo. 5 44) :
1 Gilrlersl., Am. Jour, of I'liiloL, p. 244. In Sans, tlu- inf. has no tenses at all.
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 204. Cf. (iildersl., Synt., p. 133 f.; Cioochvin, Moods
and Tenses, p. 30. Plato, Theat., 155 C, avev tov yiyvfadaL ytvkadai hbvvarov.
» Moulton, ib., p. 130. ^ Blass, Gr. ofN. T. Gk., p. 196 f.
* Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 361. « Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 360 f.
:
inf. occurs in Ro. 14 : 21.^ The aorist inf. is used with an aorist
as the ind., ovk ^\6ov /caraXCcrat (Mt. 5 : 17), the subj., dTcoixtv irvp
KaTa^TJvai (Lu. 9:54), the imper., a</)es OarpaL (Mt. 8:22). But
the aorist inf. is common also with durative tenses hke k^rirovi'
Jo. 1 :48); Trpos (Mt. 6:1); eh (Ph. 1 :23); and even with kp
sometimes (Lu. 2 27), but only once wth 5ta (Mt. 24
: 12). Cf. :
t6
:
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
tense. It is a very common
idiom (chiefly circumstantial) in the
N. T.3 as in the older Greek.^ So irkfixPas elwep (Mt. 2:8); —
airoKpiBds elirep (22 :
1) ; T^fxaprop wapadovs alfia dUaioP (27 4) : ; av
(27 : 3). Cf. Ac. 1 : 24; Ro. 4 : 20; Hcb. 2 : 10. It is needless
to press the point except to observe that the order of the part, is
immaterial. Note Ac. 10 : 33 above. So in auaou KarajSas (Mk.
15 : 30) ; rjXdap airevaavres (Lu. 2 : 16. Cf. aireiiaas /card/Srj^t, Lu.
19:5); kjiapTvprjaev 8ovs to irvevixa (Ac. 15:8); bikKpLVtv Kadapiaas
(15:9); k-Kol-qaav airoaTdXavTes (11:30); kyKaTeXenrev ayair-qaas (2
Tim. 4 : 10); eXd/Sere rtdTevaavTes (Ac. 19 : 2). This construction
of the part, after the verb is very common in the N. T. The
coincident use of the aorist tense occurs also with the imper-
fect, as avvriXXaaaev eiirujv (Ac. —
7:26), kin^akoiv eKkaitv (Mk.
14 : 72) ; the present, as aTroKpiOeU Xeyet (Mk. 8 : 29) ; the per-
fect, as eKireT\ripo}Keu — avaaraTriaas (Ac. 13 : 33) ; and the future,
as KoXus ToiriaeLs Tpore/ji^as (3 Jo. 6).^ In many examples only
exegesis can determine whether antecedent or coincident action
is intended, as in Heb. 912, eiarjXeev cupd/xews (Moulton, Prol,
: —
p. 132). So Moulton (ib., p. 131) notes elirovaa for antecedent and
eiwaaa (BC*) for coincident action in Jo. 11 28. The coincident :
"In all these cases it is scarcely possible to doubt that the par-
ticiple (which is without the article and follows the verb) is
> Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 65. Cf Goodwin, Moods and Tenses,
.
p. 50.
^ Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 408.
* N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 66.
862 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
vinced. Blass* bluntly says that such a notion "is not Greek"
and even refuses to follow the uncials in Ac. 25 : 13 in read-
ing aairaaaixeuoL rather than aairaaoixevoL. Moulton^ refuses to
follow Rackham in his interpretation of Ac. 12:25: "But to
take avvTrapoKa^ovTes in this way involves an unblushing aorist
of subsequent action, and this I must maintain has not yet
been paralleled in the N. T. or outside." And, once more,
Schmieden comments on Ac. 16 : 6: "It has to be maintained
that the participle must contain, if not something antecedent to
'they went' (dLijXdov), at least something synchronous with it, in
they are in Antioch with John Mark. The great uncials are not
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-
* Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 408. Cf. also his Pindar Pyth., IV, 189.
B
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 197 f.
6 Prol., p. 133.
7 Encyc. Bibl., II, p. 1599.
TENSE (XPONOS) 8G3
XO}pa.v, KoAvdhres viro rod ayiov irvevixaTOS XaXijcrat top \6yov kv rfj
'Keyuip in Heb. 2 : 11 f.; Ac. 7 35.: Precisely the same thing is true
of e^f] — KeXevaas in 23 : 35. In 24 : 23, di^e/SdXero is expanded
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 Punc-
tiliar Present and Linear Present). The one Greek form covers
both ideas in the ind." The present was only gradually developed
tense the confusion about e-<t>r]-v, whether aorist
as a distinct (cf.
has the form generally found only in aorists (§ 11, § 31) may be
* Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 120 f.; Sayce, Intr. to the Science of L., vol. II,
' Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 45. " Giles, Man., p. 484. ' lb., p. 491 f.
* Prol., p. 119 f. ' Giles, Man., p. 485. »Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 120.
8 Synt. of CI. Gk., p. 81. ^ Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 433.
866 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
aprt iSXeTTco (Jo. 9 : 25). The frequent kydi 8e Uyo: (Mt. 5 : 22, 28,
etc.) is example of the specific aoristic present (constative) . So
aXrieoiS XeTW (Lu. 12 :44). Cf. (xol 'Keyco (Mk. 5 : 41) ;
0r?aci/ (Mt.
14:8); ov Xa/x/Saj/oj — dXXa \eyu} (Jo. 5:34), etc. In Mk. 2:5
a(}>levTaL is effective aorist present as in idrat (Ac. 9:34). Cf.
oaoL ovK ixovcnv, oirLves ovk eyucjocrap (Rev. 2 : 24) ; iroOeu rfKdov and
iroBev epxofjLaL (Jo. 8 : 14) ; ex^L — rjMev (Jo.
Moulton {ProL, 16 : 21).
the aoristic pres. and the perfective use of airb makes it very
vivid. " The hypocrites have as it were their money do^vn, as soon
as their trumpet has sounded." The "perfective" dTrexw (Mk.
14 : 41) is copiously illustrated in the papyri and ostraca (Deiss-
mann, Light, etc., p. 111).
(6) The Gnomic Present. This is the aorist present that is time-
less in reality, true of gnomic present
all time. It is really a
(cf. the Gnomic Aorist) and differs very little from the "Specific
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
: :
iroLovaL (Mt. 6:2). Abbott^ has great difficulty with k ttjs TaXi-
Xatas !vpo(i>i]T7]s ovk eyeiperat. (Jo. 7: 52). It is this gnomic present.
It is not true, to be sure, but this was not the only error of the
Sanhedrin. Cf Mt. 7 8. . :
rare.* Luke's Gospel has it only 9 times (possibly 11) and the
Acts 13 times. Hawkins, from whose Horae Synopticae (2d ed.,
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 longer than Mark's, but when the discourses
and dialogues are eliminated, the difference between John and
Mark is not great.^ Moulton*^ adds that the idiom is common
in the papyri. Cf. Par. P. 51 (ii/B.c.) avvyw — bpS) — /cXat7co
eTopevojjLrju — /cat epxcixac — eXeyov, etc. Moulton illustrates Xeyei
'Irjaovs in the Oxyrhynchus Logia by Ka2aap Xeyet, Syll. 376.
See
also a(})ripTraaev mi
Oxy. 37 (a.d. 49). Luke's mani-
^ovXeraL, P.
fest reluctance to use it (changing Mark's historical presents
except in 8 49) is due to the fact that in Luke's time the con-
:
^ Gk. Gr., p. 484 f. The hist, present demands merely that tlie reader
take his stand with the writer in the midst of the moving panorama. Del-
briick, Versl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 261.
' Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 11.
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 188. " Ih.
* Hawkins, Horae Synopticae, p. 143 f. « Prol., p. 121.
868 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
common enough to
in the cultured speech of his time, but not
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^ un-
dertakes to give a philosophy of the matter on the theory that
the "circumstances," "incidentals" and "final results" are ex-
pressed in the past tenses of the ind., while the "principal actions"
are found in the historical present. He cites Jo. 1 : 29-42 in il-
(Tap— \eyeL — dirav — \eyu — r]\dav Kai eldav — — — — rjv rjv evpiffKei
brought under any rule. Matthew and Luke use l8ov to enliven
the narrative, while Mark and John avoid it.* Mark has a habit
of using Kal before the historical present, while John often employs
asyndeton.^ But there is no doubt of the vividness of the narra-
tive in Mark and John which is largely due to the historical
presents. Modern literary English abhors this idiom, but it
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
aorists and imperfects, or alternate with aorists. In Mt. 3 1 :
the MSS. vary as between ^atj^erat and kcjiaprj (Mt. 2 13). The :
the present is used when she sees Jesus. Historical presents run
through the dialogue with Jesus (15-18). Then the resumptive
ravTa elirev. That is enough to say on the subject.
(d) The Futuristic Present. This futuristic present is gener-
ally punctiliar or aoristic.^ The construction certainly had its
some perfectives like ^/cco). Thus all three kinds of action are
found in the present (punctiliar, durative, perfect). All three
kinds of time are also found in the present ind. (historical pres-
ent = past, futuristic present = future, the common use for present
time). Some of these "momentary presents" are always future.
So efjui in old Greek prose,^ but Homer uses dixL also as a pres-
ent.^ The N. T. uses epxo/xat and -KopevonaL in this futuristic sense
(Jo. 14 : 2 Indeed "the future of Greek was origi-
f.), not et/xt-
<i>ayeaaL (Lu. 17:8) are really old aorist subjs. Cf. Mt. 24:40f.
The futuristic pres. occurs in the inscriptions and papyri, as in
1 Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 309; Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 484.
2 Giles, Man., p. 485. » Prol., p. 120. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 189.
* Gildorslcevc, Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 393.
\ Moulton, Prol., p. 120. « Gildersl., Synt., p. 84.
^ Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 10.
8 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 434. " Giles, Man., p. 485.
870 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
31 we have
TapadldoraL, in Mt. 17:22 peWeL irapablboadaL. This
use of AteXXco and inf. is a sort of half-way station between the
futuristic present and the punctiliar future. Cf. Jannaris, Hist.
Gk. Gr., p. 443. The and arrests atten-
futuristic pres. startles
tion. It affirms and not merely predicts. It gives a sense of
certainty. Cf. in Mt. 18 12, atprjaei Kal wopevdels fryrei together,
:
tive). 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. :
12 14, etc.).
: An excellent example of the effective future is
found in 6 vToixelpas els reXos (TcodrjaeraL (Mt. 10 22). So the same :
(Jo. 8 : 28, 32). From 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-
rentiated." But it must be borne in mind that the future tense
in itself makes as much distinction between punctiliar and dura-
1 Cf. K.-G., Bd. I, pp. 114 ff., 170 ff.; Giles, Man., p. 483; Jann., Hist. Gk.
Gr., p. 441.
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 150. =>
lb., p. 149.
* Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 33.
6 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 201. j.
.
tive action as the present tense does. The difference is that the
future isusually punctiliar, while the present is more often dura-
tive. The point need not be pressed. Other examples of the
punctiliar aorist are KoXeaeis (Mt. 1 : 21) ingressive; TrapaKk-qB-qaovTaL
(Mt. 5 : 4) effective, and so xopraaOrjaovTai, but k\€r]6r]<jovTaL is in-
(Rev. 4:9; 17: 17), in final clauses (Lu. 20 : 10; Heb. 3 : 12), in
3 9 the fut. ind. and the aorist subj. occur side by side with tva.
:
41 ciTroXea-et, 43 apdrjaeTaL
irrjaovTac, dodrjaeraL, 24 —
30 aTrocrreXet, :
Sometimes (very rarely) ov tirj occurs with the predictive fut. (cf.
evprjaovaLU (Rev. 9:0); ovKert ov fxi] evp-qaovaip (18 : 14; cf. airfjXdev,
18) we seem to find 'will,' not mere declaration. Most of the ex-
amples are in the second person, (Mt. 6:5), and like ovk eaeade
are chiefly negative (4:7; Ac. 23 Ro. 7:7). But some ex- : 5;
amples occur in the third person also; though Burton^ is scep-
tical. Cf. earai in Mt. 20 26 f. (note deXri)- So Mk. 9 35. In
: :
10 13 eXdcLTO}
: elprjpr} vfxwv ex' avTrjv.^
ri In the volitive future
'will' is the English translation for the first person, 'shall' for
the second and third. The rare use of p.ri with the fut. ind. shows
a volitive use. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 117) is sceptical, but
Moulton (Prol., p. 177) cites from Demosthenes jSovXijaeade ijlt]
1
Prol., p. 190. 2 Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 35.
»
Moulton, Prol., p. 184.
*
lb., p. 177. " Gildersl., Synt., p. 116.
fi
lb., p. 176. 8 N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 35,
6
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 209. » N. T. Gk., p. 209.
Blass, Gr. of
TENSE (XPONOS) 875
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).: /jlt} :
X^i-pos fjLov (Jo. 10 : 28. Cf. ov jiri airoXcovTaL) . Cf. pres. imper.
and fut. ind. side by side in Jo. 1 : 38 (cf. 1 :46). On 01; /X17 see
Modes and Particles. It is possible that ov KanaxvcovaLP avTrjs
(Mt. 16 : 18) is voUtive.
questions are all disputed by some MSS. which have the aorist
subj., so that Blass"* remarks that "the N. T. in this case prac-
tically uses only the conjunctive"; but that is an overstatement,
since the best MSS. (see W. H. and Nestle texts) sujiport the
fut. ind. in some instances. As an example of merely interroga-
2 N. T. Moods and Tenses,
1 lb. pp. 30, 7G f.
Mk. 4:13 TTois yvucreade, Jo. 6 68 xpos rlpa a-Kekevabntda. Cf. fur- :
ther Ro. 3:5; 6:1 (the common t'l epovfiep;); 9 14; 1 Cor. 14 7, : :
9, 16; 15 29, 51; 1 Tim. 3 5. Cf. Lu. 20 15. Cf. ayopiiacofjLev Kal
: : :
(c) The Future in the Moods. The future differs from the
other tenses in this respect, that in the moods where it occurs it
has always the element of time. This is not true of any other
Greek tense.^
The Indicative. It is far more
(a) common here than in the
other moods. In direct discourse the fut. ind. expresses absolute
time. Cf. TOTe 64/cvTaL (Lu. 21:27). In the gnomic future the
act is true of any time (cf. gnomic aorist and present). So /xoXis
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 : : :
inf. after eXwi^ca. In the fut. inf. the time relation is only relative,
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.
: :
most frequent. They are used for purpose or aim. Cf. Mt. 27
I''
>» Moulton, Prol., p. 151. That is, in the old Gk. Both volitive and futur-
istic are rare in the N. T.
:
/xeXXo) with the aorist inf. approaches the punctiliar future. ^ Cf.
TjfjLeXKev Tpoaayayeip (Ac. 12:6); ixeWovaav aTOKa\v(f)drjvaL (Ro. 8 :
18. Cf. Gal. 3 : 23), with which compare the pres. inf. in 1 Pet.
5:1. The aorist inf. occurs also in Rev. 3:2, 16; 12 4. The :
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;
Ac. 5 : 28; 17: 20. With deXco the aorist inf. is the usual construc-
tion, and it is nearly always easy to see the element of will as
dominant. In a few cases deXcjo seems to shade off towards the voli-
tive fut. ind. Cf. Jo. 5 : 40, ov OeXere eKdetv irpos pe, Ac. 25 : 9, de-
Xets — KptdrjpaL; Here we have an approach to the later usage, but
the auxihary has not yet lost its force. Cf. also Jo. 6 : 67; 9 : 27;
Jas. 2 : 20, where the formula is polite. But in Jo. 7: 17 the
R. V. rightly preserves "willeth." So in 24. Herodotus Mt. 16 :
been seen that the durative sense does not monopolize the "pres-
ent" tense, though it more frequently denotes linear action.^
The verb and the context must decide.
The Descriptive Present. Its graph is (
(a) ). As with the
imperfect, so with the present this is the most frequent use. Cf.
awoWviJLeda (Mt. 8 25. Contrast aorist : auiaov. So Mk. 4 38; :
Toaavra err} 8ov\evo} aoi (15 : 29); iroKvv i]5r} xpovov ex" (Jo. 5:6);
ToaovTov xpovov p.ed' vpuv eipl (14 : 9); air' apxv^ MC"' ^MOi' ^(^Te (15 :
27); TrdXat SoKetTe (2 Cor. 12 : 19). Cf. dTro /Spe^ous ol8as (2 Tim.
ravu (1 Jo. 3:6); a/jLapraveL (3 : 8). Cf. Mt. 9 : 17. Probably also
a4)ioptv (Lu. 11:4).
(5) The Inchoative or Conative Present. Either an act just
beginning, like ylverai (Mk. 11:23), tvdvs aKavha\l^ovTaL (4:17),
Xt^afere (Jo. 10:32), vtTrrets (13:6), Trotets (13:27), ciTet (Ro.
2 :4), or an act begun but interrupted like weideLs (Ac. 26:28;
cf. 2 Cor. 5 : 11), apayKa^eLS (Gal. 2 : 14), dLKatovade (5 :
4), dm7-
Ka^ovaiv (6 : 12). Indeed Xida^ere (Jo. 10 : 32) and viirTeis (13 : 6)
may be regarded as conative also. This idiom is more common
in the imperfect. Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 82. In English we
have to use "begin" or ''try."
(e) The Historical Present. These examples are usually aoristic,
but sometimes durative.^ In Mk. 1 12 we have e/c|3dXXei which :
3 15).
: The use of the pres. ind. in a deliberative question is a
rare idiom. Blass^ finds parallels in colloquial Latin and an ex-
ample in Herm., Sim., IX, 9, 1.
(q) The Periphrastic Present. The examples are not numerous
in the LXX." Cf. Num. 14 8; 1 Ki. 18 12, etc. It is rare in : :
the N. T. Moulton^ warns us that "Ixoiv karl and 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 classical examples see Gildersleeve {Syntax, p. 81). So the
impersonal verbs (and ex<^) stand to themselves ^ in support from
ancient Greek and the kolvt]., Cf. tarLv exovra (Col. 2 :23); wpe-
irop tcTTLv (Mt. 3:15); e^6v {sc. kari) in Ac. 2 : 29 and 2 Cor. 12
4; 8eov eariv (Ac. 19:36. Cf. 1 Pet. 1:6). Other examples are
earcos el/jLl (Ac. 25 : 10), earLV Karefixo/JLefr] (Jas. 3 : 15), kaTLU irpoaava-
TrXrjpovaa — dXXa /cat Tepiacrevovaa (2 Cor. 9:12), karip a\\r]yopov~
ixtva (Gal. 4 : 24) and, in particular, explanatory phrases with
o kariv (Mt. 1:23; 27:33; Mk. 5:41; Jo. 1:41). Cf. further
Ac. 5 : 25; Col. 1 : 6; 3 : 2; 2 Cor. 2 : 17.
here'). Cf. e^fjXdou /cat 77/cco (Jo. 8:42). See ch. VIII. So with
Ketrat(Mt. 3 10), 'the axe lies at the root of the trees' (has
:
»
Prol., p. 226. Cf. also Schmid, Atticismus, III, p. 114; K.-G., Bd. I, pp.
38 ff. ""
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 204.
3 Goodwin, M. and T., p. 9; Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 10; Gildersl., Synt.,
* Moulton, Prol., p. 120.
p. 87.
882 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
and the pres. inf. is, of course, a prospective present. This idiom
is very common in the N. T., 84 examples with the pres. (6 aor.,
3 fut.) inf., though, of course, jueXXco is not always in the pres. ind.
Cf. Mt. 2:13; 16 27, etc. :
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
the beginning.^ We see this difficulty in rjv, ecprjv, eXeyov, etc., par-
ticularly in verbs of saying, commanding,
INIodern Greek etc.*
0€pe Kol fiake in Jo. 20 27. But one must not think that the
:
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
usually very sharply drawn.^ The distinction is as old as the
Sanskrit.'^ In modern Greek it still survives, though the differ-
1
Moulton, Prol., p. 128. ^ Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 394.
»
Giles, Man., p. 488; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 4S7; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 46.
* Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Philol., XXIV, p. ISO; XXIX, p. 4.
^
Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 17.
• Gildersl., Synt., pp. 91, 94. ^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 201 f.
TENSE (XPONOS) 883
perfect). It may
be sometimes actually aorist also. So as to
'i4>n (Mt. 4:7); l\tyev (Mk. 4 21, 24, 26, 30, etc.), etc. Blass, :
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),
: : :
k^iaTavTo (Lu. 2 :47; cf. Ac. 2 : 12). Cf. Lu. 9 : 43^5; 16 : 19;
Mt. 8 : 24. A good example is kKvKltTo a^pl^wp (Mk. 9 : 20). Cf.
further, eTLxrep Kal irpoarivxeTo (Mk. 14:35), the realistic scene in
Gethsemane (Peter's description probably); €xe06/xec Kal ov8els
(Mt. 26: 63) = 'kept silent.' So ewXeopep (Ac. 21:3). Note ho-
hl'^op (Ac. 21 : 29) between past perfect and aorist. Cf. c</)iXet
(Jo. 11 : 36), 5t€ri7pet (Lu. 2 : 51. Cf. 2 : 19). See the picture of
Noah's time in Lu. 17:27. Cf. ewopevouTo xo-lpopres (Ac. 5 :41).
Quite striking is rjXTri^ofxeu in Lu. 24 21. See further for the :
(Ac. 3:3); iipura avrbv (Mk. 7 26). Cf. Jo. 4 31. The modern
: :
14); kXaXei (Mk. 7 35. Cf. Lu. 1 64); e/cXatev (14 72); dieprjaaeTo
: : :
was begun, but was sharply interrupted by ovxi, aXXa from Eliza-
beth. Cf. vvv e^TjTovv (Jo. 11:8). A good instance of the inter-
rupted imperf. is Trpoae4)epev in Heb. 11 17. Examples of the :
15 16), OVK ridekev (15 27. Note (hpyladri), OVK eTriaTevev (Jo. 2 24),
: : :
ov yap riOeXev (Jo. 7:1), ovdeh eroXyua (21 : 12), ovk etuiu (Ac. 19 : 30).
Cf. Mt. 22 3. :
(cf. 1 Tim. 2 8). The exact idea is 'I was just on the point of
:
'ibei TTOLTJaaL KaKtLva fii) a(f)eivaL, (25 : 27) e5et ae ^aXeiv, (26 : 9) kbvvaro
TrpadrjvaL Kal dodrjvai, (26 : 24) KaXoj' rjp avT(2 (no inf. here), (Ac. 22 :
22) ov yap KadrjKev ainov ^y)v, (24 : 19) ovs tbet. kirl aov rrape^vaL, (26 :
32) a-rroXeXvaOaL eSvparo (note perf. inf.), (27:21) e5et /xi) avayeadai
1 Burton, N. T. Mooda and Tenses, p. 15. ^ W.-Th., p. 282.
:
KepBrjaai re, (2 Pet. 2 : 21) KpelrTOV rjv avrols fxri tirtyvuKkvai (pcrf.
inf.), 2:3) d0' wv Ibei (xe xatpetJ', (Col. 3 18) cos avrJKev h
(2 Cor. :
Kvpiu}. (Cf. Eph. 5 4.) But it must not be supposed that these
:
meaning.
Another instance where the imperfect refers to present time is in
the second-class conditional sentences (see chapter XIX, Mode).
When a condition is assumed as unreal and refers to present
time, the imperfect tense used both in the protasis and the
is
the verb is thrown back to past time. Our idiom more natu-
rally calls for eaTLV here. Gildersleeve^ calls this the "imperfect
of 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
real function of the imperfect tense. The demand for this stress-
ing of the durative idea by rjv and the present participle was cer-
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 192; Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 339. This imperfect
is particularly common in John.
« Synt., p. 9G f.
888 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
22); Tjv hbacFKwv to Kad' r]ixkpav (19 :47).^ In Lu. 5 : 17 the peri-
phrastic imperfect and past perfect occur in the same sentence.
In Lu. 23 : 12 note irpovirrjpxov ovres (cf. Ac. 8:9).
(k) Past Perfects as Imperfects. The present perfects of these
verbs are merely presents in sense when compared with other
verbs. So the past perfects have only an imperfect force. Thus
pSet (Mt. 27: 18); elwda (27: 15); IffrijKeL (Jo. 18 : 5).
(c) The Future for Future Time. The future mainly aoristic
is
1
Cf. K.-G., Bd. I, p. 38 f. 5 Moulton, Prol., p. 227.
* Atticismus, III, p. 113 f. <>
Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 16.
'
Moulton, Prol., p. 227. ^ Moulton, Prol., p. 149.
* C. and S., Sel., p. 69.
TENSE (XPONOS) 889
GLv (Rev. 9:6). Burton^ calls this "the progressive future." Cf.
Ac. 7:6. -Durative also is adiK-qaet with ov p-f] (Lu. 10 19). : So
ov fxr] dixl/ricreL (Jo. 4 : 14; cf. 6 : 36); ov /jlt] aKoKovdrjaovaiv (Jo. 10 :
5). Examples of the volitive durative future are the legal pre-
cepts (common in the LXX) so often quoted in the N. T. Cf.
oi) (lx)vevaeLS (Mt. 5 : 21); ov ixolx^v(JHS (5 : 27); ovk e-mopK-qaeiS, oltoSo}-
ceLS (5 : 33) ayairriaeis (5 43
; cf d7a7rare, verse 44) eaeade (5
: ; . ; :
TTLTTOVTes, (Lu. 1 : 20) ear] (JLonrQiu, (5 : 10) effrj ^o^ypojv, (17 : 35)
iaovTat aXrjOovaat., (21 : 24) earat iraTOVnevrj, (1 Cor. 14 : 9) eaeaOe
\akovuTes. Cf. Gen. 4 : 12, 14; Deut. 28 : 29; Mai. 3 : 3, etc. The
frequent use of /xeXXco and the pres. inf. (durative) has already
been mentioned. The fut. of m^XXco itself occurs (Mt. 24 : 6) with
the pres. inf.
(Jo. 6 : 28); eav Ixnre (Mt. 17: 20); ixm^v (Ro. 5:1). The sub-
junctive is very common indeed, but not in the present tense.
There is in the N. T. no instance of a periphrastic present subj.
1
N. T. M. and T., p. 32. "
Cf. Jaim., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 444.
890 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
or optative. John's free use of the pres. subj. has already been
noted (Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 369 ff.). Cf. kav woLrjre (13 17); ed;' :
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).
: : : : : :
(ih.); ^li, fiedvaKeade (Eph. 5 : 18) ; fxii ypebbeude (Col. 3:9).^ Cf. m'?
(Jo. 6 : 20) ;
/jltj Kplpere (Mt. 7:1); ^rjKcrt afxaprape (Jo. 5 : 14) ; fxif
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 exoiP (Lu. 19 : 17); iVre yLPcoaKovres (Eph. 5 : 5)^;
earcoaap Kaibp-epoL (Lu. 12:35). Cf. Judg. 11: 10; Prov. 3:5; yipov
yp-qyopoip (Rev. 3:2); 2 Cor. 6 : 14. Moulton {Prol., p. 249) cites
ToD TraTetp (Lu. 10 : 19), etc. For the distinction between the
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 125 f. Cf. Naylor, CI. Rev., 1906, p. 348.
2 Blass, Gr. ofN. T. Gk., p. 204.
3 Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 46. * Moulton, Prol., p. 204.
TENSE (XPONO2;) 891
aorist and pres. inf. see kfxjSrjvai — Kal irpoayeiv (Mt. 14 : 22). Cf.
aireiv in Ac. 3 : 2. The frequent use of /xeXXoj and the pres. inf.
has already been twice mentioned. In indirect discourse the
pres. inf.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
representing an imperfect ind.^ Luke has a periphrastic pres.
inf., h Tc3 elpaL which occurs twice (9 18"
ahrov wpoaevxoiJ.ei'ov, :
11:1). Cf. 2 Chron. 15 16. Only two fut. infs. in the N. T.'
:
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
timeless and durative.
(a) The Time of the Present Participle Relative. The time comes
from the principal verb. Thus in -KiSKovvT^s ^epov (Ac. 4 : 34.
Cf. TTuiXrjaas ijueyKev in verse 37) the time is past; in nepifjLvcjp SOvarai,
part, is common
Thuc. (Gildersleeve, A. J. P., 1908, p. 408).
in
(c) Descriptive. But usually the pres. part, is merely descrip-
tive. Cf. Mk. 1 4; Ac. 20 9; 2 Cor. 3 18; 4 18. There is no
: : : :
10 : 10).
1 Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 52.
892 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(g) With the Article. The present participle has often the itera-
tive (cf. pres. ind.) sense. So 6 Kkkirroiv (Eph. 4 :
28)= 'the rogue.'
Cf. 6 KaraUccv (Mt. 27:40); ol fr/roOires (2 : 20). The part, with
the article sometimes loses much of its verbal force (Moulton,
Prol, p. 127; Kuhner-Gerth, I, p. 266). He cites from the pa-
pyri, TOLS yafxovaL, C. P. R. 24 (ii/A.D.). Cf. to. vTapxovTa (Lu.
19 : 8). So in Gal. 4: 27, 17 ov r'lKTovaa, 17 ovk wblvovaa.
note vire(XTpe\l/av ets T-qv Avarpav — eTrtarryptf o^res rds \}/vxo-S twv fxadr]-
ingressive punctiliar.
IV. Perfected State of the Action (6 xAcios y\ o-vvt€\ik6s).
1. The Idea of the Perfect.
(a) The Present Perfect. The oldest of the perfects. "The
perfect is Such it was in the beginning un-
a present perfect." ^
doubtedly. The past perfect and future perfect are both built
upon the present perfect stem. Both are comparatively rare,
especially the future perfect. The use was at first also confined
to the indicative. Moulton {Prol, p. 140) calls it the most im-
portant exegetically of the Greek tenses.
1 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 198. Cf. K.-G., Bd. II, p. 121 f.
(6) The Intensive Perfect. This use (or the iterative) was prob-
ably the origin of the tense. So 6XXi;^cat='I perish,' 6XwXa = 'I
perish utterly.'^ Cf. also dvquKW, Tedv-qKa; iXLixvqaKW, fjLe/jLvrjfxaL. The
iterative process is seen in direaTaXKa (2 Cor. 12 : 17), eupaKeu
(Jo. 1 : 18). The "effective" aoristic present is close kin to the
perfect, as we have already seen in tjkoj (Lu. 15 27); d/couco :
(1 Cor.
11:18); ddiKoj (Ac. 25:11). Reduphcation, though not always
used, was an effort to express this intensive or iterative idea. So
likewise the aorist of an action just accomplished, like eyvwv tI
TroLr]cro) (Lu. 16:4), is near m idea to the present perfect, though
there is a difference. More about the intensive perfect a little
later.
» Jebb in V. and D.'s Handb., p. 327. Cf. Giles, Man., pp. 449, 491 f.
2. The Indicative.
(a) The Present Perfect (6 evearws avvTeKiKos rj irapaKelixevos) . It
is not clear how the notion of present time is conveyed by this
tense in the ind. since it is absent in the subj. and imper., not to
say inf. and part. Gildersleeve suggests that it "comes from the
absence of the augment and from the fact that a completed
phenomenon cannot complete itself in the future." But that ex-
planation is not very satisfactory. The tense does occur some-
times in the future, and the present perfect is older than the past
perfect which rests on it. Perhaps at
was just the perfect first it
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 past perfect made it clear. The pres. perf. is much more
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).
In particular is this true of the vernacular as the papyri show.
(a) The Intensive Present Perfect. Moulton^ calls these "Per-
fects with Present Force." They are Pcrfeda Praesentia. In
reality they are perfects where the punctiliar force is dropped and
only the durative remains (cf. past perfect). Gildersleeve'' dis-
tinguishes 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 fxaprvpov-:
3 Prol., p. 147.
;
the subject.^ In these verbs when the perfect has lost the
punctiHar notion it is due to the change meaning of the verbs.^
in
The list is rather large in Homer, particularly where attitude of
mind is expressed.^ Giles (Man., p. 481) thinks that originally
the perf. was either intensive or iterative like earriKa, and that
the notion of recently completed action (extensive) is 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)
: ; :
stances like etprjKev in Heb. 10: 9 (cf. elirou in 10 7). 'The state- :
Cf. further Heb. 7:6, 9, 11, 13, 16, 20, 23, where the perma-
nence 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- :
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
ecxxTiKev in 7 5. A particularly good instance is yeyoueu (Mt. 25
: :
6), where the present perfect notes the sudden cry (cf. aorist
and imperf. just before). Cf. e'iprjKev in 2 Cor. 12 : 9. Blass^ has
observed that it occurs sometimes in parables or illustrations,
and quite naturally so, for .the imagination is at play. Thus is
to be explained aweX-qXvdev (Jas. 1 : 24) between two aorists. James
sees the man. 'He has gone off.' Cf. Mt. 13 : 46, a-rvekOoiv werpaKev
Travra oaa elx^v Kal riyopaaev avTOV. In Lu. 9 : 36 edpaKav is "virtu-
ally reported speech." ^ Cf. a.Kr]K6ap.ev (Ac. 6:11, but r]Kovaap.ev in
15 : 24).
The Gnomic Present Perfect. A few examples of this idiom
(e)
In Mk. 5 : 33, dSvXa 6 yeyoueu avrfj riXdev, the perfect preserves the
13:8; 14 23.i :
instance (merely oratio obliqua). Simcox^ says that "no one but
a doctrinaire special pleader is likely to deny that in Rev. 5:7;
8 5, e[Kr](f)ev, and in 7 14, e'iprjKa, are mere preterits in sense."
: :
here. But if the whole case has to be made out from one ex-
ample (2 Cor. 2:13; cf . 2 Cor. 7:5), it is at least quite proble-
matical. The only substantial plea for taking eaxvxo- as preterit
here is the fact that Paul did have di^eats for his spirit after Titus
tain. Paul may have wished to accent the strain of his anxiety
up to the time of the arrival of Titus. The aorist would not have
done that. The imperfect would not have noted the end of his
anxiety. It was durative plus punctiliar. Only the past perfect
and the present perfect could do both. The experience may have
seemed too vivid to Paul for the past perfect. Hence he uses the
(historical dramatic) present perfect. That is certainly a pos-
sible interpretation of his idea. Moulton (Prol., p. 238) in the
Additional Notes draws back a bit from the preterit use of
eaxrjKa. He had advanced it "with great hesitation" and as "a
tentative account." "The pure perfect force is found long after
Paul's day: thus in the formula of an lOU, 6/X0X07W kaxw'^vai
irapa (xou 5td x^vo? e^ oIkov xPWi-^ evroKov (B. U. 1015 in the early
iii/A.D.), 'to have received and still possess.' " We have eiXT/^a and
e'lprjKa left. Take elX-qcjia. In Rev. 3 : 3 we have nvrjuoveve ovv ttws
of the use of aorists and perfects side by side does not prove con-
fusion of tenses. It rather argues the other way. It is possible
with Blass^ to see the force of each tense in IdopaKev and ^Kovaeu
in Jo. 3 32 (cf. 1 Jo. 1 1-3).
: Note also dar^yayev Kal KeKoivooKtv
:
(Ac. 21 28). Cf. Lu. 4 18 where Nestle puts period after fxe.
: :
'receivedst and still hast') that calls for explanation, but e^atrl-
'Kevaas, which may be used to accent the ingressive idea or as a
practical equivalent of the perfect. The use of etpTj/ca (Rev. 7 :
14) and etprjKav (19 3) seems more like a real preterit than any-
:
not labour the point over these two examples. If such a confu-
sion 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
entitled to a
that Moultoni "frankly yields" these instances and Blass^ says
that "the popular intermixture of the two tenses appears un-
doubtedly in the Apocalypse." It is to be remembered that the
ApocaljTDse is a series of visions, is intensely dramatic. It is just
xelpa (Mk. 3:1). Cf. Mk. 8 : 18; Heb. 5 : 14; Jo. 17 : 13, ex<^atu
— KeTr\t]po:p.kvy]v. Here the perf. part, is, of course, predicate, but
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 and number (cf. French).
So Ti]v exw Ibcoiihv, 'I have seen her' (Thumb, Handh., p. 162).
Passive is el/xaL btukvos. The use of -^IvoixaL is limited. Cf. tykvero
1 Prol., p. 145.
""
Gr. of N. T. Gk, p. 200.
3 Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 396.
« E. J. Goodspeed (Am. Jour, of Theol., Jan., 1906, p. 102 f.) shows that
the ostraoa confirm the pap. in the free use of the perfect.
6 Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 438.
.
o/xai, KfiixaL, have already been discussed under 1, (a), (ry). Cf. dTro-
(a) The Double Idea. 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 (punc-
tiliar) 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-
tive ideas willvary 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
past"^ is not always true.
(0) A
Luxury in Greek. The Greeks cared nothing for rela-
tive time, though that was not the only use for the past perfect,
as just stated.^ Ordinarily the aorist ind. was sufficient for a
narrative unless the durative idea was wanted when the imperfect
was ready to hand. Herodotus shows a fondness for the past
perfect.^ It disappeared in Greek before the present perfect,^
though in the N. T. it still survives in current, but not common,
usage.** It was never so frequent in Greek as the past perfect
1
N. T. M. and T., p. 40. « Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 201.
» Giles, Man., p. 457. * Thompson, Synt., p. 217.
* Moulton, Prol., p. 14S. It is absent from the Boeotian dial. (Claflin,
So xiSeLv (Jo. 1 : 31), l<jT7]Kei(xav (Jo. 19 : 25; cf. Ac. 1 : 10 f.), kwe-
irolda 11:22) and even kyvuKeire (Mt. 12:7)/ for eyuooKa
(Lu.
sometimes is used like oUa (1 Jo. 2 4). So with ^p airoXoAo^s (Lu. :
doubt from the standpoint of the writer, and that is the very rea-
son 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
cared there to express relative time, to stress the interval at all.
just before, but note Uo^av. The tenses in 11:11-13 are all in-
teresting (eiTre, Xe7€i, el-KOV, dpi]KeL, K€KoliJ.r]VTai., iropevofxai, (Tcodrja-eTaL)
In 11 : and in 11 30,
19 eX7}\vdeLaav denotes antecedent action, :
later than the event described, but none the less it stretches
backward though from a relatively future time. But this dis-
tinction is not confined to John. Cf. Mt. 7 25, TedefieXicoTo, :
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 amount of time, yet the in-
terval is real (cf. 3 : 1-10).^ In Ac. 9 : 21 e\r]\vdeL is contrasted
with k(TTLV 6 Topdrjaas. In 14 : 23 cf. ireinaTehKeLaav with irapkdevTO.
eipr]KeL, the two ends of the action nearly come together, but in,
dei — dXX' rjv €TL — oTTov vTTTjvTrjaev, the three past tenses of the ind.
come out well. In 11 : 56 f. tL 5o/cet v/uv; otl ov jUt) eX^jj els T-qv eopr-qv;
SeSchKetaav, the three kinds of time (present, future, past) are all
riv (XTToXcoXcos. Cf. also Lu. 1:7. Examples of the extensive type
are ricrav eXrjXvdores (Lu. 5 : 17); riaav TrpoecopaKores (Ac. 21 : 29). For
examples in the LXX see 2 Chron. 18 : 34; Judg. 8 : 11; Ex. 39:
23, etc. See also ^e^aTTLaneuoL v-Krjpxov (Ac. 8 16). :
{d) Special Use of eKeifxrjv. This verb was used as the passive
of Tid-qixL. The present was = a present perfect. So the imperfect
was used as a past perfect, as in Jo. 20 12, owov tKeLTo to crQiiJ.a = :
'
where the body had lain ' or '
had been placed.' So in Jo. 2 : 6 v<^av
Kdixevai is a periphrastic past perfect in sense. Cf. Lu. 23 : 53, riv
have a practical future perfect (intensive). For the rest the /m-
44: 32; Is. 58 14, etc. The passive in Gen. 41 36; Ex. 12 6).
: : :
reflection will show how usually there was no demand for a true
perfect, combining punctiliar and durative, in the subj. Even in
the literary style of the older Greek, when the perf. subj. did
occur it was often the periphrastic form 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,
present or future. Cf. the LXX
also, Is. 8 14; 10 20; 17: 8. : :
feet (completed act). The same thing is true of 17: 19, Iva uicnv
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,
: :
8; Hob. 11 : 3.
Tos). Not very different is the use with cocrre (Ro. 15 19). :
and els TO yeyovhaL (Heb. 11:3). It is most frequent with 5ta and
the ace. (causal sense). So Mk. 5 : 4, 8e8eadat. /cat bieairdcfdai koI
6. The
Participle,
The Meaning. The perf. part, either represents a state (in-
(a)
tensive) or a completed act (extensive). Examples of the former
are KeKOTrm/ccbs (Jo. 4:6); ecTTcos (18 18); to elwdos (Lu. 4 16). In- : :
Handh., p. 167).
(c) The Perfect Tense Occurs with Various Uses of the Participle.
6 /caXeo-as in Lu. 14: 9 with 6 KexXTj/ccb? (14 10). Cf. 2 Cor. 12 21; : :
1 Pet. 2 : 10. The predicate participle also uses it. Cf. Lu. 8 :
46; 6 : 18, 20 f.; Jo. 19 : 33; Ac. 18 : 2; Heb. 13 : 23. With Rev.
9 : 1, dbov TreTTTUiKOTa, compare Lu. 10 : 18, Wecopow TeaouTa (the
state, the act).
(d) The Periphrastic Participle. There are two examples of this
unusual idiom. Cf. Eph. 4 18 : kaKOTWiikvoi rfj 8Lavola ovres, (Col.
1 : 21) bvTas airrjWoTpLcoiJLevovs. The durative aspect of the perfect
is thus accented. Cf. Heb. 5 : 14 for ex" used periphrastically.
CHAPTER XIX
MODE CErKAISIS)
1 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. of Att. Gk., p. 185.
3 Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 498; K.-G., I, p. 200; Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt.,
p. 220. See Sandys, Hist, of Class. Scholarship, HI, p. 458.
911
912 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
The mode is the manner 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
action). But even so the matter is not always clear. The mode
is and away the most difficult theme in Greek syntax. Our
far
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
to help us out. " If the moods are \l/vxi.Kal diadeaeLs, why is not every
utterance modal? Why does not every utterance denote a state
of the soul? A 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 neces-
sarily modal from this point of view. But the term is naturally
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 "*
notes also that "moods are
temporal and tenses modal." He sees that the ordermoods
and tenses is the natural sequence in the English (cf. chapter
VII, but he follows the order tenses and moods in his
v),
^ Thompson, Synt., p. 494. In the Sans, it was the subjunctive that went
down in the fight. Cf. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 201 f.
help one all along. The indicative has nothing to do with reality
("an sich").2 xhe speaker presents something as true.^ Actuality
is implied, to be sure, but nothing more.'* Whether it is true or
no is another matter. Most untruths are told in the indicative
mode. The true translation into Latin of oplcttikt] would hefinitus or
definitus.^ Indicativus is a translation of dTro^ai'Tuos. The indic-
ative is the most frequent mode in all languages. It is the nor-
V€T0, yfKOev, ovk eyvco, wapeh.a^ov, eXa^ov, e8(j)Kev, kdeacrdfxeOa, etc., has the
kirelvaaa yap eScoKare fioi <l)ayeiv, e8i\{/r](Ta Kal eTOTlaaTe fxe, kt\., and
TTore ae dbop,ev ivHvCiVTa Kal edpexpafxev, kt\. (Mt. 25 : 35,-39). For
the change from question to simple assertion see 7rio-re6ets tovto;
kyd} TreiriaTevKa (Jo. 11 26 f.). Cf. Ac. 26:27. The formula au
:
For this very reason the Greek used various interrogatory par-
ticles to make plain the question. Thus apd yt yLvooaKeis a aua-
yLvucTKeLs; (Ac. 8 : 30. Note the play on the verb). Cf. Lu. 18 : 8;
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
as 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: :
TTore (Mt. 17 : 17); ttcos (Lu. 10 : 26); tov (Lu. 8 : 25); iroaaKLs (Mt.
18 : 21).
Alternative questions are expressed by ^ alone as in 1 Cor. 9 :
(Mt. 7:9).
Exclamations are sometimes expressed by the relative forms,
like cos (hpatoL in Ro. 10 15, but more frequently by the inter- :
39 IJ.T)TL bbvarai rv^i^os tv(})\6v oS-qyeiv; ovxl ap.<l>6Tepoi. tis ^odvvov knirt-
translates only ov. Cf. 1 Cor. 9 :4, 5; 11: 22; Ro. 10 18, 19. :
always the most virile of all the modes and has outlived them all.
But, after the other modes became fully developed, these less fre-
quent uses of the indicative seemed anomalous. The courteous or
polite use of the imperfect indicative is the simplest of these spe-
cial constructions. Here the indicative is used for direct assertion,
but the statement is thrown into a past tense, though the present
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 :
22, t^ov\6ixr)v Kal avTos rod avQpioirov aKovaai. Agrippa does not
bluntly say jSoi-Xo/iat (cf. Paul in 1 Tim. 2:8; 5 14) nor ejSouXStJL-qv :
Jo. 12 and Phil. 13, k^ovKbix-qv , not 'would have liked' as Blass
(Gr. of p. 207) has it.
N. T. Gk., In Gal. 4: 20, ride\ov be irapetvai
Trpos Paul is speaking of present time (cf. 6tl airopovfiai.).
v/JLOLs apTL,
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. : :
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
doing it, example we come close to the
but drew back. With this
» W.-Th., p. 283.
« K.-G., Bd. I, p. 204 f. 3 Bla.ss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 20(5.
920 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
del in verse 14) Ac. 27 21. It is an easy step from this notion to
; :
that of an obUgation which comes over from the past and is not
Uved up to. The present non-fulfilment of the obligation is left
to the inference of the reader or hearer. It is not formally stated.
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
the present time is referred to. Thus in Ac. 24 : 19, ovs edet eirl
(70V irapetvaL. They ought to be here, but they are not. Our Eng-
lish "ought" is likewise a past form about the present as well as
about the past.^ So 2 Cor. 2 :d^' Siv e5et fxe xa^pet^. In Heb.
3,
past. But in 1 Cor. 5 : 10, eirel w^etXere apa k rod Koaixov k^eKdetv,
condition without iiu in Jo. 9 33; Ac. 26 32. The use of us avrJKev : :
(Col. 3 : 18) and a ovk aprJKev (Eph. 5 : 4) are both pertinent, though
in subordinate clauses. Note in particular oh yap Kad^rjKev avTov f rji'
1 Our transl. therefore often fails to distinguish the two senses of ehei in Gk.
Gildersl., Synt., Pt. I, p. 144 f. Cf chapter on Tense.
.
2 Prol., p. 200.
3 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 206. " W.-Th., p. 282.
< Prol., p. 200. " Synt., Pt. I, p. 144.
:
edcoKare p.0L and Ro. 7 7 : Tr]P ap-aprlap ovk eypo:p el p.r] bid poixov, ttjv re
' Gildorsl., Am. Jour, of Philol., Jan., 1909, p. IG. Cf. Stahl, Krit.-hist.
Synt., p. 251 f.
and the other MSS. differ in the position of ixp.^ This particle
comes near the beginning of the clause, though not at the begin-
ning. It does not precede om (cf. Gal. 1 : 10). It is sometimes
repeated in successive apodoses (cf. Jo. 4 : 10), but not always
(cf. Lu. 12 :39). Cf. Kiihner-Gerth, Bd. I, p. 247. On the use-
of iiv in general see Thompson, Syntax, pp. 291 ff. Hoogeveen
{Doctrina Partic. Linguae Graecae, ed. sec, 1806, p. 35) makes
av mean simply deheo, a very doubtful interpretation. "The
addition of iiv to an indicative apodosis produced much the same
effect as we can express in writing This by italicizing 'if.' "^
emphasis suggests that the condition was not realized. The
papyri likewise occasionally show the absence of av.^ The condi-
tion 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
(Lu. 19 : 23) and /cai eXduv eych eKoixiaaixriv av to kfiov avv tokw (Mt.
25:27). Here the condition is implied in the context, a con-
struction thoroughly classical. But, in principal clauses, there is
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 with-
out 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 :
1 N. T. Gk., p. 206.
Blass, Gr. of ^ Moulton, Pro!., p. 200.
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.
21. The two tenses may come in the same condition and con-
clusion, as in Jo. 14 28. The past perfect is found in the protasis,
:
Xevaare (1 Cor. 4:8), and twice with the imperfect about the
present (2 Cor. 11 1; Rev. 3 15). "O^eXoj' occurs once also with
: :
(&) The Present. In Mt. 12 : 38, StSacr/caXe, OeXopieu airb aov crrj-
lielov Ibetv, the present seems rather abrupt.^ In Jo. 12 : 21, Kupte,
deXofxev tov 'Irjaovv ibdv, this is felt SO strongly that it is translated:
'Sir, we loould see Jesus.' See also Jo. 6 : 67. Cf. e^ovXoixrjv in
Ac. 25 : 22 and There does
d^aipi7]v av in 26 : 29. not seem to be
the same abruptness in 7. Cf dk\oo in 1 Cor. 7 : . also 4)dbop.ai in
7 28. There were probably delicate nuances of
: meaning which
sufficiently softened these words, shadings which now escape us.
There is no difficulty about dp/ceT in 2 Cor. 12 9. : In a case like
UTraToj dXieuetf (cf. epxcfieda) in Jo. 21 : 3, the suggestion or hint is
Jo. 6: 28), like the Latin Quid fadamus? The subjunctive of de-
opTes; (Mt. 12 : 34); ri (xe del iroielv Iva awdch; (Ac. 16 : 30). This is
This fact comes out in the fact that the future tense of the indic-
ative is a rival of the subjunctive, the optative and the impera-
tive.'' Like the subjunctive and optative the future may be
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 voli- :
* Jolly, Ein Kapitel d. vergl. Synt., Der Konjunktiv und Optativ, p. 119.
9 Die Grundl., p. 116 f. Cf. Synt., II, pp. 349 ff.
" M. and T., App., Relation of the Optative to the Subjunctive and other
Moods, p. 371.
" Griech. Gr., p. 499.
MODE (efkaisis) 927
istic). W.
G. Hale^ identifies the deliberative and futuristic uses
as identical. 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
true "that the future indicative has carried off not only the fu-
turistic but also the volitive and deliberative subjunctives." But
for practical purposes there is wisdom in Brugmann's division.
Stahl* sees the origin of the subjunctive uses in the notion of
all
' The Anticipatory Subjunctive in Gk. and Lat., Stud. Class. Phil. (Chicago)*
I, p. 6. See discussion of these three uses of fut. ind. under Tense.
2 CI. Rev., XVI, p. 166. « Synt., Pt. I, p. 147.
3 Prol., p. 184. 7 lb., p. 148.
^ 235 f.
Krit.-hist. Synt., p. « Horn. Gr., p. 231.
while the indicative is the mode of positive assertion and the im-
perative that of commanding statement. The modes, as already
seen, overlap all along the line, but in a general way this outline
is correct. The subjunctive in principal sentences appears in both
declarative and interrogative sentences. Cf. dprjvriv exco/xeu irpbs
»
Cf. Giles, Man., p. 505. 5 Moulton, Prol., p. 240.
2 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 198. ^ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 321.
3 Synt., Pt. I, p. 153. ? Prol., p. 240.
*
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 503.
MODE (efkaisis) 929
that "the mixture of the fut. ind. and aorist conj. has, in com-
parison 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 — 8vvr]dfj, and Blass has noted also in Is. 33 : 24 acpedfi yap
auTols rj afxapTia. We cannot, indeed, trace the idiom 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
antiquity of such a usage." ^ It was certainly primitive in its sim-
plicity^ was not the most primitive idiom. The use of ov
even if it
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 :
and MSS. in Mt. 25 9 (/U17 Trore ovk apKeay). It is even possible that
:
(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 fxij as an abbreviation of nrjv. If either of these
each other, being simplex, but they do not (cf. /x?) ou). The ex-
amples are partly futuristic and partly prohibitory. Ellipsis is
not satisfactory nor complete separation (Gildersleeve) of the two
negatives. Perhaps ov expresses the emphatic denial and mi? the
prohibition which come to be blended into the one construction.
At any rate it is proper to cite the examples of emphatic denial
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] Trio: (Mk. 14 : 25). Cf. Lu. 6: 37 etc. See ov ii-q in both prin-
cipal and subordinate clauses in Mk. 13 : 2. See also Tense.
a rhetorical question in Lu. 18 7 (note also fxaKpoOv/iet)
It is :
subj. and the fut. ind. side by side in a rhetorical question, tIs ov
firi <t)0^r]9fj, KVpie, Kal So^aaeL to ovoixa; See also the rts e^ vp.wv e^et
</)tXof Kai TTopevcreTaL irpos avrbv — Kol etTT] avrQ; (Lu. 11:5). It IS
1 Moulton, Prol., 3d ed., p. 190. But in the Germ, ed., p. 300, Moul-
ton names 74. He had given 78 in the first Engl. ed.
- M. and T., pp. 389 ff. See also pp. 101-105.
3 Giles, Man., p. 505. ' Griech. Gr., p. 500.
* Synt., Pt. I, p. 148. « Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 197.
:
amples 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 :
1 Prol., p. 175. ==
lb.
' See 1 Cor. 10 : 7-9 for the change from first to second persons.
* Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 447.
6 Blass, Gr. of N. T, Gk., p. 208. But see fit^ere Ucjfxep (Mk. 15 : 36), though
KD here read &<j>es.
* Moulton, Prol., p. 170. Jannaris (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 44S) derives fis from
eacre (iaffov), acre.
^ It was rare in classic Gk. not to have a7e or <f)epe or some such word. Cf.
Goodwin, M. and T., p. 88; Gildcrsl., Synt., Ft. I, p. 148 f. The volitive
eubj.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
KaTa^Lwffji, P.Oxy. I, 128, 9. So in the hiscr. roiavra 7rdf)fj, Poutioa III, 62, S
^
4); Lu. 6 :42 and 8evpo airoaTelXio (Ac. 7:34, LXX). Moulton^
cites a<^es eyC} avTrju dp-qvqao) from 0. P. 413 (Roman period). We
do not have to suppose the ellipsis of Iva, for d^es is just the
20); nil vop.iaT}Te (5: 17); ^ii? eiaevejKjis (6: 13). The use of 6pa and
opoLTe with fxij and the aorist subj . is to be noted. Some of these
are examples of asyndeton just like d0es. Thus 6pa p.r]bevl p-qdeu
elTrns (Mk. 1 : 44; cf. Mt. 8:4). So also 6pa fir] (Rev. 22 : 9) where
the' verb -n-oLriaris is not expressed. Cf. also 6pa TroL-fjaeLs (Heb. 8 :
5) opare ixrjBeis ycvwaKeTw (Mt. 9 : 30), and bpaT€ piT} dpoetade (24 6). :
These forms occur with the third person also, as /SXeTrere /jltj tls
vnds irXavrjaji (Mt. 24 : 4). But, per contra, see 1 Cor. 10 : 12 {fxr}
IcxTai in Col. 2:8). In 1 Th. 5 : 15, opSre jx-q tls KaKov clptl /ca/coD
20), which is prohibitive. So ov mi? i't'/'?7s (Jo. 13 8); ov ni] Trlri (Lu. :
ov uri dpKeaji rifuv Kal vfxtv, the subj. is probably futuristic (or de-
liberative). In a late papyrus, O. P. 1150, 6 (vI/a.d.), note del^ov
Triv 8vvap.lv where the 3d pers. subj = imperative like
aov kol e^eXdxi .
'iva (j)o^rJTaL (Eph. 5 : 33) parallel with dyaTrdrco., Cf. I'm — Scotj (Sw)
15). This "innovation" in the kolvt] takes the place of ottcos and
the future ind. Moulton (ProL, p. 177 note) cites ottws poL pij
kpels, Plato, 337 B, 'don't tell me,' where O7rcos='in which case.'
11, ov pi] TTiw avTo; Cf. also Lu. 18 :7; Rev. 15 4. The aorist
:
Kai Sdoaopev; The first person is the one of most frequent occur-
rence (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
a-Ko T7JS Kp'Laecos Trjs yehvtjs; (Mt. 23 : 33); t'l y'tvqTaL; (Lu. 23 : 31).
See further Mt. 26 : 14; Ro. 10 : 14. It is 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
tIs e^et and eliry. So tL 8ol (Mk. 8 : 37, ACD 5coo-ct) may be com-
pared with tL 5cbo-€t This ambiguity appears in tI
(Mt. 16 : 26).^
TTOL-qaw; and tva dj^a/SXei/'co as the reply. But the I'ra was not ne-
cessary. Cf. further Mt. 13 28. In Jo. 18 39, jSovXeade ovv
: :
been shown that the optative does not differ radically from the
subjunctive. Jannaris^ calls the optative the "secondary sub-
junctive."
1. History of the Optative. For the facts see chapter on
Conjugation of the Verb. It is an interesting history and is well
outhned by Jannaris'' in his Appendix V, "The Moods Chiefly
Since A. (Ancient Greek) Times." It retreated first from de-
pendent clauses and held on longest in the use for wish in inde-
pendent sentences like jevoLTo. But even here it finally went
down before the fut. ind. and subj. The optative was a luxury
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.
Brugmann^ notes only two, omitting the deliberative as some
scholars do for the subj. He
does reckon a third use in indirect
discourse, but this is merely the opt. in subordinate sentences
and may be either of the three normal usages. The rare fut.
and the fut. ind. are somew^hat parallel. Moulton (ProL, p. 194)
cites Dcut. 28 24 ff., where
: the opt. and fut. ind. alternate in
Synt. In the last of these he suggests that the potential and wishing functions
are distinct in origin.
^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 219. » Frol., p. 197.
8 Gildersl., Synt., Ft. I, p. 153. " lb., p. 100.
938 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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). The
other examples in Luke's writings are all in questions and 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 :
instances of av and the opt. are all in indirect questions, but the
construction is not due to the indirect question. It is merely re-
tained from the direct. The use of the optative in an indirect
question when the direct would have the indicative or the sub-
junctive is not the point. This is merely the classic sequence of
modes in indirect questions. See Lu. 8
So : 9, eTrr^pcorcoj/ tIs etr].
^ lb., p. 198. He
notes also 4 Mace. 5 13, avyyvcoatitv without av. In the
:
pap. a;' is usually present with the potential opt. (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p.
129). Sometimes lo-cos occurs with the opt., as lo-cos — aTrop-qcruev in Joh. Philop.
* Burton, M. and T., p. 80; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 220.
MODE (efkaisis) 939
109 8) has Xd/3ot, Luke gives Xa/Serco.'^ There are only 23 exam-
:
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
:
the Iva being merely introductory (cf. examples with the subj.).^
It is hardly with the optative. Blass^ reads
a case of final Iva
18 : without av as
33, etc.) in Homer, where a deliberative subj.
would be admissible. See also Ps. 120 (119) 3, tL bodely] aoi koI t'l :
Bavero, dLrjTTopovv) all show this state of mind. One may note also
el ^ovKoLTo in Ac. 25 : 20 after airopohixevos. Cf 27 39. The de-
. :
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 : : :
5, 13; 1 Cor. 6 : 15; Gal. 2 : 17; 3 : 21; 6 : 14; 1 Th. 3 : 11, 12 bis; 5 : 23
bis; 2 Th. 2 : 17 bis; 3 : 5, 16; 2 Tim. 1 : 16, 18; 4 : 16; Phil. 20; Heb.
13 : 21; 1 Pet. 1 : 2; 2 Pet. 1 : 2; Ju. 2, 9.
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 196.
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 211.
* Moulton, Prol., p. 194.
^ lb., p. 198. On the "development principle" of the opt. see Mutzbauer,
Konj. und Opt., p. 155.
MODE (etkaizis) 941
person in prohibitions and finally gave up the fight all along the
line. The modes were slower than the tenses in making sharp dis-
tinctions 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."^
The ambiguity of the imperative persists in the second person
plural present where only the context can decide the mode. Thus
epavvare (Jo. 5 : 39) ; iriaTeveTe (14 : 1); a-yaWiaade (1 Pet. 1:6);
oiKohonetadt (2:5); rtXeTre (Ro. 13:6); /ca^ifere (1 Cor. 6:4); cf.
'^Jo. 12 : 19. The perfect form Ure (Jas. 1 : 19; Heb. 12 : 17) shows
-the same situation.
2. Meaning of the Imperative.In its original significance it
was demand-* or exhortation. But, as will be shown, it was not
(Mt. 27 4). Blass^ denies that this is a " classical" idiom (against
:
» Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 449, 451, 555 ff.; V. and D., Handb. (Jebb), p.
322 f.; Thumb, Handb., p. 127.
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 177. Cf. Gildorsl., Synt., p. 117.
» Moulton, Prol., p. 177.
* Synt., Ft. I, p. IIG. Cf. W.-Th., p. 31G.
^ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 2U9.
MODE (EFKAISIi:) 943
in Mk. 11:3. Some MSS. have 'iaroi rather than ecrrat in Mt.
20 : 26.
(6) The Subjunctive. The volitive subjunctive is quite to the
point. In the first person this use of the subj. held its own al-
ways in lieu of the imperative. It is needless to repeat the dis-
cussion of this matter (see Subjunctive in this chapter). The use
of 'iva with the subj, in an imperatival sense is seen in Mk. 5 23 :
and optative (the imper. form aor. mid. sec. singl. is irapaKa-
Xeo-at), Cf, ^aiTTcaai and jSaTrrto-at, one and the same form. The
idiom is less frequent in the Attic ^ outside of laws and maxims,
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 179. * Moulton, Prol., p. 179.
2 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 162, « Blass, Gr. of N, T, Gk., p. 222.
» Giles, Man., p. 468,
944 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
but happens to be the one infinitive construction that
is ahve in
Lua fxrjSev aipcoaLv, the other with fxfi kvdvaaadai) The marg. in .
W.H. has yUTj kvbv(jr}ade. The MSS. often vary between the middle
inf.and imper. or subj. Winer^ thinks that expositors have been
unduly anxious to find this use of the infinitive in the N.T. But
it is there. See further chapter XX, Verbal Nouns.
(e) The Winer ^ found much difficulty in the abso-
Participle.
lute use of the participle in the N. T. The so-called genitive ab-
solute 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
prose writers have this construction, though "seldom." He ex-
In the papyrus example given above Grenfell and Hunt call the
writer "an official of some importance." Moulton^ also trans-
lates Thumb ^ concerning the "hanging nominative" (common in
classical and kolvt] Greek) as saying that the usage "is the pre-
cursor of the process which ends in modern Greek with the dis-
appearance 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
supplied. Cf. evXoyrjTos 6 deos (2 Cor. 1:3). Shall we supply
eaTLv or t)tco (earco) as we have it in 1 Cor. 16 22? In a case like :
perative, but Moulton notes the curious fact that eare (impera-
tive) does not appear in the N. T. at all, though we have ladi. five
times, iarct} or ^tcj fourteen, and eaTooaav twice.'' There are in-
Index Pat. he finds it only in 1 Clem. 45 : 1, and the accent is doubtful here.
He finds it also in Test. XII Pat. Reub. G : 1. It could have been used in
Napht. 3 : 2 and in Ign. Eph. 10 2. :
d7a7rarc to us exdpovs vfxoiv (Mt. 5 : 44) ; eiaeXOe els to Ta/iietof aov Kal
irpoaev^aL (6:6); TravTore xo-lp^re (1 Th. 5 : 16). Moulton^ 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.
(b) Prohibition. This is just a negative command and differs
in no respect save the presence of the negative nr}. Thus /x?) /cpt-
vere (Mt. 7 :l), fxr] (po^elcrde (Jo. 6 20). Often the presence of the :
rov vabv tovtov, Kal h Tpicrlu rnxepaLs eyepco aiirbv. This is much the
same as kav XmrjTe. It is not a strict command. We have para-
taxis with Kal, but it is equivalent in idea to hypotaxis with kav.
So with avTlartjTe tc3 5ia/36Xa), Kal (jiev^erac a4>' vpQiv (Jas. 4 : 7 f .)
avaara e/c tC)v veKpcov (LXX), Kal kTrL(f)avaeL aoL 6 XpiaTos (Eph. 5 : 14).
See also /xi) Kplvere, Kal oh p-rj KpLdfJTe' Kal pi] KaradLKa^eTe, /cat ov p-q
(joi (Mt. 18 : 26). So also tovto ttoUl Kai ^naxi (Lu. 10 : 28) ;
'ipx^oQf^
epavPTjaov Kai tSe (Jo. 7:52). Cf. epxov Kai 'i8e (Jo. 1:46). This
seems simple enough.
(/) In Asyndeton. It is a regular classic idiom ^ to have aye,
4)epe with another imperative. "A7e with KXavaare (Jas. 5:1) is
an interjection like 8evpo aKoKoWei p,oL (Mt. 19 21) and SeOre tSere :
(Mt. 28 6). See : also Jo. 4 29; 21 12; Rev. 19 17. More : : :
different, opare fxrjSels yLvwaKero). In Rev. 19 10, opa prj, the verb :
with fir] is not expressed. For 6pa Tronyo-ets see also Heb. 8 5 :
ject here is that it is so rare that one may not catch it in the dis-
not made on the basis of the modes at all. Leaving out the
imperative because of its rarity in subordinate sentences, all other
three modes occur in almost all the suborctinate clauses. The
same mode-ideas are to be sought here as there. The subor-
dinate 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. I, p. 164. See also Thompson, Synt., p. 190 f.
tense a force different from that which they usually have in prin-
cipal clauses. Hence arises the necessity for special treatment of
the moods and tenses in subordinate clauses." I cannot agree to
this as the reason for the separate treatment. Sometimes in in-
direct discourse after secondary tenses there may be a sequence
of modes Greek with final clauses after sec-
(true also in ancient
ondary but that is so slight a matter that it bears no
tenses),
sort of proportion to the subordinate clauses as a whole. Gilder-
sleeve (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,
the futuristic aorist subj.
(cf. octls apvqaTjTat in Mt. 10 33), but :
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 is not absolute. The paratactic conjunctions
were first on the Popular speech has always had a fondness
field.^
that the clause is the object of the preceding verb, but the clause
is preserved in the direct (co-ordinate) form. Cf. Xkyere 6tl jSXa-
a4)r]ixeh (Jo. 10 : 36). 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
principal sentence, a paragraph, forsooth, as kv oh (Lu. 12 1) :
and avd' Siv (12 3). But, on the whole, we can draw a pretty
:
1 : 14, evxo.pi.crT(Jj oti ovSeva vfxoiiv e/SaTTTicra et /ii) ^piairov koI Vaiov, Iva
(jLT] TLS etTT^ OTL €ts TO k/jLov ovofia k^aiTTiaOriTe. See also Mk. 6 : 55
and section 10 in this chapter. The infinitive and the participle
are used also in subordinate clauses, but they do not directly con-
cern the problem of the modes save in indirect discourse. They
are so important and partake of the functions of both noun and
verb to such an extent that they demand a separate chapter
— XX.
1. Relative Sentences.
(a) Relative Sentences Originally Paratactic. The relative 6s,
Cf. ha, oTore and perhaps el. Upiv, e-n-ei, axph yikxpt are not relative.
Thus the subordinate clauses overlap. Burton/ indeed, includes
ecos under relative sentences.
That is not necessary, since thus
nearly the subordinate clauses would properly be treated as
all
1 See, per contra, Baron,Le Pronom Rcl. et la Conjonction en Grec, pp. 61 ff.
2 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-
ing." D in Mk. reads (pdyofjiai.
.
:
\oyriaet (Lu. 12 : 8). See also 6aTt,s oixoKoyrjaeL and oorts apvqarjTat,
(Mt. 10:32f.).
(e) Definite and Indefinite Relative Sentences. Goodwin^ has
made popular the custom of calling some relative sentences " con-
ditional relatives." He has been followed by Burton.^ Jannaris^
considers conditional relative clauses "virtually condensed clauses
capable of being changed into conditional protases." Almost any
sentence is capable of being changed into some other form as a
practical equivalent. The relative clause may indeed have the
resultant effect of cause, condition, purpose or result, but in it-
Mk. 4 23. One might as well say that 6 \aix^aviiiv (Jo. 13 20) is
: :
30, 32; Lu. 9 50. So then av TLva t€ijl\{/oi} (Jo. 13 20) is a condi-
: :
tional 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
is a fine one. The MSS. sometimes vary between el tls and oorts
as in Mk. 6 : 22 f.; 8 : 34; 1 Cor. 7 : 13. In Jo. 14 : 13 f. note
OTi av alT7]a7]Te and eav tl airrjarjTe. Note the distinction between
6 Kexo-pLcrpai and e'i tl KexapLa/xaL in 2 Cor. 2 : 10. In Mk. 8 34 f :
note el' TLS deXeL — 6s eav 6e\y. What is true is that the relative
sentences are either definite or indefinite. It is not a question of
mode nor but merely whether the relative de-
of the use of av,
scribes a definite antecedent or is used in an indefinite sense.
The definite relative is well illustrated by 2 Th. 3 3, ttio-tos 8e :
(Mk. 4 25). In the same verse Kal 6s ovk ex" is indefinite, but nal
:
oaoL av rixpavTo (Mk. 6 : 56). So also with 7ras os epeZ (Lu. 12 : 10)
and ttSs 6s av o/jioXoyqaei (12 : 8). Cf. os eorat (17: 31) with os edj/
^r]TWV (17: 33) and os 5' av airoKkaH. Cf. Ac. 7: 3, 7; Gal. 5 : 17.
That it is not a question of mode is thus clear. Cf. os tav d'ekxi
with OS av otTToXeo-et (Mk. 8 : 35). Thus note in Mk. 4 25 os yap :
33), oo-rts T7]pi]arj (Jas. 2 : 10) and otrtves ov ixi] yevaoovTai (Mk. 9 :
Latin an and the Gothic an, and had apparently two meanings,
'else' and 'in that case rather.' Monro ^ argues that the pri-
mary use of iiu and Keu is with particular and definite examples.
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 limi-
tation 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.
165). That is putting it a bit strong. I should rather say that it
was an interpreter of the sentence, not a transformer. Moulton
counts 172 instances of modal av (eav) in the N. T. (p. 166). Mat-
thew leads with 55, then Mark 30, Gospel of Luke 28 and Acts
only 10, Paul's Epistles 27, the Johannine writings only 20, He-
brews 1, James 1. Mr. H. Scott fears that these figures are not
correct, but they are approximately so. The MSS. vary very
much. These examples occur with ind. or sul)j. Moulton finds
739 cases of modal iiv in the LXX (Hatch and Redpath). Of
these 40 are with opt. (26 aorist), 56 with ind. (41 aorist, 6
imp., 1 plup., 1 pres., 7 fut. ind.), the rest with subj. Rader-
macher {N. T. Gr., p. 165) finds modal av in the kolpt] decreas-
ing 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
of ap survive especially in temporal clauses. So in Rev. 8:1,
oTav ripoi^tv. But (Mk. 11:25) may be general.
orap arrjKeTe
There is doubt also about orap d\pe eyhero (11 19). But in Mk. :
TYiprjar] — TTalar} 8e (Jas. 2 : 10). The use of eav like av has been
shown (cf. Orthography) to be very common with relatives at
this period. It is immaterial which is found. So 6s eav \uari and
OS av iroLr]<jri (Mt. 5 : 19). The MSS. often vary between eav and
av, as in Mt. 10 14; Ac. 7:7. So also ocra eav OeXrjTe (Mt. 7: 12)
:
ols eav TvxoL, F.P. (see Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32). Rader-
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
is that dv has no peculiar construction of its own. It is more
frequent with the subjunctive than with the indicative in rela-
tive sentences, but is not absolutely essential with either mode.*
In the Attic the subj. is invariable with dv, l)ut "in the less cul-
tured Hellenistic writers" (Moulton, Prol., p. 166) it occurs with
the ind. also. Curiously in the Gospel of John di^ occurs with
oarts only in the neuter (Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 304).
Always in the N. T. on 'edv='6TL dv unless in Mk. 6 23 the correct :
iSiov vlov ouK h4>dffaTo. Cf. also a e/jLeWov (Rev. 3 : 2) and the com-
mon avd' &v (Lu. 1 : 20). Cf. Ac. 10 : 47; Ro.
1 25, 32; Ph. 2 : :
the merely explanatory relative 6s eortv ixov t'^kvov *in the same
sentence. So otrLves airodwaovaLV avrt^ (Mt. 21:41); ot irpoiropev-
GovTai (Ac. 7 40; Ex. 32 1) : : ; ovk exco 6 Trapaer]<rco (Lu. 11:6) where
the Attic Greek would ^ have 6tl. Sometimes I'm occurs where a
relative might have been used. So 2 Cor. 12 7 e86dr] : fioi aKoXoxp
— 'iva p.e KoXa(f)l^ri, (Jo. 5 : 7) ovk exco avdpoiirov tva /3dX7? /xe, (9 : 36)
I'm TTLarevaco els ainbv. Cf. Gal. 4:5; Rev. 19 : 15. Viteau^ stri-
aerai, with Mk. 4 : 22, kav /xi) I'm <t)avepudfj and tva eXdri eis 4)avepbv.
The classic idiom preferred the fut. ind. for purpose with the
relative (Schmid, Atticismus, IV, p. 621), but Isocrates (IV, 44)
has e(/)' oh ^tXon/iTj^coo-tj'. Radermacher (V. T. Gr., p. 138) cites
for the KOLVT] Diod. XI, 21, 3, 8l' ov rpowov — aveXri; XIV, 8, 3, 8l'
Siv ki,k\u(xi.v; Ach. Tatius, IV, 16, 13, 6aov — XAjSp, etc.
Purpose is often contemplated result so that the consecutive
idea follows naturally that of design. Only the ind. future is used
in the N. T., unless one follows Blass^ in taking 6 irpoaevkyKri (Heb.
8 : 3) as result. A
good instance of the future ind. is in Lu. 7 4, :
XanjSdvtL (Mt. 10 : 38); 6s yap ovk eort Kad' vjjlwv (Lu. 9 : 50). Oc-
casionally when the relative is indefinite the subjective negative
9); fjiii onoXoyeL (1 Jo. 4 : 3) ; a mi? ^^t (Tit. 1:11). So also D in Ac.
15 : 29. Moulton (Prol., p. 171) calls this use of fx-lj a survival of
literary construction. He gives also some papyri examples {ib., p.
239) of jujj in relative clauses: B.U. 114 (U/a.d.) ^j^ awodeSoiKev abrca
2. Causal Sentences.
27:8), didTvep (1 Cor. 8:13), 6deu (Ac. 26:19), 5t' ifjv aiTlav (2
Tim. 1:6, 12), ov x^-P'-v (Lu. 7:47) are not always regarded as
formally causal. The construction is sometimes paratactic. In-
deed, the subordination of the on and Stort clauses is often rather
loose.^ Thus there is very little difference between 6tl (begins
the sentence with W. H.) in 1 Cor. 1 : 25 and yap in 1 : 26. Cf.
also h-Ktibr) in 1 : 22. See further 6tl in 2 Cor. 4 6; 7 : : 8, 14, and
biOTi in Ro. 3 : 20; 8 : 7. The causal sentence is primarily para-
due at all to kirel. In the same way we explain ewel Uet in Heb.
9 : 26 and eirei dxpeiXeTe apa in 1 Cor. 5 : 10. There is ellipsis also
5, 8-9. Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 162, 535. The distinction is
/X17 TOTe (or M'? T^oTe) laxvet, we likewise meet jir]. In B. G. U. 530
(I/a.D.), CTTt nil avT€ypa\j/as avT^ on ovk tireyi^m xpos ae, note kirl (et) —
/U17 and OTL OVK with true distinction. With ov we have the objec-
tive fact, with M17 the element of blame ((iefj.cl)eTaL) appears. "The
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. 471 ff.; Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 171.
Cor. 5:4; Ph. 4:10. Cf. k<t>' a) Scbaet, P. Oxy. 38 (a.d. 49).
The classical e<^' cS re does not occur in the N. T. See e0' w Sdjcret,
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.^
:
Jo. 5:9 OTL occurs twice, once as causal and once as objec-
tive particle. In 2 Th. 3 7 f exegesis alone can determine the : .
Cf. also Jo. 16 8-11 (see Abbott, Johannine Gr., p. 158). The
:
the ancient Greek meant 'not only do I say that, but I also
it
say.' But in the N. T. it either means 'I say this not because'
or 'I do not mean to say that,' and usually the latter according
to Abbott.i
We must have a word about kird, eTeid-f], kireibriTcep. As a matter
of fact kivei-br]-Tcep (note the composition) appears in the N. T.
only in Lu. 1 : 1 (Luke's classical introduction). This is un-
doubtedly a literary touch.^ 'EireLbi] is read by W. H. in Lu. 7:
and Ac. 13 46, but exet be : is put in the margin. Eight other
examples remain, all in Luke (Gospel and Acts) and Paul (1 Co-
rinthians and Philippians) . Cf. Lu. 11:6; 1 Cor. 1 : 21 f. 'Eird,
obsolescent in the late Greek,^ is almost confined to Luke, Paul,
Mt. 21 46, eiret ds ir po4>i]Tr]v elxov. The classical idiom of the el-
:
lipsis with eireL has already been mentioned and is relatively fre-
3 13), though davjid^oi otl is found also* (Lu. 11: 38; Gal. 1
: :
38); xatpco (Lu. 10 20); xoXaco (Jo. 7 23). Cf. 5n and e4>' 4i in
: :
Ph. 4 10. On the possible causal use of ore and oTav see article
:
Feb. 12:6. For oam note Mt. 7:15; Ro. 6:2. See also ov
xapLv (Lu. 7 47) and 8l' riv alriav (8 47).
: :
Kad(j:s and 5td to. In Mk. 5 4, 5td to bebkadai Kai dLeairaadai, /cat
:
(TvvTeTpi4>daL, note the perfect tense and the repetition of the in-
finitive. Burton^ thinks that here 5id gives rather the evidence
than the reason. Why not both? There is one example of the
instrumental use of the infinitive to express cause, tc3 firj ebpetv jie
occur.*
(e) The Participle. We do not have aTe, olov, ola, as in classical
Greek, to give the real reason. That is given simply by the parti-
ciple as in SiKatos cov Kal fir] deXcov avT-qv buy fiaTlaaL (Mt. 1 19). It :
25; Ac. 4 : 21. But cos occurs with the participle to give the al-
leged reason, which may be the real one or mere assumption.
Thus in Mt. 7 : 28 f., cos e^ovalav exoov Kai ovx cos ol ypannaTeis, the
first cos gives the ostensible (and true ground) of the astonishment
of the people. Cf. also Lu. 16 : 1; Ac. 2 2. But in Lu. 23 14,
: :
cos airo(jTpkcf)ovTa tov \a6v, Pilate does not believe the charge against
Jesus to be true. So also with cos fxeWovTuv in Ac. 27 30. :
1 The Use of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20. Mr. H. Scott notes pres. 24,
aor. 1 (Mt. 24 : 7 times.
12), perf .
KaBo iav exd evrpocrdeKTOs, oh Kadd ova exet, where a good distinction
is drawn between the subjunctive and the indicative. Cf. 0. P.
1125, 14 (ii/A.D.) KaOo ixLffdol pepos. The construction with eav is
like that of the indefinite relative with eav (av) and the subj. The
plural Kada is found only once in the N. T. (Mt. 27 10). Ka^dTrep, :
Attic and a shght literary touch. Cf. 1 Cor. 10 10. The mode :
2 45 4 35) and the same idiom precisely each time, KadoTL av tls
: ; :
parative particles. The most frequent of all is cos itself which has
various other uses as exclamatory (<hs wpaTot ol iroSes in Ro. 10 :
Mt. 8 13).^ The verb is not always expressed. Thus cos oi viroKpi.-
:
rai (Mt. 6:5). This predicate use of cbs is very extensive. Cf.
COS Kat (1 Cor. 7:7). The mode is usually the indicative, as in
Mk. 10 : 1, but the subj. occurs in Mk. 4 : 26, cbs avdpwTos ^aXji
(cf. cbs oi'K oUev). Blass^ considers this "quite impossible," but it is
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.
Gr., p. 164. In 1 Th. 2 : 7, cbs kav Tpo4>6^ daXirri to. eavrrjs reKva,
we do have kav, but the construction in Mark is not lawless. 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) :
/Calebs — ovTus (Jo. 3 : 14) ; Ka^cbs — oi5rcos /cat (2 Cor. 8:6); /ca^cbs
Kat — ourcos /cat (Col. 3 : 13) ; /cat — Ka^cbs Kat (Ro. 1 : 13) ; Ka^cbs — Kat
(Jo. 15 : 9) ; oMotcos Ka^cbs (Lu. 17 : 28), and note Kara to. avra in verse
30. The correlative is not always expressed (Mt. 21: 6). So in
Col. 1 : 6, Ka^cbs Kat. Sometimes the principal clause is unex-
pressed as in 1 Tim. 1:3, or only ov occurs, as ov KaQws (1 Jo. 3
12; Jo. 6 : 58). It is a late word but is aJ3undant in the papyri.
In the N. T. it occurs only with the indicative. The word, as
already noted, sometimes has a causal sense (Ro. 1 : 28). It may
have a temporal signification in Ac. 7: 17. It occurs in indirect
question in Ac. 15 : and is epexegetical in 3 Jo. 3. Ka0cbo-7rep is
14,
read only once in the N. T. (Heb. 5:4), though W. H. put it in
the margin in 2 Cor. 3 : 18 (text Kadairep). 'ficret but
is classical,
has no verb (cf. Mt. 3 : 16; Mk. 9 : 26, etc.) in the though
N. T.,
it occurs with the participle (had Trpo/Sara uri exovra -n-oifxha (Mt.
9 : 36). Cf. also Ro. 6 : 13. It is used in the sense of 'about' as
in Lu 9 : 14, 28, etc. It is commonest in the Gospels and Acts.
1 In general correlatives are rare in the LXX. Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 142.
2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 321.
:
TTOV 4>aycjo in the direct question. Cf. ovk exet irov rriv Ke(i)a\r]v kXIvj]
(Lu. 9 : 58). But the subj. with eav in otov kav airepxv (Lu. 9 :
Mt. 8 : 19. See further Mt. 24 : 28; 26 : 13; Mk. 6 : 10; 9 : 18;
14 : 9, 14. Curiously enough all 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. :
5. Temporal Clauses.
(a) Kin to Relative Clauses in Origin and Idiom. Blass^
bluntly says that temporal clauses introduced byj^re and orav
"are generally only a special class of relative sentence, and ex-
hibit the same constructions." The same thing is true of local
sentences. Burton^ carries this conception to such a point that
he has no separate treatment of temporal sentences at all. This
is surely going too far. Thompson'* sees the matter rightly when
he says: "The vague original relative import becomes specialized."
Hence we expect to find both definite and indefinite temporal
clauses as with other relative (and local) clauses. Definite tem-
poral clauses may be illustrated by Mt. 7 28, : oTe tTektcev 6 'Itj-
drjv OTL oi'K ecFTLV Wos "Pco/xatots xc-Ptr^cr^oit riva avOpwirov ivplv t) 6 KaTt)-
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 connec-
tion between ore (cf. 6-dep, Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 254) and
Homeric ore and 6s re (Monro, Ho7n. Gr., p. 191) is disputed.^
Cf. the conjunction 6 from 6s and on from oo-rts. Homer used
ore asa causal conjunction like on. Only the indicative (see be-
low) mode appears with ore in the N. T., but it occurs with past,
present and future. Usually the events are definite, as in Mt.
21 : 1, ore riyyiaap ds 'lepocroXujua. The present tense is rare, as in
ore ykyopa api]p in 1 Cor. 13 : 11; ore ffj in Hcb. 9 : 17. 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 preceded by a word like copa (Jo. 4 : 21, 23) or y]txkpa (Ro. 2 :
eojs eiTrr]Te in Lu. 13 : 35, but Nestle still reads ews ^^et ore elwnTe.
The text is in much confusion, but at any rate here is manuscript
evidence for the subjunctive with ore without av. This is in har-
mony with what we saw was true of 6s and oo-rts. It is also a
well-known Homeric idiom.^ Radermacher (A''. T. Gr., p. 164)
cites 6t€ ap^TjTat (Vettius, pp. 106, 36). "Orav naturally occurs
more frequently with the subjunctive for indefinite future time.
It is usually the aorist tense, as in Mt. 24 33, orav U-qre. : The
present subj. does occur when the notion of repetition is implied,
as in Mt. 15 : 2, orav aprov iaeiwuLv. Cf. Mt. 6 : 2. Once the idea
of duration seems manifest but usu- (Jo. 9 : 5, orav kv rw Koafjiw &),
ally it is future uncertainty simply. not necessary to take It is
save in the doubtful ore of Lu. 13 35. "Ore with the subj.
elirriTe :
ity in form and meaning of the aorist subj. with the future
indicative should cause no surprise at this idiom. In Lu. 13 :
though more common in the kolvt]. Cf. Ex. 1 16; Ps. 101 3; : :
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-
:
56. But the kolv-t] writers used oTav with the aorist indicative for
This is common in the Byzantine^ writers.
a definite occurrence.
In the modern Greek oTav is freely used with the indicative.^ See
Philo II, 112, 23, OTav els evoLa rjXOev. Blass^ calls this quite in-
correct, 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 ex-
amples in the N. T., Mk. 11 19, otuu d^pe kyeveTO, e^eTopevovTo e^w
:
with eav and the subjunctive. These points are all obvious.
'fis is rather common
N. T. as a temporal conjunction.
in the
It is adverb from 6s and occurs in a variety
originally a relative
of constructions. The temporal use is closely allied to the com-
parative. Cf. cos eXdXet -qixlv hv rrj 68Q (Lu. 24 32). So Jo. 12 : :
list 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 preposi-
: :
Greek prose and dxpt o.v only in poetry.^ But Philo (I, 166, 20)
has dxpis av a(3ea€Le.—But the simple conjunction is less fre-
quent 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 (prepo- :
sition). Cf. Ac. 1 22. Past tenses of the indicative are used of
:
IJLexpLs ou. In all three instances the aorist subj. is used without
ixu for the indefinite future. The use as a preposition is more
frequent. Cf. /xexpt 'lo^auov (Lu. 16 : 16) and m^XP^s a'C/jLaros (Heb.
12 : 4). It means 'up to the point of.'^ The kolvti writers show
a rather varied use of Aiexpt (cf. Diodorus, Strabo, Polybius,
Josephus, Justin Martyr). They, like the papyri, have /xexpt
and tikxpi-s ou with and without av (Radermacher, A^. T. Gr.,
p. 140). "Ecos is much more frequent in the N. T. both as
preposition (cf. ews ovpavou, Mt. 11: 23) and as conjunction. The
prepositional use is illustrated also in ews rod eXdelv (Ac. 8 :40).
The prepositional use (more frequent than the conjunctional)
goes back as far as Aristotle and denotes the terminus ad quern.
"Ecos is Attic for Homeric rjos and Doric as.- As with axpi- and
nkxPh we 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 in-
: .
25), ecos OTOU e(t)6iPT](rav (Jo. 9 18). When the present ind. appears
:
with ecos the notion is 'while,' not 'until,' and it is either a con-
temporaneous event, as in ecos aOros awoXuet Tov oxXov (Mk. 6 45. :
W. H. read in the text cos, not ecos. We have, besides, ecos otov 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, be-
ing 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
: :
1 Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 128. But the proper sense of the indie, is
€ws av here. A few MSS. have Tplv in Lu, 22 34.* The papyri rj :
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,
81, 11 (iii/A.D.). See also Job 13 22 k^. :
1 Cf. Sturm, Goschichtl. Entw. der Konstr. mit -n-plv, 1882, p. 4; Frenzel,
Die Entw. der Siitzo mit TrptV, 1896, p. 12.
2 Sturm, ib., p. 145. < Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Ck., p. 219.
3 lb., p. G. 6 Moulton, Prol., p. 169 note.
978 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
means 'since.' Cf. rplTiqv ravTrjv inxkpav ayei d0' ov in Lu. 24:21.
In Rev. 16 : 18 it is the simple equivalent of oltto tovtov ore as in
the Attic Greek and Herodotus. In these examples the indica-
tive 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 mo-
ment when,' 'when once' the steward arises. In like manner we
see d^' ^s used for 'since' in Lu. 7:45; Ac. 24 : 11; 2 Pet. 3 : 4.
In Col. 1 : 6, 9 we have the form d0' ^s rjnepas. 'Ev a) is not
always temporal. It may be merely local (Ro. 2:1), instrumen-
tal (Ro. 14: 21) or causal (Ro. 8:3). The temporal use is much
hke ews in the sense of 'while,' as in Mk. 2 : 19 (Lu. 5: 34) ei^ w 6
vvix4>L0^ I1€t' avToov kcTiv. Cf. Jo. 5 : 7, ej' (3 epxojjLaL with eojs epxopat
in Jo. 21 : 22. In Lu. 19 : 13 the Text. Rec. has ecos epxofJiaL,
but h if is the true reading.
l:Qevu) has its antece- In 1 Pet.
dent 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 :
'
Votaw, The Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20. » lb.
3 Moiilton, Prol., p. 230. "Wc should not usually put a tenii)oral clause
to represent these, as it would overdo the emphasis."
J
lb., p. 108. ' IMoulton, Prol., p. 185.
2 Am. Jour, of Philol., 1883, p. 419. " Goodwin, M. and T., p. 107.
' Entwickclungsgcschichte der Absichtsiitze (1SS4, 1885).
« Dyroff, Gesch. dea Pronomcn rcflexivum, 1892, p. 71.
' Cf. Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 5GG. » lb.
:
of I'm, much
preferring ottcos and oircos av.^ So in epic and lyric
poetry overshadowed by o(/)pa and in tragedy by cos, though
tva is
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 the natural mode for the expectant note in clauses of purpose.^
But must not be overlooked that IVa in no way controls the
it
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
distinction is sometimes faint. All in all it is one of the most
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
we are now specifically concerned with the pure final use of I'm.
22). Cf. Ph. 3 : 8. The negative with iVa is nrj, as in Iva (iri
KpLdrjTe (Mt. 7:1). The aorist subj. is the normal tense, of course,
as in I'm n€Ta8u) (Ro. 1: 11), though the present occurs to denote
a continuous action, as in 'iva -maTevrjTe (Jo. 13 : 19). Cf, Iva yvaire
Kal jLvcoaKTjTe (Jo. 10: 38). The perfect subj. occurs in tlSC), as I'm
dSfjs (1 Tim. 3 : 15); tm eiocbuev (1 Cor. 2 : 12); I'm eldrjTe (1 Jo.
5: 13). Cf. also Jo. 17: 19, 23; 1 Cor. 1 : 10; 2 Cor. 1 :9 (I'm
of the optative used with I'm after a secondary tense of the indica-
tive. 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
iva Trapa8ol (Mk. 14: 10) and in the sub-final I'm yvoX (Mk. 9 30).^ :
In Homer and the early writers generally the rule was to use the
opt. with the final clauses after secondary tenses, l^ut in the Attic
orators the two modes (subj. and opt.) are on a par in such a con-
struction, while Thucydides 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 :
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., W—
tlrji in primary sequence. Tb. 1 (ii/B.c.) actually
has Tj^iuiaa xP'?MO'''"''^i7o^otTo.
* Weber, Entwickclungsgeschichtc dcr Al)sichtsatze, p. 2 13.
984 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
pure design (Radermacher, A^. T.Gr., p. 138). But while the subj. is
the normal construction, the indicative is also present. In clas-
sical Greek IW was not used with the future ind.'^ It was not com-
mon even with ottws, tbs and fir]. The similarity in form and
sense (not to mention itacism of -?? and -et) made the change very
easy and, indeed, the text is not always certain as between the
aorist subj.and the future ind. Thus in 1 Cor. 13:3 I'm Kavx'f]-
aio/xaL issupported by {<AB, 'iva Kavdrjaoj/xaL by CK and Iva Kavdij-
(xofxaL late documents.^ In Gal. 2 4 the best documents have
by :
between 'iva Scoo-et and duaxi. So in Jo. 15 8 note 'iva 4>^pr]Te Kal :
rai (1 Pet. 3:1); I'm a4>a^ovaLv (Rev. 6:4); 'iva Scixret (8:3); 'iva
ri^ovaiv — yvQ>GLV (3 : 9); 'iva ecrrat Kal daekdcocnv (22 : 14), etc. This
last example may In some of these examples the
be non-final.
subj. and ind. future occur side by side. In Mk. 6 56 and :
This is not modal 'dv, but K'dv as even = Kal (Jannaris, Hist. ' '
MSS. vary between I'm TroL-qari and -et, and in 16 between I'm
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
: : :
MSS. support the present ind. with I'm in Jo. 4 15; 5:20; 17: :
3; Gal. 6:12;. ITh. 4:13; Tit. 2:4; 2 Pet. 1:10; Rev. 12:6.^
In the earher Greek writers we do find iVa used with past tenses
of the indicative.2 show that the purpose was
The idea was to
dependent on an unfulfilled wish or unattained action. But this
lenistic,^ at the heart of it there is the pure telic idiom. "Im with
the imperative in 1 Cor. 1 : 31 is due, of course, to the quotation.
"Ira is repeated three times in 2 Cor. 12
7. In Jo. 11 37, iroLrjaai : :
2 Goodwin, M. and T., p. 120. The Mod. Gk. has va with past tenses
Cf.
of the ind. (Thumb, Handb., p. 198).
» Moulton, Prol., pp. 41, 205, 211.
tation from the LXX (Ps. 51: 6), but changed from subj. there.
But OTTCOS OavaToiaovuLv is a variant reading in Mt. 26 59, and :
(A^. T. Gr., p. 158) finds Sttcos &v in Diodorus XIV, 80, 8, Aris-
teas, § 239, inscr. of Halicarnassus (iii/B.c), Jahrh. d. Ost. Inst.
XI, 56. But it is rare and ottcos steps into the background be-
fore tva. The 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 nega-
tive is, of course, always fxrj, as in Ac. 20 16, ottcos fxi] yev-qrat. The :
{'Iva iJLrjvva^, ottcos TLaacoaiv) and may be used for the sake of variety
as in I'm yevrjraL ottcos yevrjTaL (2 Cor. 8 : 14). Cf. also Lu. 16:28;
» Moulton, Prol., p. 197; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 417.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 211.
MODE (efkaisis) 987
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 subor-
that one not certain. J<B read cbs reXetcoo-co in Ac. 20 24 instead of :
cos TeXetcoaat (cf. Lu. 9 52). W. H. and Nestle read reXeicbo-co, but
:
Souter (Rev. V.) gives reXetcocrai. It is the last leaf on the tree
and a fluttering one at that. The form could be the future ind.
or aorist subj. Radermacher (A'^. T. Gr., p. 158) finds final cb$
(5) Mr], fir] TTore, nr] ttcos. Negative purpose is expressed by 'iva
ixi], OTTCOS fir] also, but originally it was done merely by /197 in a para-
junction fxr]. Only the sul)j. is used, though in Ac. 27:42 ni] tls
6ta0i)7otis 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 :
1 lb. ="
Moulton, Prol., p. 220.
» Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 107, 112.
« lb., p. 112. 6 lb., p. 107.
988 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Trapa\oyi^r]TaL instead of ^117 tls (the variant reading). See also /jlt]
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 con-
and Tenses, §333. In 1 Th. 3:5 we have p.r] ttcos kirelpaa-ev Kal
ykvy]Tai side by side. It is better therefore to take rpexco in Gal.
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
tempter did not succeed with the Thessalonians. It is thus un-
fulfilledpurpose 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 ' '
'
any time.' Radermacher (iV. T. Gr., p. 158) thinks that Tore and
TTcbs often distinguish deliberative (dubitative) from final /jlt]. As
a strictly final particle it occurs either with the subj or the future .
ind., though the sul)j. is more common.^ For the fut. ind. note
Mt. 7 :Q iJ,r} TTore KaTairaTr]crov(ni' (correct text, though the aorist
subj. has support), Mk. 14 : 2 jui? T^ore earaL. In Lu. 12:58 note
M17 TTore KaracFvpri Kal aTodcccreL. Both subj. and fut. ind. likewise
occur in Mt. 13 : 15 (Ac. 28 : 27) fx-q wore Ibuiaiv — /cat laaop.ai (LXX,
Is. 6 : 10). So also in Lu. 14: 8 f., m^ Trore fi
K^KK-qiikvos (note per-
fect subj.) Kal epel (cf. tm epet in verse 10). The normal subj. is
seen in Lu. 14 12, : fir] wore avTLKa\eao)aLi>. The opt. in the N. T.
is wanting in final sentences as in cases of repetition (Rader-
macher, 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
:
6 'Irjaovs avrjxdv — TreipacxdrjvaL viro rod Sia^oKov (4:1); ovk rjSBov Ka-
(Mk. 2 17); irapecy iiev aKomai (Ac. 10 33). Cf. Lu.
Xecrai diKalovs : :
18 10; Ac.
: 11 25; 12 13; 13 44, etc. Less frequent is the inf.
: : :
with rov for the idea of purpose. Votaw^ notes but 33 such ex-
amples of direct purpose in the N. T., though the 0. T. shows
734. 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 : :
(A^. T. Gr., p. 160) cites P. Oxy. I, 52, 7 (325 a.d.), kwiaraXevTos coare
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
ets TO and irpbs TO occur with the inf. in the papyri, the latter
12; Ph. 1 10). The instances of -Kpbs to are few (12) and chiefly
:
(Eph. 6 : n)}
(d) The Participle. The future participle, so common in this
2 N. T. Gk., p. 198.
Blass, Or. of
8 Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 122 ff.
* N. T. M. and T., p. 83.
992 A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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.
: :
Thayer under I'm (2). Cf. Acta Pauli et Theclae, 29, rpocxev^ai
virep Tov rkKvov fxov, Iva ^rjaerai,. With these verbs iW 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 Greek genius. The parallel between i'm in this sense and oti
3) ; and Xe7a; (Ac. 19:4); dk\oi (Mk. 6 : 25) ; Utlv ^eX^a (Mt. 18 :
531 (ii/A.D.) TrapaKa\ct3 ae 'iva Karacrxv^j C). P. 121 (iii/A.D.) etTrd trot
e'iva doiawatv. Moulton {Prol., pp. 177, 208) recalls the old jussive
subj. as sufficient explanation of this use of I'm. Radermachcr
{Rh. M., LVI, 203) and Thumb (Hellen., p. 159) support Moulton
against the Latin influence theory. Per contra see Goetzeler,
De Polyhii EL, pp. 17 £f.; Kalker, Quest.; Viereck, Sermo Grae-
1 It is found in Horn. Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 128.
994 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
cus, p. 67. Moulton scores his point and observes also that the
inf. was not driven out by I'm in the papyri, see (e). Cf. A. P. 135
subj., not the opt. As already noted, 'iva dco-q in Eph. 1:17 is
an optative of wish after a primary tense. It is here also the
subfinal 'iva. Cf. Phil. 14; Col. 4 12. Moulton^ points out how :
closely akin are irpoaevx^ade 'iva ixi] 'eKdrjTe (Mk. 14 : 38) and dpare
Kai (pvXaaaeade (Lu. 12 : 15). The paratactic origin of the 'iva con-
struction is innovation in Hellenistic
thus well illustrated. "An
is 'iva c. subj. in commands, which takes the place of the classic
oTTcos c. fut. indie." 2 Moulton cites a moderate number of ex-
amples of this abrupt use of 'iva in the papyri. So F. P. 112 (99
A.D.) eirexov {=oov) Zw'CKwl kol e'iva avTOV fxi] dvacjoir-qays, letter of
Cicero {Alt. 6 : 5) ravra ovv, wpoJTOV ixkv, 'iva Tvavra acbfrjraf Bevrepov
8e, 'iva juTjS^ tojv tokwv dXiycopwris, B. U. 48 (ii/iii A.D.) 'iva 6p.6ae
vav TO. rov Oeov ottcos dwrjcreL, inscr. from Magn., 90, 12 (ii/B.c.)
ecppovTiaev ottoos — awoKaraaTcJaLv. The few examples in the N. T.
are all in the subj. Burton notes only three (Mt. 12 : 14; 22 : 15;
Mk. 3:6), and all three after avu^ovXiov eXajSov {k8l8ovv). The
clause thus partakes of the nature of an indirect deliberative
1 Prol., p. 178. 2 lb. » W.-M., p. 396.
« See art. by Jann., Expositor, ser. V, vol. IX, p. 296.
MODE (efkaiziz:) 995
question (cf. Mk. 11:18, ttws)- They are all after secondary-
tenses. 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
: : :
(7) M17, /X17 xcos, nr} Tore. The 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 fjLTi except in Col. 2 8 ^Xewere : (jltj tls eo-rat. Thus /SXeTrere
jLiT? TLs upas ir\avr](Txi (Mt. 24 : 4). Treg. and Tisch. read the fut. ind.
in 2 Cor. 12 : 21, but W, H. and Nestle rightly have Tairuvoia-Q (cf.
/SXeTTw (Mk. 13 : 5); opao) (Mt. 18 : 10); o-kottcco (Gal. 6:1); (t>o^eo-
nai (Ac. 27: 17). In Ac. 23 : 10 some MSS. have evXa^eofim, but
</)o/3eo/xat This construction with (po^eofiaL is rare in
is correct.
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
: : /jltj
/X17 TTOJs ovx o'lovs 6e\co eupco (2 Cor. 12 20). This is to show contrast
:
and ira /ir}). Thus Ac. 5 : 39, mi? Trore evped^re. This is a possible
explanation of pi? irore ov fxri apKkaxi (or p.y] TTore om) in Mt. 25 9 :
TrpoaevxofJiaL, Xe7co, etc. Cf. cl^los XOcrai (Ac. 13 : 25) and ci^tos 'iva
\v(T(jo (Jo. 1 : 27) . In 2 Cor. 9 : 5 the inf. is used after the 'im
clause to express an epexegetic or complementary purpose (ravTriv
eToifxrjv dvai), a rather
usage. Cf. in 1 Cor. 9 15 both common :
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
instead of the preposition). The construction is always final in
the other N. T. writers. But Paul has non-final uses, as in
1 Th. 2 : 12; 4:9. The papyri show this non-final use of tov
and the inf.(Moulton, Prol, p. 219 f.). So B. U. 1031 (ii/A.D.)
(ppourjaop TOV woLrjaaL, B. U. 164 (ii/iii A.D.) Tretcrat avrou tov eXOdv,
B. M. 23 (ii/B.C.) irpoadeofxevov fj.ov tov irepLwocrjcrat..
avTo. Cf also Mt. 1 22, 'iva T'Xrjpcodyj. But surel}^ no such pur-
. :
pose'* appears in Jo. 6 7, ovk apKovcnv ai'Tols 'iva 'eKaaros ^paxv XajS;/.
:
Tts rip-aprev —
'iva tv4)\6s yevvrjdfj; But the effort is not successful.
He denies that there is a certain, "scarcely a probable, instance
in the N. T. of a clause denoting actual result conceived as such."*^
He considers^ Rev. 13 13, Trotei ar]pe7a jue7dXa, 'iva Kal Tvp
: toltj e/c-
accents the ecbatic force of Iva. This use is possible also in Jo.
9 36;: Mk. 11 : 28. In Mk. 4 : 22, kav iir\ 'iva 4>avtpoidri, we have 'iva.
(cf. dXX' 'iva) used like cotrre and the inf. (cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T.
Gk., p. 218). In Mk. 2 : 10 I'm almost means 'on condition that.'
deov 'iv' eKojv Tret^co/xat avru). Several other examples occur in Epic-
tetus. So, then, we conclude that I'm has in the N. T. all three
uses (final, sub-final, consecutive), and thus runs a close parallel
consecutive sentence began with the inf. and was extended to the
finite verb."* In late Greek it returned to the inf. construction.
Cf. Green, Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War, 1899, p. 21. Of
the 83 instances =^
of coore in the N. T. probably 30 do not come
up for discussion under either final or consecutive clauses. The
word in these examples is merely an introductory inferential par-
ticle like ovv. The structure is wholly paratactic. In this sense
of 'therefore' the particle occurs with the ind. twenty-one times.
Cf. Mt. 12 : 12, coo-re 'e^ecTTiv. Once the subj. appears, 1 Cor. 5 :
pp. 21-27.
6 Mr. II. Scott makes 95 times by counting the verbs.
1
'lovdaiOL ihare Kal Bappa^as avpaivqxdr] avrOiP ttj viroKpiaH. Here the
actual result is distinctly accented. Blass^ on the flimsiest grounds
seeks to oust wore in Jo. 3 : 16 by otl and to put the inf. in Gal.
2 : 13, so as to get rid of this construction entirely in the N. T.
Moulton^ rightly shows small patience with such "summary"
methods in textual criticism. The construction with the ind. is
not quite obsolete in the vernacular KOLpi], but in the it is LXX
almost absent. This classic idiom stands, therefore, in the N. T.,
but only to make the contrast sharper. Of the 62 instances of
coo-re with the inf. in the N. T. they are nearly all consecutive,
not final nor even sub-final. Even in the classical Greek the inf.
with coare in the sense of actual result was displacing^ the ind.
and in the vernacular it grew rapidly. Cf ware — awoXeXvadaL,
.
cos has kept its place as a consecutive particle in the koivt] (Rader-
macher, A^. T. Gr., p. 160).
(5) "Ort. There is no doubt about the consecutive use of ort
djxi e7w oTL Topevaonai. irpos ^apacb; Cf. also 2 Ki. 8 : 13. The in-
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
viraKoveL avTco; In Mt. 8 : 27 note TroraTros otl (cf. ourcos coare). See
also Heb. 2:6 (Ps. 8:5); Lu. 4:36. Radermacher (A^ T. Gr.,
p. 160) quotes Acta Christophori, 68, 18, tolovtol yap elaiv ot deol
diSois Toh anvoh crov, otl fcoi^j' alwvLOv exovcTLv; Pelagkl, 20. It OCCUrs
In Jo. 5 7, avdpojirov ovk ex" tva ^a\y, we see i'm usurping this
:
Sub-final.
The Infinitive. The inf. with ware has been discussed, but
(f)
we have left the simple inf., the articular (tov) inf., els to and the
inf. There are apparently examples of each construction in the
N. T. Thus the simple inf. of result is seen in Lu. 1 54, di/reXd- :
jSero 'la-parjX 7rat56s avTov iJi,vr]adrjvaL e\eovs; at any rate it is used here
1 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 455; Moulton, Prol., p. 249. Cf. Compernass, § 38.
See Sophocles' Lexicon.
2 Goodwin, M. and T., p. 218 f.
p. 154) quotes Acta Barnabae, 10, fxi] /Stdo-p Bappa^av tov nrj tto-
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
: :
€1 yap 6<l)e\ov dwalfxriv in Job 30 24. Evidently 6<j>e\oi' was not felt to be sufli-
:
cient alone.
9 Prol., p. 201.
1004 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
third persons due to the meaning 'I would' rather than 'thou
is
(Mk. 8 : 12; Heb. 4 : 3), et ixrjp (Heb. 6 : 14), the use of the parti-
ciple like the Hebrew inf. absolute (Mt. 13 : 14). The distinction
between wish and supposition with et was sometimes hard to make
in Homer.^ The relation between wishes and conditions is not
clear.
8. Conditional Sentences.
(a) Two Types. No hypotactic clause is more important than
this. For some reason the Greek conditional sentence has been
very difficult for the students to understand. In truth the
doctors have disagreed themselves and the rest have not known
how to go. The theory of Hermann, followed by most Germans
(Winer ,2 Blass^), is the one that I learned from Broadus and have
expounded in my Short Grammar.'^ It is also that of Gilder-
sleeve.^ This theory in brief is that there are four classes of con-
ditions which fall into two groups or types. The two types are
the determined and the undetermined. The point in "deter-
mined" is that the premise or condition is assumed to be true (or
untrue). A positive statement is made in either case and the
conclusion follows logically from this premise. The indicative is
the one used for this type (the first and second class conditions,
real 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 opta-
tive. 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
1 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 227. Cf . Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Philol., 1909, p. 14.
2 W.-M., pp. 363ff. " Pp. 161 ff.
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 213 f. ^ Am. Jour, of Philol., 1882, pp. 435 ff.
MODE (efkaisis) 1005
ismore 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.
than the opt. In broad outline this is the classification of the
conditional sentences which I hold to he true. Thompson ^ is
surely right in saying that no division can claim any higher right
sentence before it broke down from the loss of the optative and
the future indicative. In the modern Greek it is therefore a
wreck, and there is corresponding obscurity between the various
classes of conditions, as in English, in spite of special develop-
ments to make atonement In broad outline these
for the loss.^
four classes of conditions may be termed ReaUty, Unreality,
Probability, Possibility. The word ProbabiUty is, however, too
strong a term for the third-class condition {lav and the subj.). La
Roche 3 prefers "objektive Moglichkeit" for the third class and
"subjective Moglichkeit" for the fourth class (el and the opt.).
do only with the statement, not with the absolute truth or cer-
tainty of the matter. Examples will be given directly to show that
the second class condition is sometimes used where the fact is
just the opposite. The same thing is true of the first class condi-
tion. We must distinguish always therefore between the fact
and the The conditional sentence deals
statement of the fact.
only with the statement. This point is clearly seen in Kiihner-
Gerth, 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. Jour, of Philol., 1882, pp. 4.35 ff. Gildersl. still objects to the distinc-
tion of "particular" and "general" suppositions which Goodwin brought into
fashion. That merely depends on the character of the apodosis. Cf. Am.
Jour, of Philol., 1909, p. 10. 2 M. and
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).
MODE (efkaisis) 1007
1 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 210 f. " Baunilein, Unters., pp. 352 ff.
TO, baijxbvLa, apa e(f)daaev ec})' v/xSs 17 /SacrtXeta. Note apa with the
aorist. For the past ind. in both clauses see Ac. 11 : 17 (el UwKev,
Tts rimv)', 1 Rev. 20 15 {el tls ovx evpedrj, e^\r]dt]). For
Cor. 15 : 2; :
the present ind. in both clauses note Mt. 19 10 {el ovtws earlp :
—
ov (rvfj.4)epeL) Ro. 8 9; Jo. 15 18; 1 Cor. 15 10.
; : The presence
: :
of the perfect in protasis (15 : 14, 17, 19) or apodosis (15 : 13, 16)
aop-ai). Cf. Mk. 14 : 29; Lu. 19 : 40; 1 Cor. 3 : 15; 2 Tim. 2 : 12; 1
Cor. 3 : 14 f. But such little niceties cut no figure in this con-
struction.There is perfect hberty to mix the tenses ad libitum.
Lange (Der hom. Gebr. tier Partikel Ei) makes it exclamatory. But Hale
(The Orig. of Subj. and Opt. Cond. in Gk., Harv. Stu. in Class. Philol., 1901)
treats it as a demonstrative in the locative case, meaning 'in that case.'
This is more probable.
.
4:2; 15 : 27; 1 Jo. 4 : 11), past and future (Jo. 13 : 32; 15 : 20:
Lu. 16 : 11), present and future (Mt. 17:4; Jo. 5 :47; 11 : 12;
Ac. 5 : 39; 19 : 39; Ro. 8 : 11). In 1 Cor. 9:11 ei eaireipanev and
occur side by side. Examples of the imperative in the
el Oeplcrofiev
Mt. 5 :29; 8 :31; Lu. 4 :3; Ac. 16 15; Jo. 7:4; 18 23. In Lu. : :
ind. {el e^aaracras) and the imper. {elire). Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 215) takes el dekeLs in the late kolvt] to be like the French s'il
vous plait. Cf. Mt. 17 : 4. For the subj. in the apodosis note Gal.
5 : 25, el ^wp-ev irpevpan, TvevparL Kal aroix^l^^v- The use of eav with
the ind. is rather more frequent in the late Koivi]. Finally elcame
to be "a mere literary alternative."^ In the Koivi] in Pisidia and
Phrygia eav occurs with the aorist ind., the pres. ind. and the
future ind. as well as with the subj.^ The papyri examples are
unmistakable, as eav Set in Tb. P. 58 (ii/B.c), eav ol8ev B. U.
546 (Byz.), eav (t)alveTat. A. P. 93 (ii/A.D.j, eav 8' elalv O. P.
(ii/A.D.), eav KeXeveis O. P. 1150, 2 f. (vI/a.D.), eav paxovaiv Par.
P. 18, eavirep eKirXr] puaovcnv Par. P. 62 (ii/B.c.).^ Radermacher
(A''. T. Gr., pp. 83, 163) cites others from the papyri and in-
scriptions. So Heberdey-Wilhelm, Reisen, p. 137, eav 8e tls d-qa-ei;
remembered that kav was never confined to the subj. nor el to the
ind. and opt. 'Ed^ riada occurs in Job 22 3, and Moulton^ quotes :
p. 194 f.). Theophylact in his Proem to Luke has kav p.i] kdappei,
In the N. T. we note kav o'iSanev (1 Jo. 5 15); kav aTrjKeTe (1 Th. :
I, 3. 2, V. 1. In Lev. 22 There is at
: 9 we find kav ^e^-nXcoaovaLv.
any rate no great difference in the resultant sense between the
fut. ind. and the aor. subj. and it was a very natural develop-
ment. 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
is for el to appear with the ind. and kav with the subj. In 1 Cor.
7 5 we have el htjtl av (bracketed by W. H.) without a verb. It
:
ayvoeLTai.
The negative of the protasis in the first class condition is
cists.'^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
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. Rader-
' Moulton, Prol., p. 170. Of. Gildorwl., Atn. Jour, of Philol., ISSO, first copy.
8 Trol., p. 170. Cf. P. Thouvc'uiu, Lcs N6gations dans Ic Nouvcau Testa-
ment, Revue de Philol., 1894, p. 229.
1012 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
CTevere, el 8e —
oh TnaTevere. See further Lu. 11:8; Jas. 2 11; 2 :
This is not always done in the context and one is either left to
his wits or av is added to the apodosis. In verse 18 of John 15
we have el eK tov Koap-ov rJTe, 6 Koa/jLos av to Ibtov e(f)l\ei. "The addi-
tion of av to an indicative hypothesis produced much the same
effect as we can express in writing by italicising 'if "^ or by add-
' Cf. Wilhehnus, De Modo Irroali qvii Vooatur, ISSl, p. 3. Mod. Ck. no
longer has tliia idiom. It uses ai^ with the past ind. and 66. in the apodosis for 6.i>.
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 200.
1014 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
ing to the apodosis 'in that case.' This is the definite use of au.
But it is a mistake to say, as some writers^ do, that av in the apod-
osis is essential to the second class condition. Even Moulton^
says: "The dropping of iiv in the apodosis of unfulfilled conditions
was classical with phrases like edei, expw> naXov ^p." The absence
was so undoubtedly, but was av ever really necessary with these
verbs? When ixv was used with them, there was a slight change
of meaning. The N. T. is in perfect accord with ancient idiom
when it has koXov rjv d ovk eyewridri (Mt. 26 24) kSvvaTO el uri kire- : ;
tion the apodosis alone in Mt. 25: 27; Lu. 19 23; Ac. 22: 22; 27: :
21; 2 Cor. 2 : 3; 12 : 11; 2 Pet. 2 : 21. In Ac. 24 : 19, oOs eSei kirl
Kark (jlol; Jo. 15 : 22, 24; 19 : 11, ovk elxf^s, ei nrj rjp aoi beooixevov] Ro.
7 : 7, OVK eyvoiv ei /jlt] 5td vo/jlov and ovk ySeLV ei p.r] 'eKeyev. In 1 Cor.
5 : 10, eirel we have the apodosis of this condition. Moul-
u4)ei\eTe,
ton (Prol., p. 200 note) cites O. P. 526 (ii/A.D.) el /cat /xi) avejSepe,
€7cb ov Tapej3epop; O. P. 530 (ii/A.D.) ei Trape/cetro, aweaToXKeLp; —
Rein. P. 7 (ii/fi.c.) ovk a-rreaTrji, ei (jltj ijpayKaae. But in most cases
the av regularly appears in the apodosis, though not as the first
v6p.ov Tov KaQ' v/jids, 6\peade avroi. Here Gallio neatly justifies his
own impatience by the first condition (second class) and shows
his own opinion by the second condition (first class). Sometimes
av is repeated with two verbs as in el fi8eL, eypr]y6pr]aep ap /cat ovk Slp
24. In Jo. 4 : 10, el ydeis, ovk dv firrjaa^, we have the same thing.
Cf. also Mt. 24 : 43. In Ac. 18 : 14 note in the next verse el be
eoTLv, oxpeade (first class). In 1 Jo. 2 : 19 we have the past perfect
in the apodosis el rjaav, fxefxevriKeiaav dv, the solitar}^ example.^ But
the past perfect occurs in the protasis as in Ac. 26 : 32, dTroXe-
\va6aL ebhvaTO, 6 dvOpcoiros ovtos el firj eTeKeKXrjro Kaicrapa. Cf. also el
' Cf. Wcstcott on Ileb., pp. Ill ff., for an excellent euniniary of the second
class conditions.
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 201.
3 On IIcl)., ]K 113. * Prol., p. IGG.
1016 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
9 : 33; 15 : 22, 24; 18 : 30; 19 : 11; Ac. 26 : 32; Ro. 7:7. In itself
second class condition and to the elliptical use like irXrjv in the
sense of 'except' or the phrase el 8^ nr] meaning 'otherwise' with-
out a verb (cf. el ixi] thus in Mt. 12: 4; Lu. 4: 26; el be /xi? in Jo.
14 : 11).^ See a bit later on this point. As already noted, modern
Greek uses av bev in this condition (Thumb, Handb., p. 195).
the subj. in conditions, and yet some cases of el ov with the subj.
and late writers. So Epictetus, II, 18, 11 ei fxr] tls e^a\ei\l/ji, Vet-
tius, 274, 11 ei be tls XoyiarjTaL, Hippiatr., 177, 2 ei irpoaaxv^,
bination. Deissmann (B. S., p. 118) cites inscr. kros el nrj eav —
deXrjan. It is true that in the N. T. as a rule el goes with the ind.
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 :
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 (contrac-
: :
1 The Phrygian inscr. show similar exx. Cf. Ramsay, Cities and Bish. of
Phrygia, II, Burton (N. T. M. and T., p. 105) admits that it is an over-
292.
refinement to rule out d and the subj. Cf. Moulton, Pro!., p. 240.
2 ProL, p. 187.
' Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 43; Meisterh.-Schw., p. 225 f. In Jo. 5: 19 we have
both uses of av (conditional and modal). In Mk 5 : 28 note kav a<pQ}fiaL kSlv
Tuv iixaTiwu, not a repetition of modal av, but a particle Kav = ' even.'
MODE (efkai:;!::;;) 1019
tare eav TroLrJTe avra. Here we have the first and third class con-
ditions happily combined with clear distinction. Jesus assumes
the knowledge as a fact, but the performance is doubtful.
The tense is usually the aorist, though sometimes the pros. subj.
occurs. Thus eau cLKovan (Mt. 18 15); eau bi^a (Jo. 7: 37). In 2 :
Tim. 2 : 5 note kav be koI aOXfj rts, ou aTe(i)avovTai eav fxi] vo/JLLfxcos
ficient. John's fondness (see Tenses) for the pres. subj. with eav
has been discussed.^ In Jo. 3 27 we have the periphrastic per- :
fect, eav (i-q bebojxkvov. Cf. also Jas. 5:15, kolv y TeTOitjKios.
fj
The
conclusion of this condition is naturally most frequently the
future ind. Thus Mt. 9 21 : kav ai/'co/xat, (TCjo6T]<70fj.ai; Jo. 16 : 7 eav
TTopevdu}, Tre/xi/'co; Ac. 5:38 eav y, KaraXvOycreTaL. So Mt. 5:13;
28 : 14; Jo. 7: 17; 12 : 26; 14 : 15; Ro. 2 : 26. But this normal
apodosis is by no means universal. Thus note ov /jL-q 'ekdy in Jo.
16 : 7 after eav iiri airekdoi. See also Jo. 8 : 51. Cf. Ac. 13 : 41.
In Mk. 14 : 31 note ob uri airapv-qao/jiaL. The imperative may occur
in the apodosis as in Mt. 18 : 15, eav afxapT-fjar), U7ra7e eXey^ov. So
Mt. 10 13, 18 : 42; Ro. 12 20; 13 4; Ph. 2 1.
: 17; 26 But
: : : :
12 both the fut. and the pres. ind. appear in the apodosis. A
lively sense of present need is seen in Mt. 8:2. A practical turn
is given by the pointed question in Mt. 5 47. In Ro. 14 8 note : :
eav re —
eav re. A maxim often has the pres. ind. in the apodosis.
Thus oi) bvvaraL ovbels — eav jxi} irpwTOV brjay (Mk. 3 : 27). Cf. Jo.
8 : 16, 54; 11 : 9; 12 : 24; 1 Cor. 7: 39,40; 2 Tim. 2 : 5. The pres.
perf. is likewise so used, as in Ro. 14 : 23, 6 be biaKpLvonevos eav
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 N. T. Gk., p. 215.
2 Prol., p. 186. 3 Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 371.
1020 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Tenses where papyri parallels are given). That may be the ex-
tKepbrjdas; Jo. 15 : 6, kav /jltj tls iievri kv e/JLoi, e^\r]dr] e^co Kal k^-qpavBt]
(cf . kdo^aadt] 'Lva ^epTjre also of the future) ; 1 Cor. 7 : 28, eav Kal
yafx-naris, ovx riiiapTer Kal eav yrnirj 17 irapdevos, ovx riixaprev. For a
similar idiom see Ignatius, Ep. to Romans 8:3; to Polycarp 5:2.
Moulton {ProL, p. 247) cites Epict., dv nev arpaTivawixaL, airriWayriv.
See also Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 586. In Mk. 10 : 30, kau m^ Xa^l7, we
have eav p-i] almost in the sense of 6s pr}. Cf. also eav p-q lva in Mk.
4: 22. The use of ei oh and eav pi] side by side is seen in Mt. 26 :
42, el ov bbvarai tovto jrapeXde'tv eav pi] avTO Trtco. Cf. also Jo. 10 :
Lu. 22 67. The use of the opt. in both apodosis and protasis
:
mirage, but does not slip quite away. It is thus suitable not
merely for real doubt, but it also fits well the polite temper of
courteous address. It is evident that this condition will be com-
paratively infrequent. It is an ornament of the cultured class
and was used by the masses save in a few set phrases (or
little
133, 143) with all his diligence produces no example of the opt.
in both condition and conclusion in the current kolvyj. In the
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.
Of these he observes that 2 are wishes, 5 are cases of ioaiirep) d
TLs and 2 are indirect questions. There are in the N. T. only 11
examples. Some of these are indirect questions. Thus in eXeyov
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
:
:
But the exx. occur in questions save one (Ac. 26 29). Twice the :
questions are direct (Ac. 8:31; 17:18). The rest are indirect
17. The MSS. vary in some cases about the presence of av, as
1 lb. 2 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 228 f.
kiri crov irapelvai koI KaT-qyopelv d tl exotev Trpos e/xe, we find a prot-
11 29; Gal. 6 9.
: This use of the participle is still very fre-
:
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-
deXere /jlol Bovvai Kayco vp.lv TrapaScocrco ai'Tov; the question takes the
place of the protasis. Here Kal joins the two parts of the sentence,
but in Jas. 5 : 13 we have question and imperative in separate
sentences. Cf. also 1 Cor. 7: 21. These devices are all found in
the classic idiom.^
(7) Elliptical Conditions. An incomplete condition is really a
species of ellipsis or aposiopesis and is common to all languages.^
Ellipsis of the copula in the apodosis (1 Cor. 12 : 19) or the prot-
asis (Ro. 8 : 17) is not the point. That is, of course, common.
So Ro. 4 14; 8 17; 11 16; 1 Cor. 7 5; 1 Pet. 3 14; 2 Cor.
: : : : :
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
merely a variation of r} fx-qp. He finds eleven papyri examples of
el ix-t]v from ii/B.c. to I/a.d. Particularly clear is the Messenian
Mysteries inscr., Michel 694, el nav e^eLv. If so, it does not come in
here. But the use of ei in questions is pertinent. Thus et 6X1701
XdjSco, we have the third class and possibly also in Ro. 11:14.
But in Ac. 27 : 12 it is the fourth class, et ttojs bbvaivTo. The use
of et in the indirect question, as in Mk. 3 : 2, et eepairevaeL, corre-
sponds closely with the preceding. Cf. also 11:13. The same
thing is true of et in the sense of 6rt, as in Ac. 26 : 23. This is also
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
common as in classic Greek. Sometimes we have et /117 l^-ovov as in
1
App., p. 151. * Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 180 ff.
'^
Prol., p. 46. * Moulton, Prol., p. 194.
;
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 :
trepov 8i tcop airoaToKwv ovk ddov d fir} 'laKujSov tov adeXcpou. The
effect here is to make el /jltj seem adversative instead of exceptive.
Cf. Mt. 12 : 4. For eav firj in this construction see Gal. 2 : 16.
In 1 has the sense of 'only' and is not to be con-
Cor. 7: 17 el fxrj
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. :
21; Rev. 2:5, 16. For el be /jLrjye see Lu. 5 : Other forms of
36.
el used elliptically are et xep (Rq. 3 : 30); wcret (Mt. 3 16); uawe-
:
K&v — KOLV. The suppression of the protasis occurs in all the ex-
amples of the potential opt. already discussed, as in Ac. 26 29. :
22. In 1 Cor. 14 : 16, kirel eav evXoyfjs ttcos epet, the ellipsis still
occurs in spite of eav. In Heb. 9 : 26, eirel Uei, and 10 : 2, ewel ovk
true also of exet wcfyeiXeTe apa in 1 Cor. 5 : 10. In 7 : 14, erret ixpa
Kal. It is possible that we may read the idea into this passage
because in the parallel passage in Mk. 14 29 we read : el Kal —
dXX' eycb. Cf also kolv 8er] in Mt. 26 35 with eav dey in
. : Mk. 14
31. The use of el {eav) in the sense of 'though' shows that there
is at bottom no essential difference. The structure is precisely
the same as the conditional sentence. They are, to repeat,
nothing but conditional sentences of a special tone or emphasis.
The use of Kal was to sharpen this emphasis either up or down.
With Kal el the supposition is considered improbable.'' With
Kal el the truth of the principal sentence is stoutly affirmed in the
face of this one objection. It is rhetorically an extreme case. In
1 Cor. 8 : 5, Kal yap elirep elalv — [dXX] rifxlv els deos, we have an in-
stance. In Mk. 14 : 29 the true text is el Kal, not Kal el. In 1 Pet.
3 : 1 W. H. read simply el. In late Greek Kal el vanishes before
Kal av (eav).* So in the N. T. we have Kal eav Kplvo: (Jo. 8 : 16).
So also Gal. 1 8.: For kHv see Jo. 8 14, Kav : yuaprupco. So Mt.
21 : 21; 26 : 35. See Jo. 10 : 38, el be ttoioo, kolv ep.ol Tria Teh-qre. The
clauses with eav and the subj. are, of course, third class condi-
tions. Sometimes^ Kal el and Kav can hardly^ be considered as
strong as 'even They may be resolved into 'and if.' So Mt.
if.'
In 1 Cor. 7:28, kap Kal yafxifajis, the notion is 'if even' rather
than 'also' (cf. /cat tav yniirj). In Mt. 18 : 17 note eav wapaKovaji
avTUiP and eav 8e Kal ttjs e/cKXrjatas irapaKovaji . There is nothing
peculiar about Ro. 14 : 8, eav re ^Cinev — eav re airodv-qcrKwuev. (Cf.
Ex. 19 : 13.) Cf. etre — etre with the ind. (1 Cor. 3 : 23) or the
subj. (1 Th. 5 10). The use of the participle for concession (see
:
hk fxifye (Lu. 5 : 36); el olv (Mt. 6 : 23; Heb. 7: 11); el-irep (Ro. 3 :
30); eavirep (Heb. 3 : 14; 6 : 3); et ttcos (Ro. 1 : 10, the fut. ind.; Ac.
27 : 12, the opt.). In Mk. 8 : 23 et rt is in direct question.
^ Vitcau, Le Vcrbc, p. 50; but see on the other hand Con. and Stock, Sel.,
* Hist. Gk. C!r., p. 472.
p. 114.
^
The idiom appears chiefly in the historical books. See Mt. 7 23, :
no doubt at all. See 26 74, bjxvveLv otl ovk ol8a top avOpoiirov, and
:
Mk. 1:37; 2 12, 16; 4:21; 8 :28; Jo. 10 :36; Ac. 25 8; Ro.
: :
sal) recitative otl (6tl aprovs ovk eXa^opev); while in verse 8 the
indirect (probably causal) use, 6tl dprous ovk exere; In Mk. 6 23 :
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
all their quotations. Cf. Jo. 9 9. This redundant on may occur :
secondary tenses that any change occurs. Usually even then there
is no change of tense in Greek. Thus owov riKovov 6tl earcv (Mk. 6
55) . So with aKOvaa^ otl jSaaiKemL — e<j)0^r]dr] (Mt. 2 : 22) . So ^Xtti-
^on€v 6tl avT6s kaTiv (Lu. 24 : 21). See also Mt. 21 45; Mk. 6 14; : :
Lu. 1: 22; Jo. 2:17; 6: 24. Cf. Gal. 2: 14, eUov 6tl ovk dpdoirodov-
CLV. So Jo. 11 13. In Jo. 21 : : 19 the future ind. is retained after
direv Mt. 20: 10. So in Lu. 5 19 the aorist subj.
o-rj/xaij'cov. Cf. :
discourse and the second with recitative otl. But sometimes the
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 occasionally the same construction. In a case
like Jo. 1 : 50, dirbv aoi on dbbv ae, the aorist tense belonged to the
direct. Cf 9 . : 30, 32, 35. So as to the imperfect riu and aorist
hvk^XexPeu in Jo. 9 : 18, Cf also Lu. 13 2.
. In Mt. 27 18, f/Set : :
OTL 5td cl)d6pop -KapkhoiKav avTov, the aorist is used for antecedent
OTL OVK €LTev. But lu Jo. 2 : 25, avTOS yap eyiuo^aKeu t'l rju kv rc3 av-
dpwTTixi, the direct form^ would have eaTLv, not riv. So with fjSet tI
tfxtWev TTOLetv (6 :
6) ; ovk eyvooa-au otl tov waTepa avTo7s eXeyev (8 : 27).
Cf. also 11 : 51; 12 : 16, 33; 18: 32. In Ac. 19: 32, ovk ribeLaau tLvos
eveKa avvtXriXvduaav, the past perfect stands when the direct would
have the present perfect. In Ac. 16 :
3, fibaaav otl "'E.XX-qv 6 rrari^p
we have just seen. Cf. Mk. 11 32; Jo. 6 22-24; 16 19; Ac. 22
: : :
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.
1030 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Jo. 11 : 40, ovK elirov gol otl eav TLcrTevajis oypii, the subj. and the
fut. ind. are retained after secondary tense, unless on is recitative.
This preservation of the original tense appears in clauses not
strictly in indirect discourse. In Lu. 9 33, elwev etScbs 6 Xe7et, :
— fjLrj
in the causal clause in 9 : 49, e/ccoXyo/zei' avrdv 6tl ovk oKoKovdel iu.e6'
tiixCiv. In Jo. 21 25, : x^piyo-eti^, the future inf. stands for the future
ind. in the direct, as TedprjKevai does in Ac. 14 : 19 for the perfect
ind. In Lu. 20 : 6 etmt really represents the imperfect indicative
of the direct.
(d) Change of Mode in Indirect Discourse. The rule with the
Greek was not to change the tense. The mode after past ten-
ses, with more freedom, was either retained or changed to the ^
the optative occurs where the subj. with (cf. Lu. 2 26) or without :
1 In archaic Lat. the ind. was used in indirect discourse as in Gk. Cf.
Draeger, Hist. Synt., Bd. II, p. 460.
2 Goodwin, M. and T., p. 263.
3 Madvig, Bemerk. iiber einige Punkte der griech. Wortfiig. 1848, p. 23.
* Goodwin, M. and T., p. 273.
:
In Ac. 21 33, : kirwdaveTO t'ls elrj Kal tL kaTLV TrevrotTj/ccos, both con-
structions occur side by side. The variation here in the mode
(retention of the ind.) gives a certain vividness to this part of
the question. See Optative in Paratactic Sentences where the
KOLvrj parallels are given. In ylvoLTO KpaTdlv iraarjs rjs av aiprjade
xcbpas, P. Par. 26 (b.c. 163), there is no sequence of mode. The
subj. is with the indefinite relative and the opt. is a wish. It has
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
18, Tt av OeXoL; with Lu. 1 62, to tI av deXot. Sometimes, one
:
dri (cf. TO tIs dt] m Lu. 22 23). See also Lu. 15 26; Ac. 10 17.
: : :
finitive Sovvai is the direct object of the verb and does not seem
to be in indir. discourse, for in Mk. 6 : 23 the direct form has
5cb(Tw. But, after all, it is 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 :
Reeb^ points out that Demosthenes uses cbs for what is false and
OTL for what The German wie is used like cos with verbs
is true.
of reading, narrating, testifying. 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 mean-
20: 20 with kiviaTafxaL, Ro. 1:9 with fjiaprvs (so Ph. 1:8; 1 Th.
1:8). The manuscripts vary in some passages between cbs and
OTL and TTcbs. W. H. bracket cbs in Lu. 6 4 and read ttcos : in Mk.
12 : 26 and 6tl in Jude 5, though cbs is retained in 7.^ In all these
passages it is possible to regard cbs as the 'how' of indirect ques-
tion rather than declarative. The encroachment of ttcos on on is
Gradually ttcos gained the ascendency over 6tl till in the modern
Greek it became the regular declarative particle. See Thumb,
Handb., p. 190. In Ro. 10 : 15; 11:33, cbs is exclamatory. The
KOLVT] writers and the papyri show this same retreat of cbs before
1
Goodwin, M. and T., p. 258. ^ jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 571.
'
De Particulorum 6tl et ws apud Demosthenum Usu, 1890, p. 38.
*
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 230 f.
"
Hatz., Einl., p. 19.
.
It hke the Latin quasi in the Vulgate. The late papyri (fourth
is
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
Hellen. Ill, ii, 14, eliroju cbs on okvolt]. Moulton agrees to Blass'
stigma of "unclassical" on cbs on, but Paul has kolvj] support for
his use of it in 2 Cor. 5 : 19; 11:21; 2 Th. 2:2. But on has
won its place in the N. T. not only over but also over the in-
cbs,
finitive. The use of the inf. in indir. discourse^ takes quite a sub-
ordinate place in the N. T. Luke alone uses it to any extent.
The use of on is the common way of making a declaration in in-
direct discourse in the N. T. The periphrasis with on has super-
seded it in nearly all the N. T. writers.^ There arose also 5t6rt in
the declarative sense ^ (cf. late Latin quia = quod), but no example
occurs in the N. T. The classic causal sense of bibn prevailed.
It is sometimes doubtful whether on is causal or declarative
as in Ac. 22 : 29. The context must decide. Finally, as noted,
TTcbs came to be the normal declarative conjunction in the ver-
nacular (over the inf. as over cbs and on) as the infinitive disap-
peared from indir. discourse.^ The only mode used with on in the
N. T. is the ind. In Ro. 3 8 (subj.) on is recitative. At bottom
:
' See Sophocles' Lexicon under ws. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 413.
Moulton (Prol., p. 212) gives C.P.R. 19 (iv/A.D.) -n-purjv fii0\la kiriSiSoiKa T^ ffg
iiviiJieXelq. cos otl 't0ov\r)d7\v
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 212. < Moulton, Prol., p. 211.
3 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 231. ^ Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 413.
* Mitsotakis, Praktischc Gr. dcr neugriechischen Schrift- und Umgangs-
sprache, 1891, p. 235.
1034 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
times 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). :
ovx OTL (cf. Jo. 6 46) is like the corresponding English 'not that.'
:
15 ff. the three are all causal. In Jo. 11 : 50 we have otl and I'm
in much the same sense. Not so 1 Jo. 5 : 13. Cf. I'm in 1 Jo. 5 :
the infinitive or the participle. Thus d/coi;co (Mt. 5 21; Jo. 12 18; : :
>
Le Vcrbe, p. 51. ^ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 231 f.
» lb., p. 233.
;
(N. T. Gr., p. 159) cites on — uTrdpxetv from Proklus' /ri rem puhl.,
II, 225, 22.
{(3) The Infinitive. With some verbs we have only single in-
stances of the infinitive of indir. discourse in the N. T. So with
/3odw (Ac. 25 : 24); jLvooaKOi (Heb. 10 : 34); /caTaXa,u/3di'o/xat (Ac. 25 :
25); riyeofiai (Ph. 3:8); voeo) (Heb. 11:3). ' AiroKplvoixai has it
not used with any construction very often, some occur only wdth
the infinitive, like eTrtSet/ci'uco (Ac. 18 : 28); irpoadoKao} (Ac. 3 : 5;28 :
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 of the case of the substantive
or adjective used with this inf. is not vital to the idiom. It is
so, 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
inf. in indir. it is put in the accusative of general refer-
discourse
ence, if no word in the sentence in another case for it
there is
Kvpos ei't/CTjcre becomes riyyeLKav tov Is.vpov on evUrjaev, but ort hi-
Kri(Tep = vLKrj<Tai" (A. J. P., XXXIII, 4, p. 489). To go no further,
Gildersleeve shows that the 6tl construction is later than the
ace. c.But the grammarians went astray and called
inf. this
accusative the "subject" of the inf., and, when some other case
appears with the an " exception" to the rules of the gram-
inf., it is
drjaap firj eldevai, but in Ac. 25 4 ^ijaros aireKpidrj rripttadaL top Hav-
:
18; 8:2; 14 37; 2 Cor. 10 2; Heb. 5 11; Jas. 1 26; Jo. 7:4
: : : :
68r]y6p elpai TvcpXcop, where avros (cf Ro. 9 3) would have been suf- . :
would have had oPTa?, not thai. Even so, but the N. T. has
1 Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 238 f.
elvaL. An example
20 (see above) is hardly pertinent,
like Lu. 20 :
adai lie airobwaoi aoi. See further Lu. 1 ; 57; 2 :21; 24 : 30; Ac.
18 : 3. It is easy to show from this use of the articular inf. that
the inf. has no proper "subject." The accusative is due to other
reasons. Take Lu. 2 : 27, ep rw elaayayelp tovs yopels to waLdlop
where the context makes plain that iraLdiop is the object of
'Irjaovp,
The ace. with the inf. was normal when the substantive with the
inf. was different from the subject of the principal verb. Cf. Ro.
3 : 8, (paalp TLPes fiij.as Xeyetp otl (note inf. after 4>rini, and on after
Xeyco, but In Lu. 24 23, Xeyovaip avTop ^rjp,
it is recitative on). :
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;
: : : :
we find Swo-oj, But the future is aoristic anyhow. The fine be-
tween indir. discourse and the simple object inf. is not sharply-
drawn. Cf. Ac. 23 12. In Lu. 20 6, Treirei(Tnevos yap karLv 'Icod-
: :
V7]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 Ten- : :
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 :
Cf. Lu. 6 12, e^eXMv avTOP eis to opos wpoaev^aadaL, where the first
:
Cf. Ph. 4 11; Tit. 3 : : 14. But some verbs in the N. T. still
have the participle in indir. discourse. They are verbs of percep-
tion 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
: : ^
monly used with the participle. See Mt. 1 18; 12 44; Lu. 23: : :
but note Lu. 8 46, 'iyvwv 8vvap.Lv k^ekrfKvdvlav air' epov, where Christ
:
thus graphically describes the terrible nervous loss from his heal-
ing work. He felt the power "gone" out of him. In our ver-
nacular 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
: :
Kal eyhero plus finite verb (Gen. 22 1; 24 45, etc.). For eyevero : :
is also common in the future as Kal earat with finite verb (Is.
few times in the N. T. (Ac. 2 17, 21; Ro. 9 26) from the LXX. : :
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 de-
scription. Luke has in the Gospel eleven of the Kat eyevero Kal ex-
amples 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
inf. with the idiom. So 9 51, eyevero 8e ev rw avidTrXrjpovadaL
: Kat —
avros earrjpLaev. Here Kat is almost equivalent to 6rt. So Kat eye^
vero ev tc3 elvai —
etTrei' rts (11 1). We have Kal eyevero Kal also in :
•
Gr. of N. T. Ck., p. 24G.
» W.-M., p. 760, n. 2. ^ prcJ., p. 16.
MODE (efkaisis) 1043
Luke only twice in Mark and five times in Matthew with the
phrase eykpero ore ereXeaev. Cf. Mt. 7 28. Moulton is concerned :
(asyndeton). But surely the LXX has left its mark in this point
also. The LXX does not have eyhero (or ylveTai) and the infini-
tive (but cf. 2 Mace. 3 16 tjv TiTpoiaKeadai). In the N. T. we
:
—
find it in Mt. 18 13; Mk. 2 15; five
: times in Luke and seventeen :
avpk^T] OTL while the country districts^ use ervxe va. Moulton finds
the inf. with ylveTai in the papyri and rightly sees in the vernacu-
lar KOLvi] the origin of this idiom. There is no essential difference
between the with ylverai and kyevero. Cf. Ac. 6:1; 16 16;
inf. :
the inf. with kyevero is confined to Mk. 2 23, which Moulton calls :
struction due to the fact that the subj. would have been
it is
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 sec-
:
Mk. 6 36; Lu. 5 19; 12 36. So also the optative occurs a few
: : :
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
: : :
27, et apaye xpTjXacfjTjaeLav, the opt. represents a subj. with kdv after
a primary tense. So in Ac. 27 : 12. In no instance where the
opt. wdthout av occurs in the indirect discourse is it necessary.
In all these examples the indicative or the subj. could have been
retained. The infinitive with rlva in 1 Pet. 5 : 8 is read by Nestle,
but not by W. H. or Souter. See under (/), {^).
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
: : :
2 :
4), TTodev (Jo. 8 : 14), irotos (Rev. 3 : 3), irore (Lu. 12 : 36), ttcos
(Lu. 8 : 36), tttiXIkos (Gal. 6 : 11), irdaos (Mt. 16 : 9), woraTros (Lu.
Ph. 3 : 12; 2 Th. 2 : 15. See also the optative with el in Ac.
rect question occurs with iroTepov f). The only other alternative —
construction in an indirect question is in 2 Cor. 12 : 2 f. after ol8a,
distinguished from the use of the inf. after oUa ('know how to
do.' Cf. Lu. 11 13). In Mk. 2 24, t8e tL ttolovctlv; the i5e is prob-
: :
ably just the interjection as in Mt. 25 25. For the ace. and the :
Iva fxrjdep aipoicnv, Mt. 16 20 eireTLiJ.T](Teu : rots iJ.adr]Tdls 'Iva {jirjdevl eiTrw-
ordinate 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 :
command preserved.
(7) The Infinitive. It seems more obvious and is still common
in the koivt), though retreating before 'iva. The negative is, of
course, ixi). This use of the infinitive must not be confounded
with the idiom for indirect assertion (declarative) as in Mk. 12 :
18, o'lTivts XkyovaLV avaaTaaiv p-i] dvai. Note Ac. 21 21, \ky(jiv p.ri :
irepLTtpveLV avTOvs to. TtKva p.r]8e rots WeaLV irepiiraTeLV, where we have
after elira in Lu. 9 : 54, etircopev irvp KaTa^rjvai; See also Mk. 8 :
:
TTJ TTto-rtt /cat OTL — 5et, the construction glides from the inf. into
OTL. In Ro. 3 : 8 the recitative 6rt is dependent on the inf.
X€7etJ' after ^acri;/. In Ac. 9 : 27, dtrjyriaaPTO ttcos eu rfj oSco elSev tov
Kvpiov Kal OTL ekoK-qaev avTui, Kal ttws ktX., we have a change from ind.
question to indirect assertion and then back again to indirect
question. The change may be from the indirect to the direct
as in Ac. 1 : 4, TrepijikveLV T-qv kirayyeKlav tov vaTpos fjv rjKOvaaTe jjlov.
classic Attic (cf. Xen., Cyr., \, 6, 18, etc.). See Jannaris, Hist.
Gk. Gr., p. 570. Moulton (Prol., p. 213) gives a papyrus example,
O. P. 237 (ii/A.D.), 87]\a3V 6tl ei to. aXrjOrj (jyaveir] iirjde KpLcreus bdladai.
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 :
OTL d/iaprcoXos ecmv. For a causal sentence see kK<x)kvop.ev avrov 6tl
ovK aKo\ovBd fxeO' rmcov (Lu. 9 :49). A temporal clause with the
subjunctive appears in Mt. 14 22, rjvayKaaev : irpoayeLv ecoj ov — —
CLToXvaxi. See also Ac. 23 12, avede/jLarLaav : ecos ov aTroKTeivojaiV. —
In 25 16, however, we have the optative in the subordinate
:
clause of time with Trplv (exot, Xd/3ot) after cnreKpidrjv, the sole ex-
ri
but the relative clause proceeds with Kal prj dcaKpidfj dXXd TnaTevji
OTL 6 XaXet ylveraL. The relative 6 XaXet is the fourth involution of
subordinate clauses after Xeyw. Cf. also Jo. 17:24. A similar
multiplicity of subordinate clauses is found in Ac. 25 : 14-16.
1 Goodwin, M. and T., p. 273. " lb., p. 272.
.
After avkOero Xeycov we have oratio recta. The first step is the rela-
tive clause Trept ov —
on which hangs irpos ovs aweKpldrjv,
eve(l)avLaav,
fifth involution in the oratio recta. Cf. also Ac. 3 : 19 ff. (wpos to
€^a\L(f)9y]vaL, ottcos ap, 6v Set bk^aaQai, uv). In Ac. 11 : 13 there are
five involutions. The complications are not, of course, always
so many. In Lu. 7 39 the oratio recta has a series of three (rts
:
—
T^Tts — oTi). See the threefold series in Ro. 3 8, /ca^cbs 4)a<rlv rive's :
riiias \eyeLV otl, ktX. So also Mk. 6 : 55, Kepi(f)kpHV oirov tjkovov oti
Utlv (infinitive, relative, declarative). So again 1 Cor. 11 : 23 f
7 25, hofXL^ev
: (TwihaL tovs a8e\cj)ovs otl, kt\., we have two forms of
indirect assertion (the inf., then 6rt), one dependent on the other.
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 :
deiarfs /jlol eirL^ovXyjs els top avSpa eaeadaL, the future inf. in indirect
discourse is dependent on the participle in the genitive absolute.
In Heb. 9 : 8, tovto 8r]\ovPTOS tov TTPev/jiaTOS tov ayiov irecpapepojadaL,
the perfect inf. follows the genitive absolute. There are various
other combinations. These are given as illustrations. No rules
are called for about the using of a series of subordinate clauses.
The presence of so many of them in Luke,. Paul and Hebrews
shows the literary quality of a more periodic structure.
CHAPTER XX
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS)
pftJia)
2 : 15. The firsf* step towards the verbal idea was in the con-
struction dovvai TO. ayadd. Moulton^ illustrates the border-land of
the Enghsh inf. by the sentence: "He went out to work again."
tive 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 limita-
tion has survived with verbs, substantives and adjectives. So
6 xpovos Tov TeKeZv (Lu. 1:57). Cf. our "a wonder to behold."
See dvparai 8ov\€veLV (Mt. 6 : 24), op/iri v^plaai (Ac. 14:5), iKavds
Xvcrai (Mk. 1:7).See also Jas. 1: 19, raxus els to aKovaai, where
eis TO reproduces the dative idea.
(6) The Earliest Historic Period. The case-form (dative or lo-
cative) begins to lose its significance. In Homer the dative idea is
still the usual one for the infinitive, in harmony with the form.^
With verbs of wishing, commanding, expecting, beginning, being
able, etc., the dative idea is probably the original explanation of
* Cf. Giles (Man., p. 470) for \v-tLv and its relation to the Sans, -san-i.
2 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 515. * lb.
' lb. 6 Prol., p. 203.
« Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 143, has four. But see Robertson, Short Gr.
of the Gk. N. T., p. 188.
^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 154.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOZ) 1053
indirect discourse.^ The use of -n-plv with the inf. is common also
in Homer. Ilpii' would naturally be used with the ablative, like
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.,
and that is Odyssey (20. 52), to (f)v\a(xcrav.
in the But even
here to be demonstrative.^ But in Homer the inf. has tense
may
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
the inf. to become distinctly verbalized.* As it came to be, it
was an imperfect instrument of language. As a verb it lacked
person, number and time except in indirect discourse. As a
substantive it lacked inflection (without case or number) after it
came to be limited to two cases. Even after the case-idea van-
ished and it was used in various cases it was still indeclinable.^
« Monro, Horn. Gk., pp. 158 ff. Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 515.
' Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 299.
8 Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Philol., 1882, p. 195.
» Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 568.
^
val 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 de-
velopment 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
or character of the inf. in the Homeric period.^ Hence it is best
to think of the article as being used more freely with the inf. as
with other nouns as the article made its onward way. The greatly
increased use of the article with the
inf. did serve to restore the
we find i'm with jSouXojuat and ShvafiaL in Polybius, the LXX and
later kolvt] writers.^ As the inf. disappears in the later Greek
strange combinations appear, as in Malalas and Theophanes we
meet irpb tov with the subjunctive {irpo tov kTnppl\poi<jLv, irpb tov
€V(jiB(h(TLv)} The
never had a monopoly of any construction
inf.
rat eupeiv ahrb, (3 : 15) irperov ecrrlv rip.1v irXrjpooaai, (Ac. 21 : 35)
avve^r] ^aara^eaOaL, (Lu. 6 : 12) eyevero e^eXdelu avrbv, (18 : 25) tvKO-
TTwrepov ecFTLV eiaeXOeLV, (Jo. 18 : 14) avfjL4>epeL arodapelv, (Mt. 22 17) :
e^tuTLV bovvai, (Heb. 9 : 5) ovK ecTTLV vvv 'XeyeLV, (Ac. 27 : 24) 8e2 wapa-
CTrjvai., (Ac. 2 : 24) rjv bwarbv KpareXadai, (Ph. 3:1) to. avra ypa-
^eiv OVK oKvqpbv. So Ac. 20 : 16; 2 Pet. 2 : 21. All this is simple
enough. The articular inf. is likewise found in the nominative
as in Mk. 9 10, t'l eanu to €k veKpwv avaaTrjuai. Here the article is
:
KadiaaL ovk laTiv hp.bv hovvai, where bovvai is probably the original
dative 'for giving.' One naturally feels that the articular inf.
is more substantival than the anarthrous, as in Ro. 7 18, Tb de- :
pect of the inf. is shown by the use of the pronoun avTo tovto to
\vTrr]drjvaL nominative with KaTeLpyaaaro. Cf. the inf. in the
in the
predicate nom. with tovto in Ro. 1 12, tovto 8e kaTiv awirapa- :
(Lu. 18 : 1) Trpos TO Selv Trpoaeuxeo-^at (both infs. in the ace, one with
Tpos, the other general reference with Selj^), (Ro. 15 : 8) Xcyco
XpLffTOV bib-Kovov yeyevrjadaL (cf. Ac. 27: 13), (2 Cor. 10: 2) Xo7tfo/xat
ToXiJirjaaL, (1 Th. 4:11) TapaKaXovp.ei> irepiacreveLV /cat ^iXort/xetcr^at
qavxa^^LV Kal Trpaaativ to. Ibia Kal epya^eadaL (note the interrelation
of these infs.). See further Mk. 5: 28; 12 :12; Lu. 16: 3; Jo. 5:
18; Ro. 14: 2; Gal. 3: 2; 1 Cor. 10 : 13. In the ace. also are the
articular infs. with prepositions like cis (Ro. 1:11); 5id (Ac. 8 :
of TOVwith 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 :
(1 Cor. 9 10) evr' eXTrtSt rod nerexeLV, (10 13) tw U^aaiv tov bbva-
:
:
Ph. 3 : 21, Kara T-qu euepyeLav tov 6vvaadaL avTOV /cat viroTa^ai. Let
these suffice. They illustrate well how the inf. continued to be
regarded as a real substantive. 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
:
The ablative illustrations are not very numerous, but they are
clear. Thus we have the abl. with verbs of hindering as in Mt.
19 : 14, fxri KcoXuere aura kXdelu wpos and Lu. 4
[xe, : 42, KaTtlxov avTOV
TOV nil TopeveadaL. The classical Greek had also to and the inf., as
ixri (jTvdpuv. See further Lu. 24:16 eKpaTOVvTO tov pii eirL'yvwvai
KaTeiravaav tov pii dvetv. Cf. also Ac. 20:20, 27; Ro. 11:10;
15 : 22; 2 Cor. 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 prep-
:
ositions as e/c in 2 Cor. 8:11, e/c tov execv and Trp6, in Mt. 6:8
TTpo tov aiTTJaai. In Ac. 15 28, TOVTo^v Twv eTravajKes, a-Kkx^aOai, the :
ovK fjXdov KaraXDcrat, dXXd ir'KrjpciaaL, '1 came not for destroying, but
for fulfilling.' So Lu. 12 : 58, dds epjaalav airr^WaxQaL, 'give dili-
gence for being reconciled.' Cf. Mt. 7: 11; 16 3 with oUa and :
tive also has the dative inf. in Ro. 9 21, k^ovaiav iroLrjaaL, 'power :
s
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 233. ^ lb., p. 213.
4 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 579. * lb., p. 215.
9 Allen, The Inf. in Polyb. Compared with the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 47.
:
Here the article to has just the effect that the Greek article has
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
: : : : :
12; 25:11; Ro. 4:11, 13, 16, 18; 13:8; 14:21; 2 Cor. 8:10f.;
9 :1; Ph. 1:23, 29; 2 : 6; 4 : 10; 1 Th. 3 2 f. :
Some special words are needed about rod and the inf. The
question of purpose or result may
be deferred for separate dis-
cussion. We have seen how the genitive inf. with rod occurs with
verbs, substantives, adjectives and prepositions. The ablative
inf. with Tov is found with verbs and prepositions. The ablative
use is not here under discussion, since it involves no special diffi-
culties save the redundant /X17. We may note that in Critias tov
was very common with the inf.^ We see it also in Polybius in
various uses named an Attic idiom that became
above.^ It is
very common and Byzantine Greek.^ Cf. jui)
in the postclassical
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
doubtful if in 1 Cor. 16 :
4, kav Be a^Lov fj
tov Ka/j,^ iropeveaOaL, the
inf. is to be taken with Moulton^ so regards it,
cl^lov as genitive.
but it may be a loose nominative, as we shall see directly.
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
in Rev. 12 : 7, eyeveTO TroXe/ios kv tc3 ohpavQ, 6 Mlxo-tiX /cat oi ayyeXot.
avTOv TOV iroXe/xrjaaL fxeTo. This inf. (note the nom.
tov dpaKOVTos.
with it) is in explanatory apposition with iroKefios. Moulton^
cleverly illustrates it with the English: "There will be a cricket
match —
the champions to play the rest." It is a long jump to
this from a case like Ac. 21 12, TrapaKoKovixev tov /xi) ava^alvetv:
The normal use of rod with the inf. was undoubtedly final as it
chief use.^ But many of the examples are not final nor consecu-
tive. It is only in Luke (Gospel 23, Acts 21) and Paul (13) that
Tov with the inf. (without prepositions) is common.^ They have
five-sixths of the examples.^ And Luke has himself two-thirds of
the total in the N. T., Matthew has six. John avoids it. Moul-
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
:
So 1 Sam. 12:23; 1 Ki. 8: 18; 16:31; Ps. 91:3; Is. 49:6; Jer.
2 : 18; Eccl. 3 : 12; 1 Esd. 5 : 67.^ One must recall the fact that
the inf. had already lost for the most part the significance of the
dative ending -ai and the locative -t {-eLv). Now the genitive
tov and the dative both obscured and the combination is
-at are
used as subject nominative. We have this curious construction
1 Moulton, Prol., p. 216. ^ ib., p. 217.
« Mr. H. Scott gives the following list for tov and the inf.:
1068 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
in Lu. 17: 1, avkvbeKrbp eaTiv tov See also Ac. 10: 25, kye-
htj ekOetv.
20. Cf. also tTOLfjLos TOV in Ac. 23 : 15. This is surely "a wide
departure from classical Greek." ^ It is, however, after all in
harmony with the genius and history of the inf., 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.) ; Mt. 18 25 and : Jo. 5 : 7 (exco) with ip'
papyri and holds that the plentiful testimony from the LXX
concurs with the N. T. usage to the effect "that it belongs to
the higher stratum of education in the main." This conclu-
sion holds as to the N. T. and the papyri, but not as to the
LXX, where obviously the Hebrew inf. construct had a consider-
able influence. Moulton seems reluctant to admit this obvious
Hebraism.
(c) Prepositions. We are not here discussing the inf. as pur-
pose or result, as temporal or causal, but merely the fact of the
prepositional usage. The idiom cannot be said to be unusual in
classical Greek. Jannaris^ agrees with Birklein^ that classical
writers show some 2,000 instances of this prepositional construc-
tion. The
writers (classic and later) who use the idiom most
frequently are Thucydides, Xenophon, Polybius, Diodorus, Diony-
sius, Josephus, Plutarch, Dio Cassius. The most prolific user of
the construction is Polybius (1,053 instances) and Josephus next
1 Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 159. In late Gk. this use of rod and the inf.
came to displace the circumstantial participle and even finite clauses, only to
die itself in time. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 483.
^ ProL, p. 219 f. * Entwickelungsgesch., p. 103.
3 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 576. » Krapp, Der substantivierte Inf., 1892, p. 1.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs) 1069
Trpds TO firi
— evTvyxo-veiv, O. P. 237 (I/a.d.) ; rpos to — Seridijvai (ib.).
are found without the article. Thus di^Tt 8e apx^cydai (note pres-
ence 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
Treij' ('for drinking'). Cf. 56s juot Tetv in Jo. 4 10. Moulton^o :
eis iretv in the papyri is due to Ionic influence. The LXX furnishes
several instances of anarthrous els, as els eKcfyvyelv in Judg. 6 :11
(cf. 2 Esd. 22 :24; Sir. 38 : 27; Judith 4 : 15). Note also ^cos
clauses of this nature as the ancient Greek, and the adverbs usu-
ally 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
only eight are the strict prepositions {clvtI, 5td, els, h, k, peTo.,
TOV Xeyeiv. Votaw gives one for the LXX, Ps. 108 4, clvtI tov :
ayairav.
but one (genitive, Heb.
Aid has 33 instances in the N. T., all
1 : 18; 1 Pet. 3:7; Heb. 2 : 17, and other examples in Mt. and
Heb., to go no further. In Paul we notice other usages. In
Ph. 1 : 23, kindviilav els to avaXvaaL, we have it with a substantive
and in Jas. 1:19 it occurs with the adjectives raxus and ^paSvs.
It is epexegetic also with the verbal adjective deodidaKTOL in 1
Th. 4 : 9. Besides, we find it as the object of verbs of com-
mand or entreaty giving the content of the verb as in 1Th.
2 : 12; 3 : 10; 2 Th. 2 : 2, epcoroo/xev els to ixi] raxeojs aakevdrivai.
Cf. also 1 Cor. 8 : 10. So in Mt. 20 : 19; 26 : 2; 1 Cor. 11 : 22
there is a really dative idea in eis to. Just as ha came to be non-
final sometimes, so it was with ets to, which seems to express con-
ceived or actual result (cf. tov also) as in Ro. 1 : 20; 12 : 3; 2 Cor.
8:6; Gal. 3 : 17. Cf. the double use of (boTe for 'aim' or 'result.'^
The perfect tense can be used with ets to as in Eph. 1 : 18 ets to
elb'evai. and Heb. 11 : 3 ets to jeyovevai, the only instances. But
the present or aorist is usual. These developed uses of ets to
occur to some extent in the LXX (1 Ki. 22 8; 1 Esd. 2 24; : :
8:84).
'Ev Tc3 appears in the tragedies.^ It is found 6 times in Thu-
cydides, 16 in Xenophon, 26 in Plato.^ But Blass^ observes that
the classical writers did not use kv 7c3 in the temporal sense of
'while' or 'during.' Moulton^ sought to minimize the fact that
in the O. T. ev tQi occurs 455 times (45 in the Apocrypha) and
that it Hebrew a and held that it did not
exactly translates the
in principle 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 un-
doubted 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;
8 5 (ej; rc3 cnreipeLv); 24 51; Ac. 3 26; 4 30; 9 3, etc.
: Jan- : : : :
mt, where Blass^ sees the equivalent of the aorist participle (cf.
the simple action of the verb which is thus presented, leaving the
precise relation to be defined by the context, like the aorist par-
ticiple of simultaneous action. Cf. ev tQ virora^at. in Heb. 2
8; Gen. 32 : 19, kv tu) evpetv. This is all that kv rw should be
made to mean with either the present or the aorist. Cf. Mt.
13 : 4; 27 : 12; Lu. 8 : 40; 9 : 29. The idea is not always strictly
temporal. In Ac. 3 : 26 (cf. Jer. 11 : 17), 4 : 30, it is more like
means. Votaw^ sees content in Lu. 12 : 15; Heb. 3 : 12. In
Heb. 8 : 13, kv rco \kyeLv, the notion is rather causal. The con-
ception is not wholly temporal in Mk, 6 48; Lu.
: 1 : 21.^ No other
preposition occurs in the N. T. with the inf. In the locative case.
But cf. kiri TU) k/jLal irapafxevLV, O. P. 1122, 9 f. (a.D. 407).
"Ev€Kev Tov appears in 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 it in the N. T., 2 Cor. 7: 12, 'iveKev tov ^ave-
pwdrjvat T-fjv airovSriv vjxwv, where it is clearly causal as with the two
preceding participles, tveKtv tov aSLKrjcravTos, eveKev tov adurjOevTOS
(a good passage to note the distinction between the inf. and the
part.). The case is, of course, the genitive.
'E/c tov, likewise, appears in the N. T. only once with the inf.
(2 Cor. S : 11, kK tov exeiv), but the case is ablative. Its usual
idea in Attic prose is that of outcome or result.^ Votaw^ gives no
illustration from the 0. T., but three from the Apocrypha. Blass*
takes it in 2 Cor. 8:11, to be equivalent to Kadd av 'ixv- More
and with the genitive. Birklein does not find any instances of
€ws TOV and the inf. in the classic writers, though he does note
/xexpt TOV 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 : :
)uexpt(s) ov and the inf., 1 Esd. 1 49, and Tob. 11 1 B.: It is rather :
41; 15 13; 19 21; 20 1). See also Mt. 26 32; Mk. 16 19; 1
: : : : :
IIpo TOV in the ancient writers was used much like Tvplv and in
the temporal sense. ^ It gradually
invaded the province of irplv,
though in the N. T. we only meet it 9 times. It is not com-
mon 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. :
ence in construction and idea between Trpiv and the inf. and
irpo Tov and the inf. The use of irpiu with the inf. was common
in Homer was used with the inf. The usage
before the article
became and the article never intervened. But the inf. with
fixed
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-
position, but there is just as much reason for treating wplv as a
prepositional adverb with the ablative inf. as there is for so con-
sidering ecos TOV, not to say ecos alone as in tcos tKOelv (1 Mace. 16 :
9) . The use of the article is the common idiom. The 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.,
p. 193). In the N. T. irplv is still ahead with 13 examples. The
instances of irpd tov are Mt. 6:8; Lu. 2 21; 22 15; Jo. 1 48; : : :
of the inf. The matter calls for only a short treatment at this
point. The use of the inf. with substantives was ancient and **
1 Whitney, Sans. Gr., § 983; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 158. Homer used irpif
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 re-
lation with other substantives is obvious and natural.
(e) The Infinitive with Adjectives. This idiom is likewise clas-
sical 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
substantive on longest with Swards, Uavos, but other
is. It held
adjectives in late began to give way to els ro (cf. Jas. 1 19,
kolvt] :
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 an-
arthrous 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) Sv- : :
» Goodwin, M. and T., p. 301. » Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., pp. 15, 26.
2 AUen, Inf. in Polyb., pp. 23, 32. * lb., p. 27.
6 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 155 f For Polyb. see Allen, . Inf. in Polyb., pp. 23, 32.
6 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 487.
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 : 13, deOrjpat awodauelu eroi/xoos ex'«^ (so 2
Cor. 12 : 14). The articular examples are less frequent. But note
(Lu. 24 25) : /SpaSeTs rod TTLaTevetu, (Ac. 23 : 15) eTOLfioi. tov avtkeiv.
Some would add 1 Cor. 16 :
4, a^iov tov iroptveadai., but see Cases
of the Inf.
(/) The Infinitive with Verbs. This usage came to be, of course,
the most frequent of all. It started as a dative or locative, then
a sort of accusative of reference,^ then the object of verbs with
whatever case the verb used. It is both anarthrous and articu-
lar. It is not necessary to go over again (see Cases of the Inf.)
the varied uses of the inf. with verbs, whether the object of verbs
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.
1078 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
He 'iva about 125 times and the inf. with verbs about 129
finds
times. 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.
The rest are scattered with SlScoyui, €x«, 6(})€i\co, So/cew, d0t?;/it,
much less frequent. But note rd ayairav after 6(t>ei\co (Ro. 13:8);
TrapaLTovfxai to a.ivodavttv (Ac. 25 : 11); roD TrepLiraTelp after Troteco (Ac.
3 : 12); eTrta-retXat rod awexco^daL (15 : 20); Karelxov tov /jlti iropeveadaL
inf. is used with verbs. But at bottom the two uses are one.
They are both limitative. With nouns the appositional inf. re-
stricts 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.
15 : 28 7rX?7J' TOVTwv TLCV eiravayKes, airex^cydciL, (Jas. 1 : 27) dpyjaKeia
Kadapa Kal a/xlavTos — Cf further Ac.
avrrj eariv, ewLaKeiTTeadaL. .
each inf. has both substantival and verbal aspects. The uses
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 its dual character
was fixed. But, as already shown, the inf. did not come to the
rank of a mode.
(a) Voice. The Sanskrit inf. had no voice. In Homer the inf.
already has the voices, so that it is speculative as to the origin.
It is possible that the original Greek inf. had no voice. This is an
inference so far as the Greek is concerned, but a justifiable one.
Moulton^ illustrates it well by Suwros davixacrai, 'capable for won-
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 in-
dividuality, 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 dXucrets. See also 5 : 43, etirev SoOrjvai avrfj (j)ayelv. No
special voice significance is manifest in cpayetv, which is like our
vtos (Lu. 15 19). Cf. deaaaadai. (Lu. 7 24) and deaOfjvaL (Mt. 6:1).
: :
the tenses, as well as the three voices, were equipped with infini-
5 Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 59, notes 5,484 aorists and 3,.327 presents in
the Gk. Bible. In the N. T. the ratio is 4 3, in the O. T. 2 1. : :
:
Toiis yoveis to iraLdlop rod iroLrja-aL avrovs (Lu. 2 : 27) where the same
principle applies. Contrast the tense of TOLrjaai and ireldeLs in
Ac. 26 : 28. In Lu. 24 46, TeYpaTrrat wadelv TOP
: XpLffTov, we have
19; 16 : 27. This is natural enough. But the perfect inf. is found
also in the 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
: : :
aorist or even the present, since the sense of the future was van-
ishing. Cf. x^PW^i-^ in Jo. 21 25 (KBC), while the other later
:
2 Prol., p. 204 f. Cf. Hatz., Einl., pp. 142, 190; Kalker, Quest., p. 281.
3 Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 59.
* Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Tl. II, p. 460. Brug. (Griech. Gr., p. 518)
takes the ace. as originally the obj. of the verb. That was not always true,
as we have seen in Indirect Discourse.
^
place to start. Cf. Mt. 19 : 21, el deXets reXetos elvau See also 2
Cor. 10 : 2, Seo/xat to (xri irapchv Oappriaai, where the nominative oc-
curs within the domain of the accusative articular inf. But note
Mk. 14 : 28, ixera to eyepOi^val ixe irpoa^oi. The true nature of the ace.
with the inf. 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
inf. the ace. of general reference. The usual beaten track is taken
by Jolly,** but the truth is making its way and will win. Schmitt*
admits that the ace. is not the grammatical subject, but only the
logical subject. But why call it "subject" at all? Schroeder^
properly likens it to the double accusative with diddaKo:, as in
bibaaKoi avTov TrepnraTfTiv. The late Sanskrit shows a few examples
like Enghsh "if you wish me to live."^ The use of the ace. with
the inf. early reached a state of perfection in Greek and Latin.
Schhcher* notes 130 instances of it in Homer with (i>T]ixl alone as
against 15 with ws, on. We see hke it in its glory in historians
1 Hist. Synt., Bd. II, pp. 380, 446. ' Ubcr den Infinitiv, p. 40.
2 Introd. to Comp. Gr., 1890, p. 214. * Gesch. dcs Inf., p. 247.
» tibor den Urspr. dcs Substantivsatzcs, p. 5.
« t)bor die forincUc Untersch. dcr Iledet., p. 28.
^ Wilhelmius, De Inf. linguaruin Sanscritao, Beoticao, Porsicae, Graecae,
verbs in the N. T. which may use the ace. and the inf. in indirect
assertion were given under Modes. A general view of the matter
discloses a rather wide range still. But the idiom, being largely-
literary, is chieflyfound 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
is, in truth, no essential difference in the Greek construction,
whether the without a substantive, as in Ac. 12 15 Suax^-
inf. is :
pl^ero ovTO)s ex^i-v, with the acc, Ac. 24 9 4>a(TK0vre% ravTa oOrcos :
tX^iv, or with the nom. Ro. 1 22 <f)daK0VTes elvaL aocpoL Cf. Ac. :
17: 30; 1 Pet. 3 : 17. Words like Set, avayKrj may be followed by
no substantive (Mt. 23 23; Ro. 13 5). Cf. Lu. 2 26. In 1 : : :
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.
A difficult inf. occurs in Ac. 26 : 28, h dXiyo} fxe irddus Xpianavov
TTOLTJaaL. Is fj.€ the object of Teideis or of Trotrjo-at? Can Tveldets be
'try by persuasion'? Prof. W. Petersen suggests that this is a
contamination of h oXlyu) jue Teideus XptarLavdv dvai and kv oXiyco ne
iroLTiaeLs XpiuTLavov. But verbs differ. KeXeuco, for instance, always
has the acc. and the inf., while the dative comes with Taaaw (Ac.
22 : 10), iTTtrdcro-co (Mk. 6 39), and verbs like : hreXXofxaL, tTTLrptiru,
wapayyeXXco, and impersonal expressions like (xvix4>epu, Wos eariv,
ade/jLLTou, aiaxpov, etc. As shown above, KaXov eaTLv is used either
with the acc. or the dative, as is true of XeTco (cf. Mt. 5 34, 39 :
vplv Treipaaai. He notes also that Tpoaraaaco occurs with the acc.
(Ac. 10 : 48) as is true of eTrtrdo-a-co (Mk. 6 27) and raaaco (Ac. :
15 : 2). Even aviJ.4>epeL appears with the acc. and inf. (Jo. 18 14) :
help avTOP ^ijp yurj/cert, where note inf. dependent on inf. as is com-
mon (Lu. 6 12; Ac. 26 :9; Lu. 5 34; Heb. 7 23;: Mk. 5 43; : : :
(cf. Ac. 15 : 28, etc.) and even ebo^a epLavrus delp rpa^ai (Ac. 26 : 9).
The KOLPT] seems to use it less frequently than the ancient Greek.
Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 148) quotes Vett. Valcns, p. 277, 19,
do^eL — x)Trdpxt<-v avTr)P r-qp a'tpeaip. We have SedoKLiidafxeda iriaTev-
I
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 241. 2 j^.
* Cf. Middlcton, Analogy in Synt., p. 9. Maximus of Tyre has it in a rrl.
aboKiyiov vovv, iroielv to. fir] KaOijKovTa (Ro. 1 28). The first is appo- :
articular inf. in this sense (cf. Gen. 3:22; Judg. 8:33; Ps.
77: 18). The N. T. shows very few. Indeed, Votaw finds only
one, that in Gal. 3 : 10, eTTLKaTaparos ttSs bs oiiK efx/xeveL xScrij' rots
17; Col. 1 : 10, etc. The sub-final or objective use of the inf. 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
back to the Indo-Germanic stock.* It was always more
original
common in poetrythan in prose. The close connection between
the epexegetical inf. and that of purpose is seen in Mk. 7 4, a :
avTco ine'Lv olvov ('for drinking,' 'to drink'). So Mt. 25 35, eScb- :
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
verbs.5 H ^as abundant in Herodotus." Hence Thumb ^ thinks
its 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 dia-
lect still preserves the inf. of purpose after verbs hke ava^alvw,
etc. It is noteworthy that the inf. was not admitted into Latin
except with a verb of motion. Moulton {Prol, p. 205) cites Par.
P. 49 (ii/B.c.) eav ava^w koltco irpoaKwrjaaL, as parallel to Lu. 18 :
Congress of Arts and Sciences, 1904, vol. Ill, pp. 171 ff.
* Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 510; Delbriick, Grundr., IV, pp. 463 ff.
13) ^r}Te1v tov airoXeaaL, (13 : 3) e^rfKdev tov airelpeLV, (Lu. 21 : 22)
tov irXTjcrdfjuaL Travra, (24: 29) tov p-elvaL. See further Ac. 3 : 2; 5 :
31; 26 : 18; 1 Cor. 10 : 13; Gal. 3 : 10; Heb. 10 : 7, etc. The use
of tov p.i] is, of course, the same construction. Cf. Ro. 6 6, tov :
^ Prol., p. 205. Allen gives no ex. of the simple inf. of purpose in Polyb.,
only TOV, uxrre, ec^' 4' re. 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 'PHMAT02;) 1089
ToTs k^ovcriav chcrre e/c/SdXXeti'. Here the notion of cicrre (=c<;j, re,
'and so') is simply 'so as,' not 'so that.' See also Lu. 4 29, ware :
tive and the regular object- inf. (su bstantival aspect). Cf. Lu.
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
is KcoXiio). See further Final Clauses in chapter on Modes for
papyri examples.
(h) Result. Purpose is only "intended result," as Burton^ ar-
gues. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 153) says that the difference
between purpose and result in the inf. is often only in the more
subjective or objective colouring of the thought. It is hard to
draw a between conceived result and intended result. Blass^
line
explains a number
of examples as result that I have put above
under Purpose, as Rev. 5 5; 16 9. It is largely a matter of
: :
The lion had opened the book and so it was actual result. So
also Ac. 5 : 3, 5ta tI eirXripwaev b aaravas TrjP Kapblav aov, xpevaaadai
ae. 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, dTro-
: . :
is hard to deny it in this passage. But it is cio-re and the inf. that
is 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 :
2, Kav exoi iraaav Tr]v ttIctlv oxjTe opt] yLedicTTaveiv. Burton^ goes fur-
ther and includes in this category Mt. 10 1; 2 Cor. 2 7. But
: :
fioi's (TOV rod eiTLyvSival /le; See also 2 Chron. 33 9; 1 Mace. 14 36. : :
avTOVs ware eKT^rjaaeadaL Kai Xeyetv, (Mk. 9 26) ojo-re tovs ttoXXous
:
peiv. See also Ac. 15 39; Ro. 7 6; 2 Cor. 7:7; Ph. 1 13, etc. : : :
(Ac. 25 16), both in Luke (literary style). See, for the inf.,^
:
within,' etc. See also Epictetus, IV, 10, 18, Iva 8e TavTa ykvy}Tai,
imperatival inf. in the N. T., Ph. 3 16, t<2 avTui aToix^lv. But :
imperatival use of the inf. was common in laws and maxims and
He gives also the Hellenistic formula, els bbva^xLv dvai t^v kfiriv,
Inscr. Pergam., 13, 31; 13, 34. Hatzidakis^ notes that in the
Pontic dialect this construction still exists. The epistolary inf.
has the same origin as the imperatival inf. It is the absolute inf.
This is common in the papyri. See Ac. 15 : 23; 23 : 26; Jas. 1 : 1,
xalpeiv. The nom. is the nominative absolute also. Cf. 2 Jo. 10,
where xo-ipeLv is the object of Xkyere. Radermacher {N. T. Gr.,
p. 146) notes how in the later language the ace. comes to be used
with the absolute inf., as in C. Inscr. lat. V. 8733, bowe avTO)v =
dovpaL avTov. It is just in this absolute inf. that we best see the
gradual acquirement of verbal aspects by the inf. It is probably
the oldest verbal use of the inf .^ The construction in Heb. 7 : 9,
ws €7ros but a step further on the way. There is but one
tnrdv, is
instance of this sort with cos in the N. T.^ Cf. roO TroXejurJo-at in
Rev. 12 : 7, where it is an independent parenthesis.
{I) Negatives. The ancient Greek used
jui? chiefly with the inf.
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
principal verb as in oh OkXoi. We do have oh in infinitival clauses,
as will be shown, but in general it is true to say that the inf.
» lb., p. 179. 2 s
Kii^i^ p 192. jviotilton, Prol., p. 203.
* For the variety of uses of the absolute inf. in ancient Gk. see Goodwin,
M. andT., pp. 31011".
^ Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 414.
« Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 58.
1094 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TJiSTAMENT
all sorts of uses of the inf. So the subject-inf. uses iir], as Kpeir-
Tov riv avToU fi-q tTveyvoiKkvaL (2 Pet. 2 : 21), both the anarthrous
as above and the articular as in Lu. 17 : 1. The object-inf.
likewise has ni], as in Lu. 21 : 14, Q'trt kv tols Kapdiats vixdv fxij
Tpo/jLeXerav. For the articular accusative with ni] see Ro. 14 : 13.
elvai avaaraaiv ixrjre ixyyeXov fj.r]Te irvevixa. We have it with tov fxr]
deia fir) weldeadaL, (Ro. 15 : 22) eveKOTVTbp.r]v tov eXOeiv, (Lu. 4 : 42)
KaTeixov avTov tov ixt] Topeveadat, (Mt. 19 : 14) jui) KcoXuere avTO. k^delv
jrpos ixe, (1 Cor. 14:39) to Xakelv p-rj /ccoXuere, (Ac. 14:18) /xoXis
KaTtiravaav tovs oxXous tov jxi] dveiv avTols, (Ac. 8 : 36) tL KwXuet fie
^a-KTiadrivai, (10 : 47) p.y]TL to u5cop hbvaTai KwKma'i tls tov p.r) ^air-
macher (A''. T. Gr., p. 149) illustrates "the Pauline to prj with the
infinitive" by Sophocles' Electra, 1078, to re prj /SXereti^ holpa, and
the inscr. (Heberdey-Wilhelm, Reisen in Kilikien, 170, 2), to pr]bkv
aWov —
eTretaevevKeLV. We may note also Ac. 4 20, ov Swapeda pri :
XaXetv, where the negative not redundant. Cf. also Jo. 5 19, is :
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.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOZ) 1095
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-
(m) "Av with the hifinitive. This classic idiom has vanished
from the N. T. save in 2 Cor. 10 : 9, cos av kK<^o^€tv. Even here it
is not a clear case, since kK^o^etv depends on 56^aj and cos av comes
in as a parenthetical clause, 'as if ('as it were')-
The treatment of the infinitive has thus required a good many
twists and turns due to its double nature. ^
The Participle (f |i€TOXil). /'^/r^-A^^r^x*/ - -me-^ 2'^"^^^^ uAMU.s»f^(/k
III.
1. The Verbals in -to? and -xeo?. These verbals are not ex- ^"^ a /»*-<
actly participles inasmuch as they have no tense nor voice. They
are formed from verb-stems, not from tense-stems, and hence
are properly called verbal adjectives.^ In the broadest sense,
however, these verbals are participles, since they partake of both
verb and adjective. Originally the infinitive had no tense nor
voice, and the same thing was true of the participle. For con-
venience we have limited the term participle to the verbal ad-
jectives with voice and tense. The verbal in -tos goes back to
the original Indo-Germanic time and had a sort of perfect passive
idea.^ This form is hke the Latin -tus. Cf. jvojtos, notiis; ayvco-
Tos, ignotus. But we must not overdo this point. Strictly this
pro-ethnic -tos has no voice nor tense and it never came to have
intimate verbal connections in the Greek as it did in Latin and
English.^ Thus amatus est and ayarrrjTos hanv do not correspond,
nor, in truth, does 'he is loved' square with either. "Even in
Latin, a word like tacitus illustrates the absence of both tense
J
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255.
2 Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 2G2.
8 Drug., Gricch. Gr., p. 200. * Moulton, Prol., p. 221.
1096 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
151), though the new formation in -dros has more verbal force.
This ambiguity appears in Homer and all through the Greek
language.* Blass^ overstates it when he saj^s that in the N. T.
"the verbal adjective has practically disappeared, with the ex-
ception of forms like Swards, which have become stereotyped as
adjectives." As a matter of fact the verbal in -tos is still com-
mon in the N. T. as in the kolvt] in general. Take, for instance,
ajairriTds, ixyvwros, adwaros, aKarayvc^Tos , avaiJ.apTr]TOs, aveKTOs, aop-q-
Tos (Mt. 3 : 17); eWeros (Lu. 9 :62); 5t5a/<r6s (Jo. 6 :45); dtoirvev-
(XTos (2 Tim. 3 : 16); deodldaKTos (1 Th. 4:9); ypairros and kpvttos
though not frequent. It is more like the 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-
:
1
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, Prol., p. 222.
6 Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 184, 525. ' Goodwin, M. and T., p. 368 f.
* Brug., Indoger. Forsch., V, pp. 89 ff.; Giles, Man., p. 473; Moulton, Prol.,
p. 221.
s
Williams, The Part, in the Book of Acts, 1909, p. 7.
6 Boiling, The Part, in Hesiod, Cath. Univ. Bull., 1897, III, p. 423.
7 lb. 8 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 505.
9 GildersL, Stylistic Effect of the Gk. Part., Am. Jour, of Philol., 1888, p. 142.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT "PUMATOi:) 1099
not all verbs express motion. The mere adjectival notion is more
common in the Latin, as in prceteritus, quietus, tacitus, etc. In
Mt. 17 17, yepea aTTLffTos Kal StecTTpantihr], the verbal adjective
:
and
participle occur together.
(6) The Addition of the Verbal Functions. These functions are
tense, voice and case-government. There was originally no no-
tion of time in the tense, nor does the tense in the participle
ever express time absolutely. It only gives relative time by sug-
gestion or 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
not have subject.^
(c) The Double Aspect of the Participle. The very name parti-
ciple {pars, capio) indicates this fact. The word is part adjective,
part verb. Voss calls it mules, which is part horse and part ass.*
Dionysius Thrax says: Meroxri e<TTL Xe^ts nerexovaa ttjs tuiv prjfxaTuv
Kal TTJs Twu opoiJLaTuv ioLOTTiTos. In the true participle, therefore, we
are to look for both the adjectival and the verbal aspects, as in
the infinitive we have the substantival and the verbal. The em-
phasis will vary in certain instances. Now the adjectival will be
more to the fore as in the attributive articular participle like 6
KoXoJv.^ Now
the verbal side is stressed as in the circumstantial
participle. But the adjectival notion never quite disappears in
the one as the verbal always remains in the other (barring a few
cases noted above). One must, therefore, explain in each in-
stance both the adjectival and verbal functions of the participle
else he has set forth only one side of the subject. It is true that
the verbal functions are usually more complicated and interest-
ing,6 but the adjectival must not be neglected.
(d) Relation between Participle and Infinitive. As already ex-
though different in origin.
plained, they are closely allied in use,
Both are verbal nouns; both are infinitival; both are participial.
But the participle so-called is inflected always, while the infinitive
so-called has lost its proper inflection. The infinitive, besides, ex-
presses^ the action in relation to the verb, while the participle ex-
presses the action in relation to the subject or the object of the
»
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 522. * Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 1G9.
2
lb. * Brug., Griooh. Gr., p. 522.
« Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 163.
3 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 53.
' lilasH, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 242. In general, on this point, see Goodwin,
M. and T., p. 357.
1102 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
4) 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;
: : : :
dvHv, which well illustrates the difference between the inf. and
the part. The use of kreXeaep biaTaacruv (Mt. 11: 1) Blass^ calls
unclassical. The part, alone occurs with emaKeo} (Gal. 6 :9; 2
Th. 3 : 13). Note also eTrkjievov kpwTOiVTes (spurious passage in
Jo. 8:7), but aaiTOL SiareXeZre (Ac. 27:33) without ovres. Cf.
Ac. 12 : 16, kire/jLevev Kpovuv, and Lu. 7 : 45, ov bLeKnrev /cara^tXoOcra.
Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 169) finds the part, with kTnp.kvoo
The adjective alone is seen in Mt. 23 : 27, 28. Cf. also Ro.
7 : 13. It is hardly on a par with the participle in Mt. 6 : 17
in spite of Blass's insistence.^ Thoroughly classical also are
Tpo€4>9a(7ev avrov 'Keycov (Mt. 17 25) and eXadov ^evLcravTes (Heb. 13
: :
1 Cf. Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten, 1862, p. 34.
2 Robertson, Short Gr., p. 194. ^ II).
inf. again. In Mt. 7:11, ol'Sare dopara dya^d 5t56mt, the inf. with
ol8a means 4vnow how to give.' But in Lu. 4 :41, fibaaav top
XpLaTou avTop elvai, it is mere indirect discourse. For the part, see
2 Cor. 12 : 2, olba — apirayevTa top tolovtop (cf. Mk. 6 .'
20). In Ac.
3 : 9 note el8ep avTop irepLiraTovpTa. Here we have the same root,
though a different sense. OUa is common with otl. But yiPwaKij)
occurs both with the inf. as in Heb. 10 34, yiPoxjKOPTes exeiv iav- :
aKeTC TOP a8eX4>6p rjpuip Tipodeop awoXeXvpepov. Cf. Lu. 8 : 46, 67w
eypoip bvpapip e^eXrjXvdv'iap, where the tense and participle both ac-
cent the vivid reality of the experience. But note the inf. in Mt.
16 : 13. The same thing is true of opoXoyeoo as in Tit. 1 : 16, dtop
bpoXoyovcTLP eidepai, and 1 Jo. 4 : 2, 6 dpoXoyel 'Irjaovp ep aapKl kXrjXvdoTa
(cf. 2 Jo. 7). Cf. also Ac. 24: 10 6vTa ae KpiT-qv kincrTdpevos and
doKLpd^oo in 1 Th. 2 : 4 and 2 Cor. 8 22. : Note difference between
Ipa evpcoffLV KaTrjyopeip avTOV (Lu. 6 7) and evplaKei avTovs KadevSopras :
o}Ko86pT](T€v avTov Trjv oUiav. See also Lu. 6 49. Cf. Ro. 8 24, : :
This use of
3 ttos without art. occurs occasionally in class. Gk. Sec K.-G.,
U, p. GOSf.
;
/xevos (Mt. 2: 6, LXX), ovk eanv avviwv and ovk tariv eK^riTOJV (Ro.
22). Like other articular adjectives, the participle may come be-
tween the article aud the substantive, as in rf) vyLaLPovay 5t5acr/ca-
Xta (1 Tim. 1 10); rod (f)aLPop.epov aarepos (Mt. 2 7); Trjs TpoKeLu'epyj^
: :
avTU) xapas (Heb. 12 2). Cf. Jude 3. : The substantive may pre-
cede and the -article may be repeated, as to uScop to ^ojp (Jo. 4 11) :
57). Cf. Mt. 26 :28; 27:44; Jas. 5 :1; Ro. 2 :11. In Mk. 12:38
the article is repeated as in 12 40 (apposition)
: when the nom-
inative reminds us of the coimnon anacoluthon m Revelation.
where in the long clause the participle with ToiavT-qv comes in be-
tween rbv and vironeixevriKbTa and a good distance from avTCkoylav.
Sometimes the article is used with the participle, but not with
the substantive, as in 7rat5tots rots kv ayopa Kadrjjxkvois (Lu. 7 :
14; 13 : 16. The use of the articular participle with xSs is com-
mon, as Tras 6 dpyi^ofjLevos (Mt. 5 22) ttSs 6 clkovwv (Mt. 7:26),
: ;
Tras 6 \eyociv (7: 21). This is equal to the relative clause ttSs oo-ris
(Mt. 7: 24). In Ro. 2 : 1 was 6 Kplvcov is used with avdpoowe. Cf.
TCLVTes ol cLKovovTes in Ac. 9 : 21. Here also 6 Topdrjaas is continued
b^ Kal e\r]\WeL as if it were a relative clause. The articular parti-
ciple sometimes occurs where it is followed by an infinitive. Here
it is still further complicated, but it is clear. See Tijv neXKovaav
86^av airoKa\v4>dfivaL (Ro. 8 : 18) ; to. boKovvTa fjieXr] — VTrapx^i-P (1 Cor.
12 : 22). Cf. also 2 Pet. 3 : 2. The use of 6 chv in Acts calls for
special remark. In Ac. 13 : 1, /card ttjv ovaav eKKXrjalav, we see this
idiom, which Moulton^ translates 'the local church.' Note 14: 13
D, TOV optos Atos IIpoTroXecos (or Trpo TroXecos). Cf. Ramsay's remark
(Ch. in 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
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 that will be discussed a bit later. Like a relative clause, the
articular participle may
suggest ^ the notion of cause, condition,
purpose, etc., as in Mt. 10 37, 39, 40, 41; Lu. 14: 11; Ro. 3:5.
:
kpx6fj.eva (Jo. 16 : 13), to vvv txov (Ac. 24:25), to. p.i] 6vTa, to. 6vTa
(1 Cor. 1 : 28), to aUKovp.evov (14 : 7), to dedo^aa/xhov (2 Cor. 3 : 10 f.),
23). Besides, the participle itself (cf. neuter adjective iroXv, etc.)
irkirpaKtv (Mt. 13:46), 'he has gone and sold.' So also avaaTo.^
fiXdep (Lu. 15: 20), 'he arose and came.' Once again note \a^ovaa
kveKpvypeu (Mt. 13 33), 'she took and hid.'
:
This idiom is more
Aramaic than Hebraic and is at any rate picturesque vernacular.
But it is also Greek. Pleonasm belongs to all tongues. Rader-
macher {N. T. Gr., p. 179) quotes Herod. VI, 67, 10, elite <^ds;
VI, 68, 5, e^r? — XcTcoj'. Mr. Dan Crawford finds in the Bantu
TvaOovaa virb TroWdv larpcoj', the active participle has the construc-
tion of the passive, but this is due to the verb iraax^, not to the
voice. Cf . also Gal. 4 :
9, yvopres dedv jjcdWov 8e yvooadepres viro deov.
(6) Tense.
Timelessness of the Participle. It may be said at once that
(a)
the participle has tense in the same sense that the subjunctive,
optative and imperative have, giving the state of the action
as punctiliar, linear, completed. In the beginning ^ this was all
it is not present time that is here given by this tense, but the gen-
eral description of John as the Baptizer without regard to time.
It is actually used of him after his death. Cf. ol fryroOires (Mt.
2 20). In Mt. 10 39, 6 evpojv aToXeaei, the principal verb is future
: :
while the participle but the aorist tense does not mean
is aorist,
<t>us have no notion of time but only the state of the action. But
the tenses of the participle may be used for relative time. In
relation to the principal verb there may be suggested time. Thus
6 evpojv oLTToXeo-et above implies that evpcop is antecedent to airoXeaei
ovTos riv 6 —
KaOrjixevos (Ac. 3:10), where the principal verb is
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
: :
from the nature of the case, the original use of the aorist participle
for simultaneous action continued. One has no ground for as-
suming that antecedent action a necessary or an actual fact is
Tov Trapadovs alfia aOQov. So also hivoKa^div elurev (Lu. 10 30). See :
aas SaprjaeraL (Lu. 12 : 47) where the aorist participle gives the
simple action with a future verb. Cf. Lu. 6 : 49 for the articular
aorist part, with the present indicative. Burton ^ feels
the weak-
ness of his contention for ''subsequent" action in the aorist
participle when he explains that it is "perhaps due to Aramaic
influence." There is no need for an appeal to that explanation,
since the fact does not exist. It is only in the circumstantial par-
ticiple that any contention is made 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. :
vlbs ep.adep (Heb. 5:8); fxepLfxvoJv dvvaraL (Mt. 6 : 27); eaeaOe XaXoDj/-
res (1 Cor. 14:9). The articular present especially shows the
absence of time. So ol doKovvres ovdev TpoaavWevro (Gal. 2:6);
TrpoaeTidei tovs cro:^op.evous (Ac. 2 : 47) ; 6 SexoAtews Uyuas c/xe Sexerat
(Mt. 10 40) : ; eadiere to. TrapaTideneva (Lu. 10:8); 6 jSXeTrcoi/ kv ra3
43; Jo. 5 :5; Ac. 24 :10; Eph. 2 :13; Col. 1:21; 1 Tim. 1:13, etc.
There are also undoubted instances of the present participle to
express the notion of purpose, futuristic in conception, though
present in form. Add to the instances already given the follow-
ing: Mk. 3 : 31, e^w arrjKovTes arkaTeCKav KoKovi'Tes. Here the first
vovi d0t€T€ eiaeKdetv, (27 40) 6 KaraXvoiiV rov vabv, (Ac. 28: 23) Trei- :
Rev. 9:1.
(5) The Perfect. This tense brings little that is distinctive in
the participle. Cf. TeTeXeiwixevot (Jo. 17: 23), xeTrotTjKores (18: 18),
irpoai^aTcos kX7]Xvd6Ta (Ac. 18 : 2), KeKOinaKcos (Jo.4 6), : TreTTooKora
fxhoL vvv 5e eXe-qdevTes. The same act may be looked at from cither
standpoint. One may not always care to add the linear aspect
to the punctiliar. Cf. 6 yeyevt^nkvos and 6 yevvr]Bds in 1 Jo. 5 : 18,
(19 : 35). The difference between the perfect and present tenses
after tUov is strikingly shown in Revelation.. Cf. el8ov ras \puxas
TU3V ka^ayiJLevoov (6:9), aWov ayyekov ava^aivovTa (7:2), aarkpa e/c
ToO ovpavov TreTTTOOKOTa (9:1). Cf. also Mk. 5:33, (po^rjdeLaa Kal
Tpe/jLovaa, eiSvla. One must not confuse the perf. part, in Gal.
2:11 and Rev. 21 8 with a present like \(/7]\a(f)o:iJiei>cp in Heb.
:
12:18 ('touchable').
(e) The Future. The future participle, like the future tense in
general, was later in its development than the other tenses. It
is usually punctiliar also and has something of a modal value
(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 sugges-
tion), 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. Cf.
6 irapaSuacov aiiTOV (Jo. 6 : 64) and 6 iJLeWoov avrov TTapabibbvaL (12 : 4).
As already shown, the future participle is much less frequent in
the N. T. (as in LXX) than in the Koivi] generally (as in the
papyri). Another rival to the future participle is hpxonevo^
(Jo. 1:9), 6 epxoixevos (Lu. 7:19). Both jueXXo) and epxonai (cf.
etjui) are anticipatory presents.^ Cf. ej^earcora and fxeWovTa in Ro.
8 : Nearly all the N. T. examples of the future participle
38.
(see chapter on Tense for discussion) are in Luke and Paul and
Hebrews (the three best specimens of literary style in the N. T.).
But see Mt. 27:49, crdoacov; Jo. 6 64, : 6 Trapadoiaoov; 1 Pet. 3 :
awv, (24 : 17) TTOLrjaccv. For Paul see Ro. 8 : 33, 6 KaraKpLvup (a
note that the future part, disappeared wholly from the later
Greek. The modern Greek does not know it at all. Instead it
uses vd and the subjunctive.^ But in general in the N. T. the
participle used in thorough accord with the ancient idiom
is still
eK^a\<hv irdvTas (Mk. 5 : 40) and Kparrjaas rijs xetpos tov iratdiov (5 :
But note e^op rjp (Mt. 12 4) and 6eop earlp (Ac. 19 36). So Tp'eirop
: :
(/3) A
Diminution of the Complementary Participle. This de-
crease 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 per-
sonal construction and the growth of the impersonal with 6tl or
Lva. In Mk. 2:1, eiaeXOciiv toXlv els Ka<j)apvaovn 5t' rnxepuiv rjKOvcrdr]
OTL kv oUco tdTiv, the personal construction is retained even with
the circumstantial participle. Cf. also 2 Cor. 3 : 2, <^avepovp.evoi
oTi kari eTLaroXi} XpLarou. But it is vanishing with the verbs where
it was once so common. See under Infinitive, 5, (e), for further re-
marks. 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. T., though the LXX
(and Apocrypha) has it 24 times, twice
with the disappeared from the vernacular. As to ru7xam
inf. It
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
also in the (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 169).
kolvt] Curiously
enough appears once with the participle in the
Xavdavo: LXX
(Tob. 12 13) as in the N. T. (Heb. 13 2). In the kolvt, the inf.
: :
^davo) continued in use 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
: .
<i>davi)i, and see also 1 Ki. 12 : 18. It is common in the koivt].'^ The
1 Hist.Gk. Gr., p. 493. » Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 493.
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 228. * lb., p. 494.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs) 1121
See also the part, with eT/caKeco in Gal. 6:9; 2Th.3:13. The
part, with /caprepeco in Heb. 11:27 is circumstantial, as is that
with dj/exo/xat and with /capj^co in Heb. 12: 3. The
in 1 Cor. 4: 12
doubtful participle with fiavdavo^ in 1 Tim. 5 13 has already been :
1 lb. » 228 f.
lb., p.
2 Prol., p. 229. * Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 245.
1122 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
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. :
is giving way to the inf. or ort, but still the idiom is common
enough to attract notice in all parts of the N. T. Cf. yeivoiaKe
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, still better, Lu. 14:18, exe /xe ivapxj-
Cf. Mk. 3:1; Ac. 9 : 21, IW deSeixhous avrovs ayayy. See also 24 27. :
ciple is itself the full predicate and represents the predicate of the
direct discourse. Cf Mk. 12 28 aKovaas
. : avTcov aw^-qTovvTcov, (Lu.
8 46)
: €7J'coj/ bvvaixLv e^ekifKvdvlav air' kfxov. The point 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 nu-
merous to discuss in detail or even to quote in full. As represen-
tative examples see Mt. 16 28 after el8ov {epxoiJ.evou, but Mk. 9 :
Tvpovarjs, and Heb. S :9, h rinkpa kTriKa^onkvov fxov. The first ex-
ample is really the attributive participle like rod irpociyriTov Xeyovro^
(Mt. 21:4). The second example is more difficult, but it is a
quotation from the (Jer. 31 32) and is not therefore a LXX :
model of Greek. The iiov has to be taken with 'niitpq. and the
1 Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 359 flf.
6 Certainly we cannot admit the idea that the part, itself has different
meanings. Cf. Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 15S.
1126 A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK 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 usu-
ally 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'
with 'and.' The slightness of the temporal idea is well seen in
the pleonastic participles avaaras (Mt. 26 : 62), airoKpidds (Mt. 3 :
31, cf. verse 33), iropevdepres (21 : 6). Here the notion is temporal,
but very slightly so. Cf. also Tpoadels elwev in Lu. 19 : 11. The use
of ap^afxevos as a note of time is seen in Mt. 20 : 8f.; Lu. 23 :
5; 24 47; Ac.
: 1 : 22. In Ac. 11:4, ap^ap.evos Ilerpos k^eTidero avrols
Kade^rjs, the part, is slightly pleonastic,^ but note contrast with
Kade^TJs as with ecos tcov Tpcorcov in Mt. 20: 8. Cf. epxop.evo[s] tpxov,
P. Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.). Sometimes the temporal idea 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 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
1 Prol., p. 230.
2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 249. ^ lb., p. 248.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATO:;) 1127
arpov iJLvpov, Ac. 21 23 evxw exopres acj)' eavTUP. Cf. also </)<pa;v in
:
in Ac. 3 : 17.
Means. usuaP to distinguish means from manner in the
It is
There is a real point, but it is not always clear where
participle.
manner shades off into means. But some instances are clear.
Cf. Mt. 6 27, ris ixepiiJ-voiV dvuaraL TvpoaOelvaL; So also navTevofxhrj
:
in Ac. 16 : 16. Thus the maid furnished the revenue for her
masters. In Heb. 2 : 10 ayayovra and 2 : 18 ireipaaOels we may
also have instances of this notion, but the be temporal first may
and the second causal. Jannaris^ blends the treatment of man-
ner and means and notes how this participle disappears in the
later Greek.
Cause. The ground of action in the principal verb may be sug-
gested by the participle. Cf. dUaios Kal firi deKcov avr-qv SeLyfiaTlaaL
24 22, eldcos
: elVas, —
Ro. 6 6, yLi>6)aKovTes, and 9, dbbres; 2 Pet.
:
3:9; Col. 1 3 f.; 1 Tim. 4:8; Jas. 2 25. For ws with this parti-
: :
1 Goodwin, M. and T., p. 333. ' Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 335.
2 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 504, * Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 248.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS) 1129
27; Ro. 15 : 25. But it is not absent from the papyri. Cf. P.
Goodsp. 4 (ii/B.C.) aTrtaToKKaiiev — KOLVoXoyrjaofxevSu aoL. So also
the present part., P. Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66), OLaKovov[v]Ta Kal TroLo[v]vTa.
Condition. The use of the conditional disappeared more
rapidly than the temporal and causal in the later Greek.^ It is
only the protasis, of course, which is here considered. It is still
a common idiom in the N. T. In Mt. 16 26 we have kav t6v :
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
: :
and 8eov eariv (Ac. 19 36). Cf. also oh crvfi(f)€pop (xh in 2 Cor.
:
use of the genitive absolute, nrjwOeiarjs 8e ixol iin^ovkri^ €ts Tov av-
8pa 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
:
n'tv-qs d\'ol/e(j)s r) 5ta)7/xoO ha tov Xoyov evOvs (XKapSaKi^ovTaf, Ac. 12: 18,
yei'oiievqs 6e rifxepas rjv rapaxos ovK oKlyo%; 18 : 20; 7: 5; Eph, 2 : 20;
Mk, 8 1; 2 Pet. 3 11; Heb. 9
: : These are perfectly : 6-8, 15, 19.
regular and normal examples. But sometimes the genitive abso-
lute occurs where there is already a genitive in the sentence. So
Mt. 6 : 3, (TOV be ttolovvtos — 17 apiaTepa cfov; 9 : 10; Ac. 17 : 16. In
Mk. 14 3 : we find a double gen. absolute ovtos avrov — KaraKHixevov
avTov. Even Greek the genitive absolute is found
in the classical
when the participle could have agreed with some sul^stantive or
pronoun in the sentence.^ It was done apparently to make the
* Cf. Spiekor, The Genitive Abs. in the Attic Orators, Am. Jt)ur. of Pliilol.,
avTOv XaXoOvroj —
eiriaTeuaav eis avrbv. Cf. also Mt. 18:25; Ac.
28 17. Quite unusual is Ac. 22 17 where we have /xot vToarpe-
: :
is not expressed.
(/) The Independent Participle in a Sentence. There is no
doubt that the use of the absolute participle (nominative, ac-
cusative, genitive-ablative)is a sort of ''implied predication."^
1 Cf. Moulton, Prol., pp. 74, 236; CI. Rev., XV, p. 437.
* Goodwin, M. and T., p. 338.
' Moulton, Prol., p. 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 'PIIMATOS) 1133
7 Moulton, Prol., p. 180, cites Mcistcrh., pp. 244-216, for the use of the
11 with Kai eldores rbv Kaipov} But other examples leave no such
alternative. We may first summarize Moulton's satisfactory ex-
position of the matter. There is a striking similarity between
the third person plural indicative and the participle in the Indo-
Germanic tongues (*bheroriti, ferunt, (t)epov(TL, hairand, etc.). The
frequent ellipsis of est in the Latin perfect and passive is to be
noted also. The probability that the Latin second plural middle
indicative is really a participle which has been incorporated into
the verb inflection (cf. sequimini and eTrbixevoi) is also suggestive.
This fact may point to the prehistoric time when the Latin used
the participle as indicative. The papyri re-enforce the argument
strongly. We
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 fol-
lows). A. P. 78 (ii/A.D.), ^iav waaxoiv eKaaroTe, etc. (no verb)."
This may serve as a sample of many more like them. Moulton
{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:
12 where exovres does not agree with the TrapoUovs. We may now
approach the passages in dispute between Winer ^ and Moulton.*
Moulton passes by Winer's suggestion that in 2 Cor. 4 13 :
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 con-
:
=
deepened' 'he dug 8:59. There remains the
deep.' Cf, Jo.
relation of participles to each other when a series of them comes
together. There is no rule on this subject beyond what applies
to other words. Two or more participles may be connected by
Kal as in Ac. 3 : 8, TrepnraTO^v Kal aXKofxevos Kal aivdv tov debv. But we
have asyndeton^ in Ac. 18 : 23, bi.epxbp.evos rijv TaXaTLKijv x'^P^-v,
CFTTipL^oiv Tovs pLadriTCLS. Cf. Lu. 6 : 38, p'tTpov KoXov TV eiTieff jxevov aeaa-
Xevjjiepou vTveptKxvvvbpevov ddocrovaLv. Sometimes Kal occurs only
once as in Mk. 5 : 15, Kadijpevov Ipanap-evop Kal cco^pofoCvra. There
may be a subtle reason for such a procedure as in Ac. 18 : 22,
KareXdcbv els KaLaaplav, avaj3as Kal aairaaapevos, where the first parti-
ciple stands apart in sense from the other two. Cf. also Mk. 5 :
the participle. In modern Greek fxri alone occurs with the pres-
ent participle (Thumb, Handb., p. 200). It is generally said that
Homer with its one use of to the modern Greek with nothing
fj.rj
ousted ov altogether. The Attic marks one stage, the kolvt] an-
other. It is true that in the Attic there is a sort of correspondence
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 /jlyj. But ou occurred in
Homer with the subj. and fxrj persisted with the indicative. The
lines crossed and the development was not even, but on the whole
JU17 gradually pushed ou aside from the participle. In the N. T.,
as in the kolvt] generally, the development has gone quite beyond
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.
Lu. 12 33 : nrj raKaLOUfxepa, Jo. 5 : 23 6 //17 Tifiaiv, Ac. 17 6 : fJLri
calls for explanation, not ixr]. But it may be said at once that the
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 in-
roads of The papyri go further than Plutarch, but still have
fx-i].
1 Howes, The Use of /xr, with the Part., Ilarv. Stu. in Class. Philol., 1901,
pp. 277-285.
2 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 430. 3 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255.
* See further exx. in Moulton, Prol., p. 231.
6 Prol, p. 232.
1138 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
42) ov /SXcTrcov, (Jo. 10: 12) 6 ijnadwros Kal ovk o}p tvoljit^v, (Ac. 7: 5)
OVK ovTOS avT(2 TeKvov, (17 : 27) Kai ye ov fxaKpav — virapxovTa, (26 :
22) ovbev eKTOS Xkyciiv, (28 : 17) ovSep TroLrjaas, (1 Cor. 4 : 14) ovk kp-
rpkiroiv, (9 : 26) cos ovk akpa depwp, (2 Cor. 4 : 8) dXX' ov arepoxcopov-
nepoi, (Ph. 3 : 4) Kal ovk kp aapKl TeTocOoTes, (Col. 2 : 19) /cat ov
KparGiV, (Heb. 11:1) irpajnaToop ov (SXiTrofihcov , (11 : 35) ov Trpoade^afjLe-
poi, (1 Pet. 1 : 8) OVK idoPTes, (2 : 10) ol ovk eKeqixkpoL. In all these 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 con-
trast seems intentional. Thus in Mt. 22 11 we have ovk hbebv- :
liepop tpbvjia yaiJLov, while in verse 12 we read uri exo^p epSv/jia yanov.
The first instance lays emphasis on the actual situation in the
description (the plain fact) while the second instance is the
hypothetical argument about it. In 1 Pet. 1 : 8 we read op ovk
idoPTes ayaTTOLTe, eis op apn fxrj opccPTes TTLaTevopres 8e ayaXKiaTe. Here
ov harmonizes with the tense of iSopres as an actual experience,
while /ii7 with dpoopres is in accord with the concessive idea in con-
trast with TiarevopTes. Cf. Hort in locowho holds that the change
of particles here is not capricious. "Though Blass thinks it arti-
ficial to distinguish,hard to believe that any but a slovenly
it is
KOPTa (Ro. 1:28) and Text. Rec. to. ov aprjKopra (Eph. 5:4). Cf.
fXT) and ov in Ac. 9 9. Blass ^ notes that the Hebrew !s)3 is regu-
:
21. Moulton- also rules out ovk e^ov (2 Cor. 12 : 4) on the ground
that it is the equivalent of the indicative. The copula is not ex-
pressed. But note ovk e^ovros, P. Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66). On 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; :
Ac. 7 5; 17 27; 26
: Paul leads with a dozen or so
: : 22; 28 : 17).
(Ro. 9 25; Gal. 4 27 twice; 1 Cor. 4 14; 9 26; 2 Cor. 4 8,
: : : : :
9; Ph. 3 :4; Col. 2 19; 1 Th. 2:4). Hebrews has two (11 : :
11). Worth noting, besides, is Kal tovto as in Ro. 13: 11, though
here a finite verb may be implied. So also Kal ravra veveKpconevov
(Heb. 11 There remain cbs, uael, ihairep. The use of cbo-et
: 12),
(Ro. 6 13) and of coairep (Ac. 2:2) is limited to condition or
:
lute with cos in the N. T. and its absence from the future parti-
ciple save in Heb. 13 17, where it is not strictly design.
: There
isnothing 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
:
(Col. 3 : 23); cbs ev ^pkpa (Ro. 13 : 13); cbs 8l' Th. 2 2),
ijpup (2 :
Par. P. 26 (ii/B.c), cos dv evraKTridrjaoiievoov. Cf. also lb., cos olp vto
TTjs \ifj.r]s dLaKuofxepot. The inscrs. show it also, O. G. I. S. 90, 23
(ii/B.c), cos ap — (xvue(TTr]Kvias. Blass "*
finds a genitive absolute
with cos Barnabas 6 11. All this is interesting as
ap in : fore-
shadowing the modern Greek use of cav as a conjunction.^
'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,
p. 35 f.) write.s well on the obscurity of the origin of particles and the use
of the term.
' Doctrina Particulanim Linguae Graecae. Ed. Secunda, ISOG.
* See above.
^ De Graecae Linguae Particulis, vol. I, 1S40; II, IS 12.
1144 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
with words, clauses and sentences (like apa, 5e, ovv), so that a strict
sible to 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
spoken vernacular thus has all the advantage of the written stjde.
All the vernacular cannot be reproduced on the page. Cf. the
1104, 5 (vi/vii a.d.) ov /jltiv 5e dXXd Kai. This shows that Paul
at least knew how to indicate the finer shades of thought by
means of the Greek particles. Blass^ notes that, in comparison
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
1 Paley, The Gk. Particles, p. vi. * lb.
2 lb., p. ix.
" Cir. of N. T. Gk., p. 259.
» Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 195.
1146 A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
precision of thought. Only Kal {ovre, ov8e), and the less com- ri
ever, Trore sometimes 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 :
29. In rjdr] Tore (Ro. 1 10; Ph. 4 10) it is more the notion of
: :
culmination (' now at last ') than of time. But in ni] irore the notion
of time may be wholly gone before that of contingency (' lest per-
chance'), as in Lu. 12: 58. In the N. T. we find undoubted in-
stances of the non-temporal use of vvv and wvl where the sense
differs little from Si? or ovv. Some of the passages are in doubt.
But the logical and emotional use, as distinct from the temporal,
is clear in Jo. 15 22, 24 where vvv 8k gives the contrast to the
:
preceding conditions, 'but as it is.' Cf. also 1 Jo. 2 28, rat vvp, :
vvv. Cf. likewise /cat vuv 8evpo in Ac. 7:34 (LXX). Cf. /cat vvv,
2. The N. T. Illustrations.
(a) Fe. We may begin with ye. The origin of ye is by no
means In the Boeotian, Doric and Eleatic dialects it is
certain.
ya. It seems to correspond ^ to the k in the Gothic mi-k (German
mi-ch). Cf. Greek eixk-ye. Brugmann sees also a kinship to the
g in the Latin ne-g-otiiwi, ne-g-kgere, ne-g-are. Hartung^ con-
nects it with the adverb fa. It may also be the same word
as the Vedic Sanskrit gha, which is used in the same way.'* Cf
further qui in the Latin qui-dem. It is not so common in the
KOLvrf as in the classic Attic (Radermacher, A''. T. Gr., p. 29). Its
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 : : 23, and el 8e ixr] ye in
Mt. 6 1 9 17, etc. There is a keen touch
: ; : of irony in Ro. 9 : 20,
0) avdpixnre, fxevovvye crv tLs el; Cf. iipaye in Mt. 17 : 26. On the
other hand ye means 'this much,' 'as much as this,' in other
contexts. So in Lu. 24: 21, dXXd ye /cat crvv iraai toutols, where the
ascensive forceis accented by /cat, (tvv and dXXd (affirmative here,
not adversative), and the climax of the crescendo is reached in
ye. The same climacteric force of the particles occurs in Ph.
3 : 8, dXXd fiev ovv ye Kal -qyovpiaL itavTa ^rjixlav elvai. 'I go,' says
Paul, 'as far as to consider all things to be loss.' Cf. apaye in Mt.
7: 20 and /cat ye in Ac. 2 : 18 (Joel 3:2). So we have apa. ye in
Ac. 8 : 30. A fine example is 6s ye tov l8iov vlov ovk e^yelaaro (Ro.
8 : 32). So 10 : 18. There is irony again in Kat 6(})eX6v ye e^aaiXev-
6:1); Kai ye (Ac. 17: 27); KaiTotye (Jo. 4:2); fx-qnye (1 Cor. 6 :
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,
while 56 was the form for the conjunction. It is certain that in
sage with 8i) irore in Jo. 5 : 4 has disappeared from the critical text.
(c) El fxrjp, PT] and pal. Somewhat akin to the positive note in
5i7 is the use of nrjp which is read by many MSS. in Heb. 6
rj 14. :
is possible that it may have the same root as {rjFe, riFe).^ Cf. r;
rj 8ri (r/Srj). In i]Trep (Jo. 12 43) and rjroi (Ro. 6 16) we have 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
el. The Doric has el for ^ where Moulton^ holds against Hort^
that the distinction is strictly orthographical. See further chap-
ter VI, 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 "assevera-
rj
tive particles" pi] and jxd. We do not have ij.a in the N. T. and vii
only once in 1 Cor. 15 31, KaQ' rnx'epap a-Kodp-qoKw pi) rijp vfierepap
:
though Brugmann^ compares it with the Latin tie and nae and
possibly also with the old Indo-Germanic na-na ('so — so').
{d) Mev. We know which is postposi-
a little more about nep,
tive, but not enclitic. It is only another form of ixr]p which occurs
in the N. T. only in Heb. 6 14. The Doric and Lesbian use imp:
(na used with words of swearing after a negative), nrjp and fxh
are one and the same word. Indeed, in Homer all three forms ^
fxev elirev, (17: 12) ttoWoI fxev ovv e^ avTWV ewiaTevaav, (21:39) eyo)
avOpooTOS fj.ev elfxi, (23 : 18) 6 fxev ovv irapoKa^wv (cf. also 23 : 31), (27
21) e5et nkv, (28 : 22) ivepl (xev yap Trjs alpeaecos ravr-qs, and the in-
stances of oi fxh odv like Acts 1 : 6; 2 : 41 ; 5 : 41 ; 8 : 25, where no
contrast is intended. See el ixh ovv in Heb. 7 -.11 ; fi nev evSoKta in
Ro. 10 1; : €</>' oaov nkv ovv dpi 12; kyo: in 11 : 13. Cf. 2 Cor. 12 :
have rbv p.ev tpojtop 'Koyop in Ac. 1 1 without a devrepov 5k, though :
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
pep stands alone, while cltoop and irapccv are contrasted by 5e. In
Heb. 12 9 there is : contrast between the pep clause and the next,
which has no particle (only toXv paXKop). In Ac. 26 4, 6, pep is :
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
: :
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 267. Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 410) gives a very
large list of illustrations of the original use of y.kv from anc. Gk.
2 Cf. W.-Th., p. 576.
3 But Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 267) takes it to be 'from the very outset'
and so the original use of ixkv. ^ j^,., p. 266.
PARTICLES (aI nAPABIIKAl) 1153
OTL avToi ixev airenTeLvav avTOvs y/xets 8e olKoboixeiTe. The whole sen-
tence is quoted to show that agreement (correspondence), not
it is
occurs. But in Homer this is not true, while irkp follows Kal only
once.i There is no doubt about the etymology of this particle.^
(critical text in Ac. 19:39). But this idea does not conflict
with the other, for irept is the locative of repa. It is an Indo-
Germanic root, and the original notion of irkpi occurs in -n-ept-
give, have dwep) exetS^jrep (only Lu. 1:1); w^P (only the crit-
;
17; Heb. 4:3), KairoLje once (Jo. 4:2), p.ePTOL eight times,
five
tide that occurs three times in the N. T. (Jo. 12 42, here with :
(h) History. As far back as Greek goes we find ov, but ov did
not hold its own with /jlt] in the progress of the language. Within
the past century ov has become obsolete in modern Greek outside
of a 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 dia-
lect, 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 nrj-
bev 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
Greek. At any rate this is the outcome. Aei- is the negative of
the ind. in modern Greek except after va and final clauses when
we find va fXT] (Thumb, Handb., p. 200). And bh is the regular
negative in the protasis of conditional sentences both with ind.
and subj.* The distinction between oh and nrj did become more or
less 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.
Buttmann^ even thinks that the N. T. idiom here conforms more
exactly to the old literary style than in any other point. Ah
may represent(Rendel Harris, Exp., Feb., 1914, p. 163).
fx-qbh
(c) Meaning.
Oh denies the reality of an alleged fact. It is the
clear-cut, point-blank negative, objective, final.*' Jannaris^ com-
pares oh to OTL and fXT] to tva, while Blass^ compares oh to the
indicative mode and /X17 to the other modes. But these analogies
are not wholly true. Sometimes, indeed, oh coalesces with the
word as in ov 0r;/xt = not merely 'I do not say,' but 'I deny.' So
ohK edco (Ac. 16 : 7) = 'I forbid.' Cf. oh OeXo: (Mk. 9: 30); ohK exw
(Mt. 13: 12); ohK ayvoeoi (2 Cor. 2 11). See also t6v oh \a6v in :
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 i^^.
till ov
Note the progressive bluntness of the Baptist's denials
In the N. T. ob alone
comes out flat at the last (Jo. 1:21 f.).
prohibition, though
occurs with the future indicative used as a
(Mt. 5:21);
the classic idiom sometimes had fxr]. Cf ob cj)ovevaei.s .
where ob is the
kt\.,negative of the whole long
kTrpocj^-nrdaa^ceu
1 W.-Th., p. 511.
2 Harv. Stu. in Class. Philol., 1901, The Use of M17 in Questions, p. 307.
'^
W.-Th., p. 4S1. * Thouvemin, Les Negations, etc., p. 233 f.
PARTICLES (aI nAPAGHKAl) 1159
11, cos ovK he^Xeirou, and of an indefinite period as in Jo. 4 21, ibpa :
dxev yrjp iroWrju (Mt. 13:5); oirov ov ^eXeis (Jo. 21 : 18. Here the
ov is 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\a-
. :
xi(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.]
: :
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
that ov is found with the verb when p.i] occurs as the conjunc-
tion. Cf. 2 Cor. 12 : 20, 4>o^ovixai, ixij ttcos ovx ^vpo:. But this is the
subj., not the ind. Cf. here ovx o'^ovs ^eXco and oloj^ ov deXere. Cf.
also Mt. 25 9. In Col. 2 8 we have /3X£7rcre
: rts eVrat /cat ov
: fx-f] —
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 any-
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 Winer ^ to bring the examples into
accord ^\^th ancient usage. It is gratuitous to take ei oh 8e as
causal in Lu. 12 : 26, or to make ei ohic eifxi in 1 Cor. 9:2a denial
of a positive idea. There are cases of emphatic denial, as e'L tls oh
(^tXet (1 Cor. 16 : 22). Cf. also 2 Jo. 10, el tls epxerat /cat oh 4>'epei.
Cf. also ei oh TToioj and el ttolQi in Jo. 10 37 : f., where the antithesis
is quite marked. See also the decisive negation in Jo. 1 : 25. But,
when all is said, ei oh has made distinct inroads on ei fxi] in the
later Greek.
As to the negative in indirect discourse with the indicative, it
is The text has /X17 Trore oh fxrj. Jannaris^ boldly cuts the
there.
Gordian knot by denying that ixr] in oh nrj is a true negative. He
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
these, however, are volitive or deliberative. This view of Jan-
naris is not yet accepted among scholars. It is too simple a
solution, 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).
with ov.
S}v earco ohx o — Koa/jLos, aXX' 6 KpvTTOS, kt\. It is the sharp contrast
with dXX' that explains the use of ohx- Cf. also oh nbvov in 1 Pet.
2 : 18, where the participle stands in an imperative atmosphere.
1 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 433.
2 RobertsoD, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 200.
1162 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Cf. also ov with the inf. in the imperatival sense in 1 Cor. 5 : 10;
2 Tim. 2 Elsewhere with the imperative we have fxij (xbvov
: 14.
(Jo. 13 9; Ph. 2 12; Jas. 1 22).
: Ov is used in an imperatival
: :
connection with the fut. ind. (Mt. 5 21) and in questions of like :
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 :
on the inf., as in Heb. 7: 11; Ro. 8 12; Ac. 10 :41; Ro. 7:6; :
15: 20; Heb. 13 9; 1 Cor. 1 17; Ac. 19 27. : For the discussion : :
ovx 't-^o. —
dXX' I'ra where the ovx is clearly an addendum. Burton^
explains eis oWeu XoyiadrjpaL in Ac. 19 27, "as a fixed phrase," :
Ro. 7 6. The use of ov8ev with the inf. after ov with the prin-
:
cipal verb is common enough. Cf. Mk. 7 12; Lu. 20 40; Jo. : :
ov iibvov occurs always (cf. Jo. 11 52; Ac. 21 13; 26 29; 27: 10; : : :
cept once )U77 iibvov in Gal. 4 18. The use of oh ixbvov occurs both :
1 Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 430. ' N. T. M. and T., p. 184.
2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255. * lb., p. 183 f.
PARTICLES (aI HAPAOUKAI) 11G3
the subject of ov and nv with the participle under the Verbal As-
pects of the Participle (see Verbal Nouns). Galloway ^ thinks
that it was with the participle that ou was first used (as opposed
to the Sanskrit negative prefix) before the infinitive had ov. At
any rate ou is well established in Homer. may simply accent We
the fact that the encroachment of nv on oii with the participle
gives all the greater emphasis to the examples of ov which re-
main. Cf. 6 ovK &V TTOLii-qv (Jo. 10 12) cbs ovk Sepcoj/ (1 Cor. 9 26). : ; :
Greek. Cf. net ov ttoXu (Ac. 27 : 14); (ler' ov TroXXds wepas (Lu.
15 : 13); ovk 6\iya (Ac 17:4); ovk aarjfxov (21:39). Cf. ovk k /xe-
Tpov (Jo. 3 : 34); ov nerpius (Ac 20 : 12). Ou 7ras and ttSs ov have
received discussion under Adjectives, and so just a word will
suffice. Ov iraca aap^ (1 Cor. 15 39) is 'not every kind of :
flesh.' Cf. ov TravH Tc3 Xac3 (Ac 10: 41); ov Tavres (Mt. 19 11); oil :
Trai'TaJS (1 Cor. 5 : 10). But ovk av kacoOrj Traaa aap^ (Mt. 24:22)
fxevos OTL 'Itjctovs ovk ecTLv. Some MSS. have the pleonastic ov in
Mk. 9 : 39.
15 f., ov irapa tovto ovk 'Icxtlv €/c tov au/jLaTos, 'It is not therefore
not of the body.' There are instances of ov followed by /xt?
where both preserve the full force, Ac. 4 20, ov dwafxeda : — p.ri
note ov, p.r] TTore kptfcoo-T/re (Mt. 13—29) where ov stands alone. :
29. The form ov8eis is 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); o^» 8{jvri eTL (Lu. 16 : 2); oure —m (Ac. 28 : 21);
lost its negative force (Jo. 18 : 37), unless one writes it ovkovv.
fjLopou —dXXd Kal (Jo. 5:18; Ro. 1:32, etc.), but sometimes
merely ov novov —
dXXd (Ac. 19 26; 1 Jo. 5:6). Sometimes the
:
(a) The History of M17. The Ionic, Attic and Doric dialects
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 San-
skrit 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 fx-f]
survived into modern Greek. But from the very start nrj made
inroads on ov, so that finally fx-f] occupies much of the field. In the
modern Greek fxi] is used exclusively with participle, in prohibi-
tions and with the subj. except in conditions, and occurs with vd
(vd fxri) and the ind. Gildersleeve^ has shown in a masterly way
how luT] made continual encroachments on ov. In the N. T., out-
side of el ov, the advance of /jlti is quite distinct, as Gildersleeve
shows is true even of Lucian. So as to the papyri and the inscrip-
tions. The exact Attic refinements between ov and /it? are not
reproduced, though on the whole the root-distinction remains.^
(6) Significance of Mr]. Max Miiller^ gives an old Sanskrit
phrase, 7na kaphaltiya,' not for unsteadiness,' which pretty well
gives the root-idea of It is an "unsteady" particle, a hesi-
ij.r].
TL ovros eaTLu 6 Xpcaros; where oi) would have challenged the op-
lb.
T
On Soph. Trach., 90.
8 Cf. Postgatc, Contrasts of Oh and M17, Cambridge Philol. Jour., ISSG.
1168 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
the use of fxr] the answer in mind is the one expected, not always
the one actually received as is illustrated in the question of the
apostles at the last passover. They all asked ^17 rt e7cb el/xi, pa^-
/3et; The very thought was abhorrent to them, 'It surely is not
I,'^ But Judas, who did not dare use oh, received the affirmative
answer, ah etvras (Mt. 26 : 25). M57 tl comes to be used intensively
much like ohxi (both chiefly in questions). In the case of /xt) ov
14 21). Cf. d ixrj in Jo. 15 22, etc. There are also four instances
: :
clauses, as a /xi) Set (Tit. 1 : 11); w m^? TrapecTLv ravra (2 Pet. 1:9);
(ii) The Subjunctive. After all that has been said it is obvious
that /X17 was destined to be the negative of the subj., first of the
volitive and deliberative uses and finally of the futuristic also.
The few remnants of ov with the subj. have already been dis-
cussed. For the rest the normal and universal negative of the
1 Moulton, Pro!., p. 171. ' Moulton, Prol., p. 171.
2 Thompson, Synt., p. 441. * lb., p. 192.
1170 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
subj. is fXT]. Cf. fjirf evKaKcciiev (Gal. 6:9). In Mk. 12 : 14, dci/xev rj
fxi] bOiixev; (cf. o{; just before), we see how well /itj suits this delibera-
tive question. 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) .
3:4, 6, 31; Gal. 6 14, etc. But note also the curse of Jesus on
:
with Lu. 12 11, : iJ.r) fxepLfxprjarjTe, and m'7 (f^o^etade with firj 4)o(3rjdfJTe
other finite modes that /xi? crept into constant use with the inf.
dta t6 txi] (Mt. 13 : 5); rc3 ixi) (2 Cor. 2 : 13); ciare pi] (Mt. 8 28), :
etc. 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
:
eiriyvoivaL avTov. See also Lu. 4: 42; 1 Pet. 3 : 10; Gal. 5 : 7. But
this pleonastic pi] is by no means necessary (cf. Ac. 8 :36; Ro.
15 : 22). It does not usually occur with kcoXuco in the N. T., but
note Ac. 10 : 47, pi] tl to v8o)p bhvaTai Koikvcfai rts tov pi] ^aTTTiaOrj-
The use of pi] and pi] ov was not compulsory in the ancient Greek.''
' Synt., p. 414. « jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 430.
s
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255.
* Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., pp. :521IT.; Thompson, Synt., pp. 425 fT.
1172 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(vi) The Participle. We have seen already how the oldest San-
skrit did not use the negative particles with the participle. In
Homer we have only one instance of ix-q with the participle {Od.,
IV, 684). 1 But JU17 gradually made its way with
participles even
in Attic Greek. In the modern Greek has driven oh entirely
/ii?
tween 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. :
fxri TTjpav, fifi viTodriixaTa, we have just before ^tj) /3ao-Td^ere ^aWav-
TLov. In Jo. 13 9, p.i] rovs woSas ijlov {jlovov, we have no verb, but
:
2 Th. 3 6. :
(Ac. 25 : 24) ewi^ooovTes (jltj delu avTov frji' //ij/ceri, (Ro. 13 : 8) firioevl
fi7]8iv 64)el\eTe, (2 Cor. 13 : 7) /jltj — fj-rjdh, etc. Besides nrjdeis there
is firjdev (Ac. 27:33), ixrjdk in the sense of 'not even' (Eph. 5 :
kK Tov deov, the last negative retains its force. So vice versa in Ac.
4 20.: In Gal. 6 a sharp contrast between tl and
: 3 there is
(e) Kai JU17. We saw that after a positive statement the nega-
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
: : :
/cat rather than fxr]8e. Cf. also Lu. 3 14. We have instances :
also of /cat connecting a clause with the conjunction fii] Trore (Mt.
13 15; Mk. 4 12). ^
: In Lu. 14 29, tva ix-q Trore dhros avrov difxk-
: :
Plato's Protag. 312 A, dXX' ixpa ixi] ouk viroKaiJL^aveLS. Cf. also /JL-q
sion, nor the redundant /Z17 after ov (Ac. 20: 20, 27), but only the
idiomatic ov with the aorist subj. (rarely present) or occasion-
/jltj
ally the fut. ind. Cf. ov /jL-fj ({>a.yoj, ov /jL-q Trdvoj in the boy's letter,
P. Oxy. 119 (ii/iii a.d.). See Is. 11:9, ov /jltj KaKoiroLqaovcnv ovbi
j-LT] hhvoivTaL. Whatever the origin of this 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 firj. Moulton {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 Moul-
ton (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
:
» Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 389 ff.; Thompson, Synt., pp. 431-438.
* Juatin Martyr, p. 169.
PARTICLES (aI IIAPAOIIKAi) 1175
at what point the question ends. Cf. Jo. 7 19; Ro. 4 1. Winer^ : :
» Cf. W.-Th., pp. 508 ff.; Robertson, Short Gr., i)p. 177 IT.
2 W.-Th., p. 508.
1176 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(iii) Other Particles. There are not many. There is dpa (akin
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
: :
tive 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. :
So also 19 : 3. It is common
Gen. 17 17) but in the LXX (cf. :
is foreign to the old Greek. The classic Greek, however, did use
el in indirect questions, and this fact may have made it easier for
the direct use of el to arise. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 136) takes
this el = ^. The N. T. does not use but the papyri have
rj, it: ^
fxelvwc ev j3a/cxtd5t; ^ /i€X(X)a) evTVVxo-VLv; P. Fay. 137 (I/a.D.). So
the question to the oracle.
(iv) Interrogative The most common in the N. T. is Pronouns.
Tis (cf. Mt. 3:7).
Other words are frequently added, as apa (24 :
Cf. iroaaKLs (Mt. 18 : 21); irSre (25 : 38); ecos wdre (17 : 17); rod (Lu.
8 : 25); ttws (10 : 26); T60ev (Mt. 13 : 27), etc.
(6) Indirect Questions. 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. :
oo-os (Mk. 5 : 19) and birolos (Jas. 1: 24). Cf. also -kolos (Mk. 11:
29); TToaos (Mt. 27 : 13); TroraTros (Lu. 7:39); TTTjXkos (Heb. 7:4),
and rfKiKos in Gal. 6 : 11 (margin of W. H.) if this reading be ac-
cepted. Cf. rl in Ac. 12 : 18.
(ii) Conjunctions. These are also common, as ei (Mk. 15 :44);
TTodev and TTou (Jo. 3:8); Tdre (Mk. 13 33); ttws (1 Th. 1:9); :
oTTcos (Lu. 24: 20); owov (Mk. 14 : 14); ^i? Trore (Lu. 3 : 15), etc.
(c) Double Questions. These are rare.
(i) Direct. There is no instance of Trorepov ??. We do have —
TLs — (Mt. 9 5; 23 17; 27 17), the later Greek caring little for
r? : : :
Mt. 7 : 9.
1 The distinction botwoon adv. and conj. is, of courso, :irl)itrary. Conjs. arc
advs. just as the other particles are. Cf. Paul, Principles of the ilist. of Lang.,
p. 406.
^ "Co-ordinating" is from co-ordino, to range togcthi^r.
1178 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
ton.^ But
a mistake to suppose that these connectives are
it is
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 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 pronomi-
nal origin in its use for and and ever (just like que, quis-que).^
The indefinite use is distinctly Homeric.^ The use of ewei re, 6s re
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 — :
Kalwv re Kat adlKwv (24 : 15) ; fXLKpu re Kat fjieyaXo: (26 : 22) ; "FXKrjfflv
tween re and 5e (cf. Ac. 3 10; 4 14, etc.). We have re yap (com-
: :
' This classic idiom is a mark of Luke's literary style. But in the kolpt] n
ison the retreat before Kal. Jann., Ilist. Gk. dr., p. 401.
^ Cf. Hammer, De Te Particulao Usu llerodotco Thucydideo Xenophonteo,
» Gk. Etymology.
1904, p. 92.
1180 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
(12 : 10) tva Kal TOP Aa^apov. This use of Kal is more frequent in
Luke than elsewhere in the N. T.^ Cf . Kayo) (Lu. 20 :
3) ; fj Kal
(Lu. 12 :41); 5e Kal (12 : 54, 57); tI Kal (1 Cor. 15 :29); Kal yap
(Mt. 8: 9); kau Kal (Gal. 6:1); ei Kal (2 Cor. 11:15); Kal dt (Mt. 10 :
18); d)s /cat (Ac, 11 : 17); Kadoos Kal (Ro. 15 : 7); ovtc^ nal (Ro. 6:11);
OS Kal (Ac. 24 : 6, 8); diioius /cat (Jo. 6 : 11); coaavrojs /cat (1 Cor.
11 : 25); KaOawep /cat (1 Th. 3 : 12); 8l6 /cat (Lu. 1 : 35); 5td tovto Kai
(Lu. 11:49); dXXd /cat (24:22), etc. So then /cat in the sense of
'also' occurs with nouns, pronouns, verbs, adverbs, conjunctions.
It may refer to a word or a clause. Cf. dXXcos re Kat, B. G. U. 530
(i/A.D.). For the use of 6 /cat see the Article, and for avu /cat see
Prepositions.^ It is common for /cat to sum up a sentence that
precedes. For the relative and articular participle see the /cat in
the sentences in Mt. 5 39^3. Here /cat balances the principal:
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).
: :
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 :
Kal may be used to connect all sorts of words, clauses and sen-
tences. Thus XeTco "Epxov, Kal epxerat (Mt. 8:9). The use of Kal
after the imperative is seen in Mt. 11:29. The chain with Kal
Cf. Mk. 4 : 41; Ph. 2 : 13; Ac. 26 : 29. Sometimes the connection
almost amounts to 'not only, but also.' In Col. 2:16 note
Kat — r). Cf. Kixv — kHu (Lu. 12 : 38). A. Brinkmann contends that
in the papyri and late Greek kclv is sometimes 'at any rate'
and is never a mere link {Scriptio continua und Anderes, Rhein.
Mus. LXVII, 4, 1912). In Lu. 5 36 we have Kat Kat — Kat ov : —
(so Jo. 6 36), and in Jo. 17 25 Kat ov—8^
:
Kat. It is usual to :
—
have Kat ov after an affirmative clause as in Jo. 10 35. Cf. Kat :
questions. Cf. Kat av rjada in Mt. 26 70 (and : 73) likeEt tu, Brute.
See also Mk. 10 : 26, Kat tIs Svparai audrjvaL. So also Lu. 10 29; :
in John's Gospel (Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 135 ff.). See Jer. 23 21. :
3 13; 5
: 39 f.; 7 27 f.; 8: 57, etc. In Lu.: 12 24 Kal is almost
: :
equal to dXXd, that is, the context makes contrast. Cf. also Mt.
6 : 26 {ov — Kai); Mk. Tholuck^
12 : 12; Lu. 20 : 19; Jo. 18 : 28.
so takes mt in Ro. 1 13 (the parenthetical Kal). Sometimes Kal :
In particular note Kal eyevero Kal (as in Lu. 5 1, 12, 17, etc.). In :
modern Greek Kal has so far usurped the field that it is used not
only in all sorts of paratactic senses like 'and,' 'but,' 'for,' 'or,'
'and but even in hypotactic senses for va or tov, declarative
so,'
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
Kat Xd/iTret, Mt. 5 15; Kat ^XeiropLev, Heb. 3 19. See also Ph. 4 7.
: : :
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
Kat l8ov in the apodosis, 'and behold,' as in Lu. 7: 12. In 2 Tim.
2 20 note Kat followed by a ixkv
: a. be. In Ph. 4 16 note Kat — :
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; :
seen in Jo. 3 : 19 ('And this is/ etc.); 19 : 23 ('Now the coat,' etc.).
For COS be ('and when,' 'so when') in John see 2 : 9, 23. In John
yap, we have ov8e in the sense of 'not even' as often (Mt. 6 : 29,
etc.). In Mt. 6 : 15 ov8e means 'not also' (cf. also 21 : 27, etc.).
All three uses of Kat are thus paralleled in ov8e (merely ov 8e) For .
tiTjSe in the continuative sense see Mt. 7:6. It means 'not even'
in 1 Cor. 5:11. For the repetition of continuative fx-qSe see 1
Cor. 10 : 7-10. In Mk. 14 68, ovre ol8a ovre
: eirlaTafxaL (some MSS.
ovK— ov8e), we come pretty close to having ovre — ovre in the merely
continuative sense as we have in ovre — (Jo. 4:11; 3 Jo. /cat 10).
(iv) 'AXXa. Here there no doubt at all as to the etymol-
is
ogy. 'AXXa is a virtual proclitic (cf. ein and cTri), and the neuter
plural was dXXd (aXXa, 'other things')- Biiumlein^ does take dXXa
as originally an adverb. But in reality it is 'this other matter''
(cf. raOra and tovto). In actual usage the adversative came to
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
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.
Jo. 16:2, dXX' epxerai wpa, 'yea, the hour comes.' The same
use of dXXd occurs also in negative sentences. In 1 Cor. 3 : 3,
dXX' ov8e vvv dvvaade after oviroj tbvvaade. In 4 : 3, dXX' ovbk after
(Jo. 2: 24), etc. The contrast is made more manifest by the use
of fjih (see Intensive Particles) as in Mt. 3:11. In 1 Cor. 2 : 6,
(ii) 'AXXd. Just as aXXos (cf. 2 Cor. 11:4) can be used in the
sense of erepos (when it means 'different,' not merely 'second'), so
1 Joh. Gr., p. 100. 2 lb., p. 99.
PARTICLES (aI nAPAOHKAl) 1187
dXXd Ktti (Ro. 5:3). See Negative Particles. For ovx otl oWo. —
see Jo. 7 : 22, for ovx i'^'a — aXKa see 6 : 38. For dXXd ye in apod-
osis see 1 Cor. 9 : 2, for dXXd Col. 2 : 5, for dXX' ov, 1 Cor. 4 :
Moulton (Prol, p. 241) quotes Tb. P. 104 (I/b.c), Kal nrj e^earw
$tXio-/v'coi yvpa^Ka oKXrjv eirayayeadat. dXXd 'AiroXKwviav, where dXXd
means practically 'except.' See also Gen. 21 : 26. Moulton sug-
gests that, since ei ixi] (brachylogy) in Lu. 4 :26f.; Rev. 21:27,
means 'but only,' the same may be true of dXXd.
(iii) nXi7i'. from -wKkov ('more'), but Brugmann-
Curtius gets it
16; 4 14. :
(v) "Ofxcos. This word is even more rare than fxeuTOL. It occurs
with two participles (1 Cor. 14: 7; Gal. 3: 15) and once with fxh-
TOL (Jo. 12:42).
(vi) This phrase marks an exception, as in Mt. 12 :4;
Etjuiy.
5 19).
:
For fj Kal see Mt. 7 10; Lu. 18 In the sense of 'or' 7) may
: : 11.
TOTrjpLov Tov Kvplov, somc MSS. havc /cat, but is the true text. ij
This, however, does not mean that some partook of one element
and some of the other, but that, whatever element was taken in
this way, there was guilt. The correlative use of (' either rJ
— 7?
7 17 and
: ^ in Mk. ij13 — — —
35. For
ij irplp v see i] Mt. :
after xo-po-, Lu. 15:7; for dXX' 7?, Lu. 12:51. Radermacher
{N. T. Gr., p. 27) finds i] tol — v, B. G. U. 956; ^ rot — 7^ rot,
like the Latin sive — sive. Cf. 1 Cor. 10:31, dre — eUe — eire.
follows t;
— ^ in verse 6. For kavre — kapre see Ro. 14 : 8.
— ovre —
Kol ov. In 1 Cor. 6 10 note ovre ovre ov:
ov. In — — —
Jas. 3 12 cf. ovre
: after question. A good example of the correla-
tive ovre —
ojjTe is 1 Cor. 3:7. In Ro. 8 38 f ovre occurs ten : .
pLn8k
—
iiVTe fjiVTe. In— Lu. 7:33 ixii fxi)Te, while in 9:3 fxrjdkv —
is followed by firjTe five times. There is often some confusion
in the MSS. between [XTjdk and firjTe, ovhk and ovre. Blass^ rejects
the term ''causal" for the hypotactic particles on, kwel, etc.
One
has to be arbitrary sometimes. And even so these particles (apa,
sense.
ovv, yap) were originally just transitional or explanatory in
Blass'' calls them "consecutive" co-ordinate
conjunctions.
6
Cf. K.-G., II, p. 317 f., for the discussion of the theories. So Drug.,
Griech. Gr., p. 539.
1190 A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Mt. 12 28; Ac. 17: 27. It occurs some 50 times in the N. T.,
:
Thayer wrongly calls the illative use the primary one. The word
is common in all the larger books of the N. T. It is least common
in the Gospel of John and in Revelation. In Matthew and Luke
it is much more frequent in the discourses and is rare in the strict
narrative. In Mark and John it is about half and half.^ In gen-
eral the N. T. use of yap is in accord with that of the classic period.
The explanatory use is common in Homer.^ The N. T. examples
are numerous. Cf. Mt. 19 12; Mk. 5 :42; 16 :4; Lu. 11 :30; :
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 :
uses yap with fine scorn, 'why, just in this,' etc. In Jo. 19 :6
it is hardly creditable to Pilate's common sense to take yap as
illative. Cf. also Jo. 7 : 41 Ac. 19
; : 35; Mt. 9 : 5. Tap sometimes
» Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 102. 2 Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 253.
"PAKTICLES (aI nAPAOIIKAl) 1191
gives the major premise (Mt. 26 : 52), more often the minor prem-
ise (2 Pet. 1 : 15 f.), sometimes both (Jo. 3 19 f.).
: The purely
illative use of 7dp
simple enough, though the force of the
is
yap o-ojo-et; (6 : 24) fj yap; (Ro. 8 : 18) \oyl^op.ac yap. Paul begins
every sentence with yap in Ro. 8 For Kal : 18-24. yap see Ro.
11: 1; 15 : 3. The precise relation between clauses or sentences
is not set forth by yap. That must be gathered from the con-
text if possible. Cf . Jo. 4 : 44. Note yap —
6tl in 1 Tim. 6 7. :
The Ionic also has o^v (so Lesbian, Doric, Boeotian). But, how-
ever that may be, it is important to note that the particle is
not illative nor even consequential in Homer.^ It is merely a
transitional particle relating clauses or sentences loosely together
by way of confirmation. It was common in this sense in Homer,
though rare in the Attic writers save in jxh ovv. But it 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
boldly uses ovv alone and needs no apology for doing so. It just
carries along the narrative with no necessary thought of cause or
result. It is, because of John's free use, one of the commonest
particles in the N. T. and is oftener in the narrative books than
in the epistles.^ It is interesting in John to take a chapter and
note when ovv is merely continuative and when illative. 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
also of apa ovv (Ro. 8 : 12) and of tL ovv (6 1, 15; 7:7; 8 31,: :
Thumb goes on with the story. We have ws in aav and ware va=
'until.' "On is gone before ttoO and va,though ottcos has revived.
1 On the relative origin of conjs. like on, ore, ottws, ws, fws see Baron, Le
Pronom Relatif et la Conjonction, 1891, pp. 95 ff.
2 Cf Nilsson, Die Kausalsatze im Griech. bis Arist. See also Gildersl., Am.
.
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. :
' Miillor, I)c interjcctionum apud Sophoclem, Euripidem que Usu, 1885, p. 3.
* Gk. Synt., p. 201.
CHAPTER XXII
FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA 2XHMATA)
general, though in some of them the Greek has turns of its own.
Each writer has, besides, his own style of thought and speech.
See discussion in chapter IV. Under The Sentence we have
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-
tences, connection between words (polysyndeton and asj^ndeton),
connection between clauses and sentences (paratactic and hypo-
tactic) and asyndeton again, running and periodic style, parenthe-
sis, anacoluthon, oratio variata, connection between paragraphs.
V 1 N. T. Gk., p. 295.
Blass, Gr. of
^ Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa, 1905.
1194
FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA L'XIIMATa) 1195
1 Thcol. Lit., 1900, p. 434; The Expositor, 1908, p. 74. See also his St.
Paul (1912).
2 Hermcneutik und Kritik, 1892, p. 198. The true grauiniariau is but too
willing to see the other point of view. Cf. Gildersl., Am. 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 Tlic lOxpositor
for 1911 anent (Jarvic's book. Studies of Paul and His (.iospcl (,1911).
" The Expositor, Aug., 1911, p. IT)?.
^ Light from the Ancient East, p. 404.
1196 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
Diatribe and makes his point, but even so one wonders if after
all Paul uses question and answer so skilfully by reason of definite
ever, entirely possible that Paul knew the common Stoic dialectic
also as he did the tenets of current Stoicism (cf. Paul's work in
Athens). The examples of figures of speech in the 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
of genius, to We must not make the mistake of
mere accident.
rating men Luke, Paul, James and the author of Hebrews as
like
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
to such a situation. They do show a distinct literary flavour as
Heinrici^ has so well shown. In 1 Cor. 13 we have finish of form
and thought. Even John, called aypafxnaros Kal tStcbrrjs (Ac. 4 : 13),
1 Norden (Die ant. Kunstprosa, Bd. II, p. 508) speaks of Paul's use of rhe-
torical figures as due to his "Ton." Hcinrici (Zuni Ilellen. d. Paulus, Komni.
zu II Kor.) sees raul'a "Eijj;enart."
2 Der hterarische Charakter d. neut. SchiifttMi, 1908.
» Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 295.
« Die Rhythnien der asianischen und roniischen Kunstprosa, 1905.
1198 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
rather than bluntly assert Kai 6 vofios cnredavev (or WapaTcodri) There .
ixbvov, aXXa Kai oXov tov Koapiov, instead of tcoj' oKov tov Koapov. Cf.
also Ph. 2 : 22, Trarpi — avv epoi. Cf . irepLiraTelv Kai aairacr povs in
Mk. 12 : 38 f., 7771' phovaav ev riplv Kai peO' -qpcov ccrrat in 2 Jo. 2.
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
:
I doubt very much if Paul was at all conscious of the stilted paral-
lelism that Blass^ sees in 1 Cor. 1: 25 ff. with anaphora (the first
words — ov iroWol, or antistrophe (the last words
alike) as in ov toXXoL
alike) as in rod deov — tov deov — —
• or sym- toov avdpd>irwi> rwt' avOpiciroiv,
eireaev eweaev. See Ph. 3 2. Cf. also the two hours of shouting in
:
Trdw and (t>L\eoo side by side in Jo. 21 15-17 where Peter makes a :
stem, like KaKov^ mKoos (Mt. 21:41); h -Kavrl TavTore wdaav (2 Cor.
9:8); 6 vo/jlos wmi/xcos (1 Tim. 1:8), and uses parechesis for differ-
ent words of similar sound, hke Xiyuot Kal \oLixoi (Lu. 21 11); 'ifxadev :
fine one and need not be pressed. But annominatio deals with
the sense as well as the sound. Thus Tlerpos and -werpa in Mt.
16:18; yivuaKeis a avajLVCoaKeLS (Ac. 8 30) : ;
v-wep^povdv — 4>poveiv
— (jw4>poveiv (Ro. 12 : 3) ; p-n^h epya^ofxevovs, dXXd irepLepya^ofxhovs
(2 Th. 3:11). Mt. 27 9; Lu. 9 60; Ac. 23 3; 2 Cor.
Cf. also : : :
1 II, p. 570.
a
Cf. Trench, N. T. Synonyms; Heine, Syncniytnik d. neut. Criech.
* Gr. of N. T. Clk., p. 298.
8 W.-Th., p. 636.
1202 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
The Sentence. But a few more words are needed here. Cf.
TTLaTos 6 debs (2 Cor. 1:18); 6 Kvpios €77us (Ph. 4:5) as samples
of the absence of the copula. So Jo. 14 : 11; Ac. 19 : 28, 34; 2
Cor. 11:6. It is not always clear what verb is to be supplied,
though dtxl and yivoiiai are the most common. Cf . (pwvrj ttoXlv k
SevTepov irpos avTOV, Ac. 10 : 15; ovk ev Xoycc rj jSacrtXeta rod deov, dXX'
h dwiL/jLet, 1 Cor. 4: 20. Cf. Jo. 21 : 21; 1 Cor. 5 : 12. Usually the
context makes clear what verb is wanting, as in Mt. 27:25;
Ac. 18 : 6; Ro. 4 : 9; 5 : 18; 2 Cor. 9 : 7; Gal. 2 : 9; Rev. 1 : 4.
In 2 Cor. 8 : 15 the participle excof must be supplied with 6 ac-
(Mt. 6 34) ttjs awepov (Mt. 27 8) rfi 'txoixkvrj (Lu. 13 33) ttj
: ; : ; : ;
3, 17 5e^ta, 17 aptaTepa and x^pa in Lu. 17 : 24, k rrjs — els ttjv. Much
more serious is the ellipsis in Mt. 26 : 5, and Gal. 5 : 13, where
the context must supply both verb and subject. Cf. also ovx on
— dXX' in Jo. 7: 22. In a case like 2 Th. 2 : 3 f., on edv — oti,
1 W.-Th., p. 590.
:
again in Gal. 2 : 9. Cf. also Mk. 14: 29; 1 Cor. 10 : 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
anger, fear, pity. Curiously enough Blass,^ who sees so many
rhetorical tropes in the any instances of aposio-
N. T., denies that
pesis occur in the do not consider his objections well
N. T. I
So again 19 : 42, el e7J'cos hat <jv. So Jo. 6 : 62, eap ovv dewprJTe t6v
vlbv Tov apdpLOTTOV ava^alpoPTa owov rjp to irpoTepov; Then again Ac.
23 : 9, el de TTPevpa e\a\7]aep avTiS> rj ayjeXos — . It is possible to
14; Mk. 13 34; 2 Cor. 3 13) is the passion. One can almost see
: :
vlos TOV avdpoiTTOV kirl ttjs yrjs a(f)LepaL a/JLapTlas — TOTe \e'yeL tui irapa-
XuTiKo) "E7etp€ apop oov ttjp kKlptjp, kt\. Here the Evangelist has
inserted TOTe Xeyei tw Trap, before the conclusion to make it clearer.
5 24 (an
: incidental argument for a common document for this
paragraph). Cf. also Mk. 14:49, dXX' IVa ir'KrjpcoduiaLv al 7pa0ai.
So Jo. 13 : 18; 15 where ^p^aTo implies /cai Ste-
: 25. Cf. Ac. 1 : 1,
reXet before iroLe'LV re Kai hhaaKeiP axpi- V^ W^P^s, fcrX. See a similar
use of ap^apepos in Mt. 20 8, Lu. 23 5. A case like Lu. 24 47, : : :
8vo opoia. apPLU}, i.e. KepaatP applov. Cf. 1 Jo. 3 11 f.; 2 Pet. 2:1. :
5 : 36; 15 : 11; Ac. 27: 22; Gal. 2 : 16. The so-called construc-
tio praegnans belongs here also. Cf. 2 Tim. 4 : 18, acbo-et eis 7171'
fiaaiKdav, though ets of itself does not mean 'into.' But note 5ta-
o-ojo-ojcn Trpos ^rj\LKa (Ac. 23 : 24) where the notion is that of taking
to Felix and so saving Paul. Cf. also kd^rjro wapa ttjv bbbv (Mk.
10 :46). See also Lu. 11: 13 6 iraTrip 6 e^ ovpavov, (Col. 4 : 16)
Triv eK AaoBLKias. Blass^ distinguishes brachylogy from elhpsis in
that brachylogy affects the thought rather than the grammatical
Cf.Ro. 11:18. It would
form, but both ideas are usually present.
be wearisome to endeavour to put a name or tag upon every struc-
ture that seems defective from the standpoint of formal gram-
mar or rhetoric, "It will be seen that many of them are due to
that agility and acuteness of the Greek intellect which enables
the Hellene or Hellenist readily to sacrifice the grammar of a
sentence to its logic, or in other words its form to its meaning.
Hence arose the many forms of the sense-figure (arxwf^ ^rpos to
cqixacvoiJLevov, constructio ad scnsmji) ." "^
Wehave seen illustra-
tions of this construction /card avvtaiv under Concord (The Sen-
tence) and only a few further are called for here. Indeed, this
section is largely an illustration of this principle. In Jo. 15 : 6
avTo. refers to to K\r}p.a; in Ac. 17: 16 avrov points to Christ, who
has not been mentioned; in 7: 24, rbv kiyh-wTLov, though no Egyp-
tian 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
himself in 2 Cor. 3 : The papyri have taught us
7, for instance?
to be chary about charging 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 vivid-
ness and dramatic power .^
like our "church-house" (Lu. 22 11); eireiTa fxeTo. tovto (Jo. 11: :
cb/Jioaeu (Ac. 2 : 30); apvovp-evos otl ovk ecrTiv (1 Jo. 2 : 22); TraXti' €K
Sevrepov (Ac. 10 : 15), etc. Cf. also the cognate accusative. Re-
dundances like these examples are not linguistic vices. They seem
pleonastic to the technical student who is unwilling to allow for
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 : 20).
28, xpovop OVK bUyov. See also 15 : 2; 19 : 11, 23 f.; 21: 39; 27 :
Paul are ^apetai koL laxvpal, as even his enemies admit (2 Cor. 10 :
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
the rhetorical flights of the artificial orators of the time.
(d) Metaphors and Similar Tropes. We need not tarry over
antiphrasis, ambiguity, hendiadys, hypokorisma, oxymoron, peri-
phrasis, polyptoton, syllepsis, and the hundred and one distinc-
tions in verbal anatomy. Most of it is the rattle of dry bones
and the joy of dissection is gone. We may
pause over Metaphor
(M€ra0opd), since little progress could be made
in speech without
the picture of the literal and physical carried over to the moral
and spiritual as in 6 TOLfM-qu 6 koXos (Jo. 10 : 11). Cf. the greatest
metaphor in the N. T., Paul's use of acona for the church (Eph.
1 : 22 f.). The Simile is just a bit more formal, p^Jfh,seen in the
use of ofxoLOS in Mt. 13 : 52, ttSs ypamxarevs ojioibs k(TTLV avOpdoirw
oiKobecrirbT-Q. Parables are but special forms of the metaphor or
simile and form the most characteristic feature of the teaching of
Jesus in so far as form is concerned. The parable {irapa^oXri)
baaKwv avTovs cos e^ovaiap ex^i' nal ovx tos ol ypajjLjj.aTe'is avrcou (Mt.
7 : 28 f .) . It is the constant peril of scribes and grammarians to ^
strain out the gnat and to swallow the camel. I may have fallen
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 uni-
versal 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 "that anthropology is fioinj;; to invade
the sacrosanct reahn of syntax, which beloiif^s, strictly speakinfj;, to tiie niicrot-
omists and statisticians — (ntherwise known as Dead Sea Ajjcs." Am. Jour.
of Philol., 1907, p. 235.
1208 A GR^iMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
N 0/8 . 8/8
B 2/7 Mt., Mk. . . . 5/7
A 7/7 . 0/7
C 4/5 . 1/5
D 0/6 . 6/6
Syr. 0/6 . 6/6
Before
1210 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
3. Elision (p. 208). Mr. H. Scott adds ovd' hav (Lu. 16:31,
W. H. text), ohb' ri (Tisch., ov8e ly W. H.), ov8' avrbv (Jo. 21:25).
We have both Kad' and Kara els, but /card tKaTov (Mk. 6:40). There
is much variation with prepositions before nouns.
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.
ADDITIONAL NOTES 1211
Proclitics
10. Perfect of opdo) (p. 364). Mr. H. Scott counts the perf.
active (indie, inf., part.) 34 times in the N. T. (Luke, Gospel 3,
Acts 2; John, Gospel 20, Ei)istles 6; Paul 3). Luke has -co-
established 5 times, John's Gospel 20. NACD so always, B
20/24. In 1 Ep. John B has 6/6 -o-, Paul 3 -co- (N 3/3, B 2/3,
C 2/2, D 1/3; -0- A 3/3).
11. Augment 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
1212 A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
OefxeXLoco is imaugmented.
passive verbs only BaXXw is augmented
but not in the active. Ftw/xat and lariqiiL have
in the passive,
both the augmented and the unaugmented forms in the active.
(Lu. 1 : 47), but the active does not occur in LXX. The middle is in LXX
(Ps. 15 : 9) and the N. T. (Jo. 8 56, etc.). The aor. passive appears in
:
'A.yyOO\.(o (comp. ai>~, air-, 5t— e^, eir—, irpo-eiv—, Kar—, , irpo-Kar—). Simplex
only in Jo. 20 18 ayyeWovaa, and Jo. 4 51 in i<D.
: : -o77eXw, -riyyuXa,
-riyyeXnai, -^yyk\r]v. The classic aor. pass. riyyt\Or]v does not occur in
LXX or N. T.
"AYvvjii (only Kar-dyvfjivt. as in Attic and LXX). Three forms in N. T.: a fut.
act. Kar-ea$€t (Mt. 12:20; LXX has /caTd^co), an aor. act. Kar-ka^av (Jo.
19:32 f.), an aor. pass. Kareayuxxiv (Jo. 19:31. Cf. KaTeayfjvat in Plato, etc.).
The copyists kept the augment where it did not belong, so that even a
pres. act. KaTedao-co is found. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 253.
"A-yw (comp. av—, kir-av—, arr—, avv-air—, 5t— , eia—, wap-elcr—, e^, eir—, Kar—, fier—.
Trap-, Trepi-, Trpo~, Trpoo— , crvi^, ewi-avif-, vw-). The principal parts are reg-
ular save the aorist active (usually the redupUcated second aorist form
i^yayov, but sometimes the rare sigmatic aorist rj^a as in Hesiod).
Alp^o) (comp. &V-, a(f>-, 5t-, ef-, Kad-, irepi-, Trpo-). Simplex only middle. -eXw
(as LXX), alprjcTOfiaL, —aipedrjaoiiai; —eiXov and —eiXa (middle also); -Tipovurjv,
—(iprinai, -jipWr]v.
Aipw (dTT-, k^, kir-, /xe-r-, avv-, inrep-). Principal parts regular. Only note
imperative aor. act. apop and inf. aor. act. apai, while ind. aor. act. is fipa
'Akovw (5t-, €10-—, Itt— , Trap—, Trpo-, vw—). 'AKovaoo, fjKovcra, aKriKoa ("AttiC perf. ),
'AXXd<r(rw (d7r— , 6t— , Kar—, awo-KaT—, ner—, avu—). 'AXXd^co, f/Wa^a, riWa^ap.T]v
(Ro. 1:23, LXX); pass. —)7XXa7Mai, —ijXXdYTjf, Cor. 15:51).
&.\\ayr)<Toiiai (1
"AXXo|iai («$-, £</)-). Aor. -d/xTj^ and -6p.riv. Confined to Acts save Jo. 4:14.
' A\i.aprdv<i) (ttpo—). '
A/xapTriaci}, rip^apTov and rjixapr-qaa, ^fiaprriKa.
fjuoi^- (16 times without v. r.) and read by W. H., except Afi^^ev (Jo.
9:14), and rii>(co^(v (Jo. 9:17, 32). Pass. fut. AvoixOriffeTai (Lu. 11:9 f. A);
AvoiyriaeTai (W. H., Mt. 7:7, 8=Lu. 11:9,
10). Aor. indie, occurs 9 times:
iivoixd-n- (Rev. 20:12 Lu. 24:31); Aftdjixerr- (Lu. 1:64); vvei^xOv-
{his), Si-,
(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.
part, (only) 11 times: Si^uoLytikvos (Ac. 7:56); Aveajytiiuos (Ac. 9:8; 10:
11; 16:27; Ro. 3:13; 2 Cor. 2:12); r,uei^y,xhos (Rev. 3:8; 4:1; 10:2, 8;
19:11).
'Avrdw (ctTT-, /car-, avi^, vw-). The simplex docs not occur. The parts, are
regular. Fut. infin. KaT-avT-qauu (Ac. 26:7, W. H. marg.); fut. part, avv-
avT-qaovTo. (Ac. 20:22).
'A-iro-KTetvw. The simplex does not occur. Pres. varies between -Krelvo},
-KTkvvoy (2 Cor. 3:6 W. H. alt., Mt. 10:28 W. H. alt., Lu. 12:4 W. H.
alt.) and -KTevw/ii (Mk. 12:5); fut. cltto-kt woi; aor. air-kKTeiva; pass. inf.
&-rro-KTkvv€CT0ai. (Rev. 6:11); 1st aor. &Tr-eKTav9r]v.
'Apird^w (5t-, avp-). 'Apirdaw, iipwacra', pass. 2d aor. rjpTrdyrjf] 1st aor. rjpTrdadTjv;
2d fut. dpTrayr]CTOfj,ai.
Bafvu (only in comp., ava—, wpoa-ava—, avv-ava-, dwa-, dia—, Ik—, k/j.—, eiri—,
Kara-, /xera-, Trapa-, wpo-, avp.-, avy-Kara-, vtrep-). -fir](joixai, -kfirjv, -fik^riKa.
BdXXu (dju0t-, di'tt— , avTL—, diro—, Sia—, en—, kfi—, ext— , Kara-, fiera—, Trapa-, irap-
ep.-, wept.-, vpo-, avv-, virep-, viro-). Imperf. ejSaWov (k^ kir- ffVP-)] fut.
/SaXw {he-, kin-, wap-ep-, irepi-). 1st aorist ("Alexandrian") ?/3aXa;' (Ac.
16:37); k^ (Mt. 7:22 W. H. alt.; 21:39 W. H. alt.); kw- (Ac. 21:27; Mk.
14:46); 2d aorist, i^aXov {k^, kir-, irap-, irepi-, avv-, utt-) ;
perf. ^e/3X7;\-ws;
pluperf . €K-j3€/3Xi7K€t. Mid. fut. irepi-^aXelTai (Rev. 3:5); 2d aor. di^, wept-,
<Tw-e^a\6p,T]p; pass. fut. ^\r]6r]aopai, k-; 1st aor. 5l-, k^, k^X-qd-qv] j)erf.
e0XkireTO', irepi-ivpo-^Xeipdpevos.
Opt. ykvoiTo) part, yevbpevos. The fraiuent use of the part, in comp.,
dTTo-, bia—, kiri—, irapa-, avv-irapa-, is noteworthy. Vevapevos is a fnHjuent
variant. H. Moulton counts 69 instances of the i)art. (simple and
J.
comp.) in Luke's writings, and 48 in remainder of N. T. It does not
.
Pluperf. ytybvti (Ac. 4:24), and iytyopei. (Jo. 6 :17). Vtiv- is a rather fre-
quent spelling, e.g. Ac. 21:14 hB*AD; 23:10 B*; Lu. 22:26 SBD; 42
SiBAA; 1 Cor. 10:20 B*D*, etc.
Tivwo-KW {ava.-, bia-, kin-, Kara-, irpo-). Tvucronai, f7;^coi', tyvwKa, kyvuKup, eyvw-
ff/xai, kyvuddrip, yvoiadiiaoixai. Subj. aor. both yvQ (Jo. 7:51) and yvdt (Mk.
5:43; 9:30; Lu. 19:15); imper. yvQiOi; inf. yvwvai; part, yvovs.
Kara- irpo-). •E7pa0or, ypa^j/o), typaxpa,- yky pa<l)a; pass.
rpd<j>a) (dTTO-, ky-, eirt-,
ykypa/jLixai, -tyeypanp.-r}v, kiri-, kypa<t)rjv, irpo-. Mid. 1st aor. a.iro-yp(vpa<jOai
(Lu. 2:5).
AciKVV|i.t and SeiKvu'w {ava-, airo-, kv-, kin.-, inro-). Aei^oj, cdeL^a] pass. kSelxOv
(Heb. 8:5); perf. diro-Sedeiyixkvos; mid. 1st aor. kv-edei^afiriv. The pres. has
A€X0fJ.ai {ava-, &iro-, 5ta-, eta—, k-, air-eK-, kv-, km-, irapa-, irpoa-, viro-).
Ae'w (Kara-, irepi-, aw-, inrcr-). Arjaw, eS-qcra, SkdeKa] pass, dtde/xai, irepi-edi8kp.Tiv,
A£8w|ii (di'a-, dj'r-OTTo-, aTro-, 5ta-, k-, eirt-, fiera-, irapa-, irpo-). PreS. Trapa-
StScos (2d sing.), 3d pi. didoaaiv (Rev. 17:13); subj. wapaSidQ (1 Cor. 15:24,
-5i5ol BEG); imperf. kdldoaav (Jo. 19:3), irap- (Ac. 16:4); fut. 5<i(rw; part.
dTTO- (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),
5(? (Jo. 15:16); subj. 3d sing. cont. bol (Mk. 8:37), irapa- (Mk. 4:29), S^t? or
boiXt (2 Tim. 2:25, Eph. 1:17); opt. 3d sing. 54)7, (Ro. 15:5; 2 Th. 3:16; 2
Tim. 1:16, 18); inf. hovvai; part. Sous; perf. bkhwKa; plup. htboiKtiv; mid. fut.
SdxTo/iai, k- (Mt. 21 41) 2d aor. e^eSero (s Mt. 21 33 =Mk. =Lu.) with vari-
: ; :
ant -oTo in each passage; plur. without variant, dir-eSoo-flt, -kdovro. Pass,
1.
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-,
irap-; perf. SeSo/xai. Dr. Hort considers the change of the vowels in imperf.
and 2d from -oto to -tro as probably euphonic.