A Grammar of The Greek New Testament in The Light of Historical Research - Robertson (1914)

'^'
'
^m
MS
a.
PRINCIPAL W. R. TAYLOR
COLLECTION
1951
i
i
/^y^.^^^
f%/
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT IN THE LIGHT OF

HISTORICAL RESEARCH
BOOKS BY PROF.
A. T.
ROBERTSON
Harmony of the
Critical Notes to Broadus'
Gospels
Life and Letters op John A. Broadus
Teaching of Jesus Concerning God the Father The Student's Chronological New Testament
Syllabus for
New Testament
Study
Keywords
in
the Teaching of Jesus
Epochs in the Life of Jesus A Short Grammar of the Greek ment

Epochs in the Life of Paul
New
Testa-
Commentary on Matthew John the Loyal The Glory op the Ministry A Grammar of the Greek New Testament THE Light of Historical Research
in
âSiammar
of the greek new testament in the light of

historical research
__^.>^'*-.*
BY
M.A., D.D., LL.D.
Ky.
Af T.' ROBERTSON,
Louisville,
Professor of Interpretation of the New Testament in the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
"'Exofitv Se Tov Orjaavpov tovtov iv dcrrpaKlvois aKelecnv,
iva
rj
virepfioXr] Trjs 8vvafj.ecjs
b tov dead Kai
(jltj
k^
riixCiv.
2 Cor. 4:7
521498
HODDER & STOUGHTON NEW YORK GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY
COPYEIGHT, 1914
BY
GEORGE
H.
DORAN COMPANY
PR
Presswork: Composition, Electroiyping and U.S.A. THE UNIVERSITT PRESS, CAMBRIDGE,
TO THE MEMORY OF
SCHOLAR
TEACHER
PREACHER
PREFACE
with mingled feelings of gratitude and regret that I let I am grateful for God's sustaining this book go to the public. grace through so many years of intense work and am fully conFor a scious of the inevitable imperfections that still remain.
It
is
dozen years this Grammar has been the chief task of my life. I have given to it sedulously what time was mine outside of my teaching. But it was twenty-six years ago that my great predecessor in the chair of New Testament Interpretation proposed to his young assistant that they together get out a revised edition
The manifest demand for a new grammar of the New Testament is voiced by Thayer, the translator of the American edition of Winer's Grammar, in his article on "Language of the
of Winer.
New Testament"
in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible.
I actually began the work and prepared the sheets for the first hundred pages, but I soon became convinced that it was not possible to revise Winer's Grammar as it ought to be done without making a new grammar on a new plan. So much progress had been made in comparative philology and historical grammar since Winer wrote his great book that it seemed useless to go on with it. Then Dr. Broadus said to me that he was out of it by reason of his age, and that it was my task. He reluctantly gave From that day it was in my it up and pressed me to go on.
thoughts and plans and I was gathering material for the great If Schmiedel had pushed through his work, I undertaking. might have stopped. By the time that Dr. James Hope Moulton announced his new grammar, I was too deep into the enterprise
to
draw back. And so I have held to the titanic task somehow the end has come. There were many discouragements and I was often tempted to give it up at all costs. No one who has not done similar work can understand the amount of research, the mass of detail and the reflection required in a book of this nature. The mere physical effort of writing was a joy of exprestill
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
problems of the language of the

historical research.
New
Testament
in the light of
point of view a grammar of the Greek New Testaan impossible task, if one has to be a specialist in the whole Greek language, in Latin, in Sanskrit, in Hebrew and the other Semitic tongues, in Church History, in the Talmud, in English, in psychology, in exegesis.^ I certainly lay no claim to omniscience. I am a linguist by profession and by love also, but I am not a specialist in the Semitic tongues, though I have a working knowledge of Hebrew and Aramaic, but not of Syriac and Arabic. The Coptic and the Sanskrit I can use. The Latin and the Greek, the French and German and Anglo-Saxon complete my modest linguistic equipment. I have, besides, a smattering of Assyrian, Dutch, Gothic and Italian. I have explained how I inherited the task of this Grammar from Broadus. He was a disciple of Gessner Harrison, of the University of Virginia, who was the first scholar in America to make use of Bopp's Vergleichende Grammatik. Broadus' views of grammar were thus for long considered queer by the students who came to him trained in the traditional grammars and unused to the historical method; but he held to his position to the end.
From one
is
ment
This
Grammar aims
to keep in touch at salient points with the
results of comparative philology
and
historical
grammar
as the
true linguistic science.
In theory one should be allowed to as-
all this in a grammar of the Greek N. T., but in fact that cannot be done unless the book is confined in use to a few technical scholars. I have tried not to inject too much of general grammar into the work, but one hardly knows what is best when
sume
the demands are so varied.
So many men now get no Greek
except in the theological seminary that one has to interpret for them the language of modern philology. I have simply sought
modest way to keep the Greek of the N. T. out in the middle In actual it is proper to do so. class use some teachers will skip certain chapters. Alfred Gudemann,^ of Munich, says of American classical scholars: "Not a single contribution marking genuine progress, no work on an extensive scale, opening up a new perspective or
in a
of the linguistic stream as far as
breaking entirely new ground, nothing, in

scientific
fact, of the slightest
value can be placed to their credit."

is
That
is
a serious
charge, to be sure, but then originality

1
a relative matter.
The
f.
Cf. Dr.
James Moffatt's remarks
in
The
Expositor, Oct., 1910, p. 383
The
CI. Rev., June, 1909, p. 116.
PREFACE
true scholar
is
IX
only too glad to stand upon the shoulders of his predecessors and give full credit at every turn. Who could make any progress in human knowledge but for the ceaseless toil of
those 1
Prof. Paul Shorey,^ of the Unianswer to Prof. Gudemann. He speaks of "the need of rescuing scholarship itself from the German yoke." He does not mean "German pedantry and but ... in all superfluous accuracy in insignificant research seriousness from German inaccuracy." He continues about "the disease of German scholarship" that "insists on 'sweat-boxing'
who have gone
before?
versity of Chicago, has a sharp
the evidence and straining after 'vigorous and rigorous' demonstration 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
it is,
conviction that
my own
work, such as
wish to record my would have been imI

is
possible but for the painstaking
and
scientific investigation of the
Germans
In
at every turn.
The
republic of letters
cosmopolitan.
common with all modern linguists I have leaned upon Brugmann and Delbriick as masters in linguistic learning.
1 cannot here recite my indebtedness to all the scholars whose books and writings have helped me. But, besides Broadus, I must mention Gildersleeve as the American Hellenist whose wit and wisdom have helped me over many a hard place. Gildersleeve has spent much of his life in puncturing grammatical He exercises a sort of bubbles blown by other grammarians. "At least whole grammars have been grammatical censorship. constructed about one emptiness." ^ It is possible to be " grammar
mad," to use The Independent's phrase.* It is easy to scout all grammar and say: "Grammar to the Wolves."^ Browning sings in A Grammarian's Funeral:
"He
settled Hoti's business
Properly based Oun Gave us the doctrine of the enchtic De, Dead from the waist down."
F. H. Colson, in an article entitled "The Grammatical Chapters in Quin4-8 (The 01. Quarterly, Jan., 1914, p. 33), says: "The five chapters which Quintilian devotes to Grammatica' are in many ways the most valuable
^
let it be!
tilian," I,
'
discussion of the subject which

into
we
possess," though he divides
"grammatica"
is et
"grammar" and
The
CI.
"literature,"
and
(p.
37) "the whole of this chapter

is
largely directed to
2 3
meet the objection that grammar
'tenuis
jejuna.'"
Weekly,
F.
May
27, 1911, p. 229.
Gildersleeve,
Article
by
* Am. Jour, of Philol., July, 1909, p. 229. A. W. Henderson, Blackwood for May, 1906.
1911, p. 717.
Perhaps those who pity the grammarian do not know that he

finds joy in his task
and
is
sustained by the conviction that his
work
is
necessary.
Prof. C. F.
Smith {The
first
Classical Weekly,
1912, p. 150) tells of the joy of the professor of Greek at
Bonn
when he
received a copy of the
volume
of Gildersleeve's
Syntax of Classical Greek. The professor brought it to the Seminar and "clasped and hugged it as though it were a most precious darling {Liehling)." Dr. A. M. Fairbairn^ once said: "No man can be a theologian who is not a philologian. He who is no grammarian is no divine." Let Alexander McLaren serve as a good illustration of that dictum. His matchless discourses are
the fruit of the most exact scholarship and spiritual enthusiasm.
I
venture to quote another defence of the study of Greek which

yet come back to
its true place in modern education. Kalamazoo College, says-: "Greek yet remains the very best means we have for plowing up and wrinkling the human brain and developing its gray matter, and wrinkles and gray matter are still the most valuable assets a student can set down on the credit side of his ledger," Dr. J. H. Moulton has shown that it is possible to make grammar interesting, as Gildersleeve had done before him. Moulton protests^ against the notion that grammar is dull: "And yet there is no subject which can be made more interesting than grammar,
will, I trust,
Prof, G, A, Williams, of
a science which deals not with dead rocks or mindless vegetables, but with the ever changing expression of human thought," I wish to acknowledge here my very great indebtedness to Dr, Moulton for his brilliant use of the Egyptian papyri in proof of
the fact that the
KoivT],
New
is
Testament was written

field
in the vernacular
Deissmann
it.
the pioneer in this
and
is
still
the
hard to overestimate the debt of modern New Testament scholarship to his work. Dr, D. S. Margoliouth, it is true, is rather pessimistic as to the value of the papyri: "Not one per cent, of those which are deciphered and edited with so much
leader in
It is
care
1
tell
us anything worth knowing."*
Certainly that
is
too
Address before the Baptist Theological College at Glasgow, reported in British Weekly, April 26, 1906. 2 The CI. Weekly, April 16, 1910. 3 London Quarterly Review, 1908, p. 214. Moulton and Deissmann also disprove the pessimism of Hatch {Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 1): "The language of the New Testament, on the other hand, has not yet attracted the There is no good lexicon. special attention of any considerable scholar. There is no good philological commentary. There is no adequate grammar."
The
The
Expositor, Jan., 1912, p. 73.
PREFACE
Xi
gloomy a statement. Apart from the linguistic value of the papyri and the ostraca which has been demonstrated, these
letters
and
receipts
have interest as human documents.

life
They
give us real glimpses of the actual
of the
common
people in
the
first
Christian centuries, their joys and their sorrows, the
life what it is for us all. But Testament finds a joy all his own in seeing so many words in common use that were hitherto found almost or quite alone in the New Testament or LXX. But the grammar of the N. T. has also had a flood of light thrown on it from the papyri, ostraca and inscriptions as a result of the work of Deissmann, Mayser, Milligan, Moulton, Radermacher, Thumb, Volker, Wilcken and others. I have gratefully availed myself of the work of these scholars and have worked in this rich field for other pertinent illustrations of the New Testament idiom. The material is almost exhaustless and the temptation was constant to use too much of it. I have not thought it best to use so much of it in proportion as Radermacher has done, for the case is now proven and what Moulton and Radermacher did does not have to be repeated. As large as my book is, the space is precious for the New Testament itself. But I have used the new material freely. The book has grown so that in terror I often hold back. It is a long step from Winer, three generations ago, to the present time. We shall never go back again to that standpoint. Winer was himself a great emancipator in the gram-
little
things that go so far to
make
the student of the Greek
New
matical
history.
It
is
field.
But the
battles that he fought are
now
ancient
proper to state that the purpose of this
Grammar
is
not
that of the author's Short
Grammar which
is
now
in use in various
modern languages of America and Europe. That book has its own place. The present volume is designed for advanced students in theological schools, for the use of teachers, for scholarly pastors who wish a comprehensive grammar of the Greek New
for constant use, for all who make a thorough study of the New Testament or who are interested in the study of language, and for libraries. If new editions come,
Testament on the desk
as I hope, I shall endeavour to

tions.
make improvements and
correc-
Errata are sure to exist in a book of this nature. Occasionally (cf. Accusative with Infinitive) the same subject is
treated
points.
more than once
for the purpose of fulness at special

is
Some
repetition
necessary in teaching.
I
Some
needless
repetition can be eliminated later.
may
explain also that the
XU
works used by me in the Bodleian Library and the British Museum had the citations copied twice with double opportunity for
errors of reference, but I
my
ability.
have guarded that point to the best of have been careful to give credit in detail to the
many works
But, after
consulted.
all is said, I
am reluctant to let my book slip away There is so much yet to learn, I had hoped that Mayser's Syntax der griechischen Papyri could have appeared so that I could have used it, but he sorrowfully writes me that illness has held him back. Neither Helbing nor Thackeray has finished his Syntax of the LXX. The N. T. Lexicon of Moulton and Milligan, though announced, has not yet appeared. Deissmann's Lexicon is still in the future. Thumb's revision of Brugmann's Griechische Grammatik appeared after my book had gone to the press.^ I could use it only here and there. The same thing is true of Debrunner's revision of Blass' Grammatik des New light will continue to be turned on the neutest. Griechisch. Greek of the N. T. Prof. J. Rendel Harris (The Expository Times, Nov., 1913, p. 54 f.) points out, what had not been recently noticed, that Prof. Masson, in his first edition of Winer in 1859, p. vii, had said: "The diction of the New Testament is the plain and unaffected Hellenic of the Apostolic Age, as employed by Greek-speaking Christians when discoursing on religious subthe number of which jects Apart from the Hebraisms the New has, for the most part, been grossly exaggerated genuine only Testament may be considered as exhibiting the unsophisticated facsimile of the colloquial diction employed by Grecian gentlemen of the first century, who spoke without pedantry as IbLOiTai and not as ao(l)L(TTal." The papyri have simply confirmed the insight of Masson in 1859 and of Lightfoot
from
my
hands.
in 1863 (Moulton, ProL, p. 242).
One's mind lingers with fas-
cination over the words of the New Testament as they meet him in unexpected contexts in the papyri, as when aperr] (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9) occurs in the sense of 'Thy Excellency,' exco irapa(Tx^lu rfi afj aperfj, 1
:
13)
is
ahrCo
O. P. 1131, 11 f. (v/a.d.), or when vTzepcoov (Ac. used of a pigeon-house, t6v vivepcoov tottou ttjs vTapxovarjs Movxivvp oldas, O. P. 1127, 5-7 (a.d. 183). But the book
forth to do
its
must now go
part in the elucidation of the
New
1 Prof. E. H. Sturtevant (CI. Weekly, Jan. 24, 1914, p. 103) criticises Thumb because he retains in his revision of Brugmann's book the distinction between accidence and syntax, and so is "not abreast of the best scholarship of the day." But for the N. T. the distinction is certainly useful.
PREFACE
Xlll
I indulge the hope that Testament, the treasure of the ages.^ Dods {Later Letters, Marcus in vain. the toil has not been all are content to grammarians who the admire p. 248) says: "I knowledge intemple of permanent the add one solid stone to many swallows and only like it so round twittering stead of
attracting attention to themselves."
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
^0517
interpreters.
koTLv (Jo. 6
:
Td
63).
prjixara
a 70? XeXdXTj/ca v/uv
irvevixb.
kcTiv koI
must record
my
grateful appreciation of the
sympathy and
have in the Seminary colleagues My years. the through on plodded Faculty have placed me under many obligations in making it possible for me to devote myself to my task and in rendering In particular Pres. E. Y. Mullins and Prof. substantial help. been active in the endowment of the plates. have Sampey J. R. Prof. Sampey also kindly read the proof of the Aramaic and Hebrew words. Prof. W. O. Carver graciously read the proof of the entire book and made many valuable suggestions. Dr. S. Angus, of Edinburgh, read the manuscript in the first rough draft and was exceedingly helpful in his comments and sympathy. Prof. W. H. P. Hatch, of the General Episcopal Theological Seminary, New York, read the manuscript for the publishers and part of the proof and exhibited sympathetic insight that is greatly
help received from
friends all over the world as I
many
appreciated.
Prof. J. S. Riggs, of the

till
Auburn Theological Semi-
nary, read the proof
gave way, and was gracious in his enthusiasm for the enterprise. Prof. Walter Petersen, Ph.D., of Bethany College, Lindsborg, Kansas, read all the proof and freely gave his linguistic attainments to the improvement of the Last, but not least in this list, Mr. H. Scott, of Birkenbook. head, England, read the whole book in proof, and in the Accidence
his health
verified all the references
with minute care and loving interest, and all through the book contributed freely from his wealth of knowledge of detail concerning the Greek N. T. The references in Syntax were verified by a dozen of my students whose labour
of love
is
greatly appreciated.
Pres. J.
W.
Shepherd, of Rio
Janeiro, Brazil,
and
Prof. G.
W.
Taylor, of Pineville, La., had
verified the Scripture references in the

verified in proof.
1
The Index
of Quotations has
is
MS., which were again been prepared by

Moffatt's
Brilliant use of the
new knowledge
made by Dr. James
New
Testament (A
New
Translation, 1913).
xiv
Rev.
Davis, of Richmond College, Va. the Index of Greek S. L. Watson, Tutor of N. T. Greek for this sesRev. Words by All this work has been done for me Seminary. in the sion recital of it humbles me very much. mere The gladly. and freely
W. H.
Without
this expert aid in so
many
directions the
book could
not have been produced at all. I must add, however, that all errors should be attributed to me. I have done the best that I could with my almost impossible task. I have had to put on an old man's glasses during the reading of the proof. I must add also my sincere appreciation of the kind words
of Prof.
Edwin Mayser
of Stuttgart, Oberlehrer
H. Stocks of
Cottbus, Pres. D. G. Whittinghill of Rome, Prof. Caspar Rene Gregory of Leipzig, the late Prof. E. Nestle of Maulbronn, Prof. James Stalker of Aberdeen, Prof. Giovanni Luzzi of Florence, Prof. J. G. Machen of Princeton, Profs. G. A. Johnston Ross and
Union Seminary, and many others who have of toil. For sheer joy in the thing Prof. C. M. Cobern of Allegheny College, Penn., and Mr. Dan Crawford, the author of Thinking Black, have read a large part of the
Jas. E.
Frame
of
cheered
me
in
my years
proof.
I gladly record
my
gratitude to Mr. G.
W. Norton,
Misses
Lucie and Mattie Norton, Mr. R. A. Peter (who gave in memory of his father and mother, Dr. and Mrs. Arthur Peter), Rev. R. N. Lynch, Rev. R. J. Burdette, Mr. F. H. Goodridge, and others
who have
generously contributed to the endowment of the plates I am inso that the book can be sold at a reasonable price. deeply I am co-operation. kindly debted to Mr. K. B. Grahn for making for Seminary the Trustees of grateful also to the Board of
provision for completing the payment for the plates. It is a pleasure to add that Mr. Doran has shown genuine enthusiasm in the enterprise, and that Mr. Linsenbarth of the
University Press, Cambridge, has taken the utmost pains in the

final proofreading,
should say that the text of Westcott and Hort is followed Use is made also of the Greek Testaments of in all essentials. Von Soden whose untimely death is so reand Nestle, Souter, chapter on Orthography and Phonetics the In event. cent an
I
more constant use
is made, for obvious reasons, of variations It is now four in the rest of the book. than manuscripts in the hundred years since Cardinal Francisco Ximenes de Cisneros had printed the Greek New Testament under the auspices of the University of Alcala or Complutum, near Madrid, though it
PREFACE
was not circulated
lation in 1516.
till
XV
his edition into circu-
1522.
Erasmus got
"The Complutensian
edition of 1514
of
more than a thousand
editions of the
New Testament
was the first 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
"Book of Humanity." The Freer Gospels and the Karidethi Gospels show how much we have to expect
to the study of the
in the
I
way of discovery of manuscripts of the New Testament. think with pleasure of the preacher or teacher who under
Grammar may turn afresh to his Greek Testament and there find things new and old, the vital message all electric with power for the new age. That will be my joy so long as the book shall find use and service at the hands
the inspiration of this
New
of the ministers of Jesus Christ.
A. T. ROBEETSON.
Louisville, Ky., 1914.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART
Chapter
"
I.
INTRODUCTION
PAQB
3
New
The The
Material
Historical
II.
Method
31
"
III.
KoLPv
of the
49
IV.
The Place
New
Testament
in the Koivi]
...
76
PART
Chapter
" " "
II
ACCIDENCE
143 177
V. Word-Formation
VI. Orthography and Phonetics
VII.
VIII.
The Declensions The Conjugation
246
of the
Verb
303
PART
Chapter
" "
"
III
SYNTAX
379 390
446
IX. The Meaning of Syntax
X. The Sentence
XI. The Cases
XII. Adverbs
XIII. Prepositions
544
553
" " "

" " " "
XIV. Adjectives
650 676 754

797
821
.
.
.
XV. Pronouns XVI. The Article

XVII. Voice
XVIII. Tense
XIX. Mode
911
" "
"
XX.
Verbal Nouns
1050 1142 1194

l-'09
XXI. Particles XXII. Figures of Speech
Additional Notes
Index of Subjects
1223
1-49
Index of Greek Words Index of Quotations

xvii
1-^5
LIST OF
I
WORKS MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO

analytic bibliography of the perit
HAD prepared an exhaustive
was so long that, on the advice of several friends, I have substituted an alphabetical list of the main works mentioned in the book. The editions of Greek authors, the papyri and the inscriptions will be found in the Index of Quotations. Look there for them. For full histories of grammatical
tinent literature, but
discussion one
may
turn to Sandys,
History of Classical Scholarder Geschichte
ship, vols. I-III (1906-1908);
Gudemann, GrundriB
der klassischen Philologie (2. Aufl., 1909);

riB
zu Vorlesungen
all
iiber
die griechische
and Hubner, GrundSyntax (1883). By no
the works consulted and referred to in the Grammar are given below. Only the most important can be mentioned.
means
Hundreds that were consulted are not alluded to in the Grammar. But the following list represents fairly well the works that have contributed most to the making of my book. The chief
journals quoted are also mentioned here.
Abbott, E. A., Clue. A Guide through Greek to Hebrew (1904). Johannine Grammar (1906). Johannine Vocabulary (1905). A7n. J. Ph., The American Journal of Philology (Baltimore). Alexander, W. J., Participial Periphrases in Attic Orators (Am.
, ,
J.
Ph., IV, pp. 291-309).

F.,
Allen, H.
finitive in
The Infinitive in Polybius compared with the InBibhcal Greek (1907).
Lit., The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature (Chicago). Am. J. of TheoL, The American Journal of Theology (Chicago). Angus, S., Modern Methods in New Testament Philology (Harvard Theol. Rev., Oct., 1909). The KoiPT], the Language of the New Testament (Princ.
Am.. J. of Sem. L. and
Theol. Rev., Jan., 1910). Anz, H., Subsidia ad cognoscendum Graecorum
sermonem
vul-
garum
e Pentateuchi versione Alexandrina repetita
(Diss,
phil. Hal.,
XII, 1894, pp. 259-387).
XX
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK
NEW TESTAMENT
Apostolides, Essai sur rHellenisme figyptien et ses rapports avec I'Hellenisme cla.ssique et THellenisme moderne (1898).
,
Du
grec alexandrin et des rapports avec
le
grec ancien et.le
grec
moderne
(1892).
Archiv fur Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gehiete (Leipzig). Arnaud, Essai sur le caractere de la langue grec du N. T. (1899).
Arnold and Conway, The Restored Pronunciation

Latin (1885).
of
Greek and
AuDOiN,
E.,
De
la declinaison
dans
les
langues indo-europeennes
(1898).
Babbitt, The Use of Mr] in Questions (Harvard Studies in Class.

Phil., 1901).
Bacon, Roger, Oxford Greek Grammar.
Edited by Nolan and Hirsch (1902). Bamberg, Hauptregeln der griechischen Syntax (1890).
Baron, Le Pronom Relatif et la Conjonctive en Grec (1892). Barry, W., The Holy Latin Tongue (Dublin Rev., April, 1906); Our Latin Bible (ib., July). Baumlein, Untersuchungen iiber die griech. Modi und die Partikeln Kev und av (1846).
,
Untersuch. iiber griech. Partikeln (1861).
Bekker, Anecdota Graeca. 3 Bde. (1814-1821). Benard, Formes verbales en grec d'apres le texte d'Herodote
(1890).
Berdolt, Der Konsekutivsatz
in der altern griech. Lit. (1896).
Bernhardy,
G.,
Wissenschaftliche
Syntax
der
griechischen
Sprache (1829). Bihl. Ec, Bibliotheque de

Bibl. Gr. V., Bibliotheque Bihl. S.,
I'ecole des hautes Etudes (Paris). grecque vulgaire (Paris). The Bibliotheca Sacra (Oberlin).
Bibl. W.,
The
Biblical
World (Chicago).
BiRKE, De Particularum /xi? et ov Usu Polybiano Dionysiaeo Diodoreo Straboniano (1897). BiRKLEiN, F., Entwickelungsgeschichte des substantivierten Infinitivs (1882).
Blass,
,
F., Acta Apostolorum (1895). Die griech. Beredsamkeit von Alex, bis auf August. (1865). Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa
(1905).
,
Krit., 1902, pp.

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

d. neut. Griech.
2. Aufl.
XXI
F.,
Grammatik
(1902).
Hermeneutik
unci Kritik (1892).
Philology of the Gospels (1898).
1890 of
Pronunciation of Ancient Greek (translation by Purton in 3. Aufl. of Tiber die Aussprache des Griech. (1888).
Blass-Debrunner, Grammatik d. neut. Griech. 4. Aufl. (1913). Blass-Thackeray, Grammar of New Testament Greek. 2d ed.
(1905).
Bloomfield, study
of
Greek Accent
(A. J. Ph., 1883).
BoHMER,
,
J.,
Das
biblische
"im Namen"
(1898).
BoiSACQ, Les dialectes doriens (1891). Dictionnaire etymol. de la langue grecque (1907 ff.). BoLLiNG, The Participle in Hesiod (Cath. Univ. Bulletin, 1897). BoNHOFFER, A., Epiktet und das N. T. (1911).
Bopp, Vergleichende Grammatik (1857). Br. W., The British Weekly (London). Broadus, John A., Comm. on Matt. (1886). Brockelmann, C., GrundriB der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen (1907). Brugmann, K., Elements of Comparative Grammar of the IndoGermanic Languages (translation by Wright, 1895).
,
Griechische Grammatik.
3. Aufl.
(1900), the ed. quoted. (1913).

2. Aufl.,
Vierte vermehrte Aufl. of A.

,
Thumb
GrundriB der
vergl. Gr. d. indog. Sprachen.
Bde.
I,
,
II (1897-1913).
Kurze vergleichende Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen (1904). Buck, C. D., Introduction to the Study of the Greek Dialects
(1910).
BuLTMANN,
R.,
Der
Stil
der paulinischen Predigt
und
die kynisch-
stoische Diatribe (1910).
Buresch, Teyovav und anderes Vulgargriechisch (Rhein. Mus.

f.
Phil., 1891, pp.
193-232).
BuRKiTT, F. C., Syriac Forms of N. T. Proper Names (1912). Burrows, R. M., Discoveries in Crete (1907). Burton, E. D., Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the N. T. Gk. 3d ed. (1909). BuRTON-ZwAAN, Syntax d. Wijzen etijden in h. Gr. N. T. (1906). Butcher, S. H., Some Aspects of the Greek Genius (1893). Harvard Lectures on Greek Subjects (1904). BuTTMANN, A., Grammatik d. neut. Sprachgebrauchs (1859). Buttmann-Thayer, a Grammar of the N. T. Greek (1880).
,
XXll

J.,
NEW TESTAMENT
of
Bywater,
The Erasmian Pronunciation
Greek and
its
Pre-
cursors (1908).
Byz.Z., Byzantinische Zeitschrift (Leipzig). Cambr. Ph. J., Cambridge Philological Journal.
Cath. Univ. Bull., Catholic University Bulletin.
Cauer, Grammatica Militans. 3d ed. (1912). Chandler, H., A Practical Introduction to Greek Accentuation.
2d ed. (1881). Chase, F. H., The Credibihty of the Acts (1902). Christ, W., Geschichte der griech. Literatur bis auf die Zeit Justinians.
4. Aufl. (1905).
5.
Aufl. (1913).
Churton, The Influence

Christianity (1861).
of the Septuagint
upon the Progress
of
Claflin, Edith, Syntax of Boeotian Dialect Inscriptions (1905). Classen, J., De Grammaticae Graecae Primordiis (1829).
CI. Ph., Classical
CI. Q., Classical
Philology (Chicago).
Quarterly (London).
CI. Rev., Classical CI.
Review (London).
W., Classical Weekly (New York).
Clyde, J., Greek Syntax (1876). CoMPERNASS, De Sermone Gr. Volg. Pisidiae Phrygiaeque meridionalis (1895).
CoNYBEARE and Stock,
Selections from the
LXX.
A Gram-
matical Introduction (1905).
CouRTOZ, Les Prefixes en Grec, en Latin et en Frangais (1894). Cremer, H., Biblico-Theological Lexicon of N. T. Greek (1892).
Urwick's translation.
,
Bibl.-theol.
Worterbuch
d. neut. Gracitat.
9. Aufl. (1902).
Cremer-Kligel, neue Aufl. (1912).
Cronert, W., Memoria Graeca Herculanensis

,
(1903).
Questiones Herculanenses (1898). Crum, W. E., Coptic Ostraca from the Collections of the Egypt Exploration Fund, the Cairo Museum and others (1902).
Curtius, G., Greek Etymology.

,
2 vols. (1886).
Studien zur griech. und

G.,
lat.
Grammatik (1868-1878).
Dalman,
,
Grammatik des
judisch-palastinischen Aramaisch
(1894).
Worte Jesu (1902). The Words of Jesus (1902). Translation by D. M. Kay. Dawes, E. S., Pronunciation of the Gk. Aspirates (1894).
,
D. B., Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings, 1898-1904). D. C. G., Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels (Hastings, 1906).
LIST OF

Tr. by A. Grieve; Neue Bibelstudien (1897).
cf.
XXIU
Bibel-
Deissmann,
,
a., Bible Studies (1901).
studien (1895) and
Biblische Gracitat etc. (Theol. Rundschau, Okt. 1912).
Die Hellenisierung des semitischen Monotheismus

f.
(N.
Jahrb.
,
d. kl. Alt., 1903).
Die neut. Formel "in Christo" (1892). Die Sprache d. griech. Bibel (Theol. Rundschau, 1906, No. 116). Die Urgeschichte des Christentums im Lichte der Sprachforschung (Intern. Woch., 30. Okt. 1909). Hellenistisches Griechisch (Herzog-Hauck's Realencyc, VII,
, , ,
1899).
,
Licht
vom
Osten (1908).
Light from the Ancient East (1910). Tr. by Strachan. New Light on the N. T. (1907). Tr. by Strachan.
St.
Papyri (Encyc. Bibl., Ill, 1902). Paul in the Light of Social and Religious History (1912). Delbrijck, B., Ablativ LocaHs Instrumentalis (1867). GrundriU der vergl. Gramm. d. indog. Sprachen. Syntax.
, ,
"
Bde. III-V (1893, 1897, 1900). Introduction to the Study of Language (1882). Einleitung in das Sprachstudium. 4. Aufl. (1904). 5. Aufl. (1913). Syntaktische Forschungen. 5 Bde. (1871-1888).
,
Dick, Der schriftstellerische Plural bei Paulus (1900). Dickey, S., New Points of View for the Study of the Greek of the N. T. (Princeton Theol. Rev., Oct., 1903). Diel, De enuntiatis finalibus apud graecorum rerum scriptores
posterioris aetatis (1894).
Dieterich, K., Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Sprache von

der hellen. Zeit bis
zum
10.
Jahrh. n. Chr. (1898).
Donaldson, J. W., The New Cratylus (1859). Draeger, Hist. Syntax d. lat. Sprache (1878-1881). Dubl. Rev., The Dublin Review (Dublin).
DtJRR, Sprachliche Untersuchungen (1899). Dyroff, a., Geschichte des Pronomen Reflexivum (1892, 1893). Earle, M. L., Classical Papers (1912). Ebeling, H., Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zum N. T. (1913). Eckinger, Die Orthographie lateinischer Worter in griech. Inschriften (1893).
E. G. T., Expositor's Greek Testament.

Encyc. Bibl., Encyclopaedia Biblica. Encyc.
Brit.,
Encyclopaedia Britannica.
11th ed. (1910).
XXIV
Engel, E., Die Aussprache des Griechischen (1887). Ernault, Du Parfait en Grec et en Latin (1886). Evans, A. J., Cretan Pictographs and Pre-Phoenician Script
(1895).
Further Researches (1898). The Expositor (London). Expos. T., The Expository Times (Edinburgh).
,
Exp.,
Farnell, L. R., Greek Conditional and Relative Sentences (1892). Farrar, F. W., Greek Syntax (1876). Fick-Bechtel, Die griechischen Personennamen. 2. Aufl. (1894).
Field, F., Otiura Norvicense.
Pars Tertia (1881).
Flensberg, tJber Ursprung und Bildung des Pron. auros (1893). Fowler, The Negatives of the Indo-European Languages (1896). FoY, K., Lautsystem der griech. Vulgarsprache (1879). ^Frankel, Griechische Denominativa (1906). Frenzel, Die Entwick. des relativen Satzbaues im Griech. (1889). Die Entwick. der Satze mit irpiv (1896). FucHS, A., Die Temporalsatze mit den Konjunktionen "bis" und "solangals" (1902).
,
FiJHRER,
De
Particulae ws
cum
Participiis et Praepos.
punctae
Usu Thucydideo (1889). Galloway, W. F., On the Use

sical
of Mtj with the Participle in Clas-
Greek (1897). Geddes, a Compendious Greek Grammar (1888). Gelbart, The Modern Greek Language in Its Relation to Ancient Greek (1870). Gersdorf, C. G., Beitrage zur Sprachcharakteristik der Schriftsteller des N. T. (1816). Gesenius-Kautzsch, Hebrew Grammar. Geyer, M., Observationes epigraphicae de praepositionum graec. forma et Usu (1880). GiLDERSLEEVE, B. L., Editions of Pindar and Justin Martyr.
,
Latin Grammar.
Many
editions since 1867.
Notes on Stahl's Syntax of the Greek Verb (1910). Numerous articles in the American Journal of Philology. GiLDERSLEEVE and Miller, Syntax of Classical Greek. Part
, ,
(1900), Part II (1911).

Gildersleeve Studies.
Volume
in
honour of Prof. Gildersleeve of
Johns Hopkins (1902).

Giles,
P.,
Short Manual of Comparative Philology.

Britannica, 1910).
2d
ed.
(1901).
,
The Greek Language (Encyc.
LIST OF
XXV
Giles-Hertel, Vergl. Grammatik (1896). Tr. of Giles' Manual. GoETZELER, L., De Polybii elocutione (1887). Einflufi d. Dion. Hal. auf d. Sprachgebrauch (1891). GooDSPEED, E. J., Did Alexandria Influence the Nautical Language of St. Luke? (The Expositor, VIII, 1903, pp. 130-141). Goodwin, W. W., Greek Grammar. Various editions. Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb. Rev.
, ,
ed. (1890).
Granit,
De
Inf. et Part, in Inscr. Dial.
Graec.
Questiones Sjnit.
(1892).
Green,
Mrj for ov before
Lucian (Studies in Honour of B. Gil-
dersleeve, 1902).,
Green, Green,
B.,
S. G.,
Notes on Greek and Latin Syntax (1897). Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek N. T.
Rev. ed. (1904).
Gregory, C.
,
,
R., Canon and Text of the N. T. (1907). Die griech. Handschriften d. N. T. (1908). Nov. Test. Graece, ed. Tischendorf. Bd. Ill, Prolegomena
(1884-1894).
,
Textkritik d. N. T.
3 Bde. (1900-1909).
Grimm-Thayer,
GrIjnewald,
L.,
Greek-English Lexicon of the N. T. (1887). Der freie formelhafte Inf. d. Limitation im

d.
Griech. (1888).
GuDEMANN,
2. Aufl.
A.,
GrundriB der Geschichte
klass.
Philologie.
(1909).
GuiLLEMARD, W. H., Hebraisms in the Greek Testament (1879). GuNTHER, R., Die Prapos. in d. griech. Dialektinschriften (Indog.
Forsch., 1906).
Hadley and Allen, Greek Grammar

,
(1895).
Hadley, James, Essays Philological and Critical (1873). Language of the N. T. (vol. II, Hackett and Abbott's
Smith's B. D., 1898).
ed. of
Hahne, Zur sprachlichen Asthetik d. Griechischen (1896). Hale, W. G., The Anticipatory Subj. in Gk. and Lat. (Stud.
Phil., 1895).
,
CI.
in Gk. and Lat. (Harvard Studies in Class. PhiloL, 1901). Hamilton, The Negative Conditions in Greek (1899). Hammer, De re Particulae Usu Herodoteo Thucydideo Xenophonteo (1904).
,
The Cum Constructions (Studies in Class. The Origin of Subj. and Opt. Conditions
Phil., 1887).
Hammerschmidt,
tjber die Grundb.
von Konjunktiv und Optativ.
XXvi
NEW TESTAMENT
Harnack, a., Luke the Physician (1907). The Acts of the Apostles (1909). Harris, J. Rendel, Side-Lights on N. T. Research
,
(1908).
Harrison, Gessner,
sitions (1858).
Treatise on the Philology of Greek Prepo-
Harrison, Miss Jane, Prol. to the Study of Greek Religion (1903). Harsing, C., De Optativi in Chartis Aegyptiis Usu. Diss. Bonn
(1910).
Hartel, Abrifi der Gr. d. hom. und herod. Dial. (1888). Hartung, J. A., Lehre von den Partikeln der griech. Spr.,
(1832-1833).
I,
II
Hatch, E., Essays in Bibl. Greek (1892). Hatch, W. H. P., Some Illustrations of N. T. Usage from Greek Inscriptions of Asia Minor (Journ. of Bibl. Lit., 1908, pp.
134-146).
Hatzidakis, G. N., Einleitung in die neugriechische Grammatik

(1892).
Havers, W., Untersuch. zur Kasussyntax der indog. Sprachen

(1911).
Horae Synopticae. 2d ed. (1909). Heine, G., Synonymik des neutest. Griechisch (1898). Heinrici, K. F., Der literarische Charakter der neutest. Schriften
Hawkins,
J. C.,
(1908).
HEiTMiJLLER, W., Im Namcu Jesu (1902). Helbing, R., Die Priipos. bei Herodot und andern Historikern
(1904).
,
Grammatik der Septuaginta.

tJber den
Laut- und Wortlehre (1907). Gebrauch des echten und soziativen Dativs bei
Herodot.
Henry,
Precis de
grammaire du grec
et
du
latin.
5th ed. (1894).
Elliott's tr. of 1st ed. (1890).
Hermes, Zeitschrift fiir klassische Philologie. Hesseling, D. C., De Koine en de oude dialekten van Griechenland (1906).
Hicks, E.
1896).
,
L., St.
Paul and Hellenism (Studia Biblica et EccL,
Traces of Greek Philosophy and
Roman Law
in the
N. T.
(1896).
Use of Political Terms in the N. T. (Class. Rev., March and April, 1887). Hicks, E. L., and Hill, G. F., A Manual of Greek Historical In,
scriptions (1901).
LIST OF
XXVll
HiRT, H., Handbuch der griech. Laut- und Formenlehre (1902).

2.
Aufl. (1912).
HoBART, W. K., The Medical Language of Luke (1882). Hoffmann, F., Neutestamentliche Bibelstudien, 5 Bde. tjber die Entwick. des Begriffs der Grammatik
,
(1903).
bei
den
Alten (1891).
O., Das Prasens der indog. Grundsprache (1889). Die griechische Dialekte, I-III (1891-1898). Die Makedonen, ihre Sprache und ihr Volkstum (1906). Geschichte d. griech. Sprache (1911). Hogarth, D. G., Philip and Alexander (1897). HoLL, K., Das Fortleben der Volkssprachen in nachchristlicher Zeit (Hermes, 1908, 43, pp. 243 ff.). HooLE, C. H., The Classical Element in the N. T. (1888). HoRT, F. J. A., Notes on Orthography (pp. 141-173, vol. H of the N. T. in the Original Greek, 1882). Howes, The Use of Mrj with the Participle (Harv. St. in CI. Ph.,
,
, ,
Hoffmann,
1901).
Hatch and Redpath, Concordance

(1883).
to the
LXX
(1897).
HiJBNER, E., GrundriB zu Vorlesungen iiber die griech. Syntax
HuBSCHMANN, Zur Kasuslchre (1875). Humphreys, M. W., The Problems of Greek (Congress
and Sciences, 1904,
Immer,
J.,
of Arts
vol. Ill, pp. 171
ff.).
Indog. Forsch., Indogermanische Forschungen (StraCburg).
Hermeneutics of the N. T.
Tr.
by A. H. Newman
(1877).
Intern. Woch., Internationale Wochenschrift.
Jacobsthal, H. K., Der Gebrauch der Tempora und Modi in den kretischen Dialektinschriften (1906). Jacquier, E., Histoire des Livres du N. T. Tomes I-IV. Ch. ii, Tome I, Langue du N. T. J. kl. Ph., Jahrbuch fiir klass. Philologie (Leipzig). Jannaris, a. N., a Historical Greek Grammar (1897). On the True Meaning of the KoLvri (Class. Rev., 1903, pp.
,
93
ff.).
Jebb, R.
,
C,
Attic Orators.
2d
ed. (1893).
Introduction to the Iliad and the Odyssey (1892). On the Relation of Classical to Modern Greek (Appendix
to Vincent
Jelf,
W.
E.,
a Grammar
and Dickson's Handbook to Mod. Gk., 1887). of the Greek Language. 2 vols.
(1866).
XXViii
NEW TESTAMENT
JoHANNESsoHN, M., Dgt Gebrauch der Kasus und der Prapositionen in der Septuaginta. Teil I (1910). Jolly, Ein Kapitel d. vergl. Syntax, Der Konjunktiv und Optativ.
,
Joy,
On
Geschichte des Infinitivs im Indog. (1873). the Syntax of Some Prepositions in the Greek Dialects
(1905).
The Journal of Philology (London). The Journal of Bibhcal Literature (Boston). J. H. S., The Journal of Hellenic Studies (London). J. T. S., The Journal of Theological Studies (London). JtJLicHER, A., Introduction to the N. T. Tr. by Ward
J. of Phil., J. B. L.,
(1904).
Kaerst, J., Geschichte des hellenistischen Zeitalters (1901). Kaibel, Stil und Text der 'AQtivaiwv IIoXtTeta. Kalker, F., Questiones de elocutione Polybiana (1880). Kallenberg, Stud, iiber den griech. Artikel (1891). Kautzsch, E., Grammatik d. bibl. Aram. (1884). Kennedy, H. A. A., Recent Research in the Language of the N. T. (The Expos. T., xii, 1901). Sources of N. T. Greek (1895). St Paul and the Mystery Rehgions (1913). Kenyon, F. G., Evidence of the Papyri for Textual Criticism of the N. T. (1905). Handbook to the Textual Grit, of the N. T. 2d ed. (1912). Palseography of the Greek Papyri (1899). Papyri (Hastings' D. B., extra vol., 1904). King and Cookson, The Principles of Sound and Inflexion as Illustrated in the Greek and Latin Languages (1888). Krauss, S,, Griechische und lateinische Lehnworter in Talmud,
, ,
Midrasch und Targum. I (1898), II (1899). Krebs, F., Die Prapositionen bei Polybius (1882.
trage).
,
Schanz' Bei-
Die Prapositionsadverbien
in der spateren hist. Gracitat.
Tl. I (1889).
,
Zur Rektion der Kasus
in der spateren hist. Gracit. (1887-
1890).
Krenkel, Josephus und Lukas (1894). Kretschmer, p., Die Einl. in die Geschichte der
(1906).
,
griech,
Sprache
Die Entstehung der Kotj'^ (Sitz. ber, d, Wien. Akad., 1900), Die griech, Vaseninschriften ihrer Sprache nach untersucht
(1894).
LIST OF

der
XXIX
griech.
Krumbacher,
,
K., Beitrage zu einer Geschichte Sprache (Kuhn's Zeitschr., 1885, pp. 481-545).
Das Problem d. neugriech. Schriftsprache (1902). Das Programm des neuen Thesaurus d. griech. Spr.
Die griech.
I,
(1909).
Lit.
des Mittelalters (Kultur d. Gegenwart,

d.
Tl.
Abt.
viii,
1905).
griech.
Kuhner-Blass, AusfiihrHche Grammatik

3. Aufl. of
Sprache.
Kiihner.
Kuhner.
Ausf.
I,
Teil
I,
Bde.
I,
II (1890, 1892).
3. Aufl. of
Kuhner-Gerth,
Tl. II,
Gramm.
d. griech. Spr.
Bde.
G.,
II (1898, 1904).
KuHRiNG,
De
praepositionum Graecarum in chartis Aegyp-
tiacis (1906).
KuPFF, Der Gebr. d. Opt. bei Diod. Sic. (1903). K. Z., Kuhn's Zeitschrift flir vergl. Sprachforschung (Berlin). Lafoscade, Infl. du Lat. sur le Grec (Bibl. de TEcole des hautes
fit.,
1892, pp. 83-158).
Lagarde, p. de, Septuagintastudien. I (1891). Lake, K., The Text of the N. T. 4th ed. (1908). Lambert, fitude sur le dialecte eolien (1903). Lang, A., Homer and His Age (1906). Laqueur, R., Questiones epigraphicae et papyrologicae
(1904).
selectae
La Roche, Beitrage zur griech. Gr. (1883). Das Augment des griech. Verbums (1882). Laughlin, T. C., The Solecisms of the Apocalypse
,
(1902).
Lautensach, Verbalflexion der attischen Inschriften (1887). Lefevre, Race and Language (1909). Lell, Der Absolut-Akk. im Griech. bis zu Aristoteles (1892). Leutner, W. G., The Article in Theocritus (1907). LiDDELL and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon. 7th ed. (1882). LiETZMANN, H., Die klass. Philologie und das N. T. (N. Jahrb.
f.
,
kl. Alt.,
1908, Bd. 21).

2. Aufl.
Griechische Papyri ausgewahlt und erklart.
(1910).
Lightfoot, Trench, Ellicott, The Revision of the N. T. (1873). Lipsius, K. HA-'., Grammatische Untersuchungen iiber die bibl.
Gracitat (1863).
Livingston, The Greek Genius and Its Meaning to Us (1912). LoBECK, C. A., Phrynichi ecloga nominum et verborum Atticorum
(1820).
Lock, W., The Bible and Christian Life (1905).

LoiSY, A., Histoire critique du texte et des versions de
(1892).
la
Bible
XXX
A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK
NEW TESTAMENT
LoTTicH, B.,
De sermone
vulgari Atticorum (1881).
att. Rednern (1891). Punkte des Griech. (1848). Syntax of the Greek Language (1880). Mahaffy, J. P., A Survey of Greek Civilization (1897). Greek Life and Thought (1896). Progress of Hellenism in Alexander's Empire (1905). The Greek World under Roman Sway (1890). What Have the Greeks Done for Civilization? (1909). Margoliouth, D. S., Language of the O. T. (Hastings' D. B.). Margolis, The Particle in O. T. Gk. (Am. J. of Sem. Lang, and
LuTZ, Die Kasus-Adverbien bei

iiber einige
Madvig, Bemerk.
,
ij
Lit., July, 1909).
Marshall,
ii,
J. T.,
iii,
iv, vi, viii;
The Aramaic Gospel (The Expositor, The Expos. Times, iv, 260).
d. bibl.
ser.
IV,
Marti, K., Kurzgef. Gr.
aram. Spr. (1911).
Mayser,
Grammatik der griech. Papyri aus der Ptolemaerzeit. Laut- und Wortlehre (1906).
E.,
Meillet,
,
a.. Introduction h 1' etude comparative des langues indoeuropeennes (1908). 3d ed. (1912). L'aoriste en lat. (Revue de Phil., 1897, p. 81 f.).
,
Notes d'fitymologie Grecque (1896). Meister, R., Beitrage zur Lautlehre d. LXX (1909). Der syntakt. Gebrauch d. Genitivs in den kret. Dialektinschriften (Indog. Forsch., XVIII, pp. 133-204). Die griech. Dialekte. 2 Bde. (1882-1889).
, ,
,
Prol. zu einer
Gramm.
d.
LXX
(1907).
Meisterhans-Schwyzer, Gramm.
Aufl. (1900) of Meisterhans.
d. attischen
Inschriften.
3.
Merriam, a. C, Temporal Coincidence

Principal Verb (Proc.
of the Aor. Part, with the
Am.
Phil.
Assoc, 1877).
(1896).
Meyer, Meyer, Meyer,

,
A., Jesu
Muttersprache (1896).
G., Griech.
Grammatik.
3. Aufl.
L., Griech. Aoriste (1879).
Vergl. Gr. d. griech.
und
lat.
Spr.
2 Bde.
h..
2. Aufl.
(1882-
1884).
MEYER-LtJBKE, Gramm. d. roman. Spr. 3 Bde. (1890-1899). MiDDLETON, Analogy in Sjmtax (1892). The Doctrine of the Greek Article (1855). MiLDEN, The Limitations of the Predicate Position in Greek. Miller, C. W. E., The Limitation of the Imperative in the Attic Orators (Am. J. Ph., 1892, pp. 399-436). MiLLiGAN, G., Selections from the Greek Papyri (1910).
,
LIST OF
XXXI
MiLLiGAN, G., The Greek Papyri with Special Reference to their Value for N. T. Study (1912). The N. T. Documents (1913). MiTSOTAKis, Praktische Gr. d. neugriech. Schrift- und Umgangs,
sprache (1891).
MiTTEis und WiLCKEN, Grundziige und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde.

2 Bde. (1912).
MoFFATT,
J.,
The New Testament.

Beitrage
A New
MoMMSEN,
,
T.,
zur Lehre der griech.
Translation (1913). Prapositionen
(1886-1895).
Die Prap.
B.,
Monro, D.
crvp und nera bei den nachhom. Epikern (1879). Homeric Grammar (1882). 2d ed. (1891). First
ed. used.
Moulton; J. H., A Grammar of N. T. Greek. mena (1906). 3d ed. (1908).

,
Vol.
I,
Prolego-
Characteristics of
N. T. Greek (The Expositor,
1904).
Einleitung in die Sprache des N. T. (1911).
pp. 271-282; 1903, pp. 104-121, 423-439.
Grammatical Notes from the Papyri (The Expositor, 1901, The Classical ReIntroduction to N. T. Greek (1895).
view, 1901, pp. 31-37, 434-441; 1904, pp. 106-112, 151-155).

,
2d
ed. (1904).
Language of Christ (Hastings' One-vol. D. B., 1909). N. T. Greek in the Light of Modern Discovery (Cambr.
Bibl. Essays, 1909, pp. 461-505).
The Science of Language (1903). Moulton, W. F., and Geden, A. S., A Concordance
,
to the Greek Testament (1897). Moulton and Milligan, Lexical Notes from the Papyri (The Expos., 1908). A Lexicon of N. T. Greek based on these "Notes" is
,
announced. MozLEY, F. W., Notes on the Bibl. Use of the Present and Aorist Imperative (Journ. of Theol. Stud., 1903, iv, pp. 279-282). MuLLACH, F., Grammatik d. griech. Vulgarsprache (1856). MtJLLER, H. C, Hist. Gramm. d. hellen. Sprache (1891). MtJLLER, I., Handbuch d. klass. Altertumswissenschaft (1885 ). MtJLLER, Max, Three Lectures on the Science of Language (1891). Murray, G., A History of Ancient Greek Lit. (1897). MuTZBAUER, C, Die Grundbedeutung des Konjunktivs und Optativs und ihre Entwick. im Griech. (1908). Die Grundlagen der griech. Tempuslehre und des hom. Tempusgebrauchs. I (1893), II (1909).
XXXii

E., Beitrage zur
NEW TESTAMENT
altgriech. Volks-
Nachmanson,
,
Kenntnis der
sprache (1910). Epigraphisch-grammatische

1912).
Bemerkungen
(Eranos
11,
Laute und Formen der magnetischen Inschriften (1903). e (1905). Nageli, T., Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus. a
,
Navarre, Etude
116-130).
sur les particules grecques (R. E. A.,
vii,
pp.
Nestle,
,
E., Einfiihrung in das griech.
N. T.
2.
Aufl.
(1899).
Introd. to the Textual Crit. of the N. T. (Tr. 1901).
Novum Testamentum
Graece.
8th ed. (1910).
Septuagint (Hastings' D. B., 1902). Septuaginta-Studien. I-V (1886-1907).
Zum
neutest. Griechisch (Z. N. W.,
vii,
1906).
'
Neubauer, Studia Bibhca (1885). N. k. Z., Neue kirchhche Zeitschrift (Leipzig). N. Jahrb. U. Alt, Neue Jahrbiieher fiir das
(Leipzig).
klass.
Altertum
NiLssoN, Kausalsatze im Griech. bis Aristoteles. I., Die Poesie. NoRDEN, E., Die antike Kunstprosa. 2. Aufl. (1909). Oertel, H., Lectures on tlie Study of Language (1902).
Ogden, De
infinitivi finalis vel consecutivi constr.
apud
priscos
poetas Graecos (1913). Paley, Greek Particles and their Combinations (1881). Pallis, A., A Few Notes on the Gospel (1903). The N. T. (Gospels) in modern 'H Nea ^la^r]Kr) (1902). Greek vernacular. Pater, W., The Renaissance (1904). Paul, H., Principles of the History of Language (1888). Tr. Petersen, W., Greek Diminutives in -lov (1910). Pfeifauf, Der Artikel vor Personen- und Gotternamen bei Thuk.
,
und Herod. (1908). Pfister, Die parataktische Darstellungsform in der volkstiimhchen Erzahlung (Woch. f. klass. Phil, 1911, pp. 809-813).
Ph. W., Philologische Wochenschrift. Ph. Z., Philologus: Zeitschrift f. d. kl. Alt. (Gottingen). Postgate, J. p.. Contrasts of Oh and M?? (Cambr. Phil. Jour., 1886). Prellwitz, Etym. Worterbuch d. griech. Sprache (1893). 2d ed.
(1905).
Preuschen, E., Vollstandiges griechisch-deutsches Handworterbuch zu den Schriften d. N. T. und d. ubrigen urchristlichen
Literatur (1908).
LIST OF
Pr. Rev.,

(Princeton).
XXxiii
The Princeton Review

J.,
PsiCHARi,
Essai sur
le
grec de la Septante (Rev. des etudes
juives, April, 1908).

,
Essais de grammaire historique neo-grecque (1886-1889).
Radermacher, L., Neut. Grammatik. Das Griechisch des N. T. im Zusammenhang mit der Volkssprache (1911). Ramsay, W. M., Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia. 2 vols. (1895,
1897).
,
St.
Paul the Traveller (1896).
R. E., Herzog-Hauck's Realencyclopadie. R. E. Gr., Revue des etudes grecques (Paris).
Reffel, tJber den Sprachgebr. d. Agathias. Reik, Der Opt. bei Polyb. und Philo (1907). Reinach, S., Pap. grecs et demotiques (1905).
Reinhold, H., De graecitate Patrum (1898). Reisart, Zur Attraktion der Relativsatze in der griech. Prosa. Reitzenstein, Geschichte d. griech. Etym. (1897). Renaud, The Distributed Emphasis of the Pers. Pronoun (1884). Rev. and Exp., The Review and Expositor (Louisville). Rev. d. Ling., Revue de Linguistique de la Phil, comparee (Paris).
Rev.
d.
Ph.,
Rev. of
Revue de Philologie (Paris). Th. & Ph., Review of Theology and Philosophy (Edin.
burgh)
Rh. M., Rheinisches
Museum
(Bonn).
et
Ridgeway, W., The Early Age of Greece. Vol. I (1901). RiEMANN and Goelzer, Grammaire Comparee du Grec
Latin.
I (1897), II (1901).
ist
du
RiES,
Was
Syntax? (1894).
Roberts,
Short Proof that Greek was the Language of Jesus
(1893).
Roberts-Gardner, Introduction to Greek Epigraphy (1883). Robertson, A. T. A Short Grammar of the Greek N. T. (1908).
3d
,
ed. (1912).
Syllabus on N. T. Greek Syntax (1900).
Robertson-Bonaccorsi, Breve grammatica del Nuovo Testamento greco (1910). Robertson-Grosheide, Beknopte Grammatica op het Grieksche Nieuwe Testament (1912). Robertson-Montet, Grammaire du grec du N. T. (1911). Robertson-Stocks, KurzgefaBte Grammatik des neut. Griechisch
(1911).
Rose,
A., Christian
Greece and Living Greek (1898).
XXxiv
NEW TESTAMENT
RossBERG, C,
RouFFiAC,
J.,
De
prapos.
graecamm
in chartis aegyptiis ptolem.
aetatis usu (1909).
Recherches sur
les caracteres
du grec dans
le
N. T.
d'apres les inscriptions de Priene (1911). Rutherford, W. G., A Chapter in the History of Annotation
(1905).
,
The New Phrynichus
(1881).
RiJGER, Prap. bei Joh. Antiochenus (1896). Priip. bei Pausanias (1889). Sand AY, W., The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel (1905). Sandys, J. E., A History of Classical Scholarship. I-III (1906,
1908).
Sayce, a. H., Introduction to the Science of Language (1880).
Language (Encyc. Brit., Uth ed., 1910). Principles of Comparative Philology (1875). ScHAEFER, Das Partizip des Aor. bei d. Tragikern (1894). ScHAFF, p., A Companion to the Greek N. T. and Engl. Vers.
, ,
3d ed. (1889). ScHANZ, M., Beitrage zur histor. Syntax d. griech. Sprache (1882). Schilling, D., Comm. exeg.-philol. im Hebraism, d. N. T. (1886). ScHiRLiTZ, S. C, Anleitung zur Kenntnis d. neut. Grundsprache
(1863).
ScHLACHTER,
Statist.
Unters. iiber den Gebr. der
Temp, und
Modi
bei einzelnen griech. Schriftst. (1908).
ScHLAGETER, J., Der Wortschatz d. auCerhalb Attikas gefundenen Inschriften (1912). Zur Laut- und Formenlehre d. aufi. Att. gef attischen Inschr.
,
.
(1908).
Schleicher, A., Compendium

4. Aufl. (1876).
d. vergl.
Gr. d. indog. Sprachen.
ScHMiD, J., tJber den gnomischen Aor. des Griech. (1894). ScHMiD, W., Der Atticismus in seinen Hauptvertretern. 4 Bde.
(1887-1897).
Schmidt,
De
Articulo in nominibus propiis
apud
Att. scriptores
(1890).
Schmidt, W., De Flavii Josephi elocutione (1894). ScHMiTT, P., tJber den Ursprung des Substantivsatzes mit Relativpartikeln im Griech. (1889). Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten (1862). Schroeder, tlber die form. Untersch. d. Redet. im Griech. und
Lat. (1874).
LIST OF
XXXV
ScHUERER,
Christ.
A.,
History of the Jew. P. in the Time of Jesus
Tr. by Macpherson. ScHULZE, Der schriftsteller. Charakter unci Wert des Petrus, Judas und Jakobus (1802). ScHULZE, W., Graeca Latina (1901). Schwab, O., Hist. Syntax der griech. Komparative in d. klass. Lit. Heft I (1893), II (1894), III (1895). ScHWEiZER, E., Bericht iiber die Forschungen auf dem Gebiet der griech, Sprachw. mit Ausschlufi der Koine und der Dialekte in den Jahren 1890-1903 (Bursian's Jahresbericht, cxx, 1904,
5 vols. (1898).
pp. 1-152).
,
Die griech. Sprache in Zeit

vii, viii).
d. Hellen. (N. Jahrb.
f.
kl. Alt.,
1901,
,
Grammatik der pergamen.
Inschriften (1898).
f.
Neugriech. Sjmtax und altgriech. (N. Jahrb.

E.,
kl. Alt.,
1908,
pp. 498-507).
ScHWYZER (Schweizer),
(1902).
Die Weltsprachen des Altertums

(Bibl. Sacra, April,
ScoMP, H. A., The Case Absolute in the N. T.

1902).
Seymour, T. D., Homeric Language and Verse Life in the Homeric Age (1907). The Use of the Gk. Aor. Part. (Trans. Am.
,
,
(1902).
Phil.
Assoc, XII,
1881, pp. 88
S. H.,
ff.).
Sanday and Headlam on Romans. Sharp, G., Remarks on the Definitive Article in the Greek of the N. T. (1803). Sheffield, A. D., Grammar and Thinking (1912). SiMCOX, W. H., The Language of the N. T. (1890).
SiMONSON,
of the N. T. Greek Grammar. 2 vols. (1903, 1908). Smith, R. H., The Theory of Conditional Sentences in Greek and
,
The Writers
A.,
Latin (1894).
Smyth, H. W., The Sounds and Inflexions of Greek Dialects.

Ionic (1894).
I,
SoDEN, H. VON, Die Schriften des N. T. in ihrer altesten erreichbaren Textgestalt. Teil I, Untersuch. (1902-1910) Teil II, Text und Apparat (1913). Griechisches N. T. Text mit kurzem Apparat (1913). SoLMSEN, F., Beitrage zur griech. Wortforschung (1909).
; ,
,
Inscriptiones graecae selectae (1905).
Untersuch. zur griech. Laut- und Verslehre (1901).
XXXvi

A.,
Sophocles, E.
Greek Lexicon
of the
Roman and
Byzantine
Period (1888).
SouTER, A., Novum Testamentum Graece (1910). The Revisers' Text with a New Apparatus Criticus. Spieker, The Gen. Abs. in the Attic Orators (Am. J. of Ph., VI,
pp. 310-343).
SL
B.,
Stahl,
Standard Bible Dictionary (Ed. by M. W. Jacobus, 1909). J. M., Kritisch-historische Syntax des griech. Verbums
der klass. Zeit. (1907).
Staurac, tjber den Gebr. d. Gen. bei Herodot. Steinthal, H., Geschichte der Sprachwiss. bei den Griech. und Romern. 2. Aufl. (1890-1891). Introduction to the Psychology and Science of Language
,
(1900).
Sterenbourg, The Use
of the
Cond. Sentence in the Alex. Ver-
sion of the Pentateuch (1908). Sterrett, J. R. S., Homer's Ihad with Grammar (1907). Stocks, H., Das neutestamentliche Griechisch im Lichte der modernen Sprachforschung (Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift, XXIV.
Jahrgang, 633-700).
Strack, H. L., Grammatik des bibl. Aram. 4. Aufl. (1905). Strong, Logeman and Wheeler, Introduction to the Study of the History of Lang. (1891). Sturm, J., Geschichtl. Entwick. der Konstrukt. mit Upiu (1882). Sturtevant, Studies in Greek Noun Formation (01. Philol., VII,
4, 1912).
SusEMiHL, Gesch. der griech.

II (1892).
Lit. in der Alexandrinerzeit. I (1891),
SiJTTERLiN, Gesch. der Verba denom. in Altgriech. (1891).
Sweet, History of Language (1900). SwETE, H. B., Introduction to the O. T. in Greek (1900). The Apocalypse of St. John (1906). The 0. T. in Greek according to the Septuagint
,
,
(1887).
3 vols.
SzuczuRAT, De Inf. Hom. Usu (1902). Telfy, Chron. und Topogr. der griech. Ausspr. nach
der Inschr. (1893).
d.
Zeugnisse
Vol.
Thackeray, H.
,
St.,
A Grammar
of the O. T. in Greek.
I,
Introduction, Orthography and Accidence (1909).
Relation of St. Paul to Contemporary Thought (1900). Thayer, J. H., Greek-Enghsh Lexicon of the N. T. (1887). Language of the N. T. (Hastings' D. B., 1900).
,
LIST OF
XXXVli
Theimer,
a., Beitrage zur
Kenntnis des Sprachgebr. im N. T.
(1896).
Th. L.-Z., Theologische Literaturzeitung (Leipzig).

Th. R., Theologische
Th. St. u. Kr., Theol. Studicn
Thieme, G., N. T. (1906). Tholuck, Beitrage zur Spracherklarung des N. T. Thompson, E. M., Handbook of Greek and Latin Palaeography
(1893).
Rundschau (Tubingen). und Kritiken (Gotha). Die Inschr. von Magnesia am Maander und das
New
ed. (1913).
Thompson, F. E., A Syntax of Attic Greek. New ed. (1907). Thomson, J. E. H., The Language of Palestine during the Time of Our Lord (Temple Bible Diet.). Thomson, P., The Greek Tenses in the N. T. (1895). Thouvenin, p., Les Negations dans le N. T. (Revue de Philologie,
1894).
Thumb,
,
A., Die Forsch. liber die hellen. Spr. in den Jahren 1902-1904 (Arch. f. Pap. 3, pp. 443-473). Die griech. Sprache im Zeitalter des Hellenismus (1901). Die sprachgesch. Stell. des bibl. Griech. (Theol. Rund., 1902).
Handbuch Handbuch Handbuch
der griech. Dial. (1909).

d. neugriech.
Volkssprache.
I,
2.
Aufl. (1910).
des Sanskrits.
Grammatik
(1905).
Unters. iiber d. Sp. Asper

of
im Griech.
the
(1889).
Thumb-Angus, Handbook
(1912).
Modern Greek Vernacular

by C. Tischendorf.
Edi-
TiscH.,
tio
Novum Testamentum
octava critica major.
Graece,
2 vols. (1869-1872).
Trench, R. C., Synonyms of the N. T. 11th ed. (1890). Deutsche Ausgabe von Werner (1907). TsouNTAS and Manatt, The Mycenaean Age (1897). Tucker, T. G., Litroduction to the Natural History of Language
(1908).
Vandacle, L'Optatif Grec (1897). Veitch, W., Greek Verbs, Irregular and Defective. 2d ed. (1871). Viereck, p.. Die griech. Papyruskunde (1899-1905). 34. Jahrgang 1906. UL Abt. (1907). Die Papyrusliteratur in den 70 Jahren bis 1898 (1900). 27. Jahrgang 1899. IIL Abt. Sermo Graecus quo senatus populusque Romanus (1888). ViERKE, De AT7 Particulae cum Indicative Conjunctae Usu An, ,
tiquiore (1876).
XXXVlll
NEW TESTAMENT
Modern Greek
le
Vincent and Dickson,

ViTEAU,
J.,
A Handbook
du N. T.
to
(1887).
Essai sur la syntaxe des voix dans

grec
grec
du N. T.
Le Sujet
Stil
(Rev. de Phil., 1894).

,
Etude sur
le
I,
Le Verbe (1893)
II,
(1896).
VoGEL, H., Zur Charakteristik des Lukas nach Sprache und

(1899).
d. hom. Dial. (1889). VoLKER, F., Papyrorum graecorum syntaxis specimen (1900). Syntax d. griech. Papyri. I, Der Artikel (1903). VoTAW, C. W., The Use of the Infinitive in Bibl. Greek (1896). Wackernagel, J., Das Dehnungsgesetz der griech. Komposita
,
Vogrinz, Grammatik
(1889).
,
Die hellenistische Gemeinsprache. (Die Kult.

I,
d.
Gegenwart,
Tl.
,
Abt.
viii,
1905, pp. 98-305).
Wagner,
Die Sprache des Plut. etc. Teile I, II (1895-1896). R., Questiones de epigrammatis graecis ex lapidibus collectis grammaticae (1883). Walch, Observationes in Matt, ex graecis inscriptionibus (1779). Walker, D., Elementary Greek Syntax (1897). Warfield, B. B., An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of
the N. T.
in
New
ed. (1914).
Warren, Winifred,
Weber,
P.,
Study
of Conjunctional
Temporal Clauses
I (1884),
Thucyd. (1897).
Entwick. der Absichtssatze.
Heft
Heft II
et
(1885).
Wecklein, Curae epigraphicae ad grammaticam graecam

poetas scenicos pertinentes (1869).
ad
Weiss,
B.,
Der Gebr. des

ff.).
Artikels bei den
Gottesnamen (Th.
Stu. u. Krit., 1911, pp. 319-392).

,
Textkritik (1894
J.,
Weiss,
2.
Beitrage zur paulinischen Rhetorik (1897).

J.,
Wellhausen,
Einl. in
die
drei
ersten Evangelien
(1905).
Ausg. (1911). Wendland, p., Christentum und Hellenismus (1907).

,
Hellen.-rom. Kultur.
lat.
3. Aufl. (1912).
Wesseley, C, Die
,
Elemente in
d.
Gracitat d. agypt. Pap.
(Wien. Stud., xxiv, 1902).

Lit. der
Papyruskunde (Stud, zur Palaogr. und Pap.
I,
1901, pp. 17-20; II, 1902, pp. 43-52).

,
Proleg.
ad papyrorum graecorum novam collectionem eden-
dam
(1883).
LIST OF "WORKS
MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO
XXXIX
Westcott, B.
Greek.
,
Language of the N. T. (Smith's B. D.). W. H., Westcott and Hort's Edition of the N. T. in the Original
F.,
Numerous
eds.
The N.
T. in the Original Greek.
Introduction and Appen-
dix (1882).
Weymouth, On
and
the Rendering into English of the Greek Aorist
Perfect (1894).
I.,
Wheeler, B.
Science of
The Whence and the Whither

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

3-238.
,
d.
Gegenw., 1907, Tl.
I,
Abt.
viii,
pp.
3. Aufl.
1912).
tjber die Entstehung der griech. Schriftsprachen (Verf.
deutscher Phil, und Schulm., 1879, pp. 36^1).
WiLCKEN,
in den U., Die Forschungen tiber die hellen. Spr. Jahren 1902-1904 (Archiv f. Pap., 1906, pp. 443-473).
Wilhelm, a., Beitrage zur griech. Inschriftenkunde (1909). WiLHELMUs, De Modo Irreali qui Vocatur (1881). WiLKE, Neutestamentliche Rhetorik (1843). Williams, C. B., The Participle in the Book of Acts (1908). Wilson, A. J., Emphasis in the N. T. (Jour, of Th. Stud., VIII,
pp. 75ff.).
Winer, G.
,
B.,
De verborum cum
praep. compos, in N. T.
Usu
(1834-1843).
Gramm. d. neut. Sprachidioms (1822). 7. Aufl. von Liinemann (1867). Winer-Masson, a Grammar of the N. T. Gk. (1859). WiNER-MouLTON, A Treatise of the Grammar of N. T. Gk. 3d
ed. (1882).
Various eds.
Aufl.
WiNER-ScHMiEDEL, Winer's Grammatik des neutest. Sprachidioms.

8.
(1894).
of the
Winer-Thayer,
Various eds.
a Grammar
Idiom
of the
N. T. (1869).
WiTKOWSKi,
,
St.,
Bericht iiber die Lit. zur Koine aus den Jahren
1898-1902 (Bursian's Jahrb.

(Jahresber.
f.
CXX, 1904, pp. 153-256). Bericht iiber die Lit. zur Koine aus den Jahren 1903-1906
Alt., 1912, III. Bd., 159).
Xl
WiTKOWSKi, St., Epistulae privatae graecae (1906). Prodromus grammaticae papyrorum graecarum Lagidarum (1897).
,
aetatis
Woch.
/.
M. Ph., Wochenschrift
J.,
fiir
klassische Philologie.
of the
Wright,
Comparative Grammar
2.
Greek Language
Aufl. (1911
f.).
(1912).
WuNDT,
Volkerpsychologie.
Einl. in das
Aufl. (1904).
3.
Young, Language
Zahn, Th.,
,
of Christ (Hastings'
D. C. G.).
I,
N. T.
Tr.
Bd.
I (1906), II (1907).
On
the Language of Palestine.
Vol.
pp. 1-72.
Introduc-
tion to the N. T.
by Jacobus
(1909).
griech.
Zarncke,
(1890).
E.,
Die Entstehung der

Inf.
Literatursprachen
in
Zeitlin,
The Ace. with
and Some Kindred Constrs.
Eng-
lish (1908).
Zezschwitz, Profangrac. und bibl. Sprachg. (1859). ZiEMER, Vergl. Syntax der indog. Kompar. (1884). Z. N.-T. W., Zeitschrift fiir neut. Wissenschaft (GieBen).
PART
INTEODUCTION
CHAPTER
NEW MATERIAL
Testament Greek
Perhaps the ideal grammar of the New It is a supremely difficult task to interpret accurately the forms of human speech, for they have life and change with the years. But few themes have
The
Ideal
Grammar?
may
never be written.
possessed greater charm for the best furnished scholars of the
world than the study of language.^ The language of the N. T. has a special interest by reason of the message that it bears. Every word and phrase calls for minute investigation where so much is at stake. It is the task and the duty of the N. T. student to apply the results of linguistic
research to the Greek of the N. T.
But, strange to say, this has

in the
not been adequately done.^
New
Testament study has made remarkable progress
sphere of criticism, history and interpretation, but has lagged
behind in this department.

of the subject
brief survey of the literary history
shows it. It was Winer who in 1822 made a I. The Pre-Winer Period. new epoch in N. T. grammatical study by his Neutestamentliches
Sprachidiom.
It
is
hardly possible for the student of the present

inanities
day to enter into sympathy with the
and
sinuosities
that characterized the previous treatises on the N. T. idiom.
Not
was
alone in the controversy between the Purists and Hebraists

this true,
but writers
like Storr,
by a
secret
system of quid
pro quo, cut the Gordian knot of grammatical difficulty by explaining one term as used for another, one preposition for another, one case for another, etc.
1
As a
university tutor
Winer
See
J.
Classen,
De
humani
ingenii inventa,
Gr. Graecae Primordiis, 1S29, p. 1, who says: "Inter quae diuturna consuetudine quasi naturae iura adepta
sunt, nullum fere magis invaluit et pervulgatuni est, quani grannnaticae ratio
ct usus."
rational
despite the enormous advance since the days of Winer toward a and unitary conception of the N. T. language, we still labour to-day under the remains of the old conceptions." Samuel Dickey, Prince. Thcol.
2
"And
Rev., Oct., 1903,
"New
Points of View."
3
combated "this absurd system of interpretation," and not without success in spite of receiving some sneers. He had the temerity to insist on this order of interpretation: grammatical,
historical, theological.
He
adhered to his task and lived to see
"an enlightened philology, as deduced and taught by Herrmann and his school," triumph over the previous "unbridled license."^ II. The Service of Winer. It must be said, however, that (a) Winer's Inconsistencies. great as was the service of Winer to this science, he did not at all
points carry out consistently his own principles, for he often explained one tense as used for another. He was not able to rise
entirely
above the point
of
view of
his
time nor to
make
persist-
ent application of the philosophical grammar. It is to be borne in mind also that the great science of comparative philology had
not revolutionized linguistic study when Winer first wrote. In a true sense he was a pathfinder. (6) Winer Epoch-Making. Winer IN English. But none the less his work has been the epoch-making one for N. T. study. After his death Dr. Gottlieb Liinemann revised and improved the NeutestamentUcJies Sprachidwm. Translations of Winer's Grammatik into English were first made by Prof. Masson of Edinburgh, then by Prof. Thayer of Harvard (revision of Masson), and finally by Prof. W. F. Moulton of Cambridge, who added
excellent footnotes, especially concerning points in
modern Greek.
The
various editions of Winer-Thayer and Winer-Moulton have served nearly two generations of English and American scholars.
But uow at last Prof. Schmiedel of Ziirich is (c) ScHMiEDEL. thoroughly revising Winer's Grammatik, but it is proceeding slowly and does not radically change Winer's method, though Deissmann,^ use is made of much of the modern knowledge.^ indeed, expresses disappointment in this regard concerning
Schmiedel's work as being far "too much Winer and too little Schmiedel." But Deissmann concedes that Schmiedel's work "marks a characteristic and decisive turning-point in N. T.
philology."
1
J.
H. Thayer
2
See Pref to the sixth and last ed. by Winer himself as translated by Dr. in the seventh and enlarged ed. of 1869. Winer's Gr. des neutest. Sprachid. 8. Aufl. neu bearbeitet von Dr. Paul
.
Wilhelm Schmiedel, 1894. He adds, "Der 3 Die sprachl. Erforsch. der griech. Bibel, 1898, p. 20. alte Winer war seiner Zeit ein Protest des philologischen Gewissens gegen
die Willktir eines
p. 63.
anmaCenden Empiricismus."
Cf. also Exp., Jan., 1908,
NEW MATERIAL
(d)
Buttmann's Grammatik des neutestamentlichen had appeared in 1859 and was translated by Thayer as Buttmann's Grammar ofN.T. Greek (1873), an able work.
Sprachgebrauchs
(e)
BuTTMANN.
Blass.
It is
not
till
Griechisch
by
Prof. Blass in 1896 that

in this field.
the Grammatik des neutedamentlichen any other adequate gramBlass departs a

little
mar appears
tional
And
from tradi-
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.
Period. It is just in the last decade that has become possible to make a real advance in New Testament grammatical study. The discovery and investigation that
^
^m. The Modern
it.
have characterized every department of knowledge have borne

rich fruit here also.
(a) Deissmann. Deissmann^ sees rightly the immensity of the task imposed upon the N. T. grammarian by the very richness of the new discoveries. He likewise properly condemns the too fre-
quent isolation of the N. T. Greek from the so-called "profane Greek." 3 Deissmann has justly pointed out that the terms "profane" and "bibhcal" do not stand in linguistic contrast, but
rather "classical" and "biblical."
Even
practical identity of biblical with the of the popular style.*

It
here he insists on the contemporary later Greek

his Bibelstudien,
his
was Neue
in 1895 that
Deissmann published
and
Bibelstudien followed in 1897.
The new
era has
now
fairly
begun.
by Grieve appeared
1
In 1901 the English translation of both volumes as Bible Studies. In 1907 came the Philol-
First ed. 1898, second ed. 1905, as Blass' Gr. of N. T. Gk. revision work of Blass (the 4th German edition) by Dr. A. Debrunner has appeared as these pages are going through the press.
of the
2 Die sprachl. Erforsch. der griech. Bibel, 1898, p. 5: "Durch neue Erkenntnisse befruchtet steht die griechische Philologie gegenwiirtig im Zeichen eincr
vielverheiCenden Renaissance, die fordert von der sprachlichen Erforschung der griechischen Bibel, daO sie in engste Fiihlung trete mit der historischen Erforschung der griechischen Sprache."
lb., p. 7.
Like, for instance, Zezschwitz, Profangrac.
und
bibl.
Sprachg
1859.
* Die Spr. der griech. Bibel, Theol. Rnnds., 1898, pp. 4G3-472. He aptly says: "Nicht die Profangriicitat ist dor sprachgeschichtliche Gegensatz zur
'biblischen,' sondern das classische Griechisch. Die neueren Funde zur GeBchichte der griechischen Si)rache zeigen, dafi die Eigontiinilichkeitcn des
'biblischen'
ten auch der Syntax)
Formen- und Wortschatzos (bei don original-griechischon Schrifim groBen und ganzon Eigentiinilichkeiton des spiiteren
unliterarischen Griechisch iiberhaupt sind."
und zwar zumeist des
His Licht vom Osten (1908) was his next most important work (Light from the Ancient East, 1910, translated by Strachan). See Bibliography for full list of his books. The
ogy of the Bible.
contribution of Deissmann
(b)
is
largely in the field of lexicography.
Thumb.
It
was
in 1901 that A.
Thumb
published his great
Die griechische Sprache im Zeitalter des Helbook on the which has done so much to give the true picture of the lenismus, already in 1895 produced his Handbuch der neuhad KOLvrj. He In 1912 the second enlarged edition Volkssprache. griechischen issued in English dress, by S. Angus, as Handbook of Modern Greek Vernacular. This book at once took front place for the
kolvt],
study of the modern Greek by English students. It is the only book in English that confines itself to the vernacular. In 1895, J. H. Moulton, son of W. F, Moulton, (c) MouLTON. the translator of Winer, produced his Introduction to N. T. Greek, in a noble linguistic succession. In 1901 he began to publish in The Classical Review and in The Expositor, "Grammatical Notes from the Papyri," which attracted instant attention by their freshness and pertinency. In 1906 appeared his now famous Prolegomena, vol. I, of A Grammar of N. T. Greek, which
reached the third edition by 1908. With great ability Moulton took the cue from Deissmann and used the papyri for grammatical He demonstrated that the Greek of the N. T. is in purposes. the main just the vernacular kolvt] of the papyri. In 1911 the Prolegomena appeared in German as Einleitung in die Sprache des
Neuen
(d)
all
Testaments.
Other Contributions.
The
It is
not possible to mention here

field of
is still
N. T. grammar (see found in the books of Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (1889); Hoole, The Classical Element in the N. T. (1888); Simcox, The Language of the N. T. (1890) Schaff A Companion to the Greek Testament and English
the names of the workers in the
old standpoint
Bibliography).
Versio7i (1889); Viteau,
Etude sur
le
grec
is
du N. T.
Le
Verbe
(1893);
Le Sujet
(1896).
The same
thing
true of Abbott's Jo-
hannine Vocabidary (1905) and Johannine Grammar (1906); Burton's Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the N. T. Greek (1888, In Kennedy's third ed. 1909) is yet a genuine contribution. transition toward distinct Sources of N. T. Greek (1895) we see a
N. T. grammar. In 1911 Radermacher's Neutestamentliche Grammatik is in fact more a grammar of the kocvti than of the N. T., as it is designed to be an Einleitung. The author's Short Grammar of the Greek N. T. (1908) gives the new
the
new
era of
NEW MATERIAL
knowledge in a succinct form. The Italian translation (1910) by Bonaccorsi has additional notes by the translator. Stocks (1911) made numerous additions to the Laut- und Formenlehre of the
Grosheide in the Dutch translation (1912) has The French edition (1911) by Montet is mainly just a translation. The third enlarged edition in English appeared in 1912. Many special treatises of great value have appeared (see Bibliography), by men like Angus,
edition.
German made a
revision of the whole book.
Buttmann, Heinrici, Tliieme, Vogel, Votaw, J. Weiss, Wellhausen. (e) Richness of Material. Now indeed it is the extent of the material demanding examination that causes embarrassment. But only twenty years ago K. Krumbacher^ lamented that it was not possible to give "a comprehensive presentation of the Greek language" because of the many points on which work must be done beforehand. But we have come far in the meantime. The task is now possible, though gigantic and well-nigh insurmountable. But it is not for us moderns to boast because of the material that has come to our hand. We need first to use it. Dieterich^
has well said that the general truth that progress is from error to its confirmation also in the history of the development that the Greek language has received in the last two thoutruth "finds
sand years."
By
the induction of a wider range of facts
we can
a Dionysius Thrax,^ one of the Alexandrian fathers of the old Greek grammar (circa 100 B.C.),
this is
eliminate errors arising from false generalizations.
But
slow process that
calls for patience.
said: Tpa/xfiariK-f] kaTLV efiireLpia twv irapa TrotTjraTs

4>ev(nv ws
krcl
re
/cat
avyypais
a disDionysius Thrax in one respect, for he contends that students are taught too much grammar and too little language.
ciple of
to ttoXv Xeyopikvwv.
Andrew Lang^ indeed
They know the grammars and not the tongue. can be given of the sources of the new material
matical study.
bare outline
for such
gram-
Kuhn's Zeits. fur vergl. Sprach"Eine zusammenhiingende Darstellung des Entwicklungsganges der griechischen Sprache ist gegenwiirtig nicht moglich. Auf allzu vielen Pimkten eines langen und viel verschlungenen Weges gcbricht es an den Vorarbeiten, welche fiir ein solches Untcrnchmen unerlilBlich sintl." 2 Unters. zur Gesch. der griech. Spr. von der hell. Zeit bis zuni 10. Jahrh.
'
Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr.,
forsch.,
1882, p. 484:
n. Chr., 1898, p. x.
'
As quoted
mentions
in
Bekker, Anec. Graeca (1816), vol.
II, p.
629.
Dionysius
re nai urroKplffis
iroi-
also
six ixkpn in
grammar:
dLvayviisaiz,
evpr](Ti.s,
*
i^Tiyncns,
yXwaawv
piuv irpSxei-pos inroSoais, ervnoXoylas

tjhAtwv.
ifaXoylas iK\oyi(rn6s,
Post, Lond.,
a generous allowance truly!
Morning
May 5, 1905.
8
IV.
(a)
The New Grammatical Equipment for N. T. Study. Comparative Philology. We must consider the great advance in comparative philology. The next chapter will deal somewhat at length with various phases of the historical method
of linguistic study.
1.
The Linguistic Revolution.

It
in the study of language.
A revolution has been wrought must be confessed that grammatical

What
investigation has not always been conducted on the inductive principle nor according to the historical method. Too often the
rule has
been drawn from a limited range of
facts.
is
afterwards found to conflict with a rule is called an ''exception." Soon the exceptions equal or surpass the rule. Unfortunately the ancients did not have the benefit of our distinctions of "regular"
Metaphysical speculation with lofty superiis sometimes charged upon grammarians.^ "Grammar and logic do not coincide." ^ Comparative grammar is merely the historical method applied to several languages to-
and "irregular."
ority
to
the facts
gether instead of only one.^

2.
A
its
had
The Greek has Sketch of Greek Grammatical History. of kindred history the own history, but it is related to
tongues.
the the days of Plato's Kratylus do^vnward convention originated by language Greek disputed as to whether Indeed formal Greek grammar (vofxco) or by nature {(t)vaeL)."*
"From
was the comparison with the Latin and began "with Dionysius Thrax, who utilized the philological lucubrations of Aristotle and the Alexandrian critics for the sake of teaching Greek to the sons
of the aristocratic contemporaries of
Pompey
at Ilome."^
His
is
Greek grammar
the cause of
is still
in existence in Bekker's Anecdota,^
and
much
grotesque etymology since.'
This period of grammatical activity came after the great creative period of Greek literature was over, and in Alexandria, not
1
So Dr. John H. Kerr, sometime Prof,

^
of
N. T.
in the Pac. Theol. Sem.,
in conversation with me.

3
lb.,
pp.
"Comparative
historical
4
Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888, p. 18. ff. So Oertel, Lect. on the Study of Lang., 1901, p. 42, grammar in Schleicher's sense is in its essence nothing but
Sayce, Prin. of
lb., p. 261.
grammar by the comparative method." Comp. Philol., 1875, p. 259 f.
Op. dt., pp. 629-643. See Sayce, Intr. to the Sci. of Lang., 1880, vol. I, p. 19 f.; Dionysius Thrax's rkx^v ypa/xfiarLKr) was developed into a system by ApoUonius Dyscolus (ii/A.D.) and his son Herodian. Dionysius Thrax was born b.c. 166. Dyscolus WTote a systematic Gk. Syntax of accentuation in 20 books (known to
us only in epitome) about 200 a.d.
NEW MATERIAL
in Athens.^
Rhetoric was scientifically developed by Aristotle
long before there was a scientific syntax. Aristotle perfected logical analysis of style before there was historical grammar.^ With
Aristotle 6 ypan/j-aTLKos
ters (ypaufxaTo).
was one that busied himself with the

not ay pa nnaros;
fi
let-
He was
ypaufxaTui] then
had
and was exegetical.^ Plato does not treat grammar, though the substantive and the adjective are distinguished, but only dialectics, metaphysics, logic* The Stoic grammarians, who succeeded Plato and Aristotle, treated language from the logical standpoint and accented its psychological side.^ So the Alexandrian grammarians made ypaufxaTiKr] more like KptTuiJ. They got hold of the right idea, though they did not attain the
to do with the letters
true historical method.*'

ancients, for the
Comparative grammar was not wholly unknown indeed to the Roman grammarians since Varro made a comparison between Greek and Latin words.^ The Roman writers
on grammar defined it as the "scientia recte loquendi et scribendi,"^ and hence came nearer to the truth than did the Alexandrian writers with their Stoic philosophy and exegesis. It has indeed been a hard struggle to reach the light in grammar.^ But Roger Bacon in this ''blooming time" saw that it was necessary for the knowledge of both Greek and Latin to compare them.^^ And Bernhardy in 1829 saw that there was needed a grammaticohistorical discussion of
syntax because of the "distrust of the union of philosophy with grammar." ^^ We needed "the view1
See Jebb in Whibley's Comp. to Gk. Stud., 1905, p. 147 f. See Steinthal, Gesch. der Sprachw. bei den Griech. und Rom.,
2.
Tl.,
1891, p. 179.
3
F. Hoffmann, tjber die Entwickelung des Begriffs der Or. bei den Alien,
1.
1891, p.
*
grammarians were "ohne richtiges historisches Sprachw. etc., 1. Tl., 1863, p. 39). Even in Plato's Kxatylus we do not see "das Ganze in seiner Ganzheit" (p. 40). 6 lb., p. 277 f. For a good discussion of Dion. Thr. see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 34 f.
lb., p. 144.
The
early Gk.
BewuBtsein"
(Steinthal, Gesch. der
8
9
See Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, p. 1. See Ivretschmer, op. cit., p. 4. F. Blass, Hermen. und Krit., 1892, p. 157 f. Steinthal, Gesch. etc., 2. TL, 1891, p. 1, calls this time of struggle "ihre
Blutezeit."
Roger Bacon, Oxford Gk. Gr., edited by Nolan and Hirsch, 1902, p. 27: in hac comparatione Grammaticae Graecae ad Latinum non solum est necessitas propter intelligendam Grammaticam Graecam, sed omnino neceaBarium est ad inteUigentiam Latinae Grammaticae." " Wissensch. Synt. der griech. Spr., 1829, pp. 7, 12.
10
"Et
10
NEW TESTAMENT
point of the historical Syntax." Humboldt is quoted by OerteU as saying: "Linguistic science, as I understand it, must be based upon facts alone, and this collection must be neither one-sided
So Bopp conceived also: "A grammar in the higher scientific sense of the word must be both history and natural science." This is not an unreasonable demand, for it is
nor incomplete."
made
3.
of every other department of science.^ The Discovery of Sanskrit. It is a transcendent fact which has revolutionized grammatical research. The discovery of Sanskrit by Sir William Jones is what did it. In 1786 he wrote thus^: "The Sanskrit language, whatever may be its antiquity, is of wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either; yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and the forms of grammar, than could have been produced by accident; so strong that no philologer could examine all the three without believing them to have sprung from some common source which no longer exists. There is a similar reason, though not so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothic and the Celtic, though blended with a different idiom, had the same origin with
the Sanskrit."
He saw
though not all of it, and Slav group of languages, the Iranian, Italic, Armenian and Albanian belong to the same Aryan, Indo-Germanic or IndoEuropean family as it is variously called. 4. From Bopp to Brugmann. But Bopp^ is the real founder of comparative philology. Before Bopp's day "in all grammars the mass of 'irregular' words was at least as great as that of the 'regular' ones, and a rule without exception actually excited
suspicion."^
phonetics.^
1
then the significance of his own discovery, for the Teutonic tongues, the Lithuanian
work names Other great

Pott's great
laid the
foundation of
science are
scientific
in this
new
W. von
Lect. on the Study of Lang., 1901, p. 47.
See C. Herrmann, Philos. Gr., 1858, p. 422: "Die Natur der philosophischen Grammatik war von Anfang an bestimmt worden als die eine Grenzwissenschaft zwischen Philosophie und Philologie." But it is a more objective task now. 8 Cf. Benfey, Gesch. der Sprachw., p. 348. "This brilliant discovery, deJ. H. clared in 1786, practically Ues at the root of all linguistic science."
2
Moulton, Sci. of Lang., 1903, p. See his Vergl. Gr., 1857.

1816.
6 6
4.
He began
pubhcation on the subject in
Study of Lang., 1882, p. 25. Etym. Forsch. auf dem Gebiet der indoger. Spr., 1833-1836.
Delbriick, Intr. to the
NEW MATERIAL
Humboldt,^ Jacob Grimm,^ Schlegel,^ Schleicher,*
11
Max
Muller,^
Curtius/ Verner/ Whitney,^ L. Meyer.^ But in recent years two men, K. Brugmann and B. Delbruck, have organized the previous knowledge into a great monumental
work,
GrundriB
in
der
vergleichenden
Grammatik der indogermais
nischen Syrachen}^
This achievement
as yet the high-water-
comparative grammar. Brugmann has issued a briefer and cheaper edition giving the main results." Delbruck has also a brief treatise on Greek syntax in the light of comparative grammar, ^^ while Brugmann has applied comparative philology to the Laut- und Formenlehre of Greek grammar.^^ In the GrundriB Brugmann has Bd. I, II, while Delbruck treats syntax in Bd. III-V. In the new edition Brugmann has also that part of the syntax which is treated in Vol. Ill and IV of the first edition.
mark
The
is
best discussion of comparative
grammar
for begin-
ners
the second edition of P. Giles's

Greek.^^
ManuaU*
Hatzidakis
successfully undertakes to apply comparative
modern
deed,
grammar to the Riemann and Goelzer have made an exhaustive

There
are, in-
comparison of the Greek and Latin languages.!^
many
interesting discussions of the history

all this
and
principles
growing out of
*
hnguistic development, such as the works
ters.
2
Always mentioned by Bopp with reverence. Deutsche Gr., 1S22. Author of Grimm's law Next to Bopp in influence.
Indische Bibl.
Vergl. Gr. der indoger. Spr., 1876,
of the interchange of let-
<
^ 8
marks the next great advance.

did
Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1866.
He
much to
popularize this study.

vols.
I, II, fifth ed.,
His most enduring work
is
his Prin. of
Gk. Etym.,
1886.
from Grimm's law, according d and g, instead of /, th and h when not immediately followed by the word-accent. 8 Life and Growth of Lang., 1875; Sans. Gr., 1892, etc.
^
The discovery
t
of Verner's law, a variation
to which p,
and
k,
pass into
h,
Vergl. Gr., 1865.
" Bd.
I-V, 1st ed. 1886-1900; 2d ed. 1897;
cf.
also Giles-Hertel, Vergl.
Or., 1896.
" Kurze vergl. Gr., 1902-1904. " Die Grundl. der griech. Synt., 1879.
"
Griech. Gr., 1900,

3.
3. Aufl.; 4. Aufl.,
1913,
by Thumb.
See also G. Meyer,
Griech. Gr.,
16
verm.
Aufl., 1896.
" A Short Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., 1901.
Einl. in die neugr. Gr., 1892.
" Gr. compar6e du Grec et du Lat.: Syntaxc, 1897; Phon6tiquo ct fttudo de Formes, 1901. Cf. also King and Cookson's Prin. of Sound and Inflexion as illustrated in the Gk. and Lat. Lang., 1SS8.
12
of

Jolly ,^
ney,'
Max
Delbruck,2 Sweet,^ Paul," Oertel/ Moulton/ WhitMiiller,^ Sayce.^ It is impossible to write a grammar
of the
Greek N. T. without taking into consideration this new conception of language. No language lives to itself, and least of
It the Greek of the N. T. in the heart of the world-empire. had this science recently use of until that not necessary to say
i*'
all
is
not been made by N. T. grammars.^^

(6)
Advance
in
General Greek Grammar.
great advance
in the study of general
There has been 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 volumes by Blass" and Gerth,i" furnishing a magnificent apparatus Hirt's handbook ^^ gives the modern for the advanced student. knowledge in briefer form. These make use of comparative grammar, while G. Meyer ^^ and Brugmann ^^ are professedly on the
*
Schulgr.
Intr.
und Sprachw.,
Study
of
1874.
Lang., 1882; .5th Germ. ed. 1908. tjber die Resultate der vergl. Synt., 1872. Cf. Wheeler, The Whence and Whither of the Mod. Sci. of Lang., 1905; Henry, Precis de gr. du grec et du latin, .5th ' The Hist, of Lang., 1899. ed., 1894.
*
to the
* ^ 8
Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888; 4th
Germ.
ed. 1909.
Sci. of
Lect. on the
Study of Lang., 1901. Lang, and the Study of Lang., 1867. Three Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1891.
The
Lang., 1903.
Philol., 1875.
Prin. of
Comp.
"die historische Sprachforschung " the Gk. tongue is shown to be a of the Indo-Germanic family; thus is gained "der sprachgeschichtliche Gesichtspunkt," and then is gained "ein wesentUch richtiges VerstandBrugmann, Griech. Gr., fiir den Entwicklungsgang der Sprache." nis
By member
10
.
1885, p. 4.
11
Cf. p. 3 in third ed., 1901.
H. Moulton's Prol. to the N. T. Gk. Gr., 1906, and A. T. Robertson's N. T. Syll., 1900, and Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., 1908. 12 The late G. N. Hatzidakis contemplated a thesaurus of the Gk. language,
See
J.
but his death cut it short. " Ausfiihrl. Gr. der griech. Spr. von Dr. Raphael Kiihner, 1. Tl.: Elementar- und Formenlehre, Bd. I, IL Besorgt von Dr. Friedrich Blass, 1890, 1892. " lb., 2. TL: Satzlehre, Bd. I, IL Besorgt von Dr. Bernhard Gerth, 1898,
1904.
18
Handb. der
griech.
Laut- und Formenlehre, 1902,
1.
Aufl.; 2. Aufl., 1912.
16
" now
Griech. Gr., 3. Aufl., 1896. lb., 1900; 4. Aufl., 1913, by

(1912)
Thumb; 3d
ed.
quoted
in this book.
And
Wright has given
in
Enghsh a Comp. Gr.
of the
Gk. Lang.
NEW MATERIAL
basis of comparative philology.
13
is
Jannaris^
the
first fairly
suc-
one volume the survey of the progwhole. Schanz^ makes a much more endeavours in a large number of monofor a future historical grammar. Gildersleeve^ has issued only two volumes of his work, while the grammars of Hadley-Allen and Goodwin are too well known to call for remark. New grammars, like F. E. Thompson's (1907, new ed.) and Simonson's (2 vols., 1903, 1908), continue to appear. (c) Critical Editions of Greek Authors. The Greek authors in general have received minute and exhaustive investigation. The modern editions of Greek writers are well-nigh ideal. Careful
cessful
attempt to present ress of the language as a ambitious undertaking and graphs to furnish material
in
and
critical historical notes give the student all needed, sometimes too much, aid for the illumination of the text. The thing most lacking is the reading of the authors and, one may add, the study of the modern Greek. Butcher^ well says "Greek literature is
the one entirely original Uterature of Europe."

totle, Plato,
still
Homer,
Aris-
not to say Êschylus, Sophocles and Euripides are the modern masters of the intellect. Translations are better
than nothing, but can never equal the original. The Greek language remains the most perfect organ of human speech and largely because "they were talkers, whereas we are readers."^
They
(d)
studied diligently
how
to talk.^
Individual Writers. In nothing has the tendency to specialize been carried further than in Greek grammatical research. The language of Homer, Thucydides, Herodotus, the tragic poets, the comic writers, have all called for minute investi1
Works on
An
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
chiefly of the Att. Dial., 1897.

I,
Die
griech. Spr. (pp. 291-318), Tl.
Of. also Wackernagel, Abt. VIII, Kultur der Gegenw.
2 Beitr. zur histor. Synt. der griech. Spr., Tl. I. Cf. also Hubner, Grundr. zur Vorlesung fiber die griech. Synt., 1883. A good bibliography. Ivrumbacher, Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr., Kuhn's Zeitschr. etc., 1885, pp. 481-545.
3
*
Synt. of Class. Gk., 1900, 1911.
Harv. Lect. on Gk. Subj., 1904, p. 129. See also Butcher, Some Aspects Gk. Genius, 1893, p. 2: "Greece, first smitten with the passion for truth, had the courage to put faith in reason, and, in following its guidance, to take no account of consequences." So p. 1 "To see things as they really are, to discern their meanings and adjust their relations was with them an 6 instinct and a passion." j^^ p 203. See Bernhardy, Griech. Lit., Tl. I, II, 1856; Christ, Gesch. der griech.
of the
:
Lit. bis auf die Zeit Justinians, 4. revid. Aufl., 1905; 5. Aufl.,
1908
Gk. Lyric Poetry, 1891, etc. A. Croiset and M. Croiset, of Gk. Lit., transl. by Heffelbower, 1904.
nell,
An
fif. FarAbr. Hist,
14
gation/ and those of interest to N. T. students are the monographs on Polybius, Josephus, Plutarch, etc. The concordances The Apostolic Fathers, of Plato, Aristotle, etc., are valuable.
Greek Christian Apologists and the Apocryphal writings illusCf. Reinhold, De Graec. trate the tendencies of N. T. speech. America and Europe of universities The Apost. (1898). Pair. produced a great number of have degree Ph.D. the give which monographs on minute points hke the use of the preposition in Herodotus, etc. These all supply data of value and many of them have been used in this grammar. Dr. Mahaffy,^ indeed, is impatient of too much specialism, and sometimes in linguistic study the speciaHst has missed the larger and true conception of
the whole.
The Greek inscriptions speak (e) The Greek Inscriptions. with the voice of authority concerning various epochs of the language. Once we had to depend entirely on books for our knowledge of the Greek tongue. There is still much obscurity, but it
is
no longer possible to think
of
Homer
as the father of Greek
nor to consider 1000
beginning of Greek culture. The two chief names in epigraphical studies are those of August Boeckh {Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum) and Theodor Mommsen {Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum). For a careful review of "the Nature of the New Texts" now at our service in the uiB.C. as the
scriptions see
Deissmann, Light, etc., pp. 10-20. See W. H. P. Hatch's article {Jour, of Bibl Lit., 1908, pp. 134-146, Part 2) on "Some Illustrations of N. T. Usage from Greek Inscriptions Cf. also Thieme, Die Inschriften von Magnesia of Asia Minor."
am M&ander und
sur
les
das Neue Test. (1906), and Rouffiac, Recherckes
du Grec dans le N. T. d'apres les Inscriptions de Prime (1911). Deissmann, op. cit., p. 18, thinks that aya[Trr]]v of the imperial is rightly restored in a pagan inscription in Pisidia op. cit., Deissmann, see For the Christian inscriptions period. to Troy of story the restored Schliemann^ has not only p. 19.
Caracteres
the reader of the historic past, but he has revealed a great civi1 Cf., for instance, Die Spr. des Plut. etc., Tl. I, II, 1895, 1896; &ebs. Die Prapositionen bei Polybius, 1881; Goetzeler, Einfl. des Dion. Hal. auf die Sprachgesch. etc., 1891; Schmidt, De Flavii Josephi eloc. observ. crit., 1894;
Kaelker, Quest, de Eloc. Polyb. etc. 2 "A herd of specialists is rising up, each master of his own subject, but absolutely ignorant and careless of all that is going on around him in kindred
studies."
3
Survey of Gk. Civilization, 1897, Mycenae and Tiryns, 1878.
p. 3.
NEW MATERIAL
lization at Mycense.^
15
Homer stands at the close of a long antecedent history of linguistic progress, and once again scholars are admitting the date 850 or even 1000 b.c. for his poems as well as
abandoning Wolff's hypothesis.^ They have been driven to this by the abundant linguistic testimony from the inscriptions from many parts of Greece. So vast is this material that numerous grammatical discussions have been made
their essential unity, thus
concerning the inscriptions, as those by Roehl,^ Kretschmer,* Lautensach,^ Rang, ^ Meisterhans,^ Schweizer,^ Viteau,^ Wagner,^"
Nachmanson,"
etc.
These inscriptions are not sporadic nor local, but are found in Egypt, in Crete, in Asia Minor, the various isles of the sea,^^ jn Italy, in Greece, in Macedonia, etc. Indeed Apostolides" seems to show that the Greeks were in Egypt long before Alexander the Great founded Alexandria. The discoveries of Dr. A. J.
See also Tsountas and Manatt, The Mycensean Age, 1897. Ridgeway (Early Age of Greece, vol. I, 1901, p. 635) says that the methods apphed to dissection of the lUad and the Odyssey would pick to pieces the
^ 2
Paradise Lost and
may be
1906, p.
said to
unity of
* 6
">
The Antiquary. "The hnguistic attack upon their age have at last definitely failed." (T. W. Allen, CI. Rev., May, Lang, Homer and His Age (1906), advocates strongly the 193.) ^ Inscr. Graecae Antiq., 1882. the Homeric poems.
Spr., 1894.
^
Die griech. Vaseninschr. und ihre

Verbalfl. der att. Inschr., 1887.
Antiquites hellen., 1842.
Or. der att. Inschr.,
3. Aufl.
von E. Schwyzer, 1900.

de I'Empire, 1895.
8 '
Gr. der perg. Inschr., 1898.
La
decl.
dans
les inscr. att.
ô
Quest, de epigram. Graecis, 1883.
" Laute und Formen der magn. Inschr., 1903; cf. also Sohnsen, Inscr. Graecae ad illustr. Dial, sel.; Audollent, Defix. Tabellae, 1904; Michel, Rec. d'inscr. Graec, 1883; Dittenberger, Or. Graeci Inscr. Sel., 1903-1905; RobertsGardner, Intr. to Gk. Epigr., 1888. See Bibhography. Cf. especially the various volumes of the Corpus Inscr. Graecarum. 12 As, for example, Paton and Hicks, The Inscr. of Cos, 1891; Kern, Die Inschr. von Magn., 1900; Gartingen, Inschr. von Priene, 1906; Giirtingen and Paton, Inscr. Maris Aegaei, 1903; Letronne, Rec. des inscr. lat. et grec. de I'Egypte, 1842. As early as 1779 Walch made use of the inscriptions for the N. T. Gk. in his Observationes in Matt, ex graecis inscriptionibus. Cf. also the works of E. L. Hicks, Lightfoot, Ramsay. 1' Essai sur I'Hellenisme Egypt., 1908, p. vi. He says: "Les d(?couverte3
rdcentes des arch6ologucs ont dissip6 ces illusions.
Des ruines de Naucratis, de Daphn6, de Gurob, et de I'lllahoun (pour ne citer que les locaUtt^s dans lesquoUes les recherches ont donn6 le plus de r^sultats) est sortie toute une nouvelle Grdce; une Gr^ce ant<5rieure aux Ramsds .; et, si les recherches se continuent, on ne tardera pas, nous en sommes convaincus, k acqui^rir la certitude que les Grecs sont aussi ancicns en Egypto qu'en Gr^ce mfiine."
.
.
16
NEW TESTAMENT
Evans in Crete have pushed back the known examples of Greek a thousand years or more. The Hnear script of Knossos, Crete, may be some primitive form of Greek 500 years before the first dated example of Phoenician writing. The civilization of the how old no Hellenic race was very old when Homer wrote, one dares say.^ For specimens of the use of the inscriptions see Buck's Introduction to the Study of the Greek Dialects (Gram-
mar, Selected Inscriptions, Glossary), 1910. (/) Fuller Knowledge of the Dialects. The new knowledge of the other dialects makes it possible to form a juster judgment of the relative position of the Attic. There has been much confusion on this subject and concerning the relation of the various
races. It now seems clear that the Pelasgians, Achseans, Dorians were successively dominant in Greece.^ Pelasgian appears to be the name for the various pre-Achsean tribes, and it
Greek
was the Pelasgian

while "the people
Ji]olians,
tribe that
sings the glories of the Achseans
made Mycenae glorious.^ Homer who displaced the Pelasgians,
who
play a great part in later times

to
Dorians,
lonians
are
Homer
little
more than names."*
The Pelasgian belonged to the bronze age, the Achaean to the The Pelasgians may have been Slavs and kin to the Etruscans of Italy. The Achaeans were possibly Celts from northern Europe.^ The old Ionic was the base of the old Attic.''
iron age.^
This old Ionic-Attic was the archaic Greek tongue, and the
choruses in the Attic poets partly represent
Doric.
artificial
literary
There was not a sharp division^ between the early dialects owing to the successive waves of population sweeping over the country. There were numerous minor subdivisions in the
dialects (as the Arcadian, Boeotian, Northwest, Thessalian, etc.)
due to the mountain ranges, the peninsulas, the islands, etc., and other causes into which we cannot enter. For a skilful attempt at grouping and relating the dialects to each other see Thumb's Handbuch, p. 54 f. The matter cannot be elaborated here (see ch. III). But the point needs to be emphasized that
^ 2
'
<
A. J. Evans, Ann. Rep. of the Smiths. Inst., p. 436. See Ridgeway, The Early Age of Greece, vol. I, p. 84. For the contribution of the dialects to the lb., p. 293.
Giles,
kolvt)
see ch. III.
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., 1901, p. 526.
* '
lb., p. 406.
*
8
Ridgeway, op. cit., vol. I, p. 337. Hoffmann, Die griech. Dial., Bd. I,
is
lb., pp.
666-670.
of the
p. 7.
dialects
Thumb's Handb. der

p. 61
f.
griech. Dial.
more recent treatment (1909), which makes use
of all
the recent discoveries from the inscriptions.

see
On
the mixing of the dialects
Thumb,
NEW MATERIAL
the literary dialects
of Greece Itself
(cf.
17
and
still less
Greek Dialects, p. 1). The blending of these dialects was not complete as we shall see.i "Of dialects the purest Hellenic is Dorian, preserved in religious odes, pure because they kept aloof from their subjects. The next is the ôlic preserved in lyric odes of the Lesbian school. The earliest to be embodied hterature was Ionic, preserved in epic
s
Buck
by no means represent the linguistic history that of the islands and other colonies
into the
KOLvi,
the language of drama, philosophy and oratory. This arose out of the Ionic by introducing some of the strength of Doric-ôlic forms without sacrificing the sweet smoothness of Ionic." ^ In general concerning the Greek dialects one may consult the works of Meister,^ Ridgeway,^ Hoffmann,^ Thumb,6 Buck,7 Boisacq,^ Pezzi,^ etc.
is
most perfect
poems
The
Attic,
and in English-speaking time agreed that the starting-point for the philological investigations must be the language of the non-literary
countries, are
Farrar {Messages of the Books, 1884 noted the similarity of phrase between Paul's correspondence and the papyri in the Brit. Mus. "N. T. philology is at present undergoing thorough reconstruction; and probably all the workers concerned, both on the continent
p. lol)
lin for
{g) The Papyri and Ostraca. Thiersch in 1841 had pointed out the value of the papyri for the study of the in his De Fentateuch versione Alexandrina, but nobody thought it worth while to study the masses of papyri in London, Paris and Ber-
LXX
the N. T. language.
by
this
Light, etc., p. 55) rich in material for the study of the vernacular or popular speech as opposed to the book language, this distinction belongs to all languages which have a literature and to all periods of the language. It is particularly true of the
papyri, ostraca,
and inscriptions" (Deissmann,
Ihe
KOLvrj IS
now
modern
SeeDieterich DieKo..ûnddieheut.kIeinasiat. ^ Mundarten-Untors. zur Gesch. etc., pp. 271-310. Cf. Chabert, Hist, sommaire des ct. d'cpigr. grecque,
^''^'' ''
Collcê^"
^^' ^'' ^^ ^- ^- ^^''^''
^^^" P""^- ^
^^- ^* Ri^hniond
'
'
Op
cit.
and BdÎI, 1S93, Bd.
Op
cit
III. 1898.
Samml. der griech. Dial.-Inschr. Handb. der griech. Dial., 1909.

''*''
See also various volumes of the

7
Qk
Dialects
(I^'îc
onlyUSgf
^"'"'' ^^^^'
'^- ''''^
^- ^-
^'"y*'^'
'^^^"^
^''^" ^'''^1-
Lingua Greca Antica, 1888.
Cf. Lambert,
fit.
sur
le dial, eolicn,
1903.
18
NEW TESTAMENT
Greek to-day as it was true in the early period. Witness the Athenian riot over the Pallis vernacular translation. Occasionally a writer like Aristophanes would purposely write in the language of the street. It is not therefore a peculiarity of the kolvt] It always prevails. that the vernacular Greek prevailed then. But the Kadapevovcra has secured a more disastrous supremacy over the Stjixotlkt] than in any other language. And we are now
able to estimate the vernacular
discoveries of Flinders-Petrie,
kolvt],
since the
great
papyri
and Hunt and others. We had already the excellent discussions of Mullach/ Niebuhr,^ Blass,^ Foy^ and Lottich.^ But in the last fifteen years or so a decided impetus has been given to this phase of Greek grammatical
Grenfell
research.
It is in truth
new
study, the attention
now
paid to
the vernacular, as Moulton points out in his Prolegomena (p. 22). "I will go further and say that if we could only recover letters
that ordinary people wrote to each other without being literary,
we should have
the greatest possible help for the understanding
of the language of the
N. T. generally" (Bishop Lightfoot, 1863,

If
as quoted in Moulton's Prol, 2d and 3d ed., p. 242).
Lightfoot
Masson's Preface to Winer (1859). The most abundant source of new light for the vernacular kolvt} is found in the papyri collections, many volumes of which have already been published (see Bibliography for fuller list), while more are yet to be issued. Indeed, Prof. W. N. Stearns'' complains: "There would seem to be a plethora of such material already as evidenced by such collections as the Berlinische Urkunde and the Rainier Papyri." But the earnest student of the Greek tongue can only rejoice at the "extraordinary and in part unexpected wealth of material from the contemporary and the later languages."^ See the publications of Drs. Grenfell and Hunt,
only lived now!
Cf.
^
Gr. der griech. Vulgarspr., 1856.

tJber das Agyp.-Griech., Kl. Schr., II, p. 197
f.
'
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
Oxyrhyn. Pap.,
vols. I-VIII,
the Study of the Gk. of the N. T.
(Prince. Theol. Rev., Oct., 1903).

8
1898-1911; Fayfim Pap., 1900; Tebtunis
I, II, 1907; Hibeh Pap., pt. I, 1906; vol. IV, Oxyrhyn. Pap., pp. 265-271, 1904; Grenfell and Hunt, The Hibeh Pap., 1906, pt. I. In general, for the bibliography of the papyri see Hohlwein,
Pap., 1902 (Univ. of Cal. Publ., pts.
La
papjTol. grec, bibliog. raisonn6e, 1905.
NEW MATERIAL
19
Mahaffy/ Goodspeed,^ the Berlinische Urkunde,^ Papyri in the British Museum/ the Turin Papyri,^ the Leyden Papyri,^ the Geneva Papyri,^ Lord Amherst's collection (Paris, 1865), etc. For
general discussions of the papyri see the writings of Wilcken,^
Kenyon,^
Wessely.^^
HartcV
Haberlin," Viereck,^^ Deissmann,^^ de Ricci,^^

is
great and increasing hterature
thus coming into
existence on this subject.

size are
Excellent handbooks of convenient
those by H. Lietzmann, Greek Papyri (1905), and by G. Milligan, Greek Papyri (1910). For a good discussion of the papyri and the literature on the subject see Deissmann, Light, The grammatical material in the papyri has not etc., pp. 20-41. exhausted. There are a number of excellent workers in the been field such as Mayser,^^ St. Witkowski,^^ Deissmann,^^ Moulton,^^ H. A. A. Kennedy,2 Jannaris,^^ Kenyon,^^ Voelker,^^ Thumb.^'*
1
Flinders-Petrie Pap., 1891, 1892, 1893.
2
3
Gk. Pap. from the Cairo Mus., 1902, 1903.

Griech. Urk., 1895, 1898, 1903, 1907, etc.
F. G. Kenyon, Cat. of Gk. Pap. in the B. M., 1893; Evid. of the Pap. for Text. Crit. of the N. T., 1905; B. M. Pap., vol. I, 1893, vol. II, 1898.
*
6 8
Peyron, 1826, 1827.

J. Nicole, 1896,
Zauber Pap., 1885; Leeman's Pap. Graeci, 1843. 1900; cf. Wessely's Corpus Pap., 1895. 8 Griech. Papyrusurk., 1897; Archiv fiir Papyrusforsch. und verw. Gebiete, 1900. 9 Palajog. of Gk. Pap., 1899; art. Papyri in Hast. D. B. (ext. vol.).
1"
tjber die griech. Pap.

fiir
" Griech. Pap., Centralbl.

12
Bibhothekswesen,
14. 1
f.
Ber. liber die altere Pap.-Lit., Jahresb. iiber d. Fortschr. etc., 1898, 1899.
Art. Papyri in Encyc. Bibl.
1^
1*
Bui. papyrologique in Rev. des
fit.
grecques since 1901.
Papyrus-Samml. since 1883. Cf. also Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., 1903; Reinach, Pap. grecs et demot. etc., 1905. i Gr. der griech. Pap., Tl. I, Laut- und Worth, 1906. " Prodromus Gr. Pap. Graec. aetatis Lagidarum, 26. Bd. der Abhandl. der Phil, class, der Acad, zu Krakau, 1897, pp. 196-260. 18 B. S., 1901; Light, etc.; art. Hell. Griech. in Hauck's Realencyc; art. Papyrus in Encyc. Bibl., etc. " Gr. Notes from the Pap., CI. Rev., 1901; Notes on the Pap., Exp., April, 1901, Feb., 1903; Characteristics of N. T. Gk., Exp., March to Dec, 1904; Prol. to Gr. of N. T. Gk., 1908, 3d ed., etc. 2" Sources of N. T. Gk., 1895; Recent Res. in the Lang, of the N. T., Exp.
15
Times, May, July, Sept., 1901.

21 22
Hist.
Gk. Gr., 1897; The Term Koiv^,
CI. Rev.,
March, 1903.
Art. Papyri in Hast. D. B.
Syntax der griech. Pap., Tl. I, 1903. Die Forsch. iiber die hell. Spr. in d. Jahr. 1896-1901, Archiv fiir Papyrusforsch., 1903, pp. 396-426; Die Forsch. liber die hell. Spr. in d. Jahr. 1902-4,
2
2<
20
A GRAM^L\R OF THE GREEK
NEW TESTAMENT
These are all helpful, but Cronert^ is right in urging that we need a comprehensive discussion of the syntax of the Ptolemaic
papjT-i in order to set forth properly the relation of the papyri
both to the N. T. Greek and to the older Attic. This wall require time, for the mass of material is very great and is constantly
But enough already is clear for us to see the general growing.^ bearing of the whole on the problem of the N. T. It is just here that the papyri have special interest and value. They give the language of business and life. The N. T. writers were partly
aypaiJLîaTOL, but what they wrote has become the chief Book of Mankind.^ Hear Deissmann^ again, for he it is who has done most to blaze the way here: "The papyrus-leaf is aUve; one sees in a word, autographs, indi^^dual peculiarities of penmanship men; manifold ghmpses are given into inmost nooks and crannies of personal life in which history has no eyes and historians no glasses ... It may seem a paradox, but it can safely be affirmed that the unliterary pap^'ri are more important in these respects
than the hterary." fragments of Greek
Some
classics,
of the papjTi contain hterary works,
portions of the LXX or of the N. T., though the great mass of them are non-literary documents, letCf. also Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 29. ters and business papers. Unusual interest attaches to the fragments containing the Logia of Jesus, some of which are new, dating from the second or third centuries a.d. and sho\\ing a Gnostic tinge.^ It is no longer possible to say, what even Friedrich Blass^ did in 1894, that the N. T. Greek "is to be regarded something by itself and following laws
of its
own." That view is doomed in the presence of the papyri. Hatch^ in particular laboured under this error. The N. T. Greek
Archiv fiir Pap., 111. 4; also Jahresb. iiber die Fortschr. des Class., 1906; Die griech. Pap>-rusurk., 1899-1905, pp. 36-40; Die griech. Spr. etc., 1901. 1 Archiv fiir Pap.-Forsch., 1900, p. 215. 2 " Zum ersten Mai gewinnen wir reale VorsteUungen von dem Zustand und der Entwickelung der handschriftlichen Lebenslieferung im Altertum Neue wichtige Probleme sind damit der Philologie gestellt." N. selbst. Wilcken, Die griech. Papyrusurk., 1897, p. 7. Mayser's Tl. II will supply
this
3
need when it appears. See Deissmann, Die sprachl. Erforsch. der griech. Bibel, 1898, p. 27. * Art. PapjTi in Encyc. Bibl. New 6 See AoYia 'Iriffov, Sayings of Jesus, by Grenfell and Hunt, 1897. Sayings of Jesus, by Grenfell and Hunt, 1904. See also two books by Dr. C. Taylor, The Ox^Thyn. Logia, 1899; The Ox>Thyn. Sayings of Jesus, 1905;
Lock and Sanday,
Two
Lect.
on the Sayings
.3.38.
f.
of Jesus, 1897.
Theol. Literaturzeit., 1894, p.
Essays in Bibl. Gk., 1892,
p. 11
The
earhest dated papyrus
is
now
NEW MATERIAL
will
21
It will
no longer be despised as
inferior or unclassical.
be
seen to be a vital part of the great current of the Greek language. For the formal discussion of the bearing of the papyri on the N. T.
Greek
reason
see chapter IV.
word should be
all
said concerning the
found in Egypt.' It is due to the dryness of the climate there. Elsewhere the brittle material soon perished, though it has on the whole a natural toughness. The earliest known use of the papyri in Egypt is about 3400 B.C. More exactly, the reign of Assa in the fifth dynasty is put at 3360 B.C. This piece of writing is an account-sheet belonging to this reign (Deissmaim, Light from A. E., p. 22). The oldest specimen of the Greek papyri goes back to "the regnal year of Alexander .'Egus, the son of Alexander the Great. That would make it the oldest Greek papyrus document yet discovered" (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 29). The discoveries go on as far as the seventh century a.d., well into the Byzantine period. The plant still grows in Egypt and it was once the well-nigh universal writing material. As waste paper it was used to wrap the mummies. Thus it has come to be preserved. The rubbish-heaps at Faylam and Oxyrhynchus are full of these papyri scraps. Mention should be made also of the ostraca, or pieces of pottery, which contain numerous examples of the vernacular Kot-v-q. For a very interesting sketch of the ostraca see Deissmann, Light, etc. (pp. 41-53). Crum and Wilcken have done the chief work on the ostraca. They are all non-literary and occur in old Egyptian, Arabic, Aramaic, Coptic, Greek and Latin. "Prof. Wilcken, in his Griechische Ostraka,^ has printed the texts of over sixteen hundred of the inscribed potsherds on which the commonest receipts and orders of Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt were written."^ It was the material used by the poorer classes.
(h) The Byzantine and the Modern Greek. The Byzantine and modern Greek has at last received adequate recognition.
why
the papyri are nearly
Thackeray has it in his Gr. of the O. T. Moulton, CI. Rev., March, 1910, p. 53. 1 The practical limitation of the papyri to Egypt (and Herculaneum) has its disadvantages; cf. Angus, The Koivq, The Lang, of the N. T. (Prince.
P. Eleph. 1 (311 B.C.), not P. Hibeh, as
in Gk., p. 56.
This was true
in 1907; cf.
Theol. Rev., Jan., 1910, p. 80). * Griech. Ostraka aus Xgypten
und Nubien, Bd. I, II, 1899; cf. also Crum, Coptic Ostraca, 2 vols. (1899); cf. Hilprecht, S. S. Times, 1902, p. 560. " In many Coptic letters that are written on potsherds the writers beg their correspondents to excuse their having to use an ostrakon for want of papyrus" (Deissmann, Exp. Times, 1906, Oct., p. 15). E. J. Goodspeed, Am. Jour, of Theol., Jan., 1906, p. 102.
22

of the
NEW TESTAMENT
The student
N. T. idiom has much to learn from the new The scorn bestowed on the kolvt] by the intense classicists was intensified by the modern Greek, which was long regarded as a nondescript jumble of Greek, Albanian, Indeed the modern Greeks themselves Turkish, Italian, etc. have not always shown proper appreciation of the dignity of the modern vernacular, as is shown, for instance, in the recent upheaval at Athens by the University students over the translation of the Gospels into the Greek vernacular {b-qnoTiKri) of to-day, though the N. T. was manifestly written in the vernacular of its "While the later Greeks, however, could no longer write day.
books on this subject.
classically,
classical
language."^
they retained a keen sense for the beauties of the Just as the "popular Latin finally sup-
pressed the Latin of elegant literature, "^ so the vernacular Koivrj lived on through the Roman and Byzantine periods and survives
to-day as the modern Greek. There is unity in the present-day Greek and historical continuity with the past. Dr. Rose is possibly correct in saying: "There is more difference between the
Greek of Herodotus and the Greek of Xenophon than there is between the Greek of the latter and the Greek of to-day." ^ And certainly Prof. Dickey* is right in affirming "that the Greek of N. T. stands in the centre of the :development of which classical and modern Greek may be called extremes, and that of the two The interit is nearer to the second in character than the first. been in the sole fight pretation of the N. T. has almost entirely
of the ancient,
i.
e.
the Attic Greek, and, therefore, to that ex-
and often inaccurate." Hatzidakis^ indeed complained that the whole subject had been treated with
tent has been unscientific
Dr. Achilles Rose, Chris. Greece and Living Gk., 1898, p. 7. R. C. Jebb, On the Rela. of Mod. to Class. Gk., in V. and D.'s Handb. to Mod. Gk., 1887, p. 287. "In other words, the Bible was cast into spoken Latin, famihar to every rank of society though not countenanced in the schoolroom; and thus it foreshadowed the revolution of ages whereby the Roman tongue expanded into what we may label as Romance." W. Barry,
^
"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
unworthy
plaint.
23
and not without ground for the comhis great work to put the study of basis/ but he has not worked alone in this important field. Another native Greek, Prof. Sophocles, has produced a Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods in which there is an excellent discussion for that time^ of the KOLvi], the Byzantine and the modern Greek. Other scholars have developed special phases of the problem, as Krumbacher,^ who has enriched our knowledge of the Byzantine* or Middle Ages Greek. Dieterich ^ also has done fine work in this period of Greek, as has Thumb.^ Worthy of mention also is the work of G. Meyer,^ Geldart^ and Prestel,^ though the latter have not produced books of great value. See also Meyer-Liibke's grammar,^" Jannaris' Historical Greek Grammar and the writings of Psichari." In general great progress has been made and it is now possible to view the development of the N. T. idiom in the
" dilettanteism "
He himself did much by modem Greek on a scientific
light of the
modern Greek.
es
The apparent
drift in the
vernacular
ihrer wohl-
"Und wenn
mir
gelingt, die wissenschaftliche
Welt von
berechtigten
Mittel-
Zuriickhaltung
abzubringen
und
ihr nachzuweisen,
daC das
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.
needs is a lexicon of the papyri also. See Contopoulos, Lex. of Mod. Gk., 1868, and others. 3 Das Problem der neugr. Schriftspr., 1903. "Heute bedarf das Studiengebiet der byzantinischen und neugriechischen Philologie keine Apologie," p. 3. In his hands the middle Gk. (Byzantine) is shown to be a rich field for the
1870.
One
of the pressing
student both of philology and hteratm-e;

p. 20.
cf.
also Gesch. der byzant. Lit.,
* Gesch. der byzant. Lit. etc.; cf. also his Byz. Zeitschr. and his Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr., Kuhn's Zeitschr., 1885. ^ Unters. zur Gesch. d. griech. Spr. etc., 1898; Gesch. der byz. und neugr.
Lit., 1902.
Handb. d. neugr. Volkspr., 1895; Thumb-Angus, Handb. of Mod. Gk. Vernac, 1912; Die neugr. Sprachforsch. in d. Jahr. 1890 u. 1891 (Anz. fur indoger. Spr., I, 1892; VI, 1896, and IX, 1898); Die griech. Spr. im Zeitalter dea Hellen., 1901; Die sprachgesch. Stellung des bibl. Griechisch, Theol. Runds., March, 1902. ^ Neugr. Stud., 1894. 8 The Mod. Gk. Lang, in its Rcla. to Anc. Gk., 1870. On the Orig. and Devel. of the Mod. Gk. Lang., .lour, of Philol., 1869. ' Zur Entwickolungsgcsch. der griech. Spr. '" Gr. der romanischen Spr. " Essais de Gr. hist. Ncogrecque, 1886; cf. also Boltz, Die hell. Si)r. dor Gegenw., 1882.
24
KOLVT]
of the N. T., like ha in the non-final clause, is too common remark in the modern Greek. Indeed the N. T. had a predominant influence on the later Greek as the chief literature of the period, and especially as Christianity won the victory over heathenism. The Byzantine Greek is in subject-matter largely The sermons and treatises of the Greek Christian ecclesiastical. Fathers constitute a large and valuable literature and amply illustrate the language of the time.^ The modern Greek is in all essential points the same as the Byzantine Greek of 1000 a.d. In forty years ^ we have seen a revolution in the study of the modern Greek. But as late as 1887 Vincent and Dickson^ could say: "By many it is believed that a corrupt patois of Turkish and Italian is now spoken in Greece; and few even among professed scholars are aware how small the difference is between the Greek of the N. T. and the Greek of a contemporary Athenian newspaper." The new Greek speech was developed not out of the Byzantine literary language, but out of the Hellenistic popular for
speech.'*
Less that is new has come (0 The Hebrew and Aramaic. from the Hebrew and Aramaic field of research. Still real advance has been made here also. The most startling result is the In decrease of emphasis upon Hebraisms in the N. T. style. chapter IV, iii the Semitic influence on the N. T. language is discussed. Here the literary history is sketched. It was only in 1879 that Guillemard'^ issued 1. The Old View. his Hebraisms in the Greek Testament, in which he said in the Preface: "I earnestly disavow any claim to an exhaustive exhibition of all the Hebraisms, or all the deviations from classical phraseology contained in the Greek Testament; of which I have gathered together and put forward only a few specimens, in the hope of stimulating others to fuller and more exact research." Even in 1889, Dr. Edwin Hatch ^ says: "Biblical Greek is thus a
1
See the Migne Lib. and the

Dieterich, op.
cit.,
new
Ber. Royal Lib. ed;
*
'
p. 10. p. 3.
See also Horae Hellenicae, by Stuart Blaekie, classical Gk. from beginning to end, with only such insignificant changes as the altered circumstances, combined with the law of its original genius, naturally produced." Cf. Rangabe, Gr. Abre-
Handb.
to
Mod. Gk.,
1874, p. 115: "Byzantine Gk.
was
g6e du grec actuel; TewdStos, Tpa/xnaTiK'^

* ^
ttjs
'EWeviKrjs
VKwffffijs.
Dieterich, op,
cit.,
p. 5.
1878,
6
See also A. Miiller, Semit. Lehnw. in alteren Griech., Bezzenb. Beitr., I, pp. 273 ff.; S. Ivrauss, Griech. und lat. Lehnw. im Tal., 1898, 1899.
Essays
in Bibl. Gk., p. 11.
NEW MATERIAL
language by
25
itself. What we have to find out in studying it is what meaning certain Greek words conveyed to a Semitic mind." Again he says^: "The great majority of N. T. words are words which, though for the most part common to biblical and to con-
temporary secular Greek, express in their biblical use the concepand which must consequently be examined by the light of the cognate documents which form the LXX." And W. H. Simcox^ says: "Thus it is that there came to exist a Hellenistic dialect, having real though variable differences from
tions of a Semitic race,
the
2.
Common
or Hellenic."
Change with Kennedy.

says:
Kennedy 3
But a turn comes when H. A. A. "But while the writer began with a complete,
far-
though provisional, acceptance of Hatch's conclusions, the

ther the inquiry
was pushed, the more decidedly was he compelled to doubt those conclusions, and finally to seek to establish the connection between the language of the LXX and that of the N. T. on a totally different basis." He finds that common bond in "the colloquial Greek of the time."^
3.
Deissmann's
says'':
it
Revolt.
Semitic or biblical Greek
who
"The
full revolt against the theory of a seen in the writings of Deissmann,^ theory indicated is a great power in exegesis,
is is
The
and that
It
possesses a certain plausibility
not to be denied.
It is edifying,
and what
is
more,
is
convenient.
But
it is
absurd.
mechanizes the marvellous variety of the hnguistic elements of the Greek Bible and cannot be established either by the psychology of language or by history." There is here some of the
new discovery, but it is true. The old view of Hatch is dead and gone. The "clamant need of a lexicon to the LXX" is emphasized by Deissmann^ himself. Prof. H. B. Swete of Cambridge has laid all biblical students under lasting obligation
zeal of
Gk. belongs not only to a later period than classical Gk., but also to a different country." On page 14 we read: "It is a true paradox that while, historically as well as philologically, the Gk. (LXX) is a translation of the Hebrew, philologically, though not historically, the Hebrew may be regarded as a trans^
lb., p. 34.
See also
p. 9: "Biblical
of the history of the language
lation of the
2
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 concordance to the LXX and other Gk. versions of tlie O. T., 1892-189G, 1900.
Gk." The Lang, of the N.
26
to

him by
his contribution to the
NEW TESTAMENT
sisting of
an edition
of the
LXX^
study of the Septuagint, conwith brief critical apparatus
and a general discussion ^ of the Septuagint. Brooke and McLean are publishing an edition of the Septuagint with exhaustive critical apparatus.^
der Septuaginta:
now rejoice in Helbing's Gr. Students of the Laut- u. Formenlehre (1907) and Thackeray's
Conybeare and Stock's
the
LXX
Gr. of the 0. T. in Greek, vol. I (1909).

Selections
Septuagint (1905) has the old standpoint. Other modern workers in this department are Nestle/ Lagarde,^
from
Hartung,^ Ralfs/ Susemihl,^ Apostolides.^ Another point of special interest in 4. The Language of Jesus.
this connection,
which
may
the
new
light concerning the
be as well discussed now as later, is Aramaic as the language habitually
spoken by Jesus.
This matter has been in
much
confusion and
the scholars are not at one even now.
Roberts^'' maintains that
Greek, not Hebrew, was "the language of the common public intercourse in Palestine in the days of Christ and His apostles." By Hebrew he means Aramaic. In The Expositor (1st series, vols.
VI, VII) Roberts argued also that Christ usually spoke Greek. He was replied to (vol. VII) by Sanday. Lightfoot (on Gal. 4 6)
:
holds that Jesus said

lated
it.
'AiS/Sd 6 Trariyp
thus,
Mark
not having trans-
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., 1886Bibel, 1897.

e
1896; Urtext
6 8 9
und Ubersetz. der
Nestle died in 1913.

'
Sept.-Stud., 1891-1892.
lb., 1886.
lb.,
1904.
Gesch. der griech. Lit. in der Alexandrinzeit, Bd. I, II, 1891, 1892. Du grec Alexandrin et de ses rapports avec le grec ancien et le grec moGf.
derne, 1892.
among
the older discussions, Sturz,

of Ghris., 1861.
De
dial.
Maced.
et
Alexan., 1808; Lipsius, Gr. Unters. iiber die bibl. Grac, 1853; Churton,
Infl. of
The
the
LXX
upon the Prog,
See also Anz, Subs, ad
cognos. Graec. serm. vulg. e Pent. vers. Alexan., 1894.

1"
Disc, on the Gosp., pt.
Apost., 1864, p. 316;

(1893).
I, On the Lang. Employed by Our Lord and His Short Proof that Greek was the Language of Jesus
" On the Dial, of Palestine " Stud. Bibl., p. 54.
in the
Time
of Ch., Stud. Bibl., 1885.
NEW MATERIAL
little
27
the Jews
of Jesus
knew Greek." A. Meyer urges that the vernacular was Aramaic and shows what })earing this fact has on
^
the interpretation of the Gospels.

suppose, however
(as,
e.g.
A. Jiilicher^ indeed says: "To G. B. Winer supposes, because of
Mk. 7:24;
is
Jo. 7:25; 12:20) that Jesus used the
Greek language
quite out of the question."
Christ
and
the
But Young, vol. II, Dictionary of 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.).
* 5
lb., p. 10.
Exp., ser. IV, VI, VIII. 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.
A Guide through Gk. to Hob., 1904. Prog, of Hcllen. in Aloxan. Emp., 1905, p. 130 f. Hadley (Ess. Pliil. and Crit., p. 413) reaches the conclusion that Jesus spoke both Gk. and Aram.
6
Clue,
The
28
with Pontius Pilate, were certainly carried on mainly in the
Zahn {Intr. to the N. T.) labours needlessly to show that Hebrew was no longer the language of Palestine, but he does not prove that Aramaic was everywhere spoken, nor that Jesus
Greek."
always spoke Aramaic. Wellhausen {Einl. in die drei erst. Evang.) It may be admitted is prejudiced in favour of the Aramaic theory. known the majority of the Jews in Aramaic was to that once at Palestine, particularly in Judea. Cf. Ac. 1 19: rfj StaXeKrw avTcbv
:
22:2, aKovaavres otl rrj 'E/3pat5t 6i.aXe/crco irpoaeThere is no doubt which (j)coveL avTOLS (xaWov irapeaxov rjavxiav. language is the vernacular in Jerusalem. Cf. also 26 14. Jo'AKeXdafiax',
:
sephus confirms Luke on this point {War, V, 6. 3), for the people of Jerusalem cried out ttj TaTpio: yXdoaari, and Joscphus also acted
intermediary for Titus,
also 2
rfj
Trarptoj yXdcaari
(War, VI,
2.
1).
See
Josephus wrote his War first in Aramaic and then in Greek. The testimony of Papias that Matthew wrote his Xoyta in Aramaic bears on the question because of the The brogue tradition that Mark was the interpreter of Peter.
Mace. 7:8,
21.
that Peter revealed (Mt. 26 73) was probably due to his Gali:
lean accent of Aramaic.
Aramaic was one

It
of the languages for

is
the inscription on the cross (Jo. 19:20).
clear therefore that
and Antiochus Epiphanes received a set-back in Palestine. The reaction kept Greek from becoming the one language of the country. Even in Lycaonia the people kept their vernacular though they understood Greek (Ac. 14 11). On the other hand Peter clearly spoke in Greek on the Day of Pentecost, and no mention is made of Greek as one of the peculiar "tongues," on that occasion. It is clear that Paul was understood in Jerusalem when he spoke Greek (Ac. 22:2). Jesus Himself laboured chiefly in Galilee where were many gentiles and much commerce and travel. He taught in Decapolis, a Greek region. He preached also in the regions of Tyre and Sidon (Phoenicia), where Greek was necessary, and he held converse with a Greek (Syro-Phoenician) woman. Near Csesarea-Philippi (a Greek region), after the Transfiguration, Jesus spoke to the people at the foot of the mountain. At the time of the Sermon on the Mount Jesus addressed people from Decapolis and Perea (largely Hellenized), besides the mixed multitudes from Galilee, Jerusalem and Judea (Mt. 4 25). Luke (6 17) adds that crowds came also from Tyre and Sidon, and Mark (3 8) gives "from Idumaea." It is hardly possible that these crowds understood Aramaic. The fact that Mark
the Hellenizing work of Jason and Menelaus
:
NEW MATERIAL
Jesus does not prove that
that
29
twice (5:41; 7:34) uses Aramaic quotations from the words of
always spoke in that tongue nor In Mk. 14 36, *A/3/3a 6 waTYip, it is possible that Jesus may have used both words as Paul did (Ro. 8: 15). In the quotation from Ps. 22: 1, spoken on the cross, Mt. 27:46 gives the Hebrew, while Mk. 15:34 has an Aramaic adaptation. There is no reason to doubt that
He
He
did so only on these occasions.
Jesus
knew Hebrew
Palestine) proves that
Christ in the
But Thomson (Temple Bible, Lang, of Matthew gives the quotations made by words of the LXX, while his own quotations are
also.
It is clear, therefore, that Jesus spoke both Aramaic and Greek according to the demands of the occasion and read the Hebrew as well as the Septuagint, if we may argue from the O. T. quotations in the Gospels which are partly
like the
is
usually from the Hebrew.
not clear whether
read in
and partly like the LXX.^ In Lu. 4: 17 it was the Hebrew text or the LXX that was the synagogue at Nazareth.^ One surely needs no argutext
it
Hebrew
to see the possibility that a people may be bilingual when he remembers the Welsh, Scotch, Irish, Bretons of the present day.3 The people in Jerusalem understood either Greek or Ara-
ment
maic (Ac. 22:2).

(j)
cerning the
Grammatical Commentaries. A word must be said connew type of commentaries which accent the gram-
This is, to be sure, the result of the emphasis upon scientific grammar. The commentary must have other elements besides the grammatical. Even the historical element when added does not exhaust what is required. There
still
matical side of exegesis.
historical
is
remains the apprehension of the soul of the author to which grammar is only an introduction. But distinct credit to be given to those commentators who have lifted this kind
of exegesis out of the merely homiletic vein.
Among
the older
writers are to be mentioned Meyer, Ellicott, Godet, Broadus,
Hackett, Lightfoot and Westcott, while
among
the more recent
commentators stand out most
of the writers in the International
See C. Taylor, The Gospel in the Law, 1869; Boehl, Alttestamcntl. Cit. T., 1878; Toy, Quota, in the N. T., 1884; Huhn, Die alttestamcntl. Cit. etc., 1900; Gregory, Canon and Text of the N. T., 1907, p. 394. ^ On the Gk. in the Tal. sec art. Greek in Jew. Encyc; Ivrauss, Gricch. und lat. Lehnw. im Tal.; Schiircr, Jew. Hist., div. II, vol. I, p. 29 f. ' See Zahn, Einl. in das N. T., ch. 11. On the bilingual character of many of the Palestinian Jews see Schiircr, Jew. Peo. in the Time of Ch., div. II,
im N.
vol.
I,
p.
48
f .;
Moulton,
Prol., p. 7
f.
30
Critical

Commentary, Holtzmann's
Hand Comm., The
Expositor's
Greek Test, Swete, Mayor, G. Milligan, Lietzmann's Handhuch, Zahn's Kommentar, The Camb. Gk. Test., etc. In works like these, grammatical remarks of great value are found. There has been
great advance in the N. T. commentaries since Winer's day, these
when
comments "were rendered
useless
by that
uncritical empi-
ricism which controlled Greek philology."^
View. It will hardly be denied, in view condensed presentation of the new material now at hand that new light has been turned upon the problems of the N. T. Greek. The first effect upon many minds Some will not know how to is to dazzle and to cause confusion. assimilate the new facts and to co-ordinate them with old theories
V.
of of the preceding necessarily
The New Point
nor be willing to form or adopt new theories as a result of the fresh phenomena. But it is the inevitable duty of the student in
this
department to welcome the new discoveries and to attack
the problems arising therefrom.
The new horizon and wider

It will not
out-
look
be possible to avoid some mistakes at first. A truer conception of the language is now offered to us and one that will be found to be richer and more inspiring.2 Every line of biblical study must respond to the new
make
possible real progress.
discovery in language.
"A new
new Winer
will give the
Cremer, a new Thayer-Grimm, twentieth century plenty of editing to
keep its scholars busy. New Meyers and Alfords will have fresh matter from which to interpret the text, and new Spurgeons and Moodys will, we may hope, be ready to pass the new teaching on to the people." ^ The N. T. Greek is now seen to be not an
abnormal excrescence, but a natural development in the Greek language; to be, in fact, a not unworthy part of the great stream
of the
mighty tongue.
It
but in the very heart of

of the
1
was not outside of the world-language, it and influenced considerably the future
Greek tongue.
Winer, Gr. of the N. T. Idiom, Thayer's transl., p. 7. "Nun hat man aber die Sprache der heiUgen Biicher mit den Papyrusdenkmalern iind den Inschriften der alexandrinischen und romischen Zeit
2
genau verghchen, und da hat sich die gar manchen Anhanger der alten Doktrin verbUiffende, in Wahrheit ganz natiirhche Tatsache ergeben, da(5 die Sprache des N. T. nichts anderes ist als eine fiir den hterarischen Zweck Krumbacher, Das leicht temperierte Form des volkstumhch Griechisch."
Prob. der neugr. Schriftspr., 1903, p. 27. 3 J. H. Moulton, New Lights on Bibl. Gk., Bibl. World, March, 1902.
CHAPTER
II
THE HISTORICAL METHOD

I.
Language as History. The
scientific
grammar
is
at
bottom
a grammatical history, and not a linguistic law-book. The seat of authority in language is therefore not the books about language, but the people who use the language. The majority of well-educated people determine correct usage (the mos loquendi as Horace Even modern dictionaries merely record from time to says). Wolff was right time the changing phenomena of language. when he conceived of philology as the "biography of a nation." The life of a people is expressed in the speech which they use.^ We can well agree with Benfey^ that "speech is the truest picture of the soul of a people, the content of all that which has brought a people to self-consciousness." However, we must not think that we can necessarily argue race from language.^ The historical conception of grammar has had to win its way against the purely theoretical and speculative notion. Etymology was the work The study of the forms, the syntax, the of the philosophers. dialects came later. The work of the Alexandrians was originally philology, not scientific grammar.^ (a) Combining the Various Elements. It is not indeed easy to combine properly the various elements in the study of language. Sayce considers Steinthal too psychological and Schleicher too physical.^ The historical element must be added to both. PauF objects to the phrase "philosophy of language" as suggesting "metaphysical speculations of which the historical investigation
1
2
3 *
See Oertel, Lect. on the Study of Lang., 1902, Kleinere Schr., 1892, 2. Bd., 4. Abt., p. 51.
p.
f.
See Sayce, Prin. of Comp. Philol., 1875, p. 175 f. See Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, pp.
Prin. of
2, 3.
Comp.
Philol., p. xvi.
Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888, p. xxi.
of which
ology
is
philosophy in the same philosophy, neither more, nor less."

are thinking
is
we
"The truth is that the science way as physics or i)h3'si-
31
32

no count."
of language needs to take
He
prefers the
is
term
"sci-
ence of principles."
real philosophy,
is
The study
of language
a true science, a
with a psychical as well as a physical basis. It properly related to the historical natural sciences which have been subject "to the misdirected attempt at excluding them from the circle of the sciences of culture." ^ Language is capable
almost perfect scientific treatment. Kretschmer- outlines as modern advances over ancient grammar the psychological treatment of language, the physiology of sound, the use of the comparative method, the historical development of the language, the
of
recognition of speech as a product of human culture, and not to be separated from the history of culture, world-history and life
of the peoples.
thinks that no language has yet received such treatment as this, for present-day handbooks are only "speechpictures," not "speech-histories."
He
Practical Grammar a Compromise. Historical practical grammars have to make a compromise. They can give the whole view only in outline and show development and interrelation in part. It is not possible then to write the final grammar of Greek The modern is constantly changing either ancient or modern. What was true of more of the old. learning and we are ever
(b)
Mistriotes^
and Jannaris^
will
be true of the attempts of

is
all.
But
none the less the
way
to study Greek
to look at
it
as a
history of the speech-development of one of the greatest of peoBut it is at least possible now to have the right attitude, ples.
thanks to the books already mentioned and others by Bernhardy,^

1 Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 1888, p. Gesch. der Philol., 1892, p. 22: "Zu der Sie sich die historische Betrachtung. Satze von deren loser Verkniipfung, die
xxvii.
See
Von
Ulrich's Grundl.
und
wissenschaftlichen
Grammatik
gesellt
unterscheidet die Periodisierung der
wechselnde Bedeutung der Partikeln, den Gebrauch der Modi und Tempora, die erfahrungsmaCig festgestellten Regeln der Syntax, den Sprachgebrauch der Schriftsteller." On the scientific study of the Gk. language sketched historically see Wackernagel, Die Kult.
der Gegenw., Tl.
2
I,
Abt.
8,
pp. 314-316.
Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., pp. 3-5.
He himseK
here merely
cutUnes the historical background of the Gk. language.

*
" Kara ravra
\oLir6v
ij
ypanfJ-aroXoyia dkv
elvat.
ovre aniyris laropiKr], ovre d/xt-
7^s
*
aia0r]TiKri eiri(TTriixr]
dXXd
fxerkxtt- aix4>0Tkpuiv."
'^W-qvLK-q TpapnaToXoyia, 1894,
p. 6.
"As a matter
of course, I
do not presume to have said the
last
word on
or most of these points, seeing that, even in the -case of modern Gk., I cannot be expected to master, in all its details, the entire vocabulary and grammar of every single Neohellenic dialect." Hist. Gk. Gr., 1897, p. x.
all
B
Wissensch. Synt. der griech. Spr., 1829.
33
I.
Christ/ Wun(lt,2 Johannsen,'' Krumbacher,'' Schanz,* G. Meyer/ Miiller/ Hirt/ Thumb/ Dieterich/" Steinthal." The Latin
syntax received historical treatment by Landgraf/^ not to men-
EngUsh and other modern languages. Language as a Living Organism. (a) The Origin of Language. Speech is indeed a characteristic of man and may be considered a divine gift, however slowly the gift was won and developed by him.'-^ Sayce is undoubtedly
tion
II.
is a social creation and the effort communicate is the only true solution of the riddle of speech, whether there was ever a speechless man or not. "Grammar has grown out of gesture and gesticulation."!* But speech has not created the capacities which mark the civilized man as higher than the savage. ^^ Max Miiller remarks that "language forms an impassable barrier between man and beast." Growls and signs do not constitute "intellectual symbolism." i Paul indeed, in opposition to Lazarus and Steinthal, urges that "every linguistic creation is always the work of a single individual only."i^ The
correct in saying that language
to
psychological organisms are in fact the true media of linguistic
2
' <
Gesch. der griech. Lit., 1893. Volkerpsychol., 1900, 3. Aufl., 1911 Beitr. zur griech. Sprachk., 1890.
f.
Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1885.

Beitr. zur hist. Synt. der griech. Spr.,
7 8
Bd. I-XVII.
Ess.
und Stud, zur Sprachgesch. und Volksk., Bd. I, II, 1885, 1893. Handb. der Altertumswiss. He edits the series (1890). Handb. der griech. Laut- und Formenl. Eine Einfuhr. in das sprach-
wiss. Stud, des Griech., 1902, 2. Aufl., 1912.

9
Die griech. Spr. im Zeitalter des Hellen., 1901,

Untersuch. zur Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1898.
TI. I, II, 1891.
1"
" Gesch. der Sprachwiss. bei den Griech. und Rom.,

12
Lat. Gr., 4. Aufl., 1910; Draeger, Hist. Synt. der lat. Spr., Bd. I, II, 1878, 1881; Lindsay, The Lat. Lang., 1894. In Bd. Ill of Landgraf's Gr., GoUing says (p. 2) that Latin Grammar as a study is due to the Stoics who did it "in der cngsten Vcrbindung mit der Logik." Cf. Origin of Gk. Gr.
Hist. Gr. der lat. Spr., 1903.
Cf. Stolz
und Schmalz,
" See Whitney, Lang, and the Study

1^
of Lang., 18G8, p. 399.

II, p.
Sayce, Intr. to the Sci. of Lang., vol.
301.
15
Whitney, Darwinism and Lang., Reprint from North Am. Rev., July,
1874.
16 Three Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1891, p. 9. See also The Silesian Horseherd: "Language and thought go hand in hand; where there is as yet no word, there is as yet no idea." Many of the writers on animals do not accept this doctrine.
"
Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. xHii.
34

Self-observation
development.
tific.
and analogy help one
to strike a
general average and so
make grammar
practical as well as scien-
(6)
in a living tongue.
is
in
Evolution in Language. Growth, then, is to be expected Change is inseparable from life. No language dead so long as it is undergoing change, and this must be true spoken and written usage. It is not the function of the gram-
marian to stop change in language, a thing impossible in itself. Such change is not usually cataclysmic, but gradual and varied. " A written language, to serve any practical purpose, must change with the times, just like a living dialect."^ In general, change in usage may be compared to change in organic structure in The changes by analogy in the "greater or lesser fitness." ^ speech of children are very suggestive on this point. The vocabulary of the Greek tongue must therefore continually develop, for new ideas demand new words and new meanings come to old words. Likewise inflections vary in response to new movements. This change brings great wealth and variety. The idea of progress has seized the modern mind and has been applied to the
study of language as to everything
(c)
else.
Change Chiefly
in
the Vernacular.
Linguistic change
occurs chiefly in the vernacular.
From
the spoken language
new
words and new inflections work their way gradually into the written style, which is essentially conservative, sometimes even Much slang is finally acanachronistic and purposely archaic. cepted in the literary style. The study of grammar was originally confined to the artificial book-style. Dionysius Thrax expressly
defined
cos
grammar
TO
TToXv
as
ejUTretpta roiv
irapa TrotijraTs re Kal crvyypa4>evaLU
ewl
\eyofjLP(jop.
It
was with him a concern

first
for the
poets and writers, not "die Sprache des Lebens."^

(ypafxnaTLK-fi, 7pd0aj),
Grammar
then,
was
to write
and to understand
It is
what was wTitten; then the

moderns who
its
scientific interpretation of this litera-
ture; later the study of hterary linguistic usage.
only the
have learned to investigate the living speech for
own
scriptions the distinction

style
Before the discovery of the Greek inbetween the vernacular and the literary could not be so sharply drawn for the Greek of the classical
historical value.
^ 2
Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 481.

lb., p. 13.
Kiihner speaks of "das organische Leben der Sprache" and und lebensvoUes Bild des groBen und kraftig bliihenden Sprachbaums." Ausfiihrl. Gr. der griech. Spr., 1. Bd., 1890, p. iii. 3 Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, pp. 3-5.
of "ein klares, anschauliches

period,
35
though Aristophanes should have taught us much. We have moved away from the position of Mure^ who said: "The distinction between the language of letters and the vulgar tongue, so characteristic of modern civilization, is imperceptible or but
little
defined in the flourishing age of Greece.
Numerous
peculi-
tended to constitute cla'ssical expression in speaking or writing, not, as with us, the privilege of a few, but a public property in which every Hellene had an equal interest." The people as a whole were wonderfully well educated, but the educated classes themselves then, as now with us, used a
arities in her social condition
spoken as well as a literary style. Jannaris^ is clear on this point: "But, speaking of Attic Greek, we must not infer that all Athenians and Atticized Greeks wrote and spoke the classical Attic
what
portrayed in the aforesaid literature, for this Attic is essentially it still remains in modern Greek composition: a merely historical abstraction; that is, an artistic language which nobody
spoke but
still
everybody understood."
We
must note
therefore
both the vernacular and the literary style and expect constant change in each, though not in the same degree. Zarncke indeed still sounds a note of warning against too much attention to the vernacular, though a needless one.^ In the first century a.d. the vernacular Greek was in common use all over the world, the character of which we can now accurately set forth. But this nonUterary language was not necessarily the speech of the
illiterate.
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. first Christian writer whom we know to have been thoroughly educated in this training. Remember that he was a practical teacher, not likely to commit the fault of speaking over the heads of his audience, as the phrase is," Hatzidakis^ laments that the monuments of the Greek since the Alexandrian period are no longer in the pure actual living speech of the time, but in the arI
Paul, the
'
Crit. Hist, of the

cit.,
Lang, and
Lit. of
Anc. Greece, 1850,
vol.
I,
p. 117,
Op.
1897, p. 3
f.
3 Die Entst. der griech. Literaturspr., 1890, p. 2: "Denn man liefe Gefahr, den Charakter der Literaturdeiikinaler giinzlich zu zenslorcn, indcni man, ihre eigenartigc Gestaltung vcrkcnnend, sie nach den Normen eincr gesprochenen Mundart corrigirt." But see Lottich, De Serm, vulg. Att., 1881; and
Apostolides, op.
* ^
cit.
Prog, of Hcllen. in Alex. Emp., 1905, p. 137.

Einleitung, p. 3.
36
tificial
Attic of a bygone age. The modern Greek vernacular is a living tongue, but the modern literary language so proudly
called Kadapevovaa
of language as life
is artificial
makes
it
and unreal.'^ This new conception no longer possible to set up the Greek
of
writer to-day
any one period as the standard for all time. The English who would use Hooker's style would be affected and anachronistic. Good English to-day is not what it was two hundred years ago, even with the help of printing and (part of the time) dictionaries. What we wish to know is not what was good Greek at Athens in the days of Pericles, but what was good Greek in Syria and Palestine in the first century a.d. The direct evidence for this must be sought among contemporaries, not from ancestors in a distant land. It is the living Greek that
we
desire,
not the dead.
Greek not an Isolated Language. (a) The Importance of Comparative Grammar. Julius Csesar, who wrote a work on grammar, had in mind Latin and Greek, for both were in constant use in the Roman world.^ Formal Sanskrit grammar itself may have resulted from the comparison of Sanskrit with the native dialects of India. ^ Hence comparative grammar seems to lie at the very heart of the science. It cannot be said, however, that Panini, the great Sanskrit scholar and grammarian of the fourth century e.g., received any impulse from the Greek civilization of Alexander the Great.^ The work of Panini is one of the most remarkable in history for subtle originality, "une histoire naturelle de la langue sanscrite." The Roman and Greek grammarians attended to the use of words in
III.
sentences, while the Sanskrit writers analyzed words into syl-
and studied the relation of sounds to each other. It is not possible to state the period when linguistic comparison was first made. Max Miiller in The Science of Language even says:
lables^
"From an
the
first
historical point of
view
it is
not too
Day
of Pentecost
marks the
real
much to say that beginning of the Science

method
of language."
is
^
One must not think
that the comparative
"more
characteristic of the study of language than of other

ist
iiie
"Eine Literatursprache
to
eine Art Normalsprache. "
Schwyzer,
Weltspr. des Altert., 1902,

^ ffing, Intr.
'
p. 12.
Comp. Gr., p. 2. Comp. Philol., p. 261. Goblet d'Alviella, Ce que I'lnde doit a la Grece, 1897, p. 129. ^ King, op. cit., p. 2 f "The method of comparative grammar is merely auxiliary to historical grammar," Wheeler, Whence and Whither of the Mod. Sci. of Lang., p. 96.
Sayce, Prin. of
.

branches of modern inquiry." i
37
The
root idea of the

is
new gram-
said to be one of the curiosities of the world, and some other grammatical works can be regarded in that light. But our fundamental obli-
mar
is
the kinship of languages.
Chinese grammar
gation
(6)
is
to the
The Common Bond

of
It is
Hindu and Greek grammarians. in Language. Prof. Alfredo Tromlink in all
betti,
Rome, has sought the connecting

a gigantic task, but it of ultimate common origin.
is
human
all
speech.3
doubtless true that
speech
tive
is
The remote
relationships
are very difficult to trace.
grammarians speak
of isolating, agglutinative
As a working hypothesis the comparaand inflectional
languages.
etc.,
In the isolating tongues like the Chinese, Burmese, the words have no inflection and the position in the sen-
of meaning.
tence and the tone in pronunciation are relied on for clearness Giles* points out that modern English and Persian
have nearly returned to the position

guages.
of Chinese as isolating lan-
Hence
it is
inferred that the Chinese has already gone
through a history similar to the English and is starting again on inflectional career. Agglutinative tongues like the Turkish express the various grammatical relations by numerous separable
an
prefixes, infixes
still
and
suffixes.
Inflectional languages
is
further development, for while a distinction
have made made between
the stem and the inflexional endings, the stems and the endings do not exist apart from each other. There are two great families
Hebrew, and the Indo-Germanic or Indo-European (the Indo-Iranian or Aryan, the Armenian, the Greek, the Albanian, the Italic, the Celtic, the Germanic and the BaltoSlavic).^ Indo-European also are Illyrian, Macedonian, Phrygian, Thracian and the newly-discovered Tocharian. Some of these
the Syriac, the Arabic,
etc.)
in the inflexional group, the Semitic (the Assyrian, the
groups, like the Italic, the Germanic, the Balto-Slavic, the IndoIranian, embrace a number of separate tongues which show an
inner affinity, but
all
the groups have a general family likeness."

,
Whitney, Life and Growth of Lang., 1S75 p. 315. F. Hoffmann, Ubcr die Entwickel. des Begriffs dcr Gr. bei den Alten,
1.
1891, p.
*
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
(c)
NEW TESTAMENT
It is
The Original Indo-Germanic Speech,

the
original
not claimed
that
Indo-Germanic speech has been discovered, though Kretschmer does speak of "die indogermanische Ursprache," but he considers it only a necessary hypothesis and a
useful definition for the early speech-unity before the Indo-Germanic stock separated. 1 Brugmann speaks also of the original
and ground-speech ( Ur- und Grundsprache) in the prehistoric background of every member of the Indo-Germanic family .2 The
science of language has as a historic discipline the task of investigating the collective speech-development of the Indo-Germanic peoples.^ Since Bopp's day this task is no longer impossible. The
existence of an original Indo-Germanic speech This hypothesis of all modern linguistic study.
is
the working
demands indeed
a study of the Indo-Germanic people. Horatio Hale* insists that language is the only proper basis for the classification of manBut this test breaks down when Jews and Egyptians speak kind. Greek after Alexander's conquests or when the Irish and the American Negro use English. The probable home and wanderings of the original Indo-Germanic peoples are well discussed by Kretschmer.^ It is undeniable that many of the same roots exist
in slightly different
forms in
all
or
most
of the
Indo-Germanic
tongues.
They
are usually words that refer to the
common
do-
mestic relations, elementary agriculture, the ordinary articles of food, the elemental forces, the pronouns and the numerals. Inflexional languages have two kinds of roots, predicative (nouns
and verbs) and pronominal. Panini found 1706 such roots in Sanskrit, but Edgren has reduced the number of necessary Sanskrit roots to 587.^ But one must not suppose that these hypothetical roots ever constituted a real language, though there was
an
original
Indo-Germanic tongue.^
baues, 1893.
For further literature on comparative gi-ammar see ch. I, 2 (j) There is an Enghsh translation of Brugmann's Bde. I and II called Elements of the Comp. Gr. of the Indo-Ger. Lang., 5 vols., 1886-97. But his Kurze vergl. Gr. (1902-4) is the handiest edition. Meillet (Intr. k 1 'Etude Comp. etc., pp. 441-455) has a discriminating discussion of the Mteraof this book.
ture.
1
Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, pp. 7-9.
2 3 4
Kurze
Pop.
vergl. Gr., 1. Lief., 1902, p. 3.
lb., p. 27.
Sci.
Rev., Jan., 1888.
6 8
Einl. in die Gesch. etc., pp. 7-92.
See Max Muller, Three Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1891, p. 29. Sayce, Prin. of Comp. Philol., 1875, p. vi.
39
(d) Greek as a "Dialect" of the Indo-Germanic Speech. Greek then can be regarded as one of the branches of this original Indo-Germanic speech, just as French is one of the descendants of the Latin/ Hke Spanish, Portuguese, Itahan. Compare also the re-
lation of English to the other Teutonic tongues.^
To go
further,
the separation of this original Indo-Germanic speech into various tongues was much like the breaking-up of the original Greek into
dialects
and was due to natural
causes.
Dialectic variety itself
Greek has vital relations with all the branches of the Indo-Germanic tongues, though in varying degrees. The Greek shows decided affinity with the Sanskrit, the Latin and the Celtic" languages. Part of the early Greek stock was probably Celtic. The Greek and the Latin flourished side by side for centuries and had much common history. All the comparative grammars and the Greek grammars from this point of view constantly compare the Greek with the Latin. See especially the great work of Riemann and Goelzer, Grammaire comparee du Grec et du Latin.^ On the whole subject of the relation of the Greek with the various Indo-Germanic languages see the excel-
implies previous speech-unity.'
But the hypothesis of an cannot be considered as shown, though there are many points of contact between Greek and Latin. ^ But Greek, as the next oldest branch known to us, shows marked affinity with the Sanskrit. Constant use of the Sanskrit must be made by one who wishes to understand the
original
lent brief discussion of Kretschmer.^
Graeco-Italic tongue
historical development of the Greek tongue. Such a work as Whitney's Sanskrit Grammar is very useful for this purpose. See also J. Wackernagel, Altindische Grammatik. I, Lautlehre
(1896).
1
II,
1,
Einleitung zur Wortlehre (1905).
So Thumb's
See Meyer-Liibke, Gr. der rom. Spr., 3 Bde., 1890, 1894, 1899. See Hirt, Handb. der gricch. Laut- und Fornienl., 2d ed., 1912, p. 13. Cf. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 112 (Ethn. Affin. of the Anc. Greeks). 3 Whitney, Lang, and the Study of Lang., 1868, p. 185. See Brugmann,
2
Griech. Gr., p. 5: "Die griechische, lateinische, indische u.s.w. Grammatik sind die konstitutiven Teile der indogermanischen Grammatik in gleicher Weise, wie z. B. die dorische, die ionische u.s.w. Grammatik die griechische
Grammatik ausmachen."
See Holder, Altcelt. Sprachsch., 1891 flf. Phon6t. ct Et. dcs Formes Grq. et Lat., 1901. 8 Einl. in die Gesch. der gricch. Spr., pp. 153-170. ' Prof. B. L. Gildersleeve, Johns Hopkins Univ., has always taught Greek, but his Latin Grammar shows his fondness for Latin. See also Henry, A Short Comp. Gr. of Gk. and Lat., 1890, and A Short Comp. Gr. of Eng. and
^ *
Synt., 1897.
Ger., 1893.
40

des
Handbuch
Sanskrit.
I,
Grammatik
(1905).
Max
Mliller^
playfully remarks: "It has often been said that no one can
know
anything of the science of language who does not know Sanskrit, and that is enough to frighten anybody away from its study." It is not quite so bad, however. Sanskrit is not the parent stock The age of of the Greek, but the oldest member of the group. the Sanskrit makes it invaluable for the study of the later speechdevelopments.
The Greek
therefore
is
not an isolated tongue, but sustains vital
relations with a great family of languages.
So important does he devotes his notable Einleitimg in die Geschichte der griechischen Sprache to the setting forth of "the prehistoric beginnings of the Greek speech-development." 2 This effort is, of necessity, fragmentary and partly inferential, but most valuable for a scientific treatment of the Greek language. He has a luminous discussion of the effect of the Thracian and Phrygian stocks upon the Greek when the language spread over Asia Minor.^ IV. Looking at the Greek Language as a Whole. We cannot indeed make an exhaustive study of the entire Greek language in a book that is professedly concerned only with one epoch of that Jannaris^ inhistory. As a matter of fact no such work exists. deed said that "an 'historical' grammar, tracing in a connected manner the life of the Greek language from classical antiquity to the present time, has not been written nor even seriously attempted as yet." Jannaris himself felt his limitations when he faced so gigantic a task and found it necessary to rest his work
Kretschmer consider
this aspect of the subject that
upon the
1
classical Attic as the
only practical basis.^
But
so far
Three Lect. on the Sci. of Lang., 1891, p. 72. P. 5. Prof. Burrows (Disc, in Crete, 1907, pp. 145 fT.) raises the question whether the Greek race (a blend of northern and southern elements) made the Gk. language out of a pre-existing Indo-European tongue. Or did the northerners bring the Gk. with them? Or did they find it already in the .^gean? It is easier to ask than to answer these questions. * Hist. Gk. Gr., 1897, p. v. 3 See pp. 171-243. ^ lb., p. xi. Thumb says: "Wir sind noch sehr weit von einer Geschichte oder historischen Grammatik der griechischen Sprache entfernt; der Versuch von Jannaris, so dankenswert er ist, kann doch nur provisorische Geltung beanspruchen, wobei man mehr die gute Absicht und den FleiB als das Die griech. sprachgeschichtliche Verstiindnis des Verfassers loben muB." Spr., etc., 1901, p. 1. Cf. also Krumbacher, Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr. (1884, p. 4): "Eine zusammenhangende Darstellung des Entwickelungsganges der griechischen Sprache ist gegenwartig nicht mogUch." But it is more possible now than in 1884.
2
41
mar
he departed from the pure historical method. But such a gramwill come some day. (a) Descriptivp: Historical Grammar. Meanwhile descriptive
and necessary. " Descriptive gramand grammatical conditions in use at a given date within a certain community speaking a common language." There is this justification for taking
historical
is
grammar
possible
mar has
to register the grammatical forms

i
Attic as the standard for classical study; only the true historical perspective should be given and Attic should not be taught as
and essential then to correlate other Greek and to use all Greek to throw light on the stage of the language under review. If the Greek itself is not an isolated tongue, no one stage of the language can be so regarded. ''Wolffs deprecates the restriction of
It is possible
all
the only real Greek.
the N. T. Greek with
grammar to a set of rules abstracted from the writings of a 'golden' period, while in reality it should comprise the whole history of a language and trace its development." H. C. Miiller'
indeed thought that the time had not arrived for a grammar of Greek on the historical plan, because it must rest on a greater amount of material than is now at hand. But since then a vast
material has come to light in the form of papyri, and research in the modern Greek. Muller's owti book has added no little to our knowledge of the subject. Meanof
amount
new
inscriptions
while
we can
use the historical material for the study of N. T.

risk of slight repe-
Greek.
(b)
Unity of the Greek Language. At the

it is
worth while to emphasize this point. Muller^ is apologetic and eager to show that "the Greek language and hterature is one organic, coherent whole." The dialectical variations, while
tition
possess original
confusing to a certain extent, do not show that the Greek did not and continuous unity. As early as 1000 b.c. these
dialectical distinctions
is
probably existed and the speech of Homer a literary dialect, not the folk-speech.^ The original sources of
Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., 18SS, p. 2.
Oertel, Lect.
'
on the Study
of Lang., 1902, p. 27.
Thumb
(Thtol. Litera-
the hope that in a future edition of his Gr. des N. T., Blass may do this for his book: "Die Sprache des N. T. auf dem grofien Hintergrund dcr hellenistischen Sprachontwickhmg boschreibcn zu
turzeit., 1903, p. 424) expresses
konnen."
*
m^^ q^
fi,>,.
i,(.ii
j^^j.^
jj,f)|^
^^
j^
"die griechische Spraehe als Einlioit" see Thumb's able discussion in Handb. d. gricch. Dial. (pp. 1-12). With all the diversity of dialects there was essential unity in comparison with other tongues.
lb., p. 16.
*
On
Brugmann,
Vergl. Gr., 1902, p. 8.
42

when
as one single
the Greek speech go back to a far distant time
language an Asiatic idiom had taken Europe in its circle of- inThe translator of Buttmann's Greek Grammar speaks fluence.^ This was of Homer "almost as the work of another language."
once a common opinion for all Greek that was not classic Attic. But Thiersch entitled his great work Griechische Grammatik vorziiglich des homerischen Dialekts, not simply because of the worth
of
Homer, "but because, on the contrary, a thorough knowledge of the Homeric dialect is indispensably necessary for those who desire to comprehend, in their whole depth and compass, the Grecian tongue and literature." ^ But Homer is not the gauge by which to test Greek; his poems are invaluable testimony to the
early history of one stage of the language. It is a pity that we know so little of the pre-Homeric history of Greek. " Homer pre-
sents not a starting-point, but a culmination, a complete achievement, an almost mechanical accomplishment, with scarcely a
it has persisted as a whether we read the language one linguistic unit till now. the Attic Herodotus, Ionic the Pindar, Doric Epic Homer, the Paul the Plutarch, Atticistic the Sappho, Êolic Xenophon, the
hint of origins."^
But whenever Greek began

It is
exponent of Christ, an inscription in Pergamus, a papyrus letter None of in Egypt, Tricoupis or Vlachos in the modern time. impertior excrescences as regarded can be representatives these persons, but the uneducated been always have There nences. all history checkered, though continuous, had a has tongue Greek of appreciation keen has a Greek educated modern The the way. complained MuUer^ Sprache."" klassischen der Schonheiten "die that "almost no grammarians have treated the Greek language
as a whole," but the works of Krumbacher, Thumb, Dieterich, Hatzidakis, Psichari, Jannaris, etc., have made it possible to obtain a general survey of the Greek language up to the present
Like English,^ Greek has emerged into a unity and consistent growth.
time.
1
new sphere
of
Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, p. 6. On the unof the Gk. tongue see Wackernagel, Die griech. Spr., p. 294, Tl. I, Abt. 8 (Die Kult. der Gegenw.). On the antiquity of Gk. see p. 292 f. 2 Sandford, Pref. to Thiersch's Gk. Gr., 1830, p. viii. 3 Miss Harrison, Prol. to the Study of Gk. Rel., 1903, p. vii.
mixed character
* 6
6
Hatzidakis, Einl. in die neugr. Gr., 1892, p.

Hist. Gr. der hell. Spr., 1891, p. 2.
4.
See John Koch, Eng. Gr., for an admirable bibhography of works on Eng. Ergeb. und Fortschr. der germanist. Wiss. im letzten Vierteljahrh., 1902, The Germans have taught us how to study Enghsh! pp. 89-138, 325-437).
(in

(c)
43
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
Periods
by Schliemann and Evans. The following is a tentative outhne: The Mycenaan Age, 2000 b.c. to 1000 b.c; the Age of the DiaB.C. to 300 B.C.; the Age of the Koivij, 300 b.c. to 330 Byzantine Greek, 330 a.d. to 1453 a.d.; the modern Greek, 1453 a.d. to the present time. The early stage of the Byzantine Greek (up to 600 a.d.) is really KOiv-q and the rest is modern Greek. See a different outline by Jannaris^ and Hadley
lects,
1000
A.D.; the
and
the
Allen.2 As a matter of fact any division is arbitrary, for language has had an unbroken history, though there' are
these general epochs in that history. We can no longer call the pre-Homeric time mythical as Sophocles does.^ In naming this
the Mycenaean age we do not wish to state positively that the Mycenseans were Greeks and spoke Greek. "Of their speech we have yet to read the first syllable." ^ Tsountas^ and Manatt, however, venture to believe that they were either Greeks or of the same stock. They use the term "to designate all Greek peoples who shared in the Mycenaean civilization, irrespective of
their
habitat." ^
Ohnefalsch-Richter {Cont.
p. 862) claims
Cyprus as the purveyor
Rev., Dec, 1912, of culture to the Creto-
age. He claims that Hellenes lived in Cyprus 1200 to 1000 B.C. The Mycenaean influence was wide-spread and comes "do^vn to the very dawn of historical Greece." ^ That Greek was known and used widely during the Mycenaean age the researches
Mycenaean
of
^
Evans at Knossos,
Hist.
in Crete,
make
clear.^
The
early linear
Moulton
B.C.,
Cf. also Schuckburgh, Greece, 1906, p. 24 f. counts 32 centuries of the Gk. language from 1275 the date of the mention of the Acha;ans on an Egyptian monument.
p.
xxii.
Gk. Gr.,
(Prol., p. 184)
2 Gk. Gr., 1885, p. 1 f. Deissmann indeed would have only three divisions, the Dialects up to 300 b.c, Middle Period up to 600 a.d., and Mod. Gk. up to the present time. Hauck's Realencyc, 1889, p. 030. Cf. Miillc-, Hist Gr. der hell. Spr., 1891, pp. 42-62, for another outline. ' * ^
Gk. Lex., etc., p. 11. Tsountas and Manatt, The Mycenaean Age, 1897 p 316 lb., p. 335 fT.
lb., p. 235.
lb., p. 325. See also Beloch, Grieoh. Gesch., I., 85: "Auch sonst kann kern Zweifel sem, dafi die mykeniiischo Kultur in Griechonland bis in das VIII. Jahrhundcrt gehorrscht." Flinders-Petrie
(Jour, of Hell. Stud.,
xii
204) speaks of 1100 to 800 b.c. as the "age of
Mycemran
decaxlcnce."
j).
Cretan Pictographs and Pre-Phoenician Script, 1895,
362;
cf.
also
44
came from a still earlier pictograph. The emerge into light from about 1000 b.c. onward and culminate in the Attic which flourished till the work of Alexander is done. The Homeric poems prove that Greek was an old language by 1000 to 800 b.c. The dialects certainly have their roots deep Roughly, 300 b.c. is the time when the in the Mycensean age. Greek has become the universal language of the world, a Weltsprache. 330 a.d. is the date when the seat of government was removed from Rome to Constantinople, while a.d. 1453 is the date when Constantinople was captured by the Turks. With all the changes in this long history the standards of classicity have not varied greatly from Homer till now in the written style, while the Greek vernacular to-day is remarkably like the earliest known We know something inscriptions of the folk-speech in Greece.^ of this history for about 3000 years, and it is at least a thousand years longer. Mahaffy has too poor an idea of modern Greek, but even he can say: "Even in our miserable modern pigeonGreek, which represents no real pronunciation, either ancient or modern, the lyrics of Sophocles or Aristophanes are unmistakably
writing of the Cretans
Greek
dialects
lovely."
(d)
Modern Greek in Particular.

it is
It
is
important to single out
the modern Greek vernacular^ from the rest of the language for the obvious reason that
of the vernacular
the abiding witness to the perpetuity

living organism.
It
is
Greek as a
a witness
also that
is
at our service always.
The modern Greek popular
differ materially from the vernacular Byzantine, and thus connects directly with the vernacular kolvI]. Alexandria was "the great culture-reservoir of the Greek-Oriental world the repository of the ancient literary treasures.""* With this
speech does not
Jour, of Hell. Stud., xiv, 270-372.

Crete, 1907, p. 73
B.C.
^
See Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr.,
p. 22, for fur-
ther proofs of the antiquity of Gk. as a written tongue.

f.)
Mosso (Palaces of argues that the Mycenaian Unear script was used 1900
Gr., p. 13.
Cf. Evans, Further Researches, 1898.
Brugmann, Griech.
Survey
of
See also Hatzidakis, Einl. in die neugr.
Gr., 1892, p. 3.
2
in Crete, 1910; Baike,
Gk. Civihz., 1896, p. 209. Cf. further Mosso, Dawn of Civiliz. Kings of Crete, 1910; Firmen, Zeit und Dauer der
Kult., 1909.
kretisch*
myken.
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.

general position
45
Thumb
heartily agrees.^
Hatzidakis^ even says:

this last diifers
"The language
generally spoken to-day in the towns differs less
from the common language of Polybius than
from
the language of Homer." Since this is true it at first seems odd that the students at the University of Athens should object so much to the translation of the N. T. into the modern vernacular.
They
KOLPT].
forget that the
N. T.
is
itself
written in the vernacular

it is
But that was
so long ago that
now
classic to
them.
Certainly in the Gospels, as Wellhausen^
insists,
the spoken
Greek became
of the modern Greek* helps Procrustean bed of the old "the the student to escape from thing.^ dead It is probfixed and Greek" which he learned as a besides the Byzantine manual had some able that Roger Bacon in the of less than rest England, no "In old Greek grammars.^ had died away, and of Greek knowledge the Western Europe, here also, it was only after the conquest of Constantinople that a
literature.
Knowledge
change was possible."^ Western Christians had been afraid of the corruptions of paganism if they knew Greek, and of Moham-
medanism
But at if they knew Hebrew (being kin to Arabic!). inBoltz modern Greek. the favour of in come has change last a for language common the Greek as modern advocated has deed the scholars of the world since Latin is so httle spoken.^ There is indeed need of a new world-speech, as Greek was in the N. T. times, but there is no language that can now justly make such a English comes nearer to it than any other. This need claim. has given rise to the artificial tongues Uke Volaptik and Espe1
"Die heutige
griechische Volkssprache ist die natiirliche Fortsetzung der

Spr., 1892, p. 8.
alten Kolvt]."
Die neugr.
fii-st
See Heilmeier's book on the Ro-
maic Gk. (1834), who

the vern. kolvt). 2 Transl. by
J.
saw
this connection
between the mod. vcrn. and

p. 30,
H. Moulton
1903,
p.
in Gr. of
N. T. Gk., 1906 and 1908,
from
Rev. des
*
fit.
Grq.,
220.
'
Of. Ivrumbachcr,
Das Prob. der
ncugr.
Schriftspr., 1902.
Einl. in die drei erstcn Evang., 1905, p. 9.
6 6
^
See Riiger, Prap. bei Joh. Antiochenus, 1896, p. 7. Thumb, Handb. der neugr. Volkspr., 1895, p. x.
Roger Bacon's Gk.

lb., p. xlii.
Gr., edited
by Nohxn and Hirsch,
1902, p. ]x
f.
Hell, die internat. Gelehrtenspr. der Zukunft, 18SS.
Likewise A. Rose:
"Die
griechische Sprache
hat
cine gliinzcnde Zukunft vor sich."
p. 271.
Die Griechen und ihre Spr., 1890, p. 4. He pleads for it as a "Weltsprache," 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
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

is
earlier in inscriptions representing
other of the early dialects.

land.
The persistence
of early English
one or anforms
easily observed in the vernacular in parts of
In the same
way
the late Latin vernacular
is
America or Engto be compared
with the early Latin vernacular, not with the Latin of elegant "Speaking generally, we may say that the Greek of a literature. well-written newspaper [the literary language] is now, as a rule, far more classical than the Hellenistic of the N. T., but decidedly
less
classical
than the Greek of Plutarch." 2
What
the rela-
Greek and the modern Greek is will be shown in the next chapter. It should be noted here that the N. T. Greek had a strong moulding influence on the Byzantine, and so on the modern Greek because of the use of the Greek New Testament all over the world, due to the spread of Christianity
tion between the N. T.
throughout the Roman Empire.^ The great Christian preachers did not indeed use a peculiar ecclesiastical Greek, but the N. T. did tend to emphasize the type of kolvt] in which it was written. "The diction of the N. T. had a direct influence in moulding
the Greek ordinarily used by Christians in the succeeding cenCompare the effect of the King James Version on the turies."^
English language and of Luther's translation of the Bible on
German.
of View. It sounds like a truism to Greek idiom must be explained from the Greek point of view. But none the less the caution is not superfluous. Trained Unguists may forget it and so commit a grammatical vice. Even Winer ^ will be found saying, for instance: "Appel-
V.
The Greek Point
insist that the
latives which,
*
as expressing definite objects,
should naturally
Cf. J. C. O'Connor, Esperanto Text-book,
and Eng.-Esper. Diet.
Jebb,
On
the Rela. of
Mod.
to Class. Gk., in Vincent and Dickson's
Blass actually says: "Der SprachgeHandb. to Mod. Gk., 1887, p. 294. brauch des Neuen Testaments, der vielfaltig vom Neugriechischen her eine viel bessere Beleuchtung empfangt als aus der alten klassischen Literatur."
Kiihner's Ausf. Gr.
etc.,
1890, p. 25.
Blass also says

fehlt."
(ib., p.
26) that "eine
wissenschaftliche neugriechische
Grammatik
But Hatzidakis and
others have written since.

3
See Reinhold,
Jebb,
ib., p.
De
Graecitate Patrum, 1898.
* '
290.
Gr. of the N. T. Gk., Moulton's transl., 1877, p. 147.
47
That have the article, arc in certain cases used without it." appelThe Greek. toward attitude wrong the "should" has to be lative in Greek does not need to have the article in order is used tense one that admits often Winer when So definite. "for" another, he is really thinking of German and how it would be expressed in German. Each tongue has its own history and of langenius. Parallel idioms may or may not exist in a group is guages. Sanskrit and Latin, for instance, have no article. It the not possible to parallel the Hebrew tenses, for example, with Greek, nor, indeed, can it be done as between Greek and English. The English translation of a Greek aorist may have to be in the but past perfect or the present perfect to suit the English usage,
that proves nothing as to
how a Greek regarded
the aorist tense.
We
must assume in a language that a good writer knew how to Greek use his own tongue and said what he meant to say. Good tovs Haayaytlv tQ h uses may be very poor English, as when Luke this of translation literal A -yoveZs TO TraiBlov 'Irjaovv (Lu. 2:27).
simply neat Greek idiom makes barbarous English. The Greeks and commonest the of "One did not look at this clause as we do. is languages foreign of grammar gravest errors in studying the back reason then and translation, to make a half-conjectural
exfrom our own language to the meaning of the original; or to idiom different formally the by original plain some idiom of the which is our substantial equivalent." ^ Broadus was the greatest said nothing teacher of language that I have known and he has what he knew Greek educated an all, After truer than this. task difficult and great a indeed is It do. meant better than we underto-day who grammarian Greek the of that is demanded development of takes to present a living picture of the orderly Ganzen" and groBen und schonen einem "zu the Greek tongue of the Greek flower the light beautiful most the show "in
also
spirit
and
life."^
neglect of the literary
Deissmann^ feels strongly on the subject of the development of Primitive Christianity, "a
als Mt., 1886, p. 316. See also Gerber, Die Spr. Sprache jener odcr dieser Charakter ganzc Kunst 1. Bd., 1871, p. 321: "Der des Landcs, wo sic gcsprochen wird. Die gricchiist der Abdruck dor Natiir selbst mit seiner tiefdunklen Bliiue, schc Sprache ist der gricchische Himniel Meere spiegelt." agaischen wogcnden sanft dem in die sich How much more so ^ Kuhner, Ausf. Gr. der griech. Spr., 1834, p. iv.
1
Broadus,
Comm. on
now'
3 Expos. Times, Dec, 1906, neue Folge, 1882, p. 429 ff
p. 103.
Cf. also F. Overbeck, Hist. Zeitschr.,
48
A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
subject which has not yet been recognized by many pBrsoTis in its Huge as is the library of books that have been full importance.
written on the origin of the N. T. and of its separate parts, the N. T. has not often been studied by historians of literature; that
is
to say, as a branch of the history of ancient literature."
CHAPTER
THE
III
KOINII
The Greek of the N. T. has many streams that flow into it. But this fact is not a pecuharity of this phase of the language. The KOLvrj itself has this characteristic in a marked degree. If
one needs further examples, he can recall how composite English is, not only combining various branches of the Teutonic group, but also incorporating much of the old Celtic of Britain and receiving a tremendous impress from the
Latin), not to
Norman-French (and so
mention the indirect literary influence of Latin and Greek. The early Greek itself was subject to non-Greek influence as other Indo-Germanic tongues were, and in particular from the side of the Thracians and Phrygians in the East,^ and in the West and North the Italic, Celtic and Germanic pressure was
strong.^
I.
The Term Koivn.
The word
kolvt],
sc.
StdXe/cros,
means
simply
common
language or dialect
common
is
to
all,
a world-
speech (Weltsprache).
in the use of a
Unfortunately there
not yet uniformity
term to describe the Greek that prevailed over Alexander's empire and became the world-tongue. KiihnerBlass^ speak of " kolvt] oder eXXrjVLKri SiaXeKTos." So also Schmierj
exactly. But Hellenic language is properly only Greek language, as Hellenic culture'' is Greek culture. Jannaris" suggests Panhellenic or new Attic for the universal Greek,
del* follows
* Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. der griech. Spr., 1896, pp. 171-243. But the true Phrygians were kin to the Greeks. See Percy Gardner, New Ch.
Winer
Gk. Hist., p. 84. Kretschmer, op. cit., pp. 153-170, 244-282, 3 Griech. Gr., Bd. I, i p. 22. W.-Sch., N. T. Gr., p. 17. 8 Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., p. 3. Mahaffy does use Hellenism like Droysen in his Hist, of Ilollenism, as corresponding to Hellonistic, but he does so under protest (p. 3 f.). He wishes indeed that he had coined the word "Hellcnicism." But Hogarth (Philip and Alexander, p. 277) had ah-eady used "Hellenisticism," saying: " Hellcnisticism grew out of Helof
'^
lenism."
Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 6.
49
50

'par excellence
the Greek
as to
common
usage.
Hellenistic
Greek
would answer in so far as it is Greek spoken also by Hellenists Krumbacher applies Heldiffering from Hellenes or pure Greeks.
lenistic to
the vernacular and
mivi] to
the " conventional Uterary
language" of the time,i but this is wholly arbitrary. Krumbacher Hatzidaterms the Hellenistic "ein verschwommenes Idiom." kis and Schwyzer include in the Koivi] both the literary and the spoken language of the Hellenistic time. This is the view adopted Deissmann dislikes the term Hellenistic Greek in this grammar. because it was so long used for the supposedly peculiar biblical Greek, though the term itself has a wide significance.^ He also strongly disapproves the terms "vulgar Greek," "bad Greek," "graecitas fatiscens," in contrast with the "classic Greek." Deissmann moreover objects to the word koivt] because it is used
either for the vernacular, the literary style or for all the Greek So he proposes of the time including the Atticistic revival.
cumbersome. It is indeed the world-speech of the Alexandrian and Roman period that is meant by the term Koivi]. There is on the other hand the
"Hellenistic world-speech."
^
But
this is too
literary speech of the orators, historians, philosophers, poets, the public documents preserved in the inscriptions (some even Atticistic);
on the other hand we have the popular writings in the LXX, the N. T., the Apostolic Fathers, the papyri (as a rule) and the ostraca. The term is thus sufficient by itself to express the Greek in common use over the world, both oral and literary,
as Schweizer^ uses
it
following Hatzidakis.
it
Thumb ^
identifies
to both vernacular and KOLvi] and Hellenistic Greek and applies written style, though he would not regard the Atticists as proper producers of the Koivij. Moulton^ uses the term KOLvi] for both
spoken and literary kolvt]. The doctors thus disagree very widely. On the whole it seems best to use the term KOLvq (or Hellenistic Greek) both for the vernacular and literary Koivi], excluding the Atticistic revival, which was a conscious effort to write not Koivii
1 2
s
Miinchener Sitzungsber., 1886, p. 435. Art. Hell. Griech., Hauck's Realencyc, p. 629.
lb., p. 630.
^ Die griech. Spr. etc., p. 9. Gr. der perg. Inschr., p. 19 f. "Hellenistic" Prol., p. 23. It is not necessary to discuss here the use of Gk. as "Jewish-Gk." (see "Semitic Influence" in ch. IV), for it is absurd. The notion that the kolv^ is Macedonian Gk. is quite beside the mark, for
"
Mac. Gk.
Du
The theory of an Alexandrian dialect is obsolete. is too barbarous. " corruptissima lingua," and Ganges, in his Glossarium called Hell. Gk. caUs it "jargon." Schr., 197) Kl. p. Xgyp.-Griech., Niebuhr (Uber das
THE Komn
51
but old Attic.i At last then the Greek world has speech-unity, whatever was true of the beginning of the Greek language.^ n. The Origin of the Kotvii. (a) Triumph of the Attic. This is what happened. Even
Ionia the Attic influence was felt. The Attic verto the Ionic vernacular, was greatly influenced by the speech of soldiers and merchants from all the Greek
in
Asiatic
nacular, sister
world.
in
Attic
fifth
the
infer that all
became the standard language of the Greek world and the fourth centuries b.c. "We must not Athenians and Atticized Greeks wrote and spoke
the classical Attic portrayed in the aforesaid literature, for this Attic is essentially what it still remains in modern Greek composition:
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
" It
is
more and more lose touch with the verone of our misfortunes, whatever be its practical convenience, that we are taught Attic as the standard Greek, and all other forms and dialects as deviations from it when many grammarians come to characterize the later Greek of the Middle Ages or of to-day, or even that of the Alexandrian or N. T.
classic literary Attic did
nacular.
periods, no adjective is strong enough to condemn this 'verdorbenes, veruneinigtes Attisch'" (S. Dickey, Princeton Rev., Oct., 1903).
The
this
even in
fast lines
literary Attic was allied to the literary Ionic; but crowning development of Greek speech no hard and are drawn, for the artificial Doric choruses are used in
tragedy and the vernacular in comedy.^

as gain as the Attic
1
There was
loss as well
is
was more extensively
used, just as
true
this principle,
Blass indeed contrasts the literature of the Alex, and Rom. periods on 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., Dieterich: "Das Sprachgebiet der Koi^ p. 410. bildet eben ein Ganzcs und kann nur im Zusammenhang betrachtet werden."
Unters., p. xvi.
Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., 1897, p. 3 f. On the superiority of the Attic see Wackernagel, Die Kult. der Gegenw., TI. I, Abt. 8, p. 299. * Rutherford, Zur Gesch. des Atticismus, Jahrb. fiir class. Phil., suppl.
xiii,
1884, pp. 360, 399.
les dcrivains grecs
ont employ6
4.
So Audoin says: "Ce n'est point arbitrairement que tel ou tel dialecte." fit. sommaire des Dial.
Grecs. Litt., 1891, p.
52
of

modern English.
be counted in
NEW TESTAMENT
may
"The orators Demosthenes and ^schines the new Attic, where other leading representa^
tives in literature are
of the
KOLvr],
New
Comedy."
kolvt].
Menander, Philemon and the other writers As the literary Attic lived on in the literary
so the vernacular Attic survived with
many
changes in the
vernacular
We
on
are at last in possession of enough of the

kolut}
old Attic inscriptions
and the
inscriptions
make
this clear.
The march
of the
and the papyri to Greek language has been

even to this presdialect
steadily forward
this Attic vernacular base

kolvt]
ent day .2
stehung der
dialect.
In a sense, therefore, the

kolvt]).
became another
(ôlic, Doric, Ionic, Attic,

Koivij,
Cf. Kretschmer,
kolvt]
pp. 1-37.
But the
Die Entwas far more than a

" eine
Kretschmer holds, it is fair to say, that the kolutj is merkwiirdige Mischung verschiedenster Dialecte" {op. cit.,
p. 6).
He
portions.
the dialects into the melting-pot in almost equal proWilamowitz-Mollendorff considers the Ionic as the chief influence in the kolvt], while W. Schmidt denies all Doric
puts
all
and Ionic elements.
influences varied in different places,
Schwyzer rightly sees that the dialectical though the vernacular Attic
of the Attic
was the common base. (6) Fate of the Other Dialects. The triumph
was
not complete, though in Ionia, at the end of the third century b.c, inscriptions in Attic are found, showing that in Asia Minor pure In the first century b.c. the Attic Ionic had about vanished. appears in inscriptions in Boeotia, but as late as the second century A.D. Ji]olic inscriptions are found in Asia Minor. Êohc first went down, followed by the Ionic. The Doric made a very stub-
born resistance.
It
was only natural that the

See
patois of
agricultural
com-
munities should hold out longest.
Even to-day the Zaconian
Thumb, Hellen., p. 28 f. modern Greek vernacular

He
has a good discussion of
Simonson, Gk. Gr., Accidence, 1903,
p. 6.
the dialects, pp. 221-265. 2 Riemann and Goelzer well say:
"Quant au
dialecte attique, grace
aux
grace a la preponderence politique et commerciale d'Athenes, grace aussi a son caractere de dialecte interinediaire entre I'ionien et les dialectes en a, il se repandit de bonne heure, hors de son domaine
grands ccrivains qui
I'illustrerent,
continua a s'etendre meme apres la chute de I'empire politique d'Athenes et finit par embrasser tout le monde sur le nom de langue comprimitif,
mune
{Koiv-n
SLoXeKTos)"
(Phonetique, p. 16).
And
yet the
common
people
3, 5,
understood
Homer
also as late as
oXrjj'
Xenophon.
Cf.
Xenophon, Com.
Kal vvi' hvvaljxriv av 'IXtd5a
koI 'Obvaatiav airo crxoyuaros elweii'.
Cf. Lottich,
De Serm.
vulg. Attic, 1881.
Rutherford,
New
On the "Growth of the Attic Dialect" see 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
world.^
was merged into the kolvt] of the whole Grajco-Roman There are undoubtedly instances of the remains of the Northwest Greek and of the other dialects in the Koivri and so in the N. T. The Ionic, so near to the Attic and having flourished over the coast of Asia Minor, would naturally have considerable influence on the Greek world-speech. The proof of this will appear in the discussion of the kolvt] where remains of all the main
before
it
dialects are naturally found, especially in the vernacular.^
Partial Koines. The standardizing of the Attic is the The kolpt] was not a sudden creation. There were These were Strabo's aUiquasi-koines before Alexander's day. ance of Ionic- Attic, Doric-JiloHc (Thumb, Handh., p. 49). It is therefore to be remembered that there were "various forms of KOLvi]'^ before the Koivi] which commenced with the conquests of
(c)
real
basis.
Alexander (Buck, Gk. Dialects, pp. 154-161), as Doric Koi.vq, Ionic Hybrid forms are not unKOLvi], Attic KOLVT], Nortliwcst KOLvi).
common, such
(cf.
as the Doric future with Attic ov as in
ttolt](tovvti
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 2
Moulton,
starksten
Pro!., p. 32.
lb., p. 37.
Radermacher(N. T.
Gr., p. 1) puts
it
clearly:
"Es geniigt zu sagcn,
dafJ die
Koivii
Zusammenhang mit dem
Attischen, in zweitcr Linie mit
dem
In der altesten Pcriode des Hellcnismus zeigt sich daneben geringcr EinfluO anderer Dialektc, dcs Dorischen und Aolischcn." * " II est k peine besoin de r6p6ter que ces caracteires s'effaccnt, k mcsure
lonischen, verriit.
que Ton descend vers

sante de I'atticisme,
Sous I'influencc sans cesse grandisune sorte d'uniformite." Boisacq, Los Dial. Dor., 1891, p. 204. "The Gk. of the N. T. is not, however, mere Koivi). In vocabulary it is fundamentally Ionic" (John Burnet, Rev. of Tlieol. and "Fundamentally" is rather strong, but dTroaroXos, Phil., Aug., 190G, p. 95).
I'ere chrctienne.
il
s'etablit
as ambassador, not
statement.
mere expedition, evXoyia, vqarela, give some colour But what does Prof. Burnet mean by "mere koivi?"?
to the
54
NEW TESTAMENT
customs and language of all the conquered nations, but it was inevitable that the Greek should become the lingua franca of the world of Alexander and his successors. In a true sense Alexander made possible this new epoch in the history of the Greek tongue. The time of Alexander divides the Greek language into two periods.
"The
first
period
is
that of the separate
life
of the dialects
and
the second that of the speech- unity, the
common
The
speech or
of
KOLVT]"
(e)
(Kretschmer, Die
Entst. d. Kolvt], p.
1).
The March toward Universalism.
successors
Alexander could not stop the march toward universalism that had begun. The success of the Roman Empire was but another proof
of this trend of history.
The days
of ancient nationalism
were
over and the KOLvq was but one expression of the glacial move-
ment.
for use.
The time
for the world-speech
had come and
it
was ready
m. The Spread of the KoivTJ. What (a) A World-Speech.

tribes as
is
called
17
kolutj
speech, not merely a general Greek tongue
among
was a worldthe Greek
speculation to speak of the
Achaean-Dorian and the Attic. It is not kolpt] as a world-speech, for the inscriptions in the kolvt] testify to its spread over Asia, Egypt, Greece, Italy, Sicily and the isles of the sea, not to mention the papyri. Marseilles was a great centre of Greek civilization, and even Gy-
was true
of the
though not Carthage, was Grecized.^ The kolvt) was in such general use that the Roman Senate and imperial governors had the decrees translated into the world-language and scattered over the empire.^ It is significant that the Greek speech becomes
rene,
one instead of many dialects at the very time that the Roman rule sweeps over the world.^ The language spread by Alexander's army over the Eastern world persisted after the division of the kingdom and penetrated all parts of the Roman world, even Rome itself. Paul wrote to the church at Rome in Greek, and Marcus Aurelius, the Roman Emperor, wrote his Meditations It was the language not only of letters, (tojv eis 'EavTov) in Greek.
but of commerce and every-day

1 2
life.
A common
lan?,uage for all
See Churton,
Viereck,
Infl. of
the
LXX Vers.,
1861, p. 14.
Sermo Graecus quo Senatus Popul. Rom. etc., 1888, p. xi. 3 See Wilamowitz-MoUendorff: "In demselben Momente, wo die casarische Weltmonarchie alle Strome hellenischer und italischer Kultur in einem Bette leitet, kommt die griechische Kunst auf alien Gebieten zu der Erkenntnis, daI5 ihre &eise erfiillt sind, das einzige das ihr bleibt, Nachahmung ist."
tJber die Entst. der griech. Schriftspr., Abhandl. deuts. Phil., 1878, p. 40.
THE KOINH
55
men may indeed be only an ideal norm, but " the whole character of a common language may be strengthened by the fact of its
transference to an unquestionably foreign linguistic area, as
we
may
observe in the case of the Greek

Kotvf]
kolvt]."^
The
late
Latin
became a
for the
West
first
as the old Babylonian
the East, this latter the the
world-tongue
known
to us.^
had been for Xeno-
phon with the retreat of the Ten Thousand'' was a forerunner of KOLvrj. Both Xenophon and Aristotle show the wider outlook
which uses Ionic words very extensively.
It already has yipofiaL, eueKev,
e8coKaiJ.P
is
of the literary Attic
There
G(j,
now
elwa
the "GroB-Attisch,"
roiaav,
and
is
rjve'yKa,
and
eSco/caj',
âaiXtaaa,
btLKVvoi,
vaos.
Aheady Thucydides and

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

It
is
the remarkable thing in
the history of the world." ^

history
was
really
an epoch
of
in the world's
when
the babel of tongues was hushed in the wonderful
language of Greece.
The vernaculars
still
the eastern
Roman
when
provinces remained, though the Greek was universal;
so,
Paul came to Lystra, the people

^
spoke the Lycaonian speech

See also Kaerst, Gesch.
d. Hel-

Zeitalt.,
"Die Weiterentwicklung der Gcschiehte des Altertums, so weit sie fiir unsere eigene Kultur entschcidende Bedeutung erlangt hat, beruht auf einer fortschreitenden Occidentalisierung; auch das im Oriente emporgekorninene Christentum entfaltet sich nach dem Westen zu und gelangt hier zu seiner eigentlich weltgeschichtlichen Wirksamkeit."
lenist.
1901, p. 420:
Schwyzer, Die Weltspr. etc., p. 7. See Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., p. 7; cf. also Rutherford New Phrynichus, 1881, p. 160 f.; Schweizer, Gr. der perg. Inschr., p. 16. Moulton (Prol., p. 31) points out that the vase-inscriptions prove the statement of the Const, of Athens, 11. .3, that the Athenians spoke a language compounded of all Greek and barbarian tongues besides. * Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen., etc., p. 40.
2 *
56
of their fathers.^
The papyri and the inscriptions prove beyond controversy that the Greek tongue was practically the same
whether in Egypt, Herculaneum, Pergamum or Magnesia. The Greek was Greeks were the school-teachers of the empire. but West, Latin was not taught in the grammar schools in the taught in the East. (6) Vernacular and Literary. L Vernacular. The spoken language is never identical with the literary style, though in the social intercourse of the best educated people there is less difference than with the uncultured.^ We now know that the old Attic of Athens had a vernacular and a literary style that differed considerably from each other.^ This distinction exists from the very start with the kolvti, as is apparent in Pergamum and elsewhere.* This vernacular kolvt] grows right out of the vernacular Attic normally and naturally.^ The colonists, merchants and soldiers who mingled all over Alexander's world did not carry literary Attic, but the language of social and
business intercourse.^
This vernacular
of
kolut]
at first differed little
from the vernacular Attic
300 B.C. and always retained the bulk of the oral Attic idioms. "Vulgar dialects both of the ancient and modern times should be expected to contain far more archaisms than innovations."^ The vernacular is not a variation from the literary style, but the literary language is a development from the vernacular.* See Schmid^ for the relation between
the literary and the vernacular
kolvt].
Hence
if
the vernacular
is
the normal speech of the people,
we must
look to the inscriptions
and the papyri
for the living

it
The pure
1
Attic as
was spoken
idiom of the common Greek or kolvt]. in Athens is preserved only in
^ Schweizer, Gr. der perg. etc., p. 22. Schwyzer, Weltspr., p. 29. See Ivretschmer, Die griech. Vaseninschr. und ihre Spr., 1894; and Meisterhans, Gr. der att. Inschr., 1900. Cf. Lottich, De Serm. vulg. Attic, 1881. 3 *
Schweizer, Gr., p. 27. Thumb, Griech. Spr. im Zeitalter
etc., p.
208
f.
Lottich in his
De
Serm.
use of
vulg. Attic, shows from the writings of Aristophanes
how
the Attic vernacular
varied in a
8 7
number
of points
from the Uterary
style, as in the frequent
diminutives, desiderative verbs, metaphors, etc.
Schweizer, Gr., p. 23.

Geldart,
Mod. Gk. Lang,
in its Rela. to Anc. Gk., 1870, p. 73.
Thumb,
als der
Griech. Spr.
etc., p. 10,
who
calls
"die
kolvt)
See also weniger ein AbschluC
Anfang einer neuen Entwicklung." On the okler Gk. kolvt] see Wackernagel, Die Kult. der Gegenw., Tl. I, Abt. 8, p. 300 f. 8 Deissmann, HeU. Griech., Hauck's Realencyc, p. 633. 9 Atticismus, Bd. IV, pp. 577-734. A very important treatment of the
whole question
is
here given.
THE KOINH
the inscriptions.^
57
In the Roman Empire the vernacular kolvt) would be understood almost everywhere from Spain to Pontus. See IV for further remarks on the vernacular kolvti. If the vernacular kolvt] was the natural develop2. Literary. ment of the vernacular Attic, the literary kolvt] was the normal
evolution of the literary Attic.
Thumb
life."^
well says,
style
"Where
there
and syntax the is widely more from the collodiverges Greek literary common with the in harmony previous renatural and This is quial."* The the language of the people.^ from Attic literary of the moval growth of the literary kolvt] was parallel with that of the popular The first prose monuKOLVT] and was, of course, influenced by it.
no development, there
is
no
"In
ment
of literary Attic
known
to us, according to Schwyzer,
is
the
Constitution of Athens^ (before 413), falsely ascribed to Xenophon. The forms of the literary kolvt] are much like the Attic, as
in Polybius, for instance,
ulary and meaning of the same words.^
but the chief difference is in the vocabPolybius 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
medical terms natural to a physician Writers like Polybius aimed to write without pedantry and without vulgarism. In a true sense then the literary KOi.vj] was a "compromise between the vernacular kolvt] and the literary
also using
many common
of culture.
Attic," between "life
and school." ^^
There
is
indeed no Chinese
Laut- und Formonl., 1902, p. 41. Moulton, Prol., p. 26. ^ Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 5. Deissmann (New Light on the N. T., 1907, p. 3 f.) shows that part of Norden's criticism of Paul's Gk. is nothing but the contrast between hterary Koivq and vernacular koivt)] cf. Die ant. Kunstjir. 5 Schwyzer, Die Wcltspr. der Alt., p. 15. See also Christ, Gesch. der
1
Hirt,
Handb. der
griech.
Griech. Spr., p. 251.
griech. Lit., p. 305.
See Die pseudoxenophontische

''
'Adrjvalo:v
IloXireia,
von
E. Kalinka, 1913.
8
Schweizer, Gr., p. 21.
Christ, op.
cil.,
p. 5SS.
Thumb, Thumb,
ff.
Griech. Spr.
etc., p.
213.
See also Goetzeler,
De
Polyb. EIoc,
1887, p. 15.
9
ib.,
p.
225
f.
See also Krenkel, Josephus und Lukas, 1894,
pp. 283
" Thumb,
ib., ji. 8.
58
and the vernacular kolvyj, but a constant from the vernacular to the written style as between prose and poetry, though Zarncke ^ insists on a thorough-going distinction between them. The literary KOLvrj would not, of course, use such dialectical forms as tovs iravTes, toIs TpayfiaroLs, etc., common in the vernacular Koivi]} But, as Krumbacher^ well shows, no literary speech worthy of the name can have an independent development apart from the vernacular. Besides Polybius and Josephus, other writers in the literary kolvt) were Diodorus, Philo, Plutarch, though Plutarch indeed is almost an "Anhanger des Atticismus"^ and Josephus was rather self-conscious in his use of the literary style.^ The literary kolvt) was still affected by the fact that many of the writers were of "un-Greek or half Greek descent," Greek being an acquired tongue.^ But the point must not be overdone, for the literary Koivi] "was written by cosmopolitan scholars for readers of the same sort," and it did not make much difference "whether a book was written at Alexandria or Pergamum."^ Radermacher^ notes that, while in the oldest Greek there was no artificiality even in the written prose, yet in the period of the KOLvi] all the literary prose shows "eine Kunstsprache." He applies this rule to Polybius, to Philo, to the N. T., to Epictetus. But certainly it does not hold in the same manner
wall between the literary
inflow
for each of these.
(c)
The Atticistic Reaction. Athens was no

civilization.
longer the centre
That glory passed to Alexandria, to Pergamum, to Antioch, to Ephesus, to Tarsus. But the great creative epoch of Greek culture was past. Alexandria, the chief seat of Greek learning, was the home, not of poets, but of critics of style who found fault with Xenophon and Aristotle, but could not produce an Anabasis nor a Rhetoric. The Atticists wrote, to be sure, in the kolvt] period, but their gaze was always backward The grammarians (Dionysius, Phrynito the pre-Kotî7 period.
of
Greek
1 Zarncke in Griech. Stud., Hermann Lipsius, 1894, p. 121. He considers the Homeric poetry a reflection of the still older historical prose and the epic the oldest hterary form. See his Die Entst. der griech. Literaturspr., 1896. Cf. Wilamowitz-MoUendorff, Die Entst. der griech. Schriftspr., Verhandl. d.
Phil., 1878, p.
3
Das Prob.
^ Hatzidakis, Einl. in die neugr. Spr., p. 6. 36 f. der neugr. Schriftspr., 1903, p. 6. A valuable treatment of
this point.
* 6 8
Weissenberger, Die Spr. Plut. von Charonea, 1895, pp.

Jos., Ant.,
3, 11.
XIV,
I,
1.
Susemihl, Gesch. der griech. Lit. in der Alexandrienzeit, 1. Bd., 1891, p. ^ n. T. Gr., p. 2. Croiset, An Abr. Hist, of Gk. Lit., 1904, p. 425.
2.
THE KOINH
59
chus, Moeris) set up Thucydides and Plato as the standards for pure Greek style, while Aratus and Callimachus sought to revive the style of Homer, and Lucian and Arrian ^ even imitated Herodotus. When they wished to imitate the past, the problem still remained which master to follow. The Ionic revival had no great vogue, but the Attic revival did. Lucian himself took to Attic. Others of the Atticists were Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Dio
Chrysostom, Aristides, Herodes Atticus, Êlian, etc. "They assumed that the limits of the Greek language had been forever
fixed during the Attic period."^
Some
of the pedantic declaimers
of the time, like Polemon, were thought to put
Demosthenes to These purists were opposed to change in language and sought to check the departure from the Attic idiom. "The
the blush.
purists of to-day are like the old Atticists to a hair."^

cists
The
Atti-
were then archaic and anachronistic. The movement was rhetorical therefore and not confined either to Alexandria or Pergamum. The conflict between the kolvt] (vernacular and literary) and this Atticistic reaction affected both to some extent.* This struggle between "archaism and life" is old and survives to-day.* The Atticists were in fact out of harmony with their time,^ and not like Dante, who chose the language of his people for his imThey made the mistake of thinking that by mortal poems.
imitation they could restore the old Attic style.
"The
effort
and
example
of these purists, too,
though
criticized at first, gradually
became a sort of moral dictatorship, and so has been tacitly if not zealously obeyed by all subsequent scribes down to the present time."^ As a result when one compares N. T. Greek,^ he
1
Arrian and Epict.
sharp distinction as a rule must be made between the language of The Gk. of Epict. as reported by Arrian, his pupil, is a
of the vern.
koivt]
good representative
duction
is
of
an educated man.
Arrian 's intro-
quite Atticistic, but he aims to reproduce Epictetus'
own words
ov5h av
as
far as possible.
^ Sophocles, Lex., p. 6. rdv ypaufxaTecop ixijiportpov. 3
Athena;us
etc., p. 180.
I,
15.
2 said: Et
/ni)
iarpol âav,
fjv
Thumb,
Griech. Spr.
On
Atticism in the
309.
I,
Koivii
see
Wacker-
nagel, Die Kult. der Gegenw., Tl.

*
Abt.
8, p.
Norden, Die griech. Kunstpr. bis Aug., Bd.
1898, p. 150.
6 6
Thumb,
lb., p.
ib., p. 8.
7 Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 7. 252 f. Moulton, Prol., p. 26. The diction of Aristophanes is interesting ii8 a specimen of varieties of speech of the time. Cf. Hope, The Lang, of Parody; a Study in the Diction of Aristophanes (190G). Radermacher (N. T. Gk., p. 3) holds that we must even note the " barbarischcs Griechisch" of writers like John Philoponos and Proclos.
'
60

careful to note
NEW TESTAMENT
with the book Greek (KaThis artificial reac-
must be
whether
it is
dapevovaa)
or the vernacular (ojuiXouêi'Tj).
tionary movement, however, had

KOLvrf
it is
little effect
upon the vernacular
Consequently a negligible quantity in direct influence upon the writers of the N. T.^ But the Atticists did have a real influence upon the With literary kolvt] both as to word-formation ^ and syntax.^ Dionysius of Halicarnassus beauty was the chief element of style, and he hoped that the Attic revival would drive out the Asiatic The whole movement was a strong reaction against influence.'* what was termed "Asianism" in the language.^ It is not surprising therefore that the later ecclesiastical literary Greek was largely under the influence of the Atticists. "Now there was but one grammar: Attic. It was Attic grammar that every freeman, whether highly or poorly educated, had learned."^ "This purist conspiracy" Jannaris calls it. The main thing with the Atticists was to have something as old as Athens. Strabo said the style
as
is
witnessed by the spoken Greek of to-day.
of
IV.
Diodorus was properly "antique."' The Characteristics of the Vernacular Koivii. One must not (a) Vernacular Attic the Base.
is
feel
that the
vernacular Greek
unworthy
of study.
"
The
fact
is
that, during
the beBt days of Greece, the great teacher of Greek was the com-
mon
There was no violent break between the vernacuand the vernacular KOLvrj, but the one flowed into the other as a living stream.^ If the reign of the separated dialects was over, the power of the one general Greek speech had just begun
people."^
lar Attic
on the
heels of Alexander's victories.
The
battle of Chseronea
broke the
1 ^
spirit of the old Attic culture indeed,

etc.,
but the Athenians

^
Schmid, Der Atticismus
Bd. IV,
p. 578.
jb., p.
606
f.
Troger, Der Sprachgeb. in der pseudolong. Schr., 1899, Tl. I, p. 61. Schmid, ib., Bd. I, pp. 17, 25. See Bd. IV, pp. 577-734, for very valu-
able
6
summary of this whole subject. Norden, Die griech. Kunstpr., 1898. 1. Bd., p. 149. So Blass calls it " gleichzeitige atticistische Reaction gegen die asianische Beredsamkeit." Die griech. Beredsamkeit etc. von Alex, bis Aug., 1865, p. 77. 6 Jannaris, op. cit., p. 11. See also Fritz, Die Brief e des Bischofs Synesius von Kyrene. Ein Beitr. zur Gesch. des Att. im 4. und 5. Jahrh., 1898.
7
Strabo, 13.
4, 9.
Rom. and Byz. Period, p. 11. Deissmann, Die sprachl. Erforsch. etc., p. 11. Rutherford (New Phryn., p. 2) says that "the debased forms and mixed vocabulary of the common dialect would have struck the contemporaries of Aristophanes and Plato as On the form of the kolvti little better than jargon of the Scythian policemen." see Wackernagel, Kult. etc., Tl. I, Abt. 8, p. 305,
8
Sophocles, Lex. of
THE KOINH
61
gathered up the treasures of the past, while Alexander opened the flood-gates for the change in the language and for its spread over the world.^ "What, however, was loss to standard Attic was
The language m which Hellenism was eminently practical, better fitted for life than for the schools. Only a cosmopolitan speech could comport with Hellenistic cosmopolitanism. Grammar was simplified, exceptions decreased or generalized, flexions dropped or harmonized,
gain to the ecumenical tongue.
expressed
itself
construction of sentences
Jan., 1910, p. 53).
nacular
KOLvi]
is
pleted product.2
KOLvi].
made easier" (Angus, Prince. Rev., The beginning of the development of the vernot perfectly clear, for we see rather the comBut it is in the later Attic that lies behind the
optative was never common in the vernacular Attic a vanishing quantity in the kolvt]. The disappearance of the dual was already coming on and so was the limited use of the
The
and
is
superlative, -Twaav instead of -vrwv,

yivofiaL,
aa,
dira,
tLs
and -adwaav instead of -aduiv, instead of Torepos, eKaaros and not eKarepos.^
But while the Attic forms the ground-form* of the kolptj it must not be forgotten that the kolvt] was resultant of the various forces and must be judged by its own standards.^ There is not complete
unanimity of opinion concernmg the character of the vernacular Steinthal^ indeed called it merely a levelled and debased Attic, while Wilamowitz ^ described it as more properly an Ionic popular idiom. Kretschmer now (wrongly, I think) contends that the Northwest Greek, Ionic and Boeotian had more influence on the KOLvi] than the Attic. The truth seems to be the position of
KOLPT).
Thumb,^ that the vernacular kolvy] is the result of the mingling with all dialects upon the late Attic vernacular as the base. As between the Doric d and the Ionic the vernacular kolpy] follows the Attic
rj
Christ, Gesch. der griech. Lit., 1905, p. 509

KOLvri" see
character of the
2 '
f. For "the Attic groundMayscr, Gr. dcr griech. Pap. (1906, p. 1).
Kaibel, Stil
Blass, Gr. of
und Text der
'Adr)valu}v UoXiTeia, p. 37.
gone, as in
N. T. Gk., p. 3. Even in the htorary koivt] the dual is nearly Polybius and Diodorus Siculus; cf. Schmidt, De Duali Grace, et
1895,
p.
Emor.
*
et Reviv., 1893, pp. 22, 25.
Gott.
f.;
Gel.-Anz.,
30
f.;
Ilatzidakis,
Einl.
in
die
neugr. Gr.,
p.
168
*
Krumbacher, Byz.
Lit., p. 789.
"Die Erforschung der
kolvti
hat lange gcnug unter

Griech. Spr.
p. 40. p. 3;
dem
Gesichtswinkel des
'Klas-sicismus' gestanden."
*
^
Thumb,
etc., p. 10.
Gesch. der Sprachw., H, p. 37 f. Verhandl. der 32. jihil. Versamml.,
Wochenschr. fiir klass. Philol., 1899, Op. cit., pp. 53-101, 202 f.
Die Entst. der Koivv, 1900.
62
usage,

and
this fact alone is decisive.^
Dieterieh^ indeed
sums
up
several points as belonging to the "Attic kolvtj" such as verbs
in -voo instead of -vfii, in

fects, disuse of
-uaav instead of
-cov in
contract imper-
the temporal and the syllabic augment in comsing,
position, disuse of reduplication, -rjv instead of -tj in ace.

of adjs. in
sion,
-17s, -01;
instead of -ovs in gen. sing, of third declen-
-a instead of -ov in proper names, disuse of the Attic deas possessive pronoun.
clension, -es for -as in accusative plural, t6v as relative pronoun,

tStos
But
clearly
by "Attic
kolvt]"
he means
the resultant Attic, not the Attic as distinct from the other dialects. Besides the orthography is Attic (cf. I'Xecos, not tXaos) and the
bulk of the inflections and conjugations likewise, as can be seen by comparison with the Attic inscriptions.^ Schlageter* sums the matter up " The Attic foundation of the kolvt] is to-day generally admitted." But Kretschmer ^ is (h) The Other Dialects in the Koivq.
:
in saying that the KOivq mixture of the dialects. Attic, but a
clearly
wrong
is
neither Attic nor decayed
He compares
the mixture
of dialects in the kolut] to that of the high, middle
man.
The The mixed
Attic
itself is
kolvt]
out of Ionic,
kolvt)
character of the vernacular
and low GerÊolic and Doric. is made plain by

influence in the
Ko.d'
Schweizer^ and Dieterich.^

presence of forms like
idlr],
The Ionic shows

awelprjs,
its
eiSvZa, vlrjs,
eros (cf.
vetus), oarea, x^tXecoi', /3Xa|3ecof, xP^^'ôv, -as,
rough breathing
of
ixi
(psilo&is
aSos; absence of the or de-aspiration, ôlic also); dropping

iJLov-6(j)da\fios
in verbs like StSco; KiQiiv (xtTwi'), reaaepa, irpaaaoo for xpdrrco
(Attic also), etc.
Ionic words like
(Herod.) instead
Conybeare and Stock {Sel. from LXX, p. 48) suggest that Homer was used as a text-book in Alexandria and so caused lonisms like <nrelpr}s in the kolpt]. The spread In Alexander's of the Ionic over the East was to be expected. army many of the Greek dialects were represented.^ In the Egyptian army of the Ptolemies nearly all the dialects were spoken.' The lonians were, besides, part of the Greeks who settled in Alexof Attic tTp-b4)daKp.os occur.
1 2
' * * 7 9
Moulton,
Prol., p.
33
f.
Unters. zur Gesch. d. griech. Spr., 1898, p. 258
f.
Meisterhans, Gr. der Att. Inschr. Der Wortsch. der auBerhalb Attikas gefundenen att. Inschr., 1912.
Wochenschr.
fiir
klass. Phil., 1899, p. xvii.
Gr. der perg. Inschr., p. 201 f. Unters. zur Gesch. etc., p. 259 f.
Arrian, II, 20. 5.
Myer, Das Heerwesen der Ptolemaer und Romer
in
Agypten, 1900.
THE KOINH
andria.*
63
Besides, even after the triumph of the Attic in Greece
the Ionic had continued to be spoken in large parts of Asia Minor.
The
Attic with foreign, before
The mixing of the with Ionic, elements, has laid the foundation for the kolvt]} The Molic makes a poor showing, but can be traced especially in Pergamum, where Schweizer considers it one of the elements of the language with a large injection
Ionic influence appears in
all
Pergamum also.
Jilolic has the a for r/ in proper names and forms Bceotian-ôlic uses the ending -oaav, as etxoaap, so common in the LXX. Moulton'* points out that this ending is very rare in the papyri and is found chiefly in the LXX. He calls Boeotian-
of the Ionic. ^ in as.
.ôlic also "the
monophthongizing
In the
like
kolvt]
of the diphthongs."
rj
In the
Attic and the Ionic the open sound of
prevailed, while in the
Boeotian the closed.

together
till
the two pronunciations existed

Psilosis is also Ionic.
the closed triumphed.
The
Doric appears in
kcrirovdaâ,
17
forms
Xaos (Xews), vaos
(vecos), Trtafco (tu^cS),

;
and in had the Doric softer sound as /3, But, Moulton^ modern Greek vernacular. as argues, the the in vernacular kolpt] comes to us now only in the written form, and that was undoubtedly chiefly Attic. The Arcadian dialed possibly contributes a(t>ecopTaL, since it has dêcbo-^r?, but this form occurs Xt)u6s in Doric and Ionic also.^ Cf. also the change of gender The Northivest Greek contrib(Luke) and to ttXoCtos (Paul).
Xi/x6s,
to ttXoOtos, oKeKTCop, K\lâvos (KpilSapos)

7, 8
the pronunciation perhaps
17
uted forms
\e\vKap.
like
apxoPTois,
tovs
"Kejopres,
rJTaL
{riiJ.T)p
cf.
Messein
nian and Lesbian
also), tjpcotovp (like Ionic), etxoaav (cf. Bosotian),

is
The
accusative plural in -es
very
common
the
some N. T. MSS. give rkaaapes for reaaapas.'' The Achsean-Dorian kolpt] had resisted in Northwest Greece the inroads of the common Greek for a century or so. The Macepapyri, and
1 H. Anz, Subsidia ad cognoscendum Graec. Serm. vulg. etc., 1894, p. 386. Mayser, Gr., pp. 9-24, finds numerous Ionic peculiarities in the Ptolemaic pap. far more than Êolic and Doric. He cites rcoo-a/', iiaxa.Lpr]s, ecrco, (ftKiv, On the Ionic and other nonopkoiv, yoyyv^cj, wapaOijKTi, rkaaipts, K7rTco/ja, etc. Attic elements in th(! Koivrj see Wackernugel, Kult., p. 3()G f. 2 Kaibel, Stil und Text etc., p. 37. ^ Gr. d. pej-g. Inschr., p. 202. < Prol., The caution of Tsichari (Essais de Gr. Hist. Neo-grq., 2*"^ p. 33.
6d., 1889, p.
lectical,
cxhx) is to be noted, that the vernacular is not necessarily diabut "destin6e au peuple et ven;iit du j)euple." Cf. on .iEolic elements, Mayser, Gr., p. 9. He cites Xi/u6s in the pap.; cf. N. T.
17
Prol., p. 34.
Moulton,
f.
ib.,
p. 38, n. 3.
^
For
l)ori(!
Iiitr.
clcincnts in the paj). see Mayser,

to the
Gr., p. 5
W.
H.,
Gk. N.
T., App., p. 150.
64
donian Greek, spoken by many of Alexander's soldiers, naturally had very slight influence on the kolvt]. We know nothing of the old Macedonian Greek. Polybius ^ says that the Illyrians needed an interpreter for Macedonian, Sturz^ indeed gives a list of Macedonian words found in the kolvt], as ao-xtXos, Kopacnov, TapenBut he also includes d77XXw! The Macedonians /3oXi7, pu/iTj.
apparently used |3 instead of ^ as j3l\LTnros, 6 = 9 as davaros, a = ^ Plutarch^ speaks of Alexander and his soldiers as akpedpov.
Ma/ceSoj/to-rt. For full discussion of the Macedonian dialect see O. Hoffmann, Die Makedonen, ihre Sprache und Volkstum, 1906, pp. 232-255. It is uot always possible to (c) NoN-DiALECTiCAL CHANGES.
speaking to each other
separate the various peculiarities of the

fluences.
kolpt]
into dialectical in-
"Where Macedonian, Spartan,
Boeotian, Athenian
and
Thessalian were messmates a kolvt] was inevitable. Pronounced dialecticisms which would render unintelligible or ludicrous to
others were dropped" (see Angus, Prince. Theol. Rev., Jan., 1910,
p. 67).
The common blood
itself
went on changing.
It
was a
whole and not a mere artificial mingling of various elements. There is less difference in the syntax of the KOLvi} and that of the earlier Greek than in the forms, though the gradual disappearance of the optative use of 'iva and finite verb in the non-final sense rather than the infinitive or even 6tl, the gradual disuse of the future part, may be mentioned. It was in the finer shades of thought that a common vernacular would fail to hold its "Any language which aspires to be a Weltsprache (worldown.
living
language), as the
cacy,
its
Germans
say,
must
sacrifice
shades of meaning, expressed by
much of its delimany synonjins and

hurry and without
particles
and
tenses,
which the foreigner in
his
contact with natives cannot be expected to master."^
1 2
Polybius, 28.
8, 9.
f.;
De
Dial. Alexan. etc., 1786, p. 56
see also
De
Dial.
Macedonica
et
Alexan., 1808, pp. 37, 42; Maittaire, Graecae Ling. Dial. Sturzii, 1807, p. 184; Sophocles, Lex. of Rom. and Byz. Period, p. 3. Schweizer, Gr. der perg.
Inschr., p. 27, sees very little in the
Macedonian
influence.
(Sources of N. T. Gk., p. 17) says: "In any case, the Macedonian type of Greek, whether or not it is admissible to call it
I,
592 B, 694 C.
dialect,
Kennedy
a special
was
so far
tain that the latter on
removed from ordinary Attic as to make it cerMacedonian 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."

THE KOI Nil
.
65
(d) New Words, New Forms or New Meanings to Old Words. Naturally most change is found either in new words or in new meanings in old words, just as our English dictionaries must have new and enlarged editions every ten years or so. This growth
in the vocabulary
is
inevitable unless the
life
of a people stops.
A
for
third-century inscription in Thera, for instance,
shows avvayuyrj
fxtToiKos)
used of a religious meeting,

stranger, aToaroXos
ivapoiKos
(not the Attic
and Karrixw-'^ in their old senses like those Americanisms which preserve Elizabethan English ("fall" for "autumn," for instance).^ Here are some further examples. It is hard to be sure that all of these are words that arose in the kolvt], for we cannot inark off a definite line of cleavage. We mention
ayairt],
ayioTrjs,
ayvorrjs,
adeafxos,
aderrjaLs,
oXKoTpioeTrlaKOTros , d/card-
\vTOS,
aKpoaTTjpLOV,
ai'dpuTrapeaKos, avT'CkvTpov, avaKaivow
(and
many
verbs in
-ooj, -aôi, -tfw),
avay ^wabi, âwTtaixa
(many words
in -ô),
âTTiafj.6s, âTTTLffT-qs, yprjyopew (cf. also arrjKw), deLaidaifxovla, SrjvapLOV,
SLKaLOKpLala, e\er](jLoavv7],
Karrixîji,
e/c/caKeco, eKfJLVKTrjpiô^, decoT-qs,
OeoTri/evaTOS, \oyia,
b\p6}vi.ov,
KpajSaTTOs, p.a6y]Ttvw, OLKobeairbTTqs, bpdplôi, 6\pa.pL0v,

poiJ.(f)aia,
irpoaKaipos,
({)ia,
avp.ôvKLOV, reKiiviov, vlodeaia, viroTrodiov, <^tXa5eX-
For others from the Ancient East, Moulton and Millegan's "Lexical Notes on the Papyri" {Expositor, 1908 ), Winer-Schmiedel (p. 22), Thayer's Lexicon, (p. 691 f.), Rutherford's New Phrynichus, and the indices to the
CotIov, etc.
Let these serve merely as examples.
see the lists in Deissmann's Bible Studies, Light
papyri collections.
One
of the pressing needs

kolvy]
is
a lexicon of the
papyri and then of the

the vernacular.^
were already in the literary
of these words though they probably came from Some old words received slightly new forms,
as a whole.
Many
Koivrj,
like auadefxa 'curse' {avadr]p.a 'offering'), aTrapri](TLS (airavTrjixa), airo(TTaaia

(airdaTaaLs),
Se/caroco
dporptdo;
{deKarevo:),
(dpoco),
XvxJ^lo.
(SaaiXiaaa
(Xux^ôi'),
(/3acrtXeia)
761'eo'ta
(yeveOXLo),
8oaLa),
paadaivoboaia {fnado-
iJL0p6(t}da\(JL0S
(erep6(/)âXjuos),
vovdeala {vovderrjaLs), oiKobopii] {pl5.
Hicks, St. Paul and Hellen., in Stud. Bibl. et Eccl., 1896, p.

list
Mayser
(Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 24-35) gives an interesting

chiefly "poetical" in the classic literature,
of
words that were
The
ffKOj,
poets often use the vernacular.

btay.ios,
Some
of these
but are common in the papjTi. words are dXtKTwp, /3i;Spweiriaelu),
duina,
iKTivaaaw,
evrpiiroiiai,
iJ.kpLfj.va,
kiraiTea),
daXiru:,
KaraaTtWo),
Trpo<7<{)(jJviu),
Koindofxai, Koiros, \aol
people,
vqirios, oIktjttipmu, irepf/cei/iot,
forms arc given to old words as XL/jiravo} from XetTTco, etc. Ramsay (see The Independent, 1913, p. 37G) finds ififiartvo) (cf. Col. 2 18) used in the technical sense of entering in on the part of initiates in the sanctuary of Apollos at Clai'os in an inscription there.
ffKvWo}, urkyri, avvavraco, verSs.
:
New
See W.-Sch.,
p. 19, n. 8.
66

bveibicxubs
NEW TESTAMENT
KoSofxriaLs),
(oveLSos),
,
oirraaia (oi^ts), iravSox^vs (TavSoKevs),
jrapa4)povia {irapaippoavvr])
(effTrjKo),
pai^rifco {palvw, cf. /SaTTTifco, jSaTrrco), arrjKO}
Tafxetov (TafiLelop), (popTiov
(and
which
lose their force), Tai.8apLov

,
(and
many diminutives in -iov many diminutives in -apiop),

avaK\iv(a ('re-
4>vaiaofj.aL {(^vaaojiai)
etc.
Words
cline
(old
and new) receive new meanings, as

Cf. also
avaTrlTTTCo,
at table').
dvaKeiixaL,
avTiXkyoi ('speak
against'), aTOKpidrjvaL (passive not middle, 'to answer'), baiixovLov

('evil spirit,'
'demon'),
buiixa
('house-top'), epccraco ('beg'), evxapLareco
('thank'),
eTrto-reXXco
('write
letter'),
6\papLov
('fish'),
o^/oovlov
('wages'), TTapa/caXeco ('entreat'), Tapprjaia ('confidence'), TrepLairaonat.
('distract'),
iraidevo}
('chastise'),
4>da.voj
TVTwp.a
('corpse'),
avyKpivcx)
('compare'), axoXr] {'schooV),

Xpr]fô.Ti-^(^
('come'), xoprafco ('nourish'),
('be called').^
This
is all
perfectly natural.
Only we
vocabulary
are to
remember that the
difference
between the
kolvtj
and the Attic literature is not the true standard. The vernacular must be compared with the Attic vernacular as seen in the inscriptions and to a large extent in a writer like Aristophanes and the comic poets. Many words common in Aristophanes, taboo to the great Attic writers, reappear in the kolvt]. They were in the vernacular all the time.^ Moulton^ remarks that the verKOLvri
nacular changed very

third.
little
from the
first
century a.d. to the
"The papyri show throughout the marks of a real language of daily life, unspoilt by the blundering bookishness which makes the later documents so irritating." It is just in the first
century a.d. that the
language.
"
kolvt]
comes to
its full
glory as a world-
The
fact remains that in the period
to Christianity there
which gave birth was an international language" (Deissmaim,

It
is
Light from the Ancient East, p. 59).

points as to the origin of the
Koivi]
not claimed that

clear.
all
the
are
now
See Hesseling,
De
koine en de oude dialekten van Griechenland (1906).

is
But
enough
(e)
known
to give
an
intelligible
idea of this language
that has played so great a part in the history of man.
Provincial Influences. For all practical purposes the dialects were fused into one common tongue largely as a result of Alexander's conquests. The Germanic dialects have gone farther and farther apart (German, Dutch, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, English), for no great conqueror has arisen to Greek
' Schlageter (Wortsch. etc., pp. 59-62) gives a good another meaning in the kolvt). 2 Cf. Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., pp. 70 f., 147.
list
of
words with
CI. Quar., April, 1908, p. 137.
THE KOINH
bind them into one.
ple.
67
The language
follows the history of the peo-
But the
unification of the
"the old dialects

lenistic,
Greek was finally so radical that merged into the general mass, the to-day are
is
modern folk-language
only a continuation of the united, Hel^
common
speech."
So completely did Alexander do
his
work that the balance of culture definitely shifted from Athens to the East, to Pergamum, to Tarsus, to Antioch, to Alexandria.^
This "union of oriental and occidental was attempted in every city of Western Asia. That is the most remarkable and interesting feature of Hellenistic history in the Graeco-Asiatic kingdoms and cities." 3 Prof. Ramsay adds: "In Tarsus the Greek qualities
and powers were used and guided by a society which was, on the whole, more Asiatic in character." There were thus non-Greek influences which also entered into the common Greek life and language in various parts of the empire. Cf. K. Holl, "Das Fort43, p. 240).
leben der Volkssprachen in nachchristlicher Zeit" {Hermes, 1908, These non-Greek influences were especially noticeable
in
Pergamum, Tarsus and Alexandria, though perceptible at other But in the case of Phrygia long before Alexander's conquest there had been direct contact with the Arcadian and the ôlic dialects through immigration.^ The Greek inscriptions
points also.
in the Hellenistic time
were
first in
the old dialect of Phrygia,
then gliding into the Koivij, then finally the pure kolvt].^ Hence the KOLvi] won an easy victory in Pergamum, but the door for Phrygian influence was also wide open. Thus, though the kolvt] rests on the foundation of the Greek dialects, some non-Greek elements
were intermingled.''
Dieterich^ indeed gives a special

KOivi]
list
of
peculiarities that belong to the
of Asia Minor,
as, for in-
stance, -av instead of -a in the accus. sing, of

in as, ris for oaris, SoTts for
6s, dixai.
for
dfj.[,
3d deck, proper names use of ^tXco rather than
future tense.
1
In the case of Tarsus "a few traces of the Doric
Kretschmer, Einl. in die Gesch. etc., p. 417. The multitudinous mod. Gk. patois Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 6.
KOLvi).
illus-
trate the
3
W. M. Ramsay,
Tarsus, Exp., Mar., 1906, p. 261.
* lb., p. 25. Schweizer, Gr. der pcrg. Inschr., pp. 15 IT. Bnms, Die att. Bestrebungcn in dor gricch. Lit., 1896, p. 12, says: "Statt ihrcr (classische attische Sprache) rogicrt ein gemcines Kcbswoih, das aus
das ist der hellenistische Stil" irgend ciner phrygischen SjK'lunkc stanmit A slight exaggeration. Cf. Brugmann, Vergl. Gr., p. 9. ^ Untersuch. zur Gesch. etc., pp. 258 ff. The speech of Asia Minor has in!
deed close
affinity
Cf. Thierae, Die Inschr.
with that of Paul and Luke and with all the N. T. writers. von Magn. am Maandcr ur.d das N. T., 1906.
68
dialect
may
perhaps have Hngered" in the
kolvt],
as
Ramsay
sug-
gests {Expositor, 1906, p. 31),

vecoKopos in
who
also thinks that vaoKopos for
Ac. 19 35 in
:
may
thus be explained.
also, e.g. in dvyarepav.
But no hard and

to speak of
fast distinction can
as accusative appears in
Egypt
be drawn, as -av for -v Is it proper
an Alexandrian dialect? Blass^ says so, agreeing with Winer-SchmiedeP (77 'A\eâv8pecov StdXe/cros). This is the old view, but we can hardly give the name dialect to the Egyptian Greek. Kennedy^ says: "In all probability the language of the Egyptian capital had no more right to be called a dialect than the vernacular of any other great centre of population." Schweizer^ likewise refuses to consider the Alexandrian kolvt] as a dialect. Dieterich^ again gives a list of Eg>T)tian peculiarities such as ol instead of at, -a instead of -as in nominatives of third declension, adjectives in -77 instead of -a, kaov for aov, Kadeh for e/caaros, im-
augment in simple Mayser {Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 35-40) gives a list of "Egyptian words" found in the Ptolemaic papyri. They are words of the soil, like toltvpos But Thumb shows that the majority of the so-called itself.
perfect
verbs,
and
aorist in -a,
iifirju
for
rjv,
disuse of
indicative instead
of
the subjunctive.
"^
Alexandrian peculiarities were general in the Kotvr) like riXdoaav, "There was indeed a certain undxo.v, yeyovav, ecbpa/ces, etc.
wieldmess and capriciousness about their language, which displays As itself especially in harsh and fantastic word-composition." examples of their words may be mentioned Karapc^TLô/jLevos, irapaIt is to be observed also that the avyypactieLv, (jyCkavOpo^Tretv, etc.
KOLvi]
was not the vernacular
of all the peoples
when
it
was spoken
as a secondary language.
1
In Palestine, for instance, Aramaic was
Gr. of N. T. Gk., 1905, p. 3 note. Gr. des neut. Sprachid., 3. 1, n. 4.
3 Sour, of N. T. Gk., 1895, p. 23. Irenseus (Minucius Pacatus) and Demetrius Ixion wTote treatises on "the dialect of Alexandria" (Swete, Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., p. 289). But they probably did not understand that the vernacular kolvti, which differed from the hterary Koivi), was international
(Thackeray, Gr. of the O. T. in Gk., vol. I, p. 19). "It is certain that many forms of this later language were specially characteristic of Alexandria" (ib.). ^ Unters. zur Gesch. etc., * Gr. der perg. Inschr., p. 27. pp. 258 ff. * Die griech. Spr. etc., p. 168 ff. See also Anz, Subs, ad cognos. Graec. Serm. vulg. etc., 1891, p. 262. "Nee quae ApostoUdes homo doctus AlexanCerte nemo drinus nuperrime protulit omnes caHgines propulsaverunt.
existet qui cum Sturzio Macedonicam dialectum ibi quaerat, sed altera e parte neminem puto judicare illam quae vulgo appellatur dialectum Alexandrinam soUs vindicandam esse Alexandrinis." Cf. Susemihl, Lit. der Alexan-
jam
drinerzeit.
THE KOINH
69
the usual language of the people who could also, most of them, speak Greek. Moulton's parallel of the variations in modem English is not therefore true, unless you include also peoples Uke the Welsh, Scotch, Irish, etc. But as a whole the vernacular koivt] was a single language with only natural variations like that in the English of various parts of the United States or England.^ Thumb perhaps makes too
much
Minor
where
of a point out of the use of in its bearing

it
kfxos
rather than nov in Asia

of the
on the authorship
Gospel of John
occurs 41 times, once only in 3 Jo. and Rev. (34 times elsewhere in the N. T.), though it is interesting to note, as he does, that the infinitive is still used in Pontus. But there were
non-Greek influences here and there over the empire as Thumb ^ well shows. Thumb ^ indeed holds that "the Alexandrian popular speech is only one member of a great speech-development." In the vernacular Koivrj, as in the (/) The Personal Equation. literary language, many variations are due to differences in education
its
and personal
idiosyncrasies.
"The
colloquial language in
turn went
off into
various shades of distinction according to
the refinement of the speaker" (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient

East, p. 59).
The
inscriptions
on the whole give us a more
for-
mal speech, sometimes
official decrees,
while the papyri furnish a
much wider variety. "The papyri show us the dialect of Greek Egypt in many forms, the language of the Government official,
of the educated private person, of the dwellers in the temples,
We have numerous examples through both the Ptolemaic and the Roman rule in Egypt. All sorts of men from the farm to the palace are here found writing all sorts of documents, a will or a receipt, a loveof the peasantry in the villages."^ of the papyri
Jonathan Williams, an Eng. savant, is quoted in the Louisville Cou(May 9, 1906) as saying: "I have found in the city of Louisville a pronunciation and a use of terms which is nearer, to my mind, to Addison and the Enghsh classicists than anything which the counties of England, the provinces of Australia, or the marshes of Scotland can offer." He added that the purest English known to him is spoken in Edinburgh and Louisville. These two cities, for geographical reasons, are not provincial.
^
Sir
rier-Journal
Grioch. Spr.
etc.,
pp. 102-lGl; Theol. Literaturzeit., 1903, p. 421;
cf.
Moulton, Prol. p. 40. Moulton sets over against i/xos the fact that John's Gospel uses IVa rather than the iiifinitivc so often. Much of the force of su(!h an argument vanishes also under the personal equation. ' Gricch. Spr. etc., \i. 171. Cf. also Zahn, Einleitung in tlas N. T.,
also
I,
38.
*
Kenyon,
ext. vol. of Hast.
D.
B., art. Papyri, p. 355''.
See also
iil.,
Palaôg. of the
Gk. Pap., 1899.
'
70
A GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK

a dun, a
NEW TESTAMENT
are
letter or
memorandum
all
or a census report, a private letter
or a public epistle.
sources;
"Private letters
our most valuable
and they are
the better for the immense differences
that betray themselves in the education of the writers. The wellworn epistolary formulae show variety mostly in their spelling; and their value for the student lies primarily in their remarkable
letter-writers
resemblances to the conventional phraseology which even the N. T. were content to use."^ Deissmann^ has insisted on
a sharp distinction between letters and epistles, the letter being private and instinct with life, the epistles being written for the
pubhc
eye,
an open
letter,
a literary
letter.
This
is
a just disis
tinction.
real letter that has
become
literature
different
from an
epistle written as literature.
In the papyri therefore
we
find all grades of culture
would to-day if he rummaged in the rubbish-heaps of our great cities. One need not be surprised at seeing t6v fir}Tpo:s, t6v deaiv, and even worse blunders. As a sample Jannaris^ gives aêLccdels viraipaTUiv ypa-
and
of illiteracy, as one
Hara
nei eidcoTOOv, for a^LCodels ur' avTcov ypaiJ.iJ.aTa
/jr}
tlboTOiv.
Part
of these are crass errors, part are due to identity of sounds in
pronunciation, as o and w,
insists that
ei
and
-q,
ei
and
t.
Witkowski^ properly
the character of
we
take note of the
man and
work
in each case.
It is obvious that
truer picture of the situation.

KOLvi}
of
Egypt
this
by the papyri and the inscriptions we gain a As a specimen of the vernacular letter of the school-boy Theon to his father has
It belongs to the
keen interest
A.D.
(see O. P. 119).
second century
and has a boy's mistakes as well as a boy's

is
spirit.
The
writ-
ing
1
uncial.
Prol., p.
Moulton,
B.
the
S.,
27
f.
all
"The distinction way with Deissmann in pronouncing

1901, pp. 3-59.
7.
holds good, even

all
if
we cannot go
'
the Pauline writings letters

p. xxxi.
rather than 'Epistles.'"

3
G. Milligan, Gk. Pap.,
"Hist. Gk. Gr., p.
Quoted from Griech. Urk.,
Berlin, 13^, belonging
to year 289 a.d.
The papyri contain "exempla ex vita deprompta, cum sermo scriptout solutae ita poeticae orationis nuUo modo veram nobis imaginem sermonis illius aetatis praebeat. Etenim sermo, quem apud auctores hellinisticos deprehendimus, arti, non vitae, debetur." Witkowski Prodr. gr. pap. Graec,
*
rum
etc.,
1898, p. 197.
He
urges that in case of variations in forms or syntax one
must inquire "utrum ab alia qua dialecto petita sit an in Aegypto nata, utrum ab homine Graeco an barbaro formata." lb., p. 198. He thinks it is necessary that we have "Ubrum de sermone pap>Torum, librum de sermone titulorum, librum de sermone auctorum poeticae et pedestris orationis iUius aetatis, librum de dialecto Macedonica tractantem." lb.
THE KOINH
Qkciov QeoJVL ra3 Trarpt xatpfti'.
71
/caXcos kirolrjaes.
ovk cnreprjxts ne ner' ei]
crov eis irokiv.

T* effoO eis
ov 9e\ts a-KevtKKHV
/xe-
'AXeâi/Spiav ou
^n) 7pdi/'co (tc I-
KicFToKriv ovTe \a\Ci ae, ovre viyevco ae,
elra.
fxrj
av 8e eXdus
els
'A\eâp8piap, ov
X'^'^P^j^
XdjSco x^^P^'^ Tvapa \a\ov ovTe ttoKl

a/x ni] OeKjis cnreveKai
fJi[e],
at \vTrbv.
ravTa
7e[t]j'ere.
Kal
17
iJ.r]Tr]p
'
jiov
dire 'Ap-
XeXdw
fxeyaXa
TTJ
fxe,
OTL
avaaraTot
p.e
ixppou avrbv.
jjlol
koKSjs 81
eTTOtTjcres.
5copd
eTeiJ.\j/e[s
apaua
1.(3'
ireirXavTjKav ly/xws
e/ceft],
qp.kpa
OTL eir'Kevaes.
ere.
\vt6v
TreiJLx{/r]s
-Keixypov
fxr]
d[s
TrapaKaXoj
ixi]
d/x
/xtj
ov
(pa-
7W, ov
T0/3t
17?'.
ireivw raDra.
kpusade
ere
ei;x(o/xat).
On
the other side

dTToSos QeoiVL [d]7r6 Qeoovaros
vlQi.
a temptation "to exaggerate the surely his book has a wonderful Take this extract from terest. Alis (P. Oxy. 744 B.C. 1) 'Edi'
:
Milligan (Greek Papyri, p. xxxii) admits that there may be now significance of the papyri." But
human, not
iroWaTroWQip
to say linguistic, in-
a letter of Hilarion to his wife

TtKijs,
eav
rjv
apaevov,
a(f)es,
eav
rjv
drjXea, eKâXe.
(g)
is
Resume.
To
all
intents
and purposes the vernacular
kolvt]
the later vernacular Attic with normal development under
historical
environment created by Alexander's conquests. On this base then were deposited varied influences from the other dialects, but not enough to change the essential Attic character of the language. There is one kolptj everywhere (cf Thumb, Griech. The literary KOLvi] was homogeneous, while the Spr., p. 200).
.
vernacular
kolptj
was
practically so in spite of local variations
(cf. Angus, The Koine: "The Language of the N. T.," Prince. In remote districts the language Theol. Rev., Jan., 1910, p. 78 f.).
would be Doric-coloured or Ionic-coloured. It is in pronunciation that the Phonetics and Orthography. most serious differences appear in the KOLvrj (Moulton, Prol., p. 5). We do not know certainly how the ancient Attic was pronounced, though we can approximate it. The modern Greek vernacular The koivt) stands along the path of pronunciation is known. progress, precisely where it is hard to tell. But we know enough
72
NEW TESTAMENT
not to insist too strongly on "hair-splitting differences hinging on forms which for the scribe of our uncials had identical value
phonetically, e.g.
p. 79).
ol,
tj, -q,
v,
i=ee
w.
in feet, or at = e" (Angus, op.

is
cit.,
Besides itacisms the i-monophthongizing

of o
to be noticed
and the equalizing
and
The
Attic tt
is
aa except in a few
is toward dewhere the reverse is true as a aspiration except in a few cases ec^' digamma). Cf. eXTlBc. Elision is not result of analogy (or a lost assimilation is carried still further in the Attic, but so common as care for rhythm in general, There is less and the (cf. kfjL/jLeao:) v and appear constantly before confinal consonants variable s for -tetin forms like relu and ra/jLelou The use of -etsonants. probably comes by analogy. OWels and /jL-qdeis are the common forms till 100 B.C. when ov8eis and ixrjSeis begin to regain their
instances (like eXaTTcov,
KpelTTcov).
The tendency
ascendency.
The words from the town-life (the stage, the marto the front. The vocabulary of Aristophanes is There was an increase in the number of diminutive in point. forms. The kolpt] was not averse to foreign elements if they were Xenophon is a good illustration of the preparation for useful.
Vocabulary.
ket-place)
come
Radermacher, A^. T. Gr., p. 8. There is the natural dropping of some old suffixes and the coining of new suffixes, some of which appear in the modern Greek vernacular. The number of compound words
the
Koivr].
Cf.
Word-Formation.
by juxtaposition is greatly
increased, like xXTjpo-côpeoj,
x^'-po-ypa-<t>ov.
In particular two prepositions in compounds are frequent, like New meanings are given to old words. avv-avTL-\ayiâvoiiai. Accidence. In substantives the Ionic -prjs, not -pas, is common, bringing nouns in -pa into harmony with other nouns of the first declension (Thackeray, Gr. of the 0. T. in Gk., p. 22). The Attic second declension disappears. Some feminine nouns in -os be-
come masculine.
to the
first in
The
third declension
is
occasionally assimilated
forms like vvKrav, Ovyarepav. Contraction is absent sometimes in forms like bpkwv. Both x^Pf-v and xapira occur. Adjectives have forms like aacfjoXyjp, irX-qp-qs indeclinable, irav for iravra (cf. p'e'yav), bval for bvoiv. The dual, in fact, has disappeared Pronouns show the disapin all inflections and conjugations.
like tKarepos and uroTepos. Tis is used sometimes like oo-rts, and os eav is more frequent than 6s av about A.D. 1. Analogy plays a big part in the language, and this is proof In the verb there is a general tendency toward simpliof life. fication, the two conjugations blending into one {pi, verbs going).
pearance of the dual forms
THE KOINH
73
There
is
New
The
presents like
airoKT'twoi,
oirTavo},
are formed.
con-
fusion in the use of -dco
and
-eco
verbs.
We
find ylvoixaL, yivdoaKd}.

ecrxa (cf tlirov
.
increase of the use of
first
aorist forms
hke
and
diva in the older Greek).
This
etxa.
first aorist
termination appears
even in the imperfect as in
The use
of -oaav {dxocrav, taxo-
aav) for -ov in the third plural is occasionally noticeable.
The
form -av
{bkbwKav) for -dcri
first aorist.
There
is
be due to analogy of this same frequent absence of the syllabic augment
may
in the past perfect, while in
doubled
like aireKaTeaT-qaav.
compound verbs it is sometimes The temporal augment is often ab-
sent, especially
with diphthongs.
is is
We
have -rcoaav rather than

of
-vrwv, -adwaav rather than -aOoiv.
Syntax.
There
in general
an absence
many
This
Attic refineis
ments.
Simplicity
much more
in evidence.
seen in the
shorter sentences
and the paratactic constructions rather than
the more complex hypotactic idioms.

cles is noticeable.
The
sparing use of parti-
There is no effort at rhetorical embellishment. What is called "Asianism" is the bombastic rhetoric of the artificial orators. Atticism aims to reproduce the classic idiom. The vernacular kolvt] is utterly free from this vice of Asianism and Atticism. Thackeray (op. cit., p. 23) notes that "in the breach of the rules of concord is seen the widest deviation from classical orthodoxy." This varies a great deal in different writers as the
papyri amply
dence.
testify.
The nominaiivus
-pendens
is
much
in evi-
The
is
variations in case, gender
and number
KaTo. avveaiv.
of substan-
tives, adjectives
and verbs are frequent
plural
used with either a singular or plural verb.
parative does duty often for the superlative

superlative form usually has the elative sense.
The neuter The comadjective. The

Ilpcoros is
com-
mon
its
(as
sometimes in older Greek) when only two are compared.

all
'EavTwv occurs for

old ascendency.
three persons.
The
accusative
is
regaining
There is an increase in the use of the accusatives with verbs and much freedom in the use of transitive and intransitive verbs. The growth in the use of prepositions is very marked both with nouns and in composition, though some
of the old prepositions are disappearing.
Few
prepositions occur
with more than two cases.

parture from the old idiom.
phrases, are
Phrases
like
^Xkirui airo
show a de-
New
adverbial and prepositional
changing.
is
coming into use. The cases with prepositions are The instrumental use of h is common. The optative disappearing. The future participle is less frequent. The inTc3, ets
finitive (outside of rod, kv
TO
and the
inf.) is
receding before
74
tva,
NEW TESTAMENT
which is extending its use very greatly. There is a wider use Everywhere it is the language of life and not of the books. of T. use of expressions like els to ovoixa, 8vo 8vo, once cited N. The as Hebraisms, is finding illustration in the papyri (cf. Deissmann, M17 begins to encroach on ov, especially Light, etc., p. 123 f.). with infinitives and participles. The periphrastic conjugation is frequently employed. The non-final use of tva is quite marked. Clearness is Direct discourse is more frequent than indirect. more desired than elegance. It is the language of nature, not of
oTL.
the schools.
V.
The
Adaptability of the Kotvii to the
Roman
World.
It is
worth while to make this point for the benefit of those who may wonder why the literary Attic could not have retained its supremacy in the Grseco-Roman world. That was impossible. The very victory of the Greek spirit made necessary a modern common dialect. Colonial and foreign influences were inevitable and the old classical culture could not be assimilated by the Jews and Persians, Syrians, Romans, Ethiopians. " In this way a Panhellenic Greek sprang up, which, while always preserving all its main features of Attic grammar and vocabulary, adopted many colonial and foreign elements and moreover began to proceed in a more analytical spirit and on a simplified grammar."^ The old literary Attic could not have held its own against the Latin, for the Romans lamented that they were Hellenized by the Greeks Spenserian English would be an afafter conquering them.^ fectation to-day. The tremendous vitality of the Greek is seen precisely in its power to adjust itself to new conditions even to the present time. The failure of the Latin to do this not only
made
it
give
way
before the Greek, but, after Latin
became the
speech of the Western world during the Byzantine period, the vernacular Latin broke up into various separate tongues, the modern
Romance
the
KOLVT]
languages.
The
conclusion
is irresistible
therefore that
possessed wonderful adaptabihty to the manifold needs
Roman world. ^ It was the international language. Nor must one think that it was an ignorant age. What we call the "Dark Ages" came long afterwards. "Let me further insist that this civilization was so perfect that, as far as it reached, men were
of the
* *
Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 6.
Gk. was the language of culture in Rome. Gk. tutors, often slaves, taught in the schools, cf. Epictetus. Paul wrote to Rome in Gk. 5 Lafoscade, Infl. du Lat. sur le Grec, pp. 83-158, in BibHot. de I'Ecole des
hautes
6t.,
1892.
THE KOINH
more cultivated
in the strict sense
75
than they ever have been We have discovered new forces in nature; we have made since. new inventions; but we have changed in no way the methods of The Hellenistic world was thinking laid down by the Greeks nowadays." ^ Moulton^ are more cultivated in argument than we the remarkable fact that to attention cannot refrain from calling began its career the world master was to the new religion that world had one ruler Mediterranean the when at the very time possible language the best it was whole the and one language. On a.d. century first of the world for the Grseco-Roman
. .
Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., 1905, p. 137. He adds (p. Ill): of Alexandria was a permanent education to the whole Greekspeaking world; and we know that in due time Pergamum began to do similar
1
"The work
work."
See also Breed, Prep, of the World for Chr., 1904, ch. IX, Hellenizing of the Nations, and ch. XI, The Unification of the World. Jannaris (op. cit., p. 8) indeed puts the LXX, N. T. and many pap. into "the
2
Prol., p. 6.
The
for
Levantine group" of the Uterary language, but this both the LXX and the N. T.
is
a wrong assignment
CHAPTER
IV
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH

I.
The New Testament

KOLVT]
Chiefly in the Vernacular Koivrj.

all
Ob-
serve "chiefly/' for not quite
the N. T.
is
wholly in the verpoint,
nacular
as will be shown. ^
is
But the new
now obvious
to every one,
just this, that the

is
it.
the period.
That
N. T. is in the normal kolvt) of what one would have looked for, when you
come
to think of
And
yet that
is
a recent discovery, for the
Purists held that the N. T.
was
in pure Attic, while the Hebraists
explained every peculiarity as a Hebraism.

revelation could only
The
Purists felt that
and hence it had to be in the Attic. This, as we now know, could only have been true if the N. T. writers had been Atticistic and artificial stylists. So the Hebraists got the better of the argument and then overdid The most popular language in the N. T. is found in the it. Synoptic Gospels. Even Luke preserves the words of Jesus in colloquial form. The Epistle of James and the Johannine writings
in the "best" Greek,
reflect
come
the vernacular style very distinctly.

is
We
see this also in
the Epistles of Peter (Second Peter
very colloquial) and Jude.
colloquial tone is less manifest in Acts, some of Paul's Epistles and Hebrews. Cf. Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, p. 63 f. Wellhausen (Einl., p. 9) stresses the fact that in the Gospels the Greek spoken by the people makes its entry into literature.^ (a) Not a Biblical Greek. As late as 1893 Viteau^ says: "Le grec du N. T. est une variete du grec hebraisant." Again: "C'est
The
par
grec
le
grec des
LXX qu'il
faudrait expliquer,
le
plus souvent,
le
du N. T."^ Viteau is aware of the inscriptions and the papyri and even says: "The Greek of the N. T. must be compared continually wdth the post-classical Greek in its various branches: with the Greek of the profane writers, the Greek of the inscripDeissmann, Light, pp. 55, 69. Ok. (Camb. Bibl. Ess., pp. 488 ff.) who notes a special deficiency in Gk. culture in Mark's Gospel and the Apocalypse. 3 Etude sur le Grec du N. T., Le Verbe, p. Uv. * lb., p. Iv. 76
^
Cf.
Cf. Moulton, N. T.

tions of the Alexandrian
77
and GriECO-Roman
^
periods, the
braizing Greek, finally the Christian Greek,"
HeBut he labours
is
under Hatch's
false idea of
a distinct biblical Greek of which the
N. T.
a variety; both of these ideas are erroneous. There distinct biblical Greek, and the N. T. is not a variety of the
is
no
LXX
Greek.
Jowett^ over forty years ago said: "There seem to be

considerable
light
reasons for doubting whether any
can be
thrown on the N. T. from inquiry into language." That prophecy is now almost amusing in the light of modern research. Simcox^ admitted that "the half-Hebraized Greek of the N. T. is neither a very elegant nor a very expressive language," but he found consolation in the idea that "it is a many-sided language, an eminently translatable language." Dr. Hatch* felt a reaction against the modern Atticistic attitude toward the N. T. language: "In almost every lexicon, grammar and commentary the words and idioms of the N. T. are explained, not indeed exclusively, but chiefly, by a reference to the words and idioms of Attic historians and philosophers." In this protest he was partly right, but he went too far when he insisted that^ "biblical Greek is thus a language which stands by itself. What we have to find in studying it is what meaning certain Greek words conveyed to a Semitic mind." Dr. Hatch's error arose from his failure to apply the Greek influence in Palestine to the language of Christianity as he had done to Christian study. Judea was not an oasis in the desert, but was merged into the Grseco-Roman world. Rothe^ had spoken "of a language of the Holy Ghost. For in the Bible it is evident that the Holy Spirit has been at work, moulding for itself a distinc-
mode of expression out of the language of the Cremer,^ in quoting the above, says: "We have a very clear and striking proof of this in N. T. Greek." Winer ^ had indeed seen that "the grammatical character of the N. T. language has a very slight Hebrew colouring," but exactly how slight he
tively religious
country."
could not
species,"
In this
mar
1
of
tell. Winer felt that N. T. Greek Avas "a species of a "a variety of later Greek," in a word, a sort of dialect. he was wrong, but his notion (op. cit., p. 3) that a gramthe N. T. should thus presuppose a grammar of the later
lb., p.
lii.
Ess. in Bibl. Glc, ISSO, p. 2.

p. 23S.
^
3 7
lb., ]). 11. and Rev., p. 477. Dogniatik, 1S03, Lang, of the N. T., 1890, p. 20. Biblico-Theol. Lex. of N. T. Gk., 1802, p. iv. W.-M., 1877, p. 38. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 28.
Ess.
78
Greek or kolvt] is quite right, only we have no such grammar even Winer made Httle use of the papyri and inscriptions (p. 21 We still sigh for a grammar of the kolvt], though Thumb ft. n.). has related the kolvt] to the Greek language as a whole. Kennedy contended that there was "some general characteristic" about the LXX and N. T. books, which distinctly marked them off from the other Greek books; but "they are both children of the same parent, namely, the colloquial Greek of the time. This is the secret
yet.
^
of their striking resemblance."
Even
in the Hastings' Dictionary
Thayer^ contends for the name "Hellenistic Greek" as the proper term for N. T. Greek. That is better than "biblical" or "Jewish" Greek, etc. But in simple truth we had better just call it N. T. Greek, or the Greek of the N. T., and let it go at that. It is the Greek of a group of books on a common theme, as we would speak of the Greek of the Attic orators, the Platonic Greek, etc. It is not a peculiar type of Greek except so far as that is due to the historical conditions, the message of Christianity, and the Deissmann,^ however, is the man pecuharities of the writers. who has proven from the papyri and inscriptions that the N. T. Greek is not a separate variety of the Greek language. He denies that the N. T. is like the LXX Greek, which was "a written Semitic-Greek which no one ever spoke, far less used for literary purposes, either before or after. "^
this
Blass^ at
first
stood out against
view and held that "the N. T. books form a special group one to be primarily explained by study," but in his Grammar of N. T. Greek he changed his mind and admitted that " a grammar of the popular language of that period written on the basis of all these various authorities and remains" was better than limiting oneself "to the language of the N. T."^ So Moulton^ concludes: "The disappearance of that word 'Hebraic' from its prominent place in our dehneation of N. T. language marks a change in our conceptions of the subject nothing less than revolutionary." The new knowledge of the kolvt] has buried forever the old controversy between Purists and Hebraists.^ The men who wrote the N. T.
1
Sour, of N. T. Gk., 1895, p. 146.

Art. Lang, of the N. T., Hast.
2
'
D.
B., 1900.
B.
S.,
1901; Hell. Griech., Hauck's Realencyc. etc.
* 6
8
B.
S., p. 67.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p.
2.
^ Prol., p. 1. Thcol. Literaturzeit., 1895, p. 487. Thumb, Griech. Spr. etc., p. 120. It lasted "solange die bibhsche Gra-
citat als etwas isoliertes betrachtet
wurde."
1,
Thumb
Koivrj,
attacks the idea of a

pp. 162-201.
2.
N. T.
dialect or a pecuhar bibhcal variety of the
For
his-
tory of the Purist controversy see W.-Th.
W.-Sch.

were not aloof from the
lofty conceptions of the
life
79
of their time.
"It embodied the
Hebrew and Christian faith in a language which brought them home to men's business and bosoms."* Wackernagel understates the matter: "As little as the LXX does
the N. T. need to be isolated linguistically." ^ (b) Proof that N. T. Greek is in the Vernacular Koivq.
proof
is
The
numerous contemporary Greek inscriptions already published and in the ever-increasing volumes of papyri, many of which are also contemporary. As early as 1887 a start had already been made in using the inscriptions to explain the N. T. by E. L. Hicks.^ He was followed by W. M. Ramsay/ but it is Deissmann who has given us most of the proof that we now possess, and he has been ably seconded l)y Deissmann^ indeed insists: "If we are ever in J. Hope Moulton.
at hand.
now
We
have
it
in the
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

strictly
artificial
bound
life,
as
it
Greek of the rhetoricians and litterateurs, was by technical rules. This language of or-
dinary
this cosmopolitan Greek,
of a process of development that
respects
1
differs
shows unmistakable traces going on, and in many from the older dialects as from the classical
was
still
2 3
Thayer, Hast. D. B., art. Lang, of the N. T., Die griech. Spr. (Die Kult. der Gegenw., Tl.
CI. Rev., 1887.
Ill, p. 366.
I,
Abt.
8), p.
309.
X, pp. 9 ff. Deissmann calls attention also to a booklet by Walch, Observ. in Mattha3um ex graecis inscr., 1779. So in 1850, Robinson in the Pref. to his N. T. Lex. says: "It was, therefore, the spoken language of common life, and not that of books, with which they became acquainted"; cf. also the works of Schweizer, Nachmanson, Dittcnbcrger, etc. 6 Encyc. Bibl., art. Papyri. "At the time when the ancient Greek culture was in conflict with Christianity, the assailants pointed sarcastically at the boatman's idiom of the N. T., while the d(>fenders, glorying in the taunt,
* ^
Exp. Times,
B.
S.,
vol.
p. 81.
made make
Latin apologists were the first to this very homeliness their boast. the hopeless attempt to prove that the literary form of the Bible as a
Deissmann, whole, and of the N. T. in particular, was artistically perfect." Exp. Times, Nov., 1906, p. 59; cf. also Norden, Kunstpr., II, pp. 512 f., 526 f.

80
Attic."

As Moultoni puts
it,
NEW TESTAMENT
"the Holy Ghost spoke absolutely

is
in the language of the people." The evidence that the N. T. Greek
in the vernacular
kolvt] is
partly lexical
and partly grammatical, though
in the nature of
the case chiefly lexical.
The evidence
is
constantly growing.
See
Deissmann, Bible Studies, Light from the Ancient East; Moulton and Milligan's "Lexical Notes on the Papyri" {The Expositor,
1908
).
We
give
first
posed to be purely "bibUcal,"
some examples of words, previously supnow shown to be merely popular

apaaraTOOJ,
avTL\r]iJ.TTO}p,
Greek because
ayaTTT],
of their presence in the papyri or inscriptions:

ava'âo^,
aKarayvciocrTOs,
aWoyevijs,
a(j)L\dpyvpos, aWevreo), jSpoxv, ivavri, evbibhaKOJ, hdoircov, eTriKardparos,

einavvaycjoyr],
evapearos,
evTrpo(XO)ireo3,
ieparevo},
t/xarti'co,
KaTaireTaap-a,
KarayyeXevs, Karrjyo^p, Kadaplû, kokklvos, KvpLaKos, XetrovpyLKOs, Xoyela,

ve6(f)VT0S, 6(/>etXi7, -KapaôKtvojiai, Treptaaela, TXrjpocjiopew, irpodKapTepriffLS,
t pcoToroKos aiTop-erpiov, avvavTiKaixâvonaL, For a lively discussion of these etc. words see Deissmann {Bible Studies, pp. 198-247; Light, etc., pp. 69-107). The recovery of the inscription on the marble slab that
TrpoaKvi^rjTTjs,
irpoaevxV}
</)tXo7rpajreuco,
(f)pepaTraTr]s,
warned the
OS
5'
gentiles
from the Updv

irepl
a'cTLOS
is
very impressive,
M-qdha
aWoyovrj daTTopeveadaL kvTOS tov

av
\r]drj,
to lepov Tpv4>aKT0V Kal -KtpiôKov.

olcl
eavTccL
earai
to hâKoXovOetv davaTOV.
The
words above are no longer biblical avra^ \ey6fxeva. But this is not all. Many words which were thought to have a peculiar meaning in the LXX or the N. T. have been found in that very
sense in the inscriptions or papyri, such as d5eX06s in the sense of
'common brotherhood,'
CTpe4>onaL,
a.vacj)epoo,
adeTrjaLs, d/xerai'OJjTos, aiJL4>6TepoL

avrexco,
iravTes,
dm-
avTiKrjixxJ/LS,
anoKpLixa,
cltottos,
airoTaacTOfiaL,
apeTr],-
apKeTos,
'AcTLapxv^,
aarnios,
aai: agonal,
jSaaTa^w,
/3e/3atco(rts,
^Laôfxai, jSouXo/xat, ykvqiia, yoyyvôo, ypa/JLfxaTevs, ypacjjco, SeLirvku}, bkov

effTL,
IJLOS,
StajSdXXco,
dojfia,
biaadw, bUaios, 8l6tl
otl,
bixorojikw,
8ok'lhlos,
56/ct-
eau
av,
el
lurjv,
el8os,
els,
eKTeveia,
Utos, eKTivdacroi,
ev,
evebpehoi,
eTTLOvaios,
'idios,
epoxos,
evTvyx^vw, kinâkiov, eTlaKOiros, epcordw,

ecos,
evaxVfJ-^Vj
decxipeo),
tiixaptcrreco,
riyovfxaL,
riXiKla,
riavxia,
dep-ekiov,
IXaaT-qpiov,
I'Xecos,
laTopeo), KadapVôi, Kadapos, Kaivos, KaKoirddeLa,

kXIvt},
Kard, KaTO-Kpiixa, KaTavrdu!,
KoXdfopat, KoWdco, KoXa^tfw, kotos,
KopaaLOV, KTOLOixaL, KvpLOS, XtK/xdco, Xti^, Xouojuai, fxevovvye, iJ.apTvpovp.aL,

IxeiôTepos,
piKpbs,
poyCKoKos,
povi],
mDs,
veKpol,
vt],
vofxos,
oU'ia,
6p.o~
\oyeu,
a<j>'epw,
opo/ia,
6\poji>LOV,
irapd, Tvapabeiaos, TvapaO-qKr], Trapa/cuTrrw, irapeiirdpoLKOs,
Kapeirib-qpos,
Trdpecrts,
Tvapo^vvofiai,
-rraTpoirapaboTOS,
xepto-TrdoJ, irepLTtfjiVb),
Ttrixvs, irXeoveKTeoj, ttXtjOos, 'ir\r]po(})opeu, irpdyna,

1
Prol., p. 5.

TrpcLKTWp,
Trpe<Tl3uTepos,
81
wpodeaLS,
ivpocfkxoi,
TrpoffKaprepeoj,
Trpo(f>T)Tr]s,
(Tawp6s,
(TKvWa), okoKox}/, anapaySLPos, crovoaptov, aireKovXaTo^p, araaLS,

a(j>pa'y'i^w,
<T(j)vpLS,
(TTpaTevofxai,
avyyevris, (tvhôvXlov, cvveidrjcns, avpawTrjp, r-qpricns, tottos,

<f>p(t3,
xo}, (TvvevdoKeo}, crvvevcjoxeoidai, avvlaTriixL, aujia,

vios,
vios deov,
(f)i\os,
vlodeala, vwo^vyLOv, VTroirbhov,

(fiCKoTitxkoixaL,
VToaraaLS, (pacns,
tui
c})6avo},
4>L\oaTopyLa,
xapayfxa, xo-pis
Gew,
XP^'i-O-,
ypoiixlov, xl/vxhv aojaai. This seems like a very long list, but do more than pages of argument to convince the reader that the vocabulary of the N. T. is practically the same as that of the vernacular KOLvrj in the Roman Empire in the first century A.D.i This is not a complete list, for new words will be added from time to time, and all that are known are not here included. Besides neither Deissmann nor Moulton has put together such a single list of words, and Kenyon's in Hastings' D. B. (Papyri)
xpovos,
it
will
words I turned to by Thayer (art. "Language of the N. T.") where are found some thirty new words common to the N. T. and the vernacular kolvtj, words not comis
very incomplete.
list
After compiling this
list
of
the
in the Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
mon
in the classic Greek.
Thayer's hst
is
entirely different save
a half-dozen.
kmxoprjyeui,
In his
list
are comprised such interesting words as

5eLaL5aLp.ovia,
aX\r]yop0}; aPTo4)da\{jLeo), airoKapadoKia,

evBoKea:,
eu/catpeco,
eyxplo:, kyyl^co,
list
dpLa{jLJ3evo),
etc.
This
can
be
largely increased also
common
der, etc.)
lists in
to
by the comparison between words that are the N. T. and the comic poets (Aristophanes, Menan-
who used the language of the people. See Kennedy's Sources of N. T. Greek (ch. VI). Many of these, as Kennedy shows, are theological terms, like aladrjTrjpLov, appa^wv, â-wTL^Q}, vxo.pL(7Tia, Kvpia, fxvaT-qpLov,
^tXaSeXîa.
The
Christians found
in
common
use in the
Roman Empire
terms
like dSeXôs, cTrt^djêta,
eiTLcfiavrjs,
Kvpcos,
XeLTOvpyla, rapovala, Tpea(3vTepos, Tpoypa(f>o), aojrrjp,
acoTTjpla, vios Qeov.
connotation and
1
They took these words with the new popular gave them "the deeper and more spiritual
not meant, of course, that the bullc of the N. T. words are new as Far from it. Of the 4829 words in the N. T. (not including proper names) 3933 belong to older classic language (litenxry and vernac.) while 99G arc late or foreign words. See Jacquier, Hist, des Livres du N. T., tome 1", 1906, p. 25. Thayer's Lex. claimed 707 N. T. words, but Thayer considered 89 as doubtful and 76 as late. Kennedy (Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 02) found about 550 "biblical" words. But now Deissmann admits only about 50, or one per cent, of the 5000 words in the N. T. (Light,
It
is
compared with the old Gk.
etc.,
p.
72
f.).
words
in the
Findlay (Exp. Gk. T., 1 Cor., p. 748) gives 5594 Greek N. T. (whole number), while Viteau (Syntaxe des Prop., p. xxx)
gives 5420.
82
sense with which the N. T. writings have made us famihar" They could even find tov (Milhgan, Greek Papyri, p. xxx).
neyaXov Qeov evepykrov Kal awTrjpos (GH 15, ii/B.c). Cf. Tit. 2 13; 2 Pet. 1:1.^ The papyri often show us how we have misunderstood a word. So airoypa^yi] (Lu. 2 2) is not "taxing," but "en: :
rolHng" for the census (very common in the papyri). But this is not all, for the modern Greek vernacular will also augment the When list of N. T. words known to belong to the oral speech. character vernacular the admit this much is done, we are ready to
of all the
words not known to be otherwise.
The N. T. Greek
is
like the Koivi] also in using
many compounded
same frequency
("sesquipedalian")
virepevTvy-
words
like avtKbii]'yr]TOS, aveêpavvr]Tos,
dXXoTpto7rt(TK07ros,
some There is etc. dirapiov, lotIov, irXoLapLov, as significance, of which have lost that fist in the illustrated well are words old The new meanings to hrpoTr], fwoxoteco, avakvui, added be which may from the papyri, to
xavoo, etc.
also the
of diminutives,
o'Xo^^j XopTo.^^, etc.
As
tive,
to the forms
effect.
we need say less, but the evidence is to the same show examples of 'AKuXa (and -ov) for genipapyri The
and
Svai,
tyevap.riv,
dvojv
eXa/3a,
ekeyas, 'ekevâ, ^\da,

tl6oj,
r]V0Lyr]v,
ripirayriv,
riâ,
6e5co/f6S,
oUes, eypa\pes,
airelpr]s;
the imperative
has only the long forms -rcoaav, -adcoaav, etc. The various dialects are represented in the forms retained in the N. T., as the Attic in ôvXei, 5t56a(7t, rifxeXKe, etc.; the Ionic in ixaxalp-ns, yivop.aL, yLPoâKu,
rirco, etc.; the Êolic in airoKTewi^, 3d Northwest Greek in accusative plural in -s, perfect in -av (3d plural), confusion of -aco and -eco verbs, etc.; the Arcadian-Cyprian group in accusative singular in -av, d(/)ecovIt is curious that Thayer in Hastings' D. B., follows rat (also). in giving eblhoaav as an example of a form like e'ixoaav, error Winer's stem is 5t5o-, and aau is merely the usual p.L ending. present the for
etc.;
the Doric in
a.(j)eo)UTaL,
plural in -aav, etc.; the
See Mayser, Gr.
d. griech. Pap., pp. 4-20. the syntactical peculiarities of N. T. Greek which are less numerous, as in the kolvt], the following are worthy of note and are found in the KOLvrj: the non-final use of IW; the frequent
Among
use of the personal pronoun; the decreased use of the possessive pronouns; disuse of the optative; increased use of 6tl; disuse of the future participle; use of participle with elfxl; article with the
infinitive (especially
with
and
els);
cities
and
/SXcxe
with sub-
junctive without conjunction; the absence of the dual; use of 6ê>iOv as conjunction; frequency of kav; orav, etc., with indicative;
1
Moulton,
Prol., p. 84;
Wendland,
Hell.-rora. Kult., p. 100.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE

interchange of eav and ap;
jui?
KOINII
83
upon ov; decreased use of interrogative particles; some indirect discourse; Wep with comparaTrapd and pronoun; use of tdm as possessive
increasing
els = TLs;
disuse of
disappearance of the superlative; frequency of prepositions; vivid use of present tense (and perfect); laxer use of particles; growth of the passive over the middle, etc. Various phrases are common both to the N. T. and to the
tives;
papyri, like Se^tav

8tr]veKes, Kad<hs
StSw/it; ku rots
e/c
'in
house
kiri
of,' avro
tov vvv,
els
to
yeypawraL,
avix^wvov,
to avTO, KaT
(fypoveXv.
ovap, KaTO. to
Wos, ovx o
Tvx<j^v,
-irapexofiaL
kjxavTov, to avTO
"There
is
placed before us in the N. T. neither a specific speech-form nor a barbaric Jewish-Greek, but a natural phase of the Hellenistic
Deissmann {Exp. Times, 1906, p. 63) speech-development." 1 properly holds the N. T. to be the Book of Humanity because and not from the it "came from the unexhausted forces below, Swete (0. T. feeble, resigned culture of a worn-out upper class." is influenced by the in Gk., pp. 295 ff.) shows how the
LXX
vernacular
Koivrj.
As
early as 1843 B.
p. 14) explained the
LXX as "Volkssprache."
Hase (Wellhausen, Einl, Thackeray {Gram-
mar, pp. 22 ff.) gives a good summary of "the kolvt] basis of Greek." is true II. Literary Elements in the New Testament Greek. It then, as Blass^ sums it up, that "the language employed in the N. T. is, on the whole, such as was spoken in the lower circles
of society, not such as
LXX
was written
in
works
of literature."
The
N. T. writers were
not Atticists with the artificial straining after
the antique Attic idiom.
were mere purveyors of
But one must not imagine that they FreudenthaP slang and vulgarisms.
speaks of the Hellenistic Jews as "one of those societies without a mother-tongue which have never attained to any true excelAnd even Mahaffy^ speaks of the Greek lence in literature." learned by the Jews as "the new and artificial idiom of the trading classes" which had neither "traditions nor literature nor
precious associations which give depth and poetry to words." That is a curious mistake, for it was the Atticistic re-
those
vival that
1
was
artificial.
The
Stell.
kolpt]
had
all
the memories of a
Thumb, Die
sprachgesch.
des bibl. Grioch., Tliool. Runds., 1002,
p. 93.
1899.
2 4
N. T., Cf. also Arnaud, Essai sur le caractcre dc la languo ^rccquc du disViteau (Et. sur le Grec du N. T., 2 vols., 1893, 1896) insists on the
tinction
between the
lit.
and the vernac. elements

1.
in the
''
N. T.
Hell. Stud., 1875.
Gr. of the N. T. Gk., p.
Gk. Life and Thought, 1896,
p. 530.
84
people's
said for
:
Instance Robert Burns in Scotland. It is to be life. ^ Mahaffy, however, that he changed his mind, for he later wrote " They write a dialect simple and rude in comparison with Attic Greek; they use forms which shock the purists who examine But did any men ever tell a great for Cambridge scholarships. story with more simplicity, with more directness, with more
power?
Believe
me
against
all
the pedants of the world, the
dialect that tells such a story
no poor language, but the outcome of a great and a fruitful education." The N. T. uses the language of the people, but with a dignity, restraint and pathos
is
far
All the
beyond the trivial nonentities in much of the papyri remains. N. T. Greek is not so vernacular as parts of the LXX.^ The papyri often show the literary kolvt] and all grades of variation, while the lengthy and official inscriptions^ "often approxLong before many imate in style to the Hterary language."
words are used in
speech."
literature they belong to the diction of polite
In a word, the N. T. Greek "occupies apparently an intermediate position between the vulgarisms of the populace and the studied style of the litterateurs of the period. It affords a
honour on strange been It would indeed have what man no shown if men like Paul, Luke and the author of Hebrews had Classical Prof. J. C. Robertson {The literary affinities at all.
striking illustration of the divine policy
of putting
"^ calls 'common.'
Weekly,
for
March
9,
1912, p. 139) in
an
article entitled
"Reasons
par-
Teaching the Greek N. T. in Colleges" says:
"Take the
able of the Prodigal Son, for instance. Nothing piece of narrative is unsurpassed.
In literary excellence this
more simple, more the famous among from direct, more forceful can be adduced tragedy of moving It is a passages of classical Greek literature.
Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., 1905, p. 114 f. Cf. Schiirer, Jew. Peo. in Time of Jes. Ch., div. II, vol. I, pp. 11 ff., Hellen. in the Non-Jew. Regions, Hellen. in the Jew. Regions. He shows how Gk. and Lat. words were common
1
in the
Aram, and how thoroughly Gk. the Jews
of the Dispersion were.
On
this point see Schiirer, Diaspora, in ext. vol. of Hast. D. B. "Greek was the mother-tongue of the Jews" all over the gentile world. Susemihl holds that
in Alexandria the
KOLPr,,
Jews gave "quite a considerable Hebraic tinge" to the
Gesch. der griech. Lit., Bd. II, 1892, p. 602. An excellent discussion of the hterary elements in the Gk. N. T. is to be found in Heinrici's Der ht. Charakter der neutest. Schr. (1908). He shows also the differences between Palestinian and Alexandrian Judaism. Cf. also 2 Cf. Geldart, Mod. Gk. in its Rela. to Anc. Gk., 1870, p. 180.
Kennedy, Som*. of N. T. Gk., p. 65; Frankel, Altert. von Perg., 1890, p. xvii. " Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 77. 3 Deissmann, B. S., p. 180. 5 Thayer, art. Lang, of the N. T., Hast. D. B., Ill, 36*'.

reconciliation.
KOI Nil
85
The is not accidental. unof In an age analyzed." be elements of that excellence can culture. touch with that some for usual culture one would look "I contend, therefore, that the peculiar modernness, the high inYet
its literary
excellence
tellectual standard of Christianity as
we
find
it
in the
N.
T., is
caused by its contact with Greek culture." ^ In his helpful article on N. T. Times Buhl^ underrates, as Schlirer^ does, the amount of Greek known in Palestine. It is to be remembered also that great diversity of culture existed among the writers of the N. T.
men used much the same vernacular all and a grade of speech that approached world over the in English to-day .^ One is not to stress as standard literary the Paul's language in 1 Cor. 2 1-4 into a denial that he could use the literary style. It is rather a rejection of the bombastic rhetBesides, the educated
Roman
oric that the Corinthians liked
and the
rhetorical art that

It is
f.)
was so
common from Thucydides

parison in
literary inferiority.
to Chrysostom.^
(c.
with this comDeiss-
mind that Origen
Celsus, vii, 59
speaks of Paul's
It is largely
a matter of standpoint.
mann^ has done a good

letters
service in accenting the difference
between
and
epistles.
of course, in the vernacular.
Personal letters not for the public eye are, Cicero's Letters are epistles written
"
with an eye on posterity.

parts."
^
tises, still less for treatises in rigid
In letters one does not look for treauniformity and proportion of

letters (private, family,
letter is published
There
may
be several kinds of
pastoral or congregational, etc.).
But when a
consciously as literature, like Horace's Ars Poetica, for instance, Epistles may be either it becomes a literary letter or epistle.
genuine or unauthentic.
1
Tire unauthentic
may
be either merely
^ Ext. vol. of Hast. D. B. Mahaffy, Prog, of Hellen., p. 139. Jew. Peo. in Time of Jes. Ch., div. II, vol. I, p. 47 f. He admits a wide diffusion of a little knowledge of and easy use of Gk. among the educated 3
classes in Palestine.
Cf. Norden, Ant. Kunstpr., Bd. II, pp. 482 ff ., for discussion of literary elements in N. T. Gk. Deissmann makes "a protest against overestimating the literary evidence" (Theol. Runds., 1902, pp. 66 ff.; Exp. Times, 1906, p. 9) and points out how Norden has missed it in contrasting Paul and that ancient world, merely the contrast between non-Hterary prose and artistic lit. prose. 5 Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 15. B. S., pp. 16 ff. However, one must not think that the N. T. Epistles al-
ways
fall
wholly in one or the other category.

in the
Ramsay
calls attention to the
"new category"
(Let. to the
>
new
conditions, viz., a general letter to a congregation

in
lb., p. 11.
Seven Chur., p. 24). See also Walter Lock, The Epistles, pp. 114
ff.,
The
Bible
and Chr. Life, 1905.
86

real forgeries.
If
NEW TESTAMENT
pseudonymous or
or Epistles in the hght of this distinction,
we examine the N. T. Letters we shall see that Philetrue of the Pastoral Epistles;
mon is a personal
but Ephesians
is
letter.
The same
like
is
more
an
epistle
from
its
general nature.
The
Thessalonian, Corinthian,
all
Galatian,
Colossian,
Philippian
writings are
congregational and doctrinal letters.
Romans
partakes of the nature of a letter and an epistle.

ever {Histoire des Livres
howtome V, p. 66), remarks that "The Pauline Epistles are often more discourse than It will thus be seen that I do not agree with Deissmann letter." (Bible Studies, p. 3 f.) in calling all the PauHne writings "letters"
Jacquier,
du N.
T.,
1906,
as opposed to "epistles."
Milligan (Greek Papyri, p. xxxi) like-
wise protests against
the sweeping statement of Deissmann.
Deissmann gives a great variety of interesting letters from the papyri in his Light from the Ancient East, and argues here (pp. 224-234) with passion that even Romans is just "a long let"I have no hesitation in maintaining the thesis that all ter." Hebrews is the letters of Paul are real, non-literary letters." more like an epistle, as are James, 1 John, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, Jude, while 2 and 3 John are again letters. The Letters to the Seven Churches again are epistles. This is a useful distinction and shows that the N. T. writers knew how to use one of the favourite literary methods of the Alexandrian period. Dr. Lock concludes: "Letters have more of historic and literary interest, epistles more That Paul could of central teaching and practical guidance."^ use the more literary style is apparent from the address on Mars Hill, the speech before Agrippa,^ and Ephesians and Romans. Paul quotes Aratus, Menander and Epimenides and may have been acquainted with other Greek authors. He seems also to have understood Stoic philosophy. We cannot tell how extensive his literary training was. But he had a real Hellenic feeling and outlook. The introduction to Luke's Gospel and the Acts show real literary skill. The Epistle to the Hebrews has oratorical flow and power with traces of Alexandrian culture. Viteau^ reminds
For the history and literature of ancient Deissmann, B. S.; Susemihl, Gesch. der griech. Lit.; Overbeck, tJber die Anf. der patrist. Lit. The oldest known Gk. letter was written on a lead tablet and belongs to the Iv/b.c. and comes from near Athens. It was discovered by Prof. Wiinsch of Giessen. See art. by Dr. Wilhelm of Athens in Jahresh. des osterreich. archilol. Inst. (1904, vii, pp. 94 ff.). ' Le Verbe: Synt. des Prop., p. xxx. 2 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 5.
*
Bible and Chr. Life, p. 117.
letters
and
epistles see
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
IN
THE KOINE
87
US that about 3000 of the 5420 words in the Greek N. T. are found in ancient Attic writers, while the syntax in general " obeys the ordinary laws of Greek grammar."^ These and other N. T. writers, as James, occasionally use classic forms like IV/xej', tcrre, laaaL, e^fjeaap, etc. Konig^ in his discussion of the Style of Scripture finds ample illustration in the N. T. of the various Uterary linguistic devices, though in varying degree. See "Figures of Speech" (ch. XXI). But the literary element in the N. T. is subordinate to the practical and
is
never
artificial
nor strained.
We
have the language of spirit and life. The difference between the old point of view and the new is well illustrated by Hort's remark {Notes on Orthography, p. 152 f.) when he speaks of "the popular Greek in which the N. T. is to a certain extent written." He conceives of
it
as literary
KOLv-q
with some popular elements.

is
The
new and
KOLvri
the true view
is
that the N. T.
written in the popular
with some literary elements, especially in Luke, Paul, Hebrews and James. Josephus is interesting as a background to the N. T. He wrote his War in Aramaic and secured the help of Greek writers to translate it, but the Antiquities was composed in Greek, probably with the aid of similar collaborateurs, for parts of Books XVIIXIX copy the style of Thucydides and are really Atticistic' It
is
interesting to take a portion of
translated from the
Hebrew
original
responding portion of Josephus. the IjXX, translation Greek and intensely Hebraistic, while Josephus smooths out all the Hebraistic wrinkles and shifts it into
the rolling periods of Thucydides.
1 Maccabees as we have it and compare it with the corThe Greek of 1 Mace, is, like
The N. T. has
slight affinities
in vocabulary, besides Josephus, with Philo, Plutarch, Polybius,
Strabo, Diodorus and a few other writers in the literary
kolvt}.^
Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 64) holds that Paul's "Greek never becomes literary." "It is never disciplined, say, by the canon of the Atticists, never tuned to the Asian rhythm:
1 W.-M., p. 37. Kennedy indeed (Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 134) says that 80 per cent, of the N. T. words date from before 322 B.C. ^ Hast. D. B., ext. vol. 3 See Thackeray, art. Josephus in ext. vol. of Hast. D. B.; of. also Schmidt, De Flavii Jos. Eloc, 1893. Thumb (Die griech. Spr., p. 125) and Moulton
(Prol., p. 233)
dtadai
<
accent the fact that Josephus has only one Hebraism, wpoffHwith infinitive = ^ '^Qh. Cf. also Raab, De Fl. Jos. Eloc. Quest., 1890. Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., pp. 50 ff. Hoolo, The Class. I'^lem. in the
N.
T., 1888, gives
an interesting
list
of
Gk. and Rom.
i)r()por
names that
occur in the N. T.
88
it
remains non-literary." But has not Deissmann given a too special sense to "literary"? If 1 Cor. 13 and 15, Ro. 8 and Eph. 3 do not rise to literary flavour and nobility of thought and
expression, I confess
my
ignorance of what literature
is.
Har-
nack (Da's hohe Lied des Apostels Paulus von der Liehe und seine religionsgeschichtliche Bedeutung, 1911) speaks of the rhythm, the
poetic form, the real oratory, the literary grace of 1 Cor. 13. The best literature is not artificial nor pedantic hke the work of the
Atticists
and Asian
stylists.
That
is
a caricature of
64
literature.
We
saw
must not forget that Paul was a

of the people.
man
of culture as well as a
f.) does admit the more ornate as Origen
man
Deissmann
(Light, p.
is
literary quality of
Hebrews.
This epistle
This
(Eus., Eccl. Hist., VI, xxv, 11).
III.
The Semitic
Influence.
is still
the subject of keen
same way that the Purists and the Hebraists debated it. Now the point is whether the N. T. Greek is wholly in the kolvt] or whether there is an appreciable Semitic colouring in addition. There is something to be said on both
controversy, though not in the
sides of the question.
(a)
The Tradition.
^
See
i,
(a) for
,
tion.
It is certain that the idea of a special
proof of the error of this posiHebraic Greek for the
N. T. is gone. Schaff said that the Greek spoken by the Grecian Jews "assumed a strongly Hebraizing character," and the N. T. Greek shared in this "sacred and Hebraizing character." According to Hatch2 "the great majority of N. T. words ... express in their biblical use the conceptions of a
Semitic race."
Viteau^
"Hebraizing Greek," while Simcox^ speaks of "the half-Hebraized Greek of the N. T." Reuss^ calls it "the JewishHadley^ considered the "Hellenistic dialect, Greek idiom." Westcott^ spoke of largely intermixed with Semitic idioms."
calls it
"the Hebraic style more or less pervading the whole N. T." But Westcott^ admitted that "a philosophical view of the N. T. language as a whole is yet to be desired," as Hatch ^ lamented that the N. T. Greek "has not yet attracted the attention of any considerable scholar." That cannot now be said after the work of
Blass, Deissmann, Moulton,
Radermacher and
yet the old view
others,
overstatement then.
1 2 3
And
of "biblical
and was an Greek"
Comp.
to the Gk. Test., 1885, pp. 22, 25.

^
Ess. in Bibl. Gk., p. 34. Synt. des Prop., p. xxxvi.
Lang, of the N. T., Smith's B. D. Art. N. T., Smith's B. D.

lb.
Lang, of the N. T., p. 20. Hist, of the N. T., 1SS5, p. 36.
Ess. in Bibl. Gk., p.
1.
'
THE PLACE OF THE

for
NEW TESTAMENT
IN
THE KOINH
89
both N. T. and LXX is still championed by Conybeare and Stock in their grammar of the Septuagint {Selections from the Sept., 1905, p. 22 f.). They insist, against Deissmann, on the "hnguistic unity" of the LXX and of the N. T. as opposed to the
vernacular
kolpt].
They admit,
of course, that the
LXX is far more
Hebraic than the N. T. is interesting, to say the
This sturdy contention for the old view Wellhausen {Einl. in die drei ersten least. Evangelien) is rather disposed to accent the "Semiticisms" (Aramaisms) in the Synoptic Gospels in contrast \vith the Attic Greek.
Nobody now
claims the N. T. Greek to be Attic in purity. " No one denies the existence of Seraiticisms; opinions are only divided with reference to the relative proportion of these Semiticisms"
(Deissmann, Light from

is
the
Ancient East,
p. 65).
The
old view
dead beyond
(6)
recall.
The View of Deissmann and Moulton. Over against

says:
the
old conception stands out in sharp outline the view of
Deissmann^
who
Greek Bible appears only contemporary 'proagainst the background more^: "The few Once "only." word the Note fane' Greek." T. which were in the N. of parts in those expressions Hebraizing not essentially which does accidens an are but first Greek from the
"The
linguistic unity of the
of classical, not of
alter the
fundamental character of
its
language."
The
portions
of the Synoptic Gospels which were either in Aramaic or made use of Aramaic originals he considers on a par with the LXX. They use translation Greek. No one "ever really spoke as he
as
may have
translated the Logia-collection, blessed
and
cramped
=^
he was by the timid consciousness of being permitted to convey the sacred words of the Son of God to the Greeks." Thumb* accepts the view of Deissmann and admits "Hebraisms in a few cases" only and then principally the meaning of words. In 1879 Guillemard^ disclaimed any idea of being able to give "an exhaustive exhibition of all the Hebraisms," but he "put forMoulton admits practically no ward only a few specimens''
\
'^
Hebraisms nor Aramaisms outside of "translation Greek." "Between these two extremes the N. T. writers lie; and of them all
1
B.
S.,
1901, p. 66.
'
lb., p. 177.
lb., p. 76.
"What would wc
we would,
I
give
if
we
could recover but one papjTus

of Jesus!
book with a few leaves containing genuine Aramaic sayings

those few leaves
* 6
For
think, part willingly with the theological outp. 57).
put of a whole century" (Deissmann, Light,

Griech. Spr.
etc., p. 121.
Hebraisms
in the
Gk.
Test., Pref.
Prol., p. 10.
90

assert with
we may
some confidence
that,
where translation
is
not involved, we shall find hardly any Greek expression used which would sound strangely to speakers of the kolvt] in Gentile lands." Once more^: "What we can assert with assurance is that
the papyri have finally destroyed the figment of a N. T. Greek which in any material respect differed from that spoken by ordinary people in daily life." Moulton^ realizes "the danger of going too far" in
over N. T. Hebraisms.
is
summing up thus the issue According to Moulton
of the long strife

(p. 18)
the matter
complicated only in Luke, who, though a gentile, used Aramaic sources in the opening chapters of the Gospel and Acts. This new
and revolutionary view as to Semitisms is still challenged by Dalman^ who finds many more Aramaisms in the Synoptic Gospels than Moulton is willing to admit. Dcissmann indeed is not dislast
posed in his later writings to be dogmatic on the subject. "The word has not yet been said about the proportion of Semiticisms" {Expositor, Jan., 1908, p. 67). He is undoubtedly right in the idea that many so-called Semiticisms are really "internavulgarisms."
Schtirer,
tional
Theol.
Literaturzeiiung,
1908,
p.
vom Osten, 1908, p. 35) for running the parallel too close between the N. T. and the unliterary papyri. It is truer of the LXX than of the N. T. The old view cannot stand in the light of the pap3Ti and inscriptions. Both the Purists and the Hebraists were wrong. Many words and idioms heretofore claimed as Hebraisms are shown to be current in the vernacular kolvt]. As specimens^ one can mention huinou ("^.^c^ according to Winer-Liinemann, p. 201, and "biblical" according to Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek,
555, criticizes
(Licht
p. 90) is
Deissmann
found in the papyri;
Trpecr/Surepos
in the official sense
occurs in the papyri of Egypt in combinations like irpea^vTepoi

tepets; epcordco
'
to beg'
is
in the papyri;
els
in sense of irpooTos also;
Prol., p. 18.
lb., p. 18. He quotes approvingly Deissmann's remark that "Semitisms which are in common use belong mostly to the technical language of religion" and they do not alter the scientific description of the language. Moulton
2
(Interp., July, 1906, p. 380) says: "Suffice
it
to say that, except so far as the
N. T. writers are quoting baldly Hteral translations from the LXX, or making equally hteral translations from the Aramaic in which the Lord and His disciples usually spoke, we have no reason whatever to say that the N. T. was composed in a Greek distinguishable from that spoken all over the Roman Empire." 3 Wds. of Jes., 1902. * See Deissmann (B. S. and Light) and Moulton (Prol.).
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINE
91
for a Jewish place of prayer, since
Tpoaevxv can no longer be regarded as a word of Jewish formation it appears in that sense in a
Ptolemaic inscription in Lower Egypt in the III cent. B.C.;
ovofxa
occurs also in the sense of "person"; expressions like vlos dauarov are found in the papyri; jSXexeij' airo occurs in a papyrus letter;
ets ovofxa is
in inscriptions, ostraca, papyri; 8vo 8vo is
matched
in
the papyri by rpla rpla (this idiom has been traced in Greek for
2500 years); the instrumental use of

the use of
as
iu fiaxalpji is
tcS
and the
infinitive so
common
in
common; Luke appears in
the papyri; and even
ets a-rravrriaLv meets us in the papyri (Tebt. Pap. 43, II cent. b.c). Certainly a full list of the words and phrases that can no longer be called Hebraisms would be very Besides, the list grows continually under the reformidable. searches of Deissmann, Moulton, Mayser, Thumb, Kalker, Wit-
kowski, Milligan and other scholars.

clearly against a
The presumption
is
now
gone
Hebraism.
The balance
of evidence has
the joy of
over to the other side. But after all one has the conviction that new 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 Greekspeaking Jewish population of the Delta" (Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 1906, p. cxx). Thackeray (Gr. of the 0. T. in Gk., vol. I, p. 20) uses the small number of Coptic words in the Greek papyri against the notion of Hebrew influence on the kolvt] in Eg5T)t. However, Thackeray (p. 27) notes that the papyri so far discovered tell us little of the private life of the Jews of Egypt and of the Greek used by them specifically. The marshes of the Delta were not favourable for the preservation of the papyri. The KOLVT] received other foreign influences we know. The Jews of the Dispersion spoke the vernacular kolvti everywhere, but they read the LXX, " a written Semitic Greek which no one ever spoke, far
less
1
used for literary purposes, either before or after." ^

Deissmann, B.
S.,
And
yet
p. 67.
See also Angus, N. T.
Philol.,
Harv. Theol.
(see above),
Rev., July, 1909, p. 453.
The I.XX, though
translation
Greek
92

all
NEW TESTAMENT
the Hellenistic Jews

the
over the world could not read continually

feel
LXX
and not to some extent
the influence of
its
peculiar
one to-day speaks the English of the King James Version, or ever did for that matter, for, though like Shakespeare, it is the pure Anglo-Saxon, yet, unlike Shakespeare, it reproduces to a remarkable extent the spirit and language of the Bible. As
style.
No
Luther's
German Bible
largely
made
the
German
language, so the
King James Version has greatly affected modern English (both vernacular and literary). The situation is not the same, but there There are fewer is enough of truth to justify the comparison. details that preserve the Semitic character, but what does not disappear is the Hebrew cast of thought in a writer like John, for
a parallel to John's Gospel as Westcott^ has true insight when he says of N. T. Greek: "It combines the simple directness of Hebrew thought with the precision of Greek expression. In this way
instance.
is
No
papyrus
as
much
the
Book
of Job, for instance.
the subtle delicacy of Greek expression in some sense interprets
Hebrew thought." What is true of John's Gospel is true also of James. The numerous quotations both from the LXX and the Hebrew in the N. T. put beyond controversy the constant use of
the O. T. in Greek on the part of the N. T. writers. Besides, with the possible exception of Luke and the author of Hebrews,
they
all
knew and used Aramaic
as well as Greek.
The point
is
that the N. T. writers were open to Semitic influence. How great that was must be settled by the facts in the case, not by pre-
sumptions for or against. Dr. George Milligan {Greek Papyri, p. xxix f .) says " In the matter of language, we have now abundant proof that the so-called 'peculiarities' of biblical Greek are due simply to the fact that the writers of the N. T. for the most
:
part
made
This
use of the ordinary colloquial Greek, the

is
KOLvi]
of their
day.
not to say that
we
are to disregard altogether the

of
influence of 'translation Greek,'
and the consequent presence
undoubted Hebraisms, both in language and grammar. An overtendency to minimize these last is probably the most pertinent
is
in the vern.
KOLvi}.
KOLvij,
and thus the N. T. writers had a double point
of contact
with the
Cf. Wackernagel, Theol. Lit., 1908, p. 38; Milligan, Epis. to
the Th., p. Iv. 1 Exp., 1887, p. 241. Thumb (Griech. Spr. etc., p. 132) denies any influence on the development of the Gk. But Thayer (Hast. D. B., Lang, of the N. T., Ill, 40^) is not surprised to find "idioms having a distinctly Hebraistic
flavour even in native Greek circles."

I,
Cf. also Reuss, Hist, of the
N. T.,
1884, vol.
p. 33.
93
criticism that can be directed against Dr. J. H. Moulton's ProSo Dr. Swete legomena to his Grammar of N. T. Greek."
"deprecates the induction which, as it seems to him, is being somewhat hastily based upon them (the papyri), that the Greek of the N. T. has been but shghtly influenced by the famiharity of the writers with Hebrew and Aramaic" {Apocalypse of St. John,
p. cxx).
Von Soden^ sums up the whole matter as follows: "It was unavoidable but that the primitive Christian writers often used compulsion with the Greek tongue and offended against its genius. They wished to bring to expression things which, up to that time, were foreign to the Greek spirit and only found expression in Semitic languages.
And
besides,
it
is
only natural
that the phraseology of the Greek translation of the O. T., to which they were habituated from their youth, should unconsciously flow from their pens, and still more, that when their subject-matter brought
them
into close contact with the O. T. or
when they
translated from the Aramaic dialect of Palestine, their
Greek should receive a foreign tinge." This by no means makes a special N. T. dialect nor even Jewish-Greek, but it admits a " transreal, though slight, Semitic influence even where it is not with all This position is more nearly in accord lation Greek." Deissmann find the facts as we now know them. It is pleasing to {Expositor, Oct., 1907, "Philology of the Greek Bible," p. 292)
extreme position. He accents here strongly the influence of the LXX on the N. T. "It is one of the most painful deficiencies of biblical study at the present day that the reading of the LXX has been pushed into the background, while its exegesis has been scarcely even begun." {lb., p. 293): "A single hour lovingly devoted to the text of the Seprather reacting a bit from the
first
tuagint will further our
exegetical knowledge of the Pauline whole day spent over a commentary." {lb., Epistles more than a " This restoration of the Greek Bible to its own epoch is p. 294)
:
really the distinctive feature of the

hits the point.
work
of
modern
scholarship."
remark {ExposiThat the Greek Bible Semiticisms of the that 435) tor, Nov., 1907, p. philology, of Greek scope the outside of T. the N. place not do but are merely its birth-marks. In the Dec. (1907) Expositor (p. 520) Deissmann comments feelingly on the fact that the LXX "has served the Christian Church of Anatolia in unbroken concordially agree with his
We
tinuity
down
to the present day."

1
Early Chr.
Lit., 1906, p. 11 f.
94
(c)
Little Direct Hebrew Influence. The Hebrew was not any longer. Less than half of the O. T. quotations^ in the N. T. are from the Hebrew text. It was still read in most of the synagogues of Palestine and it is possible that a modernized Hebrew was in use to some extent for literary purPerhaps the Hebrew text was consulted by the N. T. poses.2 writers who used it much as a modern minister refers to his Greek Testament. The reading of the Hebrew 0. T. would give one dignity of style and simplicity of expression. The co-ordination of clauses so common in the Hebrew is not confined to the Hebrew, but is certainly in marked contrast with the highly developed sysa living language
tem
of subordinate sentences of the Greek.

is
But
this paratactic
construction
partly Hebraic
and partly
colloquial.
The
total
absence of extended indirect discourse is a case in point also. Compare the historical books of the N. T. with Xenophon and
Thucydides.
Likewise the frequent use of
/cat
and the sparing

:
use of particles
may
be mentioned.
The
pleonastic use of pro8) finds
nouns
like
Tjv
ovdels Svvarai KXeiaai avTrjv
(Rev. 3
an occaless its
sional parallel (Moulton)
in the papyri,
but none the
frequency in the N. T.
applies to the effort
solute
due to the Hebrew. The same remark to express in Greek the Hebrew infinitive abis
by the
participle, as ^Xkirovres ^Xkipere

xo-pq.
(Mt. 13
14), or
the
instrumental, as
x^tpet (Jo. 3
29).
Both
of these construc-
tions are found in the Greek, but with far less frequency.
The
cjo;;'.
use of
TefxxJ/ai
TpoaridrjiJLL
with an
12)
is
infinitive for repetition, as Tpoaedero rplrov
(Lu. 20
in evident imitation of the

ov as in
ei SoOrjaerai.
Hebrew
:
Et=ti5i!
is
does not
mean
a-qixdov
(Mk. 8
12),
but
in
aposiopesis, the apodosis not being expressed.
This use
is
the papyri.
lation of
oivev
Ou-xas in the sense of ovhds

(p.
i3"!*ii, though Moulton and x^P^s so used with ttSs.
due to the LXX trans246) has found in the papyri

is
'
thing is a Hebraism after Greek already has X670S in this sense. IIpoYlpoawTroKruxivTko) aoi-Kov \ap.â.veiv ^^^^ Si'iJp is a clear Hebraism. So also is apkaKeiv kvwiriov tlvos rather than first appears in the N. T. Cf. the circumlocutions irpo Trpoaunrov tt]s ap(TKHv TLvl CI Hcbraism. The elabbov avrov (Acts 13 24) rather than the simple 7rp6 avrov. frequent use of the article in address, though occasional in Greek,
use of
py)p.a,
The
in the sense of "i^l
'
the
LXX. The
classic
1 2
Swete, Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., 1900, pp. 381-405.
Schiirer, Jew. Peo. in Times of Ch., div. II, vol. I, p. 10. "Hebrew also continued to be the language of the learned, in which even the legal discussions of the scribes were carried on."

is like
rjv
95
the
Hebrew and Aramaic

the participle suits
vocative.
The common
use of
or
ecrrt
and
both the Hebrew and the analy-
tendency of the kolvt]. Cf. the more frequent use of the instrumental h. So the frequent construction ehat els is due to h in Hebrew, though in itself not out of harmony with the Greek
tic
genius.
It occurs in the papyri.
'Atto irpocruirov='''2'B'^
and rpd
in
7rpoo-cb7rou=''35^
are both Hebraisms.

is
The use
:
of hbovai.
the
sense of TLdkvai
due to
inp
having both senses (Thackeray, Gr.

1,
Scoo-et
of the 0. T. in Gk., p. 39); cf. Deut. 28 rinkpat takes the flavour of the Hebrew
ae vwepavoj.
eiprjpr]
So
salutation like
also.
tiii^'.
and The superfluous pronoun

Q"^??-;
is
used in
calls
for notice
due to 2i. So also vlos occurs in some Hebraistic senses like 1?, but the papyri have some examples of vlSs for 'quahty,' 'characteristic' Thackeray (p. 42) notes the Hebrew fondness for "physiognomical
The frequency
of kv rw with the infinitive is
expressions" like 600aX/x6s, irpoacoTov,

creased use of
avrjp
aro/jLa, x^'i-P, ttous, etc.
The
in-
and avdpwTos
like
Tii''i<
rather than
tIs, ttSs,
eKaaros
must be observed. The very extensive use of prepositions is accented by the Hebrew. Kal kyevero translates ^ri'^l. The use of a question to express wish is Uke the Hebrew idiom (cf. 2 Kgs. 18:33). But these constructions are doubtless due to the LXX rather than to Hebrew itself. It is not possible to give in clear outline the influence of the Hebrew Bible on the N. T. apart from the LXX and the Aramaic, though there was httle of just that kind. Kennedy^ gives thirteen words common to the LXX and the N. T. (Thackeray, Gr., pp. 31 ff., gives a hst of "Hebraisms in Vocabulary") and counts "twenty Hebrew and Aramaic
words which do not occur in the LXX, e.g. ^t^dviov, na/xoipas, paKa, The words in the N. T. known to be Hebrew and not cbo-ai'ra." Aramaic are as follows: d/3a56wj'=ii"^35*; dXXrjXoi;id=n^"ib):n; afxrjv
= '\?2N; = înT
dp)ua75cbj'=liâ>? "^n; dppa/3cbj'=
Ills'!?;
j8dTOS=ria; /SeeXfejSoujS
b?5;
(3oai/77P7es
= ^'^'l
also
49); |8u(7o-os=Y'^2
(cf.
Dalman, Words of ^maLvos); l^paiaTl from ^3?;

"^5?
(cf.
Jesus, p.
^Xet ="'';
(MSS. Mt. 27:46); Kd)Lt?7Xos = ^p3; lovbat^co, iovdaia/jLos, iovdaUos, Ki'/xtwf=li?23; Xt/âras = reia^ fxawa 101)5010$ = nnin"!; Kopâp = = = 'no*^ (LXX, but same for Aramaic s^v^s); iJ.wpe=T^y2; -7raaxa o-arams = lî? crdTrpai3î{l)='^^^; (xaâ6)d=t^-\ii:^'2; ad/SiSaro;/ = nsp = = riblip; n'Ol5ffi; crcoTTOS = niTx; ^'''SO au;:d/xtt'os from StXcod/x 4>tpos
'\:^')'p/,
;
^'>?;
i;cr
xepoi;j3tM=^^^^'^?;
p. 222).
1
wo-aj'vd
Some
of these
ycin (Dalman, Words of Jesus, !*3 were already in classical Greek (fimaos,
f.
Sour, of the N. T. Gk., p. 110
Cf. Gregory, Pro!., etc., p. 102
f.,
for
foreign words in the N. T.
96

.
"Klâuos, (j-aTTeêtpos)
avKaiJLLvos.
Of doubtful Origin are vapdos, vlrpov (Jer. 2 22), a fairly complete list of the Hebrew words in the N. T. The Aramaic words will be given later. There are to be added, however, the very numerous Hebrew proper names, only a few samples of which can be given, as Mapid/x= U'^^??;
:
This
is
MXxto-5k = p'ir-'i3^>a; 2aouX=
b^sîî;
2a/iou7;X
= ^5i!^?ar2;
kt\.
Deiss-
mann
is
correct
in saying ("Papyri," Encyc. Bihl.) that lexical
Hebraisms "must be subjected to careful revision," but these

remain.
Certain
it is
that the bulk of the examples of Hebraisms given

in the light of the papyri
by Guillemard vanish
and
inscriptions.
He
feared indeed that his book

It
is
was "a return
to old exploded
is
methods."
indeed "exploded" now, for the N. T.
not
"unlike any other Greek, with one single exception, and absolutely unique in its peculiarities."^
There are three ways of giv-
ing these Semitic words: mere transliteration and indeclinable,

transliteration
(d)
A Deeper
and declinable, Greek endings to Aramaic words. Impress by the LXX. It is true that the
affinities
N. T. at many points has
with the
LXX,
the "single
is not ''the basis of the exception" of Guillemard, but the Christian Greek." ^ In his second volume Viteau began to see
LXX
that he had been too extreme in his notion that the N. T. was Hebraized Greek: "The language of the N. T. is not derived from that of the
LXX;
it is its sister.
It is the
same
familiar
Greek
language which one finds employed in the one or the other. But has exercised a considerable influence upon the Greek of the that of the N. T."^ But even in this volume Viteau overestimates
LXX
the influence of the

as to
LXX
on the N. T.
Westcott''
its
had the old
idea that the N. T. language, "both as to

its
lexicography and
grammar, is based on the language of the LXX." It is undoubtedly true^ that a very large proportion of the N. T.
1
2 Schaff, Comp. to the Gk. Test., p. 23. N. T., 1879, p. ix f. Compl. et Attr., 1896, p. ii. * Art. N. T., Smith's B. D. Helbing in his Gr. der LXX (1907) promises to investigate the Hebraisms in the second volume (p. iv). But he ah-eady sees that irpoaTLdkvai occurs in the papyri as well as constructions Uke k^Siv $ avTuv. In general (p. vii) the LXX shows the same tendency as the rest of the Koivri towards uniformity (the disappearance of the opt., the superl., the 2d aorist, the middle, etc.). Cf. also Sel. from the LXX by C. S. (1905) with a brief Gr. of the LXX; Deissmann, Die Anf. der Sept.-Gr., Intern.
Hebr.
in the
'
Sujet,
Wochenschr., Sept. 26, 1908. Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk.,

vergl. Gr. der semit. Spr. (1907).
p.
142
f.
Cf. Brockehnann, Grundr. der
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINU

words are found in the
97
LXX,
but there are very few words that
and nowhere else.^ Both are found in the N. T. and the and the N. T. use the current vocabulary. There are the
LXX
LXX
indeed numerous theological terms that have a new meaning in the LXX, and so in the N. T., Hke ayLaêtv, acêais, ykevva, eKKk-qala,
Kvptos,
\6yos, \vTp6w,
list
fjLOVoyeurjs, Truevfia,
auTrjpla, xpiaTos, ktK.
(See
longer
also
6eov,
i]
in Swetc, Introduction to 0. T. in Greek, p. 454.)
So
dKwv
many N.
oajjiri
T.
phrases are found

Tvpoaoîrov
in
the
LXX,
like
evwdlas,
Tpos
Trpbauiirov,
'Ka/j.âveLV
irpoauirou,
haffTTopa,
kt\. {ib.).
The
0. T. apocryphal books also are of
interest
LXX
on this point. We have a splendid treatment of the Greek by Thackeray. He shows "the kolvt] basis of LXX Greek," as to vocabulary, orthography, accidence and syntax He notes a<x, reaaepaKovTa, finds v movable before (pp. 16-25).
consonants,
vaos,
vmrav,
irXrjp-qs
indechnable,
do-e/Srjj',
disappearance
of /xt-verbs, rikdoaav, rjXOa, aveâivav, ecopaKav, 6s eau, oWeLs,

tivus pendens, even in apposition with genitive
(cf.
nomina-
Apocalypse),
constructio
ad sensum,
\eycov
and
ort,
Xeyopres with construction like
ax-qyyeXr] Xeyovres, recitative
neuter plurals with plural verb,
partial disappearance of the superlative
and usually
in elative sense,
TpuiTos instead of wporepos, eavrovs, -wv, -oTs for all three persons,
disappearance of the optative, great increase of tov and the infinitive, co-ordination of sentences with /cat, genitive absolute
when noun
between
kv
in another case
is
present,
blending of cases, inels,
crease of adverbial phrases
and
prepositions, elpX
of
els),
interchange
and
els
(increase
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,
writers,
the
inscriptions
and
kolvt]
but
it is
extremely
common
Li the realm of syntax ^. than the N. T., for it is a translation by Jews who at many points slavishly follow the Hebrew either from ignorance of the Hebrew or the Greek, perhaps sometimes a little of both. B in Judges, Ruth, 2-4 Kings, has eyu elpa with indicative, as eydo elfXL Kadiaonat (Judges 6 18) .^ BA in Tobit 5 15 have 'iaoixai
Hebrew
istic
LXX because of the the LXX is far more Hebrain the
5t56mt.
in Eccl. 2
17 has enlarjaa avv
ttju
ôorju
ts'^'^tiri-n^t.
J The 150 words out of over (?) 4800 (not counting proper names) in the N. T. which Kennedy (Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 8S) gives as "strictly peculiar to the LXX and N. T." cut a much smaller figure now. New pap. may remove many from the list that are still left.
Cf. Swetc, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 308.
98
NEW TESTAMENT
nis!
Swete^ finds this misunderstanding of

clesiastes
common
in
in
Ec-
and
six
times in 3 Kings.
It
is
the characteristic of
Aquila.2
No
such barbarisms as these occur in the N. T,, though
the "wearisome iteration of the obhque cases of personal pro-
nouns answering to the Hebrew suffixes" finds illustration to some extent in the N. T. books, and the pleonastic use of the pronoun after the Greek relative is due to the fact that the Hebrew The N. T. does not have such a conrelative is indeclinable.^ struction as ripâTo Tov oLKohoixelv (2 Chron. 3 1), though tov kaekdeiv with kyevero (Ac. 10 25) is as awkward an imitation of the Hebrew infinitive construct. The LXX translators had great difficulty in rendering the Hebrew tenses into Greek and were often whimsical about it. It was indeed a difficult matter to put the two simple Hebrew timeless tenses into the complicated and highly developed Greek system, and ''Vav conversive" added to the complexity of the problem. Conybeare and Stock, Selections from the LXX, p. 23, doubt if the LXX Greek always had a meaning to the translators, as in Num. 9:10; Deut. 33:10. The LXX Greek is indeed "abnormal Greek," ^ but it can be un:
:
derstood.
Schiirer^
is
wrong when he
is
calls it
"quite a
new
lan-
guage, swarming with such strong Hebraisms that a Greek could
not understand
the people
out.
it."
It
indeed in places ''barbarous Greek," but
kolvy] could and did make it Jews knew no Hebrew nor Aramaic but only the kolvt]. The Greek proselyte, like the Ethiopian eunuch, could read it, if he did need a spiritual interpreter. Schlirer, who credits the Palestinian Jews with very little knowledge of the current Greek, considers "the ancient anon\Tnous Greek
who spoke
the vernacular
Many
of the Hellenistic
translation of the Scriptures" to be "the foundation of

dseo-Hellenistic culture."
all
Ju-
He
is
indeed right in contrasting the
hardness of Palestinian Pharisaism with the pliable Hellenistic
Judaism on the
spirit
soil of Hellenism.''
But the Jews
felt
the Greek
they could not handle easily oratio indireda) not only in the Diaspora, but to a large extent in the cities of Palestine, especially along the coast, in Galilee and in the Decapolis.
(even
if
1 2
Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 308.
Use should be made of the transl. of Aquila, Theodotion and Symmachus, though they are of much less importance. Cf. Swete, p. 457 f 3 Swete, ib., p. 307. * Moulton, Prol., p. 13.
6 6 7
Hist, of Jew. Peo. in

lb., vol. I, p.
Time
of Ch., div. II, vol. Ill, p. 163.
47
f.,
and
div. II, vol. Ill, p. 159.
lb., p. 157.
99
On the spread of Greek
in Palestine see Milligan, iV. T.
Documents,
pp. 39 ff. The lem, against a Jew teaching his son Greek, shows that
prohibition/ about the time of the siege of Jerusait
had previ-
ously been done. The quotations in the N. T. from the O. T. show the use of the LXX more frequently than the Hebrew, sometimes the text quoted in the Synoptics is more like that of A than B, sometimes more like Theodotion than the LXX.^ In the Synoptic Gospels the quotations, with the exception of five in Matthew which are more like the Hebrew, closely follow the LXX. In John the LXX is either quoted or a free rendering of the Hebrew The Acts quotes from the LXX exclusively. The is made. Catholic Epistles use the LXX. The Epistle to the Hebrews "is
in great part
Epistles
more than
a catena of quotations from the LXX."^ In Paul's half of the direct quotations follow the LXX.
Here also the text of A is followed more often than the text of B. Swete^ even thinks that the Hterary form of the N. T. would have been very different but for the LXX. The Apocalypse indeed does not formally quote the O. T., but it is a mass of alluIt is not certain^ that the LXX was sions to the LXX text. used in the synagogues of Galilee and Judea, but it is clear that Peter, James, Matthew and Mark, Jewish writers, quote it, and that they represent Jesus as using it. In the Hellenistic synagogues of Jerusalem it would certainly be read. It would greatly facihtate a just conclusion on the general relation of the N. T. Greek to the LXX Greek if we had a complete grammar and a dictionary of the LXX, though we are grateful for the luminous
tion to the 0. T. in Greek; to
chapter of Swete on the Greek of the Septuagint in his IntroducKennedy for his Sources of N. T.
Greek; to
Hatch
for his Essays in Biblical Greek; to
Deissmann
for
his Bible Studies
and
his Philologij of the Greek Bible (1908); to
Helbing for his very useful Grammatik, and especially to Thack
Megilla,
I, 8.
Cf.
Hamburger, Realencyc,
art.
Griechentum; R. Meister,
Prol. zu einer Gr. der Sept., (Wiener Stud., xxix, 27). ^ Swete, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 395. Cf. Deissmann in
Exp. Times, Deissmann, Die Sept. Pap., 1905) "assimilates such passages as are cited in the N.T., or are capable of a Christian meaning, as far as possible, to their form in the N. T. Ileinrici shows the same thing text, or to the sphere of Christian thought." to be true of Die Leip. Pap. frag, der Psalmcn, 1903. 3 Swete, Intr., etc., p. 402. All these facts about LXX quotations come
Mar., 1906,
p. 254,
who
points out that Pap. Heid.
(cf.
from Swete.
*
lb., p. 404.
lb., pp.
See
ff.
ib., p.
404
f.,
for bibliography
on N. T. quotations.
29
100
NEW TESTAMENT
eray for vol. I of his Grammar. It is now possible to make inin the study telligent and, to a degree, adequate use of the The completion of Helbing's Syntax and of of N. T. Greek.
LXX
Thackeray's Syntax will further enrich N. T. students. The Oxford Concordance of Hatch and Redpath and the larger Cambridge Swete^ laments that the N. T. Se-ptuagint are of great value.
grammars have only "incidental

acteristics of the
references to the linguistic char-
Alexandrian version."
The
translation
was not done
Jerusalem, but by Jews of Alexandria
the Alexandrian streets

if
and not by men of who knew "the patois of and markets." ^ One doubts, however,
all
at once,
KOLvi] and from most scholars and insists that "the translators write Greek largely as they doubtless spoke it." They could not shake off the Hebrew spell in translation. In free Greek like most of the N. T. the Semitic influence Mahaffy was quick to see the likeness between the is far less. papyri and the LXX.'* But one must not assume that a N. T.
these translators spoke this mixture of Egyptian
Hebrew.
On
this point
Swete^
differs
word
necessarily has the

KOLvi].
same sense that
it
has either in the
LXX
or the
sidered later.
The N. T. has ideas of its own, a point to be conis "indispenWe agree with Swete^ that the
LXX
sable to the study of the N. T."
Nestle'' justly
remarks that the
Greek of the LXX from philologists than some twenty years ago. Conybeare and Stock {Set. from the LXX, p. 22) observe that, while the vocabuenjoys
now a much more
favourable judgment
lary of the
LXX
is
that of the market-place of Alexandria, the

the influence of the
syntax
is
much more under
Hebrew
original.
The
LXX
does, of course, contain a few books like 4 Maccabees,

spirit, like Philo's
written in Greek originally and in the Greek
works.
Philo represents the Atticistic revival in Alexandria that

real factor
was a
6 KPIT17S T^s dSiKtas, is paralleled in the
But the "genitivus hebraicus," like papyri and the inscriptions, though not so often as in the LXX. Cf. Radermacher, N. T. Greek, p. 19. So also (p. 21) roh e^ kpideias (Ro. 2:8) is like k Thumb ^ irXrjpovs in the papyri and already in the tragic poets. properly takes the side of Deissmann against Viteau's exaggerated
with a few.
1
Intr., p. 289.
lb., p. 9.
^ *
f.
ib., p. 299.
2 ^
Exp. Times,
iii,
p. 291.
lectures
open his on O. T. by asking: "Gentlemen, have you a LXX? If not, seU whatever you have and buy a LXX." Nestle, LXX, in Hast. D. B., p. 438. ^ Griech. Spr. etc., 6 LXX, Hast. D. B., p. 451. pp. 128-132.
Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 4.50
Hitzig, of Heidelberg, used to
IN THE KOINH 101 THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

idea of
and what to the to decide have an open must One development of the ko.^ vernacular. clearly right is Deissmann^ mind to light from cither direction. o the Hebrais-s the of scientific investigation
in calling for a
LXX
influence (following Hatch). what is due to the use of the
It
is
not always easy
LXX
LXX. Even
i and N. T. use of aperrj (Is. 42 8 12, Caria. 9- 2 Pet 1:3) is paralleled by an inscription m Pet 2as ever Christians the or Jews the We" are not then to think of Greek used m thetransor Uterature the peculiar
the
LXX
using in speech which in lation of the Hebrew O. T.,

respect in different parts.
The
varied much same intense Hebraistic

itself
this
cast
books which were originally appears in the O. T. apocryphal Ecclesias icus, 1 MaccaTobit, as Hebrew and then translated, the Greek of the Wisdom of Solobees etc. Contrast with these to the Greek translation of mon, 2 Maccabees and the Prologue The Wisis at once manifest. 3 Ecclesiasticus, and the difference wrote who for the author, is of special interest,
dom
in
of Solomon Greek culture, art, science Greek and revealed knowledge of with the LXX -d imjtated and philosophy, was yet familiar himself. Cf Siegfried, Book some of its Hebraisms, being a Jew that B. It must never be forgotten of Wisdom," Hastings' D.
"by
great
The name
"and so the very Christ (Xp.ar6s) is found in the language emthe of arose out terms Christian and Christianity Bible known only The interpreters."^ ployed by the Alexandrian century was Christian world in the first to most of the Jews in the ihe Bible Greek the The first complete Bible was the used freely was and was the "first Apostle to the Gentiles" (êL Christians. Conybeare and Stock for many centuries by the itsel T N. the that say as to from the LXX, p. 24) go so far Certainly it would not not have been but for the LXX.
the of Alexandrian Pro^^ to far the greatest contribution 1. O. the of translation very literature of the world is this
LXX
LXX LXX
would
1
. n^ ^ Hell -Gricch., Hauck's Realencyc, p. G-tzschius, Spec. Exer^^^^^^^^^^^ DelLann, B. S., pp. 95 f ., 360 ff. Cf 38o points cognos. Grace. Scrm. etc., 1894, p. 1778 p 23. H. Anz, Subs, ad the common speech. Cf through also the in are out that poetic words .
.
638.
LXX
1863, p. vu. Gr Unters. tiber die bibl. Griic, T.insius Lipsius, ur. .
ume
Deissmann, a. b., p. /di. xit. nîi^'J' t o,i,l bn.tU, hri^tle eontemporary with the LXX and many of the Ptolemaic pap. are Li^jptof ko.., vernac. whole is in the with proof that the LXX on the itself in the act of translating. The Hebraisms came from the Hebrew 80. Mah;iffy, Prog, of Hellen. in Alex. Emp., p.
3
_
jl
, ,, attention to the fact that
Churton,
Infl. of
the
LXX
Vers., 1861, p.
1.
102

it is.
have been what
"The
Bible whose
God
is
is
Yahweh
is
is
the
Bible of one people, the Bible whose
God
Kupios
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
gives "a true picture of the that the Greek of the language of ordinary intercourse between Jewish residents in
(p. 27),
LXX
the country." He denies also any influence of the Hebrew on the vernacular Greek of the Jew^s in Alexandria outside of the vocabulary of special Jewish words like aKpo^varia.
He
thinks
(p.
28)
the
Book
of Tobit the best representative of the vernacular
Greek
of the Jews.
maic
s^'ii'^3
(Heb.
There are more transliterations like yetupas for Ara13) in the later books where the early books had
irdpoLKos
or TpoarjXvros.
fading of the
The fact of a translation argues for a Hebrew from the thought of the people. In the
is
early books the translation
better
done and "the Hebraic
character of these books consists in the accumulation of a

of just tolerable
is
number
Greek phrases, which nearly correspond to what
normal and idiomatic in Hebrew" (p. 29). But in the later books the Hebraisms are more numerous and more marked, due to "a growing reverence for the letter of the Hebrew" (p. 30). We cannot follow in detail Thackeray's helpful sketch of the transliterations from the Hebrew, the Hellenized Semitic words, the use of words of like sound, Hebrew senses in Greek words
like 8l8u!fj.L=
X^'i-P,
Tidi]fj.L
after
^].,
vids dSi/ctas, 600aX/i6s,
TpoaoiTov, arona,
/cat
the pleonastic pronoun, extensive use of prepositions,
accompaniment or instrument, etc. (e) Aramaisms. N. T. grammars have usualty blended the Aramaic with the Hebrew influence. Schmieden complains that the Aramaisms have received too little attention. But Dalman^ retorts that Schmiedel himself did not do the matter justice, and still less did Blass. Moulton^ recognizes the distinction as just and shows that Aramaisms are found chiefly in Mark and Matthew, but does not point out the exact character of the Aramaisms in question. We take it as proved that Jesus and the Apostles, like most of their Jewish contemporaries in Palestine who moved in pubhc life, spoke both Aramaic and Greek and read Hebrew
kykvero, ev for
*
W.-Sch., Gr.,
2, 1 c.
And Dalman (Words
of Jesus, p. 18
f.)
criticizes
Schmiedel for not distinguishing Aramaisms from Hebraisms.

2
Words
of Jesus, p. 18.
Prol., p. 8.

(cf.
KOINII
103
Lu. 4
17).
Even
Schiirer^ admits that the educated classes
used Greek without
There is no doubt about the Arahis time knew the Hemaic. Jerome says that all the Jews of Hebrew was used in but that, disproves brew O. T. The LXX was clearly read by and Palestine of the schools and synagogues the impression that give not do Jesus many. The discourses of used the undoubtedly he though seclusion, he grew up in absolute occasions many on address public and Aramaic in conversation The Aramaic tongue is very old and its use as a if not as a rule.^ previous Aradiplomatic tongue (Is. 36 U) implies perhaps a a vernacular well as as hterary .3 a was There maic leadership Targum of the Ezra, Daniel, of portions Aramaic Aramaic. The
difficulty.
:
Dalman^ suggests that Onlêlos are in the literary Aramaic." Judean literary Arathe in originally Gospel his Matthew wrote
reason is not maic rather than the Galilean vernacular, but the distinction Dalman's of validity the doubts Zahn<^ very apparent. Peter was recogbut Aramaic, Galilean a and Judean between a
pronunciation (Mt. 26 73). nized in Jerusalem by the Galilean This gutturals and '^. the with difficulty had Gahleans^
:
The
Christian AraAramaic is not to be confounded with the later translated. The Aramaic or Syriac into which the N. T. was Aramaic,^ not the East maic spoken in Palestine was the West feel the differAramaic (Babylonia). So keenly does Dahnan^ that "the avers that he ence between Hebraisms and Aramaisms freer considerably was Jewish Aramaic current among the people Synoptists the which from Hebrew influence than the Greek in that statement. But he write." Not many can go with him
on a real difference, though, as a matter of about it at the time. With Jofact, no great point was made pr. 1; v. 6, 3; TCLTpLos 'y\w(i(Ta was the Aramaic (B. J. sephus
is
right in insisting
7j
Gk
2
3 4
Ch., div. II, vol. I., p. 48. On the Hist, of the Jew. Peo. in Time of fiir neutest. Wiss., 1908, 4. Heft. Zeitschr. Fiebig, see of the Mishna for full discussion. of Jesus, pp. 9, 11; Ch. I, IV, (i) 4,
6 7 8
Dalman, Words Hast. D. B. D. S. Margoliouth, Lang, of the O. T., Dalman, Words of Jesus, p. 80. Einl. in das N. T., I, 1897, p. 19. See Neubauer, Stud. Bibl., 1885, p. 51.
lb., p. 81.
T. was written in that tongue! thought that Jesus spoke Lat. and that the N. that Jesus knew Cd<. Chase, on the allow not will 63 f.) (ib., p. Meyer But spoke Gk. on the Day of Pentecost other hand, shows that Peter necessarily
(Credibility of the Acts, 1902, p. 114). Words of Jesus, p. 42.
Meyer Jesu Muttcrspr.,
1896, p. 58
Some
of the Lat.
monks
actually
104
NEW TESTAMENT
11; 16
V. 9, 2).
He
wrote his
War
:
originally in the native tongue for

:
Tois avco âpl3apoLs.
uses
'E/Spato-Ti
13, 17, 20; Rev. 9 (5 2; 19 in the sense of the Aramaic. So
John
21
16)
17
Luke has
'EjSpats dLoXeKTos (Ac.
stood Paul's
The people underGreek, but they gave the more heed when he dropped
:
40; 22
2;
26
14).
into Aramaic.
4>0!}vr].
The two kinds
4 Mace. (12 7; 16 15) likewise employs 'E/3pais of Jewish Christians are even called (Ac.
: :
6 1) 'EX\r]VLaTal and 'E/3patot, though 'EWrjVLaTai and Supto-rat would have been a more exact distinction.^ It is beyond controversy that the gospel message was told largely in Aramaic, which to some extent withstood the influx of Greek as the vernacular
:
did in Lycaonia^ (Ac. 14 the Synoptic problem.

gentile,
11).
is
One cannot
at this point discuss
It
not certain that Luke, probably a

is
knew
either
Aramaic or Hebrew, though there

example and a possible
a real
Semitic influence on part of the Gospel and Acts, due,

holds, to the
LXX
Dalman^ Aramaic or Hebrew
put inprobably written in Rome, not Palestine. Hence the Aramaic original of Mark, Bousset argues, cannot be considered as proved.* He rightly insists, as against Wellhausen,* that the question is not between the classic Greek and Aramaic, but between the vernacular kolvt] and Aramaic. But whatever is
to Greek.
original for the opening chapters of the Gospel, already
Mark was
or
is
not true as to the original language of

first
Mark and
of
thew, the gospel story was
told largely in Aramaic.
MatThe
:
translation of the Aramaic expressions in Mark proves this beyond all doubt, as ToKeida, kovix by to Kopaaiov, eyeipe (Mk. 5 41). Dalman^ indeed claims that every Semitism in the N. T. should first be looked upon as an Aramaism unless it is clear that the Aramaic cannot explain it. The Mishna (Neo-Hebraic) was not itself unaffected by the Greek, for the Mishna has numerous
Schwyzer, Weltspr. etc., p. 27. the Heb. document, but admits a "wealth of Hebraisms" in Lu. Vogel (ZurCharac. des Lu., p. 32 f.) argues for a "special source" for these opening chapters. Blass, Philol. of theGosp.,
*
Dalman, Words
of Jesus, p. 7.
Words
of Jesus, p. 38.
Dabnan doubts
p. 195, denies that

4 ^
Luke knew Hebrew.

f.
Theol. Runds., Jan., 1906, pp. 2-4, 35 Einl. in die drei Evang., 2-4.
6 Words of Jesus, p. 19; cf. also Schaf?, Comp. to the Gk. N. T., p. 28. In 1877 Dr. John A. Broadus said in lecture (Sum. of the Leading Peculiarities of N. T. Gk. Gr., Immer's Hermen., p. 378) that the N. T. Gk. had a "Hebrew and Aramaic tinge which arises partly from reading Hebrew and chiefly (so his own correction) from speaking Aramaic." If instead of Hebrew he had
said
LXX,
or
had added
LXX
to
Hebrew, he would not have missed
it far.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINH 105

Greek words and phrases that were current in the Aramaic.^ The Aramaisms of vocabulary that one can certainly admit in the N. T. are the following words: d(3i3a=sas; 'AKeX5a/idx='<'?1 ip-"; all words beginning with /3ap="i5 hke Bapra/Sas; BeeXi'e/3oL'X = i''?2,
i^nT;
B7?ê(76d=iDD
yeepua =
rr^?;
Brjdâda,
B77fa0d=!!<n7.
eXcot,
rr^?;
Ta^âBa =
Kri53; FoXTO^d KIJ^3^3; aaâx^^^ davd (or probably Heb. "^^Js^^Xet, and the rest Aramaic, DalS*?.;
eXwt,
Xa/zd
man, Wcrrds
nnsri^;
f = ^^^P?".?' s^î^ ^^)^ ^'î^; t4><t>oJda.= = J?'^^p; /xaAtcoms=!*;'i?2!S:'9; fxapava, 0d = sn S^J'^^^; /cop/3aj/as = S^nittiTp 0apt(raTot=i*'\'45 '")?; pa^l3o{ov)vL{el) = Trdo-xa^'*'??^; Meo-crtas o-drof =^S9; ''pia'l; j5aKd=Spil; o-d|3/3aTa = 5^ri:3'0; aaraj'as = 5<3pO
of Jesus, p. 53
.)
(7kepa=!s'i^t:";
ToKada,
Kouii=^'!2'^p
'^fi'^^P;
names
of
persons like
expression
K7j0ds =
5*p'^5; Ta;Set0d=Kri-^nt?,
etc.
Aramaisms
of syntax are seen in the following.
The
yeveadaL davarov
seems to be in imitation of the Aramaic.
Well-
hausen {Einl. in die drei Evang., pp. 31 ff.) suggests that els Kad' els (Mk. 14 19) is a hybrid between the Aramaic els els (but this is an old Greek idiom) and the vernacular (kolvt)) Kad' eh. He suggests also that Aramaic meanings are found in such words as acoêLu,
:
TvoieXv
Kapirov, avfj-ôvXiov Trotelv (5t56i'at), elpi]vq, eiprjvrjv SidopaL, 686s
6eov, TrXTjpoofxa, etc.
of a possible original
As already explained, apart from the question Aramaic Mark and an original Aramaic Matthew and Aramaic sources for the early chapters of Luke and
the
first
twelve chapters of Acts,^
many
of the discourses of Christ
were undoubtedly in Aramaic. There was translation then from this Aramaic spoken (or written) gospel story into the vernacular KOLvr] as we now have it in large portions of the Synoptic Gospels
and possibly part Aramaic original
of Acts.
The
conjectural efforts to restore this
words of Jesus are suggestive, but not always convincing. On the whole subject of Semitic words in The the. Ptolemaic papyri see Mayser, Grammatik, pp. 40-42.
of the
list
is
includes ap{p)a^6)P, ^vaaos,

list
Kvp-ivov, Viâvos, cvKap-LVOs, x^t-wv.
It
not a very long

little
indeed, but shows that the Orient did have
some
influence
on the Greek vocabulary.
These words oc-
cur in older Greek writers.

Schiirer, Hist, of the Jew. Peo., etc., div. II, vol. I, pp. 29-50.
Cf.
mod.
Yiddish.
2 Cf. Bickel, Zcitschr. fiir Cath. Thool., viii, 43. This would then mean, W. 11. give it fiapav iiOa. "Lord, come." Cf. Rev. 22 20. ' Sec Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., ch. XI; Dahiian, Words of Jesus, pp. 1778; Wellhausen, Einl. m die drei Evang. (Die aram. Grundl. der Evang., pp.
:
14-43).
106
(/)

Varying Results.
It
is
natural that different writers
in
the N. T. should diverge in the
ence manifest in their writings.

KOLvr]
amount of Semitic influThey all used the vernacular

a very faint trace of Semitic
which in
itself
may have had
influence.
But
of the nine authors of the
N. T.
six
were prob-
ably Palestinian Jews.^

reveal the Semitic
Now
these six writers (Mark, are just the very ones
thew, James, Peter, Jude, John)
Matwho
mould of thought. It is often merely the Hebrew and Aramaic spirit and background. In Mark the Aramaic influence appears; in Matthew ^ the LXX is quoted along with the Hebrew, and Aramaisms occur also; in James
there
is
the stately dignity of an O. T. prophet with Aramaic

(cf.
his address and letter in Ac. 15) but with many neat turns of Greek phrase and idiom; Peter's two letters pre-
touches
sent quite a problem and suggest at least an amanuensis in one

case or a different one for each letter (cf. Biggs, Int. and Crit. Comm.); Jude is very brief, but is not distinctly Hebraic or Grecian; John in his Gospel is free from minor Semitisms beyond the frequent use of /cat like but the tone of the book is distinctly that of a noble Jew and the sum total of the impression from the book is Semitic, while the Apocalypse has minor Hebraisms and many grammatical idiosyncrasies to be discussed later, many of which remind one of the LXX. If the absence of the optative be taken as a test, even when compared with the vernacular kolvyi, Matthew, James and John do not use it at all, while Mark has it only once and Jude twice. Peter indeed has it four times and Hebrews only once, but Luke uses the optative 28 times and Paul 31. The remaining three writers (Paul, Luke, author of Hebrews) were not Palestinian Jews. Paul was a Hellenistic Jew who knew his vernacular kolvt] well and spoke Aramaic and read Hebrew. His Epistles are addressed chiefly to gentile Christians and naturally show little Semitic flavour, for he did not have to translate his ideas from Aramaic into Greek. In some of his speeches, especially the one delivered in Aramaic, as reported by Luke in Ac. 22, a trace of the Semitic point of view is retained. In contrast with Ac. 22 note Paul's address on the Areopagus in 17. The author of Hebrews makes abundant use of the LXX but exhibits possible Alexandrian origin or training, and it is not clear that he knew either
"i,
1
2
Swete, Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., p. 381. Dalman (Wds. of Jes., p. 42) thinks that the Heb. of Mt. are due to
the
LXX.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINU 107

Hebrew
also Ac.
or Aramaic.^
he seems
with the
Hebrew.
Luke presents something of a problem, for to have had Aramaic sources in Lu. 1 and 2 (possibly 1-12), while it is uncertain whether he was famiUar There seems little evidence that he knew Aramaic. that he may have read his Aramaic thinks Blass^
gentile
sources or had
them translated for him. Curiously enough, and capable of writing almost classic Attic though a uses Semitisms not common elsewhere Luke yet (Lu. 1 1-4), shows that the few real Hebraisms in Dalman^ T. in the N. of things (9 28 but classical authority sense in \6yovs like Luke
:
:
for this exists),
bia.
aTonaros (1:70) are due to the

of ev
tc3
LXX,
not the
Hebrew.
with the infinitive and followed by the subject of the clause occurs 25 times in Luke, once in Mark, thrice in Matthew and in John not at all.^ See kv tc3 vTvo(jTpt<i)ii.v tov 40). Blass calls this an Aramaism.^ But it is not 'l-qaovv (Lu. 8 a pecuharity of the discourses of Jesus, as it is found there only in Mt. 13: 4; Lu. kv TOO awdpeLv (common to all the Synoptics, Mk. 4: 4;
The use
common^ 8:5), and in Lu. 10:35; 19:15. Hence the idiom is " clasin Luke from some other cause. The construction occurs in common sical historians, in Polybius and in papyri," ^ but is most
in the
LXX, and
the parallel
is
wanting in the spoken Aramaic.
Luke also freely uses /cat kyhero (almost peculiar to him in the N. T.), which at once suggests ^^':l. He doubtless got this from
the
Kal
LXX.s
He
has three constructions,
viz. Kal
kyhero koL
rfKde,
eyhtTo riWe and koX eykuero ehdeZv. The first i" LXX, while kyepero ekSeiv is due to the Greek vernacular Araas the papyri testify. The superfluous d<êts, ripâro, etc., are Hebrew, the Uke Aramaic, maisms, while ei/xt and the participle is
two^ are
common
in the
and
1
also in
harmony with the
analytic vernacular
Koivi].
Nestle"
even Biesenthal (Das Trostschreiben des Ap. Paulus an d. Heb., 1878) Heb. or Ai'am. in written was Ep. the that thinks
2 3
Philol. of the Gosp., p. 205.
Wds.
of Jes., p. 38
f.
Vogel, Zur Charac. des Lukas, p. 27.
Cf. also Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., pp. 113 f., 118; ^ Dalman, Wds. of Jes., p. 33.
6 Evang. sec. Lucam, p. xxii. But kv tw with the inf. occurs with great freInf. quency in the LXX, 555 times in the O. T., Apoc. and N. T. (Votaw, in the N. T.). It in Bib. Gk., p. 20), chiefly in the LXX (455 times, only 72
occurs nearly as often in the

together.
'
LXX as all other prepositions with

^
the infinitive
3-4.
Moulton, Prol., p. 14 (1st ed.).

Cf. Thackeray, Gr.,-pp. 50
v\Oe 209 times
ff.
Dalman, Wds. W.-M., p. 760
of Jes., p.
note.
We
and iykvero Kal 11:43 B). " Zeitschr.
in the
LXX,
have the type iykvtro f,\Oe 145 times, but kyhiro kUetv only once (1 Kgs. ^ Moulton, Prol., p. 17.
f.
f iir
ncutest. Wiss., 190G, p. 279
108

:
agrees with Blass (p. 131) in taking buoKoydv kv in Mt. 10 32 and Lu. 12 8 as a Syrism. n with nnin is not in the Hebrew, nor
:
bixok.
the LXX, but "^nist is used with n in the Jewish-Aramaic and Christian-Syriac. Nestle refers to o/xoXoyovvrcov tQ bvb15) as a Hebraism, for in such a case the Hebrew fxaTL (Heb. 13 used ^. The LXX and the Aramaic explain all the Semitisms in Luke. Dalman^ ventures to call the LXX Hebraisms in Luke
ev in
:
"Septuagint-Grsecisms" and thinks that the same thing is true Certainly it is proper to investigate ^ the words of Jesus from the point of view of the peculiarities of style
of the other Synoptists. 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 inbeyond the general impress of the Jewish genius and point
of view.
fluence
it
and Other Foreign Words. Moulton^ considers "hardly worth while" to discuss Latin influence on the kolvt] of the N. T. Blass ^ describes the Latin element as "clearly traceable." Swete^ indeed alleges that the vulgar Greek of the Empire "freely adopted Latin words and some Latin phraseology." Thumb'' thinks that they are "not noteworthy." In spite of the conservative character of the Greek language, it yet incorInasporated Latin civil and military terms with freedom.
IV. Latinisms as Judea was a Roman province, some allusion to Roman customs and some use of Latin military and official terms was to be expected,^ though certainly not to the extent of Romanizing
much
or Latinizing the language.
Cicero^ himself described Latin as
provincial in comparison ^vith the Greek.
Latin words are fairly
Latin names were early naturaUzed into the Greek vernacular and in the N. T. we find such Roman names as Aquila, Cornelius, Claudia, Clemens, Crescens, Crispus, Fortunatus, Julia, Junia, Justus, Linus, Lucius, Luke, Mark,
common
in
the Mishna.^
1 2
Wds.
of Jes., p. 41.
" ^ ^
4.
lb., p. 72.
Comm.
on Mk., 189S,
p. xliv.
3
' 8
Prol., p. 20.
Griech. Spr.
etc., p. 152.
Hoole, Class. Element in the N. T., p. 4. Pro Archia 10. Cato lamented: airoXoCo-t
a.vaTr\T)ue'evTe% (Plut.,
'PwAtaiot ra -Kpayixara ypafj.naTo:v
'EWtjvikwu
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.
(Griech.
II, vol. I,
pp. 43
ff.
Krausa
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

Rufus, Sergius, Silvanus Niger, Paul, Priscilla, Publius, Pudens, themselves (Jewish Christians the among Titus (Silas), Tertius, êâaros), while Agrippa, Augustus (translated
and
gentile),
Julius, Caesar, Claudius, Gallio, Felix, Festus, names. Roman typical are TertuUus Pilate,
cities
Nero (Text. Rec.), Note the Roman
Palestine. mentioned in Ac. 28, Ca^sarca and Tiberias in occur places More than forty Latin names of persons and are milithirty-one), (or the N. T. The other Latin words, thirty into the come They terms. tary, judicial, monetary or domestic in appearing them of N. T. through the vernacular kolvt], none words Latin uses "Plutarch but two in Polybius.
the
LXX and part not those more frequently than Polybius, but for the most "the Roman that employed in the N. T.''^ Jannaris^ observes culture Greek to surrendering administration, notwithstanding its language." Greek the and education, did not fail to influence aaadpLov (as), But in the N. T. only these Latin words are found: Lu. 14 18), irapvrw^vov, dvvapLov (denarius), ?x^=aestimo (exe fie
:
(centurio), Kûaos (census), KoSpavevpaKv\o^v, 6 piap.êheiv Kevrvplc^v \eyi6:v Ko\oivia (colonia), Kovarwhla (custodia),
,
T-qs
(quadrans),
(libertinus), Virpa (libra), txa(legio), \kvTi.ov (linteum), Xt/SeprTvos (mille), MoStos ii'CKiov (membrana), KeWov (macellum), ixep-^pava (xuaptos (si(praetorium) Trpan6,pLov , (modius), êarrjs (sextarius), aizeKov(sudarium), covhaptov carius), aLpuKivdLov (semicinctium), cjêKouris (titlus), rlrXos (taberna), Urcop (speculator), a^ raêppat ct>payk\\Lov (fiagellum), cj^payeWdo: (flagello),
(paenula), ôpo^forum),
This is at most (31) not a foroccur like epyaaiav SovpaL (opephrases midable list. A few Latin accipere), rb kapop Tvoietp (satis (satis \ap.âpeip ram dare), to Ikupop capere). But Deissmann (consilium facere), cvixôv\iov \aix^kpeiv the use of kpyo-aiap notes f.) 117 East, p. the Ancient
xaprrjs (? charta), xîpos (corus).
from the vulgar type in in an Oxyrhynchus papyrus letter of with a decree of Caria in inscription an in 2d cent. b.c. and also Kplfco to bkaiop (cf. shows Amorgus at tablet lead the Senate. A So aumipco Uyop (Mt. 18 23 f.) occurs in two pa{Light
blboîxi
Lu. 12
p.
57).
pyri letters of 2d
cent. a.d. (Moulton,

='
The Expositor,
oypxi
April, 1901,
:
274
1
f.).
Thayer
calls attention also to ai)
(Mt. 27
4)
as
Burton, Notes on N. T. Gr., 1904,

Hist.
p. 15.
, ,
Gk. Gr., p. 7. . ^. -ni Cf. also C. Wessely, Die lat. Elem. in 3 Lang of the N. T., Hast. D. B. subwhole 24 (1902). On the der Griic der ilgyp. Papyrusurk., Wien. Stud., Trotetv is lKav6^> T6 83-158. Grec, le sur pp. ject see L. Laforcade, Infl. du Lat.
2
115). as old as Polybius (Moulton, Exp., Feb., 1903, p.
110

So also
:
NEW TESTAMENT
18
:
being like videris.
6\peade
avroi (Ac.
15).
Griimn^
considers \ayLâvtLv in Jo. 5 The majority of these instances occur in
34, 41 equal to capto ('to catch at').
Mark and Matthew,
Mark using more Latinisms than any other N. T. writer. Too much, however, cannot be argued from this point. ^ There are besides such adjectives as 'HpwStawt, XpiaTiavol, ^LKnnrrjaLoi, which
are
made
after the Latin model.
Blass^ thinks that the syntax shows a greater Latin influence, but admits that it is difficult to tell the difference between native
development in the Greek and a possible Latin bent. It is indeed difficult to speak with decision on this point. Ultimately Greek and Latin had great influence on each other, but at this stage the matter is at least too doubtful to appeal to with conPaul indeed may have spoken in Latin at Lystra, acfidence." cording to Prof. Ramsay .5 Thayer'' indeed gives a longer list of Latin syntactical influences on N. T. Greek, but not all of them are certain. The anticipatory position of airo and irpo in expressions of time
and place, as wpd U w^poiv (Jo. 12: 1), is a possible Latinism, though only of the secondary sort, since the Doric and the Ionic use this construction occasionally and the kolvt] frequently
(cf.
Moulton, Prolegomena,
1:5).'^
p. 101).
Cf. also Merd xoXXas ravras
increased use of the subjunctive rather rinkpas (Ac. past tense of the indicative is a necessary after a optative than the of the optative rather than a Latindisappearance the result of
The
ism.
The
alleged blending of present perfect
and
aorist
might
2 3
Gk.-Eng. Lex. of the N. T. Swete, Comm. on Mk., p. xliii.
Cf. Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., p. 211
f.
Or. of N. T. Gk., p. 4. Thumb (Griech. Spr., p. 152) 4 Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 1888, pp. 60, 66. considers the matter .inconclusive, as does Moulton (Prol., p. 21). For the Schulze, Graeca later Latinisms see Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 13 f. See also W.
Lat., 1891; Schwyzer, Weltspr. des Altert., p. 20.
Cf. Sophocles, Lex., pp.
25-30 for Latinisms in Gk. 6 Exp., Sept., 1905, and March, 1906.
"As
his father,
and possibly
also
use of Latin speech his grandfather, had possessed the Roman citizenship, the and names was an inheritance in the family" (Ramsay, Ex-p., Aug., 1906, Cf. also Ramsay, Pauhne and Other Studies (1906, p. 65), where p. 160).
Alex. he says it is "certain" that he spoke the Latin language. So holds certain "a Iconium At April, 1911). Exp., Latin?, Speak Paul Souter (Did Moulton also thinks that affectation of speaking Latin was fashionable."
Lat. Paul preached in Lat. at Lystra, since the earhest inscriptions there are
(Prol., p. 233).
6
1
Lang, of the N. T., Hast. D. B. On this matter of time see Schulze, Graeca Lat., pp. 13
ff.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOIMI

be a Latinism, but
it is
111
at least doubtful
'Lva
if
that
is
found
in the
rather than the infinitive follows N. T. The use of 6ri and but it is parallel to the growvanishes, naturally as the infinitive the ablative after 4)v\a.(x<rHv and 'Atto etc. ing use of ut with rogo,
may
be due to cavere ab or to the general analytic tendency to also). express the preposition with the case (cf. the Hebrew avv vocative, with the o: of absence the are Other smaller details =nwwith dative 7aMeco hie), {qui=et outos = /cat as equal to Kal, 6s
bere alicui, infinitive alone
with KeKehw.
There
is
no evidence that
verthe absence of the article in Latin had any influence on the irregular in the it sees he thinks Schmidi though nacular Koivi], connection use of the article in iElian. It is interesting in this represented as Latin vernacular the in development the to note the Old Latin and the Vulgate versions. Unusual cases are
in
used with
many
verbs; prepositions are
indicative with final ut
and
in indirect questions;
much more frequent; the common use of
quia and quoniam like quod with verb rather than the accusative and infinitive; ille, ipse, hie, is, more like the article, as the later
Itahan
earlier
il,
Spanish
el,
French
le."^
Other foreign words had, of course, entered the
kolvt]
or
the
Greek, like /Souros (Cyrenaic and Sicilian); peSrj (Gallic or aavdoKLov (PerCeltic); ayyapevoo (even J^^schylus), yaâ, Trapadetaos, irapefxôXi,, sian); xiTcbv (Oriental); Kpaârros (cf. Latin grabatus),
pvixr]
(Macedonian);
iStjSXos,
appa(3uu, Kivvaixwuov, kvixlvov, nva (Phoenician);

alvaTi, <nv86}v
Pa'Cov,
(Egyptian or Semitic?); ftfaOn the Egyptian words in the Ptolemaic papyri vLov (Arabic?). words, 26., see Mayser, Grammatik, pp. 35-40; on the Persian origin. uncertain StmTrt is of p. 42 f., including yaâ and 7rapa5eio-os.
iSucraos,
But Greek was known
in all parts of the
Roman Empire
except
parts of North Africa and the extreme west of Europe. Schools great hbraries in Alexandria, Pergamum and elsewhere. of the mass the less were numerous and excellent. But none the
There were
people were âpâpoi to the real Greeks and inevitably brought Cf. Eadermacher, N. T. Gr., pp. laxities into the vernacular. 9 ff., who gives a good discussion of the Latinisms in kolvt] writers.
1
Atticismus
etc., p. 64.
Cf. Gcorgi,
Dc
Latinismis N. T.,
iii,
Vita, 1733.
whole subject sec Ronsch, Itala unci Vulgata. Das Sprachid. der und der Kath. Vulg. unter Beriicks. der rom. Volksspr., 1875, Itala urchristl. Cf also The Holy Lat. Tongue, W. Barry, in Dublin Rev., April, p. 480 f and Our Lat. Bible, ib., July, 1906. "The common dialect, spoken
2
On
this
1906,
Africa, saw with local differences in every part of Italy, in Gaul, Spain and (Dubshores" those over spread Christianity when arrive moment happy its
lin
Rev., April, 1906, p. 293).
112
V.

The
Christian Addition.
But was there a Christian adbibhcal no separate Greek, not to say a special was dition if Christian Greek? Winer ^ admitted "religious technical terms" in the Christian sense, but thought that "the subject scarcely
there
within the limits of philological inquiry." Blass has nothing on the subject. But even Deissmann^ insisted that "the say to language of the early Christians contained a series of religious terms peculiar to itself, -some of which it formed for the first
lies
time," but he added that this enrichment did not extend to the
Once more hear Deissmann^: "Christianity, like any affecting civilization, must have produced an effect upon language by the formation of new ideas and the modification of old ones." Moulton^ sounds a note of warning when he says that "it does not follow that we must promptly obliterate every grammatical distinction that proves to have
"syntax."
other
new movement
been unfamiliar to the daily conversation of the first century The N. T. must still be studied largely by Egyptian farmer Westcott^ indeed thinks the subject light drawn from itself." calls for "the most careful handling" in order to avoid Jewish usage on the one hand and the later ecclesiastical ideas on the other. This is obviously true. Connect the discussion of the Semitic influence on the N. T. wdth this point and recall the revolutionary effect that Christianity had upon the Greek language in the ecclesiastical Greek of the Byzantine period, and the difficulty will be appreciated. Mahaffy^ does not hesitate to say that the main cause of the persistence of Greek studies to-day
. .
due to the fact that the Gospels are written in Greek. "Greek conquered Jew and Jew conquered Greek and the world inherited Under the the legacy of their struggle through Roman hands." influence of Christianity some of the old heathen vocabulary
is
vanished and the remaining stock "was now considerably reduced and modified in a Christian and modern spirit."^ The
1
W.-M.,
B.
p. 36.
65 (note). Encyc. Bib., art. Papyri, p. 3562. 4 Prol., p. 20. Cf Thumb, Griech. Spr., p. 182 f. B Smith's D. B., art. N. T. 6 The Gk. World under Rom. Sway, 1890, p. 389 f. Butcher, Harv. Lect. on Gk. Subj., 1894, p. 2 f., calls the power of Jew and Gk. on modern Hfe one of "the mysterious forces of the spirit." "Each entered on a career of world-wide empire, till at length the principles of Hellenism became those of civilization itself, and the religion of Judea that of civiUzed humanity."
2
S., p.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 10
f.

N. T. Greek became the standard for ecclesiastical Greek as the Attic had been for the ancient world. Winer ^ indeed curtly says: "To attempt to explain such expressions of the apostolical terminology by quotations from Greek authors is highly absurd." Rutherford ^ almost despairs of understanding N. T. Greek as well as "classical Greek," since it contains so many alien elements, "but it has at least begun to be studied from the proper point of view," though he overestimates
the difficulty and the difference when he speaks of "the singular speech in which the oracles of God are enshrined." On the other hand 3 we must not let the papyri make us swing so far away
from the old "biblical" Greek idea as to imagine that we can

find in the vernacular kolvv all that Christianity has to offer. Christian spirit put a new flavour into this vernacular kolpt}
The
and
thought and dignity of style that lifted it to a new unify and glorify the language. This new and victorious spirit, which seized the best in Jew and Greek, knew how to use the Greek language with freedom and power.^ If the beauty of the
elevation of
N. T. writings is different from the ancient standard, there is none the less undoubted charm. Matthew Arnold put the Gospels at the acme of simplicity and winsomeness, and Renan spoke of Luke's Gospel as the most beautiful book in the world. Norden^ admits that the N. T. style is less exclusive and more universal. There was indeed a compromise between the old and the new. The victory of the new brought rhythm (not the technical sort)
and unity as the chief characteristics.^ In Christianity Hellenism becomes really cosmopolitan.^ If Christianity had merely used the Greek language and had been entirely alien to Hellenism, the
1 3
W.-M.,
p. 36, n. 3.
Epis. to the
Rom.,
p.
f.
Cf. Zezschwitz, Profangrac.
und
bibl. Sprachg.,
1859, p. 4, where he
speaks of "dieses neue geistige Princip an der Sprachc." Deissmann (Die sprachl. Erforsch. der griech. Bibel, p. 8) accents the dilTcrence between the Christian ideas and the Gra!CO-Rom. heathen words that express them. * lb., Norden (Die griech. Kunstpr., Bd. II, pp. 453 ff.) indeed p. 12. thinks that the N. T. wants the "freedom" (Freiheit) and "serenity" {Heiterkeit)
This is true in part of Paul's wTiting, of the ancient hterature. where passion rages fiercely, and in Rev. and other apocalyptic passages. But what can excel Lu. and Jo. in lucidity and beauty? " Ileiterkeit ft,cnera\ity or breadth, are the blitheness or repose, and Allgemeinhcit Walter Pater, The Renaisideal." Hellenic of the characteristics supreme
sance, 1904, p. 225.

6
6
Die
lb.,
griech. Kunstpr.,
Bd.
II, p. 456.
^
Bd.
I,
p. 290.
lb.,
Bd.
II, p.
463.
114
N. T. would not have belonged to Greek literature, but this sympathy with the best in the world must not be overworked.^ The N. T. language is real Greek, though with the Christian
supreme in it because Christianity seized the Hellenic and transformed it. W. Christ ^ rightly calls attention to the fact that Christianity brought "a renewal of the human race," "the moral worth of man and a purer view of God." So "this ethical new birth of mankind" found expression in the N. T. The touch of life is what distinguishes the N. T. writings from the philosophical, historical, religious and ethical writings of
spirit spirit
In the Synoptic Gospels this quality reaches its height. details is the spirit, the literary conception of a life to be written without ornament, without reflection, without the writer's personality."* This fact constitutes a literary phenomenon amounting almost to a miracle. This vital spirit disthe time.^
"Far above these
on every page and baffles analysis. It is the essence N. T. language, but "is as pervasive as the atmosphere," "as intangible as a perfume."^ If some concentration and strength are lost, there is great adaptability.^ Thayer^ does not hesitate to speak of the fitness of N. T. Greek for its providential It is It is the language of men's business and bosoms. office.
closes itself
of the
It is not the life, not of the study nor the cloister. language of a bygone age, but the speech of the men of the time. " The Book of the people has become, in the course of centuries,
the language of
the
Book
of all
mankind" (Deissmaim,
Light, p. 142).
Chris-
"began without any written book at all" except the Old the gospel, but Testament. "There was only the living word no Gospels. Instead of the letter was the spirit. The beginning, in fact, was Jesus HimseK" {ih., p. 245). The N. T. is in close sympathy with both Jew and Greek, in a sense has both languages to draw on, can reach both the Semitic and the gentile mind, becomes a bond of union, in a word (as Broadus used to say) it is better suited to be the vehicle of truth conveyed by Jewish minds than classical Greek would have been. And a grammarian must admit that, however necessary and fundamental grammattianity
2
3
Cf. Hatch, Infl. of Hellen. on Christ. Gesch. der griech. Lit., 1905, p. 912. Hicks, Gk. Phil, and Rom. Law in the N. T., 1896, p. 12.
6 6 7
Mahaffy, Su^\^ of Gk. CiviUz., 1897, p. 309. Thayer, Hast. D. B., art. Lang, of the N. T., p. 40^. Rodwell, N. T. Gk., 1899, p. 2. Hast. D. B., ib. Cf. Schaff, Comp. to the Gk. N. T., p. 26.

ical exegesis
is, it
forms only the basis for the spiritual exposition

details,
which should follow. When one comes to

Christianity
is
chiefly lexical,
he notes that the influence of not grammatical.^ But a few points
in syntax are to
be observed, as in expressions like kv Xpto-rcS^; h the Kupicp; TTio-reuco^ h with locative, els with accusative, kirl with accuthe with dative, the with Trtareuco locative or the accusative, sative or absolutely. As to the lexical element the lists of aira^
vpy]ixkva
require severe sifting.*
It is too
soon to pass a final verdict,

small.
but in the nature of the case the
number would be
Such
words
as clvtIxpi-'^tos, erepoStSao-KaXeco, evayyeXLCTTjs , avvaravpow, \pev-
5d5eX0os, xf/ev8aTr6aTo\os, etc., naturally spring out of the Christian The vocabulary of the N. T. Greek is not very exenterprise.
somewhere near 5600 words, including proper names.^ But the main point to note is the distinctive ideas given to words
tensive,
already in use, like
01701x77,
ayM^cc,
0,7105,
dSeXôs, avrlTviros, avrifiL-
âcrtXeta, fiairadla, dTToXurpcocris, (ZTrcoXeta, airoaToXos, airoaToXi] , apTOS,

Tifco,
/SaTTTto-juct
(-M05),
yXcccrcra,
Slclkovos,
SiKatoco,
eiprjvr],
eKKKrjala,
CK'XeKTOs, eX-TTtfco, eXTrts, eTlaKoiros, tTnaTp'tcôjiaL,
epya, evayyeXiov, evay-
yeXitco,
kôvala,
^cor],
davaros,
lepevs,
/caXeco,
KaToWayri, KaToWaaac^,
irpea^VTepos,
raireLVOs,
KTipvaaw, Kk-qTOS,. K6(jp.o<;, Koivwvia,

paKKrjTOS,
tt'l<jtls,
\vTpov, \vrpbw, neravoia, 656s, Trairpevna,

adoô:,
ttlotos,
irKXTevw,
irvevp-aTLKOs,
(rcoTi7p,
irpoaKonida, aap^, cravpos,
(Xvvel8r](XLS,
cruTr]pla,
TaTreLVOcppoavpt], 6 vios tov deov, 6 vlos

o-t6s,
yj/vxr],
rod avOpoiwov, viodeala, X^P^s, Xpt-
xpvxi-Kos.
When
one considers the new connotations
that that these words bear in the N. T., it is not too much "to say lies the history of words like such and these of history the in used Christianity.'"^ The fact that these and other terms were
1
Cf.
Thumb,
griech. Spr., pp. 1G2-201.
Formel "in Christo Jesu" untersucht, 1892. On the whole question see Vocab., 1905, pp. 19-80. Job. Cf. Abb., Buttmann, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 173 ff.; Moulton, Prol., p. 67 f. Not 550 (as Ken4 Cf. Deiss., Hell.-Griech., Hauck's Realencyc, p. 636.
2
Cf. Deiss., Die neutest.
T. formations nedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 93) bibl. words, but only 50 N. (Deissmann, Exp., Jan., 1908; Light, p. 73). 6 Kennedy, Sour, of N. T. Gk., p. 88. The Eng. of the King James Vers. and N. T.) contains only about 6000 words (Adey, The Eng. of the T. (O. use only King James Vers.). Max Miillor (Sci. of Lang., p. 16) says that we
about 4000 words in ordinary Eng. Cf. also Hatch, Ess. in Bibl. Gk., p. 11. 6 Weatcott, Smith's B. D., N. T. "Though Greek words were used they were the symbols of quite other than
Greek
On
That is, when the distinctively Christian ideas are given. ideas." Gegenw., the influence of Gk. on other languages see Wack., Die Kult. der ff. 311 Tl. I, Abt. 8, pp.
116

day gives a sharper point to the of the emperor
vlbs deov, detos,
in the popular language of the
new turn in the gospel message. The deification made Christians sensitive about the words dtos,
KvpLos, KvpLaKos,
(7(iOTr]p,
xttpttT/xa,
âatXevs, âaCKda.
See the lumi-
nous discussion of Deissmann {Light, pp. 343-384). The papyri and the inscriptions throw almost a lurid light on these words.
Cf. Ki)ptos Katcrap
and
Kuptos
'Iriaovs
{Martijrium Polycarpi,
viii, 2)
with
cult,
Cor. 12
1-3.
The
Christians did not shrink from using
these words in spite of the debased ideas due to the emperor-
Mithraism, or other popular superstitions. Indeed, Paul (cf. Col. 2 1 f .) often took the very words of Gnostic or Mithra cult and filled them with the riches of Christ. Cf. The Expositor for April, 1912, "Paul and the Mystery Religions," by H. A. A.
:
For the stimuli that Christianity derived from popular notions of law, religion and morality see Deissmann, Light, The mass of the N. T. vocabulary has been transpp. 283-290. of a Csesar would indeed call him worshippers The figured. deov, but the words were empty flattery. vlbs or (TUT-qp Tov Kocrixov that well shows a LXX word, for instance, in the Deissmann^ did not mean what it did in the Ephesus, of citizen mouth of a
Kennedy.
Much more is N. T. The new message glorified the current kolvt], took the words from the street and made them bear a new content, linked heaven with earth in a new sense. In particular the N. T. wi'iters took and greatly enriched the religious vocabulary
LXX,
as
dpxtepei'S, dLadijKr], deos, ttpo^tjttjs, acorripia.
this true of the
of the
LXX.
The language
of
VI. Individual Peculiarities.
Christianity
and there was more play for individualism. If the style is not all of the man, certainly each writer has his own style. But style varies with the same man also at different stages of his own development, with varying moods and when discussing different themes. Style is thus a function All these points of view must be kept in mind of the subject. with several of the N. T. writers, as Paul, Luke, Peter and John, whose writings show marked variations. Simcox^ notes that in the Thessalonian and Corinthian letters Paul uses kv Tavrl twelve
was not stereotyped at
first
1 B. S., p. S3. Cf. Schleierm., Hermen., pp. 66 ff., 138 ff., who early called attention to the Christian element in the N. T. Cf. also Viteau, Le Verbe;
Synt. des Prep., p. xl f 2 Writers of the N. T., p. 37.
on the Study
of the
Gk. N. T.,
p. 145) says:
A. Souter (The Exp., 1904, Some Thoughts "We must take each writer's
grammar by
itself."

times, in the Pastoral Epistles
:
iraai five (or six) times,
while in
In thus accenting the individuahty of the Ph. 4 forget that each writer had access to not must one writers N. T. of early Christianity. There was terminology religious common the expressions that reappear in and ideas of substratum common a them all, though in certain cases there may have been actual use
12 he has both.
documents. But one can never be sure whether Peter had James, or the author of Hebrews Luke's writings. Peter probably had some of Paul's letters when he wrote 1 Peter, and 2 Peter The grammarian cannot be 3 15 f. expressly refers to them.
of
:
expected to settle questions of authorship and genuineness, but he has a right to call attention to the common facts of linguistic
usage.
of the
Immer^ indeed complains that the
linguistic peculiarities
N. T. writers have been worked more in the interest of The modern method of biblical criticism than of exegesis. theology is designed to correct this fault, but there is a work here for the grammarian also. Winer ^ declines to discuss this
question and
of the
is
horrified at the idea of

is
grammars
of each writer
of
N. T.3
Language
rightly viewed
from the point
view
rapid and continued changes in the individual mind during the mental process of expressing thought find a parallel in the syntactical relations in the sentence.* One cannot protest too strongly against the levelling process of
of the speaker or writer.
The
an unsympathetic and unimaginative linguistic method that puts all the books of the N. T. through the same syntactical mill and tags this tense as "regular" and that one as "irregular." It is not too much to say that the characteristic of the Greek literature of this time
Lives). ^
was
precisely that of individuality (cf Plutarch's

.
Viteau^ has a brief discussion of "The Psychological Character of the Syntax of the N. T.," for, added to all other
things, there
1
is
"the influence of the moment."
Differences in
Hermen.
speaks of
N. T., 1877, p. 132. Thayer (Lex. of N. T. Gk., p. 689) misjudgments committed by some who have monumental "the
of the
made
2
W.-M.,
(cf.
questions of authorship .turn on vocabulary alone." rhetoric p. 1 f., remands \''^ TL^ Jiole matter to the realm of N. T. Wilke, 1843, N. T. Rhet.; Schleicrm., Ilermcn.; Gersdorf, Beitr. zur
d.
Sprachchar.
N.
T.),
but some discussion
is
demanded
here.
Schmiedel
abbreviates Winer's comments. 3 W.-M., p. 4. He did not live to see Dr. Abbott's two stout volumes,
Joh. Vocab. (1905) and Joh. Gr. (190()). * Cf. Steinthal, Intr. to the Psych, and Sci. of Lang. Cf. also Blass, Ilermcn. 6 Cf. Norden, Die griech. Kuîiitpr., Bd. I, p. 243.
und
Krit., p. 206.
Le Vcrbe; Synt. dcs
Prep., pp. xUff.
118

temperament inevitably
af-
culture, in environment, in gifts, in

fect style,
but
this fact
is
not to be stressed so as to
make a
new-
In the following discussions some lexical comments are given besides the grammatical to give a better idea of the writer's style as a whole. Certainly Blass' theory ^ of an original Aramaic (a) Mark. Mark is not proven, but Peter often spoke in Aramaic, and Mark
dialect for each writer.^
was
bilingual like Peter.
For the Aramaisms and Hebraisms of
Mark Mark
It
is
see previous discussion (Semitic Influence). The idea that Matfirst wrote in Latin need not be seriously discussed.
also nearly as
thew and Luke have

not
in his
vocabulary that
many Latinisms as Mark. Mark is most distinctive, for of
the 1270 words in
Mark
(besides 60 proper names) only 80 are
pecuhar to him among the N. T. writers.^ He has 150 in common with Matthew and Luke alone, while only 15 belong to Mark and John and nowhere else in the N. T. About 40 words belong only to Mark and the LXX in the Greek Bible, while Mark has 38 (besides proper names) occurring nowhere else in the N. T. or
but these are not all real awa^ 'Xeyofxeva, for there are the papyri! Mark seems fond of diminutives like the vernacular
the
KOLPT}
LXX;
in general (dvyarpLov, KopaaLov, Kwapiov, etc.);
et/xt
:
and
.
epxofxai
. .
kwith the participle are common, as in Luke (cf. 1 6, ^j' pictorial multiplies he in fact Krjpvaawv); 1 ri\dev :39, 8e8vtxhos; av occurs with efx(3\\paaa Xe7et) participles (cf 14 67, ibovaa
.
:
past tenses of the indicative (3 the double negative

:
11, orav ainbv kQedopow);

;
he loves
mon
(9
(cf
: .
(as in
23, TO
is com(1 N. T. generally) with the infinitive and sentences d dvprf) broken and parenthetic clauses are frequent
44,
ixribevl ii-qUv e'lirris)
the article
19,
Kadapiô)v)
iKelvji TT) rjfxepa);
at times he is pleonastic (2 20, Tore kv he uses eWvs or eWews al)out 40 times; he is emo; :
and vivid, as showTi by descriptive adjectives, questions and exclamations (cf. 1 :24; 2:7); the intermingling of tenses
tional
(9
:
33
ff.,
eTTTjpajra
XeTet
Greek* or to
^
artificiality, as
elTrev) is not due to ignorance of Swete well says, but to "a keen sense
.
As Simcox does
ib., ser. 6, vi,
in Writers of the
ff.
Philol. of the Gosp., pp. 196
N. 1 ., y.'A Cf. MarshaU, Exp.,
ser. 4, vi,
pp. 81
ff.;
Allen,
3
pp. 436-443.
1898, p. xl. Thayer (Lex. of N. T. Gk., App., but the text of some 32 is in dispute. Hawkins, Hor. Syn. 2, p. 200, gives 71. Swete gives interesting Hsts of Mark's vocabulary from various points of view. Cf. also Salmond, Mark (Gosp. of), in Hast. D. B. * Swete, Comm. on Mk., p. xhii. Thi'erie (Die Inschr. von Magn. am Maander und das N. T., 1906, p. 4) says: "Die Gruppe der sogenannten Ha-
Swete,
Comm. on Mk.,
p. 699) gives 102,

of the reality
119
and
living interest of the facts; there are 151 his-
toric presents in the
W. H.
text against 78 in
Matthew and 4
of prepositions in Luke; there is frequent and discriminating use than 8k, selrather Kal the connective is usually (2 1, 2, 10, 13) and great simplicity much but there is little artistic effect,
: ;
dom
ovv;
little vividness of detail; the vernacular kolvt] is dominant with by held so b\}/ia are and raihbdev literary influence, though elreu,
Norden.i
n7rXi7pcoTat
(Mk.
15) is paralleled
by
eTrXrypco^rj
in
Fayum papyrus and
'avynvbcna avy.TrbaLa,
xpaatat xpaatai
by Taynara
World, raTMara in the "Shepherd of Hermas" (Goodspeed, Bihl. illiterate, considered be not to is Mark 1906, p. 311 f.). In general though more Semitic in his culture than Greek. Wellhausen has has more Aramaisms in Mark's text than B. But noted that Mark's Semitisms are not really barbarous Greek, "though extremely vernacular language often makes us think so,
Mark's
until
the less educated papyri" (Moulton, Camb. Bihl. (even double Essays, p. 492). Even his fondness for compound influence of the If kolvJ]. vernacular the like compound) verbs is
we read
Peter
is
seen in the Gospel of Mark,
it
as to language and temperament.^

of Jesus
(6)
He
gives
was thoroughly congenial an objective picture
and a
realistic one.
LXX
writer quotes both the Hebrew and the as doing the same. He has 65 allusions Jesus and represents verbal quotations. And yet the being them of to the 0. T., 43 He has the instinct for Hebrew Hebraistic. book is not intensely and his thought and genelaboration, Hebrew the and
Matthew.
The
parallelism
eral outlook are Hebraistic,
though
his
language
is
"colourless Hel-
Essays, p. 484). lenistic of the average type" (Moulton, Camh. Bihl. of peculiarities linguistic Q as distinct the into enter We need not In Mt. 9 6 correct. be hypothesis that if Matthew Greek from our rather than the vulgar KpaârTos of Mark. In 12 14
:
we see Matthew has

kKIvt]
avixôvKiov 'eXaôp for a. e8idovv of
Mark (Moulton,
Ka/cojs
op.
cit.,
p. 485).
Uaei avTovs
He can use paronomasia as (21:41). He uses rbre 91 times

17
in KaKovs
dTro-
against 6 in
Mark
he
and 14
in
Luke; he has
âacXeia rihv ovpavdv 32 times, while
im Ncucn paxlegomena ist bedenklich zusammensoschrumpft; cs handclt sich aira^ dp-nfxiva. nicht tvp-qukva, aTra? um meistens Testament 1 Die Ant. Kunstpr., Bd. II, p. 488. Cf. on Mark, Schulze, Dor schrift2 Schaff, Comp. to Gk. N. T., p. 51. (Keil and Tzschirncr's Analecta, II, Marcus Btcllcr. Charakter und Wert des Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 114-153. Syn.2, Hor. pp. Hawkins, Sec .3). 2, style of Mark. narrative the on comments 302) has
203, 2G1, 270, 278,
120
has
ri

âacXeia rod Oeov 14 times (Mt. 4; Lu. 32); he uses 6
Trarrip 6
ovpavLos 7
times and
6 Trariip 6 kv toIs ovpavols
13 times; he 12 times
quotes the O. T. with the formula h>a (ottws) ifK-qpo^dfi to p-qdh or Tore hifK-qpiidi] to prjdh, whereas Luke does not have it at all, Mark
only once and John 7 times;
/car'
6vap occurs 6 times
and no-
where
else in
N. T.;
like
Luke he
uses Kal l8ov often (27 times)
and
rj
idov after
ttoKls
the genitive absolute 11 times; he alone speaks of

TroXts
like Mark he uses whereas Luke usually has 'lepovaaXrjiJL] 6p.vvw kv or els, common in Matthew, does not occur in the other Gospels; rd</)os, not in the other Gospels, is found 6 times; o-wreXeta tov aiwuos occurs 5 times, and only once more
ayia
and
tov ixejaXou jSao-tXews;

:
'lepoaoKviia
always save once (23
37),
in the
TTos jSao-iXeiis;
N. T. (Heb.); note the pleonastic use of avdpwTos as avdpwhe twice uses ds to ovofxa, but the other Gospels h re?
or
eirl
;
ovofxaTL
the oriental particularity
is
seen in using Trpoaepxoixai
51 times while
is
Mark
has
it
only 5 and Luke 10 times; awayeLv

kolvt] is
used by Matthew 24 times; the vernacular

as in the use of
/xovocpdaKixos (like
manifest in
many ways
Thayer
in
in his list {Lexicon, p.
698
f.)
Mark), KoXXu/Stcrrat. gives 137 words occurring
Matthew alone in the N. T., but 21 are doubtful readings. Matthew has fewer compound verbs than Mark. Matthew does
not use adverbial where Mark has
ttoXXol,
while
Mark
has
it
9 times.
He
ort
has
8e
Kal
about 60 times.
Matthew has
has
it
after
verbs of saying 38 times, while

the 151 historic presents in
Mark
50 times.
Of
Mark
only 21 appear in Matthew,

all.
though Matthew has 93 Horae Syriopt., p. 144 f.
historic presents in
See Hawkins,
Matthew
frequently has aorist

p.
when
xx f.). The periphrastic tenses are less common in Matthew than in Mark and Luke Matthew is less fond than Mark of redundant (op. cit., p. xxii). phrases {o-p. cit., p. xxvi). The Gospel is largely in the form of discourses with less narrative element than Mark. The style is more uniform and less graphic than either Mark or Luke and so
has imperfect (see Allen, Matthew,
less individual.^
(c)
Mark
Luke.
Whether Luke knew Hebrew
or
Aramaic or both,
cannot be stated with certainty. He did make use of Aramaic documents or sayings in Lu. 1 and 2, and in the earl}^ part of the Acts. He was also quite familiar with the LXX, as his quo1 Cf. Dalman, Wds. of Jes., 1902; Gla, Die Originalspr. des Mt., 1887; See Hawkins, Hor. Syn.-, pp. 154-173; Allen, Mt., pp. xix-xxxi; Plummer, Mt., Zahn, Einl. in d. N. T., Bd. II, 1898. On Matthew's style see p. xiiif.; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Ok., pp. 203, 276, 278, 300, 302, 305.
IN THE KOINH 121 THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
from it show. The Semitic influence "He consciously imitates the Greek already been discussed. narrative which have their scene Bible and in the parts of his rough diction of he feels it congruous to retain the
tations
in Palestine his sources" (Moulton,
in his writings has
Camh. Bihl. Essays, p. 479). One thing He had a good command of the vernacular is certain about him. the literary KOLvii in Lu. 1 1-4 and Ac. KOLvi, and even attains often been 1-516-34. The preface to his Gospel has
:
17
Herodotus, and it does not compared to those of Thucydides and is an offset to their vainmodesty his for suffer by the comparison, Roman citizen, and he a was Luke glory 1 Selwyn^ thinks that the spirit of Paul in exhibits He was a fit companion for Paul. doctrinal position. general his in and his comprehensive sympathy the Gospels. He of literary most the Renan^ calls Luke's Gospel use of his mateskilful makes and writes more like an historian the Gospel have in . pictures His accuracy rials^ and with minute thinks that indeed Norden painter." given him the title of "the influence Atticistic received writers Luke alone among the N. T. asiamschen der Rhythmen Die Blass, Cf (Kunstprosa, II, pp. 485 ff But we need not go that ar. und ramischen Kunstprosa, p. 42). makes apparent in many ways, but withal he
.
.
His versatility
is
His vocabulary illustrates his a faithful use of his materials.^ counting doubtful readings) breadth of culture, for he uses 750 (851 N. T. Some of them are the in elsewhere words not occurring One special item in his vocabulary is the large still avra^ \ey6fxem. as is natural, since he number of medical terms in his writings, nautical phraseology is abunwas a physician.^ His command of
1
SchniT,
intr. of
Comp.
to Gk.
N.
T.. p. 55.
He
calls
the
2
3
Herodotus and Luke

ff
are about the
same
attentbn to the fact that length. Cf Blass, Philol.

.
of the Gosp., pp. 7

St.
Luke the Prophet,

Intr. to
1901, p. 81.
T.,
* B e
ii, p. 17. Davidson, Les Evang., pp. 232, 283. Plummer, Comm. on Luke, 1896, p. xlvn.
N.
Ramsay,
St.
Paul the Traveller, 1895;
Was
Christ
Born
, ^ , u at Bethlehem?,
,,
rVii'ô
Credibility of Acts, 1902.
calls attention to fvogel (Zur Charak. d;s Lukas, 1899, p. 19) Peter and Paul m the Acts. in the sDccches of Stephen, 699 ff.), Plummer (Comm., pp. lu ff.) 8 See the lists of Thayer (Lex., pp. Of the 851 some 312 occur m the Gospel Hawkins (Ilor. Syn.S pp. 201-207). and 478 in the Acts. , occur n. the
,
differences
LXX
1882. Many o those Hobart, Medical Lang, of St. Luke, phrahis knowledge of the medical show to remain plenty also, but
iî
ecology of the time.
122

The
question of a double edihere.^
dantly shown in Ac. 27 and 28.^

tion of the Gospel
is
and Acts does not belong
His language
that of a
man
of culture with a cosmopolite tone,
who
f.).
yet knows
how
to be popular also (Deissmann, Light, p. 241
He
not
KOLvrj
only has a rich vocabulary, but also fine

diction.
command
of the of Paul
In particular his stjde
is
more Hke that

with
kv tc3
and
of
the writer to the Hebrews.
Among
matters of detail in Luke one

(37 times)
is
will note his use of the infinitives
and
ToO with the infinitive (25 instances); avv (25 times)
frequent,
though seldom in the other Gospels; Kai avros {avrr]) he has 28 times, and often constructions like avros 6 xpovos; Kal kykvero or eyevero 8e he uses 43 times; he has 8e Kal 29 times; he loves iropevofxai (88 examples); he uses el like an interrogative 18 times; to occurs often before a clause, especially an indirect question; he makes frequent use of Kal l8ov; Uavos is common with him; rjv with present participle occurs 47 times; the descriptive genitive is common; irpds with the accusative occurs 151 times with him and only 25 in the rest of the N. T.; he is fond of hoiinov; re (and re Kal) is almost confined to him in the N. T.; the optative is alone used by Luke in indirect questions and more often otherwise than by any other N. T. writer save Paul. This is a literary touch but not Atticistic. He alone makes any special use of the future participle; he is fond of xas and awas; cbs in temporal sense is common in Luke, once in Mark, not in Matthew; a good many anacolutha occur in Acts, and the change from direct to indirect
discourse
is
frequent; the relative
is
often attracted to the case of

:
the antecedent and often begins a sentence (Ac. 2
24)
cTrio-rdra
used 7 times (peculiar to Luke) rather than syntax is throughout in general that of the
is
1
/cupte
or â^êl; the
of the time.^
kolvt]
Smith, Voy. and Shipw. of St. Paul, 1882. Blass, Philol. of the Gosp., and Acta Apostol. Bacon (Story of St. Paul, 1905, p. 156, note) actually urges Kai kytvtTo in the "we" sections of Acts as a
2
"pronounced Septuagintism improbable

p. 16
f.
On
for a Greek"! Cf. Moulton, Prol., 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. On relation of Luke to Josephus, cf. Bebb, Luke's Syii.^, pp. 174-193. Gosp. in Hast. D. B. On Luke's Hebraisms cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 13 f. Cf. Norden, Ant. Kunstpr., II, pp. 486 ff., for differences between Luke and Mark and Matthew. See also Harnack, Lukas der Arzt der Verfasser des dritten Evang. und der Apostelgesch. (1906). On p. 15 he gives a hst of 84 words

Luke is also fond of 6 fxev ovv (Acts). The historic present is rare Luke (4 or 6 times). Luke uses the conjunctions and subordinate clauses with more literary skill than the other N. T. writers. He makes choice use of words .and idioms. Cf his report He accumulates participles, espeof Paul's speech on Mars Hill.
in
.
cially in the Acts,
but not without

kv
stylistic refinement.
In the
Acts he
is
fond of eh when
would ordinarily be used.
{(J) James. It is at first surprising that one recognized as such a thorough Jew as James, the brother of our Lord, and who used Aramaic, should have written in such idiomatic Greek. "In the skilful use of the Greek language its [Epistle of James] author
There are very few Hebraisms distinctly Jewish, perhaps the earliest Christian document in the N. T. But one cannot think that James wrote the book in Aramaic, for the ear-marks of translation are not present, as Bishop John Wordsworth once argued." There is not, however, in James studied rhetoric nor keen dialectics. The author of Hebrews, Luke and Paul far surpass him in formal rhetoric. "The Epistle of James is from the beginning a little work of literature," "a product of popular literature" (Deissmann, Light, p. 235). The writer uses asyndeton very often and many crisp aphorisms. Just as the
is
inferior to
in the Epistle,
no N. T. writer."^ though the tone
is
Synoptic Gospels preserve the local

side, so the Epistle of
colour
of
the
countrya
James
p.
is
best understood in the open air
of the harvest-field
{ih.,
241).
The incongruity
of such
Greek as this Epistle being written by a Palestinian Jew like James vanishes when we consider the bilingual character of the people of Palestine (cf. Moulton, Camh. Bibl.
of
smooth piece
Essays, p. 487).
But,
all
the same, the author has a
mould
is
of thought reminiscent of 0. T. phrases.
Hebrew The atmosphere

it all.
Jewish and "international vulgarisms" do not explain

are just those seen in the
The pleonasms
ley,
LXX, and
the book has
the fondness for assonance so
Exp. Gk.
Test., p.
394.
common in the 0. T. Cf. OesterHe uses many examples that re-
Luke and Paul. On p. 15 of Luke the Physician Harnack considers the Gk. of Luke's Gospel "excellent." "It occupies a middle position between the kolvt] and Attic Gk. (the language of Mterature)." This is not a very exact description, for Harnack here uses Koivri for vernac. Koivri and Attic was not the language of literature in Luke's
peculiar in the N. T. to
(trans., 1907)
time (save the Atticists), but the literary 1 Thayer, Lang, of N. T., Hast. D. B.
"^
KOLvrj.
First series of Stud. Bibl., pp. 144

ff.
ff.
Cf.
Mayor, Comm. on James,
pp. ccv
124
NEW TESTAMENT
mind one vividly of the parables of Jesus and many of the ideas and phrases of the Sermon on the Mount are here. There is also a marked similarity between this Epistle and the speech of James in Ac. 15 and the letter there given, which was probably written by him.^ He is fond of repeating the same word or root,
as OprjaKos, 9p7]aKeia (1 :2QL)^; his sentences,
though short, are

is
rhythmical^; he
is
crisp, vivid, energetic;

it
there
little
in the
forms or the syntax to mark

the N. T. representatives of
it,
from the current kolvt] or though his idiomatic use of the

off
worth mentioning, as is also that of a7 as an interjection, the gnomic aorist, the possible nominative Aieori? in apposition with yXuaaav (3 8). But it is in the vocabulary that James shows his individuality, for in this short epistle there are 73 (9 doubtful) words not appearing elsewhere in the N. T., some of which are found in the LXX,^ like TapaXXayr]. The use of avvaycoyr] (2 2) of a Christian assembly is noteworthy (cf. eKKXrjaia in 5 14 and eTnawaycoyr] in Heb. 10 :25). He has many compound words like Mlcikpltos, bookish words like efxcjiVTos, philosophical terms like vXrj, picturesque words like oXoXv^co, some of a technical nature like inqhaXiov, some strictly classical like
pronouns
is
:
assumed against Spitta^ and Bigg^ that which is so much like Jude. There is not in Jude the epigram of James, but he has a rugged rotundity of style that is impressive and vigorous, if a bit harsh. His style is marked by metaphor and the use of trip(c)
JuDE.
It is here
Jude
is
prior to 2 Peter, the second chapter of
cannot be said to be "steeped in the language of the with Chase, ^ but there is a more Hebraistic flavour than is observed in James, his brother. He has literary affinities with some of the apocryphal books and with some of Paul's writings.
lets.
He
LXX"
If
he shows a better
^
command
of
Greek than 2 Peter, yet

of),
his
Cf. Blass, Gr. of

2 '
See this point well worked out by Mayor, James (Epis. N. T. Gk., p. 279.
Cf.
lb., p. cci
Hast. D. B.
mar
of
tive in
Mayor, Comm., pp. cxcvff., for exx. f. Mayor, ch. viii, has also a luminous discussion of the "GramSt. James," which shows conclusively that he has httle that is distinchis grammar. Cf. Thayer (Lex., p. 708) for Ust of words pecuhar
to James.
*
Cf.
Mayor, Comm.,
p. cxci
f.
On
awaycoyfj
cf.
Hort, Judaistic Christian-
ity, p. 150.
* 6
Der Zweite
Brief des Petrus

St.
und der
Brief des Judas, 1885.
Comm. on
Jude
Peter and St. Jude, 1901.
(Epis. of), Hast.
D. B.
KOINII
125
"Greek is a strong and weighty weapon over which, however, he has not a ready command." ^ Per contra, there is httle that is peculiar in his grammar, for he shows a normal use of the Greek
idiom.
in 9)
The optative occurs twice {w\7]6vvddr], verse

article is
2,
and
kinTLixriaai
used skilfully with the participle. Cases, pronouns, tenses, free use of participles, indicate a real mastery The true superlative occurs in rfj dTtwrdrj? of current Greek. The idiomatic use of e^Sofxos without article is seen in xto-ret.
and the
Jude
accusative is seen in to Sevrepov 5 and tov For further details see Mayor on "Grammar of Jude and of Peter" {Cofrmi., pp. xxvi-lv). He has 20 words (one doubtful) not found elsewhere in the N. T.^ A few of them Some of them have a stately like Tr\apr]Tr]s occur in the LXX. ring like Kvixara 6.ypi.a, and a number occur which are found in
14.
The adverbial
oiioLov TpoTvov 7.
writers of the literary
kolptj.
He
also
uses
17
kolvyi
awTr]pia ("the safety
of the state") in a Christian sense,
and so
ol
Tpoye-Ypamjihoi ("the
proscribed").
But he has
command
of technical Christian
terms
like 017101, kXtitoI, irlaTLs, irvevfxa,
if/vxi-Kos
as Paul used them.
The
vividness of his style hardly justifies the term "poetic."^

(Light, p.
Deissmann
235)
considers Jude a literary epistle in

(p. 242),
popular style and "cosmopolite" in tone
with a certain
Greek is degree of artistic expression. The correctness since Jesus, brother of quite consonant with the authorship of the Essays, Bibl. Catnh. Palestine was a bihngual country (Moulton,
of the
p. 488).
(/)
Besides, the Epistle has only 25 verses.

full of
Peter. As Peter was
impulses and emotions and apheritage falls to his
Epistles. parent inconsistencies, the same Peter is Peter and 2 between 1 The most outstanding difference in Peter, found not 2 words 361 1 Peter has in the vocabulary. are in each case Many Peter." while 2 Peter has 231 not in 1
common words
like ayiaôj, eXiriô:, evayyekiô:, etc., in 1 Peter,

1
and
/Sao-tXela, 7ra77eXta, eTnyLvoâKw, etc., in 2 Peter.
Peter has 63
words not in the rest of the N. T., while 2 Peter has 57 (5 doubtful); but of these 120 words only one (aTrodeais) occurs in both.^ This is surely a remarkable situation. But both of them have a
Chase, Jude (Epis. of), Hast. D. B. See Thayer's list (Lex., p. 709). For fresh discussion of the gram, aspects of Jude and 2 Pet. see Mayor's Comm. (1908). He accepts the genuinenefs of Jude, but rejects 2 Peter.
1
Maier, Der Judasbrief, 1906, p. 1G9. Comm. on St. Peter and St. Judo, p. 225. Thayer, Lang, of the N. T., Hast. D. B., p. 42*.
Bigg,
126

of
number
N.
words in common that occur elsewhere also

a.vacrTpo(}>i],
in the
T., like
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
3;
(1
Peter, Plato), TrXatrTos (Her., Eur., Xen., 2 Peter)
both use picture-words^; both seem to know the Apocrypha; both refer to events in the life of Christ; both show acquaintance with Paul's But, on the Epistles, and use many technical Christian terms.
other hand,
1
Peter
is
deeply influenced by the
LXX,
while 2
and elePeter shows little use of it; 1 Peter is more it though vated without affectation, while 2 Peter has grandeur, number is, perhaps, somewhat "grandiose" (Bigg) and uses a of rare words hke Taprapooj; 1 Peter makes clear distinctions between the tenses, prepositions, and uses smooth Greek generally, while 2 Peter has a certain roughness of style and even apparent solecisms like jSXkfxiJia (2:8), though it is not "baboo Greek" (Abbott) 5 nor hke modern "pigeon Enghsh"; 1 Peter shows little originality and rhetorical power, while 2 Peter, though not so original as Jude, yet has more individuality than 1 Peter. Deissmann {Light, p. 235) says: "The Epistles of Peter and Jude have also quite unreal addresses; the letter-like touches are purely decorative. Here we have the beginnings of a Christian literature; the Epistles of Jude and Peter, though still possessing as a whole many popular features, already endeavour here and
stately
there after a certain degree of artistic expression."
It is
not for
a grammarian to settle,' if anybody can, the controversy about those two Epistles, but Simcox" is not far wTong when he says
of 2 Peter that " a superficial student
is likelier
student to be certain that

1
it
is
spurious."
Spitta,^
than a thorough Bigg^ and
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 und Wert des Petrus, Judas und Jacobus, 1802. ' Cf. excellent lists by Chase, Hast. D. B., 1 Peter and 2 Peter. Many of these words are cleared up by the pap., Uke Bodiiiov and dperr].
.
* 6
Vincent, Word-Studies, vol.
I,
p. 621.
p. SOS**, finds needless difficulty
Exp., ser.
2, v. III.
Chase, Hast. D. B.,

:
with
'
irapL(T4)epeit>
(2 Pet. 1
5), for irapa is
'alongside,' 'in addition.'
Writers of the N. T., p. 64. Der Zweite Brief des Petrus.
Comm. on
St. Peter
and Jude.

Zahn^ among recent writers suggest that in 2 Peter we have Peter's own composition, while in 1 Peter we have the Greek of an amanuensis
lated
who
either wrote out Peter's ideas, revised
them
or trans-
Peter's
Aramaic
into
Greek.
We know
that Peter had
interpreters (Mark, for instance),
and Josephus used such literary (Hasthelp and Paul had amanuenses. On the other hand Chase menis worth It entirely. ings' D. B.) and others reject 2 Peter books the two are which tioning that 2 Peter and the Apocalypse, both that furnish most of the linguistic anomaUes in the N. T,,
have abundant writers, and it
parallels
among
:
the
less
well-educated papyri
is of Peter and John that the terms aypannaroi and tStljTat are used (Ac. 4 13). As we have a problem concerning 1 Peter and 2 Peter on the linguistic side, so we have one concerning John's Gospel and Epistles on the one hand and
Revelation on the other.

:
The use
3 (Bigg),
of the article in 1 Peter
is
and eight times he uses the quite Thucydidean in 3 xpovov (1 17) and once that vixSiv TapoLKias idiom like top ttjs The in the N. T. rule the Wpwv (4:3), seen in to ôv\r]na roiv with and genitive attributive the with absent article is generally There is a refined prepositions as eis pavriayLov alfxaros (1 2).
:
:
accuracy in 1 Peter's use of
<hs
jui?
(Bigg),
cf.
19; 2
16, etc.
:
with the participle in 1 8. distinction is indicative (3:1). The absence future the with Once 'iva occurs
drawn between
and
ov
of
iiv
and the
1
it.
particles apa, ye,
kirei, eireidr], re, dr], ttov, ttcos is
notice-
able.
have
tive
Peter makes idiomatic use of fj.ev, while 2 Peter does not 2 Peter uses the "compact" structure of article, attribu:
and noun, Uke 1 Peter (cf. 2 Pet. 2 1, 10, 13, 16), but the "uncompact" occurs also (cf. 2 Pet. 1 3, 9, 11, 14). In Jude and 2 Peter the commonest order is the uncompact (Mayor, Jude and Second Peter, p. xxii). The single article in 2 Pet. 1 1, 11 is The used of two names for the same object. Cf. also Jude 4.
:
article
with the infinitive does not occur in 2 Peter (nor Jude). 2 Peter has some unusual uses of the infinitive after exw (2 Pet. 1 Peter has the article and 1 f.). 1 15) and as result (2 Pet. 3
: :
and future participle once (3 13) 6 KaKcoao:v. Both 1 Pet. (1 2) Peter 1 2 Pet. (1 :2) have the optative TrXvdvudeiv (Uke Jude). on twice (3 14, 17) has ei and the optative. See further Mayor
: :
:
of Jude and 2 Peter" (Comm., pp. xxvi-lv). There was a Christian terminology apart from Paul. (g) their Paul, but many of the terms most familiar to us received
"Grammar
Einl. in d.
jects 2 Peter partly
N. T. Mayor in his Comm. on Jude and 2 Pctor (1007) on linguistic grounds.
re-
128
NEW TESTAMENT
pathfinder, but had inexResch^ has done good service in putting together the words of Paul and the words of Jesus. Paul's rabbinical training and Jewish cast of mind led Farrar^ to call him a Hagadist. Simcox^ says that "there is hardly a line in his writings that a non-Jewish author of his day would have written." Harnack'* points out that Paul was wholly unintelligible to such a Hellenist as Porphyry, but Ramsay^ replies that Porphyry resented Paul's use of Hellenism in favour of Christianity. But Hicks ^ is certainly right in seeing a Hellenistic side to Paul, though Pfleiderer'' goes too far in finding in Paul merely "a Christianized Pharisaism" and a "Christianized Hellenism." Paul and Seneca have often been compared as to style and ideas, but a more pertinent linguistic parallel is Arrian's report of the lectures of Epictetus. Here we have the vernacular kolvt] of an educated man in the second century a.d. The style of Paul, like his theology, has challenged the attention of the greatest minds. ^ Farrar^ calls his language "the style of genius, if not the genius of style." There is no doubt about its individuality. While in the four groups of his letters each group has a style and to some extent a vocabulary of its own, yet, as in
interpretation from him.
He was a
haustible resources for such a task.
is the stamp of the same tremendous mind. These differences of language lead some to doubt the genuineness of certain of the Pauline Epistles, especially the Pastoral Group, but criticism is coming more to the acceptance of
Shakespeare's plays, there
all of
them
as genuine.
Longinus ranks Paul as master of the

4)7] jxi.
dogmatic style
* 2 3 *
(IlaCXos 6 Tapo-eus ovTiva koL ivpCirbv

die Logia Jesu, 1904.
I,
wpoLCTTdnevop
Der Paulinismus und

Life
and Work
of St. Paul, vol.
p. 63S.
Writers of the N. T., p. 27. Miss, und Ausbr. des Christent., p. 354.
Exp., 1906, p. 263.
St.
Cf. Moffatt's transl., vol. II,
p. 137.
6
Paul and Hellen., Stud. Bib., IV, i. Urchristentum, pp. 174-178. 8 See Excursus I to vol. I of Farrar's Life of Paul. 9 lb., p. 623. On Paul's style cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 1, 5, 251, 276, 279, 281 f., 284 f., 289, 300-305. As to the Pastoral Epistles it has been pointed out that there is nothing in Paul's vocabulary inconsistent with the time (James, Genuin. and Author, of the Past. Epis., 1906). It is natural
6 '
for one's style to
1907) shows that

Aristotle,
p.
kolvt]
be enriched with age. The Church Quart. Rev. (Jan., the new words in the Past. Epis. come from the LXX, writers before or during Paul's time. Cf. Exp. Times, 1907,
all
245
f.

SojiJLaTos avvTrode'iKTov) .
Baur^ says that he has "the true ring of Col. 4 16) says: "Tonat, fulgurat, meras flammas loquitur Paulus." Hausrath^ correctly says that "it is hard to characterize this individuality in whom Christian
Thucydides."
Erasmus (ad
fulness of love, rabbinic keenness of perception
and ancient willpower so wonderfully mingle." It is indeed the most personal^ and the most powerful writing of antiquity. He disclaims classic elegance and calls himself IBlcottis t(2 \6ycp (2 Cor. 11 6), yet this was in contrast with the false taste of the Corinthians. But Deissmann (St. Paul, p. 6) goes too far in making Paul a mere
:
tentmaker, devoid of culture.

antithetical,
He
is
abrupt, paradoxical, bold,
a torrent, now like a summer brook. But He was indeed no it is passion, not ignorance nor carelessness. He used the vernacular kolvt] of the time with some Atticist.
now
like
touch of the literary flavour, though his quotation of three heathen poets does not show an extended acquaintance with Greek literature.* The difference between the vernacular and the literary Koivi] is often a vanishing point. Paul's style is unhellenic in arrangement, but in Ro. 8 and 1 Cor. 13 he reaches the elevaCertainly his ethical teaching has tion and dignity of Plato.^
quite
a Hellenic ring, being both philosophical and logical.^ Hatch ^ considers Paul to be the foremost representative of the Hellenic influence on early Christianity. He shows some knowl-
edge of
terms ^ and uses arguments calling for educated minds of a high order.^ The grammar shows Uttle Semitic influence. He uses many rhetorical figures such as paronomasia, paradox, etc., which will be discussed in the chapter on that sublegal
1
Roman
Paul, vol. II, p. 281.
Cf.
K. L. Bauer,
1866.
Philol. Thucyd.-Paul., 1773; also
his Rhet. Paul., 1782.
Cf. Tzschirner, Observ. Pauli ap. epist., 1800; La-
sonder,
2 '
De
ling. paul. idiom.,
Der Apost. Paulus,

Renan,
l", 1906, p. 37:
p. 502.
St. Paul, p. 232.
Cf. also Jacquier, Hist, des Livres
du N.
T.,
tome
"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 6
Cf. Farrar, Exc. Ill, vol. I of Life of St. Paul.
Norden, Die Ant. Kunstpr., Bd. II, 1898, pp. 499, 509. Hicks, St. Paul and HoUcn., 1896, p. 9. 7 Hibbert Lect. (Infl. of Ilellen. on Cln-is., p. 12). 8 Ball, St. Paul and the Rom. Law (1901). Cf. Thack., Rola. of St. Paul to Contemp. Thought (1900). Paul's use of vo/xos shows knowledge of the Roman lex as well the Jewish Torah. 8 Mahaffy, Surv. of Gk. Civihz., p. 310.
130
ject,

some
thirty kinds occurring in his writings.
Farrar^ sug-
gests that Paul
had a teacher
of rhetoric in Tarsus.
He
is
noted
for his varied use of the particles
and
writes with freedom

:
and
accuracy, though his anacolutha are numerous, as in Gal. 2 6-9. He uses prepositions with great frequency and discrimination. The genitive is employed by Paul with every variety of applicaThe participle appears with great luxuriance and in all tion.
sorts of ways, as imperative or indicative or genitive absolute, articular, anarthrous, etc.
He
is 'E/3patos e^ 'E^palcov,
but he handles
Greek with all the freedom and it is the vernacular kolvt] of a brilliant and well-educated man in touch with the Greek culture of his time, though remaining
his
of a Hellenist.
He
thinks in Greek
thoroughly Jewish in his mental fibre. The peculiar turns in Paul's language are not due to Hebraisms, but to the passion of
which occasionally (cf. 2 Cor.) bursts all bounds and piles parenthesis and anacoluthon on each other in a heap. But even in a riot of language his thought is clear, and Paul often draws a fine point on the turn of a word or a tense or a case. To go into detail with Paul's writings would be largely to give the tls grammar of the N. T. In Phil. 2 1 we have a solecism in Thayer expressive. and rich is very vocabulary His oirXayxva.. {Lexicon, pp. 704 ff.) gives 895 (44 doubtful) words that are found
his nature
:
e'i
nowhere
else in
the N. T., 168 of
them being
first
in the Pastoral
part of a Pauline lexicon Epistles. use of the papyri makes helpful and very which is (from a to e) this study is the in thing strildng The most inscriptions. and
Nageli^ has pubhshed the
cosmopolitan character of Paul's vocabulary. There are very few words which are found only in the Attic writers, like alaxpoTTjs, and no cases of Atticism, though even in the letters a to
he finds some 85 that belong to the literary kolvt] as shown by books, papyri and inscriptions, words hke adavaala, aderko}, etc. In some 50 more the meaning corresponds to that of the literary To these he adds words which 23). KOLvrj, as in dvaXuco (Ph. 1
:
appear in the literary kolvt], papyri and inscriptions after Paul's time, words like apirayixos, ava^rjv, etc. Then there are words
that,
so
far
as
known,
occur
first
in
the
N.
T.
kolvt]
in
the
Christian sense, like

1
kKKk-qaia.
But the vernacular
as set
Life of St. Paul, vol.
I,
p. 6.30.
(p. 86):
Der Wortsch. des Apost. Paulus, 1905. He says
"Es
iiberrascht
uns nicht mehr, dafi jeder paulinische Brief cine Reihe von Wortern enthalt, die den iibrigen unbekannt sind." This is well said. Each letter oxight to have words not in the others.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE KOINU 131

forth in the papyri
of
his vocabulary,
and
inscriptions furnishes the
ground-work
of the
when
to this
is
added the use
LXX
Especially noteworthy are some nice Greek points that are wanting in Paul (as well as in the rest of the N. T.) and in the papyri and inscriptions, as olos re el/iL, aiadavonat, tclvv, fiaXa, eTrojuat (seldom in
in avTi\anâvofj.aL, ayiaôi}.
Niigeli sums up by saying that no one the inscriptions), etc. would think that Paul made direct use of Plato or Demosthenes and that his dihgent use of the LXX explains all his Hebraisms besides a few Hebrew words like afirjv or when he translated Hebrew. His Aramaisms (like a^^d) are few, as are his Latinisms "The Apostle writes in the style natural to a (like TpaLTupLov). Greek of Asia Minor adopting the current Greek of the time, borrowing more or less consciously from the ethical writers of the time, framing new words or giving a new meaning to old words
.
.
.
(including the Apocrypha) as
His choice of vocabulary
is
therefore
much
like that of
Epic-
tetus save that his intimate knowledge of the

it."^
LXX
has modified
Paul's Greek, in a word, "has to do with no school, with no
model, but streams unhindered with overflowing bubbling right out of the heart, but it is real Greek" (Wilamowitz-MoUendorff,
Die
griechische Literatur des Altertunis, pp. 1-126.

I,
Cf. Die Kultur

(Light, p. 234)
der Gegenwart, Tl.

seesi
Abt.
8,
1905).
Deissmann
Paul wholly as "a non-literary man of the non-literary class in the Imperial Age, but prophet-like rising above his class and surveying the contemporary educated world with the consciousness of superior strength."
1 Walter Lock, Jour, of Theol. Stud., 1906, p. 298. Athletic figures are almost confined to Paul (and Heb.), and Ramsay (Exp., 1906, pp. 2S3ff.) thinks Tarsus left this impress on him. A further discussion of Paul's rhetoric will be found in the chapter on Figures of Speech. Cf. J. Weiss, Beitr. zur pauUn. Rhetorik, 1897; Blass, Die Rhyth. der asian. und rom. Kunstpr., 1905. Deiss. (Theol. Literaturzeit., 1906, pp. 231 ff.) strongly controverts Blass' idea that Paul used conscious rhythm. Cf. Howson, Metaph. of St. Paul. On Paul's Hellen. see Hicks, St. Paul and Hellen. (Stud. Bibl. et Eccl., 1896); Curtius, Paulus in Athens (Gesamm. Abhandl., 1894, pp. 527 ff.); Ramsay, Cities of St. Paul (pp. 9, 30-41); Heinrici, Zum Hellen. des Paulus (2 Cor. in Meyer);
Wilamowitz-Moll., Die griech. Lit. des Altcrt. (p. 157); G. Milligan, Epis. to the Th. (1908, p. Iv). Paul had a full and free Gk. vocab., thought in Gk., wrote in Gk. as easily as in Aramaic. But his chief indebtedness seems to
bo to the
LXX,
the vernac.
koivt]
and the
ethical Stoical writers.
Milhgan
(see
above, pp. lii-lv) has a very discriminating discussion of Paul's vocab. and style. Garvie (Stud, of Paul and His Gospel, p. 6 f.) opposes the notion that
Paul had a decided Gk. influence.
132
(h)

Writer OF Hebrews.
Bruce is certain that the author Simcox^ is willing to admit that have belonged once to the school of Philo, as Paul did to
^
was not a
he
disciple of Paul, while
may
that of Gamaliel.
Harnack suggests
Priscilla as the author.
If
Paul had "imperial disregard for niceties of construction," Hebrews shows "a studied rhetorical periodicity." ^ Von Soden*
considers that in the N. T.
different in
is
Hebrews is "the best Greek, scarcely any point from that of contemporary writers." This
the more surprising
of the
LXX. The
when one observes his constant quotation grammatical peculiarities are few, like the frecomparison,
kwei
quent use of
Trapd in
with apodosis (protasis sup-
pressed), the perfect tense to emphasize the
permanence of the Scripture record which sometimes verges close to the aorist (4 3), the frequent participles, the varied use of particles, periphrases,
:
more than
the absence of the harsher kinds of hiatus, the presence of rhythm in any of the N. T. books, and in general the quality
of literary style
more than
in
any other N. T.
writing.
Westcott
notes "the parenthetical involutions." the periods

is
"The
calculated force of
of St. Paul."
sharply distinguished from the impetuous eloquence The writer does not use Paul's rhetorical expres-
sions tI ovv; t'l yap; Moulton {Camb. Bihl. Essays, p. 483) notes the paradox that the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by one who apparently knew no Hebrew and read only the LXX. The
use of subordinate sentences

is
is
common and
the position of words

fxeu
carefully chosen.
There
is
frequent use of
and
re as well as
The optative occurs only once and shows that it is true KOLvrj. The studied style appears particularly in ch. 11 in the use of TTto-ret. The style is hortatory, noble and eloquent, and has points of contact with Paul, Luke and Peter. The vocabulary,
odev
8l6.
and
vernacular kolvt] than any book in Of 87 words which are found in the LXX and in this book alone in the N. T., 74 belong to the ancient literary works and only 13 to the vernacular. 18 other words pecuhar, to this Epistle are found in the literary kolvt]. There are 168 (10 doubtful) words in Hebrews that appear nowhere else in the N. T. (cf. Thayer, Lexicon, p. 708). These 168 words are quite characteristic also, like a4)opav, aiadrjT-qpLOV, iravrjyvpLS, irpooTOTOKLa. Westthe N. T.
2 Writers of the N. T., p. 42. Hast. D. B., Hebrews. Thayer, Lang, of the N. T., Hast. D. B. * Early Chris. Lit., 1906, p. 12. On the lang. of Heb. see the careful remarks of Jacquier (Hist, des Livres du N. T., tome V, 1906, pp. 457 ff.). Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 1, 5, 279, 280 f ., 288 f., 296 ff., 303 f.
like the style, is less like the

cott^ considers
irXrjpoo}
KOINII
133
the absence of words like evayykXLou,
ixvar-qpLov,
remarkable.
like
The
chief
bond
is
of contact in the
in the vocab-
ulary of
Hebrews with the

aPTiKaOiaTrjixL,
words
means an Atticist, Deissmann^ indeed considers Hebrews

other sphere: as in subject-matter
logical
use of "sonorous" but the author is by no though he does approach the literary kolptj.
kolvti
euTrepto-raros,
as alone belonging "to an-
it is
more
work, so in form
it is
more
artistic
of a learned theothan the other books
N. T." He even feels that it "seems to hang in the background like an intruder among the N. T. company of popular books" {Light, p. 243). The Johannine question at once confronts the mod(i) John. ern grammarian who approaches the books in the N. T. that are accredited to John. It is indeed a difficult problem.^ There is a triple difficulty the Gospel presents a problem of its own (with the Epistles), the Apocalypse also has its burden, and there is the serious matter of the relation of the Gospel and Apocalypse on the linguistic side. Assuming that John the Apostle wrote the Gospel, Epistles and Apocalypse, we have the following situation. The Gospel of John has a well-defined character. There are few Hebraisms in detail beyond the use of vloi cfx^Tos (12 36), /cat in the sense of "and yet" or "but" (cf. Hebrew 1 and Kal in LXX) as in 20 14, the absence of the particles save ovp, and the conof the
:
:
stant co-ordination of the sentences with rhythmical parallelism.
In the formal grammar the Greek is much like the vernacular literary) kolvt], but the cast of thought is wholly Hebrew. Ewald"* rightly calls its spirit "genuinely Hebrew," while Renan^ even says that the Gospel "has nothing Hebrew" in its style.
(and
Godet^
calls
the Gospel a
quotes Luthardt as saying that
Hebrew body with a Greek dress and it "has a Hebrew soul in the
Greek language." Schaff compares Paul to an Alpine torrent and John to an Alpine lake. There is indeed in this Gospel great simplicity and profundity. John's vocabulary is somewhat limited, some 114 words (12 doubtful, Thayer, Lexicon, p. 704) begxp. Times, Nov., 1906, p. 59. Fourth Gosp., 1904; Sanday, Crit. of the Fourth Gosp., 1905; Bacon, The Fourth Gosp. in Res. and DeHeb., p.
xlvi.
^ '
J
Comm. on
Cf.
Drummond, Charac. and Author,
of the
bate, 1910.
* 5
Quoted
lb.
in Schaff,
p.
Comp.
to
Gk. N.
:
T., p. 67.
73 Sch;iff puts Jo. 1 18 side by side in Gk. and Heb. Heb. tone of the Gk. is clear. 8 Comm. sur I'Evang. de S. Jean, vol. I, pp. 226, 232.
On
The
Comp.
to
Gk. N.
T., p. 66.
134
NEW TESTAMENT
longing to the Gospel alone in the N. T. But the characteristic words are repeated many times, such as oKriQaa, anapria, ytuuaKoo,
86â,
fco57,
k6(j/xos,
KplaLS, X670S, fxaprvpeco,
-maTevco, ckotos,
4>uis,
etc.
on a small number of elementary words and their synonyms."^ But words like eKKXrjaia, evayyeXiov, puravoLa, irapaôXi], irlaTLs, crocjiLa do not occur at all. However, too much must not be inferred from this fact, for TncrTevoo and thayytOther characteristics of the Gospel Xtfco do appear very often.^
rings the changes
"He
are the
common
use of tva in the non-final sense, the distinctive

eKtlvos, kfxos, I'Sios),
force of the pronouns (especially

of the tenses (like
the vivid use
Mark), the unusual use of ovv,^ fw?) atcb^tos is frequent (21 times, and more than all the rest of the N. T.), frequent repetition, favourite synonyms.^ The Johannine use of
/cat, 5e,
dXXd, yap,
el,
otl,
/jlt],
oh, etc., is all
interesting (see Abbott).
The
prepositions, the cases, the voices, the
results in Abbott's hands.
The
Epistles of
modes all yield good John possess the same

all
general traits of the Gospel save that ovv does not occur at
save in 3 Jo. 8 while on

nective.
is
very common.
Kat
is
the usual con-
Only eight words are common alone to the Gospel and
the Epistles in the N. T., while eleven are found in the Epistles
and not in the Gospel. Westcott,^ however, gives parallel sentences which show how common phrases and idioms recur in the The Apocalypse has much in Gospel and the First Epistle. common with the Gospel, as, for instance, no optative is found in
either;
oiroos is
not in either save in Jo. 11
57; Iva
is
very
common
John and Apocalypse, more so than in any other book of the N. T. save Mark, and 'iva is very common in Gospel and Apocalypse; ovv is almost absent from the Apocalypse
in Gospel,
1
/jlt]
Abb., Job. Vocab., p. 348. lb., p. 158. Abbott has luminous remarks on such words as kôvaia, and all phases of John's vocabulary.
1
Trto-reuw,
courses of Jesus.
Occurs 195 times in the Gospel and only 8 of the instances Nearly aU of these are in the transitional sense.
Joh. Synon. In John 6pdw
(like deoipkw, opaco) see ch. Ill of
is
in the dis-
Cf. Abb.,
Joh. Gr., 1906, p. 165.
Abbott's Joh. Vocab., not used in present (though often ewpa/ca), but /SXcttw and Oewpew. Luke uses it also in present only 3 times, Heb. 2, Jas. 2, Ac. 8, Apoc. 18. On the whole subject of Joh. gr. see the same author's able work on Joh. Gr. (1906), which has a careful and exhaustive discussion of the most
*
On
1905.
interesting points in the Gospel.

*
Comm. on
Epis. of Jo., pp. xh
ff.
The absence
of ovv,
when
so characteris.
istic of
the Gospel, shows
how
precarious mere verbal argument
Baur,
Cf.
Die Evang., p. 380, calls the Gospel the Apocalypse "transfigured." Blass on John's style, Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 261, 276, 278 f., 291, 302.

as in Epistles
and the discourses
of Jesus, being
common
as tran-
GospeP; apa, common in other Evangelists and Paul, is not found in Gospel, Epistles or Apocalypse; fxev, so common in Matthew, Luke (Gospel and Acts), Paul and Hebrews, is not found at all in Apocalypse and John's Epistles and only eight times in his Gospel; coo-re, which appears 75 times elsewhere in the N. T., is not found in Gospel, Epistles or Apocalypse save once in Jo. 3 16; /xiy Tore, fairly common in Matthew, Luke and Hebrews, does not occur in John's writings save in Jo. 7 26 (Paul uses it also once only, 2 Tim. 2 25, preferring ^117 ttcos, which John does not have) napTvpkw is more frequent in Gospel than in 1 John and Apocalypse, but fxaprvpla is as common in Apocalypse as Gospel; ovoixa is frequent in Gospel and Apocalypse as applied to God; oUa is found less often in Apocalypse than in Gospel; a\r]divbs is common in Gospel, Epistle and Apocalypse, though a\r]dr]s and oXrjOeLa do not appear in the Apocasitional particle in narrative portion of
: :
lypse;
in 1
plkckjo
occurs only once in Gospel (16:33), but
is
common
John and Apocalypse; diScofjiL is more frequent in Gospel and Apocalypse than in any other N. T. book (even Matt.); 5etKvvfXL appears about the same number of times in Gospel and Apocalypse; X670S is applied to Christ in Jo. 1 1 and Rev. 19 13; the pecuHar expression Kal vvv eariv which occurs in John 5 25 is similar to the Kal ka/xev of 1 Jo. 3:1, and the Kal ouk eial of Rev. 2:2, 3 9; all are fond of antithesis and parenthesis and repeat the article often. Over against these is to be placed the fact that the Apocalypse has 156 (33 doubtful) words not in the Gospel or Epistles, and only nine common alone to them. Certainly the subject-matter and spirit are different, for the Son of Thunder speaks in the Apocalypse. Dionysius^ of Alexandria called the language of the Apocalypse barbaric and ungrammatical because of the numerous departures from usual Greek
:
assonance.
The
solecisms in the Apocalypse are not in the realm

d^rj/ces,
of accidence, for forms like
irkirrooKav, 8l8co, etc.,
are com-
mon
in
the vernacular
kolvt).
The
syntactical peculiarities are

variatio structurae.
due partly to construdio ad sensum and

sion of the unchangeableness of
6
77
Some
As
to
("idiotisms" according to Dionysius) are designed, as the expres-
rjv
the relative use of 6 in

:
God by awo Homer may be

:
uv
(1 :4).
recalled.
k.
See also
oval in 11
14, o/xolou viov in 14
14, oval tovs
in 8
13.
Benson
' Similarly re, which occurs 160 times in the Acts, Luke's Gospel. Cf. Leo, Speaker's Comm., p. 457. 2 Apud Eus. H. E., VII, xxv.
is
found only 8 times in
136
NEW TESTAMENT
(Apocalypse) speaks of
bold
way
of putting
are chiefly cases of

free use of the
"a grammar of Ungrammar," which is a But the "solecisms" in the Apocalypse anacolutha. Concord is treated lightly in the
it.
nominative
(1
5; 2
20; 3
:
12), in particular
the
participles Xe7wj'
and
:
pronoun as
in 3
8;
(4:1; 14 14) in the addition of a in gender and number as in 7 9; in the use

exo^v
;
:
of parenthesis as in
f.
Cf. Swete, Apocalypse, p. cxviii

kolvt]
f.
The
accusative, as in the vernacular
has encroached upon other cases

participle is used freely
6 vLKwv (2
:
modern Greek) as with Kar-qyopdv (12 10). The

(cf.
:
and often absolutely
in the nominative as
26)
Most
of the variations in case are
with the parti-
ciple or in apposition, as 6 ixaprvs after XpiaTov (1:5).
Moulton^
has called attention to the numerous examples of nominative apposition in the papyri, especially of the less educated kind. The
old explanation of these grammatical variations was that they were Hebraisms, but Winer ^ long ago showed the absurdity of that idea. It is the frequency of these phenomena that calls for remark, not any isolated solecism in the Apocalypse. Moulton* denies that the Apocalypse has any Hebraisms. That is possibly going too far the other way, for the book is saturated with the apocalyptic images and phrases of Ezeldel and Daniel and is very much hke the other Jewish apocalypses. It is not so much particular Hebraisms that meet us in the Apocalypse as the flavour of the LXX whose words are interwoven in the text at every turn. It is possible that in the Apocalypse we have the early style of John before he had lived in Ephesus, if the Apocalypse was written early. On the other hand the Apocalypse, as Bigg holds true
"
1
Exp., 1904, p. 71.

etc.,
Graec. Patr.
Evang. 2 W.-M.,
'
Cf. also Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 151; Reinhold, 57 f.; Schlatter, Die Spr. und Heimat dea vierten Schl. overemphasizes the Aramaic colour of the Gospel.
p. p. 671.
Prol., p. 9.
Cf. also Jiilicher, Intr. to
N. T.; Bousset, Die Offenb. Joh.,

(Apoc. of St. John, 1906, p.
1896; Lee, Speaker's

cause:
Comm. on Rev. Swete may have

him
cxx) thinks that John's "eccentricities of syntax belong to
more than one
some
to the habit which he
retained from early years of
thinking in a Semitic language; some to the desire of giving

vivid reality to his visions, which leads
of shorthand notes, jotted to report
them
after the
movement and maimer
which the book was wTitten."

writings in
down at the time; some to the circumstances in The Apoc. "stands alone among Gk. hterary
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.

of 2 Peter,
KOI Nil
137
Epistles
may represent John's real style, while the Gospel and may have been revised as to Greek idioms by a friend or
:
friends of
John in Ephesus (of. Jo. 21 24). With tliis theory compare Josephus' War and Antiquities. One is slow (despite Moffatt's positiveness in the Exp. Gk. Test.), in the light of Dante, Shakespeare, Milton, to say that John could not have written
the Apocalypse, though Besides what composed was has been said one must recall that the Apocalypse without possibly on the Isle of Patmos, in some excitement, and had probably Epistle careful revision, while the Gospel and First the verrate any care and the assistance of cultured friends. At
it
be the
last of his books.
nacular
KOLvr]
is
far
more
in evidence in the Apocalypse
than in
the Gospel and Epistles. "As Dante accepted language of education, Latin, and the vulgar tongue, so artificial kind of Greek, St. John had to choose between a more the common vulgar and as perpetuated from past teaching, rules, but gramm.atical strict speech, often emancipated from speech."^ nervous and vigorous, a true living Vn. N. T. Greek Illustrated by the Modem Greek VernacuConstant use will be made of the modern Greek in the lar.
course of the
had the choice between the
Grammar.
Here a
brief survey
is
given merely to
show how the colloquial kolvtj survives in present-day Greek vernacular. Caution is necessary in such a comparison. The hterary modern Greek has its affinities with the hterary Koiv-q or even
with the
Atticists, while the vernacular of
to-day often shows
the N. T. affinities with the less educated writers of papyri of the later upon effect great a have indeed time. The N. T. did
KOLvr]
when
theological questions were
uppermost at Alexandria
ecclesiastical
and Constantinople.^ The vernacular became wider

terms there
nacular
is
KOLpi]
cleavage between the literary and the

also.
But apart from
a striking likeness at
many
points between the ver-
and modern Greek vernacular, though modern Greek ^ has, of course, Germanic and other elements not in the Koivn. Greek than in modern the in common more The diminutive'* is
In general see to the Seven Churches, 1905, p. 209. Zeitschr., 1905, Kirch. Neuc pp. 51-64. Joh., Apost. des Charak. Seeberg, Zur 2 Cf. Gregory Naz., II, 13, A; Gregory Nyssa, III, 557 B; Reinhold, De
1
Ramsay, Letters
Graec. Patr.
1898. Indoger. Forsch., 1903, p. 359 f. Boltz (Die hell. Spr., 1881, Gk. is as far removed from p. 10) quotes Rangab6 as saying that the mod. as from that of Xenophon. that of the
etc.,
Thumb,
LXX
Cf. Hatz., Einl. in d. ncugr. Gr., p. 37
f.,
for Ust.
138
the

KOLVT]
NEW TESTAMENT
and usually in i, as t6 apvl. The optative is rare in the modern Greek it has disappeared. The infinitive is vanishing before I'ra in the N. T. in the modern Greek va has disN. T.;
placed
in in the
;
it
completely save with auxiliary verbs.^
The
accusative ^
modern Greek has made still further headway and is used even The fxi verb has entirely vanished ttTTo and all prepositions. The forms in -oaav, in modern Greek vernacular except dvai. -ovaav are very common, as are the a forms in aorist and imperfect. The forms in -es (-as) for perfect and first aorist are also frequent. The middle voice has almost vanished as a separate
with
voice
(cf.
Latin).
Prepositions in the vernacular (chiefly
eis)
have
displaced the dative.
The
superlative
is
usually expressed
by
the article and the comparative.

list
Kennedy^
gives an interesting
words that appear either for the first time or with a new sense in the LXX or the N. T. (or the papyri) that preserve that meaning in the modern Greek, as 8a}fj.a{' rooi') fdvcnaarrjpLov ('altar'), Kadr]yriTr]s ('professor,' in N. T. 'master'), êvodoxelov ('hotel,' in N. T. ^ti'oSoxeco =' entertain strangers'), iraLbehw ('chastise,' from TraTs) ^^dj/co (' arrive ') xoprdf co (' feed ') etc. The Ust could be greatly extended, but let these suffice.'* A specimen of modern Greek vernacular is given from Pallis' translation of Jo. 1 6-8: By^/ce
of
,
,
ejâs
avdpwTOS (TTaXixhos
clto to Geo' r' bvofxa tov 'Iccavqs.

irov va Kavei
kl
Autos
rjpde
7td Aev
Kripvy/Jia,
7id
J^d
Krjpvêi to c/xis,
oKol va TncFTeif/ovv.
HTav
text,
eKelvos to
4>cos,
Tapa 7td va
Kripvêi to 0cDs.
The
literary
modern
Moulis
Greek
ton*
in these verses differs very httle
from the original N. T.
only in the use of

in
vTijpêv, 6vop,a^6iJ.evos, 5td va, dev, rJTo.
an interesting note gives some early illustrations of

In the second century a.d. kaov
modern Greek vernacular.

1
It still persists in
Pontic-Cappadocian Gk. according to Thumb, Theol.
Literaturzeit., 1903, p. 421.
avv
a riot of indifference as to case in the vernacular Byz. Gk., as Cf. Mullach, Gr. der griech. Vulgarspr., p. 27. Jean Psichari, 'P65a KoX M^Xa (1906), has written a defence of the mod. Gk. vemac. and has shown its connection with the ancient vernac. The mod. Gk. has like free^
There
is
rrjs
yvvaiKos.
Thumb, Handb., pp. 32 ff.). Prephave displaced the partitive gen., the genitive of material and of comparison (abl.), in mod. Gk. The mod. Gk. shows the ace. displacing the gen. and dat. of the older Gk. {op. cit., p. 35 f.) after aKoXovdu, &kovo}, airavTu, The double ace. goes beyond anc. Gk. usages {op. cit., p. 36) as oKa p65iva etc.
in the use of the genitive case (cf.
dom
ositions
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.,
(1887);
Handb. to
Mod. Gk.
6
Thumb-Angus, Handb.
of
Mod. Gk. Vernac.
(1912).
ProL, p. 234.
THE PLACE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

found in OP 528. He quotes Thumb from an inscription of the first century a.d.
IN
THE KOINH 139

234)
(BZ
ix,
who
cites
exouaes as
nommative
and accusative
plural.
And Ramsay
gives kmrvdemovu as third plural

of the third century a.d.
Karkxoi (Ro. 1
:
{Cities and Bish., II, p. 537) form on a Phrygian inscription
18).
As one illustration note Paul's use In modern Greek dialects KaTexw = 5?êupw,
of
'I
know.'
PART
II
ACCIDENCE
CHAPTER V
WORD-FORMATION
I.
Etymology.
Grammar was
at
first
a branch of philosophy
among
the Greeks, and with the foundation of the Alexandrian
library a
new
era began with the study of the text of Homer.^

"rules the whole later grammatical
After Photius etymology

literature." 2
The
Stoic granmiarians were far better in ety-
mology than
this respect,
in anything else and we owe them a real debt in though their extended struggle as to whether analogy or anomaly ruled in language has left its legacy in the long lists of "exceptions" in the grammars.^ In some granmiars the term etymology is still applied to the whole discussion of Forms
or Accidence, Formenlehre.
But to-day it is generally applied and meaning of words.* The word krvfioXoyia is, of course, from eru/zos and \6yos, and er-viios, meaning 'real' or 'true,' is itself from the same root er- from which er-eos, 'true,' comes. So also tr-dfco, 'to test.' Compare also Sanskrit sat-yas, 'true,' and sat-yam, 'truth,' as well as the Anglo-Saxon
to the study of the original form
soS, 'sooth.'
root.
To
tTVjjLov
is
the true literal sense of a word, the
this point than to on the importance of the student's seeing the original form and import of each word and suffix or prefix. This is not all that is needed by any means, but it is a beginning, and the right beginning.^ " It was the comparative study of languages that first
No more
helpful
remark can be made at
insist
1
"^
Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet.
et fit. des
Formes Grq.
ct Lat., 1901, p. 245.
Reitzenstein, Gesch. der griech. Etym., 1897, p. vi.

Stcinthal, Gesch. der Sprachw. etc., 2. Tl., pp. 347
ff.
'
wahre Bedeutung'; daI3 man hior Itx>fios sagte und nicht d.\-n6i]s, liegt daran, daO ionische Sophisten, namentlich Prodikos, die Etymologic und Synonymik aufbrachten." F. Blass, Herman, und Krit., Bd. I, Muller's Handb. d. klass. Alt., 1892, p. 183. 6 See Pott, Etym. Forsch., 1801; Curtius, Gk. Etym., vols. I, II, 1SS6; Prellwitz, Etym. Worterb. der griech. Spr., 1893; Brug. und Delb., Grundr. der vergl. Gr., 1897-1901; Skeat, Etym. Diet, of the Eng. Lang., etc.
^
"6
tru/uos
X670S heiBt ja auch 'die
143
144
NEW TESTAMENT
gave etymology a surer holcl."^ Curtius means etymology in the modern sense, to be sure. II. Roots.2 It is not to be supposed that what are called roots
necessarily existed in this form.
They
represent the original
stock from which other words as a rule come.
What
the original
words actually were we have no means of telling. They were not necessarily interjections, as some have supposed. Mere articulate sounds, unintelligible roots, did not constitute speech. Some interjections are not roots, but express ideas and can often be analyzed, as "]emme"= Jesu Domine.^ Others, hke most nursery words, are onomatopoetic. There is, besides, no evidence that primitive man could produce speech at will.^ But a few root-words appear like the Latin i ('go') and probably the Greek 77 (though i]k is found in Epic Greek) The number of Greek roots is comparatively few, not more than 400, probably less. Harris^ observes that of the 90,000 words in a Greek lexicon only 40,000 are what are termed classic words. The new words, which are constantly made from slang or necessity, are usually made from one of the
.
by various combinations, or at any rate after the analogy of the old words.^ Words are "the small coin of language,"' though some of them are sesquipedalian enough. There seem to be two ultimate kinds of words or roots, verbs and pronouns, and they were at last united into a single word as 077-/X1, 'say I.'
old roots
1 2
Curtius, Gk. Etym., vol.
I,
p. 16.
The whole subject of N. T. lexicography calls for reworking. Deissmann is known to be at work on a N. T. Lex. in the hght of the pap. and the inscr. Meanwhile reference can be made to his Bible Studies, Light, and
his
J. H. Moulton's articles in the Ex-p. Kennedy's Sour, of N. T. Gk. (for LXX and N. T.); to Thayer's N. T. Gk. Lex. and his art. on Lang., of N. T. in Hast. D. B.; to Cremer's Theol. Lex. of N. T.; to Mayser's Gr. d. griech. Pap. For
New
Light on the N. T.; to
(1901, 1903, 1904, 1908); to
the
LXX
phenomena
see careful discussion of Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 112-
Nothing hke an exhaustive discussion of N. T. word-formation can yet be attempted. But what is here given aims to follow the hnes of historical and comparative grammar. We must wait in patience for Deissmann's Lex. George MiUigan is at work with Moulton on his Lexical Notes from the Pap. (Exp., 1908 ). Cf. also NageH, Der Wortsch. des Apost. Paulus, a portion of which has appeared. Especially valuable is Abb. Joh. Vocab. (1905). For the LXX cf. also Swete, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., pp. 302-304. The indices to the hsts of inscr. and pap. can also be consulted with profit.
136.
3 6
MS.
Cf.
Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 181. notes on Gk. Gr.
lb., p. 187.
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
It does not
^^^
verbal and nomiseem possible to distinguish between indifferently verb is word same the nal roots, as in English to-day is that verbs are view modern The or noun "walk," for instance. roots pronominal The 280). nominal in origin (Hirt, Handb., p. nouns and {pwara) verbs both for may furnish most of the suffixes {aura^voixiaL) thereVerbs, substantives and pronouns (opouiaTa). all the others are and speech, of parts the earliest
,
fore, constitute
developed from these three.^
Adjectives {opdfxara
kindera)
are
or pronouns. merely variations from substantives
Adverbs
(e^^p-
pwara)
nouns. with verbs (in composition). Intenin various ways. used to connect words and sentences pronominal adverbs from nominal or sive (^TTtrdaecos) particles are Speech has made a very smal bekind. stems of a special the sentence is probably as ginning with isolated words; in fact words.^ The number speech, though we first discuss
old as
or adjectives or proare fixed case-forms of substantives used with nouns or Prepositions {Tpodkcas) are adverbs Conjunctions {Mea,.o.) are adverbs
ending is not very great, but some of root-words with the mere where the case-ending is added few survive even in the N. T.,
directly to the root, as aX-s
{6:Ka,
human
Latin
aXas,
sal,
English
sal-t.
with which compare InSo mCs (Ac. 27:41), Latin nav-is.
Mk.
50),
stead of aXs
the N. T. elsewhere follows the
kolvv in
using to
is only .ohs {.68-s) r6 xXoTov instead of vavs. In ihe 68ovs). or ovs of 5 (analogy of slightly changed after the loss numerals and Pronouns pronoun els (e.-s) is similarly explained.
and
the root
we have many more such roots use the root directly. In verbs endings without the thematic used directly with the personal any tense-suffix for the presvowel o/e and sometimes without The whole subject of verbs is much more
ent,
Uke 4>vy^ (<â-MO. non-thematic forms are rapidly compUcated, but in general the
the vernacular modern Greek disappearing in the N. T., while in no longer used (save in the case the non-thematic or m^ verbs are instance. A number of these roots of etâO, as 515a. for dldc-nc for stock. Take 8ck, the root go back to the common Indo-Germanic in-dic-o, dig-a-rm.; the Latin dic-o, of 8elKPv-nc. The Sanskrit has thematic the Take zeigm. ju-dex; the Gothic teiho; the German is spa? ('look), spaf =spy. verb aKk-.-To-m- The Sanskrit root spec-ulum, spec-to, etc. in The Zend has fpaf, the Latin ^yec-io, and areK has become place taken the Greek root metathesis has
X
oder der andercn W^^^^lasse "t)ber das relative Alter der einen 164). (Vogrinz, Gr. dc8 hom. Dud., ISbO, p. sich nichts Sicheres ausmac-hcn" 281. Gr., 2 Brug., Kurze vergl. p.
Mt
146
cKtT in

(TKkir-To-fMaL
NEW TESTAMENT
('a watching'),
ctkco;/'
('to
spy
out'),
o-kott-tj
(jkott-io.
('a watch-tower'), oKoir-bs ('a spy,' 'a goal'),
('owr).^
Cf.
Ph. 3
14 Kara
(xkottov.
The
old
Greek writers ^ made
iJ,vaTr]pLov
/xOs T-qpeivl
The Indo-Germanic in. Words with Formative Suffixes. languages have a highly developed system of affixes,^ prefixes, The suffixes are used for various purposes, as infixes, suffijfes. case-endings of nouns, as personal endings of verbs, as aids in the
formative
creation of words (formative suffixes). The Greek is rich in these sufl&xes, which are more or less popular at various peri-
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 derivaThere tive substantives, primitive and derivative adjectives.
are, of course, in the
N. T. Greek no "special" formative suffixes, does vary naturally in the relative use of these terminations from the earher language. In the modern Greek a number of new suffixes appear like the diminutives ttouXos (ttcoXos,
though the
kolvt]
'foal'), ktX.
"In
all
essentials the old patterns are
adhered to"
N. T. word-formation.'' See also Hadley-Allen (pp. 188 ff .) for the meaning of the Greek formative suffixes. On the stem-building of the verb one can consult (a) Verbs. Hirt or Brugmann for the new point of view.^ Without attempting a complete list of the new words in the kolvt], I give what
in the
is,
I trust, a just interpretation of the facts
concerning the
new
words appearing from N. T. Hence some classes of words are not treated. No new roots are used to 1. Primary or Primitive Verbs.
the time of Aristotle
on that we
find in the
make
1
verbs with old or
new
terminations^ in the
ff.,
kolvt].
The
ten-
Cf. Rachel White, CI. Rev., 1906, pp. 203
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. Cf. Jann., 8 Next to Sans. Gk. uses more inflections and so more affixes.
Hist.
*
Gk. Gr.,
p. 45.
N. T. Gk., p. 61. On the whole subject of word-building see Brug., Griech. Gr., 1900, pp. 160-362; K.-BL, Bd. II, Ausf. Gr., pp. 254-340. 6 Brug. op. cit. Hirt, Handb. der griech. Laut- und Formenl., 1902, pp.
Blass, Gr. of
360-391. 6 Schmid, Der Atticis.
etc., 4.
Bd., p. 702.
WORD-FORMATION
147
dency is all towards the dropping of the non-thematic or /zt forms both with the simple root and with the suffix. The remnants of the fXL forms, which are not quite obsolete in the N. T., will be given in the chapter on the Conjugation of the Verb. Here may be mentioned dTroXXu/zt, which uses the suffix -I'l;.^ Thematic verbs made from the root by the addition of o/e are very common, like \ey-w, XeiTc-w (Xt-rr). The N. T., as the kolvt], has new presents like These kept increasing and are vouched KpvjSo:, viTTTw, x^vvw, etc. Cf Thumb, Handbook, pp. 129 ff. for by modern Greek.
.
2.
Secondary or Derivative Verbs.
Not
all
of these verbs are
formed from nouns; many come also from verbs. Denominatives are made from nouns, like rt/xd-oj from rt/xiy, while verbals (postThe simple denomiverbals, Jannaris^) are made from verbs. natives,^ ending in -dco, -eco, -euco, -dfco, -tfw, are not always distinguished from the intensive verbals or the causative denominatives, though -6co, -alvw, -vpco more commonly represent the
latter.
'Ottclvoo
(from
otttco)
besides Ac.
3 appears in the
LXX,
kolvt)
Hermes, Tebt. Papyri.

rich in
Cf. also the rare 'Ktuwdpoj.
The
in the
is
new verbs
kolvt],
in -vco.
tl/jlclo:,
Verbs
in -dco are
common
N.
T.,
as in the
like
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 -aîj)
show great
vriTTLCiôo
increase in the
N. T. as
in the
kolvt]
and modern Greek,^

Anthol., Plut.),
like ayia^cji (ajLOs, ayi^w,

(vrj-n-Los)
LXX),
evTa(f)Laôj {ePTacf)ia,
in Hippocrates, arvypaô) (from aTvypds) in Schol.

in
on ^sch. and
16
:
f.)
occurs in
LXX aiPLa^co {aLpiop, eccl., Byz.). Iluppdfco (Mt. LXX and Philo, but W. H. reject this passage.
new verbs
in -eco are
The majority
of the
compound, as aaxviôpew,
pap.), but Sumreoj (only in N. T.) !r\r]po(f)opo) (ir\T]po-(f)6pos, 'Aratpeco (from d/catpos) is found is to be noticed on the other side.^
LXX,
m verbs see Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 234. In the pap. keep the non-thematic form in the middle, while in the active both appear. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 38. 2 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 300. Harris, MS. Notes on Gk. Gr. * Thumb, Handb., p. 175; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 21S, 300.
1
On
history of the
-vjj.l
verbs in
Siittcrlin,
Gesch. der Verba Denom. in Altgriech., 1S91, p.
7.
Cf. also
Pfordten, Zur Gesch. der griech. Denom., 1886.
Mayser
There
(Gr., pp.
459-466)
has an interesting
8
list
of derivative verbs in the Ptol. pap.
Thumb, Handb.
of
Mod. Gk.,
V., p. 135
f.
is
frequent inter-
change between forms in -afw, -ifco and -w. 7 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,'p. 61.
148

is
in Diodorus; evrpoaoiTrkco {evTrpoacairos)
found in Gal. 6
12 (in
Cf.
papyri, 114 B.C.;
ottojs
evTpocroiTrciixeu,
Tebt. P. No.
19i2f.).
Moulton, Expositor, 1903, p. 114. These verbs have always been very numerous, though -eco gradually retreats before -aco. Tp-qyo(Arist., LXX, Jos.) is formed from the perfect kyprjyopa, pk(ji which is not in the N. T., but Winer long ago found a similar
form in
pap.)
is
kinKexeLpeoo
(Papyri Taurin.
7).^
'EXarroj'eco (Arist.,
is in
LXX,
and
the
in
from
eXarTov.
'EXXoyeoi (and -dco)
inscriptions
papyri.
'Eô.Kokovdeco (Polyb., Plut., inscriptions) is

it.
not "biblical"
evTea) is in
as Thayer called
KOLVT],
AWevrecc {aWevrrjs, avros
and
according to Moeris, for the Attic
avTohiKkui.
(In the late

distinction
papyri see Deissmann, Light, p. 85.)

sense exists between -dco and
-eco.
No
great
Verbs in
-eucu
are also very
conmion and are formed from a

(from
aixp.a\ooTLs) is
great variety of stems.
AixiâXo^Tevca
read in
2 Tim. 3: 6 only by D" EKL al. pi. Or., the form in -^w being genuine. It is, however, common in the LXX, as is eyKparevofxaL Tvp.vLTevo3 (not yvp.PT](1 Cor. 9 25), from kyKparrjs (in Aristotle). Tevo), Dio Chrys., Plut., Dio Cass., etc.) is found in 1 Cor. 4: 11 and is from yvjjLvrjT-qs. ZrjKeve (Simplic, Democr.), not ^77X^0-01', is the correct text in Rev, 3 19 (so W. H. with ABC against KP). Both are from f^Xos. QpLanêvoi (from dpiafxôs) is in the literary 'leparevcjo (Lu. 1:8) is from lepevs and is found in the K01V17.2
:
KOLVT} writers and the inscriptions. Meo-trtuo) (Heb. from fxealrris and is found in Arist., Polyb. and papyri. oKoBpevoi (Heb. 11:28, MadrjTevco is from /jLadrjTrjs (Plut., Jambl.) LXX) is from bXedpos (ADE read dXedpevuv in Heb. 11:28). In Ac. 3 23 kôXedpevoi is the form accepted by W. H. after the Uaytdevo: (Mt. 22 15) is from wayls best MSS. of the LXX.^
LXX,
:
the
17) is
and occurs
:
in the
LXX.
Uapa-ôXevofiai. is
the correct word in
CKLP which read Tapa-ôvXevonai. The word from xapa-jSoXos, which has not been found in other writers, but an inscription (Ii/a.d.) at Olbia on the Black Sea has the very form TrapaôXevacifjLevos used by Paul (cf. Deissmann, Light, p. 84). UepirepevofxaL (1 Cor. 13 4) is made from irepwepos and is found in
Ph. 2 30 against
is
:
W.-M.,
p. 115.
Cf. dplanôv daayeiv, triumphuin agere.
Goetzeler, Einfl. d. Dion,
von
auf d. Sprachgeb. d. Plut., 1891, p. 203: Deiss. (Light, p. 368) gives this word (with aperri, kôvcrLa, 86â, icrxvs, Kparos, ixeyakeioT-qs) as proof of a parallel between the language of the imperial cult and of Christianity.
Ital.
3 Cf. W.-M., note, p. 114. Mayser (Gr., pp. 415-509) gives a very plete discussion of " Stammbildung " in the Ptol. pap.
com-
WORD-FORMATION
Antoninus.
149
Three verbs in -6oi Xprjareuo/iai is from xpv^^tos. appear which are made from verbs in -dco and -koo, viz. dXijSoj (dXew), KPTjdoj (/cmoj), urjOa: (veoS), one (vriOw) being found also in Plato
Polit. (p.
is
289 c). Cf. modern Greek dkro) (TidrjijLi). The causative ending -ow is usually formed on noun-stems and very common, sometimes supplanting verbs in -evoo or -ifco, as
djâ/cati'tf co)
/xe,
ava-Katuoco (Isocrates,
/ avacTTarboi (from dwcrra tos,
LXX,
papyri.
a4>-VKvb(j:
80X1.600
Cf. avaaTarot
'he upsets me,' Deissmann, Light, p. 81);

;
{AnthoL, classical d^DTrfif oj)

56Xtos);
beKarboi (classical beKaTtvoi)]
(LXX, from
bwanboi
(LXX,
but
eccl.
and Byz., from

read kôvbevkw in
bwanii); kôvbevboi (often
in
LXX,
W. H.
deixeXibco
Mk. 9:12,
BefxeKiov;
Plutarch even kôvbtvl^w);
(LXX)
is
from
Kavabu (from Kavaos, Disc, Galen);

/c(/)aXtfco,
K</)aXt6co
(Lob., ad
Phryn., p. 95,
though not in any known Greek author) 4 with KBL as against /ceâXatoco and it means 'beat on the head' (cf. /coXa^tfco). So koXojSow (from k6Xo/3os,
W. H.
read in
Mk.
12
Arist., Polyb., Diod.)
i/e/cpoco
(from
eccl.),
veKpbs, Plut., Epict.,
M.
Aur.,
inscriptions); Kparaiboo Apoll.,
(LXX,
from Kparvvw; aapow (Artem.,

(from
arjiietov,
Dysc), from
catpco (<rdpos);
o-ij/êtoco
Theoph.,
Polyb.,
LXX,
Philo, Dion. Hal., etc.); adevboi (Rhet. Gr.),
adtvk(jo (adevos); xo-pi-rboi
(LXX,
full
do not always have the
from from xap^?- Verbs in-6co causative idea,^ d^t6w='deem worthy'

Jos., eccl.),
and
sity.
5tKat6c<;='deem righteous.'
-ifco
do not necessarily represent repetition or intencausative idea and then again lose even that distinctive note and supplant the older form of the word. Forms in -If co are very common in modern Greek. Tai^Tlf oj (LXX, Athen.), for instance, in the N. T. has displaced patfco, and These verbs /SaTTTtfcj (since Plato) has nearly supplanted iSdrrco. come from many sorts of roots and are very frequent in the N. T., The new formations in the Koivi] as the KOLVI] is lavish with them. appearing in the N. T. are as follows: aiperifco (from alperbs, LXX, inscriptions); aixMaXcorifco (literary Koivrj and LXX), from alxy^b.XcoTOs; avadenaTi^w (LXX and inscriptions), from ava.dep.a; ave^xlîo (Jas. 1 6) is found in schol. on Hom. Od. 12, 336, the old form
Verbs in
They sometimes have a
being
aveixboj; drej/tfco
delyfjLo)
(from
SoyixaTLô}
77i's,
(from arevrjs, Arist., Polyb., Jos.); detynaTlû appears in apocryphal Acts of Peter and Paul; (from 667/xa) is in Diodorus and the LXX; eyyi^cj: (from
e^-virvLi;co
from Polyb. and Diod. on);

dearpi^cj
eKdeaTpiôj
(from vtvos, (from
LXX,
is
Plut.);
(from OkaTpov) in ecclesiastical and being in Poly bins;

ijjLaTi^co
Byzantine
iixaTLov)
^
writers,
1
Cf. Siitterlin,
Zur Gcsch. der Verba Denom.,
p. 95.
lb.
150
NEW TESTAMENT
found in Serapeum papyrus 163 e.g.; lovdatô) (from 'lovSatos) is found in the LXX and Josephus and is formed like eXkr]viâ3 and similar ethnic terms; Kadapiô: (classic Kadalpw, from Kadapos, LXX, Jos., inscriptions); /cpuo-raXXtfco (from /cpuo-raXXos, Rev. 21:11) is
still
"not found elsewhere" (Thayer);

is
ixvkttipI^co
is
(from
hvkttjp,
'the
nose')
in the
LXX;
is
dpdplû (from opdpos)

in literary
in the
LXX;
TreXe/cifco
(from
ttIos,
TreXcKus) is
common
in
kolpt]; aKopirL^to
kolvt],
(akin to aKop-
root skerp)
LXX
and
in literary
Attic form being
oKehavvvixi,
old Ionic according to Phrynichus;
(nr\ayxv''-ôjjLai
(from
o-TrXdyxra,
(TTrXaYxêuco
Heb.
;
tj'^^qin'i)
occurs
in
LXX,
Attic
is
had an active
is
(jvp.p.op(i)iô3
(from
avfjiiiop(pos)
the correct text in
Ph. 3
10 against
avp.p.op^bu>
(EKL), though neither word
known
is
elsewhere, perhaps coined
by Paul;
ct)v\aKlôo
(from
(l>v\aKri)
in
LXX
and Byzantine
writers.
Of verbs
in -vû,
yoyyv^w (onois
matopoetic, like TovSpvôi of the cooing of doves)
in the
LXX
and the papyri.

Verbs in -hvio are fairly common, like irapo^vvo}. Only one word mention, aKk-qphvco (from aKK-qpos), which takes the place of the rare cK'Xrjpow and is found in LXX and Hippocrates. No new verbs in -aipo) (like ev(t)palvcS) appear in the N. T. Verbs in
calls for
-o-Kco are, like
or causative.
the Latin verbs in -sco, generally either inchoative It is not a very common termination in the N. T.,
Tivcoo-Kco
though
StSao-Kco occur very often, but these In the N. T. the inchoative sense is greatly weakened. The suffix belongs to the present and the imIn modern Greek it has nearly disappeared save perfect only. TafilaKO) (accepted by W. H. in Lu. 20 34) in the dialects.^
evplffKui,
and
are not derivative verbs.
rather than yaniô}
is
causative (Arist. pol.)
yTjpaaKco
and
fxtdvaKO}
both come from the earher Greek.^
'Ep-8l8v-(tkcj)
o-r^/cco
occurs in the
:
LXX,
in
Jos., inscriptions.
The new present
made from
N.
out.
the perfect stem
eaTrjKa (areKco in
(Mk. 11 25) is modern Greek). As

drop
dv/x-Ldo:,
T., so in
modem
in -toco
Greek desideratives
still
in -aeioo, -ataw
The verbs
retained {iiyaWLdo}, aporp-ido},
Koir-idi^
Of these d7aXXtdco, for the old dydWofxai, is late kolvt]; dporptdco is from Theophr. on, No new redupUcated verbs /coTTidco is late in the sense of 'toil.'
have no desiderative meaning.
appear in the N. T. (6) Substantives.

1.
Primary
or
Primitive
is
Substantives.
root.
It is
Here the formative

important to seek the
(stem-suffix) suffix
1
added to the
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 302; Thumb, Handb., p. 133. Cf. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 615, for discussion of -aKw verbs.
WOED-FORMATION
meaning not only
151
of the root, but of this formative suffix also
root has in most cases the strong form, as These substantives are thus from the same root as the verb. With -ju^-s, -ixt], expressing action, are formed in the old Greek words like 6v-/j,6s, tl-iit). With -/xa, denoting result, we find aPT-air6-8o-na (LXX, old Greek avT-aTr6-8o-aLs, from
possible.
when
The
in X67(X7)-o-s.
aPT-airo-8i8ojîi.)
tv-8v-fj.a
Sid-CTTj-jua
ep-8vo},
(from
8L-iaTr]iJ.L,
Arist., Polyb.,
Philo);
(from
êXco,
;
Arist.
LXX, Strabo, Jos., Plut.); dk\r]-na and LXX); Kara-Kpi-na (from Kara-Kpivo}, Dion.
kolvt]
(from
Hal.,
pap.) Kara-Xv-fxa (from Kara-Kv-co, literary
for old Kar-ajcoyeiov,
and with idea
of place); KaTa-aTrj-iia
{Kad-laT-q-iiL,
;
Plut.
and the
(from
LXX)
KTla-jjia
(from
ktI^(j3,
Strabo, Dion. Hal.)
Trp6a-KoiJ.-ixa
Tpoa-KOT-Tco, in
LXX
and
Plut.).
The
suffix -cn-s,
meaning action
d^d-Sei^-ts
(abstract), appears in kvb.-^\el/-Lt (Arist.,

ava-8dK-vv-ixi, Plut.,
LXX)
(from
Diod., Strabo, Sirach);
dkXrj-aLs
in
Heb. 2 :4
(from
eccl.);
deXco,
Kara-vvaa-co,
a "vulgarism," according to Pollux); KaT6.-pv^-Ls (from LXX) KariL-KpLcns (from Kara-Kplvw, Vettius Valens, ire-TToW-rf-ats (from -Kk-iroLd-a, Treldoo, Josephus and Philo,
; ;
condemned by the Atticists) tp6(x-kKl-(tls (from Trpoa-K\lv-w, Polyb. and Diod.); xp6(j-xi'-<ns (from Trpoa-xe-co, Justin Martyr and later). The suffix -ixovq is used with Teia-novr] (from xt0aj, Ignatius and later) and hirc-\7]a-fxovr} {eTt-\apd-avco, kTn-\r]<j-p.uiv Sirach). llay-rjvr]
,
(LXX,
(TTTop-d
Plut., Lucian)
{8La-cnreip(ji,
has suffix
Plut.)
-rivrj (cf.
~opo, -ovq,
etc.).
Aia-
LXX,
and Tpoa-evx-V
(-77).
{n-poa-evx-op-o.i,
LXX,
inscriptions) use the suffix -a
Cf. aTro-^pa(p-r] (N. T.,
papyri), olto-Soxv (inscriptions), ^poxi (papyri), kixwXoKr] {kfiTXeKO},

inscriptions),
ings).
5ta-Ta7T7
is
(Sia-Taaaw, papyri, inscriptions, later writ-
The agent
5tcb/cT7js
usually
-rijs (Blass, Gr., p.
62),
-T7/P as in
8i-8oi-iJLL,
(from
Slwkui, earliest
example) and
86-Trjs
not -rojp or (from

(yL-vwaKOJ,
classic
8oT-qp.
But
cf.
aco-rrjp).
See
yvcharrjs
LXX,
Plut.), KTicr-T-qs
e^tcrrrjAti)
.
(kt'l^co,
Arist., Plut.,
in Luke,
See further
LXX), ewL-aTa-Tris (only under compound words for more

preserved, but -rcop
examples.
In modern Greek
-Trjpas.
I
-ttjs is
and
ttjp
become
2.
-Topr]s,
Jannaris, op. ciL, p. 288;

-evs,
Thumb, Hand-
hook, p. 49.
pass by words in
-mv,
-rpov, etc.
Secondary or Derivative Substantives.
Only important words
not in
(a)
common
use in the older Greek can be mentioned.
verbs. Words in -p.6s expressing action. From verbs in -dfco come ayiaa-iios (ancient Greek ayiô}, but later form
Those from
common in LXX and N. T.); ayvia-ixds (from ayvl^co, Dion. Hal., LXX, Plut.); airapTLa-ixbs (Dion. Hal., Apoll. Dysc, papjTJ);
apiray-fios (apTrdfco is
from root
dp7r, like
Latin rapio. 'Apiray-pos once
152

common from
(from
iEschylus)^; yoyyva-nos (from
in Plutarch, apirayri
yoyyvîo, Antonin.)
Arist., errac^td^co)
; ;
evTa^naa-^bs (Plutarch
t/xartfco,
and
scholia to Eur,
and
in
lixaTia-ixos
LXX,
Theophr.,Polyb.,
Diod., Plut., Athen.); ireLpaa-nos (from xetpdfco and
common
verbs in -tf co we have âirTicr-iJLos (Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 62) used by Josephus of John's baptism,^ but not in the N. T. of the ordinance of baptism, save in Col. 2 12, in J-i" BD*FG 47, 67**, 71, a Western reading rejected by W. H.;
the
.
LXX)
From
ovtihiff-ixos
(Plutarch and Dion. Hal.); irapopyia-ixos (not found
earlier
ixos
than
LXX nor in kolvt] writers,

(Plut.
Dion, uses Tvapopyl^w) Topia;
(Sap., Polyb., Jos., Plut., Test.
XII
Patr.); pauna-ixos
aa:<l)povLa-iJ.6s
(LXX);
Plut.,
aa^âTLCT-fMos
and
eccl.
writers);
(Jos.,
etc.); xf/LdvpL(7-p.6s
(from
xpidvpiô},
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
Kaiv(j}-(JLS
/Stw-crts
(in Sirach,
from
(3t6co);
ava-
(ava-Kaivo-a),
Etym.
M.
Her7n.);
airavTri-aLS
{aT-avTa-w,
LXX,
o-Ta-crts
Polyb., Diod., papyri);
airo-Ka\v\l/Ls
;
(Potyb., Diod., papyri, etc.)
dTro-o-ra-o-ta
(LXX, Plut.); (LXX)

;
awo-KaTaeKî]T7]-cn%
kv-bbii-q-aLs
evrt.-
{kK-^r]Teco,
true text in 1 Tim.

Jos.,
4, Basil Cses.,
Didym.)
in
(from
in
evSofiew,
also
hddojjLTjaLs)',
kirLirodrj-cns
(LXX, from
-o-is,
Todeoo); vTr-dvTr]-ais
(LXX,
Jos., App.).
Words
in
common
Greek.
Hebrews, make
in
few new formations
the
later
'Ayairrj
begins to displace ayaTrjats
(LXX,
inscription in Pisidia,
and papyrus
Herculaneum)
Abstract nouns in -eia (W. H.

-evoo
-ia) are chiefly from verbs in
as apeaKela
in
(from apeaKivw,
Polyb., Diod., papyri,
and usually
in
:
W.
Ro. 15 23, Not found elsewhere). 'Epidela (from The verb from eptdos, 'working for hire'); epLdevoo, Arist. pol. lepareia (from leparevco, Arist. pol., Dion. Hal., LXX, inscriptions); Xoyela {-ia) is from \oyevco ('collect') and is found in inscriptions, ostraca, papyri (see Deissmann, Light, p. 105); fiedoSeia (from fxedodevo}, which occurs in the kolvt], from (xWodos, but not
H.,
not
ein-irodla,
bad sense); kin-TrSdeLa (so from einTodeo:, probably
by analogy
like
tTnOvixla.
the abstract noun).

1
Rutherford,
New
Phryn., p. 407; Donaldson,
New
Crat., p. 451; Light-
foot
2
on Ph. 2:6.
Ant. 18.
4,
5, 2.
Cf. Sturtevant, Stud, in

list
Gk. Noun-Formation
(CI. Philol.,
vii,
1912).
For long
of derivative substantives in the Ptol. pap. see
Mayser, Gr., pp. 416-447.
WORD-FORMATION
From
64)el\w
153
the papyri),
are
b4>d\7]tia
(Plato, Arist.,
we have b(l)L\r} (common in LXX). Words in -jua (result)
more common
in
the later Greek and gradually take an abstract idea of -ats in modern Greek. ^ The new formations appearing in the N. T. are
a-yp6r]-ij.a
(O.
7,
Ac.
25
T. Apoc, from ayuoew); alTLw-fia and not alTiana), from alTLa.oiJ.aL.
(correct text
in in
Cf.
aiTioâ-Ls
Eustathius, p. 1422, 21.

avrXtjua (from auTêoo,
This form as yet not found elsewhere); Plut., what is drawn, and then strangely a
like ai^rX-qTrjp
thing
to
draw with,
or avT\r]T7}pLov); air-avyaa-na
(from awavydô:, and this from diro and 01)717, in Philo); d-Ko-aKLaa-jia (from axoo-Kidfo), and this from
Wisdom and
d-Ko
and
oklo..
Only
in Jas. 1:17); dadkvq-iia (from dadevkoi, in physical sense in

;
Arist. hist., papyri) |Sd7rrto--Ata (from j8a7rrtfco, "pecuHar to N. T. and ecclesiastical writers," Thayer). In ^divTLa-txa, as distinct from âiTTLa-nos, the result of the act is included (cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 62); kêpa-na (from eêpdco, in Dioscor., example of the verb, cf. Lob., ad Phryn., p. 64); ^rrrj-pLa (from r]TTdo-ixaL,
LXX,
Jos.,
tiph.,
in ecclesiastical writers); tepdreu-ûa (from Uparevu,
LXX);
An-
Kar-opdw-fjia
(from
Kar-opdoo:, literary kolvt], as Polyb.,

pdirLa-ixa
Diod., Strabo,
pairl^w,
Plut.,
Lucian and 3 Mace);

aTtpkoo-jxa
(from
Anthol., Lucian);
(from
arepioo:, Arist.,
LXX).
Blass 2 calls attention to the fact that in the later Greek words in
-/xa, like
those in
-o-ts, -ttjs,
-tos, often prefer
stems with a short
vowel, as
86{xa (86(tls), d'efxa (deaLs),
though
(Attic
this
the older Doric,
KKt-p-a, Kpt-fxa, Trbp-a
xco/xa).
form is already in Hence dvdde-fxa
inN. T., though duddvpa in Lu. 21: 5 (W. H. ace. to BLQr, etc.), and in the papyri "nouns in -fxa are constantly showing short penult."^ But dvadejia, like Qkua and bbp.a, belongs to the list
of
primary substantives.
Words
/SaTTTtfo),
in -rrys (agent) are fairly

Jos.)
;
numerous,
like âirTLa-rrfs
(from
and others use /Stards); yoyyv(j-rri<i (from 707711^0;, Theodotion ojid SjTnm. translation of the LXX); eXXTivLa-T-qs (from iW-qvlô}, not in Greek authors, though iWrjvl^co is, as in Xen., Anab., and Strabo, etc.); e^^Laa-TT)s
(from
/Stdfco.
Pind., Pyth.
opKLa-Tr\s
(from
e^-op/ctfo), Jos.,
Lucian,
eccl. writers); evayyeXLa-TTjs
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 289.
Thumb,
Ilandb., p. G5.
On
frequency in
LXX see C. and S., Sel.
from LXX, p. 28. Cf. Frankel, Griech. Denom., 1906. 2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 62 f. For same thing in LXX {kvhOttxa, -n-pSaOeiJia, S6na, etc.) see C. and S., Sel. from LXX, p. 28. ^ Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 108. lie instances besides d^vaOttxa in tlie
Okixa, k-KiOttxa, irpbaOtna, irpobona.
sense of 'curse,'
On
ivaOf/jLa,
for exx. in iii/B.C.
inscr., see Glaser,
De
Rat., quae intorc. inter serm. Poljb. etc., 1894, p. 82.
154

eccl. writers)
;
NEW TESTAMENT
(from
KepfxaTiô),
(from evayyeXi^w,
KepfiarLa-Trjs
Nicet.,
Max.
Tyr.); koXKv^kt-ttjs (found in
Men. and
jxepl^w,
Lys.) has
no verb
KoWvî^co, but only koWvjSos, a small coin; Xvrpu-Trjs (from Xvrpbo),
LXX
(from
and
Philo);
p-tpia-T-q^
(from
Pollux);
Tpoa-Kwrj-rris
-irpoaKvveo),
inscriptions, eccl.
and Byz.);
araaLaa-rris
(from
o-rao-iafoj,
Diod., Dion. Hal., Jos., Ptol.); Ttkuw-T-qs (from

:
reXeidco,
only in Heb. 12
2).
few
late
words
in -rrjp-tov (from -rrjp
and
-lov)
occur as aKpoawriters)
TT)pi.ov
(from
cLKpodoixai,
Plut.
and
other
kolut}
where
inscrip-
-TTjpiov
means
'place'; iXaa-rripLov (from IXdaKo/jLaL,

is
LXX,
tions,
papyri, Dio Chrys.)
a substantive in the N. T.,

IXaarrjpLos (cf.
auTrjpLos)
made
probably from the adjective

to the
and means
and does not allude mercy seat^ or covering. However, in Heb. 9 5 ikaarrjpLov does have the meaning of 'place of propitiation' or 'mercy seat' (cf. dvjjLta-TrjpLov). Deissmann passed this passage by, though he is
'propitiatory gift' or 'means of propitiation'
:
correct in Ro. 3
(0)
25.
Cf. 4>v\aKTy]pLov.
Those from substantives.
Several words expressing place

d(f>e8p6:v
are formed after the fashion of the older Greek as
(probdTro)
ably from the Macedonian
acpeSpos,
and that from
edpa
and
be compared with Koirpuv; (3paj3eLov (from ^paêvs, Menand. Mon., 0pp., Lycoph., Clem. Rom.); eXacuv (from eXaLov, like diJLTreX-6:p from a/jLireXos, in the LXX, Jos., inscriptions and papyri),- with which compare fjLvXoiv {-wvos) in Mt. 24 41 accord-
which
may
ing to
DHM
Esd.,
and most cursives instead

</)ot/ccbj^
of fivXas.
{-ojuos),
Moulton {The
'palm-grove,' in
Expositor, 1903, p. Ill) has found
A. P. 31 (112
and
first in 1 Mace, formed after the analogy of povae-lo-v. "YiXwvLov (from reXiovrjs) is found in Strabo. Herpahov (Philo) is from rerpas, the usual guard in the prisons. Several new words in -ttjs (quality) appear, as dSeXô-TTjs (from a.8eX(t)6s, 1 Mace, 4 Mace, Dio
B.C.).
EldcjcXelou (-LOV
W.
H.),
found
is
Chrys., eccl. writers);
ded-rrjs
(from
deos,
Lucian, Plut.);
KvpLo-Trjs
* See Deiss., B. S., p. 131 f., where a lucid and conclusive discussion of the controversy over this word is given. See also Zeitschr. fiir neutest. Wiss., 4
(1903), p. 193.
2
Blass
is
unduly sceptical
eXatwi'
(Gr., p. 64).
Deiss. (B. S., p. 208
f.)
finds nine
examples of
'
place of olives' or 'oUve orchard' in vol. I of the Ber.
Pap., and Moulton (Exp., 1903, p. Ill; Prol., p. 49) has discovered over thirty in the first three centuries a.d. In Ac. 1 12 it is read by all MSS.
:
29 (ag. W. H.) and 21 37 (ag. W. H.). 'EXaiuv is right in Lu. 19 37, etc. In Lu. 19 29; 21 37, question of accent. Cf. also afxireXcoi' (from d/xTeXos, LXX, Diod., Plut.) which is now found in the pap.
and
is
correct in Lu.
:
19
WORD-FORMATION
(from
is
'
155
Kvpios, originally adj., eccl.
and Byz.
7
:
writers).
lîvpo-ôLvlKLaaa.
ôLv'iKLaaa.
the text of
J<AKL,
In
is
etc., in
Mk.
26 as against 26pa
in
BEFG,
etc.
either
case
(fjoivlKLaaa,
not
as
(polpLcraa
(Text.
is
Rec.) which
KtXt^.
the usual feminine of
0otj't|,
KiXto-o-a
of
Lucian has a masculine

1^vpo4>oiv'LK-q.
I,vpo4>oivL^
and Justin Martyr a

probably comes.
/SacnXts
feminine
From
this last (jjoivlKLcaa
Cf. the use of

(SaatXeta.
âaiXLaaa,
the
Atticists
preferring
or
'Ilpw8-Lav6s
(from
'HpobSrys)
and
Xpiar-Lavos (from XptcxTos) first
appear in the N. T., and are modelled after Latin patronymics

like
Caesariamis {Kaiaap-iapos, Arrjan-Epictetus)
Blass^ goes unXprjar-Lavos
necessarily far in saying that the
N. T. form was
(from Xprjaros), though, of course, t and ij at this time had little, MeyLardv is from fxeytaTos if any, distinction in pronunciation.
from veos)^ Cf. Latin megistanes. MeyLardv is found in Maneth. UXT^/jLixvpa (LXX, Dion. Hal., Jos., Philo) is from 7r\r]fxixr]. There was, of course, no "Christian" or "biblical" way of forming words. Diminutives are not so common in the N. T. as in the Byzantine and modern Greek ^ where diminutives are very numerous,
(as peav
LXX,
Jos.,
losing
often their original force.

XtâptStoj/)
is
Bt/3Xapt5toj'
(a
new
form, but
against
of
compare
jSt/3Xt5dptoi^
read in Rev.
10
2 by
NACP
(fragment of Aristoph.) according to

.
C* and most
the cursives and ^l^XIov (by B)

of verses 8, 9, 10.
in
Variations occur also in the text

is
TwaiKapLOP (from ywrj)
used contemptuously
'Ixdvdiov
2 Tim. 3
6 (also in Antonin. and Epict.).
(from
ixdvs), K^Lvidiov
and
kKlvolplov
(from
kKIvt])
occur from Aristoph. on.
Kopaaiov (from
in Diog. Laert.
that
is
Kop-q, called Maced. by Blass) is used disparagingly and Lucian, but in LXX and Epict. as in the N. T. not true, though it hardly has the endearing sense (some-
times found in the diminutive) in Kwapiov (k6vs=' street-dogs'),
but that sense appears often in

(from
oypov)
o\}/ov)
TTaibiov
as in Jo. 21
5.
'Ovapiov
ovos)
is
is
is
found
in
Machon and
Epictetus.
'Oypapiov
(from
found in Alexis and Lucian, and b^puvLov (likewise from used by Dion., Polyb., Jos., Apocrypha and papyri. Hre-
' Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 63. Cf. Lipsius, Ursp. dos Christcnnamons, 1873. W.-Sch. (p. 135) suggests that these two words are not after the Lat. model, but after the type of 'Kai.avb%, which was foreign to the European Greeks. But 'kaiavbs (from Kaia) is in Thucyd. and besides is not parallel to Xpiaris, XpiffT-iaws. Cf. Eckinger, Die Orthog. lat. Worter in griech. luschr., 1893,.
'
p. 27.
2
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 292;
Thumb,
Ilandb., p. 62.
156
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMEISTT
comes from Arist. down, but \1/lxIop (from Both cbrdptoi' {Anthol., Anax.) and iOTLov (LXX) are from o5s, but have lost the diminutive idea, just as Atdrt in modern Greek means merely 'eye' {omiaTLov) Blass^
pvyLov (from vrrepu^)
i^t^)
does not appear elsewhere.
indeed accuses Luke of atticising when he uses ovs in Lu. 22 50. The new substantives derived from (7) Those from adjectives. adjectives in the later Greek found in the N. T. all have suffixes
:
expressing quality.
With
-ia
we
find airo-Toî-la (from airo-TOfios,

e\a(j)p6s,
;
Diod., Dion., pap.); eXa^pta (from

p. 343.
.
cf.
Lob., ad Phryn.,
Cf alaxp-la- from alaxpos, Eust.) Trapa4>pop-ia (from irapaGreek writers use rapacfipo-avvr], but cf. evdai/jLov-ia from eu<i)pwv. 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]
in inscriptions or in Glycas.^
Most
of the
and upo-avvq are both found words in -avvri belong

k\er]ij.uu,
to the later language.^
'EXerjuo-avvrj
(from
Callim. in Del.,
v.
Diog. Laert.,
LXX),
like other
words
in -avvt], loses the
So
TairHvo-4>po-avv7] (Jos., Epict.).
Rather more numerous are the new words

(from
T7JS
in -ttjs,* as 01716-77/5
0,7105,
Mace);
ayv6-Tr]s
(from
d7J'6s,
inscriptions);
a(j)e\6-Tr]s
dStj'Ko-
(from
adrjXos,
Polyb.,
Dion. Hal., Philo);

(from
(xaTaios,
(from
yvix-
a(l)eKr]s,
eccl. writers,
ancient Greek dêXeia);

/xarato-rjjs
yviivb-ryis
(from
vbs,
Deut., Antonin.);
LXX
and
is
eccl.
writers); peyaXeLd-rris (from neyaXelos, Athen., Jer.);
ttio-tt/s
(from
LXX). AKadap-TTjs supported by any Greek MSS. The neuter (and often the mascuhne and
TTLOJv,
Arist.,
Thcophr.,
'
(Rev. 17:4)
feminine) of
not
any adf.,
jective can be used as a substantive with or without the article, as

TO
SoKL/jLLov
(from
7
SokLulos,
Dcissmann, Bible Studies,

Like
ixedopiov
p.
259
Dion.
Hal., Long.,
opia in
LXX,
:
papyri).
is
(the Syrian reading for
Mk.
24)
Kpoa<i}ayi.ov
{Tpo<T-4>ayLos,
ov
from
Tpoa-tpa-
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 63. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 124, n. 14.
On
the termination
-crwrj see
Aufrecht, Ber.
Zeitschr. fur verp;!. Sprachf., 6. Heft.

3
W.-M., p. On words
ttjs,
118, n.
1.
darsuffix
Lob. ad Phryn., p. 350; Biihler, Das griech. Secun1858; Frankel, Gesch. d. Gr. Norn. Ag. (1910).
in -ttjs see
WORD-FORMATION
yelv, inscriptions) (T(f)ayLOP (o-</)d7tos, -ov,
\t]ulov {vTroKr]VLos, -ov,
157
from
utto \7]p6v,
Cf. vTTo-^vyLov).
As already
seen,
of the adjective iKaa-r-qpLos, -a,

TrjpLov
is
from <T(})ayn, Am., Ezek.), i'ttoDemiopr. in Poll., Geop., LXX. ikaa-Tnpiov is probably the neuter So <î;XaK-ov (from iXacr/co/iat)
.
the neuter of the adjective
<i)vKaK-Ty]pios,
-a,
-ov (from
^wTr]pLov and 4>v\aKTi]p, vKa(jc(ji, Dem., Diosc, Plut., LXX).i Greek as old in the common both are auTrjpLos) auTTjpia (from
the case with virep-uov (from vTepwos, -cotos). ZevK-Trjpla (from feuK-Tijpios, only in Ac. 27 40) reverts to the abstract form in -ia.
is
:
(c)
Adjectives.
1.
Primary
or
Primitive Adjectives.
'A/xdpr-ojXos
is
These, of course, come

afxapr-dvco,
from verbal
roots.
(from root
(/)et5-wXo5
Arist.,
Mace. 2:9), from Plut., from 4>e'L8ofiat) êt5-6s ireido}, as from tlB-os H. UtLd-6s (W. <êt5-o/xat. regards Blass^ but 2 in 1 Cor. than elsewhere found 4, yet is not is evidence The TretôT. for TretôTs corruption," patent "a it as versions). and cursives uncials, most the (all Treidots of favour in âyos (from root (f)ay-) is a substantive in the N. T. with paroxy-
LXX,
inscriptions)
like
(4
tone accent as in the grammarians, the adjective being 4>ay-bs. The other new adjectives from roots in the N. T. are verbals in
-Tos.
There is only one verbal (gerundive) in -reos (Lu. 5 38, elsewhere only in Basil), and that is neuter (jSXTjreoj'), "a survival The sense of capability or of the literary language in Luke."'' possibility is only presented by the verbal iraQ-q-Tos (from root
:
7ra0-, xdo-xo), eccl. writers).
in -Tos,
more
like
later Greek.^
But the weakened sense of the verbal an ordinary adjective, is very common in the But they are rare in the modern Greek (Thumb,
These verbals correspond to the Latin participle
Handb., p. 151).
are
in -tus,^ like yvucrros, or to adjectives in -hilis, like dpards.
They
ypacfio:,
common
apol.,
in
the N. T., though not

usually passive
like
many new
formations
root
appear.
They
are
ypaT-Tos (from
Georg.
-qkvB-,
LXX), though
Philo)
is
irpoa-rjXv-TOs
{irpoa-'epx-oixai,
LXX,
active in sense.
The
ancient form was
This termination became rather

btriT-qpiov,
common
in the later Gk., as, for instance,
in
(ij'a/caXi;7rT:7ptOJ',
Oavar-qpiov,
'i.a)iari)pi.ov.
See also btratton, Lnap-
ters in the Hist, of
Gk. Noun-Formation, 1889. 2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. G4. So W.-Sch., p. 135. ' Viteau, Ess. sur hi Synt. des Voix, Rev. de Thilol., p. 38. < Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 297. 'V.k<^v also is wholly adjective and ixk\\<^v sometimes so. Cf. Brugmann, Grundr. d. vergl. Gr., p. 429. ^ W.-M., Cf. Viteau, Ess. sur le Synt. de Voix, Rev. de Philol., p. 120. p. 41. For deriv. adj. in the Ptol. pap. see Mayser, Gr., pp. 447-455.
158
eTTiyXus.
A number
will
of
new
verbals were formed on

later.
compound
words which
For the syntactical aspects of the verbal adjectives see discussion of the participle (cf. Moulbe discussed
ton, Prolegomena, p. 221).
2.
(a)
Secondary or Derivative Adjectives. Those from verbs. Strtcr-ros (from

It is equivalent to the
o-irtfc;,
Jos.,
Athen.)
is is
to be mentioned.
Latin saginatus and

in -lvos
passive in meaning.
(0)
Those from substantives.

Kad'
rj/xepav,
Some new words

is
occur
as anapavTLVos (from afxdpavTos, Philost., inscriptions);
Kadrjidep-Lvos
Kad-qixkpLos]
(from
opOpos,
Athen., Plut,, Jos.)
for
ancient
;
KOKK-ivos is
from
kokkos
(LXX,
Plut., Epict., papyri)
opOp-ivos
(from
LXX,
(so
older form opdpLos), with which compare

1,
ea-rrep-ivos
:
(from iawepa, from Xen. on) in the minusc.

irpoiLvos
118, 209 (Lu. 12

Trpcotos,
38);
W.
H., from
irvp-Lvos
xpcot,
for the older

irvp,
LXX,
Plut.,
Athen.,
raxt-vos
etc.);
(from
Arist.,
(from rdxa) from Theocritus on

Kepafx-LKos
LXX, Polyb., (LXX also).

pol.,
Plut.);
There are several words

Diod.);
in -lkos, like Wvlkos (from Wvos, Polyb.,
(from
Kepafxos,
KepajXLos,
t,
Hipp., Plat,
Kepa/jieods;
LXX)
(from
which
Kvptos,
supplanted the earlier
Kvpi-aKos
-aKos instead of -ikos after
Fayum and
Kos
in
found in papyri of inscriptions of Phrygia and Lydia.^ So XecTovpyteccl. writers) is
(from \eiTovpyia,
special
tract in the
Of
ivos
(from
LXX, papyri) and ovlkos (from ovos, in a conFaytim Papyri dated Feb. 8, a.d. 33). interest are several words in -tjôs and -lkos. 'OarpaKoarpaKov, Hipp., Anthol., LXX), 'made of clay,'
:
'earthen'; aapK-ivos (from aap^, Aristoph., Plato, Arist.) is thus not a new word, but is used in Heb. 7 16 and by Paul in 1 Cor. 3:1; Ro. 7 14 (correct text in each instance), where many
:
MSS. have aapK-iKos. Indeed aapuvos in these two mean more than made of flesh or consisting in
"rooted in the flesh" (Thayer) .^
6ks.
passages must
flesh,
perhaps
clXtj-
Cf. relation of a\r]d-iv6s to
Still
real distinction
seems to be observed between adpK:
ivos
and
is
aapK-LKos in 1 Cor. 3
and 3
3.
Sap/c-i/cos
(from adp^,
Arist., Plut.,
LXX)
is
man who
who
in
lives
according to the flesh

xi'eOûa,
and
from
here opposed to those
are irvevnar-LKol (from
Arist.
down, but not

(from
p.
\j/vxv,
f.;
LXX,
pertaining to the wind).
But
>
6 rpvx-Liids
Arist., Polyb.,
down)
is
the
man
pos15.
Deiss., B. S., See comm. in
217
16,
Liget, p. 361;
(p. 123)
Thieme, Die Inschr.
v.
M., p.
loco.
:
W.-M.
held that aapKivos was "hardly to be

(p.
tolerated" in Heb. 7
Cf.
but Schmiedel
139) has modified that statement.
on
-iTOs,
Donaldson,
New
Crat., p. 458.
WORD-FORMATION
sessed of
159
opposed to regenerate
mere natural
two
life (1
:
Cor. 2
14) as
{irvevfjiaT-iKos) life (1
Cor. 2
15).
ZapK-LKos can-be applied to either
3 en yap aapKiKol names also have Proper eo-re Paul reproaches the Corinthians. (from Tcojua-V/cos in Tux-ikos. Note accent -tKos, as 'E|3pa-u-6s.
of these
distinct classes.^
But
in 1 Cor. 3
TcoMi?) is
read in Lu. 23
in the literary
38 by the Western and Syrian MSS.,

(Polyb., Diod., etc.).
common
Aicoi/tos,
kolvt]
though found
in Plato
and Diod.,
1908,
is
not a
174.
common
AokIulos
adjective.
Cf.
is
But cf. Moulton and Milligan,

(Dion.
Plut.),
LXX,
O. T. Apoc, Philo, inscriptions, papyri.

Expositor,
p.
from So/ci/ii? from uLaOos (LXX,

erary
K0LV7].
Hal.,
Long.,
LXX,
is
papyri).
MladLos
in the
is
lit-
while
'Fa^fiaios
common
(from ixtKiaca, like da\aa<XLOS from OaXaaaa) The class of documents in Lu. 24 42. Syrian is read by the and /zcXiao-aTos has Nic. though else, nowhere word occurs
MeXttrcnos
:
Eustath. neKlaaeios.
(7)
Those fro7n
adjectives.
There are only a few new adjectives
About of this character, but they present special difficulties. with used and and Lu. 11: 3 6:11 in Mt. only (found kmovaios
has raged a long controversy. It has been derived eiri and ovala, 'bread for sustenance,' though of inrapîs in philosophical language (ansense the has only omia other theory, bread of substance' in the spiritual sense) from 7rt and ojv {e-irovTLos, kirovaLos, like eKOiv, eKovaLos, etc.), 'bread for the
apros) there
successively from
'
present,'
though the
17
in
ctti is
not allowed to remain with a vowel

tTneLKrjs;
save
last
when a digamma
a
existed as in
from
eTr-icoj'
:
(eT-eiixi,
'approach'), like
einovaa {wepa), 'the next day' (Ac. 16
11), this
common
idiom.
Lightfoot^ has settled the matter in favour
of the last position.
See also
ripefxos
(from
(from
rjpeixrjs,
adv. vpkua, 3
Lucian, Eustath., Hesych);

Polyb., Jos.).
vecoreptKos
vecorepos,
Mace,
In irepLomLos (from Trept-cov, Treptetjut, LXX) no serious problem in etymology arises, for Trept retains the t in composition with vowels. It is used with Xaos, to express the idea that Xltar-uos (from Trtaros, Israel belongs to God as his very own.^
See Trench, N. T. Synon., 1890, pp. 268 ff. See Rev. of the N. T., pp. 194-234. Deiss., B. S., p. 214, calls attention to Grimm's comment on 2 Mace. 1:8 about tovs kwiovfflovs being added to tov% &PTOVS by "three codices Scrgii." Cf. W.-Sch., p. 13G f., n. 23, for full details. Cf. Bischoff, 'ETnoljffLos, p. 2G6, Neutest. Wiss., 1906. Debrunner (Clotta, IV. Bd., 3. Heft, 1912) argues for iirl rijv ovaav r\titpav, 'for the day in question.'
1
Cf. Lightfoot, Rev. of the
N.
T.,
pp. 234-242, for
full
discussion of
jrepfouaos.
160
Plato, Diog., Dion. Hal., in sense of persuading, but Artem.,
to
Cedrenus and othqf late writers in sense of 'genuine') is hardly be derived from TrtxtcrKo; or ttico and hence =' drinkable.' 'Genuine nard' is a much more probable meaning. For curious
TTobaTTos
UoTairos is from the and occurs in Dion. Hal., Philo, Jos., papyri. From avw come di/cbrepos (Polyb., LXX, (5) Those from adverbs. Arist.) and avoo-repLKos (Hippoc, Galen); e^do-repos (LXX, Strabo, etc.). See also eaw-repos (only N. T.); Karco-repos (Theoc, Hippoc, Athen.). Cf. Hagen, Bildung d. griech. Adverbien. (d) The Adverb. The adverb (peLooiJLevoos (from the participle (j)abbp.ivos, Plut., Mosch., Alex.) is a new word of this nature. Cf. dfjLoXoyoviJihcos in the older Greek. So tvxov, ovtoos and vTrepâWovTcos. The neuter accusative singular and plural of adjectives con-
details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 138, n. 24.
older
tinue to be used adverbially.

iElian.
'Akixtju
Badews occurs also in Theoc.

is
and
(Theoc, Polyb., Strabo)

(cf.
in the inscriptions also

'E/Jpatart (Sirach) is
as well as ev
d/c/iat (cf.
Ditt., Syll. 326, 12).
properly formed
"EWrjmarL) from Expats.
'lovdaUCos is in Jos.
See also WvuCbs (Apoll. Dysc, Diog. Laert.).
Elrtv (correct text

also)
.
Mk. 4
is
28)
is
a rare Ionic form for eUa (papyri

'OXtycos occurs
Ilpcbrcos
Kei^ws
used from Arist. on.

the
first
Anihol. and Aquila.

for
out of the N. T. only in (correct text Ac. 11 26) occurs here

:
time.
Tr?rcos
is
found in Polyb., Strabo, Plut.
'PwjuatVrt is
common
in the literary
in
Epictetus.
is
SojyuartKws
kolvj) (Plut., App., etc.) and comes from Aristotle and Plutarch.
HvKLKws
in the ecclesiastical writers.
^vcnKchs is
in Aristotle,
Philo, etc.
Mayser
(GV.,
pp. 455-459) has a good hst of derivafull
tive adverbs.
See ch. VII for
discussion of the formation
of the adverb.
rV.
Words Formed by Composition

is
in the Ptolemaic papyri

facility
(Composita). The Greek not equal to modern German in the
with which agglutinative compound words (5t7rXa Aristermed them) are formed, but it is a good second. The N. T. writers make use of many of the new compounds (some new kinds also), but not more than the literary kolpti, though more than the Atticists or Purists.^ The following lists will show how fond the N. T. is of double prepositional compounds hke a.vT-ava-ir\r]pbo3, dTTO-zcaT-aXXdcro-co, hiri.-avv-a'yoi, avv-avTL-\apâvoixaL, etc. So also compound prepositional adverbs like kvLoiTLov, KaTevchinov, KarkvavTi, etc. On the whole subject of compound words in the Ptolemaic papyri see Mayser, Gr., pp. 466-506. Compound words played an intotle
^
Schmid, Der Atticismus, Bd. IV,
p. 730.
WORD-FORMATION
creasing role in the
particular
setzung
(a)
Koivrj.
161
cit.,
Cf. Jannaris, op.
p. 310.
See in
F. Schubert,
im Griechischen, Kinds of Compound Words

In the
first
Zur mehrfachen prdfixalen ZusammenXenia Austriaca, 1893, pp. 191 ff.

in
Greek
,
proper composition
derivative composiis
(crvvdecns),
copulative composition {irapadeais)

class
tion (irapaavudeaLs).
the principal idea
ex-
pressed
by the second part

is
of
the word, while the
first
and
qualifying part
not inflected, but coalesces with the second,
using merely the stem with connective vowel. take oiKo-vbuos, 'manager of the house.' The
As an example
second kind of
composition, paratactic or copulative,
is
the mere union of two
independent words hke wapa-KXrjTos.

this
It is
not
common
in the
old Greek save in the case of prepositions with verbs,
and even
usage
late
many
ative
It is seen in is far more frequent in the later Greek. compound adverbs as in vTep-avco. The third or derivcomposition is a new word made on a compound, whether
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
copulative.
(6)
into
two
classes.
Modern
linguists
it
do not
like
the term "proper composition."
In principle
is
the same as
Inseparable Prefixes.
These make a
cross-line in the
study of compound words.
They
enter into the formation of
verbs, substantives, adjectives
and adverbs.
By
prefixes here
is
not meant the adverbs and prepositions so commonly used in composition, but the inseparable particles d- (av-) privative, dcoUective or intensive, dpxi-, 8va-, r\p.L-, vr]-. As examples of such
new formations
tives
in the N. T. may be taken the foUomng substanand adjectives (chiefly verbals) with d- privative: d-/3api7s (from Arist. down, papyri, in metaphysical sense) a-jvea-\6yT]Tos (LXX); a-yva(t)os (Thom. Mag.); a-yporjixa (0. T. Apoc, papyri); d7pt-eXaios (Arist., papyri); a-yvokoj (Apoc, papyri); d-STjXorrjs
;
(Polyb., Dion. Hal., Philo); d-Std-Kptros (from Hippocrates dowai);

a.-8La-\eLirTos
(Tim.
Locr., Attic inscriptions, i/B.c);
a.-8ia-(t>6opla
(not in ancient Greek);

'to
a-SwaTeo:
(for
;
(LXX,
ancient Greek
;
be weak');
(Diog.
eccl.
a-dkp.LTO'i
earlier
d-êptaros)
a-deayios
means (LXX,
Diod., Philo, Jos., Plut.)

a-deT-qais
d-êrô;
(LXX,
writers,
Polyb.); d-Katpeo; (Died.); papyri); papyri);

a-KaTa-yuaâTos
d-Kara-zcdXi'Trros
Lacrt.,
writers,
eccl.
(2
Mace,
(4
inscriptions,
(Polyb.,
XuTos
LXX,
Philo);
d-K-ard-Kptros
(earliest
example);
d-zcard-
Mace, Dion.
Hal.);
d-Kard-Tracrros
(found only here.
162
This
is

the reading of verbal of
NEW TESTAMENT
:
iravaTos,
14 rather than ct-KaTafound in Polyb., Diod., Jos., Plut., cf. W. H., App., p. 170; Moulton, Prol., p. 47); a-KaTa-araaia (Polyb., Dion. Hal., papyri); a-Kara-cxTaTos (Hippoc, Polyb.,
in 2 Pet. 2
Karairavoi,
AB
LXX);
Plut., 1
d-Kard-(Txeros
(LXX,
Diod.); a-Kvpbw (Diod., Dion. Hal.,
Esdr.); d-XdXrjTos (Anth. Pal.); a-nedvaros
(LXX, Dion.
Hal., Plut.); a-idera-deTos (Polyb.,

a-nera-vo-qTos
LXX,
Diod., Plut., inscriptions);
(Lucian, Philo, papyri); av-avrl-priTos (from Polyb.

(Polyb.,
;
down,
inscriptions); av-aTro-KoyrjTos
Dion.
eccl.,
Hal.,
Plut.);
av-eK-dL-rj-Y-qTos
(Clem. Rom., Athen.)

(Artem.,
di'-k-Xetxros (Diod., Plut.,
papyri);
epevvTjTos
av-ev-5eKTos
Diog.
Laert.,
Byz.); av-e^-
(LXX, Symm., Dio

av-ew-alaxwTos
:
Cass.); av-e^-LxviaaTos
av-ev-deros
(LXX,
eccl.
writers);
(Jos.);
(Moschion);
di^-tXecos
(reading in Jas. 2
av-r]\er]s)
;
13 of L, other
a-vo/Jiia
d-vo/xos
(LXX,
MSS. have di'-eXeos, old Greek from Thuc); av-viro-TaKTOS (Artem.,
Philo); d-Trapd-jSaros
eccl.,
(Jos.,
Plut., papyri, etc.); a-TeipaaTos (Jos.,

;
old
Greek
d-7retparos)
a-Tepi-Tn-qTos
(LXX,
Philo,
Plut.);
a-Trp6a-LTos (lit. KOLvij);
a-rrpoa-KOTos (Sir., Sext., inscriptions); a-paôs
(LXX,
Jos.); a-aiTLkos (Anthol., eccl.); a-aTaTkco{Anthol.); d-o-roxeoj
(Polyb.,
Plut.,
;
Lucian, papyri); a-arripLKTos (Anthol.);

a.-4>dapTo$ (Arist.,
a-4>e\6Tr]s
d-<?!)tX-
(eccl. writers)
Wisd., Plut., inscriptions);
ayados (papyri and 2 Tim. 3:3); a-cj)L\-apyvpos (Diod., Hippoc,

inscriptions, papyri) .^
With dpxt- (from apx^) we have dpx-d77Xos (eccl); apx-i-epariKos (inscr., Jos.); apx-i-^p^vs (LXX, inscr.); apxi.-Trot.ixi]v (Test, of 12 Patr., wooden tablet from Egypt, Deissmann, Exp. Times,
1906, p. 61); apxi-crvv-aywyo^ (inscr., eccl.); dpxi-reXdjvrjs (only in Lu. 19:2); apxi--rpl-K\ivos (Heliod., cf. avp.Troai-apxy]s in Sirach).
Cf. apxi.-4>v\aKlTr]s, P.Tb.
40
(b.C. 117), apxi--êa p.o-^v\a^

a-veyj/ibs
(LXX).
(for a-veir-
With d- connective or intensive are formed

Tios,
LXX,
.^
cf.
Lat. con-nepot-ius), a-revl^co (Polyb., Diod., Jos.,
Lucian)
With dva- we have

evrepLov (late
8v<r-â(TTaKTos
(LXX,
:
Philo,
Plut.);
8v(t-
form, correct text in Ac. 28
8,
older form bm-tvTepla)
Cf. Hamilton,
The Neg. Comp.
in Gk., 1899.
"The
true sphere of the
negative prefix
combination with nouns, adjectives and verbal stems Cf. also Margarete Heine, Subst. to form adjective compounds" (p. 17). mit a privativum. Wack. (Verm. Beitr. zur griech. Sprachk., 1897, p. 4) suggests that ^Stjs is from ael and -de, not from d- and Idetv. Ingenious! Cf. Wack. again, Das Dehnungsgesetz der griech. Composita, 1889. 2 Cf. on a- connective or intensive, Don., New Crat., p. 397. Also Doderis its
lein,
De
aX</)a
intense, 1830.
WORD-FORMATION
8v(x-eptJi^vVTos
163
(Arist.
(Diod.,
Philo,
Artcm.);
8v(T-v6r]Tos
Diog.
Laert.);
8v(r-(j)r]nla
rifj.L-
(LXX, Dion.
rjfxi-ojpov
Hal., Plut.).
fifiL-dap-qs
With
Died.,
WpiOv).
(cf.
Lat. semi) are found only

(so
(Dion. Hal.,
LXX,
Cf.
vrj--
Strabo),
V/JLLCVS.
W.
H., Strabo, Geop., ^{P
have
For
(c)
note
vrjinaôi
(Hippoc,
eccl.).
Agglutinative Compounds {Juxtaposition
or Parathesis).
This sort of composition includes the prepositions and the copThis last is much more comulative composition {dvaiidvd). mon in the kolvt] than in the older Greek. Cf. Jannaris, op. cit.,
p. 310,
1.
and Mayser,
Gr., p. 469.
Verbs.
The new compound verbs

or adjectives or
are
made
either
from
compound substantives
by combining adverbs
with a verb-stem or noun-stem or by adding a preposition to the older verb. This last method is very frequent in the later Greek due to "a love for what is vivid and expressive."^ This embellishment of the speech by compounds is not absent from the simplest speech, as Blass- shows in the case of Titus, where over thirty
compound words are found, omitting verbals and other ones. Moulton {CI. Quarterly, April, 1908, p. 140) shows from the papyri that the compound verb is no mark of the literary style, but is common in the vernacular also. The preposition fills
striking
common
out the picture as in

(Diod.,
avTi-fxeTpeco
(Lucian),
and so
avrL-Xafxâvo)
Dio
Cass.,
LXX). So
also observe the realistic
form of
:
(LXX, Tryphiod.) in Lu. 9 29; The modern Greek 6. Kara-Xt^dfco (eccl. writings) in Lu. 20 even combines two verbs to make a compound, as irai^w-yeXo). As examples of new compound verbs may be given ayadovpyeo:, ayadoepyeo), in 1 Tim. 6 18 (eccl.) ayado-Troikco (LXX, later writers)
the preposition in e^-aarpaTTco
:
dXX-777opeco (Philo,
Jos.,
;
Plut.,
grammatical writers); dm-faw

Plut
,
(in-
scriptions, later writers)

araTo-o)
1
ava-dew-pko: (Diod.,
df-erdfoj
Lucian)
dm-
(LXX,
papyri);
(LXX,
cum
papyri);
avTL-ha-TLdTi]iii
W.-M.,
p. 127.
Cf. Winer,
De
Verb,
Praep. compos, in N. T. usu,
1834-43.
^
Blass,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 70. Mostly adj., but ireid-apxtlv occurs in the list. ib., p. 65, even thinks that it is not the province of granunar to discuss
the numerous
lists
compounds with
prepositions.
It
belongs to the lexicon.
The
that I give are not complete for prepositional compounds because of lack of space. See Helbing (Gr. d. Sept., pp. 128-130) for good list of compound verbs in the LXX. Mayser (Gr., pp. 48G-506) gives list of compountl verbs
in the Ptol. pap.
The
Koi.vri
is
el
fond of compound verbs

^co56x'70^ti' (1
made
So
of
noun and
verb.
Cf.
iTKVOTp64>ri<Tev,
Tim. 5
10).
v\prj\opoi'eii'
(text of
W. H.
in 6: 17).
164
(Philo, eccl. writers); avTL-Tvap-kpxo-jJLai {Anthol., Sap., eccl. writers,
Byz.); avT-o(l)da\neo: (Sap., Polyb., eccl. writers); dTr-eXTrt^w

Diod., Jos., Epict.); dTro-KeâXtfco
(Polyb., papyri);
(LXX,
aW-
Polyb., Diod., inscriptions); airo-ypaepofxaL (papyri); airoSrjaavpi^c^

(Sir.,
(LXX,
Epict., etc.);
ePT0}
yovv-Tereoo (Polyb., Heliod., eccl. writers);
Sia-yvopl^co (Philo,
schol. in Bekk.); Sta-yoyyvô:
(LXX,
Heliod.,
Byz.); ha-yp7]yopeoi (Herod., Niceph.); h-avya^w

8La-4>T]iJ.i^w
(Polyb., Plut.);
Dion. Hal.); dL-epixrjvevo} (2 Mace, Polyb., (LXX, Polj^b., Plut.); 5oi;X-a7co7eco (Diod. Sic. and on); dp-qvo-iroLkw (LXX, Hermes); kK-dairavaoi (Polyb.); eK-biKkw (LXX, Apoll., Diod.); M-/3aTeuco (inscr.); kv-KaivLôi (LXX); kv(Aratus,
Philo);
5t-o5ei;co
Ka/ceco
(Polyb.,
gymm.
translation of
LXX,
Philo, Clem.
(Jos.,
Rom.);
Hipp.);
kv-xploo
(Tob., Strabo, AnthoL, Epict.);

(Sir.,
e^-aprtfco
e^-iaxvco
Strabo,
Plut.);
ein-aKr]v6oi
(Polyb.);
eTn-(l>avaKoi
(LXX, Acta Thom.);

Alex.
ev-apeareoo
ev
kiri-xop-qykoi
(Dion. Hal., Phal., Diog. Laert.,

writers);
lTepo-l;vy'ew
Aphr.); erepo-bLhaaKciKko:
(eccl.
(LXX);
and
cf.
(LXX,
in
Philo,
is
Diod.);
ev-doKeco
(probably simply from

86kos or evdoKos,
evdv-bpoiikoi
and
SoKeco,
as there
no such form as
Dion.
Kapa-Soaew
ev-Kaipeco
Polyb.,
Diod.,
Hal.);
(Philo);
dripLo-naxeco
(from Polybius on, papyri); ev-Tpoa-coweco (P. Tb., Chrys.); (Diod., Artem., Ign.); ^wo-yopeca (Theophr., Diod.,
;
Lucian, Plut.)
fcoo-Troieoj (Arist.,
i.e.
obsolete KaK-ovxos,
KaXo-TToteco
KaKov,
(Et>Tn.
Magn.,
LXX) mK-oi^xew (from LXX, Diod., Dio Cass., Plut.); exw, LXX, Philo); Kara-âpeoo (Polyb.,
Theophr.,
;
Diod., App., Lucian papyri); KaT-ayuvlôiJLaL (Polyb., Jos., Lucian,

Plut.,
iElian); Kar-avTaoo
(Polyb.,
Diod.,
eccl.
writers,
papyri);
KaTa-Kk-qpo-boTew
(LXX);
Diod., Jos., ÊL, etc.);
and 3 Macc, Hipp., Polyb., /car-e^-ouo-tdfoj (only N. T.); Kar-oTTpl^co

Kara-TTovkw (2
if
(Athen., Diog. Laert., Philo);

Col. 2
âTTf]s
the conjectural
longer
Kev-efx-âTevo)
in
be correct (as is has to be presupposed;

:
18
now no
Xa-rofxeco
probable),
Kev-ep.-
(LXX,
;
Diod., Dion. Hal.,
Strabo);
in 2
Xido-jSokkoo
:
(LXX,
Diod., Plut.); Xoyo-piaxeoo (only instance
Tim. 2
14)
ixaKpo-dvu'ew,
(LXX,
Plut.)
iied-tpp.r]vehcji
(Polyb.,
(Philo,
;
Diod.,
Jos.)
;
Sir., Plut.); fxera-ixopcjido}
(Diod., Philo);
;
ixeTpLo-iraQeo}
noaxo-Tvoikco
(LXX
;
and
eccl. writers)
p.v-wTra^w (Arist.)
oUoit
Seo-TToreco
(Lucian, Plut.)
bpLeipojiai is
a puzzle (Fritzsche derives
but other compounds with 6/xoO have instrumental-associative, not genitive case, as 6jut-Xeco, from ojutXos {bpLov, '[Xr]); Photius and Theophr. get it from ofiov rjpfxdadaL; but, as Nicander uses fxelpo/xaL Ifxelpopai, modern editors print 6/xeLpbjxevoi in 1 Th. 2 8 (6-, W. H., elsewhere only in Job and
6/xoO
el'pco,
:
from
and
Synom., Ps. 62)
bpdo-irobkw (only instance)
opdo-rofieco
(LXX,
eccl.
WORD-FORMATION
writers)
ii/A.D.);
;
165
Trapa-ôkevonaL
;
6xXo-7roieco
(only in
Ac.
17:5);
(inscr.
Trap-eia-epxofJLaL
;
(Polyb., Philo, Plut.)
Trept-Xd/xTraj
;
(Diod.,
Jos.,
Plut.)
7rX?7po-0opa}
(LXX,
eccl. writers)
Trpo-eXTrifco (Posid.,
Dexipp., Greg. N.); irpoa-eyyiôi

Tpo(T-K\r]p6oo (Philo, Plut.,
(LXX,
Polyb., Diod., Lucian);
Lucian); TrpoacoTo-XTjuTTeco (N. T. word);

;
0vp-avâp(jo
(LXX,
inscriptions)
cruv-aTroo-reXXoj
(LXX,
Jos.,
papyri, inPlut., etc.);
scriptions);
(XTparo-Xoyea)
(Diod.,
Dion.
Hal.,
avv-viro-Kplvop.ai (Polyb., Plut.)

TeKTO-yovecx)
TpoTro-<i)opkcii
and many other verbs with aw;

(Arist.)
;
(Anthol.)
TeKvo-rpo4)ew
eccl.
Terpa-apxkio
(Jos.)
(LXX
:
and
in
writers, so
W. H.
with
NBDHLP,
etc., in
Ac. 13
18);
Tpoo-(i>opk(j:
(LXX and
18)
;
eccl. writers, so
ACE
He-
and some cursives

rond., Herm.);
(t)L\o-TpcoTva)
Ac.
13
vTep-irXeovd^w (Ps.
Sal,
viro-XLijnravoo
(Themist., Dion. Hal., eccl. and Byz.);

4>pev-airaTaoi (eccl.
(Artem., Plut.);
(Arist.,
and Byz.
writers);
it
Xpovo-TpL^kb}
Plut.,
Heliod., Byz. writers).
Thus,
will
be noticed, verbs compounded with nouns are very

the
KOLvr}.
common
in
Often two prepositions are used in composition with the same meaning must be given to each. The use of double prepositional compounds grew rapidly in the kolvt); cf.
verb, where the proper
Schmid, Att. IV, pp. 708

papyri
the
(Gr., pp.
ff.
Mayser
gives a long hst in the Ptol.
497-504), some of which are old and some new.
Of 162 examples 96 are new. The N. T. is in perfect accord with KOLvrj here. So it is with avTL-Trap-'epxop.aL {Anthol., Wisdom, eccl. and Byz. writers) in Lu. 10 31; avr-ava-wX-qpooi in Col. 1 24 (Dem., Dio Cass., Apoll. Dysc); avTL-BLa-TidrjpL (Philo, Diod.);
: :
airo-KaT-aXKacrcrw
(not
in
old
Greek),
cTrt-Sta-rdo-ffo/xat
/car-e^-ouo-tdi'co
(only
in
N. N.
in
T.); ewL-avv-ayoj
(LXX,
yEsop, Polyb.);
(only in
T.); Kap-aa-'epxop.ai. (Polyb., Philo, Plut.); Tpo-ev-apxcfxaL (only
N.
T.)
aw-ava-plyvvjiL
(LXX,
(LXX);
Plut.)
avu-ava-iravopai
(LXX,
Dion. Hal., Plut.);
(jvv-avTL-\aixâvo}xo.L
(LXX,
Diod., Jos., inscrip-
tions, papyri); virep-eK-xvvoj

is
u7rp-ej'-TU7xdj'aj (eccl.).
in the papyri (P.
Tb.
I,
66) a triple prepositional
There compound,
irpo-avT-av-aLpeco.
2. Substantives. Here again the new compound substantive draws on verbs, substantives, adjectives, adverbs and pri^positions for part or all of the word. There are also double compound substantives from compound substantives, adjectives, adverbs and
prepositions like
Trpoawiro\rifji\l/La,
dXXorpteTriaKOTros, SiairapaTpL^r].
The
great majority have substantive or adjective for the second half

of the word.
'
Ayado-TToua (from adjective
These nouns are more often abstract than concrete, and verb-stem, eccl. writers); ayado-
166
TTotos

(adjective
aypL-kXaLos
and verb-stem, Sirach, Plut. and later papyri); iiypLOS and eXaios, Arist.); alixaT-eK-xvala (from substantive, preposition and verb x^'i'co, eccl. writers) aKpo-^vaHa
(from
;
(LXX)
cKOTTos
aXeKTopo-4>o:vLa (iEsop, Strabo, ecel. writers)

eiri-aKoiros,
aXXoTpL-eirieccl. writers.
(from dXXorptos and

finds a
Dion. Areop.,
Deissmann
TTjs,
Fayum
in
Papyri.
synon3rm for the word in aXXoTploov kindviiriSee Bible Studies, p. 224); afxcji-odop (LXX,
(Sir.,
Aristoph., Hyper., papyri); dm-5et^ts

(TTpo(j)r]
Polyb., Plut.);
dra-
the ethical sense

;
(LXX, Polybius
on, inscriptions in
;
Pergamum and Magnesia)

(one
translation
of
dm-xuats (Strabo, Philo, Plut.)

Orph.)
av9-
vTaros (Polyb., Dion. Hal., Lucian, Plut., inscriptions); avTi-\vTpov

Ps.
48
9,
clvtI-xplcttos
(probably
apaevoPlut.);
formed by John,
Kolrris
eccl.); apyvpo-Kowos (Plut.,
(Anthol., eccl.); diro-Kapa-SoKla
LXX, papyri); (verb -ceo in LXX, Jos.,

(LXX,
acTL-apxvs (inscriptions,
Polyc); yaô-4)v\aKLov
Jos., Strabo);
yXoiaao-Kofxov (earlier yXoâaoKOfxetov,
LXX,
Jos., Plut., Longin., in-
scriptions, papyri); 8eLaL-8aLiJLovia (Polyb., Diod., Jos., Plut.); deaixo(j)v\a^
(Jos.,
Lucian, Artem., dpx'-Seo-juo-ûXa^,

1
LXX);
h-epixri-via
1
(only in
AD
Cor. 12
against
10;
bi-tpix-qvevTq'i
probably correct
;
Cor.
14
28,
{<AKL
Ipix-qvtvT-qs
by BDFG)
ha-Tvapa-Tpiî] (not
:
found elsewhere) is the correct text for 1 Tim. 6 5, not irapadia-TpL^ri, which may be compared with Trapa-KaTa-dr]-Krj in 2 Tim. 1 12, but Trapa-drj-KT] (Herod., LXX, inscriptions, papyri) is the
:
true reading; ScoSe/cd-ûXov (Clem, of

KpL<ria
(Test, xii Pat., eccl., papyri);
8(jopo-(f)opia
Rome, N. T. Apoc); 5t/catois read by MSS.

;
BDFG
eêXco
against diaKovia in Ro. 15:31; kdeXo-dprjada (from verb

OprjaKia, eccl., cf. kdcXo-dovXeia)
and
etSwXo-Xarpeta
;
(W. H.
-la,
two substantives,
Strabo); eK-Teveia
eccl.)
and
ei5coXo-Adrpr;s (eccl.)
d\i-KplveLa
(LXX,
k-TrXTjpcoo-ts (2 Mace, Dion. Hal., Philo, Mace, Judith, inscriptions); ev-e8pov (late form of kvk8pa, LXX); el-ara-ara-o-ts (double compound, Polyb.); eTTL-avv-ayojyr} (double compound, 2 Mace, inscriptions, Artem.,
Theophr. Sext., Stob.);

(2
Ptol.); eTL-av-aracns
xop-rjyia
(eccl.)
;
(double compound,
LXX,
;
Philo, Sext.);
eTrt-
ev-8oKia
(LXX,
27
:
inscriptions)
evp-aKvXuv (a hybrid
from
'
evpos
and Lat.
aquilo, like auto-mobile; so

14,
W. H.
for Text.
Rec. vpo-K\v8o:v in Ac.

ri8v-ocrnos
which
is
Etjin.
Magn.
alone)
(Strabo, Theophr.);
KaXo-StSdo-zcaXos
'lepo-o-oXu/ietrrjs
(Jos.);
/caXXt-eXatos
(eccl.
:
(Arist.);
(only in Tit.
;
2:3);
KapSLo-yvoâTrjs
writers)
Kar-ayyeXevs (inscriptions)
(Sir.,
/card-êpa (onty in
Rev. 22
cf.
3)
KaTa-Kpifia
Dion. Hal., papyri); Kara-XeLfxpa

utto-X,
(N^'DEFGKLP
Deiss-
in
Ro. 9:27 for
LXX,
Gal.); Kar-ijyojp (papyri;
mann,
Light, p. 90;
Radermacher,
Gr., p. 15); /card-Xuâ
(LXX,
WORD-FORMATION
Polyb., Diod.); KaTa-ireTacrna
tions); Kepo-8o^la
(4
167
(LXX,
Jos., Aristeas, Philo, inscripkoct/xo-
Macc,
Polyb., Philo, Plut., Lucian);
Kparcop (Orph., eccl. writers, inscriptions); kojuo-toXls (Strabo,
Ag.
and
Theod., eccl.); Xoyo-fxaxla (only in 1

ixtao-vvK-Tiov
Tim. 6:4);
Koivi)
fiaTaio-'Xoyla
titab-
(Plut., Porph.);
(Arist.,
LXX,
(eccl.);
writers);
TOLXov
(Erat.);
nea-ovpavqiJLa
(Manetho, Plut.);
-boTiqs
utT-oLKtala
ncopo-'Koyla
(LXX,
(Arist.,
Anthol);
Plut.);
ixiad-aTvo-boola
and
(eccl);
vono-didaaKaXos
(Alexis,
vvxQ-w^pov (Alex.,
Ign.,
etc.);
App.,
Geop.);
(possibly
OLKoSeaTOT'ns
Arist.,
Jos.,
Plut.,
oko-doixi)
Theophr., certainly
(eccl.
LXX,
Diod., Philo, Jos., Plut., con(Polyb.,
demned by Phrynichus);
Anacr); oKiyo-TnaTla
Laert., Plut.);
opo-deala
(eccl.)
;
olvo-iroT-qs
LXX,
in
Anthol.,
and Byz.);
6\o-KKr]pla
(LXX, Diog.
Attic);
T.);
in
opK-wixoaia
(LXX,
Jos.,
rd
6pK-coiJ.6aia
is
dcpdaXfxo-dovUa
(only
instance
N.
TToKiv-yeveaia (Philo, Longin.,

eccl.,
Lucian, Plut.); iravTo-KpaTOip

(Polyb.,
(LXX,
Anthol); Tapa-K\r]Tos (Aq. Theod., Diog. Laert., Dio Cass.,

Diod.);
TaTpL-dpxv^
Epict.,
Tepi-deaLs (Arr., Gal.,
trepL-oxv
;
papyri, inscriptions); irapa-x^Liiaala
(LXX);
Curt.);
Scxt.);
ivepi-Kad-apixa
(LXX,
(Theophr., Diod., Plut.,

(Tob., Ign.)
;
etc.);
Trept-ro/xi?
(LXX,
;
Jos., papyri)
wepl-rj/'qiâ
Tpav-waOla (Philo, Ign.)

eccl.)
;
Tpo-
avXiOP (Pollux);
irpoa-Kop-na
Trpo(r-KVPT]Tr]s
01^01'
Trpo-aa^ârov
Plut.);
(LXX,
ir po<T-aLT7]s
(lit. KOLvr]);
(LXX,
irpoa-KapTep-qaLS (inscriptions,
eccl.,
81 A.D.);
(inscriptions,
irpoa-ipayLOV
Byz.);
Tcpoa-4>ayi.ov (inscriptions,
'Attikws,
'EWrjVLKoJs,
Moeris);
Trpo(TO}iro-\r]ixirTr]s
(Chrys.);
Trpoo-coTro-Xr^M'/'ta (eccl.);
-n
irpwT0-Kade8pLa (eccl.; xpcoro-KXiaia
(eccl. writers);
pcoro-TOKLa
(LXX,
(
Philo, Byz.); pa^8-ovxos (pd/35os,

(literary
Koivq,
exw, literary
kolvt});
pabi-ovpynp-a
eccl.);
aapb-bw^
(Jos., Plut., Ptol.); (jLTo-pLiTpLov

aKT]vo-Tr]yia (Arist.,
Polyb., Diod., Jos., inscriptions);
LXX,
28
:
Philo, inscriptions); cK-qvo-iroLbs (Êlian,

(XTpaTo-ired-apxos,
eccl.);
aKkripo-Kapdia
(LXX);
;
-apxv^ (reading of
text rejects both
Syrian class in Ac.
16),
though
critical
;
(Dion. Hal., Jos., Lucian)
o-uKo-yuopea
(Geop.)
various
new words
(Philo,
with
avv, like (Tvv-aLxlJia.\coTOS, avv-KaTa-dea-is, <jvv-K\it]povbp.os

cfvu-kolvcovos,
inscriptions);
Plut.);
avv-o8ia
(LXX,
(LXX),
Strabo, Jos.,
etc.;
Epict.,
avv-Trpea-^vTtpos,
(XVV-Tpo(t>os
TaTTiLVO-^poavvT]
(Jos., Epict.); TeKvo-yovia (Arist.); rtrpa-dpx'js (Strabo, Jos.); vlo-
Beaia (Diod., Diog. Laert., inscriptions); uTrep-ketm (Byz.

VTTO-y panixb^
and eccl.);
i)7ro-Xel7rw,
(2
Macc,
Philo,
eccl.);
;
VTb-Xeifxpa (from
vtvo-X^plop
LXX, Arist.,
viro-TrbbiOP
Thcoph., Plut., Galen)

viro-Tvirooais
;
(LXX, Demioph.)
ptp-aTra.Tj]s
(LXX, Lucian,
Att.); viro-aToXi) (Jos., Plut.); viro-Tayi]

(Sext.
(Dion. Hal.);
Emp., Diog. Laert.);
(papyri, eccl. writers)
xaXKo-Xt/3ajôi^
(LXX)
xî-po-ypo.(l>ov
(Polyb.,
168
Dion.

Hal.,
Tob.,
Plut.,
Artem., papyri);
xp-o</>tXr7js
(from
Jos.);
xpeos or
xpe<^s
and
dcpeLKerrjs,
LXX,
Êsop, Plut., Dion. Hal.);
XprjcrTo-Xoyia (Eust., eccl. writers); xp^'o'o-Xtôs (Diod.,

Xpvo-o-irpaaos
LXX,
(only in Rev. 21:20);

(ancient
\pev8-a8eX(j>6s,
\pev8-aT6crTo\os,
xpevdo-didaaKaXos, \pev86-xpi-o-Tos are all
N. T. words;
in
êv8o-irpo4>r]Ty]s
LXX,
Philo,
both go back to examples of such compounds.

(B.C. 117).
3. Adjectives.
compounds of \pev8r]s and are Greek 4êv8bixavTLs) is found Jos.; \}/ev86-ijLapTvs (LXX) and \l/ev8o-txapTvpla Plato and Aristotle. The papyri show many
Cf.
Kwixo-ypaixîaTevs,
P.Tb. 40
tives
It will not be necessary to repeat the adjecformed with inseparable prefixes d-, etc. The method of
many grammars
element in the
is
in dividing the
compounds according
is
to the
It
first
or second part has not been followed here.
believed that the plan adopted
a simpler and more rational
These adjectives are compounded of an adjective and substantive like aKpo-ycjouLalos or vice versa avOpcorr-apeaKos; a substantive and a verbal like x^tpo-TrotTjros; a preposition and a verb like (xv/ji-iradr]s, with two prepositions and verbal like Tap-eia-aKTos; an adverb and a preposition and a verbal like ev-Trp6a-8eKTos, etc. The adjective compounds used in the N. T. characteristic of the kolvt] Ayado-iroLos (Sirach, Plut.); aypt-tXaLos are somewhat numerous.
exposition of the facts.
two adjectives
like 6\Ly6->pvxos,
'
(Anthol.)
dKpo-ycjvLOLos
(eccl.)
aXXo-yevqs
(LXX and Temple

(from
dj/d,
inscriptions
exo/uat
meant
KaKos,
for gentiles to read); av-e^l-KaKos
and
(2
Lucian, Justin M.,
Poll., papyri); avdpooTr-dpeaKos
(LXX,
d7co7os
(eccl.
eccl.); dwo-SeKros (Scxt.

Esdi'.)
; ;
Emp.,
Plut., inscriptions); diro-aw;
dpn-yepi'riTos
(Lucian, Long.)
;
avTo-Kard-KpLTos
el8os,
writers)
âpv-Tiixos
;
(Strabo)
ypa-6i8ris
(from 7paDs,
:
Strabo, Galen)
8e^Lo-\di3os
(true reading in Ac. 23
23, late eccl.
writers); Seurepo-Trpcoros
(cf. 8evTep-e(Txo.Tos,
only
MSS.
in Lu. 6: 1);
'h-dap-ôs
8L-dd\aaaos (Strabo,
Dio Chrys.,
(Polyb.,
eccl.); 8i-\pvxos
(eccl.);
(Polyb.,
eccl.);
eK-Tevrjs
Philo);
eK-rpofios
(only in
KD
but
Heb. 12:21, other MSS.,

Plut.)
<jos
;
ev-rpo/xos,
;
LXX,
Plut.); e/c-0o(3os (Arist.,

(eccl.)
;
eTTL-dapcLTLOS
(Dion. Hal.)
e-m-Tr6dr]TOS
hepo-yXwainscr.,
(LXX,
Strabo, Philo);
;
ev-dpecrros
(Wisd., eccl.,
Xen. has
eSpos,
euapeurcos)
ev-KOwos (Polyb.,
LXX^)
ev-XoyriTOS
(LXX,
Philo); ev-fxeT6.-8oTos (Anton.); ev-Tdp-e8pos (for Text. Rec. ev-irp6a-
Hesych.)
ev-wepi-aTaTos (only in
Heb. 12
1)
ev-Tr p6(7-8eKTos
(Plut., eccl.); vpv-xo}pos (Arist.,
LXX,
Diod., Jos.); ev-awXayxvos

(eccl.);
(Hippoc,
(Plut.,
LXX,
eccl.
writers);
deo-8l8aKTos
deo-irvevaros
Phoc,
eccl. writers,
inscriptions);
to--d77eXos (cf. lao-deos,
WORD-FORMATION
Philo,
eccl.);
etc.)
;
169
loo-TLfxos
(cf.
ia6-\l/vxos,
Philo, Jos., Plut., Lucian,
^lia,
Kadrjueptvos
(from
Kad' r]fxepau,
Judith, Theophr., Athen.,

17
:
Plut., Alciph., Jos.); Kar-eiScoXos (only in Ac.
16); Kev6-8oôs
(Polyb.,
Diod., Philo, Anton., eccl. writers); Xa-êwros
XeLT-ovpyLKos
(LXX,
eccl.
writers);
;
fxaKpo-xpovLos
Agath.);
/xarato-XoYos
veb-cjiVTos
(Telest.)
fxoyL-XaXos
(LXX); (LXX, Hipp., (LXX, schol. to

oKra-rnjiepos
Lucian);
(LXX,
(Plut.,
;
papyri,
Aristophanes?);
writers);
(eccl. writers); oXLyo-Tnaros
(only in N. T.); okLyo-xl/vxos
(LXX,
Artem.);
(Arist.,
oXo-reXiys
KOLvi],
Hexapla,
eccl.
irav-ovpyos
Trap-etcr-aKros
LXX)
Trapa-XuTtKos
(eccl.
writers)
(Strabo);
Tvap-eirl-b-qixos
(Polyb.,
Athen.,
LXX);
Tarpo-Tapa-SoTos
(Diod., Plut.,
(Diod., Dion. Hal.,
eccl. writers); irevTe-KaL-8eKaTos
etc.); iroXXa-TXaaio^v (Polyb.,
Plut., etc.); TroXv-airXayxiôs
(LXX,
TrorapLo-
Theod. Stud.);
(f)6pr}Tos
woXv-TLiJios
(Plut.,
:
Herodian,
Anthol);
7rpo-/3art/c6s
(only in Rev.
12
15 and Hesych.);
irpba-Kaipos (4
(from
Cass.,
TTpb-ârov,
LXX,
Jo. 5:2);
Macc,
Jos.,
Dio
Dion. Hal., Strabo, Plut., Herodian);

eccl.); TrpwTb-TOKos
/SpcoTOS
Kpo-(f)r]TLKbs
(Philo, Lucian,
o-tjto-
(LXX,
;
Philo, Anthol., inscriptions, eccl.);

aKkripo-rpaxvôs
;
(LXX,
;
Sibyll. Or.)
(LXX)
1
aKooXrjKb-^pooros
(Theophr.)
\j/vxos (eccl.
avfji-fiopcfyos
(Lucian, Nicand.)
avix-irad-qs
(LXX)
13)
;
abv-
writers)
;
ow-eK-XeKrbs (onlj^ in
;
Pet. 5
avv-aufxos
(eccl. writers)
iriLvbs,
4>p'nv,
av-ararLKbs (Diog. Laert.)
jaiTLvb-4)poiv
(from ra-
LXX,
Plut.); Tpi-areyos (Dion. Hal., Jos.,
Symm.);
(Arist.,
4>6Lv-oTO)pLvbs
(Arist.,
Polyb.,
Strabo,
</)tX-ai;Tos
Plut.);
4>L\-ayadbs
Polyb., Wisd., Plut., Philo);

Sext.); 4)l\-7]8ovos (Polyb.,
(Arist., Philo, Plut., Jos.,

etc.);
Plut.,
Lucian,
(eccl.
0tX6-0eos
(Arist.,
Philo,
Lucian,
Plut.,
etc.); etc.);
(fypev-airaTrjs
writers);
xî-P-o-y^yos
(Artem.,
x^'^po-TroirjTos
:
(LXX,
Polyb., Dion.
Hal.,
papyri); xpv<ô-daKTv\Los (Jas. 2

It
will
2,
elsewhere only in Hesych.).
be apparent from this

first
list
how many words used

kolvt].
in
the N. T. appear
totle
in Aristotle or the literary
Aris-
and broke away from the narrow vocabMany of these late words are found But we in the papyri and inscriptions also, as is pointed out. must remember that we have not learned all that the papyri and inscriptions have to teach us. Cf. also the numeral adjective
was no
Atticist
ulary of his contemporaries.
SeKa-Tcaaapes
(LXX,
The
list
Polyb., papyri).^
Sec further chapter VII,
Declensions.
4. Adverbs.
late
Greek uses many new adverbs and new
kinds of adverbs (especially compounds and prepositional adverbs).
For
of the
1
new
prepositional adverbs see chapter
on
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 70.
170

These are usually formed either from adjectives
prepositions.
by composition of preposition and adverb as in virep-avoo, or preposition and adjective as in eK-wePLcr-aov, or two or more prepositions (prepositional adverbs as in aT-kv-avTi), or a preposition and a noun-root as in airo-Toiiws, or a substantive and a verl3 as in vow-exois, or an adjective and a substantive as in Trav-Tr\r]6ei, or an adjective and an adverb as in irav-roTe, or a preposition and a pronoun as in k^-avrrjs. In a word, the compound adverb is made from compound adjectives, substantives, verbs with all sorts of combinations. The kolvt} shows a distinct turn for new adverbial combinations and the N. T. illustrates
like kv-6}inov (neuter of h-doTLoi) or
Paul, especially, doubles his adverbs as in vrepThese adverbs are generally formed by parathetic composition and are used as prepositions in the later Greek, incorrectly so according to Blass.^ But it must be remembered that the KOLVT] developed according to its own genius and that even the Atticists could not check it. In Luke Trav-wk-qdd (Lu. 23 18) and irav-oLKei (Ac. 16 34) are not derived from adjectives or previous adverbs, but from substantives (perhaps assoc. instr.). As to the use of adverbs as prepositions, all prepositions were originally adverbs (cf. h-avTlov). In the later language we simply can see the process of development in a better state of preservation. No magical change has come over an adverb used with a case. It is mereljâ helper of the case-idea and is part of the analj'tic linguistic development. The chief compound adverbs used in the N. T. characteristic of the KOLVT] are here given. As the list of adverbs is much smaller than those of verbs, substantives and adjectives, compounds
it
very clearly.
eK-wepLaaov.
with d- privative are included here.

Strabo,
in
1
'A-Sta-XetTrrcos (Polyb.,
Diod.,
Mace,
:
papyri)
1
ava-fxeaov
:
and
ava-fiepos is
is
the Text. Rec.
Rev. 7
17
and
Cor. 14
etc.;
27,
but this
aiv-kvavTL
not the modern edit-
ing, rather ava p-kaov,
av-avTL-pT]To)s
(Polyb., etc.); avTL-irkpa

(Polyb.,
(Xen. avTL-wepav, Polyb.,
etc.);
LXX,
;
papyri
in
and
8
:
inscriptions)
d-Trept-o-.Trdo-rws
(Polyb.,
Plut.)
airo-ToiJLOJs
(Polyb.,
Diod.,
Wisd., Longin.);
;
87]\-avyw (so
KCLA
Mk.
25 for
TT]\-avyC}s)
bLa-iravrbs is
the
way Griesbach and

on, inscriptions);
Tisch.
eK-revoos
print 5td
(Polyb.,
wavros;
e/c-7raXai
(Philo
and
(Theoc,
LXX, inscriptions); ev-avTL (LXX, inscriptions); LXX, papyri); e^-a-n-Lva (LXX, Jamb., Byz.);
etc.); k^-aira^
of
h-ooiTLov
h^-avTTjs
(Theogn., Arat., Polyb., Jos.,

1
(Lucian, Dio Cass.,

485
ff.
Gr.
N. T. Gk.,
p.
65.
Cf.
Mayser's Gr., pp.
Jannaris,
1490.
WORD-FORMATION
etc.);
Kae-e^7]s
171
(iElian,
;
Plut.); KaT-h-avTL
(LXX, Hermas);
;
Kar-
ev-wTTLov
Trav-oLKei
(LXX)
vovv-exôs (Arist.,
Polyb.)
irap-Tr\r]dl
(Dio Cass.)
(rejected
by the
Atticists for iravoLKia
[LXX], Plato Eryx.,

7rpocr-<j!)drcos
Philo,
Jos.); Tvav-TOTe
(Sap., Menancl., Dion. Hal., condemned by

;
the Atticists for eKaaTOTe)

(Byz.
irap-eKTOS
(LXX);
(LXX,
Polyb., Alciph.); virep-avoo (Arist.,

virep-eKeiva
LXX,
Polyb., Jos., Plut., etc.);
and
eccl.);
vTep-eK-irepL(xaov
Compl.); vTrep-eK-7repL(T(Tus (T,
W. H. marg.
(Dan. 2:22, Aid., Th. 5:13, Clem.

:
Rom.); virep-Xiav (Eust.); virep-wepLaaais (only Mk. 7 37). There are two ways of writing some of these compound adverbs, either The editors differ as as single words or as two or more words.
to 5td TavTOS,
(/)'
dTra^, e/c-TrdXat,
Kad'
r]ixkpav, Kad'
it.
6\ov, vwep ketra,
These compound etc. The For writers. Byzantine in the numerous more still were adverbs "Language see prepositions with compounded verbs of further list The kolvt] was fond of the N. T." by Thayer, in Hastings' D. B. the term sesquipedeserve which of some words, compound of
editors do as they wish about
^
dalian, like KaraSwacTTevo}, (rvvavTikan^kvonai, etc.
get that after
are Greek, p. 62) claims that only about 20 per cent, of the words in the N. T. are post-Aristotelian. Many of this 20 per cent, reach
We must not formodern words from Aristotle onwards only a small portion of the whole. Kennedy {Sources of N. T.
all
these
back into the past, though we have no record as yet to observe. of the words in the N. T. are the old words of the ancients, some of which have a distinct classic flavour, literary
The bulk
and even
These
poetic, like ala6r]Tr]pLou, TroXuroktXos.
See
list
in Thayer's
article in Hastings'
lists
D. B., Ill, p. 37. seem long, but will repay study.
They
are reason-
ably complete save in the case of verbs compounded with preposiAs a rule only words tions and substantives so compounded. used by Aristotle and later writers are given, while Demosthenes
is
not usually considered, since he was more purely Attic. Names Abbreviated or Hypocoristic. The chapter on Orthography will discuss the peculiarities of N. T. proper
V. Personal
names in general. Here we are concerned only with the short names formed either from longer names that are preserved or from names not preserved. This custom of giving short petnames is not a peculiarity of Greek alone. It belonged, moreover, to the early stages of the language and survives still.- It was used not merely with Greek names, ])ut also with foreign names brought into the Greek. It is proof of the vernacular kolvt] in the N. T.
1
W.-M.,
p. 127.
Junn., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 293.
172
Cf.

English
are
NEW TESTAMENT
"Tom" and "Will." Many of these abbreviated compound also, as Zrjvds for Z7]v6-8upos (Tit. 3 13). Of the various forms used in these abbreviated names onlythree occur in the N. T., -as, -^s, -cos. The great majority
names
:
belong to -as or
-as.^
'A/xTrXtas
(or -iSs)
is
the reading of the

'
Western and Syrian

Ampliatus); 'AvSpeas
'AvTlwas
AfxirXiaTos (Latin according to Blass,^ "a genuine old Greek form," while Schmieden thinks it can come from 'AvdpofjLeSrjs;
is,
classes in
Ro. 16:8 for
is
a contraction of 'AvTlTarpos (Rev. 2

iii/A.D.
13)
(found in
inscription
at
Pergamum^);
is
'AttoXXcos
may
be^
:
a con-
traction for 'AtoWloplos,
the reading of
in Ac. 18
24,
though
180 read 'AvreXXT^s here, while 'AireXXrjs is read by all MSS. Ro. 16 10 (cf. Doric 'AreXXas in inscriptions, PAS, ii, 397); 'Apre/iSs (Tit. 3 12) is an abbreviation of 'ApTefj.l8copos; Ar?/ias (Col. 4 14; Phil. 24; 2 Tim. 4 10) is probably an abbreviation of ArjperpLos, though Ar]peas and Arjpapxos are both possible, not to mention ArjfxapaTos, ArjpoBoKos; 'E7ra0pas (Col. 1:7; 4:12;
15,
in
Phil. 23)
may (Ramsay
so
takes
it,
iii,
:
Expositor, Aug., 1906, p.
may not be a conbut it does not follow that, if true, the same man is indicated in Ph. and Col.; 'Eppas (Ro. 16 14) is from the old Doric form contracted from 'Ep)u65wpos; 'EppTjs (Ro. 16 14) may be merely the name of the god given to a man, though Blass doubts it^; Z-quds (Tit. 3 13) is from Zr]p68upos; Qev8ds (Ac. 5 36) is possibly a contraction of GeoScopos; 'lowias (sometimes taken as feminine 'lovvia, Ro. 16: 7) may be 'lowtds as contraction of 'lowiavos; KXeowas (Lu. 24 18) is apparently a contraction of KXeoTrarpos; AoukSs (Col. 4 14; Phil. 24; 2 Tim. 4 11) is a contraction of AovKavos and of Aovklos'^;
153.
Cf. genitive
'ETra({>pa8os,
PAS,
:
375) or
traction of 'ETa(f>p68LTos (Ph. 2
25; 4
18),
Ni;/i0as (Col.
15)
is
probably derived from
Nu/x065copos; 'OXu/xTras
1 See Fick-Bechtel, Die griech. Personennamen, 1894; Pape, Worterbuch dergriech. Eigennamen, 1842, ed. Benseler, 1870; Keil, Beitr. zur Onomatologie; W. Schulze, Graeca Lat., 1901; Hoole, the Class. Elem. in the N. T., 1888; Kretsch., Gesch. der griech. Spr., Die kleinasiat. Personennamen, pp. 311-370.
2
3 5
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 71. W.-Sch., p. 143.

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 143
S.,
f.,
Deiss., B. S., p. 187.
for objections to this derivation.

'AiroXXcbwos occurs os Kal crvpLarl
In a Fajolm
'Iwcdeas.
pap. (Deiss., B.
p.
149)
Cf.
Drug., Griech. Gr., 1900, p. 175.
it
from
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 71. 'Ep/xoKpdrrjs, as also
Cf. also Fick-Bechtel, p. 304.

'EpjuSs.
Fick
(xxxviii) takes
7 Ramsay (Exp., Dec, 1912, pp. 504 ff.) quotes inscription of Antioch where Aowas and Aovkios are used for the same person.
Pisid.
WORD-FORMATION
(Ro. 16
:
173
'0\vnTn68o)pos,
5)
is
15) is apparently contracted

is
from
:
though
probably a con0\vfnnav6s Uarpoâs Uapixha:v; suggests Blass^ though UapfJLivi8r}S, of traction etc.) is (Ac. 15:22, 2tXas narpo/Stos; from derived is 16 14) (Ro. same man as StXouaws (MSS. often StX/Sai'os) as Paul always
possible; llapfxevas (Ac. 6
:
the
calls
^l
1 Pet. 5 12); Sreâvas be either a modification of Sre</)aScjTrarpos (Ac. 20:4) is read vos or a contraction of Sreâj/rjôpos; the Sah. Cop. Arm. Sojo-tTraTpos by a dozen of the cursives and but versions, while ZcoaiTarpos is the correct text in Ro. 16:21,
him
1
(1
Th.
1
:
1, etc.
So Peter in
Cor.
16; 16
15, 17)
may
it is
not certain that they represent the same man, for SajTrarpos Corinth, though it is posis from Beroea and Scoo-irarpos from 'ApxeXaos, NiKoXaos appear in the N. T. in the uncontracted sible. forms, though in the Doric the abbreviated forms in -as were used. On the subject of the N. T. proper names one can consult also
Thieme, Die Inschriften von Magnesia am Mdander und das N. T., in the Mag1906, p. 39 f. He finds twenty of the N. T. names
nesia inscriptions, such as
'Aircpia,
'
kpnixasi' kpTep.'ihwpoi) etc.

,
Kupta
Journal of Bibl. Lit., 1908, is a common proper name (cf. Hatch, see Mayser, Gr. der griech. illustrations For the papyri p. 145). Papyri {Laid- und Wortlehre, 1906), p. 253 f. Cf. also Traube,
Nomina Sacra
as
(1907),
who s hows
that in both
is
and
p.
J<
as well
the abbreviation IHC XPC

Cf. Nestle,
found as well as the more

189.
usual TC XC.
Exp. Times, Jan., 1908,

1908, p.
Moul-
ton {CI. Quarterly, April,
140) finds 'AKovalUos in the
body
papyrus and 'Akovtl, the abbreviated adalso Burkitt, Syriac Forms of N. T. Proper See dress, on the back. Die griech. Sklavennajnen (1907) Lambertz, and Names (1912), This subject concerns not merely Words. of VI. The History N. T. but all words there used. the in appearing the new words on it. It is not enough remarks few for a place best This is the
of a letter in a
to
know
its
a given
writ'er.
know
the etymology, the proper formation and the usage in Before one has really learned a word, he must history up to the present time, certainly up to the period
which he
The resultant meaning of a word in any is studying. given instance will be d(^tormined by the etymology, the history and the immediate context.^ The etymology and the history belong to the lexicon, but the insistence on these principles is within
114Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 71. Cf. Meistcrh., Gr. dcr att. Inschr. (pp. formation of proper names. Goodcll, The Gk. in Eng., 2 Cf. Heine, Synon. dcs neutest. Griech., p. 29. of Gk. on Eng. 1886, gives a popular exhibition of the inlhience
118), for
174
NEW TESTAMENT
this point only-
the purview of grammar.

calls for
The N. T. Greek on
the same treatment granted
all literature in all
languages
and ages. Take (TKavSaXov, for instance. It is a shorter form of the old Greek word aKavdaXrjdpov, trap-stick.' The root aKav8 is seen in the
'
Sanskrit skdnddmi, 'to dart/ 'to leap.'

de-scendo.
{-dpov) for
The Latin has

The form
it
in scando,
The termination
instrument and
-ak-qdpov is possibly the suffix rpov

(TKavdaXrj
aKav8-a\a{ri).
occurs
or
in Alciphro, of
which
(7Kav8-aXo-v is
simply the neuter variation.

as a translation for
:
XkclvS-oXo-v occurs first in the

iiiu:p)a,
LXX
TiJpiâ
'a noose,' 'a snare,' as in Ps. 69 (68)
23.
It
was the
:
trap-
stick, the trap, the
person
impediment; then a stumbling-block or any So 13, Peter became a stumbling-block to Jesus, arnvhakov el efxod (Mt. 16 23). Christ crucified became a aKavdoKov to the Jews (1 Cor.
who was an
occasion of stumbling, as in Josh. 23
1:23).
Take again
eK-KXrjaia
(from
e/c-zcXjjros,
k/caXeco).
The
root
KaX appears in the Latin cal-endae, con-cil-ium, nomen-dd-tor; in
Ho call.' Originally kK-KXrjala was a from their homes, but that usage soon calling-out of the people assembly of Athens constitutional became the passed away. It minds all remembrance of its etyfrom our must banish and "we the of is used as equivalent LXX the word In the mology."^ In the N. T. iinp,, the assembly of the Israelites as a whole. the word takes a further advance. It still appears in the sense of 'assembly' at times, as in 1 Cor. 11 18, but usually, as Thayer shows (Lexicon), the idea of the word is that of body or company of believers whether assembled or not, the body of Christ. This is true at times where the idea of assembly is impossible, as in Ac. 8:3. The word in this sense of body of Christians is used
the Old High
German
hal-on,
either in the local (Ac. 8:3) or the general sense (Mt. 16
18).
In the general sense the word does not differ greatly from one aspect of the word /SacnXeta. These examples must suffice. VII. The Kinship of Greek Words. The study of the family tree of a word is very suggestive. AeiK-vv-ixi is a good illustration in point. It has the root 8lk which appears in the Sanskrit dig-dmi, 'to show,' Latin dic-o, Gothic teiho, German zeigen, etc. On the root 8lk a number of Greek words are built, as SU-r},
'the
way
pointed out,' 'right' or 'justice';

SeT^-is,
dUrjv, 'after
the way'
5t/c-atos,
or 'like';
'a
1
'a showing'; Sety-pa, 'something
shown';
man who
seeks to go the right way,' 'righteous'; 5iK-at6w, 'to

See also Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk.
Hicks, CI. Rev., 1887, p. 43.

T., pp. 57-60.
,
N.
WORD-FORMATION
make
175
declaror declare one to be righteous'; 5tK-atw-(ns, 'the act of right'; be to declared ing one righteous'; diK-a'^-ixa, 'the thing Su-aiojs, righteousness '; 8tK-aLo-avpr], 'the quality of being right,' decides 'righteously' or 'justly'; 5tK-atco-Ti7s or dLK-aa-T-qs, 'one who righteously.' judging for place righteously'; SiK-aff-TVPLov, 'the
'
Each
words occurs in the N. T. save three, S'lktjv, bu-aioiWith these twelve words the difference in meanTi]z, dLKaa-Trjpiou. (like k/cXTjaia) as ing is not so much due to historical development
of these
true that the to the idea of the various suffixes. It is, of course, gift of God the as righteousness N. T. has a special doctrine of all these that is point The words. colours most of these
which
word. Anvarious points of view must be observed with each (Mt. Xv-rpov is up followed be not other illustration that will agent, action, of ideas The :24). 3 20 :28), dTTo-Xu-rpco-ots (Ro. instrument, quality, plan, person, etc., as shown by the
result,
words from each other. Green in his Handbook to Grammar of N. T. Greek^ illustrates only the examples this point well with the root kpl {kplv), giving first, the interesting: found be will They that occur in the N. T.
suffixes, differentiate
verb,
Kplv-o),
ava-Kplv-w,
avT-aTro-Kplv-ofxaL,
aro-Kplv-Ofxai,,
dLa-Kpiv-u),
viro-
ky-Kplv-o},
Kplv-cc;
kTL-Kplv-c^,
KaTa-Kpiv-oi,
avy-Kplv-u,
Kpl-cns,
<Tvv-VTro-Kpiv-op.aL,
second, the substantive,
Kpl-fxa,
kpl-ttiplov,
kp^-t^s,
elXL-Kplv-aa, Kara-KpL-fxa, &pa-KpL-(TLS, airo-Kpi-ixa, dvro-Kpi-ats, Std-zcpt-cns,
Kara-KpL-cns,
Tpo-Kpi-fia,
viro-KpL-aLS,
VTro-KpL-Trjs;
third,
adjectives,
av-viro-KpL-TOS, avTO-Kara-KpL-Tos, KpL-TLKOS, a-dia-KpL-TOS, a-Kara-KpL-TOS,

elXi-KpL-v-qs.
The development
N. T. student.
VIII. Contrasts in
of this fine of study will
amply repay the
Greek Words or Synonyms.
The Greek
is
choice between the rich in synonyms. In English one often has a as "to ask" equivalent, Norman-French its or word Anglo-Saxon in words. distinctions careful 2 made Greeks The or "to inquire." words as of meaning exact the on Sophists the tripped
Socrates
often as anywhere.
We are fortunate in N. T. study in the postreatises on this subject. Trench, Synoexcellent two session of But nyms of the N. T., 1890, is valuable, though not exhaustive. investihe gives enough to teach one how to use this method of comHeine, Synon. des neutest. Griech., 1898, is more gation. mentioned prehensive and equally able. The matter can only be
1
149,
new
ed., 1904.
Cf. Skeat, Prin. of
Eng. Etym., Ist
Bcr.
(Native Words, 1892); 2d
ser.
(Foreign Words, 1891).
176
A GRAMMAE OF THE GREEK

With
NEW TESTAMENT
one should com-
here and illustrated.
dkaios, for instance,

koXos,
oaLos,
before he can obtain a complete idea of N. T. goodness or righteousness. see Jesus himself insisting on the use of ayaOos for the idea of absolute
pare d7a06s,
a7ios,
Kadapos,
We
goodness in
Mk.
10
18, ovSels ayaOds

:
el yu?)
els 6 deos.
:
Both
ayados
and
for
SUaLos occur in Lu. 23
50.
In Lu. 8
15 the phrase KapSla
approaches Socrates' common use of koKos k ayados "the beautiful and the good." It is also the Greek way of saying "gentleman" which no other language can translate. To go no further, repas, dhva/xis and arjfxeXov are all three used to deayaOrj Kal koXt]
scribe the complete picture of a
and 'not yet
old,'
mtws
is
'recent'
N. T. miracle. Neos and 'not ancient.'
is
'young'
CHAPTER
VI
ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONETICS

The term orthography
spelling of
is
used to include
all
that pertains to the
Greek words. Phonetics deals with the sounds of the The orthography was constantly changing, but not so letters. Each had an independent developrapidly as did the sounds. ment as is seen very strikingly in the modern Greek vernacular (Thumb, Handbook of the Mod. Gk. Vernac, p. 6). There has never been a fixed orthography for the Greek tongue at any stage There has always been an effort to have new of its history.
phonetic spelling to correspond to the sound-change,
Gr. of
Cf. Blass,
N.
T. Gk., p. 6.
The confusion
in spelling
grew with the
centuries as in English.
Many
delicate questions confront us at
seemed possible to give the explanation of all the varied phonetic (true or merely analogical) and orthographic changes in the use of the vowels and consonants. An orderly
once.
It has not
collection of the
facts with
historical side-lights
is
all
that
is
attempted.
I.
The Uncertainty
is
of
the
Evidence.
It
is
difficult
to
tell
what
(a)
the vernacular usage in N. T. times on

less so since
many
points,
though somewhat
increased
the discovery of the papyri.
The Ancient Literary

by the comparison
Spelling.
The
difficulty is
much
of the phonetic spelling of the
modern
vernacular with the historical orthography of the ancient literary

Greek.^
error.
This method applied to any language may lead one into Modern conversational English differs widely in orthog-
raphy from Spenser's Faerie Queene. For most of the history of the Greek language no lexicons nor grammars were in use. There were the schools and the books on the one hand and popular usage on the other. The movement of the Atticists was just the opposite of the modern phonetic spelling movement in English. The Atticists sought to check change rather than hasten it. It is to be remembered also that the Atticists were the cloister
*
Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 19
f.
177
178
NEW TESTAMENT
Later
less so.
copyists of the ancient Greek writings copyists reflect local types,
and of the N. T. some more conservative, some
The law of
restraint.
life is best here, as always, without artificial impulse or In seeking to restore the orthography of the kolvt] ver-
nacular of the
will
first
century a.d. one must not be handicapped by
the literary Attic nor the modern Greek vernacular, though each
In simple truth one has to be less dogmatic what could or could not have been in the past. Breasted^ calmly assures us that over 3000 b.c. "the alphabetic signs, each of which stood for one consonant," were in use in Egypt. He adds: "Had the Egyptian been less a creature of habit, he might have discarded his syllabic signs 3500 years before Christ, and have written with an alphabet of 24 letters." The Greek language was a growth and did not at first have 24
these days concerning
be of service.
even in early Attic,^ not to mention Cretan, had the and sometimes et. Indeed Jannaris^ asserts that "the symbols r] and w, in numerous cases also i, originated at school as mere compensatory marks, to represent positional or 'thetic' e or o." It is not surprising with this origin of vowels (and consonants do not differ) that variations always exist in the sound and use of the Greek letters. Blass* is clearly right when he points out that in changes in the sounds of words "it is usual for the spelling not to imitate the new sound off-hand," and in the case of the N. T. writers there was "no one fixed orthography in existence, but writers fluctuated between the old historical spelling and a new phonetic manner of writing." Moulton^ adds that the N. T. writers had to choose "between the literary and illiterate Greek of their time," and "an artificial orthography left the door open for not a few uncertainties." Here is a "letter of a prodigal son" (B.G.U. ^6 ii/A.D. See MiUigan, Gk. Papijn, p. 93 f.) in which we have "phonetic" spelling in abundance: Kai 8la iravTwlv] evxonai (Tat xryeiaiveLV. To TrpoaKvvrjixa aov [ttoiJco /car' alKaaTrjv rjiJ,aipap irapa tQ Kvpiijo [2ep]a7ri5t. VeivdoaKtiv aai deko: kt\. There is here interchange of e and at, of t and et.
letters.
E,
,
force of
7]
(b) The Dialect-Coloured Vernacular. The dialects explain some variations in orthography. One copyist would be a better
representative of the pure vernacular

'
kolvt},
while another might
Hist, of Egypt, 1906, p. 45.

f.;
Meisterh., Gr. etc., p. 3; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 26

etc.,
cit.,
Solmsen, Inscr.
Graecae 3 Op.
*
pp. 52
p. 27.
ff.
6.
Prol., p. 42.

live
179
Northwest Greek had still positive influence. Often what looks Hke a breaking-down of the language is but the survival or revival of old dialectical forms or pronunciation. But these variations are mainly due to the perwhere
Attic, Ionic, Doric or
sonal equation.
was not till the time of Marcus Aurelius that the learned grammarians succeeded in formulating the artificial rules which afterwards prevailed for writing the old classical Greek. The first century a.d. was still an age of freedom in orIt
thography.
fers
is
t
Even
in the fourth century a.d. the scribe of ^{ pre-
rather than
ei,
while in the case of
et
often occurs where

is
the rule elsewhere.
This
is
not mere itacism, but
also indi-
vidual preference.^
"The
oldest scribes
whose work we possess
(centuries 4 to 6) always kept themselves much freer from the But, even if Luke and Paul did not schools than the later." ^
the old historical spelling in the case of t mute (subscript) and t, it is merely cutting the Gordian knot to "follow the Byzantine school, and consistently employ the historical spelling in
know
the N. T." and that "without any regard to the MS. evidence." It is not the spelling of the Byzantine school nor of the Attic dialect that we are after, but the vernacular Greek of the first cen-
tury A.D., and this is not quite "the most unprofitable of tasks," as Blass would have us beheve.^ They do complicate the situation. On some (c) The Uncials. points, as noted above, the great uncials X and B differ, but usuThere is a general agreement between the ally that is not true.
older uncials in orthography as against the later uncials and the cursives which fell under the spell of the Byzantine reformers,
who sought
class of
to restore the classical Uterary spelling.

fails
The Syrian
documents therefore
The N.
to represent the orthography of
Hort,
in the Intr. (p. 304)

strictly dialectic
T. in Orig. Gk., App., Notes on Sel. Read., p. 152. But Hort is not willing to admit 'peculiarities of a local or
nature" in the N. T. Still Hort (Notes on Orth., p. 151) allows the Doric oSaykco (oSrjTtoj) in "single MS." like B and D, trpoaaxtiv in B, kâau 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.
N. T. Gk., p. 6 f. N. T. in Orig. Gk.) makes a strong defence of his effort to give as nearly as possible "the spelling of the autographs by means of documentary evidence." There must not be "slovenly neglect of philological truth." But Moulton (Prol., p. 47) docs not "set much store by some of the minutiae which W. H. so conscientiously gather from the great uncials." Certainly "finality is impossible, notwithstanding the assistance now afforded by the papyri" (Thack., Gr., p. 71).
30G
3
''
f.
Blass, Gr. of
lb., p. 7.
Hort
(p.
302
f.
of the Intr. to the
180

kolvt]
the vernacular
of the first century a.d.
instance, reads Kairepvaovn, not Ka4)apvaoviJ..
The Syrian class, for But do the MSS.
which give us the pre-Syrian types of text preserve the autographic orthography? The fourth century is a long time from the first and the presumption might seem to be to some extent against the Neutral, Alexandrian and Western classes also. The temptation
is
is
constant to spell as people of one's time do.

felt
This
diffi-
culty
by every
editor of classical
Greek texts and often

critics.
purely arbitrary rules are used, rules
made by modern
Hort^ is willing to admit that in some instances the spellings found in the great uncials which are at variance with the Textus Receptus are due to the "literary spellings of the time" when the MSS. were written, "but for the most part they belong to the 'vulgar' or popular form of the language." Hort could see that before we had the new knowledge from the papyri and inscriptions. He adds 2: "A large proportion of the peculiar spellings of the N. T. are simply spellings of common life. In most cases either identical or analogous spellings occur frequently in inscrip-
by no means always of the This fact showed that the unclassical spellings in the uncials were current in the Apostolic age and were the
tions written in different countries,
more
illiterate sort."
most trustworthy even

formity belongs only to
it is
if
artificial
sometimes doubtful. "Absolute unitimes," Hort^ argues, and hence
not strange to find this confusion in the

first
MSS. The
confusion
century a.d. and probably the autographs did not follow uniform rules in spelling. Certain it is that
existed in fact in the
the N. T. writings as preserved in the
MSS.
apphes to
to
all
the
MSS.
to a certain extent
vary. But itacism and makes it difficult
know what vowel
or diphthong
was
is
really before the scribe.
grounded in matters of orthography on the rules of the grammarians of the time of the Caesars (Appollonius and Herodian) rather than upon those of the time of Hadrian, when they had an archaistic or Atticistic tendency (Helbing, Grammatik d. LXX, p. 1). Moulton (ProL,
p. 42)
In general the N. T., Hke the
LXX,
thinks that "there are some suggestive signs that the great
uncials, in this respect as in others, are
not far away from the

56) denies that
this
autographs."
But Thackeray
(op. cit, p.
1 Op. cit., p. 303 f. Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 35) calls attention to the fact that the professional copyists not only had to copy accurately, but "in the received uniform spelling." Cf also Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, p. 2. For further
.
remarks on the phenomena in the 2 Op. cit., p. 304.
LXX
MSS.
see Swete, O. T. in Gk. p. 300

*
f.
Op.
cit.,
p. 308.

conclusion can be
181
it
drawn
ipso facto of the
LXX,
since
was transthan
lated (the Pentateuch certainly)
some three centuries
earlier
the N. T.
(d)
was
written.
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

this point.
is
is
worked out well by Moulton to prove

dated
A.D.
b.c. the
In the papyri
13 to 29, while
proportion of eav to
it is
iiv
in such cases
9.
in the first century a.d.
76 to
But
in the fourth century
it is 4 to 8 and the usage disappears in the sixth century a.d. Thackeray (Grammar, vol. I, pp. 65 ff.) shows (after Deissmann^)
confirms this conclusion for eav=av. The usage how the appears in b.c. 133; copyists are divided in different parts of the
LXX
first
same book as in Exodus or Leviticus; it is predominant in the and second centuries a.d., and then disappears. Thackeray (p. 58) traces oWels (jurjêls) "from its cradle to its grave" (from 378 B.C. to end of ii/A.D.) and shows how in ii/A.D. ovdeis is supreme
again.
uncials in orthography in a matter out of
This point very strikingly confirms the faithfulness of the harmony with the time when the MSS. were written. We may conclude then that Hort
is
right
and the
uncials, inscriptions
kolvt]
nacular orthography of the
and papyri give us the verwith reasonable correctness.

In the old times the
n. Vowel-Changes (crToiXia
vowels underwent
4)a)VT|VTa).
many
changes, for orthography was not fixed.
Indeed is it ever fixed? If the Atticists had let the kolvt] have a normal development, Dr. Rutherford would not have complained that Greek was ruined by their persistence "in an obsolete orthography instead of spelling as they speak." ^ But as early as 403 B.C. the orator Archinos^ had a law passed in Attica prescribing the use of the Ionic alphabet in the schools.
The
early
Greek
used only
1
a,
e,
i,
o,
v,
and no
distinction
was made
in writing be-
2 prol., pp. 202 ff. pp. 42 ff. pp. 202 ff. On the whole subject of the difficulty of N. T. orthog. see W.-Sch., pp. 31 ff. Deiss. (B. S., p. 180) is clearly right in denying a
B. B.
S.,
S.,
"N. T. orthography" save

ities.
as individual writers, as now,

in
have
their peculiar-
For general remarks about vowel changes

p. .301
f.;
LXX
MSS.
see Swete,
O. T. in Gk.,
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
tween long and short vowels, as indeed was never done in the The Ionic invented^ 12 for long o. Before the t and v. introduction of the Ionic alphabet, o and e were both represented by z. H was at first the aspirate like Hebrew n and then now aspirate and now long e or a as the inscriptions amply show. It
case of
e thus used as long Indeed e sometimes represented did ov. The kinship of these vowels with the Phcenician ct as alphabet is plain, as a is from ^{, e from H, t from , o from p, u from the doubling of (and so a Greek invention). It is interesting to note that the Sanskrit has three pure vowels, a, i, u, while e and o are diphthongs in origin. In Sanskrit a far surpasses all other vowel-sounds, more than twice as many as all other vowelsounds put together. 2 Schleicher^ speaks of the weakening of a into i and m, and thus he goes back to an original a sound for all the vowels. In Latin also a breaks into e, i and u^ Even in Attica in the first century e.g., in spite of Archinos' law, the inand scriptions use sometimes at and ae, et and t, 77 and i, v and t, VL, t and et interchangeably.^ Uniformity did not exist in one dialect, not to mention the persistent differences between the various Greek These changes were going on constantly all over the dialects. Greek world in the first century a.d. For the alphabetical changes in the dialects see Buck's Greek Dialects, pp. 15 ff. These inter-
is
very
common
in the early inscriptions to see
and
o likewise, as in
hat and
ros.
i;
changes between vowels are interesting.
The first sound (a) The Changes (Interchanges) with a. made by a baby is a. These changes became dialectical peculiarities in many words like the Lesbian Kperos (kpcltos, "ablaut" variations), the
Boeotian drepos
(erepos),
vernacular Attic
we
find
kperrf {apery])
(vowel assimilation), as in
lapos (lepos).^ So in the where a breaks to e before the Ionic- Attic a sometimes changes
Doric
to
1
after
and vJ
See Kiihner-Blass^ for

et
f.;
many
du
examples.
Riem. and Goelzer, Gr. Comp. du Grec

I,
Lat., Phonet., p. 38.

I,
Cf. also Donaldson,
Bd.
Sir
pp. 39
ff.;
The New Earle, Names
Crat., pp. 207
K.-Bl., Griech. Gr., Tl.
of the Orig. Letters of the
Gk. Alph. (Class-
Papers, 1912, pp. 257
Flin.-Pet., Form, of the Gk. Alph. (1912). ff.); Arthur Evans gets the Gk. Alph. from Crete. 2 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 10. 3 Vergl. Gr., p. 55. His opinion is now considered antiquated.
Giles,
But
*
*
Comp.
Philol., p.
149
f.
Telfy, Chron.
und Topog.
d. griech.
Ausspr.
etc.,
1893, p. 39.
See also
Larsfeld, Griech. Epig., 1892, pp. 494

Inflex. in
^
ff.;
King and Cookson, Sounds and

K.-Bl., Tl.
I,
Hirt,
Gk. and Lat., 1888. Handb. der griech. Laut-
u. Formenl., pp. 115, 119.
Bd. I, p. 115 f. Vk is the form

a and (Mk. 15
:
183
:
Ji{ (Mt. 5 41) and {<B (more commonly eveKep) has nearly displaced the Attic eveKa which Blass^ admits only in Ac. 26 21. Elrev for elra appears in Mk. 4 28 as a rare Ionic Herodotus^ had both| elra and cTretra. Kadapiôi in the form. aorist (active and passive) and perfect middle has e for the second
'Ayyapevco appears as kyyap. in
21).^
The New
Ionic
e'ipeKev
a in
many
of the best
:
MSS. both
in
LXX
and N. T.
(cf.
Mk.
Gregory, Prolegomena, p. 82, gives the Blass"* points out that Xldrepa (Ildrapa) occurs in AC in facts. Ac. 21 1. TeaaepoLKovTa is the form given always by W. H. This is an Ionic form (vowel assimilation) which is not so common in
1:42; Mt. 8
3
W.
H.).
the papyri as in the N. T. MSS.^ In modern Greek both aapavra and aepavTa survive. Likewise W. H. always give the preference to reaaepa, though the papyri do not use it till the fourth century a.d.^ But in the inscriptions reaaepa is found several times, ^ one case in
the
first
century a.d.^
Teaaepas, however, does not occur in the
N. T. MSS., though the papyri have it in the Byzantine age.^ The Ionic and the modern Greek have recraepes and recrcrepa. The N. T. thus differs from the kolpt] papjrri, but is in harmony with the Ionic In some MSS. in both LXX and N. T. literature and inscriptions.
in Doric
and BcEotian, while ye
is
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.).
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, words are eo-xaTcos /3dp/3apa.

*
New
Phryn., p. 204) both of these
^ Moulton, Prol., p. 46. For assimilation between a and e in modern Gk. dialects see Dictcrich, Unters. etc., pp. 272, 274. In mod. Gk. vernacular a frequently displaces Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 14. initial e or o.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 20.

lb.
'
Dieterich, Unters. zur Gesch. der griech. Spr., p. 4; also Schweizer, Gr.
d. perg. Inschr., p. 163.
Nachm., Laute und Formcn d. magn. Inschr., p. 146. Moulton, Prol., p. 46. For further evidence see Cronert, Mem. Graeca Hercul., 1903, p. 199. In the Apostolic Fathers^ and the N. T. Apoc. rkaatpa
8
9
and
TtaaepcLKovTa are
Patr. Apostol. etc., p. 38
common as well as 'eKad<iplad-q (Reinhold, De On the whole subject of a and e in the f.

where he mentions
inf.
Graicitate
papjTi see
kyyapiUii,
careful discussion of Mayser, Gr., pp. 54-60,

(wtXevcraffOaL (for similar
tKoLo},
confusion of aorist and fut.
see
eK(t>evâcrOai,
2 Mace.
22 V).
Tkaffipa.
and TeaaepaKovra are very common
also in the
LXX
MSS.
Cf. Helbing, Gr. d.
Thack., Gr., p. 62 f. This spelling occurs as early as iv/B.c. in Pcrgamum (Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 163 f.). In Egypt it hardly appears before i/A.D. and is not conunon till ii/A.D. (Thack., Gr., p. 62). The uncials give the later spelling. See "Additional Notes."
p. 5;
LXX,
184
Ttaaapes
lect,

is
NEW TESTAMENT
16 has
accusative as well as nominative, like the Achaean diais
but this
another story.
epwreco will
J^
in
Rev. 3
xî-^pos.
The
common
(Ionic
and Northwest Greek) use
of -eco instead of -aco
be discussed in the chapter on Verbs. sometimes changed to a. 'A^c^tafet is accepted by W. H, in Lu. 12 28 rather than either the late afx^Lkû or the early ajx^Levvvai. The form epavvao> instead of epewdu) W. H, have everywhere received into the text, and so with kêpawaw and aveêpavvqTos. {<B always read it so, sometimes AC. It is supported by the papyri. Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 113; Helbing, Gr. d. LXX,
Conversely
e is
:
with verbs as in
p. 7, for similar Initial

e
phenomena
in the
LXX.
as dXap. 14.
often becomes a in
modern Greek vernacular,

Cf.
4)pbs {e\a4)p6s),
avrepa (evTepa), etc.

irLa^co is
Thumb, Handbook,
So the Doric
:
used in the N. T. everywhere save in Lu. 6 38, where, however, TeinecriJLevos has the original idea ('pressed down,' not 'seized'). Both occur in the LXX. The Attic forms
^tdXTj, vaXos
are retained in the N. T. (as in

kolvt]
LXX)
rather than the
Ionic
and vernacular
kolvt].
forms in
e,
mark
of the influence of
the literary^
Some
verbs in
-eco also
use -dco forms, like eXedw, eXXo7dco,
^vpao:.
See the chapter on Verbs.
Changes
vaovjjL is
in a take place in a
few Hebrew proper names.

Kacfjappaov/j,
,
Kairep-
(W. H.). So W. H. read MaXeXeTyX in Lu. 3 37, not MeX. (Tisch.) and NaâwTjX. SeXa^tiyX (instead of SaX.) appears in B. Thumb ^ remarks that these changes between a and e occur to-day in the Kappadocian dialect. a and t|. The Doric forms dSayos, oSdyco are found in the Koivfi, though Schweizer^ calls it hardly a Dorism. So in N. T. MSS. we have Tpoaaxeco in B (Ac. 27 27) and pdaaco in D (Mk. 9 18). The Ptolemaic papyri regularly have avriKiaKeiv till ii/A.D. (Mayser, Gr., p. 345). For a and a see and rj under (c). a and o. The changes* between these two vowels are seen in the Lesbian vira. (vtvo), Arcadian TpiaKaaLoi, Doric etKan {eiKoat), etc. W. H. give âTToKoykoi in Mt. 6 7 (cf. âTTaplôo) instead of ârToXoyew. ABK and twice 'J{ and many cursives have vrpos KoXao-o-aeTs
the Syrian reading for
: : :
??
etc., p. 70. Cf. Thack., Gr., vol. I, p. 75 f. So AaXfxarla though C has AeXi^. as Lat. has both. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21. Both forms are in the pap., Deiss., B. S., p. 182. 2 Hellen. (Griech. Spr.), p. 76. See also Radermacher, N. T. Gr., pp. 34 ff. 3 Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 49. Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 62, xpaadai. for xpwâi. 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 N07roXtrr?s.
1
Dieterich Unters.
:
in 2
Tim. 4
10,

as the
title,
185
while in Col.
2 nearly
all
MSS.
read
KoXoaaals.
Blass finds the title in o also in accordance with the coins and the profane writers; Xen., Anab. I, 2. 6, has a variant reading in KoXao-o-ai.
In
Mk.
13
35
1
has ixeaavvKnov and

1
:
in Lu.
11:5
instead
of neaovvKTLov}
Xciats
In
Tim.
W. H.
give ^tTjrpoXwats and irarpoof
(instead of -aXoiats)
on the authority
}<ADFGL.
Blass^
compares irar po-kt6vos. a and <o. 'AvayaLov is read by the most and the best MSS. in Mk. 14 15; Lu. 22 12, 'Avooyeov, LvccyaLov, avuyeoov, avayeov have only "trifling authority." ^ Taios is Doric and Ionic. a and ai. The papyri^ sometimes have the Epic and Ionic atet, though the N. T. only reads det. The t early dropped out between
:
:
the vowels.
Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 103.
has aid in
/cXatco,
Esd.
30.
The N.
T., like the
LXX,
:
has Kalw and
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. This spelling of d for av is found in Pergamum by Schweizer^ in the reflexive pronoun earbv, while Meisterhans^ gives examples
'
of
Moulton^ is it as early as 74 b.c. in the Attic inscriptions. probably correct in saying that we need not assume the existence of this spelling in the N. T. autographs, though it is not imposHe indorses Mayor's suggestion {Exp., VI, x, 289) "that sible.
d/caraTrdcrrous in
2 Pet. 2
'
14
AB may
i;
be thus explained: he com-
This dropping of u between vowels expares axiJiVPQ 1 19 A." before consonants. In the modern tended to the dropping of
Greek we have
vrjTou
avros (aftos)
and
dros (in Pontus)
TO (not the article).^
The examples
of 'Ayovaros
once) in the papyri are very common.-'
whence comes and dros {aroyevThackeray (Gr.,

,
p. 79) finds
1
no instances in the
p. 152)
is
LXX.
compares ixkaaôv, and Blass (Gr., p. 21) Clem, and Barn. (Reinhold, De Graec,
Hort (Notes on Orth.,

Mero^v
. .
necraffTvXiov.
{fxera^v)
in
p. 40;
a and
2 '
Cf Mayser, Gr., p. GO f ., oXXot for aXXot. Illiterate scribes confused a and e in the LXX (as ixiTo^v) and in the pap. (Thack., Gr., p. 77). Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 151. W.-Sch., p. 51, compare KaTa-4>ayas and
o,
Karoi-âyai as parallel.
Cf. Meistcrh., Gr., p. 17.

p. 31, 1904, p. 107.
^
Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901,

Gr.
etc., p. 61.
Gr.
^
etc., p.
91
f.
Cf. also Dieterich, Unters. etc., p. 78.

p. 3G3.
Moulton, Exp., 1904,

pp. 2
\^.
So
also in the
Rom.
ProL, p. 47. period occasionally
e/uaroO, taTov.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 35; Wack.,
Kuhn's
Zeitschr.,
xxxiii,
Moulton,
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 33; 1904, p. 107.
He
quotes Laurent (B.C.IL,

in the latter
1903, p. 356) us saying that this

half of i/u.c.
phenomenon was very common
186

.
NEW TESTAMENT
Boeotian and Attic inscrip-
ai and
tions
(cf.
at
was written
ae in early
Latin transliteration) and so naturally was pronounced as e (Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 28). By 100 a.d. in the KOLvrj at was the mere equivalent of e. The Egyptian papyri show abun-
dant illustrations of it. Especially do the LXX MSS. exhibit it (Thackeray, Gr., p. 78). The modern Greek pronounces both these vowel-sounds alike, as indeed did the Boeotian dialect long before the KOLPT]. Numerous examples of this interchange of spelling exist
wall-inscriptions and in the vernacular kolvt] from Indeed in the N. T. MSS. it is very common to find -adai and -ade used indiscriminately, probably representing the common later pronunciation which was already developing in the Hort^ compares this "shortening of an identical first century a.d.
in the
Pompeian
100 A.D. on.^
sound" to the
late (ttvKos for arvXos
and
Kplixa for Kplfxa.

little
So comconfidence
mon
did this blending become that Blass^ places
in the
for aLTelade
N. T. MSS. on this point. Such readings occur as kretade and yweKats for yvvoLKes. Sometimes only the context^ can decide between e and at where different forms result, as
14
:
in avaTeae or -at (Lu.
10), eyetpe or -at
(Mt. 9
5), kirduayKes
(Ac. 15:28),^ epxeade or -aât in

eratpois
:
^<ADL
(Lu. 14:17), ertpots or

:
(Mt. 11 16 Syrian reading), TapheyKe or -at (Mk. 14 36), In Gal. 4 18 both K and B read ^riXovade for ^r]\ovadaL. B reads AtXa/xtrat in Ac. 2 9, from fi^"!?, the rest 'EX. The authority according to Hort^ is "usually preponderant" for eê(l)vr]s and k4>vldLos instead of at0. So Kepka for Kepaia is accepted^ in Mt. 5 18; Lu. 16 17, and KpeiraKy] for KpanraKy] in Lu. 21 34. Likewise
etc.
:
: :
W. H.
Luke.
receive Aacrea for Aacrata

XalXaxp
is
Ac. 27
8.
NAG
in
in 2 Pet. 2
17
read XeXaxos, but
the undoubted reading in Matthew,

pe8r],
The
uncials all have
not
palSr],
Rev. 18
13.
:
So
4.
all the early uncials but
have
for
'^vKop.opka
(fyaiXourjs
(not -ata) in Lu. 19
Hort^ accepts also
<j)e\6vr]s
(2
Tim. 4
13),
though
Moulton ^ doubts, because

1 2 3 5
of the Latin paenula.
W.-Sch., p. 47.
Notes on Orth., p. 150. Cf. on at and e, Mayser, Gr., p. 107. W.-Sch., p. 47. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 9. 'Ett' d;'d7Kais "Alexandrian only" according to Hort, Notes on Orth.,
lb. lb.
:
. :
p. 151.
Cf the Western Kaivo4>o:vlas for Kevfxjxj^via^ in 1 Tim. 6 20. In 1 3 instead of aalveadai FG read cuveadai. Nestle (Neut.-Zeit., 1906, p. 361) finds parallels in the forms ffLawoixevcov and aiavdeis.
^
Th. 3
8 9
Notes on Orth.,
p. 151.
CI. Rev., 1904, p. 107.
The pap.
give
(paip6Xi.ov.

(6)
187
c
The Changes with
The interchanges
of
and a have
already been discussed under (a), but others took place with rj, t, o. In the Boeotian these were freely interchanged^ and and 1.
the
as
same interchange occurs

TrXecoi'
in the Doric,
New
Ionic
and Attic
or TrXelwv.
The
Attic inscriptions ^
show
this
common
phenomenon. The i before a vowel easily and early loses its force and drops out. Before the adoption of the scholastic orthography at Athens (b.c. 403) e stood for e, rj, et. Sooner or later et became
everywhere a monophthong (Buck, Greek Dialects, p. 28), But the Koivri usually wrote et before vowels rather than e (Thackeray,
MSS. reveal the same traits as the N. T. Acts 17 34, but "Apeios occurs (Ac. 17 19, 22). 'Axpetos is uniform in the N. T., but in Ro. 3 12 we have -qxpeudwav (iXABDG). In Lu. 3:13; Jo. 21:15; Ac. 15:28, W. H. print TrXeoj' (Attic has even irXkouos),^ but elsewhere the N. T. has forms in et. The derivatives all have e like wXeoveKTeo}. But the N. T. has only reXeLos, TeKubw, though Herodotus always and the
Gr., p. 81).
The
LXX
'Ap07ra7tTJ7s is in
Attic usually used
reXeooi}.
D" has
TeXeaxraL in
Heb. 10
1.^
Of
dTro-
words with
oretXco in
eveKep
and
:
et
before consonants one
may
note that
:
34 is aorist subjunctive. (Cf. Ex. 3 10.) Both occur in the N. T. (both Ionic and Attic). The N. T. never has es, but always els. However, eaw is the uniform reading in the N. T. Homer used either eiVco or eo-co. Numerous examples of long e occur in the inscriptions and T|. like Here (fjLTjTe).^ These changes are probably all analogical and not phonetic. But in the N. T. we have only the shortening of 7], back to short e in some words like avade/xa, though this particular word ('curse') came to be distinct from avadrj/jia ('votive offering').
Ac. 7
and
e'lveKeu
'Avadrjua occurs
only once in the N. T. (Lu. 21

avadefxa.
5),
and even here
NADX,
6r]fji.a
etc.,
have
Tisch. quotes Moeris as saying ava-
aTTLKus, avadefxa eXXrjVLKois.
But the use
of avadefxa as 'curse'
p. 220.
f.
BruR., Griech. Gr., p. 28, as

Meisterh., Gr., p. 20
f.
0et6s
= 0e6s; Thumb, Handb.,
The change and ei was very common in vi/iii u.c. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 37. ' But even the Arcadian dial, has nXkoua, irXfovwv (Sohnsen, Inscr. Graec, p. UXkov is common in the N. T. Apoc. (Reinhold, De Graec. Patr. Apost. etc., 4). Cf. Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 40 f. On the whole subject of e p. 40). and 6t in the pap. see Mayser, Gr., pp. 67-73. They are very numerous indeed, * Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22. these changes in the pap., both ways. ^ Solmscn, Inscr. Graecae etc., p. 1. Arcadian dial. Cf. also Meisterh., Gr., p. 3. In the Pontic dial, to-day there is a wide-spread use of e instead of t], as in akiroixai (Thumb, HeUcn. [Griech. Spr., referred to hereafter usually as
'
Cf. Schweizer, Gr. etc., p. 44
in
HeUen.], p. 149).
188
"is not
p. 46).

an innovation of
In Ac. 11
:
biblical
Greek" (Moulton, Prolegomena,
Perhaps this rjfxeu, not wvêxchange between e and ij bears on the use of (TTr}KeTe with Iva in Mk. 11 25; 1 Th. 3 8, and of MS. evidence for davixaêre in Cf. also oxl/rjad^ and Jo. 5 20 and kôixoXoyqaeraL in Ph. 2:11.
11
NABDcr
:
read
6\l/e(rd
in Lu. 13
e
28.
So in 13
25.
Mayser
rj
{Gr., p. 64)
thinks
that sometimes
represents an original open
as in irapeaTeKOTes.
The
-77jua
shows quite a preference for words in -eâ rather than Gr., p. 65 f.), and the LXX has new words in -ejua, though some words have both forms (Thackeray, Gr., p. 80). In the papyri this shortening (as in the LXX) appears in words and et, tjl like eirieeixa, Trpoadeixa, etc.^ The interchanges between
KOLVT]
(Mayser,
77
and
(tj
will
be discussed under
rj
(c).
Mayser
(Gr., p.
63
f.)
thus
e) explains xXijprjs as an indeclinable neuter form. and t. Dieterich^ mentions as one of the marks of the Attic and Egyptian kolvt] the fact that t and e interchange when used with X and v. Cf. the modern Greek, and the Lesbian Greek used It is a Doric rkpros for tp'ltos, and the Thessalian Olos for Beds. inscriptions in the ^ and in This variation appears characteristic. Xeyedov and which is also the papyri,^ especially in the case of XeTtajv, having and co \eyLOPo:s (o genitive even X7etcb;', not to mention a AeyLOiv is the reading of the best N. T. MSS. the same sound).
for
(NBDL;
cf.
Latin
legio),
i
as in the papyri.
kolvt]
Especially in the case

'AXeeTs,
of the Latin short
does the
have
e.
not
aXteZs, is
:
the
reading in the N. T. according to the best MSS. (Mk. 1 16, etc.).^ This is a natural assimilation after a liquid. The frequency of e for I in the Egyptian papyri may be due in part to the Coptic, which has no short i (Steindorff, Kopt. Gr., p. 13). Note a
soldier's use of x^pc^v
(Jo.
13
i
4,
Latin lenteum)
Latin
1
to
Greek
c.
B.G.U. 423 (ii/A.D.). Ahnov a change in the other direction, Blass^ says that \evTeov would have looked
for xetpa(v),
is
p. 108.
Cf. also Moulton, Prol., p. 46,

ff.,
and
Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., pp. ening of 77 to e and also w to o. " E
has good discussion of this shortand 7; interchange times without number from v/b.c. down to ix/A.D." (Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 36). Reinhold (De Graec. Patr. etc., p. 101 f.) shows how the confusion between ij and e led to
47
forms
2 4
like
mv ay ay ere.
etc., p. 136.
Cf. the
mod. Gk. orkw

^
(aTT]Kco)
and Oeru
Cf.
{drjTw).
Unters.
Schweizer, Perg.
Insclir., p.
Moulton,
f
CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 33, 434; 1904, p. 107.
43 f. Mayser, Gr.,
p.
80
5
"AXuTs occurs in pap. also.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 307;
Thackeray,
p. 84.
6
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22.

unnatural to a Greek.
vri4>b.\eos (1
189
N770dXtos also
Tim. 3
2, etc.).
i
IioTlo\oL in
Latin Puteoli, using

(not -eou)
is
for e (cf.
alone well-attested/ not Ac. 28 13 represents the Dittenberger, p. 145). ZcfjuKlvdLou

is
:
the N. T. reading (Ac. 19

is
So
3
:
TiêpLos (not Teêptos)

1,
12) for Latin semidnctium. the N. T. rendition of Tiberius in Lu.

:
Greek writers used TejSepios, AofierpLos, etc.^ more examples of this exchange of e and I do not appear. The interchanges between et and t are discussed under (d), those between eu and v under (/). The Lesbian ôlic had aTp6<j)u: for the Doric arpdcfxc. ando.
later
though the
It is really surprising that
The Ionic-Attic made it o-rpe^co. Meisterhans^ gives numerous examples of this change in e and o: djSoXos for 6/3eX6s as early as the middle of the fourth century b.c. Dieterich^ mentions the assimilation of e and o as one of the marks of the Egyptian kolpt,. In Ac. 18 24 }<{ 15. 180. Cop. arm. and in 19 1 N* 180. read 'ATreXXT^s for 'AxoXXws, though D has AiroWcovm in 18 24. The Doric and the
:
'
Attic inscriptions^ had 'Att^XXo^v, 'ATreXXconos, 'ATreXXtos, etc. In 1 Cor. and Titus we have only 'AttoXXojs. Indeed Blass^ suggests that 'ATreXXTjs is the reading of the a text in Acts and that 'AttoXXcos is an interpolation from 1 Cor. It is more likely to think that the two old forms of the name were still in use, though 'AttoXXws is the correct text in Acts also. The MSS. of the
N.
T.,
even
the
good
usual
uncials,
have
etc.
dXodpeOco, kôKodpeboi,
(cf.
oXodpevT-qs as well as
oXedpehc^,
6/3oX6s
for 6(3eX6s
:
by
assimilation),
and
Hort7 accepts the e form only in Ac. 3 23. The Syrian class has the o form. Blass,^ who usually cares httle for such points, properly insists on the documentary evidence. In
only
^
ADE
Heb. 11:28
read
e.
have the
form, while in
Cor. 10
10
DFG
But always Tiro,. Cf. Nachm., Magn. i. Both Xe7twj' and XkfTcop are road in Magn. inscr. (Thieme, Die Inschr. von Magn. etc., p. 8). Cf. also Schwcizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 46. For assimilation between e and in mod. Gk. see
'
Notes on Orth., p. 151. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 21.
Inschr., p. 22, in discussion of
for Lat.
Dieterich, Unters. etc., p. 272

*
f.
Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 22. Cf. also K.-Bl., Tl. I, Bd. I, p. US. Unters. etc., p. 135 f. Cf. Ilirt, Ilandb. d. Griech. etc.', p. 115
K.-Bl., Tl.
I,
"
Bd.
I,
p. 118,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21. the pap. situation.

^
Cf.
and Ilirt, Mayser
op. ciL, p. 115.

(Gr., pp. 94-97) for
a discussion of
Notes on Orth., p. 152. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 21. He quotes Buresch, Rhein. Mus., 210 f as m favour of e in the N. T. as well as the LXX. '()\,o. ajipears inp the Apost. Fathers (Goodspeed, Index) and 6\o0. in N. T. Apoc. (Reinhold, p. 40). For assimilation between e and o in mod. Gk. see Dieterich, Unters. etc., 274.
p.
190
NEW TESTAMENT
though the modern Greek
The
and
LXX
is
according to
NAB
is
reads
e,
has ôXoOpevw.
But
14
oKedpos
the uniform spelhng in the N. T.
the rule in the

:
LXX
has
(Thackeray, Gr., p. 88).
In Mk. 8 (Thackeray,
kêbtro
kireKadevro as is
common
in the
LXX
LXX),
:
Gr., p. 89).
:
Cf.
also kirkbtTo (Heb. 12:16,

:
(Ac. 4 35), irapedldeTo (1 Cor. 11 23), 48 NB). Hort {Appendix, p. 167 f.) explains these changes as "euphonic," but it is a change of the rootvowel of 8o, a confusion of thematic and athematic conjugations. dv and dv. See also i (d) under Papyri. This is as good a place as any to say a word further on the interchange of these two forms, not strictly vowel-changes, however. We have also See also aldv for kav, elav (really el-\-av) as in P Eleph. 1 (b.c. 311).
1), 5te5t5ero
:
(Mk. 12
and kêKpeneTo (Lu. 19
B.G.U. 530
so
(i/A.D.).
The
use of
eai/
= modal
av in relative sentences,
i/ii a.d., is not an exchange of vowels, but possibly a slurring over of the e before a. "Ap=eap survives from the ancient Greek in a few instances, as Jo. 12 32 (B and accepted by W. H.) 13 20 DEFG, 5 19 (NB) 16 23 (BACD, etc., have eav, but NBC iiv and accepted by W. H.) accepted by W. H.) 20 23 (twice and accepted by W. H., though AD have first eav and NAD second). In Ac. 9 2 only NE have iiu and W. H. read eav. Blass^ thinks that as kdv made encroachment into the province of ap " a kind of interchange of meaning between the two words " grew up. The modern Greek vernacular uses ap for Hort^ considers the whole subject of the interchange between 'if.'
common
in the
LXX, N.
T. and papyri of
eav
and iiv after relatives Predominantly iiv is found

:
" peculiarly
irregular
after consonants,
but there are many exceptions." Cf. edv Mt. 20 26 f. Moulton^ has shown that edv = iiv is scarce in the papyri save from 100 b.c. to 200 a.d. In the Magnesian inscriptions^ only edv appears, not Hv nor riv, as riv = edv is not in the N. T. But in the Herculaneum papyri these particles interchange freely. ^ The Attic inscriptions uniformly have av with relatives.^
:
and perplexing. and edv after vowels, in Mt. 20 4 and Hv in
Omitted by Debrunner in ed. 4. Notes on Orth., p. 173. Hort has a curious error here, for the references under av and eav should be exactly reversed. "Av = ka.v ('if') is rarely found
1
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 60.
in the pap. also.

ii/B.c).
Moulton
(CI. Rev., 1901, p. 434) gives av
fxi)
airobun.
Cf. also CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32; Mayser, Gr., p. 152
f.
(AP 43, Mayser gives
^ Prol., p. 43; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32, etc. = av and of av = tav. Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 68. See Gregory, Prol. (Nov. Test. Gr.), p. 96, for the facts about the N. T. MSS. and kav. ^ Cronert, Mem. Graeca Here, p. 130.
exx. of edv
*
Dieterich, Unters. etc., p. 326.
191
cdi'
Indeed Attic does not contract ea with exception of kav= ^v.^ But = modal av is found in Xen. Mem., w eau apuoTTy, in Lysias, This oOs kav ôvK-qQdaLv, etc. (see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 421).
late
use of kav occurs over sixty times in the N. T.
Greek of
el
eav as well as
ei
av,
instead of
Examples occur in kav. Cf Rein.
Patrum Apost. etc., p. 35; Moulton, Classical Review, 1901, p. 32. Thackeray {Gr., pp. 65 ff.) finds that in the ii/B.c. the papyri nearly always have 6s av, while in the i/A.D. they nearly always have 6s kav. In the books of Exodus and Leviticus he notes that in the first half of each book both forms occur while in the second part ds eav almost vanishes. Each book may have been written on two rolls. The changes between and a, and (c) The Changes with t). have already been discussed. and I. As already stated, originally H was merely the rough breathing, but the Ionic psilosis left a symbol useless, and heta was called eta.^ Thus the new letter took the old long e value in Ionic and Attic and also largely supplanted the long a where a became e. The Sanskrit used long a, the Greek and the Latin either e or i. This new (in spelling) (v/b.c.) gradually turned more to the i sound in harmony with the growing itacism of the language, though there was some etacism on the other hand.^ As early as 150 B.C. the Egyptian papyri show evidence of the use of t for rj.^ By the and i, middle of the second century a.d. the confusion between and et, rjând et is very general. By the Byzantine times it is complete and the itacism is triumphant in the modern Greek.^ and t was natural Reinhold^ thinks that the exchange between and e and the interchange bein view of the relation between tween and I. As early as the fifth century b.c. the change between and t is seen on vases and inscriptions. But the Ptolemaic papyri^show little of it and it is rare in the LXX MSS. NAB (Thackeray, Gr., p. 85). In the N. T. times the interchanges between and i, and et, til and et are not many. In 1 Cor. 4:11 W. H. read yvuvLTevo:, though L and most of the cursives have 77.
hold,
Graecitate
rj
De
t]
(.
'x\
tj
??
t]
r/
r;
tj
tj
77
17
Thumb,
Hirt,
Hellon., p. 92.
d.
*
*
Handb.
Griech.
etc., p. G3.
Thumb,
77
Ilellen., p.
98
f.
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 29.
Cf. also
Thumb,
Ilellon., p. 138.
41).
In Bcrotia
p. 82)
also
cites
^
and i interchange from a Horn. pap.
in ii/B.c.
Cf. W.-Sch., p.
^îice
Maj'ser (Gr.,
for
iirl
of i/B.c.
for WrjKe,
and per contra

gives
iwii
(p. 84) a<j)r)KeTo.
Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 47.
He
from a Byz.
34
f.
inscr.
'
De Grace.
Patr. etc., p. 41.
C"f.
also Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inselir., p.
192
NEW TESTAMENT
b-qvapiov, though btvapLov appears very early.^ Mt. 19 24 and Lu. 18 25 a few late cursive MSS. substitute K-d/xtXos ('rope'), a word found only in Suidas and a schoUum on Arist. But "it is certainly wrong," ^ a mere effort to explain away the difficulty in the text, an effort as old as Cyril For Kvprjvios B^ it. vg. sah. have Kvptvos, of Alexandria on Luke. and A has KvpvuLos, a striking example of Kvpetvos while B* has same sound in these MSS. The the having ei, v itacism, 77, t, 19 12, but Liddell and Thayer in Acts give aLiJUKlvdiov N. T. MSS. spelling like the Latin semialternative as an suggest both crju. cindium. So also the best MSS. in Rev. 18 12 read (tlplkos, though some cursives have a-qpiKos (like Jos, and others), and still others Indeed in 1 Pet. 2 3 for xPWôs L and many cursives avpiKos.^ have XpLffTos. The heathen misunderstood the word XpLaros and confounded it with the familiar xPW'o'i, pronounced much ahke.
The N. T. always has

For
Kafxr]\os
in
Suetonius (Claudius 25) probably confused Christus with ChresIn Ac. 11 26 ^^ 61 have Xpr^crTLavovs, while B has Xpeiar. tus. So in Ac. 26 28 N has Xp-rjaTiavov for Xptcrr., while B has again ei.
: :
The same thing occurs in 1 Pet. 4 16. T| and 1. The Boeotian and the Thessalian
:
dialects
early
for
changed^
TrapdSeto-os
7?
for
et,
TldeLiJLL
= TidrinL.
Schweizer^ gives
irapddTjcros
(Byzantine inscription).
In Lu. 14
13 (21)
we have
dmTretpos
(ABDEL), avaweipos (GHK, etc.), and -Trip- (^{R). This condemned by Phrynichus the Atticist as vulgar.^ In the LXX J^ has draTrctpos in Tob. 14:2 and AV show it in 2
itacism
is
Mace. 8
follow
24 (Thackeray,
in reading
Gr.,
p.
83).
In Heb. 6
rj
14
W. H.
J<ABD
et nrjv
rather than
jii]v.
This form
occurs in the
cism,
LXX
is
i<ib
several times in the papyri
and so
ei
î77
use of
^
Moulton' has shown that nrjv by mere itanot due to a confusion between the Hebraistic "î^, thus correcting Hort. The uncials and the
and
in the papyri.
it is
obviously for
ri
Blass, Ausspr. d. Griech., pp. 37, 94. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 151.
3 lb., refers to o-iptKOTrotos in Neap, inscr. (C. I. G. 5834). In the mod. Gk. (j = i in pronunciation. Cf. Thumb, Handb. d. neugr. VoLkerspr., p. 2. W.-Sch. (p. 46) mention ei7/3r?i', ei^v", 6ii0-nv in Ex. 2 3-6. * Cf. Blass, K.-BL, Tl. I, Bd. I, p. 135. 5 Perg. Inschr., p. 47. Cf. also p. 56. See numerous exx. of this change in
:
Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 47

6
f.
:
pp. 9, 22. It is found also in 2 Mace. 8 24. Hort (Notes on Orth., p. 15) shows that aireipos (not airripos) is read in Herod,
Cf. Bekker,
Anec,
I,
i.
32.
^
ProL, p. 46; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 33.
See also Thackeray, p. 83.

papyri here agree.
I93
mv in a Doric oJN T Gk., p.

(.ci.
Deissmanni calls attention to the use of el inscription of the first century b.c. Blass {Gr 306) observes that a papyrus reads Krjpla for K^pia
KTip-, KLp-iais).
Jo. 11:44, Keip^,
mum3
and 1. In the old Attic there was no 771 in writing, only ei, since was not used as a vowel. As early as 400 b.c. the Attic used m and et interchangeably, K\r,c, becoming ^Xetco, /cXjys = Xets, Xyrovpyos-Xecrovpyos, etc.^ This usage was not very common in Perga111
_
7]
nor in Magnesia.^
Herculaneum papyri only in the papyri copies of Epicurus and Polystratus.^ In the N. T. Xecrovpyos, ~ia, -eXu, -ckos are taken over trom the Attic, but they occur also in Pergamum^ and Magnesia.7
Cronert finds this interchange in the
The
middle everywhere, the other dialects using save the Ionic. The kocpt, has y ôOXa, o'la, b^â. In the N. T. W save y is universal according to W^H. save in Lu. 22 :42 where iSovXec is genuine, though some Mbfe. have ec other passages. Blass ^ observes that this is a hterary touch in Luke for the colloquial êXe.s. Hatzidakis^ notes
was used always
Attic indeed carried the fondness for ec so far that in writing in the second singular indicative
it
how
difficult this
process
TroL-fiays
and
Trotijaets,
made it to tell the difference between for instance, because of this Attic intermix-
ture of the diphthongs. Blass 10 will not hear of this as a possible explanation any cases, but one must remark how well this vowel-blending harmonized with the kinship in meaning between the aorist subjunctive and the future indicative
(cf.
17:2) and made it easy for the later so-called future subjunctive (cf. Latin) to develop. WinerSchmiedel indeed accept as possible this vowel confusion in several mstances.ii In Mk. 8 35 (Lu. 17 33) 8s a. aôXean, Lu. 12 OS av dfxoXoyriaei, 2 Cor. 12 21 fxi) TaireLPuaei, Ro. 3 4 (Ps. 51 6)
:
:
some MSS.
8o:av
in
for
SchaeL
in Jo.
B. S pp. 205-8. Cf. Dittenb., Syll., ' ur., pp. 74-79, for careful discussion.
No. 388,
p. 570.
See also Mayser,
Mîsterh. Gr. d. att. Inschr., pp. 36 ff. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 39 1 and 49. See also Mayser, Gr., pp. 79 f., 126-131. ' Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 60 f.
*
Nachm
Magn.
Inschr., p. 50
f.
e 7
Graeca Hcrcul., p. 37. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 8. /3ouXet, oUl,

Einl.
Mem
Schweizer, op. ciL, p. 60.
Nachm.,
op.
cit.,
p. 51.
64,u in
d. neugr. Gr., p. 306.
He
^ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 8. W.-Sch., Moulton (Prol., p. 16S) woul.l take indifTerently (nrhy,, p. 47. '; or uxAtt, in Rev. 14 4. For many similar exx. in the inscr. see Dittenb &TVW B.V iw&pxei (117. 17), tlpkB-ntrav (352.
'
'
Ap. Fathers (Goodspeed, Index). gives exx. from the N. T. Apoc
66), etc.
194

8LKaL(jodfjs)
,
viKrjaeLS (cf.
Ac. 5
15
'Iva
exicrKtacrei,
31 eav
odr^yrjcrei.
Winer-Schmiedel would find the aorist subjunctive and not the future indicative. This is possible but by no means certain, since the future indicative was undoubtedly used both with edp and W. H. read 'IcoaveL instead of 27 in Mt. 11:4; Lu. 7 18. 'iva (oTTcos). In 2 Cor. Tc3 hoiKTirel occurs in papyri Brit. Mus. I, Nr. 2. 135. 2 9 AB 109 have fi where et is probably correct. Irrational Iota. The iota subscript was iota adscript T] and T). till the twelfth century a.d., but as early as the third century B.C. When et was practically equal to r; in it was not pronounced.^ sound, it was natural that xi (^0 should be. The t was then dropped in sound long before it was subscript.^ Gradually it was felt to be a matter of indifference in some words whether this iota was written or not. Examples of i] instead of -q occur in the inscrip: :
tions of
Pergamum^
t
as ev
rj
as well as in the Attic*

for instance)
finds irrational
adscript
(excot,
Moulton abundant in the

Cf.
Ptolemaic Tebt. Papyri {Classical Review, 1904, p. 106).
Mayser {Gr., pp. 122-126) who gives many examples. In the N. T. has dropped from 6vT]aKoo. Indeed since the second cenadscript in the diphthongs a, tury B.C. v ^^'^ become mute. Hort,^ hoAvever, argues for the retention of i in ^fjv^ and infinitives
t L 27,
in -av instead of the Doric-Attic form, as well as in adcios, eUrj,

fc3ov, ûiov,
'UpcoSrjs, Kpv(l)fj,
\adpa, iravraxd}
ttclvtii,
irpcopa,
cwfco,
virepQiov,
though he hesitated to put

of these examples go
crwfoj
in the text.
It
is
just as
well to finish the discussion of the iota subscript here, though
some
beyond the range

jur/rpoXojas,
of
J7.
The
best ediTre^fj,
tors print also drjuoaia,

"LanodpaK-q,
i8ia,
irarpoXwas, Trarpwos,
irpaos.
Tpwas, though
iJLLfj.vr]<rKo:
and
W. H. have forms
in -olv also, as KaraaK-nvoTv (Mt. 13: 32). Moulton^ gives a curious example of the loss of the irrational t in the case of the subjunctive sometimes in the papjTi appears as rjv, having lost the i, II which and taken on irrational v. As a matter of fact iota adscript (iota
1
Blass, Pronun., etc., p. 50.
Hirt,
Handb.
d. Griech., p. 114.
Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Inschr., p. 65.

Meisterh., Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 64.
rji.,
In the Iv/b.c. the Attic often

Jilol.
wrongly inserted (irrational i), as in Cf. K.-BL, Tl. I, Bd. I, p. 183 f. Strabo rfj iroXei, to. opu, as early as vi/s.c. in spurious diphthongs. ttoX(14. 41) says that many regularly dropped the \ol yap x^P''^ Tov I ypaôvai ras Sotikcls, Kal fK/3d\Xoi(n 8e to Wos 4>^(nKriv airlav Schweizer (Perg. Inschr., p. 47) ovK exop. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 29 f. ^ Introd. to N. T. Gk., p. 314. cites T'fiiv evvoiav. 6 Mayser, Gr., p. 121, finds no i with av in the pap. ' Prol., pp. 49, 168, 187.
77,
wrote 1 for the 1 with a,
but not for

03
p.
In the Thess.,
and Ionic
inscriptions
is
freely omitted or
195
subscript not yet, of course) does not appear in the great uncials
fiLdLaav in D (Mk. 1 34) and ûXojt in K (Lu. 23 31).^ Forms with and without the mute iota appear in the Herculaneum pa-
save
pyri,2 as eUrjc or dKrj.
Blass^ would also restore

in such
to avTLTrepa(a).
Scotjj/
He
r\
doubts
Attic)
if
was written
it
new
optative forms as
(Solrjv
though
should be put in the text.
v. Since these two vowels came to be pronounced alike modern Greek/ it was to be expected that some interchange would come, though any early examples are wanting. However, by the second century a.d. the inscriptions give many instances
and
as in
such as
is
drjpa (dupa),
iJ.r]<JTr]pLOV
{fxvar.), aKvirrpov {aKT]TTpov), etc.^

kolvtj
It
already in the Egyptian

Especially in
according to Thumb.^
Hence
we
MSS. get mixed over 17/xets Peter does this itacism lead to a mixing of the historical^ standpoint as in 1 12, where vfxXv is read by
are not surprised to see the N. T.
vixels.
and
and most cursives Syr^<=^ Cop. In 1 Pet. 5 10 the MSS. similarly support vnds and 17/xas. In 2 Cor. the personal relations of Paul and his converts are involved in this piece of orthography as in 8 7 e^ vfxoiv kv rj/juv (J<CDE, etc.) or
etc.,
rjfxlv
:
:
KABCL,
by
(B 30, 31, 37, etc.). See especially Kad' 17/xas in Ac. 17 28 (B 33 Cop., etc.) which reading would make Paul identify himself with the Greeks on this occasion.
el
rjiJLoJv
kv vixtv
{d)
ri
The Changes with

(c)
;
i.
For
and
see under
,
(6)
for
and
i,
see under
for iota subscript (adscript)
mute
or irrational
see under
(c).
For
it
irrational iota see also Infinitive

in queer
The papyri show

(a.d. 49).
forms
like
aXrjdiJL,
under Verb. 'KkycoL, P. Oxy. 37
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 introduc1
Gregory, Prol.
Cronert,
(Now
Test. Gr.), p. 109.

pj).
2
'
Mem.
Grace, llercul.,
41
IT.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 7. Griech. d. LXX, pp. 3 ff.

*
The
LXX
phenomena
are Bimilar.
Cf. Helbing,
Hatz., Einl. in neugr. Gr., p. 304.

* ^
Ilcllen., p. 171.
Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 310. On the subject of -q and v sec Maj^ser, Gr., p. 85 f. He denies (p. 86) that the itacising pronunciation of i)rcvailed in the Ptolemaic period.
77
Jann., Hist. Gk.
CIr., p.
47.
lb.
10
lb.
"
lb., p. 41.
196
tion

??
contributed to this confusion as by and rapid spread of was taken by many, not et was pronounced hke t, and as long , but equal to t. The confusion apparently began in the BcEotian dialect^ and in postclassical times, but swept the field in all the dialects till every et (closed and open) was pronounced By 100 b.c. the Attic inscriptions show a general interas I. change between et and I, and in the second century a.d.^ the confusion exists between et and I. Dieterich^ thinks that this itacism had its widest development in Egypt. The Ptolemaic papyri of It is only the more illitii/B.c. show itacism very frequently. B has opeiov (Thackeray, l, though erate scribes that use et for * between t and the interchange Thumb considers Gr., p. 86 f.). In Pergamum^ between o and co. that 1 in the kolvt] on a par with that from et common than much more is the change from i to et thing The same occur, as d/xeXta. for -ela though forms in -la to t, The Hercuis common." Magnesia, where {fifxTv) rifxelu is true in laneum papyri tell the same story,'' while it is so common in the Egyptian papyri that Moulton^ is unable to set much store by the minutiae gathered by W. H. from the great uncials, "for even W. H. admit that their paramount witness, B, 'has little authority on behalf of et as against t.'" Clearly the partiality of N for t and of B for et throw them both out of court as decisive witnesses on
that time
77
this point. ^
So
it is
in the
numerous N. T. examples
not merely itacism that we have to deal with of exchange between t and et,
but "genuine peculiarities of original orthography" also.^'' Whatever Dr. Hort meant, all that is true is that different scribes merely preferred one or the other method of representing Z. The whole matter therefore remains in doubt and one is prepared for all sorts of variations in the N. T. MSS., because the koipt] no
1
K.-Bl., p. 131.
Mayser
closely
(Gr., pp. 87-94)
has a
full
discussion of the prob-
lem
2
in the pap. of the first tliree centuries B.C.

et
and
finds that in
Egypt the
pronunciation of
approached that of
t.

identical with the
In the succeeding pages he gives
numerous exx. many of them
between i and , ^ Unters. etc., p. 45. N. T. exx. * Hellen., The next most common interchange of vowels in the p. 172. and t or , ot and v (Warfield, Text. Crit. of the N. T. MSS. are ai and e, 5 Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 53 f. N. T., p. 103). Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 35 f. Cf. Egyp. pap. also.
in cliron. order of the various interchanges
77
Cronert,
Mem.
Prol., p. 47.
(Gr., p.
86
f.)
Graec. Hercul., pp. 27 ff. see Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, pp. 7 S. Thack. thinks that the orthography in this point is older than that of
For the
LXX
K and A.
10
Warfield, Text. Crit. of the N. T., p. 103.
Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 152.

longer' insisted in the vernacular
197
on the distinction between long

here presented will give a fair
dis-
or short
and
et.
The examples
Where
et
idea of the situation.

cussion
For the textual evidence see careful

is
t
by Gregory.^
like
I.
written for
in
it is
to be pro-
nounced
El
is
shortened to
some abstract substantives,

WeKodp-qaKla (but dp-qaKeia),
tKTevia, eTrteuta, kpidia,
-la instead of -ela, as^ 'ArTaKla, ay via (possibly), perhaps aKpiîa,

aXaôvia, avaSla, apeaKla,
perhaps
aireidla,
etScoXoXarpta (but XaTpela), elXuKpLvia,

epfj.r]v'i.a,
perhaps
leparla, Katcapta, KaKorjdia, KaKoiradla, KoXaKia, Kv^la, AaoStKta,
fiayla, pLtdobla, 6(f)da\fxo8ov\ia
(8ov\ia doubtful), possibly TratSta (cf.

irpayixaTla, Trpaviradia,
(papfiaKla,
Ps. 53
5), TToXtrta, -Kopia, xrcoxtct,
probably
coêXta.
2a/iapta,
XeXevKla,
perhaps dTparla,
it is
$tXa5eX(^ta,
Deissmann^ shows that

so in 1 Cor. 16
(for -la), late
:
Xo7ek, not \oyia in the papyri and

cTrapxeta (for -La), evrpaTeXeLa
f.
Some MSS. have

KoXcovela.
MSS.
-eiov
The endings
alyLos,
and
-etos
appear sometimes as
fxeyaXLor-qs)
-lov, -los.
So
"Aptos (nd7os), acrtos, baviov (cf. bavVô), davLarris), el8o)XLOV,

eTLTTjdiOS,
'ExiKOvptos,
fieyaXia (cf.
irav8oKiov,
(xtolx'lov.
these. So also -lvos for -eLvos Strong testimony appears in opivos, aKonvbs, (pccTipos. Further examples of t for et are found as in the MSS. in aStdexists for all
XiiTTOS, aueKXiirros, aXicpw, cLTvidew, aTndrjs, aindLa, aTro8e8Lyfj,evos, "Apeoirayir-qs, 8iyp.a, eâXicjicc, KaTaXeXLp.p.epos
(Ac. 25
14),
even
Kpiaffuv, Xinfxa,
olKripoj,
XiTovpyos, fJLapyapLTrjs (cf.

dtyfiaTL^co, Tidos,
7roXtrT?s,
TexvlTrjs),
[j.eaiTr]s,
irapais
uTroXt/xyua, 4>lX6plkos,
^tXoj^t/cta,
'i8av,
xPô(f)LXeTr]s.
This
not to mention the verb-forms Uov,

alternate forms in
itacism.
which W. H. count Revelation, but which are pure examples of

lueu
In the case of
'Ik.
'Ikovlov (Ac.
13
51; 14
1)
the inscriptions
give both
and
Elk.*
i for i is seen in several ways also in N. T. MSS. W. H. give etSea, not I8ea. TeluoiiaL and yeLvcjaKw are very common in the best MSS. 'II/xeTj/ and v/jLeXv are rarely seen,
The use of
:
In Mt. 28 3
however.
^'apetaatoi.
'Aêlvr],
FaXetXata,
'EXa/jLelTrjs,
Aevelr-qs, AVltlk6s,
Xelap,
'NLvevdrrjs, IletXaros, 'âp.apelTrjs all
arc found, as well as
rpaTrefetrT/s,
toral Epistles,
appears in John and Hebrews. In the PasHort^ finds -XetTr- for -Xlt- forms. Ketpmts is correct in Jo. 11:44. Hort*^ also prefers iravoLKei, but Ta/jLTrX-qdei is undisputed. Such verb-forms occur as iidyvvp-L, ret/^dco, reiaco.
Tdx^toi'
1
''
Prol., pp. 83-90.
"
According to Hort, Notes on Orth., B. S., pp. 142 f., 219 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 8.
p. 153.
6
Notes on Orth.,
154.
p. 155.
lb., p.
198

*
NEW TESTAMENT
as 'ASdei,
'
Semitic proper names in

'HXct, MeXxet,
have
kpvei,
'EcXet,
^rjpd.
Cf. also^ 'kbixdv, 'Axd/j., Bepianeip, Aavel8,

N(/)âXt/^, SaXei^t,
liefxeeiv,
'EXia/cet^t, 'loopeln, Keis, Aevels,
x^povêlv,
Xopaêlv.
'Ic(j(rets,
So also
'EXetcra/3er,
'HXetas,
Guaretpa, 'Idetpos, 'lepetxw,

17X61,
'Of etas,
Sd7r</)etpa,
'
TajSeida.
i
Cf. also
pa/3;Set,
pa^ôvvel,
(Taâxdavei.
But
appears as
in 'AnLvada^, MeXxtceSe/c,
Stw,
Stcoi'.
Likewise the
MSS.
usually read 'Ami^tas, Bapaxtas,

Maddias, Marradias, Ovpias.
t
'Efc/ctas,
Zaxa-
pias, 'lepeixlas, 'lexovias,
and et the testimony and one must not stickle too much for either The papyri and the inscriptions have nearly all of spelling. them. See 1 (c) for remarks on the difficulty of relying on the
In
of these examples of changes in
is
many
greatly divided
uncials in the matter of orthography.
It is impossible to
be dog-
matic on the subject. I a7id 0. It is a peculiar change, as Blass^ observes, that we have in diieLpo/jievoi. for lixapbixtvoL (1 Th. 2:8). It appears in the LXX (some MSS. for Job 3 21 and Symm. at Ps. 62 2). The
: :
only example so far brought to light
is
vireponeipeaOaL in Iren. 60.
Winer-SchmiedeP
sees
no comparison in KaraprpoKv for

t
KaravTiKph.
Meisterhans^ gives airavrpoKV for airavTLKpv. Jannaris^ defends the exchange of I and OL.
early as the fifth century b.c.
AvyovaroLPos occurs in the inscriptions.^
et
and
first
ot
possibly as
Certainly in the
Ot
century B.C.
in
was exchanged with

is
and
ji
:
as well as with
t.
In the N. T. the only example
Mk. 11 8 where ACSVXr Or. have aroLâs for the usual o-7t/3ds Zonar. (from (7Tti3co). N and a few other MSS. read arvâs.
illustrates this also
etc.
by using
o-rot/3ds.
Cf. also
(ttol^t],
c7rot/3dfco,
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
1

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22.
o.
*
But
it is
quite possible (see
j)
that this
is
a case
of prothetic
3 6
W.-Sch., p. 52.
Hist.
Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 81.

I, 3,
Gk. Gr.,
ib., p.
p. 53.
Jann.,
52.
on the other side K.-BL, Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 112.

Cf.
p. 53.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 27, 55, etc.

vowel, loses
its syllabic
199
value and becomes consonanted" (Thumb,
Handh.,
So ayLos = mjos. The t is the last of the five p. This relative value e, t. original vowel-sounds in this order: a, o, has persisted in modern Greek (Thum])'s Handbook, p. 12 f.). Jannaris^ gives a-rro^doviJLevoi as an illustration of this gradation in sound. But as a matter of fact the interchange between t and v Meisterhans^ finds only five examples in the is not frequent. Attic inscriptions, two of which, ^v^Xiop and MltvXtjvolos, are found
10).
i;,
in
N. T. MSS. (assimilation). Examples occur in the kolvt] of Asia Minor, though Thumb ^ agrees with Kretschmer in calling it a "barbarism." Still the old distinction in sound between t and u slowly broke down till in modern Greek the two vowels have the same sound. BiypuXXos in Rev. 21 20 is spelled also in MSS. ^-q:
piWos, /SiVtXXos,
jSyiSXos
jStpuXXtos,
for
/3i/3Xos
in
Mk.
reads a fine illustration of itacism. In Ac. 20 14 12 26 and Lu. 20 42.

:
McTv\r]vr] is the correct text for
have Mtri;the Byand For the TpwylXiov of Strabo Xlpri and L MvTv\ivr]. 20 to Ac. 15 has zantine writers the Textus Receptus addition shows LXX The TposyvMa, other MSS. TpuyvWiov, Tpo:yv\Lou.^ in papyri vary Ptolemaic The also niJLvav in 9 Dan. 7:25 (B).
the old Mur., but
:
AE
word (Thackeray, Gr., p. 95). In Lu. 19 8 For changes with (e) The Changes with o. and e under (h), for o and t under (d). for
this
:
has
vi^vaov.
a see under (a),
and ov. The old Attic used AtoaKopos, which Phrynichus^ prefers, though Thucyd. and Plato have the form in -ovpos also (Epic In Ac. 28 11 only some of the cursives have the form or Ionic). in -opos. Both forms appear in the inscriptions.^ This exchange
:
is
rather
f.).
common
In the
in the
{<
116
LXX
Ptolemaic papyri (Mayser, Gr., pp. 10 f., shows sometimes 6k for ovk (Thackeray,
diversity of
Gr., p. 91).
The modern Greek dialects have much Of. Thumb, Handh., p. 8. point. this usage on
1 3
lb., p. 84.
Gr. d. att. Inschr., p. 28
f.
Hellen., pp. 139, 193
ff.
Spr., p.
pap.
o,
225 f. Croncrt (Mem. Cf Mayser, Gr., pp. 100-103, for exx. like m\os, ^vjiUov, < Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22. In Athens before 403 03, ov (Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 24).
.
Cf. Kretschmer, Einl. in d. Gesch. d. griech. Grace. Hercul., p. 21 f .) gives exx. in Hercul.
etc., in
B.C. o
the pap. stood for
6 Lobeck, Cf. K.-Bl., I, p. 140 f., for this p. 235; The New. Phryn., p. 310. change in Old Attic and New Ionic. The N. T. Apoc. (Reinhold, Do Grace, Nougr. etc., p. 41) has exx. hke iôU/jL-nv as the mod. Gk. vernac. (Thumb,
Volksspr., p. 6).
to Jann., Hist.
8
Cf. Buresch, Phil.
l\,
89.
Most common
bet. vi/iii u.c. ace.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 37.
f.
Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. GG
200

and
V.
NEW TESTAMENT
irpaos (Syrian)
The MSS. vary between*

:
and
7rpai5s
in
Mt.
11 29; 1 Pet. 3
:
4,
Pauline Epistles. W. between these forms, giving no reasons. It has the surviving in the kolvt]. The
as well as between Tpaorrjs and Tpavrrjs in H. adopt the form in -v. Von Soden varies
is
i;
the old distinction
LXX
form.
The papyri
have other illustrations (Mayser, Gr., p. 97). Cf. UotLoKol in Ac. 28 13 for the Latin Puteoli. and (0. Originally o represented both the short and long sounds,
:
so that it was easy with careless pronunciation for more or less confusion to exist after co came into use. The Boeotian Pindar, for The New Ionic ôrj instance, has Aidowaos instead of Aiowaos.^ (parox.) appears in heu of fcoi]. However, the introduction of the
Ionic alphabet in 403 b.c. kept the two vowels pretty distinct in Attic till the Roman time, though the change began in the third century b.c.^ After the second century b.c. the exchange
two vowels was indiscriminate in the more ilHterate vernacular.^ The confusion was earliest in Egypt, but the Attic
of these
inscriptions kept the distinction well
100 a.d. The early unand the N.T. show httle evidence of the intercials for the change (Thackeray, Gr., p. 89). Jannaris finds it common. The
till
LXX
modern Greek makes no
difference in
sound between
and w
ex-
"In the early papyri the instances of cept medial o as in not. confusion between o and co are innumerable."^ The inscriptions Pergamum.'' tell the same story about the kolvt] in Magnesia^ and is shortened an co and irpodofxa, In some instances,^ like Sofxa for 5cbixa
to o after the analogy of
from 77 in êâ. In the N. T. MSS. and w, chiefly is that of permutation "probably the commonest
e
exemplified in the endings -onev and -uixepJ' ^ It is useless to follow the MSS. through their variations on this point. In Ro. 5 1 excojuei' is supported by all the best documents and gives a
:
difficult
exoiJiev.
sense at
In
though a better one on reflection than the evidence is so nearly balanced that 49 Cor. 15
first,
:
1 3
Gregory, Prol., p. 82.

Meisterh.,Gr. d. att. Inschr.,p. 24
Tp6ivu,i.
f.,
'
K.-Bl.,
I,
p. 141.
gives
numerous
exx. of the exchange
in inscr. of various dates.

4
has r5 abro
of o
6 6
Jann. quotes a Louvre pap. (165 b.c.) which ff.) finds only two exx. of this confusion and CO in the Ptol. pap. of iii/s.c, but seventy in the next two. lb. Cf. Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., p. 19 f.
Mayser (Gr., pp. 97
Nachm., Magn.
Inschr., p. 64.
8 9
Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 95. Cf. Thumb, Hellen., pp. 143, 172. 108. Reinhold, De Graec. Patr., p. 41, and Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p.
Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 309.

W. H, cannot
decide between
(f)ope(TO}iJ.ev
201
(the latter
and
(})opkcronev
in the margin).
Von Soden
kolvt]
tinguishing between o
increased in later
I'm avairamovTai
This difficulty of disand w in the indicative and subjunctive times.^ Several further N. T. examples of
gives
-o-co-.
:
interest are ayopaaccixev (Lu. 9
13), I'm avaTrar]aovTaL

aTodvn(XKOfj,ep
(Rev. 14
13),
(Rev. 6:11), kav
as read
by Lachmann
:
(Ro. 14
8), I'm yLva}<xKoixev (1 Jo.

:
20), I'm StwKovrat according to

15),
Tisch. (Gal. 6
12), i'm dLepxoiJ.aL
according to Treg. (Jo. 4
Sucunev according to Treg. and Tisch., and preceded by ayopa15; cf. Is. 6 10), i'm Kavdr](jwnai acofxiv (Mk. 6 37), laaop.ai (Mt. 13
: : :
In all or Kavxriawp-aL (1 Cor. 13:3), I'm ^vprjaopraL (Ac. 21:24). these instances syntactical questions enter also besides the mere
question of vowel interchange.^
The
Trpoi'juos
appears instead of w in
ttomci (1
Cor. 10
4;
Heb. 9
10),
19
4),
5:7), Ztolkos (Ac. 17: 18),^ avKop-opea, not -/xcopea (Lu. xpô4)Lh.eTr]s according to W. H. and not xPô4>eL\eTr]s (Soden)
(J as.
etc. (Lu.
nor xpewêtXerTjs according to LU, correct apparently in ayaOooavvr],
7:41; 16
ei^Sw/xTjcris
5).
But w
:
is
aycwavvr],
(Rev. 21
18,
Soden
(ih.).
-dop.-), iepcoavvr], p.eyaKwahvq, xpcotVos.
So
also the
LXX,
but
irpoipos
(Thack., Gr., p. 90).

1
Codex B shows others

Cor. 9
:
in the
LXX
In Lu. 18:5 and

(from
vir-coTnop)
27 the
MSS. vary between

old form), though
i)7rw7ridfco
and
vtotlol^co (-Trtefco
:
In Ro. 13 3 tw ayadQ epyu) may So in 2 Pet. 3 6 5t' o}v may be^ for possibly be rcS ayadoepyco. In Rev. 4 7 f ex^^v, not exov (Soden), is read by the best 5t' 6v. MSS., though the substantive is ^wof. Now second century B.C.
the best
MSS. read
:
uttcott.*
papyri have
(/)
viropvrjpa exo)v
The Changes with

,
where co and o are exchanged.^ and v. For the changes with

i;
see
under (d) v and o under (e) V and \). Only one example of
this
exchange appears in the
N.
T., that of Tpea^vTTjs in Phil. 9.

Trpeaêvriis.
demand
Here the sense seems to Bentlcy suggested it long ago and Lightfoot
(comm. in loco) collected a

Cf. Reinhold,
number
of instances of the omission
De
Grace. Patr.,
p. 102; Hatz., Einl. etc., p. 306.
2
3
W.-Sch., p. 48.
Hort thinks so "perhaps."

the correct
(p.
p. 22) prefers
>
2rcotK6s,
The Doric had (ttolo.. Von Soden 2toik6s.

is
Blass (Gr. N. T. Gk.,
Ace. to W.-Sch.
48
f.)
this
not orthographical at
all,
but etymolog-
ical.
6
Why
not both?
lb., p. 48.
may have
Doubtless other vowel-exchanges in Rev. a similar explanation and so do not violate concord of gender.
202
of

from
ev in single
NEW TESTAMENT
Hort^ thinks it due to a scribe and not to Paul, since the earher Greek shows no examples of this interchange. However, Wood^ has found irpeaêvTepos for irpea^vrepos in an Ephesian inscription (analogy: in modern Greek
u
MSS.
= e/).
Thackeray
(Gr., p. 97) finds this
"natural error" in the
LXX
MSS.
This has always been a rare exchange in the Greek,
v
V and ov.
the Boeotian dialect having retained the original v sound of

after the Attic
gave
it
up.^
The Zaconian
preserves
it
in the
ov
modern Greek.^ The kolvt] has sometimes xpov(r6s for xpi^cos-^ But was rather frequent in the kolvt] to represent the Latin u as
Apovcros.^
In Rev. 3
18 the Latin collyrium
is
given in the
MSS.
as KoWovpLov, KoWvpiov, KovXKovpiov, ctc.
W. H.
prefer KoWovpLov,
though
long
of
KBC
read -vptov (so Soden).
Blass^ observes that

instances.
we have
V in -hpiov.
in the
LXX shows the same variations (Thack.,

Of. change
f.)
Gr., p. 92).
i;
The Ptolemaic papyri have few

(Mayser, Gr., p. 118).
Koivi]
and
i;
ov
Thumb
like
{Hellen., p. 193
thinks
and also u. In Rev. 1 5 the distinction between Xvaavn (JÂC) and XovaavTL (BP) is more than mere orthography, though the confusion was rendered easy. TI is always so written in the N, T. uncial MSS.,^ though the iota was sometimes dropped in the inscriptions. For changes with co and a see under {g) The Changes with , (a), for CO and o under (e). The Thessalian dialect^ exchanged co and ov as in ca and ov. This change reappears in Rhodes and Tov KOLvov for Tco KOLvoj. the iEolic-Doric.^" Buresch^^ finds the change between co and ov common in the Egyptian vernacular, as in the Sahidic Greek oo
that
in the
:
was pronounced
German
il,
It is, of course, possible, according to the is often used for co.^^ view of Winer-Schmiedel,^^ that some indicatives in ov may really
Notes on
Sel.
Read., p. 136.
p. 31.
djsc. at Ephesus, App., p. 24.

f.
Thumb, HeUen.,
Cf.
Cf. Bnig., Griech. Gr., 4th ed., p. 32

^
<
Hatz., Einl. etc., p. 103.
Thumb, HeUen.,
p. 85.
6
7
Nachm., Magn.
Inschr., p. 62. Cf.
Schweizer, Perg.
Insclir., p.
71
f.
Mayser, Gr., p. 118. 8 Cf. Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 46 f.; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 9 f., observes that B occasionally divides thus v/i6s at end of a hne and so practically
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22.
and D.
9
K.-Bl.,
I,
p. 135.
Common
in
mod. Gk. (Thumb, Handb.,

f
p. 8).
'"
Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 70
" Jahrb. f. klass. Philol., 1891, p. 434. 12 Tattam's Egyp. Gr., p. 5. " P. 52. Reinhold (De Grace. Patr. Apost., p. 41) gives similar exx. TIwkvCf. Mayser, Gr., p. 99 f. pOivra appears in Egyp. pap. (B. M., vol. II, cUv).

The
203
con-
be subjunctive as a result of this vowel-interchange. vlkovvtl is read by AC in tract form for the present participle t<2 likely due to confumore change Rev. 2 17 and A in 2 7, a (Gal. 4 17) and ^rjXovre tva with So sion of -dco and -ew verbs. can be used indicative present the but Ua 4>vcnomde (1 Cor. 4:6), vowelmere to a form this credit to with Iva, and one is slow marg. H. (W. Tpecfôvatv tva to applies exchange. The same remark Jo. Treg., 17 3) and (Tisch. jiPcoaKovaLv Rev 12 6) as well as I'm
: :
:
and tm
a<,4>poviôvaLv (Tisch.
and Treg.,
Tit. 2
4).
The
future
indicative with
tm
:
(Rev. 9:20), readings with co, aorist subjunctive. aci)6.ôv(n (Rev. 6 4) has rival Similar instances are fxijTOTe similarity. vocal mere It is hardly (Rev. 2 22), w eav 8ovneravoi,(xovaLP kap (Mt. 7:6), KaraTarrjaovaLV In these and similar examples where the
:
aravpiâovatv
as KaradovXcâovaLP (Gal. 2:4), rpoaKwiiaovcnp (Tisch., Treg., Lach., Mk. 15:20),
\ehaovaLP (Ac. 7:7).
and e, o MSS. vary between w and ov it is probable that, as with the tenand CO, the difference in mode may have been blurred by is question dency to exchange these vowels. But the syntactical
77
orthographical problem. not essentially altered by this incidental
and (ou. Lachmann, Tregelles, W. H. all write cou urges that the word is a trisyllable Mc^mrjs Thayer but
(0
in Moivarjs,
(Fritzsche,
Cf. trisyllable. Gesenius, Tisch., Soden). The Ionic eoovrov is a wu diphthong Mayser, Gr., p. 138. Blass^ indeed says that the Rec. Text. The the Attic. is non-existent in the N. T. as in the Antiquities, reads Ucoarjs, following Strabo and Josephus in McouaTjs. have and Josephus elsewhere we though in the the kolvv uses and Syncope. In general
LXX
(h)
Contraction
though a contraction of vowels from the standpoint of the Attic,^ opku^, xetXt"", like forms strong Ionic infusion^ is present also as in illustration" find contraction etc. The N. T. examples of unusual In the N. T. contraction is rarely neglected, as in the KOLpi,. read Winer^ saw, though kdkero (NC for Lu. 8 38, though BL 33
:
ede-LTo),
pot (1
Cor.
1 :10,
etc.),
:
oarka (Lu.
24:39),
dcrrkoû
(Mt.
xeiXecoi/ 23:27, etc.), dpko^p (Rev. 6 15, Attic as well as Ionic), the that show Treg.) Lach., (Heb. 13 15), xpv<^^^v (R^v. 2:1,
:
N. T.
and not the literary Attic. did not go quite as far in Greek T. Blass observes that the N.
in this respect
was
like the kolpt]
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 10.
Thumb,
Ilollcn., p. 237.
C^f.
also
ih.,
Schwcizor, Perg. Inschr., p. 100. For the mod. Gk. contracp. G3.
ff.
tion sec p. 249.

*
Cf. K.-Bl., Bd. I, pp. 201-21S. Iiisclir., pp. 68 Schwcizor, Perg. Insdir., pp. lOUlT.; Nachiu., Magn. " Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 22 f. 51. W.-Th., p. 40; W.-M., p.
204
NEW TESTAMENT
In illustration can be menayadovpyoov is the corthough tioned ayadoepyelv (1 Tim. 6 18), lepovpyetv, aiiirekovp'yb^, have rect text in Ac. 14 17. But we conjectural readthe mention to KaKovpyos, okovpyos, iravovpyos, not Col. 16 hand. In other 2 the on ing ayadoepyos for Ro. 13 3 supported though H., by read W. is veonrjvla for the Attic vovfi7]vla only by BFG 121 f g vg. So the LXX (Thack., Gr., p. 98). In the case of eXeLvos W. H. have the regular form in Rev. 3 17, but Blass^ reminds us, however, that even eXeetj'os in 1 Cor. 15 19.
contracting vowels as the Attic did.
:
tXeivos
may
represent
eXe'ivos.
The N. T.
this
likewise has voaaos in Lu.

:
24 (hke the
LXX) and
:
voaaia (or voaaLo) in Lu. 13
34;
Mt. 23
37.
Phrynichus^ condemned
:
dropping of
:
in veoacros.
Kaixp.vca
both from Is. 6 10) comes from the Epic Kar was an old form parallel with /card. and points about t. The t is retained noteworthy several are There The same thing is true with 4 15). Pet. dXXoTpteTTttrKOTTos (1 in
(Mt. 13
15; Ac. 28
27,
the old vernacular.
The rip.L(jipov (Rev. 8:1), like riixiwôKov in the Attic inscriptions.^ form 'iadoiv in Mk. 1 6 (already in Homer) is a twin rather than a syncopated form of kadlo^v (Mt. 11 19) .^ In the N. T. the i
:
is
not dropped in such forms as

LeL
jSLooaeade, evvirvLov,
(nwindv,
vlos.
Blass^ calls the contraction of
= ii = l "an
entirely
new
kind,"
though
it
appears in the
kolvt],
t,
When
find
et
came
to be equal to
as in cTrei/ccos, rap,eiov, vyeta, etc.^ the two sounds naturally blended
Cf. the Ionic dative xoXt for ttoXu. So in the N. T. we (BCD), even tIv (NAL) for Tnetv in Jo. 4:9, and elsewhere in the N. T. In Mt. 6 6, etc., raixetov is read for Tap.ia.ov.'' On the other hand in Rev. 21 20 A reads aapbibwi, for aapbbvv^. W. H. read rerpaapxôj, reTpaapxn'^ rather than rerpapxew, etc. The
into one.
iretv
be noticed
use of yXucraoKonov instead of the earlier y'KcoaaoKop.eLov {-lov) should For the use of edj' = modal av see under (c). also. and Diuresis. The Boeotians monoph(i) Diphthongs
thongized the diphthongs

1
at,
ei,
ol,
ov
in the fourth
and
fifth
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 23. Rutherford, New Phrjm., p. 287.

see Thack., Gr., p. 99.
For other syncopated forms
in the
LXX
^
Meisterh., Gr. etc., p. 23.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 23.
* Hort., Notes on Orth., Omitted by Debrunner.
p. 145.
Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 101.

(565. 19), raptelov (515. 26
ff.),
Cf. Dittenb., Or. Graec. Inscr. Sel.,
iireiKCos
vyelas (618. 2).

p. 10
f.
For the same phenomena

TreTf, irlv, ratietov.
i
in the
^
LXX
see Helbing, Gr. d.

S., p.
LXX,
See Deiss., B.
183, for pap. illustrations of
Moul-
ton, Prol., p. 45, calls this coalescence of
two successive
law of Hellenistic phonology."
Cf. for the
LXX
sounds "a universal Thack., Gr., pp. 22, 63 f., 98.

centuries b.c.^
205
The Boeotians pronounced

did.
xo-'t-Pî-
= cheri
as the
vernacular
kolvt]
Thumb
(Hellenismus, p. 228) objects to "this

griech.
emphasizing of Boeotian" by Kretschmer {Die

schriften; Einleit. in d. Gesch).
Vasenin-
allows this Boeotian influence on the
p. 33 f.) with a "perhaps." The itacising process still further developed this use of the diphthongs as monophthongs. Indeed Jannaris^ insists that the term bl^Qoykoivt]
Moulton {Prolegomena,
70s as applied to avKkaî] concerned the eye rather than the ear
than bivocal. The spurious diphthongs a state of completion. The papyri, unlike the inscriptions, do not dissect a diphthong at the close of a line.' Where two vowels do not blend into one syllable, it is necessary
and meant more show the process
biliteral
in
Hence from very early times marks of diaeresis it. were used to show that each vowel has its own sound. The mark which might otherwise be considered to is put over the i or unite with the preceding vowel. These marks are found in the oldest N. T. MSS. with such words as aXXryXouta (Rev. 19 1; but in the case of proper names transliterated from the Hebrew or Aramaic W. H. follow the Hebrew or Aramaic spelling. Cf. Hort, Intr., p. 313. So in other examples below), 'Axata, 'Axa'iKos (1 Cor. 16 17), Brjdaa'iSa, Taios (also Tatos in Ac. 20:4, etc., but cf. Allen, Harvard Studies in Class. Philol., ii, 1891, pp. 71 ff.), 8Lv\iêLv {Mi. 23:24), 'E^paiarl, eXcot (Mk. 15:34), 'E0pai/jL, however, or 'E^peju (NL in Jo. 11 54), 'Ho-atas, though B usually without,^ 'lovdaiKuiS, taxi^t (2 Pet. 2 11), KaVdâs, KdiV (W. H. Kail'), so W. H. Katj'dj' (not Ka'ivav nor -ol/jl), Aeveir-qs and not AevLTrjs in W. H., Acots (W. H. -ts), Mwvarjs in W. H., not Mccmfjs, Nii'eueirTjs and not NivevtTT^s, irpoino^ according to W. H., but Trpwi, irpuLvos.
to indicate
i;
: : : :
W. H. have
HroXejuatSa in Ac. 21
and
Tco/xaio-rt in Jo.
19
20.
reads Xopa'âtp.
with some of the beginning of words as in iVa." ^{A regularly write t]v, while See Giles ^ on the subject of diphthongs. For coi; is correct also.^
iota subscript see
(j)
The Semitic etymology complicates the matter these words.'' Many of the MSS. use diaeresis at
under
(c).
Aph^resis and Prothetic Vowels.

it is
QeXoo,
not
têXco, is
kolvt]
the
only form in the N. T., as

is
the
common form
in the
and
that used in
>
modern Greek.
304.
.
It is as old as
Homer, and
since
Hatz., Einl.
Hist.
etc., p.
Cf K.-Bl., Bd.
I,
2
^ "
Gk. Gr., p. 29. lilass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 34.
lb.,
j).
43.
pp. 243 ff. Cf. Mayscr, Gr., p. 153
f.
p. 17.
So
^
'Uacral.
lb.
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 10.
Gregory, Prol.
etc., p. 108.
Comp.
Philol., pp.
158
ff.
206
250

B.C. is the
only form in the Attic ^ and Ionic ^ inscriptions.

is
The augment, however,

consonants.
Ketvos
always
is
r].
Cronert^ finds
eêXco after
The
KeZ
kolvti
does not follow the Ionic in the use of

frequent* in the
8ev
for eKelvos.
Aphseresis
e/cet,
vernacular,
and
for ov8ev, etc.

(cf.
modern Greek But the N. T. has

Jo.
only kxdks (so

Ac. 7:28
LXX) in the best MSS. NBCD; Heb. 13:8 ^<ACD),
52
kVABCD;
the usual Attic form,
though the papyri sometimes have x^ instead of the common The N. T. does not have Svponai, KeXXco, (xeiponaL, where hxOes. o is dropped. Cf. Kuhner-Blass, Tl. I, Bd. 1, p. 186. The form fielponai (cf. dfxeLpofjLevot. in 1 Th. 2 8) occurs in Nicander for It is possible that in b{o)iielpop.aL we have prothetic o l/jLelponai. Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 152; Winerinstead of aphseresis. Schmiedel, p. 141. See Additional Notes for full list. Besides the use of the movable final v and s the (Jc) Elision. Greeks had two other methods of obviating hiatus (elision, erasis). The hiatus was distasteful to the finished writers, though
:
more freedom was exercised in poetry. The avoidance of hiatus was always a more or less artificial matter and hiatus was unavoidable in the most careful Attic writers, as in the case of on,
xept, irpo, TL, TL,
1,
ixT)),
the article, relative, the small "form-words"

like kblboTo aurw
(/cat,
etc.
But the harsher hiatus

kolvt]
would be
Atticists.
avoided by the literary
writers as well as
by the
The
inscriptions
and the papyri show
far less concern
tus than do the literary writers of the
Koivi].
about hiaAs 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 words in the later language. Indeed he thinks that only one^ book in the N. T. (Hebrews) shows the care of an artistic
this situation in
of the
writer in the avoidance of hiatus.

tions
is
By
omitting the O. T. quota-
and chapter 13 he
finds that hiatus
where there
is
a pause
a matter of indifference, as also with nal. He finds fifty-two other instances of hiatus, whereas Romans goes beyond that num1
Meisterh., Gr., p. 178.
2
3
Smyth, Ionic
Dial., p. 482.
p.
Cf.
f.
Nachm., Magn.
Inschr., p. 155.
Mem.
Cf.
Graec. Hercul.,
133
Cf.
< 6
Thumb, Handb.,
296
f.
p. 13.
on hiatus K.-Bl, I, pp. 190 ff Gk. to hiatus see Bischoff, Neut. Wiss., 1906, p. 268; Thieme, ib., p. 265. Moulton (Prol., p. 92) quotes Kaelker (Quaest., p. 245 f.) as saying that Polyb. uses '6(ttl% for 6s merely to avoid hiatus. Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 160.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 18.
lb., p.
8
On
indifference of later

ber as far as ch. 4
:
207
of harsher hiatus in
But even then Blass has to admit cases Hebrews, like adeXcpol 0,7101, ivoxoi âav, etc. The Attic inscriptions show that the vernacular tongue did not care much about hiatus.^ The Hghter ehsions like 5' were used or not at will, while the heavier ones like Skat' ottojs were rare. The same indifference to elision appears in the koivt] inscriptions^ and in the papyri.^ In general in the N. T. elision takes place regularly before pronouns and particles and before nouns in combinations of frequent occurrence^ like kut' oXkov. Blass ^ has carefully
18.
worked out the following

alia,
apa, ye,
kfie, ert,
tra,
noun- or verb-forms.
15
:
N. T. MSS. Te, ovre, fxTjre, do not undergo elision nor do The verse of Menander quoted in 1 Cor.
facts in the ware, etc.,
6/it\tat
33
is
properly printed XPV'^^^

TeaaepaKovraeTris
19)
compound words
(Ro. 4
:
(Ac.
by W. H.^ 7:23) and

or rovrkcTi
Even the
eKaTovTaerrjs
eli-
do not
suffer elision, while
TeTpa-dpxv^ has no
is
sion in J<CA (Alexandrian, Hort).
Tout'
eo-rt
the only
example in the pronouns that we have in the N. T.'' It is in the particles then that most N. T. elisions occur, though there are
comparatively few.
'AXXa, according to Gregory,^ has ehsion in
215 cases and fails to have it in 130, though the MSS. vary much. Hort^ observes that in dXXa elision is usual before articles, pronouns and particles, but rare before nouns and verbs. Ro. 6 14-8 32 has many non-elisions of dXXd, and the elision varies be: :
fore the different vowels except that
it is
constant before
i.
Ae
rarely suffers elision outside of
6s 5' av,
:
W. H. read U ahrb^'m Ph. 2 W. H. put 171^1^ 5' av in the

Nestle).
but here frequently, while In 2 Cor. 3 16 18 after NBP.

:
margin, text
iiv.
kav (so Tisch.,
(Heb. 8:4),
'6ri
:
In obbk elision takes place several times, as in ovb' av ohb' d (Ac. 19:2, NAB), ohb' Iva (Heb. 9:25), owS'
ou5'
^"^
(Ro. 9:7),
ov
(Mt. 24 21; Heb. 13

:
5), ovb' oOrcos (1
Cor.
14 21).
^
Blass
further notes that prepositions seldom use elision
2
3
Mcisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 69 f. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 134; Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 71 f. Cronert, Mem. Grace. Hereul., p. 138 f. Cf. also Thumb, Hcllen.
*
etc.,
p. 82.
6
6
Cf. also Gregory, p. 93 f. Feb. 31, 1901) finds that the pap. hke the Lat. have a vowel not used in the metre. The inscr. concur in this practice. Moulton, Cf. also Mayser, Gr., pp. IS.'j-l.^S, 100-162. He shows that in Prol., p. 4.5. the pap. it is largely a matter of inditTerence. On the scarcity of elision in the see Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, p. 12 f.; Thackeray, pp. 22, 136 f.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 18.
Moulton
(CI. Rev.,
LXX
'
Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 306) refers to the Oxyrhynchus pap., which

tovt' diTosv in Jo.
have
20 22.
:
Prol., p.
93
Notes, p. 146.
"
Blaas, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 18.
'
208
NEW TESTAMENT
with proper names, since it was thought better, as on the inscriptions, to keep the name distinct and readily discernible, though W. H. read 8l' 'A^paan in Heb. 7 9. Elision is most common with 5td as 8l' eaoiTTpov (1 Cor. 13: 12), "because there
:
were already two vowels adjacent to each other" Blass^ thinks. 'AvtI has elision only in avd' oou (Lu. 1 20, etc.). Elsewhere the prepositions show elision with pronouns and in current phrases,
:
as in
air'
apxvs,
air'
apri, aw' avrov, air' e/xoO,
eir'
avTU), Kar'
r]ij,oov'
'efxk,
/car'
vir'
Iblav {Kad' I8iap),
Kar' oIkov, fxer' e/ioD, Trap'

:
o:v,
vcj)'
(vficou),
ov8ev6s (1 Cor.
(I)
15) .2
So the
LXX (Thackeray,
Gr., p. 137).
little
Crasis.
The
Attic
official inscriptions
make
use of
crasis,
fifth
though
it is fairly
common
in the vase-inscriptions of the
century b.c.^ In Magnesia Nachmanson finds only a few examples of /cat and the article.^ The same thing is true of Pergamum.^ In the N. T. it is confined also to /cat and the article.
And
in the case of
/cat
crasis only occurs
if
the following word
is
a pronoun or a
there
is
particle.
Kat thus often, though not always,
coalesces with kydo
and the oblique cases, as Ka,7cb, /cd/iot, /cd/xe. If a " distinct co-ordination of eycb with another pronoun or
crasis does not take place.^
is
Even the MSS. vary found as well as /cd/cet and KaKeWev. Kal likewise blends only occasionally with eav in the sense of and if,
a substantive,"
greatly.''
KaKeivos also
'
as in
if'
Mk.
16
18; Lu. 13
9; Jas. 5
15.
In the sense of 'even

Jo. 8: 14.
is
In uniform as in Mk. 5:28; 6:56; 2 Cor. 11 16.^ Cf. mv Kal 'eav (Jo. 8:14, The article suffers crasis very often in the older Greek, but 16). in the N. T. it is seldom so. Hort^ declines to accent ravTo. for ravTa in 1 Cor. 9 8 or raurd for rd aijrd in Lu. 6 23, 26 17: 30, though supported in Luke by some good MSS. He does, however, accept Tovvoixa in Mt. 27:57 and TovvavTlov in 2 Cor. 2:7; Gal. 2:7; 1 Pet. 3:9 ("stereotyped as a single word," Blassô). Crasis is quite rare in the LXX (Thackeray, Gr., p. 137).
the crasis
is
more common,
be but' or
'if
:
as in
Mt. 26:35;
the sense of
'if it
only' the crasis
2
3
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 18. See Additional Notes. For more minute details about the prep, see Gregory,
Meisterh., Att. Inschr., pp. 70
exx.
ff.
*
Prol., pp.
94
ff.
Magn.
Inschr., p. 74.
ff.,
Cf. Mayser, Gr., pp. 158

*
for the
common pap.
'
Uke Kdyw,
TaXtjdks, etc.
See Gregory, Prol., p. 96; Von Soden, I, p. 1380. See Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 18, and W.-Sch., p. 38; Von Soden, I, p. 1380. ^ Notes on Orth.,. p. 145. (Lu. 15 16). Blass gives KairfBhuei from 10 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 19. see Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, For scarcity in
8
LXX
p. 13
f.

III.
209
Consonant-Changes (o-roixeta (n3|X(})<ova). The Greek, hke other Indo-Germanic tongues, wrote out both vowels and consonants save in the case of iota adscript, which was not always used. But, as with the Phoenician and Hebrew, which wrote only consonants, the consonants form the backbone of the language. Both consonants and vowels are originally pictographic. "Beth" (jSTjra) is 'house,' "gimul" {yaixixa) is 'camel,' "daleth" (5eXra) is 'door,' etc.^ The Greek indeed developed the vowels a, e, t, o out of the Phoenician consonants aleph, he, yod, ayin? (a) Origin and Character of the Consonants. Though the Greek consonants undoubtedly come chiefly from the Phoenician sjnubols, they were not all used at once nor in the same places. At first the digraphs KB, TB, V\ B were used for the later X, 6, $, and even after these letters won a foothold K2, XS, ns, $S were used in Attic for ^, \p. It is only since 403 B.C. that the Greek alphabet (aXâ /Sjjra) has had regularly twenty-four letters. Jannaris^ gives an interesting study of the way the Greek letters looked in eighth, sixth, fifth and fourth centuries In the inscriptions, however, B.C. as shown by the inscriptions. KOTTTra continued to be used (like Latin Q) and /3aO or diyaidfia. This last, though called double yafx/j-a, perhaps represents the Phoenician vau.
It is
like
On
{v)
the use of
digamma
t
in
Homer
of
see Kiihner-Blass.^
a half-vowel in
Latin u
^
fact, as
i
(j).^
and
are partly consonant in force,
and
The dropping
digamma
affected
many words, some of which have the rough breathing, though Thumb and Moulton^ think that this is an accident simply, and
the rough breathing
cases like Kad'
is
due to analogy and not to the digamma
in
eros, etc.
But changes
in the use of the consonants
403
when the Euclidean spelling reform was instituted As the vowels underwent steady development, so it was and is with the consonants. B early began occasionally to have the force of v, and y sometimes the j value of as in modern Greek, and it was even inserted (irrational 7).^ In general in the kolvt] the
did not cease
B.C.
t 1
2 jb. Gk. Gr., p. 21. Cf. Mcisterh., Gr. etc., p. 3. 24 f. On the whole subj. of changes in the pap. see Mayser, Gr., MSS. pp. 163-248. For general remarks about consonant-changes in Bd. I, Bee Swete, O. T. in Gk., p. 301. pp. 85-101. 5 lb., pp. 77-85, 101-103. The mod. Gk. pronounces avT6s = aftos. The
Cf. Jann., Hist.

lb., p.
'
LXX
inscr. give the

8
form
dFuToD.
ff.
Cf.
Riem. and Goelzcr, Phonet.,
p. 34.
Hellen., pp. 245
ProL, p. 44.
is
But Sommer, Gr. Lauistudien, shows

187
f.; cf.
tluit
tlie
rough
breathing
*
sometimes due to digamma.

Ilcllen., p.
Thumb,
p.
134
f.
for
mtervocal 7.
210
NEW TESTAMENT
Such
consonant-changes are
pecuUarities as
p. 100).
(6)
is
much
fewer than those of the vowel.

are
era, ylvojiaL, \i]ii4/oyLaL
common
(Thackeray, Gr.,
5
The Insertion of Consonants.

in
a.v-b-pbs,
In the older Greek

/3
inserted
and
so
with
in
iiea-qix-^-pia}
The
Attic used either form in
tii-K[{iji)-K\r}p.L,
e/i7rt(/i)7rpr7;ut.
:
So in Ac.
6 N*'^BHLP
14
17
DEP
read kfXTnfnrXwp (D h-), and in Ac. 28

Tiiu-irpaadaL.
:
most cursives have

variation.
The
LXX
in Lu. 2
32, etc., has 'la-r-paijX.
MSS. show the same The retention of
in all the forms (derivatives also) of Xa/x/Sdj^co (root \a0) is in accord with the usage of the papyri ("almost invariably")- and the inscriptions of the Koivrj, and is due to the Ionic \aii\pofxaL.^ Hence
\7]iJ.\po{xai,
papyri give both forms.
(LXX
In the Ptolemaic age (iii/i B.C.) the i/iv a.d. the papyri and uncials and N. T.) give almost wholly /x forms. In the Byzantine
tKi]ii4)Qy}v,
etc.
From
period (vi/viii a.d.) the classic

eray, Gr., p. 108
f.;
\i]\pojiaL
reappears.
f.;
Cf.
Thack-
Mayser,
In
Gr., p.
194
Cronert, Mem., p. 66.
In the
LXX
the uncials give the spelling of their
own
date, not
that of the translation.
32 the extra 7 in /xo7(7)tXdXoj' In is inserted by the Syrian class only and is not to be accepted. So also in Ac. 3 7 Heb. 11 32 tt is added to 'Laixawv (Sa/zi^coj^)
7:
: . :
Mk.
({<ABC)
ity of
5 is
added to
o-(j^L'(o)p6i'
which
is
as yet "unexplained."^
In the case of
'kbpaixvvTrfvQ)
(Ac. 27: 2), read

'
by W. H. on authorand
spelling
AB
16 Copt, instead of
kbpanvrrripQ, a slightly different
situation exists.
Two ways
of pronouncing
the
name
(c)
of the city existed.
The Omission of Consonants.

(all
There are not

is
many
apKov,
cases where a consonant drops out of a N. T. word.
In Rev.
13
2 the correct reading
the uncials)
undoubtedly
not apKTov.
and in inscripThis form is found also in the tions of the first or second century a.d.^ W. H., following B and 22) read jSeefe/SouX instead of êeXêôvX. J<, also (save in Mk. 3
:
LXX
and ytvoicrKO} are the exclusive forms in the N. T., though some MSS., as in the papyri and inscriptions, have yeLv-. NachTivo/xai
'
pas, Ma^l-p-pr].
3
Blass compares the insertion of consonants in Semitic names like "Ecr-52 Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34.
Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 179
f.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 64, for full references
concerning the use of n with XanlSavw. Cf. Gregory (Prol., p. 72) for list and references of the various compounds of Xanfiavu and Xij/ji/'ts in the N. T., The MSS. &va, iviwir-, &VTI, aTTO Kara, ixera, irapa, wpo irpocr. have Xrifixpofiat (Q \ri\povTai) and kXr!fji(f)9rjv. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 22.
,
LXX
Blass, Gr. of
lb., p. 65.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 24; W.-Sch., p. 64.
"

manson^
211
states clearly the facts. The Ionic as early as the fifth century B.C. used the 711^ forms, and the Doric shows the same Even in Athens the jlv forms situation in the fourth century. appear, and in the kolvt] the 7171' forms vanish. To\yo9a follows the Hebrew nibapa rather than the Chaldaic s^nâlba in having only one X. According to Winer-SchmiedeP the two forms Kav5a
and KKavda (Ac. 27 16) represent two different islands near each other, which were confused in the MSS. It is hardly worth while to remark that aapdcov (correct text in Rev. 4 3) is a substantive, while aaphvos (Text. Rec.) is an adjective. Blass^ and Wineror Double Consonants. (r/) Single concerning the use of single Schmiedel* comment on the obscurity in the N. T. The phenomena kolvt). or double consonants in the the modern In in the kolvt].^ situation the in general correspond to
: :
Greek vernacular
sonants, except in
(cf.
Thumb, Handbook, p. 27) the double conSoutheastern Greek dialects, have the value of
only one.
In the oldest Attic inscriptions in most cases where the doubling of consonants was possible the single consonant was used.^ The rule with initial p was that when it passed to the
middle of a word as a result of reduplication or the prefixing of

a preposition,
etc., it
:
was doubled.
But
pepapTLa/xhos is read
pepLUfxeuoL in
by
KACDP in Heb.
(Mt. 9
1
:
10 22 as in Ionic and late Greek,

-irepLpepapLixhos
36),
and
in N* (Rev. 19
13).
Blass''
observes
Inschr., p. 108. Cf. also Hoffmann, Griech. Dial., Bd. Ill, p. 173; Meisterh., p. 128; Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 165; Schmid, Atticismus, Bd. IV., p. 579 (for the Atticistic yLyv); Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., p. 91 f.;
Magn.
Reinhold,
De
Graec. Patr.
etc.,
pp. 46-48.
In the
LXX
yivoixat
and
yivuaKOi
f.)
are uniform.
Cf. Holbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 21.
Thack.
(Gr., p. Ill
finds
illustrations of the omission of intervocalic
in the
LXX
uncials as in the
pap. (Mayser, Gr., 2 P. 65, where a

3
p.
167
f.).
full
discussion of the geographical points
is
given.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 10.

P. 55;
cf.
* 6
also
Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., pp. 225
ff.
Thumb, Hellen., pp. 20 ff.; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., pp. 122 ff.; Nachm., Magn. Inschr., pp. 88 ff.; Cronert, Mem. Graec. Hercul., pp. 74 ff.
See
Cf. Mayser, Gr., pp. 211-219.
For the
LXX
see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp.
The MSS. of the LXX are largely the same as those of the N. T. and show similar phenomena in orthograpliy. So in Ex. 7: 10 B has tpiftv, 'App. Both Appaftuv and kpafiwv occur, and it is in the paji. that we can often find the
14-16.
true Pt()l(Mnai(! spelling.
'
curiously has usually
yif-rjtxa
and B
yffvriiâ.
appear
Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 10, 32<S. Similar variations in usage as to p or pp in the inscr. of the koivt) (Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 124, Ai'o'Tipi7rajs, etc.; Nachm., Magn. etc., p. 91) and even in the Attic inscr. (Meisterh., p. 95,
Cf. Reinhold,
dvaprjOii'Tts, etc.).
De
Graec.
etc., p. 42, for exx. of ipixraro, etc.
212
S4?3in"i for 'Fufirj, though some Attic In Mt. 9 20 alixoppoovaa is correct inscriptions use initial pp. BD 61 read avavTLpy]To:s, and in Ac. In Ac. 10:29 (NL one p). avavTipi]TOJv. In Ac. 27 43 W. H. follow NC in 19 36 BL have all but the Syrian class read ewLand in Lu. 19 35 awoplxpavTas, In Mt. 9 36 pl\j/avTes and NAB have the same form in 1 Pet. 5:7. the Neutral (and Alexandrian) class has epin/xevoL, the Syrian epp., has pepL/j.^.-. In Mt. 15 30 ^^DL read eptxpav, while only while the Syrian class has lppL\pav, and so in Ac. 27: 19. But in Lu. 17: 2 In Jo. 19 23 'ippiTTTai is supported by all MSS. save 11 and p^'=^ In 2 Cor. 12 4 apprjra apa<t)o<i is read by W. H., though B has app. In 2 Cor. 1 22 W. H. is right as appcoaros in Mk. 6 5, 13, etc.
that the Syriac versions use
follow
BCD
vs.
NAL
in reading appa^cova, a Semitic of
in its Semitic
form has the doubling
word which the consonant and the

:
--- according to Blass/ who compares also the Latin arrha. W. H. have Staprjâs in Mk. 14 63 after BN, while in Lu. 8 29 Siapricrcrcov is supported by ABCRUA. In Mt. 26 65 W. H. give bCtpri^tv on the authority of only 9f according
metrical prosody
:
BL read dLeprjaaero in Lu. 5 6. But Tpoakprjêv 48 is supported by }<BDL and in 6 49 by BDL. In Ac. 16 22 xeptpiyâ^res is the reading of all uncials save P, but most cursives follow P. But in Ac. 14 14 all MSS. have biappi]âvres and in Lu. 9 42 the same thing is true of epp-qêv. In Mk. 2 21 kwipairTH is read by all the best MSS. and the Syrian class 67 kpaTnaav. In 2 Cor. is divided, and the same is true of Mt. 26 11:25 epa^bladrjv is correct, while likewise epaPTLtxev (Heb. 9:19, 21) has all save late Syrian support. So -pp- in eppWir] (BD epp-qd-q,
to Tisch., though
in Lu. 6
:
: : :
not
W.
H.,
:
Mt. 5
21, etc.) is the constant reading in the

:
N. T.
In Eph. 3
follow
Col. 1
17 (18) and Col. 2

1
:
7, all
MSS. have
:
kppLto^/xhoL.
W. H.
7 with epvaaro, while in In 2 Tim. 3 11 AD read epvaaro, and NAC 37 give epvaOrjv in 2 Tim. 4 17. All MSS. have eppcoaOe (Ac. 15 29). Mvppa (B) is changed to Mvpa in the Syrian text (Ac.
alone in 2 Cor.
10; 2 Pet. 2
13
is
joined
by FGP.
Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 160), but Winer-Schmiedel found only Mvpa in the inscriptions. Uapapvcipev (Heb. 2 1)
2 5;
:
cf.
(p. 58)
is
read
by
all
the pre-Syrian classes.
UappTjala, Tapprjcnaôfxat. (from Tav-
priaia),
not
Tvapt]-, is
the usual reading in the N. T. (see Additional
Notes), as occasionally in the inscriptions.^

1
W. H.
read
ivvppbs in
p. 148.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 10. 'Apa/Scoj- "only Western," Hort, Notes on Orth., But the pap. (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 33; Deiss., B. S., p. 183 f.)
frequently have apa^6>v, and, as Deissmann remarks, people are not always particular to preserve
mere etymology.
CIGn,2722.
5.
Cf.W.-Sch.,p. 56.

Rev. 6 :4 and 12
:3,
213
though the evidence
is
pretty evenly balanced.^

:
The Alexandrian class has wvpaêL in Mt. 16 2, but W. H. reject the passage. The MSS. all have XeL/jiappov in Jo. 18 1. The other instances outside of p are not so numerous. The MSS. (all but late Syrian) support âWapTLov, not fioKavTiov, as
:
Blass^ argues for it also on metrical grounds. because given by no grammarian, was "attributed by Fritzsche (on Mark, pp. 619 f.) to the carelessness of transcribers" (Ezek. 36 30) so in the (Thayer), but as sometimes in the
do the papyri. 2
TevrjfjLa,
LXX
N. T. the best MSS. distinguish between yhvqixa (from yepuaoS), 'living creatures,' as yevprifxara extSt-iif (Mt. 3 7) and ykpyjixa (from yivonai), 'the fruits of the earth/ as k rod yePTjuaros ttjs a/xTeXov (Mk. 14:25). Phrynichus* condemns the use of ykppriiia = Kapirbs (Diodorus, Polybius, etc.). Root of both verbs is yep. This distinction between yhrjfxa and y'tvvr}pi.a appears in the papyri also, though ytp-qdePTa occurs in the Fayiim Papyri (B.U. 110. 14) "undoubtedly from yeppao)."^ So N. T. MSS. vary^ about ytppr]p.a. The gram:
marians (Lobeck, ad Phrynichum, p. 726) reject tKxvvoi for e/cxw, but the best MSS. give eKxvvfo) everywhere in the N. T. W. H. accept this ôlic form in Mt. 23:35; 26 28; Mk. 14:24; Lu. 11 50 marg.) Lu. 22 20 (bracket the passage) Ac. 9 22; 22 20. So also avpxvvpco (W. H.) in Ac. 9 22; 21 31. Cf. vwepeKxvppofxeLikewise MSS. support apaâlppoi, oTTappofxaL, vov in Lu. 6 38. while the Êolic airoKTeppu is received by W. H. in Rev. 6:11 and aiTOKTeppvoi in Mk. 12 5, though rejected elsewhere in N. T. on divided testimony. "Emros has been restored throughout the
:
N. T. by W. H. instead of epparos of the Text. Rec. The inscriptions support the N. T. MSS. in this change (Thayer). So W. H. give epeprjKOPTa (Mt. 18:12 ff.; Lu. 15:4, 7) but kppea always. 'Epeos, not kpueos, W. H. give (Ac. 9 7) as the LXX (Is. 56 10), a word possibly identical with a.peo:s (apaos). W. H. present^ /cpd/SarTos instead of the Kpa^âros of the Text. Rec, though Kpaâros would more nearly represent the Latin grabatus as it appears KpajSarptos is found also for the in Etym. M. (154. 34; 376. 36).
:
Tho
inscr.
show
irvpd^
also (Dittcnb., 177. 15; 748. 20).

^
2 * s ^
Cninert,
Graec. ilercul., p. 76. Rutherford, New Phryn., p. 348.

Dciss., B. S., pp. 109
f.,
Mem.
Qr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 11.
184.
Cf. Thackeray, p. 118.
Gregory, Prol., p. 79. ^ In Mk. IJ (.5) has Kp&âros, but is not followed by W. 11. in .To. and Ac. Thumb, Ilellen., p. 22, argues for (ifi as the correct form from mod. Gk. (6). usage. Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 328) cites both KpafiaTTo-: anti Kpaânov from
Arrian's Diss. Epict.
and
Kpaliarros
from the pap.
Cf.
Moult on's note
in Einl.
214

i)-
NEW TESTAMENT
however, has 10/11 times Aaaea (Ac. 15).
:
Latin grahatarius (CIGII 2114 d 27

is
{^>
the strange form KpaâKTos {-tt- only in Ac. 5

:
8) is Aao-crata in
some MSS.
correct.
Mao-ao/xat is
from Aramaic s^îtisiD, the right reading in Rev. 16 10 (NACP).

Maixwvas,
:
Only the Western class has TX-quvprjs for irXrjiJLiJLvprjs in Lu. 6 48. W. H. properly have paKos, not pd/cKos, from prjypvjjLL (Mt. 9 16; Mk. 2 21). In the Western interpolation in Ac. 20 15, W. H.
: : :
:
read TpwyvXiou, not -vWtov nor
-tXtoj'.
Some Latin MSS.

:
read
hysopus for vaawTos in Jo. 19

-eXXos, is read in 2
29 and Heb. 9
19.
^vyeXos, not
cursives.
Tim.
15
by
all
save
and most
call
Cf. ^vyeXios in
CIGn
3027.
for special re-
The Hebrew and Aramaic proper names

mark.
"Avms = '\-^ (Josephus "Avavos) may be due to the dropping of a or to the analogy of "Aj^m = "jn. W. H. (Ac. 1:23; 15:22) prefer Bapaa^jSas (from i^3"4:i5, 'son of the Sabbath') to The Text. Rec. has Tepr]BapaajSas (from s^nri ^?, 'son of Saba').^ aaper (W. H. Tevvr]aapeT) in Mk. 6 53, elsewhere -vv-.^ V6p.oppa is read in LXX and N. T. (Mt. 10: 15, etc.), nSa^. W. H. accept in Lu. 4 27 = S'^'"'^'*. 'leaaal 'EXio-atos, not 'EXtcro-. (Syrian) (Lu. 3 32, etc.) comes from ^"43^. The N. T. and 1 Mace, have
: : :
but the ancient grammarians and lexicographers preIn Lu. 3 27 'loiavav (indeclinable) is the right text. W. H. prefer 'Icodra (ini'^) to 'Icodvm in Lu. 8:3; 24 10. But more doubt exists concerning 'IcodfTjs, which W. H. read everywhere save in Ac. 4:6; 13:5; Rev. 22:8, following B and sometimes
'loTTTTTj,
fer
'loTrry.^
D. The single v prevails in D in Luke and Acts, while 'Iwawq^ is more common in D in Matthew, Mark, John.* }< has the single The inscriptions have V in the part written by the scribe of B.^
Blass^ finds the explanation in the Hebrew termiit both ways. nation -an, which was treated as a variable inflection in the Greek, MSS. having now 'loiavav and now 'Iwavov. This fact the
LXX
opposes the derivation of the name '\wavvr]s from 'lwavav-y}s, leaving Maptd/x {"^T^p) = MapLafxp.rj in Josephus.* the -jjs unexplained.^ Mecalas is from the Aramaic i*n;^":;?3 = Hebrew niffi^n, but the Syr-
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 57.
Cf. Pliny (Nat. Hist., V, 15. 71 for Tevv) also. In W.-Sch., p. 57, the point is made that the unpointed Targums do not distinguish between "^Q'^ and ^Qli. 3 W.-Sch., p. 56, =13' or "2\ Cf. on this subject Helbing, Gr. d. Sept.,
2
p.
26
6 6
f.
Blass,"Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 328, quoting E. Lippett.

'
Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 159. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 11.
W.-Sch., p. 57; E. Bibl., p. 2504 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 11.
f.
215
Sdppa, Heb. ian class reads Meaias in Jo. 1:41 (42); 4:25. n-iic (feminine of îa), is read by MSS. generally in N. T., though
has âpas in Ro. 4:19 (vulg. Sarae). All the MSS. have vv Xappav is in Xovaavpa (Lu. 8: 3) after the Heb. nr^^T:; ('a lily')and a few cursives have supported by most MSS., though has Xappap Xapap in Ac. 7:2 after the Hebrew T)n. The
LXX
and the Greek writers (Strabo, etc.) have Kdppat, Latin Carrhae. Doubling of the Aspirate. As a rule the aspirated mutes (0, x, are not doubled in more correct writing either in early or late Greek, but N. T. MSS. give examples of 66, xx, 00- In Philemon 2 D has 'A(t>(pia, while 3 has 'AxTria (so vulg.) and FG, etc., even In Mk. 7 34 all MSS. have e(j)cj)ada (or </)0e0d) save A 'Aix(t)ia. and two Coptic MSS. which have kiT4>a6a. W. H. give Ua66ato^ = Hebrew .-"in?? in the N. T. (Mt. 9:9ff., etc.), and ^la66av in Mt.
(f>)
:
15.
W.'h. read MaT^dr

1
:
in Lu. 3
In Ac.
23, 26
W. H. have
24, but Ma^^dr in Lu. 3 29. Ma66im, but in Lu. 3 25 f they pre:
fer Marra^tas to Ma66a6las.
In Ac. 5
1,
W. H.
consider 2d0(/)etpa
'beautiful,' or
Western and read
SdTrêtpa (either
Aramaic TQp,
Hebrew
(e)
^"^QP,
'precious stone ').^
The
LXX MSS.
show the same
variations.
Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 121. Assimilation of Consonants. In the early period of the Greek language the inscriptions often show assimilation of consonants between separate words. The words all ran together in the writing {scriptura continua) and to some extent in proUsage varied nunciation like the modern French vernacular. the distowards constantly very early, but the tendency was e^ However, (dissimilation). tinctness of the separate words Ikk, though ky, ex, consonants, before came finally to be written k k^K
and even e (cf. Latin) are found in Attic inscriptions,^ as ky Only sporadic examples outside of e^ and k appear vTja^v, etc. in the N. T. as diê7Xt7rros in D (Lu. 12:33), aireySvaeL in B (Col. 2 11), eyyova in D (1 Tim. 5 4), eggona, not cngona? The Attic The most inscriptions even have s assimilated in tovK \ldovs.
:
:
On the whole subject see Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 159, and Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 11, Cf. also Schweizer, Pcrg. etc., pp. 110 f., 114 f. Cf. for the pap., Mayser, Gr., pp. 190-224; Soden, I, pp. 1372 ff. 2 Cf. Meistorh., In North Engl, one hears "ith wood" for pp. 105-109. the LXX show the same phenomena as one of MSS. The "in the wood."
sees in the N. T.
MSS. and the pap., like iy yaarpL, tfj. nfcrv, avyypa(l)fi.i', etc. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 16 f.; Thack., Gr., pp. 130 ff. Alexandrian ' Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 12; Ausspr. etc., p. 123. writers followed the Attic in this assimilation. Rlass compares the gullural
use of a
in aijXi
(Mt. 27
4())
in
L and
in
the
LXX
'Atpudif, 'Atvdup.
216

assimilation between separate words
is
common
in
words ending
like
tthjl
in -V, especially
with the article and h.

in the
kolvtj
Examples
-koXlv,
ToK \6yov, Top 'F68lov, eX Aea^co, ea XlSuvi, etc., are very
common.
Similar
phenomena occur
inscriptions,
failure to assimilate is far
more
noticeable.
See
list
of
though the examples
Nachmanson.^ As a rule the papyri do not assimilate such In the N. T., as in the later kolpt] generally, only a few remnants survive of this assimilation of v between words. Blass,* who has used the MSS. to good purpose, finds several, as, for instance, ky yaarpi in A (Lu. 21 23), ey Kavd in AF (Jo. 2 11), eî
in
cases.^
: :
fikaoi
in
:
AC
(Rev. 1:13; 2:1,

e/x
etc.),
in
(Mt. 18 2; Lu. 8:7),
Trpaurrjrt
in J<
(Heb. 2:12), in LA (Jas. 1 21), av^ Mapta^ in

:
AP
AE,
etc. (Lu.
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 assimilation is the rule (only two clear exceptions) for both avv and h, due possibly^ to the absence of uncials. The later papyri as a rule do not assimilate avv, though often h.'' In the N. T. no examples occur of h or avv before ^ or p.^ Hort^ gives a list of what he considers "the certain and constant forms" of h and aiiu in composition. "All other compounds of avv and h are included in the list of alternative readings." Hort thus reads kp.- before the labials (x, j8, 0) and the liquid p except evTepLiraTTjcrco (2 Cor. 6 16), possibly kvTvv'eoiv (Ac. 9:1), and evwpoadev once (Rev. 4:6) and Western class elsewhere. So assimilation takes place before the liquid X, as hWoyaw. But before the palatals k, y the usage varies, though before % we have kyxp'^crai (Rev. 3 18) with K reading h.
: :
Meisterh., p. 110
f.
Cf. Jann., Hist.

f.
Gk.
Gr., p. 97.
Magn.
Inschr., p. 100
p. 92.
Cf. also Schwcizer, Perg. etc., p. 127; Jann.,
Hist.
3
Gk. Gr.,
Cronert,
lb.
f.
*
8
lb., pp. 11
Graec. Hercul., p. 57; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 12. 6 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 149. In general see Wecklein, Curae Epigr. ad Gr. Graecae etc., 1869,
f.,
Mem.
30G.
p.
47
'
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 12.
Cf. Cronert,
Mem.
Graec. Hercul., p. 61.
8 ^
Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 149. See for Thackeray, pp. 132 ff. lb. For the inscr. see Nachm., Magn., p. 104 f. The Coptic shows similar
LXX
variation.
For the loss of final u in mod. Gk. vernac. see Thumb, Handb.,
p.
24 f.
217
kvKai-
We
vt.a,
read hy^y pafxfihr] in 2 Cor. 3

kvKaLviô:,
(NABCDFG) and
tPKaroLKeoo, ej^/cayxw/xat, kvKevTpiû, kvKplvoi,
though
7-
except in Acts.^- As to avv here is Hort's decision. Zwir- he accepts save in avfj-iroaLa. On the other hand Hort has only awâaCkeboo, awîâ^w, elsewhere avuâs in avfjLâlvcj; only avv^y-qpn, cvp(f>vcj:, but cru/z^- as in (Tun4)epo:. With
Kokkiji,
eyK\T]na, etc.,
and
tyKaTaXelTTOj
avvKa.Q-np.aL, only avyyibut avvxpo^paL and avyxv(n%. He has both avvkakku), avvKvirovpai and avWapâvw, avWeyco; avvpadrjTrjs, etc., but avppopvr]s,
the palatals Hort reads awK- always, as in

(7vy KaXviTTO},
<^tfco,
(jvppop4)os.
Hort has
etc.,
aw^C:, etc.,
but ch^vye;
avp\Pvxos,
but
and <yvaTpe4)w, etc. For the detailed MS. evidence see Gregory .2 Hort also prefers -KoXLvyeveala, but
is
has both avvoTavpow,
doubtful about Kevxptal,

(/)
iravTX-qdei.
Interchange and Changing Value of Consonants. One

labial, palatal, dental,
cannot here go into the discussion of the

velar stops, the spirants, liquids, nasals.
One can give only the special variations in the N. T. The 6 sound was rare in the older Indo-Germanic languages and easily glided into u or v.^ The Greek
/Saifco is
like venio in Latin,
/Stos is
like vivus
v).
though
different in his-
tory.
In modern Greek
AajSiS.^
^=v
v in
(English
AaveiS
In the N. T. as in the
(W. H.) where the minuscules Cor. 6 15) it is from n?: 5? ('lord of the forest'), while the Text. Rec. /SeXtaX is from "2?^^|i ('worthlessness').^ The variation between pa and pp, Moulton^ obread
LXX all the uncials have
In the case of
I3e\iap (2
down to modern Greek. The Attic pp did not displace the Ionic and early Attic pa entirely in the Attic inscriptions.^ In the N. T., like the rest of the kolvt], usage is divided.^ Hort (p. 149)
serves, runs
prefers aparjv except apprju perhaps 4/4 times in Paul.

pels
In the Gos(13
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.
p.
6)
About
iv
in
composition see Gregory, Prol.
etc.,
70
f.;
Sodcn,
I,
p. 1383.
iKK6Trr]v.
'Ep in
MSS. appears
f.
On
tvirpoadev
composition as in the pap. see Mayser, Gr.,

in
iv-,
ey- and even -, as

for the history of
p. 45.
Prol. etc., p. 73
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr., pp. 91-97,
this subject
* '
during various stages of the language.
Cf. Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
PhiloL, pp. 98, 124
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 66 note.

Cf.
ib., p.
58 note, for further discussion.

Cf. also
^ '
Pro!., p. 45.
Thumb,
Thcol. Literaturzeit.,
XXVIII,
p.
122.
Meisterh., Att. Inschr., pp. 99 f. Schweizcr, Perg. Inschr., p. 125;

6.PP7IV
Nachm., Magn.
44
f.
Inschr., p. 91.
In the
pap.
33).
"greatly preponderates over
&pcrriv" (INIoulton, CI.
Cf. also Reinhold,
De
Grace,
etc., p.
Thumb,
Rev., 1901, p. llellen., p. 77 f.
218

f displaces
NEW TESTAMENT
o-
dappttv is the correct text,

0-
in a
few words.
Voiced
had the sound of z, and f was pronounced ad} "Afcoros (Ac. 8 40) lilffi!!*!, Ashdod. Lagarde's LXX has 'Aae8d6}8 in Josh. 11:22 (A has 'Ao-rjSwS, B 'AaeXSw). nt? is rendered also "Efpas or "Ecrdpas. But in the N. T. period 'Ap/iofoj, not the Attic f is changing from the ds sound to z. Lachmann has /xaôs for /j-aaros in dpjUOTTco, is the N. T. form.^
in union with voiced consonants
:
Rev. 1 13. In 1 Th. 5 19 BDFG (Western class) read ^(3hpvre,^ simply phonetic spelling. Hort^ considers Zfxuppa as Western only in Rev. 1 11; 2 8, but the papyri and inscriptions both give it.^ The most noticeable feature of all is, however, that
:
:
the Attic and Boeotian tt did not hold against the Ionic aa (though even Thucydides and the Tragic poets used o-cr). Papyri,
inscriptions
and N. T. MSS.
all
unite in using aa as the rule,

It
though
all
occasionally have tt.
does not seem possible to
reduce the usage to an intelligent rule.'' 'EKirXrjTTOfxevos is accepted by W. H. in Ac. 13 12, elsewhere aa. Both eXaaacov
:
2:10; Ro. 9:12) and eXaTTuv (1 Tim. 5:9; Heb. 7:7) are found, but only the "Hterary" (so Blass) words eXarroco (Jo. 3 30; Heb. 2:7, 9) and eXarroj/ew (2 Cor. 8: 15). Similar diversity exists between riacov (1 Cor. 11 17; 2 Cor. 12: 15) and i](rGudr]Te 13) on the one hand and riTTrjjxa (1 Cor. 6:7; Ro. (2 Cor. 12 11 12) and riTTaadai (2 Pet. 2 19 f.) on the other. In Heb. 6:9; 10:34 W. H. read Kpdaaova, elsewhere KpeWTova (Heb. 1:4; 7:7,
(Jo.
:
:
19,
22; 8:6; 9:23; 11:16,

literary influence,
35,
40;
12:24), and Hebrews has

for Blass' idea above.
is
some
7
:
an argument
:
Paul
1
has KptLTTov only in 1 Cor. 7

38; 11
:
9,
while Kpetaaov
found in
1
Cor.
:
17; Ph. 1
23.
Hort accepts
KpelTTov in
Pet. 3
17
1 Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., pp. 113, 115. On the whole subject of the exchange of consonants in the pap. see Mayser, Gr., pp. 169-188, 219-224. For the LXX exx. {ovbkv, oWkv; yX&aaa, yXcoTTa; <j}v\aaao}, (f)vXa.TTu', kXdacrcov,
kXcLTTuv; apprjp, dappo), etc.) see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 17-20;
Thack., Gr.,
pp. 100-124. 2 Cf. Rutherford,

3 * 6
New
Phyrn., p. 14.
:
Cf. a^êcTTos in
(Mk. 9
43), iyvwîxhos, etc., in pap. (W.-Sch., p. 59).
Notes on Orth.,
p. 148.
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.
219
Trjfiepou.
2:21
it
(doubtful).
is
Cf. arifxepou for the Attic
"OpvL^ (Lu. 13:34)
observes that
Western by Hort, though Moulton^ has some papyrus support and is like the modern
called
Greek (Cappadocian) dpvix. (g) Aspiration of Consonants.
There
is
besides
some
fluc-
tuation in the aspiration of consonants.
double aspirates Hke 'k^cfila, etc. very old and very common in the inscriptions and papyri, ^ though the N. T. has only a few specimens. W. H. read "kKt\bap.dx in
Ac. 1:19, bm. So paKo. (Mt. 5:22), S^p^^:,, but aaâxdavd (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,
:
See under (d) for the This uncertainty of aspiration is
^W
and read ââpkr save in four passages, NaâpW in Mt. 21 11; Ac. 10 38, and Nafapa in Mt. 4 13; Lu. 4 16. In Lu. 11 27; 23 29 DFG have fiaadoi for fxaarol, likewise {< in Rev. 1 13. 'EdWri is read by cursives, Clem., Or., etc., in 1 Cor. 5:7. In oWeis and
: : : : : :
H-ndels
after elision of
the
has blended with the eh as
if it
were
and become d. It is first found in an inscr. 378 b.c. and is the usual form in the pap. in iii/B.c. and first half of ii/B.c. By I/a.d. the 5 forms are supreme again (Thack., Gr., pp. 58 ff) Blass^ finds
T
.
ovdepos in
Lu. 22
;
35 (ABQT); 2 Cor. 11:8

:
23
1
14
(NET)
:
Ac. 15
9
;
(BHLP)
fxrjdh in
19
27
:
(NBMP); oWh in Lu. (NABHP) 26 26 (NB)

;
:
Cor. 13
2 (kVABCL)
Ac. 27
33 (N*AB).
But
kôvdeveo:
in the
LXX and
in
the N. T. prevails, though
W. H.
(after
BD)
read
and KD read the Attic TravSoKdov, -evs in Lu. 10:34f., but W. H. accept iravBoxelop, -evs (from dexonai). Zapewra in Lu. 4 26 is the LXX rendering of riQi;^. T poirocfyopeo} and Tpo(t)0(i)opew are two distinct words, though the MSS. differ widely in Ac. 13 18, the Neutral and Western supporting rpoir-. Hort considers a4)vph for cnrvph right (Mt. 15:37, etc.). It is well attested by the papyri." W. H. read <t>6^'qdpov; not (p6(3r]Tpop, inLu. 21:11. (h) Variable Final Consonants. The use of p e(t)e\KvaTLK6v (paragogic p) cannot be reduced to any clear rule. The desire to avoid hiatus extended this usage, though it probably originally had a meaning and was extended by analogy to cases where it had none. Cf. English articles a, an (Giles, Man. of Camp. Philol, p. 208).
eôv8P7]drj
Mk.
12.
Prol., p. 45. Cf. Thumb, Ilellon., p. 90. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 59. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 24; W.-Sch., p. (jl. Cf. Mcisterh., p. 48, for this interuspiration in the old Attic inscr. Cf. Mayser, pji. ISO fT.
'
Moulton,
Prol., p. 45.
The
Ptol. pai).
have both
spellings, Deiss., B. S.,
p. 185.
Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 173.
220

thing
NEW TESTAMENT
403
In the old Attic before is true of movable final s. movable v was seldom used. It is more frequent in the new Attic up to 336 b.c, and most common in the kolvt], vanishing again in the modern Greek, as v easily disappears in pronunciation. Meisterhans^ has an interesting table on the subject, show-
The same
B.C. this
ing the relative frequency in different centuries.
This table
proves that in the kolvt] it came to be the rule to use the movable This is shown also by the V both before consonants and vowels.
and the Ptolemaic papyri. Per contra note the disfinal V in modern Greek vernacular, when not pronounced (Thumb, Handh., pp. 24 ff.). However, as a rule, this movable final v occurs only with the same classes of words as in the Attic as after -ct, karl and e in verbs (3d sing, past tenses). The irrational v mentioned as common later by Hatzidakis^ is The older N. T. MSS. (^ÂBC) are in harmony with the rare. Koivq and have the movable v and s both before consonants and vowels with a few exceptions. The later N. T. MSS. seem to Moulton* feel the tendency to drop these variable consonants. mentions ixdôiv (Jo. 5 36) as a good example of the irrational v
inscriptions^
appearance of
N. T. MSS. (ABEGMA). Cf. also the irrational v with the subjunctive in the papyri. So eav r]v apaevov P. Oxy. 744 (i/s.c.) for See Moulton, Prol., pp. 168, 187, for further examples. The %. failure to use this v was originally most common in pause, sometimes even before vowels.'^ Blass^ observes that it was only the Byzantine grammarians who made the rule that this v should be used before vowels and not before consonants, a rule of which their predecessors did not have the benefit, a thing true of many We moderns can teach the ancients other grammatical rules. the T. MSS.'' show no knowledge of this Since N. much Greek! H. follow a mechanical one indeed, "rule," grammatical W. later
in
1
"^
Att. Insclir., p. 114.
Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 137, whose table confirms that of Meisterh.
Cf. also Thieme, Inschr.
von Magn.,
236
ff.
p. 8;
Nachm., Magn.
Inschr., p. 110,
with similar table.
The pap.
agree, Cronert,
Mem.
Mayser, Gr.
sonants
3 *
d. gi-iech. Pap., pp.
In the
LXX
Graec. Hercul., p. 137, and v k<f>e\K. occurs before con-
also.
Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 22

s.
ff.;
Thack., Gr., pp. 134
ff.
So as to movable
Prol., p. 49.
Cf.
iêxpi- vixo>v
and
mxpis ov in
LXX.
Einl. etc., p. Ill, like
laToprje-rjv 6 uaos.
Cf. Schweiz., Perg. Inschr., p. 137.

p. 37.
Cf. also Reinhold,

.
De Graec,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 19. W.-Sch., p. 62. 7 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 147 f.; Gregory, Prol., p. 97 f. In simple truth movable was not so uniform in the earher Gk. (esp. Thuc.) as the grammars ^
imply.
Cf.
Maasson,
De
Uttera
Graec. parag., 1881, pp. 47, 61.
221
but the only practical guide under the circumstances. They go by the testimony of the oldest uncials. Hort gives a considerable list of examples where the v is wanting in one or more of the older uncials, but where W. H. have v, as in apovcnv (Mt. 4 6), iraffLv (Mt. 5 15), etc. But in Lu. 1 3 eSoê is read by J<BCD. In Ac. 24 27 /careXtTre is supported by {<B. There are about a dozen more instances in Hort's long list of alternative readings where W. H. prefer the form without v, rather more frequently after ai, than after e.^ W. H., however, have dKocn every^vhere, as was usually the case in the Attic inscriptions and always in the Ptolemaic papyri and the LXX MSS. both before vowels and consonants.^ So efxirpoadev, 'i^wdev, owLadev in the N. T. Likewise
: : : :
jrepvaL is
correct in 2 Cor. 8
s
10; 9:2.^
The
variable
calls for
a few words more.
All good
MSS.
give
avTLKpvs Xiov in Ac.
20
15.^
But
as in Attic, the
N. T. MSS.
"Axpt (always
usually have
axpi-
and
/x^xpt
even before vowels.
before consonants) thus precedes vowels some fifteen times, and
once only do we certainly^ have axpts (Gal. 3:

uncertain whether
in the
it is
19),
is
followed by av or
ov.
Mexpt
though it is always used
N. T. before a consonant and once before a vowel, M^xpt 'Iwavov (Lu. 16 16). The early N. T. editors used to print ovtoj before consonants and ourcos before vowels, but W. H. print ovtcos 196 times before consonants and vowels and only ten times outco These ten instances are Mk. 2:7; Mt. (air before consonants). 3: 15; 7: 17; Ac. 13:47; 23:11; Ro. 1:15; 6:19; Ph. 3:17; Heb. 12:21; Rev. 16:18." âtXoi'Tjs (2 Tim. 4: 13), Latin paenwZa. (i) Metathesis. See
:
Additional Notes.
IV. Breathings.
(a)
Origin of the Aspirate.

is
As
ern Greek no distinction

tus asper
'
made
or
in pronunciation
and spintus
lenis,
-wvevp-a
known, in the modbetween spiridaav and iruevfjia \pL\bv. That

is
well
'^
See Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 19; Gregory, Prol., p. 97. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 328, and references there given.
Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 19) quotes Attic usage for
irkpuffiv
Cf. Thack.,
Gr., p. 135.
*
''
before vowels.
For the Horn, avrupv and further items see W.-Sch., p. G3 and note. 'S.VTIKPVZ {KaravTLKpv) in Attic is 'downright,' not 'over against' (Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 20). Cf. for the pap. Mayscr, Gr., pp. 242 ff. * Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 148. But W. H. read dxp ov in Heb. 3 13, elsewhere axpi ov. oT further discussions of axpt and mxp' 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
is

"rough" breathing
is
NEW TESTAMENT
to say, the
in writing.
'
This sign
is only a conventional sign used indeed a comparatively modern device,
and
',
A.D.^
\-
then did not find a place in the Greek alphabet, and so is not found in the early uncial MSS. It becomes therefore a difficult question to tell whether the modern ignoring of the rough breathing was
the rule in the
first
in use in the MSS. generally since the eleventh century This form was an evolution from H (Phcenician B, he), and H, then L and J.^ This breathing (rough or smooth)
century a.d.
are practically worthless on this point.
The MSS., as Hort^ points out, The original use of H as

Ionic.
equal to h or the rough breathing was general in the old Attic
and the Doric, not the

inscriptions the usage
is
vEolic
and
And even
in the Attic
very irregular and uncertain.
Numerous
examples like HEKATON occur, but some like HEN also, so that even H was not always rough.'* The modern English cockneys have no monopoly of trouble with /I's. In French h is silent as Vhomme. The Greeks always found the matter a knotty probThe use of H = in the Ionic and Attic (after 403 B.C.) lem. The inscriptions left the Greeks without a literary sign for h. show that in the vernacular II continued to be so used for some
7j
time.
(fe)
Increasing De-aspiration
(Psilosis).
But
there
was a
steady decrease in the use of the h sound. The Ionic, like the ôlic, was distinguished by psilosis, and the kolv-t] largely^ fol-
lowed the Ionic in this respect. More certain is the use of the which succeeded the older KH, TH, aspirated consonants x, &, IIH.^ But certainly the rough breathing was in early use as the
</>>

Cf. Beldcer,
Intr. to
The marking
ib., p.
of the
rough breathing was
general in the earlier forms in vii/A.D.,

2
65.
MSS. of the Gk. See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 25 f., for remarks on breathMSS., where ôlic and Ionic psilosis occur in iw' 65o0 ings in the /car' Va as well as exx. of aspirated consonants like KaO' 6(p0a\novs, Kad' kviavrbv,
p. 310.
Anec, Gk. N. T.,
II. 692,
and Jann.,
Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 63.
Cf. also Sitterley, Praxis in
Test., 1898, p. 32.
LXX
k(f)'
eUev, not to
mention
ovk kcopaKaaiu
and ovx
l5ov.
For further remarks on

stop for the opening of the
Cf. also
breathings in the
*
LXX
see Swete, O. T. in Gk., p. 302.

Philol., pp. 81, 91.
Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
The
becomes breathed (rough). ijber d. Spir. Asper. im Griech., 1888, p. 63. ^ Cf. Thumb., p. 73 f. The Laconic Gk. used
glottis (lenis) easily
Thumb,
Unters.
in interaspiration as well
as at the beginning
p. 103) is
(ib., p. 8).
Dawes (Pronun.
of the
Gk. Aspirates, 1894,
not able to reach a final decision as to whether the Gk. aspirates are genuine aspirates Uke the Sans, according to Brugmann, Curtius, etc. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 91. On the whole subject of the aspirated

inscriptions show,
223
though not with much consistency.^ Somemay be due to the disappearance of a digamma, though sometimes a smooth breathing displaces it, as Then again the disapepyov from Fepyov"^ (cf. Enghsh 'work'). 0= lep6s.^ It is not strange result, as Laap6s same pearance of has the therefore that usage in the kolvt] is not uniform. Examples like vt' avTov, v(j>' avTov, ovk eoipconev, etc., appear in the Pergamum inThe same scriptions, not to mention Ka9' eVos, Ka9' I5iav, etc*
times the rough breathing
is told elsewhere in the kolvt] as in Magnesia,* Herculaneum.^ Some of this variation is probably due to analogy,^ so that though "de-aspiration was the prevailing tendency," ^ yet the N. T. shows several examples in the opposite direction.
story of uncertainty
(c)
Variations in the MSS. {Aspiration and

k,
Psilosis).
The
aspiration of the consonants
t, t in case of elision is therefore
a matter of documentary evidence ^ and occurs in the case of olvtI, The N. T. MSS. vary considerably among kwi, Kara, fieTo., ovk, vtto.
in the Gospels themselves as in the LXX, though some like and Acts are wholly untrustworthy about aspiration.^" In general
Attic literary usage cannot be assumed to be the
kolvt]
vernacular.
'AXodco
Hort^^ prefers
(1
'AdpaiJ.vvTr}v6s
:
(Ac. 27: 2) like
Hadrumetum.
Tim. 5 18) is connected with aXcjs or aXoorj and may be compared with dTTTjXiojrr/s (r?Xios).^^ Hort (p. 144) prefers a\v(TLs (Mk. 5:3), but elXiKpLvrjs and eVKLKpLvla, though eiX. has
Cor. 9:9
f.; 1
ancient authority.
and the
LXX
'AêXTrtfoj^res is read by DP in Lu. 6 35 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,
Cf.
De
Dig.
etc.,
1889, p. 47.
Cf. also Panes,
De
Dig. Hesiodea
in aspiration,
Quest., 1887, p. 48.

'
Sommer, Griech. Lautstudien, 1905,

in
p. 2.
On metathesis
aa Ixco
article
{ix'^),
see Meistcrh., p. 102, exx. of txw in Attic inscr. v/b.c.
See also
by Pernot
Rev. des
fit.
Grq., 1906, pp. 10-23,
on La Metathese
dans
*
les Dial,
de Chio.
etc.,
Schweizor, Perg. Inschr.

(Meistcrh., p. 87).
pp. 116
*
ff.
The
Attic
had only
i5ios,
but
ioprij
8
Nachm., Magn.
p.
Inschr., p. 83.
Cronert,
Mem.
Grace. Hercul.,
152
f.
Thumb,
Hellen. etc., p. 64.

Prol., p. 44.
Moulton,
(p. 106).
Cf. also for the inscr., Dittenb.,
e'
Ito% (458. 71),
KoJB'
iUav (233. 49),

311.
and
for the pap.,
1904
9
Cf. also Hort, Intr.
Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901 (pp. 33, 434) and to Gk. N. T., p. 312.
Bla.ss,
lb., p.
'
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 15.

Prol., p. 91;
" Intr. to Gk. N. " W.-Sch., p. 40.
T., p. 313; App., p. 160.
" Gregory,
Thack., p. 125.
224
in

in the Attic.^
NEW TESTAMENT
:
Hermas and
:
In Ro. 8
it
20
:
W. H.
26;
1
accept
Cor. 9
:
</>'
eXiridL,
while various
MSS. support
:
in Ac. 2
10;
:
Ro. 4 18; 5:2; Tit. 1 2, and FG have Kad' k\Trl8a in Tit. 3 7. Hort^ thinks this is due to digamma dropped as well as in the case of d(/)t5co (Ph. 2 23), but analogy to a4)opav may be the explanation.^ "E^tSe is read by a few MSS. in Ac. 4 29 as k4>Zbev in Lu. 1 25. Gregory* gives many examples of d(/)-, e^-, Kad- with eXxtfco and dbov in the LXX. W. H. offer ohx l5ov as an alternative
: :
reading in Ac. 2
eUop in Gal.
ovx
once, in
1
:
7,
while
reads ovx
Ibovres in 1 Pet. 1
8 and ovx
19.
has ovx
oiPeade in
:
Lu. 17: 22.
W. H.^ put
:
Ka^' idiav appears in K the margin in Gal. 2 14. B eight times, in D three times, in A once (Mt. 14 23; 17: 1,19; 20: 17; 24:3; Mk.4 :34; 6 :31; 9 :28; 13:3). But W. H. nowhere accept it, not even when B combines with }< or D. }<B have
'lovdaLKoJs in
Mt. 24 3. The form Kad' IBlav is common in the kolpt] inscripin Ac. 17 16. On the and the papyri. KadeiSoAov is read by other hand Kad' eros, so common in the kolv-q (cf. Latin vetiis), is not found in the N. T., all MSS. in Lu. 2 41 reading Kar' 'eros. Hort^ considers ovk loT-qKev (Jo. 8 :44) to be merely the imperfect indicative of (xttjko}. So also as to lar-qKev in Rev. 12 4. f< has k(})iopKr](TLs in Mt. 5 33, a form common in the Doric inscripDP have 'e4>lopKo% in 1 Tim. 1:10. Li Rev. 12:11 A tions.^ reads ovx vyaT-rjaeu, while ovx oXiyos is read in the LXX and papyri as well as a number of times in Ac. (12 18 by }<A, 14 28 by N, 17 4 by B, 19 23 by N*AD, 19 24 by Js*, 27 20 by A). In Ac. 5 28 D has 'tcjâya-ydv. W. H. print on the other hand airoKaTLUTavei in Mk. 9 12 rather than aTOKaraaTaveL though with hesitation.^ So likewise W. H. give eTrto-rarat instead of k(j)l<7TaTaL
it
in
tions
N. T. Gk., p. 16. Cf. Thumb, Unters. d. Spir. Asper, p. 65. Notes on Orth., p. 143. 3 Moulton, Prol., p. 44} Thumb, Spu-. Asper, p. 71. Moulton (CI. Rev., Mar., 1910, p. 53) now says: "I am quite wilhng to be convinced that the long-lost digamma was an accessory here if no better explanation turns up." Thumb (Spir. Asper, pp. 11, 71) admits the possibihty of the digamma ex1 2
Blass, Gr. of
planation in some eases.

^
Prol., p. 91.
313 f., where Hort really favours ovx 'lov8. and the rough breathing for all the forms of 'lovdas, 'lovdalos, etc. For the variations in the LXX MSS. see Thack., p. 125. 6 Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 312. ^ Rutherford, New Plu-yn., p. 363. For this transfer of aspiration cf. Cmiius, Gk. Verb, II, 109. Nestle (Am. Jour, of Theol., July, 1909, p. 448) urges that, since the Gk. of the Bible is an "east-west language," attention must be paid to oriental tongues. He notes that the Coptic has aspiration in ^ Notes on Orth., p. 168. helpis, hisos, for eXn-ts, laos.
Cf. Intr. to
Gk. N.
T., p.

in 1
225
Th. 5
3 (like
in Sap. 6 of
f.
8),
a wholly unusual^ absence of
aspiration in
compounds
is
taT-qixt.
For the
LXX
phenomena
o/xet-
see Thackeray, Gr., p. 127

pojiai
It is
wholly doubtful whether
or
oixelpoiJLaL
:
right (1 Th. 2:8).

:
Om
evpov in
some MSS.
and ouk IveKev in 2 Cor. 7 12, Blass^ considers as clerthough they are common in the LXX and in the inscriptions.^ N.T. MSS. (late cursives) even have atrew, ocrrecbi', For nrjdels, .oWeis see this chapter iii (/), the Intero-x\os, etc. change of Consonants and chapter on Pronouns. (d) Transliterated Semitic Words. The aspirate in the case of transliterated Semitic words (chiefly proper names) causes some difficulty. Blass^ calls it "insoluble," though he accepts Hort's practice as rational,^ expressing J{ and V by the smooth breathing and H and H by the rough breathing. The MSS. disagree and are not consistent, but Blass calls the result of this procedure "strange." Hence Hort argues for "A/SeX (,1), 'A/3pad/i (J>{), "Ayaôs (J/), "Ayap (n), 'A/ceXSa/xdx (H), aXkrj'KovLa (H), 'AXâtos
in Lu. 24
3,
ical errors,
(n), Âvaulas
(il),
"Awa
(H), 'Aperas (H), 'Aptââta (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),

(^),
i;(r(rco7ros
ijXet
(K), but "HXei (H), 'HXetas (X), "Up

'ô'rje
(N),^ oâavva {r\) ,

all
(M).
Hort^
gives,
*>
moreover,
as 'llaalas.
'lepefiias,
the smooth breathing to
names beginning with

with
lepos,
Besides he considers
it
a "false association"^ to connect
'lepetxw, 'lepocroKvfjLa (-/ietrT/s), 'lepovaaKrjiJ.
though Blass
retains 'lepocroXu/xa rather inconsistently.^"

p and pp. W. H. follow dropping the breathings in pp as in dppr/ra (2 Cor. 12:4), though retaining the rough breathing with initial p as in prjiiara {ih). Winer ^^ argued that the Romans heard an aspiration with pp, since they used Pyrrhus, Tijrrhenus, etc. W. H. seem justified in using the smooth breathing with the
(e)
The Use of Breathings with

Lachmann
in
Tischcndorf and
first p in
1
the word pepavTcafxhoL (Hcb. 10

s
*
22)
by old Greek
cus-
^
6
Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 144. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 16.
W.-Sch., p. 39. Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 16.
f.,
list
Hort, Intr. to N. T. Gk., p. 313. of these words.
Cf. also Gregory, Prol., p. 106
for
Intr. to
it may seem, "Hebrew "rather than "Ebrew" is modern (Hort, Gk. N. T., p. 313). ^ Hort (Notes, etc., p. 144), however, merely follows custom and prints vffcr. " 8 Intr. to N. T. Gk., p. 313. lb. Gr. of N. T. Gk., Cf. Ilelbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 30 f. p. 16. " W.-M., p. 53.
"
Strange as
226
tom.^
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK The MSS.,

is
NEW TESTAMENT
in the matter.
of course, give
no help
The
breathing with p
not written in the modern Greek vernacular
text as in Pallis or
(/)
Thumb.
This
is
The Question of Avtov.
somewhat knotty.
It
seems clear that as a rule avTov and not avTov is to be printed in the N. T. A number of reasons converge^ on this point. The older Greek often used avrov rather than eavTov as shown by the In the N. T. aspiration of the prepositions like d^' avrov, etc. there is not a single case of such aspiration after elision save in a few single MSS. Add to this the fact that the N. T. uses the reflexive pronoun much less than the earlier Greek, "with unusual parsimony" (Hort). Besides the personal pronouns of the first and second persons are frequently employed (Buttmann) where Buttmann urges also the the reflexive might have been used. point that in the N. T. we always have aeavrov, not aavrov. The earliest uncial MSS. of the N. T. and the LXX that use the diacritical marks belong to the eighth century, but they all have Even in the early times it was largely a matter avTov, not avTov. of individual taste as to whether the personal or the reflexive pro-
noun was used. Blass avTov. But the matter

tions give examples of
(p. 35)
is
indeed decides absolutely against

kolvt]
not quite so easy, for the

of papyri
inscripa.d.^
v(f>'
avrov in first century B.C.
and
Mayser^
IJLeO'
also gives a
vcf)'
number
examples
like Kad' avrov,
avrwv, where the matter is beyond dispute. Hort Winer in thinking that sometimes avrov must be read unless one insists on undue harshness in the Greek idiom. He instances Jo. 2 24, avrbs be 'IrjcroOs ovk kwiarevcrev avrov avrols, and
avrov,
agrees with
Lu. 23
12, irpovwrjpxov
yap
tv
exdpa ovres
irpos
avrovs.
There are
other examples where a different meaning will result from the
smooth and the rough breathing as in 1 Jo. 5 10 (avrui), 18 {avrov, avrov), Eph. 1 5 (avrov), 10 (avrcp), Col. 1 20 (avrov), 2 15 (avrui). W. H. print avrov about twenty times. Winer leaves the matter "to the cautious judgment of the editors."
:
V. Accent.
(a)
The Age of Greek Accent.

accent as for breathings.
tle for
The MSS. are worth as litThe systematic application of

lenis,
accent in the MSS., like the regular use of the spiritus

1
dates
Cf. W.-Sch., p.
40
f. f.;
the whole matter see Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 144 f.; W.-M., p. 183 Buttmann, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. Ill; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 35.
2
'
On
Nachm., Magn. Inschr., pp. 84, 144; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 161. Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 306.
227
from the seventh century a.d.i Hort^ caustically remarks that most modern grammarians have merely worked out " a consistent system of accentuation on paper" and have not recovered the Greek intonations of voice, though he has little to offer on the subject. Chandler^ indeed laments that modern scholars scatter their Greek accents about rather recklessly, but he adds: "In England, at all events, every man will accent his Greek properly who
wishes to stand well with the world." It is a comfort to find one's accents irreproachable, and Chandler rightly urges that the only
way
is to pronounce according to the ancients were interested in Greek accent. Herodian in his KaOoKiKri Tpoaudla investigated the accent of 60,000 words,
to use the accents properly
accent.
The
but the bulk of his twenty books is lost. Chandler ^ found most help from Gottling, though others have written at length on the subject.^ There are no accent-marks in the early inscriptions and
papyri; in fact tradition ascribes the invention of these signs as a
system to Aristophanes of Byzantium in the third century b.c, though the beginnings appear in the preceding century.^ He and
his disciple, Aristarchus, made the rules at any rate.^ The Alexandrian grammarians developed these rules, which have shown a marvellous tenacity even to the present day in the modern Greek,
though, of course, some words would naturally vary in accent There is the Harris papyrus of Homer in the first century a.d. which has accents, and clearly the word had
with the centuries.^
ten out.
the accent in pronunciation like English long before it was writAfter the fourth century a.d. the use of accentual rhythm in Greek in place of quantitative rhythm had a tendency
'
Cf. also pp. 507
ff.
on the Origin and History
of Accent.
Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 314. Gk. Accentuation (1881), p. xxiii. * lb., p. xvii. " Cf. Meister, Bemerk. zur dorischen Accentuation (1883); Hadley, On the Nat. and Theory of the Gk. Accent. (Ess. Phil, and Grit., pp. 110 ff.); Wheeler, Die griech. NominaIaccente(1885); Bloomfield, Study of Gk. Accent (Am. Jour,
2
Wack., Beitr. zur Lchre vom pjiech. Akzent; Brusmann, Griech. Gr. (1900), pp. l.Wff.; K.-Bl., I, pp. 317 ff.; for further ht. see Brusmann above. On accent changes in mod. Gk. see Ilatz., Einl., pp. 418-440;
of Philol., 1883);
Thumb, Hundb.,
Sept., p. 24.
in the
For the accent in the LXX see llelbing, Gr. d. p. 28 f. Here the same MSS. present the same problems that we have
N. T.
Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 62.
Krumb.,
Beitr. zu einer Gesch. der griech. Spr.,
Sprachl., 1885, p. 521. Cf. also Ilatz., tuation, p. v; Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 150.
Ricm. and Goclzer, Phonet., p. 77. Kuhn's Zeitschr. fiir Einl. etc., p. 418; Chandler, Gk. Accen^
228
to
NEW TESTAMENT
"Of
all
make
the accent rather more stable.^

is
the phonetic
pecuHarities of a language accent

earlier use of accents
the most important." ^
The
and breathings was probably "for the text

(cf.
of poetry written in dialect"^
our reading-books for children).

prose
till
They were not written out "in ordinary

minuscule writing," though Euthahus
the times of
(a.d.
396)
them in his edition of the N. T.^ The Christian show signs of changing from tone (pitch) to stress as is the rule in modern Greek. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 6. In Greek it is (6) Significance of Accent in the Kolvij. pitch, not stress, that is expressed by the accent, though in modern Greek the accents indicate stress. "In the ancient Sanskrit and the ancient Greek the rise and fall in musical tone was very marked."^ In English we are familiar with stress-accent. "Hadley has ably argued that the compass of tone used by the Greeks was a musical fifth, i.e. from C = do to G = sol, involving also the intermediate third or E = me."^ It was not a stronger current of breath,'' but a higher musical note that we have. It was in a word "das musikalische Moment."^ Hadley (" Nature and Theory of Gk. Accent," Essays Philol. and Crit., p. Ill f.) points out that TTpoawbla comes from a root meaning to sing (like the Latin accentus) and so 6ûs 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
' '
made use of hymns early
lower
down
in the scale.
Cf. the secondary accent in the English
"incompatibility."
every syllable in
tence
is
The Harris papyrus of Homer even accents each word.^*^ Then again " the accent of a senthe influence of a law of some kind as the
^^
as
much under
accent of the word."

^
Language without accent or musical va-
Sophocles, Lex. of
Giles,
2 *
6 6
Man.
of
Rom. and Byz. Period, p. 48. Comp. Philol., p. 91. ^ Blass, Gr.
lb.
Cf. Gregory, Prol., p. 114, for
of N. T. Gk., specimen from Euthahus.
p. 14.
Giles,
Harris,
Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 92. MS. Notes on Gk. Gr. Cf. Riem. and
Goelzer, Phonet., p. 77
f.,
for a discussion of the musical aspect of the matter.

^ *
Arnold and Conway, The Restored Pronun. of Gk. and Lat., 1895,
^
p. 18.
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., p. 94.
10
11
Bloomfield, Study of Gk. Accent,
Am.
Jour, of Philol., 1883, p. 22.
Cf.
Plato, Crat., 399
A-B. Hirt (Der Indoger. Akzent,
1895, p. 17) contends for
the two-tone principle.
'

riety in tone
229
ineffective.
is
would be hopelessly monotonous and
instance of the importance of accent and breathings ov oh, Ac. 19 40.

:
An
seen in
(c) Signs of Accent. In practical usage (in our school grammars) there is only one distinction, the accented syllable and the unaccented syllables. The Greeks themselves distinguished the pronunciation of the acute and the circumflex. The differ-
ence
is
well illustrated
by
etjut
and
dixl.
The
three signs (acute
or b^da, grave or
fiapeta,
circumflex
or
TepLairaifxepr])
^
come
to
symbolize the higher pitch of the accented syllable. Originally the accented syllable was marked by the acute and all the unaccented syllables by the grave (merely the absence of the acute), but by and by this use of the grave accent was felt to be useless
flection
and was dropped.^ Then the grave accentual mark of falling inwas used for the acute when an oxytone word comes before another word (not enclitic), though this "grave" accent has the
Similarly in contraction of two and grave (' ') arose the circumflex, the grave and the acute making acute still. The actual use in pronunciation of both acute and grave in the contracted syllable disappeared, so
syllables with acute
pitch of the unaccented syllable.
that the circumflex in pitch differed
little, if
any, from the acute.

in STjXoxrat
The
difference, for instance,

dr]\u>aaL
between the acute
and the
circumflex in
was not perceptible
in sound.^
The Greek
last syllables
and the Latin agree in having the accent only on one of the three and thus differ from English and French for instance.
It is not necessary here to go into the rules (not wholly arbitrary) which the Greeks developed for the accent of words. In the use of unaccented words (proclitics or enclitics) Greek does not differ radically from English. If the Greek has ev oIkco, the English has "at-home." If the Greek has elirk (xol, the English has "tcll-me." (d) Later Developments in Accent. There was not indeed uniformity among the dialects in the use of accent. They agreed only in the one point of not accenting further back than the third syllable from the end. "In other respects the Greek
show the widest divergencies in their accentuation. The two antipodes are ôlic and Doric, which are so closely i\\Vn\\ phonetically: JEoVic throws the accent as far back as possible in
dialects
'
Jaiin., Hist.
' *
Iladloy,
Giles,
Gk. (!r., p. 6G. Uber Wcscn und Thcorie der
lb., pp. 05, 68.
griech. Bcton., 1872, pp. 409, 415.
originally
p. 80, for
Man. of Coinp. Philol., p. 9G. Giles thinks that words like ^tp6Mefla had the accent further back. Cf. Rieni. and Goelzer, Phonet., Plato's word of 17 syllables and Aristophanes' word of 7S.
230
all

words,
e.g. /SaatXeus
= /SaatXeus,
.;
Doric, on the contrary,
faithfully preserves the original
two
dialects
lie
oxytone accent. Between these Ionic and Attic, which, however, are much nearer
to Doric than to ôlic.
But
all
the dialects, including Doric,
observe the rule that, in those forms of the verb which are capable of being conjugated, the accent goes back as far as possible."^ But all arj where the Attic has ^ 0-17. iEoHc, for instance, has
r)
the dialects 2 have
eyoo,
eyoije.
On
this
point
in
general
see
The Dorians even had avOpoiTroL, Kiihner-Blass, I, pp. 323 ff. was no more possible in Greek uniformity Perfect eXvaav, etc.
than in English.
accent rule.
since the
The modern Greek preserves the three-syllable Examples like eTrtao-e, k^paSvaae are not exceptions,
Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 28. t and i; count as consonants. Pecheur is 'fisher,' Greek. ancient the Hke tone follows French only in quality, difference example, a for 'sinner,' is pecheur while
not in accent. (e) N. T. Peculiarities.

cessive refinement
is
Where
so
much
is
in doubt,
ex-
certainly not desirable.
But the
followfor the
ing points call for remark,
and Gregory ^ can be consulted
actual evidence (very slight) from the N. T. MSS. on the subject alone among the older uncials has the accent (and of accent.
that the occasional circumflex) save

1.
KOLvt]
by the hand
is
of a corrector.
Shortening Stem-Vowels.
There
quite a tendency in the
towards shortening some of the stem-vowels, especially in words in -/xa. Hence W. H. do not follow the Attic accent here, but that of the kolvy], and give us KXl/xa, Kpifxa, fj.iyfj.a (cf. eXLyna), irojia, xpto-â, though as to xPô-â Blass^ suggests that xpto-â is correct because of xpi-<^Tos and because B (1 Jo. 2 20, 27) has XpeUp-a. Analogy plays havoc with rules. Herodian^ says that and were usually shortened before ^ So W. H. give us ktjpv^,
:
i;
KTipvât,
(jrqpiâL
(Ro. 16:25), probably

agree.
(i)oivL^,
yp
xoi-vi^-
Accord-
ing to Winer-SchmiedeP this rule appHes to
also,
but
W. H.
(Lu.
f.
and Blass^ do not
So
W. H. have
0Xti/'ts,
pl\lâv
1 Henry, Comp. Gr. of Gk. and Lat., Elliott's transl., 1890, p. 93 Meister, Bemerk. zur dorischen Accentuation, p. 1.
Cf.
2 3
Cf. Wheeler, Griech. Norn, etc., p. 11,
and Wack.,
Beitr., p. 19.
99 f. Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
Prol., p.
p. 15.
">
W.-M.,
7
p. 57.
Blass, Gr. of
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 67, for further parallels. Also P. 68. N. T. Gk., p. 15.
to follow
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 15. Blass urges that B has e\e"l^pLs, but W. H. refuse B in matters of orthography. But the Herculaneum rolls here reinforce B with et before yp. On the whole subject see Lipsius, Gr. Unters., pp. 31 ff.; Lobeck, Parall., pp. 400 ff.; Cobet, N. T. Vatic, pp. xHxff.
6 ;
231
4:35). By parity of reasoning W. H. reject the circumflex accent in eXKvaaL, ytpov, ^xvpov, airiXos, (ttvXos, <JvvTeTp[cj)dai (Mk. 5:4),
though
(TvvTplôv (Lu.
9:39) and
<jKv\a (Lu.
11:22).
Cf. nWos,
fxapyapXraL, vIkos, (tItos, (jvkov, etc.
W. H.
read
ypbxos also.
The
:
length of
V in kutttco is
appear in the N. T. and XaiXai/' in Mk. 4 37. But eardrnt (Ac. 12 14) is right, though apai (Mt. 24 17), ^wAttao-at. (Lu. 1 9) because of long o. Cf. also
: : : :
uncertain; avaKvxpaL and Trapa/cuât usually W. H. have, however, Kpaôv in Gal. 4
kirapai
TTtdo-at
(Lu. 18:13), eTVLâvai (Lu. 1:79), TrpSât (Ac. 26:9), but (Jo. 7 30). So KaToXvaai (Mt. 5 17), KaTtvOvvaL (Lu. 1 79)
: : : :
and
KcoXOaat (Ac. 10
47).
classified.
avTlirepa,
2. Separate Words. These are not so easily read ayopaloi, not ay opatoL; avTLKpvs, not avriKph;
W. H.
not avn-
Trepa(p);
aw68eKTOs,
not
cnrodeKTOs
apeada (from
apeaKevoi),
but e/cXe/cros, evXoyrjTos, lULadooTOs with which compare epLOia (from epLOevco);
eprjfjLos
axpetos (Attic dxpetos), as also
(Attic
kprjfxos),
eroLpos (Attic
eTotpos), p-wpos (Attic pccpos), opoios (Attic dpotos), xXcopos (Attic

pos); (3pa8uTr]s
-eioi'
xXw-
(3d decl.), but adpoTrjs (3d dccl.); ya'ôcpvXdKLOP, not
and
5terr?s
dbwXiov, with
which compare
bkapuri,
reXcovtoj',
SecrAtj?;
yXuaaoKopov being
for the earher yXwaaoKoixLov;
not
Steriys
(Mt. 2:
16),
not
(Attic),
tKaTOVTaerifs, etc.,
and so with other compounds of -er-qs, like but eKaroPTapxojP (Ac. 23 17) is from -dpxvs, not
:
-apxos;
Attic,
etxoj/
is
the imperative (Mt. 18
17),
for dirop
is
only
and Charax calls eiirop Syracusan,^ with which one may compare 'i8e (t5e only Attic according to the Alexandrian gram:
Bornemann urged ide when verb and I8e when exclamation) and \dê (Xaê only Attic); dprjaKos (J as. 1 26), not 6p^<rKos; Idpcos (Lu. 22:44), not ISpcbs; ipapra (Mk. 1:7), not the
marians, though
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)
:
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
'
:
DHM
with which compare irovs (Mk. 9 45), not TTovs, and ar]s (Mt. 6:19), not arj^; Krlar-qs (1 Pet. 4:19), not KTLaryjs, as ypcoarrj^, etc.; KpvwTr}, not KpuTrrij (Lu. 11 33); poyiXdXos (Mk. 7 32), not -XaXos; pvXcop (Mt. 24 :41) is read only by
: :
:
in accusative plural, etc.,
32),
not
-koiixpIov,
and
Tpv^Xiov in
Mk.
14
20
W.-M., p. 58. As shown in W.-M.

Cf.
es.
(p. GO),
the N. T.
MSS. have
la^,,
not
n<rco,
thouf^li
tij,
not
232
(called
no diminutive by some)/ but TtKviov always; ir'K-niifj.vpa (Lu. 6:48) is preferred by Winer-SchmiedeP as nominative to ttXt^mnvprjs rather than -/xupa iropripos always, not irbvripos in the physical sense (Rev. 16:2) and Tovrjpos in the moral (Gal. 1:4)^; Trpu>pa (Ac. 27:41), not xpcbpa; aireipa (Mk. 15:16), not airelpa; </)Xi)apos
;
Tim. 5 13), not (pXvapos. The compound adverbs eTrketm, i;7repketra have thrown back the accent. With some words the accent makes a 3. Difference in Sense. We have, for inis quite important. and sense in the difference read aXXd, not tiXXa, H. 9:2. Heb. W. in ayla, not "A7ta, stance, -eco), not cnroKvel (from have H. 15 1 W. In Jas. 6:23. in Jo. So W. H. print apa (interrog.) in Gal. 2 17, airoKvei (from -kuw). not apa (illative). Aiirr] and avrrj are easily confused, but W. H. prefer avrrj to avri] in Mt. 22:39 {avrfj in margin); Ro. 7:10; 1 Cor. 7:12; and airij to avrr] in Lu. 2:37; 7:12; 8:42; Ro.
(1
:
:
:
16
2.
In Rev. 2 24 the adjective âdea

:
is
correct, not the subAeîoXd/3os or
stantive I3adea (uncontracted from âdos).

ôs
is
SeîoXa-
possible in Ac.
23:23
(cf.
Winer-Schmiedel,
:
p. 69).
So
W. H.
-TJaaL.
give us e7xpto'at (infinitive) in Rev. 3

Cf. also
eTrtn/xiyo-ai
18,
not
e7xpto'ai
(imperative).
(Jude
9),
optative, not infinitive
between ô/Sry^ryre (subjunctive) and In Jo. 7 34, 36, W. H. prefer 5. (t)o^T]dr}Te (imperative) in Lu. 12 elfii rather than dp-L (not elsewhere used in the N. T. save in comIn Mk. 13:28 position with prepositions airo, els, k^, eirl, avv).
Note the
difference
and Mt. 24:32 W, H. have

not
21
1
:
:
k^vrj (present active subjunctive),
k'(/)uf]
(second aorist passive subjunctive).

in
In Lu.
19:29;
37
W. H.
prefer 'EXatwj', not 'EXatwv (the correct text in Ac.
12,
and possibly
Luke
also according to the papyri,
though
'EXatcom would be the form expected).'*

kv in
In
Mk. 4
not
8, 20,
W. H. put W. H.
1
the text and
eV in
the margin.
:
"Ei^t,
kvl,
occurs with ovk

:
several times, once (1 Cor. 6
5)
ok
'hi kv.
read eTL^Xeipai
5
:
(infinitive),
fj
not
eirl^XtxpaL
r)
In Lu. 9 38, (imperative). In
Cor.
W. H. read Ro. 1 30 W. H.
11
:
(subjunctive), not
(conjunction as Rec).
In
follow
most
editors in giving deoarvyels (pas-
sive),
all
not
deo(TTvyeLs (active
sense of the adjective).
In
Mk.
29
have the perfect iarai, not the present iarat. In Lu. 22:30 W. H. read Kadrjade (subjunctive), not KadrjaOe (indicative) nor KaOrjaeade (future, margin). In 1 Cor. 9:21 W. H. prefer Kepdavoj (future indicative) to KepSavo) (aorist subjunctive), and in
editors
1
Cf. W.-S., p. 73. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 69.
lb., p. 72.
lb.,
p 69.
On
accent of the vernac. see Apostolides,
T\u(T(TiKai
MeXerai (1906).

1
233
Cor.
6:2
In
prefer
KpLvomiv (future)
to Kplvovaiv (present indicative in
marg.).
Mk.
12
40 we have nanpa, not naKpa.

tikvei
:
In
Cor. 3
:
14
W. H.
p.evel
have ixkvei. In 1 can be made in

('
and in Jo. 14 17 they Cor. 4 15 (14 19) and Mt. 18 24 no distinction the accent of tivploL C innumerable') and juuptot
(future) to
:
(present),
ten thousand') because of the cases. Dr. E. J. Goodspeed, of Chicago University {Expository Times, July, 1909, p. 471 f.), suggests
(h(t>e\ridris
in
Mk. 7:11
oûcos
instead of
is
w0eX77i9fj$.
It
is
entirely possible.
W. H. W. H.
In Jo. 18:37 In Ac. 28 In print Kip.irpaaBai {pn verb), not inpTrpaadaL (w verb). Rev. 17 5 ivopvlxiv (feminine) is probal^ly right, not iropvoiv (masripcoToro/cos (Col. 1 15), not tpuitotokos, is manifestly culine).
In
1
Cor. 14 :7
correct, not ojuws = o/iotcos.
give ovKovv, not omow, in Pilate's question.
between the interrogative tLs and the inIn Heb. 5 12 W. H. definite Tts calls for frequent attention. have TLva, not rtm, but in Heb. 3 16 ripes, not Tives, and in 3 17 rlaiv, not Ticrlp, while in Mt. 24 41, 1 Th. 4 6, 1 Cor. 15 8 and 16 16 the article tw is to be read, not the indefinite rw, which
right.
The
difference
form 'does not occur in the N. T. In 1 Cor. 10 19 H kariv (twice) is not interrogative, but the enclitic indefinite with the accent of In Jas. 3:6 Tpoxos ('wheel') is properly read, not rpoxos kcTTLv. In Mk. 4:12 W. H. read awiwaLv, not awLwaiv, as ('course').
:
avvLov(7ivm.M.i. 13
for
</>a)Tcoi'
13.
:
Winer considers the suggestion

^
of
4>o:t(^v
in Jas. 1
17 "altogether absurd."
Proclitics are regular in the rule
4. Enclitics
{and Proclitics).
N. T.
The
accent of enchtics calls for

Ibov TLves
:
accent them. 5:36),
comment. As a So we have avrov rtms (Mk. 12

:
W. H. do not
13), elval Tiva (Ac.
(Mt. 28:
kare
11), 686v elaLv

:
(Lu. 8: 12), aavveToi tare
(Mk. 7 18), yap However, plenty

example, in
evpelp
:
(Mk. 13
11), rat 0r?(7t (Ac.
10
31; 25
24).
of cases
call
1)
for accent
on the
enclitic, as^ for

4)r]aiv
nvas (Ac. 19:
for emphasis, yap,

:
(Heb. 8:5
:
and
cf.
Mt. 14
8; Ac.
25
5,
22; 26
25;
Cor. 6 :16; 2 Cor. 10

:
10)
for clearness in punctuation, Kal elaiv (Mt. 19

for emphasis, deov
ovK dpi (Jo. 1
:
12 and
(Lu. 9
cf.
:
Ac. 5 25)
:
eaph
In
(1 Jo.
3:2),
bird tlvC^v
:
8) likewise,
21).
critics
oTvov
dpi (Jo. 7
34, 36) the accent is regular,
though some
The use
of eaTlv
wrongly prefer dpi. and Iotlv demands
special
comment.
When
uncmphatic, not at the beginning of a sentence, not preceded by dXX', d, Kal, OVK, on, tovt', or a paroxytone syllable, as, for example, in 'lovdaiuiu tarlv (Jo. 4 22), we have unaccented (.ctlv as in aypbs In some exkaxLv (Mt. 13:37, 39), Kaôjs kariv (1 Jo. 3:2), etc.
:
W.-M.,
p. 62.
234
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 are numerous where 'Iotlv is correct, as when it is emphatic, and
: : :
expresses existence or possibihty, as in

avTOV
ecTTLV
ei5es
:
eartv
(Rev. 17
18),
(Ac. 2
29), ayiov eariv (Ac. 19
2), 6 els earLV

-'Ecttlv is
:
(Rev.
44;
17
10), ov8eis i(JTLv
(Lu. 1
61; 7
28; 18
29).
also the
:
accent at the beginning of sentences, as in Jo. 21

1 1
:
25; 1 Cor. 15
:
Jo. 5
17.
16
f.;
Heb. 11:1.
10),
et
Cf. karlv in Col. 1
15 and eaTiv in
Then again we have, according

:
to the usual rule, iarLv

:
after dXX' (Jo. 13
(1
Cor. 15
:
44), Kal
4
11
:3),
'6ti
:
(2
Th. 2 :4; Mk. 6

9, etc.), tovt'
ttoO (Jo.
55;
(Mk. 12 11; 2 Cor. Heb. 11 6), but on karlv

:
(Ac. 23
:
5)
when the
:
idea of existence
is
not stressed, ovk
(1 Cor.
20; Ro. 8
(Mk. 7
2;
Ro. 7
14
18). 14).
W. H.
give
only harlv after
12;
57;
Mk.
Sometimes two enclitics come together. Here the critics differ and W. H.^ do not make clear the reasons for their practice. In Ac. 13 15 W. H. have d tls earLv, and in Gal. 6 15 TepiTOfj-rj tl
:
:
because they take eaTLv to be emphatic in both instances. In Jo. 6 51 W. H. have aap^ ixov kariv. But in many examples the first enclitic is accented and the second unaccented as in Lu. 8 46
eaTLv,
: :
Tjxl/aTO
}xov
TLS,
10
29
:
tLs
kariv
ixov,
Jo. 5
:
14
x^'^pov aoi tl,
8:31
:
jjiadrjTai
nou eare, 12
47
5
kav tls
/xov,
14
:
28
ne'i^wv /lov tOTLV,
Ac. 2
25
19
8e^Lcov
fjLov kcTTLu,
25
t TL
koTLv,
25
t'l
14
avi]p TLS kcTTLv, 1
Cor. 10
(xov
dbiSKbdvTOV TL
tcxTLV
yui?
and
fj.e,
eiboSKbv
earLV,
11
24 tovto
TLves,
kcxTLV,
2 Cor. 11
16
t'ls
:
Ro. 3 :8 Kadws
tls,
4>aa'Lv
Heb.
10
Xî'P<Jov <Jov dcTLv,
5e
xou
Tit. 1
et t'ls
eaTLv.
Modern Greek
only has a second accent

as in
t' dpfxaTCL juas
when
the accent
is
in the third syllable
(Thumb, Handbook, p. 29). The personal pronouns now have the accent in W. H. and now are without it, as 6(f)daXnu) aov and 6cf)da\iJ.ov gov (both in Mt. 7:4). Cf. also eyw ae (Jo. 17:4), av fxe (17:8), but t'l kfxoi Kal (jo'l (Lu. 8 With prepositions generally the enclitics are 28). accented, as kv aoi (Jo. 17 21), though ewpoadev ixov and ottio-co jiov (Jo. 1 :30 both, and so continually with these two prepositions). ''EiVLOTVLov e/ioO (Lu. 4 7) and kvdoirLov fiov (Ac. 2 25) both appear. With the prepositions usually e/ioO, not nov, occurs as 'eveKa eiJ.ov
:
only with irpos that we have much trouble. have generally printed wpos at, but W. H. have that only in Mt. 25 39, elsewhere irpos ak as in Mt, 26 18.
(Mt. 5
11).
It is
The N. T.
Usually
Jo. 6
:
editors
we
have, according to
:
W.
H.,
irpos
/xe
as in
Mt. 25 36;
:
65; 7
37, etc.,
and where the "me"

1
is
emphatic in sense,
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 77.

: :
235
as Mt. 3 14; 11 28, in the first of which Tisch. and Griesbach have Trpos /xe, a usage not followed by W. H., though kept in the LXX text of B, as in Is. 48 16, etc.^ W. H. a few times prefer Trpos k/xk (not enclitic) as in Lu. 1:43; Jo. 6:35, 37 (both ways Occasionally here), 44 (marg.), 45; Ac. 22 8, 13; 23 22; 24 19. the enclitic nves is found at the beginning of a sentence, as in Mt. 27 47; Lu. 6 2; Jo. 13 29; Ph. 1 15; 1 Tim. 5 24. 5. Proper Names cannot always be brought under rules, for in
:
Greek, as in English,
names names
(Tit.
as they will.
men claim the On the accent

'Ai'TtTras
'
right to accent their
own
of the abbreviated proper
see chapter V, v.
It is difficult to
make a
clear line of
distinction as to
why
(Rev. 2
13) is proper,
but
'Apre/xas
3
/x.
12),
save that in
cf.
Aprenidupos the accent
was already
:
after
But
KXeoTras (Lu.
24
18)
and
KXcovras (Jo. 19
25) .^
say that proper names (geographical and personal) throw the accent back, if the original adjectives or sub-
In general one
may
stantives were oxytone. This

SpLvos (Ac.
is
is
for the sake of distinction. 'AXeâi'-
27
6;
28
11) is the adjective.
"Aaaos (Ac. 20
13
f.)
doubtless correct, though Pape gives 'Aaaos also.^
In
'Axa'tKos
(1
Cor. 16
Cor. 16
17) the accent is

:
not thrown back nor

(Ro. 16
:
is it
in 'AttoXXws
(1
12).
'Ao-w/cptros
14) retains the accent of
the adjective, like Tp60i/xos (Ac

20).
veros
20
:
4)
and
'T^teratos (1
Tim.
1
But we have BXdaros
(Ac. 12
20), Atorpe^Tjs (3 Jo. 9), 'ETrai'Eppioykpr]s

:
(Ro. 16:5), "Epaaros (16:23),
(2
Tim.
'
15),
EvTuxos (Ac. 20:9), KdpTros (2 Tim. 4

(2
13),
:
probably
OviaL(i>opos
Tim.
16;
19),
ndrapa (Ac. 21
1),
Hippos (Ac. 20:4),

re-
llvvrvxv
(Ph. 4 :2), Zoiadh-qs (1 Cor. 1:2), Tipwi/ (Ac. 0:5), Ty-
XiKos (Ac.
20:4)
^l\r]Tos (2
Tim. 2
16).
:
17).
But XpLaros always
tains the oxytone accent whether proper
name
:
(1
Tim.
1)
or
verbal adjective (Mt. 16

is
In 2 Tim. 4
22, etc.
21
:
Atj'os,
not
Atvos,
read.
So Tiros
(2 Cor.
13, etc.).
:
In Ac. 27
17
Zi^prts is
read
by W. H.
6.
But
^fj\L^ in
Ac. 24
Foreign Words.
These always give occasion
for diversity
Blass'*
of usage in
lets
transliterating
them
into another tongue.
the quantity of the vowel in Latin determine the accent in
the Greek equivalent for Latin words.
but
W.
H. do not accept
:
this easy principle

(1
in Ac. 12
*
'
25, etc.,
Kptaxos
Cor.
So Marcus, Map/cos, etc., and give us IVIdpKos etc. W. H. likewise 14),
Cf. .ilso W.-Sch., p. 78. In W.-Sch., p. 74 f., sec remarks on the subject. Thi.s word is, of course, not to be confounded with Cf. W.-Sch., p. 7.3.
(Ac. 27
:
Cf. Lipsius, Gr. Unters., p. 01.
&a<Toi>
13) as Text. lice. did.
Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 15.
236
NEW TESTAMENT
like Kovapros (Ro. 16:23),
throw the accent back on Latin names

Upi(TKi.\\a (Ac.
we
18:2), i:Kovu8os (Ac. 20:4), TepruXXos (24:2), but have on the other hand Talos (Ro. 16 23), not rdtos, Ovp:
:
âvos (Ro. 16
9), ZiKovavos (2
Cor.
19), ^Kevas (Ac.
19
14) .^
But not even Blass attempts

regular rules.
Still, it is
to bring the Semitic
words under
true, as
Winer ^ shows, that indeclinable
Semitic words (especially proper names) have the accent, as a
though the usage of Josephus is the conwords that in the LXX and the N. T. are indecHnable. So 'Aapwp, 'Aâ88cov, 'A/Sta, 'A/3tou5, 'A^paa/jL, to take only the first two pages of Thayer's Lexicon, though even here we find on the other side "A/SeX and 'A^Ladap. If you turn over you meet "Ayap, 'Aoap, 'Ad8ei, 'A8p.eiv, 'Afwp, etc. It is not necessary here to give a full list of these proper names, but reference can be made to Lu. 3 23-38 for a good sample. In this list some indeclinable words have the accent on the penult, as 'EXie^P (29), Zopoi3d/3eX (27), Adêx (36), *dXe/c (35) .^ The inflected Semitic words often throw the accent back, as "Afwros, Many of the Aramaic words accent the ultima, 'Id/cw|3os, Adf apoj. as 'AjSâ, ToXyoda, Kopâv, 'EXcot, aajSaxdavei, etc. For further remarks on the subject see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 26-31. The
rule,
on the
last syllable,
trary, because he generally inflects the
difficulties of
the
LXX
translators are well illustrated here
by
Helbing.
This is indeed a knotty VI. Pronunciation in the Koivii. problem and has been the occasion of fierce controversy. When the Byzantine scholars revived the study of Greek in Italy, they
introduced, of course, their
own pronunciation
as well as their
spelling is
own
spelling.
But English-speaking people know that
not a safe guide in pronunciation, for the pronunciation may change very much when the spelling remains the same. Writing
an effort to represent the sound and is more or less but the comparison of Homer with modern Greek is a fruitful subject.* Roger Bacon, as Reuchlin two centuries later, adopted the Byzantine pronunciation.^ Reuchlin, who introduced Greek to the further West, studied in Italy and passed on the Byzantine pronunciation. Erasmus is indirectly responsible
is
originally
successful,
for the current pronunciation of ancient Greek, for the

1 3
Byzan-
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 75.

Cf. also Gregory, Prol., p. 102
f.;
W.-M.,
p. 59.
W.-Sch., p. 75; Westcott, Notes on

ff.
Orth., pp. 155, 159; Thackeray, pp. 150

*
Blass, Ausspr. des Griech., 1888, p. 7.
Nolan, The Gk. Gr. of Roger Bacon, p. xx.

tine scholars
237
Jannaris^
pronounced ancient and modern
alike.
quotes the story of Voss, a Dutch scholar (1577-1649), as to how Erasmus heard some learned Greeks pronounce Greek in a very Erasmus published a different way from the Byzantine custom.
discussion between a lion
and a bear
entitled
Graecique sermonis pronuntiatione, which

sion that those
called
De Recta Latini made such an impres-
who accepted the ideas advanced in this book were Erasmians and the rest Reuchlinians. As a matter of fact, however, Engel has shown that Erasmus merely wrote a literary squib to "take off" the new non-Byzantine pronunciation, though he was taken seriously by many. Dr. Caspar Rene Gregory writes me (May 6, 1912): "The philologians were of course down on Engel and sided gladly with Blass. It was much easier to go on with the totally impossible pronunciation that they used than Cf. Engel, Die Aussprachen des Griechischen, to change it." In 1542 Stephen Gardiner, Chancellor of the University 1887. of Cambridge, "issued an edict for his university, in which, e.g. it was categorically forbidden to distinguish at from e, et and ot from I in pronunciation, under penalty of expulsion from the Senate, exclusion from the attainment of a degree, rustication for students, and domestic chastisement for boys."^ Hence though the continental pronunciation of Greek and Latin was "Erasmian," at Cambridge and Oxford the Reuchlinian influence Geldart,^ however, prevailed, though with local modifications. complains that at Eton, Rugby and Harrow so little attention is paid to pronouncing according to accent that most Greek
scholars handle the accents loosely.
1906, p. 146
cieties of
f.)
The
Classical Review (April,
has the scheme approved by the Philological Sofor
Cambridge and Oxford

is
"The Restored Pronunciarather vehemently in-
tion of Latin," which

principle.
sist
is.
the virtual adoption of the Continental
The modern Greeks themselves

for instance,
it
that ancient Greek should be pronounced as

Miiller,^
calls
modern Greek
the "Erasmian" pronunciation
"false" because
treats
Greek "as dead."
Gcldart {Modern
Gk. Language in Its Relation to Ancient Gr., p. vii) says: "Modern Greek is nothing but ancient Greek made easy." It is not
Hist.
1 2
8 *
Gk. Gr.,
p. 31
f.
Cf. Mayser, Gr., pp. 138-151.
Blass, Pronun. of Anc. Gk., Purton's transl., p. 3.
Guide to Mod. Gk.,
p. x.
Hist. Gr. dor hell. Spr. (pp. 2G, 30).
In pp. 35-40 he states the case
against the squib of Erasmus.
Cf. Engel (Die Ausspr. dcs Gricch., 1S87)
who
defends the mod. Gk. method, as already stated.
238

Foy^ properly distinguishes between the and the modern Greek and refers to the Latin into the several Romance languages. There
however, that
it
quite as simple as that.
old Greek vocal sounds
development of
is
this difference in the Greek,
has only one
modern representative (with dialectical variations) of the ancient tongue. One must not make the mistake of comparing the pronunciation of the modern Greek vernacular with the probable
fifth century b.c. Then, and the vernacular pronunciation. The changes in pronunciation that have come in the modern Greek have come through the Byzantine Greek from the kolvtj, and thus represent a common stream with many rills. The various dialects have made contributions to the pronunciation of the In cultivated Athens at its KOLvrj and so of the modern Greek. best there was a closer approximation between the people and the "Demosthenes, in his oration xept aTe4>avov, educated classes. called Êschines a ixiado^Tov, but had accented the word erroneously, namely, iiladc/iTov, whereupon the audience corrected him by crying uLadojTov."^ Like the modern Italian, the ancient Greek had a musical cadence that set it above all other European tongues.^ We can indeed appeal to the old Greek inscriptions for the popuAccording to this evidence lar pronunciation on many points.*
pronunciation of the literary Attic of the
as now, there
was the
literary
in the first century b.c. in Attica at = ae,

/3
ei
i, 17
1,
i;
i,
vl
= v,
et=t,
=y
(English
v).^
Clearly then in the
kolvt]
the process of itacism

written.
was already at work before the N. T. was

true of the
kolvt]
What was
vernacular then does not of course argue conclu-
sively for the pronunciation of cultivated Athenians in the time
In versatile Athens "a stranger, if introduced on the always represented as talking the language or dialect of the people to which he belongs."^ Blass^ indeed thinks that in Tarsus the school-teacher taught Paul Atticistic Greek! ""lafxev,
of Socrates.
is
stage,
^ 2
Lautsystem der
griech. Vulgarspr., 1879, p. 83
f.
and Living Gk., 1898, p. 61. 3 Cf. Mure, A Grit. Hist, of the Lang, and Lit. of Anc. Greece, I, p. 99; Bolland, Die althell. Wortbet. im Lichte der Gesch., 1897, p. 6. Cf. Pronun. of Gk. as deduced from Graeco-Latin Biling. Coins. By Cecil Bendall in Jour, of Philol., vol. XXIX, No. 58, 1904. Here the rough breathing is represented by h, d = th, <j>=ph. * Thumb, Unters. etc., 1888, p. 1. Cf. Sophocles, Hist, of Gk. Alph. and
Achilles Rose, Chris. Greece
Pronun., 1854.
^
Telfy, Chron.
und Topog. der
griech. Ausspr.
nach
d.
Zeugnisse der
Inschr., 1893, p. 39.
Rutherford,
The New Phryn.,
p. 32.
'
Philol. of the Gosp., p. 9.

Ure,
'l<xa<xLV,
239
are the true forms which you a cultivated speaker or considered must employ if you care to be has oiSafxeu, -are, constantly he Epistles Yet in Paul's writer." successful than more no was pronunciation -aoLv. The Atticistic be sure of one may We syntax. and forms the Atticistic spelling, koij'i? was not exactly vernacular the of thing, the pronunciation modern Greek the ancient literary Attic nor precisely like the
he must have
said,
like
vernacular, but veering
more towards the latter. In Greek as has perhaps varied more than the pronunciation in English the 1 English pronunciation "is really that observes Giles spelling. history of the English language." the tracing in a stumbling-block discussion of this matter of sane and able very a âs
Hadley2
changes in Greek pronunciation.
He
insists
on change
all
through
position. If we the centuries (p. 139), which is the only rational undoubtedly traces turn to the earUest N. T. MSS. we shall find toward the Byzantine of this process of change from the old Attic in the fourth and fifth or modern Greek pronunciation. Indeed the process is centuries a.d.,^ the date of the earUest uncials, no hesitation in pretty well complete. The N. T. scribes make or indiconvenience according to writing at or e; t, et, -q, r, oi Tarsus, about view vidual taste." Blass,^ contrary to his former in anybody was there says that it is impossible to suppose that correct the Paul the schools at Tarsus who would have taught student of the kocj'i?, historical spelling or pronunciation. To the were dead symbols, as to us, in a sense ''the Greek rd ypafxfxara ^ Of one thing sounds." from which must be recovered the hving the Attic besides dialects sure, and it is that other
ow
we may be
contributed
The kolvv would be pronunciation. Alexanpronunciation. its in dialect-coloured here and there present the of steamship the and der's conquest, like the railroad whereas points, many in variations day, levelled the dialectical pronunciation of before every valley in Greece had its own environment Doric in a KOLvi, the taught One certain words.^
to
the
kolvt]
Man. of Comp. "Gk. Pronun."
Philol., p. 103.
Cf. also Ellis, Early

Crit., pp.
Eng. Pronun.
in Ess. Philol.
and
128-140.
Hatzidakis, Einl. etc.

' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 6 f. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 34 f. the objection that Nicklin, CI. Rev., Mar., 190G, p. 116. This is precisely grammarians aa ancient the against brings Gr., 33)
* 8
p. Jannaris (Hist. Gk. the pro"post-Christian scribes" and unable to "speak with authority of
nunciation of classical Greek."

'
Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., p. 75.
Cf.
Oppcnhcim und
Lucixs,
Byz.
Zeitschr., 1905, p. 13, for cxx. of phonetic .spelling.
240

it
NEW TESTAMENT
would show
of fact the Boeotian diavernacular pronunciation (and so the modern Greek) in points where the Boeotian differed radically from the old Attic.^ Boeotian Greek "modified its vowellect contributed largely to the kolvt]
somewhat.
As a matter
system more than any other Greek dialect." ^ Thus already in Boeotian at and e are confused and interchanged (yhrire, for instance), not to mention ae and 77. So in Boeotian -q, ei and t blend^ in sound, as eTrLdd = eTreLdr]. The early Greek generally, as already shown, made no distinction in sound between and co, and 77 was a slow development from e. The Ionic dialect never took kindly to the rough breathing and greatly influenced the kolptj and so the modern Greek. By the Christian era (3 is beginning to be pronounced as v, as the transliteration of Latin words like BepyiKios shows. Z is no longer ds, but 2, though 5 seems still usually d, not th. Who is right, therefore, the "Erasmians" or
the Reuchlinians?
linians, while
Jannaris^ sums up in favour of the Reuch-
are wholly right.
Riemann and Goelzer^ the "Erasmians" As a matter of fact neither side is wholly right. In speaking of ancient Greek one must recognize other dialects than the literary Attic of the fifth century B.C. If you ask for the
according to
kolvt] of the first century a.d., be found as a whole neither in the literary Attic alone nor in the N. T. MSS. of the fifth century a.d. The papyri* and
pronunciation of the vernacular

Avill
that
the inscriptions of the time throw light on a good
many
points,
though not on all. But even here the illiterate papyri do not furnish a safe standard for the vernacular of a man like Paul or Luke. It is small wonder therefore that N. T. MSS. show much confusion between -aet (future indicative) and 0-77 (aorist subjunctive), -ojjLev (indicative) and -co/xej' (subjunctive), -adai (infinitive)
(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
and -ade
Cf. Riem.
Giles,
and Goelzer, Phonct.,

of
p. 41.
2
3
Man.
Comp.
Philol., p. 540.
Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., pp.

thje
41, 46.
Thumb
(Hellen., p. 228)
warns
us against overemphasis of
*
Ba?otian influence.
"The pronunciation of ancient Gk. in the manner Greeks had been traditionally accepted at all times, before and through the Middle Ages, as a matter of unquestioned fact." ^ Phonet., p. 56. "En resume, la prononciation grecque ancienne etait, 6ur presque tous les points, diflerente de la prononciation moderne."
Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 31.
of the present

is
241
was done. On the other hand the modern Greek by excess, as the literary Attic does by default. There was, of course, no Jewish pronunciation of the KOLpfj. The Coptic shows the current pronunciation in many ways and probably influenced the pronunciation of the kolpt] in Egypt. Cf. a German's pronunciation of English.
not the
way
it
method misses
it
VII. Punctuation.
In the
spoken language the division of
words
is
made by
the voice, pauses, emphasis, tone, gesture, but
it is difficult
to reproduce all this
on the page
for the eye.
Many
questions arise for the editor of the Greek N. T. that are not easy
of solution.
Caspar Rene Gregory
insists that
it
whenever N. T.
MSvS. have punctuation of any kind,

since
(a)
it
must be duly weighed,
represents the reading given to the passage.

early as Aristotle's time the para-
The Paragraph. As
A dividing horizontal stroke was (7rapaypa(t)os) was known. written between the lines marking the end of a paragraph. Some other marks like > (SLTrXrj) or 7 (/copwfts) were used, or a slight break in the line made by a blank space. Then again the first letter of the line was written larger than the others or even made to project out farther than the rest.^ The paragraph was to the ancients the most important item in punctuation, and we owe a debt to the N. T. revisers for restoring it to the English N. T. Cf. Lightfoot, Trench, Ellicott, The Revision of the N. T., 1873, Euthalius (a.d. 458) prepared an edition of the Greek p. xlvi. N. T. with chapters (Ke<j)a\aLa) but long before him Clement of Alexandria spoke of Trepi/coTrat and Tertullian of capitula. These "chapters" were later called also tLtXol? The arlxos of Euthalius was a line of set length with no regard to the sense, like our pringraph
,
ter's
ems.
W. H. have made
The
careful use of the paragraph in their
Greek N. T.
marked off by spaces and the larger paragraphs are broken into smaller sub-paragraphs (after the French method) by smaller spaces.^ Another division
larger sections are
is
made by W. H.
in the use of the capital letter at the beginning
an important sentence, while the other sentences, though after a period, begin with a small letter. This is a wholly arbitrary method, but it helps one better to understand W. H.'s interpreof
tation of the text.

'
On
the
paraâph
soc
pp. G7
2 '
fT.
Occasionally the double point
Thompson, Handb. of Gk. and Lat. PaliroR., (;) was used to close a paragraph.
N.
T., pp. 40
ff.
Cf. Warfield, Text. Crit. of
Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 319. Prol., p. 112 f.
For the arlxos see further Gregory,
242
NEW TESTAMENT
W.
of a
rhythm
H.^ have also printed in metrical form passages metrical in like the Magnificat of Mary (Lu. 1 46-55), the fragment
:
hymn
in 1
Tim. 3
16, etc.,
while Lu. 2
14 and the non-
metrical
hymns in Revelation are merely printed in narrower columns. The Hebrew parallelism of 0. T. quotations is indicated
(6)
also.
oldest inscriptions and papyri show few between sentences or clauses in a sentence,^ though punctuation by points does appear on some of the ancient inscriptions. In the Artemisia papyrus the double point (:) occasionally ends the sentence.^ It was Aristophanes of Byzantium (260 B.C.) who is credited with inventing a more regular system of sentence punctuation which was further developed by the
signs of punctuation
Sentences.
The
Alexandrian grammarians.'' As a rule all the sentences, like the words, ran into one another in an unbroken line {scriptura continua), but finally three stops were provided for the sentence by
the use of the
full point.
The point
full
at the top of the fine

(.)
() (orrtTMi)
Tekda, 'high point')
was a
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/ârt/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,

Parenthetical
the dash, quotation-marks, the parenthesis, etc.^

clauses were certainly used,
which
will
be discussed elsewhere,
though no signs were used for this structure by the ancient W. H. represent the parenthesis either by the comma (Ro. 1 13) or the dash with comma (1 Tim. 2:7). Instead of
Greeks.
:
Intr. to
Gk. N.
T., p.
319
f.
^ *
Thompson, Handb.,
lb., p. 70;
etc., p. 69.
2 ^

I follow
6.3
(pp.
6
and
67),
Thompson who makes
Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 67. (Handb., etc., p. 70) on this point instead of Jannaris
the vTroaTLynr]
= our comma.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 17.
Of. Gregory, Prol., pp. 345, 348; Blass, Gr. of
has
the arlxoL in the

^
way
of sense-Unes (Blass, ib.).
243
quotation-marks W. H. begin the quotation with a capital letter with no punctuation before it, as in Jo. 12 19, 21. One way of expressing a quotation was by to, as in Ro. 13 8. In the case 13). of O. T. quotations the Scripture is put in uncial type (Jo. 12 The period (ireplodos) gives very Httle trouble to the modern edi:
tor, for it is
obviously necessary for modern needs.
Here the
it is
editor has to
ful,
make
give
his interpretation
5 yeyovep
sometimes when
doubt-
as
W. H.
read
ev.
h, not
ev 6 yeyoveu. kv (Jo.
:
1:4).
So
W. H.
dav/jLaêre. 5td
tovto Mcouo-tjs in Jo. 7

(kcoXov),^
:
22, not davnaiêre
5id TOVTO. Moivarjs, etc.
The colon
'limb of the sentence'
formed a complete clause. See Jo. 3 31 for example of use of colon made by W. H. The comma {kohho) is the most conunon division of the sentence and is often necessary, as with the vocative. So AtSdcr/caXe, tL TroLr]aconp; (Lu. 3 12) and many common examples. In general W. H. use the comma only where it is necessary to make clear an otherwise ambiguous clause, whether
:
it
be a participial (Col. 2
:
2)
or conjunctional phrase (Col.
23),
or appositive (Col. 1
18), or relative (Col.
2:3).
The
first
chap-
ter of Colossians has a rather unusual

16, 18, 20, 27, 28) as
number
of colons (2, 6, 14,
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 "excessive" use of the comma, Winer himself being judge.^ My
:
:
friend.
Rev.
S.
M.
stop before
jua^coj^
Provence, D.D. (Victoria, Tex.), suggests a full in Ac. 23 27 f. That would help the character
:
of Claudius Lysias on the point of veracity.
The continuous writing of words without any space between them was not quite universal, though nearly so.^ The oldest Attic inscription (Dipylon vase, probalily eighth century B.C.) is written from right to left. With the common method
(c)
Words.
was not always easy for the practised eye to distinguish between words. Hence there arose the SiaaroX?; or virohaaToXi}, a comma used to distinguish between ambiguous words, as eort vovs, not But W. H. make no use of this mark, not even in o, tl cffTii' oDs.
it
to distinguish
OTL
1
it
from the conjunction on.

:
They
:
print uniformly
(Lu. 10
35; Jo. 2
5;
14
13;
Cor. 16
2, etc.),
not to mcn-
Thompson, Handb.,
division of the sentence,
So Suidas. The colon is the main semietc., p. 81. but mod. Eng. makes less use of all marks save the
period and
2
comma.
63, 07.
W.-M., pp.
Thompson, Handb.,
etc., p. 07.
244
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK Mk.

9
:
NEW TESTAMENT
8:25; Ac. 9:27; 2 may be had in this chapter under
apostrophe
(')
tion doubtful cases like
11, 28; Jo.

(")
Cor. 3
14.^
As
to the
marks
of dieeresis
reference
to the discussion of diphthongs

II (i).
and
diaeresis
W.
H., like other
modern
editors, Use the

air'
(or
smooth breathing)
to represent elision, as
apxrjs
(Mt. 24: 21) .^
when crasis The hyphen, a long straight line, was used in the Harris-Homer MS. to connect compound words, but it is not in the N. T.^ The editors vary much in the way such words as dXXd ye, ha ri, tovt' 1(tti, etc., are printed. The MSS. give no help at all, for tovto 8e karLv in Ro. 1 12 is not
coronis
is
The
the smooth breathing used also to show

Kaixoi
has taken place, as in
(Lu. 1:3).^
conclusive against tovt' eaTLv elsewhere.^
W. H.
:
prefer dXXd ye (Lu.

:
24 21;
:
Cor. 9
:
2),
dpd ye (Ac. 8
30), 5td ye (Lu. 11

:
8;
18
:
5),
et
ye (2 Cor. 5
3, etc.), Kai
:
ye (Ac. 2
18; 7
27), 6s ye (Ro. 8
etc.),
32),
:
5td TravTos
etc.), et
(Mk. 5
ixi)
5, etc.), 5td tL
:
(Mt. 9:11,
xws
iW
:
tI
(Mt. 9
4,
:
TTcos
(Ac. 27
12),
/xij
woTe (everj^where save in

:
Mt. 25 9
fXT]
:
where
Tts
nrjTOTe),
tov (Ac. 27
29),
fî]
(1
Cor. 9
27, etc.),
(1
Cor. 16
:
11, etc.).
So also
Kalirep,
8rj\ov 6tl in 1
Cor. 15
27, oo-rts
ovv
(Mt. 18
etre,
4).
But on the other hand W. H.

cicrre,
print Slotl as well

iJ,r]8eiroTe,
jurjSeTrco,
as
ovTe,
fxriTe,
ixrjrroTe
(once),
ovSeiroTe,
nrjKeTL,
oi'KeTC,
iirjirco,
oviroo,
fj.r]TLye,
even
iiriye
Kadd, KaQb, Kad6:s, KaBdirep, nadoTL, KadoXou, ihairep, ojael,

: :
(Mt. 6:1), 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. Adverbs hke eireKeLva (Ac. 7 43), vrrepeKeiva (2 Cor. 10 16), irapeKTos W. H. prop(2 Cor. 11 28) are, of course, printed as one word. erly have virep eyoo (2 Cor. 11:23), not i'7repe7cb. In Ac. 27:33
:
4 13 and Nea
:
one word, but W. H. have 'lepd IloXts in Col. Ac. 16 11. It must be confessed that no very clear principles in this matter can be set forth, and the effort of Winer-Schmiedel ^ at minute analysis does not throw much light
TeacrapeaKacSeKaTos is
ttoXls in
:
on the
(d)
subject.
The
Editor's Prerogative.
is
Where
there
^
is
so
much
con-
fusion,
1
what
the editor's prerogative?
Blass
boldly advances
W.-Sch., p. 35.
See this ch. ii (k) for discussion of elision. For origin and early use of the apostrophe see Thompson, Handb., etc., p. 73. ^ See this ch. ii (Z) for discussion of crasis. Cf. Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., * Thompson, Handb., etc., p. 72. p. 88. ^ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 14. For the usage of Tisch. in the union and the separation of particles see Gregory, Prol., pp. 109-111. In most cases * P. 35. Tisch. ran the particles together as one word. ^ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 17. Left out by Debrunner.
2
245
the German idea: "The most correct principle appears to be to punctuate wherever a pause is necessary for reading correctly." But Winer ^ shrinks from this profusion of punctuation-marks by
the editors, which " often intruded on the text their

tation of it."
own
interpre-
The
editor indeed has to interpret the text with
but certainly good taste demands that the miniof punctuation-marks be the rule. They must of necessity decide "a multitude of subtle and difficult points of interpretation." 2 Hort indeed aimed at "the greatest simplicity compatible with clearness," and this obviously should
his punctuation,
mum,
not the
maximum,
be the goal in the Greek N. T. But the editor's punctuation may be a hindrance to the student instead of a help. It is the privilege of each N. T. student to make his own punctuation.
1
W.-M.,
p. 63.
Hort, Intr. to Gk. N. T., p. 318.
CHAPTER
VII
(KAI2EI2)
THE DECLENSIONS
Space
will
nouns, for the student of this

the normal Attic inflections.
(TTTcoo-ts)
not be taken for the inflection of the nouns and programmar may be assumed to know
Aristotle ^ used the
term " inflection "
tion
is
of noun and verb and even adverb, but practically inflecappHed to nouns and conjugation (kXIctls priixa.TUiv = av^vyLa)
to verbs.
tive
Noun
(ovo/jlo)
does, of course, include both substan-
and adjective without entering the psychological realm and affirming the connection between name and thing (cf. Plato's
Cratylus)
I.
THE SUBSTANTIVE (TO "ONOMA)

(to
ovo/jlo)
The Substantive
(TpdyiJLa),
is
either concrete
(aoJ/jLo)
or abstract
ordinary appellative
{ovoiia TrpoarjjopLKov)
or proper {ovo/xa
Kvpiov) .
1. History of the Declensions. It is only since the seventeenth century a.d. that modern grammarians distinguish for convenience three declensions in Greek. The older grammars had ten
or more.2
In the modern Greek vernacular the
first
and third de-
clensions have been largely fused into one, using the singular of
the
first
and the
plural of the third.^
Thumb
{Handbook, pp.
43
ff.)
divides the declension of substantives in
modern Greek
feminine,
vernacular
neuter).
according
is
to
gender simply
(masculine,
In Sanbut Whitney^ says: "There is nothing absolute in this arrangement; it is merely believed to be open to as few objections as any other." Evidently
skrit five declensions are usually given as in Latin,
^
This
the simplest
way out
of the confusion.
Donaldson,
New
Crat., p. 421.
It is in the accidence that the practical
identity of N. T. Gk. with the popular
Koivii is best seen, here and in the lexical point of view (Deissmann, Exp., Nov., 1907, p. 434). 2 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 102; Gildersl., Am. Jour, of PhiloL, 1908, p. 264.
3 *
lb., pp. 10.5, 111. Sans. Gr., p. 111.
Cf. Hatzidakis, Einl. etc., pp. 376
ff.
246
THE DECLENSIONS
(kaISEIS)
247
therefore the ancient Greeks did not have the benefit of our modern theories and rules, but inflected the substantives according to
principles not
now known to us. The various dialects exercised great freedom also and exhibited independent development at
points, not to
in time in each dialect. purely a convenience, but with this justification: the first has a stems, the second o stems, the third consonant and close vowel (i, v) stems. There are some differences in the suffixes also, the third declension having always the genitive
many
The
mention the changes

is
threefold division
ending in
conform.
-os.
In the third declension especially
it is
not possible
variations.
to give a type to
which
all
the words in
all
the cases and numbers
Besides, the
is
same word may experience
Much
freedom
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

This
is
is
use of the cases will have a special chapter in Syntax (ch. XI).
(a)
The History of the Forms of the

is
Cases.
called
for before the declensions are discussed.
The term "case"
(Trrcoo-ts,
casus)
considered a "falling," because the nominative

(tttcoo-u
6pdr},
regarded
as the upright case

fact the accusative
oponacTTLKr]
is
though as a matter of probably older than the nominative (Trrcoo-t?

eWela),
or
opOrj).
The
other cases are called oblique
(7rXd7tat)
as deviations from the nominative.

(KXrjTLKT]
or
Trpoa-ayopevTLKr])
In simple truth the vocative has no inflection and is not properly a
It is usually the noun-stem or like There are only three other case-endings preserved in the Greek, and the grammars usually term them accusative (TTTcocrts aiTiartKij), genitive {ttcoctls yeviKYj) and dative (tttuxtls boTui})} There is no dispute as to the integrity of the accusative case, the earliest, most common of all the oblique cases and the most persistent. In the breakdown of the other cases the accusative and the prepositions reap the benefit. In truth the other oblique cases are variations from the normal accusative. But this subject is complicated with the genitive and the dative. It is now a commonplace in comparative philology that the Greek genitive has taken over the function of the ablative (d0at-
case in
its logical relations.
the nominative in form.
ptTiKi])
also.
In the singular the Sanskrit had already the same
' Mod. Gk. vernac. has only three cases (nom., \:,n\. and ace.) and these are not always formally ditTcrcntiated from each other. The mod. Cdc. has thus carried the blending of case-forms almost as far as mod. Eng. Cf. Thumb,
Handb.,
p. 31.
248
ending

{-as) for genitive
and ablative, while in the plural the Sanhad the same form as the dative {bkiyas; cf. Latin Thus in the Sanskrit the ablative has no distinctive endihus). ings save in the singular of a stems like kamat ('love') where the ablative ending -t (d) is preserved. In Latin, as we know, the ablative, dative, locative and instrumental have the same
skrit ablative
endings in the plural.

inscriptions
The Latin
ablative
singular
is
partly
ablative, partly locative, partly instrumental.
Some
old Latin
show the
d,
as hened, in altod marid, etc.
In Greek
the ablative forms merged with the genitive as in the Sanskrit
but not because of any inherent "internal connecbetween them, as from accidents affecting the outward forms of inflection."^ The Greek did not allow r or 5 to stand at the end of a word. So the Greek has irpos (not irpor for irpoTi). KaXcos may be (but see Brugmann^) the ablative KokuiT and so all adverbs in -cos. The meaning of the two cases remained distinct in the Greek as in the Sanskrit. It is not possible to derive the ablative (source or separation) idea from the genitive (or '^kvos) idea nor vice versa. The Greek dative {Sotlkt]) is even more complicated. " The Greek dative, it is well known, both in singular and plural, has the form of a locative case, denoting the place where
singular,
tion
or in which; but, as actually used,
it
combines, with the mean-
ing of a locative, those of the dative and instrumental."^

is
This
only true of some datives.
There are true datives

as
of
like 68(2,
xcopa.
The Indo-Germanic
originally
stock,
sets
shown by the
Sanskrit,
had
1
three separate
endings for these cases.
Hadley, Ess. Philol. and Crit., Gk. Gen. or Abl., p. 52. Cf. also Miles, of Gk. and Lat., 1893, p. xvii. This blending of the cases in Gk. is the result of "partial confusion" "between the genitive and the ablative
Comp. Synt.
between the dative and the locative, between the locative and the instrumental" (Audoin, La Decl. dans les Lang. Indo-Europ., 1898, p. 248). In general on the subject of the history of the eight cases in Gk. see Brugmann, Griech. Gr., pp. 217-250,375 f.; Comp. Gr. of the Indo-Ger. Lang., vol. Ill, pp. 52-280; Kurze vergl. Gram., II, pp. 418 fT.; K.-Bl., I, pp. 365-370, II, pp. 299-307; Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., pp. 268-301; Bopp, tJber das Dem. imd den Urspr. der Casuszeichen etc., 1826; Hartung, tJber die Casus etc., 1831; Hiibschmann, Zur Casuslehre, 1875; Rumpel, CasusL, 1845; Meillet, Intr. h I'Etude Comp., pp. 257 ff.; Penka, Die Entst. der Synkr. Casus im Lat., Griech. und Deutsch., 1874. See also p. 33 f. of Hiibner, Grundr. zu
Vorles. viber die griech. SjTit.; Schleicher, Vergl. Griech.; Schmidt, Griech.
Gr., etc.
2
Brugmann
.
(Griech. Gr., 1900, p. 225),
who
considers the
in ovtcjs, kt\.,
due to analogy merely, like the s in iyyv-s, kt\. But he sees an abl. idea in * Hadley, Ess. Phil, and Crit., iK-rds. Cf also ovpavo-de like coeli-tus. p. 52.
THE DECLENSIONS
The Greek
tive in
-ats,
-(TL
(kaIZEIS)
249
locain
plural
uses
for all
three cases either "the
or the instrumental forms in -ots."^

-4s,
"The forms
Latin
from -o stems, are a new formation on the analogy

'AdT]vr}aL is
i;
of forms
from -o stems." ^ singular of consonant, and

t
locative plural.
In the
stems, the locative ending -t
for all three cases in Greek, as wktI.
is used In the a declension the
dative ending -at usually answers for
all
three cases.
ij.
-at contracts with the stem-vowel a into ^ or
The form few examples
of the locative -t here survive, as in vraXat, 'OXv/xTriat, Qrjât-yevr]?.^

Xa/jLai
may
the dative ending -at

into
CO.
be either dative or locative. In the o declension also is the usual form, contracting with the o
distinct
But a few
locative endings survive, like kei,
'ladjxol, o'lkol (cf. oLKcp), TToT, ctc.
Thc Homeric
infinitive 86ixev
and
t,
the infinitive like

are datives.'*
c{>epeLv
are probably locatives also without the

{bbixevai, bovvai, 'KeKvKevai, \veadaL,
while the infinitives in at

etc.)
XDuat,
The instrumental has
left little of its original
form on the Greek singular. The usual Sanskrit is a. Cf. in Greek such words as a/xa, eveKa, ha, ixtra, irapa, TreSd, possibly
the Doric
why).
-</)t
Kpv(j)a,
Lesbian aXXd.
Brugmann^ thinks the Laconic

Uke the Gothic (English Another Greek suffix
/Stry^t,
7n7-7roKa= Attic Toj-TroTe is instrumental
Cf. the in " the
more the
bhi)
is
better," etc.
(Indo-Germanic,
found in Homer, as
ê60tv
(plural).
But
this -0t
was used
also for ablative or locative,
and
even genitive or dative. It is clear therefore that in Greek the usual seven (eight with the vocative) Indo-Germanic cases are present, though in a badly mutilated condition as to form. The ideas, of course, expressed by the cases continued to be expressed by the blended forms. In actual intelligent treatment it is simpler to preserve the seven case-names as will be seen later. This is a marked pe(h) The Blending of Case-Endings. culiarity of the Indo-Germanic tongues. Neuter nouns illustrate
1
Giles,
lb., p.
Man.
290.
of
Comp.
Philol., p. 287.
For survivals
of the dat. -at sec the
Rhodian
tSi (Bjorkegren,
De
Sonis dial. Rhod., p. 41).
' Brugmann, Cf. the Lat. doml, Roicr{i). For nuGrie(!h. Or., p. 228. merous exx. of loc. and dat. distinct in form in the various dialects see Meistcr, Griech. Dial., Bd. II, pp. 61 ff.; Hoffmann, Griech. Dial., Bd. I, p. 233 (dat. -dt, loc.-i; dat. -wt, loc. -oi). Cf. Collitz and Bechto?l, Samml. d. griech. dial.
Inschr., p. 308.
6
"
Giles,
Man.
in
of
Comp.
Philol., p.
278
f.
Griech. Gr.,
3. Aufl., p.
220.
Cf. K.-Bl., II., pp. 301-307, for examples of
the survival of
Griech. Dial.,
eLlXwâ).
abl., loc.
and
in.str.
forms
Gk. adverbs.
194.
Cf. also Moister,
II., p.
295, for survivals of instr. forms in Cypriotic dial, (ipa,

I. 'II., p.
See Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,
'
250
NEW TESTAMENT
the same tendency, not to mention the dual. The analytic prohas largely triumphed over the synthetic case-endings. Originally no prepositions were used and all the word-relations
cess
were expressed by
cases.
are no case-endings at
all,
In modern French, for instance, there but prepositions and the order of
all that was originally done by the caseIn English, outside of the old dative form in pronouns like him, them, etc., the genitive form alone remains. Finnish indeed has fifteen cases and several other of the ruder tongues
the words have to do
forms.
ings,
etc.
have many.^ On the other hand the Coptic had no case-endbut used particles and prepositions like NTE for genitive,
It is indeed possible that all inflectional languages passed once through the isolating and agglutinative stages. English may
some day
like the
for the relation, of
Chinese depend entirely on position and tone words to each other.
(c) Origin of Case Suffixes. Giles ^ frankly confesses that comparative philology has nothing to say as to the origin of the case-suffixes. They do not exist apart from the noun-stems. Some of them may be pronominal, others may be positional (postpositions), but it adds nothing to our knowledge to call some of the cases local and others grammatical. They are all gramma-
tical.
The
ablative
and the locative
clearly
had a
local origin.
Some
cases were used less often than others.
Some
of the case-
forms became identical. Analogy carried on the process. The desire to be more specific than the case-endings led to the use of prepositional adverbs. As these adverbs were used more and more there was "an ever-increasing tendency to find the important part of the meaning in the preposition and not in the case-ending." In the modern Greek vernacular, as already stated, only three
case-forms survive (nominative, genitive, accusative), the dative
vanishing like the

1 2
ablative.**
Farrar, Gr. Synt., p. 23.
Bergaigne (Du Role de la Deriv. dans la de la Soc. de Ling, de Paris, to. ii, fasc. 5) and G. Meyer (Zur Gesch. der indo-germ. Stammb. und Decl.) both argue that caseendings had no distinctive meaning in themselves nor separate existence.
of
Philol., p. 271.
Man.
Comp.
Decl. Indo-Europ.,
Mem.
But
On
see also Hirt, Handb. etc., pp. 231-288, for careful treatment of the cases. the general subject of syncretism in the Gk. cases see Delbriick, Vergl.
1. Tl.,
Synt.,
pp. 189
instr.
cit.,
abl., loc.
3
and
ff., 195 f. See also Sterrett, Horn. II., N. 15, for traces of forms in Horn. (loc. -i, -Ol; instr., -4>i, -<t>Lv; abl., -dtv).
Giles, op.
p. 273.
Dieterich, Unters. etc., p. 149.

etc.,
Cf. also Keck,
Uber
d.
Dual
bei d. griech.
Rednern
1882.
THE DECLENSIONS
3.
(kAISEIs)
251
The N. T. Greek has (epiKos) and the singular the only uses and lost the dual (ouuos) had the dual, Hebrew the and Sanskrit The plural {Tr\ridvvTLK6s). odo and vipossibly (and amho and duo only had but the Latin
Number
(dpiefios) in Substantives.
ginti)
which had a plural inflection in the oblique cases. Coptic^ had no plural nor dual save as the plural article distinguished words. English has only the dual twain, but we now say twins.
The
scholars do not agree as to the origin of the dual. Moul" when ton2 inclines to the idea that it arose in prehistoric days
men
could not count beyond two."
It
is
more
likely that
it is
due to the desire to emphasize pairs, as hands, eyes, etc., not to accept "Du Ponceau's jest that it must have been invented for
and married people." ^ In the oldest Indo-Germanic languages the luxury of the dual is vanishing, but Moulton considers It never won a foothold in the its use in the Attic as a revival.'' and Êolic and the New Ionic, and its use in the Attic was hmited
lovers
not consistent.^ The dual tions,^ while in the kolvt} it
is is
nearly gone in the late Attic inscriponly sporadic and constantly vanish-
ing in the inscriptions and papyri.'' In Pergamum*^ and Pisidia^ no dual appears in the inscriptions. The only dual form that and the N. T. is 8vo (not 5uco) for all the cases occurs in the
LXX
(as genitive in 1
Tim. 5: 19), save 8val{v) for the dative-locativeinstrumental, a plural form found in Aristotle, Polybius, etc., and Only in 4 Mace. 1 28 is called a barbarism by Phrynichus.i^ and the Atticists Polybius SvoiP A found, but 8velv in ^{V, as in Mt. 6:24; Lu. see 8v(tI{v) of (Thackeray, p. 187). For examples however, papyri, the In etc. 16 :13; Ac. 21:33; Heb. 10:28, In the 8v(tI{v). with along 8vco, 5uco, 8ve2v occasionally appear" in vanished has "Am</)co used. longer modern Greek the dual is no
:
the N. T. while d/xôrepot occurs fourteen times (Mt. 9

1 3
17, etc.),
Tattam's Egyp. Gr., Farrar, Gk. Synt., p.

of
p. 16.
Prol., p. 57.
ix.
23.
Cf. Geiger, Ursp. d. Spr.,

<
Cf. Giles,
Man.
6 '
Comp.
PhiloL, p. 264.
Prol., p. 57.
Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 101. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436.
Compemass, De Serm. Vulg.
etc.,
Meistorhans, Att. Inschr., p. 201. Schweizcr, Perg. Inschr., p. 138. Tatian (p. 96 of his works) p. 15.
shows a dual.
' Rutherford, New Phryn., p. 289 f. But cf. K.-Bl., I, p. 362, for further items about the dual. '1 Dcissmann, H. S., p. 187. For Svalif) in the inscriptions see Dittcnberger, For similar situations Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pa))., p. 313. 118. 22, etc. see Hclbing, Gr. d. Svtiv) Svolv, and A K dvai, roh 5uo, MSS. (rots in the
LXX
Sept., p. 53.
Cf. also C.
and
S., Scl.
from the
LXX,
p. 25.
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
and "two clear examples of it in NP 67 and 69 Once for all then it may be remarked that in the N. T, both for nouns and verbs the dual is ignored. The dual was rare in the later Ionic and the kolvt) follows suit (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p. 184). The syntactical aspects of number are to be
of d/iôrepot
(iv/A.D.)."^
discussed later.
4.
Gender
(-ye'vos)
in Substantives.
In the long history of the
Greek language gender has been wonderfully persistent and has suffered little variation.^ It is probably due to the natural difference of sex that grammatical gender^ arose. The idea of sense gender continued, but was supplemented by the use of endings
for the distinction of gender.
This personification of inanimate
was probably due to the poetic imagination of early peoples, Imt it persists in modern European tongues, though French has dropped the neuter (cf. the Hebrew) and modern English (like the Persian and Chinese) has no grammatical gender save in the third personal pronoun (he, she, it) and the relative.^ Analogy has played a large part in gender.^ The Sanskrit, Latin and Greek all gave close attention to gender and developed rules that are difficult to apply, with many inconsistencies and absurdities. In Greek i]\Los is masculine and aekrjvq feminine, while in German we have die Sonne and der Mond. Perhaps we had better be grateful that the Greek did not develop gender in the verb like the Hebrew verb. Moulton^ thinks it "exceedingly strange" that English should be almost alone in shaking off "this outworn excrescence on language." The N. T., like Homer and the modern Greek, preserves the masculine (apaevLKOp), feminine (drj'KvKov) and neuter (ovSerepov). Some words indeed have common {kolvov) sex,
objects
like 6
7]
TOLs, ovos, Beds,

{eirlKOLvov)
,
while others, applied to each sex, are called

-q
epicene
like
dXcoTrr?^, apKTos.
In
are
German we
actually
have das Weib ('wife')! (o) Variations in Gender.

a^vaaos (x^po)
is
They
not numerous.
(Gen.
in
1
:
'H
a substantive in the
etc.), else
LXX
2, etc.)
and
the N. T. (Lu. 8:31,

1
where soonly
Diogenes Laertes.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 80.
jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 103.
Paul, Prin. of Hist, of Lang., pp. 289 fT. Brugmann thinks that gender came largely by formal assimilation of adj. to subst. as avOpuiros kclkos, x<^po^
iepa.
4
Dan. Crawford, the Bantu missionary, claims 19 genders

Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 26
Prol., p. 59.
f.
^
for
Bantu.
Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., pp. 64, 259.

I,
On
the whole subject of gender see K.-Bl.,
pp. 358 ff.
THE DECLENSIONS
:
(kAISEIs)
253
In Mk. 14 3 W. H. and Nestle properly read rriv aXaâarpov, though the Western and Syrian classes give t6v dX. after HerodIn Rev. 8:116 (not 17) otus, and a few of the late MSS. to dX. a\J/tvdos is read, though K and some cursives omit the article, beIn Mk. 12 26 all editors cause the word is a proper name. have 6 /Sdros (the Attic form according to Moeris), elsewhere
:
17
/Sdros
(Lu. 20
:
37; Acts 7
35).
Qeos
may
:
in Ac. 19
11 or feminine as in Ac. 19
37,
be either masculine as but in Ac. 19 27 we

:
have
dea (Text.
1
variation."
17
Rcc. also in 35, 37), an "apparently purposeless Thieme {Die Inschr. von Magn., p. 10) says that
Theology and Philosophy,
1906,
deos is
used in the inscriptions of Asia Minor in formal religious
language.
p. 96)
Burnet {Review
-q
of
deos
says that in Athens
was used
in every-day language,
but 17 dea. in the public prayers, thus taking the Ionic ded. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Papyri {Laid- und Wortlehre, 1906), p. 254 f., for papyri illustrations. Blass^ considers 17 'lepovaaXrjij. (Ac. 5 28, etc., the common form in LXX, Luke and Paul) feminine because it is a place-name, and hence he explains Traaa 'lepoaoXvixa (Mt. 2 3) rather than by toXls understood. Ar]v6s in Rev. 14 19 strangely enough has both masculine and feminine, riiv \r}vbv
:
:
TOP neyav
but
Ji{
fem.
(his)
The feminine
is
the
common
:
construc-
but the masculine is found in LXX in Is. 63 2 only. Atôs always 6 in the N. T., even when it means a precious stone (Rev. 5 times), where Attic after 385 b.c.^ had 17. Al/jlos is masculine in Lu. 4 25 as in the Attic, but is chiefly feminine in Acts and Luke, Hke the Doric and late Attic, as in Lu. 15: 14; Acts 11 28.* In Lu. 13 4, Jo. 9:7, 11 we have 6 2)tXcod/i, while Josephus has both ii {War, V, 12. 2) and 6 {War, II, 16. 2). Blass* explains the use of 6 in the Gospels by the participle dTreo-raX/xej'os in Jo. 9 7. ^rdnvos in Heb. 9 4 is feminine after the Attic instead of the Doric 6 ar., as in Ex. 16 33. In Rev. 21 18 (21) uaXos as is customary with we read also 6 vaKos rather than
tion,
is
: : :
:
17
'
Moulton,
Prol., p. 60,
but he adds "is explained by inscriptions."

12(),
Cf.
Nachmanson, Magn.
2
Inschr., p.
for
many
exx.
p. IGO.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 32.

t6 'lepoaoXvua
have only
^ *
Cf. Ilort, Notes on Orth., and Mt. usually.
Mk. and
Jo.
Mei.sterhans, Att. Inschr., p. 129.

Cf. llort,
now masc. and now
Moulton (Prol., p. GO) fuuls Xtjuos MSS. show similar variations. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 45; Thack., p. 145 f., for same situation in LXX concerning /Jdros, iXafiaaTpos {-ov), \tjv6s, ardnvos. Cf. C. and S., Sel. from the
Notes on Orth.,
p.
157.
fem. in the pap.
LXX
LXX,
p. 27, for further exx. p. 32.
Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
254
NEW TESTAMENT
19:29) reveals its where it is masc. in
to aXas occurs
precious stones.^
"Taawiros (Heb. 9:19; Jo.
gender only in the
LXX
1 (3)
(Lev. 14
:
6,
51
f.)
BA, fem.
in
and
Ki. 4
19
BA.
The neuter
in papyri as early as third century B.C.
(Moulton and Milligan,
Expositor, 1908, p. 177).
Interpretation of the LXX. In Ro. 11:4 Paul uses than the frequent LXX tQ /3daX. The feminine is due, according to Burkitt, to the Q'ri ti'^'2. (alaxwrj)- Moulton /3daX as occurring "three times in LXX and in Ascenspeaks of jSdaX occurs "everywhere in the prosio Isaiae ii. 12." ^ But phetic books, Jer., Zeph., Hos., etc." (Thayer), though not so common in the historical books, far more than the "three times" of Moulton. In Mk. 12 11 and Mt. 21 42 the LXX avr-q is due to nsir, though the translators may have "interpreted their own Greek
(6)
TTj
/3daX rather
fj
17
by
recalling
KecfyaX^nv
yo^vlas."^
takenly used TO with "Ayap, for he is treating the merely. Any word can be so regarded.
(c)
In Gal. 4:25 Paul has not misname as a word
taplasm.
clension
Variations in Gender Due to Heteroclisis and MeThese will be discussed a little later. Delbriick thinks
all the masculine substantives of the first or a dewere feminine and that all the feminine substantives of the second or o declension were masculine. There was a general tendency 5. The First or a Declension. towards uniformity* in this declension that made it more popular than ever. Here only the N. T. modifications in this general development can be mentioned. This form (a) The Doric Genitive-Ablative Singular a. survives in /Soppa (Lu. 13:29; Rev. 21 13) and was common in the Attic after 400 b.c. Note also fjLafxwvd (Lu. 16 9). It is frequent in the LXX, papyri, inscriptions, though mainly in proper
that originally
These proper names in -as, chiefly oriental, make the So AûXa and if unaccented -as, in a. 'AkuXoi; m papyri (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 187), though no gen. in N. T. (only -as and -av) 'AypiirTa^ (Ac. 25 23), 'Avavla
names.
genitive-ablative in -S or,
:
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 26.
Cf. Theophrast,
De
lapid. 49, for
r,
SeXos.
2
3
Moulton,
lb.
Prol., p. 59.
He
corrects this erratum in note to H. Scott.
"
Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. lOG.
Swete, O. T. in Gk., p. 304
f.,
has some
good illustrations and remarks about the declensions in the LXX. * Both 'Aypinira and 'Ayplirirov occur in the pap. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 34 and 434. This gen. in -a gradually became "a ruling principle" for all substantives in -os (Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 108, 110). See Thumb,
THE DECLENSIONS
:
(kAISEIs)
255
here (from -as, so Thayer), "kvva (Lu. 3 2), 'AvrtTras (indeclinable Bftpa^â 11 Cor. "Apera 32), (2 2 Rev. 13), or mere sHp for -a, accus. -av (gen. does not appear, only nom. -as as Mk. 15 7, and
:
: :
as
15:11,
etc.),
Bapm/3a (Gal. 2
Col. 4:10; see Deissmann,

:
Bible Studie&, p. 187), 'Era</.pa (Col. 1 accusative), Zrjvdu
7), 'Epfxap
(Ro. IG
:
14,
Doric
tribe,
hkewise
8; land,
(Tit. 3
13); 'IlXeta (Lu. 1

:
17) accord-
ing to
NB
:
(so
W.
:
H.); 'lohda (person, Lu. 3
33;
Mk. 6:3;
:
Mt. 2
6;
Heb. 8
Lu.
(1
39), 'Icora
1
:
(Mt. 12
39),
Katdâ
19:25),
-a),
(Lu. 3:2; Jo. 18: 13),

AovKOis (only in
K#a
Cor.
:
12),
KXcoTra (Jo.
nominative, as Col. 4
:
14,
but genitive would be
Xarava (Mk. 1 13), StXas (dative 2tXa in Ac, and genitive SiXa Nachin Jos. Vit, 17), 2/ceua (Ac. 19 14), ^Te(t>aud (1 Cor. 1 16). short such finds the Doric genitive fairly common with
: :
manson
proper names and mentions Stj^^S in his list.^ Very common in modern Greek, cf. Hatzidakis, Einl, p. 76. The usual Attic form for (b) The Attic Genitive-Ablative. the genitive-ablative (ov) is found also as in Alueas (so Lobeck,
Prol. Pathol, p. 487), 'AvSpkou
'EêKlov (so
'lepetiiov
(Mk.
29), Bapaxiov
(Mt. 23
35),
LXX),
'HXetou (Lu. 4:25), 'Uaaiov (Mt. 3:3, etc.),
(Mt. 2:
17), Avaaviov (Lu.
3:1), Ohpiov (Mt. 1:6), Zaxa,
piov (Lu. 1 :40).
These Hebrew proper names ended in n but first receive the regular inflection for masculine nouns of the with in -^s names proper declension. There are likewise some 8) only 'laup'fjs and 'lap-^pvs (2 Tim. 3 genitive-ablative in -ov. and Tim. 4 10) Kp-fjaKTis (2 nominative. appear in the N. T. in the (Rev. Ev(t)pdTrjs declension. 3d the Uov8r]s (2 Tim. 4:21) belong to 9 14; 16 12) has only accusative and dative (instrumental-locagenitive-ablative tive) in the oblique cases in the N. T., though the (Mt. 'lopSavov 3 5) follow the and 2 (Mt. 1) form is -ov. 'llpvdou
:
usual rule like a8ov (Mt. 16: 18). 'AvreXX^s (Ro. 16: 10), 'EpMr?s (Ro. 16 14), like Kodpavrr^s (Mt. 5 26) and cjêXovris (2 Tim. 4 13), have no oblique case in the N. T. save the accusative (-vv).^ in -ov for the Apostle 'Icodvrjs in W. H. always has genitive-ablative
:
and in though
Handb.,
for
1
Jo. 1 :42; 21
Baptcora in
15, 16, 17, for

:
Mt. 16
17.=^
So
for
the father of Simon Peter, John Mark (Acts 12 12).

:
p. 49.
Cf. Thackeray, Gr., pp. IGO-IGG.
Ilelbing, Cr. d. Sept., p. 33,
LXX
illustrations.
Magn.
Inschr., p. 120.
Cf. also Schweizor, Terg. Iiischr., p.
1:59.
2 3
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 94.
Notes on Orth., p. 159. See Naiainumson (Maf^n. Insehr., p. and Schweizcr (PcrR. Inschr., p. 138 f.) for illustrations of these jwinta that m from the KocfTj inser. The gen. iu -ov is more common in the paj). than
Cf. Hort,
119)
'
256

has accusative in
-î>
NEW TESTAMENT
:
Iiojadkpris
(Ac. 18
17) for the first declension
and
is
heterochte.^
We
have only êaruv
in
Mk.
:
4.
Words
like
veavlas
(c)
have the genitive-ablative in -ov (Ac. 7 58). Voc. in -a of masc. nouns in -rrjs in dkaTora, kirLaTaTa, KapCf.
ixdr].
dioyvcoara, VTroKpna..
{d)
These come regand the dative-locativeinstrumental in -r; like the Ionic. Moulton^ indeed thinks that "analogical assimilation," on the model of forms like 56^ci, hb^-qs, had more to do with this tendency in the KOLvi) than the Ionic influence. Possibly so, but it seems gratuitous to deny all Ionic influence where it was so easy for it to make itself felt. The "best MSS."* support the testimony of the papyri and the inscriptions here.^ So W. H. read p.axa-lp-ns (Rev. 13 14), w'Krjfjifxvprjs (Lu. 6
in -pa
ularly ^ to have the genitive-ablative in -^s
:
Words
and Participles in -via.
48), irpwpris (Ac. 27
30), SaTrcêtpTj (Ac. 5
1), (nreiprjs
(Ac. 21
31;
:
27
1).
In Acts
is
prone to have
-as,
-a as with
:
in Ac. 5
1,
but
the
W. H. do
not follow
here.
In Ac. 5
:
2 aweLdvirjs
may
be
in
compared with
einl3e^r]Kviris (1
Sam. 25
20),
and other examples
LXX,^ but The period.'^
the forms -vlas, -via

preference of the
still
survive in the Ptolemaic
LXX MSS. and the early papyri shows that it is a matter of growth with time. In the early Empire of Rome -prjs forms are well-nigh universal. Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 142. On the other hand note the adjective cTeipa (Lu. 1 36). Words like rnjiepa (-pa) and oXrjdeLa, ixia (m, eta)
for naxalpas (-pa)
:
preserve the Attic inflection in -as,

(e)
a.^
The Opposite Tendency to

:
ples as Av88as (Ac. 9
Mdpâs
(Jo. 11
1).
(d). We see it in such exambut Soden reads -Brjs with EHLP) and Moulton^ finds the Egyptian papyri giving
38,
Qepfxa is given by Lobeck, though not in N. T. (genitive ^s, Ac. 28:3), and note irpvtxva in Ac. 27:41.
Ta/jLvadas as genitive.
-a.
See Mayser, Gr. griech. Pap., 1906,
p.
250
f.
(Laut- u. Wortlehre).
in the
For
Cf.
the contracted forms see p. 252. Thackeray, Gr., p. 161 f.

1
It is also
more frequent
2
LXX.
W.-Sch., p. 94.
Prol., p. 48; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34.
B.
S., p.
186.
where a number
for similar
^
of exx. are given
hke
apovprjs, Ka6r]Kvir]s, etc.
Cf.
Thumb,
Hellen., p. 69.
f.,
Cf. Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept.,
pp. 31-33, and Thack., Gr., p. 140 4 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 1.56.
6 7 8
phenomena
in the
LXX.
Deissmann, B.
S., p. 186.
Gregory, Prol.,
p. 117.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 81.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 48.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
'
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 434.

f.
hans, p. 119
N. T. Gk., p. 25. For examples in Attic inscriptions see MeisterCf. -ou^dwas in LXX, C. and S., Sel. fr. the LXX, p. 26.
THE DECLENSIONS
(KAir:EI2)
257
Moulton' suggests that Nvn<}}av (Col. 4 15 according to the correct text) is not due to a Doric Nu/xâv, but by a "reverse analogy process" the genitive Nu^</)r?s produced the short nominative N6/x</>a
:
hkc 86â, 86^r]s. Blass^ calls xpv(tS.p (Rev. 1 13) "a gross blunder, wrongly formed on the model of xP'ô'Ss 1 12," but Moulton' holds that we have "abundant parallels." This phenomenon appears in the (/) Double Declension. and 'lepS HoXet (Col. 4 13), the (Ac. 16 UoXlp 11) case of Neav
:
adjective as well as the substantive being treated separately in
the
and third declensions. Heteroclisis (erepd/cXtcrt?) and Metaplasm (ytteraTrXacr/Lto?) Blass"* makes no distinction in his treatment of heteroclisis and metaplasm, though the distinction is observed in Winer-SchmieFor practical use one may ignore the distinction and call del.^ all the examples metaplasm. with Blass or heteroclisis with Moulton. The fluctuation is rare for the first declension in the N. T. In Ac. 28 8 editors properly read SvaeprepLov rather than SvaevreThe usual Attic form Oea pla (supported only by a few cursives).
first
(fif)
:
This variation deos (Ac. 19 37) are both found. and the second declensions is well illustrated by ToLxbppas (2 Pet. 2:6) and Tofioppoiu (Mt. 10: 15; -ots, Mk. 6: 11 Moulton^ Rec), Amrpav (Ac. 14:6) and AvarpoLs (Ac. 14:8). finds abundant parallel in the Egyptian papyri use of place-names. In Rev. 1 11 ABC and some cursives read 'QvareLpap instead of the usual evaretpa. So in Ac. 27 5 some of the MSS. read Mvppav instead of Mvppa as accus., a reading confirmed by Ramsay, ^ who found the accus. in -av and the gen. in -up. Moulton^ cites 17
(Ac. 19
:
27)
and
17
between the
first
from two MSS. of xI/a.d. (Usener, Pelagia, p. 50). between the first and second declensions appears in the compounds in -apx^s and (Attic) -apxos. Moulton^" finds examples of it passim in the papyri and calls the minute work of Winer-Schmiedel "conscientious labour wasted thereon." But Hort" does not think these variations in good MSS. "wholly
'lepoaoXvfjLa
The
chief variation
Prol., p. 48.
Cf. also his pai)cr in Proc.
Camb.
Philol.
Soc, Oct., 1893,

rj
p. 12.
2 * 6
Prol., p. 48.
Gr., p. 25, but 4th cd., p. 28, cites P. Lond. I, 124, 26, xpwar "Falschc Analogic" ace. to W.-Sch., p. 81.
f.
apyvpdv.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28
Pp. 83
St.
ff.
Thack.
(Gr., p. 153) inckidcs heteroclisis
under metaplasm.
'
Prol., p. 48.
lb., p. 244.
'0
Paul the Traveller, p. 129. Cf. Moulton, lb. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34.
p. 150.
Prol., p. 48.
lb.
" Notes on Orth.,
258
NEW TESTAMENT
irregular."
In the N. T. forms in -apxvs, like most of the dialects and the kolvt], are greatly in the majority.^ Thus in the N. T. we have 'A(na,px7?s (Ac. 19:31; not in nom. in N. T.), kSvapxn^ (2
Cor. 11:32), TrarpLapxn^ (Heb. 7:4), 7roXtTapxr?s (Ac. 17:6, 8), Terpaapxv^ (Lu. 3 19), but always x'^âpxos- In the addition of
:
the
/3
text to Ac. 28
16 the
MSS.
divide between aTpaToirkSapxos

is
(HLP) and -apxv^

in
(cursives).
54),
"EKaTourapxos
the nominative
is
Mt.
(8
5, 8;
27
and the accusative
in -xov
found once
in Acts (22:25). Elsewhere in all cases in Acts the form in -xvs is read by the best MSS. (as Ac. 10 1). The first and the third declensions show variation in 8i\pos (old form 8l\J/a) in 2 Cor. 11 27, where indeed B has dl\py instead of Ni/cT7 (the old form) survives in 1 Jo. 5 4, but elsewhere the dlipei.. hkewise The late form v2kos prevails (as 1 Cor. 15:54 f.).
: : :
Matthew, Luke and
LXX
is
shows
TO bbpos, TO vIkos
interchangeably with the

Gr., p. 157.
'Icoavy (first
:
17
forms.
Helbing,
'Icodi/ti
Gr. d. Sept., p.
49; Thackeray,
The
dative
(third declension) instead of
declension)
accepted a
â\a}xlvri
:
few times by
W. H.
(Mt. 11
4; Lu. 7
18; Rev. 1:1).
(first declension) for âkapXvi (third declension) in Ac. 13
5,
Hort^
considers only Alexandrian.
The
as
third declension nouns often in various N. T.
MSS. have
the accusative singular of consonant stems in -v in addition to -a,

xeTpai' in Jo.
20 25 (NAB),
:
Pet. 5
analogy of the
first
declension.
:
6 (NA). This is after the Other examples are apaevav in

:
Rev. 12
13 (A), aaeîjv in Ro. 4
(NDFG),
:
aaTkpav in
:
Mt. 2 10
:
Heb. 6: 19 (ACD), Mau in Ac. 14 12 (DEH), (KC), elKovav in Rev. 13 14 (A), fx^mv in Rev. 22 2 (A), iroBijprjv in Rev. 1 13 (A), avyyepfjv in Ro. 16 11 (ABD), vyiijv in Jo. 5:11 (N). Blass^ rejects them all in the N. T., some as "incredible," though properly recalling the Attic Tpii]pr]v, Arfixoadhriv. Moulton^ finds this conformation to the "analogy of first declension nouns" very comjnon in "uneducated papyri, which adequately foreshadows
aacjiaXvp in
: : :
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28; K.-Bl., I, 3, 502. Cf. also W.-M., p. 70 f.; see W.-M. W.-Sch., p. 82; Soden, p. 1387 f. For illustrations from the Cf. also Nachmanson, Magn. Inschr., p. 121. For numerous pap. examples
LXX
of
p.
compounds from
256
2 *
f.
dpx<^ see
Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap. (Lautf.
u. Wortl.),
For the
LXX
see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 37
Thack., Gr.,
p. 156, finds
-apxv^ ousting -apxos.

p. 156.
'
Notes on Orth.,
Frol., p. 49.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 26.
Not
in ed. 4.
542; Psichari,
34
f.,
for this
f
W.-M., p. 76; Jann., pp. 119, Grec de la Sepf., pp. 165 ff. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. See Mayser, Gr. d. griech. "very common" ace. in the pap.
Cf. Gregory, Prol., p. 118;
Pap., p. 286
THE DECLENSIONS
(kaISEIs)
259
its victory in modern Greek." The inscriptions' as well as the papyri have forms like ywoLKav, Ixvbpav, etc. It is these accusative forms on which the modern Greek nominative in ixpxovTas is made
and thus blended the first and the accept none of these readings in the N. T. because of the "irregularity and apparent capriciousness" of the MS. evidence, though he confesses the strength of the testimony for a(r(})a\rju in Heb. 6 19, avjyeprjv in Ro. 16: 11, and xeipai' in Jo. 20 25. These nouns are treated here rather
(cf.
Thumb, Handh.,
p. 47)
third declensions.^
Hort^
will
than under the third declension because

the precincts of the
first.
in this point
they invade
nomena
V in
is
(eXTiSav, fjLovoyeprjv, etc.).
Thackeray,
the
Gr., p. 147.
same pheSee Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 50; The opposite tendency, the dropping of
exhibit the
The
LXX MSS.
declension accusative, so common in modern Greek, appearing in the papyri, as 5e^td xîpa (Volker, Papyrorum Graecorum Syntaxis etc., p. 30 f.).
first
(h)
in
in
Indeclinable Substantives. These are sometimes inflected some of the cases in the first declension. B-qOavLa is accusative Lu. 19 29, and so indeclinable, hke BrjOcjiayr], but elsewhere it is
:
inflected regularly in the first declension (so -Lav
save once or twice in B.
BrjOaaLda
Mk. 6:45; 8:22, but

clinable
it
may
Mk. 11:1, etc.) has accusative B-qdaatdav in be only another alternate indeSo likewise ToXyoda has Hort^ finds "the variations
form (Thayer)
like
Ma7a5dj^.
accusative in -au in
Mk. 15:22.
between Mapla and the indechnable Mapid/x" "singularly intricate and perplexing, except as regards the genitive, which is always -las, virtually without variation, and without difference of the
persons intended."
the sister of
Mapla.
It
is
not necessary to go through
all
the
details save to observe that as a rule the
mother
of Jesus
and
Martha
are Maptdû, while

is
Mary Magdalene
is
now
Maptd/x,
Mary of Clopas is always now Mapla. In the
in the Hebrew probably all were called Mapia/j.. merely the Hellenized form of Maptd^t. It is probably splitting too fine a hair to see with Hort^ a special appropriateness in Maptap. in Jo. 20 16, 18. 6. The Second or o Declension. There is no distinctively feminine inflection in the o declension, though feminine words oc-
Aramaic as
Mapla
'
Nachm., Magn.
Notes on Orth.,
Inschr., p. 1.33.
f.; Sohmid, Atticismus, IV, 586. Kretschmcr (Entst. dcr Koiptj, p. 28) finds
^ '
Cf. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 156

p. 158.
this
etc.,
ace. in -av in various dialect inscriptions.

p. 24, for xApiToi', etc.
*
Cf. also Reinliold,

p. 156.
Dc
Grace,
^
Notes on Orth.,
Jb.
260

17
NEW TESTAMENT
inflection.
cur, like
656s.
But the neuter has a separate

ver}^
Modern
Greek preserves
gives none.
(a)
few feminines in
-os.^
Thumb (Handb., p. 53 f).

N. T. are here noted.
It is nearly
The main
peculiarities in the
The So-Called Attic Second Declension.
Indeed the Attic inscriptions began to show variations fairly early .^ The kolpt] inscriptions^ show only remains here and there and the papyri tell the same story."* Already Xa6s (as Lu. 1 21) has displaced Xecbs and va6$ (as Lu. 1 21) vedos, though veo)Kopos survives in Ac. 19 35. 'AvayaLov hkewise is the true text in Mk. 14 15 and Lu. 22 12, not av6)yeoop nor any of the various modifications in the MSS. In Mt. 3 12 and Lu. 3 17 17 aXcov may be used in the sense of aXcos (see Thayer) by metonymy. The papyri show aXws (Attic second declension) still frequently (Moulton and Milligan, Expositor, Feb., 1908, p. 180). Cf. same
gone.
: : : :
17
thing in
Sel. Jr.
LXX. LXX, p.
Helbing, Gr.
d. Sept., p.
49
f.;
26; Thackeray, Gr., p. 144.

:
'AttoXXcos
Con. and Stock, has accusa-
13, though the Western and both instances. In Ac. 19 1 'AttoXXw is clearly right as only A^L 40 have -coj/. The genitive is 'AxoXXcb without variant (1 Cor. ter). So the adjective I'Xecos is read in Mt. 16 22 and Heb. 8 12, though a few MSS. have I'Xeos in both places. The best MSS. have riiv Kw in Ac. 21 1, not KcDi' as Text. Rec. Cf.
:
tive in -6iv in 1 Cor. 4
6 and Tit. 3
Syrian classes have
-co in
Mace. 15 23. Blass^ compares alBoas of the third declension. There is little to say here. The adjectives (6) Contraction.
:
will
be treated
later.
'Oarovv (Jo. 19
36) has baTta, accus.

in
:
pi.,
in
Mt. 23 27 and Heb. 11 22. So also oarecov in the Western and Syrian addition to Eph. 5:30. 'Opi'eou (Rev. 18:2) and opvea (Rev. 19:21) are without variant. The papyri show this Ionic influence on uncontracted vowels in this very word as well as in various adjectives (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 435). For examples in the LXX (as barko^v 2 Ki. 13 21) see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 82, and Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 36; Thackeray, p. 144; Con. and Stock, Sel. jr. LXX, Moulton considers it remarkable that the N. T. shows p. 27.
:
the best
:
MSS.
in Lu.
24 39 and
ocrrecoi/
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. Ill
f.
Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 127
f.
Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 123 f.; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 142. * Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, See also Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 34. 1906, p. 259 f. For the LXX see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 38 f., where a few
3
exx. occur.
Prol., p.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 25. 48 f. He thinks
Necos
it
appears in 2 Mace. 6 2, etc. 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
no traces of the contraction of
(kAISEIs)
261
and
irai8lov
kvplos into kvpls
into
papyri have so many illustrations Tvaidlu, for instance, since the ^ show the same frequency of inscriptions The of this tendency. Greek. Cf. modern in day the won finally which forms the -Ls, -Lv
Thumb, Handb.,
(c)
p. 61.
The Vocative.
In the o declension
it
does not always end
masculine singular. Geos in ancient Greek is practically the same always retained in the vocative singular. The N. T. has once Oek also form as in Mk. 15 34 (cf. also Jo. 20 28), but
in
e
in the
found occasionally in the LXX and twice (1 Tim. 1 :18; in the late papyri.^ So also Paul uses Tifxodee and the inTt/x69ee, Aristophanes had kix4>i0ee, Lucian 6:20). (Mt. 1 20) AaueiS utos Note also the vocative scriptions <i)L\6det?
(Mt. 27 46).
:
This usage
is
'
and even
in apposition with Kbpie (Mt. 15 22). vocative, chiefly in the of the article with the nominative form as an instance of third declension, belongs more to syntax. Take as
:
The common use
the second declension

(d)
m^? oôv,
to (xiKpbv -koijivIov (Lu. 12
32).
first
Heteroclisis and Metaplasm. and second declensions have been treated under 5 (/). The number of such variations between the second and third declendeclension, sions is considerable. NoDs is no longer in the second 14 15, Cor. vot Th. (1 2:2), vob$ (2 but is inflected hke /3oCs, viz. interfrequent most The ttXoO.^ not 19). So ttXoos in Ac. 27 9,
:
Variations between the
in -os, masculine in second declension these examples the N. T. MSS. show In and neuter in the third. wholly supplants tov eXeov (Attic) 'ekeos To frequent fluctuations.
change
is
between forms
in the
N. T. (as in the LXX), as, for instance, Mt. 9 13; 12 7; which read 23:23; Tit. 3:5; Heb. 4:16, except in a few MSS. other hand the On eXeet. and eXeovs have we eXeov. Without variant (so ^-qX^, Greek ancient the in as form T. N. 6 rîXos is the usual
:
in 2 Cor. Ro. 13 13; 2 Cor. 11 2), but rd f^Xos is the true text all read and has B tvôvs, only 17 5 Ac. In 3:6. 9 2 and Ph. second in the and masculine usually is 45. 'Hxos 13 f 77X01; in Acts for the and Ac. 2 4 2), Lu. 37; (cf. 19 12 Heb. in as declension,
:
On Schweizer, Perg. laschr., p. 143. 1 Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 125; Brug., Grundr., ii, 02 n.; the origin of these forms sec Hatz., Einl., p. 318; Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 34. 2 Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 34, 434. both OtSs and 9ek occur. Cf. Ilclbing, 3 Cf. W.-Sch., p. 81. In the Thack., p. 145. Gr. d. Sept., p. 34; C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 26; the * See W.-Sch., p. 84, for similar exx. 17(3.
LXX
Cf. Arrian, Peripl., p.
inscr., as f>ods, pod': in late
Gr. d. griech.
Gk. For pap. exx. of (iovp, Pap., pp. 257 f., 268 f.
irXovf
and xovu see Mayser,
262
earlier

17x17
according to Moeris and Blass.^
In Lu. 21
25
W. H.
be
10
:
read
rixovs
from
rjxo},
but Hort^ admits

danlSovs.
:
i]xovs
from
to rjxos to
possible,
and Nestle reads

:
ijxovs in his sixth edition.
In Ac. 3
reads danôv instead of

in the
In eight instances in Paul

:
8:2; Ph. 4 19; Col. 1 27; 2 2; Eph. 1:7, 2:7; 3:8, nominative and accusative we have to tXovtos, but 6 t\ovtos m Gospels, Jas., Heb., Rev. The genitive is always -tov. To (jKOTos instead of 6 okotos is read everj^where in the N. T. save in the late addition to Heb. 12 18 where o-zcorw appears, though ^b4)u> is the true text. The form baKpvaiv (Lu. 7 38, 44) is from boLKpv, an old word that is found now and then in Attic, but to doLKpvov appears also in Rev. 7: 17; 21 :4; baKphwv may belong to either decl. Sd/Sâro?/ {-tov, -rw) is the form used in the N. T. always, as Mk. 6 2, but aa^âaiv as Mk. 1 21, etc. B has (7al3j3a.TOLs, like the LXX sometimes, in Mt. 12 1, 12. KaTr]yu)p is accepted by W. H. and Nestle in Rev. 12 10 on the authority of A against XBCP, which have the usual KaTriyopos. According to WinerSchmiedeP this is not Greek, but a transliteration of the Aramaic ^la'itjp. Blass,"* however, thinks it is formed on the model of pi77cop. Several words fluctuate between the masculine and the neuter in the second declension. In Lu. 14 16; Rev. 19 9, 17, several
(2 Cor.
16)
:
:
:
MSS. read
SeafjLos
Selirvos
instead of the usual

deafxd in
:
8e1irvov.
Like the old Greek,

: :
ol
Lu. 8 29; Ac. 16 26; 20 23, but Before Polybius ^vyov was more common (Thayer), but in the N. T. it is ^vyos (Mt. 11 30). '0 depieXios is
decr/jLoi
has the plural

in Ph. 1
:
13.
the only form of the nom. sing, in the N. T., as 2 Tim. 2
19
(supply
like the
\idos)
Rev. 21
19.
19,
but
to.
6ep.k\La
(ace.)
LXX and the Attic.

:
The
plural depLeXlovs
26 we have in Heb.
in Ac.
16
may be either mascuhne used in the quotation from the O. T. instead of the older to vwtov. In the early Greek 6 o-iros (never to cjItov) had a plural in atra as well as o-Trot. The same thing is true of the N. T. MSS. for Ac. 7 12 except that they diRev. 21 :i 14, or neuter. In Ro. 11
11
:
10;
QefxeXiov (ace.)
vcoros is
10 6
vide between
to.
alra
and rd
Of.
aiTla,
and
cnTia is the correct text.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28.

6 f ., 6 eXeos
LXX
to
and
and
f.
t6 eX., 6 fixos
and
Gr. d. Sept., p. 47
2
See
p.
49 for
ff.
Uke variations in rb fiJXos and to ttX. See Helbing, aa^âai and ffafiffdroLs, baKpvov and Sd/cpwi.
MSS.,
for
fj.,
6 irXoDros
Cf. also Thack., Gr., pp. 153
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)

Blass^ indeed objects that aiTia does not suit the sense.
263
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. (e) The Mixed Declension. Some substantives with special inflection have this. It is particularly in foreign names in the a and o declensions that this inflection became popular. " The stem ends in a long vowel or diphthong, which receives -s for nominative and -V for accusative, remaining unchanged in vocative, genitive, and dative singular. 'Irjaovs is the most conspicuous of many N. T. examples. It plays a large part in modern Greek." ^ Hence we have 'Irjaovs nominative, 'Itjo-oO genitive-ablative, as Mt. 26 6; dative, etc., as Mt. 27 57; vocative Mk. 1 24. Some MSS. of the LXX have dative 'I-qaol in Deut. 3 21, etc. The accusative is 'Irjaovv, as Mt. 26 4. 'Icocrrj is the genitive of 'Icoarjs according to the reading of Mt. 27 56 in W. H. instead of 'Icoo-170, but in Mk. 6 3 'looarJTos is the reading. So runs Aevels
: : : : : : : :
(nominative, Lu. 5:29), Aevel (genitive, Lu. 3:24), Aeveiu (accusative, Lu. 5:27).
Dative appears only in the
LXX
Mt.
1
as Gen.
:
34 30
:
10 and the genitive in -^ (Rev. 7:6), but Hort^ calls attention to the fact that ii.^B have Mavaaarj instead of the nominative in Mt. 1 10, making the word indeclinable.
Aevel.
Mamo-arjs has accusative Mavaaaij in
(/)
Proper Names.
'IcLKwôp in
'IaKw/3 is
:
indeclinable in
have
Mt. 4
:
21.
:
Several proper
plural, as Qvaretpa (Rev. 2

'lepoaoXvixa
(Mt. 2
:
Kav8a (Ac. 27
(Lu. 4
:
16),
18, but B -prj but wdaa 'I., 2 :3), ^lXlttol (Ac. 16:12), Mvppa (Ac. 27: 5), Uarapa (Ac. 21 1), "LapeiTTa
:
Mt. 1 2, but we names have only the and ABC -pav, 1 11),
:
:
1,
26), 265o/xa
(1
(Jude
:
7).
and ixaKeWov
Avarpav see 5
7.
Cor. 10
25)
The Latin words nbhos (Mt. 5 15) are inflected. So Latin proper names
:
like 'lovaTos (Ac.

(/).
18:7) and IlaOXos (Ro. 1:1).
For Tonoppas and

i
The Third Declension (consonants and close vowels and The third declension could easily be divided into several and thus we should have the five declensions of the Sanskrit and the Latin. But the usual seven divisions of the third declension have the genitive-ablative singular in -os (-ws). The consonantal
v).
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 28.

-a,
Oe/jikXioi
In the
LXX
MSS. wc
and
find
and
and
-o, vutoi
and
-o, arddtov
<rrd5ioi, airos
" Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 46 f.; Thack., p. 154 f. ' In the proper names have great liberty in inflection. natural in a transl. Cf. Thack., Gr., pp. 160-171.
and -a, ^vyol and aiTa. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 49.

Sec^tiol
LXX
This
is
quite
264
NEW TESTAMENT
stems show more sweeping changes than the vocahc (sonantic) stems in this declension.^ Only those changes that are related to the N. T. Greek can be here discussed. (a) The Nominative as Vocative. There is an increasing use of nominative forms as vocatives. This usage had long existed for nouns that were oxytone or had labial or guttural stems. Elsewhere in g"eneral the stem had served as vocative. No notice is here taken of the common use of the article with the nominative form as vocative, like rj ttols (Lu. 8 54), a construction coming under syntactical treatment. According to WinerSchmiedel- the use of the singular without the article belongs also to syntax and the solution of W. H. is called "certainly false."
:
Hort ^ had suggested that in the case of OvyaT-qp as vocative (Mk. 5 34; Lu. 8 48; Jo. 12 15) and TrarTjp (Jo. 17 21, 24, 25) the long vowel (??) was pronounced short. Why not the rather suppose that the vocative is like the nominative as in the case of labial and guttural stems? The usage is thus extended sometimes to these liquids. Indeed, in Jo. 17 25 we have iraTrip ayaQ'e, the adjective having the vocative form. In Mk. 9 19 (Lu. 9 41) we have d> 7ej'ea aTrto-ros and a(})pu)v in Lu. 12:20; 1 Cor. 15:36). See also w TrXiyprjs (Ac. 13 10) for -es, which might be an indeclinable form like the accusative (ii, 2 (/)). But these adjectives show that the usage is possible with substantives. There are indeed variant readings in the MSS. above, which have dvyarep and Tarep, but in Mt. 9 22 DGL have Ovyar-qp. Note also o.vep (1 Cor. 7: 16) and yvvai (Lu. 13 12). For peculiarities in nom. see (d). (fe) The Accusative Singular. The theoretical distinction that consonant-stems had the accusative singular in -a and vocalic stems in -v began to break down very earh\ From the third century B.C. Jannaris^ suspects that popular speech began to have all accusative singulars vnih. v, an overstatement, but still the tendency was that way. The use of v with words hke -koKiv, vavv (Ac. 27 41, only time in N. T., elsewhere vernacular ifKotov), etc., together wnth the analog}^ of the first and second declensions, had a
: : :
:
positive influence.
tive ending -a plus
v,
See 5 (/) for discussion of the double accusalike avbpav in the papjTi.^ These forms belong
in realit}' to the third declension,
of the
1
first,
though formed after the analogy and so were presented when first reached in the dis2
P. 90.
'
Notes on Orth.,
Hist.
p. 158.
Moulton,
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35, gives mi7T7?p as
voc. three times in a iii/A.D. pap. (B.U.).

4
Gk.
Gr., p. 119.
Moulton,
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 435.
THE DECLENSIONS
cussion.
(kAISEI^)
265
However, there are other consonant-stems which form In Tit. 3 9 and Ph. 1 15 the accusative in -v instead of -a. Rev. in 3 7 and 20 1 the Attic So eptda.' of instead we have epcp by any means, but tendency new not a is this for KXeTu is read, /cXeTSa, though here also D has have MSS. the 52 11 in Lu.
:
: : : :
KXetv.
found in the appears in Ac. 24 27 and Ju.

KXet5a
is
:
LXX
4,
as in Judg. 3
25.
:
Xdptra
9,
and
has
it
in Ac. 25
but
the Attic
the holds the field (forty times) .2 In the and Ionic and poetical xo-pi-ra occurs only twice (Zech. 4:7; 6 14) the Roman period. Cf Thackis absent from the papyri before For the irrational p with Mtf^ in Jo. 5 36 see Gr., p. 150.
xapii'
:
LXX
eray,
Adjectives.
In Ac. 27 40 the correct text

:
is apreixo^va,
not -ova,
from nom. aprknuv. In Winer-Schmiedel (p. 88) (c) The Accusative Plural. except in 1 Cor. 1:11 epeis is given as nominative and accusative
but as a matter of fact the accusative plural reading does not appear in the N. T. except as an alternative 5 20 In Gal. eptp). text (correct 9 'ipeis in {^''ACKLP, in Tit. 3 "an probably epis, than rather W. H. put epets in the margin K\el8as but 1 Rev. in 18, /cXets W. H. read ras itacistic error."
{iptSes,
nom.),
=^
in
and Mt. 16 19. In Ac. 24 27 x^ptras is supported by HP (NÊL, and xapti' text) (correct most of the cursives against x^-pi-Tf^ The accusative in -vs has changed into -as with -i; and -ov etc.).
:
:
stems, as
/36as
:
from
/3o0s (Jo.
14
f.,
cf.
LXX),
:
jBdrpvas
from ^6-
rpvs (Rev. 14
18), IxOvas
from
Ixevs
(Mt. 14
carried
17) .^
still
tion of the accusative plural
was
This simplificaJust as further.
TroXeis, so âaiXkas has beTToXeas had long ago been dropped for accusative plural is regthis "and nominative, come -eTs hke the LXX -eas appears a the In -evs."^ in words all ular in N. T. for show -eis as inscriptions Attic the B.C. 307 since few times, but and Xenophon in sometimes indeed found is It accusative.6
Cf. Hort,
bing, Gr. d. Sept., p.

2
HelNotes on Orth., p. 157. For the LXX sec Thack., p. 140; 40 f., where the N. T. situation is duplicated.
aces, in the insor.
See Schweizer, Pcrg. Inschr., p. 151, for illustr. of these and x-ip'", etc. For the pap. see Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35, both x&P^ra f. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. gricch. Pap., p. 271 3 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 157. Arrian has IxBvas. 4 Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 26, and W.-Sch., p. 86.
LXX
MSS.
(Thack., Gr., p. 147) show
vtôs
and
vtchs, vrjo-^
and mDs,
P6as.
Cf.
Holbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 43. 6 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 26. 8 Meisterh., p. 141. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 86.
Usually
ixOvas, p. 44.
p 147
f.;
Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 43.
So the LXX. Cf. Thack., Gr., Wackcrn. (Indogcr. Forsch., 1903,
'
266
NEW TESTAMENT
Thucydides, though the rels in Mt. 23 34, etc.

:
strict Atticists
disown it. Cf. ypaufxafew forms in -eas survive in the inthe correct accusative in
vrjarLs,
scriptions.^
:
Niyo-reis
:
(from
^{
vrjaris) is
Mk.
8 3 and Mt. 15 32.

this itacism (Hort,
here reads
Notes on Orth.,
p. 157).
unrehable on The Achaean, Elean,

is
but
Delphian and Phocian inscriptions^ (Northwest Greek) have the accusative plural in -es just like the nominative (cf. Latin) .^ It is very common in the modern Greek vernacular and in the papyri.* Moulton^ finds many examples like ywalKes, nrjves, ovres, Travres, In the LXX reacrapes as accusative is very TeKToves, Teaaapes, etc. common as a variant in the text of Swete.^ In Herodotus reaaapeaKaldeKa is indeclinable and TptiaKalbeKa in Attic since 300 B.C. ^ So in the N. T. some MSS. read rkaaapes (though the most still have Teaaapas) as JÂ in Jo. 11 17, X in Ac. 27 29, AP in Rev. 4 4; 7: 1, N* in Rev. 9 14.^ In Rev. 4 4 the best authority (N, AP, etc.) is really on the side of reaaapes (second example).^ Indeed "in the N. T. reaaapas never occurs without some excellent authority for reaaapes." ^^ In the first 900 of Wilcken's ostraca, Moulton (ProL, p. 243) finds forty-two examples of accusative reaaapes and twenty-nine of reaaapas. Moulton ^^ considers it probable that other nominative forms in Revelation, like aarepes in A (Rev. 1 16), may be illustrations of this same tendency.
: : : :
:
p. 371) thinks the ace. in -is is
due not to the nom. but to compensative
lengthening.
^ 2
Also early in Phthiotis
(J.
Forsch., 1903, p. 368).
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Wackernagel, Zur Nominahnfl., indoger. Gk. Gr., p. 119; Mayser, Gr. d. griech.
Pap., 1906, p. 270

3
f.
Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
p. 36.
PhiloL, p. 546.
Cf. Volker, Pap. Graec. Synt., p. 28.
Cf. also Buresch, Rhein. Mus.,
4 6 6 8 9
Moulton, ProL,
CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 34, 435.
XLVI,
218.
f.
W.-Sch., p. 87. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

Cf. Hort,
'
lb.
Cf. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 163 Cf. Jann., p. 120.
p. 26.
Notes on
Pro!.,
Sel.
Read., p. 138.
10
Moulton,
lb.
p. 36.
"In Rev.
CB
have
-pas,
ik
3/5,
AP
3/6."
H.
Scott.
11
This use of -es as ace.
may be compared
in -es in the
mod. Gk. vernac.

iroXires,
Cf.
Thumb, Handb.,
with the common ace. pi. Cf. nom. like pp. 47 ff.
6 irarepas (Psichari, Ess.
Even
vfxkpes,
XPVfJ-a-TOLs.
de Gr. Hist. Neo-grecque, 1886, P partie, p. xviii). In the Eleatic dial, the loc.-dat. pi. is -ots as in Cf. Meister, Bd. II, p. 61. The LXX MSS. show rtaaapes as ace.
etc.
See Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 54. The ace. in -es rare in MSS. outside of Thack., Gr., p. 148 f. Moulton (Prol., p. 243, ed. 2) suggests that Ttaaapes. this tendency started with reaaapes because it is the only early cardinal that had a separate form for the ace. plural.
LXX
THE DECLENSIONS
(kaIZEIS)
267
(d) Peculiarities in the Nominative. In general one maysay that the various ways of forming the nominative singular in Greek are blending gradually into unity, the masculine in s and the feminine in a or 77. Many of the new substantives went over
to the first declension.^
nom.
'EXaiOiv,
Luke has gen. 'EXaLoJvos, in Ac. 1 12 from and the papyri give nearly thirty examples of this
:
noun.2
Jos. also (Ant. vii, 9, 2)
has 'EXaicows.
On
eis
the other
to 6pos tCov
hand the use

'EXaicoj'
of 'EXala
:
is
frequent (in Jos. also), as
But in Lu. 19:29 we have Trpos to opos rb (W. H.),and in Lu. 21:37 els to opos kt\. In both these examples it would be possible to have 'EXatcbi/, not as an indeclinable substantive, but as a lax use of the nominative with 6 KoXovfjiepos (cf. Revelation and papyri). So Deissmann.^ But even so it is still possible for 'EXatuiv to be proper (on the whole probably correct) in these two disputed passages.* It is even probable that the new nominative 'EXaidov is made from the
(Mt. 21
1).
KoKovfjLevov 'EXaioov
epts in Gal. 5 20 ( marg. Tim. 6:4, but in 1 Cor. 1:11 all MSS. have >5es. W. H. once (Ac. 1:10) accept the rare form eadriats (2, 3 Mace.) rather than the usual kadrjs, though the Alexandrian and Syrian classes have it also in Lu. 24 4. In Lu. 13 34 J<D read bpvL^, nominative not found in ancient Greek (Thayer), though the Doric used the oblique cases opvLxos, etc.^ Elsewhere in all MSS. the usual opvis occurs, as Mt. 23 27, and in the N. T. only the nominative singular is found.^ Another contrary tendency to the usual s in the nominative singular is seen in (h8iv (1 Th. 5 3; cf. also Is. 37: 3) for the usual wdls. The papyri show forms like oûpptv. One or two points about neuter substantives call for remark.
genitive 'EXatcof .^
"Epets is
a variant with
1
W.
H.),
Cor. 3:3; 2 Cor. 12:20;
inflection in -as, -aos = -a;s, has nearly vanished.^ A few examples still survive in the inscriptions.^ In Lu. 1 36 the Ionic form yrjpet from yfjpas is found, as often in the LXX and Test.
The
1 2
3 *
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p.
12L
Deiss., B. S., pp.
Moulton,
B.
S., p.
Prol., p. 49; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.
208
ff.
210.
235) has a
6
Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 158. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 93. Moulton (Prol., pp. 69, full presentation of the facts.
Prol., p. 235.
opviî ai)i)ears several
Moulton,
The form
times in the pap.
Moulton, CI. Rev.,
1901, p. 35.
7 8
*
Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 149.
W.-Sch., p. 89.
Blass, Gr. of
LXX
6pi'Lduii>.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 26.
Schweizer, Perg. Insclir., p. 156.
268
XII

Pat.^
Kepas always in the N. T. (as in
LXX)
has the Attic

Cor.
plural Kepara (Rev. 8 times)
and
is
repas regularly rkpara (11 times).

(1
The
8
:
plural Kpka (from Kpkai)
the only form in the N. T.
13;
Rom.
14
21) as in the
LXX, though
MSS.
or so in each
case has Kpkas (singular).
These call for little rewhich see later. ZtmTrecos (from alvain) is uniform in the N. T., as Mt. 17 20. Tlr]xvs has no genitive singular in the N. T. though Trrjxeos is common in the LXX,^ but has irrjxociv (from Ionic Tni]x^(^v or through assimilation to neuters in -os), not the Attic Trjxecoi'. In Jo. 21 8 only A Cyr. have Trr]xeo}v and in Rev. 21:17 onl}^ K.^ For the genitive singular of 'lucrrjs and Mavaaarjs see 6 (e). It is not observed in dpeoov (Rev. 6 15) if) Contraction. and xetXecoj' (Heb. 13 15). In both instances the Ionic absence of contraction is alwaj^s found in the LXX (Prov. 12 14). This open form is not in the Attic inscriptions, though found in MSS. of Attic writers and the poets especially.^ In the kolvt] it is a "widespread tendency" to leave these forms in -os uncontracted, though huv is correct in Ac. 4 22, etc.^ So the LXX, Thackeray,
(e)
The Genitive-Ablative Forms.

in the adjective, for
mark save
Gr., p. 151.
Mcouo-^s has always the genitive-ablative though no nominative Moivaevs is known. The genitive Mcoarj appears usually in the LXX, as Num. 4 41, and the vocative Mojo-^ as in Ex. 3 4. Cf Thackeray, Gr., p. 163 f. W. H. have McovaeX (always with v. r. -afj) as in Mk. 9 4, except in Ac. 7 44 where the form in -f? is due to the LXX (usual form
(g)
Proper Names.
9
:
Mcoucrecos (Jo.
28),
there).^
The
accusative
is
Mcouo-ea
once only (Lu. 16:29),

'ôKofxuv (so
else-
where
the
-7]v,
as in Ac.
is
7:35
best
(so
LXX).
J<
in the
nom-
inative, not -u!v)
indeclinable in
LXX.
But the
few
ZoXo/xoim, a
1
-oopra.
Mt. 1 6 as usually in 6 have the accusative So the genitive llo\ofjt,ojvos in Mt. 12 42,
in
1
:
MSS.
in
Mt.
W.-Sch., p. 86. So Sir. 2.5 3, etc. The also has the Ionic gen. See Thack., Gr., p. 149; Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 42. Cf. Mayser, ^ As Ex. 25 Gr. d. Griech. Pap., p. 276. 9. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 87. ' Hort, Notes on Orth. But Xen. and Plut. (often) have ir-qx^v. See
:
LXX
:
yr)povs.
W.-M.,
^
p. 75.
In
LXX
note
7n7xeos
and
Tnyxews,
irrixeoji'
and
TT-qxi^v.
Helbing,
Gr., p. 45; Thack., p.
15L
5 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 27. W.-Sch., p. 88. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 158. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 58-60, for discussion of the dccl. of proper names in the LXX. The phenomena correspond to those in N. T. MSS. UpofjLrjdtvs had an Attic nom. -rjs, gen. -ews,
Thumb, Handb.,
330.
1.
THE DECLENSIONS
though a few MSS. have
genitive in -uvos.
also 5
:
(kAIZEIz)
269
-ojvtos.
The Gospels have uniformly the
W. H. accept SoXo/xw^ros (so though BD etc. have covos in 5: 12. Cf. Eew^coj/ros (from nominative -oiv). ALOTpe<j)r}s (3 Jo. 9) and 'Ep/jLoykv-qs (2 Tim. 1 15) occur in nom. There are other proper names (Roman and Semitic) which are inflected regularly hke Ba(3v\cov (Mt. 1:11),
But
in Ac. 3: 11
12),
:
TaXKloiv (Ac. 18: 12), 'EXato^p (Ac. 1
12)
Kalaap (Mt. 22: (Mt. 4:

18).
17), Sapcbv
(Ac. 9
35),
2t5cbj'
(Mt. 11
21), Zlô:v
There should
Cf. proper
be mentioned also SaXa/xts (dative -Tvl, Ac. 13:5). names in the LXX, Thackeray, Gr., pp. 163 ff
Most of the examples (h) Heteroclisis and Metaplasm. have already been treated under the first declension 5 (g) or the The accusative iiXa (Mk. 9 50) is like second declension 6 (d) the old Greek 6 aXs. Some MSS. (Western and Syrian classes) in Mk. 9 49 have dXi also. In Mk. 9 50 KLA have to a\a as nominative (cf. Lev. 2 13) Hke yaXa. But the best MSS. (k\BDLA) give TO aXas in the first two examples in 9 50 and aXa (accusative) in the third (so W. H.). So also Mt. 5 13 and Lu. 14 34. Cf.
. :
dative aXart in Col. 4

Gr., p. 152).
6.
In the
LXX
to aXas is rare
(Thackeray,
Papyri show to aXas in third century b.c (Moulton, and Milligan, Expositor, Feb., 1908, p. 177). Instead of opvis in Rev. 18 2 we have the genitive bpvkov, from opveov (good old Greek word), opveoLs in Rev. 19 17, and opvea in 19 21. In Mk. 6 and Lu. 2 44 avyyevemi (cf. 1 Mace. 10 88) is probably^ from This is a good Cf. 1 Mace. 10 89. cvyyevevs, not avyyevr]s. place for me to record the admiration which has possessed me as I have tested the work of Hort through the maze of details in the
: :
MS.
8.
evidence concerning the forms.
These do not, of course, belong to Indeclinable Words. any declension. Josephus Grccizcd most of the Hebrew proper names like 'A/xtra/Sos (Mt. 1:4, kixivaba^) ? Some he put in the Blass* first declension, many in the second and third declensions.^ sums the matter up by observing that "the Hebrew personal names of the O. T., when quoted as such," arc indeclinable. This is an overstatement. But certainly many that in the LXX and inflected, might have been, such, for instance, the N. T. are not -i^/xecoj', to go no further.-'' KeSpwp, waX/xcof, It 'laKujS, as Kapwv, is hardly worth while to give the entire list of these words.
'
'
2
^
^ W.-Sch., p. 91. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 158. * Gr. of N. T. Gk., j). 20. lb. for extensive list. Thack., Gr., p. 169, suggests that i)laoe-namc3 in -uv are declined or in-
declinable according to rank and distance.
270

include such other words as the majority of those in the
They
1 and that in Lu. 3, besides many other proper names/ including such geographical names as Alv6:v, Bri9(f)ayri,
genealogy in Mt.
Hlwv,
"ZlvS.,
etc.
There are other indeclinable Hebrew and Aramaic words such as Kop^dp (Mk. 7 11), /xdwa (Rev. 2 17), Trao-xa (Lu. 2 :41), aiKtpa (Lu. 1 15 as in LXX). The gender (fem.) of the indeclinable oval (Rev. 9 12; 11 14) is probably due, as Blass^ suggests, to 6\i\l/Ls. In 1 Cor. 9 16 oval is used as a substantive (so
:
also
LXX). The use of

Rev.
1
:
6 cop
/cat
rju
Kal 6 epx6nvos in
the nominative after
airo in
4, etc.,
belongs more to syntax than to accidence.

(to express the
It is evidently
on purpose
unchangeableness of
ixt
God), just as
13
:
6 SidaaKoKos Kal 6 Kvptos is in
apposition with
(Jo.
13) in lieu of quotation-marks.
II.
THE ADJECTIVE ("ONOMA 'EniGETON)

is
Donaldson^
etymology.
that
1.
probably right in saying that, in general, the

[to
explanation of the adjective belongs to syntax rather than
But
there are
some points concerning the adjective

Adjectives are not indis-
demand treatment here. The Origin of the Adjective.
pensable in language, however convenient they

Sanskrit, for instance, the adjective plays
may
be."*
In the
an unimportant part. Whitney^ says: " The accordance in inflection of substantive and adjective stems is so complete that the two cannot be separated in treatment from one another." He adds^ that this wavering line of distinction between substantive and adjective is even more uncertain in Sanskrit than in the other early Indo-Germanic tongues. Most of the Sanskrit adjectives have three endings, the masculine and neuter being usually a stems while the feminine may have a or i, this matter being "determined in great part only by actual usage, and not by grammatical rule." So likewise Giles in his Comparative Philology has no distinct treatment of adjectives. The adjective is an added descriptive appellative {ovofxa eTlderop) while the substantive is an essential appellative [ovotxa ovcnaaTLKou). But substantives were doubtless
1
See further list in W.-Sch., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 32.

Sans. Gr., p. 111.
lb. Cf.
p. 91.
êw
Crat., p. 502.
Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 29.
6 ^
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 117, for the adjectival use of the substantive.
THE DECLENSIONS
(kAISEIs)
271
used in this descriptive sense before adjectives arose, as they are So, for instance, we say brother man, Doctor A., still so used.
Professor B., etc.
Cf. in the
is,
N. T.
tc3
'lopdavp iroTa^w
it is
(Mt.
3:6),
etc.
This
it is
indeed, apposition, but
descriptive ap-
position,
and
just at this point that the adjective emerges in
Other Greek adjectives in form as in idea are variations from the genitive case, the genus In itself the adjective is as truly a noun as the substantive. case."^ As to the form, while it is not necessary^ that in every case the adjective express its gender by a different inflection, yet the adjectives wath three genders become far commoner than those with two or one.^ From the etymological point of view this inflection in different genders is the only distinction between subThe Greek has a much more highly stantive and adjective.^ developed system of adjectives than the Sanskrit, which has survived fairly well in modern Greek, though a strong tendency is present to simplify adjectives to the one declension (-oj, -77, -ov). Participles, though adjectives in inflection, are also verbs in sevthe early period of the language.^
eral respects
and
call for
separative discussion.
The
process of
treating the adjective as a substantive belongs to syntax.^
The
substantivizing of the adjective
is
as natural, though not so com-
in Greek as in Latin, as the adjectivizing of the substantive which we have been discussing.'^ The distinction between adjective and substantive is hard to draw in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 66). In modern Greek every adjective has a special feminine form. The development is complete. Cf. Thumb, pp.
mon
66
ff.
2. Inflection of
Adjectives.
In Greek as in Sanskrit, the ad-
jective has to follow the inflection of the substantive in the various
declensions, the three genders being obtained

first
by combining the
with the second or the third declensions.
Adjectives with One Termination. Of course at first been the way the earliest adjectives arose. Then the genders would be formed. But analogy soon led to the formation of most adjectives with three endings. Some of these
(a)
this
may have
Delbriick, Syntakt. Forsch., IV, pp. 65, 259.
Cf. Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
Phik)l., p. 239.
* Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 139. Donaldson, Now Crat., p. 474. Donaklson, Now Crat., p. 502. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 30. " Brug. (Griooh. Gr., pp. 41.3-417) has no discussion of the adjective save from the syntactical point of view. ^ See Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 414 f., for numerous exx. in the carHer Gk. 2
3
272
NEW TESTAMENT
mascuUne
or
adjectives with one ending were used only with the

considers
the feminine, and few were ever used with the neuter.^
Jannaris^
them rather substantives than
lustrate well the transition

airaLs,
fxamp, 4)vyas.
adjectives, but they ilfrom substantive to adjective, like 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. ZvyYevls 9 9. Cf. TrXarrjTes, Jude 13 B), and avyyevl'i (Lu. 1 36). is a later feminine form lilce ehyevls for the usual avyyevrjs (both masculine and feminine) which Winer ^ treats as a substantive (so Thayer). Strictly this feminine adjective belongs* only to words
:
: :
in -Ti7$
and
-evs.
Blass^ quotes evyevldwv ywaiKo^v

still
by way
of
com-
parison.
Modern Greek
has a few of these adjectives in use.
The ancient adjectives in -tjs (evyevqs) have disappeared from the modern Greek vernacular (Thumb, Handb., p. 72). Some adjectives (6) Adjectives with Two Terminations.
never had more than two endings, the masculine and the feminine having the same form. In the so-called Attic second deBut a few simple clension this is true of tXecos (Mt. 16:22). adjectives of the second declension never developed a feminine
ending, as, for instance, ^dpâpos (1 Cor. 14
:
11), e{al)ct)vi8Los (Lu.
21:34),
to
acori7ptos (Tit.
11)."
In the N. T.
riavxos
has changed
Tjavxi-os (1
Pet. 3:4).
-ijs
The
adjectives in the third declension
which end
eu7ei/?7s
in
or ~o)v have no separate feminine form.

emel3rjs
So
(Lu.
19:12),
(Ac.
10:7)
ixei^c^v
(Jo. 15:13), etc.
Then again some simple
adjectives varied'' in usage in the earlier
Greek, especially in the Attic, and some of these have only two endings in the N. T., like dtStos (Ro. 1 20), epTj/xos (Ac. 1 20, etc.,
: :
and often as substantive with yrj or x<^po- not expressed), Koapnos (1 Tim. 2:9), ohp6.vLos (Lu. 2:13; Ac. 26:19), </>X6apos (1 Tim. 5:13), 4>pbvip.o^ (Mt. 25:2, 4, 9), co^^Xt/xos (1 Tim. 4:8; 2 Tim. 3: 16). With still others N. T. usage itself varies as in the case of atcbi/ios (Mt. 25:46, etc.) and aloivia (Heb. 9:12; 2 Th. 2:16, and often as a variant reading); 'tTOLjjios (Mt. 25 10) and ItoIixt] (1 Pet. 1:5); ixdraios (Jas. 1 26) and fiarala (1 Pet. 1 18); oôtos (Rev. 4:3, second example correct text) and d/jLoia (Rev. 9:10,
: :
1 3
4 6
K.-BL,
I,
p.
547
f.
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 143.
W.-M.,
W.-Sch., p. 97. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33.

p. 80.
cf.
I,
But
ib.
Cf. K.-BL,
p.
535
f.,
for fuller
list.
Some
of the simple verbals in -ros
also
'
had no
fern.,
as
ihvrjTos.
all
we see a very slight tendency towards giving a In the adjs. Thack., Gr., p. 172.
LXX
fern,
form to
THE DECLENSIONS (kaISEIs)

;
273
though W. H. put dfxoLOLs in the margin instead of ofiolas, 19) oo-tos construed with (1 Tim. 2:8; so probably, though daiovs may be
kiralpovTas
instead of xetpas)-
The
early Attic inscriptions furnish
examples of two endings with such adjectives as doKLfxos (no feminine example in the N. T.) and Xoittos with either two or three
(N. T. only three). ^ The papyri furnish eprjfjLos and ovpavLos as feminine and others not so used in the N. T., as 5u-atos, ixerpLos, It was the rule with compound adjectives to have only aTTopipos.-
two endings,
form, as 6
for the
iiXoyos.^
most
of
them never developed a feminine
This tendency survives in the inscriptions, (17) especially wth compounds of a- privative and prepositions, and in the papyri also we have abundant examples.^ The N. T. usage
is
well illustrated
.
by
Pet. 1
:
4, els KXrjpovofjiiav a<pdapTov Kal b.p.iav-
rov Kal afxapavTOP

(c)
Cf. Jas. 3
17.
jority of
The great maAdjectives with Three Terminations. Greek adjectives, like d7a06s, -fj, -6v, developed three endings and continue normal (cf. Thumb, Handbook, p. 68), as
is
modern Greek. Some of the compound adjechad three endings, especially compounds in -lkos and The same thing is observed in -LOS, as {jLovapxt-KV, avaîa (Plato) .^ the inscriptions" and the papyri.^ In the N. T. we have several examples, as apyos, -n (Attic always apyos, though Epimenides has
universal in the
tives also
-17)
20 according to BC. In Mk. 4 28 avToparr] is not entirely new, for classic writers use it. In 2 Jo. 13 (and probably also 1) we have kXe/cri?. In Mt. 4 13 has -Lov. However, in Lu. the MSS. give irapadaXaaala, but
in 1
:
Tim. 5
13; Tit. 1
12; Jas. 2
the feminine form, though occasionally the and older Greek had -la, varying like the other compounds in Other adjectives of three endings belong to the third and -LOS.
17 TrapaXtos
is
LXX
Cf. Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 148.

Inschr., p. 140).
Cf. also
aicovios, Koanio^, in
Magnesia
Aristophanes used PaaiXetos, ê/3aios, fiaKa(Nachm., Magn. Wirth, De Motione Adjcctivorum, pios, oijpavios, warpios with two endings (G. For further discus(ib., p. 49 f.). Euripides of also true This is 51). 1880, p. dreier sion of adjectives with two endings see Willielm, Zur Motion der Adjec. etc., p. Lukianos der Sprachgebr. Der Wilhelm, 23; etc., Griech. p. in End.
23.
shows the exCf. llelbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 57 f. On the whole the terminations tension of the fcni. so that adjs. which in Attic have two or three
have
2 *
LXX
tliree in
the
LXX
{aypios, êâios, dUaLos, eXeWtpos, /xdraLos).
Thack., Gr.,
p. 172.
Mayser, Gr.
Cf.
d. griech. Pap., p.
289
f.
'
K.-Bl.,
I,
p. 538.
Nachm., Magn.
I, p.
Inschr., p. 141; Schweizer,
Terg. Inschr., p.
158;
Mayser, Gr.
6
d. griech. Pap., p. 291.
K.-Bl.,
538
f.
Mayser, Gr.
274
the

first
declensions, like o^vs, oêla, 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.
etc.)
sometimes have
Tr\rjpris.
irav
as indeclinable
{tolv
t6v
totov,
like
Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 51.
Indeclinable
ib.
ttXtjpt??
is
retained
by Swete
in Sir.
19 26.
:
Cf. Helbing,
See
(/)
below.
(d)
The Accusative
v
i,
Singular.
Some
adjectives of the third
declension have
this chapter,
after the analogy of the first declension.
See
reject
5, (g), for
the discussion in detail.

is
W. H.
them
all,
though
in
a few cases the testimony

(Heb. 6:
is
strong.^
They
with
are
aae^rjv
(Ro. 4:
5), aa<l>aKT]v
19), iiel^wv (Jo. 5: 36), avyyevriv
(Ro. 16:
(Jo. 5
:
11), vyiriv (Jo. 5: 11).

ixdôiv in
The
fi
use of irrational
?/
ixeiô)
36
ABEGMA)
likened
{^v).
by Moulton
Cf. ch. VI,
{Prol, p. 49)
(c).
to irrational v with subjunctive
ii
Adjectives. Two points are involved, (e) Contraction absence (or the of it) and the use of a or the fact of contraction forms uncontracted of adjectives are not so The t, p. 77 after e,
common
(6).
as
is
the case with substantives.
Cf. this chapter,
i,
6,
The
like
contracted forms are practically confined to forms in

aTrXoOs,
StTrXoDs,
ovs,
dp7i;poOs,
Trop4>vpovs,
(nSrjpovs,
xciX/v'ous,
Xpvaovs.
Here again we have a
still
further limitation, for the
uncontracted forms occur chiefly in the Apocalypse and in {< and in the case of xp^(ôvs.^ Cf. Rev. 4:4; 5:8, where J^ reads But in Rev. 2 1 XPB read xpi^cwv, while AC have Xpvaeovs, -eas. Xpvadv in Rev. 1 13, though accepted by W. H. and xpvaecov.
:
:
read by JÂC,
(p. 28), as
is
rejected
by
Blass, but achnitted
shown on
p. 257.
P. Lond. reads xpvaav
by Debrunner apyvpav, and

r)
L. P.^
(ii/iii
a.d.) also has xpvf^W V apyvpTJv.^
In each instance
(Gr., p.
probably analogy has been at work."*

accept the genitive
in
^
Thackeray
:
172
f.)
gives a very few uncontracted forms in -eos in the

âdeoos in
LXX. W. H.
:
instead of the usual form in -os.

TjiiLavs
1 and xpaews in 1 Pet. 3 Hort^ considers the variations as "curious," but they find abundant parallel in the
Lu. 24
Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 157
f.
For pap. exx. of
vyi^v see
griech. Pap., p. 295.
Thack.
(Gr., p. 146) considers it a vulgarism,
Mayser, Gr. though
d.
it
began as early as iv/B.c. (see ScoKpdxTjj', rpLrjptjv). It is common u/a.d. 2 Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 157; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 25. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 34 f., for LXX. 3 Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 35, 435. * Moulton, Prol., p. 48. Cf. T-qv Itp-qv Kt(t>a\r]v on Rom. tomb (Kaibel, Epigram. Graeca, 1878, p. 269). 6 Notes on Orth., p. 158.
THE DECLENSIONS
(kAI2;EI2)
275
papyri as does xpv<^^^^ abovc.^ In Mk. 6 23 rnjLla-ovs, not -eos, is the genitive form, the usual (probably only) form in the pa:
plural riniaea has practically no support in Lu. though ruilarj is the Text. Rec. on the authority of late uncials and cursives. Td rjulav has slight support. W. H. read rd r]nlaia (NBQ 382, L having itacistic -eta) and derive it from a
pyri.-
The neuter
19
8,
possible
rnxiaios.^
But
it is
possible,
if
not probable, that
rj/jLiaeLa
form changed by itacism to rudiaLa^ The plural of vrjaTLs is i>7]aTLs (Mk. 8:3; Mt. 15: 32), and not vrjaTLs as already sho^vn.^ For participles in -via, -vlrjs see this chapter, i, 5, (c). As a rule the forms in -virjs and -prjs predominate, but note aTdpq. in Lu. 1 36.'^ In the case of v'î-ns, whereas the Attic had accusative v'Yio. {vjLy) in Plato, Phadr. 89 d), the N. T., like the inscriptions, papyri and the LXX, has only vyLTJ (Jo. 5: 11, 15; 7: 23).^ In Jo. 18 1 xî-mppov is almost certainly from x^'i-fô-ppos instead of
earlier
:
:
was the
the classical xetM^ppoos.^
In 2 Pet. 2 5 oySoov
:
is
not contracted,
though sometimes the papyri have 6y8ovs, 6y8ovvy The papyri have cleared up (/) Indeclinable Adjectives.
two points of much interest here. One is the use of ir\r]pr]s in N. T. MSS. in an oblique case. In Mk. 4 28 Hort (Appendix, p. 24) suggests Tr\r]py]s alrov (C* two lectionaries) as probably the original. In Ac. 6 5 W. H. put ap8pa irXriprjs in the margin, though Tr\r]pT] is read only by B among the MSS. of importance. In Jo. 1 14 all the MSS. (save D 5 followed by Chrys. and Theoph.) have irXripris. Moulton^'' indeed suggests that 7rXi7p7y was the original text, which was changed to the vulgar irXrjprjs. But the argument can be turned round just as easily. In almost every N. T. instance of an oblique case of ttXtjptjs good uncials
:
: :
also has
1
have the indeclinable form (Moulton, Prol., p. 50). The LXX examples of indeclinable irXrjprjs (cf. Hort, Appendix, p.
Xpvakifi is
exceedingly
common
in the pap.
(Moulton, CI. Rev., Dec, 1901,
p. 435).
2
Mayscr, Gr.
d. grioch. Pap., p.
294
f.
Cf. also Deiss., B. S., p. 186;
Moul-
ton, CI. Rev., 1901, p.

3
M. So
also the

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 87.
oLKtlos is
'II/xt(7ta
Thack., Gr., p. 179. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 87. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d.
LXX,
Sept., p. 52.
*
occurs in Antoninus Libcralis (ab. 150 a.d.)
and
6
^
;'
analogous.
Blass, Gr. of
Ilort,
Notes on Orth., p. 157. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.

r;^)
N. T. Gk.,
ii,
p. 25.
For
adjs. with ace. in-r; (and

('f.
sometimes
added,
8
see Dieterich, Unters., p. 175.
this ch.,
2,
((/).
Blass, Gr. of
Prol., p.
.50.
10
100
ff.
N. T. Gk., p. 25. " Mayscr, Gr. d. griech. Bap., p. 294. See Croncrt, Mem., p. 179; Turner, Jour. Tlieol. St., I, pp. Milligan (N. T. Doc. $, p. 05) finds one ex. of indecl. wXripr]s b.c.
276
24).

So Job 21
B.C.:
NEW TESTAMENT
24,
JÂBC.
"fairly
common"
in the papyri^
The examples of TrXiypiys so used are and come as early as the second
There seems therefore no reason to refuse to con14 as accusative and to accept it as the text in Mk. 4 28 and Ac. 6:5. The other example of indeclinable adjectives is found in comparative forms in -co, like TrXeiw. Moulton^ points out that in Mt. 26 53 NBD read TrXetw 5co5e;a Xeytcofas, while the later MSS. have mended the grammar with irXeiovs. He quotes also Cronert^ who has furnished abundant evidence from the papyri and literature of such a use of these forms just like irXrjprjs. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Papj/ri, p. 63 f. The comparative is a natural 3. Comparison of Adjectives. development in the adjective, as the adjective itself is a growth on the substantive. (a) The Positive (OercKov ovojxa or ovofia airXovv). This is the oldest form of the adjective, the most common and the most persistent. It is not always true that the comparative and superlative forms represent an actually higher grade than the positive. The good is sometimes more absolute than better or even best. See ayados in Mk. 10 18, for instance. Sometimes indeed the positive itself is used to suggest comparison as in Mt. 18 9, koXov aol
century
sider
7rXi7p7js
:
in Jo. 1
k(TTLv
daekdelv
^ bvo xetpas, kt\.
This construction
is
common
in the
LXX,
Hebrew.^
suggested perhaps by the absence of comparison in The tendency of the later Greek is also constantly to
this
make one
p. 181.
of the degrees
But
do duty for two. Cf. Thackeray, Gr., matter belongs rather to the syntax of compari-
Participles are, of course, used only in the positive save in a few cases where the adjective-idea has triumphed wholly over the verb-conception.^ Verbals in -tos sometimes have comparison, though jiaXKov may be freely used with participles.
son.
(6)
The Comparative
.
{avyKptTtKov
oiô/xa)
The stem may be

an adverb
(besides adjective) either a substantive (âaiKev-Tepos) or

{irpo-Tepos)
Cf.
Monro, Homeric Grammar,
p. 82.
The primary
comparative-ending -iwv (Sanskrit iyans)

jective-ending
^
-tos.'^
is probably kin to the adThis form along with the superlative -tcrros is p. 35.
Reinhold,
p. 52.
De
Graec.
etc., p. 24.
It is
it
thinks
2
not till I/a.d. that it not genuine in the LXX.
For the indecl. wXr/pris in Acta Thomae see Cf Sir. 19 26. See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., is common in the pap. Thack. (Gr., p. 176)
.
lb., p. 435.
But
see Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 297.

4
3
fi
Prol., p. 50.
Philologus, LXI., pp. 161
K.-Bl.,
I,
p. 553;
ff.
Schwab, Die Hist. Synt.

"
Heft, 1895, pp. 152
Hirt,
Handb.
etc., p.
W.-M., p. 302. Comparative, 3. 290; Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 30.

ff.
d.
griech.
THE DECLENSIONS
(kAISEIs)
277
probably originally qualitative in idea and does not necessarily imply excess. In the modern Greek these forms are not used at all.^ They have disappeared before the secondary comparative form -Ttpos, which even in the earlier Greek is far more common. The ending -repos docs imply excess and appears in various words that are not usually looked upon as comparatives, as e-repos ('one of
two'), eKCL-Tepos ('each of two'), we-Tepos {nos-ter), vfie-repos (vos-ter),
So also biv-repos like wpo-Tepos (cf. Latin al-ter, Enga comparative form.^ "The comparison-suffixes lwv, LOTOS, repos belong to the Indo-Germanic ground speech."^ In the N. T. the forms in -lwv, as in the papyri,^ hold their own only
ua-repos."
lish other) is
in the
most common words.
Schwab
(op.
cit.,
p. 5)
makes -aros
/3eX-
older than -raros.

TLov
'Kptdvoiv is
not used in the N. T. and
only as an adverb once (2 Tim. 1:18). 'Ekaaauv appears four times, once about age as opposed to p-d^wv (Ro. 9: 12), once
about rank as opposed to Kpdaawv (Heb. 7:7), once about excellence (Jo. 2:10) as again opposed to Kpelaacov, and once as an adverb (eXaaaov, 1 Tim. 5:9) in the sense of 'less, not /juKpoTepos ('smaller'). ''E.aaov (neuter only) is found in 1 Cor. 11: 17 as opposed to Kpeiauov, and as an adverb in 2 Cor. 12 15. KdXXtoj' (Ac. 25 10) is an adverb. Kpelaawv is confined to Peter, Paul's Epistles and Hebrews (some eighteen examples, ten of them in Heb.). Meifcov is common (some fifty times), though some of them dis: :
place the superlative as

{p.dôva)
we
shall see directly.
The neuter
Once
plural
appears once as
êtfco (Jo.
1:50).^
also (3 Jo. 4)
double comparative form fxeLôrepos occurs, several simiexamples appearing in the papyri, as ixeLôrepos, fxeKavrcoTepov, Kpta^vTepwTtpa.'' A few other examples in poetry and late Greek are cited by Wincr-Moulton,^ like KpeLTTorepos, pLeLôvorepos, fiaôthe
lar
1
Cf.
Thumb, Handb.,
Handb.
p. 73.
2
2
*
Cf. Hirt,
etc., p.
Cf. Ascoli in Curtius' Stud, zur gricch.
292; Brug., Indoger. Forsch., 1903, pp. 7 und lat. Gr., 1876, p. 351.
ff.
Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. griech. Comp., Heft I, 1893, p. 3. Mayser, Gr. d. gricch. Pap., p. 298. He mentions êKrlwp, 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

jjLeioTepos,
Tepos itself,
TrXetorepos.
Cf. English vernacular "lesser,"

is
TaxLov (W. H.
eLov),
not daauov,
.
the N. T. form as
we read
in
the papyri
(cf.
also.^
Cf
Jo. 20 4, etc.
:
Mt. 9:16).
Cf.
The ending
-Tepo's
Xdpwv is found a dozen times is more and more the usual
one.
To/jLcoTepos
(Heb. 4:12).
Some comparative
like
adjectives
are
derived
from positive adverbs

in the
e^wrepos
(Mt. 8:12),
latter adjec-
kacoTepos (Ac.
16:24), KaTcorepos (Eph. 4:9).
These
is
tives are
common
LXX
also.
and the
:
later Greek,
not to say
Attic sometimes.^
StxXoucrrepos.
AtrXorepos
(Mt. 23 15)
for the old Attic
So Appian
Cf. airXbrepov, Anthol. Pal., Ill,
The Ionic already had oXtycorepos and Taxvrepos (Radermacher, Gr., p. 56). Cf. ayadcorepos (Hermas, Mand. VIII, 9, 11) and ayadi^Taros (Diod., 16, 85). The rules for the use of -dorepos and -orepos apply in the N. T. As iJ.aX\ov
158 (Dieterich, Unters.,
p. 181).
is
often used with the positive in lieu of the comparative ending,

it is
sometimes with the comparative, a double comparative Kpelcraov, Ph. 1:23; yuaXXov TepLcraorepop, Mk. 7:36), a construction not unknown to the classic orators of Athens where emphasis was desired.^ Paul did not perpetrate a barbarism when he used k\axt-<y tot epos (Eph. 3 8), a comparative on a superlative. It ''is correctly formed according to the rule of the common language."^ Cf. also such a late form as eo-xarcbrepos.^ (c) The Superlative {virepOerLKov 6vo/xa). As with the comparative, so with the superlative there are primary and secondary forms. The primary superlative ending -kttos (old Indian isthas, Zend, and Goth, istay did not perhaps represent the true superlative so much as the elative (intensive like English "very") superlative.^ It was never very widely used and has become extinct in modern Greek.^ The kolvt] inscriptions show only a few examples like ayxi-f^Ta, eyy Lara, KaXXtcTos, kpcltlcftos, ixkyiaros, TXelaros.^ In the papyri Maj'scr^^ notes êXTLarov, tkaxicfrov {-laT-q also), mXXtGTt], KpcLTLaros, TrXelaTOi, Tax't-crTriu (terra), x^'Pôttji'. In the N. T., however, the superlative in -to-ros is more common than that in They are besides usu-TttTos, though none too frequent in itself. D reads 7ally elative (intensive) and not true superlatives.^^
so
(ixclXKop
:
Moulton,
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.
Cf. also aneiforepos in the older language

p. 81;
(Blass, Gr. of
3
4 6 9
2 w.-M., Schwab, Hist. Synt. etc., Heft HI, p. 65. W.-M., Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 34.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 34).
Thack., Gr., p. 183.
p. 81, Jann., p. 147.
K.-Bl.,
I,
p. 554; Hirt,
Handb.
etc., p.
291.
10
Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 160; Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 143. " Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33. Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 298.
THE DECLENSIONS
7t(rTa in
:
(kAISEIz)
279
Mk. 6 36. '0 e\axi-(^Tos (1 Cor. 15:9) is a true superlathing so rare in the N. T. that Blass^ attributes this extive, a
either to the literary language or to
ample
text.^
corruption in the
But Moulton^ is able to find a parallel in the Tb.P. 24, ii/B.c. But more about true and elative superlatives in Syntax (eh. XIV, xiv). In 2 Cor. 12:9, 15 (D in Ac. 13:8), we have
TJdLara.
Kparto-re (Lu.
3,
etc.)
is
"only a
title"
(Moulton,
is
p. 78).
MdXto-Ta appears a dozen times only, though (jloWop
exceedingly
common.
Blass^ indeed suggests that a popular sub-
stitute for jiaKiaTa as for xXeto-ra
was found
:
in the use of wepLaaos.
This
is
much more
or
TrXetwj' (cf.
true of the use of irepLaaos as the equivalent of
naWov
adverb
7:36).
dr]\ov
Mt. 5 37; 27
:
23).
Paul uses the comparative
wepLacroTepoos
(Ph.
14.
Cf. double comparative in

:
Mk.
/cara-
In Heb. 7: 15 (cf. 2:1; 13 19 we have more than /jlolWop. Cf.
-cos)
irepLaaoTepov
en
:
fxeyLaros (2 Pet. 1
:
4)
:
and
Tdxtcr (Ac. 17 15) Blass^ credits again to the literary element in Luke. In u^toros
TrXelaTos in
:
:
Mt. 11 20; 21
8; 1 Cor. 14
27.
we have a superlative that occurs thirteen times and always about God or heaven (as Mk. 5 7; 11 10). When we take up the form in -raros in the N. T. the story is soon told. Brugmann^ finds the origin of this ending in forms
:
Latin decimus), Trpwros (cf. Latin primus), vTaros, has no direct parallel in the other languages.^ Hirt^ suggests -Tap-os and -aros as two forms which finally resulted in
like SeKUTos (cf.
vararos.
It
-Taros.
It
is
true that the forms in -aros faded
away
as superla-
tives
and
eaxa.rov
became
eaxarcoTaTov in the
KOLVT]
inscriptions,^
but this is true also of the forms in -raros.^ The papyri have "scores" of examples of superlatives in -raros (chiefly elative). The rarity of the -raros forms in the N T. ma}^ be purely accidental (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 154). It is not quite true that
''^
lb.
Prol., p. 79.
8 *
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33
lb., p. 33.
etc.,
f.
2
B
suggests
*
Indog. Forsch., 1903, pp. 7-9. Ascoli (Curtius' Stud., Tp'iTos (cf. Horn. TpiraTos.) also. Cf. also ?(rxaros.
1876, p. 351)
Hirt,
Handb.
etc., p.
294.
jb.
Sc^hweizer, Perg. Iiischr., p. IGl.
" This double superl. does not appear in the N. T., but various instances are noted in the paj). and the latcT Gk. as eXax'^Toraros, neyiaToraTos, Trpwriara,
So Lat.
p. 181.
rninissitnus,
pessinm^simus.
Cf.
W.-M.,
p.
81; Dieterioh, Unters.,
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
"only one example of the -raros superlative" (Moulton, Prol., N. T. There are three with -raros, besides those with -aros: aytdoTaros (Ju. 20), aKpL^karaTos (Acts 26 5), rtyutcjraros (Rev. 18 12; 21 11). Thackeray {Gr., p. 182) finds -raros much more common in the LXX, though chiefly in the elative sense and in the more literary books of the LXX (Wisd., 2^
p. 78) survives in the
:
Mace,
d)
Prov., Esd.).
'
AKpLJ3eararos (Ac. 26: 5) Blass again credits
to the literary language.
"Eaxaros and
Trpcoros (co
are both very frequent in the N. T.
from cofa, Doric See Mt. 19 30 for the

:
of times used in the N. T. (some 200) in contrast to only ten instances of irporepov and one of irporepa (Eph. 4 22) deserves comment. This seems in conflict with the ob-
contrasted wpccroL eo-xarot Kr\.

Trpojros {jpCorov
The very
great
number
that
included)
is
But work here. The disappearance of duality before plurality has worked against irporepov. Luke does not use irporepov at all and it appears only once in Grenfell and Hunt's four volumes of papyri.^ The LXX shows vrpcoros displacing irporea counter-tendency
is
served disuse of the superlative in favour of the comparative.

at
(Thackeray, Gr., p. 183). So in English we say first story of a house with only two, first edition of a book which had only two, It is almost an affectation in Greek and English, however etc. good Latin it may be, to insist on irporepos. So in Jo. 1 15 (rpcopos
:
Tos p-ov), 15: 18 {irpCirov vpcov),
Ac.
1 {rdv irpLcrov \6yov)
we have
merely
first of
two and
in the
two
first
instances the ablative con-
struction as with the comparative.

of rpwrov to be true to the
Greek
genius.^
Winer properly saw this usage In Mt. 27: 64 we have

ri
both
eaxo-Tos
and
irpooros
is
used of two, earai
eaxarT] tXclvt] x^tpwj'
indeed used in the sense of the former in Eph. 4 22, whereas irporepov in the sense of the first of two does
TTjs Tpcorr]s.
:
Uporepos
exetra).^ appear in Heb. 7:27 {irporepov It is probably a defect in both Latin and Greek that the same forms were used to express the elative and true superlative sense (so as to comparative also).^ As the dual vanished, so it was inevitable that with the same principle at work either the comparative or the superlative would. Outside of ecrxaros and Trpcoros where the principle crossed with a different application because irporepos was disappearing, it is the superlative that goes down, especially the true superlative as opposed to the elative (intensive) Hermas, though
.
in the vernacular,
still
uses the superlative in the elative (inten-
Moulton, Prol., W.-M., p. 306.
p.
79
^ *
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 34.
THE DECLENSIONS (kaISEIS)

sive) sense
281
very often.^ In the N. T. then the comparative is beginning to take the place of the superlative, a usage occasionally found in classical Greek,^ and found now and then in the
papyri.^
See
Cor. 13: 13 rd rpia raDra /xetfcoj'
8e TovTuiv
57
a-yaivri.
See also
6 /jLeiûv
(Mt. 18:4).
(ch.
But
this
matter
will call for
more
comment under Sjmtax
XIV
xiii, (i)).
m. NUMERALS
('API0MOI).
No
1.
great space
is
demanded
for the discussion of the
non-
syntactical aspects of the numerals.
The Origin
of
Numerals.
Donaldson^ thinks that seven of

ele-
the
first
ten numerals
may
be traced to primitive pronominal
Pronouns and numerals belong to the stable elements of language, and the numerals are rather more stable than the pronouns in the Indo-Germanic tongues.^ See the numerals in substantial integrity in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., pp. 80-84). The system of numeration is originally decimal (cf. fingers and toes) with occasional crossing of the duodecimal.^ There possibly were savages who could not count beyond two, but one doubts if the immediate ancestors of the Indo-Germanic peoples were so
ments.
See previous discussion in this chapter, i, 3. one of the first and easiest things that the child learns. It is certain that the original Indo-Germanic stock had numerals up to 100 before they separated.^ The roots are widespread and fairly uniform. 2. Variety among Numerals. (a) Different Functions. The numerals may be either subprimitive as
is
that.''
Counting
stantive,
adjective or adverb.
eTrrciKts
So
17
x^^'ds (Lu. 14:31),
x^^tot
(2 Pet. 3 :8),
(Mt. 18:21).9
Number
thus embraces sep-
arate ideas.
(b)
Thu C AB.DIN Ahs (6v6 fiara

and
apiOfirjTiKa).
They may be
either
declinable or indeclinable,
fined principle.
frequent
use.^'^
no very well-deThe first four are dcclina!:)lo, possibly from their After 200 {bia-KoaLOL, -at, -a) they have the regular
this according to
' Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33. He cites the mod. Italian also which makes no distinction between the comp. and supcrl. Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. gricch. Comp., \\, j)]). 172 iT. 3 IVloulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439. ^ Giles, Man., etc., p. 393.
''
New
Crat., p. 294.
Prol., p. 58.
"
lb.
I,
^ 8
However, see Moulton, Moulton, Prol., p. 58. Cf. K.-BL, I, p. G21 f.
Cf. Taylor, Prim. Cult.,
p.
242
f.
"
282
NEW TESTAMENT
inflection of adjectives of the
history of
els, /xta, ev is
second and first declensions. The very interesting, for which see the comparais
tive grammars.^
Els
:
exceedingly
common
cardinal (Mt. 25
15)
and as an
indefinite
in the N. T. as a pronoun (Mt. 8 19),

:
approaching the indefinite article. For the use of els in sense of ordinal see Syntax, ch. XIV, xv, (a), but it may be remarked here that the papyri have rfj ulS. Kal et/cd5t (Moulton, CI. Rev.,
1901, p. 35).
is
The
indeclinable use of
Cf. Kad'
els
(or adverbial use of Kara)

:
Mk. 14 19; (Jo. 8:9); So modern Greek uses ha as neuter with which Mayser^ compares eva as feminine on an early ostrakon. But the modern Greek declines eVas, nia, eva in all genders (Thumb, Handb., Ov8els and ixrjdeis are both very cormnon in the N. T. with p. 81). the inflection of els. Mrjdeis occurs only once (Ac. 27 33). W. H. admit oWels only seven times (all in Luke and Paul, as Ac. 20 33), and once (Ac. 15 9) ovSkv is in the margin. Jannaris (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 170) calls this form in 6 chiefly Alexandrian, rare in Attic, but Mayser (Gr., p. 180) notes ov8eis as "Neubildung" while oWeis is good Attic. For history of it see Orthography and Phoin later Greek.
els
common
:
in
Ro. 12
5.^
netics, 3, (/).
The
frequent use of 8vo as indeclinable save in the
plural form 8vai in the later
Greek has already been commented

a/x0co
on
is
in this chapter
(i,
3)
as well as the disappearance of

is classical,
be8v(rl
fore a/xôrepot.
Indeclinable 8vo
and
after Aristotle
rpTs) is
the normal dative (Thackeray, Gr., p. 186). Tpia (possibly also occasionally indeclinable in the papyri.'* The common use
kolvt]
and the occasional occurrence of reaaapes MSS. (like Northwest Greek) have been noticed in chapters VI, 2, (a), and VII, i, 7, (c).^ Uhre, e^ and iirra need not detain us. The originally dual form oktco is found only ten times, and five of them with other numerals. 'Ewea appears
of reaaepa in the
as accusative in N. T.
as eTrrd, not found six times, but 8co8eKa is quite common, due chiefly to the frequent mention of the Apostles. From thirteen to nineteen in the N. T., like the papyri ^ and the modern Greek, Ska comes first, usually without Kal,
is
only five times, while 5k-a

first five
nothing
like so
common
to mention the
cardinals.
"Eu8eKa
is
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 211; Hirt,
Handb.
etc., p.
311; Giles, Man., p. 394.
On numerals in LXX, p. 30 f.
3
the
LXX see Thack.,

2
Cf.
Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 312. For the usage cf. W.-Sch., p. 90. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 315.
and S., Sel. fr. the W.-M., p. 312. So dm eh (Rev. 21 21). Perhaps the earliest ex. of indeclinable eW.
Gr., pp. 186-190; C.
:
LXX
lb.
Cf. also Dittenb., 674. 28.
*'
Mayser, Gr.
THE DECLENSIONS
as 8eKa oKTio (Lu. 13 :4),
(kAISEIS)
Kal (Lu.
283
13
:
though once with
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
:
:
each.
'EKaTov
-77/5.
Ekocri
is
is
a dual form,
wtiile TpcaKovra
and so on are
plural.^
one hundred like
d-ira^.
is
W. H.
accent
eKaTOPTaerrjs,
not
used with these numerals, as 15), but recraapaeiKocrt reaaapes (Rev. .19 :4), eKarov e'UoaL (Ac. 1 In the LXX there is Kovra Kal e'^ (Jo. 2 20). Cf. Rev. 13 18. Thackeray, Gr., ''teens." the no fixed order for numbers above
Usually no conjunction
: : :
p. 188.
The N. T.
uses xiXtot often

:
and
5t(Txt>*>tot
once (Mk. 5
13)
and TpLaxi^^LOL once (Ac. 2 41). The N. T. examples of p-vpios by reason of case do not distinguish between phpioi, 'ten thousand'
(Mt. 18
:
24)
and
pvploi,
'many thousands'
(1
Cor. 4
15).
The
N. T. uses
pvpLOL^
several times for the latter idea ('myriads'), some-
So also xiKias times repeated, as pvpiaSes pvpLabwv (Rev. 5:11). appearing chiefly both than xt>^toi, in the T. N. common is more
in Revelation
(cf.
5:11).
In Rev. 13
18
B and many
cursives
have x^^' = ^^(^'<o(rLOL

ffLoi
8eKa e^.
As
while the cursive 5 has x' = tâ/c6a rule in the N. T. MSS. the numbers are spelled
e^rjKovTa e,
out instead of mere signs being used.

(c)
The Ordinals
and
{ovofiara TaKriKo).
raise the question of order, Toaros.^
They describe rank and They are all adjectives of
three endings
repos
all have the superlative form -ros save irpowhich are comparative.^ In most cases the But ordinals are made from the same stem as the cardinals.^ this is not true of Trpcoros nor indeed of dev-repos (not from 8vo, but
and
dev-repos
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 (Eph. 4:22).

use of
els
irpbTepov)
The disappearance
save in one instance, irporepau avaaTpo4>r]v of irpuros before the ordinal
belongs to Syntax.
In the N. T. as in the papyri^ the
ordinals
up
to twelve are regular.
From
kolvt}
13 to 19 the N. T., like the
vernacular papyri^ (so Ionic and

1
generally), puts the smaller

:
Aka
bvo is
normal
in the pap. of the Ptol. age.
So
also
Ska
6ka
2 3
*
reaaapts,
Giles,
6ka irivre, dtKa oktw. Man., p. 398.

I,
Cf Cf. Rec, Ac. 19 7. and even Ska yua^ once. Always Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.
rpels,
K.-Bl.,
p. 622.
Cf. BruM;.,
Tro^rro^,
CI. Pliilol., 1907, p. 208.
These both have a

C;ilrs,
suporl., as Trpcoros
and
5tvraTos (Honi.).
Brug., Gk. Gr.,
p. 212.
''
" ^
Man., j). 400. C^f. Brug., Grioch. Gr., Mayser, Gr. d. grioch. Pap., p. 318. lb. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35.
p. 212;
Moulton,
Prol., p.
95
f.
284
number first and as a compound with /cat, only the second half of the word in the ordinal form. So TeaaapeaKaideKaTos (Ac. 27:27), not TTapTos Kal BeKUTos (Attic). But the papyri show examples of the usual Attic method,^ as evaros Kal eUoaTos. The distinction
^
between the decades (like TpLaKoaros) and the hundreds (like rptaKoaioaTos) should be noted. In modern Greek all the ordinals have disappeared out of the vernacular save Trpajros, devrepos, rplThe article with the cardinal is used instead. Tos, Tcrapros.^ Distributives in the N. T. The multipHcative distrib(f/) utives (with ending -ttXoDs) occur in the N. T. also. 'AttXoDs as an adjective is found onty twice (Mt. 6 22; Lu. 11 34), both times about the eye. AlttXovs appears four times (as 1 Tim. 5:17).
: :
Cf. the Latin sim-plex, du-plex, English simple, diplomatic.
The
:
proportional
distributives
end
in
:
wXacrioiv.
8)
As examples one
and TroWaTrXaaiova (Lu. 18 One of the commonest ways of expressing distribution is by repetition of the numeral as in 8vo 8vo (Mk. 6:7). Cf. avinvbaia avpTrbaia (Mk. 6 39 f.). In Lu. 10 1 we have ava bho 8vo in the text of W. H., a "mixed distributive" (Moulton, ProL, p. 97). The modern Greek has either aird dv6 or 8vd 8v6 (Thumb, Handb., p. 83). It is a vernacular idiom which was given fresh impetus (Brugmann, Distributiva, p. 9) from the Hebrew idiom. Deissmann cites rpla Tpla from 0. P. 121 (iii/A.D.). j Moulton {ProL, p. 21) follows
note iKaTOVTaivXaaiova (Lu. 8
30).
may
Cf. English "two-fold," "three-fold," etc.
Thumb
(e)
(Hellen., p. 152) in
denying that
it
is
a Hebraism.
See
like
further ch.
XIV, xv
(d).
Numeral Adverbs.
:
These are of two kinds, either
ana (Ac. 24: 26), bixa, 'in two' (not in the N. T., though see Stxaf'^ Mt. 10 35), or like aira^, 8'ls, rpis, etc. The one kind answers to
multiplicatives
and the other to proportionals.^ The numeral ad-
verbs continue in use in the
LXX (Thackeray, Gr.,

CANTfiNYMIAI)
p.
189
f.).
The
modern Greek
Handb.,
p. 83).
instead of the numeral adverb uses 4>opd
(Thumb,
IV.
1.
PRONOUNS
It is
Idea of Pronouns.
is
not the idea of a subject or object
that
set forth
by the pronoun, but the
object to the speaker.^

1
relation of a subject or Sometimes, to be sure, as in conversation,
N. T. Gk., p. 35. So the LXX also. Thack., Gr., p. 188. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 35. And even the use of forms like tv Kal elKoarop, Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 318. ^ Thumb, Handb. d. neugr. Volksspr., p. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., 56. " Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 36. ^ K.-Bl., I, p. 579. p. 175.
Blass, Gr. of
^
THE DECLENSIONS
(kAISEIs)
285
the pronoun does not strictly stand in the place of a substantive.
When
one person addresses another, "I" and "thou" are plain enough from the nature of the circumstances. The pronoun inIn a sense then dicates, but does not name the speaker, etc. language is a sort of drama in which there are three characters, the speaker, the person addressed and the person spoken of.^ Hence the first and second personal pronouns have no gender,
while the third person,
der.
who may
or
may
not be present, has gen-
Giles ^ cites the case of
tive so
reverse
is
Macaulay who repeated the substanoften as almost to make the pronoun useless, though the tendency is more common. The right use of pronouns
style.
a good index of
2.
Antiquity of Pronouns.
The
personal pronouns are prob-
ably the oldest part of the Indo-Germanic declension.^
Pronouns
(and numerals) are the most persistent parts of speech.

essential to the very life of
They
are
a language.*
Strange enough, the
Coptic and the Hebrew, for instance, are only alike in their pronouns and their numerals.^ In Greek as in Sanskrit and English the pronouns maintain themselves with great tenacity. The pronouns are also closely akin in all the Indo-Germanic tongues. Cf. Sanskrit aham, Greek e7cb(i'), Latin ego, Gothic ik, Anglo-Saxon They retain the case-forms ic, German ich, English /, French je. better than any other parts of speech. Indeed pronouns present an indepen3. Pronominal Roots. dent set of roots parallel to the verbal and nominal roots. As
verb, noun, adjective, adverb, preposition, conjunctions, inten-
grow up around the old verbal (and nominal) roots, There are two great root-stocks then (verbal or nominal and pronominal).^ The pronouns can be resolved into monosyllabic roots.'^ One may not follow Donaldson^ (now obsolete), when he calls all the pronouns originally demonstrative, and yet something can be said for that idea. In the -Sanskrit Whitney^ calls this "very limited set of roots, the so-called pronominal or demonstrative roots." Monro'" remarks that noun-stems name or describe while pronouns only
sive particles
so pronouns represent a separate history.
'
Farrar,
Gk. Synt.,
p. 32.
He
accents irpoaunvov (persona) as illustrating

p. 13.
this
'
^
dramatic aspect. ^ jb., Giles, Man., p. 238. lb., p. 297. Renan, Ilist. des Lang. Somit., p. 84 f. Cf. Bopp, Uber den Einfl. der Pron. auf die Wortbild., 1832. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 241.
"
lb., p. 245.
Sans. Cr., p. 185.
" Horn.
Gr., p. 57;
Bopp, Vcrgl. Gr., 105.
286
is predicative, the other demonstrative. The fundamental. "Pronouns are found to contain the same elements as those which furnish the person-endings of verbs." (Monro, ib.)
point out; the one

is
difference then
4.
Classification.
Pronouns are either substantive

rjiJ.Tepos,
in
signifi-
cation and inflection as eyu, adjective as

ourcos.
or adverb as
The other
classification is into nine or ten great classes:

reflexive, possessive,
personal, intensive,
demonstrative, relative,
correlative pronouns can be regarded separately also. These classes will call for special comment in detail See also ch. XV, i. (a) The Personal Pronouns. In all the Indo-Germanic tongues the personal pronouns vary a good deal in inflection from
interrogative, indefinite, distributive.^
The
the substantives and adjectives.^ The various Greek dialects show great variety in the inflection of the personal pronouns.^ The nominative singular has a different stem in the first personal
pronoun from the other cases in all the Indo-Germanic languages. The N. T. follows current and ancient usage fairly well in the form of the first and second personal pronouns. The same thing is true as to the enclitic and the emphatic forms in the oblique cases. The MSS. vary between nov and enov, etc. Not only do
MSS.
irepi
give the regular wpos

viro
jiov.
fjLov,
read
is
editor.
6(j)da\iJLcp
but the papyri* furnish eU ixt, cov or coD should be a very delicate one and rests almost wholly with the W. H. have, for instance, k tov d(})da\iJLov aov and h ti2
jue,
The question whether
aov in the
same sentence (Mt.

third
7:4.
Cf. also the next

all
verse).
Nestle here has no such refinement, but aov

verses.
in
through
in
these
Greek as
In Attic the old ov, ot, e (without nominative) was chiefly reflexive,^ though not true of the Ionic. Possibly this pronoun was originally reflexive for all the persons, but came to be used also as the simple pronoun
other languages.
of the third person, whereas in Latin
it
The some
personal
pronoun gave trouble
remained
is
reflexive
and
was
1
restricted to the third person.*'
The N. T.
like the kolvtj
I, p. 579, have only five. Handb., p. 296. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 84, for mod. Gk. ' Cf. K.-BL, I, pp. 580 f. See briefer summary in Giles, Man., p. 298 f., and Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 244 f. On the multiplicity of roots in the pers. pron. see Riem. and Goelzer, Phon6t., p. 336. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 302 f. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 165. 6 Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 33. He illustrates by the Eng.: "I will lay me down and sleep." Cf. vixlv in Mt. 6 19 f. * Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., p. 341.
K.-Bl.,
Hirt,
THE DECLENSIONS
in the use of avros
(kAISEIs)
287
(common
It
also in Attic) instead of ov as the

is
used in all three genders and nominative it usually has emphasis (cf. Mt. 1 21), a matter to be discussed under Syntax. Indeed avTos, whatever its etymology, is originally an intensive pronoun (like Latin (pse), not a personal pronoun.^ The "frequent and almost inordinate use" (Thayer) of avros in the LXX (cf.
in all cases save that in the
:
third personal pronoun.
18 3 f and the N. T. is noticeable. So modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 86) (b) The Intensive Pronoun. The N. T. has nothing new to say as to the form of the intensive avros. It is usually in the nominative that it is intensive like avros iibvos (Jo. 6 15), though not always (cf. Jo. 14 11). The modern Greek ^ uses also a shorter form rov, etc. (also Pontic arov), as personal pronoun. The use of 6 abrb's may be compared with 6 tStos. See ch. XV, iii, yg). (c) Reflexive Pronouns. The reflexive form is nothing but the personal pronoun plus the intensive ahrbs. The reflexive is
Jer.
:
.)
one use of this intensive in combination with the personal pronoun. They were originally separate words.'' So avrbs 'eyio (Ro. 7: 25) which is, of course, not reflexive, but intensive. The Greek reflexives have no nominative and the English has almost lost ''himself," "myself" as nominative.^ In the N. T. the first and second persons have a distinct reflexive form only in the singular
{k^xavrov, aeavrov).
sive,
not
reflexive.
IV,
In 2 Th. 1:4 avrovs rjfxas In 1 Cor. 7 35 rnxoiv avraiv

:
is
obviously intendoubtful.^
it is
See
ch.
is
XV,
for further discussion.

It is
not found in the N. T.
The contracted form aavrov common in the Kingdom books in
See even aarbv in aii /SXeire carov airo ruv 'lovbalwv, B.G.U. 1079 (a.D. 41). So as to avrov. Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 190. The modern Greek uses rod enavrov nov for the reflexive (Thuml), Handb., p. 88). The reflexive for the
third person^ (usually eavrov in the singular, about
avrov, etc., in
the
LXX
and occurs
in the papyri.
twenty times
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 possil^le
reflexive (or demonstrative?) origin of ov
made
I. 15,
this usage
15)
natural.
>
It
appears in the papyri'' (rd avrov, Pet.
and the
it is
2
Flcnsborg (dbcr Urspr. und Bild. dos Pron. avrd^, 1893, p. 69) denies that from av, but rather from ai, ava. Cf. BruR., Griech. Gr., p. 244.
Thumb, Handb.,
K.-Bl.,
I,
p. 85.
q{
ii^rt,
" *
p. 596.
p. 62.
6 ^
Cf. Farrar,
Notes on Orth., p. 144. Gk. Synt., p. 33.

d. griech. Pap., p.
Simcox, Lang, of the N. T.,
Mayscr, Gr.
303
f.
288
NEW TESTAMENT
late inscriptions ^ for the first
modern MSS. read

Gal. 5
:
Greek the same thing

d^' eavTov against
:
and second person singular. In the is true.^ But in the N. T. only late
aeavrov
a-rro
(NBCL)
in Jo. 18
34.
In
14
and Ro. 13 9 only Syrian uncials have

is
eavrov for
aeavTOP.^
in classical Attic.
This use of eavrojv for all three persons Indeed the personal pronoun
{8oKu} ixoL, for
fairly
common
itself
was someIt is
times so used
(d)
instance).^
{icT-qriKal avToow/xiat).
Possessive Pronouns
difficult
some-
what
in
the discussion of the pronouns to keep off
syntactical ground,
adjectives.
and this is especially true of the possessive For the etymology of these adjectives from the corresponding personal pronouns one may consult the comparative grammars.^ But it is the rarity of these adjectives in the N. T. that one notices at once. The third person possessives {6s, 1,6$ is found in only two of (T(j)Tepos) have entirely disappeared. Paul's letters: 1 Cor. and Phil., and these only three times. I,ds is found about twenty-six times and viikrepos eleven (two doubtful, 'T/xerepos appears in Paul only in Lu. 16:12; 1 Cor. 16:17).
1
and 2
:
Cor., Gal., Ro.

12,
'HêT-epos
appears only nine times counting

:
where W. H. have viikrepov in the margin, and Ac. 24 6 which W. H. reject. It is only e^tos that makes any show at all in the N. T., occurring some seventy-five times, about half of them (41) in the Gospel of John. Thumb and Moulton^ have made a good deal of the fact that in Pontus and Cappadocia the use of
Lu. 16
*^
t/x6s,
common, while elsewhere the genitive perThe point is that the Gospel of John thus shows Asiatic origin, while Revelation is by another writer. But one can easily go astray in such an argument. The Gospel of Luke has e^tos three times, but Acts not at all. The large
(Tos,
etc., is still
sonal pronoun prevails.^
amount
of
dialogue
in
the Gospel of John perhaps explains
the frequency of the pronoun there. The possessive e/x6s is naturally in the mouth of Jesus (or of John his reporter) more
than
CTos,
for Jesus
is
is
speaking so
much about
himself.
in
The
possessive
1
more formal and more emphatic
the solemn
^ Thumb, Handb., p. 88. Schweizer, Gr. d. perg. Insclir., p. 161. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 167. These last two quote Lev. 19 18. Cf. Simcox, ib.; Dyroff, Gesch. des Pron. Reflex., 2. Abt., pp. 23 ff. (Hefte 9
3
:
und 10
* 6
6
in
Schanz's Beitr.
etc.).
Cf. Simcox, Lang, of the

Giles,
N.
T., p. 63; Blass, Gr. of
Man.,
p. 301; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 250; Hirt,
N. T. Gk., p. 167. Handb. etc., p. 307.

tell
Theol. Literaturzeit., 1893, p. 421. Prol., p. 40 f. He admits that the other possessives do not
^
the
same
Btory.
Cf.
Thumb, Handb.,
p. 89.
THE DECLENSIONS
words of Jesus
in this Gospel.^
(kAISEIs)
is
289
This
probably the explanation
coupled with the fact that John was doubtless in Asia also
that direction
later, as will
when
come
he wrote the Gospel and was open to whatever influence in
was
there.
The
discussion of details will
the
common
use of the genitive of the personal pro'
nouns rather than the possessive adjective, not to mention the The reflexive pronoun itself is really possessive when in article.
the genitive case.
fldLos in this
But
this as well as the
common
idiom
6 tSios
need only be mentioned here.
The Boeotian
inscriptions
show
sense as early as 150 b.c. (Claflin, Syntax of Boeotian Inscriptions, p. 42). The line of distinction between the pronouns
is
thus not always distinct, as

:
when
eavrwv {avTOiv)
is
used in the
reciprocal sense (Lu. 23
12),
a usage
known
to the ancients.
The
necessity in the
N. T.
of using the genitive of personal pro-
nouns
in the third person after the disappearance of 6s is like
the Latin, which used ejus, suus being reflexive.

Sijntax, p. 34) recalls
Farrar (Greek
his being origi-
the fact that
its is
modern,
nally neuter also.
Demonstrative Pronouns (SeiKTiKol avrcovu/jLLai). But must have a special limitation, for all pronouns were possibly originally deictic (marking an ol^ject by its position). The anaphoric (avacfiopLKai) pronouns develop out of the deictic by usage. They refer to or repeat. The true relative is a further
(e)
deictic
development of the anaphoric, which includes demonstrative in the narrower sense. In a strict historical method one should begin the discussion of pronouns with the demonstratives in the
larger sense
and show how the others developed.^
But here we
must
treat the demonstrative
pronouns in the narrower sense
as distinct from the original deictic or the later relative.
The
demonstrative thus applies both to position and relation. The declension of the demonstratives is more akin to that of substan-
than any of the other pronouns.^ "05t'' occurs only ten times N. T., and eight of these in the form raSe, seven of which come in the formula in Rev. rade Xeyet (as Rev. 2 1, etc.). The
tives
in the
:
others are rdSe (Ac. 21
11), rfide (Lu.
10
39), rrivSe (Jas.
13).^
Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 54.
Dr. Abbott (Joh. Gr.,

ujueTs
p. 295) thinks
that John's love of contrast leads

2 *
him
to use
as often as all the Synoptists.
So Iliem. and Goelzcr in their PhonC't., pp. 31G fF. Gildersleeve (Am. Jour, of Phil., liK)7, p. 'I'AFi) con.siders
first
lb.
65
the pron. of
the
6
person, ovto^ of the second, eKetvos of the third.

f.
Cf. Bla.ss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 35

f.
For the etymology of the dem. pron.
see Brug., Cik. Gr., p. 242
290

inscriptions
NEW TESTAMENT
The
but
rarity of 65e in the later

chiefly
and the papyri agree with the N. T. in the great kolvt].^ But in the LXX it is commoner, here also rdSe Xeja (Thackeray, Gr., p. 191). There
of 6s as a demonstrative, as Ro. 14
5e,
:
are also
many examples
cf. 6,
17,
Mt. 27 4. This latter demonstrative construction is very common. Autos is beginning to have a semi-demonstrative sense (common in modern Greek) in the N. T., as in Lu. 13:1, kp aura) tQ KaipCo. There is little to say on the non-syntactical side about kttvos and oCros save that both are very common in the N. T., oSros extremely so, perhaps four times as often as keTws which is relatively more frequent in John.^
also
and
to with
as
ol 8e
in
Blass^ points out the fact that ovToa-i does not appear in the
N. T. (nor in the LXX), though the adverb vw-l is fairly common in Paul and twice each in Acts and Hebrews. Ovxl is much more frequent especially in Luke and Paul. Smith ^ compares k-KeXvos (Kelvos in Homer) to Oscan e-tanto. Modern Greek uses both forms and also e-roOros and tovtos in the nominative.^ Of the correlative demonstratives of quality roTos is not found in the N. T. and roLoaSe only once (2 Pet. 1 17). Totouros (neuter TOLOVTO and -ov) occurs less than sixty times, chiefly in the Gospels and Paul's earlier Epistles (Gal. 5 21). We find neither rocros nor Toaoade and roaovTos (the only correlative demonstrative of quantity) is less frequent than tolovtos (cf. Lu. 7:9). The neuter is also in -op and -0. Of the correlatives of age t7}\lkovtos alone is found four times (cf. Jas. 3:4). See also ch. XV, vi. Homer (/) Relative Pronouns (avaôpiKal avrcow/XLai). shows the transition of the demonstrative to the relative, using five forms (6, 6 re, 6s, 6s re, 6s rts). Attic dropped 6 and 6 re as well as 6s re. This use of re with 6 and 6s may be compared with the common use of the Latin qui = et is. So the Hebrew mt (' this') is sometimes relative. Cf. German der and English that.^ Relatives in the narrower sense grew naturally out of the anaphoric use of the demonstrative. The weakening of 6 to the article and
:
:
the introduction of the longer demonstratives

left 6s
(65e, ouros, tKeiPos)
more and more
for the true relative use.
'0
and
6s
have a
1 See Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 145; Dieterich, Unters., p. 197; Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 308. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 171. lb., p. 35; Thackeray, p. 191.
< 5
The
Cf.
Ionic Dial., p. 448.
Thumb, Handb.
Monro, Horn.
d. neugr. Volkspr., p. 64.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 161.
6
Cf.
Gr., pp. 185
ff.;
THE DECLENSIONS
different etymology.
(kaISEIS)
yds.
291
There are thus
Relative
6s
= Sanskrit
only two pure relatives that survive in the N. T., 6s and bans, for oairep and oadrjiroTe are not found save that the Western and
Syrian classes read ovirep in Mk. 15 6. 'OadrjiroTe in Jo. 5 4 disappears with the rejection of that verse. Already the papyri^ and the inscriptions^ show the rare occurrence of octtls, confined as
: :
a rule to the nominative and gradually disappearing in the modern Greek before 6 owolos and even tov.^ Compare the vulgar
"whar"
OS
in
"the
man whar
rts
'
said that."
'
"0<ttls is, of course,

'
merely
'
any one or again of somebody in particular. Both of these senses occur in the N.T. usage. The N. T. follows the papyri and inscriptions in using only the
plus the indefinite
in the sense of
nominative of
oarts
save the neuter accusative

ecos
6 tl
(Lu. 10
:
35),
and the genitive
in set phrases like
otov (Jo. 9
18).
is
It is
used in both the singular and the plural, however, but

wise nearly indeclinable.
OS
other-
"Os ye (Ro. 8
32)
is,
of course, simply
plus the intensive particle ye.

in the
"Os itself
raises
is
many
times more
common
N. T. than
OIos,
oo-ns
and
no questions save
many
syntactical ones.
quality, quantity
ottoTos,
oaos,
-qXlKos
are also relatives of
the N. T., ten of

"Ottoios
and age. OIos is found only fourteen times in them in Paul's writings (cf. 2 Cor. 10 11). can count up only five examples, four in Paul if we credit
:
to
him Ac. 26
it is
29.
This
is
little
strange
when one
recalls
how
common
are
in the
modern Greek. But the

kolvt].
correlatives generally
weak
in the vernacular'*
'Oiroaos is
:
not in the N. T.
nor modern Greek, but

rjXlKos, it
oo-os (1
Cor. 7
39) holds its
own.
As
to
drops to four instances, two of them in the same sentence

Tis
(ri) is
(Jas.
(g)
3:5).
Interrogative Pronouns.
:
fairly
common
in
the N. T. both in direct (Mt. 21
31)
and
tL
indirect questions (Mt.
20 22)
:
is KLs,^ kL.
in the Thessalian Greek Gothic hwa, English loho, German wer. In Latin and English the relative is formed from the same root, but not so in the Greek. In modern Greek, however, Tts has vanished before ttoTos (cf. oo-rts before 6 ttoTos),*' accented xotos, though Tt (indeclinable) survives strangely enough in the sense of "what sort."^ In the N. T. the qualitative corlike
the papyri usage.
Tts,
So Sanskrit
kds, Latin quis,
'
Mayser, Gr.

f.
Nachm., M:ign.
Inschr., p. 145.
*
"
Mayser, Gr.
K.-Bl.,
I,
d. grioch. Pap., p.
Thumb, Handb., p. 93. 311; Nachm., Magn. Inschr.,

Cf.
gr. Dial.,
^
p. 145.
p. 013;
Hoffmann, Die
p. 94.
Bd.
II, p.
558.
Thumb, Handb.,
lb.
292
NEW TESTAMENT
(cf.
relative xoios is used fairly often as a direct interrogative
Mk.
11:28) and sometimes as an indirect interrogative (Mt. 24:42). XIoraTTos is used a few times in direct (Mt. 8 27) and indirect Uoaos is still used as a direct interrogative also (Lu. 7:39).
:
(Mt. 12
12) in quantitative questions
and a few times
in indi-
rect questions
(Mk, 15:4).
:
IlrjXt/cos
occurs only twice (one of
these doubtful, Gal. 6
11,
W. H.
tiXIkols
margin) and both times

of duality
in indirect question (Heb. 7:4).
The disappearance
has taken Torepos entirely away, though irorepov occurs once as an adverb in an indirect question (Jo. 7: 17). In the we find
LXX
only once in Job (Thackeray, Gr., p. 192). does not use TrrjXlKos, though Toaos survives.
-wbrepov
(h)
Modern Greek
Indefinite Pronouns.
tIs differs
Like the Latin ali-qids (interrog-
ative quis) the Greek

accent.
it is
It is
very
to
common
els
in
from the interrogative rts only in the N. T. (as Lu. 1:5), but already
(Mk. 8: 19), a usage not unknown to the older Greek.^ In the N. T. we have els rts together (Mk. 14: 47; Lu. 7: 19). Modern Greek has supplanted ris, ri by Kaveis {kHu, The negative forms juiyrts els) and Kaêts (cf. Kad' eh in N. T.).^ and ovTLs do not appear in the N. T. save that fxrjTL occurs in questions (Mt. 12 23) and firj rts with IVa. But ixTjdeis and ovdels The old delua meets us only once (Mt. 26 18), are very common. but hangs on in the modern Greek.^ Oi; ttSs and fxi] was belong
giving
: :
way
wholly to Syntax. (i) Distributive
and Reciprocal Pronouns. These pronouns have an insecure place in the N. T. with the exception of 'E/cdrepos like irbrepos has vandXXos, aX\r]\o:v, eKaaros and erepos.
It is rare in the
ajjLcjjoTepoL
ished, as impljdng duality.

Gr., p. 192).
LXX
(Thackeray,
on in some fourteen instances (cf. Mt. 9 17). 'AW-q'Kcov (composed of aXXos, aXXos) is naturally only in the oblique cases of the plural, but is fairly common (cf. Jo. 4 33). It has vanished in the modern Greek. "Eicacrros on the other hand appears only in the singular
"Am0co
is
gone, but
:
lingers
except in Ph. 2:4 (probably twice there). It too has disap"Erepos is beside d/x06repot the only peared in the modern Greek. and it dual pronoun, surviving goes down in the modern Greek
along with
1 2
dAtôrepot.'*
It is less
common
(97 times) in the
N. T.
Dieterich, Unters., p. 202; Hatz., Einl., p. 207.
Thumb, Handb.,
Blass, Gr. of
p.
95
f.
jb.^ p. gg.
N. T. Gk., p. 179. The pap. (Mayser, Gr. d. gxiech. Pap., Once (Prov. p. 312) show a few examples of eKarepos, îrjSerepos, b-Korepos. 24 21) the LXX has uriOtTepos.
^
:
THE DECLENSIONS
(kaISEIS)
293
than aXXos (150), chiefly in Matthew, Luke, Paul, Heb., never in Revelation, Peter, and only once in Jo. (19: 37) and Mk. (16: 12)
and
this latter in disputed part.
It
is
usually in the singular
(73 times, plural 24).
The
distinction (not always observed in
the N. T.) between aXXos and erepos belongs to Syntax.

of
The use
eh Tov va as reciprocal (1 Th. 5:11) and of tavTihv (1 Cor. 6: 7) along with other uses of dXXos and erepos will receive treatment under Syntax.
V.
1.
ADVERBS ('EniPPHMATA)
Neglect of Adverbs.
glance at the average
grammar
will
show that the grammarians as a rule have not cared much for the adverb, though there are some honorable exceptions. Winer has
no discussion of the adverb save under Syntax. Still others have not understood the adverb. For instance, Green says that once in the N. T. "a preposition without change is employed as an
^
adverb,"
error
viz. uTrep eya; (2
Cor. 11:23).
That
is
a perfunctory
which assumes that the preposition is older than the adverb. It is of a piece with the idea that regards some adverbs Donaldson^ says that, with comas "improper" prepositions. pliments to Home Tooke, "the old grammarian was right, who
said that
when we know not what

safely
call
it
else to call
a part of speech,
we may
verb
it is not easy nor practicable always to distinguish sharply between the ad-
an adverb."
Certainly
and
preposition,
conjunction,
interjections
particles.^
But the
it.
great part played

it
and by the adverb
other
in
the
history of the
shall
Greek language makes

This
is
imperative that justice
be done to
itself.
essential for the clear understand-
ing of the prepositions,
the adverb
conjunctions and particles as well as Substantive and verb blend at many points
instance.
and
glide easily into each other in English, for
At-
tention has often been called to the use of
"but"
in English
as adverb, preposition, conjunction, substantive, adjective

pronoun.''
and
of the N. T., p. 138. Gk. Gr., p. 37. Dolbiiick, Vergl. Synt., I, pp. 535-G43, has the most complete treatment of the adv. ' Brug., Gk. Gr., p. 250. In the Sans, the line is still loss clearly drawn between the various indeclinable words (Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 403). * Giles, Man., p. 237 f. Cf. Schroedor, Ubor die form. Untersch. der Redet.,
1
Handb. to the Gr.
p.
35
f.;
Dclbriick, Grundr., Bd. Ill, p.
.5;5() f.
294
NEW TESTAMENT
The name suggests a mere 2. Formation of the Adverb. addendum to the verb, an added word (hke the adjective) that is not necessary. But in actual fact adverbs come out of the heart of the language, expressions fixed by frequent usage. (a) Fixed Cases. A large number^ of words retam the caseending in the adverb and often with the same function. Perhaps
the bulk of the adverbs are either the simple case used directly in an adverbial sense or the formation by analogy. It is just be-
cause adverbs are usually fLxed case-forms or remnants of obsolete case-forms that they deserve to be treated under the head of Declensions.
They have
to be approached from the standpoint of
the cases to understand their history.
Leaving analogy for the
moment let us see some examples of the cases that are so used. The cases most commonly used thus are the ablative, locative, instrumental and accusative.^ The dative and genitive are sel-
dom employed
sense,
as adverbs.
The vocative never occurs

:
in this
and the nominative

Kad'
:
phrase like
eh (Ro. 12
in the
5).
a eh in the addition to John's Gospel (Jo. 8 9), ro Kad' Cf. ava-txl^. Examples of the various cases as used
(so occasionally in Sanskrit) only in
N. T. will be given without attempting to be exhaustive. and the modern Greek illustrate the same general tendencies as to adverbs that we see in the earlier Greek. Here the N. T. is in close accord with the papyri as to adverbs in use.^ The most obvious illustration of the ac(1) The Accusative.
The
KOLvi]
cusative in adverbs is the neuter of adjectives in the positive, comparative and superlative (singular and plural). In the comis the rule, in the superlative the plural, but In the modern Greek accusative plural is more common even in the comparative (Thumb, Handh., p. 77). Take for the positive avpiov, eWv (s added later), 7711(5), iJ.eya, ixeaov, TrXtjaiov, to\v, raxv, (rrjiiepov, dXXd {iiWo.), TroXXd, /laKpav. The com-
parative the singular
variations occur.*
parative
may
is
be illustrated by varepov,
TcpCbTa)
êkriov,
by
TrpooTov
(and
and
rfhara.
Cf. also
Ta-xl(TTr]v.
and the superlative Sometimes
used with the adjective where the adverbial idea is \ol-k6v, to. iroWa, and note also rriv apxw (Jo. But the substantive alone has 8:25), substantive with article. abundant examples also, as 6.Kixi}v, apxw, 5wpeav, wepav, xapLV.
the article
encroaching, as to
1
Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 250
ff.
jjirt,
Handb.
etc.,
pp. 320
ff.
Mayser, Gr.
d. griech. Pap., pp.
456
ff.
4 Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 251; Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 322. In the Sans. the ace. also is the case most widely used adverbially (WTiitney, Sans. Gr., 408). Cf. Delbnick, Grundl., pp. 34 ff.
THE DECLENSIONS
SxfSoi' is
(kAISEIS)
-8op, -8a.
is
295
Cf. also o/iodvfia-
a specimen of the adverb in
bov, poL^ribbv.
The
(cf.
accusative in adver})s
specially characteristic
Attic, II, pp. 36
Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 459; Schmid, In the modern Greek the accusative for the adverbs is almost universal. Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 77. All adverbs in -cos are probably ablatives. (2) The Ablative. KaXws, for instance, is from an original koKccS. The 5 (Sanskrit t) is dropped and a final s is added. ^ Cf. old Latin meritod, facilumed.^ The outcjos, cos of the Greek correspond exactly with the old Sanskrit The ending in -cos comes by analogy to be exceedingly tad, ydd. common. Practically any adjective can by -cos make an adverb in the positive. Some, like dStaXetTrroos, belong to the later Greek Participles also may yield such adverbs as (êtôîei'cos (KOLvrj).^ (2 Cor. 9:6), 6tio\oyovixho:s (1 Tim. 3:16), 6vtus (Mk. 11 32).
of the
Koivrj
ff.).
:
Radermacher (A''. T. Gk., p. 54) cites apKovvTws, TeToXurjKOToos (Diod., XVI, 74. 6), etc. The bulk of the adverbs in -cos are from adjectives and pronouns. But the examples of -cos are rare in the modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 77). There are not many adverbs in this case (3) The Genitive. outside of those ending in -ov, like avrov, oirov, tov, 6/xoD and -tjs This use survives in modern Greek. Cf. the local use of (e^rjs).
the genitive in 'Eêo-ou (Ac. 19: 26).
vvKTos verges
The common use
of
rifxepas,
:
toward the adverb.*

is
Cf. also rod XoixoO (Gal. 6
17).
The
(4)
genitive
almost never used adverbially in Sanskrit.^
The
Locative.
This
is
a rare use in Sanskrit,^ but more

cKeT,
frequent in Greek.
irepvaL,
Instance
(but not
etc.,
kvkXw,
o'Uol,
irpwl.
So also
act,
etc.
Hirf
Brugmann)
likewise treats examples
like drjfxoaLa, ioia,
Tre^fj,
as locative.
Certainly
irol is
locative,
but
it
does not appear in the N. T.
Cf. also
rco ovti (article
and
participle) in adverbial sense (Ro. 7:23).
This case lends itself naturally to the (5) The Instrumental. adverb where the idea of manner (associative) is so common.* In the Sanskrit it is very common for adverbs to be in the instrumental.^ Such adverbs as a/xa (cf. ablative o/icos from same root), ekr],
Kpv(})7]{fi), '\a.dpa{a), p.a'Ka,
TravT7](ji)
-wavTaxviv)} "^^X^y etc., are
doubt-
^ Hirt, Ilandb. etc., Man., p. 240. p. 320. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 457 f., for further exx. Cf. the Lat. adv. (abl.) ram, quomodo etc., Bopp, Vergleich. Gr., 183. Cf also Delbriick, Grundl., pp. 48 ff. ^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 410. * lb. Brug., Griocli. Gr., p. 252. ^ Handb. etc., p. 321. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 252 (dat. ace. to Drug.). 8 Ilirt, Handb., p. 321. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 409. 1
Giles,
'
Cf
296
less instrumental. In some cases l is added to bring it in harmony with the locative-dative cases with which it blended.^ Brugmann^ also puts here such words as avw, kLtw, e^w, dj/cortpco, di^w-IIco is by al)laut from -Trr? (so Laconic Trrj-iroKa) rdrco, ou-ttco. As in the Sanskrit/ so in the Greek the dative (6) The Dative. Indeed Hirt* is not far wrong when is very rare in adverbs.
he says that
it
is
not easy to find any dative adverbs distinct
from the
(p. 260).
locative,
though he accepts
irapal, xo^Mot, kt\.
as dative
Brugmann^ thinks otherwise, and one is slow to dissent from the modern master of comparative grammar. He cites But Delbriick^ is TrdXat, xo-fJ-(^h Karat, irapai, kvkKco, awovofj, etc. against Brugmann here. Besides the dative in its proper sense is a little difficult to fit into an adverb. But we have given enough
to justify the treatment of adverbs under the declensions.'^
Other adverbs are formed by suffixes which case-endings that are no longer clear to us. Here only the main suffixes in use in the N. T. will be mentioned. For -ciKL-s take iroWaKLs and the numeral adverbs hke rerpd/cts, etc. For -axov note wavTaxov. For -8e take oUade. For -8ou take oijloFor ?7s we may note eâi<t)vr]s, e^rjs, k(j)e^rjs. dvixabbv (Ac. 18:12). numerous, like avwdtv, 'i^wdev, ohpavbdev, TratStoThose in -de{v) are in the papyri, but not m the N. T.^ dtv, etc. AvTodc is common The deictic l appears in vvvi and ovxi- An example of -is appears in ijloKls (cf. fxoyLs Text. Rec. in Lu. 9:39). For -tL note 'E(3paiFor /ca take r]vlKa. For v OTL, 'FiXK-qvLffTl, AvKaovLari, "Paj/xaiVrt. vvv, ttoKlv. For -re may mention have we o-re, To-re. we Then -s is added in the case of 8'ls, rpls and various other words like dxpts, 'E/cetcre is an instance of eWvs, fxexpi-s, ovtoos, TerpaKLs, x<^p'i-^) etc. Then -ros appears in eKtos, evros, Finalty -xa is seen in evere.
(6)
Suffixes.
may
be
relics of lost
wxa. The papyri furnish parallels for practically all these N. T. examples (and many more).^ "Aira^ seems to stand by itself. Some adverbs are due to the blend(c) Compound Adverbs.
1
Hirt,
Handb.,
p.
321
f.
f.
2
3
Griech. Gr., p. 252
Cf. Delbriick, Grundr., Ill, p. 581

p. 410.
*
f.
Handb., p. 321. * Griech. Gr., p. 252. Cf. also p. 229 f., where he acknowledges the other ^ Grundl., point of view as possible. p. 60 f. ^ In Lat. adv. are partly remnants of case-forms and partly built by analogy. Draeger, Hist. Synt., p. 109. For Gk. see also Lutz, Die Casus-Adv.
bei att.
*
9
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
Rednern
(1891).
Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 456. 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
ing of several words into
(kAISEIs)
297
one word, perhaps with modification
by analogy. The kolvt] is rather rich in these compound adverbs and Paul fairly revels in them. As samples take e/c7raXai
(2
Pet. 2:3),
(2
KarhavTi (2 Cor.
12:19), KaTevco-mov (Eph. 1:4),

(1
irapavTiKa
Cor. 4:17),
d7rpoo-a)7roXi7jU7rrcos
Pet. 1:17), Trapa-
XPWo- (Lu. 1:64), vwepavoj (Eph. 4: 10), virep'tKeiva (2 Cor. 10: 16), virepeKTrepLcraov (1 Th. 3:10), vwepXiav (2 Cor. 11:5), virepTrepiaaCis (Mk. 7:37), etc. The intense emotion in 2 Cor. explains the
piling-up
and doubhng
of
some
is
of these prepositional phrases.
Occasionally a verbal clause
blended into one word and an ad-cos. So (from vovv ex^) vowexl^'i (Mk. with analogy by verb made bins along with another adPoly and Aristotle by used 12:34), in Mark it is used without But Isocrates.^ in vovvtxovTiMs Uke verb Cor. 11:23) is made from 'TirepâXKSvTws (2 adverb. other any
the participle and
is
common
in Attic (Xen., Plato).

cltto
besides, adverbial phrases like

dev, ews Kctrco
(Mt. 27: 51), etc. Cf. IV, iv, (/), for discussion of the formation of chapter See 47. p. compound adverbs which are very common in the kolvt]. Paul uses the idiom frequently. For the use of adverbs in the kolvt],
see Mayser's careful
list
There are, (Mk. 15 40) oltt' avwCon. and Stock, Sel fr. LXX,
/xaKpodev
:
from the papyri, pp. 455 ff

p.
.,
and Nach-
adverbs are continually made in the later Greek, though many of the older ones survive He groups Cf. Thumb, Handb., pp. 78 ff. in the modern Greek.
manson, Magn. Inschr.,
138
f.
New
them under place, time, manner and quantity. A word is needed to accent the part played by (fl) Analogy.
analogy in the formation of adverbs, though it has already been The two examples mentioned above, povvex(^s and alluded to.
serve as good illustrations of the work done by the principle of analogy. The bulk of the -m adverbs are ablavirepj3a\\6uTO)s will
tives
(e)
made by
analogy.^
In general the adverb is like the adjective save that in the comparative the accusative singular is used, like rdxi-ov, and the accusative plural in the super-
The Comparison of Adverbs.
lative, like raxifrra.

:
But, per contra, note
irpC>Tov
and
KaTurepco
(Mt. 2 16), Trepia-o-orepcos (2 Cor. 1: 12), (TTTovdaLOTkpcos (Ph. 2:28), Cf. fur-pov). eaxdrcos (Mk. 5:23), Troppwrepw (Lu. 24:28.
AB
ther ch. XII,

3.
III.
The derivation of the adverb deserves the facts have already been hinted at. though a further word, Brief mention is all that is here called for by way of illustration.
Adverbial Stems.
1
Giles,
Man.,
p. 240.
lb.
298
(a)

Substantives.
NEW TESTAMENT
As N. T. examples of adverbs from subbe mentioned apxhv, Scjopeav, x^-pi-v. (h) Adjectives. It was and is always possible to make an adverb from any Greek adjective by the ablative ending -u>s. Cf. both Taxv (accusative) and raxews (ablative). Indeed the line bestantives
may
tween the adjective and adverb was never sharply drawn, as will be shown when we come to the study of the syntax of the adjective
(cf.
Enghsh
''looks bad," "feels bad," a different idea

:
from
In passing note hovaa (Ro. 8 20) and SevTepaXoL (Ac. 28 13) in strict accordance with the Greek idiom. The comparison of adverbs is another link between adverb and
:
the adverb, however).
In most cases, however, it is merely the use of the comparative and superlative forms of the adjective as an adverb. But in some cases the comparative and superlative adverb is made without any corresponding adjective, done by analogy merely. So fxaXXov, /idXio-ra, from ^tdXa, avcorepov from the adverb av(a. Cf. also kyyvTepop (Ro. 13 11) from 77115, KaroiTepco (Mt. 2 16) from kcltco, and woppccTepov (Lu. 24 28) from Toppoj. Comparative adjectives made from positive adverbs are, on the other hand, seen in e^cbrepos (Mt. 8 12), kaurepos (Heb. 6 19), Karoirepos (Eph. 4:9). Karcorepco, TreptaaoTepus (Heb. 2:1, often in Paul;
adjective.
: :
: : :
Gal. 1:14), o-xouSatorepcos (Ph. 2:28), ToXixrjpoTepcos (Ro. 15:15) rather than the forms in -repov are due to analogy of the ablative
-COS.
Adverbs made from
participles can be looked

is
upon
as
adjectival or verbal in origin, since the participle
both verb
and
(c)
adjective.
Numerals.
All that
is
necessary here
is
:
to
mention such
Trpwrcos
words as
Clem.,
(d)
irpC^Tov, bis, Itttclkls, etc.
In Ac. 11
26
we have
instead of xpcDrov.
Hom.
9,
Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 58) cites for -ws 4; 16, 20; Polyb. vi, 5. 10; Diod., etc.
Pronouns.
The pronominal adverbs

so
are very numerous,
As with the the correlative adverbs are lessening. Of the indefinite adverbs only tot, ttov (a few times), and xcos (only in el-Kws, /xr] xcos) appear.^ Forms like ol, 6tol, ttoI have vancorrelative pronouns,
like ourcos, oxravTcos, etc., avTov, Trore, Tore, w5e, etc.
ished before
ov,
oirov,
wov.
Cf.
English,^
also
'whither') are
you going?"
Cf.
the accusative
"where (rather than H (Mk.
10
18)
'why.'
(e)
Verbs.
Besides such words as vowexojs (verbal phrase) and

<f>ei,8oiJLhcjos,
participles like ovtws, bpiokoyovukvois,
virepâXKovTois
should note 'E^paiaTi (from

1
'EjSpatû), 'EWr]VL(7Tl
f.
one (from 'E\\r]d^cS)
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 59
Green, Handb. to N. T. Gk., p. 137.
THE DECLENSIONS
etc.
if
:
(kAISEIs)
299
In Jas. 4 13; 5:1 a7e is used with the phiral as an adverb, The modern view of it is not in reahty an interjection. the imperative forms Hke iiye (cf. vocative 0,76 from ayos) is that In the case of devpo we it is merely the root without suffix.^
indeed
actually have a plural Sedre. Moulton^ illustrates the close connection between inter jectional adverb and verb by the English "Murder!" which could be mere interjection or verbal injunction
according to circumstances. 4. Use of Adverbs. This

subject, but
it is
is still
another
way
of looking at the
a convenience rather than a
scientific principle.
Blass^ in his N. T.
(a)
Grammar follows this method solely. Adverbs of Manner. These are very numerous
indeed,
'E(Txarws ex^L (Mk. 5:23) is not like TTvev/mTLKCjs, airovdaMS, etc. The phrase really means that she has it like the English idiom. in the last stages. Cf. /Sapecos exovaa (Pap. Brit. M., 42). ES, so common in Attic, has nearly gone in the N. T. (only in Mk. 14 7; Mt. 25 21, 23; Ac. 15 29; Eph. 6 3 quot.). ESts occurs also in Lu. 19 17 (W. H. text, margin ev). KaXws is common. BeXrLov appears once (2 Tim. 1 18) and Kpdaaov often (1 Cor. 7: 38). The comparative adverb Snr'KoTepov (Mt. 23 15) is irregular in form
:
: : :
and late.^ Adverbs of Place. These answer the questions "where" (6) and "whence." "Whither" is no longer a distinct idea in N. T. Greek nor the kolvt] generally. Even in ancient Greek the distinction was not always maintained.^ Blass'' carefully illustrates how "here" and "hither" are both expressed by such words as kvdade (Ac. 16 28; Jo. 4 16), oddly enough never by evravda, though 33, Side (especially in the Gospels) is the common word (Lu. 9 41). But ket is very common in the sense of 'there' and 'thither' 'EKelae (here again chiefly in the Gospels) as in Mt. 2 15, 22. ('thither') is found only twice, and both times in Acts (21 3; 22 So ov in both senses (Lu. 4 16; 5), which has a literary element. 10 1) and oirov (very common in John's Gospel, 14 3 f.). The The indefinite interrogative ttou (Jo. 1:39; 3:8) follows suit. irov is too little used to count (Heb. 2 6) and once without local 'AXXaxoO occurs once (Mk. 1: idea, rather 'about' (Ro. 4 19).
(airXowTepov)
:
38),
four times only (Jo. 4

1
'^
but wavraxov several times (Lu. 9 6, 36, etc.), and once

: :
etc.).
'Onov
ofxoae
is
found
:
adds
(Ac. 20
Moulton,
lb., p.
Prol., p.
f.
171
17L But adv. from verbs arc "late and always

ff.
"
rare," Giles,
Man.,
5
p. 342.
Gr. of N. T. Gr., pp. 5S
lb.
'
lb.
lb.
300
18).
NEW TESTAMENT
-oO.
UavTaxviv) likewise is read once (Ac. 21:28), Syrian class In Ac. 24 3 TravTrjiri) is contrasted with iravraxov. Other adverbs of place in the N. T. are avco, pt6s, kros, ecroo, eôo, kLtw.
:
adverbs answer to the question "whence." They 'AWaxodev (Jo. 10 1) is found only once in the N. T. "kvwdev (Mk. 15 38) is more frequent, though never Karcodev. The only pronominal forms that appear in the N. T. are eKetdev (Rev. 22 2, rather common in Matthew), evdev (Mt. 17 20), euT.vdev (twice in Jo. 19 18, and in contrast with
of
A number
are usually words in -dev.
odev (Mt. 12:44), wodeu (Mt. 21:25). The last two are fairly frequent. Blass^ notes how "stereotyped and meaningless" the ending -dev has become in many examples, especially with enrpoadev (common in Matthew
eKeWep
Rev. 22:2), TavroOev (Mk. 1:45),
and Luke) and oirMdev (rare). See both in Rev. 4:6. In some cases by a little effort the real force of -Oev may be seen, but the old Greek soon allowed it to become dim in these words. In the case of laoidev and î^}êv Blass^ insists on the force of -dev only in
Mk.
7: 18, 21, 23; Lu. 11:7.
Cf. also KVK\6dev (Rev. 4:8).
The
be due either to the weakened sense of -dev or to a fuller expansion of its true idea. So air' avcodev twice (Mt. 27:51, so W. H. against ^VL Hvicdev, Mk. 15:38),
(ZTTo
addition of avb occasionally
may
jiaKpodev
(Mk. 5:6; 15:40,
etc.),
TatdLodev
Blass^ observes that both naKpoOev and
TvaLbibdev
are late words
(Mk. 9:21). and
that late writers are fond of using prepositions with -dev as Homer had oltt' oi'pavodev. But Luke used only oi'pavodev in Ac. 14 17. (c) Adverbs of Time. The list is not very great, and yet ap:
preciable.
'Aet (Ac.
largely supplanted
Greek.
:
'Hi'I/ca is
not in the Gospels at all and is 34) hke the kolvt] and modern read twice only (2 Cor. 3 15 f.). "ETretra (1 Cor.
7:51)
is
by
iraPTore (Jo. 6
about equally frequent. "Ore (Mt. 9:25) and orav (Mt. 9:15) are both used freely. 'OwdTe
:
12 28) and etra (Mk. 4
17) are
and Western
appears only in the Syrian class in Lu. 6 3 against the neutral ore (so W. H.). Uore (Mt. 17:17) and vrore (Lu. 22:32) are both far less common than ore and orav. But rore
:
and
5.
ttoXlv
amply atone
irpuiTov,
his,
for this scarcity.

ewTciKLs etc.)
All the numeral adalso.
verbs
(ciTra^,
belong here
Adverbs. Here again we are retracing ground and crossing our steps, but a brief word will be useful to show how from adverbs grew other parts of speech. The fact has been
of
Scope
stated before.
illustration.
1
What
is
here called for
is
some
of the proof
and
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 59.
lb.
Jb.
THE DECLENSIONS
(a)
(kAIZEIs)
301
Relation between Adverbs and Prepositions. When we come to study prepositions (ch. XIII) a fuller discussion of this matter will be given. Here the principle will be stated.
"The
older
preposition therefore
^
a case-usage."
is only an adverb specialized to That puts the matter in a nutshell. Many
define
of the
\j
grammars have the matter backwards.

is
The use
of prepo-
sitions with verbs scattered about at
not the original one. In Homer they are will. So with substantives. "Anastrophe is therefore no exception, but the original type"^ like tLvos eVera (Ac. 19: 32), To quote Giles^ again, "between adverbs and prepositions
no distinct
line
can be drawn."
As samples
irep-l
of cases in
prepositions take vap-bs (gen.), Tvap-al (dat.),

(instr.).
(loc), irap-a
It is unscientific to
used
tions
like prepositions
to govern
speak of adverbs which "may be nouns "^ and then term them
Preposiadverbs" or "spurious prepositions." do not "govern" cases, but more clearly define them. When adverbs do this, they are just as really prepositions as any These will be treated therefore in connection with the others. other prepositions. They are words like aiâ, avev, e^w, ottIo-co, etc. These are usually of pro(6) Adverbs and Conjunctions. nominal origin like o-re (ace. plus re), ov (gen.), ws (abl), dXXa
"preposition
(ace plural),
X-va (instr.), etc.

de,
Some
re,
conjunctions are so early
as to elude analysis, like
etc.^
history can be traced.
Blass {Gr.
of
But N.
in
most cases the

Gk.,
p.
T.
60)
re-
marks on the poverty

erty as early as
of the
N, T, Greek
XloXtreta
the
'ASr/ratcov
povof Aristotle, which is

in particles, a
apa, apaye, apa, apa
much
barer than the N. T,

the N. T, are cited
These conjunctions and other pardXXd,

apia,
ticles in
by Blass:
ho,
ye, axpt(s), yap, ye, be.

elre, kirav, eirei, eireLdr],
Si], br}irov,
bioirep, eav, eavirep, el, elirep, elra,
eireib-qTvep,
rj
eTreiirep
tjSt?,
(only as variation in Ro.
3: 30), eweLTa,
Jo, 12:43),
KalTOiiye),
eo)s,
t),
or
el nrju,
riuLKa (r/Trep
only variation in
Kaddct,
7/rot,
tra, Ka9a, Kaddirep, Kado,

p.'exp'-i'i)
KadoTi,
Kai, Kalirep,
nrj,
p.'ev,
iievovvye, /levTOL,
ov (p-expi-b]
variation for),
Uribe, fxrjTe, ixt^tl, val, vr],'6pws, bivore, ottojs,
orav, ore, otl, ov, ovx'h ov8e,

wplp, re, roi (in Kairoi,
ovKovp, ovv,
ome,
irep
with other words,

COS,
ttXtji^,
jikvTOi, etc.),
TOL-âp-ovv, Toivvv,
uaav,
ucrel, ooawep, oiairepei, (hare.

eireLb-qirep,
vi],
Several of these occur only once

^
{drjirov,
oiroTe,
ov-
Giles,
Man.,
p. 341.
I,
Cf. also Krebs,
Die Priipositionsadverbion
in
der
spiitcron hist. Griic, Tl.

2
1884.
Giles, ib.
ff.
On "Nouns
used as Prep." see Donaldson,

"
New
Crat., pp.
478
*
lb.
Green, Handb.,
etc., p. 138.
Giles,
Man.,
p. 343.
302
Kovf).
A GEEEK GRAMMAR OF THE
NEW TESTAMENT
list.
But Blass has not given a complete

this
Cf. also 8l6tl,
oQev, ov, OTTOL, TTore, etc.
Fifteen other Attic particles are absent
from
(c)
N. T. list. The matter will come up again in ch. XXI. Adverbs and Intensive Particles. Hep is an older form
Trep-t. Usually, however, as with ye, the origin is obscure. Others used in the N. T. are 8r], drjirov, n'ev, roi (with other particles). Seech.
of
XXL
(d)
Adverbs and Interjections.
Interjections
are
often
So with aye, Sevpo, Sevre, ea, ISe, Iboh, ova, oval, co. Interjections may be mere sounds, but they are chiefly words with real meaning, "kye and Ibe are both verbstems and Ibov is kin to Ue. The origin of the adverbs here used
as interjections
in the
merely adverbs used in exclamation.
LXX, N.
hesitates.
TaXatTTOjpta
not always clear. Oiât as in Mt. 1 21 (common T. and Epictetus) has the look of a dative, but one As a substantive 17 oval is probably due to B\l\l/i.s or
is
:
and XVI, v, (e), for use For the adverb like adjective, as ovTws xipo. (1 Tim. 5:5), see ch. XII, vi. In Lu. 12:49 tI may be an exclamatory adverb (accusative case), but that is not certain. Aevpo sometimes is almost a verb (Mk. 10 21). The relative adverb cos is used as an exclamation in cos copatot (Ro. 10: 15) and cos aveêpevvrjra (Ro. 11 33). The interrogative ttcos is like(Thayer).
Cf. chapters XII, v,
of article with adverb, as ro vvv.
17
: :
wise so employed, as
(Lu. 12: 50),
Gk., p. 258. of
TTCOS
ttcos
8vaKo\6p
ean (Mk. 10:

:
24),
ttcos
avvexofxai
e0iXei avrop (Jo. 11
36).
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
Thus we
see
many
sorts of adverbs
N. T. and many ways
making them.
CHAPTER
VIII
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (THMA)

I.
Difficulty of the Subject.
greater difficulty than that of the
The discussion noun for two

of
of the verb gives
reasons especially.
For one thing the declension
(/cXto-ts)
nouns
is
more
stable than
the conjugation (av^vyla) of the verb. This difficulty applies to both the forms and the syntax of the verb.^ There is besides special difficulty in
the Greek verb due to the ease and
number of new
verbal formations. ^
Sanskrit and Greek can be compared with

Giles ^ indeed calls the Latin
more ease than Greek and Latin.
verb-system "only a mutilated fragment" of the original parent stock, so that "a curious medley of forms" is the result, while in the syntax of the verb no two Indo-Germanic languages are further apart than Greek and Latin. Both noun and verb have
suffered greatly in the ravages of time in inflection.
It is in de-
clension (cases)
and conjugation (personal endings) that noun and verb mainly differ."* "These suffixes [used for the present tense],
however, are exactly parallel to the suffixes in the substantive, and in many instances can be identified with them."^
II.
Nature
of the Verb.
verhum is merely 'word,' any word, and so includes noun also. As a matter of fact that was probably true originally. In isolating languages only position and the context can determine a verb from a noun, and that is often true in English to-day. But in inflected tongues the case-endings
(a)
Verb and Noun.
In
itself
and the personal endings mark off noun and verb. But in simple truth we do not know which is actually older, noun or verb; both probably grew up together from the same or similar roots.^ Schoemann,'' however, is much more positive that "the first word
Giles,
Man.,
p.
403
f.
Hirt,
Handb.,
etc., 4.
p. 332.
Man.,
p. 404.
Steinthul, Zcitschr.
fiir
Volkerpsych.
^
etc., p.
351.
Cf. Schleicher, Unterd. phil. etc., 1865,
Bchcidung von
p. 509.
8
Nomen und Verbum

Giles,
Bd. der Abh.
Man.,
p. 424.
Schroeder, tlber die form. Untersch. d. Rcdet. im Griech.

ff.
'
und
Lat., 1874,
pp. 10
Die Lehre von den Redet. 303
etc.,
1864, p. 31.
304
NEW TESTAMENT
which man spoke was essentially much more a verb than a noun." But, whether the verb is the first word or not, it is undoubtedly the main one and often in the inflected tongue forms a sentence in itself, since the stem expresses the predicate and the ending the subject.^ It is worth noting also that by the verb-root and the pronominal root (personal endings) the verb unites the two ultimate parts of speech. The verl) and noun suffixes, as already In all said, are often identical (Giles, Manual, etc., p. 424). sentences the verb is the main part of speech (the word par excellence) save in the copula (eo-rt) where the predicate is completed by substantive or adjective or adverb (another link between verb and noun). "A noun is a word that designates and a verb a word that asserts" (Whitney, Aw. Jour, of Philol., xiii, p. 275). A man who does not see that " has no real bottom to his grammatical science." Scholars have found much diffi(b) Me.\ning of the Verb. culty in defining the verb as distinct from the noun. Indeed there is no inherent difference between nouns and verbs as to action, since both may express that.- The chief difference lies in the idea of affirmation. The verb affirms, a thing not done by a noun except by suggested predication. Verbs indicate affirmation by the
personal endings.
Affirmation includes negative assertions also.^
Farrar^ cites also the
German "abstract conception

,
of existence"
(Humboldt) and action (Tdtigkeitswort) but they do not fit the Curiously enough many ancient grammarians found time facts. to be the main idea in the verb. The close kinship between (c) Pure and Hybrid Verbs. nouns and verbs appears in the verbal nouns which partake of both. The infinitive is a verbal substantive, and the participle is a verbal adjective. There is also the verbal in -tos and -reos. Some of the properties of both verb and noun belong to each.
They
are thus hybrids.
Thej' are generally called non-finite
^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 1. In the Sans, it is to be noted that the noun had an earher and a more rapid development than the verb. The case-endings appear first in the Sans., the verb-conjugation in the Gk., though the personal Cf. Garnett, Philol. Ess. endings are more distinct in the Sans. 3 Cf. Gr. Gen. of Port Royal; Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 38. * lb. He considers the verb later than the noun because of its complex idea. Cf. Schramm, tjber die Bedeutung der Formen des Verbums (1884); Curtius, Die Bildung der Tempora und Modi im Griech. und Lat. (1846); Junius, Evolution of the Greek Verb from Primary Elements (1843) Lautensach, Verbalflexion der att. Inschr. (1887); Hogue, Irregular Verbs of Attic
'^
Prose (1889).
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB

verbs, because they
("PIIMa)
305
do not make affirmation. They have no perfall short of being mere verbs, but they are more than the noun. The pure verb has personal endings and is thus finite (limited). The two must be kept distinct in mind, though they run together sometimes in treatment. The finite
sonal endings.
They
verb has person and number expressed in the personal ending.^ The verhum finitum has modes while the verbum infinitum (infinitive and participle) has no modes. III. The Building of the Verb. This is not the place for a full
phenomena concerning verb-structure. The' essential facts as to paradigms must be assumed. But attention can be called to the fact that the Greek verb is built up by means of suffixes and affixes around the verb-root. So it was originally, and a number of such examples survive. Afterwards analogy, of course, played the main part. The oldest verbs are those which
presentation of the
have the simple root without a thematic vowel like 0rj-/xt or e-pr]-v. This root is the ground floor, so to speak, of the Greek verb. On this root the aorist and present-tense systems were built by merely adding the personal endings. This was the simplest form of the verb. There is no essential difference in form between e-îj-j^ and We call one imperfect indicative and the other second 'i-arrj-v.
aorist indicative,
but they are originally the same form.^ The term second aorist is itself a misnomer, for it is older than the so-called first aorist -<ra or -a. The thematic stem (vowel added to root) is seen in verbs like -Xt7r-o/e. On this model the rest of the verb is built. So all Greek root-verbs are either nonthematic or thematic. The denominative verbs like tl/jlcl-o) are On roots or stems then all the verbs (simple or all thematic. compound) are built. The modes, the voices, the tenses all con-
The personal endings have to carry a heavy burden. They express not only person and number, but also voice. There are mode-signs and tense-suffixes, but no separate voice suffixes apart from the personal endings. The personal pronouns thus used with the verb-root
tribute their special part to the whole.
antedate the
mode and
more
tense suffixes.
clearly
The
Sanskrit preserves
than the Greek, though the Greek has a more fully developed system of modes and tenses than the later classical Sanskrit.^ It seems certain that these prothe person-endings
*
Cf. Bru^., r.niiulr., Bil. II, pp. 2, 837.
On
differciu'c
bctwocn
f. ff.
finite
and
non-finite vcrh.s wee Curtius, Diis

2
^
Vcrbinn
IT.
d. f^riecli. Spr., p. 1
Hirt, Ilundb., p.
3(j:i f.
Cf. also Giles,
Man., pp. 425
Donaldson,
New
Crat., pp. 570
306
NEW TESTAMENT
nominal suffixes, like -jut, -ai, -n, are not in the nominative, but an oblique case^ connected with the stem: ne, o-e, tl (cf. demonstrative to). But the subject of personal endings is a very extensive and obscure one, for treatment of which see the comparative grammars.^ There is a constant tendency to syncretism in Homer has fewer than the the use of these personal endings. dual is gone in the N. T. The Plato. more than but Sanskrit, The nominative progradually. drop away endings other and modern English. hke and more, more expressed be to has noun
The Survival of -ijll Verbs. Before we take up modes, voices, Cross Division. tenses, we are confronted with a double method of inflection that cuts across the modes, voices and tenses. One is called the -fxi
IV.
(a)
inflection
to the stem.
from the immediate attachment of the personal endings 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 the present-tense systems (and a few second perfects), and even so the -Mt conjugation is confined to four very common verbs {tr]fXL, in the 'i(TTr]iJ.L, di8o:fxi, ridrj/jLi.), except that a number have it either
present system, like
like e-^r}-v.^
delK-vv-nL
(with
w inserted here),
or the aorist,
The
dialects differed
(cf.
and thematic verbs
much in the use of non-thematic Buck, "The Interrelations of the Greek
Dialects," Classical Philology, July, 1907, p. 724). This is now a commonplace in Greek (6) The Oldest Verbs.
grammar.
It is
probable that originally
all
verbs were -mi verbs.
This inflection is preserved in optative forms like Xuot/it, and in Homer the subjunctive* WeKufxi, Uc^fXL, etc. The simplest roots with the most elementary ideas have the -fxi, form.^ Hence the conclusion is obvious that the -^t conjugation that survives in some verbs in the second aorist and present systems (one or both) is the original. It was in the beginning \ey-o-ixL with the-
matic as well as
(c)
with non-thematic verbs.^ In Latin the -/jll ending is seen only in inquam and sum, though Latin has many athematic stems. In English we see it in am. Even in Homer the -/xi
(jbij-jut
Gradual Disappearance.
Donaldson,
New
Crat., pp.
570
f.
ff.
2
3
Cf. Hirt, Handb., pp. 355
ff.;
Giles,
Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., Man., pp. 413 ff.
p. 39.
Monro, Horn. Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 51.
Gr., p. 2.

ed., 1876, p. 54;
Cf. Clyde,
ff.
Gk. Synt., 5th
Riem.
and Goelzer, Phonct., pp. 347
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMa)

forms are vanishing before the
vanishing of the
-jui
307
-co
conjugation.
Jannaris (Hist.
Gk. Gr., p. 234) has an excellent brief sketch of
Greek.
papyri
The
LXX
the gradual forms which flourished chiefly in pre-Attic MSS. show the same tendency towards the
disappearance of
-/jll
forms
so
noticeable
of the
in
the N.
T., the
and other representatives

the transition to -co verbs
kolvt].
See numerous
In advanced than in the the LXX N. T. (Thackeray, Gr., p. 244) and the middle -/il forms held on In the koiptj this process kept on till in modern Greek longest. vernacular et/iat is the only remnant left. In the Attic SeUvvfii, for instance, is side by side with SeiKvvw. In the N. T. we find
parallel illustrations
is less
in Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 104-110.
such forms as
Cor. 3
(d)
:
5t5co
(Rev. 3:9),
icrrco
(Ro. 3:31,
EKL),
avvLaroo (2
1,
BD).
-ît Verbs. The -/xt verbs in the N. T. as in the papyri are badly broken, but still in use. We take first the 1. The Second Aorists (active and middle). so-called second aorists (athematic) because they come first save where the present is practically identical. In some verbs only the second aorist is athematic, the stem of the verb having dropped the -jut inflection. A new view^ makes the second aorist some-
N. T. Usage as to
times
"a reduced
root," but this does not
stock the old aorist was not the mere root.

as elsewhere.
show that in the parent Analogy worked here
/SctXXco (c-jSXtj-to
itive
Kaegi^ properly calls the old aorists of verbs like instead of the thematic and later e-jSaX-e-ro) "primIn the early Epic the root-aorists and strong aorists."
thematic aorists outnumber the o- or weak aorists by three to one.^ The important N. T. -/it verbs will now be considered.
BaCvo).
ava-,
CLTTO-,
Only
6ta-,
in
e/c-,
composition in N. T. (ava-,
ejLt-,
irpoa-ava-,
aw-
Kara-, nera-, irapa-, irpo-, avjx-).
In the
LXX
it is
rare in simplex.
prepositions.^
The papyri use it freely with nine Note the common forms like ave^r] (Mt. 5:1). The
"contract" forms are in the imperative as in the Attic poets Mayser^ gives no examples from the papyri, nor (elaâ, Karaâ).^
does the
LXX have
.''
any
(LXX
:
only
ava^rjOL, Kara^-ndL, -^-nre, -/Sijrco,

:
-^r}TW(Tav)
So
avafia
(Syrian class in
*
Mk.
(Rev. 4:1), dm/Sare (Rev. 11 12), Karaâ. Cf. 15 30), KaraiSdrco (Mt. 24 17; 27 42.
: :
Cf.
2
=>
King and Cookson, Prin. Gk. Gr., 1893, p. 245.
of
Sound and
Inflexion, ISSS, pp.
225
ff.
Thompson, Horn.
Maysor, Gr.
W.-Sch., p. 115.
Gr., 1890, p. 127.
Hlasa, Gr. of
d. sriech. Pap., p. 389.
Gr.
tl.
gricch. Pap., p.
N. T. Gk., p. 50. 3C4 f.
'
Cf. Veitch,
Gk. Verb,
p. 110.
308
also
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK Mk.

(Jo.
NEW TESTAMENT
(Mt. 17
: :
13
15; 15
32; Lu. 17
31), ^xeTa(3a
20).
On
(jLera-
the other hand note the usual Kara^-qdc (Mt. 27

/3rj0t
40, etc.),
7:3),
irpoaavaQrjdL (Lu. 14
10).
The forms
in -arw, -are,
-cLTooaav are like
the Doric.
kolvti jlv. form is very Gospel and the First Epistle. It is used in composition with dm-, 5ta-, ewt,-, Kara-, Trpo-, the papyri adding still other compounds.^ The N. T. shows the usual second aorist forms like eyvcov (Lu. 16 4). What calls for remark is the second aorist subjunctive yvol instead of yvQ. W. F. Moulton's view^ on this
rivwcrKo).
This verb in the Ionic and
common in John's
point
is
confirmed by the papyri^ parallel in

Nestle.
8oX.
by W. H. and
make
yvol like
d7ro5ot and accepted Analogy seems to have worked here to But Winer-Schmiedel (p. 115) cite yvol from
Hermas, Mand. IV,

tion of -00) verbs
1,
5 N.
It is in
accordance with the contrac71^01, do2, etc., brj
when wc
71^01
:
find forms like
oi
:
in-
stead of
see also
(ert-).
bri
= Q. For
in Jo. 7
see
:
Mk. 5:43; 9:30;

in each passage.
:
Lu. 19: 15.

:
But
71^05
51; 11
But the MSS. vary

This very
airo-,
57 (D has 7^1); 14 31; Ac. 22 24 In the the
LXX
regular yvQi occurs save in Judith 14

Ai8(i>|JLL.
5,
is
where
has kinyvot.
common
,
verb
frequently
irapa,
compounded
as in the
{ava, avT,
5ta
eK,
kwi,
fxera,
Trpo-)
papyri.^
The
old indicative active appears only in TrapkSoaav in

:
the literary preface to Luke's Gospel

aorist
2).^ Elsewhere the first (1 forms in -Ka (like rjKa, Wr]Ka) sweep the field for both singuThese k forms for the plural appear in the Attic lar and plural. inscriptions in the fourth century b.c.^ and rapidly grow. In the papyri Mayser'' finds only the k aorists. The other modes go regularly 56s, 8oj, etc. The indicative middle occasionally, as the imperfect, has e for o of the root. This is possibly due to
These forms are aTedero (Heb. 12 16), k^kdero (Mk. 12 1; Mt. 21 33; Lu. 20 9). The usual form aireSoaOe, etc., appears in Ac. 5 8; The subjunctive active third singular shows great varia7 9.
proportional analogy {e^kSeTo
:
:
eê86i.i.r]v
eKvero
kXvo/xrjp)
:
.^
tion between
dol,
5c3
(cf.
yvol
above), and
durj
(especially in
Paul's Epistles).^
The
LXX
MSS.
occasionally give -80I and
2 w.-M., p. 360 note. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 391. Moulton, Prol., p. 55. Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 137, 325, for oTTcos So2. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, pp. 37, 436. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 392, " Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 188 f. B ^ Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 367 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 49. 8 So W.-H., Notes on Orth., p. 167 f. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 121. For pap. exx. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 49. see Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37. 1
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ('PHMa)
309
even -6fj by assimilation (Thackeray, Gr., p. 255 f.). For papyri examples see references under 'ylvcjcko:. Mark four times (all the examples) has wapaBol according to the best MSS. (4 29; 8 37; 14 10 f.) and John one out of three (13 2). Tisch. (not W. H.) reads dToSoT in 1 Th. 5 15, but all MSS. have d7ro5c3 in Mt 18 30. W. H. accept 5c3 in Jo. 15 16; Eph. 3 16; 1 Th. 5
: :
15
25,
(dTTo-).
Most MSS. read

Scot?
:
8oon
in
in
both of which places

(Jer.
W.
Eph. H, put
17 and 2 Tun. 2
(opt. for
5oIr?)
dcorj
in
the text and
in the margin.
The
opt.
8ccr;
appears in the
Sel.
dolrj
LXX
LXX,
8l8o:iJLL
2) in
the text of Swete.
Con. and Stock,
from
three
p. 45, give
dco-q
twenty-nine times in
give an interesting
in the
LXX
list
is
and
times as variant.
They
of other forms of
and
its
compounds
LXX.
Hort^
doubtful about
such a subjunctive in ddori except in the epic poets. Blass^ is willing to take dcorj, and Moulton^ cites Boeotian and Delphian inscriptions which preserve this Homeric form. He adds that the
subjunctive seems 2 Tim. 2
:
"a
syntactical necessity" in Eph. 1

8cc7]
:
17
is
and
25.
The
opt.
8o'lt]
(cf.
subjunctive
1
:
86ri
= 8ui)
with-
out variant in 2 Th. 3 the idea of a possible

(Jo. 17
:
16;
2 Tim.
aorist
:
16,
18."
eScoo-a
Blass^ scouts
first
active
2 N'ÂC),
8ooawiJLv
and
et,
and
co
so often blend in
(Mk. 6 37, sound
from tua 8uari ND), on the ground that

in the
kolvt].
rj
future subjunctive will be discussed later (ch.

"Itijii.
d0tT7/xt
The XIX).
so-called
Not
quite
in simplex in
N. T.
(see p.
314 for
details),
but
is
common
(especially in the Gospels),
and
awlrjiJLL
less
so.
wapiritxL.
Besides a few examples occur also of aviriiJLL, Kadlrjiii, The papyri^ use the various prepositions freely in comtrjiJiL.
position with
The common
:
/xi
second
aorists,
hke
acfies
(Mt.
15),
d(/)fj
(Mk. 12
19), apevres (Ac. 27:40), are found.

is
In the
indicative active, however, the form in -Ka
used alone in both

:
singular
27), d0i7KaTe (Mt. 23 and plural, as a(i>r]Kajxv all the compounds of is true of This 23), acjifJKav (Mk. 11 :6). Gr., The (Thackeray, in LXX as p. 252). in the N. T. I'rjMt with the second person sinpar is on a 2 form d0r)/cs (Rev. 4) by in KeKoirlaKes accepted H. indicative as W. active gular perfect
(Mt. 19
(Rev. 2
is
:3), ireTruKes
aorist
in
Mk.
10
(Rev. 2:5), etXTjês (Rev. 11 17).^ 'A<f)riKaneu 28 as well as in its parallel Mt. 19 27
: : :
*
8 ^
Notes on Orth., p. 168. Cf. also W.-Sch., j). 121. Prol., p. 55. Cf. Dittcnb., Syll., 462. 17, etc. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 48 f. ^ Qr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 49, 212. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 168. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 398. Cf. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 166. The evidence is "nowhere free from
=>
310
(cf.

Lu. 18
fect
(cf.
Mt. 13 51. The perin -eT/ca does not, however, occur in the N. T. nor in the LXX Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 51), though the papyri have it
:
28).
So
also as to avvrjKaTe in
(Mayser, Gr.
"lo-T-nfii.
d. griech.
Pap., p. 331).
is
This verb
used freely by
itself,
especially in the
Gospels, and occurs in twenty prepositional combinations according to Thayer {av-, kw-av-, k^-av-, avd-, d0-, 5t-, kv-, e^, ctt-,
I0-, Kar-icf)-, avv-ecf)-, Kad-, avn-Kad-, aTO-Kad~, fxed-, Tap-, irepL-, irpo-, <xvv-), going quite beyond the papyri in richness of expression.^ The
second aorist active indicative

p. 50).
eaTrj (cnreaTr], etc.) is

.
common and
N.
:
is
intransitive as in Attic, just like karadr] (cf Blass, Gr. of
T. Gk.,
other forms are regular (o-rco, ar^dL, etc.) save that avaara (like avaâ) is read in a few places (Ac. 9 11; 12 7; Eph. 5 14), but ffTijOi, ava<TTr]dL (Ac. 9 6, 34), eiriaT-qdL, (TTijre, avTlarrjTe, Winer ^ cites axoaTa, irapaara also from late airdaT-qre, aroaTrjToo.^
The
writers
and a few
earlier
authors for avaara.
The
LXX
shows a
few examples
'OvivTiiJLi.
also.^
This classic word (not given in the papyri, according is found only once in the N. T., the secGramniatik) Mayser's to (Phil. 20). 6vaip.y}v middle opt. aorist ond
Tl9t||xl.
The compounds
k-,
of rld-qpi in the
N. T.
{ava-, irpocr-ava-,
airo-, hia-, avTi-ho.-,
eTrt-,
cvv-ein-, Kara-, avv-KaTa-, pera-, iraviro-)
pa-, irepL-, irpo-, irpoa-,
aw-,
vie with those of
'larrjpL
and
equal the papyri use.^ pears (so
The second
aorist active in -/ca alone ap-
in the indicative singular and plural as Wr^Kav subjunctive in -6cb (Mt. 22 44), imperative the but 29), The middle has the regular second aorist Tpoades (Lu. 17:5).
LXX)
(Mk. 6
edero (Ac.
$T||XL.
19
If
21 and often).
one is surprised to see this verb put under the list of second aorists, he can turn to Blass,^ who says that it is "at once
doubt," some say
the
considers -es a
MSS. read
8
:
?5co/ces
(Jo. 17
7
:
f.)
and
(i(î^re
(Mt. 23
23),
not to
a)paK6s (Jo.
57), k\v\vee^ (Ac. 21
22,
also).
Moulton
(Prol., p. 52)
"mark of imperfect Gk." For further exx. of this -es ending in and kolpt, see Buresch, Rhein. Mus. etc., 1891, p. 222 f. For tv/xi and its compounds in the LXX see C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 45 f., showing numerous -co forms, acprjKav (Xen. fjKav), etc.
LXX
2 *
Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 398. ^ w.-M., p. 94. Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 168. Thack., Gr., p. 254. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 122 f. On iardvai and
its
compounds
f.,
in the
LXX
see interesting
list in
C. and
^
S., Sel.
fr.
LXX,
p.
43
giving
-w forms,
6
transitive taraKa, etc.
that
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 50. it is aorist as well as imperfect.
Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 411. The verb is mentioned here to impress the fact
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMa)

imperfect and aorist."
It
is
311
common
7,
for instance,
t^??).
It is
in the N. T. as aorist (Mt. not always possible to decide.
2.
Some
-/it
Presents.
It
is difficult
to
group these verbs ac-
cording to any rational system, though one or two small groups

(like
those in
in the
-vv/jll,
-^/jll)
appear.
aorists.
mon
N. T. than the compounded forms.

AcLK-v\j-|JiL.
The presents are more comThe list is based on the undeLKvvo: is
Already in the Attic

It is
common, but
-/xt
Blass^
observes that in the N. T. the middle-passive

rather
compounded with dm-, arro-, dm- and utto-. The word itself is not used very extensively. The form deUvvni is found once (1 Cor. 12 31), -Oco not at all. So on the other hand deuvvtis occurs once (Jo. 2 AelKwaLv is read by 18), -us not at all. the best MSS. (Mt. 4 8; Jo. 5 20). The middle hdelKPWTaL appears in Ro. 2 15. The -fXL participle active is found in Ac. 18 28 (eTndeLKvvs) and 2 Th. 2 4 {airobuKvhvTa) The middle -/xt par-
common.
forms are still h-, ctti-, utto-.
No
presents (or imperfects) occur with
ticiple is
seen in Ac. 9
39; Tit. 2
10;
3:2
{-vfievos,
etc.).
In
:
Heb. 6:11 the

21
infinitive evMnvvudai. is read,
but
beLKvveLv
(Mt. 16
-hvai).'^
The
other N, T. verbs in -vul
(dTroXXu/zt, ^dcwvixL, viro-
ûvvvfxi,
o/jLvvfiL,
aêppvfjLL, (TTPCCVVVIJ.L, vToarpwvvviJLL, ktX.)
will
be dis-
cussed in alphabetical order of the simplex.

these forms
still
The
inscriptions
show
in use (Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 178).
The
were the first to succumb to the -co inflection. In the LXX the -/zt forms are universal in the middle, but in the active the -co forms are more usual (Thack., Gr., p. 245). AC8a)|xi. See under (d), 1, for list of compounds in the N. T. Attic Greek had numerous examples from the form 5t56-co {8i8ov, eSLdovv, -ovs, -ou). This usage is extended in the N. T. as in the papyri^ to Sidco (Rev. 3:9), though even here BP have 5t5co/xi. In VVisd. of Sol. 12 19 SlSols occurs, but Lu. 22 48 has the regular TTapa5i8(x)s. Al8co(n is common (in LXX, Ps. 37:21, 5t5oT appears) and hihoaaLv in Rev. 17 13. The uniform imperfect khibov (Mt. 15 36) is like the Attic. Hort observes that Mk. (15 23) and Ac. (4 33; 27 1) prefer kbibovv. Jo. (19 3) has, however, kbiboaav and Acts once also (16 :4). Albov (Attic present imperative) is read by some MSS. in Mt. 5 42 for bb%. In Rev. 22 2 the
verbs in
-vv/xi
:
'
lb., p. 48.
In the pap. both
-I'/it
and
-6co,
but only
-u/ât.
Mayser, Gr.
d. grioch.
Pap., p. 392.
'
p. 37.
Cf. Dciss., B. S., p. 192.
Mod. Gk.
lias
i5co.
312
text has participle aTo8i8ovv for -6v (marg. -om), while irapaSiin Mk. 14 42, etc.^ The 8cov is read by N* in Mt. 26 46 and
:
middle-passive forms in -ero (imperfect) from a present StSco are like the aorist forms, which see above. So 5ie5t5ero (Ac. 4 35) and So also subjmictive -KapaMot is found irapeblbeTo (1 Cor. 11:23).
:
only once
(1 Cor. 15:24) and is probably to be rejected (BG), though the papyri amply support it.^ In the imperfect kbiboaav holds its place- in the LXX, while in the present the -^t forms
generally prevail (Thackeray, Gr., p. 250). The behind the N. T. in the transition from -p.L to -co forms.
LXX
is
quite
AvvaixaL. The use of bhvri (Mk. 9: 22; Lu. 16: 2; Rev. 2:2) instead of bvvaoai argues for the thematic 5uw/xat. Elsewhere bwaaai (Lu. 6 42, etc.). This use of bvvri is found in the poets and from
:
Polybius on in prose (Thayer), as shown by inscriptions^ and papyri.^ Hort^ calls it a "tragic" form retained in the kolvt). It (also -o/xeda, is not surprising therefore to find B reading bbvoixai -bfxevos) in Mk. 10:39; Mt. 19:12; 26:53; Ac. 4:20; 27:15;
Is.
28 20 (so
:
in Is. 59
15).
The papyri
give plenty of
illus-
trations also.
EljiL.
Trap-,
MSS. in the LXX give bbvoixai and bbvri. The compounds are with oltt-, kv-, k^- (only eê<rTLv, k^bv), aw-, avv-irap-. The papyri^ show a much more extended use
This very
of prepositions.
verb has not undergone many changes, though a few call for notice. In the present indicative The imperfect shows the middle there is nothing for remark. weda regularly (as Mt. 25 :43; 23 :30), as modern Greek riijLriv,
common
uniformly has the middle present
elfxai, etc.,
as well as imperfect
middle. Cf. already in ancient Greek the future middle eao^xaL. The use of riny]v, seen in the papyri^ and inscriptions^ also, served But examples of we" to mark it off from the third singular rjv.
still
survive (Ro. 7:5,
etc.).
Moulton^'' quotes from Ramsay^^
a Phrygian inscription of elfxai for early fourth century a.d. He cites also the Delphian middle forms rJTaL, eoiVTai, Messenian ^j/rat,
Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 167. Cf. also W.-Sch., p. 121. ^ Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 177. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37. Cf. * Mayser, Or. d. griech. Pap., p. 355; Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36. also Dieterich, Untersuch., p. 222; Schmid, Atticismus, IV, p. 597; Deiss.,
1
B.
S., p.
B 6 ^ 8
193.
p. 36.
Notes on Orth., p. 168. Cf. Lobeck, Phryn., p. 359 f. Mayser, Or. d. griech. Pap., p. 355; Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, Mayser, ib., p. 394.
lb., p. 356.
^

fiv
"
11
Prol., p. 56.
(M. shows) alone has

of Phrygia, II, 565.
in Ac.
20
18.
Cities
and Bish.

Lesbian
'iaao,
313
mention
r)ada
as early instances of this tendency, not to
the Northwest Greek. ^

is
The pecuHar
classical
second person
(Ro. 6
found in
is
32, etc.),
Mk. 14:67; Mt. 26:69, but the common form in the KOLvi]}
regular.
elsewhere ^s (Jo. 11:21,

^llre
:
20, for in:
stance)
"Htw (as
1:8).
So with the imperative ladi (Mt. 2 Cor. 16: 22) is less common^ than the usual
(never
ovtoov
13, etc.).
ecrrco
(Gal.
is
"'EiCTOiaav
nor
tGTiiov),
as in Lu. 12:35,
form found in Attic inscriptions since 200 b.c* Some of the papyri even have rjTo:aav.^ Mention has already (Orthography) been
made
3
:
of the irrational v with the subjunctive

Tjv
xi
in the papjTi,^ as
in orav
8r]\coao}.
28, etc.)
is
an old
The use of evL='eveaTL (as 1 Cor. 6:5; Gal. idiom. "EvL=h and in modern Greek has
elai also).''
supplanted karL in the form ehe or etmt (so for

Sir. ^37
EifJLi.
:
Cf.
2.
pyri*^
Only in compounds (d7r-, etcr-, e^-, Itt- crvv-). The paand the inscriptions^ show only the compound forms. Blass^'' indeed denies that even the compound appears in the popular KOLvr], but this is an overstatement. The Attic employed epxoiJLaL for the present indicative and kept ei/xi for the fu-
ture indicative.
The
kolvt]
followed the Ionic (and Epic) in the
et/^t. In the N. T. only Luke and the writer of Hebrews (once) use these compound forms of elfXL and that very rarely. "AireinL only occurs in Etcreiût appears the imperfect indicative (Ac. 17: 10, airfieaav). four times, two in the present indicative (Ac. 3:3; Heb. 9:6), two in the imperfect indicative (Ac. 21:18, 26), while elakpxonat appears over two hundred times. "Eêtît also occurs four times, all in Acts (13 42; 17: 15; 20 :7; 27: 43), against a host of instances of eêpxo/xat. "ETretjut is read five times in Acts and all of them in the participle rrj enovar} (Ac. 7: 26, etc.). Xwet/JLL is found only in Lu. 8:4. B reads etcn^t in Ac. 9:6, not daeXde. Blass" rather
use of
epxofjiaL
for all the tenses to the neglect of
Prol., p. 37.
2
'
W.-Sch., p. IIV.
Cf.
Moulton,
f.
Prol., p. 56.
flufOa, fiTco, iarccffap in
thc
LXX
see C.
Both forms in pap. and inscr. On i^firiv, ^s, and S., Hel. fr. LXX, p. 31 f. Thack.,
goes very Httle.
dr., p.
*
256
Beyond
this the
LXX
Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 191.
^ ' *
lb., p. 38.
Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436. Cf. Gen. 6 17 E, according to Moulton, Prol., p. 49. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 51 f.; Thack., p. 257. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 355. ' Gr. of N. T. Gk., Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 157. pp. 52, 54.
:
"
lb., p. 52.
314

:
needlessly construes e^Lovruv (Ac. 13
42) in the aoristic sense (so
as to 17: 10, 15; 21
18, 26).
Et/xt is
nearly gone from the
LXX
(Thackeray,
in Acts (10
Gr., p. 257).
'ETTLCTTaixaL.
:
This verb occurs fifteen times in the N. T., chiefly 28, etc.) and always in the present tense.^
ZiVYVv\Li.
Only
in the
compound
:
(Tv-êvypvtJ.(,
:
and
in the aorist
active alone, awkêvêv

ZcowuiJLi.
(Mk. 10
9;
Mt. 19
6).
irepi-,
The compounds
are with ava-, ha-,
vtto-.
Curiously enough the verb does not appear in Mayser, Nachmanson nor Schweizer, though Mayser (p. 397) does mention êvyvv/jLL, which on the other hand the N. T. does not give save the one form above. But the uncompounded form is read in the
N. T. only three times, one aorist indicative (Ac. 12 8), one future 18, k^covwes, a 18), and one imperfect (Jo. 21 form in -vco, not -vnC) There is only one instance of the compound with dm- and that an aorist participle (1 Pet. 1 13). The three examples of Staf., all in Jo. (13 4, etc.), yield no presents nor im:
indicative (Jo. 21
perfects.
Treptf .,
The same
:
thing
is
true of the half-dozen instances of
as Lu. 12
35.
The
LXX
has irepi^wvvvTaL (Thackeray,

in Ac. 27
:
Gr., p. 269).
The one
-vijll,
instance of
viro^. is
17
and shows
the form in
'^H|Jiai.
vTroô^pvvPTes.
It is only in the compound form Kadriixai that this verb seen in the N. T. and thus very frequently, twice with awIt is usually the participle prefixed (Mk. 14 54; Ac. 26 :30). The imperKadrjuevos that one meets in the N. T. (as Mt. 9:9).
is
:
fect is regularly hKadriro, etc. (as (as
Mt. 13
1),
the future Kadrjaonai
Mt. 19
:
28).
No -w
forms appear in the present, though Kady

:
(Ac. 23
3) is
perides).^
is
a contract form like dvprj for KaOrjaaL (already in HyThe short imperative mdov for Kad-qao (as Jas. 2 3)
(cf. Mt. 22:44 from Ps. already in the indeed in the late Attic (Blass, ih), though chiefly postclassical.^ Like elixi this verb only appears in the N. T. in the "It1|Jli. compounded form {ap-, acf)-, Kad-, wap-, crvp-). The same thing
LXX
110:1) and
appears to be true of the papyri as given by Mayser," though fifteen combinations greet us in the papyri. But the papyri and the KOipi] inscriptions have not yet furnished us with the -co
formation with
'irjfjLL
compounds which we
find in d<^-
and
avpLrjtit
Just so the pap., Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 395. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 52. Cf. also for pap., Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901,
p. 38.
3
For
LXX
see Thackeray, p. 272.
W.-Sch., p. 118; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 177; Rcinhold, De Graec, ^ Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 398. p. 89.

in the
("I'HMa)
315
N. T.^ and the LXX.^ But Philo^ and the N. T. Apocrypha and early Christian writers^ follow the LXX and the N. T.
:
'kvL-qixL
indeed has only avLhres (Eph. 6

Kadi7]fjLL
9) in
the present
:
shows only Kadikixevov {-iikv-qv) in Ac. 10 11; stem. So has no present, but only an aorist (Lu. 11: irapl-qtii while 11 5, (Heb. 12 12). 'A^trj/xi is the form of passive perfect and a 42) In Rev. 2 20 dcêis is in the N. T. common is that verb the probably a present from dêco.^ But Blass (p. 51, of A''. T. Grammar) compares the Attic dîets and Tideis. Only acjiirjfjn (Jo. 14 27) and d(/)t7?(7t (Mt. 3 15) occur, but in Lu. 11:4 a4)ionev is from the Ionic d</)ico (cf. 8I803). So also in Rev. 11 9 a(f)iovaiu and in Elsewhere acfyUvTai (Mt. Jo. 20 23 marg. W. H. have a.<i)iovTaL. 9 2, etc.). In the imperfect r/^tev from d</)tw is read in Mk. 1 34; 'A(êcovrat (Lu. 5 20, 23, etc.) is a perfect passive (Doric 11 16. Simcox (Language of the Cf. Ionic eojKa. Arcadian, Ionic) .^ N. T., p. 38) quotes also avkwvTai from Herodotus. With (twItjul the task is much simpler. Blass ^ sums it up in a word. In Ac.
also
:
:
25 (TWikvaL gives us the only undisputed instance of a -^t form.
All the others are -co

avvikvros is correct in
is
forms or have
:
-co
variations.
:
However
45.
Mt. 13
:
19 and awikvaL in Lu. 24
There
a good deal of fluctuation in the

13), owlioaiv
MSS.
in
:
most
cases.
W. H.
(Ro. 3
:
read awlovcnv (Mt. 13

11).
(Mk. 4
12), o-wicov
In 2 Cor. 10
12
W. H.
read awidaLu after B.
In the
-/xt
LXX
ecr-
only the
compounded verb
Cf. also
occurs,
p.
and usually the

f.).
forms save
(from
with
avv[y]ixL
(Thackeray, Gr.,
in
250
"laT-qiii.
TT?xa,
tTT-to-rajuat
(see
:
above) and
4, o-rkco in
aTi]K03
imperfect
list
eoTTj/ce
Rev. 12
see
list
For the
of
compounds^
of aorists (1).
modern Greek). But the essen-
can be briefly set forth. The -jut form in the present stem has disappeared in the active voice save in KadiarrjaLu (Heb.
tial facts
7:28; 2 Pet. 1:8), (xvpiaTr]ixL (Ro. 16 1) and avpiaTrjcn (2 Cor. 10 18; Ro. 3:5; 5:8).^ The middle (passive) forms retain the -Ml inflection regularly with IVrTjAit and its compounds (di^-, d(/)-, avd~, e^, </)-, Trpo-, cfvv-), as KadiararaL (Heb. 5 1), TrepudTaao
:
Mayser,
Ib.
ib., p.
354; Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 167.
*
'
W.-Sch., p. 123.
Herod,
is
cited for the use of iîu
and
neTlei as -co presents.
De Grace, p. 94. So Ilort, Notes on Orth., p. 167; W.-Sch., p. 123; Hatz., Einl., pp. 309, 334. Moulton, Prol., p. 38 f. ^ Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 51. He gives the MS. variations and parallels in Hermas and Barn. See further A. Buttmann, Gr., p. 48. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 398. Ilort, Notes on Orth., p. 168; Blass, Gr. of N. T., p. 48.
Reinhold,
'
316
(2

:
NEW TESTAMENT
-fxL
compounds, that in -dw and that in -avw, though usually the MSS. vary greatly between the two.^ In 1 Cor. 13 2 NBDEFG read ixeQiardvaL, though W. H. follow ACKL in txtBiThe form in -dw is found in various MSS. for to-rdco (as (jTOLveiv.^ laTLOixev Ro. 3:31), airoKad- (Mt. 9:12 Rec), k^Loraw, KadiaTaw, nedcarao}, avvLaraco, but is nowhere accepted in the W. H. text, though Hort^ prefers avvLarav to avvLaraveLv in 2 Cor. 3:1. In 2 Cor. 4:2a threefold division occurs in the evidence. For avui(TTCLVovTes we have ABP (so W. H. and Nestle), for avvLardPTes NCD*FG, for avvLarCiVTes DÊKL.^ The form in -dvco is uniformly given by W. H., though the form in -dco comes from Herodotus
'iaTTjfjLL
Tim. 2 and
16).^
its
Two
-co
forms supplant the
conjugation of
on and
is
frequent in the
LXX.^ But
the -^t forms hold their
own
(Thackeray, Gr., p. 247). The form in -avi>i may be compared with the Cretan aravveiv and is found in the late Attic inscriptions.^ Instances of the form in -dj/cj in
pretty well in the
the W. H. text are Ac. 1:6; 8:9; 17:15; 1 Cor. 13:2; 2 Cor. 3:1; 5:12; 6:4; 10:12, 18; Gal. 2:18; Ro. 3: 31; 6: 13, 16). In Mk. 9 12 W. H. (not so Nestle) accept the form dTro/carto-rdj/et after B, while ND read dvoKaTaaTaveL (cf. Cretan oraj/uoj). D has this
:
LXX
form also
KeLjJLai.
in Ac.
6 and 17
15.
This defective verb is only used in the present and imperfect in the N. T. as in the papyri,^ and with a number of prepositions in composition like the papyri also. The prepositions
are
diâ-,
aw-ava-, dvTL-, dwo-, kin-, Kara-, irapa-,

as
Trept-, Trpo-.
The
regular
of
forms are always used, and sometimes as the passive For dm/ceiMai only ireplKeLiJLaL (Ac. 28: 20; Heb. 5:2). the participle dvaKeiiJiepos appears (so Mt. 9 10) save once dve/cetro (Mt. 26: 20) and twice with aw- (Mt. 9 10 = Mk. 2 15). In
-fXL
Tldr]fjLL,
:
: :
Lu. 23 53
:
rjv
Kelp-evos
follows the Attic, but

in the
KB
have
yj^
reOeLixe-
vos in Jo.
19:41.^
So
LXX
TldyjixL
partially replaces
KeT/xai
(Thackeray, Gr., pp. 255, 272). This verb is used as the middle of the active Kpe/xduKpe|JLa'H''a''" hst vvfiL (this form not in N. T.) and does not appear in Mayser's
1
Blass, Gr. of
N.
T., p. 49.
2
3 4 6 7
Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 168; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 49.
Here Hort (Notes,

lb. lb.
etc., p. 168) differs

6
from Westcott and prefers -avaL. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 48.

in
W.-Sch., p. 122.

p.
For many -vu verbs
mod. Gk. see
Thumb, Handb.,
133
f.
8 Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 354, 399. For the Byz. and mod. Gk. ^ Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk*., p. 51. usage see Dicterich, Unters., p. 223.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ('PHMa)

for the papyri.
317
The form^
Nestle) read
KpenaTai. is
:
participle Kpenayievosiy) in Gal. 3

(so
13; Ac.
read in Mt. 22:40 and the 28 4. In Lu. 19 48 NB

: :
W. H. and
eê/cpe^tero,
an
-co
compound form of the verb in the N. T. which come from an active present KpenawvfXL, -awvoi, -doj or -afco. They are Kpetxaaavres (Ac. 5 30) and Kpe/jtaadrj (Mt. 18 But none of these presents occurs in the N. T. Cf. Veitch, 6).
aorists
:
form and the only The other forms are
Greek Verbs, p. 343
f., for examples of the active and the middle. So also no present of Kpdvvu|XL (compound aw-) is found in the N. T., but only the perfect passive (Rev. 14 10) and the aorist
:
active (Rev. 18
6).
MiYvuixt.
(1
The
only-^tt form
:
is
the
compound
avv-ava-p.iyvvadaL
Cor. 5:9, 11) and so 2 Th. 3
14 according to
W.
H., instead of
cvv-ava-fjiiypvade.
Elsewhere, as in the papyri,^ the N. T. has only

:
the perfect passive (Mt. 27 34)

Oiyvv\LL.
and the
aorist active (Lu. 13
1).^
This verb does not appear in the N. T. in the simple form, but always compounded with av- or 8L-av-. Besides it is always an -co verb as in the papyri^ and the LXX.^ It is worth
mentioning here to mark the decline of the -/jll forms. "OXXvfii. Only in the common dr- and once with auv-air~ (Heb. 11 31). In the active only the -co forms are found as aroWvet. (Jo. 12:25), airoWve (Ro. 14:15). But in the middle (passive)
:
only the
(1
-/xl
forms^ meet us, as airoWuraL
(1
Cor. 8: 11), awciAXwro
Cor. 10:9).
"0(ivi)|xt.
So the
LXX.
All but one {bp-vvvai,
bixvvei
half-dozen examples of the present tense of this
verb occur in the N. T.

to the -co inflection, as
(Mt. 23
21
f.).
pyri also
LXX
:
have one example of opvvpn, the sometimes has the -fxi form in the active and always
Mk. 14:71) belong The Ptolemaic parest from bfxvvw.^ The

in the
middle (Thackeray, Gr., p. 279). Neither -niy^vvî (aorist Heb. 8 2) nor Trpoair-qypvpL (aorist Ac. 2 23) appears in the present in
:
the N. T.
ni'fnrXT|}xi.
No
present tense in the N. T., though a good

participle
efiinirXoiu,
many
verb
aorists,
-dco.
save the
compound
from the
has
-co
Mayser^ gives no papyri examples.
LXX
-co
form
usually.
^
In the
LXX
404.
the active goes over to the -w class.

^
' *
Mayscr, Gr.
lb., p.
And
indeed the old Attic avoLyu, Meistcrh., p. 191.

p. 246.
Thack., Gr.,
p. 277.
' ^
So the pap. Mayscr, Gr., p. 352; Thackeray, Mayser, ib., pp. 351 f., 404.
lb., p.
406.
318
NEW TESTAMENT
only, TriixirpaadaL (Ac.
nL}JLTrpTi|xi.
The simple verb occurs once
28
6)
according to
W.
H.^
This
is
the only instance where a

give no light as yet.
:
present occurs at
all in
the N. T.
The papyri
No
'
simplex in the
Pii"YVU|XL.
LXX,
but
evewlnirpo^v in
2 Mace. 8 6 (Thack-
eray, Gr., p. 249).
The compounds
are with 5ta-,
irept-, -Kpoa-.
No pres:
ents appear save in the simple verb and 5tap-.

-co
With
hap. only the
forms are used as

p-qyvvvTaL
SceprjaaeTo (Lu.
But we have
ser gives
(Mt. 9
17)
and
5:6), dcap-naawv (Lu. 8 29). MayprjaaeL (Mk. 9 18).

:
no papyri examples of the present. 'Pwwujii has no presents at all in the N. T., but only the per:
fect passive imperative eppcoaê (Ac. 15

Spvvv|i,i.
29).
This verb has only three presents in the N. T. and all of the -/zt form, one active a^twvTt (1 Th. 5 19, Tisch. ^êvv.), two middle a^kwvTai (Mk. 9 :48) and (x^kvvvvTai (Mt. 25 has only -jxl forms and in the more literary books The 8).
:
LXX
(Thackeray, Gr.,
STp(bvvi)|ii.
p. 284).
The compounds
:
are with Kara-, vwo-.
There are
:
only two present stems used in the N. T., earpuvpuop (Mt. 21 8) and vTToaT. (Lu. 19 36). Thus the -pa form is wholly dropped as
and the LXX.' For the list of compounds see Aorist (1). This verb has preferred the -pn form of the present stem as a rule in the kolvt]. The inscriptions^ do so uniformly and the papyri^ use the -co inIn the present indicative D flection far less than is true of 8i8wixi.
in the papyri^
Tl9t||jli.
has
tIOl {rWeL)
:
for
rt^Tjo-t''
(Lu. 8:16).
:
In the imperfect
rtêco,
eTldei is
read
twice (Ac. 2
47; 2 Cor. 3
13)
from
as already in the Attic.

:
So likewise kridow (as in Attic) twice (Ac. 3 2; 4 35), but the best MSS. have hideaap in Mk. 6 56 (NBLA) and Ac. 8 17 (NAC, though B has -oaav and C -ei.aav).'' The reading of B in Ac. 8 17 (eTidoaav) calls for a present rt^co which the papyri supply against
:
:
the idea of Winer-Schmiedel,^ as TapariOdpevos (BM 239), irapaKaTarWoixai (B.U. 326).^ Good cursives show that the late language
used
Ttêco
in the present
(Mk. 10
16; 15
i**
17).
Cf. viroTLdovaa in
350). In the LXX -pa forms presecond century papyrus (B.U. vail in the present and imperfect (Thackeray, Gr., p. 250).
1
Tisch. reads
(ninTrpc.(T9ai
from
-rrnrpaco.
Nestle agrees with
W. H.
2 4 5
6
Mayser, Gr.,
Thack., Gr., p. 286. Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 156; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 176. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 352 f. ^ Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 167.
p. 352.
Blass, Gr. of
Deiss., B. S., p. 192
10
lb.
N. T. Gk., p. 49. f.; Moulton, Mod. Gk. has dkru.
P. 121.
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37.

ir\\ii.
319
in
The only N. T. compound
is
with evv-, none

0a<r/caj
the pa-
pyri according to Mayscr.^
In the papyri
(lengthened
form)
07/^1.
is
usually employed for the participle and infinitive^ of

participle
is
The
so used in the N. T. (Ac. 24

:
9;
Ro.
22).
is
I,vv<f)r]iJLL
appears only once (Ro. 7

^Tj^tt
16).
The
:
-fxi
inflection
(aorist).
uniform in
both in the present and the imperfect
The only forms

13
:
in the
:
29), (j)aalv (Ro. 3
N. T. are c^rjjut (1 Cor. 7 29), ^tjo-ij/ (Mt. It is 8), and the common 0?? (Mt. 4:7).
xP'j^'cit
regular -^t in the

XpTJ.
-fiL
LXX.
of the
This impersonal verb had a poetic infinitive
but Veitch (p. 627) and L. and S. get it from xpaco. At any rate XPV is found only once in the N. T. (Jas. 3 10), Set having supplanted it. Mayser does not find it in the papyri nor Nachmanson and Schweizer in the inscriptions.
inflection,
:
There are only three verbs that show the N. T. (mere root, athematic). VTjCTKw. The compounds are dxo- (very common), avu-airo(rare). The uncompounded verb occurs nine times and forms the perfect regularly as an -co verb {redv-qKa), save that in Ac. 14 19 DEHLP read redvavaL instead of TedvrjKevaL, but the -/xt form is not accepted by W. H. The N. T. has always TedprjKws, never redvecos. In the LXX these shorter second perfect forms occur a few times in the more literary books (Thackeray, (7r., pp. 253, 270). They show "a partial analogy to verbs in -jui" (Blass, Gr., p. 50). Ot8a is a -/xl perfect in a few forms ('laidev, 'iare) from root l8- (cf. Latin vid-eo, Greek eUov). The word is very common in the N. T. and avvoiba is found twice (Ac. 5 2; 1 Cor. 4:4). The present per3.
-/jll
Some
Perfects.
active perfects without (K)a in the
fect indicative like the papyri^ usually

-are, -aaiv,
has oUa, oUas, oUe,
o'ldafiev,
which was the Ionic inflection and so naturally prevailed in the ^011^17. Three times indeed the literary Attic I'crre appears (Jas. 1 19; Eph. 5:5; Heb. 12 17). The passage in James
:
:
may
be imperative instead of indicative.

is
:
In Ac. 26
also runs
'(.aaaiv (lit-
erary Attic also)

"EtSeLaav
read.
:
The imperfect
:
f]5eiv, j/Sets,
:
etc.
(Mk. 1 34; 14 40) is like larr]KLaav (Rev. 7 11).' The other modes go regularly elbch (Mt. 9 6), dbhat (1 Th. 5 12), dbw (Mt. 12 25). The LXX usage is in accord with the N. T.
: :
Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 278.

"I(rTT||i,i.
in tlie
*
See Aorist (1) for compounds. The second perfect is N. T. only in the infinitive iaravaL (Lu. 13 25; Ac. 12 14;
:
:
Cr.
(1.
(rricch.
Pap.,
\^.
.355.
n,
>^ inscr.,
Nacliin., p. 157
'
*
MayKcr, dr.
d. sriccli. iVip., p. ,372.

f.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 114
Neither
olaOa.
nor VibuaOa
apjxû-.s in
the N. T.
320
1

:
NEW TESTAMENT
:
Cor. 10 Cor. 7
12)
eaTTjKcos (-co
and the participle earws (Mt. 20 3, 6, form) also sometimes (Mk. 13: 14; 15: 35,
:
etc.)
though
etc.), earuxxa
:
(1
26; 2 Pet. 3
5), earos
eaTrjKos also
(Rev. 5
6 text,
'^
W. H.
(Mt. 24: 15; Rev. 14 1) although marg. -cos). The same variation
Curiously enough the earlier LXX books show less of the short perfect than the later ones and the N. T. Thackeray (Gr., p. 253) suggests an "Atticistic reversion" for a while. The form earaKa (papyri also) belongs to the -co form as
occurs in the papyri.
well as the late present perfects of
tive
laTtjixL
o-nyKco
from the perfect stem.

This in brief
B.C.
is
These
is
-fxL
are always intransitive, while earajKa

transitive.^
intransi-fii
and
eo-ra/ca is
the story of the

is
verbs in the N. T.^

in the
kolvt]
The new
transitive perfect earaKa
common
from second century
onwards.
Cf. Schweizer,
Perg. Inschr., p. 185; Mayser, Gr., p. 371.
The Modes (c-yKXio-eis). The meaning and use of the modes moods belongs to syntax. We have here to deal briefly with any special items that concern the differentiation of the modes from each other by means of mode-signs. There is no clearly proper method of approaching the study of the verb. One can begin with tense, voice and then mode or vice versa. The first is
V.
or
probably the historical order to a certain extent, for the matter is complicated. Some tenses are later than others; the passive voice is more recent than the other two, the imperative as a complete
system
possible
is
a late growth.
is
Since no purely historical treatment
is
by reason
best.
first
of this complicated development, a practical
treatment
ideas in
is
up modes
There are reasons of this nature for taking which do not apply to syntax. The two main a verb are action and affirmation. The state of the action
set forth
by the
tense, the relation of the action to the subject
by mode. Tense and voice thus have and mode with affirmation. Mode deals only with the manner of the affirmation. The same personal endings used for voice limit the action (hence finite verbs) in person and number. (a) The Number of the Moods or Modes (Modi). This is not so simple a matter as it would at first appear. Modern gramby
voice, the affirmation
to do with action
marians generally agree in declining to call infinitives, participles and the verbal adjectives in -t6s and -Aos moods. Some refuse to call the indicative a mood, reserving the term for the variations
2 lb. Mayser, Gr. d. gi-iech. Pap., p. 370 f. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 119. See Hoffmann, Die gricch. Dial., Bd. II, pp. 572 ff., for -î verbs in North Achaia. For the "strong" perfects, Hke yeyova, see vii, (g), 2.
1
'
321
from the indicative as the normal verb by means of mode-signs. Thus Clyde ^ thinks of "only two moods, viz. the subjunctive and the optative, because, these only possess, in combination with the personal endings, a purely modal element." There is point in that, and yet the indicative and imperative can hardly be denied the use of the term. Jannaris^ admits three moods; inHe follows Donaldson' in dicative, subjunctive and imperative. treating the subjunctive and optative as one mood. Others, like Monro,^ find the three in the subjunctive, optative and imperaOnce again five moods are seen in early Greek by Riemann tive.
and Goelzer^: the

imperative.
indicative, injunctive, subjunctive, optative,
the injunctive see Brugmann, Griechische Grammatik, p. 332, though he does not apply the term mode to the So Hirt, Handbuch, p. 421 f. Moulton'' admits this indicative.
On
primitive division, though declining to call the indicative a mode save when it is a "modus irrealis." The injunctive is no longer
regarded as a separate mood, and yet it contributed so much to the forms of the imperative that it has to be considered in an hisThe indicative can only be ruled out when it is torical review. regarded as the standard verb and the moods as variations. Certainly
best to let the indicative go in also. Greek, having no optative, has a special conditional Indeed, the future indicative Cf. Sanskrit. TiKT]).
it is
The modern mode (virodeis
considered
by some grammarians
Sijntax of Attic Greek,
as a separate mode.
p.
Cf.
Thompson,
494; Moulton, Prolegomeim, p. 151.

in
Thumb accepts the four modes

p. 115).
{b)
modern Greek {Handbook,
absolute, as will be seen, either in
These are not form or in syntax. The indicative and the imperative blend in some forms, the subjunctive and the indicative are alike in others, the injunctive is largely merged into the imperative and subjunctive, while the subjunctive and optative are closely akin and in Latin l)lend into one. Greek held on to the optative several centuries longer than the Sanskrit.^
The Distinctions between the Moods.
primitive
1
Moulton^ indeed despairs cf our being able to give the That subject belongs to root-idea of each mood.
etc., p.
2
3
Gk. Synt., p. G2. Cf. Hirt, Handb. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 179.
417.
''
Horn. Gr., p. 49.

Phonet., p. 455.
New
first
Crat., p. 617
f.
"
Prol., p.
1G4
f.
Farrar (Gk. Synt.,
p. 45) refers to
Protagoras as the one
who
'
distinguished the moods.
Giles,
Man.,
p. 459.
Proh, p. 104.
322
NEW TESTAMENT
is
syntax, but the history of the mode-forms
in
harmony with
As with the cases so with the moods: each mood this position. in its development and long history. differently Not fared has mood perform more functions than one, but each does only may sometimes expressed function be by several^ same the moods. The names themselves do not cover the whole ground of each mood. The indicative is not the only mood that indicates, though it does it more clearly than the others and it is
used in questions also. The subjunctive not merely subjoins, but The optative is not merely is used in independent sentences also. a wish, but was once really a sort of past subjunctive. The imperative has the best name of any, though we have to explain some forms as "permissive" imperatives, and the indicative and subjunctive, not to say injunctive, invade the territory of the imperative.
tive
"It
is
probable, but not demonstrable, that the indica-
was the original verb-form, from which the others were evolved by morphological changes" (Thompson, Syntax of Attic
Greek, p. 494). plained.
(c)
The
origin of the mode-signs cannot yet be ex-
The
the
Indicative
that
is
{opiaTLKri eyKXtai';).
There
it
is
indeed
little
to say as to the form of the indicative since

It
is
has no mode-sign.
mode
is
used in
all
the Indo-Germanic languages
In fact probably the earliest Per contra it and the one from which the others are derived. may be argued that emotion precedes passionless intellection. The indicative continues always to be the most frequent and perunless there
it is
a special reason to use one of the others.
the normal
mode
in speech.
It
is
sists
only
in
when mode
others, like the injunctive
and optative,
die.
It is the
that uses
all
the tenses in Sanskrit and Greek.

is
In the
Sanskrit, for instance, the future
found only in the indicative (as

in
Greek save
in the optative in indirect discourse to represent
a future indicative of the direct)

the indicative
and the perfect appears only
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
period.
tive,
*
till the Byzantine and optative, not to say imperawere always a rarity outside of the periphrastic forms and
The
perfect subjunctive
Clyde, Gk.
lat.
Sjiit., p. 62.
Cf.
Kohlmann, Uber
die
Modi des
griech.
und
dee
s
Verbums
(1883).
p. 201.
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

in the
kolvt]
('PiniA)
323
clearly see
have practically vanished.^
Thus we can
the gradual growth of the modes.
In modern English
we have
almost dropped the subjunctive and use instead the indicative. In the modern Greek the indicative survives with as much vigor
can best be be here remarked, however, that besides the regular indicative forms a periphrastic conjugation for all the tenses of the indicative appears in the N. T. The present is thus found as earlv TpoaavaTr\7]povaa (2 Cor. 9 12), the
as ever.
The N. T.
peculiarities of the indicative

It
treated under Syntax.
may
perfect as eariv ireTpaynhov (Ac. 2G

(TKcop
26), the imperfect as
rjv
:
5t5d-
(Lu. 5: 17), the past perfect as âau TpoecopaKores (Ac. 21

riu /SXT^êt?
29),
even the aorist as

2: 13).
(Lu. 23: 19), the future as eaeade \a-
Xovvres (1 Cor. 14:9), the future perfect as
tion
(d)
is
ecrofiai irewoLdo^s (Heb. This widening of the range of the periphrastic conjugaseen also in the LXX. Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p. 195.
The Subjunctive
{viroraKriKrj)
The
function of the sub-
junctive as of the other
be discussed under Syntax. Changes come in function as in form. Each form originally had one function which varied with the course of time. But the bond
will
modes
between form and function is always to be noted.^ The German grammarians (Blass, Hirt, Brugmann, etc.) call this the conjunctive mode. Neither conjunctive nor subjunctive is wholly good, for the indicative and the optative both fall often under that technical category .^ It is in the Greek that mode-building reaches its perfection as in no other tongue.^ But even in the Greek subjunctive we practically deal only with the aorist and present tenses, and in the Sanskrit the subjunctive rapidly dies out save in the first person as an imperative.^ In Homer lixev is indicative^ and 'iopiv is subjunctive so that non-thematic stems make the subjunctive with the thematic vowel o/e. Thematic stems made the subjunctive with a lengthened form of it co/rj. Cf. in the Ionic, Lesbian, Cretan inscriptions^ forms like ap.el\l/eTaL. The same thing
appears in Homer also in the transition period.^ Jannaris'' indeed calls the aorist subjunctive a future subjunctive because he
*
Cf. also
2 '
See discussion bet. Profs. Harry and Sonnensrh(Mn in CI. Rev., 1905-6. La Roche, Beitr. zur prioc^h. Gr., 1893; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 197. For contrary view see Burton^ N. T. Moods and Tenses*, p. 1.
Farrar,
Gk. Synt.,
4.'39.
p.
45
f.
* ^
K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 40.

lb., p.
Giles,
Man.,
p.
458
f.
In the Bo-otian dial, the subj. does not api)ear in simple sentences (Claflin, Hynt. of Bcrotian, etc., p. 73)
^
and Goelzer, Phont't., Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 49.

Rieip.
p.
450
f.
a
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 179.
324
NEW TESTAMENT
The
conceives of the aorist as essentially past, a mistaken idea.
subjunctive does occur more freely in

tinction between
Homer than
in the later
Greek, partly perhaps because of the fact that the line of disit and the indicative (especially the aorist subjunctive and the future indicative) had not been sharply drawn.^ Add to this the fact that iroirjari and Toc-qaeL came to be pronounced
exactly alike and one can see
Cf. tVa SuxreL
{8coar])
how
the confusion would
come
again.
in the
N. T. MSS.^
in the
On
the short vocal ending
of the subjunctive
recall
edo/jLat,
and
its
connection with the indicative one
may
iriofxai,
(payo/jLat
N.
T., futures
'ioiJt.ev.
which have a
are really
strange likeness to the Homeric subjunctive
They
subjunctives in origin.
future indicative
or in part
is
It is still a
mooted question whether the
always derived from the aorist subjunctive
corresponds to the Sanskrit sya.^

call for special
The only
aorist
N. T. are the forms yvol and 5oT, for which see this chapter, iv, (d), 1^ There are parallels in the papyri as is there shown. The form oxf/rjade in Lu. 13 28 (supported by AL, etc., against 6\peade, BD) is probably a late aorist form like edwaa (Bccari) rather than the Byzantine future subjunctive.^ As already pointed out, the examples in N. T. MSS. of the Byzantine future subjunctive are probably due to the blending of o with co, et with ry, e with rj, etc. N. T. MSS., for instance, show examples of apKeadrjao^fxeda (1 Tim. 6:8), yvuKxcovTai (Ac. 21 24), yevrâ-qaee (Jo. 15 8), boâwaiv (Lu. 20 10; Rev. 4 9), evprjacoaLv (Rev. 9:6), ^r]a7]TaL (Mk. 5 23), i]^coaLu (Rev. 3 9),
in the
:
subjunctives that
comment
KavdrjawfxaL (1
Cor. 13
3), Kepbrjd-qao^VTaL (1
:
Pet. 3:1),
It
is
wopevao^/jLat
(Ro. 15
24), (roid-qa-qraL (Ro. 11
26), etc.
to be admitted,
however, that the Byzantine future subjunctive was in use at the MSS. Cf. Winer-Schmiedel, p. 107. Hort dismisses them all {Appendix, "Notes on Orthography,"
age of our oldest Greek N. T.
p. 172).
The present subjunctive

II.,
81801 is parallel to 8o2.
No
ex-
Sterrett, Horn.
Dial, of
Homer,
pp. 161
p.
of the Subj.
(Am. Jour,
of Philol., 10, 185

I,
27 (1907). Cf. Moulton, The Suffix f.); La Roche, Die conj. und opt.
-et.
Formen des
2
Perfects (Beitr.
fT.).
Cf. ah-eady in the Attic inscr. the spelling of the subj. in
Meisterh.,
d.
Att. Inscr., p. 166.

griech. Pap., p. 324.
3
For
this
phenomenon
in the pap. see
Mayser, Or.
f.
Cf. Henry,
note; Giles,
*
Comp. Or. of Gk. and Comp. Philol., p. 459.
Lat., Elliott's transl., 1890, p. 115
and
Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 37,
and 1904,
etc.)
p. Ill, for subjs. dTroSoT,
fTnyvol in the pap.

5
Cf.
dp^ri<rd in
Lu. 13
25,
but dp^âde (BEG,
and
apk-nade
(AD,
etc.)
in verse 26.
('I'IIMa)
325
ample of the periphrastic present subjunctive appears in the N.T. In Gal. 4 17 (iVa fTjXoOre) the contraction of or] is hke that of the indicative oe/ unless indeed, as is more probable, we have here
:
(cf.
also 1 Cor. 4
:
6, (l>vaLova6e)
the present indicative used with I'm
as in IJo. 5
hCiKovTaL.
20
(yLvwcTKoixev).
:
In Gal. 6
Cf.
12
ACFGKLP read
tva
jxi]
Cf. Ro. 14
19.
Homer.
The
perfect subjunctive
{'iva
does not exist in the N. T. save in the second perfect db(h

eidooijiev,
:
and the periphrastic form as y TrexoiTy/cws (Jas. 5 15. Cf. ireiroLdoTes wjxev, 2 Cor. 1 9) and usually in the passive as TeTrXripuiJLevr] (Jo. 16 24). In Lu. 19 40 Rec. with most MSS. read KeKpaôvrai (LXX). In the papyri rjv sometimes is subjunctive
1
Cor. 2
12)
J7
= ^t.
Cf.
Moulton,
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 38, 1904, p. 108;
Prolegom-
But the modern Greek constantly uses eav with the indicative, and we find it in the N. T. and papyri (Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 203 ff.). Some of the papyri examples may be merely the indicative with
ena, pp. 49, 168.
cites oaa eav
rjv
He
in
Gen. 6
17E.
kav,
but others undoubtedly give the irrational

(Thackeray, Gr.,
p. 194).
v.
In the
LXX the
subjunctive shows signs of shrinkage before the indicative with

eav, orav, Iva
(e)
Like the subjunctive the optathe wishing mood. As Giles ^ remarks, difference of formation is more easily discerned
{evKTiKrj).
it is
The Optative
tive is poorly
named, as
much more than
in these
two moods than

(save
difference of meaning.
first
the
subjunctive
in
person)
In the Sanskrit gave way before the

{sim originally op-
optative, as in Latin the optative

tative)
largely
disappeared
is
before
the
subjunctive.^
The Greek,
as
already stated,
the only language that preserved both the
and the optative,* and finally in the modern Greek the optative has vanished, jxr] yevoLTo being merely "the coffin of the dead optative."^ It is doubtful if the optative was ever used much in conversation even in Athens (Farrar, Greek Syntax, p. 142), and the unlearned scribes of the late Greek blunsubjunctive
I
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Ck.,
p. 48.
But
in 1 Cor. IG
we have
is
resularly evo-
durai (marg. evoSwdfj).
Ilort (Notes on Orth., pp. 167, 172)
uncertain whether
(MioTai
is
perf. ind. or subj. (pres. or perf.).

:
He
cites irapa^riXodiiei' (1
Cor.
10
of
22)
"
and ha^tjiaLovvTai. (1 Tim. 1 Man. of Conip. Philol., p. 458.

p. 202.
7)
as [)ossible pres. subjs.
Cf. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 337, for hst
works on optative. Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
Giles,
Comp.
Philol., p.
503
f.
the blending of subj. and opt. in Ital., Germ, and Balto-Slav. tongues sec Brug., Kurze vergl. Gr., 2. Tl., p. 585. Cf. the Byz. Gk. mingling of subj. and ind. in Hatz., Einl., p. 216 f.
Giles, ib., p. 459.
^
On
Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 84.
326

when they
did use
it
NEW TESTAMENT
dered greatly
204).
(Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p.
Moulton {Prol, p. 240) agrees with Thumb that the optative was doomed from the very birth of the kolvt}, and its disappearance was not due to itacism between ol and y, which was late.
Clyde/ however, suggests that the blending of sound between ol and n had much to do with the disappearance of the optative. But apart from this fact the distinction was never absolutely rigid, for in Homer both moods are used in much the same way.^ And even in the N. T., as in Homer and occasionally later, we find an instance of the optative after a present indicative, ov iravofiat
evxapLffTuiu tva
8cor]
(Eph.
17, text of
W.
H., subj.
dooy
or
8(2
in marg., question of editing).
Jannaris^ calls the Greek optative the subjunctive of the past or the secondary subjunctive (cf. Latin).
Like the indicative (and originally the subjunctive) the non-thematic and thematic stems have a different history. The non-thematic stems use lt] (te) and the thematic ol (composed of o and t)-
a+t besides the form in -eta. This two-fold the optative goes back to the earlier Indo-Germanic tongues^ (Sanskrit ja and i). The optative was never common in
0-
The
aorist has
affix for
the language of the people, as

inscriptions.^
is
shown by
its
rarity in the Attic
The Boeotian
dialect inscriptions
in simple sentences,
and Dr. Edith

clauses.^
Claflin reports only
show no optative two exrare also in the
amples in subordinate
inscriptions of
The
optative
is
Pergamum.^ The same thing is true of the papyri.^ In the N. T. the future optative no longer appears, nor does the perfect. The classic idiom usually had the perfect subjunctive and optative in the periphrastic forms.^ Examples of the periphrastic perfect optative survive in the papyri, ^^ but not in the
N. T. There are only sixty-seven examples of the optative in the N. T. Luke has twenty-eight and Paul thirty-one (not including Eph. 1 17), whereas John, Matthew and James do not use it at all. Mark and Hebrews show it only once each, Jude twice and Peter
:
four times.
times, as
54)7?
The non-thematic aorist appears in the N. T. some(perhaps by analogy). So W. H. read without reser1
:
vation in 2 Th. 3: 16; Ro. 15:5; 2 Tim.

1
16, 18.
This
is
the
Gr. S., p. 85. 2 Monro, Horn. Cxr., p. 219. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 179. Riem. and Goelzer, Phonet., p. 461. Cf K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 40 f Brug., Gk. 6 Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 166. Gr., pp. 337 ff.
*
. .
^ 8 >"
Synt. of BoDot. Dial. Inscr., pp. 77, 81. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 191.
Mayser, Gr. Mayser, Gr.
K.-BL, Bd.
II, p. 99.

preferred text in Eph.
1
:
327
:
17; 2
Tim. 2
25,
16,
W. H. read
5c3
(subjunctive).
In Eph.
but in Jo. 15 16; Eph. 1 17 the margin has

:
5a)j7
(subjunctive) also.^
The
inscriptions^
-olrjv).
the
same form
doi-g
{-ccrjv
instead of
In Eph.
and the papyri^ show 1 17 Moulton^ con:
siders
(subjunctive) a "syntactical necessity" in spite of the

8cor]
evidence for
(optative).
But
see above.
The
aorist optative
Th. 3: 11), xXeomaai koI irepLaaevaai (1 Th. 3:12), KarapTiaai (Heb. 13:21), etc., not the ôHc-Attic -ete. So also iroLrjaaLep (Lu. 6 11), but \l/r]\a(^T](TeLav
in -at is the usual form, as Karevdhvai (1
:
Blass comments on the fact that only one example of the present optative appears in the simple sentence, viz. eirj (Ac. 8:20), but more occur in dependent clauses, as Tracrxotre (1 Pet. 3: 14). The optative is rare in the LXX save for wishes. Thackeray, Gr., p. 193. The imperative is a later (/) The Imperative {irpoaraKTiKr]). development in language and is in a sense a makeshift like the passive voice. It has no mode-sign (cf. indicative) and uses only personal suffixes.'' These suffixes have a varied and interesting
(Ac. 17:27) according to the best
(B, etc.).^
history.
1.
MSS.
The Non-Thematic Stem.

will
An
early
imperative was just

is
the non-thematic present stem.^
In the imperative the aorist
a later growth, as
are pertinent.
2.
be shown directly.
Cf. aye, Xeye.
Forms
This
is
like
1(jt7],
deUw
in-
The Thematic Stem.

(cf.
merely an
terjection
vocative \6ye).^
This
is
the root pure and simple
with the thematic vowel which is here regarded as part of the stem as in the vocative \6ye. The accent elire, eXOe, evpk, t5e, Xa/3e was probably the accent of all such primitive imperatives at the beginning of a sentence. ^ We use exclamations as verbs or nouns.^^
'
Hort, Intr. to N. T. Gk., p. 168.

p.
f.
Cf.
LXX.
Mem.
Gr. Hercul., p. 215
f.
' Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. Ill
326
f.
Cronert,
Aol also appears in pap. as opt. as well aa
subj.
* '
Prol., p. 55.
Cf. Blass' hesitation, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
is
p.
49
f.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 114.

f.
In the
bing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 68
The
LXX the <'orm in -eie very rare. LXX has also -oiaav, -aiaav for 3d
Cf. Helplu.
Cf.
Thack., Gr.,
8
Opt. is common in 4 Mace. Giles, Comp. Philol., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p 220. 9 lb., p. 269. K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 41.
p. 215.
lb., p. 464.
p. 464.
p. 359.
It
is
Cf. Brug., Grundr., II, 958; Iliem. and Goelzer, Phon^t., coming more and more to be the custom to regard the thematic
Philol., p. 415.
vowel as part of the root. Giles, Comp. " Moulton, Prol., p. 171 f.
328

:
NEW TESTAMENT
In Jas, 4 13 we have aye

lustrate the origin of aye.
of Ue (so
vw
oi Xeyovres, an example that will ilNote the common interjectional use
N.
T.).
Cf. also accent of \aê.

e^co)
/Jte
The adverb
8evpo (Jo.
11:43, Aaâpe 8evpo
has a plural
like
the imperative in -re

also used the suf-
(Mt. 11 28,
:
8evTe xpos
iravres ol KOTLcovTes).
3.
The
Suffix -6l.
The non-thematic stems

cf.
'iaOc
fix -di (cf.
Sanskrit dhi, possibly an adverb;
"you
there!").
<j)avr]di,
So
\v-
yvcodi for
6t]tl
second aorist active,
for present active,
and first aorist passive.^ In the N. T. sometimes dropped and the mere root used as in avaâ (Rev. 4 1), fxeraâ (Mt. 17:20), avaara (Eph. 5:14; Ac. 12:7) according The plural apdâre (Rev. 11:12) instead of to the best MSS.^ The LXX MSS. exhibit these short ava^r]Te is to be noted also. forms (avaara, airoara, but not avdâ) also. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 70; Con. and Stock, Sel. from LXX, p. 46. See enâ, Karaâ, etc., in Attic drama. But dvdarrjdL (Ac. 8 26), kiriaTrjdL 2 Tim. 4:2), /xerdjSry^t (Jo. 7:3), Kara^ridi (Lu. 19:5), Trpoaavd^7]dL
for second
this -9l is
:
(Lu. 14
10)
occur as usual.
'iadt.^
In the papyri -di has practically
disappeared save in
4.
The
strative
(earw)
Suffix -rw. It is probably the ablative of the demonpronoun (Sanskrit tod). It is used with non-thematic and thematic stems (Xtye-roS). The Latin ^ uses this form for
(agito).
the second person also the N. T. has also

17)
k-KKXTpeparoi.
t/tco
In the case of
12)
.'^
earo) (Jas.
1: 19)
(Jas. 5
The form
Kara/Sarw (Mt. 24:
has the unlengthened stem, but
eXârco is like
the
first
aorist
The N. T. like the koivt] generally^ has the plural only in Twaav which is made by the addition of aav to rco. Cf. eo-rcoaai' (Lu. 12:35). The middle aQw (of uncertain origin)^ hkewise has
the plural in the N. T. in aOoâav.
This
is
true of the plural of both present
So Tpoaev^daduxxav (Jas. 5 14). and aorist as in papyri

:
So the LXX cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 69 f. The Old Injunctive Mood. It is responsible for more of the imperative forms than any other single source. "The injunctive
and
inscriptions.
5.
Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 341.
* 4
^
Mayser, Gr.
Giles,
d. griech. Pap., p. 327. Philol., p. 466.
Comp.
Cf. Brug., Gk. Gr., p. 341.

Prol., p. 56.
So pap. and
Cf. for pap.
It
is
late inscr.,
Moulton,
Mayser, Gr.
iii/s.c.
Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr.,
p. 343.
after
that -Tcoaav completely supplants -vtoiv.
Cf.
Nachm., Magn.
cfs. iireadu}
f.)
Inschr., p. 149.
Schweizer,
Perg. Inschr., p. 167.

^
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 343 (he

Giles
with
(TreaOai)
Hirt,
430.
(Comp.
Philol., p.
467
gets
it
from tw by analogy
Handb. etc., p. of re and ade.
329
was simply an imperfect or aorist indicative without the augSo XttiSoD was originally e-XajSeao, XajSeade was k-Xaêade, ment." was e-XajSere.^ So ctx" (f-o-X) may 'Kr](l>driT was k-'KT]er]T, Xaêre be compared with e-\ves (diyes with e-OLyes), but 56s, h, 6es Brug^
mann
considers of uncertain origin, possibly subjunctive.^ Forms hke Xvere may be injunctive (e-Xuere)" or merely the indicative.^ Note the difficulty of deciding on imperative and indicative in
forms
19).
like epavvdre (Jo. 5:39),
7rto-rciere
:
(Jo. 14:1), laTe (Jas. 1:
But
in these cases, except Jo. 5
39,
we probably have
the
imperative.
oUare.'^
KaOriao,
In
In the case of tare the N. T. indicative would be the N. T. Kadov (Jas. 2:3) is the shorter form of
though not by phonetic processes. The injunctive survives to some extent in the Sanskrit and borders on the subjunctive and the imperative and was specially common in prohibitions.'' It consists of the bare stem with the personal endings. These, hke âTTLaai (Ac. 22 16), are prob6. Forms in -aau sigmatic aorist.^ Cf Setâi. Cf. also Latin infinitive the ably just
:
.
legimini with the

in the
Homeric infinitive Xeyefxevai.^ The infinitive is inscriptions in the sense of an imperative.^" Greek common papyri this use is not infrequent. So the in as T. the N. In (Ph. 3:16), Ml? (TwavaiiiyvvadaL (2 Th. aroLX^lv as. (J 1:1), Xaipeiv
3
:
14).
In modern Greek instead of the imperative in -aai the
form \vaov occurs with the sense of Xu^rjrt.^^ It It is difficult of explanation. 7. The Form in -aov (Kvaov). may be injunctive or a verbal substantive.^' The N. T. has eiirov (Mt. 4 3) rather than elire (Mt. 8 8) in about half the instances in W. H.i^ This is merely in keeping with the common kolvtj cus:
:
tom
form
8.
of using first aorist endings with second aorist stems.

elTTov is
The
First Person.
traced to the Syracusan dialect.^* The Sanskrit used the first person subjunctive
first
as imperative of the
person.
Cf English
.
" charge
we
the foe."
The Greek continued

use of the imperative
subjunctive)
tive.
I
this idiom.
d</)es (cf.
But already in the N. T. the modern Greek as and third person
is
So
Hirt,
a(^s
creeping in as a sort of particle with the subjuncCf. Enghsh "let" ^v^th infinikiSdXco (Mt. 7:4).
lb. * lb. ^ Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 332. Moulton, Prol., p. 165. Moulton, Prol., p. 165. ' W.-S(!h.,p. 119. Handb., p. 429 f. 8 Ricm. and Goelzcr, Phonet., p. 372. Cf. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 345. 9 Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 468; Hirt, Handb., p. 430; Wright, Conip. Gk. ' Moulton, Prol., p. 179 f. Gr., p. 334. II V. and D., Handb., p. 81. Cf. Dietcrich, Unters., p. 205. '2 Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 345; Hirt, Handb., p. 427. " K.-BL, Bd. II, p. 45. Hurt, Notes on Orth., p. 164.
'
330
tive.

Cf. 5eDre
airoKTelvcoiJLev
NEW TESTAMENT
:
in
Mt. 21
38.
Besides aye, SeDre

/SXeTrere
we
may have
9.
6pa with the subjunctive (Mt. 8:4),

:
with future
held
its
indicative (Heb. 3
Prohibitions.
12).
Here the
aorist subjunctive with
fxi]
own
tive,
against the aorist imperative quite successfully.
In the
imperathan the other modes and how the aorist imperative never won its full way into prohibitions. However, in the N. T. as in the inscriptions and papyri, we occasionally find the aorist imperative with ii-q in 3d person. So fxri KaTaâToo (Mt. 24 17). In the Sanskrit the imperative is 10. Perfect Imperative.
tive
is
Veda the negative md is never found with the but only with the subjunctive.^ Later the Sanskrit present imperative with md, but not the aorist. This history in the Greek ^ is interesting as showing how the
Sanskrit
later
imperauses the
piece of
nearly confined to the present tense.
The
perfect imperative
is
very rare in the N. T. (only the two verbs cited) as in all Greek. We find eppwaOe (Ac. 15: 29; in 23 30 W. H. reject eppcoao) and
:
(Mk. 4 39). The perfect imperative also occurs in the periphrastic form as ecrTwaav irepie^waiikvai (Lu. 12 35). Other periphrastic forms of the im11. Periphrastic Presents.
Tre^t^wo-o
:
perative are
Icrdi
evmccv (Mt. 5
:
25), tadi
excoj'
(Lu. 19
17),
/xi)
ybeade
irepo^vyovvTes (2 Cor. 6
12. Circumlocutions.
14)
and even
iVre yivcoaKovres
(Eph. 5:5).
But even
so other devices (see Syntax)
are used instead of the imperative, as the future indicative {ayairrjaeis,
Mt. 5
43)
Iva
and the subjunctive (Eph. 5

:
33)
a ques-
tion of impatience like ov Kavari Staorpe^coi' (Ac. 13
10), etc.
VI.
(a)
The Voices
(SLaGeo-cis).
Transitive and Intransitive. The point is that ''transitive" is not synonymous with "active." Transitive verbs may belong to any voice, and intransitive verbs to any voice. Take kblbaâ, edidaâfXT^v, ehibaxdiqv, which may be transitive in each voice. On the other hand eiVt, yivo/jLai, eXWrjv are intransitive. The same verb may be transitive or intransitive in the same voice, as ayo}. A verb may be transitive in Greek while intransitive in English, as with KarayeKdoi} and vice versa. This matter properly belongs to syntax, but it seems necessary to clear it up at once before we proceed to discuss voice. Per se the question of transitiveness
belongs to the idea of the verb
1
itself,
not to that of voice.
We
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 240.
lb.; cf. also Delbriick, Synt. Forsch., IV, p. 120.
Hence Delbriick argues
that the aorist imper. did not
come
into use until after the pres. imper.
The
imper. was originally only positive, not negative.

actually find
331
Green
Ttpov) voice (using active
making four voices, putting a neuter (ovSkand middle endings) on a par with the
{v-ktlov),
others!
The
Stoic grammarians^ did speak of a neuter voice as
neither active {Kar-qyop-qua bpObv) nor passive
meaning the
is
middle
{txear]}.
Jannaris^ confounds transitiveness with voice,

(p.
though he properly says

transitive,"
i.e.
356) that "the active voice
usually
itself.
verbs in the active voice, not the voice

of the antithesis
Even Whitney^ speaks

ever present?
between transitive and
reflexive action being effaced in Sanskrit.
Was
that antithesis
Farrar^ speaks of verbs with an "active meaning,
but only a passive or middle form," where by "active" he means Even the active uses verbs which are either transitransitive.
tive (aWoTrad-qs)
voices.
If
or intransitive
(avToiradr]s)
we
clearly grasp this point,
we
shall
So may the other have less difficulty

voice.^
with voice which does not deal primarily with the transitive idea.
That belongs rather to the verb itself apart from transitive and intransitive verbs in modern Greek
Handb., p. 112.
(6)
On
see
Thumb,
The Names of the

active (evepjeTtKri)
is
Voices.
They
are
by no means good.
The
ing.
not distinctive, since the other voices ex-
press action also.
This voice represents the subject as merely act-
called the active parasmai padam word for another,') and the middle (iJLeari) dtmane padam ('a word for one's self').^ There is very little point in the term middle since it does not come in between the active and the passive.
('a
The Hindu grammarians
Indeed reflexive
direct reflexive is
is
a better designation of the middle voice
if
not meant.
That
is
rare.
The middle
voice
stresses the interest of the agent.

p.
Cf.
Moulton, Prolegomena,
for this voice.
155
f.
In truth
is
we have no good name

all,
Passive
(Tradr}Ti.Kri)
the best term of
for here the subject does experi-
ence the action even

thboLxd-qv.
when the
passive verb
is
transitive, as in
But
this point encroaches
upon syntax.
'
Handb.
Hist.
to the
Gk.
of
N.
T., p. 55.
2
* 6 "
Cf. Dion. Thr., p. 886.
Cf. Farrar,
Gk. Synt.,
p. 40.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 179.
Sans. Gr., p. 200.
Gk. Synt.,
p. 41.
Cf. Bnip;., Griooh. Gr., p. 4()7
f.
Giles, CoHip. Pliilol., p. 476: "Tiio (listiiiction
intransitive
in
meanings
of the active; voice
(lei)(>ncls
hctwoon the transitive and upon the nature of the root
each case."
' Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 200. ('f. also 15rug., Kurze verj^h Gr., II, p. 492. See also Clark, Comp. Gr., p. 182, for the meaningless term "middle." It is as active as the "active" voice. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 119.
332
(c)
The Relative Age of the

development.
Voices.
It is
a matter of doubt
is
as between the active and middle.

later
The
passive
is
known
to be a
The
Sanskrit passive
its full
Homer
the passive has not reached
sive future occurs there only twice.
In development. The pasThe aorist middle is often used

class.^
the yd
That is to say, in Homer the tenses of the middle with no distinct forms save sometimes in the aorist. In later Greek the future middle (as TLfxrjaoixaL) continued to be used occasionally in the passive sense.
the passive uses
all
in passive sense ('^XrjTo, for instance). ^
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
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.
dLdaaKOfxai, 'get
passive (Coptic and Lithuanian, for instance), and in
Giles^
is
thinks that the causative middle (like
taught')
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:
makes the middle a mere doubling of the active Another view is that the middle is the original and the active a shortening due to less stress in accent, or rather (as in TtdefxaL and TidyjiuL) the middle puts the stress on the reflexive ending while the active puts it on the stem.^ But Brugmann^ considers the whole question about the relation between the personal suffixes uncertain. Of one thing we may be sure, and that is that both the active and the middle are very old and long
dle.
An
old theory
."*
(as
/ia-/it
= /iat)
antedate the passive.

(d) The So-called ''Deponent" Verbs. These call for a word (cf. ch. XVII, iii, (k)) at the risk of trespassing on sjTitax. Moulton^ is certainly right in saying that the term should be ap-
plied to all three voices if to any. The truth is that it should not be used at all. As in the Sanskrit^ so in the Greek some verbs were used in both active and middle in all tenses (like X6aj) some verbs in some tenses in one and some in the other (like âbu,
;
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

Sterrett, Horn.
II.,
p. 275;
Thumb, Handbuch
*
2
3
Diah
Cf.
of Horn., p. 27.
d. Skt., pp. 394 ff. Clyde, Gk. Sjoi., p. 55.
Comp.
Philol., p. 477.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 152.
Griech. Gr., p. 346. Philol., p. 419.

^
Kurze
vergl. Gr., II, p. 599.
Cf. Giles,
Comp.
Prol., p. 153.
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
p. 200.

PrjaoiJLaL);
('I'IIMa)
333
some on one voice only
(like Kelixat).
these verbs were defective rather than deponent.^
As concerns voice Note also the

{ylvotiai,
common
jkyopo.).^
use of the second perfect active with middle verbs
sometimes have the future in the active in the N. T. which usually had it in the middle in the older Greek. These are: olkouo-co (Jo. 5 25, 28, etc., but aKovao/xai, Ac. 17 32), a/jLapTrjcroj (Mt. 18 21), airaPTrjao} (Mk. 14 13), dpTracroJ (Jo. 10 28), ^Xex^co (Ac. 28 26), yeUaoo (Lu. 6 21), Slu^co (Mt.
of verbs
: :
:
number
23
34), fiycrw (Jo. 5

/cpd^co
25), kiriopKiiao:
(Mt. 5
1
33,
LXX),
/cXauaco
:
(Lu.
38),
6:25),
(Lu. 19 :40), rat^co (Mk. 10

:
34), pehao: (Jo. 7
Gm-Kr}(T(i}
(Lu. 19 :40), GTrovbacoi (2 Pet.

still
15), avvavrrjao} (Lu.
22
10). HaL,
But
note
a-rroOavovixai, laoixaL, ^rjao/ML, davp.a(JOjxai, XrjfxxJ/oTriofiaL,
6\{/op.ai,
Treeov/jLai,
rkôpaL,
f.;
4>ayojj.at,
0eyô/iat,
etc.
Cf.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T.
Gk., p.
42
Winer-Schmiedel,
d. Sept., p.
p. 107;
Moul-
89 f.; Thackeray, term ''deponent" arose from the idea that these verbs had dropped the active voice. Verbs do vary in the use of the voices in different stages
pp. 231
ff.,
ton, ProL, p. 155.
See Helbing, Gr.
for illustrations in the
LXX. The
of the language.
(e) The Passive Supplanting the Middle. In Latin the middle and passive have completely blended and the grammars speak no more of the Latin middle. Greek indeed is the only European speech which retains the original middle form and
when we consider other tongues, it is not strange made inroads on the middle, but rather that there was any distinction preserved at all.^ In most modern languages the middle is represented only by the use of the reflexive pronoun. The Greek itself constantly uses the active with reusage.^
In
fact,
that the passive
flexive
pronoun and even the middle.
Jannaris^ has an interest-
ing sketch of the history of the aorist
passive forms, the only forms where the
and future middle and two voices differ. As
already remarked, the old Greek as in Homer'' did not distinguish sharply between these forms. In Homer the middle is much
more common than
in later Greek,^ for the passive has no distinct form in the future and not always in the aorist. In the modern Greek the middle has no distinctive form save Xvaov (cf. XOcrat)
BruK., Kurzo vcrgl. dr., p. .598; Moulton, Prol., p. 153. Ilirt, Hand})., p. ;}34; Moulton, Prol., p. 154.
Dolbriick, Synt. Fors(;h., Bd. IV, p. ()!). ^ Hist. Gk. Gr., Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 55. pp. 362 Storrett, Honi. II., Horn. Dial., p. 27. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 7.
'
2 3
4 ^
ff.
334
NEW TESTAMENT
and this is used as passive imperative second singular.^ Elsewhere in the aorist and future the passive forms have driven out the middle. These passive forms are, however, used sometimes in the middle sense, as was true of aiveKpldt], for instance, in the N. T. The passive forms maintain the field in modern Greek and appropriate the meaning of the middle. We see this tendency at work in the N. T. and the kolvt] generally. Since the passive used the middle forms in all the other tenses, it was natural that in these two there should come uniformity also.^ The result of this struggle between the middle and passive in the aorist and future was an increasing number of passive forms without the distinctive passive idca.^ So in Mt. 10 26 (mi? <l>o(37]dr]re avrovs) the pas:
sive
is
used substantially as a middle.

as future passive in the earlier
Cf. the continued use of
Greek as a tendency the makes intelligible what would be otherwise a veritable puzzle in language. Here is a list of the chief passive aorists in the N. T. without the passive idea, the so-called "deponent" passives: aireKpld-qv (Mt. 25 9 and
TLfxrjaofxai,
other way.
The
history of this matter thus
often, as John,
Luke alone having

: :
Attic aireKpivaTo also, Ac. 3
12),
:
huKpWy]v (Ro. 4
14,
20), avvvirtKpl6y]v (Gal.

11), riyaWLadrû (Jo.
2
:
13), dTreXoyr]dr]v (Lu. 21

kyev-qdrju
but see 12
(Lu. 5
Ionic
5
;
35),
cf
.
(Mt. 6
10,
but also
ed(r]dr]v
eyevotJiTjv
:
often, as Ac.
;
20
18)
:
yeyopa and yeyemjuai.,
12)
riypdr]v
(Lu. 24
ri^vvrjdriv
34), rjSvvaadTjv
(Mk. 7
24,
as
New
:
and
1
LXX) and
(Rev. 13
:
(Mt. 17
16), bLeK'exQw
(Mk.
:
34), edavjjLaaOrjp
3,
eeafjL^r]9r]v
(Mk.
27), kvOvii-neds
but passive sense in 2 Th. 1 10), (Mt. 1 20), ixereixeX-qdriv (Mt. 21

:
32),
koî]dr]v
LXX
fiaL
(Mt. 10 :26), usage see Thackeray,
evXa^rjdels
p. 238.
For the The future passives without

(Heb. 11
:
7),
etc.
certain passive sense are illustrated
by the
:
following: dm/cXtSiyo-oeTTavaTarjaerai
(1
:
(Mt. 8
:
11), aTTOKpLdrjaoixai
(Mt. 25
:
37),
(Lu.
:
10
6),
dav/jLaadrjaofjiaL
(Rev. 17
:
8),
KOL/JLTjOrjaofxaL
Cor.
15
51),
hrpaTrjaovraL
(Mk. 12
6), fieTa/Jie'KTjdrjaoiJ.aL
(Heb. 7
21), <j)avr]aofxaL
yevrjao/iaL,
(Mt. 24
30),
<f)o^r]driaoiJLai
(Heb. 13 :6).
dvvqaonai, kinfxeXrjaofxaL,
TTopthcjojxaL.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
But we have N.
T. Gr., p.
44 f.; Winer-Schmiedel, p. 108. For the rapid development of. this tendency in later Greek see Hatzidakis, Einl., p. 192 f. See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 97-100,
lar
in
and Thackeray, p. 240 f., for simiphenomena in the LXX. These so-called deponents appear modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 113). Cf. ch. XVII, iv, (c).
' Thumb, Handb., p. 111. So mod. Gk. has only two voices; V. and D., jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 362. Handb., to Mod. Gk., p. 81. ' lb. KoiJ'^ exx. are numerous, Uke fidkaOrjv, kveOvfxrjOriv, eiroptWy^v, e<t>o^T)d-qv, etc.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMA)
335
They are probably pronominal/ (/) The Personal Endings. though Brugmann- does not consider the matter as clear in all One point to note is the heavy burden that is placed respects. upon these endings. They have to express voice, person and numMode ber, everything in truth that has to do with the subject. and tense are indicated otherwise. There was a constant tendency to slough off these personal endings and get back to the mode and tense-stems. Hence Stow/xi becomes 6i5a> (papyri) in
late Greek.
(g)
Ae7co
was
originally Xeyoni.^
These personal endings have two and middle have a separate list, the passive having none of its own. Then there is another cleavage on the line of primary and secondary tenses in the indicative, i.e. The subjunctive the unaugm exited and the augmented tenses. mode falls in with the primary endings and the optative uses the
Cross-Divisions.
cross-divisions.
The
active
secondary endings.
But the
first
person active singular of the
Xyoijut).^ But may it not be a reminiscence of the time when there was no distinction between subjunctive and optative? The imperative has no regular set of endings, as has already been shown, and does not fall in with this development, but pursues a line of its own. As a matter of fact the imperative always refers to the future. They have received some modifica(h) The Active Endings. The imperative can be passed by as tion in the N. T. Greek.
optative has one primary ending (as
already sufficiently discussed.
The disappearance
of
the
-/it
forms in favour of the

also, as
-co
inflection
has been carefully treated
The subjunctive Sot and optative Swtj acjiiofiev (Lu. 11:4). have likewise received discussion as well as the optative -at and
-ete.
But some interesting points remain. The use of -oaau instead of -ov is very common in the LXX (as Jer. 5 23, 26) and was once thought to be purely an Alexandrian peculiarity (Simcox, Language of the N. T., p. 37). For the LXX phenomena see Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 65-67; Con. and Stock, Sel. from the LXX, p. 32 f. The LXX is the principal
:
witness to the -oaav forms (Thackeray, Gr., p. 195), where they

Cf. Clyde,
loss
"
Gk.
Gr., p. 346.
in
'
Gk. Synt.,
is
p. .54.
The same thing has happened
Eng.
where the
save 2d and 3d pors. sing. It is not worth while here to take time to make a careful discussion of each of these endings. Vov the hist, treatment of them see Brug., Griech. Gr.,
nearly
e()rni)l('te
pp. 34.5
ff.;
Giles,
Comp.
Philol., pp.
413
ff.;
Riem. and Goclzer, Thonet., pp.
348
ff.
336
It is not so abundant (/&., pp. 212 ff.). but the Boeotians used it for the imperfect and optative.^ Mayser^ has found more examples of it in the Tebtunis Papyri, both aorist and imperfect, than Moulton'^ had discovered. The inscriptions also show it."* In the N. T. the contract verb eSoXiovaav (Ro. 3 13) is a quotatipn from the LXX. In Jo. 15 22, 24, the imperfect dxooav has to be admitted. In 2 Th. 3 6 irapeKaôaav is read by {<AD and W. H. put it in the margin. The text TrapeXaêre is supported by BFG. This
are exceedingly frequent
outside of the
LXX,
use of the
-/^t
inflection
may
be compared with the use of rco-aau

it is
in the imperative.
In the modern Greek

like edoXiovaav
common
with con-
tract verbs
kpccTovaa
is
(cf.
LXX)
above.
The modern Greek
a new formation (Thumb, Handb., p. 171) modelled
after
it.
Blass^ needlessly hesitates to accept ~av in the present perfect
instead of the usual -dat, and even Moulton^
is
reluctant to ad-
mit it for Paul and Luke, preferring to regard it "a vulgarism due to the occasional lapse of an early scribe." It is certainly not a mere Alexandrianism as Buresch'^ supposed. The ending -avTL in the Doric usually dropped v and became -do-t in Attic, but the later Cretan inscriptions show -av after the analogy of the aorist.^ The Alexandrian kolvt] followed the Cretan. The papyri examples are very numerous'-* and it is in the inscriptions of Per-
gamum^"
also.
Hort (Notes on Orthography,

it
p. 166) considers it
"curious," but has to admit

212) thinks that in
in various cases,
always some MS. evidence for -dai.

uine in the
\7}4)av
though there is Thackeray (Gr., pp. 195,
LXX.
The
some instances -av with the perfect is genearliest examples are from Lydia, TrapelCf. Dieterich, Unters.,
:
(246 B.C.) and aTearaXKav (193 B.C.).

f.
p.
235
1
The N. T. examples
p. 33.
are direaToXKav (Ac. 16
36), 7670-
Moulton, ProL,
Cf. Dieterich, Unters., p. 242.
Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 323. 3 Prol., p. 52; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36, 1904, p. 110. * Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 148; Sehweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 166. See further Dieterich, Unters., p. 242 f. Cf. Deiss., B. S., p. 191; W.-Sch., p. 112 f. 6 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 46. Prol., p. 52.
2 ^
Tiyovav
und anderes Vulgargriechisch, Rhein. Mus.,
1891, pp. 193
ff.
Cf.
f.
Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36. 8 Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., Moulton, Prol., p. 52.
1
K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 48
p.
323
f.
"A
fair
show
in the papyri,"
that
it is
Sehweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 167. merely Alexandrian. For
Thumb
(Hellen., p. 170) rightly denies
LXX e.xx.
{kwpaKav, wkirpaKav, etc.) see
Hel-
bing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 67.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ("PHMa)

vav (Ro.
337
16:7; Rev. 21:6),
eyvcoKai'
(Jo.
17:7), elprjKav (Rev. 19:

1), Tr'e-KTWKav
3), dffeXrjXvdav (Jas.
5:4), ewpaKav (Lu. 9:36; Col. 2:
(Rev. 18:
class of
3), reriyprj/caj' (Jo. 17: 6).
On
the other hand the Western
documents (KADN Syr. Sin.) read yjKaaLv in Mk. 8:3 But it is in the LXX (Jer. 4: 16), and Moulton^ The form of r}Kw is present, but the finds riKaixev in the papyri. sense is perfect and the k lends itself to the perfect ending by aninstead of dalv.
alogy.
Another ending that

pecially).
calls for
explanation
is
the use of -s in-
stead of -as in the present perfect
and the
first aorist (in -/ca es-
Hort considers the MS. evidence "scanty" save in The papyri give some confirmation. Moulton^ Revelation. act)rjKes, cites ypa\}/es, etc., from "uneducated scribes" and thinks
it is a mark of "imperfect Greek." Deissmann^ finds the phenomenon common in a "badly written private letter" from Fayum. Mayser^ confirms the rarity of its occur-
that in Revelation
rence in the papyri.
In the inscriptions Dieterich^ finds

in widely separated sections.
:
it
rather
:
more frequent and
In Mt. 23
eXrjXvdes.^
23
in
has
d</)77Kere;
in Jo. 8
57
has
ewpa/ces;
in Jo. 17 :7
and
17:8
will
has UoiKes; once more in Ac. 21:22

lê
gives
It
hardly
possible to call
illiterate,
nor Luke, whatever
one
may
think of John.
in
has
a'ir.eKa\v\pes
in
Mt.
11
25.''
W. H.
accept
it
Rev. 2:3
(/ceKoxta/ces),
2:4
{a(j>rjKes),
2: 5
(TreTrrco/ces),
11:17 (etXryês), all perfects save a(j)rjKes. It is rare in the (Thackeray, Gr., p. 215); found in A (Ex. 5 22, cnrkaTakKes) and in e5coKes (Ezek. 16:21; Neh. 9:10). The modern Greek has it
:
LXX
as in Ueaa, -es
(Thumb, Handb.,
:
p. 152). ^s
We
in -da
have both âda (Mt. 26 69) and

is
(Mt. 25 21).
:
The form
vanishing (Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 166). Cf. also Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 321. The papyri have oUas, as
N.
T.,
and
e^rys.
But
see
is
-/xl
Verbs.
-as, etc.,
first aorist endings -a, with the second aorist stem and even with the imperfect. This change occurs in the indicative middle as well as active. This matter more technically belongs to the treatment of the
Much more common
the use of the
Prol., p. 53.
Cf. Hort,
Notes on Orth.,
p. 169.
Tlio N. T. does not follow
illiterate jjiip. in
2
putting -aai to aorist stems (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36).

*
lb.; Prol., p. 52.
"
B.
S., p.
192.
etc., p.
Gr. d. griech. Pap.,
]).
321.
Untcrs.
239.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 46.
p. 46, citee Apoll., Synt.,
I,
10, p. 37, as
saying that
o
dpijKes, iLypa\pes, ypaxpkrw, etc.,
gave the grannnarians

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 113.
trouble.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Glc,
'
338

is
NEW TESTAMENT
it is
aorist tense, as the -a
part of the tense-stem, but
also con-
veniently discussed here.
The
Attic inscriptions
riXinâ,
kolvt]
The Attic already had el-pra, eireaa, ^veyna. indeed show eo-xa, evpafi-qv and even the
This
imperfects
eêpa.^
tendency towards
uniformity
spread in the
papyri, but
somewhat
extensively. ^
strong aorists with -a chiefly in
Moulton^ finds the "uneducated writing" in the
common
in general.
This process of assimilation of
was not yet complete.* Blass^ thinks it an "intermediate" form already in the ancient Greek which spread in the kolvt]. Cf. the liquid form riyyeiXa. But both the strong and the weak aorists appear in the N. T. Thackeray
the strong with the
aorist
weak
210 ff.) notes that the -av termination past tenses, though in the LXX the imperfect forms are due to later copyists. In the modern Greek we note it regularly with KaTe\a(3a, rjdeKa, elxa, etc. (Thumb, Handb., pp. 152, 160, etc.). Hort*^ has a detailed discussion of the
{Gr., p. 195;
cf.
also pp.
was
finally
extended to
all
matter in the N. T. The -a form eLTTOv.

eiirancaav)
.
is
This mixture of usage is shown in elwa and uniform wdth endings in -r (etTrare, etTrarco,
Both dirov and etTre occur. We have aireLTraiJieda (2 and TrpoeiTranev (1 Th. 4:6). The participle is usuBoth eliras and etvres, elirov and ally -6:v, but sometimes et-rras. We always have the ripeyKa inflection save in the elirav meet us. And even here we once have di'einfinitive and the imperative. pkyKaL (1 Pet. 2 5) and once also wpoaeveyKou (Mt. 8 :4 BC). So also with eweaa we have the weak or first aorist inflection in the indicative and imperative plural Treaare (Lu. 23 30; Rev. 6 16). But in these two examples Hort^ (against W. H.) favours Trecrere on MS. grounds (N*ABD, kS*BC). In Lu. 14 10; 17 7 apaireae is correct. The other forms that are accepted by W. H. are 'iôKav
Cor. 4
:
2)
Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 1S3

Dieterich, Unters., p. 237
f.;
f.
f.
For the
f.
inscr. see Schweizer, Perg. Inschr.,
p. 181
3
Nachm., Magn.
Inschr., p. 166
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 36. lb.
Cf.
Mayser, Gr.
f.
d. griech. Pap., p.
368
f.
* *
Cf. Deiss., B. S., p. 190
is in harmony with this tendency also. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 45. The Cihcian according to HeracUdcs? W.-Sch., p. Ill note. Cf. in Horn, forms Uke fiôvTo, kfUjatTo, where the sec. aorist endings go with the first aorist
LXX
Is
it
stem (Sterrett, Horn. II., N. 6 Notes on Orth., p. 164 f.

p. Ill
f.
42).
See also Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 45; W.-Sch., with the N. T. in the use of -o. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 62-65; C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 35 f. ^ Notes on Orth., p. 164. Moulton (Prol., p. 51) speaks of "the functionally useless difference of ending between the strong and the weak aorist."
The
LXX
MSS.
tally

once (Ac. 16
dbaixev in
:
339
:
37); tTrkfiaXav twice

:
a few places (Mt. 13
17; Lu. 10
(Mk. 14 46; Ac. 21 27); 24; Mt. 25 37,

:
tlbav,
etc.);
the indicatives aveTKav (Ac. 10

(Ac. 7:21), eCkaro (2
:
: :
39), dveiXare (Ac. 2
23), avtlKaTo
Th. 2 13), iêCkayn^v (Ac. 23 27), kêikaro (Ac. 7 10; 12 11); evpav once (Lu. 8 35, or avevpav), evpaêv once (Lu. 23 2), and eupafxeuos once (Heb. 9 12); the imperatives eXdare, eX^droj uniformly, both rjXdav and rj\dov, once a-Krfkda (Rev. There are many other ex10 9), regularly T]\dap.ev (Ac. 21 8). amples in various MSS. which W. H. are not willing to accept, but which illustrate this general movement, such as airkdavav (Mt.
:
:
:
8
2
32, etc.), eXa/Saj^ (Jo. 1

27), te/3aXai/
:
12), kXaânev
(Lu. 5:5), eXd/Sare (1 Jo.

:
(Mk. 12 8), emap (1 Cor. 10 4 D), '^clivyau (Lu. 8 34 D), KaTe4>ayav (Mk. 4:4D), avvkaxo-v (Ac. 7 57 D), yepa/jLevos (Lu. 22 44 N), etc. But let these suffice. Moulton^ is doubtful about allowing this -a in the imperfect. But the papyri support it as Deissmann- shows, and the modern Greek ^ reinforces it also as we have just seen. W. H. receive elxav in Mk. 8:7; Ac. 28 2 Rev. 9:8; elxap^^v in 2 Jo. 5. But D has elxo^v in Jo. (TrapeTxai') 15 22, 24; N* has 'eXeyav in Jo. 9 10; 11 36, etc. There is a dis:
tinct increase in the use of the sigmatic aorist as in rnxapTrjcra
(Mt. 18
15), 6^Pr]aê (Lu.
13
28).
It appears already in the
LXX
(Thackeray, Gr., p. 235). But see further under vii, (d). The past perfect has the -eiv forms exclusively as uniformly in
So eiaTr]KLaav (Rev. 7 11), têLcrav (Mk. 14 40), 7re(Mk. 15 7). So the LXX. Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., But the imperfect e^fjeaav (Ac. 17 15) is to be observed. p. 68. (?') The Middle Endings. These call for less remark. BovXet (Lu. 22 42) is the only second singular middle form in -ei, for The inscriptions^ sometimes show 4) displaces oi/'ct. 6\pii (Mt. 27 /3oi/Xr/. Blass^ regards ôvXh a remnant of literary style in Luke,
the
KOLvr].^
: :
7roir]KHaap
Hort (Notes on Orth., a second aorist imper. instead of the present. Cf. eêxâf (usual form in Rev. 16:6). Cf. W.-Sch., p. 111. But Karexêv (Mk. 14 3) is the usual Attic aorist. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 55.
1
Prol., p. 52.
So Buresch, Rhein. Mus.,

(Rev. 16
:
46, 224.
p. 1G5) needlessly considers iKxeere
1)
B.
S., p. 191, eXeyas, etc.
Cf. Siiiicox, Lang, of the
N.
T., p. 36; Geldart's
Guide to Mod. Gk.,

Prol., p. 53.
p.
272 note.
*
With
rare variations in the inscr.

d. griech. Pap., pp.
and pap.
Moulton,
Cf.
Mayser, Gr.
^
320
ff.
Schweizcr, Perg. Inschr., p. 168.
Cf. also Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p.

6\pti,
328.
8
The
pap. do not
show
oUi
and
but only
0ov\ei.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 47. For oln, 6^v, arid ô6Xjj in Gr. d. Sept., p. 60 f.; C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX, p. 33 f. fondness for -u forms
(itacisni).
LXX MSS. sec Helbing, B in the LXX shows a

217.
Cf. Thack., Gr.,
j).
340
but the papyri also have ôvXei. The occasional use of 8vvr} (Mk. 9 22 f.) has been discussed under -jjll Verbs. It appears only once in the LXX, but the "poetic and apparently Ionic" kwiaTji is more frequent (Thackeray, Gr., p. 217). Cf. also kclBov (Jas. 2 3) as LXX and Kadrj (Ac. 23 3). On the other hand we have (fyayeaai and TTtecrat (Lu. 17 8). This revival of the use of -o-at parallel with -fj-ai, -rat in the perfect of vowel verbs in the vernacular amounts to a "new formation" in the view of Blass.^ So Moulton, Prol.,
: :
:
p.
54
f.
To
call this revival
a "survival"
universal
is
"antediluvian philol0d7ecrat outside of the
ogy."
In the
LXX
irkcraL is
and
Pentateuch where (lâyri holds on (Thackeray, p. 218). The -aai form is universal in modern Greek. The love of uniformity made But see Contract Verbs for further discussion. The it triumph. middle form rîx-qv (Mt. 25 35) and riixeda (Mt. 23 30) is like the KOLvi] generally and the modern Greek et/xat. Cf. also eaofxat. For k^kdero (Mt. 21 33) with loss of root o and w inflection (thematic
: :
:
e)
see
-/it
Verbs.
Cf. also
eêKpefj-ero
(Lu. 19:48).
The
LXX
has
-evTo for -ovTo (Thackeray, p. 216).

(j)
Passive Endings.
has no distinctive endings of

like k-âvr]-v, is really
As already observed, the passive voice its own. The second aorist passive,
an active form like l-^-q-v {t-(i)6.vr]-v is the So i-xa-p-q-v from xatpeco. The first aorist in -d-qv seems to have developed by analogy out of the old secondary middle ending in -^tjs {k-bb-d-qs) parallel mth (TO (Sanskrit thds).^ The future passive is a late development and merely adds the usual ao/e and uses the middle endings. The ending in -O-qv is sometimes transitive in Archilochus,^ as the middle often is, and perhaps helps to understand how in the KOLVT] these forms (first aorist passive) are so often transitive ("deproper division) .^
Cf. Latin tace-re.
ponents") as in
aireKpidriv, kcjô^-qd-qv , etc.

is
The second
aorist passive
an active form. So the passive forms have a decidedly mixed origin and history. There is nothing special to note about these passive endings in the N. T. save the increased use of them when even the passive idea does not exist. In some verbs a is inserted contrary to Attic practice. So /ckXeio-rat (Lu. 11:7), XeXovafxaL (Heb. 10:22). It is a common usage in the LXX (Thackeray, Gr., pp. 219 ff.). See also vii,
as noticed above
really
1
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 47.

Giles,
Cf.
Mayser, Gr.
2 *
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., pp. 410, 427.
lb., pp. 411, 422.
On
Grit., p. 199.
On
the strong passive forms in

*
"Passive Formations" see Hadley, Ess. Phil, and see C. and S., Sel. fr. LXX,
LXX
p. 41.
Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., p. 411.

(g),
341
9.
active,
cf
In Rev. 8:12; 18:23, W. H. print âi/T? (first aorist kinct)avai, in Lu. 1 79) rather than the passive <t>apfi.
. :
Note
13
:
eK(f)vn
(Mt. 24
1
32,
but Rec.
:
e/cûf},
though
k</)ii27
in
for
Mk.
Uvv
p.
28),
crvv(l)velaai.
:
(Lu. 8
7)
and
TraptLaehh-qaav
(Ju. 4)
(Rec.
235)
.
Mk.
32)
which the
first
LXX
retains (Thackeray, Gr.,

first
In the
LXX, when
a verb had both

{ih., p.
passive forms, the
disappeared
237).
and second aorist But see vii, {d),
for further discussion,

(/v)
Contract Verbs.
:
The use
of -(rai
It appears^ in Kavxaaat (1 Cor.
4:7; Ro. 2
was mentioned above. 17, etc.) and oSwaaaL

:
(Lu. 16 25)
where ae regularly contracts into a. Sec x^pteaat (=-eT<raO P. Oxy. 292 (a.d. 25). Verbs in -aw. The confusion with verbs in -eco is already seen
in the Ionic (Herodotus).
The
LXX
in general preserves the dis-
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 i]pwTwv in Mk. 4 10 though -ow is here supported by {<C and by
: :
single
MSS.
elsewhere.
considers rjpwrovv due to Ionic influence.

KOTTLovaip in
Hatzidakis {Einl. in d. Neug., p. 128 f.) In Mt. 6 28 we have

:
B
:
33,
2,
but
W. H.
reject
it,
:
as they do vlkovvtl in Rev.

:
and KareUyovu (Lu. 8 53) .^ In Mk. 14 5 W. H. read helSpLfjLojpTo (i^C -ovvto) and in Jo. 11 38 eiJi.(3pLiJL6)nevos (HA. So there is a variation as to iiTTchvTaL (2 Pet. 2 20) -ovjxevos) from rjTTaofiat. and y]a<TioQr}Te (2 Cor. 12:13) from eo-o-oco after the analogy of eXacraoco.^ W. H. print ^fiv (Ro. 8 12). This is a matter of much dispute with the editors, but it is more than doubtful if W. H. are correct. On the other side see WinerSchmiedeH and Moulton.^ But both faco (Ro. 8 12) and xP<ô1 8) have the 77 contraction rather than a (-ijco ixai (1 Tim.
2
:
7, 17;
15
verbs, Moulton, Prol, p. 54).

i'^wv.
1
In Ro. 7
But the
KOLvi]
uses
xpao'^cti,
though not
in the
even has t^j]v for N. T.^ Paul
Cf. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 328, for xapteTaat. The 6 A) shows 6iTrti,evov<Tai. The only certain instance in the 6 7). See Thack., p. 218. Cf. further Hatz., Einl., p. 188. 2 Hort, Notes on Orth., p. IGG.
:
LXX (1 Ki. 14 LXX is /cratrat (Sir.
*
* ^
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 Moulton, Prol., p. 54. with N. T. usage here, Mayser, pp. 346 ff.
342
NEW TESTAMENT
Elsewhere also the a So ireLvq. (1 Cor.
has XP'?^ (pres. subj.) in 1 Tim. 1:8. forms prevail in the kolvt] as in dL^pdu and
11: 21), ireLPaw (Ph. 4
ireLvq.
:
Tretuap.
:
12),
8i4^q.
(Ro. 12
20) as subjunctive (so
same verse). The LXX keeps Attic îjv and xpwdoî-, but 8L\pdp and veLvdv (Thackeray, Gr., p. 242).^ Verbs in -ew sometimes show forms in -aco. So XX67a in Phil. 18, eWoyoLTaL in Ro. 5 13, eKeoLTe in Ju. 22, 23, and eXeco^/Tos in
:
LXX has both forms. The For further examples of this confusion between -aw and -eco in LXX and isolated N. T. MSS. see Winer-Schmiedel.^ In 1 Cor. 11:6 all editors print ^vpaadat (cf. Keipaadai just before), though in 1 Cor. 11:5 k^vprjukpr] and ^vprjooPTai (Ac. 21 24) probably come from ^vpkw} Cf. edoj, edcrco.^
Ro. 9
:
16,
but
eXeet in
Ro. 9
18.
KOLvr}
usually has the -etp forms.^
Contraction does not always take place with
ee
in verbs in -ew.
In Lu. 8: 38
that
it
is
W. H.
follow
BL
in giving ebdro,
Blass''
but
Horf
admits
and Moulton^ consider kbktTo correct and the contraction a mere correction, and it is supported by the LXX and papyri. AP even have eSeetro. In Rev. 16 1 kxTe is undoubtedly right and eêxeej/ in 16 2, but note
not free from doubt.
: :
kKxtiTai
(cf.
(Mt. 9
17).
In
Mk.
14
3 Karexeep
is
:
to be noticed also
Attic aorist).
:
On
the other hand in Jo. 3

(Ac. 27
:
8 note
irpei, e^cTrXet
(Ac. 18
18),
TrXtZp,
diroTrêip
1 f.).
In the
LXX
these
words appear now one way, now the other.^ Aew ('to bind'), pew have no ee forms in the N. T. W. H. accept in text only eôv9eP(a in all the dozen examples in the N. T. (as Lu. 18 9, eôvdepovpras) but in Mk. 9 12 they have 5 instead of 6.^'^ Observe also d(f)ecovrai (Lu. 5 20, etc.) instead of d0covrat or the regular a4>a.PTaL. In the N. T., W. H. give kppkdr] (Gal. 3 16; Mt. 5 21, etc.), but Hort^^ thinks the Attic eppr]dr] should appear always in Matthew. Verbs in -oco have two knotty problems. In Gal. 4 17 frjXoOre and 1 Cor. 4 6 cf)vaiou(Tde are regular if indicative. But if they are subjunctive, the contraction 077 is hke the indicative oe (cf, indica:
:
W.-Sch., p. 116 note.

Hatz., Einl., p. 128
f.
Cf. Karvpa/xhos (Mt. 25
41).
Moulton
(CI. Rev., 1904, p. 110) cites (ppovcovres

'
and
per contra ayairodi'Tes from pap.

*
P. 117 note.
p. 166) prefers ^vpaadai after Plut. and Lucian. See further on this mixing of contract verbs, Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 349. The MSS. show much the same situation as to contract verbs that we find in the N. T. and the pap. Helbing (Gr. d. Sept., pp. 110-112) gives the facts in detail. 6 Notes on Orth., p. 166. Cf. Thack.,Gr., pp. 242ff.; W.-Sch.. p. 115 note. 7 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 47. " Hort, Notes on Orth., p. 166.
^
Hort (Notes on Orth.,

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 116
f.
LXX
Prol., p. 54.
"
lb.
BD always have
it.
343
So Blass^ and Moulton.^ tive and subjunctive of -ow verbs). Hort^ doubts the indicative here. If evoSoJTaL (1 Cor. 16 2) be regarded as a present subjunctive no problem in contraction is raised.* But in Col. 4 17 we have the subjunctive in I'm ttXtjpoh as in Attic for both indicative and subjunctive. In Ro. 3 13 k5o\tov(rau is the common LXX form in -oaau. The other point is the infinitive in -ovv or -olv. W. H. give -olu for Cf. -q.p this infinitive everywhere except TXrjpovv in Lu. 9 31.^ and -fjv in W. H. Blass*' considers the -olv termination "hardly established for the N. T." since even in the N. T. the evidence is "small," though "of good quality" Hort contends.'^ In Mt. 13: 32 KaTaaKr]uo7v is supported by BD (in Mk. 4 32 by B), in 1 Pet. 2 15 (t>tiJ.0Lv has N, and in Heb. 7 5 dTroSe/carotj' has BD. Moulton^ finds no support earlier in date than B save one inscription cited in Hatzidakis {Einl., p. 193) and one papyrus of second century A.D. Mayser^ likewise finds no infinitive in -olv till after
:
:
first
century a.d. and gives some references for this late infinitive
It looks as
is
if the case will go against W. H. on this point. probably due to some late grammarian's refinement
form.
The form
and
(so
irlv.
is
linguistically unintelligible.
ZI,
ULiiv is often contracted (sounded finally
then
I)
into
ireXv
W.
H., Jo. 4:
TTteiv
7, 9, etc.)
and
in
some MSS. (N 8/9 times)

:
into
But
is
the Syrian reading (Mt. 20
22, etc.).^
Con-
traction in -aoj,
-eoo, -ooi
verbs, of course, takes place only in the

participle.
present, imperfect
and present
(xp6voi).
It
VII.
(a)
The Tenses
and
is
The Term Tense.
is
from the French word temps,
a misnomer and a hindrance to the understanding of this aspect of the verb-form. Time does come finally to enter
'time,'
and in a limited way affects the opand participle. But it is not the original nor the general idea of what we call tense.^^ Indeed it cannot be shown of
relatively into the indicative
tative, infinitive
1
Or. of N. T. Gk., p. 48.

Prol., p. 54.
Cf. K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 5S7.

3
2 * "
Moulton,
Prol., p. 54.
Cf. Hort,
Ilort, ib., p. IGG.
Notes on Ortli., p. 171 f. Notes on Orth., p. 1G7. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 48.
Notes on Orth., p.lGG.

Prol., p. 53.
Cf. Nestle
(Am. Jour, of Theol., July, 1909,

"
fjia(TTiyYoti>
in Coptic.
p. 448) for Gr. d. griech. Pup., p. 349; Raderm., p. 74.
" Hort, Notes on
Orth., p. 170.
Cf. D(;lbrtick, Grundi. d. Kriech. Synt., Bd. IV, p. SO; BruK., Grioch. Gr., p. 469 f.; Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 481 f. See Swetc, O. T. in Gk., p. 305, for remarks about tenses in the LXX.
344
any verb-form that it had originally any reference to time. We must therefore dismiss time from our minds in the study of the
forms of the tenses as well as in the matter of syntax. late to get a new name, however.
It is too
The greatest confusion prevails in (6) Confusion in Names. the names given to the various tenses. The time idea appears in the names present, past perfect and future. The state of the action rules in the
names
aorist,
imperfect and perfect.
clear that the time idea did not prevail with all the
Thus it is names that
the grammarians used.

two).
In the indicative, indeed, in the past three tenses appear, in the present two, in the future one (sometimes In the other modes as a rule only three tenses are found;
in truth, in the subjunctive, optative
only two are in
common
usage, the aorist
and imperative practically and the present.
As a matter of fact there are nine possible tenses for each voice in the indicative: the aorist present, the imperfect present, the perfect present, the aorist past, the imperfect past, the
perfect past; the aorist future, the imperfect future, the perfect
future.
clear cut.
aorist
These ideas do occur. In the past the distinction is In the present no sharp hne is drawn between the and durative (unfinished or imperfect) save when the periconjugation
is
phrastic
used
or
when Aktionsart comes

rule,
in
to
help out the word

at
all is
itself.
In the future, as a
no distinction
made between
anyhow.
the three ideas.
phrastic conjugation can be employed.

aoristic
But here again the periAs a rule the future is
For further discussion see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Greek Syntax, p. 120, and the references there to Harris' Hermes, Harper's Powers of the Greek Tenses, and H. Schmidt's Dodrina Temporum Verbi Graeci et Latini. The modern Greek preserves as distinct forms the aorist, present, imperfect; the future, the perfect and past perfect using periphrastic forms. Mr. Dan Crawford reports 32 tenses for Bantu. (c) The Verb-Root. There were originally two types of verbroots, the punctiliar and the durative. The tense called aorist (aopLdTos, 'undefined action') is due to the use of the punctiliar verbs (the idea of a point on a line). The present tense comes out of the durative verb-root. But it is worth repeating that tenses are a later development in the use of the verb.^ Hence it was natural that some verbs never developed a present tense, like eldov, and some made no aorist, like opdco. The defective verbs thus throw much light on the history of the tenses.
Gr., p. 180; Farrar,
1
Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
Pliilol., p.
482
f.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (pIIMa)

Out
of these
345
its
two ideas grew
all
the tenses.
Each language had

its
own development. Some

the Greek ecTov.
aorists in Sanskrit had no presents, like
Each tense
in the
Greek pursued
own way.
The idea of comIt is a complex development as will be seen. present to a line is due to the point and paring the aorist to a
Curtius, but
it
has since been worked out at length.^
Instead of
saying "irregular" verbs, Delbruck (Vergl. Sijntax, Tl. II, p. 256) speaks of "several roots united to one verb."
This Aktionsart or kind of action belongs more specifically to syntax.2 g^^ i^ is not possible to make a modern study of the tense formations without having clearly in mind this important matter. It will come out at every turn. Along with the various
tense-suffixes
which came to be used to express the tense-distincwere developed there remains also the meaning of they tions as This is never to be left out of sight. Prepoitself. verb-root the sitions also enter into the problem and give a touch much like a
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
(d)
KaTe4>ayov.
But more
of this in Syntax.
The point
here
is
simply to get the matter in mind.
The Aorist Tense
this tense
was always the oldest or the
(adpio-ro? xP'^^^)- ^^ '^^ ^^t true that original form of the verb.
As seen above, sometimes a durative root never made an aorist or punctiliar stem. But the punctiUar idea is the simplest idea of the verb-root, with many verbs was the original form, and logically precedes the others. Hence it can best be treated first. This is clearer if we dismiss for the moment the so-called first aorists and
think only of the second aorists of the -jxl form, the oldest aorists. Henry ^ has put this It is here that we see the rise of the aorist. matter tersely: "The ordinary grammars have been very unfortu-
nate in their nomenclature; the so-called second perfects are much more simple and primitive than those called first perfects; the same is the case with the second aorists passive as contrasted with the
first aorists," etc.
The same remark
applies to second aorists active

aorists represent, of course,
and middle. The non-thematic second

1
Cf.
griech. Synt., II, pp. 13

Philol., p.
2
Mutzbauer, Gruiull. der Tenipuslohre (1893); Dolbriick, Grundl. d. fT.; V>v\i^., Griech. Gr., pp. 470 IT.; Giles, Man. of Comp.
480 f.; Moulton, Prol., pp. 108 ff. (Handb., p. 123) likewise feels the necessity of a word about Aktionsart under Morphology. Cf. ' Comp. Gr. of the Gk. and Lat., Elliott's transl., 1890, p. 105 f. note. Leo Meyer, Griech. Aoriste, 1879, p. 5 f.
Thumb
346

The
NEW TESTAMENT
the most primitive form.
survivals of these forms in the
N. T. have been discussed under -/it Verbs. The difference between the strong aorist (both thematic and non-thematic) and similar presents is syntactical and not formal.^ The point is that the strong aorists and the corresponding presents represent the simple stem of the verl). Brugmann^ indeed treats them together. It is not possible to make an etymological distinction between the imperfects e(t)r]p, eypa(})OP and the aorists eaTrjv, ecfyvyov. The imperfect, of course, differs from the present only in the augment and secondary endings.^ The kinship lêtween the aorist and present stems is further shown in reduplication. Reduplication
in the aorist, as riyayov,
is
supposed to be originally causative.*

7t(7)j/djo-/ca;.
Cf. the use of

aorist
it
with inceptive presents like

in the older Sanskrit,
The
was quite common
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)
Greek.^
is far more common in Homer than in the later Indeed in the modern Greek the strong aorist has well-
nigh vanished before the weak
aorist.'^
As often, the grammars have it backwards. The so-called second is the old aorist, and the so-called first is the late form of the verb. This weak form of the aorist has a distinct tense-sign, a, the sigmatic aorist. The a (-aa) was not always used, as with
liquid
verbs,^
like
ecxTeLXa.
This sigmatic
aorists of
aorist
appears also
in the Sanskrit.^
The
distinction
was not always observed beboth kinds occur in

therefore that uniformity
tween the two forms, and mixed
Homer,
like i]ôvTo,
r/i/et/ca.^"
No wonder
gradually prevailed at the expense of the strong aorist in two

first aorist
ways, the disuse of the strong aorist (so rjâ) and the putting of endings to the second aorist stems, as elira, eVxa.
The
K aorists in
the indicative
{edccKa,
W-qKa,
rJKo)
continued to
hold their
1
own and
to be used usually in the plural also.
An
ex-
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 268. lb. Cf. also Riem. and Goelzor, Phonct., pp. 396, 410, 414. So K.-BL, II,
3 Cf. Giles, Man. of Comp. Philol., p. 4.5.3 f. 92 f. * So Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 308. Cf. Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 371. Cf. K.-BL, ^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 298. for list. II, p. 30 f 6 See interesting lists in Sterrett's II., N. 38 ff. 7 V. and D., Handb. etc., p. 79 f. 8 K.-BL, II, p. 102 f. Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 313; Delbriick, GnindL, Hartmann (De aoristo secundo, 1881, p. 21) makes too etc., IV, pp. 75 ff. much distinction between the second and first aorists. " Sterrett, Horn. IL, N. 42. 9 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 313.
p.
.,
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (*PHMa)

tension of this usage (after the analogy of the perfect)
is
347
seen in
the Byzantine and
There is shown, the so-called second aorist passive {-^p), like k4>avr]u, kxapw, The so-called first aorist is merely the second aorist active.^ passive in Sriv is a Greek creation after the analogy of the old Indo-Germanic.^ Homer makes little use of either of these passive aorists, but the second is the more frequent with him and the
very rare.'* emphasis upon the aorist forms seem unusual to nfodern students, they may be reminded that in English we have only two tenses (apart from the periphrastic conjugation) and that they One is a present are usually punctiliar, as "I sing," "I sang." aorist, the other a past aorist.^ We do not here enter into the Aktionsart of the aorist (whether ingressive, constative or effec-6Tf]v is
modern Greek ^ form eXWrjKa for eXW-qv. one more aorist form, the aorist passive. As already
form in
If this
tive).*^
That belongs
to syntax.
development shown above in Mayser^ gives a In brief it is in careful discussion of the papyri development. harmony with what has already been observed. The non-thematic strong aorist is confined to a few verbs like îjvai, yvcopac, The k aorists are used exdovvai, 8vvat, delvai, Tpiaadat, aTTJvaL. clusively in both singular and plural. The thematic strong aorist
inscriptions agree with the
The
the aorist and support the N. T. phenomena.'^
is
disappearing before the
weak sigmatic
eSco/ca,
aorist.
a.(j)7]Ka
In the N. T. the
cept that
k aorists
WrjKa,
occur always ex-
Luke (1:2
and
in the literary introduction) has wapedoaav.

:
Elsewhere eSwrare (Mt. 25

23:23),
etc.,
35), WrjKav
(Mk. 6:29),
a(t>r]KaT
(Mt.
quite
frequently.^
The
LXX
list is
also
nearly
always has k with these aorists in the plural.^" The aorists in the N. T. are not numerous.
discussion
(hva/jLTip,
The non-thematic
found in the
eaTrjv,
e4>r]v,
of
all
-/it
verbs and includes
ave^rip,
lyvoiv,
and
the forms of dovpai, elmt and
OeLPai.
save the indica-
tive active.
'
V. and D. Handb.,
Storrett, Horn.
etc., p. 81,
f.
2 * 6 6 ^
Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. 93

II.,
but in particular Thumb, Handb., p. 144. 3 Hirt, Ilandb. etc., p. 399 f.
N. 42
f.
Cf.
Monro, Horn.
fT.;
Gr., p. 45.
Munro,
ff.;
ib., p.
47.
Cf. Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., pp. 180
Nachm., Magn.
Inschr., pp.
162
8
Mcisterh., Att. Inschr., pp. 181, 185, 187.
'"
^ Cf. W.-Sch., p. 119. Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 358-370. See Ilelbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 94 f ., for similar exx. in the LXX, and Thack.,
Gr., p. 255.
348
NEW TESTAMENT
strong aorist in the N. T. shows the two developThe use of -a instead of -ov with the strong above. noted ments aorist-stem is very common. See this chapter, vi, (/?), for N. T. hst Hke el3a\av, etc. The MSS. vary much in the matter.^ The other
The thematic
Here again is the increased use of the sigmatic aorist. 'E^lcoaa (1 Pet. Blass^ has a careful presentation of the facts. 4 2) is a case in point instead of the old Attic kîoov. So is e/3Xdchange
:
arrjaa
Both
(Mt. 13:26; Heb. 9:4; Jas. 5 18) rather than 'i^XaaTov. (Mt. 5 32) and cT^JMa (Mt. 22 25) occur. Cf. Helbing,"Gr. d. Sept., p. 93 f., and Thackeray, Gr., pp. 233 ff., for
:
eyo-l^woi
LXX illustrations.
"Hâ occurs a few times instead of the
(2 Pet. 2:5), evrtauraât (Lu. 13:34).
common
ijyayov, as cTrdâs
it
Blass justifies
as appear-
and late writers.^ It is part of the ing at least in dialects, tendency towards the sigmatic aorist. Likewise anapT-qaco is slipping in beside dMdprco (Mt. 18
Blass finds
it
:
LXX
15;
Ro. 5
14,
16, cf. verse 12).
Emped., LXX, Lob., PJmjn., 732. W. H. accept edvaev (Mk. 1 32 on the authority of BD (fCA, etc., edv). Luke in Ac. 24: 21 has the redupHcated aorist eKeKpaâ like the LXX; but usually the N. T. has the late form hpaâ as in Mt. 8 29 (eKpaâv), though once the Attic dveKpayop appears (Lu. 23 18). Once Luke (Ac. 6 2) has KaTa\el\(/avTas, a form that Blass^ finds in Herm.,
in
: : : :
Vis. VIII, 3. 5,
"Oxj/rjcrde
cbi/'d/xr?!'
and Mayser^ observes di'raX#at in the papyri. (Lu. 13 28) finds a parallel in an old Homeric aorist
:
(Winer-Schmiedel,
13
p. 109).
In Rev. 18:14 the Text. Rec.
(without any
Jas. 4
:
known some MSS. have

aorist
authority) has an aorist form

eix-rropevauixeda.
So in evpriaa. Indeed some verbs have

f.
dropped the strong

ixai,
form entirely
like /Stow, ^Xaardvoj, kyelpo-
KTeivu.
See careful discussion of Winer-Schmiedel, p. 109
MSS. frequently read dcoay, 8<xiacofj.ev, etc., as if from an aorist Ucoaa, Cf. Helas Jo. 17:2; Rev. 4:9. Cf. Winer-Schmiedel, p. 120. parallel further that examples for f., 90 Sept., d. Gr. p. bing,
LXX
these illustrations.
Conversely
10)
({)poveLv)
is to be noted a new strong aorist dvkdakov (Ph. 4 which Blass^ takes in a causative sense (dveddXeTe to virep e/xoO
:
Verbs in
1 '
-fco
make
the aorist both in a and

p. 4.5
f. ^
^.
Most
of these
Cf. Blass, Gr. of

lb.
N. T. Gk.,
lb., p. 43.
it
Mayser
(Gr. d. grioch. Pap., p. 369) finds
in the pap. as well as
i.yayfj(Tai..
*
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 43. Cf KaraXeLxPy Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 370.

.
Mk.
12
19 S.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 43.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tIIMA)

verbs have dental stems in Attic, but some have guttural.
the a forms prevail
till
349
Hence
k/xTOLâL
to-day.
f.).
The
LXX
agrees with the N. T.
(Thackeray, GV., p. 222

(Mt. 20:19),
karripKTev
aaXiriajis
So hvaraâv (Mt. 25:5),

(Ac. 8: 39),
-qpiJLoaafjLrju
kireaTTipLâv
:
(Ac. 15:32); but on the other
hand
:
(Lu. 9 51),
rjpiraaev
(2 Cor. 11
2),
(Mt. 6:2).^
The tendency
is
in the papyri
and the
^
in-
scriptions
on the whole
-fco.^
towards the use of a and not

e
with
the verbs in
Cf. BaTrrtfco, Xoytfo/iat, vofxi^w, etc.
Like
eppWrj
KoKeco
and
:
reXew^
we have
in 4>opeaapep (1 Cor. 15
:
49)
22)
(Mt. 5
21),
but
ev(t>bpr](Ta
(Lu. 12
16), p-qdkv
(Mt.
and and
er(ir6dr]aa (1
Pet. 2:2).
dLiprjau,
Cf. also ijveaa,
i]pKeae, e^tecrai.
:
Cf. tTrdvaaa
though D has -a- in Jo. 6 35 and {< in Rev. The liquid verbs in -aivco and -alpoo generally retain d even when not preceded by e or as in Attic. So ejSdaKava (Gal. 3:1); once Kep(Mt. 4:2), but
t
5apu} (1
Cor. 9
:
21),
elsewhere -^(ra; kêKadapa

eTrL4>duaL
(1
Cor. 5:7); kXemavap
(Rev. 7 14)
and 18
(Rev. 1:1); 23 note (}>ap7], not (j)aprj.

;
karjpiava
(Lu.
1 :79).
In Rev. 8 12
:
The
kolpt]
begins to use -dra and
-dpa with
all
verbs,
and
it is
well-nigh universal in
modern Greek.
p. 223).
A few forms survive in modern Greek (Thumb, Handh., p. 140 f.). The second aorist passive has a few late developments of its own. This substitution of the second aorist passive for the first
with the N. T. (Thackeray, Gr.,
-7]va
is
The
LXX agrees
a favorite idiom in the N, T.*

-r]p
The
is
Koipi]
ness for the
formations.^
This
is
true of the inscriptions''
shows likewise fondand
the papyri.^
This development
directly the opposite of that in
the case of the second and

rare.
first aorist
active
and middle.
It
is
has
already been observed that in

to the general
Homer
the passive aorist
Perhaps the increase in the use of --qp forms is encroachment of aorist passive forms on the middle, and this is the simplest one. The Attic, of course, had many such forms also. Here are the chief N. T. examples: rjyyeX-qp {air-, ap-, 8l~, KaT-, Lu. 8 20, etc.) is in the LXX and the papyri;
:
very partly due
rjpolyrjp
(Mk. 7:35,
Cor. 12
:
etc.),
but
iipolxdwo-v
also (Rev.
20:12);
:
rip-
irayrjp (2
2, 4),
but the Attic
i)pTvaad-n
(Rev. 12
5);
:
ho-
pvyrjpaL is
VTrerayrip
1
read by some
(Ro. 8
:
MSS.
20, etc.),
in Mt. 24:43; dieTaynp (Gal. 3 19), but the Attic StaraxOtPTa (Lu. 17:9f.);
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.

f.
*
^
Blass, Gr. of
Cf. Schniid, Atticismus, IV, p. 594 Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 171; Schweizer, IVrg. In.schr., p. 190 f. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 381 f. Cf Roinhold, De Grace, p. 7G
.
N. T.
GIv., p. 43.
f.
350
KareKarjv

(Rev. 8
:
NEW TESTAMENT
eêKavdiiaav (Ro.
1
:
7; 1 Cor. 3
15),
but Attic
:
27); Karepvyrju (Ac. 2 :37); tKpv^rjv (Jo. 8
59).
So also
:
c})vr]v
in-
stead of
(Lu. 22
:
e(j)vv
follows the analogy of kppvrjv (Heb. 2

:
1)
and exapw
Thus we have kK4>vfj (Mk. 13 28) and avix^yvdaai (Lu. 8 :6-8). Forms Hke eTrXrjyrjp (Rev., 8 12) and e^dj^T/z/ (Mt. On the other hand the poetical kKkW-qv (Mt. 1 20) are Attic.
5)
.
14
19
avaK\i.9r]pai.)
has displaced the Attic
eKkiv-qv.
'
KirtKravO-qv oc-
casionally appears (as in
Mk. 8:31 and Rev.
six times)
where the
the Attic
Attic would have airWavou, and krexQw (Lu. 2:11)
when
:
would usually have kyevonrip. Both eyep7]dr]p (Mt. 6 10 and often in 1 Th.) and eyepofxrjp (Mt. 7 28) are common, as r]8vpr]dr]p (Mt. 17 16) and edvpaadrjp (Mk. 7 24). The many aorist passives in the deponent sense have already been noticed under vi, (e).
: : :
(e)
The Present Tense
(6
eVeo-TW"? ;^poVo9).
The present
from the nature of the case, is the most frequent in actual use and hence shows the greatest diversity of development. Brugmann- finds thirty-two distinct ways of forming the present tense in the Indo-Germanic tongues and thirty of them in the Greek. But some of these represent very few verbs and for practical purposes a much simpler classification is sufficient.^ Unfortunately the grammars by no means agree on the As samples see Giles, Man. of Comp. PhiloL, p. simplification. 425 f.; Hadley and Allen, p. 122 f.; Monro, Homeric Grammar, p. 9; Riemann and Goelzer, Phonetique, pp. 394 ff.; Kiihner-Blass,
indicative,
II, pp. 88 ff. In simple truth the facts are so varied that they lend themselves to many combinations more or less artificial.
One
1.
of the
most satisfactory
Class.
is
is
that of Monro,
who has
the his-
torical instinct at least in his
arrangement.
is
The Root
0r?/xt.
This
is
the simple non-thematic present

first,
like
This
the logical one to put

e^),
as with the aorist
like e-^t]-p.
fjLai,
tljj.1,
This class
disappearing in the N. T. though 8vpa(etcr ,

Kad-r]-iJ,aL,
elfXL
in composition
Kei-fiaL, Kpefj.a-iJ.aL
appear.
2.
p.1,
The Non-Thematic Reduplicated Present.

KL-xpri-p-i,
bp'LPr}-p.i,
iriiJ.-Tr\r]-iJ.i.,
So
It
bl-bw-fxi,
'i-rj-
'i-(JTri-p.L,
TL-d-q-fii.
was never a
forms are
very large
class,
but holds on in the N. T.
And
-co
common
1
with these verbs.

and
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 110, for exx. in Jos.

f.
LXX.
Cf. also Helbing, Gr. d.
Sept., p. 95
^
MSS. simply read

II,
-<f)vrj.
Grundr.,
Giles,
pp. 836-1330.
to^xt^,
In Horn, the same root wiU form a present in

Cf.
several ways, as tx^,

3
t^xai'w.
Monro, Hom. Gr.,
p. 40.
Man.
of
Comp.
PhiloL, p. 423.

3.
351
So
in the
The Non-Thematic Present with -va- and

aii4)L-e-vvv-p.i,
-vv-.
N. T.
vv-fiL,
a.TT-oX-'Kv-iJ.L, SeiK-vv-fiL, êvy-vv-fxt, ^63V-vv-hl, Kar-
ofi-vv-idt, ir-qyay-vv-ixi, Ktpa-vvv-ixL, Kope-PVV-fXL, Kpe-fia-vvv-ni, fxly-vv-nt,
prjy-vv-ixL,
aj3e-vpv-fjiL,
(TTpw-vvv-fjLi,
but these
all
have more
This was a
verbs.
It
commonly the
4,
-co
forms.^
The Simple Thematic Present.
So
\eyo), Xuco.
constantly increasing class at the
expense of the
Xet7r-co
-/ti
had
several branches also including root-verbs like

like Treid-w
{tvlO),
ayc^},
ypa-^,
a strengthened vowel
<x7]Tio,
(Xitt),
(pevy-w (0iry),
Tr)Ku, Tpooyo:,
d\Wc^,
TTviyoi, etc.,
Hadley and
Allen's "strong
vowel class,"- and the

Tt/xa-co, c^tXe-co, dî6-co.
many
contract denominative verbs hke

t
But see the Class for these contract verbs. to this list from nouns and some also from added were New verbs
verb-stems, ypriyopk-oi from the old perfect kypr)yopa (this tense
never in the N.
o-rkaj)."
T.),-'^
or-qK-w
1
:
(Mk. 11:25) from

-KepieKpvêv
is
taT-qKo.
(modern
probably imperfect, Greek The LXX shows eKpv^r]v} Cf. {kov-ktw). Kpv^w from aorist, not Gr., p. 224 f.). (Thackeray, stems perfect from presents new these So yivonai (ylyv-o-nai, 5. The Reduplicated Thematic Present.
In Lu. 24
*yL-ykp-OHaL),
])eing
tcrxi'-co
TTtTTT-CO (*7rt-7rr-Co)
ri/CT-O) (*Tt-TK-C0),
-^V-, WT-, -KT-,

also
weak forms
of --yev-, -irer-, -reK-.
The N. T. has
There are
6.
-o-^^
from iVxco {* ai-akx-^) The Thematic Present with a
Suffix.
five (-i, -v,
-T^ _0).
Each
of these divisions furnishes a
number
"^
of verbs.
The L class. It is very large. This suffix is used to make verbs from roots and substantives. It is probable that originally the suffix was -71. It is thought that contract verbs in -aw, -eco, It -oco, etc., originally had this t as j or ?/ which was dropped.'' preis thus the chief way of forming denominative verbs and is
(a)
eminently a secondary
suffix.^
Some
of these verbs are causative,
some
intensive,
some
desiderative.^
The
special
Greek desidera-
tive in -aelo) does not
appear in the N. T., but forms like KOTridw are found. In particular, forms in -tfw become so common that ^" they no longer have an intensive, iterative or causative force,
1
Blass, Gr. of HlasH, Gr. of

lb., p. 41.
'
*
N. T. Gk., p. 48. N. T. Gk., p. 40.
Gr., p. 122.
The
LXX
MSS. show both
ypr,yopecj
and
arriKoi.
Cf. Helbing,
Gr. a. Sept., p. 82.

^
^
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
Cf.
N. T. Gk., p. 41. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 34; Hirt,

f.
llaiulb. etc., p. .380.

Giles,
Hirt, ib., p. 38.3

lb.,
Man.
ib., p.
of
Comp.
Philol., p. 440.
pp. 44.5
ff.
On
llio
whole subject of contract verbs see Jann., Hist.

'
Gk. Gr., pp. 207
iT.
Jann.,
222.
352
NEW TESTAMENT
but are used side by side with the older form, as /SaTrroj, jSaTrrtfco; In all the -fco forms the t has united with a palatal (guttural) or lingual (dental), a matter determined by the aorist or future. So 4)v\aa-ao: is from (j)v\a.K-jo:, ^pdfco from 4>pa8joj. Other familiar combinations are i and X, as l3a\-ja) = âK\oj, t with V by transposition, as 4)a.v-jw = cl)aivco, i with p hkewise, as
palvio, pavTiôi, etc.
ap-joj
= aLpcio.
In
Kaioj
and
/cXatw
the
In the N. T. verbs in
active as already
-aipo}, -alpco
v has dropped between a and t. have -dm, -dpa in the first aorist
shown under the aorist tense (d). 'A/i^tdfco (Lu, an example of a new present for a.4>Lkvvvp.L. Cf. also aTTOKTtvudvTojv (Mt. 10 28) in some MSS. for the older aTOKrelvu,
12
:
28)
is
-vvui, -pjcjo.
See Blass^ for the variations in the MSS. at many places in the N. T. with this word. So eKxvwca (Mt. 26 28, etc.)
:
Mt. 9 17 we have /cxetrat from kxeco and in Rev. 16 1 kxeare^ in some MSS. The V class is also well represented in the N. T. with the(iS) matic stems. It takes various forms. There is the v alone, as KdfjL-vo:, -av as ajxapr-avui -ve as a4>-LK-veo-jjLaL. Sometimes the p is
in the best
MSS.
for kxeco.
:
Only
in
repeated in the root, as Xa^lSaPCjO (Xa/3), fxapdapa: (fxad), ruTxdj^co (tvx). In the KOLPT] (so and N. T.) this inserted p (n) is retained in the aorist and future of \afxj3ava} {e\r]fj.<l)drjp, Xi7/xi/'o/iat) contrary
LXX
to literary Attic.
(7)
So the papyri.
It is
The
(TK
class.
commonly
called inceptive,^
but Del-
briick'*
considers these verbs originally terminative in idea, while

calls attention to
Monro ^
with the
the iterative idea
suffix -aKe, -ctko.
The verbs with

Bp-q-aKw,
5t-5d-o-Kco
cr/c
common in Homer may be either withor with

,
out reduplication, as
jra-axco
/So-o-koj,
tXd-o-Ko/xat, 4)a-aKoo,
reduplication as yL(y)pw-aKw,
(for irad-aKcS).
(for 8L-8ax-(TK(jS)
p.L-ij.pi]-aKoi,
Cf. ape-aKoo,
is
yap.-iaKco,
yr]pa-(JKco,
evp-laKoi,
fiedv-aKO).
Reduplication
8'L-8o}-fj.i.
thematic) like
thus a feature with root-verbs (nonand thematic like yl(y)po-naL as well as
the
(TK
class.
see (h).
The
iterative idea of
For reduplication in the aorist and the perfect some of these ctk verbs suits well the
It
is
reduplication.
(5)
The
T class.
not a very numerous one (about 18
verbs), though
some
of the verbs are
common.
The verb has
1 2
Gr. of
Blass, ib.
N.T. Gk.,p.41. The LXX has these new presents. Thack., p.225. The LXX MSS. illustrate most of these peeuUarities of verbs
Cf. Helbing, Or. d. Sept., pp. 82-84.
Philol., p. 436.
in the present tense.

3 *
Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
Grundr., IV, p. 59. Horn. Gr., p. 34.
Cf. Brug., Grundr., II, 669.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tHMA)

always a labial stem
in
j3
353
like clt-tw, /3d7r-Tco, tvtt-to).
The
(cf.
root
may end
even
as in koKv-k-toi,
ttt
tv
as in
tvtt-toj,
or
(f>
as in
jSaTr-rco.
It is
possible that
(e)
may
represent an original x/
iota class).
in the present.
The
6 class.
Cf.
aKrj-da), ea-doo, Kvrj-Oo), vrj-doj
The modern Greek has developed many new presents on the basis of the aorist or the perfect (Thmnb, Handb., p. 143). The origin of this (/) The Future Tense (6 fieWojv ;)^poV 09) tense has given rise to much discussion and some confusion.
.
Vincent and Dickson^ even say that the first aorist is derived from the a future! Like the other tenses there has been a development along several lines. No general remark can be made As already remarked, the future that will cover all the facts. tense is fundamentally aoristic or punctiliar in idea and not durative or linear. The linear idea can be accented by the periphrastic form, as eaeade XoKovvres (1 Cor. 14:9). Cf. also Mt. 24:9; Lu. 1:20; 5 10; Mk. 13:25. But as a rule no such distinction is drawn. The truth is that the future tense is a late development
:
in language.
In the Sanskrit
it is
practically confined to the in-
and the participle, as in the Greek to the indicative, infinitive and participle (optative only in indirect discourse, and rarely then, not at all in N. T.). And in the Rigveda the sya form occurs only some seventeen times.- The Teutonic tongues have no future form at all apart from the periphrastic, which existed in the Sanskrit also.^ In the modern Greek again the future as a distinct form has practically vanished and instead there occurs da and the subjunctive or deXoo and the remnant of the indicative
finitive, like
our English "shall" or "will."^

far the old
Giles^ thinks
it
un-
certain
future.
how
Indo-Germanic peoples had developed a
Probably the
earliest use of the future
was one that
still
sur-
vives in most languages.
It is just the present in
a vivid, lively
disciples
sense projected into the future.
So we say "I go a-fishing" as
Simon Peter
respond
of syntax
did,
inra-yoi
oKLehnv (Jo. 21:3).
The other
tpxcixeda Kal qixeh avv aoi.
This usage belongs to the realm
and yet
it
throws light on the origin of the future tense.

:
So Jesus used
(Jo. 14
3)
the present and future side
by
side {epxo-
2 3
*
Handb. of Mod. Gk., p. 82. Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 401. Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 446; Whitney, Sans.
Gr., p.
333
f.
Thumb, Man. of
llandb., pp. 161

(k)in]). Philol., p.
f.,
173.
446.
On
the whole subject of "Indo-European
Futures" see Hadley, Ess.
Phil,
and
Crit., pp.
184
ff.
354
fjLai

Kal irapa\ritx\poiJLaL).
NEW TESTAMENT
We have seen already that a number of and presents hke (ji-q-iii had identically the same root and with no original distinction. That is, the durative idea was not distinguished from the aoristic or punctiliar. It is not strange, therefore, to see a number of these roots with primary endings (cf subj. and opt. aorists) used as futures without any tense-suffix at all. Some were originally either present or future in sense (cf. epxonaL above), others came to be used only as future. These
aorists
appear in Homer naturally, as ^lofxaL, Uonai, dfiL, TviofiaL, etc.^ N. T. (payo/jLaL. It is possible that those with variable vowel like UofxaL may really be the same form as the Homeric subjunctive (like loiJiev as opposed to lfxeu)r Ilto/zat is common in Attic (N. T.) and is from aorist root {e-irL-ov). The form 4)ay ofxaL (LXX and N. T.) is analogous (aorist, e(l)ayop). The Attic used x^^ as future also, but LXX and N. T. have x^co (Blass, Gr. of N. T.
ver])s
Cf.
GL,
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-
aorist.^
ory has been advanced which derives the a future from the oThe frequency of the aorist subjunctive in Homer with
principal clauses
K (oLp) in
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 delô^ and the Latin dixo would be identical in form and meaning.^ But Brugmann'' has perhaps solved the problem by the suggestion that both explanations are true. Thus ypa\pco he derives from the aorist subjunctive ypaôi, a mixed tense with a double origin.
The
use of -aio/e in the Doric lends weight to the derivation of these verbs at least from the sya (Sanskrit) type.^ Hirt^ regards aeo/e (Doric) as a combination of the <r future and the e
future (liquid verbs, for instance) and considers
it
new Greek
formation.
This Doric future therefore

N. 38.
may
be as old as any,
Sterrett, Horn.
Giles,
II.,
Man.,
p. 447.
Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 184;
Riem. and Goelzer,
Phonct., p. 438.
'
lb., p. 446.
Cf. also Hirt,

II.,
Handb.
etc., p.
401
f.
6
Sterrett, Horn.
N. 27.
This position
is
Giles,
Man.,
p. 446.
Griech. Gr., p. 320.

lb., p.
accepted by K.-Bl.,
8
II, p. 105.
etc., p.
105
f.
Handb.
403
f.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (thMa)

if
355
not the oldest suffix, in fact the really distinctively future In the N. T. this Doric form survives in ireaoviiaL^ (Mt. 10 29). Teco has pemca (Jo. 7: 38), /cXalco has KKavaco (Lu. 6 25), while 4>uy(io has 4>evôiJLaL (Jo. 10 5). The other forms common
suffix.
:
have no future in the N. T, This mixed ^ origin of the future (partly aorist subj., partly Indo-Germ. sya) shows itself So Moulton notes rpod^co (Mk. in the Aktionsart of the tense. Cf. 14 28) as durative, but dêt (1 Th. 4 14) as aoristic. Thumb, Handb., p. 123. Thus we may gain further light ^ on the Ionic-Attic future of verbs in -t^co. It is like the Doric -aeo/e. So we have -taeoo, dropping 0" we get -teco = -tw. These verbs in -ifco are very common in the later Greek. In the N. T. the usage varies between this form of the future and the aoristic form in -ao/e. The LXX, like the
in Attic
: :
Ptolemaic papyri (Thackeray,

quotations.
p. 228),
has usually
7rapop7tai
-tco in first sin:
gular and so neroiKLw (Ac. 7:43)
and
(Ro. 10
-io-co,
19),
both
Elsewhere
W.
H.'*
prefer the forms in
and Blass^
uniform in
thinks that in the original passages of the N. T. the -laco forms

are genuine.
So the forms
:
in -laei (like jSaTTiaeL) are

:
the N. T. (Lu. 3
16)
save Kadapiei (Hel). 9

cKôpLtt
(Mt. 3
-icret,
12)
.^
MSS. vary between

-tcrei.
xpovid and
Cf. Blass.''
KOfiLelTaL
So
in
and haKadapiel and -lati, <i)WTLL and Eph. 6: 8; Col. 3:25,

14)
the
MSS. vary between

in 2 Pet. 2
:
and
Koniaerai.
Some MSS. read
KonLovfjLevoL
13.^
All editors^ accept Koptttade in 1 Pet.

H.^" print as -lomi always (as pana-
4.
The
Lu.
active plural
1 :48)
W.
pLovatv,
The
in the
save in yvojpiaovaiv (Col. 4:9). syncopated futures" from the dropping of a do not survive
KoXeaco, reXkaoj
:
N. T. in
which always retain the

dTroXci
is
<x.
^^
So even
dTToXeo-o)
*
(Mt. 21 41), though

this ireffovnai is possibly
common
in the
LXX
and
<r.
And
not from
Trer-o-oO/xat,
but a change of
t to
Cf.
K.-Bl., II, p.
107; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 322; Hirt. Handb., p. 404.

of
Henry (Comp. Gr.

affix of
2
*
Gk. and
Lat., p. IIG) considers the

aecro, aeo.
Doric future to be the

f.
the fviture twice over, as
* ^
Moulton, Prol., p. 149. Notes on Orth., p. 163. Cf. Mayser, Gr., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 42.
lb. Ib.
Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. lOG
p. 35G.
But Blass
(ib.)
prefers e77ieT (Jas. 4

f.,
8).
f.,
See Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 84
87
for the
LXX
exx. of verbs
in -foj.
8
Ib.
10
Ib.
Notes on Orth., p. 163. " Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
"
p. 41
f.
Giles,
Man.,
a.
p.
446
f.
Brug. (Griech. Gr.,
p. 321) considers this
a new formation after the aor. subj. suffix. Gr. d. Sept., p. 86; Thack., Gr., p. 230.
The
LXX
keeps
Cf. Helbing,
356
is

:
NEW TESTAMENT
quoted once in the N. T. (1 Cor. 1 19). However, the middle the N. T. form (Lu. 5 37) like awoOavovnaL. 'EXai'i'co has no future in the N. T. The N. T., like the LXX, has a future form dêXw (Rev. 22 19) from the aorist elXov of alpkoj. The liquid verbs in X, v, p present few problems. They belong to the aorist subjunctive type of formation.^ Here again we have syncopation of the a. Verbs like /SdXXco (|3aXco), fxhoo (fJLepoi), a'ipca (dpoi) form the future with the variable vowel o/e added to the stem without a in the N. T. as in the earlier Greek. Blass^ has shown that in the N. T. the future active has largely displaced the future middle with verbs that were defective in the active voice. These futures are as follows: anapr-qaw (Mt. 18 21), kTvavTr)a<^ (Mk. 14 13), dpTrdaw (Jo. 10 28), Û-ôi (Ac. 28 26), yeXaaco (Lu. 6 21), 5tcb|co (Mt. 23 34), KXavaoo (Lu. 6 25), /cpd^w (Lu. 19 :40 N*BL), Tra^^w (Mk. 10: 34), j6e^(rco (Jo. 7 38), awovdaaoi We see this tendency al(2 Pet. 1 15), GvvavTjâw (Lu. 22 10).
cnroXovfxai, is
: :
:
ready in the
Tj'coaoMdt (1
ireaovixaL
LXX
(Thackeray, Gr.,
p.
231
f.).
On
the other
hand the future middle alone occurs with

Cor. 4: 19),
\y]ixôp.aL
:
airodavovixaL (Jo.
24),
(Doric,
Mt. 10
10
:
29),
(Mt. 10:41), oô/xat (Mt. 24: 30), Trloât (Mk. 10 39), 4>ayofjLaL (Lu. 14
:
15), 4)tvôixai (Jo.
5).
XaprjaofxaL (Lu. 1
{hxo-p-qv)
14) Blass^ regards as
Attic future from the aorist

XCLLpTjao)
from the present.

:
(Ac. 21
22, chiefly in
:
compared with the future 5 25) and aaovaofxai the Acts) are found, and ^rjaco (Jo. 5 25)
as
Both
d/couaco (Jo.
and ^riaoixai (Jo. 11 25). The so-called second future passive

nai
as seen in the case of x^piycro-
above
is
really just the middle ending with a put to the aorist
active stem.
fi-q-ao-jxai
of
There is no difference in form or sense between and (XTaK-T]-(To-p.ai save the -17- which was really a part the active stem of these verbs.^ The point is that fundamentally
these so-called second future passives are really future middles
corresponding to active aorists like the future middles and presents above
{\i]p.'\pop.aL,
for instance).
This point
is
made
clearer
by the
(i)ri(7a.
fact that the Doric ^ used only active endings like avaypa.
(not -erat)
Homer,
besides, only has one second future pas-
sive (pLyrjaoiML, really middle)
and none
in -drja-.^
Instead he uses
the middle future as later Greek continued to do with verbs like

TifjLrj(roiJiaL.
Cf.
yevrjao/jLaL
from
e-yev-ofxrjv.
Some verbs indeed used

(Mt. 24
:
both
1
this
second future passive like
(pavrjaojjLaL
*
^
30)
which
Giles,
Man., pp. 410, 427.
2
3
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 42.

lb., p. 43.
ib., p. 447.
K.-Bl., II, p. 111.

is
:
357
punctiliar and âwO/xat (1 Pet. 4 18) which may be durative Hke the Attic as Moulton^ argues. So iravaovTai (1 Cor. 13:8) and e-iravaTari<xTaL (Lu. 10:6). Cf. also avoiyrjaoiJLaL (Mt. 7:7), apTrajT] aopLat (1 Th. 4 30), VTroTayr]arofj.at 17), 4>avr]aoixai. (Mt. 24 14, see 12), xc^pWo/jlcll (Lu. 1 (1 Cor. 15:28), 4/vyriaop.ai. (Mt. 24
: : : :
above)
The
Greek
first
future passive so-called

It is
aorist in -dr]-.
and, like the second aorist
upon the distinctively ^ unknown to Homer, as stated above, passive, is aorist in origin and idea.
is
built
Here again the Doric used the active endings^ like awaxQwovvTi.. This later form in -^770 grew continually in usage over the merely
middle form
crofiaL
like
TL/irjaoiJiaL.
But the passive future did not always

avaKXidi)-
have the passive sense, as has been shown in the case of

(Mt. 8
:
11), aTVOKpidriaoixaL
:
(Mt. 25
37), etc.*
'
h.voLxî](Jop.ai
also appears in Lu. 11
f.
in
some MSS.
aradrjaoixaL
As an example
Cor. 14
earrjô:)
:
of the
usual forms in the N. T. take

fxv-qadrjaoîaL
yvcoadrjaoixaL (1
7).
Only
(not
jxeixvyâoixat)
and
(not
appear in
the N.
T.=^
For a periphrastic future passive expressing continuance see eaeade ixiaoviiivoL (Mt. 10 22).^ This is naturally not a very common idiom for this tense, though the active periphrastic future is less infrequent as already shown.
:
{g)
1.
The Perfect Tenses
{reXeLoi 'y^povoi).
The Name. It does fairly well if we do not think of time in connection with the tense, a mistake that Clyde makes.'' The completed state does not of itself have reference to present time. That comes later and by usage in the indicative alone in contrast to past and future. Originally the perfect was merely an intensive or iterative tense like the repetition of the aoristic present.^
The Greek perfect is an inheritance 2. The Original Perfect. from the Indo-Germanic original and in its oldest form had no reduplication, but merely a vowel-change in the singular.^ Indeed olba (Sanskrit veda, Latin vidi, English wot) has never had reduplication.^'^ It illustrates also the ablaut from t5- to ot5- in the singular, se(>n in Sanskrit and Gothic also.^^ Cf. Latin ceyi. Note
also Kel-iiaL in the sense of Te-0et-/xat.
Pro!., p. 150.
2 3 * 6 6
Giles,
Man., pp. 420, 447.

chapter.
Gk. Synt., p. 7L Giles, Man., p. 449.

Ilirt,
lb., p. 447.
Ilandb.
etc.,
pp. 406, 410.

410.
See
VI, (r), in this
'"
Giles,
Ilirt,
Man.,
Ilandb.
p. 449.
etc., p.
lilass,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 3G.
"
lb., p. 204.
358
NEW TESTAMENT
is
But the vowel-change
characteristic of the original perfects
seen in other verbs which did use reduplication. Reduplication will receive separate treatment a little later, as it pertains to the
present and aorist tenses also.
It
may
be here remarked that the

perfect tense.
reduplicated form of some iterative presents doubtless had some

influence in fastening reduplication
upon the
Note
the English
syllable
is
"mur-mur" (Greek
yoy-yv^co, dp-ap-iaKco),
where the
doubled in the repetition. It was a natural process. these reduplicated forms Avith the mere change in the vowel appear in the N. T. This so-called second perfect, like the second aorist, is a misnomer and is the oldest form.^ In Homer indeed it is the usual form of the perfect.^ These old root-perfects,
A number of
old inherited perfect forms according to Brugmann,^ persist in
the
tions^
and are reasonably common in the papyri,"* the inscripand the N. T. They are of two classes: (1) real /xt perfects without any perfect suffix, like earavaL (Ac. 12 14) (2) second perfects in -a, like yeyova, XeXotTra. As N. T. examples may be mentioned aK-qKoa (Ac. 6:11), yeyova (1 Cor. 13 1)), elooda (Lu. 4:16), yky pacâ (Jo. 19:22), oUa (Jo. 10:4), oXcoXa (oltt-, Mt. 10 6), etc. These forms are found in the LXX. Cf. HelKOLVT]
:
bing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 103; Thackeray, Gr., p. 252
f.
But the
kolpt]
gave up the shorter (without -a) forms of the plural indicative See this chapter, active perfect of 'iarr}p.L (eara/JLev, earare, taTaaiv)
.
IV, {d), 3, for details.
This is a new type created by the Greek lan3. The K Perfect. guage of which no adequate explanation has yet been offered. The Attic inscriptions already had the k form (Meisterhans, p. 189 f.).
It
is
apparently at
first in
the singular, as in laTriKa

t/kco
(pi. ea-Tanev), etc.^
One might think that

finally
K
like KetixaL and had a few perfect forms ^ (like TjKaaLv), so by analogy some verbs became the type and analogy did the rest. But Giles ^ ob-
just as
has a perfect sense
serves that the stems of the twelve or fourteen k perfects in

all
end
in
a vowel, a liquid or a nasal, not one in
k.
Homer And then the

etc.
2 3 * ^
Riem. and Goelzer, Phonct., p. 445. II., N. 43. So 7670^, elcoOa, Gk. Gr., p. 323. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 372 ff. Nachm., Magn. Inschr., p. 159 f. Hirt, Handb. etc., p. 412 f.
Sterrett, Horn.
\k\onra,
Tr'tTvoiOa,
ijKafxev, ^Kare, rjKaffLV OCCUr. The pap. add KaO-rjKvlaS; rjKOTccv, In the Wackern., Theol. Literaturzcit., 1908, p. 38. Cf. Ilclbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 103 f.; Thack., Gr., p. 269. The pap. show the perfect forms in the plural. Man., p. 450. Mayser, p. 372,
'
LXX
^Kkvai.

three k aorists (UcoKa, W-qKa,
contra there are
8opKa,
rJKo)
('PIJMA)
359 But per
call for
explanation.
some
perfects in
'ioLKa, TTT]Ka,
etc.
So that
Homer which have k stems like okafter all analogy may be the true
explanation of the k perfects which came, after Homer's time, to
be the dominant type in Greek. But the -Ka perfects are rare in Homer. The examples are so common (5e5co/ca, etc.), in the kolutj
list. Note earrjKa intransiand earaKa transitive. They are made from labials and 4. The Aspirated Perfects. Even in the early palatals (4>, x) and are absent from Homer. classical period they are confined to xeTro/iâ and rerpocfya.^ Homer 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
as in the classic Greek, as to need no

tive
fact that
K,
7,
X were not distinguished

:
in
the middle perfect
forms.
As a N. T. example
(Heb. 11
17).
of this later aspirated perfect take

e'C\ri4>a,
irpoaevrjvoxo.
5.
Cf. also
irkirpaxo., Teraxa..
Middle and Passive Forms. It is only in the active that the perfect used the k or the aspirated form ((/>, x)- We have seen already that in the kocvt] some active perfect forms drop the distinctive endings and we find forms like ecopaKav and ecbpa/ces. Helbing {Gr. d. Sept., pp. 101-103) gives LXX examples of rootperfects like eppwya, k perfects like redeiKa, earrjKa and transitive The middle and passive earaKa, aspirated perfects like Ipprjxa. perfects did use the reduplication, but the endings were added directly to this reduplicated stem as in Xe-Xv-nai. On the history of the ending -/ca see Pfordten, Zur Geschichte des griechischen
Perfectums, 1882, p. 29.
6.
The Decay
it
of the Perfect
Forms.
In the Sanskrit the per-
fect appears in half the roots of the language,
Sanskrit
but in the later tends more and more to be confused with the mere past tenses of the indicative (aorist and imperf.) and grows less
common
also.^
In the Latin, as
is
well
known, the perfect and
the aorist tenses blended. the old perfect and in dixi

of the
fect
1
In vidi and dedi we see preserved''
we see the old aorist. The Greek Byzantine period, shows a great confusion between the perand the aorist, partly due to the Latin influence.'^ Finally
Man.,
p. 451.
'
Giles,
2 *
Brus-, Gricoh. Gr., p. 325.

Sterrett, Honi.
Giles,
II.,
N. 43.
Whitney, Suns. Or., pp. 279, 295 f. Giles, Man. of Conip. Philol., p. 451. Moulton, Prol., p. 142.
Man.,
p.
451.
360
in the

modern Greek vernacular the
exco
perfect form
is
lost
save in
the perfect passive participle like

is
KtKK-qtxkvos.
The
perfect active
beiikvo)
now made with

(ex<^
Seo-et
and the passive

Cf.
participle (exw
or with exw
and a root
or
similar to the third singular aorist subbkaxi).
junctive
Thumb, Handb.,
148).
p. 161.
The
only
(Lu.
K perfect in
modern Greek
is evprjKa,
"the only certain remCf. exe

ttjv
Ate
nant of the ancient perfect"

14
:
(ih., p.
TraprjT-qfxhov
v/jluiv
18).
is
Cf. also TreTrwpwfxeprjv exere
KapSiav
(Mk,
17).
This
much hke
the English perfect in reality, not like

Cf.
the Greek exw and aorist participle (like exw aKovaas).

schein, Greek
Sonnen-
Grammar, Syntax, 1894, p. 284. The perfect passive in modern Greek vernacular is formed like exco \vdri (-et) or \e\vphos el/jLai.^ But we are in no position to throw stones at the Greeks, for we in English have never had a perfect save the periphrastic form. How far the perfect and the aorist may have become confused in the N. T. in sense is a matter of syntax to be
discussed later.^
7.
The Perfect in
is
the Subjunctive, Optative,
Imperative.
the perfect
practically^ confined to the indicative.
No
:
Here example
of the perfect optative occurs
even
in the periphrastic form.

et5co (elSrjTe,
The
subjunctive perfect, except the form

remain.
appears only in the periphrastic conjugation, of which a few examples

1
Jo. 5
13),
(2 Cor. 1:9),
So the active, as TewoiriKcos and the passive, as ooaiv

fi
:
(Jas. 5
15), TrcTrotôres Cofxev

:
TeTeXecwpevoL (Jo. 17
23), ^
:
So also Jo. 17 19, 1 Cor. 1 10, etc. The imperative makes a little better showing. We still have tare (Jas. 1 19; Eph. 5:5; Heb. 12 17 all possible indicatives), Tre^t^'^âo (Mk. 4 39) and eppcoade (Ac. 15 29). The periphrastic imperative perfect is also found as earcoaav
9), ^ ireirXTjpiOfjLevr] (Jo.
KeKXriphos (Lu. 14
:
16
24).
irepLeôicTjjikvaL
(Lu.
12
35).
In simple truth, as previously re-
proof in Prof. Harry's articles), the perfect subjunctive, optative and imperative never had any considerable
(see
marked
vogue
it is
in Greek, not as
much
is
as in Sanskrit.
In
Homer
the per-
fect subjunctive active
more common than

It
is
in later Greek,
but
rare in Homer.^
8.
The Perfect Indicative.

p. 165.
to the indicative that
we turn
in
'
Thumb., Handb.,
Certainly the aorists in -Ka are very

ff.).
common
the mod. Gk. (Thumb, Handb., pp. 140, 146 2 Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 143 f.
'
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
II.,
jx
200
f.
Prof. Sonnenschein in CI. Rev., 1906,

*
Cf discussion between Prof. Harry and and La Roche, Beitr. z. griech. Gr., 1893.
.
Sterrett,
Hom.
N. 43.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (tiIMa)

for the real
361
for
development
of the perfect.
Here the perfect was
long very frequent indeed, and the time element comes in also. The ancients did not agree in the names for the three tenses of perfect action in the indicative.
The
Stoics^ called the present perfect
cvvTeKLKos (or reXetos) xpovo% hearoos, the past perfect crvPTeXtKos (reXetos) xpovos Trapcoxwî'os,
the future perfect avvreXiKos
(reXetos) xpovo's
IxtWwv.
Sometimes the present perfect was
called merely 6 irapa-
Kdnevos xpovos, the past perfect 6 virepawTikiKb'i xpovos,
and the future
perfect 6 net 6\iyov /jieWcov xpovos {futurum exadwri).
plu-perfect
is
not a good one.
with 22 verbs and 15 XtcoTo (Mt. 7 25) and eX^XWet

:
The name The tense occurs in the N. T. have the augment (H. Scott). Thus reOene(Jo.
17),
but
k^t^\y]To (Lu. 16
20)
and
xepieSeSero (Jo. 11
44).
Cf. elxov
airoKeLjjikvrjv
(Lu. 19
20) in the
modern Greek. In the N. T. the past perfect is not very was it ever as abundant as in the Latin.^ It goes down as a distinct form with the present perfect in modern Greek. Hirt^ calls attention to the fact that Homer knows the past perfect only in the dual and the plural, not the singular, and that the
light of
frequent, nor
singular ending
q.
-r? is
new
formation, a contraction of -ea into

-eiv is used.
In the N. T., however, only
It is
not certain
whether the past perfect is an original Indo-Germanic form. The future perfect was always a very rare tense with only two active forms of any frequency, eo-riy^co and redv-qû. The middle and passive could make a better showing. In Heb. 8:11 eldqaovcnv is probably future active (from LXX),* and in Lu. 19:40 some MSS., but not i^BL (rejected by W.H.), give KeKpaôpraL (cf. LXX). In Heb. 2 13 (another quotation from the LXX) we .have the periphrastic form eaonai, TeiroLdcos. The future perfect passive occurs in the N. T. only in the periphrastic form in such examples as ecrat bebep-kvov (Mt. 16 19), eaTai. \e\vp.kva (Mt. 18 18), ecrovTac hianefxepKTpkvoL (Lu. 12 52). Cf. ecTTj Kar[a]Te0et/x[]i'o(s) B.G.U. 596 (a.d. 84). In the nature of the case the future perfect would not often be needed. This 'periphrastic future perfect is found as early as Homer.^ The papyri likewise show some examples.^
: : :
:
K.-BL,
II, p.
2f.
p. 201.
2 3 *
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
Drug,
calls
the past perf. a "neue Bildung."
in seeing a new stem here db-q-. Cf. ib., p. 416. Deut. 8 3 has db-qaav like the aorist t'Lbr)ffa from .\rist. onwards. Cf. Mayser, Gr., p. 370; Thack., Gr., p. 278. * Sterrett, Hom. II., N. 27. ^ Mayser, Gr. d. griceh. Pap., p. 377. In the Boeotian inscr. the past perf. and the fut. perf. are both absent. in
:
Handb. etc., p. 415 f. So Hirt follows Wackorn.
362
NEW TESTAMENT
The
present perfect and the past perfect also have the periphrastic
yeypanneva (Jo. 20
So we find with comparative indifference^ ecrrti/ So also 30) and in the next verse yeypaTrrai. rjv yey paniJievov (Jo. 19:19) and kireyeypaiTTo (Ac. 17:23). Cf. also Lu. 2 26. The active has some examples also, though not so many, as eo-rcbs eifxi (Ac. 25: 10), and rjaav irpoeojpaKOTes (Ac. 21 29). 9. S in Perfect Middle and Passive and Aorist Passive. It may be due to a variety of causes. Some of these verbs had an original
conjugation.
: :
(T
in the present stem, like TeXe(a-)w, dKov(a)o}.

(rjKovadrjv) ,
Hence
TereXeafxaL,
-wk-
riKovcFixaL
etc.^
Others are dental stems

v
like irdd-w,
stems which in Attic (apparently analogical) changed to a, as (palpoo, Treâcr/xat, but in the N. T. this V assimilates to the p, as in k^r]paiJ.p.kvos (Mk. 1 1 20) from ^rjpalvo:, Then again some verbs take Htp.Laixpkvos (Tit. 1 15) from jutalrco. the a by analogy merely, as in the case of eyvcoaixai, eyvcoaOrjv 12), KkXecapLaL (Lu. 11:7), UXovapaL (Heb. 10 23). (1 Cor. 13
Keiaixai.
Others again are
(h)
1.
Reduplication
Primitive.
{SiirXaaiacrno'; or avahiirXcocri.'^). this primitive repetition of the root belongs
Now
Hence
to
many
languages and has a

it calls
much
wider range than merely the

It is older,
perfect tense.
for separate treatment.
this repetition or intensifying of a
word, than either the inflection
of
nouns or the conjugation

2.
of verbs.^
Root reduplication
ex-
isted in the parent language.^
Both Nouns and

etc.
Ve7-bs.
it
jSapos, /Se-zSr/Xos,
But
Among nouns note ay-coyos, âpwas among verbs that reduplication
found its chief development.^ It is in the aorist, the present 3. In Three Tenses in Verbs. and the perfect. This is precisely the case with the Sanskrit,
where very many aorists, some presents and nearly all perfects have reduplication.^ In Horner^ the reduplication of the second
1
Blass, Gr. of
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
2
opt. middle
and
passive, as indeed
was
practically true always for
all
the voices.
lb., p. 326.
illustr. of
Cf. Helbing, Gr. d. Sept., p. 100
f.;
Thack., pp. 219
ff.,
for
LXX
3
both a and
v (n).
Brug.,
Comp.
Gr. (transl.), vol. IV, p. 10.
Reduplication.
4
5
Add
See note there for books on Lautensach, Gr. Stud. (1899).

Fritzsche (Ques. de redupl. graeca; Curtius,
lb., p. 11.
Cf. K.-Bl., II, p. 8.
Stud, zu griech. and lat. Gr., pp. 279 ff.) considers the doubling of the syllable (iteration) the origin of all redupUcation like Ap-ap-iaKw, fii-fia-ô:.
6
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
p. 222.
Sterrett,
Hom.
II.,
N. 32.

aoriet is
363
much more
kkpaâ
t-ri-in,
frequent than in later Greek, but forms like
T]yayov, ^vejKov, dirov, persist in

ally.
Of.
in
Ac.
24
N. T. Greek and the kolvt] gener21. The Greek present shows

of
reduplication
(like
5t-5co/ii,
in three
classes
presents,
viz.
the root class

(like
etc.).
t-arrjui,
yi-yvo-ixai,
ttI-tto),
etc.),
thematic presents inceptive verbs (like yc-yvco-aKo:,

etc.),
the
The most common

sonal endings.
voices
reduplication in Greek
it is
the perfect tense, where

It is
is, of course, that in not like augment, mode-sign or peran integral part of the tense in all modes,
and persons.
is
And
yet
it
is
just in the perfect that re-
duplication disappears in the later Greek.

the extinction
In the vernacular
yvojaKcxi
nearly complete.^
Even
presents^ like
occur in modern Greek.
Dieterich^ gives numerous examples of
dropped reduplication in inscriptions and papyri. It is absent in the modern Greek vernacular, even in the participle.* 4. Three Methods in Reduplication. Perhaps the oldest is the doubling of the whole syllable, chiefly in presents and aorists, like yoy-yv^w, ap-apiaKco, i]y-ay-ov, etc. This is the oldest form of reduplication^ and is more common in Greek than in Latin.^ The later grammarians called it Attic reduplication because it was less common in their day,^ though, as a matter of fact. Homer used it much more than did the Attic writers.^ But perfects have this form also, as d/ciy/coa, e\r]\vda, etc. But the reduplication by t is
confined to presents like
bi-bwixi,
yi-yvoy.aL, yL-yvicaKoi, etc.

e
And
most perfects form the reduplication with
and the repetition of the first letter of the verb as \k-\vKa. But Homer had irkindov and other such aorists. ^1-kov is really an example of such an aorist.
5.
Reduplication in the Perfect.
The we
history
is
probably as
follows in the main.
Originally there were
some
perfects without
redupHcation,^ a remnant of which

of the
see in oUa.
like
The doubling
k-ypij-yop-a,
whole syllable was the next step

e
a.K-r}Koa,
e\-r]\v6a, dTroXcoXa, etc., like
the present and aorist usage.^"

initial letter of
Then
comes the
*
with repetition of the

f.,
a consonantand
later
See Jann., Hist. Gr., p. 190

lb.
for exx. like traKTo
even
in Polyb.,
ypaufxtuos, etc.
2 3 < 6
Cf.
Thumb, Handb.,
etc., p.
p.
148
f.
8
Unters.
215.
f.
Giles,
Comp.
Philol., p. 409.
Thumb,
Hirt,
Haridb., p. 148
etc., p.

Sterrett, Horn.
II.,
Handb.
369.
(transl.),
N. 32.
Cf. BruR.,
Comp. Gr.
IV, p. 384.
Cf. also Hirt,
Handb.
etc.
p. 407; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 259.

^^
lb.,
Hclbing, Gr. d. Sept., pp. 70-82, treats together augment and redu-
plication, not a very satisfactory
method.
364

Xe-XotTra.
NEW TESTAMENT
stem like
But here some
further modifications crept in.
rk-deLKa. Those with abut instead used the rough breathing as 'icxT-qKa or the smooth hke 'i-axn'ô.- 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 ê-^XrjKa, yk-ypa4>a.. The Cretan dialect has indeed t'YpaTTaL = yk-ypaivTaL} So far the N. T. phenomena are in harmony with the general Greek history, as indeed is the case with the papyri^ and the inscriptions.^ In Lu. 1 27 and 2 5, we have Just as a verbs did not repeat, e-ixvr](jTtvixk.vri, not juejuv. (cf jxeiivîiaC) so with p verbs sometimes. So epLii/jihoL (Mt. 9: 36), eppaxrde (Ac. 15 29), etc. But in Rev. 19 13 W. H. read pepavnaixhov, though Hort^ advocates pepa/ipievov. D has pepiixjikvoi in Mt. 9 36 above. This reduplication of initial p is contrary to Attic rule. For the
The
aspirates did not repeat, but

it,
we have
did not repeat
LXX see Thackeray,

in the
:
Gr., p.
204
f.
This use of
begins to spread
and is seen in LXX MSS., as in A kirkypaivTo (Deut. 9 10). For similar forms in Ionic and late writers see WinerSchmiedel.^ Once more several verbs that begin with a liquid have et as the reduplication in the Attic and Ionic, though not in all dialects. Perhaps euphony and analogy entered to some extent in the case of ei-Krj4>a (KaixâvcS) etprjKa (cf. eppr]dr]v). Note also e'lXrjxa and ti'Xoxa. With verbs beginning with a vowel there was sometimes the doubling of the syllable as aKrjKoa, or the mere
KOLvrj
,
lengthening of the vowel as
riKovaixai,
or the addition of
eot/ca
alone
e'tKco).
with contraction as
Cf. dwda.
ddi.ap.kvos,
:
or uncontracted as
(from
In Jo. 3
eiX/cco/xews
21 (so
1 Pet.
:
Attic
and
in Lu. 16
20.
we have eipyaafxai as In opaco we have ibpaKa

3)
1
:
in in
Paul's Epistles (1
Cor. 9
1)
and sometimes a
18).
1
sort of double
reduplication (like do^da) as ewpa/ca (Jo.
So Attic.
See
Additional Note.
In Col. 2
the form eopaKav calls for notice
both for its reduplication and its ending (cf. echpaKav Lu. 9:36). So also aveojyev (1 Cor. 16 9; }< i]veo:y6)s, Jo. 1 52) and avewyfievi^s (2 Cor. 2 12). Indeed in this last verb the preposition may re:
:
ceive additional reduplication (treble therefore), as in rjveuynevrj
(Rev. five times).

a.ii(j)LkvvvpLi.
See also
r]p4)Le(Tfihov
But
as a rule with
etc., p.
compound verbs
(Mt. 11:8; Lu. 7 25) from in the N. T. re:
Hirt,
Handb.
408.
2
'
* 5
Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 338 ff. Nachm., p. 150 f.; Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 171. Notes on Orth., p. 170. P. 103. Cf. also K.-Bl., II, p. 23, and Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 38.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB ("PHMa)
365
duplication comes only between the prepositions and the verb.
Sometimes the reduplication is not used, as in evapearriKevat (Heb., 11 5), but J<DEP have evrjp-. We have coKoSoijiriTo (Lu. 4:29), but oLKodofxrjadai (Lu. 6:48).^ Cf. oiKodofjLrjdr] (Jo. 2:20) for absence 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).
The Origin of Augment. It has never been explained. It is generally conceded to be an independent word, an adverb, added to the verb, which is an enclitic after the augment like e-XtTre.^ We have mere conjectures for the origin of the adverb, possibly a
1.
locative of the pronoun-stem.

2.
W^here Found.
It is
In Sanskrit it is a. found in Sanskrit, Iranian, Armenian
and Greek, and only in the past tenses of the indicative. But in Mt. 12 20 we actually have /caredêt (fut. ind. of KaTayvvpLi), and
:
in Jo. 19
31 KareayojaLv (aor. pass, subj.), probably to distinguish
So Winer-Schmiedel, p. 98. This in later Greek (Hatzidakis, Einl., Augment persists in modern Greek (Thumb, p. 117). p. 64). 3. The Purpose of Augment. It denotes past time. The secondary endings do that also and with sufficient clearness at first. More than half of the past tenses of the Sanskrit do not have the augment.^ In Homer some verbs like opdco never had augment,
"false
these forms from Karayoj.
augment"
is
very
common
and often
mer.
for metrical reasons the
augment
is
not found in HoJannaris^

is
He
used
much freedom
in the matter.^
is
prob-
ably right in the opinion that this freedom

fulness of the verb-endings.
due to the original

firm foothold in
Augment won a
be shown.
prose before
it
did in poetry,'' but never was every^vhere essential.
It varied greatly in its history as will

4.
Its use with the past tenses of the indicative was not exactly uniform, being less constant with the past perfect than with the aorist and imperfect.
(au^rjaLs o-uXXa/Su-ij),
The Syllabic Augment
The
syllabic
augment occurs
F,
also with
some
initial
e'laaeu
due to original digamma

1
a in the anlaut.
So
vowel verbs (Ac. 28 4),

:
Moulton
Brug.,
(CI.
Rev., Feb., 1901,
p. 30) cites airaiTTjaOai, eroiixaKafxtv
from the
pap.
2
it is
3 *
Comp. Gr. (transl.), IV, p. 25. Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 1S5) thinks an archaic form of the imperf. of dni (e, ev). iii^t_ qj^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 221. c,r., p. 185. Brug., Comp. Gr. (transl.), IV, Sterrctt, Ilom. XL, N. 30 f. p. 32.
366
elSofiev

(Mt. 2:2),
elirev
:
(Mt. 2:8), e'CXaro (2 Th. 2 13), etc. 200 f. In the N. T. it is absent from the past perfect more frequently than it is present, as is true of the
Cf. Thackeray, Gr., p.
papyri^ and late Greek generally.^
So, for instance, reêûeXicoro
(Mt. 7: 25),
TreiroLTjKeKjav
:
(Mk. 15
7), TrapaoeSoiKeiaap
e\r]\WeL (Jo. 6
17), etc.
On
the other hand the
(Mk. 15 10), augment does

:
appear in such examples as

16
:
20), kyeyovei (Jo.
17),
eTreToidet (Lu. 11:22), kêjSXriTo (Lu. aweTkdavTO (Jo. 9 22), TrepLeSkdero (Jo.
:
both augment and reduplication appeared. The kolvyi strove to destroy the distinction between reduplication and augment so that ultimately reduplication vanished (Thumb, Hellenismus, p. 170). But first the augment vanished in the past perfect. The Attic sometimes had earrjKeLv (Winer-Schmiedel, p. 100). Hort (Notes on Orthography, p. 162) contends for larriKeLv uniformly in the N. T. as more than mere itacism for elarTjKeLv, for even B has t five times in spite of its fondness for et. So W. H. uniformly, as Rev. 7: 11 and even in Jo. 1 35 and Lu. 23 49. Cf. similar itacism between eUop and 'IBov in the MSS. (Hort, Notes on Orthography, p. 162). On augment in the LXX see Conybeare and Stock, Sel. from
11: 44), etc.
It
was only
in the past perfect that
LXX,
pp. 36
ff.;
Swete, Intr.
to
0. T., p. 305; Thackeray, Gr.,
Syllabic augment was much more pp. 195 ff. the aorist and imperfect than the temporal.
5.
tenacious with
simplicity of
The Temporal Augment
(av^-rjcns
xpovlkt]).
The
the syllabic and the resulting confusion of the temporal had un-
doubtedly something to do with the non-use of the temporal augment in many cases.^ The kolvy] shows this tendency.^ Even the Attic was not uniform in the use of the temporal augment. At bottom there is no real distinction between the temporal and syllabic augment. Both express time and both make use of the syllabic e. The difference is more one of the eye and ear than of
fact.
What we
call
e
the temporal
initial
augment
is
the result of the con-
vowel of the verb.^ As remarked above, this very confusion of result, difficult to keep clear as the vowel-sounds tended to blend more and more, led to the disuse of this e and contraction A^^th initial vowel verbs, especially with diphthongs." Hence in the N. T. we meet such examples as the
traction of this
with the
2 w.-Sch., p. 99. Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 333. See good discussion in Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 186. * Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 336. ^ jann.. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 185. ' lb., p. 186. Hence in mod. Gk. temporal augment is nearly gone. Already in the the movement toward the loss of the temporal augment is 1
'
LXX

following: of at, ewaLaxvi'O'n (2
307
(Mt.
Tim.
16); of ev, ev\6yr]aeu
14
19),
evdoK-qaa
(Mt.
17
5),
evpovxi-frav
(Mt.
19
12),
evKaipovi>
(Mk. 6:31),
SpofjLrjaafxeu
vcf)paiuoPTo
(Ac. 7:41),
evxaplcrT-qcrev
eviropelro
(Ac. 11:29), eWu-
(Ac. 16:11),
(Ac. 27:35).^
:
But on the
:
8 15), 9:3), rjvdoKrfaav (Ro. 15:26); of ot, olKodofxrjdr] (Jo. 2 20), etc., but ccKobbixriaev (Lu. 7 5), etc.; of et, e'lâfxev (Gal. 2 27), SuyelpeTo (Jo. 6 5) just like Attic; of e, dtepprjuvaev (Lu. 24
-qvpLcrKov
other hand
we have
(Mk. 14
55), TpoarjOâvro (Ac.
qvxop.r]v
:
(Ilo.
18), avedv (Ac.

opwMr?!'
:
16
26), acjiWriaau (Ro.

:
7,
Ps. 32
1); of o, Trpo:
(Ac. 2 25; Ps. 16 8), and some MSS. in Lu. 13 13 (auopand Ro. 9: 29 ipjxoLoid'rîJ.ev); of i, taxvcrep (Lu. 8 43), iKavccaev (2 Cor. 3 6) and ta ro (Lu. 9 11); of oo, (hveo/xaL has no augment, uvrjaaro (Ac. 7: 16), and the same thing is true of chdeco, as dTrcb6u}drj)
: :
aaTo (Ac. 7
its
27), k^cbaev (Ac. 7 :45).
'Ep7dfo/xat has
rj,
not
:
t,
as
augment according
etxov.
to
W. H.
.
So
ripyaôvTo (Ac. 18
3),
but
always
6.
Compound Verbs (TapaavvOeTo) The language varied in the way it regarded compound verbs, though usually a verb derived from a compound is treated as a unit. So Wr}poiiax'n<yo., eXidofioKr\(xav, k/jLoaxoTôlrjaav
(Ac. 7:41), evavayrjaa, kTrpo4)r}Tevaev

:
(Mk.
7:
6), Trappr](na(TaTO
(Ac. 9
27),
kavKOipavTrjaa,
but
evTjyyeXicraTO (Ac.
35) in late Greek and TpoevrjyyeXlaaTo (Gal. 3:8). If the compound embraces a preposition, the augment as in Attic usually
follows the preposition hke aTr-qvrqaav (Lu. 17: 12).
Some verbs
like
derived from nouns already
compounded
are
augmented
: :
verbs
compounded with a preposition, as dirjKopeL (Mt. 8 tic. As further examples note aTre8r]ixr]aev (Mt. 21
:
15) unlike At33), kTvedhjxy]aav

:
(Mt. 13: 17), KaTiqyopouv (Mk. 15 3), erexdprjaav (Lu. 1 1), aire\oydro (Ac. 26:1), uvvqpytt (Jas. 2:22). Cf. Winer-Schmiedcl, But in Mt. 7:22 and 11 13 the Syrian class of MSS. p. 102. have Tvpoec^yiTevaajxtv and -aav. Sometimes the preposition itself is
:
treated as a part of the verb

ri(i>i.iv
when put
:
:
directly to the verb, as
(Mk.
(Jo.
34), rivoLêv (Rev. 6

:
1), h7]VQLytv 1),
(Lu. 24
32),
13),
e/cd-
Bivbov
(Mt. 25
5), kd^Tjro
(Mt. 13
:
tKadiaev (Jo.
19
Is.
kais
ek^tTo
4:6).
In Mt. 13
15 tKap^tivaav (from
10)
Verbs bc^ginning with eu- vary in augmented tenses between ev- and -qv-, but when followed by a vowel, the verb is treated as a compound like ehriyyiKlaaTo above. 7. Double Augment. It is fairly common in the N. T. In the
assimilation of
KaTajxboo.
seen (Thack., Gr., pp. 19G, 199 (Mayser, pp. 127, 3:35).
f.).
The pap.
often have
-eipidT]i>
for -TipkO-qv
See W.-Sch.,
i).
100
f.
Cf. llort,
Notes on Orth.,
p. IGi:
f.
368

and elirov the augment is added to the aoristic reBut in ecopccu (Jo. 6 2 in Tischendorf s text, W. H. there is a clear case of double augment like the double
:
case of riyayov
duphcation.
ideoopovv)
So also the N. T. regularly ridw-qO-qv (Mt. and even rjdviâadr] (Mk. 7 24). Both edvvaro (Mk. 6 5) and rjdvvaTo (Mk. 14 5) appear and the MSS. vary much. This
reduplication in icopaKa.
17
16)
7]
(analogy to
iideXov) first arises
in the Attic in 300 b.c.i
With
jueXXco, riij.eX\ov is
the usual form (Jo. 4: 47), though ep.eX\ov occurs

BouXoyuat in the
though the always has ?? (Gal. 4:20, rjdeKov) even after the initial e was dropped. 'ATroradlartiixi has always a double augment, one with each preposition. So cnreKaTeaTr] (Mk. 8 25) and cLTreKaTeaTadr] (Mk. 3 5).2 So LXX
77,
also (Jo. 7:39).
N. T. never has
Text. Rec. has
it
in 2 Jo. 12.
On
the other hand
deXco
and
later Greek.^
'Ai'ot7a;
But
in
Heb. 12
(Rev. 6
avTLKareaTrjTe
is
the true
text."*
has a peculiar history.

^voLêv
:
It
3),
on the preposition, as
the verb, as avewêv (Jo. 9:14),
now a
:
triple
preposition, as rjvewxGwa-v (Mt. 9 30). hand, has only one augment, as ave<jx6p.vv
(2 Cor. 11:1).
Gr., pp.
double augment of augment on verb and 'Aj/exoAtat, on the other (Ac. 18 14) and avelxecrde
:
now now
has single augment
For double augment

Infinitive
{r\
in the
LXX
see Thackeray,
202
ff.
VIII.
The
d'irap(x<{)aTos
"YK\icris).
kolvti
The most
striking development of the infinitive in the
syntax, and not accidence.^

suffice.
belongs to Hence a brief discussion will here
Blass, for instance, in his Grammar of N. T. Greek, has no discussion of the infinitive under "Accidence," nor has Moulton in his Prolegomena. But the infinitive has a very interesting history on its morphological side.
it was a mere noun of nouns of action developed into infinitives. Brugmann*^ quotes from Plato Ti]v rod deov Soaiv vplv where a noun of action {bbcns) is used with the dative. This is, of course, not an infinitive. The older Sanskrit shows quite a variety of nouns of action used in a "quasi-infinitive sense," ^ governing cases like the verb, but having no tense nor voice. 1.
No
Terminology at
First.
Originally
action {nomen actionis).
Not
all
2. Fixed Case-Forms. The first stage in the development was reached when these nouns of action were regarded as fixed case-
1
"^

Dieterich, Unters., p. 209.
So
inscr.
Letronne, Rec.
II, p.
463.
^ 6
W.-Sch., p. 103. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 203.
Comp. Gr.
(transl.), II, p. 471.
On
these infs. in posse see Brug.,
Comp.
Gr.,
IV, p. 599.
CONJUGATION OF THE VERB (pIIMa)

forms.
tive
369
That stage was obtained in the Sanskrit. At first the dawas the most common case so used along with the accusative, genitive, ablative and sometimes the locative. In the later Sanskrit the accusative
supplanted the rest {turn or itum).

infinitive,
Cf. the
Latin supine.^
substantive.
But the Sanskrit
while governing cases,
never developed tense nor voice, and so remained essentially a

3. With Voice and Tense. But the second stage appears in the Greek and Latin where it had its most characteristic development.^ The infinitive becomes a real verbal substantive. Here voice and tense are firmly established. But while, by analogy, the Greek infinitive comes to be formed on the various tense and voice stems, that is an after-thought and not an inherent part of the infinitive. There was originally no voice, so that it is even a debatable question if TL/jirj-aai., for instance, and haheri are not formed exactly alike.^ The active and the passive ideas are both capable of development from dvparos Oavfiaaai, 'capable for wondering.'^ The passive infinitive had only sporadic development in single languages.^ The middle is explained in the same way as active and passive. The tense-development is more complete in Greek than in Latin, the future infinitive being peculiar to Greek.
But here and we are not to think of XDo-at, for instance, as having at bottom more kinship with eXvaa than with Xvais.*^ Indeed the perfect and future infinitives are both very rare in the N. T. as in the kolvt} generally.^ This weakalso the distinctive aorist infinitive. also analogy has played a large part
The Latin missed
ening of the future infinitive

AteXXco
is
as well as in indirect discourse.
general in the kolvtj, even with In Jo. 21 25 late MSS.

:
have
KOLvr]
^
Indeed, the papyri in the later x^PW'^'- instead of x^PWî-^show a hybrid infinitive form, a sort of mixture of aorist and
ib., p.
Whitney,
347.
Cf. ger. of Lat.
For
special treatises
on the
inf.
see
Comp. Gr. (transl.), IV, pp. 595 ff.; Griech. Gr., p. 359. Cf. also Griinewald, Der freie formelhafte Inf. der Limitation im Griech. (1888); Birkloin, Entwickelungsgesch. dcs substant. Inf. (1888); Votaw, The Use of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk. (189G); Allen, The Inf. in Polyb. compared with Bibl. Gk. (1907).
Brug.,
Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 480 ff., 568 ff.) has a very good sketch of the history of the inf. in Gk. On p. 572 f. he discusses John's use of the inf. with verbs (129 exx.). Cf. Jolly, Gesch. des Inf. im Indog. (1873); Gildersleeve, Contrib. to the Hist, of the Articular Inf. (Transl. Am. Phil. Ass., 1878, A. J. P., vol. Ill, pp. 193 ff.; vol. VIII, pp. .329 ff.; vol. XXVII, p. 105 f.).
2
Brug.,
Ilirt,
Comp. Gr.
(transl.), II, p. 471.
3 *
Ilandb.
etc., p.
433.
Moulton, Prol., p. 203. Hirt, Handb., p. 431.
Moulton, Prol., p. 204. Votaw, U.se of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., Moulton, Prol., p. 204.
p. 59.
370
NEW TESTAMENT
In the
future like eTreXemaadai (even in early papyri).^

find TevâaOaL (2
:
LXX
:
we
Macc. 15 7) and eK4)evâadaL in 2 Mace. 9 22. In other cases the two are used side by side. It is only in the state of the action that the infinitive has any true tense-action developed save in indirect discourse where the infinitive tense
represents the time of the direct discourse.

is like
The
infinitive
thus
a verb in that
it
expresses action, governs cases, has voice
and
4.
tense.-
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.
but serve merely as a convenience.^ In the nature of the case neither can have a subject in any literal sense. But it is to be admitted even here that the line between the finite and the infinite verb is not
distinction,
The terms have no inherent
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
At first the was observed, but gradually that disapThe Greek infinitives are peared, though the form remained. always either datives or locatives, "dead datives or locatives" usually.^ All infinitives in -at are datives. Thus all those in -rat, Those in -adau alone give -trat, -erat, -fxevaL (Homer), -adai (-ât). any trouble. It is probably a compound (a, 6ai), but its precise origin is not clear.^ The locative is seen in -eiv, and Homeric -yiev, but the origin of -av is again doubtful.'' But no distinction remains between the two cases in actual usage. ^ In Horner^ the dative sense as well as form remain extremely common, as indeed is true of all Greek where the infinitive remains. The very
case-idea of the form
substantive after the voice and tense-development.
common
(Cf.
infinitive of purpose, like riKdov ayopaaai, is

:
a true dative.
Mt. 2 2.) But the very essence of the infinitive as a complete development is that this dative or locative form could be
p.
Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., 36 f Cf Hatz., Einl., p. 190.

.
.
p. 38.5.
Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., Feb., 1901,
2 3 6 7
Brug.,
Comp.
Gr. (transl.), IV, p.

of
7.
Brug.,
Comp.Gr.
(transl.),p.7.
K.-Bl., II, p. 4.
Clyde, Gk.
f.;
S>Tit., p. 90.
II,
Cf. Giles,
Man.
Comp.
Philol., p.
469
Brug., Grundr.,
1093. 8.
Hirt, Handb., p. 4.32; Giles,
Man.,
p. 470.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 202.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 154.

used in any case
6.
('PIIMa)
371
inflection,
like
any other substantive without

the Article.
an
indeclinable substantive in a fixed case-form.
The Presence of
After Homer's day

is
it
was com-
mon and
not
chiefly in the Attic/
but this
a matter to
is
])e
treated fur-
ther in Syntax.
The point
to observe here
It
that the article did
make a
substantive of the infinitive.
was that before voice
and tense were used with it. But it is true that even in Homer is more prominent than the substantival. In the vernacular the article was never much used with the infinitive; perhaps for convenience it was not so employed. 7. The Disappearance of the Infinitive. The old forms in -hv and -vai remain longest (Thackeray, Gr., pp. 210, 257). The causes for the disappearance of the infinitive in later Greek till in the modern Greek vernacular it is (outside of the Pontic dialect) dead and gone, lie largely in the region of syntax. The infinitive as a whole disappears before 6tl and Iva (modern Greek va). Farthe verbal aspect
rar^ calls attention to the absence of the infinitive in Arabic.
It
was always a matter of discretion with a Greek writer whether in certain clauses he would use the infinitive or an object-clause (oTt, oTTOJs, 'iva).^ Cf. Latin. The English infinitive has an interesting history also as the mutilated form of the dative of a ge-
rund.*
8. Some N. T. Forms. Not many N. T. forms call for special remark and those have been explained already, such as -otv (Mt. 13 32; Heb. 7 5), T\-elv and even irlv for inelv (Jo. 4: 9). In Lu.
:
:
79
12
ein(l)dvac
instead of the Attic
eTL<j)rjpaL is
noticeable.
In Ph.
we have ireLvav, not -riv. The Coptic has the infinitive juaaTiyyoLv (cf. W. H. KaTaaKTjvotv, Mt. 13 32; Mk. 4 32, and dTroSeKarolv in Heb. 7:5). In 1 Cor. 11:6 we find both KdpaaBai and ^vpaaOaL. In Mk. 14 71 bixvvvai is the regular -;ut form. In Heb.
4
:
: :
11:5
18 (11
evapearriKhaL
:
is
without reduplication in
AKT.
In Lu. 9:
irpo-
1)
a periphrastic infinitive appears,
rw ehat avTov
cevxofJLevop.
The augment
in
occurs with
dveux'^vô-i- in
Lu. 3 21.
:
Cf.
ecro/iat 6t56rai
Tob. 5:15 B.
(r]
IX.
1.
The
Participle
|jltoxii).
The Name. jective from the

1
This does not really distinguish this

verljal substantive, the infinitive.
vcrlial
ad-
Both are par-
2
'
Moulton, Prol., p. 213 f. Gk. Synt., p. 164. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

p. 221.
Thumb
(Ilandb. of
Mod. Gk.) has no
diwoussion of the infinitive.

^
Cf. Donaldson,
New
Cnit., p. 003.
372
ticiples
and both are infinitives. Voss^ calls the participles "mules" because they partake of both noun and verb, but the infinitives are hybrid in exactly the same sense. Like the infinitive, the Greek participle has voice, tense, and governs cases, and
may
use the article.
Unlike the infinitive the participle has reg-
ular inflection like other adjectives.

ciples
in the infinitive.
Clyde ^ would include partiSo Kiihncr-Blass.^ Dionysius Thrax^

Xe^ts fxerexovaa.
ttjs
puts the participle right: Merox'? eori

Harcov Kai
2.
rrjs
twv
p-q-
twv
ovofxaTOiv iSiOTrjTos.
line
Verbal Adjectives. As a matter of fact no absolutely clear can be dra^vn between verbal adjectives and other adjec-
tives.^
An
adjective
with the ablative, but

tain connections.^
tival.''
may not only be used may even take on a

like kXvtos,
Avith
a case
like Kevos
verbal nature in cer-
Some,
Most of the forms in -ros in Greek man}^ of them have a verbal idea developed
completion, as ayaTrjTos ('beloved,' Mt. 3
capability, as
Tra^r/ros ('liable
:
were always purely adjecare adjectival, but

also, either
that of
17), or of possibility or
:
to suffering,' Ac. 26
23).
In Greek
est
these verbals in -tos never became a part of the verb as in Latin

perfect passive participle.^
Moulton^ shows how amatus
and
loved" represent different tenses, but scriptum est and But there was no reason why the -ros "it is written" agree. should not have had a further verbal development in Greek. For
is
"he
the structure of this verbal adjective see the chapter on Formation of Words, where a
list
of the chief
examples
ton^" points out the wavering between the active
when
the true verbal exists in the N. T.,
is given. Mouland passive idea by the example of a8v-
varov in Ro.
sible' as is
8:3.
Is it 'incapable' as in
Ro. 15
7 or 'impos-
usual?
Blass^^ indeed denies the verbal character of the

:
-ros
form
in the
But
this is too extreme, as

1
:
N. T. to any examples except iradrjTos (Ac. 26 23). Moulton^- clearly proves. 'Aavveros is
31 while aavvOeros
is
active in Ro.
middle
(avvTiOefxaL)
With
first, if
the forms in -ros therefore two points have to be watched:
sive.
they are verbal at all, and then, if they are active, middle or pasThere is no doubt as to the verbal character of the form in
-reos,
which expresses the idea
of necessity.
This
Comp.
is
in fact a ge-
1 2
^ s
9
Giles,
Philol., p. 474.
Gk. Synt.,
II, p. 4.
p. 94.
15.
Prol., p. 221.
3 * 5
19.
"
Comp.
Gr., IV, p. 605.
12
lb.
Brug.,
" Gr.
of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 37.
lb., II, p. 456.
Prol., p. 222.

rundive and
is
('PUiMa)
373
both a per-
closely allied to the -ros form.^
It has
and the impersonal, and governs cases like the verb. It is not in Homer ^ (though -ros is common), and the first example in Greek is in Hesiod.^ The N. T. shows only one example, (3\r]Teou (Lu. 5 38), impersonal and governing the accusasonal construction
:
tive.
22.
is
MSS. in the parallel passage in Mk. 2 One further remark is to be made about the verbals, which that some participles lose their verbal force and drop back to
It
appears in a few
So eKcoi>, /xeXXco;' in the sense of and sapiens in Latin.^ In general, just as the infinitive and the gerund were surrounded by many other verbal substantives, so the participle and the gerundive come out In the Sanskrit, as one would of many other verbal adjectives. expect, the division-line between the participle and ordinary adthe purely adjectival function.
'future.'
Cf. eloquens
jectives
3.
is less
sharply drawn.^
True Participles. These have tense and also voice. Brugmann^ indeed shows that the Greek participle endings go back to the proethnic participle. Already in the Sanskrit the present, perfect and future tenses (and in the Veda the aorist) have parti-
and middle), thus showing an earlier The endings of the Greek participles are practically the same as those of the Sanskrit. The Latin, unlike the Sanskrit and the Greek, had no aorist and no perfect active participle, and the future participle like acturus may have come from the infinitive.^ The Greek has, however, two
ciples in
two voices
(active
'^
development than the
infinitive.
endings for the active, -vt for

the Sanskrit.
all
tenses save the perfect, just like
The
perfect ending {-^wes, -^wos, -us,

is
Greek
-ws, -or,
-vl) is difficult of
explanation, but
is
hkewise parallel with the San-
skrit.^
The
perfect participle
more common
other form of the perfect (Sterrett, Homer's Iliad, N. 44).
middle ending
is
aorist passive participle
uniform and is like the ending (-devr) is peculiar to the Greek and made by analogy from the old active form like ipav-ePT-s {âv-di),
-fievo is
Homer than any The Sanskrit. The Greek

in
Brug.,
Comp.
Hirt, Ilandb., p. 438.
ex. of -rto^ in
^ Sterrett, Horn. II., N. 28. Moulton (CI. Rev., Mar., 1904, p. 112) finds one the pap. and "the -ros participle is common in neg. forms."
Gr., IV, p. 60.5.
Note that he
* *
">
calls it
a participle.
p. 347.
Brus.,
Comp.
Or., II, p. 457.
Whitney, Sans. Or.,
Indog. Forsch., V, pp. 89 fif. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 202.

Giles,
Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 221.
8
'
Comp.
Handb.,
Philol., p. 474.
Hirt,
p.
436
f.
374
like

Latin,
manens}
."^
The
participles survive in
modern Greek,
on the form
though the
active, like the third declension, takes
ypd4>0PTas (y pa.(i)Cov)
The modern Greek uses chiefly the present active, the past passive participle (Dieterich, Unters., p. 206), and some middle or passive participles in -ovixevos or -anevos (Thumb, Handb., p. The use of the aorist and perfect active participles gave 167). Greek a great superiority over the Latin, which had such a usage only in deponent verbs like sequor, secutus. But Greek used the other participles far more than the Latin. English alone is a rival for the Greek in the use of the participle. One of the grammarians calls the Greeks 0iXo/xeroxot because they were a participle-loving The use of the tenses One may merely remark here
people.^
of the participle belongs to syntax.
that the future participle
is
very
N. T. as in the papyri and KOLvi] generally (cf. Infinitive). The LXX has it seldom (Thackeray, Gr., p. 194). It is found chiefly in Luke in the N. T., as Lu. 22:49; Ac. 8:27; 20 22; 22:5; 24: 11, 17.^ The N. T. itself presents no special peculiarities as to the forms of the participle. In Rev. 19 13 pepaixukvov has been cited under the question of reduplication. "Eo-rws is more frequent than ecrrTj/ccbs. Other perfects like dTroXcoXdjs call for no comment. 4. In Periphrastic Use. The participle is common in the N. T. in the periphrastic tenses. These have been given in detail under the various tenses, but a summary at this point is desirable. This use of the participle with various forms of the verb 'Ho be" is so common in all languages, ancient and modern, as hardly to
rare in the
:
require justification.
inflection, as
does modern Greek.
Modern English The
uses
it
largely in its verb-
use of the participle as the
is found all through the Indo-Germanic languages.^ It very frequent in the Sanskrit, especially in the later language.^ Its oldest usage seems to be in the perfect tense, which exists as far back as we can go.'' In the N. T. the perfect optative does
predicate
is
Giles,
Comp.
Philol., p. 473.
Cf. the Sans, passive part, in -td or -7id,
Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 340. 2 Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 206. Cf. Hatz., Einl., p. 143. 3 Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 169. * Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 37. He cites elsewhere Mt. 27 41, adia^v, Jo. 6 64, 1 Cor. 15 37; Heb. 3:5; 13 17; 1 Pet. 3 13. Then these are the doubtful forms Kavcrovneva (2 Pet. 3 10, 12) and Kotxiovufvoi (2 Pet.
: :
: :
13).
6
Brug.,
Comp.
Gr., IV, p. 444.

p. 394.
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
Brug.,
Comp.
Gr., IV, p. 446.
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]:
Kojs.
The
perfect subjunctive
is
seen in the N. T. only in the

:
TreTronjKcbs (Jas. 5 15), and xi the passive, as ^ -KeTrX-qpoinkv-q (Jo. 16 24).^ So 2 Cor. 9 3. The periphrastic perfect imperative is illustrated by eaTwaav Trepie-
periphrastic
form both
in the active, as
:
^wafxhaL (Lu. 12
finitive
35).
No
appears in the N. T., so far as

:
example of the periphrastic perfect inI have noticed, except

36).
KareoraX/xeTOus virapxîv (Ac. 19

ticiple
periphrastic perfect par(Col.

1
:
also
is
observed in
it
oj^ras
airr]\\oTpiojiJLei>ovs
21),
Ran. 721) and the inscriptions (Syll. 928^2 ii/B.c.) aTOKeKpLiJihi]s ouarjs (Moulton, ProL, p. 227), In the indicative the periphrastic form is the common one for the future perfect, both active, as eo-o/xat rexot^cos (Heb, 2 13), and passive, as earai XeXv/iha (Mt. 18: 18). Cf. Lu. 12: 52. Moulton (Prol, p. 227) finds three papyri with aorist participles in future perfect sense. With ylvoiiaL note yeyomre exovres (Heb. 5 12). Cf. Rev. 16 10, eyhero eaKOTtafievr]. Cf. 2 Cor. 6 14; Col. 1 18; Rev. 3 2. The past perfect is very common in the passive, as rjv yey panptvov (Jo. 19 19), but less frequent in the active, as riaav
(Arist.
: : : :
Colloquial Attic has
irpoecopaKOTes (Ac.
ireiTTcoKws,
TJv
21:29).
In Ac. 8
16
we not only have

:
rjv
kin-
but even
(SejSawTLaiJLevoL
rjv
:
vTrjpxou (cf. also 19
36).
Cf. also
Keipevos as
equal to
TtOeipevos (Lu.
23
53);
rjv
earcos
(Lu. 5:1);
:
dxov
airoKeipkvrjv
is
(Lu. 19
20), like exe irapj]Tr]pevov (Lu. 14
18), since
/cet/xat
perfect in sense.
The
present perfect
is
common
25
: :
also
10),
in the periphrastic
form
in the active, as earus dpi (Ac.
and
especially in the passive, as yey pappevov earlv (Jo. 6
31).
:
The The
periphrastic aorist appears only in

in the indicative.^
rjv
iSXrjdds
(Lu. 23
19)
:
and only
But not
eyevero arlXôvTa
is
(Mk. 9
3).
periphrastic future indicative
found several times in the
active, as eaovrat TrLTTTovTes

ptaovpevoL (Lu. 21
:
(Mk. 13:
25),
and the
passive, as eaeade
17).
is
The present
as
pr]
tense
written periphrastically in the imperative,

cf.
as ladL ei'vowv (Mt. 5: 25;
Lu. 19
17),
:
yiveaOe erepo^vyovvres
:
(2 Cor, 6
14),
and even with Cf, Rev. 3
ylvopai,
:
2.
In
Col.
ciple,
18
we
find
an aorist subjunctive with a present parti-
tva yevr]TaL Tpoorevoov.
The present
:
infinitive occurs in ev t<2
elvaL avTov irpoaevxopevov
(Lu. 9
18; 11: 1),
As an example
:
of the
present indicative active take a eanv ixovra (Col. 2

'
23),
and
of

Blass, Gr. of
KtKrunai and KeKTynrjv had no

I
followiiifj; in
Gk.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 204.
am
chiefly indebted to Blasa for the
facta in thia auniinary.
376

6
NEW TESTAMENT
:
the passive take

last is
kariv ixtdtpix-qvtvbixevov (Jo. 1
42),
though
this
not strictly an instance in point.

:
Cf. also karlv irpoaava-
T\r]povaa (2 Cor. 9
12).
The periphrastic imperfect is the most common of all. It is not unknown to the old Greek, and is abundant in the papyri and the KOLPT] generally, but it is even more frequent in the LXX (Thackeray, Gr., p. 195) and in the Aramaic. As Blass^ shows,
not
rjaav
all
.
the examples in the N. T. are strictly periphrastic, like

.
aypav\ovvTes (Lu. 2:8).
as one can see on almost

âlvovres Kal
:
fjp
irpoaycov
But they are abundant enough, any page of the Gospels. Take rjaav am(Mk. 10 32). So Ac. 2: 2, rjaap Kadrj/depoi,
:
and Gal. 1 22, rjjxrip ay poovfxepos. For hst of important verbs in the N. T. see Additional Notes and my Short Grammar of the Greek N. T. (third ed.), pp. 48-56, 241-244. For such verbs in the LXX see Thackeray, Gr., pp. 258-920 (Table of Verbs); Helbing, Gr. d. LXX, pp. 128-135. For list in the papyri see Mayser, Gr., pp. 387-415.
1
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 203.
PART
III
SYNTAX
CHAPTER IX
THE MEANING OF SYNTAX
I.
(STNTAEIS)
Backwardness
in the
Study of S3mtax.
^
What
the
Germans
call
Laut- und Formenlehre has received far more
scientific treat-
ment than has syntax. In 1874 Jolly lamented that so little work on syntax of a really valuable nature had been done. To a certain extent it was necessary that the study of the forms should precede that of syntax.^ The full survey of the words and their inflections was essential to adequate syntactical investigation.
And
It
yet one can but
feel
that syntax has lagged too far

field for
behind.
has been the favourite
grammatical charlatans
large induc-
to operate in,
men who from a few examples drew
grammars with "exceptions" to their own hastily made rules. Appeal was made to logic rather than to the actual facts in the history of language. Thus we had grammar made to order for the consumption of the poor students. Others perhaps became disgusted with the situation and hastily concluded that scientific syntax was impracticable, at least for the present, and so confined their researches either to etymology or to the forms. In 1891 Miiller^ sees no hope of doing anything soon for modern Greek syntax except in the literary high style
tions
and
filled their
on which he adds a few remarks about prepositions. Thumb ^ likewise has added a chapter on syntax to his Handbuch. If you turn to Whitney's Sanskrit Grammar, you will find no separate syntax, but merely some additional remarks on the "uses" of the
aorist,
the present, the subjunctive, etc.

follows
Monro
in his
Homeric
somewhat the same plan, but ^^^th much more attention to the "uses" of cases and modes. Brugmann^ in his Griechische Grammatik devotes far more space to Formenlehre,
*
Grammar
Schulgr.
und Sprachw.,
p. 71.
Ricm. and Goelzer, Or. Compardc du Grcc

Hist. Gr. der hell. Spr., p. 172.
et
du
of
Lat., Synt., p. 7.
Handb. der neugr. Volksspr., 1895; Handb.

379
Mod. Gk. Vcrnac,
pp.
179-206.
p. vu.
380
even

in the third edition,
NEW TESTAMENT
from the second
in
which
chiefly differs
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 When Brugmann his great treatise on the syntax of the noun. planned his first volume of Kurze vergleichende Grammatik (1880), he had no hope of going on with the syntax either with the "GrundriB" or the "Kurze," for at that time comparative grammar of the Indo-Germanic tongues was confined to Laut- und Formenlehre} But in the revision of Klihner the Syntax by B. Gerth has two volumes, as exhaustive a treatment as Blass' two volumes on the Accidence. In the Riemarm and Goelzer volumes the one on Syntax is the larger. Gildersleeve {Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 115) boasts of his freedom from bias, "being of an impressionable nature and having no special views of my own on any subject except Greek syntax and all that Greek syntax
implies, I
am
carried about
by every
^\^nd of doctrine."
is still
As
to the dialectical inscriptions the situation
worse.
Dr. Claflin^ as late as 1905 complains that the German monographs on the inscriptions confine themselves to Laut- und Formenlehre almost entirel3^
(1900)
is
nearly the sole exception.^
Meisterhans in Schwyzer's revision Thieme'' has a few syntactical
remarks, but Nachmanson,'^ Schweizer^ and Valaori^ have nothing about syntax, nor has Dieterich.^" The same thing is true of
of course, is not a formal have touched on the syntax of the Attic inscriptions" and Schanz in his Beitrdge has several writers ^^ who have noticed the subject. The inscriptions do in-
Thumb's Hellenismus, though

grammar.
this,
few additional
essaj^s
deed have limitations as to syntax, since much of the language is Thackofficial and formal, but there is much to learn from them. eray has not yet published his Syntax of the LXX. nor has Helbing.
1
P.
xi.
p_
viii f.
Kurze
vergl. Gr., 3. Lief., 1904, p.
iii f.
* ^
8 ^ 8
Sj'nt. of the Boeot. Dial. Inscr., p. 9.
Gr. der att. Inschr.
But even he has very much more about the forms.
10
Die Inschr. von Magn. etc., 1906. Laute und Formen der magn. Inschr., 1903. Gr. d. perg. Inschr., Beitr. zur Laut- und Formenl. etc., 1898. " Claflin, Synt. of the Bosot. Dial. Inscr., Der delph. Dial., 1901. ^- D>TofT, Weber, Keck. Unters. etc., 1898.
p. 10.
THE MEANING OF SYNTAX (STNTAEIS)
381
somewhat better off as to the papyri as a result chiefly of the work of Dr. James Hope Moulton, who has published his reCronert searches in that field as apphed to the New Testament. remarks syntactical many good a has Hercul. Graeca Mem. his in especially on the cases,^ but no formal treatment of the subject. Volker^ has not finished his good beginning. No syntax has come
are
^
We
from Mayser yet, who stopped with Laut- unci Formenlehre, though he is at work on one. Moulton does not profess^ to cover all the syntactical points in the papyri, but only those that throw light on some special points in the N. T. usage.
Testament Limitations. It is evident therefore that grammarian is in a poorer plight when he approaches syntax. And yet, strange to say, the N. T. grammars have largely confined themselves to syntax. Winer-Moulton, out of 799 pages, has only 128 not syntax. Buttmann, out of 403 pages (Thayer's
II.
New
the N. T.
translation), has only 74 not syntax.

is
In Winer-Schmiedel syntax
reached on p. 145.
Blass begins syntax on p. 72, out of 305
pages.
in
Moulton in his Prolegomena starts syntax on p. 57 (232 The present book has given the discussion of the forms more space at any rate. It is at least interesting to note that N. T. grammarians have reversed the example of the comparative
all).
philologists.
One may
great
a case of rushing in where angels fear to tread? plead in defence that the demands of exegesis are
Is it
and urgent, not to say more congenial. The distinctive character of the N. T. teaching is more closely allied to lexicography and syntax than to mere forms. That is very true, but many a theologian's syntax has run away with him and far from the sense of the writer, because he was weak on the mere forms. Knowledge of the forms is the first great step toward syntax. Deissmann even complains of Blass for assuming too much in his Syntax and not making enough comments "to rouse up energetically this easy-going deference of the
tor,
youthful reader" (Exposi-
Jan., 1908, p. 65).

it is
Blass ^ urges, besides, that

1
just in the sphere of syntax that
on Charact.
2
See CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, pp. 436 ff.; Apr., 1904, p. 150; Exp., 1904, series of N. T. Gk.; ProL, 190G. * Synt. dor griech. Pap., I, Der Art., 1903. Pp. 159 ff.
CI. Rev.,
d.
<
Dec,
1901, p. 43G.
Debrunner
(p. xi of his 4. Aufl. of Blass'
Gramm.
N. Griech., 1913, which he has kindly sent me as I reach this point in the galley proof) laments: "Fiir die Studicn dor hcllenistischcn (nnd der mittel- und neugriechischen) Syntax gilt leider noch das Wort ttoXus ixlv 6
^
OtpLcrnoi, oi 5k kpyaTai. oXiyoi..
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 72.
382
NEW TESTAMENT
the N. T. variations from the ancient Greek can be best observed, in this and the change in the meaning of words. This is true, but just as much so of the kolpt] in general. This is just the opposite
view/ who held that the N. T. pecuUarities of syntax were very few. The explanation of the difference lies partly in the undeveloped state of syntax when Winer wrote, though he wrote voluminously enough himself, and partly in the wider conception of syntax that Blass^ holds as being "the method of employing and combining the several word-forms and 'form-words'
of Winer's
current in the language."
On the other hand attention must be called to the fact that the study of the forms is just the element, along wath vocabulary, mainly relied on by Deissmann in his Bible Studies to show the
practical identity of the vernacular
kolvt]
in the papyri
and
in the
N. T. Greek.
writers:
Burton ^ puts
it
rightly
when he
says of the N. T.
"The
waiters in respect to syntax

of words,
divergence of their language from that of classical is greater than in reference to forms
and less than in respect to the meaning of words, both the Jewish and the Christian influence affecting more deeply the
meanings of words than either their form or their syntactical employment." Deissmann^ readily admits that Christianity has a set of ideas peculiar to itself, as has every system of teaching which leads to a characteristic terminology. But one is not to think of the N. T. as jargon or a dialect of the
less systematic and orderly than the and the kolpt] is as much a real language with its own laws as the Greek of Athens.*^ As remarked above, the KOLPT] showed more development in syntax than in forms, but it was not a lawless development. It was the growi^h of life and use, not the artificial imitation of the old language of Athens by the Atticists. Blass^ properly insists on the antithesis here between the artificial Atticist and "the plain narrator of facts or the letter-writer" such as we meet in the N. T. Deissmann {ExKOLVT)
in syntax.^
It is
not
rest of the vernacular
kolvt],
positor, Jan., 1908, p. 75) holds that Christianity in its classical
epoch "has very

jects
little
connection with
official
culture."
it
this
"It re-
is
the second result of our inquiry
rejects, in this
3 6
W.-M., p. 27. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 72; cf. p. 3 also. Notes on N. T. Gr., 1904, p. 22. Thumb, Die sprachgeschichtl. Stell. des
Blass, Gr. of
<
B.
S., p. 65.
bibl. Griech.,
Theol. Ru., 1902,
p. 97.
6
N. T. Gk.,
p. 3.
jb., p. 72.

epoch,
lary,
all
(:;TNTAHIS)
383
the outward devices of rhetoric.

it
In grammar, vocabu-
syntax and style
occupies a place in the midst of the peo-
and draws from the inexhaustible soil of the popular element which it was native a good share of its youthful strength." This is largely true. Men of passion charged with a great message do strike forth the best kind of rhetoric and style with simplicity, power, beauty. It is blind not to see charm in Luke, in John, in Paul, James and the writer of Hebrews, a charm that is th6 despair of mere "devices of rhetoric" or artificial rules of style and
ple
to
syntax.
It is
not surprising to find variations in culture
writers,
men who had
different antecedents
in the N. T. (Jew or Greek), dif-
ferent environment (Palestine, Asia

different
Minor and possibly Egypt),
natural gifts and educational advantages, as seen in
These individual peculiarities show themselves and naturally in syntax and style. See chapter IV, The Place of the N. T. in the KoLvrj, for a larger discussion of this matter of the peculiarities of the N. T. writers. But even in 2 Peter and the Apocalypse one has no difficulty in understanding this simple vernacular kolvt], however far short these books come of the standard of Isocrates or Demosthenes. The study of N. T. syntax is a worthy subject and one entirely within the range
Peter and Paul.
easily
of scientific historical treatment so far as that subject has ad-
vanced.
III.
great
briick
his
name
is
Recent Advance by Delbriick. Just as Brugmann is the in the accidence of comparative grammar, so Delthe great
name
in syntax.
Brugmann
gladly recognises
own
indebtedness to Delbriick.
It
He
is
has sought to follow Del-
briick
in
the syntax of his Griechische Grammatik^ and in the
Kurze vergleichende Grammatik."

count the story of
not necessary here to re-
how
Delbriick was finally associated with
Brugmann
and the S>yntax by Delbriick lirought tells the story well in Kurze vergl. Gr. (pp. v ff.) and Delbriick in the GrundriB itself. It is a great achievement and much led up to it. Delbriick has recounted
in the GrundriB,
to completion in 1900.
Brugmann
the progress of comparative
grammar
in his Introduction to the
Study of Language (1882).

sultate
In 1872 he had published Die Reder vergleichenden Syntax. In 1879 lu^ l>rought out Die
("
Grundlagen der griechischen Syntax
Syntaktische Forschungen,"
P.
P.
vii.
ix.
Ho
feels "als Schiller
unseres Bepxiindcrs uiul Meisters der ver-
gleichenden Syntiix."
384

That marked him
in 1829
NEW TESTAMENT
to
Bd. IV).
as the
man
do
for syntax
what
the
Brugmann would do
Bernhardy
for forms.
Delbriick does not claim
all
had published Wissenschaftliche Syncredit. Sprache, but Bopp, Schleicher and the rest griechischen der tax besides. The very progress in the knowledge of much done had forms called for advance in syntax. In 1883 Hiibner wrote GrundriB zu Vorlesungen iiber die griechische Syntax.
It is not a treatbut a systematized bibliography of the great works up to date on Greek syntax. It is still valuable for that purpose. One can follow Brugmann and Delbriick, Vergl. Syn-
ment
of syntax,
tax, Dritter Teil, pp. xvi-xx, for later bibliography.
ders of syntax Hiibner ^ points back to Dionysius
As the founThrax and
Apollonius Dyscolus in the Alexandrian epoch. themselves felt httle concern about syntax.
rectly,
but were not grammatical anatomists. language instead of inspecting and dissecting it.
The older Greeks They spoke corThey used the
Delbriick {Vergleichende Syntax, Erster Teil, pp. 2-72) gives a

lucid review of the history of syntactical study all the
way from
Dionysius Thrax to Paul's Principles of the History of Language. He makes many luminous remarks by the waj^ also on the general subject of syntax. I cannot accent too strongly my own debt to
Delbriick.
Syntax, especially that of the verb, has peculiar
difficulties.^
Not
all
the problems have been solved yet.^
fully appreciates the situation that
cellent Beitrdge zur historischen
He
is
gathering fresh material.
he is Syntax der griechischen Sprache. Many of the American and Euro-
Indeed Schanz so publishing a series of ex-
pean universities issue monographs by the new doctors of philosophy on various points of syntax, especially points in individual Thus we learn more about the facts. But meanwhile writers. we are grateful to Delbriick for his monumental work and for all
the rest.
IV.
(a)
The Province
'
of Syntax.
(o-vvra^L'i).
The Word Syntax

'
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
1
modern grammatical
'
discussion, but
Philol., pp.
it is
Giles,
Comp.
404
f.,
475.
Grundr. zu Vorles.,
p. 3.
Iliem. and Goelzer, Syiit., p. 7.

gr.
brought to
Farrar (Gk. Synt., p. 54) quotes Suetonius as saying that the first Gk. Rome was by Crates Mallotes after the Second Punic War.
THE MEANING OF SYNTAX (sTNTAHIs)

too late to
Philol.,
385
Gildersleeve (Am. Jour, of some syntacticians treat "syntax as a rag-bag for holding odds and ends of linguistic observations." But the difficulty is not all with the (6) Scope of Syntax. term, for the thing itself is not an absolutely distinct province. What the Germans call Lautlehre ('teaching about sounds') is indeed quite to itself. But when we come to define the exact line of demarcation between syntax or the relation of words on the one hand and single words on the other the task is not always so easy. Ries- indeed in his very able monograph makes the contrast between syntax (or construction) and single words. His scheme is this: Under Wortlehre ('science of words') he puts Formenlehre ('theory of forms') and Bedeutungslehre ('meaning of words').' He also subdivides syntax in the same way. Syntax thus treats of the binding of words together in all relations. Brugmann^ follows Delbriick'^ in rejecting the special use of syntax by Ries. Brugmann^ considers the breaking-up of the sentence by Ries It is ininto single words to be wilful and only conventional. have teaching both the word single words a as to true that deed itself (form-word, as prepositions) and the form (inflection).'' That is to say, two things call for consideration in the case of single words: the facts as to the words and the inflection on the one hand and the meaning of these facts on the other. Now Ries refuses to give the term syntax to the meaning of these
make a change
now.^
1908, p. 269) says that
facts (words, inflections, etc.),

field of
but confines sjmtax to the other
One is bound to go against Ries here and side with Delbriick and Brugmann. We use syntax, (c) Construction of Words and Clauses. therefore, both for construction of the single word and for clauses. But one must admit the difficulty of the whole question and not conceive that the ancients ran a sharp line between the form and the meaning of the form. But, all in all, it is more scientific to
word-relations.
gather the facts of usage

interpretation
is
first
and then interpret these
facts.
This
scientific syntax,
while the facts of usage are
themselves syntax.
Thus considered one may properly think

words themselves, the forms of the
of syntax in relation to the
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 3G4.

lb., p.
it
'
142
f.
Ries calls
it
take
*
in this sense.
Griech. Gr., p. 363
But he is f.; Kurze
2 Was ist Syntax? 1894, p. 142. a "naive misuse of the word syntax" not to not himself wholly consistent.
vcrgl. Gr., Ill, p. vii.
Grundr., V, pp.
1 ff.
''
Kurze
vergl. Gr., Ill, p. vii.
386
words, the clauses and sentences, the general style. Clyde makes two divisions in his Greek Syntax, viz. Words (p. 126) and Sentences (p. 193). But this formal division is artificial. Here, as
usual, Delbriick has perceived that syntax deals not only with
words (both Wortarten and

sentence as a whole and
p. 83).
all
Wortjormen), but
also
with
the
its
parts {Vergl. Syntax, Erster Teil,
to keep syntactical remarks out of acciThackeray's vol. I and in "Morphology" dence may be seen in in Accidence of this book. well as in Thumb's Handbook as
How
hard
it is
But this is not to fall into the old Historical Syntax. the Stoic grammarians and apply logic to the phenomena of grammar, using the phenomena of various grammatical catePlato indeed first applied logic to gories previously laid down. grammar.^ The method of historical grammar and comparative grammar has had a long and a hard fight against the logical and
(d)
pitfall of
philosophical
method of syntax. "They sought among the facts

in syntax,
But
it
has at last triumphed.
of language for the illustration

it.
of theories," as Dr. Wheeler^ so well puts
We
still
need logic
two agents into service after we have gathered the facts, not before, and after the historical and comparative methods have both been applied to these facts. Thus alone is it possible to have a really scientific syntax, one "definitely oriented" "as a social science" dealing
and philosophy
but we
call
these
with the total

(e)
life
of man.^
Irregularities.
We
shall
not therefore be surprised to
find
many
so-called "irregularities" in the use of syntactical prin-
Greek writers. This is a point of the utmost importance in any rational study of syntax. The personal equation
ciples in various
of the writer
amount
is
of elasticity
must always be taken into consideration. A certain and play must be given to each writer if one
to understand
human
speech, for speech

If
is
merely a reflection
of the mind's activities.

it
a tense brings one to a turn, perhaps
This is not to say that there are no barFar from it. But it is unnatural to expect all speakers or writers in Greek to conform slavishly to our modern grammatical rules, of most of which, besides, they were in The fact is that language is life and responds blissful ignorance. to the peculiarities of the individual temper, and it is to be reto do so.
was meant
barisms nor solecisms.
membered that the mind

^
itself is
not a perfect instrument.
The
The Whence and Whither

lb., p. 107.
Sandys, Hist, of CI. Scholarship, vol. I, p. 90. of the Mod. Sci. of Lang.,
p. 97.

mind
etc.,
is
(:STNTAHI2)
387
anacolutha,
not always clear nor
logical.
The
ellipses,
of language represent* partially the imperfections of the
"It often depends on the writer which of the two tenses he will use," Winer ^ remarks about the aorist and the past perIt always depends on the writer which tense and which fect.
mind.
everything else he will use.
Pray, on
whom
else
can
it
depend?
The
writer happens to be doing the writing.
He
decides whether
he will conform to the usual construction or will give added piquancy by a variation. This assumes, of course, that he is an educated writer. If he is not, he will often have the piquancy just the same without knowing it. "Syntactical irregularities are numerous in Greek," Clyde* observes, and, he might have added, in all other living languages. Greek is not, like "Esperanto," made to order by any one man. In point of fact what we call idioms are the very peculiarities (tStcbyuara) which mark it off from
other languages or at least characterize
spring out of the
it.
common
intelligence of
Some of these idioms men and belong to many
tongues, others mark the variations of certain minds which gain a following. Compare the rapid spread of "slang" to-day, if it happens to be a "taking phrase." Hence rules of syntax ought not to be arbitrary, though many of them are. Those that really express the life of language are in harmony with the facts. In general I would say that the fewer rules one gives the better for the student and for the facts.
V.
(a)
The Method
of this
Principles, not Rules.
not rules will be sought.

special
Grammar. As far as possible principles and The Greek grammarian is an interpreter
of the facts, not a regulator of the facts.
This point calls for emphasis in syntax where the subjective element comes in
so largely.
(6)
The Original
This
is
Significance.
The
starting-point thereis
fore in the explanation of

significance.
any given idiom
to find the original
not always possible, but it generally is. Historical and comparative grammar lend strong help in this endeavour. Always the best place to begin is the beginning if you
can find
(c)
it.
Form and Function.
would not
do(^s
all
insist
that form antl
function always correspond.
One
not
know
that the two
It is hard to prove a universal proposition. But certainly one is justified in beginning with one function for one form wherever he finds it to
did so correspond in the beginning in
instances.
Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 4
f.
W.-Th.,
p. 276.
gynt., p. 5.
388
NEW TESTAMENT
be true. Burton^ saj^s: ''It is by no means the case that each form has but one function, and that each function can be discharged by but one form." Certainly the same function can come to be discharged by various forms, as is the case with the locative and dative infinitive forms (Xajdelp, aKovaai). But that is not
to say that originally the locative and dative verbal substantive were identical in idea. The Sanskrit completely disproves it. It may very well be true that each form had one function originally, whereas later the same function came to be expressed by various forms. As a starting-point, therefore, one may assume, till he learns otherwise, that form and function correspond. The necessity of getting at the ground-idea of an idiom is rightly emphasized
It may indeed come to pass as p. 1). "but," that the one form may be used for most of the parts of speech (Giles, Man. ofCotnp. Philol., p. 237 f.). On the whole subject of the agreement of form and idea see Kiihner-
by Delbriick (Grundlagen,
in the English
Gerth,
{d)
I,
pp. 64-77.
Development.
But the beginning
is
not the end.
The
ac-
Greek language up to the time must be observed. Each idiom T. has a history. Now it N. cannot be expected that the space can be given to the actual working-out of each idiom in history as Jamiaris has done in his Historical Grammar, or minute comparison at every point by means What is essential is that the gramof comparative grammar. marian shall have both these points in mind as he seeks to explain the development from the etymological basis. This is the only secure path to tread, if it can be found. Burton ^ indeed distinguishes sharply between historical and exegetical grammar and conceives his task to be that of the exegetical grammarian. For
tual development of a given idiom in the
myself
cess
regard exegetical
grammar
as the last stage in the pro-
and not to be dissociated from the historical. Indeed how a Greek idiom is to be represented in English is a matter of little concern to the Greek grammarian till the work of translation is reached. The Greek point of view is to be observed all through the process till translation comes. It is Greek syntax, not English. There is one more stage in the interpretation (e) Context. of the Greek idiom. That is the actual context in any given instance. The variation in the total result is often due to the difference in the local colour of the context. The same idiom with a given etymology may not have varied greatly in the long course
of history save as
1
it
responds to the context.

p. 1.
In a word, etymol2
N. T. Moods and Tenses,
lb., p. 3.
THE MEANING OF SYNTAX (STNTASIS)
389
ogy, history, context are the factors that mark the processes in the evolution of a Greek idiom in a given case. These are the things to keep constantly in mind as we approach the idioms of
Greek syntax.
We may
not always succeed in finding the solu-
tion of every idiom, but most of
them
will yield to this process.
The result is to put syntax on a firmer scientific basis and take it out of the realm of the speculative subjective sciences. This is the translation of the total result, (/) Translation.
not of the exact Greek idiom.
result of all the processes in
Translation crisply reproduces the
which the translation
harmony with the language into made, often into an utterly different idiom. It is folly to reason backwards from the translation to the Greek idiom, for the English or German idiom is often foreign to the Greek and usually varies greatly from the original Greek. English is English and Greek is Greek. Syntax is not translation, though it is the only safe way to reach a correct translaExegesis is not syntax, but syntax comes before real tion. The importance of syntax is rightly appreciated by exegesis.
is
Gildersleeve.^
(g)
Limits of Syntax.
After
all is
done, instances remain where
syntax cannot say the last word, where theological bias will inevitably determine
how one interprets the Greek idiom. Take

In
itself
/SaTrrifco.
uSart
in Ac. 1:5, for instance.
the word can be either locative or

in Ac. 2
:
instrumental Avith
express design (see
So
41),
38
eis
does not of
in,
itself
Mt. 10
but
it
may
be so used.
When
the
grammarian has finished, the theologian steps before the grammarian is through.
'
and sometimes
Synt. of CIass.Gk.,p.iv. C.andS.,Sel.fr.theLXX,p.22,observe that the

of a
life
language
lies in
the syntax and that

literal
it is
is,
impossible to translate syntax
completely.
in syntax.
The more
a translation
like the
LXX,
the more
it fails
CHAPTER X
THE SENTENCE
In point of fact syntax deals I. The Sentence and Syntax. with the sentence in its parts and as a whole. And yet it is not tautology to have a chapter on the sentence, a thing few grammars do. It is important to get a clear conception of the sentence
as well as of syntax before one proceeds to the
criticism.
treats,
work
of detailed
The sentence
is
the thing in
all its
parts that syntax
but the two things are not synonymous.

teaching about the sentence.^
At bottom gram-
mar
II.
is
(a)
The Sentence Defined. Complex Conception.
sentence
is
the expression of
the idea or ideas in the speaker's mind.

tia)
It is
an opinion (senten-
This idea is in itself complex. combination of "the small coin of language" into an intelligible whole that we call a sentence.^ Just a mere word accidentally expressed is not a sentence. "The sentence is the symbol whereby the speaker denotes that two or more ideas have
expressed (avToreXris \6yos).
this It
is
combined
(b)
in his mind."^
Essential Parts. Only two parts are essential to complex intelligible whole to form a sentence. These two A statement is made about parts are subject and predicate. something and thus an idea is expressed. These two parts are called substantive and verb, though the line of distinction between substantive and verb was originally very dim, as is now often seen in the English ("laugh," "touch," "work," etc.). Many modern linguists hold that the verb is nominal in origin,
this
1
Two
K.-G.,
1.
I, p. 1.
Cf. Brug.,
Kurze
vergl. Gr., Ill, p. 623; Delbnick, Vergl.
Synt.,
^
TL, pp. 73-85.
Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
is
as
due to synthesis
'
Philol., p. 235. Opposed to this idea of a sentence the modern psychological definition of Wundt who
defines a sentence as "die Gliodening einer Gesamtvorstellung."
Strong,
Logeman and Wheeler,
Intr. to the
Study
iii;
of the Hist, of Lang.,
1891, p. 93.
Cf. Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p.
Sayce, Prin. of
Comp.
Philol., p. 13G.
390
THE SENTENCE
since
391
some primitive languages know only nominal sentences. do not know which is the oldest, subject or predicate.^ In the Greek verb indeed subject and predicate are united in the one form, the original sentence.^ The sentence in form may be (c) One-Membered Sentence. very brief, even one word in truth. Indeed the long sentence may not express as much as the short one. In moments of passion an exclamation may be charged with more meaning than a long rambling sentence.^ We have plenty of examples of one-word sentences in the N. T., hke airexei (Mk. 14 :41), Trpo^Tjreuaoj/ (Mk. 14 65), Trpox6fj.eda (Ro. 3:9), deXco (Mt. 8:3), ovxl (Lu. 1 Com60). pare also iropeWrjTL, epxov, iroirjcTov (Mt. 8:9). (d) Elliptical Sentence. Indeed, as seen in the case of ovxl (Lu. 1 60) the sentence does not absolutely require the expression of either subject or predicate, though both are implied by the word used. This shortening or condensation of speech is common to all the Indo-Germanic languages.^ Other examples of such condensation are the vocative, as Kupte (Mt. 8: 2), with which compare viraye, liarava (Mt. 4 10), the interjections like 0,76 (Jas. 5 1), ea (Lu. 4 34), l8ov (Rev. 14 14), 'I8e (Jo. 1 29), oval (Rev. 8 13). These interjections may be used alone, as ea (Lu. 4 34), or with other words, as oval and tSe above. Cf. Martha's Nat,
We
Kvpie (Jo. 11
is
27),
two sentences.
Jo. 11
35 (kdaKpvaev
6 'Irjaovs)
the shortest verse, but not the shortest sentence in the N. T.

(e)
Only Predicates.
still
The
subject
may
i.e.
be absent and the
predicate will
idea intended.
constitute a sentence,
express the complex
graph.
The
is
Greek
This follows naturally from the preceding paramay imply the subject. The subject in involved in the verbal personal ending and often the
predicate
makes it clear what the subject really is. Indeed the Greek only expressed the personal subject as a rule where clearness, emphasis or contrast demanded it. The N. T., like the KOLvq in general, uses the pronominal subject more frequently than the older Greek (cf. English). Often a glance at the context is
context
Thompson, Gk. Synt., 1883, p. xv. Delbriick (Vcrgl. Synt., 1. TL, p. 77) quotes Schleicher as saying that nouns either have or had case-forms, verbs cither have or had pers. endings, and that all words were originally either nouns or verbs. But it is not quite so easy as that unless pronouns be included in 2 K.-G., I, p. 2. nouns.
'
Giles,
Man.
624
f.
of
Comp.
Philol., p. 23G.
On
sentence-building see Brug.,

p. 179).
Kurze
*
vergl. Gr., Ill, pp. 623-774.
lb., p.
R. Nicoll
in Br.
The mod. Gk. shows it (Thumb, Handb., W. instances the Scotch "aweel."
Sir
W.
392
all

that
is
NEW TESTAMENT
3
needed, as with
Kal Tapeylpovro Kal kâwTlôvTo (Jo.
Sometimes indeed close attention is required to notice a change of subject which is not indicated. So Kal 'icjâyov iraPTes Kal exopTaadrjaav, Kal rjpav to irepLaaevop tC:v K\a(Tp.aTwv (]Mt. 14:20). For this change of subject with no indication see Lu. 8: 29; Jo. 19: 31; 2 Cor. 3 16; 1 Jo. 5 16.^ Sometimes the subject is drawn out of the verb itself, as in aaXTrlaeL (1 Cor. 15:52), 'the trumpet shall trumpet.' So in ovre yanovaiv ovTe ya/jLLôvTaL (Mt. 22 30) men have to be supplied with the j5rst and women with the second verb. God is considered by some the unexpressed, but well-known subject, as with /Spexet (Mt. 5
23), epxovraL
:
(Mk. 2
3), etc.
(Eph. 4:8), (}>7]alu (Heb. 8 5). Often what is said is a matter of common remark or usage and the subject is designedly concealed, indefinite subject. So when Paul uses (f)7]aiv (2 Cor. 10 10) of his opponent unless we follow
45),
e'iprjKev
(Ac. 13
34), XeTet
and read
0ao-t.
The
plural
:
is
very
common
sagt,
in this sense as orav

:
oveLblcxwaLV vixas
(Mt. 5
:
11),
p.r}TL
avXKeyovaLv; (Mt. 7
16), ws Xedit.
yovffLP
(Rev. 2
24)
like
German man
:
:
French on
10
:
Cf.
:
also,
not to
:
pile 6;
up examples, Mt. 8
:
16;
:
Mk.
13; Lu. 17
23; Jo. 15
20
2; Ac. 3
2;
Rev. 12
6.
This impersonal or
:
rhetorical plural appears in irpoacpepovaLP

if
the text
I.
is
genuine.
1359).
(Eurip.
T.,
and bvpaprai (Heb. 10 1) Moulton (ProL, p. 58) cites KXeTTTovres Sometimes the plural purposely conceals
the identity of the person referred to, as
20)
is
used of Herod the Great.

:
when TedprjKaaLP (Mt. The same principle apphes to

(Mk. 14
still
:
alrovaLP (Lu. 12
20).
Then again the verb may be merely im:
personal, as with e^peêp (Jas. 5
17), airexei
41), ayei (Lu.

10).
24
21), ov fie\L aoL
(Mt. 22
16),
rhxai (1 Cor. 14
Cf.
oi/ê
ky'tpero
(Mk.
11
19).
So the modern Greek

is
(Thumb, Handb.,
is
p. 179).
Usually the impersonal verb in the N. T.
in the pas-
sive voice, so that the subject

:
involved in the action of the verb.

:
Thus nerprid-qaeTaL (Mk. 4 24), dodrjaeraL (Mk. 4 25), TnareveTaL and o/jioXoyeLTaL (Ro. 10: 10), aireiperaL and kyeiperaL (1 Cor. 15:42), etc. Sometimes indeed a verb appears to be impersonal at first blush, when really it is not. So earoo de (2 Cor. 12 16) has the
:
previous sentence as the subject.

Treptexet
is
In
Pet. 2
:
6 the subject of
avpejSrj
the following quotation.
In Ac. 21 35
has as
its
subject the infinitive âaTaêadaL.
So in general whenever the

is
infinitive is
used with a verb as subject, the verb

(Ac. 7
:
not imperare
sonal, as
apelSy] eTTLaKeiJ/aadaL
23).
The examples
ypa\pai.
numere5et
f.
ous,
1
as eêaTLP
iroLtlp
le
(Mt.
12:2),
eboê
(Lu. 1:3),
et Attr., p.
See Viteau, Et. sur
Grec du N.
T., Sujet,
Compl.
55
THE SENTENCE
8iepx^<^9aL (Jo.
393
(Mt. 3
33),
:
:4), Trpeirou earlu
ir'KrjpoJa-at
15), KadrJKev ^fjv
(Ac. 22
kaTLv rov
22), evdex^rai airokeaOat (Lu.

iii]
13
and even avhoeKTOV

:
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 infinitive as subject, as dtairopeveadaL (Lu.
6).
1)
and
elaeXdelv (Lu.
8e is
Cf.
Mk.
15.
But often
:
Kal eyevero or
eyhero
used with
9
finite
verb as a practical, though not the technical, subject.

eXaXovv (Lu. 2
Kal
So
37).
Kal kyepero,
15), eyevero 8e, avurjurrjaev (Lu.
So also
earaL, k'xtco (Ac.
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

for
I see
no adequate reason
/cat
rjv
denying a Semitic influence on this

also parallels the other idiom,
17, cf. 5
:
point, especially as the

eyevero
didacrKOJv
LXX
:
/cat
(Lu. 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 The use of a 6rt or 'iva clause as subject is common eyevero. either alone or in apposition with a pronoun. Cf. Mt. 10 25 (tra); 1 Jo. 5:9 (ort); Jo. 15: 12 (tm). In a case like dp/cet (Jo. 14 8), avrJKev (Col. 3 18), ekoylddr] (Ro. 4 3) the subject comes
:
: : :
So also the subject is really implied when the partitive genitive is used without the expression of rives or TToXXot as uvvrfKdov be Kal rcov jxaO-qroiv (Ac. 21 16) and elirav ovv
easily out of the context.
:
/c
a clear case of the ablative with e/c. The conclusion of the whole matter is that the subject is either
roiv ixadr]ruiv (Jo.
16
17),
expressed or implied by various linguistic devices.

debs as
(/)
The
strictly
impersonal verbs in the old Greek arose from the conception of
doing the thing.^

Likewise the
predicate
Only Subject.
may
be absent
of
and only implied
in the subject.
Yet naturally the examples
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), XafxâveL (Heb. 5:4). Cf. Eph. 5 22. It may be that the verb would be
this nature are far fewer
:
Prol., p. 17.
3. Tl., pp.
the whole matter of subjectless sentences see Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., 23-37. Cf. Gildersleeve, Gk. Synt., pp. 35-41, for classical illustrations of the absence of the subject. Cf. also Moulton, CI. Rov., 1901, p. 436, for exx. in the pap. of the absence of the subject in standing formulas.
^
On
394
slightly

changed
in form,
if
NEW TESTAMENT
expressed, as aKavdakLadrfaonai (Mk.

:
14
29), viroTaaaeado)aav
(Eph. 5
24.
24),
TiOeiJLev
(2 Cor. 3
13), etc.
Sometimes again the affirmative

as in
to be
1
is
to be inferred from a negative
Cor. 7: 19; 10
In
Mk.
two
12
5 the principal verb has
drawn from the idea

:
of the
participles depopres
/xiy
and
dTroK-
very often absent (as Mt. 6 1), so that the idiom becomes a set phrase (Lu. 10 6; 13 9). In Ro. 5 3 with ov iibvov be, KavxoifJ.eda is to be
el 8e ht]
Tevpvvres.
In particular ^\^th
(or
ye) the
verb
is
and in 5 11 ao)6r]a6iJ.eda. In Ro. 9 10 the verb has to come from verse 9 or 12. In Ro. 4 9 probably XeyeraL (cf. verse
supplied,
: : :
6) is to
be supplied. Often etirep is not expressed, as in Ac. 25 22. In Ro. 5 18 Winer^ supplies aire^rj in the first clause and cnro^r}: :
ceraL in the second.
In 2 Cor. 9
7 he likewise
:
is
right in suggesttpa
ing
56rco
from the context, as in Gal. 2

not
difficult
9 after
we must
mentally insert
tations
Jas.
it is
evayyeXi'^wixeBa, evayyeXi^copTai.
In
epistiolary salu-
to supply Xe7et or X67et xoiipcv as in

1
:
1:1; Ph. 1:1; Rev.

ellipsis,
4.
:
simple
as in 2 Pet. 2
:
These are all examples of very 22 in the proverb. Cf. also 1 Cor.
But the predicate is not The verb indeed is the usual way of expressing it, but not the only way. The verb eiyut, especially eari and elaiv, may be merely a "form-word" like a preposition and not be the predicate. Sometimes it does express existence as a predicate like any other verb, as in eycb ein'i (Jo. OaXaaaa ovk Icftlp en (Rev. 21 1). Cf. Mt. 23 30. 8 58) and But more commonly the real predicate is another word and et/xt merely serves as a connective or copula. Thus the predicate may be complex. With this use of elixL as copula ("form-word") the
quite so simple a matter as the subject.
:
4:21; 2 Cor. 5:13; Gal. 3 5. (g) Verb not the Only Predicate.
17
predicate
may
be another substantive, as
aypos
kcxTip
6 Koafjios
:
(Mt. 13 :38); an adjective, as to ^peap

especially the participle, as
rjp
earl 0a9u (Jo.
4
:
11);
;
prepositional phrase, as 771-? aov to pijua taTip (Ro. 10

diSaaKuip
8)
and
:
(Mt. 7
29)
Other verbs,
(Jo. 1
:
besides
eifil,
may
5
:
be used as a mere copula, as yiponai

:
14),
KadiffTanaL (Ro.
vo/jiaL
19), eaTrjKa (Jas.

7), vivapxo^
9), /caXoOât
:
(Mt. 5
9), 0at-
(2 Cor. 13
(Ac. 16
3).^
Predicative amplificafor class, exx.

in the Attic
W.-Th., p. 587.
Cf. also Gildcrslecve,
Gk. Synt., pp. 41-44,

is
of the omission of the pred.

inscr.
The
eUipsis of the pred.
common
Cf. Meisterh., p. 196.
2 Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., 3. Tl., p. 12, for the origin of the copula, and pp. 15-22 for the adj., adv., subst. (oblique cases as well as nom. as pred.). Cf. also Gildersleeve, Gk. Synt., pp. 30-35,
THE SENTENCE
tions belong to apposition of the predicate.
(h)
395
and
will
be so treated as an expansion
is
The subject also has amplifications, Copula not Necessary. Naturally this copula
not
al-
ways considered necessary. It can be readily dispensed with when both subject and the real predicate are present. This indeed is the most frequent ellipsis of all in all stages of the language, especially the form eart. But strictly speaking, the absence of the copula is not ellipsis, but a remnant of a primitive idiom, since some primitive tongues could do without the copula.
Still,
as Blass^ observes,
the ellipsis never

drj'Kov
became a
:
fixed usage save in a
few phrases
like
on
(1
Cor. 15
27) or
on
drjôu (Gal.
3:11).
In ha
(Mt. 9:4), jkvqTaL has dropped out. There are many idiomatic uses of tI without the copula. So tI rifuv /cat aol (Mk. 1 24), ri irpos ae
:
(Jo. 21
22), ovTos 8e
(Jo. 21
:
21),
60eXos (Jas. 2
14), tI ovv
yap (Ro. 3:3), etc. Exclamations, as well as questions, show the absence of the copula. Thus cos
tIs
rj
and
wêXeta (Ro. 3
1), rt
cbpaTot
(Ro. 10
15),
:
cos
apeêpavvrjra (Ro. 11
33), ixeyoKyj
i}
"Aprefjus
'E(f)eaio:v
(Ac. 19
28).
As a matter
of fact the copula

is
absent from any Idnd of sentence which

as
/xa/cdpioi ol
:
KadapOL (Mt. 5:8),
'iTycroOs
13
8), a^tos 6 epycLTTTi
(Mt. 10
:
10), trt
.
be from aml)iguity, Xptcros ... 6 auros (Heb. fiLKpov (Jo. 14 19), en yap
free
:
may
yuKpbv oaov oaov (Heb. 10
37), ttSs
:
aTretpos
\6yov
11
:
SiKaLoavprjs
f.
(Heb.
5: 13),
ojs ol
vTvoKpLTai
(Mt. 6
16).
Cf. Ro.
15
for
several
further examples, which could be easily multiplied not only for

koTL
and
dal,
the absence of
but for other forms as well, though the examples for Forms of the elul and et are not very numerous.
imp., fut., imper., subj., opt., inf.

also.
his.
:
and part, (often) are absent For djil see 2 Cor, 11 6. For d see Jo. 17 21; Gal. 4 7 Observe ôylôixat in verse 5 and t5tdjrj/s in verse 6, but the
:
participle dXX' ev Tavrl ipavepojaavres ev iracnv
eis
u/^Ss
goes over to
the literary plural, about which see further in this chapter.
Com-
pare also 2 Cor. 8

is
23,
In
Mk.
12
26
et/xt is
absent, though kyo)
used.
:
17; Ph. 3
:
14
For further examples of the absence of eapikv see Ro. 15. For d see Rev. 15 :4 {otl /jlouos oaLos). In Jo. 11 both dixi and ka-Tlv are absent, 6tl kyo^ kv tQ Trarpl Kal 6
:
irariip
kv knot.
The
4
:
imperfect
rjv
may
,
also be absent as with
oj
6pop.a
5),
(Lu. 2
25), ovofxa avTU) (Jo. 3
1), Kal
to ovojxa avrrjs (Lu, 1:
In
1 Pet.
:
17
rjv
we
and
find
eorai.
wanting
kaTlv
and
earai.
Cf. also
Cor. 15
21 for
The
other moods, besides indica-
tive,
D after ottws (2 Cor.
show occasional lapses of this copula. Thus the subjunctive 8:11) and after 'im (2 Cor, 8 13), The op:
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 73.
Cf. Gildcrsleevc,
Gk. Synt., pp. 41-43.
396
tative
eiprjVT]

177
more frequently drops out

8e
in wishes, as xo^pts
vjjuu
:
Kal
(Ro. 1:7), 6
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
etri
earip or
is
e'lrj
or even
earco,
though Winer^ strongly
insists that
necessary because of the

:
LXX
kanv
examples.
evXoyriTds
But Blass very propalQ)uas.
erly points to Ro. 1

1 Pet.
25, 6s
eh rovs
Cf also
.
4:11, where A drops examples of the dropping of

12
:
eaTiv.
The imperative shows a few

with the participles in Ro.
right against
eare as
9,
though, of course, only the context can decide between the
indicative
and imperative.
Winer ^
is
Meyer
in rein
fusing to supply eare after the second
& (simply resumptive)

the absence of
Eph.
13.
But some
clear instances of
'icTco
:
h x^-P'-ti-, Mt. 27 19 Heb. 13 fx-qdep x^^pi-^ TV ^^V) 4 rt/uos 6 yafxos. The infinitive elpat is present in Ph. 3 8, but absent in Ph. 3 7. The participle shows a similar ellipsis as in Jo. 1 50 eU6v The other verbs ae vTTOKaToo rrjs avKtjs, Lu. 4 1 'Irjaovs 8e ir'KT]pr]s.
appear, as in Col.
aoi,
4:66
:
\6yos vfxwv Taprore
2 Cor. 8
16
used as copula (Mt. 6

:
may
:
also be absent
15).
if
not needed, as with

is
yipoixai
10; Ac. 10
The absence
of the copula with Iboh

ri.2ri
indeed like the construcit is
tion after the Heb.
as Blass ^ points out, but

as
also in
Moulton^ shows. But it is especially frequent in the parts of the N. T. most allied to the O. T. Like other interjections Iboh does not need a verbal predicate, though it may have one. As examples see Mt. 17 5; Lu. 5 18; Rev. 4:1. In the last example both dbop and Ibob occur and the con-
harmony with the
kolvti
struction follows,
{i)
now one now the other, as is seen in The Two Radiating Foci of the Sentence.
seen, the subject
verse 4.
Thus, as
and predicate are the two foci of the sentence regarded as an ellipse. Around these two foci all the other parts of the sentence radiate, if there are any other parts. The sentence may go all the way from one abrupt word to a period a couple of pages long, as in Demosthenes or Isocrates. Schoolboys will recall a sentence in Thucydides so long that he forgot to finish it. Giles'' speaks of the sentence as a kingdom with many provinces or a house with many stories. That is true potentially. But the sentence is elastic and may have only the two foci (subject and predicate) and indeed one of them may exist only by im1
we have
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 74.
"
"*
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 74.

Prol., p. 11.
2 3
W.-Th.,
lb.
p. 586.
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., p. 236.
'
THE SENTENCE
plication.
397
other focus in the

context,
The context can generally be relied on to supply the mind of the speaker or writer. Thus by the by look and by gesture, words can be filled to the full
of themselves they would not carry. Emotion can make itself understood with few words. The matters here outlined about the Greek sentence apply to Greek as a whole and so to the N. T. Greek.
It is immaterial (j) Varieties of the Simple Sentence. whether the simple sentence, which is the oldest sentence, be declarative, interrogative or imperative.
and even run over with meanings that
That
affects in
essential idea.
All three varieties occur in great
no way the abundance in
the N. T. and need not be illustrated. tence
So likewise the simple sen-
may
be affirmative or negative.
That
is
beside the
mark
in getting at the foundation of the sentence.
All these matters
(and also abstract and concrete) are mere accidents that give colour and form, but do not alter the organic structure. For an
extensive discussion of the various
kinds of independent sen-
tences in the N. T. (declarative, interrogative, hortatory, wish,
command) see Viteau, Syntaxe des Propositions, pp. 17-40. The matter will be discussed at length in the chapter on Môdes. ni. The Expansion of the Subject.
(a) Idea-Words and Form- Words. There are indeed, as already seen, two sorts of words in general in the sentence, ideawôrds and form-words, as the comparative grammars teach us.^ The idea-words (called by Aristotle cjicoual arjfxavTuiai) have an inner
content in themselves (word-stuff), while the form-words

aarjixai)
{4>o:val
express rather relations^ between words.
Substantive,
prepositions,
verb, adjective, adverb are idea-words,
and pronouns,
some adverbs
reality the
einl,
(place, time, etc.), the
copula are form-words.
In
(cf.
form-words
logical
may have
been originally idea-words
for instance,
and the
prepositions).
The
distinction
is
a real
than practical. The form-words, when prepositions, really help out the meanings of the cases.
one, but
(6)
more
Concord and Government.
Clj'de^ offers another distinc-
between concord and government, which has something in it if it is not pushed too far. *'In concord, the substantive is, as it were, a syntactical chief, and all his followers wear the same badge as himself; in government, the substantive aption, that
pears, as
it
were, in various conditions of service,
and
is
dressed
each time according to the particular function he discharges."
Cf. Brug.,
Kurzc
vergl. Cr., Ill, p. G31.

3
K.-G.,
I, p. 7.
Gk. Synt.,
p. 120.
398
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NE"W TESTAMENT
He uses concord where the substantive is king and government where the verb rules. There is something in this distinction between the two parts of the sentence, only at bottom the verb has concord too as well as the substantive, as can be shown, and as Clyde really admits by the term congruity for the case-relations with the verb. This distinction is not one between subject and predicate, but between substantive and verb. This may be formed (c) The Group around the Subject. in various ways, as, for instance, by another substantive, by an adjective, by the article, by a pronoun, by an adverb, by a prepositional phrase (adjunct),
calls for illustration
by subordinate
and
discussion.
clause. Each of these They may be explained in

^
inverse order for practical reasons.
For Subordinate Clause take Lu. 1 :43. euroXi] With the Article. In Ro. 7 10 we have ds ^corjv. Here the article shows that this prepositional phrase or adjunct In the chapter on is under the wing of the substantive evToXrj. the Article this matter will call for more elaborate discussion. For the article and pronoun take ovtos 6 'I-qaovs (Ac. 1 11). As examples of adverbs with substantives take 3. The Adverb. 4 25) and 8e avcj 'lepovaaXrjiJ. (verse 26). vvv (Gal. Tp 'lepovaaXriiJ, The origin of the adjective and its close The Adjective. 4. relation to the substantive was discussed under Declensions (chapter VII) and will be further shown in the chapter on Adjectives in Syntax. Take as an example 6 tol/jltju 6 koXos (Jo. 10: 11). The earliest and always a common way 5. The Substantive. of expanding the subject was by the addition of another substantive. It was done in either of two ways. (a) By an oblique case, usually the genitive. Even the dative
1.
2.
17
ri
17
may occur. The

But the
another.
ablative
is
seen in ^hoL twv
8Lad7]Koop
is
(Eph. 2
12).
genitive, the case of
genus or kind,
the case usually
employed to express this subordinate relation of one word to This whole matter will be discussed under the genitive case and here only one example will be mentioned, 6 warrip rfjs
Bo^rjs
(/3)
(Eph.
17), as illustrating
the point.
Apposition.
This was the earliest method.
Apposition
is
common
^
to both subject
and predicate.
Sometimes indeed the
of fact any substantive, whatever its place in the sentence, be the nucleus of a similar grouping. But this is a further subdivision to be noticed later. On the grouping of verbs around the subst. see Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., 3. TL, pp. 200-221. For various ways of grouping words around the subj. in a Gk. sentence see K.-G., I, p. 52.
As a matter
may
THE SENTENCE
genitive
irepl
is
399
is
used where really the substantive

crco/xaros
in apposition, as
Tov vaov rod
aiiTov (Jo.
21),
a predicate example
where "temple" and "body" are meant to be identical. So with But in 1) and many other examples. 17 okia TOV aKTjvovs (2 Cor. 5 general the two substantives are in the same case, and with the subject, of course, in the nominative. As a matter of fact apposition can be employed with any case. The use of avrjp, avOpwiros, 7W17 with words in apposition seems superfluous, though it is The word in apposition conveys the main perfectly intelligible.
:
idea,
as
6.vr]p
TTpo4>i]Tri<i
(Lu. 24:19),
(Ac.
1
:
avOpw-KOs
olKoSeairoTris
(Mt.
:
21
33).
Cf.
ixvdpes a8e\cj)oL
IG)
and
iiudpa (povea (Ac.
14).
So also av8pes 'lapa-qXelraL (Ac. 2 22), apdpes 'AdrjpotoL (Ac. 17: 22), an idiom common in the Attic orators. Such apposition, of course, is not confined to the subject, but is used in any case in every sort of phrase. So irpos ywoLKa xvpo-v (Lu. 4 26), avdpwwu) olKoSeairoTj] (Mt. 13:52, but note also 21:33), St/iwros Bvpaeoos Sometimes the word in apposition precedes the (Ac. 10 32). other, though not usually. Thus 6 Koa/jtos rrjs aSiKias, yXoJaaa (Jas. 3:6); /cat yap to -waaxo. rjuQiv Tvdr], XptaTos (1 Cor. 5:7). But this is largely a matter of definition. The pronoun, of course, may be the subject, as eyu) 'Irjaovs (Rev. 22 16). So
:
17
70)
ITaOXos
(Gal. 5:2).
in apposition
Cf.
vvu
vnels
ot
iâpLcraloi,
(Lu. 11:39).
The word
of
itself
may
Thus
vary greatly
in the precise result
the apposition,
a matter determined wholly by the word

in 'A/3padî 6 vrarptapx??? (Heb. 7 4)
:
and the context.

title
is
a descriptive
position
is
given.
Cf. also
:
eL
7cb
tVti/'a
vfxup tovs irbbas,
6 KvpLos Kal 6 SidaaKoXos (Jo. 13
14).
Partitive or distributive apin apposition

airrjXdou,
:
common, when the words

ot
do not coroj /leu ets tov
respond to the whole, as

I81.OV
8e
aixek-qaavTes
ay pbv,
OS
8e
eirl
word
17
in apposition
(Jo.
aKy]voTT't]yla
tfiiropiav avTov (Mt. 22 Often the 5). merely epexegetic, as ri eopTri twv 'lov8a[wv 7:2). Auros is sometimes used in emphatic
ttju
is
apposition, as 6 Xpttrros
Tos
Ke4)a\ri rrjs eKKXrjaias, avros acoTrip
tov
aui/xa-
(Eph. 5 :23).
20).
The phrase
is
tovt' 'Igtlv is
used in epexegetical
Pet.
apposition with the subject, as oKlyoi, tovt'

3
:
'icTLv 6kt<j} xf'vxal (1
But the phrase
a mere expletive and has no effect on
number (as seen above) or case. any case as the locative (Ro. 7
: :
can be used indifferently with 18), the instrumental (Mk. 7:2),

It
the accusative (Ac. 19:4; Heb. 13:15; Phil. 13), the genitive (Heb. 9 12; 11 16). Any number of words or phrases may be
in apposition, as in
Hevos Atd/3oXos
/cat
k^\r]dr] 6 8paKu>v
6 nkya$, b
6<f)is,
b dpxatos, 6 koXov-
6 Zarai'Ss, 6 TrXavcoj/
Tijv olKOVukvrjv 6\i]v
(Rev. 12
9).
400

infinitive
i]
NEW TESTAMENT
An
be in apposition with the subject, as ov yap 5td tQ airepfxan avrov, to Kkripovbixov avrov Cf. 1 Th. 4 3; 1 Pet. 2 15. Once more, elvai Kbaixov (Ro. 4:13). a clause with otl or Iva may be in apposition with the subject (or
po/xov
may
eTrayyeXia, tco 'AfSpaafx
rj
predicate either), as
Beds rifup (1 Jo.
avrt] karlv
r\
ixaprvpia, otl
fcoTjj'
alcovLov
edoiKev 6
'iva
11)
and
avT-q
yap
(jtlv
rj
ayairrj
:
tov deov
rds
For many more or less interesting details of apposition in the N. T. and the LXX see Viteau, Sujet, Complement et Attribut (1896), pp. 220236. On apposition in John see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, pp. 36 ff. On the general subject of apposition see Delbriick, Vergl.
kuroXas avTov Ty]pw{xev (1 Jo. 5:3).
Cf. Jo. 6
29, 39, 40.
Syntax, Dritter Teil, pp. 195-199; Kiihner-Gerth, IV. The Expansion of the Predicate.
(a)
I,
pp. 281-290.
Predicate in Wider Sense. Here predicate must be its full sense and not merely the verb, but also the other ways of making a predicate -^dth the copula. One cannot do better here than follow Brugmann/ though he makes the verb, not the
taken in
predicate, the centre of this group.
It is simpler just to take the
predicate as the other focus answering to the subject.

cate can be expanded
nouns, by adjectives,
The prediby other verbs, by substantives, by proby adverbs, by prepositions, by particles, by

Participle.
subordinate clauses.
the (6) The Infinitive and common ways of supplementing a
These are the
verb by another verb directly.
They
will
both
here.
call for special
treatment later and can only be

:
mentioned
êvlaavTes
(Heb. 13
gether directly
:
(Mk. 6 48) and eXaOov TLves But sometimes twô verbs are used towithout any connective, as ttov deXeis eTOLfiaawixep
Cf. i]9eXep irapeKddv
:
2).
(Mt. 26 17). See discussion of asyndeton Connection in Sentences).

(c)
in this chapter (xii.
The Relation between the Predicate and SubstanThis matter receives

full
três.
treatment under the head of

It is
Cases, and a
word
of illustration suffices here.
not the accusaof the substan-
tive case alone that occurs, but tive or
any oblique case
be used to express this relation, as wpoaexeTe -svill be the eTrayy eXia (1 nominative and forms the predicate, as avrrj eaTcu
eavTols (Lu. 21
:
pronoun
may
34).
In the case of a copula this case

ri
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
(e)
401
with predicates and as
:
Adjectives.
They
are
common
predicates.
(Jo.
So
aireKaTearaOr] vycrjs
(Mt. 12
13).
Cf. ^\9ev wpuTO^
20
:4), airapaâTou exet ttjv Upoâvvqv
(Heb. 7: 24).
The
:
article
and the participle often form the predicate, as Mt. 10 20. The use of the adver!) witli the predicate (/) The Adverb. is so normal as to call for no remark. So o/j.oXoyovij.hws peya karlv TO TTJs evaejSeias nvar-qpLOV (1 Tim. 3 16). Cf. ourcos yap TrXouatcos
:
kiTLXoprfyqdrja-eTaL (2
(g)
Pet. 1:11).
Prepositions.
tW
ir\r}po)dr]T els ttSz'
to Tr\ripwp.a tov Oeov
Let one example serve for prepositions: (Eph. 3 19).

:
(/j)
Negative Particles ov and
fx^.
These
their
12)
are
not conillus-
fined to
trations.
the predicate, but there find

Cf. ov yap ToXpccnev (2 Cor. 10
:
commonest and p-i] ykvoiro
(Gal.
14).
(i)
Subordinate Clauses. Most commonh^, though by no means always, they are expansions of the predicate. The adverbial clauses are mainly so, as eypa\l/a vpXv Iva elSrjTe (1 Jo. 5 13), and most object (substantival) clauses, as the 6tl ^corjv exere alcovLov in the same sentence. But adjective clauses likewise often link themselves on to a word in the predicate, as h XpLaT<2 'I-qaou 6v
:
TpoedeTo (Ro. 3
24).
(j) Apposition with the Predicate and Looser Amplifications. It is common also, but calls for httle additional remark. Predicative amplifications, as Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 527) calls them, are common. So ets 6 ey(h Tedr]v K-fjpv^ (1 Tim. 2:7), 6v irpoedeTo 6 deos lkaaTr]piov (Ro. 3:25). The participle with cis is
frequent, as
1
fjpS.s
ws Kara aapKa TeptTarovuTas (2 Cor. 10

also
els
2).
Cf.
Pet. 2
5.
Note
is
as
els
vl6v
(Ac. 7: 21), a
in
parallel to the
Hebrew and very abundant
Greek idiom the LXX. A comyivdoaKeTe
mon
construction
case.
rj
to have a clause in apposition with tovto in

11), ablative as in jielôva
dfj
an oblique
OTL riyyiKev
So we see the accusative as in tovto

:
âaiXeia tov Oeov (Lu. 10
TavTTjs ayairriv ovdeis exî- tva tls ttjv
^pvxw auTov
vrep tC^v
4>'lKuv
avTov
(Jo. 15
13), locative ev tovtco yLvdoaKopev otl ev avT<Jo fxevopep (1 Jo.
13).
Cf. Xeyw TOVTO otl eKaaTos vpQiv Xeyet (1 Cor. 1
12).
Like-
wise the infinitive
may
be in apposition with tovto, as

peta avopcou ekoyladrj
is
eKptva e/xaurcS
TOVTO, TO pij ttoXlv kv \vTxi Tvpos vpois eXdelv (2 Cor.
2:1).
Cf. also
Lu. 22
37 where
to' Kal
TO yeypappevov Set TeXeadrjuaL
epol.
:
with For an fcxtcnded predicate

TroteT
in apposition
with numerous classes see Rev. 13

povs Kal TOVS SovXovs.
16,
Trauras, tovs fxiKpovs
Kal TOVS peyaXovs, Kal tovs TrXovaiovs Kal tovs iVTioxovs, Kal tovs eXevde-
402
A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK
NEW TESTAMENT
Each
of the
V. Subordinate Centres in the Sentence.
words
itself
or phrases that the subject or predicate groups
around
may form
a fresh nucleus for new combinations. Thus the long sentences with many subordinate clauses resemble the cell multiplication in life. The N. T. indeed does not show so many
Athens.
complications in the sentence as the more rhetorical writers of In Mt. 7 19 the subject bkvbpov has the participle -kolovv,
:
which
in turn has its
own
:
clause with
ixi]
as negative
and
Kapirbv
KoKbv as object.
36 the predicate exw has naprvpiav as object, which has the predicate adjective nel^cc, which in turn is
In Jo. 5
followed
further illustration.
tives as in
(h8e
by the ablative rod 'looavov. This is all too simple to need Even adverbs may have expansive apposiev rfj iraTplh
cov (Lu. 4
23).
Cf. Delbrlick, Vergl.

its
Syntax, pp. 222-227, for discussion of the adjective and nection, and p. 228 for the adverb.
VI. Concord in Person. predicate as to person
is
con-
The concord between
subject
little
and
In
so uniform as to call for
remark.
In Greek the person was originally expressed in the ending.

(see chapter
the later Greek the pronoun was increasingly used in addition
But only ignorance would allow one The only problem occurs when the subject comprises two or even all three persons. Then, of course, the first prevails over both the second and the third. So e7cb /cat 6 Trariyp eV eafxev (Jo. 10 30). Cf. Mt. 9 14; Lu. 2 :48; 1 Cor. 9 6. But in Gal. 1:8 (eav rifxels ayyekos e^
on Pronouns).
to
mix
his persons in the use of the verb.
rj
ovpavov evayye\L(T7]TaL) the reverse
is
true either because Paul fol-
lows the nearest in both person and number or (Winer-Thayer,

p. 518)
the angel. the

31.
because he acknowledges thus the superior exaltation of Then again in cases like Ac. 11 14 ((xoid-qarj av koI iras
:
6 oIkos (xov)
first
the speaker merely uses the person and

of the group.
number
of
:
and most important member
Cf. Ac. 16
The
subject of person thus easily runs into that of number,
same ending expresses both. Sometimes indeed the first and second persons are used without any direct reference to the
for the
Paul in particular is fond of In Ro. 2 1 he calls him u) apdpooTre iras 6 Kpivwv. So also 2 3. In Ro. 9 20 Paul is very earnest, nevovvye ah tIs el; cf. also 11: 17; 14 4. In 1 Cor. 10 30 the first person may be used in this representative way. The same may be true of Gal. 2 18, but not of 2 19. Ro. 7 7-25 The vehemence of passion argues for Paul's is not so clear. but note ae in 8 2. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., own experience,
speaker or the person addressed. arguing with an imaginary antagonist.
:
THE SENTENCE
p. 317.
403
On
the whole suliject of agreement in person see Del-
briick, Vergl. Synt., p.
229
f.;
Kiihncr-Gerth,
:
I,
p. 82.
For change
in person see 2 Jo. 8; 1 Cor. 10
7-10.
Concord in Number. Here we have a double concord, between subject and predicate (both verb and adjective if that and that between substantive and adjective in used) is copula general. It is simpler, however, to follow another division. (a) Subject and Predicate.
VII.
1.
Two
Conflicting Principles.
One
follows
the granmiatical
number, the other the sense

matical rule
is,
(/card
avveaiv).
The formal gramThis
of course, usually observed, a singular subject hav-
ing a singular verb, a plural subject having a plural verb.

is
the obvious principle in

It
all
languages of the Indo-Germanic
was once true of the dual also, though never to the Moulton^ aptly says: ''Many Greek dialects, Ionic conspicuously, had discarded this hoary luxury long before the common Greek was born." The Attic gave it a temporary lease of life, "but it never invaded Hellenistic, not even when a Hebrew dual might have been exactly rendered by its aid." I doubt, however, as previously shown (ch. VII, i, 3), Moulton's explanation
group.
same
extent.
that the dual probably arose in prehistoric days
when men could

Probably
count only two.
That was indeed a
prehistoric time!
the dual was rather the effort to accent the fact that only two
were meant, not more, as in pairs, etc. Hence the dual verb even in Attic was not always used, and it was an extra burden to carry a special inflection for just this idea. No wonder that it vanished
utterly in the
2.
kolvt].
Neuter Plural and Singular Verb.
But
the
kolpt] fails
to re-
spond to the Attic rule that a neuter plural inanimate subject takes a singular verb. Homer indeed was not so insistent and the " modern Greek has gone back completely and exclusively to the use of the plural verb in this instance as in others."^ The N. T., hke the KOLPTj in general, has broken away from the Attic rule and responds more to the sense, and also more often regards a neuter plural as really plural. It never was a binding rule, though more so in Attic than in Homer. In the vernacular kolvt] the people treated the neuter plural like other plurals. (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 96.) Usually a neuter plural in the N. T. that has a personal or collective meaning has a plural verb.^ So tiravaarijaovTaL reKva (Mt. 10 21),
:
Prol., p. 57.
Bliiss, C.r. of
N. T. Gk.,
I,
p. 78.
pp. 82-88; Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., 3. Tl., pp. 230-230; Gildersleevc, Gk. Synt., pp. 52-55.'
^
lb.
On
the whole subject of concord in ntnnber sec K.-G.,
404
TO.

2
:
baiixbvia iviaTevovaiv (Jas.
19), Wvt] kirL^r]TOvaLV
(Mt. 6
32), rd
(Mk. 3 11). But the only rule on the matter that is true for N. T. Greek is the rule of liberty. The papyri show the same variety of usage.^ So does the LXX. In the examples given above the MSS. often vary sharply and examples of the singular verb occur with all of them, baiixovta more frequently with the singular verb, as elaijXdev baiixovia roXXd (Lu. 8:30), but TrapeKoKovv in next verse. So in Lu. 4 41 we have daLfxovLa e^rjpX^ro and a little further on 6tl fioeiaav. In Jo. 10 4 we see a similar change in the same sentence, rd vpoâra avTU) aKoXoudel 6tl otoaaiv. The same indifference to the Attic rule appears about
TTvevnaTo. TrpoaeTLiTTou
: :
things as about persons.
Thus
tva cfyavepudfj
:
to.
epya rod deov (Jo.

1
:
9
a
3)
and
e4>avriaav TO. prjp.aTa
(Lu. 24
11).
In Rev.
19
we
find
of
eiaiv
Kai
a yueXXtt yeveaOai.
if
The
predicate
is
adjective
will,
course, be plural, even

reKva (1 Jo. 3: 10).
the verb
singular, as (f>avepa kaTLv rd

(to
Cf. Gal. 5: 19.
Winer ^ and
some extent)
Blass^ feel called on to explain in detail these variations, but one
has to confess that the success is not brilliant. It is better to regard this indifference to congruity as chiefly an historical move-
ment
characteristic of the
kolvj]
as
shown above.
was
Even the
in
Attic
did not insist on a singular verb with a neuter plural of animate

objects
when the number
of
individuals
mind.
1
The
:
neuter plural was in origin a collective singular.

11 the
In
Cor. 10
MSS.
differ
much between
awkâivev and ~ov.
3. Collective Substantives.
Thus we have
eKadjjTo vepl avrdv
These show a similar double usage. oxXos (Mk. 3 32) and so more
:
conmionly with these collective substantives like oxôs, ir\T]dos, But plenty of examples of construction according o'lKia, Xaos. to sense occur. So 6 8e TrXeTo-ros oxXos eaTpcoaau (Mt. 21 8). Sometimes we have both together, as rjKoXoWei avrw oxXos toKvs, OTL Wewpovv (Jo. 6:2). Where there was such liberty each writer or speaker followed his bent or the humour of the moment. The same variation is to be noticed with the participle. Thus 6 yLVioanoiv tov vo/jlov eirapaTol elaiv (Jo. 7:49). oxXos 6 Here the predicate is plural with the verb. Cf. also Lu. 23 1. But in Ac.
:
ij.r)
16 the participle
4>kpovTe$ is plural,
though the verb awrfpxeTo

:
is
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

4.
1
subject. So ecrre k-maroki] XpLarov (2 Cor. 3:3). The Pindaric Construction. Another complication is possible
Moulton, CI. Rev., Dec, 1901, p. 436. W.-Th., p. 514 f.
"
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 78.
THE SENTENCE
when several subjects are united. compound subject, it is put in the
405
If the predicate follows this
But the "Pindaric construction" {(xxwo- UipSapiKov) puts the verb in the Blass says German cannot do this, and he ignores singular. the N. T. examples.^ In Jas. 5 2 f we have a striking explural nearly always.
:
ample: '0
vv,
irXovTOS
vjuLoov
aearjirev, Kal to. lixaTia v/jtwu arjTolSpwTa
yeyo-
6 XP^<ôs 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 cKpavlêi (' where moth and rust doth corrupt,' A. v.). Other examples are Mk. 4:41, koI b avtixo^ koI
:
ri
ddXaaaa vwaKoveL
K\t]povop.riaaL oh
avTcp; 1
Cor. 15: 50,
otl
aap^
Kal alp,a
âaCkdav 9eod
dhvarai. Here the principle of anacoluthon sugby Moulton^ will hardly apply. It is rather the totality that is emphasized by the singular verb as in the English examples. But when the predicate comes first and is followed by sev-
gested
eral subjects,
anacoluthon
may very well

that the
8e
first
be the explanation, as in
the Shakespearean examples given
by Moulton.
subject
is
The
simplest
explanation in such cases
is
alone in mind.
to.
Thus
ravra
in 1 Cor. 13
(cf.
13 vvvl
p.evet
TriarLS,
eXxts, aydirri,
rpla
English 'and
now
abideth faith, hope, love, these three,'

:
Tim. 6 4. However, in Mt. 5 18, ecos seems rather the totality that is emphasized as above. See Jo. 12 22. In Rev. 9 12, l8ov epxerat en 8vo oval ixerd ravra, probably the neuter conception of the interjection prevails, though just before we have oval /xia. In Lu. 2 p.'fjrTjp davfxdôvres, the copula follows one 33, rjv 6 irarrip avrov Kal plan and the participle another. So also rjv Kadrjfxtvai, (Mt. 27 61). Just so aj0077 Mwvarjs Kal 'HXelas avvXaXovvres (Mt. 17 3). Cf. Eph. 4 17 f. In Rev. 21 16, rd /utj/cos Kal rb TrXdros /cat rb v^/os avrrjs laa iarlv, the neuter plural adjective and singular copula are regular. 5. Singular Verb with First Subject. It is very common indeed for the verb to have the singular with the first of the subjects. Cf. Jo. 2 2, 12; 8 5; 18 15; Ac. 11 24. But on the other hand we have Tpoairopevovrai avrQ 'Iclkcoôs Kal 'Icodprjs ot viol Zeêdaiov (Mk. 10 35). Cf. also Lu. 23 12; Jo. 21 2; Ac. 5 24. In Ac. 25 23 one particijio j is singular and the other plural. So in Ac. 5 29 we meet aTroKpidels 5e Ilerpos /cat ot dTrocrroXot elirav. With
like the Greek).
Cf. also 1
rj
au irapeXdy 6 ovpavos Kal
yyj, it
17
17
17
7)
1 ^
lb., p. 79.
Prol., p. 58.
metre (Farrar, Gk. Synt.,

is
now a
hiiruln'd
Sometimes Shakespeare used a sinjiular verb for the sak(> of p. 65), at otlier times more like our mod. Kiig.: "It years since," etc. Cf. Ck. ianr o'l, etc. Cf. also Riem. and
Goclzer, Hynt., p. 18; Giles,
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., pp.
263-2C8.
"
406

is
NEW TESTAMENT
So Mt. 12
:
the verb
usually in the singular in the N. T.

t)
25
iraaa ttoXls
:
oi/cta
:
(xepiaOelaa
KaO'
eavrrjs
ov (iTadrjaeTaL.
:
Cf. also
Mt. 5 18; 18 8; Eph. 5:5. In Gal. 1 8 Blass^ thinks it would be impossible to have evayyeXiûixeda with ly/xtTs ^ ayyeXos. d5eX(/)i7 But the impossible happens in Jas. 2 15, eav d5eX06s
:
rj
yv/jLvoi
uTrdpxwcrtj/.
We
have a similar
left their
difficulty
in English in
the use
get them.
6.
of
the
disjunctive
and other pronouns.

books, they can
loosely say: "If
any one has
One will come and
The Literary Plural.
We
have already mentioned the use
of the plural in a kind of impersonal
way
to conceal one's identity,
as Tedvy]Kaaiv (Mt. 2
indefinite plural like
20), aiTovaiv (Lu.
12
20)
and the general

critics disagree
cos \k.yovcFLv
(Rev. 2: 24).
The
sharply about
it
(the literary plural).
Blass^ flatly denies that
we
in-
have any right to claim

sists
this literary plural in Paul's Epistles beletters.
cause he associates others with himself in his
Winer ^
that Paul often speaks in his apostolic character
when he
Moul-
uses the plural and hence does not always include others.
ton^ considers the matter settled in favour of the epistolary plural
from the papyri several examples. So Tb.P. Tpoaeireaev rjfuu, B.U., 449 (iiiii/A.D.) cLKomas OTL vcoOpevr] ayo^vLovjxev, J.H.S., xix, 92 (ii/A.D.), x^tpe Dick^ has made an exfioL, HTjrep yXvKVTCLTr], Kal 4>povTi'êTe riixcov. haustive study of the whole subject and produces parallels from late Greek that show how easily 70; and 17^1615 were exchanged. The matter can be clarified, I think. To begin with, there is no reason in the nature of things why Paul should not use the literary plural if he wished to do so. He was a man of culture and used to books even if he used the vernacular koivt] in the main. The late Greek writers did; the papyri show examples of it. G. Milligan evpov êôv(Thess., p. 132) cites Tb. P. 58 (ii/B.c.) evpr]Kap.v bpC^VTes io'iiirjV, P. Held. Xeviieda; P. Hib. 44 (iii/B.C.) eypaxpafxev ypacfio} Kal (jAvaprjaw; and an inscription, 6 (iv/A.D.) TLdTevofiev [fxeTeireix-] possibly a rescript of Hadrian, O. G. I. S 484, Xodfxev
in the
koivt).
He
cites
26
(ii/B.C.) ovTi HOI. kv HroXe/iatSet
\}/aiJLr]V
j3ov\rideis
edoêv
is
rfjittv
edoKifxaaafxev kirlcmvov
we ha
,
qyr](7ap.7]V
:
vofxl^co.
Besides, Blass^ admits that
v/:t in 1
Jo. 1
1.
4,
where
in Jo.
ypa4>op.ev
:
does not
differ in reality
from
ypa(f)0}
of 2
But
21 24 oWafxev probably
1
in contrast to John,
^
"
who
uses
oiûat
just
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 80.

lb., p. 1G6.
W.-Th.,
p. 517.
2
6 6
Prol., p. 86.
Dcr
schriftstell. Plu. bei
Paulus (1900),
p. 18.

THE SENTENCE
: :
407
below. In Jo. 1 14, as certainly in 1 16, others are associated with the writer. The author of Hebrews also uses the singular or plural according to the humour of the moment. Thus 7rei06/xc0a
exofiev
(13
:
18)
and the next verse

11, with 13
x^-P'-v
:
Trapa/caXco
cnroKaTaa-Tadoj.
In Ro.
is
Cf.
1
:
also 6
1, 3, 9,
22
f.
Now
as to Paul.
he has
5i'
ov kXaô/xev
nal aTcoaToK-qv.
aTro(TToKi]v.
Surely he
talking of
one
else
when he mentions
attention to
iituv
is
Blass^ overlooks this

all.
no word
in
It is
and
calls
:
x^-pi-v
as applicable to
Then again
5e5e/xat.
Col. 4
followed in the same verse by

:
Th. 2 18, rjdeXrjaaiiev But what 70? /jLev UavXos. whole matter ^ is 2 Cor. 10 1-11 C. Paul is here defending his own apostolic authority where the whole point turns on his own personality. But he uses first the singular, then
clear also in 1
really settles the
:
:
the plural.
Tv6p.eda
86ôj
Thus
:
TrapaKoXcb (10
1), dappco, Xo7tfo/xat
(10
2),
arpa:
(10
:
3),
ij^teis
(10
:
7),
Kauxwco/xat, alaxvv6r](ToiJLaL (10

:
8),
(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

plural.
14-7
16 for a similar change from singular to
The use of the literary plural by Paul sometimes does mean that he always uses it when he has a plural. Each case rests on its own merits. Jesus seems to use it also in
not, of course,
3:11, o dibapLev \a\ovpev /cat 6 eccpuKafxev paprvpovpev. In Mk. 30 (ttws opoLcoacopev rrju jSacnXeiav rod Oeov;) Christ associates others with him in a very natural manner. The concord between ad(6) Substantive and Adjective.
Jo.
:
jective
and substantive is just as close as that between subject and verb. This applies to both predicate and attributive adjectives. Here again number is confined to the singular and the
plural, for the dual is gone.
Cf. in lieu of the dual the curious
Kaipov Kol Kaipovs Kal i]ptav Kaipov
(Rev. 12
14).
When
adjectives
from this accord in number or gender (Eph. 4:17f.; 1 Cor. 12:2; Rev. 19:14), it is due to the sense instead of mere grammar, Kara uhvecnv. Thus in Mk. 9 15 we have 6 oxXos Iddvres, Ac. 3:11 aweSpapev irds 6 Xaos
and
participles deviate
tKdapÔL,
Lu. 2
13 (TTpaTids alvovvTuv,
:
Mk. 8
oxXov OPTOS Kal
pi]
exovTuu (note both), Ac. 21

IwapaTOL (Jo. 7: 49).
tive differs little
CIS
30
:
irXijdos Kpaôvres, etc.
Cf. 6 oxXos
In Ph. 2
9), tI av
to etrat tVa deu) the plural adjec-
from
:
taov in adverbial sense.

e'i-q
Cf. xaDra
tI koTLv
ToaovTOVi (Jo. 6
>
ravra (Lu. 15
20).
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. IGG.
Dick, Der
sohriftstoll. Plu. hoi P:iuliis,

f.
1900,
j).
53.
Milligan, St. Paul's
Epist. to the Thcss., 1908, p. 131
agrees with Dick.
408
(c)
NEW TESTAMENT
Representative Singular. But other points come up about the number of the substantives. One is the use of the singular with the article to signify the whole class. The examples are frequent, such as 6 ayados av9po:iros (Mt. 12 35), ariixeta
also
:
Tov OLTToaToXov (2 Cor. 12
12), 6 epyaTrjs (Lu.
10
7), rod
'lov8aiov
This discussion about the number of nouns could more properly be treated under syntax of nouns, but I have no such chapter. Cf. Cases.
(Ro. 3:1), TOV TTTwxov (Jas. 2:6).
{d)
Idiomatic Plural in Nouns.
Abstract substantives oc22), TrpoacoTro\7]fx\}/iaLs (Jas.
cur in the plural in the N. T. as in the older Greek, an idiom foreign to English.
Thus
1
irXeopeîaL
:
(Mk. 7
1).
Cf. also
:
ôwt Mt. 15
Pet. 2
:
:
19; rds iropvelas 1 Cor. 7:2.
In 2
both the singular and the plural occur. Cf. Mt. 15 19. This use of the plural of abstract substantives does indeed lay stress on the separate acts. Some words were used almost exclusively in the plural, or at any rate the plural was felt to be more appropriate. So alojpes in the sense of 'world' (Heb. 1 2) or 'eternity,' as els tovs alCjvas twv aio^vuv (Gal. 1:5), or with singular and plural, as tov alccvos toop ai6:vcov (Eph. 3:21). Cf. also to. ayia for 'the sanctuary' (Heb. 8 2) and ayta ayluv for 'the most Holy Place' (Heb. 9:3). The word ovpavos is used in the singular often enough, and always so in the Gospel of John, as 1 32, but the plural is common also. Cf. Paul's allusion to "third heaven" (2 Cor. 12 2), an apparent reflection of the Jewish idea of seven heavens. In English we use "the heavens" usually for the canopy of sky above us, but 17 jSacrt\da Twv ovpavihv uniformly in the N. T., as Mt. 3 2. The Hebrew
Cor. 12
1
:
: : :
20 and
D'i;ad
is
partly responsible for ovpavol.

it.
The
so-called "plural of
details see
majesty" has an element of truth in

Blass, Gr. of
For further
N. T.
Gk., p. 83.
this idiomatic plural,
such as
A number of other words have k 8e^LQ>v, e^ apLaTepwv, e^ evoivviiwv

:
(Mt. 25
TTuXat
33), ds
to. de^Lo. jiepy]
(Jo. 21
6), kv toIs
:
de^Loh
(Mk. 16
5
:
5),
aird avaToXcop
(Mt. 2:1),
:
airo dva/jLojp
(Mt. 8
23).
11), dvpat (Ac.
19),
(Mt. 16
is
TTjs
18), koXttoi
(Lu. 16
ttj
But the
:
singular of
ei'
some
1:
of
them
also found, as ev
dupas (Ac. 12
:
apaToXfj
(Mt. 2 23
9),
5e^tS
(Eph.
20), irpo
6).
The
plural of
Iixoltlov
only
IfiCLTLOP
(not
x^tcoj'
also)
:
in Jo.
19
(cf.
seems to mean 19 2). For the

:
plural alixaTa note Jo.
13.
:
The names
:
of feasts are often plural,

:
TO. eyKalvta (Jo. 10 22), to. yeveaia (Mk. 6 21), rd a^vfia (Mk. 14 1), yaiJLOL (Mt. 22 2), (7d/3/3ara (Ac. 17 2). So also some cities have plural names, as 'lepoaoXv/jLa (Mt. 2:1), 'kdrjvai.
such as
(Ac. 17
16), KoXoo-o-at (Col.
1:2).
Different are tTnaroXai (1 Cor.
THE SENTENCE
16
:
409
:
3), TO.
apyvpia (Mt. 27:
5),
rd oi/'wâ (Lu. 3
14), SiadrJKaL
(Ro.
9:4).
Idiomatic Singular in Nouns. On the other hand the where one would naturally look for a plural. A neuter singular as an abstract expression may sum up the whole
(e)
singular appears
mass.
:
Jo. 17 2.
Thus irav 6 The same

"(1
in Jo. 6
37 refers to believers.
Cf. also
collective use of the neuter singular
in TO eXarroi'
(Heb. 7:7).
Jo. 5:4).
Cf. to yeuvufiepou (Lu. 1:35)
found and -jrav

is
TO yeyevvT] idhov
is
seen in to KaTexov otSare (2 Th. 2:6).

is
The same concealment of the person The neuter plural into. fxcopd, to. aadeprj,
deed
1
:
very
common
in this sense, as
etc. (1
Cor.
Kapext
:
27
f.).
belongs
8iav
Then again the to more than one

:
singular
subject.
ttj
is
used where the substantive

Tmroipwpikvqv ex^Te
:
So
ttju
(Mk. 8
17),
WevTo
KapSia avTa)v (Lu. 1
66),
t-wecrav
TrpoacjTTOV avTojv
(Mt. 17:6),
TepLi^coaa/jLevoL
ttjv 6a(f)vv vpa>v

(ztto
:
(Eph. 6
tcjp
14), eSodT] avTols aToXi] \evKr]

poiv
(Rev. 6
11),
TrpoadoTrou
etc
iraTe-
(Ac. 7:45), 5td aTOfxaros iravToov (Ac. 3

:
18),
ttjs
x^'pos avTcov
lies
(Jo. 10
39).
In
Cor. 6
5, di^d
peaov tov
a8e\(f)ou.
a8e\(t)ov,
the difficulty
not in
p-eaop,
but in the singular
The
fuller
form would
have been the plural or the repetition of the word, dSeXôO Kal In all these variations in number the N. T. writers dSeXôO. merely follow in the beaten track of Greek usage with proper freedom and individuality. For copious illustrations from the ancient Greek see Gildersleeve, Greek Syntax, pp. 17-59.^ Two or three other passages of a (/) Special Instances. more special nature call for comment. In Mt. 21 7 (eireKadLcrev
:
CTrdi/o;
not to T-qv In Mt. 24 26 h ttj eprjfjLco and h toIs ra/xeiois are in contrast. In Mt. 27 44 ot \riaTai is not to be taken as plural
avToov) it is
probable that
avToiv refers to rd liiaTia,
bvov Kal TOV ttojXov.
for the singular.
Probal)ly both reproached Jesus at
first
and
:
afterwards one grew sorry and turned on the other, as Lu. 23 39
In Mt. 22 1 and Mk. 12 1 eWev h Trapa(3o\als is followed by only one parable, but there were douljtless others not recorded.
has
it.
:
:
In Mt. 9
8, kdoâaav top Oeop top boPTa kôvalav TOLavTtjp rots di'^pcoTrois,
we have a double
not true of
sense in dopra, for Jesus
had the
it.
kôvaLav in
a sense
:
40 merely equivalent to ev /StjSXo) tQiv irpo<l)riTU)p (Ac. On these special matters see Winer7 42). Schmiedel, p. 251. Cf. x^pov^dv (Aramaic dual) and KaraaKiaôPTa (Heb. 9:5).
di'^pcoTrots
who
got the benefit of

is
So
in Ac. 13
TO Hpr]p.epop tp Tols
tt po(i>i]TaLs
Cf. also Dclbriick, Vcrfrl. Synt.,

I,
1. Tl., Cir.,
pp. 133-172,3. Tl., pp. 240-248; pp. 3G9-373.
K.-C, Bd.
pp. 271
IT.;
Brug., Griech.
410
VIII.
A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK

Concord in Gender.
NEW TESTAMENT
Here we deal only with nouns, for But gender plays an important part in the agreement of substantive and adjective. (a) Fluctuations in Gender. The whole matter is difficult, for substantives have two sorts of gender, natural and grammatical. The two do not always agree. The apparent violations of the rules of gender can generally be explained by the conflict in these two points of view with the additional observation that the grammatical gender of some words changed or was never
verbs have no gender.
firmly settled.
All the constructions according to sense are
due
re-
to analogy (Middleton in Syntax, p. 39).
For further general

In Ac. 11
:
:
marks on gender
see chapter
on Declensions.
28 Luke
has XLfjLov fxeyaX-qv, not ixkyav. Ill Rev. 14 19 two genders are found with the same word, eâXev els ttju \r}v6v rod Ovixov rov 6eov tov Cf. Lu. 4 25 and 15 14. fieyav. The papyri vary also in the gender of this word (Moulton, Prol, p. 60). The common gender of Beds (Ac. 19 37, cf. dea 19 27) and similar words is discussed in the chapter on Declensions. In Rev. 11:4 al eorcores skips over 'KvxvlaL curiously and goes back (the participle, not the article) to
: : : :
ouTOL (ovToi
elffLV
ai 8vo eXatat Kal al dvo \vxviaL al kvoiinov rov Kvplov
TTJs yrjs eaTcoTes).
But more
evToiXrj
al)out the
Apocalypse
later.
In
Mk.
p.
12
28, TToia karlv
TpcoTT) iravTwv,
Winer (Winer-Thayer,
178) thinks that iraacop
general idea of
would be beside the point as it is rather the omnium. Is it not just construction Kara avpeaLv?
airXaxva
is difficult
In Ph. 2
el
tls
after
el tl
TrapaiJ.Wt.ov
and
in
el
TLs KOLvwvla.
Blass- cuts the knot boldly
by suggesting
el tl
all
si
.
quid
the examples here which Moulton ^ accepts with the sense of valet, but he cites papyri examples like hirl tl ixlav twv
.
B.U.326 (ii/A.D.). See also eav 8e TL aXXa (nraLTr]dQ)p.ev, Amh. Pap. 11, 85, 11, and eav be TL cijSpoxos yevrjTaL, ib., 15. Cf. Radcrmacher, N. T. Gr., p. 184. Perhaps after all this correction may be right or the text may be corrupt. The scribe could easily have written tls for TLva because of the preceding examples. A nodding scribe may even have thought (TifKaxva feminine singular. But what is one to say of
olklCov,
el 8e tl
Par. p. 15(ii/B.c.);
TepLaaaypanfiaTa,
17
oval in
pia?
^
Rev. 9 12; 11 14? Shall we think"* of OXixpLs or TaXatTrwIn Mt. 21 42 (Mk. 12 11), rapd Kvplov eyeveTo avT-q Kal Icftlv
:
: : :
(CI. Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 151) cites from the pap. numerous gender concords like rfiv ireirTcoKOTa, etc. Cf. Reinhold, De Graec. etc., p. 57; Krumbacher, Prob. d. neugr. Schriftspr., p. 50. 2 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 81.
But Moulton
false
Prol., p. 59.
"
W.-Sch., p. 255.
THE SENTENCE
eaviiaarri,
411
translation of the Hebrew nkt (Ps. just before in reference to \idou. used (117) 118 23), for ovtos avrr]. It is even possible that for idiom Greek TovTo would be the also So ycjovlas. rfj BdaX in Ro. 11:4 avrr] may refer to KecfjoXriv
we may have a
:
is
comes from the LXX (Jer. in Tobit Tfi BaaX TTJ oafiaXeL
remarks.
(6)
2:8;2:28;7:9;
1
:
Hos. 2:8).
Cf.
5 B.
See Declensions for further
The Neuter Singular. This is not always to be regarded of gender. Often the neuter conveys a different conbreach as a in the question of Pilate, tL karLv dXijêta; (Jo. 18 38). So ception. 6 vofxos; (Gal. 3 19), tL kanv avOpcoiros; (Heb. 2 6), rt ovv TL also Cf. av e'ir} ravra; (Lu. 15 26), et 8oKe2 tis elvai tl iir]bev cbv; (Gal. 6:3).
: :
: :
But on the other hand note

ya\r] ePToKr]
eXTTts;
eluai
rj
nva (Ac. 5
36), avrr] taTiv

:
rj
ne17
(Mt. 22
1
:
38), tIs
irp6<r\i]ijL\pLs;
(Ro. 11
rl 6
15), tIs
kcmv
(Eph.
18).
In particular observe
:
Uerpos eyevero (Ac.
12
18)
and
:
ovtos 8i tl (Jo. 21
f.,
21).
Cf. also tovto xo-pls (twice) in

el
1 Pet.
19
where tovto
vivop.veLTe.
is
predicate and really refers to

17
vto-
êpei TIS
and
:
el
Cf. also
^/vxh TrXetov kaTLv
tt]s Tpo4)r]s
(Lu. 12
23).
Indeed TavTa
Cor. 6
:
may be
the predicate with persons, as

adjective in the prediri
TavTCL TLves rJT^ (1
11).
The neuter
ttj
cate
is
perfectly normal in cases like kavov tw tolovtco
kirLTLula
:
avTTi (2
Cor. 2:6). So also apKeTOV

eoTLv in
rjnepa
Tj
KaKLa avTrjs
:
(Mt. 6 34).
Cf. also the reading of

Tov
D apeoTov in Ac.
Lu. 22
:
12
3.
Blass^ treats dpKlike the
above and
is
Ikolvov
38 as
Latin
satis.
The neuter
persons
TTciv
singular in the collective or general sense to represent
not peculiar to the N. T.

17:2), TO
(ZTToXcoXos
So
:
to KaTexov (2
10), etc.
6 (Jo.
(Lu. 19
Th. 2:6), So the neuter
plural also as rd /xcopd tov Koaixou,

:
to. aadevrj (1
Cor. 1: 27).
The
neuter article to "kyap (Gal. 4 25) deals with the word Hagar, not the gender of the person. In Jas. 4 4 noLxaXides in W. H. stands without /jlolxoXoI Kai, but none the less may be regarded Cf. Tei'ed ij.olxo.\'ls (Mt. 12 39) and Hos. 2 as comprehensive.^
:
:
4, 23.
(c)
In
Cor. 15
10 note
6 iariv
elul 6
elfiL,
not
6s,
a different idea.
special idiom
is
Explanatory
'i(jTL,
and tovt
eariv.
the relative 6 as
TOVT
an explanation which are both used without much regard to the gender (not to say number) of antecedent or predicate. Thus in Mk. 3 17 ovopLa Boaur]pyes, 6 koTLV viol ^poPTr^s] 12 42 Xevrrd 8vo 6 koTLV
(6 koTLv)
:
and the demonstrative
KoSpavTris;
15
16
ttjs
avXrjs,
kcTLV irpOLLTiopLOV,
15
22 Vo\yodav
1
:
TOirov, 6 kdTLV KpavLOV TOTTOS (cf.
Mt. 27
:
33)) pa^êl, b XeyeraL (Jo.

ttjp aycnrrip, 6
"
38);
1
1:42 Meaaiap
6 taTLP] Col. 3
14
toTLP avpbtap.os;
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 76.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 254.
412

iJ.axo.ipav,
NEW TESTAMENT
Blass^ observes that
it is
Eph. 6: 17
o kaTLv prjfxa deov.
only in the Apocalypse that this explanatory relative is assimilated to the antecedent or predicate, as Xa/jLiraSes, d daiv to. -Kvevixara (Rev.
4:5), but
6({)da\iJLovs eTrra, ot elaiv to.
TPevnara (5:6).
But
:
it is
other-
wise with the ordinary

Cor. 3
:
relative, as 6 vaos tov deov, o'lrLves lore uûeTs (1

Tjrts
17); $tXt7r7roi;s,
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 86â
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 tovt' Utlv dee fxov regard to case, number or gender. So 'EXcot Cf. Heb. 2 (Heb. 7:5). tovs adeMovs Utlv (Mt. 27:46); tout'
14; 9
(d)
<nv,
11, etc.
See further p. 399,
and
ch.
XV,
vii, (d), 10.
The Participle. It often has the construction /card avpeas in Mk. 9 26, /cpdâs Kal ToXXd airapaâs referring to to irvevp.a.
:
Cf. Lu. 2
res (25
1).
:
13 o-rpartas alvohvTOiV,
TrXrjdos
KpaôvTes (Ac. 21
36)
ôo:v:
24).
But on the other hand note avaaTav

Eph. 4
11
:
TrXrjdos
:
(Lu. 23
So
also in 1 Cor. 12: 2 Wvi] aiva'ybixevoi;
17
f.
Wvi] eaKofxeya-
TwiJLevoL;
Rev. 4
.
8 fwa,
(f)Oivr]v
eu Kad'
ep exoiv Xeyovres;
15
c/jcofat
Xat XeyoPTes (cf

kvbebvixevoL.
XeyovTa,
Rev. 9
:
14)
19
14 aTpaTeufxaTa
Cf. also
Cf. dr}piov y'ep-ovTa (Rev. 17

:
3).
vixas.
p. 526) takes kaKOTwp.evoL in Eph. 4 Cf. Lu. 19 37. ct>epovTes (Ac. 5 16).
: :
18 with
irXridos
So
(at eKKXrjaiaL) aKovovTes
(Gal.
Rev. 21 14 to Tetxos exoiv seems a- mere sHp. exwf (Rev. 4 7) may be mere confusion in sound of But ^(ôv XeyoPTes Xeycov (4:1), (jio^val See also (puvi] 'ixov and ex^^v.
1
:
22
f.).
But
in
(11
15), XvxviaL
eaTS^Tes
(11:4).
Radermacher {N.
T. Gr., p.
87) cites ^Qov

(e)
aaTpaiTTcov from Apocalypsis Anastasiae (pp. 6, 13).
form
:
The question of an adjective's using one Adjectives. for more than one gender has been already discussed at
length in the chapter on Declensions. Thus oTpaTids ovpaviov (Lu. 2 13) is not a breach of concord, for ovpaviov is feminine. If masculine and feminine are used together and the plural adjective or
participle occurs, the masculine, of course, prevails over the feminine when persons are considered. Thus r^v 6 iraTrip avTov Kai ly
fjLTjTTjp
davfiCiôvTes
(Lu. 2: 33).
13)
So also
'A7pt7r7ras
/cat
Bepvt/c??
aairar)
and even with the disjunctive 77, In Rev. 8: 7 the neuter plural is used 15). a8eX(t>rj yvijivoi (Jas. 2 of two nouns (one feminine and one neuter), x^Wa ko,' ^rOp neîiyaafievoL (Ac.
25
as d5eX06s
neva.
Cf. also (jidapToh, apyvplcj
t)
xpv(î-V (1
P^t. 1: 18), really ap:
position.
Ilot/ctXats voaoLS /cat jBaaavots

1
(Mt. 4
24), xdcnjs dpx^s nal
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 77.
THE SENTENCE
kôvalas
413
(Eph.
21), etc.
:
Kia ixeptadelaa
(Mt. 12
25), the
is
:
But on the other hand note xoXts ^ olsame gender. But when different
usually repeated, as in xoraTroi \i6oL
iraaa doais Kai irav owprjfxa (J as. 1
:
genders occur, the adjective

Kal TTOTairai olKodofiai
(Mk. 13
1),
17), ovpavbv aaivov Kal yrjy KaLvijv
(Rev. 21
1), etc.
There
is
em-
phasis also in the repetition.

of one of the substantives
is
But one adjective with the gender by no means uncommon. Thus in

/jlt]
Heb. 9
9,
8Qipa re Kal OvalaL
bvvap.evai.,
the last substantive
is
followed, while in
Heb. 3
,
6, kav rr}v -jrapprjalav Kal TO KavxHIJ-a fikxpi'
rkXovs êfSaiav Karaax'î^^v
the
:
first
rules in gender.^
Per contra
Gr., p. 86)
note
cites
vlbv
(f)i\e
apaev in Rev. 12
5.
reKvov from the Iliad, Concord in Case. This is not the place for the syntax of the cases. That matter belongs to a special chapter. They concur in the case of the substantive (a) Adjectives. with which they are used. The variations are either indeclinable forms like irXrjpris^ in Jo. 1 14 (agreeing with avrov or 86âv) or are due to anacoluthon, as Jas. 3 8 ttjv 8e yXuaaau ov8els 8aiJLaaai bbvarai avdpoiiroiV aKaTaararov KaKov, fxearri lov (so W. H. punctuate). They lend themselves readily to anacoluthon (6) Participles.
Radermacher {N. T. XXII, 84.
IX.
in case.
Thus
:
e8oê rots awoaToXoLS Kal Tols irpea^vrepoLS, ypOAl/avrts

:
:
See Mk. 7 19 KaOapiCccv. Mk. 6 9 has vTo8e8ewhereas before we have avrols and a'ipwaiv, but W. H. read h8vaaadaL (Nestle, h8vcrr]ade). In Mk. 12 40, ol Kareodovres Kal TpoaevxofjLevoL, we have a nominative in apposition with the ablative aird rdv ypafx/JiaTecov rwv deXovTcov. Ill Ph. 3 18 f. tovs ex^povs is in agreement ^vith the case of ovs, while ol 4)povovvTts below skips back to woXXoi. Sometimes, as in kTn<jTeWr]aav to. Xoyta
(Ac. 15
22
f.).
fihovs,
(Ro. 3:2), the substantive will

of the verb.
make
sense as subject or object
In Heb. 9
10
oiKatcb^cara
einKdyLeva
:
in apposition
with dvalai skips over the parenthetical clause between. Cf. also perhaps apâp.evoi (Lu. 24 47), apâp.evos (Ac. 1 22. Cf. Lu. 23 5), apâp.tvos (Ac. 10 37). Note this idiom in Luke's writings.
:
(c)
The Book of Revelation.

:
It is full of variations (sole-
from case-concord, especially in appositional clauses. Thus in Rev. 7 9 after eUov, Kal i8ov we first have the nominacisms)
1
On
the subject of gender see Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,

of this indecl. use of
1. Tl., i)p.
89-133;
Drug., Gricch. Gr., pp. 30.5-369.

^
The
e.x.x.
irX-npris
occurring in mo.st passag(!s of the N. T.
The
(/),
pap. confirm the N. T.

of this book, for details.
MSS.
MSS. of the N. T., See IMass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 81. See Moulton, Prol., p. 50. See ch. VII, 2,
are abundant in
414
NEW TESTAMENT
eUop.
tive with iSov
and then the accusative with

:
Thus
6 fxaprvs
(Rev.
'Irjaov
5)
retains the nominative rather than the ablative dTro
XpiaTov, whereas in 11
18 tovs
. :
/jlikpovs is
in apposition
6 ocpLs (text,
the dative toXs SovXols, ktX.

ace.)
is
Cf 20 2 where
the
with marg.
in
apposition with
accusative tov bpaKovra.
The
papyri show
(i/B.c).
the idiom.
Cf. tov a8eKcf)ov
5tdroxos (=5ta5.) in
Letr. 149 (ii/A.D.),

Cf.
'AvTL4>i\ov
"EW-qv
linrdpxTis
in
B.G.U. 1002
is
Moulton,
Pro!., p. 60.
The Apocalypse
thus by
no means alone. See also wapa to[v JloaTJov/jLov rov evpovra B.G.U. 846 (ii/A.D.), i]Kovaa Todrjs Xeyuv P. Par. 51 (b.c. 160), t/xe XeXu/cas
TToXtds exco?', lb.
In particular the participle
is
common in
the
rjv
nomKal 6
inative in the Apocalypse.

kpxbixivos
In the case of
is
oltto
6 cbv Kal 6
the nominative
evidently intentional to accent the

Cf. this formula in 1
:
unchangeableness of
1
:
God
(1:4).
8;
8;
17; 16
5.
"0
vikCov
occurs as a set phrase, the case being exfollows.
pressed
3
is
:
by
avTos
which
So
in 2
26
ainco {ttjpCjv also)

:
12
ai'TOP,
21
aiiTU).
But
in
1
:
in tw vlkcovtl 8coaw avTui 2
7, 17,
the case
case
it is
regularly in the dative without anacoluthon.

exo)v
The wrong
if
appears with
16 (almost separate sentence)

if (j)covr];
meant
14
:
to refer to avrov or gender
14
(6 exo)v in
cf.
apposi1
:
tion with ayyeXcS);
10:2
exccp
(sort
:
of parenthesis,
16);
14 exwv (loosely appended); 19

:
12 (loose connection of
ex<^'')-
6 and 17:3 exoov has wrong gender and case. This partiseems to be strung on loosely generally, but in 21 11 f. the proper case and gender occur. Cf also 17 \eyovaa (2 20) and \eywv (14: 7). In 14 12 ot TrjpovPTes is a loose addition like More difficult seems tp Kapipco ireTrvpcofxeKaTapalpovaa (3 12). 17 20 T-qp \liipr]p tov irvpos pr]s (1 15), margin TreTvpu/j-kpot. In 19 TTJs KaLopeprjs the participle agrees in gender wdth \inP7]p and in
In 5
ciple
case with
Trap'
ivvpos.
avTov top ofioXoyovpTa
Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. (Amh. Pap. 11, m to

gives also Oxy. P. I
86) cites
113,
airexoo
larly the accusative of a participle is in
where reguapposition with a geni-
tive or ablative).
He
120, 25, ov SeSo/crat
yap
rifup
ex^LP tl dvaTvxovPTes ; Flinders-Pet.
Pap. Ill 42
(3) 3,
aSLKovfxeda vtto
'AttoWwpIov hfxâWwp.
Dittenberger (Or. inscr. 611)
gives ZeâcTTov
in the
and
vlos in
apposition.
is
But the point
of difficulty
Revelation of John
that
attracts
not any one isolated discord in
case or gender.
of
It is rather the great
concord
attention.
number of such violations As showTi above, other
books of the N. T. show such phenomena. Observe especially Luke, who is a careful writer of education. Note also Paul in Ph. 1 30 where exovres (cf. this word in Rev.) is used with ufxlp,
:
THE SENTENCE
and 2 Cor. 7
:
415
5 rmwu
6\i^byLevoL.
Dan. 10
:
Similar discords occur in the

:
1 Mace. 13 16; 1 Mace. and indeed occasionally in the very best of Greek writers. The example in 1 Mace. 13 16 {\a6v Xeyopres) is worth singling out for its bearing on both case and number. Nestle {Einf. in das griech. N. T., p. 90 f.) notes the indeclinable use of Veywv and Xe-
LXX,
15
:
as in Jer. 14: 13;
5-7;
28;
yovTe^ in the
LXX,
like l>25<^.
Cf. Nestle, Phil. Sacra., p. 7.
See
also
Thackeray,
Gr., p. 23.
such matters at sion of anacoluthon in a sentence

off
One must not be a slavish martinet in the expense of vigour and directness. The occais
just the necessity of breaking
and making a new
start.
than these general remarks.
But the Apocalypse demands more Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 534) calls
attention to the fact that these irregularities occur chiefly in the description of the visions where there would naturally be some
Moulton^ argues from the fact that the papyri of uneducated writers show frequent discord in case that John was somewhat backward in his Greek. He speaks of "the curious Greek of Revelation," "the imperfect Greek culture of this book." He notes the fact that most of the examples in both the papyri and Revelation are in apposition and the writer's "grammatical sense is satisfied when the governing word has affected the case of one object. "2 Moulton^ cites in illustration Shakespeare's use of "between you and I." This point indeed justifies John. But one must observe the comparative absence of these syntactical discords in the Gospel of John and the Epistles of John. In Ac. 4 13 both Peter and John are called aypaixnaroL koI iditoTaL. This need not be pushed too far, and yet it is noteworthy that 2 Peter
excitement.
:
and Revelation are just the two books of the N. T. whose Greek jars most upon the cultured mind and which show most kinship to the KOLVT] in somewhat illiterate papyri. One of the theories about the relation between 1 Peter and 2 Peter is that Silvanus (1 Pet. 5 12) was Peter's scribe in writing the first Epistle, and that thus the Greek is smooth and flowing, while in 2 Peter we have Peter's own somewhat uncouth, unrevised Greek. This theory rests on
:
the assumption of the genuineness of 2 Peter, which puted.

Exp.,
So also
J:in.,
in
is mucli disActs Luke refines Peter's Greek in the reports
'
1901,
j).
71; CI. Rov., Apr., 1904, p. 151; Trol., pp. 0, GO.

2.
2
*
CI. Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 151; Prol., p. 9.

lb.
Merch. of Venice,
In
tlie
iii,
Cf. also Harrison, Prol. to
tlie
Study
of
Gk.
203
Rcl., p. 1G8.
loc.
Attio insor. the
noun
is
found
in
apposition with
the abl., the

p.
f.
and
in absolute expressions.
Cf. Meisterh., Att. Inschr.,
416
NEW TESTAMENT
24 we seem to have the comon the Gospel of John which he has read and approved. Moulton^ naturally suggests the hypothesis that the Gospel and Epistles of John had the smoothing hand of this brother of culture (perhaps in Ephesus), while in the Apocalypse we have John's own rather uncultured Greek. One may add to this the idea of Winer about possible excitement and passion due to the great ideas of the book. In the Isle of Patmos John, if still there, would have little opportunity for scholarly help and the book may have gone out unrevised. There are other theories, but this matter of authorship is not the grammarians'
of his addresses.
in Jo. 21
:
Now
ment
of a brother (or several)
task.
(d)
Other Peculiarities
rju
in Apposition.
Further examples of
:
apposition
e7ra77eXta,
call for illustration.
Thus
in 1 Jo. 2
25, avTrj karlv
17
avTos eirrjyyeiXaTO
rj/juv, Trjv ôo-qp Trjv
alcovLOV,
we have
ttju
in the case of the relative (incorporation almost)
and not
in that of
the antecedent.
Then again
in Jo. 1
38
pajSêl is
:
explained as
:
SLdaaKoXe, vocative in the predicate (cf. also
Meaalav
cKoXos
is
is
naturally interpreted as Xpto-ros.
20 16), while in 1 41 In Jo. 13 13 6 8180.:
in apposition with
But
this passage
fxe where we would use quotation-marks. needs to be borne in mind in connection with
Revelation.
In
Cor. 16
-.21, rfj enfj
x^m
TlavKov,
note the geni-
tive in apposition with the possessive
the sense of the possessive, not
its
pronoun eî? according to case. Once more the common
use of the genitive of one substantive in practical apposition has already been noted in this chapter. III, (c), 5, Apposition. Thus 17
Twv a^vfxicp (Lu. 22 1). The use of tovt' earLv with any case has already been alluded to under Gender. Note Mk. 7:2; Ac. 19 4; Ro. 7: 18; Phil. 12; 1 Pet. 3 20; Heb. 9 11; 11 16, etc. In avTos (TcoTTip Tov aiofxaTo^ (Eph. 5 23) auros gives emphasis to the
eopri)
:
apposition.
Inverse attraction of antecedent to case of the relais
tive (see Pronouns)

(e)
really apposition.
The Absolute Use of the Cases

accusative).
(nominative, genitive, abla-
treatment in the chapter on Cases. Some of the peculiar nominatives noted in Revelation are the nominativus -pendens, a common anacoluthon. Cf. rama ddewpeire (Lu. 21 6), 6 vlkcov /cat 6 TT]pu>v (Rev. 2: 26). The parenthetic nominative is seen in Jo. 1:6, ovopa avT^ 'Iwavrjs, where 'Icoavrjs might have been dative. But here merely the mention of the
tive
and
These
will receive
fact of the absolute use of the cases

1
is all
that
is
called for.^
Prol., p. 9.
See also Zahn's
Intr., 74.
Cf. Gildersleeve,
Gk. Synt.,
p. 5; Brug., Griech. Gr., pp.
373-376.
THE SENTENCE
X. Position of
(a)
417
Words in the Sentence. Freedom from Rules. The freedom

and
its
of the
Greek from
artificial rules
response to the play of the mind is never seen In English, better than in the order of words in the sentence. in the senwords since it has lost its inflections, the order of the is substantive tence largely determines the sense. Whether a thus, or only English subject or object can usually be seen in whether a given word is verb or substantive, substantive or adEven the Latin, which is an inflectional tongue, has jective. much less liberty than the Greek. We are thinking, of course, of the prose, not of poetry, where metre so largely regulates
Greek
position of words.
the same freedom independadditional some that the older Greek did with perhaps older litthe with contrasted ence from the vernacular kolvt] as maintained has vernacular The modern Greek erary language. The the Greek freedom in this respect (Thumb, Handb., p. 200). EngIn matter. in this liberty Semitic tongues also have much
The N. T. indeed enjoys
lish it is
common
to see words in the
wrong place that make ab-
rode a horse with a surd bungles, as this, for instance: tou vlbv, 6 iraTraT7]p îXet 6 black hat." In Greek one may say the stress in to according iraTrip, vlov 6 Trip <îXet Tov vlbv or 0tXet tov
the
"The man
(6)
mind of the speaker.^ Predicate often First.
In Greek narrative, where the
commonly rhetorical element has less play, the predicate very the most is predicate the rule, as a comes first, simply because,
important thing in the sentence. Thus ixaKaptoi oi ttuxoI tc3 ivpev(Lu. 1 42), kyeveTO 5e (Lu. fxaTL (Mt. 5:3), evXoyrjfxevr] av ev yvvaL^lv
:
2:1),
Kal kiropevovTo
(2:3),
kvk^y] 8k
(2:4),
etc.
But
this
is
true so
predicate often, not because of any rule, but simply because the even Blass^ clause. the in point main is most frequently the subpredicate, thus: scheme tentative undertakes to suggest a rightly Winer^ But etc. participle, complementary ject, object, remarks that he would be an empirical expositor who would insist
on any unalterable rule in the Greek sentence save that of

is
spontaneity.
Emphasis. This words. This emphasis

(c)
one of the ruling ideas in the order of be at the end as well as at the beginin the middle in case of antithesis. even or sentence, ning of the a word from its usual iiosition removing in consists emphasis The
may
to an unusual one.
1
So oXvkou yXvKv
vrotrjo-at
'
v8o:p (J as.
12).
Thus
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 2S7. W.-Th., p. 551.
418

:
NEW TESTAMENT
:
in Lu. 1
12
we have
(j)6j3os
Kal 4)6ôs kireTeaev
Kai eireTreatu
evl iravras avTovs.
eir' avTov, but in Ac. 19 17 Sometimes the words in con:
trast are brought sharply together, as in Jo. 17
4,
:
kyw
16.
ere
eSoâaa,
and 17:
5, vvi^
bbâabv
/xe
ah.
So
viiC^v eixov
Lu. 10
in
Note
also
Heb. 7:4a) btmTqv 'A/3pad/i ebu>Kev (.k tCov aKpodivluv, 6 TarpLapxr)^So also in 1 Pet. 2 TLp-i] Tols TTLaTevovaLu, note the beginning and the end 7, vplv ovv of the sentence. This rhetorical emphasis is more common in the Epistles (Paul's in particular) than in the Gospels and Acts for obvious reasons. Thus observe the position of av in Ro. 11: 17 and of KaKelvoL in verse 23. In Heb. 6 19 aa(j)aXrj re Kai êâlav do not come in immediate contact with ayKvpav as adjectives usually do. Observe also the emphatic climax in TeTeXeLcofxhov at the end of the sentence in Heb. 7 28. Cf. i]5ri /cetrat in ]Mt. 3 10. Note
the intentional position of 6
iraTpLapxris
:
Tj
the sharpness given to ov in 10

:
Cor.
17
by putting
it first.
So
It
5.
In
Cor. 2
7 deov
ao(l)iav
throws proper emphasis upon
deov.
The
position of the subordinate clause varies greatly.

first,
often comes
(d)
as in Lu.
1-4.
in a Sentence. In general they word to which they belong in sense. Thus the adj. is near the subst. and after it. So vSojp ôjv (Jo. 4 10), 8idadKoke ayad'e (Mk. 10 17), ^wqv aiwvLov (lb.). But observe oXov avdpcoirov vyirj (Jo. 7 23), both adjs. So also note 8l' avbbpwv towcov
The Minor Words
come
close to the
(Mt. 12 :43), KoXdv airepfxa (Mt. 13: 27), ex^pos audpuiros (Mt. 13 With the repeated 28), where the adj. gives the main idea. article the adj. has increased emphasis in 6 tolijltjv 6 koXos (Jo. 10:
11).
With
1
:
Tvevfxa ajLov this is the usual

1
:
order (as Mt. 3

to ayiov (Jo. 14
:
11),
also TO ajLov irvevixa (Ac.
8)
or TO
irvevfia
26).
but In
Ac.
5 the verb comes in between the substantive
and adjective
So
alcjOPLOV
(h
in
TTvevfiaTL
âwTLadrjaeade aylw) to give unity to the clause.
Mt.
:
20, K irvevpLaros eaTiv aylov.

:
Cf.
^coriv
exere
(1 Jo.
13).
ireptTptTrei,.
To/jLa.
24 note ae thus, to. toXXo. are ypafifiaTa els fiavlav So also in 1 Cor. 10 4 tlov comes between to and The position of the genitive varies greatly, but the same
In Ac. 26
:
general principle applies.

TTJs
The
genitive follows as in Tots XoyoLs
emphatic as in tojv aXXoTplcov ttiv (}>o}V7]v (Jo. 10 5). There is sharp emphasis in Toiv twircov in Jas. 3:3. A genitive may be on each side of the substantive as in rjucoi' oMa tov aKTjvovs (2 Cor. 5:1). Sharp contrast may be expressed by proximity of two genitives, as in tov avvaTpaTLWT-qv /jlov, There may be some contrast also vfjLosv di airoaToXov (Ph. 2 25).
xo-pi-Tos
(Lu. 4
:
22), unless
in
(TV jjiov
vLTTTeLs
Tovs TTodas (Jo. 13
6).
But the personal
enclitic
THE SENTENCE
pronouns have a tendency to come early
emphasis, as
ttcos
419
in the sentence
:
without
Cf. IVa
riveooxGwo-^ ôv ol dcpdaXijLoi (Jo. 9
10).
B.G.U. 423 (ii/A.D.). Radermacher (^V. T. Gr., p. 90) notes great freedom in the position of the genitive in the Attic authors and in the inscriptions. In the case of 6 auOpcoTTos ovTos and ovtos 6 apdpoiiros one must not look for any fine-spun distinction, though the same general principle of emphasis exists. In the matter of ravra iravra (Lu. 12 30) and wauTa ravra (Mt. 6 32) the first word carries the emphasis just as in ttSs 6 oxXos and 6 oxXos ttSs. Cf. iravra ra ix'tkr] tov cco/xaros (1 Cor. 12 12) and
aov TpoaKwrjcroo
rrjp x^po-v
:
01
Tarepes
rjucov
Tavres (1 Cor. 10
ris
1)
with
8
6 ttSs v6p.os (Gal.

:
14).
is
Note the common Greek av
(Jo.
25).
The vocative
:
often at the beginning of the sentence, as var-qp bUaie (Jo. 17
25),
but not always, as in TrapaKaXw

Jo. 14
:
be vpas, a8eX(j>ol (1
Cor.
10).
In
9 ovK eyvwKas
It
p.e,
ÎXnTxe the vocative naturally comes after

dj
the pronoun.
1),
comes within the sentence, as
Beo^tXe (Ac. 1
or at either end according as occasion requires.
Some
set
phrases come in formal order, as av8pes dSeXôt Kal

2), like
irarepes (Ac.
our "brethren and sisters," "ladies and gentlemen," etc. Other conventional phrases are iivSpas Kal yvpalKas (Ac. 8:3), x<^P's
yvpaiKcJv Kal
TratStcoj/
(Mt. 14
:
21),
pmra
Kal
rjpepav
(Ac. 20
:
31),
aap^
Kal alpa
(Mt. 16
10 42)
: :
17),
/Jpcocrts
Kal wdaLS
(Ro. 14
:
17),
^wvrwv
lyXto)
Kal veKpCbv (Ac.

aeKr]V[f
T-qv yrju Kal Tr]v
daXaaaap (Ac. 4
yrjs
24),
Kal
(Lu. 21
:
25), rod ovpavov Kal
ttjs
(Mt. 11:
25), epyo} Kal
X67W (Lu. 24
v\pr]Xdp
:
19), 'lovSalovs re Kal "EWrjpas

:
(Ro. 3:9), SovXos ov8i
eXeWepos (Gal. 3
28).
The adverb
generally has second place, as
but not always, as Xiav yap aPTearr] (2 Tim. Matthew often puts the adverb after imperatives, as Karaârw pvp {Mi. 27:42), but before indicatives, as en v(TTepoo (Mt. 19 20), a refinement somewhat unconscious, one may suppose. In general the words go together that make
Xlap (Mt. 4:8),
15).
Blass^ notes that
is sometimes left to the reader's inIn Eph. 2 3, ripeOa reKPa 4>v<xet opyrjs, note the position of </)6(Tet between re/cm and opyrjs. In Ro. 8 3, KareKpcve ttjp apapriap ep Tjj aapKi, the adjunct ep ry aapKL goes in sense with KareKpLpe, not apapTiap. But this matter comes up again under the Article. In
sense,
and the interpretation

:
sight.
Mt. 2
(e)
2, e'ibopep
yap avTOV
top acrrepa ep
tjj
aparoXy, probably ep
tjj
aua-
ToX^ belongs in sense to the subject ('we being in the east,' etc.).-
Euphony and Rhythm.

p. 289.
It will
not do to say that em-
Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
'
Porphyrios Logothetca as quoted by Agnes Lewis Smith in Exp. Times,
Feb., 1908, p. 237.
420
NEW TESTAMENT
phasis alone explains every unusual order of words in a Greek sentence.
Take
Jo. 9
6, for
is
instance,
entirely
kirkd-qKev
avrov t6v tyjXop ewi tovs
removed from 6(j)da\iiovs and is without particular emphasis. It was probably felt that the geniObserve tive of the pronouns made a weak close of a sentence. also Jo. 9 10, aov ol dcpeaXfxoi (cf. 9: 11). Thus also 9 17, 26, 30. Note eire<jev avrov trpos tovs woSas (Jo. 11 32) and ovk av jjlov airkdaviv 6 a8eX4>6s {ib.). So cv ixov vlttths tovs Tcodas (Jo. 13 6) where some emphasis by contrast may exist in spite of the enclitic form /xov. Cf. vfuv eixoi in Ph. 3:1. But on the other hand we have 6 a8e\(f)6s iJLov in Jo. 11 21 (cf. 11 23 aov) and rod irarpos ijlov (Jo. 10 The tendency to draw the pronouns toward the first part of 18). the sentence may account for some of this transposition, as in to.
6(l)daXfj.ovs.
Here avTov
TToXXa ae ypaixjxaTa
ets iJLaviav
Treptrpexet (Ac.
26
24),
but the matter
goes
large
much beyond the personal

amount
pronouns, as in
h irvevfxaTL âwTLadr]in
aeaOe ayiu) (Ac. 1:5), ixupav ex^ts bvvap.Lv (Rev. 3:8), etc.
of personal liberty
was exercised
But a such trajection
of words.^
Is there
any such thing as ryhthm

If
mann^
thenes,
scouts the idea.
in the N. T.? Deissone thinks of the carefully balanced
sentences of the Attic orators like Isocrates, Lysias and
Demosall
Deissmann
is
correct, for there is
nothing that at
ap-
N. T., not even in Luke, Paul or Hebrews. Blass^ insists that Paul shows rhythm in He compares'* Paul with 1 Cor. and that the book is full of art. Cicero, Seneca, Q. Curtius, Apuleius, and finds rhythm also in Hebrews which "not unfrequently has a really oratorical and choice order of words." ^ He cites in Heb. 1 4 touovtw KpeiTTwv
proaches such
artificial
rhythm
in the
yevopevos Tcbv ayyeXuv

:
oaco
8i,a4)opcoTepov Trap'
avTOvs KKKr]pov6pr]Kev
ovopa; 1:5; 11 32; 12: 1, 8, etc. In Greek in general he suggests that lively and animated discourse gives rise to dislocations of
words.
of
Now
Greek
style.
one would think Blass ought to know something But Deissmann will have none of it. He refers
Blass to Schramm,
who wrote
in 1710 of
is
De stupenda
eruditione
in his
Pauli apostoli and thinks that Blass

*
wilful
and arbitrary
Boldt,
De
lib.
Ling. Grsec. et Lat.' Colloc. Verb. Capita

4:34;
Sel., p. 186.
2 ^
Theol. Literatiirzeit., 1906, p.
Exp., Jan., 190S, p. 74.
Die Rhythmen der asian. und rcim. Kunstprosa, 1905, pp. 43, 53. Cf. Hadley, On Anc. Gk. Rhythm and Metre in Ess. lb., pp. 73 f., 77. Phil, and Crit., pp. 81 ff. 6 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 286 f. Cf. Zarncke, Die Entstehung der griech. Literatursprachen, p. 5 f., for good remarks about rhythm. See also Dewing,
<
The
Orig. of the Accentual Prose
Rhythm
in Gk.,
Am.
Jour, of PhiloL, 1910,
pp. 313-328.
THE SENTENCE
use and proof of rhythm.
421
On
the other hand Sir
W. M. Ramsay^
contends that Paul was a better Hellenist in point of culture than some suppose, and knew Greek philosophy and used it. It is after
all
partly a dispute about terms.
If
by rhythm one means grace
and charm
of diction that naturally belong to the expression of
elevated ideas under the stress of chastened passion, surely one
would be hypercritical to deny it to 1 Cor. 13 and 15, Ac. 17, Ro. 12, Eph. 3, Jo. 14-17, Heb. 2 and 11, not to mention many beautiful passages that seem perfect like pearls. At white heat nature often strikes off what is better than anything mere art can do even as to beauty of form and expression. Luke^ may even have known Thucydides, and yet one has, no right to expect the "niceties of language^ in the vernacular which contribute so much to the charm of Plato." Intonation and gesture in spoken
8 and
language take the place of these linguistic refinements to a very large extent. It is true that Paul's "Greek has to do with no school, with no pattern, but streams unhindered with overflowing
bubbling direct out of the heart," but "yet is real Greek," as Wilamowitz-Mollendorff * remarks. Wilamowitz-Mollendorff does indeed hold that Paul knew httle Greek outside of the Greek Bible, but he thinks that his letters are unique in Greek literature. On
Paul's Hellenism see chapter IV, and also G. Milligan, Epistles
the Thess., p. Iv.
to
On
p. Ivi
Milligan takes the writer's view that
the "well-ordered passages" and "splendid outbursts" in Paul's

writings are due to natural emotion
and
Stil
instinctive feeling rather
than studied
art.
Bultmann (Der
der Paulinischen Predigt
und
die Kynisch-stoische Diatribe, 1910) finds that
essential elements of the Stoic Diatribe in his
Paul had the argumentative style

Paul's art
(question
is
and answer,
antithesis, parallelism, etc.).
indeed like that of the Cynic-Stoic Diatribe as described by Wendland,^ but he does not have their refinement or overpunctiliousness.^ It is not surprising to find that occasionally N. T.
writers writers of
show unintentional metre, as is common with speakers and any language. In the Textus Receptus of Heb. 12 13
:
there
is
a good hexameter,
koL Tp6xi\as dp\dds ttoI Tjcrare rois iroalpl

|
Cities of Paul, 1908, pp. 6, 10, 34. Cf. Hicks, St. Paul and Ilellen. H. Smith, Short Stud, on the Gk. Text of the Acts of the Apost., Prcf. 3 J. H. Moulton, Intr. to the Study of N. T. Gk., p. 7. * Die griech. Lit. des Altert., p. 159. Tl. I, .\ht. 8, Die Kultur der Gegenw., 1907. W. H. P. Hatch, J.H.L., 1909, p. 149 f., suf-gests r" ay. in Jas. 1 17. 6 iieitr. zur Gesch. der Gk. Phil, und Rel., 190."), ]). 3 f
1
The
J.
J.
Weiss, Beitr. zur Paulin. Rhet., 1897, p. 107
f.
422
vficbv,

but the
critical text spoils it all
NEW TESTAMENT
one
Jo.
may
:
find
two trimeters
4 35 {TeTpaiJ.r]v6s Green {Handbook to
by reading Trotetre. So also Heb. 12 14 f. (o5 airo), one in epxerat), one in Ac. 23 5 {apxopra KUKcos). the Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 356) cites the acciin
:
dental English anapaestic line "To preach the acceptable year of the Lord," the hexameter "Husbands, love your wives, and be
not bitter against them," and the iambic couplet "Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace." But surely
no one would call these writers poets because occasional metre is found in their writings. There is an unconscious harmony of soul between matter and form. Paul does indeed quote the Greek poets three times, once an iambic trimeter acataleptus from the
comic poet Menander (1 Cor. 15: 33) cf)d~Lpou\alu ri\dfi xpv\(^ra. 6/xt| though one anapaest occurs (some MSS. have XPW^'), once half an hexameter from Aratus (Ac. 17:28) rov 7a,p|/v'at ylvos\t(7iJ.ev, and a full hexameter from Epimenides of Crete (Tit.
\Lal\Ka.Kal,
1
:
12)
KprjTes
el \{/ev
aral KaKo. Oripla yaaTepes dpycu.

|
How much
Greek poetry we do not know, but he was not ignorant of the philosophy of the Stoics and Epicureans in Athens. Blass^ indeed thinks that the author of Hebrews studied in the schools of rhetoric where prose rhythm was taught, such as
of
more Paul knew
the careful balancing of ending with ending, beginning with beginning, or ending with beginning.
it
He
thinks he sees proof of

is in-
in
Heb.
f.,
3,
f.;
12: 14
f.,
24.
But here again one
clined to think that

of
we have
rather the natural correspondence
form with thought than studied rhetorical imitation of the We cannot now follow the lead of the old writers who saw many fanciful artistic turns of phrase.^ Antitheses and parallelisms could be treated here as expressions of rhythm, but they can be handled better in the chapter on Figures of Speech. As a specimen of an early Christian hymn note 1 Tim. 3 16. Harnack {The Independent, Dec. Elizabeth (Lu. 1 28, 1912) takes this as a Christmas hjTnn. 42-45), Mary (1:46-55) and Zacharias (1:67-79) break forth into poetic strains with something of Hebrew spirit and form. In Eph. 5 14 we have another possible fragment of a Christian hymn. The Lord's Prayer in Mt. 6 9-13 is given in metrical arrangement by W. H. Cf. Hort, Intr. to N. T. in Gk., p. 319 f. In general on N. T. parallelism see Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels
schools of Atticism or even of Asianism.
:
: :
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 297 f Cf., for instance, Gersdorf, Bcitr. zur Sprachcharakt. d. Schriftst. d. N.T.,
1816, pp. 90, 502.
THE SENTENCE
423
and Messiah of the Apostles. In 1 Cor. 13 one can sec the beauty and melody of a harmonious arrangement of words. See also the
latter part of 1 Cor. 15.
(/)
Prolepsis
its
is
not
uncommon where
'yvwTe (2 Cor. 2
either the substantive
is
placed out of
clause like
eai'
right place before the conjunction in a subordinate
ttjv ayairr]v
:
ha
4)
and
îwtlko. KpLT-qpia
ex^re (1 Cor. 6
4),
or the subject of the subordinate clause even

like I8elv t6v 'l-qaovv tLs
becomes the object of the previous verb

kffTLv
(Lu. 19
Cf.
3).
Cf. Ac. 13
32.
But
:
this
betokens no studied
:
art.
Mk.
24; Lu. 10
:
26; Ro. 9
19, 20; 14
4, 10; 1
Cor.
15
36.
So w^v
in Ac. 3
12.
{g)
Hysteron Proteron.
1
:
We
occasionally
meet
also
an exKara-
ample
of varepov irpoTepov like ayêkov^ tov deov a.va(3aluovTas

51),
/cat
âivovras (Jo.
a natural inversion from our point of view.

p. 553)
But Winer (Winer-Thayer,

the N. T.
that of
6.X\6iJ.i>os
does not admit this figure in
Certainly not
all
the apparent examples are real.
The
order of we-jnaTevKafxev
(Ac. 3
Kai kypc^Kafiev (Jo.
69)
is
just as true as
eyvcioaav Kal kirlaTtvaav (Jo.

:
17:8).
Cf. also TeptiraTcov Kal

:
8)
and
i]\aTo Kal TepLeirareL (Ac. 14
10)
where each
1
:
order suits the special case.
Cf
Tim. 2
4 and 2 Pet.
9 for
on close examination. (h) Hyperbaton. Adverbs sometimes appear to be in the wrong place, a phenomenon common in all Greek prose writers. In 1 Cor. 14 7 o/jlos would come in more smoothly just before eav, but it is perfectly intelligible where it is. Cf. also Gal. 3 15 for similar use of ojucos. Cf. distance of ^dr] from Ketrai
alleged examples that disappear
:
:
(Mt. 3
1
Trdi'Tes
10).
:
In Ro. 3
9 oy
ttclvtcos
is
our 'not at
1
all,'
while in
:
Cor. 16
ov
12 tclutus ovk 'wholly not,' just as in
Cor. 15
51
Kotfj,r]dr]a6iJLeda
means
.
'all of
us shall not sleep,' not 'none

1
of us shall sleep.'
Cf
also ou -n-avTus in
Cor. 5 9
:
f .,
an explana-
tion of the negative
ixij
awavaixiyvvadaL just before, 'not wholly.'
In the case of ov
separated and in 4
novov
ixbvov in
:
Ro. 4
12, 16,
the words ov novov are
makes ov Winer (Wincr-Thayer, p. 555) is certainly right in insisting that ovx ort (2 Cor. 3:5) is not to be treated as 6tl ovk. Cf. ovx dXX' I'm (2 Cor. 13 7). A more difficult passage is found in Heb. 11:3, eis to fxi] tK 4>aLvofxvcov to. jSXeTTo/iem yeyovevai, where /xiy is the negative of the phrase Ik (i>aivoixkvwv TO ^XeiTonevov ytyovevai. In general the negative comes before the word or words that are negatived. Hence ovk du^v (Ac. 19 30), oi'K ecTTLv (Gal. 3:20). But note m'7 ttoWoI SiSdaKaXoi yiveade (J as. 3:1). Blass (6V. of N. T. GL, p. 257) notes the possible am12 the repetition of the article toIs
seem quite misplaced.
'-''â
424

:
NEW TESTAMENT
Oi/'io-tos
biguity in Ac. 7 48 because of the use of ovx before 6 Observe in strong contrasts instead of before KaroLKtl.
:
how
ov
stands over against dXXd (Ro. 2 13). Blass^ has little sympathy with the grammatical device of hyperbaton to help out exegesis.
The
construction, found in cos dTro aTablu^v deKairevTe (Jo. 11 18) has been supposed to be a Latinism when compared with Lu. 24: 13. So also with wpd e^ riij.epa)v Tov Traaxo- (Jo. 12: 1) was for:
merly considered a Latinism. But Moulton^ shows conclusively that it is Doric and Ionic before the possibility of Latin influence, and besides is common in the kolvt] papyri, a mere coincidence with
the Latin.
(i)
See also ch. XIII,
vii, (m), 5.
PosTPOsiTivES.
A number
of
words are always postposinever
tive in Greek.
In the N. T.
dv, yap, ye, 8e, p.h, p-evToi, ovv, re
begin a sentence, in harmony with ancient Greek usage. These words commonly in the N. T. come in the second place, always so
with
ixkvTOL (Jo.
27, etc.).
1
In the case of
:
ixkv
the third place

:
is
occasionally found as
fifth in
Pet. 2
:
4,
the fourth as 2 Cor. 10

:
1,
the
Eph. 4 11
:
Jo. 16
22, or
occupies the seventh place in Herm. Sim.
even the sixth in Jas. 3 17. It viii, 5 1 (Mr. H. Scott

:
has noted).
In general these words vary in position according to
the point to be
made
in relation to other words.
So also
ovv is
:
more commonly in the second, but varies to the third (Jo. 16 22) and fourth (1 Cor. 8:4). The same remark applies to yap, for which see Mk. 1 38; 2 Cor. 1 19. As to be, it may not only go
: :
to the fourth place (Jo. 8
16),
be.
but even appears in the

It
fifth (1 Jo.
2:2),
of ye
ov irepl
Tojv
f]iieTepo^v
stands in the sixth place in
Test. XII. Patr. Judah, 91 (Mr. H. Scott reports).

it
:
In the case
belongs as in
:
follows naturally the
word with
w^hich
it
Ro. 8 32 (6s ye), even in the case of dXXd ye (Lu. 24 21) which is always separated in the older Greek. Cf. also ei ye Eph. 3 2. "kv in the apodosis (not = dj') or with relatives or conjunctives, never begins a clause in Greek. It is usually the second word in
:
the apodosis, either after the verb, as

ovK, as ovK dv
elirov
dv (Jo. 14
2),
or after
:
(Mk. 13
20), or the interrogative, as rts dv (Lu. 9
46).
With the relative dv and OS b'dv (Mt. 23

as in
Tvov-qpovs re
follows directly or as the third word, as os dv

:
16).
:
Te usually follows the word directly,

10),
even after a preposition, as avv re but note twv edvojv re (Ac. 14 5). There is another group of words (j) Fluctuating Words. Thus dpa that vary in the matter, now postpositive, now not.
(Mt. 22
:
XtXiapxots (Ac. 25
23);
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 290. Prol., pp. 100 ff. Cf. also
LXX,
as
Amos
1:1; 4:7, etc.
THE SENTENCE
425
the clause (Mt. 12 28), contrary to older Greek So also apaye (Mt. 7 20) and iipa ovv (Ro. 7:3). Except in a few instances like Ro. 8 1 the examples where apa is postpositive in the N. T. are in questions after the interrogative or after a conjunction. Once (Ro. 10 18) ixtvovvyt begins the senlolvvv occurs only three times and twice begins the sentence, tence (Lu. 20 25; Heb. 13 13) as Toiyapovv does (Heb. 12 1). The indefinite rts sometimes comes first in the sentence, as nves 8e (Lu. 6:2). Enclitics can therefore stand at the beginning, though not commonly so. In the case of eveKev its position is usually before the word except with the interrogative, as tIvos eveKev (Ac. 19 32), or a relative, as ov etveKtv (Lu. 4 18). But x^-P'-v follows
may
be
first in
custom.
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 more freedom with these words. {k) The Order of Clauses in Compound Sentences. Blass^ considers this a matter of style rather than of grammar. When the whole sentence is composed of a principal clause, with one or
more subordinate
clauses, the order of these clauses is largely
dependent on the flow of thought in the speaker's mind. In the case of conditional as Mt. 17 4, final as in Mt. 17 27, and relative clauses as in Mt. 16 25, the dependent very often precedes the principal clause. There is usually a logical basis for this order.
: :
But
(jLOVov
in Jo. 19
28 the
final clause
somewhat interrupts the flow

In 2 Cor. 8
:
of the sentence.
TO TOLTJaaL
Cf. also Ro.
9:11.
10, o'irLves ov
dXXd
Kal to deXeiv Tpoeviqpâade airo irepvai,
there
is
no
in
violent change of order.
Logically the willing preceded the doing
and makes the natural climax.

refusing to take
tIvl
:
:
Blass^
is
undoubtedly right
Xoyw evrjyyeXcaanrjv as dependent on el Karexere (1 Cor. 15 2). In Jo. 10 36 we meet a somewhat tangled sentence because the antecedent of ov is not expressed. Here Xeyere is the principal verb, the apodosis of the condition, and has two objects (the relative clause and the otl clause) with a causal clause added. So in Jo. 10 38 we have a good example of the
:
complex sentence with two conditions, a

clause, besides the ])rincipal clause.^
final clause,
an object-
XI.
(a)
Compound Sentences.
Two Kinds
of Sentences.
is
or complex.
1
The complex
The sentence is cither simple nothing but two simple sentences
'
On
Rfl.
^ lb. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 291. the whole subject of the position of words in the sentence sec K.-G., IT, pp. 592-604.
426
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.
(6)
Cf.
Brugmann,
of Compound Sentences {Paratadic and In parataxis (xapdraîs) we have co-ordination Hypotadic). Take Mk. 14 37 as an example, Kal of two parallel clauses. In hypoepX^Tai Kai evplcFKei avToiis KadevSovTas, Kal Xeyei too Ilerpaj. taxis (uTTora^ts) one clause is subordinated to the other, as in ovk oUare tI aLrelaOe (Mk. 10 38) where tL alTelade is in the accusative
: :
Two Kinds
case, the object of oUare.
Parataxis
is
the rule in the speech of
men, unlettered men and also of Homer. Cf. Sterrett, Homer's Iliad, N. 49. On the two kinds of sentences see Paul, Principles of Language, See also Delbriick, Vergl. Syntax, 3. TL, pp. 259-286; p. 139 f. Brugmann, Griech. Gr., pp. 551 ff.; Kiihner-Gerth, Bd. II, p. 351. They are very common in the (c) Paratactic Sentences. Sanskrit and in Homer (cf. Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 555) and in the Hebrew. In truth in the vernacular generally and the earlier
children, primitive
It is more common with some writers than with others, John, for instance, using it much more frequently than Paul or even Luke. In John Kal sometimes is strained to mean 'and yet,' as in 3:19; 4:20, etc.^ The KOLVT) shows a decided fondness for the paratactic construction which in the modern Greek is still stronger (Thumb, Handb., As in the modern Greek, so in the N. T. Kal, according p. 184).
stages of language parataxis prevails.
to logical sequence of thought, carries the notion of 'but,' 'that,'

besides 'and yet,'
introducing quasi-subordinate clauses.

Kal (cf. Heb."]) after
details concerning paratactic conjunctions see chapter

ticles.
For on ParKal
8e Kai
In the use of
kyhero the paratactic
borders very close on to the hypotactic on.
Thus kyhero
avTos TO
(d)
irpoawTOV eaT-qpiaev (Lu. 9
51).
Hypotactic Sentences.
They
are introduced either
by
pronouns or conjunctions, many of which are relatives in origin and others adverbs. The subject of conjunctions will demand special and extended treatment later on (chapters on Modes and on Particles) and so will relative clauses. On the use of the relative
relative
,
thus see Brugmann, Griech. Gr.,

later
p. 553.
The propensity
of the
Greek
for parataxis led to

1
an impoverishment of
particles.
Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 135.
THE SENTENCE
427
Hypotactic sentences, once more, are either substantival, adjectival or adverbial, in their relation to the principal or another
subordinate clause.
stantive object of
Thus
in Lu. 22
2 rb
ttws
aveXuaLv
is
the sub:
k^rjTovv,
as to
tLs dt] is
of (Tvu^rjTeiu in Lu. 22
23.
As a sample
of the subject-clause in the nominative take ov
/xeXet
aoL OTL cLToWv/xeda
adjective sentence
rire is
(Mk. 4:38). In Mt. 7: 12 6aa eav de\7]T is an and describes vavTa. In Mt. 6 16 orau urjaTeb:
an adverb
in its relation to ylveade.
In the beginning the hypotactic sentence corresponded closely

to the principal sentence.
'the
Cf.
Brugmann,
Griech.
Gi'.,
p. 554.
On
whole subject of substantive, adjective and adverb sentences see Kiihner-Gerth, Bd. II, pp. 354-465. The matter has further discussion under Modes (Subordinate Clauses). Xn. Comiection in Sentences. (a) Single Words. These have connectives in a very natural^ way, as 8vvaiJ.Lv Kai kôva-lav batixovia koI v6aov% (Lu. 9:1). But
common
T
also
is /cat
:
Kai
(Jo. 2
14), re
mi
:
(2
re (Ac. 26
15),
and rarely
is
16).
:
This tendency to break up into pairs

r}
well
For see Mt. 5 17, dXXd 2 Cor. 7:11, ovbk Rev. 5:3. In enumerations the repetition of Kai gives a kind of solemn dignity and is called polysyndeton. Cf. Rev.
in Ac. 2
shown
9-11.
12
17
evXoyla Kai
rj
17
86â Kai
OeQ.
rj
ao(t)ia Kai
17
ei'xapto'Tta Kai
:
17
Tifxij /cat
:
17
Rev. 4:11; 5 12; Ro. 9 4. Note also a similar repetition of ovre in Ro. 8 38 f. For jji-qre see Jas. 5 12. So with r? in Mk. 10 29. Perhaps, as Blass suggests,^ polys3aideton is sometimes necessary and devoid of any particular
Svvafxis Kai
tcrxi's
tw
Cf. also
rhetorical effect, as in Lu. 14: 21.
But asyndeton
See Mt. 15
is
:
frequent also.
Cf. avbpes 'lapariXdrai (Ac. 2
5:3; 1 For a striking example of asyndeton see Ro. 29-31, where some variety is gained by change in construction 1 (case) and the use of adjective instead of substantive, TewXrjpo):
22).
19; Jo.
Cor. 14
:
24; 15
f.
n'evovi iraaj] d8i.Klq. Trovrjpia TrXeot-e^tg. /ca/cta, ixearovs (fiOovou (povov epiSos
80X0V
KaKorjOlas,
îOvpLara^,
/caraXdXous,
deoarvye^s,
vf^pLaras,
virep-
r)(f}dvovs,
dXaôvas, eêuperds KaKcov, yovevaiv
direLOels, davvkrovs,
davv-
derovs, daropyovs, dveXerjfxovas.
Cf. also
Cor. 3
12.
the connective the

rest, for
is
used with part of the
list (jiairs)
1
:
Sometimes and not with

9
f.
the sake of variety, as in
ample
*
like emalpojs dKaipcos is
1 Tim. compared by Blass^
An
ex-
to ?wlcns volcns.
Vorgl. Synt.,
On the whole subject of connection in sentences see Dolbriu-k,
3.TI., pp. 40G-4:j7; Hrufr., Gricch.Gr., i)p. 551-560; K.-G., Hd. II, pp. 224-515. On asyndeton in t;;('nerul sec Ricni. and Goelzcr, Synt., p|). 312-358.
2
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 277.
n,.
428
(6)

Clauses.
NEW TESTAMENT
But connection is by no means uniform between This remark applies to both the paratactic and the hypotactic sentences. Asyndeton in hypotactic sentences is on the whole repugnant to the Greek language in the opinion of
sentences.
Blass.^
Hence complex sentences
in the
N. T. usually have con-
nectives, but not always.

1.
Paratactic Sentences.
The
co-ordinating conjunctions form
the most frequent means of connecting clauses into one paratactic
These conjunctions will receive special treatment in the chapter on Particles and here only some illustrations can be given.
sentence.
Kai,
T, 8e, ovbk,
fj-riSk,
fiev
and
8e, ovre,
dXXd are the most frequent
are more common indeed and Acts. But in the Gospels the use of Kai varies a good deal. Mark, for instance, has it more than 400 times, while John contains it only 100.^ Deissmann
particles used for this purpose.
They
in historical writings, as in the Gospels
calls this
use of
Kai
primitive popular Greek.

all
The presence
of
dialogue in John hardly explains
the difference, and even in
John the first chapter uses it much more frequently than the last. As a good example of the use of Kai turn to Mt. 4 23-25. Cf. Lu. 6 13-17 and Mk. 9 2. Te is common chiefly in the Acts, as 14 11-13. Sometimes the use of /cat between clauses amounted
:
: :
:
to polysyndeton, as in Jo. 10 3,
:
9, 12.
/xev
Ae
is
perhaps
:
less
common
8e Kai
in clauses (Jo. 4
Jo. 2
:
5)
except with
(Mt. 3
:
11).
For
:
see
2.
Ov8e
is
illustrated
by Mt. 5
15,
dXXd by 5
17, ovre
:
by
f.,
Ac. 28:21.
But asyndeton appears

:
also,
as in Lu. 6
27
even if it be to a limited extent. Cf. Gal. 5 22. Blass^ points out that that is not a case of asyndeton where a demonstrative pronoun is used which red7a7rare, iroielre, evkoyelre, Tpoaevx^c^d^,
flects
the connection.
Cf. thus the use of tovtou in Ac. 16
3; Jo.
6.
Winer"* finds asyndeton frequent in cases of a climax in

1
impassioned discourse, as in
eT\ovT7](xaT, x<^pis
r]iJLcbv
Cor. 4
8,
r^Srj
KeKopeaixhoi eare-
i]8r)
hâaiKehaaTe.
The absence
of the connective
:
gives
life
and movement,
(Mk. 2
:
serve also vTaye

eyeipe apov
irpaJTOV SLaXXayTjOi
11),
Tre(f)iiJ.a)ao (Mk. 4 Ob39). (Mt. 5:24), U7ra7e eXeyôv (18: 15), kydpeade aycofxev (Mt. 26 46), aye, KXavaare
as in
o-tcjTra,
(Jas.
5:1).
This use of
0,76 is
common
in the old
sleeve, Greek Syntax, p. 29).
But
in Jo.
Greek (Gilder1:46 we have epxov Kai
We.
In 1 Tim. 3 16 the fragment of an early anced in Hebrew parallelism.

:
hymn
is
neatly bal-
Gr. of N. T. Gr., p. 276. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 134.

ff.
3
On the subject of asyndeton in John see Abbott,

"
pp. 09
W.-Th.,
p. 538.
THE SENTENCE
"Os
e4)avep6}dri
429
aapKi,
kSLKaicoOr] kv irvehpaTi,
eKTjpvxdr] kv
WveaLV,
Kocrfxu},
eTnaTeWf] kv
ave\r]iJ,<pdr].
Here the connective would be quite out

In contrast the connective
TpoaKweire 6 ovk
o'iSaTe,
rip.et'i
of place.
y/zets
may
also be absent, as in
olbajiev (Jo.
ff.,
TpoaKwov/xev 6
:
22).
So
Ac. 25
12.
Cf. in particular 1 Cor. 15
42
axeipeTai kv
cfidopq.,
eyelperaL kv a(f)dapaia' aireipeTat kv aTL/xia, kyeiperaL kv 86^r]'

aadevela,
crireipeTat. kv
kyeiperaL kv bvvapec cTretperat
crci/xa
\pvx'-K-ov,
kyeiperat aoofxa
is like
TvevpaTLKov.
Here the solemn repetition

Cf. also Jas.
1
:
of the verbs
the
tolling of a bell.
19, raxvs els to aKomai, ^padvs els

is
TO XakijaaL,
/3pa5i)s els opyrjv.
John
rather fond of repetition with

ij
asyndeton
a.\r]$eia Kai
:
in his report of Jesus' words, as kyw elpi

r]
686s
/cat
:
17
^cor)'
:
ovdels epxerai Trp6s t6v irarepa el pr] 81 kpov
(14
6).
Cf. 10 11; 15 13, etc. But this sort of asyndeton occurs elsewhere also, as in 1 Cor. 7 15, ov SeSouXcorat 6 dSeXôs. Cf. also 7: A common asyndeton in Luke occurs after Kal 23; Rev. 22: 13. kyeveTo without another Kal, as el-n-ev tls (11:1).
:
2.
Hypotactic Sentences.
In the nature of the case they usuare
ally
have connectives.
The subordinating conjunctions
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
But
:
of the correlative accents this point, as olos

:
6 kirovpavLOS, tolovtol Kal ol kwovpavioL (1 Cor. 15
48)
uxxirep
ourcos
(Mt. 12 :40).
tive, as in
real antithesis
:
may
exist
without the correla-
Mt. 5 48; 6 2. In relative clauses the bond is very sometimes made closer by agreement of the relative and antecedent not only in number and gender but even in case, as ols (Lu. 2 20) and t6v aprov 6v (1 Cor. 10 IG). There may be
close
and
is
several relative clauses either co-ordinate (Ac. 3
f .)
or subordielra,
nate to another (Ac. 13

t6t, apa, Kal, dXXd, 8e in
31; 25
15
f.).
So also the use of

14; Jo. 7 10; 20
the apodosis accents the logical connection

:
of thought.
Cf.
Mt. 12
:
28;
Mk.
13
21; 1
But much closer than with temporal, comparative, conditional, or even some relative clauses is the tie between the principal clause and the subordinate objective, consecutive, final and causal clauses. These are directly deCor. 15
:
54; 2 Cor. 7
12, etc.
430

clause.
NEW TESTAMENT
when
in
pendent on the leading

indirect discourse really
Interrogative sentences
become
object-clauses, like to tLs apa drj
(Lu. 22
23), object of (Tvv^r]Tdv.
The
ort, tva, ottcos
(and
cos
rarely)
clauses are closely knit to the principal clause as subject, object

(direct or indirect) of the verb. There is a natural interblending between object and causal sentences, as shown by the use of ort for both and 5t6rt in late Greek in the sense of 'that,' objective 6tl. Cf. quod and quia in late Latin, and English the "reason that" and colloquial the "reason why." In Greek on even interchanges with d (cf. English "wonder if" and "wonder that"). So Wahnaatv d i]5r] redu7]Kep (Mk. 15 44). Cf. Ac. 8 22; 26 8. Clauses with the consecutive idea usually have the infinitive in the N. T. Hypotactic sentences cannot be here discussed in detail, but only as illustrating the point of connection between sentences. Winer is probably right in describing as asyndeton Jas. 5 13, KaKoiradd tls kv vfuv, irpoaevxeffdoo, where d is not used, though the sense is con:
:
ditional.
He
cites also 5oDXos
tKKi]dr)s,
fxi]
aoi êXerco (1
Cor. 7:21).
cer-
The questions
dropped out
in Jas. 2
19
f.
may
be so construed.
But more
tain examples exist than these, where either a conjunction has

or, as
is
more
Thus
:
a0s
K/3dXco
(Mt.
be compared with 5eDre 7 34), heme aTOKTeivoj/xep (Mk. 12 7) and the common Greek idiom with aye, (})epe. Cf. Jas. 5:1. In Mk. 15 36 note a.(()eTe One verb really supplements the other much as the infiniSoinev. itive or participle. Cf. English "let us see." In the modern Greek
:
likely, we have original parataxis. 7:4), aês Uwixev (Mt. 27 49) can loeTe (Mt. 28 6), bevpo dTrocrretXco (Ac.
:
used uniformly as the English and alOf a similar nature is the asyndeton with ekXeLS avWeôi/xev (Mt. 13 28) and l3ov\eade aToXvaco (Jo. 18 39). Cf. deXere TOLtjao: (Mk. 10 36). Cf. also eyelpeaee ayo)fxev (Mt. 26 46) above. These are all paratactic in origin, though hypotactic in logical sequence. But see chapter on Modes for further details.
as (abbreviation of aês) is
like
most
particle.
In the case of
the border
fii)
6pa, opdre, (SXeirere,

/jlt]
conjunctional use of
line.
examples of both the asyndeton with some on Thus clearly conjunctional firi is found in jSXeTrerco
find
we can
and
clear cases of
irearf
(1 Cor. 10
12), ^Xewere
:
/jlt]
eTeXdrj (Ac.
13 :40),
/SXcTrere
p.-q
wapaLT-qcrrjade
devl fxiqbh
(Heb. 12
25).
eiirris
(Mk.
44)
Asyndeton is undoubtedly in 6pa nrjwith which compare viraye Selôv in the

:
same
verse.
:
(Mt. 9 30) (Mt. 24 6).

:
Mt. 8 4. Thus again opSre /xTjSets yiucoaKeTco where note two imperatives as in opSre, fir) dpoelade But in /SXeTrere p.i] TLS vfJias TrXavijay (Mt. 24 4) and
Cf. also
:
W.-Th.,
p. 541.
THE SENTENCE
opdre since
3.
iirj
:
431
ni]
tls (xttoSw (1 Th. 5 15) the asyndeton is more doubtful, can be regarded as a conjunction. Cf. 2 Cor. 8 20.
:
and Participle as Connectives. A very common connection is made between clauses by means of the infinitive or the participle, sometimes with particles Hke ware and -n-plv with the infinitive or cos, coarep, Kalwep, with the participle, but
The
Infinitive
usually without a particle.
The
infinitive
kv
often
is
:
used with
18).
the article and a preposition, as

usually the
infinitive
is
tQ
dmt
(Lu. 9
But
:
brought into the closest connection with the verb as subject (to yap deKeip TapaKeLrai pot, Ro. 7 18) or object (jSovkopaL 7rpoaevx^(^dai avbpas, 1 Tim. 2:8), or in a remoter relation, as t^rjXOev 6 airdpijov tov aireXpaL (Mk. 4:3), The participle sometimes is an essential part of the predicate, as
tTTavaaTo XaXaiv (Lu.
or preliminary or even
daeKQdov, StaXeyopepos
5:4), or again it may be a mere addendum an independent statement. Thus observe

:
/cat TcelBwv in Ac. 19 8. As further examples of somewhat loosely strung together without a connective in more or less close relation to each other and the principal sentence see Ac. 12:25; 16:27; 23:27. The genitive absolute is common in such accessory participles. The only point to consider concerning the infinitive and participle here is the frequency with which they are used in the structure of the Greek sentence. Thus long sentences are easily constructed and sometimes
participles
the connection
is
not
clear.
come from the

See
free use pf the participle, as will
Frequent examples of anacoluthon be shown later.

:
xetporoj'Tjêts
and
areXXopevoL as instances in 2 Cor. 8
19
f.
By means
and participle the Greek enjoyed much elasticity and freedom which the modern Greek has lost. In modern Greek conjunctions and finite verbs have very largely displaced the infinitive and the participle. Even in the N. T. a tendency in that direction is discernible, as is seen in the use of I'm with ekXco (Mk. 6 25), d^tT/î (Mk. 11 16). One is inclined to think that Viteau^ overstates it when he says that the N. T. writers have a natural and general inability to combine and subordinate the elements of thought and so express them separately and make an abnormal use of asyndeton. I would rather say that there is a great simplicity and directness due partly to the colloquial style and the earnestness of the writers. They are men with a message rather than philosophical ramblers. But part of this absence of subordination may be due to the Hebrew temper as in John, and
of the infinitive
:
part to the general spirit of the time as less concerned, save in the
'
Lc Vcrbc, Synt. dcs
Prop., p. 9.
432
NEW TESTAMENT
case of the Atticists, with the niceties of style. Clearness and force were the main things with these N. T, writers. They use connectives or not as best suits their purposes. But the infinitive construction
as identical even in the N. T.
and the conjunction construction must not be regarded Note koXov avru) el ovk tyevpridr]
21),
(Mk. 14
(c)
TOVTCp yLVOjaKOfxev otl (1 Jo.
5:2),
/SouX?)
eyeuero Iva
(Ac. 27:42).
Two Kinds
of Style.
in this matter, the running {elpofxht])
There are indeed two kinds of style and the periodic {kv irepLoSoLs)
In
is
or compact
{KaTeaTpajxiikvri),
to use Aristotle's terminology.^
the words of Blass^ the running or continuous style

istic of
character-
the oldest prose as well as unsophisticated, unconventional

KOLv-q,
prose like the vernacular
and hence
is
the usual form in the
N. T.
ally
The
periodic style, on the other hand, belongs to "artisticlike
developed prose"
that of Demosthenes and Thucydides.

is
As a matter
of fact the 0. T. narrative
also in the running style,
while the prophets sometimes use the periodic.

sentences are usually connected
The
longer N. T.
shown But occasionally something approaching a real period appears somewhat like that of the great Greek writers, but by no means so frequently. Interesting examples of some length may
/cat
by
or use asyndeton as
above.
be found in Lu.
1
:
1:1^;
:
Ac. 15
24-26; 26
10-14, 16-18; Ro.

:
2-A. In Lu. 1 1-4 Blass^ notes that the protasis has three clauses and the apodosis two, while in Heb. 1 1-3 he finds some ten divisions of the
1-7; 1 Pet. 3
18-22; 2 Pet. 1:2-7; Heb. 2
sentence which
It
is
is
not so neatly balanced as the passage in Luke.
noticeable that
Luke uses
this classic
idiom nowhere
else in
his Gospel, while the Epistle to the
Hebrews has a
fluent oratorical
little beauty. Chapter 11 finds a splendid peroration which should belong to chapter 11 as the closing period Cf. a similar peroration, in the discussion about the promises. though not in one sentence, in Ro. 11 33-36. So also Ro. 8:3139, where verses 38 and 39 form a really eloquent period. Blass^ indeed gives a rather free interpretation to the term period and applies it to sentences of only two parts like a conditional sentence when the condition comes first, sentences with antithesis with
style of
:
no
f.,
in 12
likv
Kai. 5e, disjunctive clauses with r), or parallehsms with re even finds a period in a case of asyndeton like 1 Cor. 7 27. But this is to make nearly all complex sentences periods. Blass'
He
1
Arist. Rhet.,
iii.
9.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of

^
N. T. Gk.,
p. 275,
who
amplifies
this point.
3
lb.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 280.
THE SENTENCE
opinion on this point
is
433
for
to be borne in
mind when he argues

: :
hterary rhythm on a considerable scale in the N. T. has some noble periods like Eph. 1:3-14; 2
Paul indeed 14-18; 3 14-19.
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 symmetry of the sentence as a period. Cf. 2 Cor. 8 18-21; Ro. 12 6-8; Col. 1 9-23. In Ro. 3 7 f the m^cos and 6tl clauses make a not very strong culmination. The ground element in Paul's speech is the short sentence. Only occasionally does he combine these into a period.^ But Paul does use antithetic and comparative particles and apposition. One other reason for the absence of rhetorical periods is the avoidance of prolonged passages of indirect discourse. In truth none of that nature occur at all, so that we do not have in the N. T. passages of much length in indirect discourse such as one meets in Xenophon or Thucydides (cf. Caesar). But the quotations are usually direct either with recitative OTL (Mt. 9 18) or without (Mt. 9 22). Winer ^ well remarks that what the style thus loses in periodic compactness, it gains in animation and vividness. But the use of the participle in giving periodic compactness is to be noticed, as in Ac. 23 27. The at:
traction of the relative to the case of
its
antecedent, as already
observed, adds another bond of union to the compactness of the

relative sentence as in Lu. 5:9.
(rf)
The Parenthesis
common
is
{irapevOeai'^).
Such a
clause, inserted in
the midst of the sentence without proper syntactical connection,

is
quite
in the
N. T.^
Once the
editors used too

is still
many
do
parentheses in the N. T., but the
number
Thus
considerable.
The term
somewhat
loosely applied to clauses that really

it is
not interrupt the flow of the thought.

find a parenthesis in Jo. 7
:
not necessary to
is
39.
is
The 7ap
clause
:
merely ex:
30 and Ac. 13 8. Certainly not every explanatory remark is to be regarded as parenthetical. On the other hand even a relative clause may be regarded as parenthetical where it is purely by the way as the interpretation of 'Pa/3/3et (Jo. 1 38 o XeTerat) and of Meaalav (o
planatory.
true of Jo. 9
:
The same thing
k<jTLv^
etc., Jo.
:41).
But
see
Mk. 7:11.
Editors indeed will
J.
Weiss, Beitr. zur Paulin. Rhot., Thcol. Stud., 1S97, p. 1G7.
W.-Th., p. 545.
' For the Joh. use of parenthesis see Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 470-4S0. John fond of the resumptive ovv after a parenthesis, as in 2 18; 3 25; 4 28. On the parenthesis in general sec K.-C, Bd. II, i)p. 353, 602.
is
434
NEW TESTAMENT
differ as to
17 where
what constitutes a parenthesis as in the case of Mk. W. H. use the marks of parenthesis while Nestle does
:
not consider this a parenthesis. In Jo. 1 15 W. H. print a double parenthesis, using the dash inside the parenthetical marks. Here again Nestle has the colon instead of the dash and the full stop in lieu of the parenthetical marks. W. H. are not uniform in the indication of the parenthesis.
in
Mk.
16, 17, or the
They do it by the curved lines ( ) as dash as in Jo. 7 22; 10 12, or merely

:
:
the
comma
:
as in the short phrases like

all
^tjo-Ij'
(2 Cor. 10
10), or
again with no punctuation at

10
29).
as in the case of doKetre (Heb.
The
is
insertion of one or
two words
in the
midst of the
ttoXXoi, X7a)
sentence
v/xlv,
the simplest form of the parenthesis, like

(Lu. 13
(t>v(rlv
:
^riTrjcrovaLV
24)
and
:
ort /card dvpaiJ.LV, iJiapTvpco, Kal (2

ecj)r]
Cor. 8:3).
Cf.
(Mt. 14
8),
(Ac. 23
35), ov
^Pevdo/jiaL
(Ro.
9:1),
kv a4>po(jvvri \eyoj (2
Cor. 11
is
21), etc.
But the
insertion of
(j)r]aLv and 6(1)7] between words Language of the N. T., p. 200.
rare in the
A
(9
:
N. T. Cf. Simcox, very interesting parenthesis is

rcS
the insertion in the speech of Jesus to the paralytic, of Xe7t

Kapa\vTLK(^
(Mk. 2
10).
Mt.
6)
adds
all
roTe.
d-Ktv Tc3 TapaXeXvjjLkvco.
The Synoptists
Lu. (5 24) has had the same source

:
These phrases, common also to the ancient Greek, do not need marks of parenthesis, and the comma is sufficient. A little more extended parenthesis is found in a clause like 6voiJ.a avr^ 'looavris (Jo. 1:6), Ni/c65?7/ios opofxa avTw (Jo. 3:1), though this again may be considered merely a form of apposition. A more distinct
here.
parenthesis
fi/jLepai
still
is
the insertion of a note of time like

:
rjaav 8^
Thackeray (Gr., p. 149 note) notes a tendency in the LXX to put numeral statements in parenthesis. Note also the explanatory parenthesis in Ac. 1 15 introduced by re. Cf. also (hael i]iikpaL oktw in Lu. 9 28, which can be explained otherwise. In Mt. 24 :15 the parenthetical command of Matthew or of Jesus, 6 avayivdoaKoiv voetrco, is indicated by W. H. only with the comma. In general the historical books have fewer parentheses than the Epistles, and naturally so. In Paul it is sometimes hard to draw the line between the mere parenthesis and anacoluthon. Cf. 1 Cor. 16 5; Ro. 5 12 (18); 9:11; 15 23-28. 05;^ may look back lêyond the parenthesis as in Jo. 4:7 ff. (Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 470). See Jo. 10:35 Kal ov BvvaTai XvdrjvaL
To>v a^vp.(jov
(Ac. 12 3).
7j
7pa(/)T7.
Cf. the sharp interruption in Jo. 4
1-3.
In Gal. 2 5
:
f.
we have two
parentheses right together marked by the dash in

Cf. Lu. 23
:
W.
H.'s text, besides anacoluthon.
51, Col. 1
21
f.
for
parenthesis of
some
length.
But
see 2 Pet. 2
8 for a
still
longer
THE SENTENCE
one, not to
435
:
mention 2 Cor. 9
12;
Hcb. 7
Viteau, tude, 189G, p. 11.
As
illustrating
20 f.; Lu. 6 4. See once more the wide

:
difference of opinion concerning the parenthesis, Blass^
comments
on the harshness of the parenthesis in Ac. 5

not consider that there
in Jo. 13
is
14, while
W. H. do
a parenthesis in the sentence at all. At bottom the parenthesis in the text is a matter of exegesis. Thus
:
if
1 ff. els reXos rjyairrjaev
avTovs
be regarded as a paren-
and verses 1-5 be considered one sentence (note repetition of elddos) a much simpler construction is the result.^ Instead of a parenthesis a writer switches off to one aspect of a subject and then comes back in another sentence as Paul does in 1 Cor. 8 1-4. He resumes by the repetition of irepl dboAodvTwv oldaideu. Cf also a
thesis
:
similar resumption in
sion in verses 1-13.
Eph. 3 14 tovtov xapiv after the long digresThis construction is not, however, a technical
:
parenthesis.
(e)
Anacoluthon. But a more
violent break in the connection

is
of sentences than the parenthesis
anacoluthon.
This
it
is
merely
was begun (avaKoXovdov) The completion does not follow grammatically from the beginning. The N. T. writers are not peculiar in this matter,
the failure to complete a sentence as intended
.
when
since even in
an
artistic orator like Isocrates
such grammatical
'^
blemishes,
if
they be so considered, are found.
And
a careful
(iii.
historian like
36. 2).
Thucydides
will
have Uoêv
avTols einKakovvTes
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
stirred, as in Gal.
when he
is
greatly
are
common
in
Such violent changes in the sentence conversation and public addresses. The dialogues
examples.
and 2 Cor.
of Plato
have
many
either intentional or unintentional.
The anacoluthon may be therefore The writer may be led off by
finishing his sentence,
a fresh idea or by a parenthesis, or he may think of a better way of one that will be more effective. The very jolt that is given by the anacoluthon is often successful in making
more emphasis. The attention is drawn anew to the sentence to see what is the matter. Some of the anacolutha belong to other languages with equal pertinence, others are ])ec'uliar to the Greek
genius.
The
participle in particular
is
a very
common
occasion
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 279.

S.
Provence, Rev. and Exp., 1905, p. 96. N. T. Gk., p. 282. On the anacoluthon 6cc K.-G., Bd. pp. 588-592.
2
M.
Blass, Gr. of
II,
436
The Apocalypse, as already shown, has many examples of anacoluthon. The more important N. T. illustrations of anacoluthon will now be given. It is difficult to make a clear grouping of the examples of anacoluthon in the N. T. on
for anacoluthon.
any
1.
scientific principle.
But the following
will
answer.
the suspended
The Suspended
his share.
It
Subject.
What Abbott^
calls
subject finds illustration elsewhere than in John, though he does
have
may
be looked at indeed as suspended object
as well sometimes.
participle
is left
is that the substantive, pronoun or by the wayside and the sentence is completed some other way. Thus in ttSj' prjiJ-a apyov 6 XaXTjaovaLv ol ixvdpwvot, airoScoaovaLv irepl avTov (Mt. 12 36) observe how TOiv prjiâ is dropped In Trds ovv oarts bp.oko'yi}in the construction and xept avrov used. Kayo: kv (Mt. 10 avToo aei, otxoXoyrjaco 32) the same principle holds in regard to ttSs and kv avTQi. But in the same verse the regular
:
The point
construction obtains in
:
6<jtls apvâ-qraL
b.pvi]aoixaL
Kayu
avrov.
In
Lu. 6 47 ttSs 6 epxofxevos kt\., inrodeiô: vplv t'lvl eariv ofxoios we see a similar anacoluthon unless ttSs 6 epx- be regarded as a rather violent prolepsis of the subject, which is not so likely in this instance. In Lu. 11:11 the anacoluthon
is is
not quite so simple, though riva

If instead of riva
after all left to itself (rlva 8e e^ vfxuv rov irarepa airrjaeL 6 vlos
o.i^Tt
ix^^^j f^v
ixdvos
6(})tv
avTi2 eTrtSwcret;).
the sen-
would go smoothly except that e^ v/jloov would awkward. Observe that aW-qaeL has two accusatives slightly be without Tiva. The apodosis is introduced by p.i] and as an interrogative clause expects the answer "no." But in spite of the gramtence read
el
or kav, all
matical hopelessness of the sentence

12
:
it
has great power.
In Lu.
^rjTrjdr]-
48 the matter
is
simpler
{iravTl be
ebbdt] ttoXv,
toXv
ceraL Trap' avrov).
Here two things are

(cf.
true.
We not only have the

not
10).
ttSs.
stranded subject
wap' avrov), but
it
has been attracted into the

iravrl,
case of the relative (inverse attraction),
With
this
:
compare
17
tcLs 6s epel
a<j>edi}(Terai
avrui (Lu.
12
In 2 Cor. 12
we merely have
8l'
the anacoluthon -without any attraction, nva

(/î; nva &v aireara\Ka Here indeed o}v is attracted
expecting a verb governing the accusative

Tpos vnas, avrov ewXeoveKrYjaa
vjjLas;).
into the case of rovrcov unexpressed.

(TTJs
simpler instance
:
is 6 Mcoi;-
ovros
olbap.ev ri
eyevero avrw (Ac. 7
40; Ex. 32
1).
Blass"
finds anacoluthon in
20 {Ibdiv avrov to irvevna crvveairapaêv avrov), but surely this is merely treating irvevixa as masculine (natural gender). But in Ac. 19 34 (eiTLyvovres be on 'lovbalos eanv (jiv'fj eyevero /xla eK iravrcov) there is a clear case of anacoluthon in
9
: :
Mk.
Joh. Gr., p. 32.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 283.
THE SENTENCE
the change to
tions.
eK
is
437
wavTwv.
There
The writmgs of John show similar illustrano anacoluthon in Jo. 6 22 in the text of W. H.,
:
which reads eUov
6tl
is
instead of
real
Ibd^v otl
oTe (margin
of
W.
H.).
But
anacoluthon {irav 6 bkbwKh jiol /x-q airoKkcoi e| avTov) in the change from ttSz' to e^ avrov. It is possible to regard TTciv iiT] here^ as equivalent to ovSels and not like irds in Jo. 3 16. In 7 38 another suspended subject is found in 6 irtin 6
:
39 there
/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.
thon,
if
In 15:2 wav
KXrjiJLa
avro we have very slight anacolube in the same case

(cf.
any, since both
may
resumptive
</>epet)
use of
ovTos).
But
in 15: 5 the
matter
efxol
is
complicated by the in.
sertion of Kayo: ev avrQ (6 ixkvwv kv
Kaych kv avTW ovtos
In
17:2
i/yuets
(ttSj^
dedwKas
aiirc^ 8coaeL
:
avrols)
we have
(xtt'
the more usual anaapxvs

ev v/juu /jLevercS)
coluthon.
In
Jo. 2
24
(ij/xets
6 rjKomaTe
may
be merely prolepsis, but this seems

air'
less likely in verse
27
(v/JieLS
TO xplaixa b eXd/3ere
u/xets
avTOV
fjihei kv vjja.v)
:
where note the
position of
(6 vLKwv
and
:
kv
vixtv.
In Rev. 2
26 the anacoluthon
differ from some of those above.^ So but in 2 7, 17 (rw vlkojvtl Swao) avTw) the case is the same and may be compared with Jo. 15 2, 5. Cf. the probable reading (W. H. bracket avTcS) in Rev. 6 4 as well as Mt. 6 4 (LXX) 5 40 (tw OeXovn avrui), where there is no real anacoluthon, but a resumptive use of avrQ. Cf. also vfxds repeated
Scocrco
avrco)
does not
also as to
Rev. 3
12, 21,
after parenthesis in Col. 1
22.
:
The
15.
LXX
A
has other similar ex-
amples
o)
like Josh. 9
12; Ps. 103
similar resumptive use of

:
occurs in the text (not marg. in
W.
H.) of Ro. 16 27.
In a sim-
ilar
way a
Cf.
relative clause
:
may
be
ixi]
left as
a suspended subject or
object, as in Lu. 9
avTobs.
5,
:
oaoi av
bkx'^VTai vixas
8,
aTOTLvdaaere
and the
22).
7r'
Mt. 10
eis
14; Lu. 10
10.
Cf. this with the very

participle,
common use
2.
of resumptive ovtos after the article

reXos ovtos cco^Tytrerat
like 6 VTOfxelvas
(Mt. 10
Digression.
is
somewhat more complicated kind
of anacolu-
where a digression is caused by an intervening sentence or explanatory fV.ûse. Those naturally occur mainly in the Epistles of Paul where his energy of thought and passion of soul overleap all trammels. In Jo. 5 44 the participle is dropped for the indica:
thon
tive ^r}TLTe.
In Jo. 21
12
{ovdels kToKjia tCjv fxadrjrccv eêrdcrai
avrov
Xi) ris el; el56res)

1
the question breaks the smooth flow autl

p. 283. p. 283, calls
it
=
eiSores
p. 33.
Blass, Gr. of
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk., N. T. Gk.,
Abbott, Job. Gr.,
a "very
awkward
instance."
438

ovdels
agrees in case with
and number with

I'm
/iiy
nad-qruv.
With
this
compare the change from

tive
firj
aipcjav in
Mk.
8 to the
infini-
tvbvaaadaL in verse 9.
Nestle has, however,
kvbhaiqade.
In
Mk.
19 (Kadapi^cov iravra
to. iSpcb/zara)
the participle can be con-
nected in thought, as Mark probably did, with Xe7et in verse 18, but the intervening quotation makes Mark's explanatory adden-
a real anacoluthon. The example in Jo. 1 15 Abbott^ calls "impressionism" due to the writer's desire to make his impression He compares first and then to add the explanatory correction. 4 1 with 3 22. In 1 15 ovtos rjv 6p dirov is taken by Abbott as a part of the Baptist's statement, but W. H. read ovtos rjv 6 elTcou as a parenthetical remark of the writer. So in Jo. 20 18 Kal ravra
dum
elirep avrfj
does not
is
fit
in exactly after
on
'Ewpa/ca tov kvplop.
The
of
added clause the Ac. 10 36 (W. H.) with

:
comment of John, not

6p is
:
of
Mary. The margin

6p
/cat
a case of anacoluthon, but the text

leaves evpop-
itself is
without
off
6v.
In Ac. 24 6 the repetition of

.
:
from eKpariiaanep In Ac. 27 10 (decopC) ort neWeip) the res the infinitive, phenomenon clause is changed a noted by to oTi Winer- in Plato, Gorg. 453 b. The anacoluthon in Gal. 2 6 (oltto 5e
cut
:
T03V
SoKOVVTWP elpal Ti
oTToloi TTore ^crap ovb'ep
/jlol
Staêpei
irpdacjoirop 6
Beds apdponrov oh
is
XaîjSdi'et
ep.OL
yap
ol
8okovpts ov8ep irpoaapedePTo)
noteworthy
for the
complete change of construction as shown by

in the
the repetition of the
ol SoKovpres
the middle instead of the passive voice.

theses that led to the variation.
It
is
nominative and followed by Observe the two pareneasier in such a case to make
a new start, as Paul does here. In Gal. 2:5 Blass^ follows D in omitting oh in order to get rid of the anacoluthon, as he does also in Ro. 16 27 (w), but it is more than likely that the difficulty of the anacoluthon with oh led to the omission in D. One of the most striking anacolutha in Paul's Epistles is found at the end of Ro. 5 12
: :
where the apodosis to the
coairep
clause
is
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
rjKovaaiJiep.
Winer* seems to be wrong

:
in finding
an anacoluthon
is
in
the long sentence in 2 Pet. 2

in verse 9 (verse
1
The apodosis 8 being a long parenthesis as W. H.

4-10.
^
really olSep
rightly punc-
Job. Gr., p. 34.
Qr. of
N. T. Gk., p. 284.
p. 569.
W.-Th.,
p. 573.
W.-Th.,
THE SENTENCE
tuate).
439
anacoluthon
However, Winer
is justified
in refusing to see
in many passages formerly so regarded and that call for no disSee further Mt. 7:9; 12 36; Mk. 2 28; 7 3 f. cussion now.
:
12:8, 10; 21:6; Jo. 6:39; 17: 18; Ac. 15: 22 ff. Lu. 11:11 24 20; 26 3; Ro. 16 25-27; 1 Cor. 9 15; Col. 2 2 19 34; 3 Eph. 4 6; 8; 2 Cor. 7 5; 1 Th. 4 1; Heb. 3 15; 10 15 f.
f.;
: : : : :
:
Tim.
3.
3-5; Ju. 16.
It
is
very
common
in the
Apocalypse as
in 2 Corinthians
and Galatians.
The Participle in Anacolutha. It calls for a word of its own matter of anacoluthon, although, as a matter of fact, it occurs in both the kinds of anacoluthon already noticed. The
in the
reason
is,
renders
it
the free use of the participle in long sentences (cf Paul) peculiarly subject to anacoluthon. The point with the
.
participle
sense.
is
not that
:
it is
a special kind of anacoluthon in any other

fxr]
Gal. 6
1,
KaTapTiêre, (JKOTTWV creavTOV,
Kal
av reipaadyj^
may
be regarded as anacoluthon in the change of number, but it is a natural singling-out of the individual in the application. In 2 Cor. 5 12 the ellipsis of ypcKpofxev ravra with didovres is so harsh as to
:
amount
Cf also dXclSofxevoi in 2 Cor. 7:5. It is about areWonevoL in 2 Cor. 8 20, for, skipping the long parenthesis in verse 19, we have aweirkixypaiiev. But in the parenthesis itself xî-porop7]dtis is an example of anacoluthon, for regularly exetpoTovTjdr] would be the form. In 2 Cor. 9:11, 13, the participles TrXovTiôfxepoL and Soâôvres have no formal connection with a principal verb and are separated by a long parenthesis in verse 12. But these participles may be after all tantamount to the
to anacoluthon.
.
less certain
indicative
mid. ind.)
and not mere anacoluthon. Just as sequimini (sec. pi. iironepoL, so other Greek participles may correspond to the indicative or imperative.^ Moulton^ cites numerous examples from the papyri which make this possible for the kolvt}. But Moulton'' sees a sharp difference between the "hanging nominative" like exoiv o vofxos in Heb. 10 1 (if bbvavTai be accepted, W. H. dwarai marg.) and exoptes in Ph. 1 30, where, however, W. H. make a long parenthesis and seek to connect exovTs with These are indeed mere anacolutha, but one aT7]KTe (verse 27). wonders if the connection between these and Ro. 12 6 {'IxovTes) is
so very distant after
all.
Participles are scattered along in this
chapter in an "unending series"^ mingled with infinitives and imperatives. Thus in 12 9-13 we have participles, verse "14 the
:
lb., p.
571.
Prol., p. 223.
'1\ C.k.,
]).
2
s
Moulton,
Bliiss,
lb.
lb., p.
225.
Cr. of N.
2S5.
440
imperative, verse 15 infinitive, verse 16 ^ participles, 16^ imperative,
17 participles.
Here the
participle does
seem to be
In 2 Cor. 6
practi-
cally equivalent to the imperative (cf. inf. also).
See Participle
:
(Verbal Nouns) for discussion of this point.

participles skip over verse 2
3 the
verse
1,
and
it is
resumed
in
and carry on the construction of verse 9. For a group of participles

:
:
with the imperative see Eph. 5

point
is
15-22. Cf. also Col. 3 16. The that these various gradations in the use of the participle
As regards the nominative parthan the genitive absolute, Winer ^ remarks that thus the participle gains greater prominence in the sentence. In Eph. 4 2 avexofjLevoL may not be anacoluthon, but may be in accord with ^s kKXrjdrjTe. Col. 1 26 is the case of the indicative rather than a participle (k4)avepw9r], not ireâvepwiikvov) See 1 Cor. 7:37 where excoj/ is succeeded by exî, but (W. H.) eyeipas Kal Kadlaas (Eph. 1: 20). Cf. Rev. 2:2, 9. As to Heb. 8: 10 (10: 16) ScSohs is explained by Winer ^ as referring to had-qaop-ai without anacoluthon, while Moulton^ considers it equal to an indicative and parallel to ewt.ypa^'co. I am inclined to agree with Winer on this
are not always clearly defined.
ticiple rather
:
point. In 2 Cor. 5 6 ff. Paul, after using dappovvres, repeats it in the form of dappovnev because of the intermediate clauses before he expresses evSoKovfiev, the main verb.^ Finally compare c0' ov av
:
'L8j]s
TO Tvev/JLa Karaâlvov
/cat
p-hov ex' avTov (Jo. 1
33) wath to irvevpa
KaTaâtvov ws repiaTepav k^ ovpavov, Kal epeLvev
ctt'
avTov (verse 32),
where the last clause is the comment of the Baptist to give special emphasis to that point, more than the participle would. 4. Asyndeton Due to Absence of 8e and akXa. Winer'^ considers
de or dXXd to correspond with ph as a species of anacoluthon, and Blass^ shares the same idea. As a matter of fact (see chapter on Particles) ph does not require 8e either by et>inol-
the absence of
ogy or usage.
It
is
rather gratuitous to call such absence an in-
stance of anacoluthon.
The examples
will
be discussed
later,
such
as Ac. 1:1; 13:4; Ro. 11:13, etc.

(/)
1.
Oratio Variata.
Distinction from Anacoluthon.

to. aKevrj
line
between anacoluthon and
oratio variata is
kirl
not very clearh' drawn.

avTOV
kv tt}
os,
Thus
m Lu. 17: 31
Cf.
1
(^6%
earat
tov 8copaTos Kal
olda) the second clause
cannot repeat the relative

:
use avTQv.
Kol avT(hv).
1
Cor. 8
1
(e^ o5
Kal
:
but has to
:
eis ai'Tov),
2 Pet. 2
r^rts.
3 {oh
So also in
p. 572.
Cor. 7
3 4
13
avTrjs
repeats
Cf.
Rev.
W.-Th.,
lb., p.
Prol., p. 224.
lb.
573.
W.-Th., p. 573.
Op.
cit.,
p. 286.
THE SENTENCE
17
is
:
441
d7ro5cb(Ti
2.
In Ro. 2
ff .
after the relative clause os
there
a subdivision of the object, on the one
alwviov), on the other (rots 5e abLKia opyy) /cat dv/jLos) where the nominative changes the construction and os cannot here be repeated. In Ro. 11 22 indeed both of the phrases that extend the
^(jii}v
:
hand
(rots ixev
^rjTovatv
are put in the nominative Paul changes from kare to This is all oratio variata in reality and is in accord with the ei. ancient Greek idiom. Blass^ considers Tit. 1 2 f an instance of oraiio variata, but t6v \6yov in all probability is to be regarded as in apposition with r/v, which is the object both of eTrriyyeLXaTo and Thus W. H., but Nestle agrees with Blass. e(t)avepwaev.
accusatives xPV^TorriTa Kol

{airoToula,' xpriaTOT-qi) .
a-KOToixlav deov
:
In Gal. 4
f.
2.
is
Heterogeneous Structure.
it
That
is
what
oratio variata really
can be illustrated by a number of passages other than the relative and with less element of obscurity about them. In Rev. 2 18 6 exwi/ is followed by Kal avrov just hke the relative sentences above. Thus also 2 Jo. 2. In Rev. 7 9 after eUov Kal iSov we find a mixed construction, oxXos earcbres (constr. /card ahveaiv) with Iboh, Winer^ rightly distinguishes the varia7repLl3e^\r](j.evovs with eUov. tion in case in Rev. 18 12 f. (gen., ace, gen., ace.) and the similar phenomenon in Rev. 2:17 where there is a real distinction between
and
the use of the genitive and the accusative.

nkvovs in
The use
of virodede-
Mk.
is
probably due to the
ellipse of wopeveadaL, for
the correct text has
ait)
hSvaaadai just after. For similar ellipse and
oratio variata see 2 Cor. 8 :23.

it
InMk.
12 :38 after OeXovrwv KepL-irardv

affiraa/xovs,
looks like a sudden change to find
but after
it
all
both
3
:
are in the accusative with deXovrov.

is
The
irregularity in
Mk.
16
met
in the text of
W. H. by
a parenthesis, but
could have
been cleared up also by & (referring to JJerpov instead of Kal as Winer ^ suggests). In Jo. 8: 53 the continuity of the interrogative form of sentence is abruptly broken by the short clause /cat oi wpo(jjrJTaL axkdavov, a very effective interruption, however. The case of 1 Jo. 2 2 is simple where instead of irepl rojv 6\ov tov kogixov (to be parallel with oh wepl rwv r}p.iTkpwv) John has merely -wepl
:
6\ov TOV
Koa/jLov,
a somewhat different conception.

:
similar ex-
amph;
{inr^p
is
ouCTt )Lter'
found in Ac. 20 34 as between rats xp^âts /lov and toTs Heb. 9 7 furnishes the same point in inverse ordrr kfiov.
:
tavTOv
/cat
tcou
tov Xaov ayuo-qfiaTcop).

:
lack of parallel
is
shown
also in Ph. 2
22
ljetvve(!n Trarpt TeKPov
and avp
th(>
eôl wliere
Paul purposely puts in

the figure.
1
aw
:
to break a too literal carrying out of

i)arenthesis has
In Rev.
6 the correct text in

2
Gr. of N. T.
C.k., p. 2SG.
W.-Tli., p. 579.
n,.
442
rifias

âaiKelav, tepels rep de^,
:
a different conception from
/Sao-tXeis.
See further Ac. 16
16
f.
3. Participles in Oratio Variata. These offer a frequent occasion for oratio variata, since they can so often be used parallel with subordinate clauses of various kinds. Thus in Jo. 5 44
:
would naturally be followed by ^rjTovvTes, but we have ^T]TelTe. So, on the other hand, in 1 Cor. 7 13 Kal awevdoKel does not fit in as smoothly with ainaTov as /cat avvevdoKovpra would. The
Xa/xâvouTes
:
is seen in Jo. Kay 6)) and in Lu. 17:31 where the relative and the participle are paired off. So also Ph. 1 23 and 1 Jo. 3 24. Cf the Participle in Anacolutha. In Ro. 12 6 f. participles and sub-
same lack
15
:
of parallel in the use of the participle
(6 nevcav
stantives are placed in antithesis, as in 2 Cor. 6

participles, in 4-7^
ciples.
tv,
:
in
7*^ f.
if.
Cf. 2 Cor. 11
23
we have and partiwhere adverbs, adjuncts and verbs

:
ha, in 9
f.
adjectives
are in antithesis.
Exchange of Direct and Indirect Discourse. But the most is that between direct and indirect discourse. It is either from the indirect to the direct or from the direct to the indirect. As Blass^ justly observes, the N. T. writers, like all popular narrators, deal very little in indirect dis4.
striking instance of oratio variata
course.
The
accusative and the infinitive

is 6tl
old sense nor
is not common in the always the sign of indirect quotation. Fre-
quently
Xeyet.
it is merely recitative otl and corresponds to our quotationmarks, as in Mk. 14 14, elirare tw olKoSecnroTri otl '0 StSacrKaXos
: :
So also v/xeh Xeyere otl /SXao-^Tj^teis (Jo. 10 36). This reversion to one form of discourse from another is not unknown to
the ancient Greek. But it is peculiarly in harmony with the N. T. vernacular and essentially vivid narrative style. In Lu. 5 14 we have a typical instance of the change from indirect to direct dis:
course (xapriyYeikev
Tov irarpos
aiiTui ij.r]8eul eiireiv,

is
dXX' aTreXdcbv Selôv aeavTOv).

TrepLixeveiv ttjv
Exactly parallel with this

riv
Ac.
4 dXXd
eTayyeXlav
:
rjKovaare pov
where observe
/jlov.
where after 5ieXeâro otl 6 'Ir]aovs Luke concludes with the direct words of Paul 6p eycj KaTayyeWw vptv. In Jo. 13 29 we have the reverse process where the writer drops from the direct to the in:
Cf. also Ac. 17
direct statement (aySpaaov wv

ttojxo'ls Lva tl 5(3).
XP^'-O-^
exo/xev els ttjv eoprrjv,
rj
rots
So also we see the same thing
in Ac. 23
{eTOLpdaaTe
in Ac. 23
Xô-ai ort
:
23
f.
ttjs
vvktos, KT7]vr] re TapaaTrjaaL Iva
bLacrwacoaLv),
But
:
ravra
22 the other change occurs, as TapayyeiXas prjded kXakpecpduLa-as irpos kpe. In W. H.'s text of Ro. 12
1
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 2S6.
THE SENTENCE
1
f.
443
fxri
-aSai).
we have irapaKoXu} vfj.3.s In Mk. 11 32 the

:
irapacrrriaai.' Kal
avv(TXfl^>-o.Tlâde
liis
(not
writer proceeds with
own remarks
(k(j)oôvvTo Tov
oxKov) after the question rather in the nature of ana:
coluthon, though in Mt. 21
26
(})oôvixtda is
:
read as indeed a few
MSS. do
into
Mark. So also Mt. 9 6, where the writer injects the words of Jesus rore Xeyei tc3 TapaXvTLKui, we probably have
in
(d),
anacoluthon rather than cranio fan'af a (see

(g)
Parenthesis).
So far we have been considering the matter of connection between the various parts of the same sentence, whether simple or complex, and the various comphcations that arise. But this is not all. The
Greeks, especially in the literary style,
felt
Connection between Separate Sentences.
the propriety of indiartistic device,
cating the inner relation of the various independent sentences that
This was not merely an but a logical expression of coherence of thought.
composed a paragraph.
Kai, be,
Particles like
in this connec-
dXXd, yap,
ovv,
8r},
etc.,
were very
common
tion. Demonstrative pronouns, adverbs, and even relative pronouns were also used for this purpose. I happen to open at Mt. 24 32-51 a paragraph of some length. The first sentence begins with 8k. The sentences in verses 33 and 34 have asyndeton and so are without a connective. In verse 36 8e reappears, while the two sentences in verses 37 and 38 both have yap. Verse 40 begins with Tore, a common word in this usage in Matthew, as h abrrj rfj chpa is in Luke. Verse 42 begins with ovp as its connective, while 43 drops back to 8e. In 44 Slo. tovto answers as a link of union while 45 uses apa. Verses 46 f. have asyndeton while 48 has 8e. This long sentence completes the paragraph save the short sentence in verse 51 introduced by ket. I think this paragraph a fair sample of the didactic portion of the Gospels. Asyndeton occurs, but it is not the rule. In the Gospel of John ovv is a much more frequent connective between sentences than Kai, as any chapter (11 for instance) will show. The Beatitudes (Mt. 5:3-12) have no connectives at all, and are all the more effective because of the asyndeton. Winer^ finds this didactic asyndeton common also in James, the Gospel of John (cf 14-17) and 1 John. But asyndeton is sometimes
: .
noticeable also in the non-didactic portions of John, as 20: 14-18.
No
formal rules on the subject can be made, as the individual speaker or writer follows his mood of the moment in the matter. The point is to observe that, while asyndeton often occurs, in
gen(!ral
Greek writers even
in the
N. T. use connectives between

p. 53G.
separate sentences.
W.-Th.,
444
(h)

Connection between Paragraphs. It is only natural and unite paragraph with
For a discussion of the origin of the paragraph see
to carry the matter one step further
paragraph.
The paragraphs in our printed Greek texts are partly the work of the modern editors,
the chapter on Orthography and Phonetics.
yet not wholly
so.
But even
in real or original paragraphs the
connection varies greatly.
an
entirely
new
In some there will be none at all, but theme will be presented, whereas with others we
merely have a new aspect of the same subject. I happen to turn The chapter opens with /uerd raOra, a to the sixth chapter of John. real connective that refers to the incidents in chapter 5, which may have been a full year before. The next paragraph in W. H. begins At verse 22 there is no connective exat verse 14 and has ovv. cept T7j kirahpiov which may be compared with the roTf: of Matthew. The paragraph at verse 41 has ovv again, which is very common in John in this connection, as can be seen illustrated also in verses 52 and 60. At verse 66 the paragraph begins with Ik tovtov, a real
connective.
If
we go
into chapter 7
we
find Kal in verse
1, 8e
in
verse 10,
5e
again in verse 14, ovv in verse 25, no connective in verse

the whole
is
Asyndeton on more frequent in the Gospel of John than in Abbott 2 gives a detailed discussion of Gospels.^ asyndeton in John. In Paul's Epistles one would
32, de in verse 37, ovu in verse 45.
rather
the Synoptic
the kinds of
expect
little
asyndeton between the paragraphs especially in the argumentative portions. In general this is true, and yet occasionally even in Ro. asyndeton is met as in 9 1; 13 1. But in chapter 8 every paragraph has its connective particle. Note also ovv in 12 1 at the
:
:
beginning of the hortatory portion after the long preceding arguis freedom in the individual For Hort's theory of the paragraph see expression on 319. By means of spaces he has a system Gr., Intr. to N. T. in p. is plain in the text of W. H. of sub-paragraphs, as There are things to be considered in Forecast. other XIII. enough has been treated in of the sentence, but construction the examination remains in is the minute What syntax chapter. this pronouns, verbs in words (cases, prepositions, relations of of the relations participles), the tense, infinitives and voice and and mood
ment.
As between
sentences, there
the subject.
of clause with clause in the use of subordinating conjunctions, the particles, figures of speech (aposiopesis, ellipsis, paronomasia, zeugma, etc.). There is a natural order in the development of
these matters which will be followed as far as possible in the dis1
Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 70
f.
lb.
Cf. W.-Th., p. 537.
THE SENTENCE
cussion of syntax.
445
The
individual words
of sentences or clauses.
come before the relation In the discussion of words either nouns
or verbs could be taken

closely
up first, but, as verbs are connected more with conjunctions than nouns they are best treated just
Prepositions are properly discussed a variation of the demonstrative pronoun. But at best no treatment of syntax can handle every aspect and phase of language. The most that can be achieved is a presafter cases.
before conjunctional clauses.
The
article is
entation of the essential principles of N. T. syntax so that the student will be able to interpret his Greek N. T. according to correct grammatical principles derived from the living language
of the time.
CHAPTER XI
THE CASES
I.
(HTfiSEIS)
History of the Interpretation of the Greek Cases. Perhaps nowhere has confusion been worse (o) Confusion.
confounded than in the study of the Greek cases. The tendency has been usually to reason backwards and to explain past phenomena by present conditions. The merely logical method of syntax
has turned the pyramid on
into
its
apex and has brought untold error
grammar.
The' Stoics took interest in
grammar
for philo-
and gave the logical bent to it in lieu of the hisDionysius Thrax and Apollonius Dyscolus went off on torical. the wrong trail in the matter of the Greek cases. Bopp brought dayhght out of (6) Bopp's Contribution. darkness by comparative grammar. Hiibschmann^ gives an adsophical purposes
mirable history of the matter.
He
illustrates the eight cases
copiously from the Sanskrit, Zend and Persian.
Thanks now
to
such workers as Schleicher, Brugmann, Delbriick, the eight IndoGermanic cases are well wrought out and generally acknowledged. Cf. brief discussion of the forms of the Greek cases in chapter
VH
(Declensions).
Greek grammarians
still
differ,
however, in the
terminology applied to the cases.

bridge scholars issued a tract
In 1911 the Oxford and
Cam-
"On
Terminology
in
Grammar,"
but confusion still reigns. See also W. Havers, Untersuchungen zur Kasussyntax der indog. Sprachen. When the Stoic grammarians wrote, the genitive and ablative had the same forms, and the locative, instrumental and dative likewise. There were occasional survivals of distinction like oUol
and
o'Ikco,
Cypriotic
instrumental apa and dative dpat, etc.
But
in general the
work
of
syncretism was complete in the respects just mentioned, though

Hiibschmann, Zur Casuslehre, p. v. lb. Cf Dewischeit, Zui Theorie der Casus (1857) Rumpel, Die Casuslehre (1875). Hadley (Essays Phil, and Crit., Gk. Gen. as Abl., p. 46) speaks of "the Beckerite tendency, too frequently apparent in Kiihner, to impose a meaning on language rather than educe the meaning out of it."
^
446
THE CASES
in
(IITHSEIS)
447
Arcadian the genitive and the locative took the same form^ Latin Romae, domi). But the grammarians, ignorant of the history of the language, sought to explain the genitive and ablative ideas from a common source. Thus Winer ^ boldly calls the genitive the "whence-case" and undertakes to explain every usage of the genitive from that standpoint, a hopeless exercise in grammat(of.
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. Some modern grammarians^ help mat(c) Modern Usage. ters a good deal by saying true genitive, ablatival genitive, true
dative, locatival dative, instrumental dative.
nises the real case-distinctions
and the
historical
This custom recogoutcome. But
some confusion
never
remains because the locative and the dative same thing and are not the same thing in fact. It partly depends on whether one is to apply the term "case" to the ending or to the relation expressed by the ending. As a matter of fact the term is used both ways. "Ovo/xa is called
still
mean
exactly the
indiscriminately nominative, vocative or accusative, according to
the facts in the context, not nominatival accusative or accusatival
nominative.
So with âaiXels or TroXeis. We are used to this in it seems a shock to say that TroXecos may be either genitive or ablative, that kfioi may be either locative, instrumental or dative. But why more of an absurdity than in the case of ovofxa and TroXets? The only difference is that in the gen.-abl. the syncretism of form applies to all Greek words. For various examples of syncretism in the forms of the Greek cases with fragments of distinctive endings also see Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 375 f.; Brugmann, Kurze vergl. Gr., II, p. 420 f.; and chapter VII (Declensions).
the grammars, but
Green's Classification. I agree with Green,-* whom I quote at some length: "I shall classify the uses of the cases under the heads of the Aryan Cases, as in every instance the true method of explanation of any particular idiom is to trace its connection to the general meaning of the original Aryan case, to which the case in Greek or Latin corresponds, and not arbitrarily to distinguish the uses of any case in (îreek or Latin by terms
{d)
shall here
which cannot be properly applied to tliat case; e. g., the term dative of manner is no explanation. Manner cannot be expressed
1
Hoffmann, Grioch.
Cf. Babbitt,
Dial.,
Bd.
I,
p. 303.
w.-Th.,
p.
184
f.
>
Clr.
of Attic
and Ionic Gk., 1902.

1S)7, p. 11.
Notes on Gk. and Lat. Synt.,
448 by the
is

true dative case.
NEW TESTAMENT
The correct explanation is that the use instrumental case in Greek has coalesced instrumental, but the
form with the dative. This method of explanation has the advantage of demanding fewer set terms, while at the same time it requires a logical connection to be made between the particular use in question and the fundamental meaning of the case involved. Such an explanation is the better the simpler the words used in it are." This is wonderfully well said and has the advantage of being true, a remark not always true of grammatical comments. It
in
is
the
method
of history, of science, of
life.
It is the
method pur-
sued in the etymology and history of a word. It is the only way to get at the truth about the significance of the Greek cases. This method of interpretation (e) Syncretism of the Cases. does not ignore the syncretism of the cases. On the other hand
it
accents sharply the blending of the forms while insisting on the
integrity of the case-ideas.
There are indeed some instances where
either of the blended cases will

vipwdels
make
sense, like
rrj
de^ta rod 6eov
(Ac. 2
33),
which
may be
locative 'exalted at,' instrumen-
tal 'exalted by,' or
dative 'exalted to' (a rare idiom and in the
older Greek), 'the right
hand
of God.'
Cf. also
rfj eX7r[5t eaooO-rjiJLev
(Ro. 8: 24).
So
in
Heb. 12:11 x^pSj and Xvmjs
may
be explained
But such occasional ambiguity is not surprising and these instances on the "border-line" made syncretism possible. In general the context makes it perfectly
either as genitive or ablative.
is meant, just as in English depend on the order of the words to show the difference between nominative and accusative. Yet no one would say that nominative and accusative are the same in English and French.^ As a matter of fact it was often (/) Freedom in Use of Case. immaterial whether a writer or speaker used one of several ways of expressing himself, for the Greek allows liberty and flexibility at many points. Thus to yevos and ra5 yevec would either answer
clear
which
of the syncretistic cases
and French we have
to
for the specifying idea, TpoaKweoo is
used with either accusative or
dative,
fxifxvijaKoiJLat
with accusative or genitive, etc.^

is
But
this
is
not to say that one construction
with the other. The difference may (Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 66). Moulton properly
^
used for another or is identical be "subtle, no doubt, but real"

(i6.)
cites the
p. 75, illustrates
the rapid disappearance of
case-endings in the Irish tongue, which as late as I/a.d. had a full set of inflections, whereas by the fifth century only traces of the dat. plur. survive.
2
W.-Th.,
p. 180.
THE CASES
(nxfiSEis)
449
aKovoi in
well-known distinction between the accusative and genitive with Ac. 9 7 and 22 9 as disproof of apparent self-contradiction and a gentle hint not to be too ready to blur over case-dis: :
Luke or elsewhere in the N. T. He notes also genitive and accusative with yeveadau in Heb. 6 4 f and the common use of ets with accusative after verbs of rest and kv with locative even after verbs of motion. But it is hazardous to insist always on a clear distinction between els and h, for they are really originally the same word. The point is that by different routes one may reach practically the same place, but the routes are different. Indeed
tinctions in
:
.
one
may
take so
many
different standpoints that the border-lines

close sometimes.
all
of the cases
come very
apLarepq. (loc), eis apiaT^pav (acc.) are
So e^ apuarepas (abl.), h good Greek for 'on the left'

'
(we have also in English 'at the left/ 'to the n. The Purpose of the Cases.
(a)
left')-^
Aristotle's Usage. He applied the term tttwo-is to verb, noun, adverb, etc., but the later grammarians spoke only^ of the TTTcoats opoixaros, though as a matter of fact adverbs and prepositions are in cases, and even conjunctions and other particles are usually in cases. But in ordinary parlance substantives, adjectives, pronouns, the article are in cases and have inflection. The cases originally had to do only with these. The adverbs were
merely later modifications or fixed case-forms. The cases were used to express word(h) Word-Relations.
relations, the endings serving to
make
it
plain
what the
particular
case was.
relations
The
isolating languages, like the Chinese,
show such
by the order of the words and the tone in pronunciation. and French use prepositions chiefly besides the English Modern
order of the words.
These word-relations concern substantives in substantives, with adjectives, with prepother with their relations So adjectives and pronouns have all verbs. with and ositions whether verb or substantive is immaterial is It relations. these with a substantive. In the old case of a use the in earliest the
Sanskrit practically
eight cases.
all
the word-relations are expressed by the
This was a very simple plan, but as language became more complicated a great strain was bound to be put on each of these cases in order to convey clearly so many resultant ideas. As a matter of fact the ground-meaning of the case-forms is not
known.^
1
On
Origin of Case-Forms see chapter VII,
i,
2, (c).
* '
Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 07. Cf. Stcinthal, G(\s(;h. der Sprachw., p. 259; Ilubschin., Zur Casusl., p.
3.
Brugmann, Gricch.
Gr., p. 374.
450
ni.
(a)

The Encroachment
NEW TESTAMENT
on the Cases.
the cases was too great.
of Prepositions
The Reason. The burden upon

in the later Sanskrit a
Even came
were
number
of set case-forms (adverbs)
to be used with
some
of the cases to
make
clearer the exact
relations of words, whereas in the older Sanskrit

felt to
no such helpers
be needed. This was the beginning of prepositions. Prepositions have a wrong name. They do not come before anything essentially, and just as often in Homer came after the noun.
Indeed
dfifxaTo^v airo is
not anastrophe, but the original type.^
Nor
was the preposition originally used with verbs. The preposition is merely an adverb that is used with nouns or in composition with verbs. But more ^bout that hereafter (Prepositions). The point to note here is that when the burden upon the cases grew too great adverbs were called in to make clearer the meaning of the case in harmony with the analytic tendency of language.^ These adverbs chd not (6) No ''Governing" of Cases.
govern
cases.
They were merely
the accidental concomitants,
more or
less constant, of certain cases.
At
best "the cases could
express relationship only in a very general way.
Hence arose the

the meaning more
use of adverbs to go with cases in order to

specific.
make
These adverbs, which we now
call prepositions, in
time
became the constant concomitants of some cases; and when this has happened there is an ever-increasing tendency to find the important part of the meaning in the preposition and not in the
case-ending."^
nutshell.
This quotation from Giles puts the matter in a In spite of the average grammarian's notion that prepit is is
ositions govern cases,
osition in question
in
not true. The utmost is that the prepharmony with the case in question.^
These prepositions were not (c) Not Used Indifferently. used indifferently with all the cases. They are, of course, imposBut the nominative may be used with sible with the vocative. such adverbs, not called prepositions by the grammarians because it seems difficult to explain a preposition "governing" the nominative. But Paul does not hesitate to say vwep e7co (2 Cor. 1 1 23) where the change of accent is to be noted. Cf. also els Kara eh
:
(Mk. 14
19), Kad' els
(Ro. 12
5).
It is
ositions are [see xii, (/)] used with the true dative
1 3
not certain that any prepand few with
Giles,
lb., p.
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., p. 341.
lb.
272 f. ^ Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. S>Tit., I, p. 173. Farrar (Gk. S>Tit., p. 94 f.) puts the matter succinctly " It is the case which borrows the aid of the preposition, not the preposition which requires the case."
:
THE CASES
the instrumental
(a/ia, avi').
(nTflSEIs)
451
is
Giles ^ denies that the genitive
ever
used with a preposition. Certainly what is called the geniProbably kwi and tive with prepositions is often the ablative. Naturally the cases that avri are used with the real genitive.
are
more
local in idea
hke the locative ('where'), the accusais
tive ('whither')
which
partly local, the instrumental ('where-
and the ablative ('whence') are those that are most frequently supplemented by prepositions.^ Originally most of (d) Original Use with Local Cases.
with')
the prepositions were used with either of these local cases (loc,
instr., abl.).
them continued to be so used even in come up again under the head of Prepositions, but we may note here that exi and xapa are the only prepositions that use three cases with any frequency^ in the N. T., and in the case of kiri it is probably the true genitive, not the ablaUpos has accusative 679 times, locative 6, and ablative 1 tive. (Ac. 27 34, a hterary example).^ The bulk of those that have two
of
Some few
the N. T.
This matter
will
are narrowing
down
d/i</)t
to one case^ while dm,
clptL,
els,
h,
irpo
have
only one, and
has disappeared save in composition.

is
If this
is
N. T.
situation,
which
amply supported by the papyri,
com-
pared with the usage of Homer, the contrast will be very great.'' To carry the matter a step further one may note that in late
Greek there is a constant tendency for all prepositions to be used with the accusative, so that in modern Greek vernacular all the
tive.^
"proper" prepositions are regularly employed with the accusaThe occasional LXX use of aw + accusative, while a mere
(e)
was in line with this tendency. Increasing Use of PRErosiTioNS. The constantly increasing use of prepositions is one of the main reasons for the blending of the case-forms. This was already partly apparent in the Sanskrit in the assimilation of genitive and ablative singular and in the plural of ablative and dative. So the Latin locative, dative, ablative, instrumental, in most words merged their forms. Moulton** accents the fact that it was the local cases (loc, abl., instr.) in the Greek that first gave way in their endings. That is
error,
true with the exception of the accusative (not a purely local
Man. of Comp. Pliilol., lb. But Monro, Iloin.

Moulton,
Cf.
Prol., p. lOd
p. 341.
Gr., p. 125, correctly udinita the gen.

"
f. ff.
lb.
lb., p.
105
f.
' '
Monro,
GO
Iloni. (!r., pp. 125
Thumb,
Pro!., p.
Ilandb., p. 9S; Junn., Hist. Ck. dr., p. 366.

f.
452
case),
NEW TESTAMENT
which has shown more persistence than any case save the The genitive is a non-local case and has held on, though the dative has disappeared in modern Greek vernacular before els + accusative, the accusative without eis, and the genitive. But this break-down of the case-endings seen in Sanskrit, much more apparent in Greek and Latin, has reached its climax in modern English and French. In modern English the six Anglo-Saxon endings, barring pronouns, have disappeared save one, the genitive (s), and even that can be expressed by the prep. of. In French the process is complete except in prons. Modern Greek vernacular shows the influence of this tendency very decidedly. The Greek of the N. T. comes therefore in the middle of the stream of this analytic tendency. In the old Sanskrit it was all case and no preposition. In modern French it is all preposition and no caseending. The case-ideas have not disappeared. They are simply expressed more minutely and exactly by means of prepositions. By and by the case-endings were felt to be useless as the preposition was looked to entirely for the idea. The case without prepgenitive.
osition belongs to the early stage of language history.^
When
Delbriick^ speaks of a "living" case, he
means the
case-ending,
as does Moulton^ when he asserts that "we can detect a few moribund traces of instrumental, locative and ablative." If he means the case-meaning, the instances are abundant. And even
in case-ending
it is
not
all
one-sided, for the locative -t
and the
instrumental -ols both contributed to the
common
stock of forms.
Henry ^ even suggests that in bvona-Tos we have the ablative t (d), for the Latin word is nomen {nominis). But the N. T. has if) Distinction Preserved in the N. T. not lost distinctive use of the cases and prepositions. Special causes explain some of the phenomena in the N. T. The excessive
N. T. is parallel to that in the LXX (cf. Jer. 21, and is doubtless due partly to the Hebrew 3 which it so commonly translates as Moulton^ observes. But the socalled instrumental use of h like h poiJ.(j)aiq. (Rev. 6:8; cf. Mt. 12 26 f .) is not due entirely to the Hebrew, for, while very common in the LXX, where it is in "the plenitude of its power,"" yet the papyri show undoubted examples of the same instrumental
use of
in the
for instance)
See further Brug., Griech. Gr.,

Vergl. Synt.,
Prol., p. 60.
I,
p. 376; Brug.,
Kurze
2 3 *
p. 193.
Comp. Gr.
of
Gk. and Lat.,
p. 217.
6
Prol., p. 61.
C. and
S., Sel.
from the
LXX,
p. 82.
THE CASES
usage.^
(nTOSEIs)
453
In-
See further Locative Case and also Prepositions (h).
deed in the N. T.
outnumbers
is
els
three to two.^
If these
two
prepositions are left out of consideration, the disappearance of
the locative with prepositions
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
with the accusative
have gone from the modern Greek vernacular and that aro (els rbv) replaces all three cases in modern Greek and that originally ev and els were the same preposition, he is not surprised to read 6 els rbv aypbv (Mk. 13 16) where Mt. 24 18
: :
has
6 kv TO) aypQi.
So Mt. 12
41, fxerevbrjaav
els
to K-qpvyiJLa 'IcofS.
TLarevoo. He omits those examples where the verb means 'entrust' and finds about forty others with the simple dative. In the majority of these forty the verb means 'believe.' There are some debatable passages like Jo. 5 24, 38; 8 31; Ac. 5 14; 16 34; 18 8. He finds only one passage outside of Eph. 1 13 where h w is assimilated (cf. eo-^payiad-qre), viz. Mk. 1 15 (TLcrTeveTe ev to) evayyeXlo:), and he follows Deissmann^ in taking kv as 'in the sphere of.' nto-reiico krl is found six times with the genitive and seven with the accusative
Moulton"* has a very suggestive study of
in the sense of 'repose one's trust'

arevoj els
upon God
kv
or Christ.
But
xt-
occurs 45 times (37 in Jo. and
1 Jo.)
in the sense of
'mystical union with Christ,' like Paul's

TV.
(a)
XpiaTu.^
The Distinctive Ideas of Each of Fundamental Idea. The point

essential that
the Cases.
is,
if
possible, to get at
To do one look at the Greek cases historically and from the Greek point of view. Foreigners may not appreciate all the niceties, but they can understand the respective import of the Greek cases.'' The N. T. writers, as we now know perfectly well, were not strangers to the vernacular KOLvrj, nor were the LXX translators for that matter, though they indeed were hampered by translating a Semitic tongue into Greek. The N. T. writers were in their element when they wrote vernacular
the fundamental idea of each of the eight original cases.
this
it is
1
^
Moulton,
lb., p. 02.
ff.,
Prol., p. 61
f.
pp. 8
<
Die Propos. boi Hcrodot iind andorn ITistor. (1004), Cf also Moultou's regives a summary of the uses of tf and ds.
Hclbinp;,
.
marks on Helbing's items

Moulton, Prol., p. 62. Prol., p. 67 f. In Christo, p. 46 f.
(Pro!., p. 62).
" ^
Cf. Heitmuller,
Im Namen
Jcsu,
I,
ch. 4.
"
Farrar, Ck. Synt., p. 68.
454
KoivT].

They knew the import
of
NEW TESTAMENT
the Greek cases as used at
that time by the people at large.
We have no right used for another. That is to say, that you have a genitive, but it is to be understood as an accusative. Winer ^ properly condemns such enallage casuum. Not even in 2 Cor. 6 4 (awiaTavovTes eavroiis cos Beov haKovot) do
(h)
Cases not Used for One Another,

is
to assume in the N. T. that one case
we have an
minister of
instance of
it,
for the
nominative
(lit.
plural)
means
'
as
would
be,
God I commend myself,' while the accusative {haKovovs) '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 (dative, locative,
instrumental gone) that one cannot look for the old
distinctions.
(c)
Vitality of Case-Idea.
is
idea
This independence of the casenot out of harmony \vith the blending of case-forms (abl.
and gen., loc. and instr. and dat.). This is a very different matter from the supposed substitution of cases alluded to above. The genitive continued to be a genitive, the ablative an ablative in spite of the fact that both had the same ending. There would be, of course, ambiguous examples, as such ambiguities occur in other
parts of speech.
to
The context
is
always to be appealed to in order
know
(d)
the case.
The Historical Development of the

The accusative
is
Cases.
This
is
always to be considered.
the oldest of the
may, in fact, be considered the original and normal case. Other cases are variations from it in course of hnguistic development. With verbs in particular which were transitive the accusacases,
tive
was the obvious case
to use unless there
reason to use some other.

(gen., abl., loc, instr., dat.)
was some special The other oblique cases with verbs came to be used with one verb or the
other rather than the accusative, because the idea of that verb and the case coalesced in a sense. Thus the dative with ireWofiaL, the instrumental with xpao/zai, etc. But with many of these
verbs the accusative continued to be used in the vernacular (or even in the literary language with a difference of idea, as d/couco).
In the vernacular
kolutj
the accusative
is
gradually reasserting
itself
by the side of the other cases with many verbs. This tendency kept up to the complete disappearance of the dative, locative and instrumental in modern Greek (cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 31), and the
*
W.-Th.,
p.
180
f.
The ancients developed no adequate theory of the

little
cases
p. 37.
since they were concerned
with syntax.
Riem. and Goelzer, Synt.,
THE CASES
genitive, accusative
(nxflSEis)
455
and
ff.).^
els
compete
for the function of the old
dative
{ib.,
pp. 38
popular case.
the literary
The accusative was always the most Krebs^ has made a useful study of the cases in
are really derived from the vernacular.
kolvt],
the literary
all
kolvti
and Moulton^ thinks that these tendencies of But not

with the decay of the dative-locative-instruN. T. has the dative twice as often
the verbs
fall in
mental.
Thus
irpoaKwelv in the
as the accusative, just the opposite of the inscriptions.*
But the
papyri show
illiterate
little
proof of the decay of the dative save in the
examples.^
The accusative
gains from the genitive and
ablative in the N. T. also, as Krebs found in the later literary
Greek.
Moulton^
finds that out of 46
examples
Kparetv has the
genitive only 8 times,

'EvTpkireudaL takes
but
bta^^kpnv
has the ablative always.

his
only the accusative, and the accusative appears

(Rev. 17
:
resume were once intransitive, but are transitive in the KOLvq. This is a matter that is always changing and the same verb may be used either way. A verb is transitive, by the way, whether it takes the accusative or not; if it has any oblique case it is transitive. As illustrations of this varied usage Moulton cites from the N. T.
with verbs of
filling
3).^
Moulton concludes
of
Krebs by
calling attention to the list of verbs that
ipepyelv, avvepyetp, eTrepxecrât, KaTaâpeiu, KaTaXoKelu, KaTairoveTv, Ka-
TLaxvîV, TrXeoveKTeLV, TTpo(j<t>wveiv, I'TrorpexetJ', xopVY^^^-
He
65
concludes
f.)
his discussion of the
matter with a needed caveat
(p.
against
"
thinking that
all
distinctions of case are blurred in the
N. T.
We
should not assume, from the evidence just presented as to variation of case with verbs, that the old distinctions of case-meaning
have vanished, or that we may treat ^s mere equivalents those constructions which are found in common with the same word." Analogy no doubt played its part in case-contamination as well
as in the blending of the case-endings.^
1
^ 3 7
Zur Rection der Casus in der spat.

Prol., p. 64.
lb.; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 430.
hist. Gritc,
6
<>
1887-90.
p. 153.

Prol., p. 65.
lb.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 102.
Cf.
Thumb,
Theol.
Lit.,
XXVIII,
p. 422, for
ular in
mod. Gk. usage. As a mattcT of fact the ace. was ahvays more popthe vernac. Gk., and no wonder that the pap. show it to be so even with
in
verbs usually
Synt., 1900,
*
the
f.
lit.
lanj^.
used with other cases.
Cf. Volker, Pap. Graec.
j).
Middletoii, Anal, in Synt., pp. 47-55.
Farrar, Gk. Synt., overstates

its
it
when he
says that the ace. alone has preserved
original force.
He means
form alone.
456
(e)
The Method of
method
of this
case the
the particular case in
this Grammar. In the study of each grammar is to begin with the root-idea of hand. Out of that by means of context
resultant
is
and grammatical history the

instance can be reached.
in
meaning
in the particular
it is
This
not only more simple, but
harmony with the facts of the linguistic development and usage. Even in an instance like h fxaxalpy (Lu. 22 49) the locative case The smiting {iraTaôixev) is conceived as located is not out of place. in the sword. Cf, kv pa^Bw (1 Cor. 4 21). The papyri show the same usage, as indeed the older classical Greek did occasionally. In English we translate this resultant idea by Svith,' but we
: :
The
have no right to assume that the Greeks thought of kv as 'with.' LXX shows that the Hebrew ^ corresponded closely to the Greek h in this resultant idea. In translation we often give not the real meaning of the word, but the total idea, though here the LXX follows closely the Hebrew. One of the chief difficulties in syntax is to distinguish between the Greek idiom and the English translation of the idiom plus the context. But enough of preliminary survey. Let us now examine each case in turn. V. The Nominative (TrTwo-is opBr\, evSeia, 6vo|xa(rTiKT|). For the older books on the nominative case see Hiibner, Grund(a)
riss etc., p. 36.
Case. The first thing to observe about not the oldest case. The accusative is treated first in some grammars and seems to be the oldest. That is the proper historical order, but it seems best on the whole to treat the so-called "oblique" cases together. The term "oblique cases" (xrwo-ets xXdYtat) has a history. The nominative was not originally regarded as a case, but merely the noun (ovopa).
the nominative
is
Not the Oldest

that
it is
So
Aristotle.^
The vocative
tttwo-is.
is
not a real case, as

cos
we
shall see didvofxaros
rectly.
Hence a
a real
it
case (casus)
was considered
dTro rod
ireirTcoKvIa,
All the true cases therefore were oblique.
sidered a case
,
airTcora. When the nominative was conwas still called by the word for noun {ovofxaaTLKr], nominaiivus) the naming or noun case. The Hindu grammarians
Indeclinable words are
indeed
call
the nominative prathamd
('first')
as the leading case,
merely the logical arrangement followed by the Western scholars. ^ There was once no need felt for a nominative, since the verb itself had its own subject in the personal endings.^ But originally one may suppose a word served
not in time, but in service.
This
is
'
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

p. 301.
p. 89.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 113; Giles,
Man.,
THE CASES
as subject of the verb
(nxfiSEis)
457
ending.
and
may have become an
Even
the impersonal verbs like
way.
(6)
have the subject in the same The use of a special case for this purpose was an after/caXais exei
thought.
Reason for the Case.
used?
Why then was the nominative 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 substantive
and pronoun are employed as

:
in avros de eyw UavXos Trapa/caXoj
Other languages can even use other cases for such apposition in the predicate. Cf. English It's me, French c'est moi and Latin dedecori est. And the Greek itself shows abundant evidence of lack of concord of case in apposition (cf. Rev. in the N. T.),^ But the nominative is a constant resource in appositional phrases, whatever case the other word may be in. The whole subject of apposition was discussed in the chapter on the Sentence. Cf. 6 avOpooiros ovtos, where the same point applies.'* Cf. avrjp tls 'Avavlas (Ac. 5:1). In the modern Greek this usage partly re(2 Cor. 10
1).
places the explanatory genitive, as airvpl aimwL, 'mustard seed'
The predicate nominative is in with the subject nominative. It is really apposition.* The double nominative belongs to Greek as to all languages which use certain verbs as a copula like elvai, jlpeadat, KaXeladai, etc. Cf. o-y el Uerpos (Mt. 16 18). The Latin is fond of the dative in such
line
:
(Thumb, Handh., p. 33). (c) Predicate Nominative.
examples as id mihi honori

6vop.a eaTL fxoL.^
Thus
2 21),
:
avrip KoXov/JLevos
:
and the Greek can use one dative, as N. T. eK\r]dr] TO ovojxa avrov 'Irjaovs (Lu. Za/cxatos (Lu. 19 2), rjv ovo/xa tCo bovKw MdXxos
est,
in the
(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.
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.
I,
2
3
Cf. Dclbriick, Vorgl. Synt.,
p. 188.
Cf. Mcistcrh., Or. d. att. Inschr., p. 203, for exx. of the free use of the
noun in app. * Monro, Horn.

6
Cr., p. 117.
I, p.
Cf. Delbriick, Vcrgl. Synt.,

Cf. K.-G.,
I,
393
f.;
Monro, Horn. Gk.,

7
p.
114
f.
p. 44.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 256.
458
els
NEW TESTAMENT
and the accusative rather than the predicate nom. Moulton^ it is a real Hebraism since the papyri show the idiom eaxov Trap' vjiCiv els d6.(veL0p) airepfxara, K.P. 46 (ii/A.D.), where ets means as' or for,' much like the N. T. usage. But the fact that it is so common in the translation passages and that the LXX is so
denies that
'
'
full of it
as a tranlation of ^ justifies Blass^ in saying that
it is
formed on a Hebrew model though it is not un-Greek. Winer finds it in the late Greek writers, but the Hebrew is chiefly responsible for the LXX situation. The most frequent examples in the N. T. are with elvai. (eaoprat els aapKa niau, Mt. 19 5, which can be compared with Lu. 3:5; 2 Cor. 6 18; Ac. 8 23, etc.), yivecrdai (kyevrjdri els Ke(f)a\riv 7coj^tas, Mt. 21 42, with which compare Lu. 13 19; Jo. 16 20; Rev. 8:11, etc.), eyeipetu els âaCK'ea (Ac. 13 22), kXoyiarOri els 8iKaLoavvr]v (Ro. 4 3 ff.). Cf. also Jo. 16 20. Probably the following examples have rather some idea of purpose and are more in accord with the older Greek idiom. In 1 Cor. 4 3, e/xot els Cf. also 1 Cor. kXaxt-cTTov effTLP, the point is not very different. 14 22 (els a-nixelov) But observe ixi] els nevov yeur^raL (1 Th. 3:5),
: : : : : : : : : : : .
els
iravras avdpojirovs els KaraKpLfxa
(Ro. 5
18), eyevero
17
ttoKls els rpla
nepr,
(Rev. 16
19).
(d)
is
Sometimes Unaltered.
left
As the name-case the nominative

it is
sometimes
12
unaltered in the sentence instead of being put in

in apposition.
:
the case of the word with which
Cf Rev. 1:5;
.
Mk.
38-40; Lu. 20
27; Ac. 10
37.
This
is
in accord
with
the ancient Greek idiom, though the
Book
of Rev. has rather
more
than the usual proportion of such examples. See chapter on the Sentence for detailed discussion. In Rev. 9:11 observe ouofxa ex^L 'AToXKvoiv (cf. 'Aâ88ojv also), where the nominative is retained much after the fashion of our quotation-marks. The same thing* 13 vjj.els ^comre /xe '0 SidaaKaXos Kal 6 kvplos, is noticeable in Jo. 13 This is a classic idiom. Cf. Xenoph., for thus W. H. print it. Cf. Lu. Oec. 6, 14 exovras, to aefxvov tovto to koXos re Kay ados. 19 29; 21 37, where W. H. print els to 6pos to KaXovfievov eXaLcov. But we know from Ac. 1 12 (avro opovs tov KaXovp.'evov eXaiQivos) that eXaiuiv could be in Luke a nominative (abundantly confirmed
:
1 2 a
Prol., p. 71
f.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 85.
"Ein starker Hebraismus," W.-Sch.,
p. 257.
W.-Th., p. 184. Moulton, Prol.,

:
p. 235,
that in Jo. 13
13
we have the
nom.
endorses Blass's view (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 85) voc. The nom. is hardly "incredible" (Blass).
Cf. loose use of the
in lists in Boeot. inscr. in the midst of other cases
(Claflin, Synt., etc., p. 46).
THE CASES
(nTQSEIs)
459
by the papyri). The most that can be said about the passages in Luke is that the nominative kXaiuv is entirely possible, perhaps
probable.^ In Rev. 1 4 (dTro 6 &V Kal 6 rjv Kal 6 epxo/jievos) the nominative is kept purposely, as has been shown, to accent the unchangeableness of God, not that John did not know how to use the ablative after airo, for in the same sentence he has dxo tuv Moulton^ aptly describes the nominative as "residirvevnarcov. uary legatee of case-relations not obviously appropriated by other cases." But as a matter of fact the nominative as a rule is used normally and assimilation is general so that in Mt. 1 21
: :
(cf.
25 also)
2.
we read
is,
/caXeaets to ovoixa
:
avrov
'Irjaovv.
Cf.
Mk.
Cf.
16
ovojia.
:
Yi'tTpov
and Ac. 27
tKaTovTapxv ovoixaTL
'lovXlco.
Ac. 18
tive
It
of course, nothing strange to see the
nomina(Lu.
form in apposition with a vocative, as

39), Trdrep rifiuv 6 kv tols ovpavots
vfiels ol 4)apLaa'L0L
11
(Mt. 6:9).
This
is
only natCf.
ural as the article

avdpcoire 6 Kpipuv
and
participles
have no vocative form.
(Ro. 2:3).
Cf. even oval vpXv,
ol enTeirXtjcrnevoi,
where we have really the vocative, not apposition. The nominative is sometimes used absolutely, nominatus pendens, just as the genitive (ablative) and accusative are. Cf. ablative absolute in Latin, locative in Anglo-Saxon, and nominative absolute in modern Greek and modern English. In titles the nominative is the natural case
(Lu. 6
(e)
:
25),
The Nominative Absolute.
and
is left
suspended.
The
some
LXX
also
Cf. ITaCXos kXtjtos airSaToXos (1 Cor. 1:1), has an abnormal number of suspended nominatives,
the Hebrew.^ But the N. T. has which are due to change of structure, as 6 vlk>p xotTycrco avTov (Rev. 3 12), 6 vlkoov dwao} avrco (Rev. 3 21), 6 yap Mcoi^ct^s
due to a
literal translation of
ovTos
ovK
o'lSa/jiev
tI
eyevero avrc^ (Ac.

:
7:40),
irdv prjua
apyov
airo8uaovaL
TjiiepaL
irepl
avTov \6yov (Mt. 12
36), Tavra a deccpelre, eXevaovrac
(Lu. 21 :6).
e/ie)
In particular
in such
is
the participle
(cf.
Jo. 7
38,
6 Tnarevcov ets
common
a nominative, about which see
the chapter on the Sentence (anacoluthon).

this
Moulton^ considers
ttSs 6s epel
:
one of "the easiest of anacolutha."

(Lu. 12
:
Cf. further Cf. Jo. 18
a(t>edr]aeTaL avrCo
10; cf. verse 8).

vo/jlov,
11.
Some
of the examples, like to abhvn.Tov tov
may
*
(Ro. 8:3), be regarded as accusative as easily as nominative. The

'))adeveL
this Gr. in ch.

2
Sec extended discussion in Moulton, Prol., pp. 69, 235. on Orthog. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 250 f.
Prol., p. 69.
See also note in
C. and
S., Sel.
from the
LXX,
p. 55.
Prol., pp. 09, 225.
460
papyri^ show plenty of examples of this suspended nominative.
For For
classical instances see

elliptical
Riemann and
Goelzer, Syntaxe, p. 41.

:
nominative see Ev8ia (Mt. 16 2). There was a constant tendency in the LXX to drift into the nominative in a long series of words in apposition (Thackeray, p. 23). (/) The Parenthetic Nominative is of a piece with what we have been considering. So in Jo. 1 6 we have ovo/jia avr^ 'Iwavrjs
:
all
by
itself.
Cf. 3
1 {NlkoStj/jlos ovo/xa
avrw).
Similarly the
nombe
inative in expressions of time rather than the accusative

explained.^
:
may
For example in Mk. 8 2 we read 6tl rjb-q rjfjLepaL rpels Trpoaixkvovalv ixoi. Cf. Mt. 15 32. In Lu. 9 28 wad rip.'epaL okto: the matter is simpler. Blass^ compares with this passage cos wpuiv rpLcov The use SiaaTrjua (Ac. 5: 7) and i5oi; SeKa Kai okto: errj (Lu. 13 16). of l8ov with the nominative is very common and may be a case of ellipsis. Cf. i8ov 4)wvr] Ik tuv ovpavdv Xeyovcra (Mt. 3 17). Cf. Heb, 2 13, etc. In Mk. 6 40 observe aveireaav Tpaaial irpaaial. This leads one to suspect that avfjnroaLa avixTrbcna in verse 39 may be nominative also. The repetition is not a mere Hebraism, since the papyri show examples of it. See Eccl. 2:16 Kadon r/Sr? at This use of the nominative is riiMepat kpxofJLevaL to. iravra eTreXrjadr]. common in the papyri (cf. ert i]p.'epai yap r/5r? rpels Kai vvKres rpets GkXa ovK eynyeprai, Acta Pauli et Theclae in O.P. i., p. 9) and can be traced in the Attic vernacular back to the fifth century b.c* Thumb finds it still in the modern Greek, and Hopkins (A.J. P. xxiv. 1) "cites a rare use from the Sanskrit: 'a year (nom.) almost, I have not gone out from the hermitage' " (Moulton, Prol., p. 235). See other papyri examples in CI. Rev., April, 1904, p. 152. Of a piece with this is the nominative with adverbs (prepositions) like CIS Kara els (Mk. 14 19) where the first els is in partitive apposition and the second is kept rather than made accusative. Cf. Kad' els
: : :
(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 But avrb tovto (2 Pet. 1 5) is probably accusative. (1 Cor. 6:6). The prolepsis of the nominative as in 1 Cor. 14 16 (6 avaTXrjpZv Cf. examples like xpovos TOP TOTTov Tov LSloitov ttcos cpet) Is uatural.
:
6 auTos in
1 2
Boeotian inscriptions (Claflin, Syntax,

p. 151
f.
^
etc., p. 47).

Moulton, Prol., p. 70; Meisterh., Or., Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 152.
*
etc., p.
^
Qr. of N. T. Gk., p. 85. 203. For pap. exx. see

Griech. Or., p. 378.
THE CASES
(g)
(hTQSEIs)
4G1
tions,
In Exclamations. The nominative is natural in exclamaa sort of interjectional nominative.^ So Paul in Ro. 7 24,
:
ToXalTojpos kyd) avOpoiwos,

irXovTov.
and 11:33, w
âdos (a possible vocative)
Ro. 7:24; 2 Cor. 12:18. Cf. xapts rc3 deQ (Ro. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436. Cf. xap rots deols, B.U. 843 (i/A.D.). It only remains to consider the nom(^) Used as Vocative. inative form which is used as a vocative. Cf. chapter VII, 7, (a), for details as to form. It all depends on what one means by the term "case" when he says that the nominative is used as a vocative. The form is undoubtedly the same as that of the vocative in a multitude of instances (all neuter nouns, for instance, singular and plural, plural of all nouns in truth). It is only in the singular that any distinction was made between the nominative and vocative in form, and by no means always here, as in the case of feminine nouns of the first declension, deos (usually) in the second, liquid oxytones like ttolhtju in the third, etc. But if by the vpcative one means the case of address, then the nominative form in address is really vocative, not nominative. Thus av, iraT-qp (Jo. 17:21) is just as truly vocative as av, irarep (17:5). Indeed in Jo. 17 25 we have irarrip 5t/cate, showing that rar-qp is here regarded as vocative. The article with the vocative in address was the usual Hebrew and Aramaic idiom, as indeed in Aristophanes^ we have 6 Trais ukoXoWh. It is good Greek and good Aramaic too when we have 'AjSjSa 6 Trarrip (Mk. 14 36) whether Jesus said one or both. In Mt. 11 26 (mt, 6 rarrjp) we have the vocative. When the article is used, of course the nominative form must occur. Thus in Rev. 18 20 we have both together, ovpave Kal ol ayioi. Indeed the second member of the address is always in the nomSo.
17).
For
parallel in papyri see
inative form.^
Jo.
:
Thus Kupte, 6 6e6s, 6 iravTOKparup (Rev. 15 3). Cf. 20 28. I shall treat therefore this as really the vocative, not the nominative, whatever the form may be, and now pass on to
:
the consideration of the Vocative Case.

VI.
(a)
The Vocative
(tttcoo-ls k\t]tlktj).
Nature of the Vocative.

but in reality
it is
Dionysius Thrax called

not a case at
all.
it
also
it
irpoaayopevTLKr],
Practically
has to be treated as a case, though technically it is not (Farrar, Greek Syntax, p. 69). It is wholly outside of syntax in that the
word
* 2
is
isolated
and has no
word-relations."*
The
isolation of the
'
Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 41; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 115 f. N. T. Gk., p. SO; Moulton, Prol., p. 70. Riem. andGoclzcr, p. 42. Brug.,Gncch.Gr.,p.37G;Gilcs, Maa.,p. 302.
Cf.
Cf. BlaaH, Gr. of
462
vocative
tive, genitive
be compared to the absolute use of the nominaand accusative. The native Sanskrit grammarians do not name it in their hst of cases, and Whitney^ merely
treats
it
may
the singular after the other cases. Indeed the sometimes as much a sentence as a case, since the word stands to itself and forms a complete idea. Thus Maptdju and 'Fa^ôvvel (Jo. 20 16) tell the whole story of recognition between Jesus and Mary. When Thomas said '0 KvpLos Kai 6 deos fxov, he gave Christ full acceptance of his deity and his
in
vocative
is
resurrection.
(6)
Various Devices.
The vocative has no
case-ending, but
has to resort to various expedients. In general it is just like the nominative in form. This is true in all pronouns, participles and
various special words like
in the Sanskrit.^
deos,
besides the plurals, neuters and

Cf. the
feminines mentioned under v,
(h).
same
practical situation
Farrar^ indeed conjectures that originally there
was no difference in form at all between the nominative and vocative and that the variation which did come was due to rapid pronunciation in address. Thus xaxTjp, but xdrep. Cf. avep (1 Cor. 7 16). In most languages there is no distinction in form at all between nominative and vocative, and in Latin the distinction is
:
rare.* It need not be surprising, therefore, to find the nominative form of many singular words used as vocative as noted above under the discussion of the nominative. Moulton^ indeed remarks: ''The anarthrous nominative should probably be regarded as a mere substitute for the vocative, which begins from the earEven in the liest times to be supplanted by the nominative." singular the distinction was only partial and not very stable at best, especially in the vernacular, and gradually broke down till "in modern Greek the forms in e are practically the only separate
vocatives surviving."
times (the practice

in the singular in address.
is
as old as
Thus Blass^ observes: "From the earhest Homer) the nominative has a tendThis nominative form when used
ency to usurp the place of the vocative."

is
just as really vocative as in the plural
merely in line with the oldest (Mk. 5 34; Lu. 8: 48; Jo. 12 15, LXX), but see dvyarep in Mt. 9 22. In Jo. 17: 21, 24, 25, W. H. read Tarrip, but Trdrep in Jo. 12 28; 17 1, 5, 11, etc. Moulton ^ rightly refuses to follow Hort in writing Trdrryp in vocatherefore
is
The N. T.
Greek idiom
:
in such examples.
So
dvydrrip
Sans. Gr., p. 89.
Qk. Synt.,
lb., p. 69.
p. 70.
prol., p. 71.
2
7
Whitney,
p. 105.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 86.
Prol., p. 71.
THE CASES (nTQSEIs)

:
463
In the margin of Mt. 9 27 W. H. read vids AaveiS rather tive. than vU A. Mt. 1 20 has 'Icjo-tj^ vids AavelS, and 15 22 Kvpue vlos Aaveid, all examples of apposition. Cf. Mt. 20 30. But in Lu. 8 28 and 18 38 we have vie. The adjective a(f)puv is vocative in Lu. 12 20 and 1 Cor. 15 36. Cf. also yevea ainaTos in Lu. 9 41. In Acts 13 10 T\r]pr]s is vocative. Cf. indeclinable use of this
:
: : : :
word.
in
As
:
is
well
known
6e6s
tive in the older Greek, not
dee.
was usually retained in the vocaIn the N. T. dee only appears

in
in
Mt. 27 46
in quotation
from the
that
pov
Jannaris^
indeed
is
thinks
Cf.
Xaos
rather frequent.
oLKos
where it is rare.^ N. T. this idiom is Baruch 4:5. In Ac. 7 42

the
:
LXX
Cf.
'lapaijX
:
vocative (from
LXX).
it is
also âdos
ttXovtov
(Ro. 11
33),
not address, but exclamation.
When
the vocative
has a separate form in the singular

of the word, like ToXlra,
Sol/jlov,
usually merely the stem
But it is more than Xeovir), etc. back to the original Indo-Germanic stock.^ Cf. /Sao-iXeO in Ac. 26 7. In the second declension masculine nouns in the singular show a change in the stem-vowel, o changing to e. This usage has persisted in modern Greek vernacular in most words; but note deos above and the variations about But see avOpwire (Ro. 2 1) as usual. In yvvo-L (Mt. 15 28) vlos. K has dropped from the stem, as in forms like \eov the t vanishes for euphony. In dbyarep and Trdrep the mere stem suffers recessive accent. In Ps. 51 6 {yXwaaav SoXiav) we actually have the accusative form used as a vocative.'* See further discussion in ch. VII
doubtful
if
this usage goes
(Declensions)
(c)
Use of w with the Vocative.

all
It
is
rare in the
N.
T.,
only 16 times,
but four of these in Luke and Paul.

co
In Blass-
Debrunner,
fluence.
p. 90, the rarity of
is
attributed to the Semitic init
The common absence

found. ^
of
gives a sort of solemnity
Moulton^ observes that it is only in Luke's writings that it appears in the N. T. without emphasis after the classical fashion. Take as an instance of this literary usage cj Moulton Geo^tXe (Ac. 1:1), but KpaTiare Geot^tXe in Lu. 1 3. likewise notes the absence of w in prayer in the N. T. (though sometimes in the LXX) and considers "the progressive omission of co" in Greek not easy to explain. It came up from the vernacular and then gradually vanished from the vernacular much as
where
it is
:
2 3 *
W.-Sch., p. 258
Hist.
f.;
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk., p. 86
^
f.
Gk.
Gr., p. 327.
Dclbriick, Syntakt. Forch., IV, p. 2S.

Prol., p. 71.
C. and
S., Sol.
from the
Sept., p. 50.
464
our
it
has done.^
Blass- notes that in most of the N. T. examples

co
:
expresses emotion, as
:
yhvaL (Mt. 15
28),
co
yevea ainaTos
(Mk.
19),
7rXi7p?7s
(Ac. 13
10), etc.
it is
The tone may be one
of censure
as in Ro. 2:3; 9:20.
But
cD
a mistake to think that the ancient
Greeks always used
in formal address.
Simcox^ notes that
Demosthenes often said av8pes 'Adrjvaioc just as Paul did in Ac. But the addresses 17: 22. Paul says & avSpes once (Ac. 27: 21). in the N. T. are usually without w (cf. Ac. 7:3). (d) Adjectives Used with the Vocative naturally have the same form. Thus w avdpoiire Keve (Jas. 2 20), 5oDXe irovt^pk (Mt.
:
In showing that Tarrjp was regarded as a true vocative form. In Lu. 9 41 w yepea ainaTos the substantive has the same form in nominative and vocative and the adjective here follows suit. Cf. also Ac. 13 10; Lu. 12 20 where the adjective alone in the vocative has nominative form. (e) Apposition to the Vocative. The nominative forms and distinctive vocative forms are freely used side by side, in apposition, etc., when the case is vocative.^ In Mt. 1 20 we have 22 W. H. read in the text KvpLe vids 'lcc(Tri(f) vlos Aaveld, and in 15 Aaveid. Cf. also Mt. 20 30. So Kvpie, 6 deos, 6 iravTOKpaTcop (Rev. 15 3), and w avOpoiire, iras 6 Kplvwv (Ro. 2:1). In the last instance the participle and article naturally are unchanged. See again
18:32), Trarep
:
ix'yLe
(Jo. 17:11),
Kpariare Ge60tXe (Lu. 1:3).
Jo. 17
25
we read
irarrip dkaie,
clearly
ovpave Kal ol
ayioi,,
etc.
(Rev. 18
20).
Cf. also Trdrep
rjfxuiP
rots
ovpapols (M.t. 6: 9).
So Kupte^toi; 7raT97p, B.U. 423 (ii/A.D.). But two vocative forms are put together also. So 'Irjaov vU rod v\piaTov
(Lu. 8
:
28), Trarep Kvpie rod ovpapov (10

:
21), 'Ir]aod vie Aaveid (18

is
38).
In Ac. 13
forms,
CO
10 the nominative form

8o\ov kt\.,
vie
followed by two vocative
T\ripr]s iraPTOS
8La^6\ov, ex9p^ iraarjs diKaLoavpris.

is
But ir\rjpr}s may be here indeclinable. There among the less educated writers in the papyri
as
TTJs e'7rLTr]pr]ats,
a distinct tendency
to use the nominative
a convenient indeclinable (Moulton, CI. Rev., April, 1904). So N. P. 38 (iii/A.D.). The vocative is rarely found in (/) Vocative in Predicate. the predicate, though not grammatical predicate. This was oc1
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
casionally the case in the older
real vocative in the sentence.^
(llTflSEIs)
465
a
Greek by a
sort of attraction to
few examples in the nature of

1
:
N. T. we only have a quotation or translation. So in Jo.

in the
AtSdcrKaXe;
But
38,
'Pa/3/3et,
6 Xeyerai,
fj.e6epiJ.r]i>ev6fjLepov
20
16 "Pa/S-
ôvvei, o XeyeraL AidaaKoXe.

(g)
The Article with the Vocative.

N. T., some 60 examples.^
it
This idiom
is
frequent
in the
infrequent.^ Delbriick^ finds
a good Greek idiom and not in harmony with the Indo-Germanic

It is
Moulton^ denies that the coincident Hebrew and Aramaic use of the article in address had any influence on the N. T. But one must admit that the LXX translators would be tempted to use this Greek idiom very frequently, since the Hebrew had the article in address.*^ Of. 3 Ki. 17:20, 21, etc. In Mk. 5:41 the Aramaic TaXetda is translated to Kopaaiov. One is therefore bound to allow some influence to the Hebrew and AraCf. also 'A/SjSd 6 xar^jp in Mk. 14 36, Gal. 4 6, and Ro. maic. 8:15. It is doubtless true that Trats lyeLpe (Lu. 8 54) has a touch of tenderness, and that to iiupov TOLfxuiov (Lu. 12 32) means 'you little flock.' But one can hardly see such familiarity in
languages.
'^ : :
17
6 Trariyp
(Mt. 11
26).
But
in
Mk.
25 there
may
be a sort of
spirit' (to
insistence in the article, like
'Thou dumb and deaf

here the Aramaic,
if
aXakov Kal koxôv
Tuevfia).
Even
Jesus used
:
it, had the article. Moulton^ considers that ISacnXeu in Ac. 26 7 admits the royal prerogative in a way that would be inappropriate
mockery of Jesus in Jo. 19 3 (xatpe, 6 âaiXevs toju 'lovdalwv). But Mk. 15 18 does have fiaaiXev tcov 'lovdalcop, due, according to Moulton, to "the writer's imperfect sensibility to the more delicate shades of Greek idiom." Possibly so, but may not the grammarian be guilty of slight overrefinement just here? In Mt. 27 29 the
in the
:
text of
W. H.
has
/Jao-tXeD
while the margin reads 6

tcov
aio}p<joi>.
/3ao-tXei>s.
:
In
not
Rev. 15: 3 we have 6 jSaacXevs certain whether (6 dpopos aov 6
In Heb.
10)
is
it
is
deos) 6 Beds is
vocative or nominative.
:
But
6 SeairoTrjs 6 ayLos Kal
a\r]0Lv6s
(Rev. 6
vocative.
:
As
examples of participles
1
in the vocative
take
6 KaToXvcov
(Mt. 27 40)
Giles,
f.
Man.,
p.
302; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 377. Cf. Dolbrtick, Vcrgl. Synt.,

2
p.
397
*
Moulton,
ff.
Prol., p. 70.

Vergl. Synt., p. 398
f.
Cf. K.-G., II, pp. 46

b
Prol., p. 70.
'
^
C. and
it
S., Sel., etc., p. 54.
Moulton
brews
p. 118.
8
in a note (p. 235) does concede eome Aram, influence. In Heonly occurs, as he notes, in O. T. citations. Cf. also Dalnian, Gr.,
Prol., p. 70.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 327.
466
and

01 e/xTreTrXr/a/xevoi vvif
(Lu. 6: 25).
the vocative case in 6
kvplos Kal 6 debs.

ixov Kal 6 debs
In Rev. 4 11 we have also In Jo. 20 28 Thomas ad:
dresses Jesus as 6 Kvpibs
/jlov,
the vocative Hke those
Yet, strange to say, Winer ^ calls this exclamation rather than address, apparently to avoid the conclusion that Thomas
above.
was
satisfied as to the deity of Jesus
after the resurrection.
by his appearance to him 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 aîos el, 6 Kvpios Kal 6 deds rnxccv, ought to have been mentioned above." This is a manly retraction, and he adds: "John may have used it here exceptionally." Leave out "excep:
tionally"
and the conclusion

It
is just. is
If
Thomas used Aramaic he

in Jo.
certainly used the article.
no more exceptional
20
28
than in Rev. 4:11.

VII.
(a)
it it
The Accusative
(r\
aiTiaTiKT] irxwo-is).
is
The Name.
It signifies little that

alTi.aop.aL,
pertinent.
Varro
calls
accusandei casus from
while Dionysius Thrax explains

idea.
as Kar' aiTiav ('cause'), a
more hkely
it
Glycas
calls it also
TO aiTLov.
So Priscian terms
causativus.
Gildersleeve ("A Syn-
tactician
p. 76)
remarks:
among the Psychologists," Am. Jour. PhiloL, Jan., 1910, "The Romans took the bad end of atria, and transaccusativus
lated
aiTLaTiKr],
hopeless
stupidity,
from which
grammar
that
did not emerge

-KTwcTLs
till
1836,
when Trendelenburg showed

effectivus,
alTiaTLKfi
mcaus casus
or causativus
The
its
object affected appears in Greek
now
as an accusative,
now
now as a genitive. The object effected refuses to give glory to another, and the object affected can be subsumed under the object effected." With this I agree. Cf. Farrar, Greek Sijntax,
as a dative,
Old Enghsh "accuse" could mean 'betray' or 'show,' but mark it off from the rest. Originally, however, it was the only case and thus did show the relations of nouns with other words. On the small value of the case-names see
p. 81.
the "showing" case does not
Brugmann,
(6)
But
at
any
rate accusativus
is
false translation of alTLaTiaKr].
Steinthal, Geschichte d. Spr., p. 295.
Age and History. A more
pertinent point
all
is
the age and
history of the accusative, the oldest of
the cases.
Farrar (Greek
all
ff.
Syntax, p. 81) calls attention to the fact that eywv (old form of
eyu), Sanskrit
1
aham, tvdm, Boeotian

p. 183.
tovv,
2
Latin idem,
have the
W.-Th.,
joh, Gr., pp. 93
THE CASES (nxnsEis)

accusative ending though in the nominative.
the accusative
cusative
is
467
If it is true
that
the oldest case, perhaps
we
are to think of the
it. In other words the acwas the normal oblique case for a noun (especially with verbs) unless there was some special reason for it to be in another The other oblique cases were developed apparently to excase. press more exactly than the accusative the various word-relations. Indeed in the vernacular Greek the accusative retained its old frequency as the normal case with verbs that in the literary style used other cases.^ In the old Greek poets the same thing is no-
other obhque cases as variations from
ticeable.
Pindar,^ for example, has
"a multiplicity of accusatives."

its
In the modern Greek vernacular the accusative has regained

cases.
original frequency to the corresponding disuse of the other oblique
Cf.
Thumb, Handb.,
p. 35.
"When
a fine sense for lan-
guage
is failing, it is
natural to use the direct accusative to ex-
press any object which verbal action affects,

difference
and so
to efface the
between
'transitive'
and
'intransitive' verbs." ^
There
was
therefore first a decrease in the use of the accusative as the
literary
language grew, then an increase in the

Greek,^ and
especially the
kolvt]
vernacular,*
the later
modern Greek
vernacular.
This gain or rather persistence of the accusative in the vernacular

is
manifest in the N. T. in various ways.

it
But the
literary
Kotvri
shows
(c)
also, as
The
Krebs' has carefully worked out with many verbs, Meaning of the Accusative. It is not so easy to
determine this in the view of

cusative.
many
scholars.
Delbriick * despairs
of finding a single unifying idea, but only special types of the ac-
Brugmann^
also admits that the real ground-idea of the
unknown, though the relation between noun and verb is expressed by it. The categories are not always sharply defined in the soul of the speaker.^" Hiibschmann" treats the expansion
case
is
Mullach, Gr. dcr gricch. Vulgarspr., pp. 328-333.

Giles,
Man.,
p. 306.
Jcbb, Vincent and Dickson's Handb. to

Volkcr, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, p. 5
f.
Mod. Gk.,
p. 307.
<
6 ^
Hatz., Einl., p. 221.

.
Zur Rect. der Casus in der spat.

d. griech. Synt.,
hist.
Grac. (1887-90)
Cf
also
Moulton,
Cf.
Prol., pp.
63 ff. 8 Die Grundl. Ill, pp. 360-393.

Kurze vergl. " Zur Casusl.,
Bd. IV,
p. 29; Vergl. Synt.,
I,
p. 1S7.
Gr., p. 441.
p. 133.

ace. see Iliibnor,
For
list
of
books on the
p. 44, agree
Grundr.
Cf. also
etc., p.
40
I,
f.
Rieni.
and Goclzcr, Synt.,
with Hiibschni.
K.-G.,
p. 291.
4G8
NEW TESTAMENT
"The
relation
of the verb as the ground-idea of the accusative.
of the accusative to its governing verb resembles the relation of
the genitive to
it
its
governing substantive."^
originally a local case
La Roche ^ considers and that the inner meaning came later.

can indeed, for convenience, be
:
The usage
of the accusative
di-
vided into the outer (okiav, Mt. 7

4>bôv fxeyav,
24)
and the inner
{t^yo^-qd-qaav
Mk. 4:41)
usage.
But the whole

as
case cannot be
discussed on this
sees
artificial principle,
Monro ^
rightly sees.
He
hope only in the direction of the wide adverbial use of. the accusative. In the Sanskrit certainly "a host of adverbs are accusative cases in form."^ Green^ calls it ''thehmitativejjase,'' and he is not far out of the way. Farrar^ thinks that "motion towards" explains it all. Giles,'' while recognising all the difficulties, defines the accusative as the answer to the question "How far?" The word extension comes as near as any to expressing the broad general idea of the accusative as applied to its use with verbs, substantives, adjectives, prepositions. It is far more commonly used with verbs, to be sure, but at bottom the other uses have this same general idea. Being the first case If you ask a child (in it is naturally the most general in idea. English) "Who is it?" he will reply "It's me." This is, however, not a German idiom. The accusative measures an idea as to But the accusative was used in its content, scope, direction.
so
many
special applications of this principle that various sub-
became necessary for intelligent study. It is natural to begin with verbs {d) With Verbs of Motion. of motion, whether we know that this was the earliest use or not, a matter impossible to decide. We still in English say "go home," and the Latin used domum in exactly that way. Extension over space is, of course, the idea here. One goes all the way to his home. It is found in Homer and occasionally in Greek writers.^ Modern Greek (Thumb, Handh., p. 37, has a local accusative) Moulton {ProL, p. 61) notes that 7rd/ie o-TTtrt, 'we are going home.'
divisions
it is
just the local cases that first lost their distinctive forms (abla-
tive, locative, associative-instrumental;
tive" like ire

*
'^
Romam
disappeared also.
and the "terminal accusa"The surviving Greek
Strong,
Logeman and Wheeler,

in Horn., p. 1.
Hist, of Lang., p. 128.

*
Der Accus.
p. 10.
* 8
Gk. Synt., p. 81 f. Horn. Gr., p. 92. ^ Man., p. 303. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 90. See K.-G., I, p. 311 f. for exx.; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 96. Extremely com-
mon
in Sanskrit.
THE CASES (nxnsEis)
469
cases thus represent purely grammatical relations, those of subject,

object, possession, remoter object
and instrument."
The
place-
adverb does supply the place of the terminal accusative, but not
entirely of the locative, ablative
and instrumental.
27 2 read irXdv tovs Kara Trjv 'Aalav roirovs, but the best (W. H.) have eis after TrXttp. In vireTrXevaa/jiev Tr}v KvTTpov and TO ireXayos StaTrXeiicaj'Tes (cf. English " sail the sea"), verses 4 f., the prepositions in composition help to explain the case. In Mt. 4 15 oddv daXaaa-qs has no verb of motion and comes in the midst of vocatives in a way quite startling. Green ^ refers to
in Ac.
: :
Some MSS.
for the explanation and quotes " Christ and But the LXX gives little relief, for, while B does not have it, several MSS. do and without a verb. B however reads ol ttjv irapoKiav, which presents the same difficulty as to case. Winer^ suggests oiKovvTts with oi, possibly correct. But even in Matthew the writer may have had in mind the general
the
LXX
(Is.
1)
Him
Crucified."
accusative notion of extension, 'along the

(e)
way
of the sea.'
Extent of Space. The

is is
.space
ordinary accusative for extent of does not differ materially from that of motion above. Here
easily perceived apart
the root-idea of the case

of the verb.
from the force
The point
but
is
that this
is
not a special development
of the accusative,
the normal idea of the case, extension.

is
The
application to space
along to have this idiom as the Latin and English.

txaKpav (Ac.
cbs
22
21)
is
The Greek continues all The adverb a good example. Take Jo. 6 19 kX-qXaKores
natural.
:
(TTadlovs e'UoaL irevTe
rj
TpiaKOvra,
Lu. 22
4:1
aireairaadri air' avTcov
The accusative tells "how far." Observe in Lu. 44 ^Xdov riij.epas bbbv. UpoaeXduu jxiKpov (Mt. 26 39) is a good example of this use of the accusative. In Ac. 1 12 aa/S/Sdroi; exov
coaelXidov ôXrjv.
bhov varies the construction
by the
insertion of ixov.
e^rjKovra.
In Lu. 24
13
24.
similarly
we have
of
:
airkxovaav araSiovs
cos
Cf.
:
Mt. 14
cf.
The use
clto,
as
airo o-TaSicov deKairepre (Jo. 11
18;
21
8;
Rev. 14 20), Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 95) calls a Latinism (cf. a millibus passuum duohus), but Moulton (ProL, p. 101 f.) cites
Doric and paiivrH parallels for irpo and makes a mere Latinism unlikely. So O.P. 492 (ii/A.D.) /xer' euiavrop eva. Diodorus and Plutarch use the same idiom. It is clearly not a direct Latinism. In modern Greek the accusative is common for locality or place
affected (Thuml), Ilandh., p. 35
(/)
f.).
I^xTENT OF Time. It answers the question "how far?" in time, or "how long?" In the N. T. the examples of time are far
1
Handb.,
etc., p.
234.
W.-Th., p. 231.
470
more frequent than those of mere space. The locative, instrumental and genitive are also used to express time, but they bring out a different idea, as will be shown. The accusative is thus used
Indo-Germanic languages generapjoi (Mt. 20 6); Toaavra err] dovXevco <jol (Lu. 15 29). A good example is tiu.eLvai' TTjv rifxepav kKeivnv (Jo. 1 Cf. Jo. 2 12; 11 6. 39). In Lu. 1 75 W. H. (text) read Trdo-ats rats r)ixkpaLs (instr.). Another good illustration is aTredrjiJL-rjaev xpovovs Uavohs (Lu. 20 Cf. tK drjvapiov ttjv riixepav 9). (Mt. 20 2) where the accusative well brings out the agreement between the landlord and the labourers. In vmra Kal r}p.tpav (Mk. 4 27) the sleeping and rising go on continually from day to day. Cf. Tjnepau e^ rjnepas (2 Pet. 2:8). The papyri examples are numerous, like TOKOVS didpaxiJi-ovs rrjs p-vcis top pr]va eKaarop, A. P. 50 (ii/B.c). Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., Dec, 1901. The plural is likeally.
for duration or extension in the Cf. TL
<S5e eaTTjKare 6\t]u ri]v r](j.epav

:
wise so used, as ras
-qpepas
rds vvKTas
(Lu. 21
37).
:
Perhaps
little difficulty is felt
in the accusative in Ac. 24

in
25, to
vvv 'ixov TTopevov. TO irXelaTou (1

22).
So also as to to \oLTrbv (or XoLTTOp) Cor. 14: 27), and even kveKowTOix-qv to.
first
Mk. 14:41,
vroXXd (Ro. 15:
But
there are uses of the accusative in expressions of time

blush.
that do furnish trouble at
In some of these the accu-
sative seems to be merely adverbial (Blass, Gr. of
with
little stress
on duration.
irpoTepov
N. T. Gk., p. 94) Indeed a point of time may be in6

:
dicated.
jrpoJTOP
Cf.
:
TO
(Jo.
62),
irpoTepov
(Heb.
it is
10
32),
(Mt. 5
24).
It
is
not hard to sec
how
:
the accusative of
general reference
time.
tive.
came
to be used here, although
a point of
ttju
Note the
:
article {to Kad' -qpepav,
Lu. 19
:
47) in the accusa-
We can now go on to to reXos (1

25).
Pet. 3
8)
and even
apx-qv
:
(Jo. 8
But a more
:
difficult
example
is
found
in Jo.
52,
where a point of time is indicated. See also TToiav copav in Rev. 3 One may 3; iraaav copap (1 Cor. 15:30). conjecture that this use of &pav was not regarded as essentially Either the action was redifferent from the idea of extension. garded as going over the hour or the hour was looked at more Cf. also T-qp 17/xeas an adverbial accusative like to Xolttop above.
ex^^s <^po-v ej3o6pr]v,
16). In BlassTTJs TrePTtjKoaTrjs yepeaOai eis 'lepoaoXvâ (Ac. 20 Debrunner, p. 98, examples are given from Êschylus, Euripides, Cf. Moulton, Aristotle, Demosthenes, where wpap = els copap.
pap
Prol., p. 63, for to -wkpTTOP eros (O.P. 477, ii/A.D.) 'in the fifth year.'
B.U. 22 (ii/A.D.) means 'at present' (Moulton, CI. Rev., In the modern Greek vernacular the accusative is used freely to designate a point of time as well as extent of time
T(i Trapop
1901, p. 437).
THE CASES
(Thumb, Handh.,
ing
its
(nxiiZEis)
471
is
p. 37).
So
in the
:
N. T. the accusative
widen-
scope again.
In Ac. 10
30
a-wo TtrapT-qs rinkpas fxkxpt- ravTrjs
rfjs o>pas riixr]v Trju hdrrju Trpoaevxofjiepos we can see an interesting example where ttiv tvdrrjv is explanatory of the previous note of time, a point of time, and yet a whole hour is meant. In Ac. 10 (Trept ibpav kvarrtv) observe Tvepl, though some MSS. do not have the
:
preposition.
irpoî
Cf. also jxeaovvKTiov (ace.)

for points of time.^
r)
aKeKTopo4)OiVLas (gen.)
fj
(loc.)
a point of time in the

locative as
TTota
is
The papyri have examples of accusative,^ as already seen. But the

in the
still
more frequent
:
N. T.
for a point of time,
ibpa
(Lu. 12
39).
It is
not
difficult to
see the appro(rrjiJLepov
priateness of the accusative in TeaaapeaKatdeKarriv

irpoadoKcoPTes aairoi SiareXetre (Ac.
r]p.kpav
27
33).
It
is
good Greek with
the ordinal.
(g)
is
With Transitive Verbs. The most common

it is
when
to pursue
all
accusative the object of a transitive verb. One cannot hope the uses of the accusative in the order of historical
For instance, no one knows whether cognate accusative (of inner content or objective result) preceded the ordinary objective use of the case. Does the adverbial accusative (so
development.
common
in adjectives) precede the accusative with verbs?
These
points have to be left unsettled.
In actual usage the accusative
with transitive verbs

to a noun.
calls for
sitive" needs a word.
It
most attention. But the term "tranmeans a verb whose action passes over
be intransitive in another language,
ixTj-re
This idea
prj
may
as,
for instance,
dfiuvere fxrjre t6v ovpavbv

is
rrjv yrju
(Jas. 5
12).
In English
6(j.vvco
rendered by 'swear by.'

for.'
Cf. epydi;ead
nrj ttju
^pdaiv (Jo. 6 :27), English 'work

transitive, as dp.1, for example.
Not all Greek verbs are The same verb may be used now
Yificis
transitively,
now
intransitively, as ep.evov
:
(Ac.
epepev Trap' avrols (Ac. 18
3).
So
6 /SXeTCov
rca KpvirTui
20 5) and (Mt. 6 4)
: :
and t'l 81 (ÛreLs to Kdp(f>os (Mt. 7:3). Cf. English word "see." As further illustration of the freedom of the Greek verb note j8Xe7reT t'l aKovtTt (Mk. 4 24), /SXerere tovs Kvvas (Ph. 3:2), /SXeTrcre Atto t^s ivfxrjs (Mk. 8 15).^ There is indeed a difference between the accusative and the use of a preposition as in êbytTe ttiv iropveiav (1 Cor. G 18) and cêvyeTe dro ttjs dduXoXarpeias (1 Cor. 10 14).
:
N. T. Ck., p. 311. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1<)()4, p. 1.52. O.P. 477 (21) tTa is so uso(L Tho arc. ia used in the Ran.s. for a point of time. Cf. Whitney, tian.s. (Jr., p. Qg. For cxx. in the LXX see C. and S., Sel. from the LXX, p. .%. Cf. also Abbott,
2
Blass, Gr. of
Job. Gr., p. 75.
Green, llandb.,
etc., p.
230.
472

for practical purposes
But
erty.
dTTo
many Greek
In the case of
0o/3eo/zat
:
verbs were used with libwith accus. (Mt. 10 26, 28) or with
:
and ablative (Mt. 10
28)
we have a Hebraism. Moulton

:
:
(ProL,
admits that this use of airo is a "translation-Hebraism" (p). It occurs in both Mt. (10 28) and Lu. (12 4) and represents probably the Aramaic original. Cf. opdre Kal (pvXaaaeade airb
p. 102)
(Lu. 12
11.
3,
15)
and
opSre koI irpoaex^re awo (Mt. 16

4>v\d(X(xco.
6).
Xen. (Cyr.,
9)
uses dwo with
This matter
will call for further
discussion directly.
But we have already observed that transitive verbs in Greek The transitiveness may be as clearly expressed by a dative as with dKoKovdeco, the genitive with eTLdvixeco, the ablative with dToarepkco, etc. The accusative is
do not always have the accusative.
indeed the normal case with transitive verbs, but not the only one. Some verbs continued to use the accusative parallel with the other cases. Thus eTLXapddvoixaL has rd ixh oTrlaw in Ph. 3 13,
:
but
(pLXoêvias in
Heb. 13
2.
Sometimes the point hes

fxep Ti]s
(jicovrjs
in the difrriv
ference of case, as aKOVOVTes

(})0)vriv
(Ac. 9:7), but
8^
ovK fjKovcav (Ac.
22
9).
Then again verbs

:
otherwise in-
position.
be rendered transitive by the preposition in comTrjv 'lepeLxo) (Lu. 19 4. 1), but eKeiurjs in 19 So TrapawXevaai. ttju "E(l)eaov (Ac. 20 16), etc. Another introductory remark about transitive verbs is that it is not a question of
transitive
Cf. Sirjpxero
:
may
the voice of the verb.
Many active verbs
are intransitive like
ei/jil;
middle verbs may be either transitive or intransitive; even passive verbs may be transitive. Thus tjkovou raOra (Lu. 16 14), eKTrjaaro
:
xoopiov (Ac. 1
18),
and
/jltj
oivv 4>o0r]6rjTe
avTovs
(Mt. 10
:
26) are all
transitive constructions.
Cf.
Mk.
38; Ro. 1
16; 2
Tim.
for tTraiaxvvo/jLaL (passive) with accusative.
One
cannot, of course, mention
all
the N. T. transitive verbs

of the most frequent verbs
that have the accusative.

that are not always
Here
is
list
but sometimes have the accusa'ASi/ceco indeed may be either transitive (Mt. 20 tive} 13) or intransitive (Ac. 25 11), in the one case meaning 'do wrong to,' in the other 'be guilty.' BXaTrro? (only twice in the N. T., Mk. 16 18; Lu. 4 35) is transitive both times. Bor/êco has only dative (Mk. 9 22) and wêXeo; only accusative (Mk. 8 36). In Lu. 17 2 we have Xuo-treXet avrQ. 'Awopeo/jLaL is always intransitive in the N. T. (Hke 5ta7r.) except in Ac. 25 20 (so ancient Greek sometimes). kivo(jTpk<t>onaL as in Attic is found with the accusative in Tit. 1': 14 and Heb. 12 25. In 2 Tim. 1 15 the aorist passive
transitive,
: :
:
'
See Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk., pp. 87-89.
Cf. also W.-Th., pp. 221
ff.
THE CASES
(aTre(TTpa(f)r]aav /le) is
(nTfiSEIs)
473
SO used.
For
like
use of the aorist or future

vlov fxov
passive with accusative see evrpair-qaovTat rbv
(Mt. 21 37),
:
where the earher writers generally had dative (ej/rpeTro/iat) kiraLax^^^V M (Mk. 8 38) from kiroLLaxovoixai, whereas alax^vofxai is intransitive (dxo and abl. in 1 Jo. 2 28). So also ohbev a-n-eKpidr] (Mk. 15 5) as oiidev aireplvaTo (Mt. 27: 12), but note aireKpldt] irpos ov8e ev p^p.a (Mt. 27 14). Cf. tI aTTOKpLdfi (Mk. 9:6). For (j)o^r]efJTe 26 and note tpojSyjdiJTe airo twv aTvoKTtivbvTwv aijTohs see Mt. 10 (10 28) which happens to be in imitation of the Hebrew idiom (Cf. above.) See Jer. 1 8. {p) as of the English "be afraid of." In Mt. 10 31 (poêlade is intransitive. BacTKaivoj in Attic Greek was used with the dative in the sense of 'envy,' but in Gal. 3 1 the accusative in the sense of 'bewitch.' B\aa4>7]iJLeoo in the Attic had ets as in Lu. 12 10, but it
;
:
: :
also occurs as transitive with accusative (Mt. 27:39).
In 2 Pet.
/carapdoyuat
12
we
find h, not
ets (cf.
Jude
:
10).
'ETrTjpedfco
1
has the accusa-
tive,
not dative as Attic, in Lu. 6
28;
Pet. 3
:
16.
So
has
i/yuas
:
(some MSS.
vp.7p.\ike
Attic) in Lu. 6
28.
:
Cf.
Mk.
:
11
:
21;
with accusative see Jo. 9 28; Ac. 23 4, and for XvfxaivojjLaL see Ac. 8 3. The MSS. vary in Heb. 8 8 between avTovs and avrols (as in Attic) with ixkixôp.ai, but W. H. read ahJas. 3
9.
For
XotSopeco
Tovs.
In Mt. 5 11 and 27:44 oveidL^co has the accusative, though Attic used the dative. The accusative alone occurs with vlSpiôj (Lu. 11 45). So also both evXoyecc (Lu. 2 28) and KaKoXoyeco (Ac.
: :
:
19
9)
have the accusative.

In Jo. 8 27
In Ac. 23
5 ovk
1
epeZs Kanais is
:
with the accusative.

d-wov.
:
In the margin of Jo.
we have
(Ph. 3
:
t6v irarepa avrols
found H. give 6v W. eXeyev, with which

15
compare
ovs eXeyov
18),
a construction
is
common
in
the
older Greek.
similar construction
ev (/caXcos) Troteoj, /ca/cws Troteco, etc.
found in Attic Greek with In the N. T., however, note av(Lu. 6

:
TOis ev TTOLetv
(Mk. 14
7)
and
/caXoJs iroLelre rots fxiaovaLV
27).
The remaining
verbs' that call for discussion in this connection
cannot be grouped very well. They will be treated simply in In the LXX yehonai is fairly common with the accusative, and some examples occur in other later writers instead of the usual genitive.^ In the N. T. the genitive is still the usual case {Oavarov, Lu. 9 27; Jo. 8 52; Heb. 2:9; belirvov, Lu.
alphabetical order.
: :
14
'
24; dupeas, Heb.
6:4;
(xr)bev6s,
Ac. 23
14),
but the accusative
Volker, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, pp. 0-S, jîvos the following verbs as having
SovXtOco,
kinOvukcis,
XvTrecii, *
the ace. in the pap.: aWaaaw,

inrafTaw, xpaoyuat, etc.
tTri.Tvyx6.voi,
iinXavOdi'oijLaL,
iîpxofiai, tvdoKiCi}, KaTTjyopiu), Kpartu, Kvpitvw,
TrapiaTanai, Tropevofiai, TrXi/pou",
Cf. Abbott, Joli. dr., p. 77.
474
is

:
NEW TESTAMENT
:
found in Jo. 2 9 {t6 vSoip) and Heb. 6 5 (koXou deov pwo). In Rev. 17 3 we even have ye/uovTa ovbuara instead of bvonaTcov. The accusative appears with yopvirereo) (Mk. 10 17), but absolutely in Mk. 1:40, and with luirpoadev in Mt. 27 29. In Rev. 2 14 5t5do-/cco has the dative {t(^ ôXclk), a construction which might a priori seem natural with this verb, but not so used in Greek (cf. Latin and English) .1 Ati/'dw and Tretmoj are intransitive in the N. T. save in Mt. 5 6 where the accusative is used, not the usual genitive. Apdo-o-o/xat appears only once (1 Cor. 3 19) in a quotation from the LXX and has the accusative. 'EXeeco is transitive (Mt. 9 27, etc.) as is okretpco (Ro. 9 'Efiwopevo15, quotation from LXX). nai occurs only twice, once intransitive (Jas. 4 13), once with accusative (2 Pet. 2:3). 'Evedpevco likewise occurs only twice (Lu. 11 54; Ac. 23 21) and with accusative both times. Cf. O.P. 484 (ii/A.D.) in sense of 'defraud' with accusative. (Moulton, CI. 'EwL9vjj.eoi} is found with the genitive (Ac. 20 Rev., Apr., 1904). 33) or with the accusative (Mt. 5 28) according to W. H. (BD, etc.). 'EpydônaL is often transitive, but Trjv OaXaacrav epyaôvraL (Rev. 18 17) is somewhat unusual, to say the least. Ei;a77eXii'ojuai (active in Rev. 10 7; 14 6; passive Gal. 1:11; Heb. 4 6, etc.) has the Attic idiom of accusative of the thing and dative of the person (Lu. 4 43; Ac. 8 35, etc.), but examples occur of the
:
:
:
accusative of the person and of the thing (Lu. 3
18; Ac. 8
25).
90 note) denies two e7ra77eXtaj' with 6tl ravr-qv 6 accusatives to evayy., construing ttjv This is rather forced, but even so the on clause Beds eKireirX-qpcoKev. would be in the accus. EuSoKew is trans, in the LXX and so appears in the N. T. twice (Mt. 12: 18, quotation from the LXX; Heb. 10:
In Ac. 13
:
32 Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p.
6, 8,
LXX
also).
Euxapto-rea) in 2 Cor.
1:11 occurs
in the passive
shows that the active would have had an accusative of the thing and a dative of the Cf., for instance, T'KeoveKT7]9u>iJ.ev in 2 Cor. 2:11 with person. 17 f.), only eux- did not go so far as to kirXeoveKT-qaa vfias (2 Cor. 12 have the accusative. On the other hand in the N. T. dapp'eoi is not transitive (2 Cor. 10 2 instr.), though in the older Greek it was sometimes. It occurs absolutely (2 Cor. 5:6), with kv (2
(to xcipto-îa vxo.pLaTr]9fi) in a construction that
: :
Cor. 7
16),
with
:
ets
(2 Cor. 10
1).
Gay/xdfco
Lu. 7
9,
:
Ac. 7 31 and Ju. 16.

:
epta/i/Seuco
has the accusative in has the accusative in 2
Cor 2 14 and Col. 2 15, though the verb has a different sense in each passage. 'Iepoi;p7eaj occurs only once (Ro. 15 16) and with In Heb. 2 17 l\a.(jKop.aL has accusative of the the accusative.
: :
p. 80.
THE CASES (nTQSEIs)

thing as in
88).
475
LXX,
Philo and inscriptions (Blass, Gr. of N. T., p.

:
has accusative in 2 Cor. 9 2 and 11 30. KXatcj has accusative in Mt. 2 18 (O. T. quotation unlike LXX), but kirl omits kirl. KXrjpovoneoo has only the However, in Lu. 23 28.
'Kavxo-oixai
:
: :
accusative.
has accusative in Lu. 8 52 (ctti Rev. 1:7). Kpareco out of forty-six instances in the N. T. has the genitive in only eight, rest accusative. (Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 65). ^ MaKoTrro^tat
:
67}Tev(a is
Ac. 14
a late word and has the accusative in Mt. 28 19 and The other examples (Mt. 13 52; 27 57) are passive, but in Mt. 27 57 the active (intr.) is the marginal reading of W. H. Cf. old English verb "disciple." Me/xôyuat has the accu:
:
21.
sative, not dative, in

is
Heb. 8
8,
but the text

:
is
doubtful.
Mcj/co
usually intransitive, but in Ac. 20
5, 23,
the accusative occurs

avankvoo (1
(sense of 'wait for')1

:
Cf. also accusative with

:
Th.
10),
Trepi/jikvco
(Ac.
4), virofxeuco
(Heb. 10
32) in sense of 'en-
dure.'
NtKaco
it
is
transitive with accusative usually, but in Rev.
15
uses
with ablative.
:
So
êi/tfo/xai is
transitive with ac-
cusative in Heb. 13
2.
"OAtzû/xt
usually has
:
(Mt. 23
16, etc.,
13), or occurs absolutely cf. Hebrew |), sometimes Kara (Heb. 6 (sense of 'swear by,' common in accusative the (Mt. 5 34), but appears only in Jas. 5 15 for LXX) cf. 4 Hos. ancient Greek,
:
The 73), a cognate accusative. 12, except opKov ov cbfxoaev (Lu. 1 papyri show it with the accusative, B.U. 543 (i/B.c). Moulton,
:
CI. Rev.,
Dec,
1901.
"Op/ctfoj
'Ovecdiô:
has the accusative, not the dative,
has the accusative in both instances that occur in the N. T. (Mk. 5 7; Ac. 19 13), while eôpKifw (Mt. 26 63) has the accusative and Kara also (ere Kara rod Oeov). 'Oijloin the
N. T.
Xoyeoo is
with the accusative or absolutely, but in Mt. 8 (two examples) ev is used as the translation of the Aramaic 3. Moulton ^ is unable to find any justification for this idiom in Greek and calls attention to the fact that both Matthew and Luke have it in a parallel passage as
10
:
common
32 (two examples) and Lu. 12
proof of the Aramaic original as the language of Jesus.
One may
eêXeâro
note
TreptjSaXeTrat
:
lixarlois
(Rcv. 3:5).
The
Use of
y]iJ.lv
(Ac. 15
7) is
'among us.' N. T., p. 90) has the accusative instead of the dative of the person. In 2 Cor. 12 21 ivtvdko) has the accusative, but iirl in Rev. 18 11.
:
not parallel as Winer^ observes. Here ev y]p.'tv means In Ac. 27 22 irapaivkLo (like irapaKaXeco, Blass, Gr. of
Moulton
^
(Prol., p.
(ib., p.
07
f.)
has a very heli)ful discussion of

tliat
Trtareiicu
Moulton
235)
comments on Wellhiiuscn'a remark

and
Kparkw.
=
prefers
uniformly ace. with

2
imovoi, Karriyopiu
Prol., p. 104.
W.-Th., p. 226.
476
A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

absolute and not meaning 'entrust.' Under the dative UtaTevu is often absolute (Jo. 1 50) will be pertinent.
: :
when not
his
remarks
and often means 'entrust' when it has the accusative (Jo. 2 UpoaKvveo) in the ancient Greek uses the accusative regularly.
24).
In
the Ptolemaic inscriptions the accusative is still the more. usual case/ but the N.T.uses the dative twice as often as the accusative.^
In Jo. 4: 23 the accusative and the dative occur with httle difference in result.^ Cf. also Rev. 13 4, 8. Abbott" observes that the
:
dative
is
the regular usage in the

:
LXX. As
to varepew
we
:
find
it
used absolutely (Mt. 19 20), with the ablative (Ro. 3 23) once with the accusative (ev ere varepeL, Mk. 10 21) as in Ps. 22
:
and
:
1.
Some
:
of the
MSS.
in
Mark have crot,

:
as the
LXX usually.^
:
êvyo3
occurs absolutely (Mt. 2 13), with airo (Mt. 23 33), with k (Ac. 27 30) or with the accusative (Mk. 5 14; 1 Tim. 6:11). So 36) with accusative while d7ro0cu7co kK4>evyo: is transitive (Lu. 21
: :
has accusative in 2 Pet. 2 20. ûXaaau has, of course, the accusative, but in Ac. 21 25 two accusatives occur with the sense of In Lu. 12 15 the middle is used with awo and in 1 Jo. 'shun.' 5 21 (f)v\dâT eavTo. diro. XpdofjLai still uses the instrumental (cf.
: :
:
uior in Latin), as Ac. 27: 3, 17, etc., but in
Cor. 7: 31 the ac-
cusative
is
found
(xpcoMf^'ot Tou kogixov) in response to the general
accusative tendency. accusative with

It
xpo-op.ai
Cf. KaraxpiîêvoL in the
same
verse.
The
appears
in later writers."
remains in this connection to call special attention to the intransitive verbs which have the accus. by reason of a preposition in composition. This applies to intrans. verbs and trans, verbs also which in simplex used some other case. 'Am furnishes one example in dva-ddWco (Ph. 4 10) if to (ppovetu there is the object
:
of the verb after the transitive use in the
LXX
(Ezek. 17: 24).
But most probably

'AireKivi^w (Lu. 6
is eXTTifoj
:
this
is
35)
:
the accusative of general reference. indeed transitive with accusative, but so

is
:
(1 Cor. 13
7; 2 Cor. 1
13, etc.)
sometimes.
Here are
21;
cf.
some
ovTO
examples of 5ia: rdireKayos dLairXevaavres (Ac. 27: 5), dieropevTToXets

:
TOLS
(Ac. 16 :4), 8ie\6oov

1
TTju
MaKedoviav (Ac. 19
:
ace. in Lu. 19
and gen.
eKdfrjs in
19
4).
In Heb. 11
29
(Ste/ST?-
aav
TTju
daXaaaav
(hs
did ^rjpds yfjs) Blass^
genitive (with
6td).
Even
kpepyeco
12
1
6, 11.
As examples
of /card
notes both accusative and has the accusative in 1 Cor. observe KaTeâprjaa vp-ds (2 Cor. 12
^
2 3
Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 436. Moulton, Prol., p. 64. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 80.
Joh. Gr., p. 78.
'
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 89. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 78. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 89.
THE CASES
16),
vfJ.as
(riTSiZEIi:)
477
(Heb.
KaTa!3pa(3evkTco (Col.
18), KaT-qyoivldavTO âaiXelas
11
33).
Note
also KaracrocpLadiJLevos to yevos (Ac. 7: 19).

1
:
Cf. /cara:
XpoifxevoL in 1
irapa note
Trjv KplcxLv
irapaâlveTe
:
Cor. 7:31, but instrumental in kvTo\r]v (Mt. 15 rriv

42;
cf.
Cor. 9
18.
For
3)
and
irapepx^ffde
(Lu. 11
15
29 and
Mk.
48).
Hepi furnishes
several examples like

:
ywoLKa Tepiayetv (1 Cor. 9:5; cf. Mt. 9 35, etc.), but intransitive in Mt. 4 23. This verb, a7w, however, is both transitive (Mt. 21 7) and intransitive (Mk. 1 lleptepxoAtemt has the accusative in 1 38) in the simple form.
o.bi\(l>r]v
: :
Tim. 5
25
:
13, but elsewhere intransitive. So irepteaTrjcrap avrop in Ac. but intransitive (Trepteo-rwra) in Jo. 11 42. In Mk. 6 55 we find TTdpikbpaixov oK-qv ttjp x^p^^- With irpb one notes irpoayu (Mt. 14 22, irpodyeLV avrov), irporjpxeTO avTOVS (Lu. 22 47), with
:
7,
which compare TrpoeKevaeraL hoowLOV avrov (Lu. 1 17). In Ac. 12 10 both 6tepxo/xat and wpoepxoiJ.ai, are used with the accusative.
:
Ilpoo-^coj'eco,
like irpoaKweo),
:
or the dative (Mt. 11

{wavTa avvepytl 6
6e6s)
,
16).
has either the accusative (Lu. 6 13) If 6 deos be accepted in Ro. 8 28

: :
more than doubtful, then avvepyei would be transitive (cf. instr. in Jas. 2 :22). For virep observe 14) and v virepexovaa irdpTa povp virepKTeipojjiev eavrovs (2 Cor. 10 (Ph. 4:7). With viro we can mention virofxho} (1 Cor. 13 7, but see fxepo) itself), vireirXevaafxep ttjp Kpr]Tr]P (Ac. 27: 7) and prjaiop 5e tl Thus it will be seen that in the N. T. 16). virodpanopTes (Ac. 27 the accusative with transitive verbs, both simple and compound,
which
is
:
follows the increase in the use of the accusative in line with the
current vernacular.
really implied,
Sometimes indeed the object of the verb is not expressed, but and the verb is transitive. Thus irpoaexeTe eavToZs
:
(Lu. 17
3)
implies top povp.

:
Cf. also Tpoaex^Te diro tu)P \pevboTrpo^t]~
Tuv (Mt. 7
15)
and
kirkxoiP ttws
(Lu. 14
7)
/card Ke(j)a\rjs exo^P (1
must be supplied, and with duTptôp (Ac. 15 35) xpopop is needed. It may be either that of in(h) The Cognate Accusative. ner content, exdpwap xo-pd-p (Mt. 2 10), objective result duapTkpopTa dp-apTiap (1 Jo. 5 16), 4)v\d.aaoPTi^ (})v\aKds (Lu. 2 8), or even
Cor. 11:4).
In
eTLdrjaeTai aoi (Ac.

:
18
10) xetpoLs
a kindred word in idea but a different root, as dap-qaeraL oXlyas Considcral)le freedom must thus be given {irXr^yds, Lu. 12 :48). the term "cognate" as to both form and idea. The real cognate
accusative
a form of the Figura Etymologica as a])plicd to cither internal or external object. The quasi-cognate is due to analogy where the idea, not the form, is cognate.^ The cognate is not very
is
1
Giles,
Man.
of Conip. Pliilol., p. 304.
478

in the papyri/
NEW TESTAMENT
common
quent.^
but in the Hebrew the idiom is very fregood Greek to have^ this "playing with paronymous terms," as a passage from Plato's Protagoras 326 D
It is perfectly
illustrates, uiroypaxl/avTes
Tts
TTOLfxaiveL
KoliJ.i'yiv
y pan/xas
rfj ypacjjiSi
oDrco to ypanixaritov.
:
Cf.
(1
Cor. 9:7).
So
also in Lu. 8
5, k^viKdiv 6
(TTelpwv Tov aireipai top airbpov.

xxxiii,
4,
Gildersleeve (Am. Jour, of Philol.,
p.
488) objects properly to Cauer's crediting, in his
Grammatica Militans, "the division of the accusative into the object affected and the object effected" to Kern, since Gildersleeve himself was using it as far back as 1867. In modern English this repetition of the same root is condemned, but it was not so in Greek. Conybeare and Stock ^ observe that the Hebrew and the Greek coincide on this point, and hence the excess of such accusatives in the LXX in various applications. And the N. T., here unlike the. papyri, shows an abundance of the cognate accusatives.
The accusative
3
:
of the inner content
may
:
be illustrated
p.r}
l)y ttjv
SiKalav KpiaLV Kpivere (Jo. 7: 24), tov 4>ol3ov avToov

14), av^tL Tr}u av^rjaiv tov deov (Col.
(po^yjdrjTe (1
Pet.
19), iVa aTparevrj ttjv KoXifV
(XTpaTelav (1
Tim.
18), ayojviôv 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
(Rev. 17:
6).
Cf. Rev. 16
9.
i]
In
Mk.
10
38, t6 âirTiaixa 6 kyd)

:
and Jo. 17: 26, ayairr] fjv riyaTrjaas p.e (cf. Eph. 2 4), the relative shows this use of the accusative. In Jo. 17 26 and Eph. 2 4 {rjv -qyairrjaev rinds) the Cognate accusative of the inner
PaTTTLôixai,
: :
is used along with the accusative of the person also.^ Indeed in Eph. 4:1, Trjs KXrjaews ^s eK\7]6r]Te, the relative has been attracted from the cognate accusative. The modern Greek keeps
content
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.
33), iravra eyKpareueTaL (1 Cor. 9
25),
perhaps even
(Jas.
tp'ltov
oi'dev
TOVTO
vare-
epxofJLat
(2 Cor. 13
1),
fx-qSev
dLaKpLVOfievos
1:6),
P7]aa (2
Cor. 12:11).
Cf. the interrogative tI mrepoo (Mt. 19:20),

to
p. 436.
But note
^-qfidav
ki-nfju.waa/iTji',
B.U. 146
(ii/iii), irpocrKVPelv
2 3 ^
irpocTKvi'rjfxa
Letr. 70, 79, 92 (i/s.c.).

p. 56.
*
C. and
>S.,
Scl.
from the Sept.,
lb., p. 57.
lb., p. 56.
Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 76, finds no instance of such a construction with

Blass, Gr. of
dyairu) in anc.
6
Gk. N. T. Gk.,
p. 91.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 329.
THE CASES
the relative o yap airkdavev and
fco kv crapKL
(nTfiSEIs)
479
:
o 5e
f^ (Ro. G
10).
Cf. also o
j^Dj'
(Gal. 2
20)
which
:
may
be equal to 'in that,' adverbial
accusative.^
In 2 Cor. 12
13 the accusative relative follows the
nominative interrogative
sative, like iravTa iraaiv
:
tL kartv 6 riacrudrjTe.
This neuter accusa-
tive of the adjective easily glides into the purely adverbial accudpecr/cco
(1
Cor. 10
33), iravra fxou fxefxvrjade
2). (1 Cor. 11 As a further example of the more objective result one
may
note
jjxiJ-a\6:Teuaev alxiJLaXuaiav
(Eph. 4
8,
LXX), but Winer^
rightly
shows that this type is chiefly represented in the N. T. by the relative. So fxaprvpla rju ixaprvpel (Jo. 5 32), bLadrjKT] rjv Siadrjao/jLat (Heb. 8 10), ^\a(x4>riiJ.iaL oaa kav ^\acr4>r]p.i](J(j:aLV (Mk. 3 28), 7ra77eXta rfV
: :
kirrjyydXaTo (1 Jo. 2
25).
The cognate
serve
accusative of the outward object (result also) calls
for little discussion.
Besides ({)v\daaoPTes ûXa/cas (Lu. 2
8)
:
ob30,
6}Ko86fxr]aei> Tr]v oiKiav
(Mt. 7:
24), drjaare 5e<r/xds
(Mt. 13
but
as
NBC
have
els).
The analogous
fxri
cognate accusative
TTTorjaLV (1
is
seen in such constructions

jStcoaat
(f)oôvfxevaL
iJ.rj8efj.Lav
Pet. 3:6),
xP^vov (1 Pet.
rjXdop
rjijepas
4:2),
(Col. 2
Saprjaerai.
iroWas (oXiyas) in Lu.

ttju 0861'
12:47
(48),
:
b8bv (Lu. 2 :44), eiropevero

:
avTOV (Ac. 8
39), avêL av^rjaLV

:
19),
and the
relative also as in opKov 6p &p.oaev (Lu. 1

:
73)
Cf. the instrumental opKco cbfjoaev (Ac. 2

{i)
30), etc.
satives.
Some verbs may have two accuone count space and time, three accusatives are possible.^ In Mk. 10 18 (rt /xe Xe7ets ayaOov;) we have three accusatives, one (rt) being adverbial. In the Sanskrit it is very common to have two accusatives with one verb.'* When one recalls that the accusative is the old and normal case with transi-
Double Accusative.
Indeed,
if
tive verbs,
it is
just as
many
transitive verbs
not surprising that some verbs use two accusatives, have an accusative and a dative,
an accusative and an ablative, an accusative and an intrumental, an accusative and a genitive. This double accusative is common in Homer ^ and a "multiplicity of accusatives is a characteristic
of Pindar's style." ^
It is
common
idiom
*
in the papj^ri also.''
It
1 2 ^ 8 7
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
Gr., p. 97.
p. 91.
W.-Th.,
Giles,
p. 225.
Whitnoy, Sans. Gr.,
p. 90.
Monro, Hoin.
Man.
of Coinp. Philol., p. .306.
He
Volkcr, Paj). Gr. Synt. Sikm-., p. i:if.; Moulton, CI. Rov., 1901, p. 430. citos Hi irdaaTo viipLv rijn ai'coT&Trjv, B.H. 212 (ii/A.u.). For the Attic in.s('r.
see Mcistcrh., p. 204.
480
is

unknown
in
in Latin (cf, doceo)
NEW TESTAMENT
{teach).
not
very
common
and English modern Greek (Thumb, Handb.,
It is
p. 36),
going
Middleton^ holds that the double acsince, in a number of examples, alternative constructions occur like accusative and ablative with atreco (Ac. 3 2) and d0atpeo/xat (Lu. 16 3). Cf. two accusatives with (hveiSLôp in Mt. 27 44. Perhaps the simplest kind of a double accusative is what is called
: : :
beyond the ancient idiom. cusative is due to analogy,
the predicate accusative, really a sort of apposition.

vficis
Thus omeTi
This appositional feature is seen also in the passive of those verbs where a double nominative occurs. For other examples with verbs of saying see Xe'/w (Mk. 10
\kyco SovXovs (Jo. 15
:
15).
18)
and
elirov in
Jo. 10
35
(eKeivovs dire deovs), etc.

'Iwavrju,
Similar to this
cf. 'Irjaovv
is KaXeco
(KoXkaeLS to
6voiJ.a
avrov
1
:
Lu.
21
31; eKoXovv auTo
Zaxaplav,
14).
13;
verse
59).
We
:
happen
to have the pas-
sive of this very construction in Lu. 2

'Irjaovs).
(kXij^r; to ovofxa
avTov
Cf. further
:
Mt. 22
UeTpov (Lu. 6
in Jo. 9
:
'OixoXoyeco
:
Observe also 6v nal wvofxacxev appears with the double accusative

43.
and curiously nowhere else outside two accusatives as in TttDra ruvfjLat ^wIolv (Ph. 3:7). See 2 Pet. 3 15; Heb. 11 26. Blass^ observes that wMtfoj and uFoXaAt/Sai^co do not have the double accusative in the N. T. UoLov/j-aL in the same sense does occur, as iroLovfxaL Trjv \}/vxhv TL/xiav (Ac. 20 24), and very frequently in the
22;
1
Jo. 4
2; 2 Jo. 7
of John's writings.
'Hyeoât likewise has
active, as xotets aeavTov Qeov (Jo. 10 :33).
Cf. further for

:
Troteco
:
Mt. 4
19; Lu. 19
:
46; Jo. 5
11; 6
15; 19
is
:
7;
Eph. 2
"Exe
14;
Rev. 21
virr]peT7]v,
5.
Closely allied to this use of xotew

:
exw {elxou
29.
'lojavtjv
Ac. 13
:
5)
and note Heb. 12

be observed
TidrjfXL
9;
Ph. 2
fie irapr]-
Tr]p.kvov
(Lu. 14
18) is to
also.
Cf. also aeavTov wapexo:
ixevos TVTTov (Tit.
2:7).
Kajxâvoo is SO
"KaêTe
tovs irpocprjTas.
Kvevna TO aytov WeTO einaKOTrovs

Ktv)
used in Jas. 5 10, virbêiyp-a be exemplified by vfxds to (Ac. 20 28). Cf. Heb, 1 2 {edr]-
may
and Ro. 3
:
25, 6v wpoedeTO 6 6eds iXaaTtipcov.

tIs
:
KadlaTiqixi
:
shows
Cf.
several examples like

also Ac. 7
10;
ixe
KaTeo-Tiâev kplttjv
:
(Lu. 12
14).
Heb. 7
'
28.
In Gal. 2
18
we have
TrapaâT-qv kjxav:
Tov avuLffTavo:.
irpooplôj in
AToSe'iKPVfjLL
:
Ro. 8 29.
shows an example in 1 Cor. 4 9 and For further verbs with two accusatives, not
:
/xat
irepLayo: (1 Cor. 9:5), Uavbo: (2 Cor. 3:6), UXkyo2:5), v\pbo: (Ac. 5 31). This second accusative may be either substantive, adjective or 'participle. As specimens of the adjective take 6 Toc7]aas jue 117177
to
weary one, see

(Jas.
Anal, in Synt., p. 25.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 92.
THE CASES
(Jo.
(nTiiZEIs)
481
:
11), Tovs TOLovTovs evTlfjLovs excre (Ph.
29).
In
Cor. 4
cbs
indeed the adjective makes three accusatives and with

Beds
riij,ds
four, 6
tovs aToaroXovs eaxo-Tovs aireSaêv
cos
eTidavaTiovs (so
W.
H.).
As an example
7
:
of the participle see Karkariqaiv avrdu
rjyovfjLeuop
(Ac.
10).
Cf. 2
Tim. 2
8.
Sometimes ws occurs with the second

avrbv elxov (Mt. 14
:
accusative, as in
cbs irpo(f)r]Tr]v
jui)
5).
Cf. 21
cos cos
26.
In 2 Th. 3
(t)6v.
15 note
:
cos
kxdpdv riyelade, dXXd vovdeTelre

ijjuas
a8e\virr]-
In
Cor. 4
observe also
:
Xoyiêadco dvdpcjiros
cos
peras XpiaTov.
In 2 Cor. 10
Xoytô/jieuovs ri/xds cos
with the participle, tovs Kara adpKa irepLTarovvTas. In 2 Cor. 6 4 cos

2
:
we have
cos
6eov didKovoL is
not exactly what

elvai is
SiaKopovs
:
the predicate nominative in Ro. 8
would 36 (LXX).
be.
Cf.
cos
with
Sometimes
presence.
used as the copula before such a predicate

is
accusative where the sense
not greatly altered by
its
absence or
iauTovs
As a matter
(Lu. 20
:
of fact with ehau
we have
indirect dis-
course with the accusative and infinitive.

diKaiovs elpaL
So vwoKptpophovs
20),
where
does not have etmi.
Cf. avpelvat
:
eaT-qaaTe eavrovs dypovs elpai (2

peKpovs (Ro.
Cor. 7: 11), Xoylêode eavTOvs
do not have etmt. In Ph. 3 7 we do not have elpaL, while in verse 8 we do after riyovixaL. The predicate accusative with els used to be explained as an undoubted Hebraism.^ But Moulton^ is only willing to admit it is a secondary Hebraism since the papyri show a few examples like eaxop Trap' vjj.ojp els 8d(peL0p) aTepp-ara, K.P. 46 (ii/A.D.), "a recurrent
formula," a probable vernacular "extension of
tination."
ets
6:11), but
ADEFG
expressing des-
Moulton pertinently remarks that *'as a loan" (cos or just the accusative in apposition) and "for a loan" (els) "do not differ except in grammar." But certainly the great frequency of ets in the LXX as compared with even the vernacular kolpt] is due
to the
Hebrew
"7
which
it
so 'often translates.^
:
Cf. dooaere poL

ets
ttip
jralda ravTif}p
eh yvpalKa (Gen. 34
12).
Cf. the similar use of
and
the accusative instead of the predicate nominative
(Xo7ts'o/xat els
Ro. 2
sative;
Winer^ shows parallels for this predicate accufrom the late Greek writers. The N. T. exhibits this ac26, etc.).
ets
cusative in
Trpo4>r]Tr]P
avTOP elxop (Mt. 21
46), dpedpe\l/aTO avTov
Gk. Gr., pp. 332, 378, who says that it is ab.sent in mod. But mod. Gk. docs use yia. instoud of pred. ace, as ?xw tovs fipdxovs -ytd Kpipffari (Thumb, Ilandb., p. 3G). Cf. also W.-Th., p. 22S; Bhiss, Gr. of N. T.
^
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gk., p. 93. C. and

*
Prol., p. 72.
lb.
from the Sept., p. 81 f. Cf. also W.-Th., p. 22S. In the mod. Gk. the ace. of the thing to some extent takes the place
S., Sol.
of the dat. or abl.
(Thumb, llandb.,
p. 37).
482

(Ac. 7
:
NEW TESTAMENT
as SiaTayas ayykXwv (Ac.
:
iavrfj eis viov
21), eXaêre top

els
vo/jlop
53), ^yeipev top Aauet5 avTols

</)cDs
âaCKka (Ac. 13
22), TcêiKo, ae
one must admit some Hebrew influence here because of its frequency. Ph. 4 16 is not a case in point. See further under ets. But there is another kind of double accusative besides the predets
eî'coi'
(Ac. 13
47,
LXX).
When
all is said,
icate accusative.
It is usually described as the accusative of the
person and of the thing. This in a general way is true of this group of double accusatives. Some of these were also cognate accusatives, as in KaTaKKlpare avrovs KXtaias (Lu. 9 14) and, accord:
ing to
(Jo. 17
some MSS.,
:
b-qaare
avra deafxas (Mt. 13
30),
fjp
ijyairrjaas jue
Eph. 2:4), both of the outer and the inner obCf. the passive 6 eyib /SaTrrtfo/iat (Mk. 10 38) which really ject. implies two accusatives in the active. Further examples of this cognate accusative of the inner object with the negative pronoun
26;
cf.
also
may
rPap
be seen in ovSh fxe rjdLKr^craTe (Gal. 4 12; cf. 5 2), ij.ri8ep /3XdIn Mt. 27 44 the second 35). See also Ac. 25 10. accusative is likewise a pronoun, to avTo wveldLôp avrop, while in
:
(Lu. 4
Mk.
6 34 it is an adjective, diSaaKeip avrovs woWd. Indeed SMcxkoo is just one of the verbs that can easily have two
:
accusatives (asking and teaching).
Cf. also vnds otSaêt wdpTa (Jo.

d-n-oaTaalap 5t-
14
26.
In Ac. 21
21
we have a normal example,

In Heb. 5
:
Saa/cets
dTro Mcouaecos tovs 'lovbalovs.

is
12
we note
three
the accusative of general reference with Cf. Mt. 15 9 the infinitive, tov diddaKeLP vfxds TLPd to. crrotxeta. t<2 BakdidacrKep where one accusative is predicate. In Rev. 2 14
accusatives, but one
:
XdK
we have the
dative, a construction entirely possible in the ab-
stract,^
but elsewhere absent in the concrete. The number of verbs like hbdoKOi which may have two accusatives is not considerable. They include verbs hke atreco in Mt. 7:9, op air-naeL 6 vlos avTov apTOP, but not Mt. 6 8 where vfids is merely accusative of general reference with the infinitive. But we do meet it with
:
alTeo) in
15. But instead of an 1 Pet. 3 with dx6 as in ablative the have accusative of the person we may in 1 Jo. 5 avrov, and tl dx' airoOcrd xapd), Mt. 20 20 BD (against aireXs, and iretp e/xoD Trap' 4 in xapd as Jo. 9, 15, or the ablative with has two acculikewise 'Epcordo; 2. 9 in Ac. the middle fiTrjaaTo Mk. epo); 4 10; \6yop Kayd {kpoiT-qaoi 24 vtxds 21 satives in Mt. only is used middle and active in both 23. 'ApanLfxpridKoi Jo. 16
Mk.
22
f.;
Jo. 16
23;
with the accusative in the N. T. tive save adverbial accusative in

1
{p.ipiPi)<jKoiiaL
only with the geni2),
Cor. 11
and two accusa-
p. 80.
THE CASES (nTnsEis)

tives occur in 1 Cor.
483
rots
17, 6s vfxds avaixv-qaeL
bbohs
{J.OV,
and
in 2
Tim.
aKOi
both in the accusative). With vTOfufxpr]the genitive occurs once in the passive (Lu. 22 61), the accu1
:
((Tt
dm^'coTrupctf,
sative elsewhere,
iravTa,
and two accusatives

:
in Jo. 14
26,
1
virofiv-qaeL vixds
:
and
in Tit. 3
1 (avrovs viroraaaeadaL).
In
Cor. 14
6 ob-
serve
TL vfids (^(peXrjaco.
In 2 Pet.
12
irepl tovtcov
occurs rather
17; 3
than a second accusative.

of the thing
EvayyeXiôfxaL usually has accusative
and dative
:
of the person, as in
Eph. 2
8, etc.
But
32 the accusative of person^ and thing is found, and the same thing is true in Ac. 14 15 (vnds kTrLaTpk4)Hv), taking
in Ac. 13
:
object-sentence as "thing."
yeXiêTai,
Trap'
Indeed
in Gal. 1
(et
ns
u/xas
ua7-
6 xapeXdêre) 6
the same thing exists, for while the

irapd tovto, ti is really
antecedent of
Trapd TOVTO
6.
would be
implied also,
Greek with two accusaHere indeed the ablative may take the place of one accusative, as in 1 Tim. 6 5 with the passive of cLToaTepeoo the ablative is retained (r^s aKrjOeias). But in the N. T. neither airoaTeptw, nor dâtpeco, nor kpvttto: has two accusatives.
in the ancient
tives
is
Another group of verbs
that of depriving, etc.
Either the ablative alone occurs or with dx6 (Lu. 16

42; Rev. 6
:
3; Lu. 19
is
16).
With (pvMaaeaOaL
(Ac. 21
25) avTovs
the ac-
cusative of general reference (so-called "subject") of the infinitive.
But verbs of clothing or unclothing, anointing, etc., do have two accusatives, though not always. Thus k^khvaav avTov ttjv
xXafxhda
Tov
TO.
(Mt. 27
31;
cf.
Mk.
:
15
cf.
17; Lu. 15
22), hkSvaap av-
lp.6.TLa
avTov (Mt. 27
31;
Mk.
15
22).
But
diu<pievvvfjLL
does not have two accusatives nor
Lu. 23:11
some MSS.
omit
avTov.
but
NBLT
(Mt. 27:28). In give two accusatives with wepLlSaXcov, In Jo. 19 2 the text is beyond dispute
irepLTidrjui
:
IfxcLTLOV Trop(f)vpovv
TTepufSoKou avTOU.
Cf. Trept/SaXetrai ev (Rev.

:
3:5).
is
Moreover xptw has two accusatives in Heb. 1 9 eXaiov), a quotation from the LXX. In Rev. 3
{expi.<jeu
:
ae 6 Oeds
18 KoXXovpLov
not the object of kyxp'^crai, but of ayopaaai. 'AXei(/)co is not used with two accusatives, but has the thing in the instrumenlal case (Mk. 6 13). IlXTypoco does not indeed have two accusatives in the
:
N.
T.,
but the passive with accusative in Ph. 1:11 and Col.

following causative verbs have
really involves the idiom.
The
*
two accusatives.
(cf. eôpKecj in
'Op/cl^'co
ae TOP dtbv
(Mk. 5
7) is
a case in point
T., p. 7S
f .,
Herod.).
See
Sirncox, Laii^. of the
N.
aryuca uiisucccssfull}' against the idea
that tvayyeXlônai has two acCB.
484

19
is
:
also Ac.
13 and one example of evopdôi in
1
:
Th. 5
12
27.
The
fxijTe
idea
really to
"cause to swear by."
In Jas. 5
{byLvhtre
fj.r]Te r-qv yrjv yriTe aWov tlvo. opKov) we have two conone "swear by," the other the cognate accusative. So biaixaprhpop-ai in 2 Tim. 4:1 f. Cf. P.O. 79 (ii/A.D.) 6p.pv(ji3 AvroKparopa
TOP ovpavbv
structions,
Kalaapa Map[Ko]v Avpr]\Lov aXrjdyj rj'[at] to. irpo-. Ilortfo; is a good example of the causative sense. Thus 6s av Toriay vfids ttottiplov In Ro. 12 20 SSaros (Mk. 9 41). Cf. Mt. 10 42; 1 Cor. 3:2.
:
i/'co/xtfo)
has the accusative of the person, in

(cf. Jer.
Cor. 13
3 the ac-
cusative of the thing
both these verbs).

Trov% (jioprla
In Lu. 11
SvaâaraKTa.
15 for double accusative with 46 we have (f)opTiêT tovs avdpdoCf. r]\a.TTuaas avTOV /Spaxt' rt in Heb. 2 7
23
(LXX).
Finally
some words
of doing good or
Thus
2).
fjLrjSep
^Xaxpav avrov (Lu.

is
35)
ill have two accusatives. where the pronoun is really a
cognate accusative, as
Cf. Ac. 25
TOLT](TCt)
:
the case with
uûas ovbtv co^tXiyo-et
(Gal. 5
10 'lovbalovs ohUv
Cf. also
rjblK-qKa.
tI ovv
'Irjaovu.
Mk.
15
12,
In Mt. 27: 22 we read though D has tco jSaaiXei
Elsewhere in the N. T. we meet the dative of the person as in Mt. 21 40; Ac. 9 13. See Tepl Sjv
(Blass, Gr.
ofN.
T. Gk., p. 91).
avTTjv TTtiroL-qKadLv, P.
Grenf.
ii,
73 (late iii/A.c), where

her.'
S}v is
attracted
from a='of what they have done to

KaKov (Ac. 16
:
Cf.
p.ir]btv
Trpd^Tjs aeavTca
is
28).
In
Mk.
7: 12 the dative of the person
in
keeping with ancient Greek usage.
In Mt. 17
12
kv avrca
may
els
be more exactly
vfjLas
'in his case'
(ND do
not have h), but note
in Jo. 15
21 and the likeness of this to the
modern Greek
:
Blass {ib., p. 92) is with accusative as the usual dative. compares also the use of h kp-oi (Mk. 14 6) and eh epk (Mt. 26 10) with epyaôpaL and observes that epyaôpac in Attic had sometimes two accusatives. One may compare again the expression H apa 6 Uerpos e-yevero (Ac. 12 18). Xeytji and elirov indeed have two accusatives in the N. T., but in Jo. 1 15 the margin (W. H.,
use of
:
R. V.) really has this idiom.

(j)
Cf. also Ac. 23
5.
With Passive Verbs.
Indeed
the accusative
may
be
found with verbs in the passive voice.

tive
Draeger^
calls
the accusa-
tive with passive verbs in Latin "ein Gracismus."
This accusa:
may
be
of several kinds.
10, exaprjaav x-P^^-
like aireKplOr^v (ov8ep
See cognate accusative in Mt. 2 It occurs with the so-called passive deponents Cf. ohbev aTreKpivaro (Mt. a-KeKpldt), Mk. 15 5).
:
27
12)
and
aTeKpidrj
p.e
\6yov (Mt. 15
(2
23).
As
further instances
note
awecTTpcKpTjaav
Tim.
1
15), evrpaT-qaovTai rbv vlbv p-ov
(Mt.
Hist. Synt., p. 3G2.
THE CASES
21
:
:
(nTfiZEIs)
485
:
Cf.
37), eirataxwdfj fxe (Mk. 8 38), <l)ol3r]9^T avrovs (Mt. 10 26). Mt. 14 :4; 2 Tim 1 15. To all intents and purposes these "deponent" forms are not regarded as passives. This use of
:
the passive
is
common
is
But the
thing.
tive.
true passive of
This
Cf. Volker, Syît. Spec, p. 15. verbs retains the accusative of the true of verbs that have two accusatives in the ackolvt].
in the
many
So rjv KaTrjxniihos ttjv d5dv tov Kvpiov (Ac. 18 25), as edidax6r]T (2 Th. 2 15), ovk ep8e8vfj.hov tvdvfxa yaiJLov (Mt. 22 11 and cf. Mk. 1 13; 15 6; Rev. 1 6; 19 14), heSiSvaKeTo Tropîipav
: : :
(Lu. 16
19), kKavnariadrjaau Kavfxa fxeya

:
(Rev. 16
9), SapriaeraL ttoX(Sair-
Xds (TXrjyas, Lu. 12

TiadrivaL
47, oXiyas, 48), to jSaTTLfffxa 6 âwTLi'ofxaL
(Mk. 10
(Ph. 1
3,
38,
two examples),
1
:
Iv Tvevfxa eiroTiadrjfxeu (1
:
Cor.
12
13),
Treireiafxeda
:
to.
Kpelaaova (Heb. 6
9),
ireTrXrjpoofxevoL
ttjv
Kapirov
and and compare 2 Tim. 1 5 for genitive (I'm x^pSs irXrjpcx^doo), ^rjfjuwdijvaL rrju ^VXW olvtov (Mk. 8 36). Cf. also Mt. 16 26; Ph. 3 8; Heb. 10:22. See 6 kav e^ e/iov
StKaLOcrvvris
of.
11; Col.
9 iVa
TXrjpcodijre
eTriyvoâLv
Ex. 31
hewX-qaa
aiirdv iwevp-a ao4>ias)
0}<t)eXr]6fjs
(Mt. 15
5); tL wêXTjîjo-erat
:
ayyeXovs riXaTTwixkvov (Heb. 2 2

:
9)
(Mt. 16 26); ^paxv TL Tap' with active (two aces.) in Heb.

:
7.
Once more observe

predicate accusative,
aSiKov/jcevoL ixiadbv
it
ahda^
(2 Pet. 2
13).
should be said, becomes the nominative in the passive, as in amol viol deov KX-qdyjaovTai (Mt. 5:9). Cf. Heb. 5 10; 2 Tim. 1:11.
:
The
Some verbs which have
only one accusative in the active or
middle yet retain the accusative of the thing in the passive with the person in the nominative. This is a freedom not possessed by the Latin. The person in the active was generally in the dative. Thus Paul a number of times uses TnaTtboixai (TnarevdrjuaL to evayykXtov 1 Th. 2 :4; kTLdTtvOr} to /xapTvpLov 2 Th. 1 10; cf. also 1
:
Cor. 9
17; Gal. 2
/3dXXo/xat is
Ro. 3 2; 1 Tim. 1:11). Then again irepi. frequently so employed, as Trepiê^Xy]p.'evos avbova (Mk.
:
7;
14 12
51;
1;
cf.
16
:
5;
:
and
especially in Rev., as 7
:
9, 13;
10
1; 11
3;
This is not the middle as Blassi has it, though the future middle does occur in Rev. 3 5 with tv, and the aorist middle with the accusative in Rev. 19 8. In Rev. 4:4 we have TrepL(3el3Xrifj.evovs inaTioLs (loc), and margin (W. H.) ev
:
17
4; 18
16; 19
13).
Once more vrepket/xat is used as the passive of irepLTl6r]fxL with the accusative of the thing, though the verb itself means to 'he around' instead of 'be cnconi])assed with.' So ttiv iiXvaip irepiill.
Ktifxat
(Ac. 28
20).
Cf. also
Heb. 5
2,
but in Lu. 17
we have
irepi
repeated.
1
9:3.
486
NEW TESTAMENT
partly
There are once more still looser accusatives with passive verbs, by analogy and partly merely an extension of the principle
illustrated already.
Thus
from
:
KaT-qxoviievos t6v
\6yov (Gal. 6
not
differ radically
as edLddxdrjTe
above.
13.
6) does In Men'evos tovs tto:
5as Kal Tas xipas (Jo. 11
44)
in
we
see a close parallel to irepLê^Xr]:
fxhos above.
(1
Note active
:
Mt. 22
In
8L4)dapiJLep(x)u
:
top vovv
Tim. 6:5),
o-co/xa
pepavTLafihoL rds KapSias (Heb. 10
22), XeXovafxhoi
seems to be rather remote and reference, but not quite, for the force of the verb is still felt. This is still true of
(10
23) the accusative
TO
to
come
close to the accusative of general
T-qp avTTjp
Tr]p avT-qp
eUopa ixiTanopôvixeda (2 Cor. 3
18)
:
and perhaps even of
aPTLULadlap ir\aTvvdy]Te (2 Cor. 6
acpapaPTes,
not
apacfiapepTes, is
In Ac. 21 :3 apthe correct text, as Blass^ observes.

13).
The impersonal verbal

(Lu. 5
:
in -top occurs only once in the
38)
and as
in the ancient
els
Greek
it is
cusative, OLPOP pkop
aaKovs Katpovs
l3\r]Teop.
N. T. used with the acThis verbal is more

is
usually transitive than the personal form in ~tos, which found in the N. T.
not
(A:) The Adverbial Accusative. It is not very common in the N. T. except in the case of pure adverbs. The adverbial accusative is really nothing more than a loose use of the accusative with intransitive verbs, with substantives or adjectives. It is rare in
Homer 2 and increases steadily till it becomes very common, though perhaps never quite so abundant as in the Sanskrit, where a veritable host of such accusatives occur.^ It is a perfectly normal development of the case, for extension is its root-idea. This acsometimes called the accusative of general reference. of such an accusative with an intransitive verb note KadLaTaTaL to. xpos top 6e6v (Heb. 5:1). See also apeweaav oi
is
cusative
As an example
dpSpes TOP apLd/jLOP cos wePTaKLaxiXLOi (Jo. 6 10),^ top Tpoirop eKiroppevaaaai (Jude 7), op Tpbirop opPLs tTnavpaya (Mt. 23 37) and 2
: :
Tim. 3 Ro. 15
(w
tpotop).
Cf. apeixeade
luov p.LKpbp tl
is
(2 Cor. 11:1).
to.
In
17 the whole verbal phrase

:
concerned with
wpds 6e6p,
but see Ro. 12
18, to e^
vjjlu>p
/xerd iraPTOiP apdpwTôip

:
elpr]pevoPTes,
where to e^ v/xup is ace. In Ro. 1 15 t6 KaT' kfxe may be nom. In Heb. 2 17 this adv. ace. occurs with the adj. as in tticttos apxLepevs to. Trpos top deop. So also with a subst. as in 6 Xptaris to /card o-dpra (Ro. 9:5). The Text. Recept. in Ac. 18 3 had aK-qpoKOLos Tijp Tkxvqp, but W. H. read aK^vowoiol ttj TkxvrjIndeed the
:
:
'
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 93. Whitney, Sans. Gr., pp.
Giles,
Man.,
etc., p.
309.
91, 93.
Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 75.
So 2 Maco. 8
16.
THE CASES
instrumental
KapSia (Lu. 24
is
:
(nTQSEIs)
487
/SpaSets
ttj
usual in the N. T. in such instances/ as

25), ZvpocjjOLvlKLaaa tc? yeveL
Traj/rt
(Mk. 7
rats
26), KvirpLOS to)

eKXvofxevoL
yevH (Ac. 4
36),
rpoirco
(Ph.
18),
iûxats
But, on the other hand, observe Tovvona 'Icocttj^ (Mt. 27: 57), but elsewhere in the N. T. we have dvofxan (Ac. 18 2). In Ro. 16 19 some MSS. have to 0' vij.7v. The phrase to Ka9' eh
(Heb. 12
3).
nominative in thus is Perhaps form. In 1 Cor. 11 18 see also fxepos tl inaTevoj. in Rev. 8 13 to be explained the accusative with the interjection in Is. vocative) (or Cf. oval and nominative ovai Tovs KaTOiKovPTas. an adverb with There is only one instance of an accusative 4. 1
(Ro. 12
:
5) is
accusative, even though eh itself

:
is
of swearing in the
Tepap KavxVfî-V'
N. T. and that
:
is
in 1 Cor. 15 :3l, pv
avfjLiroaLa
T-qp v/xe-
In Mk. 6
39 avfXToaLa
may
be looked
:
at as nominative
(cf. Lu. 9 nominative Brugmann^ considers /cat tovto (1 Cor. 6 6, 8) 14). rather than accusative, but that seems hardly possible with avTd TOVTO (2 Pet. 1:5), and Kal tovto may be accusative also (Ph. 1 tovto 8e (Heb. 10 33). In Ac. 15 29, etc.). Cf. also tovto fxep (cf. Trpao-tai
in verse 40) or accusative

:
10 {apedaXeTe to virep 11; 27 25 we have Ka9' 6p tpotop. of general accusative the enov (ppopelp) the infinitive is probably
: :
In Ph. 4
reference.
Cf. top irdSap
iropets
aird aKoXairov,
B.U. 380
(ni/A.D.).
There are indeed other expressions that

the pure adverb.
come more
Kad' rip.epap
closely to
Such, for instance, are to
(Lu. 11:3;
19:47; Ac. 17:11), tyip Ph. 3: 1; Heb. 10: 13, etc.), to wpoTepop (Jo. 6:62, etc.), to irpcoTOP 16); to wXelaTOP (1 Cor. 14:27), Ta TroXXa (Ro. (Jo. 10 :40; 12 15: 22, MSS. TroXXd/cts), rd pvp (Ac. 17 30), t6 pvp exop (Ac. 24 25),
: : :
apxvv (Jo. 8:25), to \olt6p
(Mk. 14:41;
TO TeXos (1 Pet. 3
8).
In the case of to
Xolttop
(1
Cor. 7
:
29)
T-qp
In 2 Cor. 6 it may be either accusative or nominative. by some, as accusative adverbial aPTiixiadlav is considered
with
3
dpecTKco
13
is
iraPTa
(1
Cor. 10
:
also TO avTo (Ph. 2

:
18;
33) and with Mt. 27 :44).
ixkixp-qaBe
(11:2).
Observe
in
Cf. ovdep xpelap ex(^ (Rev.
17),
and the common use
of ti in the sense of
'why' as
Mt.
17: 10 (5td Tt in verse 19).

tive
is
This phase of the adverbial accusaof adverbial accusatives is

is
common
in the papyri.^
But the most numerous group

in the advor})s themselves.
found
The accusative
a very
used for adverbs, but
it
is
common
not the only case one. In Homer-* in-

p.
;37(),
Cf. Landgraf,
Dor Accus. dcr Beziehung
nach Adj.,
2 4
An-hiv
fiir lat.
Lox. und Gr., vol. X.

Volkcr, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, pp. 10-13.
Gricch. Gr., p. 378.

Giles,
Man.,
etc., p.
309.
488
NEW TESTAMENT
deed adverbial accusatives of substantives are almost absent. But the N. T. shows a few in harmony with the development of the language. Thus dK/xTjv (Mt, 15 16), Sojpeav (Alt. 10 8), x^^pi-v as a preposition (Eph. 3 1, etc.). But adjectives in the accusative were numerous in Horner^ both in the singular and the plural. They occur in the positive, comparative and occasionally the superlative. As examples of the positive singular may be taken ttoXu (2 Cor. 8 22), dXiyov (Mk. 6 31), fxeaou (Ph. 2 15), raxv (Alt. 5:25), XoLTTou (1 Cor. 1: 16, etc. Cf. B.U., iv, 1079, 6). Indeed the participle Tvxof (1 Cor. 16:6) is used as an adv. ace. (see Ace. Absolute). As an example of the plural positive note TroXXd in Ro. 16 6, though this may be construed as cognate ace. with kKOT'ia<Tv. Cf. Jas. 3 2; 1 Cor. 16 12, 19. For the comparative singular note fxaWov Kpelaaov (Ph. 1 23), cirovbaLOTtpov (2 Cor. 8 22), bevTepov (1 Cor. 12 28), TepLacxbTepov (Mk. 7:36), fieknov (2 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\ov (Ph. 1 23), the instrumental and usual idiom in the N. T. In the superlative it is usually the plural form like JiSiaTa (2 Cor. 12 9), naKidTa (Ac. 20 38), Taxiara (Ac. 17: 15), etc. But note irpOiTov (1 Cor. 12 28), tp'ltov (ib.). The later Greek continued to exhibit a wealth of adverbs in the accusative.It is not in realit}' a (/) The Accusative by Antiptosis.^ special use of the accusative, biit merely a shifting of the noun or pronoun out of its usual order and into the government of the other preceding clause, and thus it becomes accusative whereas it would otherwise be nominative. So in Alk. 1 24, ol8a ae ris et (cf. Lu. 4 34), Lu. 19 3, Ibetv 'l-qaovv tLs kanv. But in Alt. 15 14 we have a kind of prolepsis (not the technical sort) without any change of case, tv4>\6s tv4>\6i' eau odrjyfj. In the case of p-r] riva ^v
:
: :
aireaToXKa irpos vpds,

TLva is left to
8l'
ai'TOv ewXeoveKT-qaa v/xSs; (2
Cor. 12
17) the
tence
(m)
is
one side and anacoluthon takes place and the senconcluded by 8l' avTov.
The Accusative by Inverse Attraction.

:
Thus
:
6p'
Kov 6v copoaeu (Lu. 1
73), top aprov ov KXcofxev (1 Cor. 10

:
16).
Cf.
TO iroTTjpLov (1 Cor. 10
15).
In Alk. 3
16 but for the parenthesis

to
(\at kiredrjKev opo/jLa Zt/iwi't)
Uerpop
we should Seem
have the dative
and the accusative

1
in apposition.
Cf. Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 34S
f.;
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 93.
f.
Dclbriick,
Vergl. Synt., Ill, p. 625

2 '
Faxrar, Gk. Synt., p. So.
THE CASES
(n)
(nxsjsEiz)
489
The Accusative with the
Infinitive.
The grammars
generally speak of the accusative as the subject of the infinitive.

finitive clause in indirect discourse
seems a grammatical misnomer. The indoes correspond to a finite clause in English, and a clause with on and the indicative may often be used as well as the infinitive clause. But it is not technically scientific to read back into the Greek infinitive clause the syntax of English nor even of the on clause in Greek. Besides, not only is the infinitive a verbal substantive^ and in a case like the verbal adjective (the participle), but being non-finite (in-finitive) like the participle (partaking of both verb and noun), it can have no subject in the grammatical sense. No one thinks of calling the accusative the "subject" of the participle. Take ecos av 'idcocTLP TOP viov Tod avdpcjOTTov kpxoixevov (Mt. 16 Here the ac28).
I confess that to
me
this
cusative
vibv.
is
the object of IbwaLv and the participle
is
descriptive of
it is
Now with
further case
the infinitive in indirect discourse

is
as a rule
the infinitive, not the substantive, that
the object of the verb.

if
No
is
needed with the
infinitive,
the pronoun or
substantive be the same as the subject of the principal verb.
Thus
used,
et TLs
aaxn^LoviZv
it
may
If such a word is voixlêi (1 Cor. 7 36). be in the nominative in apposition with the subject
: :
of the verb, as 4>a.aKovTes dvac aoipoi (Ro. 1
22), or the accusative
may
3
:
be used.
This accusative
in
k'y(j>
may
be with a verb that can have

(Ph.
two accusatives, as
Top odrjyop elpac
kixavtop ov \oylôiJ,aL KaTtXri4>epaL
13) or the accusative of general reference as in ireiroLdas re aeavTV(f)\icp
(Ro. 2
19).
This latter usage
is
the ex-
planation of the accusative with the infinitive in the instances
where the word used with the

of the principal verb.
infinitive is other
than the subject

at \kyovaLv
:
Typical examples are seen in
avTOP
XofxaL
^rjp
(Lu. 24
23), po/diôpres avrop TedprjKhat (Ac. 14
19), (Sou-
TpoaevxeadaL tovs apSpas (1 Tim. 2:8).
In these examples the

is
infinitive is the object of the
verb and the affirmation
made
as
far forth as the
word
in the accusative.
They
affirm living as to
him; considering having died or death as to him; and wish praying as to the men. This is the psychology of this accusative with
the infinitive.
The
fact that later
grammarians
call it
the "sub-
ject" of the infinitive cuts no figure in the matter of the origin of
the usage.
Clyde ^ has interpreted the matter
correctly.
He
sees
that "grammarians framed this rule in ignorance of the etymology

For inf. as subjoct and as ()l)joct. sec ch. on Verbal Nouna. Gk. Synt., p. 139 f. Cf. also Donaldson's Gk. Gr., 5S4, and Green's Handb. to N. T. Gk. Gr., p. 232.
'^
"^
490

and that "since the
NEW TESTAMENT
was
originally a case,
of infinitives,"
infinitive
the accusative could not originally have been
its
subject."
This
is
descriptive accusative or accusative of definition (general reference) has a very wide range in Greek, as seen above,
and
the
true historical explanation of the accusative with the infinitive

(other than the accusative which
tive itself).
may
is
be the object of the
infini-
When
the accusative
used with the
infinitive, it in-
dicates the agent
who has
since the infinitive can
to do with the action by the accusative, have no subject in the technical sense.
infinitive is
This use of the accusative with the

the infinitive
is
common
also
when
in a prepositional clause like

:
tQ eiaayayelp tovs
yovels TO iraLblov 'l-quovv (Lu. 2
27).
Here the matter becomes

to;
clearer for the reason that the article
cannot be slurred over

of the accusatives as
it is
and
it
becomes imperative to explain one
that of general reference.

blov is
The context makes
clear that to
Trat-
the object of eiaayayelv, while tovs yovels
the accusative of
general reference.
13
:
Many examples of this sort occur. Cf. Mt. In Mt. 26 32, /nerd to kyepdrjpai fie, note the accusative /xe rather than nothing or avTos or kiuavTov. Cf. also Ac. 23 15. The article may be so used without a preposition, and either the nomi4.
: :
native appear, as
accusative, as
rcS
5eojuat to
fxij
irapwv dapprjaai (2 Cor. 10
2),
or the
/u?)
tvpelv
/ze
'YItov (2
Cor. 2
13).
Then again the

infinitive
2.
accusative
may
be used with the
infinitive in
such constructions
as KoKbv kuTLv
rijias a)5e
etmt (Mt. 17:4).
Note here the

:
There infinitive in Heb. 5 12 (ttclXlv xpetaJ' ^xere tov dLdaa-KHV 6/ias Tiva to. crTOLX^la). Here we have a verb that is used with two accusatives, and tlvo. is the
as subject, as the infinitive as object occurs in 2 Cor. 10
is
one example of three accusatives with the
accusative of general reference.

11
:
Cf. the three accusatives in Lu.
11.
This subject
will call for further discussion in the
chap-
on Indirect Discourse and Verbal Nouns. There was a constant tendency in the later Greek to exchange this use of the infinitive and accusative for the 6tl clause.^ (o) The Accusative Absolute. The absolute use of the accusative is rare in the N. T. as compared with the earlier Greek.2 Usually the genitive occurs with the participle and subters
stantive
when used
in the
absolutely.
In
Cor. 16
6 tvxou
is
really the
accusative absolute though used as an adverb.
The most
6vTa ae.
certain
1
example
2
:
N. T.
is
in Ac. 26
idioLs
yv6:(7Tr)v
In
6 TO ixapTvpiov Katpols
1
is
f.
in the accusative without
Tim. any

It is rare also in the pap.
Volker, Pap. Gr. Synt. Spec, p. 18.
THE CASES
immediate connection unless
clause
"^
(nTfiSEIs)
491
with the preceding
it is
in apposition
(Elhcott in
loco)
or
:
is
loosely united with 8ovs.
As
to t6
abvvaTov rov vofiov (Ro. 8
3)
we have
either the nominativus pen-
dens, the accusative in apposition with the object of the sentence,
the accusative of general reference or an instance of anacoluthon.^
47 the Text. Recept. reads apânevov which would be W. H. rightly have ~voi. Twice kôv occurs in the N. T., once with riv (Mt. 12 4) and once alone, a ok k^bv (2 Cor. 12 4), but in both instances in the nominative. In Ph. 1 7 A vixas ovras the vjids is repeated and is not accusative absolute. subordinate sentence may also be in the accusative of general reference. Thus TO d bbvji (Mk. 9 23), to tLs av fxeiô^p avTcov (Lu. 9 46) See further chapter on Verbal Nouns. Only a general (p) The Accusative with Prepositions. remark is needed here, since each preposition will be discussed later in detail. In general one may note that the accusative is the most frequent case with prepositions.^ Indeed in modern Greek these all have the accusative. IIpos in the N. T. has geniIn Lu. 24
: ,
anacoluthon, but
e'irj
tive
1,
locative 6, accusative 679 times.'*
Here the preposition,

is
like all prepositions, is
merely an adverb that
used to express
more exactly the idea

nically govern a case.
of the case.
The
preposition does not techfollowing prepositions
The
accusative with the preposition has,
of course, its usual force, extension.
The
occur in the N. T. with the accusative, one example being given in each instance. 'Ava fj.eaov (Mk. 7:31), 5id t6u 4>bfiov (Jo. 7 13),
:
CIS Ti]v
toXlv (Mt. 26
:
18),
kirl Tr]i>
yrjv
:
(Mt. 15
35), KaTCL tov vbixov

bbbv
virtp
(Lu. 2
Trept
22), /êrd 17/xepas rptts (Lu. 2

:
46), irapa
:
T-qv
(Mt. 20
30),
avTbv (Mt. 8
fjibSiou
18),
Trpos
:
avTov (Mt. 3
5),
is,
bovKov (Phil.
16), vTTo TOV
(Mt. 5
15).
Of these
ets
of course,
by
far
the most frequent and has only the accusative.

virep,
Atd, perd,
irepi,
have the genitive-ablative more than the accusative, KaTCL, wpbs have the accusative more often. For exact figures see Moulton, ProL, pp. 105-107. In the chapter on Prepovirb
while
eirl,
sitions there will be further discussion of the matter.
VIII.
(a)
The Genitive
(True) Case
(r\
ytviKti tttwctls).
Form. It is now generally accepted by the comparative grammars that in Greek two cases appear under the form of tiie genitive: the genitive proper and the
*
Two Cases with One
For
ace. in apposition
At))
with sentence in pap. see Moulton, CI. Rov., 1904,

234.
*
p. 152, t6
^
6y,
T.P.
1 (ii/B.c).
Green, Handb.,
Giles,
etc., p.
Man.,
etc., p.
311.
Moulton,
Prul., p. 100.
492
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
a different
case.
Delbriick^ gives an interesting sketch of the fate
of the ablative case in the Indo-Germanic languages. In the Sanskrit singular the two cases (gen. and abl.) have the same form, except I.-G. -o (Sans, -a) stems (Sans. gen. -asya, abl. -ad).
endings.
In the Balto-Slavic tongues ablative and genitive have the same In the Italic languages, ablative, locative, instrumental
(and partly dative) have the same form. Indeed in the Thessalian dialect as in the Latin some forms of the genitive and locative coincide (like domi). Dionysius Thrax^ had the idea that both
cases flourished under one form in Greek, for he describes this case
as
17
ytvLKrj KTifiTLKri Kal iraTpLKr].
Thompson^ indeed
recognises the
two cases, but thinks it is not possible to group the uses of the form under these two divisions because some suit either case. There is a "debatable land" as Giles^ observes, but this applies to only a very small part of the examples and is very natural indeed. As a matter of fact it is not possible to give a really scientific explanation of the usage in Greek from any other standpoint. The ablative will therefore be treated as a separate case and the true genitive discussed now. The genitive case has the wrong name. (6) Name Incorrect.
The Latin
genitivus
is
a translation of
yevpijTLKr]
(more
7ei/tKT7
like
the abPris-
lative in idea).
ItisriyeviKriTTToJaLs.
The name
comes from
still
yevos (genus), 'kind,'
and corresponds
to the Latin generalis.^
cian^ so calls
to call
1
it
(generalis casus).
It is
a pity that one
has
it
"genitive."
Man.,
p. 319.
Delbriick, Grundl. der gricoh. Synt., IV, p. 37; Giles,

Philol., etc., p. p. 184;
Cf.
Hadley, Ess. 2 W.-Th.,
4G
f.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 72.
But W.-Sch.,
p. 259,
does not
make
3 B
this error.
^ Vergl. Synt., I, Handb., etc., p. 207. p. 200. Bekker, Anec. Graeca, ISIG, Vol. II, p. 636. 6 Gk. Synt., 1883, p. 59. ^ Man., p. 313. 8 Cf. Max Muller, Lect., I, pp. 103-105; Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 70. ' Lib. V, de Casu. See Meister, Der synt. Gebrauch des Genit. in den Indoger. Forsch., XVIII, pp. 133-204. kretischen Dial.-Inschr. Cf. also Ruttgers, De accus., gen., dat. usu in inscr. archaicis cretensibus. Diss. Bonn, 47 p.
THE CASES
(c)
(nTf2ZEIs)
493
The Specifying Case.

is
of the genitive case

bialptaLv
at
It is this and no other. The idea bottom simple. The genitive shows
or kind.
and something elStKov. It is the case of genus (yevos) For a very full discussion of the genitive see Del307-360.
it is
briick, Vergl. Synt., Ill, pp.
The
genitive does indeed

in
origin,^
resemble
the
adjective,
but
not adjectival
though the source of the genitive ending is unknown. The adjectival possessive pronoun (like kfxos) is a mere variation of the genitive case (k/jLov) and the two may be in apposition with one another, as ttj e/x^ x^'P^ ITauXou (2 Th. 3 17). But the function
:
of the case
54),
is
largely adjectival as in
rjpLkpa
TapaaKevrjs (Lu. 23
though the adjective and the genitive are not exactly parallel, for with two substantives each idea, stands out with more sharpness, as in h KaivoT-qTL fco^s (Ro. 6 4) and ert ttXovtov a8r]\6Tr]TL (1 Tim. 6 17).^ It is the specifying case, then, the case of appurte: :
nance.^
In the Sanskrit Whitney'' finds the genitive adjectival in
idea and defining the
noun more
nearly.
So also Kiihner-Gerth^
who
find
it
qualitative with nouns or verbs.
But
Delbriick,^
followed by Brugmann,'' makes the verb the starting-point for explaining the genitive.
briick
One
hesitates to part
company with Del-
and Brugmann, but the older view that it was first used with nouns seems here to have the best of it.^ It may be remarked that the genitive is the most persistent of all the cases in retaining its forms, as is seen in the English s. Indeed in the modern Greek the form shares with the accusative the result of the loss of the dative, so that we often meet a construction hke avTov to dira ('I told him so').^ One other remark is called for concerning the meaning of the genitive in Greek. It is that the case does not of
itself
its
mean
all
that one finds in translation.
The
case adheres to
technical root-idea.
The
resultant idea will naturally vary

is
greatly according as the root-conception of the case

different
applied to
words and different contexts. But the varying clement is not the case, but the words and the context. The error must not be made of mistaking the translation of the resultant whole
1
Giles,
Man.,
p. 331.
etc., p.
311.
Hadley, Ess. Philol. and

Sans. Gr., p. 98
f.
Ciit., p. 48.
2 s
Cf. W.-Th., p. 236.

Tl.
I,
Cf.
I,
Monro,
f.,
Iloin. Gr., p. 102.
Vergl. Synt.,
pp. 185
307-380.
^ 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.
494

Thus
in
NEW TESTAMENT
we have
iieTOLKeaiav Ba^v\co-
for the case itself.

vos.
Mt.
12
It
is
translated 'removal to Babylon.'
Now
the genitive
but that is the correct translation of the total idea obtained by knowledge of the O. T. What the genitive says is that it is a 'Babylon-removal.' That is all. So in
does not
'to,'
mean
Mt. 12
31,
-fj
Tov TTvevtiaTo^
^Xacrcji-qixia, it is
the 'Spirit-blasphemy.'
From
Spirit,
the context
we know
that
it
is
blasphemy against the
case has so
though the genitive does not mean 'against.' When a many possible combinations in detail it is difficult to
satisfactory grouping of the various resultant usages. A very simple and obvious one is here followed. But one must always bear in mind that these divisions are merely our modern conveniences and were not needed by the Greeks themselves. At every stage one needs to recall the root-idea of the case (genus
make a
or kind)
and
find in that
and the environment and history the
explanation.
{d) The Local Use. This is normally the first to begin with. In Greek literature it appears mainly in poetry ^ and in adverbs of
place like avTOv,
ov,
rod, owov,
o/jlou,
wapraxov.
But
it is
possible that
these are locatives like aWodi in a shortened form.^
But on the
other hand in
Homer
the genitive undoubtedly^ appears in local
relations with the archaic genitive in -olo,
the examples are chiefly stereotyped ones.
though even in Homer There are in the N. T.

:
only these examples in Luke and Acts.

TTolas
In Lu. 5
19
/x?)
evobvTes
eiaevkyKwaiv avTov
and 19 4
:
eKelvrjs
^fxeXXeu Siepxe^crdaL
we have
two undoubted examples. Blass^ indeed calls these "incorrect" on the ground that "classical Greek" would not have used the genitive thus. But it is sufficient reply to say that Luke was not writing classical Greek. Certainly Xenophon might have used TTotct, eKeivj] (as D has in Lu. 19 Moulton^ finds often in the 4). papyri votov, Xt/36s, though in Rev. 21 13 we have the ablative^ uTTo poTov. In Ac. 19 26 we have a very striking example that the commentaries have failed to notice as Moulton^ observes. It
:
IS ov
nopop 'E0eo"ou dXXd ax^Sop waaris
ttjs
'Aaias 6 ITaDXos welaas iiere-
Moulton on the whole agrees with Hackett that the genitive here is dependent on oxôp. In Homer one has a parallel like ovk "Apyeos rjep, but Moulton finds none in the vernacular KOLPT]. Still, since Luke did use eKelp-qs and Trotas, it does
arrjaep
kapop oxôp.
>

Delbriick, Vergl. Gr.,
I,
Cf. K.-G.,
p. 359.
I,
^
p.
384
f.
= * *
ci. Rev., 1901, p. 437.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 104.
Moulton,
ib.
Prol., p. 73.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 109.
THE CASES
not seem
difficult to believe
(nTftSEIz)
495
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
â\pn to olkpov too daKTvXov aiirov vdaros.
emphasizes the kind of material which the speaker ^{ has vdarL. One may note in this connection the Homeric idiom XoveadaL TroTanoXo, 'to bathe in the river.'
vdaros
Here
clearly has in mind.
Cf. also the classic ttoO

T(hv 'E\\r]vo3v (Jo.
yris.
Somewhat
656s
similar also
:
is
17
biaairopa
35)
and
Wvwv (Mt. 10
5),
which are ob-
jective genitives but of place also.
22 3) which
:
is
Cf. kv Tapo-oJ t^s KtXt/cias (Acts described by Blass-Debrunner, p. 101, as parti-
tive genitive.
(e) The Temporal Use. It is common enough. This is a very old use of the genitive.^ This is the true genitive.^ The accusative when used of time expresses duration over the period,
the locative regards the period as a point even

ble length
(cf. e^ eTeaiv,
if it is
of considera-
Jo. 2
20), while the genitive

:
ing^ as to duration.
in xetMfSws
/cat
In Mt. 24
20 this
imphes nothdistinction can be seen
aa^ârw, one the case of genus, the other a point of time. Brugmann"* indeed regards the genitive of time as a development of the partitive genitive, but this seems hardly necessary.
session
Moulton,^ on the other hand, connects it with the genitive of posand finds it very frequently in the papyri, like erous B,
'in the
second year.'
So tov
ovtos
fxr]u6s,
F.P. 124
(ii/A.D.).
On
:
the difference between the genitive and the accusative of time see ijfxepas Kal vvktos (Lu. 18 7) and vmra Kal rju'epav (Lu. 2 37),
:
the genitive the time within which (kind of time), the accusative the time during which (all through). Cf. also vvkt6% to wpuiTov
See also tov \oltov (Gal. 6 17) and to Xolttov (Heb. Once more observe fxeaovvKTcov aXeKTopocpuivias (Mk. 13 35) where some MSS. have p.eaovvKTLov. The accusative here is more like the adverb oxj/k just preceding. Further examples of
(Jo. 19
:
39).
10
13).
r/
the genitive
(Lu. 24
(/)
:
be seen in fxearjs vvktos (Mt. 25 6), 6pdpov fiaOkos For adverbs in expressions of time, see viii, (/?,). With Substantives. This is the chief use of the case.
:
may
1).
The
1.
2 3
accusative indeed
is
the genitive
is chiefly connected with the verb, while mainly related to substantives.^ The Possessive'' Genitive. In simple point of fact it is not
I,
Dclbriick, Vergl. Synt.,
p. 356.
C-f.
Sans.,
^
Whitney's Sans. Gr.,
p. 100.
Dolbriick, Gnindl., etc., IV, p. 45.
Prol., p. 73.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 105.
Giles,
Man.,
etc., p.
311.
I,
Delbruck, Vcrgl. Synt.,
p. 344.
496
A GRAIVIMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
necessary to see any particular inner connection between the many uses of the genitive with substantives other than the com-
mon
root-idea of the case.
For convenience
it
suits us to
group
these usages, but one must think that the Greeks themselves looked at the whole matter much more simply. After all it is the
context that varies rather than the genitive.^

is
The
resultant idea
therefore a matter of exegesis rather than due to
any particular
:
label to be attached.^
Tov bovXov Tov
little
The most obvious
illustrations like Trardâs
apxi-^P^<j^s a.4>el\ev ai'TOV
to wtIov
(Mt. 26
51) call for
not another's, and The possessive pronouns, it is the servant's ear, not another's. especially kfxos in John's Gospel, were used to some extent in the
remark.
It is the high-priest's servant,
N.
T., but usually the genitive of the personal pronoun is found. In Jo. 7 16 they occur side by side. Of. tt? e/irj xîpi liavKov (1 Cor. 16:21). Like an adjective the genitive may 2. Attributive Genitive. be either attributive or predicate. This is sometimes called the
:
genitive of quality.
But the name helps
little,
is
as
all
genitives
have this idea. The sense of attribute one with the genitive, as IlaOXos 8ov\os
1:1).
rr]v
indeed the usual

Xpiarov
:
'I-qaov
(Ro.
els
Thus observe the

(and
ttjs So^rys,
descriptive genitive in
:
Mt. 18 9
aapKos (Col.
:
yeevpav tov Tvpos, Ro. 6
6 to
:
acoixa Trjs ap.apTlas, to awjJLa

ttjs
t^s
1
:
TaTreti'cocrews
Ph. 3
21), to acopa
rjijepas
22), (3airTi(Tp.a jitTavolas

fxos
TTJs
(Mk. 1:4),
:
686v (Lu. 2
44), 6 OLKOvoviol (t>wT6s
adiKias (Lu.
:
16
8).
And even
expressions like
and coins (Deissmann, Bib. Stud., p. 165) to be not mere Hebraisms, though far more frequent in the LXX than in the N. T. because of the Hebrew.
(1
Th. 5
5)
are
shown by the
inscriptions
Other examples are \6yoLs

(Ac. 9
iradrj
:
Tfjs
x^ptros (Lu. 4
:
22), aKevos eKKoyijs

aSiKias
1
:
15), aKevT] opyrjs
(Ro. 9
vlos
22), KpLT-qs
ttjs
(Lu. 18
vo/jlov
6),
tt]s
drtîtas
(Ro.
26),
ttjs
ayaT7]s (Col.
:
13),
eKevdepias
and
aKpoaTrjs
e7nXr]aiJ.oi>rjs
(Jas. 1
:
25), aTavya(riJ.a
ttjs 86^r]S
:
(Heb.
q
3), Kapbia dTrtcrrtas
(Heb. 3
:
12), plâ TTLKpias
(Heb. 12
15),
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
: :
piifxaTL
TTjs
Sufdjuecos
avTov, the
second genitive
is
technically de-
Man., etc., p. 312. Moulton, Prol., p. 72. Blass, also (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 95) thinks that the exact shade of the gen. idea is often a matter of theological, not gram1
Giles,
matical interpretation.
THE CASES
pendent on Swanecos. Winer (Winer-Thayer,
TavTt}% (Ac.
(nTfiZEIz)
497
Cf. 2 Th.
p. 237) in
1:7,
doubt the wisdom of

prjfxara rrjs fco^s
saying that in rd
20) the demonstrative goes in sense with prjiiara.

:
objection apphes to 6 X670S rris acoTrjplas ravTrjs (Ac. 13 rod o-co/xaros rod davarov tovtov (Ro. 7 24), Besides viol and e/c 26) 4)0)70$ above observe a similar idiom in rkKva (jjcotos (Eph. 5:8),
:
The same
TeKPa opjfjs
(2 Pet, 2
:
(Eph. 2
14), viol
3), reKva viraKorjs (1
Pet. 1
i^tos
:
14), t^kvu Karapas
aireLdlas
(Eph. 2
PVfxcfjoovos
2), 6
rrjs aircoXeias
(2
Th.
2:3).
Cf. also
:
ol viol
rod
(Mt. 9
15); 6 vlos rrjs aya-n-qs
avTov (Col. 1
13), 6 dudpcoTTOs
Trjs
avonias (2
Th, 2
3),
One may
rifxepa
instance further the use of

:
17/zepa
opyrjs
(Ro, 2:5),
awr-qplas (2 Cor. 6
:
2 quot, from O. T.),

(Lu.
1
:
rip.kpa kTn.aKOTrrjs (1
Pet, 2
12), rifxepa apadelêcjos
80)
where the
LXX may
be
appealed to for abundant illustration.
The
karlu
genitive of place or country
is
descriptive also.
Trjs
âper t^s TaKtXaias (M,k, 1:9), TaptrcS

irpoiTT] ixepiSos rrjs
KtXtictas (Ac.
:
MaKedovias ttoKls (Ac, 16

is
12), etc.
Thus Na22 3), rfrts This geni:
tive of quality or descriptive genitive
largely extended in the
LXX
3.
by reason
of translation (Thackeray, p. 23).
The Predicate
It
is
is
veadai, etc., in reality^ it is to
stantives.
While having the copula elvai, yibe explained as a genitive with subnot the copula that affects the case of the genitive
Genitive.
at
all.
It
just the possessive genitive in the predicate instead
of being an attriljute. Often the substantive or pronoun is repeated in sense before the predicate genitive. Thus ovk tanv d/caTacTTacrlas
6 deos (1
Cor. 14 :33).
:
Cf.
^j/xeTs
ovk kafxev vttocttoXtjs

So/cet
dXXd
12
:
Tlarecjs 11).
(Heb. 10
39), irdaa Tacdela ov
xîpds etvat
:
(Heb.
Cf,
So v^ yap
vp-[i rrjs
:
krC^v 86}8eKa
(Mk. 5
42).
So Lu, 2
42,
also kav TLvas

nr]s
(Ac, 20
3)
is
and indeed kykvero yvdcto be explained the same way. There is as

oSov ovras (Ac, 9:2),
much
5
:
latitude in
the
predicate genitive as in the attributive
possessive genitive.
5)
We
have
viol 4>cot6s
eare Kal viol

:
rjjxkpas (1
fip.epa$
eifXL
Th,
opres
and
1
ovk kafxh vvktos ov8e ctkotovs (1
Th. 5
6)
and
eyoi
(verse 8),^
(1
We may
:
continue the illustrations like

Cor, 6
:
Ilai-Xou
Cor,
12), ovk ka-Ti eavruip (1

v/jLcop
ri/jLcop
19), tov deov ov

vfxcjp
:
elfxl
(Ac,
27:23), iraPTa
(Ac, 1:7), tpa
IdTai yvpTj
karlp
(1
ri
Cor, 3:21), ovx

KXrjpopofxla
17
karip
ypC^pai
yeprjrat
(Lu. 20
14), tIpos avroop
(Mk. 12
17
23), reXeioop karlp

:
anpea
Tpo4)i]
(Ileb, 5
14),
XpiaToO dpai (2 Cor. 10

1
:
7), SiP karlp ^^vyeKos koI 'Ep,uo7tj'7js (2
Tim.
15), I'm
vwepôXii
rfys
8vpanea)$ y rod (2
Cor, 4:7), and finally,

Man.,
p. 317.
W.-Th.,
p. 195.
Blass, Gr. of
Is no distinct type, N, T, Gk., p. i)G.
Giles,
498

all
NEW TESTAMENT
earco ovx 6
though by no means
Koaixos (1
that can be adduced, uv
Pet. 3:3).
These passages not only
illustrate the va-
riety of the predicate genitive, but
show that
this is essentially
substantival genitive
genitive.
(cf.
predicate nominative) and not a verbal

of the objective genitive in the predi-
As an example
cate take aKCLvdaXou
el kjuov
(Mt. 16
23).
In the modern Greek
the predicate genitive has been
still
further extended
(Thumb,
Handb., p. 35). 4. Apposition or Definition. This is a very simple use of the case, but is not an extremely common idiom in the N. T., since the
two substantives can easily be put in the same case. In the modern Greek mere apposition rules (Thumb, Handb., p. 33). But some interesting examples occur. It is a well-known idiom in Homer and certainly needs no appeal to the Hebrew for justi^
fication.2
Kiihner-Gerth^
examples.
Pet. 2
:
6)
may also be consulted for other poetical In the N. T. we note ttoXcis Zodofxcov Kal Toiioppas (2 which Blass compares with 'IXtou ttoXlv of Homer and
:
observes"* that iroXeoos QvaTelpcov (Ac. 16
14) is
tive of TToXis Qvareipa

:
(cf.
TroXet 'Iottxjj in
Ac. 11:5).
merely the geniIn 2 Cor.
11 32 the adjective is used as ttjv toXiv AanaaKrjuwv, while in Rev. 18 10 we have true apposition. One may note further tov
:
vaov TOV
croj/iaTOS
avrov (Jo. 2
21), tov appaûiva tov TrveviJ.aTos (2 Cor.
5:5),
iaaeojs
ar]iJ.elov
TepiTO/jirjs
:
(Ro. 4:11,
AC
ttjs
TrepLTOfxriu)
:
to a-qjittov
Tr]S
(Ac. 4
(1
22),
17
Kol/drjais
tov vttvov (Jo. 11
13), OojpaKa iriaTeccs

(1
17
Kal
T(Jo
6.yairr\%
Th. 5:8), to epyov

24),
:
Trtcrrews
Th. 1:3),
avTairoSoaLS
17
ev
ttjs ttjs
Xbycd
TTJS
oKrjdeias tov
:
evayy eXiov (Col. 1:5),
KXrjpovonias (Col. 3
h
14),
^vpiji
17
Kadas
(1
Cor. 5:8),
daidij
:
yposaeus avTov (2 Cor. 2

IxeaoTOLxov tov (jipay/dov
'!rpoa4>opa tQiv
:
Wvwv (Ro. 15
16), to
(Eph. 2
14), 6 deixeXios Tchv airoaToXcov

airoKpiixa
(Eph.
20), de/ieXLOS jj-eTauoias

1
:
(Heb. 6:1), to
tov davarov (2
Cor.
ôoTJs
9), 6 e/zTrXo/c^s Tpix^^v

:
Koafxos
7775 bo^-qs
(1 Pet.
(1
3
:
3), 6 aTe(f)avos ttJs
(Rev. 2
10), 6 aTk4>avos
:
Pet. 5
4), 6 Trjs SiKaLoavvrjs

1), eopT-q
ffTecpapos (2
Tim. 4
17
8), iopT-q Toov a^vixwv
(Lu. 22
:
tov iraax'^
TrpeviJ,aTOS
(Jo. 13
1),
otVta TOV aKr]vovs (2
Cor. 5
1),
17
airapxv tov
(Ro. 8
23), tyjv eirayyeXiav tov TvevpiaTOs (Ac.
33), popos xiarecjs
(Ro. 3 :27).
least the
These are by no means all, but they illustrate at freedom of the N. T. in the use of the genitive of definiIt
is,
tion or of apposition.
of course, possible, as
Moulton (ProL,
p. 74) suggests, that the
vernacular has preserved the poetical
2 *
Gk. Gr., p. 335. Moulton, Pro!., p. 73 f. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 98. Cf also W.-Sch.,
Cf. Jann., Hist.
.
u^
f.
p_ 2G4.
p.
2G6
THE CASES (ninsEis)
499
idiom in this as in so many other matters. Poetry often expresses better than prose the language of the people. In Eph. 4 9 eis to. KaTWTtpa nepTj t^s yrjs we probably have not this usage, but the ablative after the comparative. Cf. Elhcott in loco. In Jo. 21 8 TO 8lktvov tcov IxOvwv the genitive merely gives the content (cf.
:
material and quantity as opposed to quality). Cf. also bXaâarpov 13), d7eX7? xo'i-pfj^v 3) and Kepafxtov vdaros (Mk. 14 fivpov (Mk. 14
: :
(Mt. 8
5.
30)
and
tKarop jSarovs kXaiov (Lu. 16
6).
The Subjective
This genitive
Genitive.
It
objective use only

clear.
by the
is
context.
can be distinguished from the Sometimes the matter is not

possessive genitive looked at
the
common
from another angle. In itself the genitive is neither subjective nor objective, but lends itself readily to either point of view. The subjective genitive can indeed be applied to the merely possessive genitive noted above.^ Take Ro. 1 17 where hKaiOGvvrj deov means the righteousness which God has and wishes to bestow on us. A yap ayairr] rod Xpiarov typical example is found in 2 Cor. 5 14,
: :
17
avvkx^L
riixas.
Here
it is
unquestionably the love that Christ has for

is
sinners
and
:
so for Paul that

is
the constraining influence in his
life.
In Ro. 8
39 the matter
explained indeed by the phrase
airo ttjs
ayawrfs rod deov ttjs h Xpto-roj 'IrjaoD. Abbott ^ is apparently right in finding only a couple of passages in the N. T. where aycnrr] is used
with the objective genitive (2 Th. 2

11
:
10,
17
017.
ttjs
a\r]deias;
Lu.
ttiv
42, irapepxô^de
tyju
Kpiaiv Kal
T-qv
ayainiv tov deov).
Jo. 5
42
aya-n-qv tov Oeov ovk exere
might be either subjective or obIn Ph. 4 7 elprjpr] tov deov is probably jective, but see Ro. 5:5. subjective and so 'the peace that God has and gives,' but the meaning is richer than any phrase, as Simcox^ well observes. Cf. Col. 3 15. In Ro. 15 8, vvep aXrideias deov, we seem to have the subNote also StKatoavvq iricrTeois (Ro. 4 13), which is jective genitive.
eauroTs
:
17
explained as subjective
(Ro. 10
:
by Paul
in the
phrase
17
bLKaioavvq
h iricrTeuis
6).
In
Tim. 4:1,
didaaKaXiais baipiovlwv,
we have again
tt]s
the subjective genitive.
Some passages
20
:
are open to doubt, as

(SaaiXetas
eua77Xtoj' r^s x^piros tov deov (Ac.
24), evayyeXiov
(Mt. 4 :23).
6.
The
Objective Genitive.
It is quite frequent in the
especially
when
it is
vanishing in the later
N. T.,^ adnominal Greek.^ The
genitive preservers a
2 3
remnant
.333.
of the old objective genitive in
mod-
Jann., Hist. C.k. Cr., p.
Joh. Or.,
PI).
84
ff.
Abbott gives a very just discussion of the matter.

^
Lang, of the N. T., p. 87. Green, Handb., etc., p. 219.
Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 334.
500
NEW TESTAMENT
ern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 34). Here again we must appeal to the root-idea of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The
resultant idea
is
due to the context and one must not suppose
that the Greek genitive

deov
means
all
the different English preposi-
tions used to translate the resultant idea.

exT
iricFTLi'
Thus
in
we
rightly translate 'have faith in
Mk. 11 22 God/ though

:
mean 'in/ but only the God kind of faith. 8e tov Tvev/jLaros ^'KacrcfyrjiJ.ia, Take Mt. 12 31, where the context makes it clear that it is blasphemy 'against' the Holy Spirit. Another striking example is Ac. 4 9, eirl evepthe genitive does not
Cf. Ro. 3
:
22.
77
yeaia avd pcoirov aadevovs, where the good deed
is
done
'to'
a sick
man.
In Jo. 7:
13, 5td t6v (})bôv toov 'lovbalwv, it is fear
'towards'
or 'in reference to' the Jews, while Jo. 17:
2, kôvala -jraarjs aapKos,
means authority 'over' all flesh (cf. eôuaiav TrvevfxaTuv aKadaprcou, Mt. 10: 1, and rrjs vfxuv kôvaias, 1 Cor. 9: 12). In 1 Cor. 10:6, In Jo. 18 29 we have accuTVTTOL r]nS)u, we have types 'for' us. sation 'against' this man, KaTrjyoplav rod avOpdoirov, etc. Each example calls for separate treatment. So to <jrip,iov 'Iwm (Lu. 11
:
29)
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
:
may
God. '0 i'rJXos tov oIkov aov (Jo. 2 17) is zeal 'concerning' thy house. See Ro. 10: 2; cf. also Heb. 11 26, top duethiGjiov TOV XpL(TTod. lu Col. 2 18, dprjaKeia tccv ayyeXwv, it is worship
prayer
'to'
: :
'paid to' angels, while
eis Trjv viraKovijv
tov XpLaTov (2 Cor. 10: 5)

viraKorj rtcrrecos
:
is
obedience 'to' Christ.
But
see per contra
(Ro.
5)
which is subjective genitive. In 1 Cor. 1 6, ixapTvpiov tov XpiaTov, we have again witness 'concerning' Christ. Cf. also 6 X670S 6 TOV (TTavpov (1 Cor. 1 18) and d/coai TvdXkp.wv (Mt. 24 6). So in
:
:
Cor. 8
17
aweiSTjaLs tov eldooKov is
consciousness 'about' the
idol,
not the
idol's consciousness.
See also the two objective uses

:
of ayawq tov Oeov (2

Jo. 5
:
Th. 2
10; Lu. 11
:
42)
:
and possibly
5 either will
:
also
42; 2 Th. 3
5; 1 Jo. 2
5.
In Ro. 5
deov
make
:
good sense. The phrase (l)6(3os and note also 2 Cor. 5 11 (t6v
:
(Ro. 3
18)
is
objective,
(f)6l3ov
tov Kvplov).
Eph. 5
21
is
objective.
See also
Kad' viropovrjv
epyov ayadov (Ro. 2:7), 'in' a

:
good work, and

(TLv
els hiKal(j:<jLv fcoTjs

:
(Ro. 5
18), 'to' life.
Cf. dmcrra-
fw^s Kplaews (Jo. 5
29).
Indeed one
may
go on and include
off
those genitives of "looser relation" usually set
to themselves.
656s
:
They
are really just the objective genitive.

5),
So as to
Wvup
(Mt. 10:
way
'to'
the Gentiles; d86p dakaaarjs (Mt. 4
15),
way
THE CASES
'by' the sea;
ttju
(nTi2i:EI2)
501
:
diaqiropav tCju 'EXKrivccv (Jo. 7
35), dispersion
'among' the Greeks;

slaughter; dhpa
TOLKeaia BajQuXcoj'os
aecov
Trpbâra
aâYrys (llo. 8:36),
'doomed
to'
/xe-
tcov irpoPaTccv (Jo.
10:7), door 'to' the sheep;
(Mt.
11
f.),
and even
cnroKvTpcoaLS tojv xapa/3d-
(Heb. 9
15),
though
this last
:
may
be regarded as an ablative.
But
PawTLafxcop
btbaxw (Heb. 6
:
2) is
objective genitive.
Note
also
rpoTTTJs
aTroaKLaafjLa (Jas. 1
17),
iriaTH aXvdîas (2
Th. 2
/cat
13),
a shadow 'cast by' turning, and faith in the truth. In Heb. 10 24,
:
Trapo^va/iov ayairr]s
koXuv epycov there

14
is
little
cause for comXycrroov (2
ment.
Cor. 11
The same remark

:
applies to klv^vvol
97
iroraiicov,
26).
In Jo. 19
wapaaKevr} tov iraaxo.
probably
17
al-
ready means the day 'before' the Sabbath (Friday).^ Cf. irapaCf. also the genitive of price, 18). l3o\ri TOV aireipovTos (Mt. 13 XolvL^ a'lTov b-qvapLOv (Rev. 6:6), 'for' a penny; avTaXkayiia. rijs Cf. Lu. 10: i^vx'ys avTov (Mt. 16 26), exchange 'for' his soul. 36. Enough has been said to show how carefully the genitive must be interpreted and what great latitude Avas used in connection with it. Deissmann {St. Paul, pp. 140 f.) thinks that Paul's use of the genitive is "very pecuhar" and transcends all rules about subjective and objective. He even suggests "mystic geni:
:
tive" for Paul.

7.
Genitive of Relationship.
is
use of the genitive

lationship." ^
special application.
called "genitive of
it is
In reality
For lack of a better name this membership" ^ or "of remerely the possessive genitive of a
17
:
The substantive is not used because the conThus Mapla 'laKco/Soi; ('Lu. 24 10) is James' text makes it clear. Mary; whether mother, wife, daughter or sister, the context must decide. In this instance it is James' mother. Mk. 16 1 and Mk. 15 47 give us Mapta 'luarJTos, while in 15 40 we have both James and Joses. In Mt. 27 56 as in Mk. 15 40 we have the full construction with /jltittip. But in Jo. 19 25 Mapia rod
: :
77
77
KXwTra
meant. So in Mt. 1 6 k t^s tov Ovpiov. In Lu. 6 16 and Ac. 1 13 we have 'lovdas 'Ia/cw/3ou, which probably means the brother (dSeXôs) of Jude in view of Jude 1 (d5eX06s 'laKcoôv) rather than son. But i;t6s is the word usually to be supphed, as in 'Iclkcoôv tov tov ZeêSalov (Mt. 4: 21), tov 'lovit is
the wife
:
(yvvri)
that
is
:
8av
'EliJLwvos
(Jo. 6
71), 2t/xcof
'Icoavov (Jo.
21
15
ff.),
AavelS tov
TOV 'leaaai (Ac. 13: 22).
See also Ac. 20:4,

vloi
:
2ico7rarpos
is
Uvppov.
Cf.
Lu. 3: 2 where
dee'
vl6s is
used, as
generally
ol
for 'sons of
Zebe-
(Mk. 10
1
35).
In Jo. 21
C.r., p.
we have
tov ZejSedaLov so used.
Abbott, Joh.
Blass, Gr. of
92.
p. 95.
=>
N. T. Gk.,
W.-Th.,
p. 190.
502

article
:
But sometimes the

In
refers to
11).
the family in general as

ol
it
in vTo Tcov XXoTjs (1 Cor. 1
Cf.
Tepl ahrov (Lu.

is
22 :49).
is
Mk.
35, a-Ko tov apxt-frvvayuyov,
possible that oIkos
to be supplied, since the
come.^
In Ac. 2: 27, 31,

a8ov (cf.
man W. H.
himself (verse 22) has already
read
els
adrju,
while some
MSS.
have vary
is
els
also' in Ps.
Brugmann, Griech. 16 10 (LXX). Cf.

:
:
Gr., p. 395)
and the MSS.

:
more
:
likely that in Lu. 2
49, ev rots tov Trarpos,
t^ ady in Lu. 16 23. It we have the

Cf.
ets to.
idea of 'house' rather than that of 'business.'

(Jo. 19
Ibta
27)
and
ets
rd
Ibia
and
ol
Ulol in Jo. 1:11.

of.
See
all
eu rots
l\.\av8(iov),
P.O. 523
ets
(ii/A.D.), for
'house'
It is
a classic idiom.
in harttjs
Cf. Lysias
mony
These constructions are with the ancient Greek idiom.^ In an example

rd rod dSeXôO.
:
like to
oKrjdovs irapoLnlas (2 Pet. 2
22)
it is
not the genitive that
calls for
remark so much as the

8. Partitive Genitive.
article
without any substantive.

is
The
See
eojs
discussion belongs to the chapter on the Article.
Here a part of the whole

b'tKaTov
:
given.
:
TovToov
(Mt. 6
29), TO
ttJs
TToXeojs
(Rev. 11 (Rev. 12
13),
:
ijixlcFOvs
TTJs
jSacrtXetas
(Mk. 6
TTJs
23), ^/XLav Kacpov

:
14),
rd
^7^ltotd iJLov Tojv
vwapxovTo^v (Lu. 19
yfjs
8), to Trepicraevov to>v

:
K\aap.aTwv
ev tcov
(Mt. 15
fieXuiv
37), TO TpiTov
:
(Rev. 8
7).
See further
:
aov (Mt. 5
29), Tipa twu

ol
Trpo(f)riTQiv
(Acts 7
52), tovs tttojxovs
Twv ayiuv (Rom. 15:26),

p-vpiabes (jLVpLaSciov Kal
Xotxot
xtXtdScoi'
tuv avOpo^wuv
(Lu.
18:11),
ixov
xt^XtdSes
:
(Rev. 5:11), rd
r}p.[(TLa.
Tuv vTrapxoPTuv (Lu. 19

(1 Pet.
5:9).
8) and the curious rd avTo. tQv iraOrjiJLaTwv For the blending of the partitive genitive with
e/c
the ablative and
and
for further discussion see ix,

is
(c).
In the
16,
N. T. the partitive relation

(TvvrjXOov
usually
more sharply defined by

Cf. Ac. 21
is
:
prepositions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 102).
Twv
fiaOrjToiv,
where the partitive genitive

the
subject.
9.
The Position of
Genitive.
In
general one
may
note
that the genitive usually comes after the limiting substantive, as

TYjv
is
ykevvav tov irvpbs (Mt. 5 22), but the genitive comes first if it emphatic hke 'EXXi7i'coi' tvo\v 7r\rjdos (Ac. 14 1) or if there is sharp contrast like tov avaTpaTidoT-rjv nov, vnojp 8^ awoaToXov (Ph. 2 25). In Eph. 6 9 both genitives precede, /cat avTwv Kal v/jloov 6 If the article is used with both words we may have the Kvpios. usual order, as Trjv Travoir\lav tov deov (Eph. 6 11), or less often the Sometimes classic idiom, as top ttjs xtorecos apxvyov (Heb. 12: 2).
:
indeed the article

1
may
be repeated, as
etc., p.
X670S 6 tov aTavpov (1 Cor.

*
Green, Handb.,
Blass, Gr. of
213.
p.
N. T. Gk.,
95
f.
THE CASES
1
:
(nTfiZEIs)
503
AvTov usually comes after the noun in the Synoptics, as aXupa avTov (Lu. 3 17), but John sometimes puts avTov first^ Sometimes a word 10, aov ol dcjidaXfiol) (1 27; 9:8; cf. aov in 9 and the genitive as in ijneda substantive intervenes between the
18).^
Tfjv
:
T'tKva 4>vaL hpyrjs
(Eph. 2:3).
Cf. also Ph. 2

:
10; Ro. 9
21, etc.
But note
10.
els
aXevpov aara rpia (Mt. 13
33).
Concatenation of Genitives.
Two
or
more
genitives
may
be used together. This is, of course, common in the earlier Greek. Paul in particular is fond of piling up genitives. Take 1 Th. 3 as a typical example, ixvrnxovehovres v/jlcov tov epyov rrjs Trtcrreajs 1
:
Kal TOV KOTTOV TTjs ayaTrrjs kol ttjs VTOiJ.ovfjs rrjs eXirlSos tov Kvpiov
'Itjo-ou
r]fxu)V
Here we have practically all the points, viz., two simple genitives, two in apposition, three together, one of the person and the other of the thing. A very simple case is found in Ro. 8 21, TTjv eXevOepiav ttjs 86^r]s to)v TeKvoov tov 6eov, and in verse 23
XptaroO.
:
Ttjv
cnroXvTpuatv tov
1
:
(Tco/xaTos rjfxccv.
:
Cf. also Jo. 6
1;
2 Cor. 4:4;
Eph.
6;
13; Col. 1
13, etc.
In Rev. 16
tijs
19
we have
and
four
five
genitives, to TOT-qpLov tov divov tov dvp.ov
6p7^s avTov,
Ti}v X-qvov
occur in Rev. 19
TOV dvfxov
really
is
TYJs
15,
counting the appositives,

of words,"
tov divov
opyrjs tov deov tov iravTOKpaTopos .
Blass^ calls this
"a
burdensome accumulation
clear enough. pendent genitive
but surely the sense The governing genitive comes before the de-
in regular order here.
But
in 2 Pet. 3
2 this
smooth order
stood:
TOV Kvplov.
is
not observed, yet
all five
can be readily under-
viro TU)P ayio)v
irpoip-qTUV Kai ttjs t>v airocrToXcjv vptup ePToXrjs

: :
30 also. In 2 Cor. 3 18, aird KvpLov iTPevp.aTos, it is not clear whether Kvplov is genitive or is the ablative in apposition with TpevnaTos. In Jas. 2 1 it is difficult to put into brief compass the Greek idiom, ttjp irlcrTip tov KvpLov r]p.wp 'l-qaov XptcrTou Here 'I??. Xp. is in apposition with Kvpiov. Kvplov has T?7s 56^7?s. TiiJLcJp and is itself the objective genitive with ttIotlv, while t^s So^tjs is probably in apposition with 'It?. Xp. (see Mayor in loco). (g) The Genitive WITH Adjectives. Giles* observes how natuCf. Ph. 2
:
take the genitive, since many of them are developed from substantives in apposition. Adjectives of fulness can logically take either the genitive or the instrumental. Giles"^ explains how with the Latin plenus, by analogy to vacuvs, the al)lative is used and also because the ablative and instrumental forms
ral it is for adjectives to
Cf. Green, Ilaiulb., etc., p. 215.

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 99. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 90. Man., etc., p. 31G.* Cf. Dclbriick, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 353 f.
2
4 ^
lb.
504
are the

same
in Latin.
we have
an
3).
the genitive
when the
:
Indeed even in the case of the participle participle is regarded no longer as

to.
adjective, but as a substantive, as

Cf. Lu. 12
tt^s
:
virapxovTa nov (1 Cor. 13
33; Lu. 2
27, to ddtaixhov tov vbixov;
and Ph. 3
1
8,
TO virepexov
yvwaeuis.
The
adjective itself
.
is
so used in
Cor.
10 33, TO
:
k/jLavTov avn(i>opov.
Cf
Cor. 7 35.
: :
IJLopcjiovs
Trjs
ekovos tov viov avTov (Ro. 8
29).
But different is avjj.Here we have the
is due to the principle just stated. In crvvepyos, Ro. 16: 21, we have the substantive also. The case with verbals in -ros may be considered genitive, but see the ab-
true adjective, but the genitive
lative also.
Thus
6
:
ol ayairrjTol deov
:
(Ro. 1:7), yewrjTol yvpaLKcou (Lu.
7 2
28), kXe/cTot deov (Ro. 8
33),
/cXrjrot 'It](jov
(Ro.
6).
In
StSa/c-
Tol deov (Jo.

:
45),
oi'K kv 8i.8aKTols avOpcoir'tpris ao<pias
\6yoLS (1 Cor.
13)
one
is
may
question
if
we do not have
:
the ablative.
is
But
in
evXoytfiJLevoL
There
tov Trarpos (Mt. 25 only one adjective in -lk6s in the N. T. which has the genitive, kpltlkos evdvp-iiaewv (Heb. 4 12). "Aîos is very common with the genitive in the N. T., as ixîov Trjs neTavolas (Mt. 3:8). So
34) the genitive
:
hkely the case.
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
though Blass^ considers it genitive of price. weighing or scales seems to be involved in the word. figure of The In 1 Cor. 9 21 (ewoixos XptcrroO) we have a very "bold use" of the
explain this genitive,
:
genitive^ due to the substantive idea involved
(vo/jlos).
But probdependent
in
ably in Heb. 3
12, KapSla irov-qpa aTLaTias,
the genitive
is
on Kap8la, not
26
:
TTovrjpd.
"Epoxos brings
up an unusual genitive
Mt.
66 epoxos davaTov, and

aiJ.apTr]fjLaTos.
vlov
29 (correct text) evoxos eaTiv aicoMoulton^ considers this genitive "aberrant"

3
:
Mk.
and
In
1
still
more
:
euoxos Kpiaeus in Sj^rian class of

acxifxaTos,
Cor. 11
27, epoxos eaTat TOV
MSS. in Mk. 3 we have the usage of

Tfj
29.
the
66.
pre-Syrian classes in
Mk.
epoxos
29 and not the idiom in Mt. 26

Kpiaei
The
usual construction appears also as in epoxos eaTai

f.)
(Mt.
7
5: 21
and even
els
tw
yeeppap
(i'6.).
In the instance
In 2 Cor.
if
of KOLvwvbs the construction
is
also interesting.
we
have
8
KOLPupoi tore tuv
iradij/jLaTOiv,
but
it is
debatable
the adjec-
tive has not here

: ;
.
become a substantive as with kolvcj}v6s e/xos (2 Cor. Koti'coj'os has also the dative, as 23 cf avpepybs in same verse) Sce avPKOLPO)pds avTov (1 Cor. 9 23) KOLPwvol TOO '^LfjLCjoPL (Lu. 5 10).
.
and
in Ph. 1
1
1
:
Rev.
two 9 we have
:
genitives, awKoiPcavovs
ep
ixov Trjs
xpt5.
But
with locative.
^ *
Note
ib.
also p-ecTol vwoKplaeus
Vergl. Synt.,
I,
p. 254.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 106.
01. Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 152.
THE CASES
(Mt. 23
in
vos
1
: :
(lITfiSEIs)
505
28)
:
and
ifK-qp-qs x^-pi-tos
(Jo. 1
14).^
The
Cf.
case of /xeroxos
Heb. 3
26).
1 (KK-qaecos eTrovpaviov ixeToxoi) is
similar to that of kolvufiecros
above, though more decidedly adjectival.
vp-dv (Jo.
In Jo. 8
55
W. H.
:
read
opoLO's vplp,
though J<CLX have
a construction sometimes found in ancient Greek,^ One 1 Pet. 5 9, rd aurd tuv iradripdToov, which is perhaps to be understood as the same "kinds" of sufferings, rather than the same sufferings. (h) The Genitive with Adverbs and Prepositions. At bottom there is little difference between the adverb and the genivpcov,
may
note also in
tive and the preposition and the genitive. The preposition is an adverb that is used with a case for clearer expression. The adverb is still an adverb when used with a case and called a preposition. Some adverbs indeed are only used as prepositions, but this is in the later stages of the language. 'A^Lcos, hke the adjective d^tos, occurs with the genitive, as d^tcos rod eva-yytklov (Ph. 1:27; cf. Ro. 16 2). The genitive is not persistent with some of the adverbs and prepositions in late Greek.' It is more especially with adverbs of time that the genitive is found.^ Thus aira^ tov hiav:
Tov (Heb. 9
7),
8ls
rod cra(3âT0v (Lu. 18
12), eirraKLS ttjs ripepas

it is
(Lu. 17 :4).
Giles^ indeed observes that
only the genitive
of place that uses prepositions.
Here only specimens without

:
discussion can be given.
Thus
8
:
avTiKpvs Xtoy (Ac. 20: 15), airkvavTi

16), axpt- Kaipov (Lu.
:
TOV Ta4>ov (Mt. 27 :61), aprl xdptros (Jo. 1
13),
Slcl
TrapaôXrjs (Lu.
4), eyyvs eov (Ro. 10
8), IvavTi tov
6eov (Lu. 1:8), kvavTiov tov Bôv (Lu. 1:6), evfKeu epov
kPTds vpOiV (Lu. 17: 21), kvonnov Kvpiov (Lu. 1
:
(Mt. 5
11),
15), eiravo) opovs
(Mt.
14),
eiri
ttjs
:
yrjs
(Rev. 6
10), eaco
ttjs
avXijs
(Mk. 15
16), ccos
ripu)u
(Mt. 26: 59), KaThavTi vpwv (IVIk. 11:2), KaTivdoTTLov TTjs So^Tjs (Ju. 24), kvkXcc TOV dpovov (Rcv. 4 6), peaop 7eêas cr/coXtSs (Ph. 2 15), peO' rjpcov (Mt. 1 23), peTa^v aov (Mt. 18 15), pexpi- TTJs arjpepov (Mt. 11 23), TapaTrXrjaLOv davaTOV
(Ac. 9
38), /card tov 'Irjaov
: : :
:
(Ph. 2
27), tXtjc'lov tov x^p'i-ov (Jo,

:
5), -wepl
tov
cf)o)T6s
(Jo.
8),
TOVTOV xdpiJ' (Eph. 3

all
1).
"EpirpoaOev, oTTLaOtv, irpo, irpos, virep, etc.,

:
may
have the ablative. Cf. to 'lawOev hpCiv (Lu. 11 39) where eawdev be looked at more as a noun. 'Ev pkaw has almost the force of a preposition with the genitive {hpwv, for instance, 1 Th. 2:7). As already remarked, Dcl{%) The Genitive with Verbs.
1
Ktvbs, hSeris, etc.,

2
Jann. (Hist. CJk. Gr., p. 338), after the aiialofjiy of (he I.at. and the Gk. considers it the al)l. that \vc have with irXTifirjs. " Giles, Man., Hhiss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. lOG. p. 318.
Jann., Hist. Gk, Gr., p. 337.
b
Jb., p. 319.
506
NEW TESTAMENT
In Lu.
is
briick^ begins his discussion of the genitive with the verb.
5:19,
1.
TToias elaeveyKcx)(TLv,
the genitive
is
not due to the verb and
rather loose almost adverbial phrase.
Very Common. In Greek the genitive with verbs cuts a than in Latin.^ Broadus used to say that the genitive with verbs means 'this and no other,' while the accusative with verbs means 'this and no more.' Probably therefore the genitive with verbs is a variation from the accusative with verbs, the
larger figure
original
trated
41).
and normal case with verbs. by OLKOveTe avrov (Mk. 9 7) and

:
This point
may
be
illus-
^Kovaev tov aairaaixbv (Lu. 1
Some
verbs yield themselves naturally to the idea of the
genitive, while others use the accusative.
Others again use

is
now
one,
now
the other.
The
predicate genitive
passed by here,
having been discussed under Substantives.
Fading Distinction from Accusative. But it must not be it is wholly a matter of indifference whether the accusative or the genitive is used with a verb, though the accusative in the later Greek constantly made inroads on the genitive. Even in the old Greek much freedom existed. In the modern Greek the genitive with verbs occurs only in some dialects (Thumb, Handb., Cf. (jLV7]noveveTe ttjs yvpaiKos Acot (Lu. 17:32), but nvrjuop. 35). In Tavra nov neiJ-vqade (1 Cor. vevere tovs whre aprovs (Mt. 16 9). 11:2) both cases occur. This is all in accord with classical usage. So also kTiKaOeaOai tov epyov vijlQiv (Heb. 6 10), but rd fxev birlaoi
2.
assumed that
tTviKavdavbuevos (Ph.
13); yevaerai ixov tov bdirvov (Lu. 14
24),
but eyevaaTo to v8up
(Jo.
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^ The accusative (case of extent) accents (poivriv ovK i]Kovaav (22 9)
: : .
the intellectual apprehension of the sound, while the genitive (spe-
sound of the voice without accenting the sense. The word olkovo) itself has two senses which fall in well with this case-distinction, one 'to hear,' the other 'to understand.' Cf. ou ovk T]Kovaav (Ro. 10 14) and /xi) ow riKovaau (Ro. 10 18). And yet the genitive can be used where the sense is meant, though not stressed, as ^Kovaa (puvrjs (Ac. 22 7), but under 3. further 14).^ see and 26 But ^Kovaev 4>b}vr]p (Ac. 9:4;
cifying case) calls attention to the
:
^ Giles, Man., p. 315. Vergl. Synt., I, p. 308. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., pp. 87 ff., has an extensive discussion of the gen. and ace. with &kovco, but seems to miss the point after all. They heard the sound but not the words. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 103, admits this classic distinction sometimes in the N. T.
1
'
. :
THE CASES
3.
(nTflZEIz)
507
Verbs of Sensation.
One
of the chief classes of verbs that

is
may
be used with the genitive
verbs of sensation.
One seems
compelled to
itive for the
make some
division in the verbs used with the gen-
Yet as a matter of and each verb indeed relates itself to the root-idea of the genitive. That is the thing to keep in mind and not a mere artificial grouping of the verbs. Analogy was at work, of course, but the verbs after all were separate units and had independent development. These groupings of the grammarians are mere
sake of intelligible discussion.
fact each class
matters of convenience.
And
it is
a deUcate matter that varies
somewhat with the

refer to verbs that
writer, this use of the genitive.
By sensation we
mean
to hear, smell, taste, touch, though verbs
have the accusative. The most common verb of hearing about which some remarks have already been made. It is not necessary to give an exhaustive list of the instances of d/couw. A tjrpical one is iJKovcrev au^t^coj'tas Kal xopcov (Lu. 15 25). The genitive is used either with things, as in this illustration, or with perof seeing
is cLKovoi),
:
For accusative with persons 35). Eph. 4 21. Besides the use of the accusative with this verb, both with the classic distinction as above and without, there may also be the accusative and the ablative as in Ac. 1 4 rî* riKovaare
sons, as in avTov uKovere (Lu. 9
:
see
used in the sense of hear, to understand, and even to obey (hearken). The sense of hearken is often in John's Gospel with the genitive, as ok ^Kovaav avrcjp to.
fjLov.
Then again
the verb
itself is
irpbâra (Jo. 10
8).
Cf. Rev. 3
20, etc.
genitive in the last passage r^s
^co^tjs tôv is
merely possessive. between the usages in the various N. T. writers, but that is not to be pushed too far. In 2 Cor. 6 2 (LXX, Is. 49 8) we have kiriiKovca aov, but vraKovco uses the dative (Mt. 8 27) But we have kirriKpoGiVTo avrHbv ol Sea/jnoL (Ac. 16 25) in the sense of
ixov is
:
the verb, for
The apparent double not to be attributed to Cf. Ac. 22 1. Blass^ makes

:
careful distinction
hearken.
No
vcrl) of smelling is
used with the genitive in the

:
N.
T.,
but
efXTTPecov aTretXTjs Kai 4>6vov
(Ac. 9
1) is
certainly analogous,
for parallels (Josh.
as Blass^ observes,
who
refers to the
LXX
10:40, irav tixTTvtov fcojjs), for both genitive and accusative. Cf. Johannessohn, Der Gebr., p. 36. Thus ov fir/ ytm-qraL davarov (Jo. 8 52), but in Heb. 6 4 f we have the genitive and accusative
: :
right together, a matter hardly accidental, ^ yevaanhovs

yevaaixevous deov prjua.
Trjs
Swpeas,
But
Blass'' consitlers the accusative here,
as in Jo. 2
1
9,
merely a colloquialism
in
^ *
harmony with the general
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 103.

lb.
Moiilton, Prol., p. 6G.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 101.
508

(see 2 above).
:
tendency to retain the accusative

tasting are Kopeadhres
rpoclirjs
Other verbs of
(Ac. 27
38)
and
tovtovs xopraaat aproip
(Mk.
8:4).
Cf. also fxeTeXafxISavov

An/'dw
Tpocjirjs
(Ac. 2:46)
and TpoaeXaôvro
Tpo4)rjs
(Ac. 27:36).
and
ireLvao)
use only the accusative

briefly disposed of.
(Matt. 5:6).
The verbs
l/jLaTLOJv
of touching
:
can be
Thus
i]\j/aTo
Twv
(Mk. 5
30)
:
and often
but
in the Gospels.
So
Kav dripiov diyri tov opovs (Heb. 12
20),
\pri\a<pa.bi
has only the
Perhaps the other verbs of taking hold and seizing may as well be mentioned, for it is less than a step from the idea of touch. Thus hbs audeêraL (Lu. 16 13) rd hxdneva
accusative (Ac. 17: 27).
of
:
TTjs acoTrjpias
(Heb. 6:9); avreKaêro
'laparjX TacSos avTov (Lu. 1
54)
and
ol rrjs evepyeaLas avTCkajj-âvoiievoL (1
(Mt. 14:31), and kirCKa^biievos rijs where the part taken hold of is indicated; eKpaTr}aev rrjs xî-po^ avTTJs (Mt. 9 25), where the part is again in genitive, but the whole is in the accusative in Kpar-qaas tov 'Iwaptjv (Mt. 14 3) Tnaaas av~ TOP TT]s xî-pbs (Ac. 3:7), where the whole is in the accusative and
:
Tim. 6:2); kTekaêTO avTOV xî-pos rod tv(J)\ov (Mk. 8:23),
the part in the genitive.
Blass^ notes that this last (Trtdfw)
is
"vulgar" word.
the vernacular.
But here, as usual, the N. T. is in harmony with The papyri ^ show exo/xat with the genitive as
p.ovj'P.
well as aPTLkaixâpojxai. So txbixevbs
Par. 51 (b.c. 160). Besides
Mk.
23 (above) the double genitive (whole and part)

eTriXd/Scoj'Tat
may
be
seen in Lu. 20: 20, I'm
avTov \6yov
(cf.
also verse 26),
probably dependent on Xoyov. These naturally have the genitive, such as to desire, care for, neglect, have compassion, spare, bear with, aim after, obtain, remember, forget, enjoy, etc. 'EindviJLkco has the genitive in Ac. 20:33, apyvplov lp.aTi,afxov ovdepos, xp^^^'i-ov but the accusative probably in Mt. 5 28 (text uncertain, but LXX has accusative, Ex. 20 17). 'Opeyo/jLai also has the genitive,
though here avTov

4.
is
Verbs of Emotion.
tj
r)
as in Heb. 11
opkyeTat
16, KpdTTovos bpkyopTai.
Cf.
Tim. 3
1,
where both
and
kTrtOviiei
are used with the genitive.
Cf. also bixapb-
numerous N. T. as in the older Greek. So firi afxeXec tov h aol xapt^Mciros (1 Tim. 4 14), pij) bXiycopei TratSetas Kvpiov (Heb. 12 5). But these three verbs may have the ablative. 'Apexoixat here is hold oneself back from.' Like the earlier Greek also is eTreixeXrjdr] avTov (Lu. 10 34) and nil Twv (3ocop fxeXet rw Oeci; (1 Cor. 9:9). Blass^ considers ov8ep
fxepoL vfxoip (1
Th. 2:8).
The verbs
of concern are fairly

(Col. 3
:
and uniform.
:
Thus
apexbp.epoi. aXX-qXcop
13) in the
'
TovTOjp Tc3 TaXXioopL efieXep (Ac.
18
17) the personal construction,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 101.
Moulton,
CI. Rev.,
Dec,
1901, p. 437.
Gr. of N. T, Gk., p. 104.
THE CASES
as often in the classical Greek.
tions (Meisterhans, p. 211)
(IITOZEIS)
509
in the Attic inscrip-
But already
we have
kinntkkotxai.
:
So, too,
Trept
rcDt'
appears with the genitive in Jo. 10

Ka\cov epyo^v (Tit.
13, etc.
with the dative. Consider

:
further
Iblwv koL t-MXtara oiKeiccu ov wpovoel (1
4>poi'T'i^(joaLu
pvriaet avTrjs,
Tim. 5 8) and 'Iva 3:8). In Mt. 6 34 we have nepLthough some MSS. read rd eavTTJs. Once again take
: :
Tov Idiov ovK ecf)iaaTo (Ro. 8
32).
These
all
are in regular order.

6 Kuptos
In Mt. 18
27 tov 8ou\ov
is
more hkely dependent on
rather
than on
Verbs of obtaining are illustrated by eXaxe tov dv/jLLaaau (Lu. 1 9), not mere " appearance," ^ though the accusative is elsewhere found in the N. T. as in Ac. 1 17 (cf.
cT'Kayxvt-'ydeis.
: :
frequency of the accusative). On the other hand Tvyxo-vo) always has the genitive in the N.T., as tov alQivos eKelvov ruxtti' (Lu. 20 35). But with eirtTvyxo-^^ we have eireTvxov eirayyekLuv (Heb.
classic
:
and tovto ovk eveTvx^v (Ro. 11 7). Moulton {CI. Rev., p. 437, Dec, 1901) notes genitive and accusative with kTLTvxovTts In general TTJs 'Fiofxaiwu TToXtretas Kal tTnyaixiav, B.U. 113 (ii/A.D.). rememof Verbs the papyri confirm the N. T. use of these verbs. 8Ladr]Kr]s Thus fxvrjadrjuaL bering and forgetting call for little remark.
11 :33)
:
(Lu.
72), p.vr]ixovtveTt tov \6yov (Jo. 15
20).
M.LiJLvriaKOfj.ai
always
has the genitive and Cf. mid. and pass.) always has the accusative in the N. T. usually had ancient Greek whereas ave/jLvrjadr] to prjpa (Mk. 14 72), the genitive. With viropLiJLvrjaK'x} the usage is divided again, as the
p.vr]nopevu usually.
But
avaixinvqaKoi (act.,
accusative
is
alone used in the active (Jo. 14

vwep-vqadr]
26),
but the genitive
in the passive (deponent), as

cf.
tov prjuaTos (Lu. 22 :61;
Mk.
14
72 above).
p.r)
'EwLXavdai'oiJ.aL
itive, as <})L\o^vias
einXavdaveade (Heb. 13
{^ in
again has usually the gen2), but the accusative

:
once (Ph. 3
13)
and
Heb. 13:2 according to

(I/a.d.).
classic idiom.
Cf Oxy.
.
P. IV, 744, 11
and 12
:
We once also have (KXeXrjade

of enjoying
TTJs TrapaK\r]<Tus
(Heb. 12
5).
Of verbs
is
we have only
kyu) (TOV ovaipriv (Phil. 20).
and neither
N. T., used with the genitive, but only absolutely, with the instrumental, or with prepositions, kiadavonai appears only once (Lu. 9 45) and with accusative. Indeed, verbs of 5. Verbs of Sharing, Partaking and Filling.
'AiroXauw does not occur in the
d7aXXtdco nor xaipco
sharing can be looked at as taking the partitive genitive.
Thus
with
ixtTtx^LV
we have
rpaTrefrjs
(1
Cor. 10
Cf.
21), tK tov evos apTOV
(verse 17, clearly ablative)
and
xo-P'-ri.
(verse 30, associative^ inKeKoi.v6}vr}Kv
strumental by analogy of
aapKos (Heb. 2
:
(rvvKotvuveoi)
aluaros Kal
14),
1
though elsewhere in the N. T. the associative

Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 102.
::
510

MeraSiSto/it
/zeraXa/x/Jdi'co
instrumental occurs with persons.

cusative and instrumental.
it
is
has only the ac-
As
is
to
and
is
Trpo(j\aiifiavoi
more doubtful
if
it
not ablative rather than genitive.
Cf. IX, (/), 7, for discussion.
The
partitive idea
divided be-
tween the genitive and the ablative.^ In the N. T. prepositions are chiefly used and with the ablative. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 102) finds in the partitive idea the explanation of the local and temporal use of the genitive, but not rightly. The true genitive is found with verbs of filling like kirXijady} ttoXls ttjs avyxv(^ôjs (Ac. 19
i]
29), irewXripooKaTe
rrjv 'lepovadXrjfj. ttJs 8t.daxvs vnchv

:
(Ac. 5
28), yeniaare
:
Tas vSpias vdaros (Jo. 2

aev a-yadup (Lu. 1
:
7),
wepLaaevovTaL dprwv (Lu. 15
17), evkirXn]-
use the ablative or instrumental, as the Greek has the ablative with words of lacking (vcxTepovuTaL rrjs d6^r]s (Ro. 3 23). By analogy
53).
filling {plenus, etc.)
:
In Latin words of
therefore
rrjs oaiJLrjs
we
find
:
k
3)
(Jo. 12
and the aljlative with Tr\r)p6w, as and yeixiôo, as eykpiaev avTov tK tou
:
twXrjpudT]
irvpos
:
e/c
(Rev.
8:5). For the instrumental with the passive see Ro. 1 29, etc. Indeed the accusative is seen in Ph. 1 11 and Rev. 17 3 and some MSS. in Ac. 2 28.
:
:
Verbs of Ruling. These probably have the true genitive, though verbs of excelling use the ablative. Thus in Mk. 10 42
6.
:
we have
three such verbs in one sentence,

ol fxeyaXoL avrCiv
ol doKovvres
apxeiv tojv
Wpojv KaraKvpLevovaiv avrwv kol
KaTeôvaiaôvcLV avToiV.
Other examples are

18
2
:
avOviraTevoPTos
according to some
:
MSS.
in Ac.
12, aWePTelp apbpos (1

eTrt),
Tim. 2
Cor.
1
12), âctXeuei
r?js
'louSatas
(Mt.
22 XB; elsewhere
-qye/jLovevoPTos rrjs
:
2uptas (Lu. 2 :2), kv-
pLeuo/Jiep vjslhp rrjs Trtcrrecos
(2
24), KaTadvpaarevovaLP hpoiP (Jas.
2:6), TeTpaapxovpTo^
ttjs
'Irovpaias (Lu.
3:1).
These verbs
all
have a
7.
distinct substantive-affinity like 'be ruler of,' etc.

:
See fur-
ther Lu. 22 25 for
KvpLevoo
and
eôvaLa^co,
Mt. 16 18
:
for Kanaxi'w.
Verbs of Buying, Selling, Being Worthy fectly clear what the origin of this usage
brivoLplov
of.
is.
It is
not peruse of
eK
The
with
avp,(f}copriaas
(Mt.
20
2)
may
be noted, but
in
Cf. also rjyopacrap k^ avTojp (Mt. b-qpaplov avpe4)copr](Tas. 27:7) with TpadrjpaL iroWov (Mt. 26:9). 'Ayopaôj is used also with P (Rev. 5:9). So again one may note eKTrjaaro x^pi-ov tK 18. Cf. Lu. 16 9, e/c tov pap.wpo) with IxLddov rrys abiKlas (Ac. 1 Cf. 5td with irepLTroieofxaL (Ac. 20:28). /jLLadov eêxvdrjaav (Ju. 11). These examples show that it was easy to go from the genitive to ^ and the ablative. Consider also oop-qaaTo Tcixrjs dpyvpiov (Ac. 7 16), dacraplov TrajXetrat (Mt. 10 29), roaobrov direSoade (Ac. 5:8), ^70-
verse 13
Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Synt.,
I,
p. 340.
THE CASES
pacrdr}T
Tt/JiTJs
(lITi2:2EI2:)
511
(1
Cor.
6."
20).
In
Mk.
14: 5,
irpadrjvai k-Kavw drjvapicov

is
TpiaKoalojv,
the adverb kwavo: has no effect on the case as

TrevTaKocriois
shown
by
oi4>dr] eTravo)
d5eX0ots (1 Cor. 15
6).
Blass^ compares
the use of
in the Attic inscriptions
with
TpadijuaL.
And Monro
is
(Homeric Grammar,
certainly possible.
p. 109) considers this
the ablative, which
But on the other hand the undoubted

'AXXaaaoj
genitive
with
a^Looj
suggests the idea of exchange or barter as the true oriin
gin and thus a real genitive. buying and selling easily fall
is not so used itself, but with the notion of worth. Thus iva vfids dîcbcTT/ rfjs KKrjaeoJS (2 Th. 1 11), KaTa^Lo^drjpac rrjs iSaaiXelas Tim. Th. Cf. also 1 5 1:5). 17; Heb. 3:3; 10 29. On the (2 whole one is inclined to this explanation of the usage and to treat
:
Cf Rev. 6 6 for the genitive of price without it as a true genitive. a verb. But the use of a-iro with verbs of buying and selling goes back in single instances to the Attic time (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 91). So (TTect)avoi' didovTes awo irevT-qKovra xp^'^^v, Inscr. of Magn., 16, 29. 8. Verbs of Accusing and Condemning. Blass^ observes that the old Greek usage of the genitive of the thing has well-nigh vanished in the N. T. We do have eyKaXeladai araaeojs (Ac. 19 40), but irepl with the genitive is the usual construction in the N. T. both with e7mXeco (Ac. 23 29), Kpivw (Ac. 23 6), and even Karrjyopkw (Ac. 24 13). However, in the case of KaTT^yopeco we do find oov in Lu. 23 14 and Ac. 25 11, but in each instance the genitive seems to be due to attraction to the case of the suppressed antecedent TovTOiv. Cf. Ac. 24 13 for irepl. Still the point is not absolutely certain and Siv could be due to Kar-qyopkoi. At any rate KaTrjyopeoo is also used with the genitive of the person as in ha Karrjyopifaoiaiv avTov (Mt. 12 Cf. also Mk. 15 3 where we have 10).
.
genitive
p. 235)
CLKovoi,
and accusative,
notes that
Karrjyopovu avrov iroWa.
Moulton
(Prol.,
D
to
often has accusative with Karriyopeoo as with

Prepositions in Composition.
Kpareoo.
9.
Genitive
Due
Some verbs
have the genitive because of the preposition in composition which gives a distinct change in idea to the verb. The preposition is often repeated with the noun. As a matter of fact the only^ preposition that seems to figure thus in the N. T. is /card which is used with a number of verbs with the genitive.'* Not all the Kara com1
Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
lb., p. 104.
p. 105.
Uv
cites Moistorh., Att. Inschr., p. 173.

^
^ *
Bliiss,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. lOG.

of
Jann.
(Hi.st.
Gk. Gr.,
i).
341) coiinnciits
on the blending
meaning be-
tween prep, and verb
in the later
Gk.
512

genitive.
pounds use the
Cf. the accusative case
and note as
illus-
trations of the accusative in the
N. T.
KarayuiviôiJLaL, Kara^paêvca,
It may be that some of the verbs already instanced as using the genitive may owe it to Kara in composition, like KaTiryopeco (Mt. 12: 10). But the point seems to be reasonably plain as to KaTeyeXwp avTov (Mt. 9 24), eav KaraKaraSiKaôj, KaraKpipo), KaTacro4>'LôiJ.aL.
:
yivoocrKTu rinGiv
rjfxcov
ij
Kapbla (1 Jo. 3
20,
and note verse
21),
though
:
might go with
ak'K'q'Koov
rip,o)v
Kapbla), KaraKavxaTai eXeos Kplaeojs (Jas. 2
13), 13),
KaraXaXetre
KaTevapKr](ja
(Jas.
11), aov KaranaprvpovaLV

:
(Mt. 27
tov
(2
Cor.
12
13),
KaTacrTprjULaacoaiv
:
Xpiarov
(1
Tim. 5
11), aiaxvvn^ KaTa4)povr]aas
TTJs Ke4>aXris
(Mk. 14
3)
(Heb. 12 2), Karexêv avTOV but in Mt. 26 7 the text of W. H. has

:
exi
with genitive as some
MSS.
in
Mk.
10. Attraction of the Relative.
word only
is
needed about
the attraction of the relative, a matter treated properly in the
chapter on Pronouns, which see. Here it may only be noted that the genitive (as of other oblique cases) of the relative sometimes
appears with a verb when the case is due, not to the verb, but to the antecedent. Thus we note Tepl tclvtcop cjv eirolrjaev (Lu. 3: 19),
an idiom common
eUes (Rev. 1:20).
(j)
in Luke,
but rare elsewhere, as aarepoov

Infinitive.
in the case.
ovs
The Genitive of the

is
This
it is
is
more properly
discussion of
an instance
of the genitive of substantives as
the substantival
full
aspect of the infinitive that
The
is
the matter belongs to the chapter on Verbal Nouns.
Here
it
may
simply be remarked that the

as the translation of the
infinitive
with tov
not unknown to
as in the
ancient Greek, though nothing hke so
common
it
LXX
Hebrew
infinitive construct.
But the
Hebrew
article.^
infinitive is
not an exact analogy as
does not have the
But Thucydidcs had already sho^^^l a fondness for this idiom which is thoroughly Greek. As an example from the LXX
take TOV kêkkaOaL (Dan. 6
aTeipojp TOV airelpeLv
:
14).
:
For the N. T. note
e^rjXdev 6
(Mt. 13
3).
The
substantival nature of this

:
infinitive
with tov
is
well sho'^\^l in Kaipos tov dpâaOaL (1 Pet. 4
17).
But in general tov with the infinitive has as wide an extension of meaning in the vernacular kolpt] as the genitive absolute.^ The details come later. (k) The Genitive Absolute. It may indeed be ablative
absolute as Farrar^ holds, following the analogy of the Latin.
But, as Giles
1
**
observes, the Latin absolute

from
tlie
is
very likely instrup. 76. p.
C. and
S., Sel.
LXX,
p. 59.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 216.
Gk. Synt., Man., etc.,
339
f.
THE CASES
(nTfiZEIs)
513
mental or locative. The various languages

language or another.
in the use of the absolute cases, nearly all
however, having a turn in one Cf. dative in Anglo-Saxon. Since the Sandiffer greatly,
skrit uses genitive as well as instrumental
construction), Giles considers the

genitive.
and locative (usual Greek genitive absolute a true
In this he
is
perhaps correct.
But Brugmann
{Griech.
Gr., p. 523) discusses the genitive
absolute separately from both

is
genitive and ablative.
Cf.Moulton,C^.72e?;., 1901, p. 437. Mullach^
observes that the genitive absolute
a mark of the higher style
and was not much used in the vernacular. Jebb ^ remarks that in the modern Greek the genitive absolute is more commonly paraphrased in harmony with the general disuse of the participle. However, in the vernacular kolvt) "the rapid extension of the genitive absolute is a very obvious feature,"^ and the N. T. is in line with the papyri on this point also as in most other matters of grammar. Moulton observes further that "in the papyri it may
often be seen forming a string of statements, without a finite verb for several lines," which is rather more than can be said of the
the N. T. chiefly in the historical Abbott 4 has felt that Mark uses the genitive absolute "somewhat monotonously to introduce the circumstances of a new narrative," and he finds it common in Matthew in temporal
books.
N. T.
It naturally occurs in
John, he observes, has the construction nowhere in recording Christ's words, though he elsewhere'^ "employs it with
clauses.
more elasticity of meaning than is found in the Triple Tradition." The LXX shows many examples of the genitive absolute and with abundant freedom also.*^ The normal usage in the older Greek is to have a genitive absolute when a participle occurs with a noun
disconnected from the rest of the sentence as in avaxo^pwav(Mt. 2 13). Cf. 2 Cor. 2 12. But the older Greek did not always conform to this norm, and variations appear
is
that
Tcov avTciv
also in the N. T. Thus sometimes the participle is found alone as in tkdbvTwv (Mt. 17: 14) and dirovros (17: 26), a very frequent idiom in the papyri.' Cf. avayvcâdhruv B.U. 925 (iii/A.D.?),
8r]\wehTos B.U. 970 (ii/A.D.).

of the old eôv.^
The papyri
as
Cf. ovK eôuTos P.O. 275 (a.d. 66).
genitive absolute occurs
when
show eôvros instead Then again the a matter of fact the noun or
also
pronoun
1
is
not absolute and the participle might have merely

6
Gr., p. 357.
lb., p. 84.
2 3 *
V. and D., Handb.,
p.
334.
'
C. and
ib.
S., p.
.'58;
Thack., p. 24.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 74.
Moulton,
Trol., p. 74.
Joh. Gr., p. 83.
514
NEW TESTAMENT
The
simplest example
agreed in case with the word in question.

is
the repetition of the pronoun in the same case as elaeXOoPTos

eis
avTov
oIkov
o'l
idadrjTai
firi
avrov
(Mk. 9
28).
But more noticeable

aurcS
is
an example
18
:
like
exopros de auroO airodovpai kKeXevcrev avTov (Mt.
25), or radra 5e avrov epdv/jLTjOevTos
e4>a.pr]
(Mt.
20),
usage more
common
apparently in the N. T. than in the papyri.

ecroiaep,
But note
where
solute
txov
KipSvPvaavTOS ds daXaaa-ap
eaitxrep.
is
:
B.U. 423
(ii/A.D.),
/xe is
implied with
One even notes the
genitive ab-
when the nominative
present as in
iiprjarevdeia-qs rrjs iJ.t]Tp6s
Moulton^ notes "a violent use" of the genitive absolute in Heb. 8 9 from the LXX, where we have h rjiJLepa kTn\aôp.kpov p.ov. Here the participle is treated almost hke the infinitive (as a substantive). Moulton regards it as due to the original Hebrew, and Westcott {in loco) cites h r]p.kpa kvTeikaixepov aov avru) (Baruch 2 28). See further under PartiavTov MapLas
evpedr]
(Mt.
18).
ciples.
The Ablative ("Ablatival Genitive") Case (-n d<j)aipTiKf| TTTwo-is). The treatment of this case will be briefer, for it never had
IX.
the manifold development of the Greek genitive.

in the o
In the original
for discus-
speech the genitive and ablative had no distinctive endings save
stems in the singular.^

the
See chapter VII,

ablativus
is
ii, (a),
sion of form.
(a)
The Name. But
name
credited to Juhus
Ca?sar.^
Besides cKpaLpenKr]
it is
also called
TraTpLKrj.
The name
' '
is
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

that the case
is
genitive."
That imphes
is
after all a kind of genitive.
That
only true as
and causes some confusion. In Greek the ablative is not a live case in form, but in sense it is. (c) Rare with Substantives. It is possible (though not
to form, not as to sense,
probably correct) to regard

following examples:
5
rrjp
dLKatoavpr] deov
(Ro.
17) as ablative,
6eov being the source of the righteousness.
More
likely are the

:
eKâaiP
rrys apaaTpo<l)r]s
:
(Heb. 13
7), diaaroXi]
'lovdaiov re Kal "EXXtjpos

:
(Ro. 10
12), StaKptats koXov kul KaKov

p. 146.
(Heb.
14).
See Monro, Homeric Grammar,
In 2 Pet.
20 we
have a clear case of the ablative in the predicate after the copula ylperai. Here extXuo-ecos ('disclosure') is in the ablative. Cf. also
Tov deov in 2 Cor. 4
1
:
7.
One may note
also eyepero
ypoiixris
(Ac. 20
Prol., p. 74.
Delbnick, Vergl.
S>Tit., I, p. 193.
THE CASES
3) as
(nTftSEIs)
515
and
probably
parallel.
In Heb. 12
11 x^pSs
considered either true genitives or ablatives.

vTTOffToKrjs
and
:
Trto-rews in
Heb. 10
39.
\vTrrjs may be Doubtful also are But we have a clear abla-
tive in Ac. 20
37 kapos
de KXavdfxds eyevero TvavTWV.
Moulton^ notes
the obvious fact that

originally abl.
tive sense.
airo
and
t/c
(with abl.) are freely used for the
old "partitive genitive."
Delbriick^ thinks the genitive of material
Cf. viii, (/), 8, for the true genitives in the partiThis partitive gen. may be illustrated by tv tovtuv
is
(Mt. 6
29)
:
which
to be compared with
e/c
ev k^
avrwv (Mt. 10
29).
In Jo. 3
25 the use of
makes
clear the ablative, eykv^To
^-qTrâLs
TuiP iJLadr{Tibp.
Blass^ rather needlessly explains this usage
by
33).
appeal to the
Tis e^
Hebrew
:
"p.
Note
also
ttSs
e^
musv (Lu. 14
:
The matter may be

vijloop
further illustrated
27).
by
tLs avrcov
(Lu. 7 42)
and
Indeed with ris, as Blass* observes, the N. T. nearly always uses e^ in such examples. He finds the oppoThus TLPes tcop ypannarecop (Mt. 12 site true of TLS save in John.
(Mt. 6
:
but TLPes e| avTUP (Lu. 11 15. Cf. Jo. 6 64). But awo is also found with ris (Mt. 27: 21). One may note also tIs h vjxiv (Jas. 5 13). A classical but curious use of this idiom, like the parti38),
: : :
tive genitive (already noted),
is
as the subject or object.
The
explanation
fiaOrjTiCP
lies,
:
of course, in the ellipsis.

16)
Thus
:
avvrjKdop koL twp
(Ac. 21
:
may
as
be compared with
elirav
tup
fxadr^rup
(Jo. 16
9.
17),
e/c
Tov 6x\ov avpe^lâaap (Ac. 19

:
33).
Cf. Rev. 11
t^
Take Mt. 23 34
an example of the use as object,

In Ac. 15
:
avTcop aTOKTepe^re, e^ avTOiP ixaartyijiaeTe.
Cf. especially k toop r'eKPWP
aov irepLTraTovpTas (2 Jo. 4).
we have
the
full ex-
pression Tims
aWovs
e^ avTcop.
Brugmann
{Griech. Gr., p. 397)
notes the syncretism between the ablative and the genitive with
the superlative.
Horn. Gr., p.
See a like confusion in the predicate (Monro, 148). W. Havers (Indog. Forsch., XXXI, Bd. 1,
Heft
3,
1912)
"on the sphtting
of the genitive in
gests that the partitive genitive adverbial.

(d)
was
originally independent
Greek" sugand
The Ablative with

(cf.
eiriaTrjtirjs Kepos,
Adjectives.
large
the Genitive with Adjectives).

the ancient writers.
aird rod ai/jLaTos
pofiov
In Plato
The number is not we have, for
instance,
eXevdepos alSovs, l)ut sec
full list in
Thus
in the
:
preposition Kadapds
(Ac. 20
Kuhner-Gerth^ for N. T. we find with 26), a clear ablative.

e/c
Cf. also k\tvdepa awo tov
(Ro. 7: 3) and eXeWepos

Gr., p. 109.
iraPTcop (I
Prol., p. 72.
Cf. also
I,
Monro, Horn.
'
2
''
VtTKl. Synt.,
I, p.
p.
401.
The
lb. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 97. adjs. with a- privativo aro ivfânliMl as usually with abl.
MO.
516
Cor. 9
êpoL

:
NEW TESTAMENT
So
19).
But the
ablative occurs without prepositions.

:
probably best to regard the verbal adjectives as having the ablative in these examples: aya-n-qroi deov (Ro. 1 7), yepvriTo7s yvpaiKoov (Mt. 11 11), didaKTol deov (Jo.
Twv
dLadrjKcov
(Eph. 2
12).
It is
6 :45), didaKTols
TTvevfjLaTos (1
Cor. 2
13), 'KXrjToi 'Irjaov XpLCTTOV
(Ro.
1:6).
One may
also suggest here evXoyrjfxhoL rod irarpos (Mt.

it is
25
34),
but on the whole
to be regarded as a true genitive.
The
ablative with adjectives with a- privative have "plentiful
illustrations
from papyri."
rrjs els
Tb. P. 105
(ii/A.D.).
airo.
(iii/B.c),
airaPTas euepyealas
a9S)6s dp.L
1
For instance aKluowos waPTos klp8vpov ajSorjd-qTos B.U. 970
In Mt. 27:24 we find
cltto
tov aliiaros with
Cf. also aaTiXop awo tov Koa/dou (Jas.
27).
:
Thus we
easily
see the ablative in dK-araTrdo-rous d/xaprtas (2 Pet. 2

TTjplcop (1
14), dra^tos KpL-
Cor. 6
2), avojxos deov (1

:
Cor. 9
21), HireLpos \6yov
(Heh.
13), airelpaaTos KaKWP (Jas. 1
13).
Moreover, the ablative after the comparative is very common N. T., apparently more so than in the papyri. Let a few examples suffice: laxvporepos p.ov (Mt. 3 11), piKporepop bv ttclptciiv Tccv (TTrepiJLaTCjOP (Mk. 4:31), TrXetofas tojp irpo^TWP (Mt. 21:36),
in the
:
jr\e7op
/lelfcov
Trjs
rpocprjs
(Lu.
(Jo.
12
13
:
23),
TOprjpoTepa eavrov
(Mt. 12
Cor. 10
45),
:
TOV
:
Kvplov
8.
16).
Cf. Jo. 21
15;
22;
1
is
Tim. 5
x'7P<i
Here the ablative idea
of difference or distinction
very plain.
A"?
The Latin
eXaTTOp eTojp
tov 'Icoapov,
also uses the ablative in this sense.

e^r]K0PTa
it is
Cf.
(1
Tim. 5:9).
In Jo. 5
36,
napTvpiap
fxel^co
not clear whether

:
it is
i]
the witness
borne by John or to him. In Ac. 4 19 deov after is genitive, not ablative, due to aKoveip. The superlative may likewise have the ablative as in TvpOnos p.ov (Jo. 1 15), a usage found in the papyri.2 Abbott^ rather needlessly endeavours to explain irpcoTos as a substantive meaning 'chief,' hke roS TrpdoToi ttjs prjaov (Ac. 28: Note also Tola earlp epToXi] TpdcTr] iraPTWP (Mk. 12 28) where 7).
: :
ttolptcop is
neuter plural (a possible partitive genitive).

Cor. 15:
8).
Cf. eaxaTOP
TTOLPTccp (1
The
positive irepiaabs
:
may
even have the

(Mt. 5
ablative, as to irepiaaop TovTUP (Mt. 5
37).
tcop
Cf. irXeXop with the
verb
20).
TepLaaevca
and the ablative
wXe'top
âpcaalup
aylcop,
In Eph. 3:8, epol tQ e\axi-<TTOTepco TrdpTcov parative and the superlative are combined.
(e)
the com-
The Ablative with

N. T.
Prepositions.
It
is
very
common
(Ac.
in the
Thus
aptv \6yov (1 Pet.
3:1), aTepapTL
ttclptoop
Moulton,
lb.,
Prol., pp. 74, 235; CI.
1901, p. 437,
(TOV TTpUITOS dlML,
Rev., 1904, p. 152 f. L.P. W (11/111 A.D.).
Joh. Gr., p. 90.
THE CASES
3
:
(nTflSEIs)
517
6),
16), a7r6
rrjs
wpas (Mt. 9
22),
'6.Ttp
:
6xkov (Lu. 22
26;
cf.
rod
Uaros (Mk.
10), kros avrov (Mt. 23
hros in same verse),

:
inirpoadev iravTO^v
(Mt. 26
70), tTre/cetm Ba/SuXcofôs (Ac. 7

:
43), e^co
rrj?
oktas (Mt. 10
14), iô^dev rijs TroXecos
(Lu. 23: 26),
ottio-co ixov
(Mt. 4:
19),
(Rcv. 14 20), oTViaBev rov 'Ir/croO possibly o^/ê aa^âruv (Mt. 28:
-iroppeias
1), Trap' avToov
(Mt. 2:4), (Mt. 19

: :
irapeKTOS
ttXtiv
\6yov
(Mt. 5:32),
:
Trepai'
ToO 'lopdavov
Trao-xa (Jo.
Trdi'Tcoi'
1),
tov ttXoIov (Ac. 27
22), irpo rod

:
55), Trpos r^s

:
vfJierepas
(2 Cor. 5
15, true genitive
aoiTrjpias (Ac. 27 34), vrep according to some), vwepavu

:
avTTjs
(Heb. 9:5), virepeKeiva vp.(hv (2 Cor. 10 16), vwepeKTepLaaov uv (Eph. 3 :20), vwd Kvpiov (Mt. 1:22), i/TroKdrco Tu>v iro8ccv (Mk. aa^âTwv 6:11), xwpis TrapajSoXrjs (Mt. 13 34). In the case of o^j/e (Mt. 28 1) oiê means 'late from' (Moulton, Prol, p. 72). Cf. dxpirepou ti]s copas Tb. P. 230 o4/^ TTjs copas. Par. P. 35, 37 (ii/B.c),
:
(ii/B.c.)
p. 312).
T. Gk., oi/'e toutwv in Philostratus (Blass, Gr. of N. Cf. Blass-Debrunner, p. 101, for still other examples in See also ner oKl-yov tovtuv in Xen., Hellen., I, 1, 2. late Greek. The list of such adverbs was growing constantly. This is a con-
and
siderable
patent in all with the noAn interesting example of the ablative is ttjv tion of separation. 21). In virep, irpo, Trpos it is the comcLTTo aov eirayye\lav (Ac. 23 parative idea that is involved and that implies separation. Hence it seems Ukely that viro is to be construed also with the
list,
but the ablative idea
is
ablative rather than the genitive, though this point is debatable. "In both Greek and Latin the ablative expresses the agent as the source of the action, almost invariably with prepositions"
(Buckland Green, Notes on Greek and Latin Syntax, p. 32). There For the ablative with prepositions in Cypriis some truth here. See chapter on Prepositions. A otic see Meister, Bd. II, p. 295. number of adverbs are themselves in the ablative case, like KaXcos,
ovTOis (all
adverbs in
-cos),
avo^, etc.
(/)
The Ablative with Verbs. The
ablative
is
not used so
frequently with verbs as the accusative, genitive or dative, yet it is by no means uncommon. Of course, wherever airo
and
(cf.
Ac. 5
2),
(cf.
Mk.
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. The ablative is so conunon 'Atto and K have only the ablative.
with compound verbs like ixîo-ttjm^ dTroa-repeco, etc., that no effort verbs. There is made to separate the simple from the compound
1
Indeed, as Winer (W.-Th.,
p. 197)
remarks, the prep,
is
most frequently
employed.
518
NEW TESTAMENT
same word
are examples where the ablative seems to be due purely to the

preposition, as
ttjs xo-Pi-tos
eêireaare (Gal. 5
4)
cf
in
2 Pet. 3
the verb
1.
17).
But
in
many
other instances the ablative idea in
is
due to the
effect of the preposition.
Verbs of Departure mid Removal.
This
is
the simplest ablative

:
with verbs.
Take, for instance,
ovk d4)laTa.To rod iepov (Lu. 2
37)
where the ablative idea is perfectly plain. So also cnroaTriaovTai TLves TTJs 7ri(7Tcos (1 Tim. 4:1). The predicate ablative of source in 2 Pet. 1 20 {eirLXvcrews) was noticed under the discussion of substantives. As a rule dro, k or irapa will be found with the mere idea of departure. So x<^ptfco awo (1 Cor. 7 10). In Lu. 7 6 airexoi has awo, but J>{D have merely the ablative. Naturally verbs meaning to free from, to separate, to deprive of, to hinder from, etc., use the ablative. 'EXevdepooo always has airo
: : :
(Ro. 6 18), as Kadapl^co

:
airo (1 Jo. 1:7), Xuco

:
a-n-d
(Lu. 13
16), Xouco
:
CLTTO
(Ac. 16
airo
33), XvTpooj airo (Tit. 2

:
14), pboixai airo
(Mt. 6
13),
a63^(t)
(Ro. 5
:
16
4.
Cf. also iiedlaTr}p.L k in Lu. 9) and k (Ro. 7 :24). But we have the ablative alone in a.TrriWoTpLuifj.evoL ttjs f coiJs
:
(Eph. 4
TTJs
18), aTTicTTepr^nkvLov
rrjs
aXrjdelas (1
Tim. 6
ttjs
5), airoKeKvaaL
aadepeias aov (Lu.
13
12), Kadaipe7a9at.
p.rf
ixeyakeioT-qTos
avr'qs
(Ac.
19:27),^ e/cparoOiro Tov
ewiyuciouaL
(Lu. 24:16), eKcoXvaev

avTrjs.
avTovs TOV jSouXij/xaros (Ac. 27 :43).
Cf. Lu. 10:42,
This
in the
tovtc^v
use of the mere ablative was not

ancient Greek.
unknown
to
good prose
Moulton^
finds
it
also in the papyri.
Thus
:
a0Xe L.Pb. (ii/B.c),
a<i)KtadaL S^v
eKwiTTTo:
UwKav O.P. 237

29).
(ii/A.D.).
One
4 and
may
2.
note here again

:
with the ablative in Gal. 5

:
2 Pet. 3
17.
Cf.
/ccoXvco airo
(Lu. 6
So one may interpret oh ^pabvvei Kvptos TTjj e7ra77eXias (2 Pet. 3:9), the marginal reading in W. H. 1) irkiravTaL dyuaprtas, and cnrkxâdaL elScdXoOvTcov (Ac. 15 (1 Pet. 4 28; cf. also 15 20; 1 Tim. 4 3; 1 Pet. 2:11), though dro also is used with kvkxopai (1 Th. 4 3; 5 22). One can only repeat that these divisions are purely arbitrary and merely for convenience. For airb with ava-Kahoixai and KaTairavoo see Rev. 14 13; Heb. 4:4, 10.
Verbs of Ceasing, Abstaining.
: : :
3.
TLves
Verbs of Missing, Lacking, Despairing. Thus we note uv aaTOxwavTes (1 Tim. 1:6), XetTrerat cro0tas (Jas. 1:5), vcTepovv(Ro. 3
:
Tai
Trjs do^rjs
23), oacov XPV^^'- (Lu. 11:8),
ir poadeo/jievos
tlvos
(Ac. 17:25),
kâiroprjdfjuaL rjpas Kal
tov
^fjv
(2 Cor. 1:8).
Cf. twu
avajKaloov vcJTepetv
L.Pb. (ii/B.c),
tC^v deovTCxiP eyXiirelv {ib.).
Moul-
ton,
CI
1
Rev., p. 437,
Dec,
1901.
p. 106.
An
"impossible" reading to Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 437.
THE CASES
4.
(nTfiSEIs)
519
dominant.
TTiv
Verbs of Differing, Excelling. Here the comparative idea is We observe ttoWojv oTpovdluiv 8La4>ep(Te vfiels (Mt. 10 31),
:
vweplSaWovaav
(Ph. 2 :3),
rrjs
ypuaeo^s ayairrfv
(Eph. 3
19),
VTrepexopras
iavrCbv
cf.
v(JTepr]KkvaL tcou virepXiav
airoaToKwv (2 Cor. 11:5;
Here the comparative uppermost. 5. Verbs of Asking and Hearing. These may also use the ablative. This is the usual construction with 6eo^tai, especially in Luke, as bkoiial aov (Lu. 8 28). The person is in the ablative, but the thing will be in the accusative, as bkoixai be to (xri -rrapwv dapprjaai (2
idea of varepos
is
:
use of varepeco in sense of lack above.
Cor. 10
(Lu. 22
2).
and k (2 Cor. 12 6) occur. 6. Verbs with the Partitive Idea. Here a sharp difference exists between the accusative which presents the whole and the genitive or the ablative which accents a part. Thus in Rev. 2 17 we have 86}(Too avT<2 Tov jxavva where the point lies in the idea of "some" of the manna, but B reads to and K k tov. In the same verse note the accusative bcoau avTcg \f/r]4)ov \evKT]i>. When the whole is expressed in the N. T. the accusative is used. Thus 4>ayei:u dboAbOvTo. (Rev. 2 14), but kaditL airo twv i^txtw (Mt. 15 27) and k tov apTov iadteTco (1 Cor. 11 28). Thus also irivcou olvov (Lu. 7 33), but
:
71)
So also note and wapa (Jo.
fju
riKovaare pov (Ac.
1:4), but both airo

:
40),
Trfere e^
avTov (Mt. 26
27), 6s av
irlxi
:
tov vbaTos (Jo. 4

'
14).
Cf.
einov
also kvejKaTe airo twv oxJ/apLou (Jo. 21

OLVOV 'AttlkoL, olvov "EXXrjj/es
10).
Kpecos
Phrynichus says:
Attlko'l, Kpeas
eipayov
:
"EWrjves.
Cf.
CLTTO
TOV Kapwov bco(TOvaLV (Lu. 20

: :
10), tVa Xa/Sjj dTro tcov Kapircbv

: :
(Mk. 12 2). Cf. also 1 Jo. 4 13. Cf. Mt. 28 1; Ac. 21 16. See Moulton, Introduction to the Study of N. T. Gk., p. 172, where the "partitive gen." is shown to be often ablative in idea. In modern Greek aro is the regular construction for the partitive sense, as 5aj(re pov airo tovto, 'give me some of that' (Moulton, Prol., p. 245). Prepositions airo and k are thus uniformly used in the N. T. with this construction of the part (clearly ablative therefore) save in Rev. 2 17 above and in irpoaeXafSovTo Tpo4>r]s (Ac. 27:36). In this last example the MSS. vary a good deal.
:
MeToXafi^dvo} (see
(i),
3)
may be
abl. or gen. in ptTtkapâvov
Tpo<f)T]s
(Ac. 2 :46).
of
Blass^ notes that only Luke, Paul and the author

in the N. T., use the and rpoaXapâvco. Examples like
Hebrews, the more literary writers

16;
ablative (gen.) with neTaXapâvoo
Ro. 9
7.
Hob. 12
11
may
be regarded as either ablative or
genitive.
Attraction of the Relative.

>
Thus
tov vbaros ov eyoj
bdoau)
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 100.
520

4
:
NEW TESTAMENT
avTi^ (Jo.
14), ov8ep e/cros Xeyajv
wv
re ol irpoiprJTaL tXaXriaav (Ac.
26:22).
X.
(a)
Cf. Pronouns.
The Locative
is
("Locatival Dative") Case (tjtottikti irTwais).

It is derived
The Name Locative.
from the Latin
locus^
and
Still
a ''grammatical neologism," but is modelled after vocative. Delbriick^ prefers "local" to locative and uses it. It is indeed
It is
local case.
worth noticing that
in the Thessalian dialect
the old genitive had this locative ending^ as did the Arkadian''
though this -ot may have come from -oto. The Latin grammarians took this I for the dative.^ We have remnants of the ending in English here, there, where. The modern grammars genalso,
erally recognise the distinction in the three cases (locative, instru-
mental and dative), which have usually identical endings, though Blass^ is correct in saying that it is not always possible to decide the case. However that uncertainty exists but seldom. Jannaris'' makes four cases, counting the associative as a separate case.
Compare
(6)
the blending in the Latin.

It
is
The Significance of the Locative.

its
indeed the
simplest of cases in
etymological idea.
It is the in case as
Whitney^
finds
it
limits, the limits
The word
sense,
itself
in the Sanskrit. It is location, a point within determined by the context, not by the case itself. is the main determining factor in the resultant
its
and each example has

at,
variation in the resultant idea. Hence, besides

ideas of on,
own atmosphere. There is indeed in, we come to the

This development was not
earUer Sanskrit.
in
still
amid, among, by, with.
only in the early Greek ^ but in the

of the locative without in the later Greek.
The use
is
much more common
Homer than
In the modern Greek vernacular indeed the
locative disappears along with the instrumental

ets
and dative before

to the locative
and the accusative.

it is
As
to kv
it
it
adds so
all
little
case that
not surprising to find

tc3 irXoLaplco
so frequently used, especially
as the locative, instrumental
and dative
(Lu. 3
:
Thus we may compare

(Mt. 14 (Mt. 3
:
:
rfkdov (Jo.
used the same endings. 21 8) with kv TrXotco

:
13),
TTj
vbari
âTTTLû)
16)
with
/SaTrrifco
ev
v5aTL
6:40) with h rfj ecrx^TV Vf^^PVThe tendency in the older Greek wâs constantly (Jo. 6 44). towards the use of h, though the mere locative survived, es11),
eaxo-Trj
ruikpa (Jo.
Cf.
Riem.
et Goelzer, Synt., p. 196.

I,
2 3 *
Vergl. Synt.,
p.
182
f .,
following Gaedicke.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 109. Hist, of Gk. Gr., p. 342.

Sans. Gr., p. 101.
Giles,
Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., p. 307.
Hoffmann, Gr. Dial., Bd. I, p. 303. Riem. et Goelzer, Synt., p. 197.
Man.,
etc., p.
329
f.
THE CASES (nTBSEIs)

pecially in
:
521
some constructions. In Mt. 13 52 MSS. vary between the mere locative rfj âaCKda. and kv with locative and ets with accusative. This was probably the original locative. Place of (c) Place. rest was put in the locative without a preposition. As already indicated, this usage abounds in Horner.^ Some of these distinctively locative forms persisted in the Greek as in the Latin. Thus
o'Lkol,
'laOjj.o'i,
MapaOcopi,
'
kdrjvxjcn,
QvpaaL,
hunii,
Corinthi,
xo-lô-l is
Romae
dative.
(ai).
Brugmann
(Griech. Gr., p. 226) thinks that
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
(cf oUoL
.
side.^
The
orators
up
to the time of
Demosthenes
naoL = kv
is
/xkcrc^
use the mere locative frequently.^
The ôlic^ has

Thus
and
oIkco)
But the
rule in Attic literary prose
to use a
preposition with the locative of place.
'Ad-qpais (1
Th.
oIkui
3:1),
ev oIkcc (1
:
Cor. 11 :34)='at home' and usually

XyaTOLs irepureaev (Lu. 10
irepi is
:
too
(Jo. 11
20).
But observe
is
the resultant idea
"among" and
30), where 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 considering the adverb kvkXco (Mk. 3 :34), and possibly xo-P-ai (Jo. 18 6). We have indeed erepa 68co eKJSoKovaa (Jas. 2 25), possibly instrumental. Cf. the figurative usage in 2 Pet. 2 15, etc. It is indeed a very short step to the figurative usage, iropeveadai rats
: :
:
65oTs avTcbv (Ac.
14
16), pride rots WecrLV TrepiTarelv (Ac.

:
21
21),
aroLxovaiv rots 'ixvecnv (Ro. 4
12).
think that
:
we have
the pure
locative also in
tc3 Tea
irXoiaplcci rjXdov
(Jo. 21
8), vbaTi
:
âTriôj (Lu.
16), Kadapiaas
XovTpco tov vdaTos

:
(Eph. 5
26), toj OvaLaaTrjplco

Trj
irape8pevovTes (1
Cor. 9
13).
Cf. also eTeOrjKav avTOV

:
KeâXfj (Jo.
19
it
12), advvaTos tols Tcoalv (Ac. 14
8).
Hence
it is
overstating
to assert that the locative of place without prepositions has
entirely disappeared
from the N. T.
comparison with guistic development.

in
Homer
is
in perfect
The scarcity of this usage harmony with the linfinds the locative of place
Moulton^ indeed
Monro, Horn.
Giles,
Gr., p. 100.
Cf. also Delbriick, Vcrgl. Synt.,

I,
I,
p. 221;
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 403; K.-G.,

2 3
p. 441.
Man., etc., Main, Loc. Expr.
p. 330.
in the Attic Orators (1892), p. 231.

II, p. 193.
<*
Mcister, Dialcc, Bd.
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
in inscriptions as late as the sixth century a.d., B.C.H., 1903,

p. 335, T(3
(d)
Tu/Soj.
Time.
locative.
It
It
is
expressed
much more
persistently with the
mere
has outlived the usage as to place and is "fairly frequent"^ in the N. T. Cf. Sanskrit, Latin, older Greek, AngloHere, of course, time is regarded from the point of view of a point, not of duration (accusative). But the accusative is making inroads on the locative and is already used occasionally for a point of time. See Accusative. For papyri examples take toTj TraXatots xpovoLS B.U. 903 (ii/A.D.) and yepecrioLS, ya/jLOts B.U. 1 (iii/A.D.), Moulton, CI. Rev., April, 1904, and Dec, 1901. See also Observe the difference between the rfj avajSaaei, O.P. 742 (ii/B.c).
Saxon.
accusative {to aa^j3aTov

(ja^ôLTwv rjXdav)
rjCFvxo.(ra.v)
and the
(opdpov
locative (t^ 6e
all
/xi^
twv
and the genitive

:
jSaêcos)
in the
same
sentence (Lu. 24
The accusative is easily differentiated from 1). both the locative and the genitive. As between the locative and the genitive the matter is not quite so clear. Brugmann^ indeed
thinks that originally there was
lies in
little difference.
the essential meaning of the two cases.

is
r]
point and the genitive
the case of genus.
The difference The locative is a Thus in Mt. 24 20

:
we have
Iva
/x?)
yev-qrac
4>vyr] vixoov xetM<2"ôs /xTjSe aa(3j3aTco.
It
is
not
mere hair-splitting to note that winter is here set over against summer (time within which) and that Sabbath is the point of time. In
practical result the difference
is
very
slight,
but
it is
hardly just to
:
regard the two usages as without difference.

6), pvktL
Cf. wktos (Mt. 25

:
20 10) for 'in due time' may be illustrated by to) 8eouTL KaLpQ, O.P. IV, 729, 5, and TU) TTJs oirwpas KaLpQi, lb., 11. As further examples of the mere locative we may note the various instances of rjiikpa. So rfj tp'it-q VHepa (Mt. 20 19), rfj pta aa^(3aTuiv (Jo. 20 1), rfj -KpwTiK "qpepa
:
(Mk. 14
30),
vmra (Ac. 26
7).
Katpc? (Lu.
Tcov
a^vpwv (Mk. 14
6
:
12),
rfj
-qpepa ry oydoy (Ac.
7:8),
rfj
:
eax^TV
ripepa (Jo.
TaKTTJ
40), irola rjpkpa

:
(Mt. 24
r]pepa
42), ^
mâ
20
:
(Lu. 17
19),
ttj
29
f.),
"fjpepa
(Ac. 12
21),
rfj
eKelvj)
(Jo.
eTrtoixr^
r]pepq.
rfj
fjpepa (Ac.
7:26),
Cor. 4
rfj
:
exophj] rjpepa (Ac. 21:26),

16).
and even
Kai r)pkpa (2
in4)W(jKovar}
The substantive
and
30)
,
is
:
not expressed in
is
(Mt. 28
1)
:
rf?
e'^Tjs
(Ac. 21
1).'
Cf. also ariptpov
TavTj]
TTJ
vvkt'l
(Mk. 14
where the adverb
accusative, but
is
the substantive locative.

1
With some
of these phrases kv
also
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 119.
Griech. Gr., p. 405. Cf. also Delbnick, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 223. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 120, for careful discussion. Cf. Abbott,
ff.
Job. Gr., pp. 77
THE CASES
:
(nTfiSEIs)
523
:
found as with ravr'a (Lu. 19 42), eKeby (Lu. 6 23), 6y86ji (Lu. 1 44), with fjfj.epa and aa^âruiv 1), eaxary (Jo. G 59), iiLq. (Lu. 20 (Lu. 4 16), rifjiepa and genitive (Lu. 4 25), with e^^s (Lu. 7 11), where W. H. read in text ev tu> rather than h rfj. The MSS., especially D, vary a good deah NvktL occurs without h (Lu. 12 20) and with h (Mt. 26 31). So also we find aa^fiaroo (Mt. 24 20), aa^âaiv (Mk. 2 24), but also h with each (Mt. 12 2; Mk. 2 23). With cipa we have both (hpa (Lu. 2 38) and kv (Lu. 12 12). Once more (pvâKij occurs without ev (Mt. 14 25) and with kv (Lu. 12 :38). With eros we have ev once (as Lu. 3 1) and without h twice (Jo. 2 20; Ac. 13 20), but these two examples {erecnv reaaepaKOpra, cos ereatv TerpaKoaloLS Kal irevTT]KovTo) are probably associative-instrumental. Cf. irpolSe^-qKOTas ^8rj ToTs erecTLv, Tb.P. i (ii/A.D.) with Lu. 1 7 ei'. Moulton observes that it is hard sometimes to draw the line between the locative and the
:
: : :
>
instrumental
{CI. Rev.,
:
Dec,
1901).
With
eopriy
:
again
we note
the
mere locative (Lu. 2 41) or usually h (Jo. 2 23). See also /caipoTs iSioLs (1 Tim. 6 Xpovos 15), but usually ev KaipQ (Mt. 11 25, etc.).
: :
has only
like
ev (as
Ac.
6)
save the associative-instrumental usage

:
iKav<2
:
xpovco (Ac.
11).
Observe also
rois
yevealois
avTov
(Eph. 3:5), but ev in Mk. 8 38, Nvvi (chiefly in Paul, as Ro. 3 21) is a locative form (cf. Other locative adverbs of time are dei (2 Cor. 6 10), ket oi>xO-
(Mk. 6
:
21).
So again
erepais yeveals
(Mt. 6 21),
:
TvkpvffL
(2 Cor. 8
10), Trpcoi
(Mk. 16
2).
ol
tttcjoxoI
irocriv
:
(e)
Locative with Adjectives.

(Mt. 5:3), Kadapol
OKTaripepos (Ph.
tj}
Thus we note
tCo
TTvev/jiaTL
rfj
KapSla (5: 8), aduvaros rots
(Ac.
11),
14
8), (XTepeol rf) irldTeL (1
Pet. 5:9), voodpoi rats aKoats (Heb. 5

rrj
jrepLTOjjLfj
3:5), eXeWepoi
(1
BLKaioavvrj
(Ro. 6
20),
TaTei.v6s
Kapdla
(Mt. 11:29),
p. 118,
airep'LTp7]T0L
Kapdiats
(Ac. 7:51),
:
ayla Kal
crw/xart Kal Trvebp.aTL
Cor. 7:34).
Cf. Ro. 12
1013.
In Blass-Dcbrunner,
mental.
(/)
these examples are treated as instruCf. 8e8ep.evos rw Trvevixan (Ac. 20
Locative with Verbs.
22), irepiê^Xrjfjievovs Ifxarlois XevKoXs (Rcv.
4,
marg.
ev).
In Ro. 12
10-13 note the various examples of the locative with participles, though Tats xpciais Koiva^vovvres is probably instrumental. Cf. also
e(TKOT03fj.evoL Tj}
Siavoia
(Eph. 4
18), ^cjjowofqdeh TrvevfxaTL (1 Pet.
18),
have the locative in KaTeipyaaaro vpXv (2 Cor. 7:11), but usually ev appears in such examples as ev enol (Gal. 1 24). Further examples with verbs are
axvfxaTL
evpeOels
(Ph. 2:8).
We
seem
to
Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 405; Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., p. 225;
Moulton,
Pro!., p. 75.
524
Tots

Weaiv
TrepLiraTelv
(Ac. 21
21), iropevonkvr) tco
<}>6^co
(Ac. 9
31),
orav ireLpaaixols
Trepnr'ear)Ti
ttolklXois
rfj
(Jas.
1:2), XjiaTots irepUTrtatv

tco
rfj
(Lu. 10
30), earepeovvTO
rats
irlaTei Kai
eireplaaevov
efx/jLeveiv
aptdp-Q (Ac.
xto-ret
16:5),
14
rfj
:
Kapr]Te
rj/vxcus
22), eirifxhoâLV
rrj
:
(Heb. 12:3), cnnaTla (Ro. 11 23;

:
(Ac.
cf. 22), evKevrpLadrjaovTai
idla eXala
(Ro. 11
24),
tw
tui
cra5
bvbp.aTL eTrpo4>r]TemaiJLv
:
cf.
eêâXopev also), fecov

:
TvevparL (Ac. 18
25;
:
cf.
(Mt. 7 22; Lu. 10 21

: :
12), and perhaps even â-rrTiaei. u^tas irvehpaTL ay ice (Mk. 1:8). See Ac. 16 5. For the so-called instrumental use of kv (like ep fiaxoLlpn, Mt. 26 52) see the chapter on Prepositions (cf. also Instrumental Case). As a matter of fact h always has the locative, and this use of kv
and Mk. 5
29),
rfj
dXiyj/ei
invopkvovTes
(Ro. 12
has the locative
also.
The
activit}^ of
the verb
is
conceived as
finding expression in the object mentioned.
not a mere Hebraism, for the papyri have it as indeed the earlier Greek occasionally. But as a practical matter this use of h with the
It is
locative
use of opoXoyeoo
104)
was nearly equivalent to the instrumental case. The kv (Mt. 10 32; Lu. 12 8) Moulton {Prol., p. considers a Semiticism due to the common Aramaic original.
: : :
Cf. the usual dative (Heb. 13

{g)
15).
:
Substantives. Cf. Heb. 11 12, /Calebs TO. OLdTpa tov ovpavov tQi wXrjdeL. So in Col. 2 14, to Kad' rjpcbv Xti-pbypa(j)ov Toh bbypautv, the adjective is used as a substantive. In 1 Cor. 14 20 we have the locative with substantive, verb and adjective, pi] Traibla yiveade rats (j)paiv, dXXd ttj KaKia vqiria^tTe, rats
: :
The Locative with
be 4>p(.(jlv TtXeLOL yiveade.
(h)
The Locative with
Prepositions.
Just
because
the
prepositions that were used with the locative were only "adverbial
elements strengthening and directing its meaning"^ they were very numerous. Originally nearly all the prepositions occurred with the locative. Thus in Homer and epic and lyric poetry generally we meet with the locative with ap(j)l, dm, ets (dialects, inscriptions), peTa,
and when the
so-called dative
is
found
in
Greek
with
kv, kwl, irapa, irepi, irpbs, inrb, it is
really the locative case.^
But
with a compound verb the case instance irpoKtlpevov riplv (Heb. 12

tions like
in the locative case.
may
:
not always be locative, as
1).
A number
xpos
(ttpotl)
of the preposi-
dyu0t, clvtI, kv (kvi), kwi, Trepi,
are themselves
Cf. the locative adverbs of time already mentioned and 'E/3/Datcrri (Jo. 5 2), 'EXXrjvtaTi (Jo. 9 20), kvkXco (Mk. 3 34), the conjunction Kai, etc. There are only four prepositions in the N. T. that use the locative. As examples note kv tQ
:
: :
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
p. 103.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 101.
THE CASES
'lop8av[i
'Irjaov
Tcpos
(nTiiSEIs)
525
rapa
:
(Mt. 3:6),
:
eTTt
dvpaLS
ra3
(]\It.
24
33),
to;
aravpco rod
(Jo. 19
25),
Trpos
yLvrmelu) (Jo.
20
11).
But
kirl
of these
it
has the locative only 6 times,

'Ei/,
irapa 50,
while
is
has
176
times.^
of course, having only the locative,
very common.
like
One may note

adverb.
here
hv
irpoiiTois
(1
Cor.
15
3)
almost
an
is
(i) The Pregnant Construction of the Locative. common in the N. T. with h, as the accusative with els after
It
verbs
This matter comes up for discussion again of motion or rest. under the head of Prepositions, but a few words are perhaps needed here. The identity of h and els in origin and early usage must be borne in mind when one approaches these two prepositions. Cf.
6
els
Tov dypbv in
epiov r-qv
els
Mk.
13
16.
On
the other hand note 6

:
kfiâxpas
ixer
xtpa ^v
has
to Tpv^\lov.
(Mt. 26 23). Here Mark (14 :.20) This interchange of ev and els is a feature of the
tc3 rpv^Xlui
LXX (Moulton,
and
in the house,"
kâTTTLôvTO ev
eis
Prol., p. 245). Originally there

els
finally ev vanishes before
looks at the matter in his
"jump
in
was no difference, modern Greek. Each writer own way. Cf. English vernacular, " come the river," etc. So also Mt. (3 6) has
in
:
tQ
'lopbavri Trora/zw,
while
text
TOV 'Iop8avr]v.
Cf. ev
o'lkcx)
ecTTiv,
Mk. (1 of Mk.
9)
:
reads
1
eâirTLadr]
ets
and marg.
:
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 enâvTi els to tXo7ov (Mt. 8 23). But observe the locative with ev in composition (Ro. 11 24). With ovo/xa we have the mere
:
locative (Mt. 7
tive (Mt. 18
:
22),
5), els
and the locative (Mt. 21 9), kirl and locaand accusative (Mt. 10 41; 28 19).^ Cf. also
: : :
Mt. 12
XI.
:41.
The
Instrumental
("
Instrumental
Dative ")
Case
it is
{r[
XpT|(rTlKTl TTTWO-IS).
(a)
The Term Instrumental. As

itself
applied to case
modThere
ern and the adjective
appears
it
first in
the fourteenth century.^
The Hindu grammarians, however,

are not wanting signs indeed that
recognised this case*
survived in the Greek as a sep-
arate case-form.
Meister'^ concludes that in the

still
Cyprian dialect
the instrumental was
a separate case-form (a "living" case).
He
find
cites dpS, evx^Xa, besides avv tvxo.,

o'Ikol
locative,
o'Ikoo
instrumental, and
later
ples are
1
dfia, Sixa, tolxcl in

Prol., p. 106.
Kuhner-Gerth" we Other examGreek, not to mention the ninny ad-
and
in
o'Ikco
dative.
Moulton,
"
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 12:}
j).
f.
<>
Whitney, Sans. Cr., p. 89. Ck. Dial., II, p. 205.

I, j).
Riem. and Goclzcr, Synt.,
207.
"
405.
526
1
NEW TESTAMENT
-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
verbs in -a and
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

I
no Greek term
/jLeTo.)
for the instrumental case,
but
have ventured to
(kv, 8ia,
call it xPV'^Ti-KV TTTcoaLs.
The
increasing use of prepositions
makes the mere instrumental a disappearing case in the 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 is not itself a mixed case combining an old associative or comitative case with the later instrumental. Both of
(b)
instrumental case
these ideas are present in the Sanskrit case (Whitney, Sanskrit
Grammar, p. 93). On the whole, however, one is constrained to doubt the existence of this so-called comitative case. Most of the difference is due to the distinction between persons (association, accompaniment) and things (means, implement, instrument). Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Syntax, I, p. 231. Hence neither term covers exactly the whole situation. We have a similar combination in our EngHsh "with" which is used in both senses. So also the Greek avv (cf. Latin cmn) and even ixera (e^rjXdare ixera fxaxatpSiu
^vXuv, Mk. 14 48). In Mk. 14 43, /JLer avrov /xerd /j-axaLpcov, both senses occur together. But we may agree that the associative was the original usage out of which the instrumental idea
/cat
: :
was
easily
is
and
logically developed.^
The comitative
usage, for
instance,
very common in Homer ^ and Herodotus.'^ There is no example of this usage in the N. T. (c) Place. except TravTaxrJ (W. H. text, Ac. 21 28). In Jas. 2 25, erkpa 68(2
:
:
Cf.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 99.
Moulton,
instr.
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 438.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
the
6
'
case at
all,
N. T. Gk., p. 116. The mod. Gk., of course, does not use but only ni {ixera). Cf. Thumb, Handb., p. 103.
Man., p. 334. Cf. Draeger, Hist. Synt., p. 428. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 99. Helbing, Uber den Gebrauch des echten und sociativen Dativs bei Herod.,
Giles,
f.
p.
58
THE CASES
Kâ\ovaa,
possil)le.
(oTOZEIi;)
527
is
we probably have
the locative, though the instr.
(d) Time. But we do find examples of the associative-instrumental used with expressions of time. This is indeed a very old use of the instrumental, as Brugmann^ and Dell^riick^ show. The Sanskrit had it also as the time "by the lapse of which anything The singular, like xpoi^V ^Kav^ (Lu. 8:27; is brought about. "^
Ac. 8
11), finds parallel in
the papyri,^ as
is
seen also in Pindar,

Cf. Polybius
Euripides, Aristophanes, Thucydides.^ For the papyri note ttoXXoTs

XpovoLs
xxxii,
N.P. 50
12,
(iii/A.D.),
xpovo;)
A. P. 77
(ii/A.o.).
(Moulton, Prol., p. 76). There is no doubt about the plural instrumental in Ro. 16 25, xpovois alwploLs, a parallel to which Moulton'' finds in the epistolary formula in
TToXXots xpovois
:
the papyri, eppwadai ae
euxofxai. ttoXXoTs xpovois.
He
rightly doubts
the necessity of appealing to the Latin as
W.
Schulze'^ does for the

roi
explanation of the use of the plural, since the classical
xpovco
could easily give the impulse.
In Jo. 2
strumental
20, TeaaepaKovra Kal e^ ereaiv oiKooonijOrf

also,
we have
the in-
though, of course, this might
])e
looked at as a
locative, the whole period regarded as a point of time. In an example like TToXXoIs xpofots avvrjp-KaKtL avrov (Lu. 8 29) we probably have the instrumental also, though here the locative would give a good idea, 'on many occasions' ('oftentimes' Rev. V.), whereas the marg. (' of a long time ') gives the instrumental idea. For the instrumental idea Moulton^ cites from Letromie (p. 220, fourth
:
century A.D.)
ttoXXois varepov jxpovois.

:
See also
cos
tTeai TerpaKoaioLs
Kal TrevTYjKOVTa (Ac. 13
20).
Cf. also
Trao-ats rats rj/jLepais
(Lu.
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 something to do with the increasing use of h to make the locative clear
from instrumental or dative. " Si)eakers of Greek were certainly beginning to feel that they could not trust the dative out alone, and we can understand the occasional emplo.ymcnt of nursemaid h in places where she would have been better left at
and
distinct
Grioch. Gr., p. 410.
Vcrgl. Synt.,
I,
p. 246.
< ^
Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 94. Moulton, Q:\. Rev., 1901, p. 438; 1904,
Dclhriiek, Vorfrl. Synt.,
I,
p. 153; Prol., p. 75.
p. 246.
Prol., p. 75.
Gr. Lat., p. 14.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
is
p. 121, calls this
"duration of
time" "unclassical," but incorrectly as

8
already shown.
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 438.
lb.
528

avv.'^
NEW TESTAMENT
of
home, or replaced by
Blass^
comments on the frequency
the instrumental with expressions of time in Josephus with no

perceptible difference between
it and the accusative. One can hardly agree to Blass'^ explanation of the instrumental of time that it is due to the disinclination of the writer to put another
accusative beside the direct object of the verb.

accusative
13
is
Certainly the
the most frequent idiom in the N. T. for the idea of
Mk. 2: 19; Lu. 13:8; Ac. Rev. 20: 3, etc. In Jo. 14 9 W. H. have roaovTov xpopov in the text and put Toaovrco xpovco in the marg. In Lu. 8 27 some MSS. have instead of the instrumental xpoi^V tâJ^w the ablative e/c
extension of time, as can be seen in
:
18;
(aTTo)
(e)
xP^vj^v LKavwv.
responsible for a good
The Associative Idea. The idea of association alone is many examples, chiefly with verbs, though
Substantives cut no figure at
ckotos (2 Cor. 6
:
: :
adjectives are not wanting.
all
according to Blass,^ for

is
tIs Koivwvia <f)WTl irpos
14)
an example of the pure dative (cf. also Lu. 5 10; 2 Cor. 6 16), and in Ro. 15 26 we have els tovs tttooxovs and in 1 Jo. 1 3, 6, 7 But another example in 2 Cor. 6 14, tIs ixeroxv dLKawcrvpri fxed' rifioov. Kal avoyLia, comes much closer to the substantive use of the associative-instrumental. But an undoubted example of a substantive followed by the associative-instrumental appears in ets hiravT-quiv
:
: :
Tw
is
'l-qaov
:
(Mt. 8
34).
Jo. 12
13
{avT<2)
and
So ets awaPTrjaiv Mace. 3:11
r]ijup
(Ac. 28
15).
Cf. also
els
awavT-qaiv aurw.
There
nothing in this construction out of harmony with the Greek idiom. The verb has the associative-instrumental. The genitive with this substantive occurs in Mt. 27 32 (5 text) and 1 Th.
:
17 (but
text has associative-instrumental).
Cf.
Moulton,
avfjLuopcjyos
:
Prol., p. 14.
There
is
no doubt as to the adjectives

avfj,fiop4>ou raJ aclofxaTL
and
(jvfx4)VTOs.
Thus
:
to auixa
(Ph. 3
21)
and
(xvfx(j>vTOL Tt2 6iJ.oLcoiJ.aTi
(Ro. 6:5), but avfjfxopcpos has the genitive ttjs eiKovos in Ro. 8 29 like a substantive. The other compounds in avv are treated as substantives* with the genitive, like cywaixm-
XcoTos, cvyyevrjs, avvepyos, uvvTpo4>os, /leToxos
(Heb. 1:9).
:
evavTLos avTols
(Mk. 6
48), hirevavTlov
is
-qf/lv
(Col. 2
14).
But note With verbs
the associative-instrumental
the older Gk.
illustration.
very
common
in the
will
N. T. as in
be given in
The most important examples

a
'A/coXou0eco is
common
(Mk. 5
:
instance, as ijKoXovOriaap avToo

37).
(Mk.
18).
Cf. also awaK.
Rather oddly
avToo (Ac.
eTroAtai is
not so used, but once we find awenreTo

1
20:4).
So
lb.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 121. Cf. Schmidt, de Jos. elocut., p. 382 f. 3 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 115. " lb.
THE CASES
SieXhero avroh (Ac. 20
:
(nTS2SEIs)
529
:
34) also is used. 7), though rpos (Mk. 9 Other compounds of 5ia with this case are diaXXayrjdL tw doeXôi (Mt. 5:24), bLe^\y]Qy] avrQ (Lu. 16:1), Tw 5ta/36Xa3 StaKpLVOfxevos
(Ju. 9), Tots
allied
'lovdaioLs
8taKaTt]\eyxeTo (Ac.
KaTrjWayrjiJLev
:
18:28).
But
:
closely
tQ dew (Ro. 5 10), crot KpLdrjvaL (Mt. 5 40), ufilXei avru (Ac. 24 26), which last may have Then again note irepo^vyovyTes 14). irpos and accusative (Lu. 24
to these
words are
(2 Cor. 6
14), rots wpevfiaTLKOLS KOLV(jivr](jav

:
(Ro. 15
:
27), KoKXaaOaL
avTols (Ac. 5
13), evTvyxavet
:
8e8eTaL (Ro. 7
2)
rw de^ (Ro. 11 2). and fxep-iy pikvnv irvpi (Rev. 15

:
Cf. further avdpi

:
we may
(R. V. dative)
In Rev. 8 4 2). have the associative-instrumental^ rais
TTpoaevxcus
Sodrjaop-evco
with
ave^t].
Moulton
cites
cnrodcoaco
aoi
too
evyidTO.
d\}/(joviu,
B.U. 69
Cf.
(ii/A.D.)
'with your next wages' {CI.
Rev.,
Dec,
1901).
the old Greek auroTs avbpaaiv and the
''military dative" (Moulton, Prol., p. 61).

chv that use this case are
The compounds with

avWajSeadat (Lu. 5:7),
this
numerous.
:
Thus
14),
avp-ôvXevaas rots 'lovdaloLS (Jo. 18
though
might be a
:
dative
(cf.
avixjSalvo:
and
(xvfxipepeL)
rfj
(Tvve4>o)vridri
vp.lv
:
(Ac. 5
9; cf.
15
15),2 p.La xl^vxv avvadXovvTes
TrlaTu (Ph. 1
first
27,
two examples
probalily of the instrumental, the

avToo
of manner), avvr]K6Xovda
(Mk. 14
:51), at avvavaâaai ai'Tw

:
(Mk. 15
:41), avpavUecvTO
:
Tw
'1-qaov
(Mt. 9
10),
fxrj
avvavap-iyvvadai. avTU (2 Th. 3

:
14), crvv-
avairavaojixai vplv
(Ro. 15
32), avvrjvTrjCTev avTu> (Lu.
37), poL avv-
avTiXa^rjTaL (Lu. 10 :40; cf.
Ro. 8
26), awairodave'LV col
(Mk. 14
arrw 31), oh avvaToiXero rots aweLdrjaaaLV (Heb. 11:31), avveâXXov tu> avvr]ykpdr]Te Cor. 4:8), (Ac. 17:18), vplu avvâaiXevaojpep (1 aurw avpelTero 18 'IrâoD (Jo. 15), Xpl(TtQ (Col. 3 1), avveia^Xdev tw (Ac. 20 4), (Tvvr]pyei rots epyois (Jas. 2 22), (xvvrjXdev avroh (Ac. 9
: : : :
39), (TvveaOieL avToh (Lu. 15
2), (TwevdoKelTe rots epyoLs (Lu. 11
48),
cvvevioxovpepoL vplv (2 Pet. 2:13),
awdx^ro
avTcp
to)
\by(^ (Ac.
18:5),
(Tvpeûio-
avv^rjaopep aura) (Ro.

TTolrjaep
tw
Xpicrra)
6:8), (Eph. 2:5),

2
:
avp^r]TLP
(Mk. 8:11),
:
avprjoopai tco
vopw (Ro. 7: 22), avv32), avyKadrjpepoL
Ta4)ePT6s avTco (Col.
12), avveaTCjTas avTw (Lu. 9

rep
avTots
(Ac. 26:30),
avPKaKOTradrjcrov
evayyeXlcp
(2
Tim. 1:8),
rfi
(TvvKaKOVxeLaOaL roi Xa<2
(Heb. 11
rfj
25), avPKaTaTedetpkvos
ôvXrj
:
(Lu.
23
51),
jui)
(TVPKeKepaapepovs
irlaTH rots ciKovcraaLP

avvKOLPcopelre toTs
:
examples of the instrumental),

iavrovs
(Heb. 4 2, two epyoLs (Kph. 5
eavToh (2 Cor. 10 12), avp'XaXovvTes t(2 11), avPKpipovTes 16), (rui'o5e6oj'res tc? irpevpaTL (Ro. 8 (TvvpapTvptl 9 'lr](T0v (Mk. :4), (Ac. 18 7), avvTradrjcai avpaywyfj avpopopovaa rfj auTW (Ac. 9:7),
: :
Moulton, Prol., p. 75. Considered peculiar by Blass, Cr. of N. T. Ok.,

Cf.
p.
lU.
530
rais

aadepelaLS
NEW TESTAMENT
rj/jLlv
(Heb. 4
15),
:
avpirapopres
(Ac.
25
24),
:
avv11),
eTreiJL\pafJLV
avTots (2
Cor. 8
22),
crvveTopevovTO
ttj
avrQ (Lu. 7
ovvaTavpwdkvros avTw (Jo. 19
32), avvaTOLXf^t
vvv 'lepovadKrjij. (Gal.

:
25),
HT]
(7vv(Tx>llJ-o-'''''-^^(^Se
:
tw aluvL tovtw (Ro. 12

:
2),
cwtux^'lv
avrQ (Lu. 8
:
19), cvvvTeKpidrjaav aurw (Gal. 2
13), avvexo-f-pov avrfj
(Lu. 1 58), avvxpoivTai âjiapuTais (Jo. 4:9), though xpo-oyiaL uses the strict instrumental usually; a rather long list surely, but one
not in vain,
these verbs occur frequently and

(/)
With
one gets a just idea of the N. T. usage. Some of some have xpos or /xera. Words of Likeness and Identity. We find this
if
:
usage with several adjectives.
Thus oûotos avdpdoTOi (Lu. 6 48) and always, save the accusative in Rev. 14 14 and in 1 13 (true text). In Jo. 8 55 some MSS. actually have o/iotos vpiCiv
: : :
instead of vplv.
ripXv
Cf. our vulgar
"the
rij/iv
likes of
you."
So also
'iaovs
(Mt. 20
12)
and
iaoTifiov
iriaTLv (2
Pet. 1:1).
'0 auros
with the instrumental is found once only, ej' koL to avro rfj k^vpTjuhij In 1 Th. 2 14 we find to. avra Kadws, and in Ph. (1 Cor. 11 5). 1 30 Tov avTov aywva olov. Several verbs are used the same way.
: : :
So
eoLKev av8pi (Jas.
23), rots
:
6.86X4)01$
bp.oLwdrivaL
(Heb. 2
:
17),
Trapo/j.oia^T rdôts
(Mt. 23
27), eirpeTev
:
avrQ (Heb. 2
:
10).
oixolos
Some
opaaeL
Xidu)
MSS. have dfxoiccs avrrj in Mt. 22 39. In Rev. 4 3 we have two instrumental examples. Manner. It is expressed by the instrumental (g)
N.
T.,
is
case.
This,
like the other uses of the case in the
in
harmony with
T. adverbs
et/cf)
ancient usage,^ not to say that of the

illustrate this
kolvy].
Some N.
16:37),
12),
usage well,
Cor. 12
16
: :
like b-qnoala (Ac.
(1
Cor.
:
15
2), Ibla (1
11), Kpv4>fi
(Epk
5
:
\adpa (Mt. 2
(Ac. 24
is
7), 3),
iravoLKd (Ac.
Trefg
34),
wavTrX-qOei
(Lu. 23
18),
TvavTri
(Mk. 6
:33), rdxa (Ro. 5:7).
But the usage
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
1
:
23).
Cf.
also 4>vaeL in Gal. 2
15 and
tc3
Tpoauiro) in Gal.
xo-P'-t'-
22.
Here are
:
some
of the chief examples with verbs:
m^^^X'*^ (1
Cor. 10
30)
t(2
TrpoaevxofJ.vr)
aKaTaKaKvTTUi
rfj
Ke0aX?7 (1 Cor. 11:5),
Trept.TiJLr]6rJTe
Wei (Ac. 15
fire
1), rfi Tpodecrei TvpoapikveLV

e'lre
(Ac. 11
2.3),
on
iravrl
:
Tpoiro),
Trpocf)a.cret
aX-qdeia,
Xptaros
KaTayyeXXeraL
(Ph. 1
18,
all
three examples),
avaKeKaXvpLjikvixi
Trpoo-oiwco
KaTOTTTpL'^bnivoi
(2
:
Cor.
18).
Blass notes also paTlaj-iaaLv avTov
eXal3ov
(Mk. 14
65) as a
vulgarism which finds a parallel in a papyrus ^ of the

1
first
century
K.-G.,
I,
p. 435.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 118.
THE CASES
A.D., KovSvKois eXaêv.
(nTfiZEIs)
531
Cf.
rfj
îa,
B.U. 45
:
(IH/a.d.).
and the genitive

XtXtdaij^,
(/xerd îas,
:
Ac. 5
26),
But often fierA and the locative (h 8eKa

(Ac. 15
:
Lu. 14
31), Kara
and the accusative

:
11) or
the mere accusative (Mt. 23
37) occur rather than the instru-
mental.
trouble.
There
is
It is called^
one usage in the N. T. that has caused some "Hebraic" by some of the grammarians.
The
to
instances are rather
numerous
in the
N.
T.,
though nothing
like so
common
as in the
LXX.^ Conybeare and Stock quote Plato
show that it is, however, an idiom in accordance with the genius Greek language. Thus Xoyu 'Kkyeiv, (t>evycov 4>vyfj, 0i)aet 'Kt4)VKv'iav, etc. They call it the "cognate dative." That will do if instrumental is inserted in the place of dative. Moulton^ admits that this idiom, like the participle /SXevrovres /3Xei/'ere, is an example
of the
of "translation Greek," but thinks that a phrase like eôXedpevaa

ovK k^ccXedpevaav (Josh. 17
finitive absolute
:
13) is
much more
like
the
Hebrew
in-
which
is
reproduced by this Greek instrumental or

that the classical parallels yanco
in the great
yaixelv,
participle.
cpvyfj
Blass'* insists
(pevyeLv
are not true illustrations, but merely accidentally
grammarian, I conceive. Here are some of the important N. T. instances: aKofj aKovaere (Mt. 13 14),
similar,
an overrefinement
The Latin has

avade/JLari
the idiom also, like curro curriculo.

(Ac. 23
a.vtdeixaTi(rap.tv
:
14),
eirLdvfiia
:
hvirvloLS evvirvtaaOr]15),
(jovTai
(Ac. 2
:
17),
eTTLdv/jila
eTedvfx-qaa
:
(Lu. 22
davarw reXeurarco
(Mt. 15
5
:
4),
opKw
0)fjLO(Tev
(Ac. 2
30), k^kaTrjaav kKaTaaec fxeyaXj]

:
(Mk.
ai]-
42), TapayyeyLO. wap-qyydXap.ev (Ac. 5

:
28), irpoaivxri wpoa-qvâTO
(Jas. 5
fxaipoiv
17),
x^pS
xo-tpet (Jo.
29;
cf.
Pet. 1:8).
:
Cf. also
TToicp
davaroi rnjieXKev airoOvrjaKeiv (Jo. 18

:
32)
and
crr]fxaivo}V
TTotw
davaru Soâaet tov Oebv (Jo. 21

Blass'^
it
19),
where the idiom seems

is
:
more normal.
verb in so far as
observes that this usage "intensifies the

to be understood
indicates that the action
as taking place in the fullest sense."

Moulton,
C. and
Prol., p.
Prol., p. 75.
In Ro. 8
24 we more likely
60 f. 75 f. Cf. davov 6avaTU) in Homer. * Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 119. 5 lb. Thack. (.Jour, of Theol. Stu., July, 1908, p. 598 f.) shows that in the Pentateuch the Hebrew infinitive absokite was more frequently rendered
2
S., p.
'
by the instr. case, while in the Books of Samuel and Kinfj.s the participle In the LXX as a whole the two methods are about et]ual. is the more usual.
On
p. 601 he obscTves that the N. T. has no ex. of the part, so used exeejit in O. T. quotations, while several instances of the instr. occur apart from quota-
tions, as in
Lu. 22
15; Jo. 3
29; Ac. 4
17; 5
28; 23
12; Jas. 5
17.
Sec
also Thack., Gr., p. 48.
532

Cf. apKelade rots
6\}/uvIols
have the means than the manner.

Lu. 3
(h)
:
in
14.
measure.
Measure. Closely allied to the idea of manner is that of The accusative is sometimes used here also with the comparative, as iroXv fxaXXov (Heb. 12:9). But in Lu. 18:39 we
have TToXXw ixdWov
(ii/B.c).
(cf.
:
Mt. 6
30).
Cf. ttoXXw
/jLaXXou,
P. Par. 26
In Ph.
23
we
find the instrumental with the double
comparative
ttoXXoS
fxaWov Kptiaaov.
:
In particular observe
roaovTU)
which corresponds to the English idiom ''the more, the less" in "the more one learns, the humbler he grows." As a matter of fact the English "the" here is instrumental also, as is seen in the Anglo-Saxon Sy. Cf. also ToaovTO)
/jlclKXov oacp /SXcTrere
(Heb. 10
25)
KpelTTuv (Heb. 1:4).

(i)
Cause.
The instrumental may be used
also to express the
idea of cause, motive or occasion.
This notion of ground wavers between the idea of association and means. Here are some illusXt)Ua5
trations: 70) de
XptcTToO
5e
T7J
fxri
co5e
dxoXXu/ât (Lu.
:
15
17),
'iva
(rravpu)
rod
SiooKoovTaL
(Gal. 6
12), XuTTTj KaTawodfj (2

bieKpldr]
Cor. 2:7), nues

rfj
(Tvvrideia
eadlovcnv (1
:
Cor. 8:7), oh
rrj
:
dxtcrrta
dXXa
:
kvebwapio^dri
ri\er]d7]Te rfj
rfj Trtcrrei
(Ro. 4 20),
a-KLdTia eêKKaadrjaav
(Ro. 11
'Iva /cat
20),
tovtojv aTrecdia
:
(Ro. 11
êviêade
30), tc3 u/ierepa) eXeet

rfj
avrol
:
vvv eXerjdoJaLV (11

rotaurats
31),
fxr]
kv vfuv irvpwati (1
:
Pet.
4
fxe
12),
yap
:
dvalaLs evapeaTetraL
(Heb. 13
(2
16), rcS
:
fxr]
evpetv
TItov
:
(2 Cor. 2
13), e{j8oKi]<ravTes
rfj d5t/cta
Th. 2
12).
In
Cor. 9
we have tIs aTpareverai lS'lols bypcovlois Trore," cf. rf/ vTepôXfj (2 Cor. 12 7). But some verbs in the N. T. prefer a preposition for this idea, but not with the instrumental case. Thus r]yaXKiaaev kirl
7
:
TpaivovTO kv rots epyoLS (Ac.

kiri
el
With
2
: :
davnaôo
5td
we
find kv (Lu. 1: 21),

7),
(Lu. 4
(Rev. 17:
not to mention
(1 Jo.
13), ort (Lu. 11
18), 38).
(j)
Means.
that of means.
persons agent,
But no usage of this case is more common than With things sometimes we call it means, with though more often the agent is expressed by
(cf.
vTo with genitive-ablative
ah with the ablative in Latin).
There
course,
is
no
essential difference in the root-idea.

it
Donaldson (N'cw
This
is,
Cratylus, p. 439) calls
the " implementive case."
of
(cf.
an idiom found with verbs.

3),
TroXXfj
Note
especially
to)
:
xpcôiJ.ai.
Latin lUor with instrumental, not ablative),

(Ac. 27
1
:
UavXco xp'jo'd/xews
12), kav Tts avTU)
Tapp-qela XPÎ^^^C- (2 Cor. 3
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 118.
Cf. for the pap. Moulton, CI. Rev.,
1901, p. 438.
THE CASES
vonlfjLois
(nTfiSEIi;)
533
xPVTo-i- (1
Tim. 1:8),
in
:
which examples we have both

12, 15, etc.
thing and person.^

in 1 Cor. 7:31.
Cf. 1 Cor. 9
But
see accusative
Among
Thus
the
ix-q
many examples we can

:
only select
:
the most striking.

kêâXev
to.
Trore Iboiatv toIs o^âX/xots
(Mt. 13
15),
Trvevnara
xl/coxovres
i]\eL(f)ev
\6yw (Mt. 8
rw
iJLvp<xi
16), ireSaLS Kal aXvaeaL deSeadat
(Mk. 5:4),
(Lu. 7:38),
pa5t5cos
expto'tJ'
rals x^P'^'-v (Lu.

{ib.),
6:1),
rats Opi^lv eênaaaev

(fyCK-qjiaTL
viruco
(Lu. 9:32),
ira-
(Lu.
22
48),
rats
Kal
imyiais eêaraKevai, avrovs (Ac. 8:11),

8vvafxeL
avTov TcvthjiarL
:
(Ac.
10
38),
:
avuXev 'laKOJôu
Haxo-ipv (Ac. 12
2), 8e8aixa(7TaL ry cfyvaeL (Jas.
7), avuairijxOr] avToJv

d5t/cta,
rfj viroKplaei (Gal.
13), TreirXrjpojfxevovs irdafi

aeao:(riJ,evoL
wovrjpia, kt\.
/jltj
(Ro.
o'luco
29),
:
x^P'-'''''-
ô-T6
(Eph. 5
01*
18), pepavna/jLevov
(Eph. 2:5, a'ip.aTL (Rev. 19

:
8),
fxedvcxKeade
13), irvevfiarL
(Ro.
8
(1
14),
dapTois,
:
apjvpico
(2)
t)
xpvf^'-Vj eKvTpojQrjTe,
dXXd
rtûtw aip.aTi
ro)
Pet.
18
f.),
ns
r/TTTjrai
(2
Pet. 2
19),
ecr4>payiadr]Te
rfj
kîfj
TTveviiaTi
(Eph.
13), TnfkiKois vfuv
y pafxiiaaiv eypa\l/a
x^'-P'-
6:11, one dative and two instrumental cases). Cf. /caraKpLvovcnu avTov OavaTco (Mk. 10 33, but dauarov in D, and in Mt. 20 18 ^( has els davarov). See the frequent use of Trtaret in Heb. 11, which is more than mere manner, though in verse 13 we have
(Gal.
: :
Kara
irlaTLv.
Moulton
{CI. Rev.,
Dec,
1901) cites
Cf. Jo.
juerd
517X000-01'
f.,
fj
TrXotco
eêpxet v
ixera
tojv
opco,
O.P. 112
(iii/iv A.D.).
19:39
oGovIols
dpwfxaTo^v for
proximity of
to the instrumental.
Moulton {ProL, p. 76) notes "the remarkable instrumental in Ep. Diogn. 7, w tovs ovpavovs eKTtaev." Besides some examples are open to doubt. Thus KaraKavaeL irvpl dajSeaTcc (Mt. 3 12) may be either locative or instrumental. The same might be true of tQ irXoLapM rjKBov (Jo. 21 8) and e^dirTiaeu v8aTL (Ac. 1 5), though the locative is pretty clearly right here. Then again in Ac. 22:
: : :
25, TrpokreLvav tols
IfidcxLv,
we have
:
either the instrumental or the

'^'<^^
dative.
But
in 2 Pet. 1
I8la bb^xi
dperfj
(marg. in
:
W.
H.)
are clearly instrumental, not dative.

kawd-qnev,
In Ro. 8
24,
rfj
tkirlbt
we have
either the
modal instrumental or the

:
instru-
mental of means. Cf. also 1 Cor. 14 15. Blass^ perhaps overemphasizes the influence of the Heb. 3 on the N. T. Greek in what is called the instrumental use of kv (the case with tv is always This is a classic idiom and locative; historically considered). the papyri give numerous illustrations'* of it, though the Heb.
''
In Horod. w(! find a <louble instr. with

in riorocL,
II,
1".)()0,
xpv<jOai.
2
Cf. Ilolbinf:;,
Dor Instru-
mental
"
p. 8.
Qr. of N. T. Gk., p. 117.
K.-G.,
p.4r)4f.
Prol., pp. 76, 104; CI. Rev., 1904, p. 153.
Moulton,
534
% did
of
NEW TESTAMENT
LXX.
Some
:
make
it
more frequent
Hke
:
in the
of the uses
52), ivokeixrâoi
:
and
locative,
ku fxaxaipm airoXovvTaL
(Mt. 26
kv TTj poixcfyaia
(Rev. 2
16),
4>6v(jo
iiaxaipiis (nrkdavov
(Heb. 11 37^
jxa-
are fairly equivalent to the pure instrumental case, as avd\v

xo-'i-pv
(Ac. 12
2),7reffovPTaL aroiiaTL
naxalpv^ (Lu. 21
24).
But others
ev in Blass' list are more debatable and may be construed merely locatives after all, as seen above. Besides the examas ples already mentioned, -rrvpl okLad-qaeTai (Mk. 9 49) may be compared with kv TLPL avTo aprvaere (9 50) and h tLvl oXiaO-qaeTaL (Mt. 5 13). See further Mt. 7:2 and h pdl38co eXdca (1 Cor. 4 21) which stands over against h ayairy wvev/jiaTi re wpavTrjTos. Some doubt remains as to whether the instrumental case is used for the agent. In the Sanskrit the instrumental is a common idiom with a perfect passive verb or participle. But the Latin uses the dative in such an example as is seen by mihi, not me. Most of the grammarians take the Greek passive perfect and verbal as the Latin with the dative.^ But Delbriick^ recognises the doubt in the matter. The one example in the N. T. is in Lu. 23 15,
without
ov8ev a^Lov Oavarov earlv TreTvpayp-kvov avrQ.
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,
have person, not thing,

also Jas. 3
:
of
whom
(Am,
20),
St. V),
w ns T/rrTjrat, we not of what. Cf.

a possible instru-
7.
One may mention here

:
also as
COS
mental
35),
Kaj(h evpedo) hplv (2 Cor. 12
cbcfid-q
ayyeXoLs (1
Tim. 3
true datives.
is
The
usual
way
avTols (Lu. 24 but these are most probably of expressing the agent in the N. T.
kyvdiiaOrj
16),
vTo for the direct agent
and
1
5td for
the intermediate agent, as

clto
in
Mt.
22.
But other
prepositions are also used, like

:
(Ac.
2:22),
(Jo. 1: 13),
(Col.
17), irapa (Jo.

eu in
1:6), etc.
See a
real distinction
(k)
between vt6 and
Ro. 12
21.
With
Prepositions.
The Greek
uses the instrumental
with only two prepositions ayua and avv, both with the comitative idea. In the Cypriot'C Greek we have avv tvxo., the distinctive instrumental ending. Cf. the Sanskrit sam with the instrumental and the Latin cum. There is only one instance of ap.a in the N. T. with the instrumental, apa avroTs (Mt. 13:29), but note aâ (tvv avTOLs (1 Th. 4 17; cf. also 5 '^vv appears chiefly in Luke's 10).
: :
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,

K.-G.,
I, p.
p. 95.
f.;
422; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 400
Meisterh., p. 210, for inscr.

Gr., p. 98
f.,
(Attic); Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 344;
^
Monro, Horn.
I,
considers
it
true dative.
*
Vergl. Synt.,
p. 300.
But
cf.
pp. 184, 297.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 112.
THE CASES
writings, as avv avrfj (Lu. 1
:
(nTfiSEIs)
535
is
5G).
But
in composition avv
very
(Ph.
common,
2
:
as
has already been shown.
So awxalpeTe
fiot.
18).
The Dative (True) Case (t| Sotikt] irTwo-is). Syncretism. That of the locative, instrumental and dative cases has not advanced so far in Greek as has that between the genitive and the ablative. Monro ^ thinks that ''distinct forms for these three cases survived down to a comparatively late period in Greek itself." He rightly conceives that it is not difficult, as a rule, to distinguish the three cases in usage. Brugmann^ gives various examples of how the three cases made contriXII.
(a)
bution to the
(6)
common endings for the final blending. The Decay of the Dative. But in modern Greek
this
syncretistic combination has vanished in the vernacular.
Moulalso.
ton^ can properly speak of the "decay of the dative," a decay that
applies for the
modern Greek
case.
to the locative
and instrumental
uses
els
Ate
In the Sanskrit (Lanman) the dative, after the ablative, was the
most infrequent
The modern Greek simply
and
accusative for the usual dative (and locative) ideas and
(ixeTo)
with accusative for the instrumental.

use of
rrfv
ets
We see an
to Wvo%
in the
N.
T., eXerjfjLoavvas
els
iroL-qaoov els
approach to this ijlov (Ac. 24 17),

:
ôvXijv rod Oeov -qOeTrjaav
eavTOvs (Lu. 7:30).
So
els
v/JLois
(1
Pet, 1:4).
to consider
els
:
p. 213) is correct in refusing

:
(Mk. 13 10; Lu. 24 way. The pregnant idea is in Mk. 8 19 and Ro. 8 18. Ets is found also with evoxos (Mt. 5 11), but cbêXiôs with 22), eWeros (Lu 14 35), evxpwTos (2 Tim. 4 Only in the most illiterate papyri is the decay TTpbs (1 Tim. 4:8). of the dative seen, as in tIvl \6yov, N.P. 47 (iii/A.D.), and in the Of. Moulton, CI. late inscrs. hke 6 ôr]9cov vp-wv, J. H. S., XIX, 14.
with
Krjpvaaco
or evayyeXiôfxaL
47
Pet. 1
:
25) as at all out of the

:
Per contra note eTTLpe\r]d[riT]L to) TratStcp, P. OxJ^ Leaving out ej/, the locative, instrumental and dative show a contraction in the N. T. as compared with the earlicMGreek.^ But even in the N. T. 'êv is considerably more than a match for cis," yet the vernacular revived and intensified the old identity of ev and ets seen in the early dialects.'' Hatzidakis" shows how this tendency increased in the later Greek till els triumphed over ev in the modern Greek. But even in the N. T. it is often impossible to insist on the idea of motion or extension in
Rev., Apr., 1904.
744 (i/B.c).
Horn. Gr.,
p.
97
f.
lb.
l^lass,
I'linl.,
Gricch. Gr., pp. 220

Prol., p. 62.
ff.
"
Gr.
p.
(.f
N. T. Gk.,
f.
p. 122.
210
. :
536
CIS,
A GEAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

03V
as 6
ds top koKttov (Jo.

:
18), 6 els tov
aypbv (Mk. 13
16).
Cf.
from D kv as equiva61). compare the disappear23. One may in Acts 7 8 els lent to 12; the accusative for both the of with vird and use locative of the ance motion and rest,^ whereas in Appian and Herodian (Atticists) the
Tois eh TOV oLKov (Lu. 9
:
Moulton^
cites
locative
is
in the lead.^
Cf. the disappearance of the dative forms
pronouns him, whom, etc. Even Wyclif had "believe ye to the gospel" (Mk. 1 15). It is that of personal interest. (c) The Idea of the Dative. It is sometimes used of things, but of things personified.'* Apolin English save in the
:
lonios Dyscolos calls the dative the case of

sative, genitive
TrepiTvol-qcns.
The
accu-
and dative are
all
cases of inner relations,^ but the
dative has a distinctive personal touch not true of the others. dative
in
it.^
The
is
not a local case.

is
It
There was originally no idea of place thus a purely grammatical case {rein grammatisch)
(xoL
Even
epxoixal
(tol
(Rev. 2
:
16) is
used of a person, not place.
Cf.
epxeral
(Mt. 21
5,
from the
LXX) and
eXê
fxot.,
P. Par. 51
(B.C. 160).
But
in physical relations the dative
approaches the
12
accusative in
idea.''
Thus we
:
find the dative of place in

^covtos (cf.
Trj
22, TrpoaekrfKvdaTe
kyylôvTi.
rfj
1.idiv
opei koI iroKei deov

6).
Heb. 12 18) and
AaâaKui (Ac. 22
Cf. ijyyLaev
Trv\r}
(Lu. 7: 12).
It
is
not used for the notion of time.
I am not here insisting with substantives rather than with verbs, ^ but only that the dative has often a looser relation to the verb than the accusative or the genitive.^ It is more common to have the verb without the dative than without the accusative or
(d)
The Dative with Substantives.

first
that the dative was used
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.
true,
Not all substantives admit of this idiom, it is but only those that convey distinctly personal relations.
of these substantives are allied to verbs that use the
evxa.pt<TTL(hv
But some
dative.
So
rw
deoo
(2 Cor. 9
12), 6\i\pLv
rfj ttj
aapd
(1
Cor.
7: 28),
avecFLV rc3 irvevfiaTi p.ov (2
Cor. 2
13), (7koKo\}/
2
aapKL (2 Cor.
Prol., p. 235.
lb., p. G3.
Cf. Helbing,
Die
Priip. bei Herod., p. 22. Cf.
JMouiton, Prol., pp. 63, 107.
* 6
6
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 98. Wundt, Volkerpsych., 1. Bd.,

Delbruck, Vergl. Synt.,
I,
Tl. II, p. 126.
p. 185.
ff.
But
see E.
W.
Hopkins, Trans.
Am.
Hist. Assoc,
7 8
XXXVII,
pp. 87
p. 95.
I,
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
p. 277.
Brug., Griech Gr., p. 399.
THE CASES
12:7), avaTavffLV
(2 Cor. 2
jucopta
:
(riTfiZEIi;)
537
roS 0eaj
rals
xpvxcus
rots
vjjlcov
(Mt. 11:29), evudia
15), eis
1
:
Tacjjrjv
^kvoLS
:
(Mt. 27:7),
14.
is
roTj d7roXXu/iei/ois
(1
Cor.
18).
Cf. Lu. 5
With some
of
these ex-
amples verbs occur, but the dative
not here due to the verb.

6e(2
:
Some
25),
of
them
are in the predicate also, as xap tw

ei^xapicrrco.
(Ro. 7
5.
with which compare marg.

Cor. 8:9).
elfxl,
See Lu. 10
Cf.
elfil
Tots aadtvkdLv (1
aTTocTToXos,
So
in
Cor. 9:2,
is
d aWois
el/jLl.
ovk
dXXd ye vfup
17
the dative
not due to
Cf. in
next verse
e/xi)
aToXoyla roTs eê avaKpivovaiv.

v6tio%
Cf. also avrots in

davaros (Ro. 7
:
Ph.
28.
So
eavTo7s (Ro. 2
14),
k/jtol
13),
and, not to multiply examples, tovto hol

ri
Kapirds epyov (Ph. 1

1
:
22),
irl(TTa<xis ixol
:
(2 Cor. 11
28).
Cf. Ro.
14; 8
12.
In
Cor.
and accusative occur, but properl}^ so, e/iot be eis ekaxt-orbv kcTiv. Cf 1 Cor. 14 22 for the same thing. The dative due to attraction of the relative is seen in oh Lu. 9 43. (e) With Adjectives. This dative occurs naturally. These adjectives and verbals, like the substantives, have a distinctly personal flavour. Here are the most striking examples: d7ret0?)s rf)
4
ets
.
:
3 both the dative and
ovpavLcf}
OTTTaala (Ac.
26
19), apeaTO. aura) Kal

api6ip.r]roL
(Jo.
29), apKtTOV (2
tui
Hadr]Trj
(Mt. 10
25),
aairiXot.
avToo
Pet. 3
:
14),
dcrretos
Tr\
rw OeQ (Ac. 7:
:
20), yvooarbs
tQ
deco
apxt-epel (Jo.
18
4),
15), 8ov\a
rfj
aKadapaia (Ro. 6
:
19), bvvaTO.
kix4)avrt
hKaioahvri (Ro. 6
8pio}
20),
rrj
rw
(2 Cor. 10
:
ekeWepoi
r}p.tv
(Ac. 10 40), 'hoxo% earac tw awe--
(Mt. 5
22), to evaxviôv Kal evirapeSpov (2 Cor.
tw Kvpiw
(1
:
Cor. 7: 35),
8), novoyev-qs
kavdv
(Ac.
TU) TOLOVTco
2:6), koXov aoi eatLV (Mt. 18

afxaprla (Ro. 6
:
rrj fxrjTpi
(Lu. 7: 12), veKpcvs

:
11), TnaTrjv tc3 Kvpic^

iradLV
16
15),
.
. .
tttcjOxovs
2
7
11), 13),
vTTjKOOL
2:5), awTrjpLos (Ac. 7:39), (f>apepdp kyhero tui

Koafxui
tQ
(Jas.
(Tit.
'âpaai (Ac.
oPTes avTU> 0tXoi (Ac.
19
31), cbêXt/ia rots avOpccTrots (Tit.
3:8). Wellhausen (Einl, p. 33 f.) calls tpoxos rw "ungriechisch." But note epoxos earui rots taois erire[t]/iots, P. Oxy. 275 (a.D. 66). The participle in Lu. 4 16 (Ac. 17 2) almost deserves to be classed with the adjectives in this connection, to e'Ôos avT(2.
:
(/)
With Adverbs and
Prepositions.
The dative
is
found
(Mt.
:
a few times with adverbs.

VfXLP
Thus
cos
oatws Kal 5tKatcos Kal

:
dûejuTrrcos
rots TTLCTTf.vovaLP ky epr]9r] /jLep (1

7)
Th. 2
10), oi'at ro) Koafxcp

:
and so frequently (but accusative in Rev. 8 13; 12 12). Blass' compares Latin vne niihi and vae me. Brugmann- indeed
18
:
considers KaTai,
irapal, iraXai,
xaMat
while this
is
true, the dative is

p. 112.
all to be dative forms. But, not used with prepositions in the

CI. Rev., 1901.
2
j,.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., with dat. in pap,
Moulton,
1.53,
finds &ko\oWcos
22(5,
Gricch. Gr., pp.
228.
538

The
locative
is
Sanskrit^ and not certainly in the Greek.^
very
common with prepositions, and the
instrumental appears with two,
but the dative is doubtful. In reality this statement must be modified a bit, for 77115 has the dative twice in the N. T. (Ac. 9:38), Ty 'loTTTTjj; w hy^s (Ac. 27 8), though the genitive is the usual case employed. Cf. eyy'i-^'^ with dative, Ac. 9:3; 10 9; Jas. 4 8. Brugmann^ admits the dative with avTiov, evav-iov, TrXrjaiov in the older Greek, though no N. T. examples occur. Delbriick (Grundl., p. 130) finds the dative with eirl. Here the dative finds its most extensive use. (g) With Verbs. Perhaps the earliest use. Certainly it re1. Indirect Object. mains the one most commonly met. Indeed there are few transitive verbs that may not use this dative of the indirect object. In
: : :
the passive of these verbs the dative

tive illustrations are here given.
40),
ol
a.4>es rifxtv to. ocfyeLKrjiJLaTa rjidcov
is
retained.
Some
representa-
"A<ês avrco Kal to Iiioltlov

:
(Mt. 5
(marg.)
dodrjvaL
:
(Mt. 6
12), avecoxdri'^'^v avT<2
ovpavol
(Mt. 3
16),
:
Score to a-yiov rots Kva'iv (j\It.
7:6),
rols TTTCoxots
(Mk. 14
5),
vijuv Trpo:TOV
aTrecrretXez'
(Ac. 3
26),
aTeL\r]a(jOfxe6a avTols nrjKeTL XaKeXv (Ac.
17), a 8e
7pd(/)aj viilv
(Gal.
20), e7re/3aXof avTols rds

:
x^'^PC-S
(Ac. 4:3), \eyeL avTo2s otl

:
(Mk.
(Mt.
x^P^v
14
5
:
27), vijup 8eiêL
avdyaiov
21), irpoakcpepov ai'TU)
(Mk. 14 TratSta (Mk. 10

d'Kl\{/LV
15), kppkdri to2s dpxatots

:
13), eL'a77eXti'o/xat
8r]papLa
i'/xtv
IxeyoK-qv
CLTrodcocrco
(Lu. 2
aoi
10), w4)eCKev
:
avTw haTov
kyelpeiv
(Mt. 18
28), iravTa
1
:
(Mt. 18
25).
26),
Toh BeapoXs pov (Ph.

:
17),
TTOL-qao)
w8e Tpets
Jo. 2
:
(TKrjvas, <Jol
piav ktX. (Mt. 17
4),
t)p
ai'TOS eirrjyyeLkaTO
:
t]plv (1
An example like eTreTxei' auroTs

Cf Ac. 26
. :
(Ac. 3
:
5) is really
eSo^r/
the indirect object.

cKoKoxp
TTj
27.
In 2 Cor. 12
7,
poi
aapKi, the pot is indirect object
and
(japd
may
be either
dative of advantage or locative.
The so-called dative of 2. Dativus Commodi vel Incommodi. advantage or disadvantage does not differ very greatly from the indirect object. A good example is epxopai aoL (Rev. 2 5, 16).
:
Moulton (ProL,
at times
p. 245) cites It is
Zr]vds aypvTvvov /SeXos.
.Eschylus (P.V. 358), dXX' ^Xêj^ aura; indeed rather more loosely connected
and varies more

(Mt. 23
:
in the resultant idea.
Thus
in papTvpeiTe
eavTols OTL
31)
we have
to translate 'against yourselves,'
mean 'against' any more means 'for' or 'in behalf of.' The personal relation is expressed by the case and it may be favourable or unfavourable.
though, of course, the dative does not
than
it
Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 96. Giles, Man., etc., p. 329, but see Prepositions
(ch.
XIII).
THE CASES
(nTfiSEIs)
539
more
vtu)
Indeed, nowhere does the personal aspect of the dative come out clearly than in this usage. Thus -KOLVTa ra yeypafx/jLha rc3
Tov avdpoiirov (Lu.

:
18
31),
ypaufxarevs
/jLad-qrevdels
:
rg
/SacrtXeto.
(Mt. 13
avTols
52),
vviJ.4>riv
:
KeKoaixrjfxhriv
v6fj.os
tu apSpi (Rev. 21
2), avairXripovTaL
(Mt. 13
3
14), dLKaicp
oh /cetrat (1
of datives), avadTavpovvTas eavrols tov vlov

TvprjKas (Jo.
:
Tim. 1:9; note long list (Heb. 6 6), w cri; fxefiap:
20), iKpiva kfiavTU) tovto (2 Cor.

:
1),
yu?)
fxepLfxvdre rrj
(Mt. 6: 25) aae^kaiv redeuws (2 Pet. 2 6), elVe eê<XTr]iJ.eu, Oeu)' elVe (TUcppovou/jLeu, vpHv (2 Cor. 5 13), emxef aura) (Mk. 6 19). Blass^ notes how frequent this idiom is in Paul's Epistles, especially
ypvxv
: :
in the
I'm êco
vehement passages. Thus

fi7(7co
:
^ly/cen iavTols
rfj
^dcnv (2 Cor. 5
:
15),
f.),
(Gal. 2 19), awedapofxeu
a/jLapTia
vfjias
rj
(Ro. 6
2; cf. 6
10
edapaTcodrjTe
IXOL
rw
:
vo/jlco
els
to yeveadaL
aTr]KeL
eTepco
(Ro. 7
10),
:
T(3
Iblw Kvpioo
TLTTTei
kaOieL
(Ro. 14
:
6), eavTU) ffj
eavTW
:
(Ro. 7:4), evpWr) (Ro. 14 4), KVpiu)

:
cnrodvrjaKeL
(verse 7).
Cf.
kfjLoi
:
in
Ro. 7 21, vp.lp in 2 Cor. 12 20 and /iot with eyhero in Ac. 22 6. A good example is airoiJiaaabp.tBa vjxtv, Lu. 10 11. See ejuaurw in 2
:
Cor. 2
(Jo.
1
:
and
17).
ro)
irveiifxaTL
(2
:
13).
Cf. âaTaôov aura) tou aTavpov
19
In
Mk.
10
33 note also the other datives, either

tfjnraiôvaiv
avTcp.
the indirect object or

Cf. also
Tracrt}'
the direct object like

'lovSaioLs in 1
tL
/jlol
and toU
(Lu. 4
:
Cor. 9
to
19
f.
In this conCor.
nection
one
may
note also
34).
64)e\os
(1
15:32),
is
TL rinlv Kal aol
The
1
intense personal relation

1
:
also
manifest in the examples in

Kal aol (Jo.
Cor.
23
f.
Cf. also 1
18, 30.
tL kfiol
Prof. Burkitt {Jour, of Theol. Stud., July, 1912) interprets
2:4) to mean 'What is it to me and thee?' That is, 'What have we to do with that?' In a word, 'Never mind!' like the modern Egyptian 77ia 'alesh in colloquial language. The so-called ethical dative (cf. cot in Mt. 18 17) belongs here. A very simple example is au/xêpet yap aoL (Mt. 5 29). Moultoncites a papyrus example for epxofxal aoi (Rev. 2 5, 16), though from an illiterate document. For p.k\eL see Ac. 18 17; 1 Pet. 5 7.
:
:
:
3.
Direct Object.
Then again the
dative
is
often the direct
These verbs may be simple or compound, but they all emphasize the close personal relation like trust, distrust, envy, please, satisfy, serve, etc. Some of them vary
object of transitive verl)s.
in construction, taking
now
the dative,
now
the accusative,
now
The
it is
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 111. Prol., p. 75. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 113, calls (his (he Hhical dativo. so-callo(l dative of "majesty" Blass considers a ]Iel)raisin. He compares
OiCi
Aareios tQ
with
if
ttoXis /xeyaXr]
tQ OtQ (Jonah, 3
3), 'a
very great
city.'
But
doubtful
the N. T. follows the
LXX
here.
540

But
:
NEW TESTAMENT
enough.
:
a preposition.
avTOLS (Lu. 24
this is all natural
Thus
nal rjirlaTow
11), kiteLdihv
rw
:
utcS
(Jo. 3
36), eirddovTO aura) (Ac.
36), vwaKovovffLP avTw
ireiroida
eis
(Ph.
:
14),
(Gal. 5
10),
(Mk. 1 27). Once we find the dative with but elsewhere prepositions, as h (2 Th. 3:4), In particular TCLaTtbtji calls for a ctti (Lu. 18 9).
:
word.
Deissmann^ has made an exhaustive study of the subject, and Moulton^ has given a clear summary of results. This verb may be used absolutely (Jo. 20 31) or with an object clause {ih) Moreover, it often means entrust (Gal. in the sense of believe. 2:7). Leaving out these uses Moulton finds that Tnarevco occurs with the dative 39 times and always in the sense of believe or trust
:
(especially in John, as Jo. 5
av
1
:
kfjLol).
It is
46, el yap that remarkable rather

:
eTLo-reveTe Mcouo-et eTrio-reuere
15,
TLcxTevere kv tc3
eua77eXtcj) explained
ing 'in the sphere

kv
of,'
to
occurs only once (Mk. by Deissmann^ as meanwhich Moulton agrees. In Eph. 1 13

:
more properly belongs to

TnaTtboi
e(x<j)payla9rjTe.
with
and no other preposition. times 45 occurs (37 times in John's Gospel and 1 Jo.) while kiri appears 6 times with the locative and 7 with the accusative. Moulton objects to overrefining here between eh and eiri (at most like
believe in
The LXX uses h rarely But in the N. T. ets
and
believe on).
with
Itti.
What
So also as to accusative and locative he does properly accent is the use of these two
to
prepositions
by the Christian writers

belief (dative
show the
difference be-
with Tnarehw) and personal trust {els and This mystic union received a further development in Paul's cTTt). frequent ev Xpio-ra). The relation between ev rQi bvopLan and eirl
tween mere
T(3 ovo/jLaTL is parallel.'*
We must note other groups with the dative, like verbs of serving.
Thus
7
:
avTUi (Mt. 4:11), tc3 vot dovXevco vo/jlco deov (Ro. both instrumental and dative here), XarpeveLv aura) (Lu. 1 But in Ph. 3 3 we have the 74), virrjpeTeXv avTU) (Ac. 24 23). instrumental with Xarpevw, and irpoaKwew uses either the dative (Mt. 2:2) or the accusative (Jo. 4 23), not to mention epcoTiop (Lu. 4:7). The dative with 8ov\6w in 1 Cor. 9 19 is merely the
bLrjKovovv
25,
indirect object.
Another convenient group

envious, angry, etc.
is
verbs to please, to
suffice, to
be
Thus
6eu>
apeaac (Ro. 8:8), eve^piixCiVTo avrfj
' In Christo, p. 46 f. My friend, Prof. Walter Petersen, of Lindsborg, Kan., does not believe that the dative is ever the direct object of a verb, and Dr. W. O. Carver agrees with him. 3 2 Prol., p. 67 f. In Christo, p. 46 f. * Moulton, Prol., p. 68; Heitmiiller, Im Namen Jesu, I, ch. i.
THE CASES
(Mk. 14
adeXcpu)
:
(nTi2i:Eiz)
541
2), 6 opyL'ô/jLevos roj
5), ixtTpioTvaOelv rots

:
ayvoovaiv (Heb. 5
:
(Mt. 5
:
22), apKel gol (2 Cor. 12
9),
aWrjXoLS
cf)6ouovvTts
(Gal. 5
26, accusative,
enjoy, etc.
(Ac. 19
:
Once more, we may So euxapio-rco

:
margin of W. H.). note verbs meaning to thank, to blame, to

aoL (Jo.
11 :41), eyKoXelTcoaav aWrjXoLs

:
38), eTeTifxrjaep aiiTots
(Mt. 12
16), rots apefjLOLS eiTLTacraeL

1
:
(Lu. 8
25).
:
So also
Tpocreraêv avrQ
(Mt.
24), ^tecrreXXero avToZs
(Mk. 8 15), efxol xoXaTt (Jo. 7: 23). But /ceXei)co has accusative, though the dative occurs in the papyri. There remain verbs meaning to confess, to lie, to help, to shine, Thus we find ofxaXoyovPTcou tc3 bvoixari (Heb. 13 15)^ and etc.
:
avdo) iJ-oKoyelTO tui deco

/3oT70et
fiOL
:
5:4), (Mt. 15 25, but wêXeco has accusative), I'm <âlpoiaip In the later kolptj we find ôrjdkco with accusa23). avrfi (Rev. 21 (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 110). Cf. also rw genitive tive or
(Lu. 2
:
38), ovk
e\{/V(7w
apdpooTOLS (Ac.
6ew irpoaevxeadaL (1 Cor. 11

:
13), w aPTiaTrjTe (1 Pet. 5 two datives in Lu. 11 4. However, this 4. The Dative with Intransitive Verbs.
:
9).
Cf.
point that
is not a always easy to decide, for in apKeZ aot. (2 Cor. 12 See above. Cf. Lu. 3 14. 9) one is not sure where to place it. We are so prone to read the English into the Greek. The same remark applies in a way to ri vplp SoKel (Mt. 18 12), irpeireL ayioi^ (Eph. 5:3). But there is no doubt about ri eyevero avrui (Ac.
it is
:
:
40),
avT(xi avfjLâipeLP
(Mk. 10
1
:
32),
and the passive constructions

(perhaps dativus commodi, (perhaps in-
like
dTToXetTrerat
ecpapTj
aa^âTLafios
Tip
Xac3
Heb. 4:9),
avrQ (Mt.
:
20), eppr]dr] rots apxaiois
Mt. 5 21). The same thing is true of a number of the examples of "advantage or disadvantage" already given, like
direct object,
Ro. 6
'ip
jueXei rw êc3 (1 Cor. 9:9). See but eV ae mrepel (Mk. 10 21). The Greek, like the Latin, may use the dative 5. Possession. for the idea of possession. Thus ovk rjp avrols towos (Lu. 2:7), ovk
:
10;
14
4, etc.
Cf. also
aoL XctTrei (Lu.
18
22),
eaTLP aoL fxepis (Ac.
21), vfxlp kcFTiP

rj/up
17
e7ra77eXta (Ac. 2
39), tIpl earip
earai
(Lu. 12:20), elalv
Ttcraapes
dpdpes (Ac. 21:23),
cvprjdeLa vplp (Jo.
18
39), kap yeprjTai tlpl

is
apOpwirco iKarop irpoâTa

like ov
jui?
(Mt. 18
eo-rat aot
12).
The idiom
: :
extended even to cxami^lcs

ool (Lu. 1
:
tovto (Mt. 10
38.
22), earat x^-POis
14).
Cf. Ac.
43; Lu. 9
This
and a perfectly natural one.

is
a frequent idiom in the ancient Greek This i)redicative dative at bottom

Giles^ calls attention to the in-
just like the usual dative.

6.
Infinitive as Final Dative.

10,: 32,
So Mt.
but note
dfxoXoyS}
h aOrv in Lu.
12
8.
Man.,
p. 327.
542

a final dative.
NEW TESTAMENT
finitive as
This was the original use of the dative
So ijXOofxev irpoaKwijaaL avrc^ Here we have the dative form and the dative of purpose. Cf the old English " for to worship." This dative form continued, however, when the case of the infinitive was no longer
in -at, the expression of purpose.
(Mt. 2:2).
.
dative.
It was discussed under the instru7. The Dative of the Agent. mental and there is nothing new to be said here. The one clear example is found in Lu. 23 15. But not very different is the idiom
:
in
Mt. 6
(irpds to dtadrivai. ai'Tols)
and 23
5.
Cf. also 2 Pet.
3 :14.
8. The Dative because of the Preposition. We have already had examples of this. Compound verbs often have the dative where the simplex verb does not. The case is due to the total
idea of the
defxaL
compound
:
verb.
The dative occurs with

So^ with
:
dj'art-
in Ac. 25
14; Gal.
tu)
2:2.
avrl,
as
Jj
aPTlaTrjTe (1
Pet. 5:9), avrtXeyeL
Katcrapt (Jo. 19
:
12), avTiKdixevoi
avTU (Lu.
13
17), TU) ayico avTiTLirTeTe (Ac. 7
51).
'Atto in airoTaaaonat
is
goes
with the dative (Mk. 6 :46).

of
kv, as evkiraiâv avTUi (Mk. 15 Sometimes with avn- we have
The same thing

:
20), e/x/^Xeiâs
ivpbs,
sometimes true avTots (Mk. 10 27).

:
as with
:
dvfiop
With hetx^v avrQ (Mk. 6 some such word. Eis and ctti usually have a preposition after the compound verb, except that compounds of ert often have the indirect object in the dative (especially exirt^rjî). But compare eTLraaaco and eTTLTLfjLao: above. Cf. eTearrj avTols (Lu. 2:9), but eiri repeated (Lu. 21 34). With Tapa we note Trapexco and
after the verb.
we find h or irpbs 19) we must supply

kv
or
irapiaTr]/j.L
with indirect object.

see
:
In
TrapaTr]aav avrOi (Ac.
39)
we can
(1
either
the dative or the locative.

1
:
Cf. TaptSpevecv
Cor. 9
13).
In 2 Pet.
we may have
again there
is
the possessive da-
tive with wapeaTLv.
With
Trepl
doubt as between
:
the
(1
locative
:
and dative
in
ireplKaixaL
(Heb. 12
Ilpos
:
1),
irepiirdpeiv
Tim. 6
10), TreptTrtTrrco (Lu.
10
30).
with
irpoaTlOrjiJLL
has
the indirect object in the dative (Mt. 6

xop-ai
33),
but with
:
irpoa'ep-
the dative directly as with
opei
(Heb. 12
18, 22).
With
nor
:
wpoaexere eavrols (Lu. 17: 3) the object vovv has to be supplied, but
this is
not the case with

irpoaeKXidr]
Trpo<jKapTepovi>Tes
:
rfj
dLdaxv (Ac. 2
avru)
42),
with
(S
(Ac. 5
36),
nor with irpoaereaeu

:
(Mk. 5
33)
nor with
15
46.
irpoaecfx^veL avrois
is
(Ac. 22
2).
With
TTpoaKvXiCjO
(Mt. 27:
60) the dative

:
Compounds
merely the indirect object, but note kiri in Mk. of viro likewise generally have the dative, as
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 116.
THE CASES (hTQSEIs)

viraKOvw
543
(Lu. 10
:
(Mt. 8
27), uTrdpxw (Lu, 12
15), vwoTaaao:
17),
Tim. 4:6). Sometimes it is not easy to decide (/i) Ambiguous Examples. whether the case is locative, instrumental or dative. The example in Ac. 2 33, vrj/ovv rfj 8eîq., has already been cited. This may mean 'to lift up to the right hand,' 'at the right hand' or 'by the right hand.' Cf. also Ro. 8 24; Jo. 21 8. But it is not often that there is any serious difficulty in the matter. In 2 Cor. 11:1,
vTTOTiOeiiaL (1
: :
:
aveixâde
/jlou
ixiKpop tl a(t)poavvr]s,
note ablative, accusative, genitive.
And,
some cases remain, as with the genitive and ablative, that cannot be finally settled, the matter must simply remain in abeyance. It so happens that in Lu. 8 29 f we have all eight cases used if TToXXoTs xpovois be here locative and not instrumental. It may serve as a good exercise to discriminate in this passage each of the cases and explain the distinctive meaning and the result in this special context. The cases have kept us for a good while, but the subject is second to none in importance in Greek syntax. Nowhere has comparative philology shed more light than in the explanation according to historical science of the growth and meaning of the Greek cases.
if
:
.
CHAPTER
ADVERBS
I.
XII
('EHIPPHMATA)
Special Difficulties.
See chapter VII (Declensions) for disTlie

in chapter
cussion of the origin, formation and history of adverbs.
matter
will
come up again
XIII
(Prepositions) where the
"improper" prepositions are treated. Brugmann^ has no handhng of the subject, though Delbriick^ gives an exhaustive presentation of the matter. But even Delbriick gives less than a page to the purely syntactical phases of the adverb (p. 643), whereas Winer ^ treats the adverb only under syntax. (a) Nature of the Adverb. The first difficulty is in deciding what is an adverb. As shown in chapter VII, the adverb not only has great variety in its origin, but also wide expansion in its
so-called
syntactical
use.
In simple truth a large portion of the "parts of speech" are
adverbs.
Brugmann^ pointedly says that
it is
not possible to draw
between adverb, particle and preposition. The development of adverb into preposition, conjunction, intensive particle and even interjection was illustrated in chapter VII with perhaps sufficient fulness. To this list may be added the negative particles which are really adverbs. In particular in the Sanskrit is there
a sharp
line
difficulty in the
treatment of preposition and conjunction as
from adverb, since the indeclinable words were less distinctly divided.^ But this vagueness apphes to other members of the Indo-Germanic group.'' In Greek and Latin no distinct line can be drawn between adverbs and prepositions.'^ of Adverb. These wider and (6) The Narrower Sense more specialized forms of the adverb must be dropped out of view
distinct
2
*
Griech. Gr., pp. 250-257. Vergl. Synt., I, pp. 535-643.
W.-Th., pp. 462-473.
On
final
in adv. see Fraser, CI. Quarterly, 1908,
p. 265.
6
fl
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
p. 403.
I,
p. 536.
Giles,
Man.,
p. 341.
544
ADVERBS ('EHIPPHMATA)
before
545
we can do anything with the mere adverb which is not prepnor interjection.
a good mere adverb, for, in spite of its being a fixed case-form, it has a varied and interesting usage in the Greek sentence. The adverb has been treated by the grammars as a sort of printer's devil in the sentence. It has been given the bone that was left for the dog, if it was left. II. Adverbs with Verbs. (a) Commonest Use. This is indeed the etymology of the word and the most frequent use of the pure adverb. But one cannot say that this was the original use, as the name kiripprjiJLa might suggest. The truth is that the adverb has such a varied origin that it is difficult to make a general remark on the subject that will be true. Only this may be said, that some adverbs began to be used with verbs, some with adjectives, some absolutely, etc. At first they were not regarded as strictly adverbs, but were used progressively so (cf x^ptJ') until with most the earlier non-adverbial
is
osition, conjunction, particle
There
deal that needs to be said concerning the syntax of the
uses ceased.
(b) N. T. Usage. Winer ^ suspects that the N. T. writers did not understand the finer shades of meaning in the Greek adverbs, but this is true only from the point of view of the Attic literar}'-
and applies to the vernacular kolptj in generaL But he is wholly right in insisting on the necessity of adverbs for precise
style
definition in language.
The grammarians
list
find offence ^ in the
adverbs of the
kolvt)
as in other portions of the vocabulary.

are at
Some
of the "poetic" adverbs in Winer's
home
in the papyri
as in the N. T., like thapkarois. A few examples will suffice for the normal usage in the N. Tj See the majestic roll of the adverbs in Heb. 1:1, woKvp.epws /cat ttoXvtpottws TrdXai. Cf. (XTOvSaLorepus (Ph. 2 28), Tepiaaorepcos and rax^t-ov (Heb. 13 19), irepaLTepo: (Ac. 19 39) as examples of comparison, (c) Predicative Uses with yivofiaL and el/xL There is nothing out of the way in the adverb with 'ylvojxaL in 1 Th. 2 10, cos oaicos Kol SiKalus /cat aiikixirT(ji$ vplv rots TTLCTTevovcnv kyevrjOrj/jLev. Here the verb is not a more copula. Indeed tt/zt appears with the adverb also when it has verbal force. Thus Kadcjs a\r]6Qis eaTtv (1 Th. 2 13)
:
is
not equivalent to
Ka9<hs aXrjOks karLV.
Cf. Kadojs 'ianv aXrjdeia

rju
h
d
Tc3 Trjo-oD
(Eph. 4:21).
17
So also
17
ykvecns ourcos
:
(Mt.
18),
ovTus karlv
atrta rod avdpdoirov

1
(Mt. 19
10), rb ourcos elvai (1
Cor.
7:26).
different
Cf.
Cor. 7:7.
The adverb
2
in all these instances is
from the adjective. Cf.

1
rt /xe erotTjcras ourcos

lb., p. 463.
(Ro. 9
20) for
W.-Th.,
p. 462.
54G

Cf. also ourcos weao^v
a similar predicate use of the adverb.

ovTcos 6 Oeos
and
:
v/jllv
karlv (1 Cor. 14
25)
and
a\r]da)s in
is
Mt. 14
33.
In Ph. 4
5, 6 Kvpios
is
:
eyym, the copula earlp

32), naKpav
to be supplied
and
here the adverb

TToppco ouTos
not far from the adjective idea.
Cf. also
:
(Lu. 14
"E;^&).
(Mk. 12
34), IVa (Ph. 2
6).
has some idiomatic constructions with the adverb that are difficult from the English point of view. Thus
(d)
With
It
TO us Ka/ccos exovras
(Mt. 14
35),
and with the instrumental case
in
Mk.
34.
Cf. Lu. 7:
1.
In Enghsh
it
we
:
prefer the predicate
adjective with have (He has
bad), whereas the Greek likes the

:
adverb with ex".

KoixôTtpov 'iax^v the
So eo-xarws exî (Mk. 5 23) and in Jo. 4 52 comparative adverb. One must be willing for
Cf. ovtws exet in Ac. 7
:
the Greek to have his standpoint.

TToppoj aTrexet
(Mk. 7:6).
Ilcos
exovcnv (Ac. 15
3G) needs
1 and no com:
ment. It is a common enough Greek idiom. Cf. (Sapews exovaa, P.Br.M. 42 (B.C. 168). "Ajua e\irlô:v (Ac. 24 (e) With Participles. 26) belongs to the discussion of participles. But one may note here i]8r] TedvrjKora (Jo. 19 33) and cos p-eWovTas (Ac. 23 Cf. also the use of 15). r)5?7 with TraprjKOev (Mt. 14 15), a matter that concerns the aorist tense. But note both vvv and j/St? with eaTiv in 1 Jo. 4 3. (/) Loose Relation to the Verb or any other part of the sentence. So aKpy]v (cf, ert) in Mt. 15 16 and r-qv apxw in Jo.
:
25, for this accusative
is
really adverbial.
Cf. also to Xolttov
(Ph. 3:1), rovvavrlov (Gal. 2:7).

III. Adverbs Used with Other Adverbs. There is, to be sure, nothing unusual about this either in Greek or any other tongue. So TToKv paWov (Heb. 12 9), pdWov Kpelaaov (Ph. 1 23), paXKov
:
(Mk. 7 36) are merely normal uses barring the double comparative in the two examples which, however, have their own explanation. The compound adverbs, which are common in the N. T. (as vTepirepiaauis, Mk. 7:37; cf. ttoXutpottcos in Heb. 1 1), call for no more explanation than other compound words. Cf. KadoXov (Ac. 4 18). The Greek, like the German, easily makes compound words, and the tendency to long compound words grows with the history of language. See airepLaTrdaTccs in 1 Cor. 7: 35. For compound adverbs see chapter VII, ii, (c). For the comparison of adverbs see ib., ii, (e). IV. Adverbs with Adjectives. A typical illustration is found in 1 Tim. 3 16, opoXoyovpevcjos /xe7a. So ourco pkyas in Rev. 16 18. The instances are not very numerous in the N. T., since indeed,
TreptaaoTepov
: :
especially in the Gospels, the adjective
is
not excessively abundant.
ADVERBS ("EniPPHMATA)
In Ac. 24
:
547
both verb and adfxtWu^v tl aKpi^ktl
25, to vvv exov, the participle being
jective, causes
no
difficulty.
In Ac. 23
20,
cos
arepov irvvdaveadaL
irepl
ahrov,
we
have the adverbial use of

with
evirapedpov in 1
as well
:
as cLKpLêaTepov.
Cf. airepiaTCKTTU^
Cor. 7 35.
recall V. Adverbs with Substantives. this gives basis for adjective a the well as that the substantive as example in the T. typical N. is NCv a River). idiom (cf. Jordan
Here indeed one
may
Thus we
:
find
rw vvv
vvv (1
Kaipco
(Ro. 3
26),
Tfj
vvv 'lepovaaXrjiJ. (Gal.

:
Tim. 4:8), t6v vvv alusva (2 Tim. 4 10). 4 25), fco^s TTjs has virtually the force of the adjective, the adverb indeed Here just as the substantive in this descriptive sense gave rise to the adjective. The English can use the same idiom as "the now time," though this particular phrase is awkward. The Greek has so much elasticity in the matter because of the article which
gives
xhpoit
(1
a great advantage over the Latin. ^ Cf. also fj 5e avm 'lepovaaXrjiJ. (Gal. 4 Tim. 5:5), 26),
17
:
6e
6vtw^
iivui
tyjs
K\r]are<j)s
(Ph. 3
14), 6 rore Koa/jLos (2 Pet.
3:6).
VI. Adverbs
named above may be

(2 Cor. 1
:
Treated as Substantives.^ here appealed to. It
The very adverbs

is
especially true of
words of place and time.

17),
to.
Thus
: :
ck tojv avoo dn.1 (Jo.
23), to vai
avw (Col. 3
1 f.),
rd vvv (Ac. 5
38), ews tov vvv
(Mk. 13
26
:
19), a-Ko TOV vvv (Lu. 1

:
48)
and
often.
Cf. toTs keT (Mt.

in the
4 9). So TXrjaiov always once as preposition with genitive (Jo. 4:5). article (Mt. 5 43), but may be used without it
71), TO. w8e (Col.
:
N. T. save
has the
It usually
in the
nominative
28).
case (Lu. 10 :29).
striking instance of the adverb treated as

x<^pts
substantive appears in
twv
Trape/cros (2
Cor. 11
Other
examples of the adverb with the

1
:
article are axpt^ rod Sevpo (Ro.

oirlau
13),
k
:
Tuv
:
KOLTCO
(Jo.
23),
els to.
(Mk. 13
:
16), tovs e^co
(1
Cor. 5
12), to eôoOev Kal to eawOev
(Lu. 11
40),
:
ets
to efxirpoaOev
(Lu. 19
is
4).
In
toTs (xaKpav
and
In
toTs kyyvs
Tfj e^rjs
(Eph. 2
:
17) the
adverb
to sup-
rather adjectival in idea.
(Ac. 21
1)
we have
17/xepa, though the text of Lu. 7:11 reads ev tc3 e^^s. Here the adverb is treated rather as an adjective, but the point of distinction between the use as substantive and adjective is not
ply, of course,
always
19 :40).
clear.
Cf. also
it is
17
avptov
(Mt. 6
34), irepl
Trjs
ariixepov
(Ac.
But
is
not merely
when
the adverb has
th(^
article
that
it
treated as a substantive.
Prepositions are used with

it is
adverbs without any article. we have two words or one.

as vTrepheLva (2 Cor. 10
'
:
Then
not always dear whether

as well as
I,
'I'hus editors print virkp eKelva as well
16), virep
p. 798.
irepLcraod
"
virepeK-
Ricm. and Goolzcr, Synt.,
Cf.
K.-C,
p. 551.
548

(Eph. 3
:
irepL(T(xov
20), virep \iav as well as virepKlav (2 Cor. 11
5).
d7r6
Cf.
cTTttra, eirauoo, ecjiaira^,
and
ecos
aprt in 1 Cor. 15
6.
Thus
Cor. 9:2), aw' avcoOev ews kcltco (Mk. 15 38), aw' aprt (Mt. 23:39), dTro p.aKpbdev (Mt. 27:55), dTro Trpcol (Ac. 28:23), ajua xpcot (Mt. 20 1), cos aprt (Mt. 11 12), ecos rpls (Lu. 22 34), eojs cTrrdKts (Mt. 18 21 f.), ^cos e^co (Ac. 21 5), ecos ecrco (Mk. 14 54), ecos TTore (Mt. 17 17), ecos co5e (Lu. 23 5), etc. For this doubling
irepvaL (2
: :
of adverbs see
e/cros ft
/ti?
(1
Cor. 14
5) in
the realm of conjunctions.
Moulton {Prol., p. 99) finds in the papyri e/c Tore, O.P. 486 (ii/A.D.), and note dTro wkpvaL (Deissmann, B. S., p. 221). Vn. The Pregnant Use of Adverbs. Just as the prepositions h and ets are used each with verbs of rest and motion (and Trapd with locative or accusative) so adverbs show the same absence of
,
minute uniformity. Hot, for instance, is absent from both the LXX and the N. T., as is 6tol. Instead we find xoO hwayei (Jo. 3 8) and owov kyoo vwayw (Jo. 13 33), but wbdev epxerai (Jo. 3 8) and odev k^ri\dov (Mt. 12 44). So also epxerat ket (Jo. 18 3) Hke
:
:
our "come here."

lar in Ac. 21
is
Tovs eKetae ovras, the usual

:
3.
But on the other hand in Ac. 22 5, 'a^wv Kal word would be e/cet. But e/ceto-e is reguWiner calls this an "abuse" of language, which
:
putting
it
rather too strongly, since
It is largely a
it is found in the best Greek. matter of usage, for with w5e and hdaSe the ideas of
hie and hue had long coalesced, while 'i^cjodep, eawdev, koltcj mean both 'without' (Mt. 23 27) and 'from without '(Mk. 7 18), 'within' (Mt. 7: 15) and 'from within' (Mk. 7: 23), 'below' (Mt. 4 6) and 'from below' (Jo. 8 23). Cf. êrd,3a hdev kei (Mt. 17 20) and
: : : : :
evdev
eKeWeu
(Lu. 16
26).
In Mt. 25
it is
24, 26, cwaycov odev oh

69ev
diecrKopircaas,
ol airo TTJs
we have
With
eKeldev ov
:
merged into
by
attraction.
In
'IraXtas
(Heb. 13 24)
e/c
writer takes.
rots
e/c
we
12)
uncertain what standpoint the have not only the normal idiom like
ot
TepLTOfxrjs
(Ro. 4
and
rrjs
Kaiaapos oUias (Ph. 4
22),
but the pregnant use where
could have occurred.
Thus
dpat rd
17) with which compare 6 ets tov aypop (Mk. Mt. 24 18). Cf. 6 7rar?7p 6 e^ oi-paiôD in Lu. 11 13, though some MSS.- do not have the second 6. The correlation of adverbs belongs to the chapter on Pronouns. Vin. Adverbs as Marks of Style. Thus dprt is not found in Mark, Luke, James, Jude nor Hebrews, though fairly often in Matthew, John and Paul. Nvi>, on the other hand, is frequent throughout the N. T. as a Avhole. Abbott ^ has an interesting disr^s
:
ot/ctas
(Mt. 24
13
16,
in
W.-Th., p. 472.
Joh. Gr., pp. 22
flf.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 258.
ADVERBS ('EniPPHMATA)
549
cussion of Kal vvv in John and Luke. Nujî is found only in Acts, Paul and Hebrews, the most literary portions of the N. T. Then again Mark has abundant use of eWvs, but not eWeos, while Matthew employs both. John uses each only three times. Abbott^ notes that wherever Matthew uses evdvs it is found in the parallel'
part of Mark.
insists
EWkcos prevails in
in idea in the
on difference
1
Luke (Gospel and Acts) Abbott two words, eWews ('immediately'),

.
eWvs ('straightway')while in
Cor. eiruTa
So
is
in
Matthew
rore is exceedingly
common,
rather frequent, though the two words
have different ideas. Then again kyyvs is more common in John than all the Synoptists together.^ The context must often decide the exact idea of an adverb, as with eKadeêro ourcos (Jo. 4:6). Cf. cos rjv ev tc3 ttXoiw (Mk. 4 36). IX. The Adverb Distinguished from the Adjective. (a) Different Meaning. The adjective and the adverb often
:
Thus in Jo. 8 29, ovk 6.4>r\Kkv ixe means that 'he did not leave me alone.' As an adverb, if the position allowed it, it would be not only did he leave, but,' etc., just the opposite. In 2 Tim. 4:11 nSvos means that Luke is alone with Paul. So in Lu. 24 18 av ixbvo^ may be contrasted with ixbvov -Klarevaov (Lu. 8 50). The point is specially clear with irpoiros and rpcorov. Thus in Ac. 3 26 we have
radically different things.
fxovov
:
mean
fjLovov,
the adjective
'
v/jlIv
TpooTou avaarijcas,
is
not vfuv
first for
irpwTois.
It is
not 'you as
:
chief,'
but 'the thing
done
you.'
So also Ro. 2
4
:
9 {'lovbalov re
kyairwiiev, otl
irpdrov Kal "EWrjvos).
But
lyûSs.
in 1 Jo.
19 note
first
17^1615
avTos TrpcoTos rjycnrriaev
'God
(Jo.
:
is
the
:
one
who
loves.'
Cf.
where John is the first one to come to the tomb. In Jo. 1 41 the MSS. vary between Trpcoros and TpoJTov (W. H.). One can but wonder here if after all irpuTos is not the correct text with the implication that John also found his brother James. The delicate implication may have been easily overlooked by a scribe. Cf. also the difference between IXdXet opdus (Mk. 7: 35) and avaar-qdi evrt tov$ irbbas gov opdos (Ac. 14 10). The English has a similar distinction in "feel bad" and "feel badly," "look bad" and "look badly." We use "well" in both
also fjXdev wpcoTos
eis
to
fjLvr}/j,eiov
20
4)
senses.
(6)
Cf. eSpatos in
Cor. 7 37.
:
Difference
in
Greek and English
Idiom.
But the
Greek uses the adjective often where the English has the adverb. That is, the Greek prefers the personal connection of the adjective
with the subject to the adverl)ial connection with the verb. So we have avTop.a.Tr} yrj KapTro(f>opel (Mk. 4 28) and ai'TO/iaTT] -qvolyr]
ri
:
lb., p. 20.
lb., p. 19.
550
(Ac. 12
(j)ui8Los

:
NEW TESTAMENT
is
10).
In Lu. 21 34 the same construction

:
found with
r]
rjnepa eKeivr].
The ancient Greek idiom
of the adjective
:
rather than the locative of time appears in Ac. 28

rjXdoiJLev.
13, devrepaioL
So opdpLval (Lu. 24:22). The same use of the adjective rather than the adverb meets us in 1 Cor. 9 17, d yap huv tovto irpaaau} ei 8e aKwv, just as we see it in the ancient Greek. Cf. the Latin nolens volens. See Ro. 8 20. In /xecos the Greek has an adjective that we have to use a phrase for. Thus /xtaos hjioiv aTTjKeL (Jo. 1 26), 'there stands in the midst of you.' Cf. a verydifferent idea in -qfiepas fiearjs (Ac. 26 13), 'middle of the day.' X. Adverbial Phrases. (a) Incipient Adverbs. Some of these are practically adverbs, though they retain the case-inflection and may even have
:
the
TO
article.
Thus
2
:
T-qv
apxw
:
(Jo-
8
12
25),
:
to
\oit6v (Ph. 3:1),
ToiivavTLov (Gal.
ir'Ke'laTov
:
7), TO irpwTov (Jo.
16), to irpoTepov (Jo.

:
6 62),
:
(1
Cor. 14
27), to Ka6' qp.kpav (Lu. 19
47), ToD XotxoO
These expressions are not technically adverbs, 10), etc. though adverbial in force. Cf. also the cognate instrumental like
(Eph. 6
29). So O.P. 1162, 5 (iv./A.D.). Prepositional Phrases. These adjuncts have the substantial force of adverbs. Indeed there is little practical difference in structure between dTro -wkpvai (2 Cor. 9 2) and virepXiav (2 Cor. 11 5), vTepdvo: (Eph. 4 10) and eccs kcltco (Mk. 15 38). Since the uncial MSS. had no division between words, we have to depend on the judgment of the modern editor and on our own for the distinction between an adverb like Tapaxpwo- (Lu. 1 64) and an adverbial phrase like xapa tovto (1 Cor. 12 15). Cf. also kweXapq. xalpeL (Jo. 3
(b)
: :
KHva (Ac. 7: 43),
virtpeKeiva (2
Cor. 10
16), Ka96\ov (Ac.
Ro. 7
13 Kad'
virepl3o\r]u is
:
are KaT' i8iav (Mt. 14

(Phil. 14), KaT
xl^vxvs
used with an adjective. 13), KaTo. /xovas (Mk. 4

:
4: 18). In Other examples

KaTo. eKovffLOV
:
10),
kviavTov
(Heb. 10
1),
ck SevTepov
(Col. 3
:
23), k^ apxvs (Jo. 6
64), dx'
:
(Mk. 14 apxvs (2 Th. 2

tp6:tols (1
72),
e/c
13), els
:
Kevbv (Ph. 2
ev
16), kv aXrjdeia
(Mt. 22
eir'
16),
Cor. 15
Kad'
:
3),
8LKaLoavvrf
(Ac.
hv
:
17:31),
oKrjOeias
:
(Lu. 22:59),
eKTevela
:
ripLepav
(Mk. 14
fiepovs
:49),
wktI
(1
Th. 5
2),
h
:
(Ac. 26
fikpos Tt,
7),
dTro
(Ro. 11
25),
nepovs (1 Cor. 12
aird /xtds
27.
Cf.
11
18),
KttTd fxepos
(Heb. 9:5),
fxeaov
:
(Lu. 14
list,
:
18), els to iravTeXes
(Heb.
:
7 25).
:
With
we have quite a
ixeaco
els
like dj'd p-eaop
(Mt. 13
:
25),
k peaov
ixeaov
(Mt. 13
49), eu
(Mk. 6
47), 5td fxeaov (Lu. 4

:
30), 5id
(Lu. 17: 11),

ixkaov
to fxeaov (Lu. 5
:
19), eis pkaov
mTd
(Ac. 27: 27), ixeaov (Ph. 2
15).
In
Mk.
14
and phrase occur together,
a-ljpepou TavTj] tt) pvktL.
(Mk. 14: 60), 30 adverb This is not a

:
ADVERBS ('EnipPHMATA)
551
complete list by any means, but it will suffice to illustrate the A striking example is found in 1 Cor. point under discussion. 12: 31, Ka9' virepôXrip 686v vixZv deiKw/jn, where the adverbial phrase has practically the force of an adjective with d86v. Clearly, then, many of the adverbs grew out of these prepositional phrases like
irapavTiKa (2 Cor. 4: 17), e/cTraXai (2 Pet. 2
excos
(c)
:
3), etc.
Cf. even vovv-
(Mk. 12
is
:34).
Participles.
11
Some
participles
This
not merely true of adverbs

:
come to be used adverbiall3\ made from participles, like optus

:
(Mk.
11
:
32), d/jLoXoyovfxepus (1
it
Tim. 3
16), virepâWovTcos (2
Cor.
23),
but
also applies to rw ovtl (Ro. 7: 23), to vvv exov (Ac.

:
24
25), Tvxop (1 Cor. 16
6)
and verbals hke
draT/caarws (1 Pet.
is
5:2).
like
Besides, the intensive use of the participle
adverbial
case
:
in effect like v\oya>v evXoyrjau ae (Heb. 6:14).

\f/ev86iJ.evoL
Then again a
{Gr. of
:
(Mt. 5:11)
is
in point.
:
Cf. deXcov in Col. 2
18.
See also
p. 258)
irpoadels elirev
(Lu. 19
11)
compares with on Verbal Nouns.

(rf)
Trpoadelaa
which Blass ertKtv (Gen. 38

This
N. T.
Gk.,
5).
See chapter not

chief
The Verb Used Adverbially.

(j)ddvo),
is,
of course,
true technically, but only in the result.
The
old
Greek idiom
So
25).
with \apdavui and
where the participle expressed the

2)
idea and the verb was subordinate, occurs twice in the N. T.

eXadop TLPes êpiaapres (Heb. 13
:
and
'
TpokcfiOaaep \eycjOP
(Mt. 17:
is
But
ing,'
is
it
must be borne
in
mind that the Greek idiom
perfectly
consistent in this construction, as they escaped notice in entertain'
he got the start in saying.'

:
Cf. \adpq. elsewhere in
N. T.
It
not necessary in Ac. 12

in sense.
16, kirkp.Ptp Kpovcap,
to take the verb as
an adverb
infinitive
:
It is simply, 'he
continued knocking.'
The
:^?i^n
may likewise
present the chief idea as in TpoeXalSep

:
ixvplaai
(Mk. 14 8), irpoaWeTo TvepyPai (Lu. 20 11 f.), hke the Heb. nV^^. But in Mk. 12 4 we have the regular Greek idiom ^
:
iroKip
is
airecTeLKep.
Cf. Ac. 12
3 wpoaWeTO crvWajSeip.
:
This idiom
ex-
ceedingly
('he
LXX.^ In Lu. 6 48, eaKa\l/eu Kai el5advpep dug and went deep'), we have an idiom somewhat like our
in the
common
it," etc.
(jjTJTe
English vernacular "he went and dug," "he has gone and done Cf. Ro. 10: 20 airoToXpq. /cat XeyeL, Mt. 18: 3 eap p.ri arpa-
Kai yeprjade. But I doubt if deXoi with the infinitive is to be taken in the N. T. either adverbially or as the mere expletive for the future tense. In Jo. 7: 17 êX^; TOLtlp means 'is wiUing to
do.'
So
in Jo. 8
1
44, etc.
W.-Th.,
C. and
The
text
is
obscure in Col. 2 18 and

:
p. 4(iS.
S., Scl.
from the
LXX,
p. 97.
552
there
NEW TESTAMENT
deXcjov may have an adverbial force. Blass^ conceives that in Mt. 6 5, <i)L\ov(jLv TpoaevxâdaL, 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)
I.
The Name.
later
(a)
As is often the case, so here the name describes development, not the original, nor the essential, idea. Some Postpositive. Prepositions may indeed be post.
positive like the Latin
(anastrophe)
And
(6)
mecum, the Greek tovtov xo-p<-v, tUvuv irkpi In the Turkish tongue^ they are all postpositive. Giles {Manual, p. 341) thinks that oju/xdrcoj/ ciTro is earlier than
dTTO o/x/xdrcoi'.
Not Originally Used with Verbs.

.
Moreover,
the
name
later
implies that they properly belong with verbs (prae-verbia,
TTpodeaeLs)
development.
But we now know that the use with verbs was a much There are indeed in Greek no "inseparable"
which are used only in composition with verbs.
d/x0t is
prepositions,
In
like
the Attic, outside of Xenophon, avv was used mainly in composition.^
In the N. T.
found only with compound verbs

cases.^
d/x(/)tjSdXXc<;,
aii4)ikvvviJLL.
In the Sanskrit most of the verbal pre-
fixes
(c)
can be traced to adverbs with
Explanation. Hence the name must be explained. The later grammarians used the term for those adverbs which were used in composition with verbs and in connection with the cases of nouns. Both things had to be true according to this definition. But it will be seen at once that this definition is arbitrary. The use with verbs in composition was the last step, not the first, in the development. Besides, what is to be said about those adverbs that are used, not with verbs, but with cases, and no longer appear as mere adverbs? Take avev, for instance, with the ablative. It is not found in composition with verbs nor by itself
1
"^
Monro, Horn.
Gr., pp. 123, 147.
et en Franâis, 1894, p. 51) says:
Courtoz (Les Prefixes en Grec, en Lat. "Outre les dix-huit propositions que nous
grec, quelques p articulcs insi^pa-
venons de passer en revue,

8ont
d, dpt
il
y a encore, en
rables,qui s'eniploient coninic prC>fixes dans les
ou
(pi.,
bv<T,
fa et
vr]."
mots composes. Ccs particules But these arc not the "prepositions" under
'
discussion.
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
p. 414.
553
554

It
is,
NEW TESTAMENT
The grammars
apart from a noun.

call it
of course, a preposition.
an "improper" or adverbial preposition. It is only "improper" from the standpoint of the definition, not from that of the Greek language. The truth seems to be that by preposition one must mean a word used with cases of nouns and many of which came to be used in composition with verbs. The facts do
not square with the other definition.
II.
The Origin
of Prepositions.
Originally Adverbs. This is now so well recognised that it seems strange to read in Winer ^ that "prepositions e.g. often assume the nature of adverbs, and vice versa," even though he adds "that the prepositions are adverbs originally." Giles^ puts the matter simply and clearly when he says: "Between adverbs and prepositions no distinct line can be drawn." Thus even
(a)
in Homer dM</)i, xepi, etc., appear still as adverbs.^ Delbriick'' goes a bit further and says that originally the prepositions were placeadverbs. Brugmann^ qualifies that to " mostly, " and he adds that we cannot draw a sharp line between the use as adverb and the
use as pre-verb or preposition.^

(6)
Reason for Use of Prepositions.

an adverb specialized to
"The
preposition
is,
therefore, only
define a case-usage."^
also. The case alone was enough between words, but, as language developed, the burden on the cases grew heavier. The analytic tendency in language is responsible for the growth of prepositions.^ The prepositions come in to help out the meaning of the case in a given context. The notion, therefore, that prepositions "govern" cases must be discarded definitely. Farrar^ clearly perceived this point. " It is the case which indicates the meaning of the preposition, and not the preposition which gives the meaning to the case." This conception explains the use and the non-use of a preposition like ev, for instance, with the locative, awo or wapa with the ablative, etc. In the Sanskrit the prepositions do not exist as a separate class of words, though a good many adverbs are coming to be used with the oblique cases (except the dative) to make clearer
This definition gives the reason

at
first
to express the relation
the case-idea.'"
2 Man., etc., p. 341. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 123.
1 3
W.-Th., p. 356.
Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,
lb., p. 659.
I,
p. 659.
Cf.
4 6
6 7
Cf. Grundl., IV, p. 134.

9
Griech. Gr., p. 429. lb., p. 430.

Giles,

lb.
Man.,
etc., p.
341.
" Whitney,
Sans. Gr., p. 414.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)
(c)
555
the cases vary greatly in their history.

as adverbs, as cvv, for instance.
Varying History. The adverbs that come to be used with Some cease to be used
Others continue (besides the
use with cases and with verbs) to be employed occasionally as
Rev. 21:21; Kara eh, Mk. 14:19; v-rrep kyu}, are used both with nouns, and in composition with verbs, like ev, irepL and the other seventeen "proper" Others 'A/i0t occurs only in composition. classical prepositions. are not used in composition with verbs, but are no longer mere adverbs like iivev. Others are employed both as adverb and with cases of nouns, like ana, e^co, etc. Some occur both as preposiadverbs
(d.j'd
:
els,
.
2 Cor. 11
23)
Some
tion
substantive, adverb
and conjunction, like axph fJ^^xPh '<^5, irXrjp. Some figure as and preposition with case, like x^pt*'III. Growth in the Use of Prepositions.
(a)
Once No Prepositions. As
is
already noted, in the Sanskrit
no separate class of prepositions, though a number of adverbs are already coming to be used as prepositions, and verbs have some prefixes. Some adverbs in Greek are occasionally used with cases, hke aîcas and the genitive, but are not prepositions. Here we see the use of prepositions started, tentatively afany rate. We may suppose a time further back in the history of the IndoGermanic tongues when no adverbs were used with cases, when
there
the cases stood

(6)
all
alone.
as Adverbs in Homer. Not only do the "adverbial" prepositions have their usual freedom, but a considerable number of adverbs are found in composition
The Prepositions Still Used
with verbs.
prepositions.
Homer marks
in the increase of prepositions.
a distinct advance over the Sanskrit There is in Homer a real class of

of the preposition to
far from being estab'on both sides,' adverbs, simply be lished. inside.' ^ So common is the separation of the preposition from the verb that the term tmesis is used for it, but no strict line can be drawn between this usage and the ordinary adverb.^ It is not (c) Decreasing Use as Adverbs after Homer.
cases of
But in Homer the limitation nouns and composition with verbs is

'A^tî,
h,
etc.,
may
'
common
thereafter for the eighteen classical prepositions, those
used in composition with verbs as well as with cases of nouns, to occur separately as adverbs. It is not common, but still posThis list comprises aixcpi, ava, avri, a-Ko, 5td, e'j, e^, kv, kiri, sible. Now these words Kara, ixeTO., irapa, irepl, irpb, rpos, avv, virep, vtto.
were used with steady increase so that one of the marks of later
1
Moiiro, Horn. Gr., p. 123.
"
lb., p. 121.
556
Greek
only
is

is
NEW TESTAMENT
as well as the
the abundance of
compound verbs
more
extensive use of these prepositions with the various cases.

this true,
Not
but continually new adverbs joined the already large list of adverbial prepositions employed with cases. In a word, as Blass' remarks, the use of a preposition with nouns was "a practice which in the course of the history of the language became more and more adopted in opposition to the employment of the simple case." The Emperor Augustus was noted for his excessive use of prepositions in his effort to speak more clearly (quod quo facilius exprimeret, Suetonius) .^ Other Latin writers
show the same tendency. (d) Semitic Influence in N. T.
The N. T. writers were once supposed to make such free use of prepositions because of the Hebrew and Aramaic. But the N. T. does not make abundant
use of
all
the prepositions.
'A/x0t
has dropped out entirely save

preposition.^
:
in composition,
and
dra
is
nearly confined to the distributive use

It occurs
and ava
neaop, a sort of
compound
only
12 times, omitting the adverbial use in Rev. 21
21.
'AvtL
appears
avd' ojv.
22 times, but as Moulton'* explains, five of these are due to
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,
Krebs has made a careful study Helbing has done for Herodotus^ and Johannessohn for the LXX.'' They show the same general tendency towards the increased use of some prepositions to the disuse of others. For the N. T., Moulton^ has made a 'Eu and ets far careful calculation which is worth reproducing. outnumber any of the other prepositions in the N. T.^ And h Moulton takes h as unity and leads ets by a good margin. finds the other N. T. prepositions ranging as follows: dm .0045,
already going the
way
of dû^t.
of the prepositions in Polybius,^ as
avTi .008, airo .24, 5td .24,
ets .64, eK
.34, ext .32, Kara .17,
fj-erd
.17,
Trapd .07, Trept .12, irpo .018, irpos .25, avv .048, VTrep .054, viro .08.
The
eTTt,
three
commonest prepositions
in Herodotus^" are
ets,
and
is kv,
in this order.
In Thucydides and Xenophon the order
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 121.

Cf. Farrar,
Gk. Synt., p. 95; Egger, Gr. Comp., p. 195. ^ lb. Moulton, Prol., p. 100. s Die Prap. bei Polyb., 1882; cf. p. 3. " Die Priip. bei Herod, und andern Hist., 1904. ^ Johannessohn, Der Gebr. der Casus und der Priip. in der Sept., Tl. 1, 1910, Cf. also C. and S., p. 80 f.
2
>
Prol., p. 98.
9
f.,
lb., p. 62.
" See
Helbing, Priip. bei Herod., p. 8
for the facts here used.
els
557
and
ewl.
But Xenophon
various books.
varies the order of frequency in his In Polybius the three chief prepositions are /card,
Trpoj, els; in Diodorus els, Kara, irpos; in Dionysius h, eirl, els; in Josephus {War) wpos, els, Kara, (A7it.) els, eirl, irpos; in Plutarch ev, irpbs, els; in Dio Cassius ev, els, ext. In the N. T. the three main ones, as seen above, are ev, els, eK, though ewi is not far behind e/c. In the hterary kolvt] it will be seen that the use of els is nearly double
that of
ev,
Hebrews.^
ing.
whereas in the N. T. els is ahead of ev only in Mark and In the vernacular kolvt], ev makes a rather better showlarge increase of the adverbial prepositions in the
calls for special
The
N. T.,
be
as in the
kolvt],
treatment a
little later.
It
may
here remarked that they
number
42, counting varjdng forms of the
same word
(e)
like oinadev, b-wlaw.
In
Modern Greek. The

still
varjdng history of the eighteen
prepositions goes
further.^
Thus
avTi{s)
survives in the ver's),
nacular as well as avb

{k6.)
(aire), Blo. {yLo), els {es, ere,
fj-era (fxe),
Kara
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
in the
for ev and Tpos, /xe for avv. Then again all prepositions modern Greek use the accusative case as do other adverbs,
els
and sometimes even with the nominative (yia Go4)bs, 'as a sage'). In a sense then the Greek prepositions mark a cycle. They show the return of the accusative to its original frequency. They have lost the fine distinctions that the old Greek prepositions once possessed
when they were used to help out the ideas of the cases. They drop out before the rise of other prepositions which more clearly
The so-called improper prepositions are more sharply defined in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., pp. 107 ff.). But in the N. T. the prepositions have not gone so far in their history.
exhibit the adverbial side of the preposition.
IV. Prepositions in Composition with Verbs.

(a)
this
Not the Main Function. As has already been showTi, was not the original use of what we call prepositions, though
name
to this
this usage has given the
group of
wortls.
lêsides
it
debars one technically from calling those numerous adverbs \)yc\)ositions which are used with cases, l)ut not used in composition with verbs. But no "inseparable" prepositions were developed
1
Moulton, Prol., p. 62. See Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr.,
p.
365
f.,
for careful
comparison between anc.
and mod. Gk.
Cf. Hatz., Einl., p. 151.
558
NEW TESTAMENT
in Greek,^
composition.
lects, p.
chiefly
though in the N. T. afj.(j)l does not appear outside of In most dialects aix(t)i was obsolete (Buck, Gk. Dia102). In modern Greek dm-, xapd- and k- (ê) are used in composition (Thumb, Handb., p. 99), but 6% occurs
with accusative.
Preposition Alone. Sometimes indeed the preposition is (ellipsis) and the verb has to be supplied, as in ovk 'ivi So virep eyco in 2 Cor. 11 23. Of. dXX' (Gal. 3 28) for ovk eveaTi. ava ('but up!') in Homer. This ellipsis does not differ greatly from the common use of tmesis in Homer, where the preposition is regarded more as an adverb. The use of prepositions in composition (c) Increasing Use. increased with the history of the Greek language. One character.^ istic of the later Greek is the number of compound verbs employed till impression and will remain so one This is a matter partly of " Xo-y<KePTepos grammarian" arrives "who will toil right through the papyri and the kolvt] literature."^ No one is anxious for that task, but Krebs^ is able to say that verbs compounded with This prepositions play a noteworthy role in the later Greek. like ev-zca/ceco, but new compounds etc., simply true of is not "there is a growing tendency to use the compounds, especially those with 5td, Kara and avv, to express what in the oldest Greek could be sufficiently indicated by the simplex."^ The N. T. does
(b)
used alone
:
not indeed show as lavish a use of compound verbs as does Polybius,
the chief representative of the literary
kolvt]
of his time.
But
these 5t7rXd belonged to the language of the people in Aristotle's
time^ and the papyri show a
common
use of
compound
less
verbs.^
As compared with Polybius the N. T. makes

writers.^
1
use of certain
verbs, but the matter varies with different verbs
and
different
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 123.
shows a great variety of uses of the prep, with due to transl. from the Heb., partly to the koivti. Cf C. and S., p. 88, for list. Cf Johannessohn, Der Gebr. d. Casus und der Priip. in der LXX. 3 Moulton, Prol., p. 118. Cf. W.-Th., p. 426. * Zur Rect. der Casus in der spateren hist. Grac, III. Heft, p. 3. " Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 70. 6 Moulton, Prol., p. 115. ^ Mayser, Gr. d. griech. Pap., pp. 486 ff. Kuhring (de praepositionum Graecarum in chartis Aegyptiis usu quaestiones selectae, 1906) and Rossberg (de praep. Graec. in chartis Aegypt. Ptol. aetatis usu, 1909) have both attacked the problems in the pap., as Geyer (Observationes epigrapliicae de praep. Graec. forma et usu, 1880) has done for the inscr. * Moulton, Prol., p. 116 f. The great work on prepositions is Tycho Mommsen's Beitr. zu der Lehre von den griech. Prap., 1895.
2
The
LXX
in particular
verbs, partly
(d)
559
is
Repetition after Verb.
Sometimes the preposition

Greek. The
kirl.
repeated after the verb, as in the older most frequently repeated are oltto, k^, els, h,
prepositions
is
This
partly
because these prepositions are so common partly because they emphasize the local notions of 'from,' 'in,' Perhaps also the preposition in or 'upon,' and 'to' or 'into.' The papyri and inscriptions down. composition is a bit worn though hardly so preposition, the show the same repetition of
in
the N. T. and
frequently,
air'
if
one
:
may
judge by his impressions.

arro
is
See
airrjXOev
avTov (Mk. 1 42). most part the preposition

also airapdfi
oltt'
With
indeed Winer ^ finds that for the repeated in the N. T. Thus we note
:
avrcov
:
(Mt. 9
15), (K^taLpdrai
air'
kfxov
:
(Lu. 16
3,
but not so in 10 42), cnrrjWaxOaL dx' avTov (Lu. 12 58), aireOaveTe dro Tuv ffTOLxelo)v (Col. 2 20), air' avTOjf airoâPTes (Lu. 5:2), cnreireaav
:
a-KO TU)P 6(l)9a\fxQiv

a4)0pl(TeL air'
(Ac. 9
18), dTi:op<t)avLadevTes
:
acj)'
vixoiv
(1
Th. 2
17),
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
Likewise
(Mt. 13 (Ac. 26
kêKOTTTjs
52),
but not 2 37). may be repeated as with e/c/3dXXet k rod drjaavpov eK aov eêXeuo-erai (Mt. 2:6), eâipoviJLePOS k tov XaoO
(Lu. 13
27,
17), elêXeâfxrjv
rod Koafiov (Jo. 15
19),
:
rrjs
Kara ^vaiv
(Ro. 11
24), eêireaav
tGjv xî-P^v
(Ac. 12 7), eKiropevoixepov

:
TOV (XTop-aTos (Mt. 15: 11),
eK(t)vyeiv
tov oIkov (Ac. 19
16).
Verbs compounded with ets "uniformly repeat eis" (WinerThayer, p. 430). So, for instance, eia'nyayov (Lu. 22 54), daikvai, (Ac. 3:3), darikdev (Mt. 2 21), dairopevov-ai (Mk. 1 21), eia</)peis
: :
(Ac. 17:20).
With
often
k we observe the repetition in some verbs appears,
though
occurs instead both where motion is implied and where the idea is simply that of rest (pregnant construction). As is well known, k and eh are really the same word. Hence the rigid diseis
tinction between the
are
two prepositions cannot be insisted on. There two extremes about eh and ev, one to blend them entirely because of alleged Hebraism, the other to insist on complete distinction always.
As a
rule they are distinct,
but eh frequently
encroached on ev where one has to admit the practical identity, like eh oUbv eaTLv (Mk. 2:1, marg. in W. H.), 6 oop eh top koKttov For the frequent LXX examples sec Tov Trarpos (Jo. 1 18), etc.
:
Conybcare and Stock,

only examples of
p. 81.
Still,
for the sake of uniformity,

'ep.â\pas
are here given, like
tw
Tpi'/3Xup
(Mt. 26
23), efi^pLfxcofxepos
1
iavTij (Jo. 11
p. 427.
38), evyey paufxepr]
rais
W.-Th.,
560

Cor. 3:2),
:
NEW TESTAMENT
KapSlais (2
kv Vfuv
evd7]ij.ovvTes kv tCo aoifxaTt.

ttj
(Ph. 2
:
13), heixetvav kv
viuv (Col. 3
16), hTpv(f)oovTes kv
(2 Cor. 5:6), evepyuv (Heb. 8:9), kvoiKtiTCj) ev rats (XTrdrats (2 Pet. 2 13).
dLadrjKy
:
such as eTrt/Se/SrjKcbs kiri with accusative (Mt. 21:5), eTLâXkei evrt with accusative (Lu. 5 36), kirrjpev eir' epik (Jo. 13 18), ecpaXoixevos eir' avrovs (Ac. 19 16),
kri repeated,
: : :
A number
of verbs
have
Tre\ev(7eTaL eirl ae
ctt'
(Lu.
38),
eir'
:
35),
7rt5e eirl
ras kt\. (Ac. 4

kt\. (Lu. 1
:
29), kireKetTO
eir'
avT^ (Jo. 11
:
eirej3\\l/ev eirl ttjv
48), eweTreaev
:
avTOV (Lu. 1
7r'
12),
ovSevl
avruv eTLTeirrcoKos (Ac. 8
16), hwLplxf/avTes
:
avTov (1 Pet. 5
CTTt
7), k-KLTLdkaaiv kirl rovs kt\.

:
(Mt. 23
kirl
4), ewoLKodo-
liel
Tov ktK. (1 Cor. 3
12), kTtoLKobop.ridk.VTes
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).
similar rarity as to repetition exists in the case of Kara, but

KaT-qyoptlTe Kar' avrov (Lu.
we note
23
14), KaraKauxoicrde
Kara
rrjs
a\r]9eias (Jas.
14).
Very seldom is 4:1, cf. 1 Th. 2

Ilept is
jrepl kfik
irapa
repeated as in
TrapeXd/Jere Trap' fjpcbu (1
Th.
13; 2 Th. 3 :6).
repeated with more verbs than rapd.

:
Thus
Treptaorpdi/'at
:
(Ac. 22
6), -Kepie^wapkvoL irepl
to.
kt\. (Rev. 15
6), irepi-
/cctrat Trept
tov kt\. (Lu. 17: 2), TvepLecnraTO itepl iroXXriv (Lu. 10 :40).
critical
kvuTTLov)
IIpo,
text,
like /xerd, shows no example of repetition in the though some MSS. read irpoTopevar] irpb Tpoadoirov (for
1
:
in
Lu.
76.
As examples
(Eph. 5
:
of Tpos repeated take TrpoaKoWrjOrjaeraL xpos
ttjv
kt\.
31), irpoakirecrev Tpos tovs kt\.

:
(Mk. 7:
25), irpoaeTkdr] rrpos
Tovs kt\. (Ac. 13
36).
It is
seldom repeated.
As a
(Col. 2
lonely example of avv repeated see crweôôToiTâev avv aura)

:
13).
inro
We
have no example of
repeated and but one of vwkp in

:
some MSS.
UTrep rjpCiv).
(e)
(not the critical text) for Ro. 8
26 (virepevrvyxaveL
Different Preposition after Verb.
ferent preposition
may
Once more, a difbe used other than the one in composition.
This
is,
of course, true
ovvaKo\ov6ov(Tai airo (Lu. 23 :49), Ijut
do not
of
kv,
:
differ
where the meaning differs radically, as in even when the prepositions very greatly. Thus eis frequently follows compounds
(Mt. 8
:
as
k/jLâvTi els TrXotoi'
23), kpj3aXe1v
:
eis Trjv
ykevvav (Lu.
eis to.
12
5), knâTTOfitvos eis t6 ktX.
(Mk. 14
20), kix^\k\paTe
kt\.
PREPOSITIONS (npoeESEis)
:
:
561
(Mt. 6 26), ejjLTreaoi'TOS els tovs kt\. (Lu. 10 3G), heiTTVcrav els to ktX. (Mt. 26:67), kveKevTpladrjs els KoWieXaLov (Ro. 11:24). There is
little
cause for
comment
here.
In general the varying of the preposition
be noted.
airo
So, for instance,

is
to the fact that one
is pertinent and is to Here wapa calls attention beside the place or person whence he starts;
airo, kK, irapa.
merely notes the point of departure, while k- distinctly asserts that one had been within the place or circle before departing. Cf.
therefore
K Tov vdaros.
Mt. 3 16 Thus
:
ave^-q airo rod vSaros
and Mk.
14
:
1
:
10
avajSaipoiv
airo
follows TrapajSaivu in Ac. 1
25, TrapaXafiirapepxofjLaL
âvw in
Cor. 11
23, Trapaêpco in
Mk.
36,
and
e/c)
in
Mt. 5
as
18.
Verbs compounded with

in 1 Pet. 3
:
(besides
may have
Lu. 2
: :
olto
IkkXij'co
11, or irapa as eêpxo/xat in

:
1,
while
kKiroptvoixai
:
shows either e/c (Mt. 15 18), dro (Mt. 20 29) or irapa (Jo. 15 26). So compounds of /card use either airo as Karaâivo} (Lu. 9 54) or k as ib. (Jo. 6: 41). See further discussion under
:
separate prepositions.
Compounds
vofjLai
of ava likewise are followed

:
by
els
as with avaâivco
:
(Mt. 5:1), avayoi (Lu. 2
22), ava^Xewoi (Lu. 9
16),
dmXaM/3a-
(Mk. 16
19), dmTrtxrco
:
(Lu. 14
eirl
10), avacpepoi (Lu.

:
24
51),
avepxop.ai (Gal. 1
18)
or
by
as avaâlvco (Lu. 5
19), avaîâô)
(Mt.
avairiiTTO}
13:48), avaKafxiTTCO (Lu. 10:6), avaKKlpofiaL (Mt. 14:19), with accusative (Mt. 15 35) or genitive (Mk. 8 6),
: :
dmêpco
(1 Pet.
:
24)
or
by
irpos
:
as avaâivw (Jo. 20
17), avaKaynrTbi
23 7). As a rule irpbs refers to perand eirl differ in that evl more distinctly marks the terminus. But the line cannot be drawn hard and fast between these prepositions, because eirl and irpos show a variation. Thus verbs compounded with eivl may be followed by els as in kiTLlSaWco (Mk. 4 37), einâlvco (Ac. 20 18), eiralpo} (Lu. 18 13), 'E7ri7pd(/)aj is even followed by ev in e(f)LKveop.aL (2 Cor. 10 14).
(Mt. 2
12), dm-Tre/xTco (Lu.

els
sonal relations while
Ac. 17 23.
:
On
has
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
11).
even
elaeiin
irpos in
Ac. 21 18 and
:
elacfyepco
has ewl (Lu. 12
Atd in composition
9), irpos
may
)uerd
be followed by
dj^d (1
els
as in Siaâlvu) (Ac. 16
(Lu. 16
26) or
Cor. 6
5), etc.
els,
Compounds with
both
(1
usually have
like neraâlvu (Lu. 10
and
:
els),
iJLeraXXaaao)
:
(Ro.
26), nerapoeco
(Mt. 12
41),
IJ.eTairep.iroiJ.at
(Ac. 10
22), ijeTaaTpe(f>o} (x\c.
20),
iJeTa(JXf]P-a.TL^<ji
Cor. 4
6), neTaTlOr]p.L
(Ac. 7: 16), jjeTaTpeiro} (Jas.
9), jueroi-
/cifco
(Ac. 7 :4).
But
juera5i5cojut
(Ro. 12
8)
and
jueraXXdcro-co
(Ro.
25)
have h.
562

followed
NEW TESTAMENT
23.
TlepLaycx) is
by
in
Mt. 4
As
to
irp6 in
Lu.
17
we have
TrpoeXeuo-erat
followed by hwinov.
Verbs compounded with avp

(Tvv
may have
ixera (cf
the displacing
:
of
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
cvpepxofjiaL Trpos
(Mt. 3 (Ac. 28
:
12),
kirl
(27
27)
:
and
20)
Trpos
(Mk.
(11
:
7:
1),
f.).
17), exl (1
:
Cor. 11
and
ets
33
For
9
:
vwep(j)povelv irapa see

vrepaipojjiaL ext in
14 and
Ro. 12 3. Cf. virepâWo) 2 Th. 2 4.

:
eiri
in 2 Cor.
With
:
vTTo
we
find a
number
of prepositions especially with inrayoi,

:
as utTo. (Mt. 5 :41), eh (9 :6), airb (13 :44), Trpos (Jo. 13 3), iv (Jas. 2 16), with which compare ottIgw (Mt. 16 23) and fxeraû Cf. also iiTroo-rpec^co with ets (Lu. 1 56) and ctti (Ac. (18 15).
:
28).
Delicate shades of meaning will be found in
all
these
prepositions without
undue refinement. See Conybeare and Stock,

with verbs in the
p. 88, for different prepositions
LXX.
But it is not (/) Second Preposition not Necessary. always necessary for any preposition to follow the compound verb. Often the preposition with the verb may be followed by the case
that
is
usual with the preposition without
much
regard to the
verb
tion.
is
itself.
That
is
is
to say, the preposition in composition
may be
tantamount
This
in result to the simple verb followed
by that preposi-
sometimes happens so. It list. As examples we may note the following: 'EirLTriirTeLv avTQi (Mk. 3 10) with the dative may be compared with r^s x^^pi-Tos kêTeaare (Gal. 5 4) with the ablative. Here the two prepositions and the cases correspond
not always true, but
it
not necessary to give an exhaustive
exactly.
The instrumental
case
is
illustrated
:
by
(Tvvxa.pr]re
/jlol
(Lu.
15
6).
Cf. also the ablative in Lu. 10
42 with
a(j)aLpedT]aeTaL.
:
As
:
an example of the locative take kixp.'tvLv rfj iriaTeL (Ac. 14 22). An example of the genitive is seen in aov KaraixapTvpovaLv (Mt. 26 62. Cf. also Mt. 16 18) and of the accusative .in Trjp aXvaiv ravTyjv irepiKi,uaL (Ac. 28 20) where a change of standpoint takes place, since the chain is around Paul. Cf. Heb. 12 1. In a case like SieTopevovTo Tois TToXets (Ac. 16 4) one may either regard the accusative
: : : :
as loosely associated with the preposition

11) or consider that the preposition
(cf. 5ta,
peaov in Lu. 17
has
made an
intransitive verb
transitive (see next point).

(g)
See ch.
XI
for further exx.
Effect of Preposition on Meaning of the Verb. Sometimes there is no effect at all. The preposition is merely local as in kêpxofxai, 'go out.' The preposition may be "perfective" and
563
merely intensify the meaning of the verb, as in KareaOiui ('eat up'), The preposition is sometimes weakened KaraStco/cco ('hunt clowTi'). Prepositions in composition in idea as in airodexofxaL, airoKpipofxaL. sometimes change the meaning of the verb and blend with it. A
resultant
6id
meaning
arises
with a new construction.
alluded to above
may
:
be a case in point.
with accusative (Heb. 11 29), Mpxami- (Lu. 5 is probably the result of StttTrXeco with the accusative in Ac. 27 also ivpoa^m u/xSs in sense composition. See the preposition
: :
The use of Thus take diaâlvu} 19 1). The use of
of 'go before' (Mt. 26

(TvyKXeieLv.
32).
Cf. further airobeKaTovv,

will
suffice,
neradldoîJLi,
These examples
though they could be
multiplied easily.
Dropping the Preposition with Second Verb. Winer we have in the N.T. an instance of the old Greek idiom of using the preposition with the first verb and dropping it with the repeated verb though really retained in sense. But Moulton^ seems to show that the N. T. does offer some examples of this
(h)
denies that
construction, like the Kar^qyov,
rjyov, rjyov,
of Euripides' Bacchides,
1065 (English 'pulled down, down, down,' Moulton).^

TapeKaôv,
eXaôv (Jo.
1
He
cites
:llf.);
:
Tpoeypa(j)r],
eypacfir]
(Ro.
15:4);
'i^yayov
k^-qpavvqaav, epavvljiVTis (1 Pet. 1
10
f .)
ewepSmaaOaL, hdvaanevoi. (2
:
Cor.
5:3);
:
avTL<jT7JuaL,
aTTJvaL
(Eph. 6
13)
KaT4>ayop,
These are certainly possible illustrations, though In Eph. 13. I have doubts about 2 Cor. 5 3 and Eph. 6 6 13 especially arrjvaL is stronger alone than with avrl. I do not agree that in 1 Cor. 12 2 we have an illustration in ijyeaOe
(Rev. 10
10).
:
aTrayofxevot.
(i)
Intensive or Perfective.
There
is
still
another very
common
use of the preposition in composition.
It is that of
mere adverb and intensifies or completes the idea of the verb. Sometimes the frequent use of the compound form tends to obscure this adverbial idea.
largely faded
off'
Thus
in airoKplvoixaL the force of dTro has
and
in airodvrjaKco
it is
quite obscure.
Doubtless
'
die
was the
original idea for the one, as 'answer back' for the
other.
The appeal
to the original usage will explain the force
of the preposition.
But
0tXoi;s
in
most instances the idea

:
is
very
clear,
as in avvKoXel rovs
(Lu. 15
6), 'calls his
friends together.'
This common function of the preposition in all the Indo-Germanic tongues was probably the original use with verbs. At any rate it is common enough in English, though we usually separate wovh and preposition. We say "up-set" as well as "setup," but they
1
W.-Th.,
p. 433.
Prol., p. 115.
lb.
564

different things.
NEW TESTAMENT
"come
but
the adverb just
mean
We
all
see the adverbial force in

etc.,
it is
home," "come back," "come away,"
as truly in "fore-close," "pre-clude,"etc. Indeed, prepositions when
compounded are etymologically pure adverbs. The English may be compared with the Homeric Greek in the separateness of the adverb from the verb.^ In German the compound use of the preposition is very extensive, but later Greek and Latin illustrate it
abundantly.detachable.
fective"
is
The German prepositions are either inseparable or As applied to the meaning of the verb the term "per-
used for the force of the preposition, but it is not a very happy designation, since one is at once reminded of the perfect tense with which it has nothing to clo.^ Moulton gives a number
of luminous examples such as dvyaKco 'to be dying,' cncodavtlv 'to die
'to escape (flee clean through)';
rripelv
Stco/coj
(off)';</)eu7eti' 'toflee,'5m(/)U7eTj/
'to pursue,' KaTabidoKw 'to hunt down';

peiv 'to
'to watch,' awr-q-
keep safe'; epyaêadaL 'to work,' KaTepyaêadat '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
Indeed, not
all
of the tenses.
of the
examples of
this "perfective" use of the preposition.
N. T. verbs by any means show Moulton*
notes this absence, as compared with Polylîus, in the case of apxofiai, deaoiJLaL, deoip'em,
Xoyiôixai, KLvdvvevo:, fieWo:, opyiôfiai, Tvpaa<j(ji.
He
finds that the papyri support this "perfective" use of the preposi-
tion as between simplex

interesting.
his
and compound.
:
Thus
awaofiaL (]\Ik. 14
47)
is
N. T. illustrations are used of Peter's drawing

:
sword (note
voice),
but
BLaaTaadfj (Ac. 23
10) expresses
the
So kpyaôixai is a common verb for doing work (as Mk. 14 6), but /carep7dj'o/iat accents the carrying of the work through as in Ph. 2 12, and in verse 13 kvepyetv is used for the idea of in-working as contrasted with the out-working or development taught by KarepyaêadaL. Cf. also firjSev kpyaôfievovs dXXd Tvepupyaô}j.evovs (2 Th. 3:11) where the whole idea turns on Trept, 'doing nothing but doing about' is a The same distinction is seen between kadioi 'to free rendering.
fear that Paul
may
be drawn in two.
:
eat' (Mt. 15
2)
and
KaTeaOiw 'to eat

:
up (down)'
jikpovs (1
in Lu. 20
:4).
:
47.
Cf. also
e(})ayov
(Mt. 6
25)
and
Karecfjayov
(Mt. 13
further illustration note aprt yLvdoaKo:
Cor. 13
As one 12) and
In general, on the whole subject, of prepositions in composition see Delbriick, VerTore be kinyvo}(ToiJiaL Kadws Kal kweyvuadrjp {ih.).
*
Moulton, Prol., p. 112. Riem. and Goelzer, Synt.,
Moulton,
Prol., p. 111.
p. 815.
Prol., p. 116.
gleichende Syntax,
p.
I,
565
Griech. Gr.,
pp. 660
ff.
Cf. also
Brugmann,
XVIII for further remarks. It is always interesting to note the (j) Double Compounds. As noted in chapter V, Word significance of both prepositions. Formation, iv, (c), these double compounds are frequent in the The point to emphasize here is that each KOLv-Q and so in the N. T.
431
f.
See also ch.
preposition as a rule adds something to the picture.

pictures in prepositions
if
one has eyes to see them.

:
There are For instance,

:
note
avTL-irap-rjXdev
:
(Lu. 10
in
31
f.),
avv-avTi-ka^rjTaL (10
40.
Cf.
Ro. 8
26.
First
known
:
LXX,
inscriptions third
virep-ev-Tvyx^^^'-
century b.c.
but now found in papyrus and Cf. Deissmann, Light., p. 83),

1
:
(Ro. 8 26), avT-ava-irXrjpu (Col.

:
24), cri;i/-7rapa-XaavTi-ha-rldtixai
êlv (2
(Ac. 15
37), Trpoa-ava-w'KripoJ (2 Cor. 9

etc.
12),
Tim. 2:25),
V. Repetition and Variation of Prepositions.

are needed in general on this subject before
ositions in detail.
(a)
few words
the prep-
we take up
Same Preposition with Different Cases.

is
Sometimes
the same preposition

ferent resultant idea.
used with different cases and so with a difTake 5id, for instance. In 1 Cor. 11:9 we
yvvoLKa, while in verse 12
:
have
6ta
ovK eKTladr] avrjp

yvvaLKos.
Slo. rrjv
we read
avrip
T77S
In Heb. 2
5t'
10 the whole point turns on the dif5t'
ference in case,
dv
to.
iravTa Kai
ov to. ivavTa.
In Heb. 11
29
the verb with
5td
in composition has the accusative while 5id

ttjv
alone has the genitive, bik^riaav

7^s.
'Epvdpav QaKaaaav
cos
dia ^rjpas
Cf. 5td ixeaov (Lu. 4

is
30)
and
5td fxeaou (Lu. 17: 11).

'Etti is
resultant idea
:
here the same.
But the 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: 6. So again in Mt. 19 28 note eirl dpovov and eirl dpovovs and in Mt. 24 2 kirl ytdov, but Xiôs ext Xldu) in Lu. 21:6. Cf. kirl tou and 7rt T-qv in Rev. 14 9. So eXTrifco kwi with dative in 1 Tim. 4 10 and accusative in 5 5. This is all in harmony with the ancient Greek idiom. For an interesting comparison between the Synoptic and the Johannine use of prepositions and the varying cases see Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, pp. 357-361. The variation is especially noticeable in 5td, Itti and xapd. The LXX shows abundant use of the preposition after verbs. Cf Conybearc and Stock, Selections from the LXX, p. 87 f., and Johannessohn, Der Gcbrauch etc. In some stereotyped formulae one notes aird KapSlas, ixtra ^las, Kardt,
:
5ta/36Xoi;
(Thumb,
Ilaiidb., pp.
103
ff.).
566
(6)
NEW TESTAMENT
Repetition with Several Nouns. When several nouns same preposition the preposition is repeated rather more frequently than in the earlier Greek.^ Winer ^ thinks that the repetition occurs only when the two or more substantives do not come easily under the same category. AVithin limits this is true (cf. repetition of the article), but there is rather more freedom in the later Greek on this point. In Jo. 4 23 we do have a
are used with the
:
similar idea in the phrase

irpoadoKLas in
irvevfiaTL Kai a\r]9eiq.
as in dTro
'Ikoplco
06/3oi; Kal
:
Lu. 21
1
26.
Cf. also hv AvarpoLs Kal

Aep^r]v Kal
els
(Ac. 16
2),
but in verse
or
re Kai
observe
/cat els
Avarpav, where perhaps
the doulile conjunction plays some part.

the preposition
(Ac. 26
:
Indeed with
repeated.
Kal kv
Kal
Kal
Kal kv
is
commonly
Thus
rfj
oKlycj: Kal ev fxeyaXco
29), ev re rots
Secr/JLols fiov
aTroXoylq.
is
(Ph. 1:7).
repetition
With
is
.
disjunctive conjunctions the repetition

fj
usual
Cf.
also, as aTTo aKavOCiv
airo rpijSoXcoj'
ûi)
(Mt. 7
dXX'
16).
With
antithesis the
the rule, as
ev ao(})ia
bvvap.tL (1
Cor. 2
5.
also verse 4)
But one cannot properly

:
insist
on any ironclad rule

Kal
airb
when he
ivpo(j)i]TU}v
considers a case like a-wb
Mcoiô-ecos
ivavTwv
(Jo.
to:v
(Lu. 24
27), irpos îp-aiva
Herpou
Kal irpos tov
aWov
20
2), kv
bwap-u Kal
kv 7rvevp.aTL aylu) Kal kv 7rX7]po4>op'La (1
Th. 1:5).
In a
comparison again the preposition is repeated, as kw' aureus oâwep disjunctive conjunctions the (Ac. 11: But even with -fjiâs 15). preposition is not always repeated, as kirl dvorlv tplglv (Heb. 10 28). In Ac. 20 18 airb is not repeated, though eis occurs in one member of the sentence and kvl in the other. In Jo. 16 8 Trept is repeated
Kal 0'
rj
: : :
for rhetorical reasons,

o-eojs.
Trept ap-aprlas Kal Trept 8i.KaLoavvT}s Kal Trept Kpi-
Cf.
Eph. 6
Trpos Tcis
12 where the repetition occurs without a con-
junction,
etc.
(c)
dpxds, Trpos rds eôucrtas, Trpos tovs KoapoKparopas,

:
Cf. also Jo. 17
9.
Repetition with the Relative. The preposition is not always repeated with the relative. Usually the classic authors
did not repeat the preposition with the relative when the antecedent had it.^ So the N. T. shows similar examples, as kv -qpepais als
eireidev
(Lu.
25),
:
ets
rb epyov 6 TpoaKeK\r]paL (Ac. 13
2), airb
Trd.P'-
Tcov (hv
(Ac. 13
39), etc.
But the
ets i]v
:
repetition
is
seen in such exa(f)'
amples as ^s (Ac. 20
there
is
ets Tr]V yrjv ravrrjv,

:
(Ac. 7:4); aTro Tpcorrjs ripepas,

rf}
18).
In Jo. 4
53, kKelvn
wpa, kv
fi,
the preposition oc-
curs with the relative, but not with the antecedent.
very
added.
1
However, between the mere locative case and kv Especially noticeable^ is a case where the antecedent is
little
difference
Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 158. W.-Th., p. 420.
W.-Th.,
p. 422.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 174.
PREPOSITIONS (npoeE2Eis)
5G7
not expressed and the relative has the preposition of the anteceSo Trepi 5iv in Jo. 17:9 is equal to ivepl tovtcov ovs SeSo^Kas dent.
fiOL.
a.
els
ou (Jo.
6:29).
(d)
Condensation by Variation.
is
Once more, the variation
of the preposition
skilful
way
of condensing thouglit, each
preposition adding a
idiom.
XpLffTov
is e^
Thus
in
Ro. 3
new idea. Paul is especially fond of this 22 we note SiKatoavvr] 8e deov 8i.a Triareus 'Irjaov
f.
els iravras.
5t'
Cf. verses 25
A
to.
particularly striking example

iravra (Ro. 11
5t'
:
:
avTOv Kal
1
:
avrov
/cat eis
avTOV
36).
Cf. also
Col.
16
ej'
aiiTOJ eKTiadr} to.
iravra
avrov
/cat
ets
avrov tKriaraL.
Eph. 4:6. In Gal. 1 1 Paul covers source and man's control of his apostleship by the use of a-wb and 5ta. See Winer-Thayer, p. 418 f. Cf. alsof v-k6 Kvpiov 6ta ToO Tpo(f)r]rov (Mt. 1 22) for mediate and intermediate agent. One should not make the prepositions mere synonjuis. Cf. vTrep (Ro. 5:6), avrl (Mt. 20 28), and irepl (Mt. 26 28) all used in connection with the death of Christ. They approach the subject
Cf. ert,
5td, ev
in
agency in
his denial of
from
VI.
(a)
different angles.
The Functions
order.
of Prepositions with Cases.
The Case before
Prepositions.
'^
Both
in time
first
and at
first in
In the Indo-Germanic tongues at

is still
the sul^stan-
tive
was followed by the preposition ^ as
seen in the Greek
eveKev, xo-pi-^, etc.
The Greek, however,
generally
preposition before the substantive as with

(6)
came to put the compound verbs.
Notion of Dimension.
The
all
prepositions especially help
express the idea of dimension and

that,^
the relations growing out of
but they come to be used in various abstract relations also. Indeed it was just the purely "local" cases (ablative, locative and instrumental) that came to lose their independent forms (Moulton,
60 f.), due partly to the increase in the use of prepositions. Original Force of the Case. The case retains its original force with the preposition and this fundamental case-idea must be observed. The same preposition will be used with different cases where the one difference lies in the variation in case
(c)
Prol., p.
as already noted.
Take
irapa, for
instance, with the ablative, the

is
locative or the accusative.
The
preposition
the same, but the
case varies and the resultant idea

'
differs radically.^
icld^c
"La proposition no fait quo confirmor, qnc invcisor uno I, p. 44S. exprimce par un cas cuiploy6 aclverbialcinent." Ricin. ami CiU'U(>l, Syiit. Grcc, 1888, p. 2i;i.
K.-G.,
2
Dclbriick, Verj^l. Rynt.,
I,
p.
()r)3.
CT. Brup;., Grirdi. Gr., p.

*
4!^:? f.
K.-G.,
I,
p. 451.
Cf. Delbnick, Grundl. etc., p. 134.
K.-G.,
I, p. 4r)0.
568
NEW TESTAMENT
(d) The Ground-Meaning of the Preposition. This must always be taken into consideration.^ It is quite erroneous to say
that
*to.'
Trapa,
for instance,
is
means now
'from,'
now
It
is
'beside,'
now
This
to confuse the resultant
meaning
itself.
of the preposition,
case
and context with the preposition

scientific
the
common
is
vice in the study of the prepositions to
make
this crucial error.
The
self,
method
of studying the
Greek preposition
to
it-
begin with the case-idea, add the meaning of the preposition

will
then consider the context. The result of this combination be what one translates into English, for instance, but he translates the total idea, not the mere preposition. It is puerile to explain the Greek prepositions merely by the English or German rendering of the whole. Unfortunately the Greeks did not have the benefit of our English and German. Kiihner-Gerth^
well observe that
it is
often impossible to
make any
translation
that at
(e)
all
corresponds to the Greek idiom.
Prepositions. See XI. The vocative was obviously out of the question, and the nominative only appeared with pure adverbs like aua els (Rev. 21 21). Of. Mk. 14 19; Ro. 12 5, Ka9' eh. But not all the six oblique cases were used with equal freedom with prepositions. Certainly in the original Indo-Germanic tongues the dative was not used with prepositions.''' The dative is not originally a "local" case and expresses purely personal relations. Delbriick thinks that the Greek dative did come to be used sometimes with kwl as in Homer, kirl Tpcoeaai ixaxecfdai^ Indeed some N. T. examples of eiri may naturally be datives like hairXayXVicrOr] evr' avTols (Mt. 14 14), iiaKpodbii7](JOV ctt' kp.o[ (Mt. 18:26). But usually even with kirl the case is locative, not dative. We do have two examples of 6771)5 with the dative, as Ac. 9 38; 27: 8. Originally again the genitive was not used with prepositions,^ but the Greek undoubtedly uses the genitive, though not a "local" case, with some prepositions like avrl, ha, kirl.
also ch.
:
The Oblique Cases Alone with
(f)
Original Freedom.
That
is
to say,
most
of the preposi-
tions could be used with ablative, locative, accusative
with the genitive or instrumental.

('whence,' 'where,' 'whither' cases)
sitions.
and some But the three just mentioned called upon most of the prepo-
The
and
I,
dialect inscriptions give

e^
many
2
proofs of this matter.
Thus
airo
both appear in the Arcadian and Cyprian dialects

lb.
K.-G.,
p. 451.
Delbriick, Grundl. etc., pp. 130, 134.

lb., p. 130.
Cf. also
^
Monro, Horn., Gr.
p. 125.
lb., p. 134.
PREPOSITIONS (nPGGESEIs)
569
with the locative as well as the ablative.^ 'A/x(/)t originally occurred with locative, accusative and genitive. The same thing
was true
Trpos
genitive).
sible
eTrl, fieTo. irepi and vtto (possibly with ablative, not Indeed Trepi once used the ablative also. Uapa and were used with locative, accusative or ablative. It is posindeed that Trpos may have been used with five cases, adding
of
true dative and true genitive to the above.^

four cases occur (Delbriick) since
also.
it
In the case of
kirl
apparently used the dative
Other prepositions once were used with two cases, as with locative and accusative and the same thing was true of els and dm, whereas Kara seems to use accusative, genitive, ablaeu
tive.
IIpo originally
had ablative
'Afx(j)i is
(genitive ?)
had locative as well as ablative, while vwep and accusative and 5td accusative and
N.
T.,
genitive. 'AvtL has only genitive, while avv has only instrumental.
no longer a
free preposition in the
but occasionally
difficult,
occurs in the papyri.

(g)
No Adequate Division by Cases.

make any adequate
There were indeed
in early
It is
very
there-
fore, to
division of the prepositions
by the
case,
cases.
Greek two with only one
eight with two,
and
eight with three cases.
But the point
to
observe
turies
is
that the usage varies greatly in the course of the cenin different regions, not to say in the vernacular
and
and in
history
the literary style.
Besides, each preposition

his
had
its
own
and every writer
rison of the prepositions see Helbing,^
For the detailed compaand for the history of the cases with the prepositions see Krebs.* But in the Ptolemaic times prepositions are more and more used with the accusative to
idiosyncrasies.
own
the corresponding disappearance of the other oblique cases.^

particular one
In
must note (cf. ch. XI) the disappearance of the locative, instrumental and dative before the accusative and the genitive, until in the modern Greek els and the accusative have superseded h and the locative and the dative proper also. Even (Tvv and the instrumental disappear in the modern Greek vernacular before ne (fxeTo) and the accusative.^ (h) Situation in the N. T. But in the N. T. the matter has not developed that far and the cases are not so much blurred,
J
Delbriick, Grundl., p. 129.
Cf. lladley
f.
f.
and
-Alloii, i)]).
252-2G0.
2
3
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 449
Die
Priip. hoi
Ilorod., p. S
Cf. Abbott, Joli.

*
for prep, in the Gospels.

6
Mullach, Gr. VoIk.,
pj).
37Gff.; V6lk(r,
Voc, etc., pp. 357 ff., Die Priip. bci Polyb., p. G f. Pap. Grace. Syiit., p. 30.
Cf. Geldart, (Juide to
mod. Gk.,
p. 247;
Thumb,
Ilandb., pp. 100
ff.
570
though the range of the prepositions in the matter of cases is The seventeen "proper" prepositions (d/xî drops out) in the N. T. use the cases as will be now shown. 1. Those with One Case. kva, aurl, cltto, ds, eK, h, irpb, avv use only one case, eight as opposed to two in the early Greek (avH and avv). The cases used are not the same (accusative with dm and ets; genitive with olvtI; ablative with airo, Ik and irpo; locative with h; instrumental with avv), but nearly half of the prepositions have come to one case in the N. T. In the modern Greek all the prepositions occur usually with the accusative (or even the nom.)The use of the genitive (abl.) is due to literary influence. The common proper prepositions in modern Greek are eh, aivo, pe, yta, and less commonly Kara, irapa, avrls, and in dialects Tpos (Thumb, Handh., p. 98). This tendency towards case simplification is well illustrated by the so-called improper prepositions which use only one case (abl., gen. or dat.), though they do not feel the movement towards the accusative. 2. Those with Two Cases. Five (as opposed to eight) use two cases: 5td, juerd, irepi, virep, virb. The cases used are genitive and accusative each with 5td, pera, irepi; ablative and accusative with virkp and v-ko. In the case of irepi some of the examples can be
greatly hmited.
'
explained as ablative (from around), while virb seems, like vpkp, to use the ablative (cf. Latin svb) and possibly the genitive also.
3.
Those with Three Cases.

eiri,
Only four prepositions

Kara, wapa, irpbs, unless
(as against
and have both ablative and genitive. Kara in Mt. 8 32, o^pprjaev Kara rod Kprjpvov, is used with the ablative. IIpos indeed only has the genitive once (Ac. 27 34) and that is due to the literary influence on the N. T.^ If irpbs drops out, only three prepositions
irepi, virkp
:
eight) retain three cases:
virb
still
use three cases, barring
irepi,
virep
and
virb.
Of these
irapa is
not very
common
(gen. 78, ace. 60, loc. 50),
still
less Kara,
while
ewi is still frequent (ace. 464, gen. 216, loc. 176).

4. Possibly Four with eiri. In the case of eiri indeed we may have to admit four cases, if there are examples of the pure dative like Mt. 18 26, paKpodvpriaov kir' e/xoi. But at any rate eiri and Trapd alone show the old freedom in the use of the cases. Like other adverbs the (0 Each Preposition in a Case. prepositions are fixed case-forms, some of which are still apparent.
:
Thus
Trapai
avri
is
in the locative case, like
ep{i), eiri, irepi.
Cf. also irpori
(wpbi).
TheformsSiatandijTrat occur also (datives). The old dative occurs, while irapa is instrumental. So dm, 5td, /card, fxera are
1
Moulton,
Prol., p. lOG.
PEEPOSITIONS (nPOGESEIs)
in the instrumental case.
571
case in which the preposition

ing on the case with which
history, but
still it is
What virb is wc do not know. But the may be itself has no necessary bear-
used. It is just a part of the word's always worth observing. VII. Proper Prepositions in the N. T. The case of avd is not clear. Originally it was am (a) 'Avct. and may be the same as the Lesbian, Thessalian and Cyprian 6v. Cf. Enghsh "on." It may be compared with the Old Persian and Gothic ana, the Latin and German an. One may compare the Greek av and Sanskrit ana} The fundamental idea seems to be "on," "upon," "along," hke German auf, and this grows easily to "up" like avoi in contrast with Kara, (kcitco). Homer uses the adverb ara as an ellipsis to mean "up." The locative was once used with dm, but in the N. T. only the accusative occurs. The distributive use may be up and down a line or series, and
it is
own
MSS.
give Kara in several of these instances (a

.
common
use of
very common in composition with verbs in the N. T. (over ten pages of examples in Moulton and Geden's Concordance), only thirteen examples of the preposition alone occur in the N. T. One of these (Lu. 9 3) is absent from W. H.
Kara also)
While
dm
is
(Nestle retains
it),
while in Rev. 21:21 (aua eh) the word
is
merely adverb
Homer), not preposition.- Of the remaining eleven instances, four are examples of d^^d fxeaov with the genitive, a sort of compound prepositional phrase with the idea of "between" (like Mt. 13 25), similar to the modern Greek ava/xeaa, and found in the LXX, Polybius, etc. One (1 Cor. 14 27, apo.
(cf.
: :
fxepos,
means
in
'in turn,'^ while the

di^d 8vo
remaining
(Lu. 10
:
six are all

1).
examples
of the distributive use, like
The
and
distributive
inscriptions
:
use
is
Xenophon.
For examples
1.5.
in papyri
see Radermacher, p.
(T/cets
Cf. our "analogy."
In Ac. 8
it is
30, yiuu-
a avayLvwaKets, the point turns on dm-, lût

to "read."
not clear
20 dmords /cardAbbott, Johnnnine Cr., pp. 222 fT., argues at length to show that the one example in John (2 6) is distributive. 'Am does not survive in modern Greek vernacular (Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366). In the papyri aua shows
See Ac. 10
:
how dm- turns "know"

for contrast
Prjdi
between
dm and
Kara.
some new compounds not

1
in the
N.
T., like avairoptvoyLaL
(Mayser,
RriiR., Gricch. Gr., p. 43G; K.-G., I, p. 473.
On
c.\x.
the N. T. prep, see

of
also
^
Tycho Moiiunscn,
Bcitr. zu d.
Lchrc von
d. {jriccli. Priip. (1S05).

6.v6.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 178, cites .sonic late Gk.

Deiss., B. S., p. 139.
as adv.
Clearly
not a Hebraism.
3 Blass,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 122, cites Polyb.
572

1, p.
Gr. d. Griech.Pap.,]). 486). Delbriick, Vergl Syntax,

siders dra, like avH,
734, con-
one of the "proethnic" prepositions. It is rare in the papyri and the inscriptions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 115). But avaaTaTol lie, 'he upsets me' (P.Oxy. 119, ii/iii a.d.),
is
strangely like Ac. 17

(b)
oi Tr]v oIk. is
apaaraTcoaavTes.
AvTi.
This preposition
in the locative case of apra.

a7ul,
Cf.
Sanskrit dnti, Latin ante, Lithuanian ant, Gothic
ant (-ent), Anglo-Saxon andlang, and-swerian ('answer'). idea is really the very word "end." Brugmann {Griech. Gr., p. 437) thinks it may mean "front." If so, "in front of" would be the idea of the
German The root-
word
in the locative.
Cf. arite-room,
clptLos,
avraw
{air-,
VTT-), euaPTLos,'
at the end' {aPTi). Suppose
two men at each end
of a
log facing each other. to face."
That
gives the etymological picture, "face
it was originally the genitive and namodern Greek the accusative has displaced it.^ It is obviously the real adnominal genitive and not ablative (cf. Sanskrit adverb dnti) that we have with apri and is hke the genitive with the adverbs ixpra, clptLop, apria, and the adjective aPTLos, etc.2 In Homer indeed apri has just begun to be used in
The
case used with

in
turally so,
though
composition with verbs so that
it
barely escapes the
list
of the
"improper" prepositions.^ Blass* calls it "one of the prepositions that are dying out," but as a matter of fact it survives in modern Greek. In the N. T. it is used in composition with twentytwo verbs (single compounds) and occurs twenty-two times also with nouns and pronouns. It is not therefore very flourishing in the N. T. It does not occur often in the indices to the papyri volumes, and Mayser^ gives papyri support for some of the N. T.
compounds
N.
like apdoiuoKoyecc, aPTLKeLfxaL, aPTLXa/jiâpofxai.
It
is
absent
from the inscriptions of Magnesia and Pergamon (Radermacher,

T. Gr., p. 115).
of the preposition
djê/icp
(Ac. 27: 15)
In some of the compounds the original idea comes out finely. Thus in aPT-o(i)da\êLP t<3 the preposition merely carries on the idea of
look at ('eye, face to face') or
is
the
bQakii6s.
The boat could not

This root-idea
always present in apri and is the basis from which to discuss every example. It is equally plain in a word like avTL-irap-rj\dep (Lu..lO: 31 f.). The priest and Levite passed along on the other side of the road, facing {clpt'l) the wounded traveller. Note apTL-PaXXere in Lu. 24 17, where the two disface the wind.
:
Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,
I,
p. 740.
f.
2 ^
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 437; Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. 126, 149
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 150.
^
Gr. of N. T. Gr., p. 124.
Qr. d. griech. Pap., p. 487.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIs)
ciples
573
were exchanging words (casting them from one to the other
as they faced each other, aPTi) with one another, an intimate vivid picture of conversation. Cf. also the contrast between
and
olptI
and
Kara in evds avdeêraL ('cleave to,' 'cUrig to,' 'hold one's self face
KaracjipourjaeL
rfj
to face with') Kal tov erepov
(Mt. 6
rjixoiv
24).
In the double
(Rom. 8: 26; cf. Lu. The Holy Spirit 10 40) the fundamental meaning is olndous. lays hold of our weakness along with {avv) us and carries his part of the burden facing us {avTi) as if two men were carrying a log,
compound
:
cvv-avTi-XafiâveTaL
aadevda
one at each end.
Cf. avTL-\aix^6.veadaL in Ac. 20

also.
35.
The English
Note KaTr]VTr](Tanep avnKpvs Xlov (Ac. 20 15) where in both verb and preposition the idea of face-to-face appears. So aiv-avTr}CH (Mk. 14:13), aPTi-irepa (Lu. 8 26), kv-avTi-ov (20 26). Now the various resultant ideas grow out of this root-idea because of different contexts. Take the notion of opposition (against). The word does not mean that in itself. The two disciples were talking in a friendly mood (aj/Tt-/3dXXcT), but 12) if a man makes himself king he dj^rt-Xe7et tw Katcrapt (Jo. 19
word "antithesis" preserves the idea

:
in a hostile sense.
It is the
atmosphere of rivalry that gives the

it
colour of hostility.
We
see
also in the
word
avrl-xpi-crTos (1 Jo.
2:18), avTL-TTiicTeTe tw
-KvevixarL
(Ac. 7:51).
In Lu. 21:15 three

Cf. avri-SiKos
instances occur: avTL-arrjpai, avT-enreiv,
aPTL-KelfxevoL.
(Mt. 5
25).
There
tion in this sense.
no instance of the uncompounded preposiThe idea of "in the place of " or " instead " comes
is
where two substantives placed opposite to each other are equivalent and so may be exchanged. The majority of the N. T. examples belong here. In b^BoKixbv LptI b4>Qa.\ixov (Mt. 5 38; cf. also 6.PTL oBoPTos) there is exact equivalence like "tit for tat." So also KaKov aPTL KaKov (Ro. 12 17; 1 Th. 5 15; 1 Pet. 3:9), \oL8oplap None the less does the idea of exchange aPTL XotSoptas (1 Pet. 3:9). (cf. aPT-aX\ayiJ.a, Mk. 8 37) result when a fish and a snake are
:
:
placed opposite each other,

birthright
avTL
efjLov
clptI
IxOvos
6<f>ip
:
(Lu. 11: 11) or one's

16).
and a mess
Kal
of pottage (Heb. 12
In Mt. 17 27,
:
a compression of statement where the stater strictly corresponds to the tax due by Christ and Peter rather than to Christ and Peter themselves. But in Xvrpop aprl
aov, there is
foWup (Mt. 20
28;
Mk.
10
45) the parallel
is
more
exact.
These
important doctrinal passages teach the substitutionary conception of Christ's death, not because apri of itself means " instead," which
is
not true, but l)ecause the context renders any other resultant
idea out of the question.
Compare
clptL
also clptlKvtpop virip tclptcop
Paul
(1
Tim. 2
6)
where both
and
virep
by combine with \vTpov
574

Cf
.
NEW TESTAMENT
: . :
in expressing this idea.

clvtI
clvtI-tvitos
tov Tarpos the substitution takes the
Jas. 4
son succeeds father on the throne. 15 apH tov yeyetv the result
:
In Mt. 2 22 24) form of succession as Cf. avd-vTraros (Ac. 13 7). In

(Heb. 9
:
is
also substitution, the points

:
of view being contrasted.
In Heb. 12
2 the cross and the joy
face each other in the

in order
to get
:
mind of Jesus and he takes both, the cross the joy. The idea of exchange appears also
17
in
Cor. 11
15
Kbix-q
avA
irepLjSoXalov.
Blass^ considers
x^ptj'
avrl xaptros (Jo. 1
16) as "peculiar,"
original
import of the preposition.
but Winer^ rightly sees the Simcox^ cites from Philo x^piras
explaining this "remark-
veas avTL iraKaioTepwv eTL8i8oo(XLv as clearly
able" passage.
of it?
But
really has not too
As the days come and go a wave follows wave upon the shore. Grace answers {ciptl) to grace. The remaining examples are five of au6' UP in the sense of 'because' ('therefore'), when two clauses
the grace already bestowed as
or sentences correspond to each other, one the reason for the other.
much difficulty been made new supply takes the place of
This
is
indeed classical enough

:
(LXX
(Gen. 2
10
:
also).
:
(Eph. 5
31)
where the
LXX
(cf.
quote, has epeKep tovtov
Mk.
7;
Similar is apH tovtov which Paul does not Mt. 19 4). There is yet
24),
:
another idea that comes out in composition like

(Lu. 14
:
aPT-aTTo-blbwp.L
14)
where
oltto
has the meaning of 'back' and dpTi of

Cf. aPT-airo-Kplpopiai. (Lu. 14
1
: :
'in return' (cf.
"in turn").
:
6)
and
apd-ofj.o\oyew (Lu. 2
38).
In Col.
24, aPT-apa-K\y]pbio,
Paul uses
avTL in the sense of 'in his turn' (answering over to Christ).
Christ, so Paul
fills
up the measure
of suffering.
that prepositions in composition often best
As One may remark show their original

is
import.
(c)
'Airo.
The etymology
of this preposition
a/,
very simple.
of,
off.
We
note the Sanskrit dpa, Latin ah, Gothic

of the older dialects
English
used the form airv (Arcad., Cypr., Thess.) and the Epic dTrai is to be noted.* We may compare ai/' (oltt-s) with Latin ays {ah; cf. k, e^). The case of airb cannot be determined, but observe dTrat above. In the Arcadian and Cyprian dirh is found with the locative, but in the literary Greek only the ablative is used with cnrb, a case in perfect harmony with the meaning of the word. The nominative oltto 6 ihp in Rev. 1 4 is,
:
Some
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 124. Lang, of the N. T., p. 137.

avTiXrifi^pLs (1
W.-Th.,
p. 364.
f.
Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 225
The vague
word
*
Cor. 12
28)
is
frequent in petitions to the Ptolemies (pap.).
Cf. P. Par. 26 (b.c. 163-2).
Cf Delbruck, Vergl. Synt.,

.
I,
pp. 666
ff.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOOESEIs)
575
of course, for a theological purpose, to accent the unchangeableness of God. It is one of the most tenacious of the prepositions,
being extremely frequent in the N. T. both with nouns and in composition with verbs. Jannaris' gives an interesting sketch of the history of ciTro in the later Greek. In the modern Greek it is used with the accusative (the ablative only in set phrases).
This accusative usage
'Ek finally is found as early as Hermas.^ vanished before airo (cf. h before els), but in the modern Greek The explaairo also supplants to some extent avd, trpos and vtvo. nation of aitb is somewhat complicated therefore ^ since the increase of its use is due partly to the general tendency regarding prepositions (cf. airb
and partly to
1.
with ablative instead of the "partitive genitive") supplanting other prepositions like e/c, irapa, vwo. Original Significance. It can be easily perceived in the N. T.
its
It
is
clear
enough
(x>TLov
in airo-KOTrTco, for instance, 'to cut
off,'
as
dx-koi/'fj'
off,'
Uerpos TO
'unveil'
(Jo.
18
26).
Cf. dTro-KaXuTrrw, 'to take the veil
(cf.
Mt. 10: 26
for contrast
So
Cf.
airo-e-qKr],
'a treasure-house for
air-edrjixricrev
(Mt. 21:33) for
and dxo/caX.). putting things away' (Mt. 3 12). 'a man off from home.' So dxbetween
koXvittcjo
:
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
parallel to a millibus
passuum duobus.
:
The same idiom
occurs in
Jo. 11
indeed rather late Greek (Strabo, Diodorus and Plutarch), but it is not such a manifest Latinism as Jannaris'' supposes. It is not the meaning of awo that is unusual here, but merely the position. We say ten miles Cf. dTro copas 6', 'at 9 o'clock,' P. Oxy. 523 off, not off ten miles.
:
18; 21
8 and Rev. 14 20.
It is
(ii/A.D.).
The
idea of "off "or
bulk of the N. T. passages.

this simple idea. vdaros (3
:
"away from" is enough to explain the The context as a rule does not alter
ttjs
Thus
dTro
TaXtXaias (Mt. 3
/3dXe dTro
13),
dTro
tov rod
16), airo
:
avaroXup (2:1),
aov (5
dTr'
29), dTro
irovripov (6
13), dTro rod pvripdov (Lu.
24:2),
epov (Mt. 7: 23),
KaTtiravaev airo TtavTWV

dTrd Toov apapTLoJv
(Heb. 4:4),
1
:
dTro ttjs copas eKelurjs
(Mt. 9
22),
(Mt.
21), a<j)avT0S eyevero air' avToJv
(Lu. 24 31),
:
avadepa
airo tov Xptaroi)
(Rom. 9:3).
Here the ablative case and

'
Hist.
Gk. Gr., pp. 369
ff.
lb., p. 373.
Simoox, Lanfr. of the N. T., j). 137. Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 'M9. * Prol., p. 102. Cf. Maysor, Gr. d. griech. Pap., p. 487. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 95. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 227, also sees Lat. inlluoncc
^
liere.
Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 371.
576

make
all clear.
the root-idea of the preposition

in the matter.
The question
of
place, time, person or abstract relations cuts very
little figure
Wherever the ablative case is natural in Greek, appear to make clearer the case-idea of source or separation. Conybeare and Stock (p. 84) consider the idiom The construction dTTo 'A^paan ecos Aavel8 (Mt. 1 17) a Hebraism. For is in the LXX, but there is nothing un-Greek about it. awo in expressions of time take a(j)' rjs rifxepas (Col. 1:9). In Mt.
there
a-irb
may
16,
(XTTo
Tcov KapTTciv
kinyvwaeade, the notion of source

'Ypa<})uiv
is
the real
idea.
Cf. SteXeâro avTois airo tcov
(Ac. 17: 2).
In Ac. 16:
33, eXovaev olto tup
ir^-nyoou, it seems at first as if the stripes were washed from Paul and Silas and not, as here, Paul and Silas washed from the stripes. Winer suggests the addition in thought of "and cleansed." Cf. Kadaplaoofxev eavroiis airo iravTOS /xoXucr/zoO (2 Cor. 7: 1), which idiom Deissmann {Bible Studies, p. 216) illustrates from the inscriptions, and on p. 227 he further cites from the
^
inscriptions three examples of
Xovofiat, airo
:
in illustration of Ac.
16
33.
Cf.
6.T-evlx{yaTo
rds x^tpas (Mt. 27
24).
In Ac. 15 38, rdv

:
diro(TTavTa aw' avTu)u
awo HaM^fXtas, no difficulty should be found in
the threefold use of awd, since the Greek, unlike the English, loves
to repeat words in varjang relations.
position, with persons, with place.
Here we have
airo in
com(Mt.
See
'A9coos airo tov al/xaTos
27 24)
:
Certainly there was never any reason for thinking Kadapds

ai/jLaros
oLTTo
TOV
(Ac. 20
26) a
Hebraism, since
it is
the pure abla-
and the usage is continuous from Demosthenes to late Greek writers and papyri.^ We even find TrXarus dx6 tQiv o:ixwv, Pap. Par. 10, 20 (Radermacher, p. 116). The Pastor Hermae shows ttTTo after eyKpaTevop-ai, KaOaplônai, Travop-ai, 4>v\aa(70jxaL (Rative idea,
dermacher,
dTTo
p. 113).
Many
a-wb
:
similar examples of this simple use of
occur in the N. T.
Cf. the
(4
:
mere ablative with

13).
d^ta-raro (Lu.
:
2 :37)
and then with
Cf. aTredavere airo (Col. 2
20), fxeTavo-qaov airo (Ac. 8
22), etc.
Like other prepositions awo

(Mt. 4
:
may occur with adverbs,

2.
like dTro rore
17).
We see it clearly in d7ro-5t5a;/it, 'give Back J back' (Mt. 16 27). But even here the point of view is simply changed. The giver gives from himself to the recipient. In the case of a debt or reward from the recipient's point of view he is getting back what was his due. This idea appears in awoXanâvu} A particularly good example is found in dTras in Lu. 6 34.
Meaning
^
: :
W.-Th.,
Deiss.,
p. 372.
B.
S.,
p.
196, for
numerous
exx.;
Moulton,
Prol., p.
102.
Cf.
Kuhring,
De
Praep. in Usu,
p. 54.
kxovaLV
TOP
ijll(x96p
577
(Mk, 14
:
avToov
(Mt. 6
2).
Cf. aTr-ex^L
41).
This notion of receipt in full is common ("in countless instances," Deissmann) for awexoi in the ostraca, papyri and inscriptions. Cf. Deissmann, Light Jr. the Anc. East, pp. llOff. Cf. Tav Tei/iav airexoi raaav (i/A.D., Delphi Inscr., Bull, de Corr. Hell., 22, p. 58), 'I have received the whole price' for the slave's manumission.
Oxy. 37 (a.D. 49). Cf. k^tbbii-qv Trjv airoSoxw, P. Oxy. 1133, 16 (a.d. 396). This idiom seems to be confined to composition (cf. awo-Kpina, 2 Cor. 1 9) and air-apxri (Ro. 8: 23). Cf. Lu. 12 4.^ 3. " Translation-Hebraism" in (i)o^dadai arcb. have the usual accusative, and 8vp., we top In Mt. 10 28, (f)oê'Lade but again shows cjio^rjdrjTe avrovs verse 28 even see 26 we in verse
Cf. aireXaêv
to.
rpoêia, P.
ôêtade
airo.
In Lu. 12
1,
Tpoaex^re eavTots airb r^s

Cf.
/SXcttco airb
^VfJ-ils,
we have
'Ax6
the usual ablative as above.

in the
in
Mk.
15.
LXX was used to translate the Hebrew y?,^ but not all the examples in the LXX are necessarily pure Hebraisms, as Conybeare and Stock imply .^
Tcip
'lovSaloop,
Besides, the papyri

(a.d. 41),
show
;8Xe7re
aarop airb
B.G.U. 1079
the
first
reference to the
Jews as money-lenders.
86)8eKa
Some
drb
of the
N. T. examples are merely
for the so-called "partitive genitive."
Thus
eKKeâfxepos air' avTcop
(Lu. 6
13), tpkyKare
:
toop b^papiwp (Jo.
21
10),
kKx^(J!} oltto
:
Tov
TrpeviJ.aTOS
(Ac. 2
17), eadiei airb

:
twp
xpLxlo^v
(Mt. 15 (Mt. 27
27),
ttico
airb TOV yepr]ixaTOS
(Lu. 22
18), Tlpa airb tcop 8vo
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
tive.
airb
to help the abla-
Moulton
(Prol., p. 246) cites
o)
airb tojp XpiaTLavoop,
dTro tojv aKapSaXoop (Usener, p. 28) as fairly parallel with oval (Mt. 18 :7). The partitive use of the ablative with airb does
Pclagia
to the realm of the genitive (cf English of and the but the ablative idea is still present. One may note rbp 6.irb KekTu^p ipbôp in Polybius XVII, 11, 2 (Radcrmacher, Cf. evdvfia airb Tpixo^p (Mt. 3 4) with the old A^. T. Gr., p. 116).
come nearer
genitive),
genitive of material.
Comparison with Ik. But airb needs to be compared more h which it finally dis})laced save'' in the Epirot Ax or ox- But the two are never exactly equivalent. 'E/c means 'from within' while airb is merely the general starting-point. 'A7r6 docs not deny the "within-ness"; it simply does not assert it as
4.
particularly with
does.
1
Thus
in
Mk.
10
we read
apajSalvcop eK tov v5aTos
when
Moulton,
Prol., p. 102.
Sol.,
otc, p. S3.
Prol., p. 102.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 126.
"
Moulton,

678
Kara

is
NEW TESTAMENT
(cf.
the assertion
els,
made by
e/c
that Jesus had been in the water

:
ava
k in Ac.
The two
(Ac. 16
:
38
f.)-
But
in
Mt. 3
16
we
merely-
read
the
avk^t] airo
rod vSaros, a
form of expression that does not deny
of
Mark.
prepositions are sometimes combined, as

18)
(Mt. 13:49). behind k in the N. T.^ Both ctTTo and k are used of domicile or birthplace, but not in exactly the same sense.^ Thus in Jo. 1 44 see ^v 8e 6 (^lXlttttos OTTO Bi]d(xaL8a, k tt]s ToXeoos 'AvSpeov, where airo corresponds closely
kêKdelv
air' avrrjs
and
a4>opLOVcnv
ixeaou
Even with
the growth in the use of
oltto it still
falls
with the
German
So no
von and French de which came to be marks
Naâper, where (in 'Iu:ari4> rov airo effort is made to express the idea that they both verses) came from within Nazareth. That idea does appear in verse 46, k Naj'aper. In Lu. 2 4 both aird and k are used for one's home (airo TTJs TaXiXalas k xoXecos Naf aper) Indeed k in this sense Both appear again in Jo. in the N. T. seems confined to ttoXis.^ 11 1. Cf. also Jo. 7 41 f., k ttjs TaXtXaias, airo B-qOXee/j., where the two prepositions are reversed. The Latin versions render both Cf. dTro ApLfxadaias (Jo. 19 38). Abbott^ airo and k here by a.^
of nobility.
in verse 45,
: .
'
John does not mean to confuse the two prepositions, but uses each in its own sense, though airo is not found in the older writers for domicile. The sense of variety, as in English, may have led to the use of now one, now the other, since at bottom either answers. So Luke in Ac. 23 34 has k- iroias eTrapxetas, but aT6 KtXtKtas. Cf. Ac. 1 4. Blass^ notes that outside of John the N. T. writers use awo for one's country. So even Luke in Ac. 24 18, The MSS. indeed vary in some instances between cLTo TTJS 'Aalas. dx6 and k as in Ac. 16 39 with rrjs TroXecos. Cf MS. variation beoltto. tween airo and irapa in Mk. 16; 9. Cf. also Ac. 13 50 for k
is
clear that
In a case
like ol airo
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 ostracon from Thebes, a.d. 192. Cf. twv air' '0^vpvyx<^^ TroXecos, P. Oxy.
38, A.D. 49.
'At6
is also,
:
hke
1,
(Ac. 10
45, etc.), used for
mem-
bers of a party in Ac. 12

usage.
rtms
tcov airo ttjs eKKXijalas,
an un-Attic
readily dis-
But on the whole the two prepositions can be

irapa.
tinguished in the N. T.
5.
1
Comparison with
Moulton,
As
to irapa,
* ^
it
suggests that one has

p. 228.
Prol., p. 102.
Abbott, Joh. Gr.,

lb., p. 229.
'
Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 227 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 125.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 125,
been by the side of the one from
579
whom
8
:
God we
(16
:
find
toO deou k^rjXdou (Jo.

:
42),
he comes. In relation to xapd rod irarpos k^rj^dov

:
27), airo deov k^rjXees (16
30).
Cf. wpos top Oeov (Jo. 1
1).
It
would be overrefinement to insist on a wide and radical difference here between awo, e/c and Trapa; and yet they are not exactly synonymous.
In the older Greek vrapa was the
common
in
preposition
airo
for the conscious personal departure.^
But
N. T.
11
occurs
a.4>'
also with persons.

vfiuip
So
aKrjKoafxev
air'
avTOV (1 Jo. 1:5), ixadetv

:
(Gal- 3:2), irapeXalSop airo rod Kvplov (1 Cor.
23).
:
One
must not, however, read too much into airo, as in Gal. 2 12, where nvas dx6 'laKoiôv does not mean 'with the authority of Cf. Mk. 15:45; 1 James,' though they doubtless claimed it. Th. 3 6. One doubts if we are justified in insisting on a radical distinction between wapa rod irarpos (Jo. 10 18) and airo rod Kvplov (1 Cor. 11 23) save as etymology throws light on the matter.^ The MSS. of ancient writers,^ as of the 6. Compared with h-irb. N. T., varied often between airo and hirb. As instances of this va: : :
riation in the
N. T. take Mk. 8
31; Ac. 4
36; 10
17;
Ro. 13
1.
The MSS.
dTTo
often vary where
airb is
the correct text.
The use
of
to
it
with the agent is not precisely like virb, though one has only airb with Latin ah and English of to see how natural Observe KarevexOeU airo rod is for d-TTo to acquire this idiom.
compare
virvov
(Ac. 20: 9).
So in
Jas. 1:13, dTro 9eov TveLpaônai,
we
trans-
late
'tempted of God.'
The temptation,
to be sure,
is
presented
a.4>'
as coming from God.
Cf. also 6 fjnadbs 6
a(f)vaTepr]ixevos
vndv
(Jas. 5:4), where the keeping back of the reward is conceived as coming from you. Cf. Ac. 4 36. In Mt. 16 21, TraêTv dTro
: :
rCiv TTpea^vTepojp, 'at the hands of,' is a free rendering of the idea of agency or source. In Lu. 16 18, airo\e\viJi.ep7}p airo avSpbs, note the repetition of airb. This idea of removal is present in LaOvvaL dTro,
:
and epoxXovfiepoL airb presents no real trouble. There may be a zeugma in the last clause. In Lu. 9 22, a-woboKiixaaQrivaL airb tu}p TTpea^vTepuv, we have the same construction as in 16 18 above Cf. rtTOLfiaaiêpop airb rev deov (Rev. 12 6) and Ac. 2 (cf. 17 25).
: :
: :
22 throws some light on this matter. Thus 7171^ dTro aov eirayyeyiau (Ac. 23 21), dTro aou ar]peiov (Mt. 12 38). Tiiis use of dTTo after passive verbs came to be the rule in the later writers. Cf. Wilhelm,
aTrobtbuyp-kpop airb tov deov.
: :
The
use of
dTro after
sul)stantives
/.
G. XII.
5, 29.
But
it is
not alone a form of agency that
d7r6
comes to express.
p. 13S.
W.-Th., p. 370. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. V2r->. ' Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., Cf. W.-Th., p. 370.
580
It

of
virb.
may also be used for the idea of cause, an old usage For instance, take airb ttjs x^pas avTov virayeL (Mt. 13 44),
:
dTro tov
:
4)6ôv
eKpaâv (14
ttjs
26),
oval
tw
Koaiio)
:
and
roov
aKavdaXwv (18
7),
KOLixufjLevovs airb
XuTrrjs
(Lu. 22
45), ovKen laxôv

56^rjs
:
airb rov irXTjOovs
(Jo. 21
6), ovK kv'e^XtTTov
aro
:
rrjs
(Ac. 22
11).
Cf. further
Lu. 19
gives
airo.
3;
24
41; Ac. 12
14; 20
9;
Heb. 5
7, etc.
^
The
:
LXX
of
abundant illustration of the same idiom, the causal use As a matter of sound see e^' 6v and d0' ^s in Heb. 7 13.
Aid.
Delbriick^ says:
(d)
"Of the
origin of 5td I
know nothing
remark by the master in syntax. Still we do know something of the history of the word both in the Greek and in other Indo-Germanic tongues. The form 5td may be in the instrumental case, but one must note Stal (dative)
to say."
hesitates to proceed after that
in the lyric passages of Êschylus, not to say the Thessalian
6te.^
One
But
there
is
no doubt about
trmjas,
tri),
5td
being kin to
8vo, Sis.
(cf.
Sanskrit
dva, dvi
(cf.
dvis;
Latin duo, his

zwei;
Sanskrit dvis,
Greek
1.
8ls,
=v
or
v);
German
It is
Enghsh two
(fem.
and
neut.),
twain (masc),
.
twi-ce, twi-Ught, be-tween, two-fold, etc.
The Root-Idea.
in these three
manifest in
dLa-KocnoL, Stcr-xtXtot, Si-dpaxfJ-a-,
Sc-t'Kovs (cf. d-7rXoDs).
The etymology
words as well as
it will
of the in
word
is
'two,' 8vo, as
of
shown
8is, 5t-7rX6aj, all
which
5
occur in the N. T.
13.
(1
Thus
be seen how persistent
is
the ety-
mological force in the word.
Cf.
Mk.
37; Rev. 18
ix.
6;
Mk.
See also
:
81$ iJ.vpLd8es
(Text.
Rec,
Cf.
8vo
Rev. 9
:
16), 8'L-\oyos
8), 8L-8paxiJ-ov
Tim. 3
2.
8), St-o-ro/ios
(Heb. 4:
:
12), 8i-\l/vxos (Jas. 1

4crxic70r? e^s
(Mt. 17:
24), M-8VIX0S (Jo. 11
16).
8vo
(Mt. 27:
51).
'By Twos' or 'Between.'
step further
But the preposition has advanced a than merely "two" to the idea of by-twain, be-tween,
This
is
in two, in twain.
the ground-meaning in actual usage.
The word
St-daXaaaos originally
2, 5, 22),
meant 'resembling two
seas'
it
(cf.
Euxine Sea, Strabo

interval (be-tween)
but in the N. T. (Ac. 27: 41)
apof
parently means lying between two seas (Thayer).

is
The notion
frequent in the N. T. both in composition
and apart from composition. Thus in qjxepwv 8La-ytvoixkvbiv tlvcov (Ac. 25 13), 'some days came in between' (5id). Cf. SLa-yvwao/jLaL to. Kad' vnas (Ac. 24 22) with Latin di-gnosco, dis-cerno and Greek-English Aia-dTjKr) is an arrangement or dia-gnosis (SLa-yvoocnv, Ac. 25:21). covenant between two (Gal. 3 17). See 8L-aLpovv (1 Cor. 12 11);
:
:
:
5ta-5t5aj;nt
(Lu. 11:22) 'divide';
oWh 8i.-'eKpivev txera^v -rjiiuv re

Cf.
Std-zcpio-ts
/cat
avTccv
(Ac. 15
9)
where
1
fxera^v explains 5td.

S., p. 8.3.
^
(Heb. 5
p. 759.
:14), 'dis-
'
C. and K.-BL,
Vergl. Synt.,
viral.
I,
II, p.
250.
Cf. Karal, irapai,
crimination';
5ta-Xet7rco
; '
581
';
(Lu. 7 45), 'intervals of delay

:
5ta-Xi;a)
;
(Ac.
36),
'
dis-solve
5ta-)upif CO
(Ac. 2
45),
'
dis-tribute
:
'
Sia-priyvvnL
(Lu. 8 :29), 'rend asunder'; bia-aKopiriôi (Jo. 11 52), opposed to aw0170), 'di-sperse'; ha-a-Kaw (Mk. 5 :4), 'rend in two'; bia-airdpo) (Ac.
8:1)=' scatter abroad

Cor. 14:
; '
ha-aivopa (Jo. 7:35),' dispersion

Sta-o-rTj/ia
'
Sta-o-reXXo;
'
'
(Heb.l2:20), 'divide';
8La-(TTo\r] (1
(Ac.5:
7),
'
distance or interval
'
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' ('cleave asunder'). These numerous examples ought to be suffi-
cient to
show what the

oltt'
real
meaning
of the
word
in itself
:
is.
particularly noticeable instance appears in Lu. 24
51,
where we
have
dL-eaTT]
avTwv.
The N. T. preserves this notion of interval in expressions of time and so it is hardly "pecuhar only to literary style." ^ Thus
2 1 5t' iifiepwv means 'interval of days,' 'days between,' days,' though surely no one would think that 5td some 'after 'after.' Cf. Mt. 26 61, 5td rpicof rjfj.epcbv (cf. h, 27 means really irXeidvuv, Ac. 24 17; Gal. 2:1, 6td deKarecraapuv krwv. erojv 8l 40);
in
Mk.
Cf. Ac. 5:7. In Ac. 1 3, hC ijiJLepoJv reaaepaKovra oTTavoiJLevos, the appearance of Jesus was at intervals within the forty days. But see opposition to this idea in Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 255 f. In the phrase 5id vvktos (Ac. 5 19; 16 9, etc.), 'by night/ It is the real adnominal Sia adds little to the genitive itself.
:
: :
genitive.
The preposition is very common in the N. T., especially with the genitive (gen. 382, ace. 279), ^ though the accusative becomes dominant
3.
later.
'Passing Between' or 'Through.'
The
idea of interval between
leads naturally to that of passing between two objects or parts of objects. 'Through' is thus not the original meaning of 6td, but
is
a very common one. The case is usually the genitive, though Horner^ the accusative is common also, as we find it once in the N. T. (Lu. 17 11), 5td fieaou >:aMaptas (cf. 5td /jieaov, 4 30), and even
in
: :
here note the genitive after

6td neaov.
Blass"*
fxeaov.
Some MSS.
in Jo. 8
59 read also
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 Cf. also dia-jSaivoj riiv a\wva (Mt. 3:12), 'will thoroughly cleanse,'
1
Jann., Hist. Gr. Gk., p. 374.
Monro,
Iloni. Gr., p. 145.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 105.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 132.
582
(Heb. 11:29), 5ta-/3X7rw(Mt.7:5), 8i.-ayye\\co (Lu.9:60), Sia-yprjyopko} (Lu. 9 :32), di-aycj^ (1 Tim. 2 2), 5ia-5exoMat (Ac. 7:45), Sta-âre:
\eyxotxai (Ac. 18
28), ha-yLaxoiiai (Ac.

:
23
9), dia-fxevo)
(Lu, 1
22),
dia-vvKTipevw (Lu. 6
12), Si-avvu} (Ac.

:
21:
7),
8La-irapaTpL^r] (1
Tim.
:
6:5); 5ta-(7taj (Lu. 3 14), 5ta-crcbfcj (Lu. 7: 3), 5ta-<ûXd(Tcrco (4 10). This sense of 5td is used with words of place, time, agent or abstract word. In all of these relations the root-idea of the preposition
is
easily perceived.
bia
^r]pas
:
Thus
:
in
Mt. 12
Slo.
43, Stepxerai
8l'
avvbpwv
5td
TOTTOiv,
(Heb. 11
29),
ttjs
2a/xaptas (Jo.
:
4:4),
:
Tvpds (1 Cor. 3
15), 8l' kaoirrpov (1

:
Cor. 13
8l'
12).
Cf. Ac. 13
49;
2 Cor. 8
18.
In Ro. 15
p. 378)
city,'
28, dTreXeuao^tat
5t'
vpLuv els STraj^tav,
Winer
i.e.
(Winer-Thayer,
'through your
takes
vfxcov
to be 'through you,'
all
'through the midst of you.' In
these
examwith
ples the idiom runs just as in the older Greek.
The use
of 5td
expressions of time
transferred^ to
oKrjs vvKTos
^yjv
els.
was never very
common and
gradually was
(Lu. 5:5), which

:
(Heb. 2
15)
But some examples occur in the N. T. like 8l' may be compared with 5td iravros rod and the common phrase 5td iravTos (Mk. 5:5).
is
Here the idea
of
through
applied to time.
oKov
Rouffiac (Recherches,
from inscriptions of Priene 112, 98 and 99 (i/B.c). The agent may also be expressed by 5id. This function was also performed in the ancient Greek, though, when means or instrument was meant, the instrumental case was commonly employed.' Atd is thus used with inanimate and animate objects. Here, of course, the agent is conceived as coming in between the non-attainment and the attainment of the object in view. One may compare ypa^/avres 816. xî-pos avruv (Ac. 15 23) with 8vo eTL(TTo\as, 5td Nr;5u/xou /xtav, 5td Kpovlou iJ.axo.i.po4>bpov jilav, B.U. 1079, A.D. 41 (Milligan, Greek Pay., p. 39). So oh d'ek^ Slo.
p. 29) cites 5td rod
xfî-IJ-^vos
:
HeKavos kol KoXaôv
ctol
ypa4>eiv (3 Jo. 13), 5td YXwtrcrrjs (1 Cor. 14: 9),

:
ra 5td Tov acofiaTOS (2 Cor. 5

TTPevfiaTOS fir)Te 5td
10), Std tcov oirXccv (2
\6yov
fxrjTe 8l'
eTiaroXrjs (2 e^ v8aTos
Th. 2:2).
8l'
Cor. 6:7), fJ.r)Te Slo. In 2 Pet.

v8aTos.
3 2
5 note the difference between

8), 5td deXrifxaTos deov
:
and
Abstract
ideas are frequently so expressed, as aeacâpLevoc 5td TrlaTews (Eph.

:
(Eph.
1), 5td
tov evayyeXiov (1 Cor. 4

:
15),
:
Sea vofxov (Ro. 3
27),
8l'
aTOKakwPeois (Gal. 1
12).
is
Cf.
Cor. 6
14.
When
5td
occurs with the personal agent, he
regarded as the inis 1

:
termediate agent.
pressed
Sometimes the immediate agent

uTTo
also ex22, etc.).
by
vTTo.
TTJs
So
Kvplov 5id TOV
Trpo4)r]Tov
(Mt.
:
Cf. also 5td
yvvaiKos
k tov deov (1
distinguished.
Cor. 11
12),
where source
avOpoiTruv
and mediate agent are

1
In Gal. 1:1,
air'
lb., p. 375.
8l'
583
:
Paul takes pains to deny both ideas. In 1 Cor. 8 6, the first refers to God the Father as the source of all things and the second refers to Jesus as the mediate agent by whom all things come into existence. Cf. Col. 1 16. Indeed
avdpuTTov,
^^
ol,
5t' ou,
be regarded as source, mediate agent, and ultimate object or end, as Paul does in his noble doxology in Ro. 11:3G, on eg avrov Kal 8l' aiirov Kal els avrov to. irauTa. There are
God
himself
may
other instances also where
looked upon as the intervening cause or agent. So 8l' ou (Heb. 2 10; 1 Cor. 1:9). But 5id is often used with Christ in regard to our relation to God (cf. Paul's use of h). Thus Ro. 1 8; 5 1, etc. Cf. 5t' kfxov in Jo. 14 6, The Slo. TroX\u>p napTvpcov (2 Tim. 2:2), 8l' ayjeXwv (Heb. 2:2). 8l' uv 8i,aKovoL Cor. in 1 3 well 5 appears intermediate idea of 5ta
God
is
kinaTevcraTe,
:
Heb. 3
16 5ta
Mojucrecos,
k.86)Kaixev
Ro.
vpXv
5:5
8ia.
5ta irvevnaTOS.
'Irjaov,
In
the
1 Th. 4 matter seems turned round, but, as Paul was the speaker, he conceives Jesus as also making the commands. Abbott, Johannine
2, TLvas -Kapayyekias
tov Kvpiov
Grammar,
p. 236, rightly
in Jo. 1:7.
It is
important to note
argues in favour of 'through him (not it ') 5td 'Irjaov XptcrroO (Eph. 1:5),
' '
pregnant with meaning. Cf. Schettler, Die paulinische Formel "Durch Christus," pp. 28 ff. This use of 5td occurs in the papyri (Wenger, Die Stellvertretung im Rechte der Papyri, 1906, p. 9 f.). Christ is conceived as our representative (Deissmann, Light, etc.,
p. 340).
It is
that of
manner
not far from the notion of means like 5td Triarecos to like 5td irapaôXris (Lu. 8:4). Indeed the two shade
8l'
off into
one another as
:
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

86^r]s (2
27), 5td irpoaKOfxpaTos (14
20), 8id
Cor. 3:11),
Cf.
8l'
virop.oviis
:
(Heb. 12
is
1),
5td ttoXXwj/ BaKpOcov
(2 Cor. 2 :4).
Rom. 2
27.
But here
Cf. also 5td
also the notion of
between
12
is
always present.
tov Oeov (Ro. 12
ttju xo-P'-^
This
:
true even in a case like 5td

Trjs xo-pi-TOs
tC}u oIktlphojv
:
1).
:
in
Ro.
3 with 5td
'Because
in 15
15.
5td
4.
of.'
With the accusative

of,' 'for
comes to be used with

'on account
:
the idea of 'because
the sake
of,'
of.'
The
notion of between
8(^Kau avrov.
is still
is
present.
Take Mt. 27
18, 5id <pd6vov irapk-
the reason that promi^tcxl the betrayal and so came in between and caused the act. The accusative (extension) is natural and helps also to distinguish this idiom from the
Envy
others.
irdvra,
For instance, in Ilel). 2 10, 8l ov rd irdvra Kal 8l' ov rd the two ideas are distinguished entirely by means of the
:
584
cases.
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK One may note

also 5ta
ry]v
NEW TESTAMENT
and
6td
rrjs
:
yvpolKa
yvvatKos (1
Cor. 11:9, 12).
Cf. 5td
riiu xo-piv
above.
In Ro. 8
11 the
MSS.
vary between
5id to hoiKovv
Note
Ti)j'
also the difference

:
and 5td tov hoLKovvTos (W. H., Nestle). between 5td irlaTecos and 5td t?71' irapeaLv
in Ro. 3
25.
Cf. also the
common
:
5td to opo/xa
rot-
(Mt. 10: 22), 5td

:
TToWriP
aya.Trr]P
:
(Eph. 2:4), 6id

Cf.
\6yop (Jo. 15
:
3),
5td tov
xpojôi/
(Heb. 5
is
12).
Heb. 5
14;
Rev. 12
'g-qawixep
11.
The
personal
:
ground
CVS
common
:
also as in 70? fw 5td top iraTepa (Jo. 6
57),
8l'
(Heb. 6
7), etc.
Cf. 1 Jo. 4
epeKo)
bC avTou.
The aim
So to
(usually expressed
crd^jSaTOP
Slcl
by
may
be set forth by
oia also.
top apOpoowop eyepeTO Kal ovx o apdpcoiros 5td to cra^âTOP in
5t' k(xk and 8l' i^xas in Jo. 12 30. Cf. Mk. Moulton (Prol, p. 105) cites I'm 5td ae /Sao-tXeO ToO dualov Ti;xco,M.P. 16 and 20 (iii/B.c), in illustration of Jo. 6 57. The Pauline phrase 5td 'Irjaovp (2 Cor. 4:5) is illustrated by 5td
Mk.
13
:
27.
Cf. also
:
20; Ph. 3
7.
TOP KvpLOP in a Berlin
Museum papyrus letter

ff.)
(ii/A. d.)
which Deiss(8ia)
mann
(Light, pp. 176
thinks curiously illumines the story of
the Prodigal Son in Lu. 15.
In the modern Greek 7td

is
this
notion of aim or purpose with the accusative
the usual one.^

is
A common
idiom in the Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Greek ^

IVa.
the use of 5td to and the infinitive in the sense of

cally equivalent in the
It is practiis fre-
N. T. to
6tl
and the indicative and
quent.
In Jo. 2
24
f.
we have both
xp^'i-o-v
constructions parallel, 5td to
avTop ytpojdKeLP irdpTas, Kal otl ov
we
actually have 7td
m (5id IVa)
tI
In the modern Greek elx^v. with the subjunctive. Cf. English

differ practically
"for that."
alone.
(e) it
The
use of 5td
does not
from
tI
'Ev.
Inasmuch as ds
kp.
(h-s) is
is
will
be treated after
in
There
eip
merely a later variation of h^ an older form hi (locative case),

like the
epL,
and
Homer
eipi
or
for metrical reasons.

Ip
dialects (Arcadian, Cretan) wrote
Latin
in.
But some of the But compare

(ein),
Latin en-do, Umbrian en, (Latin

in (en-).
inter),
German
in
English
1. Old Use of ep with Accusative or Locative. Originally h was used with either locative or accusative, not to say genitive in a case like eip M8ao which Brugmann^ does not consider mere ellipsis.
He
cites also e/xxoSwi/ as
being really
ner of doubt as to the accusative and the locative.

tions of
1
many
of the dialects
p. 104.
But there is no manThe inscripshow abundant illustrations of kv

^
h ko8wp.
Thumb, Handb.,
K.-G.,
I,
p. 468.
Cf. Drug.,
Kurze
585
with the accusative such as the Thessahan, Boeotian, Northwest epya,^ Greek, Arcadian, etc.i Cf. ev rayâ, h oTrXtras, etc.^ So Iv to. Indeed in Cypriote Greek h usually has the accusative.-J In etc. North Arcadian kv alone appears (not kv-s, eis) and with either have locative or accusative like Latin in.^ Besides in Homer we /x-/3dXXaj, like verbs h-coira, not to mention the common compound
kn-âlvw,
:
where one might look for ets. Cf. hixâvri els irXolov (Mt. 8 23), 6 ^/x^dM h rc2 rpv^Mv (Mt. 26 23). This so-called pregnant use of h seems very natural after all. It is only in comHke position that the old usage is preserved in the N. T. or a case first might at where ds motion h 7(3 Tpu/3Xiw above after a verb of seem more natural. Cf. Lu. 9 46; 1 Cor. 11 18; Ro. 1 25. In Ro. I :2A kv occurs with irapkboiKev, but ds in verse 26. Indeed and (Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130) we find kv with StScoî, tVrrjMt as T., the N. in survive usage Remnants of this early Tidrjfxc.
: :
:
8l86vtl ev
oLTT^deTo ev
TTJ
Kap8la (2 Cor. 8
16), SeSwKev ev
rrj
xeipt (Jo.
35),
(l)v\aKfi
(Mt. 14
(I,
3).
Cf. the spurious verse Jo. 5: 4
KarelSaLvev
kv
rfj
Ko\vfiî]epa;
Par. P. 10,
2
'^v
(iii/A.D.)
Tcb/ir/;
kvaKex<:opriKev
ev 'AkeâvSpela;
e9\vaL kv 'Vayois.
Epict.
11, 32) avepxv
Tob. 5:5
Tropeu-
Cf. Blass-Debrunner, p. 131. Cf.
The
p. 83.
LXX
But
shows
it
similar examples.
Conybeare and Stock,

kv
was
only by degrees that
came
the locative case and els triumph of the Ionic-Attic Greek.^

as an adverb.^
to be associated exclusively with with the accusative as a result of the
In
In
origin therefore
Homer indeed kv appears we are not to associate kv
more than in Latin, though ultiexamples of kv in composiOther true. be mately that came to are knârehoi (Col. 2 18), motion of verbs with tion in the N. T. followed by eis). The 10:36 (Lu. kp.Tr'nrToi kn^Lîiôi (Ac. 27:6), of 'within,' whether idea the expresses evidently word therefore
primarily with the locative any
:
vernaof rest or of motion depending on the context. Compare kv that in Ac. 20 26 Note house." the in "Come English, cular
:
is not repeated with 'lepoaoXvuoLs. It seems certain that originally kv stood 2. 'Ei; Older than els. in the modern Greek vernacular kv whereas els, without alone
1 '
lb., p. 438.
Moistor, Die gricch. Dial., Bd.
I,
p. 284.
Solmscn, Inscr. Graecac, p. 4. * Mcister, Gr. Dial., Bd. II, p. 283 f. 6 Hoffmann, Gr. Dial., Bd. II, p. 591. Bcrotian also knows only tv with Dial. Inscr., p. 56 f. Pindar Boeotian Clanin, Synt. of Cf. ace. either loc. or
shows
6
if
with ace.
'
Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 438.
Monro,
lloni. Gr., p. 147.
586
NEW TESTAMENT
has entirely disappeared before els which uses only the accusative.^ There is once more unity, but not exactly on the same terms. In the Greek N. T. this process of absorption is going steadily on
as in the
kolvti
generally.
ev,
There
ets
is
rarely
much doubt
it
as to the
its
it
significance of
whereas
if
has already begun to resume

ever gave
eis
:
old
up.^
identity with h,
indeed in the vernacular

rc3
We may
Mk.
eis
compare
16.
:
aypQ
in
Mt. 24
18 with
top aypSu in
22), TrjpelcrdaL
13
Cf. ewecrx^^ xpovov

eis
eis rriv
'Aaiav (Ac. 19
KaLaapiav (25 4),

:
oIkov e<jTLv
(some MSS. in Mk. 2:1).

it
Cf.
Jo. 1
18.
ev is
In the N. T.
the most
so frequent (2698 instances) that
is
still
common
preposition.
is
Indeed Moulton^ thinks that
its
due to the fact that it had become too vague as "a maid of all work." The simplest use is with expressions of place, like ev 3. Place.
ultimate disappearance
TTJ
ayopq.
(Mt. 20 (Mt. 4
ev
3), ev 8e^La
:
(Heb.
ev
3), ev
:
tQ
dpovic
tco
(Rev. 3
21),
ev Tc3 TrXotco
21),
e;'
r^ vroXet (Lu. 7
rrj
37), ev
(Jo.
'lopdavn Trora/jcp
:
(Mt. 3:6),
k^r]\dev 6
v8aTL (3
rfj
11),
afjLweXo}
15
4).
Cf. also
\6yos ev
'lovdala (Lu. 7:17)
and
ev tc3 yaôt^vKaKlco (Jo.
For the "pregnant" construction of ev after verbs of motion cf. chapter XI, x, (0- Cf. examples given under 1. In these and like examples ev indeed adds little to the idea of the locative case which it is used to explain. See also ev toIs (Lu. 2 49) in the sense of at the house of (cf ets to. Uia, Jo. 19 27) for which Moulton^ finds abundant illustration in the papyri. Cf. kv The preposition in itself Tols 'AttoWo^vIov, R.L. 38 2 (iii/B.c). merely states that the location is within the bounds marked by the word with which it occurs. It does not mean 'near,' but
8:20).
'
'
'in,'
that
is 'inside.'
The
idea.
translation of the resultant idea
may
be indeed
in, on, at,
according to the context, but the preposition
itself retains its
own
3
There
is
nothing strange about the

ev jSaaavoLs
:
metaphorical use of
ev T<2
ev in
:
expressions like
(Lu. 16
23),
davarw
(1 Jo.
14), ev bb^rj (Ph.
19), ev iivar-qpli^ (1
Cor.
2:7), etc. 4. Expressions of Time.

the mere
locative.
'Ev
rfj
may
:
Cf. ev
eaxary
appear rather oftener than 44, but rfj rifiepa in Jo. 6

:
eaxo-rxi rjixepa
r]ix'epo.Ls
in 6
54, while in 6
it
40 the MSS. vary.
By ev
Tpiaiv
(Jo.
19)
is
clear that Jesus
meant the
resurrection
^ Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 142. V. and D., Mod. Gk., p. 109 f. In the Ptol. papyri, Rossberg (Priip., p. 8) finds 2245 Prol., p. 103.
examples of
*
iv
and
Prol., p. 103.
it is the most common preposition. On the retreat of iv before ets see Jann.,
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 380.
will
587
take place within the period of three days. Cf. rfj tp'ltxi wkpg. h in the N. T.) in Mt. 16 21. ^ More common exkv pressions arc ev aa^ârw (Mt. 12 2), h rfi rjixkpa (Jo. 11:9), (Lu. 8 1), vvKTi (11 10), hv too devrepu) (Ac. 7: 13), h tQ Kade^^s
(never with
:
:
rf?
T<3
nera^v (Jo. 4
:
31),
rats
i7jLtepais
ketrats
:
(Mt. 3
1),
ev
rrj
Trapovaia (1
:
Th. 2 19), h rfj avaaraaeL (Mk. 12 (Mt. 10 15), kv Tfi kaxo^Tji aaXinyyt (1 Cor. 15 52), etc. Cf. Lu. 1:7. Another temporal use of ev is kv w in the sense of 'while' (Mk. 2:19). Cf. also kv oh in Lu. 12 1. The frequent use, espewith the infincially in Luke (cf. kv tw vTrocrrpkipeLv, 8 40), of kv rc3 in the ancient occur idiom this itive calls for a word. Examples of ^ and the in Plato) 26 Thucydides, in Xenophon, 6 in
23), ku i]p.kpq. Kpiaeuis
:
:
Greek (16 papyri show
it
occasionally.^
Cf. kv
is
tc3
XoyiêffOat,
Par. P. 63
a constant translation of a and it (ii/B.c). But in the T. as a result of the the N. is much more abundant in
profusion.
5.
LXX
LXX
'Among.'
With
plural
nouns
kv
may have
:
the resultant
'within.'
idea of 'among,' though, of course, in itself
it is still 'in,'
Thus we note kv yewrjTois yvvaiKdv (Mt. 11 11), eariv kv qp.'iv (Ac. riyep-baiv 2 29), riv kv avToh (4 34), kv vpXv (1 Pet. 5:1), kv toIs
: :
'lovba
(Mt. 2:6).
different
This
is
common idiom
in the ancient Greek.
Not very
b4>do.\p.ol%
from
:
this idea (cf. Latin apvd) is the use kv
kv
w(hv (Mt. 21 42), like Latin coram. vplv in 1 Cor. 6 2. Cf. kv roTs Wvtaiv (Gal.
:
One may note

1
:
also
16).
See also 2
Cor. 4:3; 8:1.

6.
'In the Case of/ 'in the Person of or simply 'in.' A frequent use is where a single case is selected as a specimen or Here the resultant notion is 'in the case striking illustration. greatly from the metaphorical use of kv differ not does of,' which 24 38. Thus with dTroKaXuTrrco note Lu. Cf. etc. mind, soul, with
^
:
kv kfiol
(Gal.
16), ciSojs kv eavrui (Jo. 6
61), ykvrjTaL kv
kjxol (1
Cor.
:
15), kv tQ> ^T?pc3 Ti
ykvqraL (Lu. 23
:
31), kv
i)p.tv iiaQr]Te
(1
Cor. 4
6), kv Txi K\a<reL
(Lu. 24
35).
:
One may note

tw
15
Trjo-oO
:
also kv
tc3
'ASAm
iravres
6.Trodvr}(TKOv(nv (1
Cor. 15
22), kv
(llo.
nytaaiikvj]
kv
irvtvp-aTt a.ylw
16), i]ylaaTaL kv
KarayyeWeLV (Ac. 4:2), rfj yvvaid (1

kv Kvplco (1
Cor. 7: 14), etc.
Paul's frequent mystical use of
Cor.
1),
cj/
XpL(TTU)
(Ro. 6
11, 23, etc.)
may
be compared with Jesus'

15 :4).
Cf. also kv
rco
own
1
words, ixdvart
kv kpoi,
Kayw
kv vjjuv^Jo.
it is for
impossible Sec especially Field's valuable note on this verso showing how Cf. also Abbott, the resurrection to have occurred on the fourth ihiy.
Cir., p. 255 f. Moulton, Proi.,
Joh.
2
p. 215.
lb., p. 14.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 379.
588
5tc3

:
in Col. 3 3. The LXX usage is not quite on a par with this profound meaning in the mouth of Jesus and Paul, even if "extremely indefinite" to the non-Christian.^ But Moulton^ agrees with Sanday and Headlam (Ro. 6:11) that the mystic indwelling
is
Christ's
own
is,
idea adopted
by Paul.
The
classic discussion of
Deissmann's Die Neutestamentliche Formel "in Christo Jesu" (1892), in which by careful study of the LXX and the N. T. he shows the depth and originality of Paul's
of course,
kv Xpto-rw. Moulton^ doubts if even here the N.T. writers make an innovation, but the fulness of the Christian content would amply justify them if they did have to do so.
the matter
idea in the use of
See
1.
ev avTca eKTladr} to. Travra (Col. 1

:
16).
:
As
further examples
cf.
Ro. 9
1
1;
14
14; Ph. 3
9;
Eph. 4
21.
As
a Dative?
:
One may
hesitate to say dogmatically that in
Cor. 14
11
\a\uv
ev eixol âpâpos,
we have
kv
used merely as
modern Greek). But rep \a\ovvTL jSapâpos in the same verse looks that way,* and Moulton^ cites rots ev de<2 Trarpt ri'ya'!rr]ij.evoi.s (Ju. 1) and reminds US of the common ground between the locative and dative in Sanskrit where the locative
the dative
(cf.
eh in
appears with verbs of speaking.
Cf. also ev
kfioi
in Ph. 1
26.
books (Thackeray, Gr., p. 14). One may compare eTolrjaav ev aurco (Mt. 17 12). There seems no doubt that d/jLoXoyeco ev (Mt. 10 32; Lu. 12 8) is due^ to literal translation of the Aramaic. The use of ev with dfivvvai (Mt. 5 34) is similar to the Hebrew a. It is needless to multiply un8. Accompanying Circumstance. duly the various uses of ev, which are "innumerable" in the LXX^ where its chief extension is due to the imitation of the Hebrew s.^ But by no means all these uses are Hebraic. Thus ev for the idea of accompanying circumstance is classical enough (cf. ev ottXols elvai, Xen. Anab. 5. 9, like English "The people are up in arms"), though the LXX abounds with it. It occurs also in the papyri. Cf. Tb.P. 41 (119 B.C.). Here ev draws close to fiera and <tvv in
also ev
e/xoi
Note
Kvpie in late
LXX
Blass, Gr. of
eiders this
2
N. T. Gk., p. 131. Simcox, Lang, an "extra-grammatical" point.
of the
N.
T., p. 144, con-
Prol., p. 103.
With
this cf. ttouo) eu (Mt. 17
12; Lu. 23
:
31),
an idiom
avr^
paralleled in the
(1
LXX.
Cf. k^tXeâro kv
iixol (1
Cliron. 28
4), fipkriKa iv
Chron. 28
3 *
^
6).
*
Prol., p. 103.
Prol., p. 103.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 131.
.
lb.
p.'
of ip of
8
Cf Thack., dr., S., Sel., etc., p. 82. accompanying circiunstance in the LXX. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130.
C. and
47, for the frequent use
PREPOSITIONS
usage.
^}\.6v
(np(X)E2Ei2;)
589
(Lu. 14
:
Note, for instance,

ev
Ska
x'-^'-^-'î-^
viravTrjaai
31),
kv aylaLS
nvpiaaLU avrov (Ju. 14), ev iraaLV ai>a\a^6vTes (Eph.

irepLiraTetv
16),
crroXaTs
(Mk. 12
38),
Ipxovrai
ev
hdv/jLaaiv
20:12), fxereKa25),kv ev \pvxous (Ac. 7: 14), elaepx^raL kv atnart (Heb. 9 XeaaTO Tc3 vdari. Kal ev tco ai/jLarL (1 Jo. 5 6), ev paj38co eXOco (1 Cor. 4 21), ev TrXrjpcljjuaTi (Ro. 15 29), ev KeXeva/JLaTt (1 Th. 4 16), TrepijSaXetrat
TTpoâroiv
(Mt. 7:15),
kv \evKo2s
Kadeôp-kvovi (Jo.
ev IfiaTLOLs
(Rev. 3 5;
: :
cf.
Mt. 11:8). Note
also ev
iJivaTr]pl(X)
\aXoviJ.ev
These examples (1 Cor. 2 7) where 'in the form of is the idea. show the freedom of the preposition in this direction. Somewhat
more complicated is a passage like avOpwiros ev TvevpLaTL aKaOaprc^ (Mk. 1 23), which Blass^ properly compares with wvevixa aKadaprov exL (Mk. 3 30) and the double use in Ro. 8 9, vfêls 8e ovk hare
:
:
ev (xapKL
dXXd
ev TrvevjiaTL, e'tVep
-Kvevp-a
deov
olKel ev v/juv
(followed
by
TTvevna XpiaTov ovk exet)-
The notion
it
:
of
manner
:
is
closely alcj'
lied to this
idiom as
:
we
see
in ev biKaLoavvf} (Ac. 17
8, cf.
31),
wapprj-
ala (Col. 2
:
15), ev rdxet
:
(Lu. 18
Taxv and
raxecos).
Cf.
Mt.
6 18 and Jo. 18
9.
20.
to,'
'Amounting
4
:
'Occasion,'
'Sphere.'
Moulton- considers
(note sim-
Mk.
8, ecf)epev eis rpiaKOvra Kal ev e^rjKOVTa Kal ev eKarov
and ev), as showing that ev sometimes is Cf. also Ac. 7: 14 (LXX). used in the sense of 'amounting to.' The idiom is present in the papyri. Moulton cites rpolKa ev 8paxjuats evvaKoalais, B.U. 970 (ii/A.D.), Trjv TpcoTrjv doaiv ev Spaxpôus reaoapaKovTa, O.P. 724 (U/b.c). He {Prol, p. 76) quotes Hb. P. 42
ilarity here
between
eis
(hi/B.c), hwaopev ev
:
6(l)eL\r]p.aTt,
as "predicative" use of
'
ev.
He
compares Eph. 2 15, ev bbypacnv, consisting in decrees.' Certain 9 riyopacras ev t<2 alparl aov we have price ^ indiit is that in Rev. 5 cated by ev. Cf. Ro. 3 25; Ac. 20 28. In a few examples ev gives the occasion, as evyev ev tw Xoyco tovtw (Ac. 7 29), ev rfj iroKvKoyla Note also avTOiV elaaKOvadr]crovTaL (Mt. 6:7), ev tovtw (Jo. 16 30). \aTpevw ev tQ irvevpaTi pov ev tco evayyeXlco (Ro. 1 9) where the second ev suggests 'in the sphere of.' Cf. ev perpcp (Eph. 4 16), 12). In simple ev TovTOLs 'ladi (1 Tim. 4 15), ev vopco ^paprov (Ro. 2 truth the only way to know the resultant meaning of ev is to note
: :
carefully the context.
It is so simple in idea that it
appears in
every variety of conncHition.

10.
Instrumental
Cases.
Blass'' considers it
Use of ev. See previous discussion under due to Hebrew inflaence as does Jan2
* *
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 131. Rare and possibly Hebraistic. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 130.
Prol., p. 103.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 3S0.
590
naris.^

The
NEW TESTAMENT
ku
ancient Greek writers did use

Katco
:
with certain verbs,
as the N. T.
TTvpi (1
Cor. 3
13),
(Rev. 17: 16, some MSS.), dTroKaXuTrrco ku dXtfco h tIvl (Mt. 5 13), /jLerpeoi h ui fj.Tpcx} (Mt.
irvpl
:
2).2
The
construction in
(II.
i.
itself is
as old as Homer.^
xxiv. 38).
Cf. ev
64)6a\iJ.o7s
FiSeadaL
587),
irvpl KaieLv (II.
It is ab-
normally frequent in the LXX under the influence of the Hebrew ^* but it is not so common in the N. T. Besides, the papyri show undoubted examples of it.^ Moulton finds Ptolemaic examples of h idLaxo-lpv, Tb.P. 16 al.; dLoXvofxevaL ku tc3 Xt/io; Par. P.
28
(ii/n.c), while
22 has
to) Xlijlui
StaXu^rjmt
and note
.
tovs kueaxv-
can only say, therefore, that the LXX accelerated the vernacular idiom in this matter. The Aramaic probably helped it on also. The blending
fihovs tv TLffLv ayvorjiiaaLv, Par. P.
63
(ii/B.c.)
We
of the instrumental with the locative in form facilitated this usage beyond a doubt,^ and the tendency to use prepositions abundantly helped also.'' But even so one must observe that all
the N. T. examples of
of the locative.
kv
can be explained from the point of view
The
possibility of this point of
view
is
the reason
why
kv
was so used
in the beginning.
pass by examples like
âwTLaeL ku iruevfjiaTL ayico Kal irvpl (Mt. 3:11) as probably not being instances of the instrumental usage at all. But there are real instances enough. Take Lu. 22 49 d waHere the smiting can be regarded as loTCLôfxeu ku iiaxalpri; cated in the sword. To be sure, in English, we translate the resultant idea by 'with,' but ku in itself does not mean 'with.' That resultant idea can only come in the proper context. So kv
jSaTTTifco ku v5aTL,
:
Toj Beeft/SouX
apxovTL tQiu
8aLfj.ouiwv kKj3aX\eL
(Mt. 12
24).
Here the
ku aubpl
1),
casting out
is
located in the prince of demons.
Cf.
kp'luoj
:
(Ac. 17:31), ku ^pax'iouL (Lu. 1:51), ku 56Xco

/xaxatprjs
(Mk. 14
ku
4>bv(jo
(Heb. 11 37).
:
The Apocaly]3se has

(2
:
several examples, like
'Ko\ep.i](roi ku rfj pofxcpala
16), airoKTeLuai ku pofjLcpala Kal ku Xt/ic3 Kal
kv daucLTco
(6
8),
ku fxaxalprj aTTOKTevet
(13
10).
In Rev.
it
14
15,
Kpaôiu
ku
4)cou7J,
we do not
:
necessarily have to explain

:
:
in this
manner. Cf. Ro. 2 16; 2 28; IJo. 2 3; Jas. 3:9. On the whole there is little that is out of harmony with the vernacular KOiuri in the N. T. use of ku, though Abbott^ thinks that the ex
Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 379.
But
see Deiss., B. S., p. 119
f.
2 ^ *
6 6
W.-Th., p. 388. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 144. C. and S., p. 82; Thack., p. 47. Moulton, Prol., pp. 12, 61, 104, 234
lb., p. 61.
f.
j^^nn., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 379.
^
Job. Gr., p. 256.
591
amplcs of Deissmann and Moulton do not exactly parallel the N. T. instrumental use. For repetition of ku see 2 Cor. 6 4 ff. (/) Els. There is nothing to add to the etymology of ets as compared with that of kv save that els is known to be really kv-s as we find it in the inscriptions of Argos, Crete, etc. So kps 'Adavalav} This s seems to have been added to kv by analogy to e^.^ Usually with the disappearance of v the form was eis, but Thucydides, like the Ionic and Doric writers and the poets, preferred es which was current in the inscriptions before 334 b.c.^ So is appears in a Phrygian Christian inscription.^ But the iEolic eis gradually drove out all the other forms.^ Originally, therefore, kv alone existed with either locative or accusative, and els appears nowhere else save in the Greek. The classic use of els A'iSov (some MSS. in Ac. 2 27, 31 and reading in Is. 14 15) is the true genitive, according to
: :
:
Brugmami
1.
lie
(Griech Gr., p. 439), 'in the sphere of Hades.'

ela-Keladat means merely to means the same thing as kv, it used only with the accusative, and gradually special-
Original Static Use.
In
Homer
within.
But, though
els
really
was
early
ized thus one of the usages of
kv.
The
locative with
kv,
however,
continued to be used sometimes in the same sense as the accusative with ets. The accusative indeed normally suggests motion
and that did come to be the common usage of ets plus The resultant idea would often be 'into,' but Ets is not used much in this was by no means always true. composition in the N, T. and always where motion is involved
(extension),
the accusative.
save in the case of eia-aKovu where there seems
little
difference
between
and kv (cf. 1 Cor. 14 :21; Mt. 6 7). In itself eis expresses the same dimension relation as kv, viz. tw." It does not of itself mean into, unto, or to. That is the resultant idea
ets
:
of the accusative case with verbs of motion.

this static use of
It
is
true that in
the later Greek ets with the idea of rest (in) is far more common than in the earlier Greek. This was naturally so, since in the vernacular ets finally drove kv out entirely and did duty for both, just as originally kv did. The only difference is that ets used the one case (accusative), whereas kv used either ac'
Solmsen, Inscr. Graecae, p. 46.

Brug., Grioch. Gr., p. 438.
He
treats iv
and tU together.
52.').
Ramsay,
Cf.
Cities
and Bishoprics
p. 80,
of Plirygia, II, p.
Cf. also Psiehari,
fitudcs dc Philol., 1892, p. v.

6
H. W. 8inyth,
Transactions of
p.
Am.
Philol. Assoc, for 1887.
J.
Fraser (CI. Qnarterly, 1908,
270) shows that in Cretan

"
wo
liave iu^ bp06v

I,
(before vowel), but
t6v (before consonant).
K.-G.,
p. 408.
592
NEW TESTAMENT
But^ then the accusative was once the only and must be allowed large liberty. And even in the classic writers there are not wanting examples. These are usually explained^ as instances of "pregnant" construction, but it is possible to think of them as survivals of the etymological idea of ets (h-s)
cusative or locative.
case
with only the general notion of the accusative case. Certainly the vernacular laid less stress on the distinction between els and h than the literary language did. Though eis falls behind kv in the
N. T.
in the proportion of 2 to 3,
still,
as in the papyri^
and the
examples of static els occur. Some of these were referred to under h, where the "pregnant" use of h for ets occurs. Hatzidakis gives abundant examples of h as ets and ets as h. Cf. ets 'AXeâvSpetav ecrrt, B.U. ii. 385; ets tvvôv KelfxaL, Kaibel Epigr. 134; KLvSwemavTos ets daXaaaav, B.U, 423 (ii/
inscriptions
and the
LXX/
number
of
A.D.).
Deissmann (Light, p. 169) notes Paul's klv8vvoi.s h daXaaaij and that the Roman soldier in the last example writes " more vulIn these examples
it is
garly than St. Paul."

fact that
not necessary nor
comments on the Matthew (but see below) has no such examples and John but few, while Luke has most of them. I cannot, however, follow Blass in citing Mk. 1 9 kâTTTladr] els tov 'lop8avr]v as an example. The idea of motion in /JaTrrtfco suits ets as well as ev in Mk. 1 5. Cf. vl\paL els (Jo. 9:7). But in Mt. 28:19, /SaTrrtfoj/res ets TO
pertinent to bring in the idea of 'into.'
Blass^
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

(Ac. 2
38),
true of
jSctt-
where only the context and the tenor of N. T. teaching can determine whether 'into,' 'unto' or merely 'in' or 'on' ('upon') is the right translation, a task for the interpreter, not for the grammarian. One does not need here to appeal to the Hebrew spa i?^ as Tholuck does (Beitrdge zur Spracherkldrung des N. T., p. 47 f.). Indeed the use of opojjLa for person is common in the papyri (Deissmann, Bible Deissmann gives examples of ets opona, eir' Studies, p. 196 f.). 6u6p.aros, and the mere locative ovbixaTi, from the papyri. The
TL(xdr]Tw els acpecTLv tcov anapTLojv
static use of
ets is
seen in
its
distributive use like tv in
Mk. 4
8, ets
rpiaKOVTa
/cat
ev e^rjKovra koI ev eKarov.

'in,'
But
there are undoubted
examples where only

1 2
'on' or 'at' can be the idea.
Thus

lb., p. 377.
Cf. Mullach, Gr. d. griech. Vulgarsp., p. 380.
Blass, Gr. of
f.;
N. T. Gk., p. 123, calls it a "provincialism." Moulton, Prol., p. 234 f. 4 C. and S., Sel., p. 81.
Cf. further Hatz., Einl., p. 210

^ ^
Moulton, Prol., p. 62 f. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 122.
KTipvaffoiv els
593
is
ras avpayuyas
(Mk.
:
39)
where there
some excuse
kXdchv KardoKT]eis
for the "pregnant" explanation because of riXOev. aev eis -koKlv (Mt. 2 23; 4 13), but note only (Heb. 11 9) and evpkdr] els "Aôjtov (Ac. 8 40).
:
:
So
rapcpKrjaep
yriv
els
Cf. Kadrjuhov
TO opos
(Mk. 13
:
3), 6 eis t6v
ay p6v (Mk. 13
(Lu. 11
:
16), rots els tov oIkov
(Lu. 9
61),
cf.
els rr}V kolttjv elaiv
7), eyKaToXei^peLS els a^Tju

:
(Ac.
2 8
27;
23),
verse 31), rots

xpovov
:
eis
naKpav (2
'Aalav
39),
eis
xoXw
:
ovTa (Ac.
els
eirkax^v
els
Trjv
(Ac.
19
22), awodavelv
'lepovaaKrjn (Ac. 21
els
13),
eis 'Pco/xtjj^
c!:v
papTvprjaau (Ac. 23
tov koKttou (Jo. 1
:
11), TrjpeZadai
KaLffapiau (Ac.
25
:
:4), 6
riv
els
18), ol rpeis eis

is
TO ev elaiv (1 Jo. 5
all.
8), eis
aTrjre (1
:
Pet. 5
12).
Nor
this quite
In some
10.
MSS.
:
in
ev oUcp).
10
In Ac. 2 5 Another instance 20

eis
Mk. 2 1 we have eis oUov eaTiv (NBDL the MSS. vary between eis and ev as in Mk.
is
found in Eph. 3
:
16, KpaTaLwdrjvai
els
TOV eaoo avdpoîrov.

necxov (Jo.
:
Cf. Jo. 20
7;
Mk.
13 :9.
But
is
in
ecxTr]
els
to
19, 26)
we have motion, though

of rest.
eaTrj els tov
alyiaXov
(Jo. 21
4) is
an example
eis
Jo. 17
23
is
normal.
In Mt.
little dif:
10
41
f.,
6vop.a irpoî^Tov {p.aQr]Tov, bualov)
one can see

eis
ference between
neTevorjaav
els
and
ev.
Certainly this
it is
true of Mt. 12
'
41,
Krjpvypa 'loova,
'to.'
where
absurd to take
as into' or
'unto' or even
2.
See also
Gvvr\yp.evoi els to ep.6v 6vopa{},ii.
18 20).
:
With Verbs of Motion. But the usual idiom with eis was undoubtedly with verbs of motion when the motion and the accusative case combined with eis ('in') to give the resultant meaning of 'into,' 'unto,' 'among,' 'to,' 'towards' or 'on,' 'upon,' according to the context. This is so common as to call for little illustration. As with ev so with eis, the noun itself gives the boundary or limit. So eis ttiv okiav (Mt. 2:11), eis to opos
(5:1), eis TO TpaiTwpiov (27 27), eis OaKaaaav (17 27), eis tov ovpavbv (Rev. 10 5), eis 'iBvr] (Ac. 22 21), eis ireipaffp-bv (Mt. 6 13), eis to ixv-qp-elov (Jo. 11 38), eis Triv bbbv (Mk. 11:8), eis tous ixadrjras (Lu. 6 :20), eis toi^s Xr/<7Tas (Lu. 10 36), eis kVlvt^v (Rev. 2 22), eis
:
: :
TO.
be^LO.
:
(Jo. 21 :6),
eis
ttiv Ke(f)a\r]v
(Mt. 27:30),
:
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 be seen at once, if one consults the context in th(\se passages, that the preposition does not of itself mean 'into' even with verbs of motion. That is indeed one of the resultant meanings among
:
many
Trjv
others.
eaxlf^^V
The
^'^
:
m(>tai)horical uses
do not
24),
differ in principle,
such as
û>T]v
^^^
8),
(Mt. 27:
eis
51), avvayetv
els ev
(Jo. 11
viraKorjv
52),
eis
(Mt. 18
KplaLv (Jo.
eis
(2 Cor.
594
10
:

5), els x^tpas
NEW TESTAMENT
many
interesting
(Mt. 17
22), etc.
For
ples of
h and ets see Theimer, Die Prdpositionen els,
h,
U im
examN. T.,
im N. T., 1896. Here eis marks either the limit or accents the duration expressed by the accusative. Thus in 2 Tim. 1 12 we find 4>v\aâL els eKelvrjv TTjv Tjiiepau where 'until' suits as a translation (cf. 'against'). Cf. Ph. 1 10, els wepau
3.
Beitrdge zur Kenntnis des Sprachgebrauches
With Expressions of Time.

:
XpLCTTov.
Not
quite so sharp a limit
is els Tijv is
avpiov (Mt. 6
.34).
Cf.
Pet. 1:11.
There
is little
that
added by the preposition

ets
to the accusative in such examples as

eis
to n'eWov (Lu. 13
:
9),
Tov aloiva
bi-qveKks
(Mt. 21 (Heb. 7 3),

:
19), ets 7ejêds Kal yeveas (Lu. 1
50), ets ro
etc.
Cf. Lu. 12
ets
19.
But a more
:
definite
period
is
set in cases
hke
It
tov Kaipbv (Lu. 1
20),
ets
to p.eTa^v
ca^l3aTov (Ac. 13 :42).

ets used where Indeed already ets and the accusative occur where the dative alone would be sufficient. This is especially true in the LXX, but the papyri show examples also. Cf. ol els XpiaTov {Mart. Pauli, II). Moulton (Prol,
4.
Like a Dative.
is
not strange to see

is
disposition or attitude of
mind
set forth.
p. 246) cites
Tb.P.
16, ov X-qyovTes
TTjt [ets]
avTovs aWaSia,
"where
^
ets
actually stands for the possessive genitive." the complete disappearance of the dative in
nacular.
ets
els ets
One must remember modern Greek ver:
Note
TTJs
:
\oyias
12),
ttjs ets
to us dyiovs (1 Cor. 16
ets
1),
tXoutw
TrdvTas
(Ro. 10
TrXeomfw
(Ac. 2
(Ph. 4
17), e\erip.o(yvvas woLrjawv
TO Wvos (Ac. 24
17), XeLTOvpydv els to. Wvr] (Pv,o.

ets
: :
15
16), d7ro/3Xe7rcj
:
34 f.), to (Mt. 18 6), xPWrbs els (Eph. 4 32), aydiriqv els (Ro. 5:8), etc. If one entertains hostile feeHngs the resultant idea with ets will be 'against,' though the word does not of itself mean that. So in Lu. 12 10 ets tov vlbv tov
:
(Heb. 11
els
26), XeTet
25), opvvo:
els
(Mt. 5
:
avTo
dXXjjXous (Ro. 12
:
16), TnaTeveiv ets
dvdpwTTOv (cf. Kara in
Mt. 12
32)
and
ets els
to aytov irveviia
^Xaacjy-ri-
HVaavTL,
els
^\d(T(t)r]iJLa els
:
(Ac. 6:11), eTLôvXrj
(Ac. 23
30), dp.apTaveLV
(Lu. 15
18), etc.
uates here
is
As a matter of fact all that ets really accentthe accusative case (with reference to) which happens
to be in a hostile atmosphere. But that is not true of such examples as ijOeTrjaav els eavTovs (Lu. 7:30), ets ttjv krayyeXlav tov deov (Ro. 4 :20), etc. For oxPovTat ets in Jo. 19 37 see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 245. In the modern Greek ets has dis:
placed the dative in the vernacular.

5. Aim or Purpose. Sometimes indeed ets appears in an atmosphere where aim or purpose is manifestly the resultant idea.
1
Moulton,
Prol., p. G3; C.
and
S., p.
82; W.-Th., p. 396
f.
Thus we may note kXOuu 2 12). Here the second
:
595
els
els
ttju
TpwdSa ds
to evayyeKLov (2 Cor.
suggests the purpose of his coming.
Cf. also TOVTO xotetre

15
does not
els
mean
els
'for,'
So with
stance,
ixapTvpiov
ttjv eij.r]v avaixv-qaiv (1 Cor. 11:24), where though that is clearly the resultant idea. Take Ro. 11 36, for inavTols (Mt. 8:4).
els
:
where
abrbv
is
els
set over against e^ aiiTov.

(})6ôv
:
Cf. again
eudeL^LP in
els
86âv deov in Ph.
1:11,
in
Ro. 8
15,
els
Ro.
in Jo. 6 27. One may not doubt also that Mt. 26 28, to irepl toXXojp eKxvvv6p.evov els acpeaiv But it by no means follows that the same idea is exanapTtoJv. pressed by els a(t)eaLv in Mk. 1 4 and Ac. 2 38 (cf. Mt. 10 41),
25,
els t<^riv alcovLOP
this is the idea in
though that
may
ets
in the abstract
for the interpreter to decide.
remains a matter One must not omit here also the

It
be true.
frequent use of
TO eixwalâL in
to
:
and the
19,
els
infinitive to express design.

:
Cf.
els
Mt. 20
to aTavpa^drjvac in 26
2.
See chapter on
:
Verbal Nouns for further discussion. Cf. also ets tovto (Mk. 1 38), cts avTO tovto (2 Cor. 5:5), ayopa^cx) els (Jo. 13 29), ets cnraVTTjaiv
:
(Mt. 25
6), ets viravTriaiv aiiTU) (Jo.
12
13).^
Cf. ^v\wv
els
eXaLcouas
nov (Fay. P., 50 a.d.), 'sticks for

Light, etc., p. 157),
B.C.), 'for
(iV.
ets
my
olive-gardens' (Deissmann,
(P. Fl.-Pet.,
ii.
lttttov evo-xXovixevov
XXV, 226
a sick horse' (Deissmann, B.

uiKoddiJirjaev
S., p. 118).
T. Gr., p. 112) cites
ets
eavTou (83
Radermacher N. Chr. Wadd.
Inscr., 2614).
6. Predicative Use. But there remains one more use of ets which, though good KOLvq, was greatly accelerated by the influence of the LXX.^ This is where ets occurs in the predicate with etyut or
ylvofxat,
ktX.
Radermacher (N. T.
Gr.,
p. 16
f.)
quotes
iVa /x^ ets
xPcofxlov y'evi)TaL,
P. Fay. 119, 276 (100 A.D.); Heliod., yEthiop.Yl,
14, Trjv -wripav els Kadedpav TOLrjaafxevr] ;
iEneas 114, 5 H, ywalKas

ecrrat to. crKoXtd ets
oTrXlaavTes
cos es
eWeias (Is.
40
4).
and even the Attic author avdpas. Thus in Lu. 3 5, So eaeade jxol els vlovs Kai Ovya:
Tepas (2 Cor. 6
cf.
18,
ri
LXX);
Xvttj
eaovTaL ol
dm
els
crapKa ixlav
(Mt. 19
ets
5;
Gen. 2
:
24);
v/jlcov els
xapdi' yeprjaeTai (Jo. 16: 20).
Cf.
Lu. 13
19.
As already remarked,
this predicate use of
ap-
pears in the papyri^ and in the Apostolic Fathers,'* but not with
'
Prol., p. 14.
This can no longer be called a Hebraism, since the pap. have it. Moulton, Cf. tUa.iravrrj(jLv, Tb. P. 43 (ii/B.c). Roufliac (llochorchcs, p. 28)
ets 4>v\aKiiv in
finds dvaL
'
inscr. of
f.
Prione 50, 39 (ii/B.c).
C. and
S., p.
81
f.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 71
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.
p. 143, cites
an
ex.
from
Theogn.
596

we find
1
:
the frequency that

credits
eis
it
in the
LXX.
:
Cf. Lu. 13
19.
Blass^
in i;7ra7e
(cf.
els eiprjvrjv
(Mk. 5
34) to the
Hebrew through
the
7
:
LXX
53)
els
Sam.
17).
Cf. also
where
els is
much
like ev.
els dLarayas ayyeKwv (Ac. In general therefore, as with ev
we must hark back to first principles and work out to by means of the context and the history. 7. Compared with ewi, wapd and irpos. The growth in the of els is shown by its appearance where eirl or irpbs would be
so with
the use
ex-
resultant idea
pected in the older Greek.

the point
is
Cf. epx^raL
'to.'
:
els ttoKlv
(Jo.
4:5), where
to
nvrjixelov.
not
'into,'
e-rrl,
but
not
D has dakaaaav, DHP have in 7:31 NBD have

In 11 38
:
els.
So 11 31, So in Mk. 3
2
:
vira.'yeL
els
7, avexoipâev irpos ttjv
eis.
Cf.
Mk.
13,
has
els
for
irapa.
and
is,
not
irpos.
(g)
'Ek
(|).
The etymology
Old
Irish ess,
(e^
of this
word
is
simple.
Cf. Latin
ex
(e),
Gallic ex,
Cymric
eh.
In the Greek the form

e
varies thus
before vowels), ey (assimilation),
(Locrian,
cf.
Latin
e), es
or eas like Old Irish (Arcadian, Boeotian, Thessalian).
The
1.
original
form was
e^,
then
like
Latin
ex, e.
Cf..
Brugmann,
Griech Gr., p. 147.
Meaning.
(XTTo
The word means
'out
of,'
like
or vrapa.
It stands in contrast to ev {ev-s).^
'from within,' not In the modern
Greek vernacular airb has displaced e/c except in the Epirot dx or But in the N. T. k is still ahead of a-Ko. The indifference 6x.^ of the scribes^ as to which they used is shown in the MS. variations between k- and oltto as in Mt. 7:4; 17 9; Mk. 16 3. The writings of John (Gospel, Epistles, Revelation) use k more frequently than any other N. T. books.^ In the late Greek (eighth century a.d.) we find the accusative with k, and this was the last usage to survive.^ Brugmann^ indeed thinks that k may even rarely use the genuine genitive besides the ablative, but I doubt this. But it is certain that k used the locative in Arcadian, Cypriotic and Pam: :
phylian dialects after analogy of ev (Buck, Greek Dialects, p. 101 f.).^ 2. In Composition. It is very common and sometimes with
the "perfective" idea.
a-Kopohiievoi in
So we note
:
e^-aTopovfxevoL
contrasted with
:
2 Cor. 4
8.^
Cf. also k-SaTraraco (2 Cor. 12
15),
Gr. of N. T. Gk.
Moulton, ProL, p. 102. On p. 246 he cites Psichari as saj'ing that TOP is still "line forme vivante." * Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 145. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 381. 6 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 126. ^ Griech. Gr., p. 440. 8 Delbriick, Die Grundl., p. 129; Meister, Griech. Dial., I, pp. 285, 307. 9 Moulton, Prol., p. 237.
3
PREPOSITIONS (IIPOGESEIS)
kK-8m0fxai (Ac. 13 :41), eK-Oafx^koo (Mk. 9 15), kK-davixaôi 12 17), eK-Kadaipw (2 Tim. 2 21), ^paumco (1 Pet. 1 10).
:
: :
597
(Mk.
The
other uses in composition follow the root-idea of the word closely, meaning 'out of,' 'away,' etc., like k^kpxoiiaL, e/c/SdXXaj, etc. 'Ek has a causative force in composition sometimes as in eânapravo},
'cause to sin'
3.
Place.
sions of
<))u)vri
(LXX), and eK4>ol3e1v (2 Cor. 10 9). The preposition naturally is common with expresThe strict idea of from within is common, as in place.
:
K T03V ovpavcov
:
(Mt. 3
17),
rod o^âXôO (Lu. 6
42), ck tcov
tls
nvnueluu (Mt. 8
in eK
Trjs
28), etc.
Often
it
appears in contrast with
as
'lovSaias els ttjv TaKiXaiav (Jo.
47), rod
e/c
Vfj.ds
KoXkaavTOS
oKOTovs
literal
tv
ets
TO
</)cos
(1 Pet.
:
9),
where the metaphorical follows the
usage.
In Lu. 6
tQ
6(t>da\ix(2.
42 k tov b4>da\p.ov is set in opposition to In Ac. 8 38 f we have both ets to uScop and k rod
: .
iiSaros.
So
in
Mk.
10 avaâivup
rod v5aTos a previous presence
In a case like KaraâivbvTwv k tov bpovs (Mt. kp tQ vSari, is implied. and Lu. airo) we are not to suppose that Mk. parallels in 17: 9;
they had been in a cave, but merely up in the mountain (cf English idiom), the term "mountain" including more than the earth
.
and rock. Cf. ets to opos in Mt. 5:1. But in Mt. 8 1 we merely have dTTo tov opovs. Note likewise dpl^ k ttjs Kcf)a\r]s (Lu. 21 18),
:
:
K tCiv xî-p^v
(Ac. 12
7).
Thus we explain
28
:
also Kpep-a/ievov to drjplov

:
TTJs
xeipbs avTOV (Ac.

:
4),
be^tuv
(Mt. 20
21), e^ kvavTlas
(Mk. 15 39), etc. It is not necessary to record all the verbs with which k occurs. In Lu. 5 3 kbidaaKev k tov t'KoLov the teaching is represented as proceeding out of the boat (Jesus was in the boat). One may compare with this eyeipeTat k- tov belTrvov (Jo. 13
:
4), avaXvaji
tcov
yap-wv (Lu. 12
3G),
d'Tro/cuXtetJ'
tov \iQov tK t^s dvpas

4).
(Mk. 16
4.
3),
dLaawdevTa
k rrjs OaXaaarjs
(Mk. 10
: :
(Ac. 28
k-
Time.
With
expressions of time
gives the point of de:
parture, hke
Xpbvoiv (Lu.
k
23
veoT-qTos
:
20), e^ apxrjs (Jo. 6

:
64), e^ kavCiv
8),
tov aiojvos (Jo. 9

66).
is
32),
xoXXcov hojv (Ac.
24
10),
TovTov (Jo. 6
the point of departure

(Jo. 9
:
really present.
:
In cases where succession is involved Thus with k- bevTepov
44), ^fxkpav k^ wkpas (2 Pet. 2:8). 24), k tp'ltov (Mt. 26 Other advero'aiJ phrases have a similar origin as with k fxepovs 34), e^ apayKr]s (2 Cor. 9:7), k (1 Cor. 12 27), k pteTpov (Jo. 3
:
cvp.(j)6)Pov (1 Côr.
5.
Separation.
k TrdXat. The use of k for the

:
5).
Cf.
ulcn of separation
iXevdtpos
:
is
merely
-n-avTuv
the fuller expansion of the ablative.

(1
Thus with
Cor. 9
19), avairarfaovTaL k' tojv KbiroiP

:
(Rev. 14
13),
:
{flpoiOoii
Trjs 77JS
(Jo. 12
32), v-KoaTpk^âi
ttjs
kroXTjs (2 Pet. 2
21), dpjjs
k k
598

Cf. Jo. 17: 6.
Tov Kocrnov (Jo. 17: 15).
Abbott^ doubts
if
in the
and John U always impHes previous existence from which one is delivered when used with acbf co and
tainly in Jo. 17
LXX
in the evils
rrjpeco.
Cer-
occurs rather frequently, but

still
Tr]pr]aj}s
k
:
tov
imply that the evil one once had power irovrjpov (17: 15) for Peter). Certainly in Jo. 12 27, prayer (cf. Jesus' them over
cuaov
fxe
may
k tt]s copas Taurrjs,

aoi'êLv
Jesus had already entered into the hour.
Cf. bvvaixevov
where U may accentuate though he had not yet entered into In Rev. 3 10 T-qpriaoo eK tyjs copas tov Tveipaap-ov we seem to death. have the picture of general temptation with the preservation of the saints. Cf Uâai^ in 1 Cor. 10 13. So in Mt. 13 41 avKKkôvcxLv tK Trjs jSacrtXetas the idea is 'out from among,' just as cheat or The two cockle grows in among the wheat in the same field.
davdrov (Heb. 5:7)
the power of
God
{bwciixevov) ,
:
kingdoms
separation
K TOV
veKpunf
all
coexist in the
is
same sphere
(the world).
The notion
17
of
common
:
with a number of verbs
like eôXedpevdrjaeTai
:
XaoD (Ac. 3
23), rijeipeu
kê\e^dij,r]v
(Lu. 20: 35),
seems simple and

O-qpiov
clear.
k veKpcbv (Jo. 12 1), b.vdcfTaais k k tov kocthov (Jo. 15 19), etc. This Not quite so apparent is viKoiVTas k
:
TOV
(Rev. 15
2).
Thayer and Blass both take

:
it
like T-qpkoi
k, 'victorious over' (by separation). Cf. neTevorjaau k tq^v tpywv (Rev. 16 11) and Jo. 3 25, fiyrrjo-ts k. 6. Origin or Source. Equally obvious seems the use of k for the
:
idea of origin or source.

etjut
Thus
e^rjXdov k- tov iraTpos (Jo.
16
28), ovk
TOV KoapLOV (17: 14, 16),
TOiv XiBlov tovtoov eyetpac TeKva
(Mt.
3
1
9.
Naturally this usage has a wide range.

f.),
Cf
Nafaper (Jo.
'E/3paTos
:
46
TToXews (Jo. 1
:
44),
Tijs
k
(1
ttJs
I,apapias (Jo.
4:7),
k^ 'E^paloiv (Ph. 3
^ Wpccv (Gal. 2
:
5),
yrjs (Jo.
31),
3),
15),
rjpLcbv
TrXdi^T^s
Th. 2
k deov (Ph. 3 9), k xoXX^s ^Xt^êcos (2

:
dy citji (2 Cor. 8:7). Cf. Lu. 12 15. This Hst is by no means exhaustive, but it is at least sugOne may note here aTecjiavov e^ dKavdo:v (Mt. 27:29), gestive.
Cor. 2:4),
ttj
e^
u vp.lv
where the material is expressed by e^. Closely allied to the above is the notion 7. Cause or Occasion. which may also be conveyed by k. Thus of cause or occasion 12 18, kpacroivTo k tov irovoi. \i.lev. 16 10), note TO e^ vpoiv in Ro.
:
:
(Ro. 5:1), e^ epyoju (Gal. 3 10), k tov SiKaioodevTas k evayyeklov ^riv (1 Cor. 9 14), e^ daQeveias (2 Cor. 13 4), k tov paCf. also diredavov k Tciu vbaTWV (Rev. 8 11). fioova (Lu. 16 :9).
TriaTecos
:
Perhaps here belongs
kirXrjpcodr] k- ttjs dapfjs
(Jo. 12
3).
Cf. yeplô)
in Jo. 6
13 (Abbott, Johannine Gr., p. 253).

1
At any
rate a
Joh. Gr., p. 251
f.
599
(Mk.
number
7:11), (Rev. 18
1
:
of verbs use
^-qixLomdai (2
:
e/c
in this general sense like wêXeco
3),
Cor. 7:9), adLKeladai (Rev. 2:11), irXovTeca xopraêadai (Rev. 19 21), Koinaô) (Jo. 4 6), fdw (Ro.
:
17), etc.
ck
Cf.
e^\aa(()r]jjLrjaav
top dtov
e/c
t^s irXrjyrjs
(Rev. 16
21).
Indeed
with the notion of price does not
differ radically
from
this idiom.
K piiadov
Thus
1
:
-qyopaaap e^
auT<xii>
Tov ay pop
br}papLov
(Mt. 27:
:
7), eKTYjaaTO
(Ac.
18),
(TviJ.(j)u^pr](xas
(Mt. 20
2).
'Ek 5ta-
Tayris,
'by order,' was a regular formula in the papyri (Deissmann,
Light, etc., p. 87).
idiom
twp reaaapup
Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 248, finds the 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 increase over the earlier idiom. ^ Thus in Jo. 16 17 k tup ixaOrirchv
:
even used as the subject of d-âp. Cf. Ac. 21 16 without e/c. See also Jo. 7 40. John is specially fond of the partitive use of K (Radermacher, A^". T. Gr., p. 115) and the inscriptions and papyri have it also. Cf aprip k twp rpcoTevoPToop, Petersen-Luschan, Reisen^ Further examples are apdpwTos e/c toop (âpLaaloop p. 113, xviii. A. 5.
is
:
: .
(Jo.
3:1),
fXT]
TLS
e/c
Tojp apxoPTCop (Jo.

v/jLcbp
48),
:
e/c
rod oxkov aKouaapres
(Jo. 7:40), dapaTCoaovcTLP e^
(Lu. 21
16), e^ avrojp airoKTipdre

:
(Mt. 23
34), ^XeirovaLP
e/c
tcop Xacjp
(Rev. 11
6
:
9), SirjKOPOVP
e/c
e/c
tcop
VTapxoPTUP (Lu. 8:3), e^ avrov

SeScjKep (1 Jo.
(t>dyp (Jo.
50),
:
tov irpevfiaTOs
13), Tr'tpwp
e/c
tov vdaros (Jo. 4

:
13), ovSels e^ avTcop
(Jo. 17: 12), etc.2

is
In Heb. 13
of
e/c
10
it is
what
6 top
is
on the
ttjs
:
altar that
eaten.
The use
e/c
with a class or for a side or position
may
(Jo.
Trepi-
as well be mentioned here also.
Thus
e/c
:
e/c
aXrjdelas
e/c
18
37), ol
pofjLov
(Ro. 4
14), 6
TiaTecos (Ro. 3
8), etc.
26), ol
To/xjjs
(Ac. 11:2),
OL K epLdias
(Ro. 2
The
22
ot
partisan use
is
allied closely to the partitive.
Cf. Ph.
ttjs
Kaicapos
oUias.
9.
See further ch. XI, Cases.
needed about the soif this classic idiom appears in the N. T. The passages that seem to have it are mt KaTa/Sdroj Spat rd k ttjs oldas avTov (Mt. 24 17) where k might indeed have been employed, but k coincides in idea with dpat. Cf. Mk. 13 15, where k does not have to. before it. In Lu. 11 13 6 iraTTip 6 e^ ovpavov Scbcret itvevtxa ixyiop W. H. bracket 6 before e^, and with 6 the sending of the Holy Spirit by the Father has
'E/c
and k.
called blending of
A word k with
in conclusion is
k.
Blass^ doubts
'
Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Ok.,

lb., p.
p. 145.
j).
100.
258.
Cf. also Field, Ot. Norv., Pars III,
Mk.
30,
on
riiv k^
avrov
dbvafiLv.
600
caused

e^ to displace
:
NEW TESTAMENT
h which would otherwise have been regular. some MSS. add 6 &v ev tQ ovpavui to 6 vtos rod avQpcoirov, thus making Jesus in heaven at that moment when he was speakIn Jo. 3
13
ing to Nicodemus.
of course, that
In Col. 4
16, rriv
KaohKlas, the
e/<
assumes,
an Epistle had been sent to Laodicea, and suggests that the Colossians get it from (k) them. Cf. Ro. 3 25 f for examples of 5ta, ev, eis, irpos, e/c. See dx6 and Trapd.
:
(h)
'E-ni.
See Sanskrit dpi (locative case), Zend aipi, Latin

It
is
ob,
Lithuanian pi. 1. Ground-Meaning.
'upon' as opposed to
it
vtto.
It differs
from
iiTep in
that
eiri
implies a real resting upon, not merely over.^
But the very
simplicity of this idea gives
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

in each special context.
is
root-idea
and working out from that

delicate shade of
eiri 777s
It
marks a
ovpavQ) Kol
2.
difference from h, as
seen in
obs
(Mt. 6
10).
In Composition in
the
N. T.
It
is
very common, always re-
taining the root-idea
(cf. kir-ev-dvo^,
the perfective idea

yLvcoffKO)
is clear.
:
2 Cor. 5:2), though sometimes Thus with kr-aLTeco in Lu. 16 3, ewL:
in 1
11.
Cor. 13
12,^
e-rri-'yi'OJaLS
in Col.
9, eTri-reXeco in
Cor. 8
3.
Frequency in N. T.
it
In the N. T.
ext is still in
constant use,
though
Note eojs But in the N. T. it more than two cases
ultimately dropped out of the vernacular* before kiravoi. P. Oxy. 294 (a.d. 22) like ava els, etc. evrt hLak[oy l(j]ix6s
,
is
the one preposition
still
used freely with
and loc. 176).^ Most and grammars are lexicons in the dative called examples of the really locatives, but some of them are possibly true datives.^ So then 7ri really has four cases still in the N. T. In Homer ert often
(ace. 464, gen. 216, dat.
stands alone for
eTr-eart.
hirl
Farrar,^ quoting Donaldson, finds in
the locative with
the idea of absolute superposition, while the genitive expresses only partial superposition and the accusative implies motion with a view to superposition and the dative would
be superposition for the interest of one. There is some truth in this distinction and the case-idea must always be observed. But
1
K.-G.,
I,
p. 495.
lb.
Cf.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 113.
Jann.' Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 3S3; Mullach, Vulg., p. 381.
6
e
Moulton,
K.-G.,
I,
Prol., p. 107.
p. 495;
Delbruck, Grundl., p. 130; Vergl. Synt.,
I,
p.
676
f.
Greek Synt.,
p. 102.
601
the growi:h of the accusative in the later language at the expense of the other cases caused some confusion in the usage according
to the standard of the earlier Greek. Simcox' considers it "almost a matter of indifference" whether in the N. T. one uses
locative, genitive or accusative.
it
This
is
somewhat
true,
but even
does not follow that there was no difference in the cases. The so locative accentuated mere location, the genitive brought out rather
the kind or genus, while the accusative Avould present the general idea of extension modified by the fact that the accusative tended
to absorb the other cases without insisting
idea.
on the
distinct case-
Thus sometimes either case with kiri would give substanFor tially the same idea, though technical differences did exist. instance, in Ac. 5 9 note eirl rfj dvpa, while in verse 23 we have eirl
:
TU)V dvpuv.
kirl T-qv
eirl dvpacs (Mk. 13 29) with earrjKa Here the notion of rest exists ^nXh. all three cases, though in Rev. 3 20 koL Kpovco may have some effect on the presence of the accusative. Once more observe Kadlar} kirl dpSvov and Kadrjaeade eiri 86}8eKa dpovovs in Mt. 19 28. Rev. 4 2
So compare
:
kyyiis earLV
.
dvpav (Rev. 3
20)
gives us
eTTt
Tov dpovov
KadriiJ.evos,
verse 9 (marg. of
W.
H., text of
Nestle)
tTTL
Tcj Kadrinepco cTrt
tu>
Bpovcc,
while verse 10 has rod Kadrjpkvov
Tov dpovov, threc cases with the
same
any
verb.
It
would be over-
refinement to insist on too

single verb
(cf.
much
distinction here.
rate.
fj
But the
:
cases
afford variety of construction at

Xa/xjSdi'et
:
In Rev. 14 9 the
ewl T-qv
x^'^P- o.vtov
:
has
eTri
tov fxerdiTOV avrov

also Xi0os
kirl
:
Ac. 27
eirl
44).
Compare
Lu. 21
:
\idov in
Mt. 24
oXiya
2 -^dth
Xtdos
Xi^co in
6.
In Ph. 2
eiri
27 the
MSS. vary between

kir'
\vinr]v ext Xvirrjv
and
:
\vTrrjv
Xvirrj.
Cf. also
eiri
and
eirl
TToXXwj' in
Mt. 25
21.
The use
of xtareuco
with locative or
accusative has already been discussed. The accusative suggests more the initial act of faith (intrust) while the locative implies
that of state (trust).
as dative (both
:
We find
ts
also used with this verb as well
common
in John).
Once we have
Trto-Tcvco
ku
(Mk. 1 15). See Moulton, Prol, p. 68. But, after all is said, the only practical way to study eiri is from the point of view of the cases which it supplements.
4.
With
the Accusative.
As already noted,
It is
it
is
far in excess
of the other cases
combined.
hardly necessary to
make mi-
nute subdivision of the accusative usage, though the preposition

with this case follows the familiar lines. With expressions of place So eXOelv eivl to. it is very common and very easy to understand.
vSara (Mt. 14
:
28), irepiiiraT-qctv
1
kirl to.
vdara (14
p. 146.
29), dpaireaeip
kirl
Lang, of the N. T.,
602
Trjv yrjv

(Mt. 15
eirl
:
NEW TESTAMENT
rrjv yrjp
35), ctkotos eyevero eTC irdaav

:
(Mt. 27: 45),

tou 'Irjaovv
TTOpevov
Tr)v
bbbv (Ac. 8
avaireacdv
26), eireôKov rds x^tpas
eirl
(Mt. 26
50),
is
eirl
to
arrjdos
(Jo.
13
25).
The metakirkireaev
/3a-
phorical use
kir'
in
:
harmony with
:
this idiom.
eirl
Thus
</)6/3os
avTov (Lu. 1
12), KareaTrjaas avrov
ra epya (Heb. 2:7),

evr' e/ê
17
(TiKevaei eirl
top oIkov (Lu. 1

:
33), Iva tTnaKrivwarj

:
bvvap.LS
tov
XpLffTov (2 Cor. 12
\pvxr]v.
9).
Cf. 2 Cor. 1
23, eTrtKaXoOîat kwl
ttjp kfiriv
But not all the accusative uses are so simple. In a case Mt. 7 24, (hKodoiirjaev km Trjv irerpap, some idea of motion may be seen. But that is not true of Mt. 13 2, xas 6 oxXos kirl top alyLoKov IcrTrjKeL. Cf. also KaQrip.epop eirl to TeXcoPiOP (Mt. 9 9) and others given above. So ewl to TpoaKecjjaXaiop KadevSoop (Mk. 4 38),
like
: :
TPevfxa
rjp
ayiop
tirl
tir'
avTOP (Lu. 2
25), epeipep
:
eir'
avTOP (Jo. 1
32),
tTrkcTiqaap
top irvXccpa (Ac. 10

CTTt TTjP
17),
ecp'
i;/xas
:
apawaveTaL (1 Pet.
14), KciXvppa
Kapdlap KeiTat (2 Cor. 3
15), iaoPTai aX-qdovaai
hard to think of any idea of 'whither.'^ Sometimes indeed kwi seems not to imply strictly 'upon,' but rather 'as far as.' So with epxoPTai eTvl to pprjpeLOP (Mk.
eirl
TO avTo (Lu. 17: 35).
Here
it is
16
2), KaTe^r](xap
eirl
ttjp
daXaaaap (Jo. 6
is
16), -^Xdop
eirl tl
v8o:p
(Ac.
sometimes expressed by eTri, as eirl 6 Trdpet (Mt. 26: 50). It may express TO âiTTiapa (Mt. 3:7), one's emotions as with Trtareuco ewl (Ro. 4 24), eXiriô: ext (1 Pet, Cf. e<p' op yey 6pl in Ac. 4 1 13), (77rXa7X''^fojuat eiri (Mt. 15 32). 22 and the general use of eirl in Mk. 9 12 ykypa-wTai eirl top vIop In personal relations hostility is sometimes sugTOV apdpwTov. gested, though ext in itself does not mean 'against.' Thus cos In Mt. 12 26 </)' eavTOP epeplaOr] 7rt XrjaTrjP e^rjXdaTe (Mt. 26 55). is used side by side with pepLadelaa KaO' taurTjs in the preceding 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 of 'all together' (Ac. 1 15). With expressions of time eirl may 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 (Ro. 7:1), or a more definite period may be indicated, as with
8
:
36).
The aim
or purpose
<?!)'
eirl TTjv
(hpav ttjs Trpocreux^s (Ac.
1),^ kirl T-qp

kirl
avpLOP (Lu. 10
35).
It
is
common
with adverbs
like e0' awa^,
rpis, etc.
The genitive with kwi has likewise a 5. With the Genitive. wide range of usages. Usually the simple meaning 'upon' sat1
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 136.
For
LXX ex. of rest see C. and S., p. 85.

N.
T., p. 147.
2 *
Joh. Gr., p. 259.
postclassical usage, Simcox, Lang, of the
PREPOSITIONS (IIFOGESEIS)
isfies all
603
0' ov coKo86fxr]To
eirl eirl
requirements, as in
29),
K-qpvâre
:
eirl kKLvtjs
(Mt. 9:2),
:
(Lu. 4
vt4>t\0iv
eirl
rdv bwixaTwv (Mt. 10

eirl
27), kpxo/JLepov
:
(Mt. 24
13),
eirl
30), WriKev
:
tov aravpov (Jo. 19

(Jo.
19), Kadiaas
Tov ^TinaTOS (Ac. 12
21), erl
rrjs Ke(j)a\rjs
:
20
7), eirl rrjs dakaaaris

:
(Rev. 5
^v\ov (Ac. 5
30).
In
Mk.
12
26,
eirl
tov iSarov,
thought occurs in the passage about the bush. Sometimes, indeed, as with the accusative, so with the genitive, ewl has the idea of vicinity, where the word itself with which it is used has a wide meaning. Thus in Jo. 21:1 eirl rrjs daXaaarjs seems to mean 'on the sea-shore,' and so by the sea.' So with eirl ttjs 65oD (Mt. 21 19), the fig-tree being not on the path, but on the edge of the road. Abbott^ notes how Matthew (14 25 f.) has eirl r-qv
an
ellipsis
in
'
doKaaaav which
Cf. Ac. 5
:
is
not ambiguous
tup
dvpojv.
like the genitive in Jo.
19.
23
eirl
The
classic
idiom with
eirl
genitive in the sense of 'towards'
though
it
TO -kKoIov
is not so common in has not quite disappeared as Simcox^ thinks. Cf. ey'evero 11), eirl rrjs 777s (Jo. 6 21), Kadieixevov eirl ttjs yrjs (Ac. 10
: :
and the the N. T.,
âXovaa to
ixvpov evl tov acoAtaros
(Mt. 26
12), eiriiTTev
:
eirl
Tijs
yrjs
(Mk. 14
epxofievov
35), yevbiievos
eivl
tov toitov (Lu. 22
40), tov
eir'
avTrjs
(Heb. 6:7), Teaibv eirl t^s yrjs (Mk. 9 20). In these examples we see just the opposite tendency to the use of the accusative with verbs of rest. Cf. ireaelTat eirl Trjv yrjv (Mt. 10 29) with Mk. 9 20 above and âXelv eirl Trjv yrjv (Mt. 10 34) with Mk. 4 26. With persons eirl and the genitive may yield the resultant
:
: : :
meaning (Mk. 13
8vo
fj
of 'before' or 'in the presence of.'

:
Thus
:
eirl
-qyeixovojv
p.i]
9), Kplveadai eirl tcop adUc^v (1
Cor. 6
1), eKTOs el
eirl
TpLwv napTvpoiv (1
eirl (TOV
:
Tim. 5
:
19),
eirl
HovTLOV HeiKaTOV (1 Tim.

:
13),
(Ac. 23
30),
eir'
efiov
(25
9).
Blass^ observes
is
how
eirl
in Ac. 25
10
to-rws eirl tov ^TjfxaTos
Kaiaapos the meaning

is
'before,'
while in verse 17 the usual idea 'upon'

TOV
l3r]iJ.aTos).
alone present (Kadlaas
Cf.
is
eirl
TLtov in 2 Cor. 7: 14.
With
expressions of
toju xp6vo:v
time the result

(1
much
(Ro.
1
the same.
Thus
occurs
eir'
ecrxaroi;
Pet. 1:20) where
erl naturally
:
(cf.
Ju. 18).
With
eirl
tCsp irpocrevxcov P'Ov
10)
we have
eivl
period of prayer denoted
simply by
Keaias
eivL
Cf. eirevxotxai
(Magical papyrus, Deissmann,

difficulty
There
is
no
is
about
eirl
ttjs
ixeToi-
(Mt. 1:11).
eirl
With persons a
fuller exposition is required,
since
K\av8iov {Ac. 11:28)
tantamount to
:
'in the
eirl
time of
dpxiepecos
Claudius' or 'during the reign of Claudius.' Cf. also

"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
2
:

Cf.
eir'
NEW TESTAMENT
idea of basis
eiroieL ctti tcoj'
26).
avrrjs in
metaphor as
(Jo.
in ex' aXrjdelas (Lu.

eTTt
Heb. 7:11. 4
: :
The
25), a
is
a natural
aaQtvovvTwv
:
6:2),
cbs
One
of the metaphorical uses
ToWciv (Gal. 3 16), kwl oTonaTos (Mt. 18 16). is with the resultant idea of over,'
'
growing naturally out of 'upon.' ^ Thus KaTaarrjaeL kirl rrjs Oepairelas (Lu. 12 42), though in Mt. 25 21, 23 both genitive and accusa: :
tive occur.
eTTt
Cf. also âaCkdav
kirl toov
jSaaiKeo^v
(Rev. 17:
18), 6 c^v
irdvTuv (Ro.
9:5),
etc.
6.
With
the Locative.
Here
kwi
is
more
simple,
though
still
with a variety of resultant ideas.

locative with ext.
eTTt
77?
Blass^ observes that with the
purely local sense the genitive and accusative uses outnumber the
But still some occur like iwl irlvaKi (Mt. 14 8), 4:6), eirl l/JLaTLo: TraXato; (Mt. 9 16), kirl Tavry rrj Trerpa oLKoboixrjcxoi (Mt. 16 18; cf. some MSS. in Mk. 2 4, 0' w KareKeLTo), eirl rols /cpa/Sarrots (Mk. 6 55), evrt tw xoprco (Mk. 6 39),
:
7r?777)
(Jo.
er'
epi]jiOLS
tottols
:
(Mk. 1:45),
cf.
eireKeLTO
kiv'
avrco (Jo.
:
11:38),
eirl
kir'
aavldLv (Ac.
avTui,
27 44;
also
is
evrt
tivuv).
In Lu. 23
38, ewLypacprj
:
the resultant idea

rrjs KecjjoXrj^
rather that of 'over,' Mt. 27 37 having
eTavoj
avrov.
As with the accusative and
genitive, so
with the locative the idea of contiguity sometimes appears, as in kirl dvpais (Mt. 24 33), eTrt rfj TpoâTLKrj (Jo. 5:2), eirl rfj aroq.
:
(Ac. 3
11).
Here the wider meaning

Cf. also
of the substantive
makes
'EtL
is
this result possible.
eirl tc5 Troraîoj
(Rev. 9
14).
used very sparingly with the locative in expressions of time. Cf. The use of kwl xd(rj7 tt) eirl crvvTeXeia tQiv aloivwv (Heb. 9 26).
:
p.vtlq.
eirl
vficiv
(Ph. 1
3), ou avvrjKav
:
euXoyiaLs (2 Cor. 9
6)
rots apTOLS (Mk. 6 52), depiêLV wavers between occasion and time. Cf.
eirl
: :
also
TvcTLu
eirl
eirl rfj irp6)Tr] biady]Krj
(Heb. 9
15).
The notion
of
eirl TpLfflv
papCf.
(Heb. 10
28)
:
is
rather 'before,' 'in the presence
of.'
veKpoLs
(Heb. 9
17).
All these developments admit of satiseirl,
factory explanation from the root-idea of
the locative case
and the context. There are still other metaphorical applications of eirl. Thus in Mt. 24:47, eirl iraaLP, 'over' is the resultant meaning.
So also in Lu. 12
is
44
rc3
eirl
roZs
vivapxovaL.
:
The
eirl
:
notion of basis
priparl aov in
eir'
involved in
:
ex'
apTw p6vw in Mt. 4

bvoparl pov in
4,
tQ
5,
Lu. 5
:
5,
eXevaovTai
eirl
Mt. 24
eXirlSL
in Ac. 2
eirl.
26, etc.
Ground
:
or occasion likewise
:
may
be
conveyed by
ecf)'
Thus note
:
c3,
like ext tovtco otl, in
i<^povelTe
^ 2
(Ph. 4
eTTt
eTrt tovtco in Jo. 4 27 and in particular Ro. 5 12 and 2 Cor. 5 4. Cf. ecj)' (^ See 10) where 'whereon' is the simple idea.
:
For
rov 'RvepykTov in Prol. to Sirach see Deiss., B. S., p. 339
f.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 137.
PREPOSITIONS
also
kirl Trapopyi(TixQ)
(lII'OOEZiEIi:)
605
:
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
5
:
10), 0'
a)
Koi
KaTe\rjfj.(f)9r]v
:
(Ph. 3
12).
Note
also Gal.
13,
7r'
kXevdeplg.; 1
Th. 4
7, ouk
eir'
err'
aKadapala
(cf. ev ayiaafXiJo), tirl
KaTaaTpo(t)fj (2
Tim. 2:14).
bvbp.aTL
Cf.
eXevOepiaL inscr. at
Delphi
is
ii/B.c.
(Deissm., Light, p. 327).

kKCiXovv kwl
Tc3
The notion
:
of
7rt
model
tc3
(Lu. 1
59)
and
involved in o/xotw/xart (Ro. 5

:
14).
kirl
Many
verbs of emotion use

:
kivl
Traai
(Lu. 13
17), dav/xaôvTes
eirl
the examples with these verbs

Ta(n'(Lu. 3 :20).
may
with the locative, as exatpev (Lu. 2 33), etc. But some of be real datives, as is possibly
:
the case with the notion of addition to, like irpoaWrjKtv
/cat
tovto
kirl
As we have seen, it was probably someThe N. T. examples do not seem to be very numerous, and yet some occur. So I would explain 5td riju virep7.
The True Dative.

eirl.
times used with
âXXovaav
xo-ptv rod Oeov 0' v/xlv (2
Cor. 9
14).
it.
:
This seems a clear

Cf. also
in
kirl
case of the dative with kwi supplementing
The same thing may

19.
ireiroLdb:
be true of
ras
k(j)'
</>'
vij.lv
in 1
Th. 3
:
and Ro. 16
:
eavToh in Lu. 18
1
:
9 and
fxaKpodv/jirjaov er' ep-ol
Mt. 18
26
f.
So Lu.
47
k-wl
tQ
deQ.
(cf.
In Lu. 12
also
eirl
52
f.,
rpets
8valv, 8vo
kirl
TpLCLP, vlos
eirl
Tarpi
also
OvyaTepa), the resultant sense is

kvl
'against.'
Cf.
-n-po<i)r}TemaL
\aols
in
:
Rev. 10
of.'
11.
In
Jo. 12
TovTOLs,
16,
rjv eir'
avTi2
is
the idea
eirl
yey pap.fj.ha, and Ac. 5 35, eirl rather 'about' or 'in the case
(Ac. 11
:
toIs avdponroLs
Cf. also
relation
T^s yevopevrjs
'LTecf)av(jo
19).
Here the personal

:
than the locative. The notion of addition to may also be dative. Cf. Lu. 3 20 above and Col. 3: 14, eivl iraatv 8e TOVTOLS] Heb. 8: 1, eirl Tots 'KeyopevoLs. In Eph. 6 16 the best MSS. have ev. It is possible also toTegard the use of eirl for aim or purpose as having the true dative as in 1 Th. 4 7. (^) Kara. There is doubt about the etymology of this preposition. In tmesis it appears as Kara, and in Arcadian and Cypriote Greek it has the form KaTv. It is probably in the instrumental case,^ but an apparently dative form Karat survives a few times. Brugmann^ compares it with Old Irish cet, Cymric cant, Latin
seems to
suit the dative conception better
:
:
co7n-,
1.
though
this
is
not absolutely certain.
Root-Meaning.
is
Brugmann^ thinks that the root-meaning

not perfectly
clear,
of the preposition
seems to be the idea.
The
difficulty
though 'down' (cf. dm) arises from the fact that we

I,
Giles,
Comp.
Philol., p. 342.
Cf. also Delbnick, Vergl. Synt.,
p.
759
f.
lb.
606
NEW TESTAMENT
sometimes find the ablative case used when the result is down from, then the genitive down upon, and the accusative down along. But down (cf KCLTU)) seems always to be the only idea of the preposition in itself. In the N. T. three cases occur with /card. Kara came to be used in the distribu2. Distributive Sense. tive sense with the nominative, like dm and avv, but chiefly as adverb and not as preposition.^ Hence this usage is not to be credited to the real prepositional idiom. Late Greek writers have it. So els Kara els in Mk. 14 19 (and the spurious Jo. 8:9), TO Kad' eh in Ro. 12 5. The modern Greek uses Kaêts or Kadevas as a distributive pronoun. ^ Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 138 f., considers also els Kad' eaaaTos (A Lev. 25 10) merely the adverbial
'
'
. :
use of Kara.
But
see koB'
eva.
in 1 Cor. 14
31, /card be eoprrjv (Mt.
27:15).
Kara in Composition. It is true to the root-idea of 'down,' in Mt. 7 25, Karayayelv in Ro. 10 6. But the various metaphorical uses occur also in composition. Often Kara occurs
3.
like
/carejS?]
with "perfective"
(1 Pet. 5
:
force.^
So, for
instance,
:
observe mraprio-ei
10), KaTrjycouiaavTo
:
(Heb. 11
24),
33), KareSlo^êp
:
(Mk.
:
36),
KaTadovKol (2 Cor. 11
20), KaraKavcreL
(Mt. 3
12), Kara^tdêre
(Mt.
Kara-
6 2
28),
Karauorjaare
(Lu.
12
KareTavaav (Ac.
14
18),
KLVOVTes
:
(Mt. 23
24),
Karaa-KevaaeL
:
(Mk. 1:2), Karepyaêade (Ph.

(Ro.
1
:
12), KaTe(f)ayep
(Mt. 13
4), Kadoparai
20).
This preposiKarexco in Ro.
tion vies with 5td

1
:
and
avp in the perfective sense.
18
is
well illustrated
by
6 Karexo^v rbv dvp.bv
from an ostracon
it
(Deissmann, Light,
p. 308).
In the magical texts
means
to
'cripple' or to 'bind,' 'hold fast.'
But
in
Mk.
14
45,
Kareciyikyjcre,
the preposition seems to be weakened, though the A. S.V. puts
"kissed him
much"
in
the margin.
Cf.
Moulton,
CI.
Rev.,
Nov., 1907, p. 220.
This construction is recognised by Brug4. With the Ablative. mann,* Monro,^ Kiihner-Gerth,^ Delbrlick.^ There are some examples of the ablative in the N. T., where 'down' and 'from' combine to make 'down from.' Thus, for instance, is to be explained ejSakev /car' avrrjs ave/xos tv^xj^viko^ (Ac. 27: 14), where ai^r^s refers to Kprirrju, and the meaning (cf. American Standard Revision) is manifestly 'down from' Crete. In 1 Cor. 11:4, irpo(})r]Tevcov Kara Kect)a\rjs ex^v, we have 'down from' again, the veil hanging
1

lb.;
"
"
Horn. Gr.,
I,
p. 145.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 105.
p. 475.
I,
3
4
Cf.
ib., pp. 115 ff. Griech. Gr., p. 443.
Vergl. Synt.,
p. 760.
607
17
down from
is
the head.
In
:
Mk.
5
:
13
33)
we
find
ibpiirjaev
d7eXr7 Kara
cUff'
Tov Kprjuvov (cf.
Mt. 8
32; Lu. 8
where 'down from the
again the idea.

5.
With
the Genitive.
It is
more usual with
Kara than the abla-
tive in the
N. T. as
in the earlier Greck.^
The
idea
is
'
down upon,'
the genitive merely accenting the person or thing affected. A good example of this sense in composition followed by the genitive
appears in KaraKvpLevaas afx(t)OTepo}v (Ac. 19 IG). Some MSS. in Mk. 14 3 have Kara with rrjs /ceâXrJs, but without it Karexeev means 'pour down on' the head. In 2 Cor. 8 2, 17 /card âOovs But with the genitive the iTTwx^la, the idea is 'down to' depth.
: :
other examples in the N. T. have as resultant meanings either 'against/ 'throughout' or 'by.' These notions come from the
original 'down.' tive
(also
Luke alone uses 'throughout' with the geniand always with oXos. The earher Greek had Kad' 6\ov alone in Luke in the N. T., Ac. 4 18), though Polybius
:
employed Kara
xcopov;
in this sense.
Kad'
oXrjs
ttjs
Cf. in Lu. 4
14 Kad'
oX-qs tyjs xepi-
Ac. 9 :31
'lov8aias (so 9 :42;
10 :37).
The
But older Greek would have used the accusative in such cases. of notion The dLeairaprjaau. vrjaov Kara rijs cf. Polyb. iii, 19, 7, the modern in But kolvy]. the ^ in common 'against' is also more
Greek vernacular /card (ko) is confined to the notions of 'toward' and 'according to,' having lost the old ideas of 'down' and 'against' (Thumb, Handb., p. 105 f.). Certainly the preposition does not mean 'against.' That comes out of the context when two hostile parties are brought together. Cf. English vernacular "do^vn on" one. This /card then is 'down upon' rather literally where the Attic usually had ewi and accusative.^ Among many examples note /card rod 'Irjaov fxapTvpiap (Mk. 14 55), vuiJ.(})r]v Kara
:
Trevdepds
(Mt. 10:35), Kara rod Tveufxaros (Mt. 12:32), /card tov Cf. Ro. 8 33. Sometimes /xerd and Kara JIav\ov (Ac. 24 1), etc. are contrasted (Mt. 12 30) or /card and virep (Lu. 9 50; 1 Cor. 4 G). The other use of Kard and the genitive is with verbs of swearing. The idea is perhaps that the hand is placed doAvn on the thing by which the oath is taken. But in the N. T. God him:
: : : :
self is
deov.
Cf.
used in the solemn oath. So Mt. 26 63, eôp/ctfco ae Kara tov Heb. G 13, 16. In 1 Cor. 15 15 knapTvpy]aap.ev KaTo. TOV
:
:
deov
6.
may
be taken in this sense or as meaning against.' With the Accusative. But the great majority of examples
'
DHl)nick,
J(l)b, in
ib., p. 761. V. .and D., Handb., etc., p. 313. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 133.
608
in the
NEW TESTAMENT
N. T. use the accusative. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 116) notes the frequency of the accusative in the papyri where xept would appear in the older Greek, Farrar^ suggests that Kara with
the genitive (or ablative)
is
from') while with the accusative
perpendicular ('clown on' or 'down it is horizontal ('down along').
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
idiom.
mrd corresponds
But
r-qv
pretty closely to the classic
With a
general horizontal plane to

it
metaphorical usages occur.

sions like
OLTcriKQe
work from a number of appears freely in local expres(Lu, 8

:
:
Ka6' 6\r]v rrjv toKlv K-qpvaaoov
39), 8i.rjpxovTO
Kara
T-qp
tcLs
KUfxas (Lu.
:
9:6), Kara
14),
686v (Lu. 10
4), eyevero Xljios Kara

:
x^po-v (Lu, 15
Kara
rrju
KtXiKtav (Ac, 27
5), (3\eT0PTa
Kara
Xtj8a
(Ac. 27
12), /card near]iJ.(3plav (Ac,
26), Kara irpoacowov (Gal.

:
11), /car' 6(})daXixovs (Gal,
tion of rest
Cf,
TTiv
may also have this
3:1), /card (jkottov (Ph. 3 14), The noconstruction as /car' oIkov (Ac, 2 46).
:
Kar' OLKOV avTrjs eKKK-qalav (Col,
15),
Cf, Ac, 11
1.
In
'lov-
Ac,
13:1a
Wwv
rather ambiguous usage occurs,
/card rriv ovaav kKKk-qalav
Trpo(f)rjTaL.
But
this
:
example
3), ol Kad'
may
v/jLcis
be compared with twv Kara

iroL-qTai
:
Salovs
(Ac, 26
(Ac. 17: 28,
some MSS.
18 15). This idiom is common one of the marks of Luke's literary style.^ But this is merely a natural development, and /card with the accusative always expressed direction towards in the vernacular.^ Schmidt (de eloc. Joseph., p. 21 f.) calls /card a sort of
Had' rjidds), vonou rod Kad' uyuas (Ac.
in the literary
kolpt]
and
is
periphrasis for the genitive in late Greek.

1
:
Cf. rd
/car' efxe
(Ph.
in TO
more than a mere circumlocution for the genitive^ the examples above and such as rriv Kad' vjiSis tIcttlv (Eph. 1 15),
12).
It
is
/car' e/xe
:
(Ro.
1
:
15), ro /card
aapKa (Ro. 9:5), rd KaT
e/xe
(Eph.
cf.
21;
cf.
Ac. 25
14), avbpaaLv roTs Kar' eôxvv (Ac.

is
:
25
23;
par
excellence).
Kara
used with expressions of time

Kard to ixeaovvKTLOV (Ac. 16
:
like Kar' eKetvov
Tov Kaipov (Ac. 12

fiixepav
1),
25), Kad' haarriv
(Heb. 3
13), /card irdv
aa^ârov (Ac. 13
27).
The notion
of distribution
comes
easily with Kard, as in Kard toXlv (Lu. 8:1),

:
Kard rds avvayooyds (Ac. 22

(Ac. 2
etc.
:
19), Kar' eros

:
(Lu. 2
41), Kad' rjpepav

(Jo.
46), Kad' eva Travres (1 Cor. 14

:
31), Kar'
ovo/JLa
10
3),
See Mt. 27
15 = Mk. 15
6.
Cf. Kard 8vo, P.

is
(iii/A.D.).
1 3
As a standard
or rule of measure Kard
Oxy. 886 very coromon
Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 266. Gk. Synt., p. 100. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 149; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 133.
*
6

Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 133.
:
609
and also simple. So Kara to evayyeXtop (Ro. 16 25) with which compare the headings^ to the Gospels like Kara MadOaiop, though with a different sense of evayyeXiov. Here the examples multiply
like Kara vonov (Lu. 2
:
22), Kara 4>^(nv (Ro. 11

Trjv TriaTLv
21), Kara x^pt-v (Ro.

:
4),
Kara deou (Ro. 8: 27), Kara

:
(Mt. 9
29), Kara bbvanLV
(Ro. 7: 13), Kara avvypwii-qv (1 Cor. 7:6), etc. Various resultant ideas come out of different connecThere is no reason to call mrd -Kaaav alrlav (Mt. 19 3) tions.
3), Kad' hirepôK-qv
:
(2 Cor. 8
and Kara ayvoiav (Ac. 3 17) bad Greek. If there is the idea of cause here, so in 1 Tim. 6 3, Kar' tvak^nav, the notion of tendency or aim appears. We must not try to square every detail in the development of Kara or any Greek preposition with our
: :
translation of the context nor with classic usage, for the N. T.
is
written in the
Koivi].
This preposition
is
:
specially
common
in
Acts and Hebrews.

/card TTpdacoTou is
Kar' Iblav (Mt. 14 13) is adverbial. But not a mere Hebraism, since the papyri have it
p. 140).
(Deissmann, Bible Studies,
As a sample
of the doubling
:
up
of prepositions note aweirkcxTy] Kar' avrcov (Ac. 16
22).
Most probably /lerd has the same root as /xeaos, Latin medius, German 7nit {mitSi), Gothic 7nip, English 77iid (cf. a-mid). Some scholars indeed connect it with djua and German samt. But the other view is reasonably certain. The modern Greek uses a shortened form ^le, which was indeed in early vernacular use.^ Some of the Greek dialects use TreSd. So the Lesbian, Boeotian,
(j)
Mcxd.
Arcadian,
1.
lies
etc. Merd seems to be in the instrumental case.' The Root-Meaning. It is ('mid') 'midst.' This simple idea behind the later developments. Cf. fxeraû and avafxeca. We
/zerecoptfco
see the root-idea plainly in
(from
ixer-ewpos, in 'mid-air').
In the N. T.
is
we have a metaphorical example
(Lu. 12
29)
which
intelligible
now
is
in the
day
of aeroplanes
ixer-wirov
and
dirigible balloons.
The
root-idea
manifest also in
(Rev. 7:3), 'the space
between the eyes.' 2. In Composition.

in composition such as
iSdi/co
The
later resultant
meanings predominate
:
"with"
in ixeTablboini (Ro. 12
:
8), ixerakaii-
10
is
(Ac. usually the case, the notion of change or transfer the result as with fxtdiarrîxL (1 Cor. 13 2), neTajSalpo) (Mt. 8 34),
: ;
(Ac. 2
;
46), mct^xw (1 Cor. 10
30)
"after" in
/xeraxeMTro;
5)
or, as is
Merajuopôco
(Ro. 12:2),
avv.
fxeTaixeXoijiaL
(Mt. 27:3),
ixeravokoi
(Mt.
3:2).
3.
Compared with

IVIerd is less
frequent in composition than
lb.
Giles,
j.in., Hist. Cr.
Gk., p. 388; Hatz., Einl., p. 153.
Comp.
rhilol., p. 342.
610
avv,

though far more
NEW TESTAMENT
Simcox^ thinks
common
as a preposition.
that it is useless to elaborate any distinction in meaning between The older grammars held that avv expressed a more /xerd and cvv.
intimate fellowship than
/xerd.
But
in the
N. T. nera has nearly
driven avv out.

4.
Loss of the Locative Use.

It is
locative.
common
in
Merd was originally used with the Homer, but even with him the genitive
uses the locative with collective
has begun to displace

singulars
it.^
Homer
and plurals.^ Mommsen^ indeed considers that in Hesiod aixa, fxera and avv all use the instrumental case and with about equal frequency, while êrd with the genitive was rare. But in the N. T. fxerd, along with irepl and uxo, has been confined to the genitive and accusative, and the genitive use greatly predominates (361 to 100) .5 The idea with the locative was simply between.' With several persons the notion of 'among' was present also.' In Homer it occurs only five times and 5. With the Genitive. with the resultant idea of 'among.' So once (Iliad, 13. 700, fiera Botwrcoj' kfiaxovTo), where indeed the idea is that of alliance with the Boeotians. In Rev. 2 16, etc., tiera occurs with iroXeneco in a hostile sense, a usage not occurring in the older Greek, which Simcox s considers a Hebraism. But the papyri may give us examples of this usage any day. And Thumb {Hellenismus, p. 125; cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 106) has already called attention to the modern Greek use of ixk with TroXe/xeco. Deissmann {Light, p. 191) finds nTa aTpaTLWTov with ot/ceco in an ostracon (not in hostile In Jo. 6:43 sense) and possibly with avriXoykco, 'elsewhere.' probably so with and juerd occurs in a hostile sense with yoyyvô: idea of allithe for argues 25, though Abbott^ fi7T)7(ns in Jo. 3 incite Jews to the and disciples ance here between the Baptist's f have we 6 In Cor. 1 6 Jesug. rivalry between the Baptist and
'
the hostile sense also in legal trials, dSeXôs fxera aSeXcpov KplCf. Jo. 16 19. This notion gives no difficulty to English verai.
:
students, since our "with"
is
so used.
1
:
But Moulton i" admits

kroLTjaev 6 Beds
fj-er'
a translation Hebraism avTOv juer' avrrjs. But what about 6aa

1
in Lu.
58, kp.eya\vvev Kuptos to eXeos
ahrdv
Lang, of the N. T., p. 149.

Cf. Thayer, under avv.

^
2
*
k.-G.,
I,
p. 505.
T.
Mommsen, Die
f.
1879, p. 1 1895.
6
Cf. also
aw und nera bei den nachhomerischen Epikern, Mommsen, Beitr. zu der Lehre von der griech. Priip.,
Prap.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 105.
I,
Lang, of the N. T.,

Joh. Gr., p. 267.
Prol., p. 106.
p. 150.
6
^
Delbnick, Vergl. Synt.,
p.
741
f.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 136.
"
PREPOSITIONS (nroeESEis)
(Ac.
611
(1
14
27)
and
:
TereXetwrai
17
ordain)
ixtO'
rifxuv
Jo.
17)?
Simcox^ again finds a Hebraism in "the religious sense" which appears in Mt. 1 23; Lu. 1 28; Jo. 3 2, etc. But the notion of fellowship is certainly not a Hebraism. Merd has plenty of ex: :
amples of the simple meaning of the preposition. Thus t6v ûivra 5), rjv /xera twj' d-qplwv (Mk. 1 13), txeTo. Ta:v ixera tup veKpoov (Lu. 24 Ttkwvihv (Lu. 5 30), ixera aponwu eXoyladr] (Lu. 22 37), an idiom not
: : :
common
deov
ixtTo.
to avv
and found
(Lu. 13
:
in the classical poets.^

:
Cf. also
:
aKrjvi]
rod
Tuv avBpwiro^v (Rev. 21
3), ixtTo. hiiiyiioiv
(Mk. 10
:
30), eixi^tv
jxtTo. Tcov dvffLuiv
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),
: :
1:3), avvalpi>} 'Koyov ex^ cviJL(f)ioveci} 2), frequent use of p-eTa is with most the Perhaps (Mt. 18 23), etc. (Lu. 9 49), XajuaKoXovdeoo with So accompaniment. of the idea (Mk. 1 29), ipxop.ai 12 (Mt. -KapaXap^kvoi 45), /3dvco (Mt. 25 3), 14), draxcoptco (Mk. 3:7), etc. Cf. Mt. 27 66. So with dpil (Mk. 3
(Mt. 20
KOLvuvlav
(1 Jo.
but sometimes the notion of help or aid is added as in Jo. 3:2; 8 29, etc. Cf. also 17 xapis tied' wccv (Ro. 16 20) and often. The notion of fellowship may develop into that of followers or
:
:
partisans as in
Mt. 12
(Jo.
30.
:
Sometimes the phrase

:
oi fier'
avrov
with the participle
40) or without (Mt. 12
4)
means
one's
attendants or followers (companions). The idea of accompaniment also occurs with things as in e^rjXdare pera /xaxatpwj' (Lu. 22 52), nera. raiv 'Kap.TaScov (Mt. 25 :4), peTo. aaXTnyyos (Mt. 24:31),
jLiTd
^paxlovos
v\l/r]\ov
instrumental idea.
where the idea

(Mt. 14
cases
is
which approach the 14), (1 Tim. 4 rather 'simultaneous with,' but see pera. opKov
(Ac. 13
:
17),
some
of
Cf. pLera
kTTLdeaeojs
ruv x^^P^v
:7), pera
(jûvijs
neyaXTis (Lu.
17: 15).
Still in all
these
accompaniment
it is
is
the dominant note.

58, for
See also
pr]8ev{a)
cLTToKeXvadaL tcov
pera airov ('in the corn service'), B.U. 27 (ii/A.D.).
Certainly
not a Hebraism in Lu.
Moulton (ProL,
p.
246) can cite A. P. 135 (ii/A.D.) tI 8e
ripeiv awelSri p-tTo. TCOV apxdvToiv;
In later Greek the instrumental use comes to be common with In Lu. 10 37 6 Tronjo-as to eXeos p-tT avjuerd (cf. English "with").'' But see Tov Debrunner (Blass-Deb., p. 134) sees a Hebraism.
:
Herm.
S.
V.
1, 1, kiroirjae
peT
epov.
The metaphorical
dwapews
juerd
^
use for the
idea of accompaniment occurs
also like /xerd
Kai 56^???
(Mt.
24:30),
'
/xerd airovdrjs
(Mk. 6:25),
p. 150.
baKpvwv (Heb. 12: 17), ptTo.
Lang, of the N. T.,

Jann., Hist.
Riass, Gr. of
Gk.
Gr., p. 387.
For
ptrb.
N. T. Gk., p. 133 f. compared with Trapd sec Abbott,
Joh. Gr., p. 2G8.
612
NEW TESTAMENT
:
4>bôv KoX Tpbixov (2
Cor. 7: 15), Tapprjalas (Ac. 2

fxera Kai like
29), dopbôv (Ac.
24
18), etc.
Deissmann
{Bible Studies, pp. 64, 265) finds in the
papyri examples of
that in Ph. 4
3.
Cf. Schmid,
Der Attidsmus, III, p. 338. In the modern Greek vernacular /xe is confined to accompaniment, means or instrument and manner. Time has dropped out (Thumb, Handb., p. 103 f.). At first it seems to present more dif6. With the Accusative. ficulty. But the accusative-idea added to the root-idea ("midst") with verbs of motion would mean "into the midst" or "among." But this idiom does not appear in the N. T. In the late Greek vernacular
juerd
with the accusative occurs in
all
the senses of
juerd
but that is not true of the N. T. Indeed, with one exception (and that of place), /jLera to Sevrepov KaraTrerao-â (Heb. 9 3), in the N. T. juerd with the accusative is used with expressions of time. This example in Hebrews is helpful, however. The resultant notion is that of behind or beyond the veil obtained by going through the midst of the veil. All the other examples have the resultant notion of "after" which has added to the rootmeaning, as applied to time, the notion of succession. You pass through the midst of this and that event and come to the point where you look back upon the whole. This idea is "after." Cf. In the historical books of the LXX txera 8vo rjfiepas (Mt. 26 2) /xerd raOra (cf. Lu. 5 27) is very common.^ Simcox^ treats ov ixera TToXXds rauras rjnepas (Ac. I 5) as a Latinism, but, if that is not
genitive,^
: :
.
and the
true of Tp6,
rip-kpas e'UoaL
it
is
hardly necessary to posit

1, 1.
it
of
fxera.
Cf. fxera
Herm. Vis. IV,
The
litotes is
common. Jannaris*
10
:
comments on the frequency LXX and N. T. So /xerd t6

11
:
of juerd to with the infinitive in the

avaaTijuai (Acts
41).
Cf.
Cor.
This comes to be one of the common ways of expressing a temporal clause (cf, kivd or ore). Cf. iieTa Ppaxv (Lu. 22 58), ^terd puKpov (Mk. 14 70), adverbial phrases.
25; Heb. 10
:
26, etc.
{k)
1.
Ilapd.
Significance.
Delbriick^ does not find the etymology of xapd and thinks it probal^ly is not to be connected with pdrd (Sanskrit), which means 'distant.' Brugmann^ connects it with the old word pura like Latin 'por-, Gothic /awra, Anglo-Saxon /o?-e (cf. German vor). Giles thinks the same root furnishes irapos (gen.),
clear
'^
^ ^
2 6
Abbott, Joh. Gr.,

Vergl. Synt.,
I,
p. 266.
Hist.
Lang, of the N. T., p. 151. Gk. Gr., p. 386.
pp. 755, 761.
6 7
Kurze
Vergl. Gr., II, p. 474; Griech. Gr., p. 446.
Comp.
PhiloL, p. 342.
Trapa (instr.), irapal (dat.), Trepi (loc).
613
He
also sees a kinship in
these to
2.
irkpav, irepa, Trpos.

irpos.
Compared with
In meaning^ rapa and
Trpos
do not
differ essentially
save that irapa merely means 'beside,' 'along-
irpos rather suggests 'facing one an additional idea of contrast. This oldest meaning, explains all the later developments.^ Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 116) thinks that the N. T. shows confusion in the use of irapa {8L\oylôuTo Trap' [marg. of W. H. and Nestle, h in text] eauroLs, Mt. 21 25) and hikoylôvTo irpos tavTovs (Mk. 11 31). But is
side' (of.
our "parallel"), while
another,'
it
not diversity the rather?

3.
In Composition.
The
preposition
it falls
is
exceedingly
common
in
behind some of the others a good deal. Ilapd does not survive in modern Greek vernacular save in composition (like apa and k) and some of its functions go to airo and eis.^ All the various developments of wapa appear in composition, and the simplest use is very common. Thus irapa/3oXi7 (Mk. 13 28) is a 'placing of one thing beside another.' So Cf. also Trapa-daXaaaLos (Mt. 4 13) is merely 'beside the sea.'
composition, though with nouns
:
Trapa-dTjKT]
(2
Tim.
14),
irapa-Kadeadels (Lu.
10
39), irapa-KoKkoo
14:16), xapa-Xe7o/xat (Ac. 27:8), Trap-dXtos (Lu. 6 17), wapa-fxhoo (Heb. 7 23; cf. fxeuoj /cat wapa-nevcj Ph. 1 25), Trapa-rXew (Ac. 20 16), Trapa-ppeco (Heb. 2:1), rapa(Ac. 28:20), Tapa-KXrjros
:
(Jo.
TtdrjuL
(Mk. 6
is
f.
41), Tvap-eiixL (Lu. 13

(1
1), etc.
specially noticeable
word
10
:
-Kap-oivos
Tim. 3:3).
xctpd suggests
Cf. also avTL-Trap-rj\deu in Lu.
31
Sometimes
Pet. 2
:
a notion of stealth as in
irap:
eL<r-ayo: (2
1), 7rap-tcr-6uco
(Ju. 4), wap'êla-aKTOS (Gal. 2
4),
but in
20 this notion is not present. Cf. Mt. 14 15, 57 (hpa. T]8ri iraprjXdev, 'the hour is already far spent' ('gone by'). Note also the Scotch "far in" hke modern Greek irapapeaa (Moulton, ProL, p. 247). A few examples of the "perfective" use occur as in Trapo^vpw (Ac. 17 16), irapa-TLKpalvco (Heb. 3 16), napd1 the 10, but in Lu. 14 a-niios (Ac. 28 11), irapa-rrjpeo) (Gal. 4 idea of envious watching comes out). With Trapa-(j)poueoj the noTTap-eLcr-kpxopai in
:
Ro. 5
tion
is
rather 'to be beside one's

in
:
self,'
'out of mind.'
Cf. also irapa-
found in the ostraca (AVilcken, i. 78 f.) as a 'to fall below par.' For ivapevo-xXeiv (Ac. 15 19) see TrapevoxKttv rjpas, P. Tb. 36 (ii/s.c). Ilapd occurs in the N. T. with three cases. The locative has 50 examples, the accusative 60,
TTtTTTco
Heb. 6 commercial word
6,
the ablative 78."
K.-G.,
I,
p. 509.
Thumb., Handb.,
Moulton,
p. 102.
Delbriick, Die Grundl., p. 130.
Prol., p. 106.
614
4.

With
the Locative.
NEW TESTAMENT
is
tQ This confining of xapd to persons is hke the usual Greek idiom, though Homer ^ used it freely with both. Homer used it also as an adverb and in the shortened form The only instance in the N. T. of the locative with Tapa Trap.
larriKeLcrav irapa
to persons.
Uapa with the locative Only one other example appears,

:
nearly confined
cravpui (Jo. 19
25).
after a verb of
motion
is
in Lu. 9
47,
eaTrjcrev
avro
Trap'
eavTw,
though here
reads kambv.
The
locative with irapa leaves the
etymological idea unchanged so that

simplest usage.
we
see the preposition in its
Cf. ov aireKeLwov irapa Kapirw (2
Tim. 4
13) as
typical example of the use with persons which

in Latin, 'at one's house' (Jo.
is
much hke apud

So
Tapa (Ac.
1:40), 'in his society,' etc.
KaraXvaaL irapa (Lu. 19
7), juevco irapa (Jo.
14
17), êvlô:
:
21
16).
Cf. Ac. 21
8.
In Rev. 2
13;
to)
Mt. 28
15,
Tapa has the

is
idea of 'among.'
The phrase Tapa
deQ (Lu. 1 :30)
common.
Cor.
4>povipoi.
The word
1
:
is
used in ethical relations,^ also like

vfxtv
Trap' efxol (2
:
17).
Cf. tI aTLCFTov Kplverai Tap'

:
(Ac. 26
8)
and
Tap' eavroLs (Ro. 12

in
16).
Ilapd with the locative does not occur
occurs only with persons (like the between Trapd and dvro and k has already been made. In Mk. 8:11 both Trapd and dTro occur, ^r]TOvvTes Tap' aiirov ar]p.eiov clto tov ovpavov (cf. 12 2), and in Jo. 1 40 we have both Trapd and e/c, els Ik twv bvo rcov aKovaavTOiV Tapa 'Iwavov. In a case like Jo. 8 38 the locative is followed by the ablative,^ ecopa/ca Trapd rtS Tarpi ^Kovaare Tapa rod Tarpos, though some MSS. have locative in the latter clause also. But the ablative here is in strict accordance with Greek usage as in a case like aKovaai Tapa aov (Ac. 10 22). On the other hand in Jo. 6 45 f we find the ablative in both instances, 6 aKovaas Tapa rod jrarpos
it
Hebrews. 5. With the Ablative.
But
older Greek).
The
distinction
6 oiv
Tapa TOV deov
(cf. 6
wp
els
tov koKtov tov TaTpbs in Jo. 1
18).
But
this last Trapd implies the
coming
:
of Christ
from the Father,
like Trapd tov Trarpos e^rjXdov (Jo. 16
27).
ITapd with the ablative
means 'from the side of as wdth the accusative it means 'to the side of.' The phrase ot Tap' avTov therefore describes one's family
or kinsmen (Mk. 3
for one's agents,
rjfjLibv
:
21).
In the papj^ri the phrase

auroO in
is
very
common
to.
and Moulton'* has found one or two

ot Trap'
like ot Trap*
TavTts parallel to
Mk.
21.
Cf. also
Tap'
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 134. Abbott, Job. Gr., Simcox, Lang, of N. T., p. 151. p. 271. Prol., p. 106. In G. H. 36 (ii/B.c), B. U. 998 (ii/B.c), P. Par. 36 (ii/B.c). Cf. Blasa, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 138.
*
avrdv (Lu. 10
:
615
Rouffiac {Re-
7) for one's resources or
property.
cherches, etc., p. 30)
cites kbarcavqaev Trap' eavTOV (cf.
Mk.
17
26)
Trap' kixov from inscription from Priene (111, 117). Note also With passive dLaOr]Kr] (Ro. 11:27) with notion of authorship. verbs the agent is sometimes expressed by Trapd as in a-KeaToKixkvos
irapa deov (Jo. 1:6), tols 'KeXoKrjiJ.ePOLs Trapd Kvplov (Lu. 1:45).
:
Cf.
Text. Rec. in Ac. 22 30 with Kar-qyopelTai irapa Twv 'lovbalwv, where W. H. have virb. Ilapd occurs with the middle in Mt. 21 42, Trapd
:
In the later Greek vernacular Trapd with the ablative helped supplant vt6 along with dTro, and both Trapd and viro (and k) vanished 1 "before the victorious dTro." It is not found in John's writings at 6. With the Accusative.
Kvplov kykvero.
alP as
it
is is
also
accusative
common
wanting in the other Catholic Epistles. The in the local sense both with verbs of
motion and of rest. The increase in the use of the accusative with verbs of rest explains in part the disuse of the locative.^ One naturally compares the encroachments of els upon h. We see the idiom in the papyri as in ol irapa ak deol, P. Par. 47 (b.c.
153).
The
use of Trapd with the accusative with verbs of rest
was common in Northwest Greek (Buck, Greek Dialects, p. 101). Thus in Mt. 4 18 we find irepnraTciv xapd T-fiv doKaaaav logically enough, but in 13 1 we meet tKa9r]To irapa rrjv daXaaaav, and note
:
KaOrifxevoL
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. 4 35. So no difficulty arises from epixj/av irapa tovs ir68as (Mt. 15 There is no example in the N. T. of Trapd in the sense of 30). 'beyond,' like Homer, but one where the idea is 'near to,' 'along:
side of,' as ^X0ej^
irapa
Trjv
daXaaaav (Mt. 15
'
29).
tively Trapd does occur often in the sense of
beside the
'less
But figuramark or
'
'beyond.'
Once* indeed we meet the notion of

fxlav
than,' as
in TeaaapaKOvra irapa
ireirpaKa,
(2 Cor.
11:24).
Cf. Trapd raXavTov aoi
B.U. 1079 (a.d. 41), where Trapd means 'except.' modern Greek vernacular keeps Trapd rplxa, 'within a
breadth' (Thumb, Handh., p. 98).
The
hair's
is
The notion
and
is
of 'bejônd'
in
common enough
p<jOTpov
in classic writers
It occurs
irXelovos
most frequent
He-
brews in the N. T.
(Heb. 1:4),
with comparative forms

:
like 5ta0o-
(3
3),
KpelrToai (9 :23; cf.
12:24),
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 138. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 270. W.-Th., p. 404. Bhiss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 138, loss naturally explains Trapd here as meaning 'by virtue of,' but not Debrunner. 2
*
616
NEW TESTAMENT
:
with implied comparison like rfharrwaas ^paxv tl (2 7), or with merely the positive like dAiaprcoXot (Lu. 13:2; of. 13:4). Indeed
no adjective or
tive with rapa
28).
participle
at
all
cf.
may
(cf.
appear,
as
in
ocêCkkTai
kyevovTo irapa iraPTas (Lu. 13:4;

is
13:2).
The use
of the posi-
like the
Aramaic
Here the notion
of 'beyond' or 'above'
Wellhausen, Einl., p. is simple enough.

:
3:11 and rnjLepav in Ro. 14 5; Heb. Greek was not without this natural use of In the later Greek -jrapa for comparison and the LXX is full of it.^ both retreat before irapa and the vernacular the ablative and accusative.^ In the modern Greek vernacular we find Trapd and the accusative and even with the nominative after comparison (Thumb, Handb., p. 75). The notion of comparison may glide
Cf. irapa after dXXos in 1 Cor.
11:11.
The
older
r?
over into that of opposition very easily.

kXarpevaav
rfj
KTiaeL irapa top KTiaavra,

:
Thus in Ro. where 'rather than'
1
is
25,
the
Cf. Ro. 4 18, Trap' ekirlba er' k\irih, where (cf. "instead of"). both prepositions answer over to each other, 'beyond,' 'upon.' So in 2 Cor. 8 3 Kara, bvvap.Lv and Trapd bvvap.Lv are in sharp contrast. 8 f Trap' 6 has the idea of 'beyond' and Cf. Ac. 23 3. In Gal. 1 To exceed in17. so 'contrary to.' Cf. Ro. 11 24; 12 3; 16 structions is often to go contrary to them. In a case like Trapd Cf. English vbpov (Ac. 18 13), to go beyond is to go against. Once more Trapd with the accusative trans-gression, xapd-xrcoâ.
idea
strangely enough
may
15
f.
actually
mean
Cf.
'because
of,'
:
like propter.
7.
So
in 1 Cor. 12
Trapd tovto.
it
in Lu. 5
The
Attic
writers used Trapd thus, but
disappears in the later vernacular.'
The notion of cause grows out of the idea of nearness and the nature of the context. Farrar* suggests the Enghsh colloquial: "It's all along of his own neglect."
some dispute about the etymology of Trept. it in etymology and meaning with virep. But the point is not yet clear, as Brugmann^ conWhatever may be true about the remote Indo-Germanic tends. root, Trept belongs to the same stem as xapd and is in the locative case like pari in the Sanskrit.'' Cf. also Old Persian pariy, Zend pairi, Latin per, Lithuanian per, Gothic fair-, Old High German far-, fer, German ver-. The Greek uses Trept as an adverb (Homer)
(I)
IIcpC.
There
is
Some
scholars, like Sonne,^ connect
C. and
S., p.
85
f.;
Thack., Gr.,
p. 23.
jb., p. 390.
2
5 ^
Gk. Synt.,
p. 700.
p. 104.
K. Z., Kurze
14, pp. 1
ff.
Cf. Delbnick, Vergl. Synt.,
I,

I,
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 447; Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,
p. 700.
PREPOSITIONS (nPGOEZEIz)
and the
Êolic dialect^
irep is
617
even uses wep instead of irepL The intensame word. 1. The Root-Meaning. It is 'round' ('around'), 'on all sides' (cf. dij.(f)i, 'on both sides'). Cf. Trept^ (Ac. 5 16), where the rootidea is manifest. Cf. Latin circum, circa. The preposition has indeed a manifold development,^ but after all the root-idea is plainer always than with some of the other prepositions. The N. T. examples chiefly (but cf. Ac. 28 7) concern persons and things, though even in the metaphorical uses the notion of
sive particle
this
: :
'around'
2.
is
present.
In Composition.
is
The
:
idea of 'around' in the hteral local

:
sense
abundant.
11
irepL-epxofxaL
Cf. irepLrjyev (Mt, 4

42), irepLibpaixov
23), TrepiaaTpaxJ/ai. (Ac.

:
22
6), irepLecTTooTa (Jo.
(Mk. 6
55), Trepi4>epLv
Trepiedr]Kev
(Mk.
(Mt.
55),
:
(Ac.
19
13),
:
4>pa'yiJ.6v
aura)
21
33).
In Tepi-irarew (Mt. 9
5) Trept
has nearly lost
its
special
force, while in Trepiepyaôiuhovs (2
in the preposition.
avTov kvkKcc
Th. 3:11) the whole point lies Note in Mk. 3 34, Trept-iSXei/'a/xej/os tovs irepl KaOrjuhovs, where kvkXcx) explains Trept already t^vice ex:
pressed.
Cf. also TrepL-KVK\6)(Tovali' ae (Lu. 19:43).

irepi
The
perfective
idea of
in composition
is
manifest in rept-eXeLv
a/jLapTias
(Heb.
rijs
10
11), 'to
take
:
away altogether.'
means
:
Cf. Trepi-axpaPTOiv irvp

TepL to kp
h jikaw
pikaoo.
av\r]s
(Lu. 22
55),
where note the addition of
In
Mk.
14: 65 irepL-KaXvTrTco
'to cover all round,' 'to cover up,'
Lu. 1 24. This is the "perfective" sense. Cf. inMt. 26 38. Per contra note weplepyos (1 Tim. 5 13) for 'busybody,' busy about trifles and not about important matters. In 1 Tim. 6 10 note TrepieTapav in the sense of 'pierced through.' But in 2 Cor. 3 16, TreptatptiTat, 'the veil is removed from around the head.' These were the locative, ac3. Originally Four Cases Used.
like irepL-KpvTTTco in
Trept-XvTTos
: :
:
cusative, genitive, ablative.
The
locative
was never common
in
prose and died out in the late Greek, not appearing in the N. T.
Delbriick^
is
Homer and
genitive
is
very positive about the ablative in some examples in Indeed he thinks that the true a later development after the ablative with Trept. I
the earlier Greek.
probable that some of these ablative examples survive in the N. T., though I do not stress the point.
think
4.
it
With
the Ablative.
There
is
some doubt as to how
to explain
K.-G.,
I,
p. 491.
Die Grundl.,
p. 131 f.; VorRl. Synt., I, p.
711
f.
Cf. also Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 447.
618

wepl.
the ablative with
In Horner^
Cf.
virep.
it is
usually explained as like

irepl is
ablative of comparison.
of 'beyond' or 'over,'
Thus
taken in the sense
and
is
alUed to
irepa (irkpav)
and
virep,
ac-
cording to the original sense.^

KepLylypoiJLaL
Brugmann^
cites also
Treptetjut
and
where the notion of superiority comes in. With this compare Treptfcparets yeveadaL ttjs a/cd^rys (Ac. 27: 16), which would thus have the ablative in aKa4>r}s. But Monro* admits that the
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 taken from around.' Cf also Ac. 27 20. The same notion
: . :
occurs in irepi-Kadapua (1 Cor. 4

ing'
13)
and
cf.
TrepirJ/rjixa (ib.),
'off-scour-
and
'off-scraping.'
to.
The same
(Ac. 16
:
idea of from around occurs
in irepL-pr]âvTs
ip-aria
22;
2 Macc. 4
38).
In Lu.
P.
40 this idea appears 'drawn away' or 'from Brit. M. 42 (b.c. 168) beyond in irepiepyos (1
10
:
in a metaphorical sense with irepieairaTo,
around,' 'distracted.'
for
See
(1
TrepLairaL,
'occupy.'
:
Cf.
also
the notion of
Tim. 5
13),
xepiXetroj
:
Th. 4
(Jo. 6
15), 12),
weptixhco (Ac. 1 :4),

TrepLcraos
irepLovaios
(Tit.
14),
Trepto-o-euco
In the last example, to irtpiaabv tovtwv, note remains There a group of passages of a metaphorical the ablative. nature where the idea is that of taking something away. These may be explained as ablatives rather than genitives. So in Ro. 8 3, vrept aixapTLas, the idea is that we may be freed from sin, from around sin. Thayer (under xept) explains this usage as "purpose
(Mt. 5
:
37).
removing something or taking it away." This, of course, is an ablative idea, but even so we get it rather indirectly with xept. See XpidTos aira^ Trepi aixapTiCiv airkdavev in 1 Pet. 3 18. It is worth observing that in Gal. 1 4 W. H. read virkp rather than Trepi, while in Heb. 5 3 W. H. have repl rather than hirkp. Cf. Mk. 14 24. In Eph. 6 18 f. we have Se-qaeu Trepi iravTWV tcov ayloov, Kal vivep ep.ov, where the two prepositions differ very little. But in 1 Pet. 3 18
for
: : :
:
(see above), vTrep ablKo^v, the distinction is clearer.
Cf. Jo. 16
26;
has virep with See Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 152 f kKxvvvbixevov in Mt. 26 28 rather than irepL Cf Blass, Gr. of N. T.
17
:
9.
with iXao-juos in 1 Jo. 2 2. The ablative with virep renders more probable this ablative use of Trepi. 5. With the Genitive. This is the common case with irepi in the
Gk., p. 134.
Cf.
Trepi
:
1 2 3
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 133; Sterrett,

I,
The
Dial, of Horn, in Horn.

:
II.,
N 47.
p. 714.
Cf. Trepairepo:, Ac. 19
39.
Cf.
Kurze
Horn. Gr., p. 133.
N. T.
If the genitive
619
and ablative examples are counted together
(the real ablatives are certainly few) they
number 291
as against
38 accusatives.! ût in the later Greek the accusative gradually drives out the genitive (with the help of 5id also).^ The genitive was always rare with irepl in the local or temporal sense. The N. T. shows no example of this usage outside of composition (Ac. 25 7), unless in Ac. 25 18 Tepl ov be taken with aTadhTes, which is doubtful.3 Curiously enough the Gospel of John has the genitive
:
:
with
irepl
sative not at
almost as often as all the Synoptic writers and the accu19 reading irpds r-qv all in the critical text, Jo. 11
:
Mapdav.^ This frequency in John

of napTvpeco, \eyco, XaXeco,
Ilept
is
due largely to the abundant use

Of. Jo. 1
:
7pd</)co, etc.
7,
22; 7
13, 17, etc.
may
occur with almost any verb where the notion

is
of 'about,'
'concerning'
(20
:
natural, like e(XT\ayxvi-(r6r] (Mt. 9

:
36), -qyavaKTrjaav
24), (leXeL (22
16), eXeTxo/xei'os (Lu. 3
19), edavfiaaav (Lu.
18), etc.
ydvji'toixai,
The
list
includes verbs like amvco, yLvcoaKw, 8ia\oyiônaL,

etc.
extfryreco,
The usage
Th. 5
22),
:
includes both persons, like
irpocrevx^crde irepl rnxwv (1
tI fxeptpu'dTe
(Mt. 6
28).
:
25), and things, like irepl kvdvuaTOS One neat Greek idiom is to. irepl. Of.
:
ra
TO.
irepl ttjs irepl

:
68ov (Ac. 24
to.
irepl
'Irjaov
(18
25;
Mk.
27),
eiJLavTov
(Ac. 24
10).
Blass^ considers
is
iroielv
it
irepl
avrov
(Lu. 2 27)
"an
incorrect phrase," which

:
putting
too strongly.
Cf
Xa7xdi^co Tepi in Jo. 19
24,
hke
classical ixaxopai
irepl.
Sometimes
irepl
irepl
TTjs
appears rather loosely at the beginning of the sentence,

\oyias (1 Cor. 16
:
1), itepl
'AiroWco (16
it
12).
Sometimes
if
Tepl
is
used with the relative when
would be repeated
the antece-
dent were expressed, as in irepl uv eypaxj/are (1 Cor. 7:1) or where SeSco/cds irepl properly belongs only with the antecedent, as in Tepl S:v In Lu. 19 37, irepl iraauv S:v elhov 8vva.p.euv, the tiOL (Jo. 17:9). preposition strictly belongs only to the antecedent which is in:
In a case like irepl iravTc^v evxop-aL (3 Jo. 2) the subjectmatter of the prayer is implied in irepl as cause is involved in in irepl Tov Kadapiafiov (Mk. 1 44) and as advantage is expressed But this is merely due to the context. 38). irepl avTTJs (Lu. 4 This construction in reality occurs with 6. With the Accusative.
corporated.
: :
much
the same sense as the genitive.
The
accusative, of course,
suggests a placing around. It is rare in the N. T., but in later Greek displaced the genitive as already remarked. But it does not survive in the modern Greek vernacular. With the accusative
1
Moulton,
Prol., p. 105.
Jann., Hist. Gk. W.-Th., p. 373.
Gr., p. 392.
Abbott, Job. Or., p. 272. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135.
620
Kepi is
NEW TESTAMENT
:
used of place, as in o-Kdi/'co irepl avT-qv (Lu. 13 8), xepl tov So with expressions of Cf. Mk. 3:8. To-Kov eKetvov (Ac. 28 7). time, as in xept rplrvv wpav (Mt. 20 3). Note the use of vrept with the different parts of the body, as Tvepl rrjv 6(X(t)vv (Mt. 3:4), irepl tov rpaxv'ôv (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

irepl 'Zevo(i>o:vTa
occurs in ol irepl IlaDXoj^ (Ac. 13

7, 4, 16),
13),
(Xen. Anab.
^
where the idea

irepl
is
hke ol 'Paul and

:
his companions.'
But
in a case like ol
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 are meant,^ irepl Mapdav Kal Mapiav, where only Martha and Mary that only Blass^ notes Mapdav. Trjv xpos being the critical text
with the Philippian Epistle (2 23, to. irepl ep.'e) did Paul begin the use of the accusative with irepl (cf. genitive) in the sense of 'concerning,' like Plato. Cf. in the Pastoral Epistles, irepl rriv iriarLv
:
(1
Tim.
f.)
1: 19), irepl
it
rw
aXrjOeLav (2
irepl to.
Tim.
2: 18).
40
has
already.
as in the
Cf.
roiaCra (Ac. 19:25).
But Luke (10: But /ckXoj

irepl
in the
LXX,
kolvt], is
also taking the place of
(Thackfinally
irepl
eray, Gr., p. 25).

irepl itself
'Aju0t
could not stand before
irepl,
and
went down.
The entrance
of virep into the field of
will call for notice later.
(m) npo. Cf. the Sanskrit prd and the Zend fra, Gothic fra, Lithuanian pra, Latin pro, German /-ur, vor, English /or (/or-ward), occurs fore (/ore-front). The case of rpo is not known, though it a few times in Homer as an adverb.* Cf. aTo and vird. The
Latin prod is probably remodelled from an old *pro like an ablative, as prae is dative (or locative), It is It is therefore plain enough. 1. The Original Meaning.
simply
avTi
'fore,'
'before.'
It is rather
more general
In
in idea
than
(Ac.
and has a more varied development.^

6)
i:p6 t^s dvpas
12
the simple idea
is clear.
In Composition. It is common also in composition, as in Other uses in composition 68), 'fore-court.' Trpo-a{)\Lov (Mk. 14 grow out of this idea of 'fore,' as irpo-l3alva3 (Mt. 4 21), 'to go on' 14), irpo-ayoj (Mk. 11:9; cf. aKo('for-wards'), tpo-kottc^ (Gal. 1 'openly manifest,' Xovdeo} in contrast), ttpo-StjXos (1 Tim. 5:24),
2.
:
:
W.-Th.,
K.-G.,
I,
p. 406.
'
lb.
2 B
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 134.
"
Monro, Horn.
I,
Gr., p. 149.
p. 454.
Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt.,
p. 716.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOOEZEIs)
'before
all' (cf.
621
:
Gal. 3:
1, Tpo-eypacf>r]); Trpo-exw
:
(Ro. 3
9), 'to sur-
pass'; irpo-auiapravu^ (2 Cor. 12 Kpo-oplôi (Ro. 8:29), to 'pre-ordain.'
21), 'to sin before/ 'previously';
Cf. irpo-Kptm (1
Tim. 5:
the N. T. merely follows 21), 'pre-judgment.' In these respects may illustrate 7rp6 still One in the wake of the older Greek.^ the superlative Trpw-ros and further by the comparative Trpd-repos
(cf ,
is
Cf also irpo-ao}, Tvpo-irepvai. Doric Tpa-Tos) These call for little comment. It 3. The Cases Used with rpo. in Homer may be a remnant of icpb barely possible that obpavodi
.
true genitive a locative use.^ Brugmann^ thinks that a is probably the ablative the But certain. TTpb 68ov, but this is not accusative." the with appears even irpS In very late Greek case. is due ablative The vernacular. Greek It is not in the modern pro.^ Latin the with also found is and comparison to the idea of is almost confined and T. N. the in times 48 Up6 occurs only Luke's writings and Paul's to Matthew's and John's Gospels,
is
seen in
Epistles (12 times).

irpo ttjs dvpas it occurs only in four instances, tov rvXoivos (Ac. 12 14), Tp6 (Jas. 5:9), dvpuv Twv (Ac 12 Cf. enTpoadeu (Mt. 5 24), which is more 13). TTpd rrjs TToXecos (14 Ac. common in this sense in the N. T. Some MSS. have 7rp6 to-day Cyprus (borrowing from the literary language)
4. Place.
:
Thus
6), TTpd
5-23.
we
still
In have Tpd
/ceâXrjs,
'at the
head
of the table'
(Thumb,
Handb., p. 98). u at ti I\ the This is the more common idea with 7rp6 5. Time. ivpo (Mt. 5 12), Thus we find such expressions as tovs irpo hp-oiv p.ov (Mt. 24 :38), irpb tov aplarov KaraKXvc rov 7rp6 :29), Kaipov (8 Cor. irkaxa (Jo. 11:55), irpd rC^v ai6:vc^v (1
(Lu. 11:38),
7rp6
rod
2:7), need one stumble
TTpo xetMSi'o. (2
Tim. 4
21).
This
is all
plain sailing.
Nor
:
much
at the
compound
:
preposition (translation
parallels). Cf. Ac. 13 Hebraism) irpd rpoaiîrov aov (Mk. 1 2 and with the infinitive, as tov Nine times we have -rrpo 24- Lu. 9 52. neatly expresses phrase this in Lu. 2 21 22 15; Jo. 1 48. Here quam. A real ante Cf. (antecedent). a subordinate clause of time (Jo. 12 1), which iraaxo. ôO in irpb
: :
difficulty
appears U vi^^P^^ diem tertium Kalendas. does look like the Latin idiom in ante
:
Bruc., Griech. Gr., p. 449.

.
Grundl., Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 149. Cf Dolbrik-k, Die 393. Gr., Gk. Hist. p. Jann., also. show the loc.
2 4 6
p. 132.
.^
r,,,
The
mscr.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 393. 722. Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., I, p.
622
NEW TESTAMENT
the late Greek writers
dating.
Jannaris ^ attributes this to the prevalence of the

the
common idiom in Roman system of
This has been

this
common
explanation.
But Moulton^ throws doubt on
Latinism" by showing that this idiom appears in a Doric inscription of the first century B.C. (Michel, 694), irpb afiepdv The idiom occurs also in the inscriptions, irpb 8kKa Tcjv nvffTfiplwv. le KaXavbchv AvyowTo^v, I.M.A. iii. 325 (ii/A.D.), and the papyri, So Moulton proves his point Trpoj 8vo T]p.epdv, F.P. 118 (ii/A.D.).
''plausible
that
it is
a parallel growth like the Latin.
Rouffiac {Recherches,
inscrip-
p. 29) re-enforces it
by three
it is
citations
from the Priene
tions.
Cf. also Trpo
TToXXaJj' TovTCjip rjnepoov
Ada
S. Theogn., p. 102.
Moulton thinks that

:
a natural development from the abla-
and refers to 6\f/e aajSâro^v in Mt. 28 1 as parallel. May it not be genuine Greek and yet have responded somewhat to the Latin influence as to the frequency (cf. LXX and the N. T.)? Similarly irpo hri^v beKareaaapuiv
tive case with rp6, 'starting from,'
Abbott^ conbefore (ago).' but it is doubtful if the Greek came at it in that way. Simcox^ calls attention to the double genitive with irpb in Jo. 12 1, really an ablative and a genitive.
(2
Cor. 12
it
2),
'fourteen
years
siders
a transposing of
irpb,
6. Superiority.
IIpo occurs in the sense of superiority also, as

:
in Tvpb iravTwv (Jas. 5

is
12; 1 Pet. 4
kjjLov
8).
:
In Col.
8;
17
:
irpb iravriov
probably time, as in -wpb 12. TovToiv TravToiv in Lu. 21 etymology of The (w) Epos.
:
(Jo. 10
Rom. 16
7).
Cf. irpb
-wpos
is
not perfectly
Trport
clear.
It
seems to be
itself
a phonetic variation^ of
tvotI
which
is
found in
Homer as What the
well as the form

relation
is is
(Arcad.
ttos, Ttbr
in Boeotian, etc.).
between
ttotI
and
Trport is
not certain.^
if
The
Sanskrit yrdti
in the locative case.
The
connection,
any, be-
tween Trpos and irpb is not made out, except that irpo-Ti and prd-ti both correspond to irpb and prd. Thayer considers -tL an adverbial
suffix.
1.
The Meaning.
is
"^
It is the
same as
In
Trport
and
Trort.
The
root-
idea
'near,' 'near by,' according to Delbriick,*
mann^
1 "
inclines to 'towards.'
Homer
Trpos
though Brughas an adverbial
Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 394.
Cf. Viereck,
Prol., pp.
100
ff .
He
refers also to the
Sermo Graecus, p. 12 f. numerous ex. in W. Schulze, Graec.

^
Lat., pp. 14-19.
* 7 8
Joh. Gr., p. 227.

lb.
Lang, of the N. T.,
p.
153
I,
f.
p. 726.

"
Die Grundl.,
p. 132.
use, -Kpbs
8e,
623
'Near,' rather than more satismeanings 'towards,' seems to explain the resultant Cf. gegen. German The idea seems to be 'facing,' factorily.
with the notion of
'
besides.'
7rp6aa;7rov.
In 6 X670S vu
Trpos
rdp Btbv {io. 1
1)
the
literal
idea
comes out well, 'face to face with God.' the 2 In Comvosition. Probably one sees
7rpo(7-65p6t;co,
original notion
'to sit near'

:
(cf.
Eurip.,
etc.).
Some MSS. read

:
this
though the best MSS. have TrapeSpeOw. But (Mt. 15 32; we do have Trpoa-Kt4>k\aiov (Mk. 4 38) and irpoa-ixkvoi Trpoa-opfxiô} and 21 (Jo. 5), Trpoa-<})ayLov Cf. also 1 Tim. 5 5). composition in appear meanings resultant (Mk. 6 53). the other 9:41),' to' in rpocr-KoXXaco (Eph. also as towards' in irpoa-ayc^ (Lu.
verb in
1
Cor. 9
13,
'
'for' 5:31), 'besides' in Trpocr-oêiXco (Phil. 19), composition and in common is preposition (Mt. 13 21). This in rpoa-zcaprepeco as "perfective," simply is sometimes the idea
:
irpda-Kaipos
(Ac. 1
14), 7rp6o--7reij/os (Ac.
10
10).
3. Originalhj with Five Cases.
The
cases used with
7rp6s
were
according to Brugmann,^ viz. locative, probably The only doubt is as to accusative. genitive, dative, ablative, Delbriick^ also thinks that a the true dative and the true genitive. (cf. irpo, 3) speaks few genuine datives and genitives occur. Green^ only rarely true of irpos and of "the true genitive" with irpo; it is the The genitive with irpos is wanting in the papyri and
originally five
iirkp.
Pergamon
in the
N.
:
inscriptions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 117). appears. T. no example of the genitive or dative

Trpos
And
In
Lu. 19
37
with
kyYiôvTos;
might possibly be regarded as dative rfj Karaâaec but it is better with the Revised Version to sup-
composition {rpoakx^Te ply "even" and regard it as a locative. In 2 Maccabees shows 1) the dative is common. iavTQls, Lu. 12 (Thackeray, Gr., numbers the Uterary use of ivpbs with dative of
:
p. 188).
4.
ablative in The Ablative. There is only one example of the vnerkpas ttjs irpds tovto the N. T. and this occurs in Ac. 27 34,
:
ac^rnpias vrapxî.
This metaphorical usage means 'from the point

It
is
of
view of your advantage.'
possible also to explain

is
it
as
true genitive, 'on the side of.' This to two cases. TTpos in the N. T. is nearly confined
1
a classical idiom.
So then Moulton^ agrees

still
adv. in Polyb. 2 Griech. Gr., p. 448

3
UpSs, as well as ntT&, I, p. 728. Cf. Kaelker, Quest, dc Eloc. Polyb., p. 283.
f. f.
appears as
Vergl. Synt.,
I,
p.
729
p. 163.
"
Prol., p. 106.
624
A GRAMMAR OF
is
THE.
GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
with Blass^ that this
a remnant of the hterary style in Luke.
Moulton
finds the genitive (ablative) 23 times in the

irpbs
LXX. The
true genitive appeared in examples like

river' or 'towards the river.'
rod iroTaixov, 'by the
In the modern Greek vernacular is going in the N. T. It is rarely used of place and time, and even so the usage is due to the literary language (Thumb, Handbook, p. 106). 5. With the Locative. Upos indeed occurs in the N. T. with the locative only seven times, so that it is already pretty nearly a one-case preposition. These seven examples are all of place and
xpos fades- before
els
and
clto
as the ablative use
(Mk. 5 11), Trpos rw p-vqixelo} with verbs of rest save the use with See under 3. The correct text gives 'eyyiôvTos in Lu. 19 37. the locative in Mk. 5: 11 and Jo. 20: 11, else we should have reads the accusative in Lu. 19 :37. These seven only five, and
call for little
remark.
Cf. irpos rw opet

all
(Jo.
20
11).
They
are
:
examples
illustrate
'near' or 'facing.'
dative (locative) in
in John's writings.
p. 106) notes
6.
well the etymological meaning of -wphs as Moulton counts 104 examples of Trpos and the the LXX. Four of these seven examples are Cf. especially Jo. 20 12. Moulton (ProL,
:
"P.
Fi. 5 vrpos rc3 irvXcovL, as late as
245 a.d."
in
With
the Accusative.
It
was exceedingly common
Homer
is is
and always
with
679.*
TTpos
in the literal local sense.^
The metaphorical usage with

the accusative
the accusative developed later.

in the
How common
irpos
N. T.
is
seen
when one notes
that the
number
This was the

It is
'
phorically.
both literally and metanot necessary to say that Trpos with the accusative
classic
idiom^ with
means towards.' The accusative

'
case implies extension and with verbs of motion xp6s ('near') naturally blends with the rest into the resultant idea of towards.' This is in truth a very natural
use of Tpos with the accusative, as in auex'^pr]crev trpos
r-qv
doKaaaav
Trpos (to
(Mk. 3:7).
opos)
In
Mk. 11:1 note both
eis
('lepoaoKvua)
and
wath
is
persons.
In Phil. 5 (W. H.) the margin has both with Here Lightfoot (in loco) sees a propriety in the faith
eyyiô}.
(ttpos)
which
Cf.
towards
5
19.
Christ and the love exerted upon

:
But that
distinction hardly^ applies in Ro. 3

: :
25
f.;
(els) men. Eph. 4 12.

:
In Mk. 9 17 W. H. and Nestle accent wpds ak. There seems to be something almost intimate, as well as personal, in some of the examples of Trpos. The examples of Trpos with persons are very numerous, as in eêwopeveTo irpos avrov (Mt. 3 ;5),
1
Mk.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 140. Jann., Gk. Gr., p. 366.
"
^
Moulton,
Prol., p. 106.
jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 394.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 142.
p. 155.
PREPOSITIONS (nP00E2EI2)
Sevre wp6s
fie
625
(Mt. 11
is
28), etc.
But one_must_not think jhat the

an d the accusative
:
notion of motion
(cf. els aruTei').
essential to the use o f Trpos
kTrirris
j^s
v<âu,
Thus in^M k. 4 note both ^ttc and
gaXao-Q-av 1, ttSs 6 ox^ô^ -^po^ -ryv

TTpos
(/)cos
tion.
Cf. also
depnaLVOiêvos Trpos to
and the obvious distinc(Mk. 14 54). It IS not

:
5 6), 7rp6s ci iroLuy strange, therefore, to find ^^^- 2 2. The T^jrrôsjnuLiimiLJJ^ also TO Trdaxa (26 18). Cf. locative would the what exactly indeed not accusative with irpds is
ir^pos T7Mcts elali'
(Mt. 13
be, especially with persons.
In
Mk.
14
49 we find
Kad'
wkpav
'nmv
Jo. 1
-^Pos
:
vfJiCis
h
:
Tc3
rji'
lepv
Trpos
8L5a<xKo:p.
Abbott ^ properly
illustrates
1,
6 XoTos
rov Oeov
with this passage in Mk. and
It is the face-to-face with 2 Cor. 5 So John thus mind. in has Paul that Lord the converse with
8, hb-qp-riaai Trpos rbv Kvpiov.
God. Cf. aropa conceives the fellowship between the Logos and 14 and TrpoawTroi' Trpos ypbaoiirov Trpos (JTopo. in 2 Jo. 12, 3 Jo. use of Trpos with words of rest this while But, 12. 13 1 Cor. the root-idea of the preposition itis in perfect harmony with older Greek writers nor in the self, it does not occur in the Certainly Jannaris^ is only able to find it in Malalas.
LXX.2
the more
idiom would have been Trapd, while ixera rightly and Gvv might have been employed. Abbott,^ however, speaking of verbs Trpos with calls attention to the frequent use of So then etc., and Demosthenes has it with faco.
common Greek
Uke
XeToj, XaX4co,
it is
living relationship, a natural step to find Trp6s employed for of this personal examples intimate converse. Two very interesting and verse 17, aXK-qXovs, occur in Lu. 24 14, C:p.'CKovv Trpos
intercourse
6iVTLâ\\eTe Trp6s a\\i]\ovs.

Koivoivia (2
Cf. also Trpos with

:
TreptTraxfco
(Col. 4:5),
Cor. 6
:
14), dtadiiKv (Ac. 3
25 as in ancient Greek),
X670S (Heb. 4
TTtTTTet
13), etc.
Certainly nothing anomalous exists

:
Trp6s Tous Tr65as
(Mk. 5
22)
and
TpoaKdxl^vs Trpos \idov
(Mt.
of time, and the 4:6). npos is not used often with expressions Cf. case. accusative the with notion of extension is in harmony wkpas Trp6s oXaas in Jo. 5 35, 13, Trp6s chpav Trpos Katpdu in Lu. 8 the resultant notion in Heb. 12 10. In xp6s eairkpav (Lu. 24 29) out that Trpos to points Blass^ is 'toward,' rather than 'for.' uses of Trpos metaphorical The 11) is classical. irapov (Heb. 12 is often exone towards Disposition naturally numerous.
: : :
are
pressed by
(1
Trpos,
whether
it
be friendly as in
ixaKpodvpeire irpos Kavras
Th. 5
1
14) or hostile as in
exBpa oures
* 6
Trpos ai;Toi>s
(Lu. 23
12).
Joh.
Gr,
Gk.
p.
273
f.
lb
Hist.
Gr., p. 395.
Joh. Gr., p. 275. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 139.
626
Cf.
Ater'

aW-qXuv
(ib.).
though that
may
lipos does not of itself mean 'against/ irpos roiis be the resultant idea as in yoyyvafxds
'Ej3paiovs (Ac.
6:1).
Cf. also xpos
irX-qa p.ovi)v t^s crapKos
(Col. 2
23)
and
idea
Trpos Tovs kt\. (2
Cor. 5
12).
Sometimes
irpos
adds nothing
to the
vague notion
of extension in the accusative case
and the
Thus xpos tovs dyyeXovs simply 'with reference to.' lipbs in the KOLvi] shares Cf. also Lu. 20 19. \kytL (Heb. 1:7). with ds and irepl the task of supplanting the disappearing dative (Radermacher, A^. T. Gr., p. 112). In particular xpos ahrbv {-ohsj
is
:
takes the place of aurcS
(-oTs)
after \k.yw,
elirov,
aTOKplvofxaL, as
shown by
3
:
parallel passages in the Synoptic Gospels, as in Lu.

avTots
14,
where MSS. vary between

:
and
xp6s avrovs.
Adjec-
tives
may have
29),
depiffixov
xpos in this general sense of fitness, like ayadbs

(2 Cor.
35), etc.
(Eph. 4
xpos
bwaTa (Jo. 4
:
10 :4), Uavos (2 Cor. 2
16), \evKal
:
Cf. also rd xpos tov debv (Ro. 15
The phrase tI irpbs was; (Mt. 27:4) has ancient Greek 17). 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.
13 14
28), 6 xpos rriv eXerjpLoavprjv Kadr]fxepos
(Ac. 3
10).
Cf. 1 Cor.
26; 15
34.
Some examples
:
of the infinitive occur also in
this connection, like xpos to
OeadrjvaL avTots
(Mt. 6:1), xpos to

TrpoaevxâdaL
KaTaKavaai avTo. (13
30),
etc.
In xpos to
betv
(Lu.
see
18
1)
the notion
is
hardly so strong as 'purpose.'

crKkripoKapdlav
But
Infinitive.
Then again cause may be

Tijv
the result in certain convjj.wv
texts as in MoJiKT^s xpos
eireTpepev
(Mt.
There is no difficulty about the notion of comparison. It may be merely general accord as in xpos to dtk-qixa avTov (Lu. 12 47), xpos T-qv aXridetav (Gal. 2 14), or more technical comparison as
19:8).
: :
in ovK aîa
KoXvcpOrjvai
to. TradrjixaTa
tov vvv /catpoO xpos
ttjv
jxeXKovaav 56âv dxo4)6bvov
(Ro. 8
5,
18).
With
this
may
be compared xpos
where the phrase has an adverliial force. The older form ^vv (old Attic) appears in some MSS. (o) Svv. in 1 Pet. 4 12 (Beza put it in his text here). This form ^vv is seen in ^wbs. In p.eTa-^v both /jteTa and ^v{v) are combined.^ Delbriick^ is indeed in doubt as to the origin of crvv, but see Mommsen,^ and some (Giles, Co?np. Pkilol., p. 343) consider ^vv and avv
in Jas. 4
: :
different.
1.
The Meaning. This

N. T. Gk.,
is
in little dispute.
It is
'
together with.' ^
Blass, Gr. of
p. 139.
^
2 *
Vergl. Synt.,
I,
p. 730.
Entwick. einiger Gesetze
flir
d.
Gebr.
d. griech. Priip. ixtTd, avv

s
and
a/xa,
p, 444.
Cf. Latin
627
associative init is just that never departed it
cum and English

is it
cow-comitant.
The
a/xa
^
strumental
idea that
the case used with avv as with
and
It
from
this
was used to express originally. idea, for when the notion of help
is
present
grows
naturally out of that of association.
The
Attic, according to
Blass,2 confines ahv to the notion of 'including,' but the Ionic
kept
it
along with
It is
^terd for 'with,'
In Homer it is sometimes made headway outside of poetry save in Xenophon, strange to say. The Attic prose writers use /xtrd rather than avv. Thus in 600 pages of Thucydides we find ixtTo. 400 times and ^hv 37, while Xenophon has cruj' more than
2. History.
not without interest.
an adverb
(tmesis).
Indeed
it
never
In Demosthenes the figures run 346 of ^lerd and 15 of avv, while Aristotle has 300 and 8 respectively .^ Monro* thinks that
ixfiTa.
displaced avv in the vernacular while avv held on in the poets as the result of Homer's 'influence and finally became a sort of inseparable preposition like dis- in Latin (cf. d/i0t-- in N. T.). In the
neTo.
modern Greek vernacular avv is displaced by )ue (/xerd) and sometimes by aiia.^ The rarity of avv in the N. T. therefore is in har-
mony
with the history of the language.
Its use in the

is
N. T.
is
largely confined to Luke's Gospel
and Acts and
entirely absent
from John's Epistles and the Apocalypse as it is also from Hebrews and 1 Peter, not to mention 2 Thessalonians, Philemon and the Pastoral Epistles. It is scarce in the rest of Paul's writings and in Mark and Matthew,^ and John's Gospel has it only three times (12 2; 18 1; 21 3). It occurs in the N. T. about 130 times (over two-thirds in Luke and Acts), the MSS. varying in a few
:
instances.
3.
In Composition.
Here avv
is
extremely common.
See
list
of
these verbs in chapter on Cases (Instrumental).
Cf. Thayer's
Lexicon under avv. The use in composition illustrates the associative idea mainly as in aw-dycjo (Mt. 2 4), aw-epxafxat (Mk. 3 20), though the notion of help is present also, as in aw-avrL-XanâvonaL
:
(Lu. 10 :40), avv-epyeco (1 Cor. 16 16). Cf. xatpw Kal o-u7xaipw (Ph. 2 17 f.). The "perfective" use of avv is seen in avv-Kakv-Kru) (Lu. 12:2), avv-K\d(ji (Ro. 11 32), aw-KvivTOi (Lu. 13:11). Cf.
: :
:
avvreXeco, avvrrjpeo:, etc.
In avvoida the knowing

:
may
be either with
:
another, as possibly Ac. 5

1
2,
or with one's
self,
as in 1 Cor. 4
4.
Delbriick, Die Grundl., p. 133.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 132.

Cf. Moininscn, Cf.
Horn. Gr., p. 147.
Entw.
etc., p.
f.
on the whole subject Mommscn,
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 366. Entw., p. 395.

'
628
GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

: :
avvexoi (Lu. 22 63; Ac. 18 5) is found in the papjTi (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 160. Cf. Moulton and Milligan, Expositor, 1911, p. 278). As already explained, the case used is the associative-instrumental. In the very late Greek the accusative begins to appear with avu (as indeed already in the LXX!) and both avv and a/xa show^ examples of the genitive like ûerd. There is very little comment needed on the 4. N. T. Usage. N.T. usage of the preposition beyond what has already been given.^ The bulk of the passages have the notion of accompaniment, So it occurs with fieveLv (Lu. like cvv aol awodavetv (Mt. 26 35).
:
The verb
56), KaOlaaL (Ac. 8 :31), etc.

:
Cf. also avv
6\r] rfj
eKKkrjala (Ac.
15
22),
where the use of
aw may
subordinate the church a bit

: :
Cf. also Ac. 14 5; Lu. 23 11, where than avv might have occurred. As applied to Christ, avv, like h, may express the intimate mystic union, as in KkKpvwTaL avv Tw Xpicrrw ku ri2 6eco (Col. 3:3). The phrase oi avv is used much
to the Apostles (Thayer) .^
Kal rather
like 01 irapa, ol
irepi, ol ixera.
:
Cf. Lu. 5
and Mk. 2
'besides,'
18.
26.
Thus Jlerpos Kal ol aw ainoo (Lu. 9 32). Once avv occurs in a context where
:
the idea
is
:
dXXd ye
koL
aw
-Kaaiv tovtols (Lu.
24 :21).
So probably also Ph. 1:1. It appears in the papyri in this sense also. Cf. Moulton and Milligan, "Lexical Notes on the Papyri," The Expositor, 1911, p. 276. In Mt. 8 34 Text. Rec. reads eis awavT-qaiv rco Trjo-oO where critical text has
:
Cf. Neh. 5
vir-.
stance.
8w6.tJ.eL
The case MSS.
of Ttjo-oO
is
associative-instrumental in either in-
give
aw:
in other passages.
4)
The
use of
aw
rfj
Tov Kvplov (1 Cor. 5
has a technical sense ('together with')
seen in the magical papyri and in an Attic cursing tablet (iii/B.c).

f. See also Deissmann's Die Formel "in Christo Jesu^' for discussion of aw Xptaro), the notion of fellowship in Ph. 1 23. He now cites a graffito with these words to a deceased person, evxoiJ.aL Kaych ev raxv aw aol elvai In 1 Th. 4:17 note ap.a aw {Light, p. 305). Cf. Col. 3:3. avTols and in 5 10 aij.a aw avT<2 like our "together with," which shows also the retreat of aw before aixa. For aw-eTL and Kara see
Cf. Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 304
neut.
Ac. 16 22.
:
(p) 'Yire'p.
In Homer, by anastrophe, sometimes we have
virep.
Cf. Sanskrit updri (locative case of upar),
Zend wpam, Latin

ofer,
super,
Gothic ufar, German

1 2
ilber,
Anglo-Saxon
f.;
English over.
The
and

Cf. Westcott
Jour, of Hell. Stud.,
XIX,
pp. 287-288.
avi>
on
Jo. 1
2 for discussion of distinction between

Deiss., B. S., p.
fiera.
2
Cf. the use of avv Kal in the pap.
265
f.
oldest Indo-Eur, locative
629
occurs in
viraros.
vireprepos,
Cf.
^ was without i. A longer comparative and a superlative uTrepraros shortened into Latin supcrus, summus, and English uy, upper, upper-
most.
1.
The Meaning.
It is therefore clear
enough.
It
is
the very-
English word 'over' or 'upper.' Chaucer uses 'over' in the sense of 'upper.' As an adverb it does not occur in Homer, though
Euripides {Medea, 627) has
virep
ayav.
Jannaris^ calls
virep
(Blass
virep) kydo (2 Cor. 11:23) "the monstrous construction," which is rather overdoing the matter. The use of the preposition is not
remarkably abundant in the N. T. The N.T. has also the compound preposi2. In Composition. (Eph. 1:21), VTrepeKTrepLaaov (Eph. 3 20), virepeKHva tions virepavw
:
(2 Cor. 10
TOis (2
16)
:
and the adverbs

23).
:
viTep\iav (2
Cor. 11:5), virepâWovof virep ('over') appears
Cor. 11
The
literal
meaning
in vTep-cLPo:
(Heb. 9
5), virep avT-f]v (ih.
D), virep-Qov ('upper room,'
Ac.
13).
The notion
virep-alpoo (2
:
of
'excess,'
:
appears in
VTvep-'exoi
vTep-<j)pove(x)
Cor. 12
7), virep-eKirepLaaou (1
:
'more than' (comparison), Th. 3 10),

:
(Ph. 4
7), inrep-viKao:
(Ro. 8
is
37), virep-vxpow (Ph. 2
9),
(Ro. 12 :3).
:
'Beyond'
rather
common
also, as in
virkp-aKfXOS (1
4:6),
vTrep-eKTelvco in
Cor. 7 36), iiTep-avâvcj (2 Th. 1:3), virep-âivo) (1 Th. 2 Cor. 10 14, virep-eKetva (10: 16), and this
: :
grows into the "perfective" idea as mvirep-rjcpapos (Ro. 1 30), vvepvrpwaev (Ph. 2:9), v-rrep-oxv (1 Tim. 2:2), VTvep-TrXeova^co (1 Tim.
1
:
14).
Cf. English
"over-zealous," "over-anxious," etc.

:
The
negative notion of 'overlook' appears in virep-elbov (Ac. 17 30). The idea of 'defence,' 'in behalf of,' 'bending over to protect,' occurs in virep-evTvyxo-voi (Ro. 8 26). In the late Greek vernacular
:
virep
and 5td and already in the N. T. the distinction between irepi and virep is not very marked in some Passages usages, partly due to the affinity in sound and sense.* where the MSS. vary between virep and irepi are Mk. 14 24; Jo.
fades ^ before
virepavo)
:
30; Ac. 12
3.
5;
Ro.
8; Gal. 1
4, etc.
VTrep.
With Genitive f A word is needed about the cases used with There is no trouble as to the accusative, but it is a mooted question whetk we have the true genitive or the ablative. Brugmann^ views the case as genitive without hesitation and
cites the Sanskrit use of
upari in support of his position.

Gr., p. 228.
But
2
6
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 146; Brugmunn, Griech. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 398.
Jann.,
ib., p.
366.
II, p.
"
lb., p.
398.
Griech. Gr., p. 451; Kurzc vcrgl. Gr.,
464.
630
on the
NEW TESTAMENT
side of the ablative we note Kiihner-Gerth^ and Monro,^ while Delbnick^ admits that either is possible, though leaning to the genitive. Where such doctors disagree, who shall decide?
The
Sanskrit can be quoted for both sides.

is
The main argument

inrep
for the ablative
the comparative idea in
goes with the ablative.

4.
On
the whole, therefore,

it
which naturally it seems to me
that the ablative has the best of
with
inrep.
Certainly as between the ablative and the accusative, the ablative is far in the lead. The figures^ are, ablaAblative.
With
tive 126, accusative 19. along with virS. There
On
is
no example
the whole, therefore, vwep drops back of the strictly local use of ruv
veKpo:v (1
vrep in the
N.T. unless
ol PairTLônevoL virep
Cor. 15
29)
be so understood, which is quite unhkely.^ This obscure passage still remains a puzzle to the interpreter, though no difficulty arises on the grammatical side to this or the other senses of v-n-kp. The N. T. examples are thus metaphorical. These uses fall into four
divisions.
The most common

one's benefit.'
is the general notion of 'in behalf of,' 'for This grows easily out of the root-idea of 'over'
Thus in general with irpoa(Mt. 5:44), bkoixai (Ac. 8:24), aywvlôp.ai (Col. 4:12), KadiaranaL (Heb. 5 1), wpoacfiepoi (ib.), etc. The point comes out
evxop.ai
:
in the sense of protection or defence.
with special force in instances where

as in
also
els
/card is
contrasted with vwep

Cf.
vwep rod evos (pvaLovade Kara tov erepov (1 Cor. 4:6).
Mk.
40; Ro. 8
31.
We
must
not, however,
make
the
mistake of thinking that vwep of

It
itself literally
means
'in behalf of.'
means
It is
'over.'
clptL
sometimes said that

of.'''
"In most cases one who acts in behalf of another takes his place." Whether he does or not depends on the nature of the action, not on avTL or vwep. In the Gorgias of Plato (515 C.) we have vwep gov
sees
clearly
'in behalf
But Winer ^
means more
hterally 'instead'
and
vwep
when he
says:
for thejnotion of 'instead.'

itself
mean
p. 486.
'instead.'
Neither does wp6 (nor Latin pro) in In the Alcestis of Euripides, where the
^
point turns on the substitutionary death of Alcestis for her hus1
I,
2 3
6
Horn. Gr.,
p. 147.
I,
* ^
Moulton,
Prol., p. 105.
Vergl. Synt.,
p. 749. p. 156.
Cf. W.-Th., p. 382.

thing.
Blass, Gr. of
Prol., p. 105,
Winer (W.-Th.,
p. 38)
imphes the
same
^
lb.
Moulton, with avrl.
N. T. Gk., p. 135, has nothing on this use of vwep. merely calls vwep "the more colourless" as compared
PREPOSITIONS (riPOOESEIs)
band,
.
631
irp6
virkp
occurs seven times, more than dirt and

I,
together.
Cf Thucydides
tutionary use of
\vTpov
vTvep
TjiJLcbv
141 and
Xenophon Anab.
4,
9 for the substi(p. 84)
ifwkp.
In the Epistle to Diognetus
we note
and a few
lines further the expression is aPToKXayf].

:
Paul's combination in
virep iravTuv,
1 Tim. 2 6 is worth noting, avTlXvrpou where the notion of substitution is manifest. There are a few other passages where vwep has the resultant notion of 'instead' and only violence to the context can get rid of it. One of these is Gal. 3 13. In verse 10 Paul has said that those under the law were under a curse {vt6 Karapav). In verse 13 he carries on the same image. Christ bought us "out from under" the curse (e/c TTJs Karapas tov vbjiov) of the law by becoming a curse "over" us (yevopevos vwep ripoov Karapa). In a word, we were under the curse; Christ took the curse on himself and thus over us (between the suspended curse and us) and thus rescued us out from under the curse. We went free while he was considered accursed (verse 13). It is not a point here as to whether one agrees with Paul's theology or not, but what is his meaning. In this passage vwep has the resultant meaning of 'instead.' The matter calls for this much of
:
discussion because of the central nature of the teaching involved.
In Jo. 11
50
we
find another passage

els
where vwep
is
explained as
pi]
mcanmg
substitution, iVa
avdpojTOS airoQavri virep tov \aov koI
Indeed Abbott^ thinks that "in almost all the Johannine instances it refers to the death of one for the many." In Philemon 13, virep aov fxoi diaKovrj, the more obvious notion is 'mstead.' One may note eypaxpa virep avTov pij 186tos ypappaTa, P. Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66), where the meaning is obviously 'instead of him since he does not know letters.' Dcissmann (Light, p. 152 f.) finds it thus (eypaxpev virep avTov) in an ostracon from Thebes, as in many others, and takes virep to mean 'for' or 'as representative of,' and adds that it "is not without bearing on the question of virep in the N. T." Cf. eypaxpa v[irep aurJcoD aypappaTov, B.U. 664 (i/A.D.). In the papyri and the ostraca virep often bore the sense of 'instead of.' In 2 Cor. 5 15 the notion of substitution must be understood because of Paul's use of apa oi iraPTes airedavov as the conclusion^ from eh virep itclptuv airedavep. There remain a
oKov TO Wvos aTo\r]TaL.
:
'
Joh. Gr., p. 270.

Cf. Thayer, p. 3, under
virip
uirkp. In Pausanias (RiiRor, Die Priip. bei Paus., occurs about twice as often as avri. A. Thoiiner (Boitr.
1889, p. 12)
saya:
zur Kenntn. des Hpracligeb. im N. T., 1901, p. 25), spoakinp; of Jo. 11:50, "Der Zusatz nii 6Xou t6 Wvos dTrAXTjrai die Bedeutung an Stelle anstatt."
632

of passages
number
where the notion
of substitution
is
perfectly
natural from the nature of the case.
one he wishes. But there is no inherent objection in virep itself to its conveying the notion of 'instead' as a resultant idea. In fact it is per se as natural as with avri. In the light of the above one finds little difficulty with passages hke Ro. 5 6 f.; 8 32; Gal. 2 ; 20; Jo. 10 11, 15; Heb. 2 9; Tit. 2 14, etc. In Mk. 10 45 we have Urpov avrl TToWoJv and in 14 24 to alfxa /jlov to tKXvvvonevov virep iroWoJv. But one may argue from 1 Jo. 3 16 that vTrkp in case of death does not necessarily involve substitution. Surely the very object of such death is to save life. The two other uses of vwep may be briefly treated. Sometimes the resultant notion may be merely 'for the sake of,' as in iiwep
in these passages
if
But
may
stop in translation with 'in behalf
of
TTJs 86^71$
Tov deov (Jo. 11
4), VTep aXridelas deov

:
(Ro. 15
8), VTrep
is
tov
ovdfjLaTos
(Ac. 5
41), virep Xpto-roD (Ph. 1
29), etc.
This
natural
in relations of intimate love.
more general idea

Th. 2
:
is
that of 'about' or 'concerning.'

vrept.
Here
VTep encroaches on the province of

TLtov, 2
1, virep
ti]s
Cf. 2 Cor. 8
23, virep
Perhaps 1 Cor. Moulton^ finds commercial accounts in the papyri, scores of them, with virep in the sense of 'to.' We see the free use ('concerning') with verbs like Kavxaop-ai (2 Cor. 7 14), <j)paveco (Ph. 1:7), /cpdfco (Ro. 9 27), epcordco (2 Th. 2:1),
Tapovalas tov Kvplov.
15
29 comes in here
also.
etc.
The Latin super
is
in line
1
with this idiom

:
also.
Cf. Jo. 1
30, virep ov 700 elTov.
In
Cor. 10
30, tI ^\aa4>r]p,oviJ.aL virep ov eyoj
evxapL(TTw, the preposition suits
antecedent as well as relative.
In
2 Cor.
is
6 and Ph.
2:13
uirep
suggests the object at which one
aiming.
Cf. virep wv r](3ovX6peda aireaTa\Kafieu, P.
Goodspeed 4
Grenf
(ii/B.c); virep ov \eyo)L,'P.Oxy.S7 (a.dA9); uTrep dpa/Swws, P.

ii.
67 (a.d. 237), 'by

4.
way
of earnest-money.'
virep calls
The Accusative with

2
for little remark.

:
local use of virep occurs in

alleled use,"
virepapco.
D in Heb. 9
5, uTrep 8' avTrjv,
in the sense
of 'above,'
The literal "an unparthe other MSS. having

virep top
The
accusative with vTep has the metaphorical sense of

nadrjTi-js
'above' or 'over,' as in ovk laTiv 10

:
8t8aaKa\ov (Mt.
Ke(t)a\fjv virep
24).
Cf. also to opofxa to virep irap opoiia (Ph. 2:9),

1
:
irdPTa
(Eph.
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.
adrjpai virep 6 8vpaade (1
1
Thus
"
vir^p
:
d yeypawTox (1 Cor. 4:6), ireipaCf. virep 8vpaixip (2 Cor. 1

:
Cor. 10
13).
2
8),
Prol., p. 105.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 313.
PREPOSITIONS (npooE:sEi2)
virip
:
:
633
ToWovs (Gal. 1 14), vir^p rr^v XafxirpoTriTa (Ac. 26 13). ClasGreek only shows the beginning of the use of vwkp with comparatives/ but the N. T. has several instances. Thus the LXX often uses it with comparatives, partly because the Hebrew had no special form for the comparative degree.^ But the kolvt] shows the idiom. So we find 4>povip.6:TepoL hirep tovs vlovs (Lu. 16 8), ToixoiTepos In Jo. 12 43 W. H. read îrep 12). virkp Tracrau naxaipav (Heb. 4 But virep has the comparamargin after iiaXXov. in and virkp text in
sical
:
:
tive sense of
virlp kp.k
(Mt. 10
with
Trapa.
virkp,
'more than' after verbs, as 6 4)i.\cop iraTepa ^ firjrepa In the LXX the positive adjective occurs 37). as 'ivboôs virep tovs d5eX0o6s (1 Chron. 4:9). In Ro. 12 3,
:
:
nil virepcfipove'tv
Tap' o oel
cjipovelv,
note the conjunction of

cites
I'Trep
virep
and
Moulton
{Prol., p. 237)
iavrov
(fspovelv,
T.P. 8
as
(ii/B.c).
Blass^ doubts whether virepXlav, virepeKwepccraod can be
properly regarded as compounds.

adverb,
virep \iav.
He would
separate
virep
an
has disappeared in
But the modern editors are against him. It modern Greek vernacular before jlo. (Thumb,
is
Handb.,
(q)
p. 105).
'Yird.
Little
virep.
called for
by way
of
etymology since
viro is
the positive of
possibly also
Cf. the Sanskrit upa, Latin sub, Gothic uf,
German
unknown
also
1.
case,
auf, English up, ah-ove. The form viro is of but the Elean dialect* has vira-, and Horner^ has
virai
(dative.)
The Original Meaning.^ This was probably 'upwards' or 'from under.' Unlike Kara, viro never means 'downwards.' As a matter of fact, 'up' and 'under' are merely relative terms. The very English word up is probably viro. Cf. vxpL 'aloft,' vt-tlos The meaning of 'facing upwards,' vr-aros 'uppermost,' v\1/l(xtos. under or beneath is common in the N. T., as viro t6v fxoSiop (JNIt.
5
:
15).
2.
In Composition.
(1 Pet. 2
:
of 'under' as
ypafxfjLos
in uTro-Kdrco
21),
Here viro appears simply -with the notion (Mk. 7 28), vir-ooTLa^cjo (1 Cor. 9 27), v-rroviro-ivbhov (Mt. 5 35), uTro-Sew (Mk. 6:9).
:
Cf. also vTo-Seiypa (Jo. 13

KpioLs
15), viro-^vyioi>
(Mt. 21
5).
In
viro-
(Mt. 23
28), viro-KpiTrjs
lies
(Mt. 6
2)
the notion of an actor
under a mask
behind the resultant idea. The idea of with vwo-dexofxai (Lu. In Ro. 16 :4 vro-TidrjfXL has the 38), viro-\ap.l3apoo (3 Jo. 8). In of 'put under,' as viro-^chuwijn (Ac. 27: 17), 'undergird.'
pitality (under one's roof) is natural
>
hos10
:
idea
vwo-
lb., p. 108.
Brug., Griccli.
C.r., p.
452.
C. and
S., Scl.
from
LXX,
p. 84.
Monro, Horn.
lb.
Gr., p. 139.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135.
Cf. Brug., ib.
634

:
NEW TESTAMENT
Xa/Jcbi' elirev
(Lu. 10 30) the notion of interrupting or following a speech comes from the idea of 'up' in vtto, taking up the talk, etc. The "perfective" idea appears in i7ro-Xet7rco (Ro. 11 3), 'leave behind or over.' So with viro-rpexc^ (Ac. 27 16), 'run under or past.'
:
But in vTro-irvko) (Ac. Cf. iixo-7rXeco (Ac. 27:4, 7), 'sail close by.' 27:13) the preposition minimizes the force of the verb, 'blow So with underCf. our suspicion, the French soupgon. softly.' estimate. In u7ro-/3dXXa; (Ac. 6:11) the notion of suggestion has an evil turn, but in viTo-iJ.Lixvr]<jK<jo (Jo. 14 26) there is no such colour. The idea of subjection (note how these ideas appear in English
:
usage
etc.
all
along) occurs in uTr-aKouw (Ph. 2

vir-avTOLOi
:
12),L'7r-eL/cco
(Heb. 13
vivo
17),
In
disappeared.
(Col. 2
3.
:
(Mt. 8 Cf. our vulgar "meet up" with one.
28) the special force of
has rather
vi^-evavTio^
So
14).
The Cases Once Used with vivb. The locative was originally very common with v-ko, as in Homer, even with verbs of motion.* As a matter of fact, however, in the historical writers the locative and accusative with vtto are very rare as compared with the ablative,2 though Appian and Herodian use the locative more than the
accusative.^
But the
locative retreated* before the accusative
with vTo till in the N. T. and the modern Greek it has disappeared. In the N. T.^ the accusative shows 50 examples and the ablative 165, but in the vernacular of the Byzantine Greek the accusative with VTTO disappears before dTroKoirco and uxo/cdrco.^ In the modern
Greek vernacular aivb has displaced hirb (Thumb, Handb., p. 102). Brugmann^ even thinks that viro once occurred with the instrumental case, and he is clear that the ablative, as well as the geniDelbnick^ agrees to both ablative and tive, was found with it.
genitive.
viro occurred with five cases (loc, instr., we meet only the accusative and the N.T. In ace, ablative. No example of the pure genitive with viro occurs in the N. T. In Jo. 1 50 we find eUov ere viroKaTO) rrjs avKrjs, but not VTTO. So also in some other N.T. passages where a genitive with
Thus
originally
abl., gen.).
iird
might have been used.
Cf.
Mk.
7: 28; Lu. 8
:
16, etc.
The
accusative with vro, as in ovra

1
viro ttjv cvktjv (Jo. 1
48), supplants
2
3
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 140. Helbing, Die Pnip. bei Herod, und and. Histor., p. 22. Moulton, Prol., p. 63. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 399. Cf. Jebb in V. and D., Handb. to Mod. Gk.,
Moulton,
Prol., p. 105.
f.
'
p. 313.
6 8
Griech. Gr., p. 452 f. Vergl. Synt., I, p. 698.
G35
the genitive also in the N. T. The use of virb for agency and cause is ablative like the Latin usage with ah (a).
4.
With
the Accusative.
original use of ux6.
to be the This indeed would accord with the notion of

It
is
considered
in the
l)y
Winer
'upwards,' 'up from under.'
But
N.
T., as
in the later
Greek, the accusative occurs with the notion of rest

locative
Tov \ibhiov
(cf. et$).vivo
The
with
48).
accusative in the N. T. takes the place of the local use of
and
genitive.'
:
Thus we
find (motion) TidkaaLv avrov vtto

:
(Mt. 5
15),
but also
(rest) ovra. h-wb ttju avKrjp (Jo. 1

ttip (tkiolp
l^ll,
Other examples with verbs of rest are vtto (Mk. 4 32), virb top ovpavbv (Ac. 4 12), with
: :
KaTacK-qvolv
v-wb to.
we have
XCiXtj
(Ro. 3
13),
i)Trb
vo/jlov
(Ro. 6
14
f.),
virb
iratdaycjoybv
(Gal.
These examples are as freely used as those like I'm The examples are both fjLov virb T-qv cTTeyrju elaeXdys (Mt. 8:8). local as with erLavpayco (Lu. 13 34) and figurative as -with TaireLvbo) Cf. Ac. 4:12 virb rbv ovpavbv with virb Ala Trjv "IlXtoi' (1 Pet. 5:6). kri \{jTpoLs P. Oxy. 48, 49, 722 (a.d. 86, 100, 91). Cf. Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 332. Only one instance of the use of virb with time appears in the N. T., virb tov opdpov (Ac. 5 21), where it has the notion of 'about' (or 'close upon') dawn. John uses virb with the accusative only once* (Jo. 1 48) and with the ablative only five times (Jo. 14 21; 3 Jo. 12 his; Rev. 6 8, 13), an incidental ar3
:
25), etc.
gument
for unity of authorship.
5. With the Ablative. In the sense of efficient cause or agent it was the commonest classical usage and it continues so in the N. T.^ The local and temporal uses do not occur, but only the metaphorical. These occur after passive or neuter verbs. Abbott^ thinks that John preferred to represent the agent as performing the act and so avoided virb. The ancient Greek indeed used vizb chiefly in
this sense of agent.
The use
of aTroOvrjaKca
of airoKTelvet tls
is
well known.''
virb as the correlative In the N. T. once (Rev. 6 8) virb

:
actually occurs with the active of

Kal virb Toiv drjpiuv).
airoKTelvo} (airoKTetvaL kv pofx4)aig.
This
is
probably due to the desire to distinlifeless

virb,
guish between the living agent and the
causes preceding.^
But the N. T. has neuter verbs with

10
12
:
like airbXKvfjLai (1 Cor.

:
9), Xa/xÂz/o) (2 3).
Cor. 11 24), iraaxo} (Mk. 5 26), bironkvo) (Heb. In the case of passive verbs the usage follows the tradi:
tional lines.
Cf.
Mt. 4
for
two examples,
5
'
avqxOr] virb tov irvtv-
W.-Th.,
p. 407.
Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 157.

Joh. Gr., p. 279.

Bla-ss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 135. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 278.
Moulton, Prol., p. 156. Simcox, Lang, of the N.T.,
p. 157.
636

:
juaros, ireLpaadrjvai.
i7r6
vro rod 8La(36Xov. It is to be noted that in Lu. 9 8 not repeated with aXXcoi'. The bulk of the N. T. instances of viro occur of personal agency like eâwTlôvTo vtt' avrov (Mt. 3:6), SucnraaOaL vt avrov (Mk. 5:4), etc. Sometimes, when ha is added to v-Ko, a distinction is made between the intermediate and the
is
:
mediate agent, as in to pr]6ep vro Kvpiov 5td tov Tpo(j)i]Tov (Mt. 1 22). Cf. 2 15. There is nothing peculiar about the use of vt6 in 2 Pet.
:
17,
(l)oovT]s
kvexdeiarjs
viro
rrjs
ixeyaXoirpeTrovs
So^rjs.^
But
vto
IS
not the only way of expressing the agent. Besides 5ta for the indirect agent airo is the most common- substitute for vto, though k and irapa both are found for the notion of agency. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 116) speaks of airS as "die eigentUch pradestinierte
Partikel."
also be recalled.
The instrumental case and eu and the locative must 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, counting efxirpoadev, and many such passages are found as Gal. 2
:
1, 2.
Cf. Joy,
On
the
Syntax of Some Prepositions in

Prepositions.
the
Greek
Dialects (1904).
VIII.
The "Adverbial"
The
list
in the
N. T. of
those prepositions which do not occur in composition with verbs As already remarked in the beginning of this is considerable.
chapter,
what are
called
"proper" prepositions were originally
adverbs, fixed case-forms which came to be used with nouns and in composition with verbs. We have followed the varied history
most interesting group of words.' Horner^ in particular used most of them at times merely adverbially. In Homer the "regular" prepositions often retain this adverbial force, as h 8e, Tapa 8e, and this separation from a verb is no longer considered a " surgical operation" (tmesis) Cf Seymour, Homeric Language and
of this
.
.
Verse, 25, 78.
Some
of these prepositions gradually disappeared,
but the total use of prepositions greatly increased. This increase was due to the wider use of the remaining prepositions and the increasing use of so-called "improper" prepositions, adverbs with cases that never came to be used in composition with verbs. The Sanskrit^ had no proper class of prepositions, but a number of
1
W.-Th.,
p. 369.
Blass, Gr. of
p. 369.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 126.
But
airo
occurs in this sense in Xen,

*
Cf.
W.-Th.,
3
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 151.
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
p. 414.
adverbs which were sometimes used with cases.
of them, like awev, iyyvs, eW/ca,
637
These adverbial
prepositions varied constantly in the history of the Greek.
Some
on down from Homer. Others drop by the way while each age sees a new crop coming on.
come
rigiit
number of these prepositional adverbs by the preposition^ before the case, like dTro/cdrcj dTro. In the modern Greek the improper prepositions are used either with the genitive (only with enclitic pronoun) or by the addition of 's, airo, ne with the accusative. They are quite new formations, but made from ancient Greek material (Thumb, Handb., p. 107). From our point of view any adverb that occurs with a case may
But
in the late vernacular a
are followed
be regarded as a prepositional adverb,^ like

(Ph.
1
:
a^lcos
tov evayyeKlov
27).
Some
of these
prepositional adverbs, as already

:
shown, occur both as adverbs, as afxa Kal eXwiûv (Ac. 24 26), and as prepositions, as aâ auroTs (Mt. 13 29), while others appear only as prepositions with cases, as avev rod irarpos (Mt. 10 29). But it is not necessary to make a separate list on this basis. Blass,^ who treats these words very scantily, is right in saying that no hard and fast line can be drawn between adverb and preposition here. The LXX shows some adverbial prepositions which do not occur in the N. T.^ Thus airavijidtv (Judges 16 20) may be compared with eTravudev (classical also), and viroKarcoOev (Deut. 9 14), which
: :
: :
in ancient
kvoi-KLov,
I?.*!?:?,
Greek
is
only an adverb.
in the
Simcox'' carefully explains
so
common
LXX,
as a translation
and imitation
of
but even Conybeare and Stock ^ surrender this word as not a Hebraism before Deissmann's proof.^ The N. T., like the kolvtj
in general,
makes
list
free use of these prepositional adverbs.
have
as
given the
in
my
Short
f.),
Gramfnar of
forty-two in
the
Greek
New
Testa-
ment
(3 ed., 1912, p.
116
all,
more than twice
many as the
above is not included. Cf. dxa^ TOV eviavTov (Heb. 9:7). Conybeare and Stock (p. 87) even count kxoixeva irerpas (Ps. 140 0), but surely that is
'A^tws noted
:
" regular" prepositions. ^
going too
far.
Cf.
to.
Kpdaaova
Kal
kxojxeva cruTripias
rrjs
(Heb. 6:9).
(Is.
There
1
is
more excuse
for claiming eaoorepov
KoKviJLjSijdpas
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 36G.
^ L^ng. of the N. T., Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 150. p. 159. Sol., Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 122, 127 f. p. 87. * C. and S., Sd. from LXX, ^ b. S., p. 86 f. p. 213 f. Krebs, Die Pri'ipositionsadvorbicn in der spjitoren hist. Griic, I. Tl., p. 4f., Rives a list of 61, and 31 of his list do not appear in the N. T., while 12 are in the N. T. that he does not mention, viz. ivavn, ivccTnof, Karkvavri, Kartvuinov,
2
KVK\60tv, nioop, dniaix), 6\pi, ivapaTtXiiat.ov, TroptKros, virtKuva, vntptKirtpiaaov.

list
This
by Ivrebs shows the freedom
in the Koivq
development of adv. prep.
638
22
:

11).
NEW TESTAMENT
pay us to take up briefly these adverbial prepothem use the genitive or the ablative case except sitions. (instrumental) and 7765 (dative). aij.a
It will
All of
1.
"Ajua.
It is
probably in the instrumental case

the word with the root of
afxaKLs,
els,
fiia,
itself.
Brug-
mann^ connects
a-7ra^, d-TrXoOs,
ev
as seen in
Cretan
Latin semel, Sanskrit sama, English

It occurs in
same.
Cf. also
^îov, e-Karov.
Homer with
in the
the associa-
tive-instrumental case.2
The word occurs

:
N. T. only ten
Ro. 3
times and usually as adverb, either merely with the verb as in 13; Phil. 22). Cf. Kai 12, LXX, or with 8^ Kai (1 Tim. 5
:
examples are with participles (Col. 4 3 above and Ac. 24: 26; 27: 40). Twice we find d/jia ahv with the instrumental, a sort of double preposition after the manner of the later Greek (1 Th. 4 17; 5 10) and once afxa Trpcot wiih. adverb
in Col.
3.
Three
of the
(Mt. 20 1). The use of a/xa avv Thayer explains by taking aixa as an adverb with the verb. Only once does it occur as a simple For preposition with the instrumental, a/za avTols (Mt. 13:29). the later revival of aûa and use like iiera see Jannaris.^ In 2 Esdr. 17 3 on is translated by ana. In the Acta Nerei ana is used only with the genitive (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 119). Homer has another 2. "Avev. It is of uncertain etymology."*
: :
aj'eu-s, the Epidaurian avev-v, the Megarian however, no doubt as to the meaning, 'without' or 'besides,' and the case used is the ablative. There are only three examples in the N.T., not counting Mk. 13 2, where W. H.
form,
avis.
avevdev,
the Eleatic
is,
There
and Nestle
reject avev xtLpwv.
Two
of these (1 Pet. 3
:
1;
9)
occur with abstract words, and one (Mt. 10 29) mth tov xarpos. The word is rare in the late Greek, especially with a case.^ It is a compound form that 3. "KvTLKpvi {some editors avTiKpv).
originally
meant
'straight on,' but in later

It
sense of 'opposite,' 'face to face.'
Greek as adverb
it
of place or as
:
Greek occurs in the was common in the ancient preposition. In the N. T. we find
only once (Ac. 20

It occurs in
Xlov.
15) and the case used is the genitive, avTiKpvs modern Greek vernacular (Thumb, Handh., p.
109).
4. 'Aj'TiTrepa (di^rt-Trepai^, Polybius, etc.).
It is just
dj^Tt
and
Trepav
combined. Only one example occurs in the N. T. (Lu. 8

1 2
Thucydides uses avTiirepas as adverbial preposition.

:
26), avTiirepa
rrjs
3 6
Griech. Gr., pp. 85, 211, 230. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 151; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 456. " Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 456. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 397.
In Eleatic
apevs occurs
with the ace.
PREPOSITIONS (nPOGEZEIi:)
TaXiXatas.
G39
open to dispute, since avTi comes with the 'Over against' would be Either will genitive, 'on the other side of would be ablative. make sense in Lu. 8 26. Probably genitive is the case here.
The
case
is
genitive
and
irkpav
with the ablative.
a triple compound of airb, kv, avH. A number of adverbial prepositions were formed on avH as a base. In the N.T. we find also evavri, evaPTiou, KarkvavTi. These are late, except
5.
'k-KkvavTL.
It is
kvavTiov
(from
with the 24). In the N. T. it occurs only six times, and in two (cf. Gen. 3 of these (Mt. 27: 24; Mk. 12 41) W. H. put KarkvavTi in the text and dirkvavTi in the marg. Of the remaining four examples two (Ac. 3 16; Ro. 3 18) have the sense merely of 'before,' 'in the sight or presence of.' One (Mt. 27 61) has the notion of 'opposite' or 'over against,' while the fourth (Ac. 17:7) takes on a
: :
Homer on. Cf d^^ra, Iv-avTo). Poly bins uses airkvavTi genitive, and it is common with this case in the LXX^
.
hostile idea, 'against.' These resultant ideas all come naturally out of the threefold combination. The other compounds with avTi will be noted later. This word is of unknown origin, but compare Old 6. "Arep.
Saxon
sundir,
in
Old High German suntar, Sanskrit sanutdr.

the poets generally.
It is
it.
common
But
it
Homer and
:
Later prose uses

:
occurs only once in the
LXX
(2
Mace. 12
15)
and twice
N. T. (Lu. 22 6, 35). The case is clearly the ablative, and the meaning is 'without.' One example, drep oxKov, is with persons and the other, arep .âWavriov, is with a thing.
in the
7.
"Axpi(s).
It
is
related to iêxplis) whatever its origin.
Cf.
usque in Latin and dxpt ds like usque ad. As a mere adverb it no longer occurs in the N. T., but it is common both as a preposition
and as a conjunction.
In the form
it is
axpi. ov
(Ac. 7: 18)
and
both preposition and conjunction (resultant temporal phrase). Leaving out these examples, axpi is found 30 times in the N. T. (W. H. text) and some MSS. read axpi. in Ac. 1 22 and 20 4, while in Mt. 13 30 the MSS. vary between axPh iJ^^Xpt- and eoos (W. H.). The meaning is 'up It occurs with place (Ac. to' and the case used is the genitive.
axpi
r\mpa-^
(Mt. 24
38)
13 :6), persons (Ac. 11: 5), time (Ac. 13 11) and a])stract ideas (Ac. 22 :4, 22). It occurs mainly in Acts, Paul's writings and
:
Revelation.
8.
Cf. its use with the adverb dxpi rod vvv (Ro. 8
It
is
22).
'7711$.
a mere adverb (see comp. eyyvrepop, superl.

It is
eyyiffTo) possibly related to iy-yvr}.
as adverb
and with the

>
genitive.
S., S(>1.
The
C. and
from tho
conunon in Homer both Greek added the true LXX, p. 8G.

late
640

all
NEW TESTAMENT
N. T.
dative and
three uses (adverb, gen., dat.) occur in the
There are nineteen examples of the pure adverb in the N. T. (cf. Mt. 24 :32), one the comparative (Ro. 13 11) and the superlative in some MSS. in Mk. 6 36. There are eight examples Only four times does of the genitive with 6776$ (cf. Jo. 11 :54). 6771)5 have the dative (Ac. 9 38; 27:8), counting the indeclinable 'lepov(ra\r]iJL (Lu. 19 11; Ac. 1: 12), in which case Luke (4) would have the dative miiformly and Jolm (6) and Heb. (2) the
: :
Once (Heb. 6 8) it is postpositive. combination of k and the adverbial ending -Tos with which may be compared Latin coelitus} The case used with it is, of course, the ablative and it is just a fuller expression of e/c, meaning 'without.' In the N. T. we find it only
genitive (H. Scott).
9.
:
'Ektos.
It is a
eight times, four of these with the ablative, as in 1 Cor. 6 18 (cf. with the relative in Ac. 26 22). Note position of kros Xe-yoiv wv in Ac. 26 22. Three times we have e/cros el /X17 (1 Cor. 14 5; 15:2; 1 Tim. 5 19), which is a pleonasm due first to the use of tKTos el.
:
:
Deissmann
Cilician,
/ct6s is
{Bible Studies, p. 118) cites
an inscription
of
tia for "this
jumbled
phrase," peculiarly apropos since Paul
Mopsueswas
:
Md7m /jlovt] de[\r]]arj. Once (Mt. 23 26) mere adverb used as a substantive, though even probably a
e/cros el uri [e]dv
here
10.
it
may
be regarded as a preposition.
"E/jLTTpoadep.
This
is
it
merely
ev
and
irpbadev
which adverb
it is still
used the ablative ^ when
had a
case.
In the N. T.
:
four
6, but it is preposition with the ablative. It occurs with words of in Mt. 5 24, with persons (Mt. 5 16), and sometimes notion of rank (Jo. 1: 15). As a preposition it appears
times a mere adverb of place, as in Rev. 4
usually a
place, as
with the
44 times
in the
N. T.
is
(Cf. tvavTa in Homer.) It is one of the avrl comfound with the genitive case when it has a case. It is very common in the LXX even after Swete^ has properly replaced it often by evavrlov. The old Greek did not use it. In the N. T., W. H. accept it in Lu. 1 8 and Ac. 8 21 (though some MSS. in both places read evavTiov) and reject it in Ac. 7 10. It is not found in the N. T. as a mere adverb. This is, of course, merely the neuter singular of 12. 'EvavTLov. evavrlos (cf. Mk. 6 48), and is common in the older Greek as in the LXX. For the papyri see evavrlov avBpojv rpLuiv P. Eleph. 1
11. "EvavTL.
pounds and
'
Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 198, 254.
C. and
S., Sel.
.
from
LXX,
p. 87.
The
LXX
2 jb^ p. 455. used a number of prep, to
transl. >:2b
Cf. Swete, Intr. to the O. T. in Gk., p. 308.
(B.C. 311).
it
641
In the N. T. it does not occur as a mere adverb, but times as a preposition with the genitive (cf. Lu. 1 6), all with persons (cf. Latin coram). 13. "EveKa. It occurs in three forms in the N. T., either heKa (Lu. 6 22), eveKev (9 24) or dveKev (18 29), but always as a preposition ('for the sake of), never as mere adverb. These variations existed in the earlier Greek also. In the kolvt], 'iveKev is the more
we find
five
usual (Schweizer, Perg. Inschr., p. 35). Only twice, however, is it postpositive in the N. T., and this after the interrogative (Ac. 19:
32) or the relative (Lu. 4
:
18,
LXX). The
case used
is
the genitive.
is
The etymology
and
is
quite uncertain, but the form

kolvti
e'lveKev
Ionic
partially in the
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
:
be regarded as a preposition with the article and the genitive (cf. kros, Mt. 23 26), and once as a preposition (Lu. 17 21) with the genitive. Thayer cites two passages from Xenophon where hros may have the idea of 'among' and claims that this is the idea in Lu. 17 21, because of the context. But the
this
:
even
may
meaning
in
Xenophon
is
disputed and Liddell and Scott give only
'within' for hros. Besides, in one of the new Logia^ of Jesus we have a similar saying in a context that makes 'within' necessary and would seem to settle the point about the passage in Luke:
ri
PaaiXela rdv ovpavG>v hros

15.
'EvchiTLov.
hfj-oiv
earip.
This
evwirLa,
is
the neuter singular of the adjective
is from the phrase ev ojiri (6 h uttI &v). but no example of the adverb or preposition kvuiinov occurs before the time of the LXX. Deissmann^ thinks it possible, but not probable, that it was first used in this sense as a
evwirios
which (Thayer)
to.
Homer
uses
translation of the Hebrew "âp^. A papyrus of the Thebaid from the second or third century B.C. has it also. As a preposition it is very common"* in the LXX and in the N. T. also. Curiously enough it does not occur in Matthew and Mark, though very
' 2
C. Taylor,
is
Polyb. pt6%
p. 23.
The Oxj'rhyn. Sayings of Jesus, 1905, pp. 7, 11. Besides in always the opposite of Urbs. Cf. Thienuuui, Quest. Polyb., 1SS2,
*
B.
S., p.
213.
C. and
S., p.
87.
642
NEW TESTAMENT
in Luke's writings and Revelation. The Gospel of John has only one example and the Johannine Epistles two. Cf also In the N. T., kvcînou is always a preposition with the KarevoiTLov. genitive and it occurs 92 times. It appears sometimes with place (Rev. 4 10), but usually with persons (Lu. 5 25; 12 9 his), and
common
especially of
God
1
(1
15).
:
Sometimes the notion

See Wikenhauser, pp. 263-270).
is
that of judg-
ment, as in
KaTeu6:mov
16. "E|aj.
Tim. 2
It is
3.
'Evoottlos
kpuirtou
(BM.
Z., 1910,
an adverb from
ourco(s).
in the ablative case like
e| (cf. eao), es) and is probably As adverb and preposition it is
common in the N. T. (16 times) as in the older Greek. It is found as preposition only with the ablative and that 19 times. It means 'outside' or 'without' and is used in the N. T. only with Jolm's Gospel has it 13 14). places, hke e^co ttjs okias (Mt. 10 times, first Ep. 1, Rev. 2; Paul has it 5, and only as adverb. It is the same word plus the suffix -dev, 'from 17. "Eô)dev.
:
without,'
and was common
in the poets
it is
(cf. eawdev).
The
case
used
is
the ablative.
In the N. T.
much
less
frequent (13
times) both as adverb and preposition than e^co. Indeed, if to 25; Lu. 11 39) be not considered the eôêev rod iroTTipiov (Mt. 23
:
prepositional usage, there

: :
would be only three left (Mk. 7:15; Rev. 11 2; 14 20). There is the same ambiguity in the two passages above that was noted about kros and hros (Mt. 23 26).
:
Cf. Lu. 11:40.

just the preposition kirl and the adverb Greek both as adverl) and as preposition. As an adverb it is rare in the N. T. (19 times), once with the relative adverb ov (Mt. 2:9), once with a numeral with no effect on the case (1 Cor. 15 6; cf. Mk. 14 5 where the case may arise from TrpadrjvaL), once where a pronoun is really implied
18.
'ETT-dj^co.
This
is
avo}.
It occurs in Attic
As a preposition we find it fifteen times in the (Lu. 11:44). N. T. Cf. eTravo: opovs (Mt. 5 14) where it has the somewhat weakened^ sense of 'upon' rather than 'above.' The case used Modern Greek vernacular uses it as (d)7rdjâ> 's is the genitive. (Thumb, Handbook, p. 109). Thayer suggests the It is merely kwi and eKelva. 19. 'EireKeLPa. both as adverb and Greek Attic It occurs in the ellipsis of iJLepv.
:
as preposition.
from Amos 5
In the N. T. it appears only once in a quotation 27 and as a preposition with the ablative in the
:
sense of 'beyond' (Ac. 7 43. Cf. 20. "Ecrw. It is the adverb of

^
vitep'eKuva).
(cf. e^co)
and
is
in the ablative
PREPOSITIONS (IIPOGEZEIS)
case.
643
The form eUu
(els)
LXX.
The
Indeed the word

it
eaco is
docs not occur in the N. T. nor in the found only nine times in the N. T.
and only one,
ecrw rijs avXrjs

is
(Mk. 15
16), is
case used with
the genitive.
This, however,
the prepositional use. is a gen-
uine example, while eaoidev (12 times) is never a preposition in the N. T., for even Lu. 11 39, to eacodev vixCov, has the article. Cf.
:
22 11). both demonstrative and relative adverb (from elos, ci'cos).^ Cf. &s and cos. The use of ecos as a prepIn osition appears in Demosthenes, Aristotle, Polybius, etc. Northern England and Scotland "while" is used as "till" (Liddell and Scott) and illustrates how ecos as conjunction is used in
iadoTtpov
TTjs KoKvjx^-qdpa'i (Is.
:
21. "Ews.
In
Homer
it is
the N. T.
tions, as
It is equally
if
common
in the
N. T. as preposition and
be treated as conjunc-
conjunction,
the phrases
ecos oh, ecos
otov
indeed they are, though technically composed of the It is in the preposition ecos with the genitive of the relative.
Greek mainly, therefore, that it appears as a preposition (cf. LXX and papyri). The case used with it is the genitive (but very late Greek shows accusative sometimes), and it is found 86 times in the N. T. and 51 of the examples are in the Synoptic
later
Gospels.
The
ecos
preposition
is
used with places, like

ecos
;
ecos
:
abov (Mt.
11:23),
ohpavov (Lu. 10: 15),

ecos
'Ai^Tioxetas (Ac. 11
22); with
persons, like
with expressions of time, like emr?js (27 45); with abstract ecos T7JS awepov (Mt. 27: 26 (Mt. davarov like ecos expressions, 38) with notion of measure, Hke ecos viilaovs (Mk. 6 23). See Rom. 3 12 ecos ejôs (LXX). Seventeen of the execos in Mt. 1:17; 20:8; 27:51. Cf. dTTo amples are uses of ecos with an adverb, hke ecos koltco (Mt. 27: 51),
avTov (Lu. 4
:
42)
8), ecos copas
ecos
apTL (Jo. 2
:
10),
while seven instances of

ecos
ecos
irore
occur, like
Mt. 17
14
:
17.
Four times
:
occurs with another preposition, hke

:
?cos TTpos
(Lu. 24
50),
ecos
kwl (Ac. 17
14),
e'cos
e^co
(21
5).
In
Mk.
:
54 note
it
we
In
find
Once (cf. Demosthenes, Aristotle, LXX) with the article and the infinitive ecos rod eXdeiv (Ac. 8
ecos eaco ets.
40).
In
ecos
reXous (2 Cor. 1
:
13),
the phrase
is
almost adverl)ial.
(Ac. 19
26),
ecos 'E<^co-ou,
Blass^ finds the notion of 'within.'

: :
In the
10 A,
20, ecos els iravTes, and 1 Chron. 5 Deissmann (B. S., p. 139) sees a Hebraism. 22. KarepavTi.. It is not found in the older Greek, but appears in the LXX and the N. T. It is especially frequent in the Book of Sirach.^ But in poetry we find Karkvavra and the word is merely
LXX
2 [Heb.] Esdr. 6
ecos iravTes,
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 151. Gr. of N. T. Gk., j). 127.
C. and
S., p.
87.
644

avri.
the threefold preposition Kara, h, Ac. 3

16, etc.
The MSS.
12
:
in the
:
often vary ^ between KartvavTi and cnrevavTi as in Mt. 21

:
2;
N. T. 27 24;
:
In Mt. 27 24 and
:
Mk.
41
W. H. put
kirevavTi
in the margin.
KarevavTiov,
not occur in the N. T.

in the
N. T.
One
of
found in Hesiod and Herodotus, does There are only nine examples of KareuavTi these (Lu. 19 30) is merely adverbial, while
:
the rest are prepositional.

'in the presence of,'
The
idea
is
'before,' 'over against,'
and the case used with it is the genitive. It Cf. occurs with place (Mk. 13:3) and persons (Mt. 27: 24). KarkvavTi 6eov kv XptaTu (2 Cor. 2 17; 12 19) and the attraction
: :
of relative (u) in the dative to the genitive case of deov, the incor-
porated antecedent (Ro. 4:

23. KaTevcoTTLov.
17)'.
It is just hcoinov (see above)

Karei^cbxioj'
and
Kara.
Homer
uses KarkvciiTa with the genitive, but
appears in the
LXX.
The N. T. shows only

(Ju. 24).
three examples
Col. 1
:
(cf.
the frequency of
kvdoTLou),
two with persons (Eph. 1:4;
22),
one with abstract word
The
case used
is
the genitive and the word means 'in
the presence
occurs in the
of.'
24. KvKXodev.
It
is
LXX (Jer.
an old adverb in Sep that occasionally 17 26) as a preposition. In the N. T. it

:
appears as a preposition twice with the genitive 6p6vov (Rev. 4 3 f .) and once as an adverb (4 8) 25. Kvk\u) is, of course, merely an adverb in the instrumental
:
:
case
and is common from Homer down. In the LXX it is extremely

(Is.
frequent and occasionally as a preposition with the genitive
6:2).
(Rev. 4
In the N. T.
:
it is
:
merely an adverb except with rod Bpbvov

Cf. k^kXo) ixkxpi (Ro. 15
it
:
6; 5
11; 7
11).
19).
As a preposition was not common. It appears

26. Mkaov.
7, 170, but Greek writers and the papyri.^ Many adverbial phrases were made from p.kaov which were used as prepositions, some of which survive in the N. T., like ava
occurs in Herodotus
in the late
fieaov, 5td
peaov {ôv),
els
peaov (and
ets
to peaov),
h
:
fieaco
(and
ev tc3
nkdu),
neaov, KaTo, fxkaov.

fxeaos
But
these will be discussed later.

55; Jo. 1
:
The
26),
adjective
so that
occurs with the genitive (Lu. 22
not strange to find the adverb with the genitive as in Ph. 2: 15, peaov 'Yeveas. In Mt. 14 24 W. H. put p.kaov in the margin and D reads p-kaov in Lu. 8:7; 10:3. See Hatzidakis,
it is
:
Einl., p. 214, for examples.
Cf.
Homeric
jueo-'
ern Greek vernacular uses neaa

p. 108).
's,
The mod(Thumb, Handbook, awo

iieaariyvs.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 128.
27. Mera^v.
645
it is
Like so
many
of the adverbial prepositions,

it
compound
(juera, ^vv).
As a mere adverb, we meet
only twice in
:
the N. T., once in the sense of 'meanwhile' (Jo. 4 31), once in the sense of 'afterwards' (Ac. 13 :42), as commonly in the later Greek.^ Cf. twofold use of neTo.. As a preposition it occurs seven
times in the N. T., with places (Mt. 23 and in abstract relations (Ro. 2 15).
:
35), persons
(Mt. 18
15)
good example occurs in
Ac. 15
9 where both
5td
28. Mexpi.
Like
iixpi-
and and
fxera^v
ecos,
appear.
it is
both preposition and con-
junction as well as originally adverb.
No example
of the
mere ad-
found in the N. T., as it was rare in the older Greek. The form is akin to axpi and the sense is the same. If iikxpt-s ov be treated as a conjunction (cf. axpt ov, ecos ov), the preposition with the genitive appears fifteen times with another doubtful reading in Mt. 13 30. It is used with places (Ro. 15 19), persons (Lu. 16 16), time (Ac. 10 30), abstract expressions (Ph. 2:8). Like axPh the notion of 'measure' or 'degree' is sometimes present
verb
is
:
(Heb. 12:4). etymology, perhaps related to adverb and as preposition. In It occurs in Homer both as eiri twice as preposition, and adverb the N. T. we find it five times as case used with it is 10. The Rev. 1 it in and some MSS. have It means 'from (Lu. 23 'Irjaov 26). owLadev tov the ablative. So
29. "OiTLadev.
It is of uncertain
: :
behind' and so 'after' (Mt. 15 23). It is the opposite of enirpoadev. 30. 'OTTtcrco. It is the opposite of irpoao} (cf. iroppu) and is an ablative adverb from o-ms (as above). It is very common in the older Greek as an adverb, but it is extremely common in the as a preposition.2 In the N. T. oTlaw occurs alone as an adverb
:
LXX
only twice (Mt. 24
18; Lu. 7: 38),

:
though we meet
els to. oiriavo
seven times as in Mk. 13 16. But as a preposition we find it 26 times, mostly with persons, as in the common oxto-co nov (Mt. 3 11). It is used with the ablative, 'behmd.' Cf. Sevre bmaoi
:
in
Mt. 4
31.
19.
'Oi/ê.
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 Philostratus shows examples where b\pk with the ablative has
the sense of
tratus uses
it
'after,' like b^/e tol;twv=' after
these things.'^
Philos-
also in the sense of
'
late on.'
The papyri
So b^k
ttJs
use
it
in
the sense of 'late on' with the genitive.*

1
copas
P. Par.
p. 312.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 129.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
72
f.
C. and
S., p. 87.
Moulton,
Prol., p.
646

:
NEW TESTAMENT
Hence in Mt. 28 1, ox}/^ aa^ârov may be either late on the Sabbath or after the Sabbath. Either has good support. Moulton^ is uncertain, while Blass^ prefers 'after.' It is a point for exegesis, not for grammar, to decide. If Matthew has in mind just before sunset, 'late on' would be his idea; if he means after
37 (ii/B.c).
sunset, then 'after'
32. Uapa-T^rjaiov.
irapair\r](no$.
is
correct.
It
is
Cf.
5ts
rod aa^ârov (Lu. 18
12).
merely the neuter of the adjective
mental, seldom the genitive.
This adjective usually had the associative-instruBut the one example of the adverbial
:
preposition in the N. T. (Ph. 2
27), davarov,
has the genitive.
See
33. Uap-eKTos. It is a late compound for the earlier Trape/c. It appears in the N. T. only three times, save in the margin of Mt. Once it is a mere adverb (2 Cor. 11 28), 19 9 of W. H.'s text.
:
:
and twice it is a preposition with the ablative (Mt. 5 32; Ac. 26 29) meaning 'without.' 34. Hepai'. It comes from the root Trep (cf. Trepaco, 'fare,' 'ferry,' It is an adverb (cf. adv. xepd), probably etc.). Ionic Trepr]v. accusative case. Both as adverb and as preposition with ablative (sometimes with accusative), it survives from Homer. In the N. T. it occurs ten times as an adverb in the phrase els to irkpav
: :
found 13 times as a preposition wnth the abla(Mt. 4 15). 35. nXi7J', Doric ifKav. It is probably from Tkkov, 'more,' and so In the N. T. it occurs only four times is used with the ablative. as a preposition with the ablative and in one of these we find TrXeoi' Twice it is a mere adverb, 7rXi7i' on Tr\r]v TovTwv (Ac. 15 28).
(Mt. 8
:18).
It is
tive, chiefly in the expression ir'tpav tov 'lopdavov
(Ac. 20 :23; Ph. 1

ablative.
18), unless
indeed the
6rt clause
all
is
in the
Cf. English "except that."

ttXtjj'
In
the other rather
numerous instances
usages come on
is
beginning of a clause
(cf.
an adversative conjunction at the These three be) as in Mt. 11:22.
down from
the older Greek.
is allied to reXas and is Greek the adverb occurs neuter adj. from ir\r]alos. In the older 'neighbour,' art. as in the N.T. 6 irXrialov, absolutely or with the
36. Ti\r]aiov, Doric ifKaTlov.
The word
As a preposition it appears with the associative(Mt. 5 43) instrumental or with the genitive. But in the N. T., it is found only once and with the genitive in Jo. 4:5. In Lu. 10 29, 36, the genitive is also found ^vith Tr\r]aiov, but the word here has more of the substantive idea ('neighbour') than the prepositional usage.
:
.
37.
'T-Trep-di'a).
It
is
a simple compound that in the late Greek

72
f.
"
Moulton,
Prol., p.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 97.
gradually displaced^
virkp.
647
from Aristotle on
in the
It occurs in writers
is
both as adverb and as preposition and

In the N. T.
time.
common
LXX.^
:
we find
Twice it and once of rank (Eph.

38. 'Tirep-eKHva.
eir-eKeiva in
only three times and with the ablative each occurs literally of place (Heb. 9:5; Eph, 4 10)
it
21).
Ac. 7
43)
occurs only once in
is merely virep and the pronoun Ueiva (cf. which appears in the Byzantine Greek. It the N. T. (2 Cor. 10 16), eis to. uirepeKeLva vfxwv,
It
with the ablative in the sense of 'beyond,' 'into the (regions)
beyond you.'
39. 'Tirep-eK-repLaaov.
It
is
written separately in Liddell and
it virep kKirepLaaov. It is found 22 (Aid., CompL). W. H. read it three times (Eph. 3 20; 1 Th. 3 10; 5 13), though in the last passage v-n-eptKTrepiaaojs is put in the margin by W. H, As a preposition with the ablative, we find it only in Eph. 3 20 (S^v attracted to case of omitted antecedent).
Scott and some N. T. editors print

in
Dan. 3
40. cient
'T7ro-/cdrco. It is another compound word which in the anGreek was used both as adverl) and as preposition and eskocpyi it
pecially in the
writers (Polyljius, Diodorus, Plutarch).
In
the late Greek

avwdev
gradually ^ displaced vto.
In the
LXX both virep-
and virepKarojOev occur as prepositions as well as KaToinadev.^ In the N. T. it is no longer adverb, but appears as preposition eleven times with the ablative, five of them with tQiv iroduv (as Mk. 6 11). The examples are all literal, not metaphorical. Cf.
:
VTroKCLTCO TTJs TpaTr^r]s
(Mk.
7: 28).
is
41. Xdpij'.
still
This word
just the accusative of x^pts
and
1
:
it is
common
as the substantive in the accusative (Lu.

it freely
x^^pi-^-
30).
The
ancients used
k/jiriv
sive pronoun,
gratia)
with the genitive and with the possesThe idea of 'for the sake of (cf. Latin
be due to apposition originally. The usage continues in the late Greek. ^ Among the ancients it was generally postpositive, but in the LXX it is now one way, now the other. In the N. T. it occurs nine times, and is postpositive (as Gal. 3 19) always except 1 Jo. 3 12 with interrogative. It is only once in the Gospels (Lu. 7: 47).
: :
may
42. Xcopts.
1
It
is
of doubtful
etymology
(cf. xa<^,
XV po-),
Ijut
ap-
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 367, 397.

Cf. Dciss., B. S., p. 283
f.
2
^
C. and
is
S., p.
86
f.

first in
Xdpiv as a prop,
in
poetry
till
50 n.c, when
ex. of
it
appears
prose.
Cf. Mcisterh., p. 222.
lie gives
an interesting
the prep, in Attic inscr.
648
NEW TESTAMENT
pears in
It holds
freely as an adverb and in Pindar as a preposition. on steadily in both senses. In the N. T. we have only one pure adverbial use (Jo. 20 7), while as a preposition with the ablative we find it 40 times. The usage is chiefly with persons (Mt. 14: 21) or abstract relations (Mt. 13 34), though it may be used with place (Lu. 6 49). In Ro. 10 14 note x^P^s K-npvaaouTos
Homer
without the
article.
It is postpositive once, ov
x^p'i-s
(Heb. 12
14).
Ramsay,
xojpts
el
C. and B., II, 391 (No. 254), cites from the inscriptions
TL wddrj
idT]
Of these 42 words
(Moulton, Prol., p. 239). in the N. T. the following are only used as

kirk-
prepositions: avev, avTlirepa, a-wkvavri, arep, evavri, eveKa, huinov,

KLva, KaTtvoiTTLOV, TapaTr\r]aLOV,
vwepeKeiva, VTepavw, VTroKarco.
Of the
rest are
rest ixeaov
is
also adjective; x^pi-s substantive; rXrjaiov substantive

axpt, em, p-'exph t^^vv conjunctions;
and adjective;
also adverbs.
and the
IX.
Compound
Prepositions.
considerable
number
of these
adverbial prepositions are

dvTl-irepa,
dir-'ev-avTi,
compound words.
ev-avTL,
So are
avTi-Kphis),
eir-dpit},
en-irpoadev,
h-avTiou, hv-6}inov,
eir-eKeiva, fxera-^v, irapa-TrXrjaLOV, irap-eKTOS, i'lrep-avoo, VTrep-en-irepLaaov,

vTro-KCLTcc.
aTOKCLTO}
The modern Greek vernacular shows similar forms in diroirlaco cltto, avrt^co oltto (Thumb, Handb., p. 110). CLTTO,
vi.
See chapter XII,
X. Prepositional Circumlocutions. Blass calls these Hebraisms and it is true that the frequency of these phrases in the
LXX
But
and the N. T.
is
due to the influence of the

itself is
Hebrew
idiom.
the construction
the papyri show.^
Meaov.
good Greek, though not so common, as
This word furnishes a number, one of which, dj/d neaov, "has turned up abundantly in the papyri." ^ In the N. T. we find this compound preposition only four times. Moulton
(a)
thinks that in
Cor. 6
5,
haKplvai avd fxeaov rod d6eX0oD, the text

is
is
corrupt, but probably the phrase
and etymologically (cf. 5td here). 17: 11) and 5td fxeaov once in W. H. (Lu. 4
:
not to be taken too literally Aid (xeaov is read once (Lu.

:
30).
:
Ets neaov
(Mk.
14 60) appears once, but eis to fxeaov (Lu. 4 35) six times. 'Ek neaov, like all the circumlocutions with, n'eaov, is followed by the
genitive (Mt. 13
:
49)
and
it
occurs 7 times.
in
Kard
p.'eaov is
found
'Ej^
once (Ac. 27:27).

locutions
/xecroj
The commonest
:
(27 times) of these circum-
is ev fxeaco {ep-ixeaw
:
some MSS.) as
Mt. 10:
16.
tw
toO
(Mt. 14 6; Ac. 4 7) is not a prepositional phrase. See also chapter XII, x, (&). 14). n'eaov (Col. 2
:
Cf.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 129
f.
Moulton,
Prol., p.
99
f.
(6)
649
ositional circumlocution
sometimes adduced as an example of a prepand as a pure Hebraism. Dcissmann^ has given abundant illustrations from the papyri to show that the use of ets TO ovofxa, ev tc2 ovofxaTi. is common enough in the vernacular
"Ovoiia.
It
is
KOLvi)
where, as in the
It is
LXX
and the N.
T., ofofxa represents the
more than doubtful if we are justified in considering these phrases as mere prepositional circumlocutions with the genThe examples that come ncârest to it are els 6vop.a Trpo(})r]Tov, itive.
person.
ds
(Mt. 10 41 f.), but even here character 6vona brings out the notion that one has the name or has the ovofxa Mt. 28 In 19, of prophet, righteous man, disciple.
ovoiia hiKalov, eis
Svofia /xa0r?roD
idea of 'the authority

(c)
of.'
This word also furnishes a number of such seem to be based on Hebrew originals phrases which in the .^ 19) aird Tpoadîrov rod Kvplov (Ac. 3 Thus (translation Hebraisms)
Upoaa^TTov.
LXX
is like %'sf2,
while
:
irp6 irpoawirov aov is
Hke
^.r?^,
and
/cara TpoaccTTOv
irpds
UeiXoLTov (Ac. 3
TT poaooTToi'
13) Blass^ finds

:
like
"^^QS.
Cf. irpoauTroi'
(1 Cor. 13
12).
{d)
l^Toiia.
lation.
In Mt. 4
due to transThis again is a Hebraism in the 4 we have ha. aTOfxaTos deov, a quotation from
:
LXX
Deut. 8:3. In Mt. 18 IG, evrt crTOfxaTos 5vo fiaprvpc^v is likewise from Deut. 19 15. So in Mt. 21 16, k arop-aTos vr]irlc^v is from
:
:
Ps. 8
3.
Cf. also aird rod aroparos avTOV (Lu. 22
71), ev t(3 aToparl
aov (Ro. 10 :8
from Deut. 30
14).
But
this picturesque phrase-
ology belongs to
(e)
y^dp.
It
:
all language as a matter of fact. shows several similar examples. Thus ha

:
xî-pos
avTUV (Ac. 15
23), 5td toov xî-P^v avrojv (Ac. 14

:
3), eis xetpas

:
(Lu.
71),
24
7), els TTju

x^t'Pi-
xeZpa avrov (Lu. 15
22),
xî-pos
iravTWV (Lu. 1
ry
^^"ôv (Jo.
3 :35), avv x^^pt d77eXoi; (Ac. 7:35).
Here
again the Greek idiom follows the

perfect ease.
Hebrew
is
particularity, but with
The
classical
Greek
this use of x^^P
and one may
not without examples'* of note the English idiom also.^ See

irop-
2 Sam. 15 See also

veias in
1
ava x^'^P^ ^^'^ ^bov rrjs TrvKrjs. e^ evavrlas avrov (Mk. 15 39) and rapeKTOs \6yov
2,
:
the margin (W. H.) of Mt. 19

pp. 146
f.,
9.
B.
S.,
197.

iT.
See also Heitmuller's

p.
proof,
2 *
Im Namen
Jesu, pp. 100
Moulton,
Prol., pp. 81, 99; Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
129
f.
lb.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 130.
Cf. for the
LXX,
Swete, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 308.
CHAPTER XIV
ADJECTIVES ('EniGETA)
Origin of Adjectives. This matter was touched upon in the chapter on Declensions, but calls for a further word here. There is no absolute hne of cleavage between substantive and adI.
jective either in
form or sense .^
had no tween substantive and adjective, always an uncertain one in earlyIndo-European language, is even more wavering in Sanskrit than
elsewhere." 2
special treatment of the adjective.
The Alexandrian grammarians " The division line be-
Indeed
it is
not
difficult to
conceive the time
when
there was no distinct adjective. The substantive would be used in apposition as in English, brother man, church member. Cf.
common use of titles also hke doctor, president, governor, etc. This attributive use of the sul^stantive is not a peculiarity of any language, but belongs to Hebrew, Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, English, It is out of this use of the substantive that the adjective as etc. a separate part of speech developed.' The adjective is not therethe
fore a
is
mere variation of the genitive, though, hke the genitive, it The term noun {6poiJ.a) is used to cover both substantive and adjective, but many substantives continue to be used in a descriptive or adjectival sense and many adjectives in a substantival sense." The term adjective covers words of one, two or three genders, and indeed includes numerals and some of the pronouns also. But the pronouns require treatment in a separate
descriptive.
chapter.
relation
Participles are verbal adjectives.
See
is
later.
The
close
between adjective and substantive

:
well illustrated
by
8ov\a (Ro. 6
1
19).
Cf. dovXoi.
2 3
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 117. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 111. "It is this change from subst.
is
Delbruck
etc., p.
*
in apposition to adj. which according to the explanation of the numerous Gk. adjectives in o." Giles, Man.,
239.
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 117. Cf. Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten, 1862, p. 15, where he makes the quahty of the thing essential
to the idea of noun.
650
ADJECTIVES ('EniOETA)
651
n. The Adjectival or Appositional Use of the Substantive. Examples have already been given in tlie cliapter on tlie Sentence.
Let one suffice here: h tQ 'lopSavj] woTaixQ (Mt. 3 6).^ Cf. further Lu. 24 19; Ac. 1 16; 3 14. This idiom is common enough in the N. T. I must demur, however, at this point to Winer's idea (Winer-Thayer, p. 236) that "a notion which should naturally be expressed by an adjective as an epithet, is sometimes, by a change What I object of construction, brought out by a substantive." "the N. T. saying that right in is to is the word "should." He
:
is
by no means poor^
in adjectives,"
but wrong in urging that the
N. T. ought to use more. As already observed, substantives continued to be used in a descriptive sense not only in apposition, but also in the genitive. This original use of the substantive
never ceased.
Hence
it is
useless to talk of "this substitution of
a substantive for an adjective" and to explain it as "a Hebraistic mode of expression" due to "the want of adjectives in Hebrew"
and to "the peculiar vividness
of the Oriental languages" (p. 237).
He admits,
however, that the matter is not arbitrary, but the principal word stands in the genitive. There is this difference between the adjective as an epithet and the genitive. The two substan-
do not merge into one idea quite so completely. Winer's examples illustrate this point Wêll /xTjSe ifKiriKevaL evri wXovtov dSrjXorrjrt 17), IW ijjueTs eu KaivoT-riTL fcoTjs TvepiiraT'âwixev (Ro. 6 4), (1 Tim. 6 ^Xerruv to ar^pecona rrjs Trto-rews (Col. 2:5), 'Kojols ttjs xotP'Tos (Lu.
tives
:
4:22),
drijutas
OLKOvojJLOV TTJS
dSiKttts
(16
8), KpLT-qs
TTJs
adiKias (18
6), iradr]
(Ro.
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

Phrases like
12) are
and the adjective that

TO. TTvevp-aTLKa TTJS
led to the expressions above.
analogous to the use of the adjective as substantive to be discussed directly. The use of vlos or TeKuov with the genitive is exactly like the Hebrew idiom
Tovrjpias
(Eph. 6
with
etc.
1?
and
is
extremely
common
in
:
the
LXX
and
fairly so in
the N. T.
Thus
vloh aireieias (Eph. 2
2), tc/cto (I)0}t6s
(Eph. 5
8),
But this "Hebraistic circumlocution" turns up in inscriptions and on coins,^ so that it is clearly not un-Greek. Deissmann, however, since the idiom is so common and many of the N. T.
Cf. Farrar, C.k. Rynt., p. 88; K.-G., I, p. 272 f.; Brufj., Grioch. Gr., p. 415. tho later distinction between adj. and subst. see Schroeder, Uber die formelle Untersch. der Redet., 1874, pp. 195 ff. ' But his notion of adjs. "formed by the apostles themselves" vanishes
1
On
sadly in the light of tho papyri. * Deiss., B. S., p. 105 f. So vlds
rijs
ytpouaias, vlos
TTJs tr6\iu)s,
etc.
652'
examples are quotations from the LXX or translations from the Aramaic, admits that the majority in the N. T. are due to "translation
Hebraisms" and the
rest to analogical formation.
ni.
The Adjective as
Substantive.
Simcox^ thinks that the

earlier
N. T. shows a more frequent use of this idiom than the Greek. But the earlier Greek shows abundant evidence
stantive, usually with the article,
(a)
of the
use of the adjective without the substantive as a practical sub-
but not always.^ may be of any gender, according to the gender of substantive. So 6 koKos, 17 eprj/xos, to This is no peculiarity of Greek alone, though it has its XPVCFTov. own development in the substantival use of the adjective. Indeed the participle was often used as a substantive. Thus 6 airdpoiv (Mt. 13 3), ijyoviêuos (Mt. 2:6). In Ph. 3 8 we have the participle used as a substantive with the genitive, to virepkxou rrjs yvooaeoos. Cf. Lu. 16 1, TO. virdpxovTa avTOv. So ro e/iauroO (JVjj.4>opov (1 Cor. 10 33) where the adjective, like a substantive, has the genitive. With masculine adjectives (&) With Masculine Adjectives. the substantives naturally suggest themselves out of the context or the nature of the case.^ Thus in Mt. 11:5, tv4>'Kol ava-
Any Gender.
Such adjectives
^\k'KOvaiv KoX x^ôt TrepiTaTOvaLV, ktX.

afiapTcSKovs (1
Cf.
ol
a7ioi (1
:
Cor. 6:2),
7), k\ktu)v
Tim.
15), ScKalov
and
: :
rod ayaOov (Ro. 5
deov (8
33), top aXrjdLvov (1 Jo. 5
20), 6 ayLos rod deov (Jo. 6: 69)

13).
and probably
6\}/i.nov,
rod Tovqpov (Mt. 6

verov.
In Jas. 5
12).
7,
tpol/mw Kal
supply
Sometimes only the context can determine

:
the gender, as in Eph. 6

(c)
16; 1 Jo. 3
With Feminine
Adjectives.
x^'-P,
These are usually examI
ples of the ellipsis of d86s,
IV, ywi], rmepa, y\cc(raa.
follow
Blass^ mainly in these examples.
Thus
:
yrj is
responsible for the

17
feminine gender in
rriv
^jjpav
(Mt. 23
15;
rf?
Heb. 11:29),
irepitijs
(Mt. 3:5), oiKovnevqs (Ro. 10

X(^pos
TTjv
:
bptLvr]v
(Lu. 1:39),
epwv (Mt. 3:2),

:
18), etc.
777s
In
e/c
rrjs vtto
rbv ovpavov (Lu. 17
24)
Blass prefers nepiSos to the influence of

(19
:
sharply over e^ epavrias (Mk. 15

656s
and urges that we do not refine too 39; Tit. 2:8). As examples of
:
note
17
eldelas
(Lu. 3:5), Tolas (5

17
19), eKelvrjs
:
4).
:
For
34),
x^tp observe
SeîS (Ac.
apLarepa
:
(Ro. 8
rf}
33).
and Se^td (Mt. 6 3), ev SeîS. But k Se^coj^ (2 34) may be

:
compared with eis to. Se^td /xepr] (Jo. 21 noticed by Blass in rfj exop-euy (Lu. 13
1
6).
The
rfj
ellipsis of rmepa is
33),
kinovaji (Ac.
16
11),
Lang, of the N.
Blass, Gr. of
T., p. 91.
I,
*
2
3
Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 414; K.-G.,
p.
266
f.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 140.
lb., p.
140
f.
ADJECTIVES
rfi
('EIIIOETa)
653
(Lu. 13 32),
:
hkpq. (20
15),
rf}
eiravpcov
HLq.
(Mt. 27 62),
:
rfj tp'ltxi
rijs TTJs
il3d6iJiT]S
(Heb. 4 :4), ry
:
twv
o-a/^/Sdrcoi/
(Ac. 20:7),
e^rjs
:
(J-expi:
(Twepop (Mt. 11
23),
a(f>'
vs (2 Pet.
4),
ttj
(Ac. 21
1).
But
oxj/ias
Blass rightly supplies upa with d^'

:
rjs
in Lu. 7
45, as with
(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
:
:
aro utas (Lu. 14 i8ia (1 Cor. 12
Kar' I8lav (Mk. 6 31) and though stereotyped, may refer to 65c3. Cf. also Kara novas (Mk. 4 10) as an instance of 6o6s. So drj/jLoalg. (Ac. 16 37). Words like aoorripLos (Tit. 2:11), aicoviov (Jo. 6 47), evwe:
18) insert
^coi^jjs.
But
11),
plcTTaTov
(Heb. 12
1) are,
of course, feminine, not masculine.
See
of
chapter on Declensions.
(d)
With the Neuter.

Thus
The neuter
is
furnishes a
number
:
interesting examples.
vdaros is referred to.
(Jas.
ttottjplov \pvxpov
(Mt. 10
42),
where
So vdwp
meant by
:
to yXvKv Kal to ttlkpov
3:11). With kv XevKols (Jo. 20 12), one must insert IfxaTtoLs Cf. Top4>vpovv in Rev. 18 16. as with kv idoKaKots (Mt. 11:8). With Tov SioTreroCs (Ac. 19 35) Blass ^ suggests ayaXixaTos, and with
:
:
Td tp'ltov
Blass).
t7]s yfjs
(Rev. 8
7)
we must supply juepos ("not

: :
classical,"
Cf.
eis
TO lepbv
In Mt. 19 17 we most likely Sid/SoXos is have Trept TOV ayadov explained by 6 ayados, though the American Standard Version gives it 'that which is good.' But cf. Ro. 5 7.
: :
(Mt. 21 23). In Mt. 6 meant,^ not mere evil.
13, dTro tov irovrjpou,
The number
N. T.
sions.
is
of these neuter adjectives used substantively in the
large
and
varied, but the older
Greek shows abundant
same With prepositions in particular we meet with this use of the neuter. Thus ets to ixkaov (Jo. 20 19), kv tc3 kpvtttQ (Mt. 6:4), eis
illustrations^ of the
thing, especially in philosophical discus-
4>avpbv
(Mk. 4
22),
:
p-tTo.
piKpbv (Mt. 26
73), kv ixkaco
(Mt. 10
16),
^paxv (Lu. 22 58), kv is the adverbial common Very (Jer. ado. 24:6). ay ets etc. Cf. usage of this neuter hke I3paxv (Ac. 5 :34), nupov (Mt. 26 39), novov (Mt. 8:8), to ttpQitov (Jo. 12 16), but the adjective's relaoUyu} (Ac. 26
28), kv
peyaXu (26
29), fieTa
tion to the adverb will receive special treatment.

ovTi.
See xi.
Cf.
tCo
Sometimes the neuter singular was used in a collective sense for the sum total (cf. English "the all"). Thus in Jo. 6 37, 39, The neuter plural is irav 6, 17 24 6, where persons are meant.
:
:
lb., p. 141.
So Rev. Vers, uniformly.

W.-Th., p. 235.
Cf. Green,
Handb. to Gk. N.
T., p. 268.
654

in this sense like
to.
common
is
iravra (Col. 1
16)
where the universe

:
thus described.
Cf.
to.
ovra
and rd
:
/jltj
ovra (1 Cor. 1
irdLV
28).
in
the
LXX
(Helbing, p. 51) frequently has

10; 8
:
= iravra
xii,
(ace. sing,
masc).
1
:
(Cf. also Ps. of Sol. 3
23 V; Test,
Pat. Reub.
collec-
10
rrav aprov,
Gad
is
rav
vofxov.)
See also the
common
f.).
tive neuter in the
LXX (Thackeray, Grammar, p.

Travra is
:
174
Usually
the neuter plural

(Col. 1
:
concrete, however, as in rd opaTa Kal aopara
16),
where
thus explained.
Cf. rd lâdea (Rev.
24), apxaia (2 Cor. 5
17).
In Ro.
r;
20, as
Winer^ points
re dtStos 8vvafXLs Kal deibTr\%. out, TO. aopara makes more concrete that in Eph. must confess 3 But one 10, kv tols eTrovpavioLs, it is things or relations. is, whether places, the idea clear what not In Jo. 3 12 eirlyeLa and h-wovpavLa seem to refer to truths. In
:
:
13, TveufxaTLKoXs Trvevp-aTiKo. avvKplvovres, a like ambiguity but the presence of \bjoLs inclines one to the notion that Paul is here combining spiritual ideas with spiritual words. The neuter singular with the article is very common for the expression of an abstract idea. One does not have to say that the adjective is here used instead of the abstract substantive, but merely as an
1
Cor. 2
exists,
abstract substantive. Cf. English "the beautiful and the good" Cf. with "beauty and goodness." This is good ancient Greek. also in the papyri to b'lKaiov Tb.P. 40 (b.c. 117) and {ih) to. Winer ^ was troubled over to bodiiiov ttJs Trtorreajs (1 Pet. Kad-fjKovTa. and said that no such adjective existed and therefore this 1 7) was a mere substantive. There was none in the lexica, but
:
Deissmann^ has found a number of instances of the adjective in the papyri. So xpv<ôv 8okl{jl'lov, P.E.R. xii. 6 f (93 a.d.), 'good gold.' One need not be troubled over to yvosardv (Ro. 1 19) any more than over the other neuter adjectives. Cf. to xprifrrov tov 6eov (Ro. 2 4), to fxcopdv tov deov and TO aadepes tov deov (1 Cor. 1
.
:
25), TO afxeradeTOV t^s jSouXrjs
(Heb. 6
17), to e\a(f)pdv
:
ttjs
^Xti/'ecos
:
(2 Cor. 22).
dvfxov
17), to ahvvaTOV tov vbixov
(Ro. 8
3), to
bwarov avTOV (9
It
is
thus frequent with the genitive.

1
:
Cf. also to Kar'

:
e/xe Trpo-
(Ro.
15).
See Heb. 7:8.

irXelov
is
:
kaTLv
is
Trjs Tpo(f)r}s,
we have
(1
In Lu. 12 23, r) ^vxv TrXeroi/ because the abstract idea of thing

Cf. ovdev
expressed.
This also
'6
(1 Cor. 7: 19),
Cor. 15
It is
a frequent Greek idiom. 11). 10), ravra (1 Cor. 6

:
IV. Agreem.ent of Adjectives with Substantives.

(a)
In Number.
not necessary to repeat what has been
1 W.-Th., p. 235. Cf. lateness of the forms in -lk6s (only two in Horn.). Hoffmann, tjber die Entw. des Begr. des Griech. bei den Alten, p. 2. In 1 3. S., p. 259 f. ^ lb. Tim. 5 17 note SnrXijs (from -60s).
:
ADJECTIVES ('EHIOETA)
said
055
X, vii, (6), on concord between and substantive in number. The normal thing is for adjective and substantive to agree in number. But one must not get the idea that "construction according to sense" of the grammarians is an anomaly. "The term is unobjectionable, provided we remember that constructions according to the meaning are generally older than those in which meaning is overridden by idiom or grammatical analogy."^ Thus there is no cause for asthis subject in chapter
on
adjective
tonishment in seeing eKda/iôi. with 6 Xaos in Ac. 3 11, nor ttXtjOos KpaôvTes in Ac. 21 36. For concord in gender see chapter X, viii. (6) In Gender. Here again the construction according to sense is normal like arpa:
:
TtSs ovpavlov ati'Dwro)?'

is
(Lu. 2:13), but ovpaulov in the

etc.).
same phrase
the feminine
(cf. al6:vLos,
i^fXLavs
The N. T. does not have the

in the
Attic idiom with

itive substantive,
rcbv aixapTLwv
fxov
of
agreement with the gender of the genit is still
though
:
LXX.
:
Cf. rds qp.laas
(Ezck. 16
51).
Instead see
ecos finlaovs rrjs
âaiXdas
:
But avTrj and davfiaaTrj in Mt. 21 42 (Mk. 12 11) are probably due to the Hebrew TiisT, the Hebrew using the feminine for abstract ideas, since it had no neuter. But even here in Ps. 117 23 the context has Ke4)a\riv yoovias.^ One other remark is to be made which is that when an adjective occurs with more than
(Mk. 6
:
23).
one substantive
86aLs ayadrf Kal
kv TTolcp ovbjxaTi,
it
may
Ttaaav tôKlv kol tottov (Lu. 10

ttSj'
agree with the gender of the nearest, as in 1), be repeated with each, as in iracra
:
do^prjixa
:
rekeiov (Jas. 1
17)
and
kv iroia
dvpajjiei.
rj
(Ac. 4
7),
or agree with the masculine rather than

:
the feminine or neuter, as in yviivol (Jas. 2 15). With the same gender there may be repetition (Mt. 4 23; 9 35) or not (Mt.
: :
12 :31).
(c)
In Case.
For concord
in case see chapter
X,
ix.
The main
:
instances of variation here belong to the participle as in Ac. 15
22
f.),
and
in particular the
:
Book
of Revelation furnishes illustra-
tions (Rev. 3
(rf)
12, etc.), as
already shown.
Two
OR
More
25
:
Adjectives.
When two
or
more adjectives
:
occur together the conjunction

alTLconara (Ac.
7)
be used as in TroXXd koI âpka and even ttoXXA Kal aXXa (xrip.eta (Jo. 20 30),
:
may
as in Latin.^
But
see erepuv ttoXXwi^ (Ac. 15

:
35) antl the repetition
of the adjective with the article (Rev. 2
12).
V.
is
The
Attributive Adjective.
The
adjective (from adjacco)
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.
656
NEW TESTAMENT
means the only

bute
like
attribute used with substantives. Thus the attribe substantive in apposition with another substantive, avdpdoirco oLKobejiroTr, (Mt. 13 tov deov 52), or a genitive, like
may
17
/jLaKpodvu'ia (1
Pet. 3
20), or
17
an adverb,
20).^
like
ttjs
ai'co
KK-qaeo^s
:
(Ph.
14),
or an adjunct, like
like to enov ovofxa
Kar eKKoyrju Trpodeais (Ro. 9

:
11), or
is
pronoun,
(Mt. 18
When
the article
a used
before the adjective or participle

6 KoXos (Jo. 10
:
it is,
of course, attributive, as in
:
Pet. 1 12). But adand participles may be attributive when no article is used. Thus with o-rpartSs ovpavlov (Lu. 2 13), v8o:p ^ccu (Jo. 4 10. Cf. TO v8o)p TO ^b)v in verse 11), nouoyevrjs deos (Jo. 1 18). The un11), kv
rfj
irapovaif oK-qddq, (2
jectives
usual position of the attributive adjective, like 6 oxôs toXvs (Jo. idea" where the substantive and adjective form "a composite
12:9), (Jebb, Soph. 0. T., pp. 1199 the papyri, O.P. 99, ttjs inrapxovarjs
ff.),
may
be illustrated from
oktas TpiaTeyov
ttjs
auroj
fJLrjTpLKrjs
(Moulton,
a.va(jTpo4>y]s
CI.
Rev.,
1904, p. 154).
(1
Cf. also
:
p.aTalas v/xwv
-ko.t poTvapaboTov
Pet. 1
18),
where, however,
vi).
ivaTpo-
TzapaboTov
may
very well be predicate (see

Adjective.
Cf. French
La
Rcpuhlique Franqaise.
VI.
The Predicate
The
is
adjective (including par-
ticiple) is
common
etc.
as a predicate, as
the substantive.
Monro ^
Cf. proo/xota
considers the substantive in the predicate adjectival.
noun, adverb,
:
As examples note
:
ttoXXoi
(Mk. 5:9),
:
(Mt. 13 31), (7coT77ptos (Tit. 2 11), tTotiia (Lu. 14 17), âdb (Jo. 4 11), bibaaKwv (Mt. 7:29). But adjectives are predicate without a copula, as in Tt ixe Xeyets ayadbv (Mk. 10 18), 6 iroL-qaas fxe
:
:
vjirj
(Jo.
5:11;
ttj
cf.
23), aoairavov drjaco to evayyekLOV (1 Cor. 9
18),
fJ.eya\ri
(fxxivy
(Ac. 26
:
24),
6.Trapa(3aTOV
:
exL
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 Ac. 4 16 yvuffTov a-qiietov. Cf. Mk. 3:1. As further interesting examples of the predicate adjective, note 6X0% (Jo. 9:34), Sokl/jlol (i>avo:p.ev (2 Cor. 13 1.3), ttp^jtos (Jo. 20 7), i;7ti7s (Mt. 12 4), ebpalos (1 Cor. 7:37), bpdbs (Ac. 14 10), ixbvo^ (Lu. 24 18; cf. Mt. 14 Cf. oKov in Lu. 13 21. The distinction between the 23), etc.
:
: :
attributive adjective
and the predicate adjective

is
lies in
is
just this,
that the predicate presents an additional statement,
indeed the
main
point, while the attributive
the substantive about which the statement
an incidental description of is made. Cf. Ac. 4 10

:
and 16 above
1
for
both uses of yvwaTov.

I,
Cf. TavTas in Ac. 1

Horn. Gr., p. 117.
5.
Cf. K.-G.,
pp. 268
ff.
657
This distinct predication* with the adjective in an obHque case is seen in tovto aXrjdis e'iprjKas (Jo. 4 18) and is a classical idiom.^ Note the use of irapra as predicate for 6 Beds in 1 Cor. 15 28 as
:
with Xpiaros in Col. 3:11 for the totality of things. VII. Adjective Rather than Adverb. See ch. XII, ix, for disCf. irpuiTos cussion of this subject. A few items are added here.
McoLio-Tjs
Xeyet (Ro.
10
19),
'Moses
(tov
is
the
:
jfirst
TcpuiTov 8i.aK\ayr]dL
tQ dSeXô;
(Mt. 5
24),
who says,' with 'Be reconciled with

:
In Mt. 10 2 Trpcoros first thing that you do.' means that first in the list is Simon, whereas -KpOirov, in Jo. 1:41, means that Andrew finds his brother Simon as the first thing which he does. JlpCiTov ixOvv (Mt. 17 27) means the first Cf. h eiôl wpcoTco (1 Tim. 1 IG), 'me as chief.' fish that came up. Tr/acbrjj in Lu. 2 2 is not certain, but most jorobThe exact idea of were two enrolments under Cyrenius. there ably Luke's idea is that With p.6vos and Born at Bethlehem? Christ Was Cf. Ramsay, be observed. Take is to apexo^priaev ttoXlv like distinction /jiopov a 15) and av p-bvos TapoLKets 'lepovffoKrjpL ets TO opos avTos p.6vos (Jo. 6 (Lu. 24 18). The difference is much hke that between the EngSo in Lu. 9 36, evpedrj 'Irjaovs pbvos, lish "alone" and "only." 'Jesus was found alone,' and in Mt. 17: 8 (cf. Mk. 9:8), ohh'tva
thy brother as the

llncov
dhov
ei
ixi]
avrov 'Irjaovv pbvov,

(Jo. 16
:
it
is
adjective, not adverb.

:
Cf.
ovK dpi
fjibvos
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 some examples where either adverb or adjective would make good sense,^ as in Mk. 6 8, prjbh el p-q pa^bov pbvov, where D reads pbvr^v; Ac. 11 19, p-qbevL el pi) pbvov 'louSatots, where D has pbvots; and 1 Jo. 5 6, OVK ev tQ) vbarL pbvov, where B reads pbvw. But this is not all. The Greek often uses an adjective where other languages prefer adverbs or prepositional phrases. Latin and English have similar
:
: : :
Naturally this idiom is common in For time note bevTepatoi rfKQopev (Ac. 28 13), 'we came second-day men' ('on the second day'). Cf. TeTapraios Jo. 11: 39. D has likewise irepivraXoi in Ac. 20 6. So yevbpevat dpdpival
expressions for other ideas.^
Homer.^
eirl
TO pvripelov (Lu. 24:22), eiridr^

:
e4>vldL0s
(Lu. 21:34), avdalperos
(2 Cor. 8
17),
durawepos (Ph. 3:5).

Construction.
VIII.
The Personal
This matter belongs more

it calls
properly to indirect discourse and the participle, but

*
for
Monro,
ib.,
p. 119.
"
To.
N. T. Ck., p. 141. ' Seymour, Horn. Lan^. and Verse, and adv. sec Bru^., Gricch. Gr., ]>. 41G
Blass, Gr. of
"
p. 79.
f.;
On
the relation between adj.

p.
Clyde, Gk. Synt.,
40
f.
658
just a

word
construction than
has a true
The Greeks were more fond of the personal we Enghsh are. Farrar indeed doubts if Greek impersonal verb. But kyevero in a passage like Lu. 1 8
here.
^
:
comes close to it. Cf. Lu. 1 23. We have fewer examples in the N. T. of the personal construction, none in truth with either drjXos
:
(1 Cor. 15
27
is
impersonal construction) or with

otl
4>avep6'i.
But
'iva
we do have
\v(Tco (Jo.
4)avepovfievoL
eark
ewLCTToKri
:
Xpiarov (2Cor. 3:3).
Cf. XpLdTos K-qpvaaiTai otl in 1 Cor. 15

1
:
12.
Note
:
also a^tos
but the impersonal construction is found with diKaLou in Ph. 1 7. See also kavos 'iva in Mt. 8 8. Aumros occurs with the infinitive (2 Tim. 1 12). This personal construction Cf. SoKet is probably due to assimilation of gender by analogy .^
27),
:
:
o-o06s
eimt (1 Cor. 3
18), perfectly regular

:
predicate nominative.
See good example in 1 Cor. 15 9. IX. Adjectives Used with Cases.

the several cases.
Examples were given under
the various oblique cases of adjectives that were construed with

quired here.
A mere mention of the matter is all that is reThus the genitive appears with ewxos davarov (Mt.
with
^kvoi
26
14
66), the ablative
tuv
biad-qKu^v
(Eph. 2 (Heb. 2
12),
the da-
tive (Mt.
:
20
1)
and accusative with

Trtcrros
Oyuotos vlbv
avdpcoirov
:
(Rev.
14),
the ace. with

rf?
ra
Trpos Tov Oebv

:
17),
the da:
tive with evoxos

8),
Kpiaei
(Mt. 5
25).
21)
and koKov
:
aoi lariv
(Mt. 18
13
the instrumental with laovs

rfi
rnjuv
(Mt. 20
12),
the locative with

:
ppaSels
Kapblq,
is,
(Lu. 24
Cf. locative in Col. 2
f.
The
adjective
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
in
occur with adjectives,
it
is
natural that the verbal substantive
known
a case.
as the infinitive should
come within that idiom and be

:
The
case of the infinitive will vary with the adjective.

Kkit]drivai
Thus
in aîos
(Lu. 15
19) the infinitive is

:
probably in
the genitive case.
Cf. also a^tos I'm \v(xw (Jo. 1
27).
With hwaTos
see either the
KccXvaaL (Ac. 11: 17)
we have
the accusative of general reference.
In the case of
iKavds jSaaTaaai
(Mt. 3:11)
we may
accusative of general reference, as above, or the dative, according
form and the common case with iKavos. (Mt. 8:8). The instances of both infinitive and tva are numerous in the N. T. As specimens of the infinitive and preposition after the adjective, take raxi^s ds to Indeed the genitive &Kod(7aL, jSpaSus els to XaXrjaat, (Jas. 1 19).
to the original idea of the
'iva
Cf. also IKavos
eiaeXdys
Gk. Synt.,
p. 89.
Middleton, Anal, in gynt.,
p. 15.
article tov
659
it
with the infinitive occurs with adjectives where

for, as in eToiixol kafxeu rod apeXeiv (Ac.
elfxi
would
:
not naturally be looked

Cf. eroLnos
TnareveLv (Lu. 24:25).
23
15),
iropeveadaL (Lu.
22
33).
But
see further ^padets rod
This subject has been treated on the Cases as well as in the one on Adverbs. Hence a few words will suffice here. The border line between adjective in the nominative and adverb gets very dim sometimes. Thus in English we say "I am well," "He spoke well." Farrar^ even says that it is "more correct" to use an adverb than an adin the chapter
XI.
The Adjective as Adverb.
jective in a phrase like aaixevos
even
i,
eUov. But that is going too far quotes Milton (Par. Lost, vii, 161), "Meanwhile inhabit lax," and Shakespeare (Taming of Shrew, I,
vfxds
if
we
call it
antimeria.
He
89),
"Thou
avaoTiqdL
didst
it
excellent."
We
and
can see the difference bedpdais
tween
opBos (Ac.
14
10)
tKpLvas (Lu,
p.bvov
7 :43).
But, as already observed, the difference between

:
grows faint in 1 Jo, 5 6 and similar examples. very easy for the adjective form in the accusative to be used indiscriminately as adverb where the adjective idea disappears. Thus only the context can tell whether p.bvov is adjective (Jo. 8 29) or adverb (Gal. 1 23). So as to p.iKp6v (Jo. 7 33 and 16 19), Tvo\i) (Lu. 12:48 and Ro. 3 2), oMyov (Mk. 1 19), etc. UpuTov, for instance, is very common as an adverb (cf Mt. 7 5, and even ro irpwrou is found, Jo. 10 :40), but xpcorws occurs only once (Ac. 11:26). It is needless to multiply here examples hke these. Other cases are used besides the accusative to make adverbs from adjectives, as the ablative in Trpcbrcos above, the geni:
and nbvco Hence it becomes
tive as opov (Jo.
(Ac. 16 :37).
Cf. ttoXXw (Ro.
4 :36), the associative-instrumental as drjpoaia 5:9). All degrees of comparison

:
furnish adverbs, thus toXv (Ro. 3

15),
2; 2 Cor. 8: 22),
TrXeoi'
(Jo. 21
paXcara (Ac. 20
is
38).
The accusative
singular of the
com-
parative
the
common adverb
of that degree as irepicraoTepov

:
(Heb. 7: 15), but see TrepLaaorepcos (2 Cor, 1 12). In the superlative both the singular as irpdrov (Lu. 6 42) and the plural as poKiara (above). These examples sufficiently illustrate the prin:
ciples involved.
XII.
(a)
first
The
Positive Adjective.
Relative Contrast. In discussing the positive adjective one must not get the idea that the positive was originally
the absolute idea of the adjective as distinct from the comparative or superlative. This notion of absolute goodness or great1
Gk. Synt.,
p. 90.
660
NEW TESTAMENT
Indeed
ness, etc., is itself later
than the notion of comparison.^
has a relative sense and suggests the opposite, And then many of the oldest comas light implies darkness. parative forms have no positive at all and never did have, like More of this under the afxcporepos, apLcrrepos, jSeXrepos, Sevrepos, etc.
the adjective
itself
comparative.
originally this
The
is
point to get hold of just here
is
that the ad-
jective per se (like
many
other words) implies contrast, and that
Homer some comparatives

less degree,
what the comparative form meant. Thus in in -repos have no notion of greater or
the idea of duality, but merely contrast, like dyikvrkpa
as opposed to male, dpearepos as opposed to valley, apLarepos op-
posed to
right, Se^lrepos
opposed to
37).
left, ijntTepos
opposed to
vnkrepos
and
vice versa."^
Cf. the comparative idea (and ablative case after)

:
in TO irepLaaov tovtwv (Mt. 5

(6)
Used as Comparative or Superlative, With

and the
is
this no-
tion of the relative contrast in the adjective
first
use of
the comparative one
not surprised to find the positive
still
used
alongside of the comparative.

vaLîv,
In Lu.
42, tvKoyqixkvri av kv yv-
we do not have a mere Hebraism, though a very

all
natural
one in this translation from the Aramaic Hebrew has no degrees of comparison at
circumlocutions.^
talk of Elizabeth.
The
and has to resort to Greek writers show Homer and other early But
:
a similar idiom, like 8la dedwv, bla yvvaiKwv (Eurip., Ale, 471).* Other examples occur in the N. T., Uke ayta aylwv (Heb. 9 2 f., frequent in the LXX), Trola evroKri ixeyaXr] kv rw vopc^} (Mt. 22 36). Cf. /SacrtXeus j3aaL\eccv (Rev. 19 16), KvpLOS twv KvpievbvTwv (1 Tim.
:
:
6:15), ToD
aiuivos
Twp alwvcov (Eph. 3:21).
The vernacular
kolvt]
B.U. I, 229, {Herm. ayadojv, Inscription of Thera 1901, Kai ixeyakwv /xeYoiXcoi' T. IV, 61. Cf. Radermacher, N. Herondas depixa depua, p. 445),
uses repetition of the adjective, as in
ixeyciKot fxeyaXoL,
Gr.,
p. 57.
:
The
Cf.
is
positive suggests contrast clearly in tuv ttoWuiu

ol ttoXXoI
(Mt. 24
12).
in
Ro. 5
15, 19; 1 Cor. 10
33.
Here
the majority
the idea, a comparative notion.

:
Cf. Paul's use of

:
Tovs T\eiovas (1 Cor. 9
See also
and Matthew's 6 TrXeTo-ros oxXos (21 8). oxXos and Lu. 7:11 oxXos ttoXus, and in 2 Cor. 8 15 TO ttoXu and to oKlyov. Hence it is not surprising in Lu. 16 10 to see kv \ax'i-(TTco and kv ttoXXco side by side (cf kv oKlyu) 19 also eXaxtfrros and Kal kv ixeybXco in Ac. 26 29), as in Mt. 5
19)
Mk.
:
12
37
6 ttoXus
2
*
Cf. Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. griech. Comp., Heft i, 1893, p. 7 f. Seymour, Horn. Lang, and Verse, p. 60. Cf. K.-G., II, p. 21. C. and S., Sel. from LXX, p. 64. Schwab, Hist. Synt. d. griech. Comp., Heft i, p. 9.
fjLeyas
661
:
Ac. 26
Cf. also Mt. 22 38. In we have an impUed comparison.^ The positive may be used with prep(c) With Prepositions. ositions also where comparison is implied. Thus d/iaprcoXoi irapa Winer ^ properly compares this iravTas tovs VaKiXaiovs (Lu. 13 2).
are set over against each other.

:
24, ra TroXXd ypafifiara,
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'
:
eKtivov.
{(i)
Cf. dîa irpos in Ro. 8
18.
V'
Comparison Implied by
rj.
Once more the
positive
may
occur with
not necessary, in view of the preceding discussion, to suggest the "omission" of fxdWov.* It is true that we have only one such example in the N. T., koXov (xol kcnv elceKOtiv
It is
t)
(Mt. 18 8). Cf. Mk. 9 43, 45. But the LXX again many illustrations^ like Xeu/coi (Gen. 49 12). The ancient Greek also is not without parallels. And there are N. T. examples, as in LXX, of verbs so employed like SeXco (1 Cor. 14 19) and
^XrjdrjpaL
: :
furnishes
t]
r}
and substantives as xapd earaL (Lu. 15 Older Greek waiters show this idiom with substantives and 7). verbs.^ In Mt. 18 8 we have the positive adjective both before and after as kvWov x^ôv. But cf. 2 Tim. 3 4 for comparative before and positive after.
XucrtreXet ^
(Lu. 17
2)
t?
?;
fi
After the three grades of comparison (e) In Absolute Sense. were once established, analogy worked to form and use positive, comparative and superlative. And sometimes the positive occurs in the absolute sense. So we jBnd Christ discussing the absolute meaning of the positive ayaOos in Mt. 19 17 (Mk. 10 18). Thus it comes to pass that sometimes the positive is more absolute than comparative or superlative which are relative of neces:
sity.
God
is
alone ajaOos in this sense, while others are
/SeXriojês
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."

'
Blasfl,
Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 240.
p. 113.
3
2 *
W.-Th.,
C. and
C. and
S., p.
64.
Though Blasa
S., p.
docs, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 143.
04; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 143; W.-Th., p. 241.

f.
W.-Th.,
p.
240
Schwab, Hist. Synt.
etc..
Heft
i,
p. 9.
jb.^ p. 19.
662
XIII.
3.
The Comparative Adjective (o-iryKpiTiKov ovojia). or Duality. On the forms see chapter VII, n, Contrast (a) As already observed, the first use of the comparative form
in
17
was to express contrast or duahty.^ This is clear Se^td occurs in the same verse. (Mt. 6:3), though
17
dpto-repa
But Homer
ujuereis
uses de^LTepos as comparative.
Cf. also aix<^bTtpos, rineTepos,
pos, erepos, eKarepos, oTrorepos, TTorepos,
where the notion of two
Contrast between two or duality, therefore, is clear They will receive separate treatment later. in these pronouns. Here they are merely used to illustrate the origin of the compara"AXXos (Latin alius) is also comparative,^ *dX-tos. So tive form.
accentuated.
is de^-Los^
which explains the disappearance

is -los.
of deîrepos.
One
of
the comparative endings

such, but from their
This leads one to remark that
the oldest comparative forms are not formed
own
roots.
Thus
devrepos,
from positives as which is obviously
aiJL<f)6Tepos
comparative and expresses duality, has no positive form. Cf. and the examples just mentioned.^ This original comparative need not be formed from an adjective at all, but from a substantive like iSaa-iXevTepos, Kvvrepos, etc., in Homer where the comparative expresses the possession of the quality "in contradistinction to objects which are without it" (Monro, Homeric Gr., p. 82). So Tporepos (from the adverb rpo) is not 'more forward,' but forward' in opposition to mrepos, backward.' Cf Brugmann, So e^corepos Cf. kXevdepos, 'free to come.' Griech. Gr., p. 415. These oldest forms represent is 'outside,' not 'more outside.' the original meaning which was not the comparison of greater
' ' .
or
less,
not a matter of degree, but a question of contrast or
duahty.^
So
jSeXrepos, aneivcov
have no positive forms.
There
is
indeed a distinct weakening of this original duality in adjectives as in pronouns.^ Cf. the dropping of the dual endings. Thus in the N.T. Trporepos as an adjective occurs only once, Kara rrjv Tporepav avaoTpoîlv (Eph. 4: 22). It is rare in the papyri (Moulton, Prol.,
p. 79).
Elsewhere
4), etc.
'first
-/rpcoros
holds the field

Trpcoros
p.ov
when only two

(Jo.
1
:
objects
or persons are in view, like
15),
Trpcoros
and
dXXos (20
Cf. our
'first
story'
when only two

is
stories are
contemplated,
volume,' etc.
(cf.
And
1
:
as an adverb Tporepov sur-
vives only ten times
2 Cor.
15), while wpoiTov
very comi,
Moulton,
lb.
2 Brug., Grundr. vergl. Gr., II, Prol., pp. 77 ff. Transl. (Comp. Gr.), vol. II, p. 132.
p. 420.
Schwab, Hist. Synt.

lb., pp. 4ff.
d. griech.
Comp., Heft
i,
p. 5.
B
6
Moulton,
Prol., p.
77
f.;
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439; 1903, p. 154.
mon.
663
adverb) so that
Luke does not use
Trporepos (adjective or
Trpwros in
Ac, 1:1 with X670S does not imply
finds Trporepos only once in the Grenfell-Hunt
Moulton^ volumes of papyri so

Tpiros.
-rrpCjTos.
that this dual form vanishes before the superlative
Winer
matter rightly and calls it a Latin point of view to insist on "former" and "latter" in Greek, a thing that the ancients did not do.
p. 244) sees this
(6)
(Winer-Thayer,
Degree.
The next
step
was
for the notion of degree to
The notion of "two-ness" remained, but it had the added idea of more in degree. They run along then parallel with each other. The comparative form, therefore,
come
into the comparative.
has two ideas, that of contrast or duality (Gegensatz) and of the relative comparative {Steigerung) though the first was the original.2 Relative comparison is, of course, the dominant idea in
,
most of the N. T. examples, though, as already remarked, the

notion of duality always
earai
lies in
the background.
:
Thus
av^Krorepov
(Mt. 10:
15), êfSaiorepov (2 Pet. 1
19), els to Kpetaaop (1

:
Cor.
11
17), (To4)<!oTepov
and
IcrxvpoTepov (1 Cor. 1
25).
(c) Without Suffixes. But the comparative did not always use the comparative suffixes, though this was usual. Sometimes liaWov was employed with the positive, though this idiom is not
very frequent in the N. T. Thus we find piaWov with koXos (Mk. 9 42), with fxaKapLov (Ac. 20 35), with apajKala (1 Cor. 12 22), with TToXXd (Gal. 4:27). Once indeed (2 Tim. 3 4) ûSXXoi' occurs with one adjective before r; and not with the other after 7).
: : : :
The Greeks preferred to put both qualities in the comparative when two adjectives were compared.^ But here we have <l)L\ri8ovoL fxaWov rj (j)LX6deoL. "In Jo. 3 19 ndWov is used with two substantives" (H. Scott). In Phil. 16 we have a distinction drawn between ficiXiaTa and ixaWov with aSeKcjidv ayaTrrjTov. No
degree
:
ij
example occurs in the N. T. of two comparatives with rJ, but Ro. 9 12 we have 6 jxel^cov dovXevaet tc3 eXaaaovL and in Heb. 1
:
in
:
4,
ToaovT(j^ Kpe'iTTOiv yevofxevos oaoi SiacfiopcoTepov.

i
Sometimes indeed fxaWov occurs This applies to adjectives and adverbs. Thus naWou irtpLcrabTipov (Mk. 7 36), irepiacroTepois fxaXKou
(d)
Double Comparison.
with the comparative form

(2 Cor. 7:13).
itself.
Cf. trt
naWov
Kal
ixaWov (Ph.
9), TrepLaaorepov
In KarabrfKov (Heb. 7:15). Recall also the double comparative form like vernacular English "lesser," iitiôrkpav (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.
664

xii,
curs in Test,
Pat. Jos. 17
8).
of the force of the comparative suffix
phasis.
purepos,
Homer
has
x^^poTepos,
kaxO'T<^'''^pos,
is due to the fading and the desire for em^schylus /ietfoi'cbrepos and virepre-
All this
Xenophon
Aristophanes
irpoTepaiTepos.
Cf.
Schwab, Hist. Syntax etc., Heft iii, p. 60. Modern Greek vernacular has TrXeiorepos and xî-porepos. The papyri give illustrations
like irpec^vTepuiTepa
comparative
dex-ter-ior, sinis-ter-ior.
Gk. Gr., p. 147. weakened sense of the form (Middleton, Analogij in Syntax, p. 38). Other means of strengthening the comparative were the accusative
(Moulton, Prol., p. 236). Cf. Latin double See list in Jannaris, Hist. This double comparative is due to analogy and
adverb
22
1
:
ttoXu,
as in
Heb. 12
9,
25
(cf.
2 Cor. 8
:
22),
and
1
in
particular the instrumental ttoXXw, as in Lu. 18
39.
In
Cor.
in
12
we have
ttoXXw ixoKKov over against aadevearepa.

all
But
emphasis is due to Paul's struggling emotion. The ancient Greek used all these devices very often. Cf. Schwab, Hist. Syntax, etc.. Heft Blass {Gr. ofN. T. Gk., p. 143) rightly observes that iii, pp. 59 ff. in 2 Cor. 12 9 fj5to-Ta ixaWov are not to be taken together. The older Greek used also jueya and ixaKpco to strengthen the comparison.
Ph.
this
:
23 note xoXXw /iSXXov KpeTaaov where
Cf.
Mayer, Verstarkung, Umschreihung und Entwertung der Comf.
parationsgrade in der dlteren Grdcitdt, 1891, p. 16

(e)
Without Object of Comparison.

is
Sometimes the com-
used absolutely. It is beside the mark to say with Clyde ^ that this idiom occurs "through politeness for the positive." It is not used for the positive. It is true that no obparative form
ject of
comparison
is
expressed, but that
makes this would often be true. Blass ^ comparative is no more than a positive.
the point perfectly clear.
that the point of comparison
the context."
is because the context In rapid familiar conversation also thinks that sometimes the
Winer ^ more
justly holds
may
"ordinarily be gathered from
The
point
13
:
is
always in the context.
Thus
6 TroteZs
Tol-qaov Taxet-ov (Jo.
27)
may mean more
quickly than Judas
would have done but for the exposure. Note that this is a conversation and Judas would understand. In Heb. 13 19 irepLaaoTepcos and Taxî-ov correspond easily, and in verse 23,aj' Taxeiov epxriTo-h None of the examples perhaps it means if he come before I leave. of Blass are convincing, for irpeajSiiTepos, though used of an official, is one who is older (elder) as compared with vecorepos, and the bishop The point, of course, lies is not to be a neophyte (1 Tim. 3:6).
: ' '
Gk. Svnt., p. 41. Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 142.
'
W.-Th., p. 242.
ADJECTIVES ('EHIGETa)
more
154
in length of experience
665
{B. S,, p.
than of age.
Deissmann
KufjLrjs,
f.)
finds in the papyri 6 wpea^vrepos 6

f.
an
ofHcial title.
Pap. Lugd. A, 35
(Ptol. Per.).
of course, something
In Ac. 17: 21 Kaivorepop means, newer than what they had recently heard.
ayyeWeis;
Socrates said to Hippocrates
309 C):
JUT?
TL veiOTepov
when he came in (Plato, Protagoras Then again, in Ac. 17: 22, Setcrt-
Sainovearepovs is
more
religious (or superstitious, as the case

I prefer religious)
may be,
I
a matter for exegesis.
than ordinary or than
had supposed. One does not need to deny the "elative" comparative sense of "very"^ here and elsewhere. The clative comparative is still comparative. But Blass^ denies even the elative
comparative in a number of these examples.
This
is
to a certain
extent to surrender to translation the true interpretation of the Greek idiom. In Ac. 18 2G aKpi^kcnepov k^WevTo teaches that
:
Apollos received more accurate information than he had previously had. Cf. kêTaad-qaeraL wepl tovtou aKpL^karepov, B.U. 388 (ii/A.D.).
Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439. So in Ac. 24 22 aKpLJSeaTepov tl8w means that Felix more accurately than one would suppose,
:
and in verse 26 TrvKvorepov shows that he sent for Paul more frequently than he had been doing before. Ac. 25 10 koWiov eTcyLvuaKeLs is an interesting example. Paul hints that Festus knows his innocence better than he is willing to admit. Cf. êknov av
:
yLvu}(TKeLs (2
Tim.
18), 'better
than
I.'
BeXrtcov occurs in the papyri
as adjective, though not in the N. T.

all
Thus one could go through the rather numerous examples of elative comparative adjectives and adverbs in the N. T. and show that with proper attention
to the context the point of comparison appears plainly enough.
The comparative even without

is
the expressed object of comparison So in Ac. 27 13 aaaov irapeKeyovTo clearly means 'nearer than they could do before' (cf. irapakeyonevoL in verse Again in Jo. 4: 52 Kop^/brepov eaxev (note the construction) is 8). 'better than before the word of Christ was spoken.' As further illustrations, not to overdo the point, note (jlolXXov in 2 Cor. 7: 71
not just the positive.
(cf.
Ph.
12), (TTrovdaidTepos in 2 Cor.
8
:
17
(cf.
2 Tim.
17)
and
airovSaioTepojs in
Ph. 2
28
(cf. 1
Th. 2
17), To\nr]poTpcos
:
(Ro. 15:
15), fxelôves (2 Pet.
2:11), Karoorepa in Eph. 4
9.
The common
:
expression
for
and tovs irXeiovas (1 Cor. 9 19) 'the majority' should occasion no difficulty. In free transol
wXeiovs (Ac. 19:32),
lation
one
may
sometimes use 'very' or
'rather,'
but this
is
Moulton,
:
Prol., p. 236.
:
He
28
notes some "dative comparatives" in D,
in Ac. 4
10 4>avtp6Tipov, 10
pkXriop.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 142.
666

:
merely the resultant idea. Cf. erkpoLs XoyoLs irXeioaLv (Ac. 2 40). The older Greek shows this idiom.^ This is merely the disjunctive conjunc(/) Followed by vtion. But is not common in the N. T. in this connection. Indeed Blass^ considers that it does not occur where any other construction would be perfectly clear. As is well known in the ancient Greek, r} is not common after Tr\eloov and eXarTcov with numerals. This use of the comparative as a mere parenthesis is in the papyri. Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 438. O.P. 274 (I/a.d.) TrXeio; TrjxeLs hvea. Cf. Schwab, Hist. Syntax, Heft ii, pp. 84 ff. Cf. also cTrdi'co in Mk. 14 5 and 1 Cor. 15 6, where it has no effect on the construction. In Mt. 5 20 there is an ellipsis (TrXelov twv âp.), 'than that of the Pharisees.' So in Mt. 26 53 TrXetco 86}8eKa XeyLcoms occurs with no change in the case of XejLcopas. In Ac. 4 22; 23 13; 24 11 likewise r? is absent without change of case. So in 5e/ca, for Ac. 25 6 ou TrXetous oktw here does not go with TrXetous. But in Lu. 9 13 we do find ovk elalu fjijuv TrXelov aproL Trevre. And in 1 Tim. 5 9 the ablative construction occurs. In justification of Blass' point ^ above, he points out that with two adjectives we have r? (2 Tim. 3:4); with a conjunction, as eyyvrepov rj ore (Ro. 13 11); with an infinitive, eu/coTrcorepoj' eiaeXdelv r/ (elaeXdelv to be repeated, Mt. 19:24. Cf. Ac. 20:35); with a genitive (same form as the ablative would be if r; were absent), like vpLuiv aKoveiv naWov rod Beov (Ac. 4 19); with a dative, like aueKrorepov 15). These are all pertinent yfj ôSoiJLwv fj rfj ToXa eKeivrj (Mt. 10 and striking examples. There remain others (against Blass' view) which are not so justified, like irXelovas fxadrjras TOLel 'loiCLvqs
r) r?
:
:
r)
r/
fj
rj
rj
4:1), riyairricrav (xaXKov to ctkotos r) to </)cos (Jo. 3 19), etc. But it remains true that ^ is becoming rare in this usage in the
(Jo.
:
N. T.
(g)
Followed by the Ablative.
The
ablative
is
the most
in the
common means
we must take
of expressing the standard of the comparison: so
the case, and not as genitive.
As remarked
chapter on the cases, this ablative construction seems rather more

in the N. T. than in the papyri. It is found in Homer .^ In the old Sanskrit the ablative was found with comparatives,^ though occasionally the locative or the instrumental appeared.
common
' *
^
Schwab, Hist. Synt. etc., Heft ii, p. 178; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 107 f. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 316, sustains him. Monro, Horn., Gr., p. 109. Ziemer, Vergl. Synt. der ludoger. Comp., 1884, pp. 29 ff.
p. 143.
ADJECTIVES ("EniGETA)
667
like
Indeed the various constructions after the comparative (particle r), case, preposition) occur in the other Indo-Germanic lan-
guages. ^
Schwab 2 estimates that

Blass^ thinks that in the
in this
in Attic prose the ablative after

r/
the comparative stands in relation to
as 5.5 to
and
is
in
poetry
this
18 to
as
is
1.
kolvti
the ablative
three times
further ex-
common
idiom as in Attic prose.
So in the N. T.
the usual construction after the comparative.

:
As
amples observe neiûp tovtuv (Mk. 12 31), /letfwj/ rod Trarpos wcov (Jo. 4 12), TrXeov tovtcov (Jo. 21 15), co(f)coTepou tCjv apOpcoircov
: :
(1 Cor. 1
25), etc.
is
Cf. 1 Jo. 3
20; Heb. 7
26.
:
Sometimes the
v/jlCiv
ri
comparison
(Tvvrj
little
complicated, as in Mt. 5 20,
5t/cato-
irXelop tojv ypaixnarecov,
where righteousness'
'
is
dropped
in the
Note TrXetoj' as a fixed or stereotyped form.* Cf. also Jo. 5 36. In Mt. 21 36, aWovs SouXovs 7r\eiovas rCiv irpdoTOiv, note the use of comparative and superlative side by side. {h) Followed by Prepositions. Prepositions occur not infrequently after the comparative. We have already seen the positive so used with irapa, and irpos. Wellhausen^ considers this positive use like the Aramaic. In the classical Greek we see beginnings of this usage.^ In the modern Greek, the normaF way of expressing comparison is to use airb with the accusative and occa:
second member.
sionally irapa with the nominative. The examples of the use of xapd are chiefly in Luke and Hebrews. Thus Lu. 3 13, ix-qUv irXeou
:
irapa to dLaTeraypevov vplv]
Heb.
9
:
4, 8La4)op6)Tepov wap' avrovs; 3
3,
irXeiopos 86^r]s irapa Mo^varjv;
23, KpdrTOcjL dvaiais irapa Tavras.
So
Heb. 11:4; 12
in Lu. 16
:
24.
Examples
of vwep in this sense occur likewise
8, 4>povLp.6:TepoL virep Tov^ vlovs;
Tvaaav p.a.xaipav.
In the
LXX^
Heb. 4 12, TOjiwTepos vwep comparison was usually completed

:
by means
(i)
of Trapd or
hirkp.
The Comparative Displacing the Superlative.
This
increase of the comparative in contrast to the corresponding decrease of the superlative is one of the most striking peculiarities of
the adjective in the
that in the
kolptj
kolpt]. Indeed one may broadly say with Blass,^ vernacular the comparative with the article takes
2 Hist. Synt. etc., Heft ii, p. 92. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 329. Tlic abl. is sometimes used with personal pro* Blass, ib., nouns after the comp. in mod. Gk. (Thumb, p. 76). p. 108.
'
lb., p. 1.
'
Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 23(3. ^ Thumb, Ilandb., N. T. Gk., p. 108. p. 75 f. 8 C. and S., Sel., pp. 84 ff. For various prepositions so used in older Gk. see Schwab., Hist. Synt., Heft i, pp. 45 ff. ' Hermeneutik and Kritik, p. 199.
*
Einl. in die drei erstcn Evanfj;., p. 28.
Blass, Gr. of
668
NEW TESTAMENT
over the peculiar functions of the superlative. In the modern Greek vernacular the comparative with the definite article is the only idiom employed for the true superlative.^ The form in -raros in modern Greek is rare and always elative. Moulton^ finds the
papyri supporting this disappearance of the superlative form before the comparative to a certain extent. "It seems fair to conclude that (1) the superlative, apart from its elative use, was
dying, though not dead; (2) the comparative had only sporadically begun to be used in its place." ^ He reminds us that the Uterary use had as much weight as the vulgar idiom. As a matter of fact the superlative form is not essentially necessary. The Armenian has no superlative and is like the vernacular modern Greek. The root-difference between the comparative and the superlative is that between "twoness" and "moreness." As the notion of duahty vanished or was no longer stressed, the need for a distinction between the comparative and superlative vanished also. Both are in reality comparative in relation to the positive."* In the N. T. therefore we see this ])lurring of distinction between comparative and superlative. Cf. 1 Cor. 13 13 fxei^cov 8e tovtwv ayairy] where
:
17
three things are compared.

Sir
In English we say " greatest of these."

ixtVôv in
W. M. Ramsay
:
gives iravroov
ris
a Christian inscription.^
Cf.
In Mt. 18
we have
Lu. 9
: :
apa
ixel^wv, etc.
Mk.
34.
So in
Mt. 11
avTov).
11
(cf.
48) note 6 be fXLKpoTepot (but note also nel^cov

irXelop
In Lu. 7 42
f.,
and
to -KKetov
do indeed
if
refer to the
two debtors (verse 41), though

is
it is
questionable
:
that fine point
But in 1 Cor. 12 23 the comparatives have Moulton" cites from O.P. 716 (H/a.d.) Ti]v aixdWiner^ indeed finds vova a'ipeaLv hbbvTi, 'to the highest bidder.' Note the similar examples in Demosthenes and Athenagoras. adverb mrepov wavTuv (Mt. 22:27), obviously as superlative. So in 1 Tim. 4 1, ev mrepOLS Kaipdls. In Eph. 4 9, to, Karwrepa neprj is likewise in the superlative sense. The Epistle of Barnabas shows
here insisted on.
their usual force.
:
:
similar examples.
Blass^ reminds us that the Italian does not dis-
tinguish between the comparative and the superlative. The ern Greek to-day says 6 aocjiwrtpos aird oXous 'the wisest of
1
modall.'^
Thumb, Handb.,
p. 73.
Prol., p. 78; CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439; 1904, p. 154.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T.
Gk., p. 33.
3
lb., CI.
Rev., 1901, p. 439.
Cf.
Schwab, Hist. Synt.

*
etc..
Heft
ii,
pp. 172,
177.
B
lb.,
Hefti, pp. 17
ff.
Cities
and Bish.
78
f.
of Phrygia, II, p. 525.

Prol., p.
W.-Th.,
p. 242.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 33. Jebb, V. and D.'s Handb., p. 309.
Moulton^ notes the fact
(p.
6G9
that, while KpdTTwv
are strictly comparative, they have
and xtpw in the N. T. no superlative, but he notes
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] generally.
Blass^ observes that eo-xaros and
irpcoTos
are the only excep-
tions to this disappearing tendency.
dualism wpoTepos goes down.
Under the weakening of Usually eaxo-Tos refers to more than

all,
:
two, the last of a series or last of

24), 'iaxo-Tov^ iravTwv (1 Cor. 15
8).
Hke h edxaTjj rnxepa (Jo. 11 Sometimes first and last are

:
contrasted, like
17
kaxarr]
also.
:
TXavrj
.
x'^'>-P<^v
:
TTJs
irpojTTjs
(Mt. 27:64).
/cat
Note comparative
Cf Mt. 19
30.
So
6 irpoJTos
6 eaxo-Tos
about Jesus (Rev. 1 17). In the LXX co-xaros occurs as comparative (cf. in Deut. 24:3), and even as an adverb meaning 'after' in Deut. 31 29. Cf. Thackeray, p. 184. Even more common than eaxaros is Trpcoros. It is used in the usual sense often (Mk. 12 20), but is also common where only two are concerned (1 Cor. 15 :45; Jo. 20 :4) as already shown. Sometimes irpcoTos expresses mere rank as in A^. 17 4. In Mt. 22 38 note 17 neyaXt]
: : :
:
Kal irpuTT] evToKi].

also).^
itor,
Cf.
irpcoTr]
iravTwv in
These are true superlatives.

irpwrrj in
Mk. 12 28 (note gender Sir W. M. Ramsay {Expos:
irporepos.
Lu. 2 2 is not in sense of enrolments as we now know. But this proves nothing as to Ac. 1:1. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 60) quotes I Gr. XII, 5, 590, Ôaaas aXdxov Trpcoros, where two are compared.
:
Nov., 1912) shows that

It is first of
series of
(6)
A Few True
is
Superlatives in the N. T.
least.'
But a few other

Cor.
is
true superlatives survive in the N. T.
15
a true superlative, 'the
Thus But
6 eXdxto-ros in 1
it
elative in Lu.
12:26. Cf. Mt. 2:6; 5:19. Moulton^ finds eXaxtcTos as a true superlative in a papyrus of second century B.C. Tb.P. 24. But there are very few true superlatives in the papyri.^ In Ac.
17
:
15
cos
T&xtaTa
is
a true superlative.
2
"Ti/'to-ros is
a true superf.
>
Prol., p. 78.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 141
*
*
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.,
ii,
Ileft
8
p. 175.
prol.^ p. 79.
irXdaT-qv Tinr,v.
CI. Rev., 1901, p. 439; 1904, p. 154.
See
ri/v kaoy.kirqi>
Tb.P.
105 (ii/B.c).
670
lative
NEW TESTAMENT
both when applied to God, rod inl/larov (Mk. 5:7), and the abode of God, h to7s xn^laTois (Mt. 21: 9). Some MSS. (D, etc., W. H. marg.) have lyyiaTa in Mk. 6 36, which is a true superIn Ac. 20 :38 fxaKiffra, 'most of all,' is probably a true lative. superlative. In 1 Cor. 14: 27 to irXelaTov, 'at the most,' is a true In Mt. 11 20 at TrXeTcrrat dvpafxeLs we probably have superlative.
:
the true superlative.
Cf.
ttj
:
ayiwraTrj vnuv
ir'uxTet
(Ju. 20)
and
ttjv
oLKpL^taTdT-qv a'lpecnv (Ac.

:
26
5), true superlatives
in -raros.
In
Rev. 18 12; 21 11 ri/itcbraros is probably elative, Cf. novdoTaros, 39. The Ust is indeed very small. 1 Ki. 8 In the sense of 'very' or 'ex(c) The Elative Superlative. ceedingly' it comprises the great majority of the superlative forms that survive in the N. T.^ In the papyri the immense majority Cf. Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, of superlative forms are elative. in the N. T. and is indeed always KpdTto-Tos is elative p. 439.
:
:
merely a sort of
title.^
:
So KparLare in Lu. 1:3.
So rihara
is
only
:
elative (2 Cor. 12 9, 15). Mkyiaros occurs only once (2 Pet. 1 4) and is elative, rd rtjutct koI yueyicrra riplv kwayyeXixaTa {permagnus, Blass). In Lu. 12 26 k\axi-<yrov is elative as also in 1 Cor. 4:3;
:
2,
while
in
Eph. 3
8 the comparative superlative

MaXicrra occurs
:
eXaxi-cTTo-
repos is doubtful.3
nXeto-Tos, generally elative in the papyri,"* is
so in
is
Mk. 4
1, 6x>ô^ TrXeTo-ros.
some 12 times and
usually elative, as in Ph. 4

(d)
22.
Superlatives. The scarcity of the superlaN. T. removes any ground for surprise that no double superlatives occur. In Eph. 3 8 e\axi(rTOTepco is indeed a supertive in the
:
No Double
by the comparative. In Gal. 6 10 the elative superlative /xdXto-ra occurs by way of repetition with to ayadov, as Schwab^ gives a considerable in Phil. 16 it does with a.yairr}Tbv.
lative strengthened
:
hst of double or strengthened superlatives from classic writers, hke TrXeTarov 7?5t<TTOs (Eurip., Ale), p-kyicrov ex^tcrros (Eurip., Med),
fioiXiaTa (piXraTos (Eurip.,
Hippol),
judXto-ra Setvoraros
(Thuc),
etc.
Cf. Latin minimissimus
and English "most
straitest sect,"
"most
unkindest cut of
(e)
all," etc.
Followed by Ablative. The superlative, hke the comparative, may be followed by the ablative.^ Thus with vpuTov
vfiojv
(Jo. 15:18), Trpwros p.ov (Jo. 1 :15),
and possibly
ri?
in
kir'
eaxo-Tov
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 33.
Blass considers
dTiwrdrn
(Ju. 20)
elative.
*
Moulton,
79.
Prol., p. 78.
6
lb., p. 236.
Schwab, Hist. Synt.
etc.,
Heft
ff.
iii,
pp. 70
ff.
4 lb., p.
Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 11
Tuv
rifxepicv
671
tovtwv (Heb. 1:2), though this passage
may
be merely
the genitive.
(/)
No "Hebraistic"
tQi deu)
Superlative.
:
It is gratuitous to con-
sider daretos
(Ac. 7
20)
and
similar passages superlatives.

of the forms see
XV. Numerals.
chapter VII, in.
first
For the general discussion
The
ordinals are indeed adjectives, as are the
and all after two hundred. The syntactical numerals are not many, (a) Eh AND n/3&jro9. The use of eh rather than Trpooros is one of the most striking points to observe. Before we can agree with Biass^ that this is "undoubtedly a Hebrew idiom," who follows
four cardinals
peculiarities of the
we must at least hear what Moulton^ has to say in reply. begin with, in modern Greek "the cardinals beyond 4 have ousted the ordinals entirely."^ Then we learn from the inscriptions that this usage of cardinals as ordinals is as old as the Byzantine
Winer,^
To
Greek.^
Moulton^
also quotes
from papyri of the second and third

(ii/iii a.d.),
centuries a.d.
like
ixiq. /cat
rfj ynq. koI
dKah, B.U. 623
a construction
The Germans, like the English, can say "page forty." ^ In the N. T. we only find this substitution of the cardinal in the case of els, while in the modern Greek the matter has gone much further. In the classic Greek no real analogy exists, though els stands in enumerations when Sevrepos or aXXos follows, and in compound numerals a closer parHKabi rov nrjvos in
Haggai
2:1.''
allel is
found, like
els Kal
TpiaKoarbs,
essentially different.^
Cf. Latin
though even here the case is unus et vicesimus, "a case of the
formation of the ordinal being imperfectly carried out."^ Certainly then it was possible for this development to have gone on
is
when one considers that Trpwros not derived from els, though Moulton^" admits that the Hebrew has the same peculiarity. Moulton^' further objects that if Semitic
apart from the Hebrew, especially
had been at work we should have had tt} irkvTt in the modern Greek, since the Hebrew used the later days of the month
influence
in cardinal numbers.^^
Still,
the striking fact remains that in the
LXX (cf. Numb.

is
expressed
by
p.[a,
and not by
1)
in the
Tpurrj.
N.T. the first day of the month This was obviously in harmony
with the
KOLVT]
of a later time, but the first evidence of its actual

C. and S., Sel., W.-Th., p. 249.
Blass, Gr. of
Prol., p. 9G.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 144.
^
"
p. 31.
W.-Th.,
lb.
p.
248
f.
f.
ProL, p. 95
Cf.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 144.
Thumb, Handb.,
etc., p. 82.
f.
'
Dieterich, Uiiters. etc., p. 187

Prol., p. 9G.
"
12
lb.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 144.
672

is
NEW TESTAMENT
Hebrew
use so far
in the
LXX, and
It is
it is
in exact imitation of the
hard to resist the idea that the LXX at least is here influenced by the Hebrew. And, if so, then the N. T. naturally also. Later on we need not attribute the whole matter to the Hebrew influence. Li the N.T. indeed we once have TrpoiT-g o-a/S/Sdrou (Mk. 16 9), which belongs to the disputed close of the Gospel.^ Cf., on the other hand, els jutav aa^âTwv (Mt. 28 1), 2), ttj hlo. to)U ca^âruv (Lu. Trpcot [ttj] fXLq. rdv aalSâToov (Mk. 16
idiom on the point.
: : :
24: 18
1;
Jo. 20
is
1;
Ac. 20
7);
Kara niav aa^jSarov (1 Cor. 16
2).
There
:
nothing peculiar in the use of evLavrop Kal ^rjuas e^ (Ac.

Cf. Rev. 12
:
11).
14.
(6)
The
Simplification of the "Teens."
This began in the
Hence from ordinals from find "simplified usually on we the third century B.C. ^ Tecro-apeo-/cat5e/caros, etc. Tpio-/cat5e/caros, have we 19th." So 13th to 8vo even Ska and 5ka e^, 5e/ca rpeis, usually have papyri^ So the rather more^ frequently than 86)8eKa. Cf. TeaaapeaKaiSeKaTrj in Ac. 27 27, 33. Hence Kal is not always inserted when the smaller number precedes and "omitted" when the larger comes first. It was never a uniform custom (Winer-Thayer, p. 250), least of all But three numerals may apCf. Gal. 3 17, etc. in the N. T.
classical period as is
seen in the Attic inscriptions.^
pear without Kal, as in hardv irevTrjKOVTa TpiQiv (Jo. 21: 11). Cf. Rev. 7 4; 14 3; 21 17. See further chapter VII, in, 2, (6). Cf. ahrbs rplros, 'he and two (c) The Inclusive Ordinal.
:
:
others.'
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 Moulton^ finds one parallel in the papyri, rptros uv in also.^ P.P. iii. 28, though the Hterary kolvt] Avriters (Plutarch, Appian)
Moulton expresses no surprise at this idiom in 2 Peter it. where "we rather expect bookish phrases." He comments also on the "translation English" in the Authorized Version's rendering "Noah the eighth person," and uses it as an illustration of the way that the LXX often rendered the Hebrew, though unlike the misprint "strain at a gnat," it did not gain currency
use
in English.
1
Blass, Gr. of
niS..
N. T. Gk.,
p. 144,
remarks that Eusebius quotes the verse

'
as Tp
2
Melsterh., Att. Inscr., p. 160.

lb.
is
Moulton,
Prol., p. 96.
Ae/ca
occupies
first
pkice from thirteen upwards, but with ordinals the

30.
'
reverse
s 6
true.
Like the
LXX.
p. 249.
C. and
S., p.
W.-Th.,
Prol., pp. 98, 107.
ADJECTIVES ('EHIGETa)
(d)
673
There is no trouble over the classic (Mk. 6 40) in this sense. We have already (chapter XIII, ava and /card) discussed ava els (Rev. 21 21) and Kad' eh (Ro. 12 5). The point here that calls for comment 7 is a Hebraism. Cf. dj^d bho [bho] is whether 8vo oho in Mk. 6 Winer termed it "properly Hebraistic," while in Lu. 10 1. Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 145) more guardedly described it as "after the Semitic and more colloquial manner." The repetition of the numeral is a Hebrew way of expressing the distributive idea. Cf. in the N. T. also avuTroaia avixiroaLa (Mk. 6 39), Tpaaial Moulton^ cites also Sea/jLas Seafias, as the readirpaaial (verse 40). ing of Epiphanius for Mt. 13 30. But Winer ^ had himself cited ./Eschylus, Persae, 981, iJLvpla nvpla, and Blass ^ compares in Eris, the lost drama of Sophocles, ixiav ulav. The Atticists had censured this as "colloquial," but at any rate "it was not merely a creation of Jewish Greek." Deissmann^ besides quotes rpla rpia from the Oxy. Papyri. W. F. Moulton^had already called attention to the fact that modern Greek shows the same usage. Hence we must conclude, with Moulton' and Thumb,^ that the Koivfi development was independent of the Hebrew. Moulton^ comments also on the reading of B in Lu. 10 1, di^d 8vo 8vo, and notes how
Distributives.
:
The
use of ava (Mt. 20
9)
and
/card
in the papyri neyaXov /xe7dXoi; = the elative superlative tieylarov.
See also
/card 8vo bho in
P. Oxy. 886 (iii/A.D.).
For the
proportio7ials the
N. T. has only
classic -TrXdo-tos.
Cf
iKaTovTa-wKaijLwv,
Mk.
10
rrXao-tcov, not the 30 and Mt. 19 29

: :
NCDX;
(e)
TToXXaTrXaatcoj/,
Lu. 18
30 and Mt. 19
29 BL.
Cf.
Blass-Debrunner, p. 38.
The Cardinal 'ETrra. With

eirraKLs
e^bofxr^KovTaKLs eirTo.
(Mt. 18
22)
is
rather than
the rendering 'until seventy times seven'
certainly possible in itself
and follows
literally
the Greek words.
The
identical expression {e^bonrjKovTaias iirTo) occurs in
Gen. 4
24
(where the Revised Version renders it 'seventy and seven fold') and in Test, xii, Pat. Ben. 7 4. The margin of the Revised
:
Version for Mt. 18

1
22 gives "seventy times and seven" which
W.-M.,
p- 312.
Prol., p. 97.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 330.
Thcol. Literaturzoit., 1898, p. 631. W.-Th., p. 249; W.-M., p. 312. W.-M., p. 312 note. Cf. Jcbb in V. and D.'s llandb., p. 310. Raderand eWvs W6s macher (N. T. Gr., p. 57) cites a4>6bpa a-ipoSpa from the from the Byz. Gk. ^ Prol., p. 97. 8 HeUen., p. 128.
LXX
Prol., p. 97.
bi)o.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 330, cites
from Gosp. of Pet. 35,
dfd dOo
674
NEW TESTAMENT
Moulton^ considers
Winer^ interprets as "seventy-seven times."

to
rightly that the passage in Genesis settles the usage in
Matthew
which an allusion may be made. He cites a possible parallel from the Iliad, xxii, 349, 8eKdKLs[Te] Kai feUoai. Sometimes with numerals (/) Substantive not Expressed.
the substantive for
TrePTe
Thus apyvpiov juupidSas is not expressed. but in Mt. 26 16 note apyvpia. The use of Tpirov TovTo (2 Cor. 13 1) is merely an instance of the adjective used absolutely without a substantive. Cf. the neuter to devrepov
money
:
(Ac. 19
19),
(2 Cor.
(gf)
13:2).
Adverbs with Numerals. construction. Thus Tpadrjvat eirapo:

&ct)dr]
They have no
:
TptaKocrloou di^vaploov 6),

cbs
eiravco
irevTaKocrioLS
dSeXôTs (1 Cor. 15
:
on the (Mk. 14 5), StcrxtXtot (Mk.

effect
:
19). 21), eKaTOVTaer-qs ttov (Ro. 4 13), cucret irevTaKLcrxl^LOL (Mt. 14 In the case of cbs and <haei we really have conjunctions.^ In ecos Cf. 21) we have, of course, the preposition. ewTCiKLs (Mt. 18 Winer-Moulton, p. 313, for classical parallels with eXarrov, Tr\eov,
CIS, kv,
wepl, virep, M^XP*"
(h)
Et? AS Indefinite Article.
The Greek,
as a rule,
had
no indefinite article. The older Greek did occasionally use rts with no more apparent force than an indefinite article, but usually
nothing was used for that idea in Greek.
els KairrfKos,
Still in
Aristophanes
(Av. 1292) Moulton^ rightly sees later kolvt] idiom. Aristophanes indeed preserves
as an example of the
much
of the
In the modern Greek has may be used.^ Els colloquial speech. became naturally more popular than rts since it has all three genders.^ Moulton^ finds numerous papyri illustrations. The modern languages have followed the Greek model here, for the English an (Scottish ane) is really one, like the German ein and
back on the though it here coincided with the KOLVT) idiom. Hence N. T. usage on this point is in full accord with the development of the Greek. Cf. els jpap.ixaitvs (Mt. 8 19), ix'ia TraLdlaKri (26:69), fxia xr]pa tttc^xV (Mk. 12:42), els In Jo. 6 9 some MSS. have eV with 6(/)etXeTrjs (Mt. 18 24), etc. Cf. TraiSapiov, but the sense is not materially altered either way.
the French un.
It is therefore hardly necessary to fall
Hebrew precedent^
in the use of nn,
riKovaa epos deroO
(Rev. 8
13), iduv avKrjv
p,'iav
(Mt. 21
19), etc.
W.-Th.,
p. 251.
"
Prol., p. 97.
2 Prol., p.
8 8
W.-M., p. 314. Cf. Green, Handb., etc., p. 276.

98.
Cf.
Thumb, Handb.,
p. 81.
Prol., p. 97.
Cf. Wellhausen, Einl., p. 27.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 144.
ADJECTIVES ('EDIGETa)
Moulton^ properly
cal subtleties" in
criticizes
675
19 for his "exegeti-
Meyer on Mt. 8
denying this idiom for els in the N. T. (i) Et9 = Tt9. Sometimes indeed els stands alone wth practically the same sense as rts, as in Mt. 19: 16; Mk. 10: 17, though
in the parallel passage (Lu. 18
:
18) tls apxcov occurs.

evl
The
:
use of
13
els
with genitive (or ablative), like

T03V ijixepQiv
is,
:
rwv toXitwp (Lu. 15
15), kv niq.
:
(Lu, 8 22), or the ablative, hke
els e^ vjjluv (Jo.
21),
merely the same idiom expanded. Cf. els tls, Lu. 22 50; Jo. 11 49. In Mk. 14 10, 6 ets roju ScoSeKa, the article at first looks incongruous, 'the one of the twelve,' but the early papyri give illustrations of this usage also.^ It is as a pronoun that els is to be construed here and in the rather frequent alternative expressions ets ets (Mt. 24 fxia (verse 41), t6v 'ha 40), ula Tov trepov (Mt. 6 24), evos rod erepov (ib.), ets rod evos (1 Cor.
of course,
:
4:6).
Cf. Cf.
ets Kal ets ets
5:11.
(Mt. 27: 38) and the reciprocal use in e/caaros, Mt. 26 22.
:
Th.
(j) The Distributive Use of El?. and the "barbaric" (Winer-Schmiedel,

:
:
So
ev Kad' eV in
ets
Rev. 4 8
:
p. 247)
/card ets
:
(Mk.
14 19), TO Kad' ets (Ro. 12 5), ava ets erao-ros (Rev. 21 21). This "barbaric" idiom came to be very common in the later Greek.
Cf.
modern Greek
Kade,
Kadhas
e/cao-ros.
The
free adverbial use
of prepositions like ews, aud, wapa, Kara
is
copiously illustrated in
Winer-Schmiedel,
p. 247,
from the
LXX and the late Greek writers.

see next chapter
For the use

nouns.
of ou5ets, ouêts,
p.r]bds, iir]dd^
on Pro-
Cf. also there oh
ttSs
and
ttSs
oh.
Prol., p. 95.
Ib.
CHAPTER XV
PRONOUNS
('ANTfiNTMIAI)
For the antiquity and history of pronouns see iv in chapter VII (Declensions). We are here concerned, not with the form, but with the use of pronouns."^ As a matter of fact all pronouns fall into two classes, Deictic (SeiKTiKal) and Anaphoric {avaôpLKa'C) They either "point out" or they "refer to" a substantive. So we get the modern terms, demonstrative and relative (cf. Monro, Homeric Gr., p. 168 f.). But some pronouns may be demon-
The demonstrative was the original usage. For practical purposes we have to follow a more minute division. I. Personal Pronouns (irpcoTOTUTroi r\ Trpoo-wiriKal dvTwvu|JLCai). The personal pronouns (first and second persons) are deictic (I, thou). The reason for the use of pronouns, as already explained, was to avoid the repetition of the substantive. In Jo. 11 22 note
strative or relative according to the context.
or deictic
the repetition of
(a)
debs.
Cf. also Lu. 6
45.
The Nominative. As
already explained, the verb uses the
personal pronoun as personal suffixes, so that as a rule no need
was
felt for
the separate expression of the pronoun in the
nom-
had the personal endings like el-fxl, ea-ai, ea-ri. The use of the personal pronoun in addition to the personal ending of the verb was due to desire for emphasis. Then the separate expression of the pronoun led to the gradual sloughing off of the personal ending. In modern English this process is nearly complete. In Greek this process was arrested, though in modern Greek all verbs save el/jLal are -co verbs. In most cases, therefore, in Greek the existence of the personal pronoun in the nominative implies some emphasis or contrast. But this is not quite true of all examples. "The emphasis of the first and second persons is not to be insisted on too much in poetry or in familiar prose.
inative.
All verbs
Cf.
Nomina benennen
sie
Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten, p. 95 "Die die Dinge nach ihren Qualitaten, die Pronomina bezeichnen
:
nach ihren Verhaltnissen."

676
PRONOUNS ('ANTQNTMIAl)
Notice the frequency of
particularly
eyuiSa, eywuai.^'^
G77
it
In conversation
was
have the personal pronoun in the nominative. In the later Greek generally the personal pronouns show a weakening of force,^ but never to the actual ol^literation of emphasis, not even in the modern Gpeek.^ Moulton^ agrees with Ebeling^ that there was "no necessary emphasis in the Platonic ^v 8' eyo:, e^y-qv kyw, ws av 077S." Clearly then the frequency of the pronoun in the N. T. is not to be attributed to the Semitic influence. Even Conybeare and Stock ^ see that it is not necessary to appeal to the well-known Hebrew fondness for pronouns for this
to
common
usage.
But Blass^ thinks that some
of the
MS.
variations
may
be due to Semitic influence. We are free therefore to approach the N. T. examples on their merits.^
1. The First Person, kydo and ruiels. It numerous examples where eya: shows
ix<Ji
is
easy to find in the N.T.
contrast.
de
:
So eyw
(5
:
xp^'i-o-v
VTTO
aov âTTLadrjvaL (Mt. 3

:
14),
eyco
'Keyci:
22), 700 ae
iSoâaa (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. Different shades of meaning appear also as in virep ov 70) elirov (Jo. 1 30), *I, myself.' Cf. Kayoj ovk ffbeiv avrov (Jo. 1 33) and Kayu iwpaKa Kal ntnapTvp-qKa (verse 34) and note absence with second verb. Cf. Jo. 6 48; 16 33; 1 Cor. 2:1,3. Note absence of ky<:o in Mt.
: : :
:
18, 20, Xe7co vpXv.

:
Cf. also rts aadevel Kal ovk aaOevco; (2 Cor.

(ib.)
11
29) with tIs (TKav8a\lêTaL Kal ovk kyoj Tcvpoviiai;
as proof that
Further examples of 17a) may be seen in Ro. 7:17; Jo. 5 31, 34; 10:30; Eph. 5 32; Ph. 4 11, For the plural ly/xets see rnxeis irpoaKwovyav (Jo. 4 22) in opposition to vneis, but then follows mcrel}^ 6 o'lda/xev. So in Ac. 4 20 note ov bwapuda 17/ieTs a elSafxev and tL Kal "fnxets klvSvvehonev; (1 Cor. 15 30). Cf. Mt. 6 12. The "editorial" 'we' has already received discussion (cf The Sentence) and may be merely illustrated here. Blass^" considers it a "wide-spread tendency among Greek writers, when they speak of themselves to say 17/xets instead
far in either direction.^
: :
the point
must not be pressed too

:
Gildersleeve, Synt. of CI. Gk., part
i,
p. 35.
^
7
Gildersleeve, Studies, p. 240.

Sel.
Thumb, Handb.,
Pro!., p. 85.
etc., p.
59
f.
from the
LXX,
p. 65.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 316. In general the N. T. follows the classic idiom. W.-Sch., p. 194.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 194.
p. 166.
of N. T. Gk., matter to the exegete.
" Gr.
Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 86
f.,
who
leaves the
678

:
of eyo)." This is not always true in Paul's Epistles (Ro. 1 5), for sometimes he associates others with him in the address at the beginning. There are undoubted examples in the N. T. like oloi
kafiev (2
Cor. 10: 11),
ireid6txe9a
(Heb. 13
18), ypa4>onev (1 Jo. 1
4).
But sometimes the

:
plural merely associates the readers or hearers

:
with the writer or speaker. So e4>opkcrafxev (1 Cor. 15 49), ofioiwaconev (Mk. 4 30). Sometimes the first person singular is used in a representative manner as one of a class (cf. the representative
article like 6 ayadbi).
Blass^ does not find this idiom so
common
in
Greek as
in other languages,
certainly in Paul.
Cf. in next verse
:
So
tI
but it occurs in Demosthenes and en Kayw <hs afxaprooXos Kpivoixai; (Ro. 3:7).
: :
See 1 Cor. 10 30; Gal. 2 18. In Ro. 7 7-25 special difficulties occur. 2. The Second Person, ah and vp.tts. Thus in Jo. 17: 5 note the contrast in /xe ub. Cf. Jo. 1 42 av el 1,lixwv av KXrjdrjar], 2 :10 av
^'\aa<})T]iJLoviJ.eda.
:
TeTrjpr]Kas,
eKcjiev^jl,
9
1
ttcos (tv
'IovSolos,
10
ci;
clp firrjaas,
Lu.
:76
/cat aii he,
etc.
Cf. also
Mt. 27:
is
11.
Ro. 2 3 on av Sometimes
:
av has a very emphatic position, as in
ci; tl% el
(Ro. 9
20; 14
4).
In
el
Cor. 15
36, a4)pwv, av 6
a-jrelpeLs,
it
possible,^
24).
though not
av e^ avrdv
Brute.
10).
necessary, to take av with
a0pcoi' (cf.
Ac.
In
nal
(Lu. 22
:
58) one
:
is
reminded
of the Latin
tI kôvdepels
ifxels
Et
tu,
:
See
ex-
Lu. 10 15; Ac. 23 3; rj Kai ait amples of the plural take eaeade
(j)a'ye7v
(Ro. 14
:
As
:
(Mt. 5
vnels
48), Sore aurois
VjJLels
(Mk. 6
37).
See Uelvos and

f.
contrasted in Jo. 5
:
38;
vnels in verse
39 and also in 44
v/jLets
:
Cf. Ac. 4:7; Lu. 10
24,
and
con-
in particular
o^peade
(Mt. 27: 24).

:
For
vfxets
and
rjiiels
In Jo. 4 35, ovx v/xeXs Xeyere, we have the same inclusive use of the second person that we noticed in the first.
trasted see Jo. 4
22.
In Ro. 2 In Jo. 3
phasis.
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.
:
10, av el 6 SLdaaKoXos,
we have a
:
case of distributed
1
:
em-
examples of this sustained emphasis, where the emphasis of the pronoun passes on to the remainder of the sentence and contributes point and force to the whole.^ On the whole the Greek language has freedom in the construction of the pronouns.^ Moulton raises^ the question if in av elwas (Mt. 26 64), av Xeyeis (27: 11), vêts Xeyere (Lu. 22 70), we do not have the equivalent of 'That is right,'
Cf. also
:
Mt. 16
16; Jo. 9
34; 2 Cor.
23, as
' * 6
2 w.-Sch., p. 195. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 316 f. Renaud, The Distributed Emphasis of the Pers. Pron., 1884. Bernhardy, Wissensch. Syiat. der griech. Spr., 1829, p. 45.
.
Prol., p. 86.
PRONOUNS
but
ir\r]v
('ANTfiNTMIAl)
in
679
(Thayer)
is
against
it
Mt. 26
64.
more frequently than
in all the Synoptics
20 occurs in John put together (Abbott,
Johannine Gr., p. 297). 3. The Third Person. It has had a more radical development or lack of development. As a matter of fact the Greek had and has no definite third personal pronoun for the nominative like I7C0 and av. No nominative was used for ou, ol, etc., and this pro-
noun was
though
ius use
originally reflexive.
kolvt]
Besides
it is
not used in the N. T.,
literary
it.i
writers like Aristides, Arrian, Lucian, Polyb-
Where another pronoun was desired for the third person besides that in the personal ending, various devices were
used.
6
fxkv,
The
Attic writers usually employed a demonstrative
(6 8e,
ovTos, tKttvos, OS bk, 68e, etc.).
The N. T. shows examples
of
these constructions which will be illustrated in the discussion of the demonstrative pronouns. But the N. T. uses also avros as
all
the subject, an idiom foreign to Attic writers, but foimd already in Homer 2 and common in the modern Greek, where indeed it has
come
to be itself a demonstrative.^
is
Simcox'' rightly remarks that
it has emphasis, but its appearance at all as the mere subject. All the personal pronouns in the nominative have more or less emphasis. The use of avros in contrast with other persons is natural like avros /cat ol /xer'
the main point to observe
not whether
avrov
(Mk. 2
25).
We
are not here considering the intensive use
of avros as 'self nor the use of 6 avros 'the same.'

'
There is "no dispute as to use of avros as emphatic he' in the N. T. like the Pythogorean^ (Doric) avros eâ. So Ac. 20 35 avros elwev, as much as to say 'The Master said.' Cf. the way in which some wives refer systematically to their husbands as "He." Other undoubted examples are avros yap auaei rov \abv (Mt. 1 21). Here the emphasis is so clear that the Revised Version renders: "For he it is that shall save." In Mt. 12 50 avros ixov d5eX</)6s is resumptive, gathering up oaris, and is distinctly emphatic. Cf. likewise avros
:
:
âirrlaei, referring to 6 epxoiJ.ei>os in
Mt. 3
11; 6
:
rrjpciv
Kai avros,
:
1 Jo.
3 24; ov av
:
4>CKriaio
avros eanv,
Mk.
14 44.
Strong emphasis
17).
also appears in examples like Kal avros eariv irpo iravrcov (Col. 1
: :
In Mt. 8 24 avros 8e and Mk. 4 38 Kal avros Jesus is the chief person in the story and the pronoun has emphasis. Cf. likewise Lu. 1 16, 17 24 21 Mt. 16 20. In Lu. 19 2 W. H. and Nestle
:
W.-Sch., p. 191.
* 6
Thumb, Handb.,
Pro!., p. 86.
p. 90.
Lang, of the N. T.,
p. 60.
Cf. C.
and
S., Scl.
from
LXX,
p. 29.
680
follow
in reading Kal avros twice.
Some emphasis
is
present
both times.
times.
In Ac. 7
21 (Rec.) the pronoun
avTov appears three
As regards Kai avri], the editors differ between this accent In and Kal avTT] in Lu.7:12; 8:42; 1 Cor. 7:12; Ro. 7:10. avri}. But H. in koL with agrees W. Nestle 16 Lu. 2 37; Ro. 2, There is in Lu. 2 37 avri] xhpo- may be a 'widow by herself.'^ no real reason for objecting to the feminine use of this idiom. The plural avTol appears in Mk. 7: 36; Lu. 2 50; 9 36. The
:
:
only remaining question is whether avros occurs in the nominative free from any emphasis just like the personal ending in a word. It is in Luke's Gospel and the Apocalypse^ that such instances occur. It is not a question whether avTos is so used in ancient
Winer ^ denies that any decisive passages have been Greek. adduced in the N. T. of such unemphatic use. Certainly the matter is one of tone and subjective impression to a large extent. And yet some examples do occur where emphasis is not easily discernible and even where emphasis would throw the sentence out of relation with the context. What emphasis exists
must be very
slight.
Cf. Lu.
:
22; 2
:
50; 6
8; 8
1,
22; 15
14;
24: 14, 25, 31; Rev. 14 10; 19 15. Thus we see all grades of emphasis. Abbott^ holds that in John auros never means 'he,'
either emphatic or unemphatic,
Jo. 2
:
but always
is little
:
'himself.'
But
in
12 (auros Kal
r]
ix-qrrip
avTov) there
difference
1.
between
inten-
the emphatic 'he' and 'himself.'

sive idea
is
Cf. also 18
But the
clear in Jo.
2, 12.
In the
15
f.; 1
LXX
we
find auros
might be either way. sometimes unemphatic. Cf. Gen. 3

In 4 53
:
it
(6)
1.
Sam. 17:42; 18:16. The Oblique Cases of the Personal Pronouns.

In pre-Homeric times the pronominal
reflexive form, as distinct
reflexive.^
Originally Reflexive.
stem was
The
from the per-
sonal pronoun,
was a
may
be reflexive in
other Lyric poets.^
The personal pronouns Hesiod, the Homeric Hymns, Pindar and the Indeed, the early Attic inscriptions^ show the
later
development.
same thing, not to mention the Dramatic poets and Herodotus.^ It was only gradually that the distinctively reflexive form came into common use in the Attic prose, first for the third person, and
1
3
B
W.-Sch., p. 195; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 164. Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 61. " Joh. Gr., p. 279. W.-M., p. 187.
D>TofF, Gesch. des Pron. Reflex.,
lb.,
1.
Abt., p. 16.
lb., 1. Abt.,
pp. 68, 75, 80 f. lb., 2. Abt., p. 1 f.
pp. 90
f.,
126
f.
PRONOUNS
then for the
first
('ANTfiNTMIAl)
681
of the personal
and second persons.
The use
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
Lu. 10:35), /3dXe aird aov (Mt. 5:29). See Ro. 15 16, 19. It is not necessary to split hairs here as to whether the reflexive idea is present. It is in perfect harmony with the Greek
(Mk. 14:28;
:
cf.
history.
2.
Indeed English does not
differ
here from the Greek.
and acfycov is noticeable. had long been the main pronoun In archaic and poetic for the oblique cases of the third person. forms the early use of ov and o-^Sj^ survived.^ In the N. T. avrov is the only form found, as in avTcou, avToh, avrov (Mt. 17 22 f.), kt\.
AvTov.
The use
of avrov rather than ov
As a matter
of fact, however, avrou
3. Genitive for Possession.
The
genitive of the personal pro-
noun
is very common as a possessive rather than the possessive pronoun or the mere article. In Jo. 2 12 avrov occurs twice, but once (ot d5eX0oO we do not have it. These examples are so common as to call for mere mention, as 6 -n-arrjp ixov (Jo. 5 17), rov Kpaârrbv
: :
aov (5:8), rbv KpajSarrov avrov (5:9).
The presence
of the personal
pronoun in the genitive is emphasis is to be put upon avrov even in its unusual position in Jo. 9 6, nor upon cou in 9 11, nor upon fxov in 9 15. See chapter on
: : :
not always emphatic.
Thus no undue
The
19).
Sentence.
:
See also krapas rovs
ocjidaXfJiOvs
avrov
els
rovs
fjLadrjras
avrov (Lu. 6
20),
rfj virofxourj vp.oou
Krrjaeade ras iî^x^s vfxojv (Lu. 21:

: :
See also position of pov in Mt. 8 8 and Jo. 11 matter of fact the genitive of personal pronouns, as is
the
KOLPT]
32.
As a
in
common
(Moulton, ProL,
out.
p.
40
f.),
has nearly driven the possessive
pronoun
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)
:
:
and
1
avrov (Tit. 3
5)
position of avrov
is
may be in the attributive position. The emphatic in Eph. 2 10 as is that of vpc!}v in

:
Cor. 9
11
and
4
:
ripciv
in Jo. 11
48.
The
attributive position of
:
ripcov
(2 Cor.
16)
and avrov with other attributes (Mt. 27
60)
is
enclitic
The first and second persons singular have and unenclitic forms which serve to mark distinctions of emphasis in a general way. We may be sure that when the long
>
not unusual. 4. Enclitic Forms.
lb., 2. Abt.,
pp. 69, 89.
682
NEW TESTAMENT
form efiov occurs some slight emphasis is meant, as in v/jluv re Kal kixov (Rom. 1:12). But we cannot feel sure that all emphasis is absent when the short form is used. Thus olKoboiiT)aw nov ttjp eKKXrjaiav (Mt.
With prep27). used as in ancient Greek except with irpbs, which uniformly has ne even where emphasis is obvious. 1 Thus bevTt wpos p.e (Mt. 11 28), koL av Ipxxi Trpos
:
16
18), iravra
fxoL ivaptbbdr] vird
rod Trarpos
iiov
(11
ositions (the ."true"
ones) the long
form
is
fie
(3
14).
:
Some
editors here
and
in the
LXX print
kixk
irpds
p.k.
But
in Jo. 6
37
to
Trpos ink is
the true text.
Cf. Trpos
also in P.Tb.
With aov the only difference is one of accent and depend on the judgment of the editor. It is difficult, if not impossible, to lay down any fundamental distinction on this point. On aov and oov see chapter VII, iv, 4, (a). Nestle has eônoXoyovixai 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
421
(iii/A.D.).
we have
except
clitic
when
there
is
emphasis.
But the trouble
is
that the en-
form seems to occur even where there is emphasis. The genitive of the third person can be used with emphasis. Cf.
avTcou in
(c)
Lu. 24
31.
See further chapter VI,
v, 4.
The Frequency of the Personal Pronouns.

differentiation
It is at
from the substantive, though the roots are independent of verb and substantive and antedate historical evidence.^ This pronoun came into play where the sense required
it.
bottom a
Thus Kal
5.
kTcdevres rds x^f^pas avTois aTre\v(Tav(AG. 13

is
3).
Cf.
Mk.
There
no doubt
is
of the fact that the
N. T. uses the prois
noun
in the oblique cases
more frequently than
true of the older
Greek.3
What
the explanation of this fact?
The Hebrew
pro-
once occur to one as the explanation of the situation and Blass accepts it."* The LXX shows a similar " lavish use of pronouns."^ But a glance at the modern Greek reveals the same fondness for pronouns, and the papyri abundantly prove that the usage belongs to the vernacular kolvt].^ Cf. apvyu tovs
suffixes at
6(l)da\p.ovs
y.ov
nominal
Par.P. 51 (ii/B.c), KajXTruvi
pvodajpevTrj
eduKa
ai'Tcc
O.P. 299
1
(i/A.D.).
Thumb
1.
suggests that this abundance of prop. 165.

2. Tl.,
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
2 ' *
Wundt, Volkerpsych.,
Bd.,
1904, p. 47.
Cf. W.-Th., p. 143; Blass, Gr. of Cf. also Simcox, Lang., etc., p.
N. T. Gk., p. 164. ^ Moulton, Prol., 53.

^
p.
f
84
C. and
S., Sel., etc., p. 65.
HeUen., p. 108
683
nouns is natural in the vernacular. Blass^ finds "a quite peculiar and tiresome frequency" of the pronoun in the N. T. This is only true in comparison with literary Attic. The N. T. is here a natural
expression of the vernacular.
vfxup
Thus
in Lu. 6
:
20 note avrov twice,
twice in Lu. 21
19, aov in
Mt. 6
17 as the reflexive twice
{aXtirpal aov T-qv Ke(f)a\riv Kal to irpoauirop aov vbpai). It is not necessary to go as far as Moulton does and deny that there is any Semitic influence in the N. T. on this point. It was here in harmony with the current Greek. Cf. Lu. 24 50 for three examples
:
of avTov (-ovs).
20.
(d)
Cf. ae
ae in Jo.
48.
For 01^6= 'it' see Ro. 7

waidiov.
In Lu.
62 abrb and avrov both refer to
Redundant. The pronoun was sometimes redundant. This was also a Hebrew idiom, but the vernacular kolvt] shows similar examples. The two streams flow together as above. With
participles note tQ 6k\ovrL
a(ê%
aurcS
avTOV
r}Ko\ovdr}aav
ddoaoj
(Mt. 5: 40), KarajSavTos
avTui (8 :23).
avrQ (8:1), efiâvTi avrcp els irXolov rjKoXoWrjaau There are besides the anacolutha like 6 plkccv kuI avT^ (Rev. 2
6 rrjpQiv
TTLu
ai'To
(Jo.
18
other examples.2
Cf also to ttottjplou 26) ov fxi] which does not differ radically from the Cf. also the redundant personal pronoun with
: . .
11)
the relative
ov
avTov (Mt. 3
:
like
the
:
Hebrew idiom with

rjs
the indeclinable
:
"im>,
12),
avTrjs
(Mk
But
15
17),
oh
avTots
'
25), ovs
avrovs
(Ac.
(Rev. 7:2).
is
this
idiom appeared also
in the older
Greek and
Xenophon and
il
Sophocles.
not merely Semitic.^ It occurs in Indeed in Rev. 17: 9, evrrd 6pr] oirov
yvvri KadrjTat Itt
much
(e)
like
avTwv, we have oirov in sense of relative pronoun modern Greek rod. For the redundant antecedent see
further under Relative.
According to Sense.
:
See also chapter X,
vii, viii, ix.
The
personal pronouns are sometimes used freely according to the sense. In Ac. 26 24, to. iroKXa ae ypdixnaTa els p-aviav irepLTpeireL, the position of ae is probably a matter of euphony and a case in point.
Somcitimes there
is
pronoun. meaning.
9),
The
narrative
no immediate reference in the context for the is compressed and one must supply the
1
:
avTC:v
So with avTov (Lu. (Mt. 11 1), a{)T6v

:
17), avTols
(Mt. 8
4),
aiJrcoj^
:
(12
(Jo.
20
15),
avTC>v (1 Pet. 3
kolvt].
14).
But
this is
no peculiarity of N. T. Greek or of the

all
It
is
common
at
times.
In Jo. 8
44,
xl/evar-qs
earlv Kal 6 iraTrip aiiTov,
the avTov refers to

aiiTots refers
'
\}/ev8os
suggested by
:
to Kbanov, as in Ro. 2
xJ/evaT-qs. In 2 Cor. 5:19 20 avrov has in mind aKp6l3varos

2
I.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 165. W.-Th., p. 148. Cf. C. and
Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 281.
S., p.
G5
f.
684

So
in Ac. 8
:
suggested by aKpo^varla.
5 auroTs refers to
Traidiov
ttoXlv.
In
Mk.
41
avTjj
follows the natural gender of

:
rather than
find a usage
the grammatical. But in Jo. 6 with the abstract collective tEv
39 avro agrees grammatically
6.
In Lu. 6
we
much
like
the original Homeric absence of the pure relative.^

avrov used with avdpcowos
Wvr].
We
28
:
have
/cat
much
:
as ov was.
In Mt.
46 avrols points to oxXoi'. (/) Repetition of the Substantive. Sometimes indeed the substantive is merely repeated instead of using the pronoun. 6 deos. This is usually due Thus in Jo. 11 22 we have t6v deSv would be ambiguous as in the to the fact that the mere pronoun it may be for the sake of Sometimes use of 'Irjcrovs in Jo. 4:1. avdpioirov (Lu. 12 rod emphasis as in 6 vl6s 8) rather than kyoi. sustained by the repetition of better is antithesis Sometimes Kocyjxov (Jo. KoayLw with Thus 9:5), d/xaprta the substantive. peculiarity of Greek. But this is no 5 (Ro. 12). anapTias dvT(ov\)|JiiaL). (KT-qriKal Pronouns Possessive The n. It is not merely the possessive relation (a) Just the Article. that is here under discussion, but the possessive pronoun. Often the article alone is sufficient for that relation. Thus in kreims
19 avTovs refers to
In
Mk.
Trjv
x^'i^P"-
(Mt. 8
18).
3)
the article alone

:
makes the
(14
:
relation clear.
47), rov a8e\(l)6u
Cf. also
rets
:
xetpas
(Mk. 14
46),
rrjv jiaxo-ipa-v
(2 Cor. 12
The common
use of the genitive of the personal
pronoun
is
not under consideration nor the real reflexive pronoun
like eavTov.
There is in the (b) Only for First and Second Persons. N. T. no possessive form for the third person. The other expedients mentioned above (usually the genitive avrov, avrCiv) are
used.
The
personal pronouns are substantival, while the posses-
sive forms are adjectival.

sessive exists.
In modern Greek no adjectival pos-
The
Just the genitive occurs (Thumb, Handbook, p. 89). possessive kp.bs and abs are disappearing in the papyri (Rader-
macher, N. T. Gk., p. 61). Originally the accent^ of ends was *e/ios. The forms rnxe-repos and vê-Tepos are both comparative and imply emphasis and contrast, the original meaning of the comparative.^ When these possessive forms oc(c) Emphasis, When Used. cur in the N. T. there is emphasis. But it is not true, as Blass*
1
Seymour, The Horn. Dial., p. 60. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 250. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 168.' Brugmann (Vergl. Gr., ii. 283) derives the poss. from the gen., while Delbriick (V, i. 213) obtains the gen. from the
2 *
poss.
Who
can teU?
affirms, that there
is
685
used.
See
I,
(6), 4.
The
no emphasis when the genitive forms are possessives do not occur often in the
N. T.
(d)
With the
article
:
For details see chapter VII, iv, 4, (d). Article. The possessives in the N. T. usually
save
t6
have the
kurjs
when
predicate.^
:
Thus
rj
enrj
(Jo. 5
30),
rrjs
(Ro. 10
1),
kfiSv
(Mt. 18
eûd (Jo.
20), to)
is
aw (Mt. 7:3),
31).
is
etc.
When
to. e/xd
/x?)
the article
wavTa aa
is
absent the possessive

ra ad
usually predicate as in
:
eariv, Kal
17: 10; Lu. 15

:
In
ex(^v
kuriv bLKaiochvriv T-qv eK vojjlov
(Ph. 3
9)
the possessive
attributive,
own, though the article comes later. In earLv Iva where the attributive use also occurs. But see Mt. 20 23. One may note vixC^v in predicate (1 Cor. 3:21). (e) Possessive and Genitive Together. Paul's free use of
a righteousness of
Jo.
my
34 we have
e/jLov
/SpcoAid
:
the possessive and genitive together as attributives

trated
is
well illus-
by
TO
k/jLov
TTvev/jLa
Kal to v/jluv (1
Cor. 16
18).
In
Cor.
MSS. vary between to v/jlcov mrkpyjixa and to vnerepov (BCD) mT. So in 1 Jo. 2 2 we have both Trept toou aixapTLwu i}nC:v
16
:
17 the
and
kiJifi
also
Trept
twv
rjneTepcov.
Indeed the genitive

21).
may
be in apposi-
tion with the genitive idea in the possessive pronoun.

xetpl
:
Thus
4
:
ttj
UahXov
(1
Cor. 16
Cf. 2 Th. 3
17; Col.
18; Jo.
14
24.
(/)
Objective Use. The possessive pronoun

This
is
may
:
be objective
24),
Tr]v
just like the genitive.
in full accord with the ancient
idiom.
So
Tiiu kp-r^v
avapLvqaiv (Lu.
22: 19;
Cor. 11
vpe-
Tepap Kavxr](nv (15:31), tQ vpeTepw eXeet (Ro. 11:31),

bibacFKoXlav (15
:
rriv rip.eTkpav
4).
Cf.
ttjs
vpoov TTapai<\r]aeois (2
Cor. 1:6).
The possessive, like the personal (g) Instead of Reflexive. pronoun, occurs where a reflexive might have been used. Thus TU) aw with KaTavoels in Mt. 7 3, aKOvoi to. epa TeKva (3 Jo. 4), eypa\}/a TV kpfi xî-p'i- (Phil. 19). The pronoun i'Stos is possessive, but is best
:
treated as a reflexive.
III.
vi)|JLCa).
the
The Intensive and Identical Pronoun ((t-uvtovos cLvtcoThe use of auros was originally "purely anaphoric."- As third personal pronoun it was, of course, anaphoric. The inis
tensive use
(a)
more emphatic.
Auto'?.
The Nominative Use of

ai^Tos
As already remarked,
Cf. aiiTos Kal
-fj
it is
not always clear whether we have the emphatic 'he' or the intensive 'self with
*
in the nominative.
n-nTrjp
Simcox, Lang., etc., p. 54. Monro, Horn, dr., p. 170. Jann., Hist. Ok. Gr., p. 351, calls this the "determinative" pronoun. On the whole subject of aitT6s seeK.-G., I, pp. 051 IT.
2
686

:
NEW TESTAMENT
avTov (Jo. 2
12).
ders
and numbers.
The intensive avros appears in all persons, genThus avros kyC-j (Ro. 7: 25; cf. kyui avros, Ac.
avrol vnels (1
10:26), avrol CLKT^Koanev (Jo. 4:42), bvvaaai Th. 4 9; cf. Ac. 18 15), avros
:
avros
(Lu. 6:42),
6 'Iwavrjs
:
(Mt. 3
4),
avrol Trpo^rjrai (Ac. 15

kirovpavta (9
:
32), avro to I3l^\Iov
(Heb. 9
19), avra to.
23), avra ra epya (Jo.
36).
:
The
ways
used.
Cf. avros Aaveid (Lu. 20

Tpo(f)rjraL
42), avrri
article is not alSdppa (Heb. 11

:
11), avrol
(Ac. 15
:
32).
Cf. eyu 8e avros, P.Oxy. 294
(a.d. 22).
In 2 Cor. 10
"E7co7
is
note avros kyu UavXos.
There
is
nothing
avros
particularly essential in the order whether avros eyo: or

(see above).
'ey<h
For a list of the vari(6) ous shades of meaning possible wtth avros see Thompson, Syntax of Attic Greek, p. 59 f. In Ro. 15 14 avros occurs with the first
:
not in the N. T. Varying Degrees of Emphasis.
person and avrol with the second in sharp contrast. In Shakespeare we have "myself" as subject: ''Myself have letters" (Julius
Caesar, iv. 3).^ Cf. Latin ipse. In Jo. 2 24, avros 8k 'Irjaovs, we have Jesus himself in distinction from those who believed on
:
him.
avrol,
In
Cor. 11
14
17
(f)vaLs
avrrj
is
'nature of
itself.'
:
Note
avrol diSare (1
Th. 3
3),
'ye for yourselves.'
In Ac. 18
will
15, 6\l/eade
we
find 'ye
by
yourselves.'
Each instance
:
vary slightly
ixbvos
owing to the context.

6
:
Cf. avrol (Ac. 16
37); avros
(Mk.
:
47).
On avrol fxev
ovv see
Ac. 13
4.
See d0' tavrdv (Lu. 12
57),
not
avrol.
(c)
Avt6<;
with Outo?. In Ac. 24

Cf.
els
15, 20,
:
the classical idiom avrol

17),
TrewoLdojs
ovroi.
occurs.
avro rovro (Ro. 9

1
:
avro rovro
(Ph. 1:6), avro rovro (2 Pet.

Cf. 2 Cor. 7: 11.
5,
accusative of gen. reference).

is
The
other order
found in
eypaxf/a rovro avro (2
Cor. 2:3).
(d)
Ayro? ALMOST Demonstrative.

it
In Luke avros
6 is
some-
times almost a pure demonstrative as
comes to be
in later Greek.
The sense Thus avrfj

rifxepa
of 'very'
rfi
or
:
'self
is
strengthened
to
:
'that very.'
1), ev avrfj rfj
copa
(Lu. 2
38), kv avrco rco /caipw (13
(23: 12).
tive sense.
The modern Greek freely employs Cf. Thumb, p. 90. Moulton (ProL,
this
demonstra-
p. 91) finds this
demonstrative use of avros 6 in the papyri. So avrdv rbv 'kvrav, O.P. 745 (i/A.D.). Moulton thinks that avros is demonstrative also in Mt. 3 4. See vi, (/i), for further discussion. It is not so common as the nom(e) In the Oblique Cases,
:
inative.
So
(cf.
avrols rots KKr^rots (1 Cor. 1
24).
Cf.
/cat
avrovs in Ac.
15
27
15 :32).
1
But examples occur even

Farrar, Gk, Synt., p. 35.
in the first
and
PRONOUNS
('ANTflNTMIAl)
687
:
second persons. Thus ejuoD avTov (Ro. 16 2), o-oD avrrjs (Lu. 2 35), avTovs riiias (2 Th. 1 4), e^ vficou avTcov (Ac. 20 30, probable text). Here the use is intensive, not reflexive. The same thing is possible with vnCov avToov in 1 Cor. 7 35 (cf. 11 13). But I think this This intensive use of avros with l/zoO and aov is found in reflexive. Attic. In avToJv iiixwv and vjxwv only the context can decide which
: : : : :
is
intensive
and which
reflexive.
Cf Thompson,
.
Syntax of Attic
Greek, p. 64.
Cf. e^ ahrdv tuv veKpoTa4>wv, 'from the grave-diggers

ii,
themselves,' P. Grenf.
(j)
73
(iii/A.D.).
Avt6<; Side
:
by Side with the Reflexive.

:
So
avros iavri^
:
(Eph. 5
27), avrol kv iavTo7s (Ro. 8
23).
Cf. 2 Cor. 1
9; 10
12.
The
distinctively reflexive
pronouns
avros.
are, of course,
compounded
.
of
the personal pronouns and The N. T. does not have avTOTaros
They
(cf.
will
be treated directly.
Latin ipsissimus)
Some
N. T. compounds
(Tit. 3
(g)
:
of avros are avrdpKTjs (Ph.
11), auroKard/cptros
:
11), avToixaros
(Mk. 4
28), avrorrrrjs (Lu. 1
2).
'O AuT09.
is is
The use
of 6 auros for identity ('the same,' 'the
very')
close kin to the original 'self idea.
Cf. ipse
Kvptos
:
and idem.
:
The idiom
frequent in the N. T.
:
Thus 6 avros
:
(Ro. 10
12),
39), ras avras dvalas (Heb. 10 11), and with t) avrri aap^ (1 Cor. 15 ro ahrb (Mt. 5 47), rCiv avrdv (Heb. 2 understood substantive
14), ra avra (Lu. 6
:
23).
In
it,
Cor. 11
rfj
tive instrumental case with
ro avrb
we have the associaBut in 1 Pet. k^vprnikv-Q.

:
we
actually have the genitive ('the
same
sort of), ra avra
rljiv Tradr]iJ,aro:v.
TV.
(a)
The Reflexive Pronoun
(avTavaKXao-TiKT] dvT<ovi)|x(a).
Distinctive Use. As already explained in this chapter under Personal Pronouns, the originals of the personal pronouns in oblique cases were also reflexive.^ Only gradually the distinction between personal and reflexive arose. But even so the personal pronouns continued to be used as reflexive. Hence I cannot agree with Blass^ that efxavrov, aeavrov, eavrov "have in the N. T. been to some extent displaced by the simple personal pronoun." It
is
Thus we have
and 18
\eyôp
:
rather a survival of the original (particularly colloquial) usage. 19 f. drâavplêre Vfxlv drjaavpovs, 5 29 f in Mt. 6
:
:
f.
/3dXe dTro aov,

fxov
kef)'
Q :2
17
/j-rj
(xaXirla-iis
efxirpoadh aov, 11
29
15
of
apare rbv ^vybv

.
.
VfJ.as,
27
8bs b.prl kfiov Kal crov,
18
iJieraî}
aov Kal avrov.

see d0t5co ra
Matthew has
irepi
rather
:
more
these survivals.
-Kpbdvixos
But
:
k^k (Ph.
23), rb Kar' tnk
(Ro.
J
15).
For
this
idiom in Attic see Thompson, Sijn1.
Cf. DyrofT, Gcsch. d. Pron. Reflex.,

Blass, Gr. of
Abt., p. 16.
N. T. Gk.,
p.
IGG
f.
688

This
is
NEW TESTAMENT
classic Attic
tax of Attic Greek, p. 64,
not indeed the

KOLurj) is
idiom, but the vernacular Attic (as in the

it.
not so free from In particular the third person presents peculiar problems, since
the ancient the editors.
MSS. had no
accents or breathings.
just alike.
The abbreviated
It is
reflexive avrov
and avTov would look

:
a matter with
See chapter VI,
iv, (/), for details.
Thus W. H. give
but in 14: 26
dparo) Tov aravpov avrov (Lu. 9

(Jo.
23),
but ovk
ri}v
ewicTTevev avrov avrots
24).
In Lu. 9
24 we have
^vxw
avrov,
rrjp ^pvx'fjv
eavrov.
For avrov as indirect
reflexive in Attic see
ThompIn the is not
son,
Sijntax of Attic Greek, p. 64.
Cf. avrw, Ac. 4: 32.
light of the history of the personal
pronouns the point
very material, since avrov can be reflexive also. The Attic Greek used to have So/coi ^jloi. But Luke in Ac. 26 9 has c5oâ enavrQi as Paul in 1 Cor. 4 4 says eiiavrcc ahvoiba. Old English likewise used the personal pronouns as reflexive. Thus " I will lay me down
: :
and
19
It
:
sleep,"
21,
lit
"He
sat
him down
at a pillar's base," etc.^

iv, 4, (c).
Cf. Ac.
twice.
See also chapter VII,
{h)
is
The Absence of the Reflexive from the Nominative.

impossible to have a reflexive in the nominative.
:
tensive pronoun does occur as avros eyo: (2 Cor. 10

likewise, as already
1).
The inThe Enghsh

:
shown, early
lost the old
idiom of "myself,"
51,
"himself" as mere nominatives.^

avrbs could
(c)
Cf. d0' lavrov, Jo. 11
where
The
have been employed. Indirect Reflexive.

cos
It is less
common
in the
N. T.
rravras
It docs indeed occur, as in the ancient Greek.

avdpCiirovs tlvai
So dekw
koI efiavrov (1
:
Cor. 7:7),
29).
avpeid-qaLV 8e \kyco oiixl ttjv
iavTov dXXd
rr]u
rod erepov (10

{xe
But
<jol
on, the other hand, note
kyw
ev
rc3
eiravepxtcrdal
jxoi
axo86:aco
:
(Lu.
10:35),
:
Trapa/caXaJ
avvayojviaaadal
(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.
arate forms very well.

21), aeavrui (Ac. 16
:
Here the three persons kept their sepHence we find regularly efxavrov (Jo. 14
Indeed eavrov never For aeavrov or aeavrov some MSS. read eavrov in Mk. 12 31; Jo. 18 34; Gal. 5 14; Ro. 13 9. In 1 Cor. 10: 29 eauroO=' one's own' (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 441; Prol, p. 87). There was some tendency towards this usage in the an28), eavrc^ (Lu. 18 :4).
stands for
ejj.avrov.'^
:
1 2

lb.
Dyroff, Gesch.
etc.,
Bd.
I,
1892, p. 19.
W.-Soh., p. 205.
PRONOUNS
cient Greek,!
('ANTflNTMIAl)
689
though the explanation is not perfectly clear.^ But the usage is clearly found in the Atticists, Dio Chrys., Lucian and Philost. 11.^ In Rev. 18 24 h aurf? is a sudden change from h aol of the preceding verses, but is hardly to be printed avrp, for it is not strictly reflexive. The same" use of avT-qv rather than ae appears in Mt. 23 37 and parallel Lu. 13 34. Cf. also
: :
Lu. 1:45.
But Moulton
{CI. Rev.,
Dec,
1901, p. 441, April,
1904, p. 154) finds in the papyri several examples of this "uneducated use of eavTov' for first and second persons singular, avyxcopw
(A^.
ixtTo.
TTiv
eavTov T\evTr]v,
cites tir'eypaxpa
B.U. 86
(U/a.d.).
Radermacher
T. Gr.,p.Gl)
eavrQ (Petersen-Luschan, Reisen
etc.,. p. 26,
n. 32).
Thucydides has a few possible examples and

is
certainly the Latin is
in point (Draeger, Historische Synt. d.
Lat. Spr., p. 84).
In early Greek Delbriick finds the reflexive

Cf.
referring indifferently to either person.
Thompson,
Sijnt. of
Attic Greek, p. 64.
In the modern Greek the singular iavrov occurs and second persons and even rod eavrov nov, first for constantly Cf. "myself," "thyself," "herself" emphasis. for aov Tov eavTov
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, Prol., p. 87; Robinson, Study of the Gospels, p. 114. The form avTov (Jo. 2 24), avrco (Lu. 12 21) is preserved in some 20 pas: : :
:
sages
(e)
by W. H. and Nestle. In the Plural. Here the matter
is
is
rather too
much
to say with
Simcox that
is
:
eaurcoj/ is
not in any doubt. It the only form
for the reflexive plural.
indeed true for the first and third 23 14). In 2 Th. 1 4 avTovs In the third rinds is intensive, as already shown (chapter VII). person also only eavTo:v occurs as in Mt. 18 31. In the second person plural a few examples of the reflexive vijlcov avTwv apparently
This
persons as
avedefxaTlaafxev eavrovs (Ac.
survive, as in Ac. 20
30; 1 Cor. 5 13 and probably so in 1 Cor. 7:35; vntv auroTs in 1 Cor. 11 13. But the common idiom for the second person plural is undoubtedly lavrwv, as irpoaexeTe eavrois There Cf. Mt. 25 9; Ro. 6 13; 1 Jo. 5 21, etc. (Lu. 17: 3). are some seventy examples of eavTcbv for first and second persons plural in the N. T. (Moulton, Prol, p. 87), as is the custom in the papyri, chiefly in illiterate documents. Cf. iVa yeivdoneda irpos Tols Kad' eavTovs, Tb.P. 6 (ii/B.c); I'm KOfxiac^neda to. eavTcjv, Tb.P. 47.
: : :
:
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 1G7.
Brut?., Griocli. Gr., p. 421.
Cf. Moistorh., Att. Insclir., p. 104.

"
W.-Sch., p. 205.
lb.
690
NEW TESTAMENT
p. 30)
The
LXX (Conybeare and Stock, Sel.,

and second persons
viitv
for first
plural.
We
has this use of lavTwv even find reflexive and
personal together like
eavroh (Ex. 20: 23).
The reflexive is used with or without the (/) Article with. article and in any position with the article. But curiously enough atavTov is never so found and e/iauroD only once in sharp contrast,
/zi)
^rjTCOV
t6
kfjiavTod <TVfj.(l)opov
dXXd to
ri^tco
tcov
iroWcbv (1 Cor. 10:33).
Instead of this reflexive genitive (possessive)

of the personal pronoun. TO bdpbv
(Tov
we have
the genitive
:
Cf.
t6v irarkpa nov (Jo. 8
49), aês
(Mt. 5
in
r-qv
24).
The examples
:
of eavrod are, of course,
abundant as
iavTOV
Toiis
eavrov avXrjv (Lu. 11
21), the
common
19
:
idiom in
the older Greek.

TroSas
:
But note
(Ac. 21
:
also the order to epyov eavrov (Gal. 6:4),

11),
8ov\ovs
eavrov (Lu.
13), Krjirov
These are all attributive, but the sense is not quite the same in the two last. The use of avrov in such examples has already been noted as in Mt. 16 24. Sometimes the MSS. vary between eavrov and avrov as in Lu. 4 24. The plural eavroav is likewise found thus, rov'i eavroov veKpovs (Mt. 8 22), rw Kvplco eavruu (Mt. 18:31), eavrCiv ra ifxarta (Mt. 21:8). See further chapter
eavrov (Lu. 13
19).
:
:
XVI, The Article. (g) Reflexive in the Reciprocal Sense.

does not really
differ in
idea from aX\r]\cov.
the ancient Greek idiom.

of eavrojv with aWr^Xoiv.^
(i/A.D.),
This use of iavrdv in harmony with The papyri show this same blending This
is
Cf. P.P. 8 (ii/s.c.) three times, O.P. 260
C.P.R. 11
3
(ii/A.D.) twice.
:
Thus we may note on

(Eph.5
:
Kplfiara
XT ned' eavTcov (1 Cor. 6

Ts eavrovs (Col.
:
7) ,\a\ovvres eavrots
19), vovOerovv-
16), etc.
Sometimes
it
occurs side
by
side with
xo-P*-"
aWrjXcov as
^bjievoi
if
by way
3
:
of variety, as in avexop.evoi aWrjXuv nal

:
lavTols (Col.
13).
Cf. also aXKriXuv
and avrom
in Lu.
23
12.
In Ph. 2 3 aWrjXovs
ijyovnevoL virepexovras eavroju
each word
retains its
(h)
own
idea.
Reflexive with Middle Voice.

:

it is
reflexive occurs
with the middle voice where

24,
really superflu-
ous, as in 8Lfxeplaavro eavrols (Jo. 19
LXX), where^ Mt.
27:
35
(free
paraphrase of
(Tit.
LXX)
is
irapexop-evos
2:7).
So also aeavrdv But usually such examples occur where

has only duixeplaavro.
practically lost, as in
r]yrip.aL
the force of the middle

(Ac. 26
:
kp.avr6v
2), apvriaaadco eavrov (Lu.
23).
On
Cf.
the use of the reof

the
flexive in
Pronoun in
hfiavrbv (Jo.
1
Anglo-Saxon see Penny, the English Language,

14
:
History
Reflexive
p. 8.
-KapaXrjjj.ipop.ai
xpos
3).
Moulton
Prol., p. 87.
{Prol., p. 87)
^
admits that sometimes

W.-Th., p. 257.
Moulton,
PRONOUNS
('ANTflNTMIAl)
691
eavTov occurs without great emphasis. This use of the reflexive with the middle may be compared with the reflexive and the
personal pronoun in the

(Ex. 6
self,"
:
LXX. So
\i\yLypoixaL efxavTU)
:
vnas 'Xaov enoi
7),
oil
iroL-qaere
vfuv iavTols (20
23).
So English
p.
"me my-
"you yourselves." chapter XVII, Voice. {%) The Use of "ISto?.

It
is
Cf. Thackeray,
191.
See further
This adjective
is
frequent in the N. T,
KOLvhs
/car'
usually' treated as
a possessive, opposed* to
especially (17 times) in
or
biqixbaios.
In the N. T.
we
find
it,
lUav
(cf.
Lu.
9: 10), in the sense of 'private.'
So
this sense occurs also in Ac.

: :
32 and Heb. 7 27. Cf. iStwrat in Ac. 4 13 (1 Cor. 14 16). Sometimes also the word implies what is peculiar to one, his particularity or idiosyncrasy, as 1 Cor. 3:8; 7:7 (cf. the classic
:
idiom).
But in general 6 tSios or tStos without means simply 'one's own,' a strong possessive, a real reflexive. To all intents and purposes it is interchangeable in sense with eavrov. The examples of this reflexive idea are many. Thus in Mt. 9 1; Lu. 6 41; 10 34; Jo. 1 41; 4 44, etc. The use of ol Ulol for 'one's own people' (cf. also ol
Cf. our "idiot."
(cf. lavrov)
the article
oimoi, 1 Tim. 5
8, classic
idiom)
is
not strange.
Cf. Jo.
11;
13
1, etc.
Moulton^
finds the singular in the papyri as a

to. t5ta
term of
;
:
endearment.
Ac. 21
:
The use of
'i5ta,
for 'one's
6) is
seen also in the papyri.
home' (Jo. 1 11 19 27; Moulton (CI. Rev., 1901, p.

:
440) cites rd
bis, etc.
B.U. 86
(ii/A.D.),
183
(I/a.d.),
:
168
(ii/iii
a.d.)
The papyri
So xpos
article
:
also illustrate Jo. 1
11, ol Ulol, for 'one's
relations.'
tovs l81ovs,
B.U. 341
idioLs
(ii/A.D.).
Examples withKaLpols
lS'lols
out
(1
the
are
Cf.
SeairoTaLs
(Tit.
2:9),
B.U. 16 (U/a.d.). Moulton, CI. In Jo. 1 41 Moulton^ rightly agrees with Rev., 1901, p. 440. Westcott in seeing in top Ulov an implication that some one else
Tim. 6
15).
ISlos
X670S,
:
went after his brother also. The only othsr point that here calls for remark is the question whether 6 Ulos is used in an " exhausted" or unemphatic sense. Blass"* finds it so in ets tov 'idiov aypov (Mt.
22
:
5).
Meisterhans
kolpt].
(p.
235) finds a few examples in the Attic

finds the
inscriptions
literary
and Dcissmann
weakened use
of
i5tos
in the
Deissmann'' argues further that this exhausted
sense
may
LXX
(Job 24
be assumed in the N. T. because some examples in the Moulton 12; Prov. 27: 15), etc., seem to occur.
:
Blass, Gr. of
Prol., p. 90.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 1G9.
* 5
2 6
lb.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 169. B. S., p. 123 f.
CI. Rev.,
Dec,
1901, p. 440
f.;
ProL, p. 90.
692
NEW TESTAMENT
finds that the papyri

is
beyond dispute
:
Lu. 6
41; Jo.
do not support this contention. Emphasis most of the N. T. instances hke Mt. 9:1; 41; Ac. 1 25; Gal. 6 5, etc. Moulton {ProL,
in
: :
p. 89) refers
with point to Ro. 14
5, kv rcD Ibiw vot,
as showing
t5tos
the equivalent of eavrov.
The N. T. passages may be assumed
to
show emphasis in spite of the later Byzantine Ibios nov (cf. iavrov nov in modern Greek). Moulton^ agrees with the Revisers in using 'own' in Mt. 22 5 as a "counter-attraction." The only difficult passage is Ac. 24 24 where B may be wrong. But is it not
: :
possible that
iSla
may have
a covert hint at the character of

:
For the present she was with Felix. In Tit. 1 12 note Ulos avTcbv 7rpo</)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 In modXpelav, B.U. 363 (Byz., Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 440). = or 'self,' kyoj 6 (Thumb, Handb., p. 97) ern Greek 6 i5ios 6 avTos (ii/s.c), in the papyrus of Eudoxus Cf. ttjl avTTJi l8los, 'I myself.' 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
Drusilla?
of the reflexive in the reciprocal sense has just been discussed
(cf.
personal pronouns as
reflexive).
From one
is
point of view
it
might
seem hardly necessary to give a separate discussion

pronouns.
of reciprocal
not exactly that of the mere 'AXXrjXop is, of course, reduplicated from aWos, one of reflexive. the alternative pronouns. Cf the Latin alius and alter alteri. The Latin idiom is common in the classic Greek and is found in Ac.
But, after
all,
the idea
2 12, aXXos Trpos aWov 'Keyovres; 19 32, aXXot aWo tl tKpaôV, 21: 34, aWoi ak\o TL eTe4>covovv. Cf. in the papyri aX\o kyo), aWo Tavres, B.U. 1079 (a.d. 41). But the true reciprocal dXXijXcoj' has no nominative and is necessarily plural or dual (in older Greek). It occurs 100 times in the N. T. (W. H.) and is fairly well distributed. We have examples 'of the genitive (Ro. 12 5 dXXiyXcov m^Xj?), the
:
ablative (Col. 3
13
avexo/xeuot. aX\T]\cou),
the accusative
(1
Cor. 16
20 aairaaaade aWrjXovs,
(Ro. 15
:
1 Jo.
ayairoJiJLev
oWtjXovs), the locative

:
ei'
dXXijXots),
the dative (Gal. 5
13 dovKevere aXXr]\oLs).
This pronoun In 1 Th. 5:11, TapaKoXeLTe dXKrjXovs kal oiKodofxeLTe els rbv eva, note the distributive explaining the reciprocal. Moulton (Prol., p. 246) compares the modern Greek 6 âs t6v aWov. In Ph. 2 3 note both dXXi^Xous
The
prepositions are used 48 times with aWrjXcov.
brings out the mutual relations involved.
and
eavTuv.
1
In
Th. 5
15
we have
ets
a\\i]\ovs Kal
p. 613.
ets
iravTas.
Prol., p. 90.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
PRONOUNS ('ANTKNTMIAl)
In 2 Th.
1
:
693
3 note
euos eKaaTou
and
els
a\\r]\ovs.
not, like the
LXX
(Ex. 10
23), use dSeXôs as
The N. T. does a reciprocal pro-
noun.
The middle
voice
is
also used in a reciprocal sense as in
avveôvXevaaPTo (Mt. 26:4).
Cf. chapter XVII, Voice. Pronouns (StiKTiKal dvTcovujJLLai). ('uriously enough the demonstrative pronoun, (a) Nature, like all pronouns, has given the grammarians a deal of trouble to For a discussion of the various theories during the ages define. see Riemann and Goelzer.^ Originally all pronouns were " deictic," "pointing." The "anaphoric" use came gradually .^ Indeed the
VI. Demonstrative
same pronoun often continued to be now

as
OS,
deictic,
now
anaphoric,
but later usually Indeed the anaphoric use blends with the relative. relative. Monro ^ marks out three uses of pronouns, not three kinds of pronouns. The "deictic" "marks an object by its position in respect to the speaker." Thus eyw, ah, 65e, oSros, e/cctTOs all fall under this
for instance, originally demonstrative,
head. The "anaphoric" pronoun "is one that denotes an object already mentioned or otherwise known." Thus the resumptive use of 65e, ovTos, eKeluos, 6s, oarts. The "relative" in the modern
sense would be only
As a matter of fact, and "ana"deictic" terms for practical purposes the two Greek and "demonstrative" Latin phoric" may be placed beside the (e). VII, iv, "relative." See further chapter 4, The demonstrative pro(6) Different Shades of Meaning. shade of meaning. the same have nouns do not indeed always
6s,
oans,
olos, oaos, etc.
They may point

position
(e/cetws),
out, as far or near {ode, ovtos, keti/os), as in ap-
known (eKeTvos), as already mentioned uses belong to the various deThese (resumptive ovtos, 68e)^ in the context. I do not care to will come out and monstratives pronouns (first, second, third personal the parallel with press the
as well
person demonstratives) as applied to 68e, ovtos, eKelvos. The pronouns had best be treated separately, not according to the special uses.
marians^
The gramword apdpov irpoTaKTiKov as distinct from 6s which to is the same word As a matter of fact 6, is apdpov viroTaKTLKou. as the Sanskrit sd {sds), sa, tad J The Lithuanian nominative sing(c)
'0,
77,
TO.
This was the simplest demonstrative.^
call this
17,
Synt., p. 763
f.
1
->
Monro,
lb.
Iloni. Gr., p. 1G8
f.
* s
Riom. and Goclzcr, Synt.,

K.-Bl.,
I,
i,
p. 779.
p. 603.
ii,
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk., p. 145. See Gildersleeve, Synt., pp. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 189.
216-226.
694
ular

was
td-s, td,
Tol,
NEW TESTAMENT
stead of
rat"
form, like der in
and the Greek nominative plural oi, at came "in(Brugmann, Comp. Gr., vol. Ill, p. 327). This German and this in English, was used either as
See Kiihner-Gerth,
Its old use
:
demonstrative, article or relative.
I,
p. 575.
6
One
der
is
not to trace actual historical connection between
and
(cf.
Brugmann,
Griech. Gr., p. 559).

(cf. aii 8e
:
was a
sort of
o-u 8e rl
personal demonstrative
in Lu. 1
t'ls
76).^
Cf. also Cf.
and
Brugmann, This substantival use is the main one in Griech. Gr., p. 428. Homer.2 Indeed, as a demonstrative it means rather contrast
rj
Kal (TV ri
(Ro. 14
10)
and uv
(14 :4).
than far or near like obe, ovtos, Uetvos, but after all 68e is nothing but 6 wdth the ending -8e. The demonstrative use of 6 is seen in Tous 6(701 in Agathias^ and tCjv 6aa in Maximus of Tyre.'* This demonstrative as antecedent to the relative (tous ot) appears in Justin Martyr^ and Tatian's Oration to the Greeks.^ Plato shows a good many examples^ (like t6v 6s, t6v 6(jos). We meet in Xenophon
and Demosthenes ^
Kal TO,
TO.
koI tov as
demonstrative, especially t6v

uses tov, t^s, tup,
if
kuI t6v, to
Kal
TOL.
The modern Greek

6,
r),
etc.,
as short
forms of
tive 6
is
avTov, etc.,
and Jebb^ pertinently asks

to as a
return to the earliest use of
pronoun."
Cf.
frequent in the comic writers.
"a The demonstraFuller, De Articuli

this is not
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.
amples in the N.
17: 28),
exists.
tive.
The oblique cases have only two exone a quotation from Aratus, tov Kal (Ac. the other tovs fxkv, tovs 8k (Eph. 4 11), where contrast 11 is demonstraIt is possible indeed that tov in Ph. 1
fxkv, TO. 8e, etc.).^''
T.,
Cf. also TOV
air'
:
apxrj^ in
:
Jo. 2
13 and
ttjv
in 1 Cor.
In Mt. 14 2 (Mk. 6 14) at is nearly equivalent to 'these.' In Mk. 12 :5 the correct text is oi)s ixkv, etc. But in the nominative the examples of this demonstrative in the N. T. are quite numerous. There are three uses of the nominative in the N. T. (1) One is the demonstrative pure and simple without any expressed contrast. So ot 8^ kpairiaav (Mt. 26 67), ot 5e k8l10
:
29.
cTaaav (Mt. 28
1
17).
In Mt. 26
57
ot Se KpaTr]aavTes
'^
we may have
p. 176.
Thompson, Synt.
Reffel, tJber
* *
^
Monro, Horn. Gr., of Att. Gk., p. 67. den Sprachgebr. des Agathias, 1894, p. 5.
Diirr, Sprachl. Unters., 1899, p. 27.
Cf. Gildersleeve's ed. of First Apol., ch. 5
and note
to p. 116.
6 ^
Otto's ed., pp. 24, 90. Cf. Gildersleeve, Justin Martyr, p. 116, for others.
8
9
Hadley and
Allen,
Gk.
Gr., p. 216.
V. and D.'s Handb.,
etc., p.
297.
i"
PRONOUNS
this
('ANTfiNTMIAl)
695
usage or merely the article. In Acts we often have oi ixh ovv in But this sense, usually with the participle (Ac. 1 :6; 8 :4, 40). even in these two examples there is apparently an implied contrast.
In Mt. 16
6 5e, etc.
to those already
6
iikv,
14 and Lu. 9 19 the use of ol be merely refers mentioned in an oblique case. (2) The use of This is no longer very frequent in the N. T.^ So
:
fxev ovTccs,
6 5e oCrcos (1 Cor.
7:7);
ol fxev, 6 8e
be,
oi fxh, OL Se
(Ac. 14 :4);
oi fxh,
aXKoi
6
erepoi be
(Heb. 7 20, 23); (Mt. 16 14 f.).

:
:
In Mt. 13
6
fjiev
23
we most
likely
:
have
yikv,
6 be,
oi be,
not onev,
6 be.
:
Cf.
Ro. 14 2 os fxev, 6 be. (3) The most common use of the demonstrative is where 6 be, i] be, oi be refer to persons already mentioned in an oblique Thus in Mt. 2 5 ot 5e refers to Trap' avTup. So in oi be (Lu. case.
(Lu. 8:5).
In Ac. 17
18 note nves,
and
in
23
to
is
21) the reference
is
:
to avrols, while 6 be in the next verse points

be refers
to avTov.
avTrjv.
In
Mk.
14
61 6
to
'l-qaovv,
as in Ac. 12
15,
ij
be
it
In Lu. 22
70
6 be
has no antecedent expressed, but

before.
call it apdpov viroTaKTiKov
implied in the
{(l)
elirav iravTes
"O?.
The grammarians
or relative.^
It did
come
to be chiefly relative, as already the Sanskrit yds, ya,
ydd has
lost its original
demonstrative
force.^
But
in the Lithu-
anian jA-s
t-va in
Brugmann {Comp.
Gr., Ill, p. 332) finds proof that the
pro-ethnic i-o
Homer = both
6s,
Homer
like
was demonstrative as well as relative. Cf. also 'there' and 'where' and then 'that.' In cis (ws), is now demonstrative, now relative, and was
This original demonstrative sense conrj
originally demonstrative.^
tinues in Attic prose, as in the Platonic

etc.^
b' 6s; /cat 6s
ov
jiev,
ov be,
6s
However,
ri
it is
not certain that the demonstrative use of
{koI 6s,
b' 6s) is
the same
word
as the relative.
deed finds it from an original root, *so-s like examples of this demonstrative in the nominative are few in the N.T. Thus note in Jo. 5 11 (correct text) 6s 5^ aireKpidr], and also 23. Indeed 6s bi] in Mt. 13 23 is close OS be ovK 'ekaêv in Mk. 15 But this verse furnishes a good example of this idea. to the same
:
: :
Brugmann^ inSanskrit sd-s. The
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
1
2), OS ixtv
yap
Kplvei
6s
be KplveL
(14
5).
So
Cor. 11
21.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 145.
"
K.-Bl.,
I,
i,
p. 608. p. 195.
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 185. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk.,
p. 68.
Cf. Griech. Gr., p. 241;
Comp.
Gr., Ill, p. 335.
696

I see
Instances of other cases occur also.

refusing to consider ov
:
no adequate reason
for
fxev ideipav,
ov 8^ cnreKTeLuav, op 8^ eXLOojSoXrjcrav
:
(Mt. 21 35) examples of the demonstrative 6s.^ Cf. Lu. 23 In the accusative plural note oi)s fxh, ovs 5e, Mk. 12 5; Ac. 27 Ju. 22 f. For the dative singular, w fih, u> 8k, note Mt. 25 15. 1 Cor. 12 8 we have w iikv, aXXco 8k, kt\. For the dative plural oh fjikv, oh 8e, 2 Cor, 2 16. In 1 Cor. 12 28 we have ovs as demonstrative without any corresponding ovs 8k. Cf. at
:
:
33.
44;
In
see
ixkv
fxh
ovv in
Ac. 8
in
(c).
4, 25;
11 19; 15
:
3, 30,
and
6 nev ovv in
Ac. 23 18 as
:
above
The
kv
relative at the beginning of sentences or para:
graphs, like
oh
in Lu, 12
1 (cf. avd'
uv verse
3),
may
.
indeed at
bottom be a reminiscence
English usage.
tences, as in
of the old demonstrative.

is
Cf Latin and
The demonstrative
11
:
often used to connect sen:
Mt.
25; 12
1;
:
Mk.
1, etc.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N.
In Mt, 26 50, k4>' 6 irapei, we may also have an instance of the demonstrative. But we do not have in the N, T.
T. Gk., p. 276.
Kal OS, Kal TOP, rbv Koi top, irpo rod.
finds demonstrative ocrSe in
Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 62) an inscription in Heberdey-Wilhelm, same that we have
Reisen,
(e)
N.
170.
"OSe.
Brugmann^
l-8k (?),
finds the encHtic -8e the
in 8e-vpo,
8r],
Mc, German "immediately near" in space or time,^ and is of relatively more importance than ovros. As a matter of fact 68e occurs only ten times in the N. T. In the LXX " 68e is much commoner than in
the N.
T.'.'
Latin quan-de. It corresponds to the Latin der hier, English this here. It refers to what is
(Thackeray, Gr. of the 0. T. in Gk., vol.
I,
p. 191),
especially in the
more
literary parts.
For
its rarity in
papyri and
inscriptions see Mayser, Gr., etc., p. 308.
It is already failing in
century B.C. (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 62). For Ta8e see chapter VII, iv, 4, (e). In Lu. 16:25 &8e is the correct text. In
the
first
Ac. 15
right.
23 rL8e
is
not well supported and in 2 Cor. 12
19
to,
8k is
:
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 Winer-Schmiedel^ this example is not considered as 68e used for ovTos, but rather like the classic 68e e7dj, ol'5e rifiels (cf. Ex. 8 25; Gen. 50 18). In Jas. 4 13, Topevaofxeda eh Tr]p8e ri}v tvoKlv, it is hardly necessary to take r-qvbe as like the classical rriv 8elva or Ty}v Cf. Kal rT]v (cf. Plato), though that is a possible construction.
:
:
So Thompson, Synt.
of Att. Gk., p. 68, n. 3.

"
2 8
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 170.

P. 216.
Thompson, Synt.
of Att. Gk., p. 65.
PRONOUNS
TToiriaoiiev
('ANTfiNTMIAl)
Plutarch^ seems to use
rriude
697
r-qvoe
tovto
fj
eKeivo in
verse 15.
in
merely means 'this' city which the enterprising Jew exploits for a year before he passes on
this sense.
More
likely in
James
to the next.
(/)
Oi5to9.
this
With
of so
Of doubtful etymology, possibly an original root combine 6, 17, t6=ov, av, tov. Then add ro-s, Ta.{ri),
is
uJ^
to.
In reality, therefore, ovtos

Ovtos
and to, Giles, p. 296). more often anaphoric than deictic.^ In Homer* it (deictic) expresses an object present to the speaker, but not near him. The word is limited in use in Homer and usually refers to what is previously mentioned (anaphoric).^ It is very common in the N. T. and on the whole the usage accords with that of the older
is
a doul)lcd demonstrative (combination It is like the Latin is-te (double also).
Greek.
1.
Naturally there
Deictic.
is
much
diversity in the context.
This use is not wanting. Thus in Mt. 3 17, OVTOS ea-TLv 6 mos fiov, the demonstrative identifies the one present as the Son of God. For further examples of the purely
The Purely
deictic use see

illustration)
;
Mt. 12
:
23; 17: 5; 21
37, 47, 54;
10
6
f.
:
(a particularly 3; 15
:
good
:
21
38; 27
still
Mk.
39; Lu. 4
:
22;
25, etc.
But a
plainer example
is
in Jo. 21
21,
when
to John as ovros 8e tL. The Contemptuous Use of ovtos. It is merely one variation of the purely deictic idiom due to the relation of the persons in question. It is rather common in the N. T. So in Mt. 26 61 ovtos i<t)-n we find a "fling" of reproach as the witnesses testify against Jesus. Of. Mt. 26 71 (parallel Lu. 22 56 koL ovtos), the maid about Peter; Mk. 2 7, the Pharisees about Jesus; Lu. 15 2; Jo. 6 :42; 9 :24; 12:34; Ac. 7:40, Jews about Moses; 19:26; 28: 30, the elder son at the younger; 18 11, 4, about Paul; Lu. 15 the Pharisee at the publican, etc. A striking example occurs in
Simon pointed
2.
Ac. 5
3.
28.
The Anaphoric Use. The pronoun here refers to one previously mentioned, as in Mt. 27 58 where ovtos alludes to 'Icoar]4> in verse 57, where note the anacoluthon. So in Hel). 7: 1 ovtos points to the mention of Melchizedek in the preceding verse. There are many variations in the anaphoric idiom. The simplest is the one already mentioned, where the subject of discussion is merely continued by oCtos, as in Mt. 3 :3 (cf. the Baptist in verse 1). In particular observe Kal ovtos, as in Lu. 8 41; 16 1. In Lu. 22 59
: : : :
* '
Quest, conviv.
lirtiK., r.riccli.
1.
(>.
1, TiyfSe ttjc r)txtpav.

ii).
Gr.,
242, 428.
p. 65.
*
''
Monro, Horn.
lb.
Gr., p. 170.
'
Thoinpaon, Synt. of Att. Gk.,
698

rather deictic.
NEW TESTAMENT
example
of the continua-
Kai ovTos is
A
:
striking
Here the prorepeated as often as is desired. So Jo. 6 42. Cf. the use of the pronoun because of prolepsis (Ac. 9 20). The more frequent use is the resumptive or epexegetical use which is rather
35, 36, 37, 38, 40.
tive ovTOi occurs in Ac. 7

is
noun
more abundant
:
in the N.-T.^ Here ovtos is really in apposition. In Ro. 7 10, 17 evToK-q rj els ^carjv avrr] eis davarov, we seem to have the resumptive use with a substantive. But a clear example (different
:
number and gender)^ occurs in Mt. 13 38, to 8e koXov o-xep/ia, One may note a similar use of eKeluos (Jo. 12 48; 16 13) and of avTos (Jo, 12 49). Another plain instance is in Ac. 2: 23,
in
ovToi eiaiv.
:
:
where tovtop
Ac.
7: 35.
refers to
:
'It]<xovv
ei'
(verse 22).
Cf. also tovtop (2d) in
In Ac. 4 10
tovtco is
resumptive referring to the pre-
ceding substantive followed by two relative clauses, while ovtos is In verse 11 again ovtos is continuative. In Ro. 9 6, ot e^ 'lo-paijX, ovTOL (cf. Gal. 3:7), the resumptive use is plain. The participle before ovtos is a very common idiom, as 6 de vwoneivas els reXos
deictic.
:
OVTOS
1
(Mt. 10
:
22; 24
:
13)
6 kfiâiPas fxeT' kfxov

:
ovtos (26
:
23).
Cf.
Cor. 6 4; Lu. 9 48; Jo. 7 18, etc. The participle, of course, often follows ovtos, not resumptive, as in Jo. 11 37. The relative is followed by resumptive ovtos as in 6s 8' av awoXeaii
~
:
OVTOS (Lu. 9
24), o deXu tovto
19;
Mk.
is
16; Ac. 3
plural
seen in Jo.
see Ph. 3
:
TavTa
Ph. 4
ravTa
:
20). So Mt. 5 Tim. 2 2. The 8 26, a raOra; also in Ph. 4:9. For ixTLva ovtol Ro. 8 7, and oaot 14; Gal. 6 12;
:
wpaaaw (Ro. 7 15
5
:
f.,
6; Gal.
17; 6
7; 2
8.
Cf. Winer-Schmiedel, p. 218.
See oTav
TOTe,
:
Kad6is
In Ph. 1 22 tovto resumes to ^77;^. In 2 Th. 3 14 tovtov is resumptive with ei tls as in Jas. 1 23; 3 2. Cf. also 1 Cor. 8:3; Ro. 8:9; Jas. 3 2.3 For eau tls see Jo. 9:31. Sometimes only the context can clear up the exact
(Jo.
:
28).
reference of the anaphoric ovtos.

17
So
in Ac. 8
26
avTrj
points to
656s.
4. In Apposition. See also chapter X, ix. Ovtos itself may be expanded or explained by apposition. The simplest form of this construction is where a substantive^ is in apposition as in 2 Cor.
13 9, TOVTO Kai evxofjLeda, ttju v/jlwp KardpTiaLv, where agreement in gender does not occur, Cf, the nominative 17 xto-rts in 1 Jo. 5 4. Cf 1 Th. 4 3. Ovtos is, of course, the antecedent of the rela:
:
tive
OS,
as in
Mt. 11
1
10;
Jo. 7: 25; tovto 6 in Jo. 16

p.
17.
In

lb.
3
65
f.
lb., p. 66.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 171.
:
699
5 /cat. Sometimes a clause is in apposition Ph. 2 5 note tovto with ovTos which may be either nominative or in an obHcjue case. Thus with OTL we have the nominative (with feminine predicate
noun), as in
11, 14.
avrt] karlv
:
i\
Kplas
on
(Jo. 3
19).
Cf.
Jo. 1
5; 5
9,
In
to ware.
Mk. 4 41, Tis apa ovtos kanv otl, The accusative with 6ti we have
:
the on
15
is
almost equal
in tovto 6tl (Ro.
2:3;
:
6;
Lu. 10
:
11; Ac.
24
:
14;
Cor.
12;
50; 2 Cor. 5
1
14; 10
9; 2
7,
11; 2
:
Th. 3
10; Ph.
:
1:6
{avTb tovto), 25;
Tim.
Tim. 3 1; 2 Pet. 1 20; 3 3, 8. Cf. also 5td tovto otl in Jo. In Gal. 3 17, after tovto Xkyo), we have the direct discourse without recitative on, but the quotation is really in the
:
12
39.^
accusative in apposition with tovto.

TTotTjo-cj-
Cf. also Lu. 12

:
18, tovto
KadeXco fxov Tas airodriKas,

otl (Jo.
and
16
:
Jo. 4
19).
17.
The
genitive with
otl
appears in wepl tovtov

Jo. 4
:
The
locative appears in
:
h
3
:
TOVTO) OTL, 1
9, 10, 13.
Cf. ev TovTco OTL (Jo. 16
30; 1 Jo.
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

inative, -KoQev
avTT] bk kcTLv
7]
is
that of ha.
1
:
Thus the nom43.
iioL
tovto
ha
eX0]7,
occurs in Lu.
is
In Jo. 17
11, 23; 5
is
3,
alcovLos fw?) Lua,
the pronoun
:
feminine because of
: :
the predicate substantive.
Cf. Jo. 15
12; 1 Jo. 3
3;
2 Jo.
15
6.
The
accusative as the direct object of the verb
seen
Jo.
in TOVTO TpoaevxoiJLaL
:
ha
13.
in
Ph.
9.
Cf
also TavTa
ha,
So
4
:
11, 17; 1 Jo. 5
The feminine substantive occurs

T-qv kvTo\i]V exotiev air'
in the
accusative also, as in TavT-qv
avTOv, ha, 1 Jo.

eis
21.
The
accusative
:
is
found also with prepositions.

:
ToDro, ha,
Ac. 9
21; Ro. 14
:
9; 2 Cor. 2
9; 1 Pet. 3
9;
6; 1
:
Jo.
3:8.
In Eph. 6
Likewise note ha tovto,
In 2 Cor. 2
this
3,
22 we have ds avTo tovto ha. Cf. Col. 4 8. ha in 2 Cor. 13 10; 1 Tim. 1 16; Phil. 15. eypa\pa tovto avTo ha, we probably have the direct
:
:
accusative, though tovto avTo could be adverbial accusative, 'for
very reason.' The locative appears in ku tovtco edoâaOr) ha, Jo. Cf. 1 Jo. 4 17. The ablative case appears in Jo. 15 13, ndôva TavTr\s ayaiv-qv ovSels exet, ha. In 3 Jo. 4 the ablative plural ha. The apposition in these various is found, iieLôTepav tovtwv
15
:
8.
constructions varies in degree of directness.
An example
:
of
ottcos
with
9
:
ts
avTo TOVTO occurs in Ro. 9

Cf. also cTeWo/xevoL tovto
17 quoted from the

in
LXX (Ex.
x^^pi-^
16).
ixTj
2 Cor. 8
el
20.
In
'
Pet. 2
19 note also the use of

where
it is
with tovto (though
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 217,
observed that elsewhere often
5tA tovto
points to
what goes
before.
700
is

el. Here the ei clause is in the same So in Jo. 2 3 we have eav in apposition
:
predicate), touto yap x^P's
case as tovto, nominative.
with In
TovTui (locative).
1 Jo.
2 the correct text has orav in similar apposition with

infinitive also occurs in apposition
ev TovTui.
The
with
tovto.
In
Heb. 9
8 the perfect infinitive in indirect discourse with the accusative is in apposition to tovto which is itself accusative, tovto
:
8r]\ovvTos
Tov TcvebtxaTOS tov aylov,
/jltjtco
TecftavepoJadaL
ttjp
ktX.
In
Eph. 4
\eyu)),
17 likewise
ixtjKeTL -jrepLTraTetv,
in apposition to tovto (after

it
:
is
in indirect discourse,
though here
in 1 Cor. 7
is
indirect
comiavTou
mand, not
Trapdevov is
is
indirect assertion.
But
37
Trjpeli^ ttjv
true in 2 Cor. 2
is
merely explanatory of tovto KeKptKev. The same thing 1, where the article is added to the infinitive
:
which
els
also in the accusative, eKpiva e/xaurw tovto, to

:
tir]
kXOeiv.
ein-
In Ac. 26
TOVTO.
:
16 the infinitive irpoxeLpiaaadaL

Cf. ovTws,
is
is
in the accusative like

infinitive in
avTtj,
Pet. 2
15.
The nominative
Kadapa
deKr][j.a
Jas. 1
27
2
in apposition
with
avTr] (dprjaKeia
(TKeiTTeadaL).
So
also note oOrcos eaTlv to
tov Oeov
(i)LiJ.o1v
in
1 Pet.
15.^
Cf. Ro. 1
12 where tovto
avvirapaKkyidrivaL
are
merely subject and predicate. In 2 Cor. 7:11 the nominative infinitive, to Xvwqdrjmi, occurs with aiiTo tovto. Indeed in Mk. 12 24 the causal participle is really explanatory of tovto (Slo. tovto irXapaade, jut) eiSores). It is possible to see a similar example^ in Lu. 8:21, d5eX(/)ot fxov ovToi elaiv ol ciKovovTes. Here in truth ovTOL seems unnecessary. 5. Use of the Article. The article commonly occurs with the noun when the noun is used with ovtos. The noun is by no means always necessary with ovtos. See 6. Indeed the demonstrative alone is often sufficient, as in Jo. 1 2, 7, etc. So avTol ovtol (Ac. 24 15, 20). In a sense a double demonstrative thus occurs, since the arThis is in exact accord with ticle was originally demonstrative. classic usage and calls for no special comment, except that it is an idiom foreign to Latin and English. The modern Greek preserves this idiom -with the demonstrative. So tovtt] tj yvvalKa, avTos 6 avbpas (Thumb, Handb., p. 92). It is immaterial whether
OVTOS
Tvos
comes
first,
as ovtos 6
:
reXooprjs
(Lu. 18
24.
11),
or
last,
as 6 avdpoi-
ovtos (Lu.
23
47). Cf.
Jo. 9
wnth the substantive, then the

adjective, as
17
When an adjective is used article may be repeated with the

:
xhpo-
(^vT-q
17
ttooxv
(Mk. 12
43), or ovtos
article.
the adjective, be brought \vithin the rule of the

*
may, like So tIs

17
For exx.
in earlier
Gk. and
literary
kolvt]
see W.-Sch., p. 217.
W.-Sch., p. 218.
PRONOUNS
Kaivrj avTT]
[77]
('ANTflNTMIAl)
701
viro
aov XaXovuhrj StSaxi? (Ac. 17: 19).'
Even
applies.
if
the
second article be admitted here, the point

not
made
still
The
predi-
position of ovtos with the article, oSros 6 rather than 6 outos, does
mean simply
But not
the predicate idea, though the position

T-fju
is
cate.
so
eôvaiau Tavrrjv diraaau in

ajipcârs.
it is
Lu. 4
6.
Here
p. 628)
the real predicate notion

the explanation
is
In Kiihner-Gerth
(I,
given that
either apposition (ovtos 6 avi]p =
'this, the man') or predicative sense (6 avi]p ouros= 'the man here'). Probably so, but in actual usage tlie connection is much closer than that. See Lu. 15 24, ovtos 6 vlos /jlov. Cf. the French idiom
:
La Republique
6. Article
Franqaise.
predicate explanation.
Gildersleeve {Syntax, p. 324) takes the See also chapter XVI, The Article.
stantives
in the
Absent. The article does not always occur with subwhen ovtos is used. When ovtos occurs with proper names
T., the article is present.
N.
6
So Ac.
Mcoucrrjs
11 ovtos 6
'Iriaovs,
19
26
HaOXos
:
ovtos,
1 ovtos
7 40 6 yap
:
ovtos,
32 tovtov top
:
'Ir](Tovv,
Heb. 7
yap
6 MeXxtcreSe/c,
except in Ac. 6
14
TtjctoCs
where the article is used with the adjective, not with 'Irjaovs. So uniform indeed in the Greek is the presence of the article with the noun and ovtos, that the absence of the article causes something of a jolt. In Ro. 9 8 the conjunction of the words TavTa Tknva must not deceive us. The copula koTiv must be supplied between. The American Revision indeed calls in the English relative to render the idiom oh to. TtKva ttjs aapKos TavTa TtKva
Nafwpatos
ovtos,
:
ToO deov.
rjTe.
Cf. the simple predicate use in

1
:
Cor. 6
11, Kat raOrd Tivts

is
In Lu.
36, ovtos
is
p.riv e'/cros
haTiv,
the substantive
predicate.
The same thing

hykveTo.
TO,
clearly true of Lu.

v/juv (nr]p.eiov
2:2,
:
avT-r]
aTroypa4>r} ttpcott;
Cf. also tovto
in Lu. 2
12.
but
in either case the
copula
is
supplied.
Some MSS. have 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

present.
Tp'iT-qv
L AV.
Winer^ considers the reading without the

able," since the
article ''unexception:
woman was
is
In Lu. 24 21 the predicate
accusative really
kyeveTo,
It
is
rnîepav ay a d0' ov raPra a common Greek idiom difficult to put into English. not 'this third day,' but 'this a third day.' Cf. also 2 Pet.
found,
TavTrjv
3:1,
TavT-qp devTepap ypacjio: eiriaTo'Xrjp.
In this instance the English

I write.'
translation resorts to the relative 'that' to bring out the predi-
cate relation, 'this

'
is
the second epistle that
In Jo. 2:11,
See Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 331, for thia "pseudo-attributive position." W.-Th., p. 110.
702
NEW TESTAMENT
tojv cr-qfxeloiv, even the American Revision has a wrong translation, 'this beginning of miracles.' It is rather
ravT-qv eirolrjaev apxrjv
'this Jesus did as
here have
tive
is
ttjv.
a beginning of miracles.' But }{ and Chrys. In Jo. 4 18, tovto dXrj0es eipr}Kas, the English rela:
again necessary, 'this
is
a true thing that thou didst say'
or 'thou didst speak this as a true thing.'
The
/lerd
oii
translation 'truly'
rather obscures the idea.

several difficulties appear.
In Ac.
5,
oi)
xoXXds ravras wepas,

xoXXds, does not
The
litotes,
:
fieTo.
have the usual order.^

sides a use of ixera
Tvaaxo- (Jo.
rifxepas jitTO.
Cf. Ac. 27
14 for
/xer' oh iroXv.
There
is
be-
12
somewhat akin to that of 7rp6 in 7rp6 e^ rj/jLepCiv rod 1)} The order would more naturally be oh TroXXds
However, the
ravras or oh ttoXKoop ijfiepwv ixera ravras.
predicate use of ravras without the article permits the condensation.

rect.
The
free translation 'not
It is literally 'after
not
many days hence' is essentially cormany 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 kkpaâ. 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.
:
:
fxara, rovro
Radermacher {N T. Gr., p. 92) cites rovrov -wpayixaros, ravra abiKi]KrfjiJLa from inscriptions in Magnesia (Petersen-Luschan, Reisen in Lykien, p. 35, n. 54) and ear-qaap rode uprjiia from a Bi.
thynian inscription (Perrot, Exploration arch, de la Galatie, p. 24, N, 34). Hence one had best not be too dogmatic as to Luke's idiom in Ac. 24 21. After all, the predicate use may be the original use, as with eKeXvos. Cf. Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 426 f.; Thompson, Syntax oj Attic Greek, p. 67. See also chapter XVI.
:
7.
OvTos in Contrast with eKeXvos.
The
distinction between 68e
what precedes* (not strictly observed in the ancient Greek) amounts to little in the N. T., since ode is so rare. But ovros does, as a rule, refer to what is near or last mentioned and eKelvos to what is, remote. See avrr] and ovros in
for
what
follows
and
ovros for
W.-Sch., p. 221.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
lb., p. 172.
2 3
N. T. Gk., pp. 126, 133. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk.,
p. 66.
2 Jo. 6
is
f.
703
oSros
and
tovto in 2 Cor. 13
:
9.
:
This idiomatic use of

In Ac.
plain in Ac. 7
T(2
ut'a)
19.
In
Jo. 5
20 oSros really refers to avTov
{eu
avrov)
and SO no
difficulty exists.
4:11
ovtos is
resumptive and takes up the main thread of the story again (cf. OVTOS in verse 9). In Ac. 8 26 avTij may refer to Taâv, but more probably (see 3, end) refers to 656s, a more remote substantive, indeed. In Lu. 16 1 again only the sense^ makes it clear {avOpui: :
7r6s Tts riv
-kKovglos 6s etxî' OLKOPOfjiov,
/cat
ovtos)
that ovtos refers to
oIkouo/jlov.
In Lu. 18
14, KaTej3r] ovtos dedtKaiccfxepos els top oIkop avTov
Trap' eKLPov,
the two pronouns occur in sharp contrast, one point-
ing out the publican, the other the Pharisee.

euros refers to the last
In such contrasts
clearly
mentioned.
(besides 2 Jo. 6
{Gr.
:
f.)
in the
p.
N,
T.,
one example which curiously enough Blass

This
is
of
N. T.
Gk.,
rovTio
:
171)
does not recognise.

:
Cf.
also
Jo.
13 24; eKelpos 38, and TavTa eKelvoLs in 1 Cor. and enelpos are used of John f both ovtos 11. In Jo. 1 7 10 of e/cetj'os we might have had idiom.^ Instead in proper and euros properly enough because of avTov, but Uetpos calls us back pointedly to Tcodi'T^s. Cf. Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 236. Note oSros 6 X670S 6 /xa^r/rrjs eKelpos in Jo. 21:23. In 1 Cor.
in Jo. 5
: .
for both the near
we find euros used The number and gender make it clear. In 1 Cor. 9 3 aur?? points to what follows. In a case like h tovtco xatpco (Ph. 1 18), the main thought is meant by the demonstrative. So with kp tovtco 5t5a)/xr tovto yap vplv
6
:
13, 6 5e deds Kal TavT-qp koI
raOra KaTapyrjaet,
and the remote.

:
<Tvn<i)tpeL
(2 Cor. 8
10).
Cf. tovto Ac. 24
14, etc,
8.
As Antecedent
of the Relative Pronoun.
The absence
of the
demonstrative pronoun before the relative pronoun will be discussed later.

is in the case of a possible pronoun and after it also. The resumptive use of the demonstrative pronoun after the relative sentence has been alSo ready treated. But^ it is "the normal correlative" euros 6s.
This absence
before the relative
euros Trept ov
(Mt. 11
10), cures 6v (Jo. 7
25), euros 6s (Ac. 7
40),
tovto
(Ph. 2:5).
See interrogative demonstrative and rela:
tive in rts iaTLv ovtos 6s (Lu. 5
21
7 49)
:
tL tovto 6 (Jo.
16
17
f.).
Cf. Lu. 24
17.
is
the relative
On the whole, however, not common in the N. T.
the demonstrative before
In Gal. 2
10 both avTo
and
TOVTO are incorporated into the relative clause, 6 Kal kairovdaaa

TTOLrjaaL.
aVTd TOVTO
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 171.
Blass,
ib.,
p. 172, explains eKtlvos as showinp; that tlio disoourso passes
from
p. GG.
John to Jesus.
But
iKtlfos refers to
John.
'
Thonip., Synt. of Att. Gk.,
704
9.

Gender and Number of
ovtos.
NEW TESTAMENT
In general,
See chapter X.
like other adjectives, euros agrees
with
its
substantive in gender
Cf. Jo.
and number, whether predicate or

1
attributive.
2:11.
In
Cor. 6
13, Kal ravr-qv
/cat
raCra, note the
number and gender.

to sense prevails.
earLv
rj
But sometimes the construction according

:
So the masculine, not feminine, in Ac. 8 10, ovtos So (TKeVOS 6/1X07775 kcTTLV IJLOL OVTOS (Ac. 9 IJLIS TOV deOV.
WvT] (Ro.
Avva-
2:14).
:
Cf. also Ju. 12, ovtol
15), OVTOL
and
:
ve4>k\ai,
8h8pa,
/cu/xara,
aaTtpes; 2 Pet. 2
4)
.
eXatai (Rev. 11 17, oSrot elaiv Tn^yal, and oSrot In these examples assimilation to the gender of the predicate does not occur. Cf. raOra rt, Jo. 6 9. In Mt. 21 42 (Mk. 12: 11),
: :
irapa Kvplov kyeveTo avTr],
the feminine occurs where the neuter would
be natural in Greek. This is a piece of "translation" Greek (Ps. 118 23). In Hebrew the feminine is the case for abstract words, the Hebrew having no neuter gender. In Eph. 2 -.8, ttj yap xaptrt
:
tovto ovk e^ vfiQiv, there is no reference but rather to the idea of salvation in the clause before. But in 1 Pet. 2 19 f we have two examples of the neuter (tovto) on purpose to present a more separate and abstract notion than avTT] would have done, an ancient Greek idiom, toDto yap TOVTO x^-p'-^ irapa deQ. In 1 Cor. 10 6 the same prinxapts el
k(TTe (Teecoa/jihoL dia TrlaTeoos' Kal
to
xio-recos in tovto,
ciple applies, TavTa 8e tvttol

is
rificov
found in
Cor. 6:11, Kal xaDrd
like TOLovTOL,
oSros see also Jo.

riyqpM.1
but more definite 12 34. In Ph. 3 7, artva rjp p.oL Kepdr], Tama ^r]fiiav, assimilation to the gender of the predicate is also
:
:
striking example Here raOra is much and emphatic. For this use of
eyeprjdrjcrav.
TLves rjTe.
absent.
Sometimes the plural raOra occurs where a

in mind.
single object
:
is
really
The
adverbial phrase
/lerd
raDra (Lu. 12
4)
can refer
either to one or
more
incidents.
It is
:
not necessary to consider

1
ravTa as singular in idea in Jo. 19 36 and
Cor. 9
15.
But the
xo-pt-v
:
usage does appear in 3 Jo.

xapav),
4, ixeiôTepav tovtcov ovk
exw
(or
and the adverbial accusative Kal raOra in Heb. 11 12. Some MSS. have /cat TavTa instead of /cat roDro in 1 Cor. 6 8. But assimilation to the predicate both in gender and number occurs. ireabv, ovtoI elaiv OL CLKOvaavTes. So in Lu. 8: 14f., to The same thing appears in Gal. 4:24, drtra (ttlv aWrjyopoviJLepaaSrat yap elaiv 8vo 5ta0r//cat. Note the assimilation of avTr] in Lu. 2:2; 8 11; 22 53; Jo. 1 19; Ro. 11:27; 1 Cor. 9:3; 1 Jo. 2 25; 5 3, 4, 9, 11, etc., and ouros in Mt. 7 12. See chapter XII. 10. The Adverbial Uses of tovto and Tama.
:
'
W.-Sch., p. 219.
PRONOUNS
Here we have
/cat
('ANTiiNTMIAl)
705
tovto (adverbial accusative or nominative ab:
'and that too') in 1 Cor. 6 6 11; Eph. 2 8 (this last could be otherwise explained). Kat ravra, the usual classical idiom/ appears in Hoi). 11: 12 with a concessive participle. In tovto fxeu,. TOVTO 8k (Heb. 10 33) Blass^ sees a literary usage. In 2 Cor. 2: 3 Paul has tovto avTo in the adverbial sense, while Peter (2 Pet. Cf. the adverbial 1 5) turns the phrase around /cat avrb tovto 8k. use of Ke({)a\aLov in Heb. 8:1. The case of ovtos in Jo. 21 21 is
solute) like Latin idque (English
(CD'' ravra), 8 (L Tavra); Ro. 13
noteworthy.
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

it
est.
There are
eighteen examples of
given in Moulton and Geden's Concord-
them from the Acts, Romans, Philemon and Hebrews. It is a mark of the more formal literary style. In Mt. 27 46 the case explained is the vocative, in Mk. 7 2 the instrumental, in Ro. 7 18 the locative, in Heb. 2 14 the accusative, in Heb. 9:11 the genitive, in Heb. 7 5 the plural, in 1 Pet. 3 20 the plural. In Ro. 1 12 the uncontracted form occurs with 8e. In 1 Mace, 4:52 ovtos 6 fj.rjv XaaeXev is in apposition with the genitive.^ Here ovtos performs the function of
ance, all but three of
:
tovt'
12.
'iffTLv.
Cf. the case-irregularities in the Apocalypse.
In Combination with Other Pronouns. Mention may be made of kv tovtco ovtos (Ac. 4 10) and other instances of the double
:
use of ovtos.
ovToos
Cf.
Mk.
2.
Cf. ovtos ovtco in
Mk.
7,
raOra
:
(Ac. 24:9), ovtus tovto (1 Cor. 5 :3),
and
in 2 Pet. 3
11
Paul (Ro. 9 17; 13 6; 2 Cor. 7 11 Ph. 1 6. Cf. 2 Pet. 1:5). For tovto avTo see 2 Cor. 2 3, avro tovto Ro. 13 6. For avTol ovtol see Ac. 24 15, 20. For tovto 6\ov cf. Mt. 1 22; 26 56. There is
TovTwv ovTws iravTwv.
:
:
Examples
:
:
of avTo tovto are

:
common
in
no
12
:
(lou])t
some
:
difference betw(Hni ravra iravra (Mt.
4:9; Lu.
first
30; 16
14)
and
is
ir^vra ravra
(Mt. 6
32).
"In the
ex-
pression, TravTa
iravra is
a closer specification of ravra; in the second, pointed out demonstratively by means of raDra."*
13. Ellipsis of OVTOS.
The demonstrative
is
by no means always
is
used before the relative.

(Mt. 10:27).
Often the relative clause

l'^Tj'
simply the
object of the principal verb, as in 6 X7aj
rjj
aKoriq. eXrare
expressed in the English translation.
Sometimes the implied demonstrative must be The simplest form of this

N. T. Gk.,
p. 171.
' *
Blass, Gr. of
lb.
W.-Sdi., p. 219.
W.-Th., p. 548.
706
idiom

is
where the case

:
of the demonstrative
would have been

:
the same as that of the relative. Thus avyyevris wv ov cnreKoxJ/ev Eerpos TO cjtIov (Jo. 18 26). Cf. 6v in Ac. 1 24. In Ac. 8 24 wj'
:
by attraction. But the ellipsis occurs also when a different case would have been found. ^ So in Mt. 19 11 oh bkboTai would have been ovtol oh 8e8. In Jo. 13 29 wv would have been preceded by ravra. Cf. also Ac. 8 19; 13 37, etc. In Ro. 10 14,
is
for rovTOiv d
TTws iriaTevacaaLv ov
om
T]Kovaav,
the antecedent of
is
ov
would be either
TovTU) (or
kirl
toutco)
or
more probably eh
used,
it
tovtov (preposition also
dropped).
Jo. 19
When
:
a preposition
ttojs
may
belong to the rela-
tive clause, as in
cf.
eTLKoXkacovTaL eh ov ovk ewiaTevaav (Ro. 10: 14;
37), or to the implied demonstrative, as in Iva Tiareva-qTe
eh ov
a-K'e(XTeCkev (Jo.
6 29).
:
In Ro. 14 21
:
ei/ c^
illustrates the prepit
osition with the relative, while in the next verse
illustrates the
preposition with the antecedent.
In Jo. 11 6 ej' ^ tottw is an 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
:
:
of suppressed antecedent applies to relative adverbs, as in riKdev

oTTov
rjv
(Jo.
11:32), strictly
k-eto-a oirov.
:
14. Shift in Reference.

ev T(3 iepQ rca
It is possible that in Ac. 5
20, XaXeTre
Xaw
Travra
to. p-qfiara ttjs ô^rjs rahr-qs,
a slight change in
sense has occurred,

eK Tov o-cojuaTos
raiiTTjs
rod Qavarov tovtov (Ro. 7
more naturally going with prj/jLara. Cf. 24). But the point is not
:
very material.
{g) 'EKivo<i.
Cf. Latin
ille.
The
old form (Epic, Pindar, Tragic
poets)
was
Kelvo^
or
ktjvos
(Doric and Lesbian).^

Doric, Lesbian)
Brugmann'* indeed
/co.
connects
it
with the old Indo-Germanic root

Ket-di,
The
locative
adverb
e-KeZ (cf.
Kel-dev,
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

it
not confuse
with
al vrjes
yonder are keimt (' those
sailing ahead'),
ships').
we must
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 He says: "The ordinary pronoun for the third the Greek N.T.
person
In Canton we also use k'ni. Compare eKetvos." is Wei. mentions other accidental similarities, but I dare not venture into Chinese etymology.
He
1
W.-Th.,
Cf.
ib.,
p. 158.

lb.
f.
lb., p.
426
f.
p. 169.
707
We have a few examples in the N. T. 1. The Purely Deictic. So in Jo. 13 26, e/ceTws ecmt' ^ 7cb /Sdi/'co to i/'coyutoj' Kal Scocrco avTU). for Judas was present at the table. In Mt. 26 23 we have oSros. A gesture may also have accompanied the remark of the Pharisees
: :
in Jo. 9 28, av
:
/jLadtjTris el
tKelpov.
Cf. also Jo. 19
21.
If eKeipo^ in
Jo. 19
35 be taken as an appeal to
God
as a witness to the truth
what the writer is saying (possible, though by no means cerusage would be deictic. Blass^ considers that "everything is doubtful'" as to this verse, a doubt shared by Abbott.^ For myself I think that eKetvos is here anaphoric and refers to
of
tain), the
avTov
(cf.
the similar reference of ovtos to avTov in
Jo. 5
20;
but see Remote Object). Another possible deictic example is in Jo. 7: 11. Jesus was not present, but in the minds of the people a subject of discussion. Cf. also 9 12. It appears unmistakably 2. The Contemptuous Use {d. ovtos).
:
(see 1) in Jo. 9
28,
ai; jua^Tjri)?
eKeivov.
It
may
also exist^ in Jo.
6 avOpoiiros in solemn repetition of eKetvos in verse 23. from ovtos Mt. 26 24, as well as the change this profrequent use of more This is the 3. The Anaphoric.
19
21.
Cf. the
with
noun.
Thus
in Jo. 1
:
eKe7vos
takes
up
ovtos of verse 7 {'lo)dvr]s of
verse 6).
fiadr]Tr]s
In Jo. 18 15
6 8e fiaOriTris eKelvos
resumes the story of aXXos
immediately preceding.
:
Cf. ciXXos
and
is
eKelvos in Jo.
43.
(cf.
In Jo. 13
Cf. Jo. 4
25
25.
eKeXvos refers
indeed to the preceding

2
tovtui
kKelvos ovTcos).
:
In Jo. 5
19 the reference
:
to raTepa just before.
'EKetvos 8e (Jo.
21) is continuative like ovtos.
The
So So
articular participle
fxe
:
may
6 Tk^J.^Pas
eKelvos Jo. 1
be followed by the resumptive eKelvos. Cf. Jo. 5 11; 2 Cor. 10 18. 33).
:
:
in Jo. 1
:
18 the pronoun refers to deos followed

:
See Jo. 14 21. For distinction 7 20 eKelvo. and avTov see 2 Tim. 2 26; 3 9. 4. The Remote Object (Contrast). This is not always true, as is shown by Jo. 18 15. Cf. Tit. 3:7. It is common thus to refer So in Jo. 3 28 (cf. Jo. 7 11) John to persons who are absent.
Mk.
by 6 cjv. Cf. between eKelvos
speaks of Christ in contrast to himself, aireaToXiievos elfxl enwpoadev ejxe. In 1 Cor. 9 25 note eKeXvoi eKeivov. So in verse 30, eKetvov 11 etre eyu} e'iTe i7M<S', 15 So in 10 11 eKeivoLS fiev riiiels 8e.
eKeivov, In Ac. 3 13 the contrast is sharp between vfxels vijlC>v in eKelvo^v (cf eKeivojv and in 2 Cor. 8 14 between iifiOiv In Jo. 5 39 emvai 11. eKelvois in Mt. 13 same verse). Cf vfuv
eKetvoL.
:
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 172.
Joh. Gr., pp. 2S5, 507.
Abbott,
of
ib., p.
508.
He
cites
illc.
Mt. 27
19,
03 aa exx. of the good and the
bad sense
tKeij-os.
Cf. Lat.
708
is

v/jLels,
NEW TESTAMENT
in the preceding verse.
in opposition to
as keTi/os to
vjiels
For a contrast between those present in the same narrative see oSros and ktTi'os in Lu, 18 14. Cf. e/cetws and auros in 1 Jo. 2: 6 and tovto eKetvo in Jas. 4:15. It is common in expressions of place, Uke 5td Tri% 68ov kKdv-qs (Mt. 8 28), eh oK-qv
Cf. 2 Cor.
:
8:9.
i)
rrjv yrjv kKtlvriv
(9
26;
cf.
ei^
9
kv
31), etc.
It is frequent also
e/cetmts
with
Cf.
general phrases of time, like
rah mepais
(Mt. 3:1).
a transition in the narrative and refers to something previously mentioned. Blass^ notes that Lu. (1 39) uses also raurais in this phrase and that in 6 12 D has ketmts rather than Tavrats. In particular observe the phrase eKelvr] rj vfxepa for the Last Day (Mt. 7: 22; Mk. 14 25; Lu. 21
: :
Mk. 8:1; Lu. 2:1.
It usually occurs at
34; 17
31; Jo. 16
23, etc.
Cf. Jo. 6
40, etc.).
5. Emphasis. Sometimes eKelvos is quite emphatic. Abbott ^ notes that in John's Gospel, outside of dialogue, bcelpos usually has considerable emphasis. Instance Jo. 1 8,> 18, 33; 2 21; 3 30;
: : :
25; 5
19, 38;
29; 8
42; 14
26; 15
John he observes that it but one refer to Christ. He is the important one in John's mind. Cf. avros in Ac. 20 35. But kelfos is not always so emphatic even in John. Cf. Jo. 9 11, 25; 10 6; 14 21; 18 17; Mk. 16 lOff; 2 Tim. 3 9. 6. With Apposition. It is not common with words in apposition. But note Jo. 16 13, eKeluos, to Tuev/xa rrjs aXrjdeias (cf. Jo. 14 26).
Epistle of
all
: :
In the First occurs only seven times and

:
26, etc.
Note
ovTos
1
:
also
keTw
OTL.
yLvcâKere,
on (Mt. 24
43) after the fashion of
with
Cf. also the resumptive uses with participles (Jo. except when Predicate. Wlien the noun the N. T., the article always appears, except In Jo. 10 1, ketws KXeTrrjs kaTtv, the substantive
:
18, etc.).
7. Article tvith
Nouns
is
used with
eKeXvos in
when
is
predicate.
predicate, as in 10
35, Ueivovs elirev Oeovs.
With
:
adjectives
we
may
note the repetition of the article in Jo. 20 19 and the ambiguous position of eKelur] in Heb. 8 7 due to the absence of diadriKr}.
:
With oXos we find this order, and Tras the same, irdaap ttjp
8.
ets oXrjv T-qv yrjv eKelurjv

o(f)LKr]v eKeivriv
(Mt. 9 26, (Mt. 18 32, etc.).

:
etc.)
As
Antecedent
to
:
Relative.
So Uetvos
kaTiv
c5
(Jo. 13
26),
kKeivov vwep ov
(Heb. 6:7). Note also eKe^pos koTLP 6 ayairCiv (Jo. 14 21) where the articular participle is the practical equivalent of a relative clause.
15) kKelvoLs 8l' ovs
:
(Ro. 14
9.
Gender and Number.

1
Little remains to be said
about variacall for re-
tions in gender
and number.
Two
passages in John
^
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 171.
Joh. Gr., p. 283.
mark, inasmuch as they bear on the personahty of the Holy
In 14
:
709
Spirit.
26, 6 5^ irapaKk-qTOS, to TPevfxa t6 ayiov 6
Tre/ii/'et
6 irarrip
roJ
grammatical ovSfjLaTi fxov, and reverts skips however, over irvevna 'E/ceTras, gender of irvevna. striking example more In 16 13 a irapaKXrjTos. to the gender of has tO aX-qdelas. Here one ttjs rd TrvevfJLa keiws, occurs, orav 8i e\6ji It is seven TapaKXrjTos. and to again e/ceTws six lines back to go
eKetvos vfias 5t5dêi,the relative 6 follows the
:
more evident therefore in this passage that John is insisting on the personality of the Holy Spirit, when the grammatical gender so easily called for kKetvo. Cf 6 in Jo. 14 17, 26 and avro in 14 17.
. : :
The feminine
pressed.
10.
kKeivrjs
in Lu. 19
4 evidently refers to 68ov unex-
Independent Use. The frequency of e/cetvos in John's Gospel be noticed, but the Synoptics and Acts are not far behind. More curious, however, is the fact that in the Synoptics hnelvos is nearly always used with a substantive (adjectival) while the independent pronominal use of the singular is almost confined to
may
the Gospel of John (and First Epistle). ^ All the uses in the First Epistle and nearly all in the Gospel are independent. As exceptions note Jo. 4
:
39, 53; 11
51, 53; 16
23, 26, etc.
On
(9
:
the other
6; 11
:
hand only two instances appear in the Apocalypse and both with substantives.
(/i)
13)
strative force as already
koivt] a demonand as is plain in the modern Greek. Moulton^ quotes plain examples from the papyri (see above). In the N. T. it is practically confined to Luke (and Mt. 3 4 perhaps), where it is fairly common, especially in the Gospel. So h avry rfj oLKla (Lu. 10 7), 'in that house.' Moulton^ notes that in Mt. 11:25 (parallel to Lu. 10 21) we have h eKeivco to) KatpcS and in Mk. 13 11 h eKdvri rfj wpa (parallel to Lu. 12 12 b> avrfj The tendency was not foreign to the ancient Greek and rfj o)pa). it is common enough in the modern vernacular* to find avrds 6=
Auto?.
It
has undoubtedly developed in the
shown
in 3, (d),
'this.'
{i)
The Correlative Demonstratives.

One
of
ej'cxêtdijs aurcS
the N. T.
<l)coprjs
Only four occur in them appears only once and without the article,
roiaade (2 Pet. 1
A^.
:
17).
It
has died in the ver6be,
nacular (Radcrmacher,
Toababt.
*
T. Gr., p. 63) hke
rriKiKoabe
and
Ttj'Klkovtos
appears once as predicate,
TTjXtâOra opra (Jas.
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). Gk., p. 172.
2
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N.T.
Prol., p. 91.
'
Ib.
"
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr., pp. 320, 351.
710
NEW TESTAMENT
3:4), elsewhere attributive. The article is not used. This correlative of age always refers to size in the N. T. (2 Cor. 1 10;
:
Hcb. 2:3).
(Rev. 16
ToaovTos.
:
18)
Once indeed it is and so redundant.

is
in connection with ovto:s fikyas
ToLovTos
The other two are tolovtos and the demonstrative of quality (Latin talis)
and
used with a good deal of freedom. It is, of course, merely and ovtos combined. The compound form alone occurs in the N. T. and became more frequent generally.^ TotoOros without a substantive is used either without the article (Lu. 9 9) or more
it is
Toios
usually with
the article in the attributive position (Mt. 19: 14; Ac. 19: 25; Ro. 1 32; 1 Cor. 7: 28; 2 Cor. 10 11, etc.). In
:
:
Jo.
23, TOLovTovs ^rjTet tovs irpoaKwovvTas, the
articular parti-
ciple is in the predicate accusative.
When
used with substan:
be anarthrous, as in Mt. 9 33; Heb. 7 26; 8:1; Jas. 4 16, etc., but the (Mk. 6 2; 9 37; 2 Cor. 12 3). In Mk. 6 2
tives TotovTos
: :
may
8; 18
5;
Mk. 4
article occurs also
al SvvafxeLs rota Drat (cf. ovtos, kKetvos).
It
we have the order comes before the substan:
tive (Jo. 9
16) or after (Ac. 16
24).
:
It is
used as the antece:
dent of
olos.
olos
(Mk. 13
19; 1 Cor. 15
48; 2 Cor. 10
:
11) following
6s
But note
:
also tolovtovs ottoTos in Ac. 26

in 1 Cor. 5
:
29, tolovtos
in
Heb. 7 26
P.Oxy. IV,
f.;
8:1, and
1 TOLavrr) ^tls.
tolovtos us in Phil. 9.
p. 3, 1.
Cf.
ttoTos
tolovtos
We even have
in
TocrovTos {tooos, ovtos) is the

size, ToaavT-qv TriaTLv
:
a Logion of Jesus, pronoun of degree

:
(Latin tantus), both
apTOL ToaovTOL (Mt. 15
33).
:
It occurs
(Mt. 8 10), and quantity, with the article only once,
6 ToaovTos tXovtos (Rev. 18
substantive, as in Ac.
Sometimes it appears without a 16). 5:8; Gal. 3:4; Heb. 1 4, etc. It is the correlative with ocros in Heb. 1 4 ToaovTw 20-22 Kad' 6aco, 7 oaov Kara, toctovto, and in 10 25 ToaovTc^ oaco. It is worth
: :
while at this point to note the correlative adverbs,

(Ac. 14
:
ourcos
:
w(tt6
wore
1), ouTcos cos (1
Cor. 4
1), ovtojs
owcos (Mt.
16).
Cf.
ovTcos 8e
(Ro. 15:20).
VII. Relative
(a)
Pronouns
(dvacjiopiKal dvTci)V\)|xCai).
List in the N. T. counting adverbs) are 6s,

the Apocalypse.
The only
relatives in the
ocrrts, olos, otto'los,
oaos, rjXlKos,
N. T. (not and 6 in
read ovrep in
critical text.
The others have fallen by the way. Some MSS. Mk. 15 6, while 6a8r]irep in Jo. 5 4 is not in the The LXX has owep (airep) five times,- but lyXkos not
: :
at all. These relative pronouns do not occur with uniform quency as will be seen. "Os is the only one very common.
1
fre-
Thack., Gr. of O. T. in Gk., vol.
I,
p. 192.
PRONOUNS
(6)
('ANTfiNTMIAl)
It
711
The Name "Relative."

also.
is
not very distinctive .^
The
and
idea of relation (anaphoric use) belongs to the demonstrative
The anaphoric demonstrative use to the personal pronouns The transition from demonrelative.^ the is indeed the origin of
strative to relative
6
is
apparent in
it is
strative
Sometimes and the relative apart.^ Homer often used re and tls with 6 and 6s to distinguish the relative from the demonstrative." Gradually the relative use, as distinct from the anaphoric demonstrative, won its way. The relative becomes then the (c) A Bond between Clauses. Indeed many of the chief bond of connection between clauses.
and
6s.
difficult in
Homer in the case of both Homer to tell the demonCf. English that, German der.
conjunctions are merely relative adverbs, such as cos, ore, ottcos, The relative plays a very important part in the structure etc.
of the subordinate sentence in Greek.
That matter will receive due treatment in chapter XIX, Mode. The agreement of the relative with antecedent in person, number, gender, and sometimes case,
is
just the natural effort to relate
more exactly the
two
These points will receive discussion under 6s which best exemplifies them. The assimilation is at bottom the same that we see in other adjectives (cf. demonclauses with each other.
The assimilation of the relative in person, gender, number, and even case of the antecedent may be compared to assimilation in the adjective and even verbs (comstrative pronouns).
pound verbs
especially)
and
prepositions.
Cf. Josef Liljeblad,

1).
De
Assimilatione Syntadica apud Thuc. Questiones, 1900, p.

"O?.
(d)
See discussion of the demonstrative 6s for origin.^ 1. In Homer. But already in Homer the relative sense, iipdpov viroTaKTiKov, is the main one, and the demonstrative is on the decline.^ Though 6s in the N. T. 2. Comparison with Other Relatives.
far
1
2
outnumbers
all
the other relatives, yet the distinction between
Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 81. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 556; Baron, Le Pron. Rel. et la Conj., 1891, p. 25.
notes that
He
Ss went from dem. to rel. before 6 did. Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. 186 ff. * Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 35. 'Oare survives in Pindar, Bacch., Ion. and Trag. choruses. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 68 f. " Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 195. Baron, Le Pron. Rel. et la Conj. en Grec, p.
35.
Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Ill, p. 295
f.;
Monro, Horn.
6s cf.
Gr., p. 186.
So
5s
yhp
is
ambiguous.
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 243. On the anaphoric
demonstr.
241.
Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., Ill, p. 310;
Brug., Griech. Gr., p.
712
05

relatives
is
NEW TESTAMENT
Indeed in the ver-
and the other

it
breaking down.
be questioned if it was ever .preserved. One may compare the unchangeable Hebrew ^^?'5<. Moulton ^ observes that in Poly bins the distinction between 6s and oarts has "worn rather
nacular
may
thin."
In the
LXX
6s is
frequent,^ but in the

It is
modern Greek
6s
"is used rarely even in writing."^
vernacular.
wholly absent in the modern Greek vernacular uses ttoD or 6tov. In The
the oblique cases the conjunctive pronoun rod, rrjs is added to ttov See Thumb, Handb., p. 93. Jebb (Vin(cf. the Hebrew idiom). etc., p. 303) calls it "a curious exDickson's Handb., cent and
ample
ried
it
of false
{Birds, 1300), neXr)

further.
analogy" and finds an instance in Aristophanes Here orrov^h oh. The vernacular carottov.
He
cites
modern English vernacular, "The men

: :
as he met."
Indeed in Rev. 2 13 birov really points to an unexpressed Trap' vp-lv. In Col. 3 11 oTov is almost personal. The occasional apparent confusion between 6s and interrogative pronouns will be discussed directly. On the whole, 6s in the N. T., as in the kolvt} generally, is still used in accord with the classic
idiom.
3.
With Any Person.

:
In
itself,
of course,
6s,
like all relatives,

:
has no person. So the first person in 1 Cor. 15 10, the second person in Ro. 2 23, the third person in Mt. 5 19; Lu. 6 48 f.;
:
:
Cor. 4
4.
17.
Gender.
These examples may This is not so simple.

fJLOU
suffice.
The normal
1
:
thing
is
for the
relative to agree with the antecedent in gender, as in 1 Cor.

Tinodeov,
OS eariv
ri
17,
rkKvov.
So
:
in Col.
24
virep
7}
tov acofiaros
KeâXiy (cf.
tcop
avTOV, 6 kcTTLV
eKKK-qcrla',
:
Col. 2
10
ei'
avTU), 6s kaTLV
Eph. 4
Rev. 21
15); Col. 2
17 aa^âroov, a (some
MSS.
6)
eanu aKta
fxeKKbvTOiV,
:
Rev. 5
6(j)daKiJ.ovs eTrra, o'L eiaiv to.
[eTrrd] irveufxara.
In
8, TO nepos avrOiu kv rfj \lp.v(i ttj KaLou'evrj irvpl Kai deico 6 kariv
6 davaTos 6 Sevrepos, the
agreement is regular, but the idea of 6 may be more inclusive than merely'' fxepos. Cf. 1 Pet. 3 4. On the other hand the relative is assimilated in gender to the predicate substantive. This is also a perfectly natural agreement.
:
Winer ^ considers that this is true particularly when the predicate presents the main idea. See Mk. 15 16, tyjs avXrjs, 6 kariv Trpaircbpiov; Gal. 3: 16, tw a-wkpixaTl aov, 6s karw Xpto-ros; Eph. 6: 17, rr]v iJ.6.xo.ipa.v
:
2 Thack., Gr., vol. I, p. 192. V. and D., Handb., etc., p. 56. "The disuse of 6s in common speech is characteristic; so simple a form ceased to satisfy the desire of emphasis."
1 '
Prol., p. 92.
Jebb
4
in V.
and D.,
p. 302.
f.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 231
"
W.-M.,
p. 207.
. :
PRONOUNS
Tov TvevfxaTOS, 6 kaTiv
irvevixara
pr^/xa
('ANTflNTMIAl)
713
deov;
a'i).
Rev. 4
5, Xa^tTraSes
:
a eiaiv
to.
iirra
(but
some MSS.
in
predicate.
a number of instances So Col. 1:27, rod nvaTrjplov tovtov 6s (or 6) kariv Cf. also 1 Tim. 3 16, where the true text 6s is changed XpLcrrds. in the Western class of documents to 6 to agree with iivarqpLov.
The MSS. vary between agreement with antecedent and

Cf. 2 Th. 3
17.
6 (MSS. 6s) kariv appaûv. See also Eph. 1 13 f ., tQ -n-jêu/xart So at or a in Rev. 5:8. In Mt. 13 31 f. kokkco is followed first by
:
and then by 6 (cf. airepixaToov) In another group of passages the change is made according to the real gender rather than the grammatical. Thus in Ac. 15:17 17), Jo. 6 9 iraibapLov os exet, Ro. 9 23 f TO. WvT] e</)' oiis (cf. 26 19 Ke(f)a\r]u e^ ov, Phil. 10 reKvou 6v, Rev. ovs, Col. 2 (jKdvt] eXeous 13 14 dr]plcp 6s. In Gal. 4 19 ovs is preceded by both y/xas and
6v
:
In 2 Jo. 1, eKXeKTjj KVpla /cat rots reKvois avrrjs, ovs, the grammatical gender (feminine and neuter followed by masculine) is ignored entirely. Cf. Ph. 2 15.
TtKvla.
:
In a passage like 1 Cor. 15 10, etît 6 etît, there is no mistake. See OS above in verse 9. It is not 'who I am,' but 'what I am,' not exactly olos either, but a more abstract idea than that. Cf. 6 in
:
Jo. 4
1
:
22, used twice for the object of worship,

orjv 6
God.
So in
1 Jo.
observe
aK-qKoanev, o ecopd/ca/xez^ (cf .
verse 3) for Jesus.

Cf.
One may
(Jo.
recall here that the collective abstract neuter, irav 6

:
37, 39; 17
:
2),
is
used for the disciples.
'6
Ka.KiivoL
(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
:
KaLv-qv 7pd0co vplv, 6 kdTLv aXirjOes,
'which thing
is
true.'^
6s)
So Eph.
eanv
etSw-
5, ir'KeoveKT-qs, 6
(Western and Syrian classes read

is
XoXdrpTjs,
'which thing
is
being an idolater.'
avvSeanos.
particularly good
example
Col. 3
14 where 6 comes in between a feminine and a
masculine,
ttju ayairrjv, 6 ecrrtf
In
Mk.
12
42 we have a
similar example, XeTrrd 8vo, 6 kariv Kodpavrrjs.
e<jTtv,
Indeed 6 kartv comes to be used as a set expression, like tovt' without any regard to the antecedent or the predicate, as Three phrases go together in this ecTLv viol ^povTT]s, Mk. 3 17.
:
matter, 6
ka-Tcv,
Ipfji-qveveraL,
6 Xe-erat.
The two
latter occur in
the periphrastic form also. Indeed the examples jusfc noted above may very well be explained from this point of view. So Mt. 1
23, 'EfJLuavovqX 6 taTiv nedepfirjvevoiJLevov
1
fied' rjixcov
6 deds,
where ob-
Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 302.
714

6.
serve the neuter participle like
Cf. Ac, 4
36.
ToXyoda
6 kariv Kpavlov tottos Xeyo/j-evos,
the participle
1
:
In Mt. 27 33, is masculine

:
like TOTTOS (cf.
Mk.
15
22).
In Jo.
.
39
:
Xeyerai iiedepurjvevo:
two vocatives. Cf 20 16. In Jo. 1 41 note the accusative and nominative connected with neuter participle, Mecrcriav 6 ecmv /j.eOepiJ.rjvevdiJ.evoi' XpLaros. So 6 ecmu occurs between verb-forms, as in Mk. 5 41; 7 34; or genitives as in Heb. 7 2; Rev. 20 12; 21 17; or whole clauses, as in Mk. 15 34. But see Jo. 9:7; Rev. 20 2. In Ac. 9 36, however, the personal connevov connects
:
struction occurs, Tafâdd,
rj
bLepix-qvevoixkvri
\eytTaL Aop/cas.
See also
chapter X,
sentence.
ovK h^dv
rjv
viii,
(c).
Once more,
o is
used to refer to a verbal idea or to the whole

:
Instance Mt. 12
avrui (payetv.
4, rous aprovs rrjs irpodeaeoos e4)ayov 5
Here probably to âyetv is the idea referred to,^ though in Mk. 2 26 and Lu. 6 4 we have ous. The neuter gender is only natural here. In Ac. 2 32 ov is most Hkely 'whereof,' though 'of whom,' referring to 'Itjo-oDj/, is possible. So as to 3 15. But there is no doubt as to Ac. 11 30, 8 koI kirol-qcrav;
:
: :
26
ds
10, o Kai eTTOiTjaa; Gal.
10, 6
/cat
kaTovdacra avTO tovto
iroLrjffaL
(note here the use of avrd tovto in the relative clause); Col.
6 Kal
KOTTLcio (cf. ets
29
6 in
2 Th.
11; 2
14; 1 Pet. 2:8).

:
Cf. also
Kal vfias dvTLTVTrov vvu o-cbfet fidirTiana (1 Pet.
see in the papyri 6v used
hke
6 after
j? 77
passing o 6 in Lu. 2
5.
15, like
re
3 21). Per contra analogy of tolovto{v)} Note in in Heb. 9 2.

:
Number.
antecedent in
Here again, as a rule, the relative concurs with the number, as in dcmyp 6v (Mt. 2 9), deov 6$ (Ro. 2:6).
:
The
construction according to sense

6
:
is
not infrequent, as in
:
xXtjôs
01 (Lu.
17
f.),
Kara ttoKlv iraaav kv
ah
(Ac. 15 36, note distributive

:
idea), ixwpoXoyla ^ evTpaTreXia a (Eph. 5
4,
where feminine singular
could have occurred because of

rkpav
v/juv ypd(f)0)
if),
Yevaas
ev oh
3:1,
(Ph. 2
15), 8ev-
kTn<jTo\i]v, ev
ah
(2 Pet.
:
Cf. 6 \eyovTas (Rev. 5 13). On the other hand note the change from the plural to the singular in riiJ.epaL 5a)5eKa d0' rjs
probably).
(Ac. 24
referring to both,
11),
and
kv ohpavols
(cf.
k^
ov (Ph.
3 20).
:
plural in the relative

see
o)v
:
TavTo) to cover a
:
in 1
k(f>'
26
12),
Tim. 1 6, df^' wj' Lu. 1 20, h oh Ro. 6 21, etc. Cf. Col. 2 22.
:
For the neuter vague general idea oh Lu. 12 1 (cf. Ac.

:
6.
(a)
Case.
Absence of attraction normal. The obvious way is for the case of the relative to be due to the construction in which it is used or to follow the same law as other nouns and pronouns (so
1
W.-Sch.,
p. 233.
Mayser, Gr.,
p. 310.
PRONOUNS (antantmiai)
with prepositions). That is to say, assimilation of case It was indeed in a sense an after-refinement. cessity.
is
715
not a ne-
not get the notion that assimilation of case had to dides/ for instance, did not use it so extensively in his rather complicated sentences, where the relative clauses stand to themselves.
One must Thucybe.
Indeed the absence of it is common enough in the N. T., outside of Luke. Cf Mt. 13 44 d7pc3 6v, Mk. 13 19 Krto-ecos rjv, Jo. 2 22 50), Jo. 4:5 x^p'i-ov 6 (CD o5). Tit. 3 5 epywv a, \6'Y<xi 6v (cf. 4 Mt. 27 60 ixvrineioo 6, Ac. 8 32 7pa0^s r]v- Not to be exhaustive, one may refer to the rather long list in Winer-SchmiedeP (Mt. 13 44, 48; 23 35; Lu. 13 19, 21; Ac. 1 4; 4 10; 1 Tim. 6 21; Heb. 6 19; 8 2; 9 7; 1 Pet. 1 8; Rev. 1 20, etc.). The absence of assimilation in case is not only common in the old Greek, but also in the LXX, the Apocrypha and the papyri. In Aristotle
.
: :
attraction
ler,
is
nearly confined to the more recondite essays (Schind-
De
Attradionis
((3)
Cognate accusative.
Pronominum Rel. Usu Aristotelico, p. 94). The accusative in Ro. 6 10, 6 airkdavev,
:
6
it
fij,
and Gal. 2
20, 5 fw,
may
be called adverbial.
Cf.
In reality
:
10 38 f. very common in the N. T., especially in the writings of Luke. The papyri, even "the most illiterate of them,"^ show numerous examples of attraction, "a construction at least as popular in late
reproduces the idea of the verb (cognate ace).

(7) Attraction to the case of the antecedent.
Mk.
is
This
as in classical Greek."
naturally vary sometimes,
This applies to the LXX also. The MSS. some having attraction, others not. Indeed Blass^ finds this "always" in the passages in W. H. without attraction save in Heb. 8 2. Cf. vv (rjs) in Mk. 13 19, 6v (w) in Jo. 2: 22; 4: 50, etc. On the whole attraction seems the more common. But this "idiomatic attraction of the relative" "occurs
: :
only twice in
Matthew
(18
19;
whereas
it
"is very
common
24 50) and once in Mark (7 13)," in Luke" (Plummer, Comm., p. li).

: :
pecuHar construction" was to give "a sentence more internal unity and a certain periodic compactness."^ No instance of attraction of a nominative to an oblique case occurs in the N. T., though this idiom is found in the ancient Greek.^
The
effect of "this
P. 226. N. T. Gk., p. 173. Moulton, Prol., p. 93. Attraction of the relative to the case of the antecedent is not unknown in Lat. Cf Draeger, Hist. Synt., Bd. II, p. 507. Horn. shows only one instance. Middleton (Analogies in Synt., p. 19) considera
1
Blass, Gr. of
analogy the explanation of the origin of attraction. ' W.-Th., p. 163. * Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 173. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 71; W.-Sch., p. 227.
716
It
is

usually the accusative case that
NEW TESTAMENT
is
assimilated into another

into the gen-
oblique case.
(Ac.
Thus the accusative may be attracted

(Mt. 18
: :
itive, as Tpajfj-aros ov
19),
X670U ov (Jo. 15
rjs
20),
ravruv wv
Cf. also
1:1; 3
:
21; 22
OOP
:
10), SiadTjKrjs
irvevfjiaTos
:
(Ac. 3
2.5),
eyraiTeXtas ^s
(7:17), Wvojv
(7:45),
ayiov ov (Tit. 3:6).

:
Ac. 9
6
:
36; 22
10; 1 Cor. 6
19; 2 Cor. 10
8, 13;
Eph.
is
8;
Heb.
f.
10; 9 :20; Jas.
2:5.
In several instances
is
it
the accusa1
:
tive of the inner object that

Trapa/cXiyo-fcos
rjs
attracted.
Cf.
Eph.
19
So
21),
TrapaKoKovneda (2 Cor. 1:4), x^Pi-TOS ^s kxcplTcccrev

rjs
(Eph. 1:6),
epyuv
K\r]aecos
eKXi'jdrjTe
(4:1),
4>o)Prjs -qs e/ce/cpaâ
(Ac. 24
There are examples also of the accusative attracted to the ablative. So k twi' KepaTiwv wv (Lu. 15 16), e/c rod vdaros ov (Jo. 4 14), oLTTo tcop oxpaplcov Siv (21 10),
do-e/Setas ojv rjae^yjaav
(Ju. 15).^
K Tov TTveviJLaTos ov (1 Jo.
24).
Cf. Jo. 7: 31.
Then again
the
in
assimilation of the accusative to the pure dative might have been
expected, but curiously enough I find so far no example of
it
an instance of the relative attracted from the accusative to the dative of an omitted antecethe N. T.
In
Cor. 7 39 there
:
is
dent, eXevdepa earlv
u)
BeXei yaixrjdrjvai, milcss jajjirjdrjvaL
be repeated,
when ^
mental.
iapq.
rj
is
the necessary case.

is
However, several examples occur
where the accusative

:
attracted to the locative or the instru-
ev rjiJiepa fi^kv (Mt. 24 50. This is not an instance of one preposition for antecedent and relative), kirl iraaLv oh (Lu. 2 20; 9 43; 24 25),
:
: :
Instances of the locative are found in
kv T(3 ovo/jLaTi aov
(Jo. 17
11
oj
f.),
:
ev tc3 ixvyjixari
(Ac. 7
fi
16), ev
avSpl
0}
(17
31),
eiri rcS
Xoyco
(20
38),
:
eTrt
rfj
aKadapalq,
d\i\J/e(nv
(2 Cor. (2
12
21), ert epyoLS ayadols
oh (Eph. 2
:
10),^ ev
ah
Th.
probably true also 6). eKXrjdr], where ijv would have been the of 1 Cor. 7 20, h rfj KXrjaeL cognate accusative.^ For attraction to the instrumental see -jrapaSoaei fi (Mk. 7 13), 86^ri 7/ (Jo. 17 5, but W. H. have ^v in margin), (Trjfieiots oh (Ac. 2 22), dvalais ah (Heb. 10 1, but W. H. as). In a few instances it is an open question whether we have attraction
1 :4), ev
Tw
:
TOTrjpico
c3
(Rev. 18
fi
This
is
or not.
Thus
03
in Jo. 13
5,
rw
XevTlco
(cf.
ui rjv
dceiôânhos, either
:
the in-
strumental
9 17,
:
or the accusative 6
fi
Jo. 21
7) is correct.
7]v is
In Ac.
ev
rfj 65a)
iipxov,
the cognate accusative

is
possible,
:
though
the locative originally

X0-P9-
more
likely.
In
Th. 3
9, eirl iraaj) rfj

(ijv)
xo-i-pofJ'ii',
a cognate accusative was possible

N. T. Gk.,
225)
p. 174;
attracted
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
Moulton,
Prol., p. 93.
But But
in
W.-Sch.
(p.
ols is
held to be essential to the structure.

Gr., p. 298.
For
attraction in
^
John see Abbott, Joh.
see per contra W.-Sch., p. 223.
PRONOUNS
to the locative or
('ANTflNTMIAl)
717
1
:
an
original instrumental.
In Col.
23, rod eu-
ayyeXlov ov riKovaare, either the accusative or the genitivie might
occur with
1
&kovo).
But
fxov.
in 2
Tim.
13, 'KSycov o:v Trap' e/xoO ijKovaas,
the accusative was almost certainly the original form.^

:
Cf. Ac.
4:
fjp
rjKovaare
Plummer (On Luke,

In Lu. 5
:
p.
li)
notes that this

:
attraction in
Luke
is
particularly frequent after was (Lu. 2

9, kirl
rf}
20;
(rj)
19; 9
43, etc.).
ay pa tuv
ixOvoov cou
(TvveXaôv,
the attraction in some
MSS.
is
to the locative, in others
to the genitive.
A few instances are found in the N. T. where the attraction is from some other case than the accusative. A clear case of a locative assimilated to a genitive appears in Ac. 1 22, ecos ttjs wepas rjs This is in accord with the ancient Greek idiom. The ave\rifx4)dr). very same construction appears in the LXX (Lev. 23 15. Cf. Bar. 1 19). In 1 Tim. 4 6 A reads StSao-zcaXtas TraprjKoXoWrjKas, but the rest have ^s. A dative has been attracted into the genitive along with incorporation and the preposition in Ro. 4 17, KaTtvavTL ov kiricFTtvcFev deov = Karevavrt, rod deov u) eiriaTevaev. So the phrase d^' ^s (Lu. 7:45; Ac. 24 11; 2 Pet. 3 4) is really an ab: : : :
fj
breviation of
d</>'
17/xepas
fj
(locative attracted
to ablative).
rjs
Ac. 20
18
we
actually have
dTro irpcoTrjs riiJ.epas d0'
eirejSrju,
In but
as a point of departure (ablative) rather than a point of location

6, 9) where the incorpoSo likewise axpi- v^ viJiepas (Mt. 24 38; Lu. 1 20; 17 27; Ac. 1 2) really comes from Ulxp'rjiJLkpas fi (locative to genitive) In Heb. 3 9 ou can be regarded as adverb 'where' or as relative 'wherewith' (marg. of the Ameriican Revision). If it is relative, cS was probably the unattracted form (instrumental to genitive like weipaaij.ov). In Mk. 10 38 f.,
(locative).
Cf. also d0' ^s
17/xepas
(Col. 1
.
ration resolves itself into d0'

: :
:
rifxepas
TO PaTTLo-fxa 6 /3a7rrifo/xai, the relative is in the cognate accusative
retained with the passive verb.^

(5)
See further chapter on Cases.

is
Inverse attraction.
What
called inverse attraction
is
due
to the
same tendency
is
to identify antecedent
and
relative,
only the
assimilation
that of the antecedent to the relative.
In
itself this
phenomenon
tion (Cleef,
no more peculiar than the other. Plato, who uses the ordinary attraction very often, seldom has inverse attracis
De
Attradionis in Enuntionihus Rel. Vsv Platonico,

inverse attraction
Gr., p. 13).
is
pp. 44-46).
No
found
in Pisidian
Greek
(Compernass,
De Serm.
N.
T.,
The examples
are not very
numerous
'
in the
but the ancient Greek amply supports the

2
W.-Sch., p. 225. Hort in note to text says: "up probably a primitive

Cf. W.-Sch., p. 22G
f.
error for 6^."
718
idiom. ^

One example,
:
XlOov 6u aireSoKlnaaav, occurs in
Mt. 21:42;
:
Mk.
12
2
10; Lu. 20
:
17.
It is
from the
LXX
1
:
(Ps. 118
22).
In
Cor.
I Pet.
W. H.
read
Xidos.
Cf. also Lu.
73, opKov ov wnoaev,
which might have been

10
:
opKov ov after ixvrjadrivai?
See also
16, Tov apTOV ov

If 6p is
KXcoiJiev,
Hence
also to ttottjplov 6 evXoyovfJLev of
verse 15.
a part of the text (not
W.
H.) in Ac. 10
36,
we
have
TOV \6yov 6v.^
prjua apyov 6
Lu. 12
dkSoiKev
10;
Sometimes anacoluthon occurs also as in rav Trept avTOV, Mt. 12 dêîjcrerat aurcS, 36; ttSs 6s kpel ^rjTrjdrjaeTai Tap' avTov, 12 Travrl & edodi] 48; Trat" o
:
e^
avrov, Jo. 6
39;
irav 6 8e8coKas avT(Jo
bwaei avTols, 17
2.
5t' avTod, we have anacoluthon, but In 2 Cor. 12 17, juiy Tuva wv not attraction. In Mt. 25 24, crwayeLs odev ov bieaKopiriaas, we have eKtWev otov shortened to 69ev. There is not inverse attrac:
tion in ov8eh
(e)
6s (1
Cor. 6
5) since
evt,
precedes
ovoels.
But the most striking instance of this close unity between antecedent and relative is the incorporation of the
Incorporation.
antecedent into the relative clause with identity of case. I count 54 such examples in Moulton and Geden.^ They are fairly well
distributed through the different portions of the
1)
The
is
simplest form of such incorporation
is
New Testament. where no change of

kv
case
required.
Thus Lu. 24
icai
1,
(pepovaai a riToinaaav apdofxaTa; Jo.
14, idovTes a eToirjaev arjfxela

kv
co
:
(W. H.); Mt. 7:2,
^ yap
KpifxaTi
:
KplveTe KpiQ-qaeade,
[JLerpui
fieTpeire /xeTprid-qaeTaL vplv,
Mk. 4
24; Lu. 6
38;
Mt. 24
13
:
44, y oh bonetTe wpa (but see per contra

this simple incorporation see
6v
24
50).
:
For further examples of
Mt. 23
37=Lu.
:
34 (the set phrase, adverbial accusative,

:
TpoTov), so also Ac. 1
11; 7: 28; 15
:
11; 27: 25;

:
Mk.
:
19 {6aov
:
40 (but note 12 46); 17 29 f.; Jo. 6 14; 9 14; 20; 25 18; probably 26 7; Ro. 2 16; 7 19; 9 24 (ous was note); 16 2; Ph. 3 18 (but probably only predicate accusative like Mk. 15 12); 2 Tim. 1:6 (5t' riv). In 1 Jo. 2 25 there is not exactly incorporation, but apposition to the relative. In Lu. 8 47; Ac. 22 24 and Heb. 2 11 the case is the same also, but the preposition would have been needed only with the relative. Cf. Phil. 10; 2 Tim. 1 12; Heb. 13: 11. See Siv Trov7]pccv, Ac. 25 18, where there is incorporation and
XPovov); Lu. 12
II
6; 17
:
3; Ac. 7
attraction to the case of the antecedent.

1
The same
thing
is
true
Cf.
Thompson, Synt.
of Att. Gk., p.
7L
2 '
N. T. Gk., p. 175. Cf. Blass, ib., and Comm. on Acts in loco. This is more than "occasional," as Blass says (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 174).
Blass, Gr. of
He
rightly notes the absence of the article.

PRONOUNS
of
cov
('ANTflNTMIAl)
agrees with &V.
is
.
719
In Heb, 13
:
Rev. 17
cbcoj'
f strative
TovToov, the substantive

is
8,
where
^'KTr6vT0)v
11,
incorporated, but the
demon-
avro tovto (Gal. 2:10). repeated afterwards. Cf also 6 It is possible that Ro. 4: 17 belongs here, the preposition KarkvavTi being understood twice. The same thing may be true of Lu. 1 4,
:
wv KaTTjxvdv^ \6yoov ttjv da4>a\eLau (either \6'Ywv [or irepl \6yo)v] wepl S)v or Trept Xoywv ovs). 2) But sometimes besides incorporation there has resulted a
Trept
change of case
also.
.
of the relative (cf
The antecedent may be drawn into the inverse attraction) as in Mk. 6 16, ov eycb
:
case
aire-
Here the demonstrative pronoun is Ke(f)a\Laa 'Icodi'rjj/ euros r]yepdr]. resumptive. The change is made from nominative to accusative.
The same
8r]iroTe
true of the spurious passage in Jo. 5 4, w KarelxeTo voar]iJ.aTL (change from genitive to instrumental).
thing
is
This
croivi
is
probably true of Ac. 21:

KuTrptw.
16, ayovres Trap'
<S
êvLaQuîxev
is
Mw-
rivL
it
The
Trpos
resolution of this passage

Trap'
not certain,
but
may
be ayovres Mmo-com
to locative).^
But
Mmo-a?m
els
may
cS (change from accusative be correct.
In Ro. 6:17, VTr-qKOvaare form would probably be

:
ov Tape86dr]Te tvttov didaxrjs, the resolved
tuttco
5i5ax^s
els
6v -Kapebbd-qTe.
In Heb.
7 14, els Tjv 4>vKi]v, the substantive would have been in apposition with e^ 'lovSa (the ablative). In Heb. 10 10 et- w de^wart. the accusative TO OeKrjfxa is present in the preceding sentence. The same
:
thing
is
true of 1 Pet.
:
10, vrept
tjs
aojT-qplas {cnoTTjpiav
just before).
re-
In 2 Cor. 10
13
we have
in the
same sentence the substantive
peated (once incorporated and attracted to the case of the relative, but the relative itself attracted to the case of Kavbvos), /card to êTpov
Tov Kavbvos ov
ep-kpLCfev tjijuv 6 Qebs jxeTpou.
3) In a few instances the attraction has been that of the relative to the case of the antecedent, transferred to the relative clause. See Ac. 25 18, wv eydi virevbow irov-qpciv. For examples with prepo:
sitions (see chapter

irovqpobv
on Prepositions) note
only partial.
Trept to-vtoiv o)v eiroirjaev

*.
(Lu. 3
19), Trepl Taacbv oav el8ov bwap-ewv (19

is
37),
where
the incorporation
quired.
rjixepa,
It is clear therefore that in
the great majority of instances there is no change of case reVery many also are set phrases Hke by Tpbirov, fj upa, fj
5i'
f.
?]v
atrtai^,
etc.
For presence
of the antecedent see Jo.
16
17
7.
tive has
1
Absence of Antecedent. It so often happens that the relano antecedent that it calls for special consideration.
(Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 71
f.)
Thompson
finds this
change only in the ace.
But
this is not Attic.
720
NEW TESTAMENT
The
10
:
adjective clause.
14;
clause indeed often becomes a substantive rather than an "Os thus occurs in general statements as in Mt.
Lu. 12 48; 14 33; Ac. 2 21; Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 173) gives a large number of such instances of the general or indefinite use of os. So os ex"
: : :
23
16, 18 (cf. also Tras 6s,
Gal. 3
10).
S}Ta cLKoveLv cLKoveTO)
(Mk. 4:
is
9),
where the relative clause

Cf.
(if
is
the sub:
ject of
d/couerco.
This
the indefinite relative.
Mk. 4
:
25.
Here the
relative
and the antecedent

Cf. 1 Cor. 15
:
expressed) are in the

elfil
same
(Mk.
:
case (nominative).
10,
6 dixt;
Lu. 9
50, etc.
Both may be
13
Jo.
:
in the accusative as in 6 8e vulv Xe7co -Kaaiv \kyw

6
37),
1
:
ixii
el8(hs
:
Uyei (Lu. 9
:
33).
Cf.
Mk.
15
12; Lu. 11
6;
be in the accusative when the antecedent would have been in the nominative. So 6 \a\el yiperaL (Mk. 11 23). Cf. Jo. 1 26; 4 18, etc. So both may be examples of the genitive, as avyyevris wv ov awk37, etc.
46; 6
29; 19
But the
relative
may
:
Ko^êp Ilerpos to wriop (Jo.
18
26)
it
where ov^tovtou
irepi
S)p.
ov.
So
in 1 Cor. in axpi- ou
:
1 irepl S}p
:
= irepl
wo
TobroiP (or
pay holt wp)

Kaipov
<^
But
(Rev. 2
a^ta
25)
reall}^
have axpi
(or kp w).
'6.
Li Lu. 23
41,
Siv eirpaâfxep,
the resolution
5e5co:as
is tovtoop
(gen.
and ace).
:
So in
Jo. 17: 9
Trept
&p
= xept
:
xqpTai
Trept (tov
:
ov8kp= toutcop
:
14; Ac. 8
24; 22
15; 25
ous. In Ac. 21 24 S)p KaTrjExactly so ojv in Lu. 9 36; 23 11; Ro. 15 18; 2 Cor. 12 17. In Ac.
tovtwp
a, etc.
26
Siv
16, jxapTvpa o}p re eldks
fxe
o3p re
6(pdr]aoiJ.at
ool, it
is
the second
that gives trouble.
The antecedent would be

In Ro. 4
:
tovtup
and the
relative before attraction either a (ace. of general reference) or

ols (locative
or instrumental).
ourot.
7
:
cov
pressed antecedent
Jo. 13: 29), &p
Cf. also Ac. 13
25.
has as its unexIn Mt. 6 8 (so

:
So
also
irepl
the antecedent would be in the accusative. wp, Ac. 24 13. In Lu. 17 1 bC oh is resolved into toutoj
xp^'ô.v,
: :
bC ov (dative).
In Ro. 10
14,
ttcDs
TnaTevacoaiP ov ovk iJKOvaap,
we
probably have o5 = et$ tovtov (or tovtcS) ov. The examples of the ablative are not many. See Jo. 7:31 where &p after TXelopa arjixela is to be resolved into tovtcop a (abl.
and ace).
a4>'
So in Ac. 26 22 kros
:
coj/=k'r6s tovtwp a.
:
In Heb. 5
Siv=air6 TovToiv
:
a,
while in 2 Cor. 2 3
:
d</)'
wpâ-wo tovtwp
:
a(f>' cop.
Cf. Lu. 6 34, xap' up; 1 Cor. 10 30. In Ac. 13 39, the one preposition covers both ablatives.
:
dTro ttciptcop up,
For the dative I note ols SeSorat (Mt. 19 11), where the antecelike TTOLVTes would have been in the nominative. Cf Lu. 7 43, 47 ^; Ro. 15 21 ols and 2 Pet. 1 9 î. In 1 Cor. 7 39, Jj dkXei yaprjdrjpuL, the antecedent would have been in the dative also. So also 2 Cor. 2 10 w; Ro. 6 16 cS twice. In 2 Tim. 1 12, oUa ^
dent
.
PRONOUNS
TeirlcTTevKa, it is
('ANTfiNTMIAl)
721
the accusative rather followed

:
by
dative, avrdv
c3.
In Mt. 20
TovTcov.
23 (Mk. 10
:
40) the antecedent of
oh
is
probably
In Ro. 10
14 the antecedent of ov would be

of the locative
tovtco.
appear also. Cf. i(f)' oh, Ro. 6 21, where the antecedent would have been kirl tovtols. So Ro. 2 1 and 14 22 ej/ c3 implies ev tovtco (cf. also 1 Pet. 2 12; 3 16), but not so verse 21 where kv oj refers to an involved tl or ij.r]bkv. In Ro. 7 6 ej' (? may involve tovtco kv <h. In Heb. 2 18 ej/ 4* (= kv TovTO} h ^) really has a causal force. In Ph. 4 11 ei* oh = kv tovtols hv oh, but in 2 Tim. 3 14 ev oIs = ej' tovtols a. Cf. 2 Pet. 2 12 (but TavTa h oh may be correct). I have noticed no examples of the instrumental. But great freedom and variety are manifest.
: : :
Some few examples
osition
The prepbe used twice ^ "in the case of a sharper division of the relative clause." So ds ttiv yriv TavTrjv, eh ^v, Ac. 7:4; oltto
8.
Prepositions with the Antecedent and Relative.
may
jrponTrjs rjixepas acj)' rjs, 20 18. Then again the preposition may occur with the antecedent, but not with the relative, though implied,
:
as in
h
ei'
iravTl xpbvo^
tlaifKdev,
1
:
Ac.
21.
16
wepa
vfj
:
Cf. Lu.
25.
:
It is possible also so to
So the margin in Ro. underctTro
stand
kv rfj 65c3
vpxov, Ac. 9
39.
17.
But
it is
clearly true of
irav-
TOiv Siv,
Ac. 13
On
the other hand the preposition
may
occur with the relative,

Jo.
but not with the antecedent.
Thus
kKeLvri tj} chpa ev ^,
When the antecedent is absent, the common to both, as in d^' wv (2 Cor. 2

one.
Cf.
Trap' S}v
preposition
:
may
4 53. be the one

:
3),
or which belongs to only

:
(Lu. 6
:
34),
c5
e4>'
oh (Ro. 6
21), ev
oh (Ph. 4:11),
:
vTep ov (1 Cor. 10
cov
0.4)'
30), ev
(Ro. 14: 22), eh 6v (Ro. 10
14), irepl
(l.Cor. 7:
S}V
1), etc.
:
This "one"
maybe
the antecedent, as in
:
(Heb. 5
8) =a.Trd tovtoov a,
eh ov (Jo. 6
29)=ets tovtov
:
ov,
= xept tovtcov ovs, virep a (1 Cor. 4 6) = i7rep raDra cov (Heb. a, a4>' 5 8) = d7r6 tovtuv a, eh ov (Jo. 19 37)=et$ tovtov ov, etc. Or the "one" may be the relative, as bC ov (Lu. 17:1)= TovTU) 8l' ov, 60' OV (Hcb. 7 13) = ovTos OV, ctc. The use of prepositions is common in the same way with the relative and its
irepl oov
(Jo. 17: 9)
'.
kcf)'
incorporated antecedent.
rifxepas
See
6
ev
Kplp.aTL
:
(Lu.
20),
8l'
rjv
alTiav (Lu. 8
:
47), Trap'
(Mt. 7:2), axpt h w MvaawvL (Ac.
21
16), eh ov
TVTov (Ro.
:
17),
d</)'
^s fjfxepas (Col. 1
:
9), Tepl
^s (To^TTipias (1 Pet. 1
9.
10), etc.
Cf. Ro. 16
of
2.
Relative Phrases.
Some
the abbreviated prepositional
clauses
come
to be used at the beginning of principal sentences

1
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 174.
722

and
:
like the free use of conjunctions
relatives.
Cf. Latin use of
qui.
Cf. Draeger, Hist. Syntax, Bd. II, p. 512.

3),
So
ap9'
wv (Lu.
12
kv
oh (12
:
1),
Xapiv (Lu. 7 47),
5t'
^v
hb (Heb. 3 7), Trepl alrlav (2 Tim. 1:6).

p. 228) kv
kcf)'
S)v
(1 Cor. 7:1), ov
Cf. Wev (Heb. 3:1).
Indeed (Winer-Schmiedel,
TOVTU) OTL, avO' 0}V
Blotl (1
cS
may
be here equal to
21), etc.
is
kv
= aVTl
TOVTCOV OTL,
UI
= Trl
TOVTCC OTi (2
:
Cor. 5:4),
Th. 2
8)=5td tovto
6tl, 10'
oh (Ro. G
:
poral
u>
and causal use

:
of the relative phrases

26)
The temcommon. Cf. kv

(Ac. 2
:
(Heb. 2
18).
is Kad' oTi, KaOairep
Indeed naes (Ro. 8 (Ro. 4 6) is Kad'

:
is ra0' 6, KadoTL
45)
15),
airep.
Cf.
e</)'
6<7ov
(Mt. 9
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= eKelae ov. So owov in Jo. 11 :32 = e/cer(Te otov and in Jo. 20 19 kvravda owov. In 2 Sam. 14 15 o = conjunction. 10. Pleonastic Antecedent. The redundant antecedent incorpo: : :
rated into the relative clause has attracted considerable attention.
In Herodotus 4, 44 os ovtos occurs,^ and Blass^ cites Hyper. TovTOiv. But in ancient Greek it was a very rare Eux. 3, uv usage. In Winer-SchmiedeP examples of pleonastic ovros are cited from Xenophon, Diodorus Siculus, Pausanias, Sophocles. Pleonastic avTos appears in Aristophanes, Birds, 1237, oh dvreov avrols. Reference also is made to Sophocles and Lucian. In the LXX the idiom is extremely common, manifestly under the influence of the Hebrew i? ^t^ (cf. Aramaic i). It "is found in all parts of the LXX and undoubtedly owes its frequency to the Hebrew original. But the fact that it is found in an original Greek work, such as 2 Mace, (xii, 27 kv ... kv avrfj) and a paraphrase such as 1 Esdras (iii, 5, 9; iv, 54, 63; vi, 32), is sufficient to warrant its presence in the kolvt].^'^ For numerous examples of the idiom in the LXX see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 200, and Winer-Moulton, p. 185. Cf. also Conybeare and Stock, Selections, pp. 65 ff. As a matter It occurs of fact the examples are not very numerous in the N. T. avrrjv, 7:2 oh kSodrj avTo7s, 7:9 several times in Rev. (3:8 fiv
fj
ov avTov,
13:8
ov avTov,
20:8
:
S)v
ai'ToJv).
Outside of the
Apocalypse, which so strongly bears the influence of the
LXX,
the
usage
is
is
very rare.
See Mt. 3
12, ov to tttvov kv
rfj
x^tpt avrov,
an
example hardly
parallel as a
:
matter of
fact.
Mk.
1
7 (and Lu. 3
ai'Trjs.
elx^ t6 dvydrpLOV
K.-G.,
II, p.
avrov, Cf. also ota TOLavrrj

16), ou
3
But a clearer instance and still more so 7 25, ^s

:
(IVIk.
13
19), olos
p. 185.
433.
p. 201.
Cf. also
W.-M.,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.
"
Thack., Gr. of 0. T. in Gk., p. 4G.
PRONOUNS
TrjXt/coOros
('ANTfiNTMIAl)
723
(Rev. 16
18), ota
ovTus
(Mk. 9:3), owov

:
eKel
<^'
(Rev.
ous
12
Itt'
6, 14), oTTov
ew'
avTOJv
(Rev. 17
9).^
In Ac. 15
17,
avTovs,
we have a quotation from the

all
LXX (Amos 9
12).
" The
N. T. examples are
from places where Aramaic sources are

p. 94,
One almost wonders, seems so anxious to prove that the idiom in the N.. T. is not a Hebraism. By his own admission it seems a practical Hebraism there, though the idiom had an independent development in the Greek. The early sporadic examples in the ancient Greek ^ blossom out in the later Greek
certain or suspected" (Moulton, Prol, p. 95).
after this admission,
why Moulton,
again and in the modern Greek become very common. Psichari* considers it rather far-fetched in Moulton to appeal to the modem
Greek vernacular,
sent
for,'
6 yiarpos ttov top ecxTeCka, 'the
doctor
whom
since the
modern Greek vernacular
just as readily uses
Psichari complains that Thumb* also has TToO without avTov. not explained clearly this idiom. But Psichari believes that the idiom existed in the vernacular kolvt] (and so fell in readily with the Hebrew usage) and has persisted to the present day. He considers^ the example from a papyrus of the third century a.d.
(P.Oxy.
1,
117, 15) decisive, e^
Siv
e^ ahrwv.
See also P.
Amh.
II,
11, 26, oTvep (f)avep6v tovto kyeuero.
Moulton*' has given abundant exf .):
amples from Old English. So in Chaucer {Knightes Tale, 1851

" Namely oon, That with a spere was thirled his brest-boon."
He compares
German der du hist. Simcox^ cites vernacuEvidently therefore which I don't like it." lar English "a tiling various languages in development independent the idiom has had {Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 353) Jannaris According to in the vernacular. connective." mere regarded as "a such cases is in the relative h hixiv, W. H. reject kv vixiv. In Gal. 2 10, o In Gal. 3 1, oU intensive use of auro, but tovto is pleonastic. the have avTo TOVTO, we we have again intensive avTos. avTos, 2 6s In 1 Pet. 24, Winer ^ rightly remarks that it is a 11. The Repetition of 6s.
also the
:
misapprehension of the Greek genius to expect the relative rather than avTos or ovtos in a case like Jo. 1:6; Lu. 2 36; 19 2; Ac.
:
1 2
Cf. Blass, Gr. of

Blass, Gr. of
*
* 6 ^
Essai sur le
N. T. Gk., p. 175; Simcox, Lanp. of the N. T., p. 59. N. T. Gk., p. 175, cites ov 17 tttoij avrod, from Clem. Cor. i. 21. 9. grec de la Sept., p. 182.
Hellen., p. 128.
Cf. also Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 59.
p. 353.
Prol., p. 94.
Lans. of the N. T.,
Cf. Farrar,
Gk. Synt.,
p. 113.
W.-M.,
p. 186.
724
10
:

36.
The
old
Greek could, and commonly did/ use

:
ovtos or
more usually avTos with /cat to continue the narrative. Blassrather curiously calls it "negligent usage." Cf. Lu. 13 4, k4>' ovs
eireaev 6 Trvpyos Kal airkKTHvev avTOvs', 1 Cor.
6, e^ o5
Kal
:
els
ahrbv
and
h'
ov Kal
8l
avrov
(cf.
Heb. 11
aurrjs.
:
avTcJv;
/cat Rev. 17:2, ntd' ^s 13 Cf. Jo. /cat avros. rather than
4); 2 Pet. 2 In Lu. 17:31

1
:
3, ols
/cat
Kal
occurs
24.
In Jo.
33, e0' 6p
Kal ew'
avTov, the repetition of the relative
But
OS
in 1 Cor.
would have been impracticable. /cat 7:13 Paul might very well have written rjrts
/cat
rather than
ovtos (a sort of parenthesis).
It is conmion,^
also, to
have neither the relative repeated nor the demonstrative.

Ibiov vlov ovK kcpdaaro,
So
OS
76 Tov
dXXd vrep
rjuQiv TravTOiv irapiboiKev
auT6j'
(Ro. 8:32).
relative
Cf. Ph. 4
9.
be repeated. A good many such examples may be used, as wv Kal Siu (Ro. 4:7). Cf. uv re (Ac. 26 16). Cf. w Kal (Ac. 27 23) and <hp re also o5 See Jo. 21 20. eu S) /cat 8l' ov Kal. 1 f., 6 6 Kal 1 Cor. 15 But examples occur also of the repetition of the relative with-
But the
may
occur in the N. T.
Kat
:
ou Trap' ov (Ac. 24 6). out any conjunction, as in 6s See 1 Cor. 4:17. Cf. 6aa oca, etc. (Ph. 4:8). This repetition of os is specially frequent in Paul. Cf. Col. 1 24, 28 f.; Eph. 3 11 f.; 1 Cor. 2 7 f., though it is not exactly "pecuhar" to him (WinerMoulton, p. 209). In 1 Jo. 1 1 6 is repeated without conjunction
:
three times, while in verse 3 6

verb.
:
In
1
f.
Ro. 9 4
is not repeated with the second 6-12 four sentences begin with a relative. In we have otrLves ojv S)v /cat e^ uv.
Pet. 1
The
allel in
use of avd'
the
oou
baa together (Lu. 12
3) finds
abundant parconstruction^
LXX,
:
easily falling in with the
Hebrew
with
that
luit);.
Thus a double
6
relative occurs.
is merely accidental; but Cf also oto^ ort in Ro. 9 6. 12. A Consecutive Idea. This may be implied in 6s. Thus in Lu. 7 5, a^tos kariv cS irape^y tovto. One is reminded of qui in is
In Ro. 4
21 the conjunction of ort o
not true of
ort in
Jo. 4
3.
Latin.^
Cf. also
rts kaTLv ovtos 6s Kat dîaprtas a4>iriaiv; is
(Lu. 7:49).
lyvoi vovv
particularly good example
Cor. 2
16, rts
7dp
Kvpiov, OS avp^Lâaei avTov;
See chapter
also introduce
XIX, Mode.
a causal sentence.
13. Causal.
1
"Os
may
So
6s
Bernhardy,
p. 432.
p. 304; Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 354; Jelf, 833.2; K.-G., II,

2
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.
"Normal"
indeed.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 70.
*
6
Thack., Gr. of O. T. in Gk., p. 25. Cf. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 369.
PRONOUNS ('ANTSNTMIAl)
7e in Ro. 8
:
725
is
32.
Cf. Latin quippe qui.

Cf.
This
perfectly regular
Thompson, Syntax See also chapter XIX, Mode. In Direct Questions. The passage 14.
in ancient Attic.
(/'
of Attic Greek, p. 374.
in
Mt. 26
50, iralpe,
S irapei,
possible.
is the only one in the N. T. where such a construction is There is no doubt as to the occasional use of oaris
ottcos
(see (e), 9), bivbaos, oiroTepos,
in direct questions in the ancient

f.
Greek.
For examples see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 473
See
further chapter XIX, Mode. This double use of relative pronouns is on a par with the double use of interrogative stems (cf. indefinite) so
common
in the
Indo-Germanic tongues.^ The Latin qui
and
quis are kin in root
and usage. Moulton^

'^
rightly considers
it
"superfluous to say that this usage cannot possibly be extended to direct question." Winer explained the "misuse" as belonging to late Greek. A few examples^ of 6s in a direct question do occur. So
in Euseb., P. E. vi, 7.
257
d,
Gaisford edition, wv
IveKa; Just., Cohort.
5 (p. 253 A), bC

hi
riv
aiTlav
Tpoaexets
eraipe,
'OtJLr]po);
Apophth., 105 C,
Certainly the idiom was chiefly in the ver'kpakvu, Blass^ conjectures a slip in the text, there. even rare and nacular
6 k^rjXdes;
alpe
having been changed to
and Chrysostom had an

harsh ellipsis"
"Os
relative.^
imperative in his text.

of the principal verb
We may suppose "a rather

treat
it
and
as
an ordinary
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
possible for OS here to be interrogative.
That
is
as
much
not imas one
can at present say.

15.
Blass thought
it
"quite incredible."
Here the matter is much clearer. Even Blass ^ admits that "relatives and interrogatives become confused in Greek as in other languages." In the classical language OS (still more ocrrts) is "frequently" so employed. This use comes from Homer on down and occurs in Aristophanes, Sophocles, Herodotus, Xenophon, Plato, Lysias. Thucydides^ uses it side ^^ by side v/ith oans. The papyri have it as Moulton has shown.
In
Indirect Questions.
Thompson, Synt.
Prol., p. 93.
of Att. Gr., p. 74.

=>
2
*
W.-M.,
p. 208.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
Gk. Gr.,
p. 474.
6
'
Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 68. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 176. Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 178.
8
9
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.
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

rJL K(jOfxr]L
R. L. 29 (iii/B.c); 4>povTicras 8l wv 37 (ii/B.c). It is a little surprising, however, to find Blass^ saying that this usage "is wanting in the
Cf. (f)paôvTes kv
5eT
OLKOvcnp,
ii.
Tavra epyaaBrjpat, P.P.
N. T."
olSev
W.
F.
Moulton^
in his footnote gives
of OS in indirect questions after verbs of knowing, declaring, etc.
/X97
undoubted examples So
:
COP XP^'-O-V '^X^Tî
Mt. 6:8;
33;
5i' t]p
d7ra77tXaTe a aKovere, 11:4; eiSvIa

eirolrjaep,
6 ytyopev,
Tt);
(cf.
Mk.
:
33; apeypure 6
Lu. 6
(cf.
Mt. 12
8
:
etSojs 6 Xeyei,
;
alrlap rjiparo avrov aTrr]yyeL\ep,

:
47
And
Ac. 22 24) 5t5dêi v^ds a bet direip, 12 12. Cf. also Lu. 9 46. then in 1 Tim. 1 7 we find d Xeyovatp and irepl tLpup 8(.aj3e:
fiaiowrai.
used side by side after

also Lu. 11
:
ixi}
poovpre^.
Cf. also Jo. 18: 21.

Trapad-qcro)
One may compare^
6, ovk
ex^ o
abrQ, with
cos
ladir]
Mk.
2 (Mt. 15
:
32), ovk exovacp tL 4>ayo:(jLP.

cbs
See also
in Lu. 8
47,
and note
in Lu. 23
55; 24
35, not to
mention
6a OS, oTolos.
16.
The Idiom
:
ovdeis kaTiv 6s.

1
:
It occurs in the
1
39; 10
29; Lu.
:
61; 18
:
29;
Cor. 6
5.
Mt. 10 26; Lu. 8 17. Here one is oans. Mayser {Grammatik, p. 310) calls attention to the papyri use of 6p= 6 after analogy of ro<TovTo(p). Cf. tLs 8s ov in Ac. 19 35. The N. T. does not use'* eanp 6s, eialp ol^tIs, ripes.
ov see
N. T., as Mk. For ovSeis eanp ds reminded of the old
idiom
ovdeis
(e) "OcrTi9.
1.
Varied Uses.
The form
is,
of course,
6s,
merely
6s
and
is
rts.
But
we have
uniform.
seen a variety of uses of
and
rts
likewise
not entirely
Hence the combination cannot be expected to be so. It was not ironclad 6s and oans. in the ancient language, as may be seen by reference to the Epic, Ionic, Attic poets, and to Herodotus (once Thucydides) .^ Blass" finds that the distinction between them is no longer regularly preserved in the N. T., least of all in Luke, best of all in Paul. Moulton'^ finds some examples in the papyri of octtls in the sense of 6s, but doubts if the two relatives are ever absolutely convertible and thinks that on the whole the classical distinction remains undisturbed, though sometimes during the kolpt) period it had worn rather thin.^ But Jannaris^ holds that 6o-rts, having a wider scope
2. The Distinction between
1
2 ^ ^ 8
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175. W.-M., p. 207 f. Cf. Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 172 f.
Prol., p. 91.
W.-Sch., p. 237.
lb., p. 236.
p. 69, for the exx.
lb.; CI. Rev.,
Dec,
1901, p. 441
f.
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 352.
than
OS,
727
was used indiscriminately for 6s. He is supported by Kaelker about Polybius.^ But in the vernacular modern Greek 6tl is alone common, other forms of octtis being rare, though otlvos and onvoov are found (Thumb, Handb., p. 93 f.). Kruger^ calls 6s "objective" and 6arts "qualitative and generic." W. F. Moulton^ defines 6(rrts as properly indicating the class or kind to which an object belongs. But no exact parallel can be drawn nor uniform distinction preserved. Each has its own history. Jebb^ takes 6crrts to refer to class in ancient Greek and hence In the modern Greek it is still inis either indefinite or causal.
in postclassical times
definite,
but has also in the vernacular displaced 6s in the masculine and feminine nominative. In the LXX oarLs is less frequent than 6s and is almost confined to the nominative and accusative.^
In the papyri*'
it is less
frequent than
6s
and
is
usually in the
nom-
inative as in the N. T. (Moulton, CI. Rev., 1904, p. 154). 3. The Indefinite Use. This is, as a matter of fact, still the most
frequent in the N. T. Of. Latin quicumque. The examples are too numerous to give save a few samples. Cf. 6o-rts o-^ pairlêL ets
TTjv Seîaj/
(TLayova
:
(Mt. 5
39), 6crTts apprjcr-qTal

ft
fxe
(10
33), 6rt av
alTr}ar}T
(Jo. 14 13), oans eav
(Gal. 5
10).
Thus
it is
used with
:
indicative or subjunctive, with or without av (eav). Cf. Mt. 13 In Mk. 8 34 et tls does not differ very greatly from 6o-Tts.
:
12.
Cf.
also eau
H7],
Mk. 10
30.
Has
oo-rts is,
of course, indefinite also.

:
Thus
Mt.
24;
:
irav 6 tl eav TroLrjre (Col.
17), etc.
For vaaa
ypvxh ^rts av
see Ac. 3
23 (LXX). In P. Par. 574 (iii/A.c.) note oans ttot ovv el. 4. The Definite Examples. These are chiefly causal clauses. Some indeed seem merely descriptive. Thus Mt. 7 15, tuv 4/evhoTrpo4>y\Twv Cf. also Mt. 7 26; 13 52; 21 33, etc. The value o'iTLves epxovrai.
: :
:
:
of the pronoun sometimes does not differ greatly from olos and exThus evvovxoi. o'lnves, Mt. 19 12; aXXots yeoipyoZt presses quality. Once indeed we actu1, etc. o'LTLves, 21 41; irapdhots atrim, 25
:
ally
7: 39).
Cf. also TroraTn) 17 yvvij Tjrts (Lu. ToiavTTi rjTLS (1 Cor. 5:1). See also Gal. 4 24, 26. Then again it may be merely airives rjKoKovd-qaav tc3 'iTjaoO explanatory as in ywalKes xoXXat (Mt. 27: 55). Cf. Mk. 15 7; Lu. 12 1; Col. 3:5; Rev. 11:8, etc. This use of 6(ttis is particularly frequent with proper names.
have
Quest., p. 245
Gr., p. 139.
For the confusion between 6s and Scrrts see also Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 558 f. * W.-M., p. 209, n. 3, where a very helpful discussion occurs. * V. and D., Handb. to Mod. Gk., p. 302. B Thack., Gr., Mayser, Gr., p. 310. p. 192.
2
728

:
NEW TESTAMENT
7}ris KoXelraL BrjOXeeix. Cf. also Lu. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 303, takes the explanatory or illustrative examples = 'now he,' 'one that.' Moulton^ points out that oo-ris at the beginning of a parable (cf. Mt.
So Lu. 2
8
:
4, ets -koKlv Aauet5

:
26; Ac. 16
12, etc.
20
1)
is
really a type
and
so appropriate.
Lu.
20, Tols \6yoLs

all
/lov olrLPes irK-qpoiQ-qaovTai,
In an example like Moulton takes it to

:
be 'which for
her.'
that' (almost adversative), while in Lu. 10
42
^Tts ovK aipatpedriaeTai
avT7]s='and
it
shall
not be taken away from

of
6(ttls (cf.
There
qui).
is
no doubt about the causal use

: :
qui
and
he
quippe
See Jo. 8
53, 'AjSpaafx oo-rts cnredavev ('seeing that
died'); Ac. 10
47, otrLves to Tvev/ia to ayiov eXaôv ('since they re-
ceived the Holy Spirit').
Cf. also Ac. 7: 53; Ro. 2

:
15; 6
2;
Heb.
8 2
6; 10
35; Eph. 3
13; Ph. 4
3; Col. 3
5; Jas.
14; 1 Pet.
11, etc.
5.
as usually in
a matter of dispute whether in the N. T., oorts has come already to have merely examples where it is equal There are undoubted of the force 6s. Ac. 11: ('which very'). So oaTep to 28, ^tls eyeveTo, kirl KXauStou.
Value of
6s?
It
is
modern Greek,
Cf. also Ac. 13
31; 16
16; 1 Cor. 3
17, etc.
Blass^ goes further
and finds oo-rts in Luke purely in the sense of 6s. He is supported by Jebb^ who says that "no natural interpretation can make it more in Lu. 2 4." In Acts at any rate a fairly good case can be made out for this weakened sense of 6(ttls. Cf 8 14 f Ilerpoi/ koI
:
.
'luiavqv o'LTLPes,
12
10
ttjv ttvXtjp 7?rts,
17
10.
See also Rev. 12

for
ecTTLV
13.
Moulton* gives an exact

Tfj
parallel
from the papyri

{avpLOV
Mt. 27:
ti).
62,
hTravpLOV TjTts ecTTlv
jj-eTOL
T-qv TrapaaKevr]v
:
rjTLS
He
quotes Hort also (Comm., 1 Pet. 2 11) in favour of the position that in some places in the N. T. no distinction can be drawn between OS and oo-Tts. Blass^ denies that Paul uses 6o-rts as the equivalent of
6s.
I confess
that
I fail
to see a great deal of difference

:
:
between otTives and oh in Ro. 16 4, otrtves and ot in 16 7. Cf. also OS and rfrts in verses 5 f There is little here that calls for comment. We do 6. Case. not have attraction nor incorporation. As a matter of fact only
three cases occur (nom., gen., acc.).^
'who indeed'
The stereotyped phrase

in Pisidia.
Prol., p. 92.
"Oo-Tts as
is
common
"
Cf.
Comper-
nas3,
2
=
De Serm. Grace,
p. 13.
Prol., p. 91.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 173.
V. and D., Handb., p. 302. The pap. show the same situation.
ijPTLva
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 173.

CI. Rev., April, 1904, p. 154.
p. 349, e$ orou
Moulton,
Thus
190
BM
77
(viii/A.n.),
opnva inscr. J.H.S., 1902,
BM
(iu/?),
ew
oTov
NP
56
(iii/A.D.).
PRONOUNS
with
5
:
('ANTflNTMIAl)
otov, is
729
Cf.
ecos
and the
:
genitive,
ecos
rather frequent.
Mt.
50 (Luke three times, Matthew and John once The each). This is the only form of the shortened inflection. LXX once^ (2 Mace. 5 10) has r/crrivos, elsewhere otov. The accusative is found in the N. T. only in the neuter singular 6tl (absent
25; Lu. 12
:
from modern Greek). But see (note G, p. 728) occasional ovTLva and ^vTLva in the papyri. So Lu. 10 35, 6tl av Tpoadairaprjays. Cf. 13; 15 16; 6ri kav, Mk. 6 23; 1 Cor. 16 OTL û, Jo. 2:5; 14
: : :
:
f.;
Col. 3
17;
on
alone, Jo. 8: 25; Ac. 9
6.
The
other ex-
amples are all in the nominative. In general the number of ocrrts agrees with that 7. Number. of the antecedent. But in a few instances ogtls agrees with the i'ûeTs, Eph. 3 predicate. So with 1 Cor. 3 17, vao'i olrives 13,
:
6\l\l/eaLV riTLs
ooâ.
Cf. Ac. 16
12.
8.
Gender.
Likewise ocms in general agrees with the antece-
dent in gender.
So Eph.
Cf.
22
f.
eKKKrjala
tjtls
to
aco/xa.
Gal.
24
n'ta
^TLs "Ayap.
Rev. 11:8.
:
But the gender

1
of the
predicate
may
be followed as in Ac. 16
oi)
tjtls
12, 'I'tXiTrxoi's (fem.,
H.
Scott says, but Thayer has

deou
ttoXis;
TJrts
Tim. 3
15, oUca
is
rJTLs
kKK\r]ala.
In Ph.
28,
'ivdei^Ls,
the anteceof
dent
OTL is
the general idea of the preceding clause.

:
One example
neuter singular (2 Cor. 3
14,
6tl eu
Xpitrroj
KarepYetTai),
ypdcjir]-
and several times the neuter plural

TaL).
:
(Jo. 21
25, aTLva kav
modern Greek.
lôth singular and Mt. 2 Cf. plural, are very frequent. 15; Lu. 2:4; 23 6; 7 case, gender and chapter X, vii, 55. See further for number,
: :
So Gal. 4: 24; 5 19. The masculine and feminine,
Cf. the absence of the neuter in the
VIII, IX.
9.
Direct Questions.
found in ample of
Examples of ocxtls in direct questions are and Plato as quoted by Jannaris.^ An exAristophanes
it
occurs also in
Chron. 17:
6, 6tl ovk (hKodofxriaaTe fxoL

:
Hebrew has iiîb. Cf. also 2 Ki. 8 14 oLKov KkbpLvov; have t'l. In Barn. Ep. c. 10 we have where other MSS. in AB, OTL
Hcrc the
eipriKev;
oTi
bi
Mcouo-tJs
Vulgate has quare.^
Jannaris^
gives
a
it
number
of instances for the later Greek.
And
yet Blass'' calls
the facts.
'
"quite incredible," a remark impossible to justify in the light of It is, indeed, unusual, but there is no a 'priori reason
2
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 473.
Cf.
"
W.-M., p. 208. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 473. It is more usual Riem. and GoelziT, Synt., p. 398. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 17().
Cf.
in the
second of two questions.
730

the N. T. writers could not occasionally use
oo-rts as a direct a direct question.^ The N. T. examples are all confined to 6 rt. In Mt. 7 14 otl is certainly merely causal, not exclamatory nor interrogative. In Mk. 2 16 oTL is read by BL 33 and is accepted by W. H. and Nestle as interrogative. AC al. read tL 6tl, while ND have 5td ri. It is possible, to be sure, that otl may be an " abbreviation" ^ or "ellipsis"^ for ri 6tl. But it is more probable that it is here regarded as tantamount to an interrogative (rt 6tl or 5td tI). Moulton (CI. Rev., 1904, p. 154) quotes 6tl tL in B.U. 607 (ii/A.D.) ypa\j/ov
why
interrogative.
One may note also the use
of
ei
in
not OTL TL eirpaâs.

first OTL.
But
in
Mk. 9:11
the Greek uncials
all
give the
6tl is
This
is all
the more remarkable since the second
clearly a conjunction.
The Latin MSS.

:
give variously quare, quia,
quid, etc., and some Greek cursives xcDs ovv. 'Why' is the natural and obvious idea.^ So in Mk. 9 28 6tl is read by the great mass of MSS. (including ^{BCL), though AD and a number of others have Slo. t'l, some even have 6tl 5td tL (conflate reading), a few t'l OTL. In John 8 25 both W. H. and Nestle print as a ques:
tion, Trjv
apxw
is
o tl
/cat
XaXco
v/jup;
quia.
It
a very
difficult
I
passage at best.
The Latin versions have quod or Trjv apxw 6 tl may be
speak to you at all?' (ttjv dpx'jJ'ôXajs). 'Why do you reproach me that (ort) I speak to you at all?' If necessary to the sense, 6rt may be taken here as interrogative.^ Moulton^ admits the N. T. use of ocrris in a direct question. Recitative otl is even suggested in Winer-Schmiedel, ^ but the occasional interrogative use of otl is sufficient explanation. But the passage in Jo. 8 25 is more than taken to
mean 'Why do
But
there
may
be
ellipsis,^
doubtful.
Chrysostom takes
otl
there as relative, Cyril as causal.^

ocrrts is
10. Indirect Questions.
In ancient Greek
exceedingly
honours with rts.^" The astonishing thing about this use of oorts is its almost entire absence from the N. T. (cf. modern Greek, where it is not used in this sense). No example has yet been shoAvn from the papyri.
in indirect questions, sharing the
common
Indeed the relative forms, the so-called indirect interrogatives, are not common in the N. T. in that sense. The direct interroga1 2 8 * 8 9
Lachmann,
W.-M.,
P. 238.
Praef., p. 43.
Blass, Gr. of
N.
T., p. 176.
">
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 176. Simcox, Lang, of N. T., p. 68.

Prol., p. 94.
p. 208.
p. 68.
The
use of on
tI
lends colour to the notion of recitative on.
Abbott, Joh. Gr.,

Cf. Jann., Hist.
p. 143.
10
Gk.
Gr., p. 473.
PRONOUNS ('ANTHNTMIAl)
tives are the rule in the
731
N. T.
8u
in indirect questions.^
is
instance of 6tl in an indirect question
found
in the
6, XaX-qe-fjaeTal aoL otl ae
Tvoieiv.
Even
this
Only one N. T., Ac. reading, though
supported by
XABC,
Blass^ rejects "in view of the general
practice elsewhere," a needless conclusion.
Why not call it a "Uterary" mark in Luke? "Ottcjs is so used once (Lu. 24 20), oTTov not at all (not even Jo. 14:4), oTos in 1 Th. 1:5, and ottoTos See only in 1 Cor. 3 13; Gal. 2 6; 1 Th. 1: 9; Jas. 1 24.
: : :
:
further chapter
(/)
XIX.
6'?.
0!09. Relation
is
1.
to
This correlative form
is
related to
6s
as
qualis
to qui.
The antecedent
tolovtos is not, of course,
always
expressed.
But it is qualitative, and not a mere relative like 6s or even ocrns. In the modern Greek the word has disappeared except the form oykos (6 olosY in the dialects and is rare (14 times) in Mayser* merely mentions it in his Grammatik d. the N. T. It is in the N. T. usually without tolovtos, as griech. Papyri.
in
1
Mt. 24
Cor. 15
:
21,
but
it is
several times followed

:
by
tolovtos, as in
is olos
:
48; 2 Cor. 10
11.
rather unusual instance

:
TrfKiKovTos aeiffubs ovto) ixkyas

is,
(Rev. 16
oloi 1
18).
1
:
In 2 Cor. 12
5.
20
olou
of course, first person.

2.
So
Th.
Incorporation.
No
:
instance of attraction occurs, but an exis
ample
of incorporation
found in 2 Tim. 3:11,
o'iovs
dicioynovs
vTrrjveyKa.
In Rev. 16 18 the addition of ttjXlkovtos ovtw jxkyas after olos is by way of explanatory apposition. But in Mk. 13 19, ToiavT-q, the incorporation is redundant after the o'ia. oh yeyovev
:
fashion of bv
avTov.
Like
6s
3. Indirect Question.^
we have
:
olos so
used.
Cf. 1 Th.
inIn 2 Tim. 3 (D for Lu. 55 Receptus 9 The Textus direct question also. in an indirect of olos the use of has Toiov) has another instance
1
:
5, otSare oIol 'eyevr]d7]ij.ev.
11
we may have an
:
question, ovk olbaTt

4.
o'iov irveviJLaTos ecrre vixets.
Number.
Olos
may
agree in
number with the predicate

1
rather than the antecedent.
So
Cor. 15
48, olos
tolovtol.
and
Note
ahrou
'
the difference in the position of the negative in ovx oXovs
olou oh,
2 Cor. 12
oIoi'
20.
:
Blass, Gr. of
N. T.
Gk., p. 179, calls tou
(Ph.
30) pecuhar.
f.;
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175; W.-Sch., p. 236
Viteau, Prop., pp.
62
ff.
2
8 *
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.

Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 87, IGS;
Thumb,
llandb., p. 94.
P. 311.
Cf. K.-G., II, p. 439, for exx. in the older
Gk.
732
5.
6,

Olov re kaTLv.
OTL,
ovx olov 5e
The only example^ in the N. T. is in Ro. 9 where note the absence of re. It does not occur
:
in exclamations.
(g)
1.
'OTTOio?.
is
It It corresponds to the interrogative ttoTos. very rare in the N. T. (see Declensions), but occurs in modern Greek vernacular for 'whoever' (Thumb, p. 93). In the literary
Qualitative.
modern Greek 6 was due to the

nacular
2.
oirov
ottoTos,
Jannaris- thinks that the use of the article

il
Italian
quale
and the French
lequel (cf.
Old
English the which), since educated scribes objected to the ver-
and
tov.^
Double
Office.
Like
oTos,
ocros
and
r]\iKos
it
has the double

of the
:
office of relative
and
indirect interrogative.^
:
Four
instances are indirect questions (1 Cor. 3

: :
13; Gal. 2
6; 1
N. T. Th.
1:9; Jas. 1 24). In Gal. 2 6, diroloi wore, we have the indefinite form ('whatever kind').^ Note here the use of tl and ottoIol. In 13 the antecedent is expressed and repeated by redun1 Cor. 3
:
dant
avTo.
3. Correlative.
Only one instance

Cf. qualiscumque.
is
correlative, Ac. 26
29,
TOLovTovs oiroios.
Note here the
difference in
number.
{h) "0(709.
like olos and oroTos^ There are a hundred and and survives in the modem Greek.'^ which display great eight instances in the N. T. (W. H. text) that in notes variety of usage. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 63)
1.
Quantitative.
It
is
found in the
LXX
Philo
2.
ocros is
often equal to
o'i.
Antecedent.
The presence
of the antecedent
is
not
common
as
(also
outside of
Tvavres oaoi (Ac.
5:36,
37), iravTa oaa (very

etc.),
common,
Mt. 7:12; 13:46; 18:25; Mk. 11:24,

frequent, as Ro. 8
1
:
:
oaot
14; Gal. 6
12, etc.).
Cf.
6(tol
avToXs
:
ourot
in Jo.
12.
But
in
Mk.
28
6cra
is
has d/iapri7Mara and

Cf. Ac. 3
:
/SXao-^rj/uiai
as
antecedents and naturally 21 16. It is common without antecedent both in the masculine
neuter.
24; 9
:
39; Rev.
(oaoL
3.
Mt. 14
36)
Attraction.
and the neuter (ocra Mk. 9 13). This was possible in Jo. 6:11,
:
Tibv
6\papluv
For a
different explanation
=ov
B-q
p. 179.
3 6
II,
6
V. and D., Handb., p. 303. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 318. Cf Sttws Lu. 24 20. p. 439.
.
It
N. T. Gk., Gk. Gr., p. 167. * Moulton, Prol., p. 93. K.-G., is rare in anc. Gk. in this sense.
ttou
^
kKwewr. see Blass, Gr. of
Hist.
ocrov i]de\ov,
733
but
it
does not occur.
XPU^h the regular construction

is
occurs.
In Lu. 11:8, Swo-ei aurw oacov In Winer-SchmiedeP it
stated that attraction

real
no
I find is found in the N. T. with 6aos. examples outside of the few cases of incorporation now
to be mentioned.4. Incorporation.
In Ac. 9
all
13 oaa
KaKo. is
an instance,
(Ro. 7
:
Mk.
Cor.
2
7
19 has 6aov xpovov.

39; Gal. 4
:
The other examples

:
1;
1)
are
instances of e^' oaov xpovov.
In Mk. 6 30 we have in W. H. oaa koI 6aa (not Tisch.), But in Ph. 4 8 6aa is repeated six times without In Heb. 10 37 oaov oaov (LXX) is in imitation of the Hebrew Kal. in Hab. 2 3. Cf. also Is. 26 20 and D on Lu. 5 3 where 6<7ov 6<Tov=d\iyov of the other MSS.^ But that this is not an essential Hebraism, but a vernacular idiom in harmony with the Hebrew,
5. Re-petition.
:
is
now
6.
:
clear.''
With
av.
Note the use

:
as an indefinite relative
:
Lu. 9
7.
5; Jo. 11
:
22; Ac. 2
3;
:
39; 3
22, etc.)
(Mk. 6 56; and with kav (Mt.

:
7: 12; 18
18; 23
Indirect
Mk. 3 28, etc.). Questions. The instances

:
are fairly numerous.
So
19).
CLKOVOvres
oaa
Trotet
:
(Mk. 3:8);
39; 9
:
d7rd77etXoj' oaa
:
ireiroirjKev
:
(5
Cf. 5
8.
20; Lu. 8
10; Ac. 4
23; 2 Tim. 1
18, etc.
In Comparison.
25.
"Oaov
(oacS) is
used in comparative sentences
usually with Toaovro (ToaovTco).
Cf.
Mk. 7:36; Heb. 1:4; 8:6;

:
10
9.
Adverbial
(Heb. 3
'E0' oaov (Mt. 9

:
Kad' oaov
3; 7
20; 9
15; 25 40; Ro. 7:1, etc.) and of the nature of conpartake 27)
:
junctions.
This form was used to express both age and size. (i) 'li\iKo<i. Hence the corresponding ambiguity of riXiKia. Cf. for age Jo. 9 21, for stature Mt. 6 27. The pronour is absent from the LXX, never very common, but survives in the literary modern
:
:
Greek. ^ It appears also in the papyri.'' Like the other relatives it might have had a double use in the N.T. (relative and indirect interrogative). But the few examples are all indirect interrogatives:
Col. 2
:
1 eldevai rj\iKov ayojva exco, Jas.
l8ov rj'KiKov irvp rjXiKijv
P. 224.
of fact in the
in
:
Aa a matter '6<to3v (Prol., p. 93). pap. Moulton finds LpovpGsv N. T. oaos nowhere occurs outside of the nom. and ace. except 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 Mayscr, Gr., p. 311. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 1G8.
^
But
in the
734

The examples
:
v\r]v avairreL.
in
atory.
Note
also that riyLKov refers to greatness
ness of the
after Uere.
In Gal. 6 the text and ^Xikois in the margin.

size.
James may be regarded as exclamand -nyLK-nv to small11 W. H. and Nestle read TTTjXtKots in
This again
is
indirect question
'O AS Relative. The use of the r forms of 6, -q, to as relative It appears in Horner^ and is common in is very old in Greek. 6 appears as demonstrative, as article Arkadian Herodotus. In griech. Dialekten, Bd. II, p. 116). Die (Meister, and as relative Griech. Dial, pp. 257, 292-300). (Hoffmann, Ach. Of. also South Ionic (where very common), from of it examples gives Jannaris^ in the later Greek. sporadically and (inscriptions), Attic Doric and sayings with to. sententious in only survives it Greek In modern
(j)
and
in Crete
and Southeast Greek (Thumb,
p. 94).
Mayser^
finds
a few doubtful instances in the papyri. Wilcken (Archiv, I) gives some examples from B. M. as to hol 8k5ccKes (p. 292), ttiv ayairrjv ttiv TTotets (p. 301), and Moulton {CI. Rev., 1904, p. 155) quotes Trpos to
dvpofxe
from B.U. 948 (iv/v a.d.) ''very illiterate." Mayser (op. numerous examples of 6 Kai which "first in Roman time" cit.) appears in the nominative. He compares this with the relative
gives
use
OS Kai
and
is
inclined to regard 6 Kal as relative.

et
The analogy
favours the relative idea, but the article alone is sufficient in Greek. I would not insist on the relative for SaOXos 6 It /cat naOXos (Ac. 13 9), though admitting the possibility of it.
of the Latin qui
:
means (Deissmann), not 'Saul who

Paul.'
is
henceforth Paul,' but 'also

f.,
Cf. also Hatch, Jour, of Bihl. Lit, Pt. II, p. 141

6
/cat
1908.
in
In truth this use of
with double names was very
common
N. T. times.* N. T.
Dieterich'^ sees
Rev. 1:4, 8; It is used as a relative or that it is a relative. It may be a bit artificial, 6 cov all comes to the same in the end. Kal 6 riv Kal 6 kpxofJLevos but the antique and vernacular relative 6 came in as a resource when John did not wish to use yevofxevos of
in
But
no instance of 6 as relative in the 11: 17, we have 6^1'. One either has
to say that here 6
God, and since there

1
is
no
aorist participle for
elfxi.
Psychologically
Monro, Horn.
ff.
Gr., pp. 182
ff.
For
hist, of
the matter see K.-BL,
I,
pp.
608
2
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 156; Dieterich,
*
Byz. Arch., pp.
Gr., p. 353. Cf. also Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 560; Meisterh., ^ Gr., pp. 310 ff. 1, 198 f.
III, p.
See Schmid, Der Atticismus,
p. 6;
Ramsay,
Cities
and Bish.
of Plirygia,
338; Volker, Synt. d. griech. Pap., XIX, 429; Deiss., B. S., pp. 313 ff.;
Moulton,
6
Prol., p. 83.
Unters., p. 199.
Winer (W.-Th.,
p. 107) rejects 6 Kal as relative.
PRONOUNS
the article
is
('ANTfiNTMIAl)
articles,
735
but grammar
called for here

it.
between two
fiv
can do nothing with
If
is
treated as a substantive, that
would
call for to as
to be 'Ave^-q (Eph. 4:9).
Moulton^ finds
ttju ayair-qv
several examples
TTiv TTOLeXs
in late papyri of 6 as relative, like

TTju
(B. M., p. 301),
x^pa
8,
Trjf
mwKtv
(p. 304).
The only
real difficulty in
Rev. 1:4,
etc.,
is
the nominative use, and
that was not insuperable
when the
exigencies of the sentence de-
manded it. phrase among the

ness of God.
VIII.
It is possi])le
that this phrase had come to be a set

rts
Christians for the eternity and unchangeableas relative see under
For the possible use of
VIII. Interrogative
(a)
KcDs,
Pronouns (dvTwvujXLaL
rts
p(OTT|TLKai).
kI%.
Ti9.
The
root of the interrogative
(Thess.
Cf. Ionic
KOTepos), indefinite
ns
(cf.
re),
is
at
bottom the same as the
Indo-Germanic root quis and Latin quis {aliquis, que).^ Curiously enough some of the grammars, Monro's Homeric Grammar, for example, give no separate or adequate discussion of the interrogative pronouns.
1.
Substantival or Adjectival.
Tts is either adjectival as
rtm
like
txLaSbv txeTe;
Tts v-Kkbeiêv;
(Mt. 5
46), or, as
more commonly, substantival
(Mt. 3:7).
inative
The Absence of Gender. That it appears only in the nomand accusative is noteworthy. This fact probably had something to do with the gradual retreat of tLs before ttoTos.^ The
2.
neuter in the N. T. occurs with adjectives only, as
tL
ayadov in
Mt. 19
3.
TToTos.^
16.
Tts
= 7rotos. An
As
opposite tendency
is
seen in the use of
t'ls
Hatzidakis'^ has
Euripides.
New
:
shown examples of this idiom as early as Testament illustrations one may note tLs
t'lv^s
ovTos h(JTLV OS
: ; .
(Lu.7:49),
,
oi
\6yoL ovtol oOs dj^rt/SaXXere (Lu.

:
24 17 cf itola 24 19) tU eoTiv ovtos 6 vl6s tov avdpw-Kov (Jo. 12 34) Only once'' is ttoTos used with the article (Jas. Cf. Lu. 4 36. 4 14, and here B omits 17), while we find ris 17 <xo4)ia. (Mk. 6:2), Sometimes tU and irolov are used toTts 1? aWla (Ac. 10 21), etc.
:
gether.
It
might seem at
ets
first
as
if
the distinction were here

Pet. 1:11)
insisted on, as in
Tiva
rj
ttoZov Kaipbv (1
and
wo'iov
oIkovti
last
t'ls
tottos
(Ac. 7:49).
But tautology seems

1
plain in the
example and
may
be true of
Pet. 1
11,
but not certainly
CI. Rev., April, 1904, p. 155.
Cf. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 194; Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 117, 244.

lb., p. 164.
">
Einl., p.
207
f.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 176.
736
so.^

In
NEW TESTAMENT h Toiq..
Mk. 4 30 W. H.
:
read
kp tIvl,
:
but some MSS. have
Cf. also
ris Kai iroTairos in
4. Indeclinable ri.
Lu. 7 39, which is not tautological. In Jo. 18 38, tI kanv a.\y}Qei.a, the neuter in
:
the predicate calls for no special remark.
So Gal. 3
19.
Cf.
Latin quid and English what in such a sentence.

of
This idiom be(tis),
longs to the ancient Greek and distinguishes between the essence
a thing
(rl)
it
and the
classification of
a thing
as Gilder-
(Syntax of CI. Gk., p. 59). Cf. voxels rlpes kare; (Ac. 19:15) and tI eanv apdpcoiros (Heb. 2:6). But this explanation will not hold for 1 Jo. 3:2, rl e<j6ij.eda, nor Ac. 13 25, tI
sleeve puts
:
k/xe
vTTOPoetTe.
The
text in Acts
is
not certain.
In the
this
development outside of the N. T.^

rl is
The kolpt] shows modern Greek "the

p. 55).
neuter
used with
all
genders and cases both in the singular

Cf. tL (hpa
and plural" (Vincent and Dickson, Handb.,

etrat;
'what o'clock is it?' Ti 7umtKa; 'which woman?' Thumb, Handb., p. 94. It is not unusual in classical Greek^ to have tI as
predicate to ravra, as in Lu. 15
eaTLP.
:
26
tI ap
eir]
raOra, Jo. 6
:
9 ravra
TL
So probably tI ravra Trotetre; (Ac. 14 15), though H here may be 'why' and not predicative. The usual construction appears in Ac. 17 20 rlpa deXa ravra elpai (cf. Jo. 10 6), 11 17 eyu) In Ac. 21 33 rts and ri are sharply disris rjiir]p; cf. Lu. 8:9. tinguished. The use of ri with yipofiat is hardly in point here (Ac. 5 24; 12 18) as it is found in the Attic* rl yevoofxaL. In Jo. 21 21 ovros 8^ rl; we must supply yeprjaerai. In Ac. 23 19, ri karip o exîs, 5. Predicate Use of rl ivith rovro. we find the full expression. In Lu. 16 2, rl rovro aKovoo irepl aov, we meet the abbreviated idiom. Cf. Ac. 14 15 rl ravra (see also Cf. Lu. 1 66; Ac. 5: 24. The phrase rl wpds iiixas (Mt. 27: 9). 4), ri rrpbs ae (Jo. 21:22) is matched by the Attic ri ravr' knol (Kuhner-Gerth, II, 417; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 177). Cf. Blass {ib) also compares rl yap not rovs ovTo^ rl (Jo. 21:21). eô) KplpeLP (1 Cor. 5 12) with the infinitive in Arrian, Diss.
:
Epict.,
ii,
:
17. 14.
13),
Tt
it
efxol
/cat
aol (Jo.
4, etc.) is in
the
LXX
(2 Ki. 3
but
is
also a
Greek idiom
(ellipsis,
Kiihner-
Gerth,
6.
ib.).
In Alternative Questions.
Kotpri.
from the
Tls
when
worepo^
unknown
in ancient Greek.^
is nearly gone might have been used is not Indeed even in Latin quis occurs
Quality in general
sometimes instead of the more usual

1
wter."
Ib.
jîf^
In the
LXX
irorepos
Blass, Gr. of
N.
T., p. 17G.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 1G4.

3,
74^ obs.
4;.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 177.
Draeger, Hist. Synt., p. 103.
PRONOUNS ("ANTnNTMIAl)
is
737
and the particle irSrepov occurs only once, and Moulton- finds only one example of TroreSo in the N. T. Torepos poi in the papyri, and that unintelligible. does not occur as an adjective. So in Mt. 9 5 rt yap kcmv emosupplanted by
t'ls
that in Job (literary).^
ir<jiTpov eiirelv
rj
eiirelv,
21
31
:
t'ls
eK toju 8vo eirolriaev,

:
27: 21 rlva
7
:
deXere airo roiv hho.

: :
Cf. also 23
17,
19; 27
17;
Mk. 2:9; Lu.
42;
Moulton^ notes that "whether, 22 27; 1 Cor. 4 and predicts that "the best irorepos," archaic as adjectivally, is as future. English of the the will be of the two" Cf. wodev in Soph., Tr. 421. Interrogafive. tLs Double 7. The languages.^ Cf. t'ls t'lvos Indo-Germanic other in It is common t'l apxi in Mk. 15 24. t'ls 33. So Clem. epyaTTjs, Hom. k<jTLv 2, in Lu. but not NBDL (W. H. also 19 t'ls t'l have 15, MSS. Some
21; Ph.
1
:
22.
and Nestle read
t'l).
Cf.
iiK'LKov-
rjX'LKTjv
in Jas. 3
5.
came to be used as inter8. rogatives, so t'ls drifted occasionally to a mere relative. We have seen (1 Tim. 1 7) how the relative- and the interrogative come to be used side by side. "In English, the originally interrogative pronouns 'who' and 'which' have encroached largely on the use
As
Relative.
Just as
6s
and
octtls
"^ of the i^rimitive relative 'that.'
Moulton's sketch of the
facts''
makes
usage
day.*^
ekKvo-r],
it
clear that in the
N.T.
t'ls
may be
relative
if
the exigencies
call for
is
it.
Moulton finds it only in the illiterate papyri, but the supported by inscriptions^ and by the Pontic dialect toevpop
Moulton^ gives from the papyri,

B.U. 822
the inscriptions see
t'ls
-yeopyov
t'ls
aurd
(iii/A.D.); t'lpos eav XPi-o^v exvs,
From
av KaKOJs
B.M. 239 (Iv/a.d.). Trotijaet, J.H.S., XIX, 299.
Moulton^ also quotes Jebb on Soph., 0. T. 1141: "Tts in classical Greek can replace octls only where there is an indirect question." The plainest New Testament example of t'ls as 6s appears to be Mk. 14 36 ov t'l ey<h deXo) dXXd t'l ah. Cf. Mt. 26 39 ovx ws 32 kydi OeXcc, dXX' ws av. But it is not much more so than Mt, 15 0170ovK exovaLP t'l cjyayoxxLv (cf Mk. 8 1 f .) and Mk. 6 36 IW
:
kX'lvj] (Mt. 8:20), c})ay wcxlv. Cf. ovk exet ttoO t'l See in the papyri, ovdiv exc^ t'l tol14). but oTov 00,70) (Mk. 14 ijaco aoL, B.U. 948 (iv/v A.D.), as quoted by Moulton {CI. Rev., 1904, But even so Xenophon has this idiom, and Sophocles, Oed. p. 155)
paaoÔLV eavTols
Thank., Gr., p. 192.

Prol., p. 77.
^
^
Thompson,
Prol., p. 9:3
Synt., p. 74.
Simcox, Lanp;. of the N. T., p. 67.

f.;
3
^
lb.
CL
Rev., Apr., 1904, p. 154
f.
Dieterich, Untcrs., p. 200.
Thumb,
Thcol. Litcrzaturzcit., xxviii, p. 423 (quoted in Moulton, Prol.,
p. 94).
Prol., p. 93.
: .
738

which looks Hke an indirect question.
Col. 317, has ovk ex tL 0cD,
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:
Cf. Winer-Moulton, p. 211; Winer-Schmiedel, p. 240,
direct question (deliberative question).
Cf. the direct question in

:
Mt. 6
Tai
31 with the indirect in 6

9.
ample) and see
So in Mt. 10 19 (first exBut the second example in Mt. 10 19 {doOrjae:
25.
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
It is
made
so that
tI is relative, tI kfxe uiropoelre elvai, ovk dixl kyoi.

:
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.
el in
24, ol8a ae ris el (Lu.

:
4
:
34
10.
also).
Cf. the prolepsis av
Jo. 8
25.
:
So Ro. 14
:
4,
The
rhetorical questions in
Lu. 11:5; 15 4, 8; Jas. 3 13 are not, of course, instances of this usage.^, Perhaps the anacoluthon in Lu. 11:11 (riva 8e e^ vnuv t6v
may' have arisen because of this idiom. and 6s is, of course, usually maintained (Jo. 16 18; Ac. 23 19 f.; Heb. 12 7). It is at least noteworthy that in 1 Cor. 15 2 Paul changes from 6s (used four times) to tIul Tidy CO. An indirect question comes with a jolt and makes one wonder if here also the relative use of ris docs not occur. In Mt. 26 62 (ovdh airoKplvj] t'l ovtoL crov Karap-apTVpovaiv ;) we may have an indirect question (cf. Mk. 14: 60), though irpos would be usual (cf. Mt. 27 It is better to follow W. H. with two separate 14). questions^ and even so tI = tI karcv 6. The use of tIs as relative Blass^ calls "Alexandrian and dialectical." The LXX (Lev. 21
irarepa alrrjaeL
eTrtScocret;)
The
distinction
:
between
:
ris
17 avdpWTVos
Tts)
TLVL ecLP y,
Deut. 29
it,
18
av-qp
it is
t'luos,
Ps. 40
6 ovk eariv
does show examples of
but
not confined to Egypt, as
has been already shown.^ Brugmann (Griech. Gr., p. 561) finds Tts as relative in Boeotian and even rarely in the older Attic.
9.
Adverbial Use.
The neuter accusative
tL is
frequently used
N. T. This is classical and common and calls for little comment. It still appears in modern Greek (Thumb, p. 94). See Mt. 7 3 (rt /3Xe7rets to Ka.p(f)os;) 8 26 (rl detXoi
in the sense of 'why' in the
:
:
tare;) 19
17; 20
6, etc.
ably have Tt= 'why.'

aa^âaiv 6 ovk
^ 2 8
'iêarip;
In Ac. 14: 15 ri raCra TroteTre we probCf. Mk. 11:3. In Mk. 2 24 rt TroLov(xi.v toIs note 'why,' though tL is followed by 6. It
:
As Simcox
does, Lang, of the
N.
T., p. 69
f.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 241; Moulton, Prol., p. 93.
W.-Sch., p. 241; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 331. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 241. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 175.
PRONOUNS
is
('ANTiiNTiMIAl)
739
:
interesting to note ttws

:
rj
tI,
14
22
:
TL
yeyovev
on we
:
see the full
(Lu. 2
49; Ac. 5
:
4, 9, etc.).
Mt. 10 19; Lu. 12 11. In Jo. form of the common tL 6tl Here H still='why.' But in I'm tL
:
(1 Cor. 10 29 and Mt. 9:4; 27 46; Lu. 13 7; Ac. 4 25; 7 26) It is not unknown in TL is really the subject of yevrjTat (ellipsis).
:
: :
Attic Greek.i
It is
common
in
W. H. never LXX.
print twrt
(cf.
Mt. 9
4; Lu. 13
7).
There is very little difference between 10. With Prepositions. Tt='why' and 8ta Tt='because of what' (Mt. 15:2, 3; 17:19; Lu. 24 38, etc.) Kara tL (' according to what ') is practically how.' Cf. Lu. 1:18. For ^j; Hi't see Mt. 5 13. But 7rp6s ri (Jo. 13 28)= 'for what purpose.' In Jo. 13 22 Trept tIvos \eyei. there is no such idea. But purpose again is expressed by els tL (Mt. 14 31; 26 8;
:
.
'
Mk. 14:4;
11.
Ac. 19:3).
Particles.
:
With
tI
use of
yap (Ro. 3
Tt (11
:
3;
Paul in particular is fond of the rhetorical 4 2, etc.), tL ovv (3 1, 9, etc.), tI ert (3 7;

:
19),
dXXd
4), ^ rt (11
:
2).
Cf. rts apa in Lu. 22
23 and
rl-dpa 1:66; Ac. 12

12.
18.
Tt
As Exclamation. In Mt. 7: 14 W. H. read on (causal), not (jTevr} TTuXr/. But in Lu. 12 49 Kal ri BeXoo d i]8rj avr](j)dy] there is
T]
:
no doubt of the text. W. H. punctuate as a question, but Nestle as an exclamation. Examples of exclamatory rt='how' are found in 2 Sam. 6 20; Song of Sol. 7:6 and in the modern Greek, t'l KoKos avdpunrosl Cf. Mullach, Vulg., pp. 210, 321; Winer-Moulton, p. 562. Blass^ compares the Hebrew f^^. On the whole it is best
:
to take TL in Lu. 12
49= 'how.'
It
is,
13. Indirect Questions.
of course, the ancient
have
t'ls
in
an indirect question.
oo-Tis
But
in the
idiom ^ to N. T. the indirect in:
terrogative
has disappeared in this idiom save in Ac. 9
6
:
(MSS. divided
29
t6
irvvdavo/jLaL
neuter article
t'l
good example of t'ls occurs in Ac. 10 t'lvl \6yco fxeTeTrefjLxpaade jJLe. In Luke we meet the rather frequently before the indirect question. So
here).
:
a.v
ek\oL (1
62), TO
t'ls
au
eL-q
(9
46).
Cf. 22
23, 24, etc.
Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 158) sees no special point in the article (cf. English "the which"). Paul sometimes uses it also (Ro. 8 26;
:
Th. 4
1 t6
irojs).
by the
p.
article.
The question is brought out rather more sharply The Attic use of to t'l, to ttoIov (Thompson, Synt.^
something previously mentioned is like Herm., Sim., VIII, i, 4, Clem., Horn., i, 6. Sometimes it is difficult to decide whether t'ls
Cf.
2
74) in reference to
our
"The what?"
14. Tis or TLs.
W.-Sch., p. 240.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 177.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 74.
Cf. Drug., Gricch. Gr., p. 561.
740
or

So
1
NEW TESTAMENT
^rjTcov
TLS is right.
Pet. 5
W. H. have
KaTaTnetv with
nva
in the margin.
But
Nestle actually prints ^riTwv ripa KaTaTnelv.
In Heb. 5 In Jas. 5
(6)
1.
:
12
W. H.
read
is,
tlvo.
13 the reading
of
and Nestle nva (both indefinite). course, ns, not rts. So 1 Cor. 7 18.
:
Ho to?.
Qualitative.
It occurs sixteen times in direct questions.
It
is still
used in its original qualitative sense.

:
Clearly this
(cf.
is
:
true
32),
in Jo. 12
33, arjiialvoiv
TTolu)
davaru)
i]iJ.eXKei> a-KodvriaK.eLV
18
is
Ro. 3
of
1
1
27 {ha toIov v6p.ov; tu)p tpywv;).

:
The same thing

cf.
true
Cor. 15
35
{ttoIco o-dj/xan tpxovTai.;),
also 1 Pet. 2
in
:
20.
In
Pet.
1:11 we
find both
r'lva
and
:
iroiov
apparent contrast.
Other possible instances are Jo. 10

14.
:
32; kc. 7 49
:
The common
etc.)
:
iv Tola
kôvala
(Mt. 21
is
23;
(LXX); Jas. 4 Mk. 11 28; Ac.

:
:
4 7, LXX, Lu. 24 19.

(Lu. 9
:
seems also to retain the qualitative

qualitative sense
clear in
force.
Cf. also
The
D toIov Tvevnaros eare

used regularly^= tolos. Indeed
o'iSaTe
55),
2. Non-qualitative.
a spurious passage, however. But some examples clearly have lost the
qualitative sense.
Tts,
In the modern Greek
tolos is
and
is
the usual interrogative.

this
Note the accent

of
irolos
examples of
weakened sense
See
Jannaris" finds as early
as iEschylus and Euripides.

TTola r}fjLpa 6 Kvpios vfxcbv epx^rai
(a), 3.
In Mt. 24: 42 ovk
there seems to be merely the force

:
43 Tola 4>v\aKr\, Lu. 12 39 iroia Rev. 3 3 Tolav copav. This is probably true also of Mt. 22 36 Tola hroXr] (Mk. 12 28). In Lu. 5 19 Tolas and 6 32 f. Tola x<ipts either point of view will answer. 3. In Indirect Questions. It occurs sixteen times (not counting
of
Tts,
not quality.
:
Cf
also 24
iopa,
Ac. 23
34 Tolas
eirapx^loLS,
:
Lu. 9
55) in this construction against four for
ottoTos.
Cf. in-
dicative in
Mt. 21
:
24; 24
42; Jo. 12
33; 21
19,
junctive in Lu. 5
19
/ii)
Tolas eiaeveyKcoaLv.
YloXos
and the subis found in the
LXX and in the papyri.

(c)
Ho 0-09.
Less Frequent than
ttoTos.
1.
It occurs chiefly in the
Synoptic
Gospels (twenty-seven times in

2.
:
W. H.
:
text).
Meaning. It is used in the sense of 'how much' (ttoo-oj Mt. 'how great' {rbaov Mt. 6 23), and of 'how many' {Toaovs aprovs exere; Mt. 15 34). Eleven examples of Toaco occur almost like an adverb (Mt. 7: 11; 10 25, etc.). The use of Toaos xpovos cos (Mk. 9 21) is noteworthy.
12
12),
:
:
1 2
Thumb, Handb.,
Hist.
p. 94.
Gk.
Gr., p. 163.
Cf. Dieterich, Unters., p. 202.
PRONOUNS
3.
('ANTflNTMIAl)
741
In Indirect Questions.
:
Sec ovk
20, etc.
aKoveis irbca aov KaraiiapTvpovaiv;
(Mt. 27
4.
13).
Cf. Ac. 21
The Exclamatory Use. This is found in Lu. 15 17 iroaot fxov, and in 2 Cor. 7: 11 iroarjv KareLpyaaaro vtitv The exclamatory use of ttcos may be mentioned (Mk. <7Tou8r]u. Cf. ws in Ro. 10 15 and 11 33. Cf. 10 23 f.; Jo. 11 36).
:
uladiOL rod Trarpos
TToaos
{d)
1.
COS
in
Mk.
21.
Tlr]X{/co<;.
Rare.
It is
7:4) and
the
W. H. put
found only twice in the N. T. (Gal. 6 riXlKOLs in the margin of Gal. 6

(cf.
11;
11.
Heb.
It
is
rare also^ in the
LXX
Zech. 2:2), and has disappeared from
modern Greek vernacular, Indirect Questions. Both of the N. T. examples are indirect questions. The example in Heb. 7 4 describes greatness of Melchisedek (how great), the one in Gal. 6 11 presents the size of
2.
: :
the letters (how large).

(e)
noraTTo?.
form for iroSaTos. It no longer in the N. T. means 'from what country,' but merely 'of what sort' = 7roros. It is (Dan. O Sus. 54, "where it keeps somefound only once in
It is the late
LXX
thing of
its original local
meaning")-^
It exists in the late

:
vernacular.'
It occurs
once in a direct question (Mt. 8

:
27)
Greek and
find
once probably in an exclamation (2 Pet. 3 11). Four times we it in indirect questions (Mk. 13 1; Lu. 1 29; 7 39; 1 Jo. 3:1). In Lu. 7 39 it is contrasted with tIs.
: :
:
(/)
Uorepo'?.
As a pronoun it has vanished from the LXX (Thackeray, Gr., The only p. 192) and from the papyri (Moulton, ProL, p. 77).
example
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
utruman.
28. 4.
Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 176) cites
Herm.,
Sim.,
ix,
IX. Indefinite
(a)
Pronouns
(dirro)vi)[JLLaL dopto-Toi).
Th.
Jannaris'' calls it "irrational" to accent the 1. The Accent. nominative tIs rather than tis. But then the nominative singular never has an accent unless at the beginning of a sentence or in philosophical writings (Thompson, Syntax, p. 76) and cannot
otherwise be distinguished in looks from

2.
tIs
the interrogative.
is
Relation
1 2
to tLs.
Tlic
same connection
*
seen in the Latin
Thackeray, Gr.,
II).
p. 192.
Moulton, Prol., p. 95. Ui.st. Gk. Gr., p. 1G3.
742

and
quis-quis
(cf. rio-rts
quis, ali-quis
in Argive dialect).^
Brug-
same word as tl and cites /CIS in the Thessalian dialect. Just as in modern Greek tLs disappears before ttolos, so tls vanishes before KaveLs (Thumb, Handh., p. 95). But in the N. T. ns is still very common, especially in Luke and Acts. In general the usage is in harmony with
considers -kl- in ov-d, toWclkl-s the
mann^
do not have evLOL in the N. T. In and tL ypaô:. Cf Lu. 7 40. See tls tL, Ro. 8 24, in margin of W. H. As a substantive tls may be equal to 3. Tis as Substantive.
that of ancient Greek.
:
We
Ac. 25
26 note
:
ypa\paL
'any one,' 'anybody' or 'anything,' as in ov5e t6v irarepa tls cttiMt. 11:27; ttws bvvaTal tls, 12 29; el tls deXei, 16 24; kav TLS vjuv eU-Q tl (note both examples like tlvos tl Lu. 19 8; cf.
yLvcocTKeL,
: : :
Mk.
be
'
11
25; Col. 3
13),
:
Mt. 21
3.
For several instances of

of
tls
tl
'anything' see Ac. 25
5, 8, 11.
But the substantive use

tls
may
= somebody
Mk.
15
:
'
or 'something,' as epxeTaL
Lu. 8
:
49, bpanwv
bk TLS
36, virb tlvos
Heb. 3
4.
Cf. Lu. 8
tls
46.
Often the
partitive genitive (or ablative) occurs with
as substantive.
So
e/c
Tim
tO:v ypafJifxaTeuv
:
Mt. 12
tls
38, tls twv

is
iiadrjTcJop
Lu. 11:
1,
tls
:
Tov ox^ôv 12
13.
The
plural
usually
Cor. 9
22.
In
Homer
is
was
'some,' as Mk. 9 1; 1 sometimes " public opinion, the
man
75).
in the street" (Gladstone,
This idiom
Lu. 12
the
:
5xXoi;,
quoted in Thompson's Syntax, p. very nearly represented by elirev 8e tls k tov 13 (cf. 11; 1; 7 36). In Heb. 2:6, hepiapThpaTo
:
TOV
TLS,
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
:
TLves, is
the correct text. the meaning
In Lu. 7
18, irpoaKaXeaap.Pos 8vo tlvcls

it
Tojv fxadriTojv,
may
be 'about two,' but

it is
could
mean
:
'certain two' just as well.

TrpoaKoXeadptvos TLvas 8vo,
is
The same
is els
tiling is true of
less likely
Ac. 23
23,
where
even
rts
that the idea

are quite
'about two.'
Classical also
:
(Lu. 22:50; Jo. 11:49,

tls
and probably Mk. 14

varied.
5.
47).
The
adjectival uses of
TLva, Jas. 1
1
With Substantives. Here rts may = 'a kind of,' as cnrapxhv Cf Ac. 17 20, though this is not true of Col. 18.
: .
:
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 244. lb. Interrogative and indefinite
is
at
lat.
bottom the same word.

Sprache, p. 279.
Cf. Har-
tung, tjber die Casus in der griech.
und
2
:
743
23 because of the negative,^ But the commonest use of ns with substantives is= 'certain' (really rather uncertain!). Thus Cf. rt, 11, etc. tepevs TLs, Lu. 1 5; apdpcoTos rts, Lu. 14: 2, 16; 15
: :
i;5cop,
Ac. 8
36.
Sometimes
it is difficult
to give
more
force to
:
TLS
than
the English indefinite article.

ev TLVL xoXei,
:
Cf.
vo/jllkos tls,
Lu. 18 2. Indeed KpLTtjs TLS rjv is too emphatic. true that our "certain"
6.
it
is
25; nearly always
Lu. 10
With
Adjectives.
The
^
effect is rhetorical.^
There
is
"a
double adjectival sense."

great
Thus Ac. 8
in his
9,
tlvo.
iieyav,
= 'si
very
man' ('some great man'),
own
estimation.
Blass*
needlessly considers this passage an interpolation.

:
Heb. rather intensifies 0o/3epd. The where tls 10 in Hjeb. tl. the matter as 2 soften ^paxv tend to 7, tone may 9, 26 ^poicrLjiov, 1 46 tl ayadop, Ac. 25 Jo. 41 tl 24 in Lu. But pLKpbv tl, we have kolvov, 2 Cor. 11 16 14 14 tl Ro. tl, a(T4)a\es
Cf. also
27, (f)oêpa tls eKdoxv,
: : : : :
rather the substantive use of
tl.
But
in TvcfKos
:
tls,
Lu. 18
35,
both are adjectives.

(Ac. 27:1).
7.
Cf. oXkos tls (Lu. 22
59)
and
erepos tls
As
:
Predicate.
Here
:
rts
may
tl,
be emphatic
'somebody in
See also
particular/ as Ac. 5
36, Xe7coj^ dvai TLva iavTov (cf.
8:9).
where note difference between In Gal. 6 3 note in d boKel tls dvai tl prjbev dv both TL and TLves. senses of tls. But the predicate may have the other meaning of So 1 Cor. 3 7; 10 19; Gal. 6: 15. In TL ('anyone,' 'anything'). Gal. 2 6 compare tl and otoIol.
Gal. 2
6, dTro to^v
boKovvTwv dvai
:
8.
The Position of
tls.
It is
not material.
els
Kdofi-qv
It naturally follows
tlvo.,
the substantive or adjective as in
Lu. 10
:
38,
but
Ti^/es
we
often have the other order as in TLva

:
xvpc^v,
Lu. 21
2.
may
9.
indeed begin a sentence (Ph. 1 15; 1 Cor. 8:7). In Mt. 16 28 TLvti is the antecedent of Antecedent. oLTLves, but here o'lTLves is more definite than ot would have been.
As
Cf. Lu. 8
2.
In 2 Cor. 10
It is
1
:
10. Alternative.
fxkv
2 note nms tovs X. used to express alternative ideas, as

:
TLves
:
8k
.
in
Ph.
15.
Cf vt6
.
tlvcov
:
viro
tlvccu
tlv^s
aXXcoi' de
in Lu. 9
11.
erepos in 1 Cor. 3 4. 7 f and tls These are not printed tls. The Negative Forms ov tls, as single words by W. H., except ij-titl as an interrogative particle expecting the answer No, as in Mt. 26 22, juiyrt eyoi el^L, KvpLe; cf. Jo. 4 33. It is all a matter with the editor whether in ha mt tls
(jltj
:
:
W.-Sch., p. 242.
W.-M., p. 212 f.; Blass, Gr. Moulton in W.-M., p. 213.
of
N. T. Gk.,
*
p. 178.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 178.

744
diry, 1

Cor.
1:15
:
(cf.
Eph. 2:9), we
:
may
not really have

it.
/jl-^tls.
The
uri
separation in Heb. 3
17)
13; 4
11
is
against
Cf., for instance,
TLPa (2 Cor. 12
and
fxrjri.
in the next verse.
The anacoluKal oIktlpijloI
thon with
(Ph. 2
1)
rtra here is noticeable.
12. Indeclinable tl.

:
The use
of tls with
(xirXa.'yxvo.
rt.
may
be compared with indeclinable
Indeclinable
p. 244).
TL itself
(6)
survives in
modern Greek
/cart
(Moulton, ProL,
El9 = Tt9.
This is merely one usage of els, the cardinal numeral. The idiom is common after Plutarch, but traces of it occur earlier.^ Moulton 2 sees no difference between els and tls in Aristophanes, Av., 1292. The papyri furnish similar examples. "The fact that els progressively ousted tls in popular speech, and that even in classical Greek there was a use which only needed a little diluting to make it essentially the same, is surely enough to prove that the development lay entirely within the Greek language, and only by accident agrees with Semitic."^ This use of els alone, with genitives, with substantives, was treated at the close of the chapter on els as alternative proAdjectives. For els tls see tls. For els
and ov8ds (n-qSeis) see Negative see later, and for els Pronouns under xi. = any one' no matter who, anything' no matter what. (c) Ha? Cf. quidvis.* We see this construction in Ac. 2: 21 (LXX), ttSs 6s eav eTLKoXearjTaL. So Gal. 3 10 (LXX) Lu. 14 33. Has with a participle may have the same force, like TraPTos clkovovtos tov "Koyov, Mt. 13 19 (cf. Lu. 11 4), and ttSs 6 opyLôixeuos, Mt. 5 22, etc. For xSs ov = 'no one' see negative pronouns. For the adjectival uses of ttSs, see chapter on Adjectives and chapter on
noun
ov
'
'
Article.
(d)
'O Aelva. This rare pronoun was current chiefly in colloquial

Gr., p. 166).
p. 98).
It survives in the modern means "Mr. So-and-So." It occurs only once in the N. T., -n-pos top Selpa, Mt. 26 18. X. Alternative or Distributive Pronouns (a,VT(avv[iiai SaT-q-
speech (Jannaris, Hist. Gk.
Greek (Thumb,
It
pCai).
apply a term from Êschylus in lieu of a better one. The repronoun aWrjXcop has been already'' treated. "A/x^co has vanished^ from the Koij'17. (a) 'A/jL(f)6TepoL. kix4>bTtpoL has taken its place. It continues in the later Greek,^ but Thumb
I
ciprocal
'
Hatz., Einl., p. 207; W.-Sch., p. 243.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 77.
2
3
ProL, p. 97.
lb.
Moulton, ProL, p. 57. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 320.
PRONOUNS
('ANTflNTMIAl)
745
docs not give it for modern Greek. It is frequent in the LXX,^ but is found only fourteen times in the N. T. It occurs without the article in all but five instances. So Mt. 9 17. Once the article is used with the substantive, djuôrepa to. irXoZa, Lu. 5 7.
: :
The other four examples have the article before the pronoun, It is possible, even probable, that 18. like ot 6.ix4>bTepoL, Eph. 2 from the word. It seems disappeared in two instances duality has
:
certain that three items are referred to in Ac. 23
8 and in Ac. 19
16 the seven sons of Sceva are alluded to. A corruption of the text 16), but it is hardly necesis possible (cf. the Bezan text for 19
:
"the undeniable Byzantine use"^ sary to postulate that in view ''both" in old Enghsh). The (cf. two of d/xôrepot for more than and "the Sahidic and some also examples papyri show undoubted But Moulton" hesitates 'all.'"^ as later versions took aix(f)OTepo)v early examples are so which of colloquiahsm to admit in Luke "a Moulton. On the Dr. from objection surprising rare," a rather quoted to admit here Acts in passages in the two whole one is safe bearing on this examples papyri The dpôTepot. the free use of
of
usage include N.P. 67, 69 (iv/A.D.) "where it is used oi four men" (Moulton, CI Rev., 1904, p. 154), probably also B.M. 336 (ii/A.D.). See Bury, CI. Rev., XI, p. 393, for the opposite view. Nestle {Bed.
Phil. Woch., 1900,
for
N. 47) shows that German

persons.
also uses
"beide"
three and more
(6) "E/cao-To?.
In the
LXX
e/cdrepos is still
used to a limited ex-
tent (Gen. 40:5) and occasionally = eKao-ros, without dual idea (cf. In O.P. 256 (i/A.o.) and B.M. d/xcôTepot), as often in the papyri.^ and of four in G.H. 23'' three of used is eKarepos 333 (ii/A.D.) Rev., Moulton, CI 1901, p. 440, and proper use of (ii/B.c). See eKarepov fxepos. But in the to irpos (a.d. 170), P.Oxy. 905 in eKarepos is common in the N. T., "Emo-ros appear. not does eKarepos N. T. by Kade, Kadeis and Greek modern in replaced be to but comes
Kadevas (cf. KaO' els in the
1.
N.
T.).
Without Substantive.
This
is
indeed the usual idiom, as in
Mt. 16:27; Jo. 6:7. Never with the article. 2. With Substantive. Heb. 3 13; Rev. 22 2. Thus very rare.
: :
So Eph. 4
16;
Thaok., Gr., p. 192.
2 6 6
Moulton,
lb., p. 79.
Prol., p. 80.
'
lb.
lb.
Cf. Thack., Gr., p. 192.

p. 9G; Jann., Hist.
Cf.
Thumb, Handb.,
(listrib.
Gk.
Gr., p. 178.
On
the whole
subject of
pron. see Brug., Die distrib.
and
die kollckt.
Num.
der
indoger. Spr., 1907.

746
3.

With els. This is very frequent. So We even have ava eh e/caaros, Rev. 21
:
els
'haaTos
Mt. 26
22,
19,
etc.
21.
But
in Ac. 21
e^Tjyet TO Kad' ev eKaarov Siv e-irolrjaev,
we must not^ connect
tKaarov
with
4.
ev.
With
:
Genitive.
It is
:
common
This 33
is
also with the genitive, as in
Lu. 13
5.
15;
Eph. 4
7.
Partitive Apposition.
frequent also.
Thus
:
d<^^re
eKacTTOS
Mt. 18
is
35, kiropevovTO Tavres

:
eKaaros
:
Lu. 2
3, etc.
The
is
same thing
6.
true in Eph. 5
vfxeXs Kad'
eva e/caaros.
This
classical construction.-
Rare in Plural.
So
kao-rot
Ph. 2
4,
but even here
W. H.
have
enaaros in the margin.
Heb. 8:11 by eKaaros rather than Cf. avrjp is an instance of independence of Hebrew literalism. Eph. ^vith and 4: 25 Is. Mt. 18 35 with Gen. 13 11; Ro. 15 2
7. Repetition.
:
Note the
repetition of 'haaros in
ta"^!*
(from Jer. 31 34).
This translation of
3 :5 (Winer-Schmiedel, p. 246). For avrjp (literal books) see Thackeray, Gr., p. 192.
(c)
UaaTos in the
LXX
AXXo?. Cf. Latin alius, Enghsh else. Used absolutely = 'An-other,' 'One Other.'' This is the commonest use of the pronoun. Cf. 1 Cor. 12 8-10 where aXXo; occurs six times. So Mt. 13 5-8 where ciXXa appears three times. But it is found alone also, as aWovs, Mt. 27 42. For aXXos rts see Lu. 22 59. Cf. ovbh 6.\\o (Gal. 5 10) = 'nothing else.' It occurs in modern Greek vernacular. 2. For Two. But ciXXos occurs where the idea of two is present (pair). Here erepos might have been used, but even in Euripides, /. T. 962 f., Blass^ finds ^drepoj' rb 8' aWo, though he considers it a "most striking encroachment" for aXXos to supplant erepos in this
1.
: : :
:
fashion.
8'
Moulton
G. H.
23''
{CI. Rev., 1901, p. 440) cites

ixev
aXXTjs
(ii/B.c); 8vo, rbv
eva
p.h Kal top aXKov B.U. 456

rrjs
/jllSls
rrjs
(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 appearing in Mt. 5

:
like failure
39, unless that
was
19
:
his source.
:
But the matter goes much further than that. aWrj refers to the other hand (xîp). In Jo.
ri
In Mt. 12
3
13
wpoiTov
eyd)
KOL Tov oXXov.^

for
Cf. also Jo. 18
16; 20
:
f.
32 note rod In Jo. 5 32

:
and aXXos are contrasted.

TrevTe,
aXXa
1
So Mt. 25 16, to. irevre ToXavra which Blass^ finds "complete illustration in classi* ^
6
W.-Sch., p. 246 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 179.

lb., p. 180.
Prol., p. 79.
W.-Sch., p. 245. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 180.
cal authors."
747
Mt. 19
10
:
9, TO.
There are other N. T. examples such as aWrjv in a\\a 8vo Mt. 25 17, a\\r]i> Mk. 10 11, aWop 8vo
12,
aWov
wapaKKTjTov Jo. 14:16.
3.
As
Adjective.
Common.
8,
Cf.
Mt. 2:12; 4:21; and

1
in
particular Rev. 14:6,

4.
15, 17, 18 and
Cor. 15:39, 41.
With
the Article.
It is
not frequent.
:
The
article sharply
:
John refers to a preceding example. Cf. Mt. 5 39; Mt. 27 61. alludes to himself in his Gospel as 6 aWos fjLadrjTr^s (18 16; 20 2,
: :
3,
is
be repeated, as in Jo. 18 16; 19 32. 4). This 5. The Use o/ctXXos aX\o = 'One One Thing, One Another.' In Ac. 2 12, classical and is illustrated in Ac. 19 32; 21 34.
article
: : : : :
The
may
aXXos
6.
Trpos
aWov, the idiom
is
almost reciprocal
like dXXiyXwj/.
Others.' We have dXXr? iikv aWt] In Contrast for 'Some a\\a 5e, Mt. 13 4 f. (cf. mi Cor. 15 :39 and 41; a ^j.kv erepot bk, Mt. 16:14; Kai dXXot bk ciXXo, Mk. 4:5); ol nh aWoov, Lu. 9:8; 6 els aXXot bk, Mk. 8 28; viro TLPcov aXXot 6 aWos, Rev. 17 10.
bk,
7. Ellipsis of
dXXos
is
possible in Ac. 5 29, Herpos Kal

: :
ol
(sc.
aXXot) airoaroXoL.
XotTToTs)
Blass^ cites also Ac. 2
14, Ilerpos avv tols (sc.

is
evbeKa.
But psychologically
this explanation
open to
doubt.
Blass^ finds this 8. The Use of dXXos and erepos Together. "probably only for the sake of variety." Certainly in 1 Cor. 12 9 f. no real distinction can be found between dXXos and erepos, which are here freely intermingled. But I am bound to insist on a real difference in Gal. 1 6 f The change is made from erepov to dXXo for the very reason that Paul is not willing to admit that it is a gospel on the same plane (aX\o) as that preached by him. He admits erepov, but refuses dXXo. The use of tl prj by Paul does not disturb this interpretation. The same thing would seem to
: : .
ei'a77Xtoj' rvevpa erepov be true of 2 Cor. 11 4, aWov 'Irjaovv erepov. It may be that variety (as in 1 Cor. 12 9 f.) is all that induces the change here. But it is also possible that Paul stig: :
matizes the gospel of the Judaizers as erepou (cf. Gal. 1 6) and the Spirit preached by them, while he is unwilling to admit an:
other
(dXXoj') Jesus even of the same type as the one preached by him. Besides, it is not to be forgotten that in 9. =' Different.' ancient Greek dXXoj itself was used for 'different kind.' Thompson {Syntax, p. 76) cites dXXa twu btKaloiv from Xen., Mem., IV, 4. 25.
Cf. also ctXXd in the sense of 'but.'
Cf. dXXd dXXr? in

-
Cor. 15
318.
39.
lb.
lb., p.
748

1
NEW TESTAMENT
5e,
Indeed in
Cor. 15
39, 41,
is
ciXXtj
rj
nh aXXrj
it is
expressly-
stated that the glory
In verse 40 hepa occurs. Here aXXos seems to be used in the sense of 'different,' like irepos. In Latin alius was often used where earlier Latin would
avri].
not
have used
10.
it
alter.
Cf. Draeger, Hist. Synt., p. 105.
This variation of &\\os has the same relation to It means 'belonging to another,' and occurs fourteen times in the N. T. Cf. Ro. 15 20. The con'AXXorptos.
that alienus has to alius.
trast with avTuv
is
seen in Mt. 17 25.

:
In Heb. 11 34
:
it
has the
notion of alienus.
(d)
1.
"Erepo?.
Absolutely.
So often as
in Lu. 14
19
f.,
but
it is
also
used
more frequently with substantives than is aXXos. Cf. Lu. 4 :43; Ac. 7: 18 (LXX), etc. For 'irepSs tls see Ac. 8 34; Ro. 13 9. For the genitive with erepos cf. Mt. 8 21. The article is also more common with erepos 2. With Article. than with &\\os. Cf. Mt. 10 23; 11 16, etc. 3. Second of Pair. A common, probably the original, use of
: :
:
'irepos is
surviving
repot),
a pair. Cf. Latin alter. It is the only dual pronominal word in the N. T. (except ap4>6and is common in the LXX^ and the papyri. ^ For avv
for the second of
piLq. see P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D,). The examples are rather abundant in the N. T. of this dual (comparative) sense (e-repos). So
erepa
Tov eva
ttXoIw,
Tov
:
erepov,
:
Mt. 6
24
av
r)
erepov,
11:3;
:
rw
erepco
f.;
Lu. 5
it
7.
Cf. also Lu. 7: 19
f.;
14
31; 16
13; 17: 34
18
10; 20
11.^
Not
:
radically different
:
from
this conception is
the use of
irkpav
for 'next,' as in Lu. Q
6,
erepco aa^daru),
56
eis
Kiop.ir]v,
Ac. 20
15
rf}
:
erepa.
Cf. also
Mt. 10
23.
See* also,
Tov 'irepov in
4.
Ro. 2:1; 13
8= 'neighbour.'
The two
things happen just to be dif-
=' Different.^
The
sense of 'different' grows naturally out
of the notion of duality.

ferent.
The word itself does not but merely 'one other,' a second of two. It does not necessarily involve "the secondary idea of difference of kind" (Thayer). That is only true where the context demands it. But note how Latin alter lends itself to the notion of change. ThompCf. Latin alius
and
alienus.
mean
'different,'
The N. T. examples
be "an euphemism for /ca/cos." So eyevero to etSos TOV Tpoacoirov avTov erepov, Lu. 9 29. Cf. also Ac. 2:4; Ro. 7 23; 1 Cor. 14:21; 2 Cor. 11:4; Gal. 1 6; Heb. 7:11, 13, 15; Ju. 7.
son-*
suggests that this sense
may
:
are rather numerous.
cf. W.-Sch., p. 244.
Mayser, Gr.,
p. 312.
Synt., p. 77.
PRONOUNS
Cf. also erepccs in Ph. 3
:
('ANTflNTMIAl)
749
15 and
erkpa
iJ.op4>ri
Mk.
:
16
12 (dis-
puted part of Mark.)^ Cf. Ac. 17:21. We have already seen that aXXos may be equal to 'different' (1 Cor. 15 39). "Erepoj occurs in verse 40 in the sense of 'different.' Ramsay (on Gal.
1 6) argues that, when erepos occurs in contrast with ciXXos, it means not 'different' (as Lightfoot in loco), but 'another of the same kind.' Moulton {Prol., p. 246) stands by Lightfoot in spite of Ramsay's examples. 5. =^ Another^ of Three or More. But erepos comes also to be employed merely for 'another' with more than two and with no
:
idea of difference.
two groups. Mt. 12 45,

:
This usage probably grew out of the use with So Lu. 10 1, aveSeLêv erepovs el38ofj.r]KovTa 8vo. In
:
eTTTOL
erepa irvev/jLaTa TrovrjpoTepa eavTOV, the notion of
difference
is
:
present.
32,
/cat
This difference
13.
may
also be implied
:
by
Luke
in 23
eVepot KaKovpyoi bvo.

: :
Cf. Lu. 8
3.
But
this is
hardly true of Ac. 2

that no other
in kind.
name
So in
is
at
:
In Lu. 19
In Ac. 4 12 the point of erepov is rather than that of Jesus, not that of difference 16-20 we have this order, 6 Trpcoros, 6 bevreall
pos, 6 erepos.
Cor. 4
6, els
VTep rod evds ^vaLovade Kara rod

erepos.
erepov,
the third
again presented by
:
Then, again,
:
erepot
occupies third place in Mt. 16
14 and Heb. 11
36.
In Mt. 15:
30
comes in the fifth place. Blass^ admits that this use of "at the close of enumerations may be paralleled from Attic writers." See further Lu. 3 18; Ro. 8:39; 1 Tim. 1 10. But in 1 Cor. 12 8-10 erepoj occurs in the third and the eighth places.
it
erepos
We
are not surprised then to learn that the papyri furnish plenty
of examples
more than two.^ Blass indeed and Moulton seems surprised that Luke should change the correct dXXos (Mk. 4 5-8; Mt. 13 5-8) to erepov in Lu. 8 6-8. But Luke is reinforced by Paul in this laxity as to erepos. Cf. ttoXXo, /cat erepa in Lu. 3 18. Moulton (CI. Rev., 1904, p. 154) calls this "incorrect erepos" and finds it in the papyri, as in O.P. 494 (ii/A.D.). But we do not need to hold erepos in leading strings. The "subtlety" (CI. Rev., 1901, p.
where
erepos refers to
considers this extension not correct,
440)
6.
is
only called for in that case.

Contrast.
In
"Erepos
may
also be used in contrast for

be.
'
the
one,'
'the other.'
in
So
Cor. 15:40, erepa p.'ev erepa
It is
ets
common
Mt. 6:24;
with 6
1
contrasts with other pronouns.
Thus with
:
in
6 els in
jx'ev,
Lu. 7:41; Lu. 17:34 ff.; with rts, Lu. 11:15 f.; Lu. 8 5 f.; with ot nkv and aXXot, Mt. 16 14. But
:
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 245.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 79.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 179.
750
NEW TESTAMENT
(m'?5-) nor oWerepos (m^?^-) occurs in the N. T., though ixr]deTpot is read in Prov. 24 21. In Clem. Horn. XIX, 12 we have oWhepos. For els eh (Mk. 10 37), (e) Other Antithetic Pronouns. 6 aXXos (Rev. 17 10) see els under 6 5e (Gal. 4 24 f.), 6 els els Numeral Adjectives. So likewise tis may be contrasted with TLs (Ph. 1 15), with aXXos (Lu. 9 7 f.), with eVepos (1 Cor. 3 4). os 5e see Demonstrative 6 8e, 6s ij.ev For the very common 6 fih Pronouns. The repetition of the substantive is to be noted also.
neither ovderepos
So
oIkos
:
7rt
oIkov
TTtTrret,
:
Lu. 11
17; 6 aaravas top aaravav eKâXKei,
Mt. 12 26 (cf. Lu. 11 18). This notion of repetition is seen in wepa /cat wepa (2 Cor. 4 16; cf. Heb. ?3i'^T ?2ii). Cf. also els Kal
:
els
(Mt. 20
els
21; 24
els
40
f.;
27: 38, etc.);
els 5e erepos,
Lu. 7: 41.
Lu. 9
:
For
Kal
ets
Kal
ets
see
Mk. 9:5= Mt.

els is
17
33.
This threefold repetition of

use of
XI.
(a)
1.
rhetorical.^
The
els,
distributive
with Kara and
dj'd (ev
Kad'
h,
els
Kad'
ava
els)
was
treated under
Numeral Adjectives. Negative Pronouns (dvTo>vu|JL(ai

Note
this accent rather
dpvriTiKaC).
OuSet?.
History.
than
ovdels.
Ovdels is
sup-
planted in modern Greek vernacular by

as negative particle in form
p. 171.
2. Ouêts.
dku.
Kapeis,
but
ovdev survives
Cf.- Jannaris, Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
This
is
made from
ovre eir (sometimes
also
from
ov8e
els,
'not even,'
sometimes in 35; 23:14; Ac. 15:9; 19:27; 26:26; 1 Cor. 13:2; 2 Cor. 11:9. Jaimaris^ finds it a peculiarity of the Alexandrian school. Meister:
Brugmann, Griech. Gr., p. 146) and occurs the best N.T. MSS. Cf. W. H.'s text for Lu. 22
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.,
is
p. 170.
that the change

3 * B
due to
But and
see Schwyzer, Perg. Inschr., p. 114, for idea

5
being pronounced aUke.
Att. Inschr., p. 259.

Gr., pp. 58
ff.
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, came in iv/B.c. and vanished ii/A.D. It was nearly extinct in N. T. times. See further chapters VI, in, (g), and
p. 53) that
VII,
3.
III, 2.
Gender.
the masculine and neuter.
The feminine form is less frequent in the N. T. than The word occurs with substantives
: : :
(Mk. 6: 5), with other pronouns {aXkos, Ac. 4 12; erepos, 17: 21), but usually alone, as in Mt. 5 13; 6 24. It is common with the
genitive (Lu. 18
:
34),
The
6).
adverbial use of ovdev
is
seen in Gal.
is
1 ovSeu bi.a4>kpL bovKov,

:
but the cognate accusative

Cf. ovbtv in 1 Cor. 7: 19.
is
a possible
:
explanation (Gal. 2
17,
ovbh
xpetaj' exo),
the neuter
In Rev. 3 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 classic writers, the and the Atticists.^ For examples in the
LXX
:
N. T.
see
Mt. 27
14; Jo. 1
3; Ac.
ecos ivos,
principle appears in ovk eaTLv
4 32; Ro. 3 10. The same Ro. 3 12 (Ps. 14 1, 3). Cf.

: :
: :
also the separation of ov Tore in 2 Pet.

5.
21.^
analogy of ttSs ov and distinctly found in Demosthenes.^ Cf. Lu. 12 6, ev k^ avTOJp OVK 'idTLV. So also 11 46; Mt. 10 29, tv e^ avrccv ov irecreLTaL, In Mt. 5 18 we have ev For ovbels ocrrts see oo-rts. ov In general the history of fxridds is parallel to that (6) Mr^Sei?.
Els
ov.
It is after the
emphatic, and
is
/jltj.
of
ovbels.
It
is
naturally
much
less
frequent and
its
use instead of
Particles.
ovbels
belongs to the discussion of
Modes and Negative

/jlt].
matter the fate of Mrjdeis appears only once in the text of the N. T., Ac. 27 33. The use of fMr]8h cbv, Gal. 6 3, may be compared with oWeu eifXL, 1 Cor. 13 2. In 1 Th. 4 12 note fxriSevos XP^'^V ex^jre. (c) Ourt? AND yirjTL<i. These were treated under rts. Following
It follows in that
:
the editors in the separation of these forms,

that
juiyrt
it is
to be observed
nr]Ti
as mere particle occurs not merely in questions like
ovTos kcTTiv 6 XptdTos; Jo.
Cor. 7
5; 2 Cor. 13
5.
but also with d. So ei /jltjtl But in Lu. 9 13, ei fxrjTt iropevOevTes

:
29,
in
rjfxeLs
a.'yopaawp.ev, it is
possible to take
/JLT]
^tiyrt
as the object of
iJLr]Tiye,
ayopacrco^xev.
Cf. Jo. 6
12,
rts
'iva
TL aToK-qraL.
But note
/xt]
Cor. 6
3.
The
use of
with the conjunction

/xi]
is
not infrequent (Mk. 13
5)
and with the negative adverb
also (Jo.
3:3,
5, etc.).
fxi]
So we
have, contrary to the usual classic idiom, ov
ns,
tls.^
The
2
*
W.-Sch., p. 248; Schmid, Atticismus, II, p. 137 lb., p. 178. Cf. W.-Sch., p. 249.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
f.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 256.
752
NEW TESTAMENT
undoubted separation of ov and aitj from tls in such examples as Mt. 11: 27; 12 19; Lu. 8 51; 12:4; Jo. 7:4; 10:28; Ac. 28:21; 12 argues for the same thing where fir] tls and 1 Cor. 4:5; 6 happen come together. The Koiv-q (Moulton, ProL, p. to TL fir]
: : :
246) supports the use of
tls
with the negative: Tb.P.

kyyaiov
irepLyLvofievrjs.
1 (ii/B.c.)
/iTjSe/itSs KpaTTjcreios /i7/5e KvpLeias tlvos
(d)
1.
With
Oi; ttSs.
IT a?.
Used together the words

:
call for little in
the
way
of
explanation.
Ov merely negatives xas as in
classic
Greek and =
'not every one.'
Jesus did not
Thus in Mt. 7 21, ov iras 6 Xeycoj/ eiaeKevaeTaL, 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
principle applies to the plural ov iravTes x^povaL t6v Xoyou,
11.
Cf. Ac. 10 :41; Ro.
9:6; 10
:
16.
But
my
friend,
:
Mt. 19 Mr. H.
Scott, notes that in Ro. 10
well
mean
'no,'
and that
in
16 and 1 Cor. 15 39 ov iras can Mt. 7 21 and the other clauses

:
where dXXd occurs the dXXd negatives the whole of the preceding clause. This is certainly worth considering. Cf. Mt. 7 :2l ov irds
6 \eyu>v with ttSs 6 aKovwv in 7
2.
:
26.
different situation.
is
Ou
TTtts.
Here we have a
tive goes With, the verb,

Tras.
A
:
negative statement
The negamade as to
same as if ovbeis had been used with an So Mt. 24 22 (Mk. 13 20) ovk av hadcdv, irdaa ffdp^, the idea is 'no flesh,' not 'not all flesh,' i.e. 'some flesh,' would have been lost, Cf Lu. 1 37 ovk ddvvaT-qaeL irdv pfj/ia, Ro. 3 20 (Gal. 2 16) ov dLKaLoodrjaeTaL rdaa adp^. See also Ac. 10 14 ov8eiroT irdv. Cf. ov8e irdv Rev. 7 16; 9 4. It is true that this s^5, idiom is very common in the LXX^ as a translation of 53 Cf, Ex. 12 16, 43; 20 10, etc. But it is not without analogy also in the papyri use of irds "with prepositions and adjectives of negative meaning. Thus avtv or xoipU Tdarjs virepdeaews, a recurrent formula, dwnrevdevoL iravTOS kirifj-ov, Tb.P, 105 (ii/B.c); dixo- irdaris eôvaias, Plutarch, Cons, ad Uxor., 1 (cf. Heb. 7 7)."^ Clearly the construction was in harmony with the kolvt]. The same principle applies. Cf 1 Cor. 1 29, 3. M57 irds. oirus nil KavxwriTaL irdaa adp^. Here it is 'no flesh' as above with ov TTcts. See also Rev. 7: 1. On the other hand ixfj irds (1 Jo. 4 l)='not every' like ov irds.
result is the
The
affirmative verb.
1
2
W.-M., p. 215. Moulton, Pro!.,
p. 246.
Cf. CI. Rev.,
Dec,
1901, p. 442; Apr., 1904,
p. 155.
4.
753
from the
Ou
ttSs
fxr]
Trav in
Rev. 21 27 docs not

:
differ at all
ov
5.
and
/x??
ttSs
in construction.
Has
oh.
Here the ancient Greek idiom to a certain extent

relief.^
comes to one's
translation. Gk., p. 178.
1 Jo.
But the
)kb
It is less
harsh than ov
53
lies
.
behind the
of
LXX
ttSs.
Cf Blass, Gr.
The denial about Tras is complete as with ov ttSs. 2 21, wdv \pev8os e/c rijs aXridelas ovk laTLV. Cf. 1 Jo. 3 15; Eph. 5:5; Rev. 22 3. 6. nSs ixi] falls into the same category. Cf. Jo. 3 16; 6 39; 12 46; Eph. 4: 29; 5 3. Here also the denial is universal. But most probalily ixrjbds would have pleased an older Greek more. ov In Rev. 18 22 the same explanation holds. 7. Has
See
:
N. T.
:
8.
Ov
/JLY).
iravres.
With the
is
plural ovk eiaiv Tavres e^
riiJ.)v,
1 Jo.
2
as
19, the
is
matter
not so
clear.
Two
The
all
first.
seen in the American Revision.
translations are possible, text there is: " they all are
not of us."
ov
9.
The margin
ov.
has:
"not
are of us."
xas in the singular favours the

Uavres
The analogy
Cor. 15
ttSs
:
of
With
wavres ov
KOLfj,r]dr]a6iJ,e6a,
ov goes
with the verb.

shall
'We 'We
'not
all
The effect is the same not sleep' means that 'none'

Per contra, see ov
W.-M.,
p. 215.
as
ov above.
51, the
of us shall sleep.
shall all
all.'
be changed.'
1
irdvTes,
Ro. 10: 16 =
CHAPTER XVI
THE ARTICLE
I.
(TO 'APGPON)
i^, t6. For the demonstrative 6 and the on Syntax of Pronouns. It is confusing to say with Seyffart^: "Der Artikel hat die urspriingliche demonstrative Bedeutung." It is then just the demonstrative, not the article at all. Why call the demonstrative the article? Great confusion of idea has resulted from this terminology. It is important to keep distinct the demonstrative, the article and the relative. n. Origin and Development of the Article. (a) A Greek Contribution. The development of the Greek article is one of the most interesting things in human speech.^ Among the Indo-Germanic languages it is "a new Greek departure."^ It is not found in Sanskrit nor in Latin. It does not appear to be pro-ethnic^ and first shows itself in Homer. Indeed,
Other Uses
of 6,
relative 6 see chapter
the existence of the genuine article in
Homer
is
denied by some.^
article in
it is
But
it
seems an overrefinement to refuse to see the

phl-ases as
it is ol ir\koves, ol apLaroL, etc.^
such
Homeric
And
beyond
dispute that
in the Attic prose, particularly in Plato, that the
Greek article reaches its perfection.'' The article has shown remarkable persistency and survives with very little modification in modem Greek. ^ In the N. T. the usage is in all essentials in harmony with Attic, more so than is true of the papyri.^ But Volker^" finds the papyri in practical accord at most points with Attic. Simcox" points out that even the Hebrew article does not differ radically in use from the Greek article.
^
Hauptr. der griech. Synt.,
p. 1.
^ * * ^ e
8
Cf. Sclineider, Vorles. liber griech. Gr.
Thompson, Synt.
Delbriick, op.
cit.
of Attic Gk., p. 41.

!,
pp. 507
ff.
Cf Brug., Griech.
.
Gr., p. 424.
Cf. also
Thompson,
Synt., p. 41
^
f.
f. f.
Monro, Hom. Gr., pp. 178 ff. Cf. Thumb, Handb., pp. 40 ff.; Jebb. Moulton, Prol., p. 80 f
Synt. d. griech. Pap., pp. 5
ff.
in V.
Thompson, Synt., p. 41 and D.'s Handb., p. 193

of the
1"
" Lang,
754
N.
T., p. 45.
THE ARTICLE
(h)
is
(tO "APGPOn)
755
article
Derived from the Demonstrative.

6,
17,
The Greek
the same form as the demonstrative

der
is
t6.
Indeed the Ger-
man
the
is
used as demonstrative,
article, relative.
related to the demonstrative that (also relative).
So English Clyde
the article a "mere enfeeblement" So the French le, the Italian il, the Spanish el, all come from the Latin demonstrative ille. But while this is true, the demonstrative, relative and article should not be confused in idea. The Greek grammarians applied apdpov to all three in truth, but distinguished them as apdpov irporaKTubv (dem.), apdpov viroTaKTiKov (rel.), apdpov 6pl<7tik6v (art.). Some, however, did not distinguish sharply between the demonstrative and the article. The article always retained something of the demonIt is an strative force (Gildersleeve, Syntax, Part II, p. 215). utter reversal of the facts to speak of the demonstrative use of
{Greek Syntax, p. 6) calls
of the
demonstrative.
the article.
It is only of recent years that
a really
scientific
study
of the article has
been made.^
arate treatment for the article.
Even Brugmann^ But Part II of
gives no sepGildersleeve's
Syntax (1911, pp. 215-332) has a really scientific treatment of the article. Professor Miller is mainly responsible for it. But even here
(p. 216) I
must demur against
" the substantive use of the article"
instead of plain substantival demonstrative.
Miller there
uses "article" in two senses (form and idea). The Latin word articulus has the same root as the Greek apdpov (apas seen in
ap-ap-lffKo}, 'to fit,' 'join').
The
origin of the article
from the de-
monstrative can probably be seen in Homer. Monro ^ thinks it due to apposition of a substantive with the demonstrative 6. So
alxm
Here and arSo with new proper names 6 ticle and illustrates the transition. anticipates the name which is loosely added later. "In Attic the article shows that a particular known person is spoken of; in
Iliad, 4. 501,
17
5'
17
hepoLO
Slo.
KpordÔLO irkprjaev
alxp-r] x^Xkcit?.
explains
and
17
Avavers between demonstrative
Homer it marks
the article
the turning of attention to a person." ^
In
Homer
usually marks contrast and not mere
definiteness.
But
1
this contrast or singling out of the special object is in essence

is
the real article which
thus attributive.
in. Significance of the Article. The article, unhke the demonIt is not strative, does not point out the object as far or near.
deictic.
There
is
either contrast in the distinction drawTi or allu-
sion (anaphoric) to
1
what
is
already mentioned or assumed as well

p. 794.

Ricm. and Goelzer, Synt.,

Griech. Gr.
Horn. Gr., p. 178.

lb.
756
known.
article.
NEW TESTAMENT
The article is therefore to bpiaTLKov apOpov, the definite The article is associated with gesture and aids in pointing
It
is
out like an index finger.
a pointer.
It is
not essential to
language, but certainly very convenient and useful and not " otiosum loquacissimae gentis instrumentu7Ji," as Scaliger^ called it.
The Greek
article is
not the only means of making words
definite.
definite, like yrj, ovpapos, TtjctoOs. The use of a prepowith definite anarthrous nouns is old, as h oUco. Possessive pronouns also make definite, as do genitives. The context itself often is clear enough. The demonstrative may be used besides the article. Whenever the Greek article occurs, the object is cer-
Many words itself may be

sition
are definite from the nature of the case.^
The word
tainly definite.
be.
fails
It
is
it is not used, the object may or may not never meaningless in Greek, though it often to correspond with the Enghsh idiom, as in 17 aoîa, 6 IlaOXos. not a matter of translation. The older language and higher
When
The
article is
poetry are more anarthrous than Attic prose. Dialects vary in the use of the article, as do authors. Plato is richer in the article
than any one.

IV.
Its free use leads to exactness

f.).
and
finesse (Gilder-
sleeve, Syyitax, Part II, p. 215
The Method Employed by

Individuals
the Article.
The Greek
article
points out in one of three ways.^

(a)
It distinguishes
from Individuals.
give the reason for the distinction
That is usually apparent in King James Version, under the influence of the Vulgate, handle the Greek article loosely and inaccurately.^ A goodly list of
such sins
is
The article does not drawn between individuals. the context. The translators of the
given in
article,
:
"The Revision
of the
New Testament,"^ such
as 'a pinnacle' for to TTepvyLov (Mt. 4:5).
Hes in the
So
in
Mt. 5
mountain,'
the point of
It
On
Here the whole point the wing of the Temple overlooking the abyss. TO 6pos was the mountain right at hand, not 'a the other hand, the King James translators missed
was
tion.
/xerd yvvaiKos (Jo. 4: 27) when they said 'the woman.' woman,' any woman, not the particular woman in quesBut the Canterbury Revisers cannot be absolved from all
'a
blame, for they ignore the article in Lu. 18

vital thing
^ ^
13,
rw
d/zapra)Xc3.
The
is
to see the matter
from the Greek point of view and
Quoted by Farrar, Gk. Synt.,
p. 57,
is
make a word definite seen in Madvig, Synt. of the Gk. Lang., p. 8, 8 Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 70. * lb. 6 Lightfoot, Trench, EUicott, p. xxx f.
old idea that the article was necessary to
The
THE ARTICLE
(tO 'APOPOn)
757
:
find the reason for the use of the article.
In Mt. 13
55, 6 rod
tUtovos
1
vlos, it is
the son of the (well
known
to us) carpenter.
In
.
Cor.
4:56
'iiraLuos
means the
praise
due to each one.

:
Cf
mados in Ro. 4:4. In 1 Cor. 5 :9, eu rfj eirtaToXfj, Paul refers to a previous letter which the Corinthians had received. In 15 8, tco kKTpconaTi., Paul speaks thus of himself because he alone of the Apostles saw Jesus after His Ascension. The examples of this
ixbhiov,
use are very numerous in the N. T. Thus in Mt. 5 15, tov Tr\v \vxv'mv, the article singles out the bushel, the lamp:
stand present in the room.

to the
little
dogs by the table.

roll
virrjpeTji,
the
In 15 26, toTs KwaploLs, Jesus points In Lu. 4 20, to ^l^\Iov awoBovs tQ was the usual one and the attendant was there at
: : :
his place.
So in Jo. 13
5, /3dXXei vScop eis tov vLTnrjpa,
the basin was

ttjs
there in the room.

5t5axi?s,
The
article in Jo. 7
17, '^voiatrai irepl
means the teaching concerning which they were puzzled. The (generic) article is (h) Classes from Other Classes. not always necessary here any more than under (a). See iroprjpovs
Kal ayadovs
(Mt. 5:45); Skaioj

1
virep
adlKwv (1 Pet. 3:18).

e'ire
Cf. in
particular
irov
Cor. 12
13
elre 'lovdaXoL
1
:
"EWrives, 12
29.
So also
aoôs; ttou ypafxp-aTevs; (1 Cor.
20).
But
So
:
it is
quite
:
common
at
:
to use the article with different classes.

dXcoTreKes,
in
Mt. 8 20 note
:
ra
Treretvd.
So
at yvvalKes
:
(Eph. 5
22), ot iivSpes (5
25),
In these exTO, TeKpa (6:1), ol irarkpes (6 4), oi 8ov\ol (6 5). amples the vocative often has the article. .Cf. Col. 3 18ff. A good example of the use with classes is found in Mt. 5 3-10
: :
(the Beatitudes), ot tttuxoL, etc.

in 1 Cor. 1
: :
Cf. tovs
(to4)ovs,
to.
aaOevij, etc.,
:
27. So ot aKpoaral and ot TOLr]Tal in Ro. 2 13. Cf. Rev. 11 18; 22 14. It is very common to find the singular used with the article in a representative sense for the whole class. So in 6 vios tov avOpw-Kov (Mt. 8 20, and often) Jesus calls himself the Son of Mankind. Cf. Lu. 10 7, 6 epya.Ty]s, where the labourer
:
:
represents
all
labourers.
In Mt. 18
17 note 6 Wvlkos
/cat
6 TeXuv-qs.
The Gospel of John is (both ideals and types).

avdpojiros,
especially rich in examples of this kind

^
12
29 tov
Gal.
icrx^pov, Jas.
Other examples are Mt. 12:35 6 ayadds 5 6 top dUaLov, 2 Cor. 12 12

:
Mt. 13 3 6 airelpcov. But even here the article is not always needed. So 'Ioi;5atoi; re irpooTOP In Cf. /caXoD re /cat Ka/coO, Heb. 5 14. Kal "EWr]vos (Ro. 2:9). (Mt. 24: where there is only examples like 6 ohpavos /cat 35), 777 one of the kind, the explanation is not far from the class from class
tov cLTotTToKov,
Kkrjpovbp.o'i,
: :
4:16
17
in the
Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 47. On literature upon the article sec E. Schwartz Index to Eusebius, p. 209.
758
idea.
NEW TESTAMENT
So debs, like proper names, may use the article where we do not need it in English (Jo. 3 16). Volker {Syntax, p. 19) notes in
:
the papyri examples like ywri

vloi,
/cat
vloi,
fj
ywq
koI oi vloi, yvuij
/cat ot
For the generic article see further Gildersleeve, Syntax, pp. 255 ff. (c) Qualities from Other Qualities. The English does not
6 aprjp
/cat
reKPa.
use the article with abstract qualities unless they have been previously mentioned. But French and German are like the Greek in the use of the article here. It is not necessary to have the article with qualities. So in 1 Cor. 12 :9-ll the gifts mentioned
So in chapter 13, ayaTr-qv in verses 1-3, but but xtarts, eXTrts, d7d7rrj (verse 13). In 1 Jo. 4 18 (j)6(3os is first without the article, then is repeated with the article, while 17 ayairri each time. There is much of the same freedom as to the use or non-use of the article here as elsewhere. Cf. Ro.
article.
77
have no
ayairr] in 4, 8;
12
7,
9;
13
f.;
Col. 3
5.
Blass (Gr. of N.
sees
T.
GL,
is
p.
150)
from the standpoint of the German absence than in the presence of such
in saying that the relative in Col. 3
ticle.
:
more
difficulty in the
articles.
But he
list
correct
5 explains the use of the arof attributes of

is
It is interesting to
observe that in the

:
God
in the songs in
Rev. 4
11; 5
13; 7: 11, the article

:
ex-
pressed with each quality, while in 5
12 one article
is
{tyju) is
used
with the whole

for
list.
In Ro. 13
7 the article
used with each
thing and quality.

of nev
It is possible that tw here is the article also
which the participle has to be supplied. But for the absence and 8e one might suspect t^ to be the demonstrative. In
:
Ro. 16
dLdaxw
17, (XKoiretv Toiis
tcls
Sixoa-Taalas Kal
to.
(JKav8a\a irapa rrjv

tous, tcls,
to.,
7]u v/deXs
efxaOere woLOVvras,
note
how
neatly
ttju
come
nouns
(a)
1.
in
and
illustrate the three uses of the article.
Note
also the
neat classic idiom rovs
woLovvras.
For the
article
ff.
with abstract
see further Gildersleeve, Sijntax, pp. 257
V. Varied Usages of the Article.
With Substantives.
Context.
Whether the substantive is pointed out as an inmakes clear. The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Ac. 27 23, Tov deov ov elfxi, the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse, 6 deos,
dividual, class or quality, the context
:
we
in English
do not need the

ot
article,
even
if,
as
is
unlikely, the
angel has the notion of "the special God."
Cf. also Jo. 1:1.
In Mt. 23
2,
ypafxnareLs Kai ol 4>aptcratot, the
two
classes are
THE ARTICLE
distinguished as in English.
(tO "APGPOn)
36,
759
In Ro. 11
Cor. 9
:
17
66â, it is the glory-
Ro. 4:4). It will, of course, be that of the substantive. Cf. T-qv TOP TO in Lu. 2 16. But sometimes the construction is according to the sense. So in Mt. 4 13, ttjv Naf apd, because of the implied ttoXlv. Cf. also Kacpappaovfi r-qv. But in Gal. 4 25, t6 be "kyap, Paul purposely uses the grammatical gen1
due to God. See 6 ficados, 2. Gender of the Article.
18
(cf.
der of the word rather than the natural feminine.
Cf. also 6
aixrjv
(Rev. 3
in 1
where Jesus is meant. But note the usual to ati-qv Cor. 14 16. The N. T. does not have the neuter article
:
14),
with the plural of a Hebrew word, as we occasionally see in the (Thackeray, p. 34). Cf. rc3 /SeeXei/x (Ezek. 27: 4).
LXX
3.
With Proper Names. This seems rather odd to us in English, name itself is supposed to be definite enough. But at bottom the idiom is the same as with other substantives. We do not use the article with home, husband, wife, church, unless there is special reason to do so. The word itself is usually sufficient. We must rid ourselves of the notion that any substansince the proper
But, just because proper names are so obviously definite, the article was' frequently used where we in English cannot handle it. But this is very far from saying that
tive requires the article.
the article meant nothing to the Greek.
him.
classes
We
and
often have the

qualities.
It meant definiteness to same difficulty with the article with Sometimes we can see the reason for the
use of the article with proper names.

KTjpvaaei,
So
tov 'Irjaovv dv UavXos
Ac. 19
13.
quite capricious to us.
But in most instances the matter seems The writer may have in mind a previous
mention of the name or the fact of the person being well known. In 2 Tim. 4 9-21 the proper names are all anarthrous. The same thing is true of Ro. 16, even when the adjective is not anar:
throus, as in 'AireWrjv tov
SoKifiov kv XpLCTio (verse 10). 'So in the ancient Greek for the most part the article was not used with proper names (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 229). Its use -svith per-
sons
is
a mark of familiar
contrast.
style,
but Plato uses
it
for
anaphora
or for
article
In
as
with
titles,
is
some sections it is common to use the The Reverend Doctor So-and-So. In South
Germany
It
der
used with the
name
alone."^
seems needless to make extended observations about the presence or absence of the Greek article with names of countries, cities, rivers, persons. The usage among Greek writers greatly varies about rivers, mountains, etc. Cf. Kallenberg, Stu. iiber den
1
W.-Th.,
p. 113.
: :
760
griech.

Art.,
NEW TESTAMENT
1891).
See exhaustive treatment by Gildersleeve
(Syntax, pp. 236-253) and his paper in American Journal of PhiloL, XI, pp. 483^87. Different words vary. "Names of cities most
rarely have the article
when connected with

'Iepovaa\r]ij,
is
:
prepositions,"^ but
that
is
true of other words also.
article save
when an
adjective
does not have the used (so Gal. 4: 25 f.; Rev. 3

:
12) except in
one instance (Ac. 5
28).
Curiously 'lepoaoKvua has

:
the article (in the oblique cases) only^ in Jo. 2

11
:
23; 5
cit}^
2; 10
22;
18.
As
instances of the article used with a

:
the second time (anaphoric) see Ac. 17

13, ev
TJj
10,
els
mentioned Bepoiap, and 17
Bepota; 17: 15,
eoas
'Adrjvcov;
and 17:
16,
f.
rals 'AdrjvaLs.
For further
details see Winer-Schmiedel, p. 152
Substantives in apposition with proper names

article, as in 'Upcodrjs 6 jSaatXtvs,
may have
the
Mt. 2:1; and
6 /SaatXeus 'Rp<x)8r]s,
Mt. 2:3; or
not,
as "HpcbSou
it is
'AypLTnra, Ac. 25:26,
like
/SaatXecoj, Lu. 1:5. In jSao-tXeD our 'King George.' So in Xenois
phon, when the King of Persia
meant we
find /SaaiXeus.
In
12.
Mt. 3
6, 6
'lop8avr]s
Toraiios,
we have
and
opovs
the usual order, but see

:
the order reversed and the article repeated in Rev. 9

Cf. Tov opovs
14; 16
Stm
:
(Ac. 7:30)
Stm
:
(Gal. 4:24), to opos
For the article 2tcov (Rev. 14 22). 1) and ^tchu 6pet (Heb. 12 with appositive proper names see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 231.
Cf.
'loi'Sas
'laKapLcoTTjs,
Mt. 10
;
4;
'Hpw^Tjs
Terpaapxv^ 'ind
'Iwdi'Tjs 6 âTTTLarris,
14
1 f.
'Irjaovs 6 'Naâp7]v6s,
Mk.
10 :47; Ac.
13,
2t/xcoi'
6 ^r]\o)T7]s,
etc.
Here the word

Cf.
1
in
apposition has
XptaTos in the
the article, but not the proper name.^
Cor. 1:1.
In the Gospels as a rule
'Irjaovs
has the
article.
Gospels usually has the article = the Anointed One, the Messiah. In the Epistles it usually is like a proper name and commonly
article,^ illustrating the development of Christology N. T. Indeclinable proper names usually have the article Cf. the list in Mt. 1 if the case would not otherwise be clear. 2-16, where the nominative has no article, but the accusative does have it. So 'lo-paijX in Ro. 10: 19, but tov 'lapa-qX in 1 Cor. 10 18. See also Mt. 22 42; Mk. 15 45; Lu. 2 16; Ac. 7 8; 15 1 f.; Ro. 9 13; Heb. 11 17. The use of t6v Bapa^jSav in Lu. 23 18 is not abrupt. In Xenophon's Anabasis the article is not often used with proper names unless the person is previously
without the
in the
W.-Th.,
lb.
p. 112.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 153.
See further W.-Sch., p. 153. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 152.
THE ARTICLE
mentioned.^
(tO "APGPOn)
761
In Homer the article appears only occasionally with a proper name when a new person is introduced, and "marks the turning of attention to a person," ^ rather than pointing to a particular person as in Attic. "In short the Homeric article
contrasts, the Attic article defines."
satisfactory principle can be laid
down
But, as a matter of fact, no for the use or non-use of
the article with proper names.^

see Gildersleeve,
For good discussion of the matter
Jour, of Philol., XI, pp. 483 ff. In modern Greek the article occurs with all kinds of proper names (Thumb,
Am.
Handb., p. 41). Moulton (ProL, p. 83) admits the inability of scholars to solve "completely the problem of the article with
proper names."
erally introduces
Abbott (J oh. Gr., p. 57 f.) notes that John gena proper name without the article and then
The papyri also follow this classical idiom of using the proper names when mentioned a second time. So when a man's father or mother is given in the genitive, we usually have
uses
it.
article with
the article.
Cf.
Moulton,
subject.
Prol., p. 83.
Deissmann, Phil. Wochenschrift, 1902, p. 1467; The papyri throw no great light on the
Gr., p. 95), claims that the papyri In the papyri slaves regularly have the article, even when the master does not (Volker, Syntax, p. 9). For SaOXos 6 /cat HaOXos (Ac. 13 9) the papyri show numerous parallels. Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 313 ff. Mayser (Gr.
Radermacher (N. T.
confirm the N. T. usage.
d. griech.
tive.
Pap., p. 310 f.), as already shown, takes 6 here as relaSee also Hatch, Journal of Bibl. Lit., Part II, 1908, p. 141 f. In Luke's list (Lu. 3 23-38) 'lo}ar](j> has no article, while all the
:
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,
In the N. T., however, while we have rpos t6v 6e6v (Jo. 1 1, 2), it is far more common to find simply 6e6s, especially in the Epistles. But the word is treated like a proper name and may have it (Ro. 3 5) or not have it (8 9). The same thing holds true about irvevfia
:
:
pp. 232-236) gives a full discussion of the subject.
and
TTvevfxa
aytov, Kvpios, Xpiaros.
These words
will
come up
for
further discussion later.

Zucker, Beobachtungen uber den Gcbr.
6.
'
'les
2
Artik. boi Personenn. in
Xen.
Anabasis, p.
*
.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 179.
K.-G.,
Cf Schmidt, De Articulo in nominibus propriis apiid Att. scriptorcs (1S90) I, pp. 602 ff.; Kallonberg, Stu. uber den griech. Artikel (1891). * Simcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 48. Cf. also B. Weiss, Der Gebr. dea Artikels bei den Gottesnamen, Th. Stu. Krit., 1911, pp. 319-392.
762
4.
NEW TESTAMENT
Second Mention (Anaphoric). The use of the article with is very frequent. Thus in Jo. 6 9, /cat K tuv dxâp'iMV. apTOVS /cat b\papia, but inverse 11 tov% aprovs See Lu. 9 13. Cf. also vScop in 4 10 and to v8cop in verse 11. So nayoL in Mt. 2:1, but to us fxayovs in verse 7; ftfavta in 13 25, but
the second mention of a word
:
TO.
ftfdwa in verse 26.

:
Cf. Ac. 9 :4, 7; 9

:
11,
17; Jas. 2
2, 3;
In Jo. 4 43, rds 8vo wepas, the article refers to Cf. Jo. 20 1 with 19 :41; 12 12 with 12 1; Heb. verse 40. 5 4 with 5 1; 2 Cor. 5 4 with 5:1. In Ac. 19 13 we have 15. Volker {Syntax, p. 21 f.) finds IlaOXos, but 6 IlaDXos in 19
Rev. 15
1, 6.
the anaphoric use of the article

(6)
common enough
in the papyri.
With Adjectives.
tributive or predicate
1
:
The discussion of comes up later. Thus

6
the adjective as at/caXoj 6 vo/jlos (1
Tim.
:
8) is
1.
a different construction from

Article.
is
tolijltjv
6 koKos (Jo.
10
11).
The Resumptive
The use
of
the article and the
adjective
Pet. 3:2). See also Lu. 1:70; Jas. 2 7. This repetition of the article with the adjective as in 6 iroLix-qv 6
toov ayioov Tvpo4)7]ruv (2
perfectly normal in
Cf. T% kaxo-r-Q
wepa
(Jo. 6 :40).
KaXos
above
is
quite
common
also.
Abbott^ thinks that
this re-
duplication of the article "adds weight and emphasis to the arCf. T% tp'lt-q i]p.kpa (Lu. 9 22) with rfj i]ixkpa ttj rplTy (18 33). Abbott^ considers that as a rule John reduplicates the article with the adjective only in utterances of the Lord or in weighty sayings
ticle."
:
about him.
14.
Cf. Jo. 1:9, 41; 2

is
1;
3
:
16;
5:43; 7:18; 10:11,

:
But
this
hardly true of Jo. 6

article.
:
13; 18
10.
He
(10
notes also
that in John the possessive adjective, when articular, nearly always
has the reduphcated

ally
Cf. rd Tpoâra 41.
to. e/xd
27).
So
TOP ade\(f)dv tov Ulov in Jo. 1
In
Homer
the substantive usu-
article
comes before the article and the adjective. The resumptive "repeats the noun in order to add the qualifying word."^ Cf. Rev. 1 17; 3 7; 22 16, where the article is repeated, twice. Cf. also Ac. 12 10. So tcov 8vo tcov aKovaavTwv (Jo. 1 :40). In Lu. 6 45 both the article and adjective are repeated after the form of the first part of the sentence, 6 irovrjpds e/c tov woprjpov
: : :
:
Trpoêpet to Kov7]p6v.
See in the papyri to kitwvlov
avTrjs
to \evKdv
TO Trapa aol, P.Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.).
With the Adjective Alone. It appears so with all genders and both numbers. Cf. 6 a7tos (Mk. 1 24), ttj eprifxui (Mt. 3:2), to
2.
:
ayadbv (Gal. 6
opaTo. (Col. 1
1
:
10), ot tttooxoI
(Mt. 5
3), Tds veas (Tit.

:
4),
to,
:
16), Td TToXXd in Ro. 15
22,
ol ao4>ol
in 1 Cor. 1
Joh. Gr., p. 63.

lb., p. 64.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 181.
THE ARTICLE
27, at
eTOL/jLOL
(tO "APOPON)
763
in
Mt. 25
is
10, etc.
All these examples are obvious
enough.
text.
The ellipsis The three uses
simple and usually supplied from the con-
of the article occur with the adjective alone.
The
individual use appears in such examples as 6 ayios rod deov

:
(Jo. 6
(1 Jo.
69), 6 dUatos (Ac.
22
14), 6 aKtidtvos (1 Jo.
5
:
20), 6 Trovrjpos
18),
TO
TToXv
and
:
to oKlyov (2 Cor. 8
15),
to ayadov
aov (Phil. 14), to abbvaTOV tov voôv
(Ro. 8:3),
ttiv
^qpav
(Mt.
23
15), toZs aylots (Ph. 1
1),
toXs eTovpavioLs
is
generic or representative (class from class)
(Eph. 1:3). very common
The
also,
more frequent indeed.

5:7), TOV
TTTCioxov
So
6 St/catos (1 Pet.
4
:
18), tov
ayadov (Ro.
(Jas.
So rd
KaKa
and
to.
:
2:6), tovs irTOixovs (2 5), ol ifKovaioL (5:1). 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
(2
f.,
TO kyadbv (Gal. 6
10), to Uavov (Ac. 17: 9), to Ka\6v
13:7), to ayiov (Mt. 7:6), rd opia (Mt. 19:1), tCjv The use of the neuter singular with the 23). article as the equivalent of an abstract substantive Blass^ notes
Cor.
cTToplnoov
(Mk. 2
as
"a
peculiar usage of Paul (and

is
Hebrews)" and considers that
"this
the most classical idiom in the language of the N. T.,

paralleled
literature, from ThuBut he cautions us against thinking that Paul imitated Thucydides, since Strabo^ and all other writers of the KOLVT], not to mention the papyri,^ show the same construction. Deissmann has made it plain from the papyri that to bodixiov
and may be
from the old heathen
cydides in particular."
vficov TTJs Tricrrews
in Jas. 1
(cf.
1
:
Pet.
7)
belongs here.
avjxôpov (7
:
See
35),
also TO ixwpov TOV deov (1 Cor.

TO k\a4>p6v
(8
:
25), to
:
v/JicJciv
aiiTcov
TTJs 9\i\j/ecos
(2 Cor.
17), to
1
:
ttjs
vixeTepas ayaTvqs yv-qcnov

:
8), TO yvojaTov tov deov
(Ro.
19), to xprjaTOV tov deov (2

:
4),
TO Trepiaaov (3:1), to bvvarov avTOV (9

TO OLfxeTadeTOV
ttjs
22), to
eirieiKes vficov
(Ph. 4:5),
ôvXrjs
(Hob. 6
17), to avTrjs aadeves (7: 18).

to.
Ex-
amples of the plural in this abstract sense occur in aairpa (Mt. 13 48), rd aopaTa (Ro. 1 20), rd KpvirTo.
: :
koXo.
rd
:
tojv avdpcoiruv
(2
16), rd KpvTTCL TOV (JKOTOVs (1

/cat
Cor. 4
5),
rd TavTa (Col. 1
16),
rd opard
ticle
rd aopaTa
(lb.).
The neuter
adjective with the ar-
sometimes appears
in the collective sense for persons.

8cio8eKa4>v\ov
KoafjLov (1
r}p.C:v
So
fxoipa
TO eKaTTOv
(Heb. 7:7), to
(Ac. 26:7), rd
:
TOV
KocTfiov
TO.
aadevT]
tov
Cor.'l
27
f.).
See further
Blass,*
Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 262.

3.
The
Article not Necessary with
the Adjective.
who
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 155. Cf. Schmid, Atticismus, IV, p. 608. " Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 156. Deiss., B. S., p. 259.
764
NEW TESTAMENT
notes that
(Text.
has the best discussion of the use of the article with. adjectives, it is not accidental that, while we have h tc3 âvepCo
Rec, Mt. 6:4), yet ds

:
(jiavepdv kXdelv
prevails
(Mk. 4
22;
Lu. 8
17), since
the thing
is
not yet in existence.

7
kv
:
rather fine point, since both

(a subst. Lu. 11
:
kv kpvttui (Jo.
4, 10)
re?
But it is a and els KpvwTrjp

:
33)
occur as well as
:
âvepw (Mt. 6
4,
:
Text. Rec).
17 note KoKov
:
In Ro. 2
iroutv.
:
28
ev tc3 4>avepco is
genuine.
In Jas. 4
The
;
adjective alone
:
may
:
express class as in
Mt. 5 45; Lu. 10 21 Ro. 1 14; 1 Cor. 1 20. 4. With Numerals. The article with numbers is more common in Greek than in English and is a classic idiom (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 228). Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 315) notes that with numerals the article points out a certain number now brought forward. So eTrrd ol irevTe 6 els 6 oXKos (Rev. 17 10).
(c)
With
Participles.
In
all
essential respects the article is
used with the participle exactly as with the adjective. The article is not necessary to the participle when used as an attribute (Jas. 4 17), though it is most commonly found (Heb. 12 1, 2). For
: :
the predicate use see Jo. 10

is
12.
The
participle with the article
common
without the substantive, as

for
The neuter
TO oLTroXwXos
ol irevdovvTes (Mt. 5:4). a person appears in to 'yewwpevov (Lu. 1: 35). In (Lu. 19 10) we have the collective neuter singular.
:
The
abstract singular
is
seen
in
m
to.
to vTepexov
dtacpepoPTa
Trjs
yvwaecos (Ph. 3
:
8)
to.
and the abstract vTrapxovTo. pov ('my

dividual use.
plural
(Ro. 2
:
18).
Cf.
belongings') in 1 Cor. 13
3, for
the
is
more
in-
found in 6 (TTrelpwp (Mt. 13 The article with the participle is very com3). mon as the equivalent of a relative clause.^ In Mt. 5 32 iras 6 aTToXvoiv and os eav yapi]<yri are parallel. See also Col. 1:8. So
representative or generic sense
:
The
ol ireTLdTevKOTes (Tit.
The
article is
3:8), 6 eiwuiv (2 Cor. 4:6). Cf. Mt. 5 32. repeated with participles if they refer to different
:
persons (Rev. 1:3) or even

between).
if
the same person

:
is
meant where
6
rjv
different aspects are presented (Rev. 1
4,
where
comes
in
But note rc3 ayaTcbvTt -qpds Kal XvaavTL rjpds (1:5). Winer 2 makes a special point of the use of a definite predicate
like
rii'es
with an indefinite subject

1 :7), pi] TLS vpds earaL 6
datv
at
TapaaaovTes vpas (Gal.
avXayoiyuv (Col. 2:8), aXXos eaTLV 6 papTVpoiV
(Jo. 5
32).^
He
also notes the defuiite subject
where the German

:
would have an
Cf. K.-G.,
indefinite
one as in
ovk eoTLv 6 avpicov (Ro. 3
11).
Cf. also the article

1
and the future
participle in 6 KaTaKpivCiv (Ro.

2
I,
p. 594.
W.-M.,
p. 136.
More frequent in John than in the Synoptists. Abbott,
Joh. Gr., p. 59
THE ARTICLE
8
:
(tO "APePON)
765
33), Ac.
20
22
to.
avmvTTjaouTa.
Cf. Is. 1:31, ovk earai 6 afikaoiv.

is
More
of this
when the
Participle
reached (ch.
XX).
For the
repeated article see r^
xo-P'-t'-
tv ôdtlcji (1 Cor. 1:4).
See further
that
it
VI, Position ^^^th Attributives.

(d)
With the
Infinitive.
This idiom
is
so
common
it
must be merely touched upon here and the discussion
of
re-
served for the Articular Infinitive. In general it may be said that in the Attic and the kolvti the article is used with the infinitive
in
substantive.
any case (save vocative) and very much as with any abstract The Iliad does not have the article and the infinitive, it occurs once in the Odyssey^ and is in Pindar. Examples but
of the articular infinitive
may
be seen in the nominative

(1
to KoBlaai
:
(Mt. 20
23), the accusative to \a\tiv
Cor. 14
:
39;
cf.
Ac. 25
11),
the genitive eXxts xacra tov awêadai (Ac. 27
20;
:
cf.
Lu. 24
29),
:
the ablative kKpaTovvTo tov

8),
jiri
kinyvuvaL (Lu. 24
:
16; cf. 2 Cor. 1
the locative
Cor. 2
:
vpeiv (2
tw aweipeLu (Mt. 13 4), the instrumental to) fx-n The dative does not occur in the N. T. with 13).
:
the article, but see deaaaadai (Mt. 11

itive
7).
For the articular
infin-
with prepositions see
Mk. 5:4;
14:28, etc.
The
kolvt]
article is
frequently missing with
els irelu
in the vernacular
(pap>Ti), as
Herodotus three times has clptI elvai? Cf. Clyde, Greek Syntax, But enough for the present. The articular infinitive is p. 13 f. curiously rare in the Gospel of John, "almost non-existent."^ It occurs only four times and only with prepositions (Jo. 1 48 2
:
24; 13:19; 17:5).

(e)
With Adverbs.
It is
This
is
say of the N. T.
peat what
is
common
no peculiarity of the kolvt], not to in the older Greek with adverbs

It is
of place, time, quality, rank, manner.*
not necessary to re16),

is
said under Cases
and Adverbs concerning the ad:
verbial expressions (really adjectives), like to irpoJTov (Jo. 12

TO \oLTTbv (Ph. 4:8),
Ttt
xoXXd (Ro. 15
22).
The
point to note
used somewhat freely with adverbs as with substantives and adjectives. As examples observe to, avw and ra
that the article
is
koltcj)
(Jo.
8
17
23),
17
avpiov
(Mt. 6
:
34, ellipsis of wepo), v hTvavpiou
(27: 62),
awepov (Ac. 20
5
:
26), 6
a/jL-fiu
(Rev. 3
14), to ap.i]v (1
Cor.
:
14
16), t6 vvv (Lu.
10), Tk vvv (Ac.

'
29), 6 irXriaiov (Lu. 10
27)
and note ifK-qalov alone = neighbour' in Lu. 10:29 and 36, to val and t6 oh (2 Cor. 1: 17), to e^coêf (Mt. 23 :25), ol e^ccdev (1 Tim. Z:7),ol e^co (Mk. 4 11, W. H. text), t6 kptSs (Mt. 23 26), rd eixTrpocQtv and to. oiriaco (Ph. 3 13 f.), etc. Note two adverbs in Heb.
: :
Monro, Hoin. Gr., p. 179. Moulton, Prol., pp. 81, 21G.
" "
Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 69. K.-G., I, p. 594 f.
766
12
:

27, TO 'Ert axa^ (quotation)
ellipsis of
.
NEW TESTAMENT
is
In some of these examples there a word (note different genders), but not always. There are besides the adjectival uses of the adverb, like 6 eaco avthe
dpwiros
(Eph. 3:
16), 6 e^w avdpcjoiros (2
Cor. 4
16), 6 vvv Kaipos
(Ro.
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:
oi
10,
W. H.
:
text), ol wepl
rots
UavXov (Ac.
kv
Tfj
13:13, classic idiom),
(jut'
avTov
(Mk. 1:36),
39),
to.
oMa
and
15
(Mt. 5
TO.
eirl
15),
TO.
/card tov vo/jlov
(Lu. 2
T-qv
ets
kv rots ovpavols
:
TTJS
7775
(Eph.
:
10),
TvavTas tovs ayiovs (1
15), to
:
Kad'
eh (Ro. 12
5), 6
'ev
re? (jyavepu,
(2
28
f.),
etc.
In Ac. 18
01 wepl
note voôv tov
Kad'
v/jLCis,
where the
article occurs
with the preposi-
tional phrase, but not with the substantive.
On
man
and
(g)
his followers see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 264.
With Single AVords or Whole Sentences.

is
Here the
Cf. to "Etl
word
dwa^
used verbatim, as to
e7dj (Plato, Crat.,

:
405
d).^
above (Hcb. 12 27) and to "A7ap (the name Hagar, So to 8e 'Ave(3ri (Eph. 4:9). With sentences the article sometimes marks the quotation as in to Et Svvy (Mk. 9 23), 18 f.), 'iv tc3 Kyair-qaeLS tov TO Ov (t)OvevaeLS ojs creavTOV (Mt. 19 ifKrialov cbs aeavTov (Gal. 5 to yap Oi) fxoLx^vaeis and 'ev rco 14),
8r]\ol
Gal. 4:25).
'
22 37). In particular the article is fairly common in Luke and occurs a few times in Paul with indirect questions. The modern Greek shows this essentially classical idiom .^ Blass^ remarks that the article
'
AyaTTjaeis kt\. (Ro. 13
9), to Kai jucTd av6p.wv e\oyiadr] (Lu.
makes no
essential difference to the

least: it
meaning
of the question.
It
does this at
makes
rjnojv
clearer the substantival idea of the in-
direct question
and
1
:
its relation
to the principal clause.

ttcos
See
to
:
Th.
t'l
TrapeXdjSere Trap'
to
8eX
Vfxas,
Ro. 8 26
:
yap
TTpoaevôo/jLeda,
Lu.
TO
62
av
evevevov to tL av d'ekot KaXeladaL,

eirj /zetfcoj',
:
46
elarjX-
6ev 8La\oyLafj.6s to
19 48 ovx 'QvpiaKov to 22 4 (Tvve\a\r]aev to 23 avv^rjTeTv to t'ls e'ir], 22 24 e7ej'eT0 4)CKoveLK'ia Ac. 4 21 p.T]8ev evp'LaKOVTes to ttcos KoXdacovTaL, 22 30
t'ls
tl wofqacoaiv,
ttcos
22 22
'e^r]Tovv
ttcos
aveXcoaiv,
Tvapa8(Jo,
t'ls
to
8oKe'L,
yvojvaL
to tl
KaTrjyopelTaL.
1
Gk. Synt.,
p. 14.
Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 263.
' *
Thompson, p. 45. Cf. Gildersleeve, Jebb, V. and D.'s Handb., p. 295 f.
Synt., p. 265.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 158.
THE ARTICLE
(h)
(tO "APGFOn)
767
With Genitive Alone.

The
kolvt]
This
is
also a
common
idiom in
the ancient Greek. ^
uses this idiom very often (Rader-
macher, N. T. Gk.,
the papyri.
p. 94), as seen
both in the inscriptions and
very plain,
context.
plied;
The article stands alone, but the ellipsis is usually as is shown by the gender and number as well as the
'laKw/Sos 6 rod ZejSeSaiov
ri
So Mapla
4
tov KKcottol (Jo. 19
Mapla
(1 Pet.
ri
'laKwôv (Lu. 24: 10),

:
2), where i;t6s is imwhere ywi] is to be supplied; where fxr^T-np is meant; to rrjs oo^-qs
(Mt. 10:
25),
where Tvevfxa is to be understood; ol rod Zeêdalov where viol is meant, etc. In 1 Cor. 15 23 p.adr]Tai is probably to be supplied (cf. Gal. 5: 24), and dSeXôs in Lu. 6: 16
14),
(Jo.
21
2),
(cf.
Ju.
1).
The neuter
plural
is
common for the

to.
notion of "affairs"
(Ph. 2:21),
to.
or "things."
So rd eavTuv and
Xpiarov
ttjs
'lr]aov
Kaiaapos
and
rd tov deov (Lu. 20:25), rd
avpiov (marg.
ttjs
W.
H.,
tov
also
Jas. 4:14), rd tov Kbap.ov (1 Cor. 7:33), rd

TTPevfiaTos
aapKos
and rd
(Ro. 8:
5),
rd
ttjj elprivr]s
(14:19), etc.
:
One may note
here
Cf.
h toIs tov iraTpos fxov (Lu. 2 h Tots KXav8{iov), P.Oxy. 523

The neuter
49) for 'house of
my
Father.'
ol
(ii/A.D.).
See
eis
to.
Uta and
Ulol (Jo. 1: 11).

rrjs
singular has
an abstract use
avKrjs
like to
aXrjdovs irapOLfxias (2 Pet.
2:22), to
ttjs
(Mt. 21:21),
the article
(i)
Nouns
in
the Predicate.
These
is
may have
also.
It
is,
As already
explained, the article
not essential to speech.
deos
however, "invaluable as a means of gaining precision, e.g. 6 \6yos."^ As a rule the predicate is without the article, even when the subject uses it. Cf. 6700 audpcciros djii (Lu. 7:8).
Tjv
This
is
in strict accord with the ancient idiom.^
Gildersleeve {Syn-
tax, p. 324)
notes that the predicate

is
is
usually something
new and
therefore the article

ositions.
not
much used
except in convertible prop-
Winer,* indeed, denies that the subject may be known from the predicate by its having the article. But the rule holds wherever the subject has the article and the predicate does not.
The
nite
then definite and distributed, the predicate indefiThe word with the article is then the subject, whatever the order may be. So in Jo. 1 1, Oeos rjv 6 \6yos,
article is
and undistributed.
is
the subject
perfectly clear.
rju
Cf. 6 Xoyos aap^ tykvero (Jo.
14).
It is true also that 6 deb^
6 X670S (convertible
terms) would have
I, p. 2GS f.; Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 280 f. The neuter article with extremely common in Herod. Cf StauraS, tJber den Gebr. d. Gen. bei Herod., p. 25.
K.-G.,
is
the gen.
^ ^ *
Milden,
Cf.
The Limitation^
of the Pred. Position in Gfv., p. 9
f.
Thompson, Synt.
Winer-Moulton,
of Attic Gk., p. 4G; Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 325. p. 142.
768
NEW TESTAMENT
4
:
been Sabellianism.^ See also
6 9e6s ayair-q eariv (1 Jo.
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

is
po/jlos
d/xaprm;
(Ro. 7:7).
44).
The absence
:
of the article here
essential to the true idea.
Cf. also avdpoiiroKrbvos
on purpose and and ^pevar-qs (Jo. 8

:
In Eph. 5
23, avi^p karLP KecpaXr], the context
makes
it
clear
(W. H. marg.
article.
6X0S is
aprip KecpaXr] eoTLp) that apijp is subject even without the In Jo. 9 34, hp afxapriais av eyeppr]6r]s oXos, the article with not needed, a neat use of the predicate adjective. But the
:
article is quite frequent

strict
accord with old usage.
with the predicate in the N. T. and in 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
If
that are identical are

is
convertible as in the older idiom.'*
he had added what
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.
bility apply.
divisions
But even here Moulton's rule of identity and convertiThe overrefinement of Winer-Schmiedcl's many subhere is hardly commendable. In a word, then, when
is
the article occurs with subject (or the subject
a personal pro-
noun
or proper name)
and
predicate, both are definite, treated
as identical, one
applies to substantives, adjectives
and the same, and interchangeable. The usage 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
17), ris
38), av el 6
TrtoTos
:
XpicTTOs (16
16), els kaTLP 6 ayados (19
apa earlp 6
5oDXos (24
28),
45), tovto earip to aoipa pov, tovto kaTip to alpa pov (26
26,
(TV el 6 /JacrtXeus
:
(27: 11), av
el
6 vlos pov
Kk-qpopopos
rjv
(Mk.
(12
(Jo.
1
:
11), ovx ovtos
kaTLP 6 TeKTWP (6
vpels oi
el (TV (1
3), ovtos ecTTLP 6

:
7), ov
yap eare
tv po4>i]Tris
XaXowres (13
:
11),
17
fcoi)
:
to
cf)cos
1:4), 6
Trpo(j)r}Tr]s
21),
(TV el
6 5t5acr/caXos (3
:
10), ovtos eaTip 6
(6
14),
OVTOS e(TTiv 6 dpros (6

eyo) elpt to 0tos (8
70? elpi
rj
:
50;
cf. 51),
to irpevpa eaTLP to ôootocovp (6

:
63),
f.),
12), ovx ovtos eaTip 6 Kadrjpepos (9

7), eyco
elpi.
8;
rj
cf.
19
6vpa (10
(11
:
6 iroLprjp (10
11), eych eipi

rj
apaaTaais
/cat
Kol
*
ri
fco97
25, note
both
articles), 670; elpi
d86s Kal
rj
akqdeia
3 ^
See per contra, STmcox, Lang, of the N. T., p. 48. ^ W.-M., Cf. Donaldson, New Crat., p. 522; Middleton, Gk. Art., p. 54.
p. 142.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 46.
p. 159,
THE ARTICLE
17
(tO "APGPON)
769
îor]
(14
6,
note
three separate articles), eKeivos eanu ayairCbv

kaTiv 6
\idos
jue
(14:21),
:
oSros
(Ac. 4:11), ovtos kanv

:
ri
dvpa/dLS
(8
10), ovx OVTOS eaTLV 6 TOpdrjaas (9

:
21), ovtos
:
karLV
Ke4>aKri
6 avOpwivos 6
:
(21
28), ovK
apa
av
el
AiyvirTcos (21
38),
17
XptaTos
k<7Ttv (1 <TTLP rinels

r\
Cor. 11:3), 6
eiprjvr]
thjlojp
ri
5e kvplos to iruevixa kajLv (2

:
Cor. 3
17), avTos
:
(Eph. 2
wepLTOfxr]
14), deos kaTiv 6
evepyuv (Ph. 2
17
13),
yap
ea/xev
(3:3),
''9,
rj
a/jLapTia kaTiv
avojila (1 Jo.
3:4),
70? dfXL TO
:
"AX0a
koI to
6 ecrxaros (1
17,
note both
articles),
it
This
list is
not exhaustive, but
(Rev. 1:8), 670? ei^t 6 wpuiTos Kal av el 6 ToXaiiro^pos (3 17), etc. is sufficient to illustrate the points
:
:
involved.
Note
6 /Sao-iXe^s
(Mt. 27 11) and âatXevs (Jo.

eaxaTOL (Mt. 20
:
1 :49).
:
Even
the superlative adjective
may have the article as in Rev. 1

:
17 above.
But
see
oi eaxo-TOc Trpcorot Kal ot -KpC^TOL
usual construction.
taxaTais
rj/jiepais,
Cf. eaxart] copa (1 Jo. 2

:
18).
16) for the See further iv

:
Jas. 5
3; 2
:
and
TTj
eaxaTT]
rj/jLepa,
Jo. 6
39.
Tim. 3 :1; h KaipQ eaxaTco, 1 Pet. 1 5, For the common predicate accu(i).
:
sative see chapter
XI
(Cases), vii,
are anarthrous (Jo.
5:11; 15
15),
and note
In the N. T. most examples 1 Cor. 4 9 rjuds tovs

:
airocToKovs ecrxaroi's a-Kebeiêv.

(j)
Cf. Gilderslecve, Syntax, p. 326.

:
Distributive. Cf. e/c drjuaplov T-qu iip.epav (Mt. 20 2), ara^ (Heb. 9:7), bis tov aa^âTov (Lu. 18 12), eTTciKLs This is, to be sure, an ancient idiom faTTJs rjnepas (Lu. 17:4). miliar also to the English (cf. our ''by the yard," ''by the pound," etc.). It is found in the papyri. ^ But emaTos is not used in the N. T. Avith the article. Cf. ol Kad' eva kaaros (Eph. 5 33). We have once ap.<i)6Tepa to. irXola (Lu. 5 7), and several times ol aiJL<l)6Tov eviavTov
: :
:
(Eph. 2 18), to. ap.4)bTepa (2 14). Cf. TOVS bvo in Eph. 2 15. Thompson, Syfitax of Attic Gk., p. 51. Nominative with the Article = Vocative. This matter (Ji) was sufficiently discussed in the chapter on Cases. It is an occasional Greek idiom repeated in the Hebrew and Aramaic regularly and frequent in N. T. As examples see val, 6 TaTrjp (Mt. 11 26), TO aXaXov Kal Kwcfyop iruevixa (Mk. 9 25), vraTs (Lu. 8 54),
TepoL
: :
Cf.
97
6 âaiXevs (Jo.
(Z)
19
3).
article
As THE Equivalent of a Possessive Pronoun. The does not indeed mean possession. The nature of the case
it
makes
plain that the
word
in question belongs to the
person
mentioned.
K4>a\i]v}
'
The French can say j'ai mal a la tete, aXyw ttiv The examples in the N. T. are rather numerous. See,
Volker notes also the presence of
I,
</ia(7Tos
2
Volkcr, Synt. d. griech. Pap., p. 8. or of ava, Kark, tK, irpSs.
Cf. Clyde,
Gk. Synt.,
p. 16.
Sec K.-C,
p. 556.
770

airvl\}/aTO
to.
rfj
for instance,
rds x^tpas
(Mt. 27: 24;

21
40;
cf.
cf.
Lu. 13:
13).
In
Mt. 4
20 we have
3
dUTva, while in verse 21

x^tpt (Ac.
:
we
7
:
find
to. St/crua
avTuv. Cf. KaTeaetae

fMOVoyevrj (Jo.
:
Mk.
cf.
32), top vlov tov
16), toj pol dovKtvo:
(Ro. 7: 25), rod irarpos (1 Cor.

:
5:1), TItov
Kal TOP a8e\(j)6p (2
Cor. 12
18;
also 8
18). ^
Cf.
Mt. 8:3;
(m)
in the
Jo. 1:41.
article is
With Possessive Pronouns. The

ircLPTa
always used
is
N. T. with these pronouns unless the pronoun

aa karip Kol
to.
predicate.
So TO. eiia 2:11) and
(xd
ejud
(Jo. 17
:
10)
rjfxeTepos
(Ac.
i^xkTepos (Jo.
7:6;
cf.
Lu. 6
20).
The
article is fre-
quently repeated as in 6 Katpos 6 eôs (Jo. 7:6). It was usual with possessives in the ancient Greek.^ The Gospel of John shows Cf Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 65 f. With Ihos 6 ifios very frequently. the article is customary, as in ets r-qp I8iap ttoKlp (Mt. 9:1). This
.
construction
idios
is
very
common
in the
N. T.
few times we meet

Cor. 9:7),
ycatpoTs
without the
article, as in tStots bypuiploLs (1
lbloL% (1
Tim. 2:6).
The anarthrous examples may be only memSee
bers of a class, not the particular individual in the case.

further ch.
(n)
only necessary to mention the order ami] 7] KTto-ts (Ro. 8 21), and 17 avrri aap^ (1 Cor. 15 39), to set forth the distinction in the position of the article with avros. So avTo TO TTPivixa (Ro. 8 26), but to avTo irpevfjia (1 Cor. 12 8). See
:
XV, Pronouns. With Auto'?. It is
Pronouns.
(0)
With Demonstratives.
The
essential facts
have been
al-
ready stated in the chapter on Pronouns. "05e occurs in the N. T. once with the is sufficient.
TTjp -koKlp
Here a bare
summary
article, eis TrjpSe
(Jas.
13).
The
usual position of the demonstrative
has already been discussed also. It may be repeated here that we must not confuse this predicate (appositional) position of ovtos, UeLPos with the ordinary predicate position of The construction may be paralleled to some extent adjectives.
with the
article
by the French
la republique frangaise.
Still in
is.'
Homer
tovtop top
apa\T0P=' this man,' amXros, 'that he
the origin of the idiom ovtos 6. So fixed in the Attic inscriptions the construction
Here we probably see did the usage become that
is uniform.^ The Boeotian order is immaterial, The thing.^ same the inscriptions reveal ovtos 6 apdpwKos (14 30). or 2 (Lu. ovtos 25) whether 6 apdpwivos
:
Cf. A. Souter, art. Luke, Hastings' D.C.G.,
who
takes tov
'
his,'
i.e.
Luke.
2
For pap. exx. see Volker, Synt. d. griech. Pap., p. 7. * Meisterh., Att. Inschr., p. 231. Thompson, Gk. Synt., p. 51. ^ Claflin, Synt. of B.D. Inscr., p. 42. Monro, Horn. Or., p. 181.
THE ARTICLE
In general
it
(tO "AP0POn)
771
be noted that the absence of the article with the noun means that ovtos is a real predicate, as in Jo. 2:11, Cf. Lu. 24 21; Ac. 1 5. Even ravTrjV kiroirjaev apxh^ tQiv a-qixdoiv.
may
with proper names
the article occurs, as in outos 6
'Iryo-oOs
(Ac.
For remarked that the

1:11).
further details see chapter

rigidity
on Pronouns.
It
may
be
apparent in the use of the article in does not exist in the case of the e/ccTws and connection with ouros article is wanting in the N. T. The demonstratives. correlative ToctoOtos occurs once rrikLKovTos. and Toibabe with in connection ifKovros (Rev. ToaovTO'i attributive, 6 true a article, the only with with the usually appears hand, other the on ToioOtos, 18 16).
:
article
and
:
in the attributive position, as in tuiv tolovto:v
TraL8io)u
(Mk. 9 37), though once the predicate position is found, at dvpafxeis TOLavTaL (Mk. 6:2). Most of the examples have no substantive,
like 01 TOLOVTOL (Ro. 16: 18), ra TOtavra (Gal. 5: 21).
(p)
With "OXo?, Ha? ("ATra?).

The MSS. vary
has
ttSs
"ATras is
found
15),
chiefly in
Tras.
Acts.
of
greatly between aTras and
Luke and The text

(15
:
W. H. now
in the
margin (Lu. 9
now axas
iras
13).
Blass^
fails to find
any
satisfactory rule for the use of axas, the
Attic distinction of dTras after a consonant not holding (cf. Lu. 1:3), though in general
:
and
airas
after
a vowel
does occur (when
used at all) after a consonant (cf. Mt. 6 32). "ATras, when used with a substantive in the N. T., is always with the article. Once only does it appear in the attributive position, ttju airaaav iiaKpoOvfilav (1
Tim. 1 16), 'the total sum of his long-suffering.' Elsewhere we have either the order 6 Xaos airas (Lu. 19 48) or avavTa If ovtos also is used, we have rriv kôvaiav TOP \a6v (Lu. 3 :21).
:
:
ravTrjv aracrav
(Lu. 4:6).
Cf.
ot
avTOV airavres (Ac. 16
33).
is
The
it
construction of
Tras is
varied and interesting.

all
It
an ex-
ceedingly
common
adjective in
parts of the N. T.
is
In general
may
be said that the idiom of the N. T.

ttSs
in
harmony with the

In the singular
ancient Greek in the use of

Tras
and the
article.^
may
be used without the

Cor. 4 :2),
article in the sense of 'every.'

:
So
iravTa Treipaanov (Lu. 4:13),

avOpwTTcov (2
rav aTOfxa (Ro. 3
19), iraaav avvdbr]aLV
irdv bkvbpov
'
(Mt. 3
10), etc.
Blass^ dis-
tinguishes
between cKacrros =
each individual' and Tras='any one
you
please.'
' :
= all the city' {die game Has 6= all.' So iraaa 17 ttoXis (Mt. 8 34) Stadt)^ This is the order and it is very common. Cf. irdaav tîv
'
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 161.

Cf. K.-G.,
I,
Cf. Diels, Gott. Gel.-Anz., 1894, pp. 298
ff.
pp. 631
ff.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 161.
W.-Sch., p. 187.
772
yrjv

(Mt. 27: 45), Tavrl tQ o'lkco (Ac. 10 2). Even without the armay be 'all/ if it is a proper noun, like iraaa 'lipoaokvjxa
:
ticle ttSs
(Mt. 2:3),
'ItrpaijX,
Tras
is
there
^
'l(ypai)\ (Ro. 11:26). In Ac. 2:36, xas oUos only one "house of Israel," so that 'all' is the
idea.
Winer says that
substantives also
is
very
little
it is treated as a proper name. Abstract be used with or without the article. There difference in idea between iraarj yvdocreL (1 Cor. 1 5)
may
and irdaav ttjv yvcoatv (1 Cor. 13 2). With the abstract word "every" and "all" amount practically to the same thing. There is an element of freedom in the matter. So waa-au T-qv riaTiv (1 Cor. 13 2), but iraar) ao(j)La (Ac. 7:22). There may indeed be occasionally the difference between a specific instance like irdar] rfj 6\hpeL rjfxojv (2 Cor. 1 4) and a general situation like Taar) BXlxpei (ib.).^ But see iraay virofxopfj (2 Cor. 12 12), iraar] ay via (1 Tim. 5:2), (JLera irappriaias iraarjs (Ac. 4 29), etc. See also iraaa aap^ = ^ba-b3 (Lu. 3:6), usually with oh (Mt. 24 22). But note agam Tr\7]pa}craL iraaav bLKaioahvqv (Mt. 3 15) and iraarjs ttjs TpoaSoKlas
: : : :
(Ac.
12
:
11).
See iraaa
Cf. 2
eôvala
1
:
(Mt. 28
18),
:
iraaris
irXeoveîas
(Lu. 12
15).
Tim.
15.
ri
In Ph.
KTlais
3, xAar? rfj iivda,

:
the
article is pertinent as in iraaa

1
:
(Ro. 8
22).
But
in Col.
15, 23; 1 Pet.
13
-rrdaa Kricns
has
its
true idea of 'every created

:
But what about ttpcctotokos Traarjs KTiaecos (Col. 1 15)? See also Col. 1 9 ff. and Trdaav xo-po-v (Jas. 1:2). Other examples somewhat open to doubt are irdaa olKodonrj (Eph. 2 21) which is most probably 'every building' because of els vabv. So in Eph.
thing.'
: :
15 rdaa rarpia
is
'every family,' though

:
'all
the family'
is
if
possible.
In 2 Tim. 3
16
TrScra
Ypaî?
is
'every Scripture,'
separate
portions are referred to.
Cf. Jo. 19:37, hkpa

17
ypa(f)r}.
ypa<l)i)
Usually in the singular in the N. T. we have ypacfy-f), but twice occurs alone as definite without the article, once in 1 Pet.
:
6,
ej'
ypa(f)fi,
:
once in 2 Pet.
26) the article
1
is
20,
ypa(})TJs.
Twice
in the plural
(Ro. 1:2; 16
ypacbi)
absent.
'all
It is possible for irdaa

it is
in 2
Tim. 3:16 to mean

In Jas.
1
Scripture,' but
more
likely 'every Scripture.'
17, -Kaaa Soais,
we have
'every,'
as in iravTos Tpoaooirou (Ac. 17: 26).^

Ilas 6
N. T.
to
1
and the participle is a very common construction in the Here the idea is 'every,' and 6 and the participle are in
apposition.
Tras
Thus
irds 6 aKovoov
(Mt. 7 26)
:
is
practically equivalent
ocrrts aKovti
(7: 24).
Cf.
:
ttSs 6 cpyLôixevos
f.
(Mt. 5
22), irds 6
W.-Th.,
Blass,
this imitation of
2
Cf. 1 Sam. 7 2 Hebrew. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 1G2.

p. 111.
Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 162) calls

^
cf. W.-Sch., p. 1S7.
THE ARTICLE
^'Xkirwv (5
:
(tO "APOPOn)
32), ttSs 6 alTCnv (7:8), etc.
773
28), Tras 6 airokxiwv (5
But
sometimes we find ttSs (Mt. 13 19), iravTl b4>d\ovTL (Lu. 11:4), where some MSS. read See iravTl rw TrLarevovTi (Ro. 1 16). The abstract neuter tSlv Tc3. So ttoLv to da-wopevbuevov (Mt. 15 17), ivav to cxpeiXoTO is regular.
without the article as in
ttovtos olkovoutos
: :
:
fievov
(18
34).
6
Cf.
irciv
6 in Jo. 6
37, 39.
The idiom
the singular.
6 ttSs
vbfxo'i
7ras='the whole,' 'the totality,' is not frequent in See t6v iravTa xpovov (Ac. 20:18), It occurs twice.^
:
(Gal. 5
14),
das gesamte Gesetz} Cf. also Barn. 4
9, 6
'0 ttSs vbixo% = iras xpovos. Here the whole is contrasted with a part. a concommon never so was It whole law.' 'the 'the entire law,' ^ as ttSs 6. Greek ancient in the struction In the plural iravTes is used sometimes without the article. The
article is
not necessary with proiêr names,

Cf. iravTes TouSatot (26
:
like iravTe^
'AdrjvatoL
(Ac. 17
21).
4).
But the
(Lu.
article is
absent
Tavras
elsewhere also, as in TavTes kpyaTaL

avdpojTovs (Ac.
cf. iraaLv roTs
dSt/ctas
13
27),
22
15;
:
cf.
Ro. 5:
12, 18), iraaLv ayadols (Gal.
6:6;
(Eph. 3:8), iravTes ayyeXoL (Heb. 1:6). These examples are not numerous, however. Cf. 16. Blass* considers it a violation of clas1 Pet. 2 1 2 Pet. 3 16, sical usage not to have the article in Eph. 3 8 and 2 Pet. 3
in 3
10),
ttclvtuv aylcov
: ;
:
: :
because of the adjectives, and in Lu. 4 20, ravTcov ev Tfj awaapphes chiefly to yuyfi, because of the adjunct. But that objection
:
the literary style.

construction
is
ay lol wavTes (2 Cor. 13 12). The usual (Mt. 1:17), iravTas tov^ apxi-(pd.s (2:4), etc. Sometimes we have the other order like ras TroXets Cf. 2 Cor. 13 12. Has may be repeated with 35). Trao-as (Mt. 9 separate words (Mt. 3:5). For the use with the participle see
See
ol
:
iraaaL at yeveal
Mt. 8
16.
like ol iravTes avbpes (Ac. 19
few examples of the attributive position are found, 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
us.'
(2 Cor. 5
10).
:
The
last
example =' we the
whole number of
Cf. Ac. 21 21.

:
without a substantive, as in 2 Cor. 5 15; 1 Cor. 9 22; Ro. 11: 32; Eph. 4: 13; Ph. 2:21. In 1 Cor. 10:17, ot Trdj/TCS kK Tov evbs apTOV neTexofiev, note the contrast with tov evbs.
But we
also find
:
ot iravTes
Still
more common
:
is
to.
raPTa for 'the

:
sum
:
of things,' 'the
all.'
Cf. Ro. 8
1
32; 11
36; 1 Cor. 11
12; 12
6,
19
(cf.
here ra iravTa
Green, Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 192.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 189.
W.-Sch., p. 189. Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 52
f.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. IGl.
774
and
(1

eV);
NEW TESTAMENT
The
:
2 Cor. 5
:
18; Col. 1
17, etc.
use of
Traj^res
alone
Cor. 12
29), or of Travra (1 Cor. 13
7), calls for
no comment.
The
have.
story of oXos
It
the N. T.
is brief. It is never attributive in position in has also an indefinite meaning which ttSs does not Thus kviavTou o\ov (Ac. 11: 26)= 'a whole year.' Has does
:
article. So Jo. 7 23, oKov avwhole man sound.' ^ Cf. Lu. 5: 5; Ac. 28: 30. In Mk. 12 30 compare e^ oXtjs KapSias (h 6\j] KapSia, Mt. 22 37) with e^ 6Xr]s rrjs 4^vxrjs. In this sense the plural also is found as in
dpo^TTov vyLT],
:
not have this idea apart from the

'a
oXovs oLKovs (Tit. 1
11).
One may compare

:
oX??
'lepovaaXijij,
(Ac.
21:31), with Trdaa TepocroXu/ia (Mt. 2:3). We usually have in the N. T. the order oXr] 17 ttoXis (Mk. 1 33), but sometimes 17 xoXis 6X77 (Ac. 21 :30). Sometimes we have okos and tSs in the
same sentence as
in
2 Cor.
Th. 4
10.
:
The word may be

:
repeated several times (Mt. 22 :37; Mk. 12 30, 33). It occurs alone also as a predicate (Jo. 9 34), or with tovto (Mt. 1 22). There is a peculiar use of the article with (q) With IIoXi;?.
:
TToXus
that calls for a word.
The
:
regular construction with the

:
article (attributive)
Uke
to toXv avrov eXeos (1 Pet. 1

15)
3) occurs in
the singular
(cf. 6
in the plural.
1
:
Cor. 10 17), note vdcLTuv ToXkuv (Rev. 17:

TO.
and much more frequently So ol ToWoi alone (Ro. 5 15; 12 5; Heb. 12 15; to. iroWa (Ro. 15 22). With the substantive added
to ttoXu, 2 Cor. 8
: : : :
1), at ap-apTlai at
TroXXat (Lu. 7:47),
TToXXd ypdniiaTa (Ac.
26:24).
This
is
all
in
classic
ticle in
idiom^ as well as the frequent use of
iroXvs
harmony with without the ar:
an indefinite sense. But in 6 oxXos iroXvs (Jo. 12 9, 12) Moulton^ finds "a curious misplacement of the article." Moulton cites a piece of careless Greek from Par.P. 60, aird tcop TrXrypco/zdroji' apxaloov. It is possible that oxXos iroXvs came to be regarded as one idea. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 284) cites a few rare attributive examples of the type 6 dj'i7p ayados from Homer and ^schylus where the adjective is appositive rather than predicative. The Homeric examples may be demonstrative. One may note also eK TTJs fiaTalas Vfiuv 6.va(7Tpo(t)rjs iraT poirapabbrov (1 Pet. 1 18) and viro T^s Xeyo/xevrjs Treptrojurjs ev aapu xî-POTTOLrjTOV (Eph. 2 11). See VI, (c), 5. We do find the usual order 6 ttoXus oxXos in Mk. 12
:
:
But it is a fact that oxXos iroKvs is the usual order in the N.T.(Mt. 26:47; Mk. 5:24; Lu. 7:11; 9:37; Jo. 6:2, 5). The analogy of ttSls, oXos, ovtos may have played some part in the matter. For oxkoL TToXXoi see Mt. 19 2; Lu. 14 25. In Mt. 21 8 (parallel
37.
: : :
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 190.
Thompson, Synt.
of Att. Gk., p. 53.
Pj.qI^ p_ g^.
THE ARTICLE
with
(tO "APePON)
775
is difficult
we have 6 TrXeTo-ros oxXos, but it on this point of variation. One is reminded of the constant French idiom, but that is merely an independent parallel. The idiom ol irXdoves may be seen in 1 Cor.
Mk.
12
37, 6 ttoXus 6x>ôs)
to lay
much
stress
19.
(r)
See further ch. XIV.

"A/cpo?, "H/ittrw, ''Ea-%aT09, Meo-o9.
As
:
to
a/cpos, it
does not
:
appear as an adjective in the N. T. TO aKpov is a substantive. The same thing is probably true of ixKpov and cLKpwv in Mk. 13 27 and Mt. 24 31. This is in harmony with
: :
In Lu. 16 24 and Heb. 11 21
the Septuagint (Ex. 29:20;
Is.
5:26).^
Cf.
The same
situation
is
repeated in the case of 6

:
rfjutcrus.
:
tcos rifxlcrovs ttjs /Jao-tXctas

:
(Mk.
23),
wLav
Kaipov (Rev. 12
14).
Cf. w'-<^v alone (Rev. 11

17
9, 11).
:
But
rf?
eaxoLTos is
used attributively as in
(Jo. 6
:
ecrxar?? TrXdi/r?
taxo-TV
WW
39, etc.),
to eaxarov
XtirTov
:
(Mt. 27 64), (Lu. 12 59),

:
etc.
The
construction 6 eaxo-ros alone (Rev. 2

is
8)
and
to.
laxo-To.
Tov avdpdoirov (Lu. 11:26)
classical .2
ecrxaTa;
So
(1
is
indeed also iravTuv

'Ett'
eaxaros (Mk. 9:35),

Tov Toou
rjiJLepojv
kv
/catpco
Pet. 1:5).
ccrxa-
(Heb. 1:2)
eir'
is
probably a substantive use.

r]p.epuv
But
in 2 Pet.
3:3
haxo-Twv toju
we may have
There
is
the parti-
tive construction in the predicate position.

iJLtcros.
no doubt of
Here also we find usually to ixkaov (like to aKpov it as to above) absolutely (Mk. 3 3), or the various prepositional phrases Hke 6ts iJ^kaov (Mk. 14 60), h txeao: (Mk. 6 47), dia fxkaov (Lu. 4 30), d/(i îkaov (Mk. 7 31), rara [xkaop (Ac. 27 27), k tieaov (Mt. 13 49)
:
:
or
iikcTov
as preposition (Ph. 2
15).
But the
:
old partitive construc:
tion occurs in ukat^s vvktos (Mt. 25
6), -fjnepas
is
without the
article.
The
true predicate
13) fxearjs (Ac. 26 found in to KaTareTaafxa
tov vaov fieaov (Lu. 23 :45).

TrXotof fieaov Ttjs daXaaffrjs
is
So
jueo-os
:
in Ac. 1:18.
Cf. also to
(Mt. 14
is,
24,
:
marg.
W.
H.),
where
fxeaov
probably a preposition.
In Jo. 19
is
18, ukaop top 'Irjaovp,
we have
'Jesus in the midst.'

like the old classic
TTJs 7r6Xecos
There
however, no example in the N. T.

seen in the
idiom which
LXX.
Cf.
p-earjs
(Ezek. 11: 23).^
See also ch. XIV.
(s)
With "AXXo? and

:
"Ere/Jo?.
The
it.
article is frequent
with aXX
but never in the sense of 'the rest

ot
of,' like
ancient Greek.
But
aXXot (1 Cor. 14
29)
is
close to
are meant, as in 6 Herpos Kal 6
used where only two dXXos n.aQit]Ti]% (Jo. 20 3), tj oKkq

It
is
:
Mapta (Mt. 28
Cf. also TOV
ticle is
1).
The
order 6
pa^Tyri^s 6
aXXos occurs (Jo. 18

:
16).
aWov
TOV (jvp(XTavpw6epTos (Jo. 19

XoittoTs

32)
where the arBlass*
repeated, like rots

1
tois,
etc.
(Rev. 2 :24).
Synt., p. 53.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 190.

lb.
lb.;
Thompson,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 180.
776
NEW TESTAMENT
erepaLs iro\e(TLv=
eis
says that no Attic writer would have said rats

'the remaining cities' (Lu. 4:43).
He
considers
Trjv
hepav
(Mt. 10:23
ticle
XB)
"incorrect" for 'the next' city, as well as 6

:
erepos 'the third' in Lu. 19
20.
But
it is
not the use of the ar-
here that displeases Blass, but the free interchange of dXXos

'irepo^
and
(f)
in the
kolvt].
See ch.
XV, Pronouns.
The
essential
M0V09.
This need detain us but a moment.
facts are succinctly given by Winer-Scluniedel.* Without the article ixovos occurs usually even with proper names, as 'Irjaovs ixovos
(Lu. 9 36)
:
So
(jlopo:
OeQ (Ro. 16 27
:
Tim. 1:17).
22)
is
But the pred(24

:
icate use occurs also.

Trarrip
p.bvo%
So Mt. 12
tols lepevat
ij.6vols;
;
36) 6
(Heb. 9:7).
Ju. 4.
(XBD); The articular

:
}xbvoL ol iJ,adr]Tai
(Jo. 6
p.6vos
6 apxif^p^vs
attributive use
44).
as in Tov novov deov (Jo. 5
found a few times, Cf. Jo. 17: 3; 1 Tim. 6 15 f.;

:
See ch. XIV.
VI. Position with Attributives.
The
article
does not
make a
word or phrase
article.
attributive.
It is necessary to
go
may be attributive without the over much of the same ground again
It
(Adjectives and Participles, Genitives, Adverbs and Adjuncts) in
order to get the subject clearly before us.
So epyov ayadov (Ph. 1:6) is attribu(a) With Adjectives. tive='a good work,' though it is anarthrous. Cf. also epyois
dyadots (Eph. 2
article is
:
10).
Cf. fiLKpd
^vfxr]
(1
Cor. 5:6).
is
But when the

its
used before a word or phrase there
no doubt about
It
is
being attributive.
1.
article
The Normal Position of the Adjective. and the substantive, as in to koXov

:
between the
opoixa (Jas.
d7a06s avdpcx)Tos (Mt. 12
35), to kjxbv
ovofjLa
(18: 20).
2:7), 6 In this normal

Jo. 5:
attributive type the adjective receives greater emphasis than the
substantive.^
20.
Cf. correct text in Lu. 12:12; 1 Cor. 10:3;
So
TTJ
vycaLvovari StSaaKaXia (1
Tim.
1: 10).
There must be a
special reason for the other construction.^
The Other Construction (Repetition of the Article). In the 11) both substantive and adjective irotfiriv 6 koXSs (Jo. 10 receive emphasis and the adjective is added as a sort of climax in apposition with a separate article.^ Cf 6 vl6s p-ov 6 dya-n-qTos (Mt.
2.
order ^ 6
P. 190.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 158.
3 *
Thompson, Synt.
For copious
f.
:
of Att. Gk., p. 47.

of
classical exx.
both positions see Gildersleeve, Syntax,

the repeated article makes for greater
p. 281
^
In Jas. 3
7,
rg (pmei
rfj
dvepoiwifji,
clearness.
THE ARTICLE
17:
t6
5),
i;5c.jp
:
(tO "APGPOn)
8), to
kjxbs
:
777
akriOivov (Jo. 1
:
TTiv yrjp rriv
ayadrfV (Lu.
:
0ws to
17
9),
TO ôiv (4
11),
mtpos 6
(7:6),
HfXTeKos
rj
aKy]diV7}
:
(15
1),
TO irvtvua to Trovqpbv (Ac. 19

:
15).
Cf. also
:
Mt. 6
:
G;
Lu.
7 :47; Jo. 6
:
Eph. 6 13; Col. 1 21; Heb. 13 20; 1 Jo. 1 2; 2 25; 4 9. There is an apparent 1, to re 'ayiov kocxiilkov, which may be compared difficulty in Heb. 9 Perhaps both ayiop and with 6 b-)(\os iroXvs above (Jo. 12 9).^
13; 1 Cor. 12
: :
31; 2 Cor. 6
:
7;
KocTfiLKov
were
felt
to be adjectives.
3. Article
Repeated Several Times.
So
in Ac. 12
10, riiv irvXrjv
rrjP (nb-qpav Ti]v <t)epovaau.
Cf. to irvp to alcovLOV to rjTOLnacjikvov (Mt.
25 :41),
6 fxadrjTTjs 6 ctXXos 6 ypcjaTOS (Jo.

:
18
16), Trjv pofxcftaiav tijv
In particular note the repetition 12). SicTTOfiov T-qv b^tiav (Rev. 2 In Rev. 3: 14; 17: 1; 21:9. Rev. of the article in Heb. 11: 12;
5 note four articles, apxoiv. Cf. Rev. 12 9;
1
:
:
6
1
ixapTvs
6
:
ttio-tos,
ttpcototokos
Kai
Pet. 4
14.
For
this
common
:
classic
idiom see Gildersleeve, Sijntax, pp. 328 ff.

pladr]
In Ph.l 29, vplv exato,
TO vT^p XpiffTov, the two infinitives following, each with

first to.
explain the
4.
One
Article with Several Adjectives.
When
several adjectives
with each adjective if the adjectives are used we sharply. So 6 xpcoTos /cat 6 eaxo-Tos Kal 6 aspects accent different Kal 6 kpxbp-tvos (1 4, Cf. also 6 cbv 22 cf. 13). 17; f(Sv (Rev. 1
find
an
article
8).
But
ordinarily the one article
is
sufficient for
any number
6 ToXalirwpos
of
/cat
:
adjectives referring to the

eXetvos
/cat
same substantive.
(Rev. 3
the
/cat
So
:
tttcoxos Kal TVcjyXos Kal yufxpos
17).
In Mt. 24
45, 6
TTtcTTos
5oOXos
/cat
4)pbvLp.os,
carries over the force of
the
So likewise the presence of another attribute may article.2 explain the probable predicate position iraTpoirapabbTov (1 Pet. 1 18) and xetpovrotivToi; (Eph. 2:11).^ See further (c), 5.
5.
It
is eipr]pr]v tt^v epr]v (Jo.
With Anarthrous Substantives. There is still another order.* 14 27). Here the substantive is indefinite
:
and
Cf.
general, while the attribute

vbfjLos
6 dvvafievos (Gal. 3
21).
makes a particular application. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 93)

So yvpaUa
ttju
finds this idiom frequent in the

(I.
kolvt].
evyepeaTar-qv
G., XII, 7
6.
N. 240,
13).
ticle
With Participles. The participle may come between the arand the substantive like the attributive adjective, as in rriv Cf. 1 Tim. 1 10; Ro. 34), -nTOLfJLaafJLhrjp vixIp âaCkdap (Mt. 25 8 18; 1 Cor. 12 22; 1 Pet. 1 13. On the other hand (cf. 5),
:
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 177.

Blass, Gr. of
It
is
2 *
N. T. Gk.,
p. 160.
Cf. W.-Sch., p. 181.
common enough
in classic
Gk.
Cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 283.
778
all else
may come between

:
the article and the participle, as in
Pet. 1
10, ot
Trpo(f)riTevaavTes.
long clause (including a rela-
tive clause)
may come between
the article and the participle, as in
Once more, the participle may come midst of the attributive phrases, as in 1 Pet. 1:3, 6 drayevvrjaas, or immediately after the article, as in 2 Pet. 1 3. Either
Ro. 16
in the
:
17, Tovs
iroiovPTas.
the participle or the modifier
may
p.
occur outside of the attributive
complex (Gildersleeve, Syntax,

participle.
289
f.).
Gildersleeve gives co-
pious illustrations of the various constructions of the attributive
The
article
may
(Jo.
:
like TO vdcop rd fcov
above
20.
be repeated after the substantive, 4 11), ot ypajj.fj.aTeh ot Karaâvres

:
(Mk. 3
ciple
22).
Cf. Jo. 5
:
12;
Cor. 15
article
54;
Pet.
25; 5
10;
Ac. 7:37; Heb. 13
The
may
occur with the parti-
dition of the article
when not with the substantive. This supplementary adis more common with the participle than
Cf.
7rat5tots
with other adjectives.^

7
:
roTs ev ayopq. Kadrnj-hoLs

:
(Lu.
32), yvvoLKes ai avvaKoXovdovaaL avrQ (23
49), 01776X01; tov 64>devTOS

(1
avTU) (Ac.
7:35),
xp^'^'-ov
rod
a.ToXKviJ.ei'ou
Pet.
7),
:
and
12).
in
particular ov8e yap ovofxa eanv erepov to

also Ac.
1
:
8e8ofj.Pov
plj]
(Ac. 4
Cf.
12; Gal. 3
21; Ro. 2
1
:
14
(Wi>7j to.
po/jlov
exopTo).
:
But
the
tov
in deov TOV eyeipaPTos (Gal.
1),
XptaroO tov dopTos (1

article.
f.),
proper names are defuiite without the

pvofiepop
So
'Irjaovp
Th. sonal pronouns

(1
10), etc.
Participles in apposition with perarticle.
may
also
have the
hp.ol
Cf. e7w
et/xt
6 "KoKuv
(Jas.
001 (Jo.
4:26), tQ deXoPTL
(Ro. 7:21), av 6
kp'lpcop
4:
12), rjplp Tols irepLwaTOvaLP (Ro.

1
:
8:4),
:
rjfxas
tovs TLcrTevoPTas
(Eph.
19), ai'Tols rots inaTevovaLP (Jo. 1
12), etc.
Note two
Cf.
articles
:
in 1
Th. 4
1
15, 17,
riiJ.eLS
ol
fajvres ot TepcXeLTTopLePOL.
tt.);
12;
Jo.
5:13
:
(vplp
rots
:
Cor. 8:10.
Eph. 1 The pronoun

KaTacfiv-
may
yoPTts (Heb. 6
piadkpTts
Ttvcs,
not be expressed outside of the verb, as in exc^fiev ol 18; cf. 4 3). Cf., on the other hand, ly/xeTs,
(1
6.Top4>a-
Th. 2
rtiâs
17).
The
article
and
participle
may
follow
as in
tovs ireiroLdoTas (Lu. 18:9), TLPes elaip ol TapaaaopIf
res (Gal.
1:7).
the substantive has the article and the par-
ticiple is anarthrous, the participle
may
be
(cf.
above) predicate.
So
T-qp
(jjcoprjp
epexd^'icrap (2
f.),
Pet.
18), rots TPevfjiacnv

:
6.irtt.dr)CTaaLV
(1 Pet.
19
apiraykPTa top tolovtov (2 Cor. 12

:
2),
top a.p8pa
TovTOP av\\rip4>dkpTa (Ac. 23
27).
Cf. Lu. 16
14; Jo.
:
4:6; Ro.
:
27;
Cor. 14
7; 2 Cor.
3:2;
11
9;
Heb. 10
2; 1 Pet. 1
12.
The presence
of the article
with the participle here would radically

article
change the sense.
The same
1
may
be used with several parp. 243.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
THE ARTICLE
ticiples,
(tO "APGPOn)
koI irapadovTos
779
(Gal. 2
:
as in roO aya-wqaavTos
/cat
/xe
20),
tw
ay avuPTL
raKpLVihv;
\mavTL (Rev. 1:5).

is
The
use of the article with the
participle in the predicate
illustrated
by
deos 6 biKaiQiv
'
tIs 6 /ca-
(Ro. 8 :33;
first,
cf.
Jo. 5 :45).
In questions the pronoun,
though coming
again
the article
may
may
sometimes be really predicate. Then be absent from both substantive and parti:
ciple (predicate or attributive), as in ywi} ovaa

ôjvTi,
:
(6)
(Mk. 5 25), deep (Lu. 6 48). oiKoboixovvTi apdpooTco Th. 1:9), (1 With Genitives. From the nature of the case the genitive
is
as the genus-case
tion in the
usually attributive.
In general the construc-
is
N. T. follows the ancient idiom. This 1. The Position between the Article and the Substantive. common enough, and especially so in 1 and 2 Peter. So tov
17
:
deov fxaKpodvfjila (1 Pet. 3
20); 1
17; 2
rfj
15,
1.
See in partic(Tit.
ular demonstrative pronouns like
tKeivov
xapcn
3:7).
Plato {Soph., 254a) has

series of
to.
ttjs
tuv
ttoKKoov
\l/vxyj^
onixara.
For a
such genitives in this position see

:
Koaixos (1 Pet. 3:3).

14 the article
is
For adjective and genitive see 3 In Cf. Mt. 12 31; 1 Pet. 5:1.
:
4, 6 Kpvirros rrjs napdlas ixpOpoîros.

1
Pet. 4
re:
peated, TO
TTJs
So^rys /cat
to tov deov irvevixa.
See also Jo.
40,
Tdv dvo
TOiv CLKOvaavTov.
2. Genitives after the

ticle.^
Substantives without Repetition of the Ar-
This
:
is
even more common.

3.
Thus
:
tov
(f)6ôv tC^v TouSatcoj/

:
(Jo.
20
19), Ti?s dTttTnjs TOV deov

1
:
(Ro. 8
39).
Cf. 2 Cor. 4
4;
Ro.
8
7/
2; 1
Th.
Sometimes the two types are combined, thus

tov cktjvovs (2 Cor. 5:1),
/cat ctcottjpos
eTrlyeLOS
riiJLUP
ot/cta
ttjs
tQiv
aivoaToKwv
vfiuiv evTo'\7]s
TOV Kvpiov
(2 Pet.
3:2).
is
The
:
personal pro-
nouns
TTpoiT-Q
illustrate either order except that fiov

ixov
:
nearly always out14,
side (but see tuv iraTpLKwv
irapabbaewv, Gal. 1
;
and
ev txi
nov cLTroKoyia, 2
:
Tim. 4
16)
either, as is usual, 6 Kvpios p.ov
(Jo.
20
28) or
:
p-ov
tovs 6<t)da\povs (Jo.
xa.pi.Ti.
(Ro. 3
(Jo.
24)
and
tov \abv avTov
9:11). We find rrj avTov (Mt. 1 21) and avTov ev Tfj

:
aya-K-Q
15:10.
Cf. 9:6; 11:32),

ttiv
T-qv
eavTov avXrjv (Lu. 11

Tr\v
21)
8)
and ttiv aapKa and eavTwv to.

9),
17
eavTov (Gal. 6:8),

lp.aTia
yeveav
eavTOV (Lu. 16
(Mt. 21
:
8).
Cf. also to ovopa oov (Mt.

:
beîb.
(TOV
aov xetp (Mt. 5

Ke(t)a\riv
30; but not 5

ayairr]v (Col.
:
29.
Cf. also 1
(6
:
Tim.
5:23),
TTIV
(Mt. 6:
vijlcov
17), TOV apTOV
rip.oiV
11), vfiuv
tov epyov (1 Th. 1:3), t^v
1:8), etc.
9.
With the
partitive the usual (but see Jo. 6

TO tp'ltov
1
70; 9
16, 40) position is this:

:
TTJs yrjs
(Rev. 8:7).
I,
Cf. 1 Cor. 15
Cf. K.-G.,
p. 597; Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 49. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 159.
780
3.
NEW TESTAMENT
The
genitive
Repetition of Article with Genitive.
may
fol-
low the other substantive with a repeated

ticle closely
article.
resembles the original demonstrative.

:
Here the arSo 6 \6yos 6

:
Tov cravpov (1 Cor. 1
18),
rw
Wei, rCo
Mwuo-ecos (Ac. 15
1), riiv SiSais
cKoXiav
rrjv
tov crwrrjpos
rifxccv
(Tit.
10).
This construction
not very common.^

4.
The
Article
Only
(Ac. 26
ivith
:
Genitive.
Cf. eôvalas Kal kinTpoTrrjs

:
TTJs Tcov apxi-cpecov
12).
Cf. Ac. 1
12, opovs rod,
19
29, TO opos TO.
Here again the

vo/jlov
article is
with Lu. almost pure demoneXi9eptas=' perfect
strative as in Jas. 1:25,
TeXeiov t6v
ttjs
law, that of liberty.'
Volker {Syntax,
40),
p. 16) finds
trations of these positions in the papyri.

like
abundant illusSo with proper names

'leaaai
Mapia
7}
Ta/cco/Soi;
13:22),
tive
etc.
Cf.
(Mk. 15 Mt. 4:21.
AauetS tov tov
(Ac.
5. Article
Absent with Both.

(Ro. 4
The
genitive
Cf.
may
:
still
be attribu:
and both substantives

7repi.ToiJ.Tjs
:
definite.
7ri;Xat
a8ov (Mt. 16
18),
a-qneiov
11), pofxov TrtCTrecos (3

is
27), etc.
The conCf. deov
text
vios
must decide whether the phrase

(Mt. 27:
definite or not.
54), evepyea-la avOpuwov (Ac. 4:9).
The Correlation of the Article. In such cases, according to if two substantives are united by the genitive, the article occurs with both or is absent from both.^ But note (H.
6.
Middleton,^
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 genitive aixapTlas is an abstract noun which may or may not have the article. But voixui is definite in either instance in 'the law of sin.' See again tQ vbixco tov deov (7 22) and vbixw deov (7: 25). 6e6s can be definite with or without the article. So, again, to <i)pbvy]jia tov TTveviJLaTOs (8: 6) and TriêO/xa 6eov, irvevfjia XpiaTov (8: 9), oixoLu/jLaTL aapKos (8:3) and to cjipovrjua ttjs aapKos (8 6). Cf. also 6 w/xos tov
: : :
TTvevfiaTOs ttjs fcorjs (8: 2), ttip eKevdeplav tjjs So^tjs tcov TeKvoiv
tov deov
yevecrecos
(8
21), Tr]v Scopeav tov ayiov Tvev/jtaTOs (Ac. 2
38), )3tj8Xos
'Irjaov XpidTov (Mt. 1:1). Cf. 1 Th. 1:3; Rev. 1:1. These examples could be multiplied indefinitely. If one member of the group is a proper name, the article does not always appear. So rf? eKKK-qaia QeaaaKovLKeoov (1 Th. 1:1), but rats eKK\r)aiais ttjs TaXa-
Ttas (Gal. 1:2).

1 2 3
Note
also deov iraTpds
rjixoov
(Eph.
2)
and
6 Beds
Blass, Gr. of
The Doctrine
Cf.
W.
N. T. Gk., p. 159. of the Gk. Art., 1833. Cf. Mk. 10:25 W. H. text and marg. F. Moulton's remarks, W.-M., pp. 146, 174, 175.
: :
THE ARTICLE
Kal
iroLTTip
(tO "APGPOn)
781
30),
Tov Kvpiov
r)ixQiv
(1:3).
:
Cf. also to epyop Kvpiov (Ph. 2

cf.
TO
TTveviJia
XpitrroO (1 Pet. 1
11;
Ac. 16:
all
these with proper

12; 16
:
names
:
are after
:
Such examples as "very rare." ^ See Mt. 1:

7).
13; Ac. 2
38; Rev. 12
17.
Then again
article.
other phrases
So the prepositional cf. Heb. 1:3), but note tv 33). In general, where the word without the de^Lq. TOV deov (Ac. 2 article is not otherwise definite, it is indefinite even when the other one has the article. One is indefinite, the other definite. So apxw Tuv (T-qp.eloiv (Jo. 2 11)= a beginning of miracles.' In Mk. 1 1, apxh TOV evayyeXlov 'Irjaov XpicfTov, the notion may be the same, though here apxr) is more absolute as the title of the book. In
otherwise definite do not require the phrase kv de^tq. tov dead (Ro. 8 34;
: :
'
Ro. 3 25 it is possible to take eh evdet^Lu ttJs biKaioavvri'i avTov=îqr a showing of his righteousness,' while in 3 26 xpos T-qv evbuîv ttjs SiKaLoavprjs avTov may refer to the previous mention of it as a more
: :
definite conception.
3)
Compare
:
also
T-qv
tov Oeov dLKaLOdvvrjv (Ro. 10

1
:
and
hKaLoavvt) deov (3
21),
where, however, as in
17, the idea
probably is, 'a righteousness of God,' not 'the righteousness of God.' In examples like this (cf. deov vtos, Mt. 27 54) only the context can decide. Sometimes the matter is wholly doubtful. Cf. vlds avdpoiirov (Heb. 2 6) and tov vldv tov avdpcoTov (Mt. 16 13). In an example like diaKovos tov XptaTov (Col. 1:7), therefore, the
may
be,
idea
a minister of the Christ, not the minister of Christ. So (T4>pay28a ttjs diKaLoavvrjs (Ro. 4:11), aTrXoTTyrt ttjs KOLVcovias (2 Cor. 9:13). Hence vtos tov deov (Mt. 4: 3, 6; Lu. 4 3) and 6 vlds tov deov (Jo.
is
:
do not mean the same thing. The devil is represented as admitting that Jesus is a son of God, not the Son of God. In Jo. 5 25 Jesus claims 6tl ol veKpol aKovaovaLv
1
:
49;
Mt. 16
16; Jo. 11
27)
In Jo. 10 36 Jesus uses argimientum ad hominem and only claims to be vlds tov deov. Cf. the sneer of the passers-by in Mt. 27 40 (W. H.), vlds rod deov, and the demand In Jo. 5 27 vlds avdp6:irov of Caiaphas in 26 63, 6 vlds tov deov. may be either 'the son of man' or 'a son of man.' Cf. a simiTrjs (})covr]s
tov vlov tov deov.
lar
ambiguity in the Aramaic harnasha.

fine indeed.
The point may become
6 XpiaTos and Ke(})aKri is not affirmed to man any rate yvvaLKds 6 avrjp (1 Cor. 11:3). At Christ is man's that sense same be woman's head in quite the In these examples deds. XpiaTov 6 head. But see also KtâXi) tov
very
Cf. iravTos av8pds
-q
/ce-âX?)
the anarthrous substantive
is
predicate as
is
the case with
av-qp
k<TTiP KecpoKij Ttjs 7v;'at/c6s ws Kal d XpicxTds Ke4>akyi rrjs eKKkrjcrias
(Eph.
5:23).
Hence the matter

1
is
not to be stressed here, as another

p. 146.
W.-M., footnote,
782
NEW TESTAMENT
principle
tive force of anarthrous

rrjs
comes into play. It is possible also that the qualitanouns comes in here (Eph. 5 23, KecjyoKfi
:
yvvaLKOs, Ke4>a\rj
T<Jov
rrjs
eKKKrjaias, aooTrip rod crw/xaTos).
See
"VIII, (j).
Cf. ^kvoL
hadr]K(j:v
:
r^s e7ra77eXtas (Eph. 2
12).
So
topTr]
tcov
:
'lovdaluv (Jo. 5
1).
l)
= 'a
Tociv
feast of the Jews,' dpx<^v tuv 'lovbalwv (3

/JLeraPolas els a(f)eaLv
vp-Uiv
Cf. Ac.
els
6:1.
a4>eaLV
Cf. âTTTLdixa
ap-apTLijiV
afxapTLuv
(Mk.
1:4) and
(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. Thus ai^co KXijaLs (Ph. 1. Between the Article and the Noun. 3 14), 17 Kar' eKkoyijv irpodeaLs (Ro. 9 11), 17 Trap' epov 8La9r]Kr) (11 27), 6 h kXaxlcrTcp aSiKos (Lu. 16 10), rrjv ev tw crc3 64)da\pco 8ok6v (Mt.
17
:
: :
7:3),
ol K irepLToprjs
TLarol (Ac. 10:45), rats irpoTepov ev

:
rfj
ajvola
vixuv kTTLdvpiaLs (1 Pet. 1

2. Article Repeated."^
14).
Cf. Ro. 2
27.
Thus
iravrcou tcov airepparwy
rwv
rrjs
eirl
ttjs
7^s (Mk. 4:31),

Tpwcecos
vofjiov rrjs
at
bwapeis
al ev toXs ovpavols
(13:25),
airoXv-
ev
17
Xpicrrw 'l-qaov (Ro. 3:24), ra irad-qpaTa

evToXi]
17
ra 5td tov
:
(7:5),
els
t^'V^ (7: 10).
See further Mt. 5
16
11 f.; 4 17; 2 Cor. 2:6; 9:1; 11:3 In Tim. 1 14; Rev. 5 5; 11 2, 19, etc. 4; Eph. 1 15 we find both constructions tyjv Kad' u/ias wlaTLv Kal ttjv In Rev. 8:3 (9 13), to dvaiaaTrjpLOV to xpvels iravTas tovs ayiovs. <7ovv TO evwTLov TOV dpovov, thc artlclc is repeated "s\dth both adjective and adjunct. 3. Only with Adjunct. So olKovoplav deov Tijv ev rrlaTeL (1 Tim.
: :
Lu. 20:35; 15 26; 16 Ph. 3

:
Jo.
1;
1
1:45; Ac. 8 :1; 24:5; 26:4; Ro. 4 :11; 8

Cor. 2
1
: :
39
9; Col. 1
1:4), biKaiocTvvqv
'Irjaov (2
ttjv K
:
xtcrrecos
(Ro. 9
30), ev ayairri
tjj
ev Xptcrrco
Tim.
13).
For numerous
classic illustrations of these

ff
three positions see Gildersleeve, Syntdx, pp. 285

4.
Noun. In such cases the adjunct may be either attributive or predicate. Only the context can decide. In conversation the tone of voice, the manner, the inflection make clear what in written speech is ambiguous. Still in most instances in the N. T, the point is plain.^ The cases here dealt with are those that occur without other defining phrases. In Eph. 6 5 some MSS. read to7s kvpIols KaTo. aapKa. So in Lu. 16 10 we find both 6 kv kXaxlo^Tui olSlkos and 6 TnaTos ev eXaxlcrTo:. I see no point in Blass'
Only with
the
: :
Cf. K.-G.,
I,
p.
607
f.
2
8
Cf. W.-Th., p. 133, for long

lb., pp.
list
of exx.
135
ff.;
W.-Sch., p. 179
f.;
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p.
159
f.
THE ARTICLE
(tO "APGPON)
783
remark^ that "the closely connected predicative clause could not be severed by the insertion of the article." The article could easily have been repeated or the same order preserved in both clauses. It is much simpler and truer to say that the need of another article was not felt. The same remark applies to roTs TrXouo-tots h tQ vvv
aicovL (1
Tim. 6
17), tojp aTreidohvTWV

:
rfj
'lovdaiq,
(Ro. 15
31), tov
:
'IcrpariX
T(jiv
Kara aapKa (1 Cor. 10

:
18),
m
els
Wvrj iv aapKi
(Eph. 2
11),
tVToKoiV ev doy/jLacTLV (2
15), 6 Sea/xLOs ev Kvplco
(4:1),
oi veKpol kv
:
Xpiarci (1
SoKL/JLOv kv
Th. 4
16),
rijs
:
Koivuvlas
avrovs (2 Cor. 9
13), tov
:
Xptcrrw (Ro. 16
10), oi KOLiJ,r}dkvTes kv Xptcrrw (1

1 :4,
ttiv
tv'kxtlv
Cor. 15
18).
Cf. Ph. 1:1.

:
In Col.
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^ considers this idiom peculiar to the N. T., but pertinent examples are cited ^ from Herodotus V, 108, 17 d77eXia irepl tuv lâpdlcov, Thucydides, II, 52. 1, etc. The vernacular character of the N. T. It is not common in classic diction renders it more frequent.
:
Greek.*
5.
When
Several Adjuncts Occur.

all
nient and clumsy to insert

substantive."^
in principle
of these
"It often becomes inconvebetween the article and the
Even so, but at bottom the matter does not differ from the examples above. We have seen the same freedom with a second attributive adjective (cf. Mt. 24:45). See a good example of two adjuncts in Eph. 1 15, ttiv Kad' v/jlols Thc first attribute may be adjective, KicTTLv kv tCo Kvp'iw 'lii]aov. So to Kad' fjpaiv xî-pb'Ypa4)ov rots genitive, adverb or adjunct.
:
doynacTLV (Col. 2
rriv
e/c
14), ttjs kprjs irapovaias irakiv xpos u/xas (Ph. 1

tyj
26),
6eo\j
biKaLOGVvqv kwl
TrtCTet
(3:9),
Trjv
k/jLriv
avaaTpocpriv iroTe
kv Tui 'lovda'iafjLU) (Gal. 1:13).
Cf. Ph. 1:5.
The
article
and the
Trtcrrecos
participle readily yield

k\Tri8a
(1 Pet.
examples
bvvdjxei
like 6 KaTo. iroXv avayevvrjaas eis
1:3), Tovs kv
deov
ippovpovfxkvovs
(cf.
Slo,
genitives) are inserted
and and the substantive. So TTjs kv TCO Koa/jLui kv kirLdvp-lq. 4>dopa.s (2 Pet. 1:4). Cf Ac. 21 28. For similar position of several genitives and adjuncts see 2 Pet. 2:7; Lu. 1:70. In particular note Ro. 16:17 for the various phrases between tovs and iroiovvTas. Note the many ad(1:5).
But sometimes the
several adjuncts
article
adjectives
between the
juncts in Ro. 3
1
25
f.
See further
vi, (a), 6.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 160.

lb., p. 159.
2
*
W.-Sch., p. 180.
Cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 286.
The
three regular positions are
common.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 160.
784
6.
NEW TESTAMENT
in origin readily
Phrases of Verbal Origin. Phrases that are consciously verbal do without the repeated article.' So in Ro. 6
:
we have
read
eis
t6v davarov avrov eâ^rTi(J6r]^xev
and
in the next verse
we
avveTacf)7]fxev aura) 5td

els
tov âivTlayiaTOs
els
tov Oavarov.
It is plain,
/SaTrrto-yua-
therefore, that here

Tos,
tov davarop is to
be construed with
not with
(TvveTa(j)r]nev.
In other examples the verbal construction
appears in other contexts. It is, however, possible that the usage with the verb renders the anarthrous construction more frequent.
So Ph.
with
26,
TTjs enijs
irapovclas ttoXlv irpos
vfjLas,
maybe compared with

1
:
TrapetvaL irpos vp-as (Gal.

TracFXî-v virep
4: 20). 2
:
Cf. also wad-qpara virep (Col.
24)
(1 Pet.
21), d\bl/e(nv virep
(Eph. 3
13)
with
dXiôpeda virep (2 Cor.
1:6).
The
classic
idiom shows similar

quite important for
is
examples.^
7.
Exegetical Questions.
Sometimes
it is
doctrinal reasons to be careful to note whether the adjunct

attributive or predicate.
kv
rfi (TapKL, if
ev rfj
aapd
is
Ro. 8 3, KareKpLve rriv apapriau attributive with apaprlav, there is a defiin

:
Thus
nite assertion of sin in the flesh of Jesus.
But
if
the phrase
is
predicate and
is
is
to be construed with KareKptve, no such statement
made.
The
interpreter
Here the grammarian is helpless to decide the point. must step in and appeal to the context or other
is
passages for light.

sure that eu aapd
One conversant with Paul's theology will feel here meant to be taken as predicate. The
ttjs ^ccrjs
same ambiguity
it is
arises in verse 2, 6 popos tov irpevpaTos

ttjs
ep
XpiaTUi r]\ev9ep<j)aep ae airo tov popov
apapTtas Kal tov Oaparov.
Here
ep XpuaTui is predicate with riXevdepcjoaep. Ro. 3:25 probably ep rw avTov atpaTL, as well as els epSei^LP is predicate with irpo'eOeTo. Another example from Romans is found So in in 5 8, where els ripas belongs to avplaT-qaLP, not a-yaTry^v. For further Jo. 15 11 ev vplp is construed with fj, not r} ep-q. illustration see Ac. 22 18; 1 Cor. 2 :7; 9 18; Eph. 2 7; 3 12; 5 26; Ph. 1 14; 3 9; Col. 1 9; Phil. 20; Heb. 13 20. Examples occur also of attribu8. Anarthrous Attributives. tives when the article is absent from both substantive and ad-
reasonably clear that
So
in
junct.
Thus
apdpcoirop
TvclAop
1
:
eK
yeveTrjs
(Jo.
9:1),
avdpcoiros
:
ev
Tvevp,aTi cLKaddpTip
eTL
(Mk.
23), x^^P^ ^^ irvevparL 0,71(0
(Ro. 14
17),
Kad' vwepôXrjP d86p
(1
Cor. 12
31), etc.
Note
in particular
2 Cor. 11 :23, 27.

idiom.^
1
The
older Greek furnishes illustration of this
W.-Th.,
p. 136;
W.-Sch., p. 180.
2 3
W.-Sch., p. 180. lb. But Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 159) doubts
it.
THE ARTICLE
(d)
1.
(tO "APGPON)
785
Several Epithets Applied to the

vi, (a),
4.
Several Attributives with KaL Same Person

examples see Gildersleeve, Syntax,
is
or Thing.
is
See
already under
Usually only one article
then used.
So, for in-
For
3
classic
p. 330.
stance, 6 raXatTTCopos Kai eXetvos Kal ttccxos Kai rvcpXds Kal yvfxvos (Rev.
:
17).
This
the normal idiom in accord with ancient usage.
So
Mk. 6:36
Kal
fxri
vios ttjs
Mapias
:
Kal a8e\(f>6s 'laKooôv,
Lu. 6
49
:
6 5^
ambaa^
TTotiycras,
Ac. 3
:
14 top dytov Kal SUaLov, Jas. 3

Cf. also Gal.
:
9 t6v Kvpiov
Kal Trarepa,
2 Pet. 2
20 (3:2) Tov
1
Kvplov Kal crojTrjpos, 1

1
:
Tols irtaTols Kal eireyvwKoaL.
7;
rfj).
Eph. 6
21;
Tim. 4 3 1 Tim.
:
15;
Heb. 3:1; Rev.

does occur,
it
9 (both
and
When
a second
article
accents sharply a different aspect of the
person or phase of the subject.

eaxo-Tos, Kal 6 ôjv,
So in Rev. 1 :17 6 TpcSros Kal 6 would have been sufficient, but would have obscured the separate affirmations here made. Cf. also to "AX0a Kal TO '12 in 1 8; 21 6. In Jo. 21 24 W. H. read 6 /xapTvpoov
one
article
: :
Trepl TovTcov Kal 6 ypa\j/as
raOra,
but they bracket

(brackets
:
Kal 6.
The second
:
article is
ticle
very doubtful.
1
similar superfluity of the second ar17
appears in the second
W.
H.) in Ac. 17
19,
and in the second to in

irvevfjLa
Pet. 4
14, to
ttjs
86^-qs
Kal to tov deov
(due probably to the second genitive to emphasize each).

1
:
So
Jo.
40.
See
only one
article is
same person.
above. Outside of special cases like these found when several epithets are applied to the The presence of a genitive with the group of words
(c), 9,
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
(Ph. 4
:
of fact such genitives (see above) occur either inside
or outside of the regimen of the article.

20), 6 Beds Kal TraTrip tov Kvplov
Cf.
tj/jlOiv
tc3 Oecp Kal iraTpl
riij.cbv
1:3; Eph. 1:3).

fjixoov
affect the construction
The presence of rajLui^ any more than the use

:
3; 2 Cor. with Kvplov does not

(1 Pet. 1
:
of Kvpiov itself or
jârticiple,
above.
In Ph. 3
3 one adjunct comes before one 2 Pet. 1:1, tov deov
the other after the other participle, but only one article occurs.
most important passage

between
o-wrr/pos"
is
fincou Kal
auTrjpos
TtjctoO XptcTTov.
Curiously enough Winer^ endeavours to draw a

this passage,
distinction
"where there
is
not even a pro-
noun with
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.
W.-Th.,
p. 130.
lb., p. 126.
786
still,
he bases his objection on doctrinal grounds, a matter that The matter is handled in Winer-Schmiedel,^ where it is frankly admitted that the condoes not per se concern the grammarian.
struction in 2 Pet. 1: 1
is
the same as that in 1: 11 and also in
Schmiedel says also that ''grammar demands that one person be meant." In Ju. 4, tov ixbvov SeairoTrjv Kal Kvpiov
18.
riiJLojv
2:20; 3:2,
'Irjffovu
XpidTov,
the
same point
holds,
but the fact that

slightly
Kvpios is so
it.
often anarthrous like a proper
name
1
:
weakens
rip.ojp
The same remark
applies also to 2 Th.
12, rod 6eov
Kal Kvplov 'Irjaov Xptarov, Kal deov (since 6eov
and Eph. 5
5,
rfj
âaCKda rov XptaTov
may
often occurs without the article). One person be described in these three examples, but they are not so clear as the type rod Kvplov f]p.Q:v koI aiorrjpos (2 Pet. 1 1, 11). In
: :
Tit. 2
13, Tov fxeyaXov deov Kal awTrjpos r}p.wv XpLarov

is
'Irjaov, it is
almost certain that one person

naKapiav kXriSa Kal
again described.
Cf. also
riiv
where the one article unites closely the two substantives. Moulton^ quotes most pertinently papyri examples of vii/A.D., which show that among Greek-speaking Christians "our great God and Saviour" was a current form
kTn.4>o.vHav ttjs Soîjs,
of speech as well as
the
Ptolemaic formula, tov iieyoKov deov

15, ii/n.c.).
He cites also Wendland's argument^ that the rival rendering in Titus is as great an "exegetical mistake" as to make two persons in 2 Pet. 1:1. Moulton's conclusion^ is clear enough to close the matter: "Familiarity with the everlasting apotheosis that flaunts itself in the papyri and inscriptions of Ptolemaic and Imperial times lends strong support to Wendland's contention that Christians, from the latter part of i/A.D. onward, deliberately annexed for their chvine Master
evepyerov Kal aoiTrjpos (G.
H.
some
2.
the phraseology that was impiously arrogated to themselves by of the worst of men."
When
:
to he
ol
Distinguished.
Kal
ol
Then the
âptaalot,
article
is
repeated.
:
So
Mt. 23
ypanpLarels
:
Mk.
18
ol
ixad-qral
'\wavov Kal oi âptcatoi, 6

Kal TOts TrpoJTOis,
21
rots /jLeyLaToicnu
avrov Kal rots xtXtapxots

:
11:9
ot irpoayovTes
ol
Kal ol aKoXovdovpres, 11
18
(cf.
14
Kal
43)
ol
dpxiepets
Kal
ypafifxarels,
Mk.
12
13
tov
rcov (Paptaaicov
irivaKos,
Tuv
*Iip(X)8t,avoJv,
Lu. 11:39 tov

yeiTOvas,
iroTrjplov Kal
15 :6
Tovs
(f>l\ovs
:
Kal
Tovs
23
tovs dpxiepets Kal tovs oxXous,
Jo.
4 37
6 arelpcov Kal 6 depl^wv, 1 Cor.
3:86
:
4>VTevcov Kal 6 irori'^ccv,
Jas.
3:11
:
TO y\vKV Kal to tlkpov, Ac. 26

ol ayioL Kal ol
30
6 âaiXevs Kal 6 rfyep-dcv,
Rev. 18
1
20
awdaToXoL Kal
3
ol Trpo4>r]TaL.
Cf. Rev. 11:4;

v.
P. 158.
Prol., p. 84.
On
2a;ri7P in
ZNTW,
335
f.
Prol., p. 84.
THE ARTICLE
13
:
(tO "APGPON)
787
can be extended almost indefinitely.^ same number, gender and case. But Nor have I referred to abstract words of quality like the list in Rev. 7 12, or examples like ras (Ti;j'a7a)7ds /cat ras apxas Kal rds It is not contended that these groups are eôvalas (Lu. 12 11). all absolutely distinct (cf. ol jpaix/jLareLs Kal ol âpLaaloi), but that they are treated as separate. Even with the scribes and Pharisees
16; 2
Th.
8.
The
list
these are examples of the
they did not quite coincide.

of another attributive
Cf.
Mt. 21 :45; Ac.
11
6.
The use
may
:
sometimes be partly responsible for

tov vdaros,
two
2
:
articles.
So Lu. 8
'Iccavov
24
Kal
t(^ av'eiiw Kal rcS kKv8(jovl
Mk.
:
18
ot nadrjral
oi
âpiaatoL,
11:15
.
rds
Tpaireâs toov
KoXkv^Larciv Kal ras KaOedpas tcov iroiKohvTWV
Cf. also Lu. 20
20j
Ac. 25
3.
15; 1 Cor. 11
27; Rev. 13
10.
Groups Treated as One. Sometimes groups more or less disone for the purpose in hand, and hence use only one article. Cf. rds <^tXas /cat yelropas (Lu. 15 9), tovs vop.iKovs
tinct are treated as
:
Kal 4>apt(ratous (14

Kal jpap.p.arkwv
3), rds TrXaretas

:
/cat
pv/ias
(14
21), twp ivpea^vTkpwv

Srcot/ccoi'
(Mk. 15
:
1),
rdv 'EinKOVplaiv
Kal
7),
(Ac. 17
18),
Tcov âpLaaloJV Kal
'Za88ovKaicov (Ac.
rfj
23
rcov aTroaToKcov Kal
Trpo(j)r]Ta}V
(Eph. 2
20),
airoXoyia
Kal
/Se/Satwcret
v\{/os
rod
evayy e\lov
:
(Ph. 1:7), TO tXcltos Kal

17:
iJLrJKOs
:
Kal (3ados Kal
(Eph. 3
:
18), ttjv
K\r](nv Kal eKXayrju (2 Pet. 1

1
10).
Cf.
ttju
in Tit. 2
13.
(W. H.
text)
we have
rov Uerpov Kal 'IaKO)j3ov Kal
So in Mt. 'Iccavr]v, where
is probably more frequent in examples where a genitive occurs also, or some other attribute.^ So Ph. 1 20 TTjv aiTOKapahoKiav Kal eKTriSa jjlov, 1 19 rrjs vp.wv 8er]aeo:s Kal eirLXoprjylas tov TvevpaTOs, 2:17 t^ duaia Kal XeLTOvpyla ttjs Trtcrrecos. Cf. also 1 Th. 2 12; 3 7; Mt. 24 3; Ro. 1 20; Col. 2 8; Eph. 3:5; 2 Cor. 1:6; Lu. 14:21; 1 Pet. 2:25; Ph. 1:25; 1 Th. 3:7. These are all the simplest and clearest illustrations. Obviously, therefore, whether one or more 4. Point of View. articles are to be used depends on the point of view of the speaker In geographical terms the matter of freedom is well or writer. illustrated. Thus in 1 Th. 1 7 we have h rfj MaKedovia Kal h rfj 'Axata, while in the very next verse we meet h rfj MaKeSovla Kal 'Axata as in Ac. 19 21. These two Roman provinces are distinct, but adjacent. Cf. also rrjs 'lovSalas Kal Sa/xaptas (Ac. 8:1; cf. 1 31), where these sec8), TTJs 'lovSaias Kal FaXtXatas /cat Sa/xaptas (9 tions of Palestine are treated together. Cf Ac. 27 5. In Ac.
the three are one group.
This
15
3 note
ti7J'
re ôivlKrjv Kal SaAiaptaz/,
the two sections treated

:
together are not even contiguous.

1
In Ac. 15
2
23, Kara
f.
t7]v
'Avrto-
Cf. W.-Th., p. 128.
w.-Sch., p. 15G
788
NEW TESTAMENT
we have a city grouped with two counMt. 4 25), while in 15 41 we meet ttjv Zvpiav Kal rrjp KiXiKtaj' (W. H. text). Hence no absolute conclusions can be drawn from the one article in Ac. 16 6, zriv_^pvyiav
XîCLP Kal "EvpLav Kal KCKLKlau,
tries (as in
Lu. 5
17;
FaXaT LKrivjCupayicf. reverse order in 18 l231 asjto theêparateness^ of jthe terms "Phrygia'' and "Galatic region." Cf. also
Kal
Lu.
1, Trjj^ 'iT ovpal as Kal
TpaxoiviTidos x'*'pas.
:
But the matter

Tr}v
is
not wholly whimsical.

KOTaplav,
'Aaiav,
In Ac. 2
f.
note the
with Meao-
which stands alone, while we have also XIovtov Kal ttiv probably because the province of Asia (not Asia Minor as a whole) is meant. Then again we meet ra pkprj rrjs Al^vtjs rrjs Kara Kvpr]vr]p, because of the details stated. In Ac. 8 f the use of rciv twice divides the synagogues into two groups (men from Cilicia and Asia on the one hand, men from Alexandria, Cyrene and Libertines (?) on the other). The matter is simple geography but for AiêpTLvoov, 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
rep
50
we
find
U.
Kal
tQ B.
we have top UavXov Then again in Mt.
Kal B.,
while in 15
17
observe the one*

:
article
with Peter, James and John, while in Heb. 11 20 we see

TaKw/3 Kal tov 'HtraO.
evKbyricrev Taad/c tov
The
articles here
empha:
size the distinction
Cf. also Twv
air.
Kal
between subject and object as in Mt. 1 2-16. twv rrp. (Ac. 15 4) and oi air. Kal oi wp. (15 6)
:
with
Toov air. Kal xp.
tuv (16
4).
5. Difference in Number. If the words combined differ in number, usually each one has its ONVn article. The reason is that they generally fall into separate classes. So 6 avayLvoiUKo^v Kal ol
CLKOvoPTes
(Rev. 1:3),
ttjs
aapKos Kal tccu SLavoLoiv (Eph. 2:3),
Trjv
aak^tiav Kal rds
KocrpLLKas kiTLdvplas (Tit.
12).
But one
article
may
also be found, as in
rc3 Koapc^ Kal ayyeXois Kal avdpcoTots (1 Cor. 4:9). Here, however, the anarthrous words "particularize the tQ Koapw.'^^
Yet in 1 Jo. 2 16 irdv to ev words each with the article.

:
tc3 Kocrpi^ is
"particularized" by three
different, there is
6.
Difference in Gender.
So,
if
the gender
is
likewise usually the repetition of the article.

'Iriaovv Kal ttjv avaaraaiv,
Cf. Ac. 17
to.
18 tov
Mt. 22 4
:
oi
raOpoi pov Kal

:
(HTLaTa,
Lu.
10
21 TOV ovpavov Kal
Tr\%
yr,s,
Ac. 13
TpcoTovs,
Ro. 8
1
TTJs
apapTias Kal
50 rds evaxvpovas Kal tovs tov dapcLTOV, Col. 4 1 to biKaiov

:
Cf.
W. M. Ramsay,
p. 127.
Expos., 1895, July, pp. 29-40.
W.-Th.,
THE ARTICLE
Kal
Tr\v
(tO "APGPOn)
Kal
789
rats
a/JLapTiais,
iaoT-qra,
Eph. 2
toTs
irapairTOJiJiaaiv
Heb. 3:6
peated
14
:
ttip Trapprjaiav Kal to Kavxviôi.
Though
:
usual, the
^pa-yp-obs
re-
article is
not necessary.^
2
22).
differ in
Sec rds d8ovs Kal
(Lu.
23), Tdv okoKavTWiJ.6.TWV Kal dvaiGiv

:
(Mk. 12
33),
to,
(.VToKp-aTa Kal
SiSacrKaKlas (Col.
If
indeed the words

:
Col. 2
22), it is still
more customary
both gender and number (as in to have separate articles.
Cf., for instance,
Lu. 14: 26, t6v
irarep aeavTOV Kal Trjv p-qrkpa Kal TrjV
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 substantives (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
the connective), whatever be true about number and gender. So Hera^v rod vaov Kal rod dvaiaaT-qpiov (Mt. 23 35 cf. Lu. 11 51). So
:
when
5
:
the conjunction
t)
t?
occurs as in rbv
(15
:
v6p.op
r)
tovs Tpo4)i]Ta%
</>cos
(Mt.
:
17), TO) Trarpt
ttj ^trjrpc
5), to (tkotos
:
^ to
(Jo. 3
19),
iiTTO
Tov p.bhov
:
Tj
VTO
TTju K\lvr]v
(Mk. 4
21), Tc3 Xac3
ri
toIs Weat. (Ac.
28
17).
Blass^
WvQiv re Kal 'lovbalwv,

re Kal.
article.
makes the point that outside of Ac. 14:5, TOiv we generally find the repeated article with
'lovbalwv as
Even here
:
Cf. 'lovbaiwv re Kal "EWrjvoov in 14

24) with difference in
It
is
a proper name does not need the 1, but 6 re aTpaT-qyos

:
Kal ol dpxtepeTs (5
number
also.
VII. Position with Predicates.
not the use of the article

:
with the predicate noun,

that
is
here before us.
like ovtos kaTiv 6 kKtjpopoijlos (Mk. 12 7), That point has already been discussed
under v, (i). When the article occurs with the substantive, but not with. the adjective, the result is the equivalent of a relative
clause.
Cf. fxeyoKr)
(f)o)vfj
(Ac. 14
10)
and
i>iovfj
ij.eya\ri
(7
57)
'with a loud voice,' with

elevated.'
iieyaKri tt} 4>wvy
(26: 24)= 'with the voice

:
See also
avaKeKoXvpfxepco -Kpoauiirw (2 Cor. 3

ttj
18)
:
= 'with
= 'with
xeipa.
unveiled face' and aKaTaKoXvirTw

the head unveiled.'
Cf.
/ceâXj? (1
Cor. 11
exoip
5)
Mk. 3:1,
h^rjpafxneprjp
Trju
Other examples are TfKUipwix'tprip ttip Kapblap (Mk. 8: plav nelôo (Jo. 5: 36), T-fjp aydrrfv eKTevrj (1 Pet. 4 8),
: :
17), T-qp p.apTvttjp apa<jTpo(l)r]p
KaXrjp (2 12), awapaâTOP ttjp lep(a(7Vvr]P (Heb. 7: 24), to. aiadr]Tr] pea In all these and similar examples the point 14) yeyvp.paaij.epa (5
:
.
is
quite different from that of
tlie
attributive position of the article.

exco.
Most of the instances occur with

I
Note the absence
of the
lb.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 163.
790
article
icate.

with
aToypa4)r] Trpwrr; (Lu. 2
elprjKas (Jo.
:
2)
:
because
it is
in the pred-
Cf. TovTo dXrjdk

:
18).
rg KoKovfxkvu (Lu. 1
vals
36)
may
be noted.
The position of avrfj in Mk. 7 5 reads kol:
TOLs
xcpo't*'-^
Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 292)
considers this
use of the predicate position "a

side of the
gnomon
of artificial style" out-
more simple combinations.
See also Milden,
The
Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek (1900, p. 43). It is noticeable in prepositional phrases, as in Xen., Anab., 1, 3, 14,
5id 0tXtas
TTJs x'^po-^-
Absence of the Article. I do not care to use the term "omission" in connection with the article. That word imphes that the article ought to be present. As has been already shown, the article is not the only means of showing that a word is
definite.
Vm. The
This luxury in language did not become indispensable.

master.
parallel phrases
There remained in the classic which were intelligible without the article. Indeed, new phrases came into use by analogy without the article. I do not think it is necessary to devote so much space to this phase of the subject as is done in most grammars. Most of the cases have already come up for discussion in one way or another. It is sufficient here to give a resume of the chief idioms in the N. T. which are wdthout the article and are still definite. Much of the modern difficulty about the absence of the Greek article is due to the effort to interpret it by the standard of the English or German article. So Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 119) speaks of "appellatives, which as expressing definite objects should have the article"! Even Gildersleeve, in chscussing the "Absence
period
The servant never became
many
of the Article" (note the phrase. Syntax, p. 259), says that "prepositional phrases
ticle as in
and other formulae
may
dispense with the ar-
the earlier language," and he adds "but anaphora or

bring back the article at any time and there
is
contrast
may
no
pedantical uniformity."
cites Jo. 6
Admirably
aicoviov,
said,
except "dispense with"
and "bring back," dim ghosts

:
grammar. Moulton^ which should be translated 'words of eternal life' (as marg. of R. V.). There are indeed "few of the finer points of Greek which need more constant attention"^ than the absence of the article. The word may be either definite or indefinite when the article is absent. The context and history
of the old
68, prjuara fwrjs
of the phrase in question
must
decide.
is
The
p. 315.
3
translation of the
expression into English or

1
German
not determined by the mere
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
ProL,
p. 83.
lb.
THE ARTICLE
(tO "APePON)
791
absence of the Greek article. If the word is indefinite, as in Jo. 4 27; 6 68, no article, of course, occurs. But the article is absent in a good many definite phrases also. It is about these that a few words further are needed. A brief summary of the various
: :
types of anarthrous definite phrases is given.^ A sane treatment of the subject occurs in Winer-Schmiedel.^ Here the article is used or not at the (a) With Proper Names.
will of the writer.
So rbv but Tov Havkov in verse 15.

:
'Ir/croOf
6v IlaCXos KrjpixjatL (Ac. 19

is
13),
apparent in these three examples. Words in apposition with proper names are usually Cf. Mt. 3 6; Mk. 1 5. See further v, (a), 3. anarthrous. We have seen that the substantive Genitives. With (6)
:
The reason
may
(1
still
Cf. TTvKai
q.8ou
:
be definite (Mt. 16
10),
if
:
anarthrous, though not necessarily so.
18), avaaraais veKpcov (Ac.

:
23
6),
x^-P'-'''^
Geov
Cor. 15
:
\6yov deov (1 Th. 2

:
13), tottiplov Kvpiov (1
Cor.
10 21), vU diaôXov (Ac. 13 10), etc.^ In particular, personal pronouns in the genitive were not always felt to need the article.
Cf.
this
KTJirov
eavTov (Lu. 13
19).
See further
v, (h).
The
LXX
uses
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.
:
ered definite enough without the article.

:
These were also often considSo ku o'Uu} (1 Cor. 11 34. Cf. h Tu> oIklo, 'in the house,' Jo. 11 20)= 'at home.' So we say "go to bed," etc. Moulton^ pertinently cites English "down town," "on 'change," "in bed," "from start to finish." This
(c)
Prepositional Phrases.
idiom
to mention
not therefore peculiar to Greek. It is hardly necessary all the N. T. examples, so common is the matter. Thus with avk observe di'd /xepos (1 Cor. 14 27). With aivb note
is
:
dr' irfpov
(Mk. 15
ovpavQiv
:21),
dvr'
:
a'yopas
(Mk. 7:4),
dx' ovpavov (Lu.

:
17: 29),
air'
(Heb. 12
25), dTro amroXrjs (Rev. 21

(1 Jo. 1:1), dTro /cara/SoXrjs
veKpCjv
13), dTro
:
amToKccv (Mt. 2:1), dr' dpx^s

35), aird fxepovs (Ro.
(Mt. 13
11:25), dxo
(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 See extensive Ust in W.-Sch., p. 166 f.
ff.
Pp.
1(52
ff.
Prol., p. 82.
792
For

:
ts see els q.dr]v (Ac. 2 27), els ohpavov (1 Pet. 3 22), aypov (Mk. 16:12), eh dakaaaav (Mt. 17:27), eis oIkov QAk. 3 20), eis irpodoiirov (Mk. 12 14), eh fxeaov (Mk. 14:60), ts oUlav (2 Jo. 10), eis TeXos (Mt. 10 22).
:
CIS
For ev may be noticed ev ovpavQ (Mt. 6 20), ev ovpavols (Heb. 12:23), ev vypl(TTOis (Lu. 2:14), ev beîq. (Heb. 1:3), ev Koafica (Col. 2 20), ev aypQ> (Lu. 15 25), ev ayopq. (Lu. 7: 32), h oUco (1 Cor. 14 35), ev eKK\riaia='iit church' (1 Cor. 14 19), ev Trpoadoiro}
: :
: :
(2 Cor. 5
O'PXV (Jo. 1
vvKTL (Ac.
12),
:
ev iiixepa
(Ro. 13
13),
:
ev
KatpQ (Mt. 24
45), ev
:
1), ev
:
aapd
(2 Cor. 10
3), ev avOpdoiroLs
(Lu.
25), ev
18
9).
Examples
e/c
of e^ arc
k fxepovs
(1
Cor. 12 27),
: :
k
:
\}/vxvs
veoTTjTos
(Ac. 26:4), e^ apxrjs (Jo. 6

:
64),
Se^t^j^
(Eph. 6 (Mt. 27:
6),
38),
c^ ev(îvbp.wv (Mt. 25 41), e^ apLarepcbv (Lu. 23 33), k /zeaou (2 Th. 2 7), k KapSias (Ro. 6 17), k veKpoJv (Lu. 9 7), e^ ohpavov (Jo. 1:32). For c'coj observe ccos ciSou (Mt. 11 23), ecos ohpavov (Mt. 11 23), ?W5 5i;(7Mcoi^ (Mt. 24 27), em eairepas (Ac. 28 23), ecos reXous (1 Cor. 1:8).
: :
: : : : :
Examples
7rt
of
eTri
are
:
errl 7775
(Lu. 2
14),
eirl
dbpais
(Mt. 24
33),
irpoawTTOV (Lu. 5
12).
/cat
For Kara see

(Ac. 27
:
Kar' ocjidaXfxovs (Gal. 3,: 1), Kara Xt/3a
mrd x^pov
1
:
12),
/card iêa7]iJil3piav
(Ac. 8
26), Kar' dpxds
(Heb.
10),
/caTo, TrpoacoTTOV
(Ac. 25
16), Kara jxepos
(Heb. 9:5),
(Ac.
/card adp/ca (2
Cor.
10
3), Kara, avdpwirovs (1
Pet. 4:6).
neaouvKrlov
For
fiexpi
observe
Trapd
liexpi-
20
7),
p-expi.
reXovs
(Heb. 3:6).
For xapd note

16
:
daXaaaav (Ac. 10
(Ac. 22
:
32),
Trapd 7rora/x6v (Ac.
13).
irepi
For For For

For
see see
irepl fjLearjiijSplav
-n-pd
6).
irpo
Trpos
/catpoD
(Mt. 8
29).
observe
irpoaoiirov Trpos Trpoffwivov (1
Cor. 13
12), irpbs
eairepav (Lu. 24:29).

viro
see
utt'
ohpavov (Lu. 17
24).
all is
be noted that this usage after narrow range of words, some of which,
It will
confined to a rather
like ohpavbs
and
7^, repre-
sent single objects.
More
of this a little later.
Most
of these
examples have articular parallels. examples see Gildersleeve, Syntax,
See also v, (/). For classic The papyri furnish p. 259 f.
abundant
do the inscripN. T. Gr., p. 92). {d) With Both Preposition and Genitive. It is not surprising to find no article with phrases which use both preposition
tions (Radermacher,
parallels (Volker, Syntax, pp. 15-17) as
THE ARTICLE
and genitive
like
els
(tO "APOPGn)
793
crov
tvayytKiov 6eov (Ro. 1:1), awo bâKixdv
(Lu. 19:42), k de^tcov nov (Mt. 20:23), air' apxyjs Koanov (Mt. 24:21), irapa Kaipov rjXLKias (Heb. 11:11), ev /caipw iretpaafiov (Lu. 8:13), ciTro /cara/SoX^s Koafiov (Mt. 25:34), h ^paxiovt avrov (Lu.
1:51), etc.
These may be without So EuayyeXiov Kara the article, rod evayyeXlov (Mk. MSS., many in apxri Gospel the before MdpKov
(e)
Titles of Books or Sections.
being already specific enough.
1:1),
iSt/SXos
yeveaew
Pet.
1 f.
'Irjaov
XpLarov (Mt. 1:1),
'A7roKdXi;i/'is
'Irjaov
Xpto-ToO (Rev. 1:1).
be seen in
is
good example of anarthrous headings may (cf. Hort, 1 Peter, p. 15), where no article
five hues.
occurs in the
whole opening sentence of
The
article
used quite idiomatically in 1 Peter. These often do without the (/) Words in Pairs.
often, of course, the article is used.
article.
Very
Words
for
(as in
Enghsh) frequently occur together. Cf. (Mk. 5:5), wepas /cat wktos (Rev. 4:8). They occur singly
article,
:
day and night wktos mt rifxepas

also
without the
fikarjs
CTTi
as
6).
wktos (Jo. 3:2),
rjnepas
(Rev. 21:25),
ku ovpavui etre
WKTOS (Mt. 25
Cor. 8
:
See also other pairs like

:
yfjs (1
/cat
5; cf. 2 Pet. 3
5), Trarepa ^ fiyjTepa
(Mk.
7: 10),
fcoiras
4:5). Indeed the anarthrous construcdXXd (cf. tion is common in contrast with v, elVe, ovTe, p.r]T, oh Ro. 6 14). For long lists of anarthrous words (definite and indefinite together) see Ro. 8 35; 1 Cor. 3 22; 12 13, 28; 2 Cor.
veKpovs (1 Pet.
11
25
e/c
f.;
Pet. 1:2;
Heb. 12
18, 23; 1
Tim. 3
16.i
:
Cf. also
avr]p
yvvaiKos (1 Cor. 11:8).
Some
of these usages belong to
proverbs, formulae and enumerations. See Gildersleeve, Sijntax, (Rap. 260. The kolvt] (inscriptions and papyri) shows the idiom
dermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 94).

(g)
pressions of time.
nal
Ordinal Numerals. The article is usually absent in exThe ancient idiom is here followed.^ The ordiwas often felt to be definite enough alone. This was true of the
Cf.
aTroypa<t>ri TrpoiT-q
: : :
predicate.
?iv cbs e/crr?
(Lu. 2 1), î' cipa tpItt] (Mk. 15 25), Eph. 6 2; Ac. 2 15. But it was not confined to the predicate by any means, nor even to prepositional
(Jo. 19
14).
Cf.
phrases like
Cor. 12
:
dTro Trpcbrrjs
dTro
eret
2),
rerdpTTjs
(Ac. 10 :9), ep
20 18j, wkpas (Ac. 10 Trej^re/catSe/cdrw (Lu. 3:1),

i7Mepas (Ac.
: :
:
ecos
tp'ltov
Trept
ovpavov (2
Ihpav
eKT-qv
30),
ecos
chpas epaTrjs
(Mk.
also
15
33), etc.
Cf.
Cf. Ac. 23
23.
The same construction occurs

J.
W.- Sch., p. 168; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 149. Thompson, Synt., etc., p. 54; W.-Th., p. 126. See further
Thompson,
CI. Rev., 1906, p. 304; Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 261.
794

irpdoTrjv
(pv'XaKrju
eKTTjs.
:
NEW TESTAMENT
12
:
in 8ie\66pres
/cat
Sevrepav (Ac.
10).
Cf.
Mk.
not
15
33, ytvonkvq% cipas
Examples with the

: :
article are
wanting.
{h)
Mt. 27 64; Lu. 12 38; Ac. 10 40. In the Predicate. As already shown in v, {i),
Cf.
is
in the prediriv
cate the article

(Jo.
often absent.
See
v, {i).
Cf. 0e6s
6 Xoyos
1:1), 6 deos ayairr] earlu (1 Jo. 4:8), etc. This is the rule unless the terms be convertible or the predicate is singled out as prominent. For the superlative without the article see also 1 Jo. 2 18.
:
Cf. 1 Pet. 1:5, ev

(i)
ecrxaT-o) /catpuj.
Abstract Words.
lists in
sence, of the article with abstract
In English the presence, not the abwords needs explanation. Hence

:
the anarthrous
in
Gal. 5
20
f.,
22
f.,
harmony with our idiom than the
lists
seem to us much more with the article in Rev.

is
5:12, 13; 7:12.

true.
The
article is often
In German,^ however, the opposite absent in the Greek, where the

:
often
German
would have it. Cf. Ro. 1 29. See iv, (c), for discussion of article with abstract nouns. No vital difference was felt between articu-
and anarthrous abstract nouns (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 259). (i) Qualitative Force. This is best brought out in anarthrous nouns. So el eêatLU au8pl yvvalKa airoXvaaL (Mk. 10 2; cf. 1 Cor.
lar
:
7: 10), xapaScocret
kirl
a.8e\4>ds a8e\(t>6v eis

cos
davarov Kal
irarrip reKvov
:
reKva
ttjs
yovels (13
12),
fxovoyovov^ irapa. Trarpos (Jo. 1
14), yovevaiv
CLTeLdels
(Ro. 1:30).
Cf. also
Eph. 5:23,
avrjp
kariv K(pakri
yvvauos, 6 Xpicros
/ceâXi) rrjs eKKKrjaias
and
:
avTOs aoorrip rod aooiiaros.

article, class
In
at yvvoLKes rots avbpaaLv (verse 24)
note the generic

1)}
article.
and
class.
See
utos
xaxTjp (Heb.
Some
12
(k)
Only Object of Kind.
These partake of the nature of
proper names and often occur without the

often have the article.
They
:
also
of these anarthrous examples ap33),

.
pear in prepositional phrases like e^ apLarepcou (Lu. 23

8e^tcov (ib.), etc.
These
may be passed by
(already discussed)
The
by such words as yrj and ohpavol (2 Pet. "heaven and earth." Cf. (/), Words in Pairs. 0dXao-(7a we find sometimes anarthrous with prepositions (Ac. 7 36; 10 32) and in Lu. 21 25 r]xovs dakaaarjs Kal aaXou. But it has the
point
is
best illustrated
3:5).
Cf. English
article in contrast aarpois,
with
17X101;
yrj.^
See also Lu. 21
25
:
kp lyXiw Kat creXTjvr] Kal
17X101;. So we can say "sun, moon and stars," etc. Gdraros should also be noted. Cf. ICor. 15:21;Mt. 16 28; 20: 18; Lu. 23: 15; Ph. 1 20, etc. It is anarthrous as subject, object, with adjectives and with preposi-
Mt. 13 6
:
dj'aretXavTos, 1
Cor. 15
41 86â
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 150.
f.;
W.-Sch., p. 170.
w.-Th.,
p. 121.
THE ARTICLE
(tO "APGPOn)
795
tions. Many of these examples occur with prepositions like Lu. 21 25 above, or with a genitive like vie diaôXov (Ac. 13 10).^ Cf. 1 Pet. The word 0e6s, like a proper name, is freely used with and 5 8. without the article. But it is "beyond comparison the most frequently in the Epistles without the article." ^ This may be alone as
: :
subject, deos (Ro. 8
33)
as a predicate, Beds
rju
6 'Koyos (Jo.
1:1); as
dew (Jo.
genitive, yvuaeojs deov (Ro. 11:33); with prepositions,
with participles also, deQ ûiVTL Kal ak-qdivia (1 Th. 1:9); in conjunction with Trariyp (Gal. 1:1). These illustrations can be greatly multipHed. So
:
:
21); ^vith adjectives, 9e6s evXoyrjrds (Ro. 9
5);
also wvev/uLa
ticle.
iiyiov
and Truevfxa ay lov may occur with and without the arGarvie^ quotes Bartlett on Acts as saying that when irvevna is anarthrous it describes the human condition, not the divine
agency.
But
it
may
be questioned
if
this is not a purely artificial

it.
rule, as there are
evident exceptions to
Xpiarov (Ro. 8
:
The use
of Trvevixa with
a genitive hke
irvevjia
irvevnaros (Jo.
like ouTTco like debs
3:5), accounts for (Jo. 7 39) merely illustrates the use of irvevixa as substantially a proper name. As for Middleton's rule
riv TTveviJLa
:
and with a preposition, some examples. An example

9)
that the article

is
is
absent
when
by
the personahty of the Holy Spirit

:
taught,* that
is nullified is
the Holy Spirit

the Son.
tically a
26, to irvevfxa to ayLov, where spoken of in distinction from the Father and
:
Jo. 14
Cf. also 15
26.
See also to
irvedfxa
to ayiov (Lu. 3
irveviia, is
22),
at the baptism of Jesus.
Kuptos, like deos
and
often prac-
proper
to
God,
like the O. T.
ticular it
N. T. In the Gospels it usually refers Lord, while in the Epistles of Paul in parnearly always means the Lord Jesus.^ It is not merely in
in the
like the
name
a prepositional phrase
common
ev Kvplui (1
:
Cor. 7: 22), or
the genitive like to epyov Kvplov (1 Cor. 16
but especially Kvptos Ttjo-oDs XpLOTTos (Ph. 1:2; 2:11, etc.). In the Gospels 6 XpLffTos is usually a verbal adjective='the Anointed One,' the Messiah (Mt. 2 :4; Jo. 1:41). In Mt. 1:1; Mk. 1:1, we have XptcTTos as a proper name and even in the words of Jesus as re10),
ported in
Mk.
9 41, Xpto-roO, and in the address of Peter in Ac. 2

:
was a natural growth. In Paul's Epistles Xpto-Tos is more frequent than 6 Xpto-ros.^ There is even a development in Paul's use of 'Irjaovs Xplcttos and Xpto-ros 'Irjaovs.
38, 'Irjaov XpiaTov.
It
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 148.
"
6
Cf.
W.-M., footnote,
p. 124.
p. 151.
2 3 ^
W.-Th., p. 122.
Expos., Oct., 1909, p. 327. See Rose's list for Paul's use of
w.-Th.,
Kvpios, XpiarSs, etc., in

is
trine of the
Gk.
Art., pp.
486
if.
It
Middleton's Docbased on Textus Rec.
796
in the later
In his earlier Epistles the former is the rule (cf. 1 Th. 1:1), while Epistles he prefers Xpiaros 'Irjaovs (2 Tim. 1:1). Other examples of this idiom are seen in Koa/xos, which even in the
:
nominative is anarthrous, knot Koa/jLos eaTahpwrai (Gal. 6 14). Cf. Ro. 4:13. See also kv k6(tixoo (Ro. 5 13) and cnrb KaraôXrjs kocthou No^tos is a word that is used with a deal of free(Lu. 11 50), etc. dom by Paul. In general when voijlos is anarthrous in Paul it
: :
refers to the edv

kv
Mosaic law, as
(2
:
in ewavairavT^ vonco (Ro. 2

It occurs so
vofjLov irpdcraris
25), etc.
So 17). with prepositions, as

:
vofjLcp
(2
23),
and
in the genitive, like e^ epywv

airedavov (2
vo/jlov
:
vojjlov
(Gal. 2
viro
16).
Cf. 7co 5ta vo/xov
vofxco
19), viro vbp.ov
dXXd
X'^P'-^
(Ro. 6
14).
In iTepov
(7: 23) v6yuos= 'principle,'

to.
/jlyj
indeterminate.
is
In 2
14, Wpt]
vo/jlov
exovra, the
and is here Mosaic law
meant, but not in iavrols elalv vbp.os. It is at least problematical whether vb/xos in 2 13, ol aKpoaral vbixov, and at vrotTjrat vbfxov (note the article with the other words) means the Mosaic law and so really definite or law as law (the hearers of law, the doers of law).^ X. The Indefinite Article. The Greek had no indefinite article. It would have been very easy if the absence of the article in Greek always meant that the noun was indefinite, but we have seen that this is not the case. The anarthrous noun may per se be either definite or indefinite. But the Greek made an approach to the modern indefinite article in the use of els and ns. The later writers show an increasing use of these words as the practical equivalent of the present indefinite article. This matter has already been discussed under these two words (ch. XV). An example of tls is seen in voixLKbs rts (Lu. 10:25). The tendency was constantly for els to displace rts, so that "in modern Greek
:
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
As a N. T. example of els='a' see els ypa/jL/xarevs (Mt. 8 19).^ The indefinite article does not appear with predicates in the modern Greek. ^ Unus in the sense of the indefinite article
N. T.^
:
is
N.
1
one of the peculiarities of the Latin Vulgate (Jacquier, Le T. dans VEgl. Chr., Tome II, p. 122).
For a
ff.
full
and detailed discussion

Prol., p. 96.
ib., p.
of the
whole matter see W.-Sch., pp.

p. 41.
174
2 3 *
Moulton, Moulton,
Cf. for
See
Thumb, Handb.,
25.
97.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p.
164
f.
LXX
use, C.
and
S., Sel., p.
Thumb., Handb.,
p. 42.
CHAPTER XVII
VOICE
I.
(AIA0ESI2, Genus)
Point of View. For a discussion of the nature of the verb see chapter VIII, Conjugation of the Verb, i and ii. See (a) Distinction between Voice and Transitiveness.
and chapter VIII, vi, for a discussion of this point. The matter might have been well reserved for syntax, but it seemed worth while to set forth at once the fundamental facts about
II, (b),
assumed, therefore, that one understands that deal with the question of transitive or innot does voice per se point concerns the verb itself, not the That action. transitive
voice.
It is here
Active and middle verbs may be either transitive or inPassive verbs may even be transitive, though usually intransitive, in one sense of "transitive." But Gildersleeve^ holds
voice.
transitive.
that
"a
transitive verb
is
a verb that passes over to a passive
rather than one that passes over to an object."
That
is
truer of
Latin than of Greek, which, "with a lordliness that reminds one of English," makes a passive out of any kind of an active. Terminology in syntax is open to dispute at many points, but I see only hopeless confusion here unless voice is kept to its real meanIn Kijhner-Gerth^ it is held that "the active has a double meaning," either intransitive or transitive. My point is that the voice per se has nothing to do with that question. Some verbs are intransitive, some are transitive, some are used either way.
ing.
This freedom in the use of verbs increased till in the later Greek verbs that were once intransitive become transitive.^ Brugmann^ properly separates the question of transitive and intransitive
verbs from that of voice
siderative verbs).
(cf.
iterative, intensive, inchoative, de-
Some
27: 43).^
of the intransitive uses of verbs
to the absence of the reflexive pronoun, as in repLrjye

airoppixpaPTas (Ac.
1
were due (Mk. 6:6), The modern Greek preserves the same
*
Am.
Bd.
Jour, of PhiloL, 1908, p. 279.

I,
Griech. Gr., p. 4G7.
p. 89.
Jebb.,V. and D.'s Handb., p. 318.
797
798
NEW TESTAMENT
freedom in the use of transitive and intransitive verbs and has

peculiarities of its o^vn.^
(&)
ject.
Meaning of Voice. The use of voice then
Voice relates the action to the subis
to direct attention to the subject,

transitive
not to the object.
That concerns
and
intransitive verbs.
StahP puts it crisply: "The voice of the verb describes a relation of the verb-idea to the subject." The Cf. chapter VIII, vi, (6). (c) Names of the Voices. names come from Dionysius Thrax (about B.C. 30), but "he has
no inkling
is
of a middle sense," ^ showing that already the middle disappearing before the passive. The terminology is very poor. Gildersleeve^ calls the fashion of the Germans "a positively indecent nomenclature," since they call the voices genera {yevrj),
"based on a fancied resemblance to the genders."

follow the French voix (Latin vox), found
first
We
in English
in this sense in the
Grammatica graeca nova of J. Weller (a.d. 1635).^ See chapter VIII, vi, (c), (d), (e). (d) History of the Voices. Cf. also Jannaris, Historical Gr., p. 362 f.; Moulton, Prol, p. 152. In the pro-ethnic language there were probably both active and middle. Cf. Delbruck, Vergl. Syntax, Bd. II, p. 413. There was
no passive as there was none

system.^
in the Sanskrit, save in the present the passive meaning with the use of middle and active endings was sure to bring confusion and a tendency towards simplification. It was inevitable that the three voices
The
rise of
should go back to two.
In the actual outcome, the passive, though an interloper, ousts the middle of its forms and of most of its uses.'' In the modern Greek vernacular, therefore, we find only
two voices as to form, for the passive has taken over the meaning of the middle also (Thumb, Handh., p. Ill f.). In the beginning there were only active and middle. In the end we find only active and passive. The verb development in the (e) Help from the Sanskrit. Indo-Germanic languages has been more independent than that of nouns. Latin, for instance, has recast its verb-system, and it Sanskrit is quite difficult to compare the Greek and Latin voices.
1 2
Thumb., Handb.,
p.
112
f.
Kjit.-hist. Synt. d. griech.
Verbums,
p. 42.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 158.
in
Notes on Stahl's Synt. of the Gk. Verb
Am.
Jour, of Philol., 1908,
p. 275.
6
Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 233. Whitney, Sans. Or., p. 201.
VOICE (aiaoesis)
799
and Greek have preserved the voices best of all. Hence the Sanskrit can throw a good deal of light on the Greek voices.^ (/) Defective Verbs. Not all verbs were used in all the voices. Some were used only in one, some in two, some in all three. Then again, some verbs had one voice in one tense, another voice in another tense. This is just like the Sanskrit,^ and just what one would expect from a living language in contrast with an artificial one. Brugmann,^ indeed, divides verbs, as to voices, according to
with active only, middle only, with both, etc.). In the N.T. Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gl^., p. 180) finds the same general use of the voices as in the older Greek, the same difficulty in differthis principle (those
entiating the voices,
individual verbs.
and the same "arbitrariness" in the use But much of this difficulty is due to coming
of
at
the matter with preconceived rules.

is
Blass' treatment of the voices
quite unsatisfactory.
Cf. further for this matter, cliapter VIII,
VI, {d).
II.
The
Active Voice (8id0(ns evep-yeriKTi).

bpdi] also.
The
Stoics called
the active
(a)
In this voice the submerely represented as acting or existing, for state (cf. elu'i) must be included as well as action. It is not certain whether the active or the middle is the older, but the active is far the more
ject is
Meaning of the Active Voice.
common. (6) Either Transitive or Instransitive. There is nothing peculiar in the N. T. about this. Each verb has its own history. One originally transitive may become intransitive and vice versa ^
Cf. dyco
which
may
:
be intransitive ayufieu (Mt. 26:46;

:
cf.
:
the
35).
(7171'
interjectional aye, Jas. 4
13) or transitive yjyayov avrbv (Lu. 19
In apavres (Ac. 27
vavp).
13, 17) the object is
probably understood
Cf. also avâuoo in
usually transitive,
Mt. 6:28 and 2 Cor. 9:10. BaXXw even in Jo. 13:2 (cf. Ac. 22:23), but it
(ejSa'Keu,
:
is is
intransitive in Ac. 27: 14
'rushed').
Cf. BXaaravco in Jas.

iSpexw is transitive in
5:18
:
(tr.)
and
in
Mt. 13 26
(intr.).
:
So
Lu. 7 38, but intransitive in Mt. 5 45. sitive (Mt. 10:8), but see Mt. 26:46.
in
'Eyelpco is usually tran-
EvayyeXiô:
is
transitive
Rev. 10: 7, but intransitive in 14: 6. "Ex^ is transitive except when used with adverbs, when, as in ancient Greek, it may be intransitive. Cf. robs kukcos Ixovras (Mt. 4:24), eaxarcos exet (Mk.
1
Giles,
2
'
<
Comp. Philol., p. 404 f. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 200. Gricch. Gr., pp. 459 ff. Cf. Thompson, Synt., Cf. Jtinn., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 357.
p. 159.
800
5
:

T]8r)
:
NEW TESTAMENT
1),
23),
exovra (Jo. 11: 17), ourcos ex^L (Ac. 7:

KXtiôj is
:
TO vvu txov
(Ac. 24
25).
transitive in
In Ac. 7 42 arpk4>o} is In the N.T. dpLafxêvoo is transitive and the same But in Text. Rec. kfjLadijTevae is intransitive in is true of ixadr]Tvw. Mt. 27 57. Cf 8vvo: intransitive in Lu. 4 40 and <f)vo) in Heb. 12 15. Let these serve as specimens of many such verbs in the N. T. Modem Greek is specially rich in intransitive active verbs
Lu. 9
:
12.
but intransitive in intransitive, though also transi:
Mt. 8
20,
tive elsewhere.
(Thumb, Handb.,
to the other.
(c)
p. 112)
and verbs that

.in
oscillate
from one use
Composition. These may may be just the opposite. As examples of transitive compounds from an intransitive simplex take dLafSalvw (Heb. 11:29), but intransitive in Lu. 16:26. So
Effect of Prepositions
make
the verb transitive or the result
dirjpxero rrjv Tepetx'*^ (Lu.
19
11), TapepxG(^d^ T-qv Kpiacv (11
42).
On
the other hand, instransitive compounds abound.

of
ayci}
The compounds
:
(simplex either
tr.
or
intr.)
which are often intransitive

:
are
aira.'yo}
(Mt. 7
18
:
13),
7rapd7co
(Mt. 9
3
:
9),
Treptayw (Ac. 13
11),
Trpoayco (Lu.
39), i7rd7co (Jo.

:
Mk. 4 29. and the peculiar kirtâXcov in 14 72. Examples of several intranThus airexoo (Mk. sitive compounds of exco occur in the N. T. 14 41), hexo: (Mk. 6 19), exexw (Lu. 14 7; Ac. 19 22), irepikxca Here the (1 Pet. 2 6), Trpoaexco (Mt. 7: 15), vwepkxoo (Ph. 4 7). substantive has dropped out in most cases and the verb comes to
Trapadldwfn in
: : :
:
but not dra7co. Cf. also With /3dXXw note e7rt/3dXXw in Mk. 4 37
8),
stand alone
(cf. irpoakxoi vovv).

ttpoo-kotttco
Cf. avamfiivTOi (Mt. 2

(Jo. 11:9).
12),
iKK\ivoi
(Ro. 16:17) and
Karairavco is transitive
Heb. 4:4, 10. Cf. aToppliTTco in shows intransitive compounds with ava- (Ac. The modern Greek 5 22), dTTo- (Ac. 3 26), kwL- (Lu. 2 39). surpasses even the kolpt] in its facility for making all sorts of compound verbs (tr. and intr.) and in particular verbs compounded with nouns, like kTeKvoTp64)T]aev and têvobbxw^^ (1 Tim. 5:10). Cf.
in Ac. 14:18, but intransitive in
Ac. 27 43.
:
:
^rpecjiw
Thumb, Handh., p. 112. (d) Different Tenses Vary.

'
first aorists
occur, the second
is
intransitive
Thus where both second and and the first transitive.

(Mk. 9
:
Cf.
eaTT]
(Lu. 6:8), but laT-qaev avTo

all
36).
:
This distinction
(Stao-rTjcrai'Tes)
applies to
is
the
compounds
rr}v
of
'iarqpn.
Acts 27 28
no exception, as
vavv
is
to be supplied.
or primitive perfect actives are

transitive.
Some of the "strong" intransitive when the present is

:
Thus
avtopya (1 Cor. 16
9)
from
:
avolyw, airoXoAa (Mt.
10
6)
from
airoXXviJLi,
laravaL (Lu.
13
25)
from
IVrT/Att,
irkiroida
VOICE (aiabesis)
(Ro. 2
:
:
801
Moulton^ 19) from TeWoj, akarjwa (Jas. 5 2) from a-fjro). seems to confuse "transitive" with "active" and "intransitive" with "middle" in his discussion of these perfects: "We have a number of cases in which the 'strong' perfect active attaches itself in meaning to the middle." The middle is not in itself intransitive,
nor
is
the active in
itself transitive.
"The
conjecture that the
perfect originally
had no
distinction of active
and middle,
its
person-endings being peculiar throughout, affords the most probable explanation of the facts: when the much later -Ka perfect arose, the distinction had become universal." It is doubtless true
that in the primitive -a perfect there was no distinctive middle form. But why seek for a middle sense in the primitive perfect
active because
it
happens in
1
many
:
cases to be intransitive?
It
does happen that yeyova (Jo.

(Jo. 17
:
4) is
found with
ylvoixai
and
k\rfKvda
1)
from
epxo/JiaL,
two
intransitive middles.
It is also true
few verbs which have perfect. So it is with intransitive, this primitive, but not always Rev. 11 17), ireirovda (trans.. etXr^â cLK-qKoa (trans., Ac. 6 11), Heb. 8 6). (trans., 13 reruxa is, Lu. (intr. as the verb itself 2), itself), though verb like the intr. 1 15, So with KeKpayev (Jo.
that future middles are the rule with a
:
:
KKpaôfxaL
Ol8a (Jo.
1 :6),
(some MSS. in Lu. 19 40) is future perfect middle. 10 4) is transitive, though defective, while eotfca (Jas.
: :
like
e'icoda
(Mk. 10
1),
is
intransitive.
But
yeypa4)a (Jo.
19
22) is transitive.
(e)
The Active
the voice,
as Causative. But this usage is not due to and is, besides, common to all languages.^ Cf.the Hebrew
Hiphil conjugation.
le
Viteau ("Essai sur la Syntaxe des Voix dans Grec du N. T.," Revue de Philologie, 1894, p. 2) says that the Greek voices would not be strange to a Jew who was used to the seven conjugations of the Hebrew verb. But the point is not
strictly parallel.
In one sense this idiom
i.^
due to the fact that

Cf. top tjXlov
in Jo. 19
:
what one does through another he does

avTov dmreXXet (Mt. 5
:
himself.^
45), strictly causative.
But
:
1,
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 indeed a remarkable increase in the LXX in the number of verbs used in the causative sense, many of which had been usually intransitive. Cf. /Sao-tXei/co, which occurs 36 times in the causative sense in the LXX (cf. Judg. 9:6)." The Hebrew Hiphil is partly
1
Prol., p. 154.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 359.
Gildersleeve, Synt. of CI. Gk., p. 63.
C. and
S., Sel., p. 76.
802

See further verbs in
Certainly
there
is
responsible for this increase.^

Kara8ov\6co (Gal.
(/)
-oco,
like
2:4). nothing
:
Active with Reflexives.

(Jo.
unusual in this construction.

/3aXev eavrov
Cf. accaov aeavrop
(Mk. 15
30),
21:8), irpoaex^Te eavrois (Lu. 17:3).

It is
Cf. Jo.
21
18.
Blass^ indeed says that the ''active for middle" occurs.
One
hesitates to subscribe to that dictum.
indeed true that
the use of the reflexive pronoun with the active brings out
much
than the mere middle. It is not necessary to say that KaTadovXol (2 Cor. 11 20) is used "for"
more sharply the

the middle.
TeLpaofjLaL,
reflexive relation
It is true that reipdfco in the

is
kolvt]
supplants the Attic
but this
not due to a confusion of voice.
With
xotew
the N. T. does show a the middle was more

erally
number
of examples of the active
where
the
common
in the Attic,
though the N. T. genaT0v8r]v.
has
TTOLetadaL
avaôKrjv, X670J', wopeiav,
And
MSS. vary
(TLv
greatly between active

:
and middle
of Toteco with
eKdlKr]-
(Lu. 18
f.),
eXeos (Lu. 10: 37), KOTverbv (Ac.
8:2),
kp'lglv (Jo.
5:27), 15
:
ixovr]v
(Jo.
14:23), iroXenov (Rev. 11:7),

:
avixôvKiov
:
(Mk.
this is
1),
(Tvvufxoaiav (Ac. 23
13), cFv<xTpo4)y]v
(Ac. 23
12).
But
what we find in the KOLvi] (inscriptions and papyri). Cf. Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 120. So even /3tdfaj and eTTLXavdavoj (Mayser, Gr., p. 386). The same tendency appears in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 114). Cf. bikppriêv to. lixana avTov (Mt. 26 65). In these examples Blass has in my judgment read too much into the active voice. But it is certain that in Trpocrexere eavTo'is (Lu. 12 1) there is more emphasis on the reflexive idea than
precisely
: :
in <l)v\aaaead (12
(g)
15).
Cf.
Moulton, Prol,
(1 Pet.
p. 157.
Impersonal Active.
Cf. xeptexet
Some impersonal verbs

ypa(t)fj
occur in the
ejSpeêv (Jas.
active.
rfj
2:6), and
reflect
17).
{h)
Infinitives.
These do not alwaj^s
the force of the

40.
voice, especially in the "epexegetic" use,^
Hke
our' English "fair

:
to see,"
infinitive
(ch.
(i)
"good to eat." Cf. KpLdrjvai and Xaêlv, Mt. 5 has no voice in Sanskrit. See further under
Verbal Nouns).
The
Infinitive
XX,
Active Verbs as Passives of Other Verbs.^ Thus awodvrjaKoo is more common than the passive of cnroKTeivco (-KTepvoo), though examples of this passive occur in the N. T. (Rev. 6:11, etc.). W. H. read KaKcos exet in Mt. 17:15 rather than Kaxcos So e/cTrtTTTco (Ac. 27: 17, 26, 29) occurs 7rd(rxt (cf. ttolco KaKus, etc.).
1
Thack., Gr. of the O. T. in Gk., p. 24. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 183.
cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., p. 63.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 172.
VOICE (aiaoesiz)
as passive of k/SaXXo;, but note k/3aXXeo-ât in
Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 75.
803
Mt. 8
:
12.
Cf.
In
:
Cor. 11:18
d/couerat
d/vouco
has the classic

itself
turn
'I
am
told.'
is
But
in 5
the passive
occurs
in the sense 'It
reported.'
But
in all
such cases the distinction
between the verbs is not really lost. in. The Middle Voice (SidGeo-is |icrT|). See chapter VIII, (a) Origin of the Middle.
tion
vi, (c), for
the
uncertainty as to the priority of active and middle.
is an open one and must be left open. middle appear in Sanskrit and in Homer. The prehistoric situation Logically the active would seem to come is purely speculative. first, though the difference in form may be due to variation in sound (ablaut).^ Probably at first there was neither active nor middle, the distinction being a development. In the Sanskrit we meet a full system of both active and middle forms for all the tenses (not all the modes), the participle, however, having only a
That quesBoth active and
system and the infinitive no voice at all. But each verb own development and that was by no means uniform. Some had a very limited use as to voice, tense and mode. In Homer indeed the middle is rather more common than in later Greek.^ It is only in the Sanskrit, Zend (Old Persian), Greek and Gothic that the middle is kept as a distinct voice."* In the Gothic only remnants of the middle are found,^ while in Latin the middle as a separate voice disappears.^ It is very difficult to run a parallel between the Latin and_ Greek voices. But there is a considerable remnant of Latin middles like miror, sequor, utor (cf Draeger, Hist. Syntax, pp. 145 ff.). The final disappearance of the Greek future and aorist middle before the passive is well sketched by Jannaris.'^ But at first we are not to think of the passive at all, that interloper that finally drove the middle out of use. It is urged that the term (&) Meaning of the Middle. "middle" is good because the voice in meaning stands between
partial
has
its
the active and the passive.^

the middle
is
But, unfortunately for that idea,

It is true that the passive
older than the passive.
arose out of the middle and that the middle
marks a step towards
Moulton, Prol., p. 152. ^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 7. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 200. * Cf. O. Hoffmann, Das Prasens dcr indogcr. Grundspr., 1889, p. 25. In the Bantu language Mr. Dan Crawford finds 16 voices (reflexive, reciprocal, intensive, etc., all having special forms). ^ Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 362 f. Giles, Comp. Philol., p. 406. 8 Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 57. lb., p. 405.
<*
804

The
passive idea existed before there
all
the passive.
rate passive form, a thing never true of
tenses
was a sepaand 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-
the middle voice does not say. That must come out of the context or from the significance of the verb itself. Gildersleeve ^ is clearly right in holding that the interpretation of the
cise relation is
between active and middle is in many cases more than grammatical. "The middle adds a subjective element." ^ Sometimes the variation from the active is too minute This "word for one's self" is often for translation into Enghsh. very difficult of translation, and we must not fall into the error of explaining the force of the middle by the Enghsh translation. As examples (c) Often Difference from Active Acute.
difference
lexical
note:
o-Kco,
alpeoi, 'I
take'; alpkofxat,
'I
remind';
'I
'I
aua/jLinvnaKOfxai,
take to myself ('choose'); avanLfivrj'I remind myself ('remember');

'I
ctTrexw,
hold off; airexomi-,
bold myself off

'I
('abstain');
aTro8l8o)ni,
give back'; aToSidofxai,
give back
of
my
owm'
'I 'I
('seU'); d7r6XXi;Mi, 'I destroy'; dTroXXuAiat, 'I perish'; aTrrw, 'I fasten';
oLTTTo/jiaL,
'I
touch'; apx^J, 'I rule'; apxanai, 'I begin';

'I
/SouXeuo;,
ya/j-ko},
counsel';
l3ov\evoiJLaL,
take counsel'
('deliberate');
marry' ('bridegroom'),
yevofjLaL, 'I
yaixkoixai ('bride'); 7euco, 'I
give to taste';
taste'; 7pd0cj, 'I enrol';
y pb.(i)op.ai
'I indict'
(but 'enrol
one's self in Lu. 2:5);
Samfco, 'I lend'; Savelôixai, 'I

'I get taught';
'larrjuL,
borrow';
'I place';
bMaKoi,
'i(xro.p.ai,
'I teach';
didaaKOfxaL,
'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'; âtj'w, 'I

(f)aivonaL,
show';
'I appear';
4>o(êo^,
'I frighten'; (j)ol3eonaL, 'I fear.'
These
examples in the N. T. illustrate the difference between the two

voices.^
(d)
may
this:
This remark a truism, but it is justified when one can read "As the active is used in place of the middle, so the middle
The Use of the Middle not Obligatory.^

like
sound
Ewald, Heb. Gr.,

Cf. Jann., Hist.
f.;
243.
Gr., p. 360;
"
Am.
Viteau, Essai sur la Synt. des Voix, p. 17.
Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 277. Cf. Moulton, ProL, p. 153.

p.
Gk.
Clyde Gk. Synt.,

ff.
58
f.;
Farrar, Gr.
Synt., p. 117
6
Thompson,
Synt., pp. 168
Gildersleeve, Synt. of Class. Gk., p. 66.
VOICE (aiagesis)
805
^ often stands for the active which would naturally be expected." " interchangeably." Winer^ also speaks of the two voices being used Winer loses, one of his examples, for W. H. have avyKokei in
But
Winer correctly says that "it depended on the writer" which he would use. Of course, but that is not to say that no distinction existed. In Jas. 4 2 f., atretTe /cat ov Xa/xseems rather on purpose fiavtre, Blotl Ka/ccos airdaBe, the middle
Lu. 15
:
9,
as in verse 6.
Blass^ ('ye ask for yourselves amiss,' Farrar, Gk. Syntax, p. 118). general in admits he though calls this ''an arbitrary interchange,"
ordinary requests (as from God), but the N. T., Mt. atreo/xat in business transactions (its usual use in in Jas. 4 2 f. point very the be 27 20; Lu. 23 23). This may in loco) on (James Mayor with agrees and 1 Jo. 5 14. Moulton^ "When says: loco) {in Mayor the correctness of the distinction. words, the using implies it ahetade, airetre is thus opposed to
the N. T. use of
atreco for
: : : :
without the spirit of prayer." See the same distinction drawn in Mk. 6 22-25; 10 35, 38 (Mt. 20 20, 22) 1 Jo. 5 15. Blass (Gr. Herod's offer to Salome of N. T. Gk., p. 186 note) observes that her use of the middle justifying him to gave her business relations
: :
(Mk. 6
24
f.).
When
is
the active and the middle occur side by
side the attention
to the distinction. It is to be recalled in different stages of the language varied verb again that the same hardly pertinent to bring an inis it Hence in the voice used. because the middle is not used writers, T. dictment against the N. Attic Greek. As a matter of the in was it as with all verbs just
drawn
fact,
from the Attic. Blass {Gr. ofN. T. Gk., p. 186) succinctly says that "the New Testament writers were perfectly capable of preserving the distinction between the active and the
Homer
differs
middle."
:
Mk. 14:47 note airaaaixevos ri]v (xaxo-ipav, while in In Matthew we a-wkcnraaev rrip /idxatpav avrov. have Mt. 26 51 we in Mark middle the supplanting awo and avrov pronoun have the dt, (op. Radermacher 120 f.). Gr., T. p. N. Radermacher, (cf.
So
in
p.
however, as a result of his researches, finds in the The point of im Gebrauch des Mediums." "Undcherheit KOLvri 7 24 afivveadat = in Ac. So always. same the not is the middle middle 'assist,' not 'ward off from one's self,' but the force of the So in Col. 2 15, a-ireKdvaaixevos rds apxas, it is not is present.
119),
: :
'undress,' but 'throw off

1
from one's
self.'
Cf. also ir\r]f)ovadac in
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 186.
p. 185.
2 3 *
W.-Th., p. 256. Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

Prol., p. 160.
80G
Eph.
as

1: 23
and
tXtjpoOv in 4: 10.
much freedom
by
in the papyri in the use of active
as in the N. T.
95) occur side
Thus
side.
edi^ alpfjTe
Moulton* shows that there is and middle and eap alprjaOe (G. H. 36, b.c.
So
yanl(TdaL
= nuhere
fell
out of use.
See
also
(e)
II,
(/).
Either Transitive or Intransitive. Thus kav fxri vlxp^vTai (Mk. 7:3) and rj^/avTO avrov (6:56), but eîaraPTO (6: The middle is not, 52) and elaeropevevTo (6 56) are intransitive. therefore, intransitive in itself. That is a matter that belongs to the verb-stem. As to the future middles, like ^rjaofxai, see discusra.%
xt'/'as
sion a little later.
Some
verbs, indeed, are transitive in the active,

(cltoWvijll, a-iroWviJLat, âii'co, (f)aivonaL).
ff.;
but intransitive in the middle

Cf. Hatzidakis, Einl., pp. 201
(/)
Thompson, Syntax,
p. 161.
Direct Middle.
It
is
necessary to discuss the various uses
of the middle, but the divisions
or less arbitrary and unsatisfactory.

for convenience.
made by the grammarians are more They are followed here merely
is
The middle
voice
very broad
in its
scope and
is
no one word, not even

tially
reflexive, covers all the
ground.
It
essen-
the voice of personal interest somewhat like the dative case.
Grosse (Beitrdge zur Syntax des griechischen Mediums und Passivums, 1891, p. 4) denies that the reflexive is the original use of the middle. But Rutherford {First Gk. Syntax, 1890, p. 74), derives
both passive and middle out of the reflexive use. For the various uses of the middle in Homer, who is specially fond of this voice, see Monro, Homeric Gr., p. 7. But, curiously, Monro mentions "the Intransitive use" as one of the separate idioms of the middle. Nearly every grammarian ^ has his o^vn division of these "uses" of the middle, none of which the Greeks themselves had. Gildersleeve^ is justly impatient with this ovcrrefinement and observes that "one must needs fall back on the way of the language," which "is capricious in such matters." It is needless to take up philosophical abstractions like "subjective" and "objective." It is not possible to tell whether the direct middle
(reflexive middle)
was the
It
original use of the voice or not.
The
direct middle
is
comparatively rare in
Homer and
in the early
Greek
active
generally.*
and the
reflexive
began in the kolvt] to disappear, before the pronoun (cf. N. T.), but the direct middle
(ii/A.D.).
' Prol., p. 158 f. He cites also awapai Xoyop, B.U. 775 pap. use the middle also.
But the
Bd.
Gk. Synt., p. 117; Drug., Griech. Gr., pp. 459 ff.; K.-G., pp. 100 fT.; Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., pp. 49 ff. * Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 7. Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 278.
Cf. Farrar,
I,
VOICE (aiagesis)
807
revived again as the indirect middle disappeared before the passive because of "its subtle meaning."^ Hence in Neo-Hellenic "almost every transitive verb, if active, admits of a direct middle."
middle.^
In modern Greek this direct reflexive is nearly the sole use of the The modern Greek has no distinction in forms between
middle and passive, but the middle signification survives. Thus Xoufoyuat means 'I bathe myself (Thumb, Handb., pp. Ill, 114). Thumb finds the direct reflexive use common. Moulton^ practically confines this idiom in the N. T. to awrjyâTo (Mt. 27: 5), 'he hanged himself,' and even here Moulton suggests 'choked' as a truer English translation. This is indeed "a survival from classical
The example
tKpv^r],
is
:
Greek," but there seem to be other N. T. examples cited by Winer^ from Jo. 8 59 (cf. also 12
:
also.
:
36),
passive, as
Moulton^ points
(2 Pet. 2
22) the direct
the Appendix (p. 238).

also aireXomaade,
But in us Xovaanhri middle is evident, as Moulton admits in Cf. XovaaaOe (Is. 1 16), 'wash you.' Note
out.
:
'washed yourselves' (1 Cor. 6:11, correct translation in margin of Rev. V.). A good example also is OepfxaLvofxevos (Mk. 14: 54), 'warming himself (Rev. V.). It is rather gratuitous to doubt the direct middle TapaaKevaaeraL, 'prepare himself (1 Cor. 14:8). But Moulton adds fxi] aKvWov (Lu. 7:6) to Winer's list and illustrates by "the illiterate contemporary papyrus O.P. So also 295, ixri aK\vWe lar-qv^' (active and reflexive pronoun). pavrlacovTaL (W. H., Mk. 7:4) and âTTtaoovTaL (marg.) are both
direct middles.
Zcoo-ai
(Ac. 12
:
8),
is
'gird yourself,'
is
also direct
middle.
Aoynarlêade (Col. 2
20)
probably direct middle, 'subviroraaaeade (Col. 3

:
ject yourselves to ordinances.'
And
18)
may
be also.
"AxToât ('fasten myself
to,'
'touch')
is
really the direct
middle (Mk. 8:22). 'EweKTeLvofxevos (Ph. 3: 13) is 'stretching myself forward.' Cf. also vive(yTeCKap.t]v (Ac. 20:27), 'withdraw myself; aprLraaao/jievos (Ro. 13:2), 'line one's self up against.' In the case of TepLâWofiaL it is probable that we have the direct middle 'clothe one's self (Mt. 6 29). The accusative of the thing
:
is
added
:
in
Rev. 3
direct
18.
It is possible to regard auawaveaOe
(Mt.
be 45) 5) merely the direct middle, 'enrol himself,' though the causative idea is possible. In Lu. 12 15 cfyvXaaaeaOe ('guard yourselves
26
as
middle.
'AwoypaypaadaL
(Lu.
may
from') follows the classic idiom.

is
'Avexofxepot a\\r]\cov
(Eph. 4:2)
also the direct middle, 'holding yourselves

1
back from one an-
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 3G0.

lb.
"
5
lb.
2 3
w.-Th.,
p. 253.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 15G.
Prol., p. 156.
808
other.'

The same
In
1 Pet.
thing
5: 5
is
true of aTrkxâdaL elbw\odvTOiv (Ac.

kyKon^waaade, 'gird your-
15 :29).
raTreLvocfipoavvrjv
we may have the same idiom. In Ac. 18: 5, avveixero toj Xoycp, we may have the direct middle, 'held himThere are to be added, besides, some of the self to a word.'
selves with humility/
causative middles, hke
/SdTrrio-ai
(Ac. 22:16), 'get yourself bapIt is true that the list

is
tized' (cf. kâwTLo-avTo, 1 Cor. 10:2).
not a large one, but the idiom
is
clearly not obsolete in the
N. T.
The
(g)
causative middle has a wider use also, as will be
shown
sich
directly.
Causative or Permissive Middle.
Cf. the
German
lassen.
it
This occasional use of the middle does not distinguish from the active and occurs both with the direct and the indiIt
is
rect use of the middle.^
just so in
modern Greek (Thumb,
Handb., p. 114f.). It is, like transitive and intransitive, more the notion of the word than a phase of the middle voice.^ In
later
It is
Greek the causative sense occurs only with the
direct middle.^
not to be forgotten that originally there was no passive form
at
all.
voice as between middle and passive.

future,
The verb-idea and the context then alone decided the Even in the aorist and
later has
where the passive
a distinct form, the line was
not always sharply drawn, especially in the future.

this a little later.
More about
one hesitates to find a passive voice in the middle form, though it sometimes happens. Some few of these causative middles could be explained as passives, but by no means all. Certainly eKXeâ/jLevovs (Ac. 15 A considerable residuum remains. "In 22) is a true middle. Tb.P. 35 (ii/B.c.) eavrbv alrLacreTai, 'will get himself accused,' is a middle."* In Ac. 22 16, jSaTrrtcrat /cat airoXovaai rds aidaprias crov,
in the aorist in particular
:
:
But
we have
the causative middle, one a direct, the other an indirect,
middle, 'get yourself baptized and get your sins washed away.'
So then kâivTlaavTo (W. H. text in 1 Cor. 10 2) is causative, though many MSS. read eâwTlcrd-qaav. Blass^ has eccentric notions of textual criticism, for he rejects the middle here and contends Blass^ for it in Lu. 11 :38 on the authority of one minuscule!
:
also argues that the sense of 'let' or 'allow' belongs to the pas-
sive rather
than to the middle, but this
is
:
by no means
certain.
(cf.
Thus
adLKelade
and
awoaTepeiade (1 Cor. 6
7)
may
be middles
actives in next verse), 'let yourselves be

1
wronged and robbed.'

Moulton,
Prol., p. 162.
Gildersleeve, Synt. of Class. Gr., p. 67.
*
^
2 8
Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 361.
p. 162.
Qr. of N. T. Gk., p. 187.

lb., p. 185.
VOICE (aiagesis)
809
This permissive sense of the middle is closely allied to the causa^ In Lu. 2 5 airoypa^/aaeai may tive and approaches the passive. himself enrolled/ though airo'have causative, above) be (see (/) In Mt. 5 :42 bavlaaadai is 'to have 7pd<êaât (2 1) is passive.
:
money
lent' ('to
borrow').
MiadccaaaeaL (Mt. 20
1)
is
'to
let
out for wages' ('to hire').

^vpaadai (or ^vpaadai),
(Tovrai T-qv KtclioKriv
In
24).
Cor. 11
6, /ceipda^co, Kt'ipaadai
we
find the permissive middle.

:
Cf.
:
^vpi]-
(Ac. 21
But
aTOK6\povTai.
(cf.
(Gal. 5
:
12)
is
causative, 'have themselves castrated'

'Kovaaade,
Deut. 23
Cor. 6
:
1).
So
aire-
according to text of Rev. V.
(1
11).
Trept/SaXetrat
comes rather
:
close to
^le
the passive sense.
In Rev. See
con-
(/) above.
In Lu. 14 18,
to. *lravTa
19, exe
-KaprtTtitikvov,
we have a
is
struction
more Uke modern English.

kv toj
The
causative idea in
1
:
dm-
Ke4>a\aLCoaaadaL
Xpl(XtQ>
(Eph.
10)
not due to
the voice, but to the verb

{K)
itself (-oco).
Indirect Middle. In the flourishing period of the language this was by far the most frequent use, but it finally faded before the active and the intensive (reflexive) pronoun or the passive.^ In force 1 Cor. 15 28, viroraynaeTaL, the passive may bear the middle
:
(Findlay, Expos. Gr. T., in loco). But in general the indirect middle is abundant and free in the N. T. In the modern Greek Thumb gives no instances of the indirect middle. The precise
shade of the resultant meaning varies very greatly. The subject is represented as doing something for, to or by himself. Often the
mere pronoun is sufficient translation. Each word and its context must determine the result. Thus in Heb. 9 12, alwvlav \vTpw(nv
:
evpajjLevos,
Jesus
is
by
himself.
He
represented as having found eternal redemption found the way. In Mt. 16 22, Trpo(T\afi6p.evos
:
avTov, 'Peter
8, TrepL^\e\l/anevoi, takes Jesus to himself.' In Lu. 8 27, round.' looking 'the disciples themselves suddenly In 8 52, himself.' on garment ovK evtbrnaro Ifxariov, did not put a beat 'they meaning, changed really eKOTTTOPTo avT-qv, the word has
: :
In
Mk.
'
themselves for grief as to her' ('bewailed her'), actually a direct middle. "We have, in fact, to vary the exact relation of the reflexive perpetually if we are to represent the middle in the form appropriate to the particular example." ^ That is precisely the case.
So
Trpo(TKa\e<Tafjievos
(Mt. 10
Cf.
1)
represents Jesus as calling the dis:
ciples to himself.
:
elaKoXovnaL (Ac. 10
23).
So
irpocrXanâveade
(Ro. 15 7; cf. also wpoaeXalSeTo) is 'take to yourselves.' Kalaapa behalf.' AlprjaoeruaXoOMat (Ac. 25 11) is I call upon Caesar in
' :
my
Thompson,
Synt., p. 162.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 360, 362.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 157.
~
810
fiaL

1
:
NEW TESTAMENT
(Ph.
:
22)
is 'I
10
9),
though only
In
take for myself ('choose'), while KTrja-nade (Mt. in the middle, means 'provide for yourselves'
('procure').
is
airaaaixtvo^ Trjv ixaxaipav
(Mk. 14
47), the possessive

(cf.
:
probably
sufficient,
:
'drawing his
own sword'
aireaTaaev
6) is rather 'shaking out his clothes from himself,' while aTevixparo rds xetpas (Mt. 27 24) is probably 'he himself washed his hands.' In airudelade avTov (Ac. 13 46; cf. Ro. 11: 1) the idea is 'ye push it
:
:
avTOV in
Mt. 26
51).
'E/crtmâ/iews ra ifxana (Ac. 18
away from yourselves' ('reject'), 'kirkboade (Ac. 5 8) is away for your own interest' ('sold'). 'Ewo-^to-aro (Ac. 5
: :
'ye gave
2)
:
means
39) the
'kept back for himself.'
In
kTnbeLKvbixtvaL
xtrcDms (Ac. 9
women were
'showing garments belonging to themselves.' Note the fulness of meaning in repLeTotrjaaTo (Ac. 20 :28). Cf. irapa4
:
TripelaOe (Gal.
10), aireLTanr]v (2
Cor. 4
2), *^KTpeTOfxaL (1
Tim.
20).
In
Stefcoo-aro (Jo.
21
7)
we have
off
'he girded round himself.'

('reject').
UapaLTrjarjade
(Heb. 12
25)
is
'beg
from yourselves'
In Col. 4
5, t6v Kaipov eâyopa^6iJ.evoi,
we have 'buying
'
the oppor-
tunity for yourselves out of the open market.' AiroOeiievoL (Heb. 12 1) is 'laying aside from yourselves every weight.' In eêXeâro
:
(Lu. 10:42)
we have
:
'she selected for herself ('chose').

is
'Eve-
bibvoKeTo (Lu. 16
19)
'he put clothes on himself,' though this
be direct middle with accusative of thing added. KaroTrrptCor. 3 18) is probably 'beholding for ourselves in a mirror.' In Ro. 3 25, ov irpo'tdeTo 6 Beds, note that it was God's own Son whom he set forth. This free indirect reflexive use came to be the typical middle in the flourishing period of the Greek
ô/xevoL (2
: :
may
language.
this
No
fixed rule can be laid
or
any other use
of the middle.
down for the translation of Even "deponents" like
Xpa.op.aL
may
sity')
means
:
'I
be indirect middles. This word from xpn ('necesmake for myself what is necessary with something'
(Moulton, Prol.,
in Ac. 24
/xeTeirep\l/aTO,
An interesting group of middles occurs p. 158). 2225, aveâkeTO, biaypooaopai, bLaTaâfxevos, irapayevonevos,
bLaXeyop-hov, wopevov, peraKoXeaopat.
is
:
These are not

:
all
" indirect" middles, as
obvious.
Cf. also k/5aXX6yuewt (Ac. 27
38)
and TpoaeXaPero (Ro. 14 3). It is interesting to note the difference between irapelxe in Ac. 16 16 (the damsel who furnished gain for her masters) and TapeixeTo in Ac. 19 24 (Demetrius who furnished gain for his craftsmen and himself). So xet^co is 'to exercise suasion,' and Tretô/xat to admit suasion to one's self (Moulton,
:
:
'
Prol, p. 158).
(i)
rocal sense,
Reciprocal Middle. Since eavTuv was used in the recipit was natural for the middle to fall in with this idiom.
VOICE (AIAeESIs)
811
Thus
(Tvvej3ov\ev(TavTo
other,' does
not
differ radically
selected the first
'they counselled with one anfrom eêKeyovTo (Lu. 14 7), 'they seats for themselves.'^ So also tôvKtvaavTo
:4),
:
(Mt. 26
(Jo, 12:10), avveredeLVTO (9:22), avvava/jLlypvadai (1 Cor. 5:9), KpivtaSai (6: 1), kixaxovTo (Jo. 6:52), bLokeybnevos (Ac.
19:8.
In
Mk.
34, Trpos aWrjXovs dieXexdrj'ô.v,
we have
For
passive deponent with
reciprocal pronoun) .^
The
reciprocal middle survives in

classic
modern
Greek (Thumb, Handb.,

dersleeve, Syntax, p. 66.
p. 114).
examples see Gil-
Here the pronoun and the middle (j) Redundant Middle. both occur. This idiom is found as early as Homer and indicates a dimness in the force of the middle on the part of the speaker.
"The
effect is artificial"
according to Thompson.^
Gildersleeve
{Syntax, p. 68) sees in this idiom the effort to bring out

clearly the reflexive force of the middle.
more
Moulton (ProL,
p. 162)
cites from the papyri iavTov alTiaaeTai., Tb.P. 35 (ii/B.c). This redundance probably began very naturally. Thus in Ac. 7 58, dirWei'To TO. ijudna avroov, the personal pronoun is added, not the reflexive. So in VTroSrjaaL to. aavdaXLO. gov and TrepiâKod to lp.aTi.bv GOV (12 8) and cCKatpal gov T-qu Ke4>a\7]v (Mt. 6 17). Cf. v'ncTovTai. rds xeipas (Mt. 15: 2) without the pronoun. So in Lu. 14: 1, Kal avToi Tjaav TrapaTrjpovfjievoi, the avTol wavers between mere personal and intensive. Cf. the active in Eph. 5 26, irapaGTrjGj] avTos eavTQ. But in Jo. 19 24 the LXX quotation is given as biepepiGavTo eauTois, while in Mt. 27 35 it is merely biepeplGavTo. Note also eûauroj (Ac. 20 GeavTov Tapexbpevos (Tit. 2 7) and TroioOûat 24). See also avedpbl/aTO avTov eavT^ ets vlop (Ac. 7 21) and 1 Tim. 3 13 iavTots wepLTOLovvTaL. Most of the examples, however, in the N. T. occur with verbs which are not found in the active. Cf, Lu. 9 23 apvrjGaGdo: eavTov, Ac. 24 10 to. irept epavTOV airoXoyovpaL, 26 2
:
: :
riyitipai
tpavTov, Ph. 3
12 kpavTov ovtoj Xoylôpa:.
(k)
Dynamic (Deponent) Middle.
"I would fain
call
is
the
this
drip-pan middle, the TravSkrrjs middle, the middle that

the bottom to catch the drippings of the other uses."^
is
put at
writers
And
the most difficult use of the middle to explain.
Some
distinguish between the
dynamic and the deponent. Others, like Thompson,^ make the dynamic include the deponent. The name "deponent" is very unsatisfactory. It is used to mean the laying
1
Moulton,
Prol., p. 157.
2
*
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 361.
Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 1G6.
Gildersleeve,
Am.
'
Synt., p. 161.
812
NEW TESTAMENT
aside of the active form in the case of verbs that have no active voice. But these verbs in most cases never had an active voice.
Moulton^
is
clearly right in his contention that the
applies as well to active verbs that have
term in realityno 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.
is
But "deponent" is a very poor definition. Nor 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 distinctive force of the voice. The question is raised whether these
verbs have lost the middle idea or never had it. "Like the rest of us, Stahl has to go into bankruptcy," Gildersleeve'' remarks on Stahl's attempt to explain this use of the middle. Moulton (Prol, inp. 158) thinks that in these verbs "it is useless to exercise our
genuity on interpreting the middle, for the development never progressed beyond the rudimentary stage." But these verbs perIt is possible sist in the modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 113).
that the Greeks were
more
sensitive to the exact force of this
middle than
freely.
we are, just as they used the intensive particles so Where guessing is all that we can do, is it not clear that
"dynamic" middles represent the original verb before the was drawn between active and middle? The French says je m'apergois, I perceive.' The intensive force of this middle
these
distinction
'
is
partially seen in verbs of
mental action which are so

: :
common
:
in
Greek, hke aiadavonat (Lu. 9 45), apveofxac (Lu. 12 9), TrpoatrtaoMai (Ro. 3 9), do-7rafo/zat (Ac. 25 13), dLajSeâLOVnat. (Tit. 3 8), Karain \aijLpaponaL (Ac. 4:13, but note KaraXafxlSavcj: in the same sense
:
:
Ph. 3:12), kvTkXXoixat (Heb. 11:22), kTnKavdauofjiaL (Mt. 16:5), euxojuat (Ro. 9 3), rjyeofxai, (Ph. 3 8), \oyiôiJLaL (Ph. 4 8), iialvofiai (Ac. 26 25), txkfi4>ofiaL (Ro. 9 19), 4>ei8oiJLai (Ro. 8 32). I unagine that the personal interest of the subject is not so difficult to recog: :
:
nise in such verbs, especially since in a
word
like KaTa\o.ixâ.voixa.i
not "deponent," but vary,^ as does the N. T. in the use of

it is
occurs also in the active.

TrotoOAtat
The papyri
with nouns.
fxvelav ttolov-
and
:
Trotw
Thus we have
aviiôvKiov iroLrjaavTes
^ ^
(Mk. 15
1),
but
Prol., p. 153.
Am.

Prol., p. 159.
2
3
Thompson,
W.-Th.,
Synt., p. 161.
Moulton,
p. 258.
VOICE (aiagesis)
fievos
813
(Eph.
16).
all
.
the N. T.
are
Not
There is the utmost freedom in the matter in the ''deponents" of mental action are middles
These
in the aorist.
Cf
jSouXo/zat, kvOv^xkojiai, eTrt/xeXeo/xat, evXaêojjLaL.
commonly
called passive deponents in the present as well as

is
in the aorist
and future, but the matter

26), aXkonai (Jo.
not clear by any means.

16
19),
At any
rate there are middle verbs which are very hard to explain,
like ylvoixai
(Mt. 8
14), a(f>LKvkofxaL (Ro.
haiiaprvpoixai (Ac. 2:40), epxcfiaL (Jo. 1:39),

16), Kadeôfiai
cf.
epjaôpaL (Mt. 25:

:
(Mt. 13 1), avve-rrofjLaL (Ac. 20 probably passive. It is not hard to see the reflexive idea in Sexofiat, (Mt. 10 14). UepL^XeTo/xai. is always middle in the N. T. (cf. Mk. 3:5), accenting the movement of the
:
(Mt. 26
55), Kadrjiiai
4;
sequor).
Kelfxai is
eyes or concern expressed in the look. There are also passive deponents that correspond to this list that really do not seem to be passive in idea, like povXo/xaL, bl'vajiai, (jyajSeofxai. Some of these verbs have both middle and passive forms, Hke 'îvop.ai (eyhero,
kyevqdriv) , bkxopiai (eSeâro, ebkxGr]v).
Not all of these middle "deponents" have middle forms in all tenses. Cf. ykyova, rjXdov, kX-qXvda, eXadov. Then, again, some verbs have the deponent or dynamic middle only in the future, like 6ôiJ.aL, though Homer is
But the
aorist
fond of the middle forms of this verb.^ middle call for special treatment.
(t)
and future
verbs,
Middle Future, though Active Present.
Some
active in the other tenses, have the future only in the middle.
No
real explanation of this

vi, (d).
oxpoixaL',
chapter VIII,
roots, as opaco,
phenomenon is knowTi. For a list see Some of them are really separate verbOthers represent a special
ireaovixat, irionaL,
kadio), </)d7o^tat.
variation of the future form, like airodavovixaL,
but
like
both
KOfxlaofiai
and
KO(XLovpai.
Others are regular enough,

eaopai, davpaaofxaL,
reôpat.,
aKovaofxaL,
^r]cropLaL,
yvcoaopai,
(fyeiiôpai.
In other instances the old
classic
middle has vanished in the

apiraaoi),
N. T. before the active

yeXaacj, KXavao}, Kpa^w,
fdco,
future, as in apapr-qao:, airavT-qaw,

pemoo, etc.
-rral^w,
Some
verbs, like aKovw,
Some of these middle futures no difficulty. Thompson^ calls them all "strict middles," but most of them are as "deponent" as the verbs in the previous section. Clyde ^ quotes Curtius' explanation that an act in the future lies mainly in the mind of the speaker. But on the whole the matter remains unexplained, though the number has greatly decreased in the N.T. as in the KOLvi] generally.'* See also Dieterich,
use either voice in the future.
create
1
Monro, Horn.
Synt., p. 105.
Gr., p. 7.
So the other poets. Gk. Synt., p. GO.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 165.
Prol., p. 154.
Moultou,
814
NEW TESTAMENT
Gr., p. 120.
Untersuch., p. 205; Radermacher,

justly takes
N. T.
Moulton^
"the existence of
this large class of futures as addi-
tional evidence of a close connection between the middle flexion and the stressing of the agent's interest in the action of the verb." The use of the middle future (and occasionally aorist) as passive
comes under the passive voice, for it

(m)
is
really passive.
See under
is
iv.
The Middle Retreating

.
in the N. T.
This
happen-
ing because of the active (cf
d/xaprTjo-co
above) as well as the passive.
There was a considerable and even of confusion among writers in the later period.^ Different words had different histories in the matter. But we have just seen from the Hst of "dynamic-deponent" middles plenty of evidence that from the day of Homer on the function of the middle voice was indistinct in many verbs.^ "The accuracy with which the middle was used would naturally vary with the writer's Greek culture."^ And, it may be added, with the author's feelings at the moment. The judgment of Simcox^ is right, that the middle "is one of the refinements in Greek idiom which is perhaps beginning to be blurred in some of the N. T.
is
This
true of the
kolvt]
in general.^
amount
of variation
writers,
but
is
preserved to a greater or less extent in most."

kolpt].
But
It is
it is
no more "blurred" than in other writers of the

all all
simply that
the distinctions of earlier times did not sur-
vive with
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 of the middle, not in a new use of it. From Homer to modem Greek plenty of middles are hard to define, and the N. T. is no more erratic than the rest of Greek, not to say of the kolvt} (Moulton, ProL, p. 159). But the delicate distinctions between
:
the active and the dynamic middle are lost in modem Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 112), if indeed they ever really existed.
IV.
(a)
The Passive Voice
(StdGco-is iraGTiTiKii).
Origin of the Passive.
See chapter VHI,
vi, (e), for
discussion of the rise of the passive voice. ^

Moulton, ProL, p. 155.
Hatz., Einl., pp. 194
ff.
In Sanskrit the middle

Gr., p. 42.
Cf.
Monro, Horn.
f.
.
* 8 < 5 6
Cf Thumb, HeUen.,
p. 127.
Moulton,
Prol., p.
158
f.
lb., p. 159.
Lang, of the N. T.,
p. 95.
'
Cf. K.-G., Bd.
I,
pp. 121
ff.
VOICE (aiagesis)
815
was liable to be used in the passive sense. ^ As is well known in Homer, the future passive forms do not occur except two, fjLLyqaeadat and SarjaeaL (Stahl, Syntax, p. 66), and the distinction between aorist middle and aorist passive is indistinct. Indeed, strictly spealdng, there was no passive voice as to form in Greek, as there was none in the original Indo-Germanic speech.^ The passive sense was developed in various languages in different ways. This sense may be due to verbs of state, but Greek fell upon various devices like the active of some verbs (KaKws tx^, iraax^^)) the mere use of the middle, the development of two special tenses by the use of active endings (aorist) and middle (future)
with a special
suffix.
In
Homer ^
e^\i)iir]v,
kKTaixr\v, kaxoiJLrjv
occur
as passives just like /SaXXo/iat, exonai.
"Even
In
in Attic
kaxop-riv
appears as a passive,
eax^drjv
being late."*
Homer
also the
form sometimes has practically the active This much of repetition is necessary to signification.^ or middle It is really no clearly before us. passive the position of the get
distinctive aorist passive
Of. all in form as compared with the active and middle. French je me trouve and the use of reflexive pronouns in English. The subject is represented (6) Significance of the Passive.
voice at
as the recipient of the action.
He
is
acted upon.
The name
"passive"
'
comes from patior (cf. Taax(^ vto in Mt. 17:12). The use ATTOKTavdfjvaL (Mk. 9:31) occurs as well as cnrodurjaKeLv.
irepiKeLixai
of
as the transitive passive (Ac. 28
20) of
TrepLTldrfUL is
somewhat different. The idea of having an experience is very vague and allows wide liberty. The point to note is that at first Only the this idea had no distinctive form for its expression. context and the force of the verb itself could make it clear. The future passive, being built upon the earlier aorist passive, reflects
the Aktionsart of the aorist.^
(c)
With Intransitive or Transitive Verbs.
"Theoret-
ically the passive
ought to be formed from transitive verbs only with an accusative object."^ But Greek follows no such narrow rule. That is an artificial rule of the Latin which Greek knows nothing about. ^ Cf. KaTrjyopelTaL viro tQ)v TouSatcov (Ac. 22 30).
:
Other N. T. examples are

1
diaKovrjdrjvaL
(Mk. 10
45), eyKoXtiadat (Ac.
Whitney, Sans. Gr., pp. 201, 275.
Thompson,
Sterrett,
Synt., p. 162.
'
Gildersleeve,
Am.
Am.
The
Dial, of Horn.,
N. 27.
7
8
Gildersleeve,

p. 359.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
816
19:40),

evapea-TeladaL
:
NEW TESTAMENT
Kareyvwa/j.evos
(Heb. 13:16),
xp'7i"cf'''f0"^cit
napTvpeladai (Ac. 6
3),
(Mt. 2
12).
:
(Gal. 2:11), Blass (Gr. of
N. T.
Gk., p. 185) notes that
avTco Kexio77Mart(7/êi'o^."
middle verbs.
ekoyiadrfv.
{d)
"only in Lu. 2 26 do we have riv The passive is used with both active and Thus we have from XoylôfiaL both ekoyiaaixriv and
kyepo/jLrjv
Cf.
and
eyevrjdrjv
from
ylvoixat..
The Passive Usually

AtSdo-Kco, for
Intransitive.
is
But
it is
not neces-
sarily so.
instance,
transitive in the passive, as
Th. 2: 15), and note Karr/xwews T-qv bbbv (Ac. 18:25). Cor. 9: 17; Lu. 7: 25; 9 25; Gal. 2 7. 1 Transitive passives are usually verbs that in the active have two accusatives or an accusative of the thing \vith the person in the dative or abkbibaxdnTi (2
See also
lative.
This accusative of the thing

to.
is
retained in the passive.

irepLê^X-qu'evovs
Cf. eiTLaTevdrjaav
Xeu/cds
\6yLa tov Oeov (Ro. 3:2),
aroXas
"Accusative" in chapter XI, Cases. Cf. also T-qv akvcnv ravT-qv Trepket/xat (Ac. 28 20). The transitive passive "deponents," like p-i] 4>o^r]driTe avrovs (Mt. 10: 26), call for special discussion a little later. Certainly there is no "passive" sense in iropevdyjvaL. The vernacular^ in later times
full list see
:
(Rev. 7:9).
For
preferred the active to passive.
Cf. airovaiv (Lu. 12
20) as
N. T.
illustration.
In
ayviadr]TL (Ac.
'let'
:
21
24) the passive appar-
ently has the force of
or 'get'
(cf.
the causative middle).
Cf. also TepLTepvrjade (Gal. 5
2).^
It is possible so to regard abiKelade
and
to
Cor. 6 6 f.). Sometimes, indeed, it is difficult whether a verb is middle or passive. Cf ttcoxoI eua77eXiôPTaL (Mt. 11:5), -Kpoixop-tda (Ro. 3:9), hvbvvapLomde (Eph. 6
aTToarepeLcrde (1
:
tell
10).
Indeed, as already said, in
all
the Greek tenses save the
and the future it is always an open question whether we have middle or passive. "The dividing-line is a fine one at best" (Moulton, Prol., p. 162). Only the context and the verb-idea can decide. So with kydpop.ai (Mt. 27:63), irepuairaTo (Lu. 10:40) and dopv^k^xi (10:41), /Stdrerat (Mt. 11: 12). Cf. perfects in Ac. 13:2; 25:12; Ro. 4:21; 1 Pet. 4:1; Jo. 9 22. (e) Aorist Passive. This tense calls for special comment. As already stated, in Homer the aorist middle form, like the other middle forms, was sometimes used as passive.^ In itself there is no reason why this should not be so. The distinctive passive aorist (second and first) grew up side by side with this use of the aorist middle. 'E^dj'r;?' and l^-qv are really the same form at
aorist
:
2 3
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 359. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 185. Seymour, The Horn. Dial., p. 74. Cf. Brug., Griech.
Gr., p. 464.
VOICE (aiagesis)
bottom.*
817
(cf, airoXuiXa)
Out
of this intransitive aorist active
grew
the so-called second aorist passive forms (-^v) with active endings.
We have cKpv^rjv (Jo. 8 from o-reXXco, etc.) and

:
xatpw.
It is
from the transitive kputttco (cf. eaTaXrjp 14 28) from the intransitive probable that riyepOtj sometimes (as in Mk. 16 6) is
59)
exap-qv (Jo.
: :
merely intransitive, not passive, in idea. Moulton (Prol., p. 163) says "often." In 1 Cor. 15: 15 f., etc., the true passive "emphasizes the action of
God."
p.
But
passive in sense, like
kKoifiijdriu
(Moulton, Prol.,
eypaxj/a,
162).
3) is more Hkely Th. 4 14), 'was put to sleep' Moulton quotes from the papyri "a
vTerayriaav (Ro. 10
(1
:
purely middle use of
KOLixrjdyjvaL, 'fell
asleep',"
rjulKa îJ,eWov Koifirjdrjpai
a "clear passive" in Iva to. 7rp6j3aTa em KOLfj.r]dfji, F.P. 110 (i/A.D.), but eKoXX-qdr] (Lu. 15 15) can be explained as passive or middle in sense. In a few verbs {iaT-qv, kaTadrjv) a distinction was developed.^ W. F. Moulton thinks (Winer-M., p. 315, n. 5) that "a faint passive force" may be observed in aTadrjvaL in the N. T., but hardly in Mk. 3 24. Cf. also
(iii/B.c).
Ch.P. 3
He
finds
intransitive crradrjaoixaL in
Mt. 12
25, 46.
'EaTadyjKa in
modem
Greek
'place'
is
aorist passive for arcKw, 'stand,'
and
earrjdrjKa for ar-qvoi,
,Ac.
(Thumb, Handh., p. 145). The correct text (W. H.) in 21:3 is avaâvavTes Tr]v Kvirpov (active), not ava4)avevTe% (passive). But still some MSS. do have this transitive second aorist
passive participle.
passive form (from the active), he

find
it
one keeps in mind the origin of this aorist may be the less surprised to also transitive like the active. Already in Homer this was
If
true.
The
so-called passive "deponents," verbs

aorist with the passive form.
formed the
lxeTafj.e\oiJiaL
which had no active, But they were not always
intransitive.
Some
of
(Mt. 27:3),
are really transitive.
so, like TopevofxaL (Mt. 8:9), (Mt. 17:16), but most of them They probably represent a survival of the
bbvajxai,
them were
old active origin of the aorist passive forms.^
As examples
(Mt. 1:19),
of
the transitive passive deponents note

(Lu. 5: 12), hdvfxrjOeuTos (Mt. 1:20),
eôvkrjdri
eSerjOr]
kireixtX-qdr}
(Lu. 10:34),
koî]d-n
These passive aorists have precisely the construction that the middle or active would have so far as case is
(Mt. 14
:
5)
concerned.
The
distinctive passive sense
is
absent.
Some
of the
"deponents" have both a middle and a passive aorist with a distinct passive sense. Thus note the middle and passive voices side
1
Giles,
Comp.
Philol., p. 410; Brus-, Gricch. Gr., p. 465.
2 *
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 181.
See ch. VIII,
vi, (c), for list of these
N. T. passive
aorists.
; .
818
by

and
aTrapprjdriaeTaL
side in apprjcanevos
(Lu. 12
9).
It so
happens
in the
that this context
is full
of passive forms.
:
Some
1),
:
of
them
strict passive sense, like eTnawaxOeLcrup (12
avyKeKoKviiiikvop iarlp
2), aKOvaQ-qatTai
b OVK airoKoXvipOrjaeTat, (12

/C7jpux057(TTai
2), ypcjadrjaeTaL
(12
and
:
(12
:
3), TTcoXowrat
and
:
ovk eaTcv eTrCkeK-qa iikpop (12
6),
r)pi6nr]PTaL
(12
7), dêîyaerat
(12
10).
But note
(12:5),
also the passive

(l)oêlade
:
deponents
(l>o^r}OrJTe
(12:4f.),
:
ô/STj^rjre
(12:7).
Cf. also airo8eâadat (Ac. 18
27)
and
wapedexOrjaap (15
voices are distinguished, OeaaaaOaL tovs apaKeL/xhovs

irpos
where the (Mt. 22 11) and

4),
:
TO deadrjpaL avTols
(Mt. 6:1),
'Koyiaap.epos
(Heb. 11
19)
and
22:37), laaaTo (Lu. 9:42) and ladrj (Mt. 8:13), epvaaro (Col. 1 13) and epvadrjp (2 Tim. 4 17), exapiaaro (Lu.
eXoyiadr] (Lu.
:
:
7: 21)
and
:
xo-pi-<^^vaL
(Ac. 3
/xe
14).
One may note

(Lu. 14
:
also wapjiTrjaapTo
(Heb. 12
kêkkâTO
Tpo4)ris
19)
and
:
exe
KapriTrip.kpop
19, perfect passive)
(Mk. 13
20),
but
tjSt;
6 eKXeXeypepos
(Lu. 9 :35); Kopeadkpres

It is
(Ac. 27:38)
and
'
KeKopeafxhoi kare (1 Cor. 4:8).
possible to see a difference also

yePTjdrjToo
between
(Mt. 25
eyepero (Jo.
:
14)
and
(Mt. 6
10).
:
AireKpidr]p
9)
steadily drove out
aireKplpaTo (Ac. 3
12),
difference in sense.
The papyri more

:
though both are used transitively with no 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 with passive sense in 2 Th. 1 10. As a result of this inroad of the comparatively new passive forms the aorist middle forms vanished. In modern Greek the passive aorist form is almost invariably used for both the middle and the passive ideas. This tendency seen in the N. T. (and the rest of the kolpt]) has triumphed over the aorist middle.^ In Ro. 10 3, rfj dLKaioavpy rod deou ohx vTreTa.yr]aap, the Rev. V. translates 'they did not subject themselves
:
:
to the righteousness of God.'

(/)
already.
Future Passive. As has been mentioned several times Homer has only two future passive forms (second futures)
is
The The
-drjp)
passive voice indeed occurs but rarely in the Boeotian dialect.^
future in -drjaopat
comparatively
late.
At
first,
certainly,
the distinction between passive and middle (and active also, -^p,
was
''a distinction of function,
not of form."^
It
is
not
the
surprising to find the middle future form in
Homer used with
passive sense
(cf. all
the other tenses save aorist), where the forms
Moulton,
Prol., p. 161.
Cf. Jannaris, Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 362; Hatz., Einl'., pp. 196

3
ff.;
Jebb
in V.
and D.'s Handb.,

*
p. 315.
Claflin, Synt. of the Bceot. Dial., p. 67.
Gildersleeve, Synt. of Class. Gk., p. 61.
VOICE (aiagesis)
for the
819
two voices are identical. In later prose the future middle form continued to be used in the passive sense even in the great prose writers (Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Plato, DeIn the LXX Conybeare and Stock {Selections, p. mosthenes).^
75
f.)
find the
same idiom.
Cf.
Ex. 12
oltt'
10,
om
airoXeirl/eTai. air'
avTOV
ecos Trpcot, /cat
oaTOvv oh avvTpbpiTai
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 Is xept/SaXetrat (Rev. dividing-line between middle and passive.
3
to
:
5)
cLTTOKoxl/ovTaL
middle or passive in sense? The same ambiguity exists as (Gal. 5 12). Considering the rather large list of
I
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
but
31),
but
aTrapvrjdifaofxat
(Lu. 12
:
9); laaofxaL (Ac.
28
27),
laOrjaeTaL
Ro. 2 26 \oyLa6rjaeTai is passive in sense. form was destined, like the other futures, to disappear as a distinct form. Only the compound tense occurs in the modern Greek.^ But, meanwhile, the future passive form took over the uses of the vanishing future middle forms.^ It is possible to find a passive
sense in ewavaTrarjaeTaL (Lu. 10
avaKKidrjaouTai
:
(Mt. 8:8); and in But the future passive
6), ixerafieX-qdriaeTaL
(Heb. 7
:
21),
(Mt. 8
:
11),
KOLiJirjdrjaofxeda
(1
Cor. 15
:
51), koXXtj^tj-
ceraL (Mt. 19
5).
Cf. also dav/J-aadrjaovTai (Rev. 17
8), TTuadriaovTai
(Lu. 16
31), 4>avi)(yeTai
:
(Mt. 24
30), i;7rora777<Terat (1
Cor. 15
28).^
which reinforces the argument In 1 Cor. 15 passive may also be devoid future the But passive. for the true transitive just like the aorist passive. even idea and passive of the
28 note also
uTroraTf),
Cf. aTTOKpidiqaoixaL (Mt. 25

<})o^r}dr]aoiJLaL
:
37), kvTpa-wqdovTai rov vibv
(Mt. 21 37),
: :
(Heb. 13 6). The passive a4>aLpedrjaTaL (Lu. 10 42) 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. Cf. the examples of reflexive passives in the LXX Is. 1 12). (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

Cf.
f.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 162.
p. 171.
Clyde, Gk. 8ynt., p. 61; Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk.,

pp. 115, 125. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 363.
5 8
'
Thumb, Handb.,
Moulton,
Prol., p. 163.
Cf., for the
LXX,
Helbing, Gr., p. 98.
820
Ki. 18:

1).
It
is
possible, of course, for
ojv
to be attracted to the
case of TovTcop from oh ('in which,' 'wherein').

COL
Then
64)9r]crofxal
would be
'
I will
appear to
thee.'
Note the new present

persisted in
oTrra-
vofiaL
(Ac. 1:3).
But the future middle
yevrjaofxai,
8vvr](XonaL, hiniieKrjcroixaL, 7ropeucro/xa6.
As already noted, {g) The Agent with the Passive Voice. the Greek has no difficulty in using a verb in the passive which was not used Avith the accusative in the active. Thus note kyKoKetadai (Ac. 19:40), Kar-qyopeLTaL vtto tccu 'lovdaioov (Ac. 22:30),
arevixai to evayyeKiov (Gal.
TrcTrt-
2:1)}
A few verbs idiomatically use

SauXw (Ac. 9
:
the
dative with the passive.
Thus
1
:
hyvwadi] tQ
cb(f>dv
24), evpWrjv
(Ro. 10: 20),

6:1).^
k4>auri
(Mt.
20),
(1
Cor. 15- 7
f.), deaeijâL
(Mt. (Mt.
The
direct agent
is
most commonly expressed by

(Mt.
1
:
inro
4:1), the intermediate
by
5ta
22).
The agent
:
(see chapter
:
on Prepositions)
4), irapa (Jo.
is
also expressed
17:7).
by airo (2 Cor. 3 18), k (Gal. 4 See also discussion under Instrumental Case
(chapter XI, Cases) for discussion of avTui vnth earlv

(Lu. 23
in
is
:
Teirpayfj.kvov
whether dative or instrumental. In the N. T., as ancient Greek (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 72), the instrument sometimes personified and treated as an agent. Cf KoXa/xov vird
15),
.
avejJLOV aa\ev6iJ.evov ;
(Mt. 11
7).
(h)
Impersonal Construction.
This
is
the usual idiom in
the Coptic in lieu of the absence of the passive.

rather rhetorical than s^mtactical as
pares also the French on,
Wellhausen^ shows how in
But it is often Moulton shows.^ He com^ the German man, the English one. the Aramaic this impersonal plural
: :
was common. One notes alTovaiu (Lu. 12 20), where a passive would be possible. Cf. away ova lv Kat ôXXovaLV /cat KaieraL (Jo. 15 Note in particular k^T]papd7} 6) where the passive occurs in KaieraL.
Kal (TwayovcLv avra (Jo.
The
15 6). Cf. also Tpk^waLv avrrju (Rev. 12 6). use of the impersonal passive like wLaTeveraL and o/jLoXoyeXraL (Ro. 10 10) is another matter and calls for no comment. It is
:
rare in Greek as
77).
compared with Latin

:
(Gildersleeve, Sijntax, p.
Cf. the plural in 10

:
14
f.
See also the personal construction
in 1 Cor. 15
1
12
ei
8e Xptcrros K-qpvaaeraL otl.
Cf. Gildersleeve, Synt., etc., p. 77. Cf. Blass, Gr. of
Prol., p.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 185.
<
Einl., p.
58 25
f. f.
CHAPTER
XVIII
TENSE (XPONOS)
Complexity of the Subject. Probably nothing connected with syntax is so imperfectly understood by the average student as tense. This is due to various
I.
causes.
1. The Difficulty of Comparing Greek Tenses with Germanic Tenses. "The translators of our English version have failed more frequently from their partial knowledge of the force of the tenses than from any other cause." Ignorance, one may add, both of English and Greek still stands in the way of proper rendering of the Greek. The English, like the other Germanic tongues, 2 has only two simple verb-forms. We have a great wealth of tenses in English by means of auxihary verbs, but they do not correspond with any of the Greek tenses.^ It is the commonest grammatical vice for one to make a conjectural translation into English and then to discuss the syntactical propriety of the Greek tense on the basis of this translation.^ Burton^ indeed justifies this method for the benefit of the Enghsh student of Greek. But I submit that the practice brings more confusion than help. " The Aorist for the Enghsh Perfect, and the Aorist for the English Pluperfect" Burton urges as "a pertinent illustration." But that method keeps the student at the English standpoint, just the thing to be avoided. The Greek point of view affords the only sure basis of operation. Winer ^ laments that "N. T. grammarians and expositors have been guilty of the greatest mistakes" here, though it cannot be said that Winer himself always lives up to
^
his just ideal.
'Translation into English or
German
is
the least
point to note in judging a tense.

1
Farrar, Gk. Syn't., p. 123.
'
Weymouth, On Rendering
Cf. Broadus,
into Eng. of the
K.-G., Bd. I, Gk. Aorist and

2
p. 129.
Perf., 1894,
p. 11.
*
Comm. on Matthew, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 4 f.
p.
54 note.
W.-Th.,
p. 264.
821
822
2.
NEW TESTAMENT
Most
Bad Influence of the Latin on Greek Grammarians. of the older Greek grammars were made by men who knew
is
Latin better than Greek.

tenses
Even to-day^ the study of the Greek hampered by the standpoint of Latin idioms which de-
grammars 2
veloped under very different conditions. This is true of school in particular, whereas Latin has had no influence on
the Greek tenses themselves by the time of the kolvt]. The perfect and the aorist blend in Latin, while that is not true in Greek till a very late date (1000 a.d.)-^ The separate Greek development (cf. the Sanskrit) was due to the genius and spirit of the Greek people and has continued throughout the history of the language,* though in modern times the Greek tenses have suffered serious modification. The Latin tenses must be left to one side. The time element is more prominent in the Latin. There is no time ele3. Absence of Hebrew Influence. ment at all in the Hebrew tenses. Hence it is not strange that the LXX translators had much trouble in rendering the two Hebrew tenses (perfect and imperfect) into the Greek with its richness
of tense.
similar difficulty exists for the English translators.

slips)
sometimes occur, like eydo dixL (BA in Tob. 5: 15).^ But such translation Greek left no lasting impress on the Greek of the N. T. save in irpoakSeTo irkixxPu (Lu. 20 12; cf. Ex. 25 21). The problems of the Greek tenses are not to be solved by an apCurious devices (possibly
Kadlaoixai
(B in Ju. 6:
18), eaoiiac bibbvaL
peal to the Semitic influence.

4.
future optative in
sive
Gradual Growth of the Greek Tenses. There is no Homer and no future passive. The aorist pasThe past perfect is rare in Homer,' and it does is also rare.^
not occur with the idea of relative time. "In the examination of tense usages, we must be careful to observe that tenses, in the
sense in which the
word
is
now
used, are of comparatively late
development."^
personal suffixes.
In the beginning the verb-root was used with
At first
this
some
1
tenses, others other tenses,
was enough. Some verbs developed some few all the tenses.
2 '
Mutzbauer, Die Grundl. d. griech. Tempusl., 1893, p. J K. Roth, Die erziihlenden Zeitformen bei Dion, von Hal., p. 5. Ernault, Du Parfait en Grec et en Lat., 1886, p. 164. Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gr., p. 440.
Gk.
*
5
Mutzb., Die Grundl.
d. griech.
Tempusl., 1893, p. vi
f.
Cf. Swete, Intr. to O. T. in Gk., p. 308.

Sterrett, Dial, of Horn.,
^ 8
N.
42,
Monro, Horn.
Giles,
Gr., p. 44.
Man.
of
Comp.
Philol., p. 482.
TENSE (XPONO2)
5.
823
"Aktionsart" of the Verb-Stem. Aktionsart ("kind of acmust be clearly understood. The verb-root plays a large part in the history of the verb. This essential meaning of the word itself antedates the tense development and continues afterwards.
tion")
There
is
originally
thus a double development to keep in mind. There were two verb-types, the one denoting durative or linear
action, the other
momentary
or punctiliar action. ^
Hence some
the
verbs have two roots, one linear (durative), like

other punctiliar (momentary), like i]veyKov
ToX^tdco,
T\r]v.
{/)epw (ferd),
(tuli).
So opdw,
(prj-ixl,
eldov,
With other verbs the

All this
distinction
was not drawn

'i-cfyrj-v;
sharply, the root could

Xky-co, e-Xey-o-v).
be used either way
(cf.
was before there was any idea

kadiM
is is
of the
later tense.
durative.
So e-ây-ov is punctiliar, while Moulton^ rightly observes that this
linear or
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 papyrus receipt is eaxov xapd aov. This matter of the kind of
action in the verb-root (Aktionsart) applies to
all verbs.^
It
has
long been clear that the "tense" has been overworked and made The verb itself is the beginto mean much that it did not mean.
ning of
used.
all.
But
scholars are not agreed in the terminology to be
Instead of "punctiliar" (punktuelle Aktion, Brugmann), others use "perfective" (Giles, Manual, p. 478). But this brings All verbs may be inevitable confusion with the perfect tense.
described as "punctiliar" (pwnHwe/0 and "non-punctiliar"(m'c/iipunktuell).
linear (durative)
But the *'non-punctiliar" divides into the indefinite and the definite linear (completed or perfect). The notion of perfect action as distinct from point action came later. The three essential^ kinds of action are thus momentary or punctiliar when the action is regarded as a whole and may be represented by a dot (.), linear or durative action which may be the continuance of perrepresented by a continuous line fected or completed action which may be represented by this graph The distinction between punctiliar and perfected action is not clearly drawn in the verb-root itself. That is a Brugmann^ credits this "perfected" later refinement of tense.
,
.
idea to the perfect stem.

1
"Iterative" action belongs to certain
*
6
Man., etc., p. 477 f. 110 f. Cf. K.-G., Bd. I, p. 131; Stahl,

Giles,
Prol., p.
Krit.-hist. Synt. d. griech.
Vcrbums,p. SO
f.
824

like yiyvofxai),
NEW TESTAMENT
it
is
stems (reduplicated, kind of action.

6.
but
not a fundamental
in
The Three Kinds of Action Expressed

These ideas
Terms of
Tense.
all
(punctiliar, durative, perfected state) lie be-
hind the three tenses (aorist, present, perfect) that run through The forms of these tenses are meant to accentuthe moods.
The aorist stem presents action in its simplest form {a-opL(7Tos, 'undefined'). This action is simply presented as a point by this tense. This action is timeless. The present is also
ate these ideas.^
timeless in itself as
is
the perfect.^
It is confusing to
apply the
expression "relations of time" to this fundamental aspect of tense, as is done by some grammars.^ Radermacher (A''. T. Gr., p. 121)
uses Zeitart and Zeitstufe, but
It
is
why
its
Zeitart instead oi Aktionsartf
better to keep "time" for
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 explaining the Greek tenses from the notion of time, and he has been followed by a host of imitators. The study of Homer ought to have prevented this error. The poets generally do not bring the
time relations to the of Language, p. 300)
fore.^
Even Paul
{Principles of the History

It is doubtless easier
falls into this error.
to trace the history of the verb than of the noun, but as mistakes lie along the way.
7.
many
But for the indicative the Greek There are no past history. simple had a tenses would have is an anomaly subjunctive future The tenses in the subjunctive.
Time Element in Tense.
of very late Greek.
The
discourse
and
is
is
future optative occurs only in indirect The time element in the
infinitive is confined to indirect discourse
and
/xeXXw.
Time
in the
only relative to the principal verb. It is thus kind of participle time of the action, that is expressed in these forms.^ the not action, the three grades of time had tenses of their indicative the in But own. The Greeks evidently felt that there was no need for time
in the other
modes except in a relative sense. As a matter of fact, the real time of subjunctive, optative, and imperative is future
1 3 4 6
K.-G., Bd.
I,
p. 130.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 433; Gildersleeve, Synt. of Cf. Benard, Formes Verb, en Grec, 1890, p. 279. Mutzb., Die Grundl. d. griech. Tempusl., 1890.
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 469. Class. Gk., p. 79.
6 '
Sayce, Intr. to the Sci. of Lang., vol. II, 1880, p. 149. Cf. Spyridis, Lang. grec. actuelle ou mod., 1894, p. 287.
TENSE (XPONOS)
in relation to speaker or writer.^
(cf
.
825
difficulty
It
was evidently with
absence of time in Hebrew) that time was expressed in a positive (non-relative) sense even in the indicative. It is only by the
augment (probably an adverb) that past time is clearly expressed.^ "Homer and later Greek writers often use the present with an
adverb of time instead of a past tense, a construction which has an exact parallel in Sanskrit and which is therefore supposed to be Indo-Germanic." ^ There is no really distinctive form for the present indicative. The future was a later development out of both the present and aorist. See chapter VIII, Conjugation of Verb. The augment was not always used. Homer used it only when it
But past time was objective and the three kinds of action (punctiliar, durative, perfected) were regularly expressed with the tenses (aorist, imperfect, past perfect). There is Aktionssuited him.
art also in the present
and future time, but the tense development extent here. There are only two tenseforms in the present and practically only one in the future. But both punctiliar and hnear action are expressed, but not differentiated, in the present time by the same tense, as is true also of
did not go on to the
full
the future. The kinds of action exist, but separate tense-forms unfortunately do not occur."* There might thus have been nine tenses in the indicative: three punctihar (past, present, future),
three linear (past, present, future), three perfect (past, present, Because of this difference between the indicative and future).^
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 idea thus runs through tense in the indicative (kind of action,
is
time of the action).

sistency in the
Faulty Nomenclature of the Tenses. There is no connames given the tenses, as has already been explained. Cf. chapter VIII, vii, (6). The terms aorist, imperfect and perfect (past, present, future) are properly named from the
8.
point of view of the state of the action, but present

are
named from
1
the standpoint of
and future the time element. There is
2
3
6 "
Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses, 1890, pp. 23, 27. Cf. Seymour, Trans, of the Am. Philol. Asso., 1881, p. 89. " Cf. K.-G., Bd. I, p. 131. Giles, Man., etc., p. 487. Cf Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 120 f. Cf. Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses, pp. 8, 22.
.
826
NEW TESTAMENT
no time element in the present subjunctive, for instance. But the names camiot now be changed, though very unsatisfactory. This is the com9. The Analytic Tendency (Periphrasis). the Germanic tense in tongues. It expressing mon way of very older Greek and was frequent in the unknown to not was the LXX under the Hebrew influence. See an extended list in Conybeare and Stock, Selections from the LXX, pp. 68-71. The tendency is strong in the N. T. See the summary already given in chapter VIII, vii, (j). In the modem Greek the periphrastic form
has displaced the usual inflected forms in
present, imperfect
all
the tenses but the
and aorist. These are "simple." The rest This analytic tenare "compound" (Thumb, Handb., p. 115).^ It did dency affected the durative and perfect kinds of action.
not suit the purely punctiliar idea.
10.
The Effect of Prepositions on the Verb.
This
is
This subject has already been another aspect of Aktionsart. Delbriefly discussed from the standpoint of the prepositions.^
briick^ has
followed
worked the matter out with thoroughness and he by Brugmann.^ Moulton^ has applied the principle
is
to
is
N. T.
tion.
verbs.
it is
The
point
is
that often where the simple verb
durative
rendered "perfective" by the preposition in composiis
This peculiarity
common to
all
the Indo-Germanic tongues
and reaches its highest development in the Germanic (cf. English and German) and the Balto-Slavic languages." Thus we in English say bring and bring up, burn and burn up, carry and carry off, come and coine on, drive and drive aivay {hame, in, off, out), drink and drink up, eat and eat up, follow and follow up, go and go away, grow and grow up, knock and knock down, make and make over, pluck and pluck out, run and run away, speak and speak out, stand and stand up, take and take up, wake and wake up, work and work out.'' The "imperfective" simplex becomes "perfective" in the compound. Prof. A. Thumb ^ has a paper "Zur Aktionsart der mit Prapositionen zusammengesetzten Verba im Griechischen," in which he compares some tables of Schlachter for Thucydides with some by Prof. S. Dickey for the N. T. Thucydides shows for the present tense 260 simplicia verbs to 83 compound, for the aorist 158 to 199. Dickey has investigated about thirty N. T. verbs
1
Jebb
in V.
and D.'s Handb., pp. 323, 326.

(z).
6 ^
2 *
Cf. ch. XIII, IV,

Cf.
Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, pp. 146-170.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 112.
Griech. Gr., pp. 482 Prol., pp. 111-115.
ff.
Indoger. Forsch.,
XXVII.
TENSE (XPONOS)
like
dTT^x'^^j
827
etc.
He
reports for the present tense a proportion of
1160 simplida to 83 compound, for the aorist 885 to 226. It is unfortunate that the term "perfective" is used for this idea, since it
inevitably suggests the perfect tense.
Some
writers^ use "perfec-
tive" also for the aorist or punctiliar action, a

ther confusion.
means
of
still
fur-
uses "Perfektive Aktion" for the effect of the preposition in composition and " Perfektische Aktion"
Brugmann^
a distinction hard to draw in English. Latin and Greek both show abundant illustrations of this use of prepCf. sequor and consequor, facto and efficio, teneo and ositions. Moulton^ thinks that the freedom in the position of sustineo.
for the perfect tense,
the preposition in
tion here
Homer
helped the adverb to retain
its
force
longer than in later Greek and Latin.

is
The
point of the preposi-
best seen in the prepositions
dTro-, 5ia-, Kara-, avv-.^
But even
in these the actual majority of
original local
meaning and so are not
xoXXots xpbvois avwqpTaKei avTov,
examples preserve the But in Lu. 8 29, the perfective sense of avv combines
perfective.
:
with the past perfect tense and the locative (or instrumental) TToXXots xpovoLs to denote "not the temporary paroxysm, but the
estabUshment of a permanent hold" (Moulton,

'^LvwGKOi is
is
Prol., p. 113).
So
durative ('gaining knowledge,' as in

:
Mk.
13
28), lyviîv
iroLrjao:)),
:
effective ('grasping the point,' as in Lu. 16
4, lyvo^v tI
7rt7tvcbo-Kco is
perfective ('knowing
my
lesson,' as in 1 Cor. 13
12),
(ib.,
and
einyvoJvaL also ('recognising,' as in
Mt. 14:
35).
Moulton
:
p. 114) calls particular attention to ol airoWvfjievoL (1 Cor. 1
18), 'the
where the destiny is accented by awo, and the process is depicted by the tense. In Heb. 6 18, ot Ka.Ta4>vybvTes, the perfective sense of Kara coincides with the effective aorist. So even when
perishing,'
:
the tense
is
durative, the notion of completion
is
expressed in the
:
preposition as contemplated or certain.
In
the perfect tense of the simplex

(Lu. 8 :53).
Qpr]<jK(jo
is sufficient,
(Lu. 8 49) but not so in airWavev

redprjKev
as simplex
:
perfect, so that awkdvwKev (Lu. 8
became obsolete outside of the 42; cf. 2 Cor. 6:9; Heb. 11 21)
:
occurs for the notion of 'dying.'

its
"The
linear perfective expressed
meaning sufficiently, denoting as it does the whole process leading up to an attained goal."^ Moulton notes also the iterative use of aTTodprjaKoo in 1 Cor. 15 31, and the frequentative in
:
Cor. 15:22.
See also the "perfective" use of

In
airoWvfxi.
aTroKTelu(j:,
the
active of
1
dirodvrja-Kco.
and
airdXhviJLai (oiTroXcoXa)
p. 1S7.
the sim-
So
Giles,
Man.,
p. 478; Blass,
Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
*

Prol., p. 112.
Bnig., Gricch. Gr., p. 482.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 114.
828
plex
is

obsolete.
NEW TESTAMENT
is
Even
:
in the present tense the force of dTro1

:
15 17), cLTToKKvueda (Mt. 8 25), where Moulton^ explains airo- as suggesting "the sense of an inevitable doom." Cf. also <t>evyo} (Mt. 2 13),
obvious.
Cf. ToTs dTroXXu/zei'ois (1 Cor.
18), aToXKvixaL (Lu.
with Siaê^Tco (Ac. 27:42), and kKcf)vyo3 (Heb. 2:3), 'to rrypea; (Ac. 24 23), escape, Ka.ra(l)tvyoi (Heb. 6 18), to find refuge (Lu. 2 51), and continually' keep Siariypeco, 'to 'to watch,' with
'to
flee,'
' : ' ' ; :
:
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),
:
:
'to hold
on
to,'
and
dTrexw
and awexoo (Lu. 8 (Mt. 6 5), 'to have

:
45), 'to hold together' or 'press,'
in
full,'
etc.
f.
'receipt in
full,'
see Deissmann, Light, p. 110

It
is
As to dTrex" for The papyri and
ostraca give numerous illustrations.
not necessary to
iJLevcb
make
(Ph.
an exhaustive
1
:
list
to prove the point.

:
Cf.
/cat irapafxevu}
25), xatpw
osition,
where the point hes in the prepthough not "perfective" here. So jLvccaKofxevr] Kal amyLvoiKttt
crvpxaipoj (2
17),
aKOn'tv-q (2
Cor. 3
2), avayivoiOKeTe
:
r)
/cat
eTriyivooa Kere (1
13), nerpeLTe
:
6.vrip.eTprjdr)(TTaL
e/cjSaXe
(Lu. 6 38),
:
exoj'res
KarkxovTes
(2 Cor. 6
10).
Cf.
In some verbs- the preposition has so far lost its original force that the "perfective" idea is the only one that survives. Dr. Eleanor Purdie (Indog. Forsch., IX, pp. 63-153,
(Mt. 22
13).
shows that the
compared with Homer was increasingly confined to the constative sense, while the ingressive and effective simplex gave way to the "perfective" compounds. Moulton^ is inclined to agree in the main with her contention as supported by the papyri (and Thumb thinks that modem Greek supports the same view). At any rate there is a decided increase in the number of compound verbs. The ingressive and effective uses of the aorist would natuBut it remains rally blend with the "perfective" compounds. true that the Aktionsart of the verb-root is often modified by the
1898) argues that the usage of Polybius as
aorist simplex
preposition in composition.
11.
"Aktionsart" with each Tense.
It
is
not merely true

(punctiliar, dura-
that three separate kinds of action are developed

tive, perfected),
that are represented broadly by three tenses in all the modes, though imperfectly in the present and future tenses The individual verb-root modifies greatly the of the indicative.
'
Moulton,
Prol., p. 114.
lb., p. 112.
ib.,
pp. 115-118.
TENSE (XPONOS)
resultant idea in each tense.
here,
829
This matter can only be hinted at but must be worked out more carefully in the discussion of each tense. The aorist, for instance, though always in itself merely point-action, "punctiliar," yet may be used with verbs that accent
the beginning of the action or the end of the action. Thus three distinctions arise: the unmodified point-action called "constative,"
the point-action with the accent on the beginning (inceptive) called "ingressive," the point-action with the accent on the conclusion
The names are not particularly happy, but they will answer. "Constative" is especially awkward.^ In reality it is just the normal aorist without any specific modification by the verb-meaning. Hirt^ does not use the term, but divides the
called "effective."
and "effective" when there is this special Aktionsart. But the use of these demands another term for the normal aorist.^ As an example of the "constative" aorist for the
aorist into "ingressive"
whole action take So also k^riyrjaaro

nation).
:
taK-qvwaev (Jo. 1
(1
:
14), for
:
the earthly
14)
is
life
of Jesus.
18), while eyeveTO (1
"ingressive,"
accents the entrance of

'Edeaad/jLeOa (1
:
the Logos upon

14) is
his life
and on earth (Incaris eXdjSo/xej/
probably "effective" as
(1 16), accenting the result ("resultative," Brugmann, Griech. So likewise in the so-called "present" tense various Gr., p. 475).
ideas exist as set forth
jugations."
by the various "classes" of verbs or "conThe perfect and the future likewise have many varia-
tions in resultant idea, growing out of the varying verb-idea in
These must be borne in mind be indicated in the proper place in discussing each tense. 12. Interchange of Tenses. The point here is not whether the Greeks used an aorist where we in English would use a perfect, but whether the Greeks themselves drew no distinction between an aorist and a perfect, a present and a future. It is not possible to give a categorical answer to this question when one
connection with the tense-idea.
and
will
recalls the
history of the language.

period'*
slow development of the Greek tenses and the long There was a time long after the N. T.
the line between the aorist and the perfect became It is it had been largely obliterated in Latin.
when
very indistinct, as
a question for discussion whether that was true in the N. T. or not. The subject will receive discussion under those tenses. The future grew out of the present and the aorist. The present continued to be used sometimes as vivid future, as is true of all languages. But it is a very crude way of speaking to say that one tense is used
1
Moulton,
Prol., p. 109.
Handb.
d.
Griech
etc., p.
392.
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 475. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 410.
830
NEW TESTAMENT
men.
"for" another in Greek. That would only be true of ignorant In general one may say that in normal Greek when a certain tense occurs, that tense was used rather than some other because it best expressed the idea of the speaker or writer. Each That idea is normal and tense, therefore, has its specific idea.
can be readily understood. Various modifications arise, due to the verb itself, the context, the imagination of the user of the tense. The result is a complex one, for which the tense is not wholly The tenses, therefore, are not loosely interchangeresponsible. Each tense has a separate history and presents a distinct able. Winer (Winer-Thayer, p. 264) idea. That is the starting-point. one of these tenses strictly and saying: "No is entirely correct in Writers vary greatly in another." for stand properly taken can
the
way
that the tenses are used.
vivid writer like
Mark,
for
instance, shows
tenses.
his lively imagination
by
swift changes in the

It is
The
reader must change with him.
mere common-
place to smooth the tenses into a dead level in translation and Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. misses the writer's point of view.
is doubtful whether in the N. T. we are justified in making "sharp distinctions between the imperfect, aorist or perfect; a
124)
subjunctive, imperative, or infinitive of the aorist or present."
But
for
my
scriptions for such hesitation than
part I see no more real ground in the papyri and inwe find in the ancient Attic
Greek.
spite of
Thumb
heavy
losses,
{Handh., p. 116) notes that modern Greek, in has preserved the distinction between hnear
in the imperative
and punctiliar action even
and subjunctive.
shall discuss the tenses according to the three ideas designed
by
them rather than by the names

n. Punctiliar Action.
This
is
accidentally given.
the kind of action to begin with.
It
is
probably not
possible always to tell
which
is
the older stem, the punctiliar
or the linear.
punctiliar action
by side, though the The aorist tense, though at first confined to verbs of punctiliar sense, was gradually made on verbs So also verbs of durative action came to have of durative sense. the tenses of punctiliar action.^ Thus the tenses came to be used
They come
is
into view side
logically first.
for the expression of the ideas that once belonged only to the
root.
The
Stoic grammarians,
who gave
us
much
of our termi-
nology, did not fully appreciate the aorist tense. They grouped the tenses around the present stem, while as a matter of fact in
many
verbs that
1
is
impossible, the root appearing in the aorist,
Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, pp. 241, 316.
TENSE (XPONOS)
not in the present.
Cf. e-aTr]-v
{'i-o-Trj-fxi)
,
831
e-Xa/3-o-v (Xa//|3dz^-co)
,
etc.
This error vitiated the entire theory of the Stoic grammarians.^ Grammatical forms cannot express the exact concord between the logical and the grammatical categories,^ but the aorist tense came very near doing it. By Homer's time (and Pindar's) the
between the aorist and imperfect tenses is fairly well drawn, though some verbs like e-^rj-j' remain in doubt.^ So we In modern Greek the ancient aorist start with the aorist tense. is the base-form on which a number of new presents are formed (Thumb, Handh., p. 143). J. C. Lawson {Journ. of Th. St., Oct., 1912, p. 142) says that Thumb would have smoothed the path of
distinction
the student
if
he had "dealt with the aorist before proceeding to

{a6ptaro<;).
the present."
1.
The Aorist
way
The
aorist, as will
be shoâi,
is is
is
not
it is
the only
of expressing indefinite (undefined) action, but
the normal
method
of doing so.
The Greek
kolvt]
in truth
"an
p.
aorist-
loving language" (Broadus).*

this true of the
In the
the aorist
even more
120),
frequent than in the classic Greek

especially
is
(Thumb, Handh.,
N. T.
Gildersleeve^ does not hke the
name and
prefers "apobatic,"
but that term suits only the "effective" aorist. The same thing The name aorist does very well on the is true of " culminative."
whole.
I
doubt
if
the aorist
is
a sort of " residuary legatee," taking
what
it.
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 is true that in the expression of past
all
time in the indicative
and with
the tense used as a matter of course, unless there was special reason for using some
the other moods, the aorist
is
other tense.
It gives the action
"an und
fiir
sich."
The conmion
eXe7e)
use of the "imperfect" with verbs of speaking
(ee^T;,
may
be aorist in
(a)
(a)
fact.
Aktionsart in the Aorist.

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.'-.
1
Steinthal, Gesch. d. Sprach., p. 306
f.

Cf. Gildersleeve,
Am.
Jour, of Philol., 1883, p. 101;
Monro, Horn.
Or.,
pp. 32, 45.

*
Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T.,
p. 137.
^
Am.
Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 397
f.
Pro!., p. 116.
832

''perfective or
NEW TESTAMENT
for the aoristic action,
So Giles ^ uses
momentary"
but he also (p. 478 note) uses constative. But Moulton^ also makes a distinction between "constative" and "punctiliar,"
using "punctiliar" for real point-action and "constative" for what is merely treated as point-action. That is a true distinction
for the verb-root,
was
rests
in
but the growing number of constative aorists harmony with the simple idea of the tense. Brugmann^ constative, ingressive and effective aorists, all three on the
punkhiell idea
and draws no sharp distinction between "punctilDelbriick^ divides the punktuell or aorist
iar" and "constative."
into Anfangspunkt or Ingressive, Mittelpunkt or Constative
and
SchluBpunkt or Effective. The constative accents the "middle The idea of Delbriick and Brugmann is that punktuell point."
action
"action focused in a point." ^ "The aorist describes an event as a single whole, without the time taken in its accomplishment."^ It seems best, therefore, to regard "constative" as merely the normal aorist which is not "ingressive" nor "effecis
tive."
is
The
root-difference
between the
is
aorist
and the imperfect
just this, that the aorist
"describes."^
single
The
"constative" while the imperfect "constative" aorist just treats the act as a
whole entirely irrespective of the parts or time involved.* But the aorist can If the act is a point in itself, well and good. point. This is the advance not is a which an of act be used also are punctiliar All aorists verb-root. the makes on that the tense aorist "constative" The Prol, Moulton, 109). (cf. p. in statement point-action. in itself not is which punctiliar as an act treats That is the only difference. The distinction is not enough to make a separate class like ingressive and effective over against
the purely punctiliar action. Thumb (Handh., p. 122) passes by "constative" as merely the regular aorist "to portray simply an
action or occurrence of the past," whether in reality punctiliar
or not.
Greek.
He finds both ingressive and effective aorists in modern But Thumb uses "terminative" for both "ends" (initial and final), a somewhat confusing word in this connection. The papyri show the same Aktionsart of the aorist. So note constative
1
Man.,
p.
481
f.
Prol., p. 116,
but not on
p. 109.
p. 184.
Griech. Gr., pp. 475-477. Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 230.
5 Thompson, Synt. of Att. Gk., "momentan, effektiv, ingressiv." 6 7
But
Cf. K.-G., Bd.
I,
p.
157,
Moulton, Intr. to the Stu. of N. T. Gk., 1895, Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 302. Moulton,
Prol., p. 109, prefers
p. 190,
"summary"
to "constative."
TENSE (XPONOS)
OTL ne kwaiSevcras koXus,
833
B.G.U. 423
OLKodoixrjdr]
(ii/A.D.).
TeacrepaKOVTa Kai ?^ ereaiv
6 vaos ovtos,
Thus in Jo. 2 20, we have a gOOd

:
example of the constative

years
is
aorist.
The whole
:
period of forty-six
treated as a point.
In Mt. 5
17, rfKdov,
we have a very
simple constative aorist, just punctiliar and nothing more, describing the purpose of Christ's mission.
aorist in this sense
is
It is true that the constative
far
more frequent than the

increasing
ingressive
and
com-
the effective uses of the tense.
This has always been so from the
nature of the case.
The
number
of "perfective"
pounds, as already shown, increased the proportion of constative When the action is in itself momentary or instantaneous aorists.^
no
difficulty is involved.
almost any page of the N. T.

fieraTefxrl/aadaL,
These examples are very numerous on Cf. in Ac. 10 22 f., kxpy^mTladt],

:
aKovaai, eêvtaev,
:
avvrjXQov.
5.
See the aorists in Ac.

is
10
41
f.
Cf.
the moods.
aorist.
Mt. 8 3; Ac. But verbs that
This
the normal aorist in
all
are naturally durative
may have
the
In kKaprkp-qaev (Heb. 11:27) we have a verb naturally "durative" in idea, but with the "constative" aorist. Cf. also c/cpu/S?? Tpipirjvov (Heb. 11:23), where a period of time is summed
/Ltexpt
up by the constative M. (Ro. 5 14).

:
aorist.
Cf. elSaaiXevaeu 6 dauaros

is
cltto
'A5d/^
A
err]
good example
(Rev. 20
:
e^r](xap Kai
kâalXevaau
Here e^rjaav is probably 1 Th. 5 10, but eâal\tvaoLV is clearly constative. The period of a thousand years is merely regarded as a point. Cf also Jo. 7 9 efj.eLvcv h ttj TaXiXaia, 10 40 efiavev hKel. See also Ac. 11 26 eyeveTO airoTs hiavrdu oXou
HTa Tov Xpto-ToO xtXta
ingressive,
4).
though
^rjac^fxev is
constative in
cvvaxdrjvaL kv
kviavTov Kai
rfj
(.KKK-qala,
e^,
14: 3 Uavov xpovov bikrpi-âv, 18: 11 kKadiaev

:
/jLrjpas
28
30
e/jLeivev
bieTiav
oK-qv.
Cf.
Eph. 2
4.
See det StereXecra in B.G.U. 287 (a.d. 250). Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 105) calls this "aorist of long duration" (constative).
For a striking example of the constative (summary) use of the note e<p' w irdvTes rijiapTov (Rom. 5 12). Note in particular the summary statements in Heb. 11, as airkdavov ovtol iravres (13),
aorist,
:
ovTOL iravTes
ovk
a.vTi]v.
:
tKoniaavTo (39).
p. 106) is
Gildersleeve's "aorist of total
negation" (Syntax,
or separate 2
iravTes
nothing more than this. Repeated actions are thus grouped together, as in Mt. 22 28,
:
tax^v
So
rpts kpa^blad-qv,
rpU havayrjaa
8(
(2 Cor. 11
25).
In
Mk.
12
44, Tavres
eâXov,
by the
avrr]
elSaXev,
is
the two actions

difficulty in els
:
are contrasted sharply

vir^p -wavTOiv
aorist.
There
no
airkdavev apa oi xdj'Tes aTredavov (2 Cor. 5
14).
The
kjSao-l-
same verb may sometimes be used

1
either as constative (like
Moulton, ProL,
p. 115.
834

:
NEW TESTAMENT
(/cai
Xevaap, 'reigned,'
'assumed dramatic
rule,'
Rev. 20 4 above) or ingressive Rev. 11: 17, though true here of
eâaiXevaas,
God
only in a
kaiyqaav
sense).
Thus
ealyrjaev (Ac.
15
12)
is
'kept silence'
is
(constative),
but
aiyrjaaL (verse
13)
is
ingressive as
(Lu. 9 :3G).
Cf. Burton,
ixi]
N.
:
T.
Moods and
In
line
Tenses, p. 21.
In
Gal. 5
16, ov
reXearjTe,
we have
17.
the constative aorist, while
7rXr?pcoo-at is
effective in
/SaXeTi/
Mt. 5
with what has already

'let fly' (ingres-
been
sive)
said,
may mean
'throw' (constative),
or
'hit' (effective).
Cf.
Moulton, Prol,
p. 130.
Illustra:
tions occur in the N. T. in 'ijSaXev avTov els ^v\aK-qv (Mt. 18 30, constative, 'cast' or 'threw'), /3dXe aeavTov hrevdev kcltcjo (Lu. 4:9, Note kvTevdev, as well as "perfective" force of ingressive, 'hurl.'
Kdrco.
Cf.
Mt. 5
29), iâXev
/car'
avTrjs (effective, 'beat,'
Ac. 27:
14).
(0)
Ingressive
It
is all.
Aorist.
This
is
the
inceptive
or
inchoative
aorist.
not, however, like the "constative" idea, a tenseIt is purely
notion at
Thus
14:9,
kiTToox^voev,
is
2 Cor.
8:9,
a matter with the individual verb.^ 'became poor'; ei'r]aev, Ro. is

airedavev
is
'became
alive' (cf.
just before).^
Perhaps in
Jo. 16 :3, ovK eyvoâav, the

this could be constative.
meaning
'did not recognise.'^

:
But
But
it is
clear in Jo. 1
10.
So
in oaot
eXaôv avTov (Jo. 1

fiov
12) the ingressive idea occurs, as in oh xapeXa:
in verse 11.
(vs. 42)
Cf. iKkavaev (Lu. 19

'
41)= 'burst
Cf.
:
into tears'
and
In
eyjâjs
earnest to know.'
So
cSaKpuo-ev (Jo.
11:35).
86^r}Te
Mt. 22 :7
3:9),
tîiaev
is
wpyicdr]
'became angry.'
:
also
16).
/xt)
h.<j>hTrvo^(jv
(Lu. 8
as
23),
is
kdvjio^dr]
eKOiidrjdr]
:
(Mt. 2
(Mt. In Lu. 15 32
:
ingressive,
(Ac. 7:60),
i]yaiTi](jev
iaxvaafiev fx6\Ls
:
(Ac. 27: 16), tuarâoâiv (Lu. 6

driTe (2
22),
(Mk. 10
21), eXuTTTjis
Cor. 7:9),
irXovTrjarjTe (2
Cor. 8:9).
The notion
com-
with verbs expressing state or condition (Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 16). Moulton quotes âaCkehaas avaira^qaeTai, having come to his throne he shall rest,' Agraphon, O.P. 654. See also
mon
'
Moulton {Prol, p. 248) cites Jo. 4:52, KoiJ.\p6Tepov eax^v, 'got better,' and compares it with eau KOfiipus ax<i, Tb.P. 414 (ii/A.D.). Another instance is 7)77to-aj' Mt. 21 1.^ Cf. eKTrjaaro (Ac. 1 18). The name is not particularly good and (7) Effective Aorist. "resultant aorist" is suggested by some scholars. Gildersleeve^
eXaiSa fiiaTiKov irapa Kalaapos,
B.G.U. 423
(ii/A.D.).
See Gildcrsl., Synt., p. 105. ' Cf. Abbott, Job. Or., p. 328. * These ingressive aorists are often denominative verbs. Cf Gildersl., Synt. 6 Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 104. of Att. Gk., p. 104.
1
Blass, Qr. of
lb.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 193.
TENSE (XPONOS)
suggests "upshot aorist."
Giles ^ calls
it
835
aorist of the "culminat-
is that emphasis is on the end of the action as opposed to the ])eginning (ingresThe This is done (if done) by the verb itself (Aktionsart) sive). following examples will make the matter clear: iroirjaaTe Kapirov
ing point," following Monro.^

laid
But the idea
24), eveTTprj8), K\daas (6 6), iTeXeaev (7: 28), oj/jlolcoOt] (13 (22:7), kKkp8r](Ta (25:20), eTretaav (27:20), kXWri (Mk. 7:35), earaOrtaav (Lu. 24 17), eKpvjSr] (19 :42), fijayev (Jo. 1 :42), dxe-
(Mt. 3
cv
ffTTjae
(Ac. 5
37), TrXr^pcbo-ajres
(12
25), eireaev
(20
9), kirahaavro
(21:32),
eKojXuo-ej/
(27:43),
tp.adov
(Ph. 4:11),
hUriaev
(Rev.
good example of the effective aorist in the papyri is So then in the case of each aorist eaoocreu, B.G.U, 423 (ii/A,D.). the point to note is whether it is merely punctiliar (constative) or whether the verb-idea has deflected it to the one side or the other (ingressive or effective). It needs to be repeated that there is at
5:5).
bottom only one kind
of aorist (punctiliar in fact or statement).
The
always means point-action. The tense, like the mode, has nothing to do with the fact of the action, but only Sometimes it will not be clear with the way it is stated.
tense of
itself
from the context what the Aktionsart
is.
of prepositions applies to all the tenses.
The "perfective" force It must be said also that
the Aktionsart in the aorist (ingressive, effective) applies to all the modes. Indeed, because of the time-element in the indicative (expressed
character of
by the augment and secondary endings) the real the aorist tense is best seen in the other modes where
of time.^
It
is
we do not have notes
merely a matter of con-
venience, therefore, to note the aorist in the different modes, not because of any essential difference (outside of the indicative).
One
is
in constant danger of overrefinement here.
Gildersleeve*
criticises
StahP
for "characteristic prolixity" in his treatment of
the tenses.
Aorist
few striking examples are
sufTicient here.
The caution must be once more re(h) of the aorist indicative we have subdivisions in these peated that (punctiliar action). The variaroot-idea one and tense only one
Indicative.
tions noted are incidental
and do not change at
all
this funda-
mental idea. (a) The Narrative or Historical Tense.^

1
It is the tense in
Prol., p. 129.
Pliilol.,
which
Man.,
p. 498. p. 48.
'
Moulton,
Horn. Gr.,
Am.
Jour, of
1908, p. 400.
Krit.-hist. Synt., pp. 148-220.
Burton, N. T.
Moods and
Tenses, p. 19.
It is the cliaraeteristic
idiom
in
the indicative.
Cf. Bcrnhardy, Wiss. Synt., 1829, p. 380.
836

is
a verb in ordinary narrative

using some other tense.
Hence
it is
put unless there is reason for enormously frequent in the
Greek
historians.
Writers vary greatly, of course, in the use of
the tenses as of words, but in the large view the point holds.
The
aorist holds its place in the papyri
as the usual tense in narrative
any page
the
eight
in
and in the modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 122). Almost the Gospels and Acts will show an abundance of
point.
Cf.,
aorist indicatives that illustrate this

aorists
:
for instance,
in Ac.
13:13
f.
(no
other tense), the eight

:
aorists in 21
1 f.
(no other tense), the three aorists in 25
1 f.
In these instances the tenses are not all in indicative mood, though predominantly so. See again the fifteen The aorist was used in aorists in Ac. 28 11-15 (one perfect).
(no other tense).
:
narrative as a matter of course.
Note the many
aorists
in
Heb.
11.
The redundant use
of the verb as in Xa^wv ecnreipev (Mt. 13
31) Cf.
= *took and
sowed'
is
not a peculiarity of the aorist tense.
airrjkdev kol dirtv (Jo.
5: 15)
= 'went and
told.'
Nor
is it
a peculi-
arity of Greek.
It belongs to the vernacular of
most languages.
But we no longer
(j8)
find the iterative use of av with the aorist ac-
cording to the classic idiom (Moulton, Prol., p. 167).
The Gnomic
Aorist.
Jannaris^ calls this also "empiric

distinction.
aorist," while Gildersleeve^ uses "empirical" for the aorist with
a negative or temporal adverb, a rather needless real "gnomic" aorist is a universal or timeless
The
aorist
and prob-
ably represents the original timelessness of the aorist indicative.^ This aorist is common in Homer ^ in comparisons and general sayings. The difference between the gnomic aorist and the
is that the present may be durative.^ But general truths be expressed by the aoristic present. Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 109) compares this use of the aorist to the generic article. Winer^ denies that this idiom occurs in the N. T., but on insuf-
present
may
ficient grounds.
Abbott rather needlessly appeals to the " Hebrew influence on Johannine tense-construction" to explain k^\iidrj /cat It is a general k^ripavdr] (Jo. 15:6) after kav fxrj tls fiepri eu e/xot. construction here and is followed by three presents (aoristic). This is a mixed condition certainly, the protasis being future
"^
= Synt., p. 112. Gk. Gr., p. 436. Schmid, tjbcr den gnomischen Aorist der Griech., 1894, p. 15. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 278. W.-Th., p. 277. 4 Mom-o, Horn. Gr., p. 48 f. ' Joh. Gr., ^ Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 54. p. 327. 1
Hist.
J.
Cf.
TENSE (XPONOS)
(third class,
837
fulfilment).
r/yuap-
undetermined with some Hkehhood of

:
But
eSoâadr] (Jo. 1.5
8) is
:
possibly also gnomic.
Cf. Travres
Tou Kai vaTepovvrat (Ro. 3
23).
But
in Jo. 15
6, 8,
we may have
in
merely the "timeless"

tetus, IV, 10, 27.
aorist,
like orav deXys,
i^fj'XOes,
Epic-
adds,
what
and do not admit: "The genuine gnomic aorist appears

Gr., p. 124) so thinks
Radermacher {N. T.
to be foreign to the Hellenistic vernacular."
It survives in modern Greek, according to Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 436. Moulton (Prol, pp. 135, 139) admits it in N. T., but (p. 134) considers Jo.
15
6 the "timeless" aorist, like
aTroAotxrjv et
fxe 'Keipeis
in Eur.,
:
386.
There are other examples,

(13:48),
cb/iotw^r?
like Upvypev
(Mt. 13
44)
Ale, which is
followed by presents
e/3aXoj/
virayei, xcoXeT, rjyopaaeu
(13 :46), avveXeâv

ev86Ky]aa
(18:23), UaOtaau (23:2),
(Lu.
3:22),
kbiKaiiody] (7:35), k8i8aêv (Jo. 8:28), aveTciKev and the other aorists in Jas. 1 11, kaXecre eSoâcre (Ro. 8 30), k^-qpavdr}
:
:
kê-jreaev (1
Pet.
24;
LXX,
Is.
40
7).
It is true that the time-
less
is
53.
Lu.
Hebrew perfect is much like this gnomic aorist, but it common enough Greek idiom also. Cf. further Lu. 1 51It is not certain that evdoK-qaa (Mt. 3 17; 17: 5; Mk. 1 11; 3 22) belongs here. It may be merely an example of the
: : : :
timeless aorist used in the present, but not gnomic.

(f).
See under
Burton {N. T. Moods and Tenses,

it
p. 29) finds it difficult
and
thinks
(7)
originally "inceptive" (ingressive)

to the
Relation
Imperfect.
The
is
aorist
is
not used "instead
of" the imperfect.^

imperfects.
But the
aorist
often used in the midst of
the aorist and the imperfect.

imperfects
The Old Bulgarian does not distinguish between In modern Greek, aorists and 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 imperfect used as aorist, as in e/c tcju ISlo^v kxveL (kwoUi.) t6v jSw/jlov (Inscr. de la Syrie 2413=^), and heaa^yei^ for 5teo-d0?j(ras (P. Lond., XLII, Kenyon 30). But I venture to be sceptical. In both passages the imperfects
make
perfectly good sense.
Radermacher
urges the
be merely descriptive imperfect. I grant that it is "willkiirlich" in Herodotus (in 1214) to say Sie^^dpT/ mt TeKevra, as in Strabo (C 828) to have heXevTa StaSeSeKrat. It is "rein stilistisch," but each writer exercises his own whim. Winer^ properly remarks that it "often
common
use of krekevTa, but that
may
' Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 46; Leo Meyer, Griech. Aoristc, p. 97; Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 243; Moulton, Prol., p. 128. 'II;' may be either aorist 2 W.-Th., p. 27G. or imperfect.
838
depends on the writer" which tense he will use. Why "often"? not "always"? The presence of aorist, imperfect and past perfect side by side show how keen the distinction was felt to be.^ Blass- seeks to distinguish sharply between 'ekeyov and el-Kov, but with little success. The trouble, as already stated, is probably that eKeyov may be either aorist (like eKnrov) or imperfect. He admits that Thucydides introduces his speeches either with eXeye
Why
or eXeê.
Gildersleeve,^ like Stahl, denies
of tenses."
"an actual interchange In any given incident the speaker or writer may have
the choice of representing it in narrative by the aorist (punctiliar) or the imperfect (durative). An interesting example is found in Mk. 12 41-44.* The general scene is presented by the descrip:
e(9ewpet and the durative present âWeu by ttoXXoi e/3aXXof. But the figure of the widow woman is singled out by the aorist eâXev. The closing reference by Jesus to the rest is by the constative aorist Tavres eâXov. Note also the precise distinction between dx^v and efioXtv at the end. Where the aorist and the imperfect occur side by side, it is to be assumed that the change is made on purpose and the difference
tive durative imperfect

It is generalized
in idea to
be sought.
In juxtaposition the aorist
lifts
the cur-
and the imperfect continues the play. Cf. hvaraâv (ingressive, 'fell to nodding') and hdOevdov ('went on sleeping') in Mt. 25 5. So Tis /uov T]\paTo; Kai irepu^XkirtTo (Mk. 5 32), 'He began
tain
:
:
to look around because of the touch.'

yXcoaarjs avrov, Kai eXdXet op^cos (7:35).
See also k\W-n
6 Seands rijs
similar distinction ap:
pears in ayyeXoL
edidov (13
:
TrpoarjXdop Kai Si-qKOPOvv
avTu (Mt. 4
8); Kare^r] XatXai/'

TrepteTrdret
:
Kpaârrov ainov Kai
Kai avi>e7r\r]povPTO (Lu. 8 23); (Jo. 5:9); ave^r] Kai kblbauKiv (7

:
11); eweaev
rjpe
:
/cat
tov
14)
k^rjXdov Kai tKpavyaiov (12

airkOavtv.
13).
In Lu. 8
Once again note

:
eUafxev
Kai
.
53 note KaTeyekwv and

in 9
:
eKooXvofxev
:
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
In
Cor. 10
4 note Imov
'iwLvov;
will
in 11:23, irapedcoKa, Tape8i8eTo. The same sort of event be recorded now with the aorist, as ttoXu ttXtjOos rjKoXoWriaeu
:
24).
(Mk. 3:7), now with the imperfect, as rjKoXoWeL oxXos toXvs (5 Cf. Lu. 2 18 and 4: 22.^ But the changing mood of the
:
writer does not

other.
mean
that the tenses are equivalent to each
A
of
1
quency
word further is necessary concerning the relative freaorists and imperfects. Statistical syntax is interesting,
2
Gildersl., Synt., p. 114.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 192.

6
3 *
Am.
Jour, of Philol., 190S, p. 398.
Burton, N. T.
Moods and
Tenses, p. 30.
lb.
TENSE (XPONOS)
laborious
839
statistics to
and not always conclusive. Schlachter^ has applied Homer. In both Iliad and Odyssey the aorists in the indicative are more numerous than the imperfects. GilderJacobsthal {Der Gesleeve ^ found a similar result in Pindar. hrauch der Tempora und Modi in den kretischen Dialektinschriften)
finds the aorist surpassing the imperfect.
the imperfect
very abundant in has added statistics for other writers. "The imperfect divides the crown with the aorist in different proportions at different times and in different spheres.'"^ A further extended quotation from Gildersleeve^ is pertinent: "Not the least interesting is the
table in which Schlachter has
fessor Miller's
But Hultsch'' found Polybius, and Prof. Miller^
combined
it
his results
with Pro-
and from which
it
appears that the use of the aorist

finds its
indicative gradually diminishes until

in
low-water-mark
Xenophon.
Then
it
the aorist thrusts itself
more and more to
the front until
culminates in the N. T. The pseudo-naivete of Xenophon suggests an answer to one problem. The Hellenica has the lowest percentage of imperfects, but it mounts up in the
novelistic Kyropaideia.
The other problem, the very low pere.g. Matthew 13 per in the N. T. imperfect centage of the gingerly, and well approaches Schlachter 7 cent.. Apocalypse whose 46 per Josephus to contrast marked in he may. It stands
cent, of imperfects
shows the
artificiality of his style,
somewhat
as does his use of the participles {A. J. P.,
IX
154), which, accord-
ing to Schlachter, he uses
more than thrice as often as St. John's of the aorist indicative can predominance This Gospel (41:12). of the aorist impredominance the from dissociated be hardly perative in the N. T. (Justin Martyr, Apol I, 16. 6), although the
predominance of the aorist imperative has a psychological basis which cannot be made out so readily for the aorist indicative. Besides, we have to take into consideration the growth of the perfect and the familiar use of the historical present, which is
down in The personal

kept
109, XXVII 328)." St. Luke alone (A. J. P., equation, style, character of the book, vernacular
all
XX
or literary form,
come
into play.
It largely
depends on what
Stat. Unters. iiber
den Gebr. der Temp, und Modi bei einzelnen griech.
Schriftst., 1908.
2 *
Am.
Jour. of. Philol., 1876, pp. 158-1G5.

(1898). also L. Lange,
Ziel
6
Der Gcbr. der erziihlenden Zeitf. bei Polyb. Am. .Jour, of Philol., XVI, pp. 139 ff. Cf. und Meth. der synt. Porsch., 1853.
Gildersl.,
Andeut.
iiber
Am.
lb., p. 244.
840

is after.
ness, the imperfect predominates.
aiming to describe a scene with vividOtherwise he uses the aorist, on the whole the narrative tense par excellence} "Hence the
the writer
If
he
is
aorist is the truly narrative tense, the imperfect the truly descrip-
tive one;
(5)
and both may be used

to
of the
same transaction."
after
Relation
the
Past Perfect.
It is rather shocking,
Winer's protest that the tenses are not interchanged, to find him saying bluntly: "In narratives the aorist is used for the pluperfect."^
Burton* helps the matter by inserting the word "Eng-
Winer meant "German pluperfect." by using "translated." "We often translate the aorist by a pluperfect for the sake of clearGoodwin^ adds more exactly that the aorist indicative ness." merely refers the action to the past "without the more exact That is the specification" which the past perfect would give.
lish" before "pluperfect."
Gildersleeve^ does
much
better
case.
The speaker
or writer did not always care to
make
this
more
precise specification.
He was
content with the mere narra-
we moderns Hke. back into the Greek We All that one is entitled translation. German aorist our English or the context "imoccurs where sometimes the aorist to say is that in English we where main action,"^ the before completion plies prefer the past perfect. This use of the aorist is particularly common in subordinate clauses (relative and temporal and indirect discourse).* It must be emphasized that in this construction the
tive of the events without the precision that
are therefore in constant peril of reading
"The is not stressed in the Greek. Greeks neglected to mark the priority of one event to another, leaving that to be gathered from the context."^ Strictly therefore the aorist is not used for the past perfect. The Greeks cared In Mt. 14 3 it is plain that Urjaev and not for relative time. airkdero are antecedent in time to rjKovaev, verse 1, and direv in verse 2, but the story of the previous imprisonment and death In of John is introduced by yap in a reminiscential manner.
antecedence of the action
:
Mt. 2
9 Of eUov points back to verse

:
2.
Cf. also 6rt

:
h4)iiJ.o:aev
:
(Mt. 22 34)
ore eveiraLâv avTui, eêdvaav avTov (27
31).
So in 28 2
Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 158.
2 3 6
^ 8
9
" N. T. Moods and Tenses, ^ Synt. of Att. Gk., p. 109. W.-M., p. 343. Gk. Moods and Tenses, p. 18. Cf. Gildersl., Synt., p. 109. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 47. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 437. Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 76. Cf. K.-G., Bd. I, p. 169.
p. 22.
TENSE (XPONOS)
eyevero is antecedent to rjXdev in verse
1.
841
In 27
:
18 note in par-
ticular
dcjKeLffau
fi8et
OTL -KapkbwKav
and compare with
eyivwo-Kev 6tl irapade-
Here in verse 7). which Matthew did not care to make. In Lu. 19 15 we have oh 8e86:Kei, but tI duwpayfxaTevaavTo. Other examples where the antecedence is not expressed, though true, and the aorist is used, are kireXaOovTo (Mk. 8 14), tiretSriTrep
in
Mk.
15
10
(cf. otrcues TreTrotriKeLaav
Mark
did
draw the
:
distinction
krex^lprjo-av
(Lu. 1
:
1),
cos
kreKeaav (2
39),
:
CTretSi)
ojs
kirXripwatv (7: 1),
hedmaro
OTL
(8
27), a r]ToiiJ.aaav (Lu.

elrrev
:
24
1),
eyevaaro (Jo. 2:9),

cos
riKovaav
:
(4:1), ov
(4:50), kêvevaev (5:13),

6tl k^kâkov (9
:
tykvero
(6
16),
:
OTL avk^\t\pv (9
18),
35),
cos
ovov
VTrrivTrjaev
:
(11
oi)s
30 and note
eXrjXu^tt), ore ivi\pev
(13
12),
:
airk^riaav (21
9),
In matter Jo. 18 24, aTrkareCKtv ovv, the presence of ovv makes the If ovv is transitional, there would be no antecedence. less certain. But if ovv is inferential, that may be true, though Abbott contêXkâTo (Ac.
:
1:2),
oi)s
irpokyvo:
(Ro. 8
29.
Cf. 30 also).
the aorist "an aggressive tense, particularly in the active voice, where it encroached on the domain of the perfect, and all but supplanted the pluperfect."
siders
it
"impossible."^
Clyde^
calls
That is was one
true,
and yet
it
must not be forgotten that the
aorist
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 indicative (1 Cor. 4:8) 6(f>e\6v ye eâaCKevaaTe. A similar remark applies to use of the aorist indicative in conditions of the second
class (past time),
(Jo. 11
:
21).
without av in apodosis (Gal. 4 15) or with av In both cases in English we translate this aorist by
:
a past perfect.
(e)
Relation
to the
Present.
The
so-called
Dramatic Aorist
is
In Sanskrit this is the comhas just taken place.^ One what express to mon use of the tense indicative is not still aorist timeless or gnomic wonders if the action in the punctiliar for tense specific of absence a The older.
possibly the oldest use of the tense.
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
1
from
this usage."
The idiom appears
in
Homer and
p. 23.
is
Joh. Or., p. 336.
Cf. Burton,

*
2
6
Gk. Synt., p. 76. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 329. Giles, Man., etc., p. 498. "The
lb., p. 497.
aorist
is
time."
used not unconiinonly of present ^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 48.
842
found

chiefly in the
dramatic poets where a sudden change comes,^ It is a regular idiom in modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 123) as Teivaaa, 'I grew hungry/ 'am hungry still.' This aorist is used of actions
or in colloquial speech or passionate questions.^
which have just happened.
The
effect reaches into the present.
Moulton {ProL,
cry "E00aa-a."
p. 247)
quotes a traveller in Cos
who "had a
pleasant shock, on calling for a cup of coffee, to have the waiter
The English can
still
use a past tense in passion-
ate questions affecting the present.^
Moulton* speaks
of "cases
where an
adds:
aorist indicative
denotes present time," though he
"None of these examples are really in present time, for they only seem to be so through a difference in idiom between Greek and English." This latter statement is the truth. The aorist in Greek, particularly in dialogue, may be used for what has just happened. It seems awkward in English to refer this to past time, but it is perfectly natural in Greek. So we transFrom the Greek point of view late it by the present indicative. in the Greek. The examples English, not lies in the the peculiarity
N. T. are numerous enough in spite of Winer ^ to be worth noting. Moulton^ has made a special study of Matthew concerning the translation of the aorist. " Under the head of things
in the
'
just happened' come 9

Xevaev,
18 erekevTriaev (with apn), 5
28
;
kiiol-
and 14
12
:
15 waprjXdev
(j)6a<xev,
and 17 12
:
^Xê (with
rJSr?)
12 13
6.4)7] Kafxev,
28
14
2,
etc.,
riyepdrj,
16
17
aweKaXvrpe,
18
15
eKep87]aas,
20
12
eTroirjcrav
-as,
26 26
10
25,
ripyaaaTO,
26
eTTolrjae,
26
65
e/SXacrîy/iTjcrev,
riKOvaare,
64
edodr]
t7ras,
eiradou,
27:46
kyKaTeXiwes,
28:7
elwov,
28:18
27 19 (unless 11:
:
27 forbids) and perhaps

list
eyevrjdr]."
Certainly this
is
a respectable
Matthew. Add eixepiadr] (Mt. 12 :26). These all can be translated by the English 'have.' EvdoKrjaa (Mt. 3 17 and parCf. 6v evboK-qaev allels) is a possible example also. \pvxh ij-ov It is a "timeless" aorist^ and may be gnomic, (12 18, LXX).
for
:
17
as already pointed out.

â.p.r]v
Cf. 2 Pet.
17;
Mk.
10
20, 0uXa-
Ik rrjs veoTtiTOs; eêaTT] in
Mk.
21;
ciTex^L, rjXdev
TrapaStSorat
:
(14 are
41).
rjyepdTj,
Other examples of the aorist for what has just happened kireaKel/aro (Lu. oiiK eariv w5e (Mk. 16:6); rjykpQt]
16); iiydpaaa, eyrjixa (14

kpu/S?/
18-20);
Hwev,
evpWr) (15
32)
eyvuu
(16:4);
1
(19:42); outws
ijyepdr]
(24:34);
^
irpoaeKvvrjaau (Jo.
p. 278.
Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses,

Prol., p. 134.
p. 18.
W.-Th.,
2
3
Prol., p. 140.
Moulton,
Prol., p.
134
f.
TENSE (XPONOS)
4 :20);
843
i^KOvaas (11 :42); a.Trj\dev (12 :19); ri\dov els ttjv (hpav ravrrjp
:
(12 :27); ^Xêi/ (13
1);
vvu eôâaOr] (13 :31),
Imt kdoâaa (17:4)

:
points backward,
possibly gnomic;
'I did glorify thee,' while eooâaOr] in 15
eTrtdaare vvu (21
10); k8ov\ojaa, eyevojjLrjv (1
8 is Cor.
:
19, 20, 22.

:
Cf. ttoiw in verse 23); eireaev, eweaeu (Rev. 14

this use of the aorist adverbs of time are
8;
18
to
2).^
With
common
tJStj
make
clear the present relation of time.

(Jo. 21
:
Cf. tovto
tp'ltov
k(t>avep(^d-q
action forward.
present see
ecrxes,
B.G.U. 287
eyvco, eyvoiv
(a.d.
14) where tovto has the effect of bringing the For a sharp contrast between the aorist and So Wvaa Kai d^t[(i], Kai vvv ov ex^Ls (Jo. 4: 18). See in particular Cf. also Lu. 10:24. 250).
and eyvwaav
in Jo. 17
25.
The
:
timeless aorist
t6v
is
well
illustrated in the participle in Lu. 10

TctabvTa.
18, ededopovp
I,aTavav
The problem just here is not (f) Relation to Present Perfect. whether the present perfect is ever used as an aorist. That will be discussed under the present perfect. If the distinction between the two tenses was finally ^ obliterated, as early happened But that in Latin,^ there would be some necessary confusion. has not happened in the N. T. period. Jannaris^ notes it reguIt is undeniable that the early Sanskrit larly about 1000 A.D. used the aorist chiefly for ''something past which is viewed with reference to the present" and it disappeared before the growth of the other more exact tenses.^ The perfect may be said to be a
development from the aorist, a more exact expression of completed action than mere "punctiliar" (aorist), viz. state of comBut in the Greek the aorist not only held its own with pletion. the other tenses, but "has extended its province at the expense of the perfect," particularly in the N. T. period, though different But was the aorist used "for" the writers vary greatly here.*' perfect? Clyde ^ says: "The aorist was largely used for the perWiner ^ rephes: "There is no passage in which it can be fect."
certainly proved that the aorist stands for the perfect."
sleeve'-'
Gilder-
more
correctly says:
"The
aorist
we should expect the
perfect,"
i.e.
very often used where in English. But the transis
Cf.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 135.
Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 78. Still, in Lat. the aorist must be noted for sequence of tenses. Cf. Mcillet, L'Aoriste en Lat., Revue de Phil., 1897, p. 81 f. 4 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 437. Cf. Hatz., Kinl., p. 204 f.
'
Whitney, Sans. Gr., pp. 298, 329. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 199. Gk. Synt., p. 78.
W.-M.,
p. 344.
Synt., p. 107.
844
NEW TESTAMENT
lation of the aorist into English will call for special discussion a
What is true is that the action in such cases "is regarded as subordinate to present time,"^ in other words, the precise specification of relative time which we draw in our English perfect is not drawn in the Greek. The Greek states the simple undefined punctiliar action in a connection that suggests present time and so we render it in English by our " have."^ But Farrar^ is right in insisting that we do not explain the Greek tense by the English rendering. In truth, the examples given under the head of "Relation to the Present" (e) may often be rendered by the
little later.
tolerable accuracy.* Sometimes the use an adverb or particle helps the English. The examples are rather numerous in the N. T., as in the papyri,^ where the aorist and the present perfect occur side by side. Thus x^p'i-^ S^v aireypa\paii7]v Kol ireTrpaKa, O.P. 482 (ii/A.D.) rrjs yevoiJ.vr]s /cat aTOTeireiJ.iJ.kpr]s yvpaiKos, N.P. 19 (ii/A.D.). Moulton adds: "The distinction is very clearly seen in papyri for some centuries." In most instances in the N. T. the distinction is very sharply drawn in the context, as in 6tl erd^r?, /cat otl ey-qyeprai (1 Cor. 15:4). So eKTladrj, eKTiarat (Col. 1 In most instances where Cf. Ac. 21:28. 16). we have trouble from the English standpoint it is the perfect,
of
; :
Enghsh "have" with
not the aorist that occasions

13 :46).
perfect*.
it,
as in
irkivpaKiv
/cat
rjyopaaev
(Mt.
We
As a
shall
come back
is
to this point under the present

is
rule all that
needed
little
imagination on the
part of the English reader to sympathize with the mental alertness

expressed in the changing tenses, a sort of
"moving picture"
/cat
arrangement.
eTreXaOeTo
Cf. Kanvbriaev yap eavTOV Kai

rjv
( Jas.
o.ireKiiKvdev
eWtuis
dTo2os
24)
The
single point to note con-
cerning the aorist in those examples where

(Lu. 5
we use "have"
/caXecrat
is
that
the Greeks did not care to use the perfect.

Xecrat diKaiovs
:
Cf. ovk eXrjXvda Ka6t/catous
32) with ov yap fjXdou
(Mt.
two ways of regarding the same act. That is the whole story and it is a different thing from saying that the aorist is used "for" the present perfect. Here are some of the most interesting examples in the N. T. where "we" in English prefer "have": riKovaaTe (Mt. 5 21); evpov (8 10); avkypccre
9: 13), just
: :
(12
1
3); ewaxi'vOrj
/cat
yjKovaav
/cat
emp-p-vaav (13
15,
LXX,
Is.
10.
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 48. Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses, the N. T., p. 24. Gk. Synt., p. 125. Moulton, Prol., p. 140.
*
p. 18; P.
Thomson, The Gk. Tenses
in
lb., p.
142
f.
TENSE (XPONOS)
845
Likely enough the timelessness of the Hebrew perfect may have caused this translation into the aorist so common in the LXX),
TjKvpcoaaTe
(15:6); avveêvêu (19:6); aveyvoore

:
otl
KaT-qpriaoj
:
(21:
16); CKprjKare (23
23); KarkcTrjaev (24

:
45); kiroirjaeu (27

:
23)
';
riyepdrj
:
(28
36.
6); kêarr,
(Mk. 3
21)
cnredauev (5
35;
cf. ri
en aKhWeis] 5
:
Cf. aXXd Kadevdn);

:
eldafxeu
:
(Lu. 5
26); irapeSoOr] (10

:
22); rjpapTOV
:
(15
21); eyvcâav (Jo. 7
26);
d0^/c6j/ (8
29); IXaôv (10

:
18);
Uuâ
:
(10
(13
32); kboâaa (12

18); riyairrjaa (13
28.
:
Cf. So^dcrco); 'hâ (13

:
14); eêXe^d^Tji'
3);
^pav
Abbott remarks, that the Greek perfect does not lay the same stress on what is recently completed as does the English "have." Cf. also ovk
:
Wr]Kau (20
Jo. 4
:
34); eyvcopiaa (15

:
15); ovk tyvwaav (16
2)
cTLaaare (21
10) .^
Cf.
Mk.
14
8.
yvi>i (1
8.
Cf. 1 Cor. 8:3);
e(f)avepu:dr] (1
Jo. 4
9.
Contrast
margin, in
airecrToKKev
in verse
9 and
riyaTrrjKafxev,
rjyaTrjaafxep in
;
verse 10 with rjyaTTjaep and aweareLXev in verse 10)
eXaôp (Ph.
:
3 12)
:
efxaOov (4
11)
kKadiaev
(Heb. 1:3); k^karw^v (2 Cor. 5

is first
13).
The same event

and
is
is
in
Mk. 15:44
rjdr}
mentioned by
rjb-q
redvriKev
then referred to by
(or TrdXat) aTedavev.

is
The
distinction
not here very great, but each tense
pertinent.
However,
TfBvrjKiv
means
practically 'to be dead,' while
dTreâj/ei/^'died,'
'has died.'
(r?)
Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 108.
Epistolary Aorist.
This idiom
is
merely a matter of standIt is
point.
The
writer looks at his letter as the recipient will.
probably due to delicate courtesy 'and is common in Latin as well as in the older Greek, though less so in the later Greek.^,
The most frequent word so used was lypa\pa, though also common. The aorist has its normal meaning.
:
Tvep.â
wâs
One has
merely to change his point of view, and look back at the writer. In 1 Jo. 2 12-14 we have the rhetorical repetition of 7pd0co,
eypaipa (note the perfects after 6rt).
But
in 1 Jo. 2
21 eypa\pa
may
be the epistolary use, though Winer* protests against it. Here as in 2 26, ravra eypaxpa, the reference may be not to the whole epistle, but to the portion in hand, though even so the standpoint is that of the reader. Cf. also 5 13. In 1 Cor. 9
: :
15 also the reference

irpokyparpa kv oXiycp,
is
to the verses in hand.
In Eph. 3:3,
Kadoos
the allusion
may
is
be to what Paul has just

true of tTrearetXa (Heb. 13
:
written or to the whole epistle, as

22).
Certainly
:
ypa.4>oj
is
the usual construction in the N. T.

:
(1
Cor. 4
'
14; 14: 37; 2 Cor. 13

of these exx.
10, etc.).
''Ey paxjya
usually refers
Most
from Mt. come from Moulton,

*
Prol., p. 140.
2 8
Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 324.
Jann., Hist. Ck. Gr., p. 437.
W.-Th.,
p. 278.
846
to

epistle just finished (Phil. 19; 1 Pet. 5
:
an
12;
Jo. 5
13),
but even so the standpoint veers naturally to that of the reader. This is particularly so in Gal. 6:11 which probably refers to the concluding verses 11-18 and, if so, a true epistolary aorist. In
Ro. 15
15 the reference
may
be^ to another portion of the
same
Cor. 2
epistle or to the epistle as
a whole.
eirfx\pa is
:
In
Cor. 5:9, 11,

in
eypa\}/a refers
:
to a previous letter, as seems to be true also in 2
3, 4, 9; 7: 12;
3 Jo.
:
9.
But
found
:
undoubted
:
instances as in Ac. 23
30; Eph. 6
22; Ph. 2
in Text.
28; Col. 4
8.
So
avTreijL\pa
in Phil. 11
and
riôvK-qd-qv
Rec. 2 Jo. 12.
Curiously enough Gildersleeve^ says:

[Ep. aor.]
cited."
is
"The
aorist in the
clearly
due to
Roman
is
influence,
and
The
epistolary aorist
Cicero's Letters), probably because of our having
more common more
N. T. not to be in Latin (cf.

is
epistolary
Cf.
material.
ere/ii/'a,
The idiom
occurs often enough in the papyri.
B.G.U. 423 (ii/A.D.), eypaxj/a vrrep aiirov prj idoTOs Ypd/x/xara, P.Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66). There is therefore no adequate reason for denying its presence in the N. T. examples above. The future was probably (cf. Brug{&) Relation to the Future. marm, Griech. Gr., p. 480) a late development in the language, and other devices were at first used, like the present indicative,
the perfect indicative, the aorist subjunctive.
tive
The
aorist indica-
one of the expedients that never quite disappeared. It is not exactly, like the epistolary aorist, a change of standpoint. It is a vivid transference of the action to the future (like the present epxomi-, Jo. 14 3) l^y the timeless aorist. The augmented form is still used, but the time is hardly felt to be past. This idiom survives in the Slavonic also.^ It is a vivid idiom and is still found in modern Greek.'* Thumb (Handb., p. 123) cites /ct av p.k aov(3\i(7eTe, evas TpaLKos exadr], even if you impale me only one Greek perishes.' Radermacher (iV. T. Gr., p. 124) cites from
also
:
was
'
Epictetus, orav OeXys,
e^7]\6es.
Gildersleeve^ calls
it
it
"a
vision of
the future."
Burton*' considers
"rather a rhetorical figure than
a grammatical idiom," but the idiom is not so strange after all. Cf. Eur., Ale, 380, a.TroAbp.T]v el fxe \ei\l/eis='I perish if you leave me.* The examples are not numerous in the N. T. and some Cf. kav aov aKovaj}, kKepBriaas t6v abe\4>bv of them may be gnomic. aov (Mt. 18 15. Cf. xapdXa/Se as the next apodosis in verse 16
:
and
1
eoTco
in verse 17); tav Kal
ya/jLTjays,
ovx
riixaprt^ (1
Cor. 7
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 499.
p. 194.
< ^
2
3
Synt., p. 128.
Giles,
Manual,
gynt. of Attic Gk., p. 114. N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 23.
TENSE (XPONOS)
28); orav fieWn cakTriûv, Kal eTeXeaOr] (Rev. 10
eav
nrj
:
847
7),
tls
fxevy
kv
eixoi,
e^XijOr]
/cat
k^r]pa.v6i]
(Jo.
probably also 15 6), though

:
be merely gnomic, as already stated. Cf. the use of 26, 28 in a condition of the efxepiadt] and e(t>da(rev in Mt. 12 (twice) is explained (verse tboâad-q In Jo. 13 31 present time. 32) by 5o|do-i koI eWvs So^dcrct. The special use of the aorist indicative (t) Aorist in Wishes. in wishes about the past and conditions determined as unfulfilled
this
: :
may
will
be discussed in chapter XIX, Modes. Where so much variety is (k) Variations in the Use of Tenses. In modern English we be expected. is to freedom possible, great
make
a point of uniformity of tense in narrative.
The Greeks
say no
almost
made a
point of the opposite.
It is jejune, to
more, to plane downi into a dead level the Greek spontaneous In Matt. 4:11, Cf. ritxaprov koL varepovPTaL (Ro. 3 23). variety.
:
for instance,
StrjKovovv
airekB6iv,
we have
,
a<plT](nv
(historical pres.), Trpoarikdov (aor.),

:
(imperfect).
iz'eir
In Mt. 13
45
f.
note
karlu, ^r]TovPTi, vp6)v,
paKtv
elx^v, rjyopaaev.
"When
is
fact, or to
convey a meaning, there
they wished to narrate good ground for holding
that they employed the tense appropriate for the purpose, and that they employed it just because of such appropriateness."^
That is well said. The explanation is chiefly psychological, not mere analogy, which is true of only a few tenses, especially in Janlate Greek (Middleton, Analogy in Syntax, 1892, p. 6). naris. Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 437, lays probably too much stress on "the terminal homophony of the two tenses" (aor. and perf.). The Greek aorist (X) Translation of the Aorist into English. ind., as can be readily seen, is not the exact equivalent of any tense in any other language. It has nuances all its own, many of them difficult or well-nigh impossible to reproduce in English.
Here, as everywhere, one needs to keep a sharp line between the Greek idiom and its translation into English. We merely do the
best that
we can
in
English to translate in one

,
way
or another
the total result of word (Aktionsart)

successful ^vith the
context and tensc.^
Cer-
tainly one cannot say that the English translations
have been
Greek aorist.^ Weymouth in his Neiv Testament in Modern Speech has attempted to carry out a consistent Moulton* has thought the matter principle with some success.
1
P.
Thompson, The Gk. Tenses Weymouth, On the Rendering
in the
N.
T., p.l7.
1894, p. 151.
*
Gk. Aorist and Thomson, The Gk. Tenses in the N. T.,

into Eng. of the
Perfect,
p. 23.
Prol., pp.
135-140.
848
NEW TESTAMENT
He makes
is
important enough for an extended discussion. that the Greek aorist is true to itself, however it
English.
clear
rendered into
instance,
'fell
Take
nves
tKOLiJLrjdrjaav (1
Cor. 15
6), for
asleep (at various times),'

asleep."
In Mt. 3 but 'warned' will

aorist in
it
"and so have fallen 7 vireSeLêv may be translated by 'has warned,' answer. The English past will translate the
explains,
Moulton
Greek
puts
clearly thus:
many cases where we prefer "have." Burton "The Greek employs the aorist, leaving the
context to suggest the order; the English usually suggests the
The Greek aorist takes no note of any interval between itself and the moment of speaking, while the English past takes note of the interval. The Greek
order by the use of the pluperfect."
and the English past do not exactly correspond, nor do the Greek perfect and the English perfect. ^ The Greek aorist covers much more ground than the English past. Cf. 5t6 eKXrjdr] 6 aypos eKeivos 'Aypos Mp-aTos ecos rrjs arnxepov (Mt. 27: 8), where the Greek
aorist
aorist
is
English perfect can render.

16
:
connected with the present in a way that only the See also ecos apTi ovk fiTr]aaTe (Jo.
24).
owTi
From the Greek point of view the aorist is true to its The aorist in Greek is so rich in meaning that the genius.
English labours and groans to express it. As a matter of fact the Greek aorist is translatable into almost every English tense
except the imperfect, but that fact indicates no confusion in the
Greek.^
The aorist of these (c) The Aorist Subjunctive and Optative. two "side-moods"^ may very well be discussed together. The two moods are not radically different as we shall see. There (a) No Time Element in the Subjunctive and Optative.^ is only relative time (future), and that is not due to the tense at
all.^
The subjunctive
is
future in relation to the speaker, as

is
is
often true of the optative, though the optative standpoint
then
more remote, a
sort of future
from the standpoint of the past.
As between the aorist and (/3) Frequency of Aorist Subjunctive. present in subjunctive and optative, the aorist is far more common.
For practical purposes the perfect
it is
may
be almost
left
out of view;
moods the action is either punctiliar (aorist) or durative (present). The contrast between point and linear action comes out simply and clearly here. It is just that
so rare.
As a
rule in these

lb., p.
p. 27.
3
2
*
24
f.
Thomspon, Gk.
Synt., 1883, p. xix.
Gildersleeve,
Am.

6
K.-G., Bd.
I,
p. 182.
Stahl, Hist.-krit. Synt., p. 171.
TENSE (XPONOS)
849
seen between the aorist and the imperfect indicative.^ In the classical Sanskrit the subjunctiveêxists only in a remnant of the first person, which is treated as an imperative, but it is common
In Homer (both Iliad and Odyssey) preponderance over the present (65 to 35 for the average between subjunctive and optative, about the same
enough
in the early language.^

is
the aorist
in great
for each).='
Gildersleeve'* considers the difference
due to the nature

in
of the constructions, not to
mere lack
of differentiation in the
early stage of the language.
The
subj.
is
more common
Homer
than in the later Greek and the aorist subj. is correspondingly abundant. There is no doubt that the aorist is gaining in the KOLvi] over the present in the subj., opt., imper. (Radermacher,
N. T.
r/Xtos
Gr., p. 123).
8vri
The
distinction
is
understood.
Cf. Aiexpts av
and axpi-s civ eirlKaipou 8oKfj (duration), I. G., XII, Radermacher cites also ottcos Xa/jLâvwcnv and ottcos Xaôiciv, 5, 647. oirws virapxri and tva 8o9fj from a Pergamum inscr., N. 13 (b.c. 300). He fears that this proves confusion between the tenses, and appeals also to the papyrus example tva ypd^co Kal 4)\vapr](T0} (Deissmann, Licht, p. 153). But there is no necessary confusion here. The modern Greek preserves clearly the distinction between punctihar and Hnear action in the subj. and uses the aorist and present side by side to show it (Thumb, Handb., p. 124). The situation in the N. T. is even more striking. Mr. H. Scott,
(aim)
Birkenhead, England, writes me that he finds only five present subjs. in Acts and one (13 41) is a quotation. In the Pauline Epistles (13) he notes 292 dependent aorist subjs. and only 30 dependent pres. subjs. Gildersleeve^ complains of Stahl's weari:
someness in proving what "no one will dispute." The point is is used as a matter of course unless durative (linear) action is to be emphasized or (as rarely) the completed state is to be stressed (perfect). But variations occur even here. Thus Abbott notes only two instances of the pres. subj.
that the aorist subj. or opt.
"^
2 *
8
Clyde, Gk. Synt., p. 82; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 298.
Schlachter, Statist. Unters., pp. 236-238. Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 245.
p. 194.
lb., p. 400. Joh. Gr., p. 370 f. But there is little point in these exceptions. Abbott rightly notes the variations in the major uncials between -lari and -l^v in
Mk.
1
:
43-47.
:
Mr. H. Scott
:
40; 9
47
(4 in aU).
finds kdv with pres. subj. also (W. H.) in ]\Ik. In Lu. he adds 5 12 (=Mk. 1 40); 10 G, 8, 10
: : :
{tav to
be supplied); 13
4 (=
3;
:
20 2S
:
(8 in all).
1.5
:
In Mt. he notes
:
.5
23; 6
bis; 2(3
22,
:
23; 8
Mk.
40); 10
13 bis;
14; 17
20; 21
21
24 49
:
35
(12 in aU).
But he makes 78
aor. subjs. with iav in the Synoptics.
850
with
aorist

kav in
NEW TESTAMENT
:
Mk.
/ii?
apart from
subj.
(9 45; 14 31) and two in Lu. (6 33; 19 31), and except changes with exw and dk\w. The
: :
:
in
the Synoptics
is
well-nigh universal with
kav.
John there is more diversity between the two tenses. "Most Greek writers observe the distinction between the aorist and present subjunctive, as Englishmen observe that between 'shall' and 'will,' unconsciously and without any appearance of But we have seen above deliberately emphasizing the difference. (2511) that John employs the two forms with great deliberateness, even in the same sentence, to distinguish between the beginning of 'knowing' and the development of it."^ Cf. Iva ^vC^Te koI yLVWffKTjTe (10 38) and el ravra olbare, luaKupLoi eare kav TroLrJTe avra (13 17), where the pres. is again used purposely. Note also John's Tt TTOLu^nev (6 28) and Luke's tI iroLTja-uiJLev (3 10). We need not fol-
But
in
low
all
the details of Abbott,^ but he has
made
it
perfectly clear
that John makes the sharp distinction between the aor. and pres. Cf. kav tls subj. that is common between the aor. and imperf. ind.
Tr)pr]crri
(Jo.
51)
and
kav Trjpoofiev (1 Jo.
2:3);
oTi av alrriai^Te (Jo.
14
13)
and
6 av andixev (1 Jo.
22).
But Paul
also
knows the
:
punctihar force of the aor. subj. Cf. dyuapTTjo-co/xe?' (Ro. 6 15) with kiTLfxevconev (6:1), where the point lies chiefly in the difference of
tense.
jjiT]
See also 2 Tim. 2

Cf.
is
5, kav 8e
mt
:
ad\fj tls, ov anâvovTai. kav
vofxl/jLus a6\i}ari.
Trotryre
in Gal. 5
17.
In deliberative quesas in hwjxev

r)
tions the aorist subj.
particularly
common,
:
/x?)
bCipev
(Mk. 12
occurs
14).
In
dpiivriv
ex^pev (Ro. 5
1)
the durative present
designedly
'
keep
on enjoying
.
peace already
made
(SiKaLOjOevTes)
Moulton (Prol,
:
peace with God,' the p. 186) thinks
that the aorist subj. in relative clauses like 6s av (jiovemr] (Mt. 5 21), or owov kav Karaka^ji (Mk. 9 18), or conditional sentences
:
like kav aa-Kaa-qade
(Mt. 5
Cf.
47) "gets a future-perfect sense."

is
But
one doubts
aorist subj.
if
after all this
into the Greek.
Mt. 5
31.
:
not reading English or Latin The special construction of the

:
wth
ob fiv (Jo.
35; 18
11)
comes up
for discussion
elsewhere.
(7)
Aktionsart.
The
three
kinds of
point-action occur,
of
course, iruthe aorist subj.

aorist is
kav
fir]
Thus
in IVa fxapTvprjar] (Jo.
1:7) the
:
merely constative, as
nkvy kv
kpLol
is kav fjLelvrjre kvk/jLol (Jo.
15
7).
Cf.
TLS
(15
6).
is
In Jo. 6
30, Iva Ibup-tv Kal

xto-Tcuo-coyuei/
'
inaTemwto beko.l
fikv aoL,
the ingressive use
evident in
= come
:
lieve' (cf. tva irLaTevrjTe in verse 29). ayaTiofxev (1 Jo. 3 :23);

1
Cf. also tva irL(XTevcrunev
TrepLiraTriao:fj,ev
(Ro. 6:4; 13
^
13).
The
lb., pp.
369-388.
TENSE (XPONOS)
effective aorist is seen in
Karap'/rjai] (1
ttcos
851
(Mt. 26
:
TrXr/pw^coati'
54).
Cf. orau
Cor. 15
24) for the "perfective" use of the prepo-
sition
also.
AJxtionsart
(5)
In the modern Greek the (Thumb, Handb., p. 124).
aorist subj. preserves
inally
It seems clear Hhat origboth in Sanskrit and Greek prohibition was expressed only by the subj. Hence the growth of the imperative never finally displaced it. In particular the aorist subj. held its place in prohibitions as against the aorist impcr. (a late form anyhow). This In the N. T. distinction has held in the main right on through. examples of the aor. imper. in prohibitions do occur in the third person, but the aor. subj. is the rule. In the second person the rule is still absolute. Moulton^ has given a very interesting dis-
Aorist Subjunctive in Prohibitions.
cussion of the development of the discovery of the distinction The aorist subj. is of course between the two constructions. Inasmuch as the propunctiliar, and the present imper. linear. hibition is future, the aorist subj. would naturally be ingressive. Gottfried Hermann long ago made the distinction, but one day a few years ago Dr. Henry Jackson tells how he got the idea from a friend (quoted by Moulton^): "Davidson told me that, when he was learning modern Greek, he had been puzzled about the distinction, until he heard a Greek friend use the present This gave him the imperative to a dog which was barking. and immediately stumbled Plato's Apology, clue. He turned to 'before clamour instance, 20 E, dopv^-qar^re, excellent upon the " This disbegun.' 21 A, dopvêtre, 'when it has begins,' and firj punctiliar aorist subj. and in harmony with the is clearly tinction It is maintained in ancient Greek the durative present imper. Greek, and Moulton^ shows how the papyri abunmodern in and dantly illustrate it. Unfortunately the present imperative is rare in the papyri from the nature of the subject-matter, but the few examples agree to the distinction drawn. The aorist subjunctive Moulton (JProl., p. 123) finds in O.P. (all is abundant enough.
/jlyj
ii/A.D.) six aorist subjs.
with
/jltj
JU17.
Thus
ixi] a.ij.e\-f]aj]s
refers to a re-
quest in a
letter.
Cf also
.
dXXcos
Trotijcrps,
6pa
ix-qdevl
irpoaKpohaiis.
ovv
nrf
ixii
But TovTo fiij X7, O.P. 744 (i/B.c), is in a letter in reference to what had already been said. So î?) aycovia, 'don't go on worrying.'
Another good example
avTov.
is
in
it
fxri
Moulton
clinches
Hb.P. 56 (iii/s.c), av by the modern Greek

ypaypus (to
Gr., p. 240.
kvbx^n
ypcKpjjs (to
one already writing) and

1
one who has not begun).

lb., p.
Monro, Horn.
Prol., p. 122.
122
f.
852

distinction
NEW TESTAMENT
But the is not admitted by all modern scholars.^ mainly in the use of the present imperative, not in the aorist subj. Examples like ^117 davfxaajjs (Jo. 3:7) do occur, where the thing prohibited has begun. Here it is the constative aorist rather than the ingressive which is more usual in this Moulton^ quotes Dr. Henry Jackson again: "M17 construction. Spaans always, I believe, means, *I warn you against doing this,' 'I beseech you will not'; though this is sometimes used when the thing is being done; notably in certain cases which may be called colloquial or idiomatic, with an effect of impatience, /x?) daviiaa^s, (fypovTLcrjjs, 'Oh, never mind!' /x?) SeLa'ifis, 'Never fear!' 'You mustn't be surprised!' " Add also p.r] (ô^rjdfis (Mt. 1: 20). But, as a rule, it is the ingressive aorist subj. used in prohibitions to forbid a thing not yet done or the durative present imper. to forbid the continuance of an act. The N. T. is very rich in examples of both of these idioms because of the hortatory nature of the books.^ Moulton^ finds 134 examples of ^117 with the pres. imper. and 84 of iii] with the aorist subj. In Matthew there are 12 examples of aii? with the pres. imper. and 29 of m^? with the
The
difficulty lies
/jltj
But these figures are completely reversed in the Gospel of Luke (27 to 19), in James (7 to 2), in Paul's Epistles (47 to 8) and John's writings (19 to 1). The case in Jo. 3 7 has
aorist subj.
:
already been noticed.

of
It
may
be said at once that the excess
examples of pres. imper. over aorist imper. is the old situation in Homer.^ In the Attic orators. Miller {A. J. P., xiii, 423) finds the proportion of ûi) Toiei type to /n? iroLrjaris type 56 to 44, about the same as that in the N. T., 134 to 84. In the N. T. this predominance holds except in Matthew, 1 Peter and Rev. (Moulton, Prol., p. 124). The aorist imper. was an after-growth, and yet is very common in the N. T. (and LXX) as compared, with the older Greek.^ In the Lord's Prayer, for instance, every tense is Gildersleeve remarks that the aorist suits aorist (Mt. 6 9-13). "instant prayer." But cf. Lu. 11:2-4. However, the point is
:
Cf. R. C. Seaton, CI. Rev.,

lb., p. 123.
Dec,
1906, p. 438.
Pfol., p. 126.
Mr. H. Scott properly observes that "the correctness of these figures will depend upon how a repeated jui? or yinjSe without a verb is to be counted. E.g. is Mt. 10 9 f. to be counted as one or as seven? The same
^
:
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

if
coxmted as
printed in extenso
as
of
separate sentences.
mi?
In that case Mt.
10 9
* '
f.
would count seven instances

6
with subj. aor."

lb.
Gildersl., Justin
Gildersl.,
p. 137.
Am.
MartjT,
TENSE (XPONOZ)
here that in the N. T., as a rule, the idiom gives
Cf.
fxri
853
little difficulty.
:
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 OrjaavplêTe (6 19), they were already doing it.' Note again yui) Score ^tvjSe j3a\riTe (Mt.
:
7: 6)
and
m'7
Kplvere (7: 1).

fJLT]
pare Lu. 3:S

fxrjde
ap^r]<jde
Xeynv.
With Mt. 3 9 î) 86^riTe Xeyeiv comBut in Lu. 3 14, p.y}btva dLaaeiarjTe
:
:
avKOipavT-qariTe,
we have the
at
constative aorist rather than the
if John spoke in Greek In Lu. 11 7, ût? iioi kottovs 7rapexe='quit troubling me,' while in Rev. 10 4, fx-qavTa'Ypa.\pj}s = 'do not begin to write.' (Cf. ijfjLeWov ypa(^Hv in same verse.) It is not necessary to labour the point. But in Mt. 6 25 we have /xj) 34, yui) ovv neptfxepLfjivare, implying that they were anxious; m 6 Once more, in Mt. txv7]ar]T, a general warning in conclusion. 10 26, note /xi) ovv cl)o^rjdrjTe avTovs, the warning against fearing
pres.
imper. (the soldiers were present,
to them,
more restrained
any
rate).
evil
men;
in 10
31,
is
/jlt]
m'7
ovu </)o/3tcr0e='quit
being afraid.'
In Jo.
In Jo.
Cf.
5:45, fxri doKelre, it in 2 Cor. 11 16,

:
implied that 'they had been thinking that';

tIs jue do^rj,
'no one did, of course,'^
43
uri
yoyyvêre
:
is
interpreted by kyoyyvôv
in verse 41.
In p.7] 86^ri (2 Cor. 52), 'they were weeping.' nil Kkalere (Lu. 8 the normal use of /jly] Cor. 16 11) 11: 16) and nv eôvdevqaji (1 person. A good with the third with the aorist subj. occurs
:
double example
('don't keep
salute').
occurs in
Lu.
in
cop-Q
10
4,
^177
/Jaardf ere
âWavnov
stop to
carrying'),
and
p.r]
txr]8eva
aairaarjade ('don't
In Col. 2:21
17, aKaOaprov
is
a warning to the Colossian

gnostic asceticism.
(Is.
Christians not to be led astray
2 Cor. 6 p.ri that the people were guilty,

:
aiTTeade,
if
In assumes ^ÂQ be followed as by Paul, but

the prophet
by the
52
11)
has
ixxj/rjade.
In Jo. 20
17,
(jltj
(xov aivTov,
Jesus indicates that
Mary must
and
ix-q
cease clinging to him.

(Jas. 5:12).
Cf.
fxrire bpLoajis
(Mt. 5
36)
dfjLvvere
As
to the present imperative fur-
word is necessary here. Moulton^ thinks that "rather strong external pressure is needed to force the rule upon Paul." John has only one case of fxt] with the aorist subj., and yet Moulton holds that all his uses of the present imper. fit the canon completely. The difficulty in Paul's use of the pres. imper. is due to the fact that the present tense It is sometimes punctiliar. There is an is not always durative. aoristic present imper. as well as an aoristic present ind. One
ther discussion belongs elsewhere, but a
of the imper. presents
1
is
merely exclamatory
p. 196.
(cf. aye,
^
Jas. 5:1).
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
Prol., p. 125.
854

:
Another, like 6pa with iJLT]8ed etirns (Mt. 8 4), is almost hke a "sort Besides, the Aktionsart of the of particle adding emphasis." ^ word comes into play. The word may have a punctiliar meaning or it may accent a special phase of linear action (iterative, cona-
Hence the answer^ to /xt) iroieL, which usually =' Stop be in a given case='Do not from time to time,' 'Do not as you are in danger of doing,' 'Do not attempt to do' or simply 'Do not do' (aoristic present). In Eph. 5: 18 fxri fjiedvaKeade may mean that some of them were getting drunk (cf. even
tive, etc.).
doing,'
may
at
the Lord's
Table,
Cor. 11:21),
or
course of action
:
25) be prohibited. in dpyiêade). So implied (cf. the imminent peril of sin may be present, though the aoristic have 9) we may jui) \l/ev8e(x9e (Col. 3
(the habit)
may
In
^n)
anapraveTe (Eph. 4
the usual linear notion
is
pertinent.
But
:
cf.
,3
jut)
dneXec (1
/xi)
Tim.
cos
14),
ixr]8evl
kinTiQeL
:
and
ix-qde
KOivwvei (5
22)
and
yiveade
16), where the verb accents the ingressive oi vTTOKpLTai (Mt. 6 idea. In the modern Greek "as a prohibitive the aorist subj. is on the whole less commonly used than the present" (Thumb,
Hatidb., p. 127).
M17 with the present imper. survives in a
few
the
instances, but
the subj. in
modern Greek does

oii ixrj.
practically
all
work
(e)
of prohibiting.
Aorist Subjunctive with

here, not the
It is
merely the tense that
calls
for
comment
mode nor
the negative.
The present
was sometimes used with ov ni] in the ancient Greek, but no examples occur in the N. T. The aorist is very natural as the Of the 100 examples of oh nij in action is distinctly punctiliar. aorist subj., 14 arc future inds.'' with the the W. H. text, 86 are (Mt. 5:20); oMrc ov p.7] ttIco (Mk. 14:25). Cf. ou fxri ei(7eX07jre
subj,
The other
(f)
aspects of the
subject
will
be discussed elsewhere
in
m')
(chapters on Modes and

Aorist Optative.
Particles).
It is
more frequent than the present

rarity of the optative itself.
the N. T.
This
Gal. 6
:
is
partly due to the relative frequency of
yhoLTo
(cf.
14)
is
and the
1
The
distinction of tense
preserved.
Cf
/xrjSeis cttayoL
(ingressive,
Mk.
:
11:14);
Tr\r]dvvBdi]
(effective,
Pet. 1:2);
Karevdvvai
irXeovaaai
16, Kal TrepLcraemaL (constative, 1 Th. 3: 11 f.). Cf. 8ur] (2 Tim. 1 occurs aorist The wishes. are These 16. 4 Tim. 2 Cf. 18).
:
also with the potential opt. as in
Ac. 26
29.
Cf. t'l av iroL-qaaLev (Lu. 6:11). In the N. T. certainly the optative usually refers to
is
the future (relatively), though Gildersleeve^

1
willing to
'
admit
Moulton,
Prol., p. 124.
lb., p.
125
f.
lb.
lb., p. 190.
Am.
TENSE (XPONO2)
that
past.
(d)
855
ai'
Homer
The
The
it is
uses the potential opt. with

Imperative.
is
opt. in indirect questions has to
a few times of the be noted.
Aorist
as already stated,
not so
In Homer the aorist imperative, common as the present, while in the

generally,-
N. T.
is
remarkably frequent. ^
kolvt]
characteristic of the
This frequency of the imper. 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 punctiliar (aorist)
and the durative
(present)
is
quite marked.^
In-
"the essential character of aorist action, therefore, we must start with the other moods" than ind. It is easier, for the time element is absent. deed Moulton {Prol,
p. 129) holds that to get at
Cf. xeptjSaXoO to InaTLov aov Kal aKoXoWei /jlol (Ac. 12 8). It is exactly the distinction between the aorist and imperf. ind. (cf.
:
eêXewj/ rjKoXovdeL in
verse
9).
The
constative aorist, xept/SaXoO,
is
:
like the
precedmg,
^coaai. Kal virbb'qcfai. to. aavBaXLo. aov.
In Jo. 5
note apov Tov KpaâTTov aov /cat TreptTrdret (the ingressive aorist and the durative, 'walking,' Svent on walking'), and the same tensedistinction
is
preserved in verse
9
:
9, rjpe
Kal
irepu-KaTiL (cf
further
aoristic
5:11).
In
i;7ra7e v'âL (Jo.
7)
the present 2
:
i'TraTe is itself
(cf. cTetpe
Ipov in 5:8).
:
Cf.
Mk.
9, 11.
In the midst of the
aorists in Jo. 2
5-8 (the effective

stands out.
feast.
TroL-qaare, yefxiaare, avrXriaaTe vvp)
the present
offer to the
(tikpere
master of the
probably a polite conative In the Lord's Prayer in Mt. (6 9It is

:
11)
note
ayLaadr]TCO, yevrjd-qTCO, 86s, a0es
and daeXde
Tpoaevâi
:
in
6:6. In opposition to 56s arinepov in Matthew we have 8l8ov to 3, a fine contrast between the punctiliar KaO' rtp-'epav in Lu. 11 and the linear action.'' So tw aWovvTi 86s (Mt. 5 42) and tuvtI alTovvTi 8i8ov (Lu. 6 30) xo-PVTe h eKelvrj ttj vixepa (Lu. 6 23) and
:
:
:
Xaipere (Mt. 5
12); apare raOra ePTevdeu,

:
/X17
Troietre
(Jo. 2
16,
very fine illustration). In Ro. 6 the tenses is drawn, nr]8e irapiaTaveTe rd
13 a pointed distinction in
/xeXrj
vp-dv oirXa a8iKias
tjj
forbidden, anapTiq., oKXa TrapaaTrjaaTe iavTovs (one the habit of sin also vvv Cf. enjoined). the other the instant surrender to God
1
Gildersl.,
Am.

6
f.;
Apr., 1909, p. 235.

lb., p.
I
*
449.
Prol., p. 173.
Thomson, The Gk. Tenses

Moulton,
Prol., p. 129.
in (lie
N. T.,
p. 29.
Moulton,
856

:
irapacTTriaaTe in
Tropeverai, ttoIt]verse 19. In Lu. 7 8, Kopehdr]TL the ind. the As with aoristic. are also presents the aovKoiei, word. with durative So iieivare a used be may (constative) aorist durative in itself, is action, The 15 (Jo. 9). kv Ty ayaTj] rfj kfxfj
:
treated as punctiliar.
juer'
Cf.
Mt. 26
38, fxelvare
o:8e Kal
ecos
ypriyopeLTe
irapovaias
:
enov
(Mk. 14
:
34).
7571'
:
So with
naKpodufxriaare
(f)v\aôv (1
rrjs
Tim. 6 20. Cf. 2 Tim. 1 14; 1 Jo. 5 21); raOra irapaOov (2 Tim. 2:2); awKaKoCf. the aorists in Jas. 4 9. 15). Tradrjaov (2:3); (xwovSaaov (2 Most of them call for little comment. Cf. Jo. 4 16, 35. AbTov Kupiov (Jas.
5:7);
irapadijKtû
bott^ notes the avoidance of the aorist imper. of Tnarevoj, possibly because mere belief (aorist) had come to be misunderstood. The
pres.
imper. presses the continuance of faith
(cf.
Jo.
14
11).
The
real force of the effective aorist is seen in Xvaare tov vabv rov:
Tov (Jo. 2
19).
In
Mk.
is
15
32, KarajSaTca vvv, the "perfective"
force of the preposition
added.
Moulton^ notes that
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

delicately the distinc-
the differences in a
tion of tenses
way which shows how
was observed." There may be variations in the translation of the Aramaic original (if the Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Aramaic?), "but we see no trace of indifference to
the force of the tenses."
will prefer
a different tense.
In the imperative also different writers One writer is more fond of the aorist,
another of the present.
Note the impressive

:
aorists, apare tov
XWov, Xvaare avTOV Kal dêre avTOV vrayeLV (Jo. 11 39, 44). Abbott'* rightly calls the aorist here more authoritative and solemn than
the present would have been. The aorist here accords with the consciousness of Jesus (11:41, vKouaas). The aorist imper. occurs in prohibitions of the third person, like m'? yvoirw (Mt. 6:3);
KaTaâToo (24:17); All? eTL(XTpe\PaTco (24:18). occurs in ancient Greek, as nrjde ae KLvrjaaTw
/X17
This construction
tls,
Soph. Ai. 1180.

is
But
(e)
fjLT]
and the
aorist subj.
:
was
preferred.
:
In the N. T. this
rarely found (1 Cor. 16
11; 2
Th. 2
3).
is
The Aorist Infinitive. In Homer the durative (present) idea more common than the punctiUar (aorist) with the infini1
Joh. Gr., p. 319

Pro!., p. 174.
f.
'
lb.
Job. Gr., p. 318
f.
TENSE (XPONOS)
tive, as
inf. inf.
857
no time
in the
with the imperative.^
There
is,
of course,
except relative time in indirect discourse.

belongs elsewhere, but here
illustration
The
to
history of the
we have only
and the
do with the ex-
cellent
inf.
of punctiliar action afforded
by the
aorist
Radermacher
iJiriSe
finds the aorist
pres. inf. together in

iii/A.D.),
fjLr}5e
the Carthaginian inscr. (Audollent, 238, 29,

Xif
rpe-
TepLTaretv
fx-qSe
PLKrjaaL
ix7)be
kêkdelv.
So
in the papyri
I, 183, 25. The features of the tenses in the inf., once they are fully established, correspond closely to the use in the moods.2 As a matter of fact originally the inf., because of its substantival origin, was devoid of real tense-idea (Moulton, Prol.,
B.G.U.,
p. 204),
and
it
ciated with the
was only by analogy that tense-ideas were assoinf. But still the aorist inf. deserves a passing
15
'I.
:
word.
Take Ac.
37
f.,
for instance,^ Bapra/Sas be ejSovXeTo avp-
TrapaKaêiv kol top
tov koX. MapKov.
Here the constative
aorist
is
perfectly natural for the proposed journey.

IlaOXos be rjîov
But
see the outcome,
p.ri
(Jvvirapakap.âveLv
tovtou.
Paul was keenly
conscious of the discomfort of Mark's previous desertion.
He
(in-
was not going

(durative).
to subject himself again to that continual peril
Cf. also
Mt. 14
22, rjuajKaae tovs p.adt]Tas
e/jLîjuai
gressive aorist),
mt
irpoayeLv avrov (durative, 'go
on ahead of him').
oh bvvaaai
fxoL
An
interesting
example occurs
in Jo. 13
36
f.,
vvv
cLKoXovdrjaaL (ingressive aorist for
new
act); bta tL oh bvpafxaL aoi

is
oLKoXovdeLP
dprt (durative,
is
'keep on following,'
Peter's idea).^
bvpafiai, 8v-
The
For
aorist inf.
the predominant construction with
paTos, 0eXaj, KeXevu, etc.^

bvpap.aL see
:
The
distinction in tenses
:
is
well observed.
:
âardêLP (16
37, whereas Ibelp, elaeXdelp, yepprjSo with deXw note Xaê'tp (Jo. 6 21); TTtdo-at (7 44), but epwrdp (16 In Mt. 5 17 f. KaraXdcraL and 19). TrXTjpwo-at are effective, but aLyrjaac (Ac. 15 13) is ingressive, while aiTTJa-ai (Mt. 6 Cf Lu. 7 24 f The aorist inf. 8) is constative. is rare with /xeXXa' (aTroKa\v(pdfjpai, Ro. 8 18; Gal. 3 23, though cLTTOKaXhTTTeadaL in 1 Pet. 5:1). So 'i/j-eWop airoOapetp (Rev. 3:2). Cf. Rev. 3 16; 12 4. A good example of the constative aorist
and TntjTeheip John with bvpa/xaL only

are natural (3
:
:
27) and Xaêlp (14 17); and âardaai (Rev. 2:2); TrtcrreDcrat (Jo. 5 44) (12:39).^ Abbott notes also that woLrjaai. occurs in
further \ap.âpeLP (Jo. 3
12)
in Jo. 11
dfjpai
ff.).
Gilrlersl.,
Am.
Jour, of
I'liiloL, p.
244.
In Sans,
tlu- inf.
has no tenses at
Cioochvin,
all.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 204.
Cf. (iildersl., Synt., p. 133
f.;
Moods
f.
and Tenses,
*
p. 30.
Plato, Theat., 155 C, avev tov yiyvfadaL ytvkadai hbvvarov.

^
Moulton, ib., p. 130. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 361.
N. T. Gk., p. 196 Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 360 f.

Blass, Gr. of
858
inf.

occurs in Ro. 14
:
NEW TESTAMENT
is
21.^
The
aorist inf.
:
used with an aorist

irvp
as the
ind., ovk ^\6ov /caraXCcrat
(Mt. 5
17), the subj., dTcoixtv

OarpaL
KaTa^TJvai
(Lu. 9:54), the imper.,
a</)es
(Mt. 8:22).
But
the aorist
inf. is common also with durative tenses hke k^rirovi' ewdpaL (Lu. 18:13). There (Mk. KpaTTjcxaL 12:12); ovk ijdeXev in the N. T. of an aorist inf. used to instance no apparently is In Lu. 24 46, represent an aorist ind. in indirect discourse.^ avacTTrjvaL eK veKpdv, iraOelv Kal we have the yeypaiTTai ovTUS oTi usual timeless aorist, the subject of ykypawTaL. So fxri Ibetv (2 26).
In Ac. 3
18
iradelv is
the object of
ir poKaT-qy yeiXev.
and
pres. inf.
with prepositions vary a good deal.

:
The The
aorist aorist
:
occurs with nera (Mt. 26 32; Lu. 12 5, etc.), with -n-pd (Lu. 2 21; Jo. 1 :48); Trpos (Mt. 6:1); eh (Ph. 1 :23); and even with kp
:
sometimes (Lu. 2
Cf. 12). 27), but only once wth 5ta (Mt. 24 Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 49 f. The following are Mr. H. Scott's figures for the Synoptics
:
:
Articular Infinitive
t6
TENSE (XI'ONOS)
aorist appears in wX-npcoaavres (Ac. 12
irapaXaôuTes
(ib.).
:
859
aw-
25), the constative in
Further examples of the effective aorist are

14
:
irelaavTes rovs oxôvs Kal 'KLdaaavres tov llavKov (Ac.
19)
5i/caiaj-
dkvres
(Ro. 5:1).
The
constative
is
seen again in irapaSovs (Mt.

aorist participle in itself
is,
27:4); inaTevaavTes (Jo. 7: 39).
The
of course, merely punctiliar action. '0 and the Aorist Participle. (|S)
aorist part,
is
The
punctiliar force of the

It differs
well illustrated in this idiom.

in being a
bixvvei,
is,
relative (6s
+ verb)
ofioaas
more general
expression.
from the In Mt.

ante-
23
20
f.,
we have
identical
action, not
cedent.
The
aorist
strictly speaking, timeless (Burton,
Moods
and Tenses,
ceiver,' etc.
p.-69).
'0 6yu6aas='the swearer,' 6 Xa/3cbj'='the re-
Cf.
Seymour,
"On
the Use of the Aorist Part, in
Greek," Transactions of the Am. Philol. Ass., 1881, p. 89. In John the examples, however, are usually definite.^ Contrast 6 \aû}v
(Jo. 3
:
32)
ol
probably='the Baptist' with xas

aKovaavTes, ol TvoL-qaavrts
6 anohaas
ixaOccv
{<d
45)
and
(5:25,29).
'0
+ aorist
part,
may
ol
be used with any tense of the ind.

ea-tppayLaev,
Thus
(6
:
6 \a^<:ov in Jo.
32 occurs with
TTOL-qaavres (5
:
was
UKOvaas
28
f.)
with
is
eKiropevcxovTaL.
oi
Xaôvres fxaxaipav ev fiaxaipri airoKovvrai.

timeless.
It is
with epxerai, Cf. Mt. 26 52, iravTes In simple truth the

45)
:
aorist in each instance
not necessary to take
it
as = future perf.^ in
accOweraL
OVTOS.
(Mk. 13
Cf. 6 ypovs
Kal
an example like 6 vroixeivas els reXos ovtos So Mt. 10 :39. Note the resumptive 13).
/jltj
erocpaaas
:
fj
TOtrjaas bap-qaerai (Lu.
12
47).
Cf. Jo. 7: 39; 16: 2; 20

is
simple punctiliar action
which examples the alone presented in a timeless manner.

29, in all of
el prj
But
in Jo. 3
13, obbels avafik^-qKev els tov ovpavbv
/c
tov ov-
pavov KaTaâs, the content suggests antecedent action.
Cf. also
6:41, eyw
40; Jo. 5
is
:
elpi
6 apTos
KarajSds^;
top airoareiXavTa in
Mt. 10:
part,
15, 6 xotTjo-as;
Heb. 10
29.
'0
and the
aorist
sometimes used of an act past with reference to the time of writing, though future with reference to the action of the principal .verb.* This classic idiom occurs in the N. T. also. Cf.
'lovdas 6 'laKapLOjTTjs 6 Kal
wapaSovs avTov (Mt. 10:4;
cf.
:
also 27:3);
5).
usually the phrase
is 6
ivapaMohs (26
25; Jo. 18
2,
So
in
Ac.
16 both yevop'evov and avKkaôvaiv are future to wpoel-Ke. In Col. 1 8 6 /cat brfKdouas is future to epadeTe. So Jo. 11:2 (cf.
1
:
:
12
1
3)
rjv
be
Mapiap
rj
a\ei\l/aaa
tov Kvpiov pvpco Kal eK/idâaa tovs
Abbott, Joh. Gr.,
p. 363.
s
==
As Abbott (locH, Joh. Gr., p. 3G2. Goodwin, Gk. Mooda and Tenses,
p.
f.
Humphreys,
n,^ p 354 f_ CI. Rev., Feb.,
'91.
860

..
Cf Ac. 7 35 rod 64>6ePTOs, 9:216 iropdrfcras. This development, though apparently complex, is due to the very indefiniteness (and timelessness) of the aorist participle and the
TTodas avTov.
:
adjectival force of the attributive participle.
This is the usual idiom with the circumstantial participle. This is indeed the most common use of the aorist participle. But it must not be forgotten that the aorist part, does not in itself mean antecedent action, either relative or absolute.^ That is suggested by the context, the natural sequence
(7)
Antecedent Action.
of events.
As examples
of the antecedent aorist part,

se)
(ante-
cedent from context, not per
take vrjaTevaas
(27
:
4:2);
cLTreXdoiv
I8ibv
fiTaiJLeXT]dels
earpexl/ev
3)
pti/'cts
kireluaaev
(Mt.
djêx^pTjcrei',
These so-called antecedent aorists do verb in position in the senprincipal the precede not have to Kpar-qaas ttjs x^^P^s (Mk. 1:31), tvxo.avTrjv ^yeLpev Thus tence.
awrjyâTo (27:5).
piarovp-ev
17:31),
aKOvaavres (Col. 1:3, 4), Uadiaev yeuoixevos (Heb.
jueXXet
Kpiveiv
irapa(TX<^v
is
(Ac.
1:3).
This idiom
very
par:
common in the N. T. as in the older Greek.^ Indeed, one ticiple may precede and one may follow the verb as in Lu. 4
plxlâv
35,
e^7j\dev ^\a\pav.
In Ro. 5
(verse
:
In Heb, 6
10 the
aorist
is
distin-
guished from the present, heSdâade

dLUKOPovvTes.
bt-aKovrjaavTes
:
roh
aylois Kal
16, 81 evbs anaprrjcraPTos, there is

14).
a referitself
:
ence to
Adam
The
(1
principal verb
15).
may
be
future as in apas
IBXtjOeis is
In Lu. 23 19 rjv punctiliar periphrastic (aorist passive), rjv being aoristic

irotrjaco
Cor. 6
also.
Moulton {ProL,
:
p.
249)
cites
^v aKovaaaa
4, 54, 3,
(inscr. 18).
Cf. âav yevofxepoL in
Thuc.
from Pelagia tpapds in and

el'??
Herod. 3 27. See Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 125. It is so with the (5) But Simultaneous Action is Common also. Here again circumstantial participle as with the supplementary. It is simple enough with the suppleit is a matter of suggestion. mentary participle as in eXadop êpiaavres (Heb. 13 2), though rare, the present suiting better (cf. Mt. 17: 25). The usual idiom is seen in kiravaaTo Xakasp (Lu. 5:4). Indeed this simultaneous action
:
is
in exact
It is
harmony with the

a very
punctiliar
meaning
of the aorist
tense.
idiom (chiefly circumstantial) in the elwep (Mt. 2:8); N. T.3 as in the older Greek.^ So irkfixPas
common
1)
;
airoKpiBds elirep (22
T^fxaprop
p. 197;
wapadovs alfia
dUaioP (27 4)
:
av
1 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 166. 2 W.-M., p. 433. ' Moulton, Pro!., p. 131.
Burton, N. T.
Moods and
Tenses, p. 70;
Goodwin, Gk. Moods and Tenses,
p.
49
f.
TENSE (XPONOS)
re KoXcos eTrolijaas irapayevbfxivos (Ac. 10
:
861
;
33)
XfiVô-fxevos kTre<TTpe\J/ev
:
(27
3).
Cf. Ac.
24; Ro. 4
20; Hcb. 2
10.
It is needless
is
to press the point except to observe that the order of the part,
immaterial.
15
:
Note Ac. 10
33 above.
:
So
in auaou KarajSas
(Mk.
Lu.
(2
30)
rjXdap airevaavres
kjiapTvprjaev 8ovs
k-Kol-qaav
(Lu. 2
16.
Cf. aireiiaas
/card/Srj^t,
19:5);
(15:9);
to irvevixa (Ac.
15:8);
2).
bikKpLVtv Kadapiaas
airoaTdXavTes (11:30); kyKaTeXenrev

:
ayair-qaas
Tim. 4
10); eXd/Sere rtdTevaavTes (Ac. 19

is
of the part, after the verb
very
common
This construction in the N. T. The
coincident use of the aorist tense occurs also with the imperfect, as avvriXXaaaev eiirujv (Ac. 7:26), kinâkoiv eKkaitv (Mk.
14
72)
the present, as aTroKpiOeU Xeyet (Mk. 8
fect, as eKireT\ripo}Keu
avaaraTriaas
:
29)
the perfuture,
(Ac. 13
33)
and the
as KoXus
ToiriaeLs Tpore/jiâs (3
Jo. 6).^
In
many examples
only
exegesis can determine whether antecedent or coincident action

12, eiarjXeev cupd/xews (Moulton, Prol, So Moulton (ib., p. 131) notes elirovaa for antecedent and eiwaaa (BC*) for coincident action in Jo. 11 28. The coincident
is
intended, as in Heb. 9
p. 132).
aorist part, is
common enough
(i/ii
in
the ancient Greek (Gilderit
sleeve, Syntax, p. 141).

ceLs
The papyri show

a.d.),
also.
Cf. ev
toltj-
8ovs,
F.P. 121
a constant formula in the papyri
(Moulton, ProL, p. 131). Moulton {ih.) illustrates the obscure tTnôXicv in Mk. 14 72 by knôKuv awkxojcev Tb.P. 50 (b.c.),.
:
'he set to and
dammed
up.'
If it is coincident in
Mark,
it is
so
"with the
(e)
first
point of the linear eKXaiev."
Some
Subsequent Action not Expressed by the Aorist Participle. writers have held this as possible, though no satisfactory
examples have been adduced. Gildersleeve^ denies that Stahl succeeds in his implication. " Coincidence or adverbiality will explain the tense." Burton^ Hkewise admits that no certain instance of an aorist part, used to express subsequent action has been found. He claims the idiom in the N. T. to be due to "Aramaic influence." But we can no longer call in the Aramaic or Hebrew, alas, unless the Greek itself will not square with itself. The instances cited by Burton are all in Acts (16 23; 22 24; 23 35; 24 23; 25 13).
: : :
:
"In
all
these cases
it is
scarcely possible to doubt that the par-
ticiple (which is without the article and follows the verb) is equivalent to nal with a co-ordinate verb and refers to an action
>
Burton, N. T.
Moods and Tenses,
p. 65.
Cf Goodwin, Moods and Tenses,

.
p. 50.
^
Am.

p. 66.
862
NEW TESTAMENT
subsequent in fact and in thought to that of the verb which it follows."! This view is held by Prof. Sir W. M. Ramsay^ to
apply to Ac. 16
of that passage.
6,
and
is
in fact essential to his interpretation

:
12 25 and regards these instance urged is Ac. 21:14. Another examples as "decisive." is still unconGildersleeve^ all? after ''decisive" But are they notion "is not Greek" such a that says bluntly vinced. Blass*
Rackham^ adds Ac.
and even
refuses to follow the uncials in Ac. 25
13 in read-
Moulton^ refuses to ing aairaaaixeuoL rather than aairaaoixevoL. 12:25: "But to of Ac. interpretation his in Rackham follow
take avvTrapoKaôvTes in this
way
involves an unblushing aorist
of subsequent action, and this I been paralleled in the N. T. or
must maintain has not yet

outside."
6:
And, once more,
Schmieden comments on Ac. 16 that the participle must contain,

'they went'
(dLijXdov),
if
"It has to be maintained not something antecedent to

it,
at least something synchronous with to

it,
in
no case a thing subsequent

all
if all
the rules of
sure understanding of language are not to matter might safely be left in the hands of these three great grammarians. But an appeal to the examples will be interesting.
grammar and be given up." The
As
to Ac. 12
25, virkaTperJ/av
iv\y]p6)<TavTe% Tr]v diaKoulav,
(TVVTrapa-
XajSoires 'lc:avr}v, there is
no problem at all unless els be read rather than e^ or airo. It is true that {<BL read els, but that reading is contradicted by the context. In 11: 30 it is plain that Barnabas and Saul were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem, and in 13 3, 5, 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\aj36vTes coincident.
1
In 16
6, dLrjXdov de Trjv
^pvyiav Kal Ta\aTLKr}v
N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 66. Paul the Traveller, p. 212. Cf. discussion in The Expositor in 1894 and The Exp. Times, Aug., 1894. In The Exp. Times (1913) Ramsay has sought another interpretation of the passage without the notion of "subsequent" action. * Comm. on Acts, p. 183 f. * Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 408. Cf. also his Pindar Pyth., IV, 189.
2
St.
B
6
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 197

Prol., p. 133.
f.
Encyc.
Bibl., II, p. 1599.
TENSE (XPONOS)
XO}pa.v,
8G3
rfj
KoAvdhres
viro
is
rod ayiov irvevixaTOS XaXijcrat top \6yov kv
Paul was headed west for Asia, but, being forestalled by the Spirit, he turned farther north through "the Phrygian and Galatic region." Later he tried to push on into Bithynia, but the Spirit again interposed and he deflected northwest to Troas (16 7 f.). One is not entitled to make K0i}\v6evTes = Kal eKuiXW-qaav because of the exigences of a theory that demands that "the Phrygian and
'Aalq.,
the participle
naturally antecedent (or coincident).
Galatic region" be Lycaonia (southern part of the Roman province of Galatia), which had already been traversed (IG 1 f.).
:
Besides, the narrative in 16
6 seems to be not resumptive, but
a new statement of progress. Whatever the fate of the much discussed "South Galatian" theory, the point of grammar here
is
very
clear.
Another so-called instance

tc3
Secrûcoî^Xa/ct.
is
in 16
is
23, ejSaKov
els
<j)v\aKrjP,
TrapayyeiKaPTes
This
SO obviously a
case of coincident action that
but for
it would never have been adduced need of examples to support a theory elsewhere. Certainly "in 17: 26 oplaas is not 'later' than the eTrolrjaep in time" (Moulton, Prol, p. 133). Still worse is the instance in 21: 14, elTovres' ToO Kvpiov to 6eKr]fj.a yipefxri ireLOofxepov 8e avrov riavxaa-atxeu The participle is here necessarily antecedent or coincident adco. eiiras, So in 22 24, kueXevaep (this last remark of acquiescence)
. :
the participle
'Keyuip
is
:
coincident like the

11
f.;
common
:
avoKpiOeU divep.
Cf.
in
Heb. 2
Ac. 7 35.
: :
Precisely the
23,
of
e^f]
KeXevaas
in 23
35.
In 24
same thing is true diê/SdXero is expanded
by three coincident
:
aorist participles,
etScos
eiiras
dLaTaâfxepos.
^rjffTop.
There remains 25 13, KaT-qPTrjaap els Kaia-apiap dairaaafxepoL top Here Blass, as already noted, accepts the future aairaaoBut even so, if one nepoL, but the aorist is probably correct.
simply notes the "perfective" force of the preposition in KaTijPTr]cap, 'went down,' he will have no difficulty at all with the coinci-
dent action of the aorist part. KaT-fiPTrjaap is the effective aorist and accents the end (reinforced by /car-). 'They came dowTi saThe salutation took place, of luting' ('by way of salutation').
Findlay {in loco) conThus vanish into air the examples of "subsequent" action with the aorist part, in the N. T., and the construction is not found elsewhere. Moulton \vTp(l)(raaa. {Prol., p. 132) cites from the papyri, e^ o:p Swaets 2. nov TO. i/jidTLa 8p. tKaTOP O.P. 530 (ii/A.D.), a clear case of coincident action. The redemption of the clothes is obtained by paying the
course,
(/car-).
when they were "down"

with the
initial
nects
aair.
act of KaT-qpT-qaap.
iiundred drachmae.
864
(f)

Aorist Participle in Indirect Discourse (Complementary ParIt is a rare construction on the whole/ though more
a/couco.^
ticiple).
This aorist part, is abIt is another insolutely timeless, not even relatively past. stance of the coincident aorist part. So 6aa r]KomaiJ.ev yevofxeva
frequent with opdoj than with
(Lu. 4:23),
(10
:
Weupow
top Iâravap
cos
aaTpaTrrjv
e/c
tov ovpavov ireaovTa
18).
In
ireaovTa
we
:
have the constative aorist.^

eldov aarepa
ck
:
Contrast
ets the perfect in Rev. 9 1, avaâlvoPTa eUou aXkov 7 Rev. 2, TTjv yrjv, and the present in kv tw ovo/xaTi aov kKâXKovTa baip-bvia (Lu. (linear), and eibaixev
tov ovpavov Trexrw/cora
nm
9 :49).
Cf. elbev ai>dpaei(xe\96vTa Kai
kivLd'tVTa
(Ac. 9
:
12.
So in
10
3;
26
13);
ijKomafxeu hexdetaav
(2 Pet. 1
18).
PuNCTiLiAR (AoRiSTic) PRESENT (6 eVecrro)? ;^poVo9). The present tense is named entirely from point of time which only But a greater difficulty is due to the applies to the indicative. tense between punctiliar and linear the in absence of distinction
2.
action.
found in the indicative, since in the shown, the aorist is subj., opt., imper., always linpractically present so-called the and always punctiliar punctiliar. strongly itself is verb the of Aktionsart ear, unless the
This defect
is chiefly
inf.
and
part., as already
Cf. discussion of the imper.
But
in the ind. present the sharp
line drawTi between the imperf. and aorist ind. (past time) does not exist. There is nothing left to do but to divide the so-called Pres. Ind. into Aoristic Present and Durative Present (or PuncThe one Greek form covers tiliar Present and Linear Present). only gradually developed was present The ind." in the both ideas about e-<t>r]-v, whether aorist confusion the (cf. tense distinct as a
or imperf.).
The present is formed on punctihar as well as linear wise therefore to define the pres. ind. as denoting not roots. "action in progress" like the imperf. as Burton^ does, for he has
It is
to take
it
back on
calls
p. 9 in
the discussion of the ''Aoristic Present,"
which he
a ''distinct departure from the prevailing use of the present tense to denote action in progress." In sooth, it is no "departure" at all. The idiom is as old as the tense itself and is due to the failure in the development of a separate tense
for punctihar
the ind. of present time. 7Pa0", etc., in which the stem has the form generally found only in aorists ( 11, 31) may be
and
linear action in
(t>vtî,
"The forms
eitxl,
dixi,
ayo^,
Gildersl.,
Am.
^ Moulton, Prol., p. 134. Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 51. * Cf. Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 120 f.; Sayce, Intr. to the Science of L., vol. II, ^ N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 6. p 152 f. 2
TENSE (XPONOS)
regarded as surviving instances of the 'Present Aorist,'
present not conveying the notion of progress.
i.e.
865
of a
We may
com-
pare the Enghsh use of / am, I go (now archaic in the sense of
am
going),
is
present
I say, {says she), etc."^ Hear Monro again: "The not a space of time, but a point," and, I may add,
yields itself naturally to aoristic (punctiliar) action.
Some
pres-
ents are also "perfective" in sense like
tjkw.
The
so-called "pres-
ent" tense
(punctiliar),
may
Some
be used, therefore, to express an action simply

linear),
a process (durative or
of the
a state (perfective or
are aoristic.
perfect). 2
root-presents (like ^tj-mO
came originally out of the root-meaning also (cf. t]K(jo, ol8a) and grew out of the present as a sort of intensive present.^ The notion of state in vlkQ), Kparco, rjiTCjidLat is really that of the perfect. So the momentary action in jS?? (e-^rj-v) becomes linear in the iterative /3t-|3a-co, 'patter, patter.' Moulton^
The
perfect
"the punctiliar force is obvious in certain was probably therefore aoristic, or at least some roots were used either as punctiliar or linear, and the distinctively durative notions grew up around specially formed stems and so were applied to the form with most verbs, though never with all. In the modern Greek we find "the creaclearly recognises that
presents."
The
original present
tion of a separate aorist present (Tayo))," while Tayaivco
is linear.
keep going,' while irayu is 'I go' (single act). Cf. Thumb, Handh., p. 119. "As a rule the present combines
So
irayalvo:
is
'I
cursive (durative, continuous, etc.)
and
aorist action" {ih., p. 120).
The
aoristic present = undefined action in the present, as aoristic
past (ind.)
= undefined
There
action in the past.
In the case of ayw
we
see a root used occasionally for punctiliar, linear
and even per-
fected
action.
are, besides the
naturally aoristic roots,
three special uses of the aoristic present (the universal present,
the historical present, the futuristic present).^
The Specific Present. Gildersleeve^ thus describes this simform of the aoristic present in contrast with the universal present. It is not an entirely happy description, nor is "ef(a)
plest
fective present," suggested
gressive
is
by Jannaris,^ since there may be inand constative uses also. The common eifxi (Jo. 10 11) often aoristic. A fine example of the constative aorist pres:
ent occurs in Lu. 7

'Koi-qaov, Kal
'
8, TropeWrjTL, Kal TopeveraL

.
t'pxof
;
nal epx^raL
Trotet.
Cf
eôp/ctf oj
"
tre
(Mt. 26
Man.,
Hist.
63)
opco
'
(Ac. 8
lb., p.
23)
f.
Monro, Horn.
Prol., p.
Gr., p. 45.
'
Giles,
p. 484.
491
* 8
119
f.
Giles,
Man.,
p. 485. Cf.
^
Moulton,
Prol., p. 120.
Synt. of CI. Gk.,
p. 81.
Gk.
Gr., p. 433.
866
aprt

iSXeTTco
(Jo. 9
25).
The frequent
(xol
kydi 8e
Uyo: (Mt. 5
41)
22, 28,
.
etc.) is
aXrieoiS
example of the specific XeTW (Lu. 12 :44). Cf.

ov
is
Xa/x/Saj/oj
aoristic present (constative)

'Keyco
So
(Mt.
Cf.
(Mk. 5
0r?aci/
14:8);
a(}>levTaL
dXXa
14)
;
\eyu}
(Jo.
5:34),
etc.
In
Mk. 2:5
and
effective aorist present as in idrat (Ac. 9:34).

oirLves
oaoL ovK
ixovcnv,
ovk
ex^L
eyucjocrap
(Rev. 2
16
:
24)
21).
iroOeu rfKdov
iroBev epxofjLaL (Jo.
p. 247) notes
how
in
the aoristic pres. vivid. " The hypocrites 14

41)
Moulton {ProL, Mt. 6 2, 5, 16, airkxovai, the combination of and the perfective use of airb makes it very
: :
rjMev (Jo.
it
have as
were their money do^vn, as soon
as their trumpet has sounded."

:
The "perfective"
dTrexw
(Mk.
is
copiously illustrated in the papyri and ostraca (Deiss-
mann,
(6)
The Gnomic Present.

all
This
time.
is
the aorist present that

It is really a
is
time-
gnomic present (cf. the Gnomic Aorist) and differs very little from the "Specific Present." In Mt. 23 2 eKaOiaav is gnomic, and in verse 3 we have the aoristic presents (gnomic also), \eyovaiv yap Kal ov iroLomiv. Note Jo. 9 8. Cf. also cbs \kyov(nv (Rev. 2 24). Good instances are found in 1 Cor. 15 42 ff., (nreiperai. So ibcnrep ol vroKpLrai Abbott^ has great difficulty with k ttjs TaXiiroLovaL (Mt. 6:2). It is this gnomic present. Xatas !vpo(i>i]T7]s ovk eyeiperat. (Jo. 7: 52). It is not true, to be sure, but this was not the only error of the Sanhedrin. Cf Mt. 7 8. This vivid idiom is popular in all (c) The Historical Present. "We have only to languages,^ particularly in the vernacular. overhear a servant girl's 'so she says to me' if we desiderate proof that the usage is at home among us."^ Cf. Uncle Remus.
less in reality, true of
: : : : . :
Curiously the historic present is absent in Homer."* But Gildersleeve^ applauds Stahl for agreeing with his position "that it
was tabooed as vulgar by the epos and the higher lyric" (A. J. P., It is absent from Pindar and the Nihelungenlied. xxiii, 245). Gildersleeve^ also observes that it is much more frequent in Greek than in English and is a survival of "the original stock of our
languages."
and
aorist."
The "Annahstic
in
"It antedates the differentiation into imperfect or Note-Book Present" (like ylypractically the
vovroLL xaTSes bvo) is
Moulton^ suggests yewarai

1 2 3
same use of the aorist present. Mt. 2 4, but that is more like the
:
Joh. Gr., p. 358.

Am.

of CI. Gk., p. 86.
Syntax
Moulton, Prol., p. 120 f. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 47.
'
Prol., p. 120.

TENSE (XPONOS)
futuristic (prophetic) use of the present.
hist. pres. into
867
Brugmann'
is
divides the
"dramatic" and "registering" or annalistic presThis vivid idiom

p. 120).
{Gr., p.
ents
(cf.
Gildcrsleeve).
preserved in the
modern Greek (Thumb, Handb.,

in the
It is
common enough
LXX,
since
Thackeray
xx) notes 151 examples in
1 Samuel, though it is rare in 2 Samuel and 2 Kings ("absent," Thackeray, Gr., p. 24). But Hawkins (Horae Synopticae, p. 213) finds it 32 times in 2 Samuel and twice in 2 Kings. Hawkins (lb.) finds the hist. pres. in the LXX 337 times. Josephus uses it also. The N. T. examples are thus "dramatic." The hist. pres. is not always aoristic. It may be durative like the imperfect.^ This point has to be watched. Blass^ considers that the historical present "habitually takes an aoristic meaning," but room has to be left for the durative meaning also. It is common
in the Attic orators

rare.*
and in the N.
it
T., except in
Luke where
it is
Luke's Gospel has
only 9 times (possibly 11) and the
Hawkins, from whose Horae Synopticae (2d ed., Acts 13 times. pp. 143 ff.) these figures are taken, finds 93 historic presents in
(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
Matthew
Gospel
is
much
longer than Mark's, but

difference
when the
discourses
and dialogues are eliminated, the
between John and

is
Mark
is
not great.^
Moulton*^ adds that the idiom

(ii/B.c.)
in the papyri.
eTopevojjLrju
Cf. Par. P. 51
epxcixac
avvyw
bpS) /cXat7co
common
/cat
eXeyov,
etc.
Moulton
illustrates Xeyei
See Oxy. 37 (a.d. 49). Luke's manifest reluctance to use it (changing Mark's historical presents except in 8 49) is due to the fact that in Luke's time the construction was regarded as "too familiar for his liking." He is
'Irjaovs in
the Oxyrhynchus Logia by Ka2aap Xeyet, Syll. 376.
also
a(})ripTraaev
mi
ôvXeraL, P.
the scientific historian, while

Different
Mark and John are the dramatists. would feel differently about it. "Josephus would use the tense as an imitator of the classics, Mark as a man of the people who heard it in daily use around him; while Luke
writers
^
Gk.
Gr., p.
484
f.
The
II, p.
hist,
present
demands merely that
tlie
reader
take his stand with the writer in the midst of the moving panorama.
briick, Versl. Synt.,
'
*
Del-
Bd.
261.
p. 11.
"
Goodwin, Moods and Tenses,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 188. Hawkins, Horae Synopticae, p. 143
Ih.
f.
Prol., p. 121.
868

it
would have Greek education enough to know that
was not enough to recall the encouragement of classical writers whom he probably never read and would not have imitated if he had read them."^ But what about John? Jannaris^ remarks that the idiom was common in the late Greek as in the early. The personal equation may have to explain the variations in the Gospels. Blass^ undertakes to give a philosophy of the matter on the theory that the "circumstances," "incidentals" and "final results" are ex-
common
in the cultured speech of his time, but not
pressed in the past tenses of the ind., while the "principal actions"
are found in the historical present.
lustration
(Tap
(jSXeTret
He
cites Jo. 1
laTrjKet,
rjv
29-42
in
il-
Xeyec eixaprvprjaev \eyeL \eyeL dirav \eyu r]\dav Kai eldav One doubts the phenomena can be Xe7et ijyayev
r;KOi;rjv
evpiffKei
elirep)
if
brought under any

the narrative, while
rule.
Matthew and Luke

avoid
it.*
use
l8ov
to enliven
Mark and John
Mark
has a habit
of using Kal before the historical present, while
John often employs
But there is no doubt of the vividness of the narrative in Mark and John which is largely due to the historical Modern literary English abhors this idiom, but it presents.
asyndeton.^
ought to be preserved in translating the Gospels in order to give the same element of vividness to the narrative. The historical present may begin ^ a paragraph (often so), occur in the midst of In Mt. 3 1 aorists and imperfects, or alternate with aorists. In Mk. irapayiveTaL 'Icoapiqs is preceded by a note of past time. 5 15 epxoPTaL Kal Oeojpovaip occur between aorists. In Mk. 4 37
:
the realistic yiperaL
XatXai/'
is
followed
44. Sometimes specimens of this present in parables see the MSS. vary as between âtjêrat and kcjiaprj (Mt. 2 13). The variation in parables may be partly due to obscuration of the gnomic nature of the narrative. In such a wealth of material for illustration it is hard to select, but note John 20. In verse 1 f.
:
:
by the Mt. 13
imperfect.
As
note epx^raL
jSXexet rpex^c epxerat,

Then
decjpei (5-7)
all
indicating the excite-
ment
/SXtTrei
of
Mary.
till
the narrative goes on with aorists and im-
perfects
Peter and John draw near the tomb,
when we have
Ipx^Tai
with two parenthetic aorists inter-
jected (ovK
eiarjXdep, eiarjXdep).
by
aorists.
In verse 8 the narrative is resumed In verse 12 again 6ewpe2 shows the surprise of Mary
at seeing the angels (XkyovaiP

^
\kyet,
*
^
verse 13),
as in verse 14
p. 144.
Prol., p. 121.
Hawkins, Hor. Synop.,
2 "
Gk. Gr., p. 434. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 188.

Hist.
Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 350. W.-Th., p. 267.
TENSE (XPONOS)
the present
is
869
Historical presents run
used when she sees Jesus.
through the dialogue with Jesus (15-18). Then the resumptive ravTa elirev. That is enough to say on the subject.
(d)
The Futuristic Present.

or aoristic.^
This futuristic present
is
generits
ally punctiliar
The
construction certainly had
origin in the punctiliar roots,^ but

(cf.
some
:
of the
N. T. examples
English "I am going," as well as "I go") are durative, as Moulton^ shows. Thus in 1 Cor. 16 5 hkpxom'- (in contrast Vivomi' with biekdo}) means 'I am going through' (Macedonia). leans to the aoristic'' and so ylvtrai (Mt. 26 2) may be punc"In avpt-ov a.'Kodvi)aKoiJ.ev (1 Cor. 15 32) we have a verb tiUar. in which the perfective prefix has neutralized the inceptive force
: :
of the suffix
-icr/cco:
it
is
only the obsoleteness of the simplex
which allows
The aorisever to borrow a durative action."^ tic origin of many present-stems has already been shown (and some perfectives like ^/cco). Thus all three kinds of action are
it
found in the present (punctiliar, durative, perfect). All three kinds of time are also found in the present ind. (historical present = past, futuristic present = future, the common use for present Some of these "momentary presents" are always future. time).
So
efjui
in old
Greek
not
prose,^
but
Homer
uses dixL also as a pres-
ent.^
(Jo. 14
The N. T.
:
uses epxo/xat and -KopevonaL in this futuristic sense

et/xt-
Indeed "the future of Greek was originally a present" (Jebb in Vincent and Dickson's Handbook, p. That is too strong, for the future ind. often comes from 323).
2
f.),
the aorist subj.
In the N. T. such so-called futures as

Cf.
ayeaaL (Lu. 17:8) are really old aorist subjs.
Trteaai and Mt. 24:40f.
The
an
futuristic pres. occurs in the inscriptions

p. 160,
and papyri, as
in
Petersen-Luschan,
nrj
TrawtTaL, epxerai, B.
N. 190, avbe M. II, 417

(A.D./iii),
tls dStKiyo-??, viroKeLTai.
See
(Iv/a.D.), avriypaypov Kayo)

fxot
avafialvoi,
k-KidiiK-qv,
O. P. 1157, 25 O. P. 1158, 23
f.
f.
ypaxj/ov
Kal
ire/JLirw
ai'Tia
(A.D./iii).
Cf.
Radermapher, N. T.
Gr.,
In South Italian Greek the futuristic present is the only p. 124. means of expressing the future ind.^ The other use of the futuristic
present
is
the dramatic or prophetic.^
"This present
is
sort of counterpart to the historic present

Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., Bd.
Giles,
a very frequent in
II, p.
2 *
Man.,
p. 485.
Prol., p. 120.
309; Brug., Gricch. Gr., p. 484. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 189.
Gildorslcevc,
Am.

\ Moulton, Prol., p. 120.

^
Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 434.
p. 10.
"
Giles,
Man.,
p. 485.
870

It is
NEW TESTAMENT
not merely prophecy, but As examples note Mt.
the predictions of the N. T."^

certainty of expectation that
is
involved.
17:11 'HXetas epx^Tai Kal airoKaTaaTrfaet Travra, 24:43 iroia (f)v\aKfj 2 yiverai Kal Trapadidorat, 26 KXtTTTrjs epx^Tat., 26 18 ttolco to TTCicrxa, 27 63 eyelpofxai, Lu. 3 9 eKKOTTTeTai Kal /SdXXerai, 19 8 35 6 Oepiafxds epx^rai, 8 14 irov vwayco, SiScciJiL Kal otTroStSco/ii, Jo. 4
6
:
21
virayco Kal ^rjTrjaeTe,
10
15
15
:
Trjv
^l/vxw P-ov Tidrjpi, 12

aTodprjaKeL,
1
26
oirov
:
eipl
ey(ji,
20
life
17 avaâlvio, 21
23 ovK
ridrfpL
Cor. 15
KaTapyeTraL.
In Jo. 10
ff.
really covers the
26 whole of
:
viewed as a unit (constative aorist).In Mk. 9 TapadldoraL, in Mt. 17:22 peWeL irapablboadaL. This use of AteXXco and inf. is a sort of half-way station between the
Christ's
31
we have
futuristic present
and the punctiliar
future.
Cf. Jannaris, Hist.
Gk. Gr., p. 443.

tion.
It affirms
certainty.
and arrests attenand not merely predicts. It gives a sense of Cf. in Mt. 18 12, atprjaei Kal wopevdels fryrei together,
futuristic pres. startles
:
The
and
3.
061)761
(Rev. 9:6).
The Punctiliar
Punctiliar or
(a)
both in origin
in ch. VIII, VII,
Future (6 fieXXcov )(povo<i). The future is a "mixed tense" and meaning.^ The mixed origin was discussed
(Aoristic)
Durative.
It was a late tense, little used in the early (g). Vedic Sanskrit, and as a distinct form gradually disappeared from the modern Greek, where the periphrastic forms like 6a Xuw
(Xuaco)
alone occur.
futures, 6a Xucrw punctiliar, ^d Xuw durative 116, 125).
But the modern Greek has developed thus two (Thumb, Handh., pp. The Germanic languages (cf. English shall and will)
For the history
ff.
have only the periphrastic future.
of the future
fut.
ind. see Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 552
In Sanskrit the
had no modes,
i.e.
it
was confined
practically to the ind. (Whit-
ney, Sans. Gr., p. 201).
The
oldest roots are
derived either
from punctiliar presents (ind.) or aorist (punctiliar) subjunctives.* Gradually the future was formed on duraCf. TriopaL, ^TjaopaL. tive roots also. Thus pevco, '1 shall remain.' Some verbs formed two futures,^ one punctiliar, like axw^ from e(rxoi'='I shall obtain,'
the other durative, like
e^co,
'I shall have.'
The
kolvy}
has
dropped axw^, as it has " generally got rid of alternative forms." ^ So also Opkôpai (rpex^) was durative and SpapovpaL {e8papoi>) It is probable punctiliar,'^ though both are absent in the N. T.
1 2 ' *
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 1S9. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 352.
'
Moulton,
Prol., p. 150.

Giles,
Thompson,
Synt., p. 219.
Man.,
p. 447.
TENSE (XPONOS)
that in the future passive
punctiliar future formed
871
on the
we have with most verbs a purely aorist stem. The middle future
the
was usually durative, the future passive punctiliar.' Very few of list of examples given by Jannaris can be illustrated in the N. T. owing to the disappearance of the future middle before the
In
1
future passive.
Pet. 4
18
(fyavelTai
(LXX,
30)
is
Prov. 11:31)
is
durative and certainly

:
(jjavrjaerai
(Mt. 24
punctiliar.
So
in
Lu. 16 31 iraad-qaovTai. is punctiliar not occur in the N. T. So Krrjaeade
(effective),
tols \{/vxo.s
but
iifxasv
irdco^xaL
does
:
(Lu. 21
19)
seems to be durative, though no fut. passive of this verb appears in the N. T. So also avpaxdwopraL (Mt. 24 28) is punctiliar (effective). But the very disappearance of the future middle (as with the Attic (po^-qaofxaL) threw the burden of the durative future ^ on the future passive. So 4)o^y]dr]cfoixaL in Heb. 13 6 is durative. Cf. So also dXXo. /cat x^pi?the durative apKeadrjadixeOa (1 Tim. 6:8).
: :
aofxai
(Ph. 1
18) is
1
:
durative.
Cf. also Jo. 16
20, 22,
though
xapwovTaL in Lu.
(1
:
14
is
ingrcssive punctiliar,
as w\r]adr)aeTai
\vTtr]Qr}(Teade
15) is effective punctiliar.

yePTjaeraL
is
:
But
in Jo. 16
:
20 both
and
:
seem
ingressive.
In Heb. 9
28
6(t)6riaeTaL (cf.
Ac.
:
but 6\j/op.ai may be either durative (Mt. 5 26 16) 19 1 37; Rev. 22 4) or punctihar (Jo. 1 39; Heb. 50; 8; Jo. excellent example of the effective future is An 12 14, etc.). found in 6 vToixelpas els reXos (TcodrjaeraL (Mt. 10 22). So the same form in the future may be either punctiliar or durative, as
ingressive,
: : : : :
fective
viJLas (Mk. 14 28) is durative, while aêt is punctiliar (ef=' bring ').^ lleiaonep is punctiliar (effective) in Mt. 28 14 and durative in 1 Jo. 3 19. So ypcoao/xai is punctiliar or durative (Rev. 2 23). As punctiliar ypcoaofxaL may be either ingressive (1 Cor. 14 7, 9), effective (1 Cor. 4: 19) or merely constative
Tvpoa^w
(Jo.
28, 32).
From
the nature of the action as future this

Blass^ even goes
Aktionsart of the verb will not be as prominent^ in the future

aorist as in the other punctiliar constructions.
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 differentiated."
in itself
But it must be borne in mind that the future tense makes as much distinction between punctiliar and duraI,
Cf. K.-G., Bd.
pp. 114
ff.,
170
ff.;
Giles,
Man.,
Gk.
Gr., p. 441.
2
*
Moulton,
Prol., p. 150.
=>
lb., p. 149.
Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 201.
p. 33.
j.
872
NEW TESTAMENT
The
difference
is
tive action as the present tense does.
that the
future
tive.
usually punctiliar, while the present is more often duraThe point need not be pressed. Other examples of the
is
:
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:
gressive while K\r]6r]aovTaL is effective.

îiiOTTOL-qB-naovrai
In
Cor. 15
22, 28 note
and
vTroTayqaeTaL (effective).
free'
(cf.
In Jo.
8:32 note
.^
kXevdepoiaeL
effective = 'set
ekevdepoL yevqaeaOe, verse 33)

is
So then both in origin (h) The Modal Aspect of the Future. not merely a tense in the true sense
and use the future
chiefly punctiliar.
The
future indicative
is
of that term, expressing
It is almost a mode on a par with the state of the action. Gildersleeve^ puts the matter imperative. and the subjunctive
plainly
says: "The future was originally a mood." Latin the forms of the future come for the and In both Greek subj. and it must be treated as a mode as the most part from Delbriick^ and Giles^ put it wholly under Indeed tense. well as a
when he
moods.
It partakes, as
a matter of
fact, of the qualities of
both
mood and
tense,
aspect of the fut.

or deliberative.
and both need to be considered. The modal ind. is seen in its expression of mil and feeling.
fut. ind.
Like the subj. the
may
be merely
futuristic,
volitional
We
have a
fut.
reflection of the
same thing
in our
has had a precarious history in shall Its place was always challenged by the present and Greek. even by the aorist ind., by the subj. and imper. modes, by periphrastic forms. It finally gave up the fight as a distinct form in
and
will.
The
ind.
See under 3, (a). In the modern Greek the distinction between the periphrastic fut. and the subj. is practically lost. The modal aspects of the fut. ind. appear clearly in subordinate In indirect discourse the clauses where the tense is common. future ind. merely represents the direct discourse (cf. Ro. 6
Greek.^
:
future vnih. the descriptive or identifying relative^ (Jo. 6 51) shows no modal features. But it is found in other relative clauses where purpose (Lu. 7 27) or result (Lu. 7:4) is ex8).
:
The
pressed.
The future has also a modal value (Rev. 4:9; 17: 17), in final clauses (Lu. 20
1
in temporal clauses
10;
Heb. 3
12), in
Moulton,
Prol., p. 149.
f
=^
Synt., p. 115.
3 * B
Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 320
Man., pp. 500, 505; Thompson, Synt., p. 218. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 552. Blass, Hermeneutik und Ivrit., 1892, p. 199.
TENSE (XPONOS)
:
:
873
conditional sentences (Lu. 19 40), in wish '(Gal. 5 12). In Rev. 3 9 the fut. ind. and the aorist subj. occur side by side with tva. But in independent sentences also the modal aspects of the future
:
appear.
Merehj Futuristic. This is the most common use of the future and in itself would not be modal. It is the prospective, what
(a)
The predictive^ (or prophetic) future hes before the speaker.^ (usually constative), though the aoristic as classed be has to is durative or punctiliar may action the whether to as question
not
have crossed the speaker's mind. Cf. Mt. 21 37 hrpadodrjaeraL, 24 30 aTrocrreXet, 41 ciTroXea-et, 43 apdrjaeTaL Further good examples of the predicCf. Mk. 13 24-27. etc. Unfortunately in Engtive future are in Mt. ll:28f.; 12 31. Ush we have no established principle for the translation of the predictive future. In the first person it is done by "shall," and
:
irrjaovTac,
naturally
by "will"
in the second
and third persons.
It is
not
always easy to distinguish the merely futuristic from the volitive future, "but we have to reckon with an archaic use of the auxil^ The use of iaries which is traditional in Bible translations."
"shall" in the second and third persons
is
almost constant in the
R. V. both for the volitive and the futuristic uses. If "shall" could be confined in these persons to the volitive and "will" to the futuristic, even "the solemnly predictive,"'' it would be a In gain. 5 Thus in Mk. 14 13 airavTria-a would be 'will meet.'
:
Mt. ll:28f.
give you rest' (R. V. But avairamoi here may be voUtive. If so, 'will' is correct. So in Mt. 12 31 dê^Tjaerat would be 'will be forgiven' (R. V. 'shall'). Cf. also Mt. 26 13, Moulton^ notes that airapviiari XaXr?0i7o-eTat='will be preached.'
avairavao)
would be
'shall
'will'), evpr](xeTe 'will find'
(R. V. 'shall').
Mk. 14:30; Lu. 22:61) is often misunderstood because of the rendering 'shalt deny me.' "It could not thereHere "will" is fore be Peter's fault if Jesus commanded him." Cf. Mt. 25 29, 32; Lu. 19 43. With the free from that peril.
(Mt. 26:34;
: :
negative the English "shall" becomes volitive

not.
Cf.
when
the Greek
13
:
is
Mk.
13
31, ov TapeXevaovTaL (cf. ov

tirj
fjirj
irapeXOri in
30).
(cf.
/î)
Sometimes (very
evprjaovaLU
1
rarely) ov
occurs with the predictive fut.

fxii
the usual aorist subj.) as in ov
TrapeXevaovrat (Lu. 21
evp-qaovaip (18
:
33); ov
(Rev. 9:0); ovKert ov
fxi]
14; cf.
airfjXdev,
2 3 *
Dclbruck, Vcrsl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 309. Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 34
f.
^
Moulton, Prol., p. 150. Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses,
Moulton,
Prol., p. 151.
p. 34.
ib., p. 150.
874

The
construction of ov
fXTj
aTTcbXero).
with the
fut. ind. is
"mori-
N. T./ only 14 and some of these doubtful (MSS. vary greatly between aorist subj. and fut. ind.). Some of the 14 are examples of the volitive future. In Mt. 15:6 ov fxri TLixrâu is probably volitive,^ though some hold it predictive. The three divisions (futuristic, voli{0) The Volitive Future. tive, deliberative) glide into one another both in the subjunctive and the future ind.' The volitive future is practically an impera-
bund"
in the
tive in sense, for the will
is
exercised.
The
futuristic glides imoxpji,
perceptibly into the volitive "as in the colloquial av

will see to that,'
\peLs
'you
(Lu. 13
9).
Mt. 27:4."4 Cf. vfêh o^êade (Mt. 27: In Heb. 8 5 the imperative and the
:
24), kôfut. ind.
occur together, 6pa

13
is
:
10) is
The impatient ov iravaj] diaarpecpoop (Ac. almost imperatival, certainly volitive. "The future ind.
iroirjaHs.
exceedingly
is
common
in this sense (volitive)."^
In legal precepts
the fut. ind.
unclassical.^
But the idiom
itself is classical
and "is
not a milder or gentler imperative. A prediction may imply reIt sistless power or cold indifference, compulsion or concession."^
LXX. It is chiefly found in the N. T. from the 0. T. Cf. /caXecrets (Mt. 1:21), ovk eaeaOe (6:5); epeTre (21 3) = el'Trare (Mk. 11:3). Cf. Jas. 2:8; Ro. 13 9; The voHtive future really includes purpose (will) Gal. 5 14. in the first person, as well as in the second and (rarely) in the
is
exceedingly frequent in the
in quotations
third.
Thus
irpoaehôixaL, \pa\oJ (1
Cor. 14
15)
= 'I
will pray,' 'I

:
will sing,'
not mere futurity.

to find
'will,'
18)
we seem
So in avaaras iropevaofxaL (Lu. 15 not mere declaration. Most of the exlike ovk eaeade
:
(Mt. 6:5), and Ro. 7:7). But some examples occur in the third person also; though Burton^ is sceptical. Cf. earai in Mt. 20 26 f. (note deXri)- So Mk. 9 35. In Lu. 10 6 we have eTavaTaijaeTaL kir' avTOP i] elprjvr], while in Mt. In the volitive future elprjpr} vfxwv ex' avTrjv.^ 10 13 eXdcLTO}
amples are in the second person,
are chiefly negative (4:7; Ac. 23
5;
ri
'will'
is
the English translation for the
first
person, 'shall' for

fut. ind.
the second and third.
The
rare use of
p.ri
with the
117)
is
a volitive use.
Gildersleeve (Syntax,
p.
sceptical,
ijlt]
shows but
jSovXijaeade Moulton (Prol., p. 177) cites from Demosthenes (I/a.d.) /xi) eêcrrat, B. (iii/A.D.) B. 197 814 dbkvai and from U. U.
Prol., p. 190.
Burton, N. T.
" 8
Moods and
Tenses, p. 35.
*
fi
Moulton,
Prol., p. 184.
lb., p. 177. lb., p. 176.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 209.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 35, N. T. Gk., p. 209.
TENSE (XPONOS)
fxfl
875
B. M. 42 JU17 KpaT-qaeis (ii/B.c). Blass^ quotes firjSeva from Clem., Horn., Ill, 69, and Moulton (ProZ., p. 240) adds 19, and Xeêts 8e nrjhkv, Eurip., Med. Uri drjaavplaeraL, D in Mt. 6 822, and observes (p. 248) that MS. evidence should be watched on the point. Sometimes ov n-q occurs with the voUtive future as in ov ixrj TLp.i]ati. (Mt. 15 5); ov earai aoi tovto (16 22). In Mt. 26 35 ov ixrj aTapptjaofjiaL is also volitive (cf. Mk. 14 31). The volitive future seems to be found in Lu. 10 19, ovSep ov y.ri v/jLOLs a.8LKT}(TeL (W. H. text), but it is durative. But ov alone is the
a4>r](Tis,
HLjir](jtTe
/jlt}
usual negative in the volitive future, as in ovx apiraau ns

Xî-pos
fjLov
e/c
tjJs
(Jo.
10
28.
Cf. ov
jiri
airoXcovTaL) .
:
Cf.
pres.
imper.
/X17
and
fut. ind. side
by
side in Jo. 1
It
is
38
(cf. 1
:46).
On
01;
see
Modes and
(Mt. 16
(7)
:
Particles.
possible that ov KanaxvcovaLP avTrjs
18) is voUtive.
Deliberative
Future.
Burton ^ has pointed out that ques-
tions are of
two kinds (questions of fact or questions of doubt). make an inquiry for information about the past, present or future. These questions employ the moods and tenses as other simple declarative sentences in both direct and indirect discourse. But deliberative questions ask not for the
Questions of fact
but about the "possibility, desirability or necessity" of a proposed course of action. The subj. as the mood of doubtful
facts,
assertion
is
perfectly natural here.

case.
The
future
is
also doubtful
from the nature of the

of fact)
So deliberative questions use either

Deliberative questions (like questions
the subj. or the fut. ind.
may
be merely interrogative or they

22, tI
may
be rhetorical.
The
deliberative questions in the

:
N. T. with the
alpr]<jop.a.t.
t'l
fut. ind. are all
direct questions except Ph. 1
ov yvoopiôj,
where the
In
o-x<S
punctuation
TL yparj/oj
is
doubtful. (W. H. marg. have

:
alpr](ToiJiai..y
(Ac. 25
26)
it is
not certain whether

tIs
ypaipo: is fut. ind.
or
aorist subj.
Kai
eiirri
In Lu. 11:5,
t^ vp.wv eêt (l>l\ov Kai Tropeixrerai
avTw, the fut. ind. (rhetorical)
side
if
we can
trust the reading.
and aorist subj. occur side by Cf. Mt. 7: 6, with nrjTOTe; Eph.
with ha (0. T.). The examples of the fut. ind. in deliberative questions are all disputed by some MSS. which have the aorist
6
:
3,
subj., so that Blass"*
remarks that "the N. T.

is
in this case prac-
tically uses
only the conjunctive"; but that
an overstatement,
merely interrogaf.
since the best

fut. ind. in
1
MSS.
(see
W. H. and
Nestle texts) sujiport the

of
some
instances.
As an example
lb.
'
Hlass, Cr. of
lb., p. 210.
2 N. T. Moods and Tenses, pp. 30, 7G N. T. Gk., p. 211. Cf. W.-Th., p. 279.

876
A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

ei
tive deliberative questions with fut. ind. take

xo-'i-pv
TraTaôfiev
fia-
(Lu. 22
49).
In Jo. 18
39, ôvXeaOe airoXvaco,
the
fut. ind.
or the aorist subj.,
we may have but note ôvXeaOe. The N. T.

:
examples are nearly all rhetorical. So Mt. 12 26 ttcos (jTaOrjaeTaL, Mk. 4:13 TTois yvucreade, Jo. 6 68 xpos rlpa a-Kekevabntda. Cf. further Ro. 3:5; 6:1 (the common t'l epovfiep;); 9 14; 1 Cor. 14 7, 29, 51; 1 Tim. 3 5. Cf. Lu. 20 15. Cf. ayopiiacofjLev Kal 9, 16; 15
:
:
86}<70fjLev
(c)
(Mk. 6 37). The Future in

:
the
Moods.
The
future
differs
it
from the
occurs
it
other tenses in this respect, that in the has always the element of time. This
moods where
is
not true of any other

here than in the
Greek
(a)
tense.^
The Indicative. It is far more other moods. In direct discourse the

time.
Cf. TOTe 64/cvTaL (Lu. 21:27).
common
fut. ind. expresses absolute
In the gnomic future the
act
virep
is
true of
any time
(cf.
gnomic
is
aorist
and
present).
So
/xoXis
biKaiov tls
aTodavetraL (Ro.
5:7);
xPllÔLTiaî,
(7:3), etc.
In
indirect discourse the time
relatively future to that of the
principal verb, though

IXLoav OTL \rnx^l/ovTaL
it
may
:
be absolutely past.
;
So with hodavaro)
(Mt. 20
10)
elirf^v
crr]fxalvccp to'lco
Soâau
TovOtbv (Jo. 21: 19) .2

(/3)
The Subjunctive and Optative.
perative.
The
it
so-called fut.
subjs. in
o\py](jde
There never was a fut. imthe N. T. have already

to the text in Lu. 13
:
been discussed.
but claim
true of
6wo-r7,
W. H. admit
MSS.
:
28,
to be a
late aorist subj.^
The same thing may be

:
Rev. 8 3, but not of be a lapsus calami^ for Kav3. Kav6r](X(joiJ.at in 1 Cor. 13 Expositor, May, 1912, p. 401) quotes Hamack {The xn^wiJLai. " Kavdrjaojiai is to be recnot Kau^j^crco/xai Von Soden as saying:
read by
in Jo. 17:2;
This
may
ognised as the traditional form

give
Kai;xT70"w/xat."
in families of
MSS. which do not
But Harnack
refuses to ''saddle" Paul with
this Byzantine "deformity."
Jamiaris^ thinks that these sporadic

fut. ind. "spelt
examples in late Greek are the
with the thematic
vowel (r? the Latin subj. future.

to)
and
of the subjunctive."
One
naturally thinks of
The
fut. opt.
never had a place save in
indirect discourse,
and that
is lost
in the
N. T.
The future inf. was never a common con(7) The Infinitive. The six struction and was almost confined to indirect discourse.^
1
Blass, Gr. of
lb.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 201.
*
2
'
lb.;
Moulton,
Prol., p. 151.
Appendix,
See the
p. 172.
Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 556.
list in
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 48G.
TENSE (XPONOS)
877
:
examples in the N. T. seem to be punctiliar save two (Ac. 11 28; Jo. 21: 25). MeXXo; has the fut. inf. three times, but only in the case of Ueadai. (Ac. 11 28; 24 15; 27 10). The three other instances of the fut. inf. in the N. T. belong to ind. discourse. One (x'jpi70'tJ') occurs with olixai (Jo. 21 25), one (ecreadai.) with
:
HTjviio},
or
more exactly
ijlol
:
after eirLôvXr] (Ac. 23

ecreaOaL),^
30, genitive absolute,
firji'vdelaTjs
eiTLôvXrjs
one
(elaeKeva-eadai.)
with
oiivvo}
So that the fut. inf. "was already moribund for practical purposes." ^ In the papyri Moulton found the fut. inf. often a mere blunder for an aorist. In Ac. 26 7, B has the fut. In the fut. inf. the time relation is only relative, inf. after eXwi^ca. as with all infinitives, not absolute as in the ind.^ Elsewhere with such verbs the aorist inf. occurs as with eXTrtfco (1 Cor. 16 7) /leXXco (Ro. 8 18); ofxvvo: (Ac. 2 30); o/xoXoTeco (Mt. 14: 7); irpoadoKaw (Ac. 27 33) TrpoKaTayyeWoo (Ac. 3 18) or the present inf. as with /xcXXo (Ac. 3 3); or the perfect inf. as with eX-n-tfco (2 Cor. 5 11).
(Heb. 3
18).
:
:
The Participle. The future part, was later in its development* than the other tenses of this very ancient, even prehistoric,^ The fut. part, was never developed in the verbal adjective. Boeotian Dialect.^ It is by no means dead in the papyri. Moulton^ notes "the string of final fut. participles in O. P. 727 (U/a.d.); B. U. 98 (iii/A.D., etc." See also KOLvoKoynabixevov P. Goodspeed 4 {(T)Ta97]a6fxeva P. Tb. 33 (b.c. 112), and the list in (ii/B.c.) Ta It seems to me to be more conunon in 0. P. 1118, 10 f (I/a.d.). the papyri than in the N. T. Simcox^ suggests that its rarity in
(5)
the N. T.
14; 20
:
is
due to the use of other phrases.

1
:
Cf. /xeXXw in Ac. 18
3,
7 and epxafievos in Rev.
4, etc.
The time
is,
of course,
only relative to that of the principal verb, as in e\i]\WeL ivpo(TKvvr]au)v The anarthrous examples are volitive^ and are the (Ac. 8 27). They are used for purpose or aim. Cf. Mt. 27 most frequent.
:
I''
49 epx^raL adcawv, Ac. 8 27 ikrfKWeL irpoaKvurjauv, 22 5 ewopevofxr^v 11 ape(37]P TpoaKVPrjawv, 24 17 Tvoiriawv Kapeyevbp.r]v, Heb. a^coi/, 24
: :
:
13
11
17 aypviTVomiv
13.
cos a.Trob6:aovTes.
Cf. also V.
1.
cos evpr]aa:v
in
Mk.
com-
These
all
seem to be
:
punctiliar.
is
Some MSS.
also read
dairaaofxevoL in
1
Ac. 25
13.
This
surely a slim showing
Simcox, Lang, of tho N. T., p. 120, suggests omission of m^XXw. 2 Moulton, Prol., p. 151. Cf. Hatz., Einl., pp. 190 fT. s Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 202. * Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 71. ^ Prol., p. 230. Lang, of the N. T., p. 126. 6 Moulton, Prol., p. 151. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 496. Claflin, Synt. of the B. Inscr., p. 73. > Moulton, Prol., p. 151. That is, in the old Gk. Both volitive and futuristic are rare in the N. T.
878

classic idiom.^
NEW TESTAMENT
KonLoviievoL
pared with the

Pet. 2
:
13,
rather than aSiKovnevoL.

is
Some MSS. read The future

So with
;
in 2
participle with
to eaofxevov (Lu.
:
the article
futuristic,
not volitive.
6
:
22
49)
6 7rapa86jacov (Jo.
:
64)
to.
awavT-qaovTa (Ac. 20
:
22)
KaKwaoiv (1 Pet. 3
13); rb yevrjaofxevov (1 Cor. 15
37); 6 KaraKpLvuv
(Ro. 8 :34);
(d)
tcop XaX-qOrjao/jihojp
(Heb. 3:5).
for
The
Periphrastic
is
Substitutes
the
Future.
The
periin-
phrastic future
flected
as old as the Sanskrit
and has survived the
form in Greek. Some of these forms are durative, probablymost of them, but a few are punctiliar. Jannaris notes in Sophocles,
O. C. 816,
\vTr}dels
iaa,
and 0. T. 1146,
oh
(najTr-qaas
eaa,
but no examples of the aorist participle and eaofxac occur in the N. T. They are all present parts, (like eaeade ixiaoviJLevoi, Lu. 21 In the LXX we actually have the inf. with 17) and so durative.
eaoMat
/xeXXo)
(Num. 10
2;
2 Sam. 10
inf.
with the aorist

23),
11; Tob. 5 15). The use of approaches the punctiliar future. ^ Cf.
: :
TjfjLeXKev
Tpoaayayeip (Ac. 12:6); ixeWovaav

:
aTOKa\v(f)drjvaL
(Ro. 8
18.
Cf. Gal. 3
with which compare the pres.
inf. in 1
:
Pet.
5:1.
The
aorist inf. occurs also in
volitive future
Rev. 3:2, 16; 12 4. The was sometimes expressed by OeXo: and in the later
Greek helped drive out the future form. It is disputed whether N, T. êXco is ever a mere future. But in a case like deXeLs eiirwuev (Lu. 9 54) we note the deliberative subj.^ Cf. Mt. 13 28. So l3ov\ea6e airoXvaco (Jo. 18 39). BouXoât is less frequent in the N. T. than deXo: and can hardly be resolved into a mere future. It is purpose. Cf. examples with the aorist inf. in Mt. 11:27;
in the
:
Ac. 5
tion,
28; 17: 20.

it is
With
deXco
the aorist
inf. is
the usual construc-
and
nearly always easy to see the element of will as

deXcjo
dominant. In a few cases

tive fut. ind.
Xets
seems to shade
off
towards the
:
voli9, de-
Cf. Jo. 5
40, ov OeXere eKdetv irpos pe, Ac. 25
KptdrjpaL;
:
Here we have an approach to the

its force.
is
later usage,
:
but
:
the auxihary has not yet lost

Jas. 2
20,
Cf. also Jo. 6
67; 9
27;
where the formula
polite.
R. V. rightly preserves "willeth." So in 24. Herodotus shows a fondness for kdeXco as a quasi-auxiliary, and the connection between him and the modern Greek usage is doubtless through the vernacular. Cf. Jebb in Vine, and Dickson, p. 326. Even
:
But Mt. 16
in Jo. 7: 17 the
Cf.
p. 335.
Cf. Delbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 2.53.

aor. furnishes the explan. of /ieXXw
"The
ind."
"
between pres. and Man., p. 479. Moulton, Prol., p. 185.

difference
Giles,
with aor.
TENSE (XPONOS)
bbvanai
879
In Lu. 20
:
may
contain an "inceptive future."^

bbvavrai
36 the
MSS. vary between

bbvaixai
and
ixeKKovaiv.
But
in the
N. T.
:
retains its real force even in examples like

:
Mk.
:
24; 10
38; 14
7; Jo. 13
t'l
37; Ac. 17: 19.
In Ac. 25
2 19; 26 note
ypaypai ovk ex^ (cf. ctx^
7pdi/'aj).
in. Durative (Linear) Action. The principles underlying the use of the tenses have
set forth with sufficient clearness to justify brevity.
1.
now been
Indicative.
The Present (6 evearoos) for Present Time. It has already been seen that the durative sense does not monopolize the "present" tense, though it more frequently denotes linear action.^
(a)
The verb and

(a)
the context must decide.
As with the ). The Descriptive Present. Its graph is ( frequent use. Cf. this is the most imperfect, so with the present auiaov. Mk. aorist So 4 38; Contrast awoWviJLeda (Mt. 8 25. Ij' (3 (Jo. 25 epxoiiai 5:7); (/)atvet Lu. 8 24) ajSepvuvrai (Mt. 8) Cor. 12 9); dav21 TeXttTai (2 31); (1 Jo. 2:8); awx^weTai (Ac.
: : :
judf CO
OTL
ourcos
:
rax'^'j^s
neTarideaOe (Gal. 1:6);
7rt(7Tp0eTe
(4:9);
Th. 3:8. In these examples the duraand has to be translated by the obvious tive action is very in English, 'We are perishing,' form progressive (periphrastic)
'ixovcTLv
(Mk. 2
19).
Cf. 1
'
Our lamps
are going out,' etc.
But
in the case of daviiaô: (Gal.
1:6) 'I wonder' brings out the durative idea, though 'ye are changing' is necessary for ixeTaTideaOe. Cf. ex^L (Jo. 3 36) where
:
'has'
is
durative.
Cf.
^rjTovjjLev
(Lu. 2
48), ov OeXofxev (Lu. 19
14).
This is a poor name in lieu of a (0) The Progressive Present. action still in progress. Usuof past present the for one better
ally
Gildersleeve^ calls
apTL
an adverb of time (or adjunct) accompanies the verb. Cf. earlv ecos it "Present of Unity of Time." English by a into translated be has to Often it Jo. 2:9). (1
sort of "progressive perfect" ('have been'), though, of course, that

is
the fault of the Enghsh.
"So
in
modern Greek,
e^rjvTa
iJLrjvas
a' ayawo)
(Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 222). The durative present in such cases gathers up past and present time into one phrase" (Moulton, ProL, p. 119). Cf. 'Uov rpia err] d0' ov 'ipxopai (Lu. 13 7);
:
Toaavra
err}
8ov\evo} aoi (15

p.ed'
29); iroKvv
i]5r}
xpovov ex" (Jo. 5:6);

:
ToaovTov xpovov
vpuv
eipl
(14
:
9); air' apxv^ MC"' ^MOi' ^(^Te (15
27); TrdXat SoKetTe (2 Cor. 12

1
19).
Cf. dTro /Speôus ol8as (2 Tim.

^

Synt., p. 86.
p. 10.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 119.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 189; Burton,
N. T. Moods
and Tenses,
880
3
:

It
is
15).
common
:
idiom in the N. T.
el/jLl
Cf. 2 Pet. 3 :4;
1 Jo.
(7)
3:8. The
f.).
:
In Jo. 8
58
is
really absolute.
Its
Iterative or
Cf. kyKpareveTac (1 Cor. 9

(9
:
Customary Present. 25); irvKTevo) and

:
graph
is (
).
i/TrcoTridfco /cat
SovXayccyo}
26
So
12)
;
vqareixj} 8ls
tov aa^^ciTOV, airodeKaTevoj iravTa ocra KTccfxai
(Lu. 18
didc^fjn /cat cnrooldcjOfXL
(19
8,
unless
it
refers to
a new
purpose in Zaccheus, when

Cor. 10
Xere (11
: :
it
:
would be
:
aoristic); o evXoyovpLev (1
16); 6v
K\ooiJiep
(10
16);
TpoXaiufSaveL (11: 21);

:
KarayyeXa/jiap-
26); ea^tet
/cat iriveL
(11
:
29); KOLixwvTai (11
30); ovx
ravu
(1 Jo.
3:6);
a/jLapraveL (3
8).
Cf.
Mt. 9
17.
Probably also
a4)ioptv
(Lu. 11:4).
Either an act just (5) The Inchoative or Conative Present. beginning, like ylverai (Mk. 11:23), tvdvs aKavha\lôvTaL (4:17),
Xtâfere
(Jo.
10:32),
vtTrrets
(13:6),
(Gal. 2
Trotets
(13:27),
ciTet
(Ro.
:4), or an act
begun but interrupted

:
like weideLs (Ac.

dLKatovade (5
:
26:28;
cf.
2 Cor. 5
:
11), apayKaêLS
14),
:
4),
dm7:
Kaôvaiv (6
12).
Indeed Xidaêre
(Jo. 10
32)
and
is
viirTeis
(13
6)
may
be regarded as conative
also.
This idiom
more common
In English
in the imperfect.
Cf. Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 82.
we
have to use "begin" or ''try." These examples are usually aoristic, (e) The Historical Present. but sometimes durative.^ In Mk. 1 12 we have e/c|3dXXei which Cf. i]yeTo in Lu. 4 1 (but Mt. 4:1, ap-^xdri)- So in is durative. Mk. 1 21 elcnropevovTaL is durative. The same thing seems to be true of aKoXovOovaiP in 6:1. Rhetorical deliberative questions (f) The Deliberative Present. may be put by the present ind., but it is rather a rhetorical way of putting a negation than a question of doubt. Cf. ri woLovixep;
:
(Jo. 11:47),
'What
6
are
:
we
doing?'
Cf.
woiweL (Mt. 21:40)

:
with
done.
Tt iroLuinev (Jo.
28)
and
tL iroL-qaoipep
(Ac. 4
16).
The im-
plication of the question in Jo.
11:47
is
that nothing was being

of 8vpaa9e
In Mt. 12
34,
ttcos
Svpaade ayada \a\e7p; a durative delib-
erative question
inf.
is
expressed
by means
and the
:
pres.
Cf. a similar construction with Set in Ac. 16
30.^
:
Cf. the
same idiom in an indirect question (Col. 4:6; 2 Th. 3 7; 1 Tim. The use of the pres. ind. in a deliberative question is a 15). rare idiom. Blass^ finds parallels in colloquial Latin and an example in Herm., Sim., IX, 9, 1. The examples are not numerous (q) The Periphrastic Present. It is rare in in the LXX." Cf. Num. 14 8; 1 Ki. 18 12, etc.
3
: : :
Goodwin, M. and T., p. 11. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
'
jb.
p. 210.
"
C. and
S., Sel., p. 68.
TENSE (XPONOS)
the N. T.
881
and
bkov karl
Moulton^ warns us that
"Ixoiv 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
impersonal verbs (and
examples see Gildersleeve {Syntax, p. 81). So the ex<^) stand to themselves ^ in support from
kolvt].,
ancient Greek and the

irop tcTTLv
Cf. tarLv exovra (Col. 2 :23); wpekari)

1
4; 8eov
earcos
(Mt. 3:15); e^6v {sc. Cf. eariv (Ac. 19:36.

(Ac. 25
:
in Ac. 2
29 and 2 Cor. 12
15), kaTLU irpoaava-
Pet. 1:6).
Other examples are

3
:
el/jLl
10), earLV Karefixo/JLefr] (Jas.
TrXrjpovaa
ixtva
dXXa
:
/cat
Tepiacrevovaa (2
Cor. 9:12), karip a\\r]yopov~

Jo.
(Gal. 4
24)
and, in particular, explanatory phrases with
kariv
:
(Mt. 1:23; 27:33;

25; Col. 1
:
Mk. 5:41;
:
1:41).
Cf. further
Ac. 5
{Q)
6; 3
2; 2 Cor. 2
17.
is
Presents as Perfects.
Here the form
that of the present,
but the root has the sense of completion. The action is durative only in the sense of state, not of linear action. This is an old
use of these roots.^
here').
Ketrat
Cf. Lu. 15
/cat
77/cco
27, 6 a8k4>6s
7?/ct
('has come,'
'is
Cf. e^fjXdou
:
(Jo.
8:42).
See ch. VIII.
So with
(Mt. 3 10), 'the axe lies at the root of the trees' (has been placed there); 6 didaaKoKos irapecrTLv (Jo. 11:28)= 'the Teacher is come.' Sometimes vlkolco is so used (cf. Ro. 12:21;
Rev. 15
11: 18.
'AStKco
2).
So
i^rrcoj^rat
(2 Pet. 2
:
20).
Cf. d/co6erat in 1 Cor.
See also d/couerat (1 Cor. 5 1) which is rather iterative. in Mt. 20 13 is durative, but approaches a perfect in
:
Ac. 25
(t)
11
(cf. TreTrpaxa).
Perfects as Presents.
Some
perfect forms have
come
to be
though not used as practical durative have seen,' 'I know' from el8ou='I word. Thus oUa
presents,
of
(cf.
the same
Mt. 6
8).
So
earijKa
(Lu. 8
20),
ixefjivrjuaL
(1 Cor. 11:2).
As
:
to aToKoAa that
occurs in the N. T. in the participle (Mt. 10
6)
and the same
thing
is
true of
e'iccda
(Lu. 4
10),
which occurs
in past perfect.
So
êj3r]Ka,
yeyova, 5e8oLKa,
ripc^lea p-ai, eyprjyopa, eot/ca, Ke/cXrj/iai, Ke/CTiy/xai,
ireiroLda, xe0i;/ca, TtOvriKa.

(k)
Cf. Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 438.
Futuristic Presents.
These are usually

of et^t in the
punctiliar,
but some
are durative.^
Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 83) calls this "Praesens
Propheticum."
The absence
120).
N. T.
is
noticeable.
The papyri
illustrate
abundantly
this futuristic
present (Moul-
ton, Prol., p.
Since the pres. ind. occurs for past, presI,
Prol., p. 226.
Cf. also Schmid, Atticismus, III, p. 114; K.-G., Bd.

""
pp.
38
ff.
3
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 204.
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 9; Burton,
p. 87.
N. T. M. and T., p. 10; Gildersl., Synt., * Moulton, Prol., p. 120.
882

it
is
ent and future time

in the ind.
clear that
it
"time"
is
In the other moods
has, of course,
secondary even no time at all.
As examples
:
of the durative present in this sense take irapablboTai
(Mt. 26:45), avajSaivofxev (Mk. 10:33), inrayco oKieheLV and epxoMeXXw fxeda (Jo. 21 3), Siepxofiat (1 Cor. 16 6). 5), eav (1 Tun. 4 and the pres. inf. is, of course, a prospective present. This idiom
: :
is
very
common
in the
N.
T., 84
fut.) inf.,
though, of course,
:
jueXXco is
examples with the pres. (6 aor., not always in the pres. ind.
Mt. 2:13; 16 27, etc. The Imperfect for Past Time (6 TraparartKos). Here we have the time-element proper, the augment probably being an old adverb for "then," and the action being always durative. "The augment throws linear action into the past."^ The absence of a true imperfect in English makes it hard to translate this Greek
Cf.
(6)
tense.
(a)
imperfects.
in
his
Doubtful Imperfects. They are sometimes called "aoristic" This term is not a happy one, as Gildersleeve^ shows
criticism
of
Stahl
for
his
"synonym-mongering" and
justification for
"multiplication of categories."
The only
the
it
term
is
is
that, as already
shown
tell
in the discussion of the aorist,
whether some forms are aorist ind. or imperf. ind. The same root was used for both forms, as only one form existed and it is hard to tell which tense the form is. A certain amount of obscurity and so of overlapping existed from
not possible always to
the beginning.^
conceives of
143).
e(})epov
We
see this difficulty in
rjv, ecprjv,
eXeyov, etc., par-
ticularly in verbs of saying,

i7r^7a, eTrjya
INIodern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. Thumb {Th. L.-Z., xxviii, 423) thinks that in the N. T. had begun to be treated as aorist, but Moulton (Prol., p.
etc.*
commanding,
e(j)epa
and
as aorists
though he admits the possibility of punctiliar action Mt. 5 24 {ib., p. 247). See also ^kpe koI I'Se, But one must not think that the 0pe Kol fiake in Jo. 20 27. Greeks did not know how to distinguish between the aorist and the imperfect. They "did not care to use their finest tools on every occasion," but the line between aorist and imperf. was
129) demurs,
in Tp6a4>epe to bCopov in
:
:
usually very sharply drawn.^

Sanskrit.'^
The
it
still
distinction
survives,
is
as old as the
differ-
In modern Greek
though the
*
^
^ Am. Jour, of Philol., 1908, p. 394. Moulton, Prol., p. 128. Giles, Man., p. 488; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 4S7; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 46.
Gildersl.,
Am.
Jour, of Philol.,
XXIV,
p. 17.
^
p. ISO;
XXIX,
p. 4.

Gildersl., Synt., pp. 91, 94.
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
p.
201
f.
TENSE (XPONOS)
883
ence between "Dêyev and direv is well-nigh gone/ if it ever existed. The same thing is true of the usage of Achilles Tatius.'* Hence we need not insist that riv (Jo. 1 1) is strictly durative always (im:
be sometimes actually aorist also. So as to It perfect). (Mk. 4 21, 24, 26, 30, etc.), etc. Blass, l\tyev 'i4>n (Mt. 4:7); Note fails to make a clear distinction. 192, T. Gk., Gr. of N. p.
:
may
kKkXevov (Ac. 16
22).
(0) The Descriptive Tense in Narrative. may be insisted on in the true imperfect.
But the
linear action
It is properly "nicht-
punktuell."
it is
Though
less
frequent in
Homer than
the
aorist
often ''divides the crown with the aorist."^
The imperfect
The modern Greek

:
moving panorama, a "moving-picture show." preserves this idiom (Thumb, Handb., p. In 1 Cor. 10 3 f. l(t)a'yov and einov give the summary (con121). stative) record, while Ittlvov presents an explanatory description.
here a sort of
See further TpoarjXdou
Kal
bii^Kovovv
(Mt. 4:11);
iTrtaev
kol
kblbov
Sometimes the change from aorist to imperf. or vice versa in narrative may be due In Mt. 26 59 we have ovx to the desire to avoid monotony.
(13:8); epvaraâv mt Uadevdov (25:5).
:
tvpov,
in
story.
Mk. 14 55 ovx ivpLaKov. The The imperfect draws the picture.

:
aorist
tells
the simple
see the
It helps
you to
course of the act.

history.
It passes before the
eye the flowing stream of
It is the tense of Schilderung.^
Cf
elxev to evdvua avrov
3:4), eêwopeveTo (3:5), epaTTTiôvTo (3:6). vivid scene at the Jordan is thus sketched. Then
(Mt.
The whole Matthew reSo

'
verts to the aorist (3

aiiTU)
:
7).
Cf. ripxovro in Jo. 19
2.
6s coêiXej/
(Mt. 18 28) aptly describes a debtor as eirpiyev, the choking in his rage.' See the picture of Jesus in WeupeL (Mk. 12:41). Cf. edewpovv (Lu. 10 18), eêieyopro (14 7), 7repie/3\e7rero (Mk. 5 32),
: :
:
kîaTavTo (Lu. 2 :47;
cf.
Ac. 2
12).
Cf. Lu. 9
43^5;
:
16
19;
Mt. 8
24.
good example
is kKvKltTo
a^pl^wp (Mk. 9
20).
Cf.
further, eTLxrep Kal irpoarivxeTo
(Mk. 14:35), the

probably);
:
realistic
xe06/xec
scene in
Kal
ov8els
Gethsemane
di5ou
(Peter's
description
(Lu.
15
16)
uplXovp wpos aXXrjXovs (24

:
14)
kêirXTjaaovPTO
(Mt. 7:28);
58).
tTiOei
(2 Cor. 3
13);
rjKoKovdeL
Kal eKadr^To
(Mt. 26
is
splendid example of the descriptive durative
kaicoira
(Mt. 26: 63)

hl'ôp
= 'kept
:
(Ac. 21
29)
silent.' So ewXeopep (Ac. 21:3). between past perfect and aorist.
Note hoCf.
c</)iXet
Moulton,
Prol., p. 128.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 436.
*
3 *
Sexauer, Dcr Sprachfii;ebr. d. riim. Schriftst. Achilles Tatius, 1899, p. 29. Gildcrsl., Am. Jour, of Pliilol., 1908, p. 242.
Hultsch, Dcr Gcbr. d. crziililenden Zcitf. bei Polyb.
884
(Jo. 11

:
36), 5tri7pet (Lu.
51.
Cf. 2
19).
See the picture of
Noah's time in Lu. 17:27.

Quite striking
is
rjXTriôfxeu
Cf. ewopevouTo xo-lpopres (Ac. 5 :41).

:
"imperfect
and
aorist
in Lu. 24 21. See further for the interwoven" in narrative Gildersleeve,
Syntax, p. 91. An artist could describe his work by kToirjffa or Gildersleeve notes {ib., p. 93) that in the inscriptions of eiroiovv.
the fourth cent. B.C. the imperfect
is
absent.
It
becomes com-
mon
(7)
again in the imperial time.
The
Iterative (Customary) Imperfect.
cult to tell
Cf. TToXKol
Sometimes it is diffiwhether an act is merely descriptive or is a series. ttXovcxlol e(3aK\op (Mk. 12 :41); kirplyovTo (5 13), where
:
the separate details are well described
by the
:
vivid imperfect.
k\erj^xo(jhvr]v
The notion
Greek keeps
(Lu. 7:4,
of repetition
is
clearly present in ^pcbra

:
(Ac. 3:3); iipura avrbv

this
(Mk. 7 26). Cf. Jo. 4 31. The modern usage (Thumb, Handh., p. 122). It is not necesCf. TapeKciXovp
<xTov8ai(jos
iraprjpei.
sary to see any "aoristic" notion here.^
W.
:
H.);
(Ac. 27
:
9).
It is well
shown
in Bapra-
/3as kôvXeTo,
In Ac. 24
}reiJ.T6fj,epos.
UavXos -q^lov (15 37 f.), the one opposing the other. 26 repetition is shown in cb/xtXet by irvKvorepop /xeraCf oWol de aXXo rt kweclxjjpovv (21 34) kirvpdapeTO in
. : ;
verse
oirov
33;
T]K0V0P
Kad'
rmepav
:
kKaBeôjxr^p
(Mt. 26:55);
TToXXa
erviTTOP
:
(27:30);
ov
(Mk. 6
:
55)
Kar-qyopovp
(15
3)
airtkvev
:
irapjiTOvvTO (15
6.
Cf.
eluOet.
aToXvetP op ijdeXop,
Mt. 27
/cat
15); kpe:
vevop (Lu. 1: 62); kâwTLêp (Jo.

3)
;
22); '^ve (5
18); kdiSoaap (19

buixepiôv (2
k^(j}ppves
(21
:
18)
kridovp (Ac.
3:2); kTiwpaaKOP
).
45.
Cf. 4
34).
Moulton
(
{Prol., p. 128) represents the iterative
imperfect by the graph
Cf. Ac. 16
:
18; 18
8;
Mk.
4 33 f. A good example is in Lu. 2 41, kwopevoPTo Kar' eros. Sometimes the imperfect looks (5) The Progressive Imperfect. ahead, even approaching the time of the speaker.- Thus Tt on
3
:
11;
k^rfrelrk
{xe
(Lu. 2 :49);
fjv
dx^Te
air'
apxv^ (1 Jo. 2:7); kpeKOinbu-qv
(Ro. 15:22); eneXKop (Rev. 3:2).
expressed by
:
fxeWco,^
:
Lu. 9 31; 10 1; the verb itself expresses peril or danger. Gildersleeve {Syntax, Cf. the p. 97) calls this idiom "Imperfect of Unity of Time."
:
: :
This idea is, however, often but without the backward look also. Cf. Jo. 4 47; 6 71, etc. In kKipbhpevop (Lu. 8 23)
"progressive" present in
(a), (/3).
The
Text. Recept. gives a good

ttjs
example See also

1
in
tjp
TrdXat to -kKoIop kp ukaui
doKaaa-qs
(Mk. 6
23
:
:47).
^p jap
k^ iKaPwv xpovoiv deXwp Idtlp avTOv (Lu.
8).
Blass, Gr. of
2 3
Burton, N. T.
Gildersl.,
N. T. Gk., p. 191. Moods and Tenses, Synt., p. 94 f.
p. 13
f.
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 13.
TENSE (XPONOS)?
885
(e) The Inchoative or Conative Imperfect. Here the accent is on the beginning of the action either in contrast to preceding aorists (just begun) or because the action was interrupted (begun, but not completed). The two sorts of inchoative action may be represented by two graphs, thus ( ) for the first, () for the second.^ In Enghsh we have to say "began" for the one, "tried" for the other. The modem Greek maintains this idiom (Thumb, Handb., p. 121). As examples of the first sort where "began" brings out the idea, note ediSaaKe (Mt. 5 2. Cf. Jo. 7 Cf. Lu. 1 64); e/cXatev (14 72); dieprjaaeTo 14); kXaXei (Mk. 7 35.
:
(Lu. 5:6); dceKaXow (6

34.
11); avve-Kk-qpovvTO (8
e(i)o^r]6r](Tav)
;
23)
eire<rKlaêv (9
Note
ingressive aorist
:
eTk4>w(7Kev
(23
54)
eTre-
ylvwaKov (Ac. 3
10); kK-qpvacnv (9 :20); bteKpivovTo (11 :2); Kar-qy-
yeXKou (13:5);
Tapo^^vvero (17:16); aireXoyeiTo (26:1); 'eiroiodPTo (27:18); eXi/ero (27:41). Cf. Lu. 13:13, 17. In kdXoi^j^ (Lu. 1 59) we see both ideas combined. The action
:
Wopvôvv (17:5);
was begun, but was sharply interrupted by ovxi, aXXa from Elizabeth. Cf. vvv e^TjTovv (Jo. 11:8). A good instance of the interrupted imperf. is Trpoae4)epev in Heb. 11 17. Examples of the
:
conative imperfect (action begun, but interrupted) are SLeKoAvev (Mt. 3:14); mSovp (Mk. 15:23, in contrast Aâth ovk eXaêv);
kKoAvofxev
(Lu. 9:49);
e^r)Tovv
;
(Jo.
10:39;
:
cf.
19:11);
hofxcêu
(Ac. 7
eireLdev
25.
Note
ov a-wrJKav)
avprjXkaa-aev (7
26.
Note
ciTrcbcraTo)
(Ac. 18:4);
rjuajKaôv
Moulton (Prol,
6
:
p. 247) cites the
(26:11); Trpoae(t)epev (Heb. 11:17). conative pres. avayKaôvacu (Gal.
12).
(f)
The "Negative" Imperfect.
of nomenclature, to use Gildersleeve's
refinement,
and yet
it
is
is not a very happy piece remark about Stahl's overthe best one can do. "The negative
This
commonly denotes resistance to pressure or disappoint* ment."2 As examples note 6 8e ovk i]6e\ei> (followed by 'iâkev, Mt. 18 30) and preceded by irapeKoKei (iterative), ovbels kSidov (Lu. 15 16), OVK ridekev (15 27. Note (hpyladri), OVK eTriaTevev (Jo. 2 24),
imperfect
: :
ov
yap
riOeXev (Jo.
:
7:1), ovdeh eroXyua (21
12), ovk etuiu (Ac.
19
30).
Mt. 22 3. The "Potential" Imperfect. This is a peculiar use of the (77) tense for present time, where the present ind. fails to meet the
Cf.
requirement of the situation.
Gildersleeve {Sijutax, p. 97) calls
it
"modal" use, Ua, etc. The unfulfilled duty comes as a surprise. This "modal" force of the imperfect ind. appears still in the
Cf.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 128.
Gildersl., Syat., p.
95
886
There are several vap. 128). Verbs of wishing fonn one class of passages. In a case like eôvKSfxrjv (Ac. 25 22), jSovXonai would be too blunt (cf. 1 Tim. 2 The exact idea is 'I was just on the point of 8).
rieties of
it.
: :
modern Greek (Thumb, Handb.,
wishing.'
It is freely
1
:
rendered
'I
could wish' or
'I
should wish.'
In 2 Cor.
Phil. 13 f
.
15
kôvKbixr\v irporepov
has
its
usual signification.
In
eôv\6iJ.r]v
(a past preference) is set over against ov8ev
qdeXtjaa (a past
irpds
ii/jLOLs
apTL (Gal.
1
ent see
deKoixtv.
Another example is ijdeXov iraptivai Note apTL. For the force of the presCor. 10 20; Col. 2:1; and especially Lu. 19 14, ov
decision).^
20).
In Jo. 6
21,
i]de\ov,
:
the
usual notion occurs.
An
ex-
ample is found in Ro. 9 3, 7)vx6iJ.r}v, where Paul almost expresses a moral wrong. He holds himself back from the abyss by the
tense.
He
:
does not say evxanai
(cf.
2 Cor. 13
:
7),
nor
evâifxrju
av
(Ac. 26
29).
Note
oh xlêvdonai in
Ro. 9
1.
In Ac. 27: 29 tjuxovto
has
its
usual force.
Wishes about the present are naturally unattainable. In the ancient idiom etde or et yap was used with the imperf. ind. or Callimachus, B.C. 260, uses coêXof with the (b(i>eKov and the inf. ind. The augmentless form 6cf)e\op appears in Herodotus (Moulton, ProL, p. 201). In the N. T. only 64)e\op is used with the imperf. for wishes about the present. Cf. otpeKov aveixâde (2 Cor.
11:1);
6cf)e\ou ^s
(Rev. 3
15).
Verbs of propriety, possibility, obligation or necessity are also used in the imperfect when the obligation, etc., is not lived up to, has not been met, Winer ^ has stated the matter well. The Greeks (and the Latins) start from the past and state the real
reader, by comparing that with was not met. The English and tiie Germans start from the present and find trouble with this past statement of a present duty (an unfulfilled duty). A distinction is usually drawn between the present and the aorist infinipossibility or obligation,
and the
facts, notes that the obligation
tives
r]u,
when they occur with

Tju,
these verbs {kbvvaro,
oj4>eL\ov, e5et,
koXov
diis,
KpeLTTou
aurJKev,
KadrjKeu).
The
present
inf.
refers
more
an action in the past. This however, only by suggestion. Thus in Mt. 18 33, ovk Uei /cat eXerjaaL, note ojs Kaych ae ifXk-qaa. Cf. also Mt. 23 23 ravra
rectly to the present, the aorist to
:
ae
bk
'ibei
TTOLTJaaL
KaKtLva
fii)
a(f)eivaL,
:
(25
27)
rjp
e5et ae
âXeiv, (26
9) kbvvaro
TrpadrjvaL Kal dodrjvai,
(26
24) KaXoj'
avT(2
(no
inf. here),
(Ac. 22
22) ov yap KadrjKev ainov
^y)v,
(24
19) ovs
inf.),
tbet.
kirl
aov
e5et
rrape^vaL,
/xi)
(26
32) a-rroXeXvaOaL eSvparo (note perf.

1
(27:21)
^
avayeadai
Burton, N. T.
Mooda and
Tenses, p. 15.
W.-Th.,
p. 282.
TENSE (XPONOS)
KepBrjaai
inf.),
re,
887
fxri
(2 Pet.
21) KpelrTOV
rjv
avrols
tirtyvuKkvai (pcrf.
:
2:3) d0' wv Ibei (xe xatpetJ', (Col. 3 18) cos avrJKev h Kvpiu}. (Cf. Eph. 5 4.) But it must not be supposed that these impcffects cannot be used in the normal expression of a past obligation or possibility that was met. The context makes the matter clear. Cf. Lu. 13 16; 22 7; 24 26; Jo. 4:4, etc. In Lu. 15 32 tdet applies to both the past and present, probably with an implication against the attitude of the elder brother. In Heb. 2 10 eTrpeirev and 2 17 ojêiXej' have their natural past meaning. Another instance where the imperfect refers to present time is in
(2 Cor.
: :
:
the second-class conditional sentences (see chapter
XIX, Mode).
When
a condition
is
assumed as unreal and

is
refers to present
time, the imperfect tense
apodosis in normal constructions.
and
in Ac.
26
used both in the protasis and the See apodosis in Mt. 26 24 32 (both quoted above). It is only the tense that
:
calls for discussion here.
Cf. ap-apTiau ovx elxoaav (Jo. 15
22, 24),
where
11).
vvp 8e
1
is
used to explain the point.

:
So
ei
ovk elxes (Jo. 19

:
In
Cor. 5
10, w4)ei\Te ixpa
Uei
iraOdv, we
:
eêKdtiv,
and Heb. 9
rjv
25, kivd
only have the apodosis.
Cf.
'eylvooaKev
av
(Lu. 7
39) as
Cf. Lu. 17: 6.

{Q)
a type of the more usual construction wih av. In Heb. 11 15 the imperfects describe past time.
:
In Indirect Discourse. In general the imperfect in discourse represents an imperfect of the direct discourse.
indir.
But
sometimes with verbs of perception it is relative time and refers to a time previous to the perception.^ Thus dx^v t6v 'lwavr]v 6tl Trpo(f)riTr]s î> (Mk. 11 32); eUov otl ovk rju (Jo. 6 22. Cf. OVK eaTLV
: :
in verse 24)
6tl TpoaaiTrjs
rjv
(9
8)
eireyivcoaKov otl
rjv
6 Kadrjfxevos
(Ac. 3
oKov,
10),
while in 4:13
rjaav is
ribtiaav oTL virrjpxev (16:3). In Ac. 3 10 the idiom approaches that in Jo. 1 15, ovtos rjv 6 eiircov (a parenthesis), where the verb is thrown back to past time. Our idiom more natu:
rightly antecedent to eTreylvco-
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

1
by
rjv
and the present
participle
was
cer-
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
f.
is
particularly
common
p. 192; Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 339. in John.
This imperfect
Synt., p. 9G
888
NEW TESTAMENT
And yet it is just in the imperfect in the N. T. most frequent. It is not unknown in the ancient Greek.^ Schmid^ finds it rare in the kolvt], especially in the imperfect, where the N. T. is so rich in the idiom. He suggests the Aramaic influence, particularly as that language is fond of Periphrasis is thoroughly Greek, and yet in the this periphrasis. N. T. we have unusual frequency of a usage that the kolvti has not greatly developed except "where Aramaic sources underlie the Greek" (Moulton, Prol, p. 226). Gildersleeve (Syntax, p. 124) It gives classical examples from Pindar, Thuc, Isocrates, etc. is true that in the N. T. the pres. participle with rjv occurs chiefly
tainly not so great.
that this idiom
is
but 17 of them in chapmost subject to Aramaic Only 7 occur in Acts 13influence (possible Aramaic sources). 28, and these mainly in the speech in 22 delivered in Aramaic* The LXX* gives abundant illustration of this analytic tendency
in
Mark
(16 times),
Luke
(30),
Acts
(24,
ters 1-12),
and
just in those portions
in the imperfect.
Cf. Gen. 37: 2;
Deut. 9: 24; Judg.

(p. 18)
7.
Cf.
Thackeray,
249) cites
rjv
Gr., p. 24.
^/jltjv
From
Pelagia
Moulton
itself is
(Prol., p.
airepxoiJ.evos.
For a papyrus
it
illustration see 6aa
Kadi]Kovra,
P. Oxy. 115 (ii/A.D.).
The idiom
therefore
N. T. is due to the Hebrew and Aramaic. Matthew has it 3 times, Jolm 10, Paul 3.^ The Ph. 2 26) are more like the Pauline examples (Gal. 1 22 f
Greek, but the frequency of
in the
:
classic
independence of the participle.

'Ix^v
It
is
usually the de-
scriptive imperfect that uses the periphrastic form.

aK(îv
So
riv
5i5d-
(Mt. 7:29);
it is
rjv
(Mk. 10:22);
:
riaav
rjv
avajSaipovres
:
(10:
32);
^v TrpocrevxoiJ.epou (Lu. 1
10);
KaLOjjLhr}
(Lu. 24
rjv
32).
But
:
sometimes
22);
Tjv
the iterative imperfect as in

r]ixkpav
biavevoiv
:
(Lu. 1
hbacFKwv to Kad'
(19 :47).^
In Lu. 5
in the
17 the peri-
phrastic imperfect
and past perfect occur

irpovirrjpxov ovres (cf.
same sentence.
In Lu. 23
(k)
12 note
Ac. 8:9).
Past Perfects as Imperfects.
verbs are merely presents in sense

verbs.
pSet
So the past perfects
The present perfects of these when compared with other have only an imperfect force. Thus
:
(Mt. 27: 18); elwda (27: 15); IffrijKeL (Jo. 18 The future (c) The Future for Future Time.
,
5).
is
(punctiliar)
tive.''
as has already been shown,

lines
p.
The broad
Cf. K.-G., Bd.
I,
of
the
5
<>
mainly aoristic but sometimes duraproblem have already been
38
f. f.
*
'
Atticismus, III, p. 113
Moulton,
C. and
Prol., p. 227.
Moulton, Prol., p. 227. Burton, N. T. M. and T., Moulton, Prol., p. 149.
p. 16.
S., Sel., p. 69.
TENSE (XPONOS)
drawTi.
889
tive future
As already shown, the modern Greek has a special duraby means of ^d Xuco (pros. subj.). See Thumb, Handh., A summary statement of the durative future is given. p. 160. (a) The Three Kinds of Action in the Future (futuristic, voliThese occur here also. Thus merely futurtive, deliberative).
are
acbcrei
istic
(Mt.
1
:
:21);
/SaTrrio-et
(Mt. 3 :11); eXinovaLu (12

TpoeXevaeraL (1
:
21); earai (Lu.

Kvaco
14
f.);
eTnarpeipei
and
16
;
f.);
fX-
(Jo.
12
32)
îjaoixtv
(Ro. 6:2); Kvptevaet (6
14)
âcTdaei.
^rjTrjaov-
(Gal.
GLv
6:5);
eTrtreXeaet
(Ph.
1:6);
xc-PWo/JLai-
(1
18);
(Rev. 9:6).
Burton^
4
14;
calls this
Ac. 7:6.
ov
5).
fxr]
-Durative also is
(Jo.
:
"the progressive future." adiK-qaet with ov p-f] (Lu. 10 19).

:
Cf.
So
:
dixl/ricreL
cf.
36); ov
/jlt]
aKoKovdrjaovaiv (Jo. 10
Examples of the volitive durative future are the legal pre-
cepts
oi)
(common
:
in the
:
LXX)
:
so often quoted in the

:
N. T.
Cf.
(lx)vevaeLS
(Mt. 5
;
21); ov ixolx^v(JHS (5
;
.
27); ovk e-mopK-qaeiS, oltoSo};

:
ceLS
(5
33)
48), etc.
'I shall.'
volitive.
eaeade (5 cf d7a7rare, verse 44) ayairriaeis (5 43 Perhaps olKobop.r](yo3 (Mt. 16:18)='! wall' rather than In 1 Tim. 6 8, tovtols apKeadrâoneda, the resolution is It is possible that we have the volitive use in Mt.
:
4, OVK
7r'
apTU) nbvco
^rjcreTat.
6 avOpoiiros.
:
The
deliberative future
may
be durative. Cf. Mt. 18 21, xoo-d/cts anapTrjaei; (merely interrogative) and Lu. 14 34, h tU-l aprvdrjaeTaL; (rhetorical). Cf.
also
:
aor., pres.
(/3)
and
fut. ind. in
Mt. 28
7.
The Periphrastic Future.

In Lysias
The very
(2), 13,
failure
of the
future
to express durative action clearly- led to the use of the present

participle with eaofxai.
note laovTai
:
yevbixevoi
more
:
Uke a future punctiliar (or perfect). Cf. Mt. 10 22 and 24 9, 13; Lu. 21 :-17); (Mk. 13 25) 'âovTai ecjeaê /jLiaovixevoi (Mk. 13
: :
TTLTTOVTes,
(Lu.
20) (21
:
ear]
(JLonrQiu,
(5
10)
effrj
ô^ypojv,
(17
9)
35)
iaovTat
aXrjOovaat.,
24)
earat iraTOVnevrj,
(1
Cor. 14
:
eaeaOe
\akovuTes.
Cf. Gen.
12, 14;
Deut. 28
29; Mai. 3
3, etc.
The
with
frequent use of
/xeXXco
and the
pres. inf. (durative)
has already
:
been mentioned.
the pres.
2.
inf.
The
fut. of m^XXco itself
occurs (Mt. 24
6)
Subjunctive and Optative.
The
rarity of the pres. subj.
(and opt., of course) has already been commented upon. The aorist is used as a matter of course here unless durative action is
to be expressed.
(Jo.
few examples
will
28); eav Ixnre (Mt. 17: 20);

is
Thus suffice. ixm^v (Ro. 5:1).
tI iroLcopLtp;
The subsubj.
junctive
very
common
T., p. 32.
indeed, but not in the present tense.
There
1
is
in the
N. T. no instance of a periphrastic present

"
N. T. M. and
Cf. Jaim., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 444.
890
NEW TESTAMENT
John's free use of the pres. subj. has already been noted (Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 369 ff.). Cf. kav woLrjre (13 17); ed;' In Col. 1 18 note yhrjTaL Trpurevo^v like eyepero IJLapTVpw (5 31).
or optative.
: :
cTiXjSovTa
(Mk. 9:3).
:
The
:
present opt. survives in
dvvaiinjv (Ac.
8 :31); exoL (Ac. 17:11); ôvXolto (Ac. 25:20); OeXot (Ac. 17:18; Lu. 1 62); el'r? (9 46; 15 26; 18 36; 22 23; Ac 10 17).
: : :
3.
Imperative.
The
contrast between the present imperative
and the
aorist subj. in prohibitions
had to be
set forth in con-
nection with the punctiliar-aorist subj.
The
present imper.
was
found to be regularly durative.

pres.
In Paul's frequent use of the

is
;
imper. with
/xi)
the inchoative or conative or customary

noticeable,
juTjSe
(prohibiting a course of conduct) use of the present nrfdevl kinTidei (5 22) as in uri djueXet (1 Tim. 4 14)
:
KOLPc^peL
(ih.);
^li,
fiedvaKeade
(Eph. 5
18)
fxii p.ri
ypebbeude (Col. 3:9).^

is
Cf.
m'?
dTratret
(Lu. 6:30).
In general
used
with the present

Cf.
nrj
imper, to forbid what

(Jo. 6
:
one
is
already doing.
(poiSelade
:
20)
/jltj
Kplpere
;ui7
(Mt. 7:1);
hoKtlTt
^rjKcrt afxaprape (Jo.
14)
fxif
davpLaêre
The
Kal
(5:45); jur?/cri oKvWe (Lu. 8:49). durative force of the pres. imper. is well seen in KaOevSere
(5:28);
apairaveade
ei'
(Mt. 26 :45).
Traprl
Cf. also TaPTore xo-^P^^fj dStaXetTrrcos

(1
Trpoo-ei'xecrê,
evxcLpt-crTelTe
:
Th. 5
16-22).
good ex-
ample is seen in Ac. 18 9, Mi) cl>o(3ov, dXXd XdXet Kal p.r] atojirrjcrris, 'He had been afraid, he was to go on speaking, he was not to become silent.' Cf. 2 Tim. 2 16, 22 f. The contrast between aorist and pres. imper. is often drawn in the N. T., as in Jo. 5:9; Mt. 16 24. We note the periphrastic pres. imper. in tVî evpoojp
: :
(Mt. 5
25);
'iaOi
exoiP (Lu.
19
17); iVre yLPcoaKovres
(Eph. 5
5)^;
earcoaap Kaibp-epoL (Lu. 12:35).

yp-qyopoip
Cf. Judg. 11: 10; Prov. 3:5; yipov

:
(Rev. 3:2); 2 Cor. 6
14.
Moulton
{Prol., p. 249) cites
from Pelagia
4.
(p. 26) eao yLPcoaKo^p.
Infinitive.
tive.
The present inf. can be assumed to be duraThe matter has had some discussion in connection with the
but a few further examples
yp6.4>eLP
vpTip
aorist inf. (punctiliar),
will illustrate
the usage.
avTov
Cf.
:
rd
33)
avra
(Ph. 3
1)
and
to ayanrdv
(Mk. 12 Cf
where the
inf.
is
linear action is obvious.^
Indeed
the force of the pres.

ment.'*
.
so normal as to call for

:
little
;
com-
ov hvpapai. TvoLtlp (Jo. 5

(1 Jo.
30.
Cf.
Mt. 6
24)
to deXetv
:
(Ro. 7:18); apapTapeip

ToD TraTetp (Lu.
1
10
19),
etc.
f.
3:9); irpoaevxâdaL (1 Cor. 11 13); For the distinction between the

Cf. Naylor, CI. Rev., 1906, p. 348.
Moulton,
Prol., p.
125
2 3
N. T. Gk., p. 204. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 46.

Blass, Gr. of
Moulton,
Prol., p. 204.
TENSE
aorist
(XPONO2;)
891
(Mt. 14
:
and
pres. inf. see

:
kfxjSrjvai
Kal
irpoayeiv
22).
Cf.
aireiv in
Ac. 3
2.
The frequent use
of /xeXXoj
and the
pres. inf.
In indirect discourse the merely represents the pres. ind. of the direct discourse. Cf. ehai (Mt. 22:23; Ro. 1:22); kKâWetp (Lu. 11:18), etc. There is no instance in the N. T. of a pres. inf. in indir. discourse
pres. inf.
has already been twice mentioned.
representing an imperfect ind.^

inf.,
Luke has a
periphrastic pres.
:
which occurs twice (9 18" Cf. 2 Chron. 15 16. 11:1). Only two fut. infs. in the N. T.' seem to be durative (Ac. 11:28; Jo. 21:25). The pres. inf. is most 'natural with h (cf. Lu. 8:40), and is common with 8ta (cf. Mt. 13 5 f.); ds (Ro. 12 2); but not (pres. 3, aor. 9) with wpos (Mk. 13:22). It is used only once with 7rp6 (Jo. 17:5) and is not used with fxera. Cf. Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 49 f. 5. Participle. The present participle, like the present inf., is
Tc3
elpaL
ahrov
wpoaevxoiJ.ei'ov,
:
timeless
(a)
and durative. The Time of the Present Participle
Relative.
The time comes

:
from the principal verb.

(Mt. 6
nepov
Thus
in -KiSKovvT^s êpov (Ac. 4
34.
Cf. TTuiXrjaas ijueyKev in verse 37) the time is past; in

:
nepifjLvcjp SOvarai,
:
27) the time
is
present; in eaeade pLo-ovneuot (Mt. 10

:
22),
6 jSXexwi' aTro86:aei
(Mt. 6
18),
6\povTaL tov vlbv
tov avdpooirov epx6~
(24:30) it is future. Cf. Mt. 24:46; Lu. 5:4; ,12:43. Further examples of the pres. part, of coincident action are seen
in
Mt. 27:41; Mk. 16

(h)
20; Jo.
6:6; 21:19; Ac. 9
22;
10:44;
19:9.
Futuristic.
Just as the pres. ind. sometimes has a futuristic
may be used of the future in the sense of purpose (by implication only, however). Cf. euXoyovpra (Ac. 3 26); airayyeWovTas (15 27); haKovwv (Ro. 15 26). In Ac. 18 23,
sense, so the pres. part,
:
: : :
k^ri\Qev btepxoixtvos ttju TaXaTtKrju x<^po-v,
the pres. part,

Siairepc^v
is
coincident
with the verb.

ôjievov
In 21
27)
f.
the pres. parts.
are futuristic
:
(cf.
3:26; 15:27).
:
and aTvo(t>opTLBlass compares it with
epxonevov (1 9). This use of the pres. Thuc. (Gildersleeve, A. J. P., 1908, p. 408). (c) Descriptive. But usually the pres. part, is merely descriptive. Cf. Mk. 1 4; Ac. 20 9; 2 Cor. 3 18; 4 18. There is no notion of purpose in ayovres (Ac. 21 16). In tovs aojôixhovs (Ac. 2 47) the idea is probably iterative, but the descriptive durative is certainly all that is true of to us dy laôfievovs in Heb. 10 14 (cf.
6 kpxofjLevos (Jo. 11
is
and
part,
common
in
10
10).
1
Burton, N. T.
M. and
T., p. 52.
892
(d)

Conative.
It
NEW TESTAMENT
may
:
be conative
like the pres. or imperf. ind.

:
as in Teldo)v (Ac. 28
(e)
23) or tovs dcrepxop.tvov% (Mt. 23
14).
Antecedent Time.
By
implication also the pres. part,
may
be used to suggest antecedent time (a sort of "imperfect" part.). So Ti;</)X6s Civ apTL /3Xe7rco (Jo. 9 25). See further Mt. 2 20; Jo.
:
12
17; Ac. 4
34; 10
7; Gal. 1
23.
Cf. 6 âTrriôiv
(Mk. 1:4).
An interesting example of the pres. (/) Indirect Discourse. part, with the object of a verb (a sort of indir. disc, with verbs of
sensation)
is
found in
1, etc.).
eldanev
nva
e/c/SaXXofra baiixovia
(Lu. 9 :49).
13
:
The
pres. part, is
:
common
The
after dbov in
:
Rev. (10
1;
1;
11:
14; 18
(g)
1;
20
Cf. Ac. 19
35, yivcccrKeL
ttjv ttoXlv
ovaap.
With
the Article.
present participle has often the itera6 Kkkirroiv

ol
tive
(cf.
pres. ind.) sense.
So
(Eph. 4
:
Cf. 6 KaraUccv (Mt. 27:40);
fr/roOires (2
20).
28)= 'the rogue.' The part, with
the article sometimes
loses
much
of its verbal force (Moulton,
Prol, p. 127; Kuhner-Gerth, I, p. 266). pyri, TOLS yafxovaL, C. P. R. 24 (ii/A.D.).

19
:
He
Cf.
cites
to.
from the pa-
vTapxovTa (Lu.
8).
So
in Gal. 4: 27,
Still
17
ov r'lKTovaa,
17
ovk wblvovaa.
(h)
Past Action
in Progress.
:
This
:
may
So Mk. 5 N. T. Moods and Tenses,

the pres. part.
(i)
25; Jo. 5
5; Ac. 24
be represented by Cf. Burton, 10.

:
p. 59.
"Subsequent" Action. in the pres. parts, in Ac. 14

note
Tojv,
vire(XTpe\l/av ets T-qv
Blass^ finds
:
"subsequent" action
:
21
f.
and 18
23.
But
in 14
21
f.
Avarpav
pres.
eTrtarryptf o^res rds \}/vxo-S
twv
fxadr]-
the aorist ind.
is
"effective"
part,
is
and accents the completion
of the action.
merely coincident with the not a process in the aorist. "effective" stage. The few fut. parts, in the Participles. Future Durative (j) No unless to yev-qaofxepov durative, not punctiliar, be N. T. seem to is pretty clearly example this but durative, be (1 Cor. 15 37)
The
It is a point,
ingressive punctiliar.
IV. Perfected State of the Action (6

1.
xAcios
y\
o-vvt\ik6s).
The Idea of the Perfect.

The Present
is
(a)
Perfect.
The
oldest of the perfects.
"The
perfect
Such it was in the beginning undoubtedly. The past perfect and future perfect are both built upon the present perfect stem. Both are comparatively rare, The use was at first also confined especially the future perfect. to the indicative. Moulton {Prol, p. 140) calls it the most ima present perfect." ^
portant exegetically of the Greek tenses.
1
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 198.

Gilders!.,
Cf. K.-G., Bd. II, p. 121
f.
Am.
Jour, of Philol., p. 395.
TENSE (XPONOZ)
(6)
893
was prob-
The Intensive
Perfect.
This use
(or the iterative)
ably the origin of the tense.

perish utterly.'^
iterative
(Jo.
1
:
So
6XXi;^cat='I perish,' 6XwXa = 'I

fjLe/jLvrjfxaL.
:
Cf. also dvquKW, Tedv-qKa; iXLixvqaKW,

is
The
process
seen in direaTaXKa (2
Cor.
12
17),
eupaKeu
18).
perfect, as
The "effective" aoristic present is close kin we have already seen in tjkoj (Lu. 15 27); d/couco
:
to the
(1
Cor.
11:18);
used,
ddiKoj
(Ac. 25:11).
Reduphcation, though not always
was an
effort to express this intensive or iterative idea.
So
likewise the aorist of

TroLr]cro)
an action just accomplished,

near
like eyvwv tI
(Lu. 16:4),
is
is
idea to the present perfect, though
there
later.
(c)
a difference.
More about
Perfect.
the intensive perfect a
little
The Extensive
This comes to be the usual force
of the tense.
Gildersleeve^ has put the thing finely:
"The
perfect
it
looks at both ends of an action."
It "unites in itself as
were
present and aorist, since

pleted action."^
durative.
it
expresses the continuance of comis
both punctiliar and an action as finished, the linear present as durative, but the perfect presents a completed state or condition. When the action was completed the
is
That
to say, the perfect
The
aorist (pmictiliar) represents
perfect tense does not say.
It is
still
use of the tense the
mouth
of
by speaker or John the Baptist
writer.
complete at the time of the In Jo. 1 32 reSea/xai in

:
refers to the
baptism of Jesus
:
some weeks
two words.
covery
is
before,
Kal fj.eiJiapTvpr]Ka,
but he still has the vision. Cf. 1 34, etppaKa where there is a difference of time between the
said to Peter
evpriKap-ev (1
:
When Andrew
41) his dis-
and vivid. No single graph for the perfect can In some cases the line of coiuiection from therefore be made. the act (punctiliar) to the time of speaking would be very short,
recent
in others
very long.
fact, in
it
This
line of
connection
is
just the contribu-
tion of the perfect tense as distinct
from aorist and present.
As
a matter of
the perfect
the combination of punctiliar and durative in
begins with the punctiliar and goes on with the

(
),
punctiliar,
but the emphasis may be now on the In others the two are drawn almost to a point, but not quite. In still others there is a broken continuity thus (A > B).'* It is the perfect of repeated
durative thus
now on
the durative.
action.
Cf. Jo. 1:18; 5:37; 2 Cor. 12:17.

in V.
Jebb
and D.'s Handb.,

Cf. also
p. 327.
Cf. Giles, Man., pp. 449, 491

f.
f.
Synt., p. 99.
Blass, Gr. of
Am.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 198.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 144.
894
(d)

Idea of Time in the Tense.
future perfect).
NEW TESTAMENT
it
In the ind.
appears in
three forms with the notion of time (past perfect, present perfect,
In the other modes only the present peritself
fect occurs,
but
it
has no time in
and
in the imper.
and
Often in the N. T., as in the Attic writers/ a sharp distinction is drawn between the perfect and the aorist or the present. Cf. fxapTvpel with aTearaXKev and lueiiapTvprjsubj. is naturally future.
Kev in Jo.
36
f.
elariyayev
Kai OTL eyrjyepTaL (1

eScoKas, TerripriKas
Cor. 15
Kal KeKoivooKev (Ac. 21 28); eKVLarai (Col. 4)

:
6tl ercKprj,
:
eKTiadr]
16)
rjaav,
transitive,^ as
The perfect active is frequently inhas been already shown under Voice. Cf. 'iar-qfiL,
(Jo. 17:6).
eaTr]Ka, aTroXXu/zt, airoXcoXa, etc.
2.
(a)
is
The
Indicative.
(6
The Present Perfect
evearws avvTeKiKos
is
rj
irapaKelixevos) .
It
this
not clear
inf.
how
part.
the notion of present time

it is
conveyed by
tense in the ind. since
absent in the subj. and imper., not to

it
say
and
Gildersleeve suggests that
"comes from the
absence of the augment and from the fact that a completed phenomenon cannot complete itself in the future." But that explanation
is
not very satisfactory.
The
tense does occur someis
times in the future, and the present perfect

perfect which rests
older than the past
was just the perfect tense (cf. aoristic presents and timeless aorists) and was timeless. By degrees it came to be used only for present time. The rise of The pres. perf. is much more the past perfect made it clear. common in the kolvt] than in the earlier Greek. "The perfect was increasingly used, as the language grew older, for what would formerly have been a narrative aorist" (Moulton, Prol., p. 141).
it.
on
Perhaps at
first it
In particular is this true of the vernacular as the papyri show. (a) The Intensive Present Perfect. Moulton^ calls these "PerThey are Pcrfeda Praesentia. In fects with Present Force." reality they are perfects where the punctiliar force is dropped and only the durative remains (cf. past perfect). Gildersleeve'' distinguishes sharply between the intensive use of emotional verbs and what he calls the "Perfect of Maintenance of Result." But
it is
questionable
if
the difference does not
lie
in the nature of the
verb rather than in a special modification of the tense. A real distinction exists in 1 Jo. 4 14 between redeaneda and fxaprvpovBurton^ follows Gildersleeve, but he admits the doubt on p.ev.
:
2 3
Man., p. 493. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 23.

Giles,
Prol., p. 147.
Synt., p. 99
f.
N. T. M. and
T., p.
37
f.
TENSE (XPONOS)
the subject.^
895
perfect
In
these verbs
when the
in
has
lost
the
punctiHar notion
it is
due to the change
The list mind is
is
rather large in
meaning of the verbs.^ Homer, particularly where attitude of

earriKa,
is
expressed.^
Giles (Man., p. 481) thinks that originally
the perf. was either intensive or iterative like
and that
the notion of recently completed action (extensive)
a develop-
ment. These almost purely durative perfects in the N. T. may be illustrated by eoiKa (Jas. 1:6); auecoya (2 Cor. 6: 11); oUa (Mt. 6:8); eVrr^/ca (Rev. 3 20) hearrjKa (2 Th. 2:2); TrkiroLda (Ph. 2 24)
:
KUpayev (Jo.
intensives
neiJLvr]iJ.aL
15)
which
is
an example
of Gildersleeve's emotional
and due according to

Cor. 11
:
Blass'' to the "literary
language,"
(1
2); redprjKa (Lu.
8 :49).
Most
of these verbs
have an inchoative or conative or iterative sense in the present. Moulton^ has shown from the LXX and the papyri that KeKpaya is vernacular kolpti and not merely literary. He thinks that, whfle Kpa^co in the LXX is durative, KeKpaya is merely punctiliar. See
(6)
The
Aoristic Perfect.
It is possible also that ireTnarthKafxev koI
It is less open to dispute that 69) belong here. Cf. KeKolnriTaL (Jo. 11:11). KaTaê^rjKa (Jo. 6 38) is a present state.
eyvcoKaiJLev (Jo.
But more doubtful

7r7rio-/xat
are ^XwLKa (Jo. 5
45)
T]yr]p.aL
:
(Ro. 8
38).^
But. TerapaKTaL (Jo. 12
27)
:
(Ac. 26 seems to
2)
fall
under the intensive perfect. Cf. eorcbs elfxl (Ac. 25 10). (/S) The Extensive Present Perfect = a completed state. This act may be durative-punctiliar like ^yytKev (Mt. 3 2) with a
:
Cf. thus rjywptafxaL, rereXeKa, TerrjprjKa (2 backward look ( ). Tim. 4:7). This consummative effect is seen in TerrjprjKap (Jo. Cf. Heb. 17:6), e\r]\vdev (12:23) and TreTrXr/pwKare (Ac. 5:28).
8 13; 10 14. In Jo. 20 29, 6tl tcjpa/cas fxe TreiricrTevKas, thc^ culmination is just reached a few moments before. But more fre:
quently
act
is
it is
the punctiliar-durative perfect where the completed
followed
:
by a
state of greater or less duration (
).
In
Cf.
Jo. 19
22, o yeypacfta ykypaâ,
we have an example
of each.
yeypawraL (Mt. 4:7). 'It was written (punctiliar) on record' (durative). Thus is to be explained instances like etprjKev in Heb. 10: 9 (cf. elirou in 10 7). 'The statement is on record.' It is only in appearance that wpoaeprjvoxep and TreTroir}Kev (Heb. 11 This common usage in 17, 28) seem different. Hebrews has been compared to that in Thuc. vol. I, pp. 2, 6, etc.
the
common
still
is
and
Cf. Dclbriick, Vergl. Synt., Bd. II, p. 2G9
f.
'
* 6
Goodwin, M. and Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

ProL, p. 147.
T., p. 15.
p. 198.
Monro,
lb.;
Iloni. Cr., p. 22.

f.
Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 347
Bkss, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 199.
896
NEW TESTAMENT
Cf. further Heb. 7:6, 9, 11, 13, 16, 20, 23, where the permanence of the Jewash institutions is discussed. Jo. 6 25 ykyovas
:
has punctiUar and durative ideas ('earnest and art here'). Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 347. In Col. 1 15 kKriadr] is merely punc:
tiliar,
while in verse 16 eKTiarai adds the durative idea, whereas
in verse 17 again crweaTtjKep has lost the punctiliar
and
is
only
durative.
In
Cor. 15
eyr^yepTaL
stands between two aorists
because Paul wishes to emphasize the idea that Jesus is still Usually riyepQ-q was sufficient, but not here. Cf. eaTrjpiKTaL risen.
(Lu. 16 26).
:
Cf. cKjikuvraL (Lu. 5
23)
eKKexvrai (Ro. 5:5).
John
.
is
especially fond of this use of the present perfect.

ff.
Cf
32,
34, 41; 5:33, 36
In chapter 17 the present perfects

1
call for
special attention.
Cf.
Jo. 1
for contrast
between the pres-
ent perfect and the aorist.
The Present Perfect of Broken Continuity. ^ As already exwe here have a series of links rather than a line, a broken graph (>). Perhaps rerpaxa. rt in Ac. 25 11 is to be so
(7)
plained,
:
understood.
But
certainly
it is
true of aTeaToXKa (2 Cor. 12
17)
where Paul refers to various missions to the Corinthians. In particular Moulton^ notes the examples with Trcorore, as ovSels
upaKv
TrcoTTore (Jo.
:
18).
Cf. further
fxe/jiapTvprjKev
(5
37); SeSou-
\evKapLev (8
33).
Here an action (5) The Dramatic Historical Present Perfect. completed in the past is conceived in terms of the present time for the sake of vividness. Burton ^ doubts if any genuine examples of
the vivid historical perfect occur in the N. T.
(Jo. 1
:
Certainly KeKpayev
15) is
a vivid
liistorical
tense even
if
only intensive in sense.
Cf. /SapTvpei just before. But by the term "historical" it is not meant that this use of the perfect is common in all narrative. But the VecUc Sanskrit has it often in narrative. It is a matter of personal equation after all. Thus Xenophon, who "affects naivete," uses the present perfect much more frequently than Herodotus and Thucydides.'* It is rather the tense of the orator Hence Isocrates and or the dramatist and is often rhetorical.^ Demosthenes surpass Plato in the use of the present perfect. "The nearness of any department of literature to practical life may readily be measured by the perfect."*^ Moulton^ notes how
in the papyri there
1
is
an increasing use
of the present perfect just
Cf. Moulton, ProL, p. 144.

lb.
.
2
3
"
Gildersl.,
Am.
Jour. Philol.,
XXIX,
p. 396.
N. T. M. and
Gildersl.,
T., p. 38.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 216.
'
Am.
Jour. Philol., 1908, p. 396.
Prol., p. 141.
TENSE (XPONOS)
897
because it is so largely the language of life. He notes also howSocrates in Plato's Crito uses this vivid present perfect: "reKnaipo/JLUL tK TLVOS kvvTvviov, ewpaKa oXiyov irpoTepov Taurrjs rrjs vvktos,
where point of time

the aorist
is
in the past
in English,
would have el8ov as inevital:)le as had not Socrates meant to emphasize the
This vivid perfect
to
present vividness of the vision."
John's Gospel in particular.
One only needs
is found in have some imagi-
nation himself.
Cf. Tedkaixai (1:32).
So
evpriKafxev
(1:41).
:
aTreaToXKare (5
33),
aireaToXKeu in Ac. 7:
:
John still has that vision. would have been prosaic. Cf. also a realistic change. (Cf. 1 19 ff.) So also 35; KeKolpo^Keu in 21 28 and Te-n-ol-qKa in 2 Cor.
The
aorist
11 25. A striking instance of it is seen in Rev. 5:7, d\y](j)tv, where John sees Jesus with the book in his hand. It is dull to make tl\r}4>v here = eXa/3ej'. Another example of this vivid perfect is t(xxy]Kap.tv (2 Cor. 1:9), a dreadful memory to Paul. So with 5. A particularly good instance is yeyoueu (Mt. 25 ecxxTiKev in 7 6), where the present perfect notes the sudden cry (cf. aorist
: :
and imperf.
just before).
it
Cf.
e'iprjKev
in 2 Cor. 12
9.
Blass^ has
observed that
occurs sometimes in parables or illustrations,

so, for .the
and quite naturally

sees the
imagination
:
is
at play.
aorists.
a-rvekOoiv
to be explained aweX-qXvdev (Jas. 1
24)
between two
Thus is James
werpaKev
man.
'He has gone

Cf.
off.'
Cf.
Mt. 13
:
46,
Travra oaa elx^v Kal riyopaaev avTOV.
In Lu. 9
(Ac.
36 edpaKav
is
"virtu-
ally reported speech." ^
a.Kr]K6ap.ev
6:11, but
r]Kovaap.ev in
15
24).
The Gnomic Present Perfect. A few examples of this idiom seem to appear in the N. T. The present was always the more usual tense for customary truths,'' though the aorist and the per(e)
fect
both occur.
Cf. rereXetcorat (1 Jo. 2:5); SeSeraL (1 Cor. 7

TreirlaTevKeu (Jo.
39)'*; KeKpLTaL
TreirXiipo^Kev
and
:
18); KaraKiKpLtaL (Ro. 14

:
23);
(13
8).
Cf. Jo. 5
24; Jas. 2
10.
The Perfect in Indirect Discourse. It is misleading to say, as Blass^ does, that "the perfect is used relatively instead of the pluperfect" in such instances. This is explaining Greek from the German. Blass does not call this construction "indirect discourse," but merely "after verbs of perception"; but see my discussion of Indirect Discourse in ch. XIX. Cf. Lu. 9 36 ovSeul a.irT}yyeCkav ovdev Siv ioipaKav, Ac. 10 45 kêarrjaav otl eK/cexwâi.
(f)
:
:
In
Mk.
>
33, dSvXa 6 yeyoueu avrfj riXdev, the perfect preserves the

" 6
f.
of N. T. Gk., p. 200. Moulton, Prol., p. 144. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 53

C.r.
Burton, N. T.
M. and
T., p. 39.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 200.
898
NEW TESTAMENT
Mk. 3:8;
Here the past perfect 15 10; Mt.
:
vividness of the
woman's consciousness.
(cf.
or the aorist could have been used
27: 18; Ac. 19:32).

historical perfect.
It is It is
akin to the reportorial vividness of the

call for expla-
not the perfects here that
nation from the Greek point of view.

aorists, imperfects or
(77)
It is rather the occasional
past perfects that
demand
if
discussion.
Futuristic Present Perfect.

it is
Since the present so often oc-
curs in a futuristic sense,

perfect so used also perfect
not strange
5e56âo-/xat
we
find the present
= future
perfect.
This proleptical use of the

(Jo. 17:10), dedcjKa (17:
may
(cf.
be illustrated by
:
22), TereXeo-rat (19
f.
earaL
/cat (jiayerai).
phetico-perfect."
and KarlcoTaL in Jas. sometimes called "proIndeed some of the examples classed as gnomic
28), ae(rr]Tev
and
yeyovev
is
This use
Cf. Jo. 3 18; 5 24; Jas. 2 10; Ro. 13:8; 14 23.i The Present Perfect is {&) The " Aoristic" Present Perfect. here conceived as a mere punctiliar preterit like the aorist ind. We have seen how in some verbs the punctiliar idea drops out and only the durative remains in some present perfect forms (Hke It is not per se unreasonable to suppose that with some oUa). other verbs the durative idea should disappear and the form be merely punctiliar. We seem to have this situation in KeKpaya in
are really proleptical also.

:
the
LXX
(Moulton, ProL,
p. 147).
The
action
itself
took place
though the state following its completion is present. By centering attention on the former, while forgetting the latter, the perfect becomes aoristic. We must distinguish between the We have seen aoristic (punctiliar) and the preterit notions. that originally the tense was probably timeless. Nothing, then, but an appeal to the facts can decide whether in the N. T. the
in the past
present perf. ind. ever = the aor. ind.
(i.e.
is
preterit punctiliar).
The
Sanskrit 2 shows a deal of confusion and freedom in the use
of the pres. perf. ind.
The blending
of the perfect
and
aorist
forms in Latin
of the
is
also a point to note in spite of the independence
Greek tense development. E. J. Goodspeed (Am. J. TheoL, X, 102 f.) regards Latin as having some influence on the ultimate confusion in the Greek. There is no doubt of the ultimate confusion in the late Greek^ (from a.d. 300 on) between the perfect and the aorist (see later). The use of -drjKa and ~7]Ka in the aorist pass. ind. in modern Greek illustrates one way confusion could
1
2 3
Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 15; Gildersleeve, Synt., Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 296. Jann., liist. Gk. Gr., p. 440; Moulton, Prol., p. 142.
p. 101.
TENSE (XPONOS)
arise
899
(Thumb, Handb., p. 144). Cf. e5oo/ca, 5e5oj/ca. In the modern Greek all other remnants of the old perfect form are gone save in the participle, which has lost its redupUcation, like Senkpos. But had it begun in the older Greek? Jannaris^ answers Yes and ovre Xoyoy pa4>0L cites Thuc. 1, 21, ovre ws TTOtTjrat v/xprjKaaL
^vvedeaav.
But
this
may
be the dramatic
historical
perfect.
Jebb" answers Yes and quotes Demosthenes and Lucian; but these again may be merely the rhetorical dramatic perfect. The grammarians and scholiasts, under the influence of the Latin,
did
come
to lose
all
consciousness of any distinction and explained
one tense by the other.^ The present perfect was always more common in every-day life, as we have noted. The papyri prove this abundantly.* Moreover, the present perfect grew in popular use at the expense of the aorist, where the aorist might have been employed. There is thus no strong presumption against the possibility of
such confusion in the N. T.
Besides, "the line between
aorist
and perfect is not always easy to draw."^ This is especially true of an event just past which may be described by either Moulton'^ admits that "the LXX and inscriptions show tense. a few examples of a semi-aoristic perfect in the pre-Roman age,
which, as
Thumb
tScbi'
idea that Latin influence

rightly rejects
remarks (Hellenismus, p. was working" thus

6 Xaos
153), disposes of the
early.
But Moulton
:
on
KexpovLKe M.oovarjs (Ex.
instance (merely oratio obliqua).
a doctrinaire special pleader

: :
is
32 1) as an Simcox^ says that "no one but 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." Well, I do deny it as to e[\T](f)ev in Rev. 5 7 and 8 5, where we have the vivid dramatic colloquial historical perfect. The same thing is possible with etprjKa in 7 14, but I waive that for the moment. Burton^ is more cautious. He claims that the N. T. writers "had perfect command of the distinction between the aorist and the perfect," but achnits that "there is clear evidence that the perfect tense was in the N. T. sometimes an aorist in force," though "the idiom is confined within narrow limits." Some of the examples claimed by him for this usage I have exMoulton^ sees that this confusion plained otherwise already. may exist in one writer, though not in another, but he admits a
: :
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 439.
jh., p. 142.
*
*
V. and D., Handb., p. 328.

lb.; Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p.
339
f.
Moulton,
lb.
Prol., p. 141.
Lang, of the N. T., p. 104. n. T. M. and T., p. 44. Prol., pp. 143 fT.
900
"residuum of genuinely aoristic perfects." He admits ykyova be "perplexing," though in the 45 examples in the ind. in the N. T. "it has obviously present time" and "the aoristic sense is not really proved for any of them." That is certainly true. There are instances in the N. T., as in the later Greek generally/ where yeyova approaches a present in sense, as in 1 Cor. 13: 11, but its use as a mere preterit is not shown, not even by the examples quoted by Moulton^ from the papyri (O. P. 478 and B. U. 136). The first has irpoaê^rjKhaL yeyovhaL
to
TereKevKevaL, all
three apparently vivid historical

:
perfects.
The
example in Josephus {Apion, 4

admit as an
21)
may
The
be the same.
last
is
left ei\r]4>a, dpr]Ka, eaxvâ, vrerpa/ca.
We have Moulton' refuses to

very clearly
aorist in sense, since
"the distinction
b.ireypa-\i/ap.r]v
seen in papyri for some centuries" between TrewpaKa and ijybpaaa.
He
cites O. P.
482
:
(ii/A.D.), X'^pts S>v
kol ireTrpaKa.
Be-
sides in
torical
Mt. 13 46 ireirpaKev is in a vivid parable (dramatic hisperfect). Moulton notes the confusion as worse in illiterate
r;Xt^te
papyri, like ovk e\ovaap.r]v ovk
(=
ryXet/x/xat),
0. P. 528 (ii/A.D.).
As
2
:
to eaxvKo- the matter

13).
is
more
:
plausible in one example (2 Cor.

15; 2 Cor. 1
Blass^ affirms the true present perfect sense for ecxxvKa

:
elsewhere in the N. T. (Mk. 5
9; 7
5;
Ro. 5
2).
Moulton^
replies that
passages alike."
for yeyova in
ea-xvô-
"we must, I think, treat all the Pauline But why? He does not claim such uniformity
any N. T. writer.^ There is some analogy between and WrjKa and cKprJKa, and eaxov may be ingressive, not constative. Moulton (ProL, p. 145) makes a good deal out of the fact that eaxov occurs only 20 times in the N. T. and that thus eaxriiioi may have come to mean 'possessed' (constative), but he
admits that this does not suit in Ro. 5 2. He example from B. U. 297 (ii/A.D.) to7s dualav alriav
:
cites
a possible
eaxiKoa-i Kal avev
TLVos
(A'^.
aiJ.4>L(7J3r}Tr}(jeo:s
ev
rfj
vojj.fj
yeuofxevovs
T. Gr., p. 122) thinks that the perfect in the
within the sphere of the aorist at times.

thinks that
here.
e'L\r](i)a
Radermacher kolvyj comes Thackeray (Gr., p. 24)

:
(=ots).
in
Dan.
cf
30^ and
eaxTTô.,
But
if
the whole case has to be
3 M. 5 20, belong made out from one exis
ample
here
is
(2 Cor.
2:13;
2 Cor. 7:5),
it
at least quite proble-
matical.
The only
substantial plea for taking eaxvxo- as preterit

diêats
the fact that Paul did have
for his spirit after Titus
Cf. Buresch, Fkyouai' (Rh. M., 1891, p. 231 note).

Prol., p. 146.
lb., p. 142.
6
Prol., p. 145.
jt,.,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 200.
p.
UQ,
TENSE (XPONOS)
came.
901
It is
But
it
was a
partial
iivecns
:
as the Epistle shows.
therefore possible that in 2 Cor. 2

fect = preterit punctiliar (cf.
13
we do have a
present per-
e^r]\9oi>), possible but not quite cerwished to accent the strain of his anxiety have Paul may tain. of Titus. The aorist would not have arrival the up to the time of not have noted the end of his would imperfect The done that. punctiliar. Only the past perfect plus durative It was anxiety.
and the present perfect could do both. The experience may have seemed too vivid to Paul for the past perfect. Hence he uses the That is certainly a pos(historical dramatic) present perfect. Moulton (Prol., p. 238) in the sible interpretation of his idea. Additional Notes draws back a bit from the preterit use of He had advanced it "with great hesitation" and as "a eaxrjKa.
tentative account."
"The pure
perfect force
is
found long after

6/X0X07W kaxw'^vai
Paul's day: thus in the formula of an

irapa (xou 5td
iii/A.D.), 'to
e'lprjKa left.
lOU,
have received and
x^vo? e^ oIkov xPWi-^ evroKov (B. U. 1015 in the early still possess.' " We have eiXT/â and
elX-qcjia.
Take
In Rev. 3
/cat
we have
.
nvrjuoveve ovv ttws

evprjKa
tXrj0as
/cat
rjKovaas Kal rripei,
ixeTavbrjaov
It
is
preceded by
in the proper sense.
an exhortation about the future. The perfect If ijKovaas had been aKrjKoas no difficulty would exist. would emphasize the permanence of the obligation. It is as easy Both to say that rj/couo-as = a perfect as that etXrj<âs = an aorist. are abstractly possible and neither may be true. The reception may seem more a matter to be emphasized as durative than the Cf. It is a fine point, but it is possible. hearing (punctiliar). Cf. Jo. 3 32. The mere fact 19. TreTol-qKev /cat ekerjaev in Mk. 5 of the use of aorists and perfects side by side does not prove confusion of tenses. It rather argues the other way. It is possible with Blass^ to see the force of each tense in IdopaKev and ^Kovaeu Note also dar^yayev Kal KeKoivooKtv in Jo. 3 32 (cf. 1 Jo. 1 1-3). (Ac. 21 28). Cf. Lu. 4 18 where Nestle puts period after fxe. Moulton 2 does find such confusion in the illiterate documents among the papyri. Simcox (Lang, of the N. T., p. 105) wishes to know what "distinction of sense" exists between eXajSov and Tere"EKajSou 12. It is very simple and very clear. Xelcofxai in Ph. 3
This
is
: :
: :
denies the sufficiency of Paul's past achievement,

nies
it
rereXttojAtat
de-
as a present reality.
:
Cf. Ro. 13
12.
I
is
plained etXr70a in Rev. 5
and 8
:
5.
There
have already exsurely no trouble

rriv
about
TTjv
etXrjâ in
/cat
28.
In 11
17 again, 6rt
tX7jc/>es
dvvaniv
(tov
neyaXrjv
eâalXevaas, it is
not etXij^cs (punctiliar-durative,

2
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 199.
Prol., p.
U2
f.
902
NEW TESTAMENT
'receivedst
'Kevaas,
and still hast') that calls for explanation, but eâtrlwhich 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 anyother examples in the N. T. In 7 14, B reads elirov. I would not labour the point over these two examples. If such a confusion of tenses occurred anywhere in the N. T., the Apocalypse would be the place to expect it. And yet even the Apocalypse is
entitled to a
word in its defence on this point in spite of the fact that Moultoni "frankly yields" these instances and Blass^ says that "the popular intermixture of the two tenses appears undoubtedly in the Apocalypse." It is to be remembered that the
ApocaljTDse
It is just is a series of visions, is intensely dramatic. here that the rhetorical dramatic (historical) perfect so freely granted in the orators would be found. It is wholly possible that "In history the in this use of e'ipriKa we have only this idiom.
perfect has
no place outside of the speeches and the reflective passages in which the author has his say."^ It is curious how aptly Gildersleeve here describes these very instances of the So I conclude by present perfect which are called "aoristic."
saying that the N. T. writers' may be guilty of this idiom," but they have not as yet been proven to be. Cf. kxapvv otl evprjKa in 2 Jo. 4. The distinction between the perf. and pres. is sharply
drawn
(0
in Jas. 3
7, 5a/âferat Kal bebajxacxTaL.
The Periphrastic
Perfect.
For the origin
of this idiom see

(&),
(??).
discussion in cormection with the Past Perfect,
exw (so common in later Greek and finally Greek) has a few parallels in the N. T.^ Cf. exe jue TvapriTrip.kvov Cf. exco (Lu. 14 19 f.) with Latin idiom "I have him beaten." 'ixoiv rriv Kdp.eva (Lu. 12 19, pres. part, used as perf.), e^Tipaixixev^v
: :
The use of triumphant in modern
xelpa
(Mk. 3:1).
Cf.
Mk.
18;
Heb. 5
14; Jo. 17
13, ex<âtu
Here the perf. part, is, KeTr\t]po:p.kvy]v. the idiom grew out of such examples. The modern Greek uses not only exw befxevo, but also Se/iem, but, if a conjunctive pron.
precedes, the part, agrees in gender
of course, predicate, but
So
Ti]v
exw
Ibcoiihv,
'I
have
seen her'
of
and number (cf. French). (Thumb, Handh., p. 162).

limited.
Passive
1
is el/xaL btukvos.
The use
-ÎvoixaL is
Cf. tykvero
Prol., p. 145.
""
Gr. of N. T.
Gk,
f.)
p. 200.
Gildersl.,
Am.
E. J. Goodspeed (Am. Jour, of Theol., Jan., 1906, p. 102 the ostraoa confirm the pap. in the free use of the perfect. 6 Cf. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 438.
shows that
TENSE (XPONOS)
kaKOTcouhr] (Rcv. 16
:
903
See 10), a mixture of tenses (of. Mk. 9:3). Ex. 17: 12; Ps. 72 14. Peculiar is yeyovare exovres in Heb. 5 12. It is eifML that is commonly used (al)out 40 times in the N. T.)
:
:
with the perfect part. Cf. Num. 22:12; Is. 10:20. Burton' notes that the intensive use of the perfect tense (cf. past perfect) As examples of the intenis more common than the extensive.
sive (= present) take
TreireLcrfxevos
earip (Lu.
20
6).
So Jo. 2
17;
Ac. 2
For the extensive use (= completed act) note karlv So Jo. 6 31; Heb. 4 2, etc. In Ac. ireTpaynevov (Lu. 23 15). 26 26 the main accent is on the punctiliar aspect (at the begin:
13, etc.
ning, as in Jo. 6
(k)
31).
irapeLfxt, y]Tra(ry).
Present as Perfect.
o/xai, KfiixaL,
KtiTai,
(2
These examples, like rf/cco, have already been discussed under 1, (a), Tim. 4:8).
(6 virepavvT^XiKos)
Cf. dTro-
(&)
(a)
The Past Perfect

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 (punctiliar)
and the durative present
(a sort of durative aoristic present
combined), so the past perfect is a blend of the aorist and the imperfect in idea.^ It is continuance of the completed state in past time up to a prescribed limit in the past. As in the present
perfect, so here the relation
between the punctiliar and the dura-
tive ideas will
vary in different verbs. The name vTepawTeXiKos (plus-quam-perfectum) = more than perfect in the sense that it always refers to an antecedent date, "a past prior to another
is
past"^
(0)
not always true.
Luxury in Greek. The Greeks cared nothing for relative time, though that was not the only use for the past perfect, Ordinarily the aorist ind. was sufficient for a as just stated.^ narrative unless the durative idea was wanted when the imperfect was ready to hand. Herodotus shows a fondness for the past It disappeared in Greek before the present perfect,^ perfect.^ though in the N. T. it still survives in current, but not common, It was never so frequent in Greek as the past perfect usage.**
1
N. T. M. and T., p. 40. Giles, Man., p. 457. Moulton, Prol., p. 14S.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 201.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 217.
dial.
It is
absent from the Boeotian
(Claflin,
Synt., etc., p. 72).
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 201.
904
was

in Latin.
The N. T. idiom conforms
to that of the older
language.
Present perfects that had (7) The Intensive Past Perfect. come to be mere presents through accent on the durative idea and loss of emphasis on the aoristic (punctiliar) are virtual imCf. us elo^deL (Mk. 10 1). perfects when turned into the past.
:
So
xiSeLv
(Jo. 1
31),
l<jT7]Kei(xav
(Jo. 19
25;
cf.
Ac.
10
f.),
kwe-
11:22) and even kyvuKeire (Mt. 12:7)/ for eyuooKa sometimes is used like oUa (1 Jo. 2 4). So with ^p airoXoAo^s (Lu.
irolda
(Lu.
15
24;
cf.
evpedrj).
Here we have a mere existing
state in the
past with the obscuration of the idea of completion (aoristic-
But it is to be noted that the durative sense is usually meaning from the aoristic sense. Cf. oUa from eUov. changed a For this idiom in classic Greek see Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 103. Cf. also E. Schwartz, Index to Eus., pp. 214 ff. The past perfect usually pre(5) The Extensive Past Perfect. sents a completed state or fixed condition in past time. As already In said, it is not necessarily "a blend of past and prseterpast."^ Latin the past perfect shows no trace of the Aktionsart of the perThe Greek past fect; the past perfect is just time relatively past. perfect expresses a state following a completed act in past time.^ Sometimes it is made clear by the context that a considerable space of time had intervened, though this is quite incidental with
punctiliar).
the Greek.
xpos avTovs 6
(descriptive)
Take
Jo. 6
17,
/cat
a-KOTia
rj5?j
kyeyoveu Kal ovrco eXrjXWeL

is
'Iriaovs.
The verb
is,
in the sentence before

is dceyelpero
i]PxoPTo
and the verb following
(inchoative).
The
time of these imperfects
of course, past.
But the two
interven-
ing past perfects indicate stages in the going (^pxovro) before
Both TJSrj and ovtco help to accent the they reached the shore. between the first darkness and the final appearance of Jesus which is soon expressed by the vivid historical present, decopovaLP (6 Here we have a past behind a past beyond a 19). doubt from the standpoint of the writer, and that is the very reason why John used the past perfect here. In verse 16, cos 5e 6\j/la kyepero Kark^-qaap ol fxadriTal, he had been content with the aorist in both the principal and the subordinate clauses. He had not
interval
:
cared there to express relative time, to stress the interval at
all.
The
tenses in Jo. 6
16-21,
by the way, form a very

Am.
interesting
study.
1
John'* does, as a matter of fact, use the past perfect

Prol., p. 148.
=
more
Moulton,
ff.
Gilders!.,
Brugmann, K. Vergl.
Gr., pp. 5G9, 576.

^
Cf. Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., pp.
120
9
.
TENSE
(xpoNo:;)
905
it
frequently than do the Synoptists.
He
uses
to take the reader
"behind the scenes" and often throws it in by way of parenthesis. Thus in 1 24 the past perfect aTeaToXfxepoL rjaav points back to the aorist airea-TeLXav in 1 19. In 4 8 aTreXrjXvdeLaau is a parenthetical explanation of what the disciples hatl done before this So in 9 22 aweTtdeiVTo has rJ^Tj and incident with the woman. notes a previous agreement. In 11 13 etpTj/cet points to a time The tenses in 11:11-13 are all injust before, but note Uoâv.
: : : :
teresting
(eiTre,
Xe7i, el-KOV, dpi]KeL,
KKoliJ.r]VTai.,
iropevofxai, (Tcodrja-eTaL)
:
ouTTOJ
and in 11 30, marked. Cf. also 11 44, TrepLedeSero. In 11 57 dedcoKeLaav points backward as is true of ouSeTrco ovdeh rjv In 3 24 and 7:30; 8 20, the standpoint is TedeLfxevos (19 :41). later than the event described, but none the less it stretches backward though from a relatively future time. But this disCf. Mt. 7 25, TedefieXicoTo, tinction is not confined to John. which points back to verse 24. So in Mk. 14 44 deScoKet refers to
In 11
:
19 eX7}\vdeLaav denotes antecedent action,
eX-, the interval is

:
Judas' previous arrangement.
Cf. also eKê^XfjKei. in

:
Mk.
16
with ect)avr]. The tenses in Mk. 15 6-10 are interesting. The three past perfects all refer to antecedent action. Cf. uKo86fiT]To with i^yayou in Lu. 4 29, and with eiropeveTo in verse 30. In Lu. 16 20 eê^\r]To suggests that the poor man had been at the door some while. In Ac. 4 22 yeybvei (cf. rCg yeyovbri) does not pre: :
cede airekvaav (verse 21) by any great

terval
is
amount
:
of time, yet the inis
real
(cf.
1-10).^
In Ac. 9
:
21
e\r]\vdeL
contrasted
irapkdevTO.
with
k(TTLV 6 Topdrjaas.
:
In 14
23
:
cf. ireinaTehKeLaav
with
to
Cf. Ac. 4 In 20 16, neKpiKei, and 20 38, ning of the tour from Antioch. eipr]KeL, the two ends of the action nearly come together, but in,
is
: :
27 and 31.
In 14
26 the reference
the begin-
21:29 the antecedent action

dei
is clear.
In Jo. 11:30,
oijTrcoe
XtjXu-
dXX'
rjv
TL
oTTov vTTTjvTrjaev,
:
the three past tenses of the ind.

jUt)
come out
SeSchKetaav,
well.
In 11
56
f.
tL 5o/cet v/uv; otl ov
eX^jj els T-qv eopr-qv;

all
the three kinds of time (present, future, past) are
employed.
cav TO
But
in 12
16 the aorist ind.
irpCiTov
Tore
epvriadrjaav,
employed, om e7i'a)though antecedent time is indiis
and TOTe. Here the past perfect would more exactly have marked off to irpoJTov. If the previous time is to be depicted in its course, the past perfect is used (Thumb, Handb.,
cated by TO
irpoJTOP
p. 163).
()
The Past Perfect of Broken Continuity^

:
>
avTov.
).
This
is
is
true of Lu. 8
1
29, ttoXXoTs
xpovois
awripiraKeL
^
It
an
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 201.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 148.
906
iterative past perfect in a series of links instead of a line, like the
present perfect of broken continuity in Jo.

inf. in
(f)
18.
Cf. the perf
Ac. 8:11.
ind. occurs in these conditions of the

unfulfilled in relation to the past.
Past Perfect in Conditional Sentences. Usually the aorist second class determined as
But sometimes the past

:
per-
fect appears.
Cf. Jo. 19
11; Ac. 26
32; 1 Jo. 2
19.
See Con-
ditional Sentences, ch.

(tj)
XIX.
The Periphrastic Past Perfect. This construction had already begun in ancient Greek. In the third person plural of liquid and mute verbs it was uniformly done for the sake of euphony. In the modern It was occasionally found also with other verbs. Greek we find elxo. befxkvo, 'I had bound,' tumw defxevo^ or elxa Sedel. "Exco was at first more than a .mere auxiliary, though in Herodotus it appears as a true auxiliary. The dramatists also use it often.2 In the N. T. the examples with elxov are not numerous. Cf avKrjv elxî' tls irecjiVTevfj.euTju (Lu. 13 6) fjv elxov airo^
.
KL(xhr]v
exi^-
(Lu. 19
20), really predicative accusative participles
with
But the past perfect with the perfect partic. and rjv is rather common. Cf. Jo. 19 11. Burton^ notes that about two-thirds of them are intensive and only one-third extensive. As examples of the intensive use see Mt. 26 :43, rjaav êâpy]iikvoi; Lu. 15 24, Examples of the extensive type Cf. also Lu. 1:7. riv (XTToXcoXcos.
: :
are
ricrav
eXrjXvdores (Lu.
17); riaav TrpoecopaKores (Ac. 21

:
29).
For
examples in the LXX 23, etc. See also êâTTLaneuoL v-Krjpxov (Ac. 8 16). This verb was used as the passive {d) Special Use of eKeifxrjv. = present perfect. So the imperfect present was a of Tid-qixL. The in Jo. 20 12, owov tKeLTo to crQiiJ.a = perfect, as was used as a past
see 2 Chron. 18
34; Judg. 8
:
11; Ex. 39:
'
where the body had
lain
'
or
'
had been
placed.'
So
in Jo. 2
6 v<âv
53,
riv
Kdixevai is
Keinevos.
ojj-odviJ.aBdi'
a periphrastic past perfect in sense.

See also 19
:
Cf. Lu. 23
is
20.
:
Perhaps a similar notion

20).
(6 ê^^'î' avvreKLKos).
seen
in
Taprjaav (Ac. 12
(c)
The Future Perfect

Greek and
There was never

It is rare
p. 194).
much need
in ancient
for this tense, perfect action in future time.*
in the
LXX
(Thackeray, Gr.,
The
only active forms in the N. T. are eldrjaco (Heb. 8:11, LXX, possibly a mere future) and the periphrastic form eaoidai ireirot.dws (Heb.
2
:
13,
1 ^
'
LXX also).
Thumb, Handb.,
Both
of these are intensive.
Most
of the
MSS.
pp. 161, 165.
Jebb in Vine, and Dickson's Handb., p. 329. Am. Jour, of N. T. M. and T., p. 45.
Philol., 1908, p. 395.
TENSE (XPONOS)
read KeKpaôvrai in Lu. 19
also intensive
(cf.
:
907
have
Kpaôvaiv.
it is
40,
but
NBL
This
])y
is
KeKpaya),
if it is
accepted, as
not
W. H.
nor by Nestle.
note ea^
(mol /j,eya\r]u x^^P'-tch^ /car[d]
TdeLfx[e]uo{s)
B. G. U. 596 (a.d, 84). The modern Greek has a fut. perf. in da In ^ôvaiv (Lu. 19 43) we exco defiho (Thumb, Hanclh., p. 1G2).
:
have a practical future perfect (intensive).
For the
rest the /m-
turum exadum is expressed only by means of the perfect part, and This idiom is found in the LXX (the active in Gen. 43 8; ei)ut. 44: 32; Is. 58 14, etc. The passive in Gen. 41 36; Ex. 12 6). N. T. examples are ecrrat btbeixhov and earat \e\vixkvov (Mt. 16
:
: :
19);
eo-rai
XeXu/xem (18:18);
taovTai.
haixeixtpLdfikvoi
(Lu. 12:52).
These
all
fect see
seem to be extensive. For a sketch of the future perThompson, Sijntax of Attic Greek, p. 225 f. This tense
died before the future did.

3.
The Subjunctive and Optative.

It
The
219.
perfect optative
is

early period.
perf. subj. in the
was always
Ei7il., p.
rare in the
Greek of the
inflected
See Hatzidakis,
The only
N. T.
See
is el8u},
:
(Mt. 9: 6;
fect sense
Mk.
is
10; Lu. 5
which occurs a number of times 24, etc.). But in this form the perB.
gone.
tva el8iJTe, P.
M.
1178 (a.d. 194).
In-
deed, the perf. subj.
was always very
rare in Greek.
In the
Sanskrit the perf. tense, outside of the Vedic language, never de-
veloped to any extent except in the ind. and the participle.* In the classic Greek it was in subj. and opt. a mark of the literary
style
and did not
really belong to the hfe of the people.
The
little
perf. subj. is
absent from the vernacular modern Greek.
reflection will
perfect,
show how usually there was no demand for a true 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.
:
also, Is. 8 14; 10 20; 17: 8. Cf. the In Lu. 14 8 there appears to be a conscious change from KXrjOfjs to ixrjTroTe fj KeKX-q/jihos, possibly suggesting a long-standing invitation by the latter. In Jo. 3 27, eav ixi} fj beboixkvov, it is punc:
LXX
tiliar-durative.
In 16
is
24, I'm
fi
ireTrXrjpwuevr] (cf.
Jo. 1:4), the
consummation
1
emphasized (durative-punctiliar), extensive perGk. Synt.,
Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 292. Goodwin, M. and T., p. .31 f.

Gildersleeve,
Cf. Farrar,
p. 140.
Am.
908

The same thing
is
feet (completed act).

riycaafxhoL,
KdTTOL-QKws,
true of 17: 19, Iva

:
uicnv
and 17 we secm
/ii)
23,
to
tW ihatu reTekuoiiikvoL. In Jas. 5 15, Kav p have the perfect of "broken continuity." In
oi/jLev,
2 Cor.
4.
9, I'm
ireToidoTes
it is
merely intensive.
The Imperative.
sul)j.
the perf.
has been said of the rarity of can be repeated concerning the perf. imper. Out
real
What
of 2445 imperatives in the Attic orators the speeches themselves
show only
158.
eight
perfects (Gildersleeve,
Cf. also Miller,
"The
Syntax, Part I, p. Limitation of the Imperative in the

1892, pp. 399-436).
Attic Orators," A. J. P.,
xiii,
In
is
Is.
4:
one
in
may
note
kk\t](jO<j:
intensive.
it
The
perfect imper.
common
Homer.^
verbs.2
In the late Greek
occurred most frequently in the
purely intensive perfects or in the third person singular of other
gone from the modern Greek and is nearly dead 1 19 IVre may be imperative (intensive) or ind. See the formula eppoâOe (Ac. 15 29) and eppwao in Text. Rec. (23 30) .^ The only other example is found in Mk. 4 39, o-tcoTra, Te4>iiJL0jao, where it is also intensive like the others. The durative idea is in both aicowa (linear pres.) and -weciilijioiao, 'keep on being quiet' and 'keep the muzzle on.' The periphrastic perf. imper. occurs in Lu. 12:35, earwaav irepie^waixkvai. (intensive). Cf. KaLo/jLevoL. The time of the perf. imper. and subj. is, of course,
But
it is
in the
N. T.
:
In Jas.
really future.
5.
The
Infinitive.
There were originally no tenses

inf. (the
in the
inf. (see
Sanskrit), as has already been stated.
developed a double use of the

discourse)
(a)
But the Greek common use, and indir.
Indirect Discourse.
inf.
In
indir. discourse (cf. ch.
XIX)
the
tenses of the
But
in
had the element of time, that of the direct. the N. T. there is no instance of the perf. inf. repre-
senting a past perf. ind.^
The
(12
:
tense occurs in indir. discourse,
but the time

Xeojs, vofxlôPTes
is
not changed.
redvrjKevaL,
Cf Ac. 14 19 eavpov
. :
eôj
ttjs
tto-
So eldepai in Lu. 22:34; yeyovhaL (Jo. 12:29); yeyophaL (2 Tim. 2 18). These examples are also all intensive perfects. So with Col. 2 1, 6e\(jo vfids ddeuai. In 1 Tim. 6 17, 7rapa77eXXe v\pr]\o(f)popeLi'
r/Srj
14) airrj'YyeCKev earavai.
lj.r]8e
rfK-KLKkvai (indir.
:
command), the intensive
perf. again occurs.
In Lu. 10
36, boKtt aot yeyovkvai,
we have "the
vivid present of
story-telling."^
1
Cf. Trexpaxerat (Ac. 25 :25).

^
">
On
the whole the
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 22. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 23 f. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 200
Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 52. Moulton, Prol., p. 146. So Heb. 4
1.
f.
TENSE (XPONOS)
perf. inf. is rather
909
common
(44 times, according to

:
the N.
8;
T.i
:
See further Jo. 12

3.
18;
H. Scott) in Ac. 16 27; 27 13; Ro. 15

: :
Hob. 11
(6)
Perfect Infinitive not in Indirect Discourse. Subject or Object Infinitive.

Cf. 2 Pet. 2
:
(a)
21,
fxri
eirtyv(ji-
Ktvai, where the tense accents the climacteric aspect (durativepunctihar) of the act and rather suggests antecedence (extensive)
to
r^v.
In Ac. 26
inf.
32, 6.ivoKe\h(jdaL kbvvaro,
we have an
instance of
also 56s
the obj.
with imphed antecedence
(extensive).
Note
kpyaaiav aTrrjXkaxâL (Lu. 12:58).

virapxeiv is
In Ac. 19:36
inf.
KaTt(TTa\y.kvov%
a periphrastic form of the subject
In 2 Cor.
5:11 note 7re(f)avepoiadaL with eXTrtfw. Cf. 1 Pet. 4 3 (with apKeNot very different is the use with cocrre (Ro. 15 19). Tos). Prepositions. At first it may seem surprising that the With (/3)
:
perfect tense should occur with the articular inf. after prepositions.
But the
inf.
structions.
It is still
does not lose its verbal character in such cona verbal substantive. It is, of course, only
by analogy that the tense function is brought into the infinitive. For the papyri note ewl r(3 yeyovhaL, P. Oxy. 294 (a.d. 22); virep
Tov airoXeXvaOaL ae, P. B.
M. 42
in 10
:
(b.C. 168).
^lerd.
Cf. fxera to eiprjKevai
(Heb. 10
the
15),
the only instance with

e'iprjKev
els,
Here the tense has
same
find
els
force as
it
9.
It
1
:
stands on record as said.

8, ets to elShaL (intensive)
We
and
also with
as in Eph.
TO yeyovhaL (Heb. 11:3).
It is
:
most frequent with

4,
5ta
and
the ace. (causal sense).

GvvTtTpl^QaL (extensive).
2; 27: 9.
So Mk. 5
See
inf.
8e8eadat. /cat bieairdcfdai koI
olKodoixrjadaL
(Lu. 6: 48).
Cf. Ac. 18:
In 8
11
we have
the perf.
inf. of
"broken continuity."
In the N. T. the perf.

6ta, els
with prepositions appears only with
and
/xerd.
Participle, The Meaning. The perf. part, either represents a state (intensive) or a completed act (extensive). Examples of the former are KeKOTrm/ccbs (Jo. 4:6); ecTTcos (18 18); to elwdos (Lu. 4 16). Instances of the latter occur in 6 el\r]4>a}s (Mt. 25 24) Trexotr/Kores The perf. part, is quite common in the N. T. and (Jo. 18 18).
6.
The
(a)
preserves the usual idea of the tense.

(6)
may
The Time of the Tense. It is relative, not absolute. It be coincident with that of the principal verb, usually so in
Cf. Jo.
the intensive use.^
4:6
KeKoiriaKois
hadeêTo, (19
33) el-
8ov ^Stj TeOvrjKOTa, (Ro.
15
14)
ecrre
ireTrXrfpoifJLevoL.
But by sug-
gestion the act

1
may
p.
W.-Th.,
be represented as completed before that of 2 Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 71. 334.
910
NEW TESTAMENT
Thus
:
the principal verb and so antecedent action.

TreTrotTjKores
yikvriv
iaTrjKeiaap
(Jo. 18
:
18);
Tvpo(j4>a.Toos
kXrfKvBoTa (Ac. 18
:
2); dTroXeXii-
(Lu. 16
18); elpriKOTos
(Mt. 26
75).
This antecedent action

tîj'Kdev
may
5
:
6vr)Kc!os
be expressed also by the intensive perfect as in (Jo. 11:44), but dede/xevos is coincident action.
is
6 re-
So
in
Mk.
Cf.
14 luariankvov
:
coincident, but rbv kaxvôra antecedent.
Rev. 6 9. The modern Greek keeps the perf. part. (Thumb, Handh., p. 167). (c) The Perfect Tense Occurs with Various Uses of the Participle. The attributive part, has it. Cf. oi aireaTokntvoL (Ac. 10 17). Sometimes a distinction is drawn between the aorist and the perf. part. Cf 6 XaiScof in Mt. 25 20 with 6 eiX7?(/)ws (25 24) 6 /caXeo-as in Lu. 14: 9 with 6 KexXTj/ccb? (14 10). Cf. 2 Cor. 12 21;
: . : :
:
Pet. 2
:
10.
The
f.;
predicate participle also uses

:
it.
Cf. Lu. 8
46; 6
18,
20
Jo. 19
33; Ac. 18
2;
:
Heb. 13
18,
23.
With Rev.
1,
dbov
TreTTTUiKOTa,
compare Lu. 10
Wecopow TeaouTa (the

of this
state, the act).

(d) The Periphrastic Participle. unusual idiom. Cf. Eph. 4 18
:
There are two examples

kaKOTWiikvoi
rfj
8Lavola ovres, (Col.
1
is
21) bvTas airrjWoTpLcoiJLevovs.
The durative aspect

:
of the perfect
thus accented.
Cf.
Heb. 5
14 for ex" used periphrastically.
CHAPTER XIX
MODE
Introductory.
CErKAISIS)
For a
brief sketch of the
and the reasons
for treating the indicative as

(a).
number of the modes a mode see ConjuReferences are there

of av
is
gation of the Verb, chapter VIII, v,
given to the pertinent hterature.

conjunctions
The use
given a brief
subject of
treatment below in cormection with the modes.

is
divided for logical consistency.
The The
Paratactic
tences, while Hypotactic Conjunctions fall tences.
Conjunctions belong to the same division with Paratactic Senunder Hypotactic Sen-
The conjunctions could

be there done
(v, 1) for
of course be treated in sepa-
rate chapter or as a division of the chapter
on
Particles (XXI).
That
will
Paratactic Conjunctions.
potactic Conjunctions will there receive only
Hysummary treatment
with subordinate
It
and can best be discussed

clauses.
in detail in connection
And
there are advantages in the present method.
needs to be said also that the division of the treatment of modes
Independent and Subordinate Sentences (A and B) There is no real difference in the meaning of a mode in an independent and a dependent sentence. The significance of each mode will be sufficiently discussed under A (Independent Sentences). The inclusion of all the suborcUnate clauses under mode is likewise for the
into those of
is
purely arbitrary and for the sake of clearness.
sake of perspicuity.
Voice, tense,
mode thus stand out

in
sharply.^
The
the
difficulty of
making a
clear distinction in the significance of
modes has already been discussed

is
chapter VIII, v,
(6).
A mood
an attitude of mind in which the speaker conceives the matter stated.^ Apollonius Dyskolos first described moods as i/'uxt'cat diadeaeLs. That is a correct description of the function of mood as distinct from voice and tense.^
a
of statement,
1
mode
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 44.5
ff.,
has this plan.
had abeady made
my
outline before reading his treatment of the subject.

2
3
Thompson, Synt.
of Att. Gk., p. 185.

I,
Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 498; K.-G.,
p.
200; Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt.,

p. 458.
p. 220.
See Sandys, Hist, of Class. Scholarship, HI,
911
912

is
The mode
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
is
But even so the matter is not always clear. The mode and away the most difficult theme in Greek syntax. Our modern grammatical nomenclature is never so clumsy as here in the effort to express "the delicate accuracy and beauty of those slight nuances of thought which the Greek reflected in the synthetic and manifold forms of his verb."^ So appeal is made to psychology
action).
far
to help us out.
" If the
moods are \l/vxi.Kal diadeaeLs, why
is
not every
utterance modal?
of the soul?
does not every utterance denote a state universal psychology would be a universal syntax." ^
Why
Every utterance does denote a state of the soul. This is one argument for treating the indicative as a mode. The verb is necesBut the term is naturally sarily modal from this point of view. confined to the finite verb and denied to the infinitive and participle. Dionysius Thrax does call the infinitive a mode, but he is not
generally followed.^
Gildersleeve
"*
notes also that

sees
temporal and tenses modal."
He
that the
order
(cf.
"moods are moods

chapter
and tenses
VII,
v),
is
the natural sequence in the English
but he follows the order tenses and moods in his Syntax of Classical Greek, though it is hard to separate them Gildersleeve^ laments also that SLadeais came in actual study. to be applied to voice and eyKKuaLs to mode (cf. enclitic words as to accent), "but after all tone of utterance is not so bad a description of mood." It is possible that at the begiiming the indicative was used to express all the various moods or
tones of the speaker, as the accusative case originally included
the whole
field
that the other
of the oblique cases. It was only gradually moods were developed by the side of the indic-
ative (thus limiting the scope of
the ind.) to accent certain
"moods of mind, i.e. various shades of desire," more sharply. Thompson calls this development "artificial," since no other race
but the Greeks have preserved these
fine distinctions
between
in-
dicative, subjunctive, optative, imperative, not to say injunctive
1 2
Farrar, Gk. SjTit., p. 136.

Gildersl.,
"A
Syntactician
among
the Psychologists,"
Am.
Jour,
of
Philol., Jan., 1910, p. 74.

' * 6 "
Cf. Steinthal, Gesch. d. Sprachw., pp. 309, 628.
Am.
lb.,
Jom-. of Philol.,
XXIII,
p. 127;
XXX,
p. 1.
XXX,
p. 1; Synt. of Classic. Gk., p. 79.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 510.
MODE
(ErKAISIs)
913
and future indicative (almost a mode to itself). But that is too severe a term, for the modes were a gradual evolution. The injunctive was the unaugmented indicative, like \vov, Xveade, Xvaaade, Moulton^ says: "Syntactically it rep'KWrjTe, Xiiere, Xvaare, ax.^
resented the bare combination of verbal idea with the ending which supplies the subject; and its prevailing use was for prohibitions,
if
to
some extent aUve.
we may judge from the Sanskrit, where it still remains The fact that this primitive mood thus
it
occupies ground appropriate to the subjunctive, while
supplies
the imperative ultimately with nearly all its forms, illustrates the Since the optative also can syntactical nearness of the moods.
express prohibition, even in the N. T. (Mk. 11
:
14),
we
see
how
often
much common ground

Yes, and
is
shared by
all
the subjective moods."

is
by the
indicative also.
The
present indicative
Originally the subjunctive had the short a practical future. vowel (cf. tofxev in Homer). The distinction between the indicative and subjunctive is not always clear.'^ The subjunctive in Homer is often merely futuristic. The affinity between the subjunctive and the optative is very close. The indicative continued
to be used in the volitive sense (past tenses)
(future tense).
and
of
command
original
Thus the other modes were

field.
luxuries of the lan-
guage rather than

possessor of the
necessities, while the indicative
was the
As already shown
the
fulfil
(chapter VIII, v) the
injunctive survived
in
imperative and subjunctive.

the function of
all
The
future indicative continued to

(cf.
the modes
the indicative before the rise of the other modes).
Thus the
future indicative
tive.
be merely futuristic, or volitive, or deliberaThe same thing is true of the subjunctive and the optative.
p.
may
Cf.
Moulton, Prol,
184
f.
Thompson
If
(Syntax, p. 186) curiously
says that "the indicative, however, assumed some of the functions of the other
moods."
have
error,
it right.
He had
just said properly enough: "It
he had said "retained," he would would be an
with regard both to their origin and functions, to regard moods as separate and water-tight compartments." The early process was from simplicity to variety and then from variety to The struggle besimplicity (cf. again the history of the cases). tween the modes has continued till now in the modern Greek we have practically only the indicative and the subjunctive, and they
the
'
Moulton,
lb.
Prol., p. 105.
Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 510. The injunctive had "a moaning hovering between the imperative, conjunctive and optative." ' Giles, Man., p. 459.
^
Cf. also
914
are in

some instances
is
NEW TESTAMENT
sound (Thumb, Handh., p. 115 f.). reduced" in use in the modern Greek. The optative has disappeared entirely, and the imperative, outside the second person, and the future indicative
alike in
The
subj.
"considerably
are expressed
ticiple
by
periphrasis.
Even
the infinitive and the par-
in
the
kolvj]
have
felt
the inroads of the subjunctive.^
It is true that as
a rule
we
see the
modes
to best advantage in
the simple sentence,^ though essentially the meaning in the com-
pound sentence
urges, that
But it is true, as Gildersleeve^ is the same. "the predominance of parataxis over hypotaxis is a
matter of style as well as of period. HyjDotaxis holds fast to constructions that parataxis has abandoned. The futural subjunctive abides defiantly in the dependent clause of temporal sentences and dares the future indicative to invade its domain. The modal nature of the future, obscured in the principal sentence,
forces itself
upon the most superficial observer in the dependent In a broad sense the indicative is the mode of objective statement in contrast with the subjective modes developed
clause."
it.
from
But the
differ
description needs modification
and
is
only true
in a general sense.
The N. T. idiom
from the
classic
as of the
kolvy]
in general vnU
is
be found to
Greek idiom here more than
The disappearance of the But the effort optative is responsible for part of this change. must now be made to differentiate the four modes in actual usage
true of the construction of the
tenses.'*
whatever may be true of the original idea of each. That point The vernacular in all languages is fond will need discussion also.
of parataxis.
See
Pfister,
"Die parataktische Darstellungsform

f.
in
der volkstiimlichen Erzahlung" {Woch.

809-813).
A.
klass. Phil., 1911, pp.
INDEPENDENT OR PARATACTIC SENTENCES (HAPATAKTIKA

'AHIHMATA)
I.
The
Indicative
Mode
(Xoyos diTO(j)avTLKds or
r\
opio-xiKT]
c-yKXioTLs).
1.
Meaning of the Indicative Mode.
The name
is
It is not distinctive, since all the modes "indicate." not true that the indicative gives "absolute reality,"^ though it
Thompson,
lb., p.
Synt., p. 494.
In the Sans,
3
it
was the subjunctive that went

f.
down
2 *
*
in the fight.
Cf. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 201
495.
Am.
Jour, of Philol., Jan., 1909, p. 2.

p. 384.
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 205. Bernhardy, Wiss. Synt. der griech. Sprache,
MODE
is
(efkaisis)
915
the
simple."^
"modus The
is
rectus."
It
does express "raffirmation pure et
indicative does state a thing as true, but does not
guarantee the reality of the thing.

the statement
help one
all
In the nature of the case only
under discussion.
clear grip
on
this point will
along.
The
indicative has nothing to do with reality

presents something as true.^
("an
is
sich").2
xhe speaker
Actuality
is
implied, to be sure, but nothing more.'*
Whether
it
true or
no is another matter. Most untruths are told in the indicative mode. The true translation into Latin of oplcttikt] would hefinitus or The indicdefinitus.^ Indicativus is a translation of dTroâi'Tuos.
ative
is
the most frequent
mode
is
in all languages.
It is the nor-
mal mode to use when another mode. The assertion

there
no special reason
for
employing
may
be qualified or unqualified.^
This fact does not affect the function of the indicative
mode
:
to
make
a defhiite, positive assertion.
Cf. Jo. 13
8, for instance.
study of the indicative mode is afforded in Jo. 1 1-18, where we have it 38 times, chiefly in independent sentences. The The use of v", h^subjunctive occurs only three times (1 7 f.). etc., has the e8(j)Kev, kdeacrdfxeOa, eXaôv, wapeh.aôv, eyvco, VT0, yfKOev, ovk
fine
:
note of certitude and confident statement that illustrate finely

the indicative mode.
Kinds of Sentences Using the Indicative. The mere declaration (a) Either Declarative or Interrogative. probably (and logically) precedes in use the question.^ But there
2.
is
no
essential difference in the significance of the
mode.
This
extension of the indicative from simple assertion to question is true of all Indo-Germanic tongues. Cf. Mt. 2 2; Mk. 4 7; Jo.
:
:
19.
The simple
yap
assertion
is
easily turned
e8i\{/r](Ta
to question.
fxe,
Cf.
kirelvaaa
TTore
eScoKare fioi <l)ayeiv,
Kal eTOTlaaTe
kt\.,
ae dbop,ev ivHvCiVTa Kal edpexpafxev, kt\.
(Mt. 25
35,-39).
and For
the change from question to simple assertion see 7rio-re6ets tovto; 26 f.). Cf. Ac. 26:27. The formula au kyd} TreiriaTevKa (Jo. 11
:
sometimes used for the answer, as in Mt. 27 11; Lu. So also av diras in Mt. 26 25, 64. The 22 70; Jo. 18 37. question without interrogative words is seen in Mt. 11:28; Jo. 13 6; Ac. 21 37; Ro. 2 21-23; 7:7, etc. Sometimes it is diffi'KkyeLs
:
is
Vandacle, L'Optatif Grcc, 1897, p. 111.

lb.
k.-G., Bd.
I,
p. 201.
Der Redendc
stellt
ctwas
als wirklich.
* *
8 '
Riem. and Goelzcr, Synt., p. 297 Burton, M. and T., p. 73. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 445.
f.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 205.
916

whether a sentence
:
NEW TESTAMENT
cult to tell
is
declarative or interrogative, as
in
Cor. 1:13; Ro. 8

this
33
For
very reason the Greek used various interrogatory parplain the question.
ticles to
make
8
17.
yLvucTKeLs; (Ac.
30.
Thus apd yt Note the play on the verb).
yLvooaKeis a aua-
Cf. Lu. 18
:
8;
Gal. 2
Jer. 4
:
It is rare also in the
LXX
It is
(cf.
Gen. 18
is
9;
37
10;
10),
but apa
is
common.^
of
el
a slight literary touch in

elliptical.
Luke and
really
Paul.
The use
in a question
It is
is
a condition with the conclusion not expressed or it indirect question (cf. Mk. 15 :44; Lu. 23 6; Ph. 3 12).
: :
an
It is
used in the N. T,, as in the LXX quite often (Gen. 17: 17, etc.). This construction with a direct question is unclassical and may be due to the Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew H by el as well
by fxr]."^ Cf. Mt. 12 10, Et eêaTiv rots aa^âatv depairexxiaL; see also Mt. 19:3; Mk. 8:23; Lu. 13:23; 22:49; Ac. 1 6; 7: 1; 19: 2 21 37 22 25. Note frequency in Luke. In Mk. 10 2 (parallel to Mt. 19 3) the question is indirect. The idiom, though singular, has ''attained to all the rights of a direct interrogative "^ by this time. The idiom may be illustrated by the Latin an which in later writers was used in direct questions. So si, used in the Vulgate to translate this el, became in late Latin a chrect interrogative particle. A similar ellipsis appears in the use of el (cf. Heb.
as
:
:
11) in the negative sense of a strong
The
ri is found So far the questions are colourless. The use of interrogative pronouns and adverbs is, of course, abundant in the N. T. Thus tIs, either alone as in Mt. 3 7, with 5, with ovv as in Lu. apa. as in Mt. 24 45, with yap as in Mt. 9 Mk. 15 24. For tI in tI rts 10.^ interrogative double the See 3 For the ellipsis 2. 16 Lu. tovto) see of use (predicative TovTo
particle
in the
LXX Job 25
also)."* oath (from the 5 B, but not in the

:
LXX
N.T.^
with
9
:
I'm Tt (cf. 5ta rt
in
Mt. 9
:
11; eh ri in
:
Mk.
14
4) see
Mt.
is
4,
and
for
t'l
6tl
tI in
note Lu. 2
49
(cf
:
tI
is
yeyovev 6tl in Jo. 14

interesting.
22).
The
use of
Ac. 12 18 and 13 25
Tt
an
accusative adverb in
Mk.
10
18.
el
sort of prolepsis or double
accusative occurs in ol8a ae
ris
used in direct questions are
ttoIos
(Mk. 1:24). Other pronouns (Mk. 11:28), iroaos (Mk. 6

:
1 Viteau, Etude sur le Grec du N. T. Le Verbe, p. 22. Some editors read apa in Gal. 2 17, but see Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 259. See &pa in Mt. 18 1. 2 Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 260. * Robertson, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 179. 3 W.-Th., p. 509.
:
Viteau,
Le Verbe,
p. 22.
Cf. Robertson, Short Gr. of the
Gk. N.
T., p. 178.
MODE
38), TToraTTos
(efkaizis)
of 6 in Mt. 26 25.i 11, 28; Jo. 8:
917
:
(Mt. 8
27).
'The sense
:
50
is
dis-
puted, as of OTL in
Mk.
is
ttcos
16; 9
The
:
use of
;
interrogative adverbs
TTore
frequent.
:
Cf
vrore
(Mt. 25
:
38)
eojs
(Mt. 17
21).
17);
(Lu. 10
26); tov (Lu. 8
25); iroaaKLs (Mt.
18
Alternative questions are expressed

8,
or with
tL
ij
as in
Mt. 9
5.
by ^ alone The case of
as in 1 Cor. 9
tIs
is
fj
different
(Mt. 7:9). Exclamations are sometimes expressed by the relative forms, 15, but more frequently by the interlike cos (hpatoL in Ro. 10
:
rogative pronouns like iroaa (Mk. 15 :4);

(Lu. 12
(6)
:
Trrj\iKos
(Gal. 6
:
11); rt
Mt. 6 an affirmative or negative answer is expected, then that fact is shown by the use of ov for the question expecting the affirmative reply and by ni] for the negative answer. As a matter of fact, any answer may be actually given. It is only the expectation that is presented by ov
49); iroaaKcs (Mt. 23
:
37).
If
Cf. irdaov in
23.
Positive
and Negative.
or
This use of ov is kirpoHr^haaixev; (Mt. 7

fxrj.
:
like the
Latin nonne.
:
So
:
ov
tQ
era)
bvojiaTi
12
6;
12
23; 17
is
17;
Mt. 6 25; 13 27; 13 55; Lu. 22). 1 Cor. 9:1; 14 24; Jas. 2 5; Heb. 3
Cf.
:
16, etc.
This
the
common
classic construction.
airoKpiuri ohbkv;
The use
:
of ov
Cf.
may
13
:
suggest indignation as in ovk

Surprise
(Mk. 14
38.
60.
ovK aireKpivaTo ov8ev in verse 61).

10).
is
So with
ov irava'u 8La(rTpe<j)uv; (Ac.

:
indicated
:
by
ovk apa in Ac. 21
Ouxt
is
common.
18
:
Cf. Lu. 6
39.
Ovkovv occurs once in the N. T. (Jo.

//i?
37).
The presence
of
ticipated, the only instance of ju^?
shows that the answer "no" is anwith the indicative in a princi-
pal sentence.
Gildersleeve^ calls ov ''the
mascuHne negative"
certainly a feminine
and
A117
''the feminine negative."

m^?
There
is
touch in the use of
by the woman
at Jacob's well
when she
came to the village. She refused to arouse opposition by using Thus ^1771 oCtos kanv 6 excited their curiosity by yii\. oil and XptaTos; (Jo. 4 29).^ The examples in the N. T. are very numerous. The shades of negative expectation and surprise vary very Each context supplies a slightly different tone. Cf. greatly. Mt. 7 9, 16; 12 23; 26 22, 25; Mk. 4 21; Lu. 6 39; Jo. 6 Both ov and ^77 67; 7 26, 35, 47, 51 f.; 21 5; Ro. 9 14; 11 1. may occur in contrast in the same sentence. So m^? 'â avdpojirou
: :
Tavra XaXco,
rj
Kal 6 vopos
ravra ov Xeyei; (1 Cor. 9:

ap.<l>6Tepoi.
8).
tis
Cf. Lu. 6
39
IJ.T)TL
bbvarai rvîôs tv(})\6v oS-qyeiv; ovxl
ôdvvov knirt-
See ch.
XV, Pronouns.
^
Am.
cf. also Jo. 4
33.
918
aovvTai;

The
NEW TESTAMENT
use of fxrjTL is common (cf. ouxO-^ The combination in the chapter on Particles, but it may be discussed jut) ov will be negative of the verb while /i'7 is the inthe ov is that here noted
terrogative particle expecting the answer "no."
translation expects the answer "yes," because
translates only
ov.
is it
The English
:
Cf. 1
in the
ignores mt and Cor. 9 :4, 5; 11: 22; Ro. 10 18, 19.
The
construction
It is
LXX (Judg.
13, etc.)
and
in classic
Greek.
The kinds
of sentences overlap inevitably so that
a rhetorical question, not a simple interrogative.^ we have already

indicative
is
transgressed into the territory of the next group.
As already shown, the
used indifferently with or
without the negative in either declarative or interrogative senCf., for instance, Jo. 1 2-8. tences. The groups thus overlap. The negative of a declarative independent sentence with the in:
dicative
indicative.
This outright "mascuhne" negative suits the With questions, however, it is different, as has already been shown. Thus it is true that fiij made a "raid" into the inis
ov.
The
dicative, as ov did in the early language into the subjunctive.^ optative uses either ov or (jltj, but that is another story. The
indicative with ov
makes a pointed denial. Note the progressive abruptness of the Baptist's three denials in Jo. 1 20 f 3. Special Uses of the Indicative.
:
(a)
(a)
Past Tenses.
its
For Courtesy. It is true that the indicative "is suited by whole character only to positive and negative statements, and
not to the expression of contingencies, wishes,

other subjective conceptions. "^
dicative
is
That
is perfectly true.
a thing. terms "side moods." I consider, as already explained, the indicative the mode par excellence, and I doubt the value of such language as "the modal uses of the indicative."^ It is not so much that the indicative "encroached upon the other
the normal
for saying
Gildersleeve'^ aptly
mode
commands or The inThe other modes
moods, and in so doing assumed their functions, especially in dependent sentences,"^ as that the indicative, particularly in dependent sentences, retained to some extent all the functions of It is true, as already said, that the indicative was all the modes.
Blass, Gr. of
2 3 *
Burton, N. T.
Cf. Gildersl.,
N. T. Gk., p. 254. M. and T., p. 179.
Am.
Moulton, Prol., p. 199. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 235.
Jour, of Philol., Jan., 1910, p. 78. ^ Synt. of Classic Gk., Pt.
I,
365.
Thompson, Synt.
MODE
always the most
virile of all
(efkaisis)
919
all.
the
modes and has outlived them
But, after the other modes became fully developed, these less frequent uses of the indicative seemed anomalous. The courteous or
polite use of the imperfect indicative
cial constructions.
is
the simplest of these spe-
Here the indicative is used for direct assertion, thrown into a past tense, though the present is statement the but time is contemplated. We do this in English when we say: " I was just thinking," "I was on the point of saying," etc. So Ac. 25 Agrippa does not 22, tôv\6ixr)v Kal avTos rod avQpioirov aKovaai. bluntly say jSoi-Xo/iat (cf. Paul in 1 Tim. 2:8; 5 14) nor ejSouXStJL-qv
:
:
av,
which would suggest unreality, a thing not true. He docs wish. He could have said ôvKolix-qv av (cf. Ac. 26 29, where Paul uses the optative), but the simple tôvKbixr]v is better. The optative would have been much weaker.^ In 2 Cor. 1 15 kfiovKbix-qv ivpb:
repop has its natural reference to past time.
Cf. kôv\y]di)v in 2
Jo. 12
(Gr. of
Trpos
In Gal. 4: 20, ride\ov be irapetvai p. 207) has it. Paul is speaking of present time (cf. 6tl airopovfiai.). He puts the statement in the imperfect as a polite idiom. The use of Oekoi is seen in Ro. 16 19. The usual force of the mode and tense appears in ÔeXov in Jo. 6 21. The negative brings out sharply the element of will (cf. Lu. 19 14; Mt. 22 3). In Ro.
v/JLOLs
and Phil. N. T. Gk.,

apTL,
13, kôvKbix-qv
not 'would have liked' as Blass
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
example we come close to the use of the indicative for unreahty, the so-called "unreal" indicaSee also chapter on Tense. tive.
it,
but drew back.
With
this
(j3)
Present
Necessity,
Obligation,
is
Possibility,
Propriety
in
Tenses of the Past.
This
the usual
"potential"
indicative.
The imperfect of such verbs does not necessarily refer to the present.^ Thus in Jo. 4 4, eSet avrbv 8t.epx^crdaL 5ta. rrjs Sajuaptas, it
:
simply a necessity in past time about a past event. So Set in This use of the imJo. 4 20, 24 expresses a present necessity. present or the ordinary either the from differs thus perfect UeL
is
:
imperfect.
The idiom
is
logical enough.''
It
the statement the necessity

XpLCTbv.
may l)e confined

still exists.
:
to that phase of the matter,

:
was a necessity and though

tov
(cf.
Cf. also
So Lu. 24 26, ovxl ravra eSet iraddv Mt. 18 33; 23 23; 25 27; Lu. 11 42; 13 16
: : : :
W.-Th., p. 283. K.-G., Bd. I, p. 204
f.
Bla.ss,
20(5.
920
del

; :
NEW TESTAMENT
in verse 14)
that of
Ac. 27 21. It is an easy step from this notion to an obUgation which comes over from the past and is not
The present non-fulfilment of the obligation is left to. of the reader or hearer. It is not formally stated. inference the to It happens that in the N. T. it is only in the subordinate clauses that the further development of this use of eSet comes, when only
Uved up
the present time
(70V irapetvaL.
is
referred to.
Thus
in Ac. 24
19, ovs edet
eirl
They ought
is
to be here, but they are not.
Our Eng-
lish
"ought"
likewise a past
about the past.^

9
:
So 2 Cor. 2
26, kwel UeL ahrov xoXXd/cts
form about the present as well as d^' Siv e5et fxe xa^pet^. In Heb. iraBdv, there is an implied condition
:
3,
and Uei is which see.
practically
an apodosis of the second-class condition,

process
vcf)'
The same
:
is
in 2 Cor. 12
11, kydi Ci<êLKov
vjjlwv
seen in the other words. Thus awiaTacrdaL, we have a simple

:
past obligation. So in Lu. 7:41; Heb. 2 17. Note common use of the present tense also, as in Ac. 17 29. Cf. 6 bxjte'CKoixev TOLrjaaL the TreTOL-nKafiev (Lu. 17: 10), where the obligation comes on from
:
past.
But
in 1 Cor. 5
10,
eirel
wêtXere apa
rod Koaixov kêKdetv,
we have merely
present time under consideration and a practical apodosis of a second-class condition implied. I do not agree Avith Moulton^ that av in such instances has been " dropped." It simply was not needed to suggest the unreality or non-realization of the
obligation.
The context made

:
it
clear enough.
Xpi? occurs
only
once in the N. T. (Jas. 3 10), whereas at all, nor eêaTt (but eôv) nor e^^v.^ But edhvaro is used of the present time. So Jo. 11 37. Cf. the apodosis in the second-class condition without iiu in Jo. 9 33; Ac. 26 32. The use of us avrJKev
TpoarjKeL (Attic) is
:
:
not found
(Col. 3
18)
and
a ovk aprJKev (Eph. 5
4) are
both pertinent, though

Kad^rjKev
in subordinate clauses.
:
Note
in particular oh yap
live.'
avTov f rji'
In Mt. 26: 24, koXov riv avrco (Ac. 22 22), 'He is not fit to without av of a condition of apodosis d ovk eyevvr]9r], we have the
the second class (determined as unfulfilled). There expressed in 2 Pet. 2 21, KpetrTOV yap rjv avTols p-ri
:
is
no condition
kireyvuKevai, Trjv
68dv
Moulton^ finds the origin of this idiom in the conditional sentence, but Winer ^ sees in it merely the Greek way itself. of affirming what was necessary, possible or appropriate in (Thumb, idiom this preserves Greek modern The So Gildersleeve.^
TYJs hKaio(jvv7]%.
1
Our
transl. therefore often fails to distinguish the
two senses
of ehei in
Gk.
Gildersl., Synt., Pt. I, p.

2
144
f.
Cf chapter on Tense.
.
Prol., p. 200.
Blass, Gr. of
Prol., p. 200.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 206.
" "
W.-Th., p. 282.
Synt., Pt.
I,
<
p. 144.
MODE
Handb., p. 128).
of the infinitive
17.
(efkaisis)
921
potential indicative.
Rev. 3: 2 approaches this p. 274. For the use Teaeiv in Lu. 16 rather than the indicative see ^
of eneWov in
The use
Cf.
Thompson, Syntax,
in Jo. 6
7.
So also
Lpa
and subjunctive as
Cf. Viteau,
Le
Verhe, p. 21.
The use
of 6\lyov or niKpov with
an
aorist does not
occur in the N. T. Cf. Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 445. (7) The Apodosis of Conditions of the Second Class.
This
matter has already "been touched on slightly and is treated at length under Conditional Sentences. It can be merely sketched The condition is not always expressed and av usually is here. present. The use of av, however, in the apodosis is not obligaWe know very little about the origin and meaning of av tory.^ anyhow. It seems to have a demonstrative sense (definite, then,
in that case)
which was shifted to an

of the
indefinite use.
it
Cf. t6v Kal
TOP, TO. Kal 70.?
Gildersleeve interprets
as a particle
"used to
tenses
colour the
moods
Greek language."
With the past
of the indicative in
independent sentences it is a definite particle. The effort to express unreahty by the indicative was a somewhat In Homer "the unreal imperfect indicative difficult process. always refers to the past."^ So in Heb. 11:15. Nothing but
the context can
sition to the past or the present.
show whether these past tenses are used in oppoThe Koivr\ received this idiom of the unreal indicative "from the earlier age as a fully grown and normal usage, which it proceeded to limit in various directions."* In Jo. 15 22 we have a good illustration of this construction.
:
We know
that anapTlav ovk
eLxo(rav is in
opposition to the present
reality because it is followed
by
vvv 8e TpocpaaLv ovk Ixovaiv.
The
In
same thing
verse 19 av
eXkyere av
is
seen in verse
is
24 when
vvv be ewpaKaaip follows.
k4>l\i
used, the usual construction.

are used after the protasis
In Lu. 17:6
and
vir-qKovaep 'dp
.
exere (first-
So also the marginal This is class condition) after eTrotetre el eare and is fol39 is in 8 Jo. reading in W. H. of Up seems more The absence above). (cf. lowed by pvp 5e fTjretre
a mixed condition.
:
noticeable in John's Gospel.

kpov ovbtplav
el
(iri
Cf. Jo. 19
(tol
11, ovk elx^s kôvalap Kar'
rjv
:
bthopkvop
1.5 el
dpoÔep.^
Paul has the same^

vpojp eôpvâvres
idiom.
Thus
Gal. 4
bwarop tovs
ocfydaXpiOvs
el p.r]
edcoKare p.0L
and Ro. 7 7
:
Tr]P
ap-aprlap ovk eypo:p
bid poixov, ttjv re
Blass, Gr. of
Gildorsl.,
N. T. Gk.,
p. 205.
GiUlersl., Synt., Pt.
I,
p.
168
f.
'
Am.
f.
Jour, of Philol., Jan., 1909, p. IG.
Cf. Stahl, Krit.-hist.
Synt., p. 251
*
^ IToro 5tA n-ad 2xs. Moulton, Prol., p. 199. But not in Acta. Cf. Blass, Or. of N. T. Gk., p. 20G.
922

The MSS. vary in the support 6 vofios. where EKLP (and K^'D'') have it. In Jo. does not have av, while in 8 19, D does not have it,
ovk ^8eLP
:
yap eTLdvuldv
18
36,
el
fir]
of au as in Gal. 4
:
15,
and the other MSS. differ in the position of ixp.^ This particle comes near the beginning of the clause, though not at the beginning.
It does not precede
om
(cf.
Gal.
Jo.
10).
:
repeated in successive apodoses

(cf.
(cf.
4
I,
10),
It is sometimes but not always
Lu. 12 :39).
iiv
Cf. Kiihner-Gerth, Bd. see
p. 247.
ff.
On
the use-
of
in general
Thompson, Syntax, pp. 291
{Doctrina Partic. Linguae Graecae, ed. sec, 1806, p.

av
Hoogeveen 35) makes
mean simply
iiv
deheo,
a very doubtful interpretation.
"The
addition of
effect as
to
an indicative apodosis produced much the same

express in writing
This emphasis suggests that the condition was not realized. The papyri likewise occasionally show the absence of av.^ The condition is not always expressed. It may be definitely implied in the context or left to inference. So Kayo) eKdoiv avv tokco av ewpaâ avTo
italicizing
'if.'
we can
by
"^
(Lu. 19
23)
25:27).
and /cai eXduv eych Here the condition
eKoixiaaixriv
is
av to
kfiov
avv tokw (Mt.
implied in the context, a conis
struction thoroughly classical.
But, in principal clauses, there
no instance
of av with a past tense of the indicative in a frequentIt only survives in relative,

(cf.
ative sense.^
comparative or tem35;
1
poral clauses
:
Mk.
56; Ac. 2
:
45; 4
Cor. 12
2;
Mk.
3:11; 11 19). So D in Mk. 15 6, 6v av fiTovvro. Both the aorist and the imperfect tenses are used thus with av in these subordinate clauses. There was considerable ambiguity in the use of the past tenses for this "unreal" indicative. No hard and fast rule could be laid down. A past tense of the indicative, in a condition without av, naturally meant a simple condition of the first class and described past time (cf. Heb. 12 25). But in certain contexts it was a condition of the second class (as in Jo. 15 22, 24). Even
: :
with
iiv
The
not certain^ whether past or present time is meant. certain application to present time is probably postit is
The imperfect might denote^ a past condition, as in Mt. 23 :30; 24 43 (Lu. 12 :39); Jo. 4 10; 11:21, 32; 1 Jo. 2
Homeric.^
: :
^ Moulton, Pro!., p. 200. N. T. Gk., p. 206. 3 lb. Cf. Moulton, Class. Quart., Apr., 1908, p. 140. Moulton (Prol., p. 200) cites without av O.P. 526 (ii/A.D.) ou irapk^tvov, O.P. 530 (ii/A.O.) iraXiv aoi kireaTakKiiv, Rein. P. 7 (ii/B.c.) OVK aTrear-qL, all apodoses of 2d class conditions. The mod. Gk. here uses the conditional da (Thumb, Handb., p. 19.5). 4 Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 207. Cf. Gildersl., Synt., Pt. I, p. 170 f. 6 Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., 399. Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. 230 f. ^ Moulton, Prol., p. 201. 1
Blass, Gr. of
MODE
19;
39).
(etkaisis)
(cf.
923
Lu. 7:
:
Heb. 11
15, or, as
commonly, a present condition
The aorist would naturally denote past time, as in Mt. 11 The two tenses may come in the same condition and con21. clusion, as in Jo. 14 28. The past perfect is found in the protasis,
:
as in Mt. 12
7; Jo. 19
11.
:
Once the
real past perfect

rjêtre
meets us
:
in the conclusion (1 Jo. 2

(6)
19).
And
note av
in Jo. 14
7.
These impracticable wishes were introduced in Attic by eWe or d yap, which used also ibcfjekov with the infinitive. From this form a particle was developed '6<i)eKov (augmentless) which took the place of dde and d yap. The dropping of the augment is noted in Herodotus (Moulton, Prol., p. 201). As a matter of fact, this unfulfilled wish occurs only three times in the N. T. once with the aorist about the past, 6(f)e\6v ye kâaiXevaare (1 Cor. 4:8), and twice with the imperfect about the present (2 Cor. 11 1; Rev. 3 15). "OêXoj' occurs once also with
Impossible Wishes.
: : :
of the MSS. (D'ÊFGKL) read and a few do the same in 1 Cor. 4 8. The idiom occurs in the LXX and in the inscriptions. Cf. Schwyzer, The modern Greek expresses such wishes by m or Perg., p. 173. For Upap.ov in Gal. 2: as and imperf. or aorist (Thumb, p. 128). Radermacher {N. T. 2, of unrealized purpose, see Final Clauses. Gr., p. 127) quotes 6(peXov e/xeipas, Achilles Tatius, II, 24, 3, and
the future (Gal. 5
12).
Many
ucpeXov in 2 Cor. 11:1,
(j3<j)t\ov
kyw naXXov
kirvpeaaov, Epict., Diss., 22, 12.
(&)
The Present.
In Mt. 12
38, StSacr/caXe, OeXopieu airb aov
crrj-
lielov Ibetv,
the present seems rather abrupt.^
In Jo. 12
it is
21, Kupte,
deXofxev tov 'Irjaovv ibdv, this is felt SO

'Sir,
strongly that
:
translated:
we
:
loould see Jesus.'
See also Jo. 6 26

:
67.
Cf. eôvXoixrjv in
There does 7. Cf 7 28. There were probably delicate nuances of sufficiently softened these words, shadings which There is no difficulty about dp/ceT in 2 Cor. 12 9.
Ac. 25
22 and
dâipi7]v av in
29.
not seem to be
also 4)dbop.ai in
the same abruptness in

:
dk\oo in 1
Cor. 7
meaning which
now
escape us.
In a case like
is is
UTraToj dXieuetf (cf. epxcfieda) in Jo.
21
3,
the suggestion or hint

indicative
in the fact, not in the statement.

assertion.
The
a definite In
1
The nature
Tapa^rjXovfjLev
of the case supplies the rest.
Cor.
10
22,
fj
top KvpLov; the indicative notes the fact,
while the surprise and indignation
come out
is
in the interrogative
form.
It
The question
in Jo. 11
if
47, tI iroLovnev; is very striking.
may
be questioned^
the point
the same as
tL TvoLwyitv; (cf.
Jo. 6: 28), like the Latin

1
Quid fadamus?
Lc Vcrbc,
p. 21.
The subjunctive
of de-
Cf. Vitcau,
Against Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 210.
924
NEW TESTAMENT
liberation suggests
doubt on the whole subject or expresses a

Blass' cites the colloquial Latin for paralparallels here.
wish to do something.
lels for this
idiom.
But we do not need such

is
The
inquiry of Caiaphas
rather indignant protest against the in-
activity of the Sanhedrin than a puzzled
quandary as to what
He they should do. The nothing and knowing and charges them with doing nothing
indicative suits exactly his purpose.
makes a definite proposal himself. Winer sees the point clearly. The same use of 9eXco noted above appears in questions of deliberation as in dekets avXke^wjjiev; (Mt. 13
:
28).
18 :39). pressed in questions also, as in

(Jo.
opTes; (Mt. 12
:
Cf. Lu. 18 :41.
Possibility or
xcos
So ôvkeaOe a-KokvcFw; duty may be exirov-qpol
bvvaade ayada XaXelv
34);
ri (xe del iroielv Iva awdch;
(Ac. 16
30).
This
is
method rather than trusting to the mode.^ ''It is and more convenient, to show the modal character possible, found of particles, or from the drift of the context, means by clause of a
the analytical
without a distinct verbal form."^

(c)
The Future.
The
future indicative
it
"was
originally a sub-
junctive in the main"^ and
has a distinct modal development. This fact comes out in the fact that the future tense of the indicative is a rival of the subjunctive, the optative and the imperaLike the subjunctive and optative the future may be tive.''
merely futuristic (prospective) or deliberative or volitive. This matter has been discussed at length under Tenses, which see. As an example of the merely futuristic note Mt. 11 28, of the volitive see Lu. 13 9, of the deliberative note Jo. 6 68. II. The Subjunctive Mode (t^ viroTaKTiKii e^KXicris).
: : :
Some
for the
of the
aviJiôvKevTCKT],
Greek grammarians called it 8i.crTaKTLKrj, some 17 some viroOerLKr]. But no one of the names is happy,
17 17
mode
is
principal clauses, nor

clauses.
1.
not always subordinate, since it is used freely in is it the only mode used in subordinate
But the best one is 17 biaTaKTiK-q. Relations to Other Modes. The development of the modes was gradual and the differentiation was never absolutely distinct. These (a) The Aorist Subjunctive and the Future Indicative. are closely allied in form and sense. It is quite probable that
the future indicative
Cf.
is
just a variation of the aorist subjunctive.
eSofxaL, TvioiJLaL, cfidyofjiai..

1
The subjunctive
*
is
always future, in
Gr., p. 235.
lb.
Cf.
Thompson,
p. 284.
Synt., p. 187.
Monro, Horn.
Moulton,
W.-Th.,
Prol., p. 199.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 210.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 218.
MODE
(efkaisis)
925
subordinate clauses relatively future. Hence the two forms continued side by side in the language. There is a possible dissubjunctive differs from the future indicative in likely to occur, not positively what will thought stating what ^ begirming (cf. Homer) it was probably not in the But occur." pointedly contends that many Gr., (Griech. Brugmann p. 499) so. so-called future indicatives are just "emancipated short-vowel conjunctives." Cf. Giles, Manual, pp. 446148; Moulton, ProL,
tinction.
is
"The
p. 149.
(6)
The Suhjunctive and

Indeed, the
first
the Imperative.
These are closely
al-
lied.
person imperative in Greek, as in San-
skrit,2 is
instead.
absent in usage and the subjunctive has to be employed There is a possible instance of the subjunctive as imis
perative in the second person in Sophocles, but the text

tain.^
uncer-
The use
is
of
(x-q
and the
aorist subjunctive in prohibitions

is
of the second
and third persons
also pertinent.
Thus the
subjunctive
(c)
in close affinity with the imperative.
The Subjunctive and the Optative. They are really variaof the same mode. In my Short Graynmar of the Greek N. T.^ I have for the sake of clearness grouped them together. I treat them separately here, not because I have changed my view,
tions
but in order to give a more exhaustive discussion. The closeness of the connection between the subjunctive and the optative is manifest in the Sanskrit. "Subjunctive and optative run closely parallel with one another in the oldest language in their use in independent clauses, and are hardly distinguishable in dependent."^
optative save in the imperatival uses.
In the Sanskrit the subjunctive disappeared before the It is well known that the
"Latin subjunctive is syncretistic, and does duty for the Greek conjunctive and optative."^ Delbriick, indeed, insists that the two modes originally had the same form and the same meaning.'' But Delbriick's view has carried the bulk of modern opinion. Giles^ is justified in saying: "The original meaning of these moods and the history of their development is the most difficult of the many vexed questions of comparative syntax." It is true that
2 3
Thompson, Gk.
Synt., 1883, p. 133.

p. 216.
I,
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
Cf. Giklersl., Synt., Pt.
p. 149.
* 6 ^
6 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 216. Pp. 129-131. Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., 1907, p. 191. Die Grundl. d. griech. Synt., p. 115 f.
Comp.
Philol, p. 502.
926
NEW TESTAMENT
the subjunctive in Greek refers only to the future, while the
But the optative is usually The use of the subjunctive was greater in Homer's time than afterwards. The independent subjunctive in particular was more freely used in Epic than in Attic. In the modern Greek^ the subjunctive has not only displaced the optative, but the future indicative and the infinitive. But even so in modern Greek the subjunctive is relatively reduced and is almost confined to subordinate clauses (Thumb, Handb., pp. 115, 126). The fut. ind. in modern Greek is really 6a (dava) and subj. G. Hamilton* overstates it in saying: "This monarch of the moods, which stands absolute and alone, has all the other moods dependent on it." It is possible that originally these two moods were used indifferently.^ Vandacle^ argues for a radical difference between the two moods, but he does not show what that difference is. There were distinctions developed beyond a doubt in actual use,^ but they are not of a The Iranian, Sanskrit and the Greek are the radical nature. only languages which had both the subjunctive and optative. The Sanskrit dropped the subjunctive and the Greek finally dispensed with the optative as the Latin had done long ago.^ 2. Original Significance of the Subjunctive. Delbriick^
optative
is
not boiind to any sphere.^
relatively 2 future like our "should," "could," etc.
is
clear that "will" is the
fundamental idea of the subjunctive,
while "wish" came to be that of the optative.

is
But
this position
it is
sharply challenged to-day.

in
Goodwin i
denies that
all
possible
"to include under one fundamental idea
the actual uses of
any mood
Greek except the imperative."
He
admits that the

is
only fundamental idea always present in the subjunctive

of futurity
that
and claims this as the primitive meaning from the idiom of Homer, Brugmann^^ denies that a single root-idea of the subjunctive can be found. He cuts the Gordian knot by three
uses of the subjunctive (the
1
volitive,
the deliberative, the futur-
Gildersl.,
Am.
2
3
Cf. Baumlein, Unters. iiber griech.
Modi
(1846, p. 25
f.).
Cf. V.
and
D., Handb., p. 321
f.
* ^
8
Latin of the Latins and Greek of the Greeks, p. 23. Bergaigne, De conjunctivi et optativi in indoeurop. hnguis.
L'optatif grec, p.
Jolly,
xxiii.
'
lb., p.
iii.
* 9
Ein Kapitel
p.
d. vergl. Synt.,
f.
Der Konjunktiv und Optativ,

ff.
p. 119.
Die Grundl.,
116
Cf. Synt., II, pp. 349
" M. and T., App., Relation of the Optative to the Subjunctive and other Moods, p. 371. " Griech. Gr., p. 499.
MODE
istic).
(efkaisis)
927
G. Hale^ identifies the deliberative and futuristic uses Sonnenschein^ sees no distinction between volitive and deliberative, to which Moulton^ agrees. "The objection to the term 'deliberative,' and to the separation of the first two classes, appears to be well grounded." He adds: "A command may easily be put in the interrogative tone." That is true. It is also
as identical.
W.
true "that the future indicative has carried off not only the futuristic
but also the volitive and deliberative subjunctives." But

is
for practical purposes there
wisdom
in
Brugmann's
division.
Stahl* sees the origin of

will.
The
the subjunctive uses in the notion of future meaning grows out of the volitive. Mutzbauer^
all
finds the
fundamental meaning of the subjunctive to be the attitude of expectation. This was its original idea. All else comes
out of that.
With
this Gildersleeve*^ agrees:
"The
subjunctive
mood
is
the
mood
of anticipation," except that he
draws a sharp
between "anticipation" and "expectation." "Anticiif it were present." He thinks that is a "deadened imperative."^ But Monro ^ on the whole thinks that the futuristic meaning is older than the volitive. So the grammarians lead us a merry dance with the subjunctive. Baumlein^ denies that the subjunctive is mere possibility. It aims after actuality, "a tendency towards
distinction
pation treats the future as the futuristic subjunctive
actuality."
At any
rate
it is
clear that
we must
seek the true
meaning
of the subjunctive in principal clauses, since subordinate
clauses are a later development, though the futuristic idea best
survives in the subordinate clause.^"

is
true that three ideas

.
keit,
tive
In a sense Hermann's notion come in the modes (Wirklichkeit, MoglichNotwendigkeit) The indicative is Wirklichkeit, the imperais N otwendigkeit, while the subjunctive and the optative
I have ventured in my Short Grammar'^^ to call the subjunctive and optative the modes of doubtful statement,
are Moglichkeit.
'
The Anticipatory Subjunctive in Gk. and

See discussion of these three uses of
CI. Rev.,
Lat., Stud. Class. Phil. (Chicago)*

fut. ind.
7
I,
p. 6.
2 3 ^
under Tense.
I,
XVI,
p. 166.
Synt., Pt.
p. 147.
Prol., p. 184.
lb., p. 148.
Horn. Gr., p. 231. 235 f. Konjunktiv und Optativ, p. 8 f. ' Unters. liber die gricch. Modi, p. 35. Cf. Wetzel, De Conjunctivi ct Optativi apud Graecos Usu, p. 7. ^^ Hammerschrnidt, tJber die Grundb. von Konjunktiv und Optativ, p. 4. " Pp. 129-131. A3 a matter of fa(!t both Dclbriick and Goodwin fail to establish a sharp distinction between the subjunctive and the optative. Cf. Giles, Man., p. 504.
Krit.-hist. Synt., p.
928

is
NEW TESTAMENT
and the imas already
this outline
while the indicative

perative that of
the
mode
of positive assertion
commanding statement.
The modes,
seen, overlap all along the line, but in a general

is
way
correct.
The subjunctive
in principal sentences
appears in both
exco/xeu irpbs
declarative
and interrogative sentences.

Cf
Cf. dprjvriv
:
t6v deov (Ro. 5:1), ri diroo v^xiv; (1 Cor. 11
22).
rj
It is
fxr]
found in
both positive and negative statements.

12
:
bihij.ev
Soj/xev;
(Mk.
14),
iJ.ri
(Txicroj/jLev
ahrbv,
aWa
Xaxo^fJêv
(Jo.
19
24).
It is the
mood
of doubt, of hesitation, of proposal, of prohibition, of anti-
cipation, of expectation, of brooding hope, of imperious will.

shall, then,
3.
We
do best to follow Brugmann. Threefold Usage. The three uses do

Futuristic.
ISoj/jll,
exist,
whatever their
the negative
future.^
origin or order of development.^

(a)
This idiom
'I
is
seen in
see.'
Homer with
It is
ov as in ovde
never shall
an emphatic
This emphatic future with the subjunctive is common in Homer with av or Kev and once without. Gildersleeve^ calls this the "Homeric subjunctive," but
confined to
Homer.
saying: "This like
it is more than doubtful if the usage was Moulton (ProL, p. 239) quotes P. Giles as does for many dialects what the subjunctive
did for Greek, putting a statement in a polite, inoffensive way,

asserting only verisimilitude."
Note the presence

(et).^
of the subjuncof ov
tive in the subordinate clauses with eav
The presence
here and there with the subjunctive

futuristic sense.
testifies to
a feeling for the
Greek,
Thumb
The
See 7/rts ov KaroLKLadfj (Jer. 6:8). In the modern (Handb., p. 195) gives a 8ev TrLarevris, where 8h is
practical equivalence of the aorist subjunctive
for ov8ev.
and the future

8:3).
indicative
ei,
is
evident in the subordinate clauses,
particularly those with
Iva, 6s
and
ocrns.
Cf. o TrpoaepeyKn (Heb.
This
is
manifest in the
LXX,
the N. T., the inscriptions

cos
and the
4
ov
:
late papyri.^
Blass^ pronounces
avdpooTos
âXy (Mk.
26) "quite impossible" against
XBDLA. But Moulton''' quotes
redrj from inscriptions 317, 391, 395, 399 al. in Ramsay's Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, ii, 392. For the papyri, Moulton (Prol, p. 240) notes B. U. 303 (vi/A.D.) Trapaax^='I will furnish,' A. P. 144 (v/a.d.) e\do}='I will come.' The itacisms in -a-p and -o-et prove less, as Moulton notes. The examples in the papyri of itacistic -aet, -an are "innumerable." In Ac. 5 16, W. H.
:
Cf. Giles, Man., p. 505.
5
^
?
Moulton,
Prol., p. 240.
2
3
Monro, Horn.
Synt., Pt.
I,
Gr., p. 198.
p. 153.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 321. Prol., p. 240.
MODE
print tva
Gr., p.
(efkaisis)
cursives).
ttcos
929
Radermacher {N. T.
:
7ri<TKid<ret
(B,
some
136)
is
quite prepared to take
= 7ra;s
(t)evêad.
This
better case for
to)
(f)vyr)T (Mt. 23 33) probably deliberative, but he makes a ^rjpco tI yevrjraL (Lu. 23 Blass^ notes 31).
is
that "the mixture of the fut. ind. and aorist conj. has, in comparison with the classical language,
made
considerable progress."
He refers to Sophocles, Lexicon, p. 45, where etTro) aoL is quoted as = epw o-ot.2 In a principal clause in Clem., Horn. XL 3, we have Kal
ovTws
auTols
rj
8vvr]dfj,
and Blass has noted
also in Is. 33
24
acpedfi
yap
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
It was certainly primitive in its simwas not the most primitive idiom. The use of ov with the subj. did continue here and there after Homer's day. We find it in the LXX, as in Jer. 6 8 (above) and in the Phrygian In fact, in certain constructions it is common, inscription (above) Cf. 2 Cor. 12 20 as in /xt) ov after verbs of fearing and caution. and MSS. in Mt. 25 9 (/U17 Trore ovk apKeay). It is even possible that
antiquity of such a usage." ^

plicity^
even
if it
Gildersleeve^ remarks might even seem easier to make ov belong to al(xxvv9ui, thus combining objective and subjective negatives, but it must be remembered that ov with the'subjunctive had died out
the idiom ov
iii]
is
to be thus explained.
on
this point: " It
(except in
ixi]
ov)
before this construction
came
in."
The vernacu-
lar may, however, have preserved ov with the subj. for quite a while. Jannaris^ confidently connects ov in this idiom with the
subj.
and explains
is
fxij
as an abbreviation of
nrjv.
If either of these
explanations
true, the N. T. would then preserve in negative
Burton^ is with ov ni} in subjunctive is used "the aorist clear that anyhow The ancient Greek indicative." emphatic future the sense of an this sense, but subjunctive in present the employed sometimes the N. T. does not use it. But the LXX has it, as in Jer. 1 19. So in Is. 11: 9 we find oh uri KaKowoirjcrovcrLV ov8^ fxrj Svpcovrai. The future ind. with ov txi] is rare in the N. T., but oh fxr] with the aorist
principal sentences the purely futuristic subjunctive.
:
2
8
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 208. See also Hatz., Einl., p. 218.
" '
Justin Martyr, p. 169.

Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 449. N. T. M. and T., p. 78.
Moulton, Prol., p. 186. Goodwin, M. and T., pp.
2,
372.
930
NEW TESTAMENT
It
subj. appears in the
W. H.
firj
text 71 times. ^
cannot be said that
the origin of this ou

states the
construction has been solved.
Goodwin ^
problem
well.
The two negatives ought
to neutralize
each other, being simplex, but they do not (cf. /x?) ou). The examples are partly futuristic and partly prohibitory. Ellipsis is not satisfactory nor complete separation (Gildersleeve) of the two Perhaps ov expresses the emphatic denial and mi? the negatives. prohibition which come to be blended into the one construction.
At any
rate
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
in
etc.
See ov
:
ii-q
in
both prin-
cipal
and subordinate clauses
Mk.
13
:
2.
See also Tense.
a rhetorical question in Lu. 18 7 (note also fxaKpoOv/iet) rather than a deliberative one. In Rev. 15 4 we have the aor. subj. and the fut. ind. side by side in a rhetorical question, tIs ov
It is
:
firi
<t)0^r]9fj,
KVpie, Kal SoâaeL to ovoixa;

irpos
See also the

etTT]
rts e^ vp.wv
eêt
</)tXof
Kai TTopevcreTaL
avrbv Kol
avrQ; (Lu. 11:5).
It IS
here anything very "deliberative" aljout eixj/ as It may be merely the rhetorical use of the distinct from eêi. Have the grammars been correct futuristic subj. in a question.
difficult to sec
in explaining
these subjunctives in questions as "deliberative"? Certainly the future ind. is very common in rhetorical and other
all
questions in the N. T.
no doubt about the presence of the volitive subjunctive in the N. T. The personal equation undoubtedly cuts some figure in the shades of meaning in the moods, here as Gildersleeve'* would indeed make this "imperative elsewhere.3 sense" the only meaning of the mood in the standard language
(b)
Volitive.
There
is
He does this because the deliberative subjuncimperative answer. But, as already seen, that an tive expects Brugmann^ takes pains to remark that question. is a mooted the volitive subjunctive belongs to the "will" in of the element It is purely a matter of the addressed. one the to not speaker, It occurs in both positive and negative sentences and context. The usage is common in Homer. the negative is always
after
Homer.
(jltj.
Monro
1
interprets
Prol.,
it
as expressing
ed.,
"what the speaker

But
in the
resolves or in-
Moulton,
3d
p.
190.
Germ,
ed.,
p. 300,
Moul-
ton names 74.

3 *
He had
389
p. 505.
given 78 in the
ff.
first
Engl. ed.
M. and
Giles,
T., pp.
See also pp. 101-105.

'
Man.,
I,
Synt., Pt.
p. 148.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 197.
MODE
sists
(efkaisis)
931
is the same as was a necessity for the first person, Moulton^ ventures to since the imperative was deficient there.
upon."
In principle the hortatory subjunctive

nr].
the prohibitive use with
It
treat this hortatory use of the first person subj under the imperative, since the Sanskrit grammars give the Vedic subjunctive of
.
The other first person as an ordinary part of the imperative. persons of the Sanskrit subj. are obsolete in the epic period. Thus hharama, hharata, bharaniu are compared with </)epcojuj',
the
<t)epeTe,
4>epbvTwv
(Attic for
Koivi]
also to the
combination of the
structions like eyelpeade iiyoipev
Moulton- appeals and second persons in con(Mk. 14:42). This example illus(jjepeTcoaap)
.
first
trates well the volitive idea in ayuixev.^
The
excoM^^'
plural
is
the person
usually found in this construction.

(t)ay(j)p.ev
Cf. also ayoopev (Jo. 11:7);
Kai
TMnev
(1
:
Cor.
15:32);
(Ro-
text); 4>povCinev (Ph. 3
15); yp-qyopQipiev Kai vr]4>o)Hv (1
5:1, correct Th. 5:6).

:
Cf. Lu. 9
8,
c!}(TTe
eopTCL^copev,
33 in particular (infinitive and subj.). In 1 Cor. 5 the subjunctive is hortatory and chare is an
. :
inferential particle.
Cf further Heb. 12 1 1 Jo. 4 7. As examples with pri see prj cx'-^^wpev (Jo. 19: 24); p-q KadevScopev (1 Th. 5:6). The construction continued to flourish in all stages of the language.** We have SeDre airoKTdvwpev (Mk. 12 7. Cf. 5e0re In aês the sinUere, Mt. 28 6) and acês Uwpev (Mt. 27:49). gular has become stereotyped.^ This use of aês was finally shortened into ds in the modern Greek and came to be universal with the hortatory subjunctive of the first person and even for
; :
: :
the third person imperative in the vernacular (as as Ixxi for In the N. T. aês is not yet a mere auxiliary as is our exerco).
"let" and the modern Greek Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p.

9, 15.
ds.
It
is
more
like
"do
let
me
go."^
I,
134) quotes
d(/)es
Sel^copev,
Epict.
a(t>es
Sevpo
1
In the first with the hortatory
person singular the N. T. always has

subjunctive."'^
or
Thus
==
dês k/SaXco (Mt. 7
Prol., p. 175.
lb.
' * 6
See
Cor. 10
7-9 for the change from
first
to second persons.
Jann., Hist.
Blass, Gr. of
Gk. Gr., p. 447. N. T, Gk., p. 208. But see
fitêre Ucjfxep
(Mk. 15
36),
though
fis
KD
*
here read
&<j>es.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 170.
Jannaris (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 44S) derives

or
p.
from
Cf.
eacre (iaffov), acre.

^ It was rare in Goodwin, M. and
classic
Gk. not to have a7e or
<f)epe
some such word.

148
f.
T., p. 88;
Gildcrsl., Synt., Ft.
I,
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
932
4);

Lu. 6 :42 and 8evpo
airoaTelXio (Ac.
NEW TESTAMENT
cites a<ês eyC} avTrju dp-qvqao)
7:34, LXX). Moulton^ from 0. P. 413 (Roman period). We

ellipsis of
Iva,
auxiliary.
do not have to suppose the In Jo. 12 7, dês

:
for dês
avT-qv Iva TT/jprjay, it is
is just the hardly prob-
though in the modern Greek, as used with the third person. In the second person we have only the negative construction in prohibitions with the aorist subjunctive, a very old idiom
able that
is
ha
just auxiliary, 2
is
already stated, ds
(see Tenses, Aorist).
"The
future and the imperative between
them
carried off the old jussive use of the subjunctive in positive

of
commands
cistic')
Latin
2d and 3d person. The old rule which in ('Anglimade sileas an entirely grammatical retort dis-
courteous to the Public Orator's sileamf" (Moulton, ProL, p. 177). This example reinforces the idiom in the dialect of Elis which "produced such phrases as kTnfxeKeLav -iroLrjdTai. NLKoSpofxop, 'let Nicodromus attend to it,' has no place in classical or later Greek,
unless in Soph., Phil., 300 (see Jebb).
Add doubtfully
LI. P. 1, vs.
8 (iii/B.c), Tb.P. 414
''"
(ii/A.D.)."
See Moulton, Prol,
p. 178.
In the
(}>r]Too
LXX,
Jer. 18
8,
note
Kal eTnaTpa4)fj, parallel
in 18: 11.
In the modern Greek we

is
with airoarpahave wishes for the fu-
ture in the subj., since the opt.

forbid'
(Thumb, Handb.,
p. 127).
135) finds the subj. for wish in late
So 6 6e6s (t>v\a^'[i, 'God Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. papyri and inscriptions. It is

dead.
even in the
LXX, Ruth
9, Swtj kvplos vficcv Kal euprire avcnvavaiv,
In the Veda the prohibitive md is found only with the conjunctive, thus seeming to show that the imperative was originally used only in positive sentences. This idiom
beside the optative.
of
/X97
and the
person.
aorist subj. held its own steadily in the second This point has been discussed at some length under
Tenses.
20);
Take
fxij
as illustrations the following:

(5: 17);
îi?
fxi]
(fyo^rjOfis
(Mt.
nil vop.iaT}Te
eiaevejKjis (6: 13).

.
opoLTe
with
and the
44;
cf.
aorist subj
is
are examples of asyndeton just like

elTrns
The use of 6pa and to be noted. Some of these d0es. Thus 6pa p.r]bevl p-qdeu
fir]
(Mk.
Mt. 8:4).
:
So also 6pa
30),
(Rev. 22
TroL-fjaeLs
9)
where
:
the'
verb
-n-oLriaris
is
not expressed. not always clear
Cf. also 6pa
(Heb. 8
:
5) opare
ixrjBeis
ycvwaKeTw (Mt. 9
it is
With
jSXeTrere
and bpaT piT} dpoetade (24 6). whether we have asyndeton

In Lu. 21:8,
(parataxis) or a subordinate clause (hypotaxis).

(Anderson-Cumont-Gregoire). Radermacher (N.T. Gk., Acta Thoraae, p. 129.
1
p. 128) cites alao crwr
liy]dd7]<jav Kal ykvuiPTat,
Prol., p. 175.
lb.
Delbnick, Synt., p. 120; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 240.
MODE
/3X7rT Ml? Tr\avr]dr}Te,
(efkaizis)
to
933
is
we seem
ixri
have parataxis as
:
possible^ in
:
Heb. 12 25,
:
/SXeTrere
wapaLTr]ar]<xde.
Cf. Ac. 13 40; Gal. 5

also, as /SXeTrere
1
tls
15.
tls
{fxr}
These forms occur with the third person

vnds
IcxTai
irXavrjaji
/jltj
(Mt. 24
4).
1
But, per contra, see
Cor. 10
KaKov
12
in Col. 2:8).
In
is
Th. 5
15, opSre
jx-q
clptl
/ca/coD
TLvl awoSco,
parataxis
/jltj
probable.
ixrj
But the
tls ovv
:
third person aorist
subj. occurs with
alone as in
avTov kôvdevrjay (1 Cor.
16
11);
Ml? TLS lie do^ji a(j)pova
Trarijo-Tj
(2
Th. 2
3).
dvai (2 Cor. 11 16); m^? tls vfids eâElsewhere fxrj and the aorist imperative
quotes
occur in the third person. Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 134) 3d person aor. subj. from kolvt] writers, inscr. and ixt] and papyri. Careless writers even use fxij ovv aXXcos toltjs, B. G. U. Ill,
824, 17.
Even Epictetus
(II, 22, 24)
has
/jltj
avTodev
dTroâii/rj.
No
:
less volitive is
an example with oh fxri, like ov nij kaeXdrjTe (Mt. 5 20), which is prohibitive. So ov mi? i't'/'?7s (Jo. 13 8); ov ni] Trlri (Lu. fxia Kepala ov }xr\ 1:15). There is an element of will in icora eu In Mt. 25 9, fx-q Trore 18) in the third person. TrapeXdii (Mt. 5 ov uri dpKeaji rifuv Kal vfxtv, the subj. is probably futuristic (or de:
r)
liberative).
Triv 8vvap.lv
aov kol eêXdxi
In a late papyrus, O. P. 1150, 6 (vI/a.d.), note delôv where the 3d pers. subj = imperative like
.
There are examples in the N. T. where tva seems to be merely an introductory expletive with the volitive subjunctive. Thus Iva kirLdrjs (Mk. 5 23); I'm ava^Xepw (10 51); I'm TepLaaevrjTe Note present tense) (2 Cor. 8:7); I'm pvqpovevoopev (Gal. 2 10.
Latin.
: :
'iva (j)o^rJTaL
(Eph. 5
33) parallel
1
:
with
ttj
dyaTrdrco.,
Cf. I'm
Scotj
(Sw)
margin of W. H., Eph. (B. U. 48, ii/iii A.d.) eav

also he cites
e'iva
17.
Moulton^
eoprfj
'iva
finds in the papyri
So and 'iva The modern Greek nr]di Tibv TOKoov d^Ljuip-qa-ys (Cicero, Att. vi. 5). uses m and subj. as imperative for both second and third persons (Thumb, Handh., p. 127 f.). Note also pri 'iva avaaTaTcoarjs Moulton (ProL, p. 248) iipds, B. G. U. 1079 (a.d, 41), not I'm pq.
dva^fjs
bpbae yevcopeOa.
avTOV
Ml? 8v(TO0Tr]ar]S,
F. P. 112 (99 A.D.),
quotes Epict., IV,

ek\oi
'iva
1,
41,
'iva prj
:
pcopds
fi,
dXX'
:
'iva
padrj.
The use
of
(cf.
Mk.
25; 10
35; Jo. 17
24) preceded this idiom.
Moulton^ even suggests that irpoaevxeade 'iva pi] eXd-qTe els weLpaapov (Mk. 14 38) is as much parataxis as opaTe Kal ^vXaaaeode (Lu. 12 This "innovation" in the kolvt] takes the place of ottcos and 15).
: :
the future ind.

kpels,
Moulton (ProL,
p.
177 note) cites ottws poL
pij
Plato, 337 B, 'don't

of
pi]
The use
1
after
tell me,' where O7rcos='in which case.' words of caution and apprehension is probably
But Blass
(Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 278) holds the opposite view.

"
Prol., p. 179.
lb., p. 178.
934
NEW TESTAMENT
of the present subj.
paratactic in origin.^
Moulton^ notes the use

firj
with expressions of warning as well as the

12
:
aorist.
Thus
in
Heb.
15, kinaKOTodvTes
tls piâ TLKpLas hox^fj.
But
this construc-
on subordinate clauses, if not clear over be best discussed there. Subordinate clauses show many examples of the volitive subjunctive (as clauses of design, probably paratactic in origin, Moulton, Prol., p. 185). See 81 rjs Xarpevcoixev (Heb. 12:28); oirou 4>a.'yw (Lu. 22: 11). See discussion of Sub. Clauses.
tion borders so closely
line,
the
that
it
will
(c) Deliberative. There is no great amount of difference between the hortatory (volitive) subjunctive and the deliberative.
The
Tt
volitive
is
connected with the deliberative in

bOis.
Mk.
24
f .,
Tt atTi7(Tcojuat;
TroLr](Tcj)(xep;
6k\w IVa
'what are
is
Thus TroLriawixev, 'suppose we do it,' and we to (must we) do?' do not vary much.
Gildersleeve^ notes in
of hesitating halfis
The
interrogative^
a quasi-imperative.
pi]
Plato (rare elsewhere in Attic) a

questions with
possible that
pi]
pi]
"number
or
ov
we have
this
and the present subjunctive." It construction in Mt. 25 9, pi] Tore

:
ov
(W. H. marg. just
ov)
apKeay
i]pl.v
KOi vplv.
It
is
but a step to
the deliberative question.^

as in
This
is
either positive or negative,
Mk.
12
14, bihpev
r)
pi] 8u>pev;
11, ov pi] TTiw avTo;
Cf. also Lu. 18
So also ov pi] as in Jo. 18 The aorist 7; Rev. 15 4.

:
:
or the present tense occurs as in Lu. 3
10,
t'l
ovv TOLi]ao:pev;
:
and
in Jo. 6
28,
t'l
roLo^pev;
so Xeyw in Heb. 11
32.
Cf. the
indicative
tI roiovpev; in Jo.
11:47 and the future

rhetorical
(cf.
:
t'l
ovv epovpev
:
(Ro. 9
14).
The question may be

:
Lu. 14
31;
34; Jo. 6
68; Ro. 10
14) or interrogative (cf.
18:21; Mk. 12:14; Lu. 22:49). and delib. fut. ind. is seen in Mk. 6 37, ayopaaoopev Kai Sdoaopev; The first person is the one of most frequent occurrence (cf. Ro. 6:1), t'l ahijacopaL (Mk. 6 24). But examples are not wanting for the second and third persons. Thus ttcos <^vyy]Te
delib. subj.
: :
Mt. 26 54 Mt. 6 The kinship between
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
:
Cf. Blass, Gr. of

Prol., p. 178.
N. T. Gk.,
p.
212
f.
2 *
6 6
Synt., Pt.
I,
p. 152.
Cf. Goodwin,' M.
Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. and T., p. 92.
199, 229.
Blass, Gr. of
Burton, N. T.
N. T. Gk., p. 211. Moods and Tenses,
p. 77.
MODE
tIs eêt
(ErKAisis)
37,
935
5coo-ct)
and
eliry.
So
tL 8ol
(Mk. 8
:
ACD
may
be com-
This ambiguity appears in tI Koiriaw; and lyvoi rl iroL-qaco in Lu. 16 3 f. The dehberative subj. Cf. Mt. 6:31 with Mt. 6 25. is retained in indirect questions,
pared with
tL 5cbo-t
(Mt. 16
26).^
kinship between the dehberative subj. in indirect questions and the imperative and the vohtive subjunctive is seen in Lu.
The
12
:
f., fxi] (j)0^r]d^Te
VTrodelôo 8e hyuv
rlva
(fjo^TjdrJTe' (t>o^T]Or]Te
ktX.
The
deliberative subj., hke the vohtive, has various introductory
These become set words which make asyndeton (parataxis). Thus tov OeKeLs iTOLnao-coixev; (Mt. 26 17), plirases hke a4>es, 6pa. In Lu. 18 41 we have ri col 0eXets 0eXets e'LTconev; (Lu. 9 :54). But the I'ra was not neTTOL-qaw; and tva djâ/SXei/'co as the reply. 28. In Jo. 18 39, jSovXeade ovv Cf. further Mt. 13 cessary. Some MSS. have cnroXvcrco, we probably have the subj. also.
: :
ei
Trardôîxep;
in Lu.
22
49."
We may
leave further discus-
sion of the
sul^j.
to the subordinate clauses.

iiv
We
have no ex-
with the subj. in independent sentences (but see kc and the subj. in Homer). In subordinate clauses av (Cf. is very common, though not necessary, as will be seen.^ discussion of d, oorts.) But Jannaris^ gives instances of av with
amples in the N. T. of
the subj. in principal clauses (futuristic) in Polybius, Philo, PluWith the disappearance of the fut. ind., the tarch, Galen, etc.
and the imper., the subj. has the field as the "prospective mood." It is found in the modern Greek as in tI va yLP-p (Thumb,
opt.
Handh.,
III.
p. 126).
The Optative Mode {r\ \;ktikt| e'-yKXio-is). It has already been shown that the optative does not differ radically from the
subjunctive.
junctive."
Jannaris^ calls the optative the "secondary sub-
For the facts see chapter on 1. History of the Optative. Conjugation of the Verb. It is an interesting history and is well outhned by Jannaris'' in his Appendix V, "The Moods Chiefly It retreated first from deSince A. (Ancient Greek) Times." pendent clauses and held on longest in the use for wish in independent sentences like jevoLTo. But even here it finally went down before the fut. ind. and subj. The optative was a luxury
1
Blass, Gr. of
lb.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 210.
Cf. K.-G., TI.
I,
p. 221.
2
'
Cf. Paley,
The Gk.
Particles, p. 5.
See Koppin, Beitr. zu Entwick. und
Wiird. der Idcen iibcr die Grundb. d. griech.

* 6
Modi
(1880).
Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 564.
On
lb., p.
450.
the subj. see further Earle, CI. Papers, p. 221. lb., pp. 360-367.
936
NEW TESTAMENT
in the vernacu-
of the language
lar.
and was probably never common

it is
Certainly
very rare in the vernacular

It is a literary
kolptj
(both inscrip-
and papyri). march of the subj.

tions
mood
that faded before the
In a hundred pages of the Memorabilia of
occurs 350 times. He had a "hyperorthodox love of the mood."^ Plato's Phaedo shows it 250 times in a corresponding space, but Strabo has it only 76, Polybius 37, Diodorus Siculus 13 times in a hundred pages. ^ The 67 examples in the N. T. are in harmony with the kolptj usage. Gildersleeve pithily says: "The optative, which starts life as a wish of the speaker, becomes a notion of the speaker, then a notion of somebody else, and finally a gnomon of obliquity" (A. J. of Phil., 1908, In the LXX the optative is rare, but not so rare as in p. 264). the N. T., though even in the LXX it is replaced by the subj. (Thackeray, Gr., p. 193) as in the late papyri and inscriptions (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., pp. 128, 135). There is no definite distinction between 2. Significance. the subjunctive and the optative in the Sanskrit.^ The Latin put all the burden on the subj., as the Greek finally did. The Sanskrit finally made the optative do most of the work. In a word, the optative is a sort of weaker subjunctive.* Some writers make the opt. timeless and used definitely of the past.^ It is rather a "softened future"^ sometimes flung back into the past for a Standpunkt. We do not' know "whether the opt. originally expressed wish or supposition." The name does not signify anything. It "was invented by grammarians long after the usages of the language were settled."^ They just gave it the name evKriK-f] because at that time the only use it had without av was that of wishing. The name is no proof that wishing was the primitive or the only function or the real meaning of the mode. We have
Xenophon the optative
precisely the
same
difficulty as in the subjunctive.
Indeed, the
* Gildersl., Am. Jour, of Phil., Jan., 1909, p. 19. According to Vandacle (L'Optatif Grec, p. 251) Plato et Xen. "ont donne k I'optatif la plus grande extension possible; Xenophon marque I'apogee." The optative he also de-
scribes as
"un instrument d'une dclicatesse infinie." See further Kupff, Der Gebr. d. Opt. bei Diod. Sic. (1903); Reik, Der Opt. bei Polyb. und Philo(1907). 2 Schmid, Der Gebr. des Optativs bei Diod. Sic, 1903, p. 2. ^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., In the original speech there was no clear p. 218.
distinction
p. 266).
* 6
between the subj. and the opt. (Curtius, Temp, und Modi, 1846,
T., p. 384.
^
Goodwin, M. and
Biiumlein, Griech. Modi, p. 177.
lb., p. 231.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 229.
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 375.
MODE
(efkaisis)
937
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

scholars do for the subj.
discourse, but this
is
deliberative as
some
does reckon a third use in indirect merely the opt. in subordinate sentences
He
and may be
either of the three
normal usages.
The
rare fut.
opt. in indirect discourse illustrates the point (not in the N. T.). There is no doubt of the distinction between the futuristic (po-
with negative ov (cf. futuristic subj. in Homer) and the volitive use with /xr] (cf. subj. again) .^ But there was also a "neutral sense" that can hardly be classed either as futuristic or volitive." Gildersleeve^ calls this the "optative in questions," usually
tential)
with
3. (a)
6.V.
This
is
the deliberative use.
The Three
Uses.
Futuristic or Potential.
in time or not.
We
begin with this whether

its
it is
the
first
Delbriick^ has taken several positions on
this point.
The
use of the negative ov here shows

ind.
kinship with
the future
(cf. fut.
and
aorist subj. in
Homer). ^
The
iiv
was
not always present in
Homer
potential idea to the mode. tinued. " The optative is the ideal
and it is not the av that gives the In poetry the use without av con-
mood
of the
it
the
mood
of the fancy."
Moulton^ puts
cites
clearly:
Greek language, "It was used
to express a future in a milder form,
and to express a request in from Epictetus, II, 23, 1, Radermacher deferential style." clearly that the opt. showing aKovaeL, paov av tls av ridiov avayvurj (ProL, p. 194) Moulton parallel. somew^hat and the fut. ind. are alternate in ind. fut. and opt. the where cites Dcut. 28 24 ff., Radermacher with agree not do I Hebrew. translating the same (N. T. Gr., p. 128) in seeing in rjOeKov Tvapeivai (Gal. 4 20) a mere
See imperfect ind. The presence of av equivalent i to the verb and makes one think meaning" contingent gives "a the fourth-class condition. The of protasis unexpressed of the
of dtKoip-i av.
1
Giles,
Man.,
p. 510.
ff.
^ *
Goodwin, M. and
lb., p. 4.
T., p. 375.
2 6
Griech. Gr., pp. 504

Synt., Ft.
opt.,"
Stahl (Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 236 f.) notes a "concessive I, p. 154. which is an ovcrrefinement. It is merely a weakened form of wish (K.-G., Bd. I, p. 228) or of the potential use. Cf. his Konjunktiv und Optativ, Syntaktische Forschungen, Att.-indische Synt. In the last of these he suggests that the potential and wishing functions
are distinct in origin.
^ 8
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 219.
I,
Frol., p. 197.
lb., p. 100.
Gildersl., Synt., Ft.
p. 153.
"
938
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) evâlixr^v av. This fact shows how obsolete the idiom is in the kolvt). The use of av here avoids the passion:
ateness of the mere optative (Gildersleeve, Syntax, p. 157). other examples in Luke's writings are all in questions and
The
may
be compared with the subj. in deliberative questions. Only two examples appear of the opt. with av in direct questions. They
are ttcos 7a/3 av bvva'iiJ.r]v kav fxi] tls 68-qyqaei, iJ.e; (Ac. 8 31. The only instance of a protasis in connection with an optative apodosis in the N. T.) and tL av OeXot. 6 (jirepixoKb-yos ovTos XeyeLv; (Ac.
:
17: 18).
Both
are rhetorical questions

(c).
liberative tone; see
In Ac. 2
8(hi]
{Prol., p. 198) cites rts av
and the second has a detI av Bekoi. Moulton from Job 31:31 and holds that it
:
12,
E has
from tIs 8(hr] elsewhere (Num. 11 29). The other instances of av and the opt. are all in indirect questions, but the construction is not due to the indirect question. It is merely retained from the direct. The use of the optative in an indirect
docs not
differ
:
question
junctive
when the
is
direct
would have the indicative or the subThis

is
not the point.

(cf. So/ceT
merely the
:
classic
sequence of
etr].
So adds iiv and MSS. vary with some of the other examples (cf. Lu. 18 36). So av is correct in Lu. 15 26. Moulton (ProL, p. 198) cites Esth. 13 3 irvOo/xevov ttcos a;^ axOel-q and inscr. Magnes. 215 (I/a.D.) eirepcoTq, t'l av iroLrjaas d5ecos ^tareXotr?. Moulton
9, eTrr^pcorcoj/ tIs
modes
in indirect questions.
See Lu. 8
:
Lu. 22
23
in 24).
Cf. Ac. 21
33.
In Lu.
29,
{Prol.,
p.
198)
argues for "a
minimum
of
difference" in the
examples of indirect questions with and without av. ence is in the direct question. The examples with
text)
The
cii'
:
differ-
(W. H.'s
:
in indirect questions are Lu.

:
Ac. 5
1
24; 10
17.*
In
all of
1 62; 6 11; 9 46; 15 26; these instances the deliberative ele: :
Moulton,
a;' is
lb., p. 198.
pap.
129).
*
Burton,
Sometimes lo-cos occurs with the opt., as lo-cos aTrop-qcruev in Joh. Philop. M. and T., p. 80; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 220.
= Prol., p. 197. 197 f.; Blass, Gr. of N.T. Gk., p. 220. notes also 4 Mace. 5 13, avyyvcoatitv without av. In the usually present with the potential opt. (Radermacher, N. T. Gk., p.
Prol., p.
He
MODE
ment
Lu. 3
is
:
(efkaisis)
939
undoubtedly present; see (c). The same thing is true of in 15 (/ii? TTore), Ac. 17: 27 (d), but Ac. 25 16 (irplv
:
r\
indirect discourse for subj. of the direct)

(6)
is
futuristic.
VoUtive.
Moulton^
calls this
use the "Optative Proper," a

It
curious concession to the mere name.

sistent construction of the optative,
has been the most per-
independent clauses) N. T. come under this category.^ Fifteen of the thirty-eight instances belong to juiy ykvoLTo, once in Lu. 20 16, and the other fourteen in Paul's
(in
and
thirty-eight of the sixty -seven examples of the
Epistles (10 in
Romans,
ixi}
1 in 1
Cor., 3 in Gal.).
Thumb
considers
relic of
the rare use of

Pallis retains
yhoiTo in modern Greek (the only

16.
the optative) a literary phenomenon, but Moulton^ notes that

it
in Lu. 20
of the English optative in the phrase

it
Moulton compares the persistence "be it so," "so be it," "be

it
never so humble," etc*
So he notes
in the papyri for oaths,
prayers and wishes.^

evoxoi d-qjxtv, O. P.
COL,
O. P. 240 (I/a.d.)
(ii/A.D.)
8e
ev drj,
O. P. 715
(ii/B.c.)
(ii/A.D.)
os bibolr]
526
x^tpots, L.
Pb.
B.
M.
21 (ii/B.c.)
crol
yhoLTo.
in the third person except Phil. 20, eyco aov
The N. T. examples are all One is a 6va[ixr}v.

is
curse
iJLr]KeTL /xTjSets (f)ayoL
(Mk.
11
14)
and
equivalent to the im-
perative.
"There
is
a strong inclination to use the imperative
instead of the optative, not only in requests, where the imperative has a legitimate place in classical
Greek as
well,
but also in
imprecations, where
iipadttxa ecrrw,
Gal.
:
takes the place of the classical optative: Cf. 1 Cor. 16 22."6 Only in Mk. 11 8 f
it
. :
do we have the optative in imprecations in the N. T. The opt. comes very near the imper. in ancient Greek sometimes (Gilderslceve, p. 155). Cf. In Ac. 1 20, where the LXX (Ps. yipoLTo, P. Par. 26 (b.c. 163). 109 8) has Xd/3ot, Luke gives Xa/Serco.'^ There are only 23 examples of the volitive optative in independent clauses outside of prj yhoLTo. Paul has 15 of this 23 "(Ro. 15: 5, 13; Phil. 20; 2 Tim. 1 16, 18; 4 16, and the rest in 1 and 2 Th.), while Mark, Luke, Acts, Hebrews, 1 Peter and 2 Peter have one apiece, and Jude two."^ They are all examples of the aorist optative excej^t th(> present in Ac. 8 20. The negative is /x?7 and ap is not used. In
14 and Ac. 8
20, to apyhpibv aov avv aol
elrj,
: : :
:
'
Prol., p. 194.
Burton, N. T.
lb., p. 240.
M. and
T., p. 79;
Moulton,
ff.
'
Prol., p. 194.
< 6 8
Cf. Sweet,
New
Eng. Gr.: Synt., pp. 107

195
f.
Moulton,
Prol., p.
lb.
Blass, Cr. of N. T. C.k., p. 220.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 195.
940
2 Th. 3

:
16
ddcrf
is
opt.,
not the subj.

is
Soj^.
In
Th. 3
12 the
context shows that irepLaaehaai
opt. (not
aor. inf. nor aor.
middle imperative).^
(twelve cases in the
The
rare use of the vohtive opt. with
N. T., but four belong to indirect questions), If Iva bw-q is the will be discussed under Conditional Sentences. correct text in Eph. 1 17, we probably have a volitive optative, the Iva being merely introductory (cf. examples with the subj.).^
:
with the optative. Blass^ reads In modern Greek Dr. Rouse finds people saying not jut) ykvoiro, but 6 debs va. (pvXa^rj (Moulton, Prol., p. 249), though va is not here necessary (Thumb, Handh., p. 127). The ancient idiom with eWe and el yap is not found in the N. T.,
It is hardly
a case of
final Iva
5(3
here subj. after B.
as stated already several times.
"04)e\ov
12).
with the future ind.
occurs for a future wish (Gal. 5

(c)
Deliberative.
There
tLs
is little
gives instances of
8uri;
without av as would be admissible. See also Ps. 120 (119) 3, tL bodely] aoi koI t'l In Lu. 6:11 Moulton^ remarks that tI av rotr]irpoaTedelr] aot; aaiev in the indirect question is "the hesitating substitute for the Why not rather suppose a "hesitating" direct t'l iroL-qaonev;''
18
:
33, etc.)
more to add here. The LXX^ (Num. 11 29; Judg. 9 29; 2 Sam. in Homer, where a deliberative subj.
: :
:
(deliberative) direct question like tI av BeKoi 6 (nrepiiokbyos oSros

Xkyeiv; (Ac.
As already remarked, the context shows 17 18). doubt and perplexity in the indirect questions which have av and the opt. in the N. T. (Lu. 1:62; 6: 11; 9:46; 15:26; Ac. 5:24;
:
10
17).
Bavero, dLrjTTopovv) all

el
The verbs {evkvevov, show this

:
bLeXaXow, elarjXOev
state of mind.
airopohixevos.
diaXoyLaiJLOs,
eirvv-
ôvKoLTo in Ac. 25
20 after
It
is
One may note also Cf 27 39. The de. : :
liberative opt.
undoubtedly occurs
in Lu. 3
15, bLaXoycôiievcov
jiij
TOTe avTos
elt]
6 Xptcrros.
not therefore pressing the optative

it (cf.
unduly to find remnants
of the deliberative use for
subj.
and
fut. indicative).
1 They are all exx. of the third person save Phil. 20. Here is the list (with Burton's errors corrected by H. Scott): Mk. 11 14; Lu. 1 38; 20 11; 15 1, 16; Ac. 8 20; Ro. 3 4, 6, 31; 6 2, 15; 7 7, 13; 9 14; 11
: : : : :
:
5,
13; 1 Cor. 6
15; Gal. 2
:
17; 3
21; 6
1
14;
16,
Th. 3
4
:
11,
12 bis; 5
23
bis;
2 Th. 2
17 bis; 3
:
5,
16;
:
2 Tim.
18;
16;
Phil. 20;
Heb.
13
21; 1 Pet. 1
2; 2 Pet. 1
2; Ju. 2, 9.
2 * ^
Moulton, Moulton,
Prol., p. 196.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 211.

Prol., p. 194.
lb., p. 198.
On
the "development principle" of the opt. see Mutzbauer,
Konj. und Opt.,
p. 155.
MODE
IV.
1.
(etkaizis)
941
The Imperative
(r\
Trpoo-raTiKTi t'-yKXto-is).
Origin of the Imperative. See chapter on Conjugation of the Verb for discussion of the various devices used by this
Giles/ after latest of the modes in order to get a foothold. giving the history of the imperative forms (five separate strata), curtly dismisses it as not properly a mode and declines to discuss
it
under syntax. So Radermacher passes it by in his TV. T. Gr. Moulton/ on the other hand, takes it up "first among the moods"
because "it
is
the simplest possible form of the verb." It is the 'simplest in one of its forms like the interjectional a-ye, but it is also the latest of the modes and is without a distinct set of end-
never dislodged the aorist subj. from the second person in prohibitions and finally gave up the fight all along the The modes were slower than the tenses in making sharp disline.
ings.
Besides,
it
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
plural present
epavvare (Jo.
of the imperative persists in the second person
where only the context can decide the mode. Thus

5
:
39)
iriaTeveTe (14
1);
a-yaWiaade (1 Pet. 1:6);

/caîfere (1
:
oiKohonetadt (2:5); rtXeTre (Ro.

'^Jo.
13:6);
Cor. 6:4);
:
cf.
12
19.
The
perfect form
Ure
(Jas. 1
19;
Heb. 12
17)
shows
-the
2.
same
situation.
In its original significance it will be shown, it was not But, as was demand-* or exhortation. the notion of command Besides, confined to this simple idea. ways before the imperavarious in (or prohibition) was expressed modes continued to other the of uses tive was developed. These
Meaning of the Imperative.
exist side
by
side with the imperative
till
the
N. T. time.
Ex-
amples of this will be given directly. The imperative itself was extended to include various shades of the future ind., the subj. and the opt. There is a general sense in which the imperative is distinct, as is seen in d7a7rare to us exdpoi's viiO^v (Mt. 5 :44), but
this idea of
hiroWviJieda
3.
command
:
easily softens to appeal as in Kvpit, aSiaov,
(Mt. 8
25).
Disappearance of the Imperative Forms. It was the It followed the optative into obto get on its feet. last livion save in the second person (Thumb, Handb., p. 154). There
mode
the forms held on in the main, but the present subjunctive with present imper., and nr] came also into use instead of fxi] and the
Man., pp. 464-473, 502.

Prol., p. 171.
"
Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 220. Delbruck, Die Gruudl., p. 120.
942
NEW TESTAMENT
finally the hortatory (positive) subj. also
appeared as imper. In the third person (both positive and negative with fxi]) as and the subj. drove out the imperative. Thus the imperative forms
in
else.^
modern Greek present a wreck, if indeed they were ever much The imperative, like the subjunctive, is always future
though
it
in time,
may
apply to the immediate future as in
"quit that."
4. Alternatives for the Imperative. These, under all the circumstances, can be logically treated before the imperative itself. Indeed, they have already been discussed in the preceding
remarks on tense and mode, so that little in addition is required. (a) The Future Indicative. See ch. XVIII, Tense, where it is
.
shown that the Volitive Future is the equivalent of the imperative. The fut. ind,, like the subj. and the opt., may be merely futuristic or volitive, or deliberative. The volitive future is a matter of context and tone of voice, to be sure, but that is true also of the subj. and opt., and, in truth, of the real imperative. But more of the "tone of the imperative" further on. English, as well as Greek, continues to use this volitive future. Both positive and negative (ov) commands are given by the fut. ind. The
negative
/xi)
is
sometimes
/xtj
as in
/i?)
(3ov\r]aeade dbkvai
(Demosthenes),
kêcTrai
(B. U. 197, i/A.D.), iirjSha m.ai](jeTt (Clem.,

fxT]
So also
fxij
ov
with the fut. ind.
is
Hom., Ill, 69).^ sometimes prohibition, as in ov

Cf. also Gal. 4: 30.
:
earai col tovto
(Mt. 16
22).
But
4)
;
it is ifxels
commonest
6\Jyea6e
in the simple future like av orpy (Mt. 27

kKoi/êts
(Mt. 6:5), etc. It is true that this use of ov proves the origin of this idiom to be "a purely futuristic form,"^ as is the case with the question ov irava-Q 8iaaTpe(t)wv; (Ac. 13 10), but the tone of this future is volitive (imperatival). The Latin use of the volitive future coincides with that of the Greek. Gildersleeve^ says: "It is not a milder
(27: 24);
:
(Lu. 13
9)
om
eaeade
or gentler imperative.
or
prediction
or
may
imply
resistless
power
cold
indifference,
compulsion
concession."
The exact
shade of idea in this volitive future must be watched as closely as in the imperative itself. Cf. kaXeo-ets (Mt. 1 21) with av oypxi (Mt. 27 4). Blass^ denies that this is a " classical" idiom (against
: :
Cf. Jann., Hist.

f.;
Gk.
Gr., pp. 449, 451, 555

p. 127.
ff.;
V. and D., Handb. (Jebb), p.
322
2
Thumb, Handb.,
Moulton, Moulton,
Synt., Ft.
Prol., p. 177. Prol., p. 177.

I,
Cf. Gildorsl., Synt., p. 117.
*
^
p. IIG.
Cf. W.-Th., p. 31G.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 2U9.
MODE
Gildcrsleeve)
(EFKAISIi:)
943
of the examples
and rather minimizes its use in the N. T. Many do come from the 0. T. (LXX) legal language.
Certainly in the
LXX
the fut. ind. often replaces the imperative
under the influence of the Hebrew (Thackeray, Gr., p. 194), But examples occur where the two are equivalent. Cf. ayairrjcxtis in Mt. 5 43, with a-yaTvare in 5 44, epetre in Mt. 21 3, with' etTrare Some MSS. have 'iaroi rather than ecrrat in Mt. in Mk. 11:3.
: : :
20
26.
(6)
point.
The Subjunctive. The volitive subjunctive is quite to the In the first person this use of the subj. held its own alin lieu of the imperative.
ways
of
(6
:
It
is
needless to repeat the dis-
cussion of this matter (see Subjunctive in this chapter).

'iva
with the subj, in an imperatival sense

;
is
.
seen in
Tit, 2
:
The use Mk. 5 23

:
25)
Eph. 5 33
:
is
there discussed also,
ax'i-fTconev
avrov,
dXXd
\axoofjLev (Jo.
19
Let nii 24) serve as an example. So

4.
Cf
in the second person the aorist subj. held its place in prohibitions
past
fxri.
KOLvi]
The two
Cor, 16
:
times to the practical exclusion of the aor, imper, with constructions existed in the KOLv-q side by side with
the third person.

(1 11).
Thus
/jltj
yvwro: (Mt, 6
/xri
3)
Cf, 56s
and
airoaTpa(l)f]s
and /X17 ns kôvdevrjay The in Mt. 5 42.

:
final
triumph of the subj. over the imperative (save in the second person) has been shown. Cf, the fate of the opt. before the subj. There is only one example, nrjKeri fj.r]5eis (t)a.yoi (c) The Optative. (Mk. 11 14), in the N. T. The distinction between a curse and a prohibition is not very great. The parallel passage in Mt. 21
:
19 has^ ou
(d)
fjLr]KeTL
aov Kapvos yevrjraL (volitive Subj.).
The
Infinitive.
The idiom
is
is
very frequent in Homer,^
It
occurs chiefly after an imperative.
The command
is
carried
on
by the
infinitive.
There
no need
for surprise in this construcSeTât (like
tion, since the probability is that
imperative forms like
the Latin legimini, Homeric

is
is
'Keye-fxevai.)
are infinitive in origin.^
It
true that the accent of the editors for the aorist active optative
different
from the aorist active inf. in forms like Karevdvpai, wepLaaevaat (1 Th, 3:11 f.), but the MSS, had no accent. We could properly print the infinitive if we wished,^ So as to irapaKoKeaaL (2 Th, 2 17) where the accent is the same for both infinitive and optative (the imper. form aor. mid. sec. singl. is irapaKaXeo-at), Cf, âiTTcaai and jSaTrrto-at, one and the same form. The idiom is less frequent in the Attic ^ outside of laws and maxims,
:
Moulton, Prol., p. 179. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 162, Giles, Man., p. 468,
Moulton,
Prol., p. 179.
Blass, Gr. of
N, T, Gk.,
p. 222.
944
NEW TESTAMENT
but happens to be the one

rarity of this
the Pontic dialect to-day. i the papyri. reads raDra
is ahve in Moulton^ expresses surprise at the use of the inf. in the N. T., since it is common in Cf. Iêimt, nL(jdu>aaL, A. P. 86 (i/A.D.). Moulton
ii,
infinitive construction that
(Prol, p. 248) notes that Burkitt {Evang. da-Mepharr.

5e
iroLrjaaL
252
f.)
KCLKelva
fxij
acpelvaL
inf.
in
Mt. 23
23.
Blass^
notes also a revival of the simple

finitive in. the later
or the accusative
and
in-
language in legal phraseology. He explains the idiom as an ellipsis, but Moulton is undoubtedly correct in rejecting this theory. There is no need of a verb of command understood in view of the etjTnology of a form like /3d7rTto-at. The use of xaipeti' as greeting in epistles (with the nominative) is explained in the same way.
is
C f.Ac. J 5
.
:23; 23 :26
It is
Jas. 1:1.
It
the absolute use of the
inf.
as imperative.
tQil
very
common
II, xi, 1
in the papyri,
(iii/B.c).
ellipsis of
as UoXvKpaTrjs
warpl
xaipeti',
P. Petr.
So Moulton {Prol,
a verb of
to be
p. 180) denies the necessity of the

:
are clearly parallel with evXayeire

(TTOLxeiv is
command. In Ro. 12 15 xo-lpetv and Kkaitiv mi firi KaTapdade. So in Ph. 3 :16

(l)pov)fxeu,
:
needlessly wishes to
compared with the hortatory emend the text in 2 Tim. 2
Blass*
14, so as
not to
:
read
We
(2
Xoyo/jiaxelv. This use of the inf. occurs also in Tit. 2 9. probably have the same construction in fxri avmvafxlywadai Th. 3 14), though it may be explained as purpose. In 1 Cor.
iJLri
:
12
KplueLu is
the subject
tation begins with MrjSev aipere

rect
Lua
command).
fxrjSev
aipcoaLv,
yUTj
3 after elwev the quochanged to fxr] re exetp (indiIn Mk. 6 8 f both forms are indirect (one with the other with fxfi kvdvaaadai) The marg. in
inf.
:
In Lu. 9
is
and
.
W.H.
inf.
has
kvbv(jr}ade.
The MSS.
often vary between the middle
and imper. or subj. Winer^ thinks that expositors have been unduly anxious to find this use of the infinitive in the N.T. But
it is
(e)
there.
See further chapter

Participle.
XX,
Verbal Nouns.
Winer ^ found much difficulty in the absolute use of the participle in the N. T. The so-called genitive absolute is common enough and the participle in indirect discourse representing a finite verb. It would seem but a simple step to use the participle, like the infinitive, in an independent sentence without direct dependence on a verb. Winer admits that Greek
The
prose writers have this construction, though "seldom."
1
He
ex-

Prol., p.
Cf.
Thumb,
Hellen., p. 130
f.
2 3 *
179
f.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 222.

lb.
W.-Th.,
lb.,
p. 316.
ff.
pp. 350
MODE
plains
it
(efkaizis)
the copula as
is
945
so
on the ground of
:
ellipsis of
common
with adjectives (cf. Mt. 5 3-11). He passes the poets by (often the truest index of the vernacular) and admits "the Byzantine use of participles simply for finite verbs." T. S. Green* says:
"The
absolute use of the participle as an imperative
is
a marked
feature of the language of the N. T."
an "Aramaism." To this W. F. Moulton^ expresses surprise and admits only "the participial anacoluthon," which, by the way, is very much the same thing. But J. H. Moulton^ has found a number of examples in the papyri where the participle is fairly common
explains
it
He
as
for the indicative.
The
instances in the papyri of the participle
in the sense of the imperative are not numerous, but one of
them
nov
seems very
lute.
Lv'
clear.
Thus Tb. 59
(i/B.c.)
ols eav TpoaSk-rjade
TLTa.(T(TovTes fxoL TpodvixoTepov.
It is
preceded by a genitive abso-
vyLaLV7]Te.
Moulton gives another equally so: G. 35 (i/B.c.) eTZLixekbixevoi Moulton^ cites also the Latin form sequiminl (=
for the second
middle plural present indicative. The imperative has an infinitive form sequiminl similar looking shown. See chapter XX, Verbal Nouns, for origin, as already further discussion. On the whole, therefore, and other examples there is no reason that per se why the N. T. admit we must
tirbiievoi)
writers should not use the participle in lieu of the imperative.

is and anacobut it is not the mark of an uneducated person. In the papyrus example given above Grenfell and Hunt call the Moulton^ also transwriter "an official of some importance." lates Thumb ^ concerning the "hanging nominative" (common in classical and kolvt] Greek) as saying that the usage "is the precursor of the process which ends in modern Greek with the disappearance of the old participial construction, only an absolute form in -ovras being left." In the ellipsis of the copula it is not always clear whether the indicative or the imperative is to be Shall we supply Cf. evXoyrjTos 6 deos (2 Cor. 1:3). supplied. eaTLv or t)tco (earco) as we have it in 1 Cor. 16 22? In a case like 8 f. it is plain that the unexpressed eare would be im1 Pet. 3 perative, but Moulton notes the curious fact that eare (imperative) does not appear in the N. T. at all, though we have ladi. five There are intimes, iarct} or ^tcj fourteen, and eaTooaav twice.''
It
is,
of course, a loose construction, as ellipsis

is,
luthon
dr., p. ISO.
'
Prol., p. 223.
"
lb., p. 225.
* lb. W.-Moulton, p. 732, n. 5. Mr. H. Soott, notes the absence of tare
IlcUen., p. 131.
in
V(!it(;h,
in
R. Cone, of the LXX, In Cood^poiHl's Kuhner-Bl., May.ser, Ilelbin^, Tliackeray.

in
iho
II.
946
stances

more or
less doubtful, as kTnpl\pavTes (1 Pet.
Taxet.vco9r]Te
naturally taken with
as
5:7), which is Moulton^ now admits. He
evidently reacted too strongly against Winer.

participle should not be appealed to
if
This use of the

is
the principal verb
pres-
ent in the immediate context.
tuation as in
Lu. 24
47,
Sometimes it is a matter of puncwhere W. H. give in the margin
apâjitvoL airo 'lepovaaXrifj. vfiels /JLapTvpes tovtoov, instead of 'lepovaaXrjfj.'

vne2s.
perative.
in
The marginal punctuation takes the participle as an imThe MSS. sometimes vary, as when ^{C give hdeiâade 2 Cor. 8 24, while B, etc., have evbeLKvvjxevoL? But a num:
ber of unmistakable examples appear both in Paul and Peter,
though "Paul was not so fond of

apostle."^
this construction as his brother

:
Thus
exovTt^ (1 Pet. 2
12)
.
must be
so explained or
:
So viroraaadnevoL (1 Pet. 2 taken as anacoluthon (cf. aTrkxâdai) 18; 3 1) reminds one of Eph. 5 22, an "echo" according to Moulton. Other examples occur in 1 Pet. 3:7, 9, possibly 16
: :
also;
4 8
:
ff.
Besides
(5
:
viroTaaffOjjLevoL
f .)
Ro. 12
it
f.,
16
f.
and (XTrovbaôvTes (Eph. 4 2 f.) and Paul the most outstanding example is in These participles occur in the midst of imperaavexbixevoi
:
in
tives or infinitives as imperatives (12
15).
The asyndeton makes
impossible to connect with any verb.
pears as a practical indicative.

: :
In verse 6 exopres apMoulton^ adds to these 2 Cor.

:
See also Heb. 13 5. But Lightfoot^ 9 11 f. and Col. 3 16. put in a word of caution when he said: "The absolute participle,
being (so far as regards mood) neutral in
itself,
takes
its
colour
from the general complexion of the sentence," The participle is not technically either indicative, subjunctive, optative or imperative.
The context must
decide.
In
itself
the participle
it
is
non-finite (non-modal) like the infinitive,
though
was some-
times drawn out into the modal sphere.

5.
(a)
Uses of the Imperative.
Command
is
or Exhortation.
In general the imperative keeps

It is the
call of
within the same limits observed in the classical language, but

that
not a narrow groove.^

over another or the
only in
mood
of the assertion of
will.
one's will
one to exert his
Thus
Index Pat. he finds
it
Clem. 45
1,
:
He
1
finds
it
:
also in Test.
XII
Pat. Reub. G
:
1.
and the accent is doubtful here. It could have been used in
Napht. 3
2 3 <
2 and
in Ign.
Prol., p. 181, against his
Eph. 10 2. former view

in Expositor, VI, x. 450.
lb.
lb. lb.
On
Col. 3
16
f.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 221.
MODE
d7a7rarc to us exdpovs
irpoaevâL (6:6);
vfxoiv
(etkaisis)
44)
(1
947
els
(Mt. 5
xo-lp^re
eiaeXOe
:
to Ta/iietof aov Kal
TravTore
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. This is just a negative command and differs (b) Prohibition.
:
in
no respect save the presence of the negative

:
nr}.
Thus
ij,r]
/x?)
/cpt-
(Mt. 7 :l), fxr] (poêlcrde (Jo. 6 20). Often the presence of the imperative in the midst of indicatives is shown by as in /xi) indeed, have with We do, ov the Cor. imperairXavdaOe (1 6:9).
vere
tive in
marked
contrast,
where the force of the negative
is
given
ovx o
to that rather than to the mode.
Thus
1
in
Pet. 3
3, earco
Koafios,
dXX' 6 Kpuirrds
p.bvov
:
rrjs
KapSias avOpwiros.
The same explana:
tion applies to ov
dXXd Kal in
Pet. 2
18,
but
uri ixbvov is
because of the absence of dXXd. In dXXd (with participles and imperacases of contrast with oh tives) the reason for ov is thus apparent (H. Scott). In Mt.
regular in Jas.
1
22, etc.,
37
oi)
ov (like rat rat) of

eo-rco.
is
the predicate (like a substantive), not

:
the negative
In 2 Tim. 2
ix-q
14
7r'
ovbh xPWi-fôv (a
parenthetical expression of
Xoyo/xaxelv used as
an imperative),
the negative goes specifically with the single word xPWi-Pôv. Cf. also 1 Cor. 5 10. The upshot is that ût) remains the negative
:
of the imperative.
(c)
Cf.
ixi]
p.oi.
kotovs Trdpexe (Lu. 11

easily shades off
7).
Entreaty.
A command
into petition in
is
certain circumstances.
pleading.2
The tone
of the
demand
softened to
Moulton^ notes that the imperative has a decided "The grammarian Hermogenes asserted harshtone about it. ness to be a feature of the imperative and the sophist Protagoras even blamed Homer for addressing the Muse at the beginning of the Iliad with an imperative."'* The N. T. shows a sharp de;
parture in the use of the imperative in petitions (rare in the older
Greek and
in the kolvt]) The prophet pleads with the imperative, not with potential optative or future indicative. Jesus spoke with authority and not as the scribes.'' "Moreover, even in the
.
language of prayer the imperative is at home, and that in its most urgent form, the aorist. Gildersleeve observes (on Justin Martyr, p. 137), 'As in the Lord's Prayer, so in the ancient Greek
liturgies the aorist imper.
is
almost exclusively used.

*
It is the
Pro!., p. 173.
lb.
2
3
Gildersl., Synt., Pt.

Prol., p. 172.
I,
p. 158.
"
Mt. 7
29.
948
NEW TESTAMENT
true term for instant prayer.' "^
Gildersleeve^ denies that the
N. T. shows "the absolute indifference that some scholars have considered to be characteristic of Hellenistic Greek" in the use of the imperative. He credits Mr. Mozley with the observation that "the aorist imperative is regularly used in biblical Greek when the deity is addressed; and following out this generalization Herr Krieckers, a pupil of Thumb's, has made a statistical study of the occurrences of the two tenses in Homer, Hesiod, Sappho,
^schylos, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes, with the result that in prayers addressed by men to men both present and aorist are often used, whereas in prayers addressed by men to gods the
aorist largely predominates."
Examples^
(So-qdrjaov
of the imperative in
petitions appear in
rifXLV TriffTiv,
Mk.
22,
rifj.7v,
(Lu. 17
5)
wpdades
(Jo. 17: 11) Triprjaop aureus
h
:
tQ
ouofxaTi aov.
(d)
Permission.
illustration
All this
is
is
in strict line with the ancient Greek.^
good
seen in Mt. 26
45, KadevBere Xolttop Kal dra-
not a question nor necessarily irony. It is too late to do Christ any good by keeping awake. He withdraws his
Taveade.
This
is
plea for watchfulness.
There
is
irony in
TrXrjpcbo-are
(Mt. 23
13).
32),
though
it is is
the permissive use of the imperative.
The note
:
of
permission
struck in eX^drco and

:
Ixto-rpaîyTco
(Mt. 10
Of.
the fut. ind. in Lu. 10

ayuoe'LTO)
6.
See further
x'^ptf^cr^co (1
:
Cor. 7: 15);
(14
it
38,
W. H.
our 'Let
be
so'
In 2 Cor. 12 16 earcc 8e is like or 'Granted.' In Mt. 8 31 aroareiXov is enmarg.).

:
treaty, while vrayeTe
is
permissive.
In
Cor. 11:6 KeLpaadoj
is
probably hortatory.
(e)
Concession or Condition.
It is
sion to concession.
rov vabv tovtov, Kal
This also
is classical.^
an easy step from permisTake Jo. 2 19, Xmare

:
Tpicrlu rnxepaLs eyepco aiirbv.
This
is
much
the
same
as kav XmrjTe.
It is not a strict
it is
command.
We
have parakav.
f .)
taxis with Kal, but
equivalent in idea to hypotaxis with
So with
avaara
e/c
avTlartjTe tc3 5ia/36Xa), Kal (jievêrac a4>' vpQiv (Jas.

tC)v veKpcov
/xi)
7
:
(LXX),
Kal kTrL(f)avaeL aoL 6 XpiaTos

KpLdfJTe'
(Eph. 5
/cat
14).
p-q
See also
Kplvere, Kal oh
p-rj
Kal pi] KaradLKaêTe,

dldore,
eir'
ov
KaTadiKaadrJTe'
awoXveTe,
Kal aTvoKvdrjaeaOe
Kal
dodrjaerai vplv
(Lu. 6 37
:
f.).
Then again
paKpodvp-qaov
epol, Kal irdvTa aTrodcoaco
1 2 s *
Moulton,
Prol., p. 173.
Am.
Jour, of Philol., Apr., 1909, p. 235.
Cf. Burton, N. T.
M. and
I,
T., p. 80.
Cf. Gildersl., Synt., Pt.
p. 158; Miller,
The Limitation
of the Imperative
in the Attic Orators,
Am.
Cf. K.-G., Bd.
I,
Jour, of Philol., 1892, pp. 399-436. p. 236.
MODE
(joi
Acat
(efkaisis)
ttoUl Kai ^naxi
7roii7<^co
949
(Lu. 10
:
(Mt. 18
26).
So also tovto
28)
'ipxôQf^
oêcr0e(Jo. 1:39). Cf. SeDre mi two imperatives are connected by /cat when the first suggests conThus Eph. 4 26, opylteade Kai jui? anapTavere. So also cession.
19).
:
(Mt. 4
Sometimes
epavPTjaov Kai
tSe
(Jo.
7:52).
Cf. epxov Kai
'i8e
(Jo. 1:46).
This
seems simple enough. It is a regular classic idiom ^ to have aye, (/) In Asyndeton. "A7e with KXavaare (Jas. 5:1) is imperative. 4)epe with another 21) and SeOre tSere p,oL (Mt. 19 aKoKoWei 8evpo an interjection like More Rev. 19 17. 21 4 12; Jo. 29; also (Mt. 28 6). See imperative. So uTraTe another with virkyiTe and common is viraye See airayyeiXaTe 10). virayere (28 (Mt. 5 :24); KpuiTOv dcaXKayridt,
:
: : : :
further Mt. 8
:
4; 18
15; 21
28; 27
65;
Mk.
44; 6
38, etc.
:
15. In Mt. 16 opare Opoetade. So opare 24 fir] in Mt. 6, occurs But asyndeton In Mt. 9 30 the persons and numbers are 15). iSXeTrere (Mk. 8 In Rev. 19 10, opa prj, the verb yLvwaKero). opare fxrjSels different, For 6pa Tronyo-ets see also Heb. 8 5 expressed. not is with fir] (LXX). The simplest form of asyndeton is seen in Ph. 3 2,
we have
:
opSre Kai irpoaex^re.

:
Cf. also Lu. 12
/SXeTrere,
(g)
jSXexcre, jSXtTrere.
In Subordinate Clauses.
it is
The reason
for treating this subit
ject here is that
so rare that one
may
not catch
in the dis-
It is well established, though cussion of subordinate clauses. rare, in Demosthenes, Lysias, Plato, Thucydides and the tragic
poets.2
The
1
nent, for there

stance,
case of coare at the beginning of a clause is not pertiit is a mere inferential conjunction, as, for in:
Cor. 3
21, chare fivêls Kavxaadco.
Here
el tls
coo-re
is
not a
hypotactic conjunction.
in 2
Neither
Cor.
1
is
the recitative 6rt in point, as

vfilv,
Th. 3
10, rovro Kapr]yyeWofiev
on
is
oh QeKet epyaêellipsis of
(xdai, prjde
eaduToo.
In
31 there
probably an
yevrfraL after tva,-
tation after yeypairraL.
imperative),
Pet. 3
W.
Kavxacrdo} is in the direct quol:Q,epu) ayaWLaaOe (probably H. begin a new sentence, but w points back di-
and the imperative

In
1 Pet.
rectly to KaipQi as its antecedent. in

1
:
The same
situation occurs
3 with
./^v
earw.
In both examples the imperative
appears with the relative. Two other instances of this construcThey tion are found in 1 Peter (a peculiarity of this Epistle).
are
c5
avriarrjre (5
Heb. 13
:7, cov
9)
and
els
ar^re (5
12).
:
We
see
it
also in
fiifielade,
and
in 2
Tim. 4
15, 6v Kai cv (f)v\a(raov.
Cf. 0. P. 1125, 19
1
(ii/A.D.), OOP dkfxa KaBapop aird ivaproiP apadoru).

Gildorsl., Synt., Pt. I, p. 162.
lb., p. 107.
950
NEW TESTAMENT
was hardly felt as a relabut see 1 Cor. 14 13, 8l6 Trpoaevxtodw} This matter received adequate discussion (h) The Tenses. under Tenses. It may simply be noted here that in positive sentences the aorist imperative is naturally common, especially
Ato at the beginning of the sentence
tive (inferential particle),
:
frequent in the N. T.
distinction
Tov KpaâTTov
Cf. eiaeXOe
wpoaevâi.
aorist
(Mt. 6:6),
is
The
and
'iadi,
between the present and the

crov Kal irepLiraTeL
well seen in apov

:
(Jo.
5:8).
See also Jo. 2
16
Ac. 12
8.
As an example
19
:
of the periphrastic present note

is
exwj' (Lu.
7re4)ifj.ooao
17).
The
(Mk. 4:39).
almost non-existent, but note The present imper. second person alone
perfect
occurs in prohibitions which are forbidden as in course of action

or as a present fact ('quit doing
diiferences in idea
TrapaaTTjaare (at
it')." Cf. Ro. 6 13 for sharp between nrj irapLaTaveTe (course of action) and once and for all). In the third person a prohibi:
tion
may
See the subj.
be either in the aorist imperative or the aorist subj. mode for further remarks concerning the failure of
the second person imperative aorist in prohibitions.
This subject will receive adequate (i) In Indirect Discourse. treatment under this head (see below). All that is attempted here is to indicate that, when the imperative is not quoted directly (cf. 2 Th. 3 10), it may be expressed in an indirect
:
command
either
by the
:
infinitive (cf. Xe7coj'
n-q
irepiTenvetv
fji-qd^
jreptTrareLv in
Ac. 21
21) or
by a conjunction
like 'ba as in
Mk.
6:8, or thrown into a deliberative question as

4>oPT]diJTe
in uTroSelôo rlpa
(Lu. 12
5).
B.
DEPENDENT OR HYPOTACTIC SENTENCES (YHOTAKTIKA

'AHIilMATA)
Introductory.
(a)
Use of Modes in Subordinate Sentences.
There
is
no essendivision
is
tial difference in
the meaning of the modes in subordinate clauses
from the
not
significance in independent sentences.
The
made on
the basis of the modes at

its
all.
Leaving out the
imperative because of
three
rarity in subordinate sentences, all other
modes occur
in almost all the suborctinate clauses.
The
same mode-ideas are to be sought here as there. The subordinate clauses make no change in the meaning of mode, voice or
tense.
1
Burton^ does say: "Others, however, give to the mood or

See also Thompson, Synt., p. 190
Cf. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 511.

Gildersl., Synt., Ft.
I,
p. 164.
f.
N. T. M. and
T., p. 81.
MODE
(etkaizis)
951
tense a force different from that which they usually have in principal clauses.
Hence
arises the necessity for special

I
the
moods and
tenses in subordinate clauses."
treatment of cannot agree to

in in-
this as the reason for the separate treatment.
Sometimes
direct discourse after secondary tenses there

of
may
be a sequence
Greek with final clauses after secbut that is so slight a matter that it bears no sort of proportion to the subordinate clauses as a whole. Gildersleeve (A. J. of Phil, XXXIII, 4, p. 489) regards the subordinate sentence as "the Ararat in the flood of change" and parataxis and hypotaxis as largely a matter of style. Some of the modal uses have survived better in the subordinate clauses, as, for instance,
(true also in ancient
modes
ondary
tenses),
the futuristic aorist subj.
(cf. octls apvqaTjTat in Mt. 10 33), but the subordinate clause did not create the idiom. Originally there were no subordinate sentences.^ "In dependent clauses the
:
choice of the
case "2 as
tion
tional
is
mood
is
determined by the nature of each individual

the sequence of
true also of independent sentences.
made above about

and
is
The qualificamodes was always op-
absent from the N. T. except a few examples in
Luke.
The
great wealth of subordinate clauses in Greek with
various nuances
demand
separate discussion.
But we approach
the matter with views of the modes already attained.

(6)
ter
XXI,
The Use of Conjunctions in Subordinate Clauses. In chapParticles, full space will be given to the conjunctions
(co-ordinating, disjunctive, inferential, subordinating).
Here
it is
only pertinent to note the large part played in the Greek language by the subordinating conjunctions. It must be admitted that
the line of cleavage
is
not absolute.
The
paratactic conjunctions
Popular speech has always had a fondness for parataxis.* In the modern Greek vernacular "the propensity for parataxis has considerably reduced the ancient Greek wealth of dependent constructions" (Thumb, Handb., p. 185). Hence long periods are rare. So the Hebrew used both as paratactic and hypotactic. In the Greek Kal we see a partial parallel.-' In Mt. 26 15, tL deXerk /xot Sovvai Kay<h v/uv TapaSdoao}, the Kai is almost equivalent to kav. So often in Luke, as in 9 51, kykueTo 8e Kai, the
first
field.^
"]
:
:
were
on the
Kal
clause
is
(like 6tl) the logical subject of tykvtTo.

'6tl
The common The

6tl
use of the recitative
illustrates well the close connection be-
tween subordinate and independent sentences.
shows

<
2 *
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 451. Cf. Monro, Horn, Gr., p. 194.
Brug., Griecli. Gr., p. 552.
952

is
NEW TESTAMENT
that the clause

is
the object of the preceding verb, but the clause

Cf. Xkyere 6tl jSXa-
preserved in the direct (co-ordinate) form.

10
:
a4)r]ixeh (Jo.
36).
Thus again a subordinate
clause
may
be so
a
loosely connected with the principal clause as to be virtually in-
dependent.^
Thus the
:
relative, as in Latin, often introduces

:
oh (Lu. 12 1) and avd' Siv (12 3). But, on the whole, we can draw a pretty clear line between the independent and the dependent clause by means of the conjunctions. The case of asyndeton, treated elsewhere (cf. The Sentence), concerns chiefly parataxis, but some HTev tls (Lu. examples occur in hypotaxis, as in koI eyevero 11:1) where the elwh tls clause is the logical subject of eykvero.
principal sentence, a paragraph, forsooth, as kv
(c)
Logical Varieties of Subordinate Clauses.
Each subordinate
clause sustains a syntactical relation to the principal clause after
the analogy of the case-relations.

further amplification (see
icate
tence has subject, predicate, object.
The normal complete senEach of these may receive chapter X, The Sentence). The predsubject or object).
adjective.
may have a substantive (as stantive may be described by an
An
This subadverb may be
used with predicate, adjective or substantive. Thus the sentence is built up around the predicate. In the same way each
subordinate sentence
like
is
either a substantive (subject or object

like 6<ttls or
an
is
6tl clause),
an adjective
an adverb
like owou.
This
therefore a point to note about each subordinate clause
in order to get its exact syntactical relation to the principal clause.

It
may
be related to the predicate as subject or object,
or to the subject or object as adjective, or to either as adverb.
now
may be now substantive, now adjective and In simple truth most of the conjunctions have their origin as relative or demonstrative pronouns. In Kiihner-Gerth^ the subordinate clauses are all discussed from this standpoint
relative clause
adverb.
alone.
Thumb
(Handb., pp.
of this
186
ff.)
follows this plan.
One
questions the
wisdom
method, though in
itself scientific
enough.
Burton^ has carefully worked out all the subordinate though he does not adopt it. Then, again, one may divide these clauses according to their form or their meaning.^ Viteau^ combines both ideas and the result is rather confusion than clarification. There may be a series of subordinate clauses, one dependent on the other. So in 1 Cor.
clauses from this standpoint,
1
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 194.
"
2 '
Tl. II, 2. Bd., pp. 354-459.
N. T. M. and Monro, Horn.
T., p. 82.
Gr., p. 194
f.
Le Verbe: Syntaxe des
Propositions, pp. 41-144.
MODE
1
:
(efkaisis)
e/SaTTTicra et
953
/ii)
14,
evxo.pi.crT(Jj
oti ovSeva
k/jLov
vfxoiiv
^piairov koI Vaiov, Iva
(jLT]
TLS etTT^
OTL ts TO
ovofia kâiTTiaOriTe.
See also
Mk.
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

are so important
modes save in indirect discourse. They and partake of the functions of both noun and
XX.
1.
verb to such an extent that they demand a separate chapter
Relative Sentences.
Relative Sentences Originally Paratactic.
(a)
The
relative
6s,
an anaphoric substantive pronoun.' At first the relative clause was paratactic, a principal sentence like the other. ^ Cf. os yap in Homer, where 6s may be taken ^ as demonstrative or relative. In its simplest form the relative was unnecessary and was not even a connective. It was just a rep"The relative force arises where etition of the substantive.* Indeed, the OS (and its congeners) connects and complements."^ relative sentence is probably the oldest form of parataxis.^ It is
as
is
well
known, was
first
only by degrees that the relative clause came to be regarded as a subordinate clause.^ As a matter of fact, that was not always
the case, as has been seen in such examples as h oh, av6' Siv (Lu. 12 1, 3). But it is not true that this subordination is due to the
:
use of the subjunctive mode.^ The effect of case-assimilation (cf. gender and number) and of incorporation of the antecedent was
to link the relative clause very close to the principal sentence.^
Heb. 13 11. This is true (6) Most Subordinate Clauses Relative in Origin. of 6, but accusative forms'" and which are of ore merely on not also of other adverbs, like the ablative cos, oxcos, ews. These subordinating conjunctions therefore are mostly of relative origin."
Cf.
:
lb., p. 559.
'
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 186.
is
Stahl, HLst.-krit. Synt., p. 523, points out that
the relative sentence

*
either "synthetic or parathetic."
Schmitt, tJber den Ursprung des Subatantivsatzes mit Relativpartik. im
Griech., 1889, p. 12.

6 8 '
Thompson, Synt.
Frenzel, Die Entwick. des relat. Satzb.
im Griech., 1889,
p. 4.
8 9
Thompson, Synt., p. 383. Baron, Le Pronom Relat.

Cf. Reisert,
et la Conj. en Grec, 1892, p. 61.

It was not ahvays done (attraction) either in Zur Attralvtion dcr Relativsiitze in der griech.
Herod, or Thuc. Prosa, p. 30 f

10
" Thompson,
Synt., p. 384.
954

and perhaps
el.
Cf. ha, oTore
Upiv,
e-n-ei,
axph
yikxpt
are not relative.
Thus the subordinate

ecos
clauses overlap.
Burton/ indeed, includes
nearly
well
That is not necessary, since thus the subordinate clauses would properly be treated as relative sentences. See the relative origin of various conjunctions
all
under relative sentences.
worked out by Schmitt,^ Weber ^ and Christ.'* These clauses are mainly adverbial, though objective (and subject-clause also)
is substantive simply. The word cos occurs the three values of demonstrative, relative and conjunction (cf. English "that").^ But here we pass by these
on
(indirect discourse)
in
Homer with
conjunctions from relative or demonstrative roots.^ The relative pronoun alone, apart from the adverbial uses, introduces the most frequent subordinate clause, probably almost equal in some
authors to
all
the other classes put together.

is
In
:
tive construction
very common.
Cf. 1 Pet. 1
6-12; 2
Peter the rela21-24.

:
At any
oh,
all
rate
it is
the chief
means
:
of periodic structure.^
Take
as
an instance the period
wha-s, om, the subordinate clauses in the sentence except infinitive
in Ac. 1
1-2.
Note
wv, axpi
and
.
participles.
tIvl
See also
is
Cor. 15
like
1-2,
where four
relatives
:
occur and
X67W
almost
a relative.
Cf. further Ro. 9
The relative sentence 4f without Kal.

(c)
may
be repeated indefinitely with or
Relative Clauses
Usually Adjectival.
descriptive
They
are so classed
original
by Kiihner-Gerth.^
demonstrative.
av
The
use followed the

itself
substantive idiom just as the relative
was preceded by the

So
Thus the use
of the relative clause as subject

is
or object like 6 and the participle

05
kfie
perfectly consistent.
fxe
8e^r]TaL Sexerat tou aTroaTeiXavTa

:
(Lu. 9 :48).
Cf. also
Mk.
37; Ac. 16
well
:
12.
The
1
descriptive character of the relative

tov
Truev/jLaros 6
clause
is
shown
in
T-qv iib.xo-1-pa.v
ecmv
prjixa
deov
(Eph. 6
17).
Cf. 6s in
Tim. 3
16.
The
adjectival use of the

it
relative sentence is accented
by the use
of the article with
in
ttjv
Ro. 16
17, aKoiretv tovs
tols
SixocTTacrlas Kal to. aK6.v8a\a
xapd
is
Sidaxw v^ unlets jectival, but in

1
e/xdêre TvoLovuras.
Here the
relative clause
ad-
itself
a mere incident between to6s and
iroLovvTas.
N. T. M. andT., pp. 12Gff.

tJber den Ursprung des Substantivsatzes mit Relativpartik.
im Griech.
*
* ^ 8 ^
Entwickelungsgesch. der x^bsichtsiitze.
Der Substantivs. und das Rel. ws. Baron, Le Pronom Rel. et la Conjonction en Grec, p. 130.
Frenzel, Die
J.
Entw. des
ff.
rel.
Satzb. im Griech., p.
4.
Classen, Beob. iiber don honierischcn Sprachgeb., 1867, p. 6.

II,
Bd.
pp. 420
MODE
The
12
:
(ETKAISIZi)
955
6s in
clause
is
simply adjectival with

its
ttSs
Lu. 12
8l'
8.
That
Heb.
comes to be
28.
(d)
most usual character.

There
So with
is
rjs
in
Modes
in Relative Sentences.
nothing in the rela-
tive pronoun or the construction of the clause per se to have any effect on the use of the mode.^ The relative, as a matter of fact,
has no construction of its own.^ In general in dependent clauses the choice of the mode is determined by the nature of the individual case.3 Outside of relative clauses the choice in the N. T.
is
practically confined to the indicative
and the subjunctive.
The optative holds on in one or two examples. With the relative some examples of the imperative occur, as has already been shown.
Cf. 1 Cor. 14
:
13; Tit. 1
13; 2
Tim. 4
15; 1 Pet. 5
9;
Heb.
the
13
at
7.
Cf. 69ev KaTavorjaaTe (Heb. 3:1).
But the mode
is
not due
all
all
to the relative.
In a word, the relative occurs with
constructions possible to an independent sentence.*

tive
is,
The
indica-
if one wishes to make Thus ov8eis tanv 6s a(f)rJKev riju Cf. Jo. 10 12. The various uses of the subolKiav (Mk. 10 29). junctive occur with the relative. The dehberative subj. is seen
of course, the natural tense to use
a direct and clear-cut assertion.

:
in irov tdTLV TO KaToKvua

4>ayw;
[xov
:
oirov to iraaxo- iJL^Ta
twv
ixadr]T(hv
^lov
(Mk. 14
14;
Lu. 22
11).^
Prof.
Earle, in a fine paper
on "The Subj. of Purpose in Relative Clauses in Greek" {Class. Papers, 1912, pp. 213 ff.) shows how Xenophon, Soph., Eurip., Plato and other Attic writers use the idiom. Cf. Xen., Anab., II, See also Tarbell, Class. Re4, 20, ovx eôvcTLV eKetuot otol (pvycoaiv.
view, July, 1892,
"The
Deliberative Subj. in Relative Clauses in

:
be volitive as in Ac. 21 IG, ayovTes Trap' and in Heb. 8 3, odev auajKalov ex^LV tl (J In Heb. 12 Kal TOVTOu 6 TrpoaeveyKii (cf. 6 irpo(7(f)epeL in Heb. 9:7). 28, 8l' ^s \arpevo)fxev, the subj. may be conceived as either volitive (hortatory) or merely futuristic, more probably volitive like ixo^Greek."
subj.
êpiadibfxtv
The
may
Mvacrwvi
tlvl,
fiev.
Clearly futuristic
is
the subj. in Mt. 16
28,
otrtj/es
ov
fiij
yevao^vTai QavaTov.
These examples appear isolated. The subj. with ware may be noted as in 1 Cor. 5 8, ware lopTaôijx^v (deliberative). But the futuristic subj., so rare in the independent sentence after Homer, is very common in the relative clause with
:
See, per contra, Baron,
2
"
Le Pronom Rcl. et la Conjonction en Grec, pp. 61 ff. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 189. " Thoini)son, Synt., p. 383. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 452. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 217, explains this subj. as due to a "final mean-
ing."
in
Mk.
reads
(pdyofjiai.
. :
956
av

av.
NEW TESTAMENT
Thus
Trjp-qa-p
:
and sometimes without

(Mk. 8
:
It is
not the av that determines

6s
the subj., but the subj. usually has

OS 5' av cLToKeaii
av.
yap kav
:
deXî
and
35).
Cf. oans Cf.
(Jas. 2
10),
though
In such
AKLP
read
rriprjaet.
(itacism).
Mt. 10 33 and
is
38.
relative sentences the future indicative
also very
sense.
common, the
Cf. os av
6fxo-
two forms being

\oyriaet (Lu. 12
:
closely allied in
8).
form and
See also
6aTt,s oixoKoyrjaeL
and
oorts apvqarjTat,
(Mt. 10:32f.).
(e)
Definite
and
Indefinite Relative Sentences.
Goodwin^ has
Jannaris^
made popular
the custom of calling some relative sentences " con-
ditional relatives."
He
has been followed by Burton.^
considers conditional relative clauses "virtually condensed clauses
capable of being changed into conditional protases."

sentence
is
Almost any
capable of being changed into some other form as a
practical equivalent.
The
relative clause
may
indeed have the

it-
resultant effect of cause, condition, purpose or result, but in

self it
expresses none of these things.
It is like the participle in
One must not read into it more than is there. Cf. (Mk. 4: 9) and 6 exo:v SiTa (Mt. 13 9). Cf. d tls in Mk. 4 23. One might as well say that 6 \aixâviiiv (Jo. 13 20) is the same thing as 6s \afxl3aveL (cf. Mt. 10 38). There is a change from participle to relative clause in Mt. 10 37 f., 41 f. Cf. Mt. 12 30, 32; Lu. 9 50. So then av TLva tijl\{/oi} (Jo. 13 20) is a conditional clause.* It is true that 6v nva does not occur in the N. T., but t rts and oo-rts differ in conception after all, though the point The MSS. sometimes vary between el tls and oorts is a fine one.
this respect.
05 exet (Sra
:
as in
Mk.
22
f.;
34; 1 Cor. 7
13.
In Jo. 14
10.
is
13
f.
note
OTi av alT7]a7]Te
6 Kexo-pLcrpai
and and
e'i
eav tl airrjarjTe.
tl KexapLa/xaL
Note the
:
distinction
in 2 Cor. 2
between In Mk. 8 34 f
:
note
el'
TLS deXeL
6s
eav 6e\y.
What
is
true
that the relative
sentences are either definite or indefinite.
It is
not a question of
mode nor
but merely whether the relative describes a definite antecedent or is used in an indefinite sense. The definite relative is well illustrated by 2 Th. 3 3, ttio-tos 8e
of the use of av,
:
eaTLV 6 KvpLOs 6s aTrjplêL, or

TTjv
Mk.
1
tjs
2, tov ayyeXov
jjlov
6s
:
KaTaaKevaaeL
28).
bbbv
p.ov.
So also
x^-pi-v 8l'
\aTpevoinev (Heb. 12
Cf. 6
TrpoaeveyKj]
:
(Heb. 8:3). But indefinite is os exet, SoOrjaeTaL avTco (Mk. 4 25). In the same verse Kal 6s ovk ex" is indefinite, but nal
6 exei is definite.
1
Indefinite also
is ocrot fjyl/avTo
(Mt. 14 36) and

:
Moods and Tenses, p. 197. N. T. M. and T., p. 119.

Cf. Robertson, Short Gr. of the
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 470.
Gk. N.
T., p. 169.
MODE
oaoL av rixpavTo
(efkaisis)
7ras os epeZ
957
(Lu. 12
:
(Mk. 6
56).
:
So also with
8).
10)
edj/
and
ttSs 6s
av o/jioXoyqaei (12
Cf. os eorat (17: 31) with os Cf. Ac. 7: 3, 7; Gal. 5

:
^r]TWV (17: 33) and
os 5' av airoKkaH.
17.
That
with
it is
not a question of
otTToXeo-et
OS
av
(Mk. 8
35).
mode is thus clear. Cf. os tav d'ekxi Thus note in Mk. 4 25 os yap
: :
ex^L 5odr]aeTaL avTw,
So
10
in Lu. 12
:
but in Lu. 8 18 os av yap exv SodrjaeraL avrQ.^ 8 we have ttSs os av ofxoXoyrjaeL ev kfj.oi, but in Mt.
32
Tras oarts bixo\oyi)(jei ev efxoL
The use
of
otrris is
pertinent.
It is either indefinite, as here,
from the sense of Tts='any one' or

'
definite
from the sense of
ris
= somebody
oo-rts
in particular,' as in
Lu.
30, avSpes 8vo avveXaXow avT(2 otrives rjaav Mcomrjs Kal 'HXeias.
Examples
16
:
of the definite use of

:
may
:
be seen in Mt. 7: 26;

is
28; 22
2; 27: 55, 62, etc.
The
indefinite use
seen in
ttSs
oaris OLKOvet
23
12),
(Mt. 7:24), oaTis xet (Mt. 13 12), ocrTts vxpcoaeL (Mt. but apparently no instance of oans av and the future
ind. occurs.
The
indefinite use of oarts with the subj.

oo-rts kav y
and
av
is
rather frequent, as in 12
:
(Gal. 5
10), oo-rts av iroLrjay

ocrrts apv-na-nrai.
ixi]
(Mt.
:
50).
Cf. Col. 3
17.
We
:
also find
(Mt. 10
33),
1).
oo-rts T7]pi]arj (Jas.
2
ri
10)
and
otrtves ov
yevaoovTai
(Mk. 9
In 2 Cor. 8
12,
ei
irpodvixla xpoKetrat, Kado eav exj?,
evTpoadeK-
Tos, ov Kado ovK exL,
there
is
a pointed distinction between the sub-
junctive and the indicative modes.^
Thus the
indicative occurs
with either the definite or the indefinite and the subjunctive likewise, though usually the subjunctive comes with the indefinite
relative.
One may make a
positive statement about either a
definite
either.
or an indefinite relative or a doubtful assertion about
The
lines
thus cross, but the matter can be kept distinct.
The
clearly perceived by Dawson Walker.' The subjunctive with the indefinite relative, like that with orav and
distinction
is
kav, is futuristic (cf.
also future indicative).

this subj.
is
186)
argues that, since
futuristic
Moulton (Prol., p. and the aorist

is
describes completed action, the aorist subj. here
really a fu-
seems rather like an effort to introduce the Latin idiom into the Greek and is very questionable. This is the place for (/) The Use of av in Relative Clauses. more discussion of av, though, sooth to say, the matter is not perfectly clear. See also Conditions. It is probably kin to the Latin an and the Gothic an, and had apparently two meanings,
this
"Thus Mt. 5 committed murder.' " But

ture perfect.
21, 6s av
4>ovevaxi,
'the
man who
has
Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 139.

Cf. W.-Th., p. 307. Elcm. Gk. Synt., 1897, Cf. Biluinlcin, Untcra. etc., p. 315.
p. 7.
958
'else'

and
'in that case rather.'
iiu
NEW TESTAMENT
mary
use of
and
Keu is
Monro ^ argues that the priwith 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 limitation by circumstance or condition. The use of ap with relative, temporal and conditional clauses "ties them up to particular
occurrences" (Moulton, Prol., p. 186). It is not always quite so easy as that. This use of modal au appears rarely in modern
Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 188). "It is a kind of leaven in a Greek sentence; itself untranslatable, it may transform the meaning of a clause in which it is inserted" (Moulton, Prol., p. That is putting it a bit strong. I should rather say that it 165). was an interpreter of the sentence, not a transformer. Moulton counts 172 instances of modal av (eav) in the N. T. (p. 166). Matthew leads with 55, then Mark 30, Gospel of Luke 28 and Acts only 10, Paul's Epistles 27, the Johannine writings only 20, Hebrews 1, James 1. Mr. H. Scott fears that these figures are not The MSS. vary very correct, but they are approximately so. ind. Moulton finds examples occur with or sul)j. These much. iiv in the LXX (Hatch and Redpath). Of modal 739 cases of ind. aorist, with aorist), with 6 are opt. 56 these 40 (41 (26 ind.), the with subj. Raderfut. rest plup., 1 pres., 7 imp., 1 macher {N. T. Gr., p. 165) finds modal av in the kolpt] decreasing and unessential with ind., subj. or opt. in relative, temporal,
final or conditional clauses.
The use with
indefinite or general
statements was rare in Homer, but gradually came to be more frequent. But in the N. T. some examples of the definite use
So in Rev. 8:1, (Mk. 11:25) may be general. There is doubt also about orap d\pe eyhero (11 19). But in Mk. 6 56, oaoL ap r/xpaPTo, the construction is rendered more definite by ap, though ottou ap elaeiropeueTo in the same verse is indefinite. In Mt. 14 36 we have 6aoL rixJ/aPTo, which is not more definite than Mark's construction.^ In Rev. 14 4, 6wov ap vwayei, the construction is indefinite. In Ac. 2 45 and 4 35, Kadon ap ns etxei', we have repetition and so a general statement to that extent. In Mk. 3:11, orap avrop kOecopovp, it is general. In most instances in the N. T., therefore, the use of ap is clearly in indefinite It relative clauses whether with the indicative or subjunctive.^
of ap survive especially in temporal clauses.
oTav
ripoi^tv.
But
orap
arrjKeTe
Horn. Gr., p. 263
f.
'
Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 217) quotes as
p^^ contra see W.-Th., p. 306. ai' awTtkkaovaiv from an inscr. in
Viereck's
Sermo Graecus,
p. 38.
MODE
(etkaizis)
959
cannot be said that av is necessary with the indefinite relative indicative. It does not occur in the N. T. with oaris and the future ind., but we have both oo-rts ofioKoyqaeL (Mt. 10 32)
and the and
OS av duoXoyrjaeL
(Lu. 12 :8); 6s earai (Lu. 17:31)
and
os
av
airokkaeL
(Mk. 8
35).
Sermone
8'
Pis., p. 38.
For os av and Radermacher
fut. ind. see

(A^.
Compernass, De
174,
T. Gr., p. 145) cites os
ap abiK-qati, Inscr. Petersen-Luschan, Reisen, p.
N. 223,
21.
As already
ecs fjv
seen, the relative with the subj. usually has av,

:
as
av ttoKlv tlakpxricfde (Lu. 10
8); ort av TpoaSairavqarfs (10
35).
Cf.
av /SouXTjrat (10:22).
av,
MSS. do not have

TYiprjar]
as in oaris
TTalar}
(cf.
In a few examples the best apvy)<jr]TaL (Mt. 10 33) oaris

:
8e (Jas.
10).
The
use of eav like av has been
shown
OS
this period.
Orthography) to be very common with relatives at It is immaterial which is found. So 6s eav \uari and
(Mt. 5
: :
av
iroLr]<jri
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) But in the N. T., as in the av and 6aa airriariTe (Mt. 21:22).
is
papyri, eav
(A^.
more common
in relative clauses.
Radermacher
T. Gr., p. 145) quotes 6aoL

OS
eyXlirwaL,
Gr. XII,
1,
Inscr. Perg. 249, 2G,
and
avaaTapa^r] (or av dcrx.)
I.
671.
Moulton
{Prol.,
p. 169) cites
C.P.R. 237 (II/a.D.), ocra ahr^ TpocrreK-qTac. He (lb., quotes oa' dv xdo-xfre F.P, 136 (iv/A.D.), 6aa eav wapep. 168) The av is not repeated with the 'Ka^6pr]v B.M. 331 (ii/A.D.). second verb. So 6s di' TOLrjari Kal 5t5d^r; (Mt. 5 19). There is no instance of av in a relative clause with an optative in the N. T. But in Gen. 33 10 the LXX has ws av tls Uol Trpbawirov deou. So Raderols eav TvxoL, F.P. (see Moulton, CI. Rev., 1901, p. 32). macher {N. T., Gr., p. 131) cites Kad' 6 dv p-epos (XTpecfyoLTo from Philo. There is one instance of dv with the infinitive in the N. T. (2 Cor. 10: 9), iW prj Soû cbs dv eK4>oêZv 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 relais not absolutely essential with either mode.* In the Attic the subj. is invariable with dv, l)ut "in the less cultured Hellenistic writers" (Moulton, Prol., p. 166) it occurs with Curiously in the Gospel of John di^ occurs with the ind. also.
tive sentences, but
oarts
Always
text
(cf.
only in the neuter (Abbott, Johannine Grammar, p. 304). in the N. T. on 'edv='6TL dv unless in Mk. 6 23 the correct
:
is '6tl 6
edv as in
margin of W. H.
:
The
text
is
probably correct
Lu. 10 :35; Ac. 3

1
23, etc.).
11,
Cf. K.-G., U(l.
pp. 421, 42
1.
960
(g)
NEW TESTAMENT
clause
Special Uses of Relative Clauses. As in Latin/ the relative may imply cause, purpose, result, concession or condition,
itself
though the sentence
does not say this much.
This
is
due
The sense glides from to the logical relation in the sentence. mere explanation to ground or reason, as in 6 Kal kawovdaaa avro
TovTo
TTOLijaaL
(Gal. 2
10).
In
is
Cor. 3
17, 6 vads tov deov ajLos
kaTLv oLTLves hare
vfiels,
there
:
an argument
areddponev
:
in
rfj
o'lTLves.
This
TToJs
is
clearly true^ in
^fjCTOiJiev
Ro. 6
2,
o'iTLves
aixapTla,
en
kv avrfj;
Cf. also Ac. 10

:
41, olrLves
ev
is
vofxco
(rvvecj)ayofxev Kal
avpe-
wioiiev avrOi.
See Gal. 5
4, o'lrLves
buaiovade.
:
Cf. Latin
qui,
quippe qui.
avd'
A
1
:
good example
20).
seen in Ro. 8
:
32, 6s ye tov
iSiov vlov ouK h4>dffaTo.
Cf. also a e/jLeWov (Rev. 3 Cf. Ac. 10

ind.
:
2)
:
and the com:
mon
&v (Lu.
:
20; Col. 3
qui = ut
5.
construction.^
is).
Only the Purpose is
mode
found
1 25, 32; Ph. 2 the N. T. in this occurs in
47; Ro.
also
in relative clauses (cf.

is
Either the future ind. or the subj. When the subj. occurs it is probably volitive."* So Burton 5 would explain all the cases of subj. of purpose with rela14 is analogous to the tives, but wrongly. The use in Mk. 14
construction.
:
Latin used for this
retention of the subj. of deliberation in an indirect question. Cf. the subj. of purpose with relative clause in Attic Greek.^
But the
Homeric (like Latin also). The Attic idiom is the future ind., and the future ind. also appears in the N. T. So OS KaTa<jKvb.aei (Mk. 1 2; Mt. 11 10; Lu. 7:27), with OS vixas avaixv-qaei (1 Cor. 4 17) which may be contrasted the same *in t'^kvov eortv ixov the merely explanatory relative 6s
subj. construction is
:
sentence.
So
:
otrLves airodwaovaLV
: ;
avrt^
(Mt. 21:41);
ot
irpoiropev-
40; Ex. 32 1) the Attic Greek would ^ have 6tl. Sometimes I'm relative might have been used. So 2 Cor. 12 7 e86dr]
GovTai (Ac. 7
:
ovk exco 6 Trapaer]<rco (Lu.
11:6) where occurs where a

fioi
/xe,
aKoXoxp (9
:
'iva
p.e
KoXa(f)l^ri,
(Jo. 5
7) ovk exco avdpoiirov tva /3dX7?
36)
I'm TTLarevaco els ainbv.
Cf. Gal.
:
4:5; Rev. 19
and
:
15.
Viteau^
stri-
kingly compares Mt. 10

aerai,
26, 6 ovk aivoKa\v4>Bi]a erai

/xi)
and
o oh yvuiadr}-
with
Mk. 4
22, kav
I'm <t)avepudfj
os
is
tva eXdri eis 4)avepbv.
The
variety of construction with

:
illustrated
by Mt. 24 2
:
(Lu. 21
1
6), OS oh KaraXvdrjaeTaL,
and Mk. 13
2, os oh
jut)
KaTaXudfj.
2 4 7 8
Draeger, Hist. Synt., Bd. II, p. 527. Cf. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 118. 6 N. T. Cf. K.-G., Bd. II, p. 421.
Moulton, ProL,
p. 185.
M. and T., Goodwin, M. and
p.'
126.
T., p. 217.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 218. See Vitcau, Le Verba, p. 135.
MODE
The
has
classic
(efkaisis)
fut.
961
for purpose with the but Isocrates (IV, 44)
idiom preferred the
ind.
relative (Schmid, Atticismus, IV, p. 621),

e(/)'
oh
^tXon/iTj^coo-tj'.
Radermacher (V.
T. Gr., p. 138) cites

8, 3, 8l'
for the
KOLVT]
Siv ki,k\u(xi.v;
Diod. XI, 21, 3, 8l' ov rpowov Ach. Tatius, IV, 16, 13, 6aov
aveXri; XIV, XAjSp, etc.
Purpose
in the
is
often contemplated result so that the consecutive
idea follows naturally that of design.
Only the
ind. future is
6 irpoaevkyKri
used
N.
T., unless
one follows Blass^ in taking
(Heb.
:
good instance of the future ind. is in Lu. 7 4, which may be profitably compared^ with the ^ non-final use of IVa in Jo. 1 27, Sl^los I'm Xmco. Burton^ prefers to call this a "complementary limitation of the principal clause,"
8
:
3) as result.
a^Los <JTLV
Tape^y,
a sort of secondary purpose.
But the notion
is
rather that of
contemplated result. The relative denotes a kind of consequence from a particular quality or state.^ See also Ph. 2 20 ovdha ptepLpLvqcreL, Mk. 10 29 ovbeh tcmv 6s acfyrJKev exco iaoxf/vxov octtls Cf. 2 Th. 3 3 rriP oiKLav, Lu. 7 49 tLs ovtos eanv 6s /cat afiaprias^ TicTTOS OS with 1 Jo. 1:9 Trtcrros 'Iva. An example^ of the concessive use of oirLves is seen in Jas. 4 14,
:
olVtiês
ovK eiriaTaade
rijs
avpiov ivola
i]
ûrj vp-cbv.
is
The
conditional use of the relative clause
only true in a
The relative 6s and oans, whether with or without av, does not mean rts or eav tls, though the two constructions are very much alike. There is a similarity between el tls deXei (Mk. 9 35) and 6s av deXn (10 :43). But I
modified sense, as already shown.
e'i
:
do not agree to the notion of Goodwin^ and Burton^ that in the relative clauses we have a full-fledged set of conditional sentences on a par with the scheme with the conditional particles. That procedure is entirely too forced and artificial for the Greek freedom and for the facts. There is a general sort of parallel at some points, but it is confusion in syntax to try to overdo it with careful detail as Viteau^ does. "Ap is not confined to the relative and conditional sentences, but occurs with ews, Tplv, ws, tva, owcos (temporal and final clauses). The indefinite relative like 6s eav 32) is quite similar deXi^ (Mk. 8 35) or oans opoXoyrjaeL (Mt. 10 in idea to a conditional clause with kdv tls or el tls. But, after all, it is not a conditional sentence any more than the so-called
:
2 5
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 218. Blass, ib., cites also Uapds Xvaai in
Mk.
'
7.
N. T. M. and T., p. 126. Cf. K.-G., Bd. II, p. 422. Burton, N. T. M. and T.,
m. and T., pp. 195 ff. N. T. M. and T., pp.

Le Vcrbo,
pp. 13(5
fT.
119
fT.
p. 118.
962
NEW TESTAMENT
It
is
causal, final, consecutive relativte clauses are really so.
only
by the context that one

of the relative.
inferentially gets
is
any
of these ideas out
All that
true about the indefinite relative

I
clauses has already been explained under that discussion.

fore pass
there-
by any treatment
of the kinds of conditional sentences
in connection with the relative clauses.

(h)
Negatives in Relative Clauses.

is m'7,
:
When
:
the subj. occurs the
negative
as in
fiii
ds
av
jxri
Ixv (Lu. 8
Mk. 13 we have
XanjSdvtL
2,
OS ov
fxi].
KaraXvdf}.
but ob fxt) is found in So in Mk. 9:1 and Mt. 16 28

18),
:
ov
With the
:
indicative the negative

vjjlwv
is oh,
as in
:
6s ob
(Mt. 10
38); 6s yap ovk eort Kad' relative

is
(Lu. 9
50).
Oc1
casionally
JU17
when the
indefinite the subjective negative
occurs with the indicative.

fjiii
So
c5
fj-fj
irapecrTiv
ravra (2 Pet.
9);
onoXoyeL (1 Jo. 4
3)
mi? ^^t
(Tit. 1:11).
So also
fx-lj
D in Ac.
{ib.,
15
29.
Moulton
jujj
(Prol., p. 171) calls this
use of
a survival of
p.
literary construction.
He
gives also
some papyri examples

^j^
jui)
239) of
IxrjTe
fxrj
in relative clauses:
B.U. 114 (U/a.d.)
awodeSoiKev abrca
bbvarai \a^dv,
C.P.R. 19 (Iv/a.D.) d
avpe(f)Oi)pr]aa.
The
use of
more common in the kolvt] than in the clasHe cites examples sic Greek (Radermacher, N. T.Gr., p. 171). from late Greek writers. There is nothing gained by explaining
in relative clauses is ov in relative clauses after the fashion of
el
ob in conditional sen-
tences as
done by Burton.^ 2. Causal Sentences. These do not properly be(a) Paratactic Causal Sentences. long here, but there are so many of them that they compel The common inferential particle yap introduces an innotice. dependent, not a dependent, sentence. Paul uses it usually to introduce a separate sentence as in Ro. 2:28; 1 Cor. 15:9. In It will be treated in the 17 both 6tl and yap occur. 1 Cor. 10 chapter on Particles. Phrases like av9' cjv (Lu. 12 3), 8l6 (Mt.
is
:
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. Indeed, the subordination of the
loose.^
on and
Cor.
1
:
Stort
clauses
is
often rather
6tl
1
: :
Thus there
in 1
:
is
very
H.) in
little
1
difference
the sentence with

also
h-Ktibr)
:
W.
:
22.
See further
7.
6tl in
between 25 and yap in 2 Cor. 4 6; 7

:
(begins
26.
Cf.
8, 14,
and
biOTi in
1
Ro. 3
20; 8
The
causal sentence
is
primarily para-
N. T. M. and
Blass, Gr. of
T., p. 180.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 274.
Cf. also Burton,
N. T. M.
and. T.,
p. 98,
MODE
tactic.
(efkaisis)
32; 1 Cor. 15
963
:
See Mt. 6
5;
Lu. 11
is
29; Heb. 10
2.
The subordinate
{b)
relative
a later development.^
is
that in the N. T. the
One may say at once always the indicative. There is no complication that arises save with exei when the apodosis of a condition of the second class is used without the protasis as in Heb. 10 2, kirel ovk av eirauaauTo. Here the construction is not due at all to kirel. In the same way we explain ewel Uet in Heb.
With Siihordinating Conjunctions.
mode
26 and
eirei
dxpeiXeTe
apa in
1
Cor. 5
:
10.
There
kirel tL
is ellipsis
also
in the rhetorical question in

in Ac. 5
:
Cor. 15
29,
TOLrjaovatv;
{eav
38
f.
two complete conditional sentences

6rt.
But and ei,
protasis
and apodosis) occur with

is
:
In a word,
it
may
be said
that the indicative
used precisely as in the paratactic sentences.

fw
Kai u/xeTs ^rjaeTe.
:
Cf
Jo. 14
19, oTt eyd}

is
The negative
Jo. 3
:
usually ov as in IJo. 2
ireTriaTevKev,
16.
Once
in the
N. T.,
18, OTL
OTL
/XT]
we have
jui?,
but
ov is seen in 1 Jo.
10,
ov
TreiriaTevKep.
''The former states the charge, quod
non
crediderit,
the latter the
simple
fact,
quod nan credidit"
(Moulton, Prol, p. 171). Cf. on fxi] Cf. Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 162, 535. 5, 8-9.
being more subjective and
ideal.
in Epictetus IV, 4, 11; IV,
The
distinction
:
is
In Heb. 9 17, eTret subtle, /X17 In B. G. U. 530 jir]. meet likewise /X17 TOTe (or M'? TôTe) laxvet, we ae, note kirl (et) tireyi^m xpos ovk on (I/a.D.), CTTt nil avTypa\j/as avT^
/U17
and
OTL OVK with true distinction.

M17
With
ov
we have
the objec-
tive fact, with
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.
It
is
Gr., p. 171.
He
cites
on
nri excts,
Epictetus IV, 10, 34.

avd' oiv in
making inroads on
OTL ov.
We
20,
is
sometimes have
is
and that
true also of odev in
a truly causal sense as in Lu. 1 Mt. 14 7. In Heb. 2 18 fi' a)

: :
practically causal.
So also
Cf.
k<t>'
e^'
a)
is
causal in Ro. 5
P.
12; 2
49).
Cor. 5:4; Ph. 4:10.
Scbaet,
Oxy. 38
See
(a.d.
e0'
The
classical
e<^' cS
re
does not occur in the N. T.
Sdjcret,
'on condition that he give,' P. Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66). Then cos has almost the force of a causal particle in Mk. 9 Jo. 19 33; Mt. 6 12 (cf. Lu. 11 4, Kal yap) 2 Tim. 1 3.
: : :
;
21;
The
same thing
Heb. 7 20
:
is
true of
:
KaOcos in Jo.
e<^'
17
2.
Ka^'
:
6(top is
causal in
KadoTL in
(9
27)
and
oaov in
:
Mt. 25
40, 45.
8l6tl.
I,
So
Lu. 19 9
:
(cf.
1:7).
In Ac. 17 31
HLP.
read
None
of these
'
Cf. Nilsson, Die Kaiisalsiitzo
iin (iriecli. bis Arist.
Die Pocsie.
964
NEW TESTAMENT
but they come to be so used in cerWe have cos 6tl in 2 Cor. 5 19; cos OTt deds rjv ev Xptcrrco Koaixov KaTaWaaaiov eaurcp (cf. our "since that"). Here the Vulgate has quoniam. But in 2 Cor. 11:21 the Vulgate renders cbs on by quasi, as in 2 Th. 2:2, cos on kuecrTrjKev. Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 321 f. It is found also in Esther 4 14 and is post-classical.^ Alotl is found in the Lucan writings, the Pauhne Epistles, Hebrews, James and 1 Peter. In the modern Greek^ it takes the form yLari. Once (Ro. 8 21) some MSS. (W. H. read on) have 8l6tl in the sense of objective 6tl ('that') as in later Greek (cf. late Latin quia = quod). Instances of causal 5t6n may be seen in Lu. 1 13; Ro. 1 19, etc. It is compounded of 5td and on (cf. English "for that"). In Ph. 2 26 8l6tl is causal and 6tl is declarative. In modern Greek 5t6n survives in 17 Kadapevovaa. The vernacular has a(j)ov, ewL8r}, yLari (Thumb, Handh., p. 194).
particles are strictly causal,
tain contexts in the later Greek.
But
tactic*
all
other causal particles are insignificant beside 6tl which

in use.^
It
grew steadily
In
1
was
originally merely relative
and para-
Jo. 4: 3 note 6
(cf. 6tl
6tl
accusative neuter 6tl

is
Ro. 4: 21. It is av TpoaSaTavrjays in Lu. 10 35) and

6tl
and
in
more common
5:9
OTL
as the objective particle in indirect discourse
(subject or object clause) than as a causal conjunction.

Jo.
In
occurs
twice, once
:
as causal
and once as objec'
In 2 Th. 3 7 f exegesis alone can determine the In Jo. 3:19 Chrysostom takes on = because.' Cf. also Jo. 16 8-11 (see Abbott, Johannine Gr., p. 158). The English "the reason that" (vernacular "the reason why") is similar. It is very common in 1 John in both senses. In Jo. 1:15 ff.
tive particle.
.
nature of
otl.
causal OTL occurs three times in succession.

Xvofiep avTov otl ovk a.Ko'KovdeL fied' rjixdv,
In Lu. 9
is
49, kco-
the present
used because
:
of a sort of implied
read
5 9
:
otl ovk r]Ko\oWeL.
8.
In Mk. 9 38 W. H. good example of causal otl is seen in Ro. The precise idea conveyed by otl varies greatly. In Jo.
indirect discourse.
17,
t'l
(XV
\kyeLS irepl avTOV, otl rjveuêp aov tous 6<^âX/iOLis; the use
:
between objective and causal. Cf. also Mk. 6 17. But we need not appeal to the Hebrew^ for a justification of this balancing of two ideas by otl. So in Jo. 2 18, rt (xripLetov 8hKvvH^ rjfuv, OTL TavTa xotets; Akin to this construction is that in
of OTL wavers
:
Viteau,
Le Verbe,
in
p. 98.
' *
lb.
2 *
As Viteau does
:
Le Verbe,
p. 100.
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 189. The LXX does show the idiom, as
in
1 Kl. 1
8, xi
tan
aot,
otl (cXatets;
1;
:
MODE
Jo. 14
4.
:
(efkaisis)
is
965
rl otl in
22, TL yeyopev otl,

is
:
which
shortened into
Ac. 5
a correspondence sometimes between 5td tovto and Oux on may be OTL (Jo. 10 17); ovrm and on (Ro. 9 31 f.). In either objective or causal as in Ph. 4 11, 17; 2 Th. 3:9.
There
the ancient Greek

say.'
or 'I
meant 'not only do I say that, but I also But in the N. T. it either means 'I say this not because' do not mean to say that,' and usually the latter according
it
to Abbott.i
We
must have a word about

kivei-br]-Tcep
kird, eTeid-f], kireibriTcep.
As a matter
This
in
is
of fact
(note the composition) appears in the N. T.
only in Lu.
(Luke's classical introduction).

'EireLbi] is
is
un-
doubtedly a literary touch.^ and Ac. 13 46, but exet be

:
read by
W. H.
Lu. 7:
put in the margin.

Acts)
1
Eight other
(1
examples remain,
rinthians
all
in
Luke (Gospel and

.
and Paul
1
:
Co-
and Philippians)
Cf. Lu. 11:6;
Cor.
21
f.
'Eird,
obsolescent in the late Greek,^
is almost confined to Luke, Paul, Elsewhere in Matthew, Mark and John. Two of these are examples of the temporal use (Mk. 15:42; Lu. 7 1 W. H. marg.). The ordinary causal sense is well illustrated in Mt. 21 46, eiret ds ir po4>i]Tr]v elxov. The classical idiom of the ellipsis with eireL has already been mentioned and is relatively fre-
the author of Hebrews.
quent in the N. T. Heb. 9 26; 10 2.

: :
Cf. Ro. 3
6; 11
22; 1 Cor. 14
16; 15
29;
iru>s
It occurs in the simplest
form
:
in
eTrei
(Ro. 3
it is
6)
and
kird ri (1
Cor. 15
29).
In
Cor. 14
16, kird kdv,
equivalent to 'otherwise' and in Ro. 11:22 to
'else,' eiret koL
av
/c/co7n7<rg.
The apodosis
:
of a condition of the second class oc:
curs in
Cor. 5
10;
Heb. 9
26; 10
2.
Greek sometimes used el (conceived as an hypothesis) rather than otl (a direct reason).* The N. T. shows examples of davjxa^co el in this sense (Mk. 15 44; 1 Jo. 3 13), though davjidôi otl is found also* (Lu. 11: 38; Gal. 1 "On is the N. T. construction^ with dyavaKTeco (Lu. 13 14); 6). eôp.o\oyeotiaL (Mt. 11 25); evxapLaTeco (Lu. 18 11); fxeXeL (Mk. 4 Cf. 5n and e4>' 4i in 23). 20); xoXaco (Jo. 7 38); xatpco (Lu. 10 Ph. 4 10. On the possible causal use of ore and oTav see article by Sheppard, The CI Rev., Sept., 1913.
Verbs of emotion in
classical
: : :
: :
This matter received (c) Relative Clauses. under Relative Clauses. For examples of
sufficient discussion
6s
take Ro. 8
p. 101.
32
Job. Gr. p. 162.

Cf. ib.
Viteau,
Le Verbe,
Jann., Hiat. Gk. Gr., p. 454.
*
i
Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 101.
966
For oam note Mt. 7:15; Ro. 6:2. See also ov and 8l' riv alriav (8 47). The construction is common in (d) Ata TO and the Infinitive. the N. T., occurring thirty-two times according to Votaw^ as compared with thirty-five for the 0. T. and twenty-six for the Apocrypha. It is particularly frequent in Luke.^ Cf. Lu. 2:4; 8 6; Ac. 4 2; 8 11, etc. It is not in John except in 2 24, 5ta TO avTov jLvuaKeLv. Blass^ rejects it here because the Lewis MS. and Nonnus do not have the passage. Here note that 6tl is used side by side with 5td to. So in Jas. 4 2 f we have 5id to /it) alTeiadaL vfj-as and Stort /ca/ccos aiTeiade on a parity. Cf Ph. 1 7, In Mk. 5 4, 5td to bebkadai Kai dLeairaadai, /cat Kad(j:s and 5td to. (TvvTeTpi4>daL, note the perfect tense and the repetition of the inBurton^ thinks that here 5id gives rather the evidence finitive. than the reason. Why not both? There is one example of the Feb. 12:6.
xapLv (Lu. 7 47)
:
:
instrumental use of the infinitive to express cause,

(2 Cor. 2
(cf.
:
tc3
firj
ebpetv
jie
13).
The
:
text of
has six examples in the
LXX^
eTri
2 Chron. 28
22, tc3 OXl^t^vul avTov).
No
examples of
t<3
occur.*
(e)
The Participle.
We
fir]
do not have
aTe, olov, ola, as in classical
Greek, to give the real reason.

ciple as in SiKatos
is
cov Kal
That
is
deXcov avT-qv
given simply by the partibuy fiaTlaaL (Mt. 1 19). It

:
"exceedingly
:
common" (Moulton,
But
cos
Prol., p. 234).
Cf. Jas. 2
25; Ac. 4
21.
occurs with the participle to give the al-
leged reason, which
may
be the real one or mere assumption.

cos ol
Thus
in
Mt. 7
28
f., cos
eôvalav exoov Kai ovx
ypannaTeis, the
first cos
gives the ostensible (and true ground) of the astonishment

Cf. also Lu. 16
:
of the people.
cos airo(jTpkcf)ovTa
1;
Ac. 2
tov \a6v, Pilate does
2. But in Lu. 23 14, not believe the charge against

: : :
Jesus to be true.
3.
So also with
cos
fxeWovTuv in Ac. 27 30.

discussion in
Comparative Clauses. The

all of relative origin,
my
Short Gram-
mar^ forms the basis

are
of this section.
The conjunctions employed but the construction deserves separate
treatment.
(a)
in
is
The Relative octos. This is a classic idiom and occurs only Hebrews, except once in Mark. In Heb. 1 4 the correlative expressed and the comparative form of the adjective is found
:
The Use
24
of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.

:
Mr. H. Scott notes

"
pres. 24,
aor. 1 (Mt.
2 * "
7 times. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 236. Votaw, The Use of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 101.
12), perf
.
N. T. M. and
T., p. 161.
p. 29.
^
Chapter XXVIII.
MODE
in
(efkaisis)
967
both clauses.
Both
correlative
and
relative are here in the

6(rix)
instrumental case, roaovTco KpdrTwv

(f)Op<j}Tepov Trap'
yevofxevos Toiv a/yyekoiv
5ia-
aureus
:
KeK\r]pov6p.r]Kev 'dvop-a.
The same phenomena

is
are present in 8
6,
save that the correlative
absent.
In 10
25
there is no comparative in the relative clause. The others are examples of koB' oaov. In 3 3 there is no correlative, but the comparative appears in both clauses. In 7 20 f the correlative is Kara touovto, but there is no comparative in the relative clause.
:
This is probal)ly causal in idea, as is true of Kad' oaov in 9 27, where there is no comparative, though we have the correlative The example in Mk. 7 36, oaov be avrols Steo-TeXXero ouTcos Kal. avTol paXXov TrepLaaorepov eKrjpvaeov, lacks the correlative and has no comparative with the relative, but has a double comparison in
:
the principal clause.

relative,
In Jo. 6
11
not a conjunction.
The The
:
and Rev. 21 16, 6aou is simplycausal and temporal uses of

:
oaov are discussed elsewhere.

(6)
Relative 6s with Kara.

:
singular Kadb
is
found only in
:
Ro. 8
is
26 Kadb
SeT,
Pet. 4
13 Kadd KOLvuveire,
KaBo iav exd evrpocrdeKTOs, oh Kadd ova exet,
and 2 Cor. 8 12 where a good distinction
drawn between the subjunctive and the indicative. Cf. 0. P. The construction with eav is ixLffdol pepos. The like that of the indefinite relative with eav (av) and the subj. plural Kada is found only once in the N. T. (Mt. 27 10). Ka^dTrep, however, is found seventeen times (three doubtful as compared with Kadoos, Ro. 9 13; 10 15; 2 Cor. 3 18) and all in Paul's It is thoroughly writings save in Heb. 4:2 (without verl)). Attic and a shght literary touch. Cf. 1 Cor. 10 10. The mode
1125, 14 (ii/A.D.) KaOo
:
is
always indicative, but cf Kada apeaKri in Gen. 19 8. In Ro. 12 4 the correlative is ourcos. It occurs only twice (Ac. (c) 'KadoTL in a Comparative Sense. 2 45 4 35) and the same idiom precisely each time, KadoTL av tls xpdav elxev. Here av seems to particularize each case from time to time (note imperfect tense), the iterative use of av (Moulton,
.
ProL, p. 167). This usage approaches the temporal in idea. The classic idiom of the aorist ind. with av no longer appears with
these conjunctions.
Compounds. These are the most common comparative particles. The most frequent of all is cos itself which has various other uses as exclamatory (<hs wpaTot ol iroSes in Ro. 10
((/)
'fis
and
its
15), declarative like
bn
(Ac. 10
28), causal (Mt. 6

:
12),
temporal
(Lu. 12
particle
58),
(cbs
reXeiwaco,
with the infinitive (Lu. 9 52; Hel). 7: 9), as a final Ac. 20 24, W. H. text), with superlative
:
: ;
968

rdxio-Ta,
:
NEW TESTAMENT
SicrxtXiot
with the sense of 'about,' as cos participles (cos iieXKuu, Ac. 23 The richness of this particle is thus illustrated. But the 20). comparative relative adverb is the origin of them all. In Heb.
adverbs (ws
Ac. 17:
15),
(Mk. 5
13)
and with
11;
cos
may
parative than anything

oiircos
be consecutive 'so,' but cos is more often comelse. Usually cos has a correlative. Thus
:
cos
(1
;
Cor. 4
cos
1)
cibs
ourcos
(Ac. 8
Cor. 7
cos
/cat
14)
/cat
(Gal. 1:9); tVos
32)
cos
oiJtcos /cat
:
cbs
/cat
(Ac. 11
17)
/cat
(2
(Mt. 18 :33). But often no correlative is expressed (cf. 13).^ The verb is not always expressed. Thus cos oi viroKpi.This predicate use of cbs is very extensive. Cf. rai (Mt. 6:5). The mode is usually the indicative, as in COS Kat (1 Cor. 7:7).
Mt. 8
Mk.
10
1,
but the subj. occurs in Mk. 4
26,
cbs
avdpwTos âXji
it is
(cf. cbs oi'K
oUev).
Blass^ considers this "quite impossible," but
and others read orav, but surely eav (av) is not "indispensable" to the subj. (cf. Mt. 10 33). In Gal. 6:10, cbs Kaipov exô/xej', the temporal cbs is likewise minus av. See Relative Clauses and discussion of av which is by no means necessary in these subj. clauses. Cf. Radermacher, N. T.
read by }{BD.
late
eav
:
Some
MSS. add
Gr., p. 164.
In
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
;
Kat
ourcos
9)
;
/cat
(Col. 3
13)
/cat
Ka^cbs
:
oi5rcos
/cat
(2 Cor.
1
:
8:6);
;
/ca^cbs
Kat
(Ro.
13)
to.
Ka^cbs
Kat
So
in
(Jo. 15
oMotcos Ka^cbs
is
(Lu. 17
28),
and note Kara
avra in verse
6).
is
30.
The
1
:
correlative
Ka^cbs
1
not always expressed (Mt. 21:
Col.
6,
Kat.
Sometimes the principal clause
unex-
pressed as in
12; Jo. 6
:
58).
it
Tim. 1:3, or only ov occurs, as ov KaQws (1 Jo. 3 It is a late word but is aJ3undant in the papyri.
occurs only with the indicative.
1
In the N. T.
The word,
:
as
already noted, sometimes has a causal sense (Ro.
28).
It
may
have a temporal
question in Ac. 15
signification in Ac. 7: 17.

:
It occurs in indirect
read only once in
and is epexegetical in 3 Jo. 3. Ka0cbo-7rep is the N. T. (Heb. 5:4), though W. H. put it in

14,
:
the margin in 2 Cor. 3
18 (text
Kadairep).
:
'ficret
has no verb
it
(cf.
Mt. 3
16;
Mk.
26, etc.) in the
occurs with the participle (had

:
Trpo/Sara uri
but though exovra -n-oifxha (Mt.

is classical,
N.
T.,
9
in
36).
Cf. also Ro. 6

:
13.
is
It is
used in the sense of 'about' as

in the
Lu
1
14, 28, etc.
It
commonest
Gospels and Acts.

Le Verbe,
p. 142.
In general correlatives are rare in the

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 321.
LXX.
Viteau,
MODE
In 2 Cor. 10
:
(ErKAisis)
969
we have d)s av eK(l)o^tLv (here alone in the N, T. "Qairep occurs with the in=' as if to frighten.' with infinitive) 14 6:2. In Mt. 25 a paralile is thus introMt. dicative as in But have the correlative in correlative. we with no but duced,
9
:
Ro. 5
19 (6 :4),
(hairep
:
ovtcos
cbairep
Kai.
So Jo. 5
(13
:
21.
So
cbairep
cbcraiiTcos
(Mt. 25
14-18);
ourcos
40).
We
find cbarep
Often the verb is wholly (cf. Ac. 2:2). wanting as in Mt. 6 7. We meet cbcrxepet only once (1 Cor. 15 8) and that without a verb. These are all relative adverbial sentences 4. Local Clauses. and are usually treated with relative sentences, but they are worthy of a separate note. The adverbs (conjunctions) used are With odev only the indicative is found as in Lu, odev, ov, oTTOv. 11: 24, odep t^rjKOop. More common than od^v is ov as in Mt. 2 Cf. past perfect in Ac. 20 8. It occurs mainly 9, OX) rjv TO Tvaiblov. in Luke's writings and always with the indicative save once in Here the indefinite relative natu1 Cor. 16 6, ov kav TropevwfxaL. OS is used with verbs of motion rally has av and the subjunctive.
also with the participle
:
as well as with those of rest as this passage shows.
Cf. also Lu.
10
1,
o5 TJiieWev avrds epxec^daL.
But
oirov is
the usual local con-
junction in the N. T., particularly in Matthew, Mark and John It occurs with verbs of rest as in Mk. (Gospel and Revelation).
4, oirov
rjv,
and
of
motion as in Jo. 7
Once,
34, oirov uTrdyco.
The
indicative
pevero,
is
the usual mode.
Mk.
56,
oirov
av eiaeTo-
emphasize the notion of repetition in the imCf. oirov i]6eXs (Jo. 21 is not necessary. Note the emphatic negative in 6tov ov 0eXcts (ih.). Cf. also 18). oTov av U7rd7ets (Rev. 14 4) where av occurs with the present ind. (indefinite relative). In ottou cfydyu} (Mk. 14 14; Lu. 22 11), as already explained, the subj is prolâbly deliberative, answering to
we
find av to
perfect tense, but this
TTOV 4>aycjo
in the direct question.
Cf. ovk exet irov
rriv Ke(i)a\r]v kXIvj]

:
(Lu. 9
57)
is
58).
But the
subj. with eav in otov kav airepxv (Lu. 9
the
:
common
futuristic subj.
:
So in the
28; 26
:
parallel passage in
Mt. 8
14
:
19.
See further Mt. 24

Curiously enough
all
13;
Mk.
10; 9
18;
9, 14.
the N. T. instances of otov with
the subj. are found in the Synoptic Gospels. There is ellipsis of the copula in Rev. 2 13, as is not infrequent with relatives.
:
used also in metaphorical relations, as in Heb. 9 16. The correlative adverb exet occasionally appears with oirov as in Lu. 12:34; 17:37; Jo. 12:26. Kal is a correlative in Jo. 17:24.
"Oirov is
:
The
use of
oirov in classical
tences, but the
Greek is confined to indefinite senN. T. shows a frequent use (especially in John)
970

is
:
where there
5.
a definite antecedent.*
1, etc.
Cf. Jo. 1
28; 4 :46; 7:
42; 10 :40; 12
(a)
Temporal Clauses. 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 exhibit 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 Thompson'* sees the matter rightly when is surely going too far. original relative import becomes specialized." "The vague he says: find both definite and indefinite temporal expect Hence we to
clauses as with other relative (and local) clauses.
Definite tem'Itj-
poral clauses
aovs
roiis
may
:
be illustrated by Mt. 7 28,

:
oTe tTektcev 6
The indefinite is shown in Jo. 15 26, orav eXdri 6 Trapd/cXTjros. The temporal clause may be indefinite in its futurity, frequency and duration.^ Indefinite futurity is the most common, indefinite duration the least common. The modes used in temporal clauses in the N. T. are
\6yovs tovtovs, eêTrXrjaaoPTo
ol
oxXot.
These uses conform to the development of the two modes. There is one example of the optative in a temporal clause (Ac. 25 16, vpds ovs aiveKpithe indicative and the suljjunctive.
historical
:
drjv OTL oi'K ecFTLV
Wos
"Pco/xatots xc-Ptr^crôit riva
avOpwirov ivplv
tottop
t)
6 KaTt)-
yopovfjLeuos
Kara
irpoacoTrou
exoL tovs
Karr^ybpovs
is
re
airoXoyias
is
Xd|8ot Trept Tov eyK\r]paTos).
Here, as
evident, the optative
due
to indirect discourse, not to the temporal clause.

tive with av {irplv
r)
The subjunc-
av exv Te
XajSri)
occurs rather than the optain the
tive according to sequence of modes.
and a
classic idiom,
and so
is
found
writings.
Observe that
is
eaTLP is
This sequence was optional N. T. only in Luke's retained in the indicative. This
sentence
a fine illustration of the Greek subordinate clauses.

it is
In the context in Acts

cede the Tp\v
r?
seen that four dependent clauses pre-
clause in the long sentence.
The
use of ap or kav
in temporal clauses has very

relative clauses.
much
the same history as in other
The usage varies with different conjunctions be noted in each instance. The point of time in the temporal clause may be either past, present or future. It is a rather complicated matter, the Greek temporal clause, but not so much so as the Latin cum clause, "in which the Latin lanand
will
1
Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 152
f.
*
^
Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 329.

lb., p. 328.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 218. N. T. M. and T., pp. 118, 126
ff.
MODE
(etkaisis)
971
guage is without a parallel."* The different constructions may be conveniently grouped for discussion. Just as the optative with temporal clauses vanished, so there came a retreat of vaAs a result in the later Greek the rious temporal conjunctions.
construction
(6)
is
much
simpler.^
'
Conjunctions Meaning
When.'
The
classic
use of the opGr., p. 130).

'ETret
tative for repetition with such clauses has .been effectually side-
tracked in the vernacular
kolvti
(Radermacher, N. T.
1
Only the
gin in
ind.
and
subj.
modes occur
:
in these clauses.
has
vanished^ in this sense, save in Lu. 7
where
it is
a variant (mar-
Curiously temporal use of kireLbri It is a definite point of time in in the N. T., cTrttSi) eTrXrjpcâev. the past and naturally the indicative occurs. There are three
Nestle) for
eirtihi],
W. H. and
the correct text.
enough
this is also the only instance of the
examples of eTav with the subjunctive (Mt. 2:8, e-n-ap evprire; Lu. 11:22, eirap vLK-nay; 11:34, eirav fl where it is parallel with There are only two instances of rivlKa (2 Cor. 3 15, orav fi).
:
16, "qviKa av avayuwaKrjTaL, fjulKa eap
eTrL(TTpe\f/ri).
It
is
the indefieav (indefi-
nite idea as
the subjunctive shows.
Note
au
and
nite also
oTT^re
and with notion

in
of repetition).
3,
Nestle
(AEH)
reads
but W. H. and Souter (}>{BCD) have ore. 'OrdTav does not occur in the N. T. "Ore and orau are both common and in all parts of the N. T. The conneceireipaaev
Lu. 6
tion between
ore (cf. 6-dep,
Brugmann,
Griech. Gr., p.
254) and
Homeric
ore as
ore
and
6s
re
(Monro, Ho7n.
Gr., p. 191) is disputed.^
from 6s and on from oo-rts. Homer used a causal conjunction like on. Only the indicative (see below) mode appears with ore in the N. T., but it occurs with past, present and future. Usually the events are definite, as in Mt.
Cf. the conjunction 6
21
1,
ore riyyiaap ds 'lepocroXujua.

:
The present
ffj
tense
:
is rare,
as in
ore ykyopa api]p in 1 Cor. 13
11; ore
in
Hcb. 9
17.
In
Mk.
11:1 kyylôvaiv is the historic present. The great bulk of the examples are in the past with the aorist indicative, though the imperfect occurs for custom or repetition, as in Jo. 21: 18; Col. 3:7. The future indicative is naturally indefinite even when
oTt is 16.
preceded by a word
Incorporated in
like copa (Jo.
21, 23) or
y]txkpa
(Ro. 2
W.
H.).
Souier's Rev. Text (so
W.
H.) has
W.
G. Hale, Stud,
in Class. Thilol.,
The Cum
Constructions, 1SS7, p. 259.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 4GG.

'Eirtf
Cf.
Monro, Horn. Gr:, p. 226. was rare in Homer. Monro, Horn. Gr., pp. ISO ff.; Brug., Grioch. Gr.,
f.
p.
501; Riem. and
Goelzer, Synt., p. 411
972

in Lu. 13
is
:
eojs eiTrr]Te
35,
but Nestle
still
reads ews ^êt ore elwnTe.

av.
oo-rts.
The
text
in
much
confusion, but at
any rate here
evidence for the subjunctive with ore without mony with what we saw was true of 6s and
is manuscript This is in har-
It is also
well-known Homeric idiom.^

cites 6t ap^TjTat (Vettius, pp.
Radermacher
106, 36).
(A''.
T. Gr., p. 164)
"Orav naturally occurs

time.
more frequently with the subjunctive for indefinite future It is usually the aorist tense, as in Mt. 24 33, orav U-qre.
:
The
present subj. does occur

as in
when the notion

Cf.
5,
of repetition
:
is
implied,
Mt. 15
2,
orav aprov iaeiwuLv.

(Jo. 9
:
Mt. 6
is
2.
Once the idea
of duration
but usunot necessary to take the common aorist subj. here as the Latin futurum exactum? Cf orav Trapabdl in Mk. 4 29. The av {ore av) is always present
Koafjiw &),
seems manifest
orav kv rw
It
ally it is future uncertainty simply.
of Lu. 13 35. "Ore with the subj. found in poetry and in the Byzantine writers.^ So Test. XII Pat. Levi 2 10 ore aveXdrjs eKtt. On the other hand a number of examples occur of orav with the indicative (cf. eav and 6tov av with the indicative). Homer, Iliad, 20, 335, has oTe Kev ^vfjL(3\i]elirriTe
:
save in the doubtful ore
is
So in Rev. 4 9 we find orav 86:aov(nv. The close affinform and meaning of the aorist subj. with the future indicative should cause no surprise at this idiom. In Lu. 13 28 BD read orav bxpeaOe, though W. H. put 6\}/r}ade in the text. A good many manuscripts Hkewise have orav with the future ind. in Mt. 10 19 and 1 Tim. 5:11. Cf. brav 'iarac in Clem.,
aeai avrco.
:
ity in
p. 168) notes in the papyri only a small number of examples of dv with temporal clauses and the
1.
Cor. 2, 12,
Moulton (ProL,
ind.
Thus
orav eî^pev in Par. P. 26 (ii/B.c); eirav

a.d.); biroTav avaipovvTat in
kTrvdop.-i)v
in
It
B. U. 424
is
(ii/iii
B. U. 607
(ii/A.D.).
common
and
in the
LXX,
Polybius, Strabo, etc.

TV.
See Jannaris,
Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 463;

{Cit.
Radermacher,
T. Gr., p. 164.
Ramsay
B.,
ii,
p. 477, no. 343) gives orav efcov
eyw a ''curious
anti-Christian inscription" (Moulton, Prol., p. 239). few instances occur of orav with the present indicative. So orav arrjKere in Mk. 11 25. Here^ some MSS. have the subj., as in Ro.
:
2 14 some read orav TroteT. Cf also various readings in Mk. 13 4, 7. This construction is not unknown in earlier writers, though more common in the kolvt]. Cf. Ex. 1 16; Ps. 101 3;
:
.
Cf. Mutzbauer, Konjunktiv und Optativ, p. 97. W.-M., p. 387. Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 125. Cf. Jannaris, Hist. Gk. Cf. W.-M., p. 388.
Gr., p. 463.
MODE
Prov.
126.
subj.
1
:
(efkaisiz)
Strabo,
973
I,
22; Josephus, Ant.,

:
xii, 2, 3;
1,
7; Act. Apocr.,
In 2 Cor. 12
Cf. 1 Th. 3
:
10, orav aadevib,

8, eav aTrjKeTe.
we probably have the present The examples of orav with the
more numerous. In Thucydand diroTe indefinite.^ "Orav with the optative appears in Xenophon.^ The Atticists have kwtibav and biroTav {sic) with the opt. (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 1G5). In the KOLVT] the field of orav is widened, as already shown. Agaaorist or imperfect indicative are
ides ore
was always
definite
thias uses orav with the aorist indicative.^ It is common in the Septuagint to have orav with past tenses (Gen. 38 1 1 1 Sam. 17:34, orav ^pxero; Ps. 119:7, orav kXakovv; Num. 11:9; Ps. 118 32; Dan. 3:7).'' The usual notion is that of indefinite re:
petition.
kyeveTO to
Thus we note
b'eov.
it
I,
in Polybius 4, 32, 5, orav ixh ovtol rjaav,

1,
Strabo
7 has oTav
eap.
.
(prjalf.
Cf. also 13, 7, 10.
In Tobit 7: 11 observe
56.
ovrore
In
Mk.
11
avTov Weiopovv, -wpoakinirTOV avrw.
Cf owov av and
ocrot
we have orav av in Mk. 6

:
But the
kolv-t]
writers used oTav with the aorist indicative for
a definite occurrence.
This is common in the Byzantine^ writers. In the modern Greek oTav is freely used with the indicative.^ See
els
Philo II, 112, 23, OTav

correct,
evoLa rjXOev.
Blass^ calls this quite in-
though the LXX has cos au 'e^rjXOev 'la/cw/S (Gen. 27:30; cf. 6:4) of "a single definite past action.^" There are two examples in the N. T., Mk. 11 19, otuu d^pe kyeveTO, eêTopevovTo e^w TTJs TToXecos (possible to understand it as repetition), and Rev, 8
: :
1,
OTav TqvoL^tv
Tr]v
acppayiSa
ttjv i^b6p.r]v.
But, as Moulton
{Prol.,
p. 248) observes, it is possible to regard eêiropevovTo in
Mk.
11
19 as pictorial rather than iterative and the papyri examples of OTav, as seen above, allow either usage. Simcox^ explains this
"lapse" on the ground that
Mark and
kolvt).
the tûthor of the Apoca-
lypse are the least correct of the N. T. writers.
But the idiom

'Ocrd/cis is
belonged to the vernacular

fxev
See Ex. 16
OTav
3, 6(f)e\ov airedavo-
eKadiaa/jLev eirl toov XejSrjTwv Kal ri(T6iop.ev ixpTovs.
only used with the notion of indefinite repetition.

*
It
occurs
1897, p. 73.
Winifred Warren, A Study of Conjunctional Temp. Clauses in Thucydi<les, *0t is found twice in 1 Thuc. with the optative, but Miss ^^'arren
oirore.
reads
^
Biiumlein, Unters. iiber die griech.

Reffel,
Modi und
die Piirtik. Kkv
und
df, 1S46,
p. 322.
'
*
*
'
Viteau,
Uber den Sprachgebr. dcs Agathias, Lc Verbe, p. 123; W.-M., p. 388 f.

p. 389.

p. 24.
W.-M.,
lb.;
Mullach, Vulg., p. 368. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 218.
W.-M.,
p. 389.
p. 111.
Lang, of the N. T.,
974

:
NEW TESTAMENT
three times in the N. T. (1 Cor. 11 25 f.; Rev. 11:6), each time with eav and the subjunctive. These points are all obvious.
N. T. as a temporal conjunction. adverb from 6s and occurs in a variety of constructions. The temporal use is closely allied to the comparative. Cf. cos eXdXet -qixlv hv rrj 68Q (Lu. 24 32). So Jo. 12 36. The temporal aspect is sharp in Mk. 9 21 where cos means 'since.' The examples in the N. T. are usually in the aorist
'fis
is
rather
common
in the
It
is
originally a relative
or imperfect indicative as in Jo. 6

refer to definite incidents.
12, 16;
:
Ac. 8
36 and chiefly
In
Cor. 12
2, dis
av i]yeade,
wc have
the imperfect ind. with av for the notion of repetition
(cf. orap).
So
cos
in Aristeas 7, 34,
av) is
cos av rjvâvro. In modern Greek aav (from used for 'when' (Thumb, Handh., p. 192). The use of
cos
ai'='as if
is
that of conditional, not modal,
av,
and
is
very
(Moulton, Prol., p. 167). As early as i/B.c. the papyri show examples of

in the papyri
common
See Conditions.
inally
cos
ai'='as soon as').

p. 206;
Cf.
cos av=6Tav (origRadermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 164;
Rhein. Mus., 1901,

Gr., p. 164) gives
aiJieLvov edoêv,
Hib. P.
I,
44, 45.
Radermacher
(A^.
cos
T.
av
cos
av
olfxai,
Dion. Hal. and Dio Chrys.,
Luc. Alex. 22.
But
:
cos is
used a few times with the

1
subjunctive, thrice with av (Ro. 15:24;

23),
Cor. 11:34; Ph. 2:
once without av (Gal. 6

this futuristic subj.
10),
cos
Kaipov 'Ixîxev.
In classical
Greek
248 f.). With the last temporal use cos av is not

TToo-os xpojôs
would have av (Moulton, Prol., p. construction compare Mk. 4 26. In the

:
common
:
in Attic.
cos
In
Mk.
21 note
COS.
In Ac. 17
15
cos
we have
rdxto^ra,
a remnant
It is
of the rather frequent use of
with superlative adverbs.

:
possible that Kadcos has a temporal sense in Ac. 7
17
(cf.
2 Mace.
1:31).
The Group Meaning 'Until' ('While'). The words in this have a more complex history than those in the preceding one. They are axpt, êxpt, ecos and Tpiv. "Axpt (twice in the N. T., cixpts. Gal. 3 19 and Heb. 3 13) is more frequently a preposition (cf. dxpt Kaipov, Lu. 4 13) than a conjunction. It is rare in Greek prose and dxpt o.v only in poetry.^ But Philo (I, 166, 20)
(c)
list
has dxpis av a(3eaLe. But the simple conjunction is less frequent than the compound form (preposition and relative), as axpt ov (Lu. 21:24) and dxpt v^ rinepas (Mt. 24:38). Sometimes the MSS. vary between axpi, pêxph and ecos, as in Mt. 13 30 (preposition). Cf. Ac. 1 22. Past tenses of the indicative are used of an actual historical event. No example of the simple cixpt ap:
'
Meisterh.-Schwyzer, Gr. d. attisch. Inschr., p. 251.
MODE
(ErKAiz:i2)
975
pears in this construction in the N. T., but

(Ac. 7:18)
we have
axpi ou afkcrr]
and dxpt
^s
rffxkpas is
elarjXdev
(Lu. 17:27).
:
The only
instance of the present ind.

KaXetrat.
ecos).
in
Heb. 3
13, axpts ou to arjiiepov
Here the meaning

use
is
is
'so long' (linear) or 'while' (cf.
The more common
with reference to the indefinite
In two instances (Rev. 17:17, axpt reXecrdriaovTai, and 2 25, axpt ov au t/^co. This latter could be aorist subj.) the future Elsewhere we meet the sul)junctive, either indicative is read.
future.
:
without
(iv
(axpt
(j^ypayldwixev
in
Rev. 7
3 and axpt TeXeadfj in
20:3, 5; axpi- ou eXdy in 1 Cor. 11:26; cixpt ^s rin'epas yevrjTat in Lu. 1 20) or with iiv (axpts au l\dii in Gal. 3 19, though W. H.
: :
Here the time is relatively future to the principal verb TrpoaereOri, though it is secondary. The subj. is retained instead of the optative on the principle of indirect discourse. As a matter of fact av occurs only twice, the other
put just axpis
ou in
the margin).
instance being Rev. 2

1107, 3 (v/a.d.).
25 above.
Cf. axpi-s orav
TrXripwdrj.
O. P.
MkxpLs (so twice,

:
Mk. 13:30;
Gal. 4
19,
and
once (xexph Eph. 4 13) occurs only three times as a conjuncIn Eph. 4 13 it is iJ-expt- simply, in the other examples tion. In all three instances the aorist subj. is used without IJLexpLs ou.
:
ixu
for the indefinite future.
The
use as a preposition
:
is
more
(Heb.
frequent.
Cf. /xexpt 'loâuov (Lu. 16

It
16)
and
m^XP^s
kolvti
a'C/jLaros
12
4).
means 'up
to the point of.'^

Aiexpt
(cf.
The
writers
show
a rather varied use of
Diodorus, Strabo, Polybius,
Josephus, Justin Martyr).
and
p.
tikxpi-s
ou
They, like the papyri, have /xexpt with and without av (Radermacher, A^. T. Gr.,
is
140).
"Ecos
much more
ovpavou,
frequent in the N. T. both as

11: 23)
preposition
(cf. ews
is
Mt.
and as conjunction.
The
prepositional use
illustrated also in ews rod eXdelv (Ac. 8 :40).
The
prepositional use
(more frequent than the conjunctional)

rjos
goes back as far as Aristotle and denotes the terminus ad quern.

"Ecos is Attic for
Homeric
:
and Doric
.
as.-
As with
axpi-
and
2:9), ecus ou (Mt. 14 22) and cws otou (5 25) It is used both with the indicative and the sul)junctive. When an actual event is recorded in the past only the aorist indicative is used. This is the usual classic idiom.^ So ecos rjXdev (Mt. 24:39). ecos ou ereKev (1 When the present ind. appears 18). 25), ecos OTOU e(t)6iPT](rav (Jo. 9 with ecos the notion is 'while,' not 'until,' and it is either a contemporaneous event, as in ecos aOros awoXuet Tov oxXov (Mk. 6 45.
:
: :
:
nkxPh we
find ews alone as a conjunction (Mt.
Drug., Gricch. Gr., p. 563.

lb., p. 200.
8
Goodwin, M. ami
T., p. 235.
976
NEW TESTAMENT
a lively
irpoaexe
Note dependence on
rfi
rjuajKaaev, like indirect discourse), or

ecos 'ipxoiiai
proleptic future in terms of the present, as in

avaypoâec (1
: :
:
Tim. 4 13) and in Jo. 21 22 f. It is possible to Indeed some MSS. 45 as this proleptic future.^ take Mk. 6 22 the reading (in the In Mt. 14 and -et. here give also airoXvari
:
parallel passage)
is ecos ou aToXvarj.
:
Cf. the construction with the
Latin dum.
ecos 'ipxofiaL.
In Lu. 19
Instead of
13
W. H.
ecos
read
^
:
Ipxoixai
instead of
cos
ecos rip,epa
earlv (Jo. 9
4)
W. H. have
In Jo. 12
ecos
:
in the margin,
ecos
though keeping
it is
cos,
in text (as does Nestle).
If
f.
is
genuine,
clearly 'while,' not 'until.'
35
W.
H. read in the text

:
not
ecos.
We
have, besides,
otov
in Mt. 5 25. Most of the examples of ecos deal with the future and have only the subj. after the classic idiom.- The future, being identical in form with the aorist subj., is possible in the cases of ecos o5 dmTre/ii/'co (Ac. 25 21) and ecos otov aKa^^cxj (Lu. 13 8), but In Lu. 13:35 some the regular subj. is the probable idiom. MSS. have ecos rfêt (see (6)), but W. H. reject i]êt ore. Both ecos So ecos ov ov and ecos otov are common, but always without av. With 16). aveXcoatu (Ac. 23 21) and ecos otov irXripwdfj (Lu. 22 simple ecos it is more common to have au. So ecos av airoSuis (Mt.
: : : :
26),
but note
ecos
e\9ri
:
(10
23).
:
"Av
:
is
not essential in this In
construction.
Trpoaevô)fj.aL,
Cf. Lu. 12
is
59; 15
4; 22
34.
Mk.
14
32,
e'cos
the notion
rather 'while' than 'until.'
Cf.
Mt.
14: 22; 26: 36; Lu. 17: 8.
But the note

30, eâXev avTov
of expectancy suits the

els
subjunctive.
ocjieLXofxevov,
In Mt. 18
is
(j)vXaKr]v ecos
dxo5c3 to
the subj.
retained after secondary tense of the in"Ecos
dicative as in indirect discourse.

also
(cf. TTplv),
occurs after negative verbs

p. 169)
as in Lu. 22:34.
Moulton {Prol,
(i/B.C.)
ecos
Tb. 6
papyri
(ii/B.C.) ecos p-hooaLV,

av,
G. H. 38
is
KaTa(3fjs.
quotes In the
as in the N. T.,
often absent from these conjunctions

Gr., p. 140) finds
ecos
meaning
the subj.
'until.'
Radermacher {N. T.
and
common
in the papyri, the inscrs.
and the
kolvt]
writers.
Blass^ thinks he sees a certain affinity with final sentences in the
At any good Attic and should cause no trouble. The kolvt] fully agrees with the ancient idiom. It is, of course, a matter of taste with the writer whether he will regard a future event as a present reality or a future uncertainty to be hoped for and attained. Upiv is a comparative form (cf superlative 7rpco-ros) like the Latin
subj. with these conjunctions for the future indefinite.
rate
it is
Burton, N. T.
M. and
T., p. 128.
But the proper sense
of the indie,
p. 140. p. 219.
is
better as an expression of the fact.

2
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 235.
Radermacher, N. T. Gr., ' Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
MODE
prius}
It
is
(efkaisis)
It is really the
it
977 same
the neuter accusative singular.
in idea as irporepov, 'before,' 'formerly.'
Pindar uses
copas.
as a prep-
osition with the ablative
irplv c6pas
= 7rp6
The
original con-
was the infinitive, though the subj. and the optative occur with it in Homer.- Homer has it 81 times with the infinitive, 6 with the subj., once with the opt. and not at all with the indicative.^ The word developed so much importance in the later Greek that Goodwin in his Moods and Tenses gives it a separate extensive discussion (pp. 240-254). In the N. T. there are only thirteen examples of it and all of them in the Gospels and Acts. Eleven of the thirteen are with the infinitive (cf. Homer).
struction with
irp'iu
Cf.
irplv airodavetv (Jo.
49), irplv
'
k^paap, yevkffdat (8: 58).

18.
Five
times
sic
we have
wplp
r/,
as in
Mt.
Luke alone
uses the clas-
idiom of Tpiv with the subj. or opt. after negative sentences. In both instances it is only relative future after secondary tenses, but in Lu. 2 26, ^ti) ISeLV Bavarov -wplv [r/] av 'idy tov Xplcttov Kvplov, the subj. is retained according to the usual rule in indirect dis:
kolvt] (so often in the Attic). In Ac. 25 16, as alXd/Sot after a-KtKpidriv 6tl ready explained heretofore, Tplv ^ txoL ovK earcv is changed from the subj. to the opt. as is possible in indirect discourse, a neat classic idiom found in Luke alone in the
course in the
N. T.
Some
of the
ws av here.
MSS. do not have ap in Lu. 2 26 and i< reads few MSS. have Tplv in Lu, 22 34.* The papyri
:
rj
writers do not
irplv .^
show the same consistency as Luke in the use of But note p.i]Te StSorco irplv avT(Jo eTnaTeK\r]TaL, O. P. 34
For
'until'
ecos
(ii/A.D.).
4>(j}vr]ffeL
kept the
field.
Indeed
in Lu. 22:34, ov
eojs where Tplv would usually come (Radermacher, A''. T. Gr., p. 164). Very early irpb TOV and inf. also began to displace irplv (see Verbal Nouns). In the modern Greek irplv holds its place (also irpl va, 6ao, irpoTov) with ind. and subj. (Thumb, Handb., p. 193). The N. T. does not have eare, but the papyri show it. Cf. ear' iiv, Amh. P. II, See also Job 13 22 k^. 81, 11 (iii/A.D.). (d) Some Nomiyial and Prepositional Phrases. We have already seen in the case of axPh p.'f^xp'- and ecos how they occur with relative pronouns as conjunctional phrases. The same thing occurs with a number of temporal phrases. Thus d0' ov. In Lu. 13 7 d(/)' ov is preceded by rpta cttj as the terminus a quo. It
ar]fjLepov
dXe/crcop
ecos
rpis airapv-qcrri,
we
see
1 Cf. Sturm, Goschichtl. Entw. der Konstr. mit -n-plv, 1882, p. Die Entw. der Siitzo mit TrptV, 1896, p. 12. 2 Sturm, ib., p. 145. < Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Ck., 3 lb., p. G. 6 Moulton, Prol., p. 169 note.
4; Frenzel,
p. 219.
978

'since.'
:
NEW TESTAMENT
means
Cf. rplTiqv ravTrjv inxkpav ayei d0' ov in Lu. 24:21.

it is
In Rev. 16
18
the simple equivalent of
oltto
tovtov ore as in
In these examples the indicative occurs, but in Lu. 13 25, d0' ov av ey^P^v, the construction of cojs is used for the uncertain future, the subj. with av. The con:
the Attic Greek and Herodotus.
ception of
ciTro
TOVTOV 6t lias to bc appealed to, 'from that
ment when,' 'when

In Col.
1
:
once' the steward arises.
In
:
like
momanner we
:
see d^' ^s used for 'since' in Lu. 7:45; Ac. 24

6,
11; 2 Pet. 3
4.
we have
It
the form d0' ^s
rjnepas.
'Ev
a)
is
not
always temporal.
may
tal (Ro. 14: 21) or causal (Ro.
be merely local (Ro. 2:1), instrumen8:3). The temporal use is much
hke
ews in the sense of 'while,' as in
Mk.
ej'
19 (Lu. 5: 34)
ei^
vvix4>L0^ I1t' avToov kcTiv.
Cf. Jo. 5
:
7,
(3
epxojjLaL
with
eojs
epxopat
epxofJiaL,
in Jo.
21
if
22.
In Lu. 19
13
the Text. Rec. has
ecos
l:Qevu) has its antecedent expressed in the preceding sentence and means 'wherein.' In Mk. 2 19 we see 6aou xpovov for duration of time. In Mt. 9 15 the shorter k4>' oaov occurs, while in Hcb. 10 37 note oaov oaov (a Hebraism from the LXX, though paralleled in the papyri). In Ro. 7 1 we read 10' oaov xpovov, the fullest form of all. Moulton
is
but
the true reading.
In
1 Pet.
{ProL, p. 169) cites C.P.R. 24, 25 (ii/A.D.) 0' bv
fi
xpovov (note ab-
sence of
(e)
av).
The Temporal Use of the Infinitive. There are nine examples and the infinitive. In the LXX there are 35 examples (Votaw, The Infinitive in Bibl. Gk., p. 20). These examples all have
of wpo Tov
the accusative with the infinitive, as in wpd tov
v/jlols
alTrjaaL avTov
(Mt. 6:8.
15; Gal. 2
:
Cf. Lu. 2:21;
22:15;
tense
Jo.
:
12; 3:23), except Jo. 13

is
l:48f.; 17:5; Ac. 23: 19, 7rp6 tov yeveaOai, but
even here
Jo. 17
:
it
implied.
The
is
is
aorist except a present -in
5.
The
sense
quite like
scriptions (Moulton, ProL, p. 214)
TOV
and
inf.
The use
16 times.^
of ev
(see before). The inshow scattered examples of vrpo tQ as 'when' or 'while' is much more
irpiv
But it is very common in the Septuagint as a translation of the Hebrew ^ and the infinitive construct. Moulton- admits a Hebraism here in the sense of 'during,' a meaning not found in the vernacular kolvt] so far. The construction
is,
common. Xenophon
It occurs only 6 times in
Thucydides, Plato 26 times,
however, very
common
in
N. T.
writers,
and
in all parts of the Gospel.
the sense of 'while' and 'when.'

Moulton, ProL,
Luke, the most literary of the It is found both in Usually it is the present tense
that has the notion of 'while' and the aorist that of 'when.'
So
p. 215.
xb., p. 249.
MODE
ill
(efkaizis)
27)
979
Lu.
8 note
ep
rw
ItpaTihtiv avrou, (2
T(2
ehayayeip tovs
yopeh t6
numerous (55 in the N. T.), but the LXX shows 500 instances/ undoubted proof of the influence of the Hebrew there, where it is nearly as common
iraiblov '\7](rovv.
The examples
are
as
all
and the
other prepositions with the infinitive. This use of In Lu. 12 15 infinitive is not always temporal.
: :
tv tc3
it is
rather the content than the time that is meant. In Lu. 1 21 it may be causal. Mera to and the infinitive we find fifteen times
in the
the construction appears 222 times N. T. In the according to Votaw.^ It has the resultant meaning of 'after' and always has the aorist infinitive except the perfect in Heb.
LXX
and
found in Luke, Paul, Matthew, Mark, Hebrews, Luke. A good example is found in ^tera to airoSee also Ac. 7:4; 10 :41. Mention should KTetvat (Lu. 12 5). also be made of tcos tov k\9elv in Ac. 8 :'40, as in the LXX (Judith 1:10; 11:19). It occurs 52 times in the O. T. and 16 in the Apocrypha. But note ixkxpi tov irXetp, P. B. M. 854 (I/a.d.). On prepositions and inf. see Verlml Nouns. This subject will demand (/) Temporal Use of the Participle.
10
:
15.
It is
chiefly in
more extended treatment under the head Nouns). Here it may be noted that the
self
of the Participle (Verbal
participle does not of it-
express time.
We may in translation render the participle by a

'as,' 'while,' 'since,'
temporal clause with

the Latin cum.^
'when,' 'after,'
etc., like
is
As
a rule the
unadorned participle
in English
enough to bring out the idea.

present participle
is
The
participle
may be
co-ordinated
in translation with the principal verb
by the use
of 'and.'
The
merely descriptive and contemporaneous, as The aorist participle has either simula-jrodprjaKUP (Heb. 11 21). (Ac. 25 13), or antecedent, as e/xaaTraaafiepoi as action, taneous âPTa (Mt. 13 :2). The wealth of participles gave the Greek a great advantage over the Latin in this matter. In the flourishing period of the language the temporal participle vied with the conIn the kolptj junctions in the expression of temporal relations. this use of the participle is still quite live, as almost any page of the N. T. shows, though it has manifestly in places shrunk before the analytic tendency to use conjunctions and finite verbs. This
:
tendency to use conjunctions

Greek.^
'
is still
more noticeable
in
modern
Votaw, The
Inf. in Bibl.
Moiilton, Prol., p. 230.
"Wc
lb. Gk., p. 20. should not usually put a tenii)oral clause
to represent these, as
*
Jebb
in V.
it would overdo the emphasis." and D.'s Ilandb., p. 333.
980
6. (a)
NEW TESTAMENT
Final and Consecutive Clauses.

Kinship.
It
is
matter to correlate properly these all have relative adverbs as Often the same conjunction is used indifferently conjunctions. in a number of different kinds of clauses. So cbj in comparative,
a
difficult
subordinate clauses.
They
nearly
declarative, causal, temporal, final, consecutive, indirect
inter-
rogative, exclamatory.
Cf.
In
like
is
manner
ottcos
has a varied use.

apprehensive,
the Latin
ut,
which
comparative,
final,
consecutive.
tory.
The English
that
Goodwin,^ therefore,
gether as pure final clauses,

effort, clauses
and German da have a like histreats "final and object-clauses" toobject-clauses with verbs of care and
sion of consecutive clauses.^
with verbs of fearing. He gives a separate discusBurton^ practically follows Goodall
win.
Viteau* blends them
into one.
Winer
practically ignores
consecutive clauses.' Jannaris^ pointedly says that the popular
speech "avoids the consecutive construction" and uses

the infinitive for either final or consecutive
lish that)
(cf.
coo-re
and
Latin ut and Eng-
"thus confounding consecutive with final clauses." It that. As a matter of fact the various points of view shade off into one another very easily and sometimes quite imperceptibly. It is not always easy to distinguish purpose and result in the mind of the writer or speaker. The very word finis may be the end aimed at (purpose) or attained (result). My colleague. Prof. W. O. Carver, D.D., has suggested grouping these ideas all under result, either contemplated, feared or attained. Some such idea is near the true analysis and synthesis. The later Greek showed a tendency to gather most of these ideas under IVa.^ It seems clear that these final clauses (6) Origin in Parataxis. had their origin in parataxis, not hypotaxis. The conjunctions, when used, were an after-development. The step from parataxis to hypotaxis has already been taken when we meet the Greek of Homer,^ though the paratactic construction continued side by
was not quite
side in isolated instances.

ôvKeffde (XTroXucrco; (Jo.
Examples
:
like aês k/SaXw (Lu. 6

:
42),
18
39), êXets eTOLfxaaoo/JLev
probably instances of this original

ellipsis of tva.^
(Mk. 14 12) are idiom rather than of a mere

ixi}
Cf. also the possible origin of ov
as ov-
nrj.
This
2 ' ^
T., pp. 105-137. > Le Verbe, pp. 217-233. pp. 71-95. ^ Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 455. N. T. M. and T., pp. 83-100. lb., p. 458. Thus onus and cos gradually disappear.
lb.,
M. and
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 109.
MODE
(ErKAi:2I2)
981
disconnected idiom was felt to be especially bare in the positive form, but the negative paratactic construction with ni] with
says: "Parataxis,
Gildersleeve^ quaintly is present in Homer.^ which used to be thrust into the background, has come forward and claimed its rights." This grammatical sage, barring the infinitive and participle, adds: "Nihil est in hypotaxi quod non prius fuerit in parataxi." The subjunctive, therefore, in final clauses is merely the volitive subj of parataxis.' It was natural that the parataxis should be plainer in negative sentences, for alongside of ixri (originally the mere negative in para-
verbs of fearing
taxis
fir],
and the negative conjunction

ixT].^
in hypotaxis) there
oTTcos
The whole matter
is
carefully
came tva worked out by Weber*
with careful discussion of each construction in the various writers during the long course of Greek linguistic history from Homer
through the Attic writers. Here conscious purpose is expressed. (c) Pure Final Clauses. This class constitutes the bulk of the examples and they are the
easiest to understand.
The Greek
is
rich
in variety of
con-
can deal only with the idioms in the N. T. "0(t)pa, for instance, is not in the N. T., nor is the idiom of oTTcos with the future indicative after verbs of striving. The etymology of I'm is not certain. A fragment^ of (a) "Iva. Perhaps IV-a is derived from this form. Hesiod has tv avrca.
struction for this idea.
We
But at any rate in Homer tVa=kt in Iliad, 10, 127. After Homer, especially in the poets, it has the meaning 'where,' The exact connection between this *in what place,' 'whither.'^
local
(ut)
demonstrative
is
-not
ut,
clear.^
and relative sense and the final But we have a similar transition
'that'
in
the
Latin
of the
English
that,
German
daU.
Sophocles in his Lexicon

gives
all
Roman and
Byzantine
final,
Periods
nineteen
uses of
tva for the Greek of that era.
They may
be whittled
down
to three, viz. the pure
the object-clauses or sub-final, the
There is no doubt that tva came to be used in all Byzantine period. In the kolvt] of the N. T. these ways abundantly shown. The ecbatic or conare first two time the But each in its order. secutive use is debatable in the N. T.
consecutive.
in the
Curioushtiiioit ..gh the Attic inscriptions
make a very
sparing use
lb., p. 108.
' "
IMoulton, Prol., p. 185.
Am.
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.
982
of I'm,
NEW TESTAMENT
poetry
preferring ottcos and oircos av.^ So in epic and lyric overshadowed by o(/)pa and in tragedy by cos, though Aristophanes uses it in three-fourths of his final sentences and Plato and the Attic orators use it almost exclusively (Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, p. 109). The original use of I'ra, after the demonstrative and the relative stage, was the pure final. It is so in Homer, though Monro admits one instance of the object-clause .^ Only the subj. occurs with it in Homer in this construction. This
tva is
is
much
the natural
it
mode
for the expectant note in clauses of purpose.^
must not be overlooked that IVa in no way controls the mode, for the idiom is at bottom paratactic in origin.* But the indicative had a use also as well as the optative, as will presently be shown. A word further is needed concerning the tremendous
But
development
as often as
in the use of IVa.
Thucydides used
ottcos
oircos
three times
in
I'm,
and
cos
as a final particle only twice.
Xenophon
one and a half times as often as I'm, and cos nearly as often as I'm. But Polybius (books I-V) uses I'm exclusively, and the N. T. has I'm about twelve times as often as ottcos, and cos perhaps once. It is thus
the
first
three books of the Anabasis has
not simply that
usurped the
but it gradually comes to be almost the exclusive means of expressing purpose, and in the modern Greek vernacular every phase of the subj. and the old future No, is used ind. can be expressed by m (I'm) and the subj.^ also with the ind. The intention in modern Greek is brought out a bit more sharply by 710, m (Thumb, Handh., p. 197). But the All in all it is one of the most distinction is sometimes faint. remarkable developments in the Greek tongue. The eight and a half pages of examples in Moulton and Geden's Concordance bear eloquent testimony to the triumph of ha in the N. T. Nearly a page and a half of these examples are in the Gospel of John. But
I'm
displaced
ottcos
and
cos,
final
use of the infinitive also.
It
we
are
now
specifically
concerned with the pure
final
use of
I'm.
Here
I'm is in
the accusative case of general reference.
Thus
in
k\r]\v9a tva iiadoo (cf. veni ut discam, 'I

Iva is really
am come
that I
may
learn')
a demonstrative.
is
*I
am come
as to this,' viz. 'I
may
the
1
learn.'
is
The conjunction
supplied to avoid the asyndeton and
in apposition with
ixadoo.
As already
explained,
>ftpabj. is
predominant mode, as
in tovto 8e 6\op y'eyovev Iva irXrjpwdfj

f.
2
(Mt.
Meisterh.-Schw., p. 253
Horn. Gr., p. 207.

76.
* *
Mutzbauer, Konj. und Opt., p. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 107; Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 211. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 416 f.; Jebb in V. and D., pp. 319-323.
Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 479;
MODE
22).
(efkaizis)
983
in Iva
(iri
Cf. Ph. 3
8.
KpLdrjTe
(Mt. 7:1).
The negative with iVa is nrj, as The aorist subj. is the normal tense,
'iva
of course,
as in I'm nTa8u) (Ro. 1: 11), though the present occurs to denote
a continuous action, as in
Kal jLvcoaKTjTe (Jo. 10: 38).
dSfjs (1
-maTevrjTe (Jo. 13
19).
Cf, Iva yvaire

tlSC),
The
perfect subj. occurs in
as I'm
Jo.
(I'm
Tim. 3
Cf.
15);
tm
Xva
eiocbuev (1
1
Cor. 2
12); I'm
eldrjTe (1
5: 13).
nil
also Jo.
(jOfxev)
;
17: 19, 23;
Cor.
10;
2 Cor.
:9
ireTTOLdoTes
is
irapeaKevaafievoL
^re (2 Cor.
9:3).
The
subj.
regularly retained after a secondary tense of the indicadvel^T]

'iva 'idy
tive as in
(Lu. 19
4)
eireTiiJLrjaev
'iva
fj.T]8evl
eiircoaLV
There is no instance in the N. T. of the optative used with I'm after a secondary tense of the indicative. It is true that W. H. read I'm 8uir] in the text of Eph. 1 17 (I'm 8coT] or 8u) in the margin), but this is after a primary tense, ov jravofxaL. It is the volitive use of the optative and is not due to Iva. It is like the optative in a future wish.^ This use of the opt. with I'm after a wish is not unknown to classic Greek.^ It is the subj., not the opt., that is seen in I'm tXtjpoIs (Col. 4 17), iva Trapa8ol (Mk. 14: 10) and in the sub-final I'm yvoX (Mk. 9 30).^
(Mt. 16
:
20).
Cf.
Mk.
6.
In
Homer and
the early writers generally the rule was to use the
opt. with the final clauses after secondary tenses, lût in the Attic
two modes (subj. and opt.) are on a par in such a conThucydides prefers the subj., though Xenophon is just the reverse.^ In the N. T. the optative in final clauses after secondary tenses is non-existent. In 2 Tim. 2 25 /xTy xore 8wr] is after a primary tense as in Eph. 1 17, and here again the text is uncertain (cf. Scot? in margin and avavr]\J/oi)aLv in text.) The Attiorators the
struction, while
: :
cists
(Arrian, Appian, Herodian, 4th
Mace,
Plutarch)
made a
like
point of the opt. with I'm as "the hall-mark of a pretty Attic

style" (Moulton, Prol, p. 197).
The N. T.
writers,
more
of
Diodorus and Polybius,

of
fail
*'to rival
the litterateurs in the use

also
this
resuscitated elegance."
Moulton speaks
2
"the
Cf. W.-H., vol. II, App., p. 1G8.
W.-M.,
p. 3G3.
'
in
On the sparing use of the opt. with final sentences in late Cik. see the tables Diel, De enuntiatis finalibus apud Graeearum rerum seriptores posterioris
20
ff.
aetatis, 1894, pp.
See also Radermacher, N. T. Gr.,
p. 132.
Moulton
(Prol., p. 197) notes
how
the Atticists revelled in the opt. with
VVa, ottojs, ojs.
Josephus has 32 per cent, opts., Plut. 49 (Lives), Arrian 82, Appian 87! Polyb. has only 7, Diodorus 5. These are true Koifi] literati. Moulton finds only one pap. of this period with opt. with tva, O.P. 237 (late ii/A.D.), IVa SvvriOtlrjv. In iii/A.D. he notes L.Pw., tlrji in primary sequence. Tb. 1 (ii/B.c.) actually has Tjîuiaa xP'?MO'''"''î7oôtTo.
Weber, Entwickclungsgeschichtc dcr Al)sichtsatze,
p.
13.
984
NEW TESTAMENT
On the riot of optatives" in the artificial Byzantine writers. whole subject of final clauses see Gildersleeve on "The Final Sentence in Greek," 1883, p. 419, A. J. of Philol, IV, pp. 416 ff., VI, pp. 53 ff. There is no trouble to find in the papyri, inscr. and KOLVT] writers generally abundant examples of I'm and the subj. in pure design (Radermacher, A^. T.Gr., p. 138). But while the subj. is
the normal construction, the indicative is also present. In classical Greek IW was not used with the future ind.'^ It was not com-
mon
even with
ottws,
tbs
and
fir].
The
and
similarity in
form and
sense (not to mention itacism of
-??
-et)
made
the change very
aorist subj.
aio/xaL is
(xofxaL
easy and, indeed, the text is not always certain as between the and the future ind. Thus in 1 Cor. 13:3 I'm Kavx'f]-
supported by {<AB, 'iva Kavdrjaoj/xaL by CK and Iva Kavdijlate documents.^ In Gal. 2 4 the best documents have In Jo. 17 2 the MSS. vary I'm KaTa8ov\w(xovaLv instead of -aooaiv. between 'iva Scoo-et and duaxi. So in Jo. 15 8 note 'iva 4>^pr]Te Kal yevrjade (yevrjaeade in margin of W. H.); Eph. 6 3, I'm ykvrjraL Kal
by
But the idiom is well established in the N. T., especially in the Apocalypse. Thus 'iva decoprfaovcnv (Jo. 7:3); 'iva ^vp-rjaovraL
'ia-Q.
(Ac. 21:24);
8(j)(T0vaLV
I'm kpel (Lu.

:
14
10); I'm
(1
Orjaco
:
(1
Cor. 9
'iva
18); I'm
(Lu. 20
10);
'iva
Ktvcoaei.
Cor. 9
15);
'iva
Kepb-qQriaov-
rai (1 Pet.
riôvaiv
yvQ>GLV (3
may
3:1);
I'm a4>aôvaLv
:
(Rev. 6:4);
Scixret
:
(8:3);
'iva
9);
'iva ecrrat
Kal daekdcocnv (22
14), etc.
This
In some of these examples the In Mk. 6 56 and subj. and ind. future occur side by side. of with 'iva in the N. T.). instances 'av Ac. 5 15 note I'm Kav (only = even Kal (Jannaris, Hist. K'dv as This is not modal 'dv, but In Rev. Prol, 13 15 the 167). p. Gk. Or., p. 165; Moulton,
last
example
be non-final.
'
'
MSS. vary between

SoJffLV
I'm
TroL-qari
and
-et,
and
in
16 between
is
I'm
and
Scocret
(rotet
I'm
sub-final).
The usage
thus on a
firm foundation in the N. T.

'earat
'iva
It is in the
LXX
kolvtj
also.
(Iren.,
See
I'm
in Lev. 10
and
in other writers of the
584 A,
'eay).^
But
'iva
occurs also with the present ind.

is
This
is
a rare construction in the N. T. and

occurs only three times in the N. T.
eccl.
not a classic idiom.
It
Thayer calls it "a solecism and Byzantine writers." It is too common in the late writers to change the text in the N. T.^ Thus 1 Cor. 4 6 I'm )ui7 4>v(jLova6ej Gal. 4 17 I'm fryXoDre and 1 Jo. 5 20 The first two are possible subjunctives. W. H. 'iva yivuaKOfxev. read 'iva fxrjTLs SyvaraL in the margin of Rev. 13 17, and various
frequent in the
:
Goodwin, M. and T., p. Approved by Blass, Gr.
115.
of
'
N. T. Gk.,
p. 212.
"
Moulton, Prol., W.-M., p. 362.
p. 35.
MODE
MSS. support
3;
(efkaisiz)
985
:
the present ind. with I'm in Jo. 4
Gal. 6:12;.
ITh.
15; 5:20; 17: Pet. 1:10; Rev. 12:6.^ 4:13; Tit. 2:4; 2
iVa
In the earher Greek writers we do find
used with past tenses
show that the purpose was of the indicative.2 unattained action. But this or wish unfulfilled dependent on an except in two examples T. in the N. appear refinement does not tva in Western Helextension of wide the all With TTws. with
The idea was
to
fjLT]
lenistic,^ at
the heart of
it
there
:
is
the pure telic idiom.
"Im with
the imperative in 1 Cor. 1

"Ira is
31
is
due, of course, to the quotation.

: :
In Jo. 11 37, iroLrjaai 7. the Latin facere ut of reminded tva Kal ovTos fir] gives a list of all the f.) 342 {Hebrews, Westcott p. (sub-final). ottojs. Only two of Epistle the in (20). 'ipa of examples
repeated three times in 2 Cor. 12
arodavy,
one
is
(/3)
"Ottcos.
It is
compounded
adverb
of the neuter accusative -relative

It occurs in indirect questions
and the
indefinite
:
rcbs.'*
as in Lu. 24
20 in the sense of 'how.'

in to
ttcos
One notes
also the article
and the interrogative as

which."
(Lu. 22:2) like
Enghsh "the
"Ottws in a sense is the connecting link
various kinds of final sentences.^

preferred oxcos
between the Thucydides and Xenophon to ha, and Aristotle has tVa only a few times (W.
Schmid, Aiticismus, III, p. 87). Polybius does not use ottcos at all in books I-V. The N. T. has I'm 493 times, ottcos 52 (Jannaris, p. 417) as far as Colossians. I figure Iva 661 times in text of W. H., Thumb does not not "including 6 of I'm ri and 53 of ottcos.
OTTCOS as a final particle in modern Greek {Handb., p. 197). Even in later Greek ottcos was a sign of literary affectation.^ As already noted, in the fourth and fifth centuries b.c. ottcos
give
was quite the rule in the Attic inscriptions.'' It and never has Ke or av in pure final clauses
language.^
is
rare in
Homer
In
in
the Homeric
This idiom with
iiv
first,
appears in ^schylus.
the great Attic writers and the Attic inscriptions the subjunctive, the future indicative and the optative after secondary tenses,
all
are found.
The
future indicative occurred chiefly with verbs of
The negative in pure final clauses.^ with this future indicative was î? (ottcos fj-rj), though no example
striving,
though sometimes
See further Meyer on 1 Cor. 4 6. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 120. The Mod. Gk. has va with past tenses of the ind. (Thumb, Handb., p. 198). Moulton, Prol., pp. 41, 205, 211. * Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 56.5; Delbriick, Konj. und Opt., p. 61.
1
Cf. W.-H., App., pp. 167, 1G9, 171. Cf.
6 7
Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 417.

Mcisterh.-Schw., p.
2.53
f.
p. 348.
Goodwin, M. and
lb., p. 11:5
f.
T., p. 111.
986

Moulton
ottws
fxr]
NEW TESTAMENT
177 note) finds in the
occurs in the N. T.
(Prol., p.
papyri a few survivals of
and the
fut. ind.,
though mostly
ousted by Im fii]. Cf. Hb. P. 45, 60, 168 (iii/B.c), Tb. P. 414 Stahl {Syntax, p. 360) calls ottcos fxrj and fut. ind. Attic. (ii/A.D.).
the Atticists
in
In the N. T. the optative does not occur in this construction. In The fut. ind. with ottws it is revived as with I'm.^
pure
final clauses
has practically vanished from the N. T.

:
The
one example Ro. 3 4, ottcos cLp dLKaLcodjjs Kal viKrjaeLs, is a quothe LXX (Ps. 51: 6), but changed from subj. there. from tation But OTTCOS OavaToiaovuLv is a variant reading in Mt. 26 59, and
in
:
the future ind.

it is
is
possible in
Mt. 2
ottcos
8, ottcos
TpoaKwrjaw, though
future ind.
probably the aorist subj. is supported with
Other variant readings where the

are
1
Cor.
29, KavxweTai,
and Mk. 5: 23, ottcos ^Tjaerai (here W. H. read i'ra fijo-??). But at any rate the use of the future ind. with ottcos in pure final clauses is not quite dead in the N. T. period, though surely dying. Elsewhere the aorist subj. alone occurs save in Lu. 16:26 {his), 28 and Mt. 6 4. "Ottcos no longer^ has av in final clauses save in the quotation from Ps. 51 6 (Ro. 3 4) and three passages in
:
Luke's writings (Lu. 2 35

:
ottcos
av
:
o.TTOKa\v4)do)(jLv
Ac. 3
19
f.
OTTCOS
av
'i\Bo)(nv
koI
B
is
a.TroaTeiX'p,
15
:
17
ottcos
cii'
eK^rjT-qawaLV
from
Amos
in
(A^.
(so A,
:
but
Mt. 6
5 and
T. Gr., p.
without av) 9 12). "Av is a variant reading found very often in the LXX. Radermacher 158) finds Sttcos &v in Diodorus XIV, 80, 8, Aris-
teas, 239, inscr. of Halicarnassus (iii/B.c), Jahrh. d. Ost. Inst.
But it is rare and ottcos steps into the background beThe revival of ottcos in the third and fourth cent. a.d. was Atticistic and did not affect the vernacular. The inscriptions and the papyri for the first century a.d. show the prevalence of tva over OTTCOS (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 157 note). The negative is, of course, always fxrj, as in Ac. 20 16, ottcos fxi] yev-qrat. The
XI, 56.
fore tva.
:
subj.
OTTCOS
is
used indifferently after primary tenses (Mt. 6 2, TrotoOcrtj/ BoâadQiaLv) and secondary tenses (Ac. 9 34, TraperrjpovvTo
: :
oTTws avTov aveXoiaLv).
Cf. Ro. 9
is
17.
It
is
interesting to note that
in the
N. T.
ottcos
almost confined to Matthew and Luke's

of
writings.
idiom, but
The literary flavour we do not look for

in
Luke
explains his use of the
literary ear-marks in
Matthew.
'Iva
The one example

{'Iva iJLrjvva^, ottcos
John (11:57) occurs TLaacoaiv) and may be used

ottcos
side
by
side with
for the sake of variety
as in I'm yevrjraL
yevrjTaL (2
Cor. 8
14).
Cf. also Lu. 16:28;

p. 417.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 197; Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 211.
MODE
1
(efkaisis)
987
'iva
Cor.
29; 2 Th.
:
12,
though
:
tva
appear
in
Cor.
:
4:6; Gal. 4 5.* In 1 Cor. 1 17 note IVa ^77 and ottws /hij in 1 29. But Iva has "invaded the territory of ottcos, as with (^povriiitLv and o-TTouSafeti-" (Moulton, Prol., p. 206). In modern Greek ottcos has lost all telic force (Thumb, Handb., p. 198). Sometimes OTTCOS represents the main purpose and the infinitive the subordinate purpose, a construction amply illustrated in the papyri .^
in the
So then, though ottcos as a pure final conjunction is disappearing N. T., it yet occurs with the same concept on the whole. It was not a favourite final particle with Thucydides (7) 'fis. (only twice), though Xenophon used it nearly as much as ha. It is not surprising to find only one instance of it in the N. T. and that one not certain. J<B read cbs reXetcoo-co in Ac. 20 24 instead of 52). W. H. and Nestle read reXeicbo-co, but cos TeXetcoaat (cf. Lu. 9 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$
merely a reminiscence in the kolvt], but it is needless to cite Mk. 4: 26 f., cos avdpcoTTos iSaXr/, since this is not final at all, but comparison. On cos av in final sentences see Schmidt, Joseph, eloc, Radermacher quotes F. P. 118 (110 a.d.), p. 409, for statistics. Topevov ecos tov e/cet eKaioJva TTortcT/s, where tcos is used as final cos. Per contra in modern Greek, Moulton {Prol., p. 249) notes that cos takes the meaning of ecos as well as its own. Negative purpose is expressed by 'iva (5) Mr], fir] TTore, nr] ttcos. ixi], OTTCOS fir] also, but originally it was done merely by /197 in a paraIn Homer and the early writers fii] is far in tactic sentence.^ excess of ha p.i], ottcos fxi], but in Aristophanes and Herodotus the
reverse
is
true, while in Plato
and Xenophon
ixi]
as a final con-
junction has about gone.

orators generally."*
It is rare in
the Attic historians and
Originally a negative adverb (subjective negaalso as a conjunction. Cf. Latin ne. The be used tive) it to idiom /X17 oh appears in Homer in a few final clauses, and after Homer ju?) oh is used with verbs of fearing.^ In the N. T. ha fi-q (1 Cor. 1 17) and ottcos /xr] (I: 29) have the run over the conOnly the sul)j. is used, though in Ac. 27:42 ni] tls junction fxr].
came
6ta0i)7ot
is a variant reading, but 8La(f)vyj] is correct after the secondary tense of the ind. In Mk. 13 36, ait) evpj], a primary tense occurs in the principal verb. In Col. 2 4 W. H. read ha fxr]5eis
: :
lb.
="
Moulton,
Prol., p. 220.
Goodwin, M. and
lb., p. 112.
T., pp. 107, 112.

6
lb., p. 107.
988

^117
NEW TESTAMENT
See also
/jlt]
Trapa\oyi^r]TaL instead of
TLs \oyi(jr]TaL (2
tls
(the variant reading).

/jlt]
and fxr] ttojs are preserved as Both final conjunctions in the modern Greek (Thumb, Handh., p. 198). M17 ttcos irore and ^117 ttws is practically the same. The use of appears with the subj. both after secondary and primary tenses. So eTrefxxpa ^^^7 ttcos KaTai(JX<JvQu:yLev (2 Cor. 9 3 f Note also Iva y.i} in 9 3, 4) and /X57 ttcos yhcofxai (1 Cor. 9 27). In Gal. 2:2 (/X17 ttcos eSpaiJLov) and 1 Th. 3:5 (mi? ttcos eTrelpaaev) we have a difficult conOne view is to take it as an indirect question. This struction. Even in Gal. 5. 2, but not in 1 Th. 3 is possible in Gal. 2 2 2 there would be an ellipsis of a participle like f tjtcoj' nadelv. Moulton {ProL, p. 201) suggests that Upaiiov as an "after-thought" in Gal. 2 2 has plenty of classical parallels. Of. Goodwin, Mooch and Tenses, 333. In 1 Th. 3:5 we have p.r] ttcos kirelpaa-ev Kal It is better therefore to take rpexco in Gal. ykvy]Tai side by side. 2:2 as subj. also. Thus in both examples we have the subj. and the aorist ind. This is in accord with the ancient idiom where in pure final sentences a past tense of the ind. was used if it is distinctly implied that the purpose was not attained.^ That is precisely the case here. Paul did not run in vain. The
Cor. 12
:
6).
(jltj
tempter did not succeed with the Thessalonians. It is thus unpurpose that Paul neatly expresses in accord with the Attic diction. Mij ttotc loses the notion of time in ttotc and has rather the idea of contingency, but perchance rather than lest at
fulfilled
' '
'
any
TTcbs
time.'
Radermacher
(iV.
T. Gr., p. 158) thinks that Tore

/jlt].
often distinguish deliberative (dubitative) from final

.
and As
strictly final particle it occurs either
ind.,
though the
iJ,r}
sul)j. is
more common.^
14
:
with the subj or the future For the fut. ind. note
Mt. 7 :Q
M17 TTore
TTore
KaTairaTr]crov(ni'
(correct text,
Tôre earaL.
though the
aorist
subj. has support),

KaracFvpri Kal
:
Mk.
jui?
In Lu. 12:58 note

fut. ind. likewise
/cat
aTodcccreL.
:
Both
fx-q
subj.
and
occur in Mt. 13
Is.
15 (Ac. 28
27)
wore Ibuiaiv
fi
laaop.ai
(LXX,
10).
fect subj.)
So also in Lu. 14: 8 f., m^ Trore Kal epel (cf. tm epet in verse 10).
:
K^KK-qiikvos
(note per-
seen in Lu. 14 12,

is
fir]
wore avTLKa\eao)aLi>.
The normal subj. is The opt. in the N. T.
wanting in final sentences as in cases of repetition (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 131). W. H. read fxr] Tore Scot? (opt.) in 2 Tim. 2 25. But even so, if true, it is not a pure final clause but a kind of indirect question as in Lu. 3 15, only in 2 Tim. 2 25 the opt. occurs after a primary tense. It is hardly just to say
:
Goodwin, M. and T., p. 120 f. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 86.
MODE
(efkaisis)
989
with Moulton^ that here Paul "misused an obsolete idiom," since the opt. after primary tenses occurs occasionally with I'm
in the papyri.^
aov, P.
Cf.
n-q irore
avTuiv
xp^'i-o-
yevoLTO, eudeoos avrous eêXalikely, as

Scot/,
Oxy.
I,
118, 38.
:
But
25
1.
it is
more than
is
Moulton
argues, that in 2 Tim. 2

\pcoaLP
undoubtedly
is
subj.
we should read The epic Sdcri
subj.
since kvavi]-
supported by kav
yvwri,
(e)
Clem., Paed., Ill,

Relative Clauses.
(Moulton, Prol.,
p. 193.)
This construction in the earlier Greek,
like the Latin,
the future ind.
had either the subj. or the opt. The Attic added which largely displaced the subj. and the opt.'
Cf. oiTives inroovs Karaar-qaonev (Ac.
The N.
8oo(Tov(TLv
T. follows the Attic use of the fut. ind.
(Mt. 21:41);
3).
See
Cor. 4
17,
OS avafivrjaeL.
Blass^ explains the occasional return to the
subj. as
due to
'Lva.
See
ottov (fiaycj
(Mk. 14
:
14); Trap'
c3
êvLadoonev
:
(Ac. 21: 16); 6 irpoaevkyKr) (Heb. 8
3); 8l' ^s Xarpthwixev (12
28).
Radermacher {N. T.
evpou yeopybv
t'ls
Gr., p. 138)
6s)
quotes B. U. Ill, 822

Diodorus, XIV,
(ii/A.D.)
(=
avra
eX/cucrrj,
8, 3, 8l' Siv
e^k\w(n
TO.
relxv-
The N. T. hardly
uses the relative clause of
purpose as freely as the Attic Greek.

(i")
The
it
Infinitive.
brief
statement
is
is
alone necessary here,
since the infinitive receives full discussion in the next chapter.

Suffice
to say that the infinitive
exceedingly
common
in the
N. T.
pure purpose. Votaw^ counts some 1,285 such instances of the simple infinitive of purpose in "biblical
for the notion of
Greek."
He
does not give the figures for the N. T. alone.

is
He
notes that "this use of the infinitive
second only to that of

inf.
general object in order of relative frequency of occurrence."
Moulton
{Prol., p. 205)
notes that the
of purpose
is
more
common
inf. of
in the
N. T. than in Attic, and he agrees with

kolvt] is
Thumb
(Theol. Lit., 1903, p. 421) in the theory that this frequency of the
purpose in the
due to the Ionic

Cf. hoLiiaaointv
:
dialect.
It has sur-
vived in the Pontic dialect of modern Greek, though elsewhere

displaced
by
va
and the
subj.
(j)ayelp
(Mt. 26
17)
(Mk. 14 12). The tclic inf. is common in the kolpt} writers generally (Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 152). Cf. Xenophon of Eph., 393, 28, eXriXWet. TrpoaevâadaL. It is commonest with ver])s of movement (Moulton, Prol., p. 205), as in eav avaûi Ka.y<h TrpoaKwrjaat, Par. P. 49 (ii/B.c). This infinitive may be resolved easily into the original dative (or locative), as in Jo.
and
eTOLfxaawiJLev lva (f)ayris
Prol., p. 194.
lb., p. 197.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 217. The Iiif. in Bibl. Gk., p. 10.
Goodwin, M. and
T., pp.
216
ff.
990
21
:

3, virayoj aXLeveiv, '1
NEW TESTAMENT
:
go a-fishing
;
'
Mt. 2
is
2, rikdontv TrpoaKwrjaaL,
'we went up for worshipping.'^ form of irpoaKwrjaaL, but less clear in the locative Moulton" suggests that oXieveLv (probably due to syncretism). result and gradually sort of designed originally a the locative was forms as was true between the two vanished the line of cleavage clear is in all burden of making purpose "The of Lva (and ut). and cannot be said that any the context; it thrown on these cases places." This idiom minimum of in a except results, difficulty in writers and is than Attic Homer range in wider much has a .^ in the Attic A few exthan in the T. prevalent N. more again dXXd irX-qpoxrai. (Mt. Karakvaai, 5 ovk suffice: rfKdov must 17); amples
It
easy to see the purpose
in the dative
6 'Irjaovs avrjxdv
Xecrai diKalovs
:
TreipacxdrjvaL viro
:
rod SiaôKov (4:1); ovk rjSBov Ka:
(Mk. 2 17); irapecy iiev aKomai (Ac. 10 33). Cf. Lu. 11 Ac. 25; 12 13; 13 44, etc. Less frequent is the inf. 18 10; with rov for the idea of purpose. Votaw^ notes but 33 such examples of direct purpose in the N. T., though the 0. T. shows
:
:
These 33 are almost confined to Matthew, Luke and Acts. Cf Tov airoXeaaL (Mt. 2 13) rod cnreipaL (Lu. 8:5); roD alrdv (Ac. 3:2). See both together in Lu. 1 76 f., 79; 2 22, 24, TrapaaTrjaaL For a full discussion see "Articular Infinitive" /cat TOV SoDmt. (Verbal Nouns). Paul seems to avoid it as a rule. But see Ro. 6:6; Ph. 3 10. The use of coo-re and the inf. for pure purpose is rare in the N. T., some half-dozen instances.^ Only indisputable examples should be claimed. Thus ibare k/SdXXetj^ (Mt. 10 1). Cf. Mt. 15 33; 24 24; 27 1; Lu. 4 29; 20 20. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 160) cites P. Oxy. I, 52, 7 (325 a.d.), kwiaraXevTos coare For further examples of telic ri]v 8iade<nv eyypactiop irpoacjjuvrjaaL. chare in the inscriptions and writers of the kolvt] see Koch, Ohser734.
.
vationes granmiaticae, p. 20.
It is more frequent in the LXX. Radermacher even cites a case of final ware with the subj. in a late papjTUS, B.G.U. Ill, 874, yeypa4>r]Ka vjxlv coare Tre^ti^Tjre. There are two examples of cos in W. H., cos hoinaaan (Lu. 9 52, other editors cocrre) and cos cttos direlv (Heb. 7:9). In Ac. 20:24 most editors have cos Ttkeiwaai, but not W. H. The articular infinitive with prepositions is very common in the N. T. as in the LXX, about one-half of all the examples of the articular infinitive.^ For a discussion of prepositions with the inf. see Verbal Nouns. Both
:
ets
TO
1
and
2
irpbs
TO occur with the inf. in the papyri, the latter

Prol., p. 204.
*
Moulton,
Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 21.

lb., p. 10.
lb., p. 19.
lb., p. 207.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 223.
MODE
more
frequently.
(efkaiziz)
991
They both seem "to carry the thought of a Moulton cites (Moulton, Prol, p. 220.) purpose." remoter irpos to Tvyj-V, O. P. B. U. 226 (i/A.D.) oTTOJs eiSfj irapecreaTaL (=5ai) The paeyTuxo-veiv. Trpos TO fiij 237 (ii/A.D.) oTTOJs (i)povTi(Jxis
pyri have
els
to kv n-qbevi
fie/jLcliOfjvat,
as a "recurrent formula."
Cf.
Moulton gives numerous papyri refThe examples with eis to are the most to. erences for telic common of all in the N. T. (72 instances). As a rule these indicate purpose more or less strong, though not always. It is
P. Fi. 2 (iii/A.D.) 4 times.
pixOvvaL (Ro. 1:11),

:
So eis to aT-qTh. 3:5; Eph. 1: 12; Ph. 1 10). The instances of -Kpbs to are few (12) and chiefly Cf irpbs to deaOrjpai (Mt. 6:1); xpos to bbvaadai in Luke and Paul.
particularly
in
common
Paul (50
exx.,
H.
Scott).
1
eis
t6 elvai (8:29).
Cf.
(Eph. 6
(d)
n)}
Participle.
The
The
future participle, so
common
in this
construction in the Attic Greek, has nearly vanished from the N. T. as from the rest of the KOLvq. A few remnants survive like
epxeTai 'HXetas adoauv (Mt. 27:49), ave^rjv TrpoaKvprjaoiV
and iroiqawv So also the present participle Thus dxeordX/caoccasionally occurs where purpose is implied.
(Ac. 24:11, 17).
Cf. Ac. 8:27.
liev
airayyeWovTas (Ac. 15
9).2
27).
Cf.
eirep.\l/av
ayyeXXovTas (Thuc.
VII, 26,
Cf. also
Mk. 3:31.
26, aireaTeikev avTou evXoyovPTa.
good example is Ac. 3: See Participle (Verbal Nouns) and
Tense
(d)
for further remarks. Sub-Final Clauses (really object or subject clauses like 6tl clauses ). There are a considerable number of clauses which are
not pure purpose and yet are not

in
result.
a sense, between the two extremes.
They are the bridge, They are found with verbs
of striving, beseeching,
commanding, fearing. In some instances the clause is hardly more than an object-clause. The same conjunctions are here used in general, and this shows that no hard and fast line was drawn in the matter. Various divisions are made of these verbs.* Burton* calls them object-clauses of exhorting, of striving, of fearing, of subject and predicate, of complementary and epexegetic clauses, of conceived result. But even
so they overlap
and run into one another. Here again the main conjunction is ira. All these (a) "Ira. varieties noted by Burton arc seen with tVa save with verbs of
1
Cf. Burton,
8 *
N. T. M. und T., p. 101 N. T. Gk., p. 198. Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 122 ff. N. T. M. and T., p. 83.
Blass, Or. of
f.
992
fearing.
Koivrj.
NEW TESTAMENT
As we have seen,^ there were two tendencies in the One was the spread of the Ionic use of the inf. of purpose, the other was the wide extension of I'm in Western Hellenistic. So the iVa in the non-final or sub-final sense, once rare,^ now comes to be exceedingly common. The development came on soon after the close of the classical age.^ But Thackeray (Gr., pp. 24, 194) finds it rare in the LXX. It came to be used in almost
any sense that the infinitive bore and finally displaced it. This weakened use of tva is one of the characteristics of the kolvti and is richly illustrated in the N. T., particularly in the writings of John. Thus in Mt. 5 29, aujuêpet ha airoX-qTat, the ha clause is the subject of avfjicfyepeL and is a subject-clause in the nominative case. There is a great variety of phrases ^ which thus use ha. So
:
10 25; 18 6). Cf. 1 Pet. 4 3 (inf.). See also kavos ha (Mt. 8:8), though elsewhere inf.; a^Los ha (Jo. 1 27), but inf. in 1 Cor. 16 4, as often; avvqdeLa vpuv ha (Jo.
apKTdv tva yeprirai (Mt.
:
: : :
:
18 :39);
(1
kXrjXvOev copa
ha
(Jo.
12 :23);
(Jo.
e/Jiol
eis
kXaxLarbv eanv
ha
Cor. 4:3);
efxdv /3pco/^d
eanv ha
:
34); Xuo-treXet
ha
(Lu.
17:2); tovto,
(Ph. 2:2).
ha e\6rj (Lu. 1 43) ^TjTetTaL ha (1 Cor. 4:2); xo-po-v ha Thus the ha clause is seen to be either nom. or ace,
;
simply, or in apposition with a substantive.

sitional use is
71}%,
:
In John^ the appo-
very frequent.
So
avr-q
ha
(Jo. 17: 3); ixdôva rah:
ha{lb 13, ablative); hv tovtw, ha (15 8, locative); x^-pi-v, ha John 4, accusative). Cf. Jo. 6: 39; 1 Jo. 3 1, 11, 23; 4 21; 2 Jo. 6; 1 Cor. 9 18; Rev. 2 21. In Jo. 15 12 ha ayaTare
(3
:
: : : :
(subj.) is in apposition \vith hroXr].
Some
of these are comple-
mentary or epexegetic
In the subject and object (or appositive) clauses the subjunctive is usually found, though occaclauses.
sionally the fut. ind., as in kppedrj
ha
abuijaovaLv (Rev. 9:4).
See
:
further examples of the fut. ind. in Rev.
3:9; 6
11;
13
12;
:
14
13 (especially
ebbdy]
:
common
/jltj
in the Apocalypse).
In Rev. 9
we have
ha cnroKTeivcoaLV aiiTOvs, dXX' ha âaavLadrjaovrai. In Jo. 17 3 some MSS. read ha yivioaKovaLV (read by Treg. and Tisch.). Object-clauses with ha after verbs of striving, beseeching, etc., largely displace ottws.
infinitive
Many
of these verbs use also the
and a few retain ottcos.^ Blass'' gives a careful list of the construction in the N. T. with each of these verbs. See also
1
'^
Moulton,
Prol., p. 205.
3 *
Demosthenes (IV, 28). Jebb in V. and D.'s Handb., p. 320. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Cf Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 228.
It is seen as early as
.
p.
225
f.
'
W.-Th., p. 338
f.
lb.
MODE
Thayer under
virep
(ErKAisis)
et
993
Theclae, 29, rpocxevâi
I'm (2).
fxov,
Cf. Acta Pauli
Tov rkKvov
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.
is
The
parallel
between
9,
i'm in this
sense
and
oti
Per contra see 1 Jo. 5: Cf. also on in Mt. 13 13 with IVa in Lu. 13 for distinction. 8 10. It is worth repeating that in the modern Greek (except
seen in Jo. 11:50; 1 Jo. 5:3,
11.
: :
in the Pontic dialect)

inf.
it is
universal
(i^d)
to the exclusion of the
and
ottcos.
It
is
common
after verbs of saying
(Thumb,
:
Handb.,
to give
32)
;
The examples in a complete list. But note

p. 189).
the N. T. are too numerous

'iva
after ayyapevo} (Mt. 27

:
ayaXKiaofJiai (Jo.
56)
:
ay^vlôixai (Jo. 18
10.
36)
atreo/xat (Col.
1:9); d7ra77eXXw (Mt. 28

areXXco (Ac. 16
:
36); d0tr7Mt
:
So (Mk. 11
7rapa77eXXco,
:
Mk.
6:8);
:
dTTO-
16); (SovXevofiaL (Jo. 12

:
10);
and
<7UM/3.
(Mt. 26
4); ^Xevrco (1 Cor. 16
10); ypacfô:
5eoAtat
(Mk. 9
:
12);
SiaaTeWofxaL
(many MSS.
in
Mt. 16
20)
(Lu. 9
:
40)
5t5a;jut
(Mk. 10 :37);
15:12);
kvroKriv SiSco^t {Xanâvoi), as in Jo.
hrkWofjiat.
(Mk. 13:34);
:
kirLTLixaw
W.
3)
;
H.); kôpKLô^ (Mt. 26
63); epcordo;
dk\oi
11 57 (13 :34; (Mt. 12:16; 16:20, (Mk. 7: 26); dirov (Mt. 4

:
and
;
Xe7a; (Ac.
19:4);
:
(Mk. 6
25)
Utlv êXâ (Mt. 18

K-nphaao:
:
14)
f77X60; (1 Cor. 14
(1
1)
;
fTjr^co (1
Cor. 4:2);
(Mk. 6:12);
(Mt. 27
:
fxepLixvaoi
Cor. 7
(Jo.
34)
wapaKoKea} (Mt. 14
ivpoaevxop-ai
36)
Treldo}
20);
7rotco
11:37);
(Mk. 14:35);
awTideyLai (Jo.
9:22 and
This
is
inf.); Tidwi (Jo. 15:16); (^vKaaaoixai (2 Pet. 3:17). a most interesting list. Kiilker {Questiones de elocutione Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 20) has shown how Polyhiana, 1880. Polybius favours 'iva with verbs of commanding like alTeofiai,, iraNo real distinction in sense can here be drawai payykWcj}, etc. between the inf. and IVa. The later kolvti (and so the N. T.) carried this use of 'iva much further than did Polybius, who had more There is no need to appeal affinity with the old literary Greek.
to Latin influence for this sub-final use of
'iva,
as
Moulton
(p.
208)
abundantly shows from the papyri. So 0. P. 744 (I/b.c.) epcorw ere 'iva fxri ayuviaa^s, N. P. 7 (i/A.D.) 'eypaxj/a 'iva col (j)v\axd cbai, B. LT.
531
e'iva
(ii/A.D.) TrapaKa\ct3 ae
'iva
Karacrxv^j
C).
P. 121 (iii/A.D.)
etTrd trot
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
f.;
(Hellen., p. 159)
support Moulton
against the Latin influence theory.
Per contra see Goetzeler,

T., p. 128.
De
Polyhii EL, pp. 17

1
Kalker, Quest.; Viereck, Sermo GraeCf.
It is
found
in
Horn.
Goodwin, M. and
994

Moulton
o-e
fxr]
NEW TESTAMENT
also that the
cus, p. 67.
inf.
scores his point

I'm in
and observes
(e).
was not driven out by

f.)
the papyri, see
Cf. A. P. 135
Gr., p.
(ii/A.D.), epcoTco
afxeXelv
juou.
Radermacher (N. T.
155
gives
numerous other examples
of non-final Iva in papyri
and
:
inscriptions.
The
:
subj.
is
the usual
mode employed even
Thus eôvXevaavro Iva airoKTeivucTcv (Jo. after secondary tenses. ^de\ev 'iva tls yvoi, we have still the om 9 Mk. 30, In 12 10). noted, 'iva dco-q in Eph. 1:17 is already As opt. the not subj., tense. It is here also the primary after a wish of optative an Moulton^ points out how Cf. Phil. 14; Col. 4 12. subfinal 'iva.
:
closely akin are irpoaevxâde

Kai (pvXaaaeade
'iva
ixi]
'eKdrjTe
(Mk. 14
38)
and
'iva
dpare
(Lu. 12
15).
The
paratactic origin of the
con-
struction
is 'iva c.
oTTcos
innovation in Hellenistic subj. in commands, which takes the place of the classic
is
thus well illustrated.
"An
c.
fut. indie." 2
Moulton
'iva
cites
amples of
A.D.)
this
abrupt use of
Zw'CKwl kol
5)
in the papyri.
avTOV
fxi]
a moderate number of exSo F. P. 112 (99

dvacjoir-qays,
eirexov
{=oov)
:
e'iva
letter of
Cicero {Alt. 6
8e,
'iva
juTjS^
ravra
ovv, wpoJTOV ixkv, 'iva Tvavra acbfrjraf Bevrepov

(ii/iii
tojv
tokwv dXiycopwris, B. U. 48
A.D.)
'iva
6p.6ae
yevoiixeda.
There is a doubtful ex. of this sense of 'iva in Soph., It appears in Arrian and Oed. C. 155, though oxws was so used.^ In the modern Greek the va clause sometimes "apEpictetus.
proaches the nature of a principal sentence" (Thumb, Handh., But this eUiptical imperative is undoubted in the N. T. p. 198). Cf. Mk. 5 :23, 'iva k\dCov 'eTndfjs. So also Mt. 20 :32; 1 Cor. 7:
7; Eph. 4: 29; 5: 33. With this construction compare the asyndeton without 'iva in Mk. 10 36, H deKere iroL-qaco As already explained, this may be mere parataxis (two vfjLlv; Cf. 'iva in Mk. 10 35 and Gal. 5 17.^ questions).
29; 2 Cor. 8
(|3)
"Ottws.
It is
much
rarer in the
N. T.
in these constructions.
no longer occurs with the future ind. after verbs of striving. The papyri show ottcos occasionally in this sense also. Moulton
It
{Prol, p. 208) cites B.

"d|tco
c. infin.
f.)
M.
21
(ii/B.c.) rj^'Maa ae ottojs aivobod^,
while
T.
occurs in the same papyrus."
Radermacher
2,
(A^.
Gr., p. 141
quotes Theoph. ad Autolycum,

ottcos
34
eo-rco
aoc kptv-
vav
TO.
rov Oeov
dwrjcreL,
inscr.
ecppovTiaev ottoos
awoKaraaTcJaLv.
from Magn., 90, 12 (ii/B.c.) The few examples in the N. T.

:
are
all
in the subj.
Burton notes only three (Mt. 12

eXajSov
14; 22
15;
Mk.
3:6), and all three after avuôvXiov clause thus partakes of the nature of an indirect deliberative
{k8l8ovv).
1
The
Prol., p. 178.
lb.
W.-M.,
p. 396.
See
art.
by
Jann., Expositor, ser. V, vol. IX, p. 296.
MODE
question
tenses.
(cf.
(efkaiziz:)
995
all
Mk. 11:18,
ttws)-
They
are
after
secondary-
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
:
:
34), irpoaevxoiJ.aL (Ac. 8

(7) M17,
/X17
15).
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
jLiT?
fjLTi
except in Col. 2 8 ^Xewere

:
(jltj
tls eo-rat.
Thus
/SXeTrere
TLs
upas
ir\avr](Txi
:
(Mt. 24
4).
Treg. and Tisch. read the fut. ind.
in 2 Cor. 12
21,
but
W, H. and
we have
:
Nestle rightly have
Tairuvoia-Q (cf.
verse 20).
nil
The
:
pres. subj. occurs in
Heb. 12
o-kottcco
15 eTnaKOTrovvTe^
epox>^v-
Elsewhere
only the aor. subj.

:
Thus
after
(t>oêo-
/SXeTTw
(Mk. 13
is
5); opao)
(Mt. 18
10);
(Gal. 6:1);
nai (Ac. 27: 17).

</)o/3eo/xat
In Ac. 23
10 some
MSS. have
evXaêofim,
but
This construction with (poêofiaL is rare in the N. T. (Luke, Paul and Hebrews) and is apparently a literary touch. Cf. Ac. 27 29. In Ac. 5 26, 0o/3o9j^ro yap t6v \a6v XLOaadCxTLv (note subj. after secondary tense), there is a prolepsis
correct.
: :
/jltj
of Tov Xaov.^
M17
TTOJs is
found after /SXexw with the

:
aor. subj. (1 Cor.

:
2 in 6, (c), 20). Cf. Gal. 2 9) and cpol^kofiac (2 Cor. 11 3; 12 in the object about an fear is the If Clauses. Final Pure (5) present or past, the indicative is used. Thus in Lu. 11:35, earlv, and in Gal. 4:11, ôôvp.ai vp.a.'i fxij ttws eUfj (T/coTret firi
: :
KKOTrlaKa
els
vfias.
This
it
is
in strict
accord with Attic idiom.^
So Par. P. 49 N. P. 17 (iii/A.D.) xxô^povixe p.ri apa hdpoxTKOiv eXaOev v8aTL. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 141) adds examples of fut. ind., as Enoch 6:3, <t>oôvp.aL p.r} oh 6e\r]aeTe; Dio
The papyri show

(ii/B.c.)
aycovioj
also (Moulton, Prol, p. 193).
p.T)
Tore dppcoareT,
Chrys., xxxiv, 44, ov yap taTi

arepoL doêre.
/X17
kIv8vvos,
ij-tj
MaXXcorcii' ecropevcov aadtvt-
The negative
1X7]
TTOJs
fxri.
ovx
o'lovs 6e\co eupco
to
Cf. Col. 2 :S,

is
such a clause is ov. Thus 0oi3o?pai This is to show contrast (2 Cor. 12 20). Sometimes a verb of Kal ov. TLS earaL
in
:
fearing
implied, though not expressed
(cf.
elliptical
use of
'Iva
and
ira
/ir}).
Thus Ac.
pi? irore
5
ov
39,
fxri
mi? Trore
evped^re.
p.y]
This
is
explanation of
apKkaxi (or
TTore
om) in
f.
a possible Mt. 25 9
:
Burton, N. T. M. and T., pp. 88, 95 Cf. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 95.
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 133.
996

and
nr]
NEW TESTAMENT
:
(note negatives)
wore
Scot?
(2
Tim. 2
25).
Mrj irore
:
is
1),
used
with the aorist subj. after a present subj. after

TrpoaSoKCLO}
/3X7rco
(Lu. 3
:
with (Heb. 4:1), with a pres. opt. after 15, indirect question), with a fut. ind. after
(j)oêonai
Trpocrexw (Lu.
21: 34; Heb. 2
(3
12).
These clauses are also
of paratactic origin.^
This
paratactic construction survives in the use of 6pa with the im30; 24 6), but even so the clause may be dependent in actual use as in Mt. 18 10; 1 Th. 5 15. Some doubt^ arises concerning the clauses with /SXeTrco which have a paratactic origin, but are practically dependent. Those in the third person are clearly so (Mk. 13 5; Ac. 13 40, etc.). This argues for a like usage in Lu. 21 8; Gal. 5 15; Heb. 12 25. It is a classic idiom for complemen(8) The Relative Clause. tary relative clauses to be used in a sub-final sense.^ As examples of this idiom in the N. T. note a^tos eariu u> Trape^rj (Lu, 7:4); ovk
perative (Mt. 9
exw 6
ax"^
Trapadrjaoo (11
6);
:
ovdha
26)
exco octtls
tI
jj.epLp.i'rjcreL
(Ph. 2
20).
Cf.
t'<-
ypo4'w (Ac. 25
and
ypaxpaL ovk exw
(ib.).
Rader16, 3,
macher {N. T.
(e)
Gr., p. 138)
quotes from Achilles Tatius, IV,
aToyevao/jLai toctovtov baov
KCiKelvr] Xa^rj.
The
Infinitive.
With verbs
of exhorting, beseeching, etc.,
the infinitive was the normal idiom in the ancient Greek.
In the
N. T.
acTKew,
it still
occurs twice as often as I'm and
ottcos
together.^
Some
of these verbs
have only the

ooKecc,
Idco,
inf. in
the N. T., as atcrxwojuat, d^tow,

kinTrodeoo,
/SouXo/xat,
OKveoo,
kindviikoi,
eTLTpewo},
eTrtxetpeco,
KeXevo),
-Kapaivew,
Teipaco,
airovda^co,
raaao:
and compounds,
:
4)povTL^(j), (t>o(3eoiJ.aL
in the sense of 'to
be afraid to do' (Mt. 2
20).
Many
Thus
\v(T(jo
of the verbs that use sub-final i'm

upas yeveadaL
may have
:
the
inf. also.
iroLrjao)
(Mk.
17).
So also
(Ac. 13
inf. is
fiovKehop.aL, alTeoixaL,
TrpoaevxofJiaL, Xe7co, etc.
Cf.
cl^los XOcrai
:
25)
and
ci^tos
'iva
(Jo. 1
27)
In 2 Cor. 9
5 the
used after the
'im
clause to express an epexegetic or

eToifxrjv
complementary purpose
:
(ravTriv
usage. Cf. in 1 Cor. 9 15 both broken sentence. Moulton^ argues that in Paul the majority of cases of tov with the inf. are epexegetic (Ro. 1:24; 7:3; 8: 12; 1 Cor. 10 13) or adnominal (Ro. 15
dvai),
I'm
a rather
common
and the
inf.
in a
23; 1 Cor. 9
10; 16
4; 2 Cor.
8:11; Ph. 3
21) or the ablative

/jltj
construction (Ro. 15
Lu. 17:
1 is
:
22; 2 Cor. 1:8). Certainly tov not purpose, nor tov elaeXddv in Ac. 10 25.
:
:
eXdelv in
Cf. also
Mt. 21
1 2
3
32, tov iriaTevaaL.
Luke uses
* *
tov
and the
2I8
inf.
more than
T., p. 87.
Moulton, Prol., pp. 185, 248. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 89. Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 217.
Burton, N. T.
ppoi_^ p,
f.
M. and
MODE
(efkaisis)
997
any other N. T. writer. In Lu. 18 1, irpb^ to bttv is not final. Eis TO and the inf. we find chiefly in Paul (44 examples, Moulton, Prol., p. 218. Mr. H. Scott makes 50 by counting the verbs
:
instead of the preposition).
the other N. T. writers.

1
Th. 2
12;
inf.
4:9.
The construction is always final in But Paul has non-final uses, as in The papyri show this non-final use of tov
f.).
and the
(ppourjaop
(Moulton, Prol, p. 219 TOV woLrjaaL, B. U. 164 (ii/iii

(ii/B.C.) irpoadeofxevov
:
So B. U. 1031
Tretcrat
(ii/A.D.)
A.D.)
avrou tov eXOdv,
B.
M.
(rt
23
fj.ov
tov
irepLwocrjcrat..
El and on.
In Lu. 17 2
we have
XvaiTeXel
epptTrrat
fi
I'm
(TKavSaXlaiJ,
et=6rt in
aixTTrjpos el,
where d and ha introduce subject-clauses. Cf. also Mk. 9 42. In Lu. 19:21, e0o/3o 6^1771' o-e on avdpwTos
:
the rare use of on with
(polSkofiaL is
o-e.
to be noted.
It is
made
(e)
easier
by the
proleptic use of
The usual
object-clause
with 3n belongs to indirect discourse.

Consecutive Clauses.
"Im. It is debatable whether I'm has the ecbatic use in the N. T. There is in itself no reason why it should not have it, since undoubtedly it was so used in the later Greek.^ It occurs also in modern Greek, as ttmt va xô-j? Kavels to /jlvoXo tov, that is for one to lose his reason' (Thumb, Handb., p. 197). The parallel of the Latin ut may have had some influence on this late Greek. The development, however, was in the vernacular, and out of the subfinal use of I'm, and the Latin influence was not needed. There is not space to follow the long debate in the grammars and commentaries on this subject. Kiihner^ held that I'm had the ecbatic sense, but Thayer^ boldly accepts the verdict of Fritzsche and Winer who " have clearly shown that in all the.passages adduced from the N. T. to prove the usage the telic (or final) force prevails." W. F. Moulton^ agreed with Winer as against Fritzsche
(a)
'
in the admission of the sub-final use of I'm,
consecutive idea.
is
"But
it
but he balked at the does not follow that the weakened i'm
this use of I'm
is
generally equivalent to
cio-re:
rather, as
we can
Yes,
still
perceive in most cases, an extension of eo consilio ut."

cases,
in
most
beyond a doubt.
once had just this feeling and
stood against^ the admission of the consecutive force of I'm. J. H. Moulton^ confesses to a similar development of opinion on this subject. He had once'' committed himself against the ec1
Gr., 555, 2,
Anm.
3.
' * 6
Lexicon, p. 304. W.-M., p. 421.
Abbott, Joh. Gr.,
p. 381, hold.s to the strict use of tva.

6 ^
Prol., p. 20G.
Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., pp. 153, 155.
Intr. to
N. T. Gr.,
p. 217.
998
batic

I'm,
NEW TESTAMENT
doubts."
Ellicott^
but now he confesses himself "troubled with unsettling He boldly advocates^ the freedom of commentators to
interpret Iva as the context
demands
(final, sub-final,
consecutive).
and he is the most severely grammatical of commentators. The commentator must have grammar, but he needs the grammar of the author on whose work he is making comments. So also Sanday and Headlam on
just this principle,
had defended
Ro. 11:11
"'iva
{(JLTi
iTCTaiaav Iva ireawcTLv;)
pointedly interpret
it
thus:
expresses the contemplated result."
They appeal
to Elli-
cott, Lightfoot
against
and Evans in support of this laxer use of tva as Winer and the Germans. They also (p. 143) quote Chrytva in
sostom's exposition of
force of
in Gal. 5
Ro. 5
1
20: to 8e
'Iva
evravda
om
aiTio-
Xoyias ttoXlv ctXX' eKJSaaec^s

'Lva
:
kcxTiv.
Lightfoot admits the consecutive

:
Th. 5 4. He is correct in both In Jo. 16:2, 'tpx^Tai wpa 'lva bb^rj, It is argued that, where 'iva seems to be it is almost temporal. used in a consecutive clause, it is the divine purpose that is to be considered. But certainly no such explanation is possible in Ro. There is such a thing as the divine purpose and it is 11: 11. atadcovTaL seen^ in Lu. 9 45, riv ivapaKeKaXvixjxkvov cltt' avroov 'iva Cf also Mt. 1 22, 'iva T'Xrjpcodyj. But surel}^ no such puravTo. pose'* appears in Jo. 6 7, ovk apKovcnv ai'Tols 'iva 'eKaaros ^paxv XajS;/. Here we have contemplated result, it is true, but it is result just the same. It is probably just out of this idiom (conceived result) that the use of 'iva for actual result came. Burton^ admits this conceived result as in Heb. 10 36, and seeks to explain Jo. 9 2, But the effort is not successful. 'iva tv4)\6s yevvrjdfj; Tts rip-aprev
17;
instances.
See also Lu. 1:43.
/jlt]
He
denies that there
is
a certain, "scarcely a probable, instance

such."*^
toltj
'iva
e/c-
N. T. of a clause denoting actual result conceived as He considers^ Rev. 13 13, Trotei ar]pe7a jue7dXa, 'iva Kal Tvp Tov ovpavov KaraâiveLv, as the most probable instance of
in the
:
de-
noting actual result.

clearer.
rias.
But
:
there are others just as plain,

'iva
if
not
Thus
1 Jo. 1
9, tkttos eariv Kal Skatos,

clSlkos kirCkadkadaL
'iva
ck^tj
rds ap.ap:
Blass^ places this beside
(Heb. 6
10)
and
thinks that the consecutive use of
grew out
of the infinitive in
:
that sense.
HeTev6r]aav,
With
'iva p-i)
this
Moulton^
agrees.
Cf. also Rev. 9
20, ob
TpocrKvvrjaovaLV,
with
ov perevorjaav dovvaL
avrQ 86âv
Prol., p. 209.
^ ^
lb., p. 94.
2 *
On Eph.
Moulton,
17.
lb.
Prol., p. 210.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 224.

Prol., p. 210.
N. T. Gk., p. 228. N. T. M. an4 T., p. 92 f.

Blass, Gr. of
MODE
in 16: 9.
(etkaisis)
IJo. 3
999
Kal kanev
Note
11
:
in particular
1,
where the clause

is
'iva 4>avtpoidri,
accents the ecbatic force of

9 36;
:
Iva.
:
This use
iir\
possible also in Jo.
Mk.
28.
In
2
Mk. 4
:
22, kav
(cf.
dXX'
'iva)
used
In
like cotrre
and the
inf. (cf.
Blass, Gr. of
we have N.
'iva.
T.
Gk., p. 218).
Mk.
'iva
10 I'm almost
means 'on condition

fjL-q
that.'
The
consecutive
{Diss. Epict., II, 2, 16) ovtco nojpos
appears outside of the N. T. as in Arrian rjv, 'iva %. Sophocles in his

list
Lexicon gives a quite extensive
of passages in the
kolvt]
writers
where I'm has the consecutive sense. He has probably claimed too many, but some of them are real instances. Even Josephus has I'm in the sense of conceived result.'^ Radermacher (A''. T.
Gr., p. 156) cites Epictetus, IV, 3, 9, eXevdepos
yap
d/xL Kal 4>i\os
tov
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
with the infinitive which it finally displaced .^ Sophocles cites several examples of consecutive I'm from the LXX. One of these*
is
certainly pertinent,
Wisdom
of Sol. 13
9, for I'm 8vv(j:vTaL fol-
lows ToaovTov and 'iva has the force of axrre. "âT. This conjunction is merely cos and re^'and so.' In (jS) Homer ws is both a demonstrative and a relative. Either idea may appear in wcrre. It is really a comparative particle.^ In the
early writers the
inf.
was more common than the
ind.
with
coo-re.
Thus
in Euripides the inf. occurs 130 times to

it
20 indicatives.
In
144 to 82, but in Plato it is 253 to 240. The consecutive sentence began with the inf. and was extended to the In late Greek it returned to the inf. construction. finite verb."*
Thucydides
is
Cf. Green, Diodorus
and
the
the 83 instances
=^
of coore in the
Peloponnesian War, 1899, p. 21. Of 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 parThe structure is wholly paratactic. In this sense ticle like ovv.
of 'therefore' the particle occurs with the ind. twenty-one times.
Cf.
Mt. 12
12, coo-re
8, coo-re eopTa^conev.
P.Oxy. IV, 743,
'eêcTTiv. Once the subj. appears, 1 Cor. 5 Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 161) even quotes 27(ii/B.c.), coo-r' av tovto ae 0eXco jivcoaKeLv, and there
:
are other instances like

1
it.
The
other eleven instances have the

^
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 224.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 210.
Cf. Gildersl., Cf. Berdolt,
The Consec.
Sent, in Gk.,
Am.
Jour, of Philol., 1SS6, p. 1G7.

1S9G,
Der Konsckutivsatz
in der alt<Tn grioch. Litteratur,
pp. 21-27.
6
Mr.
II.
Scott makes 95 times by counting the verbs.
1000
NEW TESTAMENT
:
imperative.
11
:
Cf. ware (SXexerco (1 Cor. 10
12).
See
Cor. 3
21;
Of the hypotactic examples 62 have the infinitive and only two the indicative. In the Attic Greek actual result was expressed by cbare and the indicative, while ajcrre and the inf. (' so as to ') denoted a result naturally or necessarily following the preceding cause.^ In the N. T. there are only two instances
33, etc.
of the ind. with oxTre (as a hypotactic conjunction).

Jo. 3
:
They
oi
are
16, ouTOJS
edooKep,
yap
rjjaTrrjaev 6
:
Beds
/cat
top Koajdov chare

avpVTreKpidrjffap
ttj
top vlop top

XolttoI
(xoPoyePTJ
and Gal. 2
13,
avTui
'lovdaiOL ihare Kal
Bappaâs avpaivqxdr] avrOiP

16
viroKpiaH.
Here the
inf. in
actual result
is
distinctly accented.
:
Blass^ on the flimsiest grounds

otl
seeks to oust wore in Jo. 3
by
and to put the
Gal.
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
it is not quite obsolete in the vernacular KOLpi], but in the almost absent. This classic idiom stands, therefore, in the N. T., but only to make the contrast sharper. Of the 62 instances of
coo-re
LXX
with the
coare in
inf.
in the
N. T. they are nearly
all
consecutive,
inf.
not
final
nor even sub-final.

it
Even
in the classical
Greek the
with
the sense of actual result was displacing^ the ind.
and
in the vernacular
(ii/A.D.).
grew rapidly.
is
B. G. U. 27
This
Cf ware awoXeXvadaL, a distinct encroachment on the

.
old idiom and has a wider range than in Attic. ^
In Ac. 14
note ovTWS
ojcrre.
See Mt. 13 32 were ekdelp

:
TO, Treretra
rod ovpapov
yefiiêadat
Kal KaTa(XKT]Po2p ep rots kXclBols avTov,
(Mk. 4
:
37) coore
ijdr]
TO tXoIop, (Ac. 15
39) ware
d7roxcop(.(T0J7i'at
avTovs aw'
aXK-fi\o)p.
Ta-
tian took chaTe consecutive in Lu. 4
Consecutive coo-re and inf. is papyri for Radermacher to mention {N. T. Gr., p. 160). We do not have coo-re after a comparative (^ coare) in the N. T. There is
29 (Moulton, Prol., p. 249). too common in the inscriptions and
no example
that.'
(7)
'fis.
of
c6o-re
:
nor of
ecf)'
wre in the sense of 'on condition
In Gal. 2
9 tpa has practically that idea.

in
Thayer considers that

cos.
Heb. 3:11 and 4
we have
(Ps.
the consecutive use of
It is
a quotation from the
LXX
94
1
11)
and
is
possible,
though the simple

ff.
'as' is sufiicient.^
But
M. and T., p. 99. N. T. Gk., p. 224. ^ In Xen. us rather than ibare occurs both with the inf. and the modes. Cf. Wehmann, De CbaTe particulae usu Heroditeo Thucydideo Xenophonteo, 1891,
2 3
Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 223 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 224.

Pro!., p. 209.
Burton, N. T.
Blass, Gr. of
p. 40.
MODE
cos
(eFKAISIs)
koivt]
1001
(Raderort
tLs
has kept
A^.
its
place as a consecutive particle in the
macher,
(5)
T. Gr., p. 160).
"Ort.
There
is
in the later Greek.^

djxi
We
no doubt about the consecutive use of find it in the LXX, as in Ex. 3:11,
Cf. also 2 Ki. 8
:
e7w
oTL Topevaonai. irpos âpacb;
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
Gr.,
deol
also
Heb. 2:6
(Ps. 8:5);
Lu. 4:36.
Radermacher (A^ T.
elaiv
ot
p. 160)
vixcov
quotes Acta Christophori, 68, 18, tolovtol yap
OTL VTTO yvvaLKos iKLvi]Qr](jav.
Moulton
6tl
{Prol., p. 249) gives rl
diSois
Toh anvoh
crov,
otl
fcoi^j'
alwvLOv exovcTLv; Pelagkl, 20.
It OCCUrs
es Tocrov-
in Theocritus Tov OTL.
ix,
25 M^Tas
ToaovTov
p.
SLeKoxpa, x,
14
Abbott {J oh.
22,
t'l
Gr.,
534) takes otl as consecutive in
Jo. 14
yeyovev otl
rnxiv /xeXXets fjL(j)api^Lp;
Abbott
finds
no
instance of consecutive otl in the Egyptian papyri. The idiom Akin to it is the modern Greek use is common in the late Greek.
of TToO as consecutive
is
:
(Thumb, Handh.,
is
p. 197).
The same
idea
found in Jo. 7 35. This (e) The Relative.
common
classic idiom.
The mode
the ind. and the negative ov.^ In Latin the subj. is the mode with qui. The tense is usually the fut. ind., though the conis
struction
:
is
rare^ in the
kolvt].
But one may note

24
:
in the
N.
T.,
Mt. 10 26 and
:
in particular
2, ov nr]
:
a(f)edfj
wSe Xldos
eiri
\Wov
:
See also Lu. 8 17; 1 Cor. 6:5; Ro. 8 32. In Jo. 5 7, avdpojirov ovk ex" tva â\y, we see i'm usurping this province of the relative. Cf. Rev. 19 15. See "Relative" under
OS ov KaToKvdrjaeTaL.
:
Sub-final.
The Infinitive. The inf. with ware has been discussed, but we have left the simple inf., the articular (tov) inf., els to and the There are apparently examples of each construction in the inf. N. T. Thus the simple inf. of result is seen in Lu. 1 54, di/reXdjSero 'la-parjX 7rat56s avTov iJi,vr]adrjvaL e\eovs; at any rate it is used here
(f)
:
very
freely.
Blass* considers the infinitives in Lu.
"quite incoherently."
5 5 and bovvaL in 16:9.
But
in Ac. 5
3 xpevaaadaL
10.
72 used 1 has a consecu:
tive idea, as has hinXaekaBaL in

:
Heb. 6
1
:
Cf. Lu.
76, 78
See also avolâL in Rev. f. It is probable that
originally the dative -at in the

1
inf.,
Soêrat as
opposed to
bbp.ev,
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 455; Moulton, Prol., p. 249.
Cf. Compernass, 38.
See Sophocles' Lexicon.

2 "
Goodwin, M. and T., Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr.,
p.
218
f.
*
p. 468.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 224.
1002
NEW TESTAMENT
expressed "designed result" (Moulton, Prol., pp. 204, 207), but This idiom is found in the this idea shrank into the background.
papyri,^ as in O. P. 526 (ii/A.D.), ovk
ireiv.
TJurjv airadris
aXoycos ae aTroKei-
Meyer on Ro.
is
3,
tov
p.y]
elvai,
argues that tov and the

I
inf.
never expresses
result,
a position which
result.
10,
fxi]
once held.^
But the
.
evidence
too strong to
resist.
See Infinitive for distinction be-
tween actual and hypothetical p. 154) quotes Acta Barnabae,

pevecrOaL,
Radermacher {N T.
/Stdo-p
Gr.,
tto-
Bappaâv tov
in the
p. 220).
nrj
as consecutive.
The idiom
is
not
common
papyri
as
is
true of rod and
inf.
(Moulton, Prol.,
writers,
It belongs
it
chiefly to the
LXX
and Byzantine
and Moulton puts
"the higher stratum of education in the main." The epexedeadai, 0. P. tov getic use occurs, as in C. P. R. 156 kôvaiav 275 TOV cnroaTraadrjpaL eir'LTeLp.ov. This construction {tov and the inf.) had a very wide development in the N. T. in opposition to the encroachments of Iva. See Lu. 17 1 and Ac. 10 25, where tov and the inf. is practically the subject of the verb (cf. original dative and locative cases). Luke has two-thirds of the examples of tov and the inf. in the N. T. Only half of these (in Gospel and Acts) seem clearly final according to Moulton.^ He holds that of the 13 examples in Paul none are unmistakably final, though Ro. 6 6 and Ph. 3 10 are probably so. In both instances tov and the inf. is epexegetic of a 'iva clause (Moulton, Prol., p. 218). In Paul so as to' will usually express his idea with tov and the inf. A
in
'
clear instance in
Luke
is
seen in Ac. 7
19, eKaaoiaev tovs Trarepas
tov 7rotTv='so as to make.'

(1 Ki.
Blass^ cites a parallel from the

aiiTtjs.
17
20), av
e/cdKcocras
:
tov davaToocai tov vlov

:
Other
LXX LXX
instances are Gen. 3
22; 19
fxi]
21;
Is.
14.
The
case in Ro.
7:3
18
:
is
very
clear, tov
dvat.
It is possible in
Lu. 9 :51; Ac.
10; 20:3; 27: 1; Ro. 1:24.
Cf. tov kpcoTrjaaL

to
yayris in Ac.
23
20.
So with
idea.
eis
and the
inf.
Its
and ottcos KaTamost natural

so here re1
:
signification is
sult
is
aim or purpose, but,
just as with
Iva,
sometimes the
Meyer
elvai avTovs dvairoXoyrjTovs, insists
on Ro. that the meaning of

in his note
20,
to
eis
to
eis
is al-
ways purpose.
In this particular instance divine purpose is probably the idea, though result is a possible conception. See Sanday and Headlam in loco. Ellicott on 1 Th. 2 12, eis to
:
admits the sub-final use of eis exhorting (cf. 1 Th. 3 of after verbs 10), though TO (cf. Iva) and that on But it is only a step to go ecbatic use. the denying
irepiTvaTelv (after TrapaKa\ovvTes ktX.),
:
Moulton, Prol., p. 210. Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 156.
'
Prol., p. 217.
"
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 236.
MODE
the N. T. writers took.
(efkaisis)
1003
1
See the epexegetic use of eh to in

of
eis
Th.
inf.
9.
Winer admitted the consecutive use
to
and the
as in 2 Cor. 8
6,
ets
to irapaKoXecrat.
is
i7/xas
T'ltov,
'so that
we
be-
sought Titus.'
tings,
This idiom
and
though it is Th.) and Hebrews.

:
not present in the Johannine wrivery frequent in Paul's writings (especially Ro.
19).
TO XaXTjcrai (Jas. 1
a clear example of result. permanence.^ See also cf)pove7v els to aoocppovelv (Ro. 12 3), where purpose is impossible. Cf. Gal. 3 17. As to irpos to and the inf. Purpose is undoubtedly present as in the point is not clear. Mt. 6:1; Eph. 6:11, and there is total absence of purpose in Lu. 18 1, wpos TO betv. It is not certain, in spite of Blass' comment,^
: : :
Notice Taxi's ds to aKovaat, ^pa8vs ds In Heb. 11:3, els to yeyovevai, we have Note the perfect tense with notion of
that in the N. T.
eiridvurjaaL,
7rp6s to
expresses result.
is
In Mt, 5
28, irpos to
either purpose or result
possible.
W.
F.
Moulton^
H. Moul-
denies that the idiom ever conveys mere result, but admits that
it
may have
subjective purpose as in
is
Th. 2:9.
J.
ton^ holds that this

writings.
7.
the idea in
:
all
the four examples in Paul's

:
See further 2 Th. 3 8; 2 Cor. 3 13. Wishes. The use of the optative for a future wish like ayiaaai (1 Th. 5 23), p.ri y'evoLTo (Gal. 6 14), is not a h3''potactic construction. This is pure parataxis and has already been discussed under the Optative.^ See Optative Mode. The only hypo: :
tactic sentence for the expression of a wish in the
with
ticle.
64>e\ov,
which comes
it
in the late
N. T. is that Greek to be used as a parIt is the
Even here
is
el
possible to regard the construction as
paratactic, but note
yap and
eWe.
second aorist ind.
of bê'Ckw without the
augment. "O(f)e\ov with the inf. occurs in Herodotus, and the form is thus probably lonic.'^ For kolvt] parallels see "Impossible Wishes" under Indicative Mode. Cf. wêi\ov avviffTaadaL in 2 Cor. 12 11. It is found in the LXX^ as a
:
conjunction, as in Ex. 16
3,
bê\ov airedavoixev.
its
Cf.
Num.
14
2;
20
1
3.
Moulton^ suggests that
application to the second and

3
<
p. 414 note. Soo further Ogden, De infinitivi finalis vol con.secutivi construolionc apud priscos poetus Graooos, 1913. " See eh. on " Wishes" in my Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 157.
2
^
W.-M., p. 413 f. Moulton, Prol., p. 219.

Prol., p. 218.
Or. of N. T. Gk., p. 23G.
W.-M.,
'
Moulton,
Pro!., p. 201.
:
In W.-Sch., p. 29, reference is made to el 6<j)t\ov itpvXaâ^ in Job 14 13 and 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

is
due to the meaning 'I would' rather than 'thou shouldst.' As a matter of fact its use in the N. T. is very Hmited, though eWe and ei yap are wanting as particles of wishing. For a wish about the past we have the aorist ind. So 6(^tK6v ye kâcnCf. Ps. 118 (119) 5. For a wish about 8). \e{j<raTe (1 Cor. 4 imperfect ind. So 2 Cor. 11:1, 64)eXov the have we the present
third persons
:
aveixecrde,
6(t)e\ov
and Rev. 3
but
it is
15, 64>i\ov
rjs.
The
Text. Rec. here has

find the fut. ind.
e'iris,
baseless.
However, we do
:
for a future wish.
So Gal. 5
12, 6eKov airoKoxJ/ovTai.
Wishes as
a separate idiom are vanishing in the N. T. But 64>e\ov appears in Lucian, Athenagoras, Greg. Naz., Socrates. Cf. Sophocles'
Lexicon.
To compensate
12;
for this loss

:
we have
el
:
the strong asseverti
ations with ov nv (Mt. 13
14),
the use of
hke the Hebrew

14).
(Mk. 8
Heb. 4
3),
et ixrjp
(Heb. 6
14),
:
the use of the parti-
ciple like the
Hebrew
inf.
absolute (Mt. 13
The
distinction
between wish and supposition with et was sometimes hard to make The relation between wishes and conditions is not in Homer.^
clear.
8. (a)
Conditional Sentences.
Two
this.
Types. No hypotactic clause is more important than For some reason the Greek conditional sentence has been
In truth the difficult for the students to understand. doctors have disagreed themselves and the rest have not known how to go. The theory of Hermann, followed by most Germans
very
(Winer ,2 Blass^), is the one that I learned from Broadus and have expounded in my Short Grammar.'^ It is also that of Gildersleeve.^ This theory in brief is that there are four classes of conditions which fall into two groups or types. The two types are The point in "deterthe determined and the undetermined. mined" is that the premise or condition is assumed to be true (or
untrue).
positive statement
is
made
in either case
and the
is
conclusion follows logically from this premise.

the one used for this type (the
real
first
The
indicative
and second
class conditions,
and unreal, or fulfilled and unfulfilled). The other type is the undetermined condition. Naturally the indicative is not allowed here. The element of uncertainty calls for the subj. or the optative. The difference therefore between the third and second class conditions is just that between the subj. and the opt. They are both modes of doubtful, hesitating affirmation, but the optative
1 2
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 227. Cf W.-M., pp. 363ff. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 213 f.
Gildersl.,
" ^
Am.
ff.
Pp. 161
Am.
Jour, of Philol., 1882, pp. 435
ff.
MODE
is
(efkaisis)
1005
more remote than the subj. In this type the premise is not assumed to be either true or untrue. The point is in the air and the cloud gathers round it. But there is less mist over the subj.
than the opt.
In broad outline this
I
is
the classification of the
conditional sentences which
hold to he true.
Thompson
any higher
I
is
surely right in saying that no division can claim
right
than that of convenience and

like to
intelligibility,
except that
should
add that the exposition should be in harmony with the facts of the historical development of the Greek language. There is no nobler achievement in syntax than the Greek conditional sentence before it broke down from the loss of the optative and In the modern Greek it is therefore a the future indicative. wreck, and there is corresponding obscurity between the various
classes of conditions, as in English, in spite of special develop-
In broad outline these ReaUty, Unreality, termed four classes of conditions may be is, however, too ProbabiUty word Probability, Possibility. The the subj.). La and {lav condition strong a term for the third-class 3 prefers "objektive Moglichkeit" class and third for the Roche the opt.). and (el class fourth the for "subjective Moglichkeit" and possibihty" "objective Winer,^ of language This is also the Possibility, words the prefers Farrar^ "subjektive possibility." Radermacher Impossibihty, Slight Probability, Uncertainty.
ments to make atonement
for the loss.^
(N. T. Gr., p. 142) calls
"an
sich objektiv,"
el
el with ind. "objektiv," eav with subj. with opt. "subjektiv," el with past tenses
of ind. "Irrealitat."
So
it
goes.
Radermacher thinks
also that,
to understand the Greek conditions, we must distinguish sharply between the vernacular and the kolvt] ("so miissen wir scharf
scheiden zwischen Volkssprache und der Koin^"), a mistaken view in my judgment. It is best to use kolvt] for both the vernacular and literary language. This brings us face to face with
the other theory, the one adopted by Farrar. It was expounded by Goodwin^ and has had quite a vogue in America and EngThis theory calls for "particular" and "general" supposiland.'^
tions as a fundamental element.
1
This
is
a false step in
itself.
As
2 3
Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 296. Jebb, V. and D.'s Ilundb., pp.
,3.3011.;
Thumb,
Beitr. zur griech. Gr., 1893, pp. 14, 18.
He
ITandb., p. 194 f. uses "WirkUchkeit" and
"Irrealitat" (pp. 8, 28) for the others.

^ Gk. Synt., p. 150 f. p. 364. See Proc. of the Am. Acad., vol. VI; Jour, of Thilol., V, pp. 186-205, VIII, pp. 13-38; M. and T., pp. 145 ff. ' Adopted by Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 290.
W.-M.,
1006
NEW TESTAMENT
may
be
Gildersleeve^ shows, each of the four classes of conditions

particular or general.
That point has no bearing on the quality
of the condition. Goodwin's past general supposition, where alone a show of distinct structure is made, is a mixed condition (see later under fourth class condition). But the point on which I wish to attack Goodwin's scheme is chiefly in his definition of the first and second class conditions. That involves the third also, as will be
seen.
fact.
Goodwin confuses the "fact" with the "statement"
of the
He
describes the
first
condition thus:
"When
the protasis
simply states a present or past particular supposition, implying nothing as to the fulfilment of the condition, it takes a present or
past tense of the indicative with
ject, besides "particular," are
et." The words to which I ob"implying nothing as to the fulfilThis condition pointedly implies the
ment
of the
condition."
fulfilment of the condition.

ity, Wirklichkeit,
It is the condition of actuality, real-
above) d
la
and not mere "possibility" as Farrar has it (see Goodwin. This is the crux of the whole matter.
see that the first class condition with the ind. implies the reality of the premise, all else follows naturally. In the discussion
of the second class condition
Once
Goodwin^ properly
says:
"When
the
protasis states a present or past supposition, implying that the
condition
is not
or
was not
is
of unreality as the other
course, used with both.

fall
fulfilled, etc." This is the condition that of reality and the indicative is, of Hence the subj. and the opt. conditions
apart to themselves as undetermined.

is
The
point about
all
the four classes to note
that the form of the condition has to do only with the statement, not with the absolute truth or certainty of the matter. Examples will be given directly to show that
the second class condition

just the opposite.
tion.
is
sometimes used where the fact

thing
is
is
The same
true of the
first class
condi-
We
must
distinguish always therefore between the fact
The conditional sentence deals only with the statement. This point is clearly seen in KiihnerGerth, II, p. 465, except that the third class is lost sight of and merged with the first. Burton ^ follows Goodwin through all his
statement of the fact.
1
and the
Am.
Jour, of Philol., 1882, pp. 4.35
ff.
Gildersl.
still
objects to the distinc-
and "general" suppositions which Goodwin brought into fashion. That merely depends on the character of the apodosis. Cf. Am. 2 M. and Jour, of Philol., 1909, p. 10. T., p. 147. N. T. M. and T., pp. 100 ff. FarneU (Gk. Conditional and Rel. Sent., 1892) also follows Goodwin, as does R. H. Smith (The Theory of Cond. Sent, in Gk. and Lat., 1894).
tion of "particular"
MODE
ramifications.
(efkaisis)
is
1007
of warning.
word further
demanded by way
One must not try to explain the Greek or German translation. The English is
ous, while the
condition by the English

often hopelessly ambigu-
Greek
is
perspicuous
if
one
will
only give
is
it
chance to speak for itself. The by the approach from the Greek standpoint. And that is by the 'Eav is nothing but d av. The av is not mode, not by d or kav. or apodosis. Homer^ used d with the protasis essential to either The Attic Greek^ sometimes has av. or Ke subj. with or without used el av with the past ind. Demosthenes and d av with the opt. Joh. Philop. De ceterniquotes T. Gr., Radermacher {N p. 127)
true explanation
only possible
He gives also (p. 163) kSlv rjBvvaTo iiv. tate 430, 28 (iii/A.D.) el The pvaaiTo, Diod. I, 77, 3. (3or]doir], Diod. XI, 37, 3; eav fxii (Thumb, the ind. of tense any with ixv (for eav) uses Greek modern There is no principle involved in av, simply Handh., p. 194).
is used, of course, more freely and the opt. have vanished.^ Jolly holds that the ind. was a later development with conditional sentences in Greek and that the first attempt was made with the subj. and the opt. He thinks that the use of the ind. was the result of a
custom.
In modern Greek the subj.
since the fut. ind.
clearer conception of the logical possibilities of the conditional

clause.
The
subj.
was more common
in
Sanskrit (and Latin) than in the Greek.*

difficult to explain.
the Zend and the Here as always iiv is
indefinite.
"Now it has a Sometimes the reference
definite reference,
is
now
it is
supplied by the context,
sometimes by the opposite."^
See The Use of av in Relative Sentences in this chapter. We shall first examine the standard forms of the conditional sentence and then note the variations
and
(h) (a)
modifications.
Four Classes.
Determined as
Fidfilled.
This class of condition assumes
the condition to be a reality and the conclusion follows logically and naturally from that assumption. Gildersleeve (Am. Jour, of
PhiloL, 1882, p. 435) observes that this
in
is
the favourite condition
argument: "It
construction
Monro, Horn.
is
when one wishes
to be
fair,

is el
when one
eav)^
is
sure of the premises."

of the in-
The
1
(sometimes
f.
"
and any tense
Gr., p.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
210 Gk. Gr.,
Baunilein, Unters., pp. 352

Ilandb., p. 194
f.
ff.
p. 463;
Thumb,
f.
Cf. Jolly, Ein Kapitel vcrgl. Synt., 1872, p. 122

Gildersl.,
Am.
The
origin of
ia
uucertuin.
Ei
ia
the
same
as al in
Homer
(and Doric).
1008

The apodosis
is
dicative in the protasis.

all
depends on what one
after,
varies very greatly. It whether mere statement, pre-
diction,
command,
prohibition, suggestion, question.
Hence the
be in the indicative (any tense) or the subjunctive There is no necessary correspondence in or the imperative.
apodosis
tense between protasis and apodosis.
of the apodosis has
dition.
may
The
variation in the
mode
on the force of the conThis condition, therefore, taken at its face value, assumes no
essential bearing
the condition to be true.
mine the actual
situation.
is
The context or other light must deterThe apodosis is the principal clause,
the premise, the protasis usually predeclarative or interis
but since the protasis

cedes the apodosis.
The apodosis may be

list
rogatory, positive or negative.
This condition
in
so frequent in
the N. T. that no exhaustive
can be given, but representative
examples must
suffice.
Thus
Mt. 12
27,
ei
ctoj
kv
Beefe/SouX
is
a good 5:11) to begin with, since the assumption is untrue in fact, though assumed to be true by Jesus for the sake of argument. The question is a redudio ad absurdum. In verse
K|8dXXco TO. haijxbvLa, ol viol vfxoju hv tIvi eKJSoKKovcnv ;
This
example
(cf.
also Gal.
26,
el
Sarams
tou "âravav k'/3a,XXet,
</>'
eavrov
eixeplcrOT],
there
is
the adchtional point of change of tense in the apodosis. He was already divided against himself, in that case, before he casts himBut the tense may be merely due to a quick change self out.
of view-point as accomplished (timeless aorist in reality).
This
point comes out well in verse 28,

TO,
el de ev
17
xvevfxaTL deov
eyu
17
k/3aXXc<j
baijxbvLa,
apa
e(f)daaev
ec})'
v/xSs
/SacrtXeta.
Note apa with the

:
aorist.
For the past

Cor. 15
:
ind. in
2;
both clauses see Ac. 11

:
(el
UwKev,
Rev. 20 15 {el tls ovx evpedrj, e^\r]dt]). For the present ind. in both clauses note Mt. 19 10 {el ovtws earlp The presence ov (rvfj.4)epeL) Ro. 8 9; Jo. 15 18; 1 Cor. 15 10.
Tts rimv)', 1
:
of the perfect in protasis (15
14, 17, 19) or

:
apodosis (15
is
13, 16)
does not vary the point.

the perfect.
Cf.
:
In 2 Cor. 2
5,
the perfect
followed
by
The
fut. ind.
in both clauses, as in
aop-ai).
may, though Mt. 26 33 {el aKavdaXLadrjaouTai,

rarely in the
:
N.
T., occur
(jKavbaKLadi}:
Mk.
f.
14
29; Lu. 19
40;
Cor. 3
15; 2 Tim. 2
12; 1
Cor. 3
14
But such
little niceties
cut no figure in this conlibitum.
There is perfect hberty to mix the tenses ad So past and present (Lu. 19 :8f.; 11 20; 2 Cor. 7 8,
struction.
:
:
14;
Ro.
Lange (Der hom. Gebr. tier Partikel Ei) makes (The Orig. of Subj. and Opt. Cond. in Gk., Harv.
treats
it
it
exclamatory.
But Hale
that case.'
Stu. in Class. Philol., 1901)
as a demonstrative in the
locative
case,
meaning
'in
This
is
more probable.
MODE
4:2; 15
Lu. 16
Ac. 5
: :
:
(EFKAISli;)
32; 15
11
1009
:
27; 1 Jo. 4
11),
past and future (Jo. 13
20:
12;
11),
present and future (Mt. 17:4; Jo. 5 :47;

:
39; 19
39; Ro. 8
11).
In
Cor.
9:11
ei
eaireipanev
and
occur side by side. Examples of the imperative in the apodosis occur as in Mk. 4 23 e'i ns ex^L oora aKobeiv, oLKoveTco. Cf Mt. 5 :29; 8 :31; Lu. 4 :3; Ac. 16 15; Jo. 7:4; 18 23. In Lu.
el Oeplcrofiev
: :
3, t vlos el
Tov
deov,
eiir'e,
we have a good example

would
of the first
class condition. class
The
devil
not, of course, use the second
(assumed to be untrue), for that would be an affront to The third and fourth classes would throw doubt on the point. The temptation, to have force, must be assumed as true. The devil knew it to be true. He accepts that fact as a working
Christ.
hypothesis in the temptation.

-prove it,
He
is
anxious to get Jesus to
needed proof for Christ's own satisfaction and If the devil used Aramaic, then we have for his reception. Christ's own translation of it or that of the Evangelist. In Jo. 18 23 (et /ca/cws eXoKrjaa, jxapTvp-qaov irepi tov KaKov), however, the assumption is not a fact, though Christ treats it as such for argument's sake. Cf. Lu. 23 35, 37. In Jo. 20 15 note the aorist
as
if
it
ind.
{el
eâaracras)
and the imper.

the late
:
{elire).
p. 215)
takes
el
dekeLs in
kolvt]
Blass {Gr. of N. T. Gk., to be like the French s'il
vous plait. 5
:
Cf.
Mt. 17
4.
For the
subj. in the apodosis note Gal.
25,
el
^wp-ev irpevpan, TvevparL Kal aroix^l^^vis
The use
Koivi]
of eav with
the ind.
to be
rather
more frequent
in the late
Koivi].
Finally
"a mere
literary alternative."^
In the
ind.,
in Pisidia
Phrygia
eav occurs
with the aorist

Set
the pres. ind.
came and and the

el
future ind. as well as with the subj.^
The papyri examples

(ii/B.c), eav ol8ev B.
eav
8'
are
unmistakable, as eav
in
Tb. P. 58
f.
U.
546 (Byz.), eav

(ii/A.D.),
(t)alveTat.
A. P. 93
(ii/A.D.j,
elalv
O. P.
eav KeXeveis
O. P. 1150, 2
(vI/a.D.), eav paxovaiv Par.
P. 18, eavirep
(A''.
eKirXr] puaovcnv
Par. P. 62 (ii/B.c.).^
cites others
T. Gr., pp. 83, 163)

Hippiatr., p.
like eav
rjv
Radermacher from the papyri and inp. 137, eav 8e tls

earlv.
d-qa-ei;
scriptions.
So Heberdey-Wilhelm, Reisen,
244,
30,
eavirep
Eum.
for ^
evopxv^
Perhaps exijv
amples
is
are not to be counted as instances, since

subj."*
sometimes
and
1
eav is
In general, the difference between el considerably lessened in the Koivi], though it must be
^ *
Coinpcrnass,
lb.,
De
Scrinone, p. 35
of
f.
pp. 49, 16S, 187; CI. Rev.,
LXX see Sterenberg, The Use

tateuch, 1908.
XVIII, Cond. Sent,
p. 108.
in
Moulton, Pro!., p. 168. For the us:iji;e of the the Alex. Version of the Pen*
1010
NEW TESTAMENT
remembered that kav was never confined to the subj. nor el to the 'Ed^ riada occurs in Job 22 3, and Moulton^ quotes ind. and opt. Cf. also eav rjaav it from Hb. P. 78 (iii/B.c.) as "certainly subj." Tb. P. 333 (iii/A.D.), and a number of undoubted examples of kav with past, present and future tenses of the ind. from kolvt] writers Thayer calls it "a are given in Sophocles' Lexicon under kav. somewhat negligent use, met with from the time of Aristotle on." It was just a normal development in the kolvt] till in the modern Greek av is used indifferently with either ind. or subj. So av to '/caves, 'if you did so,' av dLxpaa-Qs, 'if you thirst' (Thumb, Handb., Theophylact in his Proem to Luke has kav p.i] kdappei, p. 194 f.). In the N. T. we note kav o'iSanev (1 Jo. 5 15); kav aTrjKeTe (1 Th. 3:8), where no mistake is possible between the two modes (ind. and subj.). In 1 Th. 3 8 ^{D have aTrjKTjTe, but in Lu. 6 34
: : : :
there
is
considerable support for kav

in
8avell;eTe,
as there
is
for kav re
kav 6i'a7:
aTto6vr](XKoiJ.tv
Ro. 14:
is
8.
In Gal.
1:8a
few MSS. read
YeXiferai.
It
is
possible to treat kav fxaprvpui as pres. ind., Jo. 5
31; 8
kav
14.
There
is
undue scepticism on
It is true that the
Blass' part^ concerning
and the
:
fut. ind.
MSS.
are generally di-
vided, but there

in Ac. 8
is
no
real
room
:
for
doubt about following
NBCE
That
31,
edi' 68r]y7]aeL,
except for possible itacism with

5 where
-rj.
possible also in Rev. 2
W. H.
read kav
jieTavoi](jigs.
But
there
is
no room
for itacism in
Mt. 18:19
40
kav avix4>covr]aov(TLv,
supported by
J<BDELA 33,
neravo-qaovcnv.
although rejected by
:
W. H. and
Nestle
(FGKM
2
:
have
fii]
-uaiv), nor in Lu. 19
kav aLcoir-qaovaiv,
:
nor in Rev.
It is
22 kav
In Mt. 18
19 the editors seem un-
willing to follow the
MS.
evidence for the fut. ind.
mere
tradition to feel that kav has to have the subj.

kav
ear]
Besides,
1
.
we have
2 and Vis. There is at any rate no great difference in the resultant sense between the fut. ind. and the aor. subj. and it was a very natural development. Cf. Homer's use of /ce with both. But, when all is said, as a matter of fact, in the N. T. as in the kolvt] generally, the rule In 1 Cor. is for el to appear with the ind. and kav with the subj. 7 5 we have el htjtl av (bracketed by W. H.) without a verb. It KaraXtTro;, Thus B. U. 326 el tl kav is matched by the papyri.^ O. P. 105 (ii/A.D.) el TL aWo alav (e)xa;, B. M. 233 (Iv/a.D.) el tl av ava\uays, Tb. P. 28 (ii/B.c.) el kclv SvvaTaL. In these the modal av (kav) is separated from el and used as if with 6s, 6tov. Rader-
and
V.
kav firfKen Trpoadriaw in
Hermas, Mand. V,
I, 3. 2,
1.
In Lev. 22
we
find kav ê^-nXcoaovaLv.
Pro!., p. 168.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 215.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 169.
MODE
macher
85,
19,
(A^".
(ErKAI2;i2)
1011
ovK av
T. Gr., p. 162) cites also Joh. Philop., De cetern., p. Dcissman^ sees no analysis of eav /xt? virapxv-
TL in this,
use of
ei
though Moulton contends for this explanation. The irepiKHTaL in Mk. 9 42 in the sense of on Blass {Gr. of
:
N. T. Gk.,
ayvoeLTai.
p.
215)
calls
"quite incorrect."
in 1
He means
et
it
is
not "classic."
Note the irony
Cor. 14:38,
class
tls
ayvoei,
The negative
of the protasis in
the
first
condition
is
practically always ov in the N. T. We have ei ov as a rule, not In the classic Greek the rule was to use ei nrj, and ei ov ei fXT].
appeared only where the ov coalesced with a single word (the verb generally) or for sharp antithesis or emphasis.^ But in the
N. T., as in the kolvt] generally and occasionally in the Attic,' we meet ei ov in the condition of the first class. Jannaris'* notes 34 examples of ei ov in the N. T., but Moulton^ finds only 31 of this class of condition. There is only one in the second, so that there
a slight discrepancy. In truth ei fit] occurs only five times with the simple logical condition, and the examples are not quite normal except the one in Mk. & 5, ovk edhvaro ei uri eOepairevaev (a
is
:
simple past condition),
and in 1 Tim. 6 3, et tls instance from the "abnormal" an this (Blass calls see 1 Cor. 15 But "abnormal"). not surely It is
:
m
:
irpoaevxeraL
literary style.
2 kros
:
ei et
p.i\ /X17
tiKji
eTnaremaTe, 2 Cor. 13
et
p.riTL
aboKipol eare, Gal. 1
Tives eiaiv.
Elsewhere the negative

01;
is oh.
This
is
in
harmony with
the meaning of
and the
ind.
mode.
The
definite negative goes
with the definite mode.
the condition of supposed reality and et ov is the natural combination. In general Blass^ is correct of the other in saying that oh is the negative of the ind. and modes including the inf. and part. This, of course, was not the
This
is
Attic standard, but that

cists.'^
was hopelessly gone even
for the Atti-
In the modern Greek b'ev (from ohbev) supplants oh with the ind. and p.i]{v) goes with the subj. That is the goal, as Moulton observes,^ which is not yet reached in the N. T., for p.i] occurs in questions of dou])t with the ind. and et p.7] still holds on. Even in
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. Rader1
B.
S., p.
204.
p. 477.
* *
lb.
Prol., p. 171.
2
'
W.-Th.,
.lann., Hist.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253. Moulton, Prol., p. 170. Of. Gildorwl., Atn. Jour, of Philol., ISSO, first copy. Cf. P. Thouvc'uiu, Lcs N6gations dans Ic Nouvcau TestaTrol., p. 170.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 429.
ment, Revue de
Philol., 1894, p. 229.
1012
NEW TESTAMENT
macher (N. T. Gr., p. 172) cites Pap. Wess. xxvi, el oh blboTai. But the point to get clear is that in the first class condition the normal negative in the Kotvi) is el oh. Moulton counts the idiom 6 times in Luke, 3 in John, 16 in Paul, 2 in James, and one each As examples in Matthew, Hebrews, 2 Peter and Revelation.
take Lu. 18 4 el koI tov and Jo. 1 25 el ah ohK el
:
deov oh 4>oôviJ.aL ohbe avdpoLnrov evrpeTTOixai

6 XpLcrTos.
In the latter case the nega:
tive
is
very emphatic.
:
So in
Jo. 5
:
47
et
oh TLarevere.
:
Cf. further
:
Lu. 12
17; 2
26; 16
11, 31; Jo. 3
12;
Ro. 11 21;
Cor. 15
13,
15-
Th. 3:10. Sometimes oh practically coalesces with the verb, as in Lu. 14 26; 1 Cor. 7 9; 11 6; 16 22; 1 Tim. 5:8; Rev. 20 15. The notion of contrast is seen in Jo. 10 37 el oh Note also kclv ix-q TrtcrreuryTe. So in 5 46 f el iriTTOLU), el 8e TTOtco. See further Lu. 11:8; Jas. 2 11; 2 oh TnaTevere. CTevere, el 8e
:
: : :
2:4. In Mt. 26 42 note el oh hhvaTai tovto wapeXdelu eau firj In Ro. 11:21, el ohK kipelcraTO, ohde aov 4>elaeTaL, it is hardly TTico. possible to translate el oh by 'unless.' The same thing is true in
Pet.
:
Cor. 9
(13)
2 and 15
29.
Cf.
'ed.u
mi?
Determined as Unfulfilled.
to be contrary to fact.
in 9 16. In this somewhat

:
difficult
conas-
dition only past tenses of the ind. occur.
The premise
itself
is
be true, but it is treated as untrue. Here again the condition has only to do with the statement, not with the actual fact. A good illustration is found in Lu. 7 39 ovtos el tjv 6 Kpo4>r]rr]s, eylucoa-Kev. The Pharisee here assumes that Jesus is not a prophet because he al-
sumed
The
thing in
may
lowed the sinful woman to wash his feet. Jesus is therefore bound to be ignorant of her true character. The form of the condition reveals the state of mind of the Pharisee, not the truth about Jesus' nature and powers. As a matter of fact it is the Pharisee who is ignorant. For this reason I cannot agree with
Moulton's statement^ that the ind.
of contingencies, wishes,
tions.
is
not suited to the expression

or other subjective concep-
commands
On
p.
201 Moulton recovers himself by saying that "these
sentences of unfulfilled condition state nothing necessarily unreal in their apodosis," and "the sentence itself only makes it untrue
under the circumstances."
should add "as conceived by the
speaker or writer." Surely the ind. is the mode for positive and negative statements, for directness of statement and clarity of But one must emphasize the words "statement" expression. and "expression." The ind. does not go behind the face value
of the record.
1
Most untruths
Goodwin, M. and
are told in the ind. mode.

T. (p. 147), sees clearly
The
Pro!., p. 199.
on
this point.
MODE
(eFKAISIS)
1013
statement of unreality here from the standpoint of the speaker

or writer,
is
as clear cut
and positive as that
of reality in the first
class condition.
The term "unreal"
as applied to this use of the
ind. properly belongs only to the standpoint of the user.
To him
the case
effect
is
impossible and he
makes a
positive statement to that

is
with the ind.

it
By the
ind.
mode
the condition
is
determined.
matter.
Whether
is
fulfilled
or unfulfilled
a more
difficult
This idea has to be conveyed by suggestion. It is not a question of positive or negative, but of definite assumption of unreality. The "unreality" does not come from the ind. That in its origin is a matter wholly of the context. Take Mk. 6 5, for instance,
:
ovK kbvvaro
tell
el nrj
kdepcnrevaev.
In the abstract
it is
not possible to
either first or
which
class of condition
If
we have
is
here.
It
is
second,
we know.
the writer
talking about
the present
time in terms of past time, then it is a second class condition determined as unfulfilled. The Greek fell upon the use of the past
tenses of the ind. as a device to help in this matter.
filled
An
unful-
terms of the imperfect ind. An unfulfilled condition about past time was expressed in terms of the aorist or the past perfect ind. There is the analogy of wishes to justify it, if, indeed, wishes did not come out of this construction (eWe, el yap). The origin of this precise
in
condition about present time
was expressed
point
is
obscure.!
jj^ ^j^g
context one must seek for light and help.

e/cet
In
Mk.
5 {ovk ebvvaro
7rotr/o"at
ovdeixiav bvvaiJ.LV,
it is
el nrj
oXiyoLS
appu}(TTOLs eTidels
rds x^tpas edepawevaev)
clear that a definite

class,
past event is chronicled. So it is a condition of the first termined as fulfilled. But in Jo. 15 22 (and 24) el
:
de-
/jltj
rfKdov Kal
how is it? Is it a simple hisabout a past situation? Is it a hypothesis about the present time in terms of past time to suggest its unreality? Fortunately here the context shows. The very next words are
cXaXr/cra avTols, afj,apTiav ovk etxocrav,
torical narrative
vvv 5^ Trp64>a(nv ovk exovaLV
irepl rrjs afxaprias
avTwv.
(Cf. also vvv be
in verse 24).
is
The
contrast with the present and actual situation
made
is
in plain terms.
In Jo. 9
41
we have
vvv be
is
even after
dz^.
This
not always done in the context and one

is
either left to
his wits or av
added to the apodosis.

rJTe,
In verse 18 of John 15
e(f)l\ei.
we have
effect
'
el eK
tov Koap-ov
6 Koa/jLos av to Ibtov
"The
addi-
tion of av to
an indicative hypothesis produced much the same as we can express in writing by italicising 'if "^ or by add-
Cf. Wilhehnus,
tliia
De Modo
It uses
Irroali qvii
longer has
2
idiom.
ai^
Vooatur, ISSl, p. 3. Mod. Ck. no with the past ind. and 66. in the apodosis for 6.i>.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 200.
1014
NEW TESTAMENT
ing to the apodosis 'in that case.'
But
it is
osis is
This is the definite use of au. a mistake to say, as some writers^ do, that av in the apodessential to the second class condition. Even Moulton^
of
iiv
says:
"The dropping
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.
when
it
The N. T. is in perfect accord with ancient idiom has koXov rjv d ovk eyewridri (Mt. 26 24) kSvvaTO el uri kire;
KkK\r]To (Ac.
26
32);
el
ixr\
tion the apodosis alone in
33), not to menMt. 25: 27; Lu. 19 23; Ac. 22: 22; 27:
rjv,
OVK kbvvaTo (Jo. 9

:
21; 2 Cor. 2
aov irapeivai
3; 12
11; 2 Pet. 2
el
21.
In Ac. 24
e/xe,
19, oOs eSei
kirl
/cat
KaTrjyopelv
rt exoiev irpos
it is
a mixed cond.
(protasis in fourth class) and the apodosis is itself a relative clause. But the idiom goes further than these verbs of propriety and possibility and obligation, as is seen in Gal. 4 15, ei bwarov, kbco:
Kark
(jlol;
Jo. 15
22, 24; 19
/jlt]
11, ovk elxf^s,
ei nrj rjp
ei
p.r]
aoi beooixevov]
'eKeyev.
Ro.
Cor.
7, OVK eyvoiv ei
:
5td
vo/jlov
and
ovk ySeLV
In
10,
eirel
ton
7cb
(Prol., p.
ov
we have the apodosis of this condition. Moul200 note) cites O. P. 526 (ii/A.D.) el /cat /xi) avejSepe, Tapej3epop; O. P. 530 (ii/A.D.) ei Trape/cetro, aweaToXKeLp;
u4)ei\eTe,
Rein. P. 7
(ii/fi.c.) ovk a-rreaTrji, ei
(jltj
ijpayKaae.
But
in
most cases
first
the av regularly appears in the apodosis, though not as the
word.
18
av
:
Thus el eyevoPTO, TrdXat au fxeTevorjaav (Mt. 11 21). 14 f. we have the second and first class conditions
:
In Ac.
side
by
/cat
side,
el /xep rjp dSt/CTy/xd rt
fj
pabi.ohpyr]fxa iroprjpop,
ecxTiP
irepl
oo
'lovSatoL,
/cat
Kara \6yov
apecxxop-flP vijlQiV el 8e ^rjrrjiJLaTa
\6yov
opohcltwp
v6p.ov
Tov KaQ'
v/jids,
6\peade
avroi.
Here Gallio neatly

(first class).
justifies his
own impatience by his own opinion by

av
is
the
first
condition (second class) and shows
the second condition

el fi8eL,
Sometimes
/cat
repeated with two verbs as in

:
eypr]y6pr]aep ap
ovk
Slp
daaev (Mt". 24
43),
:
but
el
it
is
not repeated in the parallel pas/cat
sage in Lu. 12
39
fjdei,
eyprjyop-qaev av
ovk capTJKev,
though
W. H. have
4 :10.
ovk av in the
margin.
"Av
is
repeated also in Jo.
simplest form of this condition is when the imperfect occurs both clauses or the aorist in both. In the former case present time is generally meant, as in Lu. 7: 39 et ^v, eyivcoaKep ap; Jo. 5 46 ei einaTeveTe, eiriaTeveTe ap. So also Jo. 8 42; 9 :41; 15 19;
The
in
in Gk., p. 2,
2
Bamberg, Hauptregeln der griech. Synt., 1890, p. 45.; Conditional Clauses Anonymous Pamphlet in Bodleian Library.
Prol., p. 200.
MODE
18
:
(eTKAISIS)
1
1015
:
36;
Cor. 11
31; Gal.
10;
Heb. 8
^deLTe
dv
4,
1}
In Jo. 8
15,
el
19,
ydetre,
we have the same
construction, for this past
perfect has the sense of the imperfect.

fxovevov
elxov
In Heb. 11:
is
efxvr]-
av,
however, the reference

It is descriptive of
'
to past time as the
an unreal hypothesis in they had kept on remembering, they would have kept on having.' This is a classical idiom,
the past of a continuous nature.
If
context makes clear.
though uncommon.
^fieOa ev rats rjixepais
Another example
rdv Tarepcov
i]iiu)v,
is
seen in Mt. 23
30,
el
Only the context can help one tell the kind of condition in 1 Cor. 12 19 and Heb. 7: 11, for the apodosis appears in the form of a question without dv and the verb. The other normal condition of this class is where the aorist ind. occurs in both clauses, as in Mt. 1 1
ovk dv rjneda.
: :
21
el
eyevovTO, TrdXat dv (/.erevorjaav,
Mk.
13
20
el
/jlt]
eKokbôxrev,
Cf. Mt. 25: 27; 1 Cor. 2: Heb. 10 2 (only apodosis). Sometimes one tense occurs in one clause, another in the other: The standpoint is shifted. Thus in Jo. 14:28 el rjyairdTe, exdprjre dv, Gal. 3 21 el eSodf], dv rjv, Heb. 4 8 et KaTewavaev, ovk dv eXdXet. Cf. also Jo. 15 22, 24. It is not always certain that the present reference of ^v can be insisted on, since there was no separate aorist form of Sometimes rjv is aorist. So as to Jo. 11 21, 32, el ^s, ovk dv elfxi.
OVK dv kaudr}.
This refers to past time.

:
8; Jo. 14
2;
diredavev.
But the point

TToicov,
:
of difference
is
certainly
made
:
in Jo. 18
:
30, 24.
el
rjv
ovk dv Tape8coKaiJ,ev.
10,
:
Cf. also Ac. 18
14;
In Jo. 4
el
ydeis, ovk
dv
firrjaa^,
:
we have we have
the
Mt. 26 same thing.

el
Cf. also
Mt. 24
43.
In Ac. 18 In
1
14 note in the next verse

:
be
eoTLv, oxpeade (first class).
Jo. 2
19
the past perfect
in the apodosis
el rjaav, fxefxevriKeiaav
dv,
the solitar}^ example.^

:
But
el
the past perfect occurs in the protasis as in Ac. 26

\va6aL ebhvaTO, 6 dvOpcoiros ovtos
eyvwKeLre, ovk dv KaTebiKdaare
el firj
32, dTroXe-
eTeKeKXrjro Kaicrapa.
:
Cf. also
(Mt. 12
19
7),
though Westcott^ takes
this as a "real
imperfect" like
find in Jo.
list
:
.fibeiv
above.
The
el
fxrj
periphrastic
^v bebofxevov.
past perfect
osis in
we
11 ovk elxes,
Moulton'' has given a
of the times that dv appears in the apod-
the N. T. with the ind. imperf. (17 times), the ind. aor. and the past perfect (1). In Lu. 17:6 we have the pres. (24) ind. and the imperf. combined, el exere, eXeyere dv. This is really a mixed condition (first and second classes). Cf. Jo. 8:39, el
'
Cf. Wcstcott on Ileb., pp. Ill
ff.,
for
an excellent euniniary of the second
class conditions.
2
3
Moulton,
Prol., p. 201.
On
IIcl)., ]K
113.
Prol., p. IGG.
1016

margin
of
NEW TESTAMENT
Radermacher
/jltj
kark, kroLtLTe (the
W.
H.).
(A^.
T. Gr.,
p. 163)
e^rjcrev
kKoAvatv Zeus quotes P. Oxy. IV, 729 (137 a.d.) kav 8e with aorist ind. like the eau modern Greek av, where note
ap TO ilêvpa
(Thumb, Handb.,
p. 195).
The negative of the second class condition is in the N. T. always fxr] except once, Mt. 26 24 (Mk. 14 21) koXov rjv avrQ el
: :
Here the ov is very emphatic. Elsewhere we have ovK kyevvrjdrj. in protasis, ov in apodosis) Jo. 24 22 (note in Mt. et ni} as
:
/jlt]
9
et
33; 15
fir]
22, 24; 18
30; 19
11; Ac. 26
in the
32; Ro. 7:7.

el ov,
In
itself
is
three times as
common
el
jxi]
N. T. as
of the five
examples of
in the first class conditions

:
but outside above
in the third class (Lu. 9 13) el fxi] is confined to the second class condition and to the elliptical use like irXrjv in the sense of 'except' or the phrase el 8^ nr] meaning 'otherwise' without a verb (cf. el ixi] thus in Mt. 12: 4; Lu. 4: 26; el be /xi? in Jo.
and one
14
11).^
Greek uses av
(7)
See a bit later on this point. As already noted, modern bev in this condition (Thumb, Handb., p. 195).
but
Undetermined,
class uses in the condition clause the
This with Prospect of Determination. mode of expectation (Eris
wartung), the subj.
It is
not determined as
true of the
first
and
second class conditions. But the subj. mode brings the expectation within the horizon of a lively hope in spite of the cloud of hovering doubt. W. G. Hale- considers that the subj. in this
condition
subj."
subj.).
is
due "to a fusion

it is
of volitive subj.
and the anticipatory

(cf.
Monro^ thinks
the quasi-imperative sense (volitive

fxr)
He
argues that the use of

this.
with the subj.
prohibi/X17,
tions)
proves
But Moulton*
this
replies that
"the negative
originally excluded
from trespassed here from the
division of the subjunctive,
has
earliest times."
is
So he urges that the

ov,
subj. with eav (as with orav)
the futuristic, not the volitive, use.
The
futuristic subj. in
Homer may have
the subj. in conditions, and yet some cases of
with but usually el ov with the subj.

ijlt]
occur in
Homer when
el
ov coalesces
with the verb as

:
el
ovk edeXcocnp,
Iliad 3. 289,
ovk elojatp, 20. 139.
ov KaroLKiadfj in B.
In Jer. 6 8 we still have vtls The truth probably is that in some instances
this subj.
is
futuristic, in others volitive or deliberative.

see.
The
point
is
a fine one as one can readily
Gildersleeve^ finds the
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 254; Moulton, Prol., p. 171.
The
Origin of Subj. and Opt. Conditions in Gk. and Lat., Harv. Stu. in
p. 230.
Class. Philol., 1901, p. 115.

3
Horn. Gr.,
Stahl, Griech. histor. Synt., p. 390,

^
makes
it futuristic.
Prol., p. 185.
Am.
MODE
(ErKAISIs)
1017
prevalence of the subj. in conditional (as in temporal) clauses due to the greater exactness of the subj. here. It enables one, since
it
has a "tendency to realization" {Tendenz zur Wirklichkeit) ,^ to make a difference between the indicative and the optative conditions, though it has more affinity with the optative, except
in the case of
some future
indicative conditions which
close to the subj. idea.
The
kinship
in
origin
the aorist subj. and fut. ind. makes the line between ei and the fut. ind. and iav and the subj.
come very and sense ^ of a rather fine one

Indeed, as
we
and the fut. ind. in the first class condition, so we occasionally meet el and the subj. in the third class condition. Radermacher (A''. T. Gr., p. 162) notes ei and subj. at
sometimes have
kav
first
The inscriptions have usually only eav and But he finds also] abundant instances of
and
tius,
as a "vulgarism," but surely the classic usage answers that. aorist subj. he finds.
ei ei
and
fxr]
subj. in
kolvtj
late writers.
So Epictetus,
be tls
II, 18,
11
tls eâ\ei\l/ji,
ei
Vet-
274,
11
ei
XoyiarjTaL,
Hippiatr., 177, 2
irpoaaxv^,
Demetrius, De
vSpevcovraL.
ei
iiri
eloc. 21,
11
:
ei
yevrjTai.,
Pausanias,
II, 35,
:
tt
So
in Lu. 9
13
ei
et utitl
ayopaaw/JLev, 1
Cor. 14 5 kros
et irois
dLepiJLT]vevri,
Ph. 3
12
KaraM^co (possibly also
Karav-
Rev. 11:5 ei tls deX-nay (text of W. H., but margin deXeL or deXrjaeL). In Ro. 11:14, ei ttojs TrapafTjXcoo-oj Kal In 1 Th. 5 10 we the aorist subj. (TWO-CO, we may also have have e'ire ypr\yopwp.ev e'ire KaOevdwjjLev. It is in the midst of a final
rriaoi
in verse 11),
In 1 Cor. 9:11 some MSS. read ei deplawnev. This construction occurs occasionally in classical Greek. It was frequent in Homer and in the Attic poets, but is rare in our normalized texts of Attic prose, though a few examples occur in
sentence with IW.
Thuc,
Plato, Xenophon.3
like oTe,
vanishes before kav
out of the vernacular. In Deut. 8:5 AF have ei tls iraLdevajj. Cf. Judg. 11:9. Moulton^ finds the same construction in the papyri as does Deissmann,^
ei
with ind. or subj., while ei modern Greek av has driven
This "laxity" increased till finally ei, {av) which is used indiscriminately In is a mere "Uterary alternative."
Baumlein, Griech. Modi, p. 177.

Gildersl.
(Am. Jour,
is
of Philol.,
XXXIII,
4, p.
490) complains that in
Germany no standing
dition
(et and fut. promulgated it in 1876. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 420, 4(34. 4 Prol., p. 187. Cf. Goodwin, M. and
^
given to his distinction between the minatory conind.) and monitory condition (tdr and the subj.). lie first
T., p. 107.
B.
S., p.
118.
1018
though
187)

it is
NEW TESTAMENT
Moulton {ProL,
p.
rare
in
the
early
el
papyri.^
5e
though he^ seems As curiously unwilling to admit the examples in the N. T. to kros et fir] in 1 Cor. 15 2, we have the ind. with this combination. Deissmann (B. S., p. 118) cites inscr. kros el nrj eav It is true that in the N. T. as a rule el goes with the ind. deXrjan. and eav with the subj It is mainly in the future conditions that the line is breaking down. In Mt. 12 29 we have eap fxr{ 8r]aji and then hiapTraaei, but W.'H. break the sentence into two. Besides the normal eav and the occasional el in this condition we have also av (shortened form of eav, not the modal av). Thus Jo. 12 32 av i)i/'6J0co, 13 20 av TLva irefvpiii, 16 23 av tl alTTfarjTe. It occurs in the N. T. only six times (cf. av firj in Jo. 5 19) and all in John. Cf. Ac. 9 2 J<. But note Lu. 12 38, KavKav eXdif] Kal evpri (contraction of Kal-]- eav). Cf. Mt. 21 21 Lu. 13 9. It is absent from the
cites
O. P. 496
(ii/A.D.)
^v (=^),
Attic inscriptions, but supplants eav in
modern Greek. It is not clear why eav disappeared thus in modern Greek. The Ionic form The future conditions are naturally the most frequent of all. is i]v.^ Just as the second class condition was debarred from the futhe standpoint of the speaker or writer)
covers past, present and future.
/caXeT
.
ture, so the third class condition is confined to the future (from
The
fj
first class
:
condition
el
In
:
Cor. 10
27 note
tls
and
eav tls
is
e'iirr}.
In Ac. 5
38, eav
and
el
is
ecrriv,
a real
distinction
preserved.
Gamaliel gives the benefit of the doubt

that Christianity
of
of
to Christianity.
He assumes
it is
God and
This
puts the alternative that
men
in the third class.
does not, of course, show that Gamaliel was a Christian or an inquirer. He was merely willing to score a point against the Here, indeed, the supposition is about a present Sadducees.
situation,
but
eav
(turn out to be).

'Eav OeXys in
and the subj. contemplate the future result So eav exvTe in 1 Cor. 4 15; edj' ^ in Mt. 6 22.
: : :
Mt. 8
Cf.
is
future in conception.
In Jo. 5
'if
31, eav
I
fiapTvpoo (possibly pres. ind.),
the idea would be

14.
perchance
bear witness.'
also 8
In such instances the matter

el
may
1
be looked at as a present reality (so
aKavbakiêi
Mt. 5
29)
Cf. Ramsay, Cities and Bish. of inscr. show similar exx. Burton (N. T. M. and T., p. 105) admits that it is an overrefinement to rule out d and the subj. Cf. Moulton, Pro!., p. 240.
The Phrygian
II,
Phrygia,
2 '
292.
ProL, p. 187.
Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 43; Meisterh.-Schw., p. 225
f.
:
both uses of av (conditional and modal). In Tuv iixaTiwu, not a repetition of modal av, but a
Mk
In Jo. 5: 19 we have 28 note kav a<pQ}fiaL kSlv
particle Kav
=
'
even.'
MODE
or a future possibility (so kav
tav ayairriarjTe in
(efkai:;!::;;)
1019
(jKaphaKlaxi,
Mk.
9 :43).
:
Cf. also
46 with el ayairaTe in Lu. 6 32 (in verse In Jo. 13 17 note et ravra otdare, ixaKapioi 33, edj' ajadoiroLrJTe) .^ Here we have the first and third class contare eav TroLrJTe avra. Jesus assumes ditions happily combined with clear distinction. the knowledge as a fact, but the performance is doubtful. The tense is usually the aorist, though sometimes the pros. subj. Thus eau cLKovan (Mt. 18 15); eau biâ (Jo. 7: 37). In 2 occurs.
:
: :
Mt. 5
Tim. 2
adXrjaji,
5 note kav be koI aOXfj
rts,
ou aTe(i)avovTai eav
fxi]
vo/JLLfxcos
where the distinction is drawn between the two tenses. I doubt the propriety, however, of reading a future perfect sense a la Latin into this aorist subj. as Moulton^ does. He cites Mt. 5 47, eav aaTraarjade, but surely the simple aorist conception is sufJohn's fondness (see Tenses) for the pres. subj. with eav ficient. has been discussed.^ In Jo. 3 27 we have the periphrastic perThe bebojxkvov. Cf. also Jas. 5:15, kolv y TeTOitjKios. fect, eav (i-q conclusion of this condition is naturally most frequently the
:
fj
future ind.
TTopevdu},
Thus Mt. 9 21
:
kav
y,
:
ai/'co/xat,
(TCjo6T]<70fj.ai;
Jo. 16
7 eav
Tre/xi/'co;
Ac.
5:38
:
eav
KaraXvOycreTaL.
:
28
16
14; Jo. 7: 17; 12

is
26; 14
15; Ro. 2
26.
So Mt. 5:13; But this normal

ov
/jL-q
apodosis
:
by no means
iiri
universal.
Thus note
:
'ekdy
in Jo.
:
7 after eav
airekdoi.
See also Jo. 8
51.
Cf. Ac. 13
41.
In
Mk.
14
31 note ob
uri airapv-qao/jiaL.
:
The imperative may occur

So
: : :
in the apodosis as in
: :
Mt. 18
:
15, eav afxapT-fjar), U7ra7e eXeyôv.
But 42; Ro. 12 20; 13 4; Ph. 2 1. Mt. 10 13, 18 the present either as in terms of is stated conclusion ofttimes the the future (futuristic into projection vivid or a hope a present
17; 26
present).
So
is
in 2 Cor. 5
I,
eav KaTaXvdfj, exofxev.

is
The
:
condition
is
future in conception, but the conclusion

confident
a present
reality, so
13.
Paul of the
bliss of
heaven.
Cf.
Mt. 18
In 18
12 both the fut. and the pres. ind. appear in the apodosis.
lively sense of present
is
need
is
seen in Mt. 8:2.

:
practical turn
:
given by the pointed question in Mt. 5 47. In Ro. 14 8 note A maxim often has the pres. ind. in the apodosis. eav re eav re.
Thus
8
:
oi)
bvvaraL ovbels
:
eav
1
jxi}
irpwTOV brjay
(Mk. 3
:
27).
5.
Cf. Jo.
pres.
eav
16, 54; 11
is
9; 12
24;
Cor. 7: 39,40; 2 Tim. 2

:
The
perf.
likewise so used, as in Ro. 14
23, 6 be biaKpLvonevos
4)ayji KaraKeKpLTai.
So Jo. 20
23; Ro. 2
25; 7
2.
]\Iore difficult
seems the aorist ind. in the apodosis. The aor. ind. is sometimes timeless as is always true of the other modes (see chapter on
1
Cf. Blasa, Gr. of

Prol., p. 186.
N. T. Gk.,
3
p. 215.
1020
NEW TESTAMENT
That may be the
it
Tenses where papyri parallels are given).

planation here.
standpoint.
ex-
It is possible also to explain
as a change of
The
protasis looks to the future, while the apodosis
turns back to the past.

tKepbrjdas; Jo.
(cf
.
to the swift revolution in thought.
Such vivid changes in language are due See Mt. 18 15, kav aKoixxn,
:
15
'Lva
6, kav
/jltj
tls iievri kv
e/JLoi,
e^\r]dr]
;
e^co
Kal
:
k^-qpavBt]
kdoâadt]
êpTjre also of
the future)
17
Cor. 7
ovx
28, eav Kal
yafx-naris,
ovx
riiiapTer Kal
eav yrnirj
to
irapdevos,
riixaprev.
For a
similar idiom see Ignatius, Ep.
Romans 8:3;
In
to
Polycarp 5:2.
Moulton {ProL,
p. 247) cites Epict., dv nev arpaTivawixaL, airriWayriv.
See also Abbott, Joh. Gr., p. 586. have eav p-i] almost in the sense of
4: 22.
42, 37,
el el
Mk.
by
10
30, kau m^ Xa^l7,

p-q
6s pr}.
Cf. also eav

side
Trtco.
lva in
we Mk.
:
:
The
ov
TTOtco
use of
ei
oh
and
eav
pi]
side
pi]
is
seen in Mt. 26
Cf. also Jo. 10
ov bbvarai tovto jrapeXde'tv eav
avTO
and
kclv pi) inaTevrjTe.
Hale^ attributes "the (5) Remote Prospect of Detemiinalion. Greek optative assumption to a fusion of the true opt. and the
potential opt."
tion
is
The
use of the opt. in the protasis of this condi-
probably voHtive, since the negative^ is pi]. That is certainly true of the optative in wishes with el or el yap (eWe).^ But the deliberative use occurs a few times with el in indirect questions. The potential opt. in the apodosis with a;' is more difficult to explain. It is certainly not volitive any more, not more than
mere fancy
futuristic.
(Vorstellung), the optative of opinion,^
and apparently
This fourth class condition is undetermined with less likelihood of determination than is true of the third class with the subj. The difference between the third and fourth classes is well So Jesus draws the distinction in illustrated in 1 Pet. 3 13 f. Lu. 22 67. The use of the opt. in both apodosis and protasis accents the remoteness of the hypothesis. And yet it is not in It floats in a the category of unreahty as in the second class. mirage, but does not slip quite away. It is thus suitable not
:
merely for real doubt, but

courteous address.
It
is
it
also fits well the polite
evident
that this condition will
temper of be com-
paratively infrequent.
It is
an ornament
of the cultured class
used by the masses save in a few set phrases (or It is not strange, therefore, that no complete example wishes). of this fourth class condition appears in the LXX, the N. T. or the papyri so far as examined.^ Radermacher (iV. T. Gr., pp.
and was
little
1 2
Origin of Subj. and Opt. Cond., Harv. Stu. in Class. Philol., 1901, p. 115.
Moulton, Pro!., p. 196. Cf. Monro, Horn. Or., p. 227.
Gildersl.,
Am.
J. of Philol.,
1909, p. 7.
Moulton, ProL,
p. 196.
MODE
(eTKAISIS)
1021
no example of the opt. In the current kolvyj. in the conclusion and condition both in modern Greek it has disappeared completely. In the N. T., as in the LXX, the instances of the protasis are very few. Moultoni notes only 13 in the LXX apart from the Atticistic 4 Maccabees.
133, 143) with all his diligence produces
Of these he observes that 2 are wishes, 5 are cases of ioaiirep) d There are in the N. T. only 11 TLs and 2 are indirect questions.
examples.
el
Some
of these are indirect questions.
Thus
thing
is
in eXeyov
ôvKoLTo TTopeveffdaL (Ac. 25
course.
:
The
direct
el
was
el
we have the The same ôv\n.

:
20)
opt. of ind. dis-
true of
27 39, eôvKevovTo
pose) .^
bbvatro
e/ccrcoo-at
to ifKolov.
<3lassic
There
use of
is
el
implied
for pur-
indirect discourse or purpose
(cf.
the
avTOV Kai evpoiev,

TTws
So we see aim in 'Ac. 17: 27, ^y}Telv el apa ye ypr]'ka(l)T]aeLav and 20 16, eairevbev el Swarov etrj. In 27 12, el bvvaivTo, we have both purpose and implied indirect discourse.
: : :
In 24 19, el n exotev, the protasis is more nearly that of the proper fourth class condition, but even so it is a mixed condition, Blass^ vensince the apodosis Uei belongs to the second class.
tures to suggest
ei tl
exovaLv as
more
correct.
But
it is
needless
These examples are all in Acts, one of the more literary books of the N. T. Paul has only the stereotyped phrase el rvxoi (1 Cor. 14 10; 15 37), which is a true example of this protasis, "if it should happen." The two other examples are in 1 Pet. 3 14 et /cat TaaxoLre Slo. 8tKaL0(XVvr]v, p.aKapiOL, and 3 17
to change the text.
: : :
:
KpelTTOV ayadoiroLOVi'Tas,
el
OeXoL
is
to deXrifxa tov deov,
iracrxî-v.
The
idiom t 7 dp
is
a mere torso, as
evident.
eiTLiievoiev, ttXtjOos
einaTriaeTaL
In 0. P. 1106, 7 (vI/a.d.), arpaTLUTLKOv, we have a mixed

is
condition.
The apodosis with
av (the less definite
'6.v)
more frequent and

Since the potential
occurs both in direct and indirect discourse. opt, in the N. T. never occurs in connection with the protasis,
the matter
under The Optative Mode This poiii, 3, (6)). protasis. unexpressed an of apodosis tential opt. is practically the the Twice (Ac. 26 29). save one But the exx. occur in questions
was discussed
sufficiently
in Independent Sentences (see this chapter,
questions are direct (Ac. 8:31;

(opt. preserved as in the direct).
17:18).
Cf. Lu.
The
1
:
rest are
rt
indirect
62
av deKoi, Ac.
5 :24
Tt
av yevoiTo.
So Lu. 6
is
11.
The
deliberative element in
:
some
17.
of these questions
well illustrated in Lu. 9 :46; Ac. 10
The MSS. vary

1
in
some
2
cases about the presence of av, as

Gr., p. 228
f.
lb.
Monro, Horn.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 221.
1022

:
NEW TESTAMENT
The examples are all in Luke's writings. In Ac. have a protasis, but not of the fourth class. indeed 8 31 we do The disappearance of this opt. condicondition. mixed It is a In of the first and third classes. enlarged use the to tion led
in Lu. 18
:
36.
Ro. 3
(c)
6 and
Cor. 15
35 the
fut. ind. is
used where the po-
tential opt.
would have suited the Attic idiom.^

Conditions.
Special Points.
(a)
Mixed
work
in stereotyped forms,
is
The human mind does not always however excellent they are. Gram-
matical construction
ception.
merely the expression of the mental con-
Freedom must be acknowledged without any apology. I say these somewhat commonplace things because of the bill of "exceptions" which meet us in so many grammars at this point. It would have been a miracle if the four classes of conditions were
never "mixed," that is, if the protasis did not belong to one In P. Goodsp. 4 (ii/B.c), class, while the apodosis fell in another. et eppojo-ai, el'rj iiv, we have the protasis of the first class and the apodosis of the fourth. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., p. 132) quotes
Pastor Hermae, Si7n.
IX,
ei
12,
ov8eis
elcreXevcreTaL
/jltj
Xd/3ot,
:
Theoph.
el
Ad Autolycum
yap
XdjSot
eKKamei.
Thus
in Lu. 17
6,
exere, eXeyere av,
we have a
is
protasis of the
first class
(determined
as fulfilled)
filled).
and the apodosis

in Jo. 8
:
of the second (determined as unful-
The same thing
true of the marginal reading in the

ei ecrre, eTrotetre.
text of
kiri
W. H.
39,
In Ac. 24
19, ovs UeL
crov irapelvai koI KaT-qyopelv
tl exotev Trpos e/xe,
we
find a protclass.
asis
of the fourth class

:
with an apodosis of the second

p.r]
tls odrjyrjcreL pe; Then again in Ac. 8 31, xcos yap av 8vmlpr]v eav we have a protasis of the first class (barring itacism) and an apodosis of the fourth. The examples hke 1 Cor. 7:28 do not amount
it is merely a question of the standpoint though this apodosis does more naturally go with the first class condition. There may be two protases, as in 1 Cor. 9 11, and both of the same class, or the two may belong
to
mixed condition,
since
in time of the apodosis,
to different classes, as in Jo. 13

(/3)
17.
hnplied Conditions. Sometimes the apodosis is expressed, while the protasis is merely implied by a participle, an imperaIn such examples one must not think that tive or a question.
XoOo-a ^vith KpLve2 suggests
Thus in Ro. 2:27 rethe participle, for instance, means 'if.' a condition of either the first or the
third class according as one conceives
at,
it.
The
p. 220.
condition
is
hinted
1
not stated.
The same
.
thing
is
true of \apâvbpevov in
Tim.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
MODE
(ErKAI2:iz)
1023
:
4 :4 and neraTideuhr]^ in Hob. 7: 12. Cf. also Heb. 2 3; 1 Cor. This use of the participle is still very fre11 29; Gal. 6 9. quent* in the N. T. In Mt. 16 26 we have eav Kep8ricr-[i, while in
: : :
Lu. 9 25 note KepS-fjaas. In Lu. 19 23, koljoj ekQdiv avv t6ku) av avrd eirpaâ, the apodosis calls for a condition of the second class (con:
text).
employed.
The imperative is used where a protasis might have been Thus in Mk. 1:17, Sedre oTriaco p.ov, kol iroLriaoi. The
bevrt
There is an implied So also 11:24, TTLaTevere Kal earaL. Cf. Mt. 7: 7; 11:29; 19:21; Lu. 7:7; Jo. 2:19; 14:16; Jas. 4:7. The imp. may be (Jas. 1 5) the apodosis of an expressed condition and the implied protasis of another conclusion.- In Eph. 5 26, opyiêade Kal p.r] anapTavere, two imperatives together practically answer as protasis and apodosis. In Mt. 7 10, Kal IxQvv alT-qatt p.r] 64>Lv ewLdcoaeL auT<2; the two questions do the same thing in a rough sort of way (anacoluthon). Cf. 1 Pet. 1 24. In Mt. 26 15, H
adverb
condition here.
: :
has the force of an imperative.
rj
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,

in separate
all
but in Jas. 5
sentences.
13
we have question and imperative

These devices are
Cf. also 1 Cor. 7: 21.
found in
really
the classic idiom.^

(7)
Elliptical Conditions.
An
incomplete condition
is
species of ellipsis or aposiopesis

Ellipsis of the
asis (Ro.
and
is
common
(1
to all languages.^
:
copula in the apodosis
Cor. 12
is,
19) or the prot-
8
:
17) is
:
not the point.

:
That
:
of course,
:
common.
So Ro. 4 14; 8 17; 11 16; 1 Cor. 7 5; 1 Pet. 3 14; 2 Cor. 11 16. There may be the absence of either protasis or apodosis. The apodosis is wanting in some instances. The suppression of the apodosis in Lu. 13 9, kclp pep irot-rjar] Kapwop eis TO peWov amounts to aposiopesis.^ See also 19 42, el eypcos Kal av. Cf. further Mk. 7 11 Jo. 6 62; Ac. 23 9. In Lu. 22 42 the aposiopesis disappears from the text of W. H. (wapepeyKe, not TrapepeyKelp). In 2 Th. 2 3, kap p-q ekdri, we have a mere anacoluthon as in Ph. 1 22. These protases belong to either the first, second or
: :
third classes.
The
:
lonely protases of
14, 17)
th(i
fourth class discussed
above
(cf. 1
Pet. 3
come
in here also.
We
of anacoluthon.
The
structure of the sentence
is
have a species changed so

In the same
that the corresponding apodosis does not follow.
^ *
"^
Moulton, Pro!., p. 2m. ' Jann., Hist. Gk. Or., Burttjn, N. T. M. and T., p. 110. Robertson, Short O. of the Gk. N. T., p. 160. W.-Th., p. 000.
p. 401.
1024

(suppression of apodosis)
sense of 'not,' in
NEW TESTAMENT
way
us in the So el osis is wanting. 11 Heb. 3 (4 12). So

:
is to be explained the use of et like solemn oaths or questions. The apodSod-qaeraL TTj yevea ravry arjueiov (Mk. 8 11). This is 3, 5) eUXeuaoj/rat (Ps. 94-95
:
:
aposiopesis.
:
The
:
full
expression
is
seen in Gen. 14
23;
Num.
Sam. 14 45. It is an apparent imitation of the Hebrew 14 not un-Greek in itself. Radermacher (N. T. Gr., though idiom, idiom in Mk. 8 12 as due to translation from this treats p. 184) the Hebrew (Aramaic). Analogous to this is ei ixiiv in Heb. 6 14,
30; 1
:
:
if et is
not really ri changed by itacism (cf. Ezek. 33 27; 34 8). Hort^ holds to the difference between d fx-qv and rj nqp and would take ei in Heb. 6 14 as the true ei. But Moulton^ makes out a good case from the papyri and the inscriptions for taking it as
: : :
merely a variation of r} fx-qp. He finds eleven papyri examples of Particularly clear is the Messenian el ix-t]v from ii/B.c. to I/a.d. Mysteries inscr., Michel 694, el nav eêLv. If so, it does not come in
here.
But the use

:
of
:
ei
in questions
is
pertinent.
:
Thus
:
et
6X1701
ot acotdfxevoL;
(Lu. 13
Ac. 17:27; 19 2. questions = ^ as in Lu. 22 49.

:
Mt. 12 Radermacher {N. T.

23).
Cf.
10; Lu. 12
36; 22 :49;
ei
Gr., p. 136) takes
in
on grounds of itacism, but it does not entitle Radermacher to say "werden muB." The use of the condition in the sense of 'to see if borders on this elliptical construction. Something has to be supplied before
This
is
possible
the protasis in order to make the idea clear. The apodosis is It is a classic ^ idiom and virtually contained in the protasis. reappears in the papyri.** So 0. P. 743, oXos hairovoviia.L ei "E. xaXKovs aToXeaev.
The
et
protasis here
exei
:
may conform
;
to the first class
condition as in
(Lu. 14 28)
et
xws
rjSr]
wore
:
evoSoidrjaofxaL
(Ro. 1:10).
XdjSco,
So Mk. 11:13; Ac. 8:22. In Ph. 3 12, e^ mUarawe have the third class and possibly also in Ro. 11:14.
:
But
of
et
in Ac. 27
12
it is
the fourth class,
et ttojs
bbvaivTo.
et
The use The same
in the indirect question, as in
Mk.
2,
eepairevaeL, corre-
sponds closely with the preceding.

thing
is
Cf. also 11:13.
true of
et
in the sense of
6rt,
as in Ac. 26
:
23.
This
:
is
also
true of et with verbs of wonder, as in Mk. 15 44; Ac. 26 8. The protasis itself is sometimes abbreviated almost to the vanishing point, as in
:
without a verb, in the sense of except' (Mt. 5 13). Here et and fi-q seem to coalesce into one word like ttXij/'. Cf. 11:27, oLiSets ewLyLv6)aKeL top vlop el ix-q 6 iraTrjp. This is very
et fxi]
'
common
as in classic Greek.
1
'^
Sometimes we have
*
*
et /117 l^-ovov
as in
App., p. 151.
Prol., p. 46.
Goodwin, M. and T., pp. 180 ff. Moulton, Prol., p. 194.
MODE
:
(efkaisis)
1025
Mt. 21 19. The origin of this use of el /xri was the fact that the verb was identical with the preceding one in the apodosis and so was not repeated. From this elhpsis the usage spread to mere exceptions to the previous statement, a limitation simply. Et fxrj may make exception to a preceding negative as in Gal. 1 19
:
trepov 8i tcop airoaToKwv ovk ddov

effect here is to
fir}
'laKujSov tov adeXcpou.
The
:
make
For
fxrj
el
/jltj
seem adversative instead
of exceptive.
16.
Cf.
Mt. 12
1
4.
el
eav
firj
in this construction see Gal. 2
has the sense of 'only' and is not to be construed with TepLTaTeLToo. The use of el jut? occurs in questions expecting a negative answer, as in Mk. 2 7, tLs bbvaraL a4>Levai a/j.apCor. 7: 17
:
In
[av], we have tl (cf. et added and possibly also av. B here omits av, possibly to "ease a difficulty" as Moulton^ suggests. If genuine, it would be a sort of analysis of eav into el av that occurs in the illiterate papyri. For examples see under 8, (&), (a). For el jjltjtl with the ind. pres. see 2 Cor. 13 5 and the subj. aorist. See Lu. 9 13. The use of Iktos el ixi] probably comes by analogy from exros el (cf. Latin nisi), but it occurs in the N. T. without verbs only in 1 Tim. 5 19. Elliptical also are el iiri Iva (Jo. 10 10) et 1X7] on (2 Cor, 12 In Jo. 14 11 13); d /xt) oTav (Mk. 9:9).
Ttas el
TL in
iirj
eh
6 deos;
:
In
Cor. 7:5,
el p.y}TL
Mt. 18
28)
note
el be
/xi?
in the sense of 'but
if
not,' 'otherwise.'
:
Cf.
Mk.
21; Rev. 2:5, 16.

el
For
Et
el
be
/jLrjye
see Lu. 5
:
used
(1
elliptically are
:
et
xep (Rq. 3
ixr\
and et phrases 2 that they occur even when the preceding sentence is negative (Mt. 9 17) or where eav would be more natural (Lu. 10 6, where the phrase answers to eav y). Cf. Lu. 13 9. In
pel
Cor. 15
8).
be
Other forms of 30); wcret (Mt. 3 16); uawebe fxr] ye became such fixed
36.
:
/jltj
Jo. 14
2, et be
fj.r],
elirov av,
the conclusion
cbs
is
expressed.
In 2 Cor. 10
we have
etVe (1
av without a
:
verb='as
if.'
It is
common to have etVe

least.'
et
:
Cor. 8
5)
without the verb.
The use
of Kav without the verb
be
fjLT]
K&v
is also found in the sense of 'if only,' 'at So in Mk. 5 28; 6 56. In 2 Cor. 11 16 we have both ye and kolv (be^rjade to be supplied). In Lu. 12 38 note
:
KOLV.
The suppression
of the protasis occurs in
all
the ex:
amples of the potential opt. already discussed, as in Ac. 26 29. Even in the deliberative questions of the opt. with av the same thing is true. Cf. Ac. 17: 18 (direct); Lu. 1:62 (indirect). The protasis is also suppressed sometimes with cTret. Cf. 1 Cor. 15 29, eTret ti iroLrjaovaLv; Here a protasis of the first or (more probably) of the third class must be supplied. So in Ro. 3:6; 11:6,
:
Prol., p. 169.
Burton, N. T.
M. and
T., p.
HI.
1026
22.

In
1
NEW TESTAMENT
ttcos
Cor. 14
16,
kirel
eav evXoyfjs
:
epet,
the ellipsis
:
still
occurs in spite of
true also of exet
kaTLu,
(5)
eav.
In Heb. 9
apa in
1
26,
eirel
Uei,
and 10
In 7
just
:
2, ewel ovk
av kiravaavTo, the protasis

wcfyeiXeTe
would belong to the second

Cor. 5
are
:
class, as is
10.
14,
erret
ixpa
the protasis would be of the

Concessive
Clauses.
first class.
These
Kal.
really
el
conditional^
and Kal eau {kHv) the sense is 'even if and is chmacteric. Burton- seeks to draw quite a distinction between concessive and conditional clauses. He cites Mt. 26 33, el Tavres aKavdoKLaOrjaoPTai ev aol, e7cb ovdeiroTe aKav8a\t(r9T](70fj.aL, as an instance of the concessive idea without
clauses with the addition of
In
Kal
Kal.
It is possible that
we may read
:
the idea into this passage

:
because in the parallel passage in Mk. 14 29 we read Cf also kolv 8er] in Mt. 26 35 with eav dey in dXX' eycb.
.
el
Kal
Mk.
14
31.
is
The
use of
el
{eav) in
the sense of 'though' shows that there
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 With

Kal
el
of Kal
Kal
el
was
to sharpen this emphasis either

is
up
or down.
the supposition
considered improbable.''
is
With
the truth of the principal sentence
stoutly affirmed in the
face of this one objection.

1
It is rhetorically
Cor. 8
5, Kal
yap
14
elirep elalv
:
[dXX]
rifxlv els deos,
an extreme case. In we have an innot

Kal
el.
stance.
In
Mk.
29 the true text

el.
is el Kal,
In
Pet.
W.
H. read simply
1
In late Greek
Kal
el
vanishes before
8
:
Kal av (eav).*
So
21
:
also Gal.
So in the N. T. we have Kal eav 8. For kHv see Jo. 8 14, Kav
:
:
Kplvo: (Jo.
16).
yuaprupco.
So Mt.
21; 26
35.
See Jo. 10
38,
el
be ttoioo, kolv ep.ol Tria Teh-qre.
The
clauses with eav

tions.
and the subj. Sometimes^ Kal el and

if.'
:
are, of course, third class condi-
Kav
can hardly^ be considered as
strong as 'even
:
They may be resolved into 'and if.' So Mt. 11 14; Lu. 6 32; Mk. 16 18; Jo. 8 55; Rev. 11 5. Much more common is el Kal. This phrase means 'if also.'
:
: :
is
Here the protasis is treated as a matter of indifference. If there a conflict, it makes no real difficulty. There is sometimes a tone of contempt in el Kal. The matter is behttled. There is often some particle in the conclusion in this construction as in
Lu. 18
:
4,
el
Kal Tov Qebv oh (f)oj3ovp.aL ov8e avdpcoTrov evTpeirofiat,
8t.a
ye
TO irapexeiv, kt\.
1
Note 76
as in 11
*
8.
Cf. Col. 2
5, el Kal
dXXa.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk., p. 215. N. T. M. and T., p. 112 Paley, Gk. Part., p. 31.

.
Thayer's Lexicon.
Cf. Burton,
N. T. M. and
T., p. 114.
MODE
(etkaisis)
Kal.
1027
There is considerable variety with el have a condition of the first class

while in
1
Thus
in
2 Cor. 7 8
:
we
(so
Pet. 3
14,
el /cat Traaxot-re,
we
Lu. 11:8; 18:4, etc.), have one instance of the
fourth class.
third class.
With
eav Kal
:
and the
kau Kal
subj.
we
find, of course,
the
:
So Gal. 6
/cat
1,
rrpo\7]iJ.4)dfj.
Cf. 2
is
Tim. 2
5.
In
Cor. 7:28, kap Kal

'also' (cf.
yafxifajis,
the notion
:
'if
even' rather
than
avTUiP
tav yniirj).
ttjs
:
In Mt. 18
17 note eav wapaKovaji

.
and
:
eav 8e Kal
e/cKXrjatas
irapaKovaji
There
Cor. 3
is
nothing
(Cf.
peculiar about Ro. 14
8, eav re ^Cinev
etre
eav
re airodv-qcrKwuev.
(1
:
Ex. 19
subj. (1
13.)
Cf. etre
:
with the ind.
23) or the
Th. 5 10). The use of the participle for concession (see For Kalwep o}v, Heb. 5 8) will be treated under the Participle. 28. the use of kHv even after eav see Mk. 5 These have no effect on (e) Other Particles with el and eav. they modify the precise though the condition as a distinct class,
:
:
idea in various ways.
This point
el
will
be treated more exactly

:
under Particles. (Eph. 4 21); el apa ye (Ac. 17: 27

:
But note
el
apa (Mk. 11
opt.);
:
13; Ac. 8
Kal (2
22);
:
e'i
ye
et
:
dye
1
:
Cor. 5
el-irep
3);
hk fxifye
(Lu. 5
36);
:
olv
:
(Mt. 6
3);
23; Heb. 7:
11);
(Ro. 3
30); eavirep (Heb. 3
14; 6
et ttcos
(Ro.
10, the fut. ind.;
Ac.
27
12,
the opt.).
In
Mk.
23
et rt is
in direct question.
9.
(a)
Indirect Discourse (Oratio Ohliqua).

Recitative "Ort in Oratio Recta.
Direct quotation
is
more
vivid
frequent in primitive language, in the vernacular, and in

picturesque narrative.
It is the
all
speech.
dramatic method of reporting Homer, in the Old Testament and in the Gospels, in Aristophanes and in Shakespeare, and in Uncle Remus. The prolonged indirect discourse in Thucydides and in Livy, in Xenophon and Cgesar, is more or less artificial. In the LXX little use is made of indirect discourse. The direct quotation may not be as verbally exact as the indirect,^ but it is more lively and interesting. As a rule the direct discourse is simply introduced with a word of saying or thinking. The ancients had no quotation-marks nor our modern colon. But sometimes 6rt was used before the
It is natural in
direct quotation merely to indicate that the

find this idiom occasionally with ort,
words are quoted.

sc^ldom with
sinc(> tiie
cb?,
We
so
more
in the
Attic writers.2
It
is
very rare^ in the
LXX,
Hebrew
frequently has a special participle like 'saying.' But see Gon. 28 16. In the N. T. Jannaris^ counts 120 instances of recitative on.
Burton, N. T.
Vitcau,
M. and
T., p. 130.
Le Vcrbc,
p. 50;
p. 114.
^ Goodwin, M. and T., p. 285. but see on the other hand Con. and Stock, Sel., * Hist. Gk. C!r., p. 472.
1028
NEW TESTAMENT
:
See Mt. 7 23, chiefly in the historical books. on ovSerroTe eyvo^v v/jids. This particular instance can be looked upon as indirect discourse, since the person is the same in both clauses and the tense and mode are unaffected. It is probable that indirect declarative clauses grew out of constructions of But in Mt. 27 43, elwev 6tl deov dju vlbs, there is this nature.^ no doubt at all. See 26 74, bjxvveLv otl ovk ol8a top avOpoiirov, and 26 75, elprjKOTOS on irplv aXeKTopa (t)u>vrjaaL Tpls airapprjari pie. So Mk. 1:37; 2 12, 16; 4:21; 8 :28; Jo. 10 :36; Ac. 25 8; Ro. 4 17. In Mt. 16 7 we have (W. H., but R. V. marg. has cau-
The idiom appears

oiJLoXoyriao:
sal)
recitative otl (6tl aprovs ovk eXaôpev); while in verse 8 the

:
In Mk. 6 23 (W. H. marg.) we have a direct quotation with on, in Mt. 14 7 the same thing appears as indirect discourse without 6tl. In Jo. ovk ecmv yeypapphov otl kyco etTra deoi ecrre, note 10 34, cnreKpidr] a treble direct quotation, once with on and twice without. In Jo. 1 50 the first 6tl is recitative, the second is indirect discourse. The on in the beginning of Jo. 20 29 is causal. In Jo. 20 18 It is doubtful whether (cf 3 18) on is recitative and declarative. In Ro. 3 8, on TOLrjacopeu 17. it is recitative or causal in Jo. 21 So in 2 Th. 3 10 on (hortatory subj.), on is also recitative.
indirect (probably causal) use, 6tl dprous ovk exere;
:
:
occurs wdth the imperative
eo-^terco.
The
Cf.
instances of direct quota-
tion without OTL are very numerous.
Mt. 8
3;
26 25.
: :
Some-
times the same thing is reported with 6tl (Mt. 19 9) or without on (Mk. 10 4). For single words quoted without agreement with the word with which they are in apposition note 6 5t5ao-KaXos and
:
6 KvpLos in Jo. 13
13.
W. H.
seek to indicate the presence of reci-
tative OTL by beginning the quotation with a capital letter as in Cf. Jo. 9 9. This redundant on may occur all their quotations.
:
before direct questions as in
Mk. 4
21
4.
It continues
common
in the kolutj and the modern Greek uses ttws in this idiom. Sometimes this (h) Change of Person in Indirect Discovirse. in 43. So 16 27 in Mt. 18, Kay<h 8e aoi was not necessary, as second person. Cf. change in the no is there Xe7co OTL av el Herpos, hopLaav 6tl wXelou in Mt. 20 14. But 10, 2 Gal. also Jo. 11 27; \r]p.\p6peda. have So Lu. would discourse the direct XrjpypovTaL, with in Note v. 8. 16 7 txere in Mt. k\aôp.ev Compare 24: 23. in 25. (indirect) 6: tL (pdynre but in Mt. 6:31, (paycopLev (direct) Tt be tI cltokplOu); direct would the tI aTroKpLdfj, oi; yap In Mk. 9 6, fiêL
:
Schmitt, tJber den Urspr. des Substantivsatzes, 1889, p. 66. Thumb, Handb., p. 192. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 472. Kat rdres dire
Ae aov to '\eya tyu] 'then he said, Didn't I
tell
TTcos
you
so?'
: : :
MODE
The person may be both ways
4,
irap-qyyeLXev
-KepiixeveLV T-qv
(efkaisis)
in the
1029
in Ac. 1
same sentence, as
rjv
eirayyeKlav tov irarpos
rjKOvaaTe ixov.
See further under Mixture.

(c)
Change
of
Tense
in Indirect Discourse.
Mr. H. Scott objects
to the wide scope here given to the term "uidirect discourse" to cover "object clauses" after bpaw, kt\., but I conceive the principle to be the same. After primary tenses there is, of course, no
Cf. Mt. 16 18; 27 43 above. See also on eXaêre Kai eorat vfxlv. It is only after secondary tenses that any change occurs. Usually even then there Thus owov riKovov 6tl earcv (Mk. 6 is no change of tense in Greek.
change in mode or tense.
Mk.
11
24,
TTtcTTeueTe
55)
So with aKOvaa^
otl jSaaiKemL
:
e<j)0^r]dr]
(Mt. 2
:
22)
So
^Xtti:
ônv 6tl avT6s kaTiv (Lu. 24
21).
Lu. 1: 22; Jo. 2:17; 6: 24. CLV. So Jo. 11 13. In Jo. 21

:
See also Mt. 21 45; Mk. 6 14; Cf. Gal. 2: 14, eUov 6tl ovk dpdoirodov:
19 the future ind.

:
is
retained after
direv
Mt. 20: 10. So in Lu. 5 19 the aorist subj. In Mk. 2 16 we have on kadlH twice, the first in ind. occurs. discourse and the second with recitative otl. But sometimes the
o-rj/xaij'cov.
Cf.
ancient Greek, even the Attic,^ used a past tense of the indicative in ind. discourse where the direct had the tenses of present time.
The N. T. shows
like Jo. 1
:
occasionally the
same construction.
In a case
50, dirbv aoi

. :
on dbbv
Cf
.
ae,
the aorist tense belonged to the
direct.
Cf 9
30, 32, 35.
hvk^XexPeu in Jo.
18,
OTL 5td cl)d6pop -KapkhoiKav
So as to the imperfect riu and aorist In Mt. 27 18, f/Set also Lu. 13 2. avTov, the aorist is used for antecedent
:
:
action.
Cf. irapabebo^KHcxav in
Mk.
15
10.
See also Mt. 16

t'l
12,
OTL OVK LTev.

dpwTTixi,
But
:
lu Jo. 2
25, avTOS yap eyiuoâKeu

eaTLv,
rju
kv rc3 avfjSet tI
:
the direct form^ would have

TTOLetv (6
:
not
riv.
So with
tfxtWev
6)
ovk eyvooa-au otl tov waTepa avTo7s eXeyev (8

16, 33; 18: 32.
27).
Cf. also 11
51; 12
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
avTov vTTJpxev, the imperfect
may
:
indicate that Timothcus' father
was no longer
living,
though
we have
just seen.
:
Cf.
Mk.
:
not the necessary moaning, as 11 32; Jo. 6 22-24; 16 19; Ac. 22

it is
: :
2; 1 Pet. 1
12.
rjv
In Ac. 22
SebeKojs,
29,
eô/Siy^??
eirLyvovs otl Twixolos koTiv
Kai OTL avTbv
we
see both constructions combined.
In
Cf.
Goodwin, M. and
in oratio obliqua
T., p. 2G3.
method
of fact, the primitive very change of tense as in Eng. We have it more frequently in Horn, than the change of mode or the graphic retention of teuae. Cf. Thomi)son, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 402.
2
Cf. Robertson, Short Gr., p. 181.
As a matter
was probably
this
1030
Jo. 11
:

40, ovK
NEW TESTAMENT
oypii,
elirov gol otl eav TLcrTevajis
the subj. and the

is
fut. ind. are retained after
secondary tense, unless on
recitative.
This preservation of the original tense appears in clauses not In Lu. 9 33, elwev etScbs 6 Xe7et, strictly in indirect discourse.
:
fjLrj
the present tense
is
retained in the relative clause 6 \eyeL, as

:
it is
iu.e6'
in the causal clause in 9

tiixCiv.
49,
e/ccoXyo/zei'
avrdv 6tl ovk oKoKovdel

inf.
In Jo. 21 25,
:
x^piyo-eti^,
the future
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.
The rule with the (d) Change of Mode in Indirect Discourse. Greek was not to change the tense. The mode after past tenses, with more freedom, was either retained or changed to the corresponding tense of the optative mode. The optative, as the most remote in standpoint of the modes, suited this idiom very The imperfect and past perfect indicative were, however, well. retained, though even here the optative sometimes appeared.^ When the aorist optative represented an aorist indicative of the
^
direct discourse the opt. represented past time.^ tative
Usually the op-
and subjunctive are future as to time. We have the optative in the N. T. in indirect discourse only in Luke. It was in the kolvt] a mark of literary care, almost Atticism, quite beyond the usual vernacular. And with Luke the idiom is almost Luke never has the opt. after confined to indirect questions. Once (Ac. 25 16) in a subordinate temporal clause OTL or <hs. the optative occurs where the subj. with (cf. Lu. 2 26) or without And even here ovk re \al3oL. exoL ap would be in the direct, irplv eariv after OTL comes just before. This change in the subordinate clause was also optional in the ancient idiom.* If av was used with the subj. in the direct it was, of course, dropped with the
: :
r)
change to the optative in the indirect. Similar to this is the use d and the optative with dependent single clause either as protasis with implied apodosis or purpose like el \pr}\a4>r)(xeLav (Ac. 17: Here after 27); et bvvaTov eir] (20:16); el ttcos bvvaLVTo (27:12). primary tenses we should have kav and the subj. or et and the future ind. Cf. Ph. 3 12; Ro. 1 10. Cf. tI Tpai/^co in Ac. 25 26. As already explained also, the indirect questions with el and the
of
:
1 In archaic Lat. the ind. was used in indirect discourse as in Gk. Draeger, Hist. Synt., Bd. II, p. 460.
Cf.
3
*
Goodwin, M. and Madvig, Bemerk. Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 263.
iiber einige
Punkte der
griech. Wortfiig. 1848, p. 23.
T., p. 273.
MODE
optative (Ac. 25
:
(ErKAIZIs)
1031
where the indicative
20; 27
39) are instances
would be used
TO TLS
in the direct.
Even
in indirect questions
Luke
in
clttoocj
usually keeps the
mode
:
of the direct.
So the indicative as
ttcjs
boKtl
(Lu. 22
24), the
subjunctive as in to
:
(22
is
4) or the optative as in to tI av 6k\oi (1
62).
The
indicative
never changed to a subjunctive as in Latin. When the subj. in Greek occurs in an indirect question it does so because it was the
subj. in the direct.
Thus
tL
oh
yap
r/Stt tI
Mt. 6:25,
31, tL
4>a.y'nTf,
4>a-yi^îxv.
airoKptOfj (Mk. 9:0). Cf. So Lu. 22:2, 4; Ac. 4:21.

1
:
Cf. subj. with Iva after secondary tenses (Ro.
13; 1 Pet. 4:6).
The
use of the optative (as distinct from subj.) in indir. dis-
course was a Greek development.
We
see the beginning of

:
it
in
Homer. The
text,
optative, however, does occur in Lu. (18

av) in
36,
W. H.
margin
indicative.
:
Cf. TroTairbs
In Ac. 21 33, structions occur side by

the question.
KOLvrj
an indirect question where the direct had the drj in 1 29. So 8:9, kirrjpojTcov tIs dr]. kirwdaveTO t'ls elrj Kal tL kaTLV TrevrotTj/ccos, both con:
side.
The
variation here in the
mode
(retention of the ind.) gives a certain vividness to this part of
parallels are
See Optative in Paratactic Sentences where the In ylvoLTO KpaTdlv iraarjs rjs av aiprjade given.
xcbpas, P.
subj.
is
Par. 26 (b.c. 163), there is no sequence of mode. The 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 Sometimes, one 62, to tI av deXot. 18, Tt av OeXoL; with Lu. 1 must admit, the difference between the two is reduced to a minimum, as in the papyri occasionally.^ So in Lu. 9 46, to tLs av See also Lu. 15 26; Ac. 10 17. 23). dri (cf. TO tIs dt] m Lu. 22 The manuscripts redifference. shade of But there is always a ind. and opt. as in between variations flect this haziness in the In Lu. 2 3 Ac. 12). 15, tii] Trore drj, we Lu. 18 36; 22 23;
: : :
also have the opt. in an indir. question.

p. 165) quotes Diod. used it often.
I,
Radermacher
(A''.
T. Gr.,
75, 5, kireLdav
irpoaOoLTo.
The
Atticists
It is not always easy to (e) The Limits of Indirect Discourse. draw the line between indirect discourse and other constructions. Thus Jannaris^ uses it only for declarative clauses with on or cos. Burton-'' confines it to indirect assertions and indirect questions, but admits that it also covers indirect commands and promises. Take Mt. 14 7, ufxaXoy-qaev avT^ dovvai 8 edi^ aLTrjariTai. The in:
Moulton, Prol., p. 198. N. T. M. and T., p. 131.
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p.
471
f.
So most
of the Rraimnars.
1032
NEW TESTAMENT
6
finitive Sovvai is
the direct object of the verb and does not seem
to be in indir. discourse, for in

5cb(Tw.
Mk.
23 the direct form has
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 principle of indirect discourse. On the whole it is best to consider three classes or kinds of indirect discourse: declarative clauses,
:
indirect questions, indirect

(/) Declarative
(a)
commands.
There is no was common
I'm,
Clauses (Indirect Assertions).

clear instance of
cbs
"On and
the Indicative.
in
this sense in the
N. T.
It
in the ancient Greek.

cos
Just as final
6rt.2
ottcos
retreated before
so declarative
did before
In late Greek I'm monopolized the field as a final particle and divided it with 6tl as a declarative conjunction. We do have cos in indirect questions a few times as will be shown. This is more likely the meaning even in Ac. 10 28, eTriaraade cos adeixirov. Reeb^ points out that Demosthenes uses cbs for what is false and
:
The German wie is used like cos with verbs With these verbs cbs is more than just 6tl ('that')- "On expresses the thing itself and cbs the mode or quality of the thing (Thajêr). With this explanation it is possible to consider it as declarative, though really meanOTL for
what
is
true.
of reading, narrating, testifying.
ing 'how.'
Cf. Lu. 24: 6, npriadr]Te

:
cbs
eXaXrjaeu.
:
So in Lu. 8
Ph. 1:8;
1
cbs
47
with d7ra77eXXco, 23 55 after

20: 20 with
1:8).
OTL
kiviaTafxaL,
êdoyuat,
Ac. 10 38 after oUa, Ac.

fjiaprvs
Ro. 1:9 with

in
cbs
(so
Th.
The manuscripts vary

TTcbs.
and
:
W. H.
6tl in
bracket
5,
some passages between in Lu. 6 4 and read ttcos

:
and
in
Mk.
these
12
26 and
Jude
though
cbs is cbs
retained in
7.^
In
all
passages
it is
possible to regard
as the 'how' of indirect quesof

ttcos
tion rather than declarative. to be noticed also.

26),
The encroachment
:
on on
is
:
Cf.
Mt. 12 4
after avayivccaKco (and
Mk.
12
Mk.
12 :41 after
êc^peco,
:
Mk.
16 after
hriYeoyiaL,
1
Lu. 14
7 after
ewexoov,
Ac. 11
ttcos
13 after d7ra77XXco (so
Th. 1:9).
the
In
otl.^
the later Greek
comes gradually to be equivalent to

6tl till in
Gradually
ttcos
gained the ascendency over In Ro. 10

15; 11:33,
this
^
modern
Greek
KOLVT]
it
became the regular declarative

p. 190.
:
particle.
is
See
Handb.,
cbs
exclamatory.
retreat of
cbs
Thumb, The
before
writers
and the papyri show

T., p. 258.
6tl et ws
same
Goodwin, M. and

p. 38.
' * "
De
Particulorum
apud Demosthenum Usu, 1890,

f.
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 230
MODE
OTL
(ErKAIZIs)
1033
Gr., p. 159).
and the inroad

I,
of
ttcos
on
6tl
(Radermachcr, N. T.
Cf. B. U.,
after opaco.
37 (51
A.D.), oUa.'i Tcos

is,
xpvtî-, and
:
Epictetus often
cos
There
however, no doubt of the use of

It is
6tl in
the declarative sense='that.'
but
It
is
it
appears in the
LXX
an unclassical combination, (Esther 4 14) and in the kolvy] writers.^
hke the Latin quasi in the Vulgate. The late papyri (fourth cent. A.D.) show that cbs otl came in the vernacular to mean simply 'that.' 2 Moulton cites also two Attic inscriptions from the first century b.c. which have cos on. in the sense of cos or otl alone. The editors have removed 6tl from cos on in Xenophon's
Hellen. Ill,
ii,
14,
eliroju cbs
on
cbs
:
okvolt].
Moulton agrees
kolvj]
to Blass'
stigma of "unclassical"
his use of
it
on
on, but Paul has
support for
in 2 Cor. 5
19; 11:21; 2
won
its
place in the N. T. not only over
finitive.
The use
is
of the inf. in indir.
Th. 2:2. But on has but also over the indiscourse^ takes quite a subcbs,
ordinate place in the N. T.
The
use of on
the
common way
N. T. N. T.
direct discourse in the
Luke alone uses it to any extent. of making a declaration in inThe periphrasis with on has superwriters.^
seded
it
in nearly all the
the declarative sense ^

occurs in the N. T.
It
is
(cf.
late Latin quia = quod),
There arose also 5t6rt in but no example

causal or
declarative
The
classic causal sense of bibn prevailed.

is
sometimes doubtful whether on

:
as in Ac. 22
TTcbs
29.
The context must

inf.
decide.
Finally, as noted,
came
to be the normal declarative conjunction in the veras over

cbs
nacular (over the
and on) as the
infinitive disap-
peared from
indir. discourse.^
:
N. T.
is
the ind.
The only mode used with on in the In Ro. 3 8 (subj.) on is recitative. At bottom
OTL is just 6
n, and
Cf.
after
otl
sense (and
6).
Homer sometimes used 6 re in otl me together in 1 Coi. 12: 2.
the declarative
The verbs
range.
Indeed,
which otl is used in the N. T. cover a wide comes also after substantives like ayytKla (1
:
Jo. 1:5); KplaLs (Jo. 3
19); X670S (Jo. 15
25); napTvpia (1 Jo. 5:

:
11); (jLapTvs (2 Cor. 1:23); irapprjaia (1 Jo. 5 14);

(j)a.(TLs
14);
(j)wvr]
(Ac. 22
(Ac. 21:31).
It
is
in apposition also
otl
with
bvoptaTL
(Mk. 9:41).
'
We
see
also hv tovtco
(1
Jo. 3:16).
Somep.
See Sophocles' Lexicon under

(Prol., p. 212) gives
otl 't0ov\r)d7\v
ws.
Cf. Jann., Hist.

-n-purjv
Gk. Gr.,
413.
Moulton
2
3
C.P.R. 19 (iv/A.D.)
<
fii0\la kiriSiSoiKa T^ ffg
iiviiJieXelq. cos
Moulton,
Prol., p. 212.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 211.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 231.
Mitsotakis, Praktischc Gr. dcr neugriechischen Schrift-
und Umgangs-
sprache, 1891, p. 235.
1034
times
NEW TESTAMENT
OTL itself seems to imply h tovtco (Ro. 5:8) or -rrepl tovtov (Mk. 1:34) or eis eKetuo (Jo. 2 18). Cf. tovto 6tl (Rev. 2:6). Another irregularity of construction is the prolepsis of the sub:
stantive before 6tl (and change of case) as in
Cor. 16
6tl.
15.
This
:
idiom
is
sometimes called the epexegetic use of

:
Cf. Lu. 9
49; Ac. 9
20.
It is a rather
:
common
:
idiom.
Cf.
Mt. 25
8e
is
24.
See especially Jo. 8

1
54.
is
:
In Ro. 9
6 note ovx olop
6tl.
In
Cor. 15
27
8rj\ov
on
almost adverliial, but that
not true
:
Heb. 7 14. The elliptical tI 6tl (Lu. 2 49) be compared with ri yeyopev on in Jo. 14 22. The elliptical ovx OTL (cf. Jo. 6 46) is like the corresponding English 'not that.' The OTL clause may be in the nominative (subject clause) as in Mk. 4 38, ov /xkXeL ool 6tl airoWv^xeda; More usually it is, of
of Trp68r]\op OTL in
may
course, in the accusative (object clause) as in Jo. 11:27, irewiGTevKa OTL.

tive as in
The otl clause may Mk. 9 41. In Gal.

:
also be in apposition with the loca1

:
20,
15011
hcoirLov 6eov otl,

:
we have
:
a solemn oath as in
fxapTvs OTL (2
aXrjdeLa 6tl (2
Cor. 11
10); tlcttos otl (1
18);
14
11).
1
(Rev. 10:6); f to kyw, otl (Ro. Sometimes the personal construction occurs with on,
Cor.
1
:
23)
bjivvo^
otl
as in
Cor. 15
12, Xptoros K-qpvaaeTaL OTL.
In Jas.
:
have recitative otl or oratio variata. clause dependent on another. "On

clauses as in Jo. 6
:
In Jo. 4
1 13 we either we have one 6ti

:
may
:
be repeated in parallel
:
22 29; 1 Cor. 15 3. In 1 Jo. 9 we have two examples of otl, but one is causal. In Jo. 1
22; Ac. 17
:
3;
15
in
ff.
the three are
all
causal.
In Jo. 11
so
1
50 we have
13.
otl
and
1
I'm
:
much
the same sense.
Not
Jo. 5
Cf. I'm in
Jo. 5
3 with OTL in 5:11.
The verbs
ous.
that use declarative 6tl in the N. T. are very numer6tl.
few have only

OTL 7rpo0i7rr/s
tjp
Thus Mk. 11:32,

î').
airavTes
dxov
t6v
'Icoaprjv
(note
Blass^ calls this use of

6tl
:
ex<^
Latinism
like haheo.
Cf. also
v-iroXaiJLâpcc
(Lu. 7:43), a clas18); aviu^Lâ'ô: (Ac.
sical construction.
So also
XaAeco
(Heb. 11
16:10); acfypayl^w (Jo. 3:33); ypcopiôo (1 Cor. 12:3); kucpa(Heb. 11:14); eônoXoyeo: (Ph. 2:11); KaT-qx^cji (Ac. 21: p'l'ôo 21); Kripvaaco (1 Cor. 15 :12); aTro8eiKPviJ.L (2 Th. 2:4); pL-qpvo}
(Lu. 20:37);
aTroKoKviTTco
d-rjfXL
vTo8eiKPviJLL
(Ac. 20:35); 4>avep6oixai (2 Cor. 3:3);

12);
7rapa5t5cojut
(1
Pet.
(1
Cor.
15 :3);
irapaTl-
(Ac.
17:3);
Trpo^Tjreuco
(Jo.
11:51).
The
great mass of
the verbs of perceiving, showing (contrary to Attic), knowing,

believing, hoping, thinking, saying, declaring,
replying,
testify-
ing, etc., use either the declarative otl or the infinitive.

1
In Lu.
23L
MODE
9
:
(efkaisis)
the
1035
side
18
f.
with
\kyo}
:
we have
and
inf.
and on
by
side.
So
also in Ac. 14
eTniJLapTvpku,
22 with
is
Trapa/caXew.
Outside of Xeyco and aPTtKeyo}

the infinitive in indir. dis-
KaraKplvoi
irapaKoXeoo
course in the N. T.
confined to the writings of
Luke and Paul
and Hebrews according to Viteau/ "comme vestige de la langue But even with Luke and Paul the rule is to use on. litteraire." Blass2 has a careful list of the uses of these verbs. In margin of W. H. in Jo. 5 15 we have avayyeKXc^ with 6tl, but the text has (LTov. But see 6tl also in Ro. 2 4 (ayvokco), Mt. 12 5 {avayLPu:<TKui),
: :
37 (d7ra77eXXco) Ac. 25 IG {aT:oKp[vop.aL) 1 Jo. 2: 22 {apvko5 {ypacpoS), Mt. fiai), Ac. 17 6 (/Sodw), 1 Pet. 2 3 (yeijo/xat), Ro. 10 Ac. {hajiapTvpoiiai), 16: 21 {SeLKvvco), 1 Cor. 1 11 (StjXoco), Ac. 10: 42 9:27 (5oKeco), Ac. 17 :3 {btavolyJ), Mk. 8 31 (5t5d(T/cw), Mt. 6 7 Lu. 18
:
, :
Lu. 24 21 (eXxtfw), Mt. 6 26 (tM/SXerco), 1 Cor. 11:2 32 {tvayyeKlôixaC), Lu. 18 11 (euxapicrreco) Rev. (exaiJ'eco), Ac 13 2 4 (exw Kara, tlvos), Lu. 11 38 (Oavnai'w), Jo. 6 5 (deaofiai.) Ac. 4 13 {KaTaXapâvoixat), Lu. 12:24 (Karavoew), 2 Cor. 5 14 (/cpti'co), 2
{bi-nykotiai),
: : : : , :
Pet. 3:5 (\av9avo:),
Mt. 3 9
: :
(Xe7w), Ac. 23
27
17
{iiavdavo:)
2 Cor. 1:
:
23 {ixapTvpa Tov
{p-aprvpopai),
(voeoS),
deov 7rt/caXoO/xat),
Heb. 7: 8
{paprvpecS),
{popl^co),
:
Ac. 20
26
17
Mt. 27 63
:
(pLfjivijaKo:),
Mt. 5
:
Mt. 15
:
Mt. 26
:
:
74
{opvvoS), Jas.
,
{o'Lopai),
Ro. 9
(ou xpehhopai),
2 Th. 3
o-reiico),
10 (xapaTTeXXw)
Heb. 13
,
18
:
(reiô/xat),
Jo. 6
69
(tti-
Ro. 4 21
(TrXr/poôpeo))
:
2 Cor. 13
,
2 {irpodpriKa Koi irpoXeyu),

:
cf.
Gal. 5: 21), Ac. 23

:
34
(irvpda.i'opaL)
:
Lu. 15
6,
9 (avyxalpo:) Jo.
, :
18
14
(avfxôvXevoo) ,
Ro. 8
16 {avppapTvpeco), Mt. 16
:
:
12 {awlrjpi),
Ju. 5
:
19 (</)^mO, Lu. 10 20 (xaW, 1 Tim. claim that this is a complete hst, cannot 12 (xo-pi-v '^X(^ Tivi). I 1 help of H. Scott, Blass, Thayer, the with but it is the best I can do At any rate it gives one list. Viteau's Moulton and Geden, and
(vTOfntxvi]<TKo:), 1
Cor. 10
a fairly clear idea of the advances made by 6tl on the classic infinSome verbs still share the participle with on, but itive idiom. not verbs of showing. These no longer appear in the N. T. with
the participle.3
16
:
:
go with
:
6tl
note
(SXexco
(Heb. 3:19); deupeu (Mk.
4).
;
Cf. Ac. 19
26,
decopkoo
:
and
aKovoj.
So
also kinyLvcoaKco (Lu.

pvit]povevw
7 37)
kxlarapaL (Ac. 15
7)
eipio-cco
(Ro. 7:21);
(Ac. 20
Besides some verbs appear with either 6tl, 31); opdco Thus d/coi;co (Mt. 5 21; Jo. 12 18; participle. the or infinitive the Heb. 10 34; Lu. 8 46) \oyiôpai 21 (Mt. 45; yivuiaKoi 4 Lu. 23) and part.); oUa (Ac. 16 3; Lu. inf. 2 both 10 2 Cor. (Ro. 8 18;
(Mk. 2
16).
4 :41; 2 Cor. 12
>
2); bpoKoykoi (Mt. 7

p. 51.
^
23 unless recitative
f.
on',
Le Vcrbe,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 231
lb., p. 233.
1036
Tit. 1
:

16; 2 Jo. 7).
NEW TESTAMENT
find
finitive
on used with the inBut it is just the classic mingling of two constructions seen in the more usual form in Ac. 14 22, where a change is made from the inf. to 6tl and 6ei. Different verbs had varying histories in the matter of 6tl. It was not a mere alternative with many. With clkovoo, for instance, on The same thing is true with awoKplvo/iaL, 711/0)is the usual idiom. But with 077/xt, in classical (TKco, /3odco, olda, Xeyoo, vofxlô:, TLarevo).
In Ac. 27
:
10
we
"quite irregularly" Blass^
calls
it.
Greek almost always with the

OTL (1
infinitive (Ro. 3
8),
we
twice have
see
Cor. 10
f.
:
19; 15
50).
For on and then the

is
inf.
Mk.
8
I
28
The
6.
substantive nature of the 6tl clause

6tl
Th. 3
For
with the
inf.
see
(N. T. Gr., p. 159) cites

II,
on
uTrdpxetv
shown in Ac. 27 10. Radermacher from Proklus' /ri rem puhl.,

well
:
225, 22.
{(3)
The
Infinitive.
With some verbs we have only

(Heb. 10
:
single in-
stances of the infinitive of indir. discourse in the N. T.

/3odw (Ac.
So with
(Ac. 25
:
25
24); jLvooaKOi
34);
/caTaXa,u/3di'o/xat
'
25);
riyeofiai
(Ph. 3:8);
:
voeo)
(Heb. 11:3).
AiroKplvoixai
has
it
:
only twice (Lu. 20

14);
a.irapveoiJ.aL
7;
Ac. 25 :4).
See also d7ra77XXco (Ac. 12
22:34); 8uaxvpiôiJ.aL (Ac. 12:15); SryXow (Heb. 9:8); kirayyeWoidaL (Mk. 14:11; Ac. 7:5); ewLnapTvpofxaL (1 Pet. 5:12); KaraKplpo: (Mk. 14:64); fxaprvpkoo (Ac. 10:43);
(Lu.
irpoaLTLa.oiJ.aL
(Ro. 3:9); TpoKarayyeWo} (Ac. 3:18); cqixaivw (Ac.

:
28); xpwaTtfco (Lu. 2 26). Some of these are words that are not used with any construction very often, some occur only wdth
II
the infinitive, like
eTrtSet/ci'uco
(Ac. 18
28); irpoadoKao} (Ac. 3

:
5;
6); vwoKplvofxaL (Lu.

is,
20
inf.
20); viropoeco (Ac. 13
25; 27
27).
28 There
:
besides, the inf. with /SouXoyuat, deXco, KeXevoo, etc.,
more exactly
the simple object

inf.
are in the
list
Other verbs that have occasionally the given under (a), those with either on or the inf.
:
like apvkoiiaL
(Heb. 11
:
'24)
7pd</)a;
(Ac. 18
27)
;
beLKvvw (Ac. 10
28)
:
hbaoKw (Lu. 11 1); biaixapTvpoixaL (Ac. 18 5) biavolycji (Ac. 16 14. Cf. Tov in Lu. 24 45); evayyeXiôpLaL (Ac. 14 15), avuôvXevco (Rev. 3 18). In Luke and Paul the inf. of indir. discourse is fairly
: : :
:
common
23)
with
Xe7'^
(Lu. 9 (Lu. 2
:
18, 20, etc.
Cf.
Mt. 11
24;
Mk.
and with
vopii^cx}
44; Ac. 7
25, etc.).
In the old Greek the

direct discourse.^
inf.
was the favourite construction

it
in in-
but the gradual disappearance of the inf. from late Greek made it wither away. Indeed, it was a comparatively late development in Greek
in all its glory,
The Latin had
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 233.

Cf.
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 267.
MODE
(efkaisis)
1037
anyhow and is rare in Homer. It is not easy to draw the Hne between ôvXanaL and /ceXeuco with the inf. on the one hand and Xe7co and vo/jlIôo with the inf. on the other .^ At bottom the con^
struction
is
the same.
The question
inf. is
of the case of the substantive It

is
or adjective used with this

really a
is,
not vital to the idiom.
in
misnomer to call it "the accusative and infinitive." That fact, more frequently the case found with this inf., but 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 referno word in the sentence in another case for it This matter was disnaturally to agree with by apposition. cussed under Cases, but will bear some repetition at this point Clyde ^ correctly sees that, since it is so often misunderstood. since the inf. itself is in a case and is non-finite, it cannot have a
discourse
is
ence,
if
there
subject.
Monro ^
thinks that the accusative was a late develop-
ment
to assist the "virtual" predication of the later inf.

itself is
Some-
times this ace.
the direct object of the principal verb (so
verbs of asking,
Gildersleeve has a pertinent word: "I look etc.). with amazement at the retention [by Cauer in his Grammatica
Militans] of Curtius' utterly unsatisfactory, utterly inorganic explanation of the ace. c. inf. in oratio obliqua, against which I
protested years ago (A. J. P., XVII, 1896, 517):
i]y'YeL\au 6tl 6
Kvpos
Kri(Tep
ei't/CTjcre
becomes
riyyeLKav tov Is.vpov
on
evUrjaev,
but
ort
hi-
= vLKrj<Tai"
c.
(A. J. P.,
XXXIII,
4, p. 489).
To go no
is
further,
Gildersleeve shows that the 6tl construction

ace.
inf.
later
than the
this
But the grammarians went astray and called accusative the "subject" of the inf., and, when some other
appears with the
inf., it is
case
an " exception" to the rules of the grammarians, though in perfect harmony with the genius of the Greek inf. Even Moulton^ says: "In classical Greek, as any fifth-form boy forgets at his peril, the nominative is used regularly instead
of the accusative as subject to the infinitive
when
the subj(>ct of
the
main verb
is
the same."
Now,
there
is
no doubt about the

is
presence of the nominative in such an
instance.
"instead of the accusative"?

natural in such a construction.
The nominative
But why say normal and
This construction probably, almost certainly, antedated the accusative with the inf."^ We still
1
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. Goodwin, M. and T., Gk. Synt., p. 139.
162.
p. 269.
"
Horn. Gr.,
p. 1G2.
Prol., p. 212.
Monro,
lloni. Gr., p. 102.
1038

it
NEW TESTAMENT
was
to
meet
the
KepaL.
is
in the
N. T.
:
The
oldest idiom
have no noun with
inf.,
as in Lu. 24
23, rfKdav Xkyovaai Kal bivTaalav ayyeKwv ecopait
The context makes

:
perfectly clear that the

is
word
oirTaaiau
matter of easy inference. Cf. Ac. 26 9 (with 8elp); Jas. 2 14; 1 Jo. 2:6, 9; Tit. 1 16. In the majority of cases in the N. T. the noun is not repeated or referred to in the predicate. So in Lu. 20 7 we have aireKpldrjaap firj eldevai, but in Ac. 25 4 îjaros aireKpidrj rripttadaL top Hav\op eis Kataaplap, eavTOP 8e (xeWeLP. It is easy to see why HavXov has to be in the ace. if expressed at all. We could have had avTos rather than eavrop which probably is just co-ordinated with
:
the object of iajpaKhai and the rest
Ilav\op.
Cf.
KptTTjs
elpat
in Ac. 18
Ph. 4
11 enadop avTapK7]s ehai,
15; Mt. 19 21 reXetos etmt, where the principle is the same,

: :
though not technically indirect discourse; it is the predicate nominative. So with /SouXo^tat, êXco, fryreco, etc. The personal construction is a good illustration of the nominative. Cf. Heb. The nominative occurs also in 11:4, kpLapTvp7]dr] eipaL Skatos. Ro. 1 22, (j)daKoPTes dvac ao4>oL See further Ro. 9 3; 1 Cor. 3 18; 8:2; 14 37; 2 Cor. 10 2; Heb. 5 11; Jas. 1 26; Jo. 7:4 (W. H. text). In a case like Lu. 20 20 SLKalovs upat is inevitable because of v-KOKpiPOjikpovs. But there are a good many examples in the N. T. where the nominative could have been properly retained and where the accusative has crept in, perhaps owing to a tendency towards uniformity rather than to any special Latin influence as Blass supposed. Moulton^ notes the same tendency
: :
in the
kolvt]
outside of Latin influence.
Moulton
(Pro!., p. 249)
268 f., with the note of Sykes and WynneWilson, and to Adam's note on Plato, ApoL, 36 B., for classical examples of ace. with inf. where nom. could have occurred. Cf. Ro.
refers to JEschylus, P. V.
6:11, vpeh Xoyi'êade eavrovs elpat peKpovs. It is rare in the classical Greek for the accusative to occur in such sentences.^ The N. T. undoubtedly shows an increase of the ace. where the nominative was the rule for the older Greek. So Ro. 2 19, Trewoidas aeavrdv 68r]y6p elpai TvcpXcop, where avros (cf Ro. 9 3) would have been suf:
. :
ficient.
Cf. also Ac. 5
36
(cf.
9) \eyccp
ehai
nm
eavrop, (Ph.
:
13) ey(h e/JLavrop oinrco Xoyiôfxai KaTeL\r]4>epaL, (Hel). 10

exetJ'
34) ywb:-
4 22) airodtadai vpa^ (some distance from the verb ebibaxd-qre) See also Ac. 21 1; Ro. 1 20 f Blass thinks that in 2 Cor. 7:11 the classical Greek would have had oPTa?, not thai. Even so, but the N. T. has
cKOPTes
eavrovs Kpeiacropa virap^LP, (Eph.

.
Gr. of the Gk. N. T.,

Prol., p.
p.
238
f.
212
f.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 237.
MODE
elvaL.
(efkaizis)
1039
20 (see above) is hardly pertinent, inf. depends is itself in the accuIn Ac. 25 21, rod UavXau kinKaXeaafxevov Cf. Lu. 6 4.1 sative. T-qpdadat avTov, the pronoun could have been assimilated to the
like
:
An example
Lu. 20
since the participle
on which the
case of IlauXou {avTov).
So
also in
Rev. 2:9; 3:9,

:
to^v
Xeyovruv
'lovdaLovs elvaL eavTovs (different
order in 3
:
lack of assimilation in Ac. 22

not.
and in Heb. 2 yLp6}aKovTes is due to anacoluthon exovTes (1 Pet. 2 11 f.) and with
irefxiropTa
:
:
10 avr^ ayayovra.
17,
/xot
9)
We
/xe,
find the
same
:
27 In 2 Pet. 3 3, (cf 1 20) as with airkxioOai aTeWofievoi (2 Cor. 8 20). So

fiov
and
in 25
Lu.
74
riixlv
puadhras, 5
7 ^terexots eXdopras.
The Greek
of the
N. T. did sometimes have assimilation

d ovK eêaTLP
rjfxtp
of case as in Ac. 16:21,
Tvapabexecrdai ov5e woLetp "Pwjuatots ouaip.
15
25, eSoêv
rijxlv yevo/JiePOLS
ofiodvnadop eK\eâiJ,ePOLS {-ovs
So also margin of
of Lu.
W.
1
:
H.)
TentJ/aL
(cf.
accusative retained in verse 22, K\eânepovs)

:
Cf. also Lu.
1:3; 9
59; 2 Pet. 2
:
21.
Contrast Uo^k
Cf.
ixoi
3 with Ihoâ ifxavTw of Ac. 26
9.
The same
situation applies
:
to the cases with the articular infinitive.

eyepdrjpai
jxe
Mt. 26
32, /zard to
Trpod^w.
Here the
:
/xe is
:
not necessary and avrbs could
have been used.

superfluous, as in
adai
lie
So with Lu. 2 4, 5td to dpat avrop. The avTop is Heb. 7 24.^ Cf. Lu. 10 35, 70) h tw twap'tpx^:
airobwaoi aoi.
See further Lu.
57; 2 :21; 24
30; Ac.
18
the
3.
inf.
It is
easy to show from this use of the articular
inf.
that
has no proper "subject."
The
accusative
is
due to other
reasons.
'Irjaovp,
Take Lu. 2
27, ep rw elaayayelp tovs yopels to waLdlop
where the context makes plain that iraLdiop is the object of elaayayelp and yopeU the ace. of general reference. The article
Tc3
must be considered
:
:
in explaining this instance.

:
Cf. Lu. 18
3; 27 4; Heb. 5 12 (three accusatives in W. H.'s text). The ace. with the inf. was normal when the substantive with the Cf. Ro. inf. was different from the subject of the principal verb.
5; Ac. 1
8, (paalp TLPes
fiij.as
Xeyetp otl (note inf. after

:
4>rini,
and on
after
Xeyco,
In Lu. 24 23, Xeyovaip avTop ^rjp, we see Xe7co with the ace. and inf. Typical examples are seen in Mt. 17 4, KaXop eaTLv was oide elpai, Ac. 12 14; 14 19; 16 13; 24 15; 1 Pet. 3 17; 5 12; 1 Cor. 14 5; Heb. 9 8. See further
but
it is
recitative on).
Verbal Aspects of
Inf., (d), in
is
next chapter.
preserved in the
avTfj
dovvat.
The
tense of the original
inf.
as a rule.
case like
^
Mt. 14
:
7,
2,
(hiJLo\6yrio-ep
o eap alT-qarjTaL,
may
See also Lu. 23
Xkyovra avrov
elvai.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 212.
Cf. Zcitlin,
The Accusative with
Inf.
and some
Ivindred Constr. in Eng. (1908).
1040
seem a
NEW TESTAMENT
anyhow.
bit disconcerting since in the direct discourse in

Swo-oj,
we
find
But the future

:
is
aoristic
Mk. 6 23 The fine be:
tween indir. discourse and the simple object inf. is not sharplydrawn. Cf. Ac. 23 12. In Lu. 20 6, Treirei(Tnevos yap karLv 'IcodV7]v iTpo(i)y]Triv dvai, the inf. represents riv of the direct. There was no help for this, since there is no imperfect inf. The future inf. in indir. discourse is rare, but see Jo. 21 25; Ac. 23 30 (see TenExamples of the perfect inf. in this idiom occur in Ac. ses). 12 14; 14 19; 16 27; 25 25; Heb. 9 8. Cf. bixoXo-vei d\ricj>kvaL, P. Oxy. 37 (a.d. 49). There is little more to say. The use of tov and the inf. as subject has already been commented on. See tov e\de7p, Lu. 17 1, where rd aKavdaXa is the ace. of general reference while this genitive inf. is itself in the nominative case. See also Ac. 10 25. We do not have av with the inf. in indir. discourse. In 2 Cor. 10 9, ha fXT] 86^00 d)s ap eKcpoêtv, we have cos dz^='as if.' It is not the CLP in apodosis. Nestle in his N. T. gives at 1 Pet. 5 8 ^rjrcbp TLPa Karatnelp, but surely tlvo. is the correct accent. W. H. places even this in the margin. Souter prints Tiva, departing from R, V. which has ripa. But Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 147) cites CalHnicus in Vita Hypatii, 57, 12, wov evpetp, and 113, 11, ri TOifjaaL (cf. German Was tun?). It may be worth while to add that sometimes we meet an inf. dependent on an inf. (cf. inf. on part, in Lu. 20 20). I have noticed the idiom only in Luke and Paul. Cf. Lu. 6 12, eêXMv avTOP eis to opos wpoaevâadaL, where the first is in indirect discourse, and Ac. 18 2, 5td to Stareraxerat KXaudiop x^P'-^f'^So.'- TraPTas tovs 'lovdaiovs, where the second is indirect discourse (indir. command). Cf. Ro. 15:8. Middleton^ suggests that the use of the (7) The Participle. participle in incUr. discourse is older than the inf. This may be true, since in the Sanskrit it developed much more rapidly than the inf. But there were cross-currents at work in indirect discourse. Just as the inf. was circumscribed by the declarative otl, so the participle was limited by 6tl or the infinitive. Thus verbs of showing (de'iKvvfXL, 8r]\6cJ) and of manifesting (cpapepooS) no longer occur with the participle in the N. T. However, we have the participle with 4)alpop.ai ('appear'), as in Mt. 6 16. Besides, the participle has disappeared from use with aladaponaL, pavdapoo, pepp-qpai, (Tvuirjpi. The participles ^vith papdapu in 1 Tim. 5 13 are
:
additional statements, as the Revised Version correctly translates. With the inf. papdapw means 'to learn how,' not 'to learn that.'
'
Analogy
in Synt., p. 64.
MODE
4 11; Tit. 3 have the participle in
Cf. Ph.
:
:
(eFKAISIs)
1041
14.
indir. discourse.
But some verbs in the N. T. still They are verbs of percep-
by the senses (hearing, seeing, knowing). In the ancient Greek the nominative was used when the participle referred to the subject of the verb. Thus opco rmapTrjKoos meant 'I see that I have sinned.' In the N. T., however, we have declarative on in such clauses (Mk. 5 29; 1 Jo. 3 14). Viteau^ rightly insists on a real difference between the participial conception and the detion
:
:
clarative oTi or the inf.
If
the idea
is
hension merely, an opinion or judgment,

2 8
:
one of intellectual apprewe have opco 6rt (Jas.
24).
If it is
cbs
24,
8ev8pa opco TepiTarodpTas.
a real experience, the participle occurs as in Mk. So in Ac. 8 23, eis avvSeafiov
:
There is something in this distinction. Cf. Skkiroi OTL (Jas. 2 22), but the participle in Heb. 2 9, 'l-qaovv earecfiavcoIn Mk. 8 24 we have on with /SXeTrco and the part, with li'evov. opco. The realistic quality of the part, is finely brought out in
opco ae bvTa.
: :
Mk.
1, ecos
av
'i8o)aLV Trjv
fiaaCKelav rov deov eXrjXvOvlav tv bwajxei.

:
Note the tense as in Lu. 10 18, Weo^pow t6v âravav Teaovra. Cf. 9:49; 21:20; Ac. 11:13; 17:16. See Jo. 19:33, cbs eUov The tense of the direct is preserved. See i]87] avTou TedvTjKora. for decopkoi), Mk. 16 :4 and Lu. 24:39, Ka^cos l/ê dewpeire Ixovra. For kTvlaraixai take Ac. 15 7 and 24 10. Cf. also fjLvrjixovevo: with OTL (Ac. 20 31) and the part. (2 Tim. 2:8). It is very clear in vp[(XKod (see OTL in Ro. 7 21) which, as in classic Greek, is commonly used with the participle. See Mt. 1 18; 12 44; Lu. 23: In Mt. 1:18 we have the personal construction 2; Ac. 9:2.
:
vpk.dr}
'ixovaa.
In Lu. 23
we
find three participles.

1
:
AoKi/idfco in
the N. T. has only the
inf.
(Ro.
:
28)
:
and the
participle (2 Cor.
irapriTr]-
22).
So with
:
r]y'top.aL
(Ph. 2
6; 3
7).
Cf. also exe ne
n'evov
(Lu. 14
18).
In 2 Jo. 7 note the part, with

evpiaKoo,
dfjioXoyeoj.
In
verse 4, TreptTraroDvras with
the case agrees only in sense

:
with
5)
between 6tl with ol8a (Ac. 23 though this is the only instance of the part, with this verb. It prefers on, but may have the inf. (Lu. 4 41). The difference is even clearer in yivdcaKo:. See otl in Mt. 21 45, the inf. in Heb. 10 34. The usual idiom is 6tl, but note Lu. 8 46, 'iyvwv 8vvap.Lv kêkrfKvdvlav air' epov, where Christ thus graphically describes the terrible nervous loss from his healing work. He felt the power "gone" out of him. In our vernacular we speak of a sense of "goneness." See also Ac. 19 35; Heb. 13 23. But see Mk. 5 29, eyvcj) rco o-cbân otl XaTaL. In
rcoi'
rkKVbiv.
The
difference
and the
part,
is
clear (2 Cor. 12: 2),
Bla^s, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 246.
"
Lc Verbe,
p.
53
f.
1042

5
:
NEW TESTAMENT
it.
Mk.
the
30
eiTLyivcoaKCjo
has the attributive participle after
'Akouw also occurs with declarative

inf. (Jo.
on (Mt. 5
21; so usually),
:
12
18; 1 Cor. 11
:
18) or the part. (Ac. 7
12; 14
9; 3 Jo. 4; 2
Th. 3
11, etc.).
is
These examples have the accuBlass^ curiously calls the
sative
when
the thing
understood.
:
ace. incorrect in Ac.
occur in
point.
9:4; 26 14. The genitive with (jxnivrj does 11:7; 22:7. Blass has an overrefinement on this
with d/couco, so found in the Acts. So 2:6; But see also Mk. 12 28, aKomas avruv crv^-qace. construction of the part,
:
:
As with the
:
most
6
:
of the genitive examples are

9, etc.
:
11; 14
TOVVT03V.
So 14
58; Lu. 18
36; Jo.
37.
The
:
perfect part, in
this construction is seen in Lu. 8 :46; Jo. 19
33, etc.
For the
aorist see Lu. 10
18.
In
i'ra
Mk.
we have
oratio variata.
inf.
The
sentence starts with

part. viro8e8enkvovs
:
and concludes with the
Hence the
See the ace. part, in is construed with the inf. Rev. 4 4 as explained by eUov in verse 1, though l8ov and the nominative have come between. One hardly knows whether to treat this con(5) Kat kyhero. struction as indirect discourse or not. It is a clear imitation of the Hebrew "^niii and is common in the LXX with two constructions. It is either Kal eyevero Kal with finite verb (or eyhero 8e) as in Gen. 24 30; 29 13; Josh. 5 1, etc.), or we have asyndeton, For eyevero Kal eyhero plus finite verb (Gen. 22 1; 24 45, etc.). we often find eyeprjdr] (1 Sam. 4:1; 11 1, etc.). This asyndeton is also common in the future as Kal earat with finite verb (Is. 9 16; 10 20, 27, etc.). This Kat earai construction is quoted a few times in the N. T. (Ac. 2 17, 21; Ro. 9 26) from the LXX. For Kat eo-rat Kat see Ex. 13 11 f. W. F. Moulton^ has pointed out that the idiom occurs when the principal sentence has some note of time. J. H. Moulton^ quotes Driver (Tenses, 78) as describing the '^rr;'! construction in a similar fashion, "a clause specifying the circumstances under which an action takes place." All the examples of these two constructions in Luke fit this description. Luke has in the Gospel eleven of the Kat eyevero Kal examples and twenty-two of the Kai eyevero type. For Kat eyevero Kal see Lu. 17 11; without the second Kat 17 14. See in particular Lu. 8 and 9. It is frequently the case that Luke has ev rcc and the Kat inf. with the idiom. So 9 51, eyevero 8e ev rw avidTrXrjpovadaL avros earrjpLaev. Here Kat is almost equivalent to 6rt. So Kat eye^ etTrei' rts (11 vero ev tc3 elvai We have Kal eyevero Kal also in 1).
: : :
: : : : : : : :
Gr. of N. T. Ck.,
p. 24G.
^
W.-M.,
p. 760, n. 2.
prcJ., p. 16.
MODE
:
(efkaisis)
1043
Mt. 9 10. The form Kal kyhero Moulton* counts outside of Luke only twice in Mark and five times in Matthew with the phrase eykpero ore ereXeaev. Cf. Mt. 7 28. Moulton is concerned to show against Dalman that the idiom is not Semitic. He ad:
but doubts as to Kai eyhero (asyndeton). But surely the LXX has left its mark in this point The LXX does not have eyhero (or ylveTai) and the infinialso. In the N. T. we TiTpoiaKeadai). tive (but cf. 2 Mace. 3 16 tjv and seventeen Luke in five times find it in Mt. 18 13; Mk. 2 15;
mits the Hebraism in
Kal
eyhero
Kal,
times in Acts.
Cf.
vixtv
yivoLTo Kparelv, P. Par.
26
(b.c.
163-2).
The other two constructions are absent from the Acts, showing that in the Gospel Luke was more directly using Semitic sources on the point. But even so inf. with eyevero or imitating the
LXX
:
not ancient Greek, which used ffwe^rj. We do have crvve^r] and the inf. in Ac. 21 35. The modern Athenian vernacular has Moulton finds avpk^T] OTL while the country districts^ use ervxe va. in the vernacurightly sees and papyri in the the inf. with ylveTai
is
lar KOLvi] the origin of this idiom.
There
is
no
essential difference
:
between the
:
with ylverai and kyevero. Cf. Ac. 6:1; 16 16; Outside of Luke (Gospel and Acts) 11 26, etc. 9 32, 37, 43; confined to Mk. 2 23, which Moulton calls is kyevero with the inf. Lu. 6:1." See Ac. 10:25, eyeof assimilation primitive "a
inf.
: :
vero rov elaeXdelv.
This
is
Moulton's presentation, which
is
cer-
tainly
all
more
just than the
these constructions.^
(g) Indirect Questions.
mere description of "Hebraism" for We do not have the otl clause with
ylverai or eyevero in the
N. T.
See (c) under Indirect Discourse. It may here be (a) Tense. simply stated that when the principal verb is primary no change in tense occurs. When it is secondary, still no change appears as
rule,
:
though occasionally one does see

:
it,
as in Jo. 2
25; 6
6;
But note eirwdavero TTOV yevvdrai (Mt. 2:4); edeojpovv irov Cf. Ac. 10 18. Note difference between T'edeirai (Mk. 15 :47). present perfect in Mk. 15 44 and the aorist in the same verse.
18
32.
:
For the future ind. see Jo. 21 19; Mk. 11 13. It is only necessary to say that as a rule the same (i8) Mode. mode is retained in the indirect question that was in the direct. Thus see Mk. 5 14; 15 47; Lu. 8 36; 23 55; Ac. 10 29, where
:
: : : :
the indicative occurs.

as primary tenses.
1
We
is
have the
the
"
ind. after secondary as well
This
common
idiom in the N. T. as in
142
lb.
lb., p. 17.
As
in liurton,
N. T. M.
iind T., p.
f.
1044
the

In
all
NEW TESTAMENT
instances where a subj. appears in this condue to the fact that the subj. would have been present in the direct (deliberative subj.). Note ri 4)a.y(jiiJ.tv; in Mt. 6 31 and tI 4)ayr]Te (6 25). See also ttov ixevets; of Jo. 1 38 and tlbav TTOV ixevei of verse 39 for the retention of the indicative. The Latin changed the ind. to the subj. in indirect questions, but the Greek did not. This deliberative subj. occurs after primary tenses as in Lu. 9 58, ovk exî ttoO ttiv Ke4)aKriv kXIvt], and after secondary tenses also as in Mk. 9 6, ou yap fiSeL tL aTOKpidfj. Cf. also Mk. 6 36; Lu. 5 19; 12 36. So also the optative occurs a few times where it was in the direct. This is the construction with av which has already been discussed twice. See Ac. 17 18, ri av deXoL, for the direct form, and Lu. 1 62, tI av dkXoi, for the indirect. Cf. Lu. 9 46; Ac. 5 24. In 2 Tim. 2 25, ixi, wore 8(hr] (W. H. have SuT] in margin), we have the optative without au after a primary tense if Swt? be correct. Moulton^ considers the subj. here a "syntactical necessity." We need not moralize, therefore, on this instance of the optative even if it is genuine. Radermacher (Neut. Gr., p. 132) shows that the Atticists frequently used the opt. after a primary tense, as copyists often fail to catch the spirit of a thing. The papjî (jib.) have some illustrations of the same idiom. The other examples of the opt. in indirect questions are all after secondary tenses and the change is made from an indicative or a subj. to the optative. These examples all occur in Luke. As instances of the opt. where the direct had the ind. see Lu. 1 29; 3 15; 18 36. See Ac. 21 33 for both modes. In Ac. 17
KOLPr].
struction
it
is
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

is it
opt. wdthout av occurs in the indirect discourse
necessary.
In
all
these examples the indicative or the subj. could have been
retained.
The
infinitive
with
rlva in 1 Pet.
is
read by Nestle,
but not by
W. H.
or Souter.
See under
(/), {^).
(y) Interrogative
Pronouns and Conjunctions Used.
One notes
at once the absence of oans in this construction, the

classic idiom.
common
do have on once in Ac. 9 6, XaXrjOrj&eTai aoL oTL <xe del iroulv. Elsewhere the most usual pronoun is tLs and tL as in Ac. 10 29; 21 33. We even have ris ri apn in Mk. 15 24
: :
:
:
We
(double interrogative).
Tischendorf reads
ri.
tLs
tL in
Lu. 19
15,
but
W. H. have
1
only
This doul^le use appears rarely in the
older Greek.2
As a
rule the distinction

Cf. Burton,
between
ris
and
6s is
pre-
Prol., pp. 55, 193.
N. T. M. and
T., p. 134.
Viteau, Le Vorbe, p. G8.
MODE
(ErKAiz:i2)
1045
served in indirect questions, as in Jo. 13 24 (cf. 13 12). The occasional confusion between tLs and 6s was discussed under Pronouns. See 1 Tim. 1 7 and Jas. 3 13. Now and then the sim: :
: :
pronoun or adverb is used in an indirect question, as was true of classical Greek also. So Mk. 5 19 f. 6aa, Lu. 8 47 14 /ca^cbs, 1 Th. 1 5 oloi, and the various dl riv aiTlau, Ac. 15
ple relative
:
examples of <hs discussed in connection with Indirect Assertions (Lu. 8 :47; Ac. 10 28, 38, etc.) which are more likely to be understood in the sense of 'how,' and so indirect questions. Cf. Lu. 6 3 f (o and cbs), Mt. 10 19 {boO-qaerai TTCos t) t'l \a\r]ar]Te) and Lu. 17 8. Other interrogative words used are ttoD (Mt.
: :
4),
TTodev (Jo.
:
14), irotos
:
(Rev. 3
3), irore
(Lu. 12
:
36),
ttcos
(Lu. 8
1
:
36), tttiXIkos (Gal. 6
11), irdaos
(Mt. 16
9),
woraTros (Lu.
29).
The
:
correlative words, besides the lone instance of 6rt
in Ac. 9
6,
are
:
ottcos
(Lu. 24
20), dwoXos (1
Th. 1:9).
In
Mk.
14
14 (Lu. 22
11) tov
6tov ^cfyw;
some
writers take the oirov
clause as an indirect question with the deliberative subj., but There are plenty of init may be the volitive subj. simply.
stances of
in
d
:
in indirect questions (see Conditional Sentences) as
Mk.
14
15
:
44 after
davfxaôj
(f)i^w;
31 after 3
:
(3ov\evo fxai;
and eTrepcordco; Lu. 14 28 after \p7]Mt. 26 63 after elwov; 27 49 after

: : :
opaco;
Mk.
2 after irapaT-qpew; Jo. 9

:
25 after
ol8a;
Ac. 4
19
:
after Kpivw; 10
after
ytvcâKw;
18 after irwdavofxai; 19
2 after d/couw; 2 Cor. 2

besides,
:
passages^
13:5 after Tretpdfco. There are, where a word is suppressed, hke Mk. 11
:
those
in Ac.
13; Eph. 3:2;

el
Ph. 3
17
:
12; 2
27; 25
Th. 2 20; 27
find
15.
See also the optative with
12.
This
is all
quite classical and gives no
trouble.
cKoirkoo
We
jui?
likewise used in an indirect question after

:
with the indicative (Lu. 11 35) and ni] wore after SLoXoyiIn Jo. 7 17 an alternative indi15). fo/iat with the opt. (Lu. 3 The only other alternative f). rect question occurs with iroTepov
:
:
construction in an indirect question is in 2 Cor. 12 In all these points the N. T. eire. and is etre
f.
after ol8a,
is
in
:
harmony
with the
KOLVT].
The
:
use of ri with the subj.
future ind. (Ac. 25
26 possibly subj. aor.)

:
(Mk. 6 36) or the may be compared with
TToD after ex^^ in Lu. 9
In Col. 4 6 ttcos after eidhai is to be 58. of the inf. after oUa ('know how to the use from distinguished 2 In Mk. 24, t8e tL ttolovctlv; the i5e is prob11 13). do.' Cf. Lu. 25 25. For the ace. and the in as Mt. interjection the ably just
:
: : :
ind. question side

(5)
by
'
side see
Mt. 16
9.
The Article with Indirect Questions.

Cf. Viteiui,
This classical idiom
Lo Vcrbe,
p. 02.
1046
NEW TESTAMENT
: :
appears in Luke and Paul. See to tL (Lu. 1 62), to tI$ (9 46), t6 So Paul has to ttojs in 1 Th. 4 1 and to tL in Ro. xcis (22 4). 8:26 (cf. tL to in 8:27). See also Lu. 22:23f.; Ac. 4:21;
: :
22
30.
The
substantive nature of the indirect question
is
well
shown
is
also in Jo.
10.
Cf. Lu. 24
19
f.
As already explained, this construction (h) Indirect Command. somewhat vague and the line is hard to draw between this and
(a)
other idioms.
Deliberative
Question.
direct
command may
be turned
into a deliberative question in the indirect with the subjunctive.
The
tive.
volitive idea of the imperative thus glides into the delibera-.

:
In Lu. 12 5, virodel^w 8e vtxtv Tlva (f)o0y]OriTe (f)ol3r]6T]Te top, kt\., we have the point illustrated both in the direct (unperative) and Here the only difference bethe indirect (deliberative subj.).
tween the two forms is the accent. Cf. uri cfyojS-qOfjTe in verse 4. In Mt. 10 28 we have 4)oê"La9e. Obviously this is a natural, though
:
not very frequent, turn for the
command
to take.
(0) The Co}ij unctions Iva and ottoos. verbs of commanding and lêseeching.
may be used after This idiom does not differ

These
It
is
clearly
from the
suffice,
sub-final construction.
a species of purpose
(or sub-final.
See Final Clauses).
might
Iva
atv,
fxrjdep aipoicnv,
but note the following: Mt. 16 20 eireTLiJ.T](Teu

:
The examples there given Mk. 6 8 irapriyyeCKev avTols

:
rots iJ.adr]Tdls
'Iva
{jirjdevl
eiTrw-
2 Th. 3
'iva
12 irapayykWoixev Ac. 25 3
:
Kal
irapaKaXoviiev ev Kvpic^
'Irjaov
XpLaTU)
ecr^tcocrii',
:
alTOVjJLevoL ottcos iJ.eTaTreiJL\l/r]TaL.

1
:
See
f.
further
Mt. 8 34; Lu. 16
27; 1 Cor.
10.
In Lu. 16
27
we
and 'Iva which are subordinate to the first 'iva after epwrco. But we cannot follow this use of 'iva after êXco and such verbs where it is more or less purely objective. The recitative ort with the imperative in 2 Th. 3 10 is not an instance of indirect command, but simply the direct
have the purely
final idea in
both
ottcos
command
(7)
preserved.
Infinitive.
The
in the
koivt),
ixi).
course,
It seems more obvious and is still common though retreating before 'iva. The negative is, of This use of the infinitive must not be confounded
:
with the idiom for indirect assertion (declarative) as in Mk. 12 Note Ac. 21 21, \ky(jiv p.ri 18, o'lTivts XkyovaLV avaaTaaiv p-i] dvai. irepLTtpveLV avTOvs to. TtKva p.r]8e rots WeaLV irepiiraTeLV, where we have
:
prohibition, not assertion (note incidentally the
with
Xe7coi'
p.i)Te
(payetv
two accusatives) (same verb as above). So also 23 12, \kyovTes pLrjTe ireiv. Cf. 21 4. Simple enough is the construction
:
: :
after elira in Lu. 9
54, etircopev irvp KaTa^rjvai;
See also
Mk.
MODE
7.
(efkaisis)
1047
In Mt. 16
12, avvrJKav 6tl ovk elwev irpoakx^'-v (of. Tpoaex^re in
and 11), we have the declarative on and the indicative followed by the inf. in indirect command. In Lu. 2 26, rjv avrQ
verses 6
:
KexP^fJô.T'-f^lJ-'^vov fxri
idelv davarov,
the construction
in
is
like
that of in-
direct
command, but the

See the direct
dovvai
sense comes nearer to the mere object

Sojo-co
infinitive.
Mk.
is
23 reproduced in the
indirect
by
(Mt. 14:
7).
There
a certain amount of freeIn Ac. 18

:
dom
an
taken in such transference to the indirect.

x^P'-t^^^ô.'- Trdiras,
2, 5td
TO 5iaT6Taxi'at K\av8Lov
inf.
:
the
inf. is
dependent on
are seen in
Other instances of the

24, ôcovres
:
inf. in indir.
command
Ac. 25 12
fxri
5tLV avrbv ^rju,
26
20, airrjyyeWov neTavoelv.
6 we have TapayyeWonev aTeXXeaOai, while in verse we have iVa. In verse 10 the direct quotation follows this same verb. In Mk. 6 8 f we have both iVa fii] a'ipoaLv and fxij hdvaaadai (marg. of W. H., Mi) hdvarjade) after wapriyyeLXev. Luke
In 2 Th. 3
(9
3-5) gives
p.ri
it
all in
the direct form.
In 2 Th. 3
14, tovtov
ar)iJLLova6e,
avvavaixiyvvadaL avrcp, the inf. is not in indirect

inf.
com-
mand, but rather the the imperative. But

cdaL (so also verse 9),
(i)
used in the direct as the equivalent of
in 1 Cor.
5:11,
ypa\pa vp-lv
jir)
(jwavaiilyvv
we do have
indirect
command.
on
Mixture.
Strictly this point belongs to the chapter

(cf.
Figures of Speech
also, Oratio Variata,
The
Sentence), but
a word
elirkv re,
is
called for here.
in the classic Greek.
We have mixture of several sorts as In Ac. 19 1 f., UavXov k\Bt1v Kal ebpelv,
:
we have
the infinitive (object-clause subject of eyhero)
and the
inf.
finite clause elrev re side

/cat
by
side.
Cf. Ac. 4
f.
for
followed by
and the
elirav.
indicative.
So in Lu. 9
19
we
have the
TTJ
infinitive construction
and the
:
6tl
construction side by
kjufxheLU
side after airoKpLdePTes

TTto-rtt /cat
In Ac. 14 22, irapaKoXovpres

6rt
is
OTL
:
5et,
the construction glides from the
inf.
into
inf.
OTL.
In Ro. 3
8 the recitative
dependent on the
ttcos
X7etJ' after âcri;/.
In Ac. 9
27, dtrjyriaaPTO
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

1
:
indirect to the direct

fjv
as in Ac.
4, TrepijikveLV T-qv
:
kirayyeKlav tov vaTpos

:
rjKOvaaTe
jjlov.
Cf. also 23
22.
See also Jo. 12
Mk.
the true text is be just the reverse, from the direct to the indirect, as in Ac. 23 In 27: 10 ort OCCUrs KTr}vr] re irapaaTrjaaL. 23, eLTrev 'Erot/xdcraTe 6
:
f., if
This change appears in But the change may hSvarjcrde.

29.
with the
inf.,
a mixture of the
ort
and the
infinitive constructions
tlie
in indirect assertions.
This use of on with
inf.
appears in
1048

Xen., Cyr.,
\, 6,
NEW TESTAMENT
See Jannaris, Hist.
classic Attic (cf.
18, etc.).
Gk. Gr., p. 570.
Moulton
(Prol., p. 213) gives
a papyrus example,
KpLcreus bdladai.
O. P. 237
TO irpaytia.
(ii/A.D.), 87]\a3V 6tl
ei to. aXrjOrj (jyaveir] iirjde
See further Winer-Moulton,
p. 426.
Subordinate Clause. A complex sentence may be (j) The quoted in indirect discourse as readily as the simple sentence. This principal clause follows the usual laws already discussed. Secondary tenses of the indicative in the subordinate clause suffer no change at all in mood or tense. ^ This is obviously true after primary tenses, as in Gal. 4 15, /jLapTvpoi vplv 6tl d dwarov Here the copula rjv is suppressed. In Lu. 19 15 eScoKare ijloi. So after primary tenses the prinote elirev 4)covr}dr]vaL oh 5e5co/cei. mary tense follows, as in Mk. 11 23, Xtyw on 6s av dirrj eorcw avrQ. Cf. Ac. 25 14 f. But even after secondary tenses the rule is to retain the tense and mode of the direct much more than in the Attic where the mode was quite optional.^ See Lu. 9 33, elirtv Another example of the relative clause appears in uri ei8(hs 6 XkyeL. irpadrjvaL /cat oaa exî. Even after a conMt. 18 25, eKeXevaev dition of the second class the primary tense may be retained, as in Lu. 7 39, eyivuaKev av ris Kal iroTawrj rj yvpi] r;rts aTrrerat avrov For a causal sentence see kK<x)kvop.ev avrov 6tl OTL d/iaprcoXos ecmv. A temporal clause with the ovK aKo\ovBd fxeO' rmcov (Lu. 9 :49). subjunctive appears in Mt. 14 22, rjvayKaaev irpoayeLv ecoj ov See also Ac. 23 12, avede/jLarLaav ecos ov aTroKTeivojaiV. CLToXvaxi. In 25 16, however, we have the optative in the subordinate clause of time with Trplv (exot, Xd/3ot) after cnreKpidrjv, the sole example. It is in Luke, as one would expect. The change here is from the subj. to the opt. In Lu. 7 43, 6tl w, only the subordinate
:
ri
relative clause
10.
is
given.
Series of Subordinate Clauses. It is interesting to observe how rich the Greek language is in subordinate clauses and how they dovetail into each other. It is almost like an endThe series may run on ad infinitum and yet all be in less chain. I have colperfect conformity to the genius of the language. lected quite a number of examples to illustrate this complexity of A typical one is Mk. structure, some of which are here given. 11 23. After Xe7co 6tl we have 6s av etwri which has oratio recta, but the relative clause proceeds with Kal prj dcaKpidfj dXXd TnaTevji
:
OTL 6 XaXet ylveraL.
The
relative 6 XaXet
is
the fourth involution of
subordinate clauses after Xeyw.

Goodwin, M. and
Cf. also Jo. 17:24.

is
A
:
similar
multiplicity of subordinate clauses

1
found in Ac. 25
"
14-16.
T., p. 273.
lb., p. 272.
MODE
After avkOero Xeycov
tive clause
Trept ov
(efkaisis)
1049
step
is
we have
oratio recta.
The first
the rela-
which in and this

fifth
on which hangs irpos ovs aweKpldrjv, turn is followed by 6tl ovk eanv and that by xaptfeaât, clause is the XajSot. The irpiu exot again by Tplf
eve(l)avLaav,
rj
r?
involution in the oratio recta.

ottcos ap,
Cf. also Ac. 3
19
:
ff.
(wpos to
â\L(f)9y]vaL,
6v Set bkâaQai, uv).
In Ac. 11
13 there are
five involutions.
The complications
:
are not, of course, always
so
many.
T^Tts
riiias
In Lu. 7 39 the oratio recta has a series of three (rts See the threefold series in Ro. 3 8, /ca^cbs 4)a<rlv rive's oTi).
:
\eyeLV otl, ktX.
So also Mk. 6
55, Kepi(f)kpHV oirov tjkovov oti
Utlv
(infinitive, relative, declarative).
So again
Cor. 11
is
23
appo{otl, fi, eLTvev and (inf., In Ac. IW, tL). Cf. Lu. 19 15 clause. sition with the OTL have forms of otl, kt\., we two a8e\cj)ovs (TwihaL tovs 7 25, hofXLêv dependent on the other. then 6rt), one inf., (the indirect assertion So also OTL follows 5td, to XkyeadaL in Lu. 9 7 f In Ph. 4 10 we have the 6tl clause and then the articular inf. In Jo; 6 24 the In 1 Jo. 5 9 we have OTL clause is subordinate to the ore clause. In Jo. 4 1 we have ojs clause. on otl dependent a clause a OTL In Mt. 16 20 the sequence is 'ivaoTL. So Jo. 16: OTL OTL. 4; 17: 23. In Mk. 14 14 we have two cases of oratio recta, one
oratio recta).
Here
also the 6 clause

:
in
dependent on the other. In Lu. 24 14. In Col. 1 9 the 'iva in Gal 3

:
it is cos
otl.
Cf. tva
and the infinitive parallel. The instances are numerous where TrepLiraTTJaaL are Thus eêXOelv one infinitive is dependent on another infinitive.
:
I'm clause
irpaevâadaL (Lu. 6
X^crdaL
12)
SodrjvaL cjiayeiv (8
55)
rpos to detv irpoaev-
(18
:
1);
;
Slol
to Terax^vaL KXavdLOU xwpifeaât, after eXrjXvOoTa

:
(Ac. 18
2)
detu TrpSâi (26

eis
9)
yeyevrjadaL
:
els
to jSejSaLoJaaL (Ro. 15
8); KarrjpTiadaL
deiarfs
/jlol
to ytyovkvai
(Heb. 11
3).
In Ac. 23
30,
jirivv-
eirLôvXyjs els top
avSpa eaeadaL, the future inf. in indirect
discourse
is
:
dependent on the participle in the genitive absolute.

8, tovto 8r]\ovPTOS tov TTPev/jiaTOS tov ayiov irecpapepojadaL,
inf.
In Heb. 9
the perfect
follows the genitive absolute.
There are various
These are given as are called for about the using of a series
other combinations.
illustrations.
No
rules
of subordinate clauses.
The presence
shows the
of so
many
of
literary quality of a
them in Luke,. Paul and Hebrews more periodic structure.
CHAPTER XX
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOS)
I.
Kinship.
Verb), has
The now been

allows.
finite
verb, verbum finitum
(das
bestimmte
discussed as adequately as the space in this
grammar
Originally there
was no
difference
between
verb and noun (see Conjugation of the Verb).
But gradually there was developed a difference. It was done largely by the help of the pronouns which were added to the verb-stems. Nouns also had their own inflection. But a considerable body of words partook of the nature of both verb and noun and yet did not cut loose from either. In a sense therefore the finite verb is a combination of verb and pronoun while the non-finite verb combines verb and noun. These verbal nouns are the non-finite verb, verbum infinitum (das unbestimmte Verb).^ They failed to add the personal pronominal endings of the finite verb and so did not become limited to a subject (finite). And yet they developed tense and voice and were used with the same cases as the finite verb. In so far they are true verbs. On the other hand they are themselves always in a case like other nouns. The verbal substantive comes to drop
its inflection (fixed
case-form) while the
verbal adjective
is
regularly inflected in the singular
of all three genders just like
any other
adjective.
and plural These verbal
nouns may be regarded either as hybrids or as cases of arrested development, more properly deflected development, for they continued to develop in a very wonderful way. The Greek of the Attic period would be barren indeed if robbed of the infinitives and the participles. The names are not distinctive, since both are participles^ (partake of the nature of both verb and noun) and both are non-finite or infinitives (are not limited to a subject by personal endings). The root-difference between these lies not
1
K.-Bl., Bd. II, p. 4.
In K.-G. (Bd.
Infinitiv
II, p. 1)
the ch. begins thus: "Lehre von den Partizipialen;
dem
und dem
Partizipe."
Both are "participles" and both are

1050
"infinitives."
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

in the verbal idea,
"PIIMATOZ;)
1051
between both are nouns, but one is a substantive and the other is an adjective. These general remarks may help one to understand the history and usage of
but in the noun.
It is the difference
substantive and adjective.
Both are
verlâls,
both
II.
pftJia)
1.
infinitive
and
participle.
(t>
The
Infinitive
dTrap|X(})aTOS e^KXio-is or
to
d'n-ap|i<})aTov
Origin.
on
this subject,
There is no real ground however much scholars
for difference of opinion
may
argue as to the
sig-
nificance of the infinitive.^
In the Sanskrit the infinitive did not
have tense nor voice. The root used was that of a substantive closely connected with a verb.^ But it is verbal in Sanskrit also in the notion of action, nomina adionis. In the Veda and Brahmana the number of these verbal nouns is very large. They are used with cases, the cases corresponding to the verb, but that phenomenon appears in Latin and Greek. In Plautus "we even find the abstract noun tactio in the nominative governing its case just as if it were tangere. Classical Greek has a few well-
known examples
of a
noun
or adjective governing the case apit is
propriate to the verb with which
closely connected." ^
The
same thing occurs

6
:
in the
N. T.
also.
Cf. KOLvuvia
4>cot'l
(2 Cor.
These substantives have enough In the old Sancases.^ "govern" "verbal consciousness" to in any case (except the occur skrit these verbal substantives has only Sanskrit later The real case). vocative, which is not a
14).
See chapter on Cases.
one such case-ending so used, the accusative in -tuni or -itum But for the developments in other lan(cf. the Latin supine).*
guages, especiall}^ in the Greek and Latin, these Sanskrit verbal
substantives would not have been called infinitives. But they show beyond controversy the true origin of the infinitive before
tense and voice were added.
case,
They were originally substantives used as fixed case-forms (cf. adverbs) which were in any which had a verbal idea (action), and which were made on verbal The Latin shows three cases used in this way: the locaroots. tive as in regere, the dative as in regi and the accusative as in the supine rectum.^ The Greek infinitive shows only two caseendings, the dative -ai as in \vaaL
(cf.
also boFkvat, bovvai, with
Sanskrit davdne; Homeric

1
Fibixtvai
with Sanskrit vidmdm) or the
2 s
' lb., i>. 203. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 297. * Whitney, Sans. Or., pp. 347 iT. Moulton, Prol., p. 202. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 202; Giles, Man. of Conip. Philol., p. 409; Vogrinz,
Gr. d. horn. Dial., 18S9, p. 139.
1052

Thus
in the
NEW TESTAMENT
it is
locative in \vlv}
Greek and Latin

its start.
only oblique
cases that were used to form the infinitives.^
It is
then as a
substantive that the infinitive makes

Sanskrit ddvdne vdsundm
We
see this in the
= Sovpai
tQ>v a-yadOiv.^
aspect 2
:
is
clearly seen in the use of TavTos with rod

firsf*
TO.
This substantive ^fji/ in Heb.
15.
The
step towards the verbal idea

ayadd.
was
in the con-
struction dovvai
Moulton^
illustrates the border-land of
the Enghsh
If
inf. by the sentence: "He went out to work again." we read "hard work" we have a substantive; but if we read "work hard," we have a verbal notion. Strictly speaking, 5oumt
TO d7a0d
= 'for
giving the good things,' while
ISeiv
rd d7a0a
= 'in
seeing the good things.'
as the Sanskrit
of Verb.
2.
makes
clear.
This was the original etymological sense See further chapter on Conjugation
Development.
finitive
finitive,
In the Sanskrit we see the primitive inwithout tense or voice. In the modern Greek the inoutside of the Pontic dialect, has disappeared save with
auxiliary verbs,
6e\eL
Xuet,
and even so
Sedel,
it
is
in a mutilated state, as
with
infini-
rJêXa
exco
8eaeL,
remnants of the ancient
dedijvat, bkaai (Thumb, Handb., pp. 162, 167). Between these two extremes comes the history of the rise and fall of the
tives Xvetv,
Greek
(a)
infinitive.
We may
sketch that history in five periods.^
The Prehistoric Period. The infinitive is simply a substantive with the strict sense of the dative or locative case. Cf. the Sanskrit. We may infer also that there was no tense nor voice. This original epexegetical use of the inf. as the dative of limitation has survived with verbs, substantives and adjectives. So Cf. our "a wonder to behold." 6 xpovos Tov TeKeZv (Lu. 1:57).
See dvparai 8ov\veLV (Mt. 6
Xvcrai
eis
:
24),
op/iri
v^plaai (Ac. 14:5), iKavds

els
See also Jas. 1: 19, raxus TO reproduces the dative idea.
(Mk. 1:7).
The
to aKovaai,
where
(6)
Earliest Historic Period.
The case-form
In
(dative or lois
cative) begins to lose its significance.

still
Homer
the dative idea
the usual one for the infinitive, in

of wishing,
harmony with the
form.^
With verbs
commanding, expecting, beginning, being

is
able, etc., the dative idea
probably the original explanation of

and
its
* 2 '
Cf. Giles (Man., p. 470) for \v-tLv
relation to the Sans, -san-i.

* 6

lb.
lb.
Prol., p. 203.
Burton, N. T.
of the
^
M. and T., p. Gk. N. T., p. 188. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 154.
143, has four.
But
see Robertson, Short Gr.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOZ)

the idiom.
Cf. otSare didovai (Mt. 7: 11),
1053
'knows how to give' 5' for 'going.' But ie>'at=' stepped' has Homer ^ri (for 'giving'). is getting the case-form signs that are there already in Homer
It occurs as apparent subject with obscured or stereotyped. the logical object of verbs of saying in and as verbs impersonal of -n-plv with the inf. is common also use The discourse.^ indirect naturally be used with the ablative, like would Ilpii' Homer. in
purd and the infinitive in Sanskrit,^ and so the Greek idiom must have arisen after the dative or locative idea of the inf. in Greek was beginning to fade.^ In Homer the inf. is already a fixed case-form. The disappearance of -at as a distinct case-ending in Greek may have made men forget that the usual inf. was dative. This dative inf. was probably a survival of the old and once common dative of purpose. Gradually the inf. passed from
being merely a word of limitation (epexegetic) to being subject or object. We see the beginning of this process in Homer, though there is only* one instance of the article with the inf.,
and that
here to
But even Odyssey (20. 52), to (f)v\a(xcrav. be demonstrative.^ But in Homer the inf. has tense and voice, a tremendous advance over the Sanskrit inf. This advance marks a distinct access of the verbal aspect of the inf. But there was no notion of time in the tense of the inf. except in indir. discourse where analogy plays a part and the inf. represents a finite mode.^ This use of the inf., afterwards so common in Latin, seems to have been developed first in the Greek.^ But it was the loss of the dative force as an essential factor that allowed
is
in the
may
As it came to be, it inf. to become distinctly verbalized.* was an imperfect instrument of language. As a verb it lacked As a person, number and time except in indirect discourse.
the
substantive
it
came
to be limited to
it
lacked inflection (without case or number) after it two cases. Even after the case-idea vanin various cases
it
ished and
1
was used
was
still
indeclinable.^
^ Whitney, Sans. Gr., 983. seems a bit odd to find Radormachor (N. T. Gr., p. 145) saying of the inf.: "in seiner urspninglichcn Bcdcutung The inf. is not a mode and the original use was substantival, als Modus."
lb.,
pp. 157, 159.
Monro, Horn. Gr.,
p. 158.
It
not verbal.
*
Monro,
ib., p.
179.
f.
5
'
Birklein, Entwickelungsgesch. des substantivierten Infin., 1888, p. 2
Monro, Horn. Gk., pp. 158 ff. Goodwin, Moods and Tenses,
Gildersl.,

p. 299.
Am.
1054
The addition
of tense and voice to the fixed case-form of the substantive with verbal root was possible just because of the obscuration of the case-idea.
The Classic Period from Pindar on. The articular infinioften used and there is renewed accent on its substantival aspects. The inf. is freely used with or without the article in any case (except vocative) without any regard to the dative or locative ending. Pindar first uses the neuter article to with the inf. as the subject.^ "By the assumption of the article it was substantivized again with a decided increment of its power." It is to be remembered, however, that the article itself is a development from the demonstrative and was very rare in Homer with anything. Hence too much must not be made of the later use of the article with the inf. Hesiod shows two examples of the article with the inf. Pindar has nine and one in the accusative.^ The absence or ambiguous character of the article in early Greek makes it necessary to be slow in denying the substantival aspect
(c)
tive
is
or character of the inf. in the
to think of the article as being used
with other nouns as the article
Homeric period.^ Hence it is best more freely with the inf. as made its onward way. The greatly
inf. did serve to restore the balance between the substantival and verbal aspects of the inf. now that tense and voice had come in. The enlarged verb-force
increased use of the article with the
was retained along with the fresh access of substantival force. "The Greek infinitive has a life of its own, and a richer and more subtle development than can be found in any of the cognate languages."^ The infinitive, thus enriched on both sides,
in Thucydides,
has a great career in the classic period of the language, especially the Orators, Xenophon and Plato. It has a
great variety of uses.
In general, however,
it
it
may
be said that
the that
KOLVT]
inf.
was not
as popular in the vernacular as in the literary
style for the very reason that

it
lacked clearness and emphasis.^

inf.
was synthetic rather than analytic, But it was not till the
begins to disappear before I'm
period that the
began to disappear.^
(d)
The
KoLvri Period.
The
inf.
Burton, N. T.
Gilders!.,
M. and
T., p. 14.3.
2
'
Jour, of Philol., 1882, p. 195. Birklein, Entw. d. subst. Infinitivs, p. 4 f.

Gildersl.,
Am.
Hesseling (Essai hist, sur
I'infinitif grec,
1892, p. 5) puts the matter too strongly.

5
Am.

^
lb., p. 480.
1055
on the one hand and on on the other. Jannaris^ outhnes the two chief functions of the inf. in its developed state to be prospedive (purpose hke tva) and declarative (subject or object Hke The fondness for analysis rather oTL, and 'iva ultimately also). than synthesis, particularly in the vernacular, gradually pushed the inf. to the wall. The process was slow, but sure. There is indeed a counter tendency in the enlarged use of rod and the inf. in the kolvt], particularly in the LXX under the influence of the Hebrew infinitive construct, and so to some extent in the N. T. So from Polybius on there is seen an increase of rod and the inf. side by side with the enlarged use of 'iva and 6tl. The two contradictory tendencies work at the same time.^ On the whole in the kolvt] the inf. has all the main idioms of the classic age (with the marked absence of e^' w re) and the new turn given to Tov and kv tw. The Hebrew did not use the inf. as much as the Greek and never with the article. Certainly the inf. is far less frequent in the LXX than in the comparatively free Greek of the N. T., about half as often (2.5 to the page in the LXX, 4.2 in the N. T.).^ But the Hebrew has not, even in the LXX,
introduced any
inf. inf.
new
uses of the
article
inf. in
the Greek.
The Hebrew
no number of to Votaw,* is 2,276. The number of anarthrous infs. is 1,957, of articular 319. The inroad of tva and on is thus manifest as compared with the Attic writers. The writings of Luke show
construct had
The
total
and was thus unlike rod and the infinitives in the N. T., according
'
very uneven. Votaw^ the apocryphal books. of case in the inequality same the finds The papyri show a similar situation. Different writers vary greatly, but on the whole the inf. is dying save in the use with
is
the largest and most varied use of the writings have the fewest.^ Paul's use
inf.,
while the Johannine
auxiliary verbs,
and
it is
going even there as

Of.
is
:
seen from the
use of Iva with
deXoi in
the N. T.
Mk.
30.
In the
kolvt]
we
find i'm with jSouXojuat

kolvt]
and
ShvafiaL in
inf.
Polybius, the
LXX
and
later
writers.^
As the
disappears in the later Greek
strange combinations appear, as in Malalas and Theophanes
we
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 5G8.
2 8
de Elocutione Polyb., 1880, p. 302. Votaw, The Use of the Inf. in Bibl. Gk., 189G, p. 55.
Kiilker, Quostiones
lb., p. 50.
11).,
*
6
'
p. .52.
lb.
Thompson, Synt.
of Attic
Gk., p. 248.
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 574,
for hst of verbs with iVa in late
Gk.
1056 meet

irpb
tov with the subjunctive {irpo tov
kTnppl\poi<jLv,
irpb
tov
never had a monopoly of any construction save as the complement of certain verbs like /3ou\o/xat, dekw, etc. This was probably the original use of the inf. with verbs and it
V(jiB(h(TLv)}
The
inf.
was true to the dative case-idea.^ It was here alone that the inf. was able to make a partial stand to avoid complete obliteration. (e) The Later Period. Outside of the Pontic dialect the inf. is dead, both anarthrous and articular, save with the auxiliary verbs.^ The use of 0eXco as a mere auxiliary is common enough in Herodotus and probably was frequent in the vernacular then as it was later.* " The fortunes of the infinitive were determined by its nature."^ The increased use of abstract nouns made it less needed for that purpose, as the fondness for I'm and 6tl made it less necessary as a verb. The N. T. is mid-stream in this current and also midway between the rise and the end of this river. The writers will use the inf. and I'm side by side or the inf. and
OTL parallel.
pao/jLac
Even
in the classical Attic
we
find
ottcos
after xei-
As ottcos disappeared I'm stepped into its place. In Latin ut was likcAvise often used when the inf. could have occurred. The blending of Iva and 6tl in the kolvy] helped
(Xenophon).^
on the process. In the N. T. the exclusive province of the inf. is a rather narrow^ one. It still occurs alone with Sum/xat and yueXXco. It has a wide extension of territory with tov. But on the whole it has
made
3.
distinct retreat since the Attic period.
The
story
is
one of
the most interesting in the history of language.
Significance.
Originally, as
we have
seen, the infinitive
was a substantive, but a verbal substantive.

Stoic
This set case of an
abstract substantive has related itself closely to the verb.^
The
grammarians^
called
it
a verb,
airapeixcpaTou prjixa, airapefKpait
Tos eyKKiCTLs.
Apollonius Dyskolos^" called
''fifth
mode" and
the later grammarians followed his error.
Some
of the
Roman
grammarians actually took

^
infinitivus
in the
sense
perfectus,
^
'
Rueger, Beitr. zur Monro, Horn. Gr.,
hist.
Synt. d. griech. Sprache, 1895, p. 11.

p. 324.
p. 154.
Jebb
in V.
and D.'s Handb.,
G. Meyer (Essays und Studien, 1885, p. 101) says that the Albanians are the only Slavic folk "dem ein Infinitiv abgeht." It is due to the mod. Gk.
*
lb., p. 326.
^ 6
Thompson, Synt.
Blass, Gr. of
of the Attic Gk., p. 247.

p. 221.
v
N. T. Gk.,
Jb., p. 222.
8
9
Curtius, Erlaut., p. 296.

Jolly,
Gesch. des Inf. im Indoger., 1873,
p. 16.
i"
lb., p. 22.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT THMATOz)

just as
1057
they mistranslated yevLKr] by genitivus.^ Bopp^ rightly perceived that the inf. has a nominal origin and was later adjusted to the verb in Greek. It is not a real verb in the very height of its glory .^ And yet the consciousness of the nominal The origin was partially obscured even in the time of Homer.
is so far forgotten that this dative may appear nominative and the accusative. The tenses and voices have developed. But Brugmann^ seems to go too far in saying that already the inf. was "only" a verb in the popular feeling. Moulton,^ indeed, harks back to ApoUonius Dyskolos: "The mention of 'The Verb' has been omitted in the heading of this
original case-form
in the
chapter, in deference to the susceptibilities of grammarians
who
pro-
wax warm when Xveiv or \vaas is attached the noun. But having thus done homage
to the verb instead of
to orthodoxy,
we
ceed to treat these two categories almost exclusively as if they were mere verbal moods, as for most practical purposes they
are."
origin
all
He
is
states, it
is
true, that
every schoolboy knows that in
and part
of the use the inf. is a substantive,

is
but "nearly
is
that
distinctive
verbal."^
venture to say that this
overstating the case.
It is not a
mere question
of the notion of
the user of the infinitive in this passage or that.

as
it is.
The
history
is
development of the inf. we see the blending In this or that example the of both substantive and verb. substantival or the verbal aspect of the hybrid form may be dominant, but the inf. in the historical period is always both substantive and verb. It is not just a substantive, nor just a verb, but both at the same time. The form itself shows this. The usage conforms to the facts of etymology. It is not true that the article makes the inf. a substantive as Winer ^ has it. As a matter of fact, therefore, the inf. is to be classed neither with the noun nor with the verb, but with the participle, and both stand apart as
In the
full
verbal nouns.
The
article did enlarge^ the
scope of the
inf.
just
as the use of tense did.
The Germans can say

Greek
is
das Trinken and

is
French
le
savoir like the
to yvuivai.
There
no
infinitive
in Arabic.
As a matter
of fact, the inf. because of its lack of end-
ings (here the participle

is
better off with the adjective endings)

fulfilling its functions.^
the least capable of

1
all
parts of speech of
2
lb.,
pp. 31
ff.
Vergl. Gr., p. 3.
Cf. Schroeder,
Uber
p. 10.
die formelle Untersch. der Redet.
im Gricchischen
T., p. 298.
und Lateinischen,
* 6

Prol., p. 202.
>
lb.
W.-M.,
p. 406.
"
Goodwin, M. ard W.-M., p. 399.
1058
NEW TESTAMENT
In its very nature it is supplementary. It is either declarative or prospective/ but always a verbal substantive. There is a difference between t6 irpaaaeiv and 17 irpd^Ls. Both have verbal stems
and both are

and
voice.
abstract.
The
difference^ lies in the tense
and
voice of Trpaaaeiv.
But
wpaaffeLV
has
all
that
is
in irpa^Ls plus tense
to divide the infinitive into the popular in the grammars. These anarthrous and articular uses so represent two uses of the inf. in simply uses do exist, but they the verbal side of not affect They do its substantival aspects. under its subproperly be discussed inf. may the inf. at all. The
I decline, therefore,
stantival
and
its
verbal aspects.
But even
so a
number
of uses
cross over as indirect discourse, for instance, or the inf. to express
purpose (with or without the article). We must look at both sides of the inf. every time to get a total idea of its value. A number of points of a special nature will require treatment.
4.
(a)
Substantival Aspects of the Infinitive. Case {Subject or Object Infinitive). Here I mean the cases
used with
it.
of the inf. itself, not the cases
As a substantive the most part, all notion

case.
it
inf. is always in a have to dismiss, for of the ending (dative or locative) and treat as an indeclinable substantive. A whole series of impersonal
The
this
is
obvious.
We
expressions has the
inf.
:
as subject besides the ordinary verbs.

/xol
Thus note
9
:
Cor. 9
15 koKov
fxaWov
aivodavelv,
(Heb. 4
:
6;
27) awoKeiTaL roTs avdp6)TroLs

(3
:
ixira^ airodaveiv,
(Mt. 18
13) tav yevr]-
rat eupeiv ahrb,
15)
irperov
:
ecrrlv
rip.1v
irXrjpooaai,
(Ac. 21
:
35)
avve^r] âaraêaOaL,
(Lu. 6
12) eyevero eêXdelu avrbv, (18

:
25) tvKO:
TTwrepov ecFTLV eiaeXOeLV, (Jo. 18
14)
avfjL4>epeL
arodapelv,
(Mt. 22 17)
24) 8e2 wapato.
e^tuTLV bovvai,
CTrjvai.,
(Heb. 9
:
5) ovK ecTTLV vvv 'XeyeLV,
(Ac. 27
(Ac. 2
24)
rjv
bwarbv KpareXadai, (Ph. 3:1)

:
avra ypais
êiv OVK oKvqpbv.
So Ac. 20
16; 2 Pet. 2
is
21.
All this
simple
enough.
The
:
articular inf.
likewise found in the nominative
as in Mk. 9 10, t'l eanu to k veKpwv avaaTrjuai. Here the article is not far removed from the original demonstrative. Cf. 10 40, to KadiaaL ovk laTiv hp.bv hovvai, where bovvai is probably the original
:
dative 'for giving.'

is
One naturally feels that the articular inf. more substantival than the anarthrous, as in Ro. 7 18, Tb de:
Xetj/
but that is not correct. The subject-inf. occurs freely both with and without the article in the N. T. as in the KOLvr] generally. See Mt. 15 20 to 4)aydv, (Mk. 12 33) to
irapaKeLTai
jjlol,
: :
f.
Cf. Henry,
Revue de Linguistique de
la
Philologie Comparee, vol.

2
XX,
ii.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 153.

ayawau, (Ro. 7
:
1059
1
18) to deXeiv
and
to KaTepyaêadai.
Add
Cor.
7:26; 11:6; 2 Cor. 9:1; Ph. 1:21, 24,29; Heb. 10:31; Ro. 14: 21. The origin of this nominative or subject is probably due to its use with impersonal expressions. Moulton^ illustrates it by the Latin humanum est errare, where the force of the locative form errare may be seen by translating: 'There is something human in erring.' This may have been the original idiom, but it has gone beyond that to mean: 'Erring is human.' English
students often forget that 'erring'
ciple,
here infinitive, not partia step further in the N. T. to see Tov and the inf. used as subject nominative. Cf. Lu. 17 In 2 Cor. 7 11 the substantival as1; Ac. 10 25; 1 Cor. 16: 4.
is
both in sense and history.
It is
pect of the
\vTrr]drjvaL
inf. is
shown by the use

:
of the
pronoun avTo tovto
to
nominative with KaTeLpyaaaro. Cf. the inf. in the predicate nom. with tovto in Ro. 1 12, tovto 8e kaTiv awirapaKKrjdrjvaL. So in Ro. 13 11, ccpa i]8r] Vfj,a.s e^ vttvov eyepdrjvai, where
in the
:
with c6pa. Originally it Th. 4 6 we have both anarthrous and articular inf. in apposition with tovto. Cf. the appositive inf. in Ac. 15 :28; Jas. 1 :27; 1 Th. 4:3; 4:13.
inf.
is
the
in predicate apposition
was
the
also
doubtless
'
time for
arising.'
In
Ro.
The object-infinitive in the accusative is even more common both with and, particularly, without the article. In the N. T. more than half of the instances of the inf. come in here, the object-inf. with verbs of various sorts.^ In the LXX, however, it
is
rare in proportion to the other uses.
The accusative
See Ph. 2
case
:
is
to us
more manifest when the

177770-070.
article occurs.
6,
ovx
apirayp.6v rjyrjaaTo to elpac laa
Oeco,
direct object of
Kol TO kvepyelv.
So
:
in 2
where the articular inf. is the 13, with 6 hepywv koI to dekeiv
:
Cf. Ac. 25
:
11, ob TrapatroOîat to airodavelv.

:
See Cerit
further
Cor. 14
39; 2 Cor. 8
10.
In Ph. 4
10, dfe^dXere t6
virlp e/ioD (l)poveiv,
the ace.
may be
that of general reference.

this is true.
:
tainly in 1 Th.
3:3,
to aalveadai,
Blass^ calls
nêrai
is
here "quite superfluous."
In Ro. 14
13 to
aii)
in ap-
position with the accusative tovto, as in 2 Cor. 2:1.
In 2 Cor.
10
2, SkofiaL TO
jj.r\
irapchu dappfjaai,
bkoixai.
we should
list
naturally look for
the ablative with
The
instances without the article are
more numerous.
that have the
fairly
complete
inf. in
indirect discourse
(/), (/3)).
2
on Modes (Indirect Discourse,

1
N. T. was given in the chapter These infs. are in the ace,

of the verbs in the
8
r<i /xij
Prol., p. 210.
Votaw,
Inf. in Bihl. Gk., p. 57.

:
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 234.
Cf. 2 Esd. G
KarapynOwat.
1060
NEW TESTAMENT
that of general
though some of them

or locative idea.
may
possibly preserve the original dative

ace.
is
But the
with the
inf.
is
reference, while the inf. itself
in the ace. case, the object of the

:
verb of saying or thinking. Cf. Lu. 2 44, voiiiaavTes avrov dvai. The occasional use of the nom. predicate, as in Ph. 4 11, efxadov
:
avTapKTjs elvai,
accents the ace. character of the object-inf.

in the dative
This
the
point
is
clear also in the case of indirect

is
commands where
inf.
noun
or pronoun
:
and the
in the ace, as in 1
illustrations are
Cor. 5
11, eypa\f/a vyuv nrj avvavafxiyvvadai.
The
numerous and need not be multiplied (see list under Indirect Discourse). With ôvXaiiaL, bvvajiai, deXu the dative makes a good idea and was probably so understood in the beginning.^ It may
be questioned, however,
the ace.
Xa/SeiJ',
if
in actual
usage this idiom

:
is
not also
Tapa-
Cf.
:
Mt.
19
kôvXrjdr] dxoXOo-at, (1
p.r]
20)
uri 4>o^r]9fjs
(5
:
34) X7co vpXv
bp.baaL,
(16
12)
ovk elirev
Trpocrexeii',
(Lu. 18
Tpos,
1) Trpos TO Selv Trpoaeuxeo-ât
(both
infs. in
Selj^),
the ace, one with
the other general reference with
(Ro. 15
8)
Xcyco
XpLffTOV bib-Kovov yeyevrjadaL (cf.

ToXiJirjaaL,
Ac. 27:
13), (2
Cor. 10:
2) Xo7tfo/xat
îXort/xetcrât
(1
Th. 4:11)
to.
TapaKaXovp.ei>
Ibia Kal
irepiacreveLV /cat
qavxa^^LV Kal Trpaaativ

of these infs.).
epyaêadaL (note the interrelation
See further
1
Mk.
5: 28; 12
:
18; Ro. 14: 2; Gal. 3: 2;
Cor. 10
13.
cis
12; Lu. 16: 3; Jo. 5: In the ace. also are the

: :
articular infs. with prepositions like

11); Mrd (Lu.
(Ro. 1:11); 5id (Ac. 8
22
20); wpos (Mt. 5
28).
But the
inf.
occurs in the other oblique cases also with
more
tov
or less frequency. prepositions

^T]p)',
clvt'l
The
(Jas.
genitive, for instance, appears with the
15)
5td
(Heb. 2
15,
5td
iraPTos
eveKa (2
Cor. 7: 12);
ecos
(Ac. 8 :40).
in It
The only
is
instance of
an attribute with the
infinitive
the N. T.
except in apposition with tovto.
was
rare in classic
TrpaTTeiv,
and confined to pronouns.

433.
Cf.
to avTov
Heb. 2 15, Greek Plato, Rep.

:
The
genitive
may
be found with eTn\avdavoixaL as in
Mk.
:
14, eireXadovTO Xaêtp (cf. kirCKadkadai tov epyov in

to.
ottio-co
Heb. 6
10.
:
But we have
in Ph. 3
1
13).
:
At any
rate in Lu. 1
9,
we have an undoubted genitive. Cf. also peTepeXridrjTe TOV TTLaTevaaL (Mt. 21:32). The very common use of tov with the inf. must also be noted. Most of these are genitives, as in tov airoXkaaL (Mt. 2 13). The free use
eXaxe tov dvpaaaaL
(cf.
Sam. 14
47),
with the inf. where the case is not genitive will be discussed under a special section under the article with the inf. Cf., for instance, Lu. 17: 1; Ac. 10 :25; 20 3; 27: 1. The gen. occurs
of TOV
:
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 154.
'PIIMATO2)
1061
with substantives just as other substantives are used. This is a See Ac. 27 20 eXTrts iraaa tov aoiêaOai, fairly common idiom. rod nerexeLV, (10 13) tw Uâaiv tov bbvaeXTrtSt evr' 9 Cor. 10) (1 adaL VTrevejKeLV (acc), (1 Pet, 4 17) /catpos tov apâcrdaL, (Heb. 5
: : : : :
12)
xpetaj^
rod bihaoKeiv.
irvevfj.a
avTols 6 Beds
Note, in particular, Ro. 11:8, Uo^Ktv KaTavvêw, 6(j)da\fjL0VS tov nij iSXeTeiv, Kai UTa
infs.
TOV
nil aKoveLv,
where the
:
are parallel with

:
/caraûêcos.
Cf.
Lu.
57, 74; 2
:
6; 10
19; 21
22; 22
6, etc.
Note
/cat
especially
Ph. 3
21, Kara
T-qu
euepyeLav tov 6vvaadaL avTOV

illustrate well
viroTaâi.
Let
these suffice.
They
regarded as a real substantive.
how the inf. continued to be The genitive occurs also with

: ;
adjectives as in QpaSels tov wLaTevaaL (Lu. 24 25) eTOLp.ol kap.ev TOV aveXelv (Ac. 23 15). The genitive is found with d^tos (the
:
anarthrous
4, 9).
19, 21, cl^los KX-qdrjpaL (cf. Rev. 5 4 tov iropeveadai, may be due to a^Lov, but is probably used as subj. nominative in a rather loose way. The inf. in the genitive is specially common in Luke and also in Paul.^ The ablative illustrations are not very numerous, but they are Thus we have the abl. with verbs of hindering as in Mt. clear.
inf.)
as in Lu. 15
:
In
Cor. 16
19
TOV
14,
nil
fxri
KcoXuere aura kXdelu wpos
TopeveadaL.
:
The
classical
and Lu. 4 Greek had also

[xe,
42, KaTtlxov avTOV
to
and the
inf.,
as
in 1 Cor. 14 39, and to nn after verbs of hindering, which last does not occur in the N. T., so that it is probable that an inf. without the art. as in Mt. 19 14 is in the abl., though not cer:
tain.
Moulton
{Prol., p. 220) illustrates
Lu. 4
J.
19 by B. U. 1031 (ii/A.D.) (fypovriaov tov (Lycaonian inscription) tQ bLxoTonwavTi
TvoLfjaaL,
p.^
42 and Ac. 12 H. S., 1902, 369

^7}v,
tov to Xoe-Kov
B. U.
36
ixri
(ii/iii
A.D.) tov ^riv peTaaTiiaat,
(jTvdpuv.
N. P. 16 See further Lu. 24:16 eKpaTOVvTO tov

:
(iii/A.D.) Ko^XvovTes tov

pii
eirL'yvwvai
avTOU, Ac.
10
47
pii
bvvaTai
dvetv.
KoiKvaai tls tov
/xi)
jSaxrto-^rjrat,
14
18
KaTeiravaav tov
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 prepositions 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-KkxâOai, the inf. is in the abl., in apposition with the preceding words. The only instance of the inf. in the instrumental in the N. T. occurs in 2 Cor. 2 13, tc? pii evpeTu pe TLtov. The inf. is not found
:
:
with (xvv in the N. T. Votaw {Inf. in Biblical Greek, p. 29) notes six examples of the instrumental t^ and the inf. in the LXX text
1
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 234.
cf. Vitcau,
Le Vcibc^
p. 172.
1062
of

(2
NEW TESTAMENT
:
Chron. 28
22; Eccl.
16; Is. 56
6;
21).
But other MSS.
vary.
Moulton {ProL,
p. 220) cites L.
4 Mace. 17: 20, Pb.
(ii/B.c), aXXcos ^6
T(3 pLTjdev' ex^LV.

:
h as in h rw evXoyetu (Lu. 24 51). extremely frequent in the N. T., especially in Luke. The possible Hebraistic aspect of the idiom comes up under Prepositions with the Inf. There remains, of course, a possible locThe
locative occurs with
It is
ative use of a form like \veLv.
idea
is
preserved in the N. T.^

is
Cf.
But one doubts if this original Mt. 16 3, yivco<xKeTe haKpiveLv,

:
which
more naturally explained
as a dative: 'ye have knowl-
edge for discerning,' though 'in discerning' makes sense. But with the dative it is different. There is no instance of the dative inf. with a preposition, but the original dative is clear in all examples of purpose without rov or a preposition. Thus Mt. 5 18,
:
ovK fjXdov KaraXDcrat,
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 yivdaKO). See further Mt. 2 2, TjXdofxev rpoaKwrjaaL, 'we came for worshipping'; Jo. 21:3, i;7rd7w aXieveiv, 'I go a-fishing.' So Ro. 3 15, oêls Kxeat al/xa, 'swift for shedding blood.' The substantive also has the dative inf. in Ro. 9 21, kôvaiav iroLrjaaL, 'power for making.' See further 1 Pet. 4:3, KareLpydadai, 'for having wrought'; Gal. 5:3, 6</)iXer77s Troirjaai, 'debtor for doing'; Heb.
:
11
15, Kaipov avaKapypai,
'time for returning.'
This was the origdative
inal
idiom and, with

inf.
all
the rich later development as verbal
substantive, the
idea.
did not wholly get
away from the
We have to cross our tracks fre(6) The Articular Infinitive. quently in discussing the inf. in a lucid fashion. Numerous examples of the articular inf. have already been given in treating the cases of the inf. But the matter is so important that it calls for special investigation. If we pass by the doubtful articular
inf.,
TO (t>v\aaaeLv, in the Odyssey,^

in the oldest
we
still
find (as already
shown)
a few examples
Greek (two
in Hesiod, nine in Pin-
The use of the article with the inf. grew with the growth of the article itself. But it is not to be overlooked that in Homer the anarthrous inf. had already developed nearly
dar, nine in the Lyrics).^
1
Moulton,
Cf.
Pro!., p. 210.
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 179. Gildersl. (Am. Jour, 488) gave this name ("articular infinitive") to the idiom.
2
of Philol., 1912, p.
"I watch the fate
of mj' httle things

*
with a benevolent detachment." Birklein, Entwickelungsgeschichte, p. 91.
VERBAL NOTJNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs)

all
1063
the constructions of this verbal substantive.^
The
It
addition of
the article
made no
essential
change
is
in the inf.
was already
both substantive and verb.

larged the range of the
inf.
But the use

It
of the article greatly en-
with prepositions.
the
inf. is
The
article
extended to new uses, especially was first used with the nom., then
The use of tov and tQ with In the Dramatists and Herodotus it is still chiefly in the nom. and ace, though we do find tov and tQ, and we see the inf. used with prepositions also.^ In Thucydides the articular inf. suddenly jumps to great prominence, occurring 298 times,^ especially in the speeches. Of these 163 occur with prepositions.^ He even uses to with the future inf. and with av and the inf. The orators likewise use the art. inf.
the ace. and then the other cases.
wholly post-Homeric. ^
very freely. It was especially in Demosthenes that ''the power of taking dependent clauses" was fully developed.^ Only the
Pontic dialects, as already noted, keep the inf. as a living form, and a few substantives preserve a mutilated form, like to (i)ayi
('
eating')
= TO
(i)ayetv,
to
cf)LXL
('kissing')
= to
^tXetz'
still
(Thumb,
retained
Handh.,
p. 117).
In the N. T.
we
see
all this
power
with the further development in the use of tov. The inf. itself, as we have seen, is retreating in the N. T., but it still possesses the full range of its varied uses. The articular inf. has all the main
uses of the anarthrous
of these overlap
inf.
Votaw (The
Inf. in Bihl. Gk., p. 51)

1.5
finds 22 uses of the inf. (19 anarthrous,
articular),
but some
inf.
and are
artificial.
Moulton (ProL,
p. 214) con-
cludes from a study of the inscriptions that the articular
only invaded the dialects as the

essential difference in idea,
was starting. There is no and the mere presence or absence of

kolvt]
the article is not to be pressed too far. Jannaris^ admits that sometimes the verbal character is completely obscured. On that point I am more than sceptical, since the inf. continues to have the adjuncts of the verb and is used with any voice or tense. Jannaris^ thinks that in late Greek the substantival aspect grew at the expense of the verbal and the articular inf. had an increasing popularity. I admit the popularity, but doubt the dis1
2 * ^
Goodwin, M. and T., p. 315. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 164.
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 315.
Birklein, Entwickelungsgeschichtc, p. 91.

Gildersl., Contrib. to the Hist, of the Inf.,
Transac. of the
Am.
Philol.
Asso., 1878, pp. 5-19.

'
Goodwin, M. and
Hist.
T., p. 315.
Hypereides, he adds, even exceeds

a
Demos-
thenes.
'
Gk. Gr.,
p. 576.
jb.^ p, 577.
1064
NEW TESTAMENT
appearance of the verbal aspect.
Jannaris makes the mistake of
taking "substantival inf." as coextensive with "articular inf." Blass^ questions if the article always has its proper force with the
inf.
the case of the
and suggests that perhaps sometimes it merely occurs to show Here again I am sceptical. Why does the inf. case of the inf. need to be shown any more than other indeclinable substantives? In Mt. 1 the article does serve to distinguish I have never seen an articular inf. where object from subject. the article did not seem in place. Moulton^ considers the use of the article "the most characteristic feature of the Greek infinitive
Blass' seems puzzled over the frein post-Homeric language." quency of the articular inf. in the N. T., since it is chiefly "confined to Luke and Paul, whose writings have most affinity with the
literary language.
of
Jannaris^ notes
how
scarce
it is
in the writings
and inscriptions, doubtful in the mediaeval period, and absent from the modern vernacular. "The articular infinitive, therefore, could not resist any longer the tendency of the -time, whether it was conceived as a noun or as a verb."^ The analytic tendency drove it out finally. Moulton^ has made some researches on the use of the articular inf. in the
John and
in unlearned papyri
dialect inscriptions.
field's
He
Boeotian inscriptions.
does not find a single instance in LarHe finds one from Lesbos, one from
Elis,
silence of
one from Delphi, a few from Messene, etc. He notes the Meisterhans on the subject. The conclusion seems to
inf. is
be inevitable that the articular

nacular as
it
as rare in the Attic ver-
literary use, starting in Pindar,
It is "mainly a Herodotus and the tragedians, and matured by Attic rhetoric." Aristophanes uses it less than
was common
in the Attic orators.
and Aristophanes gives the Attic vernacular. And yet it is not absent from the papyri. Moulton^ counts 41 instances in vol. I of B. U. The N. T. uses it about as
half as often as Sophocles
often to the page as Plato. He scores a point against Kretschmer's view that the Attic contributed no more to the kolutj than
any one
of the other dialects, since
from the
literary Attic
"the
articular inf. passed into daily speech of the least cultured people Polybius^ deserves to rank with in the later Hellenist world." ^ his use of the inf. He employs the of wealth Demosthenes in the
1
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 233.

Prol., p. 213.

^ *
lb.
Prol., pp.
lb., p.
213
ff.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 233.

Hist.
Allen,
213.
4 9
Gk.
Gr., p. 579.
Inf. in Polyb.
lb., p. 215.
The
Compared with the
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT "PHMATOs)

inf. in all
1065
11,265 times, an average of 7.95 to the page. He has the articular inf. 1,901 times, an average of 1.35 to the page. In the N. T. the inf. occurs 2,276 times, an average of 4.2 times to a page. The articular inf. is found in the N. T. 319 times, an
average of
proportion, of the articular
The N. T. shows fewer uses, in than the O. T. or the Apocrypha. Of the 303 (Moulton) instances, 120 are in Luke's writings and 106 in Paul's Epistles. But Votaw^ counts 319 in all. The MSS. vary in a number of instances and explain the difference. Moulton^ gives the figures for all the N. T. books thus: James 7, Hebrews 23, Gospel of Luke 71, Paul 106, Acts 49, 1 Peter The other 4, Matthew 24, Mark 13 (14), John 4, Revelation 1. has all. Luke the most varied use at have it N. T. books do not
.6
times to a page.
inf.
of the articular
inf.,
and Paul's
is
somewhat uneven.^
The use
of the articular inf. in the various cases has already been sufficiently discussed.
In general one may agree with Moulton^ of the articular infin. in N. T. Greek does appUcation that "the what is found in Attic writers." The beyond not in principle go inf. with prepositions is reserved for articular the of special use is little doubt that the first use of There discussion. separate as it was with everything.^ demonstrative was inf. TO with the the article is almost avaaTrjvai, veKpchv eanu TO eK tI In Mk. 9 10,
:
demonstrative, certainly anaphoric

is true of 10
:
(cf.
verse
9).
The same thing
40 where to
Kadlaat refers to Kadlawixev in verse 37.
lar inf. in the
not necessary to give in detail many examples of the articuN. T. I merely wish to repeat that, when the article does occur with the inf., it should have its real force.
It
is
Often this
will
make extremely awkward
English, as in Lu. 2
27,
kv TcS daa'ya'yeLv tovs youels to TraLdlov.
But the Greek has no con-
cern about the English or German. It is simply slovenliness not to try to see the thing from the Greek standpoint. But we are
not to
matic.
make a
It
is
slavish rendering.
Translation should be idio-
hardly worth while to warn the inept that there is no connection between the article to and the English to in a sentence like Ph. 1 21, e/JLol yap to ^tjv XpLaros /cat to airoOauelp /cep5os. Here the article to has just the effect that the Greek article has
:
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
:
Inf. in Bibl. Gk., pp.
50
IT.
" ^
Prol., p. 215.
2 8
Prol., p. 216.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 164.
Votaw,
1066
12;

13, 16, 18;
:
25:11; Ro. 4:11,

special
9 :1; Ph. 1:23, 29; 2
6;
10; 1
13:8; 14:21; 2 Cor. 8:10f.; Th. 3 2 f.

:
Some
cussion.
words are needed about rod and the
inf.
The
question of purpose or result
We
have seen how
be deferred for separate disthe genitive inf. with rod occurs with
may
verbs,
inf.
substantives, adjectives
and
prepositions.
The
ablative
with Tov is found with verbs and prepositions. The ablative use is not here under discussion, since it involves no special difficulties save the redundant /X17. We may note that in Critias tov was very common with the inf.^ We see it also in Polybius in
an Attic idiom that became and Byzantine Greek.^ Cf. jui) d/ieXjycTTjs tov ewx^'Jo-at Qoivico, O. P. 1159, 11-13 (iii/A.D.). There is no special difficulty with tov and the inf. with verbs as object except in a case like Mt. 21 32 where tov TrtcrreDo-ai ''gives rather
various uses
above.^
It is
named
very
common
in the postclassical
the content than the purpose of
fxeTefxeX-qdyjTe.'^'^
:
The
instances with substantives like Ac. 14
9, exet
iriaTLv tov
awdrjvai,
give no trouble on the score of the article.
It is the case
Tr}v
(objective genitive) that has to be noted.
So with Ph. 3:21,

tov
Ka/j,^
hepyeiav tov dvvaadai.
As
:
to adjectives, as already noted,

4, kav Be a^Lov
fj
it
is
doubtful
inf. is
if
in 1 Cor. 16
iropeveaOaL,
the
Moulton^ so regards it, But there is a use of tov and the inf. that calls for comment. It is a loose construction of which the most extreme instance is seen
cl^lov
to be taken with
as genitive.
but
it
may
be a loose nominative, as we shall see directly.
in
Rev. 12
7, eyeveTO TroXe/ios kv tc3 ohpavQ, 6 Mlxo-tiX
/cat oi
ayyeXot.
This inf. (note the nom. with it) is in explanatory apposition with iroKefios. Moulton^ cleverly illustrates it with the English: "There will be a cricket
avTOv TOV
iroXe/xrjaaL fxeTo.
tov dpaKOVTos.
the champions to play the rest." It is a long jump to from a case like Ac. 21 12, TrapaKoKovixev tov /xi) avaâlvetv avTov, where the simple object-inf. is natural (cf. 1 Th. 4 10 f.).
this
:
match
Cf. also Ac. 23
20,
avpedevTO tov
epojTrjaaL
ae
oxcos
KaTayay-QS.
"This loose inf. of design" is found twelve times in Thucydides, Demosthenes and five in Xenophon.^ These writers prefer the prepositions with tov and the inf. Polybius in his first five books has this simple tov and the inf. only six times, all negative.^
six in
1
Birklein, Entwick., p. 9.
Allen,
Moulton,
jb.
Prol., p. 216.
2 3 7 *
The
Inf. in Polyb., pp.
29
ff.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 578. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 578.
Jann., ib.
lb., p. 218.
Cf. Birklein, Entwick., p. 101.

The normal
chief use.^
tive.
'PIIMATOs)
1067
final as it
is still its
use of rod with the
inf.
was developed by Thucydides, and

It is only in
inf.
in the
was undoubtedly N. T. that
But many Luke (Gospel
of the examples are not final nor consecu23,
Acts 21) and Paul

is
(13) that
Tov with the
(without prepositions)
common.^
They have
five-sixths of the examples.^
the total in the N. T., ton* shows that of Paul's "thirteen" examples two (Ro. 6 6; Ph. 3 10) may be either final or consecutive, two (Ro. 15: 22; 2
:
:
And Luke has himself two-thirds of Matthew has six. John avoids it. Moul-
Cor.
1
8)
:
are ablative, five occur with substantives (Ro. 15

10; 16
:
23;
Cor. 9
1
:
4; 2 Cor. 8
:
11; Ph. 3
:
21), four are epexegetic
(Ro.
24; 7
3; 8
12; 1 Cor. 10
13).
In Luke about half are
not
final.
It is this loose epexegetical inf. that calls for notice.

it
We
Gen. 3 22; 19 19; 31 20; 47: 29, very common idiom in the LXX is due to the Hebrew ^. It does not occur in Polybius.^ In the LXX also we see tov and the inf. used as the subject of a finite verb in complete forgetfulness of the case of tov. Cf. 2 Chron.
find
in the
(cf.
: :
:
LXX
etc.).^
It is possible that this
6 2
7,
1
eyeveTO
eTrl
KapSiav Aavel5 tov Trarpoj

1
/xov
tov
OLKoSoiJirjaaL oIkov.
So
:
Sam. 12:23;
:
Ki. 8: 18; 16:31; Ps. 91:3;

:
Is.
49:6;
Jer.
18; Eccl. 3
inf.
12; 1 Esd. 5
67.^
One must
{-eLv).
recall the fact that
the
tov
had already
lost for the
most part the
significance of the
dative ending -ai and the locative -t
Now
the genitive
both obscured and the combination is used as subject nominative. We have this curious construction
and the dative
-at are
Moulton, Prol., p. 216. Mr. H. Scott gives the following
ib., p. 217.
inf.:
list
for tov
and the
1068

See also Ac. 10: 25, kyeCf. further 20: naturally rarer in the N. T. than in the LXX. Moul1,
in Lu. 17:
avkvbeKrbp eaTiv tov
htj ekOetv.
vero TOV daiKdeiv,

3.
and 27:
1,
kKpldr}
tov axoirXeLv.
It is
a papyrus example closely allied to it, See Winer-Moulton, p. 411, for numerous examples in LXX. But closely allied to it is the use of tov as object-inf., with ei^reXXoAtat in Lu. 4:10 (Ps. 90
p. 220) gives
ton (ProL,
0. P. 86 (Iv/a.d.) Wos tov Trapaax^drjvaL.
11); KaTavevcAi in 5
7; o-rrjptfo) in 9
51;
Troteco
:
in Ac. 3:12; KaKoco in
7: 19;
20.
eTrto-reXXoj in
15
20; irapaKoXeco in 21
:
12; a-vvTideixai in 23
is
Cf. also
tTOLfjLos
TOV in Ac. 23
15.
This
is,
surely
"a wide
all
departure from classical Greek." ^
It
however, after
inf.,
in
harmony with the genius and
history of the
though the
nominative use of tov comes from the LXX. The vernacular papyri show a few examples of tov and the inf. It is found in the inscriptions of Pisidia and Phrygia. Cf. Compernass, p. 40. Moulton^ illustrates Lu. 1 9 with aneXeiv
:
tov ypcKpeiv, B. U. 665 (i/A.D.)

ext TOV TTcoXeLv,
Mt. 18 25 and
:
Jo. 5
(exco)
with
ip'
B. U. 830 (i/A.D.);
:
Cor. 9
6 with eôvalav
QkaOai, C.
46
TOV
LXX
6 with emaiplas tov evpe7v, B. U. concludes that the usage is not common in the papyri and holds that the plentiful testimony from the concurs with the N. T. usage to the effect "that it belongs to the higher stratum of education in the main." This conclu(ii/A.D.).
P. R. 156; Lu. 22
He
sion holds as to the
LXX, where
Hebraism.
obviously the
able influence.
N. T. and the papyri, but not as to the Hebrew inf. construct had a considerMoulton seems reluctant to admit this obvious
(c) Prepositions. We are not here discussing the inf. as purpose or result, as temporal or causal, but merely the fact of the
prepositional usage.
classical
The idiom cannot be
said to be unusual in
Greek.
writers
tion.
show
Jannaris^ agrees with Birklein^ that classical some 2,000 instances of this prepositional construc-
writers (classic and later) who use the idiom most frequently are Thucydides, Xenophon, Polybius, Diodorus, Dionysius, Josephus, Plutarch, Dio Cassius. The most prolific user of
The
the construction
(651 times) .^
1
If
is Polybius (1,053 instances) and Josephus next the prepositional adverbs be added to the strict
Burton, N. T.
M. and
T., p. 159.
In late Gk. this use of rod and the
inf.
came
^
3
to displace the circumstantial participle

Cf. Jann., Hist.
f.
*
and even
finite clauses,
only to
die itself in time.
Gk.
Gr., p. 483.
ProL, p. 219
Hist.
Entwickelungsgesch., p. 103.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 576.
Krapp, Der substantivierte
Inf., 1892, p. 1.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOs)

list
1069
of prepositions, the
in Polybius,
number is very much enlarged, especially who has 90 with x'^P^v, 115 with a/xa, 504 with 5ta,
160 with Trpos, 74 with eis, 24 with h>, 90 with ext, 33 with /xerd, 41 with Trept, only one with Trapd.^ The idiom was here again later
than the articular

literary.
inf.
itself
and was
But
it is
common
also in the
also Attic in origin and Greek inscriptions accord-
ing to Granit.^
It is rare in the papyri, according to

tv \xr\htvi fxefx4)dr]vaL,
Moulton,^
save in the recurrent formula, tU to

larly in the case of Trpos to.
Trpds TO
firi
and particu;
Cf. xpos to tvxIv, B. U. 226 (I/a.d.)

(I/a.d.)
inf.
;
evTvyxo-veiv, O. P. 237
the prepositional
rpos to
Seridijvai (ib.).
Votaw^
finds
almost one-half of
all
the
Apocrypha and the N. T., the proportion being about the same in each section of the Greek Bible.
articular infs. in the O. T., the
Not
quite
all
the prepositions were used with the

'Ajj-cjii
inf. in
ancient
Greek, the exception^ being dm.

tive, KaTo.
had
it
only with the geni-
irapd with the ace, Trept with the with ace. and loc, v-rrep with the ablative, utto with the ablative.^ It was not therefore freely used with all the usual cases with the different prepositions. As a rule the article was essential if a preposition occurred with an inf. The reason
with the accusative,
ace.
and
gen., Trpos
for this
was due to the absence was otherwise almost impossible
between words. It inf. from that of composition of preposition with the verb if the two came in conjunction. Cf. di^Tt toD XeyeLv in Jas. 4 15. A few instances are found without the article. Thus di^Tt 8e apx^cydai (note presence of 8e between) in Herodotus I, 210. 2. It appears thus three times in Herodotus. So also in Êschines, 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 jSdiât, 0. P. 36 (i/A.D.), and the common vernacular phrase^ ets Moultonô Cf. 56s juot Tetv in Jo. 4 10. Treij' ('for drinking'). D, and one 256 cites also an example of axpi from Plutarch, p. Michel 370) kirl from an inscription of iii/B.c. (O. G. I. S. 41,
of division
tell this
to
use of the
Xaiiâveip.
The
The
instances without the article are clearly very few.
Moulton
1
(Prol., p. 81) suggests

Inf. in Polyb., p. 33.
that the significant frequency of
Allen,
2
3
De
Inf. et Part, in Inscr. Dialect.
Prol., p. 220.
Grace. Quostiones Synt., 1892, p. 73. " Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 19.
"
"
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 320.
Cf. Birklein, Entwi(!kelung8gcsch., p. 104.
These preps, "retain
this dis-
qualification in the N. T." (Moulton, Prol., p. 21G).

^
Thompson, Synt. W.-M., p. 413.
Moulton,
lb.
Prol., p. 216.
"
1070
eis iretv

in the papyri
is
NEW TESTAMENT
The
:
due to Ionic
38
tcos
influence.
LXX furnishes
in Judg. 6 :11
several instances of anarthrous

(cf.
els,
as
els eKcfyvyelv
2 Esd. 22 :24;
Sir.
:
27; Judith 4
15).
Note
122
:
also
^cos
kKdeiv in 1
Mace. 16
9;
o5 oiKTeipTJaai in Ps.
1.
2 (so
Ruth
3 :3); throus
fj-expt-s
ov e77t(Tat in
Tob. 11:
Cf. also
ttXtjv
with anar-
inf. in
Polybius, etc.
The
(pOai.
tenses have their full force in this prepositional construc-
tion, as in
Mk.
4, 5td to
dedeadat
/cat
BuairaadaL Kal
avvreTpih
Naturally some tenses suit certain prepositions better, as
with the present tense.^ The principles of indirect discourse apply also to the inf. with prepositions. Cf. neTo. to kyepdrjval p-e Trpod^w (Mk. 14: 28). In the N. T. the accusative seems to occur always
even when the nominative predicate would be possible,^ as in 5td TO pkvHv avTop (Heb. 7 24). So also Lu. 11:8. But note Xen.,
:
Cyr.,
I, 4. 3, 6td
to ^tXo/xa^?)? elpai.
inf.
It is
not necessary for the article to come next to the

:
as
in
Mt. 13
25.
Several words
may
intervene and the clause
be one of considerable extent. Cf. Mk. 5:4; Ac. 8:11; Heb. 2. But the N. T. does not have such extended 1 Pet. 4 clauses of this nature as the ancient Greek, and the adverbs usually follow the inf.^ The English "split inf." is not quite parallel. In the 0. T. there are 22 prepositions used with the inf. and the Apocrypha has 18, while the N. T. shows only 10.^ Of these
may
11:3;
only eight are the strict prepositions

Tp6, Trpos)
{clvtI,
5td,
els,
h, k,
peTo.,
and two the prepositional adverbs evena and e'ojs. It remains now to examine each in detail. 'AvtI tov is not rare with the inf. and is chiefly found in the Greek orators.^ But we have it in Thucydidcs, Xenophon and
Herodotus^ has only 11 instances of the preposition with but 5 of them are with avTl. It does not occur in Polybius. In the N. T. we have only one instance, Jas. 4 15, clvtI TOV Xeyeiv. Votaw gives one for the LXX, Ps. 108 4, clvtI tov
Plato.
the
inf.,
ayairav.
but one (genitive, Heb. Mr. H. Scott reports the 33 exx. thus: Paul 1, Jas. 1, Heb. 4, Mk. 5, Mt. 3, Lu. 9, Ac. 9, Jo. 1. The 0. T. has it with the inf. 35 times and the
Aid has 33 instances in the N. T.,
15,
Slo.
all
TavTos TOV
^rjv)
in the accusative.
"
Burton, N. T.
M. and
T., p. 50.
'
*
6 *
W.-M., Votaw,
p. 415.
lb., p.
413.
Helbing, Die Priipositionen bei Herod., p. 148.

Apocrypha
oTi it
1071
5ta
26,'
all
with the accusative.

3.^
The idiom
to
is
so frequent in
Xenophon and Thucydides

In later Greek
I'm
(cf.
it
that as compared with
stands as 2 to
{koivi]
and Byzantine)
It is
it
comes to displace even 5td va. in modern Greek

prising therefore to find
and
ovrws,
though
finally shifting to
English "for that")-''

in the
not sur-
N. T. with comparative frequency. It is most frequent in Luke's writings, and once in Paul's Epistles, and rare in the other N. T. writers.'* It is usually the cause that is given by 5ta to, as in Mt. 13 5 f., 5ta to It is not merely the practical equivalent of on and 8l6tl, exetv. but is used side by side with them. Cf. Jas. 4 2 f 5ta to alTtl:
/jlt]
crdaL v/jids
.,
fj.ri
8l6tl
/ca/ccos
atretcrê.
It
may
stand alone, as in Lu. 9

aces, in Ac.
7;
8,
or with the accusative of general reference as in indirect
discourse, as in Lu.
2:4; 19
11.
Note two
it is
2.
The
perfect tense occurs seven times, as in

:
Mk.
5 :4
(ter);
Lu.
In Mk. 5:4 6:48; Ac. 8 11; 27:9. than the reason that is given.^ Blass
unnecessarily rejects Jo. 2
Ets TO
'is
:
rather the evidence
(Gr. of
N. T.
Gk., p. 236)
24.
common
evrt
also with the inf.

irpbs to
sense from
to
and
without much difference in with the inf.^ But the N. T. does
not use xt with the inf. There is no doubt about the final use of eis TO whatever is true of the consecutive idea. In the late Greek Jannaris^ notes a tendency to use eh to (cf. /3pa5us tt's to \a\rjaaL in Jas. 1 19) rather than the simple inf. Cf. 1 Th. 4 9. But this tendency finally gave way to I'm. The 0. T. has eh to 124, the
: :
Apocrypha 28 and the N. T. 72 times.^ In the N. T. it is more common than any other preposition with the inf., h coming next with 55 examples. Moulton^ counts only 62 instances of els to in the N. T., but Votaw is right with 72. Paul has it 50 times. There are 8 in Hebrews and only one each in Luke and Acts, a rather surprising situation. The papyri '" show scattered examples
of
it.
Cf.
els
TO kv
to
ij.r]8evl iJieix(f)dr]vaL,
P. Fi. 2 (iii/A.D.) 4 times.
In
Pet. 4:1,
els
l3i.u>aaL,
that in the N. T.
els
the classic notion of

1
:
no doubt to has broken away to some extent from purpose. That idea still occurs as in Ro.
note the long clause.
is
There
11,
ets
TO aTrjpLxOrjvoLL.
:
This
is still
the usual construction.
Cf.
Ro. 3:26; 7: 4; 8
1
29; Eph.
:12; Ph. 1: 10; 1
Th. 3
5; Jas.
Votaw,
2
'
*
6
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 375 Viteau, Le Verbe, p. 165.
f.
Gk. Gr., p. 487. Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk.,

Hist.
Prol., p. 218.
lb., p.
p. 20.
Burton, N. T.
M. and
T., p. 101.
"
220.
1072
1
:

3:7; Heb. 2
els
:
18; 1 Pet.
17,
and other examples
in
Mt. and
In
Heb., to go no further.
In Paul
Ph.
23, kindviilav
to avaXvaaL,
we notice other we have it with a
usages.
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
mand
2
:
or entreaty giving
:
the content of the verb as in

epcoroo/xev
els
:
comTh.
:
12; 3
10; 2
Th. 2
:
2,
to
ixi]
raxeojs
:
aakevdrivai.
Cf. also
Cor. 8
10.
So in Mt. 20
eis to.
ets to,
19; 26
2;
Cor. 11
22
there
final
is
a really dative idea in

it
Just as ha came to be non-
sometimes, so
17.
was with
(cf.
which seems to express con:
ceived or actual result
tov also) as in Ro. 1
20; 12
3; 2 Cor.
8:6; Gal. 3
Cf. the double use of (boTe for 'aim' or 'result.'^

ets
The
perfect tense can be used with
to as in
Eph.
18
ets
to
elb'evai.
and Heb. 11
ets
to jeyovevai, the only instances.
But
:
the present or aorist
is
usual.
occur to some extent in the
LXX
These developed uses of ets to (1 Ki. 22 8; 1 Esd. 2 24;

:
8:84).
'Ev
Tc3
appears in the tragedies.^
It is
found 6 times in ThuBlass^ observes that
cydides, 16 in
Xenophon, 26
in Plato.^
But
the classical writers did not use

'while' or 'during.'
in the O. T. ev
tQi
kv 7c3 in
the temporal sense of

fact that
Moulton^ sought to minimize the
occurs 455 times (45 in the Apocrypha) and
Hebrew a and held that it did not go beyond what we find in Attic writers. But he took that back in the second edition^ under the suggestion of Dr. E. A. Abbott that we must find Attic parallels for 'during.' So he now calls this "possible but unidiomatic Greek." In the N. T. we have ev tQ and the inf. 55 times and 3/4 in Luke. In the Greek Bible as a whole it is nearly as frequent as all the other prepositions with the inf.'' The Semitic influence is undoubted in the O. T. and seems clear in Luke, due probably to his reading the LXX or to his Aramaic sources.^ Cf. Lu. 1: 8; Jan8 5 (ej; rc3 cnreipeLv); 24 51; Ac. 3 26; 4 30; 9 3, etc. naris^ sees here a tendency also to displace the participle. The
that
it
exactly translates the
in principle
Cf. Blass, Gr. of

T., p. 161.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 236;
Moulton,
Prol., p. 219;
Burton, N. T.
M. and
2
3
Moulton,
Prol., p. 215.
PfoL, p. 215.
P. 249.
* ^ *
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 237. Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20.
But Dalman, Worte

Hist.
Jesu, p. 26
f.,
denies that
it is
an Aramaean constr.
Gk.
Gr., p. 379.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PUMATOS)

idiom
is
1073
4; 13
:
not confined to Luke't writings.

2
:
Cf.
Mt. 13
25;
inf.
Mk. 4:4; Heb.

:
8; 3
12, etc
Ordinarily
:
it is
the present
as in Mt. 13 4; Lu. 8:5; Ac. 3 would have the present participle.
26,
But
where the Attic writers in Luke we have also

:
the aorist
inf.
as in 2
27
tQ elaayayttv, (3
21) kv
to) âTTTLadrj-
mt, where Blass^ sees the equivalent of the aorist participle

'l-qaov âTTTLadhros)
(cf.
or a temporal conjunction with the aorist inis
dicative.
One
questions, however, whether the matter

so
to be
worked out with
much
finesse as that.
It
tQ occurs only 12 times in the N. T.^

the simple action of the verb which
precise relation to be defined
ticiple
is
The aorist inf. with kv is more correctly just
thus presented, leaving the
by the
This
29.
context, like the aorist par-
of simultaneous
:
action.
Cf. ev tQ viroraât. in
is
Heb. 2
Cf.
8;
Gen. 32
to
4; 27
19, kv tu) evpetv.
all
that
kv
rw should be
made
13
:
mean with
:
either the present or the aorist.

:
Mt.
like
12; Lu. 8
40; 9
The
:
idea
17),
is
:
not always strictly

30, it is
temporal.
In Ac. 3
26
(cf.
Jer. 11
4
:
more
:
means. Heb. 8
ception
Votaw^
:
sees content in Lu.
12
15;
Heb. 3
1
12.
In
13, kv rco \kyeLv, the
notion
is
:
rather causal.
:
The con-
is
not wholly temporal in

irapafxevLV,
Mk,
6 48; Lu.
inf. In
f.
21.^
No
other
preposition occurs in the N. T. with the
the locative case.
But
cf.
kiri TU)
k/jLal
O. P. 1122, 9
(a.D. 407).
"EvKev 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

pwdrjvat
T-fjv
it
in the
N.
T., 2 Cor. 7: 12,
'iveKev
tov âve-
airovSriv vjxwv,
where
it is
clearly causal as with the

eveKev
two
preceding participles,
(a
part.).
tveKtv tov
aSLKrjcravTos,
tov adurjOevTOS
inf.
good passage to note the distinction between the
and the
inf.
The
:
case
is,
of course, the genitive.
'E/c tov,
likewise, appears in the

11, kK tov exeiv),
N. T. only once with the

is
(2 Cor. S
but the case
ablative.
Its usual
idea in Attic prose

illustration
takes
it
in
is that of outcome or result.^ Votaw^ gives no from the 0. T., but three from the Apocrypha. Blass* 2 Cor. 8:11, to be equivalent to Kadd av 'ixv- More
1 2
'
Inf. in Bibl. Gk., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 237. p. 20. " Blass, Gr. Qf N. T. Gk., Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 50. p. 237. Birklein, Entwick., p. 106. It is found in Polyb. also. Cf. Kiilker, Ques-
tiones, p. 302; Allen, Inf. in Polyb., p. 35.
Lutz (Die Casus-Adverbicn bei
Att. Rcdn., 1891, p. 18) finds
it
"zucrst bei Antiphon."

Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 237.
1074
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREP.K

meant
NEW TESTAMENT
"out of" the posIn Polybius k rod with the inf. has a more varied use (departure, source of knowledge, source of advantage).^ He uses it 25 times. "Ecos Tov, hkewise, occurs but once (Ac. 8 40, ews tov kXdelv), and with the genitive. Birklein does not find any instances of
session of property, whatever
it
likely it is
to accent the ab'iity growing
may
be.
and the inf. in the classic writers, though he does note and less frequently axpc rov.^ Cf. nexpi rod wXelv, P. B. M. 854 (i/ii a.d.). But in the 0. T. Votaw^ observes 52 instances of ews TOV and 16 in the Apocrypha. Cf. Gen. 24 33; Judith 8 34. We have already noted the anarthrous use of ecos kXdetu in Cf. Gen. 10 19, 30, etc. 1 Mace. 16 9 A. So also ews o5 and )uexpt(s) ov and the inf., 1 Esd. 1 49, and Tob. 11 1 B. It is rather surprising therefore that we find only one instance in the N. T. and that in the Acts. The construction is probably due to the analogy of irplp and the inf. Merd to is found only a few times in Herodotus, Plato and
ws TOV
/xexpt TOV
:
Demosthenes.^
ius
It appears,
however, thirty-three times in Polyb-
The idea is temporal and a practical equivalent for the aorist participle. In the O. T. Votaw" finds it 99 times and only 9 in the Apocrypha.
aorist tense.^
and usually with the

is
the aorist
There are 15 examples in the N. T. and the case is the accusative always. Merd to vanished with the inf. in modern Greek.^ The aorist is always used in the N. T. save one perfect (Heb. 10 15).
:
Eight of the examples occur in Luke's writings (Lu. 12 5; 22 20; Ac. 1:3; 7:4; 10 41; 15 13; 19 21; 20 1). See also Mt. 26 32; Mk. 16 19; 1 Cor. 11:25; Heb. 10 15, 26.
1
:
:
See
Mk.
:
14; 14
28, êrd to kyepdfjual

:
ixe.
IIpo TOV in the ancient writers
was used much
like Tvplv
and
in
invaded the province of irplv, though in the N. T. we only meet it 9 times. It is not common in the papyri nor the inscriptions.^ See Delphian inscr. 220, irpb TOV irapafxeivai. Polybius has it 12 times. ^ In the O. T. we find it 46 times, but only 5 in the Apocrypha." The tense is always the aorist save one present (Jo. 17 5). Cf. Gal. 3 23, irpo TOV ekdtiv ttjv ttI(jtlv. There is no essential differ:
the temporal sense. ^
It gradually
Allen, Inf. in Polyb., p.
34
f.
?
s
2
3
<
6
Entwick., p. 105. Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 20. Birklein, Entwick., p. lOS.

Allen, Inf. in Polyb., p. 41.
jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 386. Birklein, Entwick., p. 105.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 214.
i"

" Votaw,
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PUMATOs)

ence in construction and idea between Trpiv and the The use of irpiu with the inf. was irpo Tov and the inf.
in
inf.
1075
and
common
was used with the inf. The usage and the article never intervened. But the inf. with both rpiv and rpo is in the ablative case. Cf. ablative^ inf. with purd in Sanskrit. Ilpti' was never used as a preposition in com-
Homer
before the article
became
fixed
position,
but there
ecos
is
just as
much
reason for treating wplv as a

inf.
prepositional adverb with the ablative

sidering
9)
.
as there
tcos
is
for so con-
TOV,
not to say
ecos
alone as in
tKOelv (1
Mace. 16
fact of
The
use of the article
is
the
common
idiom.
The
Trplv
and the inf. held back the development of wpo rod. In modern Greek Tpd rod as irpoTov occurs with the subj. (Thumb, Handb., In the N. T. irplv is still ahead with 13 examples. The p. 193). instances of irpd tov are Mt. 6:8; Lu. 2 21; 22 15; Jo. 1 48;
: :
13
19; 17
5; Ac. 23
15; Gal. 2
12; 3
23. It
Ilpos TO is
the remaining idiom for discussion.
was used by
to,
the ancients in
to,'
much
the same sense as
els
to
and
eiri
'looking
'with a view
to.'-
The idiom
is
very
common
in Polybius,^
150 examples, and there are 10 of irpos tw. But in the O. T. we have only 14 examples and 12 in the Apocrypha.^ The N. T. shows 12 also. Some of the LXX examples are of 7rp6s rcS (Ex. In 1 16; 2 Mace. 7: 14), but in the N. T. they are all irpos to. the papyri Moulton^ finds wpos to rather more common than eh In the N. T. Matthew has it five times (5 28; 6 1; 13 30; t6. 23 5; 26 12). These express aim unless 5 28 is explanatory
: :
of pXeTcov.^
1,
Mark
has
it
once, 13
22.
Luke has
it
twice (18
:
where wpos
13;
to belv
means 'with
els).''
reference to'; Ac. 3
19 only give the

(6
KB,
3
:
while other
MSS. read
Paul's four examples (2 Cor.

:
Eph. 6
11,
DEFG
els; 1
Th. 2
9; 2
(3
Th. 3
times)
8) all
"subjective purpose."^
times) tenses occur.
(d)
Both present
Cf. irpbs to deadrjvai in
and Mt. 6:1.
aorist
The
Infinitive with Substantives.
Numerous examples
of
with substantives were given in the discussion of the cases of the inf. The matter calls for only a short treatment at this The use of the inf. with substantives was ancient and point. natural, first in the dative or locative and then in the genitive
the
inf.
**
1 Whitney, Sans. Gr., 983; Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 158. with the inf. after both positive and negative clauses. lb., p. 218. 2 Birklein, Entwick., p. 107.
Homer
used
irpif
3
< 6
">
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 236.
Votaw,

.
'
Prol., p. 220.
W.-M., Monro,
p.
414 note.
Iloni. Gr., p. 154.
, :
1076
with
usage

rod.
is
NEW TESTAMENT
It
was always common

in Polybius
common
It is
is
articular inf.^
rypha.'
in the classic Greek. ^ The with both the anarthrous and the The same thing is true of the O. T. and the Apocso frequent as not to call for illustration. The
meaning
is
that of complement and the inf. most frequently occurs with words of time, fitness, power, authority, need, etc. It
Some anarthrous examples

2
:
abundantly used in the N. T. both with and without the article. are (Mt. 3 14) xp^'i-o-i' iSaTTTLadfjvaL, (Lu.
:
1)
dojfxa
aTroypa(j)eadaL,
(Jo.
12)
eôvaiav yeueadai,
:
(19
40)
Wos
VTa4>La^LV, (Ac.
24
15) eXrtSa ûeXXetj', (Ro. 13
11) copa eyep-
drjvai,
(Gal. 5
3) 6(/)etXer7?s TOLrjaaL,
KptdijuaL, etc.
(Heb. 7
5) VToKy]v airobeKaTotv
(Rev. 11: 18) Kaipos the construction is

in the
common
1
:
These are all real datives and enough in the N. T., more so than
eTndviJ.iav
LXX.
In Ph.
is
23 note
rod
eh to avoKvaaL.
inf.,
The
same substantives may have

course, the case
21)
r]p.kpai
and the
:
though now, of
genitive.
Cf. (Lu. 1
:
57) xpopos tov reKelv, (2

tov iraTetv, (Ac. 14:9)
etc.
TOV
irepLTeixelv,
(10
20)
19) eôvalav
Tri(TTi.v
TOV
aojdrjvaL,
(27
eXTrts
tov
acoêadat,
It
occurs
It is
eight times in Luke's writings
and nine
in Paul's Epistles.
about as common in proportion as in the LXX.^ See further Lu. 1 74; 2 6; 21 22; 22 6; Ac. 20 3; Ro. 1 24; 8 12; 11 8; 15:23; 1 Cor. 9 10; 10:13; 2 Cor. 8: 11; Ph. 3 :21; 1 Pet. 4: 17; Heb. 5 12, etc. Since the inf. is a substantive, the genitive relation with other substantives is obvious and natural. (e) The Infinitive with Adjectives. This idiom is likewise classical and is common from Homer on.^ As already shown, the case varies with different adjectives. This inf. is complementary as with substantives. It is natural with adjectives as any other
:
: : : : : :
on longest with Swards, Uavos, but other began to give way to els ro (cf. Jas. 1 19, Taxi's els TO aKovaai, ^pa8vs els to XaXijaai.) rather than the simple inf. and finally this disappeared before IW (cf. Mt. 8 8, kavos Iva).^ In the LXX and the N. T. the inf. with adjectives is less frequent than with substantives. We have it with both the anarthrous and the articular inf. See (Mt. 3:11) Uavos /Sacrrdo-ai, (Mk. 10:40) eixbv hovvai, (Lu. 15 19) a^tos KXrjdfjpaL, (Jas. 3 2) Svsubstantive
is.
It held
kolvt]
adjectives in late
vaTOs xo-î-vaycoyrjaaL, (1 Cor. 7

dvaepix-qvevTOS XeyeLV, (1
39) eXevdepa yaniqdrivaL, (Heb.

:
5:11)
It
is
Pet. 4
3) apKerds KaretpyaaOaL, etc.
2
6
Votaw, Inf. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 301. * lb., p. 27. AUen, Inf. in Polyb., pp. 23, 32. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 155 f For Polyb. see Allen, Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 487.
.
in Bibl. Gk., pp. 15, 26.

Inf. in Polyb., pp. 23, 32.
1077
more common with aîos, Swaros, havos. The only adjective that often has roO and the inf. in the O. T. is eTOL/ios.^ We find it also
with adverbs as in Ac. 21
Cor. 12
: :
13, deOrjpat awodauelu eroi/xoos
ex'^
(so
14).
The
1
articular examples are less frequent.

TTLaTevetu,
:
But note
tov avtkeiv.
(Lu. 24 25)
:
/SpaSeTs rod
(Ac. 23
15)
eTOLfioi.
Some would add

of the Inf.
(/)
Cor. 16
4, aîov tov iroptveadai.,
but see Cases
The
Infinitive with Verbs.

all.
the most frequent of
It started as
This usage came to be, of course, 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 articular.
It
is
the varied uses of the
not necessary to go over again (see Cases of the Inf.) inf. with verbs, whether the object of verbs
of saying or thinking in indirect discourse, verbs of
commanding
verbs of
or promising, the direct object of verbs (auxiliary

hindering,^ etc.
inf.),
As a matter
of fact
they are
all object-infs.
what-
ever the case (ace, gen.,
abl., dat., instr.).
Votaw'' notes that in
the N. T. this use of the inf. is four times as common as any other. It is usually the anarthrous inf., but not always. Even
bbvajxai
and
apxafxat.
came
to be used with tov

list
and the
inf.
Jan-
naris^ has
made a
careful
of the verbs that continued for a

inf.
while in late Greek to use the
against the inroads of
'Iva.
Radermacher (N. T.
use of the
inf.
Gr., p. 150)
argues that in general the N. T.
with verbs is like that of the Koivrj. The inf. XaXrjaai Th. 2; 2) is not a Hebraism, but a Hellenism. But surely it is not necessary to call this usage an Atticism. In the discussion of Iva (see chapter on Modes) the displacement
with
kirapprjcFLadaiJieda (1
of the inf.
by
Iva
even after verbs
like deXco
was
sufficiently treated.
Schmid'' "shows
how
this 'Infinitivsurrogat'
made
its
way from
Gospel of
Aristotle onwards."^
In the N. T.
it is
chiefly in the
John that we find this use of I'm. "The strong volitive flavour which clung to 'iva would perhaps commend it to a writer of John's temperament."^ But after all, the inf. with verbs has not quite disappeared from John's Gospel. Jannaris^ has worked out the situation in John's Gospel as between this use of the inf. and tva.
Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 27. * Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 7. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 154. ' ^ Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 574 f. See Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 487. Atticismus, Bd. IV, p. 81. Cf. also Hatz., Einl., p. 215. ^ jb, " Moulton, Prol., p. 211. 9 Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 572 f. For an extended li.st of the verbs in the N. T. used with the complementary inf. see Vitcau, Le Vorbc, pp. 157 ff.
1
1078
NEW TESTAMENT
'iva about 125 times and the inf. with verbs about 129 Of these 57 belong to bbva^xai (37) and d'tko^ (20). There are besides, 10 with Set and 12 each with ^Tjrew and with nkWw.
He
finds
times.
The
airku,
rest
are scattered with

apxoixai,
SlScoyui,
x,
6(})i\co,
So/cew,
d0t?;/it,
epuTCLCio,
etc.
It is clear, therefore, that the inf.
by no means dead in the N. T., though the shadow As illustrations of the great wealth of verbs with the inf. in the N. T. note (Mt. 11 20) ^pâro oveLblêiv, (27:58) Kk\ev(rev awoSodrjvaL, (Mk. 12:12) e^rjrovv Kparrjaai, (Lu. Almost any verb 16 3) crKairTHu om laxôi, k-JvaLTetv alax^vop-aL.
with verbs
of Lva
is
is
across its path.
that can be used with a substantive can be used with the
inf.
:
The use
13.
of the inf.
:
with
TrpoarideixaL is
Treî/'ttt.
a Hebraism.
It
Cf. Ex. 14
See Lu. 20
12, irpoakdero
means
'to go
'
on and
finds in
is
do' or 'do again.'
It is the
:
one Hebraism that

f.
Thumb
Josephus.
Cf. also Lu. 20
11
The
articular inf. with verbs

6(t>ei\co
much
3
:
less frequent.
But note
25
rd ayairav after
:
(Ro. 13:8);
Troteco
TrapaLTovfxai to a.ivodavttv (Ac.
11); roD TrepLiraTelp after

:
(Ac.
12); eTrta-retXat
:
rod awexco^daL (15

:
20); Karelxov tov
/jlti
iropeveadaL
(Lu. 4 42). In 1 Ki. 13 16 we have rod ewLarpexJ/aL with Suraûat. These are just a few specimens. See Cases of the Inf. The grammars draw a dis(g) The Appositional Infinitive. tinction here, but it is more apparent than real as Votaw^ well
says.
inf. in apposition is that with nouns; the epexegetical used with verbs. But at bottom the two uses are one. They are both limitative. With nouns the appositional inf. restricts or describes it. It is a common enough idiom in classical Greek ^ and is found also in the LXX. In the N. T. observe Ac.
The
inf. is
15
28
7rX?7J'
TOVTwv
TLCV
eiravayKes,
eariv,
airex^cydciL,
(Jas. 1
.
27) dpyjaKeia
Cf further Ac. 26 16; 2 Cor. 10 13; Eph. 3 6, 8; 4 17; 1 Th. 4 3 f.; Heb. 9 8; 1 Pet. 2 15 (ourcos). The articular inf. may also be appositional as in Ro. 14 13, tovto Kpivare /jLoXKov, TO ixrj TidevaL. So also 2 Cor. 2:1; 7:11; Ro. 4 13; 1 Th. 4 6 his. In the N. T. and
Kadapa Kal a/xlavTos
:
avrrj
ewLaKeiTTeadaL.
:
the Apocrypha
tional,
it is
only to (in the articular use) that
is
apposi-
but in the 0. T. 15 out of the 17 insitances have tov without any reference to the case of the noun.^ It is worth noting that I'm is common also in appositional clauses (cf. Lu. 1:43; 1 Cor. 9 18), especially in the writings of John (Jo. 4 34; 15 8;
:
:
Hellen., p. 125.
Cf. Moulton, Pro!., p. 233.
2 3
Hadley and Allen, 950; Goodwin, Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 29.
Cf.
1517.

17:3; 1 Jo. 3:11,23; 4 :21; 5:3, 2:3;3:16).i
5.
'PnMATO:s)
1079
IJo.
etc.).
We find
on
also in
Verbal Aspects of the

same
inf. is
all
Infinitive.
It is
worth repeat-
ing that the
substantive as well as verb.
Each
inf.
does not, of course, have
each
inf.
the substantival and verbal uses, but 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
it is
voice.
In
Homer
the
inf.
already has the voices, so that

It is possible that the original
speculative as to the origin.
inference so far as the
Moulton^ illustrates it dering,' and a^tos OavfxaaaL, 'worthy for wondering,' when the first means 'able to wonder' and the second 'deserving to be wondered at.' They are both active in form, but not in sense. "The middle and passive infinitives in Greek and Latin are merely adaptations of certain forms, out of a mass of units which had lost their individuality, to express a relation made prominent by the closer connection of such nouns with the verb."^ There was so much freedom in the Greek inf. that the Sanskrit -turn did not develop in the Greek as we see it in the Latin supine. Gradually by analogy the inf. forms came to be associated with the voices in the modes. Practically, therefore, the Greek inf. came to be used as if the voices had distinctive endings (cf. the history of the imper. endings)." Thus in Lu. 12 58, 56s kpyaalav aT-qWaxdaL air' avTov, it is clear that the passive voice is meant whatever the origin of the form -adaL. The reduplication shows the tense also. The same remark applies to Mk. 5 4, Slo. to be^kadai /cat duairaadai.
: :
Greek inf. had no voice. This is an Greek is concerned, but a justifiable one. well by Suwros davixacrai, 'capable for won-
vir'
avTOV ras
dXucrets.
See also 5
is
43,
etirev SoOrjvai avrfj (j)ayelv.
No
our
special voice significance
manifest in
p. 229.
cpayetv,
which
is like
1
^
See Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

As, for instance, Szczurat,
inf.
De
Inf.
Horn. Usu, 1002,
p. 17.
He claims
that
the Horn.
3
came
:
to serve ahnost all the ideas of the finite verb.

*
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
28,
p. 57G.
-n-ddeis
Prol., p. 203.
woirjaai.,
lb.
In Ac. 26
XpLcmavov
it is
one notes a possible absence of the
strict voice in woiriaai.
But
a hard passage.
1080

and
is
'eating'
the ace, of general reference with

elirep.
8odrjvaL
which
:
in
turn
is
the direct object of

.
But
:
8odr]i>aL
has the passive force
Ac. 26 32 and In general, therefore, after the inf. is fully developed, the voice in the inf. appears exactly as in the modes. So tov airexâdat (Ac. 15 20) a-n-oypaipaadai. (Lu. 2:5); kirCKadkuOai (Heb. 6 10); yajJL-qdijvaL (1 Cor. 7: 39); KXrjdrjvai vtos (Lu. 15 19). Cf. deaaaadai. (Lu. 7 24) and deaOfjvaL (Mt. 6:1). See chapter on Tenses for adequate discussion of (6) Tense. Some general remarks must here suffice. As the this point. Sanskrit inf. had no voice, so it had no tense. In the original
beyond a doubt. Cf further

eveKev rod 4>avepoodT]paL in
airoXeXvadat. edvvaro in
2 Cor. 7
12.
Greek there was possibly no tense in the inf., but in Homer the There is no time-element in the inf. (cf. is in full force.^ subj., opt. and imperative) except as the future inf. echoes the
tense
expectation of a verb like eXTrlfw (or neWco) or as the
inf.
repre-
sents a fut. ind. in indirect discourse (see Indirect Discourse under
Modes).
inf.
It is
probably true that originally there was no distinc-
tion between aorist (punctiliar)
and present
(linear) action in
the
In Sanskrit and Latin the infinitives and supines have no necessary connection with the present stem (cf. supine tactum and
inf. tangere).^
"The
a in XDcrat has only accidental similarity to
with that in eXuo-a."^ Moulton^ tersely adds: "But when once these noun-forms had established their close contact with the verb, accidental resemblances and other more or less caprilink
it
cious causes encouraged
an association that rapidly grew,
till all
the tenses, as well as the three voices, were equipped with

tives appropriated to their exclusive service."
first
infini-
But even
so at
the tense of the
inf.
had only to do with the kind

with time.
of action
(punctiliar, linear, state of completion), not
In general, as with the subj., opt. and imper., the aorist inf. came to be the naturaP one unless some reason for the present Cf KaTa^^vai (Lu. 9 54) iradetv (Lu. 24 or perf or fut. existed.
.
46); KaToKmai (Mt. 5
17); irpoaevâaOaL (Lu. 18
10); aKovaat (Ac.
10:33); kxeat (Ro. 3:15), etc. Sometimes, as in e5et TOLrjaaL (Mt. 23 23), the inf. was used to suggest antecedent action. But the timeless aorist may point to what is future, as in Lu. 24
: :
46 above.
neither.
1
Cf. also Lu. 2
26; Ac. 3
18.
Essentially,
it
does
Cf. /leXXco with aor. inf.
So
/xeXXo^'ra epeyK[eL]p, P.
Grenf.,
^ ib. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 160. jb. Moulton, Prol., p. 204 5 Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 59, notes 5,484 aorists and 3,.327 presents the Gk. Bible. In the N. T. the ratio is 4 3, in the O. T. 2 1. 2
:
in
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PUMATOZ)

ii,
1081
In indirect assertions the aorist inf. represents the aor. indicative, but the N. T. seems to show no instance like this.^ However, that is a mere accident, for note ev tw elaayaye'ti'
77
(iii/A.D.).
Toiis
yoveis to iraLdlop rod
iroLrja-aL
avrovs (Lu. 2
27)
principle applies.
Contrast the tense of

:
TOLrjaai
Ac. 26
28.
In Lu. 24 46, TeYpaTrrat wadelv TOP

inf.
where the same and ireldeLs in XpLffTov, we have
the timeless aorist in indirect discourse.
with some verbs would accent linear action Some inf. would not draw the point sharply. and the can see One present.^ the for fondness a writers have
The
present
with others the
force of linear action in

ayaircip avrov
:
rifxas
5eT
kpydêaOaL (Jo. 9
4)
:
and
16.
in to
In 1 prominent (cf. Jo. 3 ^teXXco, with with normal quite is also It verse in 6) atxaprapeL ovx which it occurs 84 times in the N. T. to 6 of the aorist. See Mt. 14 22 for both aorist eMiS^rat and present irpoayeLP in same sentence. Cf. also Ac. 15 37 f. The usual tense-distinction may be
(Mk. 12
33).
Cf. also aroLxelu in Ph. 3

,
9, oy SvvaraL aixaprapetp
.
the linear notion
is
assumed
point
is
to exist,
though in a case
like Xeyeip
(Heb. 5
11) the
not to be stressed.
The present
inf.
inf. in indirect
assertion
represents the
18, etc.
same tense
:
of the direct, as in
Mt. 22
23; Lu. 11
Rarely the present tive as in Lu. 20 6.
represents an imperfect indica-
The
for the 19; 16
perfect
inf. is
common
also in indirect discourse to stand

:
same tense
:
of the direct, as in Jo. 12
29; Ac. 12
perfect
14; 14
27.
This
is
natural enough.
But the
:
inf. is
found
complementary inf. as in Ac. 26 32, XeKvadai edvparo. Note Lu. 12 58, 56s epyaalap dTrr/XXdxât. But we also find the perfect tense with the articular inf. (so aorist and present) as in Mk. 5 4; Lu. 6 48; Ac. 27 9. In the N. T. there are in all 31 perfect infs. and the same number in the O. T.^ Of the N. T. examples 23 are anarthrous, 8 articular. The papyri show the
also in the
:
articular perf. inf.

iiTrep
Cf. ewl
ere,
to)
yeyophai, P. Oxy. 294 (a.d. 22);

(b.C. 168).
Tov aToXeXmOaL
P. Br.
M. 42
Thucydides even used to with the future inf. The same construction is found in Polybius.* But in the koipt] the future inf. is weakening rapidly. This disappearance of the fut. inf. is partly due to the retreat of the fu-
The
future
inf. is
increasingly rare.
Burton, N. T.
Gildersl.,
M. and
T., p. 53.
Am.
Jour, of Thilol., 1,SS2, p. 193.

p. 321,
einigc
Punkte des Gricch., 1848,
Madvig, BemerkunKcn iibor shows how the inf. has only the time

3
Votaw,
Alien, Inf. in Polyb., p. 48.
1082
NEW TESTAMENT
ture tense in general ^ and partly to the apparent kinship between the future and aorist forms. In the papyri Moulton^ notes that
the future
aorist or
ishing.
inf. is sometimes used in the kolvt] as equivalent to the even the present, since the sense of the future was van-
Cf. x^PWî-^ in Jo. 21

xcopjjcrat.
MSS.
give
25 (KBC), while the other later In the O. T. the fut. inf. (anarthrous always)
:
occurs only 14 times and only 6 in the N. T.

has, however, 54,
The Apocrypha
:
:
but almost all in 2 and 3 Maccabees.^ Three examples are with êXXw (Ac. 11 28; 24 15; 27 10). of the N. T. Another is in Ac. 23 30 and is dependent on a participle after a past indicative. In Ac. 26 7 the margin of W. H. (after B) has KaTavT-qaeLV (text -rjaai.) with eXTrtfei. In Heb. 3 18 note oj/xwaev elaeXevcreadaL (LXX). Another example is in Jo. 21:25, after 1X7)
:
:
ol/jLat.
Moulton
{Prol., p. 219) cites
(c)
Cases with the Infinitive.
XPV tToiixdaeiv, B. U. 830 (I/a.d.). In general the inf. uses the same
case that the finite verb does.
einXadeaOai rod epyov, the dative in
So the genitive in Heb. 6 10 1 Cor. 7 39 cS deXei yaiJ.r]dr}vaL,

:
the ace. in Ac. 23

dpliTTOLs
x^P"'^''
15 roD aveXeLv, the instrum. in Mt. 15
20 to
(jiayelv,
the locative in Ac. 21

:
21
fj.r)8e
rots eOeacv
20 rod dirkxicrBo-i- rcbv oKLayrjixdnominative in Ac. 17 18 KUTayyeXevs dvai, the predicate accusative in Ro. 2 19 irkiroLdas aeavrou dSrjydu dvai, or
TrepLiraTeLv,
the ablative in Ac. 15
Tuv, the predicate
the ace. of general reference in ind. discourse in
Mk.
12
18.
But
al-
this brings us again to the ace. in indirect assertion, a
matter
ready treated at some length. (See Accusative Case, Indirect Discourse, and the next section.) But the thing to note is the real verbal nature of the inf. in the matter of cases. Note the three accusatives with roD diSaaKeLv in Heb. 5 11 f., two objects, one of The cognate neuter plural is seen in ttoXXo, general reference.
:
Tradeiv
(d)
(Mt. 16:21).
The
Infinitive in
Indirect
Discourse.
The frequent obdiscourse justifies
scuration of the cases with the
inf. in indirect
some additional remarks besides those
in the chapter
on Modes.
The
it
inf. is
not
finite
and, like the participle, has no subject.

so,
By
the
courtesy the grammars often say

clears to
but
it
beclouds more than

is
do
so.
The
case of the predicate^ with the inf.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., pp. 486, 552

Prol., p.
ff.
2 3
204
f.
Cf. Hatz., Einl., pp. 142, 190; Kalker, Quest., p. 281.
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.

as
That was not always
true,
we have
seen in Indirect Discourse.

place to start.
Cf.
1083
See also 2
Mt. 19
(xri
21,
el
deXets reXetos elvau
Cor. 10
2, Seo/xat to
irapchv Oappriaai,
where the nominative oc-
curs within the
domain
of the accusative articular inf.

ixe
But note
Mk.
14
28, ixera to eyepOi^val

inf.
irpoaôi.
The
true nature of the ace.
with the
vfxas.
as being merely that of general reference comes out

inf.,
well in the articular
as in Jas. 4
2, ovk exere 5td to
ixri
alTelaQai
go over again the steps taken under Modes, but simply to insist on the true nature of the accusative with the inf. It stands, indeed, in the place of a finite verb of the direct statement, but does not thereby become finite with a subject. From the syntactical standpoint the construction is true to both the substantival and verbal aspects of the
It is not necessary here to
inf.
subject of the finite verb, when thrown into the ace, takes this turn because of the limitations of the inf. When it is retained in the nominative, it is by apposition with the subject
The
of the principal verb or
by
attraction
if
in the predicate.
Draeger
matter in Latin than in Greek. frequent more much is where the ace. with the inf. King and Cookson.^ misnomer," say a "The name is confessedly the makes ace. with the and clearly matter Schmid^ also sees the track is taken beaten usual The reference. general inf. the ace. of win. Schmitt* will and its way making is by Jolly,** but the truth admits that the ace. is not the grammatical subject, but only the But why call it "subject" at all? Schroeder^ logical subject.
sees this point clearly in his treatment of the
properly likens
bibaaKoi avTov
it
to the double accusative with diddaKo:, as in
TrepnraTfTiv.
The
late Sanskrit
shows a few examples

use of the ace. with
like
Enghsh
inf.
"if
you wish me to
live."^
The
the
early reached a state of perfection in

it it
Greek and Latin.

(i>T]ixl
Schhcher* notes 130 instances of against 15 with ws, on. We see
in
Homer with
alone as
hke Latin. Voin Caesar and in Greek Thucydides and Xenophon the while the 0. T., in construction the of rarity the notes taw^ Apocrypha and the N. T. have some 46 verbs which use the idiom. But even in the N. T., as compared with the ancient
in its glory in historians
Greek, the construction

1
is
greatly narrowed.
'
The
particular
Hist. Synt.,
Bd.
II,
pp. 380, 446.
Ubcr den
Infinitiv, p. 40.
Inf., p.
2 ^
Introd. to
Comp.
Gr., 1890, p. 214.
Gesch. dcs
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,
Oscae, Vnibricac, Latinae, Goticae 8 Moods of Indirect Quotation,
Forma et Vsv, 1873, Am. Jour, of Theol.,
p. 65.
Jan., 1905.
1084
NEW TESTAMENT
inf. in indirect
verbs in the N. T. which

discloses
may
use the ace. and the
assertion were given under
Modes.
general view of the matter
a rather wide range still. But the idiom, being largelyfound in Luke, Paul and Hebrews. The other writers prefer 6tl. Luke, in fact, is the one who makes the most constant use of the idiom, and he quickly passes over to the direct statement. There is with most of them flexibility as was shown. Blass^ has a sensible summary of the situation in the N. T. There
literary, is chiefly
is,
in truth,
no
essential
difference in the
Greek construction,
:
whether the
plêro
tXîv,
without a substantive, as in Ac. 12 15 SuaxôvTO)s exî-v, with the acc, Ac. 24 9 4>a(TK0vre% ravTa oOrcos or with the nom. Ro. 1 22 <f)daK0VTes elvaL aocpoL Cf. Ac.
inf. is
:
17: 30;
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 Pet. 2 11, we have only the predicate cos TrapoUovs airexeadaL. Freedom also exists. In Mk. 9 47 we have KaXov ae kanv jxovb(pdaXfxov elaeXdeLV, while in Mt. 18 8 we read koXou aol katLV /jlopo:
(t)da\iJ.ov
eiaeXdeXv.
it
Even
in
Matthew the
predicate adj.
:
though amples
Ac. 15
might have been dative, as

1
in Ac. 16
21.
is
:
is acc, Further ex-
of the predicate dative

:
seen in Lu.
:
3; 9
59; Ac. 27
:
when an accusative 3 (KAB) 2 Pet. 2

;
possible are
21.
But
see
Heb. 2 10. Impersonal constructions may also use the acc. with the inf. There are besides verbs of wiUing, desiring, allowing, making, asking, beseeching, exhorting, some verbs of commanding, the inf. with Tpiv, ware, ro, rod, prepositions and the articular infinitive. With all these the acc. may occur.
22, 25;
difficult inf.
occurs in Ac. 26
28,
dXiyo}
fxe
irddus Xpianavov
TTOLTJaaL.
Is
fj.
the object of
Prof.
jue
Teideis
or of
Trotrjo-at?
Can
and
Tveldets
be
a
'try
by persuasion'?
W.
Petersen suggests that this

XptarLavdv dvai
KeXeuco, for instance,
is
contamination of
iroLTiaeLs
oXlyu)
Teideus
kv oXiyco ne
XpiuTLavov.
But verbs
inf.,
:
differ.
always
has the acc. and the
while the dative comes with Taaaw (Ac.

hreXXofxaL, tTTLrptiru,
(xvix4>epu,
22
10), iTTtrdcro-co
wapayyeXXco,
ade/jLLTou,
(Mk. 6 39), and verbs like and impersonal expressions like aiaxpov, etc. As shown above, KaXov
: :
eaTLv is
Wos eariv, used either

:
with the acc. or the dative, as is true of XeTco (cf. Mt. 5 34, 39 with Ac. 21 21; 22 24). Blass^ adds also Ac. 5 9, avve4>wvr]dj)
:
vplv Treipaaai.
He
is
notes also that Tpoaraaaco occurs with the acc.

true of
eTrtrdo-a-co (Mk. 6 27) and raaaco (Ac. appears with the acc. and inf. (Jo. 18 14)
:
:
(Ac.
10
2).
48) as
15
Even
aviJ.4>epeL
:
and
eêiTTLu
1
(Lu. 6
4,
where
has the dative, as

2
is
true of
Mt.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 239-241.
lb., p.
240.

12 9
:
"PIIMATOs)
eyevero
1085
fioi
4).
With
fie
eyevero Blass^ observes

:
how ckimsy
inf.
is
yeveadai
:
(Ac. 22
17).
The
ace.
and
:
occurs with kyevero (Ac.

it 'befell'
(xol
32)
and the dative

Ac. 20
:
also in the sense of

16.
or 'happened
Treptacrrpat/'at
to' one, as in
<j)C}s,
In Ac. 22
6,
eyhero
the two constructions are combined.
Blass^ further observes
the independence of the inf. in adding an ace. of general reference besides the ace. with a verb of asking, as in Ac. 13 28 fiTrjaavro
UeLKdrov avaiptdrfvai avTOV, (1 Th. 5
T^v einaToKr]P.
:
27)
opKLô)
vfj.ds
/jlt]
dpayvojadrjvaL
In Ac. 21
the avrop
12, TrapeKaKovfj.ev
tov
dpaâipeLP avTOP
ds
'lepovaaX-qiJL,
is
acc. of general reference with the inf.,

real object of
inf. in
:
which
is itself
in the genitive as to form,

is
the verb.
There
though the no instance in the N. T. of the
a sub-
ordinate clause unless

KCLTaTTLelp.
we
follow Nestle in
Pet. 5
8, ^rjToop ripa
There are sporadic examples of such a construction due to analogy of the inf. in the main clause.^ Cf. O. P. 1125, 14
(ii/A.D.), ovs Kal Kvpieueip tojp Kapircbp.
(e)
Many verbs and Personal Construction with the Infinitive. personal the impersonal conthe or either adjectives allowed
The Greek developed much more Latin, which was more limited the matter than freedom in the In the N. T. the impersonal conimpersonal.^ the in the use of like Set, Ac. 25 fixed verbs with occurs 24, ôcopres txri struction as is cominf. dependent on note inf. where îjp yurj/cert, avTOP help Heb. Mk. Lu. 7 5 43; 26 5 Ac. 23; (Lu. 34; 6 12; mon 9; impersonal coneêcrnv, The with etc. also So 8 Lu. 6 12; 55). struction is seen also in Lu. 2: 26; 16: 22; Ph. 3 1; Heb. 9:26,
struction with the infinitive.
: : : : : :
with impersonal verbs is somewhat more frequent in etc. the N. T. than in the LXX. On the whole the personal construction with the inf. is rare in the N. T.^ But in the N. T. SoKew has the personal construction, as in Ac. 17: 18, 8oKet KarayyeXevs elpai (cf. Jas. 1 26; Gal. 2: 9, etc.), but we find Uo^k p.oL in Lu. 1 3
The
inf.
(cf.
Ac. 15
KOLPT]
28, etc.)
and even
it
eboâ epLavrus delp rpaâi (Ac.
26
9).
The
doêL
drjpai.
seems to use
(A^.
less
frequently than the ancient Greek.
Radermacher
T. Gr., p. 148) quotes Vett. Valcns, p. 277, 19,

r-qp a'tpeaip.
(1
x)Trdpxt<-v avTr)P
We
etpaL
have
SedoKLiidafxeda
iriaTev-
(Heb. 11:4). compare the personal construction with 6tl (1 Cor. 15
Th. 2
:4)
and
kixapTvpiÔri
One may
:
12; 2 Cor.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 241.

Cf. Middlcton,
j^.
Analogy
in Synt., p. 9.
Maximus
of
Tyre has
it in
rrl.
clause.
*
6
Dtirr, Sprachl. Unters., p. 43.
Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 239. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 239.
'
108G
3
:

:
NEW TESTAMENT
3; 1 Jo. 2
19).
(Heb. 7:26).
11
:
The personal construction occurs with Trpewti The impersonal has the ace. and the inf. (1 Cor.
inf.
13),
the ace. (Heb. 2

402.
both the dative and Winer-Moulton, p. The love of the passive impersonal appears in Ac. 13
the dative and the
:
(Mt. 3
15),
10).
Cf.
W.
F.
Moulton
in
28, fjTr]crauTo HeiXaTOv, avaiptOrivai ahrbv, and in axSfjvaL avTovs (Radcrmacher, N. T. Gr., p. 148).
21, aTrkaTeCKav
The nominative
is
predicate with the
inf.
and the nom.
in indirect discourse
to be
noted
(/)
also.
As already remarked, there is no between the appositional and the epexegetical use of the infinitive. The epexegetical inf. is added to a clause more or less complete in itself, while the merely appositional is
Epexegetical Infinitive.
essential difference
simple.^ It is common in the dramatists. This use is probably adnominaP in origin, but it drifts into the verbal aspect We see a free use of the limitative^ inf. in cbs cttos divfTiv, also. which only occurs once in the N. T. (Heb. 7:9). Brugmann does not agree with Griinewald that this is the original epexegetical or
more
limitative
inf.,
though
it is
kin to
inf.
it.
Blass^ applies " epexegetical

inf.
'
merely to the appositional
It is in the epexegetical
that
we
from the original substantive It is hard to draw the line between bbypa. to the verbal idea. 1) and 7rape5ccKe^ avTOVS eis aTroypa(f)eadaL iraaav r-qv o'iKOViJ.ei'riv (Lu. 2 The first is appoaboKiyiov vovv, iroielv to. fir] KaOijKovTa (Ro. 1 28). instance of the epexegetsitional, the latter epexegetical. A good elvat <hs evXoylav Tavr-qu eToiiJ.r}v ical inf. is seen in 2 Cor. 9 5, where
see
more
clearly the transition
is
subsidiary to the I'm clause preceding, as

is
:
is
often the case.
ViCf.
teau^ notes that the construction
frequent in the Epistles.

16
f.
Eph.
16-18 (tVa
:
els
t6 dbkvai), 3
TrepLiraTrjaaL)
:
KTJaat.),
Col. 1
10 (I'm
/cparaico^Tjmt, kutolFurther 3 (I'm

(I'm
XaXJyo-ai).
iroirjaaL /cat /jlvt]examples occur in Lu. 1 ^rjre'iv, 2 Pet. 3 KarevdvvaL, rod 79 e7rt0amt odrjvai, 1 instances of the frequent rather shows LXX^ The 2 pLvqadfjvaL. Ps. Judg. (cf. 8:33; Gen. 3:22; sense in this articular inf. only finds Votaw Indeed, few. very shows The T. N. 77: 18).
54
purjadrjuai,
72 Ac. 17 27
1
:
:
one, that in Gal. 3 yeypapp-hoLS

1
10, eTTLKaTaparos ttSs bs
oiiK
efx/xeveL
xScrij'
rots
ev
rw
jSijSXtw
tov vbp.ov tov
TroirjaaL
avra.
But
certainly
Thomspon, Synt.
2
'
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 517. Griinewald, Der freie formelhafte Inf. der Limit, im Griech., p. 21
f.
4 6
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 229. Le Verbe, p. 161.
Votaw,

Tov aTLfiaêaOaL (Ro.
1
:
1087
24) after -KapkboiKev
is
just as truly epexeget-
ical as is Koiitv in verse

:
28 after
iraptdwKep.
So also Ro. 7:3; 8

inf.
12; 1 Cor. 10 13. Burton ^ indirect object," as in Lu. 10 :40,
looks at the cpoxcgetical

17
as
"an
dSeXî? fxov
p-bv-qv jie
KaTeKenrtv
haKoveiv. There is no doubt that in such instances the inf. is in the original dative case with the dative idea. See further Mk. 4:23; 6:31; Lu.7:40; 12:4; Ac. 4 14; 7:42; 17:21; 23:17,
:
18, 19; Tit. 2

{g)
8, etc.
but a step from the explanatory or epexegetical inf. to that of design. Indeed, the epexegetical inf. sometimes is final, a secondary purpose after I'm, as in Eph. 1 18; 3
Purpose.
It is
:
17; Col.
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 in prose. The close connection between than common that of purpose is seen in Mk. 7 4, a and inf. epexegetical the 'to keep')- So Mt. 27 33, Ua)Kau keeping,' ('for Kparelu irapeXaôv So Mt. 25 35, eScb'to drink'). drinking,' ('for olvov ine'Lv avTco Kare (xol (iya-^dv. The inf. with the notion of purpose is exceedingly frequent in the LXX, second only to that of the object-inf. with
original in poetry
: : :
verbs.5
its
H âs abundant in Herodotus." Hence Thumb ^ thinks abundant use in the Koti/17 is due to the influence of the Ionic dialect. Moulton^ agrees with this opinion. This is true both of the simple inf. of purpose and tov and the inf. The Pontic dialect still preserves the inf. of purpose after verbs hke avaâlvw, It is noteworthy that the inf. was not admitted into Latin etc. except with a verb of motion. Moulton {Prol, p. 205) cites Par.
P. 49 (ii/B.c.) eav ava^w
1
koltco
irpoaKwrjaaL, as parallel to
Lu. 18
N. T. M. and
T., p. 147.
f.;
Cf. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255
Humphreys, The Problems

ff.
of Greek,
Congress of Arts and Sciences, 1904, ' Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 154.
* 5
8
vol. Ill, pp. 171
Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 510; Delbriick, Grundr., IV, pp. 463
ff.
Votaw,
Thompson, Synt.
Prol., p. 205.
7 8
Theol. Lit., 1903, p. 421.
1088
NEW TESTAMENT
Moulton^ notes this correspondence between the ancient and the modern vernacular and agrees with Thumb's verdict again that the result is due to the two conflicting tendencies, one the universahzing of Iva, which prevailed in Western Hellenism and resulted in the disappearance of the inf. in
10, avklSrjaav
irpoaevâadat..
modern Greece, while the
localizing of the inf. in
Pontus serves
of the inf.
ets
to illustrate to-day the N. T. idiom.

of purpose includes the simple
inf.,
The N. T. use
rod
and the
inf.
inf., all
inf.,
to
and
ex-
the
inf., irpos
to
4?
and the
inf., cio-re
and the
There
is
no
ample
of
e</)'
re.
First note the simple
in the original
dative case.
Attic writers.
oi'K
This use had a wider range in
Homer than
in the
Thus Mt. 2:2

dXXd
rrjp
^Xdofxev irpoaKwâaL aura);

:
(5:17)
rjXdov KaraXvaaL,
irXrjpooaai; (7
epyjp,ov
5) 5ta/3Xei/'ets eKâXetP to Kap-
(f)Os;
(11:7)
:
tI e^rjXdaiTe els
deaaaaOaL (so verse 8, iSeXv);

:
(20
28;
Mk.
14) airoaTeWri avTovs KrjpvaaeLv; (5

:
32)
Trepte/SXe-
jrero Idelv;
(Lu. 18
10) ave^-qaav Trpoaevâadai.; (Jo. 4: 15) Stepx^/iat

:
hdaSe aprXelu; (Ac. 10

aap.riv v/jLas
irapaaTrjaai;
N. T.
33) Tapea/xev aKovam; (2 Cor. 11:2)
(Rev. 5
5) eviK-qaev
avolâi;
It is
ripfjLo:
(16
9) oh
ixerevbriaav bovvai.
These examples
will suffice.
very com-
mon
in the
It is not necessary to multiply illustrations of
The O. T. shows the idiom abundance, though the construction is classic. It was used especially by Thucydides.^ This was a normal use. We have already noticed that Paul makes Httle, if any, use of this idiom.3 It is possible in Ro. 6 6; Ph."3 10. Indeed, Votaw'' notes only 33 instances of tov and inf. of purpose in the N. T.,
Tov after all the previous discussion.
in great
: :
and these are

tov
chiefly in
Matthew, Luke and Acts.

:
Note (Mt. 2
(Lu. 21
:
:
13) ^r}Te1v tov airoXeaaL, (13

irXTjcrdfjuaL Travra,
:
3)
e^rfKdev tov airelpeLV,

p-elvaL.
:
22)
:
(24: 29) tov

:
See further Ac. 3
2; 5
31; 26
of tov
p.y]KeTL
18;
is,
Cor. 10
13; Gal. 3
10;
Heb. 10
7, etc.
The use
:
p.i]
of course, the
rj/xas.
same construction.
:
bovXevetv
Cf. Ac. 21
oai,
and
1
in verse 24 tov bovvai.

:
Cf. Ro. 6 6, tov In Lu. 2 22 note TapaarTJPurpose is also expressed by eh to

12.
:
as in
Th. 3
5, eirefi\pa
els
to yvojvai,
and by wpos
to as in
Mt.
In the N. T. coore with the inf. of purpose is rare. Originally purpose was the idea with cio-re, or conceived result. Actual result with coo-re was expressed by the indicative.
irpos TO deadrjvaL.
^
6:1,
Prol., p. 205.
TOV, uxrre,
Allen gives no ex. of the simple

Cf. Inf. in Polyb., p. 22.
inf. of
purpose in Polyb.,
only
ec^' 4' re.
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.

In the
'PHMAT02;)
1089
LXX
the notion of purpose
is still
common,
especially in
In the N. T. there are Ac. 20 leaving out according instances, 24, to W. H., and only 7 only 6 if we follow W. H. in Lu. 9 52. See Mt. 10 1, ibo^Kev avHere the notion of cicrre (=c<;j, re, ToTs kôvcriav chcrre e/c/SdXXeti'. 'and so') is simply 'so as,' not 'so that.' See also Lu. 4 29, ware KaTaKpvfJiPicaL. Cf. further Mt. 15 33; 27 1; Lu. 20 20. Burton^
:
: : :
the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus. ^
thinks that in Mt. 27

pose.
wore gives rather content than pur-
One must not confuse with tov and the inf. of purpose the somewhat analogous construction of ro d and rod fxr] a fter
This is in reality, as was shown, the ablav erb^ of hinderingCf. Lu. tive and the regular object- inf. (su bstantival aspect). 4 :42; ^^0720 '277Ro. 15 22. Votaw^ notes 22 verbs in the LXX and the N. T. that use this idiom. The only common one See further Final Clauses in chapter on Modes for is KcoXiio).
. :
papyri examples.
(h)
Result.
Purpose
is
only "intended result," as Burton^ arGr., p. 153) says that the difference
gues.
Radermacher (N. T. between purpose and result
in the inf.
is
often only in the

It is
more
subjective or objective colouring of the thought.
hard to
explains a
between conceived result and intended result. Blass^ of examples as result that I have put above under Purpose, as Rev. 5 5; 16 9. It is largely a matter of standpoint. The line of distinction is often very faint, if not wholly gone. Take Rev. 5 5, for instance, hkyjaev 6 Xewu avotâL. The lion had opened the book and so it was actual result. So
draw a
line
number
also Ac. 5
ae.
3, 5ta tI eirXripwaev b
aaravas
TrjP
Kapblav aov, xpevaaadai
Ananias had actually lied. In the ancient Greek also the distinction between purpose and result was not sharply drawn.^ The inf. may represent merely the content^ and not clearly either result or purpose, as in Eph. 3 6, elmt rd Wvrj. Cf also 4 22, dTroThis is not a Hebraistic (Burton) idiom, but falls in nadeadaL.
:
.
turally with the freer use of the inf. in the
kolvt].
See also Ac.
15
10 iinQetvaL ^v^bv, (Hel). 5

it
5) yevrjQyjmL dpxtepea.
clearly result,
ical is
may
be actual or hypothetical.**
Where it is The hypothet-
the natural or conceived result.

2
The N. T. shows but 12

n. T. M. and
T., p. 150.
Votaw,
Cf.
W.-M.,
p. 409.
N. T. M. and T., p. 148. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 224. W.-M., p. 400. Soe Burton, N. T.
Bauinloin, Modi, p. 339.

T., p. 150
f.
M. and
1090

inf.
it is
NEW TESTAMENT
result,
instances of the simple
with the notion of

quite
according to
Votaw.^
In the 0. T.
common.
:
The
12 examples in
:
the N. T. are usually hypothetical, not actual. So Ro. 1 10 eiio17) KpaTaLcodrjvaL, KaTOLKrjaai., (6 8o:dr](TOfjLai eXdeTv irpos U/uSs, (Eph. 3
:
19) yviiiplcraL, (Col.
3) XaXâat, (4
6) eldhai,
(Heb. 6
is
10) eriXa-
BkaBau
It is here that the kinship
with purpose
so strong.
Cf.
do occur, as in Lu. Rev. 16:9. But some examples have actual result T.^ we In the 0. 10 40; Ac. 5 3; Rev. 5:5. the in examples occur N. T. Not no inf., but with Tov and the the inf. in Luke, who and of tov examples the of more than one-half
of actual result
: :
gives two-thirds of the N. T. instances, are
final.^
Some
of these
are examples of hypothetical result. See discussion of Result in chapter on Mode for further discussion and papyri examples. It is rather common in the 0. T., though not so frequent in the
N.
T."^
It
is
possible to regard
Mt. 21
:
32, neTefxeXrjdt^Te tou Tnarev-
aai, thus,
though
in reality it is rather the content of the verb.^

19, kdKcoae// tov iroLelv.
There
ae,
is
similar ambiguit}^ in Ac. 7

:
But
the point seems clear in Ac. 18
10, ovSeis eind-qaeTai aoi tov KaKccaai
If TOV can be ociioLxo.\l8o.. prepared to surrender the point as to ets TO if necessary. It is usually purpose, but there is ambiguity here also, as in Mt. 26 2; 1 Cor. 11 22, where the purpose shades off toward hypothetical result. In Ac. 7 19 we seem to ^woyoveZadaL. So also Ro. 6 12, have hypothetical result, ds to
and
in
Ro. 7
3, tov
ixi]
dvai avT-qv
is
casionally used for result, one
/jlt]
els
TO viraKoveLv.
It
may
:
be true also of Heb. 11:3,
els
to yeyovtvai..
See further Ro. 12

for actual result in
is
3; 2 Cor.
8:6; Gal. 3
els
17.
Votaw^ argues
It
Ro.
20,
to elvac avTovs avairoXoy-qTovs.
hard to deny
it
in this passage.
But
it is cio-re
and the
inf.
that
the usual N. T, construction for this idea with the inf. As already shown (see Mode) nearly all of the 51 examples of waTe and the inf. in the N. T. have the notion of result. Once Votaw* notes an instance of hypothetical result in the N. T., 1 Cor. 13
is
:
2,
Kav exoi iraaav
Tr]v ttIctlv oxjTe opt] yLedicTTaveiv.

:
Burton^ goes fur:
ther and includes in this category

these debatable examples are in
1
Mt. 10 1; 2 Cor. 2 7. But harmony with the usual am:
2
fioi's
Votaw,
(TOV

/le;
rod eiTLyvSival
Cf. Ruth 2 10, rl on tvpov x^pi-" See also 2 Chron. 33 9; 1 Mace. 14 36.
:
:
" o4>eaX-
3 *
6 '
8
Moulton, Prol., p. 217. ^ Moulton, Votaw, Inf. in Bibl. Gk., p. 25. Cf. Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 161; Moulton, Prol.,
lb., p. 14.
9
Prol., p. 216.
p. 219.
N. T. M. and
T., p. 149.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT "PHMATOZ)

biguity as to result and purpose.
1091
There
is
no doubt about the

:
examples of actual result with

"KeyeLV,
coare.
avTOVs ware eKT^rjaaeadaL Kai Xeyetv,
Thus Mt. 13 54 kbibaaKev (Mk. 9 26) ojo-re tovs ttoXXous

: :
(Lu. 12
1) chare
:
TrepnraTelv aX\r]\ovs, (Ac. 5

:
15) ooaTe k</)e:
See also Ac. 15 39; Ro. 7 6; 2 Cor. 7:7; Ph. 1 13, etc. There is one instance in the text of W. H. where cos occurs Here hypothetical result with the inf., Lu. 9 52, cos eroLfxaaat. or purpose is possible. Cf. cos ax^lv O. P. 1120, 19 f. (iii/A.D.). The use of cos eTros eiiretu (Heb. 7:9) is the absolute idea, as
peiv.
:
already shown.
'as
if.'
Different also
is cbs
cii'
UcpolSeiv (2
Cor. 10
9)=
50,
A
(xri
clear case of result occurs in Epictetus, IV,

airohvpaadai.
1,
oCtcos
(i)
There is only one example in the N. T. of the articular inf. without a preposition in this sense. That is in 2 Cor. evpelu, and it is in the instr. case as already shown. 2 13, Tco The LXX shows a half-dozen examples, but all with variant But it is common with 5td to to have the causal sense, readings. some 32 times in the N. T.^ See Prepositions and Substantival
Cause.
:
tJ.ri
Aspects of the Infinitive. Cf. Mt. 13 5 f.; Mk. 5 4; Lu. 6 48; There is one instance of eveKev rod in 2 Cor. 7 12. Jas. 4 2 f Temporal relations are only vaguely expressed by (j) Time. the inf. See Tense in this chapter for the absence of the time: : : :
element in the tenses of the inf. except in indirect discourse. Elsewhere it is only by prepositions and irplv (an adverbial preposition in reality) that the temporal idea is conveyed by the inf.
Antecedent time Mt. 6 8; Lu. 2

: : :
is
:
expressed by wpiv or
-rrpo
tov.
For Tpo
:
rod, see
Uplv or Tplv v (so in Mt. 1 18; 21, etc. 14 30; Ac. 7 2; W. H. have irplv r) in the margin in Ac. 2 occurs with the inf. 11 times in the N. T. (all in Gospels
Acts).
Mk.
:
20)
and
have it only twice with finite verb after negative sentences, once with the subj. (Lu. 2 26), once with the opt. (Ac. 25 16), both in Luke (literary style). See, for the inf.,^ Mt. 26 34 Tph aXUropa ^covriaai, (Jo. 4 49) irplv airodavelv. See further Mt. 26 75; Mk. 14 72; Lu. 22 61 (five of the instances In Heare prîctically identical); Jo. 8 58; 14 29; Ac. 2 20.
:
: : : : : : : : :
We
rodotus, under the influence of indirect discourse, the inf. occurs with oKcos, txei, eireidr}, el, 8l6tl and the relative pronouns.'* Con1
Votaw,
Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. IGl, mentions only 23. 3 The inf. with Trpiv is common in Ilom. See Monro, p. 15S. * lienard, Formes verbales en C.rec; d'apres le Texte d'llerodote, ISOO, p. 196. See also Sturm, Die Entwick. der Konstrukt. niit npLv, 18S3, p. 3.
2
1092

is
NEW TESTAMENT
temporaneous action
Cf. Lu. 1:21,
described by
tQ xpovlêLv.
kv tQ, especially in Luke. See Prepositions with Infinitive for
further remarks.
Mt. 26
{k)
32; Lu. 12
Subsequent action is set forth by fieTo. to as in In Ac. 8 40, ews tov k\ddv, we have 5, etc.
:
the prospective future.
The Absolute
Infinitive.
Homer,
tives.^
especially as
This idiom is very common in an imperative and in the midst of impera-
R. Wagner 2 notes that in Homer this use of the inf. ocThe papyri still show examples like 6 belva rOi 8e2va xatpeti^.^ Gerhard'* holds that in such cases there is ellipsis of \eyeL. The Attic inscriptions^ frequently have the absolute infinitive as imperative. Deissmann (Light from the Ana. East,
curs with the nom.
p. 75) notes that, as in
tices.
in edicts and nomodern French. He quotes from the ''Limestone Block from the Temple of Herod at
it
German,
is
common
Cf. imperatival use of infinitive in
Jerusalem" (early imperial period): M-qdha aWoyevrj elaTropeveadai evTos rod irepl to lepov rpvipaKTov /cat irepiôKov, Let no foreigner enter
'
within,' etc.
See also Epictetus, IV, 10, 18, Iva
8e
TavTa
ykvy}Tai,
oh ixLKpa deâadac ov8^ fiLKpccv o.ttotvx^'lv.
The imperatival
use was
an
Indo-Germanic idiom.*' It flourishes in the Greek Burton^ and Votaw^ admit one instance of the imperatival inf. in the N. T., Ph. 3 16, t<2 avTui aToix^lv. But
original
prose
writers.''
Moulton^'' rightly objects to this needless fear of this use of the

inf.
It is clearly present in
:
of Lu. 9
is
also pertinent
two imperatives. this inf. is due to a mixture of indirect with direct discourse. That is true, but it was a very easy lapse, since the inf. itself
has this
there
is
comes in between Moulton himself objects on this point that

iii]
Ro. 12 where
15, xatpetv, KkaUiv.

re Ix^lv
The
case
imperatival use.
In
Th. 3:11; 2 Th. 2:17;
3:5
the nominative case and the whole context besides the
accent. to prove that

tive
infinitive.
See
we have the optative, not the aorist acMode for further discussion. Moulton
^^
quotes Burkitt as favouring the mere
infinitive,
cL(f)e7i>at.,
not Uei, in
Mt. 23
1
23, raOra bk TroLrjaaL KaKetva
Syriac MS., and also KavxaaOai
in 2 Cor.
p.rf
after the
:
Lewis
12
after
}<{.
The
*
^
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 162. Der Gebr. des imper. Inf. im Griech., 1891,
p. 12.
* 5
6 7
Reinach, Pap. grecs et demotiques, 1905. Unters. zur Gesch. des griech. Briefes, Phil. Zeitschr., 1905, p. 56.
Meisterh., p. 244.
"
Inf. in Bibl.
Gk., p. 18.
W.-M., p. 397. N. T. M. and T.,
"
p. 146.
Prol., p. 179.
lb., p.
"
248.

imperatival use of the
recurs in the papyri.^
'PUMATOZ;)
1093
inf. was common in laws and maxims and So A. P. 86 (i/A.D.) eêlvai,, fxiadojaai. Radermacher (A^. T. Gr., p. 146) quotes Theo, Progymn., p. 128, 12, <j)ep ^riTeZv, where the inf. is used as a deliberative subj would be.
.
He
gives also the Hellenistic formula,

13, 31; 13, 34.
els
bbva^xLv
dvai t^v
kfiriv,
Inscr. Pergam.,
Hatzidakis^ notes that in the

still exists.
Pontic dialect this construction
The
It
is
epistolary inf.
inf.
1
:
has the same origin as the imperatival
inf.
:
the absolute
:
This
is
common
xo-ipeLv is
in the papyri.
is
See Ac. 15
23; 23
26; Jas.
1,
xalpeiv.
The nom.
the nominative absolute also.
Cf. 2 Jo. 10,

Gr.,
where
the object of Xkyere.

in the later
inf.,
Radermacher {N. T.
p. 146) notes
how
with the absolute

dovpaL avTov.
language the ace. comes to be used as in C. Inscr. lat. V. 8733, bowe avTO)v =
It is just in this absolute inf. that

inf.
we
It
best see the

is
gradual acquirement of verbal aspects by the

the oldest verbal use of the inf .^
ws
7ros
probably
:
The
construction in Heb. 7
9,
but a step further on the way. There is but one instance of this sort with cos in the N. T.^ Cf. roO TroXejurJo-at in
tnrdv,
is
Rev. 12
{I)
7,
where
it is
an independent parenthesis.
jui? chiefly with the inf. except in indirect assertion where oh of the direct was retained.
Negatives.
The ancient Greek used
But we
mer,
itself
see oh with the inf. after verbs of saying as early as
Ho-
(/)77s
ohx
viro/jLeLvaL,
Iliad,
XVII,
174.
Thus
oh
won a
/x??
place for
v/ith
the
inf.,
but
many
verbs retained
as verbs of
swearing, hoping, promising, etc.

oh
have anywhere and strong contrast or emphasis would justify oh.^ Votaw^ finds 354 instances in the Greek Bible where the inf. itself is modified by the negative. Of these 330 have fxi] and the rest have compounds of The anarthrous inf. with iirj he notes 59 times in the 0. T., 32 in the Apocrypha and 47 in the N. T.,
special phrases could
fx-f].
But
139 in all. The articular inf. with he finds in the 0. T. 136 times (tov 99, to 37), in the Apocrypha 21 times (roD 10, to 11), in the N. T. 35 times (tov 15, to 20), 192 in all (tov 124, to 68). With the anarthrous inf. the negative more frequently occurs with the
fjLrj
principal verb as in oh
OkXoi.
We
do have
it
oh in infinitival clauses,
inf.
as will be shown, but in general

directly
*
is
true to say that the
is
always negatived by
2
uri
in the
s
N. T.
This
is
true of
lb., p. 179.
Kiiî^
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.

1094

of uses of the inf.
fi-q
NEW
TJiSTAMENT
iir],
all sorts
So the
subject-inf. uses
:
as Kpeir-
Tov
riv
avToU
tTveyvoiKkvaL (2
Pet. 2
21),
both the anarthrous

:
as above and the

likewise
articular
as in Lu. 17
:
1.
The
object-inf.
vixdv
:
has
it
ni],
as
in Lu. 21
14,
Q'trt
kv
tols
Kapdiats
fxij
Tpo/jLeXerav.
We
fjLT]
have
ofioaai,
For the articular accusative with ni] see Ro. 14 with indirect commands as in Mt. 5 34, Xkyio
:
13.
vimv
/xi)
fxr]
and
:
in indirect assertion as in Ac. 23

ixrjre
8, XeyovaLv
it
elvai
avaaraaiv
ixyyeXov
uri
fj.r]Te
irvevixa.
We
have
with tov
as in Jas. 5
17, rod
4, eis to
/xiy
fxri
negative
is
and with prepositions as in 2 Cor. auyaaai. With verbs of hindering and denying the not necessary, but it was often used by the ancients
^peât,
as a redundant negative repeating the negative notion of the verb, just as double negatives carried on the force of the first
negative.
It
was not always used.

/xtj
When
the verb
itself
was
negatived, then
ov could follow.^
But we do not
find this
idiom in the N. T. Examples of the N. T. idiom have already been given in this chapter. The variety in the N. T. may be illustrated. See Lu. 23' 2 KoiKhovra (popovs KaiaapL bibbvai, (Ac. 4 17)
:
:
a-n-eCK-qaiiixeda
aurots
;uT?Kert
XaKetv, (Gal. 5
:
7)
tIs iimSs eveKoxlêv dX??:
deia
fir)
weldeadaL,
(Ro. 15
ixt]
22) eveKOTVTbp.r]v
tov eXOeiv, (Lu. 4

jui)
42)
KaTeixov avTov tov

jrpos
ixe,
Topeveadat,
(Mt. 19
p-rj
14)
KcoXuere avTO. k^delv
(1
Cor. 14:39) to Xakelv

jxi]
/ccoXuere,
(Ac. 14:18)
:
/xoXis
KaTtiravaav tovs oxXous tov

â-KTiadrivai, (10
:
:
dveiv avTols, (Ac. 8
36)
tL KwXuet fie
p.r)
47)
p.y]TL
to u5cop hbvaTai KwKma'i tls tov
âir-
Rader20) ovUv virecrTeiXaprjv Tiadrivai, (20 prj with the to Pauline "the illustrates macher (A''. T. Gr., p. 149) and holpa, /SXereti^ prj re to infinitive" by Sophocles' Electra, 1078,
tov
p-q
avayyelXai.
the inscr. (Heberdey-Wilhelm, Reisen in Kilikien, 170, 2), to pr]bkv We may note also Ac. 4 20, ov Swapeda pri eTretaevevKeLV. aWov
XaXetv, where the negative
not redundant. Cf. also Jo. 5 19, second negative is redundant, but the where ov bvvaTai. iroieiv ovbkv, have a redundant negative pi] with MSS. Some it repeats the ov. after otl) and with wpoaTed^22 2 (cf. 1 Jo. 34 dbkvai in Lu. 22
is
:
read avTi.\eyovT^ in Lu. 20 27. vai in Heb. 12 the same negative is repeated, as in discourse indirect Even in Here ovdev ov TeWopaL oWeu. tovtwv avTov Xavdaveiv Ac. 26 26,
:
19.
So
AP
strictly goes
with Xavdaveiv in spite of

ireldopai,
its
position after
is
ireldopai,
but
ov is
construed with
and so oWev
py]dh or pri8h.
But
in
Mk.
24, ov8eva i]9e\ep
used rather than yvoiPai, it is not
best to explain ovSha with the inf. in this fashion. This looks like the retention of the old classic use of ov with the inf. which
1
See Thompson, Synt., pp. 425
ff.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOZ)
1095
uses ov with the

cLTTOTvx^'iv-
the grammars are not willing to allow in the N. T.^ Epictetus inf. as in IV, 10, 18, ov ixiKpa dkâadat ov8i fxiKpcov
As a matter
inf.,
of fact
we have a number
tn XPeta Kara
of other
of
is
oi)
with the
too
many
to rule out without ceremony.

Tr]v
examples There
the case in Heb. 7: 11,

/cat
tLs
raîv MeXxtoêScK
erepov apiaraadai
ov Kara. Tqv Taîv 'KeyeaduL;
It is true that ou
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, oêtXerat 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 ûdprucrt; Ro. 7:6, coore 8ov\eveLV h KaivoTriTL TTPev/jLaTOs Kal ov iraXaLOT-qTL ypaiJip.aTOs; Heb. 13 9, In fieâiovadaL oi) l3p6)iJLa(nv (but here no contrast is expressed).
: :
Ro. 4
12, 16,
with
els to,
we
find ov ixbvov
dXXd
56âj
Kal.
(m) "Av with the hifinitive.
This
:
classic
idiom has vanished
from the N. T. save

is
in 2 Cor. 10
9, cos
av kK<ô^tv.
Even
cos
here
it
not a clear case, since kKôêtv depends on

it
and
av
comes
in as a parenthetical clause, 'as if ('as
were')-
The treatment
twists
III.
of the infinitive has thus required

its
a good
many
^
and turns due to
double nature.
The Participle (f |iTOXil). /'^/r^-A^^r^x*/ - -me-^ 2'^"^^^^ uAMU.sf^(/k a /*-< These verbals are not ex- ^"^ 1. The Verbals in -to? and -xeo?. actly participles inasmuch as they have no tense nor voice. They are formed from verb-stems, not from tense-stems, and hence
In the broadest sense, are properly called verbal adjectives.^ however, these verbals are participles, since they partake of both
verb and adjective.

voice,
Originally the infinitive
and the same thing was we have limited the term participle to the verbal adThe verbal in -tos goes back to jectives with voice and tense. the original Indo-Germanic time and had a sort of perfect passive Cf. jvojtos, notiis; ayvcoidea.^ This form is hke the Latin -tus. Strictly this this point. overdo But we must not Tos, ignotus. came to have never tense and it nor pro-ethnic -tos has no voice Latin and in it did Greek as in the connections intimate verbal not correspond, hanv do ayarrrjTos est and amatus English.^ Thus
true of the participle.
had no tense nor For con-
venience
nor, in truth, does 'he
is
loved' square with either.
"Even
in
Latin, a word
J
like tacitus illustrates the
absence of both tense
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 255.
2 8
Thompson, Synt.
of Attic Gk., p. 2G2.

*
Drug., Gricch. Gr., p. 200.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 221.
1096
NEW TESTAMENT
and voice from the adjective in its primary use."^ Already in the Sanskrit voice and tense appear with some of the participles, but "the division-line between participial and ordinary adjectives is less strictly drawn in Sanskrit than in the other IndoEuropean languages. "2 The ambiguity due to the absence of voice in the verbal in -tos was inherited from the original IndoGermanic time.^ It becomes, therefore, a lexical, not a syntactical problem to decide in a given instance whether the verbal is
"active" or "passive" in signification.
similar
In
itself it is neither.
compound adjectives like deo-naxoi, (Ac. 5 39), 'fighting God.' In modern Greek the verbal in -tos is rare and is little more than an adjective (Thumb, Handb., p. 151), though the new formation in -dros has more verbal force.
problem
is
raised in
This ambiguity appears in

language.*
Blass^ overstates
Homer and it when he
all
through the Greek

that in the N. T.
saj^s
"the verbal adjective has practically disappeared, with the exception of forms like Swards, which have become stereotyped as adjectives." As a matter of fact the verbal in -tos is still common in the N. T. as in the kolvt] in general. Take, for instance,
ajairriTds,
Tos,
'^*'*'"y*'**''
ixyvwros, adwaros, aKarayvc^Tos
avaiJ.apTr]TOs, aveKTOs, aop-q-
aTTtcTTos,
airo^XrjTos, apearbs, apKeros, yevvrjTos, ypairros, dtdaKTOs,

fecrTos, davfj-aaros, dvrjTOS, deoTrvevaros
,
dwaros, (vXoyrjTos,
oparos, TaOr]-
Tos, TrapelcraKTos, tlcttos, (jiOapTos, xp'?o't6s, etc.
It is true^ that the
tendency
start, as
is 1,
is
rather to accent the adjectival aspect at the expense
of the verbal idea of these words.
But
this also
was true at the

point to note
:
we have
is
:
just seen in the Sanskrit.
The
it
:
that the verbal does not denote voice.

abbvarov
In Ac. 14
is
8;
Ro. 15:
is
'incapable,' whereas usually
'impossible,' as
therefore, it
in
Mt. 19
26;
Mk.
10
27, etc.
In Ro. 8
vo/jlov is
3,
doubtful whether to abbvarov tov

'impossibility' of the law.''
the 'impotency' or the
There
is
no notion of tense nor of
Aktionsart in these verbals in -tos and so ayawt^T&s does not distinguish^ between
ayaircciJievos,
ayairrjOels
and
rjyairrjijLevos.
:
Moul-
ton thus properly notes the fact that in Mt. 25 41 we have KaTTfpafxevoL, 'having become the subjects of a curse,' not KardpaTOL,
'cursed.'
It is interesting to note
1
:
xc^P9- aPK\aXr]TU)
is
Kal 5e5o-
âa/jievy
in 1 Pet.
8,
but here
di'e/cXdXrjTos
active in sense,
1 2 '
^ '
Moulton, Prol., p. 221. Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 347.

*
^
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 37.
Cf. Viteau, Essai sur la Synt. des Voix,
Revue de
Philol., p. 41.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 221.
lb.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT THMATOS)

'inexpressible.'
ciple 'borne'
1097
used for
The ambiguity comes also alpbixevov in Mk. 2

:
in our English parti3,
and the
:
punctiliar
'brought' used for hexdelaau in 2 Pet. 1: 18. With these Moultoni contrasts vpidepov ('taken away') in Jo. 20 1. It is worth while to study a few more examples from the lexical point of
view.
Tos
(XTos
In general^ the passive sense

:
is
more common,
ypairros
as in ay awrj-
(Mt. 3
(2
:
17); eWeros (Lu. 9 :62); 5t5a/<r6s (Jo. 6 :45); dtoirvev:
Tim. 3
15
f.).^
16); deodldaKTos (1
Th. 4:9);
to.
and
kpvttos
used just hke a substantive (neuter adjective in plural). But feo-ros (Rev. 3 15) next is active in sense as is aavveTo<i (Ro. 1 31), though aavvderos
(Ro. 2
Here (Ro. 2: 15
f.)
KpvirTa is
to
nant').*
is made from the middle (TvvTidep.ai ('covesometimes passive in sense in the old Greek, is always active in the N. T., as in Mt. 11 25, but dvrjTos (Ro. 6 12) is 'liable to death,' not 'dying,' as Tra^j^ros (Ac. 26 23) is 'capable of suffering.' Cf. the Latin adjectives in -hilis. The verbal in -reos is later than that in -ros and does not ocit
(paronomasia)
^vveTos,
probably a modification of the verbal -ros to express the idea of the predicate-infinitive, like this is not to eat It is really a gerundive and is used in the per(to be eaten).' ^
cur in Homer.
It is
'
sonal or impersonal construction, more commonly the latter.^ The personal is always passive in sense, while the impersonal
is
active
and may be formed from
transitive or intransitive
It
verbs.''
It expresses the idea of necessity.
was never
as
com-
mon
as the verbal in -ros

It
is
though not frequent.
and more
is
not unknown
in the papyri,^
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:
This example of Viteau, "Essai -reov in Luke is See Theo, Philologie, 38). Revue de p. sur la Syntaxe des Voix,"
tion,
though the agent
is
not here expressed.
a survival of the literary style

yan-qreou.
(cf.
Progymn.,
p. 128, 12,
el
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.
6
6
Moulton,
Prol., p. 222.
'
Brug., Griech. Gr., pp. 184, 525. Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 707.
Goodwin, M. and T., p. 368 Moulton, Prol., p. 222.
f.
But even with -ros this sometimes appears as in 5i8aKTol where we have the ablative. Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 522.
dtov (Jo. 6
45)
1098
2.
a grammar of the greek

History of the Participle.
new testament
The Sayiskrit Participle. This was more advanced in its development than the Sanskrit infinitive, which had no voice nor tense. In the Veda the aorist, present, perfect and future tenses have participles.^ The distinction in the structure of the participle as compared with the other verbal adjectives lies just in The mere verbal is formed on the verb-stem, while this point. the participle is formed on the tense-stem.- In the Sanskrit also both voices (active and middle) show these participles. Thus already in the original Indo-Germanic tongue it appears prob(a)
able that the participle existed with voice, tense, Aktionsart
government
-ôs(6)
of cases.^
pro-ethnic participle
(-Ms).^
and The Greek participle is thus rooted in this as seen by the very suffixes -ni-, -7neno~,
Homer^s Time. Already in Homer and Hesiod the participle occurs as a fully developed part of speech. It occurs on an average of 8} times per page of 30 lines.^ In Hesiod the participle is chiefly attributive, while the predicate participle
is
less
This use of the participle as the practical equivalent of the hypotactic clause is a purely Greek development (copied by the Latin to some extent) within historical times.'
in
common than
Homer.^
The
participle
is
a literary device, and flourished best with
writers of culture
who were
(/)tXo/xeroxoi.^
Broadus used to
call
the Greek
"a
participle-loving language," and, taken as a whole,
this is true. Certainly the participle had its most perfect development in the Greek. The aorist participle died in the Sanskrit and did not appear in the Latin. It is the aorist active participle which made the participle so powerful in Greek. The English, like the Sanskrit and the Greek, is rich in participles, though the German is comparatively poor. "We gain a certain grandeur and terseness by the construction, a certain sweep, a certain Trept/80X57, such as Hermogenes recognises as lying in the participle."' This wealth of participles gives flexibility and swing to the lan-
guage.
(c)
1
The Attic Period.
In Herodotus the participle jumps to

2
Whitney, Sans. Gr.,
p. 202.
f.
Thompson, Synt.
ff.;
'
Brug., Indoger. Forsch., V, pp. 89
Giles,
Man.,
p. 473;
Moulton,
Prol.,
p. 221.
s 6
7
Williams,
Boiling,
lb.
The Part, in the Book of Acts, 1909, p. 7. The Part, in Hesiod, Cath. Univ. Bull., 1897,
8
III, p. 423.
GildersL, Stylistic Effect of the Gk. Part.,
Am.

17|^
"PUMATOi:)
1099
times on the same scale.

for Thucydides,
times per page of 30 lines.' But Sophocles has it only 9 Williams^ runs the parallel on with 13
It is thus in the historians
mosthenes.
poets, that
(d)
12f for Xenophon, 10^ for Plato, 10| for Deand orators and not the
we
see the participle in its glory.
The
KoLvr].
styles of writing.
Here we note a sharp-difference in The Atticists like Josephus with

fact.
the- several
20,
and 2
Maccabees with 232, ^^^^ They go beyond them in

KOLvr]
^^ conscious imitation of the ancients.
But the
writers of the literary
follow close behind, as Polybius with 17|, Strabo with 13|-
and Plutarch with 14. Certainly there is no sign of decay here. But in the LXX, Exodus, Deuteronomy and Judges give only This confirms the judgment 6 1 while ^ the papyri show 6|. that the vernacular was not fond of the participle and found it Jannaris* quotes striking passages from Thucydides, clumsy. Plato and Demosthenes which illustrate well the clumsiness and
ambiguity of the participle in long, involved sentences.
accumulation of participles
is
Even
in
the older Greek in unconventional or unscholarly composition the

clearer and easier was used instead.^ In the N. T. we see the participle used on the whole more frequently than in the LXX and the papyri. The Hebrew had a In certain restraining influence on the participle in the LXX. the vernacular papyri the participle was held back on the prinIt is Luke who makes most frequent ciple just stated above. use of the participle with 16f in the Gospel and 17 g in the Acts per page of 30 lines. But 1 Peter follows close behind with 15f and Hebrews with 14. In the other Gospels Matthew has it 12 J, Mark llf and John lOf.'^ James has it 10 per page, while in the Epistles and Revelation it drops back to 8 and 9. On the whole it is much as one would expect. The more literary books
shunned.
The
analysis of co-ordinate or subordinate clauses
lead (after Paul with only 9 per page average in Gal.,
Cor.,
and Rom.).^ The historical books surpass the Epistles, while Hebrews here reveals its hortatory, sermonic character. For a succession of participles see Ac. 12 25; 23 27; Heb. 1 13 f.; Mk. 5 15. The details of the N. T. situation will come later. The participle more and more came to be (e) Modern Greek.
:
: : :
>
Williams,
II).,
The
Part, in Acts, p. 7.
"
'
p. 10.
lb., p. fjOf).
lb.
Williams, Part, in Acts, p. 23.

jb.
oilier
*
8
Hist.
Gk. Cr.,
p. 504.
lb., p. 22.
Williams did not count 2 Cor. ami the
Pauline Epistles.
1100
scholastic and dropped out of the vernacular.^ In particular was this true of the circumstantial participle. The classic Greek by means of the participle developed the periodic style (Xeîs KaTtdTpaixu'evii]) and is seen at its highest in Isocrates. See, for
example, the "Ciceronian period" in Isocrates, p. 82. Jebb^ contrasts this with Xe^ts dpojxkvr], simply tacking clause to clause as in
47; 7 4.
:
Mt. 7 27 and the colloquial repetition of finite verbs as in Jo. 1 But ^Xeirere, /SXcTrere, /SXcTrere (Ph. 3 2) has rhetorical effect. In the vernacular modern Greek, therefore, we see a retreat
:
:
of the participle all along the line.
It is
not dead as the
infinitive,
some vernacular writers are bringing back the use of the participle for literary purposes (Thumb, Handb., The analytic tendency of modern language is against p. 168).
but
is
dying, though
it.
See Jebb's remarks for the various devices used instead of
the participle.
The only
participles left in
(cf.
indeclinable present active in -ofras
middle (or passive) parts, in

stems
like ibuiixhos
-ovfxevos
sives like 8efxevos (no reduplication) .^
modern Greek are the gerund in Latin), some or -afxevos and perfect pasA few are made from aorist
in the
(Thumb, Handb., p. 150). The use of the part, modern Greek is very limited indeed. 3. Significance of the Partici^'le. The infinitive was originally a sub(a) Originally an Adjective.
stantive, as
we have
seen.
it
In the Sanskrit
it
did not acquire
had the verbal idea of action. The participle, as we have seen, had made more progress in the Sanskrit, but it was also- originally an adjective. It never got away from this original adjectival idea.^ But we are not left to history and logic to prove this point. It so happens that some participles in form never became participles in fact. They are merely adjectives. Homer shows a number of such words. ^ Cf. ac-iievos. We see remnants of this usage in the N. T. like tKwv (Ro. 8 20), aKiJiv (1 Cor. 9 Other participles come in certain uses to be 17). only substantives (adjectives, then substantives), though the true
voice and tense, though
: :
participial use occurs also.

qyovijievos,
Cf. apxc^v, 'a ruler' (Mt.

:
20:25);
'a governor' (Ac. 7

:
10);
to.
vTapxovra
vficov,
'your belong-
ings' (Lu. 12
33).
In general "the adjective represents a qual-
ity at rest, the participle represents a quality in

1 3
motion."^
But
V. and D., Handb.,
p. 333.
Thumb, Handb.,
Monro, Horn.
Boiling,
p. 167.
Cf. also Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 242.

Cf. Stahl, Krit.-hist. Synt., p. 681.
Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 522.

Gr., p. 54.
The
Part, in Hesiod, Cath. Univ. Bull., 1897, III, p. 422.

not
all
1101
is
verbs express motion.
The mere
adjectival notion
more
In
common in the Latin, as in prceteritus, quietus, tacitus, etc. Mt. 17 17, yepea aTTLffTos Kal StecTTpantihr], the verbal adjective
:
and
participle occur together.

(6)
The Addition of
the Verbal Functions.
tense, voice
and case-government.
These functions are 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-
by the use of temporal adverbs or conjunctions.^ The verbal idea in the participle thus expands the adjectival notion of the word.2 But the addition of these verbal functions does not make the participle a real verb, since, like the infinitive, it does
gestion or
not have subject.^ (c) The Double Aspect of

part verb.
the Participle.
ciple {pars, capio) indicates this fact.
The very name partiThe word is part adjective,
Voss calls it mules, which is part horse and part ass.* Dionysius Thrax says: Meroxri e<TTL Xe^ts nerexovaa ttjs tuiv prjfxaTuv In the true participle, therefore, we Kal TTJs Twu opoiJLaTuv ioLOTTiTos.
are to look for both the adjectival and the verbal aspects, as in the infinitive we have the substantival and the verbal. The emphasis will vary in certain instances. Now the adjectival will be
to the fore as in the attributive articular participle like 6 the verbal side is stressed as in the circumstantial KoXoJv.^
more
Now
participle.
But the
adjectival notion never quite disappears in
the one as the verbal always remains in the other (barring a few One must, therefore, explain in each incases noted above). stance both the adjectival and verbal functions of the participle
he has set forth only one side of the subject. It is true that the verbal functions are usually more complicated and interesting,6 but the adjectival must not be neglected.
else
(d)
Relation between Participle and Infinitive.
As already
ex-
plained, they are closely allied in use,
though different in origin. both are participial. infinitival; Both are verbal nouns; both are
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 expresses the action in relation to the subject or the object of the

lb.
* *
2 3
'
Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 1G9. Brug., Griooh. Gr., p. 522.
Monro, Horn.
lilasH,
Gr., p. 53.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 242.
Burton, N. T. M. and T., p. 163. In general, on this point, see Goodwin,
M. and
T., p. 357.
1102
NEW TESTAMENT
The
distinction
verb (or some other substantive or pronoun). ^
between the participle and the

portant.
infinitive
thus becomes quite imthe idea

is
'
Thus
to beg
in Lu. 16
3, eTratreTv aiaxvvofjiaL,
am
and do not do it,' while kiraiTobv alaxvvofxaL would be 'I beg and am ashamed of it.'^ Cf. the analytic expression In Xenophon, Mem., 2, 6, 39, we have alaxovoin 2 Tim. 1 12. /jiaL \eyoiu. So apxoixaL in Attic Greek took the infinitive as a rule, linking the infinitive with the verb. But sometimes the participle occurred, linking the action to the subject (or object) and so contrasting the beginning with the end.^ In the N. T. all the examples have the inf., there being no occasion for the point of In Lu. 3 23, apxofj.evos wael krCiv TpiaKovra, we have distinction.
ashamed
neither with apxonevos.
Cf. Lu. 14
30, fipâro olKoboixtlv.

apâ.p.evos eêTtdero
Rader(Ac. 11
:
macher {N. T.
4)
Or., p. 169)
compares
with apâixevT] Karexofxai (Xen. of Eph., p. 388, 31). On the other hand, in the N. T. xauoyuat occurs only with the participle, as in Lu. 5 4, tTavaaro XaXwj'. Cf. Ac. 5 42; 6 13; Eph. 1 16; Col. 1:9; Heb. 10 2. But in Ac. 14 18 note Kareiravcrav rod iii] dvHv, which well illustrates the difference between the inf. and
:
:
the part.
unclassical.
Th. 3
Ac. 12
The use of kreXeaep biaTaacruv (Mt. 11: 1) Blass^ calls The part, alone occurs with emaKeo} (Gal. 6 :9; 2 Note also eTrkjievov kpwTOiVTes (spurious passage in 13).
but
aaiTOL
SiareXeZre
Jo. 8:7),
:
(Ac. 27:33) without

:
ovres.
Cf.
16,
kire/jLevev
Kpovuv,
and Lu. 7
45, ov bLeKnrev /cara^tXoOcra.
Radermacher {N. T.
in "vulgar literature."
Gr., p. 169) finds
the part, with
kTnp.kvoo
He
observes that
many
of these neater
classical idioms with the part, do not appear in the N. T. Contrast with this the inf. in Ac. 20 20, 22, oh yap virecFTeLkanTiv Tov ixr] avayyelXaL. There is no example of the inf. with 4>a'Lvop.aL in the N. T., but the part, occurs in Mt. 6 16, 18 {vrjaTevo^v).
: :
The
7
:
adjective alone
It
is
is
seen in Mt. 23
27, 28.
Cf.
also
Ro.
:
13.
hardly on a par with the participle in Mt. 6

Blass's insistence.^
:
17
in spite of
Tpo4>9a(7ev avrov 'Keycov

2),
Thoroughly classical also are (Mt. 17 25) and eXadov êvLcravTes (Heb. 13
:
specimens of literary occurs in Clem., Cor., II,
style.
8,
2.
The The
infinitive
with TrpocpOavo^ part, with rvyxavoo does
In the later kolvt] the inf. takes the not occur in the N. T. place of the participle with Xavdavcc, Tvavoixat and 4>davw (Rader-
macher,
1
A'^.
T. Gr., p.
169).
The
part,
is
found with
inrapxoi
p. 34.
Cf.
Schoemann, Die Lehre von den Redet. nach den Alten, 1862,
^
"
Robertson, Short Gr., p. 194. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 245.
II).
lb.

(Ac. 8
:
THMATO::;)
It
:
1103
if
16)
and xpouxapxw (Lu. 23

1
12).
is
dou])tfiil
the
participle belongs to the verb in

TepLefixofieuaL, l)ut, if so, it is
Tim. 5
13, apyai ixavdavovcnv
not to be understood as
like the inf.^
Tim. 5 4, the inf. occurs with fxapdavo} according 11; to classic idiom. At any rate, if TeptepxoiJLevat, (1 Tim. 5 13) is a circumstantial part., something has to be supplied with apyai. The part, in 1 Tim. 1 12, -wLarbv /xe rjyriaaTo dtixevos, is certainly circumstantial. The distinction between the inf. and the part, comes out sharply in indirect discourse also. The inf. is more
In Ph. 4
:
objective.
(Jo.
Th. 3 11). The participle is a descriptive adjective even though in indirect discourse (cf. Lu. 4 23; Ac. 7 12). See 1 Cor. 11 18 for the inf. again. In Mt. 7:11, ol'Sare dopara dya^d 5t56mt, the inf. with
12
:
18)
Thus note rjKovaav tovto and aKovopev yap nuas

: :
avTov
weTOLrjKhaL
to
crrjuelov
:
TrepnraTovi'Tas (2
ol8a
XpLaTou avTop
means 4vnow how to give.' But in Lu. 4 :41, fibaaav elvai, it is mere indirect discourse. For the part,
:
top
see
2 Cor. 12 3
:
2, olba
apirayevTa top tolovtop

:
(cf.
Mk.
.'
20).
In Ac.
root,
9 note
el8ep avTop irepLiraTovpTa.
Here we have the same
though a different sense. OUa is common with otl. But yiPwaKij) occurs both with the inf. as in Heb. 10 34, yiPoxjKOPTes exeiv iavToiis Kpeiaaopa virap^LP, and the participle as in Heb. 13 23, ytpo::
aKeTC TOP a8eX4>6p
rjpuip
Tipodeop awoXeXvpepov.
Cf. Lu. 8
46, 67w
eypoip bvpapip eêXrjXvdv'iap,
cent the vivid reality

16
:
where the tense and participle both acof the experience. But note the inf. in Mt.
is
13.
The same
7).
thing
true of opoXoyeoo as in Tit.
16, dtop
bpoXoyovcTLP eidepai,
(cf.
and
:
1 Jo.
2, 6
dpoXoyel
'Irjaovp ep aapKl kXrjXvdoTa
2 Jo.
Cf. also Ac. 24: 10 6vTa ae KpiT-qv kincrTdpevos
doKLpdôo in 1
Th. 2
4 and 2 Cor. 8 22.

:
Note
difference
and between
Ipa evpcoffLV KaTrjyopeip avTOV (Lu. 6 7) and evplaKei avTovs KadevSopras (Mk. 14 :37). Cf. Indirect Discourse. Further examples of the supplementary participle come later. These sufficiently illustrate the difference between the use of inf. and part. The hybrid character of (e) Method of Treating the Participle.
:
the participle has led to a great deal of diversity in
its treat-
ment in the grammars. Prof. Williams ^ gives an interesting summary in his monograph. None of them are satisfactory because they do not follow a consistent plan.
are not parallel.
Part of the divisions
are from the adjectival, part from the verbal point of view.
They
Thus we have
Kiihner's complementary, attrib-
utive, adverbial participles;

tial,
Goodwin's attributive, circumstansupplementary; Burton's adjectival, adver])ial, substantival;

1
W.-M.,
p. 4:36.
The
P;irt. in Acts, i)p.
IT.
1104

adjectival
clause;
NEW TESTAMENT
Jannaris'
additional
and adverbial; Blass' attributive and in Hadley and Allen's attributive and predi-
cate; Delbriick-Brugmann's external, objective, adverbial. Then Williams 1 adds another that is no better, ascriptive, adverbial,
complementary. Thompson ^ gives the attributive and the supplementary participle after saying that the nominal and the verbal
classification is
more
elastic.
The only way

is
to get
symmetry
in
the treatment of the participle
to follow the line of its double
nature (adjectival and verbal) and discuss the adjectival functions and the verbal functions separately. See the discussion of the
That is to say, each participle must be considered as both adjectival and verbal. Not all the adjectival aspects will be true of any one participle nor all of the verbal, but each one will have some adjectival and some verbal functions. Thus alone can one get a clear statement of the many participial combinations and permutations. As an adjective the participle is attributive (anarthrous or articular) or predicate. It may even be substantival, especially with 6. It is always declinable. As a verb there is always voice and tense and there may be cases. But any given anarthrous predicate participle may be either supplementary (complementary) or circumstantial (additional) or wholly independent (as indicative or imperative). The articular participle is ruled out of this three-fold alternative, though it still has voice, tense and governs cases. The articular participle is always atinfinitive.
The lines thus cross and recross in But a clear statement of all the essential facts can be made by taking the adjectival and the verbal aspects separately. In any given instance there is thus a double problem. Both sides of the given participle must be noted. 4. Adjectival Aspects op the Participle. (a) Declension. The free declension of the participle in number and gender and case (cf. per contra the infinitive) makes the
tributive (or substantival).
the nature of the case.
task of noting the adjectival aspects comparatively simple. There

are anomalies of agreement in these three points as with other
adjectives.
TTjs
Thus
'lep.
in
Rev. 3
12
17
Karaâluovaa in apposition with
Kaivrjs
does not conform in case.

ireTvpcjofxhrjs
of
both case and gender in

KpaôPTes (Ac. 21
:
in
There Rev. 1
is
:
a difficulty
See also
15.
where the number and gender both vary. In Mk. 4:31 note 6s du TrdvTwv twv aTepnarcou where 6v takes the gender of c-kkpixa. Cf. also tjv Kad-qnevai (Mt. 27:61).
irXrjdos
36)
The
Part, in Acts, p. 5.
Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 249.
VEEBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT

But
(6) (a)
"PIIMATOS)
1105
these matters are discussed adequately in chapter on

Attributive Participle.
The
Sentence.
The article is not of course necessary with the attributive participle any more than with any other attributive adjective. Thus we have vdcop ôjv (Jo. 4 10), hving water/
Anarthrous.
'
:
which
When
just as really attributive as to uScop to âiv (Jo. 4 11). the article is used there is no doubt about the participle
is
:
being attributive.
When
it is
absent,
it is
an open question to
also 1 Cor. 13
:
be examined in the hght of the context.

xaX/cos
rjxoji'
Note
1,
V Kv/jLâXov aXaXaôv.
is
This construction (the anaras the other uses of the
throus attributive)
participle,!
rixos
(hairep
o^^fi^
not so
common
yg^^ j^ jg
^^^ wholly absent from the N. T.

^lalas (Ac. 2
:
See
êpo/xej/rys
tti/ojjs
2)
and
dvpa
qveuyfikvr\
(Rev. 4:1). It is not always easy to draw the line between the anarthrous attributive participle and the predicate participle of
additional statement.
Ijihos 8e kv Trj
Cf. av-qp
:
yeyevv7]fj.epos
kv
TapaQ, amTedpa/x-
ivoKu Tamxi (Ac. 22
3).
If 6
occurred before these par-
ticiples,
is
we should have the

but in 10
:
articular-attributive participle
which
:
equivalent to a relative.^
So
in Ac. 10: 18,
we have
:
6 eTrt/caXou-
pevos IleTpos,
op-OLOS k(XTLV
Cf. Lu. 6 48, with Mt. 7 24, audpl oaTLS o}Ko86pT](Tv avTov Trjv oUiav. See also Lu. 6 49. Cf. Ro. 8 24, eXTTis ^Xewophr] ovk eaTiv eXwis. Cf Mt. 27 33. The problem is
32, os eiviKoXeLTaL Herpos.
avdpcoTCi} OLKobopovvTi
oldav,
particularly real in
Mk.
25, 27.
W. H.
up
indicate
by the comma
after ekdovaa that they regard the participles with ywr] (oma, iradovaa, 8aTavr]aaaa, w4>e\r]detaa, ekdovaa)
tive.
to that point as attribu-
Then the sentence proceeds with the predicate-circumstantial participles {aKovcraaa,

describe the
They
woman who
:
comes.
eXdovaa) before T]\J/aTo. Luke (8 43) makes the matter plainer by putting a relative clause after the first participle. The anarthrous attributive participle is closely bound to the substantive
or
pronoun even when

:
it
is
an additional statement.
Kad'
eavTrjs
See Mt.
12
25, iraaa
:
âaCkeia pepiaOelaa
:
eprjpovTai.
:
See also
Lu. 6 40; 2 Th. 2:4; Rev. 2 15. In Mt. 13 19, iraPTos clkovovwe probably have the genitive absolute and so predicate circumstantial, but even here avTov occurs, though remote. Cf. Tras 6 aKovoiv (Mt. 7: 26) and ttSs- oo-rts d/couet (7: 24), where we see how
Tos,
nearly these constructions approach each other.^

1
But the anar-
Goodwin, M. and
ttos
T'.,
p. 330.
art.
This use of U, p. GOSf.

3
without
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 242. occurs occasionally in class. Gk. Sec K.-G.,
1106

is
NEW TESTAMENT
found
avT<2
throus indefinite participle

ovv KoXdv TTOietv Kal
ixr]
clearly
in Jas. 4: 17, eiSoTL
ttoiovptl, afiapria
may throw some

Trpo4)i]Tov
light
on Mt. 12
25.
This passage In Mt. 13 35, otd rod

eanv.
:
XkyoPTos,
we probably have
the articular attributive
Greeks did not always place the attributive between the article and the substantive.^ The use of 1, el8ov d77eXoys eTrrd exovras irX-qyas. exoiv is interesting in Rev. 15 The anarthrous indefinite participle is seen also in a few constructions like TpoaeridevTO wLcrTevoPTes rw Kvplco (Ac. 5 14), where the participle means 'believing men' and has TXrjdr] in apposition with it. See also 4)uvfj ôojptos (Mk. 1 3, LXX), eêXeuo-erat 1770U/xevos (Mt. 2: 6, LXX), ovk eanv avviwv and ovk tariv eK^riTOJV (Ro. 3 11, LXX) where 6 is more common, exeis eKel KparovpTas (Rev. 2 14). It is worth noting in this connection also the fact that occasionally a preposition occurs with an anarthrous participle So x'^^P^s KrjpmaouTos (Ro. 10 14). Here the (cf. infinitive). preaching,' but 'without one preaching,' 'without is not idea 'without a preacher.' For 'without preaching' we must have
participle, since the
participle
Xcopts
p.Ta
Tov K-qphaaeiv.
KXaLOPTcov
:
Cor. 15
See once more xo-'-P^'-v fJ-^To. X'^'-povTCjov, KKaleLV (12:15) and kwl TOLovPTas (1 Pet. 3:12). In 1 27, kros tov viroTaâPTos, we have the usual articular
construction.
The articular participle occurs a few times in ((3) Articular. Homer.2 In general the Book of Acts has the articular participle All in about the same proportion as the great Attic writers.^ But the matter articular participles are, of course, attributive. has some points of interest and cannot be dismissed with this general statement. The examples are very numerous. The substantives may be expressed as in ttjp r]TOLp.a(jp.kvr]v vp.lp âcnXelap (Mt. 25 34) ol ypanixarels ol airo 'lepocFoKvyLOiP KaTa(3aPTes (Mk. 3
:
22).
Like other articular adjectives, the participle
may come
be-
tween the article aud the substantive, as in rf) vyLaLPovay 5t5acr/caTim. 1 10); rod (f)aLPop.epov aarepos (Mt. 2 7); Trjs TpoKeLu'epyj^ The substantive may preavTU) xapas (Heb. 12 2). Cf. Jude 3. cede and the -article may be repeated, as to uScop to ôjp (Jo. 4 11)
Xta (1
:
:
TO
(Tojfxa
TO ykpTjabjiepop (1 Cor. 15
37);
rcS OeQi tQ> 8l86ptl (1
Cor. 15
57).
Cf.
Mt. 26 :28; 27:44;

is
Jas. 5 :1; Ro. 2 :11.

:
the article
repeated as in 12
inative reminds us of the

1
40 (apposition) coimnon anacoluthon

T., p. 330.
Mk. 12:38 when the nomIn
Revelation.
Cf.
Goodwin, M. and
2 *
Vogrinz, Gr. des hom. Dialektes, 18S9, p. 184.
Williams,
The
Part, in the
Book
of Acts, p. 46.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PUMATOS)

With proper names note
6 eTTLKoXovfjLevos
'l-qaovs
:
1107
6 Xeyonevos Xptaros
Uerpos (Ac. 10
18).
Cf.
Th.
1
:
For a long passage see 6 bibdaKo^v (Ac. 21 28). The order of the words is not insisted on and in long passages the participle
8
f.
10; 2
(Mt. 1: 16); Tim. 1
may
follow without the repetition of the article, as in
Mt. 6
30,
TOP xoprop Tov
ay pod
:
arjfxepou ovto. koI avpiov els

:
Kkiâvov fia\\bp.evov.
:
:
See also Ac. 12 10; 13 :32; 26 4, 6; Heb. 2 2; Heb. 12 3, where in the long clause the participle with ToiavT-qv comes in between rbv and vironeixevriKbTa and a good distance from avTCkoylav. Sometimes the article is used with the participle, but not with
the substantive, as in
32)
;
7rat5tots
rots
kv
ayopa
Kadrjjxkvois
(Lu. 7
xpv'^'-ov
TOV
a-K6Kkvjj.'evov (1
Pet. 1:7); ovona TO btbopikvov (Ac.
4:12); toXvs
(xij
apid/xos
TcaTevaas (Ac.
;
11:21);
ttoXXoi
tXclpol
ol
o/jLoXoyovvTes (2 Jo. 7)
avOpojiroL ol
apvov/xevoL
:
(Jude
4,
where
note the with the
series of participles
and one adjective

7.
aaeêls parallel
participles).
Cf. also 1 Cor. 2
The
articular parti-
ciple also occurs

3)
;
with pronouns,^ as in av
18
:
6 epxonevos
(Mt. 11
12);
:
TLvas Tovs TeiroLdoTas (Lu.
9)
rts 6 crvXaycoyoJp
(Col.
:
2:8);
avTo7s Tots TriaTebovaiv (Jo. 1

ol
12);
av 6 Kpivwv (Jas. 4
nvh
Tapacraovres
(Gal.
Particularly in
ol (j)popovuTes (Ph. 3 1:7); 18 f.). address do we find the articular participle, as in
ttoXXoi
Mt.
7: 23; 27: 40; Lu. 6

:
14; 13
16.
Tras
The use
25 (but note dative in 6 24); Ac. 2 of the articular participle with xSs is com:
:
mon, as
(Mt. 7:
6 dpyiôfjLevos
Tras 6 \eyociv (7: 21).
This
:
is
(Mt. 5 22) ttSs 6 clkovwv (Mt. 7:26), equal to the relative clause ttSs oo-ris
:
24).
In Ro. 2
was 6
:
Kplvcov is
used with
avdpoowe.
is
Cf.
TCLVTes ol cLKovovTes in
Ac. 9
21.
Here
also 6 Topdrjaas
continued
b^
Kal e\r]\WeL as if it
ciple
it is
were a relative clause. The articular partisometimes occurs where it is followed by an infinitive. Here still further complicated, but it is clear. See Tijv neXKovaav
:
86âv airoKa\v4>dfivaL (Ro. 8
18)
:
to.
boKovvTa
fjieXr]
VTrapxî-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.'
D, TOV
(Ch. in
optos Atos IIpoTroXecos (or Trpo TroXecos).
Cf.
Note 14: 13 Ramsay's remark
Rom. Emp., p. 52, quoting J. A. Robinson), that in Acts 6 cjp "introduces some technical phrase, or some term which it marks out as having a technical sense (cf. 5 :17; 13 :1; 28 :17), and
is
almost equivalent to tov

:
opopaô/jLtpov."
An
ingenious person
might apply this in Eph. 1 1 to the text with h 'Ecfyeaip absent; but the usual view needs no defence against such an alternative.
1
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 243.
Prol., p. 228.
1108

al ovaai in
NEW TESTAMENT
Par. P. 5 (ii/B.c),
(iii/A.D.)
:
With
Ro. 13
tuv
we may compare
0' lepeo^v Kal UpeioJv
ovtcjov Kal ovaoov.
So N. P. 49
Tov ovTos
iJLT]v6s
'the cuFreiit month.'
The passage
in Ac. 5
17
reads
17
ovaa
a'ipecris,
and 28
kirt
17 has tous ovras
tusv 'lovbalcov Tpwirovs.
Moulton
loco) in
is
agrees,
we may
note, with
:
Sanday and Heacilam

5) as referring
{in
taking
6 cbv
-KavTwv (Ro. 9
to Jesus.
As
a matter of exegesis and the punctuation of the editor will be made according to his theology. But it may be said in brief that the natural way to take 6 (bv and
apposition to 6 Xpcaros. It is a very common thing in the N. T., as already noted, to have 6 and the participle where a relative clause is possible. But this idiom is common in the older Greek. See Ac. 10 18, 32, and chapter on Article. It remains
0e6s is in
:
well
known, the
difficulty here is
then to speak of the frequent use of the articular participle without a substantive or pronoun. This idiom is too common for exhaustive treatment, but some examples are given. Cf. Mt. 10:
40, 6 dexojJievos
\aPTa.
fxe.
v/JLcis
kp.e
dex^rai, Kal 6
efj.e
dexoiJ-evos Sexerat tov airoaTel-
and the next verse and 6s au TTOTian in verse 42. See further Mt. 10 37; Ac. 10: 35; Rev. 1 The question of the tense is interesting in some of these ex3. amples, as in 6 evpuv ttiv ^pvxw olvtov airoXeaeL avrrju in Mt. 10 39, but that will be discussed a bit later. Like a relative clause, the
also 6 8ex6p.epos
: :
Note
articular participle
purpose,
etc.,
suggest ^ the notion of cause, condition, as in Mt. 10 37, 39, 40, 41; Lu. 14: 11; Ro. 3:5.
:
may
But
(c)
this notion is
very
indefinite.
Predicate Participle.
From
the adjectival standpoint
all
participles that are not attributive are predicate.
This aspect of
verbal aspegt
the participle must be elucidated further.
The
prominence with all the predicate participles. They will be touched very lightly here and receive full discussion under Verbal Aspects. It may be said at once that all the supplementary and circumstantial participles are predicate. One must
special
kpxoixevos (Lu.
: :
comes into
not confuse the articular participle in the predicate like av el 6 7 19) with the real predicate participle. Cf. Lu. 16 15; 22 28.^ The predicate participle is simply the adjective
:
in the predicate position.
That
is, it
is
not attributive.
Cf. exe
:
There
are obviously
many
:
varieties of the predicate participle.
But the
p.e
predicate adjective has had adequate treatment.
Tapy-
Twevou (Lu. 14
(d)
18).
Cf. also
Heb. 5
is
14; Ac. 9
21.
The
1
Participle as a Substantive.
variation from the substantive,

Burton, N. T.
The adjective, though a sometimes used as a substantive
M. and
T., p. 167.
lb., p. 169.

as in t6 ayadop.
ciple also
'PIIMATOS)
1109
It
is
not strange, therefore, that the partiuses.

18), rjyoviJLepos
is
shows substantival
:
throus, as in iipx^^v (Mt. 9

rule, the participle as
TO,
These are sometimes anar(Mt. 2:6). But, as a

articular.
a substantive
Cf. Lu. 12
33,
virdpxovTa
vnoof,
where the genitive shows the substantival

Cf. further 2
:
character of this participle.

po/jLOV,
27 to tWiankvov tov
3
:
(1 Cor. 7: 35)
TTjs yvi}<To:s,
oj'Tt,
irpds to
V{jlQip
:
avTOJV crvfx4>epou, (Ph.
8)
5td to
virepkxou
(Mt. 14
:
20) to Trepiaaevou toop Kkaanaruv, (Ro.
7: 23) Tw
(Heb. 12
11) irpds to irapov, etc.
many examples where

pron., as in
Kos).
:
and the
part,
is
There are also the used without a subst. or
Mt. 10 39, 6 evp6}v and 6 awoXeaas (cf. 6 ayados, 6 /caThe substantive use of the participle is a classic idiom.
is
The
so
use of the neuter participle as an abstract substantive

in the
:
not
common
N. T. as
56),
to.
in the ancient Greek.^

:
But
p.i]
see further
:
TO yeyopos (Lu. 8
kpx6fj.eva (Jo.
yLvbjxeva (9
7), to airoXooXos
(19
6vTa,
10),
to.
:
to.
16
13), to vvv txov (Ac.

:
24:25),
to.
6vTa
f.),
(1
Cor.
28), to aUKovp.evov (14

:
7), to
dedoâa/xhov (2 Cor. 3
:
10
In Lu. 22 49 note to kaonepop. One is not to confuse with this idiom the so-called "substantive participle" of some grammars, which is a term used for the substantivizing of the verbal force of the participle, not the adjectival.
t6 doKovp
(Heb. 12
10), etc.
Thus Burton^
Ac. 5
I see
:
calls
the supplementary participle like that in
42, ovk kiravopTo 8L8a(TKOPTes,
and
in Lu. 8
46, eypwp bvpap.iv

I confess
têKriKvdvLap aw' epov,
the "substantive participle."
that
nothing to be gained by applying "substantive" to the purely verbal aspects of the participle. Confusion of thought is
the inevitable result.
(e)
See
5,
(d),
(5).
The
Participle
is
as an Adverb.
its
The formation
of adverbs
from participles
23).
due to
adjectival function.
:
Cf. optoos
(Mk.
:
11:32), dpo'Koyovpepojs (1 Tim. 3
16), virepâWopToos
(cf.
(2 Cor. 11
Besides, the participle itself
neuter adjective
iroXv, etc.)
sometimes has an adverbial

Cor. 16:6).
131).
In particular note tvx6p(1 (Mk. 14:72). This obscure participle expresses coincident action (cf. Moulton, ProL,
force.
See also
eTr<.0a\wp eKkaiep
p.
Cf. rfKdap
airemaPTes (Lu. 2
16),
airevaas KaTa^r}di
and
cannot always draw a distinction between this use and the circumstantial participle of manner. The verbal and the adjectival standpoints come together. A number of the grammars apply the term "adverbial" to all the circumstantial participles.'* But it is more than doubtful if
airevcras KaTe^r]
(19
f.).
We
Goodwin, M. and T., p. 331. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 244.
" *
N. T. M. and T., p. 175 f. So Burton, N. T. M. and T.,
p. 169
f.
1110
NEW TESTAMENT
one gains as much as he loses thereby. It is true that logically a sort of adverbial relation may be worked out, an adverbial addition to the sentence.^ But it does not help much from the syntactical point of view to insist on this fact in the exposition of the circumstantial participle. As to form the circumstantial participle is still adjectival.
purely logical. adverbial aspect of the redundant participle in ^Xeirovres (SXeTrere (Mt. 13:14, LXX), which is on a par with aKofj aKomere. Both
is
There
The adverbial notion is inferential and something, however, to be said for the
are attempts to translate the
Hebrew
inf.
absolute.
Moulton^
has found the idiom in ^schylus and Herodotus, but the N. T. usage is clearly due to the LXX, where it is very common. Cf. also iBoiv eUou (Ac. 7:34), ev\oyciv evXojwco (Heb. 6:14), from
the
LXX
again.
construction "thoroughly un-Greek."

participles like the
like
Blass {Gr. of the N. T. Gk., p. 251) calls this There are other pleonastic
(Mt. 3 15) which is says" (Moulton and ups somewhat Xtyei (Jo. 21: elirihu tovto 19), dTreX^wj/ also Cf. f.). 15 Prol, p. also avaaTo.^ sold.' So and gone has 'he 13:46), (Mt. irkirpaKtv \aôvaa note again Once came.' and arose 'he 15: (Lu. 20), fiXdep This idiom is more kveKpvypeu (Mt. 13 33), 'she took and hid.'
common
dxoKptêh
etirev
the vernacular:
"He
Aramaic than Hebraic and is at any rate picturesque vernacular. But it is also Greek. Pleonasm belongs to all tongues. Rader-
macher {N. T.
VI, 68,
5, e^r?
Gr., p. 179)
XcTcoj'.
Mr. Dan Crawford
quotes Herod. VI, 67, 10, elite <^ds; finds in the Bantu
now
5.
language "dying he died" for the irrevocableness of death. We turn to the verbal aspects of the participle, which are more
complex.
Verbal Aspects of the Participle.
Voice. There is nothing of a distinctive nature to say about the voice of the participle in addition to what has already been The voices run in the participles presaid (see ch. on Voice).
(a)
verb itself. We find the voice in the earliest Greek as in the Sanskrit. All the nuances of the voices appear in the participle. Cf. the active in hbaoKoiv (Lu. 13 10), fcov (Jo. 4 10) the middle in xpoadexofjievoLs (Lu._ 12 :36), eTLKoXeaanevos (Ac. 22
cisely as in the
: :
16), (xiraffaixevos
(Mk. 14:47); the passive

(1
in \virovnevos
(Mt. 19
:
22),
Trjv aTOKeKpvfJLuepriv
Cor. 2:7),
KcoXvdevTes
airo\e'\viêvov
(Heb. 13
23),
kTrL<rTpa<l>els
(Mk. 5:30),
exe
/xe
(Ac. 16:6).
We may
In
note
5
26,
in particular
Trap-QTrjpievov
(Lu. 14:18f.), eaeade

:
p.L<yobp.evoi.
:
(Mt. 10
22)
and
eaeade \a\ovvTes (1 Cor. 14

^
9).
Mk.
Prol., pp. 14, 76.
'

TvaOovaa virb
1111
TroWdv
larpcoj',
the active participle has the construcis
tion of the passive, but this

voice.
(6)
due to the verb
iraax^, not to the
Cf
also Gal.
9, yvopres dedv jjcdWov 8e yvooadepres viro deov.
Tense.
Timelessness of the Participle. It may be said at once that the participle has tense in the same sense that the subjunctive, optative and imperative have, giving the state of the action
(a)
as punctiliar, linear, completed.
In the beginning
this
was
all
that tense meant in the participle. The participle was timeless. Indeed the participle in itself continued timeless, as is well shown
by the
it is
articular participle.^
is
Thus
in
Mk.
14, 'loâpris 6 /3a7rrif coj^,
not present time that
here given
by
this tense,
but the gen-
eral description of
John as the Baptizer without regard to time. Cf. ol fryroOires (Mt. It is actually used of him after his death. 2 20). In Mt. 10 39, 6 evpojv aToXeaei, the principal verb is future
:
:
but the aorist tense does not mean So in Mt. 25 20 and 24 6 Xaôop and 6 eiXr;But <t>us have no notion of time but only the state of the action. the tenses of the participle may be used for relative time. In relation to the principal verb there may be suggested time. Thus
while the participle
is aorist,
past or future time.
6 evpojv
oLTToXeo-et
above implies that

In Ac. 24
:
evpcop is
antecedent to
airoXeaei
which
verb
is
future.
11, avej3r]p -irpoaKvvrjaojp, the principal

is
is
past, but the participle
relatively future,
of the participle
lutely past.
the indicative
The relative time mode and is able

,
though absoapproximates
to suggest antecedent (aorist,
present, perfect tenses) simultaneous (aorist, present tenses)
and
subsequent (present, future tenses) action. The participle must be studied with this distinction in mind. But this notion of relative time "is deeply imbedded in the nature of Certainly this notion the participle and the use is universal."
tenses of the
'^
of relative time
In the chapter on Tense the Latin or in completeness, reasonable with the participial tenses were treated point. A word this necessary at but some further remarks are
more obvious in the modern languages.'*

is
the Greek
participle
than in
needs to be said about the idiom ovtos rjv 6 eixcbj/ (Jo. 1 15), KaOrjixevos (Ac. 3:10), where the principal verb is ovTos riv 6
:
thrown into the

1
past.
BruK., Grioch. Gr., p. 522.

Movilton, Prol., p. 126.
IIo notes
Hob. 10
I,
14, tovs ayiaônii'ovs, as
a good
ex. of the tiiiK^lcssness of the part.

'
Gil(ler.sl.,
Synt. of Class. Gk., Pt.
p. 139.
W.-M.,
p. 427.
1112
(jS)

The
Aorist.
The
Aktionsart of the aorist participle
is
sufis,
ficiently illustrated in the discussion of the aorist tense.
There
of course,
no reason
for not
having the constative, ingressive or

Schaefer^ argues that in most
effective aorist in the participle.^
cases the participle uses the effective aorist.
That may be
true,
to Blass^ thinks that the aorist participle contains the idea of completion, but even so that notion may be merely constative
itself
though there
cause
it.
is
nothing in the nature of the participle
or ingressive.
Goodwin^ holds that the

correct
aorist participle generally
represents the action as antecedent to the principal verb.
Bur-
ton^ has
ticiple
it
more nearly
when he
insists that
the aorist par-
conceives of the event indefinitely or simply.
So Blass^
It is usu-
denies that the aorist tense implies antecedent action.

ally
assumed that the proper use of the aorist participle is antecedent action and that only certain verbs (as exceptions) may
occasionally express simultaneous action.
But
this
is
a misappre-
hension of the real situation.
It is doubtless true, as
Burton'
of in-
notes that the antecedent use furnishes the largest

conception.
number
stances, but that fact does not prove priority nor originality of
"The
is
aorist participle of antecedent action does

it is
not denote antecedence;

antecedence
used of antecedent action, where
by the aorist tense as a tense, but in some other way."^ Moulton^ is equally explicit: "The connotation of past time was largely fastened on this participle, through
implied, not
the idiomatic use in which

qualify
its action.
it
stands before an aorist indicative to

is
As point action
always completed action,

is
except in the ingressive, the participle naturally came to involve

past time relative to that of the
the original use of the aorist participle
action.
main verb." It was that
probable that
of simultaneous
From
:
this
was developed quite
naturally,
by the nature
is
of the various cases, the antecedent notion.
Cf. vrjcrTevaas k-rcdvaaev
(Mt. 4
2)
where the fasting expressed by the participle
given
by the principal verb. For further examples of antecedent action see Mt. 2 14; 2 16; 27: 3; 1 Cor. 6 16. For the articular aorist see Mt. 10 39; Lu. 12 47; Jo. 5 15. While this came to be the more common idiom
as the reason for the hungering expressed
:
:
Schaefer,
lb.
Das
Partizip des Aoristes bei den Tragikeni, 1894, p. 5.

3
2
*
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 197.

Gr., p. 48.
M. and T., p. N. T. M. and

N. T. M. and
48.
So Monro, Horn.

T., p. 59.
lb.
Prol., p. 130.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 197.

T., p. 61.
'
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT 'PHMATOz)

from the nature of the
1113
case, the original use of the aorist participle
One has no ground for asa necessary or an actual fact with the aorist participle.^ The aorist participle of simultaneous action is in perfect accord with the genius and history of the Greek participle. For numerous examples of both uses see the chapter on Tense. A good instance is seen in Mt. 27 3, 7)/xapTov Trapadovs alfia aOQov. So also hivoKa^div elurev (Lu. 10 30). See Ac. 2 23, tovtou TrpoeTrjâvTes avelXare, where the slaying was manifestly done by the impaling on the cross. The two actions
for simultaneous action continued.
suming that antecedent action
is
are identical per
se.
Moulton
{Prol., p. 131)
it is
observes that
when
the verb precedes the aorist participle

participle of
nearly always the

132) cites O. P.
It SO
coincident action.
He
{Prol., p.
530
15
(ii/A.D.), e^ Siv Swcrets
Xurpcoaaad
number
:
ixov to. lixaria.
happens
See
that the N. T. shows a great

:
of such examples.
Mk.
:
30
(Tuiaop
Karaâs, (Lu. 2
16) rjXOav aTr^vaavTes , (Ac. 10
33)
fcaXcos eTTOiTjcras irapayepofxepos.

lJLeTaTreiJL(()6e'Ls,
Cf.
the participle
is
In Ac. 10: 29, rjXdov antecedent in idea. Acts, however,

75-
Mt. 26:
is
particularly rich in examples of the coincident aorist participle
which follows the verb.

19
:
See 10:39; 11:30; 13 :33; 15:8, 9; 25 13; 26 10. It is in point of fact a characteristic of Luke's style to use frequently the coincident participle (both aorist and present) placed after the principal verb. This fact completely takes away the point of Sir W. M. Ramsay's argument^ for the aorist of subsequent action in Ac. 16 6, where, however, it is more probably antecedent action, as The argument made against it under 22. is possible in Ac. 23
2;
23
22, 25, 30;
Tense need not be repeated here.'' Burton assents^ to the notion of the aorist of "subsequent" action in the participle, but no
I have examined in detail the N. T. examples adduced and shown the lack of conclusiveness about them all. See chapter on Tense. It is even claimed that subsequent
real parallels are given.
action
is
:
shown by the
:
participles (present as well as aorist) in

: : : :
22; 17 26; 18 23; 28 14, but with no more evidence of reality. Actual examination of each' passage shows the a(!tion to be either simultaneous or antecedent. See also Lu. 1 9, eXaê rod QvyaaaaL elae\du:v els top paop, where it The same thing is true of Heb. 11 27, is obviously coincident. Cf. also Ac. 7 35 op rjppijcaPTO KareXLirep klyvirTOV, fxri ôî^deis.
Ac. 5
36; 6
11; 8
10, 18; 14
^ gt. P:iul tho Traveller, p. 212. Moulton, Prol., p. i;U. See Hallc^ntine, Bibliothcca Sacra, 1SS4, p. 787, for discussion of N. T. exx. N. T. M. and T., p. G5.
1114
eiirovres,

(13
:
22) elTev iiapTvprjaas.
case like 1 Pet.
20
f.
is
However, the common use of the aorist participle in indirect discourse (as with all the supplementary participles) without any notion of time is to the point. So Ac. 9 12, eldep av8pa elcreKdoPTa /cat kindePTa. So Wtoipovp top ârapav ireaoPTa (Lu. 10 The action is purely punctiliar with no 18).
not, of course, pertinent.
: :
notion of time at
all.
It is true that the articular participle is
occasionally used (see chapter on Tense) for time past tot he time
of the writer, but future to the time of the principal verb. As a matter of fact this aorist participle is timeless, as is shown by the use of 6 irapaSovs in Mt. 10 4 and 6 wapadLSovs in 26 25. So
:
:
6 elircop in Jo.
12; 6 iroLrjaas 5
is
15;
17
aXelxpaaa 11:2.
It is the
action alone that
under consideration, not the time
of its
rj
performance.
See, per contra, 6 ypovs

:
Kal
:
fxri
eroifxaaas
ttoitj-
aas SaprjaeraL (Lu. 12
47)
where the
aorist participle gives the
simple action with a future verb.
Cf. Lu. 6
aorist part, with the present indicative.
Burton
49 for the articular ^ 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
is
for
an appeal to that explanation,

for this notion.
It is certainly
since the fact does not exist.

ticiple that
It is only in the circumstantial par-
any contention
made
gratuitous to find subsequent action in Ro. 4 :19, /jltj aadep-rjaas rfj irlcTei. Kareporjaep, not to mention 4 :21; Ph. 2:7; Heb. 9 12. Burton reluctantly admits that, though in 1 Pet. 3 18 ^coottolt]:
:
is "clearly subsequent to airedapep,'' yet it "is probably to be taken together with dapaTcodeis as defining the whole of the preceding clause." This latter view is, of course, true, since the order
6ds
of the participles
aorist participle
is OapaTccdeis, ^cooiroLtjdels. is
The
timelessness of the
[v/jlcLs]
well
tc3
shown
dew.
in Jo. IG
2, 6 airoKTeipas
86^ri
Xarpelap Tpoaipepeip
:
Cf. also ayayovra
reXetcio-at
(Heb.
2 10). This coincident use of the aorist participle is by no means so rare in the ancient Greek as is sometimes alleged. The action was specially likely to be coincident if the principal .verb was also aorist.^ Like the other articular participles, the
aorist participle
may
be the practical equivalent of the
relative.
So
in Lu. 12
side.
f . 6s
ap ofxoXoyriaeL
and
6 apprjaa/jLepos are
used side
by
'
2
3
N. T. M. and T., p. 66. See Leo Meyer, Griech. Aor.,

GildersL, Synt., Pt.
I,
p. 125.
Part., Trans.
Am.
Philol.
See Seymour, The Use of the Gk. Aorist Assoc, XII, p. 88 f.

p. 140.

(7)
tiliar,
"rUMATO^;)
timeless
1115
and punc-
The Present.
is
As the
aorist participle
is
is
so the present participle
timeless
and
diirative.
The
participle
tive,
ahead of the present indicawhich does not distinguish between punctiliar and durative
thus, like the infinitive,
action.
careful treatment of the force of the present participle
has been given under Tense. The real timelessness of this participle is shown in the fact that it is used indiscriminately with
past, present or future
e(t)epov
tenses of the indicative.
So
TrwXoOj'res
uiv
(Ac. 4:34); awodvqcrKCOV evKoyrjaev (Heb. 11:21); Kalirep
vlbs ep.adep
(Heb. 5:8);
fxepLfxvoJv
dvvaraL
(Mt. 6
27); eaeaOe XaXoDj/-
res (1
Cor. 14:9).
The
So
ol
articular present
especially
shows the
2:6);
Sexerat
kv
ra3
c/xe
absence of time.
TrpoaeTidei tovs
doKovvres ovdev TpoaavWevro (Gal.
cro:ôp.evous
(Ac. 2
47)
SexoAtews Uyuas
(Mt. 10 40)
:
eadiere
to.
TrapaTideneva (Lu. 10:8); 6

:
jSXeTrcoi/
Kpvcpaico airodwaeL
participle also.
fiaL,
There will be Aktionsart in this Some of these words are really punctiliar (8exo(Mt. 6
18).
for instance).
But, in general, the present participle gives

participle
linear action.
The present
may have
relative
time.
This This relative time is be this relative time may Sometimes, however, is only natural. this idiom were Examples of idiom. ^ antecedent action, a classic given under Tense, but add Jo. 9:8, ol deo^povvTes to -wpbrepov, where the adverb of time helps to throw the participle back of tktyov, as apTL with /SXeTrco makes the verb later than TV(t>X6s wi' in 9 25. Cf also Gal. 1 23, 6 Stw/ccov rinas irore vvv evayyeXlêTac, where
usually simultaneous or coincident.
.
and verb have adverbs of time by way of contrast. both hke these see Mt. 9 20; Mk. 5 25; Lu. 8: instances For other 24 Ac. :10; Eph. 2 :13; Col. 1:21; 1 Tim. 1:13, etc. 43; Jo. 5 :5; instances of the present participle to undoubted are also There express the notion of purpose, futuristic in conception, though
participle
: :
present in form.
ing:
Add
to the instances already given the follow-
Mk.
3
is
31, e^w arrjKovTes arkaTeCKav KoKovi'Tes.
Here the
first
only noticeable as the usual linear action (with aorist The second participle, however, is practically purindicative). pose. 'They sent to him calling him.' 'They sent to call him.'
participle
So
also Lu.
13:6
^X0ev
fryroiv,
(13
7)
tpxopaL
^tjtcov.
It
is
not
strictly true that
here the present participle
subsequent time. It is with the verb and beyond. This prosjêctivi^ j^resent iârt. (cf. present ind.) appears in Ac. 21:3, fjv o.-Ko4>opTi^6iitvov t6v yopov. 'The ship was appointed to unload her cargo.' Cf. Mt. 6 30;
:
means future or only that the purpose goes on coincident
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 17; CJildersl., Synt., Part
I,
p. 139.
1116

: :
Lu. 7: 19; 1 Cor. 15 :57; Jas. 5 1; Ac. 3 26. "simulated"^ also by the present participle when It is, of course, not the participle it is used for conative action. that brings out this notion. See (Mt. 23 14) ov8i tovs elaepxoixk23) Treivovi d0tT eiaeKdetv, (27 40) 6 KaraXvoiiV rov vabv, (Ac. 28
11:3; 26 :28;
future
is
The
d(X)v
avTovs.
The notion
:
of repetition (iterative present)
occurs
also as in Ac. 2
47, irpoaeTWei tovs acoôfitvovs, 'kept
adding those
saved from time to time.' So TrwXoCi'res e(])pov Kal eridow (Ac. 4: 'They would from time to time sell and bring and place at the feet of the apostles.' There is thus a sharp contrast from
34).
the specific instance of Barnabas, of whom it is said: TrooXrjaas It is not clear, however, why the present partirjveyKev (4 37)
: .
ciple occurs in 3
8, eâXXo/xews earr] Kai TrtptTrdret,
unless
.
it is
to
note that he kept on leaping and walking (alternately) notion in verse 8, irepLTarcbp Kal aXKofxevos. Cf also in 5
.
Cf
:
this
5, clkovusv
d/coucoj/ is
ireaoiv eê\J/vêv,
where
Teacov
is
antecedent to the verb, but

of distribution
is
descriptive (linear).
The notion
perhaps presCf. Ac. 1:20;
ent in Heb. 10
Col.
14, tovs ajLaônevovs, 'the objects of sanctification.'^
Certainly 6 KkkirT^v is iterative
in
Eph. 4:28.
28,
ecos
2:8. It present and the

Tov avdpcoTTOV
is
interesting to note the difference
between the
aorist participle in
Mt. 16
:
av Iboiaiv t6v vibv
kpxbiJLevov,
perfect participle of the
and in Ac. 9 12, eUev avbpa eicreXdovTa. The same verb and in the same construction
occurs in
kv bvvaixei.
Mk. 9 1, ecos av ido}<TLV ttiv âffCkelav tov deov eXrjXvdvlav The three tenses of the participle of rtTTTco may also
:
be illustrated by the punctiliar notion of the aorist in

Lu. 10
: :
ireaovTa in
:
18, the durative notion of -jnirTovToov in Mt. 15 27 and of TiTTovTes in Mk. 13 25, the perfect notion of ireTTcoKOTa in
Rev. 9:1. (5) The Perfect.

the participle.
irpoaiâTcos
This tense brings

18
2),
:
little
that
is
distinctive in
Cf. TeTeXeiwixevot (Jo. 17: 23), xeTrotTjKores (18: 18),

:
kX7]Xvd6Ta (Ac.
kXrjXvdoTa
KeKOinaKcos (Jo.
(Rev. 9
1),
(1 Jo.
2), 6
4 6), ^X#ws (Mt. 25

: :
TreTTooKora
24).
The
between intensive and extensive was drawn under Some of the intensive uses have lost the notion of Tense. completion (punctiliar) and hold on to the linear alone in the
distinction
present sense.
Cf. eaTc^s dp.i (Ac. 25

ol
10),
1),
:
etScbs
(Mt. 12
(Ac.
25)
with which contrast

TedprjKoos
:
eypuKOTes (2 Jo.
avueLdvlris
5:2),
(Lu. 7 12), TrapeaTr]K6:s (Jo. 18 22). The periphrastic use of the perfect participle in past, present and future time has been sufficiently illustrated already. So has the rare com1
Gildersl., Synt., Pt. I, p. 140.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 127.

bination of perfect and present participle in Eph. 4
1
: :
1117
18; Col.
21.
The
perfect participle also
is
either articular or
anarin
to.
throus, attributive or predicate.

particular Lu. 13
:
For the predicate use see

(Heb. 5
:
crvKrju
elx^v ris Te(j)VTevtxkpr]v,
14)
aiadtiTrjpia yeyvfxvacrfjiha exovruv.
It
needs to be noted again that
the perfect participle has no time in itself. In the nature of the case the act will be antecedent except where the tense has lost
its
true force as in earus,
time, not absolute,
But it is only relative Tedv-qKchs, elSojs. and the leading verb may itself be punctiliar,
Just as the
suggest antecedent action and so be a sort
linear or perfect, in the past, present or future.^
present participle
may
of "imperfect" participle (past time), so the perfect participle is sometimes 2 used where a sort of past perfect sense results. The action was finished and is now no longer the fact, though the So eirl tw avuêlSr}state represented by the perfect once existed.
KOTi aiirQ in
KadrjjjLevov
Ac. 3
10.
Cf.
Mk.
15, deoipovaiv tov baLixovi'^biJ.tvov
iâTiankvov
kol aucppovovvTa, tov kaxriKora tov X7tcl;ra, Kai
ect)oj3r]dr]aav.
This
is
a most instructive passage.

participles
present and the aorist indicative here occur side

attributive
and the predicate
The historical by side. The appear side by side. The

Of the two per-
present and the perfect participles

fect participles, one,
come
together.
IfxaTLafjLkvov, is still
true (punctiliar plus linear)
and describes the man's present state; the other, tov kaxvKOTa, is no longer true and describes the state of the man before Jesus cast out the demon, which casting-out is itself in the past. This
participle
is
therefore a sort of past perfect.

Jo. 11:44,
Cf. also Jo. 8

6 Tedvr]K(hs
31.
nevos.
Another striking example is Here 8e8efxevos is still true, though Te6vt]K<^s is not. Lazarus had been dead, but is not now. We see the same situation in 1 Cor. 2 7, 7171^ a.iroKKpvnnkvy]v. The widsom of God is no longer
e^fjXdev
5e5e:
Ro. 16 25 f., nvaTrjplov xpowhere the long silence is sharp contrast in the the Note broken. be said to now expressly between the perfect distinction This vvv. with aorist participle See 2 Cor. 12 21 drawn. clearly often is participle and aorist
hidden.
The point
is still
clearer in
voLS alojvloLs aeaLy-qnevov (l)avepoidevTos de vvv,
TLcv irpor]jj.apTr\KbTO)V /cat
p.r]
fxeTavo-qaavTuv, (1 Pet.
10) ol
o\jk
rjXeri-
fxhoL vvv 5e eXe-qdevTes.
standpoint.
The same act may be looked at from cither One may not always care to add the linear aspect
Cf. 6 yeyevt^nkvos
to the punctiliar.
t6v kaxvôTcôj/
and
6 yevvr]Bds in 1 Jo.
daLfiovLadels in
5 5
18,
Xtyicova in
1
Mk.
15 and 6
I,
18,
Cf. Gildersl., Synt., Pt. Cf. Burton, N. T.
p. 142.
M. and
T., p. 72.
1118

Mt. 25 20 and
:
6 \al36)v in
6 eiX7?0cos in
:
25
24.
Cf. eyvoov bbvafnv
k^\rj\vdvlav air' e/ioD (Lu.
8 46) and
eTTLyvovs ttju e^ avrov SvvajjLLv
eêXdovaav
(Mk. 5
There
is
30).
Adverbs
of time
may
occur with the

:
perfect as with other tenses of the participle.

Ttdv-qKOTa.
is
Cf. Jo. 19
33,
ri8r]
(19
35).
a sort of harmony in 6 IwpaKws fj.fxapTvpr]Kev The difference between the perfect and present tenses
strikingly
after tUov
TU3V
kaâyiJLevoov
(6:9),
shown in Revelation.. Cf. el8ov ras \puxas aWov ayyekov avaâivovTa (7:2), aarkpa e/c
Cf. also
ToO ovpavov TreTTTOOKOTa (9:1).

Tpe/jLovaa,
Mk. 5:33,
(po^rjdeLaa
Kal
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'). The future participle, like the future tense in (e) The Future. general, was later in its development than the other tenses. It
is
usually punctiliar also and has something of a modal value
subjunctive (aorist).^ See discussion under Tense. The future participle is always subsequent in time to the principal verb (cf. the present participle by suggestion), not coincident and, of course, never antecedent. Hence the future participle comes nearer having a temporal notion than any of the tenses. But even so it is relative time, not absolute, and the future participle may occur with a principal verb in the past, present or future. This idiom grew out of the context and the voluntative notion of the future tense .^ This point is well
illustrated
(volitive, futuristic) like the
by the
parallel use of /xtXXwv to express intention.
Cf.
:
6 irapaSuacov aiiTOV (Jo.
64)
and
6 iJLeWoov avrov TTapabibbvaL (12

is
4).
As already shown, the future

the N. T. (as in
papyri).
participle
much
less
frequent in
LXX)
rival
than in the
to
Koivi]
generally (as in the

is
Another
the
future
participle
jueXXo)
hpxonevo^
(Jo. 1:9), 6 epxoixevos (Lu. 7:19).

etjui)
Both
are anticipatory presents.^
Cf. ejêarcora
and epxonai (cf. and fxeWovTa in Ro.
Nearly all the N. T. examples of the future participle (see chapter on Tense for discussion) are in Luke and Paul and Hebrews (the three best specimens of literary style in the N. T.).
8
:
38.
But
see
13, 6 KaKwaoov.
Mt. 27:49, crdoacov; Jo. 6 64, For the Gospel of Luke

:
6 Trapadoiaoov;
Pet. 3
see 22
49, to habn^vov.
:
The
awv,
rest
of
:
his
ret
examples are in the Acts, as 8

avvavTrjcrovTa, (22
:
27,
rpoaKv-
vqaojv,
(20
:
22)
5)
a^cov,
:
(24
11)
irpoaKVpi]-
(24
1
17)
TTOLrjaccv.
For Paul see Ro. 8
33, 6 KaraKpLvup (a
Cf. Delbruck, Synt. Forsch., IV, p. 97.
2 '
There
is
an expectant note
in rd kKxvvi'oêpov
(Mt. 26
28).

question of editing, but
cf. 6 airo0av6:v
:
1119
37,
17)
in verse 34), 1 Cot. 15

XaX-qdriaonepcov,
For Heb. see 3 5, twv TO yivqaonevov. find <hs in Heb. 13 17. We aroduaovTes.
:
(13
In conclusion one must from the later wholly disappeared part, future the that note Instead it all. at know it not does Greek modern The Greek.
uses vd and the subjunctive.^
participle
is still
But
in general in the N. T. the
used in thorough accord with the ancient idiom In the papyri I note it more so far as the tenses are concerned.^ frequently than in the N. T. Cf. Koivo\oyn(T6fj.evov, P. Goodsp. 4
(ii/B.c);
(c)
Cases.
force of
P. Tb. 33 (b.C. 112). no need to tarry here to prove the verbal the participle as to cases. Precisely the same cases occur
[a]Tad7ia6tiepa,
is
ra
There
with the participle as with the

eKâ\<hv irdvTas
finite
modes
rijs
of the verb.
Cf.
:
(Mk. 5
40)
and
Kparrjaas
xetpos tov iratdiov (5
41).
These illustrations illustrate the point and that is enough. The Supplementary Participle. The term supplementary or complementary is used to describe the participle that forms so close a cormection with the principal verb that the idea of the speaker is incomplete without it. The participle does not differ in reality from the adjective in this respect, and it is still an
{d)
adjective like
xtcrros tikpeu
(2
Tim. 2
is
aspect of the participle that
But it here accented. The

:
13).
is
the verbal
fills
participle
out the verbal notion.
The Periphrastic Construction. The general aspects of this idiom were treated in chapter on Tense (cf. also Conjugation of
(a)
Verbs).
between
It is only necessary here to stress the close connection this participle and the principal verb as in rjv UâWoiv
haiixbvLOV ku4>6p
(Lu. 11
nepovs virapxeiP,
we
In Ac. 19 36, 8eop earlp I'/iSs have two examples of this idiom.
:
14).
/cartaraX-
Cf. Lu.
13
11.
Sometimes we
:
find
the
periphrastic participle alone

:
without the copula as in kôv (Ac. 2 29), el 8kop (1 Pet. 1:6). But note eôp rjp (Mt. 12 4) and 6eop earlp (Ac. 19 36). So Tp'eirop Particularly interesting is elatp yeyopores (Heb. earlp (Mt. 3 15).
:
7:23).
LXX more frequently so used in the verbs But the reverse is true of certain commonness of the perithe that Attic. Radermacher^ thinks the rhetorical tendency. to due is T. phrastic participle in the N.
1
periphrastic participle, as already noted, was far than in the older Greek. common in the N. T. and the
The
Cf.
Jcbb
in
The
fut. part, is rare in
V. and D., p. 335. the inscr.
Cf. Granit,
De
Inf. ct Partic. in Inscr.
Dial. Graec. (iucstionoa Synt., 181)2, p. 122.

=
N. T. Ck.,
p. IGG.
1120
NEW TESTAMENT
This might apply to Hebrews, but surely not to the Synoptic Gospels and Acts. Moulton (ProL, p. 226) admits that the Semitic sources of part of the Gospels and Acts account for the frequency of the periphrastic imperf. (cf. Aramaic). Certainly the LXX is far ahead of the classic Greek and of the kolvt] in general. The papyri (Moulton, Prol, p. 226) show it often in fut. perfects and
in past perfects.
literary
kolvt]
Schmid
(Attic, III, p. 113
f.)
finds
it
rare in
Moulton finds periphr. imperf. in Matthew 3 times, Mark 16, Luke 30, John 10, Acts (1-12) 17, Acts (13-28) 7, Paul 3. And even so some of these examples are more adjectival than periphrastic. Cf. Ph. 2 26.
save in fut. perfects.
:
Diminution of the Complementary Participle. This decrease is due partly to the infinitive as with apxoiiai, SoKtu. See discussion in this chapter on Relation between the Inf. and the Participle. But it is due also to the disappearance of the personal construction and the growth of the impersonal with 6tl or Lva. In Mk. 2:1, eiaeXOciiv toXlv els Ka<j)apvaovn 5t' rnxepuiv rjKOvcrdr]
(/3)
OTL kv oUco tdTiv,
the personal construction
is
retained even with

:
the circumstantial participle.

oTi kari eTLaroXi} XpLarou.
Cf. also 2 Cor. 3

it is
2, <âvepovp.evoi
But
vanishing with the verbs where
it was once so common. See under Infinitive, 5, (e), for further remarks. Jannaris ^ has made a careful study of the facts in the later Greek. It may be noted that dixoixat- does not occur at all in the
(and Apocrypha) has it 24 times, twice disappeared from the vernacular. As to ru7xam it occurred only once with the participle (2 Mace. 3:9). It has the inf. as well as lva (va) in the later Greek, though it is very abundant with the participle in the papyri.^ Cf. T[vy]xaveL NeTXos peuv, P. B. M. 84 (ii/A.D.). But rvyxo-^^ </>tXos without uv occurs
T.,
N.
though the
inf.
LXX
with the
It
(Radermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 169). Curiously appears once with the participle in the (Tob. 12 13) as in the N. T. (Heb. 13 2). In the kolvt, the inf. supplants the part, as it had already gained a foothold in the old
also in the
kolvt]
enough
Xavdavo:
:
LXX
adverb as in \adpq. kKJ3aK\ovaLv (Ac. 16 37). through the kolvt], but with the sense of 'arrive,' 'reach,' not the idiomatic one 'arrive before.' This latter notion appears in Tpo4)davoo (cf. irpokapâvw), which has it once only in the N. T. (Mt. 17: 25), while the inf. is seen in irpoeXaêv ixvplaai (Mk. 14 8) As early as Thucydides the inf. is found with
also the
:
Greek.2
Note
^davo) continued in use
davi)i,
and
Hist.
see also
Ki. 12
18.
It
*
is
common
in the
koivt].'^
The
Gk. Moulton,
Gr., p. 493.
Prol., p. 228.
Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 493. lb., p. 494.
1121
tendency to reverse the construction by using one of these ver])s in the participial form is seen in tvxov (participial adverb) in 1
shows the participial but not in Ro. 7 13, where the participle is circumstantial, not complementary. The impersonal construction gains ^ on the personal in the Koivi}. In the N. T. we no longer have StjXos dtil nor avp6s el/xi. But we do have evpWrj exovaa in Mt. 1 18. "Apxo/uat has lost the part, in the N. T., but virapxoi holds on to it, but not in the sense of 'begin,' rather of 'existing.' Cf. both adjective and part, in Jas. 2 15 and 1 Tim.
Cor. 16
:
6.
It is possible that âivoyiaL still

:
construction in Mt. 6
16, 18,
an auxiliary verb with the periphrastic participle, as in Ac. 8 16; 19 36. The same thing is true of xpouTrapx" in Lu. 23 12, but not in Ac. 8 9 where (xayevwv is circumstantial. We have seen that iravoixaL is true to the part. (cf. Lu. 5:4; Ac. 5:42, etc.) and that the part, occurs also with eiTLfxeuo: (Jo. 8:7), reXeco (Mt. 11:1), and that StareXeco
4:3.
It tends to sink into the level of
et/xt
:
as
has the adj. without
u>v
(Ac. 27
33).
Cf. also
StaXetTrco in
Lu. 7 44.
:
See also the part, with

part, with /caprepeco in
eT/caKeco
in Gal.
6:9; 2Th.3:13.
The
Heb. 11:27 is circumstantial, as is that and with /capj^co in Heb. 12: 3. The doubtful participle with fiavdavo^ in 1 Tim. 5 13 has already been discussed (Relation between Inf. and Part., 3, (d)). Moulton^ is positive that the absolute construction advocated by Weiss is intolerable and that we must either admit the supplementary participle here or boldly insert ehat with Blass. Moultonîs probably right in opposing (7) Verbs of Emotion. the incorrectness of the part, with ev -rrpaaaoi in Ac. 15 29, 4^ o}v SLaTijpovvTes eavrovs ev Trpdêre. At bottom this is the same idiom as we have in 10 33, KaXcos ewoiriaas -Kapa'yevojxevos. Cf. also Ph.
with
dj/exo/xat
in 1 Cor. 4: 12
4: 14; 2 Pet.
19; 3 Jo. 6.
Blass^
ri
is
right in including in this

KXalovre^
category
t'l
iroLeLTe
(Mk. 11:5),
iroLelTe
(Ac. 21
it is
13),
riPiapTov irapaSovs
(Mt. 27:4).
As a matter
of fact
not be-
yond controversy that the part, with these verbs of emotion is the supplementary and not the circumstantial participle. At any rate the idiom comes to the border-line between the two constructions. I do not wish to labour the point and so treat the
construction as complementary.
so close with these verbs as
lists.
is
The connection
is
not, however,
true of those in the
two
iiroceding
Indeed, the connection varies with different verbs and with

It
the same verb in different contexts.

1
seems clear enough

p. 245.
in
lb.
Prol., p. 229.
228 f. Gr. of N. T. Gk.,

lb., p.
1122
:

ireTnaTevKiOS,
NEW TESTAMENT
in 2 Pet. 2
:
Ac. 16 34, ^YaXXtdcraro

cLv ^\aa4>ri(jLovPTes.
:
and
10, ov TpefJLOv:
The examples with
ayavaKTew (Mt. 21
15, etc.)
^
and xatpco (Mt. 2 10, etc.) all seem to be circumstantial. same thing is true of Xvireu. The participle does not occur N. T. with aiaxvponai. The step over to the circumstantial ciple of manner or cause is not very far to take.^
(5)
The
in the
parti-
Indirect Discourse.
This participle
is
clearly
supplementary
and
in the
N. T.
is
cipal verb.
The
usually connected with the object of the prinnom.^ of the part, exovaa appears with the pas:
Mt. 1 18 as noted above. The active in the N. T. would have had on and the ind., if the reference was to Mary. The classic Greek could have said evpev exovaa, but the N. T. Greek, evpev on ex^t.. Cf. also evpedels ws iivdpojiros in Ph. 2 8. But 1 Tim. 5 13 has to be noted. This subject was treated in detail under Indirect Discourse (see Modes). See that discussion for details about the different verbs, some of which, besides the participial construction, may instead use the inf. or 6tl and the Here it is sufficient to give enough illustrations of indicative. this participle in indirect discourse with verbs of mental action
sive evpWr] in
:
to
show the
real
complementary nature
of the participle.
The
With most tense, of course, represents the tense of the direct. participle the of these verbs (especially* olda, ixavOavw, 6iJ.o\ojecS) common idiom is still the is giving way to the inf. or ort, but
enough to attract notice
aavTov eôvTa, P. B.
in all parts of the
(i/A.D.).
N. T.
Cf. yeivoiaKe
M. 356
It
is
common
calls it
to explain this
participle as the object of the principal verb after the analogy of
the
inf. in
indirect discourse.
So Jannaris^
"the objective
participle" and Burton*^ "the substantive participle as object." Blass^ more correctly perceives that it is the substantive or pro-
noun that
no
is
the object while the participle

tliis
is
a predicate adjec-
tive agreeing with
object.
It is easy to see this point
where
ttjp
indirect discourse occurs, as in
Heb. 7
24, airapaâTov ixei
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-
TTjuevop,
where xw means
N. T. Gk.,
'consider'
and we have the

^
participle.
Blass, Gr. of
Blass,
ib.,
p. 245.
3 *
p. 247.
The
pap. show the same tendency.

p. 497.
See Ra-
dermacher, N. T. Gr., p. 169.

6
Hist. Gk. Gr., N. T. M. and
T., p. 176.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 246.
VERBAL NOUNS '('ONOMATA TOT

Cf. Mk. 3:1; Ac. 9 Then note Ph. 2 3,
:
'PIIMATO^)
1123
:
21,
IW
deSeixhous avrovs ayayy.
aWrjXovs -qyounepoL virepexoPTas.^
See also 24 27. The addition
of
cos
r]fxas COS /card crdp/ca
does not change the real construction as in tovs 'XoyLônhovs TrepiTraroO^ras, 2 Cor. 10 2; cos exdpou rjyelade,
:
2 Th. 3
15.
In principle
it is
the double accusative, too
common
with some verbs, only the second ace. is a predicate adj., not a Cf. Ro. 10 9 (margin of W. H.), kav onoXoyrjans substantive.
:
Kvptov 'I-qaovv,
and 2
Jo. 7, oiuoXoyovuTes 'Irjaovv XptaTOP kpxontvov tv
aapd.
ace.
The presence
Thus
6
:
or absence of the copula does not materially

.
change the construction when an adj or substantive

note 2 Cor. 8 22, ov
:
is
the second
edoKLfxaaafxev (nrovSaôv oura,
and
:
Mk.
dbov in
17: 16.
So we have no part, after 20, et5cb$ though it occurs in Ac. 8 25 23; Mt. 38, Jo. 1 50; Blass^ calls this an "eUipse" of the participle, an idiom
aurdv avbpa
b'tKaLov.
: :
common
in classical Greek.
it.
It is
hardly necessary to appeal to
the "ellipse" to explain
out well in Ac. 8 23.

:
ciple
is itself
the
full
predicate force of ovra comes no substantive or adj. is used, the partipredicate and represents the predicate of the
The
If
direct discourse.
Cf Mk. 12 28 aKovaas
. :
avTcov aw^-qTovvTcov, (Lu.
8 46)
:
7J'coj/
bvvaixLv eêkifKvdvlav 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 numerous to discuss in detail or even to quote in full. As representative examples see Mt. 16 28 after el8ov {epxoiJ.evou, but Mk. 9
:
has
k'\r]\vdv'Lav)
:
Mk. 5:30
Lu. 10
:
after einyLvcoaKoo,
7:30
after evpiaKco
(cf.
also Lu. 23
:
2),
18 after
êcopeco (cf.
in particular Ac.
:
7: 56), Jo. 1
yLvwcTKoo,
38 after
10 after
2 Cor. 8
d/xoXoyko}.
:
deaofxai,
7: 32 after ckovco, Ac. 19
35 after
:
24
eTrlaTaixat.,
:
Heb. 2
9 after
/SX^Trco,
:
Heb. 13
23
after
7ij'cbo-/cco,
22 after
SoKtîdfco,
Ph. 2
is
3 after
ifyeofxai,
2 Jo. 7 after
The
punctiliar idea
present as in we-
abvTa in Lu. 10
18, or the linear as in iyylôvaav

TreTrrcoKora
:
(Heb. 10
25),
or the perfected state as in
(Rev. 9:1).
Cf. also Ac.
2:11; 24
Tvpovarjs,
18;
Mk.
38; 1 Jo. 4
2.
Burton ^ explains as "the

4
:
substantive participle" (see
4, (d)) also Jo.
39,
rijs
ywaiKbs
first
fxap-
and Heb. S
:9,
rinkpa kTriKaônkvov fxov.
The
ex-
ample
is
really the attributive participle like rod
irpociyriTov
Xeyovro^
(Mt. 21:4). The second example is more difficult, but it is a (Jer. 31 32) and is not therefore a quotation from the model of Greek. The iiov has to be taken with 'niitpq. and the
LXX
Cf.
Goodwin, M. and
T., pp.
359
=>
flf.
N. T. M. and
T., p. 17(5.
1124
NEW TESTAMENT
participle would be a circumstantial temporal use. It is probably suggested by the original Hebrew, as Moulton (Prol., p. 47) admits. Cf. Barn. 2 28, kv "finepg. kvTtCKatikvov aov avrCo. Cf. kivl
:
G. U. 287 (a.d. 250). The reference of Burton to Josephus, Ant. 10, 4. 2, does not justify the interpretation which he gives.
irapovaip vfxeiv, B.
The Circumstantial Participle or Participial Clauses. The General Theory. There is but one difference between the supplementary and the circumstantial participle. It lies in the fact that the circumstantial participle is an additional statement and does not form an essential part of the verbal notion
(e)
(a)
The
circumstantial participle
It is still
may
be re-
moved and
ciple,
the sentence will not bleed.
a true parti-
predicate adjective as well as circumstantial addition to the
verb.
In point of agreement the circumstantial

It
may
be related
to the subject of the principal verb or the object, or indeed
any
also
other substantive or pronoun in the sentence.
may have
an independent construction with a substantive or pronoun of its ouTi (genitive or accusative absolute) or have no substantive or pronoun at all. Once again the participle may be so independent as to form a sentence of its own and not merely be a subordinate clause. See the section on The Independent Participle as a Sentence. Here we are dealing with the independent participle in a subordinate clause with various stages of independency from mere addition and agreement with a substantive or pronoun to complete isolation though still subordinate. Some of the grammars. Burton^ for instance, call this the "adverbial" participle. There is a slight element of truth here, but only so far as there is a sort of parallel with the subordinate conjunctional clauses which
are adverbial
(cf. ore, tva, cbs, etc.).
But
In
it is
distinctly misleading
a constant tendency to read into this circumstantial participle more than is there. In itself, it must be distinctly noted, the participle does not express time, manner, cause, purpose, condition or concession. These ideas are not^ in the participle, but are merely sugto treat this participle as adverbial.
fact, there is
gested
a/ua,
by the
context,
ttotc,
if
at
all,
cbs.
or occasionally
by a
particle like
tWvs, Kalirep,
vvu,
There
If
is
to use the circumstantial participle.

cise
no necessity for one he wishes a more pre-
note of time, cause, condition, purpose, etc., the various subordinate clauses (and the infinitive) are at his command,
besides
1
the
co-ordinate
clauses.
ff.
The vernacular
^
increasingly
p. 247.
N. T. M. and
T., pp. 169
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
'PHMATOi:)
1125
preferred the co-ordinate or the subordinate clause with conjunctions to the rather loose circumstantial participle.^ We see the triumph of this analytic tendency in the modern Greek.^
remains true that the participial clause was one of the great resources of the Greek language and in contrast the Latin seems very poor.' The English comes next to the Greek in its rich
But
it
use of the circumstantial participle. Moulton* notes the failure of the English, even .with the help of auxiliary verbs, to express
the precise difference between Xvaas and XeXu/cws
d\ri(t)6:s,
(6 'Ka^dov
and
for instance, in
Mt. 25
20, 24).
He
rightly also calls

its
attention to the weakness of the Greek because of

participles, since so
wealth of
or 'al-
much ambiguity
tell,
is
possible.
Does a given
circumstantial participle bear the notion of 'because'
though'?
Only the context can
terpret the context correctly.
and men do not always inOne more remark is necessary.

freedom
By means
of the circumstantial participle the sentence
lengthened indefinitely.
Good
illustrations of this
may be may
be seen in the periodic structure in Thucydides, Isocrates, Lysias and Demosthenes. But the N. T. itself has examples of it as is
seen in 2 Pet. 2
:
12-15,
j3\aa(j)7]novvTes, abiKobixevoL, rijovfxevoL, kvrpv-
{0}
Varieties of the Circumstantial Participle.
Here are treated
only those examples which have syntactical agreement in case with some substantive or pronoun in the sentence. It may be repeated that this participle does not express the ideas called by the usual classification into participles of time, manner (means),
cause, purpose, condition, concession.
Hence
it is
proper to group
the examples together.
The
classification is only justified
by the
context and occasional use of a particle.^ The same classification The is possible also for the absolute use of the participial clause.
examples are too numerous for exhaustive treatment.
few
must
suffice.
Time.
treated
It is
not the tense that
is
here under discussion, though
naturally the different tenses will vary in the

(antecedent,
way
that time
is
simultaneous, future), as
is
already
shown.
The
1
point more exactly
whether a given circumstantial parti-

" Moulton, Prol., p. 229. Jebb, in V. and D., p. 333. lb. Cf. Alexander, Partic. Perii)hrasc3 in Attic Orators (Am. Jour, of
* *
Philol., IV, p.
6
291
f.).
Certainly
we cannot admit
the idea that the part,
itself
has different
meanings.
Cf. Paul, Prin. of the Hist, of Lang., p. 15S.
1126
NEW TESTAMENT
ciple occurs in a context where the temporal relation is the main one rather than that of cause, condition, purpose, etc. It is usually a mistake to try to reproduce such participles by the English 'when,' 'after,' etc., with the indicative. To do this exaggerates the nuance of time as Moulton^ observes. It is generally sufficient
to preserve the English participle or to co-ordinate the clauses'
with 'and.'
15,
The
slightness of the temporal idea

:
is
well seen in
the pleonastic participles avaaras (Mt. 26
62), airoKpidds
(Mt. 3
very
common
in the Synoptic
Gospels.
John usually has

:
aireKpidrj
Kal direv as in 1 :49), airekdbiv

:
(Mt. 13
46), \aîov (13

is
31, cf. verse 33), iropevdepres (21
6).
Here the notion

:
temporal,
but very slightly

5;
so.
Cf. also Tpoadels elwev in Lu. 19

is
11.
The use
:
of apâfxevos as a note of time
seen in Mt. 20
8f.; Lu. 23
24 47; Ac.
:
22.
is
In Ac. 11:4,
Tpcorcov in
apâp.evos Ilerpos kêTidero avrols
Kade^rjs,
the part,
as with
slightly pleonastic,^
but note contrast with

8.
Kade^TJs
ecos tcov
Mt. 20:
Cf. epxop.evo[s] tpxov,

is
P. Tb. 421 (iii/A.D.).
Sometimes the temporal idea
much more
prominent, as in diodevaavres (Ac. 17:1), eXduv eKelvos eXeyêi tov Kodfiov (Jo. 16 8). So also Mt. 6 17, av 8e vqaTevwv oKtopaL. Here the descriptive force of the participle is distinctly temporal. In
: :
examples like Mk. 1 7 Kui/'as XDcrat tov inapra, Ac, 21 32 irapaXajSojv arpaTMTas KaTkbpap.ev evr' ainovs, there is precedence in order of time, but it is mere priority with no special accent on the temporal relation.^ Cf. Mt. 2 16; 13 2. In Ac. 24 25 f. we have some interesting examples of the participle. In bioKejopikvov avTou we see the temporal notion of 'while' with the genitive absolute. In tov jieWovTos the temporal notion in this attributive part, is due to yueXXco. In yevoixevos it is mere antecedence with aireKpWr] (almost simultaneous, in fact). In to vvv Ixov the attributive participle again has the temporal idea due to the words themselves. In p.Taka^6iv we have antecedence emphasized by Kaipov. In aiia Kal eXirl^wv we have the linear notion stressed by a/ia. In TTVKvoTepov avTov p.eTa-Kep.Trbp.evos wfxlXeL avTLo the note
: :
and verb. An example is also seen in Heb. 11:32, tinXelypeL p.e bir]jovfxevov 6 xpovos, where in a poetic way time is described as going off and leaving the writer discoursing about Gideon and the rest. In 1 Pet. 5 10, oXiyov iradbvTas, the adverb of time makes it clear. The note of time may appear in any tense of the participle and with any tense in the principal verb. It is not always easy to
of repetition in TVKPOTepov reappears in participle
interesting
Prol., p. 230.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 249.
lb., p. 248.
'PHMATO:;)
1127
discriminate between the temporal participle and that of attendant circumstance or manner. Moulton^ and Blass^ make
These two uses are the most frequent of all. A this ambiguity occurs in Ac. 21 32, where TrapaXa^cou (cf. \aj3uv in ancient Greek) may be regarded as merely So also the notion of occasion the attendant circumstance. wavers between time and cause. Cf. aKovopres (Lu. 4:28). For
no distinction. good example
of
(I)s
with this participle see
Cor. 7 29
:
ff.
Manner. The ancient use of exôv in the sense of 'with' occurs in Mt. 15 30 exopres iJLeO' eavTOJp x'^ôvs, Mk. 14 3 exovaa dXct/Saarpov iJLvpov, Ac. 21 23 evxw exopres acj)' eavTUP. Cf. also </)<pa;v in In Jo. 18 3 we have Xa/Sajj/ used in practically the Jo. 19 39. same sense as ixera in Mt. 26 47. Cf. also Xaôop in Mt. 25 1. In Lu. 1 64, tXdXet evXojojp, the part, is one of manner, as in Mt. 19 22 aTrrjXdep Xvirov/xepos, (Mk. 1 22) cos eôvcriap exoiv, where ojs makes the point plainer, (1:4) Kr]pvaawp, where the participle is
:
: : :
not the periphrastic construction with

voi,
kyepero, (1
5) eô/jLoXoyovne-
(Ac. 3
5) h-Ktix'^v avrols
Tpoa8oKuv
tl (a
picturesque bit of descrip-
Th. 3:11) jx-qh^p hpyaôjjLepovs dXXd Teptepyaôixepovs (a real pun). It is hard to tell how to classify a participle like that in Gal. It makes sense as temporal, causal or modal. But 6 3, (iridep UP. there is no douljt in a case like Lu. 19 48 eêKpefxero avrov clkovcov
tion), (2
: :
or Ac. 2
26).
13 diaxXevaôPTes eXeyop or ws ovk aepa
b'epo:p
(1
Cor. 9
This notion of manner appears in the participles that

like a-irevaas (Lu. 19
: :
have an adverljial notion

14: 72), Tvxop (1 Cor. 16 (Lu. 19
:
5
:
f.),
eTLJSaXwp
(Mk.
6), ^Xewopres (Mt. 13

elirep
14); irpoaOeis elirep
11).
Cf. also apa^Xe\J/as
in verse 5.
So also the
be looked at
pleonastic participles like airoKpLdeis (see above)

either as temporal or
fxaaaPTes (Ac. 5
:
may
30), avpi^Lâ^wp (9
modal
participle.
modal or even adverbial. See further Kpe22) as good examples of the Burton^ makes a separate division for the
:
participle "of attendant circumstance,"
sary and leads to overrefinement.
but this is not necesThese examples are either temporal as in eêXdopres (Mk. 16:20), UXeânepovs (Ac. 15: 22) or modal as doâôfxepo^ (Lu. 4 15), apaXalSdop (2 Tim. 4:11) Blass' term or pleonastic as aireKpldrjaap XeyouaaL (Mt. 25 9). "conjunctive" {Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 249) throws no particular light on the point. In 1 Tim. 1 13 aypocjp is manner. In Ac.
: :
Pro!., p. 230.
N. T. M. and
T., p. 173.
de
is
la
Synt. Grccquo, 1888, p.
2 Gr. of N. T. Ck., p. 24S. Cucuel and Riciniinn (Ragles Fond;iiiuMital(-s 110) consider this notion an "exception," but it
not necessary to do that.
1128
18
:

we have
in truth
NEW TESTAMENT
18, KCLpanevos,
both the temporal and the
modal.
But
:
it is
easy to split hairs over the various circumstan-
and to read into them much more than is there. f. See âwTiôvTes and StSdo-Kovres in Mt. 28 19 f. as modal participles. So aypoa:u in 1 Tim. 1 13. Cf. Kara ayvoiav
tial participles
Cf. 2 Cor. 4
in Ac. 3
17.
usuaP to distinguish means from manner in the There is a real point, but it is not always clear where manner shades off into means. But some instances are clear. Cf. Mt. 6 27, ris ixepiiJ-voiV dvuaraL TvpoaOelvaL; So also navTevofxhrj
Means.
It is
participle.
in Ac.
16
16.
Thus the maid furnished the revenue

:
for her
masters.
In Heb. 2
10 ayayovra and 2
18
first
ireipaaOels
we may
also have instances of this notion, but the
and the second causal. ner and means and notes how
later Greek.
be temporal Jannaris^ blends the treatment of manthis participle disappears in the
may
Cause.
The ground
of action in the principal verb

Cf. dUaios Kal
firi
may
be sug-
gested by
eôvXrjdr],
the participle.
deKcov avr-qv SeLyfiaTlaaL
Mt. 1: 19; rjfxapTOV irapabovs alpa, 27:3; exa.pr](jav ioovres, As a matter of fact this idiom is very frequent. 20: 20. Jo. 2 3, 10; Jo. 4 45; 21 12; Ac. 4 21; 9 26; further Mt. Cf. elVas, Ro. 6 6, yLi>6)aKovTes, and 9, dbbres; 2 Pet. eldcos 24 22, f.; 1 Tim. Col. 1 3 4:8; Jas. 2 25. For ws with this parti3:9;
: :
22 eidoos may be taken as 'wishing to know,' though Felix may also have actually had some knowledge of Christianity (cf. Paul's appearance before Gallio). So also eiSws (24:22) may mean 'wishing to know.' The N. T. no longer has are, olov, ola with the part, as classic Greek did.^ In Jo. 5 44 a causal participle Xanâvoures is cociple see 1 Cor. 7
:
25, ws
ijXerjiievos.
In Ac. 24
ordinate ^vith
frjreTre.
Purpose. The use of the participle to express aim or design has already been discussed several times from different points of view (Tense, Final Clauses, Tense of the Participle). This fine Purpose is expressed classic idiom is nearly gone in the N. T.
For the future chiefly by I'm or the inf. Mt. 27:49; Ac. 8 :27; 22 5; 24 11, 17.
: :
part, of purpose see
In Heb. 13
17,
<hs
airoScoaovTes,
there
is
as
much
:
accepts acrwaaonevoL in Ac. 25

in the sense of
cause as purpose. Blass^ wrongly The present part, is also used 13.
Ac. 3
1
purpose where the context makes it clear. So Cf. Lu. 13 :6f.; Ac. 15 26, airkareCKf.v avrov tUkoyovvra.
:
Goodwin, M. and T., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 504,
p. 333.
'
Cf. Goodwin, M. and T., Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 248.
p. 335.

27; Ro. 15
:
1129
Cf. P.
25.
But
it
is
not absent from the papyri.
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. The use of the conditional disappeared more Condition.
rapidly than the temporal and causal in the later Greek.^
It is
only the protasis, of course, which
is
here considered.
:
It is still
common
Here
KOdnov oKov
6\ov.
KepS-ffCTj},
In Mt. 16 26 we have kav t6v idiom in the N. T. while in Lu. 9 25, we find Kepb-qaas t6v Koafiov
:
it is
the condition of the third class plainly enough.

:
B. G. U. 596 (a.d. 84). In 1 Cor. 11 29, be the first class condition with ei that is the equivalent, but one cannot always be certain on this point. Cf.
See
Toiriaas ear], kt\., in
liij
SiaKpiviop, it
may
Ro. 2
fxevov;
27, reXovaa; Gal. 6
9, ^77 kKKvofxevoL;
Tim. 4
4, Xa/iâvo-
7:12, p.eTaTLQep.'evr]s. Moulton^ denies that the participle stands in the N. T. for a condition of the
afxeX^qaavTes;
Heb. 2:3,
second class (unreal condition).

TOKco av avTo ewpaâ,
In Lu. 19
is
23,
Kayw kXdwv avv
the condition
is
part of the apodosis, while implied in the preceding question. Moulton'
the participle
rightly notes that one can
no longer decide by the presence

is
of
nr/
/xr)
with the participle that

has come in the
kolvt]
it
conditional or concessive, since
to be the usual negative of participles.
There is no instance of av with the participle in the N. T., though Moulton {ProL, p. 167) quotes one in a kolvtj inscr., I. M. A. iii, 174, dcKaLOTepov av awdevra (in a despatch of Augustus). For cos ap see Particles with Participles.
Concession.
This
is
also
a frequent construction.
calls for
Cf.
Mt.
:
14
7
:
9,
Xvirrjdels.
The context
:
11, TOPr]poi opres.

:
the adversative idea in See further Mt. 26 60; 14: 5; Mk. 4 31;
: :
Jo. 12
1
37; 21
:
11; Jas. 3
4; Ac. 13
5.
28; Ro.
21, 32; 9
22;
Cor. 9
19; Jas.
3:4; Jude
To avoid ambiguity
the Greek
often used particles to
make
the concessive idea plain, and this
idiom survives in the N. T. Cf. Kai ye virapxovTa (Ac. 17:27), KaL TOL yeurjdevTcov (Heb. 4:3), Kaiwep more frequently as in Ph. 3 4; Heb. 5 8; 7 5; 12 17; 2 Pet. 1 12. In Heb. 11 12 we also have Kal ravra veveKpwp.kvov. 'Kalroiye occurs only with the finite verb as in Jo. 4 2.'* So /catrot in Ac. 14 17. It is worth while to note the survival of oh with nal ye in Ac. 17:27.^ Moulton {Prol, p. 231) admits Wellhauscn's {Einl, p. 22) claim
:
: :
that XaXeT
^Xa(T(i)r}ix(A.
(Mk. 2:7)
is
an Aramaism
for
two Aramaic
p. 24S.

Prol., p. 230.
lb., p. 229.
Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., Moulton, ProL, p. 230.
1130
NEW TESTAMENT
participles,
as in Lu. 22
"the second of which should appear as a participle" But W. H. punctuate 65, ^\a(x4>r]ixovvTes eXeyov.
:
XaXtt; ^\aa4>r]{jLeL.
(7)
The Absolute Participle in Subordinate Clauses.
It
is
not
strange that the participle should have been used in clauses that stand apart from the rest of the sentence. There it has its adjectival
agreement.
It
is
but a step further than the ordinary
cir-
cumstantial participle wliich makes an additional statement.

absolute participle.
All
the varieties of the ciicumstantial participle can appear in the
Nominative Absolute. It is possible thus to explain some examples of anacolutha in ancient Greek ^ and the N. T., though Trora^tot e/c rrjs KoiXlas avTOv Blass^ demurs. Cf. 6 TLcrTevoiv els efxe
pevaovffLV (Jo.
7 38)
:
eTLyvovres, de
(j)Ct}vr]
eykvero
/xta k
iravTwv (Ac.
and So Mk. 7: 19; Rev. 2 26. At any rate it is the nominativus pendens, and there is not any special In the modern Greek (Thumb, Handb., p. 169) the difference. nominative absolute with the participle occurs, though rare, and usually a conjunctional clause has supplanted the genitive ab19: 34); 6
vLKihv hdoaio avrci
:
(Rev. 3
21).
Cf. also tccu dekovroov

:
oi
KareadovTes (Mk.. 12
40).
solute.
Accusative
Absolute.
This construction was used with im8eov, eôv, irapbv, etc.
personal verbs or phrases like
It
was prob-
ably an appositional addition to the sentence.^ It has nearly, if not quite, disappeared from the N. T. The adverb tvxov (1 Cor.
16 6) is really an instance of it, but not so k^bv in Ac. 2 29, where koTlv is probably to be supplied. Cf. kôv rjp (Mt. 12 4) and 8eov eariv (Ac. 19 36). Cf. also oh crvfi(f)pop (xh in 2 Cor.
: : : :
12
1.
But a
though
possible accusative absolute

it is
is
yvdoarrjp
ovra (Ac.
very rare to see the accusative absolute with a substantive of its own.* In such instances it was usual to have also djs or ibcrwep.^ The accusative is an old idiom, appearing in the oldest Greek title known to us.^ But it came to be rather
26
:
3),
common
1
in Thucydides.''
It
was
rare in the Attic orators.
Luke
avoids the accusative absolute in Ac. 23:30, by an awkward^

Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 259. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 251. He calls it "antiquated." common.
2
3
It
was never very

* Thompson, Synt., p. 261. Goodwin, M. and T., p. 339. Deiss., Exp. Times, 1906, Dec, p. 105. Lell, Der Absolut-Akkusativ im Griech. bis zu Arist., 1892, p. 17. Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 252.
*
6 ' 8
"PHMATOi;)
1131
use of the genitive absolute, nrjwOeiarjs 8e ixol iinôvkri^ ts Tov av8pa eaeadai. The papyri use eôpros rather than eôv.^ We do not have the ace, absolute in Ph. 1 7, since vfj.S.s ofras is a resumption
:
(apposition) of umSs before.

Genitive Absolute.
is
It
is
by no means
certain that the
case
always genitive. Indeed, it is pretty clear that some of these examples are ablative. Probably some are real genitives of
time.2
The
constructions.
Sanskrit uses chiefly the locative in these absolute It is possible that the Latin ablative absolute
may
sometimes be locative or instrumental.^
The
use of the
true genitive in the Greek idiom is probably to be attributed to expressions of time in the genitive case with which participles
were used.
that
Then
the temporal circumstantial participle
was
tors,
right at hand.
It is in Attic prose, particularly the ora-
we
see the highest
development
of the idiom."*
The
accusative absolute was just as idiomatic as this genitive-al)lative construction, but it did not get the same hold on the language.^
See Cases for further remarks.

of the genitive absolute.
The kolvt] shows a rapid extension "In the papyri it may often be seen
forming a string of statements, without a finite verb for several Unes."^ In the N. T. different writers vary greatly, John's Gospel, for instance, having it only one-fourth as often as the Acts.^ The most frequent use of the idiom is when the substantive (or pronoun) and the participle stand apart with no syntactical connection with any part of the sentence,
n'tv-qs d\'ol/e(j)s
r)
Cf.
Mk. 4
17,
eUa
yevo-
5ta)7/xoO
rjv
:
ha
tov Xoyov evOvs (XKapSaKiôvTaf,

:
Ac. 12: 18,

:
yei'oiievqs 6e rifxepas
:
rapaxos ovK oKlyo%; 18

:
20; 7: 5; Eph, 2
20;
These are perfectly Mk, 8 1; 2 Pet. 3 11; Heb. 9 the genitive absosometimes But regular and normal examples. in the sentence. So genitive already a lute occurs where there is
6-8, 15, 19.
Mt. 6
3, (TOV be ttolovvtos
:
17
apiaTepa
cfov;
10; Ac. 17
16.
In
Mk.
14 3
avTov.
we Even
in
find a double gen. absolute ovtos avrov in the classical
KaraKHixevov
when
the participle could have agreed with
pronoun
1
Greek the genitive absolute is found some sul^stantive or the sentence.^ It was done apparently to make the
P. Oxy. 275 (a.d. 66).
ry24.
'
Ow
i^bvTo^,
2
*
Hrus-, (Jrioch. Gr., p.

Cf. Spiekor,
Monro,
Tloin. Or., p. 167
f.
The Genitive Abs.

p.
2.'-)l.
in the Attic Orators,
Am.
Jt)ur. of Pliilol.,
VI, pp. 310-343.

t-
Bluss,
Gr.of N. T. Gk.,
"
Moulton,
I'rol., p.
74.
'
Gildcrsl., Styl. Effect of the
Gk.
Part.,
Am.
Jour, of Philol., ISSS, p. 153.
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 338.
1132

more prominent. The papyri show illustrations same thing/ as in B, U. 1040 (ii/A.D.) xa^pw 6tl ixol raOra
Tepi nr]8ev6s. It is fairly
participial clause
of the
eTTol-qaas, hfxov neTa/JLeXoixevov
common
in the
have it even when the part, refers to the subject of the verb, as in Mt. 1 18, fxvrjcrTevdeiarjs rrjs fxrjrpds avTOv Mapias In Ro. 9 1 the construction is regular, though fxoL evpWr] exovaa. r]Ko\ovdr]and fjLov occur. In Mt. 8 1 we find KaraâvTos avrov Cf. 5:1; 9 18; 17: 22; 2 Cor. 4 18, etc. Likewise aav ahrQ. the genitive and the accusative come together as in Jo. 8 30, Cf. also Mt. 18:25; Ac. eiriaTeuaav eis avrbv. avTOv XaXoOvroj 28 17. Quite unusual is Ac. 22 17 where we have /xot vToarpeThe N. T. occasionally \J/avTL, irpoaevxoiJievov /jlov and jeveaOai fxe.
N. T.
We
uses the participle alone in the genitive absolute according to the
occasional classic usage.^

in the
In the papyri
it is
more frequent than

hôvros, P.
N. T."
In particular note the

eiTrovTos;
common
Oxy. 275
(a.d. 66).
eKdbvTOiv;
Cf. also 8r]\ccdevTos, B. U. 970 (ii/A.D.).
17:26,
Ac. 21:31,
present.
eaojae,
^rjTovvTo^v.
See Mt. 17: 14, In Lu. 12 36,

:
eXdoPTos Kal Kpomavros eWkoos avol^ccaiv avrQ,
we have
yue
the genitive
participle although abrQ
is
Cf. B. G. U. 423 (ii/A.D.)
on
is
nov KLpSeuaavTos
eis
daXaaaav
where
the object of
ecrcocre
not expressed.
(/)
The Independent
Participle
in a Sentence.
There
is
no
doubt that the use

It
of the absolute participle (nominative, ac-
is a sort of ''implied predication."^ remains to be considered whether the participle ever forms an independent sentence. We have seen that the inf. is occasionally
cusative, genitive-ablative)
so used.
It is but a step from the independent clause to the independent sentence. Did the participle take it? The nominative absolute as a sort of anacoluthon appears in the ancient Greek.
Cf. Plato, Apol. 21 C, Kal SLaXeyoiJLepos avrOi, eSoê

(Tocf)6s.
p.OL
6 avrjp elvai
As the
genitive-absolute, like other circumstantial par-
retreated before the conjunctional clauses, there was an increasing tendency to blur or negle'ct the grammatical case agreements in the use of the participles. The N. T., like the kolvyj in general, shows more examples of the anacoluthic nominative participle than the older Greek. ^ The mental strain of so many
ticiples,
participles
1
in
rapid conversation or writing
made anacolutha
Cf. Moulton, Prol., pp. 74, 236; CI. Rev.,
XV,
p. 437.
* '
Goodwin, M. and Moulton, Prol., p.
T., p. 338.
74.
This idiom
^
is
common
in
Xen.
Roche,
Beitr., p.
128.
*
Monro, Hom.
Gr., p. 167.
Thompson, Synt.

easy.^
'PIIMATOS)
1133
"Hence even
writers of systematic training could not but
occasionally blunder in the use of the circumstantial participle."
Jannaris had thus concluded that the late Greek showed an independent use of the participle as anacoluthon.^ Blass' would
go no further than this. Vitcau^ found abundant illustration of the independent use of the anacoluthic participle in the LXX. Viteau explains it as a Hebraism. But Moulton^ claims that the subject is removed from the realm of controversy by the proof from the papyri. Thumb ^ finds the idiom in classical Greek and
in the It is kolvt] (in the LXX, N. T., papyri, inscriptions, etc.). easy to be extreme on this point of dispute. In the chapter on Mode (the Imperative) adequate cUscussion appears concerning the participle as imperative. That discussion need not be re-
peated.
in itself
may be insisted, however, again that the participle never imperative nor indicative, though there seem to be examples in the N. T., as in the papyri, where, because of ellipsis or anacoluthon, the participle carries on the work of In examples like 2 Cor. either the indicative or the imperative. 1 3, evXoyrjTos 6 deos, either kcrTLP or earco may be supplied with
It
is
:
the verbal adjective.
It
must not be forgotten that
this is the
work of the interpreter to a large extent rather than of the grammarian. The manuscripts often vary in such examples
and the editors differ in the punctuation. But the grammarian must admit the facts of usage. The papyri and the N. T. show that sometimes the participle was loosely used to carry on the verbal function in independent sentences.'' Cf. airocrTvYoDj/tcs to TTOvrjpov, KoWcoiievoL TU) ayadca
(Ro. 12 9), for mstance, without connection with sentence where we have a complete is ij ayinr-q awiroKpiTOs sentence preceding anything else. The followed by a series of is and it itself) (an independent sentence
:
independent participles (verses 10-13).

abruptly
evXayelre Kal
fxij
In verse 14
Karapaade (imperatives)
we have and then the
absolute infinitive
xaipetz'
(imperatival also).
:
The
point seems to
be incontrovertible.
Cf. also Col. 3
16.
It is only necessary to
add a word about the independent participle in the midst of indicatives, since this use is far more frequent than the imperative idiom just noted. In general it may be said that no participle
pp. 200 ff. ProL, pp. ISOfT., 222 IT. HcUon., p. 131. Gr. of Gk. N. T., p. 283. 7 Moulton, Prol., p. 180, cites Mcistcrh., pp. 244-216, for the use of the imp. part, in decrees. It is the nominalivus pendens apphed to the part.
1
Jann., Hist, Gk. Gr., p 505.

lb., pp. 500, 505.
Le Vorho,
'
1134
should be explained in this way that can properly be connected with a finite verb. In Ro. 12 6, exovres 8e, it is clear that we cannot carry on the participle as suborcUnate to exofxev or kafxev in the
:
W. H. boldly start a new sentence. In either whether we have comma or period before, we must take exovres as imperatival or indicative, on the one hand, or, on the other hand, supply eapih or oifiev as Trotetre is supplied in Ro. 13 11 with Kai eldores rbv Kaipov} But other examples leave no such alternative. We may first summarize Moulton's satisfactory exposition of the matter. There is a striking similarity between
preceding verses.
case,
:
the third person plural indicative and the participle in the Indo-
Germanic tongues
frequent
(*bheroriti, ferunt,
(t)epov(TL,
hairand, etc.).
is
The
to be
ellipsis of est in
the Latin perfect and passive
noted
also.
is
The
probability that the Latin second plural middle
indicative
really a participle
(cf.
which has been incorporated into

eTrbixevoi)
the verb inflection
sequimini and
is
also suggestive.
This fact
strongly.
may
point to the prehistoric time
when the Latin used
The papyri re-enforce the argument quote a bit from Moulton^: "Tb. P. 14 (ii/B.c), Tcot ovv criixaLVOu'evoii 'Hpart TraprjyyeXKOTes evcoinov, '1 gave notice in person' (no verb follows). Tb. P. 42 (ib.), r]8LKriij.evos (no verb folthe participle as indicative.
We
lows).
A. P. 78
(ii/A.D.),
îav waaxoiv eKaaroTe, etc. (no verb)."
This
may
is
serve as a sample of
many more
like
them.
See
Moulton
1 Pet. 2:
{ProL, p. 223) adds that use of the part, as ind. or imper. in the
papyri
"not at
all
mark
of inferior education."
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 This is probable, though exovres is to be taken with Tnarehoixev. awkward. So in 2 Pet. 2 1 the participles can be joined with irapeLaaôvaiv. But in Ro. 5 11 it is, Moulton argues, somewhat forced to take oh /xovov 8e, dXXd /cat Kavxo^pievoL otherwise than as independent. If we once admit the fact of this idiom, as we have done, this is certainly the most natural way to take it here.
: :
20. Winer connects and he is supported by the punctuation of verse 19 as a parenthesis by W. H. But even so in verse 19 we have ov ixbvov 8e dXXd Kal xî-porovrjOeis (cf. Ro. 5 :11) stranded with no verb. Moulton also passes by Heb. 6 8 and 2 Pet. 3:5. In Heb. 7 1 Moulton follows W. H. in reading 6 (not
is silent
Moulton
with
as to areWbuevoL in 2 Cor. 8
in verse 18
it
avveTrkp.\paiiev
lb.,
Moulton, Prol., pp. 180, 183 pp. 223 f.
f.
=>
W.-Th.,
Prol., p.
p.
351 224 f.
f.
'PHMATOi;)
1135
6s) avvavT-qaas on the authority of C*LP against NABC^DEK 17. So he sees no necessity for taking epfxrjvevofxevos as an indicative. In Heb. 8 10; 10 16, Moulton takes 8i.8ovs as parallel with cttiTpdi/'w, whereas Winer would resolve ewcyparl/o} into a participle. Here Moulton is clearly right. In Ac. 24 5, evpovres yap, we have anacoluthon as both Winer and Moulton agree. Moulton adds:
:
:
"Luke cruelly reports the orator verbatim." Moulton omits to comment on Winer's explanation of the parenthetical anacoluthon in 2 Pet. 1:17, Xa^dsv yap. It is a violent anacoluthon and Winer does not mend it. Note 2 Cor. 5 6, Oappovvres, where after a parenthesis we have dappovnev de (resumptive). But Moulton
:
d\L^6p.evot. as an example of the "indicative" So does he explain Ro. 12 6 exovres, and ex^^" in Rev. 10 2. In Ac. 26 20 the MSS. vary between dTraTTeXXcoj' and awrjyyeXov. In Heb. 10 1 excov will also be independent if
takes 2 Cor. 7:5

participle.
:
be read. In Ph. 1 30 exoj'res has vjxtv above and halts in the case agreement. On the whole, therefore, we may conbbvavTai
:
clude that, while every instance is to be examined on its merits, a number of real examples of the idiom may be admitted in the N. T. Viteau^ has entirely too large a list of such instances.
Many
1
:
of
30 above.
laxity in
them admit a much simpler explanation as in Ph. In Revelation, it is true, there is more than usual the agreement of the participle, especially when it is in
: : :
There is also a change from nominative to accusative and eUov as in Rev. 4 1-5; 7:9; 14 1-3; 14 14, etc. But there are real examples in Rev., as Kal exoiv (1:16), \kywv (11 1). With all this development along a special line we must not forget that the participle is both adjective and verb. Blass^ has a careful discussion of "the free use of the participle." In Col. 1 26 he notes that the participle airoKeKpufx/jLhou is conapposition.
between
Ibov
tinued by the indicative

(g)
eâi/gpaj^?;.
Cf. Jo. 5: 44.
Co-ordination
between
Participles.
Blass^ uses the term
"conjunctive" participle instead of a special use of the "circumstantial" participle. It is not a particularly happy phrase. But it does accent the notion that this participle, though an
addition to the principal verb,
matical agreement.
Blass'*
is still joined to it in gramshows clearly how identity of action
may
Kal
be expressed by two (Mt. 15:23

IT.
finite verbs, as well
as
by the pleonaseKpaêv
Kal
lTr(i>
tic participle of identical action.

elirav
1
Cf. Jo.
25
Kal rjpoiTrjo-av avrou
rjpcoTovv
Xeyovres),
^
12:44
Le Verbe, pp. 201 Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
Cr. of N. T. Gk., p. 247.

lb., p. 250.
p.
284
f.
1136
(Mt. 8 22
:

29 eKpaâv
"KeyovTes),
NEW TESTAMENT
(Ac. 13
:
13
21
fxapTvpr]creu Kal elwe
elirev
fxaprvprjaas),
18
25
r]pvrjaaTO Kal elirev
(Mt. 26
'
70
rippr]-
aaro Xkyoav), where

verb.
John
prefers the particularity of the finite

:
But
= deepened' 'he dug

relation of
together.
he dug and 8:59. There remains the participles to each other when a series of them comes There is no rule on this subject beyond what applies
see also Lu. 6
48, laKoêv koL e^ddwev,
deep.'
Cf,
Jo.
to other words.
Kal as in
Two
or
more
:
participles
may
rijv
be connected by
Ac. 3
Tovs
8, TrepnraTO^v Kal aXKofxevos Kal aivdv tov debv.
But we
aeaa-
have asyndeton^ in Ac. 18

CFTTipLôiv
pLadriTCLS.
23, bi.epxbp.evos
:
TaXaTLKijv x'^P^-v,
TV eiTieff jxevov
Cf. Lu. 6
38, p'tTpov KoXov
Xevjjiepou
vTveptKxvvvbpevov
ddocrovaLv.
Sometimes
Kal
occurs
only
once as in
Mk.
15, Kadijpevov Ipanap-evop Kal cco^pofoCvra.
There
:
may
be a subtle reason for such a procedure as in Ac. 18

els
22,
KareXdcbv
KaLaaplav, avaj3as Kal aairaaapevos,
where the
first
parti:
ciple stands apart in sense
32.
In a
list
of participles one
:
from the other two. Cf. also Mk. 5 may be subordinate to the other
rifp
as in
Mk.
30, einyvous ev eavrCi
e^ avrov bbvapiv eêXdovaav
This accumulation of participles is only occasional in the Synoptic Gospels (cf. Mt. 14:19; 27:48; and, in particular, Mk. 5 25-27), but very common in Acts and the Pauline Epistles. Blass^ concedes to Luke in Acts "a certain amount of
ein(TTpa(l}els.
:
stylistic
refinement" in his use of a series of participles, while
it is rather ''a mere stringing together of words," an overstatement as to Paul. Luke was not an artificial rhetorician nor was Paul a mere bungler. When Paul's heart was all ablaze with passion, as in 2 Corinthians, lie did pile up participles like
with Paul
boulders on the mountain-side, a sort of volcanic eruption.

2 Cor. 3:8-10;
Cf.
always a path through these participles. Paul would not let himself be caught in a net of mere grammatical niceties. If necessary, he broke
6:9f.; 9:llff.
is
But there
the rule and went on (2 Cor. 8: 20).
saying that
all
this
is
But Moulton^ is right in "more a matter of style than of gram-
mar."
(h)
It is rhetoric.
Oil
It is worth noting that in normal negative of the participle, fxrj occurring only once, Od. 4. 684, and in an optative sentence of wish. It cannot be claimed that in Homer has won its place with the participle. In modern Greek fxri alone occurs with the pres-
and
/jlt]
with the Participle.
Homer ^
ov is the
ijlt]
ent participle (Thumb, Handb., p. 200).

1 2
It is generally said that
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 250.

lb., p. 251.
Prol., p. 231.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p.
262
f.
VERBAL NOUNS ('ONOMATA TOT "PUMATOS)

in classical Attic ou
is
1137
always the negative of the participle unless

is
condition or concession
if
implied
when
the negative
is ni].
But
one looks at
all
the facts up to 400 b.c. he will go slow before
he asserts that mt is proof that the participle shows a conditional Jannaris- claims the rule only for Attic, or concessive force. ^
"though even here
ou is
not rarely replaced by
/xi?,"
that
is
to
even in Attic. The use of "replaced" is wholly gratuitous when it is admitted that the rule does not apply outside of Attic. It is so hard to be historical always even If one takes the long view, from in an historical grammar. to the modern Greek with nothing Homer with its one use of which gradually he sees a steady progress in the use of but marks one the kolvt] anAttic stage, The ousted ov altogether.
say, the rule does not apply
fj.rj
iJL-n,
/.'t?
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
was not even, but on the whole the participle. In the N. T., aside from pushed ou gradually JU17 has gone quite beyond development the generally, kolvt] in the as the Attic. In the Attic the use of ou was the more general, while in the kolvt] the use of /xi? is normal. In the N. T. there is no need to explain ^117 with the participle. That is what you expect. Cf.
lines crossed and the development
Lu. 12 33
:
nrj
raKaLOUfxepa,
:
Jo.
23
//17
Tifiaiv,
Ac. 17 6
:
fJLri
eupovres,
In the N. T. it is ov that But it may be said at once that the calls for explanation, not ixr]. N. T. is in thorough accord with the kolvt] on this point. Even in a writer of the literary kolut] like Plutarch^ one notes the inThe papyri go further than Plutarch, but still have roads of
Heb. 11
13
/jL-q
KOfiLaajjievoi.
fx-i].
examples of
pcoKOTCOV
ov,
like
ou
KeKOfiLajj-evai.
P. Par. (b.c. 163), t6v ovk
\euKaLS eadrjaiv kv dearpa: KaQiaavra 0. P.
471
(ii/A.D.), oubkirc)} ttcttXtj(ii/A.D.).'
0. P. 491
(ii/A.D.), ou Svvanepos
A. P. 78
Moulis
ton''
thinks that in
many
it
of these papyri examples there
"the
lingering consciousness that the proper negative of a downright

fact
is ou."
In general
may
be said of the
kolvt}
that the presis
ence of ou with the participle means that the negative

1
clear-cut
Howes, The Use

Hist.
of
/xr,
with the Part., Ilarv. Stu.

3
in Class. Philol., 1901,
pp. 277-285.
2
Gk. Gr.,
p. 430.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 255.
See further exx. in Moulton, Prol., p. 231. Prol, p. 232.
1138

Cf.
(Jo.
and
decisive.
/SXcTrcov,
Mt. 22
:
11 ovk h8e8vfxepov epdvfia yafxou, (Lu. 6

o}p
tvoljit^v,
42) ov
10: 12) 6 ijnadwros Kal ovk
OVK ovTOS avT(2 TeKvov, (17
27) Kai ye ov fxaKpav
virapxovTa,
4
2
: :
(Ac. 7: 5)
(26
22) ovbev eKTOS

rpkiroiv, (9
:
Xkyciiv,
cos
(28
17) ovSep TroLrjaas, (1 Cor.
14) ovk kp-
26)
ovk akpa depwp, (2 Cor.

Kal
8) dXX' ov arepoxcopov-
nepoi,
(Ph.
4)
ovk kp aapKl
TeTocOoTes,
(Col.
:
19)
/cat
ov
KparGiV,
poi, (1
(Heb. 11:1) irpajnaToop ov

:
(SXiTrofihcov , (11
35) ov TrpoadeâfjLe-
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 contrast seems intentional. Thus in Mt. 22 11 we have ovk hbebv:
:
liepop tpbvjia yaiJLov,
while in verse 12
plain fact)
we read
the
uri
exo^p epSv/jia yanov.
The
first
instance lays emphasis on the actual situation in the
description (the
while
it.
second instance
Pet.
1
:
is
the
hypothetical argument about

idoPTes ayaTTOLTe, eis op
In
we read
op ovk
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 contrast with TiarevopTes.
Cf.
Hort in
loco
of particles here
ficial
is
not capricious.
it is
who holds that the change "Though Blass thinks it arti-
hard to believe that any but a slovenly in so rapid a change without a reason."^ It may be admitted further that "in Luke, Paul and Hebrews we have also to reckon with the literary consciousness of an educated man, which left some of the old idioms even
to distinguish,
writer
would have brought
had generally swept them away."^ See also to. p.7] KaOrjand Text. Rec. to. ov aprjKopra (Eph. 5:4). Cf. 9. Blass ^ notes that the Hebrew !s)3 is regufXT) and ov in Ac. 9 larly translated in the LXX by ov without any regard to the Greek refinement of meaning between ov and with the participle. Hence in the N. T. quotations from the LXX this Moulton* observes also that, while peculiarity is to be noted. this is true, the passages thus quoted happen to be instances where a single word is negatived by ov. Cf. Ro. 9 25 ttjp ovk
where
nrj
KOPTa (Ro. 1:28)
i^-f]
rjyaTrrjfj.eprjP,
(Gal. 4
27)
17
ovk riKTOvaa,
is,
17
ovk oodipovaa.
case like
It is a
Ac. 19
11,
ov ras Tvxovaas,
of course, not pertinent.

is
"common
vernacular phrase,"^ besides the fact that ov

1 2
not the
Moulton,
lb.
Prol., p. 232.
" 5
Prol., p. 232.
lb., p. 231.
Gr. of N- T. Gk., p. 255.

negative of the participle' any more than
21.
it is
1139
:
in Ac. 19
:
11;
28
Moultonit is
also rules out ovk eôv (2 Cor. 12
4)
on the ground
is
that
the equivalent of the indicative.
The copula
(a.d.
66).
not ex-
pressed.
But note
ovk eôvros, P.
Oxy. 275
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;
Paul leads with a dozen or so (Ro. 9 25; Gal. 4 27 twice; 1 Cor. 4 14; 9 26; 2 Cor. 4 8, Hebrews has two (11 9; Ph. 3 :4; Col. 2 19; 1 Th. 2:4).
Ac. 7 5; 17 27; 26
: : : :
22; 28
17).
1,
35)
and Peter three
(1
Pet.
1:8; 2
:
10; 2 Pet.
16,
ov
dXXd).
next verse.
Matthew has only one (22 11), and note /î) exoov in the The MSS. vary also between the negatives as in Mt. 22 11, where C^D have nrj which Blass^ adopts with At any rate Mathis whimsical notions of textual criticism. almost exclusively with thew, Luke (Gospel) and John use
:
fxri
the participle, while Mark, James, the Johannine Epistles and
Revelation do not have ov at
all
with the participle.

is
20, ovx
Kov(Ta,
the old participle

:
In Ro. merely an adjective as in

ancient Greek would
Heb. 9:11.
In Ro. 9
25, t6v ov Xaov, the negative occurs with a
substantive (quotation from

usually have added ovra.
(i)
LXX).
The
had quite a
Other Particles with the Participle. The ancient Greek ^ list of adverbs (particles) that were used with
the circumstantial participle on occasion to
make
clearer the
precise relation of the participle to the principal verb or substantive.
Some
of these (like are, olop, ola)
part, in the
it
N. T.
But some remain

outline.
in use.
no longer occur with the These particles,
should be noted, do not change the real force of the parti-
ciple.
They merely sharpen the

is
The
:
simplest form of this
usage
26).
seen in the adverbs of time like to irporepov (Jo. 9:8);

1
:
Tork (Gal.
23.
Cf.
Eph. 2
:
13; Lu. 22
32); TrvK^drepou (Ac. 24
In
Mk.
is
20; Jo. 5
6 note other expressions of time.

:
More
Cf.
idiomatic
also
i]87}
the use of eWvs as in eiaeKdovaa eWvs (Mk. 6

yevofjieprjs
25).
Th. 2:5) and apTL eXdouTos TLfxadeov (1 Th. 3:6). Blass^ denies that ana with the participle in the N. T. suggests simultaneousncss or immediate
6\plas
(Mk. 15:42), en dv
(2
sequence.
He
sees in aixa Kal eXiriôjv (Ac. 24
26) only
I
'
withal
in the expectation,' not 'at the

1 '
same time
*
hoping.'
question
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p.
255
f.
Prol., p. 231.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255. Cf. Gildcrslceve, Encroachmenta of ^n on o6 in later Gk., Am. Jour, of Philol., I, p. 45 f. < Cf. G(M)(lwin, M. and T., pp. 340 IT. Gr. of N. T. Cik., p. 252.
<*
1140
NEW TESTAMENT
Cf. also
the correctness of Blass' interpretation on this point.

a/xa
d-vevres
4:3), where it requires some overrefinement to refuse the classic idiom Under the concessive participle we saw examples of to Luke. Kai ye (Ac. 17:27), /cairot (Heb. 4:3), KalTep (Heb. 5:8, etc.). There is also the use of o/jlcos in the principal sentence to call at(27:40);
irpoaevxoiJievoL
'dfia
Kal
irepl
rjnuv
(Col.
tention to the concessive force of the participle (1 Cor. 14
7).
:
So
ovTcos
points back to a participle of time or

noting, besides,
is Kal
manner
(Ac. 20
11).
Worth
:
tovto as in Ro. 13: 11,
though
may be implied. So also Kal ravra veveKpconevov There remain cbs, uael, ihairep. The use of cbo-et (Ro. 6 13) and of coairep (Ac. 2:2) is limited to condition or comparison. It is only with d)s that there is any freedom or abundance. Blass notes the absence of the accusative absolute with cos in the N. T. and its absence from the future participle save in Heb. 13 17, where it is not strictly design. There
here a finite verb
(Heb. 11
:
12),
is
nothing specially significant in the phrase ovx w, 'not as if,' in Ac. 28 19; 2 Jo. 5. The N. T., like the classical Greek, uses cos
:
without the participle in al^breviated expressions

(Col. 3
etc.,
:
like
cos tc3 Kvplco

:
23);
cbs
ev
^pkpa (Ro. 13
is
13);
cbs 8l'
where the
participle
easily supplied
Th. 2 2), from the context.^

ijpup (2
In some instances one must note whether the particle does not belong with the principal verb. But, common as cbs is with the participle, it does not change the nature of the participle with
which
ral,
be causal, tempomay be used to express the notion of the speaker or writer as well as that of one who is reported. In truth, cbs implies nothing in itself on that point. The context alone must determine it.* The various uses There may be nothing but comof COS itself should be recalled.
it
occurs.^
The
participle with,
cbs
may
conditional, manner, etc.
Then
again
cbs
parison,
(1
as in
:
cbs
eôvalav
excov
:
(Mk.
22)
cbs
:
ovk
1
aepa depcou
Cor. 9
26).
:
So also Mk. 6
34; 2 Cor. 6
f.;
Pet. 2
13,
In Lu. 22 26 f. observe cbs 6 Smkovcov. The causal idea is prominent in cbs ifKe-qpkvos (1 Cor. 7:25). Cf. Heb. 12 27 and D in Ac. 20 13, cbs p-eWo^v. The concessive or conditional notion 2 Cor. 5 20, cbs tov deov irapaKais dominant in 1 Cor. 7 29 f \ovvTos dt' ripcbv. So also in Ac. 3 12; 28 19; 2 Jo. 5. In Lu. 16 1, cbs dLaaKopTriôov, the charge is given by Jesus as that of the
16.
: :
1 ^
Fiihrer,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253. De Particulae cbs

1889, p. 7.
ib.
cum
Participiis et Praepositionibus
punctae
Usu Thucydideo,
*
Goodwin, M. and
T., p. 343.
VERBAL NOUNS ("ONOMATA TOT "PHMATOS)

slanderer
alleged).^
{Sie^XriOr])
1141
Pilate
:
in Lu. 23
14.
and the context implies that it is untrue (only makes a similar use of ws airo(TTpt4>ovTa t6v \a6v He declines by the use of cos to accept the corFor a
:
rectness of the charge of the Sanhedrin against Jesus.

similar use see ws (xeWovTas (Ac. 23
</)do-et cos-
15);
:
cos
fxeWcov (23
.
20); Trpo:
But in 2 Cor. 5 fxeXKovTcop (genitive absolute 27 30) 20 (see above) Paul endorses the notion that he is an ambassador God of God and cos is not to be interpreted as mere pretence. There is no instance of av with is speaking through Paul. Winer the participle in the N. T. as appears in classic Greek. notes two instances of cos ap with the participle in the LXX To these Moulton^ adds another (2 Mace. 1:11; 3 Mace. 4:1). (2 Mace. 12 4) and a genitive absolute example in the papyri,
:
Par. P. 26 (ii/B.c),
TTjs \ifj.r]s dLaKuofxepot.
cos
dv
evraKTridrjaoiievoov.
Cf. also
lb., cos olp
vto
(ii/B.c),
cos
ap
The
inscrs.
show
"*
it also,
O. G.
I. S.
90, 23
(xvue(TTr]Kvias.
:
Blass
finds a genitive absolute

fore-
with
Barnabas 6 11. All this is interesting as shadowing the modern Greek use of cav as a conjunction.^
cos
ap in
Cf. Blass, Gr. of
2
3
W.-M.,
p. 378.
Prol., p. 167.
N. T. Gk., p. 253. " Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253. Cf. Moulton, Prol., p. 167; Hatz.,
<*
Einl., p. 217.
CHAPTER XXI
PARTICLES
I.
(AI
IIAPA0HKAI)
Scope. The word particle is a Latin diminutive, particula French particule) from pars. It is a small part of something. Longinus terjns this part of speech irapaOrjKr] with the notion that
(cf.
it
was a word placed beside another.

little
No
portion of syntax
is
treated with so
satisfaction in the
grammars.
The gram-
marians are not agreed as to what parts of speech should be called "particles." Riemann and Goelzer^ treat under this term (Les Particules) negative particles, particles of comparison and
prepositions.
Jannaris^ includes prepositions, conjunctions and
negative
particles.
Kiihner-Gerth^ here discuss conjunctions,

Blass"*
prepositions
and the modal adverbs, though they use the phrase

almost confines the
dis-
"die sogenannten Partikeln."
cussion of particles to conjunctions.
He makes
the two terms
equivalent: "Particles (Conjunctions)."
Winer^ uses the word
broadly to cover all adverbs, prepositions and conjunctions. Monro ^ limits the designation to certain conjunctions and adverbs "that are mainly used to show the relation between other
words and between clauses." But he does not treat all conj mictions (paratactic and hypotactic) nor all modal adverbs. He
passes
by
prepositions.
Brugmann^
sees clearly that, as there
is
no no
between adverbs and prepositions, so there is fast line ("keine feste Grenze") between "particles" and other adverbs. All languages have a large group of words that pass over into the category of particles, but Brugmann cuts the Gordian knot by declaring that it is not a function of scientific grammar to delimit these words. That is a matter of subjective
real distinction
standpoint.
He
takes
little
interest in the various subdivisions

its
of the particles,
1
but he extends the term to

" '
widest sense to
Synt., pp. 802-820.

Hist.
II,
2
=>
Gk. Gr., pp. 365-433.
pp. 113-347. Gr. of N. T. Gk., pp. 250-275.
W.-Th., pp. 356-512. Horn. Gr., pp. 240-269. Griech. Gr., pp. 525-550.
1142
PARTICLES
cover
all
(aI
nAPAGHKAl)
1143
modal adverbs, prepositions and conjunctions. Brugmany of these particles go back to the IndoGermanic time and hence their etymology is unknown. He treats the particles from the standp>oint of their origin so far as known. Hartungi takes a much narrower view of particles. He discusses the paratactic conj mictions and the intensive particles. He^ conceives that the greater portion of the particles have no meaning in themselves, but are merely modifications on other words This is not strictly correct. We are or on whole sentences.
mann
notes that
not always able to discover the original import of these words, but it is probable that they originally had a definite meaning.
It
is
true that the particles are
all
in various
ways.
In a broad
way
subordinated to other words it may be stated that there

nouns, pronouns, particles)
of
are
in
four classes of words
(verbs,
the sentence.
all
From
is
this point
view the word particle

conjunctions and interholds, to
covers
the
adverbs,
it
prepositions,
jections.
But
impossible, as
Brugmann
perfectly scientific treatment of the particles without
make a much over-
lapping.
mar.
The interjections in one sense do not belong to gramThe negative and the interrogative particles cannot be
So but a good deal more. Intensive It is not worth while to particles again are adverbs, but more. recount the story of the adverbs and the prepositions at this stage. They are particles, but they have received sufficient discussion in special chapters. In the same way the construction of hypotactic conjunctions came in for somewhat careful treatment in connection with subordinate sentences mider Mode. Hence, hypotactic conjunctions do not here demand as much discussion as the paratactic conjunctions. One has to be, to a certain extent, arbitrary in this field, since the ground is so extensive and so much remains to be done. There is still need of a modern and exhaustive treatise on the Greek Particles. It was in 1769 that the Dutch scholar Hoogeveen^ wrote his book. He was followed by Hartung.^ Klotz^ reworked the writings of Devarius. In
also conjunctions are adverbs,
'
properly treated imder adverbs, though they are adverbs.
p.
Lehre von den Partikcin dfr grioch. Rpr., Tl. I, 1S:52; Tl. II, 1S33. lb., Tl. I, p. 37. Schrocder (tibcr die forniello Untcrsch. dor Redot., 1874, 35 f.) write.s well on the obscurity of the origin of particles and the use
Doctrina Particulanim Linguae Graecae.
See above.
of the term.
' * ^
Ed. Secunda, ISOG.

12.
De Graecae Linguae
Particulis, vol.
I,
1S40; II, IS
1144
1861 Baumlein produced his Untersuchungen uher gricch. PartiPaley^ has carried the work on, as has Navarre.- There are, to be sure, a great number of monographs on special groups
keln.
"If any particular section of Greek grammar were taken as a specimen to illustrate the historical evolution of the Greek language, no better representative could be selected than the section of the particles."* Jannaris speaks thus,
or on single particles.^
not because the grammars have treated the particles with such skill, but because the particles best show the growth and decay of parallel words before other new synonyms that are constantly coming into existence. The particles come to a sharp point and
gradually lose the edge and whittle do^\^l into platitudes. Then they give way to others with more freshness. In general, the particles mark the history of the effort to relate words with each
other,
clause
with clause, sentence with sentence, paragraph
with paragraph.
language,
They
are the hinges of speech, the joints of

of expression,
or the delicate turns
the
7iuances of
thought that are often untranslatable.
We
must here
confine
our attention to Intensive Particles, Negative Particles, InterrogThis order is ative Particles, Conjunctions and Interjections. chosen for logical reasons simply, not because this was the order of development. That we do not know. The particles that are linked to single words logically come before conjunctions which
Interjections stand apart ^vith clauses and sentences. particles are employed the of list. Some the in last put and so are (like apa, 5e, ovv), so that a strict sentences and clauses words, with division on this basis is not possible.^
have to do
Intensive or Emphatic Particles (irapaBTiKaL |Jici>aTLKaL or irapair\Tipa)|JiaTiKol (n3v8ecr|xoi according to Diomjsius Thrax). Here again there is no absolute agreement 1. Limitations.
II.
particles are considered "emphatic" or "intensive." has no separate cHscussion of the intensive parindeed, Winer, He admits'' that, while the Greek of the N. T. Trep. ticles Hke 76,
as to
what
uses adverbs well in an extensive sense, it is defective in the inAdverbs of place, time, manner, all come in abundtensive use. ance in the N. T. Thompson^ follows Winer in the absence of
discussion of the intensive particles.
1
The
intensive particles, in
The Gk.
2 3
*
Particles, 1881. fitudes sur les particules grecques, R. E. A., VII, pp. 11&-130. 70-87. Cf. Hubner, Grundr. zu Vorlesungen uber die griech. Synt., pp. ' W.-Th., p. 462. Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 365.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 240.
Synt. of Attic Gk.
PARTICLES
fact,
(aI
nAPAOIIKAl)
1145
But as a rule receive poor handling in the grammars.^ part finished Paley^ properly sees that they are "an elaborately
of a
most complex and beautiful machinery."

poetry,
uses these emphatic
particles
Poetry, especially
tragic
more than other
kinds of writing. pulses of emotion.
In Homer "they sustain and articulate the By them alone we can perceive that Greek
of a witty, refined, intellectual, sensitive
It
was the language
and
passionate people. late the delicate shades of meaning, the subtle, intricate touches of irony or pathos, the indescribable grace and power which the
particles lend to
It is
would be impossible
in
any book
to tabu-
many of the grandest passages in ancient literaby a close study of the entire context that these only ture."* can never be fully translated from one lanThey felt. can be it is impossible to reproduce in English Thus another. to guage
the various shades of meaning of
ixev
and
5e
when
in contrast.
to translate a particle leads to curious results. Dr. Cyril Jackson used always to render Tpwes pa by 'the Trojans, God help them,' and a former head-master of Eton always
"The attempt
distinguished between
aoi, 'Sir, to you',
and
tol, 'at
(Coleridge, Greek Classic Poets, p. 221)."

sible to
Indeed,
it
your service'" is not pos-
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. Cf. the All the vernacular cannot be reproduced on the page. charm of the actual speech of Jesus and Paul. The N. T. is in the vernacular kolvt], but even so it does not reproduce to any great extent the witchery of the old Greek particles. Time has
worn them down very much.

there.
e'i
Still,
we do
: :
find
8,
them here and

/xev
There is a good example in Ph. 3 ttcos vSv irore (Ro. 1 So also riyov/xaL. Cf. P. B. M. 42 (b.c. 168) ov ^.w (3:7).
dXXd
ow
ye Kai
10)
and
ri
en Kayu ws
and O. P. that Paul shows This 1104, 5 (vi/vii a.d.) ov /jltiv 5e dXXd Kai. thought by of shades at least knew how to indicate the finer comparison in that, notes means of the Greek particles. Blass^ with the Semitic languages, the N. T. seems to make excessive use of the particles, poor as the showing is in comparison with the classic period. "Modern Greek has lost the classical Greek wealth of connective and other particles which lend nicety and
kird Kai
1
dW
Paley,
The Gk.
Particles, p. vi.
*
"
lb.
Cir.
lb., p. ix.
of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 259.
1146
A GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK
NEW TESTAMENT
ri
precision of thought. Only Kal {ovre, ov8e), and the less commonly used conjunctions dXXd, w\r)v, o/jloos have been retained. The loss of yap, apa has been compensated by new formations; but the ancient Greek re, 8e, /xev 5e, ixkvroL, firjv, ovv (yovp), Itl, brj, yk, Trap have left no successors" (Thumb, Handh., p. 185). The papyri seem barren of intensive particles in comparison with
the older Greek.

ticles
(76,
8r},
Jannaris ^ observes
irep,
how
these postpositive par-
compounds) tend in the later Greek either to disappear or to become prepositive. The N. T. is in harmony with tliis result. The same thing occurs with apa, wliich sometimes becomes prepositive, but that is not true of yap, 5e, ovv. Dionysius Thrax^ has a very extensive list
ixev,
rot
and
their
of "expletive particles" or irapawXrjpcoiJLaTLKol

8r),
crvuSea-fxoL
(elal 5e
oUe'
pa, vh, TTOv,

iJLrjv,
to'l,
drjv,
ap, Srjra, irep,
ttco,
p.riv,
av, av, vvv, ovv, Kev, ye,
dXXd,
Tolvvv,
Toiyapovv).
Some
of these (like dpa, ovv, dXXd,
and one might add
7dp,
be)
are so prevailingly conjunctival that
they are best treated under conjunctions.

belong to earlier stages of the language.
could have come here very well, since
it is
Others
(like Kev, pa)

iiv
The
discussion of
undoubtedly intensive whatever its actual meaning, whether it is blended with ei into eav or used with 6s, oarts, tva, otcos, cos, etc., or used with the verb itself in the apodosis of a condition. It is a modal adverb of emphasis (now definite as in Rev. 8:1, now indefinite as in Mt. 23: It is hke a chameleon and gets its colour from its environ18). ment or from its varying moods. This fickleness of meaning is true of all the intensive particles. Indeed, Dionysius Thrax is
rather slighting in his description of these words, oaot wapovres ov8ev
io4)e\e7v 8vvavTai ovre p.riv xcoptcrêiTes XvfxaivovTat.
He
contradicts his
disparagement by the use of /jltjv in this very sentence. The adverbial nature of the intensive particles is well shown by the variety of usage of the modal adverb ovto:s. See Thayer's
Lexicon for the N. T. illustrations, which are very numerous
(some 200). In Jo. 4:6, eKadeêro ovtcjs eirl rfj inijyfj, we have a good example of the possibilities of ovtoos. The local adverb xo6 dwindles from 'somewhere' (Heb. 2:6) to 'somewhat' in Ro. 4:19. Cf. also 517 irov ('surely') in Heb. 2:16. Some of the temporal adverbs also at times approach the emphatic particles. Cf. to Xoltov in Ph. 3:1; 4:8 (see Kemiedy in loco) sdmost^ = ovu. But in the N. T. aprt and i]8r] are always strictly temporal. How1
Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 400.
2 3
Cf. Uhlig's ed., p. 96,
and Schol. Dion. Thrax

p. 181.
in
Bekk. An., 970.
10.
So mod. Gk., Thumb, Ilandb.,
PARTICLES
ever, Trore
(aI
nAPAOirKAl)
1147
(Gal.
:
sometimes
loses its notion of 'once
upon a time'
1:23) and fades into that of 'ever' as in 1 Cor. 9:7; Eph. 5 In rjdr] Tore (Ro. 1 10; Ph. 4 10) it is more the notion of 29. culmination (' now at last ') than of time. But in ni] irore the notion
:
:
of time
be wholly gone before that of contingency (' lest perIn the N. T. we find undoubted instances of the non-temporal use of vvv and wvl where the sense Some of the passages are in doubt. differs little from Si? or ovv. But the logical and emotional use, as distinct from the temporal, 22, 24 where vvv 8k gives the contrast to the is clear in Jo. 15
chance'), as in Lu. 12: 58.
:
may
preceding conditions, 'but as it is.' Cf. also 1 Jo. 2 28, rat vvp, TKvla, where John's emotional appeal is sharpened by the use of
:
vvv.
Cf. likewise
(i/A.D.).
/cat
vuv 8evpo in Ac.
7:34 (LXX).
Cf.
/cat
vvv,
In general, the N. T. language, Hke the English, leaves most of the emotion and finer shades of thought to be brought out by the reader himself. "The historical ])ooks of the N. T., and especially their dialogues and discourses, are only
B. U. 530
fully
and truly
intelligible to
us in reading them in high voice in
the original Greek text, and in supplying the intonation, the gestures, the movement, that is to say, in reconstituting by the
imagination the scene

2.
(a)
itself."^
The N.
Fe.
T. Illustrations.
We may
begin with
ye.
The
origin of ye
is
by no
In the Boeotian, Doric and Eleatic dialects it is ya. It seems to correspond ^ to the k in the Gothic mi-k (German Brugmann sees also a kinship to the Cf. Greek eixk-ye. mi-ch).
means
certain.
g in the Latin ne-g-otiiwi, ne-g-kgere, ne-g-are. Hartung^ conIt may also be the same word nects it with the adverb fa.
as the Vedic Sanskrit gha, which
is
used in the same way.'*

It is
Cf
Its
further qui in the Latin qui-dem.

KOLvrf
not so
A''.
common
in the
as in the classic Attic (Radermacher,
T. Gr., p. 29).
function is to bring into prominence the particular word mth which it occurs. It is enclitic and so postpositive. The feelings
are sharply involved
when
ye
is
present.
It suits the Greek,
which "delights in pointed questions, irony and equivocal assent."
But
there
is
no English equivalent and

all.
it
frequently cannot be
translated at
'
Hartung'^ sees in ye a comparative element, while

le grec,
Vitcau, fitude sur

Partikellehre,
180G, p.
ii.
Cf. Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 541.

I,
p.
344
f.
Cf. K.-G., II, pp. 171-178.
* 6
K.-G.,
II, p. 171.
I,
Paley,
The Gk.
Particles, p. 14.
Partikellehre,
p. 326.
1148
Kai is

cumulative and arithmetical. As a matter of fact, ye brings word with which it is used, but adds
Hlibner^
is
to the fore the idea of the
no
ye.
distinctive notion of its own.^
calls it
a concessive
particle
on a par with
distinction
o/jlojs.
But that
ye
not always true of
The
made by
may
be either the least im-
The resultant idea portant or the most important (Thayer). may be 'at least,' this much if no more, a concessive notion.
AVe find this to be the significance of ye in Lu. 11:8, 5id ye r-qv Here, however, the ye more properly belongs to avaiblav avTov. The avaidiav, since that is the point, not the preposition 5td.
same shght variation from the

5,
classic
idiom appears in 18
ravT-qv.
5ta
ye to Trapexftv
MO'^
kottov Trjv
XVP^^
The
concessive
minimizing idea comes out clearly in Jo. 4:2, KalToiye 'Irjaovs See further apa ye and /cat ye in Ac. 17 27, and, in particuavTos. lar, dXXd ye hutv el/jii (1 Cor. 9 2) where again the ancient idiom would prefer vfuv ye, 'to you at least' (if not to others). Once
: :
more note el ye in Eph. 3 2; 4: 21; Col. 1 Mt. 6 1 9 17, etc. There is a keen touch
: :
23,
and
el
8e
ixr]
ye in
:
of irony in Ro. 9
20,
0)
avdpixnre,
fxevovvye crv tLs el;
Cf. iipaye in
Mt. 17
26.
On
the
other hand ye
contexts.
means
'this
much,' 'as
much
as this,' in other
So in Lu. 24:
21, dXXd ye
/cat crvv
iraai toutols,
where the
is accented by /cat, (tvv and not adversative), and the climax of the crescendo
ascensive force
dXXd (affirmative here,

is
reached in
in Ph.
'I go,'
ye.
The
8,
same climacteric force of the particles occurs

fiev
dXXd
ovv ye Kal -qyovpiaL

all
itavTa ^rjixlav elvai.

loss.'
says
Paul, 'as far as to consider

7: 20
things to be
Cf. apaye in
apa.
Mt.
(Ro.
and
:
/cat
ye in Ac. 2
fine
:
18 (Joel 3:2).
is 6s
So we have
ye in
Ac. 8
8
:
30.
32).
So 10
example There 18.
ye tov
l8iov vlov ovk e^yelaaro
is
irony again in
Kat 6(})eX6v ye eâaiXev-
of ye apart from /cat. In but in the N. T. pronouns,^ with the Homer ye is very common find e7co ye, but more no We we have only 6s ye (Ro. 8 :32).
aare (1 Cor. 4:8),
and note the position
av (3 14), e7co be (5 22), auros eyco (Mt. 3 11), eyoi thirty examples of ye in the N. T. the all of (Ro. 9:3). Indeed (paratactic or hjrpotactic) or other parconjunctions occur with Cf. d/xaprta y'e 18 in Lu. 11:8; those ticles except 5; Ro. 8 32. with particles The i, 1.8. Hermas, Vis., in sin') is eariv ('indeed it
ey<h p.ev
:
which ye
is
found in the N. T. are dXXd ye (Lu. 24

:
21); apa ye
(Mt. 7: 20); dpd ye (Ac. 8

1
30);
el
ye (Eph. 3
2);
^ 5e m'?
7^ (Mt.
Baumlein, Griech. Partikeln, 1861, p. 54. Grundr., p. 85. Cf. also Nagelsbach, Comm. de particulae yk usu Horn. ^ Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 258. 1830, p. 4.
2
PARTICLES
6:1);
3)
;
(aI
IIAPAOIIKAi)
1149
:
Kai
ye
(Ac. 17: 27); KaiTotye (Jo. 4:2); fx-qnye (1 Cor. 6

:
6(t)eKov
ye (1 Cor. 4:8); fxevovpye (Ro. 9

:
20).
Cf. 5id ye in Lu.
11:8; 18
5.
Tap
is
compounded
particle.
of ye
it
and
is
treated under conjunctions, though
more than an intensive

27:23).
(6)
A17.
Cf.
tL
dpa, but it will be sometimes not much yap KaKou eiroirjaev (Mt.
It has likev\dse
in the Attic poets as 5at
(cf.
an uncertain etymology.^ It appears vrj, vai) and is seen in composition

rj-dr].^
with
5i?-ra,
dr].
Stj-tov,
eireL-Sri,
In
i]-8rj
we probably have'
8-fj
rj
was originally temporal in idea and goes back to are Jannaris^ thinks that 8e and the Indo-Germanic period. one and the same word (cf. fxh and uriv) and holds that the difference is due to the transliteration from the old to the new alphabet when alone a distinction was made between e and e (r?). Thus the spelling 6r] was confined to the intensive particle, It is certain that in while 56 was the form for the conjunction. Homer there is confusion between 8e and 8r] before vowels.* In Homer also 8r] may begin a sentence, but in the N. T. as and
It
elsewhere
all
the examples are postpositive (but not

it
enclitic).
Blass^ does not treat

secutive particle.
as an hard to follow Blass' theory of the parLike the other intensive particles it has no English nor ticles. German equivalent and is a hard word to translate. It is
intensive particle,
but as a con-
It is
and indicates that the point is now at last clear and r)5rj (1 may be assumed as true.^ Cf. Latin jam nunc, vvv sense bein similarity The 1 10). Jo. 4:3); r?57? irore (Ro. tween 577 and one usage of 8e may be seen in Ac. 6 3, einaKeCf. Kai av 8k m \paade 8e (Siy), where W. H. put 5t7 in the margin. There are left 12 1. 2 Cor. in genuine is not M] Lu. 1:76. Heb. in 2 16, ov yap 8r} irov counting illustrations, only six N. T. it KapTO(t>ope'L, 6s 5?) In Mt. 13 23, eTrCkaiiâveTaL. ayyeXcov 8r} irov who.'^ The man the just 'who is sentencfe, relative in occurs a
climacteric
other examples are
all
with the hortatory subjunctive (Lu. 2

: :
15; Ac. 15 :36) or the imperative (Ac. 13 2; 1 Cor. 6 20) in accord with the classical idiom. There is a note of urgency in The pas20). 2) and So^daare 8i) (1 Cor. 6 a(j)opiaaTe 8r) (Ac. 13
: :
sage with
1
8i)
irore in Jo.
4 has disappeared from the
critical text.
Briis-, Grioch. Gr., p. 547.

\h.; Prellwitz, Et.
2
' ^
Wortcrbuch,
p. 73.
^
Monro, Horn. Hist. Gk. Gr., Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 256.
p. 410.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 273 f. Klotz ad Dcvar., H, p. 392.

Blass, Gr. of
Gr., p. 256.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 274.
1150
(c)

El
fxrjp, PT]
NEW TESTAMENT
to the positive note in
:
and
rj
pal.
Somewhat akin
14. 5i7 is nrjp which is read by many MSS. in Heb. 6 uncertain, though it quite is again adverb this of The etymology Cf. root as {rjFe, same the riFe).^ have it may that possible is In i]Trep (Jo. 12 43) and rjroi (Ro. 6 16) we have the 8ri (r/Srj). comparative or disjunctive ^. In Homer it was often used in
the use of
r;
rj
connection ^vith other particles.^ We may pass urip for the presIf rj were genuine in Hebrews the usage would be in strict ent. accord with classic construction for a strong asseveration. But
This queer idiom appears a few el fxifp is the true text. (Ezek. 33 27; 34 8; 38 19, etc.). It occurs times in the also in the papyri and the inscriptions^ after iii/B.c. Cf. d ijltjp, P. Oxy. 255 (a.d. 48). So that it is mere itacism between ^ and
certainly
LXX
el.
The Doric has
el is
for ^
where Moulton^ holds against Hort^

See further chap-
that the distinction

ter VI,
strictly orthographical.
Orthography and Phonetics, ii, (c). So then el nrjp has to be admitted in the kolptj as an asseverative particle-. It is thus another form of jx-qp. Jamiaris" gives a special section to the "asseverative particles" pi] and jxd. We do not have ij.a in the N. T. and vii
rj
1 Cor. 15 31, KaQ' rnx'epap a-Kodp-qoKw pi) rijp vfierepap Kavxw-v- Nt] is a peculiarity of the Attic dialect and is used in solemn asseverations (oaths, etc.) and means 'truly,' 'yes.' It is
only once in
probably the same word as pal, the affirmative adverb which occurs over thirty times in the N. T. Nai may be simply 'yes,' as in Mt. 13: 51. It may introduce a clause as 'yea' or 'verily,' as
in
27).
It i^ used in respectful address, Nai, Khpie (Jo. 11: be used as a substantive (like any adverb) with the article (2 Cor. 1: 17) or without the article (Mt. 5 37), where It stands in It occurs with ap.i}p in Rev. 1 7. it is repeated.
Mt. 11
It
9.
may
37 and 2 Cor. 1 17. There was an But we do not know the etymology, though Brugmann^ compares it with the Latin tie and nae and
contrast with oh in Mt. 5
old form mt-xt
(cf.
: :
ov-xl).
possibly also with the old Indo-Germanic na-na ('so

{d)
so').
which is postposiIt is only another form of ixr]p which occurs tive, but not enclitic. The Doric and Lesbian use imp in the N. T. only in Heb. 6 14. Se. So then it seems probable^ that p.b.p and the Thessahan â
Mev.
We know
little
more about
nep,
1 2
Cf. Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 541; K.-G., II, p. 144.
3 *
6
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 248. Moulton, Prol., p. 46.

lb., p. 46.
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 410.

lb.
App.,
p. 151.
PARTICLES
(na used with
(aI
nAPAGHKAl)
1151
words of swearing after a negative), nrjp and fxh same word. Indeed, in Homer all three forms the and are one sense. That original sense is affirmative, meansame the occur in
^
ing 'surely,' 'indeed,' 'in truth.' It is overrefinement to find in fih (nvv) the subjective confirmation and in 8ri the objective attestation.^
to the
probable that in the change from the old alphabet the transcribers adopted the two ways of spelling, common in Attic and Ionic {fxh and ixrjv) with a notion that ii-qv was merely emphatic with single words, while fxev was correlative
It is
new
(forwards or backwards)
or antithetical.^
Questions of metre
may
at
all
also
have entered into the matter.

itself nkv
But there
is
no dou])t
that in
does not
mean
or imply antithesis.
The
original use
was simply emphatic confirmation of single words, usually the weightiest word in the sentence. This use was gradually left more and more to txriv and other particles, but it is not anacoluthic, as Winer" holds, for fxev to occur without the presence
of 5e or dXXd.
The
older language
is
naturally richer^ in this

is
original idiom with
/xej/,
but
it
survives in the N. T. and
not to
be regarded as unclassical or uncouth. For an example in the papyri see B. U. 423 (ii/A.D.), wpd fxev iravTwv. The old idiom survived best in the vernacular and in poetry, while the literary prose was more careful to use the antithetical or resumptive tiku.
This
nh
solitarium, as the
books
call it,
may have
a concessive
11:4),
or restrictive force.^
Cf.
nev yap 6 kpxofxepos (2 Cor.
where there
buds
p.tv
often in the Acts.
no thought of 8e or dXXd. Cf 1 18 ovtos iitv ovv kKTrjaaro x^pi-ov, (3 13) ov TrapeBuKare (cf. vfieh 8k in next verse which is copulative,
is
.
It is seen also rather

:
not adversative), (3
fxev
21) 6v 5eT ovpavov

fxev fxev
ixev
deâcdai, (3
22) Mcoucttjs
eyo)
elirev,
(17: 12) ttoWoI (23

: :
ovv e^ avTWV ewiaTevaav, (21:39) ovv irapoKa^wv

(cf.
avOpooTOS
fj.ev elfxi,
18) 6
also 23
31), (27
21)
e5et nkv,
(28
22)
ivepl (xev
yap
1
:
Trjs
:
alpeaecos ravr-qs,
stances of
contrast
:
oi
fxh odv like
Acts
el
6; 2
41
41
8
;
25,
and the inwhere no
is
intended.
</>'
See
ixh ovv in
Heb. 7
:
-.11
fi
nev evSoKta in
:
12; Ro. 10 1; pevovv as instance of single the also Cf. p'ev. 1 Th. 2 18, eyw The contrast. without obviously is which one word (Lu. 1 1 28) same thing is true of p-tvovvye (Ro. 9 20; 10 18; Ph. 3 8)
oaov nkv ovv
dpi
kyo: in 11
13.
Cf. 2 Cor. 12
however point and there

it
is
1
printed.
is
The main word

W.-Th.,
is
sharpened to a
:
fine
a hint of contrast in Ph. 3

" ^
8.
Indeed, most
Monro, Hoin.
J;inn., Iliwt.
Cr., p. 251.
p. bl^^.
40'.).
2
3
K.-C;., II, p. 135.
Jaiin., Hist. (ik. (\v., p.

Ilartunt!;,
Ck. (>.,
p. 409.
I'aitiki4k4irc, II, p. 404.
1152

/jih
N. T. are resumptive, not corThere remain the instances where iJih imphes contrast. It is just a step in advance of the original idiom. Cf. Mt, 8 21, kirirp&l/ov fjLOL TrpoJTov aTrekOelv, where there is nothing
of the instances of
ovv in the
relative or antithetical.^
to correspond to
irpcoTov.
The
/cat
cTretra is
involved in what precedes.

:
Ro. 1 16 and irpwrov /cat in 2 Cor. 8 5. The /cat does not answer to the xpcoroj'.^ Just so we have rbv p.ev tpojtop 'Koyop in Ac. 1 1 without a devrepov 5k, though the clear implication is that the Acts is the second book. In 1 Cor. 11:18, irpooTov pep yap, the contrast is implied^ in verses 20 ff., but in Ro. 1 8, irpoorop pep ei'xapto-rco, there is no hint of other grounds of thanksgiving. This instance may be a change of thought on Paul's part (anacoluthon) or it may be the original
So with
:
TrpCjTov
and
re
in
use of
Cf. irpcoTop p.'ep in Ro. In Ro. 7:12, 6 pep popos, there is no contrast stated, but in verse 14 it is given by 5e, yet without ph. In Col. 2 23, artzâ
pep,
'first of all in truth.'
meaning
3:2.
eaTLP \6yov pep exopra aocplas, the antithesis is really stated in ovk
ep TLpfj, kt\.
without an adversative particle.
In
Cor. 5
3 the
pep stands alone, while cltoop

:
Heb. 12 9 there is which has no particle (only toXv paXKop). In Ac. 26 4, 6, pep is followed by /cat vvv by way of contrast and by rd pvp in 17:30. Cf. pep Kol in 1 Th. 2 18, pep - re in Ac. 27: 21, where there is practically no contrast. But see 6 pep Kat erepop in Lu. 8 5 ff., o pep /cat aXXo in Mk. 4 4 ff We have pep evretra in Jo. 11:6; Jas. 3 17; 1 Cor. 12 28. These are all efforts to express antithesis. We see this also in pep -KK-qp in Lu. 22 22 and in p'ep dXXd in Ac. 4 16; Ro. 14: 20; 1 Cor. 14 17. In Mk. 9 12 f. dXXd is independent of the pep. But it is the pep be construction that is the most frequent in the N. T. as in the Attic Greek. There are two and a half pages of examples of pep in its various uses in the N. T. given in Moulton and Geden's Concordance, but even so the particle has made a distinct retreat since the Attic period.'* It is wholly absent from 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, Titus (critical text) and Revelation. It occurs only once in Eph. (4 11), Col. (2: 23), 1 Th. (2 18), Jas. (3 17). It is most frequent in Matthew, Acts,
:
and irapccv are contrasted by 5e. In contrast between the pep clause and the next,
Blass, Gr. of
list
N. T. Gk.,
p. 267.
Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 410) gives a very

y.kv
large
2
of illustrations of the original use of
from anc. Gk.

to be 'from the very outset'
^
Cf. W.-Th., p. 576.

p. 267) takes
it
3 But Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., and so the original use of ixkv.
j^,.,
p. 266.
PARTICLES
(aI
nAPABIIKAl)
1153
Romans, 1 Corinthians and Hebrews. and 5e may contain the roots of one
Paley^ thinks that

(fiia)
nh
But
and two
(56o).
certainly the correlative antithesis is not necessary to either of them, though with 8e there is the notion of adcUtion. Cf. in this /cat (Mk. 4:4; Lu. 8 connection ij.h 5) and rote nkv (Jo. 11:6). There are varying degrees of contrast where iikv and 5e occur There may be no emphasis on the (ikv and very little together.
on the
be,
which
is
serve almost
:
its original
not essentially adversative. The ^kv may preidiom while 5e has slight contrast. So
Lu. 11 48, apa

tence
jxaprvpes eare Kal avvevdoKeiTe rots epyoLS tuip Tvarkpoiv,
OTL avToi ixev airenTeLvav avTOvs y/xets 8e olKoboixeiTe.

is
quoted to show that

is
opposition, that
ixkv,
The whole senagreement (correspondence), not here accented. In verse 47 we have 5e, but not
it is
which is hardly felt in 48. See also Ac. 13: 36 f.; Ph. 3:1; Heb. 7:8. In particular we note this slight contrast when a whole is distributed into its parts as in Mt. 25 14 ff 1 Cor. 9 25.
:
Cf. also Ac. 18
14
f.
But the
:
distribution
p.kv
may amount
to sharp
division, as in 1 Cor. 1
'7(0 be
KT]<l)d,
12,
'E7W
dya
YlaiiKov, 'E7cb be 'AttoXXw,
'E7C0 be Xptarov.
It is
thus the context that decides
how
pointed
is
the contrast.
opposition.
It is not the
words
juej^
and
be
that
inherently
mean
Indeed, the contrast
may
be indi-
cated by
be
alone as in Mt. 5: 22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44; 25: 46; Ac.
12: 9; Heb. 2: 8; 4:13; 6:12.2

antithesis in John's
^g
his
gee a
words about
Tpoâra
e/c
good illustration of clear baptism and that of Christ in

avrov
to. be epicpLa
Mt. 3:
33, Kal
11, 7cb
(TTr}(TeL
ixh6 bL
See further 20: 23; 22: 8; 23: 28; 25:

be^Lccu
to, jxev
e^ evwvbyLiov.
:
The examples
ix'ev
are numerous.
See
ol ixev
oi be
(Ph. 1
16
ovs
be
:
(Jude 22); rivk

f .)
:
p.'ev
rivh
be be
el
ff .)
oh
be
(Ph. 1: 15);
:
els
jiev
eh
fiev
be
(Heb. 9 6
Cor. 15
e-weLTa be
ol
be (1
39); tovto
(Heb.
:
dXXot (Mt. 16 14) tovto (Heb. 10 be (Ac. 19 ovv 7:2);

p.'ev
;
aWr]
:
jxev
aXX?;
p.'ev
p.'ev
33); wpcoTou
ei
iiev
38
f .)
el
These examjoles fairly exhibit the N. T. usage of pikv. It is often a matter of one's mood how much emphasis to put on pi'ev and be, as in Mt. 9 37 and Mk.^ 14: 38. In p.evT0L there is always strong contrast. As examples of p.ev dXXd in sharp contrast see Ro. 14 20; 1 Cor. 14 17. So
vvv bk (Heb. 11
15
f.),
etc.
also
(e)
ph Tr\r,v
Uep.
(Lu. 22
22).
irepl (cf.
It is
probably a shortened form of

It is
perfect) or
is
it
Trepi
more
usually in
'
both postpositive and enclitic and the N. T. printed as a part of the word with which
exactly.^
Particles, p. 34.
The Gk.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 266.
Drug., Griech. Gr., p. 545.
1154
occurs.
once.i

But
in
is
NEW TESTAMENT
irkp
Homer
it
this
is
not true, while

-rrepav
follows Kal only

this particle.^
There Some^ even connect

(critical
no doubt about the etymology of

directly ^\dth
or
irepa.
Cf. wepaLTepoj
text in Ac.
19:39).
irept is
But
this
idea does not conflict

It is
with the other, for
the locative of repa.

irkpi
an Indo-n-ept-
Germanic
ximttXtj/xi,
root,
and the
original notion of
occurs in
irepL-Tr\r]dT]s,
nu-per,
per-tnanere, per-tinax, sem-per, etc.
to do a thing to the limit (beyond), thoroughly. a note of urgency in wep. It is intensive as ye, but probably tends to be more extensive also.* Sometimes the emphasis in Trep is in spite of opposition ^ as in Kaiirep which occurs six times
It
means then
is
There
in the
N. T. (Ph. 3:4; Heb. 5:8; 7:5; 12 17; 2 Pet. 1 12), and always with participles, as Kaiwep wv vlb$ (Heb. 5:8). The Textus Receptus has ovirtp in Mk. 15 6, but W. H. read only Cor. ov, but hoTip appears twice as an inferential conjunction (1 8 13; 10 14). See 'daTtep, O. P. 1125, 6 (iii/A.D.). The other
:
examples are
kirdwep
all
elVep (a half-dozen times, all in Paul, as

:
with conjunctions, as tavwep (Heb. 3: 14; 6:3); Ro. 8 9; 1 Cor. 15 15);

: :
(some MSS. in Ro. 3 30, but the best MSS., as W. H. exetS^jrep (only Lu. 1:1); w^P (only the critgive, have dwep) save ical text in Jo. 12 :43); Kaddirep (some 17 times, all in Paul Heb. 4:2), KaOoâirep (Heb. 5 4 and a varia lectio in 2 Cor. 3 18),
;
:
ioairep
(some 36 times,
chiefly in
1
Matthew, Luke and Paul, as

8).
Mt. 6:2), (hawepd (once only,
Cor. 15:
the N. T., but only in composi(/) Tot does not occur alone in It is enclitic as in r/rot, KairoL, ixkvToi, but it comes first tion.
Toiyapovv
and
to'lvvv.
The etymology
form
is
not certain.
Brugmann''
Others^
takes
it it
to be a fixed
of the ethical dative col (rol).
take
consider
Kuhner-Gerth as the locative of the demonstrative to. There seems no way it the locative of the indefinite tL
seems to have the notion of restriction and in Homer is often combined with adversative particles. In the N. T. we find titol once (Ro. 6 16), KaiToi. twice (Ac. 14 five 17; Heb. 4:3), KairoLje once (Jo. 4:2), p.ePTOL eight times, Tim. 2 19), in John's Gospel as Jo. 4: 27 and once in Paul (2
of telling for certain.
^
But
it
TOLyapovp twice (1 Th. 4
8;
Heb. 12
:
1),
robw
three times (Lu.
20
1
25;
Cor. 9
26; Heb. 13
13).
"Omcos is
an adversative par-
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 257.
I,
Griech. Gr., pp. 402, 525.

Cf.
2 * * *
Hartung, Partikellehre,
K.-G.,
II, p. 168.
p. 327.
'
Monro, Horn.
p. 252.
Gr., p. 252.
Biiumlein, Partikeln, p. 198.
II, P- 149.
Horn. Gr.,
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 257.
PARTICLES
(aI
lIAI'AOIIKAl)
1155
:
nevTOL; 1 Cor. 14
III.
tide that occurs three times in the N. T. (Jo. 12 42, here with 15), twice with a participle. 7; Gal. 3
: :
Negative Particles ((rT6pT|TiKa I irapaSTiKai).
The
use of the
negative particles has been discussed already in various parts of the grammar in an incidental way in connection with the modes,
verbal nouns and dependent clauses. But it is necessary at this point to treat the subject as a whole. It is not the logical negaMany words are negative tive that one has here to deal with.
in idea
"cold"
for
which are positive in form. Thus "empty" is negative, Aristotle uses o-repr/rt/cos is negative, "death" is negative. It is in reality an ablative idea this negative conception.
implies.
as
(TTepecc
But the grammarian
is
concerned simply with
those words that are used to

negative.
make
positive words (or clauses)
This
is
the grammatical negative.

post-fixes.^
There
are, indeed,
is
in Greek, as in English, negative
But there
a com-
mon
a(w),
negative Greek
prefix aiv) called alpha privative, Sanskrit
Gothic un, English un. In Sanskrit this prefix does not occur with verbs and is rare with substantives. It is there found chiefly with adjectives and participles.^ In Greek it occurs with verbs, but chiefly denominative verbs like drt/xafco.^
Latin
in,
The
use of d- (dv- before vowels)

of
is
in the
Greek
still
more
common
mation
1.
with adjectives and verbals.
See the chapter on Foraavperos,
Words
for details.
aveXerj/jLo^v
Cf.
adoKLfjLOS, d5t/cia, dxetîjs,
acTVpOeroSf iicrTopyos,
(Ro.
its
2830).
sees a connection
The Objective Ou and

This
is
Compounds.
(a) Origin.
unknown.
Hiibschmann^
with the Latin haud as do other scholars.^ Fowler^ takes it as an original intensive particle like pas in the French ne pas and -xl (Indo-Ger. -ghi) in ou-x'i- The Zend ava is also noted and the
Latin au {au-fero)J But there is no doubt that ov in the Greek took the place of the Sanskrit nd, Latin ne- {nc-que, ne-scio; the relation of ne ne-quidetn, ne-quam to this ne is not known), Gothic
ni.
1
The use
of the
Greek
oh
corresponds to the Sanskrit nd.

p. 6.
2 3 *
s
Anon., Notes on Negativo Postfixes in Gk. and Lat., 1SS4, Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 447.
Cf Das
.
indoffor.
Vokal-Systom,
ry2S.
p. 191
Cf. Gildcrsl.,
ff.;
Am.
.Jour, of Philol.,
XVIII, pp.
4,
123
f.;
Horton-Smith,
ib.,
pp. 43
6
HriiK.,
Griech. Gr., p.
The Negatives
of the Indo-Eviroj). Lang., 1S96.
Cf. Delbriick, Grundr.,
IV, p. 519.
^ But Draeger (Hist. Synt., haud cannot be shown.
p. 133) say.s
that this connection with the Lat.
1156
(h)

History.
its
As
far
back as Greek goes we find

/jlt]
ov,
but
ov did
not hold
of a
own with
in the progress of the language.
Within
modern Greek outside few proverbs save in the Laconian and the Pontic dialects.^ The Pontic dialect uses kL from Old Ionic oM. But modern Greek has ov8e and ovre (Thumb, Handb., p. 200). In the Boeotian dialect, it may be noted, ov never did gain a place. We have seen ov8h used as an adverb, an idiom that goes back to Homer.^ Jannaris^ explains that the vernacular came to use ovSkv and nrjbev for emphasis and then on a par with oh and /ny. Then ovb'ev dropped oh and y.y]bkv lost b'ev, leaving bkv and ^157 for the modern
Greek.
the ind. in
the past century ov has become obsolete in
we
and
find
At any rate this is the outcome. Aei- is the negative of modern Greek except after va and final clauses when va fXT] (Thumb, Handb., p. 200). And bh is the regular
negative in the protasis of conditional sentences both with ind.

subj.* The distinction between oh and nrj did become more or blurred in the course of time, but in the N. T., as in the kolvt] generally, the old Greek idiom is very well preserved in the main.
less
Buttmann^ even thinks that the N. T. idiom here conforms more exactly to the old literary style than in any other point. Ah
(Rendel Harris, Exp., Feb., 1914, p. 163). Oh denies the reality of an alleged fact. It is the clear-cut, point-blank negative, objective, final.*' Jannaris^ comrepresent
fx-qbh
(c)
may
Meaning.
pares oh to
indicative
OTL
and
fXT] /X17
to
tva,
while Blass^ compares oh to the
mode and
0r;/xt
:
to the other modes.
But these analogies

oh coalesces
are not wholly true.
word
as in ov
ohK edco (Ac. 16
7)
= = 'I
Sometimes, indeed, not merely 'I do not

forbid.'
with the
say,'
but
'I
deny.'
So
Cf. oh OeXo:
:
(Mk. 9:
30); ohK exw
(Mt. 13: 12); ohK ayvoeoi (2 Cor. 2 11). See also t6v oh \a6v in Ro. 9 25 (LXX) where oh has the effect of an adjective or a prefix. Delbriick^ thinks that this use of oh with verbs like the Latin ne-scio was the original one in Greek. In the LXX oh
:
translates
(d)
i^^.
Uses.
Here
it will
be sufficient to
make a
brief
summary,
since the separate uses
have already been discussed in detail in
Farrar, Gk. Synt., p. 182; Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 425.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 259.
p. 194
f.;
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 426.
*
6 6
Thumb, Handb.,
Cf.
Jebb, in V. and D., p. 339. Gr. of the N. T. Gk., Thayer's TransL, p. 344.
Thouvemin, Les Negations dans
le
N.
7
T.,
Revue de
Gk.
Philol., 1894, p.
229.
8
Hist.
Gr., p. 427.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253.
Synt. Forsch., IV, p. 147.
PARTICLES
the proper places.
uses of ov are in
(i)
(aI
nAPAGHKAl)
1157
The point here harmony with the
is to show how all the varied true meaning of the particle.
in both inThe Indicative. We meet ov with the indicative clauses. dependent dependent and Here the negative ov is universal (a) Independent Sentences.
The force of ov with the indicative in declarative sentences. very powersometimes is aspirate) before ovx vowels, (ok before
ful, like
the heavy thud of a blow.

these negatives
is
Cf. ovk kbwKart, ovk kiroTiaaTe,
ov avvr]yayeTe, ov Trepte/SaXere, ovk kireaKexl/aade
(Mt. 25 :42f.). The in the one ob in verse up gathered force against each other. 44. In verse 45 ov and ov8e are balanced over In Cf. ob wapkXaôv in Jo. 1:1L See ovK lirecxev in Mt. 7:25. airijXeev. Mt. 21 29 see the contrast between kyo:, Kvpie and ovk till ov Note the progressive bluntness of the Baptist's denials alone ob In the N. T. out flat at the last (Jo. 1:21 f.).
of all
:
comes
prohibition, though occurs with the future indicative used as a (Mt. 5:21); the classic idiom sometimes had fxr]. Cf ob cj)ovevaei.s nr^Sha quotes Blass^ Still, obK eaeade ws ol vwoKpiral (6:5), etc. nature subjective The volitive uaa-fiaere in Clem., Hom., Ill, 69.
.
of this construction well suits

suits the indicative.
ob
tiv
jui?,
but
ob is
/xi?
In Mt. 16
it is
22, ob
ecrrat aot tovto,
more emphatic and we have
in the prohibitive sense.
When
ob occurs alone
fxi]
'no,' as
at the
end
of a clause,
written ov as in ov,
irore
(Mt.
13:29); t6
But
the
O'i ov (2 Cor. 1:17). always expects in interrogative (independent) sentences ob between ob distinction a answer 'yes.' The Greek here draws
tx-h
rather difficult to reproduce in English. The use to expect the anof a negative in the question seems naturally question. This the by challenged swer 'yes,' since the negative is Ob in questions it. to come we till may leave applies to ob. tQ> oQ bvbmn ob Mt. 22, Cf. 7 corresponds to the Latin nonne. whole long the of negative the is where ob
and
that
is
We
kTrpocj^-nrdaa^ceu
kt\.,
question,
:
not repeated with the other verbs. See further we have ob Mt. 13 55; Lu. 17 17; 1 Cor. 14 23. In 1 Cor. 9 1 in tone. sharper bit is a obxl form The four times (once ouxOone with have we fxv 39 Lu. 6 In 6. 12 Cf. Mt. 13 27; Lu. other the with and obxi bbriyfTiv; TV(l)\6v Tv4>\6s dbvarai
and
is
question,
(side
mi? tl
There is a els ^bdwov efireaovvTai; Ac. in ob 13 10, ob of use the in indignation tone of impatient 21 In Ac. 38, ovk ebdelas; ras Kvplov rod bSovs tcls 8La(TTpe(j)U)v
by
side) obxl antjiOTepoL
jravay
&pa ab
6 klyb-KTi-os;
the addition of apa

1
means
'as I supposed,
Gr. N. T. Gr., p. 254.
1158
but as
of ov

I
NEW TESTAMENT
and the
now
see denied.'
In Mk, 14: 60 note the measured use

descrip:
and
ov8ev in botii question, ovk airoKpivu ovbkv;
tion of Christ's silence, koL ovk dTre/cpimro ovbkv.

ni} TOLTjar}
In Lu. 18
ov
7, oh
/ir]
/cat
liaKpoOvfiel ew' ahrols;
we come near having
in
a question with the present indicative as well as with the aorist subjunctive. In a question like firi ovk exofxev; (1 Cor. 9:4) ov is
the negative of the verb, while
Cf. Ro. 10
:
/ii?
is
the negative of the sentence.

/jlyi
18, 19.
In
Cor. 9
we have
:
in
one part of the

rj
question and ov in the other,

6
vofjios
fxt}
Kara apdpwwov ravra XaXw,
Kal
ravra ov Xeyet;
In Mt. 22
is
17 (Lu. 20
we have
questions
^ ov; as the alternative question,
Mk. 12 and Mark adds

:
22;
14)
nrj.
r)
Babbitt 2 holds that "ov

(e.g.
used in questions of
ix-q
fact,
while in other
I
questions of possibility)
is
used."
doubt the
correctness of this interpretation.
In declarative sentences the position of ov is to be noted when emphasis or contrast it comes first. Cf. ov and dXXa in Ro. 9:8. So ov yap dXX' 6 in 7: 15. In 7: 18 f. note ovov side
for
by
ah
side.
dXXd),
(i8)
Cf. also position of ou in Ac. 1:5; 2 :15; Ro. 11 :18 (ov
So dXX'
ovk
ky<!o
in
Cor. 6 :12.
is
Subordinate Clauses.
In principle the use of oh
the same
brief
as in independent sentences.
tions
But
there are
some
special adapta-
which have already been discussed and need only

relative
men-
tion here.
In
clauses with the indicative oh
is
almost the only

being very few
negative used in the N. T., the examples of

as will be seen directly.
clauses where
pbvov
it is
pi]
This
is
true both with definite relative

:
wpoevrjpâade
:
obviously natural, as in 2 Cor. 8 10, oinves oh (cf. Ro. 10 14; Jas. 4:14), and in indefinite
:
relative clauses
where
jlh;
is
possible, but
as in Mt. 10
38, 6s oh XaMiSdjêt (cf.
Lu. 9
is
use of oh in the relative clause which

is
by no means necessary, 50; 14: 33, etc.). The preceded by a negative

:
not an encroachment^ on
prj.
Cf. oh
It is a
pri a4>edfj <S5e
Xldos kwl
OS oh Kara\v9r]aerat
(Mt. 24:
2).
common enough
\Wov idiom in
the old Greek, as

\vppkvov 6 ohK
relative has oh
we
see
it
in 10:
26 (Lu. 12:
2), ohSev kcrnv /cem-
airoKa\v4)6r](jeraL.
pi]
Cf. Lu. 8:17,
where the second

os
ypcoadfj,
and Ro. 15:18

In
for the negative oh in
principal
ohK exet.
and
relative clause.
Mk.
25 note
exî
and
os
Cf. 6 deXoi
and
is
6 oh OeXcj
(Ro. 7: 15, 19).
Practically the
ris
same* construction
1 2
'^
oh
with the relative in a question, as
W.-Th., p. 511. Harv. Stu. in Class. W.-Th., p. 4S1.
Philol., 1901,
*
The Use of M17 in Questions, p. 307. Thouvemin, Les Negations, etc., p. 233 f.
PARTICLES
eaTLv OS ov in
(aI
nAPAGHKAl)
1159
Heb. 12:7. For further illustration Mt. 12 2; Mk. 2 24; Jo. 6 64; Lu. 14 27; Jo. 4 22; Ro. 15 21; Gal. 3 10; Rev. 9 4. In temporal clauses with the inflicativc ov comes as a matter of course.^ This is true of a definite note of time as in Ac. 22 11, cos ovK he^Xeirou, and of an indefinite period as in Jo. 4 21, ibpa
Ac. 19:35;
cf.
of ou with relative clauses see

:
ore ovT (cf. also 9
4, vv^ ore oi'deis).
In comparative clauses with the indicative the negative

outside in the principal sentence, since comparison
is
;
comes
usually
made with a
riXirlaafJiev
positive note.
So
ov KaOairep (2 Cor. 3
:
13)
ou
:
m^wj
15
f.).
(8:5);
cos
om
et/xt
ibcnrep
(Lu. 18
11); ovx
:
<is
(Ro. 5
We
do have
:
ovk aepa depcov in 1 Cor. 9

ov yap,
cos
(j.r}
26 (participle) as in 2
Cor. 10
14
we have
e4>iKPovp,epoL,
where the two nega6Trov ovk
tives are in good contrast.
In
local clauses likewise

yrjp iroWrju
the use of ov
is
obvious, as in 21
:
dxev
ov is
(Mt. 13:5);
oirov ov êXeis (Jo.
18.
Here the
very pointed); ov de ovk eanv vop-os (Ro. 4: 15). In causal sentences ov is not quite universal, though the usual negative. Cf Mt. 25 45 0' 6aov ovk eTroirjaare ivl TOVTOiv T<j}V k\axi(yTO}v, (2:18) on ovk elaiv, (Heb. 6:13) evret Kar' ovdepos elx^P, (1 Cor. 14: 16) eTrecdri ovk oUev. See further Lu. 1:34; Jo. 8:20, 37; Ro. 11 6. In Heb. 9 17 eirel /xij rore [mt? TTore marg. of W. H.] taxwet may be a question as Thcophylact takes it, but W. H. do
.
:
not print
cient
will
But it is not a departure from anit so in the text. Greek idiom to have /X17 with the ind. in causal sentences as be shown. Cf. Jo. 3 18 with 1 Jo. 5 10.
:
In final clauses with the ind. oh does not occur. The reason for )ui7 in clauses of purpose is obvious even though the ind. mode be used (cf. Rev. 9 4, 20). It is only with clauses of apprehension
:
that ov
tion.
is
found with the verb when

:
p.i]
occurs as the conjuncovx

^vpo:.
Cf. 2 Cor. 12
20, 4>oôvixai,
ixij
ttcos
But
this is the
not the ind. Cf. here ovx o'ôvs êXco and oloj^ ov deXere. Cf. /cat ov rts eVrat also Mt. 25 9. In Col. 2 8 we have /3X7rcre Kara XpicTTOV. The Kal ov is in contrast with Kara to. crroixîci tov Koa/jLov, though as a second negative it would properly be ou anysubj.,
: :
fx-f]
obb't ouSe. Rev. 9 4 we have ha p,r] aZLK-qaovaiv This^ does seem unusual and is alm-ost an example of Iva ov. No example of a clause of result with a negative occurs in the indicative, but it would, of course, have oh. The use of ov in conditional sentences has already received
how.
But
in
Blass, Gr. of
Burton, N. T.
N. T. Gk., p. 255. M. and T., p. 181.
1160
NEW TESTAMENT
adequate treatment. See Conditional Sentences, ch. on Mode. The details need not be gone over again here. There is no doubt of the fact that ei oh made encroachments on ei (xii in the later Greek.^ Blass^ puts it "in direct contradistinction to the classical language." Thouvemin^ likewise treats this use of ei oh as " contrairement a I'usage classique ou on le trouve exceptionnellement." It is only the frequency, the normality of d oh in the N. T. that is remarkable. This is in full accord with the kolvy)
development, since* in the modern Greek
8ev "is regularly
used in
the protasis of a conditional sentence, alike with the indicative
and with the subjunctive mood." So d 8ev Trj-yaipa, 'if I had not gone' (Thumb, Handh., p. 195). See Mt. 26:42; Lu. 12:26; Jo. 1 25; 3 12; 5 47; 10 35; Ro. 7 9; 8:9; 11 21; 1 Cor. 16:22; 2 Cor. 12:11; Heb. 12:25, etc. They are all condi: :
:
tions of the first class (determined as fulfilled) save one of the
second class (determined as unfulfilled) in Mt. 26 24. In 26 42 ei oh and eav [xr] stand out sharply. It is so nearly the rule with conditions of the first class in the N. T. that it is hardly necessary
: :
to follow out the analysis of
Winer ^
to bring the examples into
accord ^\^th ancient usage.

causal in Lu. 12
:
It is gratuitous to
take
ei
oh 8e
as
26, or to
make
ei ohic eifxi
in 1 Cor.
9:2a
e'L
denial
tls oh
4>'epei.
of a positive idea.
(^tXet (1
There are cases of emphatic

22).
denial, as
/cat
Cor. 16
ei
Cf. also 2 Jo. 10,

el ttolQi
:
el
tls epxerat
oh
Cf. also
is
oh
TToioj
and
in Jo. 10 37
f.,
where the antithesis

1
ei
:
quite marked.
See also the decisive negation in Jo.

has
25.
fxi]
But,
in the
when
As
all is said, ei oh
made
distinct inroads
on
later Greek.
to the negative in indirect discourse with the indicative,

is
it
:
only remains to say that the use of oh

12, avvrJKav otl ohK elirev irpoaexeLV.
'6tl
universal.
:
Cf.
ttcos
Mt. 16
In 16
11 note
oh voelre
oh irepl aprcov elirov hixiv;

:
where each negative has
its
own
force.
Cf. also 1 Cor. 6

(ii)
9.
The Subjunctive.
use of the subj., as
In
Homer
oh
was the negative with the

Iliad,
1,
futuristic subjunctive^ as in oh 8e
ristic
i'Swyuat,
262.
This futu-
we have
seen (Modes), largely passed over
to the future indicative,'^ so that oh disappears from the subjunctive almost entirely both in principal
1
and subordinate
clauses.
p. 339.
2 7
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 254. Les Negations, etc., p. 233.
Jebb, V. and D.'s Handb., W.-Th., pp. 477 ff. Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 198.
.
Thompson, Synt. of Attic Gk., p. 498. Cf W. G. Hale, The Anticipatory Subjunctive in Gk. and Lat., Cornell Stu., 1895.
PARTICLES
(aI
nAPAGHKAl)
1161
with iirj where ^{AQ*
as already
One may compare the

participles.
final
disappearance of ov before
reads
tjtis
In Jer. 6
.
ou KaroiKLad^
have
KaTOLKL(jdr)(TtTai
noted, that in the
It is to be remembered modern Greek bkv occurs
also,
in
the
protasis
with subjunctive as well as with the indicative, as a biv TrtcT-rei/ps (Thumb, Handbook, p. 195). This is partly due, no doubt, to the obscuration of the oh in bkv, but at bottom it is the futuristic
use of the subj.
:
Cor. 12 20 with eupw after

subj. (classic
It is also
have already noted the use of jui) obx in 2 <j)o0ovfj,aL, where the ov is kept with the idiom) to distinguish it from the conjunctional n-q.
:
We
IJLT)
a case of the futuristic subj., not volitive as in final clauses with IVa or orcos. In Mt. 25 9 the margin of W. H. has Tore ovK apKkaxi without a verb of fearing, though the notion
there.
The text has /X17 Trore oh fxrj. Jannaris^ boldly cuts the knot by denying that ixr] in oh nrj is a true negative. He Gordian makes it merely a shortening of ij.r]v. If so, all the uses of oh fxr) with the subj. would be examples of oh with the subj. Some of This view of Janthese, however, are volitive or deliberative.
is
naris
is
not yet accepted
among
scholars.
It
is
too simple a
though Jannaris argues that oh fj.7]v does occur as in Soph. El. 817, Eur. Hec. 401, and he notes that the negation is continued by ov be, not by jui) 5L Per contra it is to be observed that the modern Greek writes urip as well as ^17, as va niju elxe TrapdSes, 'because he had no money' (Thumb, Handh., p. 200). But, whatever the explanation, we do have oh (xri with the aorist We have had to discuss this point already subj. in the N. T. (Tense and Mode), and shall meet it again under Double Negatives. But in Jo. 18 11, ov ixi] ttico; the answer is in accord
solution,
:
with
ov.
(iii)
The
Optative.
use of oh with the optative.
In the N. T. there are no instances of the It is only in wishes (volitive) that
the optative has a negative in the N. T. and that is naturally /X17.2 But this is just an accident due to the rapid disappearance of
the optative.
There
is
no reason why
oh
should not be found
with the potential optative
(futuristic) or the deliberative
which
3,
was always
(iv)
S}v earco
rare.
The Imperative.
ohx o
The most
striking instance
It is the
is 1
Pet. 3
Koa/jLos,
aXX' 6 KpvTTOS, kt\.
sharp contrast
with dXX' that explains the use of ohx2

:
Cf. also oh nbvov in 1 Pet.
18,
where the participle stands in an imperative atmosphere.

1
Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 433.
RobertsoD, Short Gr. of the Gk. N. T., p. 200.
1162
NEW TESTAMENT
:
Cf. also ov with the inf. in the imperatival sense in 1 Cor. 5
10;
Elsewhere with the imperative we have fxij (xbvov Ov is used in an imperatival (Jo. 13 9; Ph. 2 12; Jas. 1 22). connection with the fut. ind. (Mt. 5 21) and in questions of like
2 Tim. 2
:
14.
nature (Ac. 13
(v)
10).
The Infinitive. It is common to say that in the N. T. ^ ov does not occur with the infinitive, not even in indirect assertion. In Homer and in the classic Attic we do find ov with the inf. in indirect assertion. This is usually explained on the ground that
the ov belonged to the original indicative in the direct and
is
-Monro {Horn. Gr., p. 262) obSanskrit only finite verbs have the negative in the old serves that particles. This question received full discussion under Mode and Verbal Nouns. Only a brief word is allowed here. The oldest use of the negative in indirect discourse was in the form ov 4>r]aiv Scbcretv where oh formally goes with 4>r]aLv, but logically with dcoaeLv. From this use Monro conceives there came ov with the inf. itself. But the situation in the N. T. is not quite so simple as Blass^ makes it. In Jo. 21 25, ov8' avTov olfiai xo^prjaeLv, the negative does go with olixai. But this is hardly true in Mk. 7 24, nor in Ac. 26 26. Besides ov occurs in a number of clauses dependent on the inf., as in Heb. 7: 11; Ro. 8 12; Ac. 10 :41; Ro. 7:6; For the discussion 15: 20; Heb. 13 9; 1 Cor. 1 17; Ac. 19 27.
simply preserved in the indirect.
:
It is proper to 5, (J). have remnants of the old use of In Ro. ov with the inf., though in general /xi? is the negative. 15: 20 ovx oTTou after evayyeXiêadat stands in sharp contrast with dXXd Kaddos. In 2 Cor. 13 7 we have //t) TOLrjaai v/jlcLs Kamv H7]bkv, dXX' I'ra where the ovx is clearly an addendum. Burton^ ovx explains eis oWeu XoyiadrjpaL in Ac. 19 27, "as a fixed phrase," but even so it is in use. Besides, there is ^n) Xo7o/xaxeTi' kw' ov8ev See also Kal ov after cocrre dovXevetv in XPWLfjLov in 2 Tim. 2 14. Ro. 7 6. The use of ov8ev with the inf. after ov with the prinCf. Mk. 7 12; Lu. 20 40; Jo. cipal verb is common enough. 3 27; 5 30; Ac. 26 26, etc. Burton ^ notes that in the N. T. ov iibvov occurs always (cf. Jo. 11 52; Ac. 21 13; 26 29; 27: 10; Ro. 4 12, 16; 13 5; 2 Cor. 8 10; Ph. 1 29; 1 Th. 2 8) except once )U77 iibvov in Gal. 4 18. The use of oh ixbvov occurs both in limiting clauses and in the sentence viewed as a whole. (vi) The Participle. There is little to add to what was given on
of these passages see Infinitive, ch.
XX,
say that in the N. T.
we
still
't-ô.
1 2
Cf. Jann., Hist.
Gk. Gr.,
p. 430.
' *
N. T. M. and
lb., p.
T., p. 184.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255.
183
f.
PARTICLES
(aI
HAPAOUKAI)
11G3
the subject of ov and nv with the participle under the Verbal AsGalloway ^ thinks pects of the Participle (see Verbal Nouns). that it was with the participle that ou was first used (as opposed
to the Sanskrit negative prefix) before the infinitive had ov. At may simply accent any rate ou is well established in Homer.
We
the fact that the encroachment of nv on oii with the participle gives all the greater emphasis to the examples of ov which remain. Cf. 6 ovK &V TTOLii-qv (Jo. 10 12) cbs ovk Sepcoj/ (1 Cor. 9 26).
: ;
:
There
is
no trouble
in seeing the force of ov
wherever we find
it
with the participle in the N. T. Here we see a further advance of the nega(vii) With Nouns. tive particles over the Sanskrit idiom which confined them to the The Greek usually employs the negative prefix with finite verb.
So t6v ov. ctt' (LXX), ov \a6i> in Ro. 9 25 (LXX), ov \a6s in 1 Pet. 2 10 no is by this But OVK WuL in Ro. 10 19 (D3> ^)> Deut. 32 21). writers. Greek means a Hebraism, since it is common in the best ova eôvaia in 5, 50. 3. Cf. oil SictXyo-is in Thuc. 1, 137. 4 and Cf. As Thayer well says, ov in this OVK apxtepws in 2 Mace. 4 13.
nouns, but in a few instances in the N. T.
:
:
we have
17
ri
construction "amiuls the idea of the noun." The use of ou to deny a single word is common, as in oii Ovaiav (Mt. 9: 13). Cf. In general for ov with exceptions see ovk kv OVK kn'e in Mk. 9 37.
:
ao4>lq. (1
Cor.
17), oh ixkXavi (2
Cor. 3:3).
is
In 2 Tun. 2
14,
I-k'
ovbtv xPWi-fJôv, it is possible
that xPWf-lôv
in the substantival
ov
sense.
There
is
is,
of course, nothing
ao(j)ol
unusual in the use of

Cor. 1:26).
in the
with
noteolder
adjectives like ov ttoKKoI
(1
What
is
v/orthy
the litotes so
ov ttoXu
common
(Ac. 27
:
N. T. as
(21:39).
in the
Greek.
15
:
Cf. net
14);
(ler'
ov TroXXds
wepas (Lu.
13); ovk 6\iya

:
Tpov (Jo. 3
34);
(Ac 17:4); ovk ov nerpius (Ac 20
aarjfxov
:
Cf. ovk
ttSs ov
/xe-
12).
Ou
7ras
and
have
received discussion under Adjectives, and so just a word will Ov iraca aap^ (1 Cor. 15 39) is 'not every kind of suffice.
:
flesh.'
Trai'TaJS
Cf. ov TravH Tc3 Xac3

(1
(Ac
Cor. 5
10).
means 'no
Gospels.
flesh,' like
is
is
But the Hebrew

in
10: 41); ov Tavres (Mt. 19 11); oil ovk av kacoOrj Traaa aap^ (Mt. 24:22)
:
t^^-î.
The
construction in the
S>iioptic
ovSev or
both senses
It
more common
:
John than
in
perhaps worth while to note the use of
oWkv (1 Cor. 13 2) as an a])straet neuter in the ])redioate. In general, attention should be called to the distinction made by the Greeks l)etween negativing a word and a sentence. This is
one reason
why
with the
im])(T., subj.
and
inf.
we
find ov with
On
the Ubc of M17 with the PurticMplc iu Class. Gk., 1S97, p. 6.
1164
single
clause.
(e)

words or phrases, where
Kal Ov.
n-f]
NEW TESTAMENT
is
the normal negative of the
negative
inf.
In general when a positive clause is followed by a Kal ov as in classic Greek. Cf. Ro. 7:6 (with as in Heb. 7:11). See also Col. 2 8, 19. So Lu. 8 U, ow-
we have
irvlyovTaL Kal ov Te\ea(f)opov(nv.^
a peculiar case,
6
:
we
find Kal
fxr]
Mt. 9 13. Once, indeed, in connecting two negative clauses, Lu.

Cf.
:
37, Kal
/JLT]
Kplvere Kal ov
Kpidrjre.
There is one instance of ov (/) Redundant or Pleonastic Ov. in indirect discourse where it is pleonastic according to the classic idiom (see also the French ne). It is in 1 Jo. 2 22, 6 apvovfxevos OTL 'Itjctovs ovk ecTLv. Some MSS. have the pleonastic ov in
:
Mk.
(g)
39.
of
Repetition
Ov.
When
is
the
second
It
is is
tive,
the
full
force of each
retained.
a single negaseldom that we

:
find
two examples
of ov in the
'Icxtlv
/c
same
clause, as in 1 Cor. 12
is
15
f.,
ov irapa tovto ovk
tov au/jLaTos, 'It
not therefore
/xt?
not of the body.' There are instances of ov followed by where both preserve the full force, Ac. 4 20, ov dwafxeda
:
\a\eLv.
Cf
also ov
p.ri
^117
in 1 Cor.
9:6.
:
So also
6
:
p.rj
woLciv 81-
KaLoavvr]v ovk
eanv e/c tov deov (1 Jo. 3 10). Cf. 5 12. The examples are numerous enough when the second ov is in a dependent clause. So ov8ev yap kaTiv KeKa\vpp.kvov 6 ovk aT0Ka\vcf)6r](TTaL (Mt.
10
:
26);
ttcos
ov voelre otl ov, kt\. (16: 10); ov
To\p.r](jco tl
XaXelv uv
KkripovoyLr]-
ov KareLpyaaaro XpiffTOs (Ro. 15 :18); ovk oI'5are otl
ov
aovdiv (1 Cor. 6:9). In Mt. 24:2 ov follows ov p.rj. See also Lu. 8 17. The uses of ju?) ov and ov nrj are treated later. But note ov, p.r] TTore kptfcoo-T/re (Mt. 13 29) where ov stands alone.
:
The solemn
(h)
repetition of ov
ou in
Cor. 6
10
is
rhetorical.
Compound Negative. We have seen how ov can be made stronger by xl (ovxl, as in Lu. 1:60). Brugmann^ considers this an intensive particle and different from
The
Intensifjdng
the Homeric^
ou5e
kL (ov-kL)
which
is
hke
tl (kls,
kl,
tls,
tl).
So also
is
was
originally just ov 8e ('and not,' 'but not')
and
often
:
so printed in Homer.*
29.
In the sense of 'not even' see Mt. 6
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);

1
o^
8{jvri
eTL
(Lu. 16
2); oure
(Ac. 28
21);
Cf.
W. H.
S. Jones., CI. Rev.,
Mar., 1910.
*
^
lb.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 259.
PARTICLES
ov
(aI
nAPAOHKAl)
ov8ev
:
1165
occasionally
TTore (2
Pet. 1:21).
which flourished for a limited period in the kolvt], has already had sufficient discussion. Various other compound negatives were built up on ovdeiroTe (Mt. 7 23) ou, as oudafxois (Mt. 2:6); ov8eiroi (Jo. 20 9)
occurs in Homer.
26),
:
The adverbial form The form oWels (cf. Ac. 26
omen (Mt.
lost its
19
6).
Ovkovv
was used so much

:
in questions that
it
negative force (Jo. 18
37), unless
one writes
it
ovkovv.
These compound negatives OvTe is, of course, only ov and rt. merely strengthen the previous negative. This emphatic repetition of the compound negative was once good vernacular in
both English and German, but
it
before the influence of the Latin.^
gave way in literary circles It was always good Greek.
This discussion does not apply to subordinate clauses (as in Jo. 8 20) where each negative has its own force. The use of ov8e and ovre belongs to the discussion of conjunctions (cf. ovre
:
ovT ov8e
but the examples in the N. T. of the Farrar^ gives ov are numerous. some good illustrations of old English. *'No sonne were he never so old of years might not marry," Ascham, Scholemaster. Modern
in Ac. 24: 12
f.),
other
compound negatives with
English vernacular refuses to give up the piling-up of negatives. "Not nohow, said the landlord, thinking that where negatives
more you heard of them the better" (Felix Holt, ii, 198). Again: "Whatever may be said of the genius of the English language, yet no one could have misunderstood the query of the London citizen. Has nobody seen nothing of never a hat not their own?" So likewise the Hebrew uses two negatives to strengthen each other (cf. 1 Ki. 10 :.21; Is. 5 9). A good example is Mk. 5:3, ov8e omeTi ov8eis. So ovSels ovirco (11:2). The commonest
are good, the
:
kind of example
Cor. 11:8.
is
like ov 8vva<7de TvoLelv ou8ev (Jo. 15
5).
Cf. 2
Another instance of triple negative is Lu. 23:53, The ov is sometimes amplified^ by ovre ovK rjv ov8ls ouTTO). ov8e as in Jo. 1 25. ovre as in Mt. 12 32, as well as by ov8e Plato shows four negatives, ov8epl ov8a(JLfi ov8aixa)S ovSenlav KOLVWvlav
:
(Phaedo 78
as ov8v ov
d).
fxr]
The combinations with

(Lu. 10
:
ov
/jltj
may
is
also be noticed,
at kyKaToKliru)
19); ov
jxi]
ae avw ov8' ov
:
txi]
(Heb. 13
5); otVert ov
fxi}
(Rev. 18
14).
There
no denying the
power
of this
accumulation of negatives.
"
I'll
Cf. the English
hymn
never, no, never, no, never forsake."
(i)
The Disjunctive Negative.

is
We
'
*
frequently have ov
one thing
denied that another

W.-Th., p. 499.
may
be established."'*
"where Here
Gk. Synt.,
p. 189.
Cf. W.-Th., p. 499. Thayer's Lex., p. 461.
1166
there

is
NEW TESTAMENT
is
sharp antithesis.
oi;
The
simplest form
:
ov
8e
as in
Jas. 2 :11, or
dXXd
:
as in
Mt. 15
: :
11;
Mk.
39; Lu. 8:52;

:
Ac. 5
ovx oTL
In Jo. 7 22 we have In Ph. 4 11 ovx otl ocIn 2 Cor. 7 9 we have ovx on curs alone without dXXd. dXX' OTL. In 1 Jo. 2:21 we have ovk eypa^pa iifuv otl dXX' 6tl where
:
4; 1 Cor. 15
10; 2 Cor. 3
3, etc.
aXKa,
as also in Ph. 4
17.
more naturally we might expect eypaxpa ovx Winer makes rather overmuch of the possible
1
otl
dXX'
'(-'fa
6tl.
rhetorical
dis-
between the varying shades of emphasis in the differdXXd occur. Cf further ovx dXXd dXX' 'iva (Jo. 3 17). (Jo. 6 :38); ovx Iva We usually have ov dXXd Kal (Jo. 5:18; Ro. 1:32, etc.), but sometimes fjLopou merely ov novov dXXd (Ac. 19 26; 1 Jo. 5:6). Sometimes the negative is not expressed, but is to be supplied in thought as in Mt. 11 7-9. Then again we may have only the negative as in ov ^pwfxaaLv (Heb. 13: 9), leaving the contrast to be supplied in the thought. The contrast may even be expressed by kuI ov as in Mt. 9 13, eKeos de\co Kal ov dvaiav (LXX). But we have already
tinctions
ent contexts where ov
entered the sphere of the conjunctions as in the parallel ovt

Kai in Jo.
So 3 Jo. 10. 2. The Subjective Negative M?; and Its Compounds. The Ionic, Attic and Doric dialects (a) The History of M17. have fxr], the Eleatic has ixd, like the Sanskrit mti. In the old Sanskrit ma was used only in independent sentences, while ned occurred in dependent clauses.^ In the later Sanskrit 771a crept into the dependent clauses also. It was originally a prohibitive particle with the old injunctive which was in the oldest Sanskrit always negative with ma.^ In the later Sanskrit ma was extended to the other modes. In the Greek we see fxi] extended to wish and then denial.^ Wharton^ undertakes to show that is primarily an interrogative, not a prohibitive or negative particle, but that is more than doubtful. Already in Homer "pi] had established itself in a large and complex variety of uses, to which we have to appeal when we seek to know the true nature of the modal constructions as we come to them."^ The distinction between ov and prj goes back to Indo-Germanic stock and has
4:11.
fx-f]
W.-Th., pp. 495
ff.
2
'
Thompson, Thompson,
Synt., p. 448; Brug., Griech. Gr., p. 528.

ib., p.
499.
1.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 260.
The Gk.
Moulton,
Indirect Negative, 1892, p.
Cf. also Babbitt,
The Use
of Mt?
in Questions,
Harv. Stu. (Goodwin

Prol., p. 170.
Vol.).
PARTICLES
survived into modern Greek.
inroads on
ov,
(aI
IIAPAGHKAI)
start
nrj
1167
But from the very

occupies
made
In the
so that finally
fx-f]
much
of the field.
modern Greek fxi] is used exclusively with participle, in prohibitions and with the subj. except in conditions, and occurs with vd Gildersleeve^ has shown in a masterly way (vd fxri) and the ind.
how
luT]
made
el
continual encroachments on
ov.
In the N. T., outinscrip-
side of
ov,
the advance of
/jlti
is
quite distinct, as Gildersleeve

are not
shows
tions.
is
true even of Lucian.
So as to the papyri and the

/it?
The exact
Significance
Attic refinements between ov and
reproduced, though on the whole the root-distinction remains.^

(6)
of
Mr].
Max
Miiller^ gives
an old Sanskrit
phrase, 7na kaphaltiya,' not for unsteadiness,' which pretty well

gives the root-idea of
tating negative,
vent (prohibit) will, wish, doubt.
It is an "unsteady" particle, a hesian indirect or subjective denial, an effort to prewhat has not yet happened. It is the negative of
ij.r].
If ov denies the fact,

ov.
fxr}
denies the idea.
Mri
made one advance on
It
came
to be used as a conjunction.
We
see this use of
ma
in the late Sanskrit.''

^^7
But the
origin of this
conjunctional use of
is
undoubtedly paratactic in clauses of

obviously so in indirect questions^
both fear and purpose.^
It is
where
fir}
suggests 'perhaps.'
CampbelF argues
is
that "the whole
question of the Greek negatives
This is an extreme position, but there is no doubt a border-line between ov and fxT} which is very narrow at times. One's mood and tone have much to do with the choice of ov or nrj. Cf Jo. 4 29, n-q TL ovros eaTLu 6 Xpcaros; where oi) would have challenged the opposition of the neighbours by taking sides on the question whether The woman does not mean to imply Jesus was the Messiah. flatly that Jesus is not the Messiah by using i^-q tl, but she raises the question and throws a cloud of uncertainty and curiosity over In a word, jii] is just the negait with a woman's keen instinct. tive to use when one does not wish to be too positive. M17 leaves the question open for further remark or entreaty. Ov closes the
indeterminate."
. :
door abruptly.*^
1
The
LXX
uses
jjlt]
for
b^^.
Encroachments of Mj? on Ov in Later Gk., Am. Jour, of Philol., I, pp. 45 IT. Moulton, Prol., p. 170. Cf. also Birke, De Particularuni ûi? et ov Usu Polybiano Dionysiaco Diodoreo Straboniano, 1897, p. 14 f. ^ Oxford Inaufjural Lecture, Note C. * Thompson, Synt., p. 448. 6 Moulton, Prol., p. 192 f
''
lb.
T 8
On
Soph. Trach., 90.
Cf. Postgatc, Contrasts of Oh
and
M17,
Cambridge
Philol. Jour., ISSG.
1168
(c)
NEW TESTAMENT
Uses of M17. In general we may follow the outline of ov. Blass^ expounds the two negatives by say(i) The Indicative. ing that "ov negatives the indicative, ixi] the other moods, including the infinitive
is
and
participle."
But, unfortunately, the case
"In reviewing Blass, Thumb makes the important addition that in modern Greek bh belongs to the indicative and îi}{v) to the subjunctive." ^ But b'ev occurs in the protasis with the subj. in modern Greek, as we have seen. Besides, as Moulton^ adds, "/xi? has not been driven away from the indicative" in the N. T. It may be said at once that ixi] with
not so simple as that.
the indicative already in
is
as old as historic Greek.^

/xi?
The
Sanskrit sug-
gests that originally
was not used with the
indicative.
But
Homer
ixi]
occurs with the indicative in prohibition,
"The essence of these idioms is the which shows itself in the combination of the imperative tone particle with the mood proper to simple assertion." But in the N. T. we no longer have p.T] with the fut. ind. in prohibition,
wish, oath, fear, question.^
"^
except in case of oh
in questions. of oh
ixij.
In independent sentences we have

"It's use in questions
î]
with the indicative only
and
is
very distinct from that maintained in the N. T. Greek without real weakenis
ing."'^
In Jo. 21:5,
iraibla,
fir]
tl
Tpo(7(l)ayLov
ex^Te;
we have a
typical example with the answer ov.
Blass ^ expresses needless
objection to this "hesitant question," as
pounds
it.
Cf.
Jo.
Moulton rightly ex4:33; 7:26; and Ro. 11:1, mi? airdiaaTo;

2,
with the answer in verse
ouk
airooaaTo.
See Jo. 7:51, where
Nicodemus adroitly uses nr] in a question and the sharp retort of the other members of the Sanhedrin fxr] Kal av; The difference between oh and in questions is well shown in Jo. 4 33, 35. In the use of fxr] the answer in mind is the one expected, not always
ij.r]
:
the one actually received as

apostles at the last passover.
/3et;
is
illustrated in the question of the
They
all
asked
^17 rt e7cb el/xi,
pa^-
I,'^
The very thought was abhorrent to them, 'It surely is not But Judas, who did not dare use oh, received the affirmative
etvras
answer, ah
(Mt. 26
25).
M57 tl
comes to be used intensively

In the case of
=
much
1
like ohxi
(both chiefly in questions).
/xt)
ov
Vierke,
2 Moulton, Prol., p. 170. Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 253. lb. De ix-q Particulae cum Indicativo Conjunctae Usu Antiquiore, 1876.
lb., p. 261. Gr., pp. 260 ff. Moulton, Prol., p. 170 f Moulton gives an interesting note on the use of iraiBia as "lads" in the mod. Gk. 8 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 254. 9 lb., p. 254.
Monro, Horn.
PARTICLES
in questions (Ro. 10
:
(aI
HAPAOUKAI)
mi?
1169
is
17f.;
1
is
Cor. 9 :4f.; 11:22)
the in-
terrogative particle while ov
the negative of the verb.
In dependent clauses nrj occurs with the indicative with the second class conditions (el idii) always except in Mt. 2G 24 (Mk. 14 21). Cf. d ixrj in Jo. 15 22, etc. There are also four instances with the ind. in conditions of the first class.^ So Mk. 6:5; of d 15 Cor. 2; 2 Cor. 13 5; Gal. 1 7. We have iirj in a few relative 1
: : :
fjLrj
clauses, as a
6
is
/xi)
Set (Tit. 1
11);
m^?
TrapecTLv ravra (2 Pet. 1:9);
oiJLoXoyel (1 Jo.
3,
W. H.
fxi]
text).
Cf. Ac. 15 29
:
D.
There
(jL-q
a certain aloofness about
here that one can feel as in Plato
who, "with his sensitiveness to subtle shades of meaning, had in an instrument singularly adapted for purposes of reserve, irony, This use of txrj with the relative and pohteness or suggestion." ^ indicative is clearly a remnant of the literary construction.^ This
literary use of
ixr]
terize or describe in
with the relative was often employed to characa subjective way the relative. There is a soli6tl
fxij
tary instance of
18),
which
may
fxi] in a causal sentence, be contrasted with on ov
TeirlaTevKep (Jo. 3
ireirlaTevKep (1 Jo.
5: 10).
For OTL ixri exets see Epictetus, IV, 10. 34, and 6tl aoL ov, IV, 10. 35. Radermacher (N.T. Gr., p. 171) quotes âo-i;^ on /xri 5eT, Diog. of Oinoanda, Fragm. IV, 1. 9. There is, besides, kwei fxij roTt Laxvei in Heb. 9 17, according to the text of W. H., though they give In that case (the marginal had'eixivo%; in the margin eirel ni] irore reading) fii] iroTe would introduce a question. See further Causal with the ind., as in Clauses. In clauses of design we have iW Rev. 9 4, I'm jut) aSLKrjaovaLv. The margin of W. H. in 13 17 has
:
/jltj
with the ind. after verbs of apprehension as not originally a conjunction, but m'? in the sense of 'perhaps' (paratactic, not hypotactic). So Lu. 11:35,
'im
p.r}
TLs bbvarai.
Moulton^ explains
liT]
cTKoret
jxr]
to
</)ajs
aKOTos
ecxTiv.
Cf. also Col. 2
8;
Heb. 3
12;
Gal. 4: 11;
Th. 3:5.
The
papyri give abundant parallels.

/xi?
Moulton {ProL, p. The use (ii/B.c).
193) cites ajbivLoo
Trore appcoffrei:,
P. Par. 49
of /xi? as a conjunction in clauses of design and fear with the indicative is parallel to the use of the negative particle nv, but does not fall here for discussion. After all that has been said it is obvious (ii) The Subjunctive.
that
/X17
volitive
was destined to be the negative of the subj., first of the and deliberative uses and finally of the futuristic also.
of ov with the subj.
The few remnants

cussed.
1
For the
Moulton,
rest the
have already been disnormal and universal negative of the

'
Pro!., p. 171.
Moulton,
Prol., p. 171.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 441.
lb., p. 192.
1170
subj.
fxi]

is
fXT].
NEW TESTAMENT
In
Cf.
fjirf
evKaKcciiev
(Gal. 6:9).
see
Mk.
12
14, dci/xev
rj
bOiixev; (cf. o{;
just before),
we
how
well
/itj
suits this delibera-
The use of /x^ with the aor. subj. in prohibitions need not be further stressed. Wherever the subj. in a dependent clause has a negative (save after the conjunction ixi] after verbs of fearing) the negative is jut?. Cf os av fxri exv (Lu. 8:18); IVa /xt)
tive question.
.
e\dT]Te
(iii)
(Mk. 14:
The
38), etc.
It
is
needless to give
more examples.
wish that uses
juiy.
Optative.
It is only the optative of
It
was
rare to have the negative precative optative in the old

/jltj
is used with the optative for But already in Homer with the a future wish. In the N. T. there is no example of yepoiTo, as in Ro. optative except in wish. It is seen chiefly in 3:4, 6, 31; Gal. 6 14, etc. But note also the curse of Jesus on
Sanskrit.^
/x-f]
ij.ri
the fig-tree in
(iv)
Mk.
11
14,
ixrjSels
Kaprov
(payoL.
The Imperative. It seems that the imperative was originally used only affirmatively and the injunctive originally only negatively with ma. The oldest Sanskrit does not use 771a with the imperative.2 In Homer we find once ni] evdeo (II., IV, 410) and once nij KaraBvaeo (/?., XVIII, 134) and once nrj a.KovaaTc>3 (Ocl,
301). The second person aorist imper. in prohibitions did not take root and the third person only sparingly (in the N. T.). See Mt. 6:3, /xi) TJ^wrco.^ The original negative injunctive appears in the form /xi? iroL-qarjs (Latin 7ie feceris). The imperative
XVI,
in
Greek follows the analogy

Cf. Lu. 11
:
of this construction
uniformly.
between
^117
nv imol kotovs irapexe. with the present imperative and

7,
and uses fxr] For the difference

with the aorist
21,
fxi]
:
iirj
subjunctive see Tenses and Modes.
Cf.
Mk.
13
Trto-rei-ere,
4)o(3rjdfJTe
with Lu. 12 11, (Mt. 10 28, 31).

:
iJ.r)
fxepLfxprjarjTe,
and
m'7 (fôêtade
firj
with
firj
It is obviously natural for
to be used with
:
the imperative.
For a dehcate turn from
oh to nrj see Jo. 10
37.
T. Gr., p. 171) cites ovded kêaro: from an inscr. (Benndorf-Niemann, ReiseTi in Lykieti und Karieyi, 129 N.
But Radermacher (V.

102).
inf.
The Infinitive. As we have already seen, the oldest Sanskrit did not use the negative particles, and in Homer* oh appears to be the original negative. But there are a few instances of p.i] with the inf. in Homer. They occur when the inf. is used as an imperative (cf. in the N. T. 1 Cor. 5 9; 2 Th. 3 14), for an oath, a
(v)
: :
wish or an indirect command.

other finite modes that
/xi?
thus from the imperative and crept into constant use with the inf.
It
is
^ ^
Thompson,
Yb ^ p, 495
Synt., p. 499.
f.
lb.
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 263.
PARTICLES
It
(aI
IIAPAOIIKAI)
1171
came
to be the normal idiom with the
inf.
outside of indirect
and in antithetical or emphatic phrases (see under ov). Thompson! challenges the statement of Gildcrsleeve: "Not till the infinitive came to represent the indicative (in indirect stateassertion
ment) could ov have been tolerated with the infinitive." Thompson adds: ''But this toleration is established in Homer." Just as make inroads on ov in other constructions (cf. partiwe saw ciples), so it was with the inf. Even in indirect statement n-q came to be the rule (cf. the Atticist Lucian). Even in the Attic ov did not always occur with the inf. in indirect statement.^ The facts as to the use of fxij with the inf. in the N. T. have been
fjLT)
already given (see Infinitive and Indirect Discourse).

instance, \eyov<jLV dpaaraaLP
eldemi (Lu. 20
is
:
Cf.,
for
firi
fx-q
elvai
(Mk. 12
18); aireKpidrjaap
In short, Blass^ says that in the N. T. 'V17 used throughout." That is not quite true, as we have seen, but
7).
ov.
:
the limitations have already been given under

Tavra
fjLT}
Cf. Lu. 11
14.
42,
8e eSet TOirjaai naKetva
jjlt]
irapeLvai.
:
Cf. 21
The use
of
XaXelv after ov dwafxeda (Ac. 4

fxr)
20) has already
Here
dta t6
retains its full value.
We
/jltj
been noticed. need not pursue the matter.

:
Cf. Tov
fjiT]
(Ac. 21
12); irpds to
5); rc3
ixi)
(2 Cor. 3
:
13);
eis pi]
to
txi]
(Mt. 13
(2 Cor. 2
13); ciare
nrj (4:4); (Mt. 8 28),

:
The redundant or pleonastic use of pi] with the inf. has likewase come up for consideration under the Infinitive. In Lu. 20 27 some MSS. read avTL-\k.'yovTs and thus pi] is redundant after avTi-, but ^{BCDL do not have avTL-. Then in 22 34 J<BLT reject pi] with elbtvai after airapvijarj. In Heb. 12 19 W. H. put p-^ in the margin after TrapyTi]aavTo. But there is no doubt
etc.
: : :
of the use of the

biKTov eaTLV TOV
eiriyvoivaL avTov.
redundant
(TKCLpdaXa
pi]
in the
eKdetv,
1
N. T.
(24
:
Cf. -Lu. 17
avhpi]
TO.
pi]
16)
:
eKpaTOVVTO tov
:
See also Lu. 4: 42;

pi]
Pet. 3
10; Gal. 5
(cf.
7.
But
this pleonastic
is
by no means necessary
Ac. 8 :36; Ro.

the N. T., but
pi] âTTTiaOrj-
15
22).
It
does not usually occur with

:
kcoXuco in
note Ac. 10
vai;
47,
tl
pi] tl
to v8o)p bhvaTai Koikvcfai rts tov
Here
'no,'
pi]
is
the interrogative particle expecting the anis
py]bkva is
redundant afte^ /cwXueti'. But in Ac. 24: 23 We do not have pi] ov with the inf. in the N. T. Here (after oi) pi] stancis alone and is not redundant (cf. Ac. 4: 20) or is redundant (20 20, 27), as the case may be. The use of pi] and pi] ov was not compulsory in the ancient Greek.''
swer
while^^
not pleonastic.
'
Synt., p. 414.

T., pp. :521IT.;
s *
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 255.

Cf.
Goodwin, M. and
Thompson,
Synt., pp. 425
fT.
1172
(vi)
NEW TESTAMENT
skrit did
Homer
The Participle. We have seen already how the oldest Sannot use the negative particles with the participle. In we have only one instance of ix-q with the participle {Od.,
IV, 684). 1
But
JU17
gradually
in Attic Greek.
In the modern Greek
from the participial use. but that is all. The drift of the KOLvi] is for ^17, and a writer like Plutarch shows it.^ Mi] is the usual negative of the participle. The details were given in connection with Participles. In the N. T. we need pay no attention to the Attic refinements on this point, which were not always observed even there. We have /X17 with the participle in the N. T. as a matter of course. Cf. Mt. 12 30 6 d)U and 6 nrj awayoov, (1 Tim. 5 bkovra, (Lu. 13) to. 4 35) ixr]Uv ^Xaxlâv, (Ac. 20 22) fiij eiddos. In Mt. 22 11 f. and 1 Pet. 1 8, a distinction, as was shown, seems to be drawn between oh and JU77 with the participle, Cf. Mt. 18 25; Lu. 12 33; Jo. 7:15; Ac. 9:9; 17:6; 1 Th. 4 5 (cf. Gal. 4:8), etc. The do^vnright denial of oh lingered on awhile in the kolvyj (cf. papyri), but nr] is putting oh to rout.^ The ancient Greek* used jui? with substantives as (vii) Nouns. 6 /X17 larpos (Plato, Gorg. 459 b), adjectives as ol /xi] Kadapol (Ant. V. 82), or adverbs as to nij kfiiroSuv (Thuc. ii, 45. 1). In the N. T., so far as I have noticed, fxrj with substantives and adjectives occurs only in contexts where it is natural. Thus in Lu. 10 4, fxri TTjpav, fifi viTodriixaTa, we have just before ^tj) /3ao-Tdêre âWavTLov. In Jo. 13 9, p.i] rovs woSas ijlov {jlovov, we have no verb, but vLTTTe is to be supplied from the preceding sentence. Cf. also Eph. 5 15; Jo. 18 :40. So in Ro. 12 11 jui) oKvrjpoi is in the midst of participles used in an imperatival sense. In 1 Tim. 3:3, fxri TrapoLVov, fxr] T\r]KTr]v, the construction is del elvai. This infinitival construction is carried on in verse 6 (in spite of the parenthesis in verse 5) by fxri vt64>vrov. So as to verse 8 and Tit. 1 7. There is no difficulty as to the use of txi] in Col. 3 2 and 2 Th. 3 6. id) The Intensifying Compounds with M77. The same story in the main that we found with oh is repeated with ixij. There is no jx-qxi, but we have /iijrt in this sense. The examples in the N. T. are all in questions (cf. Mt. 7: 16: Jo. 18 35) except one, d ixi}Ti (Lu. 9 13). The position of ni) may give it emphasis as in Jas. 3 1 (cf. oh in Mt. 15 11). The use of the compound
seen,
:
participles even has driven oh entirely In the N. T. oh still hangs on, as we have
its
/ii?
made
way with
jjii)
/jltj
Monro, Horn. Gr., p. 263. Thompson, Synt., p. 255.
'
f.
Thompson,
Synt., p. 410
f.
PARTICLES
(aI
nAPAGUKAl)
is
:
1173
negative as a second (or third) negative
simply to strengthen
14
/xT/xtrt /x-qdels (payoL,
the negative as
(Ac. 25
:
is
true of
(jltj
ov.
Cf.
Mk.
frji'
11
24) ewiôoovTes
delu avTov
7)
/jltj
//ij/ceri,
(Ro. 13
fi7]8iv 64)el\eTe,
(2 Cor. 13
8) firioevl
fj-rjdh,
etc.
Besides
nrjdeis
there
:
is
firjdev
(Ac. 27:33),
ixrjdk
in the sense of 'not even'
3),
AH77
(Mt. 6:1),
:
ix-q^kiroTe
(Mk. 9 25), p-ij-KOTe in Heb. 9 17. Elsewhere in the N. T. a conjunction), firjdafiCJs (Ac. 10 14), /iriTrov (Ac. 27:29), tivwcc (Ro. 9:11), tir,TLye (1 Cor. 6:3), fivrts (2 Th. 2:3). MijTTcos is only a conjunction in the N. T. If nij is
MTy/cert
:
Tim. 3:7), (margin of W. H.

(2
/x'jSeTrw
(Eph. 5 (Heb. 11: 7),
followed
kK
:
by
ov as in 1 Jo. 3
10, 6
fxi]
ttolojv 8iKai.oavvr]v
ovk
i(XTi.v
Tov deov, the last negative retains its force.
So
vice versa in
Ac.
a sharp contrast between tl and fxrjdep (both neuter abstracts referring to a person.). We saw that after a positive statement the nega(e) Kai JU17. tive was carried on by /cat ov. So also we have /cat /xr] as in Eph. 4 26, opylêade /cat /zi) d)uaprdv6T, and in Lu. 1 20; 2 Cor. 12 21 0o/3oi) dXXd XdXet /cat /it) (ncoTrjcrjjs, where In Ac. 18 9 note a positive command comes in between the two examples of /ii). KaraKavxaade Kai xpevSeade Kara rrjs In Jas. 3 14, per contra, a\r]deias, the negative /xiy seems to cover both verbs connected by Cf. also Lu. 3 14. We have instances /cat rather than fxr]8e. also of /cat connecting a clause with the conjunction fii] Trore (Mt. In Lu. 14 29, tva ix-q Trore dhros avrov difxk13 15; Mk. 4 12). ^ apôovrai, we have fxr] Trore with apôovrat and \iov /cat jut) laxôvTOS 4 20.
In Gal. 6
:
3 there
is
fj.ri
iJ.r\
JUT]
with iaxvovTos.
(/) Disjunctive
Use
of Mr].
The
/xt)
simplest form of this con-
trast
is
fjL-f]
have
4)oôv
p77
8e as in Lu. dXXd as in
XdXet,
:
10
20,
x^tpere
xatpere
iv\i}v
8e.
Then we
/jltj
:
/jltj
tovtov dXXd tov Bapa^l3a.v, Jo. 18:40;

:
oXka
Ac. 18
9.
We
/xi)
have
6rt
fxi]
in Lu. 23
28.
In Lu. 10
1
20 we really have
yui)
5^
6rt.
Moulton
:
{Prol.,
240) does not find
6rt in
the N. T., but considers

it.
fi-qTiye
ju?)
in p.
Cor. 6
Kat.
3 as tantamount to
See Jo. 13
9 for
(jlopov
dXXd
3. (a)
So Ph. 2
12.
We
need not trench further upon the
conjunctions.
Combination or the
Mt7 ov.
Two
Negatives.
It is in the
This
/iri
is
very simple.
N. T. confined to
is
questions where
is
the interrogative particle and ov

its
the nega-
tive of the verb.

it is
Each negative thus has

good Greek.
1
bit difficult to translate the

it
hsh.
But
is
though combination into good l^ngMoulton {Prol., p. 192) quotes

force,
own
Cf. W.-Th., p. 494.
1174

ixpa
ixi]
NEW TESTAMENT
Cf. also
/JL-q
Plato's Protag. 312 A, dXX'

ovx'i-
ouk viroKaiJLâveLS.
18,
fxi]
in
Jer.
23
24.
So Ro. 10
om
riKovaav;
We may
:
it 'Did they fail to hear?' expecting the answer 'No.' Paul repeats the same idiom in 10 19. See further 1 Cor, 9 1 Cor. 9:8 is not an instance, since fx-q comes in 4f.; 11:22.
render
We do have nr} but here fxr) is a conjunction and ovx is the negative of evpo:, both retaining their The construction in 1 Jo. 3 10 is not pertinent. full force. The use of ou ^117 in Ac. 4 20 is not under discus(6) Oil fxrj. sion, nor the redundant /Z17 after ov (Ac. 20: 20, 27), but only the with the aorist subj. (rarely present) or occasionidiomatic ov
one part of the question and
TTcos
ov in the
other.
:
ovx
tupco
after
({)oj3ovfjiaL
in 2 Cor. 12
20,
/jltj
ally the fut. ind.
Cf. ov
a.d.).
/jL-fj
({>a.yoj,
ov
/jL-q
Trdvoj in
/jltj
the boy's letter,

ovbi
P. Oxy. 119
j-LT]
(ii/iii
See
Is.
11:9, ov
KaKoiroLqaovcnv
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 Moulton (Prol, pp. 187-192) will not let it go at that. "In the LXX Nb is translated ov or ov nrj indifferently within a single verse, as in Is. 5 27." It seems probable that the force of ov /iri has worn down in the LXX and the N, T. In the non-literary paHe pyri "ov ixi] is rare, and very emphatic," Moulton notes. urges also that in spite of the 96 examples in the text of W. H.
:
the idiom in the N. T.
is
as rare as in the papyri
when the
13
LXX quotations and the 57 from the words of Christ are removed,
"a feeUng that inspired language was fitly rendered by words of a peculiarly decisive tone." But in these 70 examples the force of ov is still strong. Of the other 26 fj'^^'Oia are probably weakened a bit as in Mt. 25 9; Mk. 13 2; Jo'. 18 11. It is only in the Gospels and the Apocalypse (64 and 16 respectively) that ov It is interesting to observe that on HT] occurs with frequency. this point Moulton gets the Gospels and Revelation in harfj.ri
: :
Cf.
Goodwin, M. and
T., pp.
389
ff.;
Thompson,
Synt., pp. 431-438.
Juatin Martyr, p. 169.
PARTICLES
(aI
IIAPAOIIKAi)
1175
raony with the papyri by ehminating the 70 passages due to Semitic influence. Cf. Gildersleeve (A. J. P., iii, 202 ff.) and Ballentine
explains
but as
deXrjs
453 ff.)- But Radermacher {N. T. Gr., p. 172) ov8' oh tiri yh-qraL, not as a Hebraism, Mt. 24:21, o'la a "barbarism" like the Wesseley Papyrus xxvi, ov5' ov mt
{ib., xviii,
yePT^Tai hol yvvi).
He
/xi)
quotes also Pap. Lugd.

Cf. ov
is
jut)
II, p.
107, 9, kav
:
yvvalnas ov
axÔrjpaL.
a8LKr}drj
(Rev. 2
11); ov
uri
earai
(Mt. 16
22).
There
ov8i nn
that
13
:
Even ov /xr] Trkajj. we have owe and ov fxrj

So
ov
ov5k a climax in Rev. 7:16, ov was not strong enough sometimes, so
in
ov
Heb. 13
5, ov
ixi]
ae avu ovd' ov
:
ni)
ae eyKaToXlTrco.
also
ixi]
oiiSev
nij abiK-qaei
(Lu. 10
19).
In
Mk.
we have
in
both the principal and the subordinate
(relative) clause.
IV. Interrogative Particles (eircpoTTiKal irapaGfiKaL). It is not the mode that we have under discussion here, but simply the
particles used in the various
1.
forms of questions.^
Single Questions.
Direct Questions.
(a)
(i)
No
Particle at
all.
So
avvriKare
ravra iravra; (Mt. 13

is
51).
So 13 :28 and very

fact,
all.
often.
Here the inquiry
colourless except
as the tone of voice or context

Cf. Lu. 13
2; Jo. 7
may
:
indicate one's attitude.
In
it is
most interrogative sentences have no interrogative word at

:
:
23; 13
6; Ac. 21
37, etc.
Hence
sometimes a matter of doubt whether a sentence is interrogative or declarative. Cf. Jo. 16 31; Ro. 8 33; 14: 22; 1 Cor. 1 22; 2 Cor. 3:1; Heb. 10 2; Jas. 2 4, etc. It may be dou])tful also at what point the question ends. Cf. Jo. 7 19; Ro. 4 1. Winer^
:
rightly says that on

(ii)
this point
the The Use of Negative suffialready had has subject This expected. kind of answer See under ov and nrj. Ov expects the answer cient discussion. and fxi] the answer 'no' (cf. Jo. 7:31). In 7:22) 'yes' (cf. Mt. according to W. H., which has lost its omovv, have we Jo. 18 37 preserve it. Probably Pilate was would omovp but force, negative
:
grammar cannot speak. Particles. They are used to indicate
hardly ready to go that far unless in

greatly in tone.
jest.
The
use of
nrj
varies
The
precise emotion in each case (protest, in-
dignation, scorn, excitement, sympathy, etc.) depends on the context.
Cf. Jo.
:
In Jo. 3 10 the second part has
4:29; 6:67; 7:47; Lu. 6:39; Ro. 10:18; 11:1. first part of the question has no negative and the
ov.
ff.;
Cf. W.-Th., pp. 508
Robertson, Short Gr.,
i)p.
177
IT.
W.-Th.,
p. 508.
1176
(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 Mt. 18 1. This classic use is not strictly interrogative, but illative in the interrogative sentence. But apa, from the same root^
: :
with more vocal stress, is interrogative. Indeed, it is sometimes doubtful which accent is correct, as in Gal. 2: 17, where dpa is probably correct. In Ro. 14 19, however, W. H. give iipa ovv. We have apa in Lu. 18 8 and apa ye in Ac. 8 30. "Apa looks
:
: :
backward, Spa forward.

ing.
But the accent

is
:
is
a question of edit-
The use
:
of
el
in direct questions
either a
toIs
Hebraism ^ or
depaireveLv;
:
involves elhpsis.
Cf.
is
Mt. 12
10,
el
eêan
ad^âaiv
So
is
el
Gen. 17 17) but foreign to the old Greek. The classic Greek, however, did use in indirect questions, and this fact may have made it easier for
also 19
3.
It
common
in the
LXX
(cf.
the direct use of

this
el
el
to arise.
Radermacher {N. T.
rj,
Gr., p. 136) takes

it:
= ^. The N.
ev j3a/cxtd5t;
T. does not use
fxelvwc
^ /iX(X)a)
but the papyri have evTVVxo-VLv; P. Fay. 137 (I/a.D.).
So
the question to the oracle.
The most common in the N. T. is Other words are frequently added, as apa (24 The various uses of tI as adverb 45) 'yap (9 5) ovv (Lu. 3 10) (Mk. 10 18, Lu. 16 2); wHth prepositions, as bia ri (Mt. 9:11)
(iv) Interrogative
Pronouns.
Tis (cf.
;
Mt. 3:7).
:
and
els tI
(Mk. 14
:
4) or x^pi-^ tIvos (1 Jo. 3

iVa tL
12)
or eUiptically, as
us.
tLs
tI 6tl
(Lu. 2
49)
and
1
(Mt, 9
4),
need not detain

15
:
The
double interrogative
TTOLos
(Tos
rts tL
:
occur in l.Pet.
:
see 15
34.
We
and Mt. 8 27, and woneed not tarry longer on these elementary
appears in
24.
11.
Mk.
Both
:
For
Trorairos
see
details.
(v) Interrogative Conjunctions.
These are
common
ri
besides
tI in
tI
(as
Mk. 10 49= 'how'

in
18).
The
:
possible exclamatory use of
Lu. 12:
fine.'
is
sustained
by the modern Greek

:
KaXa='how
:
Cf. iroaaKLs (Mt. 18
21); irSre (25
38);
:
ecos
wdre (17
17); rod (Lu.
25); ttws (10

(6)
26); T60ev
(Mt. 13
27), etc.
Indirect Questions.
Here there must be

of
ris (rt) is
:
either a
pronoun
25;
or a conjunction.
(i)
Pronouns.
The use
common.
Cf.
Mt. 6
Lu. 9 :46; Jo. 2 :25; Ac. 19 32. We find 6ri so used in Ac. 9 6 and a apparently so in 1 Tim. 1:7. Certainly otoIos occurs
:
in this construction (1 Cor. 3

^
13).
The same thing

rj
is
true of
Jann. (Hist. Gk. Gr., p. 411) notes the pre-Attic Blass, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 260.
pa.
PARTICLES
oo-os
(aI
HAPAGUKAI)
Cf. also
-kolos
1177
(Mk. 11:
(Mk. 5
rfKiKos
19)
and
: :
birolos (Jas. 1: 24).
29); TToaos (Mt. 27
13); TroraTros (Lu. 7:39); TTTjXkos
and
in Gal. 6
11 (margin of
:
W.
H.)
if
(Heb. 7:4), this reading be ac-
cepted.
(ii)
Cf. rl in Ac. 12
18.
Conjunctions.
TTodev
oTTcos
and
TTou
(Jo.
These are also common, as ei (Mk. 15 :44); 3:8); Tdre (Mk. 13 33); ttws (1 Th. 1:9);
:
(Lu. 24: 20); owov (Mk. 14
14);
î? Trore
(Lu. 3
15), etc.
Double Questions. These are rare. There is no instance of Trorepov (i) Direct. We do have ??. (Mt. 9 5; 23 17; 27 17), the later Greek caring little for TLs the dual idea in Trorepov. We more commonly have simply rj with the second part of the question and nothing in the first, as in Lu. 20 4; Ro. 2 3 f. We may have ^ ov (Mt. 22 17) or rj uri (Mk. 12 14). Sometimes we have simply at the beginning of the question with a reference to an implied alternative (1 Cor. 9:6; 2 Cor. 1:17). This r/ may come in the middle of the sentence as in 2 Cor. 9 8. The r; may even precede ris as in
(c)
r?
r/
Mt.
9.
(ii)
Indirect.
There
:
is
one instance of
irorepov
tJ
in
an
indi-
rect question (Jo. 7
17).
V. Conjunctions
(crvvSeo-iioi).
In the nature of the case
much
had
to be said about the conjunctions^ in the treatment of the
Sentence and also Subordinate Clauses.

ciples controlling
The
syntactical prin-
both paratactic and hypotactic sentences have received adequate discussion. But conjunctions play such an important part in the language that it is best to group them all together. They connect words, clauses, sentences and paragraphs, and thus form the joints of speech. They have a very good name, since they bind together (con-jungo) the various parts of speech not otherwise connected, if they need connection, for asyndeton is always possible to the speaker or writer. The point here is to interpret each conjunction as far as possible so that its precise function may be clear. 1. Paratactic^ Conjunctions (crvvBea/jiOL irapara/cTiKoi). (a) Copulative. Conjunctions which connect words and clauses are evidently later in development than the words and clauses. The use of conjunctions came to be very common in the Greek so that the absence was noticealjle and was called asjîde1
The
distinction
botwoon adv. and conj.
is,
of courso, :irl)itrary.
Conjs. arc
advs. just as the other particles are.

p. 406.
^
Cf. Paul, Principles of the ilist. of Lang.,
"Co-ordinating"
is
from co-ordino, to range
togcthi^r.
1178
ton.^

But
it is
NEW TESTAMENT
necessary.
a mistake to suppose that these connectives are fail to use them as a result of rapidity of thought as the words rush forth, or they may be consciously
One may
avoided for rhetorical effect. Cf. (SXewere, ^Xkrere, /SXerere in Ph. 3 2, with Tennyson's "Break, break, break." All this is entirely within the province of the speaker. Cf. 1 Cor. 3 12, xp^<ôu,
: :
apyvpov, Xtdovs
rt/xtous,
^vXa, xoprov, Kokanriv.
Cf. also
Cor. 13
4-7 where the verbs follow one another in solemn emphasis with no connective save one be. In the same way contrast may be expressed without conjunctions as in 1 Cor, 15 43 f.^ In Luke and John there is a pleasing alternation of asyndeton and con:
junctions.
Cf. Gal. 5
22.
The
first
conjunctions were the para-
tactic or co-ordinating, since language
was
originally in principal
sentences.^
The
copulative
(connecting)
conjunctions are
the
simplest and earliest type of the paratactic structure.
They
simply present the words or clauses as on a par with each other.'* The primitive conjunctions were monosyllabic like /cat, re, bkJ' This word appears to be related to the Sanskrit ca, the (i) Te.
g"), and the Gothic -h.^ These words and postpositive. The Sanskrit is almost devoid of conjunctions which were so highly developed by the Greek and Latin, but ca is one of the few possessed by this ancient tongue. There is a striking connection between quis, que, quis-que and TLs, re, rts. The Thessalian dialect has ds for tIs and da-Ke. We have tIs re in the old Greek. Te shows this double pronominal origin in its use for and and ever (just like que, quis-que).^
Latin que (with labio-velar

all enclitic
are
'^
The
indefinite use
is
.
distinctly Homeric.^
The use
of ewei
re, 6s re
was old Ionic and continued in Attic tragedy, as ol6s re did in Attic prose. Cf. Radermacher (A''. T. Gr., p. 5). Indeed, some scholars^" hold that the correlative use (re re) was the original
one, but this
somewhat
is is
It seems certain that re indicates a than does /cat. This close correlative use certainly very old. Cf. av r' 70; re in Homer.^^ In the N. T. it rare except in the Acts, where it occurs some 175 times. It is
is
doubtful.
closer unity
common
*
in all parts of the
book and
3
is
thus a subtle argument

Cf. W.-Th., p. 538.
2 * 5
7
Brug.,
f.;
ib., p.
552.
Cf. C. Pitman, Conjunctions., p. 5
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 261.
f.
W.-Th., p. 434. Whitney, Sans, Gr., p. 417.

Brug., Griech, Gr., pp. 529, 541
8
9
Cf. K.-G., II, pp. 536

11
ff.
Monro, Horn.
K.-G.,
II, p,
Gr., p. 242.
10
246.
Brug., Griech. Gr., p, 530.
PARTICLES
for the unity of the
(aI
IIAPAOHKAi)
1179
It is
work
:
(u'c-sections
and
all).
something
additional, but in intimate relation with the preceding.

T
We
find
re
where v\pco9eis and Xa/Scov are united byCf. also 10 22, where again two participles are connected. re. In 23 24, kttjut] re irapaaTrjaaL, the change from the direct to the indirect discourse is marked by re, whereas Kai is used twice before to join minor phrases, Te puts irapaarrjaaL on a par with (toluclcare} In the same way in 20 11 the first two participles are joined by nal and then both are related to the next by re. The same idiom occurs in Jo. 6:18, where re gives an additional item somewhat apart from the mt /cat just before. In Jo. 4 41 Kal re are not co-ordinate. Kal introduces the whole sentence and re connects the two parts. Cf. thus 5e re in Ac. 2 37. But
alone as in Ac. 2
:
33,
re as
is strictly
correlative.
:
Cf. the Latin que
que,
kav.
English
50.
See Ac. 2 46 where the two participles are co-ordinated.

:
In Ro. 14 8
are here
we have
The
re
four times in succession with
There
26)
is
two
pairs of conditions.
The
el're
parts of each pair are balei're
anced carefully.
at
disjunctive
(cf.
Cor. 12
same correlative use of re. So as to ovre ovre The use of re (Mt. 12 32) and ixrire Kat 20). fxrire (Ac. 27 is also common where there is an inner bond, though no hint is
bottom
:
this
given as to the relative value of the matters united.

pets re Kal ypaniJ.aTe'LS
ai>8pes
Cf. dpxte-
(Lu. 22
:
66);
Tvoielv re Kat didaaKeiv
re
/cat
yvpalKes (8
:
12);
;
eKivridr]
re
(Ac. 1:1);
:
/cat
eyevero (21
:
30);
5t-
Kalwv re Kat adlKwv (24

re Kat âpâpoLS
15)
fXLKpu re Kat fjieyaXo: (26
22)
"FXKrjfflv
:
(Ro. 1: 14); 'lovdalov re TpoJTOU Kal "EWrivos (2
re Kat 26 9:15, and for re Kat Kat ('both Kat, we really have the re 20. In Jo. 4:11, ovre Cf. Latin non que et. We even have oi;re and') construction.
etc.
For
re
Kal
re
see Ac.
9),
:
ovTe Kat
gether and both are parallel to re following.
îjre stand toPer contra we find 2 and also 3. The manuscripts often varj' bere 5e in Ac. 19 tween re and 5e (cf. Ac. 3 10; 4 14, etc.). We have re yap (common from Aristotle on 2) in Ro. 1 26 followed by 6/xotcos re Kat. In As a rule re stands after the word Kat. Heb. 2:11 note re yap or words that are paralleled, but this is not always so. The etymology of this conjunction is disputed. Cur(ii) Kat. tius^ makes it the locative case of the pronominal stem Ka-, ko-, so
in Jo. 5
37
f.
In Ac. 27
20
urire
is
' This classic idiom is a mark of Luke's literary style. But in the kolpt] n on the retreat before Kal. Jann., Ilist. Gk. dr., p. 401. ^ Cf. Hammer, De Te Particulao Usu llerodotco Thucydideo Xenophonteo, Gk. Etymology. 1904, p. 92.
1180
that
It
NEW TESTAMENT
it would ultimately come from the same root as re (que). would thus mean 'in this respect/ 'this besides.' Brugmann^
finds its original sense in kolvos, Latin co-, cum, Gothic ga.
.idea
The
would then be 'together with,' 'in addition to.' The Arkadian, South Achaean and Cypriote dialects use /cds and-Kd = Kat. Whatever the origin, it all comes to the same thing in the end. It is by far the most frequent of all the conjunctions or other It is so common in fact that Moulton particles in the N. T. and Geden do not list it in their concordance. This in itself is in accord with the later Greek idiom, as Thumb ^ notes in Aristotle and in the modern Greek and Moulton^ in the papyri. Moulton
cites Par. P. 18, ere 8vo rfixepas exofiev
/cat
4>da(xoixev
ets
Yl^\ov(Ji,
little
as
parallel to
Mk.
15
25; Jo. 4: 35.
But
there can be
doubt
that the extreme fondness for parataxis in John's Gospel, for

is partially due to the use of Kal in the LXX for the Hebrew 1 which "means a hook and resembles a hook in shape."* It was certainly used to "hook" together all sorts of sentences. There is not the same unity in the older Greek in the matters united as is true of re. Kat " connects in a free and easy manner" ^ and the Hebrew i still more loosely. There are three main uses of Kai which appear in the N. T. as in all Greek. The Adjunctive Use ('Also'). This is possibly the original use, though one cannot tell. It is thus like the Latin et-4am, English too (to) = addition to something already mentioned, and is common enough in all stages of the language.^ A good example of this use of Kal is seen in Mt. 8 9, Kai yap eya? avdpioirbs elfXL bird
instance,
kôvcriap.
The
Kal
here points to Christ's relation to the boy.

is
The who
centurion, like a true soldier, does not say that he

gives orders, but rather one
man
who obeys them. He has the true military spirit and knows therefore how Jesus can cure the boy without going to see him. The Kal is here very significant.
Cf. ovTO)s Kal
v/xeTs
in
to Christ's hearers
Mt. 7 by Kai.
12,
where the Golden Rule

:
is
applied
aov,
Cf. Jo. 7
3 tva Kal
Kal is
ol
/jLadriTal
(12
10) tva Kal TOP Aaâpov.
This use of
more frequent
20
:
in
Kal
Luke than elsewhere

(Lu. 12 :41);
5e
in the
:
N. T.^
ei
Cf
Kayo) (Lu.
3)
fj
Kal (12
54, 57); tI Kal (1 Cor. 15 :29);

Kal (2
Kal
yap
:
(Mt. 8:
1
9); kau Kal (Gal. 6:1);
Cor. 11:15); Kal
dt
(Mt. 10
HeUen., p. 129.
Prol., p. 12.
* B
Jann., Gk. Gr., p. 401.
6
7
Cf.
M. W. Humphreys, The
CI. Rev., 1897, vol.
XI, pp. 140
ff.
Abbott, Job. Gr., p. 140.
PARTICLES
18);
d)s /cat
(aI
nAPAGHKAl)
:
1181
(Ro. 6:11);
/cat
(Ac, 11
17); Kadoos Kal (Ro. 15

diioius
/cat
:
7); ovtc^ nal

coaavrojs
:
OS Kal (Ac.
24
6,
8);
(1
(Jo.
11);
(1
Cor.
11
25); KaOawep
/cat
Th. 3
12); 8l6
/cat
(Lu. 1
35); 5td tovto Kai
(Lu. 11:49); dXXd

'also' occurs
/cat (24:22), etc. So then /cat in the sense of with nouns, pronouns, verbs, adverbs, conjunctions.
It
may
refer to
a word or a clause.
6
/cat
Cf. dXXcos re Kat, B. G. U.
530
(i/A.D.).
For the use of

It is
see the Article,

for
/cat
Prepositions.^
common
:
to
and for avu /cat see sum up a sentence that
For the relative and articular participle see the /cat in the sentences in Mt. 5 39^3. Here /cat balances the principal and the subordinate clauses. So in the apodosis of a conditional sentence we find /cat as in Jo. 14 7. Cf. Heb. 7 26, where /cat almost means 'precisely,' and Mt. 6: 10, where it means 'just so.' Cf. Ro. 11 16. So with a we find it in the apodosis (Jo. 5 19). Cf also after ibawep in 15 26. Sometimes the /cat seems to be redundant as in Lu. 11:1, Ka6<hs Kai, or cos /cat in 1 Cor. 7 7. We may indeed have Kat ('also') in both parts of the comparison, a studied balancing of the two members of the sentence as in Mt. 18 33, /cat ak (hs Kayoi. So Ro. 1 13, /cat kv vfiQiv /cameos Kat ev rots
precedes.
: :
: :
XotTTOts WvecTLV.
See ol8a Kai
olda
Kai (Ph.
4:12).
The Ascensive Use {'Even'). The notion of 'even' is an advance on that of mere addition which is due to the context, not to Kat. The thing that is added is out of the ordinary and rises to a climax
like the crescendo in music.
Cf. Latin adeo.

Kat
(Ac. 21: 13; Ro. 13:5). context.

Cf.
:
This use of
ol
Cf. ov ixovov, dXXd Kat depends wholly on the
Mk.
27, Kat rots TvevixaaL toXs aKadaproLS kinracratL.
(So Lu. 10
17).
Cf. also Kat

:
TeKwvai
:
and
Kat ol kdviKoi,
:
Mt. 5
46
f.
See further Ac. 10

belongs here.
45; 11
1,
:
20; Gal. 2
13.
The use
of
Kttt t
(Cf. 1 Cor.
5.)
The Mere Connective {Ând'). The difference between Kat as 'and' and Kat as 'also' is very slight, whichever was the original The epexegetic or explicative use of Kat occupies a middle idea. ground between 'also' and 'and.' Blass^ treats it under 'also.' Cf. Lu. 3 18, TToXXd Kat erepa irapaKoXcbv, where the "connective" force of Kat is certainly very slight. So also Jo. 20 30, TroXXd Kat dXXa ariiieta. Sec further Jo. 1 16, Kat x^-pi-v clvtI xdptros, where the clause is an explanatory addition. Ct. (Ac. 22 25) Kat aKaraKpLToi',
:
(1
Cor. 2
2) Kat tovtov eaTavpcankvov,

is
(Ro. 13
11) Kat tovto (Latin
idque)
which
our 'and that too' where

:
we
combiiu^ 'and' and
'also' ('too') in the Kat, (Hel). 11
12)
K-at
raOra (frequent in ancient
Cf. Dciss., B. S.; Hatch, Jour, of Bib. Lit., 1908, p. 142.
Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 2G3.
1182
Greek).

:
NEW TESTAMENT
See in particular Eph. 2 8, Kal tovto ovk e^ vncbv, where The simple rovTo refers to the whole conception, not to x^-pi-tl. use of /cat where common most copulative idea is, however, the
words are piled together by means of

the connection
1:3);
is
this conjunction.
Sometimes
as close as with
re.
Kokfj Kal ayadfj
(Lu. 8
15).
Thus 6 deos Kal Trarrjp (2 Cor. But the words may be very
Kal ZaddovKaZoL
loosely joined in idea, as
ol $aptcraTot
(Mt. 16
1).
Kal
may
be used to connect
all
sorts of words, clauses
and senKal
Kal
tences.
Thus
XeTco "Epxov, Kal epxerat

is
(Mt. 8:9).
after the imperative
seen in Mt. 11:29.
The use of The chain with

: :
go on indefinitely. Cf. the four examples as the connective in Ro. 9 4; the six in Rev. 7 12 (so 5 12). So in Ph. 4 9; five times in 1 Cor. 15 4 (/cat to connect 6tl three we have Kal 6tl 12-16 every paragraph and most of the senIn Rev. clauses).
:
may
tences begin with

lypse.
/cat.
In fact
it is
true of
it is
much
of the
Apoca-
If one turns to First Maccabees,
true even to a
much
In First Maccabees /cat ^ has found this repetition Thumb But 1. Hebrew the translates of Kat in Aristotle so that the Hebrew influence simply intensified Kat. a Greek idiom. We have noted the use of /cat with re (re
greater extent than in the Apocalypse.
Cf. Ro. 1:20).
The
use of
as
/cat
sense of 'both
Cf.
and'
:
Kat
: :
is
far
more common
eTeXevT-qae
Kal
in the
erd^rj.
in Ac. 2
29, Kat
Mk. 4
r).
41; Ph. 2
13; Ac. 26
29.
Sometimes the connection

also.'
almost amounts to 'not only, but

Kat
In Col. 2:16 note
Cf.
Kixv
kHu (Lu.
12
38).
A. Brinkmann contends that
and late Greek kclv is sometimes 'at any rate' and is never a mere link {Scriptio continua und Anderes, Rhein. Kat Kat ov Mus. LXVII, 4, 1912). In Lu. 5 36 we have Kat Kat. It is usual to (so Jo. 6 36), and in Jo. 17 25 Kat ov8^ have Kat ov after an affirmative clause as in Jo. 10 35. Cf. Kat
in the papyri
:
In Lu. 12 6 Kat ov See Negative Particles. fXT] follows a question with ovxi- Kat connects two negative sentences
in 2 Cor. 9
:
5.
in Lu. 6
37.
For
ovre
Kai
see Jo. 4
is
11.
Sometimes
Kat
be-
gins a sentence
when the coimection Children use "and" thus often in

Cf. Kat av rjada in
:
with an unexpressed idea. telling stories and asking

73) like
questions.
Mt. 26 70 (and
See also
Jo. 9
:
Mk.
:
10
26, Kat tIs Svparai audrjvaL.

:
Et tu, Brute. So also Lu. 10 29;

:
36; 2 Cor. 2
1
2.
Cf. also the use of Kat in parenthesis as
in
Ro.
13, Kat kKco^Wrjv axpi Tov 8evpo.

Kat
The context
gives other
turns to
to find Kat
that are sometimes rather startling. It is common where it has to bear the content 'and yet.' So Jo.
1
HeUen.,
129.
PARTICLES
3
:
(aI
IIAI'AOnKAl)
1183
4 20; 6 49; 7 30; IJo. 2 9. The examples are common See Jer. 23 21. in John's Gospel (Abbott, Joh. Gr., pp. 135 ff.). In 21 we have ov Kal in Kal. 1 Cor. 10 In Mk. 4 4 note /xeu Ph. also Kal av So Cf. also Mt. 3 14, contrast. 'Ipxv t'Pos fxe; This idiom occurs in Plato, and Abbott 1 22, Kol tI alpr]a-oiJ,aL. Cf. 1:5; 2 20; notes a number of them in the Gospel of John. In 24 Kal is almost etc. Lu. 12 27 f.; 8 39 f.; 7 57, 3 13; 5
19;
: : :
:
equal to dXXd, that
is,
the context makes contrast.

12
:
Cf. also
Mt.
Tholuck^ so takes mt in Ro. 1 13 (the parenthetical Kal). Sometimes Kal seems imitative of the Hebrew \ by almost having the sense of oTt or iva ('that') as in Mt. 26: 15; Mk. 14:40; Lu. 9:51; 12: 15. In In particular note Kal eyevero Kal (as in Lu. 5 1, 12, 17, etc.). Mt. 16 6 observe opare Kal. So Lu. 12 15 and Mt. 26 15. In modern Greek Kal has so far usurped the field that it is used not
6
:
26
{ov
Kai);
Mk.
12; Lu. 20
19; Jo. 18
28.
only in
all
sorts of paratactic senses like 'and,' 'but,' 'for,' 'or,'
but even in hypotactic senses for va or tov, declarative and even consecutive (Thumb, Handb., p. 184). In Mk. 3 7 Kat comes near taking the place of 6, for in the next verse there are five instances of Kal co-ordinate with each other, but subordinate to Kal in verse 7. Sometimes after Kat we may supply 'so' as in See also Ph. 4 7. Kat Xd/iTret, Mt. 5 15; Kat ^XeiropLev, Heb. 3 19. This is a kind of consecutive- use of Kat. Cf. Lu. 24 18. The
'and
so,'
:
fondness for co-ordination in the Gospels causes the use of Kat where a temporal conjunction (ore) would be more usual. Cf. Mk. 15 25, rjv c6pa tpIttj Kal karavpoiaau (Lu. 23 44). But Blass^
:
admits that this is a classic idiom. Cf. Mt. 26 :45; Lu. 19 :43, where Kat drifts further away from the ancient idiom. Cf. also In 2 Tim. Kat l8ov in the apodosis, 'and behold,' as in Lu. 7: 12. In Ph. 4 16 note Kat a. be. 2 20 note Kat followed by a ixkv
:
thrice (one = even,'

'
two = both
'
and
').
(iii)
Ae.
This conjunction
is
generally ranked wholly as an ad-
versative particle.^
indicates
Monro^ says: "The adversative bk properly that the new clause stands in some contrast to what
Ordinarily, however,
it is
has preceded.
of a narrative."
As a matter
turned
of fact, in
used in the continuation my opinion, Monro has

narrative
the matter here
round.
The ordinary
use
(continuative) I conceive to be the original use, the adversative
the developed and later construction.

1
The etymology
confirms
Beitr. zur Sprachorklilrung d.
N.
T., p. 35.
2 3
Blass, Gr. of
lb.
N. T. Gk.,
p. 2G2.
So Jann., Hist. Gk. Gr.,

Iloni. Gr., p. 245.
p. 407.
"
1184

though
it is
NEW TESTAMENT
Brugmann^
8r]
this explanation,
largely conjectural.
also^ with
associates
enclitic
it
with the
aksl. ze
and possibly
and the
ending -5e {oUa-Se,
6-8e, roaos-de),
while Hartung^ connects
The enclitic -be thus it with 8vo, Sis, and Baumlein^ with btv-repos. means 'again/ 'back/ while the conjunction 5e would mean 'in the second place' or 'a second comment' or 'an important addition' {bi]). But, however we take it, there is in the word no essential
addition
as
is
notion of antithesis or contrast. What is true is that the is something new^ and not so closely associated in thought
true of re and
/cat.
I prefer therefore to
bk.
begin with the narra-
tive
and
transitional (copulative) use of
Kiihner-Gerth^
call
'something new' {etwas Neues) copulative and Abbott has the matter correctly: give it separate discussion. "In classical Greek, be, calling attention to the second of two
this use of be for
'^
things,
may mean
is
(1)
in the next place,

is
(2)
on
is
the other
hand."
The
first
of these uses
the original one and
copulative.
The
second
adversative.
Abbott notes
also that be in
both senses
occurs in
Matthew and Luke

John.
Its use is
nearly three times as often as in
Mark and
mainly in the historical books of the N. T. It is so common there that, as with Kai, Moulton and Geden do not give any references. A good place to note the mere copulative force of be is in the genealogy in Mt. 1 2-16 where there is no notion of opposition at all. The line is simply counted from Abraham to Christ. In verses 6 and 12 there are breaks, but the contrast is made by repetition of the names, not by be, which appears with every name alike. In Mt. 23 4 we have both uses of be. The first is properly translated 'yea' and the second 'but' (adversative). See further 1 Cor. 4: 7 (5e and be /cat) where there is a succession of steps in the same direction. So 15 35; 2 Cor. 6 15 f.; Heb. 12 6; and in particular the fist of virtues in 2 Pet. 1 5-7. Sometimes a word is repeated with be for special emphasis, as biKaLoavvq be in Ro'. 3 22 (cf. 9 :30). A new topic may be introduced by be in entire harmony with the preceding
: :
discussion, as the Birth of Jesus in
Mt.
:
18
('Now the
birth of
is
Jesus Christ,'
etc.).
The use
of be in explanatory parenthesis
seen in Jo. 3
19 ('And this is/ etc.); 19
23 ('Now the coat,'

:
etc.).
For
1
COS
be
('and when,' 'so when') in John see 2
9, 23.
In John

lb.
I,
2
3 * B
Cf. also Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 410.
Cf. Klotz
ad Dev.,
II, p.
355.
p.
156
f.
^
Part., p. 89.
II, p.
274.
W.-Th., p. 443.
Joh. Gr., p. 104.
PARTICLES
as elsewhere
it is
(aI
HAPAOUKAI)
1185
sometimes not clear whether 8e is copulative or 3:1, rjv 8e. Is Nicodemus an illustration or an exception?^ The resumptive use of 8e, after a parenthesis, to go on with the main story, is also copulative. Cf. Mt. 3:1; Lu. 4:1. There is continuation, not opposition, in the use of Kal 5e, as in Lu. 1 76, /cat av 8k, where 8e means 'and' and /cat 'also' Cf. further Mt. 10 18; 16 18; Jo. 15 27. In Jo. 6 51 we have Kal Ae is always 8e in the apodosis of the condition in this sense. postpositive and may even occupy the third place in the sentence (Mt. 10 11) or even the fourth (Jo. 6 51) or fifth (1 Jo. 2 2) or sixth (Test, xiii, Patr. Jud., 91) as shown in chapter on Sentence. In accord with the copulative use of 8e we frequently have ov8e and fX7]8e in the continuative sense, carrying on the negative with
adversative.
Cf.
:
no idea
yap,
etc.).
of contrast.
Cf.
Mt. 6
:
26, ov cnrelpovcnv ov8 deplôvaLV

:
ov8 avvayovacv.
So also 6
15 ov8e
28;
Mk. 4
22, etc.
In Jo. 7
5, ov8i
:
we have
ov8e in
:
the sense of 'not even' as often (Mt. 6
29,
In Mt. 6
means 'not
also' (cf. also 21
27, etc.).
.
All three uses of Kat are thus paralleled in ov8e (merely ov

tiTjSe
in the continuative sense see
Mt. 7:6.
It
8e) For means 'not even'

fx-qSe
in 1 Cor.
5:11.
7-10.
For the repetition

In
of continuative
eirlaTafxaL
see 1
Cor. 10
ovK
Mk.
14 68, ovre ol8a ovre

:
ov8e), we come pretty close to having ovre (Jo. 4:11; 3 Jo. continuative sense as we have in ovre
/cat
(some MSS. ovre in the merely

10).
(iv)
'AXXa.
ogy.
plural
'AXXa
is
no doubt at all as to the etymola virtual proclitic (cf. ein and cTri), and the neuter
Here there
is
was dXXd (aXXa, 'other things')- Biiumlein^ does take dXXa as originally an adverb. But in reality it is 'this other matter'' In actual usage the adversative came to (cf. raOra and tovto). be the most frequent construction, but the original copulative held on to the N. T. period. It is a mistake to infer that aXXos means 'something different.' In itself it is merely 'another.' Like 8e the thing introduced by dXXd is something new, but not essentially in contrast.^ So the classic Greek used dXXd fxfiv in the
emphatic continuative sense.^ Blass^ observes that "the simple dXXd also has this force of introducing an accessory idea." Cf. 2 Cor. 7: 11, Toarju KareLpyaaaTO vplv Girov8'r}v, dXXd d7roXo7tai', dXXd ayapoLKTrjcnv, dXXd (^6j3ov, dXXd iirnrbdriaLV, oXka ^fj\ov, dXXd eK8'LKr]aiv. All these six examples are confirmatory and continuative. Sec further Lu. 24 21, dXXd ye /cat aiiu irdcnv TouTOLs, where it is cli:
K.-G.,
lb.
II, p.
286.
^
"
Untors. iibcr griech. Partikeln, p.

Palcy, Gk. Particles, p.
1.
7.
'
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 269.
1186
NEW TESTAMENT
The story is carried on by dXXd macteric, not contradictory. In Cor. 2 1:9; Lu. 12:7; 16:21. also 22. Cf. Kal in verse
Ph.
1
:
18, xo-ipo),
dXXa
Kal xc^PWo/J-ai.,
the connection
is
is
very
close.
Kal
The most
striking
example
of all
Ph. 3
8,
dXXd nevovvye
In 2 Cor. 11:1, dXXd Kal avexeade, the tone of irony ijyovfiai. whether to take dXXd as copulative or adverdoubtful makes it similar passages are not a dropping of the and These sative.
tive meaning.
adversative idea, but merely the retention of the original copulaAbbott^ sees that "it is hard to find a satisfactory explanation of Jo. 8 26" along the usual line. If one no longer
:
impelled to translate by 'but,' the trouble vanishes. Just make it 'now' or 'yea' and it is clear. Abbott^ likewise considers
feels
dXXd "inexplicable" in 4
23, because
it
has to
mean
1
'but.'
Cf.
Jo. 16:2, dXX' epxerai wpa, 'yea, the hour comes.' use of dXXd occurs also in negative sentences. In
The same
Cor. 3
:
3,
dXX' ov8e vvv dvvaade after
oviroj tbvvaade.
:
In 4
3,
dXX' ovbk after
an affirmative
:
In Ac. 19 2, dXX' ovb', the thought answers clause. the preceding question and is probably adversative, as is possible The dXXd at any rate is negative like the obbL So in 1 Cor. 3 3.
as to dXX' ovbe 'Hpoj^Tys (Lu. 23
{h)
:
15).
all
Adversative.
It
should be stated again that not

clear.
of
these conjunctions
mean
contrast (antithesis) or opposition, but
dXXd,
The modern Greek keeps (Thumb, Handh., p. 185). In Jas. 1 13 f note the two uses of be (continuative (i) Ae. and adversative). Sometimes the positive and the negative are sharply contrasted and then be is clearly adversative as in Mt.
the context
o/xcos,
makes the matter

but not
:
Tz\i]v,
bk
and
ixkvToi
23
4, avTol bl oh d'e\ov(TLv.
.
More obvious
:
still is
14
f.,
eav d0^re
edi^ be ixr} a4>rJTe.

:
Cf also 6
:
23.
So
i^rj
drjaavplêTe
6r](ravpiêTe
be (6
19 f.). Cf. 1 Cor. 1 10, etc. The contrast may he in the nature of the case, particularly where persons stand in contrast as in eTcb be (Mt. 5 22, 28, 32, etc.), av be (Mt. 6 6; 1 Tim. 6 be 11); i7Meis be (1 Cor. 1 23) vixels be (Mk. 8 29); the common 6
:
(Mk.
of
fjih
45), ol be
(Mt. 2:5); avrds
be
(Lu. 8
37), avrds be 'Irjaovs
(Jo. 2: 24), etc.
The
contrast
is
made more manifest by

Mt. 3:11.
is filed
the use
:
(see Intensive Particles) as in
In
Cor. 2
6,
ao4)Lav be oh tov alojvos tovtov,
an exception
to the preceding.
This adversative use of be is very common indeed. Cf. further Mk. 2:18; Lu. 5 5; 9 9, 13; 24: 21; Ac. 12 15; Ro. 8:9f. Just as aXXos (cf. 2 Cor. 11:4) can be used in the (ii) 'AXXd. sense of erepos (when it means 'different,' not merely 'second'), so
:
Joh. Gr., p. 100.
lb., p. 99.
PARTICLES
dXXd can
(aI
nAPAOHKAl)
1187
"With a
KXrjOrj:
mean
'another' in contrast to the preceding.

is
:
negative the antithesis

aeraL 'Iwavrjs.
sharp as in Lu,
60, ovxi,
So Jo. 6 32, ov Mcoi;o-^s dXX' 6 irarrip (cf. 6 38). Cf. Mk. 9:37; 1 Cor. 15:37. In verse 39 of 1 Cor. 15 note dXXd oXXt? fih dXX?7 8e where both dXXd and dXX?? have the notion of difference due to the context. In 1 Cor. 9 12 note dXXd twice. In Mt. 15 11 ov begins one clause and dXXd the other. Cf. 2 Cor. 4:5, ov yap eavrovs Krjpvaaofjiev, dXXd Xptcrrw 'Irjaovj^ Kvpiov. So Mt. 5 17. In Lu. 12 51 note ovxl, dXX' r), and in 2
dXXd
a sort of pleonastic use of dXXd. This is a classical idiom. ^ Cf. also ov nbvov dXXd (Ac. 19 2G) or dXXd Ktti (Ro. 5:3). See Negative Particles. For ovx otl oWo.
1
:
Cor.
13,
dXXd
dXX'
r/,
see Jo. 7
osis 15.
1
:
22, for ovx
i'^'a
aXKa
may
see 6
38.
:
For dXXd ye
in
apod-
see
Cor. 9
2,
for dXXd
I'm
Col. 2
5,
for dXX' ov, 1 Cor.
Sometimes dXX'
'AXXd alone
be
elliptical as in
Mk.
14 :49; Jo.
8.
may
: :
refer to
expressed, as in Jo. 12
27.
dXXd occurs in Ac. 16 37, much' with fine scorn (cf.
an interruption in thought not most striking instances of ov yap, dXXd, where ov yap means 'not Kal vvv; just before). Both Winer and
One
of the
W.
Moulton (W.-M., p. 566) felt certain that dXXd never d firj, not even in Mt. 20 23 and Mk. 4 22. But J. H. Moulton (Prol, p. 241) quotes Tb. P. 104 (I/b.c), Kal nrj eêarw
F.
equalled
$tXio-/v'coi
yvpa^Ka oKXrjv eirayayeadat. dXXd 'AiroXKwviav,
where dXXd
means
practically 'except.'
ei ixi]
See also Gen. 21
26.
Moulton sug-
gests that, since
(brachylogy) in Lu. 4 :26f.; Rev. 21:27,

of dXXd.
it
means 'but
(iii)
only,' the
same may be true
from -wKkov ('more'), but Brugmannfinds its original meaning to be 'near by.' At any rate it was a preposition (Mk. 12:32). Cf. Ac. 15:28, TrXeoi' Tr\r)v tovtwv where the two words exist together. Probably its original use as a conjunction is seen in the combination TrXiiv 6tl (Ph. 1: 18). It is chiefly confined to Luke's writings in the N. T. As a conjunction it is always adversative (cf. Lu. 6 24; 12 31, etc.). In Mt. 26 39 note ttXtj?/ ovx <^^ aXX' <hs. The classical language used it as a preposition and with 6tl, l)ut Aristotle^ shows the existence of wXriv as a conjunction which developed in the vernacular. Blass^ notes that Paul uses.it at the end of an argument to single out the main point. Cf. 1 Cor. 11 11; Eph. 5 33; Ph. 3: 16; 4 14.
nXi7i'.
Curtius gets
2 '
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
.^GO.
p. 209.
Gricoh. Gr., p.
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 268.
"
lb.
1188
(iv)

MkvTou
NEW TESTAMENT
ticles (nep,
:
This word is a combination of two intensive parand is used to mean 'however.' Cf. Jo. 4 :27; 12 42. It occurs in the N. T. only eight times. This word is even more rare than fxeuTOL. It occurs (v) "Ofxcos. with two participles (1 Cor. 14: 7; Gal. 3: 15) and once with fxhToi),
12:42). This phrase marks an exception, as in Mt. 12 :4; Jo. 17 12. We even have kros d fxr] (1 Cor. 14 5; 15 2; 1 Tim. 5 19). Dionysius Thrax calls this construction avv(c) Disjunctives.
TOL (Jo.
(vi)
Etjuiy.
deais biaêvKTLKi].
It
was always
(de,
)).
/cat),
possible to
express alternative
ideas without
any conjunction
(cf.
the Latin nolens volens) or by
copulative conjunctions
a construction
vernacular
vice versa.
(i)
'^
(cf.
Hebrew
:
Dissimilar things
common in the may be united by

/cat
Kal as in Col.
11,
but we do not have to take
as being
77
or
"H.
Its origin
from
rjk
(enclitic) is
held by Brugmann.^
just
r/
They
:
are equivalent in
Homer. We may have

: :
as in
Mt. 5
17.
In the sense of 'or' 7) may For fj Kal see Mt. 7 10; Lu. 18 In Ro. 1 21 we have ovxv 8 35). be repeated indefinitely (Ro. This use in negative (Ro. 9:11). M^jSe 7/ as in 4 13. See juiyxco In 1 Th. writers. later and Thuc. 122, 1, clauses appears in
11.
:
:
19 note
:
rj
ovxi nal.
In Mt. 21 23
:
we have
is
rj
Kal tIs,
while in
Lu. 20
2 (parallel passage) the reading
tIs.
This does not
prove
Kal
and
r)
to be
synonymous.
Cor. 11: 27,
The
logion
iii]re
differently.
The modern Greek

In
1
retains ovre,
was translated (Thumb, and

r?
Handh., p. 185).
6s av eadl-d t6v
ij
aprov
ri
Trivia
to
is the true text. TOTrjpLov Tov Kvplov, somc MSS. havc /cat, but of one element partook some that mean not does This, however, element was taken in whatever that, other, but the and some of (' either of use correlative The guilt. was this way, there In Ro. 6 14: Cor. 6. 1 Cf. Mt. 6 frequent.^ 24; also or') is in Jo. -KOTepov have disjunctive we a As 7?Tot 16 note Mt. see For irplp Mk. 35. in 13 and 17 ^ v 7 Mt. Ka\6u, 18 14 after Cor. 8; see 1 OeKo: 19; after for 1 18; Radermacher after xo-po-, Lu. 15:7; for dXX' 7?, Lu. 12:51.
rJ
7?
ij

r?.
ij
7)
i]
ij
{N. T. Gr., p. 27) finds

1
i]
tol
v,
B. G. U. 956; ^
rot
7^
rot,
Jann., Hist.
Gk.
Gr., p. 406.
2
3
*
W.-Th., p. 440.
Cf. Margolis,
The
Particle ^ in O. T.
Gk. (Am. Jour, of Sem. Lang, and
Lit., July, 1909).
PARTICLES
Vett. Val.,
time);
(ii) rjre
(aI
IlAPAGHKAl)
I-
1189
562, 5
p.
138, 11;
vre-v,
.
G. XII,
2,
(Roman
Eire
rjre,
etre {kavTe
Quaest. Barth., pp. 24, 30. These conditional particles are eavTt)
like the
Latin
:
sive
7.
sive.
Cf. 1
Cor. 10:31, dre

:
eUe
:
eire.
:
So 12
(iii)
13; 14
t;
follows
OvT
^ in
have etre verse 6. For kavre
We
eight times in 3
22.
In 14 7
8.
is
it
kapre see Ro.
14
ovTe(iJLr]Te
nr]Te).
it
We have seen that there

disjunctive,
noth-
ing inherent in ovre to

10.
make
: .
Cf. Jo. 4: 11; 3 Jo.
simply ov and re (cf. ov 5k), a negative copulative con12) ovre (cf. Gal. 1 In Rev. 5 3 f we have ov8k junction. ovre have we f. 12 Ac. 24 In ovre. and the next verse ov8eis In Jo. 5 37 f note ovTt Cf. Lu. 20 35 f ovbk. ovre ovre In ov. ov ovre ovre note 10 6 Cor. 1 In Kol ov. ovre correlathe of example good A question. after Jas. 3 12 cf. ovre In Ro. 8 38 f ovre occurs ten ojjTe is 1 Cor. 3:7. ovre
It
is
tive
This is also just ix^re. fxijTe times. In Ac. 23 8 we find fxi] In Mt. (/xi? re). 5 34-36 we conjunction negative a copulative Th. 2 we have ^^ 2 2 f^VT^Mi7Te A"7Te M^^^ have Ml? 9:3 fxrjdkv in while fxi)Te, 7:33 ixii Lu. In fjiVTe. iiVTe pLn8k confusion some often is There times. five firjTe by is followed
:
in the
oi5re
MSS. between
[XTjdk
and
firjTe,
ovhk
and
ovre.
Blass^ rejects
olbaovre kmarayâi in
Mk.
14
68 (kVBDL), but on whimsical
grounds.
tinction
It is not easy to draw a disConjunctions. There is no between ''inferential" and "causal." doubt about apa and ovv. These are inferential paratactic parWhat about Tap? Monro 2 calls it causal. Kiihner-Gerth* ticles. well to reserve treat all three as causal. Perhaps it is just as
(d)
Inferential
One the term ''causal" for the hypotactic particles on, kwel, etc. (apa, particles has to be arbitrary sometimes. And even so these
ovv,
sense. yap) were originally just transitional or explanatory in conjunctions. Blass'' calls them "consecutive" co-ordinate
The etymology seems to be clear, though not acsuits cepted by all scholars. The root dp- (dp- ap- laKu, 'to fit') "arour Cf. .s It means then 'fittingly, accordingly.' exactly correof sort some ticulate" (ar-ticulus). The word expresses
(i)
"Apa.
spondence between the sentences or clauses. It was postpositive always so. Cf. in the ancient Greek, but in the N. T. it is not
1 2
6
Gr. of N. T. Gk.,
p. 265.
H,
p. 317.
Horn. Gr., p. 253.

Cf. K.-G., II, p. 317
f.,
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 272. So Drug., for the discussion of the theories.
1190

:
NEW TESTAMENT
Mt. 12 28; Ac. 17: 27. It occurs some 50 times in the N. T., in Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, Paul's Epistles, and Hebrews. The original notion of mere correspondence is apparently prehare, 'so ye are witnesses.' Cf. In Mk. 11 13; Ac. 17: 27, el apa has the idea of 'if haply.' Klotz takes apa to describe the unexpected and strange, something extrinsic, while Baumlein considers it a par-
served in Lu. 11:48, apa iâprvpes

:
also Ac. 11: 18.
what is immediately and necessarily concluN. T. instances seem to be clearly illative. Cf. Mt. 17: 26 f.; Ro. 7: 21. It has ye added several times (cf. Mt. 7:20; 17:26f.; Ac. 17:27). Paul is specially fond of &pa ol>u (Ro. 5 18; 7: 3, 25, etc.). Once he has apa vvp (Ro. 8 1). "Apa
ticle
giving point to
sive.
Most
of the
occurs also in the apodosis (Mt. 12 :28; Gal. 2 :21). /xTjTt apa in a question in 2 Cor. 1 17.
:
We
have
of this word. It is always postpositive. It is called abvbeap.os alTLoKoyiKos, but it does not always give a reason. It may be merely explanatory. We have seen that apa itself was originally just correspondence and then later inference. So then ye can accent as an intensive particle either of these ideas. It is a mistake, therefore, to approach the study of yap with the theory that it is always or properly an illative, not to say causal,
(ii)
Tap.
There
is
no doubt as to the origin

is
a compound of ye and apa and
particle.
It is best,
calls
in fact, to note the explanatory use
first.
Thayer wrongly
is
the illative use the primary one.

in Revelation.
The word
common
in all the larger
in the Gospel of
it is
John and
books of the N. T. It is least common In Matthew and Luke
narrative.
eral the
much more frequent in the discourses and is rare in the strict In Mark and John it is about half and half.^ In genN. T. use
of yap
is
is
in accord in
with that of the
classic period.
The explanatory use

are numerous.
common
:
Homer.^
The N. T. examples
Cf. Mt. 19 12; Mk. 5 :42; 16 :4; Lu. 11 :30; Here the explanation follows immediately. Sometimes the explanation comes in by way of appendix to the train of thought. So Mt. 4 18, rjaav yap dXtets. Cf. also Mk. 2 15; Ro. 7:2. In questions we have good examples, particularly tI yap. So Mt. 27 23, tI yap KaKov eToirjaev; Cf Ro. 3:3. In Ac. 16 37, ov yap, dXXd, we have to resolve yap into its parts and make the phrase =' not much, but.' In Jo. 9 30, ev tovtco yap, the man
18
32.
uses yap with fine scorn, 'why, just in

it is
this,' etc.
In Jo. 19 :6
hardly creditable to Pilate's

Cf. also Jo. 7
Abbott, Joh. Gr.,
:
common
:
sense to take yap as

:
illative.
41 Ac. 19
;
35;
2
Mt. 9
5.
Tap sometimes
Gr., p. 253.
p. 102.
Monro, Horn.
"PAKTICLES
(aI
nAPAOIIKAl)
1191
gives the major premise (Mt. 26

ise (2 Pet. 1
:
52),
15
f.),
sometimes both
is
more often the minor prem(Jo. 3 19 f.). The purely

: :
simple enough, though the force of the ground or reason naturally varies greatly. See Mt. 1 21, avrds
illative
use of 7dp
yap
o-ojo-et;
(6
24)
fj
yap; (Ro. 8
18) \oylôp.ac yap.

:
every sentence with yap in Ro. 8

11: 1; 15
is
:
3.
The
Cf
.
precise relation
not set forth by yap.

if
For Kal between clauses or sentences That must be gathered from the con:
18-24.
Paul begins yap see Ro.
text
possible.
Ovu.
Jo.
44.
(iii)
The etymology of ovv

it is
o^v
Note yap 6tl in 1 Tim. 6 7. is unknown. Brugmann^ thinks

:
it
probable that
derived from *6
or 6 6v (cf
ovtus,
tQ
ovtl)
The
not
Ionic also has
(so Lesbian, Doric, Boeotian).
But, how-
ever that
may
illative
be, it is important to note that the particle is 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,
is
though rare
in the Attic writers save in jxh ovv.
But
it
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
it is rare in the other Johannine In John's Gospel, outside of 8 examples in the words of Jesus, the rest occur in the narrative portion.^ Abbott * seems puzzled over the many non-illative instances of ovv in John and
the rest of the N. T., though
writings.
suggests that "the writer perhaps had in view the objections of

controversialists."
But
this
is
the light of the history of the particle.
wholly gratuitous and needless in Probably a majority of
the instances in John's Gospel are non-illative as in Homer, the original use of the word.^ Luke preserves the literary Attic idiom by the common use of nev ovv as in Ac. 15 3, 30, etc. But John
:
boldly uses ovv alone and needs no apology for doing so.
carries along the narrative
result.
It just
It
is,
with no necessary thought of cause or 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
illative.
and
note
when
ovv is
merely continuative and when
Cf. ch.
11, for instance, verses 3, 6, 12, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 31, 32, 33, 36,
38, 45, 47, 54, 56.

1
So we start
off
again in 12
with
6 ovv 'Ir]aovs
r.ricch. Gr., p. 549.
Abbott, Job. Gr.,

lb., p. 168.
p. 105.
2 ^
Monro, Horn.
Gr., p. 255.
Cf. K.-G., II, p. 326.
See also Weymouth, App. A, Rendering into Eng.
of the
6
Gk. Aorist and Perfect, 1S04. Blaiis, Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 272.
1192

It is the
commonest connective between sendo not feel the same need sentences. The anindependent between connecting-particles for delicate nuances. The inthese point out loved to Greeks cient
(continuative).
tences in this Gospel.
We modems
terrogative ovK ovv occurs only in Jo. 18
the purely illative use
is
in
common
etc.).
2.
in Paul's Epistles
:
also of apa ovv (Ro. 8
12)
37. A good instance of Mt. 3 8, TOLriaare ovv Kapwov. It is (Ro. 5:1; 6 12, etc.). Paul is fond and of tL ovv (6 1, 15; 7:7; 8 31,
:
:
Ovv
is
always postpositive.
{avvSea-fioi viroraicTLKoi).
Hypotactic Conjunctions
The
conjunctions used in the N. T. with subordinate clauses have been See discussed and the constructions given in detail already.
Modes (Subordinate
The relative, temporal, comparaand consecutive, apprehensive, conditional and declarative conjunctions make a goodly list. But it is not necessary to go over the same ground again. Most of these conClauses).
tive, local, causal, final
junctions, as previously shown, are of relative origin.^ All are adverbs. It was necessary to treat at length the paratactic con-
junctions which antedate the hypotactic in origin and were always exceedingly abundant in the vernacular. The hypotactic belong
more highly developed speech, but one must not think that the hypotactic conjunctions regulate the construction of the sentence. They get their meaning from the sentence, not the sentence
to the
from the conjunction.
The other view is a mechanical theory of language out of harmony with the historical growth of both mode and particle.2 Hypotaxis grew out of parataxis. This paratactic
origin survives in
many
ways.
is
Cf., for instance, the relative at

ev
the beginning of sentences, as

1 Jo.
oh (Lu. 12
1).
So also on in
11
f.
The Greek
particularly rich in its subordinating
conjunctions as compared with the Sanskrit and the Hebrew. Each subordinate clause possesses a case-relation toward the
principal sentence as substantive, adjective or adverb, so that the sentence expansion is on the lines of the word-relations. In general the
disappearance of the ancient Greek conjunctions from

is
the
kef)'
modern Greek
(3
noticeable.
'OTrore {diroTav), axpi-s, Aêxpts,
^'h
''have
entirely
disappeared" (Thumb, Handb.,
p.
186).
Thumb
'until.'
1
goes on with the story.
We
and
"On
is
gone before
ttoO
va,
have ws in aav and ware va= though ottcos has revived.
Pronom
2
.
the relative origin of conjs. like on, ore, ottws, ws, fws see Baron, Le Relatif et la Conjonction, 1891, pp. 95 ff. Cf Nilsson, Die Kausalsatze im Griech. bis Arist. See also Gildersl., Am.
On
f.
PARTICLES
(aI nAPAOIIKAl)
1193
survive greatly
ws irov
(eojs),
Na has
greatly extended
its
functions.
Some
modified, like dôD,
eav, eire
etre, hut, eTretSi?, irplv,
TTov (oTTov), irpoTov, etc.
The
paratactic conjunctions are "pressed
into service to
form dependent clauses" as at the beginning.
Parataxis turns into hypotaxis.

VI. Interjections,
Winer ^ considers
interjections to
be mere
sounds, and so entirely outside of the sphere of syntax and in-
deed of grammar. But one^ of the imperatival forms (0176) is exclamatory in origin. Or is the interjection an imperative in origin? We see this form still used as an interjection in Jas. 4 13. So also Ue in Jo. 1 29, l'3e 6 iifjLvos rod deov. Cf. devpo (Mk. 10:21), SeOre (Mt. 11:28). Aevpo is very vivid in Jo. 11:43, Adfape Sevpo e^co. 'I8ov is either used absolutely (Mt. 11: 10) or with the nominative (Rev. 4 1) and is of frequent occurrence. Kat I80V is good Greek, but its frequency reminds one of the Hebrew idiom. We have ea in Lu. 4 34. Once ova occurs (Mk. 15 29) with the vocative. So oiât is found with the vocative in Lu. 6 25. It is found absolutely in Rev. 18 10, 16, 19, oval, oval. Twice it is used with the accusative (Rev. 8 13; 12 12), as the object of thought. Usually the dative is found with oval as in Mt. 11 21; Lu. 6 24 f.; 11 42. The word occurs mainly in Matthew and Luke. Sometimes we have oj with the vocative as in Mt. 15 28, w yvmi.. So Ac. 13 10; Ro. 2 1; Gal. 3 1. There is usually some vehemence or urgency when w is used. But not always. See Ac. 1:1; 18 14. In Ro. 10 15 ws is an exclamatory particle, as tI is in Lu. 12 49. It is not quite true, therefore, to say that interjections lie quite outside of grammar. Indeed, language may come from just these ejaculatory sounds, like ''mama" with the babe. Tragedians' naturally use interjections more frequently. People differ greatly in the use of "Oh" and "Ah." The English audiences are fond of "Hear, hear," while the American crowds love to clap their hands or stamp their feet. Farrar^ follows Scaliger and Destutt de Tracy in regarding them as words par excellence and as having high
:
:
linguistic importance.
Grammar can
deal with emotion as well
as with thought.
1
W.-Th.,
p. 356.
f.
' *
Miillor, I)c interjcctionum
apud Sophoclem, Euripidem que Usu, 1885, p.
3.
Gk. Synt.,
p. 201.
CHAPTER XXII
FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA 2XHMATA)
Strictly speaking tliere is no I. Rhetorical, not Grammatical. need to go further in the discussion of the points of syntax. There
are various matters that the
grammars usually
discuss because
no N. T. rhetoric. These points belong to language in general, though in some of them the Greek has turns of its own. Each writer has, besides, his own style of thought and speech. Under The Sentence we have See discussion in chapter IV.
there
is
already discussed the
ellipsis (of
subject, predicate or copula),
matters of concord, apposition, the position of words (emphasis,
euphony, rhythm, poetry, prolepsis, varepov Tporepov, postpositive

words, hyperbaton, order of clauses), simple and
tences, connection
compound
sen-
between words (polysyndeton and asj^ndeton), connection between clauses and sentences (paratactic and hypotactic) and asyndeton again, running and periodic style, parenthesis, anacoluthon, oratio variata, connection between paragraphs. These matters call for no further comment. They could have been treated at this point, but they seemed rather to belong to the discussion of sentences in a more vital way than the remainFor attraction and incorporation see ing rhetorical figures. Cases and Relative Pronouns. The points now to be discussed have not so much to do with the orderly arrangement ((rvvdeaLsY as with the expression and the thought. The characteristics of the N. T. writers II. Style in the N. T.
received treatment in chapter IV. The precise question here is whether \he writers of the N. T. show any marks of rhetorical study. We have seen already (The Sentence, Rhythm) that the Blass^ scholars are divided into two camps on this subject. (but not Debrunner) argues that Paul's writings and the Epistle
to the
Hebrews show the
influence of the rules of
rhythm
of the
literary prose of Asia (Asianism)

V
and
Rome
(Pausanias, Cicero,
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk., p. 295. Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa, 1905. 1194
FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA L'XIIMATa)

Curtius, Apulcius).
1195
It
is
Deissmanni
will
is
have none of
it.
pretty quarrel and, as usual, there
truth in both views.
One
must get
his bearings.
We
can
all
agree with Blass^ at once
that the N.T. writers are not to be compared on this point with
the literary masters of Attic prose, but with writers like Polybius.
We
are surely not to look for the antithetic style of the Attic
If there
is
orators (Isocrates, Lysias, Demosthenes).^
esthetic
beauty in 1 Cor. 13 or Heb. 11, it may be the natural aesthetic of Homer's rhapsodies, not the artificialities of Isocrates. Blass* admits the poverty of the Oriental languages in the matter of periods and particles and does not claim that the N. T. writers rose above the O. T. or rose to the level of Plato. And yet Norden in his Antike Kunstprosa claims that in his best diction Paul rises to the height of Plato in the Phccdrus. WilamowitzMoUendorff likewise calls Paul ''a classic of Hellenism." Sir W. M. Ramsay is a stout advocate for the real Hellenic influence on Paul's life.^ But Ramsay scouts the word "rhetoric" in connection with Paul: "I can hardly imagine that one who had ever experienced the spell of Paul could use the word rhetoric about the two examples which he mentions from First Corinthians, and Romans."^ There was in Paul's time artificial rhetoric with which Paul evidently had no connection, nor did any of the writers of the N. T. One cannot believe that Paul, for instance, studied at one of the famous schools of rhetoric nor that he studied the writings of the current rhetoricians. This much may be freely admitted about all of the N. T. writers, who wrote in the language of the people, not of the schools. Deissmann^ correctly says: "The history of Christianity, with all its wealth
of incident, has been treated
much
too
often as the history
of the Christian literary upper class, the history of theologians
and
ecclesiastics,
schools, councils
tianity itself has often been

1
and most truly
parties,
alive in quarters
whereas Chrisremote
See also his St.
is
Thcol.
Lit.,
1900, p. 434;
The Expositor,
p. 198.
1908, p. 74.
Paul (1912). 2 Hermcneutik und Kritik, 1892,

willing to see the other point of view.
p. 206.
' * ^
The
true grauiniariau
but too
Cf. Gildersl.,
Am.
Jour, of Philol., 1908,
Ilahne, Zur sprachl. Xsthctik der Griech., 1890, p. 4.
C'f.
Hermcneutik und Kritik, p. 198. the controversy between him and
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
from

councils.'*
forget that Jesus
is all pre-eminently true and we must never was a carpenter, John a fisherman and Paul a tentmaker. And yet Deissmann^ himself will say of John: "St. John has no liking for progress along an unending straight
This
circling flight, like his symbol, the eagle. something hovering and brooding about his production; repetitions are in no wise abnormal with him, but the marks of a contemplation which he cherishes as a precious inheritance from St. Paul and further intensifies." There is a perfection of
road; he loves the
There
is
form in the Parables of Jesus that surpasses all the rules of the grammarians and rhetoricians. The eagle flight of John makes The passion of Paul the cawing of the syntactical crows pitiful. broke through all the traditional forms of speech. He lacked the punctilious refinements ^ of the Stoic rhetoricians, but he had the cyclonic power of Demosthenes and the elevation of Plato. Even Blass^ sees that "the studied emplojrment of the so-called Gorgian assonances is necessarily foreign to the style of the N. T., all the more because they were comparatively foreign to the whole
period; accident, however, of course produces occasional instances
of them,
that suggested themselves."

satisfy
and the writer often did not decline to make use of any This would seem modest enough to Deissmann. In particular Blass* notes "the absence of
rhetorical artifice in the Johannine speeches."
He
finds little of
that nature in
is
Mark and
Luke.
"But
but
it
in
is
Matthew
there really
some
artistic sense
of style,"
"mainly drawn from
Hebrew and not from Greek." The many quotations in this Gospel show a close use of the LXX and the Hebrew O. T. And
yet,
on the whole, the Greek runs smoothly enough. Konig has a valuable article on "Style of Scripture" in the Extra Volume of Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, but he deals mainly with the
O. T.
There
is
in truth little that is distinctive in the style of
the N. T. apart from the naturalness, simplicity, elevation and
passion of the writers.
It is only in the Epistle to the
Hebrews
that Blass^ finds "the care and dexterity of an artistic writer" as shown by his occasional avoidance of hiatus, but even here Blass has to strain a point to
make
it stick.
Bultmann^ draws a
definite parallel between the style of Paul and the Cynic-Stoic

'
Light from the Anc. East,

J.
p. 410.
2
3
Weiss, Beitr. zur paulinischen Rhetorik, 1897, p. 168.

6
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 298.

lb., p. 302. lb., p. 296.
* *
Dor
Stil
der pauUnische Predigt
und
die kynisch-stoische Diatribe, 1910.
FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPFIEIA SXHMATa)
1197
Diatribe and makes his point, but even so one wonders if after all Paul uses question and answer so skilfully by reason of definite
study of the subject or because of his dialectical training as a It is per se, howrabbi and his native genius in such matters. Paul knew the common that Stoic dialectic possible ever, entirely
also as he did the tenets of current Stoicism (cf. Paul's
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 Luke, Paul, James and the author of Hebrews as boorish and unintellectual. They lived in an age of great culture and they were saturated with the noblest ideas that ever filled the human brain. As men of genius they were bound to respond
mere accident.
rating
men
like
to such a situation.
They do show a
In
1
distinct literary flavour as
Heinrici^ has so well shown.
Cor. 13
we have
finish of
form
:
and thought.
Even John,
called aypafxnaros Kal
tStcbrrjs
(Ac. 4
13),
rose to the highest planes of thought in his Gospel.
Deissmann in his St. Paul goes to the extreme of making Paul a mere man of an untenable position in affairs devoid of theological culture, view of Acts and Paul's Epistles when he says: "His place is with Amos, the herdsman of Tekoa, and Tersteegen, the ribbon-weaver
of
Miilheim" (p. 6). We may brush aside the artificial rules of Gorgias as too studied efforts for the N. T. Indeed, the men of the time had largely refused to follow the lead of Gorgias of Sicily,
though his name clung to the figures of speech. His mannerisms were not free from affectation and pedantry .^ The Attic orators of the fourth century b.c. had their own rules for easy and flexible The writers and speakers of the later time practical speech.
modified these in their
own way.
We
are not concerned here to
follow Blass" in his effort to prove that Paul and the writer of Hebrews were students of the current rhetoricians. This we fail to see, but
we do
see that the language of the
N. T. was a
living
organism and exhibits many which the rhetoricians have discussed. we adopt their terminology.
1
of the peculiarities of
human
speech
For convenience, therefore,
Norden (Die
torical figures as
ant. Kunstprosa, Bd. II, p. 508) speaks of Paul's use of rhedue to his "Ton." Hcinrici (Zuni Ilellen. d. Paulus, Komni.
SchiifttMi, 1908.
zu II Kor.) sees raul'a "Eijj;enart." 2 Der hterarische Charakter d. neut.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 295. Die Rhythnien der asianischen und roniischen Kunstprosa, 1905.
1198
NEW TESTAMENT
ni. Figures of Idea or Thought {<rxr\\i.ara Siavoias). Blass^ observes that these figures of thought belong more to the later
period of Attic oratory.
in
Some
of
them
are distinctly rhetorical
character,
as the rhetorical
question of
which Paul makes
abundant
use, especially in the Epistle to the
Romans.
Blass^
rod
makes a good liveliness and

'lovSalov; (4
:
critique of such questions as
showing
r)
dialectical
perspicuity, as in Ro. 3
ri ovv to TvepLaadv
10) ttws ovv eXoylaOr]; ev TrepLTOfxfj ovtl
kv
aKpo^vaTla;
This
is
quite like the diatribe in Epictetus and other

Gr., p. 182).
kolvt]
writers
Other questions are quite emotional, as in 2 Cor. 11 22. In Ro. 8 31-35 we have a "brilliant oratorical passage," worthy of any orator in the world. There are others almost equal to it, Ro. 6, 7, 9, 10, 11; 1 Cor. 3, 4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15; 2 Cor. 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 13. Here we have oratory of the highest kind with the soul all ablaze with great ideas. The words respond to this high environment and are all aglow with beauty and light. Certainly the Epistle to
Cf.
1
(Radermacher, N. T.
Cor. 7
:
18
ff.
Hebrews
Acts.
is
oratory of the highest order, as are the addresses in
Blass' thinks that
Luke
is
distinctly "unprofessional {idio-
tisch)'' in his
iSiwrtKi]
manner
not
of presenting the great speeches in Acts,

4)paais.
4>paaLs,
rexviKrj
That
is
true,
but one would
have a martinet
praise in
spirit to cavil at
the word eloquence here.
The
discourses of Jesus in
Matthew, Luke and John are above all content and spirit. One cannot think that Jesus was a
far surpasses the highest
is
technical student of rhetoric, but he sang with the woodrobin's

note,
and that
achievement of the best
trained voice whose highest praise
that she approaches the
woodrobin or the nightingale. There is perfection of form in the thoughts of Jesus whether we turn to the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew, the Parables in Luke 15, or the Discourses in the Upper Room and On the Way to Gethsemane in John 14-17.
The
consummate skill "Master Preacher" of the ages. There is undoubted use of irony (eipcoveia) in the N. T. We see it in the words of Jesus. See the high scorn in /cat v/jLels TXTjpcocrare to
style of the reporters does not conceal the
of Christ as the
neTpov Toov iraTepwv

Tr\7]pooaeT.
v/jlcov
(Mt. 23
32).
This
e^co
is
the correct text, not
So also
koXccs dêretre Trjv evToX-qv tov 6eov
(Mk. 7
9)
:
and
33).
OTL
1
ovK evSex^Tai
7rpo(f)riTr]i>
airoXeadaL
'Iepov(raXrj/j.
(Lu. 13
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 304.
lb. The " Terminology of Grammar" is not fixed like the laws of the Medes and Persians. Cf. Rep. of the Joint Com. on Gr. Terminol., 1911.
^
3
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 305.
FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA ZXHMATA)

There
is
1199
Cf. 1 Cor. 4:8; 2 Cor. There was never a more nimble mind than that of Paul, and he knew how to adapt himself to every mood of his readers or hearers without any sacrifice of principle. It was no declaimer's tricks, but love for the souls of
it
more
:
of
in Paul's writings.
11: 19f.; 12
13; Ro. 11:20.
men that made him become all things He could change his tone because he
when they had been
it
to
all
men
The
(1
Cor. 9
22).
loved the Galatians even

20).
led astray (Gal.

:
rhetoricians call
(cf.
prodiorthosis, as in 2 Cor. 11
f.,
21,
h
:
a(i>poavvT[j
:
'Kk'ôi
also 11
16
f.,
23)
and
epidiorthosis, as in
:
Ro. 3
5,
Kara apOpwirov Xcyoj.
Cf. also 1 Cor. 7:3; 12

paraleipsis, as in 2 Cor.
Xe7a)/xef
v/jLels,
11; Ro. 8 34; Gal. 4:9. So Paul uses 9:4, /X17 ttcos KaTaiaxvv9a}ij.ev ijîeTs, tva
/jlti
instead of
/jlt]
iroTe KaTaicrxvvOrjre.
As Blass^
suggests,
Paul's innate delicacy of feeling
makes him take the reproach

fxij
on
<f)e'L\is.
Xeyu otl koL atavrbv /xot irpoooSo in Ro. 7 4 Paul says Kai vyueTs WavaTcodrjTe toj pouco rather than bluntly assert Kai 6 vofios cnredavev (or WapaTcodri) There is sometimes a lack of parallelism (heterogeneous structure). Cf. 1 Jo. 2:2, IXaafJids irepi twv afxapTLOJv rnxUhv, oh wepl tojv rnjLeTepojv
himself.
Cf. also Phil. 19, iVa

:
ixbvov,
aXXa
:
Kai oXov tov Koapiov,
instead of
tcoj'
oKov tov Koapov.

Kai
aairacr povs
Cf.
in
also Ph. 2
22, Trarpi
f.,
7771'
avv
epoi.
Cf
irepLiraTelv
Mk.
calls
12
38
phovaav
ev riplv Kai peO' -qpcov ccrrat in
2 Jo.
2.
What Winer ^ "Broken and Heterogeneous Structure" (anacoluthon, oratio variata) has had sufficient discussion under The Sentence. So as to asyndeton. There remain a number of other points which may
IV. Figures of Expression (o-xip-aTa Xelcws).
be grouped for convenience.
Parallels and Contrasts (Parallelismus memhrormn). many illustrations of this idiom in the N. T., both in the Gospels and Epistles. The O. T. is full of such words and phrases, particularly in the Psalms. One who read these hymns much would naturally have his eye and ear trained to this form
(a)
There are
of rhythm. We do not need to see conscious effort at poetry, though in 1 Tim. 3 16 we probably have a fragment of an early
:
parallelism is manifest in Lu. 1 42-45 (the song of Elizabeth), 46-56 (the song of Mary), and 68-79 (the song of Zacharias), 2 29-32 (the song of Simeon). One does not have to go to the Greek rhetoricians. The spirit of rhapsody here shown is due to the Spirit of God moving the heart and stirring the highest impulses of the soul. There are other examples of primitive Christian song in the N. T., as in Eph. 5
:
:
Christian hymn.
The Hebrew
Blass, C.r. of
N. T. Gk.,
p. 304.
W.-Th.,
p. 5(30.
1200
A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NE"W TESTAMENT

:
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
:
is artificial even if it is conscious. This be synonymous (Mt. 10 26; Jo. 1 17; Ro. 11 33) or antithetic (Jo. 3:6; Ro. 2:7).^ There are also examples of Chiasm or Reverted Parallelism (from the letter X) as in Phile-
antithesis or paralleHsm
parallelism
may
mon
I
5, TTiv ayairrjv Kal T-qv Triariv
riv
exets eis tov Kvpiov 'Irfcrovv Kal els

1
TzLvras rohs aylovs.
SoMt. 7:6; Ph. l:15f.;

if
Th. 5:
6;
Ph. 3:
10.^
doubt very much
Paul was at
all
conscious of the stilted paralff.
ov iroWol, or antistrophe (the last words alike) as in rod deov tov deov or symwords
alike) as in ov toXXoL
lelism that Blass^ sees in 1 Cor. 1: 25
with anaphora (the

rwt' avOpiciroiv,
first
toov avdpd>irwi>
ploce (both alike) as in eêXeâro 6 debs IVa KaTaiaxvvr], eêXeâro 6 Beds
Cf. Heb. 2 16. The manuscripts vary a deal in 1 and Blass has to juggle the text in order to make it come out in "rounded periods of three sections." What if this finesse was praised by dilettante rhetoricians when they found it in Demosthenes or Cicero? Surely Paul was not a
I'm KaTaicrxvvri.
1
: :
Cor.
25
ff.,
"stylist" of the fashion of Cicero nor even of Demosthenes. Perhaps no orator "would have regarded the eloquence of this passage with other feelings than those of the highest admiration." Doubtless so, but for the passion and force, not for the mere
word-play.
1
Just so the three poetical quotations (Ac. 17:28;

33; Tit. 1
:
do not justify straining after accidental Heb. 12 12 f., or elsewhere. Blass* is so fond of finding poetic parallelism in the Gospels that he actually makes it tilt the scales against the best manuscripts in some passages as in Mt. 5 45; 7 13 f.; 25 35. This seems
Cor. 15
: :
12)
:
lines in
Ac. 23
5; Jas. 1
17;
much
like eisegesis.
There is the solemn repetition of (6) Contrasts in Words. a word with powerful effect (the epanadiplosis of the rhetoricians), but Blass does not claim this as a rhetorical device in the N. T. It is natural to strong emotion. Cf eTrto-Tara eTrto-rdra (Lu. 8 24) Kupte Kvpie (Mt. 25 11) (XTavpcoaov (jTavpwaov (Jo. 19 6) Rev. 18 2, eireaev eweaev. See Ph. 3 2. Cf. also the two hours of shouting in Ac. 19 34. Climax is as old as Homer. This is again a perfectly
. :
:
natural
method
1
:
of emphasis.
Cf. the links in the

: :
list
of virtues
See also Ro. 5 3-5; 10 14. There is a cumulative force in the repetition. Per contra, zeugma puts together
in 2 Pet.
5-7.
W.-Th.,
p. 639.
' *
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 300

lb., p. 302.
f.
Green, Handb. to N. T. Gk., p. 355.
FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPriEIA SXHMATA)

:
1201
words that do not properly go together, as in 1 Cor. 3 2, yaXa So also Lu. 1 64, avecoxOr] to arbtxa avrov vnas kiroTLaa, ov ^pccna. yXwaaa avrov. Cf 1 Tim. 4 3. This construcirapaxpwo- '^î^ tion is usually explained as elliptical, one verb (as above) being
:
^7
used where two are necessary for the full statement. KiihnerGerthi treat it as a species of brachylogij. The use of synonyms of the classic is not absent in the N. T., though not in the richness
idiom.
and the use of (xtqTrdw and (t>L\eoo side by side in Jo. 21 15-17 where Peter makes a point of using </)tXeco. See chapter on Formation of Words.^ The play on words takes many turns. The onomato'poetic words like 70776^0) (cf. our "murmur") are very simple. Cf. Jo. 6 41. ExCf. Lu. 8
:
15,
KapSla KoXrj Kal ayadfj,

:
amples of
29);
initial alliteration occur, like Tvov-qpia, irXeoveîa. (Ro. 1

inreprjcjiavovs
:
i-jSpio-ras,
(1:30);
f.).
aireLdels,
aavperovs,
tell
aawdtrovs,
this
is
6.(TT6pyovs, aveXevnovas (1
30
It is
hard to
whether
conscious or unconscious. There are also instances of 'paronomaParonomasia is rather loosely applied in sia and annominatio.
the books.
only for words of similar sound, while of the same word or wordrecurrence Blass'' confines it to the -Kavrl TavTore wdaav (2 Cor. h stem, like KaKov^ mKoos (Mt. 21:41);
Winer ^ uses
it
9:8); 6 vo/jlos wmi/xcos (1 Tim. 1:8), and uses parechesis for different words of similar sound, hke Xiyuot Kal \oLixoi (Lu. 21 11); 'ifxadev aawkrovs aavv(pdovov bvov (Ro. 1 29) a(i>' o)V ewadev (Heb. 5:8); point is a The 11:17. Ro. 10:12; Seealso2Cor. ekTovs{l:dl). with deals annominatio But pressed. be not fine one and need
:
the sense as well as the sound.
Thus
:
Tlerpos
;
and
-werpa in
Mt.
16:18; yivuaKeis a
(jw4>poveiv
avajLVCoaKeLS
:
(Ac. 8 30)
v-wep^povdv
4>poveiv
(Ro. 12
3)
p-n^h epyaôfxevovs, dXXd irepLepyaôfxhovs

:
Mt. 27 9; Lu. 9 60; Ac. 23 3; 2 Cor. (2 Th. 3:11). 3:2f.; 2 Cor. 4: 8f.; Ro. 1:20; 5: Ph. ll:29ff.; Cor. 3:2; 1 so there is a certain amount of Even 4:1. Eph. 19; 12:15; overlapping in the two figures. The ancients did not smile because a pun was made. It was merely a neat turn of speech and was
Cf. also
:
:
very common. So Jesus says to Thomas, TTLCTos (Jo. 20:27).

(c)
firj
ylvov ainaTos dXXa
Contraction and Expansion.
It is difficult to
draw
lines
between groups among these figures of speech. Zeugma, as we have seen, can very well come in here as a sort of ellipsis. The under ellipsis of subject or predicate came up for discussion
1
II, p. 570.
a
8
Cf. Trench,
W.-Th.,
p. 636.
N. T. Synonyms; Heine, Syncniytnik d. neut. Criech. * Gr. of N. T. Clk., p. 298.
1202

Sentence.
6 debs
NEW TESTAMENT
are needed here.
11; Ac. 19
is
The
But a few more words

So
Jo. 14
Cf.
TTLaTos
(2 Cor. 1:18); 6 Kvpios 77us (Ph. 4:5) as samples

:
of the absence of the copula.
28, 34; 2
Cor. 11:6.
It
is
not always clear what verb

are the most
:
to be supplied,
.
though
dtxl
and
yivoiiai
common.
rj
Cf
(pwvrj ttoXlv
SevTepov irpos avTOV, Ac. 10
15;
ovk ev Xoycc
:
jSacrtXeta
:
rod deov, dXX'
dwiL/jLet,
Cor. 4: 20.
Cf. Jo. 21
21;
Cor. 5
12.
Usually the
context makes clear what verb
is
wanting, as in Mt. 27:25;

:
Ac. 18
6;
Ro. 4
:
9;
18; 2 Cor. 9
7;
Gal. 2
9;
Rev.
7,
4.
In 2 Cor. 8
15 the participle excof
must be supplied with

Cf. also Ro. 13
:
6 ac-
cording to a
(jiopov,
common Greek
^
idiom.
rw top
1
where Winer
It is
e'iprjKe.
supplies d7ro5t56mt KeXevovrL.

6 Beds in
Cf. also
Cor.
4:6.
yeL,
:
easy to supply
passages like Heb. 1:7 Xe-
4 3
:
The context
supplies the
noun
in
:
a case
2,
like
Ac. 21
31, ^rjTOvvTCJV re avrov aTOKTetvac.
Cf. Jo. 20
rjpav
tov
Kvpiov ('people
took away')- In Ac. 21: 16, avpjjXdov nal tojv /xa^jjMany verbs are conTU)i>, supply TLves as in Lu. 11:49, rtvas. So 5ia7aj (sc. jSiov) in sidered clear enough without the object.
Tit.
3:3;
17,
Trpoo-ex^ {sc. vovv) in
Lu. 17
(sc.
3, kirex^ in
14
7, evexoi (sc.
:
xoXop) in
Mk.
19; avjjLâWo)
Xoyovs) as in Ac.
15
(cf.
Lu.
24
avTLâWeTe with object); avWap-âvco in Lu. 1:31.
It is
unnecessary (see Adjectives) to recount again the many instances of the adjective without a substantive where the gender and
fice.
A few common examples sufit clear. For the absence of rifxepa note rfj Tplrri (Lu. 13 32); avpLov (Mt. 6 34) ttjs awepov (Mt. 27 8) rfi 'txoixkvrj (Lu. 13 33) ttj r^ is e^r?s (21: 1); t^ erepg. (Ac. 20 15). tTCLovaxi (Ac. 16 11); ^?7pd, and in Heb. 11 26, kv Aiyvireasily supplied in Mt. 23 15, Tov. Supply y\u)aaa in Rev. 9 11, h rfj 'EXXrjvLKrj. So with 656s
number and context make
: :
17
77
17
in Lu. 5
kv \evKOLs,
19, wolas; 19 :4,
eKelvrjs.
:
We
:
miss
24,
5,
ifxaTiov in Jo.
20
12,
:
and
17
CScop in
3,
17
5e^ta,
aptaTepa
is
Mt. 10 and x^pa

ellipsis
42, \pvxp6v.
in Lu. 17
So with
x^tp in
els ttjv.
:
Mt. 6
rrjs
f.,
Much
where
more
serious
the
in
Mt. 26
like
and Gal. 5
3
13,
the context must supply both verb and subject.
Cf. also ovx
on
oti,
dXX'
there
ellipses
less.
in Jo. 7: 22.
In a case
2 Th. 2
on
edv
figure
no apodosis expressed. These are but samples of the as to all languages more or to Greek (cf. el 8e It is not worth while to try to bring under this rhetorical Cf. the all the lapses and turns of style in each writer.
is
common
/jltj)
absence of the verb with
IVa in 1
Cor.
31, with to
/xtj
in 4
6,
with
ev
8e
in Ph. 3
l3,
1
with tovto
be in
2 Cor. 9
6,
with
I'm
W.-Th., p. 590.
FIGURES OF SPEECH (ropriEiA sxhmata)

again in Gal. 2
:
1203
24; 2 Cor.
9.
Cf. also
Mk.
14: 29;
Cor. 10
5:13.
Aposiopesis stands to itself since it is a conscious suppression of part of a sentence under the influence of a strong emotion like Curiously enough Blass,^ who sees so many anger, fear, pity.
any instances of aposiodo not consider his objections well founded. We may dismiss Mk. 7: 11 and Lu. 22 :42 because of the true text (see W. H.), and need not quibble over 6pa fxi] in Rev. 22 9. We may agree with Winer ^ that we have simply anacolutha in 2 Th. 2 3 ff But we have left others like Mk. 11 32,
rhetorical tropes in the
pesis occur in the
N. N. T.
T., denies that

I
dXXd
13
:
e'iirwfiev'
e^
avdpoîtcov;
k4>oôvvTO
iiri'ye,
top
ets
oxôv.
See also Lu.
9, Kav fiep TTOfqari Kapirov el 8k

:
to jikWov kKKbyptLS avTTjv.

:
So again 19
23
9,
el
42,
el
e7J'cos hat <jv.
So
rjp
rj
Jo. 6
62, eap ovv dewprJTe t6v
vlbv Tov apdpLOTTOV avaâlpoPTa

:
owov
to irpoTepov;
Then again Ac.

It is possible to
de
TTPevpa e\a\7]aep avTiS>

:
ayjeXos
regard Ro. 7 24 as aposiopesis. What differentiates these passages from ellipses or abbreviations of other clauses (cf Mt. 25 14; Mk. 13 34; 2 Cor. 3 13) is the passion. One can almost see
.
the gesture and the flash of the eye in aposiopesis. We need not follow minutely the various sorts of hreviloquence
or brachijlogy that are possible.
Thought moves more rapidly
than expression and the words often crowd together in a compressed way that may be not only terse, but at first obscure. A
good
vlos
illustration occurs in
Mt. 9
6, I'm 8e eldrJTe 6tl eôvalap ex^- b
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.
done in the parallel passages in Mk. 2 10; Lu. The argument for a common document for this incidental 5 24 (an
same thing
is
paragraph).
Cf. also
18; 15
:
Mk. 14:49,
Cf. Ac. 1
:
dXX' IVa
1,
ir'KrjpcoduiaLv
al
7pa0ai.
where ^pâTo implies /cai SteSee a similar reXet before iroLe'LV re Kai hhaaKeiP axpi- V^ W^P^s, fcrX. use of apâpepos in Mt. 20 8, Lu. 23 5. A case like Lu. 24 47, apâpepoL, amounts to anacoluthon or the use of the participle as a principal verb. Cf also Kaeapii;oiP in Mk. 7 19. Various examples of ellipsis-like zeugma are also instances of brachylogy. No clear line of distinction appears. So in comparisons we sometimes have to fill out the sense. Cf. Rev. 13 11, ix nkpaTa Cf. 1 Jo. 3 11 f.; 2 Pet. 2:1. 8vo opoia. apPLU}, i.e. KepaatP applov.
So Jo. 13
25.
Other instances of brachylogy

1
may
be seen in Lu. 4 :26f.; Jo.
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 294.
W.-Th.,
p. 600.
1204
5
:

15
:
NEW TESTAMENT
The
Tim. 4
so-called construc:
36;
11; Ac. 27: 22; Gal. 2

also.
16.
tio
praegnans belongs here
Cf. 2
18, acbo-et
eis
7171'
fiaaiKdav,
though
ets
of itself does not
mean
'into.'
is
But note
ttjv
5ta-
o-ojo-ojcn Trpos
^rj\LKa (Ac.
23
24)
where the notion

iraTrip
that of taking
bbbv
to Felix
and so saving Paul.
Cf. also kd^rjro wapa

6 e^
(Mk.
:
10 :46).
Triv eK
See also Lu. 11: 13 6
ovpavov,
(Col. 4
16)
AaoBLKias.
Blass^ distinguishes brachylogy from elhpsis in
that brachylogy affects the thought rather than the grammatical
form, but both ideas are usually present.
Cf.Ro. 11:18. It would be wearisome to endeavour to put a name or tag upon every structure that seems defective from the standpoint of formal grammar or rhetoric, "It will be seen that many of them are due to that agility and acuteness of the Greek intellect which enables
the Hellene or Hellenist readily to sacrifice the
sentence to
its logic,
grammar
its
or in other words
its
form to
of a meaning. to
Hence arose the many forms

cqixacvoiJLevov,
of the sense-figure (arxwf^ ^rpos

"^
constructio ad scnsmji) ."
tions of this construction /card avvtaiv
have seen illustraunder Concord (The SenIndeed, this
We
tence)
section
and only a few further are called for here. is largely an illustration of this principle.
to to
K\r}p.a;
In Jo. 15
avTo. refers
in Ac. 17: 16 avrov points to Christ,
who
has not been mentioned; in 7: 24, rbv kiyh-wTLov, though no Egyptian had been mentioned; in 1 Cor. 7: 36, yafielTcoaav, the subject
being drawn from the context (the two young people). Winer was glad to note a decline in emphasis on these overrefinements in his day. These supposed abnormalities were called hypallage. From the present standpoint Winer himself yielded entirely too much to the very thing that he condemned. What is the use in figuring out the various ways that Paul could have expressed
The papyri have taught us John with being ungrammatical in Tr\T]pr]s xaptros (Jo. 1: 14). These matters simply show that the N. T. writers used a live language and were not automata."* It is doubtless true that no other writer used repetition of word and phrase as did the author of the Fourth Gospel, but no one will deny that he did it with consummate skill and marvellous vividness and dramatic power .^
himself in 2 Cor. 3
:
7, for
instance?
to be chary about charging
1 *
Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 294.

Cf.
^
w.-Th.,
p. 634.
Emil Heinxich, Die sogenannte polare Ausdrucksweise im Griech.,
1899, p. 26.
6
Cf. Abbott, Job. Gr., pp. 401-465.
FIGURES OF SPEECH (rOPFIEIA SXIIMATA)

There are many instances of pleonasm
vernacular speech.
raxecos (2
1205
in all
in the
N. T. as
13)
It is of
many
viias
sorts.
iinas
The same word may be

(Col. 2
:
repeated for clearness as in
a-wobbaaov
Tim. 4:9).
auT^s
like
7);
tom
of the language with
This redundancy is usually due to the cusno thought of the repetition/ as in rjs
{xaXkov
:
(Mk. 7:25);
Trepto-o-orepajs
(2 Cor.
(Ac. 20 :20, 27); kros
n-q
(1
Cor. 15
:
2); aireKpidrj
7:13); ov htj \eyuv (Mk.
15 :9); avaaT-qOi Kal iropevov (Ac. 8 26); TcS olKodeaiTOTxi ttjs okias our "church-house" (Lu. 22 11); eireiTa fxeTo. tovto (Jo. 11:
:
irpodpaixwv
ejXTvpoadtv
:
(Lu.
19:4);
eâYeti'
ecrTiv
e^co
(24:50);
2
:
opKio
cb/Jioaeu
(Ac. 2
30); apvovp-evos otl ovk

:
(1 Jo.
22);
TraXti' K
Sevrepov (Ac. 10
15), etc.
Cf. also the cognate accusative.

linguistic vices.
is
Re-
dundances
like these
examples are not
They seem
pleonastic to the technical student
who
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/jLâvet
(Jo.
21:13);
ypaxl/avres
:
6td Xtpos avTOJv (Ac. 15: 23); wixoKoyriae Kal ovk rjpprjaaro (Jo. 1
20).
Epexegetical clauses are
common.
Cf.
rrjv
XoyiKiju \aTpelav vfiuiv
(Ro. 12
ktX.
1),
in apposition with the infinitive clause, TrapaarTjaat,

:
So
Cor. 7 26, 6rt koKov

:
dvOpuiru), as'
an expansion
of tovto
KoKov virapxeiv.
In Jo. 7 35 on is probpbly causal. We meet hyperbole in Jo. 21 25, ov8' ambv olixai t6v Koap-ov Litotes is Cf. also Mt. 13 32. xoopijo-etj' TO, ypa4)6peva /StjSXta.
:
common
14, 20;
enough, as in Ac. 1:5,

2.
oh peTo. -iroWas TaiiTas ripepas; 14

:
28, xpovop OVK bUyov.
See also 15
is,
2; 19
11,
23
f.;
21: 39; 27
28
Meiosis
Cf.
of course, only a species of hyperbole
by
understatement.
3
:
Paul's use^ of it in 1 Th. 2:15; 2 Th. put together two remarks of Milligan.^ "St. Paul had ef;il'i;:;'ntly not the pen of a ready writer, and when he had once found an expression suited to his purpose found it very difficult to vary it." "St. Paul had evidently that highest gift of a great writer, the instinctive feeling for the right word,
2, 7.
We may
and even when

1
writing, as he does here, in his

p. 295.
most 'normal
Blass, Gr. of
N. T. Gk.,
2
3
Cf. A. J. Wilson, Einiiluisis in the N.T., Jour. of Thcol. Stu., VIII, pp.75 Milligan,
IT.
Coram, on Thesa.
Epistles, p.
Ivii.
lb., p. Ivi
f.
1206
style,
NEW TESTAMENT
of the
and with an almost complete absence
rhetorical
figures, so largely practised in his day,
he does not hesitate to
more popular methods of adding point or emphasis to what he wants to say." There is no necessary inconsistency in these two statements. Add another from Milligan^ which will help to reconcile them. "We readily recognise that
avail himself of the
the arresting charm of the Apostle's style

'the
is
principally due to
man
behind,'
and that the highest form

is
of all eloquence, 'the
rhetoric of the heart,'
speaking to us."
So
it is
with
all
the
N. T. writers more or less. They are men of genius, of varying degrees of culture, and men of love for Christ and man. Language with these men is not an end in itself. They do not say "pretty" things and toy with them. As the words of Jesus are spirit and life, for they throb and pulse to-day (Jo. 6 63), so the Letters of Paul are âpetai koL laxvpal, as even his enemies admit (2 Cor. 10
:
10).
The Judaizers
at Corinth did not discuss the rhetorical
niceties of these Letters.
They
felt
the power of the ideas in
Paul used tropes,^ but he smote hearts with them and did not merely tickle the fancy of the lovers of sophistry .^ Paul denied that he spoke kv ttiOols <To4>ias XoyoLs, though his words seem to the lover of Christ to be full of the highest appeal to the soul of man. One must discount this disclaimer not merely by Paul's natural modesty, but by contrast with the Corinthian's conception of irLdos. They loved
resisted Paul's authority.
them even when they
the rhetorical flights of the

(d)
artificial
orators of the time.
Metaphors and Similar Tropes.
We need not tarry over

the rattle of dry bones
antiphrasis, ambiguity, hendiadys, hypokorisma,

phrasis, polyptoton, syllepsis,
oxymoron, periand the hundred and one distincof

it
tions in verbal
anatomy.
is
Most
gone.
is
and the joy
of dissection
(Mra0opd), since little progress could be
the picture of the literal
pause over Metaphor in speech without and physical carried over to the moral
We may
made
:
and spiritual as in 6 metaphor in the N.

1
:
TOLfM-qu
6 koXos (Jo.
10
11).
Cf. the greatest
T., Paul's use of acona for the

is
church (Eph.
22
f.).
The
Simile
just a bit
:
more formal,
p^Jfh,seen in the
use of
simile
ofxoLOS
in
Mt. 13
52, ttSs ypamxarevs ojioibs k(TTLV avOpdoirw
oiKobecrirbT-Q.
Parables are but special forms of the metaphor or

characteristic feature of the teaching of
is
and form the most

Comm. on
1
Jesus in so far as form

1
concerned.
The parable
Komm.
{irapaôXri)
Thess. Epistles, p. Ivif.
2 3
Cf. Heinrici,
Zum
HeUen. des Paulus,
zu 2 Kor.
Cor. 2
4.
FIGURES OF SPEECH (ropriEiA sxhmata)
1207
draws a comparison between the natural and the moral or implies It may be a crisp proverb (Lu. 4 23) or a narrative illustration of much length, as in the Sower (Mt. 13). The Allegory {aWriyopia) is a parable of a special sort that calls for no explanation, a speaking parable (cf. the Good Shepherd in Jo. 10 and the Prodigal Son in Lu. 15). Metonymy (iJ.eToovvfxla) and Synecdoche (crvveKSoxv) are so much matters of exegesis that they must be passed by without further comment. It is certain that no words known to man are comparable in value with those contained in the N. T. Despite all the variet}^ of diction on the part of the reporters, probably partly because of this very fact, the words of Jesus still fascinate the mind and win men to God as of old. Kal eyhero ore ereXeaev 6 'Irjaovs tovs
it.
:
\6yovs TOVTOvs, eêir\T](7aovTO
ol
oxXot
ctti
rfj
Sidaxf] avTOV'
rjv
yap
^
5l-
baaKwv avTovs
7
:
cos
eôvaiap exî' nal ovx
tos
ol ypajjLjj.aTe'is avrcou
(Mt.
28
f .)
It is the constant peril of scribes
strain out the gnat
and
to swallow the camel.
and grammarians to 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 universal appeal to all ages and all lands and all class(^s. The chief treasure of the Greek tongue is the N. T. No toil is too great if by means of it men are enabled to understand more exactly the
1
Gildersl.
is
scornful of tlioso
who
fcjir
"that anthropology
as
is fioinj;;
to invade
the sacrosanct reahn of syntax, which
beloiif^s, strictly speakinfj;,
to tiie niicrot-
omists and statisticians

of Philol., 1907, p. 235.
(ntherwise known
Dead Sea
Ajjcs."
Am.
Jour.
1208
A GRîMMAR OF THE GREEK

of Christ.
it
NEW TESTAMENT
him remember that
mind
If
one
is
disposed to think less of the N. T.

kolvt], let
because
of
it
stands in the vernacular

of Jesus.
the speech of these Christians was rich beyond measure, since out
came the words
tradition of the period

1 :l-4).
These were carried in the common and written down from time to time (Lu. Paul was not a rhetorician, though a man of culture, but
he cared much for the talk of the Christians that it should be worthy. '0 \6yos v/jLuiv iravTOTt kv x^-P^t'- aXazL rjprviJLevos, elSevai ttcos That was good advice Set ii/xSj evl haaTio aTOKpiveaOai (Col. 4:6).
for the Colossians
included,
cians
and and makes a
for all speakers

fitting
and
writers,
grammarians
who
hon mot to leave with the rhetorimight care to quibble further over niceties of language.
kv tovtols ladi.
TaOra êXcra,
ADDITIONAL NOTES
1.
KaQapitôi or KaGepil^co (p. 183).
Mr. H. Scott furnishes

e
me
the following table for the variations between a and
in the aug-
mented tenses
of Kadapl^w:
eKadep
tKaQap
.
N B
A
C
D
Syr.
0/8 2/7 Mt., Mk. 7/7 4/5 0/6 0/6
8/8 5/7 0/7

1/5
6/6
6/6
For
2.
LXX
see Helbing and Thackeray.

(p. 206).
Prothetic Vowels in the N. T.
The
following
is
table of (probable) prothetic vowels in N. T. (supplied
by Mr.
H.
Scott).
Before
1210
3.

Elision (p. 208).
text), ohb'
Kad'
ri
NEW TESTAMENT
ovd'
Mr. H. Scott adds

ly
hav (Lu.
16:31,
W. H.
(Tisch., ov8e
els,
W.
H.), ov8' avrbv (Jo. 21:25).
We
is
have both
and Kara
but
/card tKaTov
(Mk. 6:40).
There
much
4.
variation with prepositions before nouns.

(p. 212).
nappT|o-ia
Mr. H. Scott notes that out
of
40 ocIn the
9/10,
currences in the N. T. 24 read irapp- without variant.
remaining 16
N
:
reads irapp- 13/16,
10/16,
14/14,
7/14,
8/9, Syr. 16/16.
In Gospels
:
always has
Trap- ex-
cept in Jo. 11 14,

5.
only in Jo. 11 14.

[leVco (p. 216).
Assimilation of kv
ev txeaco
Mr. H. Scott notes that

Orth., p. 150)
the phrase
occurs 27 times in the N. T., of which 2 (Jo.
8:3, 9) are in a spurious passage.
Hort (Notes on
observes that
^{BD never have

eju/xeaco,
eufxeaco.
But
it
of Gospels
and
of Acts always have

6.
while
has
9/12 times.
(p. 216).
(cf.
Rules
for Assimilation of
all
Consonants
The fami-
liar rules
are given in
etc.),
the school
grammars
Allen,
Goodwin,
and need not be given here
in
Hadley and detail. Note
only these:
Before a t mute a
tt
or k
mute
is
co-ordinated.
Before n a t mute changes to n, " " a K mute changes to 7, " " a T mute changes to a (analogy).
Before o- a tt mute makes \J/, " " a K mute makes ^, " " a r mute drops out.
Before a labial v changes to " a palatal v changes to 7 (nasal). " X or p, V is assimilated.
fj..
o, V is dropped, and the preceding vowel Between two consonants o- is dropped.
"
is
lengthened.
The
insertion of a in
some tenses
is
treated in the chapter on
Conjugation of the Verb.

Metathesis (p. 221). We find aLvb\Lov in P. Oxy. Ill, 531, but also 4>ai\\o\v'iwv, B. U. iii, 816, 24 (iii/A.D.). So the modern Greek (peXopi. ^cltpt] (Lu. 2:7, etc.) is the Homeric and Attic form. Moeris (212, 9) says that iradvn is the Hellenistic form. Modern Greek has iraOvr]. Some LXX MSS. have it so. Cf. Thackeray, p. 106; Blass-Debrunner, p. 20.
7.
14
(ii/A.D.),
ADDITIONAL NOTES
8.
1211
Rules for accent by
Enclitics
and
Proclitics (p. 233
f.).
Mr. H. Scott:
Encuticb
Indefinite, tIs in all its forms.
(6)
(c)
Pers. pron.,
fxov, not, fik] (jov, ffoi, ak.
perispomenon, paroxytone.
if
if
Enclitics retain their accent:

tl);
Pres. indie,
ei/xt
(except 2d sing,
(f)r](Tip,
(a)
(6)
^rjni,
ipaalv.
dissyllables, after
they begin or end a sentence; a paroxydissyllables,
Particles, ê, rk
-5e.
and the inseparable

(c) ivoTk, wov, wkp, ttoj,
-ircos.
tone;
if
after
perispo-
Indef adverbs,
.
mena;
((/)
Enclitics incline their accent
when
after
if
the preceding word

(a)
(b)
(c)
is
(e)
dissyllables, after
an ehded vowel; a prochtic.

enclitics
proparoxytone, properispomenon,
a proclitic.
If
two or more
of
occur to-
gether, each one receives the accent
Enclitics lose their accent
when the
the preceding,
the last being

differ
preceding word
(a)
is
unaccented.
Editors
in
oxytone,
practice as to this rule.
Proclitics
Art.,
6, ^, ol, al.
eis, tK, e^, kv.
ei, cl)s.
Prochtics receive the acute accent:

(a)
Prep.,
when they
sentence;
are at the end of a

enchtic.
Conj.,
Negative, ob {om, ovx)-
(b)
when followed by an
9.
Bov(rTpo(j)Ti5o'v (p. 243).
The Greeks
to left
and then
to right)
alternately.
first wrote from right This alternate method (right to
left, left
plow.'
Cf. Geddes,
was called ôvarpocjirjdov, 'as oxen turn at the A Compendious Greek Grammar, 1888, p. xiv.
fine
The Greeks had a

For
full
particulars see
system of abbreviations in frequent use. Thompson, Handbook of Greek and Latin
Palceography, pp. 86-96.

10.
Perfect of opdo)
inf.,
(p. 364).
Mr. H. Scott counts the
perf.
active (indie,
part.) 34 times in the
Acts
2;
John, Gospel 20, Ei)istles 6;
N. T. (Luke, Gospel 3, Paul 3). Luke has -co-
established 5 times, John's Gospel 20.
NACD
so always,
20/24.
In
Ep. John
has 6/6 -o-, Paul 3 -co- (N 3/3,
2/3,
2/2,
1/3; -0-
3/3).
11.
Augment
in the Past Perfect (p. 366).
Mr. H. Scott notes

Of the 7
that of the 15 out of 22 verbs with past perfects in the N. T.

the active verbs are equally divided as to augment.
1212
passive verbs only

in the passive,
BaXXw is augmented OefxeXLoco is imaugmented. but not in the active. Ftw/xat and lariqiiL have both the augmented and the unaugmented forms in the active.
12.
List of Important Verbs.
listed here.
(Purely normal verbs are not Only the tenses are given that occur in the N. T.)
in preparing
:
Mr. H. Scott has rendered valuable aid

'A-yaXXidw.
Pres. act. in 1 Pet. 1
47),
: :
it.
(Lu.
Jo. 5
(Ps. 15
:
9)
8 and Rev. 19 7; aor. act. rjyaXXiaaa but the active does not occur in LXX. The middle is in LXX and the N. T. (Jo. 8 56, etc.). The aor. passive appears in
:
35 {&yaX\La6rji'aL, BL aOrjvai.). 'A.yyOO\.(o (comp. ai>~, air-, 5t e^, eir, irpo-eiv, Kar, only in Jo. 20 18 ayyeWovaa, and Jo. 4 51 in i<D.
,
:
irpo-Kar).
Simplex
-riyyeXnai, -^yyk\r]v.
The
classic aor. pass. riyyt\Or]v
-o77eXw, -riyyuXa, does not occur in

fut. (Jo.
LXX
act.
or N. T.
Kar-dyvfjivt.
"AYvvjii (only
as in Attic
and LXX).
has
/caTd^co),
Kar-ea$t
f.),
(Mt. 12:20;
LXX
Three forms in N. T.: a an aor. act. Kar-kaâv
19:32
an
aor. pass. Kareayuxxiv (Jo. 19:31.
Cf. KaTeayfjvat in Plato, etc.).
The
copyists kept the

is
augment where
it
did not belong, so that even a
pres. act. KaTedao-co
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
rjâ
principal parts are reg-
ular save the aorist active (usually the redupUcated second aorist form
i^yayov,
but sometimes the rare sigmatic aorist

a(f>-, 5t-,
as in Hesiod).
Alpô) (comp. &V-,

(as
ef-, Kad-, irepi-, Trpo-).
Simplex only middle. -eXw

also); -Tipovurjv,
LXX),
(dTT-,
alprjcTOfiaL, aipedrjaoiiai;
eiXov
and eiXa (middle
(iprinai, -jipWr]v.
Aipw
k^,
kir-, /xe-r-,
avv-, inrep-).
Principal parts regular.
Only note
is fipa
imperative aor. act. apop and
inf. aor. act. apai,
while ind. aor. act.
and
'Akovw
fut. act. apd.
Al<r9dvofj,ai.
Only once
,
in
N. T. (Lu. 9:45), aor. mid.
aiadcjivTai.
(5t-, 10-, Itt
Trap, Trpo-, vw).
'AKovaoo, fjKovcra, aKriKoa
("AttiC perf.
),
aKovaofxaL, aKovaOrjaonai, rjKohadriv.
'AXXd<r(rw (d7r
6t , Kar, awo-KaT, ner, avu).
'AXXd^co, f/Waâ, riWaâp.T]v

&.\\ayr)<Toiiai (1
(Ro. 1:23,
"AXXo|iai
'
LXX);
</)-).
'
pass.
)7XXa7Mai, ijXXdYTjf,
-d/xTj^
($-,
Aor.
and
-6p.riv.
Cor. 15:51). Confined to Acts save Jo. 4:14.
A\i.aprdv<i) (ttpo).
A/xapTriaci},
ripâpTov
and
rjixapr-qaa, ^fiaprriKa.
aiJ.<j)Lkû.
'A|i4)id?w.
So W. H.
in Lu.
12:28 instead of
'A|x4)ie'vvv}J,i.,
r}p.4>lea p.ai.
'AvaGdXXw (only comp.).
'Are^dXere (Ph. 4:10).

(car-ai'-).
'AvaXC<rK (only comp., also
Xwo-co; aor. act. inf. avakuiaai; aor. pass. dâXco^Tjre
augment).
In 2 Th. 2:8
W.
Other tense-stems from dj'aXdcLi; kua(N. T. forms do not show H. in margin give avakol as present (so Attic
and LXX).
'Avof-yw (5t-,
k^, Ac. 12:16 D).
The simplex
dlyw, olyw/it does not occur in
J^XX
Acts
or
N. T.
Rev.
avkwê, ^^^ê.
(5),
Imperf. Sivvoiye (Lu. 24:32); fut. ami^co] aor. act. ^wiê, The aor. ind. (22 times) is confined (H. Scott) to John (6),
except
dirivoiêv
(10),
(Lu. 24:45).
The predominant form
is
ADDITIONAL NOTES
fjuoi^-
1213
(16 times without v.
r.)
and read by W. H., except
9:14),
and
rii>(co^(v
(Jo. 9:17, 32).
Afi^êv (Jo. Pass. fut. AvoixOriffeTai (Lu. 11:9 f. A);
AvoiyriaeTai
iivoixd-n-
10). Aor. indie, occurs 9 times: Lu. 24:31); Aftdjixerr- (Lu. 1:64); vvei^xOv(Mt. 3:16; 9:30; 27:52; Jo. 9:10; Ac. 16:26). 2d aor. indie. r,polyrr- (4 times, Mk. 7: 35; Ac. 12:10; Rev. 11:19; 15:5); subj. Mt. 20:33. Perf.
(W. H., Mt. 7:7, 8=Lu. 11:9,

{his),
(Rev. 20:12
Si-,
part,
(only)
11
11; 16:27; Ro. 3:13;
times: SiûoLytikvos (Ac. 7:56); Aveajytiiuos (Ac. 9:8; 10: 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

26:7,
occur.
regular.
Fut.
infin. KaT-avT-qauu (Ac.
W. H.
The parts, are marg.); fut. part, avvbetween Lu. 12:4

-Krelvo},
avT-qaovTo. (Ac.
20:22).
occur.
Pres. varies
alt.,
'A-iro-KTetvw.
The simplex does not

3:6
-KTkvvoy (2 Cor.
alt.)
W. H.
alt.,
Mt. 10:28 W. H.
&Tr-eKTav9r]v.
ri4)0T)v.
W. H.
inf.
and
-KTevw/ii
(Mk. 12:5);
'HiZ/a,
fut. cltto-kt woi; aor. air-kKTeiva; pass.
&-rro-KTkvvCT0ai.
(Rev. 6:11); 1st aor.
"Atttw
(ai^, KaO-, Trepi-).

{ol-k),
q\p6Lij.r]i>,
'Apveofxai
dpPTjaoixat, apv-qOrjaoixai, -Tjpvrjcranriv,
ijpvrjfiai.
'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-,

Kara-, /xera-, Trapa-, wpo-, avp.-, avy-Kara-, vtrep-).
dia,
Ik,
k/j.,
eiri,
-fir](joixai, -kfirjv, -fik^riKa.
Short forms of the imperative dvdâ,
d;'d/3are.
BdXXu
ep.-,
(dju0t-, di'tt , avTL, diro, Sia, en, kfi,

wept.-,
ext
Kara-, fiera, Trapa-, irapkir- ffVP-)]
vpo-, avv-, virep-, viro-).

kin-,
Imperf. ejSaWov (k^
fut.
/SaXw
{he-,
wap-ep-,
irepi-).
1st aorist ("Alexandrian") ?/3aXa;' (Ac.
16:37);
k^
.
(Mt. 7:22
W. H.
alt.;
kir-,
21:39
W. H.
alt.);
kw- (Ac. 21:27;

;
Mk.
14:46); 2d aorist, iâXov {k^,
irap-, irepi-, avv-, utt-)
perf. ê/3X7;\-ws;
pluperf
K-j3/3Xi7Kt.
Mid.
fut. irepi-âXelTai
(Rev. 3:5); 2d aor. di^, wept-,

aor.
5l-,
<Tw-eâ\6p,T]p;
pass. fut. ^\r]6r]aopai,
k-;
1st
k^,
k^X-qd-qv]
j)erf.
PkpXripai, irepi-; pluperf. kjSejSXriTo.
Bapco)
{kiri,
Kara-).
'E^dp-qva, ê^dprjpai, kâprjdrjv in
(2 Cor. 1:8,
Lu. 21:34).
Only passive save

Bapvvw.
compounds.
is
The
older verb
Kara-âpwopiivoi.
BXaoTdvw. This is (Mk. 4:27). The

BXîrw
(dj'a , dTro
ousted in N. T. by /Sapeco except in Mk. 14:40, Lu. 21:34 Rec. ffapwOwcri. the old form of the pres. The pros, in N. T. is /SXaordw
It is read in
aor. j3Xdo-Tr?(Ta
may
be from
jiXaardco or ^Xaarkio,
a form
irepi-
of the pres. occurring in

,
LXX.
'E^Xeirov,
/SXei/oj,
8ia-~,
kp, kiri-, irepi-, irpo-).
efiXexf/a]
e0XkireTO', irepi-ivpo-^Xeipdpevos.
TayAia.
late
'Eydixovv, Attic tyr]p,a, late kydp.i}(Ta, yeydnrjKa, kyapr]9r]v.
Tafiliû is
form and only pres. active and pass, and imperf. pass, kyapliovro appear in N. T. TaplffKo: likewise in pres. pass, stem appears in Lu. 20:34 (W. H.) and kK-yapiaKu in some MSS. in Lu. 20:34 Rec. F^VOfxai {diro-, dia-, kiri, irapa, avp-irapa, irpo). Never 7171-0^101 like Attic. 'Eyivoprii'; yevr\(Topai; part. yevTjabpevos (1 Cor. 15:37), eyevSprju and kyevqOqv.
Opt. ykvoiTo) part, yevbpevos.
dTTo-, bia,
kiri,
The
is
fraiuent use of the part, in comp.,
irapa-, avv-irapa-,
noteworthy.
Vevapevos
is
a fnHjuent
H. Moulton counts 69 instances of the i)art. (simple and comp.) in Luke's writings, and 48 in remainder of N. T. It does not
variant.
J.
1214

all in
NEW TESTAMENT
"Strong perfect," ykyova, yeyhrjthe Johannine writings. Mace. 14:30 has kykvnv, probably an error (cf. ykyova). Vtiv- is a rather frePluperf. ytybvti (Ac. 4:24), and iytyopei. (Jo. 6 :17). quent spelling, e.g. Ac. 21:14 hB*AD; 23:10 B*; Lu. 22:26 SBD; 42
occur at
/xai.
in
SiBAA;
Tivwo-KW
ff/xai,
Cor. 10:20
B*D*,
etc.
{ava.-, bia-, kin-,
Kara-, irpo-).
Tvucronai,
f7;^coi',
tyvwKa, kyvuKup, eyvw-
kyvuddrip, yvoiadiiaoixai.
Subj. aor. both yvQ (Jo. 7:51) and yvdt (Mk.
rpd<j>a) (dTTO-, ky-, eirt-,
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.
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-).
Aeiôj, cdeLâ] pass.

kv-edeiâfiriv.
kSelxOv
(Heb. 8:5); perf. diro-Sedeiyixkvos; mid. 1st aor. forms from -wixi, and -vvu.
Aipa.
"ESeLpa, dap-qaofiaL.
{ava-, &iro-,
5ta-,
eta,
The
pres. has
AX0fJ.ai
k-,
air-eK-,
kv-,
km-, irapa-, read

tSet.
irpoa-,
viro-).
'E5eâîT]v^,
pass. SkSeynai, -fSexdv'ESeop-riv,

kbti]dr]v.
Aio> (irpoff-).
kbktro
(W. H.
mid.
alt.)
or eSteiro.
inrcr-).
In Lu. 8:38 Impersonal

eS-qcra,
W. H.
3et
kbtiTo
rather than
and
Ae'w (Kara-, irepi-,

k8k9r]v;
aw-,
Arjaw,
SkdeKa] pass, dtde/xai, irepi-edi8kp.Tiv,
kbT\aap.t]v
eirt-,
A8w|ii (di'a-, dj'r-OTTo-, aTro-, 5ta-, k-,

StScos
fiera-, irapa-, irpo-).
PreS. Trapa-
(2d sing.), 3d
pi. didoaaiv
(Rev. 17:13); subj. wapaSidQ
(1
Cor. 15:24,
5<i(rw;
-5i5ol
BEG);
imperf. kdldoaav (Jo. 19:3), irap- (Ac. 16:4); fut.
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. (2
boiXt
3d sing. cont. bol (Mk. 8:37), irapa- (Mk. 4:29), S^t? or Tim. 2:25, Eph. 1:17); opt. 3d sing. 54)7, (Ro. 15:5; 2 Th. 3:16; 2
Tim. 1:16,
SdxTo/iai,
k- (Mt.
18); inf. hovvai; part. Sous; perf. bkhwKa; plup. htboiKtiv; mid. fut. 21 41) 2d aor. eêSero (s Mt. 21 33 =Mk. =Lu.) with vari: ; :
-oTo in each passage; plur. without variant, dir-eSoo-flt, -kdovro. Pass, pres. and imperf. -kmero, Sl- (Ac. 4:35), irap- (1 Cor. 11:23), with variant -OTO in each case; fut. dodijaonai, dcrairo-, wapa-. 1st aor. kboB-qv, dir-, eir-, Dr. Hort considers the change of the vowels in imperf. irap-; perf. SeSo/xai.
ant
1.
from -oto to -tro as probably euphonic. AiSew (diro-, 5ia-, irapa-). (Rev. 3:9); imper. didov (Lu. 6:30; 11:3); part. diro-SiSoOi' (Rev. (Rev. 22:2); imperf. kdiSow (Mk. 3:6; Ac. 1:20), eir- irap-; fut. Sia-didoâovai-v 17:13 Rec.) ex fid tone Erasmi. Pres. 2d sing. dOvaaai (Mt. 5:36; 8:2; Mk. 1:40; Lu. 6:42). Opt. Avvafiai.
and 2d
Pres.
aor.
5t5a)
dwain-nv (Ac. 8:31; 27:12, 39).
and ri8vvk<rer,v. There are traces

26:53;
Advoâi,
2d
sing. dOvv
'ESwann" and r)hvvanr,v, bwijaoixai, T,5vvr]dr,v (Mk. 9:22 f.; Lu. 16:2; Rev. 2:2).
in
of this late
Greek form
in present tense in
Mt.
19: 12;
Mk.
10:39; Ac. 4:20; 27:15.
Aim
1:32. (-, dir-fK- [mid.], ki^, kir-ev-, irap-eiff-, km-). Simplex only, Mk. wapeiapass, mid.-tdvaapLTjv; (Mk. idvaa 1:32); eSw, aor. 2d eiri-Suerco; Pres.
edirqv.
2d
aor. (Ju. 4)
ev-SeSvfjikvos.
Avvti) (-).
In pres. only.
Eiuiv, edo-co, etacra.
'Edw
(irpoo--).
'Eyyiltt
(irpoo--).
Augt. etraf = eaf = ei-. See Jannaris, 719. myyiôv, kyylaoi and kyyiti (Jas. 4:8 W. H. alt.), nyyiaa,
TJyyLKa.
ADDITIONAL NOTES
"Eyilpo> (Si-, i^-, kir-,
1215
aw-).
as
'l^yepQy, f,yupa,
iyvyepnat, vykpOnv, hepdr,aonai.

e'7etp6 (cf. a7e, iTcecye)
In
Mk. 2:9
Mk.
5:41.
0:18 Si-vy !ilt ) hut usually intransitive 'Eytcpac not in N. T., nor lypvyopa
Si-eytipero (Jo.
kyeipov,
E8a<j>w.
'E5a<îw
("Attic"
fut.).
iio}Oeii>.
"E9w.
El8o>
Obsolete in pres.
Ei'wô,
and ,e8
alt.).
(Att-, ^tt-, vrpo-, .r.,.-, 6,rep-).
Not used
elSai>
in pres.
(Heb. 8:11,
LXX).
2d
150,//.
Fut.
tSe;
elSvao,
1st aor. dSa, dSafxeu, dSare,
and 2
(W. H. text 18 times

;
aor. el5o,
and
t5ou (ind.
both complete)
imper.
subj. Ma,;
2(5 -4)'
inf. i8el,>; part.
2d
perf. olSa complete,
and Ure
(?),
Uacriv (Ac.
imper. tare
150^
(?);
subj.
elSco; inf. el8ei>ac]
part.
etScbs;
plupcrf.
f,dH,>
put together. It does not seem reasonable to divide the same root between eUop and dpao,. Hec iSco.
El|x (air-,
iv-, It- Trap-, avu~, aufx-rrdp-). 'Îv and mid. f,pr,,>, imper. pres. UOi, laro^, tJtco, larojaai- (lare 2d pi. does not
f,ada, np^â; occur); opt. tlrjl
and
complete.
ol8a
have the
As
sa7ne root they are
taopai, eaeaOai, kaoutvos (Lu. 22:49).
i^, l^-, abv-). Only pres. (fut. sense) 3d 9:6); imper. da-iOi (Ac. 9:6 B) and imperf. (riêiv). 'EXavvw (i.e. k\a-vvo,) (Att-). Pres. inf. k\abvtiv. 1st aor. b.T,-i{kaaa; perf. tX^XaKcos; imperf. pass. tiXawero.
(Att-,
Elfiu
Only
in
comp.
da-,
pi. -io.<ji,
da- (Heb.
"E\k. Pres.
i'iXKvaa.
act.
and pass.
{-; imperf. elXKoi'] other tenses
from
iXKvco.
'EXK{>ao^,
"EiTuiaPT-,
etTTco; inf.
dTT-, TTpo-).
Pres. not used.
Fut. epS.
1st aor. elra, etc.; imper.

eliroi^;
eiTrdv (?), tiTTdrco,
-are, -drwaaV, part. 7ras.

elTrcI,*'.
2d
aor.
imper.
ei7r4;
Subj.
eiwdu; part.
part.
tpp-herj
Perf.
elpriKa,
3d
pi. -/caj'
inf.
elprjKhai;
eipjjKcbs.
Pluijerf.
6ip,it.
and -Kaaiu Mid. 1st aor.
(Ac. 17:28);
aiv-eiira,xida.
Pass. 1st aor.

EpY^Sofiai (K-ar-
and
tpp^^,,;
TTfpi-
7rpo(7-).
part, prjdds; perf. erpijrot; part, dpij^hos. Etp7af6M7?^ (Ac. 18:3 HIP) and vpya^6,ir,p
(W.
H.), vpyaaa/xriu (Gosp.)
sive).
1st aor. KaT-ei.pyhae'qv
and KaT-etpydaaro (2 Cor. 7:11), ttpTaer/xat and rar-T/p- (BDC, W. H. alt.).

di-e^-,
Trpo-, irpoa-, avv-).
(pas-
"Epxojiai {av-,
k-w-av, Att-, 5t-, ela-, ^7r-eto-, Trap-eto-, trui'-eto-, k^-,
kw-
KaT-,wap-,
iuTi-Trap-,
wept-
UpxS^rju, kXfOaonai, ^XOol
and ijXâ, kX-nXvOa. 'EpwTdw (5i-, 7r-).

aor. pass.
Plupcrf. kX-nXveeiv.
'Hpajrw;-
and
r,p<l,Tovi>,
kpcorrjaoo,
r,p<hTrjaa; kw-epcoTrjOds,
1st
Eo-Gfw
and ?a-e<o {Kar-, avv-). Pres. only. "Ilcr^toi', <j>kyopaL, 2d sing. 0d76aat (Lu. 17:8); e4,ayov complete; opt. 0A7ot (Mk. 11:14).
{irpc^).
EiayveXC^w
^6tx7)v,
Active only, 1st aor. (Rev. 10:7; 14:6).

einjyykXiapai, tvt^yyeXiad-qv.
Jlpo-, evvyytXi-
tvriyyeXiaaii-qv,
Ei8oK
iavu-), (.6, r,b)boKovpev (1
Th. 2:8),
{ev,
7]v)S6Kvaa (ev- in Gospels.
In
the Epistles the reading varies). EvpCo-Kw (Au-). Ei^pcaKou and 7,vp., tvpijaw, elpov
{tvpapei', etc.)
MSS.),
tvpriKa, rju-, fvpiaKoptjv, tvptOyjv, evpeOrjaonai.
and d>prjaa (some Mid. dpapeuos.
"Ex
^j.-, kir-, Kar- yuer-, Trap-, Trepi-, Trpo-, Trpoa-, <7u^-, CrTrfp-, Elxou (dxapeu, dxoaav, as well as elxav and elxo.'), 2$w, taxov, taxvâ, eixonTjv, 'iôfiai; 2d aor. mid. iv-faxonrjp. Zdw (A;.a-, aw-). Pres. fco, f^^, ff); inf. îju. "E^c^p, ^âco,
(&V-, &UT-, Att-,
i-rro-).
^vaoât, i^rjaa.
Ei-J,;';<i.oM,
Zuivvuiii
and
5a,vvva) (i.e.
fw-^^H (dm-,
5ia-,
Tr.pt-
^rro-).
^,l>ac,,
-fôiaa,
mid.
fut. Trepi-fwtrojuai.
"Ikoj', Tjt^,,
fiKovatv.
1st aor. k^coaaprji', -kticoanai.

f,a in
"Hk
(d-, Ka0-).
^t (in subj.),
Mk.
8:3.
Some MSS. have
fiKaaiv
instead of
1216

once
(2 Cor. 12:13).
'Ho-o-ooftai
Elsewhere
rjTTaofxai, riTTr]nai, r}TTi]Br]v.
diTTO) {aw-).
Qav\iaX,<a (<)
""EOaâ, kTa4>rjv.
'Edavnaôv, Wavnaaa, fdavtiaaOrjv, Oavnaadrjcroixai
and mid.
6aV'
ixaaonai (Rev.
17:8
54B).
vTJo-Kw (dTTo-, ffwaircr-).

TtdvTjKa.
Simplex
perf. only,
a-n--k6vr\aKov; -davovixat., -iBavov,

Te6i>r)K0}s.
Both
TiBvix-vai.
and
rtdvT]Kkvai
(Ac. 14:19), but

pass.
'Idopiai.
Pres. iarai,
i(!onr]v',
mid.
laaotxai, laaafiTjv;
tajuai {tarai
Mk.
5:29),
laOr]v, ia6r](roiJ.ai..
"I8aj obsolete.
'lK-v0(j.ai
(d<^-,
For
5t-,
el5oi>
e<^-).
and el8a see el'Sw (tiSew). Simplex not found in N. T.

part.
aijy-iKoiJievos.
Pres. -ikwu/xctoj;
2d
aor.
a4>'i.KeTo',
inf. i(t>-iKecr9ai',
"Iy\\>.i. (i.e.
*o-t-(r77-M0 (di/-, d(^-,

-/it.
Ka0-, Trap-, aw-).
or N. T. forms in
1st aor.
avv-eTt]
d0-eis.
a.4>-,
Pres. "complete, au-,
Kad-, aw-rjKa (complete).

a<f>,
Simplex does not occur in LXX a.4>-, aw-. Fut. 6.4>-, aw-ijaw. 2d aor. imper. d^-es; 2d pi. a4>-,
d(^
,
subj. av-,
aw-w,
etc.;
inf.
Trap-,
aw-tivai;
part, av-,
a<l>-f9i]aoixaL;
Medio-pass.
dfjy-edriv;
{d<j>-,
pres.
acji-Unai;
d<^-027;
part.
Kad-ienevos.
Fut.
1st aor. d;^,

eifjikvos.
Subj.
perf. a(f)-koPTai
(Lu. 5:20); part. Trapd</> ,
aw).
Pres.
a<j)-iotiv
(Lu. 11:4),
Tj^-tei'
ffw-iouo-iv; subj.
avv-lwai.; part,
aw-lwv (Ro. 3:11); imperf.
(Mk. 1:34; 11:16).

(d<^-).
Pass.
pres. a<}>-iovTai (Jo.
20:23
W. H.
marg.).
-ew
Pres.
d^-eis (Rev.
2:20, 2d sing.).
"I<rTi]ni, to-rdva), to-rdw (di^, eTraj^-, df9-,
e4>,
iâv-,
a(f>-,
5t-, Ij/-,
I^,
eTr-[taTatiai],
,
Karecj)-,
awecj)-,
KaB, dvTLKad, diroKad-, ixfB, irap, irepi- , Trpo
avv).
Simplex has not the pres. and imperf. active or passive,

eaTTjv
ixat:
^Trjaw;
2d
aor.
(complete),
ava-,
earrjaa (complete),
etc.
'iar-qKa,
ei[l](7Ti7Kii';
mid. fut.
arijao-
kitava-, awo-,
Passive dvd-,
a<f>-,
k^-iaTdjXTtv,
taTaOr)v,
ara-
drjaonai.
Both
karois
and
kaTTjKus,
e^-earaKevai.
and
karavai.
Both
'iaraKa
and
'iaT7)Ka.
KaOatpu)
(5i.a ,
K ).
eKoBapa, KeKaOapnai.
Inf. KaBapai.
hiadaplad-qv
Kaâptw, KaGapf^w (5ta-). (Mt. 8:3=Mk.).

Ka0'to[j.ai (vrapa-).
tKaddpiaa, KeKaddpianai,
and
or
eKaOeplaOrj
The simplex
2d
efoât does not occur in
LXX
imperf.
N. T. Pres.
part. Kadiôfievos] imperf.

Kd0T)|Aai {aw-).
KadrjaOe
kKa6e^6p.-i)v.
1st aor. part. irapa-KadtaOds.
Pres.
sing. Kadrj (Ac. 23:3); imper. KaOov (Jas. 2:3); subj.

KaBrj/xePos;
iKadTifj.r]v;
(Lu. 22:30); inf. Kadrjadar, part.
fut.
/ca^Tjtro/xai.
Kafl^tco (dj-a-, l^rt-, Trapa-
[Rec], aw-).
The simplex
if does not occur in
LXX or N. T.
(Mt. 19:28).
KaCo)
(k-, Kara-).
Fut.
KaOLaix)]
1st aor. kKddiaa] perf. KeKadiKa] mid. fut. KaBlaeaOe
KaT-'tKatov, Kara-Kavao:,
Kar-tKavaa,
1
KeKavfiaL,
KaT-iKa.r)v,
e^-
eKavBr)v, KaTa-Karjaofxai., Kara-KavBrjaofxaL.
In
Cor. 13:3
some MSS. have
Kav-
Briaiopai (fut. subj.,
Byz.)>
KaXe'u {avTi-,
kv-, tla- [-pâi], ctti-, fiera-,
vapa-, awwapa-, irpo-, irpoa-, avy-).

kv-eKkKX7]To,
eKXrjBrjv,
'EkclXow, KoKkao}, ikokeaa, KeKXrjKa,
KK\r]p.aL,
KXriBrjao/xai.
Mid.
Kd|J.V(<>-
fut. eTTi- , fieTa-KoXeaoiJiai, 7ri , nera-, Trpoa-eKa\eaafn]v.

"E/ca/iOJ',
KeKurjKa.
Kpd-vvv-ixi, Kepa-vvvw {avy-).

KeKepaafiai,
The
present does not occur in N. T.
'EKkpaaa,
aw. KcpSaCvco. Pres. and imperf. do not occur. aor. subj. KepSdi-w: a matter of editing.
Fut. Kepdavco
(1
Cor. 9:21
W.
H.);
ADDITIONAL NOTES
Kep8d.
KXaCcD.
1217
subj.
KepStjau
(1
Fut.
KepSrjffo
(Jas.
4:13); aor.
iKkpSriaa;
1).
Cor.
9: 19-21).
Pass. fut.
Ktpbt]dnaotxai- (1
Pet. 3:
"ExXaioj', KXavaco, eKXavaa, KXavcrofiai
(Rev. 18:9
W. H.
marg.).
KXdw
KXcCco
(tK-,
Kara-).
'EKXatra, kKXaaBriv,
e^.
e/cXettra,
{airor-, tK-,
Kara-, avy-).
KXtiaw,
KiKXeiafiai, iKXeladr]i>.
(ckXi/ca.
KXCvw
Ko|i(tw
(ava-,
k-, Kara-, wpoa-).

avy-,
ko/xicra, avv-).
'Ava-KXiuui,
tKXiva,
Pass. fut. tva-
KXi6-qaop.ai, fKXidriv,
(/c-
ava, Kara, irpoa.
Pass. t^-tKoiiiîTo; mid.
KofiiffofjLat.
and
Kotiiov-
ixai (1
Pet. 5:4;
/c-,
some MSS.
tj^,
in Col. 3:25), tKofxiaan-qv.

"Ekotttoj/,
Kd-iTTw (dTTo-,
pass.
Kara-, irpo-, Trpoo).
ck-,
wpo-Koxl/w,
tKO\pa;
2d
aor. ki-tKoir-qv]
2d
fut. tK-Koirrjaotxai., eKO^'d/xrjv, Koipoixai, awo-.
Kopvvu(iv, KKopecr/xecos, Kopeadeis.
Kpdjo) (dw-).
perf. KtKpaYo.
KpcVO'H-ciS
"E/cpafo;',
/cpd^w,
e/cpaâ
and
eKtKpaâ;
2d
aor. dLV-Upayov)
2d
Some MSS. have

Kpcfjid^co
KeKpaôixai in
Kpfjid(<>
Lu. 19:40.
Kpe|xavvv,
and
(-).
The
active pres. does not
occur.
Kpfvci)
'E/cpeMao-a, kKptpcKrO-qv .
In Lu. 19:48,
k^-eKpe/xeTo
and
-fiaro.
vivo-,
(d^'tt-,
dxo-, avrairo-
[-p-ai.],
5ta-, tj^, tTrt-, Kara-,
aw-,
avvvTro-).
iKpiva,
AieKpiva, Kpifd; pass. fKpivonTjv; KaTa-Kpipuf
(both a question of accent),
KeKpLKa, KeKpLKuv, KiKpifiai, kKplO-qv, KpLd-qaoixai.
Mid.
1st aor. air-eKpivaix-qv.
KpvTTTw
(dTTo-,
<-,
TTepi-).
''E.Kpxnpa;
2d
aor.
wept.-eKpvfiei'
(Lu. 1:24).
[This
may
be the imperf. of
,
Kpu/3w.]
KkKpvufiai, kKpv^rjv.
airo,
KvXCcD (dj'a
Ke/CLiXt(7/xoi,
dTTo-,
TTpoa-).
'Airo-KvXiau,
irpoa-eKvXicra;
pass.
e/cuXuro,
d>'a , aTro
AaKû
or Xdo-Kco.
Both presents could give

viro-).
kXaK-qat (Ac. 1:18).
Aa|x.pdvu (dm-,
TTpo-,
dm-,
(jvvavTL- {-p.ai\, kiro-, kin-, Kara-, fiera-, irapa-, avv-irapa-,

''EXapiâvov, XTjp.ipop.aL, eXaffov] opt. Xd/3ot.
wpoa-, aw-, aw-irept.-,
Ad/3e,
not
Xa/3e; eXdiSare (1 Jo.
1:12).
EtXrjfpa; elXij<pes
2:27); irap-eXalioaav (2 Th. 3:6), eXa/Ja;/ (Jo. {Rev. 11:17); -eLXrjppai, kX-np4>eriv. Pass. fut. vapak-n-i-,
XT]p(t>eriaop.aL;
mid. 2d aor. kXaôprip; imper.
wpoa-Xal3ov.
'Ew-eXaOopriv, -XeXjjcr-
AavGdvw (k,
,
kir- [-/uai]).
Simplex active only,

irpo-)
eXaOou.
pai (K kin-).
Aiya, 'say'
(dj/ri-, 5ta-,
km-,
The simplex has
pres.
and imperf.
act.
and
pres. mid. only.

^L-eXeybiJLijv;
Imp.
eXeyou, avr-, irpo-; eXtyav (Jo.
11:5G D).
this
Pass.
imperf.
1st aor. bL-tXkxOn^', mid. 1st ior. BL-eXeâpLtjv.
Alyo), 'choose'
(t/c-, kirL-,
Kara-, wapa-, avX-).
Simplex has not
meaning.
ZvX-
is
the only
compound with
active forms.
Fut. avX-\kû; 1st aor. awk-
Xeâ; mid. pres. Kara-, irapa-, avX-', imperf. e^-, irap-tXty6p.r)v; 1st aor. 5t-,
bi-, km-iXtâpriv; pass. pcrf. kK-XeXtypikvo^.
Adira and
i&iro-, Sia-, -,
km.-, Kara-, kv-Kara-, irepi-).
Simplex Only pres.
(act.
pass.) except Tit.
3:13
pass. -XkXttppai, -fXti4>0r)v.

pres.
W. H. marg. 'RXeLirov, -Xeti/'w, (Some MSS. have a compound

See
1
-kXeixâ, iXiirov;
of Xi-p-irdvu in
and
imperf., Ac. 8:24.)
Pet. 2:2.
iXoyladrjp,
AoY^ôf'''*'''
(dj'tt-,
dia-, irapa, avX).
'EXoyi.^6prjv,. kXoyiadprjv,
Xoyi-
aOrjaopaL.
Aovw
(dTTo-).
'EXovaa; pass. XkXovpai
and
XkXovapai. (Ileb.
10:23); mid. 1st
aor. kXovaap7]v.
MavOdvco {Kara-).
"EpaOop, ptpaOrjKa.
^ptXep, ini[)ors()nal.
Mi\w.
McXXti).
Only
fxkXei.,
Pass. pkXopai, km-, pera-; mid. fut.

pLiT-tptXrjOijp; pira-peXijOrjaopai.
km-ptXrjaopai.
Pass. ptr-epeXoprjp, km-,
'EpeXXop and fjptXXop, pfXXrjaoj.
1218

,
NEW TESTAMENT
irepi,
Mcvcd {ava, 5ta iv,
eiri ,
Kara, irapa, avf-irapa [Rec],
irpoa, vtto),
'E/ievov, /levui, Ijueifa, p.ep.kvrjKa, p.tp.tvriKtiv
MiaiV(o<
M*yvu|Jii
Mtyutayjptat,
kfiia.v6r]v.
and
|Aio-yio
,
(aw-ava).
'Efiiâ,
nkmynaL.
MifiVTJcTKW (dftt
Mvn<rTiJU).
iTT-ava, vwo-).
pLPrjau), yikixvrjp.ai, ifJivricrBrjv, ixvria6r}aop.ai.
'Ep.vr)(TTevp.aL,
kp.vr](TTevdr]v.
Nvcro-o) {nara-).
'Evvâ',
2d
aor. pass. Kar-evvyriv.

'E^-qpava, k^-qpanfiai, i^rjpavOtjp.
^T^paivw.
Pres. does not occur.
Qvpdw.
The form
(*'">
^vpaadai occurs (1 Cor. 11:6),
which
may
be accented fupS(also
oi/co5),
adaL (pres. inf.) or ^hpaaOai (1st aor. mid. inf.).
'EûpTjyuai, ^vprjaonai.
OlKoSoueo)
avv).
'^cKodopLovv,
olKodonrjcro:,
wKobop-rjaa
a)Ko56/x77/uai, wKodoiJ.rjp.riv, <^Ko5opr]driv
(also oUod), olKoSopridrjaopaL.
"OXXv|ii
to Job, Prov.
and oXXvu. Simplex docs not occur in N. T. and part of Jer. (Thackeray, p. 279).
.
It
is
confined in
LXX
Comp.
dir-, avv-air~.
Pres. act. dTr-oXXuw; pres. pass. air-oWvpai] imperi &.w-u\\vvto (1 Cor. 10:9);
fut. dTT-oXeffw anddTT-oXco
(ICor.
;
1:
19 Q); 1st aor.dTr-ojXeo-a; 2d perf. d7r-oXwXcbs;
mid. imperf.
'Ouoioco (d<^).
dTr-coXXiijuTji-
fut. a.Tr-o\odp.ai',
2d
aor. kir-oiKbprjVy avv-a-K', inf.
dTT-oXeo-ât; part. air-o\6pevo'S.

'0/iOtcbcrco, CcpoiCodriv
(also bpoioiOrfv), bponoOr)(Top.aL,
a.(t>-oipoLO}pkvos.
'Opdw
pi.,
(d^-, Kad~, irpo-).
Pres. complete.
Jo. 6:2); perf. eojpaKa
Imper. 6pa, dpare; imperf. ewpwv (3d (Gospels and Acts. In Paul and 1 John variation
Kad-oparai',
64>6r](Topai;
between eo) and to-)] plup. ewpdKei; pass. pres. Stem 6ir-: fut. 6\popaL', fut. pass. opwpr]v (LXX).
w4>dr]p; 1st
imperf.
irpo-
1st aor. pass.
aor. mid. subj. o^prj^de (Lu. 13:28).
Stem
18-: see ciSew.
'Opva-(roi (5i , e|).
'^pvâ, $ di-opuxdv""-'- OT
,
8i.-opvYrjvai
(W. H.
alt.).
Ua.<r\(i} {irpo, avp).
'Eiradov, irkirovda.
Ilatiw {aua, kir-ava, (Tvv-ava [-pai], Kara-).

eiravaa',
Simple aor.
(TrtTroLOtLi'',
act.
once only.
Haixro},
mid.
iravopai, kiravoprjv, ivavaropai, ewavcraprji', Trerravpai, -îraijaofxaL.

'ETrttôj',
Il6i6a>
(afa).
fireiaa,
irtTroLda,
pass.
eTrtidoprjV,
irtTrucrpai,
eTreLadr]v, TreicrOrjaopai..
IXid^ci)
and
irU^co, eiriaaa, ireiriecrpai, kmaaOriv.
IIi|iirXT]|j.i.
Pres. part. kpimfKwv,
tTrXrjaa, kp.-weirXrjap.kvo'i, kirXrjaOrjv, irXriadrjcropai.
Tlivo) {Kara, avp.).
Iliop,aL {irleaaL,
Lu. 9:8), imov (both wfiv and
intiv,
but
only
Trie),
TrtTrcoKa, Kar-eTrodrjv.
XIiirpdcTKiu, irerrpaKa, Kkirpap.aL, iirpaOrjU.
IHtttw (dra
djTi
airo,
be,
kv,
kiri,
Kara, irapa, irepi,
irpocr,
avp).
'EirtTTTov, Treaovpai,, eirtaov,
eveaa (3d
pi. tireaav.
Gospel
5,
Acts
2), irkirTUKa.
In Rev. 2:5
kTrXevcra.
TrkirrcoKts,
Rev. 18:3
irkirTooKav.
IlXeco (dTTo , bia, be, Kara, wapa, viro, kirXeoi' (3d sing. k^-kir\ei contracted),
IIXcKb)
(kp- only comp.), yrXkKopai; aor. act. part. wXkâs',
2d
aor.
pass,
t/x-
irXaKiLs.
nXT|o-o-co (K-, km.-).
kK-ir\i]aaeadaL] imperf. k^-tTr\r)<7abpr}v;
Act. 1st aor. subj. km-TrXri^ys (1 Tim. 5:1); pass. pres. 2d aor. kwXrjyr} (simplex) and k^-tirXayriv
'Eirviyov, eirviâ, ki:viybpr)v, iLTT-ewvLyriv.
(see Veitch).
IIV17W
{airo-, kiTL-, (Tvp).
Ilpdo-crw.
Ilpa^co, firpaâ, irkirpaxa, irkirpaypat.
II\iV0dvo}Jiat..
'EirwOavbprjv, kirvObprjv.
'PaVT^Jw.
kpp).
'EpavTiffa
(some MSS.
kppavi.), pepavTiapai (so
W.
H., but
some MSS.
Mid.
1st aor. subj. pavTlaoiviai
(Mk. 7:4).
ADDITIONAL NOTES
'Pi<a {irapa).
"Peii(rw;
1219
2d
aor. pass, -(ppvrjv.
'Ptjo-o-w (5ta-, irepi.-, irpoa-
and
prjyvvpn).
The
active forms belong to prjaacj
and the passive to

St-, irepi-, Trpoo ;
priywixi..
Act. pros,
prjaaei, Sia-; fut.
pv^w; 1st aor.
ep(p)r]â,
pass. pres. priyvvvrai; imporf. 8i-fp{p)r]ypvTo (Lu. 5:6).

dL-fp{p)r]ypvi>To
a(it{<j)-.
The
reading of Lu. 5:0 varies between

2|3vvv|i,i
and
8L-ep{p)ri(TatTo.
tcr/3eo-a;
and
o-pevvvw, o-pvvu|iai.,
stem
Pres. a^kvwTt, ajik^w,
pass. a^kvvvpLai
2e(o (dj'a-, 5ia-, Kara-).
tcrtio'^jji'.
'Ay-St-KaT-taeKra, vdaoi', pass. pres. <rei6/;iws;
Ist aor.
SKaTTTu
2KirT0(iai is
'ÔKaxj/a, etr/ca/x/iai (Ac. 15:16 Rec). not found in N. T. save in (TriffKeirTeadai (Jas. 1:27; Heb. 2:6 Q), hri.-aKeipop.ai', 1st aor. mid. iir-eaKepa.p.T\v.
(/cara ).
2ird(i>
(dva
dTro 5ta tTrt

, ,
irept ).
Pres. mf.
aTro-trTra;', ava.-aTra.ao},
aTr-kawaaa',
pass.
irepi-eaTrwp.r]v, eawaadtji',
av, airo-, 5ta J perf. inf. bi-tavaaOai.
1st aor.
mid.
2t\Xw.
airaaaptvo's (simplex).
'EffTretpa, eairapp.ai, kairaprjv, Sl.
SirCp(i> (5ta , 7rt ).
Simplex only
in
pass. pres.
('Atto-,
k^-airo-, aw-a-rro-,
5ia-, kwi-,
Kara, av{v), vwo).
'Tir-eareWoi', Si.-eaTeWoprji',
oreXco,
eartuXa, air-iaraXKa
eo-raXyuai, air-eaTaXrji', Sl, vir-eaTtLXapriv. modern Greek arkKw from 'iarriKa. Imperf. tarr^Kov in Jo. 8 44 and Rev. 12:4 according to W. H. SxTipttw (Itti-). Srrjpt^w (-iaco in MSS., 2 Th. 3:3, W. H. alt.; cf. -iCb in LXX), kaT-qpLâ and karripiaa, aT-qpiâi. (opt. and inf.), eaTr)piyij.ai, kaTripixOT]v.
{a-KtaToKKav in Ac. 16:36),
Sttikco.
Cf.
2Tp(|>a>
(dj'a, dTTo ,
6ta
e/c ,
7rt ,
Kara, ixera, av{v), vtto).
'Tw-iaTpe<{)Ov,
-arpepo}, taTptxpa, tarpappai, tar pa.4>r)v , p,6Ta-aTpa4>r]aopaL.
Srpuvvufil or (TTpuvvvd) (xara
iitto ).
Present does not occur.
'Earpwi'vvoi'f
farpicaa, earpcofiai, Kar-earpuO-qv.

2i{>a^(o (Kara-).
Present does not occur.

2d)(Ta>, etrwcra,
S^d^w,
ea(t>aâ, ea4>aynai, iacfyayrjv.

kacodrjv, acoOrjaopat.
Sw^ci) (5ta , tK).
akawKa, tawôpL-qv, aeawapai,

,
Tdcro-w.
iiTTo-).
{ava
[fiat.],
avri,
dxo 5ta
e7rt-5ta- [ juat], tTri , [ttpo ]

[-pai.];
wpoa-, aw,
5i.a-Taôpai;
'Eraâ, 5ta-rerax'at, reray-
2d
aor.
5i-, vw-eTa.yr)v,
2d
TtXew
fut. viro-Tayrjaopai', 1st aor. 5ta-raxSts; 1st aor. (dTTO

,
mid.
era^dpriv.
5ta
iK, 7rt , an;').
reXtcrco,
ereXecra,
rerkXeKa,
TtreXtapai, tre-
XkaOrjv, TfXeaOrjaoixai.
T^XXw
(ava-, kâva-, kv-).
Simplex does not occur
in
N. T.
1st
aor. &i^,
iâv-ireiXa; perf. aua-TeraXKa', mid. pres.

kv-TTaXnai',
tv-reXXopai; fut. h-reXoupai; perf.
T^|ivw
(irepi-, ffuj'-).
mid. 1st aor. kv-tTtCXapriv. Simplex does not occur.
2d
aor. irepi-kTepov; inf. 7rpi-
Ttpelv; pass, pres., 1st aor. irepL-TpridT]i>; perf. Tvepi-Terp-qptvos.

T9t)[JH.
(dva , irpoa-ava-, &Tro-, Sta, diri-Sia

,
t/c , Itti , tri'i'-eTri ,
KOTa
triu'-Kara
fxera-, irapa , Trept
irpo , irpoa, avv, viro).
Act. pres. complete.
Imperf.
-Kav (3d
tWi
pi.);
and
kriOfaav, kriOow
(tTrt-,
(from
TiOeco)' fut. ^lycrco; aor. ^^Tj/ca, -Kas,
imper. 0
Trpoo); .subj.
Ow (complete);
inf.
0errat;part. 0ets; perf.
jkOtLKa;
mid. and pass.

k-Ki-Oqaopai',
riOtpai, rkOeipai, aw-tTtOtii'To, tTiOkpriv {k^-, irpoa-)',
mid.
rtfli?-
fut.
ha-,
aor.
2d
aor. kdkpqv ((complete); imper. dov (xapa-); OkaOe
(diro-); inf. OkaOai (diro , Kara-); part. Okptvos (dTro-, 5ia-).

ffo/xai;
krkOrjv', inf. re^î/ai;
Pass. fut.
part. Testis.
TCktoi.
Teô/ioi, iTe/cof, erex^l''.

kK-, kv,
7ri-,
Tpivitt {6.va, 6,iro-,
pera,
TTtpi-, irpo-).
Sinipli^x
not
in
N. T.
irpo-
1st aor. &i^, kTr-tTpt\pa; mid. pron. inijM'rf. kv-tTptiropqi'', 1st
;ior. p;u"t.
1220

"strong"
fut. K,
NEW TESTAMENT
2d
aor. k ,
tir-tTp6iivT]v',
Tpepaixevoi] pass.
fv-Tpaiirr}crovTa.L',
perf. kirL-TeTpa-n-TaL (1 Cor.

Tpecbo) (dva,
e/c , ep).
14:34 Rec.)eTpa.(f)r]i'.
"Edpe^pa, e9pe\pdfXT]v. TtOpannai,
Tp\cij {ila, Kara, irepL, Trpcr-, wpocr,
aw,
i.ivi.-avv,
vwo-).
Pres. complete.
'KTpexov, ebpapov.
Tpfpw
{5ia-, avv-).
Simplex does not occur. Pres.
5ta-, avv-; imperf. 5t-4rptj3oj';
fut. avv-Tpbpoi', 1st aor. 5t , aw-kTpopa; pass. pres. avv-TpiPonai;

TpLl3r]cronat.',
2d
fut.
aw-
perf. inf. avv-Terplcpdai', part. avv-TtTptp.pkvos.
Tvyx,dvw
8:6,
{iv,
vwep-tv, twL, irapa, avi^).

rerevxa.
5**AD*KL),
tTTi-).
#afv (dw-,
kcjidvrjv,
'Etvxov, opt. tvxoi, rervxa. (Heb. (Rec, BE, or even TervxvKa in MSS.). Pres. -e4>dva {(t>ai'r], Rev. 8: 12, 18:23 is variously accented),
4>avi]aop.aL
and
,
(pavod/xai
(LXX).
,
îSo|xai.
4'p(o (di'a
,
^daoiJ.ai,
k(f>ei,crdij.rjv.
awo, 5ta eia, Trap-etcr

"Ecjjepop,
e<pep6iJ.T]v,
ck ,
kiri,
Kara, Trapa Trept

,
irpo, irpoa,
avv,
xjTTO).
o'iaco,
TjveyKa,
indie.
fjpeyKoi'',
other parts
rivkxdriv',
2d
perf. act. irpoa-ev-qvoxa..
êvym
(dTTo ,
5ta ,
tK ,
Kara).
Mid.
fut.
(jt^vônai',
2d
perf.
kK-Tr(i>ivykvai,
i.<l>vyov.
*edv
/jat,
(ttpo-).
'E^ffao-a, e(i>daKa (1
Th. 2:16
t-Ôeiptv
W. H.
marg.).
*9epaj, i(f>eeipa, -k4>dap-
4>6ip(i> (5ta-,
Kara-).
Imperf.
(?)
(Rev. 19:2).
k4>9dpTjv,
(pdaprjcrofiai.
k4>pa.yr]v,
4>pd<r(ra).
'E<^paâ,
o-uj'-).
(ppayrjaonai.
</)i'coi';
4>5
(k-,
Pres. part.
kK-4>vri
pass.
2d
aor. part.
<l>vkv,
(Tvv-<t>vti<rai.
further form
will
(Mt. 23:32 =Mk.)
may
be accented
-îi;?
then be active pres. subj. or 1st aor. subj.; or -(f>vy 2d aor. subj. In this case rd <j>vWa is considered the subject. Simplex does not occuT in N. T. and ^vvvw Xe'w (-, kwi-, Kara-, avv-). or N. T.). Comp. -, vtrepeK-, avv-. Active part. (simplex not in
pass.
(W. H.) and and will then be
LXX
kin- (Lu. 10:34); imperf. aw-kxvpvev (Ac. 9:22); fut. kK-xeco
(LXX);
1st aor.
k-,
KCLT-kxio-',
inf.
kK-xkai (Ro. 3:15,
LXX); 2d
aor. (?)
imper. kK-xkere
(Rev. 16:1), aw-kxeov (Ac. 21:27). Hort. (II, p. 165) would refer the above forms "to an otherwise virtually unknown 2d aor." Pass. pres. kK-xttraL (Mt. 9:17) and kK-avi^, --VTrep-eK-xvvvop.ai.', imperf. k^-ix^^v^TO (Ac. 22:20); fut. kK-xvOijaopai] 1st aor. k^, aw-ex^V'} perf. e/c-, avv-Kexvâi. XpCw {ky-, kiri-). Aor. explaa, ky-xp'tâi (Rev. 3:18) may be inf. of 1st aor. active (W. H.) or imper. of 1st aor. mid. (eyxpiôô-t.).
XaCpo)
(cru;^).
'Kxa-Lpov, kxdprjv, xipivtro/iat,

x-Pi-(fof^-'-)
some MSS.
x^-P^^
(Rev. 11:10).
xapi<76ij<ro-
XapCÔ(Jiai.
fxai..
Mid.
kxo.pi.aa.ix7]v',
pass. Kexd.pi.anai, kxapiadrjv,
Xpdo[xai (Kara-).
3:10).
'P'xi)(^(o
'Expcb/ir;i^,
kxpwdp.r}v, Kkxprip-at.
Impers. XPV Only once (Jas.

'^vyrjaofiai.
(diâ , dTTo , Ik,

'^vi)adp.r]v,
Kara;
di>,
K , KaT-k\pvâ)
"flveojiai.
not
kirpLdix-qv.
13. Ablaut. It is important for the student to note the part played in Greek words, both root-syllables and other syllables, by ablaut or vowel-gradation. We find qualitative ablaut, as
0epco, 4)bpos
and
\diTw,
\k\onra.
Then
there
etfXL
is
quantitative or
Xiireiv,
qualitative-quantitative ablaut, as in
'liiev,
and
Xdiro).
ADDITIONAL NOTES
1221
The subject is still more or less obscure as to the precise order of these vowel-changes and the precise factor in each change (accentuation, vowel-contraction, compensative lengthening).
For
pp.
a brief account see Wright, Comparative Grammar of Language, 1912, pp. 49-61; Brugmann, Kurze vergl.
the
Greek
Gr.,
138-50; Hirt, Handbuch der griech. Laut- und Formenlehre, pp. 84-105. For a fuller discussion see Hirt, Der indogermanische Ablaut; Brugmann, GrundriB, vol. I, pp. 482-505.
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
References to pages.
complete List of Topics
is
not attempted.
72
see Sinaiticus.
f.;
in the N.T., 82; part II,
141see
376.
S*
:
Accumulation
prepositions.
of
prepositions:
a-text: see Syrian text.
A: see Alexandrinus.
Abbreviations:
171-3.
of
Accusative case: form, 248; double
personal
names,
accusative, 257; singular in third

decl.,
264
f.;
plural,
265
f.;
like
Ablative case: form, 248; Doric genitive-ablative, 254; Attic gen.-abl.,
nom.
of,
in -et, 266; singular of adjec-
tives, 274;
255
name, 514; meaning, 514; rare with substantives, 514 f.; with adjectives, 515 f.; with prepositions, 516 f. and ch. XIII; with verbs, 517-20 (of departure and removal 518, of ceasing and abf.;
name, 466 f.; meaning with verbs of motion, 468 f.; exte nt of space, 46 9; for t ime, 469-71 with transitive verbs, 471-7; cognate, 477-9; double, 479-84; with passive verbs, 484-6;
467
f
;
.
adverbial,
486-8;
inverse
by
antiptosis,
staining 518, of missing, lacking, despairing 518, of differing, excelling 519, of asking
488;
by
attraction,
.
488;
and hearing 519,
with the partitive idea 519, attraction of relative 519 f.); after comparative, 667.
Ablaut: 1220 f. Absolute: use of cases, 416; nominative, tive,
with the infinitive, 489 f ace. absolute, 490 f., 1130; whh prepositions, 491 and ch. XIII; compared with genitive, 506-10. Achaean: origin, 16; Achaean-Doric, 17, 54, 266; Achsean-Dorian KoLv-q:
;
53, 63.
459
accusative, 490
f.
geni-
512^;
positive adjective in
inf.,
Active voice: endings, 337-9; displacing future middle, 356; meaning

of,
absolute sense, 661; participle, 1130-2.
1092
f.;
799
799; transitive or intransitive, f.; effect of prepositions, 800;

f
.
Abstract nouns: 152, 794.
variation in tenses, 800

tive,
causa802;
Accent: discussion of, 226-36 (age of Greek accent 226-8, significance of, in the kolvIi 228 f., signs of 229, later developments in 229 f., shortening stem-vowels 230 f., separate words 231 f., difference in sense
801
f.;
with
reflexives,
802; infinitives, 802; as passive of another verb, 802 f See Index of QuotaActs: 120-3.
impersonal,
tions,
and passim
in the
volume.
232 f., enclitics and proclitics 23.3foreign words 5, proper names 235, 235 f .) rules for accent of enclitics
;
Adjectives: with formative suffixes, 157-60 (primitive, 157 f.; secondary, 158-60: from verbs 158, from substantives 158, from adjectives
and
proclitics, 1211.
KOLfij,
159
f.,
Accidence: in the vernacular
jiound,
from adverbs 160); com161-9 (with inseparable
1223
. ;
. ;
1224

161
f.,
NEW TESTAMENT
of,
prefixes
agglutinative
f.);
or
formation
294,
294-7
f.,
(fixed
cases
295,
juxtapositive
of adjectives,
168
f.,
declension
accus.
294
f.,
ablative
270-6
(origin of the
genitive 295, locative 295, instru-
adjective 270
inflection of adf.,
mental 295
296,
dative 296, 'suffixes

297, anal-
jectives with one termination 271
compound adverbs
with two terminations 272 f., with three 273 f., the accus. singular 274, contraction in 274 f., indeclinable 275 f.); comparison of, 276-81 (positive 276, comparative
276-8, superlative 278-81); in predicate,
ogy 297, comparison of adverbs 297); adverbial stems, 297-9 (substantives 298, adjectives 298, nu-
merals 298, pronouns 298, verbs 298 f.); use of adverbs, 299-300 (manner 299, place 299 f., time
300); scope of, 300-2 (relative between adverbs and prepositions and conjunctions 301, adverbs 301 f., adverbs and intensive particles 302, adverbs and interjections
401; and substantive, 407;
gender in, 412 f.; with vocative, 464; with genitive, 503-5; with 515 f.; with locative ablative, or instrumental, 523; with dative,
537; distinguished from adf.,
302);
adverbial accusative,
verbs, 549
657; syntax
of,
ch.
XIV, 650-75;
stantive,
origin of, 650; adjec-
486-8; genitive with, 505; dative with, 537 f.; syntax of, ch. XII,
tival or appositional use of sub-
54452;
nature
special
difficulties,
544;
of,
as substantive, 651 f 652-4 (any gender 652, masculine 652, feminine 652 f., neuter 654 f.); agreement with substantives, 654 f
.
of,
544; narrower sense
adverbs with verbs, 545 f (commonest 545, N. T. usage 545, predicate uses 545 f., with ex'^ 546,
544
655,
(number 654 f., gender 655, case two or more adjectives 655);
f
.
attributive, 655
predicate, 656
f.
;
f.
personal construction, 657

cases, 658;
with
with participles 546, loose relation 546) with other adverbs, 546 with with substanadjectives, 546 f tives, 547 as substantives, 547 f
; ;
with the
inf.
and clauses,
frequent use
style,
;
.
of,
548; as marks of
658 f.; as adverb, 659; positive, 659-61 (relative contrast 659 f., as comparative or superlative 660 f., with prepositions 661, comparison
implied by
t)
jective,
548 f distinguished from ad549 f. (different meaning
549, difference in
lish
;
Greek and Eng-
661, in absolute sense
idiom 549 f.) adverbial phrases 550-2 (incipient adverbs 550, prepositional plirases
661); comparative, 662-9 (contrast or duality 662 f., degree 663, with-
550
f .,
participles
f.;
551, 1109
ositions,
f.);
the verb, 554

f.;
prep-
out suffixes 663, double 663 f ., without object of 664-6, followed by v 666, by the ablative 666 f., by prepositions 667, displacing the superlative 667-9)
;
554
adjective as, 659;
article with, 765 f Adversative particles: 1187

.ffiollc:
f.
lyric odes, 17; persistence of,
superlative, 669-
52; relation to Doric, 17, 53; influ-
71 (vanishing 669, few true in N. T.
ence on
KOLfT],
63; on the N. T., 82;

there,
669
inf.,
f.,
elative 670,
no "Hebraisf.;
and here and

Affixes: 146.
ad libitum.
tic" 671); numerals, 671-5; with
.^schylus: see Index of Quotations.
1076
f.;
part, originally, 1100
adjectival aspects of part., 110410; negatives with, 1163

f.
Agent: words expressing, 153 f.; dative of, 542; with passive, 820.
Agglutinative: tj-pe of languages, 37;
Adverbs:
160;
with
formative
suffixes,
agglutinative
compounds,
169-71; neglect of adverbs, 293;
compounds, 163-71. Agreement: see concord.
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Aktionsart: 344
5,
f., 823 f., 828 f., 8318o0 f., 858 f. Alexander the Great: 44, 49-51, 53 ff.,
1225
to
841-3,
relation
present
perrela-
fect 843-5, epi.stolary
845
f.,
f.,
tion to the future 846
in wishes
60-3, 66-8, 71, 239, etc.
Alexandrian:
grammarians,
31;
do
847, variation in use of tenses 847, translation of aorist into English
not treat adjectives, 650; no Alexandrian dialect, 68, 91, 100, 213,
215, 227, 242.
Alexandrian type of text: 180 and

passim.
847 f.); subjunctive and 848-55 (no time-element quency of subj, 848-50, art 850 f., aori.st subj. in
optative,
848, fre-
Aktionsprohibi-
Alexandrinus 179 and passim. AUegory: 1207.

:
tions 851-4, aorist subj. with dv (jltj 854, aorist opt. 854 f.); imperative,
Alliteration: 1201.
855 f.; infinitive, 856-8; participle, 858-64 and 1112-4 (Aktiomart 858
f.,
Alphabet: original Greek, 178; law

enforcing Ionic alphabet, 181, 209, 222.
and
f.,
aorist
859
f.,
ante-
cedent
action
action
860,
860
simultaneous subsequent action
745-50 (see distributive); questions, 736 f. Amplification: of subject, 398-400; of predicate, 400 f Anabasis: passim. See Index of
Alternative:
pronouns,
861-3, aorist participle in indirect discourse 863 f.).

Aoristic: see punctiliar, present, perfect, future.
Quotations.
Anacoluthon: discussion of, 435-40 (suspended subject 436 f., digression 437-9, participle in 439 f., asyndeton 440); distinction from oratio variata, 440 f kinds of, 1203 f. Analogy: passim. Anaphora: 1200. Anaphoric: see article, demonstra;
.
205 f Apocalypse: 101, 135 f.; solecisms in, 413-6 and passim. See Index of Quotations. Apocrypha: passim. See Index of
:
Aphaeresis
Quotations. Apodosis: see 921-3 and conditional sentences, 1007-27. Aposiopesis: 1203.
Apostrophe: use of, 244. Appian: see Index of Quotations.

Apposition:
tive, relative.
Anarthrous: attributive, 782-4; predicate, 790-6; participle, 1105 f. Annominatio: 1201. Antecedent: see demonstrative, relative, preposition.
with substantive, 368400; partitive, 399; predicative am-
plifications, 401; peculiarities in, 416; to vocative, 464; genitive of, 498 f appositional use of substan.
tive,
651
f.;
with
olros,
698-700; 1078
f.
Antiptosis: 488.
Ikuvos, 708; appositional inf.,
Antistrophe: 1200.
Antithesis: 1199
Aorist:
f.
Aquila
see Index of Quotations.
second aorist of -;ui verbs, 307-11; forms of, strong and weak, second and first, 345-50; passive, 816 ff.; name, 831; Aktionsart in, 831-5 (constative 831-4, ingressive
834,
effective
Aramaic: 24; spoken by Jesus, 26-9; distinct from the Hebrew, 102;
portions of the O. T. in, 103; the vernacular of Palestine, 103 f Josephus' use of, in his Tl'or, 104;
.
signs of, in the N. T., 104

sible use
f.;
pos-
834
f.);
indicative,
historical
f.,
835-48 (narrative or tense 835 f., gnomic 836

perfect 840
f.,
rekition
by Mark and Matthew, 105; proper names, 214 f., 236; on propositions, 5.56 f. and passim.
;
to imperfect 837-40, rekition to jiast

relation to present
Arcadian: 63, 67, 82, 84, 184, passim.
1226

and the vernacular, See Index of Quotations.
of
NEW TESTAMENT
with
Ktti,
Aristophanes:
66.
attributive 782-4, several attributives
same person or
Aristotle:
shows influence and marks transition to

58, 128, 146, 148-53,
Ionic
55,
thing,
when
distinguished, treated
koivt),
f.,
as one, point of view, difference in
168
171,
number
icates,
or gender, with disjunctive
passim.
See Index of Quotations.
particle 785-9) ; position with pred-
Arrangement: see sentence. Arrian: see Index of Quotations. Article: use by Peter, 127; with vocative,
789
791,
absence
of,
790-6
(with proper
tives
names
791, with geni-
465
f.;
as possessive, 684; with
possessive, 685; with reflexive, 690;
with
ovTos,
700-2; with
eKeXfos,
708;
prepositional phrases with both preposition and genitive 792 f., titles 793, words in pairs 793, ordinal numerals 793 f.,
791
f.,
and development of, 754 f. (a Greek contribution 754, derived from demonstrative 755); significance of, 755; method employed by, 756-8 (individuals from individuals 756, classes from classes 757, quahties from qualities 758);
origin
in
predicate 794,
abstract words
794, qualitative force 794, only object of
kind 794-6) with

;
inf.,
1062-
8; articular part., 1106-8.

Article,
indefinite:
el$
as,
674;
ns
and
eU, 796.
Articular infinitive: 1062-8.

Articular participle: 1106-8.
Artistic prose
:
758-76 (with substantives, context, gender, proper names, anaphoric 758-62, with advaried usages
of,
see literary
koivti.
jectives, resumptive, adj alone,with

.
Asianism: 60, 73, 87 f., passim. Aspirate: 191, 209; doubling of, 215;
aspiration of consonants, 219; ori-
numerals 762-4, with participles 764 f ., infinitive 765, with adverbs 765 f., with prepositional phrases 766, with single words or whole sentences 766, with genitive alone 767, nouns in predicate 767-9, distributive 769, nominative with = vocative 769, = possessive 769 f ., with possessive 770, with avros 770, with demonstratives 770 f., with oXos, Tras [tiTras] 771-4, with ttoXuj 774 f., a/cpos, fiiJ.L(TVS, ecrxo-Tos, fiiaos 775, with aXXos and ei-epos 775 f., with fiovos 776); position with attributives, 776-89 (with adjectives, normal, repetition, one with several, anarthrous substantives, participles 776-9, with genitive, between article and gen., after gen. without repetition, repetition with gen., absent with both, correlation of article 779-82, with adjuncts or adverbs, between article and noun, repeated, only with adjunct, only with noun, when several adjuncts
occur,
gin of the aspirate, 221

tions in
f.;
varia-
MSS., 223-5;
transliter-
ated Semitic words, 225; use with and pp, 225 f.; question of avrov,
226.
Assertion, sentence of: see indirect

discourse.
Asseverative particles: 1150.

Assimilation: of consonants, 215-7;
rules for, 1210.
Associative case: see instrumental.
Asyndeton: 427-44; imperative

949.
in,
Athens losing
:
its
primacy in culture,
67, passim.
Attendant circiunstance, participle of:

see participle.
Attic: 16, 17, 20, 22, 35
f.,
41-4;
tri-
umph
of
of,
51; vernacular, the base
the
KoivT),
60-2; influence
N.
T., 82; Attic inscriptions
on show
indifference to hiatus,
207; geni-
tive-abl.,255f.; "Attic" declension,
260; ad libitum in the book.

Attica: 181
f.
phrases
of
verbal
origin,
exegetical
questions,
anarthrous
Atticism: not part of the
koivt},
50; the
; ;
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Atticistic reaction
1227
ff.,
and
its
influence,
the forms 247
blending of case-
58-60, 73; conservative influence of, 177 f.; pronunciation, 239, pasAttraction of relative: inverse, 488;
endings, sjTicretism of the forma
249 f., origin of case-suffixes 250); concord in, 413-6 (adjectives 413, participles 413, the Book of Revelation 413-6, apposition 416, absolute 416); syntax of, ch.
to genitive, 512; to ablative, 519
f.;
732 f. Attributive: adjective, 655 f.; positive See participle. article, 776-89. Augment discussion of, 365-8 (origin of 365, where found 365, purpose of 365, syllabic 365 f., temporal 366 f., compound verbs 367, double
with
OS,
714-9;
6o-os,
XI, 446-
543; history of interpretation of, 446-9 (confusion 446, Bopp's contribution 446
f.,
modem
Green's classification 447

in use of
cases,
usage 447, synf.,
cretism of the cases 448, freedom
367 f.); in past perfect, 1211 Authorized version: influence English language, 92.
f.
of,
on
448 f.); purpose of the 449 (Aristotle's usage, wordrelations) encroachment of prepositions on, 450-3 (reason 450, no "governing" of cases 450, not used indifferently 450 f., original use
;
B
B
:
see Vaticanus.
with "local" cases 451, 567, increasing use of 451 f., distinction
preserved in N. T. 453)
;
p-text: see Neutral text. Bezae, Codex: 179 f., passim. "Biblical" Greek: 5; view of E. Hatch refuted by Deissmann, 24 f.; the new point of view, 30; N. T.
distinctive
idea in each case, 453-6 (funda-
mental idea 453

interchangeable
f.,
cases not yet
454,
vitahty
of
case-idea 454, historical develop-
not "biblical Greek," 92, 112 f., passim.
77-9,
88,
ment
this
of the cases
454
f.,
method
of
grammar
456);
nominative,
Bilingualism: in Palestine, 27-30; in Brittany, Ireland, Scotland, Wales,

30, 69, 102 f. Blending: see cases.
456-66; vocative, 461-6; accusative, 466-91; genitive, 491-514; ablative, 514-20; locative, 520-5; instrumental, 525-35; dative, 53543; functions of prepositions with, 567-71 see discussion of each prep;
Boeotian: 16, 52; influence
of, 61,
f
.
63;
monophthongizing, 204
ciation, 240; passim.
pov(rTpo4>'r|86v :
pronun-
osition in ch. XIII; adjective
and
1211.
Brachylogy: 1201, 1203. Breathings: 221-6; use with p and pp, 225 f.; in Ionic, 240. Breviloquence see brachylogy.
:
substantive, 655; with adjectives, 658; OS, attraction and incorporation,
714-9;
oo-ris,
728
f.;
of inf.,
1058-62; with
1119.
inf.,
1082; participle,
Brittany, bilingual: 29.
Causal participle: see participle and
Broken continuity:
past p(!rfect.
see perfect
and
causal clauses.
Causal
particles:
see
conjunctions
Byzantine Greek: literature on, 22-4,

43, 155, 179, 183, 191, 210, passim.
and causal sentences (hypotactic).

Causal sentences : use of 3s, 724 f paratactic, 962 f.; with hypotactic conjunctions, 963 f .; rohitives, 965 f
. .
Slo. tIi
and the
infinitive,
inf.,
966; parf.;
C= Codex
Ephraemi: passim.
s(!(!
ticiple, 966,
1128;
1091.
Cardinals:
miinerals.
of,
Cases: number
247-50 (history of
Causative verbs: 150; active, 801 middle, SOS f.
1228

final
Cautious assertion: see

secutive sentences.
and conSee Ara-
Chaldee (Aramaic): 211.

maic.
161, inseparable prefixes 161-3, agglutinative or by juxtaposition 163-71).
rivative
Compound sentences
in,
order of clauses
Chiasm: 1200.
Chinese: 250. Christian [element in N. T. Greek: chiefly lexical, 112-6; new connotations of familiar words, 115 f. Chrysostom: passim. Circumlocutions: 330, 648 f.
Circumstantial participle: see participle.
423; two kinds of sentences, 425 f.; two kinds of compound or complex, 426; parataxis, 426;
hypotaxis, 426 f Conative action: 880, 885. Concessive: imperative
as,
949;
clause, 1026; participle, 1128.
Concord and government, 397 f in person, 402 f.; in number, 403-9;

: ;
.
"Classical Greek": 5, 89, passim. Clause: paratactic, 428 f.; hypotactic, 429-31; inf. and part., 431 f.; clauses with the adjectives, 658 f.
in gender, 410-3; in case, 413-6. Conditional sentences: apodosis of second class, 921-3; two types, 1004-7; four classes, 1007-22 (de-
CUmax:
1200.
Collectives: see gender
and number.
Colloquial: see vernacular.
Colon: 243.
termined as fulfilled 1007-12, determined as unfulfilled 1012-6, undetermined, but with possibility of determination 1016-20, remote
possibility of determination 1021
f.);
Comma:
origin of, 243.
speech: see kolvt). Comparative: see adjectives.
Common
mixed conditions,
conditions, 1022
particles with
ticiple, 1129.
f.
;
1022;
imphed
1023other
f.;
elliptical,
Comparative clauses: with relative oaos, 966 f.; relative with /card, 967; KadoTi, 967; cos and its compounds, 967 ff. Comparative grammar or philology:
8-12; the linguistic revolution, 8; sketch of Greek grammatical history, 8-10; the discovery of San-
6; concessive clauses,
el
1026
kav,
and
1027; par-
Conjugation of verb: ch.VIII, 303-76. Conjunctions: adverbs, 301; in subordinate clauses, 951 f and all tlirough the discussion of hypotac.
from Bopp to Brugmann, 10 ff.; importance of, 36; the original Indo-Germanic speech, 38; Greek as a "dialect" of, 39 f.; applied to N. T. word-formation, 144; system of affixes, infixes, prefixes,
skrit, 10;
suffixes,
clauses, 950-1049; paratactic, 1177-92 (copulative: rk 1178 f., Kal 1179-83, 5^ 1183-5, dXXd 1185 f.; adversative: 8k 1186 f., n-Xiji' 1187,
tic
nkvToi 1188,
o/icos
f)
1188,
Ml?
1188;
disjunctive:
1188
f.,
elre
and
f.,
kdvTe 1189, ovre
and
^77x6
1189; in-
14&-247, 250, passirn.
ferential: apa
1189
f.,
yap 1190
f.
Comparison: of adjectives, 276-81;

of adverbs, 297; sôitax of, 661-9.
odp 1191
f.);
hypotactic, 1192
6s,
Consecutive: use of
see final
724; clauses,
Complementary Complementary
ciple.
infinitive: see infini-
and consecutive.
tive (with verbs).

participle: see parti-
Composition: compound words common in the N. T., 82; compound verbs in -eco, 147 f. discussion of composita in the N. T., 160-71
;
Consonants: changes, 209-21 (origin and character of the consonants 209 f., the insertion of 210, the omission of 210 f single or double
.,
211-5, assimilation of 215-7, inter-
change and changing value of 217aspiration of 219, variable final 219-21, metathesis 221).
9,
(kinds of, proper, copulative, de-
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Constative action: see aorist. Constructio ad sensum: illustrated
in,
1229
f
;
.
tory of the, 246

singular 254
first
or o declen-
sion, 2.54-9 (Doric genitive-aljlative

f.,
Constructio
400-424, 683 f., 1204. praegnans: 1204.

discussion of, 203
;
.
Attic genitive-abla-
See
f.
tive 255, vocative in -a 256,

in -pa
words
256,
also prepositions.
and
participles in -via 256,
Contraction
in
retention of -a in gen.-abl.
Becond declension, 260 f

in verbs, 341-3.
in third de-
clension, 268; in adjectives,
275
f.;
f.;
Contrasts: in Greek words, 175
in
comparison, 662
Co-ordination
ciples,
:
f f.
;
double declensions 257, heteroclisis and metaplasm 257-9, indeclinable substantives 259); second or o, 259-63 (the "Attic" 260, contraction 260 f., vocative 261, het-
443
f.,
between parti-
1135
f.
Coptic: 215, 250
passim.
and metaplasm 261-3, mixed declension 263, proper names 263); third decl., 263-9 (nomieroclisis
Copula: not necessary, 395 f. Copulative conjunctions: 1177-86. Coronis: 244.

Correlation of article
Correlative
:
native as vocative 264, accus. singular 264 f., accus. plural 265 f.,
peculiarities
in
the
268,
nominative
contraction
f.,
see article.
f.,
267
298,
268,
f.,
gen.-abl.
pronouns: 289
proper names 268

f
.
hetero-
709
f.,
732.
clisis
and metaplasm 269); inde;
Crasis: 208.
clinable words, 269
declension of
Cretan dialect: passim.

Crete: early Greek culture
381.
in, 43.
adjectives, 270-81; numerals,

4; pronouns,
281-
284-93; adverbs, 293-
Culture: variations ia N. T. writers,

Cynic-Stoic diatribe: 420
:
302.
Defective verbs: in voice, 799.

f.,
See
1196
f.
verbs.
Cyprus as purveyor of Greek culture, 43; language and N. T. Gk., 82,

passim.
Deictic: see demonstrative.
Deliberative: future, 875

tive,
f.
subjunc-
934
f.;
opt.,
940; questions,
1046.
D:
see (Codex) Bezae.
8-text: see
Dative:
Western text. 248 ff.; syncretism, 535; decay of dative, 535 f.; idea of, 536; with substantives, 536 f.;
form,
Delphian: 266. Delta: 91. Demonstrative pronouns: inflection of, 289 f.; nature of, 693; shades of meaning, 693; 6, i), t6, 693-5; 5s, 695 f.; 556, 696 f.; oItos, 697-706
(the deictic use 697, the contemptuous use 697, the anaphoric use 697 f., in apposition 698-700, use of article 700 f., without article
f ., contrast with cKeifos 702 f., antecedent of relative 703 f., gender and number 704, adverbial uses
with adjectives, 537; with adverbs and prepositions, 537 f. and ch. XIII; with verbs, 538-43 (indirect
object 538, dalivus commodi
vel in-
commodi, 538 f., direct object 53941, with intransitive verbs 541,
possession 541, infinitive in dative
701
541
f.,
of the agent 542, because of

f .)
704
f .,
preposition in composition 542
other
shift
ambiguous examples, 543.

Declarative clauses: 915
indirect discourse.
f.,
phrase tout' ianv 705, with pronouns 705, ellipsis 705, in reference 706) inflvos 706-9
;
and
f.
see
(the purely deictic 707, the con-
De-aspiration: increasing, 222
temptuous u.se 707, the anaphoric 707, the remote object 707 f., emphasis 70S,
Declensions: ch. VII, 246-302; his-
with apposition 70S,
1230
with

article 708,
NEW TESTAMENT
antecedent to rela-
or more, contrast, antithetic); article as, 769.
tive 708, gender
and number 708
f.,
independent use 709); amm, 709; correlative demonstratives 709 f .)

article
Division of words: not in old MSS.,
243
f.
derived from, 755; article

f
with, 770
Doric: purest Hellenic, 17; tenacity of, 52; Doric- J]]oUc, 53; influence
Demosthenes:
in the
New
Attic, 52;
on the
Doric: 16
KOLv-n,
63;
on the N.
f.,
T., 82;
pronouncing Greek, 238. See Index of Quotations. Denial and prohibition, with ov jiii:
see aorist subj.
genitive-ablative, 254, -passim.

f.,
52^, 62
82, 118, 184
f.,
193
f.,
211, 224, 229, 240, 249, 254
f .,
and
fut. ind.
267, passim.
Denominative verbs: 147. Deponents: 332 f., 811-3, 817

Design, sentences of: see
Diacritical
Double comparative and superlative:

f.
663, 670.
Derivation: derivative verbs, 147-50.

final.
marks: 226. Diaeresis: 204 f.; marks of, 244. Dialects: fuller knowledge of
dialects, 16 f .,
the
f.,
Double compounds: 160, 165, 565. Double consonants: 211-5. Double declension: 257. Double interrogative 737. Dual: origin and disappearance of,
:
39
f.,
41-4, 46, 52
251
f.
71, 79, 110
f.;
dialect-coloured verf.;
DuaUty:
tive,
nacular, 61-9, 82, 178
accent
in,
in,
229-31, 238
passim.
ff.;
declension
247;
in the comparative adjec662 f with erepos, 749. Durative (Unear) action: 823 f., 879;
.
92.
f.,
Diatribe, Cynic-Stoic: 420
1196
f.
Dynamic:
see middle voice.
Diffuseness: see pleonasm.
Digamma:
209, 223 f. Digraphs: 209. Digression 437 f Diminutives: frequent in the N. T., 82; less common than in modem
:
Ecbatic Zva: see consecutive clauses. Ecbatic infinitive: see consecutive

clauses
and
infinitive.
:
Gk., 155.
Editor's prerogative
244
Diodorus Siculus: see Index of Quotations.
Effective action: see aorist.
Diphthongs: 204
direct,
f.
Direct discourse: exchange with in-
Egypt: 21, 56; peculiarities of Koiurj in, 68, 91, 100 f.. Ill f., 178, 186, 189, 191, 195 f., 200, 202, 257, passim.
Elative: 278 Elean: 266.
f.,
442
;
.
with recitative on,
670.
1027
Discord: see concord.
EUsion: 72, 206-8, 223, 226, 1210.

negative,
f.
Disjunctive particles:
1165
f.,
EUipsis: of subject or predicate, 391;

of oSros, 705
f.;
1173; conjunctions, 1188
in general, 1201
f.
Dissimilation: see assimilation.

Distributive mmierals: see numerals.
Emphasis: position of, 417 f.; in pronouns, 677 ff., 684 f., 686, 708.
Enallage: 454.
Distributive pronouns: inflection
of,
syntax of, 743, 744-50; d^(poTepoL, 744 f.; eKaaros, 745 f.; aWo^, 746-8 (absolutely, for two, adjec-
292
f.;
EncUtics accent
:
of,
233
ff .
pronouns,
in
681
f.;
rules for accent of, 1211.
tive,
sis,
with
article, aXXos ctXXo, eUiperepo^, different,
EngUsh: best English' spoken burgh and Louisville, 69.

Epanadiplosis
:
Edin-
axXos
and
a\\6three
1200.
rpios);
'irepos,
748-50 (absolutely,
pair,
different,
with
article,
Epexegetic infinitive: 1086 f. Epexegetical apposition 399.

:
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Epic: 185, 204, passim.
1231
Epicene: gender, 252.

Epidiorthosis
:
985-7, ws 987, /mj, firj iron, ny TToJs 987-9, relative 989, infinitive 98991,
1199.
participle
991,
1128
f.);
subf.,
Epimenides: see Index of Quotations. Epistles: distinction from letters, 70 f., S5 ff., 197, 200, 239.
Epistolary aorist: see aorist.
final,
991-7
(iffa
991-4,
67rwi
f.,
994
nv,
ixT)
TTore, nil ttws

f.,
995
relative
996, infinitive 996

oTi 997);
1087-9,
d and
f.,
consecutive, 997-1003 (tm

f.,
Erasmus on
:
i)ronunciation of Greek,
997-9, w(XT 999
cbs
1000
5rt
237, 240.
Etacism: 191.
Etjmiology work of the philosophers, 31; use of term, 143 f.
:
1001, relative 1001, infinitive 1001 fT., 1089-91).
Final consonants (letters) 21, 248.
194,
219-
Euphony: 419-23.
Euripides see Index of Quotations. Euthalius: 241.
:
Finnish:
First or
2.50.
a declension: 254-9, 267. Foreign words: 108-11, 235 f. See

Latinisms.
Exclamation: 461, 739, 741.
Formation
lar
of
words:
in the
II,
vernacu-
KotPT,,
72; ch.
suffixes,
pp. [143-76;
formative
146-60; by com-
Fayum
tions.
Papyri: see Index of Quotasee gender.
position, 160-71.
Forms, rare see declensions and con:

:
Feininine
jugation of verbs.
Figures of speech: ch. XXII, 11941208; rhetorical, not grammatical,

1194; style in the N. T., 1194-7;
figures of thought, 1198
f.
Formulas of citation: 1027 f. Fourth Book of Maccabees: see Index

of Quotations.
(rhetor-
ical question, oratory, irony, prodi-
orthosis, epicHorthosis, paraleipsis,
Fourth Gospel and Apocalypse: see Index of Quotations. French: accent, 230; cases and prepositions of,
heterogeneous
of expression,
structure)
figures
252; gender, 252; pasof,
1199-1208
(parallels
sim.
and contrasts:
parallelism, synony-
Future: conjugation
of 353
f.,
353-7
(origin
mous
or antithetic, chiasm or re-
Ionic-Attic 355, syncof.,
verted parallelism, anaphora, antistrophe, poetry 1199 f.; contrasts
pated 353
active
sive 356
of liquid verbs 356,
and middle 356, second pas-
words: epanadiplosis, climax, zeugma, brachylogy, s>'nonyms, onomatopoetic, alliteration, paronomasia, annominatio, parechesis, pun 1200 f.; contraction and expansion ellipsis, ajjosiopesis, breviloqucncc or brachylogy, constructio
in
:
f., first passive 357, periphrastic 357); syntax of middle,
813
tic),
f.;
passive, 818-20; relation of
aorist to,
846 f.; punctiliar (aoris870-6 ("mixed" tense, punc-
tihar or durative 870-2,
modal
as-
praegnans, constructio ad scnsum,

hypallage,
litotes,
pleonasm, hyperbole, mciosis 1201-6; metaphors and similar tropes: metaphor, simparable,
f.).
merely futuristic, volitive, dehberative 872-6, in the modes 876-9: indicative 876, subjunctive
pect
of,
and optative 876,

participle 877
f.,
.
infinitive
876,
periphrastic sulv
ile,
allegory,
metonymy
1206
Btitutes for 878 f ); durative (linear), 888-9 (three kinds of action 889,
Final and consecutive clauses: kinship, 9S0; origin in jKirat axis, 980 f.;
periphrastic 889); fut. ind. and aor. subj.,92t f.;fut. ind. as imperative,
pure
final,
981-91
(iVa
981-5, owws
942
f.,
1118f.
1232

f.
NEW TESTAMENT
See verbal adjec-
Future perfect: 361, 906

Futuristic:
Gerundive: 157.
of future,
tives.
modal aspect
merely futuristic, 872-4; present, 869 f., 881; pres. part., 992; present
perfect,
tive,
Gnomic:
aorist,
836
f.;
present, 866;
present perfect, 897.
898; subj., 928-30; opta937-9.
Gorgian figures: 1197

Gothic: passim.
ff.
Grammar: the
of Winer,
7-text: see Alexandrian text.
ideal
grammar,
3;
pre- Winer period,
3; the the service
4; the modern period, the service of DeLssmann, Thumb, in sub-
Gender:
of adjectives, 156
f.;
stantives,
252-4 (grammatical gen-
Moulton, etc., 5-7; the new grammatical equipment, 8-31; sketch of
der 252, kinds of 252, variations in
252 f LXX illustrations 254) no feminine inflection in second declension, 259, 261 f.; concord in, 410-3 (fluctuations in 410 f., neuter singular 409, 411, explanatory o ecTTiv and tout' ecmv 411 f., the participle 412, adjective 412 f.); of adjectives without substantives, 652-4; agreement with substan.,
;
Greek grammatical history, 8-10; advance in general Greek grammar, 12; critical editions of Greek authors, 13; grammatical monographs, 13; grammatical commentaries, 29;
new point of view,
30; comparative, 31-48; in Alexander's time, 58-61;
Greek grammarians and Latin, 822; Alexandrian grammarians and

adjectives, 650; passim.
tives, 654; ovTos, 704; iKtivos, 708;

5s,
Greek authors: 13
f.,
f.,
55, 57-9,
86
f.,
712
ff.; ocTTts,
729.
94, 109, 121, 128
147, 191, 199,

f.,
Genealogy
in
Matthew:
270.
f.;
203, 218, 227, 238, 251, 265
chap-
Genitive: form, 248, 263, 491

genitive-abl.,
tive-abl.,
Doric
254 f.; Attic geni255 f.; name, 492; specifying case, 493 f.; local use, 494; temporal use, 495; with substantives, 495-503 (possessive 495 f., attributive 496 f., predicate 497 f., appositive or definitive 498 f., subjective 499, objective 499-501, of
on Formation passim. See Index

ter
of
Words, and
of Quotations.
Greek language: sketch
of Greek grammatical history, 8-13; relation to earlier tongues, 39; regarded as a
whole, 40-45; unity
of,
41
f.
peri-
ods
of,
43; the
Greek point
f.,
of view,
46-48; passim.
Greek
culture: 14
35; subject to
relationship 501
f.,
partitive 502,
position of 502
f.,
concatenation of
503); with adjectives, 503-5; with
non-Greek influences, 49, 58,- 67, 75, 84 f.. Ill f., passim. Greek, later: see Byzantine or modern Greek.
adverbs and prepositions, 505 and ch. XIII; with verbs, 505-12 (very
Greek point
of view: 46-8.
common
506,
fading
distinction
from ace. 506, verbs of sensation 507 f., of emotion 508 f., of sharing, partaking, filhng 509 f., of ruling 510, of bu3Tng, selling, being worthy of 510 f., of accusing and condemning 511, due to prepositions in
composition 511
relative
f.,
Headings, anarthrous: see
article.
Hebraisms:
the
attraction
infinitive,
f.
of
512);
of
512;
absolute, 512-4, 1131
German: passim.
24 ff.; Deissmann, 25 f number of, in N. T., 76 ff., 89; the traditional standpoint, 88 f translation, 89 f papyri and inscriptions disprove many, 90 f real, in
3; the old view,
revolt
of
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
N. T., 94-6; greater indirect influence of the LXX, 96-102; transliterated
1233
Hypothetical sentences: see conditional sentences.
words,
225;
variety
in
Hysteron proteron: 423.
N. T.
tions,
writers,
106-8; on preposi-
of
is,
556 f.; o(iel(Tdai 6.ir6, 577; use 595 f superlative, 671 tense,
;
.
822; passim.
Identical pronouns see intensive pro:
Hebraists: 76 ff., 88 f., 90 f. Hebrew: proper names, 214; transliterated Hebrew words, 225; accent of
263, 268
nouns.
Illative particles : see (inferential) con-
junctions.
Illiteracy
:
proper names, 236, 259,

ff.,
in
the papyri, 70
of,
diver-
passim.
quality
;
.
sity of culture, 85; passim.

of,
Hebrews:
literary
of,
106;
Imperative: origin
320,
327-30
alone of 132 f the N. T. books avoids hiatus, 206, 218; rhythm in, 1196 f. Hellenism: influence on Paul, 86.
peculiarities
(non-thematic stem 327, thematic stem 327 f., suffix -Oi 328, suffix -rw
328, old injunctive 328
-o-at 329,
f.,
forms in
form
in -a-ou 329, first per-
Hellenistic: see
Koifii.
son 329
f.,
prohibitions 330, perfect

perfect,
Hendiadys: 1206. Herculaneum: 196, 223, passim. Hermas: see Index of Quotations. Herodotus: 13, 57, 59, 266, passim. Heteroclisis: 257-9 (the first and second decls., the first and third); between second and third, 261 f.; between masculine and neuter of second, 262 f.; third decl., 269.
330, periphrastic 330, circumlocutions 330)

aorist,
;
360
;
.
use of
855
f.;
present, 890; perfect,
908; imper. and subj., 925; origin

of,
941; meaning
of,
941;
disap-
pearance of imperative forms, 941 f.; alternatives for, 942-6 (fut.

ind.
942
of,
f.,
subj. 943, opt. 943, in-
finitive
Heterogeneous structure:
1199.
441
f.,
uses
943 f., participle 944-6); 946-50 (command or exf.,
hortation 946
prohibition 947,
Hiatus: 206-8, 219.

Historic present: see present.
Historical
entreaty
of
947
f.,
permission
948,
f.,
concession or condition 948

II,
in
method
study: ch.
31-48; historical element essential,

31; descriptive historical
asyndeton 949, in subordinate clauses 949 f tenses 950, in indi.,
grammar,
rect discourse 950); negative with,
41, 71, 78, 173-5; syntax, 386.
1161
252,
f.,
1170.
of,
History of words: 173

passim.
f.
Imperfect: relation
40;
to aorist, 837-
Homer and Homeric Greek: 249,

HypaUage: 1204. Hyperbaton: 423
Hyperbole: 1205.
Hypocoristic
:
See Index of Quotations.
882 f.; descriptive tense in narrative, 883 f.; iterative or customary, 884; progressive, 884;
doubtful,
f.
inchoative or conative, 885; "negative," 885; potential, 885-7; in in-
171-3.
f.,
direct discourse, 887; periphrastic,
Hypotaxis: 426
429 f.; hypotactic sentences, 950-1049 (relative 95362, causal 962-6, comparative 9669, local 969 f., temporal 970-9,
final
887 f.; past perfect as, 888. Impersonal verbs: active, 802; construction, 820.
"Improper"
prepositions: sec prepoIT.
and
consecutive
f.,
wishes 1003
980-1003, conditional 1004-27,

1027-48,
sc-ries
f.).
sition.s, 5.")4, diU)
Inceptive action: 150.
indirect di.scour.se
Incorporation of antecedent: 718

731, 733.
f.,
of subordinate clauses 1048
1234
NEW TESTAMENT
iva
Indeclinable words: accent, 236; substantives,
junctions
finitive,
and
oTTws
1046, in-
259;
f.;
various
foreign
f.; tI,
words, 269
736;
rt,
adjectives, 275
744.
f.,
Indefinite article: 674
796.
1046 ff.); mixture, 1047 f.; the subordinate clause, 1048. Individuality of N. T. writers: 116-37. Indo-European: see Indo-Germanic.
Indefinite
pronouns: inflection of, 292; tU, 741-4 (accent 741, relation to rh 741 f., as substantive 742, with numerals 742, with substantives 742 f., with adjectives 743, as
predicate 743, position of 743, as antecedent 743, alternative 743,
Indo-Germanic:
217, passim.
10, 37 ff., 145 ff., 209, See comparative philology (grammar). Inferential conjunctions: 1189-92.
Infinitive: ending, 246;
forms
of,
368-
71 (original terminology 368, fixed case-forms 368 f., with voice and
tense 369
of inf. 371,
f.,
negative forms 743

Ti
f .,
indechnable
744; 6
see
SeXfa,
no personal endings
in apf.;
744);
els,
744;
ttSs,
370, article with 371, disappearance
744.
N. T. forms 371);
f.;
Independent
taxis.
:
sentences:
para-
position, 399
in clauses, 431
f. f.;
;
accusative with, 489

f
.
in genitive,
Indicative real mode, 320

sign,
no mode
512; in dative, 541

tives,
with adjec-
322
of
f.;
use of aor. ind., 835-
658
f.;
article with, 765;
and
48; future, 876;
meaning
kinds
sentences
914 f.; using, 915-8

of,
f.);
voice,
802; use of aorist, 856-8;
future,
876
f.
perfect,
f
.
908
f.
as im-
(declarative or interrogative 915-7, positive or negative 917

special
perative, 943
TO,
causal use of 5td

of,
966; temporal use
978
f.;
918-24 (past tenses, for courtesy 918 f., present necessity,

uses
of,
purpose, 989-91; sub-final, 996

consecutive,
discourse,
f.;
1001-3;
in
in
indirect indirect
inf.,
obhgation,
impossible
etc.
919-21, apodosis
923,
1036-40;
of second class conditions 921-3,
command, 1046-8;
1051
f.;
origin of
wishes
;
present
with,
development, 1052-6 (pre1052,

earliest his-
923
f .,
future 924)
in indirect dis-
historic period
course,
1032-6;
f.
negative
toric period 1052-4, classic period
1157-60, 1168
Indirect
direct,
1054-6, later period 1056-8)
sub-
discourse:
exchange with
stantival aspects of
(case, subject or
inf.,
1058-79
442
f.
aorist participle in,
object 1058-62,
863
f.;
imperfect ind., 887; present
articular 1062-8, prepositions with
part., 992; perfect in, 897; inf. perf.,
908; recitative
on
.
in oratio recta,
1068-75, with substantives 1075 f ., with adjectives 1076 f., with verbs
change of person in indirect f change of tense in, 1029 f change of mode in, 1030 f.; limits of indirect disc,
1027
f.;
1077
f.,
appositional
and
epexe-
discourse, 1028
.
getical 1078 f.); verbal aspects of,
1031
f.;
declarative clauses (indi-
rect assertions),
1032-43 (on and

1040-2,
f.);
indicative 1032-6, infinitive 103640,
1082-5,
participle,
1122-4, Kal kykvtTo 1042
indi-
rect questions, 1043-6 (tense 1043,
mode 1043
and
pronouns used 1044 f.); indirect command, 1046 f., 1082-5

f.,
interrog.
1079-95 (voice 1079 f., tense 1080cases with 1082, in ind. disc. 1082-5, personal construction with 1085 f., epexegetical inf. 1086 f., purpose 1087-9, result 1089-91, cause 1091, time 1091 f., absolute 1092 f., negatives with 1093-5, 1162, 1171, av with 1095); relation between part, and inf., 1101-3.
2,
conjunctions
Infixes: 146.
Inflectional languages: 37.
(deUberative questions 1046, con-
Ingressive action: see aorist.
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Injunctive
1235
mood:
f.,
321, 328
f.
TToIos,
740 (qualitative, non-qualiindirect questions);

Troaos,
Inscriptions: the
Greek
66
ff.,
inscriptions,
tative,
14-6, 52, 56
literary
76-80; more
96
than the papyri, 84, 90 f., f., 106, 116, 130 f., 138 f., 148, ISO, 181-93, 200, 202, ad libitum through the book. See Index
f.,
100
of Quotations. Inseparable prefixes: 161-3.
meaning, indirect, (rare, Trdrepos, 741 indirect questions) irorairos, 741 in indirect questions, 1044 f. Intransitive: 330 f., 797 f., 806, 815 f. Inverse attraction: 488, 717 f.
741 f. (rarity, exclamatory);
; ;
Ionic: earliest in literature, 16, 17; in-
Instrumental case
term,
endings,
249
f.
526; 525 f.; synci'etistic, time, 527 f associaplace, 526 f tive idea, 528-30; with words of likeness and identity, 530; manner,
.
on the kolvt], 62 f on the N.T., 82, 181-93, 200, 203-6, 210 f., 217 f., ad libitum. Iota adscript: 194 f., 209. Iota subscript: 194 f.
flu(!nce
.
530-2; with adjectives, 523, 530; measure, 532; cause, 532; means,
Ireland, bilingualism in: 30.
Irony: 1198
f.
i
532^; with prepositions, 534

ch. XIII.
f.
and
See
302;
Irrational final
and
v: 194, 219-21.
Instrumental use of
also locative.
iv:
589-91.
Intensive
particles:
adverbs,
f
;
.
prepositions,
563
limitations,
1144-7;
VT]
yk,
1*01,
1147-9;
1150;
8v,
1149;
el urtv,
irep,
"Irregular" verbs: see list, 1212-20. Isolating languages: 37. Isolation of Greek, not true 36-39. Itacism: 72, 178 ff., 182, 191 ff., 1947, 198-200, 239 f., 265 f., ad libitum. See ch. on Orthography and
:
and
nev,
f.
1150-3;
Phonetics.
1153f.;roI, 1154
Intensive perfect: see perfect tense.

Intensive
pronouns:
declension
of,
287; nominative use of avrds, 685 f.; varying degrees of emphasis, 686;
airos with ovtos, 686; aiirds almost
demonstrative,
cases,
686,
in
oblique
686
f.
side
by
side with re-
flexive, 687; 6 avTos, 687.
Interjections: 302, 1193.
James, peculiarities of: 123 f. See Index of Quotations. Jesus, language of: both Aramaic and Greek, 26-9. "Jewish" Greek: see "Biblicar* Greek, Hebraisms, Aramaic, koivti. Jews: 83, 98 f., 102, etc.
John, peculiarities of: Index of Quotations.
:
;
Interrogative particles: single

tions,
ques-
133-7.
See
1175-7
(direct,
no
particle,
negative,
others,
interrogative
indirect,
;
pronouns,
conjunctions,
Josephus 28 an illust rat ion of At ticistic Gk. in contrast with 1 Maccabees, 87, 236, 269, passim.
pronouns,
conjunctions)
double
of,
See
questions, 1177 (direct, indirect).
Interrogative pronouns: inflection
735-40 (substantival or adjectival 735, absence of gender 735, = TToios 735 f., indecUnable tL 736, alternative questions 736 f., double 737, as relative 737 f., predicate tL 738, adverbial 738 f., with prepositions 739, with particles 739, as exclamation 739, indirect questions 739, rts or ris 739 f.);
291
f.; Tts,
Index of (Quotations. Jude: peculiarities of, 124 f. See Index of Quotations. Justin Martjrr: see Index of Quotations.
KaOapcvovo-a
Gre(>k,
3(),
IS;
artificial
modern
f.
60, pa.'^sim.
Kinship of Greek words: 174
; ;
1236
NEW TESTAMENT
Koiv^: 17, 18, 21-4, 32, 46; 'chapter on, 49-74; term, 49; origin, 49; tri-
the N. T., 108-11, 131, 137, 144, passim.

Latin authors: 85, 108 f., 128, passim. See Index of Quotations.
umph
of the Attic, 51; fate of the

f
;
.
other dialects, 52
influence of
the dialects on the

koines,
kolvti,
53;
effect
.
of
53 partial Alexander's
;
campaigns, 53 f spread of the 54-60; a real world-speech, 54-56 vernacular, 56 literary, 57 f the Atticistic reaction, 58-60; char;
Latin versions: passim. Latinisms: 108-10, 131, etc. Lesbian: 17, 184, 249. See iEolic.
Letters: as distinct from epistles, 70,
Koivrj,
85
ff.
acteristics of the vernacular
kolvti,
60-73; vernacular Attic, the base of the KoivT], 60-2 the other dialects
;
Lewis Sjriac: passim. Lexical: new knowledge of words, 65 f.; N. T. lexicography needing
reworking, 144, passim. Limitative infinitive see infinitive.
:
in the
kolvt;,
changes in, new forms of old words, 65 f poetical and vernacular words, 65; new meanings to old words, 66; I/a.d. the climax of the kolvti, 66; provin. ;
62-64; non-dialectical 64 f.; new words in, 65;
Linear action: see durative. Literary element in N. T. 83-8.

:
Literary
50, 57
koivt)
f.
;
true part of the
kolvti,
literary elements in the
N.
85.
T., 83-8, 106; high standard of
cial
influences in,
66-9;
kolvti
in
culture in the
Grajco-Roman world,
f.,
Asia Minor and in Alexandria, 67 f.; in Palestine, 69; kolvti a single language, 69; personal equation, 6971 resum(5 of the characteristics of the vernacular Kotj/97, 71-4 (phonetics
;
Literary plural: 406

Litotes: 1205.
677
f.
f., vocabulary word-formation 72, accidence 72 f ., syntax 73 f .) adaptabihty of
and orthography 71
72,
;
the
kolvti
to the
Roman world,
74
f.
Local cases: 451. See cases. Local clauses: 969 f. Locative: form, 249 f.; name, 520; significance, 520 f.; place, 521 f. time^_522f.; with adjectives, 523; with verbs, 523 f with substan;
.
place of the N. T. in the kolvti, 76-140, 152 f., 159 f., 161-3, 171; accent in, 228 f pronunciation in,
.
tives, 524;
with prepositions, 524 f. and ch. XIII; pregnant construc-
tion, 525.
236-41; ad libitum in the book.
Lucian: see Index of Quotations. Luke: literary element in, 106; pecuharities of,
120-3,
135,
179, 240,
Labials: assimilation before, 216, 264, 1210.

of Jesus: 26-9, 99, 102 f., See Jesus. Language, study of: the fascination 105.
of, 3;
See Index of Quotations. Luther's German Bible influence of,

:
passim.
92.
Language
LXX:
see Septuagint.
Lycaonian: vernacular surviving in KOLvri, 55 f
the
new
point of view, 8-12;
as history, 31; a living organism,

origin of, evolution in, changes in
M
Macedonian: influence on the
63
f.
;
kolvt;,
vernacular,
lated, 36;
33
Greek not
iso-
words. 111.
196, 200, 208, 223, passim.
common bond in,
37, pas-
Magnesia:
sim.
Manner:
see adverbs,
instrumental
Late Greek: see Byzantine. Latin: 36, 39, 46 f.; late Latin as in KOLvii, 55, 74, 79, 103; Latinisms in
case, participle.
Manuscripts of N. T. vary in orthography, 179-89, 191-231; show

:
;; ;
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
changes in pronunciation, 239
ff
.
1237
f.,
966-9, local 969

final
temporal 970-9,
have beginnings
paragraphs, 241
distinction
of
;
chapters and
and consecutive 980-1003,

f.,
uncials have no f. between words, 242 ff.;
wishes 1003
of
conditional 1004-27,
indirect discourse
1027-48, series
ad libitum.
Mark: Aramaic
influence
in,
lOG;
f.
Latin, 110; peculiarities of, 118
See Index of Quotations. Masculine: see gender.
Matthew: Aramaic
pecuharities
of,
influence in, 106;
119 f., 135, passim. See Index of Quotations. Means see instrumental case, h, par:
1048 f.); change of mode in indirect discourse, 1030 f Modem Greek: literature on, 22-4; unportance for N. T. Gk., 44-6; illustrating N. T. Gk., 137 f., 147, 150, 155, 177 f., 557, ad libitum. Mood: see mode.
clauses
subordinate
ticiple.
Music: 228. Mycenaean age 43

:
Meiosis: 1205
f.
Metaphor: 1206. Metaplasm: 257-9, 261-3, 269.

Metathesis: 221, 1210.
N
Names
.
of persons : see proper

in,
Metonsony: 1207. Middle displacing passive, 333 f giving way to acendings, 339 f tive, 356; perfect, 359; with reflexive pronoun, 690 f.; origin of, 803; meaning of, 803 f acute difference from active, 804; use of not obligatory, 804-6 transitive or intran:
.
Narrative, tenses
perfect.
in
names. Greek: see

present
aorist, imperfect, present,
sitive,
806; direct, 806--8; causative

.
or permissive, 808
f indirect, 809 f redundant, 811; dynamic (deponent), 811-3; middle future though active present, 813 f.; retreating in
;
.
Negative particles in relative clauses, 962; with inf., 1093-5; with participle, 1136-9; objective ov and its compounds, 1155-66 (origin 1155, history 1156, meaning 1156 f., with the indicative, independent sentences, subordinate clauses 1157:
N. T., 814. Minuscules: 217, passim.
Mixed declension:
sions.
263.
See declen-
with the subjunctive 1160 f., with the optative 1161, with the imperative 1161 f., witli infinitive 1162, with the participle 1162 f., with nouns 1163 f., Kal ov 1164, redundant or pleonastic ov 1164,
60,
repetition
:
of
ov
1164,
f.,
intensify-
Mode
(mood) conjugation of, 32030 (number of 320 f., distinctions between 321 f., indicative 322 f., subjunctive 323 ff., optative 325 ff., imperative 327-30); syntax of, ch. XIX, 911-1049; introductory discussion, 910-4; in paratactic sen-
ing
compound 1164
disjunctive
and its com1165 f.); subjective pounds, 1166-75 (history of jui? 1166 f., significance of 1167, uses of firi, indicative 1168 f., subjuncii-f)
tive 1169
f.,
optative 1170, impera-
tive 1170, infinitive 1171, participle
tences,
914-50 (indicative 914-24, subjunctive 924-35, optative 93540, imperative 941-50); in
1172, nouns 1172, intensifying compounds 1172 f., Kal HT] 1173, dis-
tactic sentences,
hypo950-1049 (use of
junctive use 1173); combination of
two negatives, 1173-5

ov
fxr]
(m')
ou
1173
f.,
modes
in 950, use of conjunctions
1174
f.).
in 951 f., logical varieties of subordinate clauses 952-1049: relative
953-62, causal 962-6, comparative
Negative pronouns: ov5tU, ovdds, oiiSi, ov, 750 f.; ovtis, ni] Tis, eh, els 751 f.; ov Tras, ixij ttS':, 752 f.
1238

f.;
NEW TESTAMENT
459
f.;
Neuter: as substantive, 156, 267

see gender.
lute,
parenthetic,
460; in
see
exclamations, 461; absolute, 1130.
Neutral type of text: 180, 212, 219,

passim.
Non-thematic
present
stems:
of, in
present tense.
I,
New New
material: ch.
3-30.
Northwest Greek: remains

KOLvr],
the
Testament, Greek of: place in the Koivri, 76-140; chiefly the vernacular, 76-83; not a biblical Greek, 77-79; proof that in the vernacular, 79-83; the lexical proof from
the papyri and inscriptions, 80-2; accidence corroborated by paj^yri
53; influence of, 61, 63; on the
N. T., 82, 266, passim. Nouns: root-nouns, 145; substantive and adjective, 246; verbal, ch. XX;
negatives with, 1163
f.,
1172.
Number:
concord
in
in,
substantives,
251
f.;
and
inscriptions,
82;
.
syntactical
peculiarities,
comand papyri, 83; literary elements in N. T. Gk., 83-8; literary quality in the N. T., 84;
82
f
;
phrases
mon
to N. T.
403-9 (subject and predicate 403-7, substantive and adjective 407 f., representative singular 408, idiomatic plural in nouns 408, idiomatic singular in nouns 409,
special
instances
409);
f.;
adjective
ovtos,
controversy
now whether
there
is
and substantive, 654

eKelpos,
704;
olos,
appreciable Semitic colouring in the
708;
OS,
714; ocrns, 729;
N. T., 88 f view of Deissmann and Moulton, 89-93; some real Hebraisms in the N. T., 92 f.; little direct
.
731.
Numerals: declension
of,
281-4
(ori-
gin of 281, different functions of

281, cardinals 281-3, ordinals 283
distributives
f.,
influence, Ust of probable Hebraisms, 94-6; deeper impress of the LXX in vocabulary, accidence and syntax, though great variety in the LXX, 96-102; Aramaisms in the N. T., in vocabulary and in syntax, 102-5; variation in
Hebrew
284,
proportionals
of,
284, adverbs 284); syntax

(els
671-5
and
irpwros
671
f.,
simplification
of the 'teens 672, inclusive ordinal
672,
iifTa
distributives
673,
cardinal
673
f.,
substantive
not exels
f.,
Aramaic and Hebrew colouring in different parts of the N. T., 106-8; Latinisms in the N. T., names of persons and places, military terms, words and phrases, syntax, 108-11; sporadic foreign words in the N. T.,
Ill; the Cliristian addition, 112-6;
pressed 674, adverbs with 674,

as indefinite article 674
675,
Tis
eI$=Tt$
distributive use of
el$
675);
with, 742; article with ordinals,

f.
793
transfiguration of the vocabulary,
Object of verb: see cases.

Object-clauses: see hypotaxis.
116; individual peculiarities of N.
T. writers,
writers
116-37; see separate
by name; N. T. Gk. illustrated by modern Gk., 137 ff.; syntax

of,
381-3.
N. T. authors: 28 f., 76-139. See Index of Quotations. Nominative: nominativus pendens in the vernacular kolvti, 73; form as vocative, 264, 461; N. T. forms in, 267 f.; not the oldest case, 456; reason for, 457; predicate, 457 f.; sometimes unaltered, 458 f abso;
.
Oblique cases: 247. See cases. Old Testament: 99. See Septuagint and Index of Quotations. Onomatopoetic 1201. Optative: origin of form, 320, 325-7; perfect, 360 f., 907 f. use of aorist, 854 f.; future, 876; present, 889 f.; opt. and subj., 925 f.; history of, significance, 936 f three 935 f uses, 937-40 (futuristic or potential
:
;
937-9, volitive 939
f.,
deliberative
940); as imper., 943; in indirect dis-
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
course,
1239
1030
f.,
1043
f.;
negative
with, 1161, 1170.
Oratio obliqua: see indirect discourse.
877 f.; present, 891 f.; per909 f participle as imperative 944-6; causal, 966; temporal use,
future,
fect,
. ;
Oratio recta: see direct diiioourse. Oratio variata: 440-3 (distinctive from anacoluthon 441 f heterogeneous structure 441 f., icifticiple in 442, exchange of direct aiid mdirect
^
979; purpose, 991; in indirect discourse, 1040-2; history of part.,
tune
discourse 442
f.).
Oratory: in Hebrews, 11Q8.

Ordinals: see number. Orthography in the vernacular koivti, 71 f.; ch. VI, 176-24.5; the ancient
:
1098-1100 (Sanskrit 1098, Homer's 1098, Attic period 1098 f., KOLPr, 1099, modern Gk. 1099 f.); significance, 1100-4 (originally an adjective 1100 f., addition of verbal functions 1101, double aspect of 1101, reflation between part, and
inf.
1101-3,
method
of
treating
hterary spelling, 177 f. Ostraca: 17-21; texts of, 22, 91, 191,
266, passim.
1103 f.); adjectival aspects of, 1104-10 (declension 1104, attributive, anarthrous, articular 1105-8,
Oxyrhynchus papyri:
Quotations.
see
Index of
predicate 1108,
as a substantive
f.);
1108
bal
f.,
as
an adverb 1109
of,
ver-
aspects
f.,
1110-41
(voice
1110
Palatals: 216
f.,
tense 1111-9, timelessness

f.,
1210.
1111, aorist 1112-4, present 1115
Papyri: literature on, 17-22, 52, 56 f., 66 ff illustrate the vernacular Koivi], 69; illiteracy in, 70 f.; and the N.
;
.
perfect 1116-8, future 1118f., cases
1119, supplementary 1119-24, peri-
T. Gk., 80-3; agreeing with the uncials in orthography, 181 accidence and syntax of, 381; ad libitum
;
construction 1119 f., diminution of complementary 1120 f., with verbs of emotion 1121 f., inphrastic
direct
discourse
1122^; circum1124-
through the book. Parable: 1206 f. Paragraph: discussion of, 241 nection between, 444.
Paraleipsis: 1199.
stantial,
participial clauses
f.;
con-
32 (general theory 1124, varieties of, time, manner, means, cause,

purpose,
condition,
concession
'
ParaUeUsm: 1199f.
Parataxis: 426, 428;
1125-30, absolute nominative, accusative, genitive 1130-2); inde-
modes
in para-
pendent
1 1 32-5
co-ordinat ion
tactic sentences, 914-50, 953,
980 f
paratactic conjunctions, 1177-92.
Parechesis: 1201. Parenthesis: 433-5; parenthetic nominative, 460.
between, 1135 f.; ou and m4 with, 1136-9, 1162 f., 1172; other particles with, 1139-41). Particles: ehsion with, 207; with subordinate clauses,
participle,
Paronomasia: 1201.
Participle: in -via, 256; forms of,
371-
6 (name- 371 f., verbal adjectives 372 f., with tense and voice 373 f.,
in periphrastic use 374-6); gender
in,
950-1049; with 1036-41; scope, 11424; intensive or emphatic, 114455; negative, 1155-75; interrogative, 1175-7; conjunctions, 1177-93
(paratactic,
1177-92,
hypotactic
412; case, 413; in clauses, 431
f.;
1192
f.);
interjections, 1193.
in
anacoluthon,
ace.
439
f.;
in
oratio
f.;
Partitive: apposition, 399; genitive,
variata, 442;
absolute, 490
502, 519; ablative, 519; use of

.599;
tK,
gen. absolute, 512-4; adverbs wilh, 546; as adverbs, 551; article with,
with UaaTos, 746.
Passive: giving
way
to middle, 333
f.;
764
f.,
777-9; use of aorist, 858-64;
endings, 310f.; future, second
and
1240
first,

356
of,
f.;
NEW TESTAMENT
f.;
f'x-Ko,
perfect,
359;
o-
in
aorist, 362;
origin
with accusative, 4846; 814 f.; significance of,

or
transitive,
aorist,
f.;
563 596
576
f.;
5ta,
581
f.;
Ik,
f.; 7rt,
600; Kara, 606;
irapa,
613;
irepl, 61'i('; Trpos,
623;
<j\iv,
627
f.; virkp,
815;
intransitive
629; "perfective" and "imperfective," S26-8.
815
f.;
syntax of
816
ff.;
passive "deponents," 817

construction, 820.
future,
Pergamura: a centre
Period: use
of,
of culture, 56
f.,
818-20; agent with, 820; impersonal
61, 63, 2)6, 75, 111, 208, 223, passim.
242
f.
f.,
Past perfect: relation of aorist to, 837-40; double idea, 903; a luxury in Greek, 903 f intensive, 904 exof broken continutensive, 904 f
.
Periodic structure: 432

3-7.
1200.
Periods of N. T. grammatical study:
Periods
of
the
Greek
language:
ity,
905
;
.
in conditional sentences,
kKtlnTjv,
43
f.
906; periphrastic, 906; augment in, 1211 f.
906;
Periphrasis: with participle, 330, 357,
374-6, 826, 878, 887
f.,
889, 906,
Patronymics: 155. Paul: 54 ff.; and Hellenism, 84-8, 106;

pecuHarities
of,
127-31, 135, 179,
195, 218, ad libitum.
See Index of
1119 f. Persian: words in N. T., 111. Person: concord in, 402 f., change in ind. disc, 1028 f.
712;
Quotations.
Perfect, future: see future perfect.
Person-endings:
335-9.
329,
335;
active,
Perfect, past: see past perfect.

Perfect, present: of -hl verbs, 319
f.;
imperative,
330;
conjugation
of,
Personal construction: with adjective, 657 f.; with inf., 1085 f. Personal equation: in the koivt), 69 ff.,
179.
359-62 (name 359, original perfect 359 f., K perfect 358 f aspirated 359, middle and passive 359, decay of perfect forms 359 f., in subjunc.,
tive, optative,
imperative 360, in(J
dicative 360-2,
;
in
passive 362) reduplication

5;
middle and in, 363-
Personal pronoxms: question of auroO, 226; inflection of, 286 f.; nominative, 676-80 (emphasis in 676, first 677 f., second 678, tliird 679 f.); oblique cases, 680-2 (originally
reflexive
i'or
680
f.,
avrou 681, genitive

681, enclitic forms
completed state, 823 f.; relation of aorist to, 843-5; present as perfect, 881; perfect as present, 881
idea
of,
possessive
681 f.); frequency of, 682 f.; redmidant, 683; according to sense, 683
684.
f.
;
892^
(present, intensive
;
repetition
of
substantive,
extensive, time) present perfect in
894-903 (intensive 894 f 895 f., of broken continuity 896, dramatic historical 896 f., gnomic 897, in indirect discourse 897 f., futuristic 898, "aorisdicative,
extensive
Peter: pecuharities of, 125-7. Index of Quotations.
See
PhUo:
see Index of Quotations.
Philology: see comparative
grammar.
Ill, 182,
tic" present perfect 898-902, peri-
Phocian: 266. Phoenician: words

209, passim.
m N. T.,
phrastic
902
f.);
subj.
and
opt.,
907
f.;
infinitive,
f.,
discourse 908
908 f. (indu-ect not indirect disc,
Phonetics: in the vernacular 71 f.; ch. VI, 177-245.
Koiv-q,
subject or object, preposition 909)

participle,
909
f.
and 1116-8 (mean-
Phrygia: old dialect of, 67. Pindar; see Index of Quotations.

Pindaric construction: 405.
Plato: see Index of Quotations.
ing, time, various uses, periphrastic).
"Perfective":
use
of
prepositions.
Play on words: 1201.
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Pleonasm:
1205.
in pronouns, 683; ov, 1164,
1241
with,
767-9;
article
789
f.,
794;
participle, 1108.
Pluperfect: see past perfect.
See number. Plutarch: see Index of Quotations. Poetry: see rhythm.

Point-action: see punctiliar. Polybius: see Index of Quotations.
Plural: 251.
Prefixes: 146; inseparable, 161-3.
Pregnant construction: 584 f., 591-3.

Prepositional
525,
548
adverbs:
new ones
169
f.
Polysyndeton: 1194.
Pompeian: 186, passim. Pontic infinitive: see infinitive.

Position: of words, 417-25 (freedom 417, predicate 417, emphasis 417 f.,
Prepositions: double in composition, 160, 165; adverbs, 301; encroach-
ment on
cases,
450-3; accusative
with, 491; genitive with, 505; effect of compound preps, on case, 511
f.,
minor words in 418 f., euphony and rhythm 419-23, prolepsis 423,
hysteron proteron 423, hyjierbaton 423 f., postpositives 424 f., fluctuating words 424 f., order of
clauses
in
with ablative, 516 f.; with locative, 524 f.; with instrumental, 534 f.; with dative, 537 f.; phrases, 550 f.; ch. XIII, 553-649; name, 553 f (some postpositive 553, origf.;
.
542
compound
sentences
425); of genitive, 502 f.; of article with attributive, 776-89; with predicate, 789 f.
Positive: adjective, 276, 659-61.
with verbs 553, expla553 f.); origin of, 554 f. (originally adverbs 554, reason for use of 554, varying history 555);
nation
inal use not
Possessive pronouns: inflection
of,
first
288 684
555-7 (once none adverbs in Homer 555, decreasing use as adverbs 555 f.,
in use of,
growth
555,
still
f.;
article in
as,
684;
only
and second
f.;
N. T., 684; emphasis,

685; possessive 685; objective use,
modern Greek
Semitic influence in N. T. 556 f., 557); in composition
with
article,
and
genitive,
685; instead of reflexive, 685; ar769 f article with, 770. Postpositive: 424; some prepositions,
ticle as,
.
with verbs, 557-65 (not the main function 557 f., prep, alone 558, increasing use 558, repetition after verb 559
f.,
different
ff.,
preposition
553.
Potential:
imperfect,
885-7;
opt.,
937-9.
Predicate
second preposition not necessary 562 f., dropped with second verb 563, intensive or perfective 563 f., double compounds
565); repetition
after verb 560
390
f.;
essential part of sentence, only predicate, 390 f.; verb

:
and variation
of,
not the only, 394 f.; copula not es395 f.; one of the radiating foci, 396 f.; expansion of, 400 f. (predicate in wider sense 400, inf.
sential,
565-7 (same prep, with different case 565, repetition with several nouns 566, repetition with the relative 566 f., 721, condensation by
of, with 567-71 (case before prep. 567, notion of dimension 567, original
variation 567); functions

cases,
and
part.
400,
relation
between
predicate and substantive 400, pronoun 400, adjective 401, adverb

401, prepositions 401, negative particles 401, subordinate clauses 401,
force of the case 567
f.,
ground-
meaning
of the prep. 568, oblique
cases alone with 568, original free-
apposition
and
looser
amplifica-
dom
by
tions 401); agreeing with subje(!t, 403-6; position, 417; pred. nomina-
568 f., no adequate division cases 569, situation in N. T.
457 f vocative in, 464 f adjective, 655 f.; nouns with article,
tive,
.
569 f.: with one case, with two, with three, one with four, each prep, in a case 570 f.); "proper"
1242
NEW TESTAMENT
f.,
prepositions in N. T., 571-636; dm,
tion 620
cases used with 621,

f.,
571
ing
f.;
6.PTi,
572-4;
aw6,
574-80
place 621, time 621

622);
irpbs,
superiority
(original significance
575
f.,
mean577,
"back" 576
in
f.,
"translationairb
.,
Hebraism"
4>o^tia0aL
comcomparison with Ik 577 f parison with irapo. 578 f., compared with i}wb 579 f .) 5t<i, 580-4 (rootidea 580, by twos or between 580 f., passing between or through 581 ff., because of 583 f.); ", 584-91 (old
;
use
with
f.,
accusative
or
locative
f .,
584
case
older than ds 585

f .,
.,
place
586, time 586
among
587, in the
of 587 f as a dative 588, accompanying circumstance 588, amounting to 589, instriunental use of 589-91); ds, 591-6 (original
static use 591-3,
with verbs of mo-
622-6 (meaning 622 f., in composition 623, originally with five cases 623, with ablative 623 f ., with the locative 624, with the accusative 624-6); avv, 626-8 (meaning 626 f., history 627, in composition 627 f., N. T. usage 628); {iwkp, 628-33 (meaning 629, in composition 629, with genitive 629 f., with ablative 630-2, with accusative 632 f.); vT^b, 633-6 (meaning 633, in composition 633, cases once used with 634 f with the accusative 635, with the ablative 635 f .) the "adverbial" or "improper" prepositions, 636-48 (ci/xa 638, &.vtv 638, avTiKpvs 638, avrlirepa 638 f aivkvoiVTi
.,
;
.,
time 594, like a dative 594, aim or purpose 594 f ., predicative use 595 f., compared with ctti, irapa and vrpos 596); kK, 596-600
tion 593
f .,
639,
arep
f.,
639,
axpi(s)
639,
tyyvs
639
TL
eKTos 640, 'ifiTrpoadev 640, evav-
640, tvavTiop 640, iveKa 641, kvTOS

f.,
641, tuwirLou 641 642,

iirtKeLPa
e^co
642,
f.,
tTrctj'co
(meaning 596, in composition 596 f., place 597, time 597, separation 597 f., origin or source 598 f., partitive use of 599, k and kv 599 f .) e-rtl, 600-5 (ground-meaning 600, in composition 600, frequency in N.
T. 600 f., with the accus. 601 f., with the gen. 602^, with the loc. 604 f., the true dative 605); Kara, 605-9 (root-meaning 605 f., distributive sense 606, in composition
606, with ablative 606
f .,
642,
eao:
642
eos 643,
KarkvavTL 643, Karevdoiriov 644, kvkXo6tv 644, kvkK<^ 644, ukaov 644, fxera-
^v 645, fxexpi 645, oTnadev 645, bwiffco
645,
b\pk
645
f .,
wapaTr\i](ji.ov
ifKrjv
f.,
646,
waptKrbs 646, Tfkpav 646,

ifKrialov
646,
646, vwepavo: 646
virtpkvttof .)
Ktiva
KciTco
647, vweptKirepicrcTod 647,
647, x^ptJ' 647, x'^P's 647
compound
ositional
{p.k(Tov,
prepositions, 648; prep-
circumlocutions,
Trpbcraiirov,
648
j
f.
with geni-
6fop.a,
x'P)
^-d-
tive 607, with accusative 607-9);

juerd,
jectives of
comparison with, 661,

800;
609-12 (root-meaning 609, in composition 609 f., loss of locative use 610, with genitive 610-2, with accusative 612); -rapd, 612-6 (significance 612, compared with irpbs 613, in composition 613, with the locative 614, with the ablative 614 f., with the accusative 615 f.); Trepl, 616-20 (root-meaning 617, in composition 617, originally with
four cases 617, with the ablative
667; article with, 766; eiêct on active

voice,
with
f.,
infinitive,
1068-75.
Present tense: 73, 119

150,
12.3,
14.5,
203;
of
of
-p.c
verbs,
311-9;
classes
present
stems,
350-3
(non-thematic reduplicated 350, non-thematic with -pa and -w 351,

simple thematic 351, reduplicated thematic 351, thematic with suffix
351, 351-3, with a dropped 353);
relation of aorist to, 841-3; punctiliar
with the genitive 618 f., with the accusative 619 f.); 7rp6, 620-2 (original meaning 620, in composi-
617
f .,
(aoristic),
865
f.,
864-70 (specific gnomic 866, historical pres-
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
du879-82 (descriptive 879, progressive 879 f., iterative or customary 880, inchoaf.);
1243
f.,
ent 86C-9, futuristic 869

rativo
(linear)
Prothetic vowels: 205

Psilosis: 191, 222-5.
1209.
indicative,
Psychological treatment of grammar:

32.
tive or conative 880, tiistorical 880,
Ptolemaic: 210, 220, 256, passim.
deliberative 880
f.,
as perfect 881,
Pun:
1201.
action:
perfect as present 881, futuristic
Punctiliar
823
f.,
830-79
881 889
f.);
durative subj.
and
;
opt.,
(aorist 831-64, present 864-70, fu-
f.; durative imperative, 890; durative infinitive, 890 f durative participle, 891 f. and 1115-6 (rela.
ture 870-9).
Pimctuation: discussion of, 241-5 (the paragraphs 241 f., sentences 242 f.,
tive time 891, futuristic 891, de-
words 243
24.5).
f.,
editor's prerogative
scriptive 891, conative 892, ante-
cedent time 892, indirect discourse

892, with the article 892, past ac-
Purists:
sim.
3,
76
ff.,
88,
90
f.,
160, pas-
tion
still
in progress 892, "subse-
Purpose: see
final clauses.
quent" 892, durative future 892).

Principal parts of important verbs in
N. T.: 1212-20.
Proclitics:
accent
1211.
of,
235; rules for
Qualitative use of anarthrous notins:

see article.
accent
of,
Prodiorthosis: 1199.
Questions:
5,
6s in direct,
725;
os in inf.,
"Profane Greek":
Prohibition:
see
89.
imperative,
aorist
725 f.; mdirect 730 f.;

direct,
oaris,
olos,
direct 729
731; oaos, 733;
subj., future indicative, infinitive.
see direct discourse, indirect discoiu'se, interrogative
Prolepsis: 423.
pronouns, in-
Pronouns: 226, 234; declension of, 284-93 (idea of 284 f., antiquity of 285, pronominal roots 285 f., classification of 286-93); sj-ntax of, ch.
terrogative particles,
rect,
mode;
indi-
1043-6;
in
f.
deliberative,
1046;
single,
ticles
1175-7; double, 1177; pardirect, 1175 f.; indirect,

206, 242
XV, 676-753;
possessive,
personal,
f.
;
676-84;
1176
684
intensive
and
Quotations in O. T.
f.
identical, 685-7; reflexive,

;
.
687-92; reciprocal, 692 f demonstrative, 693-710; relative, 710-35; interrogative, 735-41; indefinite, 741-4;
alternative or distributive, 744-50;
Reciprocal pronouns:
inflection
of, of,
negative, 750-3.
292 692
f.;
f.
reflexive as, 690;
syntax
Pronunciation: 71
f.,
236-41.
Recitative Sn: 1027

course.
f.;
see direct dis-
Proper names: abbreviated, 171-3, 184, 205; douliling of consonants in Hebrew and Aramaic, 214 f.; accent of, 235; foreign names, 235 f.;
Redundance
(primitive
see pleonasm.
of, 362-5 both nouns and
Reduplication: discussion
362,
mixed declension
decl.,
of,
263; in third
verbs 362, in three tenses in verbs
269
f.;
article with,
759
ff.,
362
f.,
three methods in 363, in the
791, passim.
perfect 363-5).
554, 636
f.
"Proper" prepositions:
ripo(ru)8(a: 22S.
Reflexive
pronouns:
inflection
of,
f.,
2S7
conditional
clauses,
f.;
(KTsonal originally so, 680

distinctive
use,
Protasis:
sec
6S5;
687
f.;
no
1007-27.
nominative, 688; indirect, 688; in
; ;;
1244

688
f
;
.
singular,
article
in plural,
in
689
Result: see consecutive clauses.
with,
690;
reciprocal
middle voice, 690 f., 811; use of 181.0s, 691 f.; with active
sense, 690; with
Reuchlinian pronunciation 240. Revelation: see Apocalypse. Rhetoric: figures of speech, 1194:
voice, 802.
1208.
:
.
Relative pronouns inflection of, 290 f inverse attraction, 488; attraction

to genitive, 512; attraction to ablative, 519 f.; repetition of prepositions with, 566
Rhetorical questions: with the ind.,

924; with the subj., 930; in Paul,
1198.
N. T., 710 f.; name, 711; bond between clauses, 711; 6s, 711-26 (in Homer 711, comparison with other relatives 711 f., with any person 712, gender 712 ff., number 714, case
f.; list
in the
Rhythm metrical passages so printed in W. H., 242; position as showing,

:
417-23; poetry, 421 f. the koivV) 74 f Romans: passim. See Index of Quo-
Roman Empire and

tations.
714-9, absence of antecedent 719f.,

prepositions with antecedent
relative 721, plirases 721
f.,
and
pleo-
Roots: in Sanskrit, 38; discussion 144-6; verb-root, 344 f. Running style 432 f
:
of,
nastic antecedent 722

of OS 723
f.,
f.,
f.,
repetition
consecutive idea 724,

direct questions 725,
causal 724
indirect
ovdels
questions
os
725
f.,
haTLV
726);
octtls,
idiom 72631
Sahidic: 202, passim. Sanskrit: the discovery of Sanskrit,

10,
36
f.,
39
f.,
47, 143, 145

f.,
f.,
246See
(varied uses 726,
distinction be-
tween
OS
and
oo-Tis
726
f.,
indefinite
use 727, definite exx. 727 f., =value of 5s 728, case 728 f., number 729,
direct
ad libitum. Second Epistle of Peter passim. Index of Quotations.

8; voice in, 798
:
Second or
o declension: 257, 259-63.
questions
olos,
729
f.
f.,
indu-ect
Semitic: 37, 88-108, 198, 205, 212,

225, 236, passim.
730
731,
f.);
731
(relation to os
See Aramaic and
incorporation
731,
indirect
Hebrew.
Sentence, the: punctuation of, 242 f.; discussion of, ch. X, 390-445; the
sentence and sj^ntax, 390; sentence defined, 390-7 (complex conception
390,
question 731,
k<TTiv
number
731, ol6v rk
732)
oTToios,
732 (quaUtative,
ocros,
double
office,
correlative);
732
f.
(quantitative, antecedent, atindirect question, compari;
traction, incorporation, repetition,
two
essential parts
390
f .,
one-
with
son,
'dv,
membered sentence
391,
391, elliptical
adverbial)
ifKlKos,
f.
733
6,
734f.;rlsas, 737
Relative sentences: originally paramost subordinate tactic, 953;

clauses relative
in
origin,
953
f.
only predicate 391-3, only f., verb not the only predicate 394 f ., copula not necessary 395 f ., two radiating foci 396 f ., varieties of the simple sentence
subject 393
usually adjectival,
in,
955
f.;
modes
955
f.;
;
.
definite
and
indefinite,
use of 'dv in, 957-9; special 960-2; negatives in, 962; causal, 965 f.; purpose, 989; subfinal, 996; consecutive, 1001.
956
397) expansion of the subject, 397400; expansion of the predicate, 400 f ; subordinate centres in the
;
.
uses
of,
sentence, 402; concord in person,
Relative time
see tense.
os,
Repetition: of substantive, 684; of
723
f.;
of
ocros,
733.
402 f.; concord in number, 403-9; concord in gender, 410-3; concord in case, 413-6; position of words in, 417-25; compound sentences, 4257; connection in sentences, 427-44
Vndex of subjects
(single words 427, clauses 428-32, two kinds of style 432 f., paren-
1245
398-400); subject and predicate as

to concord, 403-7 (two conflicting
principles 403, neuter plural
thesis 433-5, anacoluthon 435-40,

oralio
and
variata
440-3,
connection
singular verb 403

stantives 404
first
f.,
f .,
collective sub-
between sentences 443,
between paragraphs 444, forecasts 444 f.); independent or paratactic, 914-50; subordinate or hypotactic, 9501049.
singular verb with

f.,
subject 405
f.);
literary plural
Septuagint: influence of Jews in Alexandria, 84; in the vernacular

Koivi)
suspended, 436 f. Subjective: see genitive case, possessive pronoun and middle voice. Subjunctive origin of form, 320, 323:
406
5;
perfect,
of Alexandria, 91;
Hebraisms
aorist,
in the
LXX,
91; influence of the
LXX
itself,
influence
on the N. T., nature of this and character of the LXX
889 924
f.
360 f., 907 f.; use of 848-54 future, 876 present, relation to other modes,
; ;
ff.
(aor.
subj.
and
subj.
fut.
ind.,
subj.
and imper.,
and
of,
opt.);
96-102; " septuagint-Grsecisms" in Luke, 108, 118-26, 18392, 198-204, 208-11, 213-27, ad lihitum.
original
significance
926-8;
threefold usage, 928-35 (futuristic
928 934
ff.,
volitive 930-4, dehberative
f.);
as imper.,
f.,
943; negative
see
Sequence, rules of: see indirect

course.
dis-
with, 1160
Subordinate
taxis.
of,
1169 f. sentences:
hypo-
Simile: 1206.
Sinaiticus,
Codex: spelHng
179,
Subsequent action in
participle.
participle: see
passim.
See number. 75 f Solecisms: in the Apocalypse, 413-6. Sophocles: see Index of QuotaSingular: 251.
Socrates
Substantives: root-substantives, 145; with suffixes, 150-7 (primitive 150 f., derivative 151-7: from verbs 1514,
tions.
jectives 156
koivt|: see ch. I
from substantives 154-6, from adf.); compound, 161-8

f.;
Sources for study of
(inseparable prefixes, 161
agglu-
and
KOLvr\.
tinative 165-8); declension
of,
246-
Southeast dialects: 211, passim.
Spoken Greek:
Stoic:
see vernacular.
grammarians,
143;
dialectic,
1197.
251 f.; gender in substantives, 252-4; with genitive, 495-503; with ablative, 514 f with locative, 524; with dative, 536 f.;
70;
in,
;
.
number
Style: in Scripture, 87;
two kinds
of,
appositional use
tive as, 652-4; tive with, 654
of,
651
f.;
adjec-
432
f.;
in the
N.
T., 116-39, 1194-7.
agreement of adjecf.
;
See individual peculiarities.

Sub-final: see final
substantival as-
and consecutive.
391; only sub-
pects of infinitive, 1058-79; wilh

inf.,
Subject: essential part of sentence,
1075
f.;
participle as, 1108
f.;
390
ing
f.;
ellipsis
.
of,
;
negatives with, 1163f.

Suffixes: 146; comparative without,
393 f one of the radiat396 f expansion of the subject, 397-400 (idea-words and form-words 397, concord and government 397 f., group around 398400, subordinate clause 398, with the article 398, the adverb 398, the
ject used,
foci,
;
.
063.
Superlative: forms, 278-81; positive

as,
660
;
.
displaced by compara-
tive 667-9; syntax of, 669-71.
adjective 398, the substantive in
an oblique case 398, or
in apposil ion
Supplementary: see participle. Syncope 203 f Synonjons: in Greek words, 175 phrases, 1200 f.
:
f.;
1246

tendency (periphrasis) 826, "perfective" use of prepositions 826-8, Aktionsart with each tense 828 f.,
Syntax: in the vernacular Koiv-q, 73 f. in the N. T., 82 f.; of LXX, 100; part III, 379-1208; meaning of syntax, ch. IX, 379-89 (backwardness in study of 379-81, N. T. limitations 381-3, advance
interchange of tenses 829

tiliar action,
f.);
p\mcdu-
830-79
(aorist 830-64,
;
383 384
f.,
f.,
by Delbriick province of 384-7, the word

construction of words and
f.,
present 864-70, future 870-9)
rative (Hnear), 879-92 (indicative,

present, imperfect, future 879-89,
subj.
clauses 385
regularities
historical
f.,
386,
ir-
and
386
method
of this
890,
infinitive
f.);
grammar
387-9,
principles
387,
891
889 f., imperative 890 f., participle perfected state, 892-910

opt.
original significance 387,
function 387
f., f.,
form and development 388,

translation
389,
(idea of perfect 892-4, indicative,
present perfect, past perfect, future

perfect
context
tax, 390.
388
892-907,
subj.
and
opt.
hmits 389); the sentence and synSyriac versions: passim.
Syrian text (o-text): 179f., 189, 210f., 214 f., 219, 260, passim.
imperative 908, infinitive 908, participle 909 f.) tenses of imperative, 950; change in ind. discourse, 1029 f
f.,
;
907
Textual criticism: passim.
Textus receptus: 199, 213, 217, passim.
Thematic vowel:
Tarsus: new centre of culture, 67; Paul learning Greek in, 239.
see present tense.
Thessalian: 192, 202, passim. Third declension: 258, 263-9.
Temporal clauses: kin to relative, 970 f.; conjunctions meaning "when," 971-4; group meaning "until," 974-7; some nominal and
prepositional phrases, 977
inf.,
f.
;
Thucydides: 265, passim.

of Quotations.
See Index
Time: cases used, 460-527
f.,
(nom.
460, ace. 469-71, gen. 495, locative
use of
978
f.,
1091
f.;
participle, 979,
1125 f. Tenses: of
-m verbs in the N. T., 307-20; conjugation of, 343-68 (term tense 343 f., confusion in names 344, verb-root 344 f., aorist 345-50, present 350-3, future 3537,
522 f., instrumental 527 f.); Slo., 580 ff.; h, 586 f.; els, 594; k, 597; Trpo, 621 f.; element in tense, 824 f., 894; temporal clauses, 970-9; timelessness of participle, 1111.
Transitive verbs
sative,
330 f with accu471-7; with genitive, etc.,

:
.
perfect
359-62,
reduplication
362-5, augment 365-8); infinitive,
369
T.,
f.,
1080-2; participle, 373

of,
ff.,
1111-9; periphrastic tenses in N.
374-6; syntax
ch.
XVIII,
799 f., 806, 815 f. Translation Greek: in the LXX and portions of Gospels and Acts, 89 f., 91 f 93, 100 ff. Transliteration of Semitic words: 225.
f.,
.,
506 797
ff.;
transitiveness
and
voice,
821-910; complexity of subject, 821-30 (Greek and Germanic tenses 821, influence of Latin on
influence 822,
U
Uncials: 179-81, 186, 189, 192
200, 202, ad libitum.
f.,
Greek grammarians 822, Hebrew gradual growth of Greek tenses 822, "Aktionsart" of
195,
Uncontracted vowels:
tion.
see
contrac-
verb-stem 823, three kinds of action 824, time-element 824 f., faulty nomenclature 825, analytic
the
Unfulfilled condition: see conditional
sentences.
tNDEX OF SUBJECTS
Greek dialects in the 534; finally complete, 07. Universal language: the Greek, 49 f.; Panhellenic, 49; origin of, 53 f.;
Unification of
KoivTJ:
1247
Vernacular:
KOii^v,
17 f., 22 f., 34 fT., 44; "vulgar" Greek, 50; vernacular
60-73; vernacular Attic, 60-2;
march towards
real
N. T. chiefly in the vernacular kolpti, N.

76-83; vernacular writers in the T., 76; dialect-coloured, 178 f.;
207; ad
li-
universalism, 54; a world-speech, 54-56; limita-
tions in, 64.
indifferent to hiatus,
bitum.
Vase-inscriptions
see inscriptions.
Vemer's law: 11, footnote. Verses: see rhythm. Vocabulary: 65 f.; in the vernacular
Koiv^, 72, 80-3, 87, passim. Vocative: 247; in first declension, 256; in second declension, 261; in third deck, 204; nominative form, 204, 461 nature of, 461 various devices
; ;
Vaticanus, Codex: 179, passim. Verbal adjectives: in reos and -to^, 157 f.; relation to participles, 372 f.;
syntax of verbals in
1095-7.
ros and
-rios,
Verbal nouns: ch. XX, 1050-1141; kinship between infinitive and participle, 1050 f.; the infinitive, 105195; the participle, 1098-1141. Verbs: root-verbs, 145; with formative
f.; adjectives with, 464; apposition to, 464; in predicate, 464 f. ; article with, 465 f.
cL,
462
f.;
use of
463
Voice: conjugation
tive
of,
330-43
(transi-
and intransitive 330
f.,
names
146-50 (primitive verbs 146 f., secondary verbs 147-50); compound verbs, 161-5 (with insepsuflfixes,
of voices 331, relative age of 332,
"deponent"
planting
332 f., passive supmiddle 333 f., personal
arable prefixes 161 f., agglutination or juxtaposition 163-5); conjugation of, 303-76 (difficulty of the
subject 303, nature of the verb,
relation to
endings 335, cross divisions 335, active endings 335-9, middle endings 339 f., passive endings 340 f.,
contract verbs 341-3); with infini-
304,
noun 303 f., meaning of pure and hybrid 304, survival
of -/xi verbs, cross division 306, oldest verbs 306, gradual disappear-
ance 306, second aorists 307-11, 311-9, perfects 319 f., modes 320-30, voices 330-43, tenses 343-08, infinitive 368-71,
presents
participle 371-0); accusative with,
369 f., 1079 f.; with participle, 373 f., 1110 f.; syntax of, ch. XVII, 797-820; point of view, 797-9 (distinction between voice and transitiveness 797 f., meaning of voice
tive,
798, names of the voices 798, history of 798, help from Sanskrit 798 f., defective verbs 799); syntax
of active, 799-803; middle, 803-14;
505-11; ablative with, 517-20; with locative, 523 f.; instrumental with, 528-32; dative with, 538-43; adwith,
verbial
use, 551 f compounded with prepositions, 557-65; syntax
;
.
471-86;
genitive
passive, 814-20.
f.; subj., 930-4; 939 f. Vowels: original of vowel svTnbols, 178; the original Greek vowels, 181 f.; vowel changes, 181-203 (changes with a 1S2-6, with e 18691, with 7, 191-5, with i 195-9, with o 199-201, with V 201 f.; with co 202 f .) contraction and syncope, 203 f.; diphthongs and diuresis, 204 f.; ai)lurrcsis and prothetic
VoUtive: future, 874

opt.,
of voice, ch.
XVII, 797-820; syntax of tense, 821-910; syntax of
mode, 911-1049: inf. with, 1077 f.; verbal aspects of inf., 1079-95; verbal aspects of particij)le, 1110-41;
list
of important verbs in N. T., 1212-20.
vowels, 205
f.;
ehsion, 206-8; era-
1248
sis,

208
f.
f.;
shortening stem-vowels,
145; with formative suffixes, 14660; composita, 160-71; history of, 173 f.; kinship of Greek, 174 f.;
230
Vulgate: passim.
W
Wales, bilingualism in: 30. Weltsprache: 44 f., 4^56, 64, 66, 79, passim. See universal or koli^t].
contrasts
in,
175
f.;
punctuation
of,
Western
218
f.,
text (8-text) : 180, 214, 216, 253, 260, ad libitum.
and form-words, 397; position of, in sentence, 41725; connection between, 427; wordrelations, 449; glory of the words of the N. T., 1207 f.
f
.
243
idea- words
World-language: see
koivt].
Wish: mode and tense in impossible wishes, 923; ways of expressing,

1003 f. Word-formation: see
words.
X
Xenophon, forenmner of the koiv^*
55.
formation
of
Words: number
in the
N.
T., 81, 87,
115; relation of words in origin,
Zeugma: 1200
f.
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

Only words are here given which are discussed, not
the
many
thousands of which are given in the
text.
words in the Hats of examples, See Index of Quotations.
871, 931; part., 891; use of d7, 941, 949.

-a:
voc.
f.,
ending,
168, 170,
151,
256; prefix,
516,
dSiaXciiTTtos:
d8iKa):
form, 295.
of,
161
273,
1155;
voice
472, 808, 816; use,
vowel-changes with, 182-6, 191, 274, 341 f., 326; Dor. gen, abl., 254 f.; stems in, 258, 267; ace. ending, 264 f.; aor. ending, 305, 337-9,
perf. in, 3.58, 801; ad526; prothetic, 1209. -a: dat. ending, 249, 256.
f.;
878, 881, 889.

'A8pa(i,vvTT]vds: spelling,. 2 10.
-d^w: verb ending,. 147, 151. aiC: form, 185, 295; use, 300.
'A0îvT]o-i:
348
2d
case
of,
249.
verbs
in,
oi:
vowel-changes, 186, 204, 327, 367; dat. ending, 249, 542; inf. ending,
ff.,
*Appd: case, 461. aâeds: meaning, 176, 276, 653, 661;

reading, 201; forms, 273.
ayadoxrvvi]: reading, 201.
249, 370, 542, 1051
1067; opt.
ending, 335.
aldv: form, 190.
dtSios:
form, 272.
147, 150,
d7a\Xid(o: constr., 509; forms, 1212.
-aCvw: verb ending,
349,
dâvaKTew:
d"Yairdft):
c. part.,
1122.
352.
aip(:
use, 1078.
in
Koii'i],
voice
of,
806, 809
compounds
dYd-TTi]:
152; gen. use, 499;
and forms
alp|j.vos: al'ptoa:
of,
1212.
and
art.,
758; meaning, 768.
use, 1097.
of,
d7ain]Tds: discussed, 1096.

.
voice
799; constr., 855
f.,
d-yairdw: use, 1201.
1097;
1212.
compounds and forms

in,
of,
"Aâp: 254, 411, 759, 766.

ayyekCa:
on with, 1033. d-yYtWw: compounds and forms

338, 1212.
-alpm: verbs
of,
349, 352.
-ais: dat. ending, 249.

ai(r0dvo|xai: constr.,
509; in
or.
obi.,
aYid?u): constr., 855,

&7i,os: use,
1003; part., 891.
1040; form
al<rxvvonai:
of,
1212.
777.
use,
1102;
482,
and
850,
part.,
ayiucrvvr]: form, 201.

dYvC^to: voice of, 816.
ft-yw)i.i:
1122.
alT^w:
of,
constr.,
of,
480,
857;
compounds and forms
voice
805, 814, 820.

of ace, 466.
1212.
alTiariKiri:
name
dYopdJw: constr., 483, 510.

"Ayovo-tos: spelling, 185.
Siyu:
dKaTairdcrrovs: spelling, 185.

-dKi-s: suffix, 296.
compounds and forms,
299,
oKii^v: 488, 546.
302, 328, 330, 346, 348, 363, 368, 391, 428, 430, 1212; constr., 477; voice of, 799 f.; meaning, 865; use.
dKoXoueû): constr., 52S; use, 880.
dKovw:
c.
rases, 449,
of,
506
f.,
511, 519,
717; voice
803; in
or. obi.,
864,
1249
1250
1035,

1042; use, 881, 901,
1103,
of,
NEW TESTAMENT
922
f.,
&v: form, 181, 190; crasis, 208, 984;
1116;
1212.
compounds and forms
use, 424, 841, 855, 887, 920,
935,
offos,
937
ff.,
956-9,
967-71;
c. cbs,
f.;
and
974;
dKpiPto-TaTos: form, 280.

oiKptPeo-Tepos:
LKpos:
733; meaning, 921; 984;

c. oirws,
meaning, 665.
775. 483.
accent,
c.
c. iVa,
985
in condif.,
and
art.,
tions, 1007,
1010
inf.,
f.,
1013-8, 1021
aXt(|>w: constr.,
1025
obi.,
f.; c.
1129, 1141; in or,
-dXii9pov: suffix, 174.
1030, 1040, 1044.
d\Xd: elision,
752,
207;
232-4;
form, 244, 294;
negative, 424,
-av: ending, 155, 257; verb ending, 336, 338; verb-stem in, 352. -dv: inf. ending, 194, 343. dCd: cases with, 451, 491, 524, 569 f.; in comp., 163, 476, 561, 571; use,
ff., 443; and asyndeton, 440; in mod. Gk., 1146; discussed, 1185 ff.
1166; use, 427
tiXXoi
form, 249, 294.

constr.,
of,
dXXdo-o-w:
511;
compounds
556; in mod. Gk., 557 f.; case-form, 570; discussed, 571 f.; with aw6,
and forms
dXXtjXwv:
1212.
dis-
dWTiXovCa: spelling, 205, 225.
575; with els, 673; in prepositional phrases, 791.

-ava: in verbs, 349, 352. dvaPaivo): forms, 328.
form, 292; use, 690;

f.
cussed, 692
a\Xofj.ai:
compounds and forms
of,
dvapdXXw: use, 863.

dvaYivioo-Kw: otl with, 1032.
1212.
&XXos: use, 292, 692; in comparison, 662; with eh, 671; with art., 695,
dva-yKd^w: constr., 857.
dvaGaXXw: forms
476.
of,
348, 1212; constr.,
775
pos,
f.;
discussed, 746
ff.;
and
ere-
dXXoTpios:
749; antithetic, 750. and aXXos, 748.
dvdOeixa: spelling, 153, 187.

dvaK(j)aXai(5a):
voice
of,
of,
809.
dXo-yos: form, 273. &|ia: origin, 249;
dvaKXCvw: voice
819.
num.
adv.,
284,
dvaXCo-Kw:
compounds and
constr., 482, 509.
forms,
295, 301; case with, 534, 638; iiera, 609; and aw, 627; c.
and
inf.,
1212.
dva|xi}i.vT)o-Ka>:
1069; use, 1126, 1139.

d|iapTdvw:
dva-iAt^: fixed case, 294, 460.

of,
compounds and forms

of,
dvd|ios: constr., 504.

dvttiravo):
348, 1212; constative aor.

use, 850, 854.
d|j.apTia: use,
d(jiivv:
833;
voice
of,
807; use, 873.
dvairC-rmo: forms, 338.

dva<j)avw: constr., 486; voice of, 817.
780. form, 277; use, 662. 759.
dvtKXdXi^Tos: use, 1096.

dvtve'YKai:
-djievos: ending, 374.

d|iT|v:
d(w}>C:
form, 338.
and
art.,
dveo-is: use,
900
f.
in comp., 451, 553,
555
f.,
558;
&vtv: use, 553, 638.

dvc'xoK-O'i-'
use in Homer, 524; case form, 524; origin, 555; original use, 569; disuse, 569; and irepi, 620; non-use
constr., 508; voice of, 807;
c. part.,
1121.
dvTJKw: use, 886.

dvC<rTT][jLi:
with
inf.,
1069.
184;
forms, 310, 328.

of,
dji<|)id?w:
reading,
compounds
form
of,
avoCyot:
compounds and forms
and forms, 1212.

djj.<})ievvv[j.i:
constr.,
483;
364, 368, 371, 1212; voice of, 800. dvTdu: compounds and forms, 1213.
avri:
elision,
f.;
1212.
dfi<t><iTepoi:
use, 251
f.;
f.,
282, 292; dis769.
451, 569
223; cases with, case-form, 524, 570; in

208,
cussed, 744
dH.<J):
and
art.,
use, 282, 292, 744.
comp., 163, 165, 542, 563, 572; use, 556; in mod. Gk., 557; in conden-

sation, 567; avrh in
1251
of,
mod. Gk., 570;

irpd,
845; use, 635, 869; voice

815.
diroKaTKrrdvti: reading, 316.
diroKcJTTTw:
802,
discussed,
572-4; with
620;
and
base
639;
virkp,
630; and ivriirepa, 639;
of
c.
compound
Jji'
prepositions,
voice
of,
809, 819.
causal, 963; with inf.,

f.
diroKp^vojiai:
"deponent, "334; constr.,

obi.,
1060, 1069
-avTi: ending, 336.

fivTiKpvs: use, 638.
473, 484, 626; voice, 818; in or. 1036.

dTTOKTttvw:
avTiXtYovTes: reading, 1171.
avTûfpa: use, 638.

fivw: in adj.,
use, 635; voice of, 802, 815; meaning, 827; forms, 1213. dirdXXvfii: voice of, 800; meaning of,
160; use, 296; adv., 298.

in,
827
f.
-dvw: verbs
316.
'AttoXXws: reading, 260.

diroXovw: voice of, 807, 809.
dirovfirTO(iai:
diroirXt'co:
&|ios: constr., 504, 1077, 1079.

d|ida>: constr.,
511.
voice
of,
810.
alius: constr., 505.
contract verb, 342.

forms, 336; use, 893, 896,
-aos: equal to
-cos,
267.
1032, 1036.
diropeofiai: intransitive, 472.
anayyiKXu: in
airdYx.o|iai:
fiirais:
or. obi.,
diroo-Tt'XXw:
voice
of,
807.
905.
diroo-Tpw: constr., 483; voice of 808,
form, 272.
637.
dfravTao): use, 873.

dird,va)6v: use,
816.
d7roo-Tp<|)0|iai:
diroTi0Tifi.i:
and
of,
case, 472.
&Tra|: use, 284, 296.

dirapve'oiJiat:
voice
810.
voice
of,
819; use, 873; in
d7ro(f>EVY(o:
constr., 476.
or. obi.,
1036.
art.,
a-irtw:
ff.
constr.,
f.;
508,
853;
voice
of,
&iras:
and
771
806
compounds and forms, 1213.

voice
of,
diri7rd(i0a: spelling,
338.
dirw96'o|xai:
810.
direXiri^w: constr., 476.

d-ire'vavTi:
dpa: reading,
use, 639, 644.
916
f.;
244; in interrogation, use, 1176.

425, 429, 916
f.,
dircpxofiai: use, 905.

dire'xw:
fipa: use,
1146, 1157,
meaning, 828; use, 866.
1176; discussed, 1189
f.
dir\ovs: use, 284.

diro:
-dpa: in verbs, 349, 352.
anticipatory position, 110; cases with. 111, 469, 482, 534, 554, 568, 570; in adv. phrases, 297, 300,
548, 550; with 6
ibv,
dpaPuv: spelling, 211 footn.

dpa7: use, 425.
dpeo-Kco: ccnstr.,
487.
135, 414, 459,
574
f.;
"translation -Hebraism,"
dpK: forms, 210, 324; constr., 541; use, 889.

in or. obi, 1035 f.; compounds and forms, 1213. dpTrd^to: compounds and forms, 1213.
apvfo|iai:
iLpira^: use,
472; with verbs, 511, 517

519;
in
f.;
f., 559, 562, 566; for "partitive gen.," 515,
827
comp., 164 f., 542, 563, frequency, 556; in mod. Gk.,

f.;
272.
557; use, 561, 977

tion, 567;
in
condensa-
dppriTa: breathing, 225.
with
6.ptI,
574; discussed,
dpri: use, 548, 1146.

dpxT]: ace.
574-80;
613
f.;
and , 596; and irapi., and wpos, 624; and vwd, 634;
791; for
-dpxîs: in comp., 231,
form adv., 546. 257

f.
f.
in prepositional phrases,
dpxi-: prefix, 161
agent, 820.
d'jro7pd(j)io:
-apxos: in comp., 257.

of,
voice voice
807, 809. 480. 810.
dpXo: &pâ.neuoi reading, 49; use, 904,
dTToScCKWfjLt: constr.,
1102, 1121, 1126;

ellipsis,
c. inf.,
1077; and
diroSCSwiAi:
of,
1203.
diro9vô-Kw:
meaning, 345, 827, 838,
&s: in
mod. Gk., 430, 923, 931.
1252

PaCvu: forms
-as: ending, 172, 254, 256, 265, 267,
and compounds, 305-8,

of,
f.,
337.
-do-i:
800, 1213.
pdXXta: aor. voice,
ending, 336.
307, 338, 836, 847;
'A<rta:
with
art.,
788.
799
815; meaning, 834,
dcrirdtonai: constr., 853,

do-o-ov:
862
f.
meaning, 665.
voice, 372; use, 1097.
838; use, 905; forms, 1212 f.

PaTrrfJw:
^cnrTiaai
compounds and
form,
329,
d<riiivTos:
944;
590,
do-vv0Tos: voice, 372; use, 1097.
constr.,
389,
520,
525, 533,
f.;
-are: per. end., 308.

ixrep: use,
639.
185.
f.
592; voice 1111, 1128.

papEu:
of,
807
use,
1073,
drds: in
-ttTos:
mod. Gk.,
pdpPapos: form, 272.
ending, 277, 279

and
art.,
-drw: per. end., 308.

-dTwo-av: per. end., 308.
av^dvco: voice of, 799.
a,{!piov:
Papvvw: forms, 1213.

Pao-tXcvs: voc. of, 465;
760,
769.
Pao-i\ii(i>:
form, 294.
form, 273.
causative, 801; constative,
avT60i: use, 296.

avTojidTT]:
833; use, 902.

Pao-KaCvw:
eavrov, 226, 232;
and
f.
cases, 473.
aires: in
problem of
Pao-rd^w: constr., 853.
intensive, 287, 399, 416; semi-de-
-PP-: 213
monstrative, 290; gen. form adverbial, 298; position of gen., 503;
PX?ePov\: spelling, 210.

PeXrepos: form, 662.
p\Tiov: form,
ing, 665.
3d
709
per. pro.,
679,
683
c.
f.;
use of
705;
in
277
f.,
294, 299;
mean-
airrov,
f.;
681, 683; discussed, 685-7,

use, 688-90;
oCros,
PiqpvXXos: reading, 199.
and
c.
eKeivos,
707
c.
f.;
pleonastic, 722;
Pipdw: meaning, 865.

ptpXos: spelUng, 199.
5s,
723;
art.,
770, 779;
sense-figure, 1204.
pXdiTTw: constr., 472, 484.
avTov: question
of,
226; use, 232, 287,
pXatrrdvu: voice of, 799; forms, 1213.

pXa<r<j)T][i'w:
289; feminine, 254.

d()>aip0(i.ai,:
and
case, 473.
constr., 480, 483; voice of,
pXcirto:
constr., 330, 996;
and async.
f.,
819.
d4>s: use,
ditTiixi:
deton, 430; and case, 471;

329, 855
of,
f.,
awo,
931
f.,
935.
577;
use of
^Xewere,
932
955,
forms
315, 329, 337, 342,

f.;
1110; in
or. obi.,
1035, 1041;
com-
347; constr., 855

900.
d<f)iw:
use, 873; aor.,
pounds and forms, 1213.

Podw: in or. ob{ 1036. PoTiBew: case with, 472, 541.
PovXonai: forms, 339; use, 876, 878,
forms
of,
315, 335.
a<}>pwv:
voc. of, 463.
-axov: suffix, 296. dXP<-: with final s, 221, 296; use, 639, 954, 974; in prepositional phrases,
791;
c. inf.,
886, 919; in or. obi, 1036

inf.,
f.;
with
1055
f.,
1060.
PpaSvvco: forms, 230.

Ppc'xw: voice of, 799.
1074.
ff.,
-dw: verbs in, 147 341 ff., 351.
184, 203, 316,
y: 209, 216, 359.
B
P:
FaXaTiKTi: with art., 788.

Yaiie'to:
constr., 1204; forms, 1213.
209
f.,
217, 240, 353.
7dp: use, 424, 433, 443, 962, 1189; in

interrogation, 916;
c. ei,
pdoX: 254, 411.

Bapv\tGv: 494.
886, 1003
f.,
1020;
c. re,
1179; discussed, 1190
f.

y^:
1253
c.
use,
302, 424,
ff.;
1144; discussed,
1145, 1153;
y.n,
1025;
c.
nega-
1147
yi\i.ilo>:
enclitic, 1211.
tive, 1164; discussed,
1183-5; ad-
constr., 510.
versative, 1186.
-8*: suffix, 296, 1211.
8i:
yiynfia:
reading, 211, 213.

f.
ycvvdw: use, 866

7vo)xai:
^rj:
and
case, 473,
507
f.
886, 919;
8kvu|j.i:
form, 319; use, 880, 919 c. inf., 1078.

311, 327, 1214.
ff.;
t5,
and
eUipsis, 272, 652, 1202.
compounds and forms, 174 f.,

or.
yi:
in verbs, 351.
306
f.,
yid: pref. in
'Y^voiiai.:
mod. Gk., 570, 982.
8iKvviw:
307,
with KaL, 95, 107, 393, 426, 1042 f.; frequency in Mt., 122; followed by asyndeton, 429; in periphrastic forms, 330, 902; ybeffdai cases with, 449, 497; with
eyevtro
311; in
obi, 1035
f.
8iva: use, 292, 744.
8Ka: use, 282; in comp., 283.

8v:
in
mod. Gk., 206, 928, 1011,

ff.,
1156
8eo|xai:
8e'ov:
1168.
advs., 545
of,
f.; 674;'tro,
658, 829; voice

ixr,,
8|i6s: in
comparison, 662.
eo-Tt,
801, 818, 820; yhoiTo with

f.,
forms, 342; constr., 519, 1059.

881, 1130.
854, 935, 939
1003; imper.
871,
of,
use with
855;
perf.,
use,
869,
896
f.,
905,
8'pw:
8xipo:
forms
of,
1214.
951, 1085, 1202; subj. forms, 890;
form, 299, 302, 328; use, 430,
900; yeyovev '6tl, 1034; compounds and forms, 1212 f.
931, 949, 1193.

8VT:
yivwo-Kcd:
compounds and forms, 210,

656;
of,
form, 299; use, 330, 430, 931, 949; in conditions, 1023.
308, 324, 328, 330, 346, 1214; use

of,
SeuTcpaioi: use, 298.
yvwarbv,
meaning,
1041;
1103.
c.
827,
8VTpos: ordinal,
Stxofxai:
283
f.;
834, 904; aor.

in
or.
843, 856; use, 871;

f.,
voice
of,
of,
813;
and els, 671. compounds
obi, 1035
inf.,
and forms
8^(1):
1214.
1062, 1103;
yXwo-o-a:
c. part.,

with on, 1034.
obi, 1036.
and
ellipsis,
652, 1202.
8^: use, 302, 443; discussed, 1149.

8fi\ov:
yXwo-cr6KO[j.ov:
various readings, 204.

853.
yo-yyv?co: constr.,
8t]\6(o: in or.
8tiia6o-ios: loc.
roXôGd: spelling, 211; form, 259.

-yovtr-:
form, 295; use, 691.
in comp., 164.
8T|irov: use,
302.
yovviraTtco:
7pa({>T):
ypd(|><o:
and case, 474. and iras, 772. compounds and forms, 346,
406,
8id: c. encUtic, 244; in
comp., 164,
f.; f.;
476, 529, 558, 561, 563, 800, 827

cases with, 491, 534, 565, 569
362,
1214;
constr.,
845
f.,
853; in mod. Gk., 851; use, 875, 895; in

yuv^:
or. obi, ellipsis,
frequency, 556; in mod. Gk., 557; verbs, 560; in condensation, c.

case-form, 570; discussed, 580-4; and Kara, 606; and v-n-kp, 629;
1035
652.
f.
567;
and
and
iiTTo,
636;
c.
ixkaov,
648;
c.
ri,
730; in prepositional phrases, 791; for agent, S20; c. inf., 858, 891,
8:
210, 240, 248.
909, 966,
TOVTO, 965.
8ia?tovvvjJii:
1060,
1069
810.
f.,
1091;
c.
-8a: adv. end., 295. Saijidvia: COnstr., 404.

8avC5u>:
8^:
voice
of,
voice
of,
809.
c.
f.,
8ia\iiTto: c. part.,
1121.
elision,
207;
art.,
290, 694
f.;
f.;
8iafjLapTvpo|iai: constr.,
484; in
or. obi,
conj., 301,
428
440, 443
postovtos,
m,^^^
f.
positive, 424;
c. 8s,
095
f.; c.
SiavoC-yto: in or.
705;
c. tKelvos,
707; antithetic, 750,
8iao-7Tdu:
ohl, 1035 f. meaning, 564, 828.
1254

1121.
NEW TESTAMENT
Hebra(?),
SiareXeoj: c. part.,
Siariipea):
8ia(})p&>:
8vo: forms, 251, 282; Sho Svo
meaning, 828.
cases with, 455.
ism
673; and
art.,
769.
8vpo|xai: spelUng, 206.
8ia4)VY":
8i8tto-Kw:
meaning, 828; constr., 987.
Suo in comp., 161

:
ff.
form, 331; constr., 474, 482, 1083; voice of, 816; in or. obi,,
f
Bib)-,

spelling, 200.
88Ka: use, 282.

8<o|xa:
1035
8i8w|xi:
compounds and forms, 307

f.,
fT.,
Swpedv: 488.
311, 324, 326
335, 337, 347, 409,
876, 1044, 1214; constr., 855, 940,
983
f.,
1032; use, 905, 1062, 1080,
E
:
1135; in indirect
command, 1047;
vowel-changes with, 178, 183-91,

324; instead of o, 308; inserted by analogy, 349; with Doric fut., 354;
bovvaL, 1052, 1058, 1132.

8i6'px,o|Aai:
8niY'o|ji.ai:
constr., 477, 869.

otl
with, 1032.
Suo-xvpCôfiai: in or. obi., 1036.
reduphcation and augment, 363-7; voc. ending, 462 f prothetic, 1209.

.
meaning, 176. 8uKaiocrvvTi: with subjective gen., 499;

8iKaios:
'ia.:
use, 391, 1193.
dv:
form,
181,
190
325,
f.;
crasis,
208;
967,
6(7os,
use, 781.
8i6: use,
constr.,
220,
850,
928,
950.
969, 1129;
and o^ns, 727; and

k-irei,
Aiovvo-os: reading, 200.

Sio-irep:
733; use, 948, 968, 971, 1129;

957, 959;
c.
c. 6s,
use, 1154.
965; in conditions,
AiooTKopos: 199.
SioTi: use, 962, 964.
1005-27.
Idvircp: use,
1154.
use, 1189.
8iir\6Tpov: form, 299.

81'rrXovs: use,
dvT
iavre:
284.
lavTov: form, 185, 226; use, 287, 289,
8ts:
adv., 284; spelling, 296.
687-90; and
law:
c.
ISlos,
691
f.;
and
art.,
8i<rxiX.ioi: use,
283.
779; with mid. voice, 810.

ovK,
Uxo.- adv., 284.

8iij/da):
1156;
compounds and
aor. forms, 342;
and
case, 474,
forms, 1214.
'EPpaio-Ti':
508.
8o7[AaTi|a):
form, 296, 298; use, 524.
voice
of,
807.
l-^yilo>:
constr.,
623
f.;
compounds
8oKw: constr., 541, 853, 1085.

8oKi|id5w: in or. obi., 1041.
8oXida):
8djjia:
and forms, 1214.

77115:
form, 294, 298; in comparison,
form, 336, 343.
298; constr., 538, 638; adjectival,

547; use, 549, 558, 639 896;
f.
spelhng, 153, 200.

f.
-8ov: adv. suffix, 295
76ipw: voice of, 799, 817;
use, 866,
8o|d5: aor. of, 837, 843, 847, 853.

c.
8ov\-: in comp., 164.

8ovX6a>: constr., 540.
8pdo-<ro|iai: use,
7KaKw:
paxt., 1121.
e7Ka\w: constr., 511.

7KO[ipdo(jiai:
of,
474.
voice
of,
808.
8i3vanai:
compounds and forms

f.,
iyi: crasis, 208; accent with enclitic,
312, 340, 351, 368, 1214; voice of,
230, 234
f.,
286, 420; interchange
820; constr., 857; use, 879 920;

c. inf.,
886,
with
466;
-nuels,
406; iyo^v old form
of,
1055, 1060, 1077
f.
discussed,
of,
677
f.;
enclitic
Svvaixis: use, 176.
forms
682; use, 685, 689, 693;
8uvaT6s:
8vvojJLai:
c. inf.,
1077, 1079.
and
785;
e/cetj'os,
707;
and
aXXoj, 746;
reading, 312.
position of nov, 779; use of vnCov,

c.
8vvw: voice of, 800;
compounds and
particles,
1148;
enclitic
forms, 1214.
forms
of,
1211.

8a({>Ct<:
t:
1255
and \ho), 838,
forms
of,
1215.
480, 484, 626, 902;
in contraction, 342.
883; use, 930; in

spelling, 187;
or. obl., 1048.
rnXot: form,
?0w:
t:
205 f.; use, 878, 886, 919. forms of, 1215. vowel-change, 187, 191-4, 195 f.,
f.,
tlpuvo-: in comp., 164.

ls:
meaning, 389, 449,

f.;
561; in idiom, 401; case with, 451,

481, 484, 491, 524, 535, 569
in
198, 204, 324, 367.

tl:
accent, 233
244, 1211; and
6tl,
mod. Gk., 453, 535, 557; Semitic

influence,
430, 965; 886,
and
f.;
oCros,
699
916,
f.;
and
ydp,
457
f.; c.
verbs, 469, 481,
1003
c.
use,
928,
997,
540, 542, 559
ff.,
562, 566; in "pregin
1176;
c.
n-qv,
rts, 956; c. ov, 962, 1160; 1004; in conditions, 1005-
nant construction," 525, 1204;
27, 1129; in or. oU., 1030, 1045; c.

JU17,
adv. phrases, 550; frequency, 556; rather than 5ta, 582; and h, 584 ff.;
discussed, 591-6;
1160, 1187; proclitic, 1211.
and
TrapA,
613;
-ila: ending, 152,

ilBio):
196
f.,
326. 1215.
and
909,
wpos, 624, 626; in prepositional

c. inf.,

forms,
use,
phrases, 792;
858, 862, 891,
tI8ov:
366;
223 f., 325, 344, 360, 413 f., 437, 441, 892,
1041. 361,
990
ff.,
f.,
997,
1001
ff.,
1060,
1069
1088, 1090; reading, 862;
1135; in
i:8w:
or. ohl,
compounds and forma,

f .,
Is:
anarthrous, 1070; prochtic, 1211. and ou, 232, 751; indeclinable use,
906
el'Oe:
1215.
-327,
282
335.
f.
f.;
supplanting
tIs,
292; case,
art.,
-w: opt. end.,

in
460; and irpwros, 671; as indef.
wish constr., 1003
-iKa: perf. end., 310.
674, 796; equal to ns, 675, 744; distributive, 675; and aXXos, 747; antithetic, 750.
-is:
EiKovov: speUing, 197.

i'Ko<ri:
form, 221, 283.

use, see
el
ending, 265.
855.
of,
el
\i.-f\:
and
n-q,
192
f.,
747,
elo-epxcfiai: constr.,
tlo-iroptvoiiai:
1188.
l \ii\v:
el|ji:
voice
806; use, 880.

1045,
discussed, 1150.
188, 194,
f .,
lTa: use, 300, 429.

i(Ti:

ff.,
dre
eire,
1025,
1179,
220, 232
312
f .,
325, 327
330,
1189.
Itv:
337, 340, 350, 395, 908, 1215; in
form, 160, 183.
periphrastic forms, 330, 822, 860,
eiris OtXet: 961.

sk: in
877 394
f.,
887-90, 906
ff.,
950; constr.,
c.
comp., 163
-5.
f.,
215, 828;
f.;
c. tovtov,
ff.,
481, 497, 545; earLv
tovto,
f.,
444;
verbs, 510, 517
for "par-
705; meaning, 865; use, 874, 945

1030,
titive gen.," 515, 519;
case with,
1202; Kai iarai in or. obl, 1042; 6 ibv, 1107; encHtic forms of,
accent, 232
534, 570; in adv. phrases, 548, 550; frequency, 556; in mod. Gk., 558;
use, 561
;
1211.
tlfii.:
c.
dx6, 575, 577; discussed,

Trapd,
f
.
compounds and
1215; use,
696-600; and
614; and
c.
vir6,
forms, 313, 350, 396,

869, 881.
-iv: ending, 342. -tiv: ending, 339, 361,
636; for agent, 820;

1073; proclitic, 1211.
^Kao-Tos:
inf.,
1061,
use,
292; discussed, 745

art.,
f.;
370
f.
with eh, 746; and

irSs,
769; and
-tivos: ending, 197.
771.
-iov: ending, 197.

-eios:
tiirep:
^Kdrtpos: use, 292, 745.
ending, 197.
use, 1154.
tKardv: use, 283.

4KpaX\a>: voice of, 803; use, 880.
iKtZ:
;
Att6v: form, 329.

tlirov:
and
accent, 229, 231

f.,
forms
of,
327,
295;
aphasresis, 206; loc. form, meaning, 299; constr., 443,
329, 338, 345
363, 368; constr.,
548; as root, 706, use, 969.
1256
Kivos:
A GRAMMAK OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Ionic
eKeivrjs
f.;
Keivos,
206;
use,
290,
vneh,
451, 484
f.,
520, 522-5, 527, 531,
693;
in Lu., 494;
oItos,
and
770.
533
use,
ff.,
554,
f.,
569
556;
f.,
721; frequent
505, 521,
540,
707
Kio-:
and
702
f.,
707; dis-
452
c.
c. nea-c^,
cussed, 706-9;
and
art.,
1210;
verbs,
510,
559
f.,
form,
296;
meaning,
owov, 722.
299;
562; case-form, 524, 570; in "preg-
constr., 548;
and
nant construction," 525, 548, 592;

in comp., 164, 542; in adv. phrases,
KKXiio-ia: origin, 174.
tKKp|xa(iai:
form, 340.
480; voice
of,
550; origin, 555; discussed, 584-90;
eKXavOdvw: constr., 509.

eKX'yo|Aai: constr.,
and
808,
1$,
591-3; and
k-,
599; and
kiri,
810
f.
600; and vv6, 636; in prepositional phrases, 792, 978; c. v, 963; prochtic, 1211.
'^v:
kXktos: forms, 273.

iKirCirTco:
Voice
of,
802.
accent, 232.
in
sKTrXew:
form, 342.
'iva:
mod. Gk., 282.

639
f. f.
KTivd(rcrw: voice of, 810.
-^vai: ending, 370.

JvavTi: use,
Iktos: use, 640.

K<j)v-yw:
constr., 476;
meaning, 828.
kvavTiov: use, 639

tvSeCKvviii:
eKc|)vw:
forms, 341.
reading, 946.
Ikx: forms, 213, 342, 352. Kwv: use, 298.

'EXaitSv: case of, 232, 267,
IXdo-trwv: form, 218,
2v8Ka: use, 282.

v8i8vo-K: voice of, 810.
f.
458
IvSiJw:
voice
of,
809.
277
f.
v8t6|ATi<ris:
spelling, 201.
eXaiivw:
1215.
ve8pvu):
and
case, 474.
eXdxio-Tos: form, 278, 669;
double su-
'ivtKa: origin,
249; position, 301; use,

inf.,
perlative, 670.
641; with
1060.
forms of, 342. IXee'w: forms of, 342; transitive, 474. eXevGepos: meaning, 662.
IXedw:
'A.t7|j.a:
?vKv: spelling of, 183, 187; aspiration,
225; position, 425; use, 641;

1073, 1091.
cvp-yw: constr.,
c. inf.,
accent, 230.
Xkw:

form, 296, 298.
of,
evOdSe:
'ivi:
476; meaning, 564. meaning, 299; use, 548.
'EXXtivio-tC:
in
mod. Gk., 313.
XXo7e'w: forms, 342.

eXir^tw:
VKaKw: use, 1102.
aspiration
constr.,
223
f.;
forms,
vva: use, 282.
338;
476;
use, 877, 884,
evopKt^w: constr., 484.
1080, 1082. -na: ending, 188.

IfAavToii: use,
^voxos: constr., 504, 537.
VTav9a: use, 299.

evTeXXonai: with
-VTo: in
inf.,
687-90.
forms, 341.
of,
1068.
tuPaCvw: forms, 328.

[j[.(3pi[j.do[Ji.ai:
LXX,
340.
evTos: use, 641.
[ilio-a):
assimilation
1210.
/xov,
evTptirw: cases with, 455.
|xds:
e/j-ov
compared with
684;
ifioi
286;
ev,
evwiriov: constr., 540, 641.

tg:
use, 288, 496,
with
form, 215; in mod. Gk., 557;

verbs,
c.
588;
art.,
k/xov,
682; with avros, 687;

transitive, 474,
and
558;
cases
with,
568;
in
770.
use, 621, 640.
prepositional
chtic, 1211.
phrases,
792;
pro-
tlATTopeiiofiai.:
?|iirpocr9v:
^v:
c.
tlaôpd^w: voice of, 810.

2|ip.i:
'iîCTTi:
inf.,
107,
f.,
122, 431, 490, 858,
forms, 314, 339.

constr., 491,
891, 978
1042, 1062, 1069, 1072,

f.;
1092; assimilation, 216
accent,
case,
t^Ti-yeofiai:
1084 meaning, 829.
f.
229j 1211; meaning, 449;
and
eîis:
constr., 547.

Îwrrdvo): voice of, 806.
lirLiiapTvpofiat: in or. obl.,
iirijieXt'ofiai:
1257
1036.
lô|AoXo7w: forms, 188.
constr.,
509;
voice of,
^6v: use, 1130.

iôpKlt,oi: coiistr.,
820.
475.
of,
ImjUvw: use, 850;

iriovo-tos".
c.
part., 1121.
egouOeve'w:
iô>:
forms
342; constr., 853.
origin, 159.
adj. stem, 160;
form, 296, 301;
irC<rTa|Aat:
obl.,
forms, 314, 328, 340; in

epistolary
aor.
of,
or.
use, 642.
^<o9ev: use, 548, 642.
1035, 1041.
eirio-TeXXw:
845;
|wTepos:
lopTTJ:
meaning, 662. with kv, 523.
with
inf.,
1068.
iiria-rpi^bi: constr.,
tirixdo-CT-u:
856; use, 948.
-os: in contraction, 274.
constr., 542, 1084.
irai<rxvvonai:
sitive, 473.
and
case, 472;
intran-
TriTi|Adw: constr.,
542.
IwiTVYxO'Vw: constr., 509.

irK}>avo):
ciraKOvw: constr., 507.

Iirdv: use,
form, 371.
282; cardinal, 673.
971.
tTrrd: use,
Travairavop,ai: voice of, 819.
lirrdKfs: use, 281, 298.

'iiro>:
tirdvw: use, 642, 666.
eirdvwOev: use, 637.

k-rni:
Ipavvdw:
compounds and forms, 1215. compounds and forms, 329.

constr., 474, 484:
use, 954, 963, 965, 971,
1025
f.
cp-ydto|j,ai.:
meaning,
IwtiSri: use,
tTretSTj-rrep:
965, 971.
564;
^p-yov:

form, 272. use of part., 1135.
313, 538;
Use, 965, 1154.
breathing, 223.
ivtliTtp: use,
iTtiira: use,
t-irjKEiva:
1154.
300, 549.
pT](j.os:
?pis:
form, 267.
use, 642.
kp\i.i\vi-C(:
TrKTvw:
Tre'xw:
voice
of,
807.
?pxo|jiai: constr.,
compounds
f.,
meaning, 828; on with, 1032.
and forms
905,
of,
327
of,
f.,
800
1105;
1215;
of
t-mipcd^w:
and
case, 473.
constative aor.
833; use, 869,
em: in comp.,
164
f.,
204;
elision,
948;
tKOovaa,
use
223; cases with, 451, 491, 524, 565,
part., 1118.
568 ff.; case-form, 524, 570; in "pregnant construction," 525; with verbs, 540, 542, 559 ff., 562, 566;
in adv.
cpwrdw:
341,
1215; constr., 482; in indirect com-
mand, 1046.
-s:
phrases,
550; frequency,
ending, 266, 337.
556; meaning, 561; and ek, 596; discussed, 600-5; and /card, 607; and
irpos,
eo-Olu:

meaning,
564;
1215;
823.
?o-6a):
stems
of,
of,
625;
c. oarov,
733, 963; in prep-
ositional phrases, 792, 963, 978; c.

inf.,
compounds and forms

279
f.,
1215.
1069, 1071.
?o-xaTos: form,
669; and art.,
'ivia<ri: in
tiriîvwo-Kw:
mod. Gk., 230. meaning of,

use, 1135.
769, 775.
827;
use,
<rxdTws: use, 299.

'iiru):
909; in
tiri-ypdcjxo:
or. obi.,
1035, 1042.
use, 642. use, 548, 643.
'ia-b)9tv:
Tri8cCKvu|xi:
voice
of,
810.
craipos: use, 725.
in8iKvvw: in or. obl., 1036.

Tr{0(ia:
crepo-: in comp., 164.

tTcpo^v-yô):
spelhng, 188.
form, 330.
292; and
231.
inf.,
Trievp.co:
and
cases, 474, 508.

of,
?Tpos: use,
fiXXoj,
tTTiKaXtoj:
voice
809.
cussed, 748-50;
and
art.,
746 f.; dis775 f.
^TTiXavOdvofiai: constr., 509;
with
inf.,
-TTjs: suffix,
1060.
t-n-CXvo-is:
^Toifios:
with
1068, 1077.
abl. use, 514.
tTovTos: in
mod. Gk., 290.
1258
'iros:
NEW TESTAMENT
iv.
form, 268; with iv, 523. vowel-changes, 198, 201 f.

c.
F:
365.
th in comp., 164, 367;

1121.
eua-yyeXtô):
of,
irpaaaoi,
fiSios:
289.
constr.,
or.
474,
483; voice
f.;
799; in
299.
obi.,
1035
com-
I:
218, 240.
pounds and forms

tSye: use,
i)-yVTJs:
of,
1215.
5dw:

f.,
194,
341
ing
460.
1215; voice
of,
807; mean^Ciy,
form, 272.
of,
of,
833
f.; fut.,
889;
1105.
314.
EuSia: case
uSoK'a):
Seo-Tos: use,
1097.
trans., 474;
of,
compounds and
tvY'^H^"'=

1078.
forms
txidv-:
837, 842, 1215.
l-q\6a>:
forms, 203, 342.
eu9ecos: use,
549.
StiT': c. inf.,
in comp., 164, 296.
-?: verbs in, 348, 352.

5<iTi:
v9v(s):
form, 294; use, 549.
speUing, 200
f.
vXo7e'w:
ivvoio)-.
and
case, 473.
?wo-: in comp., 164.

t<6vvv|xi:
forms, 330.
314,
uo86a):
form, 343.
1215.
327,
loivvvia:
vjpCa-Ku:

1114.
1215.
338,
of,
1215; aspiration, 225; voice
?woiroiT)9ts: use,
809; use, 873, 883, 893, 1103,

ending, 272.
1122, 1135; in or. obi, 1035, 1041.

-iis:
H
H: breathing,
r\:
eiia-epTis:
form, 272.
222.
evxapio-Tew: voice of, 474.

uXO(iai: use, 886, 919.
origin,
178;
vowel-changes with,
324,
e,
184,
187,
191-6,
341,
t,
361; 274;
pas.,
-uw: in comp., 147

"E4>cros:
4>to"TTi[i.i:
ff.,
152.
nom.
356.
Jj-.
end., 267; after
p,
form, 295. form, 328.
augment, 286, 368; in
fut.
(al)t}>vl8ios:
form, 272.
f.,
use, 412, 427, 661, 663, 666, 789,
gx.w:
compounds and forms, 200

f.,
1158; and
tion,
-jrapa,
616; in interroga-
206, 319, 338, 346, 367, 870, 897,
917; in mod. Gk., 1146; in
900
1215; aspu-ation, 223; peri-
phrastic forms, 330, 360; elxoaap,

336, 887, 921; in Rev., 414, 441; in
fj:
comp., 1150; in double questions, 1177; discussed, 1188 f.

use, 1150.
anacolutha, 439; exet impersonal,

457; constr., 480, 487, 508, 789, 838, 843, 850; c. adv., 546, 799;
voice
of,
-g: ending, 194, 232, 249, 256, 274.

Tj:'
vowel-changes,
326.
194
f.,
198,
324,
799
f.,
809, 815;
c.
/cacws,
T|7on.ai: constr.,
480; in
or. obi.,
1036,
802; stems
of,
823; meaning, 828;
1041.
Vfir\:
use, 879, 902, 906, 930, 946, 1122;
position, 423; constr., 546; use,
^xw, 881, 1106, 1122, 1126 f., 1134 f., 1202; "Latinism," 1034.
-e'w:
1146.
TjSicTTa:
i]{.:
form, 294; meaning, 670.

f.
verbs
in,
147
ff.,
184, 203, 341
flf.,
vowel-changes, 193
in
351.
4ior.
lKa:
fJKw:
use, 297, 550, 643, 674, 953, 975;
mod. Gk., 898. compounds and forms, 337, 358,

291
f.,
in
phrases,
c. inf.,
550,
792;
and
odTis,
907, 1215.
T|\iKos: use,
729;
1092.
979, 1060, 1070, 1074,
710, 741; discussed,
733
fjXios:
f.
(ovTov: Ionic, 203.
gender
of,
252.

f\i.ai:
1259
314, 329,
Btjia: spelling, eefitXido):
340, 350.
TJn^pa:
153, 200. form, 1212.
gen. use, 295, 497; loc. use,

ellipsis,
-ev: suffix, 296, 300.

Gtds:
522; and
T|fj.pas
652, 1202.
gender
of,
2.53;
double
decl.,
Kal vvKTos: 495.

use, 286, 288, 684. form, 192, 1024; use, 1150.
T|(jL6'Tpos:
(jitiv:
257; vocative of, 261, 403, 465; reading, 477; use of gen.', 499 f. 516; abl. of, 514; meaning, 70S;
^lAi-: prefix, 161, 163.

ij-xio-us:
and
775.
art.,
form, 274
758, 761, 780, 786, 795;
f.; c. art.,
omitted, 1202.
Btoîv: form, 269.
flfwp^w:
-t)v:
noun
end., 256; verb end., 347,
349.
-Tjv: inf.
durative meaning, 838; impf.
end., 343.
Hva:
f\vr\
adverbs, 349.
suffix, 151.
or. obi., 1032, 1035, 1041. -Oip: aor. suffix, 357.
of,
843; in
-OiiKa: in
mod. Gk., 898.

340, 347. 340, 356
ViKa: use, 300, 971.

ijirep:
-Ot]v: aor. end.,
disputed
reading,
633;
use,
Otipio-: in
comp., 164.
f.
1154.
'Hp8t)s:
-ris:
-Otis: aor. end.,
and
art.,
760.
9r]<ravpClui: constr.,
853.
abl.
proper names, 172, 214, 255; gen.end., 256, 295; adj. in, 272;
296.
accent, 230.
-6rio-op.ai:
verb end., 818.
-60-: 215.
-0i: suffix, 328.
suffix,
Tj
o-Tj:
Gi-yYaw: constr., 508.
r|<ro-do|Aai:
forms, 1216.
ex^pw: use of part., 1135.

eXi<J/ts:
form, 218, 277. fjo-vx,os: form, 272.

Tjcro-ov:
accent, 230.
evTJo-Kw:
compounds and forms
of,
iJToi:
use, 1154.
T|TTdo|xai:
form, 341, 1216; meaning,
319, 1216; meaning, 345, 827, 845; use of inf., 1030.

OvTjTds: use,
865.
7]v:
1097.
vowel-changes, 205.
Gopvpc'w: aor. of, 851.
0pia|xPvw: constr., 474; voice of, 800.

-9u>:
9:
subj. end., 310.

in,
222, 353.
-0w: verbs
149.
ed: in
mod. Gk., 353, 870, 889, 907,
926.
-Oa: ending, 337.
edvaros: USe, 784.
OavaTwOtCs: USe, 1114.
GaTTTOj:
i:
vowel-changes with, 187

195-9, 204
f.,
f.,
191
f.,
207,
230,
237;
loc.

in
eappe'w:
anacolutha,
440,
1135;
ending, 249, 452, 520, 1067; class of verbs, 351; in reduplication, 363;
in
constr., 474.
6dp<ros: spelling, 217.
augment, 366
f.;
dat.
ending,
520; prothetic, 1209.

-la: suffix, 156, 196
f.,
eav|xd5: various readings, 188; constr.,
273.
474, 532; use, 879; forms, 1216.

e\: form,
compounds and
f.
-lavds: suffix, 155.

Idojiai:
voice
of,
819;
compounds and
eedonai: meaning, 829, 893
forms, 1216.
-Cas: gen.
-idco:
ISc:
205 f.; con.str., 3.53, 391, 431, 551, 857, 878; use, 919, 923 f.,
933; in
or.
obi.,
end
in,
259.
150, 351.
verbs
1036; in indirect
c.
accent,
231; adv., 302; intorj.,

airos, 2S7; iSiaf
command,
1046;
inf.,
1055
f.
f.,
32S, 391
l'8ios:
1060, 1078, 1093; inf. of, 1058
compared with
1260

f.;
with Kara, 609; discussed, 691
'I<rpa'<]X:
and
art.,
760.
and
l8ov:
art.,
770.
interj.,
-lo-o-a: suflax,
155.
adv. and
302; in elliptical
lo-Tdto:
toTTjfjit:
sentences, 391, 396; case with, 413, 441, 460; use, 1193.
iSw: forms, 1216.
'lpq, IloXei:
compounds and forms, 316. compounds and forms, 225,

f.,
231, 305, 310, 315
319
f.,
346,
359, 366, 1212, 1216; voice of, 800,
declension, 257.
817.
-lOTos: ending, 276
ff.
Upos: spelling, 223, 225.

'Ipoo-6\v(ia:
of,
speUing
art.,
of,
225; gender
-(.cria:
fut. end., 355.
253; and
760.
'Iroupaia: with art., 788,

*Iwdvis: forms, 194, 214.
Upovp-y^w: constr., 474,

ip<rvvii: spelling,
-i<o: fut.
201.
351, 355. 309, 314, 760.
-Cv: ending, 276

'Iwtriis:
ff.,
f.
end., 355.
in,
form, 268.
-Ll^:
IT]:
verbs
147, 149
'IwcrriA:
and
art.,
761.
in opt., 326.
ttiiii:

form, 263; and
1216.
'ItIo-ovs:
art.,
iKavos: c. inf., 1077.
k: 216, 223, 346 f., 358 f., 1210. -Ka: suffix, 296, 308 ff., 319, 358f.,801.
iKavow: constr., 480.

iKveojiai:
KaO": in
phrases, 195, 209, 223
f.,
963,

197.
f.;
967, 1210.
KaOafpw:
'Ik<5viov: spelling,
-iKos:
words
in,
158
three termina-
KaOdirep: use, 967, 1154.
tions, 273; constr. of

iXa<rKO|iai: constr., 474.
words
in,
504.
VXtws: form, 272.

ijidriov:
augment of, 1209; compounds and forms, 1216. forms and other comKa6ô(i.ai:
KaOapi^w:
meaning, 408; and
eUipsis,
pounds, 1216.
Ka0is: in naod.
1202.
-uv: in
I'va:
Gk., 292.
314,
mod. Gk., 261.

inf.,
KaGTJKw: use, 886.
rather than
Ill, 371, 996,
Kd9T]iiai:

use,
1054 f., 1071, 1077; use, 120, 244, 393 f., 400, 430 f., 584, 907 f., 928 f., 933, 935, 940, 943, 950, 960 f., 980, 1054
f.,
329, 340, 350, 1216.

KaOt^w:
866;
compounds
and
forms, 1216.
Kaeio-TT]jii:
1087
f.;
c.
fut.
ind.,
194;
330,
constr., 480.
constr.,
201, 203,
292,
325,
Ka66: use, 967.
850; origin, 249, 301; c. o5ros, 699; c. M^, 981, 987, 995, 1169; in final clauses, 981-5, 991-4; and Sttcos, 987; in consecutive clauses, 997-9, 1002; and Sn, 1032, 1049; in indirect command, 1046 f.; and dXXd, 1187; and
ellipsis,
KaOoTu use, 722, 963, 967. Ka9c5s: use, 433, 963, 968; in
1045.
Ka9t6<nrp: use, 968, 1154.
Kal: crasis, 208,
or. obi,
984; use, 393, 426-9,

f.,
432, 443
f.,
680, 947
C.
951, 1041,
C.
1202.
1136, 1188;
avrov, 441;
c. Kai,
tovto,
c.
-ivos: suffix, 158, 197.

-lov:
460, 487, 1140;
427, 566;
endmg, 154-6, 197, 273.

speUing, 214.
355.
'lowirri:
numerals, 672; c. art., 694 f., 724; and ovTos, 705; with several attributives,
-los: ending, 159, 197, 273, 276.

-tov<ri: fut. end.,
-is:
785-9; and
ws,
968; correla1129; in mod.
tive, 969; in concessive clauses, 1026;
ending, 261, 296.

fut. end., 355.
m or. obi., 1047;

Gk., 1146;
c.
c. ye,
-ir(i):
negatives, 1164, 1173;
-{(TKw:
verb
suffix,
869.
discussed, 1179-83.

Kai,v($s:
1261
851.
meaning, 176.
use, 431, 1129.
Karap-yô): aor. of,
KaC-irep:
KaTacrKT]v6w: form, 343.

f
KaTa<})ii-ya):
Kaipos:
form and meaning, 522
meaning
of,
827
f.
f.
KaCroi: use, 1129, 1154.
KOLTaxioi-.
form, 342.
Kalroiye: use, 1129, 1154.
KartVavTi: use, 639, 643

Karevwiriov: use, 644.
KarepYdôfjiai:
Katw: meaning, 828; forms,- 1216.
compounds and
KaK-: in comp., 164.

KoiKcivos: crasis,
KaKo\o-y(tf:
KarecrGCu:
meaning, 564. meaning, 564.
208.
case, 473.
KaTTj-yopew: constr., 511.
and
KaTOTricrOev: use, 647. KaTO-iTTpfgw:
KUKdw: with
KoXe'o):
inf.,
1068.
480; use, 885; compounds and forms, 907 f., 1216.

f
.
constr.,
Kdrto: adj.
voice of, 810. stem, 160; case, 296; use,
298.
KavSa: spelling, 211.
Kav^doixai:
kAWiov: form, 277

KttXo-: in
meaning, 665.
Ka\6i>
c.
eifxi,
compounds, 164.
forms
of,
341, 876; constr.,
KaXos:
meaning, 661;
475.
Ke:
Kci:
886, 1084.
KoXtSs:
use, 354.
in
form, 248, 295; use, 299.
Kd|Av: c. part., 1121;

Kavtfs: in
forms
of,
1216.
Kifiai:
mod. Gk., 292.
Kaprepsw: forms of, 833;
c. part., 1121. Kara: form, 204, 223; in comp., 163, 165, 476, 511, 558, 561, 827 f.;
of, 316, 350, 375; voice of, 813; special use of, eKeijjLrjv, 906.
mod. Gk., 206. compounds and forms
Ktvos: Ionic, 206.

K(.p(a:
KiCpo)-.
form, 197.
voice
of,
cases with, 491, 531, 569
f.;
in adv.
809.
phrases,
550;
frequency,
570;
556;
in
KeXevw: constr., 541, 1084; in or. obi,
mod. Gk., 557, 570; with verbs,

560;
case-form,
&va,
;
1036
contrasted
avri,
Trapd,
KcXXw: speUing, 206.

Kv: in rel. clauses,
with
571 contrasted with
958.
523; discussed, 605-9; and 616; and vwip, 630; with

els,
Kv-: in verbs, 164.

Kepdvvufii:
673;
compounds and forms, 317, compounds

and
forms,
with with
oaop,
733,
967;
in
preposi6s,
1216.
Kcpavvvw:
tional phrases, 792; with

inf.,
967;
1069.
1216.
Kp8aCvw: forms of, 1216.
Kp8dto:
of,
KaraPatvw:
forms, 328, 330; constr.,

838.
856; use, 895.
forms
of,
1217.
KaraYeXdw: meaning
KaraSouXdw: voice
of,
Kt^JoXi]: use,
781.
802.
KTjpvg:
accent, 230.
Karai: case-form, 296, 605.
Kt]pii(r<r:
use of part., 1106.
KaraKaCw: meaning, 828.

KaraKpivb): constr., 784;
in or. obi, 1036.
KaTaXafi,|3dv(o:
-KI-: 742.
meaning, 828;
812; in
or. obi.,
KivSwfvw: use, 884.

kIs (kC):
Thessahan Gk., 291.

853;
voice
of,
-KK-: 214.
constr., 475, 834; forms, 1217. KXavSa: form, 211.
KXdo):
1036.
KaToKiyoi: form, 341.
KXatw:
meaning,
KaraXvo): meaning, 828; constr., 857.

KaTav\iw:
with
inf.,
1068.
Karavrdw: use, 863.

KaraTravw: voice, 800.
Karapdofjiai:
kXIw:
compounds and forms, 1217. compounds and forms, 340,
1217.
kXt]povoh^w: constr., 475.
KXtfia: spoiling, 230.
and
case, 473.
Kardparos: USC, 1096.
1262

compounds and
kXivw: voice of, 800;
A
X: 211, 216, 352, 356. Xa-: in comp., 164.
forms, 1217.
Koindw: voice of, 817, 819; aor. of,
848.
Koivos: readings, 202; use, 691.
Koivcovos: constr., 504.
XaKcw or
XaXe'io:
Xdo-Kco:
form, 1217.
use, 873; in or. obi., 1048; a
KoXXdu: voice
of,
817, 819.
f.
Hellenism, 1077.
Xa|x|3dv(o:
KoXoo-o-aC: form, 184
compounds and forms

f.,
of,
KoWotJpiov: readings, 202.

Konf^w:
use,
210, 231, 327

use, 897,
939, 1217; use of
878;
compounds and
voice
of,
aor. part., 859,
1127, 1135; perf.
forms, 1217.
KoiTTw:
899
ff.;
meaning, 829.
constr., 475;
809;
XavGdvo): constr., 551, 1102, 1120;
com-

Koiridw: forms, 341.
Kopevvvfi,!,:
1217.

XaTpv(o: constr., 540.
Xe'Yw:
forms, 1217.
use, 777.
art.,
compounds
and forms, 329,
KO(r|i,iKos:
Kdo-|ios:
and
796.
339, 1217; constr., 480, 484, 626, 1084; and tlwov, 838, 883; use, 866;
in or. obi, 1035
-XciTT-: root, 197.
XiliTO):
f.
ff.,
Kpd|3aTos: spelling, 213.

Kpdô):
1039, 1048
f.

mean-
348, 361, 907, 1217; use, 895

KpaT: constr., 455, 475, 511;
ing, 865.

forms, 409.
1217; constr., 541.

Xtjo-ttjs:
KpiVo-wv: form,
277
f.,
299, 669; suriv,
AiPepTivos: constr., 788.

XiOo-: in comp., 164.
X(0os:
perlative of, 670; Kpeiaaov with
886.
Kpc|iaH-ai:
gender gender
of,
of,
253; reading, 718.

253.
compounds and forms, 316 f.,

and
Kpejjidw:
Xijios:
3.50,
1217.
-Xiir-: root, 197.
Kptfiavvvo), Kpeftd^w
com-
-XX-: 214.

Kpi: root, 175.
Kpt|ia:
KpCvb>:
form, 186, 230.

constr.,
511;
meaning, 828;
use,
905;
on with. compounds and forms, 1217, XoYos: forms, 327; on with, 1033. Xoi8op(d: and case, 473. Xovw: compounds and forms, 340,
XoYiôfiai: voice of, 816, 819;
1035;
1217.
KpCcris: oTi
1217.
with, 1033.
art.,
Xv|iaCvo|j.ai:
Xvirt'ti):
and
case, 473.
c.
KpviTTos:
and
764.
Xvirt):
use, 871;
part., 1122.
KpvTTTw:
constr., 483;
voice
gen., 515.
of,
807,
XvTpov: discussed, 175.
817;
Kpv<j)d:

Doric, 249.
1217.
Xvw: accent, 230; reading, 202; form,
KTdopiai: voice of, 810;
forms
of,
871.
328, 333, 347; constr., 856; in
mod.
Kxi^w: use, 896.

KTt<ris:
Gk., 870; meaning, 828.
and
ttSs,
772.
kvkX60v: use, 644.

KuXiw:
M
pi:

f.;
210, 216, 362.
KuXvu: use, 838, 863.

kvkXw: case-form, 295
644.
Kvpios: voc. of, 466; gen. or abl., 503;
-jia: suffix, 151, 153, 230.
constr., 521,
|ia0>iTvw: constr., 475; voice Ma09aios: speUing, 215.

-fitti:
of,
800.
per. end., 340.
and
art.,
761, 785
f.,
795.
(xdKap: adj., 272.

fjiaKpdv:
KwXvw: constr., 1089, 1171.
adv., 294; adjectival, 547.

(laKpo-: in
12G3
elision,
comp., 164.
298, 663.
|ATd: in
comp., 164, 561;

491, 524, 531,
;
223;
IxdXicTTa: use, 279, 298, 663, 670.
in phrases, 226; origin, 249; cases
jidWov: constr., 276, 278

Mavao-o-fjs: form, 268.
f.,
with,
533,
569
f.;
jiavedvw: in or. obL, 1040; c. inf., 1103;

(Aap-rupew:
or. obL,
1217.
aor.
of,
850; use, 894; in
1036.
and aOv, 526, 626 f. frequency, 5.56; in mod. Gk., 557; c. verbs, 560, 562; case-form, 570; and iv, 588; and Kara, 607; discussed, 609-12; and wpos, 625; with radra, 704; c.
inf.,
[lapTvpta:
(j.dpTvs:
on
with, 1033.
art.,
858, 909, 979, 1060, 1069, 1074,
with
136, 414; 6rt with,
1092.
(xeraPatvw: forms, 328.
1033.
\i.i:
prep, in
mod. Gk.,
.53.5,
570.
p.Ta8t8wp.i: constr.,
510.
|A"yaXw(rvvT): spelling,
fjte'Yas:
201.
fi.TaXa|ipdvw: constr., 510, 519.

(ji6Ta|i7^.o(iai:
forms, 294; use, 661; superla854.
voice
of,
819.
tive of, 670.

(AeOuo-Kw: constr.,
iidloiv:
fitTavoe'w:
reading, 1010.
|iTa^v:
with verbs, 562; origin, 626;

use, 879.
forms, 272, 274, 277; in comparison, 663.

spelling, 206.
use, 645.
|iTaT(0Tj[ii:
|jiipo|iai:
|iTX(o: constr.,
509.
p,e\avT<oTpov: use, 277.

|iX\<o:
fiToxos: constr., 505.

f.,
forms
of,
368
1217; and
fierpio-: in
|ixpi:
comp., 164.
final
tense, 824; constr., 857, 870,
877
c.
ff.;
in
periphrastic
forms,
889,
891;
inf.,
use, 882, 921,
1082, 1126;
s, 221, 296; and axPh 639; use, 645, 954, 975; in prepositional phrases, 792; c. inf., 979,
and
1056, 1078; use of part., 1118.

\U\<a:
1074.
JIT):

in or. obi., 1040.
constr., 473, 475.
^Li^l.vr]î,al.
form, 244; c. ttSs, 292, 752 f.; c. yhoLTo, 325, 854, 939 f., 1003; use,
401, 423,
(i.fi(f)op.ai:
(j.ev:
330,
430,
436
f.,
751,
particle, 302; postpositive,
424;
c.
5e,
428,
4.32,
747, 749,. 1145, 1186;

art.,
c.
850-4, 890, 916, 925, 931, 933 f., 937, 941 f., 962 f., 981; c. oi, see
and asyndeton, 440; and

c.
694;
OS,
695
c.
f.;
c. ovTos,
705;
aXXos,
747;
erepos,
749; antithetic, 750,
874 f., 929, 934, 962, 1004, 1156-66; in interrogation, 917 f.; meaning, 930; in prohibitions, 947;
oi>,
1145;
discussed,
c.
1150-3;
c.
Kai,
c. t's,
951;
c. tva,
f.;
983;
Sttwj,
c. irwj,
985,
in
1183;
ow, 1191.
370.
987
ff.,
995
c.
985
f.;
-Hv: per. end., 370.

-|Avai: inf. end.,
-fjitvo-: suffix,
î.ivovvyi.
final clauses,
987
ff.,
995
f.;
f.; c. Trore,
373.
987 ff., 995 1016 ff.; c.

1045;
c. inf.,
f.;
6t,
in condition.s,
1011
or.
f.,
1024
in
obL,
use, 425.
in indirect
command, 1046;
ff.; c.
iUvroi: use, 424, 1154, 1188.

fitvw:
1061, 1066, 1093
part.,
constr.,
475;
compounds and
of,
1136ff.; discussed, 1166-77.

iir]Si:
forms, 475, 1218; aor.

p.6pi(j.vda):
850, 856.
use, 428, 1173, 1185.
constr., 853.
liTlSeCs:
form, 219; use, 282, 292, 750

use, 1156ff.
f.,
[lepos: use,
fA'crov:
487.
1094, 1156ff.
firiStv:
use, 644, 648.
Mto-oTTOTafxCa:
jiVos:
with
art.,
788.
fXTjeti's:
form, 219, 282; use, 282, 750

ff.
f.,
use, 550;
with
8ca,
art.,
775;
M<7f, c. iv,
581; and 1210.

use, 416,
1094, 1156
HTJv:
Mio-a-lar-
spelling,
214
f.;
c. ov,
fiT|-iroT:
form, 929, 1151; 1161.
c.
d, 1004, 1024;
433.
use, 203, 1173.
1264
(xirjircos:

use, 1173.
viKau:
viKU)v
with
art., 136,
243, 414;
jji^T:
use, 427, 1179; discussed, 1189.

constr., 501.
forms, 203; constr., 475; meaning,

865.
vCiTTw:
|iTJTiip:
p.'qTi:
use, 1172.
voice
fT.
of,
806.
|x^Tis:
-|ii
form, 292; use, 743, 751.

f.;
-VV-: 213
verbs: use, 147, 335

of,
discussed,
ff.,
-vvw: in verbs, 352.

voew: in or. obi., 1036.
voixC^w: constr.,
306-20; forms
358.
-jii: suffix,
345
350
ff.,
480; in
810.
or. ohl.,
1036
f.
306.
vofios: use,
vo<r<j>5w:
780; and
of,
art.,
796.
|iiaCv(o:
forms, 1218.
spelling, 230.
voice
\Lly\ua:
votJVX"s: use, 297.
(xCyvdhi:

constr.,
317,
-vs: ace. end., 265.
1218.
IxiUVTJo-Ka):
-VT-: part, end., 373. 487,
509;
com-
-W-:
in verbs, 147, 351.

T||ipav:
pounds and forms, 1218. [iCa-yta: compounds and forms, 1218.

fiio-Odw:
vvKTa Kal
470, 495.
-wni: verbs
in,
311.
f.;
voice
of,
809.
vw:
constr.,
c. 5^,
546
use,
548,
1117,
MiTvXtivaios: use, 199.

MitvXtjvt]: readings, 199.
-iHL~: 214.
p.vT]fj.ovva):
1147;
1013.
constr.,
509; in
or.
ohl.,
wvl: use, 290, 1147; loc. form, 523. vv|: dat. form, 249; gen. merging into adverb, 295; with eu, 523.
vvio-crw:
1035, 1041.
Hvrio-Tvw:
p.6\is: use,

in,
forms, 1218.
296.
151.
-vu: verbs
147.
-fjiovTJ: suffix,
(iovos:
use, 423, 549, 657, 659; nSvop
adv., 657, 659;

c. 6v,
and
art.,
776;
ixovov
^:
209, 216, 230. 475.
1161
f.;
novov
f.
c. nT],
1162.
leviôfAai: constr.,
^T]paivo>:
-|i.6s: suffix,
151
836,
jiocrxo-: in
ixvpioi:
comp., 164.
205; forms, 268.
847, 12ia.
use, 283.
Mcocrfis: spelling, 203,
|w: form, 626 f. ûpaw: forms of, 342, 1218; voice

809.
-|a: aor. in, 349.
of,
N
v:
medial, 214
f.,
340, 352, 356, 362,
1210;
final,
216,
219-21,
258
f.,
264
vd: in
f.,
274, 296.
o:
vowel-changes, 189
f.,
196, 198-201,
mod. Gk., 923, 933, 940, 982,

6,
308, 324, 367; prothetic, 1209.

'H,
994.
-VO-: in verbs, 351. vaC: discussed, 1150.
-vai: inf. end.,
to: c. vtKuv, 136, 243,
414; crasis
inf.,
of Tov, 208; as demonstrative, 290;

c.
ea-TLP,
411; constr., 502;

996,
c.
370
f.
122, 287, 512, 584, 587, 599, 659,
-v-: in verbs, 352.

vavas: type, 256.
vos:
858,
990,
1001
ff.,
1039
f.,
1042, 1054-69, 1078, 1080; reading,

of,
meaning, 176; comparative

discussed, 1150.
161, 163.
599; discussed, 693-5, 754-96;

ovTos,
c.
664.
VT|:
700;
c. eKelvos
and
6Xos,
708;
in
VI1-: prefix,
vii<ms: form, 275.
relative, 734 f.; with aXXos, 747; and aor, part., 859 f.; in relative clauses,
Homer, 711; as
739;
c. Tis,

956; in
proclitic
8-y8oos:
or.
12G5
obi, 1045;
of,
c. ibf,
1107;
o(ifpo|iai:
-o|j.v:
form, 206.
317,
forms
f.,
1211.
per. end., 200.
uncontracted, 275.
6(iw|ii:
gSe: use,
289
693
f.,
709; discussed,
f.;
371; constr., 475,

nvvw: constr., 484.
6|j.o0u|xa86v:
1032; with h,
696
770.
f.;
and
o5ros,
702
and
art.,
588; use of aor. part., 859.
oSn-yew: reading, 1010.
68os:
and
ellipsis,
652, 1202. 325, 342. 325, 342.
gjxoios: constr.,
form, 295, 296. 530, 1206.
68vvdw: forms, 341.

oe:
6|Aotdw:

forms
from,
obi.,
contraction
of,
6|j.oXo-y(o:
295,
298;
o/v.
oi]:
thematic vowel, 147, 323, 356.

contraction
contraction
of, of,
constr., 475, 480, 541, 1103; c. kv,
524, 588; in or.

(is:
1035, 1041.
01]:
308.
use, 423,
1140, 1154, 1188; in
9ev: constr., 548, 969.

oi:
mod. Gk., 1146.

-ov: per. end., 335, .348.
oveiSC^to: constr.,
ov(vT)|ii:
vowel-change, 195, 198, 204, 326;
and augment, 367; old

520.
oi!7vv(j.i:
dat. end.,
473, 475, 480.
forms, 310.
in
317,
iivo|x,a:
"pregnant construction,"
circumlocution,
1212.
otSa: forms, 239, 319, 329, 337, 357,
525;
in
649;
on
in apposition with, 1033.

gvirep:
363,
406;
voice,
801;
use,
or.
838,
obi.,
reading, 291, 710, 1154.
1128; meaning,
904; in
-ovTo: per. end., 340.

6vTs: form, 295, 298.
oo: use, 202.
1035
ol'KaSr.
f.,
1045;
c. inf.,
1062, 1103.
form, 296.
olKoSo(tb):
compounds and forms
of,
g-n-ep:
use in
LXX,
710.
365, 1218; constative aor.,833; fut.,
SiTia-Qtv:
use, 645.
889.
oilKoi:
ottCo-w:
adv., 295.
use, 406, 1082; c.
oii,
oirotos: use,
with verbs, 562; use, 645. 291, 1176 f.; and toioDtos,
oliiai:
1162,
710; discussed, 732;

in or. obi., 1045.
oTTorav: use, 971.
oiroTc: use,
8-Trov:
and
irolos,
740;
-olv: inf. end., 194, 343, 371. -oio: archaic gen. end., 494.
olos: use,
291; and tolovtos, 710; disf.;
300, 971.
f.,
cussed, 731
obi.,
and
6rt,
1034; in
or.
adv., 298
548; use, 712, 722,

1045.
1045.
969; in 266; loc. ending,

reading,
or. obi.,
-ois: dat. ending, 249,
oirrdvw: voice of, 820.

gTTws:
452.
01
T'fjv
use, 430,
fiv,
731, 933, 953, 980,
irapaXCav:
disputed
982; with
clauses,
980, 987; discussed,
469.
ol'xo|iai:
985-7; and
use, 1120.
IVa,
f.;
992
f.,
994; in final
inf.,
994
in or. obi., 1045; in
6k: for
om, 199.
indirect
command, 1046; with
oKTw: use, 282.

6\9ptla>:
1056.
8pa: use, 330, 430, 874, 932, 935.
189
f.
opdu:

1218;
or.
188,
oXCôs: use, 660.

iiXXvfjii:
324, 339, 344, 348, 364, 368, 876, 317,
1211,
voice,
819
f.;
stems,
1218; use, 893.
823; in
obi, 864, 1035, 1038,
oXXvw:

art.,
1041; use, 871, 893, 901; use of 5pa
8\os: with Kara, 607; with ouros, 705;
and
dpart,
932
of,
f.,
949; use of parts.,
with
TTOXUS,
708, 768, 771
ff.;
with
lllS;perf.
6p-yt]ô|jLai:
1211.
774.
meaning. 834.
1266

508.
NEW TESTAMENT
6pe70|iai,: constr.,
6p0o-: in comp., 164.

opOds: use, 549, 659.
708; use, 724, 951-3, 962-5, 967, 997, 1054 f., 1085 f., 1122, 1176,
1192
c.
f.;
and
otrrts,
730; in interroobi,
c. /cat,
6p9s: use, 549, 659.

bpClm: constr., 863.
gation,
916; in
or.
1027-49;
1182;
c.
negatives, 1173;
opKtJw: constr., 475, 483.

opvt^: spelling, 219.
ttXtju,
1187.
Ti:
see oo-ns.
ff
6pos:
and
art.,
760.
ov:
vowel-changes, 199, 202

use,
-opos: ending, 199.

opvo-o-w:
gs:
-ov: in gen., 255, 295; in ace, 265.

ov, ovK, ovx:
401, 418, 423

f.,
f.,
with CLP and edv, 72, 191; with ye, 244; with re, 290; 6p not expressed, 425; reading, 438; wv with verbs, 511; w with ki>, 587; use, 693, 706,
928 873
f.,
937, 962
Tts,
965, 995;
c.
^r,,
c. els,
751;
c.
751;
929,
850, 854, 942, 962,

f.;
ff.,
889,
933,
987, 1004; in interrogation, 917
953 f., 956, 959; discussed, 695 f., 711-26; and odros, 698, 703;
928,
meaning, 930;
c.
c. fj.6voi>
aXXd
f.,
Kai,
ff.;
947; in conditions, 1011

inf.,
1016
and
6
ToiovTos,
iffTLv,
710; in Homer, 711; 713; and ocrns, 726;

olos,
1093
ff.;
c.
part.,
c.
1136ff.;
with
discussed,
1154-77;
/cat,
1183;
301,
value
jiev
of,
728; and
kdv,
731; and
attraction,
S.y,
proclitic, 1211.
oZ: accent,
antithetic, 750;
and
229; use, 286, 298
f.,
820; with
959; and
961;
717, 722, 969; discussed, 679.

ovd: use, 1193.
ovai:
with
Kara, 967; in consec. clauses,

or.
1001; in
obi, 1044
f.
-os: ending, 157,

oo-dKis: use, 973.
260
f .,
263, 268, 274.
gender, 270, 410; interjection, 302; in eUipsis, 391; case with, 487 use, 1193.
elision, 207,
ff.,
-oo-av: per. end., 63, 335, 343.
ovU:
1210; and eh, 751
8s dv 9Xti: use, 961.

6(r8T|irp:
use, 1156
oiSeCs:
1185.
reading, 710.
291.
form, 219; use, 282, 292, 1094

726; discussed, 750.
6o-8T|iroT: use,
c. eo-xti' OS,
8<ros:
form, 291; and ovtos, 698; and

710;
discussed,
ovSev: use,
oieets:
TOIOVTOS,
732
ff.;
f.,
1156 ff. form, 219; use, 282, 750, 1094.
966
8cP'Trp:
f.;
in rel. clauses,
956
in or.
ovKoOv: accent, 233, 1165, 1175; use,
obL, 1045; use, 1177.

use, 291.
917, 1165, 1175.

-oi)|j.vos:
part, end., 374.
So-Tis:
form, 290 710;
f.;
use, 693, 928;
and
f.,
ofiv:
use, 424, 434,
443
f.,
841; in inf.
T0I.OVTOS,
discussed,
726-31;
terrogation, 916; discussed, 1191

-ovv: verb end., 341, 343.
oii-iTto:
and
Tts,
737; in
rel. clauses,
956
959-61; in
or. obi,
1044
f.
form, 296.
ocrrpaKivos: form, 158.
ovpavos: use, 408.
Srav: use, 300, 325, 968;
and
f.;
ovtos,
-ovpos: ending, 199.

-ovs: adj. end., 274.
oijTc.
700; in
clauses,
T:
rel.
clauses,
957
in
temp,
ff.
970 ff. adv., 300 f.; use, 953, 970

compar. end., 278.
inf..
use, 428,
1156
ff.,
1179; discussed,
1189.
oiJTis:
8 T: in Attic, 290.
-6Tpos:
gri:
form, 292; use, 743, 751.

693,
oStos: c.^cTTt, 207, 223 f.,244, 411, 416;

use, 290, 401, 411, 419, 437,
and
f.,
Ill, 120, 371, 437, 442,

ff.;
489
584, 966, 1054

kffTip,
and
rt,
hia-
tus, 206; c.
233; and 6
243,
291; Sn-clauses, 393, 400, 426, 430, 1001; and ovtos, 699;
and keiws,
and 65e, 696; discussed, 697-706; and eKelvos, 708; pleonastic, 722 f.; and 6aos, 732; TovTo with Ti, 736; and art., 770; c.
720, 843;
c. a(jT6s,
686;

8,ira^,
1267
771; and 6s, 723; c. iroXvs, 774; 6rt with prep, and, 1033 f.; c. inf., 1059; in idioms, 1111; c. Kal,
1181.
TrapdXios: form, 273.

7rapaTrXT|aiov: U.se, 646.
TrapaxpTJfia: U.se, 550.
irapeio-Svco:
forms, 341.
646.
oiiTco(s):
form, 221, 295
f.;
adv., 286,
irapeKTrfs: USC,
298, 710;
and
oiros,
705; use, 965,
irapxw: voice of, 810; constr., 853.

irapioT-dvw:
irapto-TT]fi,i:
968, 1140, 1146.

ovrxC:
meaning, 950.
constr., 542, 855.
form, 290; use, 391, 917.

use, 841, 886; constr., 1003.
f.
o(j)(\o):
xttp<5s:
gen. form, .301.
6îXov: use, 923, 940, 1003
trappr\(rla:
on
with,
1033;
spelling,
6\\q. in comp., 165.

xXos: with
6}\ii:
1210.
Trds:
f.;
iroXvs,
774.
constr.,
517,
645
meaning,
f.,
indecUnable Trap, 274; c. 752 f.; use, 419, 436, 744;

tives,
/xri,
292,
c.
negaoWos,
c.
517.
437,
c.
751-3,
1163;
ff.,
c.
-6u: verbs
in, 147,
149, 342
351.
705;
offTts,
art.,
c.
708, 771
ocros,
1107;
c.
727;
732;
woXvs,
n
it:
774;
ffdcrxw:
c. OS,
957.
of,
compounds and forms
210, 223, 353, 1210.
irayaCvo):
ird-yw:
327, 1218; with kukCs, 802; constr., 858.
ndrtpa: use, 183.

7raTT|p:
xaGtiTos: use, 1097.

irdXai: form, 296.
iraXiv: use, 300, 551.
Tra(rXii9e: spelling,
voc, 461
f.,
464; art. with voc. 788; use, 1038.
of,
465.
IlavXos:
197.
and
art.,
n-avw: c. part.,
1102, 1121;
compounds
609.
iravoiKcl: spelling, 197.
and forms, 1218.

ireSd:
wavTaxTJ: form, 526.

irovTaxoii: form, 296, 300; use, 299.
irdvTOTe: use, 300.
irdvTctfs:
x5fj:
Case of, 249; for form, 295.

constr.,
fiera,
tTiCQu:
540,
1084; voice
of,
423.
801, 810;
of,
compounds and forms

and
case,
n-apd: in
form,
comp., 165; origin, 249; case.301, 482, 570; cases with,
871, 1218.
Ktivau: aor. form, 342, 371;
451, 491, 524, 534, 554, 565, 567, 569 f.; constr. in comp., 477, 542;
474, 508.
irtipd^w.
TT^fiira):
voice
of,
802.
f.
with verbs, 517 f., 560, 562; in "pregnant construction," 525; in

adv. phrases, 550; frequency, 556; in mod. Gk., 558, 570; use, 561;
epistolary aor. of, 845

use, 272.
irVT]s:
trevOtw: constr., 475.
nip:
intensive,
302,
f.;
617,
1144; dis-
and
K,
&ir6,
578
f.;
and
eis,
596; and
irpos,
cussed, 1153
ir^pav
Trp:
enclitic, 1211.
596; discussed, 612-6; and
and
avrCirtpa: use, 646.
625; and vwo, 636; with comparatives, 667; in prepositional phrases,
792; for agent, 820; with

irapa8C8wfii: forms, 309,
inf.,
1069.
165, 477, 487, 542, 564; form, 301 f., 524, 570; with cases, 471, 491, 509, 524,
in comp.,
562,
347
569
irapaOaXao-o-Ca: form, 273.

irapal:
form, 260, 296, 301, 537.
with verbs, 511, 560, 566; 556; in condensation, 567; and Kara, 608; discu.ssed, 616f.;
fr(K]uency,
irapaivtw: constr., 475.
irapaiWoiAai: voice of, 810.
irapaKaXû: form, 943;
c. inf.,
1068.
and Trpos, 626; and i-Trep, 629, 632; in prejxisitional phrases, 792; with inf., 1()()9; use, 616.
20;
irepid-yio:
irapaXajipdvco: readings, 336.
constr., 480.
1268

constr.,
ircpipdXXoâi:
485
f.,
S55;
irXVjpTis: indecl.,
188, 274
f.,
413, 464;
voice
of,
807, 809, 819,
voc, 463
f.;
constr., 1204.
jrepipXe'irw:
voice
of,
809, 813;
mean-
xXtipo-: in comp., 165.

irXi]p6w:
ing, 838.
7rpi'pxoH^<ii'=
TTipit,o)vvv\i{,:
forms
of,
325, 343; constr.,
U96, 1103.
483, 510, 857; meaning, 834; aor.

of,
of,
form, 330.
485; voice
of,
851; use, 948.
ireptKeiiAal: constr.,
815.
irX-qo-iov:
form, 294; use, 646.
ircpiXaiipdvo): constr., 483.

ircpiovo-tos:
irXTJo-o-w:
etymology
voice
of,
159.
rrXoidpiov: constr., 521.
irspiiraTto): constr.,
855.
-ttXovs: adj. end., 284.

irvv|Aa: use,
iTpiirowa:
810.
436, 590, 709;
and
art.,
irepippaivw: reading, 211.

7rpicr<rvo-ai:
761, 795.
7rvv[iaTiKtos: use,
form, 940.
constr.,
299.
irepicro-os:
use, 279;
516; in
iT-vew:
form, 342.
comparison, 664.
irpiT0T)|Ai:
irvlyoi:

548; in
or. obL,
ird0v: constr.,
iroi:
1045.
815.
iripva-i:
form, 295.
form, 295.
iroUw: forms, 325, 327; with eu

KttKws,
and
ir^pa: use, 1201.

TTTiYvuiAi:
473; constr., 480, 850, 852,

inf.,
and compounds, 317.

use, 292; discussed, 741; in
854, 856; voice, 802, 812; use, 884,
irt]\Kos:
923, 934; with

irotos:
1068.
or. obi,
irifjxvs:
1045.
interrogative,
291
f.;
woias in
forms, 268.
Lu., 494;
Tts,
and
oiroios,
732; equal to
obi.,
irid^w: constr.,
n-itô):
508; forms, 1218.
735; discussed, 740; in or.
forms, 1218.
1206.
1045.
iroXis: dat.
iriOos: use,
ir^fXTrXrini.:
form, 204; with Qvareipa,
317,
498; with k, 578.

TToXXdKis: form, 296.
TToXiis:
1218.
-irCp.irpTjiAi:
trlva:
compounds and forms, 318. compounds and forms of, 204,

forms, 1218.
338,
ace. form,
294; constr., 532,

art.,
660; in comparison, 664; with
340, 343, 371, 1218; use, 838, 883.

iriirpdcrKw:
774
f.
irofia: Spelling,
230.
788.
816, 820; constr.,
in
trCvra:
IIovTos:
and
art.,
843, 1218; parts., 864, 1116.
iropvo[j.ai:
voice
of,
m<rTv: constr., 115, 120, 453, 475,

485, 487, 540, 601
of,
;
856; use, 869, 874.

iroo-os: use,
Trto-reêre,
mood
292; discussed, 740
f.;
329; aor.
of,
850, 856; in or. obi,
or. obi.,
1045.
1036.
-irioTTiKos:
iroTairos: origin,
160; use, 292; disobi.,
origin,
159
f.
iricrTet.
cussed, 741; in or.

TTore:
1045.
fxr,,
irtoTis:
gen. use, 499, 515, 704;

11, 533.
adv., 298, 300; with

f.,
987
ff.,
in
Heb.
995
iroTc:
1173; meaning,
obi.,
1147; en1045.
irXao-twv:
jrXeiov:
proportional, 284, 673.
chtic, 1211.
constr., 516.
adv., 300; in or.
TrXeCwv: use,
665; superlative
of,
670,
irdTcpov: in
double questions, 1177.

292; and
t/s,
775; in idiom, 775.

<irX^K(o:
jTOTepos: use,
736; dis-
irX^to:

use, 646;
cussed, 741; TvoTtpov an adv., 741,
1177.
-iroTC^w: constr.,
irXTjOvvw: use, 871.

irXTiv:
484.
f.;
in
mod. Gk., 1146;
TTov:
accent, 234; use, 291, 298

in
(yr.
in
discussed, 1187.
mod. Gk., 723;
obi.,
1045.

TTov: use,
1269
298
f.,
1146; enclitic, 1211.
Kpo<r<ûiv(u: constr., 477.

irpoo-uiro-: in
TTovXos:
irovs:
irpdos:
suffix, 146.
comp., 165.
649.
accent, 231.
"TTpdcruTrov: use,
readings, 200; form, 274.

673.
of,
irpoTtpos: form,
280,
283; meaning,
TTpao-iat: distributive,
-irpdo-o-w:
662; use, 669.

c.
5,
irpoTC6Ti|it:
use of
inf.
1058;
constr., 480; voice of, 810;
1121;
n-pe-irto:

comparison, 277, 664.
in periphrastic forms, 822.

irpovirdpx^co: C. part.,
constr., 541.
1103, 1121.
700.
irpto-pvTepos: in
ij-pcrpvTT]s:
7rpo4>9dvu): use,
1120.
spelling, 201.
irpoxLpt<J"a(r9ai: constr.,
ij,
irpCv:
use, 431, 954,

c.
970, 1049;
jTpd:
976 f., 1053; c. inf., 1074 f., 1091.

f.;
irpwt: use,
295; and
d/za,
638.
irpwivos: readings, 201.
position, 110; elision, 206; cases
irpwTos:
comparison,
ttpCtop
with, 451, 569
constr. in comp.,
283
f.;
280; ordinal, adverb, 294, 297,
165, 477; separation implied, 517;
460, 657,
659,
1152;
TrpJjrws
nu-
frequency, 556;
cussed,
c.
verbs, 560; disirpos,
meral, 298; meaning, 516; use, 549,

657, 659, 662, 669
f.;
620-2;
630;
and
in
622
f.;
and
els,
671.
and
iirkp,
prepositional
858, 891, 977,
ITT-:
in verbs, 351, 353.
phrases, 792;
c. inf.,
f.,
iTru))(îvo):
978, 1061, 1074
1091.
irvKvorepos:

212
f.
irpoaYw: constr., 857, 871.

7rpoaiTido|xai: in or. obl., 1036.
iTpo7pd<{)u:
iruvBdvofAai: forms, 1218.

Tr\jpp6s: spelling,
epistolary aor.
of,
845.
irw: enchtic,
1211.
TrpoSrjXov:
with on, 1034.

338.
477.
-ir: origin, 296.

TTciiroTe:
-TTws:
irp6So|Aa: spelling, 200.

irpoeiirov: spelling,
form, 249; use, 896.

/xr],
use, 298; with
987
ff.,
995
f.;
f.;
jrpopxo|xai,: constr.,
enclitic, 1211.
irs:
irpoKaTav-ytWoj: in or. obl., 1036.

irpooptjw: constr., 480.
rrpds: in
use,
302,
741, 985,
1032
in
mod. Gk., 1028;
in or. obl, 1045.
letter
comp., 165; accent, 234; final of, 248; frequency of use,

p:
451, 491, 556; cases with, 491, 524,
211-4, 216
f.,
225
f.,
569
f.;
separation
524,
implied,
352, 356, 364.
517;
case-form,
542, 560
ff.,
570;
with verbs,
596; and
-pa: words
in,
256.
566; in mod. Gk., 570;

els,
pappct: 41b, 433.
and
TTopd,
fi,
airo,
575; and
âvrCtw: forms of, 211

voice, 807.
peo)-.
f.,
225, 1218;
613; discussed, 622-6; with 682; in prepositional phrases,

c. inf., 8,58,

ending, 256, 275.
792;
990
f.,
1003, 1060,
piina: breathing, 225.

-pT]s:
1069, 1075, 1088.

irpocravaPafvw: form, 328.
trpoo-SoKdu): in or. obl.. 1036. pCirrw:
7rpo(riJX.o|J.ai.:
pTJo-<r:

forms, 211,
/i,
212,
318, 1219.
2.30.
form,
3I^0\'^'i.a\!,
874.
'PiijiTi: initial
212.
Trp6<r9e(ia: spelling,
188.
^4vv\j|xi:
forms, 318, 330, 908.
irpoo-KaXtw: voice of, 809.

Trpoo-KvXtw: constr., 543.
irpoa-KWiot: constr., 455,
476 f ., 540, 990.

<r,
Trpoo-Xa|xpdv: constr., 510, 519; voice

of, 80!).
irpoo'<|>^p(<>:
s:
210, 214
f.,
218, 220
f.,
223, 248,
267, 296,
34(),
354-6, 362, 1210.
form, 338.
-o-a: per. end.,
305.
1270

kv,
NEW TESTAMENT
meaning, 564, 828; voice
of,
o-dppaTov: with
-o-ai:
523.
f.,
o-jrdto:
verb end., 329, 340

form, 210.
369
f.
805, 810;
o-aXirC^w: constr., 853.

2a(A<r<ov:
1219.
o-iretpw:

299.
o-dv: in
mod. Gk., 974.

etymology, 158 f. etymology, 158.
784.
<rirXdxva: form, 410.

o-Trov8ato)s: use,
o-TTOvSfj:
o-apKiKos:
o-oLpKivos:
form, 296. form, 198. form, 275.
o-dpt: use,
erreipto:
<rTip<t):
o-ardv: in papyri, 287.

o-pevvu[Jii:
forms, 318, 1219.
o-TXX:

forms,
188,
346,
o-pevvvo):
forms, 1219.
296.
1219; use of part., 1134.
-o-e: suffix,
oT^Kw:
928.
150, 351.
o-TTipi^w:
224,
315,
320,
o-avTov:
-<rei:
form, 226; use, 288, 687-90.

in, in,
1219; reading, 1010.
itacism

inf.,
230,
-o-iw:
crei'w:
verbs
1219; with
1068.

gender
in,
of,
a~Toi\iu: use, 329.

<rTd|j.a:
o-eXrivTi:
252.
f.
use, 649.
o-eo/e: fut. suffix,

-o-Ti:
354
o-Tparo-: in comp., 165.

oTpt^xo:
itacism
928.
voice
of,
800;
compounds
and and
forms,
orTjixa^vw:
crTi(Aiov:
in or. ohl., 1036.

use, 176.
and forms, 1219. compounds o-Tptovvv|jii:

318, 1219.
o-rpwvvvw:
o-T)p.pov:
o-tjitcd:
form, 294.
of,
voice
801.
compounds
forms,
-<r6ai:
verb end., 186, 370.
1219.
jTTvXos: accent, 186.
<rv:
-(r0: per. end., 186.
-a-Qa: per. end., 328.

-o-0<rav: per. end., 328.
-o-i: dat. ending, 249;
fix,
position
of,
f.;
418; voc, 461; disuse, 693;
cussed, 678
and
kKelvos,
pronominal suf-
707;
0-0 0,
position of, 779; encUtic
306.
forms
of,
1211.
314.
in or.
of,
ohl.,
-cridw: verbs in, 150.

o-i^dto:
o-ivairi:
ru5'^7VV|Ai:
meaning, 834; constr., 857.

forms, 268.
ff.
<ru|xPava): avvel3r]
o-v|iPo\)Xev(o:
1043.
or. ohl.,
voice
811; in
-o-L-s:
denoting action, 151
1036
o-itoTrdw: use,
o-k:
883, 908; reading, 1010.
o"u |i|xop(}>os: constr.,

<rvfi.ir6<ria:
528.
verbs, 352.
form,
460;
distributive,
o-Kdv8aXov: liistory of, 174.

o-KaTTTw:
-<rK:
673.
(rv|i(f><p(o:

suffix,
constr., 1084.
verb
352.
o-vn<j)VTos: constr.,
528.
o-KTrTO(Aai,:
compounds and
forms,
o-vji<J)va):
form, 341.
reading, 1010.
f .,
1219.
o-KTivdco:
<ruiA<})cvu):
-o-Ko:
meaning, 829. verb suffix, 352.

voice
of,
<rvv: in
comp., 165, 216
528
f.,
558,
562,
827
f.;
LXX
use,
451;
case 560;
dis-
o-KviX\aj:
807.
with, 53?,"^J'^:.; use in Attic, 553;
-o-koj:
verbs
in,
150.
frequency,
556; with verbs,

Kara,
-o-o: per. end.,
340.
and
kv,
588; and
606; and
-tro/e: fut. suffix, 355.
nera, 526, 610;
2oXo[nov: spelling, 268.

-orov: per. end., 329.
o-c5s:
cussed, 626-8;
<rvvd7: use, 871.
and -wpbs, 625; and ana, 627.
form, 286, 288; use, 682, 684,
o-uvavrdw: use of part., 1135.

(rvvep-yos:
689; with avTos, 687.
substantival, 504.

o-uvt6s: use,
o-\ivex:
-<rvvr]:
1271
f.,
1097.
of,
-rtpos:
compar. end., 277
298, 600.
voice
808; meaning, 828.
T'(r<rapes:
reading, 266, 282.
ending,
1.56.
Tco-trapecTKaiSfKaTOs: form, 284.

T(r<r6pa, Teo-o-epdKovra:
(Tuvîii: in or. obi., 1040.
form, 183.
o-vvio-rdvw: constr., 480.

<ruvcrTT|(Ai:
TTapTos: form, 284.
use, 896.
TTpa-: in comp., 165.

TerpdKis'-
<r\)virapaXafiPdv<D: constr., 857, 862.
form, 296.
709.
meaning, 828. orvvTt9|xai: with inf., 1068.

(rvvTt]pi(o:
ar<âX,<ji:
T'qXtKoo-Sc: use,
TTiXtKovTos: form, 290; use, 709, 731;

constr., 598; part., 891;
and
TT]p'<):
art.,
771. 598,
oXsSdv: form, 295.

o-ci^w:
constr.,
850;
meaning,
com-
828.
-Tifipiov: suffix,

<ra>|ia:
154.
use, 1206.
-TTis: suffix, 151,
153
f.,
156,256, 272.
310,
crwTTJp:
and
art.,
786.
t dv BeXou in or. obi, 1044.

tC0t)|ii:
o-wTT|pios:
form, 272.
318, 347, 1219; constr., 480; use,
T
t:
900.
TiKTw: forms, 1219.
TLjAdo):
218, 223, 248, 352, 1210,
forms, 305, 334.
Ta8: use,
289
f .,
696.
465.
tCs:
t'l
and
f.,
hiatus, 206; interrogative,
rai: per. end., 340.
291
916, 933, 940; rl in idioms,
TaXi0d: voc.
of,
395, 539, 730; with gen., 515; discussed, 735-40, 1176;

c. ttoTos,
-rafios: early end., 279.

Tdo-o-: constr.,
740;
1084;
compounds and
f.,
and
tion,
Ti c.
TI.S,
739, 741; tL in interrogaf.,
forms, 1219.
-raros: form, 277, 279
916
oTi.,
1176; in subj., 9-34

rlva,
f.;
670; in mod.
1034; accent of
1040;
Gk., 668.
TavPTd: crasis, 208.
Tdx,i.ov:
in or. obi., 1044.

tIs: tl
and
hiatus, 206; enclitic,

in
234
f.,
use, 664.
f.,
1211;
297.
position
sentence,
425;
rdxiov: form, 278
TLva constr., 490;

Tl
with gen., 515;

584; and
tis,
rdxitTTos: form, 294, 669.

Taxvi:
T':
adverb, 547;
tl c. 5td,
form, 294, 298.

rel.,
ovTos,
698; in Homer, 711; and
c.
290; conj.,
424;
c.
301,
1178
c.
f.;
739; discussed, 741-4; antithetic, 750;
position,
re,
427;
Kai,
with
negative,
art.,
751,
987
156
f.,
427
f.,
432, 566, 789; use, 434; in

enclitic, 1211.
1164; and
778, 796.
f.;
Homer, 711;
to: sub.stantivized neut. adj.,
-T: ending, 296.
not the
art.,
185; denoting quota-
TKvo-: in comp., 165.

TKvov:
with gen., 497, 651. TKTo~: in comp., 165.

TtXeidu: reading, 987.
tion, 243; with ''Ayap, 254, 411; forming adv. phrase, 294 f., 487; with Xonrou, 470, 487; with inf., 966. Tot: use, 302; discussed, 1154 f.
TtKio)-.
meaning,
8.34;
use,
901;
c.
ToiYttpovv: use, 425, 1154.
part., 1121;

1219.
1219.
Tolvvv: use, 425, 1154.

Toido-8*:
1219.
reXXw:
Te'tAvw:
form, 290; use, 709; and

use,
art.,
compounds and forms, compounds and forms,

verbal
f.,
771.
ToioiiTos:
Siroios,
ToXfj.d<o:
290,
710,
731;
and
-ros:
form,
157,
304,
ff.
320,
732; and
of,
art.,
771.
372
4,S();
discussed, 1095
stems
S23.
f.,
T^pas: use, 176.
-ros: verbal
form, 157
304,
320,
1272
372
f.;

comparison of verbals
in,
NEW TESTAMENT
1102, 1120.
viravrdw: meaning, 634.

tp-irdpxw: c. part.,
276; superlative ending, 283; adv. end., 296; constr., 504; discussed,
1095
ff.
TocrocrSe: use,
709.
Too-ovTos: use, 290, 710;

TOTt:
and
art.,
771.
pronominal, 298; use, 300; constr., 429; in Mt., 443, 549.
row: gen., 262.
TpaxwvtTis: with art., 788. Tpeis: forms, 282.

Tp^TTw:
meaning, 634. xiir^p: in comp., 165, 477; adverb, 293 450; constr., 784; cases with, 491 569 f.; separation implied, 517 frequency, 556; with verbs, 560 in condensation, 567; with avri 573 f.; and kiri, 600; and /card, 607 and Trept, 616, 618; and irpos, 623 discussed, 628-33; with comparavirdKbi:

use; 203
;
359,
tives, 667;
with
inf.,
1069.
1219.
Tp'<j)w:
iiirepdvw: USB, 550,
646.

870,
uirepdvtoGcv: use, 647.
359, 1220.
Tpexco:
iiircppaXXovTws: origin,
viTrepKdrwGev: use, 647.
virepeKeiva: USe, 647.
uTrpKirpicr(rou: use,
297
f.
1220.
TpiaKOvra: form, 283.
TpC^w:
Tps:
647.
iiirepPCav: use,
uTTo:
550.
form, 284, 296.
form, 223, 226; constr. in comp.,

532, 524, 534, 536,
Tpwrx^Xioi: use, 283.

rp^Tos: in
165, 477, 542; cases with, 491, 517,
mod. Gk., 284.
524,
569
f.;
case-
-rpov: nominal suffix, 174.

Tpoiro-: in comp., 165.
form,
570;
frequency,
556;
Tvyxavw:
constr.,
509,
1120;
com-
with verbs, 560, 562; in condensation, 567; with aird, 575, 579; and
5td,

Tvx6v: adv. ace, 488, 490, 1130.
582; and
inrkp,
615; and
iiri, 600; and irapa, 630; discussed, 633-6;
rw:
per. end., 328.
in prepositional phrases, 792; for
rwcrav: per. end., 328, 336.
agent, 820; with inf., 1069. {nropdWw: meaning, 634,

-inroStiKvuixi:
{iiroSe'xoiAai:
aor. of, 848.
v:
vowel-changes, 185, 195, 198-202,

205, 230, 265; stems in, 247, 249.
tiTTo^wvvvni:
v-iroKdrw: Use, 647.
v^Llo):
t>-yiir]s:
and
case, 473.
tiTToKdrwOcv: use, 637.

xiTTOKpCvojAai: in or. obi.,
iiTTOKpio-is:
275.
gen. use, 495; loc. use, 521, 533,
1036.
iiScop:
590.
viroKpiTTis:

constr.,
uia:
-viis:
participles in, 256,
274
viroXa|ipdv(o:
480;
meaning,
forms
in,
275.
f.,
633.
iiroXeCirw:
mds: voc.
of,
463; with gen., 497

cb,
meaning, 634.
constr., 483, 509;
501, 651, 781.

i|icts:
{iirofii(xvT|(rK:
mean-
form, see
195
f.;
discussed,
ing, 634.
virovoe'w: in or. obi.,
678.
v(iiTpo5: use,
1036.
288, 684.
150, 213.
inroirXe'w:
xiiro-irve'to:
u|Ai: verbs in, 311. uv: in comps., 147,

itrayia: COnstr.,

gen., 515.
iiiroo-ToXT):
855
f.;
use of vwaye,
uiroTa'YTi
use, 819.
949.
viraKovw: constr., 507; meaning, 634.
inroTdo-a-o):
voice
of,
807,
809,
817;
use, 946.

viTorCBr\\L\.
:
1273
{i-iroTpt'xw:

476, 519, 541; voice
<|>uXdoro-<o:
807.
4>x)ori6a):
4>iia>:
-vppiov:
ending, 202.
spelling, 203, 342.

of,
iio-Ttpew: constr.,
of,
voice
800;
compounds and
814.
forms, 1220.
<}>wvT|:
<J>ws:
vcTTcpos:
i!4/irTos:
vi\i6it):
form, 294; meaning, 662. form, 279, 669.
in or. obL, 1033, 1042.

f.
gen. use, 496
constr., 480.
X: 215
<},:
f.,
222, 359.
215, 222, 353, 359.
(jxi-yu):
form, 340; use, 883, 1063.
"Xa: adv. suffix, 296. Xatpo: inf. with imp.

328,
constr.,
sense,
4>atva):

1040;
art.,
c.
509,
855; voice
341, 349, 871,

or. obi.,
4)avep(5s:
<})do-is:
1220; use, 868; in

part., 1102, 1120.
use, 871; use of xaipt"',

c.
329 817 944, 1093

of,
part.,
1122;
compounds and
and
764.
forms, 1220.
Xa|iaC: case-form, 296, 521, 537.
OTL with, 1033.
<J)C8ofi.ai:
origin, 295, 298;
compounds
338, 949. 346,
and forms, 295, 298, 1220. compounds and forms, <|>'pw:

855; use, 882, 1097; use of
<{>VYa>:
(f>kpe,
Xapd: gen., 515. XaptôfAttt: forms, 341, 1220.

xdpiv: position, 425; prep., 488; use,
363, 430, 1220; stems, 823; constr.,
647; with
inf.,
1069.
X^Kappos: forms, 275.

XeCp: use, 649;
and
ellipsis,
652, 1202.
828, 1220; constr., 476.

<J)T)fiC:
Xtpwv: form, 278, 669.

905; in
or.
305, 310,
Xu:
X06's:

form, 206.
1220.
319, 337, 342, 346, 434, 899, 902;

use,
obi,
1036,
1039;
XtXioi: use,
Xis':
281
f.
constr., 1083;
clitic
c|)0dva):
c. oi,
1156, 1162; en-
283.
forms
of,
1211.
X?s': 283.
constr.,
551; use, 842, 1102,
Xoivi|: accent, 230.
1120;
4>96ipw:

249.
Xopa^tv: spelling, 205.

Xpdo|iai:
319,
-4)i: suffix,
<f)iX6(o:
341, 1220; constr., 476, 530, 532,
use, 1003, 1201.
920.
XPTH-aTi^w: in or. obi., 1036.
Xpio-(j.a:
<}>iXo-: in
<|>i(j.6(o:
comp., 105.
reading, 330; use, 908.
accent, 230.
spoiling,
ôîoi: accent; 232;
and
of,
case,
472
f.;
f.;
Xpio-Tos:
192, 230; accent,
with
1046.
<}>opos:
<j>oivi|:
airo,
577; aor.
852
use,
871, 995, 997; in indirect
command,
with h, 587, 784; with th, 592; and art., 760 f., 795; and 'lri<Tovs, 795 f.
235;
XpCw: constr., 483; forms, 1220.
xpc'vos:
and
art.,
758.
compounds and
f.,
accent, 230.
4)opd: in
<j)op6'a>:
mod. Gk., 284.
with
if,
523; case, 527
543.
spelling, 201.
Xpovo-: in comp., 165.

Xpi)o-6s:
ôpTClo): constr., 484.

4>pd(r<ra):
form, 202; reading, 274.
forms, 1220.
Xu>pa: form, 248;

\o)pi(a:
and
ellipsis,
272, 1202.
*pv-y(a:
with
art.,
788.
4)U7ds: use, 272.

4>\)\aKT|-.
form, 369; use of reading, 10S2.
inf.,
1030;
with
e:>,
523.
XupCs: position of, 425; use, 647
f.
1274
NEW TESTAMENT
time, 470; with
kv,
aSpa: icpav acc. of
^. 209, 230.
x|/dXX: use, 874.
\|;v8ojj.ai:
\|/T]\a<}>d,<o:
523.
is: origin, 295, 301; constr., 302, 401,
constr., 854.
431, 481, 661,

982, 1032;
674; and toiovtos,

f.,
opt. form, 327; constr., 508.
710; use, 953, 963, 967

c.
974, 980,
c.
xlrux^xos: origin, 158.

ijnixTi:
on, 964, 1049;

c.
part.,
use, 689.
constr., 484.
966; discussed, 987;

1091,
inf.,
990,
1093;
f.;
in
consec.
clauses,
tj/tofjitâ):
t|fvX>:
1000
in conditions, 1021, 1025;

c. iiu,
in Lu., 1030;
1040; use, 1130,
1140, 1193; procUtic, 1211.
a
: 178, 196, 199-203, 324, 367.
-ws: names, 172; adv., 248. -ws: adv. end., 160, 295, 297
tocravTws: adv., 298.
ibo-tC:
f.;
neut.
substantives, 267; part, end., 274.

use, 674, 968, 1140. use,
-:
compar. end., 276; verb end., f ., 335, 350 f. &: use with voc, 463, 1193. wSe: pronominal, 298; use, 299, 548;
306, 315
dio-irep:
431,
969,
1130,
1140,
1154.
wa-TTipfC:
reading, 696.
w/tj:
use, 1154.
thematic vowel, 323.

per. end., 200.
S<rr:
-ojXos: adj. end., 157.

-t>)(iv:
inf., 431, 909, 990, 1088, 1090; with subj., 931, 955; and Xva,
c.
f.
-tov:
nom.
end., 154, 272; gen. end.,
-(OTpos:
wii:
999; in consecutive clauses, 999 compar. end., 278.

203, 205.
constr., 472,
257.
a>vio|xai:
forms, 1220.
w<}>Xa>:
483
f.,
541.
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
Complete for Scripture references and reasonably so for the other sources quoted. (Figures at end of lines refer to pages.)
(a)
NEW TESTAMENT
2:12 2:13
Matthew
1:1 1:2
780,793,795
763 760,788,1184 269 255, 268 6is, 501, 1184 263 6is 269,603
501
1:2-16 1:4 1:6 ... 1:10 1:11 l:llf 1:12 1:15 1:16 1:17 1:18
. .
494,781,1184 215
1107
576,643,773
514, 977, 1041
6is,
1091,
1:19 1:20
1121,1122,1132,1184,1188 .... 817,966,1060,1128 261,334,350,418,463,

.
.
464, 514, 541, 817, 820, 852,

932, 1060
1:21
...
.
.
287,302,459,575,679,
779, 872, 874, 889, 942, 1191
1:22 1:23 1:24 1:25 2:1
.349,517,534,567,582,
636, 705, 774, 820, 982, 998
505,611,713,881
541
459,975
...
...
255, 263, 408
bis,
575,
2:2 2:3 2:4 2:5 2:6 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:10 2:11
760,762,791 234,366,370,419,540,
561,747,800,816 313,476,513,828,868, 882,990,1060,1088 2:14 1112 2:15 636 2:15,22 299 2:16 231,297,298,834, 1112, 1126 2:17 255 2:18 475,1159 2:20 392, 406, 892 bis, 996, 1111 2:21 559 2:22 510,574,1029 2:23 593 3:1 587,697,868,1185 3:2 ... 408,609,652,762,895 3:3 255,697 3:4 ... 231, 577, 620, 686 bw, 709, 883 3:5 ... 255,624,652,773,883 3:6 271, 525 Ms, 5S6, 636, 651, 760,791,883 3:7 .. 213, 602, 735, 848, 883, 916,1176 3:8 504,835, 1192 3:9 598,834,853,1035 3:10 418,423,771,881 3:11 .418,428,516,520,586, 590,645,658,679,889,1076,
...
542, 840, 915, 990, 1062, lOSS
1148, 1153, 1186
...
253,263,760,772,774
517
6is,
3:12 3:13 3:14

3: 15
...
. .
627, 773, 795, 866, 1043, 1045
695,1186
260,355,533,562,575, 581,606,683,722 575 235,677,682,885,1076,
...
...
.
255, 559, 587, 652, 669, 729, 1106, 1 109, 1165
1148, 1183 221, 309, 315, 393, 491, 772,
530,762,1103 366,479,860,971,986
3:16
3:17
881,1058,1086,1110,1119,1126 .538,561,575,578,968,
. .
408, 642, 714, 810, 969, 975
1025, 1213
258,477,484,1122
593
...
372,460,597,697,837,
842, 1097
1275
1276
4:1 4:2 4:3

635,820,880,990 349,860,1112
329, 993
NEW TESTAMENT
. . .
5:23 5:24 5:25

5:26 5:27 5:28 5:29
4:3,6 4:4
781
604, 649, 889
756 4:5 221,548,625 4:6 311,319,874,883,895 4:7 ... 311,419 4:8 705 4:9 391 4:10 540,838,847,883 4:11 219,273,593,61.3,759 4:13 469,500,646 4:15 576 4:17 269,615,656,1190 4:18 4:19 ... 480,517,645,949 770 4:20 263,501,586,747,770,780 4:21 477,499,562,617,655 4:23 428 4:23-25 4-24 412,799 28,788 4:25 561,593,597,756,1132 5:1 .. 885 5:2 417,523,762 5:3 6-3-10 757 945 6:3-11 6-3-12 443 5-4 533,764,872 5-6 474, 508 395,523,871 5:8 394, 485 6:9 234,392,473,505,551 6:11 621,855 6:12 269,534,590,7.39,751, 5:13 . 768,1019,1024 505,642 5:14 ...221,263,428,491,633, 5:15 635, 757, 766, 1183 640,710,782 5:16 231,427,789,83-3,834, 5:17
.
849 428,470,529,621,640, 657, 690, 882, 949 375,488,573,729,890, 975, 976 255,976 889 .474,508,573,842,1003,
1060, 1075 6is
.
853, 857, 858, 932, 990, 1080, 1088, 1187, 1188
5:18
5:19 5:20 5:21
...
.
.
186,405,406,-561,677, 751, 933, 1062 660, 669, 698, 712, 959 bis
.
502,539,575,681,779, 834,992,1009,1018 687 6:29f 779 5:30 5:31 850 5:32 348, 517, 646, 764 bis, 773 224,3.33,889 5:33 5:34 .... 475,588,1060,1094 594 5:34 f 1189 5:34-36 1084 5:34,-39 5:35 633 5:36 853,1214 5:37 279,516,618,660,947, 1150 bis 5:39 727, 746, 747 1181 5:39-43 5:40 ... 437,529,538,683,802 183,562 5:41 5:42 311,809,855,943 5:43 ... 330,-547,646,889,943 5:44 630, 889, 941, 943, 947 .392,757,764,799,801,1200 5:45 735, 1019 5:46 1181 5:46 f 5:47 687, 850, 1019 bis 429,678,889 5:48 244,394,542,626,818, 6:1 ... 820, 8-58, 991, 1003, 1075 &is, 1080,1088,1148,1148-9,1173 6:2 .. 349, 429, 577, 633, 687, 853, 866 6ts, 969, 972, 986, 1154 652,662,856,943,1131, 6:3 .. 1170, 1202 437, 471, 653, 764, 986 6:4 ... 6:5 ... 552, 828, 874 6is, 942,
.
516,666,667,854,933
212, 342, 349, 504: bis, 538, 541, 658, 844, 850, 889, 957, 1035, 1042, 1157, 1162
.
. .
...
6:6 6:7 6:8
963, 968, 986, 1157 204, 777, 835, 855, 947, 1186
.
452, 482, 720, 726, 857, 881, 895, 978, 1061, 1075, 1091 459, 464, 779 6:9
.
.. ..
184,589,-591,969,1035
6:22
219,502,535,537,541,
866 1186 1153
677, 744, 772, 1107, 1148
5:22,28 5:22,28,32 6:22,28,32,34,39,44
...
855 6:9-11 6:9-13 422, 852 .334,350,396,600,818,1181 6:10 159,779 6:11 538,677,963,967 6:12
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
6:13
.
.
.
1277
6:14f
6:15 6:16 6:17
.
518,575,593,652,653, 853, 932 1186 1185 395,427,854,1040,1102

1121
683, 779, 811, 1035, 1102, 1126 589, 891, 1115
7:21 7:22
....
367, 524,
.
7r^2ter,
.525,
1107
1213
708, 917,
11.57, 1175,
7:23
548, 5.59, 575, 1028,
6:16, IS
7:24
7:25 7:26
....
1035, 1165 468, 479, 602, 727, 772, 905,9.57, 1105 6j.s, 1107
361,366,606,905,
.
.
11.57
6:18 6:19 6:19f 6:20 6:21 6:22

6:22, 23
727,
7.52,
772, 957,
231,40.5,853,875 286, 687, 1186 792 523 284, 768, 1018 849
. .
6:23 6:24
....
.
740,917,1027,1186 251,573,748,749,751,
890, 1052, 1188, 1191
7:27 7:28 7:28 7:29 8:1 8:2 8:3 8:4

5
5,
f.
1107 1100 350 532, 835, 883, 970, 1043 966, 1207 394, 656
110.5,
,
. .
597, 683, 11.32
183
391, 1018, 1019, 1214 391, 684, 770, 102S, 1216 330, 338, 430, 595, 683, 849, 854, 932, 949
6:25
...
.
.
539,564,738,853,917, 935, 1028, 1044, 1176
6:25, 31
6:26 6:27 6:28 6:29
1031 561, 581, 1035, 1183, 1185

.
8
.
.... ....
658
,
932 258
8
9
329, 473, 635, 653, 657,

his 681, 819, 992, 1076 391, 817, 1180 his, 1182 710, 844 334, 357, 408, 819
.515,561,733,891,1115,1128 341,606,619,799,1185
.
502, 515, 746, 807, 1164, 1185 532, 1107, 1115

. .
10
11
....
.
6:30 6:31 6:32 6:33 6:34

7:1 7:2 7:3 7:4 7:5 7:6
738,934,935,1028,1044
404, 419, 705, 771
...
.
542 411,509,547,594,765, 853, 1202 853, 890, 947, 983 534, 590, 718, 721 471, 685 bis, 738, 782 234, 286, 430, 596, 931 582, 659, 1088
12 13 14 15 16 18 19
....
278, 298, 803 818, 968
20
21
7:7
7:7, 8
203, 538, 763, 853, 875, 988, 1185, 1200 357, 1023
1213
773, 866
22 23 24 25 26 27
1026 367 392, 533, 653, 773 491, 646 282, 674, 675, 796, 969 737, 757 his, 800 748, 1152 690, 858 525, 560, 585, 683 679, 883 828, 879, 941 738, 813
....
.
.... ....
. .
....
....
7:8 7:9
7:9,16
292, 507, 543, 741, 917, 1001, 1176

597, 634, 708, 1171 348, 621, 702, 1136
439, 482, 917, 1177
7:10 7:11
7: 12
7:13 7:13 7:14 7:15 7:16 7:17 7:19 7:20
917 231, 1023, 1188 740, 1053, 1062, 1103, 1129 427, 704, 732, 733, 959, 1180 800 1200 730, 739
272, 477,
.'")4S,
8:28 8:29 8:30 8:31 8:32 8.34

9:1 9:2 9:4 9:5
499
948, 1009 339, 570, 607 528, 609, 628, 771, 995, lOU)
. . . .
.
691, 692, 770
...
589, 727, 72<), SOO, 96()
....
392,566,576,1172
221 402 1190
9:6
315, 603 244, 395, 739 his, 916, 1176 1S6, 617, 737, 916, 917, 1176, 1177. 1190 119, 319, 434, 443, 562,
907, 1203
....
425, 1148 bis,
1278
9:8 9:9 9:9 ff 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:13 9:14 9:15 9:16 9:17 9:18 9:20 9:21 9:22 9:24 9:25 9:26 9:27 9:29 9:30 9:31 9:35 9:36 9:37 9:38
10:1 10:2 10:4 10:5 10:6 10:8 10:9

409,710
314, 602, 800
NEW TESTAMENT
.
10:28
352, 472 6is, 473, 577 bis, 1046, 1213
215
...
. .
316bis, 529, 1043, 1131
10:28,31 10:29
.
244,916,1176
316 261,844,1163,1164,1166 '. 402 300,497,559,722,733,978 214,278,604 ... 251,292,342,352,745, 880, 1025, 1220 433,842,1109,1132
.
10:31 10:32
....
.
212, 1115
10:32 f 10:33 10:33,38 10:34 10:35 10:37

.
1170 355,356,510,515,603, 637,638,751 437,519,853 108,436,475,524,541, 588,957,959,961 956
727,951,957,959,968
956 603
284,581,607
633, 1108
1019
. .
264,433,462,517,575
512
300,508
708
6is
463 609
.368,430,932,949,996,1213
70S 477,65.5,773 211, 212, 364 6zs, 619, 968 1153 995
500,809,990,1089,1090 657,767 760,859,1114 495,500 358,800,881 488,799 810

852fei;s
10:9f 10:10
10:11 10:13 10:13 6is 10:14 10:15 10:16 10:18 10:19 10:20 10:21 10:22
.
395 1185
874,948,1019
849
.
.
437,517,642,813,959 214,257,587,663,666 648,653

1180,1185 1045 401 403 357,437,584,792,871,
7.38 bis, 739, 972,
1108 10:37 f., 41 f 956 .'956,962,1158 10:38 10:39 859,1108,1109,1111,1112 10:40 859,1108,1115 10:41 356,389,525,-595 10:41 f 593,649 10:42 484,653,1108,1202 11:1 683, 1102, 1121 11:3 748,934,1107,1116 11:4 194,258,726 652,816 11:5 11:7 765,820, 1088 1166 11:7-9 11:8 364,589,653,1088 1150 11:9 11:10 698,703,960,1193 11:11 516,587,668 11:12 548,816 367 11:13 1026 11:14 11:16 186,477,748 204 11:19 279,670,1078 11:20 11:21 .269,923,1014,1015,1193 646 11:22 11:23 505, 643, 6.53, 792 6is, 975 1036 11:24 11:25 337,419,523,682,696,
10:37,39,40,41
......
.
....
....
....
.
11:26 11:27 11:28 11:28 11:29

f
709,965,1099 461,465,769 682,742,752,842,878, 1024,1164

235,625,682,91.5,
889,891,1110
10:23 10:24 10:25 10:26
748
bis,
776, 976
924,1193
873 bis 200,523,537,687,
1023, 1182
632
393,537,740,992
.
. .
.3.34
bis,
472, 473, 485,
575,577,726,816,853,960,
10:26,28 10:27
1001,11.58,1164,1200 472 603,705
11:30
12:1
12:1,12
12:2
262 696 262
....
392,523,587,1159
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
12:3 12:4
1279
727, 957, 11 50
726,844 491,611,714,776,1016,
1025, 1032, 1039, 10S4-5, 1119, 1130, 118S
13:12 13:13 13:14 13:15

13:17 13:18 13:19 13:21 13:23 13:24 13:25
233.315,993
...
94, 531, 539, 1004 bis,
1110, 1127
12:5 12:7 12:9 12:10 12:12 12:13 12:14 12:15 12:16 12:18 12:19 12:20 12:21 12:23 12:24 12:25
....
. .
1035 261, 904, 923, 1015 683
201,376,533,844,
988, 1173
339,367
501
511,512,916,1024,1176 292,740,999 401,656,746 119,994

994
...
315,744,773,1105 623,1136
1149 835 244,5.56,571,762, 1070, 1073
695,
feis,
541,993 474,842 752 365,1212 889 292,697,917 590 319,406,413,817,1105,

1106, 1116
12:26 .602,750,842,876,1008 12:26 f 452 12:26,28 847 12:27 1008 12:28 425,429, 1008, 1190 6u 12:29 742, 757, 1018 12:30 607,611,1172 12:30,32 956 12:31 494, 500, 655, 779, 873 6is 12:32 594,607,1165,1179 12:34 880,924 12:35 408,7.57,776 12:36 436,439,459,718 12:38 515,579,742,923 12:39 25.5,411 12:40 429 12:41 453, 525, 561, 593, 828 12:42 268 12:43 418, .560, .582 12:44 300,548,1011 12:45 516, 611, 749 12:50 679,957 13:1 314,367,61.5,813 13:2 602,979,1126 13:3 512,652,7.57,764,1088 13:4 ... 107,490,564,606,695,
.
....
13:26 348,762,799 13:27 418,917,1157,1176 13:2S .418,430,878,924,93.5,1175 13:29 534,637,638,1157, 1164, 1174 13:30 479,482,626,639,645, 974, 1075 13:31 656,836,1126 13:31 f 713 13:32 194, 343, 372 feis, 1000, 1205 13:33 503,1110 1126 13:34 517, 648 13:35 791,1106 13:.37, 39 233 13:39 ... 768 13:40 969 13:41 598 13:44 562,580,71.5,837,868 13:44,48 715 13:45 f 847 13:46 735,837,844,897, 1110, 1126 13:48 561, 763, 837 13:49 5.50,578,648,775 13:51 310,1150,1175 13:52 399,475,539,5.59,656,
....
. .
.
....
727, 1206
13:54
13:.55 13:.56
765, 1073 er
13:4 f 13:5 13:5f 13:5-8 13:6 13:8 13:9 13:11
747
11.59,1171 891, 1071, lO'Jl
746,749 794 838,883 956

707
14:1 14:2 14:3 14:4 14:5 14:6 14:7
1091 757,917,11.57 625 760
694,840,842 508,585,840
485
481,817,1129
....
648 611,877,963,1028,
1031, 1039, 1047
14:8 14:9 14:13
233,434,604,866
1129
520,550,609
1280
14:14 14:15 14:17 14:19 14:20 14:21 14:22
14-23 14-24 14-25 14:25 f 14:26 14:28 14:29 14-31 14-33 14:34 14:35 14:36 15:2 15:2, 3 15:3 15:4 15:5 15-6 15-9 15:11 15:14 15:16 15:17 15:18 15:19 15:20 15:22 15:23 15:25 15:26 15:27 15:28 15:29 15:30 15:32
15-33 15-34 15:35 15:36 15:37 16-1 16:2 16-1 f 16:3 16:5 16:6 16:7

568
16:8 16:9 16:10 16:11 16:12
NEW TESTAMENT
1028
506, 1045
546,613,842
265
Ws
....
350,367,561,1136 392,1109
419, 648, 674 477,857,891,975, 976 bis, 1048, 1081 224,656,657 469,644,775
523 603 580 601 601
16:13 16:14 16:14 16:16 16:17 16:18
1164 1047,1160 1029,1035,1047, 1060, 1160 781 bis, 1103 695, 749 bis, 1103 695
235,678,768,781 255,419,682,842
.
174,255,408,457,510,
508,739 546 219 546,827 732,956,958,993 564,811,972

739 477 531
16:19 16:20
16:21 16:22
562, 604, 682, 780, 791, 875, 889, 1028, 1029, 1185, 1201 231, 265, 361, 907
.
. .
485, 679, 983, 993 bis,
1046, 1049 311, 579, 587, 1035, 1082
485,789,875 845, 874

482
.
16:23 16:24 16:25 16:26 16:27 16:28

17:1 17:3 17:4
.260,272,396,541,942, 1157,1175 174,498,562 690, 742, 878, 890 425 485,501,935,1023,1129 576,745,882
.
489, 743, 794, 955, 957, 962, 1116, 1123
559,1166,1172,1187 488,849 488,546 773,1035

561 408 bis, 427 1058, 1082
261, 463, 464
224,787,788 405,562 .425,490,538,661,750,

1009 bis
.
....
341,484,645,1135
541 757
519,577,1116 463,464,1193
615
....
. . .
212,615,749,1127 266,275,460,602,623, 720,737 710,990,1089

740, 1176
17:5 17:6 17:8 17:9 17:10 17:11 17:12 17:14 17:15 17:16 17:17
367,396,697,776,837
409
657
596, 597
487 870 484, 588 bis, 815 513,1132 802
17:19 17:20 17:22 17:22 17:24 17:25 17:26 17:26 17:27 18:1 18:2 18:3
491,561,602
311 219, 502 1182
213, 460
334,350,368,817 300,548,643,917, 1101,1176 224,487,739 .268,300,308,328,548, 849, 889 594,870,1132

681 580
....
f
.
. .
551,748,1102,1120
513, 1132, 1148
147
1190
bis
1062
bis
425, 573, 593, 687, 792
812
....
472, 949, 1047, 1183
668,916,1176 216
551
1028
.bis
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
18:4 18:5 18:6 18:7 18:8
601
244, 281
12S1
949, 1023, 1038, 1083
525,710
317, 594, 620, 992 537, 577, 580
19:21 19:22
400,537,593,658,
bis,
687, 1084, 1188
18:9 18:10 18:12 18:12 18:13 18:14 18:15
270,496 995,996
541
ff
bis,
870, 1019
213 1019,1043,1058 993 339,348,428,505,562, 645,687,842,846,949,

1019
6is,
280,669 ... 548,638,658,728,809 470,510,562,599,611,769 586,620 20:3,6 320 20:4 190 20:0 470,738
.
19:24 19:26 19:27 19:28 19:29 19:30 20:1 20:2 20:3
110,1127 192, 666 1096 309 Ws

314, 565, 601
673
bis
1020
18:16 18:17
18:18 18:19 18:20 18:21 18:22 18:23 18:23 18:24 18:25 18:26 18:26 18:27 18:28 18:30 18:31 18:32 18:33 18:34 18:35
19:1 19:2 19:3 19:4 19:5 19:6 19:8 19:9 19:10 19:11 19:12
604,649,840 231,539,757,846, 1019,1027 362,375,733,907

715,716, 1010
. .
593,656,685,767 281,333,356,548,674, 889,917,934,1176

673
6is
611,837
f
109
. .
.
233,283,674 .514,735,1048,1068,
1132, 1172
538,568,570,949
f
605 509 538,883,1025
309,834,885,976 689,690 464,708 886,919,968,1181

773
746
6?;.s
517,763 774
609, 916
bis,
1176 574
458,595,819 314,845,1165 626 646,649,747,1028

545, 1008
706,720,752,1103 233,312,307,727,
1190, 1214 710, 1001 6i,s, 1094 675, 735
19:14 19:10 19:17 19:18f 19:20
653,661,738,768
766
....
419,476,478,1216
20:8 643, 1126 Ws, 1203 20:9 673 20:10 ... 706,876,1028,1029 20:12 530,658,842 20:13 472,510,881 20:10 769 20:17 224 20:18 532,794 20:19 349,522,595,1072 20:20 482 20:20,22 805 20:21 597,750 20:22 291,343 20:23 685,721,765,1153,1187 20:24 619 20:25 1100 20:26 190,943 20:20 f 874 20:28 175,507,573,1088 20:29 561 20:30 463,464,491,615 20:32 994 20:33 1213 21:1 267,834,971 21:2 644 21:3 742,874,943 21:4 1123 21:5 536,560,633 21:6 968, 1126 21:7 409,477 21:8 .279,318,404,600,090, 774, 779, 838 21:9 525,670 21:10f 697 21:11 219 21:15 1122 21:10 049,845 21:19 594,003,074,943, 1024-5 21:21 767,840,1018,1020 21:22 959 21:23 053,740,1188
.
. .
....
....
1282
21:24 21:25 21:26 21:27 21:28 21:29 21:31 21:32 21:33
21:35 21:36 21:37 21:38 21:39 21:40 21:41 21:42
43 45 46
1

482,740 300,613 443,481
1185 949 1157
.
NEW TESTAMENT
560,1184,1186 542,1075
957
23:4 23:5 23:12 23:14 23:15
892,1116 204,278,299,652,
291,737 334,996,1060,1066,1090
.
308, 340, 367, 399
bis,
575,617,727,1214
696
516,667 473,485,819,873 330,697

1213
.
484,880 .119,355,727,873,960,
989, 1201, 1214
.254,410,458,587,615,
655, 704, 718
873
...
787, 1029, 1035, 1041
2 3 4 5 7 8
481,965 409,860 408,957 885, 919

788
399,691,695
834, 835
10
11
22:11 f 22:12 22:13 22:15 22:16 22:17 22:23 22:25 22:27 22:28 22:30 22:34 22:36 22:37 22:38 22:39 22:40 22:42 22:43 22:44 23:2 23:3 23:3, 10
1153 424 485, 818, 113S bis, 1139 bis 1172 1138
486,828
148
392,550,619
269, 1158
6zs,
1177
891, 1081
348 488,668 833 392 840 660, 740

774:bis
411,661,669
232, .530
317 760 480
763, 1202 424,475 23:16 720 23:16,18 1177 23:17 737 23:17,19 1146 23:18 23:20f 859 317 23:21 f 23:23 .261,309,310,337,347,845, 886,919,944,1080,1084,1092 23:24 205,606 642,765 23:25 23:26 517, 640, 641, 642, 765 23:27 203,260,267,506,530,548 1102 23:27, 28 23:28 505, 633, 1153 23:30 312, 340, 394, 922, 1015 538 23:31 948,1198,1220 23:32 23:33 476,929,934 23:34 266, 333, 356, 515, 599 23:35 213, 255, 645, 715, 789 23:37 120,204,486,531,689, 718, 917 548 23:39 24:2 565, 601, 828, 960, 1001, 1158, 1164 224 6zs, 787 24:3 430,933,995 24:4 604 24:5 24:6 430,500,889,932,949,996 24:9 353,889 24:12 357,660,858,966 698 24:13 320,434 24:15 24:17 .. 231,307,328,599,856 24:18 453,548,586,645,856 24:20 495, 522, 523 24:21 207, 244, 731, 793, 1175 24:22 .... 752, 772, 1016, 1163 990 24:24 409 24:26 792 24:27 24:28 871,969 24:30 334, 356 Ws, 603, 611,
. . .
. .
819, 873, 891
310,314 758,786,837,866 733,866

1128
24:31 24:32 24:32-51 24:33 24:35
611, 775
232,341,640
443
525,604,792,972
757
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
24:36 24:38 24:39 24:40 24:40 24:41 24:42 24:43 24:44 24:45
776
1283
1157 312,1157
1157, 1159 272, 1153
621,639,717,974
975 675 750,869
25:42 25:43 25:45 25:46 26:2
154,231,233,675
292, 522, 740
.
Ws
.349,708,740,870,922,
1014, 1015
718 768,777,783,792,845, 916, 1065, 1176
891 24:46 604 24:47 24:49 bis 849 24:50 715,716,718 25:1 727,1127 272 25:2,4,9 611 25:3 611 25:4 25:5 349, 367, 838, 883 25:6 ... 495,522,775,793,897 25:8 318,879 25:9 .244,334,689,818,929,933,
934, 995, 1127, 1159, 1161, 1174
25:10 25:11 25:14 25:14ff 25:14-18 25:15 25:16 25:17 25:19 25:20 .... 25:20,24 25:21 25:21,23 25:24 ....
272,763
1200^
969, 1203
1153 969
282,696 746,813
747 652
835,910,1111,1118
1125 337,601 299,604 718,909,910,1034,
1111, 1116, 1118
25:24,26 25:25 25:27

.
548 1045
.
886,919,922,1014,1015
873 559 408,1153 504, 516, 777, 793, 1106
.
.
25:29, 32
25:32 25:33 25:34 25:35 25:35-39

. .
340,347,1087,1200
'.
.
25:.36
915 234
25:37 25:38 25:39 25:40 25:40,45 25:41
334,339,357,819 917,1123,1176
234 733 963
777,792, 1096
26:4 1202 26:5 26:6 263, 595 26:7 512 739 26:8 26:9 510, 886 26:10 484,842 26:12 603, 1075 26:13 842,873,969 934 26:14 26:15 .... 951,1023,1183618 674 26:16 26:17 400,935,989 26:18 234,292,491,625,744,870 316 26:20 26:22 675,743,746 917 26:22,25 26:23 525, 559, 585, 698, 707 Ws 26:24 707, 886, 887, 920, 1014, 1015,1160,1169 26:25 859,915,1028,1114,1168 842 26:25,64 768 26:26,28 26:27 519 26:28 213,352,567,595,618, 1106,1116,1118 523 26:31 26:32 490,563,858,1039, 1074,1092 1008,1026 26:33 26:34 873, 1091 26:35 208, 628, 849, 875, 1026 bis 26:36 976 26:38 617, 643, 856 26:39 .... 469,653,737,1187 26:42 1012, 1019, 1020, 1160 bis 26:43 906 26:44 597 26:45 807,882,890,948,1183 26:40 312, 428, 439, 799 bis 26:47 774, 1127 26:.50 002 bis, 69ti, 725, 917 26:51 496,805,810,1205 26:52 524,534,859,1191 26:53 276,312,666,681,1214 26:.54 851,934 26:55 602,813,884 26:56 705 2(i:.57 694 26:.')8 883
. . .
595,612,809,870, 1072,1090 263,693,811,993
....
1284
26:59 26:60 26:61 26:62 26:63 26:64 26:65 26:66 26:67 26:69 26:70 26:71 26:73 26:74 26:75 27:1 27:3
27:4

505,883,986
1129
581,697 562,738,1126 475,607,781,865,883,

993, 1045
27:41 27:42 27:43 27:44
374,891 307,419,746
.
317, 1028 bis, 1029 409,473,480,482,487,
1106
678,679
212, 802, 842
27:45 27:46
602, 643, 772
....
.
29,95,215,219,261,
412, 463, 705, 739, 842
504
bis,
658
212,561,694 313,337,674 517,1136,1182 547,697 28,103,653,1182 1028,1035 .910,1028,1091,1113
27:5 27:7 27:8 27:9 27:10 27:11 27:12 27:13 27:14 27:15 27:17 27:18 27:19 27:20 27:21 27:22 27:23 27:24
27:25 27:27 27:28 27:29 27:30 27:31 27:32 27:33 27:34 27:35 27:37
653, 990, 1089 b?s 609,817,858,859,860, 1112, 1113, 1128 ... 109,290,339,626,736, 859, 860, 874, 942 bis, 1121 409, 807, 860 510, 537, 599 .... 643,848,962,1202
...
1201
967
. .
.
678
bis,
768, 769, 915
473,484,1073 512,741,1177 473,738,751 606,608,884,888 330,737,1177 583, 841, 888 bis, 898, 1029 396,707,842 805,835,993 515,577,737 484 .... 279,845,1149,1190 516, 576, 639, 644 <er,
.
678,770,874,810,942
1202 562, 593 483 465, 474, 598
235,1136 .430,877,931,991,1045, 1118,1128 27:51 297, 300, 580, 593, 643 bis 27:52 1213 27:54 258,780,781 27:55 548,727 27:55,62 957 27:56 263 27:57 208, 263, 475 bis, 487, 697, 800 27:58 697,1078 27:60 542,681,715 27:61 405, 505, 639, 747, 1104 27:62 653, 728, 765 27:63 816,870,1035 27:64 280,669,775,794 27:65 949 2^7:66 611 28:1 ... 517 bis, 519, 522, 622, 646,775,841 841-2 28:2 28:3 197 28:6 430,845,931,949 28:7 842,889 28:10 949,993 28:11 233 28:14 871,1019 28:15 614 28:17 694 28:18 772,842 28:19 475,525,592,649,684 28:19f 1128
. .
27:47 27:49-.
Mark
1:1 1:2 1:3 1:4 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9
593,884 483 bis, 840 528,993 411,714,881,1087,1105

611
690,811 604 697 27:37,47,54 27:38 675,750,792 27:39 473 27:40 308,465,581,781,892,
.
.
781,793,795 606,621,960 774,1106 .496,595,782,891,892,1127 592,791,1127 . 118,204,485 231,656,722,961,1052,1126 524 497,525,592

.
1107, 1116
1:10 1:11 1:12
517
bis,
561, 577, 597
532,768,837 880
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
13 14 15 16 17 19 21
255,0)11
1285
1074
...
119,453,536,540,601
188
22 23 24 1:27 1:29 1:31 1:32 1:34 1:36 1:37 1:38 1:39 1:40 1:42 1:44 1:45 2:1
996,1023 659 262,559,880 1127,1140 589,784 118,263,395,488,738, 762,916 334,540,1181 255,611 860 341, 348, 1109, 1214 Ws 195,315,319,367,546, 1034, 1216 606,766 1028
299,424,477,595 118,593
1214 183,559 118,430,619,932,949 300,604,1186 119,525,559,581,586, 593, 1120 119, 625 392,1097 604, 969 866
474, 849
ter,
...
2:2 2:3 2:4 2:5 2:7 .118,221,697,705,1025,1129 737,1215 2:9 119,434,907,999,1203 2:10 428,855 2:11 1028 2:12,16 119,596 2:13 316,393,1043,1190 2:15 730,917,1029,1035 2:16 990 2:17 786,787,1186 2:18 2:19 528, 587, 718, 733, 879 fczs, 978 6Js lis 2:20 212,1025 2:21 214,373 2:22 523,720,763,1043 2:23 523,738,1045,1159 2:24 679 2:25 603,628,714 2:26 584 2:27 439 2:28 656,789,902,1123 3:1 1024, 1045 3:2 775 3:3 368,813 3:5
.
.
.... ....
.......
.
....
994,1214 3:6 3:7 596, 611, 624, 838, 1183 Ws 3:8 28,620,733,898 3:11 118,404,884,922,958,973 3:14 611, 1088 441,459,488 3:16 434 3:16,17 3:17 411,434,713 530 3:18 3:20 627,792 614 W.s, 842, 845 3:21 3:22 210,778,1106 1036 3:23 3:24 817,879 602 3:26 1019 3:27 3:28 479, 732, 733 3:29 504 ter 589 3:30 3:31 991,1115 404 3:32 3:34 521,524,617 4:1 525,615,625,670 431 4:3 4:4 107,339,1073,1153,1183 1152 4:4 ff 4:5 747, 749 915 4:7 4:8 589,592 232 4:8, 20 720,956 4:9 4:10 244,341,482,550,653,765 4:12 233,315,1173 876 4:13 4:17 300,880,1131 4:21 789, 917, 1028 bis 883 4:21,24,26,30 4:22 653,764,960,999,1020, 1185,1187 4:23 956, 1009, 1087 4:24 392,471,718 4:25 .392,720,956,957,1158 4:26 603,928,968,974 987 4:26 f 470,1213 4:27 4:28 160,183,273,275,276, 549,687 309,800,972,1214 4:29 4:30 407,678,736 4:31 516,782,1101,1129 4:32 343,371,635 710 4:33 884 4:33 f 224 4:34 549 4:36 4:37 231,501,800,868,1000
.
.
....
1286

427, 602, 623, 879, 965, 1034 330, 360, 428, 908, 950 405, 468, 699, 1001, 1182 223, 1165 231, 581, 636, 765, 828,
.
.
NEW TESTAMENT
909, 966, 1070 bis, 1071 bis, 1079, 1081, 1091 244, 582, 793
6 7 9
11
300
279, 475, 483, 670
656
624
.
bzs
13 14 15
283, 580, 607, 674, 884, 968 476, 910, 1043 868, 900, 1099,
16 18 19 20 23
1136 1032 1117 624, 733, 901, 1045, 1177 625, 733 1117
bis,
...
297, 299, 324, 546, 933, 943, 986, 994
24 25 25,27 25-27 26
28 29 30
32 33 34 35 36 39 40
;41
774, 838 779,892,1115 1105 1136 015, 635, 1110-11 619 208, 1018, 1025, 1027, 1060 ... 232, .524, 1041 bis, 1216
.
.... ....
.
. .
508, 599, 1042, 1110, 1123, 1136
838, 883, 1088, 1136 542,726,858,897,1118 462, 596 502, 845 845
1166 1119
6:10 969 6:11 257, 517, 647 6:12 993 6:13 483 6:14 694, 1029, 1111 6:16 698,719 6:17 964 6:19 539,542,800,1202 6:20 1103, 1123 6:21 408, 523, 786 6:22 f 482, 956 6:22-25 805 6:23 ... 275,502,643,655,729, 775, 959, 1028, 1032, 1040, 1047 6:24 934 6:24 805, 934 6:25 431,611,933,943,993, 1139, 1214 1084 6:27 6:29 310, 347 6:30 733 6:31 ... 224,367,488,654,1087 6:33 530 6:34 482, 1140 6:36 279,640,670,737, 1044, 1045 6:37 ... 201, 309, .580, 876, 934 6:38 916, 949 6:39 ... 460,487,604,673,1084 6:39 f 284 6:40 ... 460, 487, 673 6is, 1210 613 6:41 6:45 259, 975, 976 6:46 542, 684 6:47 550, 686, 775, 884 6:48 ... 400,477,528,640,1073 6:.52 604, 806 6:53 214,623 6:55 ... 234, 477, 604, Gil bis,
.
. .
...
29, 104, 465, 684, 714,
866, 881, 1119, 1215
6:56
7:1 7:2 7:3 7:3 f 7:4 7:5 7:6 7:9 7:10 7:11
...
318,
884, 953, 1029, 1049 7.33, 806 6is, 922,
:42 :43
1
497,531,1190
957, 958, 969, 973, 984, 1025
....
.
. .
308, 1079, 1085, 1214
562
2.34,
880
. .
399, 416, 705
:2
202, 705, 710 his, 735, 771 255, 263, 697, 768, 785
.
4 5
5,
13
6
7
8 8 9
f
269 368,682,751,1011 1013 his, 1169 212 797 284, 673 438,441,657,944,950,
993, 1042, 1046
806 439 256, 791, 807, 1087, 1218 790 367,546 1198 793
233, 270, 4.3.3, 599, 1023, 1203 484, 1162
715, 716
10
17 his
413, 43S, 033
7:12 7:13 7:15
642
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
7:18
7:18, 21, 23
233, 43S, 548
1287
7.30
9:11
9:11, 28
300
118,413, 438 fcis, 1130, 1203
244, 917
149, 219, 224, 31(), 342,
7:19
9:12
...
602, 993
7:20 7:22 7:24

7:25 7:26 7:28 7:30 7:31 7:32 7:33 7:34 7:35 7:36
707 408
...
27, 15G, 334, 350, 368,
9:12f 9:13 9:14

9:15 9:17 9:18 9:19 9:20 9:21 9:22 9:22 9:23 9:25 9:26 9:28 9:30
9:31 9:33 9:34 9:35 9:36 9:37 9:38 9:39 9:40 9:41 9:42 9:43
1094, 11G2
560,683,722,1205 155, 487, 884, 993 633, 634, 647

1123
491, 596, 775 210, 770
1152 732 620 407, 597 624 184, 318,850, 969 264, 464 ... 436, 603 6is, 883, 1139 300, 740, 741, 963, 974 bis
.
231 29, 215, 714 349, 549, 835, 838, 885, 1213
312,472,948 340,1214
118, 491, 766 465,769,1173
... ...
.
7:37 8:1 8:2 8:3 8:4 8:6 8:7 8:11 8:12 8:14 8:15 8:17 8:18 8:19 8:22 8:23 8:24 8:25 8:28 8:28 8:29 8:31 8:34 8:34 8:35 8:36
8:.37
278,279,488,546,663, 680, 733, 967 171, 297, 546 407,696,708,737,1131 460, 726 266,275,337,1215 508,1028 561, 983 339, 1046-7 529, 614
94, 1004, 1024 bis
412,968, 1091
224, 514, 730
....
f
308, 983, 994, 1055, 1156, 1214
815,870
118
334, 529, 668, 811, 818 775, 874, 961
800
.
.
710, 771, 954, 1163, 1187
190,841, 1060
471, 541, 577, 949
360, 409, 789
....
508
bis,
902 292, 535 259, 807 916, 1027
964,1123 726,1164 630 484, 795, 1033, 1034 663,997,1011 218,1019

661 849 231,850 849, 1084 318 269, 534 145, 269 trr, .534
. . .
9:43, 45
423, 1041 bis 170, 368

f
8:38
9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5
.
747,1028 1036 861, 1186 350,579,1035 727, 956 956 ... 193,956,957,959,961 472, 485, 689 309,573,935,1214 472, 485, 523 742, 957, 962, 1041, 1116, 1123 428 375, 723, 890, 903 268, 529 750
.
9:43-47 9:45 9:47 9:48 9:49 9:50

10:1 10:2 10:4 10:7 10:9 10:10 10:11 10:12 10:13 10:16 10:17 10:18
801,904,968
794, 916
1028 574 314 593 747 747
392,538 318 4\S his, 474, 675 176,276,298,479,480,

656, 661, 916, 1176 bis 597, 842
9:6 9:8 9:9 9:10
473, 738, 1028, 1031, 1044 657, SO!) 1025, 1065

1058, 1065
20
21
...
22
302,476,541,834, 1193 S8S
1288
10:23 f 10:24 10:25 10:26 10:27 10:28 10:29 10:30 10:32 10:33 10:34 10:35 10:35,38 10:36 10:37 10:38 10:38 f 10:39 10:40 10:42 . 10:43 10:45 10:46 10:47 10:51
. .

741 302 780 1182
NEW TESTAMENT
334 430,768,789,931
339 718
. .
.
542,1096 309 427,726,955,961 611,673,727,1020 376, 541, 888 533,539,882 333,356
12:6 12:7 12:8 12:10 12:11 12:12 12:13 12:14
..
. .
234,254,410,655,704 .858,1060,1078,1183 233,786

792, 850, 928, 934 6is,
1158, 1170, 1177
405,501,933,994
805 430,994 750,993,1065 426,478,485,879 715,717 312,356,1214
.
12:17 12:18 12:19 12:20 12:23 12:24 12:26 12:28
597 1046,1082.1171 309,348 669 497,587 700

.
199, 253, 603, 1032 5is
721, 1058, 1065, 1076
11:1 11:2 11:3 11:5 11:6 11:8 11:9 11:10 11:13
510 961 573,632,815 1204 760 933 259,624,971 505,1165 738,874,943

1121
309 198,593 620,786 279

.
.
877, 1024
bis,
1027, 1043, 1045, 1190

6is,
11:14 11:15 11:16 11:18 11:19 11:20 11:21 11:22 11:23 11:24 11:25 11:28 11:29 11:31 11:32
12:1 12:2 12:4 12:5
854, 913, 939
940,
943,1170,1173,1215
787 315,431,993,1216 786,838,995 392, 922, 958, 973 bis 362 473 500
880, 1048 6ts
12:30 12:30,33 12:31 12:32 12:33 12:34 12:37 12:38 12:38 f 12:38-40 12:40 12:41 12:41-44 12:42 12:43 13:1 13:2 13:3 13:4,7 13:5 13:9 13:10 13:11 13:13 13:14 13:15 13:16
.
.
410,516,669,740, 1042,1123 774 774 667, 688

1187
789, 890, 1058, 1081
....
297,546,551 660,774,775 441,589,1106

1199 458
.
....
.
732,1023,1029 150,188,351,958,972 292,740,916,999

1177 613
295, 443, 551, 887, 1029, 1034, 1203
13:19 13:20 13:21 13:22 13:24-27 13:25

. .
233,413,1106,1130 839,844,883,884,1032 838 411,674,713 700 413,741 638, 960, 962, 1174, 1175 224,593,644,930 972 751,995,996 593,603 535 233,709,738,768 859.889 320,429 308,599 453,525,536,547,548, 586,593,645 547, 710, 715 6is, 722, 731 424,584,752,818,1015 1170 1075,891 873
.
.
353, 375, 782, 889,
190,308,409 519,614
149, 551
.
. .
213,394,694,696,1213
13:27 13:28 13:29
1116,1180 599,775 232, 341, 350, 614, 827

601
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
13:30 13:31 13:33 13:34 13:35 13:36 13:37 14:1 14:2 14:3
14:4 14:5
14:6 14:7 14:8 14:9
1289
526 550,625,1187,1203 485,529 314,548,625,643,807 367,607,883
873,975 873
1177 993,1203 185,495,1188 987 720 408, 590 988 .253,339,342,499,512,
607, 1127, 1131
14:48
14:4!)
....
. .
14:51 14:54 14:55 14:58
14:60
14:61 14:63 14:64 14:65 14:67 14:68 14:70 14:71 14:72
1042 550,648,738,775,792,
917, 1158 695, 917
212 1036
739,916,1176
. .
.
341, 368, 511, 538, 541,
642.666.674 484,564 299,473,879 551,845,1120

593 969 675,983 309 1036
.
391,530,617 118, 313 620,1185,1189 612 317,371

. .
509
bis,
550, 800, 861 bis,
1091, 1109, 1127
14:9,14 14:10 14:10f

14:11 14:12 14:13 14:14
522,980,989 333,356,499,573,873
15:1 15:3 15:4 15:5 15:6
234 bis, 442, 737, 955, 960, 969, 989, 1045, 1049, 1177
. . . . . .
14:15 14:19
185,260,538 105,282,450,460,555, 568.606.675
14:20 14:21 14:24 14:25 14:27 14:28

14:29 14:30 14:31 14:32 14:34 14:35 14:36 14:37 14:38 14:40 14:41
14:42 14:43 14-44 14:45 14:46 14:47
231,525,560 432,1016,1169 213,618,629,632 708,854,930

538
. .
355, 681, 756, 871, 1070, 1074, 1083 394, lOOS, 1026 bis, 1203 522 bis, 550, 873, 1091
529,819,850,875, 1019,1026 976 856 603,883,993

.
29, 186, 461, 465, 561, 737
.... ....
. . .
426,1103 933,994,1153,1170 319,339,1183,1213 391,392,470,487,577,

800, 842, 866
312,931 526,786 .... 679, 905 606 339,684,1213 292,564,684,742,805, 810,828,1110
15:6-10 15:7 ... 255, 339, 366, 727, 841 1205 15:9 366,841,1029 15:10 255 15:11 484,718,720 15:12 232,411,505,643,712 15:16 318,483 15:17 465,898 15:18 203, 542 15:20 183, 791 15:21 259, 411, 483, 714 15:22 311,695,885 15:23 737,916,1044,1176 15:24 793,1183 15:25 231,1193 15:29 307,802,861,1113 15:30 308,856 15:32 793 f., 794 15:33 15:34 29, 205, 261, 714 320 15:35 430,742,931 15:36 300 bis, 548, 550 15:38 597,649,652,697 15:39 297, 300, 501, 780 15:40 529 15:41 965,1139 15:42 430. 845, 916, 965, 15:44 1024, 1043, 1045, 1177 579,760 15:45 542 15:46 501, 1043 bis 15:47
. .
787,802,812 367,511,884 292,917 473,484 291,608,710,884, 922,1154 905

'
....
1290
16:1 16:2 16:3 16:4 16:5 16:6 16:9 16:10ff 16:12 16:18 16:19 16:20

501
523, 602, 672 596, 597 1035, 1041, 1190 408, 485 817, 842 578, 672, 905
NEW TESTAMENT
255 506 417, 660 422, 1199 235,398,699,992, 998, 1076 615, 689 242, 422 1199 532, 605, 1212 355, 547, 560 594 590, 793 837 510 508, 1001, 1086 535, 562, 628 1039, 1052, 1076 1061 530, 610, 611 480, 523, 605, 885 391 bis, 1187
1:40
1:41 1:42
1:42-45 1:43
708 293, 749, 792 208,472, 1026 561,1074 891,1127
Luke
1:1
1:1-4
1:2 1:3
367, 841, 965, 1154 107, 121, 418,
1208 308, 347, 687, 1214

bis,
.
432
221, 244, 279, 392, 463, 464, 670, 771, 1039 bis, 1084, 1085
1:4 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:16
1:17 1:18 1:20
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
719
292, 395, 743, 760 505, 641 523, 587, 906, 963
. .
148, 505, 640, 658, 979, 1072
.231,509,1060,1068,1113 888
418, 560, 602 480, 964
356,357,541,871
f
889
...
f
270, 505, 642, 871, 933
1:16, 17
889 679 255,477, 562,683 739
21 22
. 208, 353, 594, 714, 717, 721, 728, 889, 960, 963, 975, 1173 .260 bis, 532, 979, 1073, 1092
....
582, 680, 888, 1029
1 1
1
1
1 1
1 1
23 24 25 27 28 29 30 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
658 351, 617, 1217 224, 566, 721, 792 364 611 741, 9.38, 1031, 1044, 1045 614, 647 480, 1202 602 1159
409, 560, 764, 1181 256, 267, 272, 275, 701, 790
....
.
752 940 255, 652, 708
1:45 1:46-55 1:46-56 1:47 1:48 1:50 1:51 1:51-53 1:53 1:54 1 56 1:57 1:57, 74 1:58 1:59 1:60 1:61 234,726 1 62 683, 739, 766, 884, 890, 938, 940, 1021, 1025, 1031 bis, 1046 1:63 457 1:64 297, 550, 885, 1127, 1201, 1213 1:66 409, 736, 739 1:67-79 422 1:68-79 1199 1:70 107, 762, 783 1:71 649 1:72 509, 1001, 1086 1:73 475, 479, 488, 718 1:74 540, 1039, 1076 470, 527 1:75 1:76 560, 678, 694, 1149, 1185 1001 1:76, 78 f 990 1:76 f., 79 1 79 231 bis, 340, 349, 371, 1086 497 1:80 2:1 .. . 185, 417, 561, 708, 793, 809, 1076, 1086 2:2 82, 510, 657, 669, 701, 704, 790 417, 746 2:3 2:4 ... . 417, 578, 72S bis, 729, 966, 1039, 1071 2:5 .. 216, 364, 804, 807, 809, 1080, 1214 1061, 1076 2:6 541, 1210 2:7 376, 477 2:8 542 2:9 538 2:10
: :
.
....
....
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
2:11 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:18 2:19 2:20 2:21
1291
474, 749 Ms, 1181
350 701
.
272,404,407,412,655,656
242, 792
Ws
393,714,1149 759,760,861,1109,1113 532,619,838 828,884 429,716,717 457,480,621,858,978,

1039, 1075, 1076, 1091
2:22 2:22,24 2:24 2:25 2:26

.
491,561,609,1088
990
204, 1088 395, 602, 770
362, 816, 858, 977 bis, 1030, 1036, 1047, 1080, 1084,
. .
2:27
1085,1091 .47,490,504,619,858,979, 1039, 1065, 1073, 1081, 1109 473, 593 2:28 2:29-32 1199 210 2:32 2:33 405, 412, 605 2:35 687, 986 723 2:36 2:37 .232,495,518,559,576, 680 bis 2:38 523, 541, 574, 686 2:39 766,800,841 2:41 ... 224,279,523,608,884 497 2:42 2:44 269, 469, 479, 496, 1036, 1060 491 2:46 883 2:47 2:48 402, 879 2:49 ... 502,586,739,767,884, 1034, 1176 680 bis 2:50 828, 884 2:51 3:1 189,255,510,523,788,793 255 bis, 501, 603 3:2 458, 595, 652 3:5 772 3:6 853 3:8 870 3:9 850,916,934, 1176 3:10 213, 996 3:12 187,667 3:13 3:14 ... 409,532,541,582,626, 853, 1173 939, 910, 9S8, 996, 3:15 1031, 1044, 1015, 1177 355,521,722,828 3:16 200,503 3:17
.
.
. .
3:18 3:19 3:20 3:21 3:22 3:23 3:23-38 3:24 3:25 f 3:27 3:29 3:32 3:33 3:35 3:36 3:37 4:1 4:3 4:6 4:7 4:9 4:10 4:11 4:13
258,512,619,717,719
60'} his
371,771,1073
795, 837 6i
1102
236,761 215,263 215 214,236 215, 236 214 255 236 236
184
396, 880, 1185
781, 1009 bis
701,771
234, 540
....
.
834 582,642,762,1068 762
5:1
5:1, 12
375,615 393
1292

1183 559 597, 733
5:1, 12, 17
6:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:6 5:7

5:9 5:10 5:12 5:14 5:17 5:19
6:24 6:25
1193
333, 355, 459, 466,
1107, 1193
.. ..
431,860,891,1102,1120
339, 582, 604, 774, 1186 212, 318, 885, 1219 feis
.
... ...
529,616,745,748,769, 1039, 1068
...
.
...
433,628,717 353,504,528,765,889 334,792,817,849 442,537 323,393,788,888,906 494,506,550,561,636,
652, 740 feis, 1029, 1044, 1202 5:20 342, 1216 315 5:20,23 703 5:21 502 5:22 896 5:23 434,907,1203 5:24 642 5:25 845 5:26 263,612 5:27 263 5:29 611 5:30 844 5:32 478 5:33 264,978,1085 5:34 5:36 560,1025,1027,1182 356 5:37 5:38 157, 373, 486, 1097 6:1 .. 168, 393, 533, 560, 1043 235,425 6:2 6:3 300,726,971 1045 6:3 f 6:4 ... 714,1032,1039,1084 6:6 393,684,748 1103 6:7 6:8 680, 800 6:11 327,854,885,938,
.
. .
6:26 6:27 6:27 f 6:28 6:29 6:30 6:32 6:32 f 6:33 6:34 6:35 6:37 6:37 f 6:38 6:39 6:40 6:41 6:42 6:45 6:47 6:48
208 473 428 473

bis
518
855,890,1214 1019,1026 740 850,1019 .... 576,720,721,1010 223,476 930,1164,1182 948 184,213,718,828,1136
. .
.
917
tcr,
1157, 1175
520, 1105
691
...
312, 597 6ts, 686, 932,
980, 1138, 1139, 1214 676, 762, 763
436 .212,214,232,256,365,530,
551, 779, 909, 1071, 1081, 1091, 1105, 1136
....
.
6:48 6:49 7:1 7:3 7:4 7:5 7:6 7:7 7:8 7:9 7:11 7:12
7:16 7:17 7:18 7:19
f
. .
712
212,648,785,1105,1114
.
...
546, 841, 965

'.
6is,
971
582,995 872, 884, 961, 996 367,724 518,807

1023
...
767,856,865 290,474 523,530,547,660,774 232,536,537,680,

1116, 1183
940bis, 1021
842 586
6:12
...
6:13 6:13-17 6:14 6:16 6:17 6:17 f 6:18, 20f 6:20 6:21 6:22 6:23 6:24
.500,582,1010,1049, 1058,1085 477,577

428 480
...
194,258,742 292,1108,1116,1118
748 818 1080 857 364,816 872,960 234,504 535 778,792,1107 519,1189 594 837
7:19f
7:21 7:24
501,767 28,273,613
714 910 593,681,683,770 333,356 641,834 208,523,687,855 1107, 1187
7:24f 7:25 7:27 7:28 7:30 7:32 7:33 7:34 7:35
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
:36 :37 :38
:
1293
607 339 339 1043, 1045 1186 203, 342, 1214 608, 733 587, 891, 1073 697 232, 680, 827 828
742
586, 1035
...
44
525, 533
bis,
645, 799
38,
262
:39
...
.292,727,736,741
bis,
:40
:41
...
887, 923, 1012, 1014, 1048, 1049, 1177 742, 1087 201, 668, 749, 750, 920
515, 737
:42
:42f
:43
:43,
....
47
:44 :45 :47 :49

:
668 393,659, 1034, 1048 720 701, 1121
:33 :34 :35 :36 :37 :38 :39 :40 :41 :42 :43 :45 :46 :47 :48 :49 :50 :51 :52 :53 :54 :55 8 :56
....
107,
367, 1105, 1115
....
... ...
234, 742, 910, 1035, 1042, 1103, 1109, 1118, 1123
...
.
581,653,717,978,1102 647,722,774,777,962,966
703, 724, 735, 961 587, 608
.718,721,726615,966, 1045 bis, 1032 264, 462
742,827,867,890,895
:1,
22
:2 :3 :4
:
680 743 214, 215, 599, 749 313, 505, 583

. .
107, 478, 695, 990, 1072,
1073, 1153
:5f
:5f :6
:6-8
:7 :8
:9
:10 8 :11
:12 13 :14 14 :15
: :
16
.........
.
.
8 :17
:18 :19 :20
:21
:22 :23 :24 :25 :26 :27 :28 :29
749 1152 966 350, 949 216, 341, 644 284, 777 736, 938, 1031 993 704 233 625, 793 1164 704, 728 176, 1182, 1201 318, 634 726, 764, 1001, 1158, 1164 957,962, 1170 530 349, 881 700, 870 675 834, 838, 884, 885 787, 879, 1200 541, 697,917, 1176 573, 6.38, 639, 728
527, 528,
9 :1 9 :3 9 :3-5 9 :5 9 :6 9 :7 9 :7f 9 :8 9 :9 9 :9, 13 9 :10 9 :11 9 :12 9 :13

.
:
549 752 .... 475, 809,853, 1166 341,827, 838 264, 465, 769 1049, 1085 1109 427 571, 944, 1072, 1092, 1189 1047 437, 733 299, 608 506, 729, 1071, 1109
743, 750, 1(M9 233, 636, 747, 1218
710 1186 691, 733 367 800

.
.
201, 666, 751, 762, 1016,
1017, 1025, 1172
... ...
f
718,809,841
234, 463, 464, 519
29 30 31
212,262,318,392,527, 581, 827, 905 543 244, 404 252
9 14 9 14, 18 9 :15 9 :16 9 :18 9 :18, 20 9 :18f 9 19 9 -.22 9 :23 9 :24 9 :25 9 :27 9 :28 9 :29 9 :30
: :
482, 487
968 771
561
371, 375,431, 891
1036 1035 695, 1047 579, 762 681, 688, 690, 811 641. 688, 689, 698 816, 1023, 1129 473 107, 434, 460 163, 748, 1073 957
1294

10:19
.
9:31 343,884 9:32 529,533,582,628,766 9:33 .720,726,750,931,1030,1048 299 9:33,41 885 9:34 9:35 507,818 9:36 337,364,657,680,720, 776, 834, 897 bis 9:37 393, 529, 774 232,541 9:38 231,296 9:39 993 9:40 9:41 264,463,464,623 212,818 9:42 537,716,717 9:43 9:43-45 883 9:45 509,812,998,1212 9:46 424,491,585,726,739,
. . .
.875,890,1061,1076, 1165,1175
965, 1035, 1173 6is
10:20 10:21 10:22 10:24 10:25 10:26 10:27 10:28 10:29 10:29,36 10:30 10:31 10:31 f 10:34 10:34f. 10:35
.
.
464,524,709,764,788
845, 959
339,678,843 743,796 423,917,1176

765 949
.... ....
'.
234,547,1182 646,765 521,524,542,1113

165
565,572,613 508,691,817,1220
766, 890, 938, 940, 1021,. 1031, 1044, 1046,' 1176
219 107,243,291,602,681, 688, 729, 959 bis, 964, 1039

. .
.
9:47 9:48 9:49
614
9:50 9:51
9:52
668,698,954 611,838,864,885,892, 964, 1030, 1034, 1041, 1048 ... 607, 720, 956, 962, 1158 .... 349,426,951,1002, 1042, 1068, 1183 621,967,987,990,
.
.
.
10:36 10:37 10:38 10:39 10:40
501,561,585,593,908 611,802 633,743 289,613,696

529, 560, 565, 573, 618, 627, 816, 1087, 1090
10:40f
10:41 10:42 11:1
.
620 816
518,559,562,728,810,819
371, 375, 429, 742 bis, 891, 952, 1036, 1042, 1181
1089, 1091
...
.
.
9:54 9:55 9:56 9:57 9:58 9:59 9:60 9:61 9:62

10:1
...
561
bis,
858, 878, 935, 1046, 1080

731, 740 6is
748 969
11:2-4 11:3 11:4

11:5 11:6 11:7 11:8
852 159,487,766,855,1214 315,335,541,744,773,

853, 880, 963, 1216
969,1044,1045 1039,1084 582,1201

536, 593
... ... ...

. . .
185,738,875,930,934 720,726,960,965,996 330,340,362,593,853,

244, 518, 733
1097
947, 1170 feis, 1012,

bis,
....
673
10:3 10:4 10:5 10:6
284,299,571,655, bis, 749, 884, 969 644 608,853,1172

537
1026,1027,1070,1071,
1148
1149 1213
11:9
357, 1213
11:9, lOf
10:6,8,10
10:7 10:8
10:11 10:15 10:16 10:17 10:18
.
334,357,394,561,819, 874,948,1025 849
408,561,615,709,757 959,1115
437
11:11 11:11 11:13 11:14 11:15
436,490,573,738
f
. . .
439
.
548,599,1045,1204
1119 515 749 750
ll:15f
11:17 11:18 11:20 11:21 11:22 11:24 11:26
10:8, 10
.......
401,539,699 643,678,870
418 543,1181
750,891,1081
1008
843,864,883,910,1041,
1042, 1114, 1116, 1123 bis
690,779 .231,366,580,904,971,1181 969 775
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
11:27 11:2R 11:29 11:30 11:32 11:33 11:34 11:35 11:38 11:39 11:40 11:42
1295
669, 670, S70, 1012,
219
1151
12:26 12:28 12:29 12:30 12:31 12:32 12:33 12:34 12:35
....
1160
6i.s
500 1190 963
184,352,1212 609 419,705

1187
.
.
231,764 284,971 995,1045,1169 532,621,808,965,1035 399,459,505,642,643,786 547,642 315,477,499,500,800,

.
231,261,465 .215,504,1100,1109, 1137,1172

969 313,314,328,330,360, 375,890,908
597, 1024, 1044, 1045, 1110, 1132
919, 1171, 1193
12:36 12:38 12:39 12:40 12:41 12:42 12:43 12:44 12:46 12:47
11:44 11:45 11:46 11:47 11:48 11:49 11:50 11:51 11:52 11:54 12:1
642 473 484, 751 1153 529, 1153 6zs, 1190 1181, 1202
....
....
158,523,794,1018,
1025, 1182
471,740,922,1014
718 1180 604 891
213,796
789 265 474 231,577,587,623,696,
604,866
714, 722, 727, 801, 818, 952, 953, 1091.1192
12:2 12:3 12:4 12:5
627, 818 6is, 1158 696,722,724,818,952,962 472,577,704,752,935,

. .
1046, 1087, 1213 232,560,818,858,950, 979,1046,1074,1092 751,818,917,1157,1182 12:6 818 Ms, 1186 12:7 108,193,459,475,524,541, 12:8 588, 684, 955, 956, 957 bis, 959 1114 12:8 f 439 12-8,10 642,812,818,819 12:9 436,459,473,594,718, 12:10 728,818,957 334,561,739,787,1170 12:11 523,709,726,776 12:12 742 /ns 12:13 480 12-14 472,476,543,598,772, 12:15
. .
. .
.
.
718 479,485,626,859, 1112, 1114 653 12:47 f 12:48 436,477,485,659,718,720 12:49 302,739,917,1176,1193 302,729 12:50 1187, 1188 12:51 361,375,907 12:52 605 12:52 f 1180 12:54,57 109,686 12:57 12:58 559,909,967,988,1062,
.
1079, 1081, 1147
12:59 13:1 13:2 13:3 13:4 13:6
775,976 290,317,611,613,686
6is,
616
661, 801, 1029, 1175
849
...
. . .
253, 283, 616 Ws, 724
906,1115,1117
1128
739
bis,
13:6f
13:7 13:8 13:9
879, 977, 1115
528,620.976 208,394,594,874,924,
1110 627,1119 264,518 367,770 885 920,965 746
802, 807, 933, 949, 979, 994, 1073, 1183 Ws

12- 16
942, 1018, 1023, 1025, 1203
12:18 12:19 12:20

12-21 12:23 12:24
349 699
.
594,902 264,392,406,463,464, 523,-541,816,820 689 411,516,6.54,917 606,1035,1183
13:10 13:11 13:12 13:13 13:13,17 13:14 13:15 13:16 13:17

.
283,460,518,887,919 542,605
1296
13:19 13:19,21 13:21 13:23 13:24 13:25 13:25,26 13:27 13:28
.
A
. .

458,595,596,690,791
715 656 916,1024 434
15:2 15:4
15:4, 7
529,697 976 213

738
188,319,800,978 324
.
.
15:4,8 15:6 15:6,9

15:7 15:9 15:11 15:13 15:14 15:15 15:16 15:17 15:18 15:19
562,563,786,805
1035
559, 773 188,324,339,348,876, 972, 1218 13:29 254 13:32 653,1202 13:33 .... 393,652,1198,1202 13:34 204,219,267,348,635, 689, 718 972 6zs, 976 13:35 14:1 613,811 743 14:2, IG 787 14:3 14:4f 818 14:6 574 14:7 477,800,811,883, 1032,1202 14:8 907 988 14:8 f 14:9 360,910 14:10 186,308,328,338,561, 910, 984, 988 1108 14:11 14:12 988 192 14:13(21) 14:14 574 14:15 356 262 14:16 14:17 186,65? 14:18 109,360,375,480,550, 653, 1108, 1122 1110 14:18f 809 14:18,19 14:18-20 842 14:19 818 14:19f 748,902 14:21 427, 787 bis 14:23 789 14:24 473,506 14:25 774 14:26 688,789,1012 14:27 1159 14:28 1024,1045 14:29 1173 14:30 770,1102 14:31 281,531,589,748,1045 14:32 546 14:33 515,720,744,1158 14:34 269,889,934 14:35 535
. . . .
. . .
661,1188 787, 805 743 771,1163
253,410,608,680 675,817 208,716,883,885 510,532,741,828

594, 874 658,1076,1080
15:19,21 15:20
15:21 15:22 15:24 15:25 15:26
1061
1110 845
483,649 701,904,906 507,792 407,411,736,890,

938
6ts,
940, 1031
15:27 15:29 15:30 15:31 15:32 16:1 16:2

16:3
16:3f. 16:4 16:5
881,885,893 470,477,879
697 685
834,842,887 529,652,697,703,1140 .... 312,736,916,1164,
...
.
1176, 1214 .480,483,559,600,1060, 1078, 1102 935
...
.
. .
308,518,827,842,893
201 499
16:6 16:8 16:9 16:10 16:11 16:11,31 16:12 16:13 16:14 16:15 16:16 16:17 16:18 16:19 16:20 16:21 16:22 16:23 16:24
496,633,651,667,779 254,510,598
658, 660, 782 bis
1009 1012 288 bis
251,508,748 472,705,778
1108
221,645,975
579
186,921 bis, 910
485,810,883 361,364,366,905
1186 1085
408,502,586
495, 775
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
16:25 16:26 16:26 16:27 16:27 16:28 16:29 16:30 16:31 17:1
341, 696 548, 561, 800, 896
ftis,
1297
342, 540, 605, 778, 1107 748, 990, 1080, 1087-8,
18: 9
18: 10
28
986 1046 1046 986 268

791
1088
18:11
12 13 14 18 22
502, 697, 700, 965, 1035, 1159, 1188
505, 646, 769, 880 231, 561, 756, 858 661, 703, 708
819,871,1210
. .
393, 720, 721, 996, 1002, 1040, 1059, 1060, 1068,
675 541
192, 1058-
1094, 1171
17:2
17:3 17:4 17:5 17:6 17:7 17:8
17:9 f 17:10 17:11
17:12 17:14 17:15 17:17 17:21 17:22 17:23 17:24 17:25 17:27 17:28 17:29 17:29 17:30 17:31
17:32 17:33 17:34 17:35 17:37 18:1
18:2 18:4 18:5
212,472,485,560,661, 992, 997 ... 477,542,689,802,1202 505, 769 310, 948 .... 887, 921, 1015, 1022 338 340,738,869,976, 1045, 1215 349 728,930 550,560,562,565,581, 648, 791, 1042 367 1042
.
...
25 29 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35
234 310 641, 726 284, 673 539 1190 762

751 743
890, 938, 1022, 1031
bis,
36
18 :37 18 :38 18 :39 18 :41 19 1 19 :2 19 3 19 :4
: :
1042, 1044
1035
463, 464
532, 664,
800
924, 935 472, 476, 563

162, 457, 679, 723 423, 488, 580, 738
.
611
917,1157
505,J641
186, 201, 472, 476,
494
?)is,
....
....
224 392 652,792,1202 579 717, 884, 975 968 791 522, 718 208, 968 308,440,442,708,724, 957, 959 506 193, 957 748, 749 602, 889 969 626,997,1003,1049, 1060, 1075 743 688, 1012, 1026. 1027 201,244,1039, 1148 hi.% 1149
496, 651
547, 652, 983, 1202, 1205
19 :5 19 :5f 19 :7 19 :8 19 :8f 19 9 19 :10 19 :11 19 :12 19: 13 19: 14 19::15

: :
...
328,861,1127 1109, 1127 614 199,275,502,742,870, 880, 892 1008 963 411,764, 1109
551, 640, 800, 1071, 1126, 1127
....
272
690, 976, 978
879, 886, 919

.
.
107,308, 737,841, 1044, 1048, 1049, 1214
19: l(y-20
19: 17 19:
19:
. . .
749
.
.
20
299, 330, 375, 890, 950 361, 375, 776, 906 bis
19: 21
997
922, 1014, 1023
.
. .
23 19: 29
19:
154
bis,
18:6 18:7 18:7 18:8
232, 259, 267, 458, 780
495,930,934, 1158 802 589,916, 1176
30
35
19: 31 19:
644 850 212, 799
1298
19:36 19:37

318 154,412,619,623, 624 bis, 719
.
NEW TESTAMENT
597
19:40
19:41 19:42
325, 333 6is, 356, 361, 801,
873,907,1008,1010,1217
. . .
19:43 19:46 19:47 19:48 20:1 20:2 20:3 20:4 20:6 20:7 20:9 20:10 20:11
834 483,523,793,834,835, 842, 1023, 1203 617,873,907,1183 480 470,487,550,888 190,317,766,771, 1127, 1217 523
21:18 21:19 21:20 21:22 21:23 21:24 21:25 21:26 21:27 21:33 21:34
681,683,871
1041
1061,1076,1088 216,870 534,889,974 262, 419, 794 5is, 795 566 876 873 186,272,400,542,550,
657, 708, 996, 1213
feis
118 1180 117 163, 903, 1030, 1040, 1081 1036, 1038, 1171 308, 470
.
324,519,522,872,984
20:llf 20:12 20:14 20:15 20:16 20:17 20:19 20:20
20:22 20:24 20:25 20:26 20:27 20:28 20:34 20:35 20:35! 20:36 20:37 20:40 20:42 20:47 21:2 21:5 21:6 21:8 21:11 21:12 21:12,17 21:14 .... 21:15 21:16 21:17
.
748 551,1078 94,822, 1078 497 876 939 bis, 940 718,870 626,1183 481,508,787,990,1036, 1039, 1040, 1089, 1177 1158 393 425,767,1177 508,573 458,1094,1171 849 150 509,598,782 1189 879 253,1034 1162 199,686 564 743 153,187 416,439,459,565,601,960 932-3,996 219,1201 622
641
21:36 21:37 22:1 22:2 22:2-4 22:4 22:5 22:6 22:6,35 22:7 22:10 22:11 22:12 22:14 22:15 22:16 22:18 22:19 22:20 22:22 22:23
.
.
154
6is,
476 232, 267, 458, 470
416,498
427, 766, 985
1031
766, 1031, 1046
350
.
517, 1061, 1068, 1076
639 887
.
333,356 934,955,969,1045,1205 185,260

219
.
531
bis,
621, 978, 1075
976 577 685 213, 1060, 1074 1152, 1153 427,430,739,766,890,

938, 1031 bis
22:23 f 22:23,24 22:24 22:25 22:26 22:26 f 22:27 22:28 22:29 22:30 22:32 22:33 22:34
.
1046 739 766,938,1031 510 1214 1140 737 1108 581 232,1216 300,1139 659 548, 90S, 976 bis, 977 bis,
334,818,1094,1171
573 599
375,636,878,889
22:35 22:37 22:38 22:40 22:41 22:42 22:44 22:45
1036,1094,1171 219,750 401,611,766,818

411
603,853 469,559 193,339,1023,1203,1214 231,339 580
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
22:47 22:48 22:49
477 311,533 374,450,502,590,620,
23:5',
1299
....
.
876, 878, 916, 934, 935, 1024 bis, 1109, 1118, 1215
22:50 22:52 22:53 22:54 22:55 22:56 22:58 22:59 22:61 22:63 22:65 22:66 22:67 22:70 22:71 23:1 23:2
23:4 23:5 23:6 23:7 23:8 23:11 23:12
150,675,742
611 704 559
24:1 24:2 24:3 24:4 24:5 24:6 24:7
720,720,1032,1043 274,495,522,672,718,841
575 225 267 611 1032 649,1049
617,644
697
612,653,678 550,697,743,746 483,509,873,1091

628 1130 1179 1020
678,695,915 519,649 404,412
....
....
339, 1039, 1041 6is,
1094, 1123
786
413,548,1126,1203
23:14 23:15 .534,542,794,820,903,1186 23:18 170,348,530,760 23:19 323,375,860 23:21 695 23:23 805 23:20 517,045 23:28 475,1173 23:29 219 23:30 338 23:31 195, 587, 588, 929, 934 23:32 749 23:33 696,792,794 23:35,37 1009 23:38 159,604 23:39 409 23:41 720 23:44 1183 23:45 775 23:47 700 23:49 366, 560, 778 23:50 176 23:51 434,529 23:53 316,375,906,1165 23:54 493,885
.
916 561 597, 884 483,628 220,289,405,025,686, 690, 888, 1103, 1120 .511,560,720,750,966,1141
. .
24:10 214,501,767 24:11 404,540 24:13 263,424,469 24:14 529,625,883 24:14,25,31 680 24:16 .... 518,765,1061,1171 24:17 .572,625,703,735,835,1202 24:18 172,235,549,656, 657, 1183 24:19 399, 419, 651, 735, 740 bis 24:19f 1046 24:20 731,732,985,1045 24:21 216,244,392,424,028, 679,701,771,884,978,1029, 1035, 1148 bis, 1185, 1186 24:22 550,057,1186 24:23 .489,1028,1038,1039 24:24 968 24:25 487,658,659,716,
. . .
. .
1061, 1077
24:20 24:27 24:28 24:29 24:30 24:31 24:32 24:34 24:35 24:38 24:39 24:41 24:42 24:45 24:46 24:47
887,919 367,566 297, 298 625,765,792,1065,1088

1039 575,682,1213 367,888,974,1212 334, 842, 1213 ?)is 534,587,726 587,739 203,200,1041 580, 743
159
315, 1036, 1212 858, 1080 bis, 1081
24:50 24:51
413,491,535,946, 1126,1203 643,683,1205 561,581,1072
John
1:1
...
135,273,579,623,625,
915 441,028 700 91S
758, 761, 767, 792, 794, 795, 883
1:1-18 1:2 1:2,7 1:2-8
1300
1:3 1:4 1:5 1:6

751
NEW TESTAMENT
.
.
.
243,768,801
1183
416,434,460,534,615, 707, 723 583,703,707,850 1:7 915 1:7 f 619 1:7,22 505,707,708,1187 1:8 777,891,1118 1:9 762 1:9,41 1:10 834 1:11 502, 691 ier, 767, 834, 1157 563 1:11 f 1:12 339,732,778,834,1076, 1107, 1217 1:13 408, 534 1:14 ... 275,276,394,407,413, 505, 767, 794, 818, 829 er, 1204 1:15 ... 280,434,438,473,484,
.
.
...
1:41 (42) 215 1:42 255,376,411,678,835 1:44 578,598 1:45 578,782 1:46 428, 478, 720, 743, 875, 949 1:46 f 598 1:47 1100 1:48 621, 634, 635 bis, 765,
. . . .
1:48 1:49 1:50

1:51 1:52 2:1 2:2
2:2,12 2:3 2:4

2:5 2:5-8 2:6 2:7 2:9
516, 640, 662, 670, 801, 887,
1200 364,536,586,593,614, 656,707,708,829,893,896,906 1:19 704,905,915 l:19ff 897 1:20 1205 918 1:20 f 1:21 233,768 1157 1:21 f 1:24 905 1:25 1012, 1135, 1160 6is, 1165 1:28 505,550,644,720 1:27 503, 658 6is, 961, 992, 996 1:28 970 1:29 391,1193 1:29-42 868 1:30 234,629,632,677 1:31 904 1:32 408, 440, 602, 792, 893, 897 896 1:32,34,41 1:33 440,677,707,724 1:34 893 1:35 366
l:15ff 1:16 1:17 1:18
...
...
895,896,1111 964,1034 407,505,574,829,1181
858,1075 978 769,781,1126 277,396,476,634,871, 1028,1029,1123 423 364 762 428 405 700 539,736 243,729 855 571,906 510 474,506,507,841
1184
2:9,23 2:10
2:11 2:12 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:18 2:19 2:20
. .
218,277,643,678 216,701-2,704,771,781 470,680,681,686 265,427

427 855,950 500,903,1029 311,433,964,1034 586,856,948,1023 283,365,367,495,523, 527,833,1183 230 399,498,707,708
715
bis
...
2:20,27
2:21 2:22 2:23 2:24
523,760 226,287,476,686,688,
689, 765, 885, 966, 1071, 1186
2:24f
2:25 3:1 3:2 3:3 ff
.
1:37 1:38
1:39
1
:
40
1042 411,416,433,465,875, 1044, 1123 299,470,714,813,871, 949, 1044 519, 614 bis, 762, 779, 785
. .
584 1029,1043,1176 .395,434,460,599,782,1185 611 6is, 793 857

751 795 1200 852 bis 299, 342, 548 bis, 800, 1177 678,768,1175
1:41
416, 433, 549, 657, 691 bis, 714, 762 bis, 770, 795, 881,
.
3:3,5 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:10

3:11 3:12
893,897
407,653 654,1012,1160
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
3:13 3:14 3:16
1301
...
600,859,1183 968 135,437,753,758,762, 770, 1000 /s

1166
4:22 4:23
4:25
.4:26
3:17 3:18
3:19 3:19 3:21 3:22 3:23 3:24 3:25 3:26 3:27 3:28 3:29 3:30 3:31 3:32 3:33 3:34 3:35 3:36 4:1
f
....
...
897,898,963,1028,
1159, 1169
4:27
426,663,666,699,789,
964, 1033, 1183, 1184
1191
364,795 438, 884

392 905
4:28 4:29 4:31 4:33

4:33,
433,515,598,610
539
....
857,907,1019,1162
94, 531 bis,
4:34 4:35 4:36 4:37 4:39

4:39,
707 550
218,707,708 243,598
S59
bis,
901 his 1034
4:1-3 4:2 ...

4:2, 12
597,1163 585,643 540,879 438,666,684,841, 1034,1049 434 1129,1148,1149,1154 680
4:40 4:41 4:42 4:43 4:44 4:45 4:46 4:47 4:49 4:50 4:51 4:52 4:53
5:1 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:6 5:7 5:8 5:9 5:11
233,429,678,713,1159 234,400,470,540,566, 710,1186 ........ 215,707,708 778 424,604,611,756,791, 1154, 1188 433 251, 917, 949, 1167, 1175 587,645,884 292,743,917,1168 35 1168 685,992,1076 422,626,678,870,1180 299,659 786 1123 53 709 762 1179 686 762 691,1191 1128 . 970 368,597,884 977,1091 715 6rs, 841 1212 206,470,546,665,834
. .
566, 680, 721
4:4 4:5 4:6
393,582,887,919 428,505,547,596,646,715
.
782
...
104,169,524,604,760
...
4:7 4:7ff
367,549,599,604,778, 909 6is, 1116, 1146 598

4,34
4:7,9
4:8 4:9 4:10
343 905 ... 204, 371, 482, 530, 678 ... 418, a.'56, 678, 922 6is, 1014, 1046, 1069, 1105, 1110 4:11 394, 656 /m-, 777, 778, 1105, 1106,1166,1179,1182,1185,1189 667 4:12 599 4:13 4:14 519,J20, 716, 813, 889, 1212 4:15 201,985, 1088 299 4:16 856 4:16,35 699 4:17 4:18 ... 657,720,790,833,843 426,842-3,1183 4:20 919 4:20,24 1159 4:21 971 4:21,23
.
.
427 291,585,710,719,1149 892,1115 428,879 .. 879,960,978,1001,1068 681, 855 bis, 950 681, 838, 855, 890 ... 258,274,480,481,656, 695, 707, 769, 855 275 5:11,15 5:12 778,1114 841 5:13 5:14 234,890 5:15 ..836,859,1035,1112,1114 5:17 681 5:18 .... 396,884,1060,1166 5:19 ... 190, 707, 70S, lOlS /)w,
...
1094, 1181
5:20 5:21 5:23 5:24 5:24,38
188,311,325,985
969 1137
593, 897, S98
453
1302
5:25
.
A
.

fets,
135, 234, 333, 356
5:25, 28 5:25, 29
781 333 859
5:27 5:28 5:28 5:29 5:30 5:31
5:31, 34
5:32 5:33
6:33, 36
ff
6:34 5:35 6:36
781,802 890 859 500 685,828,890,1162 890,1010,1018 677 479,746,764 897 896 110,866 334,625,1212 220, 265, 274 6is, 516,
667, 686, 789, 894, 1204
6:23 6:24 6:25 6:27 6:28 6:29
232
887, 1029, 1049
6:29, 39,
6:37 5:37 5:38 6:39 5:39 5:40 6:41 5:42 5:43 6:44
893,896 1179,1189 678,703
...
f
329
6is,
678, 707, 941
1183 878 110
499,500
762 437,442,771,857, 1128,1135 678
707,
5:44 f 5:45 5:46 5:46 f 5:47 6:1 6:2 6:2,5 6:5 6:6 6:7 6:9 6:10 6:11 6:12
.
779,853,890,895 540,1014
1012
1009, 1012, 1160
6:30 6:31 6:32 1187 6:34 300 6:35 349,850 235 6:35,37,44,45 6:36 889,1182 6:37 409,682 6:37,39 653,713,773 6:38 895, 1166, 1187 bis 6:39 437,439,684,718,753, 769,775,992 6:40 ... 520,522,586,708,762 6:41 ... 444,561,853,859,1201 6:42 697,698 6:43 610,853 6:44 520, 523, 586 6:45 504, 516, 859 6is, 1097 6is 614 6:45 f 6:46 1034 6:47 653 6:48 677 6:49 1183 6:50 599,768
. . .
. .
896 471,595 850,880,889,923,934 567,706,708,720,721,850 400 40 850 375, 903 bis

. .
6:51 6:52
234, 768, 872, 1185 6is
44,503 368,404,604,1218 774

1035
6:52,60 6:54
6:57 6:58 6:61 6:62 6:63 6:64 6:65 6:66 6:67 6:68 6:69 6:70 6:71 7:1 7:2 7:3 7:4
7:4, 10
811 444 856
584
6is
891,950,1029,1043 745, 921, 998 407,674,704,713,736,762 486 732,762,967,1181 618,751 6:12, 16 974 6:13 598,762,777 6:14 444, 718 bis, 768 6:15 287,480,657 6:16 602,841,904 6:16-21 904
.
968 587 470, 487, 550, 1023, 1203 768,1206
374,550,597,792,878,
1118
6is,
1159, 1214
234 444,597 878,917,923,1175 790,791,876,924,934 423,652.163,895,1035

779
6:17 ... 361, 366 bis, 904, 1214 6:18 367, 1179, 1215 6:19 263,469,603,904 6:20 890,947 6:21 603, 857, 886, 919 6:22 437,444,776,887,1034 6:22-24 1029
.
501,884 444,885
399 308,328,1180 752,1009,1038,1100 764 1185 770 bis, 777
7:5 7:6
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
7:9 7:10 7:11 7:13 7:13,17 7:14 7:15 7:16 7:17
.
1303
244,294,419,470,487,
698,1186 473,1029 698,837
871
833 429,444
707 Ms
8:25
546, 550, 729, 730 6w, 738, 917
491,500
619
444,838,885
1172 496 292,551,741,757,878, 1019 Ws, 1045, 1177, 1188 698 762, 1175
.
7:18 7:19 7:22 7:23
.243,434,1166,1187,1202 275,418,541,656,774,
.
965, 1175
feis
7:24 7:25 7:26

7:26, 35, 47, 51
f
478
27,444,698,703
135,845,1168 917 1183 231,905,1183 716,720,1175 44,1123 659 969 232,233
7:27 f 7:30 7:31 7:32 7:33 7:34 7:34,36 7:35 7:37 7:38
.
495,501,581,1001,1205
234, 444 333,355,356,437, 459, 1130 368, 433, 795, 859 bis 599 bis 1190 578 970 857 444 1175 599 404,407 308,1168,1214 866,949 1210 405 1102,1121
7:39 7:40 7:41 7:41 7:42 7:44 7:45 7:47 7:48 7:49 7:51 7:52 8:5 8:7 8:9 8:12 8:14
;16
:16,
8:26 8:27 8:28 8:28,32 8:29 8:30 8:31 8:32 8:33 8:38 8:39 8:42 8:44 8:49 8:51 8:52 8:53 8:54 8:55 8:56 8:57 8:58 8:59 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7
. .
537,549,611,659,845
.
8:3,9
282,294,602
....
54
768 208,866,870,1010,
1018, 1045
208,424,1026 1019
922, 1015
19 :20
:20,
37
:23 :24
586,905,1165 1159 547 6ts, 548, 765 356
1132 234,453,1117 872 872,896 614 921,1015-16,1022 579,708,881,1014 .224,551,683,768,1219 690 850,1019 473,507 441,728 1034 505,530,1026 993,1212 310,337,1183 394,880,977,1091 350,581,807,817,1136 784 998 404 976,1081,1159 684, 972 420,681,779 253,592,714,855 253 9:7, 11 503,768,866,887,1115,1139 9:8 1028 9:9 339,419,420,503,1213 9:10 420,681,779 9:11 708 9:11,25 234,707 9:12 368,718,1213 9:14 681 9:15 710 9:16 779 9:16,40 9:17 964 420 9:17,26,30 1213 9:17,32 291,841,975,1029 9:18 9:19f 76S 9:20 524 733 9:21 9:22 366,480,811,816,905,993 9:24 597, 097, 700 9:25 .... 866,892,1045,1115 9:27 878 9:28 268, 473, 707 /)is 9:30 433,1190
.
.
1304

1029 698 597
NEW TESTAMENT
9:30,32,35
9-31 9-32 9-33 9-34 9-35 9-36 9:40 9-41 10-1 10-3
10:4 10:5 10:6 10:7 10:8 10:10 10:11
920,1014,1016 656,678,768,774
841 960,999,1182
611
.'
1013, 1014
10:3,9,12
300,708 608 428 358,404,801 355,356,418,889 500,708,736,880 501,768 507,622

1025 398,418,429,656,776, 865,1206 762 632 434,764,955,1138,1163 509 870 965 420,579,845 408,760 762 333,356,752,875,1164 402,677 740, 845, 880 bis 480 1028
.
'.
10-11 14
10:ll'l5 10:12 10-13

.
1015ff
10-17 10:18 10:22 10-27 10:28 10:30 10:32 10-33 10-34 10:35 10:36
10:37 10:37 10:38 10:39 10-40 11-1 11:2
580 11:16 266,800 11:17 11:18 283, 424, 469, 575 5ts, 760 619,620,905 11:19 521,791 11:20 420,841 11:21 313,922,1015 11:21,32 676,684,733 11:22 420 11:23 669 11:24 356,768 11:25 915 11:26 f 391,781,891,1028, 11:27 1034,1150 861,881 11:28 841, 905 bis 11:30 596 11:31 11:32 420 6is, 681, 706, 722, 779 391,834 11:35 302,339,741,884 11:36 698,857,920,985,993 11:37 341,559,560,593,596,604 11:38 657 11:39 856 11:39,44 1030 11:40 541,856 11:41 477,617,843 11:42 328,1193 11:43 193,197,361,366,486, 11:44
.
....
434,480,708,1160,1182 425,437,442,781,952, 1015,1028 1012,1020,1170

.
11:47 11:48 11:49 11:50 11:51 11:51,53 11:52

11:.54
905,910,1117 880 6is, 923, 934

681
675,742
631
bis,
993, 1034
688,1029,1034
1160 425,850,983,1026
.
...
409,885 487,659,833,970 256,578 859,1114

1191 632
11:55 11:56 11:56 11:57 12:1
11:3, 6, 12, 14 eic
11:4 11:6 . 11:7 11:8 11:9 11-10 11:11 11-11-13 11:12 11:13 11:14
470,706,718,1152,1153 931,1205
885 587,800,1019 587 895 905 1009 498,905,1029 1210 bis
12:2 12:3 HI 12:4 932 12:7 656,777 12:9 774 12:9,12 811,993,994,1180 12:10 243,528,595,838 12:13 264,462 12:15 487,550,605,653,765,905 12:16 1029 12:16,33 892 12:17
.
709 581,593,1162 205,640 517,621 1217 905 134,234,308,905,986,993 ... 110,424,598,621,622, 702, 762 bis, 970, 1191 627 510, 598, 859
.
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
12:18 .909,1035,1042,1101 12:19 843,943 243 12:19,21 27 12:20 12:21 923 12:22 405 12:23 895,992 1019 12:24 317 12:25 969,1019 12:26 12:27 598,843,895,1187 12:28 462,845 90S, 1047, 1081 12:29 12:30 584 12:32 190,597,889,1018 740bis 12:33 12:34 679,704,735 976 12:35 f 12:36 133,807,974 1129 12:37 12:39 699,875 12:42 1155, 1188 6is 301,633,1150,1154 12:43 1135 12:44 753 12:46 234 12:47 698 12:48 698 12:49 13:1 498,691,843 435 13:1 ff. 13:1-5 435 13:2 309, 799 562 13:3 13:4 188,314,597 716, 757 13:5 13:6 ... 418,420,880,915,1175 915,933 13:8 1162,1172,1173 13:9 234 13:10 481,1045 13:12 270,416,458^,466,1028 13:13 399,845 13:14 633 13:15 516 13:16 850,890,1019,1022 13:17 560,84.5,1203 13:18 765, 978, 9S3, 1075 13:19 13:20 190, 956 his, lOlS 675 13:21 739 13:22 703,724,1045 13:24 (:02, 707 13:25 707,708 13:26 488, 6()4, SSO 13:27 626,739 13:28 13:29 235,442,595,706,720
. . .
1305
843,847
1009 548 845, 993 857 879
13:31 13:32 13:33 13:34 13:36 f 13:37 14:1 14:2 14:2 f 14:3 14:3 f 14:4 14:6 14:7 14:8 14:9 14:11
329,941
424, 1015, 1025
869 353,690,846
299 731 249, 583, 769 923,1181 393 419,528,879 287,395,856,1016, 1025, 1202
....
14:13
243,727,729,850
14:13f
....
956 14:15 1019 14:16 613,747,1023 14:17 233,614,857 709 bis 14:17,29 14:19 395,963 14:21 635, 688, 707, 708 6is, 769 14:22 739,916,965,1001,1034 802 14:23 14:24 685 14:26 418,482,483,509,634, 708 6is, 709, 795 14:27 315, 777 234,817,923,1015 14:28 109 14:29 308 14:31 777 15:1 15:2 243,437 437 15:2,5 584 15:3 15:4 586,587 437,442,1165 15:5 15:6 ... 392, 820 Ws, 828, 836, 837 6is, 847, 850, 1020, 1204 850 15:7 ... 324,699,837,843,984, 15:8
.
.
.
15:9 15:10 15:11

15:11, 17
992.1076 856,968
779 784,1204 699
.
15:12 15:13 15:14 15:15 15:16 15:18
393,699,992,993 272,401,429,699,992
681
480,769,845 300,327.729,993,1214
28,
....
670,
lOOS,
1013
1306
15:19 15:20 15:21 15:22 15:22,24

559,598,921,1014 509,716,1009 484 921,1013,1169 336,339,887,922,
17:15 17:17 17:18 17:19 17:19,23 17:21 17:21,24
598 Us 768 439
360,908 983
234, 395, 461
1014, 1015, 1016, 1147 921, 1013 feis 15:24 1033,1203 15:25 561,708,795,970,1181 15:26 879,1185 15:27 859,998,1114,1186 16:2 834,845 16:3 1049 16:4 1019 6^s 16:7 566,1126 16:8 964 16:8-11 857 16:12 698,708,709,1109 16:13 393,515,599,698 16:17 703,719 16:17 f 738 16:18 610,659,699,875,1029 16:19 458 bis, 595, 871 16:20 871 16:20,22 866 16:21 424 6is 16:22 16:23 190, 482 6is, 708, 1018 709 16:23,26 325,360,375,848,907 16:24 618 16:26 579,614 16:27 598 16:28 579,589,699 16:30 1175 16:31 657 16:32 135,677 16:33 801 17:1 462 17:1,5,11 17:2 .193,309,348,409,411,437,
. . .
17:21,24,25
17:22 17:23
....
17:24 17:25 17:26 18:1 18:2,5 18:3 18:5 18:6 18:10 18:11
18:13 18:14 18:15 18:16 18:17 18:18 18:20 18:21 18:22 18:23 18:24 18:26 18:28 18:29 18:30 18:32 18:34 18:35 18:36 18:37 18:38 18:39
264 462 898 360,593,677,908, 1049,1116 653,713,933,969,1048 264 Ws, 419, 461, 464, 843, 1128 478 6zs, 482
213,275,627,680
859 548,1127 888 521 457,762 459,683,850,934, 1161,1174 255 529,1035,1058,1084 405, 529, 537, 707 bis 764, 747 bis, 775, 777 708 909 bis, 910, 1116 589 726 1116 1009 bis 841
... ... ...
575,706,720
1183 500 1015,1016
....
500,713,718,876,963,984
17:3
. .
.
531,740,1029,1043 288,688
1172
203,699,718,776,984, 985, 992 bis, 1079
17:4 17:5
.234,418,677,682,843
.
418,461,678,682,716, 765, 891, 978 bis, 1074, 1075 17:6 337,598,894,895 337 b?:s, 820 17:7 310 17:7 f 234,337,423 17:8 566,567,618,619,720,721 17:9 685,770,898 17:10 464,948 17:11 716 17:11 f 599,1188 17:12 902 17:13 598 17:14,16
. .
922,993 233,599,915,917,1165, 1175,1192 411,736 430,541,876,878,924, 935,980,992

1172, 1173
18:40 19:1 19:2 19:3 19:6 19:7 19:11 19:12
801
.
408,483,883 311,465,969,884,1214 1190,1200 480 885, 887, 906 bis, 921, 923,1014,1015,1016 521,542,573
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
19:13 19:14 19:17 19:18 19:19 19:20 19:21 19:22 19:23 19:24 19:25 19:26 19:27 19:28 19:29 19:31 19:32 19:32 19:33
19:35 19:36 19:37 19:38 19:39 19:39 19:40 19:41 20:1 20:2
1307
258,259 882,1201 2G1, 461, 466 ?;i.s, 779 859,895,1028 362,655,1181 540 bis' 603
104,367 501,793 104,539 300,775 362,375,603 28,104,205

707
bis
358,801,895 212,408,1184 619,690,811,931,943 235,255,501,614,767,904

. .
525
502,586,691 425,898
214, 254
20:25 20:27 20:28 20:29 20:30 20:31 21:1 21:2 21:3 21:4 21:5 21:6 21:7 21:8
405,501,767 .353,627,882,923,990,1062
593 155,623,917,1168
408,580,593,652 716,810
. .
.
365,392,1212 530,746,747,775
f
. .
1212 546,602,909,910,963,
1041,1042,1118 707,1118 260,704 293,594,706,720,721, 772,871 578 495,1127 533

1076
316, 762, 905
21:9 21:10 21:11 21:12 21:13 21:14 21:15 21:15ff 21:15-17 21:17 21:18 314
.
268,469,499,520,521, 533, 543, 575, 802 841 519,577,716,843,845 672,1129 437,885,949,1128 1205 702,843 187,516,659,667
21:19
522,762,868,1097 392,566,845,1202 747 20:2,3,4 20:3 775 20:3f 746,838 20:4 278,401,549,656,662,669 20:5-7 868 20:7 593,603,648 20:8 868 20:9 1165 20:11 525, 624 feis
.
21:20 21:21
21:22 21:22f 21:23 21:24 21:25
501 255,1201 1028 bis, 802, 884, 969 ftis, 971, 1199 531,740,876,891,1029, 1043, 1110 724 395,411,697,705, 736 62s, 1202
395,736,978 976 593,703,1216 137,406,416,785

.
234, 369, 729, 877 brs, 891, 1030, 1040, 1082 6is, 1162, 1205, 1210
.
.
20: 12
589, 624, 653, 868, 906, 1202
^^
.
20:13 20:14 20:14-18 20:15 20:15-18 20:16

20:16, 18
20:17 20:18 20:19 20:19,26 20:20 20:21 20:22 20:23

.
868 133,868 443 683,1009 869 416,462,465,714 259 561,853 438,1028,1212

.
1:1
..
280, 419, 440, 463, 663,
669,716,954,1152,1179, 1193,1203
1:1-5 1:2 1:3 .. 1:4 ..
1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:10
.
121
.
767,841 147,581,820,1039,1074
442, 475, 507, 519, 578,
110, 389, 418, 420, 533, 612, 656, 702, 1158, 1205
î^s,
618,688,715,717,1029,1049
.
.
522, 653, 708, 722, 779
593 1128 429 207 190,315,1019
316
523, 695, 916, 1151
l:10i
497 418,787 267 904
1308
1:11 1:12

398,701,718,771 154,232,267,269,458,
NEW TESTAMENT
1:13 1:14 1:15 1:16 1:17 1:18

1:19 1:20 1:21 1:22 1:23 1:24 1:25 2:2
469,640,778,780 501,629,760
623
283,434,602 399,651,859
...
....
.
1:23,26
509 472,510,599,775,834, 1151, 1217 28, 219 272, 939, 1116, 1214 721 413,639,717,974,1126 214 215
2:4 2:5 2-6 2:7 2-9
678,706,861 561,692 261,376,966,969, 1105,1140 748 212,593 498,1042 224

186 788 770, 1123 692,747,883,1031 749,903,1127 1107 793,1158
2:9f
2:11 2-12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:17 2:17,21 2:18 2:20 2:21 2:22 2:23 2:24 2:25 2:26 2:27
393,531,577
1042 1148 561, 1091 bis
2:27, 31
2:28 2:29 2:30 2:31 2-32 2:33 2:34 2:36 2:37 2:38
720,744 399,427,534,579,698,716 317,339,698,1113 122,1058 234 Ms, 367, 594 224, 604 591,593,792 502 510
.
234, 587, 612, 881, 1119,
1130,1182 497,531,877,1205 593 701,714 448,498,533,625,781, 1179 652 772 350,1179 389,592,595,780,781, 782,795
2:39 541,593,733 666,813 2:40 283,1151 2:41 542 2:42 541 2:43 2:45 581,722,884,922,958,967 2:46 508, 519, 608 îs, 609, 1179 2:47 .... 318,891,1115,1116 602 3:1 3:1-10 905 3:2 .. 318, 392, 480, 884, 891, 990, 1088 429 3:2 f 313,559,877,884 3:3 538,828,1036,1127 3:5 698 3:6 210,508 3:7 3:8 423, 1116 bis, 1136 1103 3:9 3:10 ... 262, 626, 885, 887 6is, 1111, 1117, 1179 269,407,604,655 3:11 3:12 334,423,818,1065,1068, 1078, 1140 649,707,1151 3:13 399,651,785,818 3:14 714 3:15 517,639,644 3:16 609,1128 3:17 409,858,877,1036,1080 3:18 649,1075 3:19 986,1049 3:19f 716,1151 3:21 733,1151 3:22 3:23 ... 184, 189, 598, 727, 959 732 3:24 625,716 3:25 3:26 538, 549, 800, 891 ftis, 991, 1072, 1073 6is, 1116, 1128 587,966,1071 4:2 538 4:3 1047 4:5 f 214 4:6 4:7 648, 655, 678, 740 500, 703, 780 4:9 .656,698,705,715,1015 4:10 656 4:10,16 698,703,769 4:11 635 6is, 749, 751, 778, 1107 4:12 127,415,691,812,887, 4:13 1035, 1197 1087, 1179 4:14 202 4:15 656,665,880,1152 4:16 531,538,1094 4:17 546,550,607 4:18
. . .
.....
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
4:19 4:20
4:21
1309
547,1018,1019
963
995, 1009, 1096
....
516,606,1045 312,677,1094,1164, 1171 bis, 1173, 1174, 1214 766,905,966,1031,

1046, 1128
.
5:38
5:3Sf 5:39
5:41 5:42 6:1 6:2 6:3 6:4 6:5 6:8 f 6:11
632,884,1151
1102, 1109, 1121
4:22 4:23 4:24 4:25 4:27 4:29 4:30 4:31 4:32 4:33 4:34
4:35
268,498,602,666,905
733 419,1214 739 905
224,560,765,772 1072,1073
905
688,691,751
311 587,884,891,892, 1115,1116 190,312,318,612,
6:13 6:14 7:1 7:2 7:3
104,626,782,1043 348 816,989,1149 435 173,235,275,276 788 594,634,801,897, 1042, 1113 1102
701
922,967,1214
4:36 487, 530, 579 feis, 714 4:37 891,1116 5:1 215, 256 bis, 457 5:2 256, 319, 517, 627, 810, 1116 5:3 1001, 1089, 1090 5:4 541,965,1166 739 5:4,9 5:5 833,1116 5:7 460, 581 bis 5:8 308,510,710,810 5:9 529,601,1084 5:12 2m bis 5:13 529 5:14 435,453,1106 5:15 194,214,984,1091 5:16 404,412,617,929 5:17 261,1107,1108 5:19 408,581,791 5:20 497,706 5:21 635,1086 5:22 800 5:23 601,603,621 5:24 405, 736 bis, 789, 938, 940, 1021, 1044 5:25 233,881 531,995 6:26 5:28 224, 253, 510, 531 bis,
. . . . .
546,800,916 215,419,1091 464 957 7:3,7 7:4 ... 561,566,721,979,1074 7:5 .... 1036,1131,1138,1139 889 7:6 203,959 7:7 7:8 522, 760 308 7:9 7:10 ... 339,480,481,640,1100 7:12 .... 262,536,1042,1103 537,587 7:13
.
697,760,878,895
5:29 5:30 5:31 5:34 5:35 5:36
405, 747 317,603,1127 480,526,1088 653 605 172,233,411,540,542, 581, 743, 1038, 1113
7:14 7:16 7:17 7:18 7:19 7:20 7:21 7:22 7:23 7:24 7:25 7:26 7:27 7:28 7:29 7:30 7:31 7:34 7:35
5S9
bis
367,510,561,716 716,968,974 639,748,975

. .
.
477, 703, 1068, 1090 bis
537,671,718 339,401,482,680,811 772 207,392 805,1204 .... 315,885,1036,1049 522,739,861,885 244,367
...
206, 718
589 760 474

.
.
187,430,932,1110,1147 .253,268,649,698,778,
860, 863, 1113
7:35,36,37,38,40
7:36 7:37 7:39 7:40
7:41 7:42
6:36,37 5:37
732 835
698 794 778 537 436,459,541,697,701, 703, 960 367 bi-s, 532 463,800,1087
1310
7:43 7:44 7:45 7:48 7:49 7:51 7:52 7:53 7:56 7:57 7:58 7:60 8:1 8:2 8:3
8:4, 25
.

244,355,517,550,642,647
268 367, 409, 582, 716 424 9:6
NEW TESTAMENT
.
..
735,740 300,523,542,573
502
482,591,728 1123,1213 339,789 255,811 834 581,782,787 802 174,419,473 696
9:6, 34 9:7 ... 9:8 9:9 9:11 9:11,17 9:12 9:13 9:15 9:17 9:18 9:20 9:21
. .
.313,729,731,739,1044, 1045, 1176, 1215 310

.
213,449,472,506,529
1213 1138,1172 310 762 .... 189,864,1114,1116 484,733 496,704,1179 716,721 559 698,885,1034 .699,769,860,905,1107,
. .
.
695 684 8:5 8:9 316, 743 feis, 888, 1038, 1120 704,769 8:10 1113 8:10,18 ... 523,527,533,906,909, 8:11
8:4,40
.
9:22 9:24 9:26 9:27 9:31 9:32
213
6is,
1108, 1123 891, 1127, 1220
820 1128
....
244,367,1035,1047 524,607,787
1085 1043 866, 986 269
966,1060,1070,1071
12 15 16 17 19
9:32,37,43
9:34 9:35 9:36 9:38 9:39 9:42
10:1 10:2 10:3 10:5 10:6 10:7 10:9
1179
367, 995
.
375,560,906,1103,1121
318
327, 939
6is,
bis
20
21 22 23
706 940 541,640 .... 430,576,1024,1027 .458,536,593,865,1041,

. .
714,716 256,505,538,568,640 311,529,542,732,810

607 258
,772
1123 6is
24 25 26
27 28 30
630,706,720,1217 474,1151 328,602,608,698,703, 792, 1205 374,877 6is, 991, 1118, 1128 562
.
.
471,864 609 615 272,892 538,793
571, 916, 1148
6is,
8:31
8:32 8:34 8:35 8:36 8:38 8:39 8:40

9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4
..
9:4,7
1176,1201 .194,628,890,938,1010, 1021, 1022 bis, 1214 715,968 748 367,474 602,743,974,1094,1171 578,597 349,479 .218,593,643,975,979, 1060, 1074, 1092 216,507 190,482,497,1018,1041 538 506,1042 762
623 315,603,1213 752,1173 396,1202,1205 579,602,890,910,938, 940,1021,1031 1043,1045,1105,1107 10:18 1108 10:18,32 571 10:20 735 10:21 561,614,1179 10:22 833 10:22 f 809 10:23 10:25 98,393,996,1002,1040, 1043, 1059, 1060, 1065, 1068 686 10:26 314,665,967,1032,1036 10:28 1045 10:28, 38 .212,739,1043,1044,1113 10:29 471,645,793 10:30
10:10 10:11 10:14 10:15 10:17
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
10:31 10:32 10:33
1311
339,772
233 399,792,794,1105
.
.
8G1 Ws, 990, 1080, 1088,
10:35 10:36 10:37 10:38 10:39 10:40 10:40 10:41

10:41 10:42 10:43 10:44 10:45 10:47
f
. .
....
1113,1121 1108 438,718,723 413,458,607 219,533,1032 339,1113 537,794 1095 .612,752,960,979,1074, 1162, 1163 833 419,1035 1036 891 578,782,897,1181 231,728,960,1061,
1094, 1171
12:11 12:12 12:13 12:14
255 990 .231,319,358,580,621,908,

1036, 1039, 1040, 1081
.
12:15 12:16 12:18 12:19 12:20 12:21 12:25

13:1 13:2 13:3
.695,1036,1084,1186 551,1102,1212 224,411,484,736,739,916, 1131,1177

. .
1061
235,906 522,603 235, 431, 835, 859 bis, 862 <er, 1099
608, 1107 bis 566, 816, 1149 bis
10:48 11:1
11:1,20
11:2 11:4 11:5 11:6 11:7 11:11 11:13 11:14 11:15 11:17 11:18 11:19 11:21 11:22 11:23 11:24 11:25 11:26
11:28 11:29 11:30 12:1 12:2 12:3 12:5 12:6 12:7 12:8 12:9 12:10
1084 608 1181
599,766,885 1102,1126 315,498,639 787,838

1042 188
1032,1041,1049 402 566 658,736,968,1008,1181 1190 605,657,696
1107 643 530 405 990 160,192,298,659,774, 833, 1043 253, 410, 603, 728, 877 bis,
.
891,1036,1082
367 714,861,862,1113
578,608 533,534
411, 434, 551
629
408,620,621,878 310,328,559,597
...
.
.
314, 807, 811, 855, 950
855,1153 477,550,762,777,794, 1107, 1213
682 862 440,686 13:5 214, 258, 269, 480, 828, 885 13:6 639 13:7 574 13:8 279,433 13:9 734,761 13:10 264, 330, 463, 464 er, 791, 874,917,942,1157,1162,1193 13:11 639,800 218 13:12 13:13 620,766 836 13:13f 234 13:15 1107 13:16 611 13:17 13:18 165 bis, 219, 528 523,527 13:20 13:22 458,482,501,780, 1114, 1136 13:24 94, 621 13:25 .720,736,738,916,996,1036 497 13:26 608,858 13:27 1085, 1086, 1129 13:28 429,602,728 13:31 423,474,483,1035,1107 13:32 861,1113 13:33 392 13:34 560 13:36 1153 13:36 f 706 13:37 566,720,721 13:39 409,430,933,996 13:40 597,849,1019 13:41 13:42 313, 314, 409, 594, 645 990 13:44 261 13:45 810, 965 13:46
13:3,5 13:4
'
1312
13:47 13:49 13:50 13:51 14:1 14:3 14:4 14:5 14:6 14:8 14:9

221,482 582 578,788 6is
197
NEW TESTAMENT
f
15:22 15:23
413,439,655
. . ,
15:22, 25
197,502,710,789,1000 649, 833 695 424, 628 6is, 1052 257 257,521,523,1096 .... 1042 bis, 1066, 1076 14: 10 423, 549, 656, 659, 789, 838 14:11 28,104 14:11-13 428 14:12 258 14:13 621,1107 14:14 212 14:15 482, 736 feis, 738, 789, 1036 14:16 521 14:17 204,210,300,1129,1154 14:18 606,800,1061,1094,1102 14:19 319,489,859,908,1030 1039, 1040, 1081, 1216 14:21 475 14:21 f S92 bis 14:22 524,562,1035,1036, 1047,1113 14:23 905 14:26 905 14:27 611 14:28 224,1205 15:1 530,780 15:1 f 760 15:2 515,788,1084,1205 15:3 787 15:3,30 696,1191 15:4 788,818 15:4,20 789 788 15_i6 15:7 475,1035,1041 15:8 861 15:8, 9 1113 15:9 219,282,580,645,750,861 15:10 1089 15:11 487,531,718 15:12 834 15:13 834,857,1074 15:14 968,1045 15:15 529 15:16 1219 15:17 683,713,723,986 15:19 613 15:20 .518,788,1068,1078, 1080,1082 15:22 173, 214, 628, 808,
. . . .
...
15:24 15:24-26 15:25 15:27 15:28

.
.
1084 582,649,696,787,944, 1093, 1205 897 432 1039
.686,891,991,1128-9
186, 187, 518, 646, 1059,
15:29 15:32 15:35 15:36 15:37 15:37 f 15:38 15:39 15:41 16: If 16:2 16:3
1061,1078,1085,1187 212,299,318,330,360,364, 80S, 908, 962, 1121, 1160 349, 686 ier 477,655 546,714,1149 565 857,884,1081 576 1000, 1091 788 863 566
394, 428, 801, 887, 1029, 1035
....
....
311,476,562,788,1214 16:4 524 bis 16:5 16:6 788, 862 bis, 863, 1110, 1113 781,1156 16:7 863 16:7 f 561,581,1065 16:9 1034 16:10 16:11 .159,244,257,367,652,1202 263,412,497,728, 16:12 729 bis, 954 .* 792,1039 16:13 498,1036 16:14 537,1009 16:15 728,810,1043,1128 16:16 ...
. .
. . .
16:16f 16:18
16:21 16:22 16:23 16:24 16:25 16:26 16:27 16:28 16:30 16:31 16:33 16:34 16:36 16:37
. .
.
442 578,884
1039, 1084 212, 609, 618, 628, 883
861,863 278,710 507,608

262
.
bis,
367, 1213
431,909,1040,1081,1213 299,484,688 880,924 402

518, 576 bis, 771 170,453,530,1122 336,993,1219 339,530,653,659,686 1120, 1187, 1190, 1213 573
1039, 1127
16:39
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
17:1 17:2 17:3 17:4 17:5 17:6
1313
256,539 342,1127
1131 1136
1126
408,576
442, 1034
6is,
1035
17:6,8 17:7
17:9 17:10
17:10,15
17:11 17:12 17:13 17:14 17:15
224,669,1163 165,885 572,1035,1137,1172 258 639 763 313,760 314 487,890

.
18:17 18:18 18:20 18:22 18:23 18:24 18:25 18:26 18:27 18:28 19:1
19:1 19:2
f
788,891,892,1113,1136
172, 189
6w
1151
760 643
. ,
279, 313, 316
6ts,
339, 488,
17:16
669,760,968,974 169,224,408,613,760,
885, 1041, 1123, 1131, 1204 17:16-34 121 17:18 .201,529,695,787,788,890, 938,940,1021,1025,1031, 1044,1082,1085 17:19 187,701,785,879 17:20 559,736,742,878 17:21 665, 749, 751, 773, 1087 17:22 187,399,464 17:23 362,561 518 17:25 17:26 772,863,1113 17:27 327, 508, 939, 1021, 1027,
.
.
19:3 19:4 19:7 19:8 19:9 19:11
485,524,619,816,1136 665 818,1036 311,529,582,1036 189,233,260 1047 .207,234,537,816,916,1024, 1045,1113,1179,1186 739,1179 399,416,993 773 431,811
.
891
253,1138,1139
f
19:11, 23
19:12 19:13 19:14 19:15

19: 16
1205 192
.475,484,617,759,762,791 236,255,742 736,762,777,791

. .
252, 559, 560, 607, 745 bis
1129
17 28
: .
1030, 1044, 1045, 1086, bis, 1138 bis, 1139, 1140, 1148, 1149, 1190 bis
19:17 19:19 19:21 19:22 19:23 19:24 19:25 19:26
418 674,828 310,476,688,787,1074 586,593,800 224 224, 810 620, 710

1 166, 1
295, 494, 643, 697, 701, 1035,
195, 422, 608, 694, 1200, 1215
187
17:29 17:30 17:31 17:32 17:34 18:2

18: 3
....
.
920 487,629,1084,1152
333 187
19:27
.219,253,257,410,518,750,
550,589,590,716,860,963
.236,459,487,530,909,
bis,
910
. .
1040, 1047, 1049, 1116
4 5 6
7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
367,471,486,1039,1215 885 529,808,1037 810,1202 263,529 453,884

.
1162 bis 395 19:28 1202 19:28,34 510 19:29 19:30 423,885 19:31 258,537 19:32 301,425,641,665,692,747, 898, 1029, 1176 515 19:33 19:34 436,439,1130,1200 19:35 68,253,260,653,726,892,
.
....
. .
. .
1041,1123,1159,1190
19:36 19:37 19:38 19:38 19:39 19:40 20:1
212, 375 bw, 881, 909, 1119 bis, 1120, 1130
583, 792, 890, 1173 bis
477,1002,1090 672,833 269,510

616
.
253
f
. .
. .
bis,
257, 410
541 1153
.
368, 877, 1014, 1015
bis,
1153,1193
18:15
.
545,618,1009,1154 .229,511,547,815-16,820
1074
110, 608,
686
bis,
766, 1038
1314
20:3 20:3,7 20:4 20:5
20:5, 23
.

497,1002,1060,1068,1076 877 173, 205, 235 <er, 236, 501, 529,639,813
471 475 657
. .
NEW TESTAMENT
561
21:18 21:18,26 21:19 21:20 21:21

.
313,314 746
741
.
.
20:6 20:7 20:8 20:9 20:11 20:12 20:13 20:14 20:15

20:16
313,529,653,672,792
969
21:22 21:23 21:24 21:25 21:26 21:27 21:28 21:29 21:30 21:31
21:32 21:33
...
235,579,580,835,891 1140,1179
116
235,1140
199
.
482,521,524,773,950, 1034, 1046, 1082, 1084 310,337,356 1127 201,324,342,412,720, 809,816,984 476,483 522 339,1213,1220 330,526,769,783,844,
199, 214, 221, 505, 573, 638,
653, 748, 1202
.
'
894, 897, 901, 1107 323, 362, 375, 883, 905, 906
.470,472,613,905,986,1021, 1030,1058,1085 20:17 508 20:18 .299,312,334,561,566,717, 721, 773, 793 20:20 1032,1094 20:20,27. 1061, 1102, 1171, 1174, 1205 20:22 374,523,765,878, 1118, 1172,1213 20:23 262,646 20:24 480,499,811,990,1089 20:26 515,576,765,987,1035 20:27 807,1089 20:28 480,510,589,810 20:30 687,689 20:31 419,1035,1041 20:33 282,474,508 20:34 441 20:35 573, 663, 666, 679, 708, 1034 20:37 515 20:38 488,659,670,716,905 21:1 183, 235, 260, 263, .522, 547,
.
.
774,1179 .213,256,774,879,1033, 1132, 1202
......
. .
835,1126,1127
251, 375, 736, 938, 1031,
lOU
21:34 21:35 21:36 21:37 21:38 21:39 21:40 22:1 22:2
bis
692,747,884
392, 1043, 1085
. . .
404,407,412,655,1104 915,916,1175 769,917,1157,1176 1151,1163,1205 104,770

.
507
....
28
feis,
29, 104, 542,
22:3 22:4,22 22:5

22:6
653,1029 495,497,615,1105 639 299,374,548,877,

1118, 1128 536, 539, 560, 617, 620, 792, 1085
...
653,836,1038,1202
21:2f
21:3
891
299,486,548,817, 883,1115
1046
21:4 21:5 21:6 21:7 21:8 21:11 21:12 21:13

21:14 21:16
548,643
691
205,582 339,614 289,690 .1065,1066,1068,1085,1088
....
.
593,657,1077,1121, 1162, 1181 862,863,1214

515, 519, 599, 614,
393,
,502,
719,721,891,955,989,1202
22:7 506,1042 235 22:8,13 22:9 449,472,506 22:10 716 bis, 795, 1084 22:11 580,1159 22:14 763,1033 22:15 720,773 22:16 329, 332, 808 bis, 11 lO 22:17 1039,1085,1132 784 22:18 608 22:19 22:20 213,1220 22:21 469,593 22:22 393,920,1014 799 22:23 ... 22:24 308,718,726,861, 863, 1084 22:25 258,533,916,1181
.
*.
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
22:29 22:30 23:3
1029, 1033, 1034 615,766,815,820,1046 314,340,616,678, 1201,1216 473 .234,422,473,484,874,
.
1315
877, 1039, 1076,
24:15
23:4 23:5
23:6 23:7 23:8 23:9 23:10 23:11 23:12 23:13 23:14 23:15
24:15,20 24:17 24:18 24:19

.
1082,1179 686,700,705 535,581,594,877,1118 578,612,1123 235,920,1014

1021, 1022
1041, 1200
511, 791
787
745,1094,1189
582, 1023, 1203
564.995,1214 221,593 .531,802,1040,1046,1048 666,802 473,531,689 490,546,659,978,1061, 1068,1075,1077,1082,1141 231 23:17 1087 23:17,18,19 690,1151 23:18 736 23:19 738 23:19f 23:20 .... 547, 968, 1002, 1066, 1068,1141 23:21 474, 517, 579, 976 23:22 .... 235,442,1047,1113 1113 23:22,25,30 168,232,742,793,1047 23:23 442 23:23 f 23:24 1179, 1204 944,1093 23:26 339,431,4.33,778, 23:27
.
. .
439 24:20 24:21 348, 363, 701, 702 bis, 716 24:22 235, 580, 619, 665, 1128 <er 24:22-25 810 24:23 540,828,861,863,1171 24:25 470,487,547,551,800,1109 1126 24:25 f 24:26 .284,529,546,637,638,
.
.
1035, 1099
23:27 23:29 23:30

23:31 23:34 23:35 24:1 24:2 24:3 24:5 24:6
243 511
.
.
330, 594, 603, 846, 877,
908,1040,1049,1082,1130
1151
578,740,1035 434, 861, 863 607 236 300, 530 782,1135 288,438,724
1181
665, 1139 Ws 24:27 221,265,1123 836 25:1 f 25:3 995,1046 25:4 586,593,1036,1038 234,534 25:5 742 25:5,8, 11 233 25:5,22 666 25:6 25:7 153,477,619,655 1028 25:8 25:9 265,603,878 25:10 277,362,375,482,484,603, 66.5,881,895,1116 25:11 472,511,720,765,809,881, 896, 1059, 1066, 1078 429,816 25:12 25:13 412,812,861,862,863,877, 979, 1113, 1128 197,234,542,608 25:14 1048 25:14f 1048 25:14-16 787 25:15 429 25:15 f. 792,939,970,977,1030, 25:16
....
1035, 1091
25:17 25:18 25:20

25:21 25:22 25:23 25:24
60:3
....
619, 718 bis, 719 472, 890, 940, 1021,
1031,1045 580,976,1039
24:6,8 24:9 24:10

24:11
319,705,1084
.
394,886,919,923 254,424,608
. .
597, 619, 811, 892, 1041, 1103, 1115, 1123
233, 404, 530, 1036, 1047, 10S5, 1173
.666,714,717,877,978,
1111, 1118
25:25 25:26 25:27 26:1 26:2
24:11,17 24:12f 24:13 24:14
374,991,1128 1165,1189 51 Us, 720 699,703
908, ia36, 1040 742, 743, 760, 875. S79, 996 6i:s, 1030, l(Vt5
1039
367. 8.S5
690,811,895
1316
26-3 26-4 26-4,6 26:5 26:7
26:8 26:9
...
.
439,490,608,1130 319,773,782,792,1215 1107,1152 280 bis, 670 463,465,522,550,718,763, 877, 1082, 1213 430,614,1024 231,688,1038,1039,1049
.
27:12
244, 60S, 792, 1021, 1024,
27:12,39 27:13 27:13,17

.
1027,1030,1044,1045 1214 235,634,665,909,1060 799
27: 14
166, 606, 702, 799, 834, 1163
1085
bis
714,1113 26-10 432 26-10-14 885 26-11 714,780 26-12 550,633,775,864 26:13 28,104,506,1042 26-14 427,700,720,724,819,871, 26:16 1048, 1078 432 26-16-18 559,713 26-17 566,1088 26-18 272,537,962 26:19 585, 1047,1135,1179 26:20 183 26:21 520, 640 bis, 720, 1138, 26:22 1139, 1179 26-23 372 6i.s, 656, 1024, 1097 418,420,656,661,683, 26:24 774, 789 233, 812 26:25 26:26 .219,313,323,750,903,1094,
.
. . . . . .
1162^8,1165
26:27 26:28 26:29
538,915
....
.
192, 653, 880, 1079,
1081,1084 291,566,646,653,660,710,
732, 854, 886, 919, 923, 938, 1021, 1025, 1162, 1182
26-30 26:32
314,529,786,789 886,887,906,909,920, 1014,1015,1016,1080,1081 256,311,459,743,1002, 27:1 1060,1068 342 27-1 f 210,223,469 27-2 532,861,1084 27:3 476 27:3,17 1039 27-4 469 27:4f 634 27-4 7 27:5' 257,263,476,563,608,787 235,585 27:6 477 27:7 186,214,538,568,613,640 27:8 261,884,909,1071,1081 27:9 162, 438, 877, 1036 bis, 27:10 1047,1082
.
. .
205 312,572,1214 27: 16 211, 263, 477, 618, 634, 834 235,314,633,995 27:17 802 27:17,26,29 855 27:18 212,886 27:19 27:20 224, 618, 765, 1061, 1076, 1179 6is 464,886,920,1014, 27:21 1151, 1152 475,517,886,1204 27:22 479,724,758 27:23 1058 27:24 487,718 27:25 184,284,550,581,648, 27:27 775,1036 672 27:27, 33 231, 800 27:28 27:29 .244,266,886,919,995,1173 256,476,996,1141 27:30 27 33 219, 244, 282, 471, 877, 1102, 1121, 1173 451,517,570,623 27:34 367 27:35 508,519 27:36 773 27:37 508,810,818 27:38 940,1021,1031 27:39 27:40 157, 265, 309, 638, 653, 1140 145,232,256,264,580,885 27:41 432,828,987 27:42 27:43 .212,313,518,797,800,835 601,604,696 27:44 339,1205 28:2 256 28:3 28:4 ... 317, 365, 579 Ws, 697 210,233,318,1036 28:6 516.617 28:7 162, 257 28:8 199,235,613 28:11 836 28:11-15 189,200,298,550,657 28:13 1113 28:14 528 28:15 167,258 28:16 .562,789,1107,1108,1132, 28:17 1138,1139 1140 6is 28:19
27:14,20 27:15
.
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
28:20 28:21 28:22 28:23 28:26 28:27 28:30
.
1317
654,703,880,1035 497 714 441
fÔO,
316, 485, 5G2, G13, 815, 816
....
428,752,1139,1164
1151
548,792,892,1116 333,356 204, 819, 988 774,833
Romans
1:1 1:1-7 1:2 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9
263,496,793
432 772
2:4 2:5 2:6 2:6 ff 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:11 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15
100, 599,
1200 764
...
549,757,1179 1106 598 424, 757, 796 537,701,778,796,972 311,645,728
407,500 504,516 396,504,781 583,629,1152

589,1032,
1:10
1:11 1:12 1:13
1:14 1:15
603,1024,1027,1030,1090, 1145, 1147, 1149 .... 983,991,1060,1071 ... 244,682,700,705,1059 .242,547,968,1031,1181, 1182,1183 537,764,1179
. . . .
221,486,608,654,678, 687,766
472,773,1152 499,514,599 139,606 654,763,964 .272,606,054,763,787,1002, 1038,1072,1090,1182,1201 1:21 1188 1:21,32 1129 1:22 319,457,489,891, 1038, 1084 1:23 1212 1:14 .... 585, 996, 1002, 1067, 1076,1087 1:25 396,561,585,616 1:2.5,32 960 1:26 496,561,585,051,1179 1:27 350 1:28 968,1041,1086,1087,1138 1:28-30 1155 1:29 ... 510, 533, 794, 1201 6is 1:29-31 427 1:30 232,629,794,1201 l:30f 1201 1:31 372,1097,1201 1:32 710,1100
. . .
.
1:16 1:17 1:18 1:19 1:20
2:1..
2:3 2:3
.
402, 463, 464, 721, 748, 978,
402, 459, 464, 678
1107,1193 /ns, 099

1177
1097 6is 2:16 ... 590,718,721,763,971 2:17 341,796 2:18 500,764 2:19 489,801,1038,1082 2:21-23 915 2:23 712,796 2:25 796, 1019 2:26 481,683,819,1019 2:27 583 t>ii-, 778, 782, 1022,1129 2:28 590,962 2:28 f 766 3:1 395,408,763,1198 3:1,9 739 3:2 413, 485, 659 bis, 816, 1152 3:3 395,739,1190 3:4 193,986 3:4,6,31 940,1170 3:5 .. 315,761,876,1108,1199 3:6 965 6zs, 1022, 1025 3:7 678,739,1145 3:7 f 433 3:8 234,319,678,763,1028,1033, 1036, 1039, 1047, 1049 3:9 .. 391,419,423,621,812, 816, 1036 3:10 751,1164 3:11 315,764,1106,1216 3:12 187,643,751 3:13 330,343,635,1213 3:15 1062, lOSO, 1220 3:18 500,639 3:19 771 3:20 752,902 3:21 523,781,1002 3:22 500,507,1184 3:23 470,518,814,837,847 3:24 175,401,779,782 3:25 1.54,401,480,584,589,595, 781, 784, 810 3:25 f 507,000,024,783 3:2() 547,599,700,781,1071 3:27 498,582,740,780
2:15f
....
....
1318
3-30 3-31 4-1 4:2 4-3 4:3 ff 4-4 4:5 4-6 4:7 4-9 4-10 4-11
.
.

.
301,1025,1027,1154
307, 316 bis
1175 739,1009 393 458 523,609,757,759 258,274 394,722
6:3 6:4 6:5 6:6
592
...
..
.
493,496,651,850,969
367,720,724 394,1202
1198
. .
498,780,781,782
1066
4:11, 13, 16, 18
4:12 4:12,16 4:13
423,521,548 423,1095,1162
400,499,796,1059, 1078, 1188 599,766,1023 644,717,719,1028
4-14 4:17 4:18 4-19
4-20 4-21 4-24 5:1
224,616 .207,215,299,674, 1114,1146 334,532,594,861 724,816,964,1035,1114

.
602
.
5-2 5-3 5-3-5 5-5 5-6 5-6 f 5-7 ... . 5:8 5-9 5-10 5:11 5:12
.
.
200, 583, 598, 823, 850, 859, 889, 928, 931, 1192 224, 900 Ws
394,1187 1200 499,500,583,896

567 632
.
530,652,653,763,876 315,594,784,964,1034 518,659 529

394, 1134 6is
5:13 5-14 5:14,16 5-15 5-15f 5:15,19 5:16 5:18 5-19 5-20 6-1 6:1,15 6:2 6-2 15
. .
348,434,438,604,773, 833,963 342,796 605,833,860 348 774

1159 660 860
394,438,458,1190,1202
394,969,1201 613,722,998
850,876,934
1192
. .
539,728,889,960,996
940 784
6-3'
528 496,699,990,1002,1067, 1088 bis, 1128 6:8 529,872 1128 6:9 6:10 479,541,715 6:10f 539 6:11 481,537,588,1038,1181 587 6:11,23 6:12 1090,1097,1192 6:13 ... 689,855,950,968,1140 316 6:13, 16 6:14 793,796,889 635 6:14f 207 6:14-8:32 850 6:15 6:16 720,1150,1154,1188 6:17 461,719,721,792 518 6:18 6:19 537,650,856 6:20 313,523,537 6:21 714, 721 bis, 722 7:1 602, 733 6is, 978 7:2 500, 529, 1019, 1190 7:3 425, 515, 876, 996, 1002 bis, 1087, 1090 1190 7:3,25 539,1071,1190 7:4 312,782 7:5 7:6 721, 1091, 1095, 1162 his, 1164 .768,874,915,921,940,1014, 7:7 1016, 1192 402,678 7:7-25 341,1160 7:9 7:10 232,398,539,680,698,782 1152 7:12 537,550,609,1102,1121 7:13 158 7:14 1158 7:15 1158 7:15,19 698 7:15 f., 20 319 7:16 677 7:17 .234,399,416,431,705, 7:18 890,1058,1059 158 7:18f 718 7:19 683 7:20 7:21 .539,778,1035,1041,1190 529,780 7:22 .295,530,551,748,780, 7:23 796,1109 461 Ws, 497, 518, 706, 1203 7:24 7:25 287, 537, 540, 770, 780 bis
. . . . .
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
1:1 8-2 8:3
1319
425,1190 402,780,784,788
372, 419, 459, 491, 618, 654, 763, 780, 784, 978, 1096
o.-^
o.-fi
778 707
8.7 8:8 8:9

..Off ^:?i^ -]l 8:12
'80 6is
9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 9:9 9:10 9:11
.480,601,008,760,795,1108
. . .
698 ?>4 7i2 7?>

' ' '
l/m
ony
'.
7OI, 1158
'394
.
.
540
.234,589,698,761,780,795,
1008,1154,1100
1186 584,1009
.
341 6zs, 5.37, 996, 1067, 1076, 1087, 1095, 1162, 1192
. .
]i 15
533,098,732
29, 405, .595
535,620,061,777,87.5,877, 878,103.5,1107,1191 94 8-18 8-18-24 1191 8:20 224,298,349,550,

.
8 ^17 18
529,1035
395, 1023 bis
9:12 9:13 9:14 870,917,934,940 9:15 474 9:16 342 519 9:17 686 699 705' 986 9:18 340 9:19 739 12 9:19,20 .... 423 9:20 402, 464, 545, 678 6is, 1148,
" ' "
"
394 425,434,566,782,1173, 1188 218, 277, 394,663 7m 967

'
.
....
'
'
'
1149, 1151
9:21 9:22
..:::
.
503 OQ^
496, 654, 703, 1129
4-^8
1100, 1139
503,770,780,904
II 22 23 24 20 27 28 29
,. 30
?} -
639, 772
9:22,24 9:23 f 9:24 9:25

.
713 718
438, 1138, '1139 6u, 1156, 1103
.
498,503,577,087
. .
448, .531, .5.3.3, 54.3, 742, 1105 529, 500, 505 /m-, .573, 629,
.
722,739,766,770,967,1040 009,1040
477
. .
9:26 9:27 9:29 9:.30 9:31
...;;
. '
1049
'166 ^474
' '
63^
^4.7
..'.'.'.'..['.
f.
782,1184
roc;
.480,504,528,021,841, 991,1071 837,841 630,1192
31-35 1198 31-39 432 32 244,291,424,509,62.3,724, 72.5,773,812,900,905,1001, 1148 /tr 8:33 504, 607, 652, 764, 779, 795,
. .
1118, 1175
300 son ... .i! 514, 594,' 6S7 500.648 706 Ws '790 721 bis, 934 6^, 1106, lllsi I'-QO 10:14f. ... ôq
.
10:1 10:2 10:3 10:5 10:0 ^0:8 10:9 10:10 10:12 10:14
11 CI
...
.'
500 781,817,818
IO35
.' ."
499,006
ii9-?
.....
..
.
394^ 505, 649
8:38 8:38 f 8:39 9:1 434, 444, 9:3 .. 307,

.
.
I ?-I
::;:;:;::'S,'^S?
629
89.5,1118
iS;!?.
10:18
.
::::::
.
. .
;--,1174, 1175
'
425,506,652,918, 1151,
.
427,1189 749,779,782
.588, 57.5,
880, 1035, 1132 812, 880, 919,
10:18,19 10:19 10:20

.
n^^
1174
3.55.057 700 1103

'
55',
J.t
94,.
11:1
.'
810, 917, 1108,1
1038
iVoVl'U
'
/MS,
1148
11:1, 11
?:!. 9:4
1
409,427,980 1182 794 oru 724,9.54
11:2 11 q 11:3
.529, 739, li
'
08 634
1320
11:4 11:6 11:6,22 11:7 11:8 11:10 11-11 11:12 11:13 11-14 11-15 11:15 f 11-16 11:17 11:18 11:20 11:21 11:22 11:23 11-24 11-25 11:26 11:27 11:30 11:31
.

254,411,739
1159 1025 509
12:21 12:26 13:1 13:2 13:3 13:3f 13:4 13:5 13:6 13:7 13:8
534,763,881
1061,1076
262, 1061 bis
99Sbis 218 440,602,1151 1017,1024 411 395 1023,1181 402,418,678,1201 1158,1204 532,1199 609, 1012 fe^s, 1160 441, 524, 965 6is 418,524
. .
524,525,559,561,616 550,791 324,559,772 615,704,782

532 532,685 627,773 302,395,461,463,795, 1032,1200 432 567,583,595,759,773 444,583,1205
443
11:,32
11:33
395 444,579,1108 807 201,204 763 1019 1084,1162,1181 705 6is, 941 758,1202 .... 243,748,897,898, 1066, 1078 288,688,748,758,766,874 13:9 13:11 298,640,666,705,1059, 1076,1134,1140 901 13:12 261,792,850,1140 13:13 14:2 695 615,1060 14:3 810 14:4 402,539,541,678,694 423,738 14:4,10 290,616,695 14:5 539 14:6 539 14:7 201,1010,1019,1027, 14:8 1179,1189 699,834 14:9 678,694 14:10
.
11:33-36 11:36
.
12:1 12:1 12:2 12:3
530,609,891 .562,583,616,629,633,
1003, 1072, 1090, 1201
.244,282,294,450,460, 487,568,606,673,675,692, 766,774 439,581,946,1134,1135 12:6 12:6-8 433 758 12:7,9 561,609 12:8 396,1133 12:9 12:9-13 439 946 12:9 f., 16 f 12:10-13 523 Ws, 1133 12- 11 1172 524 12:12 !! 439,1133 12:14 12:15 440,944,946,1092,
. . .
12:4 12:5
967
14:11 14:13 14:14 14:15 14:17 14:19 14:20 14:21
1034
1059,1078,1094 588,743 317,708 419,784 325,767,1176

583, 1152, 1153
.
.268,706,721,858,978, 1059,1066
12:16 12:17 12:18 12:20
440
&is,
1106, 1201 594, 614
440,573 486,598,611,766
342
feis,
484, 1019
721 5is,1175 14:22 897,898,1019 14:23 1096 15:1 746 15:2 1191 15:3 563,685 15:4 326,1214 15:5 939,940 15:5,13 372,809,1181 15:7 .499,632,757,909,1040, 15:8 1049, 1060 686,909 15:14 298,583,665,846 15:15 474,498,587,594 15:16 681 15:16, 19 486,626 15:17 720, 1158, 11 (M 15:18 644,645,909 15:19 710, 748, 1162 &is 15:20
.
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
15:21 15:22
1321
235, 953
720,1159
.
470, 487, 7G2, 765, 774, 884, 99G, lOGl, 10G7, 1089, 1094, 1171
.
15:23 15:23-28 15:24 15:25 15:26 15:27 15:28 15:29 15:30 15:31 15:32 15:33 16:1 16:2 ... 16:4 16:5 16:5 f 16:6 16:6 f 16:7 16:8 16:9 16:10 16:11 16:13 16:14 16:15 16:17 616, 16:18 16:19 16:20 16:21 16:23 16:25 16:25 f 16:25-27 16:26 16:27
. . . . .
.
152,996,1067,1076
434
1:14 1:15 1:16 1:17 1:18
744
173,255,488
324,974
1129
418, 987 bis, 1162, 1163 .500, 503, 537, 780, 827, 828 539 1:18, 30
...
367,502,528,782,891 529,1009
582 589 688 783 529 396 782 721 728 235 728 488 442 728 172 236
1:19 1:20 1:21 1:22 1:23 1:24 1:25 1:25 1:26 1:26 1:27 1:27 1:28 1:29 1:31
356, 1218
757, 764
f
l:23f
166,
965 962,1175 174,1186 539 686
...
ff ff
654,663,667,763,962
1200 bis 962,1163 1207 411, 757, 762 409, 763 654,1109 752,986, 987 ter 949,985,1202 677
116 85 1181
315, 505, 680, 687, 718, 633,
172,337, 622,
2:1, 3
172,255,759,783 259,274 682 172, 173, 235, 255 6is
173, 773 758, 778, 783, 800, 954
2:1-3 2:1-4 2:2 2:4 2:5 2:6 2:7
157,566,1206 566 1186

418, 586, 589, 621, 784, 1107. 1110, 1117
771
221,487,605,813,919
611
173, 504
235, 236 bis 230, 527, 696
1117 439 772 437, 438, 776
Corinthians
459, 760
.
1:1 1:2 1:4 1:5 1:6 1:8 1:9
235 765 772 500 792 583, 782

. . .
2:7 f 2:8 2:11 f 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 3:1 3:2 3:3 ... 3:4 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:11 3.12 3:13 ... 3:14
.
1:10
11
203,360, 419, 983, 1046, 1186 265, 267, 502, 1035

. .
.
3:14f
3:15 3:17 3:18 3:19
724 1015 782 325, 510 504, 516, 654 159 159,208 724 158 bis 484,1201 158, 159,267, 1186 6ts 743, 750 583 838 743,1189 691, 786 616 427,560,983,1178 590, 731, 732 6w, 1176 233 1008 350,582,1008
412, 728,
12 13
255,401,497,699,1153 129, 910
729,960 658,1038 474
1322
3:21 3:22 3:23 4:1 4:2 4:3 4:4 4:5 4:6

497,685,949,1000 793,1189
1027
...
.
481,710,968 992,993 458,537,670,992,1186 319,627,688 752,757,763
203, 260, 325, 342, 561, 587,
607,630,675,721,749,984,
987, 1202 bis
4:7 4:8
..
4:9 4:11 4:12 4:13 4:14 4:15 4:16 4:17
341,1184 428, 529, 818, 841, 923 Ms, 1004,1148,1149,1199 480,481,769,788

148, 191
1121 618
. .
845,1138,1139 233,283,582,1018,1187
632
.
...
483, 712 6is, 724, 782, 960, 989
356,871 4:19 1202 4:20 4:21 ... 394,456,534,589,737 5:1 ... 710,727,770,803,881 705,1152 5:3 628 5:4 776 6:6 219 349 399 5:7 5:8 498, 93l' 955' 999 5:9 757, 811, 1047, 1170 423 5:9 f 317,846 6:9,11 6:10 .272,887,920,947,963,965, 1014, 1026, 1162, 1163 6:11 ... 232,1047,1060,1185 5:12 547,736,944,1202 689 6:13 603,811 6:1 .233,504,616,587,652,670 6:2 751, 1149, 1173 bis 6:3 6:4 423,698,941 6:5 232, 313, 409, 561, 648, 718,
.
.....
6:13 703,704 6:14 582 860,940 6:15 6:16 233,1112 6:18 471,640 6:19 497,716 6:20 511, 1U9 bis 7:1 619,720,721,722 408 7:2 1199 7:3 7:5 .. 597, 751, 1010, 1023, 1025 609 7:6 7:7 545, 688, 695, 923, 968, 1181 218,1012 7:9 7:10 518, 794 bis 7:12 232,680 7:13 440,442,724,956 587,1026 7:14 429,948 7:15 264,462 7:16 1025 7:17 740 7:18 1198 7:18 ff 394,654,751 7:19 716 7:20 430,1023 7:21 795 7:22 429 7:23 1128, 1140 7:25 7:26 320, 545, 1059, 1205 432 7:27 7:28 536,710,846,923,1020, 1022, 1027 319,487,994 7:29 1127,1140 7:29 f 476,477,533 7:31 767 7:33 523,993 7:34 7:35 287, 504, 537, 546, 547,
. .
....
. .
7:36 7:37 7:38 7:39
687,689,763,1109 489,629,1204 440,549,656,700 218,299 .291,716,720,733,897,

1076, 1080, 1082
726, 1001
7:39, 40
6:6 6:6
460, 705
f
8:1^
8:2 8:3 8:4 8:5 8:6 8:7 8:9 8:10 8:11
6:6,8
6:7 6:8 6:9 6:10 6:11
610,816 487 218, 293, 690, 808 704,705

947, 1160, 1164
1019 435 1038
...
8:12
1164,1189 .358,411,654,701,704, 807,809 752,1158
698,845 424 793,1025,1026,1181 440, 583, 724 500,532,743 537,995 778,1072 317
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
8:13 9:1 9:2
9:3 9:4
1323
.
9:4f 9:4,5
9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 .. 9:9 9:9 f 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:12,15 9:13 9:14 9:15
.
.
268,962,1154 364,587,917,1157 244,537,1012,1148, 1160,1187 537,703,704 1158 1169,1174 918 477,480 402,1068,1164,1177 478,532,770,1147 208, 917 6is, 1158, 1174
508, 541
10:10 10:17 10:18 10:19 10:20 10:21 10:22 10:24 10:25 10:27 10:29 10:30
10:31 10:33 11:2
429, 488, 718, 880
6w
509,773,774,902 700,783 233,234,743,1035,1036 880,1214 509,791,1183 325,516,923 394,1203

263 1018 694, 739
688 6is, .402,509,530,609,632,

678, 720, 721
223 224, 996, 1061, 1067, 1076

. .
1189
.
479, 487, 504, 652, 660, 690

.
681,1009,1017,1022 500,681,1187
533
521,542,623
598
.
.439,587,704,845,984,
996, 1058
11:3 11:4 11:5 11:6 11:8 11:9
.479,482,487,506,881, 895,1035 769,781 477,606

his,
342, 530
.
656, 687, 789
342,371,809,948,1012,
1059, 1218
9:16 9:17 9:18 9:19
270,1012 485.550,816,1100 .477,656,759,784,984,

992, 1076
11:9,12
11:11 11:12 11:13 11:14 11:15 11:17 11:18
793 565 584 1187
.516,540,597,600,665, 775,1129
539 1217 843
.
9:19f
9:19-21
9:19,20,22
9:21 9:22 9:23 9:25 9:26
. .
232,329,504,516,1216 742,773,1199 504,843 148,478,707,880,1153 .1127,1138,1139,1140,1154,

. .
.
1159, 1103
11:20 11:20 11:21 11:22
ff
565,582,773 541,687,689,890,1086 686 574 218 bzs, 663 174,487,550,585,803,881, 893,1042,1103,1152 234,562 1152 342,695,854,880
.
.
.
9:26 9:27
10:1 10:2 10:3 10:3 f 10:4 10:5 10:6 10:7-9
880 201,244,633,988 419 808 bis 776 883 201,339,418,838 418 704
931 403,1185 317,635,1218 189,967 404,626,703,707 320, 430, 933, KXK)
.
918, 928, 934, 1072, 1090, 1169, 1174
10:7-10 10:9 10:10 10:11 10:12 10:13

10:14 10:15
598, 632, 996, 1000, 1(K) I, 1007, 1070, 10S7, 10S8
471,1154 488,718
11:23 .100,312,561,579,838,1214 1049 11:23 f 234,595,685 11:24 11:25 612, 1074, 1181 974 11:25 f 11:26 880,975 504,787,1188 11:27 519 11:28 11:29 880,1023,1129 1201 11:29 ff 880 11:30 1015 11:31 KKH) 11:33 502 ll:33f 11:34 521,791,974 12:2 407, 412, 503, 922, 974, 1033 1034 12:3 470,773 12:0,11
.
1324
12-8

696, 770
NEW TESTAMENT
1157 427,917 546 626 170,279,470,487,550, 571,670,791
12:8,10
746,749
74:7 bis 12-9 f 758 12-9-11 166 12-10 530,580,653,1199 12:11 419 12-12 485,757,1189 12:13 793 12-13,28 550 12:15 616,1164 12-15f 1015,1023 12-19 663,664,777,1107 12-22 668 12-23 1179 12-26 550,597,792 12:27 300, 488 tis, 574, 696, 1152 12:28 757,774 12-29 311, 551, 777, 784 12:31 358,1105 13-1 758 13-1-3 13-2 219, 316 bis, 609, 750, 751, 772 bis, 1090, 1163 201, 324, 484, 504, 764, 876, 13:3 984, 1216 148 13-4 1178 13-4-7 758 13:4,8 476,477,774 13-7 357 13:8 766 13-10 000,971 13:11 13:12 208, 564 6is, 582, 600, 625,
.
14:23 14:24 14:25 14:26 14:27
14:28 14:29 14:31 14:33 14:34 14:35 14:37 14:38 14:39 15:1 f 15:1-2 15:2
13:13 14:1 14:5 14:6 14:7
649,792,794,827 281,405,668,758 993 548,640,1017,1039,1188

483, 1188, 1189
.
.233,357,423,581,778,
1109, 1140, 1155, 1188, 1189 bis
14:7,9 14:7,9,16
14:8 14:9 14-10 14:11 14:13 14-15 14:15,19 14:16
*.
871 876 807 .323,353,582,889,1110,1115 392,1021
272,588 950,955 533,874

261
.
460, 691, 759, 965
bis,
14-17 14:19 14-20 14:21 14:22
1026,1159 1152, 1153 233,661,792,1188 524 207,591,748

458, 537
166 775 606,608 497 1220 792 845,1038 948,1011 .765,1059,1061,1094 427,724 954 .425,530,640,738,1008, 1011, 1169, 1188, 1205 525, 550, 1034 bis 15:3 844,894,896,1182 15:4 15:6 511, 548, 642, 666, 674, 848 820 15:7 f 15:8 .233, 516, 669, 969, 1025,1 154 15:9 279, 658, 669, 713, 779, 962 .411,654,712,713,720, 15:10 791, 1008, 1166 707 15:11 658, 820, 1034 6ts, 1085 15:12 1008 15:13, 16 1012 15:13, 15-17 1008 15:14,17,19 007,1154 15:15 817 15:15f 244,783 15:18 204 15:19 395,794 15:21 587, 827 15:22 872 15:22,28 767 15:23 312,851,1214 15:24 870 15:26 244, 395, 658, 1034, 1106 15:27 15:28 357, 657, 809, 819 bis 15:29 630, 632, 963 bis, 965 bis, 1012,1025,1180 876 15:29,51 470,677 15:30 487,685,827,1150 15:31 539,869,931 15:32 207,422,1200 15:33 626 15:34 740,1022 15:35 264,423,463,678 15:36 .374,878,892,1021,1106, 15:37 1119, 1187, 1213
. . .
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
15:39
.
.
1325
297,659 476,643,823,1187 662,886,919
687, 747, 749, 752
?>i.s-,
770,
15:39,41 15:40
15:41 15:42 15:42fT 15:43 f 15:44 15:45 15:48 15:49 15:50 15:51 15:52 15:54 15:54 f 15:54-7 15:57 16:1
16:
1153,1163,1187 747 6i6-, 748 748, 749 6is

794 392
1:12 1:13 1:15 1:17 1:18 1:19 1:22 1:23 1:24 2:1
...
547, 614, 765, 1150 tw,
1157, 1176, 1177, 1190 1034, 1202
429,866
1178 234 Ks 669 429, 710, 731 6is 200, 349, 678
.
.
236,424 212 .602,678,1033,1034,1035 510 ... 401, 539 &is, 700, 886,
.
1059, 1078
405,699,1036 334,423,753,819,1212 392,587 429,778 258 1200 1106,1116 594,619

197
2:2 2:3
1182 .'686,699,705,706,720,721,
2:3,4,9
2:4 2:5 2:6 2:7 2:9 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:13
887,920,1014 846 423,583,598

1008
411,537,782 208,532,1090
194,699,1045 720,956
If
16:2
325,343,672
729 408-9 .992,996,1059,1061,1066, 1067, 1077
.
16:2f
16:3 16:4 16:5 16:6
.
474,1156,1185 364,513,595,1213
.
235, 490, 532, 536, 688, 765, 900 bis, 901, 966, 1061,
.
16:7 16:9 16:10 16:11 16:12

16:15 16:16 16:17 16:18 16:20 16:21 16:22
16:12,19
434,869,882 .488,490,551,722,969, 1109,1121,1127,1130 877 364,800 795,993 244,853,856,933,943 235,243,423,619 488 . 173,1034 233,627 173,205,235,288,685 685 692 416,496,685
.
.
2:14 2:14-7:16 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:21 3:1 3:2 .. 3:2 f 3:3 ..
3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8-10 3:10
1091,1171 474,498 407 537 272,626,696 644,881 992 307, 316 6ts, 1175 560,778,828,1120,1201 217 .404,658,1034,1085-6, 1163,1166 423 367,480,1213
1204 1136 949 1109 ^^3 532
313, 939,945, 1012, 1160 6zs
2 Corinthians
^.
3:10f
g
.
j^
774 1:1 1:3 .. 396, 785, 945, 1133, 1182 716, 772 Ms 1:4 393,632,685,784,787 1:6 ... 504 1:7 518,632,765,996, 1061, 1:8 .. 1067, 1213 .325,360,498,577,687,897, 1:9 900,908,983,1186 212,710 1-10 474 1-11
. . .
3:12 3:13
3:14 3:15
318, 394, 883, 1003, 1075,
3:15f
3:15, 16
1102,1159,1171,1203 244,729 602 300

971
3:16 3:17 3:18
207,392,617,618
769
.
.
.486,503,530,789,810, 820,891,967,968,1154
1326
4:1 4:2 4:3 4:4 4:5 4:6 4:7 4:8 4:8
f

1128
316,338,771,810 234,587 503,779,1094,1171 584,1187 764,962

497, 514
1027 962,1008 7:9 599,834,1166 7:11 427, 481, 523, 686 bis, 700, 705,741,1038,1059,1078,1215 7:12 225,429,641,846,1060,
7:8
7:8,14
1073, 1080, 1091
596,1138
f
4:8,9
4:13 4:16 4:17 4:18 5:1 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:6 5:6 ff
1201 1139 1134
522,681,750,766 297,551,654,763 891,1132 399,418,498,762,779,1019 600

244, 563 bis, 1027 604, 722, 762, 963
5:6,8 5:8 5:10

5:11 5:12 5:13 5:14 5:15 5:17 5:18 5:19 6:20 6:2 6:3 6:3 f 6:4 6:4 ff 6:4-7 6:7 6:9 6:9 f
498,596 474,560,1135 440 217 625 582,773 500,877,880,909 316,439,626,792 394,539,845,1203 499,699,833,1035 517,539,631,773 654 774 683,964,1033
1140, 1141
7:13 7:14 7:15 7:16 8:1 8:2 8:3 8:5 8:6 8:7 8:8 8:9 8:10
663,1205 603,632,968 612 217,474 587 262,607 434,609,616 1152,1159 968,1003,1072,1090 195,598,933,994
763
708, 834 bis
.
.
221,425,523,703,1059,
1158, 1162
8:10f
8:11
.
1066
.395,600,996,1061,1067,
497,507 440 442 316,454,481

591 442 bis 582,777 827
1073 bis, 1076 8:12 957,967 8:13 395 8:14 707,986 8:15 660,763,774,1202 8:16 396,585 8:17 657,665 8:18 ... 562, 582, 770, 1134 <er 8:18-21 433 8:19f 431 8:20 .431,699,1039,1134,1136 8:22 488 <er, 530, 659, 664, 1041,
.
1103, 1123 bis
6:10 6:11 6:13 6:14

6:15
442,1136,1140 523,828 895 486,487

. .
8:23 8:24 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:3 f
.....
...
.
395,441,504,632 946 782,1059,1066 221,261,475,548,550 375,983

988 988 1199
9:3,4
9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 9:9 9:10 9:11
330, 375
bis,
6:15f
6:16 6:17 6:18 7:1 7:5
528 bis, 529, 625,890,1051 217 1184
996,1086,1182 295,604,1202 394,597,1202

1177, 1201
216,528 853 458,595 576

415, 439
bis,
9:11, 13
9:12
9:13 9:14
897,
900
7:7
bis, 1135 665,1091
272 799 946,1136 439 .323,375,435,439,536, 565,881 781,783 562,605
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
9:15
10:1
10:1, 2
1327
1002,1130,1149
605
.407,424,457,474,686,688
217 407
12:1 12:2
....
f
622, 77S,
7<J3, 1035, 1041, 1103
10:1-11:6 10:2 401, 407, 474, 481, 490 6w, 519,743,1035,1038,1059,1000, 1083, 1123 10:3 407, 792 bis 10:4 537,626 10:5 500, .593 10:7 407,497 699 10:7, 11 10:8 407 716 10:8, 13 10:9 407,597,9.59,909,1025, 1040,1091,1095 10:10 233,392,4.34,1200 10:11 291, 407, 078, 710 Ms, 731 10:12 315,401,529,687,1201 316 10:12,18 10:13 407,719,1078 10:14 477,561,029,11.59
. .
. . . . . . .
12:2 12:3 12:4 12:0 12:7
12:2,4
.
1045 349 710

212, 225 bis, 491, 881, 11.39
519,988
.
. .
408, 532, 536,
.5.38,
629,
12:9
900, 985 488, 541 &is, 602, 664, 670,
879, 897
12:9, 15
12:10 12:11 12:12 12:13 12:14 12:15 12:16 12:17
279 973
478,920,1003,1014,1160 408,757,772,1151 218,341,479,512,1025,

1199, 1210
10: 16
244, 297, 517, 547, 550,
702,1077 277, 596 392,476 .436,474,488,718,720, 744, 893 bis, 896 218
bis,
e29
6is,
647
10:18
11: 1
.
31.5,707
368, 486, 543, 886, 923 bis, 1004, 1180
12:18 12:19 12:20

12:21
13:1 13:2 13:4 13:5 13:7
401,084,770 297,644,696,879
.
267, 408, 534, 5.39, 731 bis, 929, 995 ter, 11.59, 1101, 1174
.
ll:lf., lOf., 23
1199
11:2 11:3 11:4 11:5 11:6 11:8 11:9 11:10
261,349,1088 782,995 .... 747,748,1151,1186 297,519,548,5.50,629 129,395,1202 219,1165 750,778 1034 1180 11:1.5 11:16 .208,2.34,743,853^,933, 1023, 1025 1199 11:19 L 606,802 11:20 11:21 4.34,963,1033,1199 1198 11:22 244,293,297,4.50,551, 11:23 555, 558, 629 bis, 1109 442 11:23 ff 784 11:23,27 61.5,635 11:24 212,833,897 11:25 793 ll:25f 501 11:26 2.58 11:27 244, .537, 547, 646 11:28 677 bis 11:29 475 11:30 255,258,498 11:32
.
. .
.193,475,021,716,910, 995,1117,1173 478,674,702 674,1035
598 751,1011,1025,104.5,1169
.
.394,423,0.56,70.3,880,
13:9 13:10 13:12
919,1102,1173 098,703 099.845

773
bis
Galatians
1:1 1:2 1:3
567,582,778,795 773, 780

f
778
232, 515, 618, 629
1:4 1:5 1:6 1:6 1:7
408
748, 749, 879 bw, 965
f
1:8 1:8 f 1:9 1:10

1:11 1:12
..
747 bis 704,778,78.5,1011, 1107, 1169 313,102,406,1010,10-26
610,939 483,968
1015 474
582.1189
1328
1:13 1:14 1:16 1:18 1:19 1:20 1:22 1:22 1:23 1:24 2:1

783
298,620,633,779
5S7
bis
561
f
.
2:1,2
2:2 2:4 2:5 2:5 2:6
224,1025 538,1034 376,530 412,888 659,892,1115,1139,1147 523 255,283,581 636 542, 988 6^s, 995 613,802,984 367,438 434 438, 731, 732 6is, 743,
751, 1115
2:6-9 2:7
130
.
3:23 3:25 3:28 4:1 4:4 4:5 4:6 4:6 f 4:7 4:8 4:9 4:10 4:11 4:12 4:15 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:20
....
857,878,1074,1075
635
313,419,558 733,751,757 820 395,960,987 26,231,395,465

441 395 1172
879,1111,1199 613,810,922 995,1169

482
.
841,921,922,1014,1048 203,325,342,984
186,1162 713, 975 368,784,886,919, 937,1199 704, 729 &is, 760, 881 750 727
2:9 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:13 334, 530, 533, 1000 bis, 1181 2:14 224,626,880,1028,1029 530,598 2:15 2:16 .... 752,796,1025,1204 2:17 232, 916 feis, 940, 1176 316,402,480,678 2:18 402,539,796 2:19 2:20 479, 632, 715, 779 1190 2:21 978 2:23 3:1 .. .349,473,608,621,723, 792,1193 3:2 579, 1060 710 3:4 394 3:5 698 3:7 367 3:8 3:10 .562,598,631,720,744, 773,1067,1086,1088,1159 395 3:11 3:13 317, 631 6is 1049 3:14 3:15 423,1155,1188 342,604,712 3:16 3:17 580, 672, 699, 1003, 1072, 1090 583 3:18 3:19 .221,349,411,647,736, 974, 975 423 3:20 777,778,940,1015 3:21
.
.208,485,540,546,550, 816,820 394,1000,1085,1202,1203 703,714,719,723,933,960 608,816,1118 579,978,1075

. .
4:24 4:24 f 4:24,26 4:25

. .
.254,398,411,530,547, 759,766
760 398,547 663,892,1138,1139 942 399,482,484,816 1062,1076 518 bts, 562, 880, 960
'
4:25 4:26 4:27 4:30 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:6 5:7 5:10 5:11 5:12
5:13 5:14 5:15 5:16 5:17 5:19 5:20
....
583
1094, 1171
540,727,746,957
1008
809,819,873,923,
940, 1004
....
. .
605,692,1202 288,419,688,766,773,874 933,996 834 ... 698,850,957,994,998 404,729 265,267 5:20f., 22f 794 5:21 290,771,1035 5:22 428,1178 5:24 767 1009 5:25 541 5:26 6:1 439,995,1027,1180 6:3 .. 411,743,751,1127,1173 6:4 690 889 6:5 6:6 486,773
. .
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
6:7 6:8 6:9 6:10 6:11
6:12 6:14 098 779 1023,1102,1121,1129,1170 2:15 2:17 2:18 2:20 2:21 3:1 3:1-13 3:2 3:3
1329
589,769,783 483,547 745,769 498,560,787,1131
772 505 435
424, 1045, 1148 bis
...
658,670,762,763,968,974 292, 533, 734, 74 Wcr,

846 feis, 917, 1045, 1177 148,201,325,532,698,
...
732,880,885,985 401,796,854,940,
1003, 1170
3:4, 13
6:15 6:17
^ ^ Ephesians
.
234, 743
295,495
1:1 1:2 1:3
582,1107 780,991 396,763,781,785 433 1:3-14 279,644 1:4 226,583 1:5 503,716 1:6 262 1:7 716,909 1:8 226,766,809 1:10 778,1071 1:12 396,543,540 1:13 713 l:13f 608,766,782,783 1:15 813,1102 1:16 1086 1:16-18 309 6is, 326 6is, 327 <er, 398, 1:17 933, 940, 983 6is, 994, 1214 1:18 411, 1072, 1087 778 1:19 716 l:19f 408,440 1:20 1:21 413,629,647 632 1:22 729,1206 l:22f 805-6 1:23 789 2:1 497,651 2:2 419,497,503,530,788 2:3 ... 478 6is, 482, 584, 833 2:4 ... 2-5 529 533 2:5,8 202, 784 2:7 2:8 582,704,705,1182 744 2:9 605,681,716,776 2:10 774,777,783 2:11 398,516,658,782 2:12 1115, 1139 2:13 2:14 480, 498, 709 /.s 433 2:14-18
. . .
845 783 523,787 3:5 1089 3:6 1078 3:6, 8 3:8 278, 439, 483, 516, 663, 760 bis, 773 ^^^ 262 3:8, 16 724 3:11 f 784 3:12 412,728,729,784 3:13 435 3:14 433 3:14-19 772 3:15 309,327,593,766 3:16 1086 3:16 f 1087,1090 3:17 212 3:17(18) 787 3:18 401,519 3:19 3:20 517, 548, 629, 647 bts 408,660 3:21 478,716,783,1201 4:1 440,807 4:2 946 4:2 f 567 4:6 746 4:7 392,479 4:8 .278,298,499,665,667, 4:9 .. 735,766 297,550,647,806 4:10 424,694,1152 4:11 624 4:12 503, 773, 975 bis 4:13 712 4:15 589,745 4:16 700,1078 4:17 405,407,412 4:17 f 412,518,523,910,1117 4:18 4:21 507, 545, 5S8, 1027, 1148 280 bw, 283, 662, 1038, ia^9 4:22 740, 854 4:25 605,949,1173 4:20 892,1116 4:28 620,753,994 4:29 594 4:32 940 5:2 f 541,753,1173 5:3
. . . .
.
1330
5:4 5:5 5:8 5:11 5:12 5:14 5:15

714,887,920,1138 .319,330,360,406,713,753, 786,890 497,651
529 530
1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:15
...
483,485,510,595,694 608,665,766
262, 1091
279,540,784
.
235, 265, 743
6is,
750, 1153
l:15f
l:16ff 1:17 1:18 1:19 1:20 1:21
310,328,422,948,1199 1172 440 5:1.5-22 5:18 533,854,890 690 5:19 500 5:21 393,757,946 5:22 5:23 399,416,768,781,782,794 394,794 5:24 757 5:25 5:26 521,784,811,1023 687 5:27 1147 5:29 260 5:30 560,574,623 5:31 677 5:32 5:33 330,746,766,769,933,943, 994,1187 757 6:1 793 6:2 6:3 299, 875, 984 757 6:4 757,782 6:5 792 6:6 355 6:8 315,502 6:9 550,816 6:10 6:11 .... 502,991,1003,1075 566,651 6:12 563ier, 777 6:13 409 6:14 6:16 589,605,652 6:17 412, 712, 954 "618 6:18 f 6:19 1090 6:21 608, 785 6:22 699,846
.
...
1200 1153 538

.
.
487, 530, 646, 703, 871,
889,1186,1187 787 787,794
Philippians
1:1 1:2 1:3 1:5 1:6
394,628,763,783
795
604,772
783
...
.
478,686,705,776,889
699
1:6,25
1:7
.491,504,566,632,658,787,
966, 1131
1:8 1:9 1:10
1032
633,699 594,991,1071
1065 1059 1:22 537,698,737,810,875, 1023, 1183 1:23 130, 278, 442, 488 bis, 532, 546, 628, 664, 858, 1072, 1076 1066 1:23,29 1:25 613,787,828 1:26 588,783,784 1:27 439,505,529,637,766 1:28 412,537,729 1:29 487,632,777,1162 1:30 414, 439, 530, 731, 1135 6is 130,410,744,1019 2:1 992 2:2 2:3 ... 519, 690, 692, 1123 bis 2:4 292,746 2:5 699,703 2:6 152,407,546,1041,1059,1066 1114 2:7 523,645,1122 2:8 629 6is, 632 2:9 503 2:10 2:11 188,795,1034 2:12 534,606,634,1162,1173 2:13 560,564,632,769,1059, 1182 2:15 488,505,550,644,713, 714, 775 2:16 550 2:17 787,828 627 2:17f 2:18 207, 487, 535 2:20 960,961,996 767,773 2:21 441,1199 2:22 2:23 224,620,687,974 895 2:24 172,418,502 2:25 888,964,1120 2:26 2:27 505, 601, 646 2:28 297, 298, 545, 665, 846 480,481 2:29 184 bis, 503, 781 2:30
1:21,24,29
.
.
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
3:1
.
1331
1128 860 782, 783 498 881, 968 717, 978 172, 255, 781 764, 779, 859
3:2 3:2 3:3 3:4 3:5 3:6 3:7

3:8
420, 487, 546, 650, 890, 1058, 1085, 1146, 1153 471, 949, 1100, 1178, 1200
.
1 1 1 1
3f
3,
... ...
.
.
1201 540, 769, 785 1129, 1138, 1139, 1154 523, 598, 657 261
1
1
1
4 5 6
6,
1 1
396,480,481,584,898,
704, 1041
8 9
483, 485, 576, 600, 731, 784, 993, 1049, 1102
396,481,485,504,652,764,
812, 983, 1036, 1109, 1145, 1148, 1151. 1186
3:9 3:10
3:11 3:12
588, 598, 685, 782, 783, 784 150 6is, 990, 1002, 1067, 1088, 1200
. .
1017 605,811,812,845,901,916, 1017, 1024, 1030

.
3:13
472, 489, 506, 807, 1038,
1060, 1202
3:13f 3:14 3:15 3:16 3:17 3:18 3:18f 3:20

3:21
765
...
.
146,547,608,656,782 395,749,931 .329,944,1081,1092,1187

221
473,718
413, 1107
714
. .
496, 528, 996, 1061, 1066 1067, 1076
4:2 4:3 4:5 4:7 4:8 4:9 4:10

4:11
235
612, 728
.
...
.
. .
546,763,1202 477,499,629,800,1183 698, 724, 733, 765, 812, 1146 698,724,1182 348,476,487,604,963,965, 1049, 1059, 1066, 1147, 1212
.
772 433 1 10 1086, 1087 1 10-12 1200 1 13 ... 212, 496, 497, 503, 818 1 15 233, 234, 772, 896 1 15, 23 772 1 16 567, 583, 588, 654 bis, 672, 763, 844, 894, 896 1 17 234, 534, 622, 679, 774, 896 1 18 243, 375 bis, 890 1 :20 226 1 :21 375,777,910, 1115, 1117 1 :21f 434 1 :22 437, 496, 644 1 :23 243,717, 1148 .... 165,565, 574, 712, 784 1 :24 1 :24, 28 f 724 440,1135 1 :26 1 :27 262, 713 714 1 :29 2 1 337, 364, 733, 908 116 2 :lf 2 :2 243, 262, 439 243 2 :3 987 2 :4 2 :5 651, 1026, 1187 212 2 :7 2 :8 764, 787, 933, 995 his, 1107,
1 1
9ff
9-23
835, 845, 1038, 1041, 1060, 1103, 1166

bis,
677, 687, 721
1116, 1159, 1169
4:11, 17
4:12 4:13 4:14 4:16 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:20 4:22
569 117,342,371,1181 478 1121, 1178 183 594,1166 172 262, 586, 783 785 548, 599, 670
Colossians
1:2
27,
185, 408
1:2,6,14,16,18,20,21,22,26,
28
243
2 :8, 19 2 :10 2 :11 2 12 2 13 2 13 f 2 14 2 15 2 :16 2 :17 2 18 2 :19 2 :20 2 :22 2 23 3 :1

: : : : : :
:
...
1164 712 215 152, 529 560, 789, 1205 658 524, 528, 634, 648, 783 226, 474, 589, 805
204,460,1182 712 164, 477, 500, .551 bL^, 585 478, 479, 713, 113S, 1139 559, 576, 792, 807 714, 789 bi-i 375, 626, 742, 88 1 1 152 bis 529
,
1332

2:18 2:19 3:1 3:2 f 3:3 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:9 3:10 3:11 3:11
NEW TESTAMENT
407, 1151, 1152 &is
547 3:1 f 3:2 881,1172 3:3 588, 628 6is 3:5 727, 728, 758 bis, 960 971 3:7 3:9 854,890 3:11 657,712,1188 3:13 ... 508,690,692,742,968 3:14 411,605,713 3:15 499 3:16 440,560,690,946,1133 3:17 727,729,957 3:18 393,807,887,920 3:18ff 757 3:23 550,1140 3:24 498 3:25 355,1217 4:1 788 4:3 407, 638 6is, 1086, 1090, 1140 4:5 625,810 4:6 .. 269,396,439,880,104,5, 1090, 1208 4:8 699,846 4:9 355, 547 4:10 255 4:12 172,630,994 4:13 244,257 4:14 172 6is, 255 4:15 172,257,608 4:16 600,1204 4:17 343,983 4:18 685
. .
186
bis,
ier,
587,1188 521 1066 686, 1059

991, 1071,
...
458, 988
1088,1169 579,1036,1139
...
. .
605, 787 6is 188, 879, 973, 1010 bis
Thessalonians
1:1 1:3 1:5 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10
173,780,796
498, 503, 779 566, 731
780 1045 787 178,1032

6is,
(er,
731,732,779,795,1032,1177 475,778,1107
1077 598
716 297,629,647,1002,1072 327,785,1092 f 854,943 3:11, 12 940 3:12 327,940,1181 4:1 .... 439,560,739,766,1046 4:2 583 4:3 400,518,698,1059 4:3 f 1078 4:5 1172 4:6 233, 338, 629, 1059, 1078 4:7 605 feis 4:8 1154 4:9 .686,997,1003,1071,1072,1097 4:10 774 4:10f 1066 4:11 1060 4:12 751 4:13 985 4:14 355,817 4:15 618 4:15, 17 778 4:16 589, 783 4:17 357, 528, 628, 638 5:2 550 5:3 225,267 5:4 998 5:5 496, 497 5:6 497, 931 bis, 1200 5:8 497,498 5:10 .534,628,638,833,1017,
.
2:2 2:3 2:4 2:7 2:8

2:9 2:10 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17
1027
485,1085,1103,1139 505,968 .164,198,206,225,508,522,

1162,1215
593, 1003, 1075
5:11 5:12 5:13 5:14 5:15
293,675,692
319 171,647 625
...
309
bis,
431, 573, 692,
933, 996
....
537,545 787,997,1002,1072 545,560,791 530

1205 1220
559,665,778
5:16 5:16-22 5:19 5:22 5:23 5:25 5:27
947 890 218,318 518 940,1003 619 484,1085
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
2 Thessalonians
1333
224,749,776,777,1106 485 1035,1103 1115,1127,1128 629,782 652 657,699,771 776 261,478 620 235 582, 629 642 423 490, 573, 631, 770 242,401 273, 431, 489, 886, 919 272 508 189 613,1172 876,1172 664,1172 765
580, 1172
1:3 1:4 1:5 1:7 1:8 1:10 1:11 1:12 2:1 2:2
629,693 287,687,689,716
511 497 787
334,485,818 511,714 786,987
..
G32 bis 261,582,964,1033,1072,
1140, 1189 497 bis, 856, 1023, 1173 2:3 .. 2:3 f 1202, 1203 2:4 234, 311, 562, 1034, 1105, 1139 2:6 409,411 2:7 792 2:8 1212 2:10 499, 500 2:12 532 2:13 339,366,501,550 2:14 714 2:15 485,816,1045 2:17 940,943,1092 1205 3:2, 7 3:3 956,961,1219 3:4 540 3:5 500,1092 940 3:5, 16 3:6 336, 560, 1047, 1172, 1217 3:7 880 3:7 f 964 3:8 1003, 1075 3:9 965 3:10 .699,950,1012,1028,1035, 1046, 1047 3:11 564,617,1042,1103, 1127,1201 3:12 1046, 1047 3:13 1121 3:14 ... 317,329,529,698,944, 1047, 1170 3:15 481,1123 3:16 309,326,940,1214 3:17 493,685,713
.
. . . .
1:10 1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:15 1:16 1:17 1:18 1:19 1:20 2:2 2:3 2:4 2:6 2:7 2:8 2:9 3:1 3:2 3:3 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:13 3:15 3:16
...
...
811
729,880,983
. . 242, 295, 401, 422, 428, 534, 546, 551, 713, 793, 954, 1109, 1199
4:1 4:3 4:4 4:6 4:8
499,518,668 518,785,1121,1201
...
1022
543, 717, 882
....
4:10 4:13 4:14 4:15

5:1 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:8 5:9
...
272,535,547,1128 565 976 508, 611, 854 bis, 890 589

1218 772 272 215,1103
Timoti?
'
.
5:10
.
.
.
1:1 1:3
235
561,968
5:11 5:13
1:3-5 4.39 1:4 152,782 1:6 518,714 1:7 .. 325,726,737,1045,1176 1:8 ... 341,342,533,762,1201 1:9 185,539,699 427 1:9 f
.
5:14 5:17 5:18 5:19 5:21
302,547,565,623 509,516,691,1012 218, 277, 488, 666 163,800 512,972 .232,273,477,617,618, 638, 1040, 1103 Ws, 1121, 1122,1172 919 284,511,654 223 251,603,040,1025,1188 621
1334

2:25
2:26 3:1 3:3 3:4 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:9 3:11 3:14 3:15 3:16 4:1 f 4:2 4:7 4:8 4:9 4:9-21 4:10 4:11 4:13 4:15 4:16 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:21
.
5:22 890 6is 5:23 779,789 6:24 235,620 6:2 508 6:3 609,1011 6:4 167, 267, 405 6:5 ... 166,483,486,518,582 1191 6:7 6:8 324, 871, 889 6:10 542,617 6:11 476,1186 478 6:12 6:13 603 6:15 523,660,691,785 6:15f 776 6:17 163,493,496,651,783,908 6:18 204 6:20 186,261,810,856 6:21 715
.
135, 309 &is, 327, 565, 983,
988
bis,
989, 996, 1044, 1214
707
699, 769
162
661, 663, 666
148,155
1173
255, 486
707,708
212, 731 6is
721 879 272, 772 6is, 1097 484 328 895 498,903 1205 759
2 Timothy 1:1 1:3 1:5 1:6
...
.
796 963 485
1:6,12
1:8 1:8 f 1:11 1:12
483,718,722 962 472,529

1107 485
166, 594, 658, 718,
172,255,547,858,861 172,535,549,1127 186,221,235,255,614 419,949,955 779,854,939,940 212,818

1204 235
235,255,621
Titus
720, 1102
1:13 1:14 1:15
1:16 1:16,18
1:17 1:18 2:2 2:3 2:5 2:8 2:12 2:13 2:14
717,782 613,856 .214,235,269,472,484, 485,497, 772 235,367 .309,326,854,939,

.
.
940, 1214
665
.
277,299,488,665,733 583,698,856
856 850, 1019 ?)is, 1027 481,1041 1008 1119 164,605,944,947, 1162 6is, 1163 856 316 890 235 620,908 262,1154
1183 597
2:15 2:16
2:16, 22
f
1:2 1:2 f 1:6 1:7 1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:15 1:16 2:3 2:4 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:13
224
441
234 1172 774,962,1169 273,422,1200 955 472 362

166
1036,1038,1103
203,762,943,985 480,690,811 652,1087 691,944 311,780 272,527,653,656

788
2:14
3:1 3:2 3:3 3:5
82,786,787 518,618,632
483 311 1202 261, 681, 715 716
2:17 2:18 2:19 2:20 2:21
3:6
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
3:7 3:8 3:9 3:11 3:12 3:13 3:14
1335
530, 505, r,S3 /.w, 861, 887, 1039, 1084, 1086, 1114, 1128
224,707,779
509, 537, 764, 812
2:10
...
205bis 687 172,235
...
172
feis,
255, 260, 1217
1041
Philemon i-miemon
2
5
.' .' ." .' .' ." ." ."
.'
.'
'.
Q 10
11
..........
624 1200
2:11 2:11 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:ie 2'^^

o ,o 2:18 3:1 3:2 3:3
..,
718,1179 803 216

.
323, 301, 375, 400, 90() 412, 509, 087, 705 582, 1052, 1000 6iv, 1070
...

590,1140,1149.1200 -474,486,530,658,887,
-,^,
'.
201,710
713, 718
721,722,963, 1128
^^^ô' }^
12 13
13f
846 410 399, 631, 919 886
722,785,955
661
. .
244, 511, 615, 661, 667, 722,
'23'^^^
l':::::::::.''''.''''^^
16 18 19
3:5 l'^ I'l

'^l'^
:::::::
:374, 878, iIiS

^^^' '^^'
491,632,663,670
342 623,685,846,1199 310, ^09, 784, 939 6is, 940 6u
A-jQ
'î
!;2
' ' '
"
20.
22
o'i
^:J l.tt
179
iyoV,-; ^^"^^'^
qin 908 TOnn ^îi'n^î'oV .m -o^ 330,496,504,8/2, 1073 6is, 1169
mH
24
Hebrews
1:1 545,546 1:1 f 422 1:1-3 432 1:2 ... 408,480,671,775,956 1:3 496 fcis, 586, 651, 781, 792,
. .
845, 860
1:3, 4 f
1:4
1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10
422 .218,420,532,615,663,667, 710 6is, 733 6is, 966 420 773 626,1202
*465
483,528 234,792
1099
. .
l:13f
2:1 2:2
212,279,298,350,613,996
583,1107 432 710,828,1023,1129
151
3:13 ... 608,744,745,974,975 3:14 1027,1154 3:15 439 3:16 233,583,613,917 3:17 233 3:18 877, 1032, iaS2 3:19 1035, 1183 4:1 814,996 4:2 520,903,907,1154 4:3 .. 132, 778, 908, 1000, 1004, 1129,1140,1154,1202 4:3,5 1024 4:4 575,653,1129 4:4, 10 518,800 4:6 474,1058 4:8 1015 4:9 541 4:11 744 4:12 ... 278,504,580,633,007 4:13 625,1153 4:15 530 4:16 261
.
.
2:2-4 2:3 2:4 2:6

2:7
234,299,411,736,742,781,
1001, 1140, 1219 484, 485, ()02, 010
2:7,9
2:8 2:9
1073
218,743
.
5:1 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:7 5:8
315,480,030,762 316,485,541 618 393,762,968,1154

10S9
580,598
..
7-2().
7'JW)/.s-,
1
1027, 111.5,
few,
..
1153 473, 485, 632, 1041, 1123

W.S-,
11-".),
MO, 1154
1201
5:10
485
1336
5:11 5:11 5:12
.

.
.
NEW TESTAMENT
.... ....
f
523,1038,1076,1081
1082
7:24
7:25 7:26 7:26 7:27 7:28 8:1 8:2 8:3 8:4 8:5 8:6 8:7 8:8 8:9 8:10 8:11 8:12 8:13 9:1 9:2 9:2 f 9:3 9:4 9:5
f
.
.
233,375,482,490,584,
740, 903, 1039, 1061, 1076
401,656,789,1039, 1070, 1122 550

667, 710, 1086, 1181
5:13 5:14
6:1
395,516 .497,514,580,584,757,
498 407
501 1027, 1154 473
789, 902, 910, 1108, 1117, 1122
710 280,691 315, 418, 480 605, 705, 710 6is

317, 408, 715
f)is
.
6:1,3,9,11
6:2 6:3 6:4 6:4 f 6-5 6:6 6:7 6:8 6:9 6:10
6:11 6:12 6:13
6:13, 16
...
928,955,956,961,989
207 1015
8:4,7
449,507 474 539, 613 584, 603, 708 590,640,1134 218,485,508,637 506,716,860,998,1001, 1060,1080,1082,1090
311 1153 475,1159 607 192, 551, 1004, 1024 feis, 1110, 1150 6is
...
6:14
6:17 6:18
6: 19
148,654,763 778,827,828
.
258, 259, 274, 298, 418, 715
7:1 7:2 7:3
7:4 7:5
..
697,701,1134 714,1153 594 .258,292,348,399,418, 741 bis, 1177

.
9:6 9:6 9:7 9:8
233,392,874,949,1214 218, 728, 733 6is, 801, 967, 1220 708 255,475 514,560,1123 440,479,1135 361,746,906,1215 260 895,1073 777 232,714 660 408,612 253 .154,409,517,550,629,632, 647, 792, 1058 313,1215
.
9:6-8, 15, 19
1153 1131
..
.441,505,637,715,769, 776, 955

700,1036,1039,1040, 1049, 1078 413 201,413 412,416,705,1139
...
343, 371 6ts, 412, 705, 1076, 1129, 1154
7:6,9,11,13,16,20,23 ... 896 218,277,409,752,763 7:7 ... 218 7:7,19,22 654,1035,1153 7:8 7:9 .208,967,990,1086,1091,1093
.
7:11
604,1015,1027,1095,1151, 1162, 1164 748 7:11,13,15 1023,1129 7:12 580,721 7:13 719,1034 7:14 279, 659, 663 7:15 15Sbis 7:16 763 7:18 7-20 733,963 7-20 f 425,967 710 7:20-22 695 7:20,23 334, 819 7:21 7:23 613, 1061, 1085, 1119
.
9:9 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:14 9:15 9:16 9:17
.272,339,399,809,861,1114
355 501,604 969 604,963,971,1159, 1169,1173 214,254,686 212 716 218,615,667,686 574 207,589,887 604, 920, 963, 965 bis,
....
9:19 9:19,21 9:20 9:23 9:24 9:25 9:26
9:27 9:28
10:1
.
....
1026, 1085 733,903,967,1058 871 187, 392, 439,550,716,1135
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
10:2
.
.
1337
260 812 '833
1036
778, 963 6is. 905
?>is,
1015,
10:6,8
10:7 10:9 10:10 10:11 10:13 10:14 10:15
.........
....
10:15f 10:15,26
10:16 10:22 10:23 10:24 10:25 10:26 10:27 10:28 10:29 10:31 10:32 10:33 10:34 10:35 10:36 10:37 10:39 11:1
11:1, 35
. .
.
1026,1102,1175 474 895,1088 895,909 719,891 617,687 487,495 891,895,1111,1116 909,979,1074 439
1074
11:22 11:23 11:24 11:25 11:26 11:27 11:28 11:29

11:31 11:32 11:33 11:34 11:35 11:36 11:37 11:39 12:1
12:1
f
.529
. . .
480,500,575,594,1202 833,1113,1121
148
6is,
189
feis,
476, 563, 565, 582
652,800 317,529 210,420,934,1126 477,509,606
440,1135
....
...
211,225,340,485,486
362,486,1217
501
748 1138 749
124, 532, 710, 733 6is,
967,1123 612 743 251,566,604 434,511,859

1059
534,590 833 168,420,425,524,542, 562,583,653,810,931,1154 432

.
12:1,2 12:2
12:3 12:4 12:5 12:6 12:7 12:9
. .
470,475 487,705,1153
.
. .
218, 1035, 1036, 1038,

1041, 1103
728 998 395, 733, 978 497,515 234,1138 1139

.
.....
12:9, 25
12:10 12:11 12:12 12:12f 12:13 12:14 12:14 f., 24 12:15 12:16 12:17
.
.
11:3
423, 909
6zs,
1003, 1036,
11:4 11:5 11:6 11:7 11:9 11:10 11:11 11:12

11:13 11:14 11:15 11:15 11:16 11:17
1049,1070,1072,1090 .... 667,724,1038,1085 365,371 234 334,1173

593 262
. .
764 154,502,512,574, 575, 1106 487,524,635,1107,1121 368,975 508, 509 966,1184 738,794,1159 480,532,546,1152 664 625,1109 448,497,515,519, 625, 1109 315 1200
421
616,686,793 524,704,705,777,1129, 1140,1181 533,833,1137

1034
887,921,923,1015,1062
1153
11:16,35,40
11:17,28 11:18 11:19 11:20
11:21
399,416,508 218
359, 760, 885
Ms
895 1034 818 788 775,827,979,1115
422,648,871 422 496,774,800,934,995 190,308,573 319,360,611,941, 1129,1154 12:18 262,536,1118 12:18,22 542,793 12:19 ... 261,818,1094,1171 12:20 508,581 12:21 168,221 12:22 536,760 792 12:23 12:24 218,615,667 12:25 .430,472,791,810,922, 933,996,1160
. . .
12:27 12:28 13:2
766
.
.
.
/os,
1140
934, 955 /xn, 956, 989 400, 472, 475, 509 ?)w, 551,
860,1102,1120
1338
13:4 13:5 13:6 13:7 13:8 13:9 13:10 13:11 13:13 13:15 13:16 13:17

396
.
NEW TESTAMENT
408, 510, 763
207,930,946,1165,1175
217, 334, 819, 871
514,949,955
395 1095,1162,1166 590,599
718,719,953 425,1154 108,203,268,399,524,541 532,816

.
2:6 2:7 2:8 2:10 2:11 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:19
762 776 874
...
956,957,959,897,898
1012, 1166
374, 634, 877,
1119
bis,
2:19f 2:20
2:22 2:24 2:25 3:1 3:2 3:3 3:4 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:9 3:10 3:11 3:12 3:13 3:14 3:15 3:17 4:2 4:2 f. 4:4 4:5 4:7
13:18 13:19 13:20 13:21 13:22 13:22 13:23 13:24
f
. .
1128,1140,1214 407,678,1035 279,545,664 777,778,784 327,940 583, 845 407 .664,910,1041,1103,

1110, 1123
162,262,512 395,1038 406,412,655,1121 562 404 430 273,464,878 367,477,529,1041
1041
548,578,766
James
1:1 1:2 1:3 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:11 1:13 1:13 1:15 1:17
1:18 1:19
1:21 1:22 1:23 1:24 1:25 1:26 1:26 1:27 2:1 2:2
329,394,944,1093 524,772 763 1023 149,478,801,895 1035 580 837 516,518,579,1034 1186 232 .153,233,413,421,501,655, 772,1200 742,1071 .319,328,329,360,429, 658 bis, 908, 941, 1003, 1052, 1071, 1072, 1076 216 947,1162 698 731,732,844,897,1177 496,780 231,272,1038,1085
. .
.
521,526,966,1128 423,1172 488, 698 feis, 1076 418 290, 709, 1129 Ws 291,733,737 233,399 533,534,776,902 124, 413 473, 590, 785 319,920,1220 786 417,1189 738,1045 560,1173 881 273, 424, 1152 bis 1083
.
805
6is,
966, 1071, 1091
411 626 1023
4:7f 4:8 4:9 4:11 4:12

4: 13
.
948 355,538,1214 561,856 512 778,1107

289, 299, 328, 348, 474, 696,
4:14
4:15
770,799,1193,1217 728,735,740,767,
....
....
.
124 516, 700, 1059, 1078, 1219
4:16 4:17
5:1
. .
961, 1158 574,697,708,1060, 1069,1070 710 764 bis, 1106

.
299, 391, 428, 430, 763, 853,
408,500
124, 169
949,1106,1116
5:2 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:6
801
f
2:2,3 2:3 2:4 2:5 ...
762 314,329,340,1216 1175 480, 537, 716, 763, 917
405,898
769
337, 579
757
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
5:7 5:9 5:10 5:12 5:13 5:14 5:15 6:17 5:18
1339
411
201,652,8.% 394,621 480 .328,427,471,475,484,

622,
S.')3
...
430,515,740,1023 124,328 208,225,360,375, 908,1019 392, 531 ?ns, 802, 1094 348,799
Peter
127
740 2:21 633,784 2:21-24 954 2:24 561, 723 2:25 787 3:1 .127,324,516,638,779,946,
.
2:19f 2:20
984,1026,1217
3:3 3:4 3:6 3:7 3:8 3:8 f 3:9 3:10 3:11 3:12 3:13
...
127,
498
W.s,
779, 947,
...
949,1161 200,272,274,712,779 479

1072 946
3:7, 9, 16
1:2 ... 1:3 1:4 1:5 ... 1:6 ... 1:6-12 1:7 1:8 ..
.
bis, 793, 854, 940 774,778,783,785 273,535 272,769,775,783,794 881,941,949,978,1119 724,954 654,763,778,1107 127,224,531,715,1096,
470,487 945 208, 573 fets, 699 1061,1171

561 1106 127,374,878,1118 1020
. .
1138
6is,
1139, 1172, 1212
3:13f 3:14
127, 327, 478, 683, 1021,
1:10 1:10 f 1:11 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:17 1:18 l:18f 1:19 1:20 1:20 f 1:24 1:25 2:1 2:2 2:3 2:4 2:5 2:6 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:10 2:11 2:11 f 2:12 2:13
597,719,721,778
.
1023,1027
3:14, 17
594, 735 6is,
563 740, 781, 1176
....
...
195,778,1029,1034 314,602,777 497,782 127,297,779 272,412,656,774,777

533 127 603 1114 837,1023
535,778 408,773 349,1217

192,1035 424
338,401,941 392,772,800,802 418,718

714 101,597
.
910, 1117, 1138, 1139, 1163 518, 728 Jns, 1084
1039 497,721,789,946,1134 772 1140 2:13,16 2:15 343, 400, 700 Ws, 779, 1078 2:16 127 2:18 946,947,1161 2:19 500,699,704
...
.
1023 3:15 482 3:16 473,721 3:17 127,218,1021,1039,1084 3:18 523, 618 6is, 757, 1114 3:18-22 432 3:19f 778 3:20 399,416,560,656,705,779 3:21 714 3:22 792 4:1 518,816,1071 4:2 348,479,1070 4:3 127,364,909,992, 1062,1076 4:5 793 4:6 699,792,1031 4:8' 622, 789 4:8 ff 946 4:9 638 4:11 396 4:12 532,626 4:13 967 4:14 ... 602, 767, 777, 779, 785 4:15 204 4:16 192 4:17 .... 395,512,1061,1076 4:18 3.57,763,871 4:19 231
. .
. .
5:1 5:2 5:4 5:5
587,779,857,878
551
355,498,1217 808
1340
5:6 5:7 5:8 5:9

258,635 212,539,560,946 740,795,1044,1085 .502,505,523,541,542,687,
949, 955 195,606,778,1126 173,415,582,593,846,949, 1036, 1039
NEW TESTAMENT
.
2:21
2:22 3:1
3:1 3:2
f
.
.219,597,887,909,920, 1014,1039,1058,1084,1094 394,502,767,807 701,714

.
127
5:10 5:12
5:13
503,762,779,785,1086,1107
169
2 Peter
1:1
..
82, 127, 530, 785,
786
fcis
1:1,11 1:2 1:2-7

1:3 1:4 1:5 1:5-7 1:8 1:9 1:10 1:11 1:12 1:14 1:15
786 127,940 432
101,127,533,778 279,670,783
.
126, 460, 487, 686, 705
feis
184, 1200
315
127, 423, 542, 720, 962, 1169
3:2,18 786 3:3 775,1039 699 3:3,8 3:4 653, 717,880, 978 3:5 320, 582, 793, 794, 1035, 1134 3:6 201, 547 3:8 281 3:9 518,1128 3:10, 12 374 3:11 705,741,1131 3:14 537,542 480 3:15 3:15 f 117 3:16 773 6is 3:17 518 bis, 993
.
787, 985
.
.
127
bis,
401, 785
bis,
786
1:1
^^
713,724,791,896
901 777
....
483,656,1129,1154
127
127,333,356
1191 1139
l:15f
1:16 1:17
1:1-3 1:2 1:3
611,713,724
528
1:3,6,7
1:4 1:5 1:7 1:9 2:1 2:2 2:3 2:4 2:5 2:6
1:18 1:19 1:20 1:21 2:1 2:3 ... 2:4 2:4-10 2:5 2:6 2:7 2:8 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:12-15 2:13
.
290,438,636,709, 842,1135 778,864,1097 663,1121 514,518,699,772,1039 751,1165 127,613,1134,1203 297, 440, 474, 551, 724
1012 438
406,678,907 579,699,1033
518 961,998 406 424,441,618,685,1185,1199 590,950,1079 904 500,897
708 1038 884
275,348,672 257,539 212,783 126,434,470,597

127,1122 205,665 473,721 1125
2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:19 2:19f 2:20
.127,355,374,485,529, 560, 878 162,497,516

521 127 186,704 533, 534 218
2:6,9 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:12-14 2:13 2:16 2:18 2:19

2:21 2:22 2:24 2:25
341,476,785,786,881
2:27 2:28
713,879 879,1183 845 694 788,963 573,769,794 753,906,922,923, 1015, 1086 753,845,1166 1035,1094,1164,1205 437 .400,416,479,538,704,718, 777, 845 339,437,1217 473,1147
.
.
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
3:1
1341
3:1,11,23
3:2 3:4 3:6 3:8 3:9 3:10 3:11
135,741,999 992 233 615,736

769 880 699, 880 feis 890,1081
5:18 5:20
5:21
226,763,1117 .201,652,703,707,763, 776,984 476,689,856

2
Tohn
3:11,23 ... 3:12 3:13 3:14 3:15 3:16 3:19

3:19, 24
404,1164,1173,1174 1192,1203 699,1079 425,647,652,968,1176 532,965

586,1041 753 632, 1033, 1079 '^ 871 699 512, 667 512 850
8.50
2 ^ 5
q 6 7
f
[][[
."
! ! !
657,1116 1199 [',.[[ 902,1041 339, 11406is 699 992 702; 703
] ! ! ! ! ! !
480, 1036, 1041, 1103, 1107,
1123 bis g
10 12 13
4O.3
.......
792, 1093, 1160
368, 625, 846, 919

.
3:20 3:21 3:22 3:23 3:24 4:1 4:2 4:3 4:7 4:8 4:9
273
J^^
619 968
442, 679, 716
752
2 3
...
.
480,1103,1116,1123
692,931 794,845 584,777,845 699 845
1009 401, 519, 599 894 768
*
^
277, 663, 685, 699, /04,
546, 724, 962, 964, 1149, 1169
^^7 JôT ^^1'

î^l

J^ 1^ 13 14
oq, oao
Vififi 1166,
S4fi
4:9, 10, 13
nsf
nSQ 1185, 1189

0jiJ
4:10 4:11 4:13 4:14 4:16 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:21 5:2 5:3
5:3,4,9, 11,
e<c
582 625
Jude
1
611,699
758 549 699,992,1079 432, 700
501,588,767
9
2
2,
3 4 5 7 9 10
11
125 940 1106

265, 341, 613, 776, 786,
400,699,1034,1079
704 993 258, 409, 698 683,589,657,659,1166 593
5:3,9,11
5:4 5:6 5:8 5:9
1107,1214 125,1032,1035,1129 125,263,486,748,1032

125, 232, 529
...
393,964,1034,1049
699
5:9, 11, 14
5:10 6:11 6:12 5:13

5:14 5:15 6:16 6:16
...
.226,963,1159,1169
400, 1033, 1034
1164
.360,401,418,699,778,845,
846, 983, 993, 1034
12 13 14 15 16 18
805,1033 482,805,1010 392,477 234
20 22 22 f 22,23 24
473 510 704 272 125,589 716 439,474 603 280, 670 W.s1153
69()
342 505,644
1342

Revelation
NEW TESTAMENT
.375
bis,
3:2
3:3 3:5
857, 884, 890, 921, 960
3:2, 16
1:1
1:3 1:4
1:4,8
1:5
.
.
258,349,780,793 764,788,1108 135,270,394,414,459,574, 764,877,1202 734,735,777

136
<er,
... ...
..
.
202, 414, 458, 764, 777, 779
3:7 3:8 3:9

3:10 3:12
878 470,740,901,1045 475,483,485,589,809, 819,1213 265,762 94,136,420,722,1213
135, 307,. 311, 324, 873,
984, 992, 1039 bis, 1214
1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10 1:11 1:12 1:13

1:15 1:16 1:17
1:18 1:19 1:20 2:1 2:2
441
598
. .
475,1150
414, 769, 785
136, 243,
414
bis,
459,
655, 760, 1104
504,785
645
218,257,263
257
.
3:12,21 3:14 3:15 .... 3:16

3: 17
.
437
759,765,777,899 886,923,1004,1097 184,857
216, 218, 219, 257, 258, 274,
204, 487, 751, 769, 777, 785
485,530
1104 266, 414 6is, 1135 414, 669, 762, 769 feis,
3:18 3:19 3:20 3:21 4:1
...
202,216,232,483,807,
1036, 1220
...
2:2,9 2:3 2:4

2:5
2:5,16 2:6 2:7 2:7,17 2:8

2:9 2:10 2:11 2:12 2:13 2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:18 2:19 2:20 2:22 2:23 2:24
777,785 231,265 404 512,715 203,216,274,289 135,213,857,1214 440 309,337 309,337,1035 309,337,1010,1218 538,539,1025 1034 203 341,414,437 218,775
1039 498 599,1175
.
148 895 414,459,586,1130

705, 601
feis,
.
136,307,328,396,412,1042, 1105,1193,1212
655,777 172,235,255,614,712,969 474,482,519,1106

1105
534,536,610
.
203, 270, 441, 519 bis
263,441 789 136,315,414,1216 203,593,1010

871
2:25 2:26
232,392,406,654, 775, 866 bis 720, 975 bis

136, 414, 416, 437,
683, 1130
2:28
901
4:1-5 1135 4:2 601 4:3 211,272,530 644 4:3 f 4:4 ... 266 bis, 274, 485, 1042 4:5 412,713 4:6 ... 216,300,505,640,644 412 4:7 4:8 300, 412, 414, 644, 675, 793 4:9 ... 324,348,601,872,972 601 4:10 4:11 427, 466 <er 758 565 5:1 427 5:3 189 5:3 f 1061 5:4,9 5:5 782,835,1001,1088, 1089 bis, 1090 320,412,414,712 5:6 5:7 897, 899 feis, 901 274,713 5:8 510,589 5:9 5:11 ... 231, 283 bis, 502, 644 427,758,1182 5:12 794 5:12,13 1200 5:12-14 5:13 603, 714, 758 367 6:1 368 6:3 6:4 203, 213, 437, 984 501, 511 6:6 635 6:8
.
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
6:8,13 6:9 6:10 6:11 6:15 6:16
7:1 7:2 7:3 7:4 7:6 7:9
1343
410,412,704,780 1017,1020
635 910,1118 465,505 201,213,409,802,992,1213 203,268 338,483 752 683,722,864,1118 009,975 072 203 485
11:4 11:5 11:6 11:7 11:8 11:9

11:9, 11
136,413,441,722,816,1135
7:9,13
7:11 7:12 7:14 7:16 7:17 8:1 8:3 8:4 8:5 8:7 8:11 8:12 8:13 9:1
11:10 11:12 11:13 11:14 11:15 11:17
...
319,339,366,644,758 427,787,794,1182
349, 899, 902 6is
752,1175 170,202 204,958,973,1140 782,876,984 529 510, 899 fcis, 901
...
.
350,412,502,653,779 253,458,598 341,349,350,1220 135,391,487,537,674,1193

. .
.. ..
231, 864, 910, 752, 992, 1159
1116
feis,
bis,
1118,1123
9:4 9:5 9:6 9:8 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:13 9:14 9:16 9:19 9:20
10:1 10:2
.
9:4,20
1169 1159 992
...
324,709,870,873,889
339 272 104,458,653,1202
...
270,405,410 782 266,412,414,604,760 580 273 203,998 485,892 155,414,828,1135

213 853
6is
10:2,8
10:4 10:5 10:0 10:7 10:8 10:9 10:10 10:11 11:1 11:2
11:2,19
11:3
593 1034 474,799,847,1215 155 155,339 155,503 005 1134 042 7S2 485
11:18 11:19 1213 12:1 485 12:3 213 12:4 224,315,645,875,878,1219 12:5 349,413 12:6 203,392,597,820,985 12:6,14 723 12:7 1066,1093 12:9 399,777 12:10 136,262 12:11 224,584 12:12 537,1198 12:13 258,723 12:14 407,502,775 12:15 169 12:17 781 13:1 892 13:2 210 13:3 334,496 13:4 818 476 13:4,8 13:8 722 13:10 787 13:11 1203 13:12 992 13:13 998 13:14 256,258,713 13:15 984 13:16 401,787,984 13:17 984,1109 2S3 Ws 13:18
. . .
974 802 727,729 315,515,599 ... 775 565,1220 307,328 502,709 135,270,410,892 412 6ts 309,337,734,801,834, 901,1217 414,757,1076
.
.
958.909 474,565,790,1215 747 14:0,8,15,17,18 14:7 414,788 14:8 483 505,001 14:9 14:10 317,080
14:1 14:1-13 14:3 14:4 14:0
320,700
1135 072
1344
14:12 14:13 14:14

418 201,518,597,992
.
. .
14:15 14:18 14:19 14:20 15:1 15:1,6 15:2 15:3 15:4 15:5 15:6 16:1 16:2 16:5 16:6 16:9
16:10 16:11 16:12 16:16 16:18 16:19 16:21 17:1 17:2 17:3 17:4 17:5 17:6 17:7 17:8 17:9 17:10 17:13 17:16 17:17 17:18 18:1 18:2 18:3 18:6 18:9 18:10 18:11 18:12 18:12f 18:13 18:14 18:16 18:17
135,136,391,414,530, 658, 1135 590 265 253,410
469,517,575,642
106 762
.
341,475,529,598,881 461,464,465 395,930,934

1213
485,560,620 339,342,352,1220 232,342 414

339
.
478, 485, 998, 1001, 1088,
1089,1090 214,375,598,903 258,259

760 104 221,546,710,722, 731 bis, 978 458,503 599 774,777 441,724
. .
18:20 18:22 18:23 18:24 19:1 19:2 19:3 19:4 19:7 19:8 19:9,17 19:10 19:11 19:12 19:13 19:14 19:15 19:16 19:17 19:20 19:21 20:1 20:2 20:3
.
461,464,786
753
341,349,1220
689 205 1220 337,902 283 269,1212 485 262 949 1213 414 135,211,364,374,485,533
20:3,5 20:4 20:8 20:12 20:15
412,414,455,474,510 156,485
233 478 532 334,719,819,1216 683,723 234,747,750,764 311, 1214 bis 590 872,975 234,604 892 260,269,843,1200 337,599,1218 317,580,716 1217 498 475 192,280,670
441 186
21:1 21:2 21:3 611 21:4 262 21:5 480 21:6 337,785 21:8 712,1118 21:9 777 21:11 150,280,670 414 21:11 f 21:13 254, 494, 791 6is 21:14 412 262 21:14,19 21:16 263,405,732,967 21:17 268,672,714 21:18 201 253 21:18(21) 21:19 262 21:20 168, 199,204 21:21 282,460,555,556,568,571,
.
407,412,485 503,680,960,1001 660 949 414 260,269,599 265,892 414,714 528 975 833,834 722 349,714,1213 1008,1012 394,413 539
673,675,746
21:23 21:25 21:27 22:2 22:3 22:4
541 793
753,1187
.
348,873,1165 485,653,710,771 474
258, 300 Ws, 311, 545, 1214
166,753 871
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
22:8 22:9 22:11 22:13 211 932,1203 947 429, 777
1345
757,984 399,762 356
22:14 22:16 22:19
(6)
OLD TESTAMENT
Exodus
1:16 3:4 3:10 3:11 5:22 6:7 7:10 8:25 9:16 10:23 12:6 12:10 12:10,43 13:11 f 14:13 16:3 16:33 17:12 19:13 20:10 20:17 20:23 25:9 25:21
Genesis
1:2 2:24 3:15 3:22 3:24
4:12, 14
4:24 6:4 6:17 10:19,30

13:11 14:23 16:2 17:17 18:9 19:8 19:19 19:21 20:6
252 574, 595 680 1002,1067,1086 639 889 673 973 325
1074 746 1024 1061
972,1075 208
187 1001
910,1176 916 967 1067 1002

1061 1187 1042 1042 1074 1042 696 973 1027 1042 1007 1073 959 481 263 888 916 551 973 696 745 907 907 907
101)7
337 691 211 696 699 693 907 819 752 1042 1078
973,1003 253 903

1027 752 508
21:26 22:1 24:30 24:33 24:45 25:24 27:30 28:16 29:13 31:20 32:19 33:10 34:12 34:30 37:2 37:10 38:5 38:11 38:27 40:5 41:36 43:8 44:32 47:29 49:12 60:18
690,691 268 822

775 485
29:20 31:3 32:1 39:23

Leviticus
436,899,900
906
2:13 10:6 14:2 14:6 21:17 22:9 23:15 25:10
269 984 500 254 738 1010 917 600
Numbers
1:1 4:41
9:10
10:2 11:9
601 096
671 208 98 878 973
1346
11:29 14-2 14:8 14:30 20:3 22:12

938,940
1003 880 1024 1003 903
NEW TESTAMENT
1061 1042 1067 1024 1060 973 680
Deuteronomy
3:21 8:3 8:5 9:10 9:14 9:24 19:15 23:1 24:3 28:1 28:24 ff 28:29 29:18 30:14 31:29 32:21 33:10
263 361,649 1017 364 637 888 649 809 669 95 937 889 738 649 669 1163 98
8:7 11:1 12:23 14:45 14:47 17:34 17:42 18:16 25:20

2
680 256
Samuel
(2
Kings)
6:20
10:11 14:15 15:2 18:13
1
739 878 722 649 940
(3)
Kings
964 254 1067 670 1165 1120 1078 341 1067 1002 465 819 880 1072
1:8 4:19
8:18 8:39
10:21 12:18 13:16 14:6 16:31 17:20
17:20, 21 18:1
Joshua
5:1 9:12 10:10 11:22 17:13 23:13
1042 437 507 218 531 174
18:12 22:8
...
2 (4) Kings
Judges
1:7 3:25 6:11 6:13 6:18 8:11
8:33 9:29
11:9 11:10 16:20
888 265 1070 918 97 906 1086 940 1017 890 637
13 13 14
736
1001
13:21 18:33
Chronicles
729 260 95
Ruth
1:9 2:10
4:9 5:10 17:6 28:4 28:6

2 Chronicles
633 643 729 588 588
932
1090 1070
1
3:3
Samuel
(1
Kings)
1:17 4:1 7:2 f
596 1042 772
3:1 6-7 15:16 18:34 28-22 33:9
98 1067 891 906 966,1062 1090
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
Nehemiah
5:18 9:10
Esther
Proverbs
1347
G28 337
4:14 13:3
964, 1033
. .
1:22 3:5 11:31 12:14 24:21
938
27:15
Ecclesiastes
973 890 871 268 292, 750 691
Job
3:21 13:22 14:13 21:24 22:3 24:12 25:5 30:24 31:31
198 977 1003 276 1010 691 916 1003 938
1:16 2:17 3:12
1062 97 1067
The Song
7:6
of
Solomon
739
Isaiah
Psalms
8:5 14:1,3 15:9 16:8 16:10 22:1 32:1 37:21 38:2 40:6 48:9 51:6 53:5 62:2 68:24 69 (68):23 72:14 77:18 90:11 91:3 94:11 94-95:11 101:3 103:15 108:4 109:8 110:1 117:23 118 (119):5 118:22 (117) 118:23 118:23 118:32 119:7 120 (119) :3 122:2 140:6
.
;
1001 751 1212
367 502 29, 476 367 311 1061 738 166 193, 463, 986 bis
197 198 1061 174 903 1086 1068 1067 1000 1024
1:4 1:12 1:16 1:31 3:5 5:9 5:14 5:26 5:27 6:2 6:10 8:14 9:16 10:20 11:9 14:15 17:8 22:11
10:20, 27
.
.
487 819 807 765 746 1165 1002 775 1174 644 201, 204, 367, 844, 988 907 1042 903, 907 1012 . 929,1174 591 907
637,
W3
733 312 929
103
972 437 1070 939 314 655 1004 718

411 704 973 973
910 1070 637
24:10 26:20 28:20 33:24 36:11 37:3 40:4 40:7 42:8 42:12 48:16 49:6 49:8 52:11 56:6 56:10 5S:14 59:15 03:2
1061
267 595
8;i7
101 101
2;?5
UMM
507 S53
UV)2
213 907 312 253
1348

Jeremiah
Daniel
1:8 1:19 2:8 2:18 2:22 2:28
4:10 4:16
5:23, 26
473 929 411 1067 96 411 916 337 335

928,929, 1016, 1161 411 1061 309 1073 415 644 287 932 932 484 1183 1174 653 1123 746
Ezekiel
2:22 3:7 3:22 4:30 6:14 7:25 10:5-7
171
977 647 900 512 199 415
Hosea
2:4, 23
6:8 7:97:10 9:2 11:17 14:13 17:26 18:3 f 18:8 18:11 23:15 23:21 23:24 26:6 31:32 31:34
2:8 4:15
Joel
411 411 475
3:2
148
Amos
5:27 9:12 642
723, 986
Jonah
3:3 539
Habakkuk
2:3
733
Haggai
2:1
11:23 16:21 16:51 17:24 27:4 33:27 34:8 36:30 38:19
671
775 337 655 476 759 1024, 1150 1024, 1150 213 150
Zechariah
2:2 4:7 6:14 11:6
741 265 265 599
Malachi
3:3
889
APOCRYPHA
1
Esdras
185 1074 1072 722
Esther
13:3
1:30 1:49 2:24
938
Wisdom
6:8 12:19 13:19
Sirach
Prol. to Sirach
3:5,9
4:54, 63
225
311 999
5:67 6:32 8:84

2 Esdras
722 1067 722 1072
6:8 6:20 17:3 22:24
1059 643 638 1070
6:7 19:26 25:3 37:2 38:27
604 341 274, 276 268 313 1070
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
Baruch
1:9 2:28 4:5 717 514 4G3 3:9 3:16 4:13 4:38 5:10 6:2 7:8 7:14 7:21 8:6 8:24 9:22 12:4 12:15 12:27 15:7
1349
1120 1043 1163 618 729 260 28 1075 28 318 192 his 183,370
141
Tobit 1:5 5:5 ... 5:15 7:11 11:1 12:13 14:2

.'
411 585
97,371,822,878 973
1070, 1074
1120 192
Judith
639 722 370
1:10 4:15 6:18 8:34 11:19 14:5
979 1070 822 1074 979 308
Maccabees
141
4:1 5:20
900
4 Maccabees
Maccabees
528 705 269 269 415 bis 1214 1090 260 415 1070, 1074, 1075
3:11 4:52 10:88 10:89 13:16 14:30 14:36 15:23 15:28 16:9
1:28 2:9 5:13 12:7 16:15 17:20,21
251 157 938 104 104 1062
Enoch
6:3 995
Psalms
3:10 8:23
of
Solomon
654 654
2 Maccabees
1:8 1:11 1:31
159 1141
Daniel
O Susannah
745
974
54
TESTAMENT OF THE TWELVE PATRIARCHS

Reuben
1:10 6:1
Gad
654 946
3:1
654
Joseph
17:8
664
Levi
2:10
972
7:4
Benjamin
673
Naphtali
Judah
91
424,1185
3:2
940
1350

(c)
INSCRIPTIONS
IG
Inscriptiones Graecae
xii, 2,
Audollent
Defixionum tabellae, ed. Audollent (Paris, 1904)
No. 238, 29
857
562, 5 7 N. 240, 13
Benndorf-Niemann
Reisen in Lykien und Karien
129 N. 102
1170
BCH
Bulletin
647 590 1,671 5, 29

5, 5,
1189 777 849 669 959 579
de 416
correspondance
(lead
IMA
Inscriptiones Maris Aegaei
iii,
hellenique
1901,
p.
tablet
at
Amorgus)
1903, p. 235
109 522
174 325
1129 622
CIG
Corpus inscriptionum Grae-
JHS
Journal of Hellenic Studies
(Hellenic Society)
xix,
carum
5834
C. Insc. Lat. (C I L)
14
192
92 299
1902, p. 349
xxii,
Corpus inscriptionum Lati-
535 406 737 728

1061
narum
V,
1902, 369
8733
1093
Kaibel
Deissmann
Light from the Anc. East, p. 75 "Limestone Block from the
Epigrammata Graeca
1878, p. 269
p.
134
(Letr.)
274 592
Temple of Herod lem"

Delphian Inscription
Inscriptions
at Jerusa-
Letronne
1092
Recueil
des
inscriptions
grecques et latines
recueillies
I'Egypte,
(1842)
ed.
de Letronne
478 414 521
Delphes (Wescher et Foucart)
No.
1074
70, 79,
92
220
149
220
Heberdey-Wilhelm
Reisen in Kilikien
170, 2
Michel
1094 1009
Recueil
d'inscriptions
137
Inscr. of
grecques, ed. C. Michel

(Brussels, 1900)
Magn.
Die Inschriften von Magnesia am Maander (von O. Kern) 16, 29 215

90, 12
No. 370 694

511 938 994
1069
622, 1024
OGIS
Orientis Graeci inscriptiones
selectae,
ed.
Dittenberger
Inscription of
Thera
660
(Leipzig, 1903-5)
Hermes
1901, p. 445
No. 41
90, 23
1069 1141
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
484
458, 71 223, 49
177, 15
r
.
. .
1351
748, 20
117, 17
406 223 223 213 213

193
Pontica
Studia
iii,
Pontica (AndersonCumont-Gregoire) 62, 8
931
Priene
Inschriften
F. Hiller
112,
352, 66 458, 41
565, 19 515, 26
f
193
von (herausg. von von Gaertringen)

582 595 615
618, 2
218 204 204 204
98
50, 39
111, 117
PAS
Papers of American School
at Athens
Ramsay, C. and B. Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, by W. M. Ramsay, 2

vols. (Oxford, 1895, 1897)
397 iii, 375

ii,
172 172
Inscr.
ii,
292
317, 391, 395, 399
Pergamon
Die Inschriften von Pergamon von M. Frankel
343 391 (No. 254) 525 849 959 1093 1093

SyU.
Sylloge
1018 928 972 648 668
N
13,
13 (B.C. 300) 31
249, 26
inscriptionum graecarum, ed. Dittenberger
13,34
Perrot Exploration arch, de la Galatie
No. 326, 12
928, 52
160 375
Viereck
Sermo Graecus quo senatus

702
p. 24,
34
populusque Romanus usi sunt, by P. Viereck

.
(Gottingen, 1888)
Petersen-Luschan Reisen im sudwestlichen

Kleinasien
p. 113, xviii
p.
38
958
Waddington
5
160,
174,
N N
190
223, 21
599 869
Inscr.
de
la Syria
959
2413* 2614
837 595
(d) A. P. (P.
PAPYRI AND OSTRACA

93
111 to 113
Amh. and Amh. Pap.) Amherst Papyri, part ii (1901) 723 No. 11, 26
31
1009
414
611, 994
50 77 78
81, 11
154 470 527 1134, 1137 977

944, 1093
135 144
92S
M.
F.
(P. B.
Britisli
M.) Mu.seum Papyri.
(\\.
G.
Konyon (London,
86
1893, 1898)
1352

Vol.
i.
NEW TESTAMENT
..
<
Nos. 1-138
939, 994
303 997 1033 326 341 350

,,
,
928
318, 410, 1010
No. 21 23 37 42
69 77
691 318
..
299, 546, 618, 875, 909,
1081
1145
Vol.
11.
Nos. 362-696 (1898)
^,
'!!!!'!!.!
Vol.
ii.
'529
728 1120
No. 363
380 385 388 423 424 530 449 456 531 543 546 596 607 623 664
665
Vol.
iii.
84
Nos. 139
f.
692 487 592 665

.
.
188, 419, 464, 514, 592,
No. 190
233 239 331 333 336 356 417 854 1178
B. U. (B. G. U.)
Berliner Griechische
Vol.
i.
728 1010 318, 737 959 745 745 1122 869 979,1074 907
833,8.34,835,846,1132,1151
972
..
190, 963, 1147, 1181
406 746 993 475 1009 361,907,1129 730, 972 671 631 1068
Nos. 697-1012 (1903)
Urkunden
Nos. 1-361 (1895)
No.
16
22 27 36 45 46 48 86 110 113 114 136 146 164 168 179 183 197 226 229 242 287 297
522 691 470 611, 1000

1061
531 1068 933, 994

689, 691
213 509 962 900 478 997 691 942 691, 857 874 991, 1069 660 479 833,843,1124 900
No. 775 790 814 816 822 824 830 843 846 874 903 925 948 956 970 998 1002
Vol. iv.
806 516 874 1210 737, 989 933 1068, 1082

461
414 990 522 513 734, 737 1188 513, 589, 1132 614 414
178,
Nos. 1013
ff.
No. 1015
1031
901
997, 1061
1040 1079.
1132
.287,488,577,582,615,
692, 933
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
Ch. P.
1353
Greek Papyri from the Cairo Museum, ed. E. J. Goodspeed (Chicago, 1902) No. 3 4
C. P. R. and P. E. R.
Hb. P. (P. ITib. and Ilib. P.) Hibeh Papyri (all iii/s.c.)
(1906)
817 692
No. 42 44
44, 45 45, 60, 168
56
Raineri,
589 406 974 986 851

1010
Cori)us
ed.
papjTorum
Wessely
78
C.
(Vienna,
1895)
No. 11
12
19
24 156 237
690 654 962 892, 978 1002, 10G8 959
K. P. Papyri from Karanis, ed. E. J. Goodspeed (Chicago,

1900)
No. 46
L. P.
458, 481, 595
Papyri Graeci
quarii
Deissmann
Ostracon, Thebes, 32-3 a.d.
publici
ed.
Batavi,
828
(1843)
Musei antiLugduniC. Liemans

665
518
bis,
Eudoxus
Papyrus of the Astronomer Eudoxus, ed. Blass
.
a35f
b
692
939, 1062
w
M.
P.
274, 516, 983
F. P. (Fay. P.
FajKim
and P. Fay.) Towns and their

817 933, 994 622, 987 595 861 495 959 1176
Papyri (1900) No. 110

112 118
119, 276
PapjTi from Magdola, in B 1902 ff., cd. Lefebore No. 16 and 20
CH
584
N. P.
Geneva Papyri,
No. 7
16
17
ed. J. Nicole,
2 vols. (1896, 1900)
121
993
1061
124 136 137
19
G.
An
Alexandrian Erotic Fragment, and other Greek

Papyri,
(1896)
chiefly
Ptolemaic
No. 35
G. H.
945
25 38 47 49 50 56 67 69
O. P. (P. Oxy. and Oxy. P.)
995 844 692 464 535 1108 527 728 2.-)2, 745 252, 745
Greek Papyri, No. 15 23"

36 38
series II (1897)
Oxyrhynchus Papyri
Vol.
i.
786 745, 746

82,
:
.
Nos. 1-207 (1898)
614, S0()
976
No. 34 36
977
10()9
1354
37 38
52 79 86
.

.
.
195, 577, 632, 867, 1040
Vol. iv.
Nos. 654-839 (1904)
578, 963
No. 654
715
48,49,722
99 105 112 115 117 118 119 120 121 128

Vol.
ii.
635 990 484 1068 656 1010 533 888 723

989 70, 572, 1174 414
284, 993
716 724 727 729 742 743 744

745
834 939 668 559 877 522, 1016 522 999_ io24
....
71, 220, 509, 53.5,
851^ 993
686
60S, 673
886 905
745
1021
hqg
1107
931
Nos. 208-400 (1899)
.
1118 1120 1122 1125

1133 1150 1157 1158 1159 1162 H^-l
975 877
1091
No. 237
240 255 256
..
518, 983, 991, 1048,
1073
.
1069
bis
949, 967, 1085, 1154
939 1150 745

'.'.
\
2m
274 275 292 294 , 299
Vol.
'.'.'.'.'..
'.
690 666
513, 537, 631, 846, 963,
1002, 1129, 1131, 1132, 11,39
577 933,1009 869 869 1066 550 1145
341
...
600, 686, 909, 1081
^^^
007
^: ^^- ^^^y Pans Papyri,
^^ in Notices et
.
682
Nos. 401-653 (1903)
Extraits, xviii, part
2,
ed.
Brunet de Presle (1865)

No. 5
iii.
1108
576, 585
10 15 18
No. 413 471 477 478 482 484 486

491
492 494 496 523 526 528 530 531
..
..
932 1137 470, 471 900 844, 900 474 548 1137 469 749 1018 502, 575, 767 .922,939,1002,1014 139, 900 863, 922, 1014, 1113 1210
410
1009, 1180
22 26 28
590
. .
532, 574, 939, 972, 1031,
1043, 1141
35, 37
590 517 614 36 645 37 615 47 49 ... 995, 989, 1087, 1169 51 414, 508, 536, 682, 867 774 60 62 1009 63 ....... 587, 590, 938 727 574
.
.
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
p. Eleph.
1355
R. L.
190,
No.
G40
Revenue Laws
Col. 29
of
Ptolemy
726 586
Philadelphia (Oxford, 1896)

P. Fi.
Florence Papyri, ed. Vitelli

(Lincei
382
Academy:
fasc. 1.,
Rhein. Mas.
Rheinisches
Milan, 1905)
Museum
fiir
Phi-
No. 2
5
P.
991, 1071
lologie
Ixvii, 4,
624
(P.
1912
1182
Goodspeed
.
.
Goodsp.)
No. 4
632, 877, 1022, 1119, 1129
Tb. P. (P. Tb., Tebt. P. and Tb.) Tebtunis Papyri (I'niversity of California PubUcations)
No.
P. Grenf.
1
1,
752, 983
66
165
689, 976
No. 67
73
77
P. Held.
632 484, 687 1080
6 8 14
16
19i2f
Heidelberg
LXX), mann (1905)

No. 6
Pap. L.
Papyri (mainly ed. G. A. Deiss-
406
Dieterich, Abraxas, 195, 9
789
24 26 28 33 35 36 40
41
633 1134 590, 594 148 279, 669 406 1010 877, 1119 808, 811
162, 168,
613 654
P.
Lend
Kenyon, Greek P.
in British
Museum
xlii
274 837
P.P.
Flinders Petrie Papyri,
J.
ed.
Mahaffy (in Proc. Royal Irish Academy, Cunningham Memoirs, viii,

P.
42 43 47 50 58 59 72 104
105
588 1134
91,
595
1891)
No. 8
i,
15, 15
xi
XXV 28
37 42
Rein. P.
Pajjyris Th.
690 287 944 595 672 72G 414
230 333 414 421

T. P.
689 861 406, 1009 945 669 1187 516, 669, 752 517 1010 834, 932, 986
...
682,748,762,1126
Turin Papyri,
(1826)
ed.
Peyron
491
No.
148
P.
Wess.
Reinach
(Paris,
1905)
Pai)yr()rum s(Tii)(ur:io cue ^Specimen
Cnn^
1012, 1175
(ii/B.c.)
922, 1014
xxvi
1356
Wilcken
Archiv
NEW TESTAMENT
266 152 631
Griechische Ostraka
fiir
Pap3TUsforschung
152
ii,
253 1027
(e)
GREEK LITERATURE
Euripides (v/b.c.)
Alcestis 386
i.
CLASSICAL
(? x/viii b.c.)
Homer
Iliad
i, i,
837, 846
137
262 i, 587 iii, 289 iv, 410

iv,
501 127
X,
700 301 xviii, 134 XX, 139

xiii,
xvi,
XX, 335
xxii,
349
xxiv, 38
Odyssey
iv,
XX,
684 52
958 1160 590 1016 1170 755 981 610 1170 1170 1016 972 674 590 1136,1172 1053
471 Bacchides 1065 Hecuba 401

Iphig. in Taur. 962
f
1359
Medea 627
822
Aristophanes (v/b.c.)
660 563 1161 746 392 629 875
Aves 1237
1292
722
674, 744
1300 Ran. 721 Vesp. 213
712 375 733
Herodotus
i,
(v/b.c.)
210, 2
1069
Hesiod
(? viii/B.c.)
Fragment
^schylus
Prom. Vinct. 268 358
Persae 981
f
981
27 iv, 44 V, 108
iii,
vi, 67,
10
5
(v/b.c.)
vi, 68,
1038 538 673
vii,
170 1214
860 722 783 1110 1110 644
837
Thucydides (v/b.c.)
i,
Sophocles (v/b.c.)
i,
21
52, 2
Oedipus Coloneus 155 ... 317 ... 816 ... Oedipus Tyrannus 1141 ...
.
1146
Philoctetes 100
...
300
994 738 878 737 878 1069 932

1161
i, i,
122
137, 4
i,
141
45, 1 52, 1
36, 2
ii, ii,
iii,
iv, 54, iv,
Electra817
1078
93
26, 9
Ajax 1180
1094 856
V, 50, 3
vii,
899 706 1188 1163 631 1172 783 435 860 645 1163 991
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
Isocrates (Iv/b.c.)
iv,
ii.
1357
KOIXH
(iii/u.c.)
44
9G1
Theocritus
IX,
Xenophon
Anabasis
6 i, 3, 14 ii, 4, 20
i,
25
14
1001
(Iv/b.c.)
X,
1001
Aristeas
2,
V,
9 9 16
vii, 4,
vii, 4,
Cyrus
i, i,
4, 6,
18
xu, 3, 9
Mem.
ii,
6,
iv,
39 4, 25
1,
Hellen.
i,
2 14
iii,
2,
Oec.
vi,
14 Plato (iv/B.c.)
185 790 955 588 631 620 1070 1048 472 1102 747 517 1033 458
(iii/ii
b.c.)
7,
34
974
Demetrius
(iii/B.c.)
Do
eloc. 21, 11
1017
Herondas
iv,
(iii/B.c.)
61
660
Polybius
(ii/a.c.)
iii,
19, 7
iv, 32,
5 2
vi, 5,
10
xvii, 11,
Apologia, 20
E 21 A 21 C 36 B
Crito44A
Theat. 155 C Protag. 309 C
851 851 1132 1038 897
xxxii, 12
607 973 298 577 527
Diodorus
i, i,
(i/B.c.)
75, 5 77, 3
1031
3
857
'665
1174 478
xi, 21,
xi, 37,
1007 961
1007
961, 989
312 A 326 D Repub. 337 B 433 Crat. 399 A-B 405 D Soph. 254 A
Polit. (p.
xiv, 8, 3 xiv, 80, 8

xvi, 74, 6
933 1060 228 766 779

149 1165
xvi,
85 Strabo
986 295 278
(i/B.c.)
289C)
i,
1,
973
bis
Phaedr. 78
D 89 D
B B C
Gorg. 453 459 515
275 438 1172 630
22 xiv, 41 c, 828
ii,
5,
580 194 837
Philo (i/A.D.)
i,
166, 20 112, 23
.ZEschines (iv/B.c.)
ii,
974 973
Eum. 737
Aristotle (iv/B.c.)
1069
Flavius Josephus
(i/.\.D.)
Antiq.
V,
82
2
.
1172
Rhet.
iii,
432
(Iv/b.c.)
vii, 9,
267
llJt
X, 4,
JEneas
114, 5
xii; 2,
3 2
973
152
595
xvii, 5,
1358
Bell,
ii,

16,
2 2
V, 6, 3
V, 12,
vi, 2, 1
Apion
iv,
21
Vit. 17
253 28 253 28 900 255
ii,
ii,
18, 11
22,
24
41
ii,
23, 1
iv, 1,
iv, 1, iv, 3,
iv, 4,
50
9
11
Dionysius Thrax
(i/A.D.)
iv, 5,
8-9
18
. .
iv, 10,
34, 372, 492, 1101, 1146 bis, 1188
iv, 10, iv, 10,
Plutarch (i/A.D.)
p.
i, i,
iv, 10,
27 34 35
1017 933 937 933 1091 999 963 963 1092, 1095 837 963, 1169 1169
256 592 B
694
D
i,
C
6, 1
Quest. Conviv.
....
Cons, ad Uxor.
1069 64 64 697 752
Ascensio Isaiae
ii,
(ii/A.D.)
12
254
of Alexandria (U/a.d.)
iii,
Clement
Pardagogus
989
(ii/A.D)
[Barnabas] (i/a.d.)
2:28 4:9 6:11
1124 773 1141
Hermas
Vis.
i, i,
1,
8 2
5
3,
iv, 1, 1
viii, 3,
Clement
1 Cor.
of
Rome
(i/A.D.)
Sim. V,
1, 1
5:7 i, 21:9 ii, 8:2 ii, 12:1 Clem. 45:1
219 723 1102 972 946
^viii, 1,
viii, 5, 1
ix, 9, 1
ix, 12,
4 5 2
11
Mand.
iv, 1,
V, 1,
viii, 9,
......
1148 1010 612 348 611 739 424 880 1022 308 1010 278
Dio Chrysostom
xxxiv, 44
(I/a.d.)
995
p.
Epistle to Diognetus (ii/A.D.)
84
631
Marcus Aurelius
vi,
(ii/A.o.)
p. 7
533
42
595
Irenaeus
Justin Martyr (ii/A.D.)
(ii/A.o.)
60 584 839 725
A
[Clement]
(iii/A.o.)
198 984
Apol.
i,
16,
Cohort. 5
(p.
253 A)
Homilies
Arrian
Epictetus
i,
i,
(ii/A.o.)
9,
15
i,
11,
2,
32
16 14
ii, ii,
17,
931 585 999 736
33 iii, 69 ix, 4
ii,
739 737
. . .
xi,
xvi,
20
xix, 12
875,942,1157 298 929 298 750
INDEX OF QUOTATIONS
Pausanias
(ii/A.o.)
1359
of
Gregory
^^^'^
iii,
Nyssa
(iv/A.D.)
"'^^'^*
Origen
Cor. 5:7 Contra Celsus
1
557B
prokius (^/û.)
137
(ii/A.D.)
.........
vii,
59
219 85
Iq rem publ.
ii,
225, 22
1036
John Philoponus
Ignatius (ii/A.D.)
(v/a.d.)
Ep. to Romans 8:3 Ep. toEphesians 10:2 Ep. toPolycarp 5:2

,..,
De
aetern. 430, 28
....
,
1020 946 1020

ii,
gc
-^g
1007 ^^^^
Achilles Tatius (v/a.d.)

.
24, 3
923
961
CaUinicus (v/a.d.)
Alexander 22
974
iv, 16,
13
Theophllns
(ii/A.D.)
Ad Autolycum
I,
2,
34
994
1022
Vita Hypatii 57, 12, 113, 11

Priscian (v/a.d.)
1040
HeUodorus
.^thiop.
vi,
(iii/A.D.)
Lib. V. de
Casu
492
14
595
Apophthegmata Patnun
Acta Christophori
68, 18
(iii/A.D. ?)
(vi/A.D.)
105
C
A u N. a> T. Apocrypha
725
T^
1001
Acta
^"
Bamabae
,
,...
(iii/a.d. ?)
Gospel of Pet. 35 * ^ mu j u Thomae /r> (Radermacner, Acta

^""^
673
N. T. Gk., p. 128) Acta Paul^ et Theclae

Martjo-ium Pauli
...
.
29,
Eusebius
(iv/A.D.)
Eccl.Hist.vi,xxv,ll P. E. vi, 7, 257d
....
88
725 672
Quaest. Barthol., pp. 24. 30
932 993 594 1189
Mark
16:9
Apocalypsis Anastasiae
6,
13
412
(iv/A.D.) Epiphanius ^^
Acta
S.
Theogn.
622
Matthew 13:30
Theodoret (iv/A.D.)
V'
673
jo2
Diogenes
10G9
p^.^g,j^
of
Oinoanda
1169
851
j^
Gregory of Nazianzen
ii,
(iv/A.D.)
Theo
ProKvnin. 128, 12
.
. .
13
137
109:>, 10-)7
1360

Usener
NEW TESTAMENT
Hippiatrici
^^^'^
Legende der
18
hi.
Pelagia
. .
L J!!'
860, 888
244, 30
1009
20
1001
.^ . ^ ^ Xenophon of Epnesus
393, 28
iii-
MODERN
^^^^
138
388,31
Vettius
989 1102
, , , John 1:6-8
The very numerous illustrations of the vernacular modern Greek idiom

1017
(cf.p. 481) are
274,11
not referred to authors.
(/)
Cicero (i/B.c.)
LATIN
Pliny (i/a.d.)
Pro Archia 10
Att.
6.
5
23, 3
Cato Maj.
108 933, 994 108
Nat. Hist,
v, 15, 71
214
PA ^^^
R6
1914-
Robertson, Arcixibald Thorn; A grammar of the Greek Testament in the li^ht of torical research
PLEASE
DO NOT REMOVE
FROM
THIS
CARDS OR
SLIPS
POCKET
UNIVERSITY
OF TORONTO
LIBRARY

A Grammar of The Greek New Testament in The Light of Historical Research - Robertson (1914)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Grammar of The Greek New Testament in The Light of Historical Research - Robertson (1914)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

'^'

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT IN THE LIGHT OF

Critical Notes to Broadus'

the Teaching of Jesus

Epochs in the Life of Jesus A Short Grammar of the Greek ment

of the greek new testament in the light of

"'Exofitv Se Tov Orjaavpov tovtov iv dcrrpaKlvois aKelecnv,

virepfioXr] Trjs 8vvafj.ecjs

b tov dead Kai

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

in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible.

sion in comparison with the rest.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

problems of the language of the

to keep in touch at salient points with the

results of comparative philology

true linguistic science.

In theory one should be allowed to as-

the demands are so varied.

So many men now get no Greek

breaking entirely new ground, nothing, in

fact, of the slightest

value can be placed to their credit."

charge, to be sure, but then originality

James Moffatt's remarks

Expositor, Oct., 1910, p. 383

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

who have gone

versity of Chicago, has a sharp

scholars guilty of this grammatical vice (are

ican and British scholars wholly free?).

wish to record my would have been imI

possible but for the painstaking

scientific investigation of the

settled Hoti's business

discussion of the subject which

possess," though he divides

37) "the whole of this chapter

meet the objection that grammar

27, 1911, p. 229.

A GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

Perhaps those who pity the grammarian do not know that he

sustained by the conviction that his

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

received a copy of the

venture to quote another defence of the study of Greek which

Testament was written

the pioneer in this

us anything worth knowing."*

Expositor, Jan., 1912, p. 73.

have interest as human documents.

give us real glimpses of the actual

Christian centuries, their joys and their sorrows, the

things that go so far to

the student of the Greek

battles that he fought are

proper to state that the purpose of this

that of the author's Short

Testament on the desk

as I hope, I shall endeavour to

make improvements and

more than once