Mark's Paratactic καί as a Secondary Syntactic Semitism: Armin D. Baum

Novum Testamentum 58 (2016) 1-26
brill.com/nt
Mark’s Paratactic καί as a Secondary

Syntactic Semitism
Armin D. Baum
Freie Theologische Hochschule Gießen, Gießen, Germany / Evangelische
Theologische Faculteit, Leuven, Belgium
baum@fthgiessen.de
Abstract
In recent research, a number of scholars have questioned the classification of paratac-

tic καί in the NT Gospels as a syntactic Semitism. As a review of all available evidence
demonstrates, however, the strong dominance of paratactic καί in the Gospel of Mark
has close analogies in the LXX but is unparalleled in ancient original Greek literature.
This conclusion can be supplemented by additional evidence which has so far not been
taken into account: The very high frequency of paragraph introducing καί in the Second
Gospel has many parallels in the Greek OT but is without analogy in original Greek texts.
Because of its exceptional frequency on sentence and pericope level, it is still correct to
classify paratactic καί in Mark’s Gospel as a syntactic Semitism, albeit a secondary one.
Keywords
kai style – parataxis – secondary Semitism – syntactic Semitism
Should the paratactic καί in the NT Gospels be identified as a syntactic

Semitism? This is controversial. While Stephanie Black (S.B.) says “it has not
been established that the frequency of καί in the Gospels is disproportionate to
its wide use in Hellenistic vernacular,”1 Rodney Decker believes that the Gospel
of Mark “appears to follow a Hebraic pattern with the ubiquitous vav.”2
1 S.L. Black, Sentence Conjunctions in the Gospel of Matthew: καί, δέ, τότε, γάρ, οὖν and Asyndeton
in Narrative Discourse (JSNTSup 216; Sheffield: Academic, 2002) 339, cf. 109-111.
2 R.J. Decker, “Markan Idiolect in the Study of the Greek of the New Testament,” in The Lan-
guage of the New Testament: Context, History, and Development (ed. S.E. Porter et al.; Early
© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ��6 | doi 10.1163/15685365-12341515

2 baum
1 Review of Research
1.1 NT Paratactic καί is a Semitism

The paratactic καί in the NT Gospels has long been identified as a syntactic
Semitism.3 Raymond A. Martin (R.A.M.) and Elliott Maloney have given the
most detailed reasons for this conclusion.
Martin observed that, in a statistical analysis conducted by Nigel Turner
(N.T.), comprising Genesis, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets,4
“those documents known to be a translation of Semitic sources have in every
case more than two καί’s copulative for every δέ, whereas the undisputed orig-
inal Greek writings . . . have less καί’s copulative than δέ’s.” Martin decided to
investigate more widely in original Greek documents.5 In 1974, he affirmed on
the basis of original Greek literature (including Plutarch, Polybius, Epictetus,
and Josephus) the conclusion “that Greek which is a translation of Hebrew or
Aramaic will have at least two or more [sentence coordinating] καί’s for every
δέ and original Greek will have considerably fewer [sentence coordinating]
καί’s than δέ’s.”6
In a dissertation written under the guidance of Joseph Fitzmyer in 1987,
Maloney conceded that καί parataxis was quite possible in ancient Greek texts
and many other Indo-European languages; at the same time, he pointed out,
no non-biblical writing even approached Mark in his use of paratactic καί.
“Paratactic καί is found in Mark with such a high frequency (paralleled only by
a minority of short, rudimentary papyri) that the likelihood of the influence of
Hebrew and/or Aramaic in this matter of Mark’s style is very high.”7
1.2 NT Paratactic καί is no Semitism

This classification of paratactic καί in the NT Gospels as a syntactic Semitism
has been called into question by other scholars, most prominently by Adolf
Christianity in its Hellenistic Context 3; Linguistic Biblical Studies 6; Leiden: Brill, 2013)
47-49.
3 E. Norden, Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen zur Formengeschichte religiöser Rede (Leipzig:
Teubner, 1913) 367; J.H. Moulton and W.F. Howard, A Grammar of New Testament Greek (Edin-
burgh: Clark, 1986) 2:420.
4 N. Turner, “The Relation of Luke i and ii to Hebraic Sources and to the Rest of Luke-Acts,” NTS
2 (1955) 100-109 (108).
5 R.A. Martin, Syntactical Evidence of Semitic Sources in Greek Documents (SBLSC 3; Cambridge,
Mass.: SBL, 1974) 16.
6 Martin, Syntactical Evidence, 19; cf. idem, Syntax Criticism of the Synoptic Gospels (SBEC 10;
Lewiston: Mellen, 1987) 9.
7 E.C. Maloney, Semitic Interference in Marcan Syntax (SBLDS 51; Chico: Scholars, 1981) 66-67.

mark ʼ s paratactic καi as a secondary syntactic semitism 3
Deissmann just over a century ago. In his magisterial work Light from the
Ancient East, Deissmann challenged the view that Johannine style was
“particularly Semitic, chiefly on account of its preference for paratactic con-
structions, especially ‘and . . . and,’ which occurs so frequently.” Deissmann
argued that “parataxis appears to be not Greek only from the orthodox point of
view of the Atticists, who laid it down that the periodic structure with hypotaxis
was good, beautiful, and Greek par excellence.” Thus, parataxis was considered
the original, ordinary, and popular form of Greek speech. It “even found its way
into literature when the ordinary conversation of the people was imitated.”8
Further, Deissmann said, it was easy to find examples of the popular narra-
tive style with its καί parataxis in ancient papyri and inscriptions. He regarded
some ancient inscriptions as “if possible, even more paratactic (‘Semitic,’
people would say, if it were a quotation from the New Testament)” than the
corresponding passages in the Gospel of John. According to Deissmann, once
the popular character of the Johannine style has been recognized, its καί para-
taxis must no longer be called Semitic.9
The most detailed research in support of Deissmann’s objections has been
done by Sophie Trenkner (S.T.) and Marius Reiser (M.R.). In her monograph
on καί style in Attic oral narratives and descriptions first published in 1948,
Trenkner presupposed that paratactic καί was a common characteristic of
both Semitic languages and Hellenistic Greek.10 At the same time she observed
that many exegetes still defended a Semitic origin of the NT καί style. Against
these scholars, Trenkner wanted to show that paratactic καί was also common
in spoken Attic Greek of the 5th and 4th century BC11 which can be found in
texts of orators (Demosthenes, Lysias etc.), historians (Herodotus, Thucydides
etc.), and philosophers (Plato, Aristotle etc.).12 She compared the frequency
and usage of καί in these Attic texts with its frequency and usage in the Gospels
of Mathew and Mark.13 Trenkner was able to demonstrate that, on the one
hand, in Attic Greek paratactic καί had the same syntactic functions (copu-
lative, adversative etc.) as in Koine and NT Greek.14 On the other hand she
8 A. Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1911) 127-128.
9 Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 132.
10 S. Trenkner, Le style kai dans le récit attique oral (Bibliotheca Classica Vangorcumiana 9;
Assen: van Gorkum, 1960) XI.
11 Trenkner, Le style kai, XI-XII.
12 Trenkner, Le style kai, 1-5.
14 Trenkner, Le style kai, 30-59; cf. H. Ljungvik, Beiträge zur Syntax der spätgriechischen Volks-
sprache (Uppsala: Almqvist, 1932) 55-87.

4 baum
admitted that paratactic καί was comparatively frequent in the NT and pre-
sumed that this high frequency was due to syntactic influence of the Hebrew
OT and the LXX. But since a Greek Hebraism is by definition unidiomatic,
Trenkner did not designate the increased use of καί style in the NT as a
Hebraism.15
In 1984, Marius Reiser pointed out that in their use of paratactic καί ancient
Greek texts written in a popular narrative style were not significantly different
from the Gospel of Mark. Rather, the frequency of paratactic καί was typical
for the low stylistic level to which the Second Gospel belonged. Mark “remains
completely within the limits of Greek syntax and of the practice that is also
known from classical literature.”16 In order to substantiate his thesis, Reiser
compared the use of paratactic καί in Mark’s Gospel with its use in sections of
the Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas, Achilles Tatius’ Adventures of Leucippe
and Cleitophon, the Acts of Paul and Thecla, the Alexander romance, and the
first speech of Lysias. His main result was that, except for the passage from
Lysias, paratactic καί outweighs the conjunction δέ, just as in Mark’s Gospel.
At the same time Reiser acknowledged that the very low number of “buts” in
relation to the many “ands” in the early chapters of the Gospel of Mark stands
out. He assumed that the second evangelist had been less careful with his style
in these chapters but ruled out Semitic influence.17
In this paper I will look again at the use of paratactic καί in the Septuagint,
in original Greek literature, and in the NT Gospels, particularly the Gospel of
Mark, and analyze its occurrence and frequency both on the sentence level
(2) and on the level of pericopes (3). I will do this by reviewing the evidence
thus far presented by biblical scholars and classicists, by adding some new evi-
dence, and by presenting all available evidence as clearly as possible with the
help of a number of simple tables.
2 Paratactic καί on the Sentence Level
2.1 Occurrence and Frequency in the NT Gospels and Acts

Paratactic καί is very common in the Synoptic Gospels, particularly in the
Gospel of Mark. The pericope of the healing of a man with an unclean spirit
in Mark 1:23-28 can serve as an example. καί is the only sentence conjunction:

16 M. Reiser, Syntax und Stil des Markusevangeliums im Licht der hellenistischen Volkslitera-
tur (WUNT 2/11; Tübingen: Mohr, 1984) 166.
17 Reiser, Syntax und Stil, 136.

Mark 1:23-2818
And (καί) then there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit.
And (καί) he cried out,
“What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth?
Have you come to destroy us?
I know who you are, the Holy One of God.”
And (καί) Jesus rebuked him, saying,
“Be silent, and come out of him!”
And (καί) the unclean spirit convulsing him and crying with a loud voice,
came out of him.
And (καί) they were all so amazed, that they asked each other,
“What is this? A new teaching with authority!
And (καί) he commands the unclean spirits.
And (καί) they obey him.”
And (καί) at once his fame began to spread throughout the surrounding
region of Galilee.
In Greek literature, δέ “is often used when the writer subjoins something new,
different, and distinct from what precedes” it,19 while the sentence conjunc-
tion καί is used when a sentence does not present anything distinctive. As
Stephen H. Levinsohn (S.H.L.) has shown, this rule also applies to the Gospel
of Luke20 and the Book of Acts.21 In 90% of the occurrences of δέ in Acts, the
distinctive element consists of a change of temporal setting or a change in the
underlying subject, for instance in Acts 5:1-6:
Acts 5:1-622
But (δέ) a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of
property.
And (καί) he kept back some of the proceeds, his wife being aware of it.
And (καί) bringing only a part he laid it at the apostles’ feet.
18 NRSV slightly modified.

19 G.B. Winer, A Treatise on the Grammar of New Testament Greek (Edinburgh: Clark, 1882)
552-553.
20 S.H. Levinsohn, Textual Connections in Acts (SBLMS 31; Atlanta: Scholars, 1987) 173-177.
21 Levinsohn, Textual Connections, 83-120; for the Gospel of Matthew see Black, Sentence
Conjunctions, 336 and passim.
22 NRSV modified.

6 baum
But (δέ) Peter said: “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart . . .?”
But (δέ) when Ananias heard these words, he fell down and died.
And (καί) great fear seized all who heard of it.
But (δέ) the young men came and wrapped up his body.
And (καί) carrying him out they buried him.
In Acts, in roughly 70% of the cases a change of subject is introduced by δέ

and in only about 30% of the cases by καί.23 In contrast, as the above quoted
example from Mark 1:23-28 demonstrates, in Mark’s Gospel καί appears to be
the regular sentence conjunction even when the subject changes.24
Fondness for the sentence conjunction “and” in the above quoted Markan
pericope is no exception but can be found throughout the Synoptic Gospels,
particularly in the Gospel of Mark. Exact numbers for the sentence conjunc-
tions καί and δέ (δέ being the second most common sentence conjunction) in
the chapters and pericopes of the Gospel of Mark have been provided by Leo
Wohleb (L.W.).25 Alternative numbers for the narrative material in Mark 1:4-3:5
are supplied by Trenkner.26 Wohleb has also offered numbers for the narra-
tive material in Matthew as well as for the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7).27
The numbers for the narrative material in Matt 2:1-8:27 come from Trenkner.28
More recently, Black has provided slightly different numbers for Matthew and
for Matthew’s narrative material.29 The numbers for Luke 1-2, Luke 3-24 and
Acts come from Turner.30 According to Levinsohn, in the first chapter of Acts
(1:1-2:4) the number of sentences linked by καί is higher than in the rest of
the book;31 but Levinsohn does not offer exact numbers. Martin has provided
23 Levinsohn, Textual Connections, 87-89; cf. C. Ziegert, “δέ statt καί als textpragmatisch
motivierte Wiedergabe des Waw consecutivum und copulativum in der Septuagintafas-
sung des Buches Ruth,” BZ 53 (2009) 263-273 (268-269).
24 Cf. M. Zerwick, Untersuchungen zum Markus-Stil: Ein Beitrag zur stilistischen Durcharbei-
tung des Neuen Testaments (Rome: Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 1937) 1-2.
25 L. Wohleb, “Beobachtungen zum Erzählungsstil des Markus-Evangeliums,” RQ 36 (1928)
185-196 (187-189).
26 Trenkner, Le style kai, 8.
27 L. Wohleb, “Die Satzbeiordnung im Erzählungsstil des Matthäus,” in Die Stammbäume
Jesu nach Matthäus und Lukas: Ihre Ursprüngliche Bedeutung und Textgestalt und ihre
Quellen (ed. J.M. Heer; BibS[F] 15; Freiburg: Herder, 1910) 214-222 (216).
29 Black, Sentence Conjunctions, 339.
30 Turner, “The Relation of Luke i and ii,” 108.
31 Levinsohn, Textual Connections, 104-106.

the numbers for the Q material (QMatt, QLuke) and Luke’s special material
(SLuke).32 Martin has also offered numbers for Acts 1-15 and Act 15-28.33 So far
no one has counted the paratactic “ands” in John’s Gospel, but their occurrence
is far less frequent than in the Synoptic Gospels34 (table 1):
Table 1 The sentence conjunctions καί and δέ in the NT history books
καί δέ καί : δέ
Mark 1-3 (L.W.) 117 5 23.4 : 1

Mark 1-3, 5 [narrative] (M.R.) 167 11 15.2 : 1
Mark 1-8 (L.W.) 352 33 10.7 : 1
Mark 1:4-3:5 [narrative] (S.T.) 80 14 5.7 : 1
Luke 1-2 (R.A.M.) 138 26 5.3 : 1
Mark (L.W.) 591 113 5.2 : 1
Luke 1-2 (N.T.) 132 26 5.1 : 1
Mark 14-15 [narrative] (M.R.) 101 41 2.5 : 1
QMatt (R.A.M.) 130 57 2.3 : 1
QLuke (R.A.M.) 136 59 2.3 : 1
S Luke (R.A.M.) 395 189 2.1 : 1
Luke (1-2 + 3-24) (N.T.) 985 537 1.8 : 1
Luke 3-24 (N.T.) 853 511 1.7 : 1
Matt 2:1-8:27 [narrative] (S.T.) 40 27 1.5 : 1
Matt (S.B.) 700 470 1.5 : 1
Matt [narrative] (S.B.) 335 257 1.3 : 1
Acts 1-15 (R.A.M.) 346 279 1.2 : 1
Matt 1:18-2:23 (R.A.M.) 20 18 1.1 : 1
Acts (N.T.) 522 556 0.9 : 1
Matt [narrative] (L.W.) 208 252 0.8 : 1
Acts 15-28 (R.A.M.) 196 273 0.7 : 1
Matt 5-7 (L.W.) 13 31 0.4 : 1
32 Martin, Syntax Criticism, 206, 209.

33 Martin, Syntactical Evidence, 133, 149.
34 E.A. Abbott, Johannine Grammar (London: Black, 1906) 104, 132-133.

8 baum
Two observations are obvious. First, “Mark’s preference for καί rather than
δέ is a characteristic of his style throughout his Gospel” to a much greater
extent than that of Matthew and Luke.35
Second, Mark’s preference for καί is particularly strong in the first chapters
of his Gospel. In Mark 1:1-16:8, for every 5.2 sentences introduced by καί one
sentence is introduced by δέ. In chapters 1-8 the ratio is 10.7:1. In chapters 1-3 it
is 23.4:1; that is, in Mark 1-3 sentences are 23 times more frequently introduced
by καί rather than by δέ. In Matthew’s infancy narrative (Matt 1:18-2:23) and in
the Book of Acts, the proportion of δέ to καί is nearly balanced. In the second
half of Acts (15-28) and in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7), the authors
introduce their sentences more often with δέ than with καί.
Does the relative frequency of καί in (parts of) the Gospel of Mark indicate
a Semitic influence or not? In other words, can a similar frequency of para
tactic καί only be found in OT books (2.2) or also in extra-biblical Greek liter-
ature (2.3)?
2.2 Occurrence and Frequency in the LXX

Paratactic καί is very common in the LXX. A pericope from the First Book of
Kingdoms (2:18-21) may serve as an example. καί is the only sentence conjunc-
tion and it is used even when the subject changes:
1 Kgdms 2:18-2136
And (καί) Samuel was ministering before the LORD, a boy wearing a linen
ephod.
And (καί) his mother used to make for him a little robe.
And (καί) she used to take it to him each year, when she went up with her
husband to offer the yearly sacrifice.
And (καί) Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife, and say,
“May the Lord repay you with children by this woman
for the gift that she made to the LORD.”
And (καί) they would return to their home.
And (καί) the Lord took note of Hannah.
And (καί) she bore three sons and two daughters.
And (καί) the boy Samuel grew up in the presence of the Lord.
35 J.S. Hawkins, Horae Synopticae: Contributions to the Study of the Synoptic Problem (Oxford:
Clarendon, 21909) 151.
36 NRSV slightly modified.

The occurrence of paratactic καί in the OT has been studied most thoroughly
for the Pentateuch. The numbers for paratactic καί and δέ in the books of the
Pentateuch come from Anneli Aejmelaeus (A.A.). In the Hebrew Pentateuch,
56% of all clauses are introduced by waw.37 The same holds true for the Aramaic
sections of the Bible. “Out of 643 clauses in Biblical Aramaic, 365 clauses begin
with a waw,” that is 57%.38 44% of all clauses in the Greek Pentateuch are intro-
duced by paratactic καί.39 As these numbers demonstrate, the translators of the
LXX have not rendered every introductory waw with καί. But all in all, about half
of the clauses in the Pentateuch begin with paratactic καί or waw respectively.
In the Greek Pentateuch, paratactic καί is much more frequent than δέ.
It appears 7224 times (6961 times paratactic καί is a translation of the Hebrew
waw,40 263 times it is not41), while δέ appears only 1236 times. On average,
for every sentence in the Greek Pentateuch introduced by δέ, 5.8 sentences
are introduced by καί. This average is due to a higher frequency of paratac-
tic καί in Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy and a much lower frequency
of paratactic καί in Genesis and Exodus. In no book of the Pentateuch is the
proportion of καί to δέ equel and nowhere is δέ more common than καί. In
Numbers, the conjunction καί is used 41.3 times more frequently than the con-
junction δέ (table 2):
Table 2 The sentence conjunctions καί and δέ in the Greek Pentateuch
Num (A.A.) 1529 37 41.3 : 1

Lev (A.A.) 1160 31 37.4 : 1
Deut (A.A.) 1118 34 32.9 : 1
Exod (A.A.) 1444 329 4.4 : 1
Gen (A.A.) 1973 805 2.5 : 1
Pent. (A.A.) 7224 1236 5.8 : 1
37 A. Aejmelaeus, Parataxis in the Septuagint: A Study of the Renderings of the Hebrew Coordi-
nate Clauses in the Greek Pentateuch (AASF.DHL 31; Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia,
1982) 32-33, 45-47.
38 M.B. Shepherd, The Verbal System of Biblical Aramaic: A Distributional Approach (Studies
in Biblical Literature 16; New York: Lang, 2008) 68-69.
39 Aejmelaeus, Parataxis, 32-33.
40 Aejmelaeus, Parataxis, 13, 123.
41 Aejmelaeus, Parataxis, 156.

10 baum
In some of the remaining books of the LXX, paratactic καί is even more pre-
dominant than in Numbers. The four Books of Kingdoms each contain more
than 2000 “ands” and only 10 (1 Kgdms), 19 (2 Kgdms), 17 (3 Kgdms), and
9 (4 Kgdms) “buts” respectively. Although not all of these “ands” introduce sen-
tences, the infrequency of δέ demonstrates clearly that in these books paratac-
tic καί prevails even more than in Numbers. Exact numbers for (portions of)
the Books of Kingdoms and many other books of the OT have been provided
by two scholars who have also offered independent numbers for Genesis. The
numbers for Genesis, Isaiah (1-39, 40-66), the Minor Prophets, Jeremiah (1-28,
29-50), and Ezekiel (1-27 and 40-48, 28-39) have been provided by Turner.42
The numbers for Genesis (1-4, 6, 39), 1 Kingdoms (3, 4, 22), 3 Kingdoms (17),
4 Kingdoms (13), Daniel (aram.), and Ezra (aram.) come from Martin.43 The
numbers for 1 Maccabees have also been provided by Martin44 (table 3):
Table 3 The sentence conjunctions καί and δέ in the LXX
1 Kgdms 3, 4, 22 (R.A.M.) 188 0

4 Kgdms 13 (R.A.M.) 61 0
Jer 29-50 (N.T.) 754 4 188.5 : 1
Ezek 28-39 (N.T.) 592 6 98.7 : 1
Ezra [aram.] (R.A.M.) 82 1 82.0 : 1
Ezek 1-27, 40-48 (N.T.) 1642 26 63.2 : 1
3 Kgdms 17 (R.A.M.) 58 1 58.0 : 1
Jer 1-28 (N.T.) 917 22 41.7 : 1
Num (A.A.) 1529 37 41.3 : 1
Lev (A.A.) 1160 31 37.4 : 1
Deut (A.A.) 1118 34 32.9 : 1
Min. Proph. (N.T.) 1548 59 26.2 : 1
1 Macc 1-5 (R.A.M.) 537 21 25.6 : 1
Dan [aram.] (R.A.M.) 280 39 7.2 : 1
Gen 1-4, 6, 39 (R.A.M.) 274 46 5.9 : 1
Pent. (A.A.) 7224 1236 5.8 : 1
42 Turner, “The Relation of Luke i and ii,” 108.

43 Martin, Syntactical Evidence, 119-120, 126, 130.
44 Martin, Syntax Criticism, 191.

Exod (A.A.) 1444 329 4.3 : 1

Gen (A.A.) 1973 805 2.5 : 1
Gen (N.T.) 2023 840 2.4 : 1
The reason for high numbers of paratactic “and” in the LXX is twofold. First,
in the Hebrew OT a single clausal coordinating conjunction (w) dominates
all others. The two other clausal coordinating conjunctions are “or” (wa) and
“and so” (p).45 While the few possible occurrences of “and so” are controversial,
“or” appears just 321 times in the OT, for instance just 6 times in Genesis. In
contrast, waw (joining clauses and nouns) appears 51023 times in the OT, for
instance 4135 times in Genesis.
The second reason for high frequency of the sentence conjunction καί in
the LXX is that many of its translators have rendered their Hebrew texts rather
literally and translated most Hebrew “ands,” including the clausal coordinating
conjunctions, with the Greek καί.
In comparison with the use of paratactic καί in the Gospel of Mark the fol-
lowing can be concluded. In some books of the Greek OT the preponderance
of paratactic καί over δέ is greater than in any of the narrative books of the NT.
But in the Gospel of Mark (5.3:1) and in Luke’s infancy narrative (5.1:1) the pre-
ponderance of paratactic καί is similar to that of the Greek Pentateuch (5.8:1).
And in the first three chapters of Mark (23.4:1) the preponderance of paratactic
καί is similar to that of 1 Maccabees (25.6:1).
It would be premature, however, to conclude on the basis of these numbers
that paratactic καί in Mark 1-3 is a syntactic Semitism. First its frequency in
extra-biblical Greek literature must be considered.
2.3 Occurrence and Frequency in Extra-Biblical Greek Literature

As Trenkner has pointed out, a very high frequency of paratactic “ands” can
be found in Theophrastus’ Characters. Trenkner emphasized that the fre-
quency of καί in Theophrastus’ Characters is greater than its frequency in
Mark.46 Theophrastus’ section on tactlessness may serve as an example. Eleven
45 B.K. Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake:
Eisenbrauns, 1990) 647 (39.1.a), 654 (39.2.6.a).

12 baum
sentences are introduced by καί, interrupted only by one sentence that is intro-
duced by δέ:
Theophrastus, The Characters 1247
Now (μέν οὖν) tactlessness is a pain-giving failure to hit upon the right
moment;
but (δέ) your tactless man is one
that will accost a busy friend and ask his advice,
and (καί) serenade his sweetheart when she is sick of a fever,
and (καί) will go up to one that has gone bail and lost it, and pray him be
his surety,
and (καί) will come to bear witness after the verdict is given,
and (καί) should you bid him to a wedding, he will inveigh against
womankind,
and (καί) should you be but now returned from a long journey, he will
invite you to a walk,
but (δέ) he is given to bringing you one that will pay you more when your
bargain is struck,
and (καί) to rising from his seat to tell a tale all afresh to such as have
heard it before and know it well,
and (καί) he is forward to undertake for you what you would not have
done but cannot well decline,
and (καί) if you are sacrificing and put to great expense, that is the day he
chooses to come and demand his usury,
and (καί) at the flogging of your servant he will stand by and tell how a
boy of his hanged himself after just such a flogging as this;
and (καί) at an arbitration he will set the parties by the ears when both
wish to be reconciled,
and (καί) when he would dance, lay hold of another who is not yet drunk.
In contrast, however, to the texts from OT and NT literature which have been
adduced so far, in Theophrastus’ Characters the frequent “ands” do not intro-
duce main clauses with finite verb forms but are used in a list of characteristics.
In addition, Theophrastus never uses καί to introduce a new paragraph (see
below). Therefore, this text is not suitable for comparison with paratactic καί
in Mark’s Gospel and in the other texts that have been adduced.
47 Edmonds, LCL, with slight modifications.

Deissmann regarded an inscription from the temple of Asclepius on the

island of the Tiber in Rome as even more “Semitic” than a corresponding pas-
sage in the Gospel of John (9:7.11):
And (καί) he received his sight.

And (καί) he came.
And (καί) he gave thanks publicly to the god.
Deissmann concluded that once the popular character of Johannine style has
been recognized, it may no longer be called Semitic.48 The Gospel of John,
however, uses paratactic καί much less frequently than any of the Synoptic
Gospels.49 And in many pericopes of the Synoptic Gospels, paratactic καί
appears much more frequently than in the inscriptions quoted by Deissmann.
More germane to the use of paratactic καί in the Gospels are a number
of texts provided by Reiser. His text with the highest frequency of paratactic
“ands” as compared to “buts” in extra-biblical non-Semitic Greek literature
comes from Achilles Tatius:50
Achilles Tatius 2.11.4-851
For (γάρ) there was once a time, you must know, when purple was still an
ornament forbidden to men;
but (δέ) it lay concealed in the round cavity of a tiny shell.
A fisherman captured some of these.
And (καί) at first he thought that he had obtained some fish.
But (δέ) when he saw that the shell was rough and hard, he was vexed
with what he had caught.
And (καί) he threw it away as the mere offal of the sea.
But (δέ) a dog found this windfall,
And (καί) he crunched it with its teeth.
And (καί) the blood of the dye streamed all over the dog’s mouth.
And (καί) it stained its muzzle.
And (καί) it indelibly imprinted the purple on its lips.
The shepherd saw his dog’s lips thus blood-stained.
And (καί) he thought that the colour arose from a wound.
48 Deissmann, Light, 127-132.

49 Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 132-133 (§ 2133-2134).
50 Reiser, Syntax und Stil, 99-101.
51 Gaselee, LCL, slightly revised.

14 baum
And (καί) he went and washed it in sea-water.

And (καί) the blood only shone the brighter.
But (δέ) when he touched it with his hands, some of the purple appeared
on the hand.
He then (οὖν) realised the character of the shell, how it contained within
it a medicament of great beauty.
And (καί) taking a fleece of wool he pressed it into the interior of the
shell, tying to find out its secret.
But (δέ) the wool too appeared as though blood-stained, like the dog’s
muzzle.
And then (καί τότε) he learned the appearance of the dye.
Taking therefore (δή) some stones he broke the outer shell which hid the
substance.
And (καί) he opened the hiding-place of the purple.
And (καί) he discovered what was a very treasury of dye.
Neither in Theophrastus’ Characters nor in the ancient papyri nor in Achilles

Tatius are sections with a high frequency of paratactic καί exceptional. And
there are other Greek texts wherein a large number of sentences is introduced
by καί.
In some original Greek texts, 40% of the sentences are introduced by καί.
The numbers for Xenophon of Ephesus have been provided by Consuelo
Ruiz Montero (C.R.M.).52 The corresponding numbers for Acts come from
Levinsohn53 and the numbers for Matthew from Black54 (table 4):
Table 4 The sentence conjunctions in NT and original Greek history books
καί δέ Asyndeton Others Total
Matt [narrative] (S.B.) 335 (47%) 257 (36%) 57 (8%) 71 (10%) 720
X. Eph. (C.R.M.) (40%) (38%) (8%) (14%)
Acts [narrative] (S.H.L.) 274 (35%) 408 (52%) 10 (1%) 87 (11%) 779
Matt (S.B.) 700 (30%) 470 (20%) 721 (31%) 411 (18%) 2.302
52 C. Ruiz Montero, “Una interpretación del ‘estilo KAI’ de Jenofonte de É feso,” Emerita 50
(1982) 305-323 (310).
53 Levinsohn, Textual Connections, 83.
54 Black, Sentence Conjunctions, 339.

According to Aejmelaeus, in 2 Maccabees, the Letter of Aristeas, Epicurus,

Polybius, Philodemus, and the Ptolemaic inscriptions and papyri sentences are
more often introduced by δέ than by καί.55 Aejmelaeus does not offer exact num-
bers, but others do. Martin has provided them for 2 Maccabees 1-6, Josephus,
Epictetus 1-4, Plutarch, Polybius, and Philo.56 The numbers for Achilles Tatius,
the Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas, the Acts of Paul and Thecla, the
Alexander Romance or Historia Alexandri Magni (HAM), and Lysias come from
Reiser.57 The numbers for Andocides, Aristophanes, Ps-Demosthenes, Isaeus,
Plato, and Theophrastus have been provided by Trenkner58 (table 5):
Table 5 The sentence conjunctions καί and δέ in original Greek literature
[Thphr. (S.T.) 352 17 20.7 : 1]

Ach. Tat. [narrative] (M.R.) 31 10 3.1 : 1
M. Perp. 3-10 [narrative] (M.R.) 105 35 3.0 : 1
Pl. (S.T.) 233 103 2.6 : 1
A. Paul. et Thecl. [narrative] (M.R.) 132 71 1.9 : 1
Ps-D., Olymp. (S.T.). 45 27 1.7 : 1
HAM b 1.1-14 [narrative] (M.R.) 124 78 1.6 : 1
Ar. (S.T.) 109 75 1.5 : 1
Is. (S.T.) 118 88 1.3 : 1
Lys. 1.6-26 narrative (M.R.) 28 30 0.9 : 1
And. (S.T.) 42 57 0.7 : 1
Pap. (R.A.M.) 44 112 0.4 : 1
2 Macc 1-6 (R.A.M.) 61 161 0.4 : 1
Jos. (R.A.M.) 14 39 0.4 : 1
Epict. 1-4 (R.A.M.) 30 94 0.3 : 1
Plu. (R.A.M.) 20 84 0.2 : 1
Plb. (R.A.M.) 2 31 01 : 1
Ph. (R.A.M.) 1 49 0.02 : 1
55 Aejmelaeus, Parataxis, 32, 36, 46.

56 Martin, Syntactical Evidence, 111-118; Syntax Criticism, 171-176.

16 baum
Except for Theophrastus’ Characters, which does not fit the definition of καί
parataxis used by other researchers and has therefore been put between square
brackets, in none of the original Greek texts considered does paratactic καί
occur more than three times more frequently than δέ. In none of them is the
preponderance of paratactic καί over δέ as great as in Luke 1-2 (5.1:1) or in the
Gospel of Mark (5.2:1) which has a particularly high frequency of paratactic καί
in chapters 1-3 (23.4:1).
2.4 Conclusion
In order to draw some conclusions, I have compiled all the evidence in one
table. The NT texts are printed in bold. The blank line marks the point above
which no original Greek texts are presented (table 6):
Table 6 The sentence conjunctions καί and δέ in ancient Greek literature
καί : δέ
1 Kgdms 3, 4, 22 (R.A.M.)
4 Kgdms 13 (R.A.M.)
Jer 29-50 (N.T.) 188.5 : 1
Ezek 28-39 (N.T.) 98.7 : 1
Ezra [aram.] (R.A.M.) 82.0 : 1
Ezek 1-27, 40-48 (N.T.) 63.2 : 1
3 Kgdms 17 (R.A.M.) 58.0 : 1
Jer 1-28 (N.T.) 41.7 : 1
Num (A.A.) 41.3 : 1
Lev (A.A.) 37.4 : 1
Deut (A.A.) 32.9 : 1
Min. Proph. (N.T.) 26.2 : 1
1 Macc 1-5 (R.A.M.) 25.6 : 1
Mark 1-3 (L.W.) 23.4 : 1
Mark 1-3, 5 [narrative] (M.R.) 15.2 : 1
Mark 1-8 (L.W.) 10.7 : 1
Dan 2:4b-7:28 [Aramaic] (R.A.M.) 7.2 : 1
Gen 1-4, 6, 39 (R.A.M.) 5.9 : 1
Pent. (A.A.) 5.8 : 1
Mark 1:4-3:5 [narrative] (S.T.) 5.7 : 1
Luke 1-2 (R.A.M.) 5.3 : 1
Mark (L.W.) 5.2 : 1

καί : δέ
Luke 1-2 (N.T.) 5.1 : 1

Exod (A.A.) 4.3 : 1
Ach. Tat. [narrative] (M.R.) 3.1 : 1

M. Perp. 3-10 [narrative] (M.R.) 3.0 : 1
Pl. (S.T.) 2.6 : 1
Gen (A.A.) 2.5 : 1
Mark 14-15 [narrative] (M.R.) 2.5 : 1
Gen (N.T.) 2.4 : 1
QMatt (R.A.M.) 2.3 : 1
QLuke (R.A.M.) 2.3 : 1
S Luke (R.A.M.) 2.1 : 1
A. Paul. et Thecl. [narrative] (M.R.) 1.9 : 1
Luke (1-2 + 3-24) (N.T.) 1.8 : 1
Ps-D., Olymp. (S.T.). 1.7 : 1
Luke 3-24 (N.T.) 1.7 : 1
HAM b 1.1-14 [narrative] (M.R.) 1.6 : 1
Ar. (S.T.) 1.5 : 1
Matt 2:1-8:27 [narrative] (S.T.) 1.5 : 1
Matt (S.B.) 1.5 : 1
Is. (S.T.) 1.3 : 1
Matt narrative (S.B.) 1.3 : 1
Acts 1-15 (R.A.M.) 1.2 : 1
Matt 1:18-2:23 (R.A.M.) 1.1 : 1
Lys. 1.6-26 [narrative] (M.R.) 0.9 : 1
Acts (N.T.) 0.9 : 1
Matt [narrative] (L.W.) 0.8 : 1
And. (S.T.) 0.7 : 1
Acts 15-28 (R.A.M.) 0.7 : 1
Matt 5-7 (L.W.) 0.4 : 1
Pap. (R.A.M.) 0.4 : 1
2 Macc 1-6 (R.A.M.) 0.4 : 1
Jos. (R.A.M.) 0.4 : 1
Epict. 1-4 (R.A.M.) 0.3 : 1
Plu. (R.A.M.) 0.2 : 1
Plb. (R.A.M.) 0.1 : 1
Ph. (R.A.M.) 0.02 : 1

18 baum
Deissmann’s assumption that the Gospel of John contains an extraordinary

number of paratactic “ands” and therefore is an adequate point of reference
for a study of καί parataxis in the NT and its extra biblical parallels59 was false.
This was corrected by later proponents of his position who put it on a firmer
footing.
The evidence summarized in table 6 forms a valid objection against Martin’s
thesis that texts in “original Greek will have considerably fewer καί’s than
δέ’s.”60 In many original Greek texts adduced by Trenkner and Reiser, the sen-
tence conjunction καί is more frequent than δέ, Plato (2.6:1), the Martyrdom of
Perpetua and Felicitas (3.0:1), and Achilles Tatius (3.1:1) being the most obvious
examples.
In the Gospels of Matthew and Luke and the Acts of the Apostles, the num-
ber of “ands” in relation to “buts” is comparable to the occurrence of these
sentence conjunctions in several original Greek texts. Maloney’s observation,
however, that “no non-biblical writing even approaches Mark in his use of
paratactic καί”61 has been confirmed by all available evidence, particularly for
Mark 1-3. So far neither Reiser nor anyone else has presented original Greek
texts or sections of texts in which the number of paratactic “ands” in relation to
“buts” is similar to the ratio found in Mark 1-16, Mark 1-8, or Mark 1-3.
Reiser rightly acknowledged that the low number of “buts” in relation to the
many “ands” in the early chapters of the Gospel of Mark stands out. But he first
ruled out a Semitic background and secondly assumed that in these chapters
the evangelist had been less careful with his style.62 The second conclusion he
draws from the evidence is obvious. Mark’s fondness of paratactic καί appears
to have decreased during the writing process. If his sources abounded overall
in sentence coordinating “ands,” Mark has reproduced their style less closely
in the latter chapters of his Gospel and has gradually approximated his use of
sentence conjunctions to the original Greek style.
As to Reiser’s first conclusion, the reason for the high number of sentence
conjoining “ands” in the Second Gospel, however, the most probable expla-
nation suggested by the ancient texts that have been compiled in table 6 is a
Semitic influence. We don’t know of any original Greek texts with more than
3.1 “ands” for every “but.” The most plausible reason is that the Greek language
has a number of commonly used sentence conjunctions (δέ, καί, οὖν, τε, τότε
etc.) and that no ancient author of an original Greek text has limited himself
59 Deissmann, Light, 127-128.

60 Martin, Syntactical Evidence, 19; cf. idem, Syntax Criticism, 9.
61 Maloney, Semitic Interference, 66-67.

largely to just one of these sentence conjunctions. Rather, a strong dominance

of “and” was the natural result of a close reproduction of the one dominat-
ing Hebrew sentence conjunction waw in a Greek text. The assumption that
colloquial Greek abounded in sentence conjoining “ands” just as much as
Mark 1-3 has not been proven and is probably improvable. At the same time,
the frequency of Mark’s paratactic καί has syntactic analogies with many books
of the LXX. Therefore, all the evidence we have points to a Semitic background
for Mark’s use of sentence conjunctions.
Finally, Trenkner’s refusal to classify the high frequency of καί in some
NT texts as a syntactic Semitism63 is only partly justified. She correctly pointed
out that, because of the syntactic analogies in original Greek literature, none of
Mark’s paratactic “ands” must be called a primary Semitism. Nevertheless, the
frequency of paratactic καί in the Gospel of Mark conforms to the definition of
secondary Semitisms developed by James Moulton and Wilbert Howard. They
restricted the term (primary) Semitism (or Hebraism or Aramaism respec-
tively) to cases where the Greek idiom is seriously strained. From these cases
they distinguished milder “secondary” Semitisms that consisted of “a very
marked over-use of a rare locution, as representing exactly what is common
in the language from which the translation is made.”64 It is the over-use of
paratactic καί in Mark 1-3 that makes it a secondary syntactic Semitism.
3 Paratactic καί at the Beginning of a Pericope
Additional evidence regarding the Semitic character of paratactic καί in the

NT Gospels comes from the way the Gospel authors introduce their pericopes.
3.1 Occurrence and Frequency in the Synoptic Gospels

In the above quoted pericope Mark 1:23-28, καί was also the first word of the
section. A first glance at the rest of the Second Gospel reveals that such section
openings were not the exception, but the rule. John Hawkins has counted the
pericopes in Matthew, Mark, and Luke which begin with καί and δέ.65 He used
the text edition prepared by Westcott and Hort (W/H). I have provided the
numbers for John and Acts, and for the sake of comparability, have also made
use of the Westcott/Hort text (table 7):

64 Moulton/Howard, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament, 2:14-15; cf. Aejmelaeus,
Parataxis, 30-33.
65 Hawkins, Horae Synopticae, 150-151.

20 baum
Table 7 Pericopes in the NT history books beginning with καί and δέ
Pericopes καί δέ Proportion of καί
Mark (ed. W/H) 88 80 6 91%

Luke (ed. W/H) 145 53 83 37%
Matt (ed. W/H) 159 38 54 24%
John (ed. W/H) 103 10 18 10%
Acts (ed. W/H) 114 7 85 6%
In Mark’s Gospel, 80 of the 88 pericopes begin with καί and only 6 with δέ.
In other words, 91% of Markan pericopes are introduced by καί.
Mark’s practice of beginning a new pericope with καί was so dominant
that the deviation from this pattern in Mark 16:9-20 is an important piece of
evidence against the literary authenticity of the longer ending of the Second
Gospel.66 A glance at chapter 16 can show the difference in style between its
authentic first half and its secondary second half:
16:1-4 And (καί) when the sabbath was over . . .

16:5-7 And (καί) as they entered the tomb . . .
16:8 And (καί) they went out and fled from the tomb . . .
16:9-11 But after he rose (ἀναστὰς δέ) early on the first day of the
week . . .
16:12-13 But after this (μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα) he appeared in another form to
two of them . . .
16:14-18 But later (ὕστερον [δὲ]) he appeared to the eleven
themselves . . .
16:19-20 So then the Lord Jesus (ὁ μὲν οὖν κύριος ʼΙησοῦς) . . . was taken up
into heaven . . .
In Luke, Matthew, John, and Acts, the frequency of introductory καί is con-
siderably lower than in Mark. In Acts, a new incident is introduced much less
often by καί than in Luke.67 The above quoted pericope from Acts 5:1-6 which
is introduced by δέ is representative.
66 Pace N.P. Lunn, The Original Ending of Mark: A New Case for the Authenticity of Mark 16:9-
20 (Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2014) 137-138, 146-147, 149-150, 155, 159-160.
67 Cf. Levinsohn, Textual Connections, 173.

3.2 Occurrence and Frequency in the LXX

Pericopes beginning with καί are very common in the LXX.68 1 Kingdoms 1:18-
21 may serve as an example (see above). Already in the OT, new sections of
a narrative are often introduced by means of καί, especially καὶ ἐγένετο.69 In
the Greek First Book of Kingdoms, practically every pericope begins with the
sentence conjunction καί. In each instance the introductory καί translates the
Hebrew waw. (Only the beginning of the whole book forms an exception.)
The same holds true for the Second, Third, and Fourth Book of Kingdoms. Even
the LXX version of Genesis which is less literal in its translation of the Hebrew
text introduces quite a number of its pericopes with καί (table 8):
Table 8 Pericopes beginning with καί and δέ in history books of the LXX
1 Kgdms (ed. Rahlfs) 58 57 0 98%

Gen (ed. Rahlfs) 183 70 105 38%
Obviously, the differences between the Gospel authors in their use of section
introducing καί and δέ are similar to the corresponding differences among
translators of the LXX.70
In the LXX, not only book sections but whole books begin with καί, for
instance Second Kingdoms: “And it came to pass (καὶ ἐγένετο) after the death
of Saul . . .” (2 Kgdms 1:1). Again as a rule the LXX translators have rendered
Hebrew waw with καί. A list of these openings of historical books of the OT can
demonstrate this stylistic peculiarity:71
68 Maloney, Semitic Interference, 68.

69 Cf. W. Gesenius, E. Kautzsch, and A.E. Cowley, Hebrew Grammar (Oxford: Clarendon,
1910) § 111f.
70 Cf. Hawkins, Horae Synopticae, 151-152.
71 P. Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Rom: Pontificio Instituto Biblico,
1991) §§ 118c, 159f; G. Davies, “The Transition from Genesis to Exodus,” in Genesis, Isaiah,
and Psalms (FS J.A. Emerton; ed. K.J. Dell et al.; VTSup 131; Leiden: Brill, 2010) 59-78 (60-61).
On the syntax of OT book openings see further W. Gross, “Syntaktische Erscheinungen am

22 baum
Lev 1:1 And (καί) the Lord summoned Moses and spoke to him . . .
Num 1:1 And (καί) the Lord spoke to Moses in the wilderness of
Sinai . . .
Jos 1:1 And (καί) it came to pass after the death of Moses . . .
Judg 1:1 And (καί) it came to pass after the death of Joshua . . .
Ruth 1:1 And (καί) it came to pass in the days when the judges
ruled . . .
2 Kgdms 1:1 And (καί) it came to pass after the death of Saul . . .
3 Kgdms 1:1 And (καί) King David was old and advanced in years . . .
4 Kgdms 1:1 And (καί) Moab rebelled against Israel . . .
2 Chr 1:1 And (καί) Solomon son of David established himself in his
kingdom . . .
2 Esd 1:1 And (καί) in the first year of King Cyrus of Persia . . .
2 Esd 11:1 The words of Nehemiah son of Hacaliah. And (καί) it came
to pass . . .
1 Macc 1:1 And (καί) it came to pass after Alexander son of Philip . . .
3.3 Occurrence and Frequency in Extra-Biblical Greek Literature

Introductory “and” can also be found in original Greek texts, particularly often
in texts written in a popular style. Achilles Tatius, for instance, opened a new
paragraph with the words καὶ ὁ Σάτυρος (1.17). In several non-biblical Greek
texts, καί appears at the beginning of a number of paragraphs. I have men-
tioned in brackets the text editions which I used for the calculation (table 9):
Table 9 Pericopes in original Greek history books beginning with καί and δέ
HAM b 1 (ed. Bergson) 45 12 25 27%

Th. 1 (LCL) 161 19 85 12%
HAM A 1 (ed. Kroll) 91 13 42 14%
Ach. Tat. 1 (LCL) 26 1 13 4%
Ach. Tat. 2 (LCL) 38 4 13 11%
Anfang althebräischer Erzählungen,” in Hintergrund und Vordergrund (ed. J.A. Emerton;

VTSup 32; Leiden: Brill, 1980) 131-145, and W. Schneider, “Und es begab sich . . . Anfänge
von Erzählungen im biblischen Hebräisch,” BN 70 (1993) 62-87.

Jos., Ant. 1 (LCL) 88 6 58 7%

Plb. 1 (LCL) 92 0 67 0%
Thphr., Char. (LCL) 30 0 25 0%
In the NT Apocrypha, καί appears more often at the beginning of new para-
graphs72 (table 10):
Table 10 Pericopes in early Christian history books beginning with καί and δέ
A. Paul. et Thecl. (ed. Lipsius) 43 20 17 47%

A. Jo. (ed. Bonnet) 110 38 39 35%
M. Perp. (ed. van Beek) 22 6 5 27%
In these early Christian texts, however, the influence of the New (and Old)
Testament narrative style is possible, if not probable. The author of the Acts
of Paul not only knew the NT and quoted it from memory, without reproduc-
ing the exact wording;73 but it is also quite possible that the author’s fondness
of the sentence conjunction καί was due to stylistic influence of the LXX and
72 Studies on the style of the apocryphal Acts of the Apostles by H. Ljungvik, Studien zur
Sprache der apokryphen Apostelgeschichten (Uppsala: Appelbergs boktryckeri aktiebolag,
1926); D.H. Warren, “The Greek Language of the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles: A Study
in Style,” in The Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles (ed. F. Bovon et al.; Cambridge: Harvard
University, 1999) 101-124; and E. Zachariades-Holmberg, “Philological Aspects of the Apoc-
ryphal Acts of the Apostles,” in The Apocryphal Acts, 125-142, do not have much to say
about the use of καί parataxis in these texts.
73 C. Schmidt, Acta Pauli: Nach dem Papyrus der Hamburger Staats- und Universitätsbiblio-
thek (Hamburg: Augustin, 1936) 109-111.

24 baum
the NT.74 For this reason, in the table below these early Christian texts have
been put between square brackets.
3.4 Conclusion
In table 11, the NT texts have again been printed in bold. The higher blank line
marks the point above which no original Greek text can be found. The lower
blank line marks the point above which no original Greek text from a non-
Christian author can be found:
Table 11 Pericopes in ancient history books beginning with καί
Proportion of καί
1 Kgdms (ed. Rahlfs) 98%

Mark (ed. Westcott/Hort) 91%
[A. Paul. et. Thecl. (ed. Lipsius) 47%]

Gen (ed. Rahlfs) 38%
Luke (ed. Westcott/Hort) 37%
[A. Jo. (ed. Bonnet) 35%]
[M. Perp. (ed. van Beek) 32%]
HAM b 1 (ed. ed. Bergson) 27%

Matt (ed. Westcott/Hort) 24%
HAM A 1 (ed. Kroll) 14%
Th. 1 (LCL) 12%
Ach. Tat. 2 (LCL) 11%
John (ed. Westcott/Hort) 10%
Jos., Ant. 1 (LCL) 7%
Acts (ed. Westcott/Hort) 6%
Ach. Tat. 1 (LCL) 4%
Plb. 1 (LCL) 0%
[Thphr., Char. (LCL) 0%]
74 Schmidt, Acta Pauli, 14-15.

The frequency of the paragraph opening καί in the Gospel of Mark (91%) had
already been noted by Hawkins about 100 years ago. The close parallels to this
syntactic phenomenon in the LXX were obvious from the beginning. But the
parallels in original Greek texts have not been studied in any detail to date.
Some time ago, Maloney claimed that “even in the highly paratactic non-
biblical Greek texts . . ., καί never begins a new paragraph, that is, a new story
or line of thought. The Greek manner of introducing a new tract in a narra-
tive is with (. . . μεν) δέ, some other connecting particle(s), or no particle at
all.”75 The assumption that paragraph opening καί was unknown in original
Greek texts has not been confirmed by the above documented research. Not
only early Christian Greek literature but also pre-Christian popular texts made
use of this stylistic device.
However, as the above numbers reveal, the frequency of paratactic καί as the
opening word of a pericope in Mark’s Gospel is unparalleled in original Greek
literature. Because of its frequency, paragraph opening καί in Mark may be
deemed a secondary Semitism. If, due to the possible influence of the paratac-
tic biblical style on early Christian Greek texts, only non-Christian original
Greek texts are taken into account, the frequency of καί at the beginning of
the pericopes of Luke’s Gospel should also to be counted as a slight secondary
Semitism.
4 Results
The evidence from ancient Greek literature regarding different levels of style
has disproved Raymond Martin’s thesis that texts in original Greek always have
considerably fewer “ands” than “buts.” As Marius Reiser has demonstrated, in
many original Greek texts the sentence conjunction καί is more frequent than
δέ. On the other hand, Elliott Maloney’s claim that no original Greek author
even approached Mark in his use of paratactic καί, particularly in chapters 1-3,
has been confirmed by all the available evidence. At the same time, the fre-
quency of Mark’s paratactic καί has close analogies within many books of the
LXX. Thus, the strong dominance of paratactic καί in many books of the LXX
and in the Gospel of Mark can best be explained as the natural result of a close
reproduction of the dominant Hebrew sentence conjunction waw. Sophie
Trenkner has correctly pointed out that, because of the syntactic analogies
in original Greek literature, none of Mark’s paratactic “ands” must be called a
75 Maloney, Semitic Interference, 67-68.

26 baum
primary Semitism. Nevertheless, the marked over-use of paratactic καί in Mark

1-3 qualifies it as a secondary syntactic Semitism.
In addition, the very high frequency of paragraph opening καί in the Gospel
of Mark also has close parallels in the LXX. Maloney’s claim that even in highly
paratactic non-biblical Greek texts καί never begins a new paragraph could not
be confirmed. Not only early Christian Greek literature but also non-Christian
popular texts make use of this stylistic device. Due to its exceptional frequency,
however, the paragraph introducing καί in the Gospel of Mark has to be classi-
fied as a secondary Semitism.
The question as to whether Mark over-used paratactic καί because he was a
native speaker of Aramaic or Hebrew, used Semitic sources or was stylistically
influenced by the LXX could not be treated in this article and leaves room for
further research.

Mark's Paratactic καί as a Secondary Syntactic Semitism: Armin D. Baum

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Mark's Paratactic καί as a Secondary Syntactic Semitism: Armin D. Baum

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Novum Testamentum 58 (2016) 1-26