Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PRINCIPAL
W. R. TAYLOR
COLLECTION
1951
/IP
I
A SHORT GRAMMAR
OF THE
mi I \ 1 in u
rEs i \mi .\ i
Commentary on Matthew
[ohn the Loyal
Tin Glory of the Ministry
Uztr&fT^ss^
A SHORT GRAMMAR
OF THE
-BY
LOUISVILLE, KY.
so s. s/
Copyright, 1908,
By A. T. ROBERTSON.
TO W. B. ROYALL, D. D.,
PROFESSOR OF GREEK
IX
years and a student of Greek for thirty. But time is a poor meas-
ure of one's real interest in the Greek tongue if he is a Greek
lover, a true Philhellene. This noble tongue contains no treasure
comparable New Testament. We could much more easily
to the
year in most of the colleges and also the first year in the
is begun
theological seminaries. It is just this definite and unoccupied
field (the last year in college and the first in the seminary) that
tion Blass's able work also. Schmiedel mid Schwyzer are likewise
:it work on a complete revision of Winer, a portion of which has
appeared. Winer-Moulton and Winer-Thayer still have a sale
and d< serve it. Rademacher also has in hand ;i N. T. ( Irammatik.
The prospect therefore
is
good for plenty of the larger grammars in
tin- But this intermediate type of grammar is a practical
future.
working grammar for men familiar with the elements of Greek both
in schooland in the pastorate. The busy pastor needs the Short
Grammar. The text of this Grammar is thai of Westcott and Hort
with constant use of Nestle and Teschendorf. It is a satisfaction
ness. The paradigms are not given, having been already acquired
by the student, hut brief discussi< ui s of the New Testament varia-
tion in forms occur. Hadley and Allen's Grammar or Goodwin's
Grammar can he used for review of the forms. There is little criti-
mind. I have not been able, for lack of .-pace, to draw largely on
PREFACE, XI
culture, but all touched b}r the Spirit of Christ and familiar with
the LXX. Greek and most of them show knowledge of the Aramaic
of the time. Most of the writers were Jews. But it is not Hebrew
Greek. It is the Greek of a group of books, not a separate dialect.'
I cannot recount here my obligations to the many writers whose
works I have consulted. In the larger grammar detailed acknowl-
edgment will be made on every page, but here I must content my-
self with a general statement. AVhere it seemed necessary I have
taken pains to mention a few authors by name. I shall never
A. T. ROBERTSON.
Louisville, Ky.. 1908.
;tions of this nature from Rev. Prof. 11. A. Kennedy, 1). ])., of
Toronto, Rev. Prof. .1. 11. Farmer, D. J)., of Toronto. Rev. Prof-
Alexander Souter, I). 1).. of Oxford, Rev. George Milligan, I). D.,
of Murthly, Scotland, Rev. Prof. Ebrard Nestle, D. D., of Maul-
Donaldson. New
Cratyhis (1859).
Farrar, Greek Syntax 1ST |
(1888).
Kroll, Gesckichte der Klassischen Philologie (1908).
Kuehner-Blass, Ausfuehrliche Grammatik Erste Teil 2 Bde
(1890, 1892).
Kuekner-Gerth, Ausfuehrliche Grammatik Zweite Teil 2 Bde,
(1898, 1901).
Mayser, Grammatik der Griechischen Papyri. Laut- and Wort-
lehre (1906).
Meillet, Introduction a 1' 'Etude Comparative des Langues Indo-
eu'ropeennes ( 1908 ) .
1903 ).
1!><)8, ).
1908).
Sayce, Principles of Comparative Philology.
Schleicher, Vergleichende Grammatik (1876).
Schmid, Der Atticismus, etc., Bde L889 1897). 1
J
'Egypte 1882
i .
189]
Part I. Introductory 2
Part II Forms 9
Chapter III. Orthography, Accent, Pronunciation, Punctuation 11
1. Orthography 11
(b) Final v 11
(c) Elision 12
(d) Crasis 12
(e) Contraction 12
Rough breathing 12
(f )
Prothetic vowel 12
(g)
12
(h) Proper names
(i) Help from papyri 12
xxi
\\11 TABLE OF CONTENTS.
2. A. -.'.lit 13
(b) Metaplasm 17
(b) Accusative 21
Devices used -
(g)
"
4. Adjectival numerals
etc 28
(a) TeWapes,
First cardinal numbers 28
(b)
The ordinals 28
(c)
1. Pronominal roots *9
29
(a)Separate roots
Relation to verbs (endings) 29
(b)
29
(c) Originally demonstrative
29
2. Brief sketch of pronominal forms
First and second persons 29
(a)
Third person 30
(b)
Possessive 30
(c)
Eeflexive 30
(d)
Demonstrative 30
(e)
Relative 31
(f )
31
(g) Interrogative
31
(h) Reciprocal
XXIV TAB] K OF CON I'KNTs.
5. The voices 45
(a) The active 45
(b) The middle I"
.
IX. The Formation* of Words in the New Testament
"
pter
1. The history of Creek words 57
'2. The kinship of Creek words with each o'her 57
3. The contrasts in (Ireek words 58
4. Compound words 59
.1.
Light from other tongues 59
6. New Testament developments 60
~ 61
Tart III.-
t X The Sentence 63
1. Definitions 63
-. Subject as cent, r of r
L r>uj. of words 63
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XXV
Chapter XT. Substantive, Adjective, Adverb 65
1. Parts of speech related 65
2. Elements of speech 65
3. Origin of adjectives 65
4. Adjective in Greek 66
5. Predicate or attributive adjective 66
6. Infrequency of the superlative 63
7. Adjective as adverb 66
8. Adjective without substantives 66
9. Adjectives with the infinitive and with various eases 66
10. Cases of adverbs 67
1 1. Adverbs as prepositions 67
12. The article with adverbs 67
in. Adverbial phrases 67
14. Adverbial participles 67
15. Comparison and composition of adverbs 67
(1) Adjectives 73
(2) With genitives 73
The vocative 91
a) Case of address HI
c) Nominative forms 91
d) The article with the vocative 92
e) But really vocatives 92
o. The accusative 92
a) The name ambiguous 92
b) The oldest case 92
c) Root idea of 93
d) Originally somewhat vague use 93
e) Retention in the vernacular 93
f) Analytic study a convenience 94
g) With verbs of motion 94
h) Extension of space 94
i) Duration of time 94
j) With transitive verbs 94
k) Inner object or content 95
1) Two or more accusatives 95
m) With passive verbs 96
n) Without a verb 97
o) With the infinitive 97
p) Accusative absolute 97
q) With prepositions 98
fhe genitive 98
^a) Genitive and ablative same ending in Greek 98
b) Wrong name for genitive 98
c) Increase in use 99
Resultant idea varies 99
e) With substantives 99
(1) Local use 99
(2) Expressions of time 100
(3) Possession 100
(4) Identity 101
(5) Partitive sense probably ablative 101
(6) Subjective or objective 101
(7) The meaning of the word specifies 101
(8) Position of the genitive 101
(9) Several genitives together 101
( d) Possession 112
(e) Ethical dative 112
(f ) Dative of the agent 113
6 'A/t^i'
118
7. 'Ava 118
8. 'Avti 118
9. 'Atto 119
10. Sid 119
11. iv 119
12. eJ s 120
13. iK 121
14. j*/ 121
15. Kara 121
16. fierd 121
17.
trupd
122
18.
irtpl
122
19.
7rpo
122
20.
Trpo's
123
21. o-w 123
22. 123
vnip
23. ^tj-o 124
Chapter XX. Co-ordinate and subordinate Clauses. Conjunctions ....147
What is a sentence ?
1 . 147
2. The simple sentence 147
3. Co-ordination of clauses 147
4. Contrast by conjunctions 148
5. Disjunctive conjunctions 148
6. Inferential conjunctions 149
7. Subordinating conjunctions 149
8. Modes, tenses, voices in subordinate sentences 150
9. Character of subordinate clauses 150
10. Connection between sentences and paragraphs 151
3.
'E7ra, c^ciSt/, and 7raS>/7rep
159
4. 'E<' oo-ov 159
5. Ka06Vi 159
6. Infinitive with 8ia 160
7. Causal participle 160
8. Relative with idea of cause 160
9. 'Avff 5>v, Sid,
etc 160
Chapter XXVIII.
Comparative Clauses 175
1.
Inadequate treatment 175
2. KuOo, Ku6d, KaOaircp 175
lairep
3. KuOotl 175
4. "O0-09 175
0. ku#ojs, Ka6wmr(.p, uxjirtp, were', 175
lis, wairtpu
TABLE OP CONTENTS. XXxiii
INTRODUCTION.
CHAPTER I.
I. The Greek of the New Testament that was used with prac-
ticaluniformity over most of the Roman world is called the Com-
mon Greek or Kounq. Not that it was not good Greek, but rather
the Greek in common use. There was indeed a literary kolvi) and
a vernacular kolio). Plutarch is a good specimen of the literary
K-oir/ while the papyri are chiefly in the vernacular KOU17 like most
the New Testament.
5. This KOLxn'j was itself the heir of the past. The various Greek
dialects blended on an Attic base. The kolvi/ was thus richer in
expression as to words and forms than any of tin' older dialects.
Compare the relation of the modern English to the various tongues
that have contributed to its power and expansion. Ionic, Doric,
Aeolic, North West treek and other dialects have made some con-
<
the Semitic influence is not very great, though it is real and defi-
nite. The readers were most of them Jews and all were familiar
with the Hebrew 0. T. and the LXX and their writings bear marks
of this knowledge in various ways. In Lu. 20:12 trpoaidtro Trefuf/ou.
tament.
PART II.
FORMS.
CHAPTER III.
Rom. 8:20, and good manuscripts give oi'x oAiyos in Acts 12:18.
The breathings were not written in the manuscripts till long after
New Testament times save when the aspiration showed in the con-
sonant. At this period of the language there was an increase in
aspiration, though in the modern Greek the reverse is seen, for
the as (irate is not pronounced.
j Compare the confusion as to h in
the usage of the English cockney.
(g) The (John 5:21), but
prothetic vowel disappears in i$e\o>
always (GaL 4:20).
rjdeXov
do not fairly represent the usage of the time. This is true of the
New Testament manuscripts. Even A B have x^P av a double )
answer another one. Do the modern Greeks pres< rve the ancient
pronunciation? Many of them think so. It is an amusing story
told in Blass's Pronunciation of Ancient Greek, (Purton's transla-
(b) Master Erasmus was mainly right though the dialects are part-
ly against him. The ancient Greeks did not as a rule pronounce at
and c alike.Most of them did distinguish between ot, et, i, vi, v, rj, y.
They did not all of them pronounce /? as v nor 8 as th. The mod-
ern Greek represents the b sound by fwr and the d sound by vt.
The aspirate was usually pronounced by the ancients, as iff}' Z-mrav
proves. Hadley (Essays Philological and Critical, p. 140,) shows
a wide difference in pronunciation between the Greek of the tenth
and the nineteenth centuries. Moreover, we can trace the changes
as far back as the manuscripts go. But even among the earlier
Boeotians these changes were already going on, for they wrote tt3s
aAAus for rots aAAois. Z is already losing the S sound in the New
Testament and becoming merely in effect our z. It is certain then
that the New Testament Greek was not pronounced exactly like the
modern Greek, but much more like the vernacular Attic of the time
of Demosthenes. The vernacular inscriptions of the various early
Greek dialects show much diversity in pronunciation and spelling.
But some of the tendencies of modern Greek were already manifest
in the kowtj.
4. Punctuation. Punctuation is the function of the modern
the Greek manuscripts had the words all written together.
editor, for
Paragraphs were not separated till late, though rough chapter di-
visions are early discernible. Punctuation is the result of inter-
pretation. The ancients were wholly without our modern conven-
16 A SHORT GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
stems and differ in one having a and the other o stems, but the
third declension is not wholly a consonant declension for some of
the stems show no trace of a final consonant, not even of a lost
and to wXovros (Eph. 1:8). The change from the first declension
to the third is rare, but yviKr/Q John 5:4) becomes tovikos in 1. Cor.
15:55. la /v-utoj'tu/jx>/ (Matt. 8:13) we have the first declension,
but in haiTovTapxpv (Acts 22:25) the second. So we have Awrrpav
(Acts 14:6) and Awrpois (Acts 14:8). But the declensions pre-
B( rve their
integrity "well both in the papyri and in the New Test-
ament.
(c)The tendency towards blending the case forms that is so
.-iron-;- Indo-germanic tongues served to some extent to oblit-
in the
erate still more the distinctions between the declensions. But for
this matter and the history of the cases see chapter on the Syntax
of the Cases. With all the substantives one needs to get the root
(primitive or derivative), and the case ending. This science of
word-building (German, Wbrt-bildung) is necessary for the real
student of language.
2. Special forms in thefird ileclcmnni.
(a)The Ionic genitive-ablative wnuptp in Acts 10:1 is, accord-
ing to Deissmann, the rule in the papyri, but the modern Greek
retains -us. Note also o-rvtiSwt^s in Acts 5:2 and other similar ex-
ample-. The so-called Doric genitive occurs in the New Testament,
as in the papyri and the modern Ireek. So we have fioppa (Luke
(
genitive.
(b) The nominative singular of the first declension has no ending
for feminine nouns, but s for masculine stems. The nominative
plural is -<u for all stems. In Sanskrit the feminine nominative
singular has also some derivative stems.
(c) The vocative has no ending for singular or plural, but with
nouns in -t^s the stem vowel is shortened from u to a. The San-
THE DECLENSION OF SUBSTANTIVES. 19
skrit liasno vocative ending and in a stems uses merely the unal-
tered stem, though these in a have vocative in e.
(d) The genitive-ablative ending for the singular was as in the
Sanskrit. It appears in Greek variously as os, s, oaio, oto, to, o.
The two here easily blend. There are several remains of the in-
strumental singular ending <i (old Sanskrit bhi) in Homer as
But in the Sanskrit singular d is the instrumental ending
/3t77-^>t.
due possibly to the union of the old associative case with the in-
strumental. This d is preserved in some Greek words like d/ta,
TrdvTd(r)). In the plural these three cases use at (with phonetic t
preceding, Schleicher), the locative ending, like the Sanskrit su
and (Giles, p. 289) ats and ots instrumental. The dative, however,
in Latin preserves sometimes its own original ending (bhyas in
(<) The name 'I^o-ovs has 'Irjaov for all the oblique cases save the
accusative which is 'Irjo-ovv.
contracted with o of the stem, but the o has been dropped. In the
locative, instrumental, dative cases the ending for the singular is
at which contracts with o of the stem into u>. Some distinctively
locative forms occur, however, as 61ko-i (compare dative form olkw) .
tive, and accusative are just alike and have the ending v like them
of the Latin. In the Sanskrit neuters in general had no ending at
all for am with pronouns is a frequent mascu-
the nominative and
line and feminine nominative ending. Some Sanskrit neuters
(tad) show a form in d like Latin istud and English that. In the
Sanskrit the ending for neuter nominative is i and the same for the
accusative and the vocative. But an, in, un were sometimes pre-
i and then the ni
fixed to this dropped, leaving a, 1, u. The Greek
and the Latin use this a for the neuter plural. In the second de-
clension in the Greek this a displaces o of the stem and there is no
contraction.
4. Special forms of the third declension.
(a) The vocative plural is always the same as the nominative,
but the vocative singular varies greatly. It is either like the noin.
as Krjpv, ttol/xt/jv, Ol* the Stem as Scu/aov, ttoXl. In Mk. 5:34 6vya.Trjp,
not Ovyarep in the vocative form, i. e. the nominative form is re-
,
tained, but dvyarcp in Matt. 9:22. So Trdrep in Jo. 17:1, but waryp
in 17:21, and even -n-ar^p BUuie in 17:25. These are examples with-
out the article.
(b) KAets has accusative singular K\el8a (Luke 11:52) and kMv
22 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
(Rev. 3:7), both kA&k (Matt. 16:19) and x-Aas (Rev. 1:18) as
accusative plural. Xupts has usually accusative singular x'*/3 "'
(Heb. 4:16), but xv tra occurs twice (Acts 24:27; Jude4). Tpa/x-
not ypu/xfuiTta^. is the accusative plural (Matt. 23:34). This
/MLTtis.
form found in the earlier Greek, in the papyri, and is the form
is
in the modern Greek. On the other hand tydvas, not ix#Ss is the
accusative plural (Matt. 14:17). Kepus has Kepara, not Kc'pJ (Rev,
5:6). The masculine and feminine
accusative singular uses a gen-
erally, though the close vowel stems, like the open vowel stems
(a and o declensions), use v (ttoXlv, raw). But Buo-iAevs and words
like it have a. and still use it in the modern Greek. The notice-
able tendency in the vernacular of the Koivrj to use both a and v, as
in x Vav ctid not succeed and was due largely to the ignorant
)
(c) The
genitive plural 6ptu>v is uncontracted sometimes (Rev.
6:15). ioAo/wov has genitive 2oAo/wtos in Acts 3:11, though usu-
ally SoAopwos (Matt. 12:42). The third declension could easily
he divided into two or more ami thus we should have the five of
the Sanskrit and the Latin. But all the usual seven divisions of
the third declension unite in forming the genitive-ablative cases in
the singular with os like Sanskrit as and Latin is. There is con-
traction in some forms when the consonant is dropped as with
yevovs (Phil. 3:5).But with words like /WiAeus os appears as ws.
This may he due to the dropping of digamma and the lengthening
of one vowel. In Homer we have /foo-iA^os where e, and not o, is
lengthened. A similar phenomenon is observable with 7rdAis, 7rdAe<os,
antepenult for a similar reason, and the <dv does not contract with
the inserted e. As already observed contraction does not always
occur in tie- genitive-ablative plural with forms like ^etAtW.
THE DECLENSION OF SUBSTANTIVES. 23
(b) Some words are only used in the singular from the nature
of the case, and some again only in the plural. Sometimes the
24 A SHOUT OKAMMAK op THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
The noun "A yap (Gal. 4:25) is not used as neuter with to
(a)
mistakenly by Paul. He treats the name as a word. Any word
can be thus treated as neuter in Greek and the neuter article can
be so employed. In Rom. :4 Paul uses 7) flduX as we have some-
1 1
(c) The New Testament usage does not vary greatly from the
earlier custom. The classic 6 ttXovtos sometimes (Rom. 2:4). So
also occasionally cAeos,t/Aos. 'O Sea-p-os (Lu. 13:16) is to. Sco-pa in
the plural (Lu. 8:29) as well as ol Seo-poi (Phil. 1:13). In general
it should be said that many
proper names are treated as indeclin-
able when they could be inflected like BrjOipuyr) (Matt 21:1).
CHAPTER V.
(b) Most of the Sanskrit adjectives have only one or two end-
ings, though some have all three genders. The great bulk are a
stems for masculine and neuter, while the feminine may have a or
i, and this matter is "determined in great part only by actual usage,
scriptive sense before adjectives arose and are still so used, as, for
instance, we say brother man. So in the New Testament iv tu
'lopSdvy 7rora/xo) (Matt. 3:6), irpocnXrjXvOaTC 2twv opa (Heb. 12;22).
This indeed, apposition, but it is descriptive apposition, and it
is,
(1>) Still other adjectives have only two sets of endings, the
masculine and the feminine being the same. So tvyevrj<i (Lu. 10:12),
Vuws (Matt. 16:22), pcgw (John 14:28).
(c) Sometimes also adjectives which can he inflected with three
of endings are used with only two. So ruwvtos (Heb. 5:9) is
feminine.
(d) Once again some adjectives are no longer used with three
terminations, as l/o^fios (Gal. 4:27). Both of these examples come
ultimately from the Septuagint, and oo-ios (1 Tim. 2:8) has two
terminations as early as Plato (Simcox). See also pdrauys 17 6p-q<r-
51 1
ond or the third. The Greek participle endings are very much
like those of the Sanskrit and Latin participles.
(h) The New Testament usage is in general in harmony with
the older language. Xpva-av (not Xpvcnjv) occurs in Rev. 1:13.
'H/xtVov?, not ij/utrcos, appears in Mark 6:23 (thus also in papyri,
1. Pronominal roots.
(a) In Greek iydi was originally eyw like the Sanskrit aham.
This form appears in Latin ego, Gothic ik, German ich, French
cyci
v/u.is are like the Lesbian a/ifih, v/*/*es; -qfuov, vf/JSw are a new form-
ation ((dies), ^uv, v/iiv are locative forms.
(1) The New Testament does
not use the third personal form
of ou, ol, I, Instead the forms of uvtos occur in all gen-
o-<eis, etc.
ders and both numbers. In the modern Greek this form in some
of the oblique cases is shortened to the enclitic forms tov, t&v, etc.
But on the whole personal pronouns have retained the case-forms
better than any other parts of speech.
(c) The possessive pronouns i^os, 0-0's are made from the per-
sonal pronominal stems, and ly/tcrqoos, r/xerepos, are really compara-
tive forms. The reflexive is merely the personal pronoun plus the
intensive auro's.
(d) The reflexive forms of the first and second persons are not
used in the plural except tyw airwv (1 Cor. 7:35) for r#w avrS>v is
emphatic rather than reflexive in 2 Thess. 1:4 (Simcox). The
uncontracted form o-wvtov alone is used. Westcott and Hort print
about twenty times (against most recent editors) rather
avrov, etc.,
than always auTov or euvrov. So Ave have avrbv in John 2:24 and
kavrbv in Luke 15:17. The variations in the manuscripts make it
roowros, ocros, and iroaos. Autos has not been explained nor 6 8etva.
fixes quite similar to those in the Greek {ant, mana, la, etc.) and
they have voice and tense, but the participle has its fullest devel-
opment in the Greek language. The infinitive and the participle
have no personal endings and never have a subject. They are
both always in a case relation to some verb, substantive, or prep-
osition. The participle has inflection in both numbers and all
genders, though the infinitive is itself indeclinable. In the modern
Greek the final v of the infinitive is dropped as \va.
(e) In the New Testament there are no peculiar forms for those
verbal nouns, though tt&v (also iriv), not 7rieTv, appears in John 4:7.
Westcott contends for infinitive in -olv with verbs in -ow (not ow)
except in Luke 9:31. But this position J. H. Moulton objects to
from evidence of the papyri.
2. The building of the verb.
(a) The verb (verbum, word) is the word par excellence. It is
themain word in the sentence and as such receives more changes
and expresses thereby more varieties of meaning than the substan-
tive.
(1) The suffixes include all t lie additions to the theme. The
dictionaries give the verb in the present tense and the impression
is thus created that the present tense is the stock around which tin'
verb grows. Now on the theme Aitt you make the aorist in the
various modes and voices, the present in the various modes and
voices (and the imperfect), the perfect in the various modes and
voices, and so the future. The tense suffix is reasonably stable
and the mode sign also. The personal endings have to express
voice, person, and number and appear in two forms (primary and
In Mark 12:1 cleSe, not ce'SoTo, has lost the root vowel and the
thematic vowel e has taken its place. The New Testament pre-
serves the three aorists in k<i
(ISw/ca, c^xa, 7/ra).
3:3; 11:28. However, the Sanskrit, Greek, Latin and other lan-
guages, have developed a distinct future tense form. The Sanskrit
did it by the use of sya or isya, but this suffix, which means "go"
as the Coptic suffix na does, was rarely used (Whitney) partly
because the subjunctive mode was practically a future in sense. In
the Greek the future form in a is much more common, though in
Homer little distinction exists between the aorist subjunctiye and
the future indicative. The two forms may have a common origin
(Giles), though this is not certain, for the future may be a varia-
tion from the present. This latter is the opinion of Delbrueck.
The modern Greek has no future form at all and, when not using
0e'Aw and infinitive, has 6d and the
subjunctive (cf. Homer).
Forms like ttlo/juu (Luke 17:8), <f>dyo/xai (ibid.) give color to the
\ SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
aoristic origin of the future form. It be that some may verbs make
the future from the aorist ;m<l some from the present. In the New
Testamenl we have e^eui, however, as in Ads 2:17. 'EXttlovo-lv
while both diroAecra) (Matt. 21:41) and aTroAw (1 Cor. 1:19) occur.
The form (Doric) Trea-ov/juu (made from o-e%) is in the New Testa-
ment, but favtofjuii. In Rev. 22:19 we have a<eAw (so Septuagint)
from acjiuLpiw. The usual future of liquid verbs (c%) like Kpivd is
con in ion. So also airodavovfmi. The Doric future seems like a combi-
nation of and e (liquid verbs), or is it that <re% is an original end-
<r
ing? This latter is entirely possible and the fact that the old Doric
and Homer both have <re% (cf. Sanskrits/a) lends color to the
idea that the Indo-germanic had such a suffix. Cf. Kuehner-
(d) The perfect system. This tense presents some special diffi-
culties both as to formation and signification. We are concerned
only with the formation, though it may be remarked that in the
Sanskrit, as the aorist disappears, the perfect increases in use with
apparent loss of precise distinctions. Both Greek an 1 Sanskrit
the meaning of the perfect. Note i$fj\9ov kuI ^k<d (Jo. 8:42). All
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 39
this seems to show that the common m for the active was a gradual
development. was used also with a few aorists (cSwjca,
This ko.
ZQrjKa, tjku).
Compare modern Greek IXvOrjKa for iXvOijv. I n the Latin
a similar phenomenon occurs in the ending vi as in ama-vi, which
has not been explained. The Latin has some reduplicated perfects
like dedi and aoristic forms in s like scripsi. This form with dou-
ble origin does double service in the Latin (both aorist and per-
fect). The modern Greek has wholly dropped the perfectform
save in the passive participle. Instead ex w w^h the aorist infini-
tive (a, not <u) is used as ex w Avo-et much like the English. In the
Attic we have sometimes l^w and the aorist participle. The past
perfect in modern Greek is expressed by elxov
Awrct. The Sanskrit
has merely a trace of the past perfect. It was never very common
in the Greek, though it was always at hand when needed. In the
modern Greek, as in the old, the common tenses are the aorist, the
present, and the imperfect. The perfect middle adds the personal
endings directly to the reduplicated stem like tara-fiev in the active.
In the New Testament olSa is conjugated regularly in singular and
Future perfect is eiSr/o-w. In Acts 26:4
plural of the indicative.
we have Outside of the indicative the form is eiSS, tore,
io-ao-iv.
Rev. (19:3) that forms like dprjKav appear; they are in the rest of
the New Testament (John 17:7, rcrijpvKav) and in the papyri. Avert,
originally avn, by analogy of aorist is av. KeKOTriWes Rev. 2:3 is
like the aorist d^Kes (Rev. 2:4) and such forms occur in the papyri
among the ignorant scribes (Moulton). 'A<<Wrai (Luke 5:20) is a
Doric form for acpelvrai, though similar forms occur in Ionic and
Arcadian. The past perfect like the imperfect, is confined to the
indicative, and like it an augment besides the
also usually has
for the present perfect and the past perfect also. This analytic use
of the verb forms is inure common in all the lenses in the New
T< stament idiom (like Koimj and Hebrew too), especially in Luke's
writings, and finally in the modern Greek wholly destroys the per-
fect verb forms.
(e) Reduplication. This peculiarity is not confined, to the per-
fect tense, though it is characteristic of the tense system and holds
through all the modes and voices, whereas ko. does not belong to
all the verbs of the active and occurs no where else. Reduplication
is found with theaorist, the present, the perfect as in Sanskrit, How-
ever, in the modern Greek reduplication has vanished save in the
perfect passive participle. As has already been said its origin is
found in the iterative presents where the verb idea was repeated by
the repetition of the initial consonant or the modification of the
initial vowel (if the verb begins with a vowel). The idea of the
perfect tense grows out of the idea of repetition. The New Testa-
ment follows ancient usage the formation of the reduplicated
in
Stem as ye'y paTTTui (Acts 15:15), eyvwKuv (John 17 :7), fJbiixvrjcrOf. (1 Cor.
11:2), elkyfcv (Rev. 5:7), i)\TriKUTe (John 5:45), u/o;kou (1 John 1:1),
(
the sign of past time was at first only used when it was necessary
to make plain that the form was a past tense. In Homer we find
both the syllabic augment (e) and the temporal augment, the
lengthening of the initial vowel, though the syllabic augment is
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 41
for using one of the other modes. It is the only mode which uses
all the tenses in Sanskrit and Greek. In the Sanskrit the future
occurs only in the indicative, and the perfect appears only in the
indicative and the participle save a few examples in the early San-
skrit (the Veda) of the other modes. The imperfect and the past
the subjunctive mode sign was firsl the variable vowel /* already
in use. This sign was gradually lengthened into "A. Even in the
fifth century P>. ('. the Ionic has aorist subjunctives like -n-otr/o-ct.
II'
nee, "the distinction between indicative and subjunctive cannoi
always be easily drawn*' (Giles). It is also
probable that the
Attic futures cSo/xat. TTLOfMii, and the New Testament <ayo/xai (Jas.
5:3) were originally aorist subjunctives. The mode sullix was
first added to the stem as in the /u forms (80-17=80)) and in the
aorist passive forms ( Xv-Oe-u =\vdo>) . In Mark8:37 Sot is subjunc-
tive (as in papyri), 6r)=oZ as often. But with thematic stems the
variable vowel %
was merely changed to WA and the o- aorist makes
the subjunctive am l<n\. In oww/xcu, hm^rai we cither have irregular
accent and contraction (so l<tt7jtui. a-qz^i] instead of a) or the mode
sign "A displaces a of the .-tern. So the optative o\Wito has irregu-
lar accent (compare ZoTdtTo). Homer frequently uses /xi with the
subjunctive of verbs, iOi\o>/u, i'Sw/xi. The subjunctive used only
primary personal endings in both Sanskrit and Greek. In Greek
the subjunctive has increased in the frequency with which it is
used, and in the modern Ireek has displaced both the optative and
<
the infinitive (save with auxiliary verbs). The (ireek used a per-
fect subjunctive also, though it was never very common in the
nature of the case. In the New Testament besides dow (1 Cor.
2:12) we only have examples
of the periphrastic perfect svbjunctivt
like rj (Jas. 5:15), J KeKAr/,u.eVos (Luke 14:.S).
7reiroir)Kw<; The later
Byzantine Greek, like the Latin, developed a future subjunctive
which is not, however, preserved in the modern Greek where the
ancient future forms are lost. Occasionally manuscript- of the
New Testament give such forms in some verbs as Kep&rjOyaowTat. (1
Pet. '':!), and in Luke 1;->:2<S W'estcott and Hort print o^-qaOt in
the text and oipeo-Oe in the margin. This may, however, be a late
first aorisl form. Cf. mg. a^-qadf. (Lu. 13:26) with text ap&vOt.
(<) The (ireek
Th< optfitwe. is the only language that preserved
both subjunctive and optative in its nourishing period. In the
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 43
(d)
imperaiivi The imperative is in a way a makeshift and
7V/,' .
-
us
development from the indicative and injunctive.
a Some
of tlie forms are just like the indicative as Ac'yere and this only the
context can decide. Cf. Jo. 5:39 and 14:1. The imperative, like
the indicative, has no mode suflix. In fact the future indicative
in Greek, as in Hebrew and English, is often used where the im-
perative could have been employed as ov </>oi/eixms (Matt. 5:21).
And for the first person both in Sanskrit and Greek the subjunc-
tive is used for the hortatory idea. There is no first person im-
perative form, though in English we say "Charge we the foe."
Moreover, in Latin the third person can he used for exhortations
also, hut and Greek the aorist subjunctiv< was early
in Sanskrit
used with ma, prohibitions, probably before there was an
/x?;
in
coivq
to speak of 6Vs, Is, So's, o^c's which seem kin to the unaugmented
aorist indicative (injunctive like XvOrjre). In the modern (J reek
the first and third persons are expressed by as (a<es) and the
subjunctive much like the English "let" and the infini-
p.
7 than in any other period of the Greek language.
In the modern Greek it is well nigh displaced by the passive, and
the distinctively passive forms (aorist) arc used, though the ver-
nacular uses aorist middle imperative Xva-ov rather than \v9tjtl. In
theNew Testament the middle is disappearing before the passive.
In Latin the passive has wholly supplanted the middle though
some verbs retain a middle sense. It is supposed by some (Don-
aldson. New Cratylus,) that the middle endings are formed by doub-
ling the suffix for the active. So then fxxu is from ivifii, the second
having dropped out. This is in entire accord with the idea of the
fx.
and the future passive the middle endings. The Greek passive
then has no endings of its own. In most tenses it merely borrows
the entire middle inflection, while in the two lenses above it draws
on the active and middle both. The so-called second aorist pas-
sive like i-aTaX-rj-v is
really the second aorist active (root aorist)
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 47
merely the addition of 0-% to 6-q. But even here some future mid-
dle forms like dSiK??<ro/*ai are used in a passive sense just as in the
other middle forms. Clearly then the passive is later in origin
than both active and middle and is built out of both of them
though it never did have a complete set of distinctive endings. In
the Latin the passive early displaced the middle, but in the Greek
the process was much more slow. In the New Testament the pas-
sive has greatly increased in use. New passive forms appear like
iyvt]6r]v (Matt. 6:10) not common in the earlier Greek. So i<f>vt]v
in Luke 8:6, ^yyiXrjv (Luke 8:20), hi.era.yqv (Gal. 3:19). The future
passive is also common as KOL/j.r]0r]rr6fie0a (1 Cor. 15:51), and the
second future passive as aXXayTja-o/xcOa (ibid). For all three voices
of yivwo-Ko) see 1 Cor. 13:12.
CHAPTER VIII.
The perfectly regular verbs like Xvw, <tA.e'<r>, <wt(.'w, etc., call for
no comment. The rare verbs arc not given with fulness. All that
is here attempted is
summary of the most important verbs in the
a
Ayye'AAw (comp. av-. dv-. 81-, -, irr-. irpo-tir-, xar-. rrpo-Kar-, 7rap-),
"Ayoi (comp. av- } 7r-ni'-. air-. (Tvv-mr-. Si-, eio -, 7rap-eio"-, e-, eir-. ar-,
/xcr-. Trap-, rrept-, 7Tpo-, 7rpocr-, aw-. eTTt-orw-, vtt-\ Vjov, aw,
rjyayov and ^a, yx@V v i d^r/fropai.
Aiveci) (comp. 7T-, 7rap-), -rjvow, -atveao). -rjvc&a.
Aipcu) (comp. dv-, d<-, Si-, -, u^-, 7repi-, 7Tpo-), -eAw and aipr/rropui,
-eTAov and eiAa, yjptdrji'.
Aipoj (COmp. a7T-, -, C7T-, )U.T-, (TW-, V7Tp-) , dpu>, T/pu, ^pKtt, Yjppni,
'Akovu) (COmp. Si-, tio--, eV-, Trap-, Trpo-, w-), t/kouov, d/<owrw a 11 1 )
BdAXco (d/A(i-, dva-, dvn-, a7ro-, Sia-, -, ep,-, irap-tp.-, im-, Kara-, p.Ta- }
7rapa-, 7repi-, 7rpo-, (rv/x-, virep-, vtto-), /3aAa>, ZfiaXov and Olice
ifiXtjOrjVj j3Xr)6i](Topxii.
Blow, i/Siuxra.
BAa7rTw, /3Ad<^a>, e/JAai/'a.
BAeVa) (dva-, a7ro-, Sia-, ep.-, 67ri-, irepi-, irpo-), e/3Xeirov, fiXeipu),
l/SAei/'a.
AeiM-r/u ;Hld Scucvuo) (dra-, a7ro-, iy-, 7ri-, U7TO-), io>, tbciZa, eSei^-
<V.
A'o/iat (7rpocr-), th'f.op.rjv, i$tijdr]y. Ill Lll. 8:38 \\ 11 read e'SeiTO.
Ae'^o/jiat (di'a-, diro-, 8ia-, eicr-, K-. a7r-K-. ev-, eVi-. irapa-. irpoa-. vTro-) f
-(.bf.Stp.yy, i&tdqv.
Auxxoi'e'w (only thus), 8177K0V0UV, Suikovi/itm, &Lr)i<6vr]<Ta. BiyKovy'/dyv.
"Eyeipw ('Ji-, e-, eV-, (rw-), iytpu) } yyupa. iyi'/yeppuu 7 yyipOyv, tyepOrj-
aopxLL.
Ei8or. see updw.
r
PRINCIPAL PARTS OF SOME IMPORTANT VEUI'.S. .
,l
numbers, la-aatv once in Acts 26:4 and (We), subj. aSu>, opt.
Eipi (a7T-, ev-, Trap-, crvp.-Tra.p-, w-), ^v and rjp-rjv, irropxxi. "Eotw and
ET/At (only comp., air-, eta-, l|-, 7r-, o-w-), -jfav. Present always in
future sense.
*E7TW obsolete present. Ei7rov (avT-, a7r-, 7rpo-) and ei7ra, ipu>, eipr/Ka,
Ek-^'w and K-^w(v)a) (only COmp. , K-, 7ri-, o-uy-, virtp-tK-} , -t^wvov,
-^cai, -'x
ea ) -k*x vIJU1 '-'
'
X^V V x v ^V <T lJM
' '- Uncontracted forms
ii<xeT and c^e^eev.
EAavvw (a7T-, <rw-), rjXavvop.r]v, -rjAatra, iXrjXaKa.
pUlL.
(.vr)yy\icr$r]v.
Eu8oku>. See Sokcw.
A SHORT GRAMMAR OF I'lli: GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
C,^(j) (a.V-. piHT-ai'-, ULVT-j 0.7T-, CV-, 7T-, KO.T-, /><"-, Trap-, jrepi-, TTpO-,
ZaWiyu and (i>iTr (dm-, <5ia-j Ttpi-, V7ro-), e^wn'vov, ^wcrw, Zu>adpr)V,
-i^wapuu.
"Hkw (dv-), V" 1 '- 7
} w , ^a. ^/<u (some MSS. in Mk. 8:3). Some MSS.
yjKaaiv instead oi y/Kovaiy.
9d-ro) (crvv-), eOaifta. iTd<prjv.
cropai.
&i\o) (not IQiXdi). yjOtXov, dtXy'jaw, yjdfXrjaa.
lyydi'w. Zdiyov.
&Xl/3w (a7ro-, o-w-) , t8Xi(3ov } TtOXippui.
ao)pai.
PRINCIPAL PARTS OP SOME IMPORTANT VERBS. 53
KaAe'w (dvri-, cv-, ela- (-pal), ori-, pera-, 7rapa-, crw-7ra,oa-, Trpo-, Trpoo--,
6t}<to/aui.
CKOl/'du^V.
Kpiva> (dva-, a7ro-, dvT-a7ro-, oia-, v-, 7n,-, KaTa-, o vv-,wo-, (mv-u7ro-),
KpiOrjcropai.
Aay^dva), 4'Aa^ov.
Aapfiavu) (dva-, dvri-, cruv-avTi-, a7ro-, eVi-, Kara-, ueTa-, 7rapa-, aw-
7rapa-, irpo-, Trpoo"-, cruv-, <rw-7repi-, V7ro), cAda/3avov, Ai/p.i/'opat,
Ae'yw (dvrt-, eVi-, KaTa-, 7rupa-, 7rpo-) to say, only pres. and imperf.
in N. T. Some MSS. lAcyav in Jo. 11:56. Cf. eW
Aeyco to Collect (only COmp. Sia-, K-, <A-), -eAeyop^v. -Aew, -e'Aea
(-da^v), -Ae'Aeypai, -cXi^drjv.
AetVoL) (a7ro-, Sia-, K-, e7ri-. KaTa-, ev-KaTa-, 7rep6-, vtto-) ,
Aei7rov, -Aeii/'U),
-
cAi7rov, -Ae'Aeipuai, cXeL<fi$r]V.
aofuu.
cropuu.
Opdio (d<-. ku^-, 7rpo-), tuipwv (some MSS. in Jo. 6:2), (opdp.rjt
solete stem tS
(Latin video). Subj. r&V imper. ?8 (nottSe),
inf. tSeif. part. JSw.
Ilat^cu (ev-). -7nnoi'. riuto). -iirai^a, -eirat^drfV, -Trai^OyaopjUL.
1 1
i'iywp.1 (irpoa-) , linqqa.
-(.airdavrp/.
2t?/k<d (cf. mod. Gk. ore'/cu)) pi'CS. from eo-rriKa (cf. ypr)yopcu> from
iyprjyopa), imperf. eaTrjKov in Jo. 8:44 and Rev. 12:4 ace. to
WH.
2tti/ch<> (ctti-), aTrjptiio and aryptaoi in some MSS. (cf. arypuo in
LXX), iarypi^a and iarypiaa, e<TT?/piypai, laT-qpL^OTqv.
2rpc<<j (dva-, a7TO-, Sia-, /<-, 67ri-, Kura-, pera-, aw- or av-, v7ro-),
0"TpWP77V.
auiOrjaopxii.
Tdcrca) (dva-, dvrt-, d7ro-, oca-, e7Ti-ota-, eVi-, 7rpo-, 7rpocr-, crw, U7ro-),
ZreXeadrjv, TtXzaOijaopxiL.
I.'<\
'
etO"-,
MITU-. TTtpl-. 77f)l>-, TTpOCT- )
(TVV-, tVl-CTUl/-, V1TO-) , ITfltVOV,
topa/wv.
Tvyxavw (V-, inrcp-ev-, eVi-, irapa-, aw-), TV)(ov } reruj(a and TCTv\a
(or even Tenixqica in MSS. in Heb.8:6).
Ti'-rrrw lias
only present stem in X. T. See 71-uTdcro-w and 7rXiyyw/m.
l
l\ui(o (dm-), (puvoi /juu. -((pava. ifpavyv, (pai'i'/aopuiL.
<t>tptj) (dl'U-, O.TTO-, 01U-, CtV-, CK-, C7TI-, KUTU-, 7TUpa- } 7Tpt-, 7T/30-, 7TpO<r-,
Xui'paj ((Tvi-), c^at/sov, )(apr]V, ^apyaopua (sonic MSS. ^upd ill Rev.
11:10).
Xupioput, ^aptaoput, i^apurdp-rji', Kt^dpttrput, e^apuTdi/i', )(apicrOrj<Topjai.
Xpuoput (kuto.-), expwp.rji' } c^pjycrdp^i', Ki^pr/puii.
^i'^w, \pvyi)<Topju.i.
f2vtoput, oii',]0-dp.rji'j
Hot 7rptdpijv.
lute goodness when he said: OuSeis ayaOos d p,r) els 6 0eo's (Mark
10:18). Both dyatfos and Simios occur together in Luke 23:50. In
Luke 8:15 Kap&La aya.61] kclI KaXrj approaches Socrates' frequent use of
these two adjectives together. Compare our "the beautiful and
the good." See Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament (1890);
Heine, Synonomik des Neutestamentlichen Griechisch (1898).
L Compound words. The Greek is not equal to the German in
the facility with which it forms compound words, but it is a good
second. A few striking examples can here be given and special
attention called to the subject. No part of the compound word is
(Eph. 6:6), Xoyofjua-^Ca (1 Tim. 6:4) which does not occur in the
older Greek, p.ovo^OaXp.o'i (Mark 9:47). The New Testament uses
compound words in harmony with the principles of the ancient
Greek, though sometimes the meaning is not perfectly clear as in
the case of iOeXoOprjo-Kta (Col. 2:23). Paul is fond of piling up
words together to express his emotion as virepcK7repio-o-ov (Eph.
3:20).
5. Light from other tongues.A number of roots belong to the
common Indo-germanic stock. Others are found in one or another
of the kindred languages. Take duKwpu again. Besides the San-
skrit dic-ci-mi the Latin has dic-o, in-dic-o, judex. The Gothic has
the root in the form teiho a messenger, the German has zelgen to
or goal, o-Kwif/ is owl. In Phil. 3:14 Paul says Kara (tkottov Siwkw.
SYNTAX.
CHAPTER X.
THE SENTENCE.
1. The sentence
is the expression of an idea and is
complex.
The and predicate are essential to the complete expression
subject
of a sentence, which may be very brief. Indeed one word may
have both as aVe^ec (Mk. 14:41). Indeed the sentence does not
absolutely require the expression of either subject or predicate.
Both may be suggested or implied as in the case of ou^i (Lu. 1:60),
vat', Kvpie. (Jo. 11:27).
2. The subject may be itself the center of a group of words
(substantives, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, etc.). Cf. Rom.
7:10 7] ivroXr) rj eis o)rjv.
(Lu. 9:54).
10. Syntax deals with the relations of words with each other,
of clauses with each other, with sentences, and with paragraphs.
We take up words first.
CHAPTER XI.
even vowels.
2. The elements of speech are probably verb, noun, and pro-
noun. It is not clear which is the earliest, verb or noun. Perhaps
now one, now the other arose first. In truth there is little real
distinction between a verb root and a noun. Compare the modern
English use of the word "work." The pronoun is itself of inde-
pendent origin and has been remarkably persistent in the Indo-
germanic languages. Compare "me," for instance, in the various
tongues. This shows the personal and social side of speech. Book
language an afterthought.
is
8:29), Ivo^os tjJ Kpio-u (Matt. 5:21), with the genitive as ttAt/ot/s
12. Adverbs may be used with the article and thus as the
(Lu. 19:11).
15. Adverbs may be compared like avurepov, p-tikiara and com-
pounded like VTreptKTrepi(T(Tov.
CHAPTER XII.
THE ARTICLE.
(cf. Justin Martyr). The modern Greek often has 6 671-0105 as the
" In the poetical quotation
relative like old English "the which.
THE ARTICLE. 69
tive, as far and near, this or that, but it simply points out some-
thing as the thing in mind. It is natural, if not good manners,
for children to point at objects. The article does nottell why a
70 \ 3H0RT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
article like proper names. So also such words asr/Aios (Matt. 1-3:0),
yjj (Luke 2:14), ddXxiacra (Luke 21:25), KoV/xos (Gal. 6:14), can be
mite without the article in English as well as in Greek. See
1 Cor 8:4 f. for iv KO<rp.w, iv ovpavw, iwl yrjq. Besides, a number of
words like v6p.o<; (Rom. 2:12). ypacprj ( 1 Pet. 2:6) are so distinctive
that they are at times definite without the article. The same is
true of a number of familiar phrases in English and Greek like at
home (e'v oiku or olkol), in town (iv 7ro'Aet), in church iv ckkXtjo-io.,
i Cor. 14:35), where it is not necessary to say that the article is
1
Nathanael said to Jesus (John 1:49) 2v e? 6 vlos tov Otov and like-
wise Peter (Matt. 16:16). A proper name in such a case does not
always have the article as /xera ttjv [xtroiKto-iav Ba/3vAa>vos (Matt. 1:12).
But where one of the words is without the article it is
indefinite as in ci vibs d
where Satan assumes
tov 6cov (Matt. 4:3)
that Jesus is a But in a case like 6eov vibs (Matt.
son of God.
27:54), both words may be indefinite or both definite and only
the context or nature of the words can decide. Compare v!6s
rot) Oeov
(Matt. 27:40) and Otov vlos (Matt. 27:43). In John
10:36, when meeting a criticism of his enemies, Jesus calls
himself vlbs tov 6eov, though elsewhere he says 6 mos tov Oeov (John
5:25).
(b) The article with attributives. There are three kinds of
attributive expressions with which the article has to do.
(rravpov (
1 ( !or. 1:1"
(3) With adjuncts. When the adjunct has the article before
it. the phrase is, of course, attributive, as in rots iv Xpio-TU) 'lya-ov
(Rom. 8:1), 8i tt]s a-n-oXi'Tpdiaews rr/s cv X/atcrTo) 'I770-0V (Rom. 3:24).
But if no article is used, then the adjunct may be cither predicate
as iv ti] o-apxt (Rom. 8:3) which goes with KaTixpive (not rijv d/juiprtav,
lias no
for Christ sin in his flesh) or attributive as eis tov 66.vu.tov
(Rom. 6:4) where this phrase goes with Sid tov j3uttti<tpm.to<; (sec
preceding verse). Often the tone of voice will show that a phrase
is attributive as 01 vacpol iv Xpto-rw avao-Ty'/o-ovTuL irpCirov (1 Thess.
4:1<'.) ;
6 7T60-TOS iv i>M.x^o-Tii) (Luke 1<>:1<>). The one article can he
used with any number of attributives (2 Pet. 1 :4).
(c) The
repetition of the article. It is not necessary for the
though this is a neat Greek idiom, asin 2 Peter 3:15 where we have
tvv tov KvpLov i]p.C)v pxjj<poOvp.iav o-wTrjpiuv rjyuo~Be. Sometimes the
article is
repeated in such examples (cf. Attic) as in to ttJs oot/s
kcu to tov deov 7rvcvpxi (1 Pet. 4:14). Sometimes the article is Used
with the attributive and not with the substantive as in cv ayaTrr) rfj
3:1. 1 John 4:16 O 0os dycwn? iariv God is love, but love is not
whom Paul preaches." The article -will often he used with the
noun in apposition to the proper name, hut not with the proper
name as 'Iwar^s 6 Bu7rTio-Tv)s (Matt. 3:1).
session. Where
is said of Pilate that d-n-evtij/uTu tols x^/3 "^ it is the
it
hands, which were, of course, his own. "Ekuotos never uses the
article in the New Testament (I Cor 3:8). We have toj/ Setva once
(Matt. 26:18). *l8tos outside of tSi'a and k<it iScav has the article
though to us it is an anomaly.
Perhaps the demonstrative Avas
felt to he so definite that the very atmosphere called for the article.
The article, moreoAr er, is generally used with the noun and not
with the demonstrative, though the force of the demonstrative
seems to be attributive, not predicate. So ovtos 6 avOpwn-os (Luke
14:30). Even with proper names ovtos is generally used with the
article as ovros 6 'lrprovs (Acts 1:11). So when ovros is not used
with the article predicate, not attributive, as rauVas r/p-epas
it is
(Acts 1 :">), days these (hence). Cf. Acts 24:21. Thus in John
2:11 TaxjTrjv iirotrjatv ap)(7]v roiv ar]p.L<j>v means that he did this as a
beginning of miracles.
(g) The article with 77-as. Without the article in the singular
7ras is ''every" as -n-avra irupa.ap.6v (Luke 4:13). But in the case of
THE ARTICLE. 77
(Matt. 10:16). But we have also the old construction //.ecn/s wktos,
v
in the middle of the night (Matt. 25:6). Axpos is not used in this
way, though we have to axpov tov SoktvXov (Luke 16:24).
(i) The article with the nominative as vocative. Here we have
an old Greek idiom intensified by the Hebrew and Aramaic usage
in which tongues the vocative regularly uses the article. In the
New Testament a number of examples occur, as vol 6 iraTrjp (Matt.
11:26); a./3(3d 6 varrjp (Mk. 14:36); to Kopdmav (Mk. 5:41). The
form is nominative, but the case is really vocative.
CHAPTER XIII.
PRONOUNS.
is
occasionally very slight, if at all, hut we must always look for
it. See I. ii. 1:2-!; 6:8; 15:14; 24:25,31. The literary plural ap-
pears also as in ypa^o/xev (1 Jo. 1:4). Cf. ypdcpu) in 1 Jo. 2:12.
PRONOUNS. 79
8:23), the second (Rom. 6:11), the third (Rom. 5:8). But v^w
.SI) A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
avrw appears in Cor 7:35 and i/uv atn-oTs in 1 Cor. 11:13. Avtov
1
good example (avros, avrov, carrots). 'EauToS in;iv bo with the article
(Lu. 11:21) or without (Lu. 13:19). The position may even be
hivTwv ra IfuxTui (Matt. 21:8). But instead of the reflexive we have
the personal form as vptv (Matt. G:l .)). "ISios (cf. iSiwti/s, Acts
(
1:
13) is common in the X. T. as in the koivtj. So tov toVoi/ tov t'Stov
(Acts 1:25).
9. Possrssirc. The various ways of expressing possession are all
distinctive. The article does not mean possession. In such a case,
where only the article is used, the idea of possession is considered
clear enough. If you say "I have a pain in the head," it is per-
fectly clear whose head it is. But "the" does not mean "my."
So John 2:11 (w). The possessive pronoun without the article
is less distinctive than with it. See John 4:34 (ctiov); 13:35 (i/xol).
For the possessive pronoun with the article see John 7:8 (6 eV6s);
Lu. 22:19 (ttjv c/a^v). The possessive; is not used in the third per-
son in the New Testament, but the genitive of uvtos (Matt. 1:2).
In the and second person the genitive thus used may be either
first
Gospel (as above, but see Phil. 3:9). The possessive pronoun
may have a genitive in apposition with it as tij l[xrj -^upl Havkov
(1 Cor. 16:21).
10. Demonstrative. The usual demonstratives are found in the
New Testament though oStos and ckcTi/os are the only ones that have
much frequency. The customary distinction between these two
obtains. In the case of outos the absence of the article means the
predicate idea as in Jo. 2:11; Acts 1:5. But in irf.pl tuas ravrq<;
<wv>7s (Acts 24:21) we comedos*; to the attributive usage though
the article is absent. The epexegetic use of tovto (kuI tovto) is seen
in 1 Cor. 6:8. The demonstrative rarely appears as the direct an-
tecedenl of the relative as ouros os (Lu. 5:21). The contemptuous
idea is conveyed by ovtos in Acts 17:18; 19:26. Interesting is the
PRONOUNS. 81
nite sense as in Matt. 13:12 and Lu. 12:1, often assumes a strongly
definite idea (compare two ideas in tis). So Lu. 2:4; Acts
10:47. For trie suppression of the antecedent see ov (Rom. 10:
14). The absence of the antecedent is not a peculiarity of Greek,
but belongs to all languages. Compare the English "who gives
quickly gives twice. Note w in Lu. 7 :47. Cf even auTots (Matt. 8:4)
' '
.
Rom. 7:15. The attraction of the relative to the case of the ante-
cedent specially common in Luke (cf. &v in 5:9) which is not
is
,
ace. to some other oblique case, but sometimes other cases than
the ace. experience it. Cf. 2a>s t^s -rj/xipas ?/? (Acts 1:22) where a
locative becomes gen. See also 2 Cor. 1:4. This attraction may
be inverse from antecedent to the case of the relative. Thus tov
usually agrees with its antecedent in gender and number, but this
bond is often broken if the sense justifies it. In Mk. 15:16 8 agrees
in gender with the predicate -n-paiTutpiov rather tnan with the ante-
cedent tj}s ai\5}s. In Phil. 2:15 o!s differs in number and gender
from yevcas. o in Eph. 5:5, and 6's in Eph. 1 :14 (mg. o
See also
text of W
and 1 Tim. 3:16. There is a real agreement in
II),
sense, however, which is more important than mere formal gram-
matical structure. But ovtos (Matt. 7:12) is strictly grammatical.
In 1 Cor. 1 "> : 1 Paul purposely says d/xl o tlpx, not 6's. "Oorts like
os is very common in the N. T., hut it is nearly confined to the
nominative, but see ace. neuter 6 in Lu. 10:35. Cf. also fa>s otov.
"Oo-os isfrequent as in Matt. 7:12, but olos (1 Thess. 1:5) is rare,
and 7}\u<os appears only four times (cf. James 3:5). For too-outo>
oo-u) see Heb. (Heb. 7:20) and oaov oa-ov (Heb.
1:4. Cf. KaO' oa-ov
10:37). In Rom. 9:6 we have the old classic idiom oty olov Sn
where olos almost equals Swaros. The repetition of the relative is
well shown in Phil. 4:8 (o<ra). Cf. 1 Cor. 15:lf. As in Latin
sometimes the relative occurs at the beginning of sentences as dv0'
wv (Lu. 12:3), iv ols (Lu. 12:1), ov x<*P<-v (Lu. 7:47). This classical
idiom is more frequent in Luke. In Rev. 1:4 6 v occurs where 6
is relative.
Toiovtos (neuter tolovto) occurs about sixty times either with the
article as ot rotovrot (Rom. 16:18) or without as toiovto (Matt.
18:5). In Rev. 16:18 we even find olos ovk iyevero ttjXikovtos o-turfws
ovTtD where the same idea occurs twice. Cf. dXtyvs ota ov yiyo-
/j.eya<;
vtv Touxvr-q (Mk. 13:19). In Acts 26:29 note toiovtovs o7toTos. And
in 1 Cor. 5:1 observe TouLvr-q $ris. TWowos (cf. Lu. 7:9) is less
common and always without the article save once 6 toowtos 7tAoi)tos
(Rev. 18:16).
13. The indefinite pronotm. In Greek the indefinite is the same
form as the interrogative save the accent. Tts is very common in
the New Testament with a substantive as Upexk Tts (Lu. 1:5) or
without as et tis tya (Mk. \
:23). It may occur at the beginning
of a sentence as in rives oV (Acts 17:18). It can be used also for
the emphatic idea of somebody or something as d yap Sokci Tts e*wu
n, p.rfikv wv, (ppevvuraTd (Gal. 6:3) where both senses occur. Cf.
PRONOUNS. 83
1:18), and with numbers tis generalizes the expression as 8vo Ttvas
twv ixadrjTuiv (Lu. 7:19). In dra ds e<ao-Tos (Rev. 21:21) we have
a distributive idiom and the adverbial use of dvd.
14. The interrogative pronouns. Tt's is, of course, the usual inter-
rogative pronoun in the New Testament, as n's vttz8ucv vjuv (Matt.
3:7). For the double interrogative ti's ti see Mk. 15:24. It is
used in alternative questions instead of 7r6repos as Tt's i< twv, etc. ,
(Matt. 21:31), TtVa 6e\eT airoXvcro) ipuv, tov Bapafifiav rj 'Ir)(rovv tov
ly dropped out for See Tt yiyovtv oti rjpuv peAAets ip,<paviciv atavTov koX
ovxi tw Koa-fiw; (John 14:22). The same thing is true of tW ti (tra
ti in quotations from the Old Testament as Acts 4:25) as Xva tL
or ydp. See Paul's ti ovv by itself (Rom. 6:15). Tt's has no effect
9:11,28, and possibly also John 8:25 we have oVt used as a direct
M \ SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
geniu-. So also in a case like Mark 1:24, oloa o-e r ei, the indirect
PRONOUNS. 85
neighbor. The
reciprocal idea is also set forth by ets (1 Cor. 4:6)
and iavTwv (1 Cor. 6:7), as well as by the usual dAAiJAwi/ (Matt.
10:37); ets jOr .... & 82 as iua [*v.... to Se (Gal. 4:24); 6 ets (or
ets .... 6 eVepos (Matt. 6:24). The negative forms outis, p-tjtis do
not occur in the New Testament save that firjri is used in questions
as (jirJTt. eyw dfu, Kvpu; (Matt. 26:22). Westcott and Hort print fir}
tis as in John 15:6. OvSet's is very common either alone as ouSeis
Bwarai (Matt. 6:24) or with a substantive as ovSeis oikct^s Swarcu
(Lu. 16:13). M^Sets is not so frequent, but is used as formerly,
SO firjStls yiva)cr/<eTa> (Matt. 9:30); ava(3o\r]V p^Sepiav (Acts 25:17).
Sometimes the negative is separated from the pronoun like the
Hebrew as ev e airruv ov Treo-etrat (Matt. 10:29), but the resultant
idea is So sometimes ov
the same. 7ras as ov 8u<cu(a9r]o-cTat, . . . .
irao-a (rapt (Rom. 3:20) and rarely ui) ttSs (1 Cor. 1:29). . . . .
Has . oi (1 Jo. 2:21) and was .... /uj (John 3:16) do not
. . .
(a)There are eight well defined cases in the Sanskrit, the oldest
member of this group of languages, viz., the nominative, the voca-
tive, the accusative, the genitive, the ablative, the locative, the
instrumental, the dative. These eight cases, with the exception
of the vocative, have, as a rule, separate case suffixes. It is pos-
sible that the oldest Sanskrit had another case, the associative,
which was merged into the instrumental. But Giles {Comparative
Philology, p. 269) suggests that the difference in sense between in-
strument and association may be due not to two cases, but to the
distinction between inanimate and animate objects (instruments
and companions).
(1 >) These eight cases have had a varied history in all the Indo-
germanic languages. The Russian language still has eight case-
forms. In Latin the eight cases have six distinct case-forms, the
PLURAL.
m. f". n.
as or i
as or i
am
bhyas
bhyas
bhis(5is or ais)
su
in most words. So then the Greek genitive and ablative follow the
Sanskrit singular while the Latin ablative, locative, instrumental,
and dative proceed along the line of the Sanskrit plural for these
cases. In Sanskrit, as in allthe Indo-germanic tongues, the voca-
tive has no case-endings. Like Latin and Greek neuters, the nom-
88 \ SHORT GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
(a) The word case (casus, 7T7wis) means falling. It is the in-
flection of the noun by case endings, though some nouns are inde-
clinable.
(c) The burden upon the eases was felt to be too great even in
the later Sanskrit and a number of set case-forms (adverbs) came
to be used with most of the eases to make clearer the relation of
words to words. Thus a few prepositions gradually arose even in
Sanskrit In the Creek and Latin this tendency to use a preposi-
tion to define more sharply the idea of the case grew rapidly. Even
in the Coptic there areno case-forms, but only particles and prep-
ositions. "These adverbs, which we now call prepositions, in time
income the constant concomitants of some cases; and when this
has happened, there is an ever-increasing tendency to find the im-
portant part of the meaning in the preposition and not in the case
ending" Comparative Philology, p. 2721). The rise of prep-
(
( riles,
usages.
(e) As it is, the distinctive idea of each case
remains practically
what it was originally even when several cases are blended to-
gether. Grammarians have made hopeless efforts to derive the
Greek genitive from the ablative or the ablative from the genitive.
Both ideas are manifestly expressed by the same case-ending, but
and express different ideas. So
historically they are different cases
it iswith the locative, instrumental and dative. The Sanskrit had
distinct ideas for each case.
practically distinct endings and clearly
Greek and Latin have distinct case ideas, but not distinct endings
for all eight cases. The proper historical method for studying the
Greek cases is to see which one of the eight a given case is, appeal
to the original meaning of that case, note the bearing of the par-
ticular context on that meaning, take note of the history of the
case, and the resultant idea will be the truth expressed.
(f) We do not know certainly the origin of the case-forms them-
selves. They are either pronominal as the nominative and accus-
ative or local as the ablative and locative. But it is all specula-
tion, since in the oldest Sanskrit the case-forms
do not appear
apart from the nouns. In general, it is to be observed that the
ablative was the earliest case to lose its case-form, while the geni-
tive has been the most tenacious of its endings in all the languages.
The accusative is the oldest of all the cases. But in the New Test-
ament, as in the older Greek, the real idea of each of the eight
cases is manifest, though the process of blending has made further
of s and accusative
progress as is seen in the practical equivalence
and iv (the locative) with verbs of rest and motion. The practical
absence of cases in the Hebrew would accentuate this tendency to
some extent.
(h) It has come to be the ease of the subject, but it was not
ginally that, for the old subject was part of the verb as <j>rj-fu, I
say. The addition of a noun or pronoun in apposition with this
verbal subject, as eyw, is a later development due to desire for
greater accuracy and clearness. It is unscientific, then, to speak
of the "omission of the subject" in such cases as is done, for in-
absolute are the most frequent and the most distinctly marked"
(Winer) of any of the absolute uses of the cases, i. e., cases with
no distinct connection with the sentence. See Acts 7:40, 6 yap
Manxes oStos. used in exclamations as in Matt. 3:17. So in
It is
Rom. 7:24, TaXaiTrwpos eyw avOpwiros. The use of the nominative
form as vocative is really vocative and is treated under that case.
4. The vocative.
are nol always used in the vocative, the nominative forms appear-
ing also as Uarrjp (John 17:2 I) and dvyarqp (Mark 5:34). even We
have Uarr/p Sucatc in John 17:25. Note o> ttXvpws. not ir\rjpe<;^ in A cts
13:10. form is used in apposition to the vocative
Tln^nmvnnfltivn
form as in the Sanskrit and Homer. Thus o>
dvOpwire, iras 6 Kpcvwv,
Rom. 2:1.
(e) These must be called vocatives though they have the form
of the nominative. So 0eo's in the New Testament, as in the older
Greek, is the nominative form always save in one quotation from
the Septuagint (Matt. 27:46). We thus have nvpu 6 0eos in Rev.
15:3. It is not surprising therefore to find Thomas saying in
direct address to Jesus, not exclamation, 'O Kvpios p.ov *<u 6 0eos p.ov
termination.
(d) The truth seems to be that originally the accusative was
used very loosely even after the other oblique cases arose, when
one did not wish to differentiate sharply, so that even a point of
space or of time could be expressed by the accusative in Sanskrit
and even in the N. T., as wpav ivdrvv (some MSS. in Acts 10:3), wpav
(John 4:52), iroiav wpav ^a> (Rev. 3:3).
efi?>6fx.r]V
(e) In fact in the vernacular Greek the accusative retains its old
frequency as the normal case with verbs where the written style
uses other cases (Mullach, Grammatik der GriechischcaValgarsprache,
S. 328-333), rather than locative, instrumental, dative, and even
verhs which imply reaching a point and in the poetSthe idiom con-
tinued to be frequenl both as to place and persons. In English we
say, go 1 if. where home is accusative. This original use of the
accusative is not preserved in the New Testament, but in Matt.
4:15 686v OuXdo-a-qs is closely related to it, by way of the Sea.
tt]v rj/j-ipav (Matt. 20:2). But note above the old use of the accusa-
tive- where duration cannot he accented (John 4:52).
(j) With verhs that are transitive the accusative is the natural
the expression of the extension of the action of the verb to
for
an external object. Not all verhs in Greek are transitive, and the
te verb is not always transitive as Ifievw ^/*fis (Acts 20:5), but
1> isides it is not a question whether
l/xevev Trap'avTois (Acts 18:3).
the verb is transitive in Sanskrit or in English, but in Greek, as
prj opvviTi. pi]Ti. tov ovpuvov p.ijre ttjv yrjv (James 5:12). So tov iru.Tt.pu.
avrdk (John 8:27). The Greek could look at 6p.wpi as trans-
lAtyei/
itive in the sense of swearing by and A'yo>iii the sense of speaking
THE CASES. 95
al >out. Moreover, when the verl i is transitive, it does not have to use
the accusative, if some other case is considered more in harmony
with the idea to be expressed. So lirikavOdvopxu is used with the ac-
cusative in Phil. 3:13 fikv ottio-w, but with the genitive
in Heb.
13:2 <f>i\ocvia<;. Sometimes the difference is quite marked as with
<f>wv?is (Acts 9:7) and rrjv
okovovtcs /xev Tr}<i
Se <f>o}vr)V ovk rjKovaav (Acts
kokws (Acts 23:5), and 6'rav koAws v/xas eiVwo-tv (Luke 6:26). But
the great bulk of the accusatives with transitive verbs call for no
remark as ckoAcctcv cvtovs (Matt. 4:21), CKT^craTO xupLOV (Acts 1:18).
(k) Some verbs may use an accusative of the inner object or
content (Delbrueck), or of the outer objective result. The action
of the verb expresses itself in a word of the same root as ifofiTJOrjo-av
TT(.ptj3a\(.lTiit.
tY i/AaTtois XerKois (Rev. 3:5). With xp!<o the instrumental
could be used as in Ads 10:38 (Trvevuan dytw). So the double
accusative is sometimes
optional. The accusative of the thing may
be cognate as in Eph. 2:4 above or causative as in Mark 9:41 os
yap av ttotio-i] v/aSs iroTypiov v8aro<;. Sometimes the adjective alone
expn one of the accusatives as ^as ol&v axeA?/o- (Gal. 5:2).
- -
the active voire Many verbs are intransitive in the active voice,
while the middle voice is just as likely to be transitive as the
active, and indeed the passive voice may also be transitive, though
in the nature of the case this not so frequent as with the other
is
development and may retain some of the force of the early form.
rtainly the passive form gradually encroached on the middle
<
usative, as ^
ovv <po(3i]dr)Te avrovs (Matt. 10:26). But in Matt.
10:28 note dird twv a-rroKTuvovTwv. The present middle cpoftdaOe is
>:17j, 8tc<p0apfivoi tov vovv (\ Tim. 6:5), where there was only one
accusative in the active or middle, that of the thing, the person
THE CASES. 97
(Rom. 16.6), rip dpxw (John 8:25), Sopaiv (Matt, 10:8). This
use of the accusative is in perfect harmony with the idea of the
case,
idea, though the connection with the sentence is no1 very close.
In 1
tuxw is an example of the neuter accusative parti-
Cor. 16:6
Trapa rijv oSoV (Matt. 20:30), Trepl avruv (Matt. 8:18), 7rpos o.vtoV (Matt.
3:5), virlp SovAov (Philemon 16), vir'6 tov (jloSlov (Matt. 5:15).
6. The i/i niti
genitiveand the ablative, are found with the same ending. Moul-
ton properly calls Winer's definition of the genitive as "unques-
tionably the wTtence-case" "an utterly unjustifiable procedure:" It
is hopeless to try to find the explanation of the genitive in the ab-
lative as Kuehner and Crosby did or the ablative in the genitive
i
Madvig attempted. Comparative grammar has settled this
matter. The two cases happen in Greek to have the same form, hut
do not have the same idea, though examples occur that can be
explained either as genitive or ablative.
(h) The genitive has the wrong name. It is not casus genitivus
or tttohtis yew/jriKrj, but rather 7TTojcrts ytviKr) as the Stoic grannna-
riai 1 it. It is, then, the case of yeyos, genus, kind, species,
in a word the specifying case. It is thus a descriptive case and is
in function adjectival, though it is not adjectival in origin. See
qixioa Trapaoxeuj}? (Luke 23:54). It is a mistake to explain the
pronominal.
(c) The use of the genitive was greatly
extended in the later
Sanskrit, and in the modern Greek it has maintained
itself far
better than the dative. The form has survived better in the Indo-
European languages than that of any of the other cases. In fact
in the modern Greek the form shares with the accusative the result
of the loss of the dative. We have such constructions as tov to euro,
I told him so. But in the New Testament the genitive form is not
so used. The real genitive always tells the kind or species. It is
this and no other.
(1) The local use of the genitive is the most objective and
probably the earliest as with most of the cases. The local adyerbs
surprising therefore to find the genitive used with such local pre])-
100 A SHORT GR \MMAK OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
(John 7:35) and 6Sos iOvw (Matt. 10:5). It is in fact the disper-
sion of the Jews among the Greeks and the way to the Gentiles.
Note also Was elaeveyicwmv avTov (Luke 5:19), iin, l eKiivrp (Luke
19:4).
(2) The root idea of the genitive is very plain in expressions of
time, the genitive of selection, tins rather than some other time. In
Luke 1 8:7 fn*.lpas kuX wkt6<; do not emphasize the wholeness of either
day or night as in Luke 2:37 (vvkto. kul r/ixepav), but rather that both
day and night are include']. So also /j-co-t/s vkkto's (Matt. 25:G). See
also to Xolttov (Heb. 10:13) and tov Xolttov (Gal. 6:17). In Matt.
24:20 the 'distinction is seen between the genitive ^ct/xwvos as the
case of genus and the locative o-u/3/3utw expressing a point of time.
It is not strange to see Sis tov o-ufifiarov (Luke 18:12) and aVa tov
iviavTov (Heb. 9:7). In the New Testament, however, prepositions
occur very often with expressions of time with either the accusa-
tive, genitive, or locative case, as
(Luke 12:19), Si a's ttoXXo. hrj
Often the genitive is used simply with the article, where the con-
text explains, as ol rov Xpio-rov (Gal. 5:24), especially the neuter
article as to. Ktucrupos (Mark 12:17).
or ZttI
evtpyeo-ia avOpuirov a<rdevov<; (Acts 4:9) when
the good deed is
done to the man, not by him. In r) Se rov Trvevparos (SXao-^rjp-ia
(Matt. 12:31) we have a good instance of the objective genitive.
There is nothing in the genitive itself to determine when the usage
is subjective or objective. In itself it is neither. That is a matter
for the context.
(7) In a word the genitive is the general or genus case and the
precise specifying lies in the word, not the case. Baimo-pa yueravoCwi
(Mark 1:4) is therefore repentance baptism; what the precise rela-
tion is between the two is not set forth by the case. In rrjv yizwav
tou 7rvpos (Matt. 5:22) Gehenna is described as characterized by fire.
(8) Most frequently the genitive comes after the limiting word
as in Matt, 5:22 above, but observe 'E AA^Vw ttoXv TrXfjOos (Acts 14:1)
and r) rov irvevpxiTos fi\ao-<fir]p.ui (Matt. 12:31).
(9) Two and even three genitives can be used together, as to*
3:8), 7rAyp/s x"LP LTO<: (John 1:1 I) though Latin here lias the abla-
tive (or is it
instrumental?) with plenus, o-vp.p.6p<pov<; -n}? cikoVos (Rom.
3:29), ro\os uliovtov apuipTypxiTos (Mark 3:25)). tvvo/xos XpurTov (1 Cor.
9 21 . and even to. avrc. twv
n-adijp.a.Tiov (1 Pet. 5:9). Occasionally
the participle is so used as to dOT(xvov tov v6p.ov (Luke 2:27).
(g) Adverbs and hence prepositions may l>e used with the geni-
tive when
the meaning of the adverb is in accord with the idea of
the case. So d|(<os twv ayiW (Rom. 16:2), and prepositions like
furagv tov vaov kol tov 6vcrui<TTr]pio-j (Matt. 23:35), eyyvs ti/s AvSoas
(Acts 9:38), ir\i](Tiov tov ^wpi'ou (John 4:5), eo-w r}p.wv (2 Cor. 4:1(5),
evTos 1'fJ.wv (Luke 17:21), p-Xp L T V'S 0-rjfj.epov rj/Atpas (Matt. 28;15), ews
tov Xpto-roD (Matt. 1:17), axpj_Jlaqi>ov ("A cts 13:6), Ivocev ip.ov (Matt.
10:1 s) cm t^s y>}s (Col. 1:16), p-tff r/ju-wv (Matt. 1:23), kut' ip.ov
?
(3) Another group of verbs that often use the genitive exhibit
one's concern for, or estimate of, a matter. These verbs do not
differ greatly from the preceding list, as i-n-epeXyOr] avrov (Luke
10:34); p.rj 6\iywpL iraiSeia? Kvptov (Heb. 12:5); iSiW ov trpovou TW
(1 Tim. 5;8); rov iStov vlov ovk iffieiaaro (Rom. 8:32); irpaOfjvai
7roXXov (Matt. 26:9); iivrjcraTo riprj<i dpyvptov (Acts 7:16); iyKa\u(T$ai
crTacrews (Acts 19:40); (1 Tim. 5:17).
8t7rA??s rip.rjs d^Lovo-9(naav
expanse rrjs x aP 0(; avrfjs (Matt. 9:25), but Kparrjcra^ rov Iwdvrjv (Matt.
14:3); 7ria<xas avrov tt}s ^eipos (Acts 3:7); rov evos dv9eerai (Luke
16:13). Some verbs evidently use the genitive as a result of the
change of idea wrought in the verb by the preposition Kara used in
Composition, as alo-xyvrjs Karacppovr)0-a<; (Heb. 12:2), aov Karapaprv-
povcriv (Matt. 27:13), KarzyiXuv avrov (Matt. 9:24).
(5) It is not possible to decide positively whether what is called
the genitive absolute genitive or ablative.
is In Sanskrit the in-
strumental (associative) is sometimes so used and the locative
often, while in Anglo-Saxon the dative is the case for absolute
clauses with a participle. This is especially true of Wyeliff, but
this dative form is sometimes instrumental. In Latin the case so
used is the ablative as generally considered, but here again the
tuvtu (H ni'ror
iv&vfirjOevTos i^dvi) airiS (Matt. 1:20), and even when
it the subject of the principal verb as prijiTTevOeio-ry; -nys p.rp-pb<;
is
adjective in agreement.
7. The ablative. The remaining uses of the genitive form, not
genitive in idea, are ablative. The old ablative ending t or d, seen
insome words, Latin inscriptions like domod, Greek ws(t), 7tws(t),
Umbrian tu (out of), Anglo-Saxon ut (out of ), is held by
ovpavoOev,
some to be demonstrative like Sanskrit ta. But, whatever may be
true as to the origin of the original ending, the idea of the case is
is the case of origin or
it. It
separation, casus ablativus as
Julius Caesar called it, 7nwis dcpaiptTiK^. This is the "whence"
case of Winer. Like the genitive, the ablative is used possibly
with substantives, certainly with adjectives, adverbs, prepositions,
and verbs.
(a) Homer
could say uXiyr} dvdirava-t<; TroXifxoio, short is the rest
from war. But, as in Latin the ablative disappears from use with
substantivi -. so in Greek, unless indeed some examples of the so-
called partitive genitive may not more properly be considered
ablative, as iv tovtwv (Matt. 6:29). This is rendered more prob-
able by the frequent use of Avo or i$ with the ablative in similar
examples, as riva d-rrb tS>v 8w> (Matt. 27:21), rts itj v/aw (Luke 12:25).
(Mark 4:81), and also after the superlative as tt/dwtos p.ov (John
1:15).
(c) The ablative is very common in the New Testament with
adverbs and so with prepositions. The growth of prepositions in
addition to the mere case is especially noticeable with the ablative.
So x w/'? TrapaftoXrjs (Matt. 13:34), avev yoyyvapov (1 Peter 4:9), K-
tos tov crayurros (1 Cor. 6:18), c$<jd rrjs oiKids (Matt. 10:14), arep oxXov
(Luke 22:6), ZtjwOev Trjs iroXews (Rev. 14:20), ttXtjv tov irXoiov (Acts
(Mark 6:11); so also goto o-ov (Matt. 5:29), e tov uScito? (Mark
1:10), Trap avriov (Matt. 24), viro irdvTayv (Acts 22:12), inrlp TrdvTwv
(2 Cor. 5:15), irpo tov irdxrya (John 11:55), 7rpos Trjs vptTtpas aiDTrjpias
(Acts 27:34). The ablative idea of comparison (separation) is in
several of these prepositions. A
number of adverbs are them-
selves in the ablative as outws, 7rws, dvo>, etc.
(d) The ablative occurs rather often with verbs (though not so
frequently as the accusative, genitive, or dative) where the idea ,
3:23), AeiVerai cro<ji>ids (James 1:5), i^yjOrj avrov (Luke 5:12), Swo-w
(Rev. 2:17) where the part is contrasted with the
avTtS tov pidwa
whole (compare the ablative in i< tov dprov Io-QUtw. 1 Cor. 11:28,
and tcrdUi Atto tS>v i/a^cW, Matt. 15:27), ov fipa&vvu Kupios Trj<i eVay-
yeAias (2 Peter 3:9); so also with a number of compound verbs as
d<f>LO-Ta.TO tov Upov (Luke 2:37), VTrepftdWovo-av tyjs yvwo'ecos (Epll.
3:19), aTrrjXXoTpioifxivoi. tt}s a7S (Epll. 4:18), diroo-Trjo-ovTaL rives T7/s
epere avVaiv (Matt. 6:26). Cf. also Trjs x *P lT0 cleTrecraTe (Gal. 5:4).
( '>
In examples like Heb. 12:11, ov Sokci yapa? eivcu dXXa AuV^s, and
Acts 20:3, iyevero yvwp.r)s, we probably have the ablative. See
eViAwrews ill 2 Peter 1:20.
8. The In Greek most of the dative and instrumental
locative.
corresponds in idea with the English in, on, among, at, by, the re-
sultant conception varying according to the meaning of thewords
and the context. In every instance it is not hard to see the simple
root idea of the ease, a point with limits set by the word and con-
text.
iv v8a.TL, as ill Mark 1:8; Acts 1:5; 11:16 the locative u&m appears
without iv. See also the locative in Eph. 5:26, KaOapto-as rwAovrpw
tov vSaTosj Johll 19;2, i-iriOrjKuv avrov rfj Kcpa\rj[ Acts 14:8, dSwaTOs
and 1 Cor. 9:13, rw Ovaiaa-TrjpLU) TrapeSpevovres.
rots tto(tiv;
<rafiftd.Tw (Luke 6:9), rots craft ftaacv (Matt. 12:1), Trj koprfj (Lllke
2:41), erepats yeveais (Eph. 3:5), rots ytveaiots avrov (Mark 6:21).
With most of the phrases mentioned above iv is also used and
other expressions of time always use iv. The iv adds little, if any-
thing, in point of fact to the true idea of the locative case, but it
constantly increases in use. The locative appears in some tem-
poral adverbs as -n-ipvai (2 Cor. 8:10), act (2 Cor. 6:10), irdXai (2
Cor. 12:19). But Brugmann (Gr. Gr., S. 252) considers 77-dAai
and x'ty"" dative forms.
(c) The locative is naturally common with many figurative ex-
pressions without iv as well as with iv. The root idea of the case
meets every demand for the explanation of all these examples as
oi tttw^ol tw irvtvpuari (Matt. 5:3), rois Wtcnv TTtpiiruTuv (Acts 21:21),
o-yrjpjaTL tvpeOus (Phil. 2:8), rfj
koklo. i>r)Tridf.Tt (1 Cor. 14:20), iropevo-
[acvt]
tw <o/3w (Acts 9:31), fiairTLcru vp,d<; TrvtvpxiTt dyij (Mark 1:8),
orav 7mpaoy/.oTs TT(.pnrko-f]Tt 7roixi\ot<; (James 1:2), \upoypa<j)ov Tots 86y-
pjaaLV (Col. 2:14), Kadapol Trj ap8t'a (Matt. 5:8).
(d) The locative is not used in the Greek New Testament with
as many prepositions as in Homer. Originally nearly all the prep-
ositions used the locative, but this case gradually disappeared with
most of these prepositional adverbs. So in the New Testament
ap.(f>i, /Aerd, V7rd, dvd, Trept no longer use the locative, but, as in
Homer (Monro, Homeric Grammar, p. 101), so in the New Testa-
ment the locative is often used after verbs compounded with them
as well as with iv, napd. iwC. See examples above. Here as always
pis \ SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
the locative case. There are only four prepositions that use the
locative in the New Testament. They are ev, ri, 7rapa, 7rp6V As
mples see er tw TopSai'*/ (Matt. 3:6), Ovpais (Matt. 24:33),
7Tupa TU> (TTCLVpuj TOV T?;(To{) (Jollll 19:25), 7T/30S TO) fJLV7)fXLlp (Jollll
20:11).'
(e) What is called the pregnant construction of the locative or
the accusative appears in the New Testament in connection with
iv and is. In the older (ireek the cases witlrout prepositions were
so used. In such instances either the accusative is used with a
veil i
as very often With eis and irapd (so 6 eh rav dypov in
of rest
Mark 13:16 and araaa oitl<tu> Trapa tovs ttocxis uvtov in Lllke :38) or ,
used not only for the instrumental, hut also for the locative, the
ablative, and possibly the dative also (Brugmann, Griechische
the idea of association (%, near), but has developed into that of
agency. And the same thing is true of by. It is proper therefore
to treat it as one case with the original significance of mere associa-
tion and a later idea of instrumental association. It was once used
with expressions of place but it no longer so appears in the New
Testament unless eWpa 68w iK^aXova-a (James 2 :25) be so taken (loca-
tive most probably). Even 071-77 and -n-rj are not used in the New
Testament. But in Westcott and Hort's text for Acts 21:28 we do
have Travraxfj.
The instrumental does occur in the N. T. in expressions of
(a)
time where a considerable period of time is presented. The ace.
might here be used, but the instr. is an old Indo-germanic usage.
So in John 2:20 we have rcaaapaKovra Kal e erecnv OiKo8ofj.t]8r]. Cf.
als o we have u>s (T<tlv tct paKocrtots kul ireyimwaa,
Acts 13:20 where
for the See Luke 8:29 7roAXois xP v0l<i Acts 8:11
whole period. i
(2 Cor. 6:14).
avofita Prepositions and other cases are sometimes
used with some of these verbs, but these are clear examples of the
associative instrumental. Cf. ets viravrrjaiv o.vt<2 (Jo. 12:13).
Ioikcv k\v-
ia/nevois (Matt. 23:27), to avrb ry ivprjp.evy (1 Cor. 11:5),
Swvi 6akd(T(Tr]<i (James 1:6).
(d) is very common with expressions
This idea of association
ofmanner, where the idea is going on towards means or instru-
ment. So we explain ei iyu> x^P LTL ^ere^to (1 Cor. 10:30), 7ravTt
Tpo7ru>, eiVe irpocpdaa.
elVe akriOtia (Phil. 1:18), aKaraXinrTU) ry Kecf>a\rj
(Gal. 6:12).
(f) Means
or instrument can thus be naturally expressed by
this case. Donaldson (Neio Cratylvs, p. 439) calls it the imple-
mentive case. The verb x/oao/icu obviously, like utor in Latin, has
the instrumental case as rroXXrj -n-apprjaLa. xpa>/xe0a (2 Cor. 3:12).
Other illustrations are crvvaTrrjxOr] Ttj vTroKpicrtL (Gal. 2:13), TjXtL^tv tw
p-vpLo (Luke 7:"> s ), dvtiXev 8e 'Iao:/3ov .... pji^aiprf (Acts 12:2), Se-
and crvv.In Latin cum is used with the instrumental and in San-
skrit sam See a^ta avTols (Matt. 13:29) and ow
(crvv). dyycAw
ttX^os (Luke 2 :13). Verbs compounded with avv take the instru-
mental very often as o-wrjyepOrjTe tw Xpio-Tu> (Col. 3:1), tra /not o-w-
avriXdjBrjTaL (Luke 10:40), <Tvvx*lperi p.oi (Phil.2:18). There are other
papyri. Greek, like other languages, and more than some, had
flexibility and variety in the expression of the same idea.
10. The dative. This Greek case, according to Brugmann,
Griechische Grammatik, S. 226 f. coalesced in form with the loca-
tive and instrumental after the}r had lost distinction in endings.
So then in Greek the union was first between the locative and
instrumental. The case-endings of the three cases which thus
united are partly locative (t, ten), partly dative (at), and partly
instrumental (a in adverbs and dialects, <i in Homer, and possibly
-ots). Clearer traces of the difference in endings survive in Greek
than in the ablative. In a few words both locative and dative
forms occur in Greek (ot/coi, oiku>). In Latin the dative singular
isoften separate from locative, instrumental, and ablative. But in
both Greek and Latin the function of these cases remains distinct
after the In the modern Greek vernacular this
forms are blended.
form for all For the dative it was eis and the accusa-
three vanishes.
tive or even the genitive form by itself. So in English the dative
form has gone save with some pronouns like him, me, though the
case is used either without any sign or usually with to, as I gave
John a book or I gave a book to John. See in Wyclyf's Bible, "Be-
lieve ye to the gospel" (Mark 1:15). The idea of the dative
(7riwis oVri/07, casus dativus, the giving case) is very simple.
It is the case of personal interest and accents one's personal
advantage or disadvantage. It is chiefly used with persons
112 \ SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
The dative, like the other eases, has a variety of applications for
its fundamental idea.
dytots (Eph. 5:3), p.r) p.epip.va.T(. rrj if/vyr] (Matt. 6:25), aTrt6a.vop.tv rrj
apxtpTia (Rom. 6:2), ipprjOi] toi? dp^ut'ot? (Matt. 5:21), i<pavr] avru
(Matt.' 1:20), eyeW aiTV (Acts 7:40), Cv 0 (Rom. 6:10),
iUwKvptta o-tijkci (Rom. 14:4), evdx^v airu (Mark 6:19), and even by
itself as dew (2 Cor. 5:13). Cf. Luke 18:31. Some of these datives
are in the predicate and are called predicate datives, but the ex-
tive, it is with the idea of having a thing done for one. See also
to OeaOrjvai clvtols (Matt. 6:1), avr<2 eipeOijvai (2 Peter 3:14)
717105 where
either the dative or the instrumental is possible.
right hand.
CHAPTER XV.
PREPOSITIONS.
osition, but rather the resultant of the preposition and the verb.
duo, bis, German zwei, English two, "'tween, from Sanskrit dva dvi. i
idea together with the case idea and the meaning of the words and
the connection will explain every instance of its use. The result-
ant idea will vary as the words, case, and circumstances vary, but
the true root idea of the preposition is still discernible. The two
New Testament are the genitive and the accusa-
cases used in the
tive. There are hundreds of examples in the New Testament and
in composition also it is very frequent. See Mark 5:41; Matt.
26:61; Gal. 2:1; Rom. 11:36; Heb. 2:10; Luke 17:11; 24:51;
Mark 13 :20.
11. eV. Older form case.
Ivl, Same word as Latin
em, locative
in, German in, ein,from Sanskrit pronominal stem and
English in,
Sanskrit ana, ani, antar (within). It simply means a position
within boundaries, and has really the same idea as the locative case
and is so used in current Greek. However, originally, as in Latin
in, iv was used with accusative (Delbrueck, p. 134) and examples
120 \ SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK MOW TESTAMENT.
occur ii> Ireek dialect ical forms as Arcadian, lypriote, etc. Indeed
( *
the Boeotian dialed does not have eis at all, bvd uses iv now with
locative, now with the accusative. In English vernacular we still
say, jump in the river, come in the house. Compare the so-called
constructio praegnans of the (ireek. It is the most common of all
The idea of into (if present) comes from the accusative case (ex-
tension) and the verb of motion and the connection. Often 's is
used where the accusative alone would be clear. Compare iv. The
preposition is very common in New Testament Greek, both singly
and in composition. Fierce polemical battles have been waged
over its usage, but the theological bearing of the preposition can
come only from the context. In modem Greek as displaces ev. See
Jo.21:23; Matt.5:l; Mk.l:9; Acts 8:38 f.;Mk. 13:16; Matt. 12:41;
Rom. 11:36; Luke 12:10; Mark 1 :4; Acts 2:38; Matt. 21:41.
PREPOSITIONS. 121
with the ablative and varies little in its usage. There is no San-
skrit equivalent, but Church Slavonic, Lithuanian, and Old Irish
have the same root. It is always true to its root idea, out of. As
with ivand s, the word with which it is used must mark the
limits and the yerb describe the action. For instance, house, river,
water, mountain, all present different boundaries. This prepo-
sition is also common in the New Testament, and especially so in
John 20:24; Rom. 12:18. For Ik, Bid, ek see Roin. 11 :36.
14. IttL. Compare Sanskrit adverb and prefix dpi, locative case.
Compare Latin ob, Curtius says that it is allied to Sanskrit dpa
(diro) in spite of difference of meaning. Compare English up, Ger-
man auf. art means over, upon, but less sharply than dvd and
v-jrip. It is very common in the New Testament separately, and
fairly so in composition. It is used with the genitive, locative,
and accusative. Observe the case idea, and meaning of the words
and the context. See Matt. 6:10; John 19:19; Matt. 3:7; 7:24;
26:55; Luke 3:2; Acts 11:19; Rev. 7:1.
15. Kara. KaTat (locative or dative) occurs in some poems. It
means "down," but the etymology is not known. Compare our
cataract, catastrophe. Quite common in New Testament, both
singly and in composition. The cases used with it are the gen.,
ace, abl. (Acts 27:14). In the older Greek the ablative was also
possible. The resultant idea does not vary very much. "Against"
comes from the idea of "down." Compare our being "down on"
a person. See Matt. 8:32; Mark 11:25; Luke 4:14; 8:1,39; John
8:15; Acts 26:3; Rom. 2:1.
16. ftera. Instrumental case. Compare //io-os. Sanskrit mithas
(genitive), Gothic mith, Latin medius, German mit (miti), English
mid. This preposition is used with the locative, genitive, and
accusative in Homer. In the New Testament only the accusative
and genitive usages survive. It is quite common, and moderately
so in composition. The sense of "after" as a resultant idea with
the accusative seems difficult; but in Homer the accusative is used
with verbs of motion with the idea of "into the midst of." Clearly
L22 \ 5H0R1 GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
Se< Mark 14:43; Luke 18:9; 19:7; John 19:25; Rom. 2:13; Matt.
4:18; Rom. 4:18,25; Heb. 1:4; 2:2.
18. 7Tpt. Compare Greek irlpi, TrepHraos and particle irep (Har-
tung). Trept is locative case. Compare Sanskrit pari, roundabout,
and Zend So Latin per before adjectives (Curtius). Har-
pairi.
ri -on says that as compared with dp.<pi (on both sides) is rather
irtpi
used with the locative, hut it is in later Greek ^cvn only with
the ablative (Delbrueck). The idea is really comparison and so
ablative as with v-rrip. It is used in the New Testament more fre-
ciples Mark
5:22; 6:51; Acts 23:30; John 1:1; 20:11; Luke 7:44;
18:11; Heb. 5:14: Matt. 11:3.
21. <rw. Older form |w. Ionic w6s (koivos) according to Curtius.
See Lu. 7:12; Rom. 8:32; Matt. 27:44; Acts 15:15; 2 Tim. 2:11;
Acts 16:10; 1 Cor. 8:7; 2 Cor. 5:14.
22. virip. viripa (upper rope). Compare Sanskrit upari (loca-
tive case ofupara) with locative, accusative, and genitive. Zend
upairi (locative) with accusative and instrumental. Latin super,
Gothic ufar, German ueber, Anglo-Saxon qfer, English over. These
are all comparative forms, Sanskrit positive upa, Greek viro. Chau-
cer uses over in sense of upper. This preposition is used only with
the ablative and accusative, generally ablative in New Testament.
As a comparative the case would be ablative rather than genitive.
124 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
ing the death of Christ, whereas Jesus used olvtl twice. It is in-
sisted that dvrt is necessary to express the doctrine of substitution,
and that in using i-n-ip Paul avoided that doctrine. But neither
avTL nor expresses substitution.
virep of itself One means in itself
"face to face" and the other "over." Both, however, in the proper
connection are used lively when that is the resultant idea. In fact,
in Alcestis (Euripides) virep is used more frequently than avri and
irpowith this idea. All three prepositions yield themselves naturally
to the idea of substitution where the connection calls for it. Here,
a- always, the root idea of the preposition, the root idea of the
case, and the context must all he considered. See Acts 1 13; Mark :
9:4d: Matt. 10:24: Heb. 7:27; Lu. 16:8; Philemon 18; John
11:50; 2 Cor. 5:14; Gal. 3:13; 1 Tim. 2:6.
23. vtto. Also v'ttui
(dative or locative). Aeolici>7rd. Sanskritwpa
(near, on, under) with locative, accusative, and instrumental. Zend
yi>it
with accusative and locative. Latin sub, Gothic uf. Compare
English ab-ove. The ideas "on" or "under" both depend on
standpoint and dc not differ much after all. Monro suggests that
tli'
original sense is "upwards" (compare
c
and wrtos,
v^i, aloft,
facing upwards). At any rate vn-6 is not, like Kara, used of motion
downwards. Hence the comparative (see virep) and the superlative
(Sanskrit upamas, Greek {Wtos, Latin summits, English oft) are
is freely used in the New Testament and
perfectly natural. It
often in composition. The locative no longer occurs with it, as in
earlier Greek,but the accusative, genitive, and possibly ablative.
In expressions of agency imo is the direct agent whereas 8id is the
intermediate agent. Other prepositions are also used to express
agent as e/<, d, irapd, irpos. It is used only twice in the Gospel of
and participles are quasi verbs, verba] nouns, possessing voice and
tense and being used with cases as verbs. They are hybrids, the
infinitive a verbal substantive, the participle a verbal adjective.
They arc nol now verb, now noun, but both at the same time.
5. How the verb is made ]\ is a complicated process which
cannot be entered into here, since it properly belongs to accidence,
not syntax. See chapter VII. Conjugation of the Verb. But the ,
verb has, however, far greater limitations apart from the help of
auxiliaries. But the Greek verb is much richer than the Sanskrit
and even than the Latin.
9. Individual verbs show very unequal development as to mode,
voice, and tense. Some have pretty free play in most directions.
Others fall far short of their opportunities, failing in either one or
the other point. These are called defective or else deponent verbs.
Deponent is rather a misnomer and defective is a much better
description of the facts as to voice as well as tense.
10. Once more the modes, voices, and tenses varied greatly in
their history. Some survived and nourished. Others barely
existed or perished. There was a survival of the fittest. The
grammarian like the true historian must tell the important facts in
each case.
11. Probably tense was earlier than mode or voice, though it
does not matter greatly how they are studied because a large part
of the development was parallel. The second aorist (coinciding
with present) is the oldest tense. The indicative is the oldest
mode. The actiye is probably the oldest voice, but the middle may
foe.
CHAPTER XVLT.
THE MODES.
(Matt. 27:24).
4. Doubtful statement. The Greek has two modes for doubt-
ing affirmation, the subjunctive and the optative. The names are
not distinctive, for both are used in subordinate senses, and the
optative is used elsewhere besides in wishes and is not the only
mode so used (see indicative). But the names will answer at any
rate. They are really different forms of the same mode, the mode
130 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
was not used so much as in the hooks. It was one of the luxuries
of the language that the spoken language little used. It is scarce
in Plutarch, and occurs only sixty-seven times in the New
Testament. The optative died as the subjunctive is doing
in English. In the New Testament wishes about the future
are expressed by the optative or sometimes by 6<j>e\ov and
the future indicative. Wishes about the present are expressed
simply by 6(f>e\ov and the imperfect indicative. Wishes about the
past arc expressed by o^eAov and the aorist indicative. The sub-
junctive has to do the work of the imperative in the first person
owing to loss of that form. The use of the aorist subjunctive in
prohibitions rather than the aorist imperative is traceable to the
Sanskrit idiom. But the aorist imperative in prohibitions does
occur a few times in the New Testament. Even the second and
third persons are used sometimes in the New Testament in ques-
tions of deli Iteration. The future indicative is doubtful because
the actionis future, and so it is not strange that Homer uses both
usually of the third as the subj. did completely for all commands
of the first person. En the imperative as with all the modes the
tive we sometimes have Xva (Eph. >3). .");.' The negative of the
imperative naturally always /xy as with the subjunctive after
is
( (
(Eph. 5:o), KuTu/iarw (Mk. 13:15), (3<iirTnu (Acts 22: l(i). In 1 Pet.
observe ds rjv (tt?jtc.
"3:12
CHAPTER XVIII.
THE VOICES.
refers to the fact that there is a reflex action in this voice, this is
It is also probably the oldest. Sonic verbs never had any othel
voir. . verbs have one voice in one tense, and another voice
Some
in another tense. In simple truth many verbs are more or less
defective on this point
5. The middle was probably built on the active by a doubling
of the personal ending, /xi becoming ixafxi=fmi. This explanation
is some scholars even putting the middle as the oldest
not certain,
voice. But certainly the middle was on a par with the active at
most points and had a parallel development. The active and the
middle had a full set of personal endings. In the middle voice
the subject is acting with reference to himself, and here again the
action may be either transitive or intransitive. Hoio the subject
middle voice does not tell. That
acts with reference to himself, the
has to be determined by the meaning of the verb and the context.
He may be represented as doing a certain thing of himself, by him-
on himself, for himself, etc. The precise shade of emphasis
self,
comes from the context and the word itself. The reflexive pro-
noun is sometimes used in the New Testament with the middle
though it is not necessary. In English the reflexive pronoun is
sive later than the active and the middle and did not develop
is
(d.Trr}y$a.To)
Matt. 27:24 (da-evtyaTo) ;
Mk. 14:47 (<77racrd^evos) ;
14:65
(fjpiavTo); Luke 2 :5 (airoypdipuadai) ;
Acts 22 :16 (/Sam-io-ai) ;
Acts
12:8 (wcrai koI vir68r](Tai) j
Gal. 2:7 (Tre7TL(TT(.vp.a.i)
2 Thess. 2:15
THE TENSES.
idea as Hadley and Allen have it. This is the original and only
general idea of tense.
3. There are three distinct ideas as to duration of the action
found in the modes, viz. incompletion, completion, or indefi-
all ,
The tense for indefinite action is the aorist, the tenses for incom-
pleted action are the present, imperfect, and future; the tenses for
completed action are the present perfect, past perfect (pluperfect),
and future perfect.
4. Here again we must insist on looking at the Greek tense from
the Greek standpoint, and not from the English or German point
of view. Each Greek tense has its meaning and is used to ex-
press that idea. What the English would have used is quite
another matter. Historical grammar is essential to exegetical
grammar, and the best exegetical grammar maintains the Greek
standpoint. It is not necessary to anglicize the Greek idiom in
order to understand it; to do so is rather to hinder true apprehen-
sion, for the student will inevitably feel that the Greek ought to be
like the English. The English will be the standard and Greek
rises or falls as it is like or unlike it. If Greek syntax is not un-
derstood as Greek, it is not truly understood.
5. Indefinite action
the aorist. The aorist is presented first
natural. the tense idea plus the verb meaning. In the indica-
It is
(cKa&crav) ;
Jo. 10:38 (yvwre, hut cf. yiviiHTKrjTe) ;
Luke 1:30 (eupes) ;
THE TENSES. 139
2:48 (eVotVas); 16:4 (lywov, /leraarrajBSi) 23:19 (fiv (3\ v 6us) 24 :17
; ;
; ;
(a)The present.
then, the present tense expresses incompleted action, which
s...
not the present used for the other tenses. The hearer or reader is
expected to wake up and see the picture. The same thing is true
of the present in the midst of futures. Some verbs naturally sug-
gest future action like eiju.i. Indeed some future tenses like e*/w,
TriofjuL are thus merely lively presents. In Homer, as is well known,
the present and imperfect steins are not always differentiated from
the aorist. The periphrastic present is not uncommon. Another
thing to be noted about the present tense is the effect of preposi-
tions on the word, Aktionsart again. It is a pity that the term
3:10 (kcitcu) ;
3:15 5 :25 tcrOc evvowv, el); 0:2 ( ttoioxxtlv,
(irplivov e'o-riV) ;
(
Mk. 11:23 (yiVcroi); Lll. 17:6 (^cre); 18:12 (KTUfxai); 19:8 (Si'Soyu);
19:17 (i<r6i X w); 22:23 (el v ); 22:24 (&*); Jo. 3:15 (?xg); 10:32
(Ai0aeTe); 10:38 (7rioTei;?7Te, yivdxTKrjTe) ; 14:3 (ep^o/xat); Heb. 3:12
eating one's dinner and living a life. With due regard to this
point and the context the Greek imperfect will be found always
true to root idea.
its The participle with dpi is very common in
the NewTestament, especially in Luke. The imperfect is the
descriptive tense of narrative and varies the simple monotony of
the aorist. It puts life into the story like the present. Some
imperfects that are very common like lAeyev perhaps do not differ
in stem from an old second aorist (cf. lAa/Sev). In English we
must use the auxiliary verb and the participle if we wish to accent
linear action either in the past, the present, or the future. In
Matt. 9:24 note carefully a-n-edavev, kclOcvSu, KdTeye'Awv. The meaning
of the word (Aktionsart) be observed in the imperfect tense
is to
also. It is interesting to compare imperfects with aorists or per-
fects in the same sentence and see the reason for the difference.
Examine, for instance, these New
Testament examples: Matt. 3:6
(e/?a7TTtovTo); 3:14 26:55 (eKa#edyu?7v) ; 27:30 (Ztvtttov);
(SlkwXviv);
Mk. 12:41 (e'0Sp); 14;61 (eVtwra); 14:72 (e'/cAauv); 15:6 (dTr&vev);
15:23 (eSt'Sow); Mk. 5:13 (e7rviyovro); Lll. 1:21 (j)v irpocr&OKwv; cf.
1:22, rjv Siaveucov); 1:59 (eKaAouv); 17:10 (ax^ei'Ao/u.ei'); 17:27 (yadiov,
etc.); 23:12 (TrpovTnjpxov wres); Jo. 21:18 (eaWues, etc.); Acts 18:4
(&r0ev); 27:18 (Ittoiowto); Eph. 5:4 (dv^cev); Acts 22:22 (ku%v),-
Matt. 23:23 (I8ei); Lu. 24:26 (18a); Matt. 25:5 (\<0&>v).
(c) The future.
The future likewise presents incompleted action which in any
1 12 A SHOUT GRAMMAR OF TI1K GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
ording to the nature of the case or the moaning of the verb. The
future with el/it and the participle is fairly common. The future
optative does not occur in the New Testament. As in the present,
so in the future no distinctive expression of aoristic action is made.
The very fact of futurity throws an air of indefiniteness over many
verbs in the future tense. The will of the speaker or writer often
enters largely into the tone and exact force of a verb in the future.
(
lompare our shall and will. The only way to emphasize the idea
of incompleteness in the future tense is by the use of dfxi and the
participle as in the present tense. There is this difference, how-
ever. In the future the idea is usually aoristic (ddpio-ros, unde-
fined). This is due partly to the nature of the case since all future
events are more or less uncertain. But another reason is the origin
of the tense itself. It is probably a variation of the aorist subjunc-
tive as the usage of Homer indicates (cf. Giles, Manual, etc., p.
446 fT.). But Giles suggests also that the Aryan and Letto-Slav-
onic future in -syo (cf. "go" in English and na in Coptic) may be
But
discernible also. the result is that the future indicative and
aorist subjunctive do not differ greatly in actual usage. Hence in
the New Testament with idv, ha, fxrj ttotc, etc., both appear. There
is a difference though slight, The subjunctive is a doubtful asser-
tion in present time, while the future indicative is a positive asser-
tion in future time. Some futures indeed are but variations of the
present indicative (cf. <uui and pxoyu.ui), due to the vivid realization
of a future event in present time. See Delbrucck. The periphras-
tic future is common in the Sanskrit. In the modern Greek 0eAw
and the is the most frequent method.
infinitive (cf. English) In
the New Testament has not yet weakened to a mere future
fo'Aco
like our "will" and "shall." In a passage like Jo. 7:17 the full
force of B(X<a is to be insisted on. Cf. dekere airokvvu) (Matt. 27:17)
with modem Greek. Mt'AAw appears in the New Testament chiefly
with the aorist or present infinitive, (Matt. 11 :14; Rom. 8:18) and
with futun- infinitive also (Acts 11:28). Forms like ttiV" 1 (Luke
17:8) give color to the aoristic origin of the future. A case like
THE TENSES. 143
the act was just completed. That may be true or not. Here again
the meaning of the verb itself and the context is to be carefully
observed (Aktionsart) The resultant idea will be due to the tense
.
plus the special verb idea. Each tense thus has a certain amount
of play in actual usage, though the tense idea itself remains stable.
The idea of completion may thus have immediate application or
remote, may accent the permanence of the completion over a long
period or merely the present situation, may suggest the unchange-
able result or accent only the actual outcome. It is not possible
to square the Greek perfect with English usage. For a good dis-
cussion of this point see Plummer on Luke, p. 424. The Greeks
used the aorist where we in English prefer the perfect and vice versa.
Each language has own point of view. These examples will
its
(vj KK\r]fi(vo<;) j
14:18 16:26 (eVr^ptxTat) 20:6
(l\(. ya. TTaprfTrifxivov) \ j
yeyoj/oTes) ;
Jas. 1 :24 (a.ire\y\v9ev); 2 Cor. 1:9 (7r7roi0oT? &p.v) ; Rev.
5:7 (el\r}<t>ev); Mk. 5:4 (SeSe'o-^ai). Cf. also Mark 5:19 and Luke
12:35.
(b) Past perfect. The augment (the sign of past time) is not
always used in the New Testament (see Homer) This tense is not
.
by one tense, present time by two tenses, past time by three though
the aorist and the imperfect held the field against the past perfect.
The aorist was used of past time in the indicative, as a matter of
stress on the incom-
course, unless there was a special desire to lay
pletion or the completion of the
action. When therefore the past
perfect if used, the completion in past time is distinctly empha-
1. But as a rule the Greeks did not care to work out the rela-
tion of time so carefully. The simple aorist told the story consec-
utively and one could see the rest for himself. The periphrastic
form appears occasionally. Examine these New Testament illustra-
tions: Matt. 7:25 (refop-cAiWo) 2G:43 (rjcrav fie(3api)ixevoi)
;
Mark ;
(t;o-uv i\i]\v6oTt<;)
8:29 (<Tvvqpir<xK.u)
;
15:24 (r/v aTroAwAok)
\
16:20 ;
(efit(3\t]To ) ;
Jo.6:17 (cyeyom, and note great variety of tenses in
verses L6-21); 11:44 (TKpieSe&To) 18:5 (/k); Acts 14:23 (ttc-
;
New T< -lament are confined to the indicative. One (KeK P dovTat)
in Lu. 19:40 not supported by Aleph B L, and is not in West-
is
cott and Hort's text. The other examples are periphrastic futures
with dfu save dBrjau) in Heb. 8:11, and this is from the LXX. The
two ancient Greek future perfects active (ecm^w and tiOv^w) do
not appear in the New Testament. As examples of the periphras-
ticconjugation observe the following: Matt. 16:19 (Io-tcu SeStpeW) ;
not always true. The verb is the main word in a sentence and is
in Luke (over fifty times) does look like the Hebrew, but the
one is km iyevero kul (Lu. 5:17), another is kuI iyevero and the verb
(1:23) another in mi iyevero xai iSov (24:4), and the last
is the
infinitive Soalsocyo/eroS^Lu. 6:1). In km iyevero km,
(Mk. 2:23).
the second Keuis almost like on. Ae (Jo. 11:4) and d\Xd (2 Cor.
7:11) are both in themselves co-ordinating conjunctions. For
kul . kcu see Jo. 6:36.
. . . For km ydP see Jo. 4:23. In Matt.
5 kul (Kdyw .... 7ra/3uSwo-a>) almost has the force of I'm.
1 Kat
can l>e used any number of times. See Matt. 18:25. The para-
tactic conjunctions are not always used. Cf. 2 Tim. 3:2 f. (Asyn-
For 17
km see Rom. 4 :9. For ....
elVc elre seeRom. 12 :6-S. Neg-
ative disjunctives are frequent. So ovk .... ovSi (Acts 8:21)
ofi8c .... oiBe (Rev. 9:4), oSre . . . . ofo-e (Rom. 8:38), <w8e ....
oSre (Gal. 1:12), jmJ... ^Se (Jo. 4:15), fujM
. .
/wjSe (Matt. . . . .
occurs. See Acts 8:31; Matt. 1:21; Rom. 2:1; 16:19. Cf. roiyapovv
(Heb. 12:1), and toCwv (Lu. 20:25). The Greek like the Latin
uses the relative like a conjunction and begins a sentence thus.
So &v (Lu. 12:3), ho (Rom. 1:24), etc.
avff Cf. <S<tt Matt. 19:6.
t'-t.(rt>/ seldom, fjviKa twice, i.<rt not at all, ?a>s often, fiixP 1 :U1( 1 -XP L
seldom, <~ttov common, <>r fairly so, odtv moderately often. But the
time would fail In tdl of all the Greek conjunctions in this space.
This list added to those already discussed in suhordinatc clauses,
will ime idea of New Testamenl usage.
.
Modi-, tenses, and voices mean the same thing in both suh-
8.
imperative is
naturally used seldom in subordinate clauses,
and in the New Testament very seldom. Note <2 uvn'o-T^re (1 Pet.
5:9), in 1 Pet. 5:12, and ho. ...
cis rjv <ttijt Kavxdo-Ou) (1 Cor. 1:31). .
PINAL CLAUSES.
1. Pure final clauses are adverbial, and are in fact in the accus-
ative ease (general reference). Compare the adverb Swpedv. Here
there is design, something aimed at, finis, em], aim.
In the New Testament the pure final particles are W, oVus,
2.
design and is used chiefly with the subjunctive, hut often with the
future indicative, and even a few times with the present indicative.
- As
k the force df mode, voice, and tense in each instance.
illustrations of these particles take Mk. IP'.* (ira p.r)Sevl Sirjyr/o-wvTai) ;
yiviliCTKOfxtv)
In the case of o7rws only the subjunctive is used in the
.
text of WH
except once (Pom. 3:4 with av), and usually without
dv as in Matt. 6:2 (oVcd? ooao-0a>o-iv) negative/*.^ (Matt. 6:18, on-ws
,
1 1 :'J
(ixr/TTore IcrTai) ; 1 Cor. 9:27 ( pr/Trwq ye'vwuai). wi;7ra)S is also USed
In 2 Tim. 2 :25 W
II have in the text Mi^ore 8wr) (opt.) after prim-
ary tense.
3. iva is not always strictly final. It is in the New Testament
very often non-final, not result, but not yet design. In this con-
FINAL CLAUSES. 153
struction the clause is substantive and gives the content and not
the purpose. The clause will then be substantive and in the nomi-
native, accusative, or some other case. In modern Greek vd and
finite mode has supplanted the infinitive. This tendency is per-
ceptible in the New Testament. The negative is /xrj. The possible
optative in Eph. 1:17 (Sw'77) is not pure design. Both here and in
2 Tim. 2:25 the optative in text of is after primary tense. ItWH
may seem strange that this non-final or sub-final use of Iva did not
come to be pure result since the Latin ut (cf. English that) was
used in both senses. But as a matter of fact it did not. "Ottws is
also sometimes employed in the non-final and substantive sense.
The same thing is also true of fx^Trore, //.t^ws, especially after
ju.77,
Jo. 15:12 f.
(iW dya-n-aTt in apposition with ivroXrj, tva 6rj in apposi-
tion with TavT^s). A peculiar use of Iva with the imperative in
1 Cor. 1 :31 {Iva Kavxd<r9<i>) is due to the direct quotation without
change of form. John's Gospel has Iva about one hundred and
fifty times while Luke has only sixteen instances of it in Acts.
4. There are other methods of expressing design in the New
CLAUSES OF RESULT.
5. The origin of wore is very simple, w? and rk. d>s was originally
a demonstrative (ws in Homer) and then a relative. It is not
so usi '1
except with <"><rr. No true example of rov and the infini-
OdXaa-a-a avroJ v7ra/n,Wriv; cf. also Lu. 8:25. This is much like
OVTWS OXTTt.
10.Burton (X. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 118) says that New Tes-
tament Greek uses the relative with the idea of result as in Latin
and the older Greek, but he cites no example to that effect. In
Bom. 8 :32 os ye with i^uaaro comes close to that idea.
CHAPTER XXIII.
WISHES.
1. It is not the verbs that express wish or will that are here
under discussion though they have an interest in themselves. Cf.
Matt. 1:19 {IfBovXridrj for deliberate choice) and Matt. 2:18 (j,6t\tv
for inclination). It is how the New Testament Greek expresses a
wish that we have to consider.
2. The old Greek usage of d6e and d yap has vanished. Instead
is found ocj)eXov (w<j>e\ov without augment) used as a particle like
utinam in Latin. Cf. already a<es with subjunctive above.
3. So then a wish about the past is put in the aorist indicative
with o<]>e\ov as in 1 Cor. 4 :8 (6<f>e\ov e'/iWiAeTXTOTe).
4. A wish about the present is expressed by the imperfect
indicative and o<j>e\ov. So Rev. 3:15 (o<eAov ^s). Cf. also 2 Cor.
11:1. In Rev. 3 15 Text. Rec actually has 6cf>e\ov ei^s-
:
5. A
wish about the future may also be expressed by S<f>e\ov and
the future indicative as we have it once in Gal. 5:12 (6'<eAov airo-
KoxpovTai). But the usual way to express a future wish in New
Testament Greek is still the optative, once the present as in Acts
8:20 (drj), usually the aorist as in 1 Thess. 5:23 (ayiao-cu). The
commonest wish of this kind is /at) yeWi-o (Gal. 6:14).
6. The wish about the future may verge on the border of a com-
mand or prohibition as in Mk. 11 :14 (ttr/KeVi <f>dyoi, the only opta-
tive in Mark). On the other hand the imperative in imprecations
is close to a wish as in Gal. 1 :9 (avdOefia corw).
7. In Acts 26:29 (jv^aifx-qv av) we have the apodosis of a fourth
class condition, the so-called potential optative, a very polite form
of expression. This is in harmony with classic diction.
8. The imperfect tense with the verb of wishing offers another
)> t \,M
(Gal. 1
20), rfixpnijv (Rom. 9:3). As examples of 0e\a> take
Matt. 20:14; Rom. 1
:13, and of (3ov\otxai 1 Tim. 2:8.
CHAPTER XXIV.
CAUSAL SENTENCES.
the usual causal sense (as Heb. 5:2, iirel irepLKurai) The classical .
4.In Matt. 25:40,45 i<f>' ocrov is causal, icp' oaov eTroirjaaTe. Note
also ko.6' oo-ov in Heb. 7 :20.
5. Ka0dn, though a comparative particle as in Acts 4:35 (*ca0dn
av eTxl/ ); i-s
)"
e^ m
Luke used also as a causal conjunction. So Lu.
19:9 (kuOoti eo-nv). In Heb. (as oOw axptiXtv, 3:1) 59ev occurs
some half dozen times.
1 SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
plied. So Matt. 1:19 (6Yk<uos &v). Usually in such cases the par-
ticle As is added to give the alleged reason, which may or may
not be the true one. So Lu. l(:l (u>s oWKop7n.'<ov) Acts 27:30 ;
9. 'Av0' S>v (Lu. 1:20) and 816 (Heb. 3:10) almost amount to
causal conjunctions. Cf. also ov x-P LV ) & W
"fr"*"? etc. In Heb.
2:18 iv is
practically causal.
CHAPTER XXV.
CONDITIONAL SENTENCES.
1. Some
general remarks. The Greek conditional sentence is
one crowning triumphs of syntax. No language has sur-
of the
sometimes lav occurs with the present indicative and often with the
future. In Homer idv (or et /ce) is used freely with indicative or
subjunctive as in the modern Greek. Sometimes the apodosis is
not in the indicative at all, but in the imperative or the hortatory
A SHORT GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
eXdXijaa. (juapTvprjcrov) ;
Acts 11:17 (ei ISgmccv, Tt's ^p-rjv); 1 Thess. 3:8
isnot a prophet and hence does not know. The indicative mode
determines the condition, and as unfulfilled oy suggestion. A
present matter looked at from the standpoint of the past (im-
is
repetition of av as in Lu. 17:6); Lu. 7:39 (ei rjv, eyt'vwoxev av); 12:39
(et $Set, iyprjyopTjaev av Kal ovk a<prJKtv; margin ill WH. has ovk av like
Matt. 24:43); Jo. 14:28 i x *pv &);
(ei ^aTi-are, 18:30 (et pi, fy
7rouuv, ovk av Trape8u)Kap.ev) ;
19:11 (ovk et^es, ' 1*9 V v SeSoyae'vov) ; Acts
18 :14 (ei fikv rjv, Kara \6yov av dvca)(6p.r]v; and contrast with the next
Verse, ci Se io-Tiv, OipecrOe); Heb. 11:15 (et ep.vrjp.6vf.vov, et^ov av, this
about past time); 1 Jo. 2:19 (et ^o-av, p.ep.evrjKUO-av av).
4. The condition undetermined with some expectation that it
eto'tv, et /jo/
ri M*v) Jo. 7:17 (iav OeXrj, yvwcrerai) ;
7:3< (ai/
compare arts KuAet (1 Cor. 10:27) with lav tk avV (1 Cor. 10:28);
Phil. 3:12 (et KuTuAa/Soj). In Mk. 10:30 eav pi} Xa/fy is unusual
after oJoa? o?. See Jo. 5 :19 for two uses of av.
al-o found in a mixed condition like Acts 8:31 (ww? yap av hwaipvqv
CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 165
iav fxrj ti? 6S?/yr/Vei fj.e) . This condition was even quite common in
fourth class with which compare Lu. 9 :46 (to ti's av tlrj) which is
not due to indirect discourse. In Acts 26:29 (eva[p.r)v av) the
usual apodosis appears. The protasis is found in 1 Pet. 3:14 (d koI
n-daxoiTe) ,
3:17 (d 0e'Aoi), and 1 Cor. 15:37 (dTvxoi).
interjjlay were not found. The human mind does not work in
ironclad forms. If we recognize the fact of life in language, what
are called mixed conditions will give no serious trouble. In Acts
8 :31 (see above) we have a protasis of the first class and an apo-
dosis of the fourth. So in Acts 24:19 we find a protasis of the
fourth and an apodosis
of the second class. In John 8:39 in the
marginal reading we have a protasis of the first class and an apo-
dosis of the second (d iare, iiroi&Te) A clear case of this is found.
may SUggCSl it. 19:23 (adyto eXOlov <riV toku> av avrb enpa^a).
So I-U.
(ci e'AeixrovTcu). Here el does not mean "not" though that is the
resultant idea. It is an ellipse also when el is used in direct ques-
tions as in Lu. 13:23 (ei 6\iyoi ol aw^o/xevot) Cf. also Luke 22:41). .
ikvTnjaa). Katircp occurs omy five times in the New Testament and
with the participle each time. But Justin Martyr has KaiVep o$a'-
Aere in the First ApolGgy. In Luke 12 :38 we find kS.v .... kov.
So Heh. 5:8 (KaiVep wv). The correct text of Rev. 17 :8 {irapiaraC)
removes the old Kalirep and the indicative.
11. The negative of the condition clause with the subjunctive is
always fir} (Lu. 13:3). With the indicative, however, either p.y or
ov is used, but not in the same sense, firj negatives rather the
condition and in the New Testament the conclusion is nearly
itself
RELATIVE CLAUSES.
(Mk. 9:38) and &C r/s AuTpev'oj/i.v (TTeb. 12:28). It is not the rela-
tive clause that requires in itself either the indicative or subjunc-
av'-r^s, Lu. 10:42) or less definite than os (6Wis ere pa-n-t^u, Matt.
5:39). So then the indicative, the mode of clear cut statement,
may be used either with the definite or the indefinite relative. So
likewise with the subjunctive the mode of doubtful assertion.
Instance Si' 77s XarpeviD/xcv (Heb. 12 :28) and oo-tis yap '6\ov t6v vo/xov
Trjprjarj (James 2:10). Cf. ottov. . . .
cpdym (Lu. 22:11). With
o 7rpoo-eveyKrj (Heb. 8:3) compare o -n-povfyipu (Heb. 9:7). This sub-
junctive is in a clause of design.
6. The grammars commonly speak of the conditional relative
daTjXOev Nwe (Lu. 17:27) and &xpt ol avio-r-q (Acts 7:18). The
present indicative can also be used of a present situation as in a^pis
ov to o-y/xepov KaXeiTai. (Heb. 3:13). If the matter is still in the
future the subjunctive aorist commonly occurs as in axP L ov 8rj
(Matt. 13:33), and Iws otov i^wvrjo-av (Jo. 9:18). Where used
about present time cws has the sense of "while" and not "until."
So Iws avros SlttoXvu tov 6\Xov ( Mk. 6 :45) after rjvdyKao-ev with which
172 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
idly drawn into the present <>r the speaker mi ntally leaps into the
future. Even <d? otov occurs once in this sense, tu>s otov el /met' (ivtov
ev rfj o&w (Malt. 5:25). Blass indeed contends for the sense of
"until" here also (Grammar of N. T. Greek, p. 21'.)) and even in
eY w tp\ofmL ( Lu. 19:13), a rather severe strain on the Greek idiom.
ecus ai'iSaxrir. Lu. 0:27), 1 Hit not always (ews irpoo-evijwpuL. Mk. 14:32).
In Rev. -^~uixpiTt\co-9i] is still future
though preceded by l^-qo-av
(e) Mc^pt is less Used hotll as a preposition (ixt^pL Trjs o-y/xcpov,
[17]
Idelv Odvarov
irplv r) av lor) tov XpiaTov nvpiov (Lll. 2:20). The
other has the optative with the same idea, hut in indirect discourse,
irplv rj . . . .
exot (Acts 25:16). Both of these idiomatic construc-
tions are in the writings of Luke. The rest are like irplv yzvlo-Oai
(Jo. 14:29).
(e) Akin to irplv is the use of irpb tov and the infinitive of which
there are nine examples in the New Testament. See irpb tov v/aSs
(g) *A<f>' ov calls also for a word of comment. In Lu. 13:7 acp' ov
"WH. (Lu. 7:1). But eVdV with the subjunctive is found three
times (Matt. 2:8; Lu. 11:22,34). So Zirhv tvPVrt (Matt. 2:8). The
only temporal use of liruZrj is the text of Lu. 7:1 (eVetS^ eVA?/pajo-v) .
(c) WH
do not read o-n-ore at all, but some MSS. have it in-
stead of ore in Lu. 6:3.
(d) But ore and commonest temporal conjunctions
orav are the
in the New Perhaps little trouble will be found with
Testament.
ore which is freely used with any tense of the indicative as ore
ireXeo-cv (Matt. 7:28). "Orav on the other hand is equally frequent
with the subjunctive (usually aorist). So orav i'S^tc (Matt. 24:33)
and occasionally the present as orav elo~<pepwo-iv (Lu. 12 :11). Occa-
sionally also the future indicative is found as orav Swo-ovo-tv (Rev.
4:9), the aorist indicative as orav 6ij/l cyeWo (Mk. 11:19), the im-
perfect indicative as orav atrbv iOewpow (Mk. 3:11), and even the
present indicative as orav o-t^kctc (Mk. 11:25). As with the relative
clauses we observe two kinds of temporal clauses, the definite and
the indefinite. "Av is more common, of course, with the indefinite
clauses, but sometimes as in Rev. 8 : 1 it is found with the definite
in. lit is indefinite, and a few times with <iV also as is av 7ropevofxai
(Hon.. 15:24 i.
(f) In Man. 9:15 we have e</>' Sow, in Mk. 2:1'.) oo-ov xpoVov, m
Rom. 7:1 xpo"v in the temporal sense, and several other
c<* oo-ov
times also. In Ileh. 1<) :-''7 oo-ov oo-ov is a Hebraism (LXX) though
not unlike the papyri examples.
Mtra to and the infinitive is found a few times with the sense
of "after. So p-tra. to Trupa&oOyvtu (Mk. 1
:11).
but the context frequently suggests such conceptions for the cir-
cumstantial participle. Whether this resultant idea is when, as,
which, after, etc., only the context can decide. As an example
take awodvtja-Kwv (Heh. 11 :21). The aorist participle may suggest
antecedent action as do-tkBwv (Mk. 1 :21) or simultaneous action as
ao-TTu.craixf.voL (Acts 25:13). But more of this when we come to the
participle.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
COMPARATIVE CLAUSES.
(Rom. 8 :26) save once with the subjunctive and idv as KaOb lav
*Xy (2 Cor. 8 :12). Ka#a we have only once and that with the in-
dicative, Kada <rvvTa$v (Matt. 27:10). KaOd-n-ep is more frequent,
but always with the indicative as KaOdirtp yiypa-rrTai (Rom. 3 :4).
3. KadoTi is a comparative conjunction twice only in the New
Testament (Acts 2:45; 4:35) and both times with the same con-
struction, dv and the indicative; kclOoti dv tk xpei'av 'X ev Cf. ottov -
bvopua; ill 8:6 ocra> ko.1 KpeiVrovos icrrtv hiaOrjK-qs p.ecrtT^s; ill 10:25 toctovto*
p.aXkov oo-u) /^AeVeTe. The fourth example is in 3:3 ko.0' oo-ov irktiova
Ttpirjv e^et
to5 olkov. The correlative too-ovtos occurs only thrice in
this connection. In Heb. 7:20 ff. (naff oo-ov .... Kara too-ovto) the
comparative is not in the relative clause.
5. The various forms o>s are far the most common in
of
compara-
tive sentences. Ka0ws very frequent indeed with the indicative.
is
So Kadlns y]ydirqo-o. vpas (Jo. 13 :34). It is Usual ill the idiom KaOths
adjectives (is i/xubi, Rom. 10:15), are like Latin quam. This last
i- i sclamation like our "how." with the participle gives the
'Os
Matt. 6:7). 'llo-n-tpiL is found once only (1 Cor. 15:8) and without
the Verb, ixrirtpti TiS e/crpw/xari.
CHAPTER XXIX.
INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES.
Grid:. ]). 1 7">. See also Moulton, Proh gomena, p. 93. So n's ap-
pears where the relative would be more usual as in Jas. 3:13 n's
tro<os Kal i.iTL(Trrjjxwv iv vp.lv, hu^aroy. Ill Mk. 1 ;24 We have dloa crc ti's
common. In Mk. 15:29 {ova 6 KaraXvoyv) oid occurs with the nom-
inative. Owuisused commonly with t lie dative as oval <roi (Matt.
11:21). But it twice occurs with the accusative (Rev. 8:13, tous
KaroiKoriTu? ; 12 :1 2,
Tr/v yfjv). It is also used absolutely as in Rev.
irarpos tfv 7XOWUT6 fjuov. Bui more of this mixture now directly.
1. Tlic mode may be changed. This
in indirect discourse
past tense was never obligatory and gradually died out with the
passing of the optative It was often not done in the older Greek.
It is only in the writings of Luke that it occurs at all in the New
irplv y . . . .
x 0L . . t
. .\d(3oL.
. So also in Lu. 22:23 we
. .
Tuvra) .
(a) There is first the infinitive. This was in the old Greek the
commonest usage and it is still found in substantial accord with
ancient practice. The t> rise, of course, is the same as the direct
discourse. It is usual to say that this infinitive has the accusative
INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 183
tvtu) ;
or it may be Unexpressed as rj\6av Xeyovcrai /ecu oirraa-Cav
dyyeXwv ewpaxevai (Lu. 24:23); or it maybe in the accusative of
general reference as 7re'7roi0as a-cavrbv oS^ycV elvai Tv(p\S)v (Rom. 2:19).
Cf. also Phil. 3:13; Lu. 24:23 (Xiyovatv alrov v) The same prin- .
ciple applies when the infinitive is used with a preposition and the
article, both of which have to be conserved in any true syntactical
ence is not to the subject of the principal verb, the noun or pronoun is
normally in the accusative of general reference as o? Xiyovaiv avrov
yv (Lu. 24:23). The same explanation applies to two accusatives
like 7re7reicr/u,eVos yap ecmv 'Iwdi'rjv irpo(f>rJT7]V etrai (Lll. 20:6) where one
is in apposition to the other. In a case like Bid ye to -n-apixeLv p.oi
kottov rrjv av Ta.vTr]v (Lu. 18:5) one accusative is the object of the
xw
infinitive, the other is in the accusative of general reference. Note
the article. Indeed three accusatives may appear with an infini-
tive as in Heb. 5:12 (WH toi) SiSao-Keiv v/xd<; two. ra
)
:
o-Tot^eta. Here
nva is accusative of general reference and the other accusatives the
objects of Bi&do-Kav. The negative of this accusative is p.rj as omves
that of the direct. >nly the context can tell whether on is declara-
(
tive or causa] as eViyroi'S on 'Pwpuids ecrnv kul otl uvtov 7)v SeStKws
(d) The construction with *xu iyevero calls for a word of com-
ment. We have kul lyivtTo .... eAa^e (Lu. 1:8) without any con-
junction. So 1:41; 2:1, etc. In Matt. 9:10 ko.1 follows kul iyevero
almost in the sense of on (like Hebrew var), ko.1
iyevero . . . . kuI
INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 185
ISov .... (TwaveKcivTo) . Cf. Lu. 24:4. In Mk. 2:15 the infinitive
is USed with yivcTcu, Kal yiverai KaraKelo-Qai avrov. Cf. Lu. 3:21 6:1, )
etc. In Luke Kal iyevtro with the infinitive is common. Cf. Jo.
is true of all the examples with dv and the optative like to Ws dv elrj
tia<w airS>v (Lu. 9:46). Cf. Lu. 6:11. Cf. also av flc'Aot (Acts
17:18) in a direct question with to ti av 0A.oi (Lu. 1:62) in the
indirect.
(Lu. 9:58). Cf. o~xu> t ypd\j/a> (Acts 25:26). So too 6-n-ov is found
\ SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
two infinitives).
(h) Conjunctions (iva and oVws) are also used witli a finite verb.
-
-apyyyuXtv gu'tois Xva p-qhlv alpiacriv (Mk. 6:8). ( )hserve relent ion
of the subjunctive after secondary tense. So also oVws p.tTairip.\ln)Tai
(Acts 25:3).
(c) Sometimes an indirect deliberative question with the sub-
idea is dominant over the verbal, but already in Homer the verbal
idea is on a par with the nominal conception.
2. The idea of the infinitive in Greek is that of a verbal sub-
(1) When the infinitive was used only in the sense of the dative
(or locative) case. This was in prehistoric times (of. Sanskrit).
(2) The infinitive begins to he used without regard to the im-
port of the dative (or locative) ending.
The same form occurs as
subject or object of verbs. Thus in Homer.
(3) The infinitive is used freely with the article and without it
in various cases and with the force of the cases. This from Pindar
on. A great many uses of the infinitive.
(1) In the kolvi] the infinitive begins to disappear before Zva and
otl. In the Septuagint and the New Testament there is the counter
increase in the use of tov and the infinitive as a special side develop-
ment.
("))
In the modern Greek the infinitive has vanished save that
after auxiliary verbs it exists in a mutilated form as deAu Awra. In
the Pontic dialect the infinitive continues to flourish.
1. The use of the article with the infinitive has given rise to a
deal of misapprehension. Even Winer (Wlner-Thayer, p. 323)
speaks of the article "making" the infinitive a substantive. The
infinitive always a substantive and like other substantives may
is
in To OiXtLV TrapaKurat fioi (Roill. 7:18). Ill Xiyoi vplv p.r) 6p.6o~ac
may be in the genitive as in lAa^e tov 6vp.La.o-ai (Lu. 1 :9), the abla-
tive as in p.r) (Matt. 19 :14) and kcltu-xov avTov
K(o\vT avTa iXdelv txe
tov fxi) Tropcvtadai (Lu. 4 :42), the instrumental as in p.r) zvpuv p-e
Titov (2 Cor. 2:18), the dative as in ot'Sare .... 8i8owu (Matt. 7:11)
and r)Xdop..v 7rpoo-Kvvr)(rai (Matt. 2:2). The infinitive, like the sub-
stantive, may be used in apposition. So tovtwv ray orarayKts,
airexto-dai (Acts 15:28), the ablative.
6. The common use of tov and the infinitive in the New Testa-
ment (as in the LXX)
calls for special remark. It may be in the
ablative as in ixpaTovvTo tov p.r) imyvwai (Lu. 24:16), but as a rule
it is the genitive (cf. Heb. infinitive construct which idiom partly
explains its frequency in the LXX). It exists already in the older
Greek to express purpose in the genitive and this is the commonest
Cf. Acts 10:25. Just as the dative and locative endings lost their
force with the infinitive, so tov sometimes comes to be regarded as
a fixed idiom.
7. The infinitive can be used with verbs as Swarai .... SovXevuv
(Matt. 6:24), with substantives as opfir) iftpto-ai (Acts 14:5), with
adjectives as kavos Xvo-ai (Mk. 1 :7), and with prepositions as iv t<3
elvoi (Lu. 9:18).
8. The infinitive is so frequent with prepositions that a special
paragraph is called for. The article is uniformly present with this
A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK M W rESTAMENT.
S
r.
8:11), ws rod ekOuv (Acts :40), 8ia to TrapeX eiv (Lu. 18 5 .
/xcTa to 8a7rv?}o"(n (Lu. 22:20), 7T/30S to Btiv (Lu. 18 :1), 7rpo tov p. Tradelv
it
may be in the accusative as in Lu. 24:30 (avroV). This is in-
deed, "virtual predication'* (Monro), but it is not technical (syn-
tactical) predication, and should not be so explained. In the
modem English idiom we reproduce such instances by finite
and simpler to treat the Greek idiom accord-
liut it is truer
els ia-Koxs Murois {iXrp-eov (Lu. 5:38). The verbal in -rios is not found
in Homer.
I. The difference between the participle and the infinitive is to
be sharply noticed. The difference between infinitive and parti-
ciple lies wholly in the fact that one is a substantive and the other
an adjective. We found that the infinitive is an indeclinable verbal
substantive, a fixed case form (dative), though used freely in any
case, however, and in the singular only, either with or without the
article. The participle is declined in both numbers and all the
genders and all the cases and
is used Ereely with or without the
Lu. 23:12 we find Trpovirypxov ovres. apxopxiL is not used with the
with some noun or pronoun. 'The contexl may be one thai sug-
- time as ducovwv 6 'Avavias tow occasion as :
12:4 and Sioxjariv in Acts 19: 36. Sometimes the genitive absolute
is found where there is a noun or pronoun in the sentence for it to
agree with. So tcutu Se avrov IvOvp.rjOivro'i iSov ayyeAos Kvpiov kclt ovap
icpdvqavru (Matt. 1 :20). See also Matt. 21:23. Cf. the nomina-
tive absolute in Rev. 2 :26, 6 vikwv km 6 rrjpuv Swo-w uvtw. The par-
ticiplesometimes carries on the sentence loosely without a verb as
(Kph. 5:21).
vTroTuavopuLvoi In Mk. 7:15) KaOaP t^v is due to ana-
coluthon. Cf. Rev. Sometimes the genitive absolute is used
without a noun or pronoun as ikQovros koI Kpoxxravros (Lu. 12:36).
10. The Septuagint uses the participle as one translation of the
Hebrew infinitive absolute as an intensive expression. This reap-
N v Testament as eikoywv ci>Aoy?/o-w
o-e
(Heb. 6:14).
Cf. davdrtf? tiXcvtoltu) (Matt. 1") :4), another method used to translate
THE PARTICIPLE. 197
5:28).
11. As to adjuncts with the circumstantial participle, they do
not alter the true force of the participle at all, but merely sharpen
and make clear the idea. So elo-eX8ovo-a tvOvs (Mk. 6 :25) apu ;
utcnrep (pepop.tvrjs (Acts 2:2). Cf. (rv 7TOTC lTn<TTpi\pa<; (Lu. 22:32).
12. The participle in indirect discourse was sufficiently treated
in the chapter on that subject. One example may suffice here,
ova 7]Kov(rap.ev yevop.eva In Eph. 5:5 (tare yivwcrKovTc^
(Lu. 4:23).
the participle has an intensive force and is hardly in indirect dis-
course. Note both verbs for knowing here used (618a, ytvwo-KO)) .
ciple likewise may be used with the future tense as ia-tadt. Luo-ovp.tvoi
pr< s<
;. nol
perfect in idea though so in form. The perfect par-
ticiple accents the idea of completion as KtKOTraiKujs (Jo. 4:6), ctA^ws
(Matt. 25:24, cf. Xafiiov in verse 20). The future participle, it
all, iv r/p-ipa (.TTiXa^ofxivov p.ov t/s ^ei/aos avruii/. Cf. Heb. 11:32,
/
CHAPTER XXXIII,
NEGATIVE PARTICLES.
1. Greek has two negatives that are used either simply (ov, ivfj)
01' in various
compounds (ovSe, ovre, ovSeis, ovOets, ovKeri, ovirore, etc.,
and so for compounds of fxrj, /i^Se, etc.)- Latin has three negatives
(ram, ne, haud). The Sanskrit has na and ma. Greek did not
use na (iw) and Latin did not use ii-q (ma) Haud and ov are
.
probably the same word (cf. Zend ava). In the Boeotian dialect
ov never was employed. In Homer indeed firj was freely used with
the indicative and ov sometimes with the subjunctive. The history
of oiand firj has been the constant increase of the use of ^rj. In
themodern Greek So/ (for ovZlv) is only used with the indicative.
Perhaps the earliest use of /jhJ was to express prohibition. For the
form otdev see 1 Cor. 13:2; Acts 19:27.
In general the New Testament uses the negative ov and
2. in /u.?/
tive, just as it did finally with the participle. Let p-y ow/xev (Mk.
distinction. So (pufiovpxLi /xy ttcos i\0iov ov% olovs 6i\w evpw ifxas (2 Cor.
12 :20). So also the marginal reading of WH
in Matt. 25:9 (y-y-n-ort
ovk dfjKeay), hut the text has /xy-n-OTe ov fxy.
5. With the optative both ov and \xy appear in the older Greek,
ov in the conclusion of the fourth class condition, elsewhere fxy.
As matter of fact the optative in the New Testament has no neg-
a
ative save in the case of wishes where it is always p.y. So p.y yivono
(Rom. 3:4).
6. The negative of the infinitive in the New Testament is p.y,
01 hindering, /*,o'Ats KaTeiravo-gv tovs o\\ov<; tov urj Qyn y ^i'-rn?T (Artg
14 :1S). But firj (redundant firj) is not necessary in this use of the
infinitive as iveKoirrofirfv to. ttoXXo. tov e\6dv (Rom. 15:22). "When
the principal verb of hindering is negative, the simple infinitive is
used as in fir) KwXvert aira. i\6dv (Matt. 19 :14) or fjLy may be employed
as firj
Tt to vSwp &vva.Tcu K(x)\vcra.i T6S tov fir) (3a7rTio-0r}vai; (Acts 10:47).
Note tov sometimes. In 1 Cor. 14 :39 observe to AaAeiv fir) Kwkvere.
In Acts 4:20 both negatives retain their value, oi Bwd/xcda yap . . .
firj AaAeiv.
77877 KeKpiTat. on firj TreirLo-TevKev. With this compare 1 Jo. 5:10 where
oti ov irtTrio'Tf.vKf.v is read, the usual idiom. Heb. 9:17 Cf. also
r fir)
Tore to^uet,which may, however, be a question.
(c) Conditional sentences usually had ei firj and d ov rarely in
202 HORT GR \MM \K OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
(_
r
) In questions p-rj expects the answer "no" as Mk. 14:11)
(p.ij
ti eyw;), while ov requires the answer "yes" as Lu. 17:17 (ovx
ol SeW (.KaOapLo-Oqo-av ; ) In 1 Cor. 9:8 we have hoth in different
.
(Matt. 16:11).
vfitv Burton (Moods and Tenses, p. 181) properly
notes the redundant ov after the verb "deny," 6 apvovp.cvos on
'lyo-ovs ovk io-nv (1 French ne.
Jo. 2:22). Cf.
This use (just like the old English idiom that survives here and
there) is not remarkably frequent, yet a number of examples occur
as ovk </>uycv ovBev (Lu. 4:2), (Rom. 13:8).
/at/Scvi p.r]8ev ot^ei'Aere
Even three or more negatives may be found as ov ovk i)v oi8d<; ovttw
Ket/Aevos (Lu. 23:53), oaWti ov /at) (Mk. 14:25). But some- tt(.<j>
times rts follows ov as ovx apTrdvei tis (Jo. 10:28). Cf. 1 Thess.
1:8.
12:15) )
ovk e^o/Aev ovo~ lav /at) ipyaauiv (1 Cor. 9 :6) ) /at)
ovk rjKovo-av
(Rom. 10 :18) ;
6 /at)
ttlo-tcvwv r)8y KViptTat otl prj TTi.Trio-Ti.VKtv (Jo. 3:18).
Cf. ovScv yap icrriv kckciAu/a/acVoj/ o ovk airoKa\v<$>d-qo-Ta.i (Matt. 10:26),
and ov /at) a<f>tOrj o8e .... os ov KaTaXvOrjcreTai. (Matt. 24:2). See
1 Cor. 6:9 (ov .... ov). Cf. also /xrj
ttotc ov /at) (or /at/
ttotc ov, mg. )
in Matt. 25:9. In Matt. 13:29 ov, /at/
ttotc .... iKpi^wo-qre each
negative has its full force. Cf. /at;, p.rj
ttotc (Mk. 14:2). Cf. Mk.
12:24 for ov p.rj in question and /at/ with participle.
(1) The use of ov p.rj calls for a special note. The usual con-
struction with the subjunctive as in ov /at) d<ptOr} above (Matt.
is
24 :2). The future indicative is read in ov /at) Io-tcu o-oi tovto (Matt.
16:22) and is doubtless the correct text in ov /at) ti/at/o-ci (Matt.
15 :6) and a few other places (Matt. 26:35; Mk. 14:31). No satis-
factory explanation of the origin of this use of ov ya\ has been found.
They do not neutralize each other, but each retains its force
as in /at)
ov in questions (Rom. 10:18). Cf. ov /at; in questions
(Lu. 18:7, ov /at) 7roiT/o-T/;). Does this use throw any light on the
problem ?
(m) The redundant negative as in 1 Jo. 2 :22 (see above) and
Lu. 24:16 (iKparovvro tov /at) eriyvtovai) after a verb of hindering (a
20 I \ SHOB r GR VMM \K OF THE GREEK NEW TES I' \MI NT.
o~t
fin) iyKaraXxiroi (IIel>. 13 :)).
(n) The form ovxi adds fresh point to the negative ov, especially
when contrasted with uAAa as in Luke 1 :60. The ]>osition of the
negative may also give new emphasis as to; 7roAAoi SidaWaAoi yivto-Ot
(Jas. o:l). In Rom. 3:9 ov iravrwi means "by no means," l>ut
in 1 Cor. 15:51 (Travres oi KOLfxr}dy](r6fjie6a)
ov goes with the verb. In
Heb. 11 :3goes with the participle, not the infinitive.
firj
Litotes
is not infrequent in the New Testament as ov fxcra 7roAAds (Acts
1
:5)=6Xiyas. Cf. Lu. 15:1:;.
*
(o) For oi<x otl dAAdi sec Jo. 7:22.
. . . For ou^ va aAAa
see Jo. 6 :38. For aAA' ovk in the apodosis of a condition see Mk.
14:20. For ov pavov .... dXXa Kat see Rom. 5:3. See Jo. 4:11
ovtc ....
itat. For ovSe oure See Rev. 5:3, and ovSei's ....
. . . .
Mai see Matt. 10:9. For furc tofre see Acts 27:20. For . . . .
ol-rt .... ovtc see Matt. 12 :32. For /x^Se .... <lAAa see 1 Pet. 5:2.
A.s is usual in ancient Greek, ko.1 ov (Col. 2:9,19), not oi8e, fol-
lows affirmative clauses.
CHAPTER XXXIV.
INTENSIVE PAETTCL.ES.
and so would have the idea of thoroughly. Bu1 others get it from
:. Iii the N< w Testamenl we find it with os in the Text. Kec.
with ilic particles SioVep (1 Cor. 8:13), Zdi'irtp (Heb. 3:14), clirep
(Rom. 8:9), cTraSj/rrep (Lu. 1:1). ip-ep (Jo. 12:43, text of WH,
mg. iTTt/H. KaOd-n-tp (Rom. 3:4), Kuiirtp (Ilch. 12:17), wa-irep (Matt.
Tii. idea is uniformly the same.
6. A>y (surely, therefore, possibly shortened form of 77817) is used
sparingly in the New Testamenl but in harmony with the ancient
idiom. The simple form appears five (possibly six, Acts 6 :"> mg.)
times and with the same idea each time. See 1 Cor. 6:20, 8oa<raTe
877
Tor tw awpxiTL vp.wi>.
$iw iv Onee we have 817 ttov (Heb. 2:1<>).
The passage with 817' ttotc (Jo. 5:4), has dropped out of the critical
text.
13:13).
8. Mcv is from epic 7x771. older epic and Doric pAv. *H p,yjv
hecame rj p.ev,
and then /xcv. It means surely, of a truth. McV is
far the most common of the intensive particles in the New Testa-
ment, but it is nothing like so frequent as in the older Greek. All
or dXXd. So Acts 5:41 (oi pxv ovv i-rropevovro) Mevow is found once .
(Lu. 11:28), ptvovvyt three times (Rom. 9 :20; 10:18; Phil. 3:8),
1:17).
10. vrj as a strong affirmation with the accusative is found only
Once, ku.0' rj/jitpav dTroOvycrKw vrj T7)V Vjxtripav Kav)Q](nv (1 Cor. 15:31),
Md does not occur at aX
CHAPTER XXXV.
FIGURES OF SPEECH.
1:17. The Greek genius was freedom and life. In this was its
glory, and, when tempered by the Hebrew spirituality, the Greek
became the best vehicle of the world for the expression of God's
210 A BHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
'
9
102, 118 7:25 ...41, im
105, 1 lit 7:26 77
203 7:28 17:!
169 8:12 27
5:42 132 8:13 18
5:43 129 8:18 08
5:45 70 8:19 68
5:46 79 8:20 70
6:1 113, 205 8:24 78
6:2 124, 140, 152. 170. -Jim! 8:27 156
1
13, 176 8:28 .
121
6:25 .
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 217
LUK
1:1 159
1:3 12
1:5 82
1:6 74, 116
1:8 Ill, 184
1:9 189
1:13 . 159
1:15 116
1:20 81, 143, 160
1:21 141
1:22 78, 141, 145
1:23 148, 151, 173
1:26 151
1:30 13S
1:36 26, 27
1:41 102, 184
1:59 141
1:60 63, 199, 204
1:62 177, 185
1:66 179
1:73 95
1:74 112
1:76 189
2:1 184
2:4 81, 160
2:5 135
2:7 112
2:8 95
3:13 Ill
218 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES.
71, 1 12 8:38 50
5:12 105 8:39 121
5:17 1
16, L48 8:46 184
5:19 (17. Km, 117 9:7 85
I 39 9:13 164
5:21 80 9: is 189, 190, 192
5:23 145 9:27 172
5:32 145 9:46 131, 165, 185
5:3S 97, 194 9:50 170
6:1 148, 185 9:52 176, 191
173 9:54 64, 131
6:8 78 9:56 85
6:9 107 10:1 lis
6:11 II. 1S5 10:7 70
6:12 70 10:15 117
(i:17 70 10:17 148
6:20 149 10:18 195
6:22 116 10:25 68
6:26 95 10:26 179
6:34 152 10:28 132
6:35 12 10:30 106
6:37 132 10:31f 119
6:42 15, 121, 154, 198 10:34 103
7:1 173 10:35 31, 82, 183
7:4 170 10:38 96
7:9 82 10:40 122, 182
7:12 113, 123 10:42 169
7:19 83 11:6 170
7:27 170 11:7 199
7:38 108, 110 11:16 121
7:39 163, 178 11:21 80
7:44 123 11:22 173
7:17 81, 82, 151 11:23 102
s : l 121 11:28 206
8:6 47 11:33 124
8:15 59 11:31 173
- - 170 11:35 202
8:20 47 11:38 122
INDEX TO NEW" TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 219
9
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 221
1:15 16 4:36 74
1 16
: 119 4 :52 ,
.93, 94
1:19 177 5:4 .....83, 206
1:25 167, 202 5:9 83
1:27 170 5:11 69, 81
1:29 180 5:19 164
1:41 66 5:20 12
1:42 73, 77 5:23 100
1:48 124 5:25 73
1:49 73 5:30 79
1:50 181 5:35 81
2:6 118 5:36 ,..13, 145
2:9 102 5:39 44, 129
2:11 76, 80 5:45 40, 145
2:18 149 5:46 81
2:19 132 5:47. , 167
2:20 41,109,138 5:58 90
2:23 120 6:2 54
2:24 30,80,160,185 6:6 185
2:25 160, 177, 181 6:10 97
3:10 75 6:16-21 146
3:15 141 6:17 146
3:16 85, 155 6:19 94
3:18 159, 201, 203 6:32 148
3:19 148 6:36 148
3:22 148 6:38 204
3:23 116 6:39 . 118
3:25 122 6:45 104
4:2 205 6:47 64, 66
4:3 129 6:51 ....148
4:5 102, 117 6:67 178
4:6 189 6:69 71
4:7 33 7:6 74
4:10 194, 195 7:8 80
4:11 63, 148, 149, 194, 204 7:13 98
4:15 149 7:17 37, 84, 142, 164, 179
4:19 182 7:21 16
4:20 120 7:22 204
4:23 63, 148 7:37 50, 164
4:27 72, 206 7:47 177
4:29 178, 199 8:15 121
4:34 80 8:16 166
222 IMTX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAG] 3.
9 165 11:56 53
2 3S 12:9 73
-
! 55 12:12 73
1
164 12:16 66
53 66 12:32 164
8:57 -10 12:42 1 is
JAMES.
1:1 H, l'.'l 2:10 169
1:2 77, ld7 2:25 106, 109
105 3:1 204
109 3:7 110
1:11 139 3:10 56
1:13 1"! 3:13 178
1:18 83 4:13 45, SI
1:19 51, 131 4:14 74
1:22 200 4:15 1!>0
T. PETER.
1:8 198, 201 4:0 L05
1:11 17s 4:12 110
1:16 143 4:13 109
l:18f 110, 200 4:15 59
2:6 72 5:1 73
3:1 42 5:2 204
3:3 200 5:S 186, 191
3:14 165 5:9 102, 150
3:17 165 5:12 132, 150
IT. PETER.
1:1 75 2:12 15, 195
1:4 27, till, 74 2:19 110
1:9 L70, 202 2:20 75
1:11 75 3:9 105
1:17 82 3:14 113
L:20 105 3:15 74
2:6 loi 2:18 75
T. JOHN.
1:1 40 2:27 .
53
1:4 78 3:4 75
1:21 85 3:5 82
2:2 1 22 4:3 1
70, 202
2:12 78 4:6 202
2:19 163 4:16 75
2:22 203, 204 4:18 71
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 227
5:4 18 5:15 16
5:10 V59, 202 5:16 95
5:11 194 5:20 152
ITT. JOHN.
A o-
,1
JUDE.
.22 20 .":... .27
KOMANS.
1:6 104 4:12 106, 201
1:7 63 4:18 122
1:8. 77 4:25 122
1:10 166 5:1 131
1 :11 154 5:3 204
1:13 158 5:7 110
1:17 104, 175 5:8 79
1:20 190 5:14 35
1:22 183 5:15 176
1:24 149 6:2 112, 160
1:28 176 6:4 74, 101
1:29 110 6:6 101
2:1 85, 91, 92, 121, 149, 172 6:10 95, 112
2:4 24 6:11 79
2; 12 . 6:15 83
6:16 148, 206
6:17 81, 208
7:1 174
7:3 153, 189
7:6 201
7:10 63
7:15 81
7:18 188, 189
7:24 91
7 25
: . 79
8:1 74
8:2 74
8:3 74, 98, 172
8:8 112
8:9 202, 206
8:12 149
'
i\i>r\ i"
wir\ r pass \'i-.
-
-
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 229
II. COEINTHIANS.
1:4 81 1:17 207
1:9 143 1:22 11
1:13 148 2:6 113
1:14 67, 113 2:13 112
8:10
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 231
PHILTPPIANS.
1:11 97 2:20 170
1:13 24 2:23 12
1:15 85 2:27 117
1:18 109, 143 3:5 22
1:27 36 3:6 191
2:6 24, 189 3:8 205, 206
2:8 107 3:9 80
2:9 75 3:12 164, 179
2:12 140 3:13 95, 102, 183
2:15 82, 117 3:14 59
2:18 Ill 4:8 , 82
COLOSSTANS.
1:4 196 2:14 107
1:15 75 2:23 59
1 :16 77, 102 3:1 . Ill
2:9 75
I. THESSALONTAXS.
1:5 82 4:8
1:8 203
7 176
3:1 106
3:5 152
3:8 162
4:2 35
I\I0\ m \i \\ rESTAMEN I' P ^SS M3ES.
II. THESSALONIANS.
1 :3ff 209 3:6 35
1:1 30 :::11 194,209
2:15 96, L35
HEBREWS.
l:lff 209 7: "5 .
2:13 39, 1 16
2:11 103
H : 1 .", 1SS
2:16 206
2:17 97
2:1s [60
3:1 L59
3:10 1(50
3:13 171
3:14 206
4:1 153
4:3 156
4:12 27
4 :16 22
5:2 159
5:4 176
5:8 17fi, 197. 209
5:99 26
5:ln 96
T:12 !!7, 1 15, isli
5:14 123
6:10 102
6 :14 1 9C)
7:11 191
7:24 66, 75
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 233
I. TIMOTHY.
1:6 105 4:1 105
1:7 84, 178 4:4 166
1:13 74 5:8 103
1:15 70 5:17 59, 103
2:6 124 5:19 166
2:8 26, 158 5:22 102
3:1 102 5:25 24
3:15 143 6:4 59
3:16 82 6:5 96, 105
II. TIMOTHY.
Irl2 151, 179 3:2f 148
1:16 77 3:16 77
2:11 123 4:8 66
2:14 200 4:13 172
2:25 152, 153 4:15f 16
TITUS.
1:11 170, 202 2:11 113
1:12 209 2:13 75
2:3 7 3:8 113
2:7 135 3:11 59
PHILEMON.
13 124 20 102
16 98
EEVELATIOX.
1:4 64, 69, 82, 90, 208 2:7 36
1:8 69 2:12 74
1:9 75 2:14 94
1:13 26 2:16 112, 113
1:18 22, 141 2:17 105
2:1 81 2:20 36
2:3 39 2:25 171
2:4 35 3:3 93
2:5 54 3:4 39, 96
2:6 196 3:7 22
234 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES.
34 11:10 56
3:12 -". 91. -OS 11:13 101
PAGE PAGE
92 60
&Ppd dvTLtraprj\8tv
27, 66 dpwa 26
aKpiySeoTUTos
oAAt/Awv
* 1
dppaftwv 11
59 dpxqv 67
a.WoTpUTTL(TKOirO<i
19, 108, 110 dYeKvos 26
dfia
19 avTOKardKpiTO<i 59
d/A<i's
18 d</>eAw 38
'AvSpe'ou
236 IMM \ TO SOME IMPORTANT GREEK WORDS.
4^ 206
*S Si)
' 11"
<i<p<u)iTcu Bifpioaia
35, 39 Si8w 34
d<^s
d<tOu>
' - 8iKuios > "
4, 37
u<iovcrii/ Sikuioo-uvt/
1 ' l 8lX(UOO> 58
<i\pi
,mA 24 BtKaiwpja
58
26 biKaiws 58
/Salc'cos
60 OOCUUlKTlS 58
j&umfr
1* 58
(iairTKTai 8ikuio)Tt;s
38 58
f3u.7TTi(r(D 81KC10T17S
23 "
/SacrtAois 22, S1K77
24 810 149
(3y]0<payy
/Si'i^i
1!' Sum 159
IS dnrkovs 59
fSoppa.
1(1 801 -
/fovAci
149, 159 80s 45
ydp
205
ye ovvapas
38 34
ye'yovu ovvopxiL
yeypatpa
22, 23 and 0
ycVos 80)17 80117
23 15- 1
ytpwv Swpcdv
7" la 179f
71
iiv 13, 128, 161, 169
yivopai
" 41
yiroitTKO) ifStfSXrfTo
and 50 3d, 47
yvot yvu> tytvrjOrjv
"0 40
*"
yoyyv tyvwKa
6"
34
orl
ypap.puu.Tt.vs 6yvo>v
21 29f., 45, 78
OuipLOJV |y<5
' " ihoXiovaav ""
htLKwpx
-" "
Otiypa i&<l)Kap.tv
OeTii? 57 e6t\o0pr)<TKia
;,,)
177
31, 81 l 161, I62ff,
Sam(6)
- ' 39
6t<rp.os. -pa 18170-01
179 Sw 39, 42
oo'rt
INDEX TO SOME IMPORTANT GREEK WORDS. 237
- '
23
- 148
eiKora 5
40 *.l
eZAij^a rjhvvrjOrjv
37
^/cw 38, 52
dpi
<38 35
e!S ^A0av
' -
l7Ta TjXiO'i
^' J
C.LTTOV r/p.apT7]cra
CITE 149 30
^/ae'repos
- 30 2
et^av r}p,i(Tovs
ou "
ei^ocrav rjpnov avroiv
18 173
EKurovTap^r;? r/viKa
41
Ka.TovTapxs rjveio^Orjcrav
KtVOS 30 41
rjpydvaTo
3^> 60
ixcKpa^a Hpwoiavos
72 36
KK\iq(Tia rjpwrovv
38 37
K^eu} rjcf>i
27 OdXaaaa '
eAa^ioros
27 0e'Aa> 12
eAa^io-ToTepos
iXTriovcnv 38 Ok 45
cAtti's 12 "1
OvyaTrjp
11 1'Se 14, 44, 179
ififtdWu)
ivKpcvia
11 I8(a HO
iS cScto 35 l8t05 31
^ '
180V 1'9
C^WTCpOS
t 41 20, 24
TTpO(j>rjT(.V(T(.V 'ItpocrdAu/Aa
26 -0
c.p-qp.0% 'lepovcraXyjfJL
11 20
ipiOta '177am'
>
C7rav
/ 179
1
- '
t Aews 26
1" Lcraau' 0J
iireiBrj
1^ UTTO.VU) *
tTTU&rjTTlp
cs 45 -
li^ei jari/KUv
coravai 38 ""
l^Ois
' '
96
^ K a6d 175
euyevr/s
r>4 1 '
175 26
fl&TOlOS
l- ! '- 17: ' - <
r. p,(yi(TTo<;
' " ' - '
s fXtlQOTCpOS
fxa'Zwv 26, 27
Ka&wcnrtp
Kill
1 17 20(5
. . . .
p.iv
Mill I
58 fiiKXta 37, 139
L67 /* e'xpi
172
Kaiirep
"s .. 177, L99ff.
KiiAtcrw
(Accra) .
p$ 152, 167, 170, L98,
Kepas
.)>
-)
>
veos 58
K(.phrj&rj(T MVTfa
^~ vi)
207
K(.<$Hi\r)tyiv
19 VIKT] 18
- 1 VIKOS 18
xypv
kAcTs 21 vowevojs 65
' vovs 20
KOivq
koct/xos
' - VVKTOLV 20
110 6, to 68ff.
Kpvcf>ij rj,
Kw 20 oSos 20
It 68vvU(T(U 46
Xc/3e
11 oioa/iev 39
\oyia
"*''
; 41
Xoyopxiy/M OLKohopvt'jOrj
* 79
18 CHKOS '-
Avrrrpav
18 oto5 30, 179
AwTTpot?
|S 12
Xvrpov oAryos
27 65
pAXirrra o/xoAoyov/xeVcos
/j.aAAoi'
27 o7roios 31, !"!
18 O7T0J5 152
~S\apBa<i
18 22
Mapux optwv .
Mapiafi
18 fo 31, 168f,
INDEX TO SOME IMPORTANT GREEK WORDS. 239
oo-ios 26, 58 . 27
irepicrcroTepoi'
ocrov 1 1 206
Trep
ocrTia 20 179
TrrjkiKo<i
otclv 1 73 37
TTOCp.UL
ore. i-io 27
TrXi'/pr/s
ovv 149 18
TroXiTap^as
ovpavos 72 7TOCT09 .31, 179
ovtc . . 149 7TOT6 .179
OVTOS 30 ,179
TTOTtpOV
4 46 60
0{j/rj Trpeafivrepos
42 .172
oxp-qaBf. irpiv
130, 157 7
6<j>eXov TZpO(JTLVy]p.L TTp.\pUl
d<t>6a\/jLo8ov\ia 59 .41
Trpoopwp.Tjv
iravoLKei 110 .
59
Trpocr<j>TroXi)p.TrTT]<;
Trav-irXrjdei
HO irpoTcpo'i
.27
TrdvTa. 19 7rpwTos ,
66
Trarras 17 <rd(3{$a.Tov
17
35 creavTov 30
TrapeXa/zocrai'
41 58
irapiOK-qaev crrjp.eLOv
i'i- (TKavoaXov 57
irarrfp
60 CTKeirTopxiL
.59
Treipa.crp.os
ttciv 33, 54 59
(TKOirrj
26 0*K07Tta 59
TTV7]<;
7T7rTO)KaV 54 CTKOTTOS 59
7r7rT(UKes 54 (TKOHp
59
45 22
7Tt(f>lp.W<TO SoAo/Awvros
240 lM'l \ I" ->Ml [MPORTANT GREEK WORDS.
' s 149
1
.')/S Totyii/.'i.
^
' ' 26 TOp.MTtpO<i
. '27
ti .,-
-U rorros . . . 30
''" ::i
(TVVKOlVtOVOS Tocrorros'
(rweiovins 18
TV^uV . . . . .
08
crwtowiv 37 vowp . . . . .
23
11 ..30
irri-^-acr^o) VfXtTpOS
'I ' UVTWV ..30
crve's VfXWV
-J 117
cruifUL VTrptK7TepL<T<TOV
ra Xtt 108, 110 46
cpdyctTiu
Ta X iov(cioi') - '
<f>dyop.ai
37
re L47
X<i/aui
19
' '
^apfj 22, 65
Tl6ip.(\i<J}TO
58 )(ti\(iov
22
Tepus .
28 20, 22
Tcrcrcu)S X&puv
13, 28 60
Toratpa Xpicrrtavos
28 14
TcrcrpttKorTu
. . .
Xpiaros
28 vpvcrav
26
T(ro-paKovTar?ys
TCTyprjKuv
39 5 179f.
TCt ..206
ADDITIONS TO THE LIST OF VERBS
Page 48
Add 'AyaAAidco (-ao/xat), iJyaAAtao-a (-aadp.r)v) , r/yaXidd-qv (Text.
Rec. -dadrjv in Jas. 5:35).
To alpeo} add -rjpovfxrjv, eiXd/xrjv, -ypr)fMLL, alptdijcropjiL.
Add AlcrOdvopai, y(r06p.r]v-
I O d\X.d<T(T(o add ijWacraov.
Add 'Ap.cpL iwvp.i, 7]p.cf)UcrpM.i. Cf. also dp.<f>idu) (Lk. 12:28).
Tisch. and Treg. give dju.</>w
To dva- /Satvw add 7rt-, V7TC/3-
Add 'Ava-OdXXw, only av-idaXov (Phil. 4":
10).
Pa#<? 49
To dv- Oiya> add T/voiyoi/, r/voiyp.vo<;.
To d7T-avTda) add ii7r- and -rjvTr]Ka.
Add 'Attokvoj (Nestle Jas. 1:15) and d-n-oKveu) (W H Jas. 1:15),
Pa#<? 50
To Tpd(p<ji add -e.ypaxpdp.yv.
To AeiKW/xi add-eSei^d/t^v, -8eSeiy/u.eVo5.
To Ae'xo/xai add Se'|o/Aai.
To At'8w/Ai add Swo-opxu.
To AtwKw add cSiWov.
To Aokc'o) add ^vSo'kow.
To AvVa/xat add "Some mss. have ^Swdo-^v."
T< Ava> add cv-
To 'Eyetpft) add -
yyeip6p.r)v.
241
ADD! riONS I" NIK LIST OF VERBS
51
To Et8o> add ;J5av.
To Etyu'add ! and iVfli, fa-fti.
I" E*c-Tpe7ra) add dm-, auro-, irf.pi-, rrpo-, Tpc\pdpevo<; and read
-Tpa.7n'](TopjuL. Better list it as 'Ava-Tpeiru).
To Ek-^coj add kutu-, -t'^eov, -e^vri'o/Ar;^.
Under 'EAaww note "<rw- is only in Text. Rec. (Acts. 7:2G)".
Under 'EXe'yx w note "c- is only in Text. Rec "
Add*EAxa>(Jas. 2:G),(.IKkov (Acts 21:30), iXxwrw (Jo. 12:33),
<u\kvou (Jo. 21:0).
To 'EXtt^w add "Lxx" after i\mS>.
TO 'Ev-rtAAo/Aui add dm-, e- am-, -e'rciAa, -rcraAxa- List as 'Aw-
tc'AAo).
is only a variant.
Page 52
T< EvpiVKw add (-o/iTp), evpdp.evo<>.
To add -v$opuu.
Ev^o/xat
"E^w add d\6pLr]v, -c&O/uu, to"x6p.rjV- Dele irpoaav-
I
2. 'A<p- 1-qp.i (also d4>- 10) forms, -tWru/ Rev. 11:9, -lopevIA..
11:4, -tovrai W II marg. Jo. 20:23, ^tc Mk. 1:34; 11:16.
Tisch reads d<p- umawJLcv. 11:9 from d<- 'a> as from WH
d<^>is in Rev. 2:20 from d<peoj), -Upxu, -r/aw, -t/kci ( r/Kcs Rev.
ADDITIONS TO THE LIST OF VERBS 243
Page 53
To KaAc'w add (-<TOjU.ai), (-crd/xiyv), iKCKXtfuyv
Under Kdp.v<a dele KeKfirjKa (only Text. Rec. Rev. 2:3).
Add Kar- dyw/xi, -cda), -m$a, -edyrjv.
To Ko/uto add (-^o'/at/v) (-icra). ,
To KoVtw add d7ro -(dm- only Text. Rec), {-o^v), -ckott^v, -kott-
Pa#<? 54
To M&a> add ^X^rco (1 Cor. 7:21).
To MeVo) add 1/u.cvov The compound a-w -irapa -occurs in Phil.
1:25 only in Text. Rec.
Add pZrjpaivu), i^rjpava, i$r/pap.pjai, l^pdvO-qv.
Add OiKTeipo), -rjaw (Rom. 9:15).
To olKoSofLeoi add olKoOop-yOr) in Jo. 2:20.
Add 'Oftw'co (Mt. 2G:74 and o/xw/xi (Mt. 14:71), But. Apoou (Mt.
2 I I \ODITIONS I" l IN' 1 .1SI OF VERBS
55
To Iliv'yo. add (6/xyv). Only Text. Roc. has ri-
To *Pam<o add "Nestle reads pavriownu in Mk. 7:4"
Add 'P/Jynyu (-/u) and prj<r<rw, f>y$u>, fjpr/$a.
Add i>yn-w, Oldy (Tiarjira (Jas. 5:2.)
To SreAAo) add eoreAAov and read -o-tcAw.
To Td(T(To) add ra<yuu. Note that 71730- is only in Text. Roc.
Add TlOtjixl (um-, irporr-avu- &tto-, oui-, airi-Suu-, in-, iirL-, (Tvv-tti-,
,
and Tidcoi (cTi'dcc2 Cor. 3:13; fa'Anw Some MSS. Mk. 6:56,
but W 11 iTtdecrav as in Acts. 3:2; 4:*r>. But im-TiOu ill 1
Tim 5:22 and Tidia<riv in Mt. 5:15), Ti'0e/*ai, -eTide/A-qv, 6i)vu>
(-Or}<r 0luu) .
e^Ka (0>, -0es Mt. 9:18 and Lk. 17:5, 0eVc Lk.
21:11, tfarui, Sets), iOffJLrjv (-0eiKti, reOei/jxit, -creOeifxyv, iriOrjv,
-TeOr'/aofJuii-
Page 56
To <Wv<d add ri-
To Qofiiofua add iK-<f>o/3th> in 2 Cor. 20:0.
Add <t>opo>, -c'ctoj, -erru.
To Xotpw- Change "Some MSS." to "Textus Rec."
Add XaXau), -acra>, -arm, -<Ut9i]v.
TO ^l^C) add UVU-, U7TO-, K-, KUTtt-
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA.
Page 12
(f) lines 2f. dele "to the lost digamma." The "lost digam-
ma" explanation is not now much in favor with philol-
ogists.
(g) line 1 add "as" before "in." As a matter of fact deXu
is as old asHomer.
Page 13-
line 10 dele "As previously noted."
Page 15
(b) at end of paragraph add: "Thus in Attic et equals Latin
e, but i in the koivtj. The aspirated explosives became
spirants in the koiv?;."
Page 19-
line 12 add: "unless wv was the original Greek ending. Cf.
Page 22-
line 15 after vavs add: "But vavs does not itself occur in the
plural in the N. T. Stems in -v make the accusative plu-
ral -vas. (/Sdi-puas, IxOvas, 6o-<jWas, ora^vas). Stems in -t have
ace. pi. -eis (8wa/As, 6'^ets, 7rdAets, etc.). Stems in -ev
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA.
(Rev. 6:5) and x et^ e'""' (Heb. 13:15). The and -tv -.
Page 23
line 9 after "a" add: "Stems ending in o- contract the -<u
Page 34-
line 2 read "Probably all" instead of "All."
!6
lines 12f. It isdeni< d y Brugmann (<Jrundriss, I., S. 497 ff.)
1
his Gr. Gr. (S. 270-312) he gives 23 classes for the Pres-
ent Tense with many subdivision*.
Page 37
(c) line 19 after "Testament" add: "nor as simple verb in
the N.T."
Page 37
(c) line 20. As a matter of fact the aorist occurs only six
times, but the present inf. after /xe'AAw about a hundred.
Page 38-
il
line 13 read sya."
Line 18 before c add "stem with."
Page 41
(b) line 3 for "a" read "a," but a for thematic stems.
Page 42-
line 20 dele "both Sanskrit and." After "Greek" add: "In
Sanskrit and in Latin the Subj used both primary and
.
Page 43-
line 6 change "whether subjunctive or optative is not clear"
to "most probably optative."
Page 57-
line 9 after "became" add "o-Kdv8a\ov or."
Page 58
line 10 change "one" to "two" and add oiKaaTrjpiov in the
parenthesis.
Page 59
end of paragraph 4. add: "In the vernacular the compound
forms sometimes come to be used much like the
simplex."
Page 60
add: "But for fuller discussion see Helbing's Grammatik d.
Sept., Thackeray's Grammar of the O. T. in Greek.
Swete's Introduction to the O. T. in Greek.
Page 68
lines 24f. read "de- monstrative."
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA.
Page 11
lines VI under I before new sentence add: "Cf. prepositional
phrases like "i in yo/iov (Rom. 4:14)."
e 72-
line 10 from bottom after "phrases" add "especially with
prepositions."
Page 73
(1) line 3. a better illustration is to ku\6v ovofm (Jas. 2:7). Cf.
Mt. 12:35.
Page 76-
line 7 after parenthesis add: "unless it is predicate (Lu.
15:31)."
Line 8 after xpos add "(Mt. 27:24)."
Line 12 add after parenthesis: "but see 1 Cor. 9:7."
Page 71
line 9 add these examples:" 6 ttus vo^i.os
: (Gal. 5:15). Cf.
also Act 19:7; 21:21; 27:37; Rom. 16: 15; Gal. 1:2. See
Winer-Schmiedel, S. 189."
Line 13 Add: ""Attus is found chiefly in Luke and Acts."
Page 84-
line 21 Add: TroTawos ,
late form from 7ro8a7ros, is found six
Page 95
(1) line 4 add "(Jo. 15:15)" after the Greek words.
Page 110
(f) line 4 add: "But see p. 93 (e)."
Page 130-
line 6 from bottom add: "But ol with the Opt. does not occur
in theX.T."
Page 139-6
line 19 after "there is" add: "in ancient Greek."
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA. 249
Page 170-
line 2 add: oo-okk.
(a) line9 add: "in the sense while like ews."
Line 13 add: "*Ha> could be Aor. Subj."
Page 174
(h) Add: 'Oo-aKis occurs only three times (I Cor. 11 :25f. ;
Rev.
11:6) Each time it has idv and each time the Pres.
Subj. is used.
Page 179-6
line 5 add; "Cf. mw^s in Mt. 18:21."
-9
line 5 add: "So Troops in Mt. 23:37; Lu. 13:34."
Page 188-4
line 7 after "Homer" add: "in the Iliad."
Line 8 add: "It occurs once in the Odyssey. Cf. Monro,
Horn. Gr., fr. 179."
Page 189-
line 5 add :
irpos before /u.e.
Page 192-17
line 11 add: 24:15.
Page 200-
line 3 after I Pet. 2:18 add: "(implied imperative)/'
line 4 dele "(as elsewhere)."
PA Robertson, Archibald Thomas
81 ? A short grammar of the
R6 Greek New Testament. 3d ed.
1912