LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 University of California. 
 
 Class 
 
A SHORT GRAMMAR 
 
 OF THE 
 
 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
BOOKS BY PROF. A. T. ROBERTSON. 
 
 Critical Notes to Broadus' Harmony of the Gospels. Price of 
 
 Ihc Harmony $1 50 
 
 Life and Letters of John A. Broadus $1 SO 
 
 Teaching of Jesus Concerning God the Father $0 75 
 
 The Student's Chronological New Testamen': $1 00 
 
 Keywords in the Teaching of Jesus $0 50 
 
 Syllabus for New Testament Study $0 90 
 
 Epochs in the Life of Jesus $1 00 
 
 A Short Grammar of the Greek New Testament .$1 50 
 
 Epochs in the Life of Paul $1 25 
 
 These books can be had through A. C. Armstrong & Son. 
 
A SHORT GRAMMAR 
 
 — OF THE- 
 
 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 FOR STUDENTS FAMILIAR WITH THE ELEMENTS OF GREEK 
 
 A. T. ROBERTSON, A. M., D. D., 
 
 Professor of New Testament Interpretation, Southern Baptist 
 Theological Seminarj', 
 
 LOUISVILLE, KY. 
 
 II VER8 IT' 
 
 OF 
 Kat TO. /3i/8At'a, ixaXio-Ta ras fjLeixf3pdva<;. — 2 Tilll. 4:13. 
 
 A. C. ARMSTRONG & SON, 
 
 3 & 5 West IStt Street, Near 5th Avenue, 
 
 NEW YORK. 
 
 J909. 
 
Copyright, 1908. 
 By A. T. ROBERTSON. 
 
 Second Printing, May, 1909. 
 
s>' 
 
 ;MA!rvJ 
 
 TO W. B. ROYALL, D. D., 
 PROFESSOR OF GREEK 
 
 IN 
 
 WAKE FOREST COLLEGE 
 TRUE GREEK AND TEACHER 
 
 01342 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 I have been a teacher of the Greek New Testament for twenty 
 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 Pliilhellene, This noble tongue contains no treasure 
 com2)arahle to the New Testament. We could much more easily 
 give up Plato and Demosthenes than John and Paul. I count it 
 a privilege and a Joy to help young ministers to a right ai3prehen- 
 sion of the Greek New Testament. At bottom exegesis is gram- 
 matical. That is not all of exegesis, but it is the true beginning. 
 
 A few years ago I published a little Syllabus of New Testament 
 Greek Syntax for the use of one of the Greek classes here. The 
 book was used in a number of other institutions also. I desire 
 now to replace it by a more extensive and comprehensive discus- 
 sion of the field of New Testament grammar and yet not one too 
 long. During the years, in fact quite recently, I have received 
 numerous requests for a New Testament grammar not so element- 
 ary as Huddilston, Green, or Harper and Weidner, and yet not 
 so minute and exhaustive as Winer, Blass, or Moulton. The 
 man who has studied the old Greek does not wish to take up a 
 primer, though ho may not be ready for the more critical minutire 
 of a book like Winer. New Testament grammar is taught the last 
 year in most of the colleges and is begun also the first year in the 
 theological seminaries. It is just this definite and unoccupied 
 field (the last year in college and the first in the seminary) that 
 this Short Grammar seeks to enter. There is here an unfilled 
 place in American educational method. I have written a number 
 of chapters of a larger grammar of the Greek New Testament 
 on the scale of Winer which I shall finish as rapidly as I can. 
 
Xl PREFACE. 
 
 But that need will also be met by Moulton's New Grammar, of 
 which the brilliant Prolegomena has already appeared, not to men- 
 tion Blass's a])le work also. Schmiedel and Schwyzer are likewise 
 at work on a complete revision of A\'iner, a i)ortion of which has 
 ai)peared. M'iner-^Moulton and AMner-Thayer still have a sale 
 and deserve it. Rademacher also has in hand a N. T. Grammatik. 
 The prospect therefore is good for plenty of the larger grammars in 
 the future. But this intermediate type of grammar is a practical 
 necessity and an urgent one. Three types of New Testament 
 grammars are needed: a beginner's grammar for men who have 
 had no Greek training, an advanced and complete grammar for 
 scliolars and more critical seminary work, an intermediate handy 
 working grammar for men familiar with the elements of Greek both 
 in school and in the pastorate. The busy j^astor needs the Short 
 Grammar. The text of this Grammar is that of Westcott and Hort 
 with constant use of Nestle and Tischendorf. It is a satisfaction 
 to note how commonl}^ the excellent critical text of Nestle agrees 
 with that of Westcott and Hort. 
 
 The plan of the present grammar is determined by the oliject in 
 view. Condensation is practised as much as possible with clear- 
 ness. The paradigms are not given, having been already acquired 
 by the student, but brief discussions of the New Testmnent A'aria- 
 tion in forms occur. Hadley and Allen's Grammar or Goodwin's 
 Grammar can be used for re\'iew of the forms. There is little criti- 
 cism of the views of different grammarians. The space is reserved 
 chiefly for the positive presentation of the main points of New 
 Testament grammar. The effort is made to put the chief facts in 
 such a way as to enlist the interest of well ])repared men who 
 know Attic Greek. 
 
 This grammar is written after much study of modern methods 
 in philology and research. The author acknowledges his debt to 
 Dr. Adolph Deissmann and Dr. J. Hope Aloulton in piu*ticular wlio 
 have inaugurated a new era in New Testament grannnatical study. 
 The results of modern study of (•omi)arative granunar, mod»'rn 
 CJroek, the inscriptions, the papyri, etc., arc kci)t constantly in 
 mind. 1 have not ]»i'cn able, for lack of space, to draw largely on 
 
PEEFAOE. Vll 
 
 these treasures by way of illustration. But my interest in the new 
 method of grammatical study goes back to the days when I first 
 heard John A. Broadus, "vir doctissimus" (Gregory, Prolegom- 
 ena, Vol. III., Nov. Test. Graece, p. 1266), teach New Testament 
 Greek from the point of view of comparative philology. He so 
 taught it because of his work with Gessner Harrison, of the Uni- 
 versity of Virginia, who was lecturing on Bopp's ideas when they 
 were novelties in America. I owe more to that impulse than to all 
 else. For ten years I have l^een planning a Greek New Testament 
 Grammar, and now I send this one forth as a commission in a 
 sense from my great predecessor here, 
 
 I cannot hope to have made no errors. I have said what I saw 
 and haVe not hesitated to put tilings differently from the current 
 grammars if truth led me on. I shall appreciate notice of errata 
 for future editions or suggestions that will make the book more 
 useful for the purposes had in view. 
 
 I call this A Short Grammar of the Greek New Testament rather 
 than of New Testament Greek. We can no longer treat the Greek 
 of the New Testament as a dialect or a patois or least of all as a 
 sacred language unlike anything else on earth. It is merely the 
 vernacular Kotv^ of the first century A. D. written by men of varied 
 culture, but all touched by 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. A\''here it seemed necessary I have 
 taken pains to mention a few authors by name. I shall never 
 forget some months in 1905 spent among the grammatical treasures 
 of the Bodleian Library of Oxford and later in the British Museum 
 nor the many courtesies I received. But this grammar does not 
 claim to be wholly original. If it were, it would not be true. 
 And 3'et I hold no one else responsible for the views expressed in 
 it. It will not be in vain if students can by this means be led into 
 
rREFACR. 
 
 a fuller and deeper knoAvk-dgc <if llic riclicF (»t' Christ. Tuvra /xfAeVa, 
 iv TovTois i(r6i. — I. Tim. 4:15. 
 
 A. T. ROBERTSON. 
 Louisville, Ky., 1908. 
 
 PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION. 
 
 It is only sicvcn months since the first edition of this Grammaj 
 came from the press. It is now the text-book in many American 
 institutions of learning and many more Avill introduce it in the 
 Autumn. It is jjublished in Great Britain by Hodder & Stough- 
 ton. An Italian translation is in process of publication from the 
 jDress of Libreria Editrice Fiorentina, Florence. Scholars of the 
 first rank in many parts of the world have welcomed the book as 
 filling a long felt want. 
 
 The errata especially in the BibliograjDhy were more numerous 
 than ought to have been the case. I gratefully acknowledge sug- 
 gestions of this nature from Rev. Prof. H. A. Kennedy, D. D., of 
 Toronto, Rev. Prof. J. II. Farmer, D. D., of Toronto, Rev. Prof- 
 Alexander Souter, D. D., of Oxford, Rev. George ]\Iilligan, D. D., 
 of INIurthly, Scotland, Rev. Prof. Ebrard Nestle, I). D., of ^laul- 
 bronn, Germany, Rev. Prof. A. Debrunner, (iermany. Rev. Prof. 
 B. C. Deweese, of Lexington, Ky., Rev. J. C. C. Dunford and 
 Rev. Prof. W. 0. Carver, D. D., of Louisville. I have tried to free 
 this edition from errors, but I do not claim perfection. I shall 
 still welcome notice of further errata for future editions. 
 
 The general plan of the Short Grammar imjjoses upon it neces- 
 sary limitations which are clearly recognized by critics. The 
 structure of the work is justified by the purpose in view. Some 
 minor changes occur in this edition. I take this occasion to salute 
 with best wishes all toilers in the sphere of New Testament 
 Grammar. 
 
 May, lOO'J. A. T. ROBERTSON. 
 
 Since completion of the plates for this edition, arrangements 
 have been made for a German edition of the Grammar. 
 
A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary (1905). 
 
 Abbott, Johannine Grammar (1906). 
 
 Bevier, Brief Greek Syntax, 
 
 Blass, Philology of the Gospels (1898). 
 
 Blass, Grammar of New Testament Greek (1905). 
 
 See also Kuehner-Blass. 
 Boatti, Grammatica del greco del Niievo Testamento (1908). 
 Boisacq, Les dialeetes doriens (1891). 
 Brugmann, Grimdriss der Vergleichenden Graramatik (1892, 
 
 1901). 
 Brugmann, Griechisehe Grammatik (1900). 
 Brugmann, Comparative Grammar (Wright's tr., 5 vols., 1895). 
 Brugmann, Kurze Vergleiehende Grammatik der Indo-german- 
 
 isehen Spraehen (1904). 
 Burton, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of New Testament 
 
 Greek (1893). 
 Buttmann, Grammar of New Testament Greek (1880). 
 Car^^, Introduction to New Testament Greek. 
 Claflin, Syntax of Boeotian Dialect Inscriptions (1905). 
 Clapperton, First Steps in New Testament Greek. 
 Clyde, Greek Syntax (1876). 
 Conybeare and Stock, Selections from the LXX. with Grammar 
 
 (1905). 
 Croenert, Memoria Graeea Herculanensis (1903). 
 Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lexicon of N. T. Greek (1892). 
 Curtius, Greek Etymology (1886). 
 Dalman, The Words of Jesus (1902). 
 Dalman, Grammatik des juedisch-paliistinischen Aramaisch 
 
 (1895). 
 
X A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Deissmann, Bible Studies (1901). 
 
 Deissniann, Licht vom Osten (1908). 
 
 Deissmann, New Light on the New Testament (1907). 
 
 Deissmann, Philology of the Greek Bible (1908). 
 
 Delbrueek, Die Grundlagen der Griechisehen Syntax (1879). 
 
 Delbrneck, The Study of Language (1882). 
 
 Delbrueek, Vergl. Syntax d. indog. Spraehen (1893-1900). 
 
 Dieterich, Uutereuchungen zur Gesehichte der Griechisehen 
 
 Sprache (1898). 
 Donaldson, New Cratylus (1859). 
 Farrar, Greek Syntax (1876). 
 Gildersleeve, Syntax of Classical Greek, Part I. (1900). Part II. 
 
 in press. 
 Giles, A Short Manual of Comparative Philology (1901). 
 Goodwin, Greek Grammar (1894). 
 Goodwin, Greek Moods and Tenses (1889). 
 Green, Handbook of the Granmiar of the Greek New Testament 
 
 (1904). 
 Gregory, Prolegomena. Tischendorf, Novum Testamentum 
 
 Graeee (1894). 
 Hadley and Allen, Greek Grammar (1895). 
 Harper and Weidner, Introductory New Testament Greek 
 
 Method (1888). 
 Harrison, Greek Prepositions (1858). 
 Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (1892). 
 
 Hatzidakis, Einleitung in die Neugriechische Grammatik (1902). 
 Heine, Sjmonoraik des Neutestamentlichen Griechisch (1898). 
 Heinrici, Der litterarische Charakter der neutest. Schriften 
 
 (1908). 
 Helbing, Grammatik der Septuaginta. Laut- uud Wortlchrc, 
 
 (1907). 
 Ilirt, llandbuch der Greichischen Laut-und Formonlelnv (1902). 
 Hoffmann, Die Griechisehen Dialekte (1891-1898). 
 Iloole, Classical Element in the N. T. (1888). 
 llorl. Appendix (Vol. II.) to Greek N. ^. 
 
A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY. XI 
 
 Huddilston, Essentials of New Testament Greek. 
 
 Jannaris, Historical Greek Grammar (1897). 
 
 Kennedy, Sources of New Testament Greek (1895). 
 
 King and Cookson, Principles of Sound and Inflexion, etc. 
 
 (1888). 
 Kroll, Geschichte der Klassischen Philologie (1908). 
 Kuehner-Blass, Ausfaehrliche Grammatik Erste Teil 2 Bde 
 
 (1890, 1892). 
 Kuehner-Gerth, Ausfuehrliche Grammatik Zweite Teil 2 Bde, 
 
 (1898, 1904). 
 Mayser, Gtammatik der Griechischen Papyri. Laut- and Wort- 
 
 lehre (1906). 
 Meillet, Introduction a T 'Etude Comparative des Langues Indo- 
 
 europeennes (1908). 
 Meister, Die Griechischen Dialekte (1882, 1889). 
 Meisterhans, Grammatik der Attisehen Insehriften (1900). 
 Meltzer, Griechische Grammatik: Bd. I., Formenlehre; Bd. II., 
 
 Bedeutungslehre und Syntax. 
 Meyer, Jesu ]Muttei*sprache (1896). 
 Monro, Homeric Grammar (1891). 
 Moulton (J. H.), Grammatical Notes in Expositor (1901), and 
 
 Classical Re\dew (1901, 1901) ; Characteristics of N. T. 
 
 Greek, Expositor (1901). 
 Moulton and Milligan, Lexical Notes on the Papyri, Expositor 
 
 (1908, ). 
 
 Moulton (J. H.), Introduction to N. T. Greek. 
 
 Moulton, Prolegomena to Grammar of N. T. Greek, third edition 
 
 (1908). 
 Moulton (J. H.), The Science of Language (1903). 
 Moulton (W. F.) and Geden, Concordance to the Greek Testa- 
 ment (1897). 
 Mueller, Historische Grammatik der Hellenischen Sprache 
 
 (1891). 
 Mutzbauer, Die Grundbedeutung des Konjunktiv und Optativ 
 
 und ihre Entwicklung im Griechischen (1908). 
 
xn A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAI'IIV. 
 
 Nacliiiiansoii, Laute imd Fornicn der .Magiietisehcu Insclirirtcn 
 
 (1903). 
 Niigeli, Der Wortscliatz dcs Apostels Pauliis (1907). 
 Nestle, Novum Testamentum Graece (190G). 
 Oertel, Five Linguistic Lectures (1901). 
 Pallis, H NEAAIA0HKH (1902). 
 Preuschen, Yollstiindiges grieehiscli-deutschcs nandwiJrterbueh 
 
 zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der iibrigen 
 
 urehrist lichen Literatur (1908, ). 
 
 Reiuhold, De Graeeitate Patrum Apostolicornm, etc. (1898). 
 Riemann et Goelzer, Grammaire Comparee du Grec et du Latin 
 
 (1897, 1901). 
 Rutherford, The New Phryniehus (1881). 
 Sandys, A History of Classical Scholarship, Vols. I, II, III (1906, 
 
 1908). 
 Sayce, Principles of Comparative Philology. 
 Schleicher, Vergleichende Grammatik (1876). 
 Schmid, Der Atticismus, etc., 4 Bde (1889-1897). 
 ScliAvyzer, Grammatik der Pergamenischen Insehriften (1898). 
 Simcox, Language of the New Testament (1890). 
 Simcox, The Writers of the New Testament. 
 Smyth (H. W.), The Greek Dialects (1894). The Tonic. 
 Sophocles, Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Period 
 
 (1870). 
 Stahl, Kritisch- historische Syntax des griechischen Verbums 
 
 (1907). 
 Sterrett, Homer's Iliad (1907). Excellent sketch of the Diakx't 
 
 of Homer. 
 Sweet, History of Language (1900). 
 
 Swete, Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek (1900). 
 Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (1887'). 
 Thieme, Die Insehriften von ]\Iagnesia am Maeander und d.is 
 
 Neue Testament (1906). 
 Thompson, A Greek Grammar for Schools. New edition (1907). 
 Thompson, Tlie Greek Tenses in the New 'JVstament (1895). 
 
A BRIEF BIBLIOCiKAI'lIV. XIU 
 
 Thumb, Die Griechische Sprache im Zeitalter des Hellenismus 
 
 (1901). 
 Thumb, Handbuch der XeugTieehischen Volksprache (1895). 
 Tischendorf, Xo\iim Testamentum Graece. 2 Vols. Editio 
 
 octava (1869, 1872). 
 Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament (1890). 
 Vincent and Dickson, Handbook of Modern Greek (1887). 
 Viteau, 'Etude snr la Gree du Nonveau Testament (Le Verbe, 
 
 1893: Snjet, 1896). 
 Voelker, Syntax d. Gr. Papyri, I. (1903). 
 Vota^, The Use of the Infinitive in Biblical Greek (1896). 
 Wackernagel, Die Griechische Sprache (Die Knltnr der Gegen- 
 
 wart. Teil 1, Abt. 8, 1897). 
 Wellhausen, Einleitnng in die drei ersten Evangelien (1905). 
 Westcott and Hort, Greek New Testament. 
 "Whitney, Sanskrit Grammar (1891). 
 "Winer-Moulton, many editions. 
 Winer-Schmiedel (and Schw^^zer), only partly done. 
 "Winer-Thayer, many editions. 
 
 The various editions of the Greek papyri and many of the in- 
 scriptions can be consulted in the various libraries in America 
 and abroad. The library of this institution has a pretty full 
 set of this ever growing line of books. 
 
 The titles of the most important editions of inscriptions and 
 papjTi are given here : 
 Archiv fiir Papyrus forsehung, Wilcken. 
 Audollent, Defixionum Tabellae (1904). 
 British :\Iuseura Papyri, F. G. Kenyon, (1893, 1898). 
 Cauer, Delectus inscriptionum Graecamm (1883). 
 Cooke, North Semitic Inscriptions (1903). 
 Corpus Papyrorum Raineri (1895). 
 Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci Inseriptiones Selectae (2 vols., 
 
 1893). 
 Florence Papyri (1905). 
 Gaertingeu uud Paton, Inseriptiones Maris Aegaei (1903, 1908). 
 
XIV A BRIEI'' BIBLIOGR.VI^HY. 
 
 Geneva Papyri (1896, 1900). 
 
 Goodsxjeed, Greek Papyri from the Cairo ]\Iiiseuiii (1902). 
 
 Grenfell and Hunt, Amherst Papyri (1901, 1905). 
 
 Grenfell and Hunt, Fayum Towns and their Papyri (1900). 
 
 Grenfell and Hunt, Ilibeh Papyri (1906). 
 
 Grenfell and Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri (1898, ). 
 
 Grenfell and Hunt, Tebtunis Papyri (1901, ). 
 
 Griechisehe Urkunden (Berlin Papyri, 1895, ). 
 
 Hicks and Hill, Greek Historical Inscriptions (1901). 
 Inscriptiones Graecae (Berlin) run from 1873 to 1908, XIV 
 
 Vols. 
 Kern, Die Inschriften von Magnesia am Maeander (1900). 
 Letronne, Recueil des inscriptions grecques et latines de 
 
 r'Egypte (1882). 
 Mahaffy, Petrie Papyri (1891). 
 Michel, Recueil d' inscriptions grecques (1900). 
 Paris Papyri (1865). 
 
 Paton and Hicks, Inscriptions of Cos (1891). 
 Solmsen, Inscriptiones Graecae (1905). 
 Turin Papyri (1826). 
 
 For further list see Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 251 ff. ; Mayser, 
 Grammatik d. griech-Pap., S. vii. ff. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 Part I Introductory 2 
 
 Chapter T. — The Modern Method of Linguistic Study 3 
 
 1. The old contrasteil with the new 3 
 
 2. Evolutionary principle of language 3 
 
 3. Greek a unit 3 
 
 4. Over emphasis on the literary Attic 4 
 
 5. Office of the grammarian 4 
 
 6. The Greek standpoint 4 
 
 Chapter IT What is the Greek of the New Testament 5 
 
 1. The papyri discoveries 5 
 
 2. New Testament in the vernacular 5 
 
 3. Backward light from :Modern Greek vernacular 5 
 
 4. The literary and the vernacular koivt; 6 
 
 5. The KoivT/ and the older Greek 6 
 
 6. Greek of the New Testament not translation Greek, not as a 
 
 rule G 
 
 7. The Semitic influence 6 
 
 8. The Latin influence ■ ^ 
 
 9. The Christian contribution ''' 
 
 10. Individual characteristics " 
 
 Part II. — Forms 9 
 
 Chapter III. — Orthography, Accent, Pronunciation, Punctuation 11 
 
 1. Orthography H 
 
 (a) Difficulties of external evidence 11 
 
 (b) Final v H 
 
 (c) Elision 12 
 
 (d) Crasis 12 
 
 (e) Contraction 12 
 
 (f ) Eough breathing 12 
 
 (g) Prothetic vowel 12 
 
 (h) Proper names 12 
 
 (i) Help from papyri 12 
 
XVI TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 2. Accent 13 
 
 (a) 01(1 scorn of accent -. 13 
 
 (b) Evidence of aceeni 13 
 
 (c) Origin of accent 13 
 
 (d) Significance of accent 14 
 
 (e) New Testament situation 14 
 
 3. Pronunciation 14 
 
 (a) Origin of modern tbeory 14 
 
 (b) Erasmus partly right and partly wrong 15 
 
 4. Punctuation 15 
 
 Chapter IV — The [Declension of Substantives 17 
 
 1. The history of the Greek declensions 17 
 
 (a) Three declensions 17 
 
 (b) Metaplasm 17 
 
 (c) Blending of case-forms 18 
 
 2. Special forms in the first declension 18 
 
 (a) Ionic and Doric genitives 18 
 
 (b) Nominative singular 18 
 
 (c ) Vocative 18 
 
 (d) History of genitive-ablative endings 19 
 
 (e) Locative, dative, instrumental endings 1£) 
 
 (f ) Accusative endings 19 
 
 3. Special forms of the second declension 20 
 
 (a) So-called Attic declension 20 
 
 (b) 0£os as vocative 20 
 
 (e) 'I7?o-o0s 20 
 
 (d) Contraction and heteroclisis 20 
 
 (e) Distinctive forms in this declension 20 
 
 4. Special forms of the third declension 21 
 
 (a) Vocative 21 
 
 (b) Accusative 21 
 
 (c) Genitive-ablative forms 22 
 
 (d) Nominative forms 23 
 
 (e) Locative, instrumental, dative 23 
 
 5. Number in substantives 23 
 
 (a) The dual 23 
 
 (b) "Words with one number only 23 
 
 (c) Neuter plurals and the verb 24 
 
 6. Gender of substantives 24 
 
 (a) I'ropcr names 24 
 
 (b) N'atural and graiiimatical gender 24 
 
 (c) New Testaincut usage 24 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XVll 
 
 Chapter V The Declension of Adjectives 25 
 
 1. The origin of adjectives 25 
 
 (a) Line between substantive and adjective 25 
 
 (b) Sanskrit adjectives witli one ending 25 
 
 (c) Adjective variations from substantive 25 
 
 (d) Specialize one use of substantives 25 
 
 2. The declension of adjectives 2G 
 
 (a) With one ending 2C) 
 
 (b) With two seta of endings 26 
 
 (c) Used only with two 20 
 
 (d) Dropped one 20 
 
 (e) With three endings 20 
 
 (f ) Compound adjectives 26 
 
 (g) Participle endings 26 
 
 (h) New Testament usage 26 
 
 3. The comparison of adjectives 27 
 
 (a) Comparison without suffixes 27 
 
 (b) The suffixes 27 
 
 (c) Use of suffixes in the New Testament 27 
 
 (d) Double comparative 27 
 
 (e) From adverbs 27 
 
 (f ) Elative superlative in the New Testament 27 
 
 (g) Devices used 27 
 
 4. Adjectival numerals 28 
 
 (a) TeVo-apes, etc 28 
 
 (b) First cardinal numbers 28 
 
 (c) The ordinals 28 
 
 Chapter VI. — The Declension of Pronovms 29 
 
 1. Pronominal roots 29 
 
 (a) Separate roots 29 
 
 (b) Relation to verbs (endings) 29 
 
 (e) Originally demonstrative 29 
 
 2. Brief sketch of pronominal forms 29 
 
 (a) First and second persons 29 
 
 (b) Third person 30 
 
 (c) Possessive 30 
 
 (d) Reflexive 30 
 
 (e) Demonstrative 30 
 
 (f ) Relative 31 
 
 (g) Interrogative 31 
 
 (h) Reciprocal 31 
 
XVIH TABLE OF CONTENTS, 
 
 Chapter VII The Conjugation of the Verb 32 
 
 1. Belation of verb forms and noun forms 32 
 
 (a) Roots and stems 32 
 
 (b) Verbal suflSxes 32 
 
 (c) Verbal substantives 32 
 
 (d) Verbal adjectives 32 
 
 (e) New Testament forms 33 
 
 2. The building of the verb 33 
 
 (a) The main word of the sentence 33 
 
 (b) Original roots neither verb nor substantive 33 
 
 (c) Analysis of the verb 33 
 
 (d) ReMion of suffixes to theme 34 
 
 (e) Disappearance of jxl verbs 34 
 
 3. The tenses 34 
 
 (a) The aorist 34 
 
 (b) The present-tense system 35 
 
 (c) The future system 37 
 
 (d) The perfect system 38 
 
 (e) Reduplication 40 
 
 ( f ) Augment 40 
 
 4. The modes 41 
 
 (a) The indicative 41 
 
 (b) The subjunctive 41 
 
 (c) The optative 42 
 
 (d) The imperative 44 
 
 . 5. The voices 45 
 
 (a) The active 45 
 
 (b) The middle 45 
 
 (c) The passive 46 
 
 Chapter VTII. — Principal Parts of Some Important Verbs 4S-56 
 
 Chapter IX. — The Formation of Words in the New Testament 57 
 
 1. The history of Greek -n-ords 57 
 
 2. The kinship of Greek words with each other 57 
 
 3. The contrasts in Greek words 58 
 
 4. Compound words 59 
 
 5. Light from other tongues 50 
 
 6. New Testament developments 60 
 
 Part III Syntax (U 
 
 Chapter X The Sentence 63 
 
 1. Definitions 63 
 
 2. Subject as center of group of W()rds 63 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XIX 
 
 3. Predicate as center of group of words 63 
 
 4. Predicate and copula 63 
 
 5. Apposition with subject and predicate 63 
 
 6. Number in subject and predicate 63 
 
 7. Gender with substantives and adjectives 64 
 
 8. Case in apposition 64 
 
 9. Simple and compound 64 
 
 10. Words, clauses, sentences, paragraphs 64 
 
 Chapter XI 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. Inf requency of the superlative 66 
 
 7. Adjective as adverb 66 
 
 8. Adjective without substantives 66 
 
 9. Adjectives with the infinitive and with various oases 66 
 
 10. Cases of adverbs 67 
 
 11. Adverbs as prepositions 67 
 
 12. The article with adverbs 67 
 
 13. Adverbial phrases 67 
 
 14. Adverbial participles 67 
 
 15. Comparison and composition of adverbs 67 
 
 Chapter XII The Article 68 
 
 1. The indefinite article in Greek 68 
 
 2. The origin of the definite article 68 
 
 3. The meaning of the article 69 
 
 (a) Individual objects from other individuals 70 
 
 (b) Classes from other classes 70 
 
 (c) Qualities from other qualities 70 
 
 4. What the article is used with 71 
 
 5. When the article is not used 72 
 
 6. Some special uses of the article 73 
 
 (a) The correlation of the article 73 
 
 (b) The article with attributives 73 
 
 (1) Adjectives ' 73 
 
 (2) With genitives 73 
 
 (3) With adjuncts 74 
 
 (c) The repetition of the article 74 
 
 (d) The article with predicates 75 
 
XX TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 (e) The article witli inojicr iiaiiics 75 
 
 (f) The article with ])r()iii)iiiis 70 
 
 (g) The article witii ttSs 7(J 
 
 (h) The article with /AtVos 77 
 
 (i) The article with the nominative as vocative 77 
 
 Chapter XIII Pronouns 78 
 
 1. What is the pronoun? 78 
 
 2. Persistence of pronouns 78 
 
 3. Emphasis 78 
 
 4. AvTos in predicate 79 
 
 5. Position 70 
 
 6. Omission 79 
 
 7. Third personal pronoun 79 
 
 8. The reflexive 79 
 
 9. Possessive 80 
 
 10. Demonstrative 80 
 
 11. Relative SI 
 
 12. Correlative pronouns 82 
 
 13. The indefinite pronoun 82 
 
 14. The interrogative pronouns S3 
 
 15. Eeciprocal pronouns S5 
 
 16. Alternative expressions S5 
 
 Chapter XIV The Cases S6 
 
 1. Cases in the Indo-germanic tongues SG 
 
 (a) Eight cases in the Sanskrit 86 
 
 (b) Varied history of the eight cases 86 
 
 (c) Sanskrit case endings 87 
 
 2. The origin and use of the oases 88 
 
 (a) The word case 88 
 
 (b) Object of cases S8 
 
 (c) Origin of the use of prepositions with the cases .... 88 
 
 (d) Blending case forms S8 
 
 (e) Distinctive idea of the cases retained 89 
 
 (f ) Origin of the case endings 89 
 
 (g) Interchange of cases 89 
 
 3. The nominative 90 
 
 (a) Ending 5 90 
 
 (b) Original use not subject 90 
 
 (c) Properly appositioual 90 
 
 (d) In apposition with other cases 90 
 
 (0) Nominative iiiiloi>ondent Wl 
 
. TABLE OF CONTENTS. XXI 
 
 4. The vocative 01 
 
 (a) Case of address 01 
 
 (b) By itself or with w 01 
 
 (c) Nominative forms 01 
 
 (d) The article with the vocative 02 
 
 (e) But really vocatives 02 
 
 5. Tihe accusative 02 
 
 (a) The name ambiguous 02 
 
 (b) The oldest case 02 
 
 (c) Root idea of 03 
 
 (d) Originally somewhat vague use 03 
 
 (e) Retention in the vernacular 03 
 
 (f ) Analytic study a convenience 04 
 
 (g) With verbs of motion 04 
 
 (h) Extension of space 04 
 
 (i) Duration of time 04 
 
 (j) With transitive verbs 04 
 
 (k) Inner object or content 05 
 
 (1) Two or more accusatives 05 
 
 (m) With passive verbs 06 
 
 (n) Without a verb 07 
 
 (o) Witli the infinitive 07 
 
 (p) Accusative absolute 07 
 
 (q) With prepositions OS 
 
 6. The genitive 08 
 
 (a) Grenitive and ablative same ending iu Greek 98 
 
 (b) Wrong name for genitive 98 
 
 (c) Increase in use 90 
 
 (d) Resultant idea varies 09 
 
 (e) With substantives 00 
 
 (1) Local use 00 
 
 (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 
 
 (f ) Witli adjectives 102 
 
 (g) With adverbs and prepositions 102 
 
XXU TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 (h) With verbs 102 
 
 (1) Predicate genitive 102 
 
 (2) Vexbs of sensation 102 
 
 (3) Verbs of anxiety 103 
 
 (4) Verbs of more objective meaning 103 
 
 (5) Genitive absolute 103 
 
 7. The ablative 104 
 
 (a) The case of separation or source 104 
 
 (b) Ablative with adjectives 104 
 
 (c) Witih adverbs and prepositions 105 
 
 (d) With verbs 105 
 
 8. The locative 105 
 
 (a) Space lOG 
 
 (b) Time 107 
 
 (c) Without and with iy 107 
 
 (d) With other prepositions 107 
 
 (e) Pregnant construction of iy and ch 108 
 
 9. The instrumental case 108 
 
 (a) Expressions of time 109 
 
 (b) Association or accompaniment 109 
 
 (c) Words of likeness 109 
 
 (d) Manner 109 
 
 (e) Cause or ground 110 
 
 (f ) Means or instrument 110 
 
 (g) Measure 110 
 
 (h) Two prepositions with 110 
 
 10. The dative Ill 
 
 (a) Indirect object of verbs 112 
 
 (b) Direct object of some verbs 112 
 
 (c) With intransitive verbs 112 
 
 (d) Possession 112 
 
 (e) Ethical dative 112 
 
 (f ) Dative of the agent 113 
 
 (g) With substantives 113 
 
 (h) Infinitives in the dative 113 
 
 (i) Sometimes the case is ambiguous 113 
 
 Chapter XV Prepositions 115 
 
 1. Reasons for use of 115 
 
 2. What are prepositions 115 
 
 3. So-called improper prepositions 1 1(3 
 
 4. Cases with prepositions 117 
 
 5. Proper iiiothod of ptudying 118 
 
TABLK OF CONTENTS. XXlll 
 
 fi .. ,, 118 
 
 7 'A ' ..J.J.O 
 • A"" lis 
 
 9- 'Atto 
 
 j;- ?- :;:::::::::::n9 
 
 12. ^Js ISl 
 
 1^- f , ;■;::;::;:. .121 
 
 it ^"^ ::::;:::::;:; m 
 
 15. Kara ^^i 
 
 16. fXiTO. 
 
 122 
 122 
 122 
 123 
 
 17. irapd 
 
 18. irept • 
 
 19. ■TTpO • 
 
 20. -TTpOS- 
 
 Ol ' J-^O 
 
 21- <^w, 103 
 
 OO «' X.jO 
 
 ^^' ^-^^P 194 
 
 no I I -l'-* 
 
 COiapter XVI General Eemarks about the Verb 125 
 
 1. The name not distinctive ^-^ 
 
 2. The function of the verb 1-5 
 
 3. The two types of verbs ^"5 
 
 4. Infinitive and participle not pure verbs 125 
 
 5. How the verb is made ■'^26 
 
 6. Specific idea in each process 126 
 
 7. Aktionsart : 1^*^ 
 
 8. Simultaneous development of mode, voice, tense 126 
 
 9. Variations in different verbs 1" ' 
 
 10. Survival of the fittest 127 
 
 "197 
 
 11. Probable order v ^-^ ' 
 
 Chapter XVII.— The Modes 1^8 
 
 1. Use of av with the modes 128 
 
 2. What is mode? 1^^ 
 
 3. Positive Statement— indicative 129 
 
 4. Doubtful statement— subjunctive and optative 129 
 
 5. Commanding statement — imperative 131 
 
 Chapter XVIII The Voices 1^^ 
 
 1. Wliat is voice? l^'' 
 
 2. "Names of the voices '■"^ 
 
 3. 
 
 Voice not transitive nor intransitive 1^3 
 
XXIV TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 4. Active voice 133 
 
 5. Middle voice 134 
 
 6. Passive voice 13-i 
 
 7. History of middle and passive 134 
 
 8. The term deponent 135 
 
 Chapter XIX The Tenses 136 
 
 1. The name 136 
 
 2. Fundamental idea 136 
 
 3. Three ideas as to duration of action 136 
 
 4. Greek standpoint in tense 137 
 
 5. Indefinite action — aorist 137 
 
 6. Incompleted action 139 
 
 (a) The present 140 
 
 (b) The imperfect 141 
 
 (c) The future 141 
 
 7. Completed action (present perfect, past perfect, future per- 
 
 fect) 143 
 
 (a) The present perfect 144 
 
 (b) The past perfect 145 
 
 (c) The future perfect 146 
 
 Chapter XX. — Co-ordinate and subordinate Clauses. Conjunctions ....147 
 
 1. What is a sentence? 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. diodes, tenses, voices in subordinate sentences l."0 
 
 9. Character of subordinate clauses 150 
 
 10. Connection between sentences and paragraphs 151 
 
 Chapter XXI.— Final Clauses 152 
 
 1. Pure final clauses — adverbial 152 
 
 2. Final conjunctions 152 
 
 3. Non-final clauses 152 
 
 4. Other methods for expressing design 153 
 
 5. Absence of the principal verb 154 
 
 6. Absence of Tva 154 
 
 Chapter XXI I. — Clauses of Itesult 155 
 
 1. Mi'.igcr devt'l<)]niiont in Greek 155 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XXV 
 
 2. "flo-Tc :inil tlio imlic-ntivo 155 
 
 3. Infiuitive with ware 155 
 
 4. Use of ware at beginuiug of sentences 155 
 
 5. Origin of uxttc 1 55 
 
 6. Infinitive alone not consecutive 155 
 
 7. 'E</>' (Sre not in the New Testament 156 
 
 8. Use of ws 156 
 
 9. Use of oTi 156 
 
 10. Use of relative 156 
 
 Chapter XXIII Wishes 157 
 
 1. Not verbs of wishing 157 
 
 2. "OffyeXov 157 
 
 3. Past wish 157 
 
 4. Present wish 157 
 
 5. Future wish 157 
 
 6. Future wish and command 157 
 
 7. The so-called potential optative 157 
 
 8. Courtesy of the imperfect tense 157 
 
 Chapter XXIV Causal Sentences 159 
 
 1. Use of ya/3 159 
 
 2. "On and 8l6tl 159 
 
 3. 'Ettci', CTreiS?;, and cTretSr^Trep 159 
 
 4. 'E^' o(Tov 159 
 
 5. Ka^dT6 159 
 
 6. Infinitive with Sia 160 
 
 7. Causal participle 160 
 
 8. Relative with idea of cause 160 
 
 9. 'AvO' wv, Blo, etc 160 
 
 Chapter XXY Conditional Sentences 161 
 
 1. General remarks 161 
 
 2. First class condition determined as fulfilled 161 
 
 3. Second class condition determined as unfulfilled 102 
 
 4. Third class condition undeterminal with expectation of ful- 
 
 fillment 163 
 
 5. Fourth class condition undetermined with little expectation 
 
 of fulfillment 164 
 
 6. Mixed conditions 165 
 
 7. Participle as a protasis 165 
 
 8. Elliptical conditions 166 
 
XXVI TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 9. Conditions in indirect discourse 166 
 
 lU. Concessive clauses 1(57 
 
 11. Negative in the protasis 167 
 
 Chapter XXVI Relative Clauses 168 
 
 1. Function of the relative with clauses 1(58 
 
 2. Two kinds of relative clauses, adjectival and adverbial ....168 
 
 3. Eelative adverbs 168 
 
 4. Mode in the relative clause 1G8 
 
 5. Definite and indefinite relatives 108 
 
 6. The so-called "conditional" relative 169 
 
 7. Use of av in relative clauses 169 
 
 8. Negative of the relative clause 170 
 
 9. Eelative of design or result 1 70 
 
 10. Use of idv with relatives 170 
 
 Chapter XXVII Temporal Clauses 171 
 
 1. List of temporal conjunctions 171 
 
 2. The group with sense of until and before 171 
 
 (a) "Axpi 171 
 
 (b) "Ews 171 
 
 (c) Mtxpi 172 
 
 (d) UpLv 172 
 
 (e) Ilyoo Tjv and infinitive 172 
 
 (f) 'Ev <5 172 
 
 (g) 'A</)''oxi 173 
 
 3. Other constructions 173 
 
 (a) 'UvLKa 173 
 
 (b) 'Effct 173 
 
 (c) 'Otto'tc 173 
 
 (d) "Ore and oruv 173 
 
 (e) 'Os 173 
 
 (f ) "Oo-ov, etc 174 
 
 (g) McTd TO and infinitive 1 74 
 
 4. Participles with temporal idea 174 
 
 Chapter XXVIII — Cojuparative Clauses 175 
 
 1. Inadequate treatment 175 
 
 2. Ku66, Ku9d, KaOdirep 175 
 
 3. KaduTi 175 
 
 4. 'Oo-o? 175 
 
 «J' fls, Kudm^ Ku6(i)airtpj uxnrep, too-tt, uxriTcpu 175 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. ^^"^'^^ 
 
 1 "'7 
 
 Chapter XXIX.— Interrogative Sentences ^^^ 
 
 1. Mark of interrogation ^„^ 
 
 2. The modes of direct questions ^^^ 
 
 3. Kind of answer expected ^^^ 
 
 4. Interrogative pronouns used 
 
 gative and relative proncuns l^s 
 
 6. Interrogative conjunctions 
 
 Confusi^on between interrogative and relative proncuns 
 
 179 
 
 , , , 179 
 
 7. Elliptical phrases like tva Tt, Tt on, et ^^^ 
 
 8. Alternative questions . ^^^ 
 
 9. Exclamations ^^^^ 
 
 10. Interjections 
 
 181 
 
 Caiapter XXX.— Indirect Discourse ^^^ 
 
 1. Direct discourse more common ^^^ . 
 
 2. Tense as a rule unchanged • ^^^ 
 
 3. Person of the verb may be changed ^^^ 
 
 4. The mode may be changed _^^^ 
 
 5. Three kinds of indirect discourse _^^^ 
 
 6. Indirect assertions 2 
 
 (a) The construction with the infinitive 
 
 (b) The construction with on 
 
 (c) The construction with the participle 1 
 
 (d) The construction with koX iyevtro 
 
 7. Indirect questions ^g^ 
 
 (a) The tense as a rule unchanged 
 
 (h) The indicative mode 
 
 ^ ^ , . ,. 1 loo 
 
 (c) The subjunctive mode • ■ 
 
 (d) The optative mode 
 
 (e) Indirect deliberative questions ^ 
 
 (f) The article with the indirect question i^^ 
 
 (g) The infinitive (?) ^^^ 
 
 8, Indirect commands ^^^ 
 
 (a) The infinitive ..•■•• ^^^ 
 
 (b) Conjunctions 
 
 (c) Indirect deliberative question 
 
 9. ^^lixture of direct and indirect discourse "'""'" 186 
 
 10, The subordinate clause • 
 
 ^ ^ .,. 187 
 
 Chapter XXXI.— The Infinitive • ^^^ 
 
 1. Origin of the infinitive • ° ' ^^„ 
 
 2. Idea of the infinitive in Greek • ^^^ 
 
 3. History of the infinitive ^^^ 
 
 4. The article with the infinitive 
 
XXVIU TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 5. Cases of the infinitive 188 
 
 6. Common use of tov and the infinitive 189 
 
 7. The infinitive witli verbs ISO 
 
 8. The infinitive vi'ith prepositions ISO 
 
 9. The infinitive in indirect disconrso 100 
 
 10. The infinitive limited in use liy otl ••nul Tva 101 
 
 11. The infinitive for purpose 101 
 
 12. "Qarc and the infinitive 101 
 
 13. The negative of the infinitive 101 
 
 14. The periphrastic infinitive 102 
 
 15. The voices of the infinitive 102 
 
 16. The tenses of the infinitive 102 
 
 17. UpoaedcTo and the infinitive 102 
 
 Chapter XXXII The Participle 103 
 
 1. Most perfect development in Greek 103 
 
 2. A verbal adjective 103 
 
 3. Other verbal adjectives 103 
 
 4. Differences between participle and infinitive 104 
 
 5. Participle and the article, attributive 194 
 
 6. Predicate participle 195 
 
 7. Su2>plementary participle 195 
 
 8. Circumstantial participle 195 
 
 9. Genitive absolute 106 
 
 10. Participle in LXX for Hebrew infinitive absolute 106 
 
 11. Adjuncts with the circumstantial participle 107 
 
 12. Participle in indirect discourse 107 
 
 13. Voice in the participle 197 
 
 14. Tense in the participle 197 
 
 15. Negative of the participle 198 
 
 16. Participle as a substantive 108 
 
 Obapter XXXIII Negative Particles 100 
 
 1. Two negatives in Greek 109 
 
 2. New Testament idiom 109 
 
 3. With the imperative 109 
 
 4. With the subjunctive 200 
 
 5. With the optative 200 
 
 6. With the infinitivi? 200 
 
 7. With tlio p;irti<ipli' 201 
 
 8. With the indic.-itive 201 
 
 (a) Declarative sentences 201 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XXIX 
 
 (b) Casual sentences 201 
 
 (c) Conditional sentences 201 
 
 (d) Eielative sentences 202 
 
 (e) Clauses of purpose 202 
 
 (f) Verbs of fearing 202 
 
 (g) Questions 202 
 
 (h) Prohibitions 202 
 
 (i) Inrlireet discourse 203 
 
 ( j) Succession of negatives 203 
 
 (k) When the second negative is a single negative 203 
 
 (1) Ohix^ 203 
 
 (m) Redundant negative 203 
 
 (n) Ovxi • • 204 
 
 (o) Ovx oTi 204 
 
 Chapter XXXIV.— Intensive Particles ; 205 
 
 1. The term particle 205 
 
 2. Origin of intensive particles 205 
 
 3. Frequency in Greek 205 
 
 4. Tc 205 
 
 5. Hip 206 
 
 6. At; 206 
 
 7. Tot 206 
 
 8. M^ 206 
 
 9. Nai , 206 
 
 10. N17 207 
 
 Chapter XXXV Figures of Speech 208 
 
 1. X"ot peculiar to Greek , 208 
 
 2. The Apocalypse 208 
 
 3. Leading types of figures 208 
 
 4. Rhythm 209 
 
 5. Periods 209 
 
 6. Position of words 20S 
 
PART I. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE MODERN METHOD OF LINGUISTIC STUDY. 
 
 1. There is a modern method. The old way treated the New 
 Testament Greek as a thing apart, a pecuhar kind of Greek Hke 
 nothing else on land or sea, a religious dialect alone fit for the ex- 
 pression of Christian truth. The term "Biblical Greek" used to 
 be the right way to define the special type of Greek found in the 
 LXX. and the New Testament. The modern method seeks to 
 study the language of the New Testament as a part of a greater 
 whole, not as an isolated phenomenon. The old Purist contro- 
 versy as to whether the Greek of the New Testament was exactly 
 like the "Classic" Greek or possessed many Hebraisms long ago 
 lost its interest, but a new turn to the whole matter has come. 
 
 2. The evolutionary principle has its application to language 
 also. Each member of the Indo-Germanic group has a common 
 basis with the rest. Several of these languages have very vital 
 connection. Comparative philology therefore is an essential aid to 
 the modern student of the New Testament Greek. Some knowl- 
 edge of comparative grammar can be obtained from any of the 
 numerous handbooks on the subject. The Greek is not a tongue 
 entirely to itself. Sanskrit, Latin, and other languages throw much 
 light upon the development of Greek. 
 
 3. The Greek itself is a unit and needs to be looked at as a 
 whole. It has had a long and wonderful history, but the language 
 heard on the streets of Athens to-day is in all essentials the same 
 that Aristophanes reports in his comedies. Indeed modern Greek 
 differs no more from the Greek of Homer than the English of Ten- 
 nyson from the Anglo-Saxon of King Alfred. The various dialects 
 all need to be considered and they can be compared with the dia- 
 lects of English. Greek is a term wide enough to include Homer 
 
4 A SHORT GHAMMAU OK THE GKEKK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 and Sophocles, Plerodotus and Thucydides, Plato and Plutarch, 
 Demosthenes and Paul, John and Tricoupis. Greek is not dead. 
 Ijanguage has a history and can only he understood rightly by a 
 long view of its whole career. 
 
 4. The older grammars gave the literary Attic as the basis of 
 the Greek New Testament and left out of vicAV all the other dialects 
 save in footnotes. Even the later Attic was given scant justice, 
 while the vernacular came in for little consideration. The ver- 
 nacular language has received better treatment in recent years in 
 the modern grammars. Scholars are now seeing that it is the stream 
 of the spoken language that has persisted. Modern Greek vernac- 
 ular needs to be compared with the ancient Greek vernacular in 
 order to get the right line of development. The literary language 
 is always more or less artificial and aloof from the life of the peo- 
 ple. Language is life and must be so studied, if one is to catch its 
 secrets. 
 
 5. The office of the grammarian is therefore to register and to 
 interpret facts, not to manufacture or warp the facts to a theory. 
 The novice in the study of S3'ntax has difficulty in ridding his 
 mind of the idea that grammars and dictionaries regulate a lan- 
 guage. They merely interpret a language more or less correctly as 
 the case may be. The seat of authority in language is not the 
 books about language, but the people who speak and write it. Tlie 
 usage of the best educated writers determines the literary style of a 
 language, while the whole people detennine the vernacular. Change 
 in language cannot be stopped save by the death of the language. 
 
 6. The genius of the Greek language itself must constantly be 
 sought. It is easy to exi)lain a Greek idiom by the Engli^^h or the 
 Gennan. This is the vice of many grammars. The Greek must 
 be allowed to be itself and have its own i)oint of view. Good 
 Greek may be very jioor English and vice versa. It is imperative 
 for a just and sympathetic a])preciation of Greek to look at the 
 languag(! from lluf Circek standpoint. The consistent api>lication 
 of tbis principle will jirevent one from ex])lnining ont> j)ri'positioii 
 as used "instead" of another, one tense "for"' aiiotlicr, etc. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 WHAT IS THE GREEK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ? 
 
 1. We are at last in a position to answer this question properly. 
 The difficulty was alwaj'^s largely an artificial one due to the pre- 
 conceived ideas and lack of due perspective in the use of the known 
 facts. But the new ])apyri discoveries in Egypt (Fayum, Oxy- 
 rhynchus, etc.) have shed a flood of light on the subject. The 
 inscriptions of Asia Minor especially add much information as to 
 the vernacular kolvt^. Even the ostraka have a deal to tell about the 
 language of the people. Dr. Deissmann, of Heidelberg, and Dr. 
 J. H. ISIoulton, of Manchester, have been the first to apply the 
 ncAV knowledge to the New Testament Greek. They have done it 
 with brilliant success. Dr. Petrie, of London, and Drs. Grenfell 
 and Hunt, of Oxford, have been the cliief modern explorers in the 
 Egyptian papyri, but now man}' scholars like Mayser, Voelker, 
 etc., are busy in this grammatical field. The free use of iv, for 
 instance, appears in the papyri as in the N. T. 
 
 2. The main point that is made clear is one that was known in 
 a way before. It is that the New Testament is written in the ver- 
 nacular Greek of the time. There are indeed literary influences 
 here and there (especially in the writings of Luke, Paul, and in 
 Hebrews), but as a whole the New Testament books represent the 
 spoken tongue, though not of illiterate men by any means, unless 
 some such traces be discernible in 2 Peter and Revelation. There 
 is thus a note of reality and vividness in the New Testament not 
 usually present in books in the formal literary style. 
 
 3. The ^Modern Greek vernacular shows a steady line of develop- 
 ment from the New Testament vernacular. A backward light is 
 thus thrown that is helpful in many ways. The common stream 
 of the spoken speecli flows on. 
 
6 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE OREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 4. TIk' CJreck of the New Testament that was used witli i»rac- 
 tical unifonuity over most of the Roman world is called the Com- 
 mon Greek or koivtIj. Not that it was not good Greek, hut rather 
 the Greek in common use. Tliere was indeed a literary KOLvrj and 
 a vernacular KOLvy. Plutarch is a good specimen of the literary 
 Koiv^ while the papyri are chiefly in the vernacular kolvt^ like most 
 of the New Testament. 
 
 5. This Koiviy was itself the heir of the past. The various Greek 
 dialects l)lended on an Attic hase. The KOLvrj was thus richer in 
 expression as to words and forms than any of the older dialects. 
 Compare tlie relation of the modern English to the various tongues 
 that have contributed to its jjower and expansion. Ionic, Doric, 
 Aeolic, North West Greek and other dialects have made some con- 
 tribution to the common result. The use of nominatives in the 
 midst of accusatives in the Boeotian, for instance, is strangely like 
 the Book of Revelation. So the absence of the future jxirticiple is 
 like the N. T. 
 
 6. The New Testament Greek is not translation Greek and thus 
 differs radically in most resj^ects from the LXX. Avhich shows the 
 Hebrew idiom at every turn. The New Testament in general con- 
 tains books composed freely in the vernacular kolvtj. But there are 
 traces of such translation influences in the numerous quotations 
 from the LXX. and the Hebrew as well as in the possible Aramaic 
 original of IMatthew and the discourses of Jesus in general, though 
 Jesus himself probaldy spoke Itoth Greek and Aramaic. Luke in 
 his Gospel and the Acts may have had Aramaic (or even Hebrew) 
 sources (written or oral) for })art of his information. Compare the 
 oi)ening cha})ters in both l)Ooks. But in general the New Testament 
 stands on a very different plane from the LXX. as to its language, 
 though like it in many idioms. 
 
 7. Still some HeVjrew and Aramaic influence is perceived in the 
 New Testament. But the Semitic influence is nothing like so much 
 as was once supposed. Both the Purists and the Hebraists were 
 wrong. One can no longer exjilain every variation from the classic 
 literary style l)y calling it a llcb-iism, wlicn the same thing is 
 common in the ]>:ipyri of Egypt. As compared witli the wliole 
 
WHAT IS THE (iUEKK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT? 7 
 
 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 Hel)rew 0. T. and the LXX and their Avritings l)ear marks 
 of this knowledge in various ways. In Lu. 20:12 irpoa-WeTo Tre/Ai/roi 
 is like the Hebrew. Compare Ex. 1-^:13. 
 
 8. The Latin influence is very slight indeed, consisting of some 
 30 words like KevTvpiwv and a few phrases. Rome had her soldiers 
 and her laws in Palestine and the trace of that fact is left in the 
 New Testament. 
 
 9. Christianity itself has made a definite contribution to the 
 language of the New Testament. In so far as the gospel has new 
 ideas to set forth, a new tm-n has to be given to old words like 
 Krjpva-a-oi or a new word comes into use Uke KoXo-SiSdo-KaXos (Tit. 2:3). 
 But the papyri have taught us to be chary about arra^ Aeyo/Mcva. 
 Certainly as a rule the New Testament took the language of the 
 time made ready to hand and put the Christian content into this 
 earthen vessel. 
 
 10. There are indeed diversities of gifts. Each writer of the 
 New Testament has his own style and angle of \4sion, a style that 
 changes to some extent in each case with change of theme, age, 
 and character of composition. On this subject see Simcox, Writers 
 of the New Testament. This is all natural and can be illustrated 
 in individual cases by the variety in the same writer as Shake- 
 speare, Milton, etc. All things considered, now that we know 
 much of the facts about the Greek of the New Testament, it is just 
 what we had a right to expect, knowing what we do of God' s method 
 of work. This is in brief the kind of tongue in which was given to 
 men the greatest collection of books in all the world, tlie New Tes- 
 tament. 
 
PART II. 
 
 FORMS. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 OETHOGRA*PHY, ACCENT, PRONUNCIATION, PUNCTUATION. 
 
 1. Orthography. — It is not an easy matter to determine the prin- 
 ciples by which to settle the problems of New Testament orthog- 
 raphy. There is first the question of text, for the manuscripts 
 differ widely. 
 
 (a) In the matter of spelling the usual principles of external 
 evidence do not easily ajjply. We cannot always appeal to the 
 Neutral class, say, as against the Western, or the Pre-Syrian classes 
 against the Syrian, though sometimes we may. Thus the Syrian 
 class uniformly reads Ka7repvaou/t, not Katfiapvaovix. Scribes would 
 have difference of opinion about spelling. So Aleph prefers i rather 
 than «, while B is fond of a and not i. Moreover the scribe is 
 under the constant temptation to correct the spelling in his docu- 
 ment by the si^elling of his day. It is hard to be sure that a fourth 
 century document gives us the first century spelling. Then again 
 the scribe was not always a com2:)etent judge and could also fall a 
 victim to itacism and confuse vowels and diphthongs that were at 
 that time pronounced alike. The tendency in the later Greek to 
 blend so many vowels and diphthongs into the t sound is an in- 
 stance. Tlius et, t, 1], rj, V, VL, oi could be confused, and e and at, 
 o and o). Many forms in eia were shortened to ta as Xoyta, ipidta. 
 
 (b) The final v of <tvv is usually retained unchanged as in 
 a-vv7rdcr)(o), though not always as in o-vyyev^<;. With €1/ the v is gen- 
 erally assimilated as ifx/SdXXw, but we have ivKpivia. Movable v be- 
 fore vowels is uniformly in harmony with Greek usage, but this 
 movable v is very common also before consonants, though not 
 always present, as iraa-tv rots kt\ (Matt. 5:15). Westcott and Hort 
 have ovTtos before a consonant 196 times and ovtoi only 10 times. 
 So ouTws Kul kt\ (Matt. 17:12). Tlie manuscripts differ as to the 
 use of double consonants as appa/^wv or apafiw (2 Cor. 1 :22). 
 
12 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 (e) Elision is somewhat arbitrary. It is much more rare 
 than in the carher Greek. The hiatus was not considered so ob- 
 jectionable after the manner of the Ionian writers. Dr. Ilort says 
 that "elision takes place habitually and without variation before 
 pronouns and particij)les; also before nouns of frequent occurrence, 
 as aTT apx^s, Kar oIkov. In other cases there is much diversity, and 
 occasional variation" (p. 146 of Apj^endix to Vol. II. of New 
 Testament m Greek). 
 
 (d) Crasis is rare and Kat is the most usual exami)le, especially 
 before eyw, av, ckcivos, €Kei, SO Kafwi in Lu. 1 :3, though koI cycj in 
 
 Lu. 2:48. 
 
 (e) Contraction is in general in harmony with the older Attic 
 Greek, though the Ionic influence is again perceived in such forms 
 as opioiv (Rev. 6:16). 
 
 (f) The rough breathing occurs sometimes where it is not usual 
 in the older Greek as d^tSw (Phil. 2:23) due to the lost digannna 
 or to analogy of a^opato and used occasionally in the earlier vernac- 
 ular (Mullach, Meisterhans). Such examples are common in the 
 papyri. So some documents read d<^eA7rt^ovTes in Lu. 6:35 (of. 
 d^iyXTTiKws in Hernias). Westcott and Hort accept c^* IX-n-ChL in 
 Rom,' 8:20, and good manuscrii^ts give ov;( oXi'yos in Acts 12:1S. 
 The breathings were not written in the manuscripts till long after 
 New Testament times save when the aspiration showed in the con- 
 sonant. At tills period of the language there was an increase in 
 aspiration, though in the modern Greek the reverse is seen, for 
 the aspirate is not pronounced. Compare the confusion as to h in 
 the usage of the English cockney. 
 
 (g) The prothetic vowel disappears in cdeXw (John 5:21), but 
 always ^dtkov (Gal. 4:20). 
 
 (h) In jiroper names sometimes the Hebrew is merely trans- 
 literated as in AavetS, while with other names an effort is made to 
 make a Greek word out of it as in Zaxapias, but the manuscripts 
 often vary in such matters. 
 
 (i) The pai)yri give us a good deal of help as to orthography 
 though it is t-o be rememlxavd tliat many of tlie documents i)iv- 
 servod in tlie i)a})vri are written by uneducated jieoplo and henee 
 
ORTHOGRAPHY, ACCKNT, PRONUNCIATION, PUNCTUATION. 13 
 
 do not fairly re^jresent tlie usage of the time. This is true of the 
 New Testament manuscripts. Even A B have x^P"", ^ douhle 
 accusative ending, in John 20:25, and many of the papyri show 
 this form (Moulton, Characteristics of N. T. Greek, Expositor, 
 May, 1904). So Dr. IMoulton argues as to the accusative fiei^wv 
 rather than /xec'^w, which some documents have in John 5:36. 
 Likewise he holds that, while good uncials have TrXrjp-q? as inde- 
 clinable like papyri from the second century on, it is more likely 
 that in John 1:14 the manuscripts have changed -n-X^prj to irXrjp-q'i to 
 suit later usage. As previously noted cav and aV are often inter- 
 changed in the later Koivrj. TeWepa, however, though common in 
 the New Testament, is unusual in the papjrri, but X-^fjAJ/^imi is pretty 
 uniform after the Ptolemaic period. 
 2. Accent. — This is a thorny subject. 
 
 (a) It is not long since the Greek scholar affected a scorn of 
 accent and scattered his accents about promiscuously or not at all. 
 Even now it is not uncommon to see woful slips in modern books 
 that use Greek. But "In England, at all events, every man wiU 
 accent his Greek properly who wishes to stand Avell with the world. " 
 (Chandler, Greek Accentuation, p. xxiii). 
 
 (b) However, when we come to ask what is the proper 
 accentuation for Greek words, we are at once in trouble. We 
 only know the facts from the manuscripts and the grammars. 
 The early Greek manuscripts give no accents at all, but were 
 written in uncial letters without breaks between words. Peo- 
 ple • were supjiosed to know the accent and the breathings, as 
 was the case with the Hebrew vowel points. So in Latin and 
 modern English no accents occur written on the words, though, 
 of course, accent itself exists. At best the manuscripts give 
 the accent of their day as they have received it. In the ver- 
 nacular there would be a persistence in accent with inevitable 
 changes at various points. The ancient Greeks were as sensitive to 
 a mispronounced word as an educated audience now in all lands. 
 We know how the modern Greek uses accent, but can not feel sure 
 about the ancient accent at all points. 
 
 (c) We cannot trace the history of accent from Homer to the 
 
14 A SlIOKT fSKAMMAU OF TIIK f;R?:KK NKW TKHTAMKNT. 
 
 tiiiK' of the (Ircrk _irr;iiiiin:iri:iiis, Imt Aristo})lKuics of Byzantium is 
 credited witli the Aviittcu system of accents al)Out 200 B. C. 
 
 (d) "We are troubled again as to the significance of the accent. 
 A\'as it only elevation of the voice? or does it also include stress? 
 Docs it make the accented syllable long? This last is practically 
 the ri'sult in modern Greek, hut does not seem to be true of the 
 earlier times. But both elevation and stress seem to be gradually 
 included in accent though this is doubtful as to stress. Voice-pitch 
 was the original value of accent. It is not possible to lay down 
 formal rules for Greek accent save in a general way. Sometimes 
 contrast is represented by the accent, as we say out'side, inside. 
 So Greek tI or t\. There is also emphasis in accent and accent often 
 is detennined by euphony. But one remark can ha made with 
 confidence. The word should receive the accent in reading where 
 the accent is. This truism is not without point if one hears Greek 
 read aloud, 
 
 (e) The New Testament does not seem to vary greatly in accent 
 from the earlier Greek, but we must remember our lack of infor- 
 mation for both sources. The difference between verb forms is still 
 shown by the accent as fid-rrTLo-ai (Acts 22:16). But Westcott and 
 Hort print iSe both where the verb force is retained (tSe in Attic, ef. 
 Rom. 11:22) and where the word is only an interjection (Mark 
 11:21). Prochtics occur without accent as ck, els. EncUtics are 
 used as in earlier Greek though sometimes the enclitic word has 
 some emphasis as nva in Acts 5:30. Upos ^ixi is rare (Acts 22:8), 
 but irpos fxe is common (Matt. 3:14) though in this passage a num- 
 ber of manuscripts have Trpos fii (cf. LXX). Sometimes the accent 
 is vital to the sense as toJ (not tw) in 1 Cor. 15:8. Indeclinable 
 proper names are often accented on the last syllable as BT^^oraiSa. 
 There is generally recessive accent in proper names Tv;^t\os, but 
 XpuTTos retains the accent of the verbal. 
 
 3. Pronunciation. — We refer now to the sounds of the vowels 
 and the consonants, for in a true sense accent is an element in pro- 
 nunciation. 
 
 (a) How did the New Testament writers pn)nounce their vowels 
 and consonants? To answer this (piestion correctly ve must 
 
OKTIKKiKAPirY, ACCENT, PRONrXCIATION, PUNCTUATION. 15 
 
 answer another one. Do the modern Greeks preserve the ancient 
 pronunciation? Many of them think so. It is an amusing story 
 told in Blass's Pronunciation of Ancient Greek, (Purton's transla- 
 tion, 1890,) how Stephen Gardiner, Chancellor of the University 
 of Cambridge, proposed in 1542 to refuse a degree to and expel 
 from the Senate all who did not pronounce at and c alike and who 
 distinguished in sound between oi, «, and i. It was a grievous 
 heresy that Erasmus had introduced! Now Chancellor Gardiner 
 had received the pronunciation of Greek as it had come to "Western 
 Europe from the Byzantine scholars during the Renaissance. But 
 they had brought their own pronunciation of Greek, not that of the 
 ancients. 
 
 (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 e alike. Most of them did distinguish between ol, a, t, w, v, rj, rj. 
 They did not all of them pronounce /? as v nor 8 as th. The mod- 
 ern Greek represents the b sound by /nr and the d sound by vt. 
 The asj^irate was usually pronounced by the ancients, as i<j>' linroiv 
 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 tOs 
 oAAvs for ToTs oXAois. Z is already losing the 8 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 sjDelling. 
 But some of the tendencies of modern Greek were already manifest 
 in the Koivq. 
 
 4. Punduatmi. — Punctuation is the function of the modem 
 editor, for the Greek manuscripts had the words all written together. 
 Paragraphs were not separated till late, though rough chapter di- 
 visions are early discernible. Punctuation is the result of inter- 
 pretation. The ancients w^ere w^holly without our modern conven- 
 
Ifj A SHOirr GKAMMAH OF TIIK GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 icnce in this res])ect. See change of place of the period in the 
 ])liraso €v o yeyovev in John 1:3. Westcott and Hort pointed it ev. 
 o yiyovfv ktX.. .See aho in Jolin 7:21 the place of the period with SiA 
 TovTo. As a rule German editors jmnctuate too freely according to 
 German ideas rather than those of the Greeks. The scarcity of 
 writing material made it important to utilize all the space. The 
 student of the New Testament to-day has many conveniences that 
 Timothy did not enjoy when he gave himself to the reading of 
 Paul's Epistles and the other Scriptures. We need the dash in his 
 Epistles at times (2 Tim. 4:15 f. ) because of the vehement emo- 
 tion. Often a parenthesis is called for in the Scripture text (John 
 1:15), especially in Paul's Epistles. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE DECLENSION OF SUBSTANTIVES. 
 
 1. The history of the Greek deelensions. 
 
 (a) Nouns (both substantives and adjectives) have three declen- 
 sions in Greek, though the distinction between them is not easily 
 made. In Sanskrit Wliitney finds five declensions, as in Latin, 
 but says: "There is nothing absolute in this arrangement; it is 
 merely believed to be open to as few objections as any other. No 
 general agreement has been reached among scholars as to tiie num- 
 ber and order of Sanskrit declensions' ' (Whitney, Sanskrit Gram- 
 mar, p. 111). There is ]3retty general agreement among Greek 
 scholars as to the number of declensions, but not as to the reason 
 for the divisions. Tlie first and second declensions do have vowel 
 stems and differ in one having a and the other o stems, Imt 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 
 digamma as iro'Xi-s, o.(ttv. They do differ in this respect that the 
 genitive singular of the third declension has always the added 
 suffix -OS, but even in this matter the first and second declensions 
 are in harmony. 
 
 (b) Moreover, while the modern Greek preserves fairly well the 
 third declension with many variations as to the case endings, it has 
 in the vernacular a supplementary declension that has a vowel 
 stem in the singular and a consonant stem in the plural and com- 
 bines thus the first or second and the third declensions, as TraTras, 
 TraTTciSes. This form of metaplasm is found in the earlier Greek. 
 In the modern vernacular Greek it has won a fixed place. The 
 New Testament shows a number of examples of such change from 
 the second declension to the third, as o-a/?/3aTa) (Luke 14:1), but 
 (Taft^a-iv (Matt. 12:1). So likewise we have 6 ttAoStos (Eph. 1:18) 
 
IS A SHORT fiRAMMAU OF TIIK GKKKK MOW TESTAMENT. 
 
 and TO ttAovtos (Epli. 1:8). The change from the first declension 
 to the third is rare, hut ^ vikt; (1 John 5:4) becomes to vticos in 1. Cor. 
 15:55. Ill iKaTovTapxi) (Matt. 8:13) we have tlie first declension, 
 hut in iKarovTupxov (Acts 22:25) the second. So we have Awn-pav 
 (Acts 14 :G) and Awrrpois (Acts 14:8). But the declensions pre- 
 serve their integrity well both in the papyri and in the New Test- 
 ament. 
 
 (c) The tendency towards blending the case forms that is so 
 strong in the Indo-germanic tongues served to some extent to oblit- 
 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, Wort-bildung) is necessary for the real 
 student of language. 
 
 2. Special forms in the first declension. 
 
 (a) The Ionic genitive-ablative <nrapr]s in Acts 10:1 is, accord- 
 ing to Deissmann, the rule in the pajjyri, but the modern Greek 
 retains -as. Note also o-waSutT/s in Acts 5 :2 and other similar ex- 
 amples. The so-called Doric genitive occurs in the New Testament, 
 as in the papyri and the modern Greek. So Ave have ^oppa (Luke 
 13:29), but'AvSpeov (:\Iark 1:29). Note also the genitive Mopftis 
 (John 11:1). There is much confusion in the manuscripts be- 
 ^tween Mapia (Matt. 1:16) and Mapidp. (Matt. 13:55), the latter the 
 HebrcAV form and indeclinaljle, tlie former the Hellenized declin- 
 able fonn. Dr. Hort contends for Mupia/A always for the sister of 
 Lazarus. In the New Testament and the later Greek the fonn 
 -o.pxj]'^ sui)plants as a rule -apxo<;, as TroXxTa.pxa'* (Acts 17:6). Mwuo^s 
 is Mwvojjv in accusative, Init Mwuo-ews (third declension) in the 
 genitive. 
 
 (1j) The nominative singular of tlie first declension has no ending 
 for feminine nouns, but s for masculine stems. Tlie nominative 
 plural is i for all stems. In Sanskrit the feminine nominative 
 singular has also some derivative stems. 
 
 (t) The vocative has no ending for singular or plural, but with 
 nouns in -tv;s tlie slcni vowel is shortened from d to u. The San- 
 
thp: declension of substantives. 19 
 
 skrit has no vocative ending and in a stems uses merely the unal- 
 tered stem. 
 
 (d) The genitive-aldative ending for the singular was as in the 
 Sanskrit. It appears in Greek variously as os, s, o-oio, oio, to, o. 
 See numerous examples in Homer. The first declension uses s for 
 feminine and to for masculine nouns. But to drops the t and the 
 d of the stem combines with o after do has become eo under Ionic 
 influence. Attic has an Ionic base. In the Ionic this genitive- 
 ablative appears as ceo and in Homer is jironounced as one syllable. 
 The genitive-ablative plural ending wv is the same for all the de- 
 clensions. In the Sanskrit the genitive plural ending is am or sam 
 while the ablative has a different ending bhyas. The Latin has 
 genitive plural tun and orum. The long a has become w and m has 
 become v. This w contracts with the stem vowel d making w. 
 
 (e) The locative, dative, and instrumental cases have as a rule 
 the same ending in the singular and plural of the first declension. 
 It is the dative form (at) that is used in the singular of the first 
 declension for all three cases. This at in the Sanskrit was ai or e 
 and seems to come from a longer form -abhi which occurred in 
 feminine stems. So Sanskrit tu-bhja or tu-bhjam like Latin tib(h)i 
 and mi(b)hi. This at contracts with the stem vowel d (17) into a, rj. 
 However a remnant of the original locative singular ending t occurs 
 as x"-l^~h though a and y could be explained as locative forms also. 
 The two here easily blend. There are several remains of the in- 
 strumental singular ending ^t (old Sanskrit bhi) in Homer as 
 Pirj-<lii. But in the Sanskrit singular d is the instrumental ending 
 due possibly to the union of the old associative case with the in- 
 strumental. This d is preserved in some Greek words hke aixa, 
 iravTa (17) . In the plural these three cases use o-t (with phonetic i 
 Ijreceding, Schleicher), the locative ending, like the Sanskrit su 
 and (Giles, p. 289) ais and ots instrumental. The dative, however, 
 in Latin preserves sometimes its own original ending (bhyas in 
 Sanskrit) as in dea-bus, capitibus. Homer uses the instrumental 
 plural ^iv (in Sanskrit bhis, possibly seen in d/i-^ts) in such fomis 
 as KccfxiXrj-cliLv. The old associative plural has no examples left. 
 
 (f) Tlie accusative singular has two endings in Greek v and a. 
 
20 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THK GREKK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 In tlie Sanskrit this ending is am or m, as in the Liitin wc have 
 em or m for masculine and feminine stems. But the Greek uses 
 now V (m thus appearing), now a. But in the papyri and in some 
 manuscripts as of the New Testament the vernacular uses ])oth a 
 and V as in x^P""? vvktuv (examples, of course, of the third declen- 
 sion). The vernacular of the modern Greek commonly drops v 
 entirely. The accusative i)lural ending is in Greek vs for this de- 
 clension. The V disappears, of course, before the s. The Sanskrit 
 had ans with short vowel masculine stems. So the Latin as is 
 from ans. The Greek third declension, however, like the Sanskrit, 
 uses only as without v. 
 
 3. Special forms of the second declension. 
 
 (a) The so-called Attic second declension is almost extinct in 
 the New Testament as it is wholly so in the modem Greek. How- 
 ever, Kaj as accusative appears in Acts 21:1 and 'AttoAXo) is genitive 
 (1 Cor. 8:4). 
 
 (b) ©COS is used as vocative always in New Testament (John 
 20.28), save in Matt. 27:46 in quotation from Ps. 22:1 where, how- 
 ever, 6c6s is read. But 6d occurs a few times in the Septuagint as 
 in Judges 21 :3. 
 
 (c) The name 'It^o-oCs has ^Irp-ov for all the oblique cases save the 
 accusative which is 'Itjo-ovv. 
 
 (d) 'Oo-TcW is contracted in John 19:36, but uncontracted in 
 plural da-ria (Lu. 24:39) and ^cn-eW (Matt. 23:27). In Matt. 2:3 
 *lcpoa6\viJua is still jjlural neuter and Traxra is used with tto'Ais not ex- 
 pressed as ^ is so used with the indeclinable form 'lepovo-oAiy/t ( Rev. 
 3:12). Novs has accusative vovv (1 Cor. 2 16), but genitive voo^ 
 and dative vol (third declension). See Eph. 4:23. 
 
 (e) The second (or o) declension has no distinctively feminine 
 inflection as in the first (or a) declension. However, feminine 
 words like oSJs occur with the masculine endings. The variations 
 in inflection between this declension and the masculine stems of 
 the first declension are several. The genitive-ablative singular ov 
 is the result of the contraction of oio after i has been dropi)e(l. 
 But Homer often keeps it as -oio. Tlie original ablative ending in 
 the Sanskrit singular was t or d and ajipears in ovfmvo-Oc and the ad- 
 
THE DECLENSION OP SUBSTANTIVES. 21 
 
 Vt'r]nal-ajs(T). So Latin tus {caelitus), Umbriau tu (out of), Anglo- 
 Saxon ut (out of). The genitive-ablative plural ending wv is not 
 contracted witli o of the stem, but the o has Ijeen droi)pcd. In the 
 locative, instrumental, dative cases the ending for the singular is- 
 oi which contracts with o of the stem into w. Some distinctively 
 locative forms occur, however, as oIko-i (compare dative form oikw). 
 The locative, instrmnental, dative j^lural has the locative ending 
 UTL appearing usually as ts and the instr. oi?. Homer often has i<rt 
 and sometimes the Attic. Homer also has the instrumental end- 
 ing in $€64>iv. The accusative plural ovs is made from o-vs. The 
 V is dropped before s and the o has compensative lengthening. In 
 the Doric this lengthening is often into <os, not ovs. In the voca- 
 tive singular the stem vowel o has been changed with no ending 
 after the manner of the Sanskrit (a to e) , though the vocative is 
 not strictly a case. The neuter declension is just like the mascu- 
 line with the exception that in the singular the nominative, voca- 
 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 the nominative and am with pronouns is a frequent mascu- 
 line and feminine nominative ending. Some Sanskrit neuters 
 (tat) 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, tin were sometimes pre- 
 fixed to this i and then the ni dropped, leaving a, i, 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 nom. 
 as KT^pvi, TroLfXTjv, oT the stem as &xi/aov, ttoAx. In Mk. 5:34 dvydr-qp, 
 not 6vyaT€p in the vocative form, i. e. , the nominative form is re- 
 tained, but Ovyarep in Matt. 9:22. So Trarep in Jo. 17:1, but iraryp 
 in 17:21,' and even iraryp StWe in 17:25. These are examples with- 
 out the article. 
 
 (b) KAeis has accusative singular /<XeiSa (Luke 11:52) and kXcTv 
 
22 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 (Eev. 3:7), l)otli KAetSas (Matt. 1G:19) und kXcTs (Rev. 1:18) as 
 accusative plural. Xapts has usually accusative singular x'^'-^ 
 (Ilel). 4:16), but xapt™ occurs twice (Acts 24:27; JuJe 4). Tpafx- 
 fmTtL<i, not ypuixfjuaTew;, is the accusativG plural (]\Iatt. 23:34). This 
 form is found in the earlier Greek, in the papyri, and is the fonn 
 in the modern Greek. On the other hand IxOvas, not I'x^i's i« the 
 accusative plural (Matt. 14:17). Kc'pas has Kcpara, not Keija (Rev, 
 5:G). 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, vavv^. But Bao-tAevs and words 
 like it have a, and still use it in the modern Greek. The notice- 
 able tendency in the vernacular of the Koin/ to use both a and v, as 
 in x^f^^j ^^^ ^o^ succeed and was due largely to the ignorant 
 classes. Cf. N. "W. Greek. The accusative plural for these genders 
 is generally as, but some have vs like vavs. In some words also the 
 accusative is like the nominative (cf. the Latin cs) as TroXets, ^ao-tXcts. 
 (c) The genitive jilural opeW is uncontracted sometimes (Rev. 
 6:15). ^oXoixwv has genitive SoXo/xwvtos in Acts 3:11, though usu- 
 ally 2oAo/xa>i/os (]\Iatt. 12:42). The third declension could easily 
 be divided into two or more and 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 
 yevovi (Phil. 3:5). But with words like /SamXevs os ai)pears as m. 
 This may be due to the dro|)i)ing of digannua and the lengthening 
 of one vowel. In Homer we have /Sua-iXrjos where e, and not o, is, 
 lengthened. A similar i)henomcnon is observable with ttoXis, ttoXcws, 
 in Homer ttoXi^os, where an c has been inserted and i drojipril. 
 Observe also the acute accent remains on the antepenult because 
 originally ttoXcws was pronounced as two syllables. Sehleichoi' 
 thinks that this ws may be rather like the Sanskrit as. The geni- 
 tive-ablative plural TToXctov likewise retains the acute accent on tlie 
 antepenult for a similar reason, and the wv does not contract with 
 the inserted £. As already ol>served contraction does not always 
 occur in tlie genilivi'-alilali\x' ]ihn'al with forms like x"'^*'"*"- 
 
THE DECLKNSI()N OF SUBSTANTIVES. 23 
 
 (d) Perhaj^s it is in the nominative singular that the forms of 
 the third declension vary most. Neuters, of course, will be the 
 mere stem for nominative, accusative, and vocative singular, if the 
 last letter is a consonant that can stand at the end of a word. If 
 not, the letter is simply dropped as in (TSifm(T). But some neuters 
 instead of this change the consonant in these cases, or originally 
 had both, as Ke/3as(T), v8co/3(aT). Or else the final s is retained and 
 the last vowel changed as yeVosCes). Neuter plurals for these cases 
 have always simply a. JNIany masculine and feminine substantives 
 have the usual s as the nominative ending with necessary euphonic 
 changes as tA-Trts. Others have the mere stem as atwv. Still others 
 have the stem with lengthened vowel as ttoi/x^v or yepwv^r). In the 
 modern Greek a curious nominative is made from the accusative 
 singular as v ^Ixom. The nominative jDlural (masculine and femi- 
 nine) is always es, sometimes contracted with preceding e (stem as 
 fiaaiXets or added as ttoXcis). 
 
 (e) The locative, instrumental, dative cases have in the singu- 
 lar the locative ending t without any exceptions. Sometimes con- 
 traction takes place as with yeVci, 7ro\a. In the plural these cases 
 use the locative ending o-i always. 
 
 5. Number in substantives. 
 
 (a) The dual is no longer used in the New Testament, nor does 
 it occur in the Septuagint, excej)t in the form Svo itself, which is 
 indeclinable save that the form Bva-c (plural locative ending) is 
 found (Lu. 16:13). But this form appears in Aristotle, and is 
 common in the papyri, where we see also (Deissmann, Bible 
 Studies) Srw, 8vwv, Bveiv. "Aixcjiw does not appear in the New Test- 
 ament, but only afxtftoTepoi. and this sometimes apparently for more 
 than two (Acts 19 : 1 G) . The dual was never used largely in the Greek 
 (Ionic dropped it before the time of kolvij) and in the modern 
 Greek is wholly disused. It is a logical effort to distinguish pairs 
 of things, as the two eyes. The Sanskrit employed it, but Latin had 
 only duo and ambo which had a plural inflection in the oblique 
 cases. 
 
 (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 SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK ^"l:\V TESTAMENT. 
 
 plural is used to avoid l)(^'ing too definite as with ol ^t/towtcs (Matt. 
 2:20), or again the word may be adverbial (accusative of general 
 reference) as icra (Phil. 2:G). 
 
 (c) Neuter plurals often use verl)S in the singular being looked 
 at as a single whole as to. tpya— frnprvpet (John 10:25), but not 
 always as to, oXAws €)(ovTa— Kpv/BrjvuL oi SvvavTuL (1 Tim. 5:25). Here 
 the items are enipliasized. A singular substantive may have a 
 collective idea and so be used with a plural verb as 6 TrXetoTos oxXik 
 
 larpaxrav (Matt. 21:8). 
 
 6. Gender of substantives. 
 
 (a) Tlie noun 'Ayap (Gal. 4 :25) is not used as neuter with to 
 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. 11 :4 Paul uses ^ fiduX as we have some- 
 times in the Septuagint, perhaps because of the idea of uio^uVt; at- 
 tril)uted to Baal. Compare also the use of ^ with 'le/jocroAu/ui (Matt. 
 2:8) evidently with the idea of iro'Ats. 
 
 (I)) Any noun used for a male is masculine, and any noun 
 used for a female is feminine. Why nouns that have no natural 
 gender are not always neuter we cannot tell. Hence no absolute 
 rule can ])e laid down for the guidance of modern students, tliough 
 the presence of the Greek article with substantives sliows already 
 how the word in question was used. All tlie older Indo-germanic 
 languages have three genders, but the Sanskrit has no gender for 
 the pei^sonal pronouns, nor has the Greek except avros when so 
 used. Delbrueck thinks that originally all the masculine iiouns 
 of tlie a declension were feminine, and all the feminine of the o de- 
 clension were masculine. 
 
 (c) The New Testament usage does not vary greatly from the 
 earlier custom.. The classic 6 7rXoT)Tos sometimes (Rom. 2:4). So 
 also occasionally eXeos, C^Xos. 'O Seo-p,os (Lu. 13. IG) is TCL^apAin 
 the plural (Lu. 8:29) as well as oi h^crpjoi (Pliil. 1:13). In general 
 it should be said that many ])roper nann's are treated as indeclin- 
 able when they could 1)0 inileeted like B7/^^yiy.(Matt. 21:1). 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE DECLENSION OF ADJECTIVES. 
 
 1 . The origin of adjectives. 
 
 (a) The line of demarkation between substantive and adjective 
 is not easily drawn. Giles, for instance, in his admirable Manual 
 of Comparative Philology has no separate treatment of adjectives, and 
 treats them incidentally in connection with the discussion of sub- 
 stantives and suffixes. So also Whitney in his Sanskrit Grammar 
 has no distinct treatment of adjectives, but says, "The accordance 
 in inflection of substantive and adjective stems is so complete that 
 the two cannot be separated in treatment from one another." 
 
 (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, 
 and not by grammatical rule." 
 
 (c) Thus it is clear that the adjective is a gradual variation from 
 the substantive. The substantive is an essential appellative (ovo- 
 imTaiTTidera). But substantives were doubtless used in this de- 
 scriptive sense before adjectives arose and are still so used, as, for 
 instance, we say brother man. So in the New Testament eV t<3 
 
 'lo/aSavjj TTOTa/jto) (Matt. 3:0), irpoatk-qXvOaT^ Siwv opu (Hcb. 12;22). 
 
 This is, indeed, apposition, but it is descriptive apposition, and it 
 is just at this point that the adjective emerges (Delbrueck), though, 
 of course, at a very early period. 
 
 (d) Adjectives then specialize one use of substantives, though 
 the substantive retains in some measure the descriptive apposi- 
 tional usage. But Greek has a much more developed system of 
 adjectives than the Sanskrit and it has survived fairly well in the 
 modern Greek, though a strong tendency exists in the vernacular 
 to simplify adjectives to one declension. 
 
20 A fJlK^irr fiUAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 2. The declension of adjectives. 
 
 (a) Some Greek adjectives, like most of the Sanskrit a stem 
 adjectives, have only one inflection for all genders, though they 
 are actually not used for the neuter. So Trends (2 Cor. 9;9), apvat 
 (Matt. 7:15) and cnryyevis (Lu. 1:36). It is here that we can best 
 Bee the evolution of the adjective. 
 
 (b) Still other adjectives have only two sets of endings, the 
 masculine and the feminine being the same. So evycvrys ( Lu. 10:12), 
 r\£(os (Matt. 16:22), p.tit,wv (John 14:28). 
 
 (c) Sometimes also adjectives which can l^e inflected with three 
 sets of endings are used with only two. So aicivios (Ileb. 5:9) is 
 feminine. 
 
 (d) Once again some adjectives are no longer used with three 
 terminations, as iprjfjMs (Gal. 4:27). Both of these examjjles come 
 ultimately from tlie Septuagint, and oo-ios (1 Tim. 2:8) has two 
 terminations as early as Plato (Simcox). See also fxd.T(uo<s 17 Oprja-- 
 K€ia (Jas. 1:26). 
 
 (e) The majority of Greek adjectives have three endings, one 
 for each gender. This is true of all tlie participles and the other 
 verbal adjectives. All the distinctively feminine inflections belong 
 to the first (a declension). But tlie masculine and neuter inflec- 
 tions fall into either the second (o declension) or the third declen- 
 sion (consonant and close vowel). 
 
 (f) Compound adjectives like areKvos (Lu. 20:28) or cvycvr/s gen- 
 erally have onl}' two endings. So with the Attic second declen- 
 sion (tXtCDs). 
 
 (g) Tlie participles also make the feminine forms according to 
 the first declension, l>ut the masculine and neuter follow either the 
 second or the third. The Greek participle endings are very much 
 like tliose of the Sanskrit and Latin participles. 
 
 (h) The New Testament usage is in general in harmony with 
 the older language. Xpva-av (not Xpv(Trjv) occurs in Rev. 1:13. 
 'H/xicrovs, not r]fU(T€o<;^ a}»pears in Mark 6:23 (thus also in papyri, 
 Deissmann), and /Sa^e'tos, not fiaOio<i, in Luke 24:1. Suyyevr/s lias cnry- 
 y(.vTjv according to some documents in Rom. 16:11 and <rvyyev€v(TL i.'^ the 
 correct n-ading in Mark 6:4. This word also has a late feiniuine 
 
UNIVERSITY ! 
 
 *^ir~_^S=*f^ DECLENSION OF ADJECTIVES. 27 
 
 in -IS (Luke 1:3G). nXiypi;s is prol)al)ly indeclinable (as in jiapyri) 
 in John 1:14 and is j^robably the true reading in Acts 6:5. 
 3. The comparmm of adjectives. 
 
 (a) It is not always necessary to use the comparative ana super- 
 lative forms in order to express the ideas of comparison. The 
 other devices used will be discussed under the syntax of the adjec- 
 tive. 
 
 (b) In the Sanskrit the suffixes of primary derivation for com- 
 parative and superlative {iyans, istha) are much like -«oi', -to-ros 
 of the Greek. In the modern Greek these suffixes are not used at 
 all, and in the earlier Greek they are less common than -T€po<s, 
 -TttTos, which suffixes are like the Sanskrit suffixes of secondary de- 
 rivation (tara, tama) and alone survive in modern Greek. 
 
 (c) 'AK/DiySe'o-TttTos (Acts 26:5) and dyiwraTos (Jude 20) are the 
 only superlatives in -raros in the New Testament (Blass), and there 
 are not a great number in -to-ros, though we have /xeyto-ros (2 Pet. 
 1:4), iXdxiCTTos (Luke 16:10), and a few others. The comparative 
 in -T£/Dos is common in the New Testament as To/xwrepos (Heb. 4:12), 
 nor is iwv uncommon as in fiec^wv (JSiati. 11:11). Cf. lUKportpo's in 
 same verse, laxi-ov (jaxuov) supplants daa-a-ov (John 20:4). 
 
 (d) A double comparative with both forms appears in /jLu^orcpo^ 
 (3 John 4), like our vernacular "lesser." So Paul makes a com- 
 parative on a superlative in iXaxt-o^rorepos (Eph. 3:8) like our 
 vulgar ''leaster." Cf. yxeyto-ToVaTos in papyri. 
 
 (e) Comparatives made from adverbs we see like e^wrcpos (Matt. 
 8:12) or from prepositions like Tr/odrepos (Eph. 4:22). 
 
 (f) The superlative is little used in the New Testament. In the 
 vernacular of the modern Greek the superlative form is hardly used 
 at all, but rather the article and the comparative form. The be- 
 ginning of this usage is apparent in the New Testament as in 
 ofxtL^oiv (Matt. 18:4) and fxetCwv (Matt. 18:1). When the superla- 
 tive is used it is usually elative (like our very), not the true su- 
 perlative. 
 
 (g) Other devices used are fiaXXov, p-dXiara. But sometimes the 
 context is relied on to suggest comparison. Compare Luke 15:7, 
 In INIk. 7:36 we have a doul)le comparative p.aXXov Trepicra-oTepov, 
 
28 A SHOUT GRAMMAR OF THE GRKRK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Prepositions like; Trupd, vnep, etc., can be used also ratlur tlian ^ 
 after a couiparative as Heb. 9:23; Luke 16:8. The ablative is com- 
 mon after tbe comparative as irovrjpoTepa eaurov (Matt. 12:45). 
 
 4. Adjectival nnmcrdls, 
 
 (a) WH read reWepa (Rev. 4:()), reaaepoKovTa (Matt, 4:2), Tco-crc- 
 paKovTtt«T>/s (Acts7:23), ])utTtcro-a/3£s( Acts 21:9), T£Wa/3a9( Jo. 11:17). 
 The jjapyri (^loulton) do not, save in cases of ignorant scribes, 
 use T€o-o-cpes, but the form occurs in the later Byzantine Greek, 
 though not in modern Greek. 
 
 (1)) The Sanskrit, like the Greek, inflects the first four cardinal 
 numl)ers in the various genders, though, of course, in only one 
 number in each instance. The Greek words themselves are like 
 the Sanskrit in root. AVith dva ets, kuO" eU (Rev. 21:21; Mark 
 14:19) the form is not indeclinal)le, but the preposition ^so in 
 modern Greek also) is simply the original adverb with no prepo- 
 sitional force. In Sanskrit cardinal numerals from 5-19 are usually 
 inflected, but without gender, though sometimes indeclinable. 
 In Greek cardinal nun>l)ers from 5-10 are indeclinabL.;. 
 
 ((•) IIpwTos as an ordinal is used in Mark 16:9. Elsewhere the 
 cardinal els is found as in Matt. 28:1. The ordinals are all adject.- 
 ival like the cardinals from 200 up. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE DECLENSION OF PRONOUNS. 
 
 1. Pronominal roots. 
 
 (a) Substantives are kin to verbs in root and adjectives are 
 variations of the substantive. But pronouns belong to a separate 
 stock and Bopp has rightly divided roots into verbal and pronom- 
 inal. All other forms as adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, in- 
 tensive particles, are really case forms of nouns or pronouns. Hence 
 three sets of stems stand out with special prominence built on two 
 root stocks. These stems are verbs, nouns, pronouns. 
 
 (b) Once more noun and pronoun are vitally connected with 
 the verb. The noun is so employed in root formation and the 
 pronoun is used to form the personal endings of the verb. Hence 
 the actual verb form is made up from the two roots of the lan- 
 guage, the verbal and the pronominal. 
 
 (c) Monro (Homeric Grammar, p. 57) further remarks that 
 noun stems name or describe while pronouns only point out, the 
 one is predicative, the other demonstrative. In a sense then all 
 pronouns were originally demonstrative. In the Sanskrit the pro- 
 nominal roots are demonstrative ("Whitney) and differ fundamentr 
 ally from the roots of nouns. 
 
 2 . Brief sketch of pronominal forms. 
 
 Some of the forms are the most primitive known in the Indo- 
 germanic languages. In the Sanskrit personal pronouns of the first 
 and second persons have no distinction of gender and are made up 
 of fragments of various roots. 
 
 (a) In Greek cyw was originally eywv like the Sanskrit ctham. 
 This eyw form appears in Latin ego, Gothic ik, German ich, French 
 je, Anglo-Saxon ic, English I. So o-u is in Doric tv hke the Latin 
 tu, etc. The Sanskrit is tuam. Compare aham. The oblique forms 
 
30 A SHOHT GRAMMAR OK TIIK CJKKKK M:\V TESTAMENT. 
 
 in tlic siiifiular conu' from anotlior h^tcm Avliich is i)racti(:i]]y the 
 same in all the ahove languages, mam, i/j-i, me, etc. (crc is from 
 re, orio;inal tuc) for the accusative; i/xemo, ifj-eo, i/xov (fiov) and 
 trao, aio, (tov for the genitive-ablatiye; c/iot, o-ol have the locative 
 ending used for locative, dative, instrumental; in the plural Ty/u-cts, 
 v/iAcis come from the Lesbian d/i./x,es, r/i/xc's; ■^/j.w, vfjuav are a new fonn- 
 ative (Giles), ^/uv, v(uv are locative forms. 
 
 (li) The New Testament does not use the third jjersonal form 
 of ov, ol, €, (7^£ts, etc. Instead the forms of avros occur in all gen- 
 ders and both numbers. In the modern Greek this form in some 
 of the ol)lique cases is. shortened to the enclitic forms rov, twv, etc. 
 But on the whole personal pronouns have retained the case-forms 
 better than any other parts of speech. 
 
 (c) The possessive pronouns c/ao's, tros are made from the per- 
 sonal pronominal stems, and yixeTepos, v^i.Ttpo'i, are really eom})ara- 
 tive forms. The reflexive is merely the personal pronoun plus the 
 intensive aurds. 
 
 (d) The reflexive forms of the first and second i)ersons are not 
 used in the plural except ii/awv avTwv (1 Cor. 7:3.")) for t//xwv avTw is 
 emphatic rather than reflexive in 2 Thess. 1:4 (Simcox). Tlie 
 uneontracted form atavTov alone is used. Westcott and Ilort print 
 avTou, etc., al)Out twenty times (against most recent editors) ratlier 
 than always avToi) or lauTov. So we have aurov in John 2:24 and 
 eavTov in Luke 15:17. The variations in the manuscrii)ts make it 
 hard to decide this point. 
 
 (e) The demonstrative o8c is formed from the old demonstrative 
 o and Se and is declined like 6. Outo? is a})parently a doubling of 
 6 and to (stem of 6) with a connecting vowel v and is a strength- 
 ened demonstrative. The form ovroa-C does not ap2>ear in the New 
 Testament. 'EkcTvos (Homer, kcTvos) is from the locative form (ad- 
 verb) €-Kt-r (com})are Latin hi-c, lOnglisb bi-ther). To-t-ovro? is 
 still another compound of ovto? and toT-os. TotoGro, not tolovtov, is 
 neuter in the New Testament. Totos (roido-St) is the demonstrative 
 t<) which corresponds the relative oTos and ottoTos an<l tin' interroga- 
 tive ttoio?. In nil idern Greek o oTToTos is the eonnnon relative. A 
 similar (•orres])ondence is shown between, too-os {roiroahc) and 
 
THK DKCLKNSION OK TRONOUNS. 31 
 
 roorovTos, oo-os, ;in<l ttoo-os. Ai'tos h;is not Ixjen explaiiUMl nor 6 Setva. 
 
 (f) Tlic relative is tlio demonstrative os developed like; Eng- 
 lish that. In Homer ws is often demonstrative ''thus." "Oo-ns is 
 merely the addition of the indefinite tU to os ])oth of which may 
 he declined or only rts. But in the New Testament this form is 
 never used outside of the nominative except in case of ews otov 
 (John 9: IS) and on as accusative neuter (Luke 10:35). In the 
 modern Greek os as a relative pretty nearly disappears out of the 
 conmion speech and besides 6 ottoTos we see ottov and irov used, as 
 6 dvTjp OTTOV eiSa. Compare the vulgar English use of "whar" as 
 ' 'the man whar did that is a rascal. ' ' 
 
 (g) The interrogative form n's is really the same root as the 
 Latin quis, Sanskrit kas, Gothic kwas, German wer, Anglo-Saxon 
 hwa, English who. In English and Latin the relative is formed 
 from the same root, l)ut in Greek the relative has a demonstrative 
 origin like English relative that. Both Latin and Greek make an 
 indefinite form from this root as ali-quis, ris. 
 
 (h) The reciprocal pronoun oXAt^Awv is, of course, a reduplica- 
 tion of oAAos as in English we say "one another." "iSios is kin to 
 Latin simm (/re) and so means what belongs to one's self. The 
 modern Greek has developed a number of special pronominal 
 forms like Kavets besides those retained from the old Greek. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 
 
 1 . Rela t ion of verb form s and noun forms. 
 
 (a) The verl) forms actually in use are made from primitive 
 roots like X£iVto(\t7r) or from denominative stems like n/xaw (n/ia). 
 Substantives and adjectives are constantly also made from verbs as 
 XoiTTos (KtiTTw). "The relation between sul)stantive and verb is at 
 all times very close" (Giles, Handbook of Comparative Philology, 
 p. 424). 
 
 (b) The various verb forms use suffixes as substantives do. 
 "These suffixes, however, are exactly parallel to the suffixes in 
 the substantive, and in many instances can be identified with 
 them" (Giles, ibid). In fact two of the so-called verb fonns re- 
 main as much noun as verb, the infinitive and participle. The 
 infinitive is always a verbal substantive, and the participle a verbal 
 adjective. 
 
 (c) The Sanskrit was especially rich in verbal substantives that 
 illustrate the close relation between verb and substantive. These 
 purely verbal substantives had no tense and no voice, but were fixed 
 case-forms as the genitive-ablative in as, the locative in i, the da- 
 tive in a'l or e, the accusative in am or m. This accusative verl)al 
 form gradually displaced the others in Sanskrit as did the Latin 
 supine in turn. But in Greek the dative form gains the day as in 
 Homer Sowai is like Sanskrit devane and i^/xam is like Sanskrit 
 vidmane. Fonns like \vclv are probal)ly in the locative. The 
 Greek infinitive thus is a verbal substantive in the dative case (or 
 locative) thou^di gradually in usage the dative case idea is no 
 longer retained and tliis form is used in any case in the singular 
 eaye the vocative. Voice and tense api)ear in the Greek infinitive. 
 
 (d) Tlie Sanskrit likewise uses verbal adjectives made by suf- 
 
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 33 
 
 fixes quite similar to those in the Greek (ant, mana, tn, 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 l^oth numbers and all 
 genders, though the infinitive is itself indeclinable. In the modern 
 Greek the final v of the infinitive is dropped as Xva. 
 
 (e) In the New Testament there are no peculiar forms for those 
 verbal nouns, though ttciv (also ttTv), not tticTv, 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 eA'idence of the papyri. 
 
 2. The building of the verb. 
 
 (a) The verb (verbum, word) is the word par excellence. It is 
 the main word in the sentence and as such receives more changes 
 and expresses thereby more varieties of meaning than the substan- 
 tive. 
 
 (b) Perhaps originally the roots were not distinctively either 
 verb or substantive, but in the Sanskrit the substantive had an 
 earlier and fuller development than did the verb. The system of 
 case endings used in noun inflection is best seen in the Sanskrit, 
 but the verb conjugation appears in its perfection in the Greek. 
 The tense system is fairly well developed in the Sanskrit, but the 
 modes and the voices not so much so. In the Latin the verb 
 swings far away from the line of progress seen in the Greek, so that 
 Greek and Latin are more unlike in verb conjugation than in noun 
 inflection, though both grow out of tendencies observable in the 
 Sanskrit. In the early Sanskrit the aorist is very common in 
 various modes, but it almost disappears in the later. 
 
 (c) The Greek verb is a complicated, though beautiful, piece of 
 word mechanism, and needs to be studied analytically. Mere 
 memorizing of the conjugations is not enough, though necessary. 
 The first thing to do is to find the verb stem or theme which may 
 be a root like \nr or a derivative stem like tijuu. Around this theme 
 or verb stem the verb forms are built with architectural skill. The 
 
 3 
 
34 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 grouml lloor, .so to speak, is the aorist tense (the old aorist, the 
 so-called second aorist) which is often identical with the present 
 as €-<}>rj-v. By a series of suffixes the other tenses, the modes, the 
 voices, the persons, the number are all expressed. 
 
 (d) The suffixes include all the 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 the 
 verb grows. Thus on the theme Xitt 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 
 secondary) which may have been originally one. 
 
 (e) In the earlier Greek there is a strong tendency towards 
 drojiping the j^ersonal endings. All ver])s were originally /« verbs. 
 In Homer many verbs have /u that do not in the Attic, wliile in 
 the New Testament and the papyri many of the Attic verbs in fu 
 are dropping the fjn as SiSoi (Rev. 3:9), lo-Tavw (Rom. 3:30). In the 
 modern Greek the /jll forms belong only to the high style. The 
 common people use only w verbs. The early Greeks had thus two 
 systems of conjugation, the fu inflection where the personal end- 
 ings were put directly to the root or root plus mode and tense suf- 
 fixes, and the w inflection where the jiersonal endings are connect- 
 ed with the tense and mode stem l)y variable vowels °/« . But the 
 constant history of language was in the direction of the disuse of 
 the fit inflections and the unification of all verbs under the w con- 
 jugation as with d<f>Lov(nv (Rev. 11:9). As with nouns, so with 
 verbs the dual is no longer in use. The papyri (Deissmann) have 
 even Swo/aui like B in the Gospels and Acts. 
 
 3. The tenses. 
 
 (a) The aorist. The New Testament preserves the original 
 second aorist of the fu form (non-thematic) which is really the 
 original vurl>-form, as iaryjv, eyi/wv. The second aorist form (the- 
 matic) with the variable vowel °/« ai)})ears also as cXittov. The re- 
 dui)licated aorist also survives as yyayov (TAike 2'2:r)l). There is 
 
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 35 
 
 even a reduplicated first aorist, eKeKpuia (Acts 24:21). The first 
 aorist forms with "/^ (with or without o-) are frequent as cXela, 
 tKpiva. To obtain the root, "A, °/e, or cr"A must be dropped. One 
 of the peculiarities of the New Testament usage is the increased 
 use of "A even with second aorist stems. This usage existed already 
 in the case of eiTra, ^veyxa, cTreo-a along with etTTor, ^vtyKov, cttcctov. In. 
 the New Testament, as in the papyri, it is extended greatly to such 
 forms as ^X6av, etSav, dvevpav, dveiXav. In fact, the modern Greek 
 uses only some dozen of the old second aorists. Everywhere else 
 the later first aorist has the field. The ending oaav, common in 
 Septuagint, existing in papyri, and frequent in modern Greek ver- 
 nacular, is strongly attested for TrapeXdfioa-av (Mg. of W H) in 
 2 Thess. 3:6. 'Rfxaprrjaa (Rom. 5:14) as well as rnxaprov (1 Cor. 
 7:28) is found. The growth is towards aorists with o-a. We have 
 iBwKa/jicv in 1 Thess. 4:2. Again forms like dcfyrjKes (Rev. 2:4) occur 
 as in the papyri and the modern Greek. 'Eytv-qd-qv is found also 
 (Acts 4:4). In Acts 28:26 eiVoV, not etTre, is the imperative form. 
 In Mark 12:1 i^iScro, not iieBoro^ has lost the root vowel and the 
 thematic vowel e has taken its place. The New Testament pre- 
 serves the three aorists in Ka (ISwKa, tdrjKa, ^ko). 
 
 (b) The present-tense system. In no part of the Greek verb 
 (and Sanskrit) do we have such a complicated system as in the 
 present system. There are (Brugmann) thirty-two classes of Indo- 
 germanic verbs in the tense system, thirty of which the Greek^os- 
 sesses. However, they can all be grouped under seven simple 
 divisions which are practically the same as the Sanskrit systems. 
 If the present is built on the aorist (or identical with it as is often 
 true like <}>r]-fiL), the obvious and easy way to make the present 
 would be to add the jDrimary personal endings to the aorist or 
 present stems, and this is seen in such forms as ^7;-/x,t. Here €-(f}r]-v 
 is either aorist or imperfect, for there would be no distinction in 
 forms. The imperfect is merely a variation of the present stem 
 with secondary endings. Some of these presents are reduplicated 
 like Si-8a)-/u,i, for reduplication is not confined to the perfect. Rather 
 it seems to begin with some aorists, continue with some presents, 
 and then be taken up by the perfect tense. What is called the 
 
36 A SHOltT GRAMMAR Or THE GKEEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 variable (tlicinatic) vowel class is but a step removed from the 
 root class, for lAey-o-v is exactly like e-XiTr-o-v (Giles) in form. 
 Hence we may argue that Xe'y-o-/At (Xe'yw) is made from the aorist 
 stem by the addition of the thematic vowel. If so, e\eyov was 
 originally aorist as well as later imperfect like €-<t>r}-v. This fact 
 throws some light on the frequent use of tXcyov in the New Testa- 
 ment, for instance. The v class (nasal class) comprises both of 
 the previous classes, those that merely add one of the v combina- 
 tions of the root (non-thematic) as a-^i-vw-fu, and those that use 
 the varial)le vowel also (thematic) as d/juupT-dv-tj), Xufxfidvoi. The 
 aorist and the imperfect, of course, differ as e-Xa/S-ov, i-Xdfi/3av-ov. 
 The strong vowel class is just like the variable vowel class save 
 that the root vowel has been strengthened. Here a distinction, as 
 in the v class, exists between the aorist and the imperfect, as €-<^v7-ov, 
 l-<^evy-ov. The T class differs from the variable vowel class only in 
 the insertion of t before the variable vowel and the consequent 
 euphonic changes c-ySa^-i^v, ySaTr-ro). The t class likewise inserts i 
 before the variable vowel with various euphonic results such as 
 oreX-Xo), Kr]pva--(T(i>. Not all the verbs in the crK°/e or io-K°/e class are 
 inceptive, and some have reduplication as yt-yvw-o-Kw. The New 
 Testament writes yivwo-Kw, ytvofuu. The uncontracted form Bvvaa-ai 
 (Matt. 5:36) and the contracted form Smr] (Mark 9:22) both exist. 
 So g, and not «, is the usual form of contracts in ew for second per- 
 son middle singular indicative. New presents like o-tt^ko) (Phil. 
 1:27) are built from the perfect stem. *H^iev (Mark 1 :34) is treated 
 like an uncompounded w verb. In Rev. 2:20 note d^ets from d^coj. 
 In rjpwTow (Matt. 15:23) we have Ionic contraction of aw verbs like 
 cto. Note reading of A vikovvtl (Rev. 2:7). The imperfect, like the 
 aorist, has forms in a. So ilxav (Mark 8:7). In axo<Tav (John 
 15:22, 24) and iSoXiova-av (Rom. 3:13, from the Septuagint) the 
 imperfect follows the aorist in the use of oaav like the papyri and the 
 modern Greek. Winer is in error, however, in citing eSiSoaav 
 (John 19:3) as an example, for So is here the root and aav 
 the usual secondary ending with p-i verl)S in the third person 
 l)lural. This example does not ai)]»ear in Winer-Schmiedel, sec. 
 13, 14. 'Ert^ov./ (Acts 3:2) and iScSow (.Vets ,4:33) sometimes 
 
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 37 
 
 displace the /u-i foriii.s, as do d<^tov(nv (Rev. 11:0), o-wtovo-ti/ (Matt. 
 13:13). 
 
 (c) The future system; The future; tense is a later (leveloi)ment 
 and the tense has had a varied history. The Sanskrit had a peri- 
 phrastic future made by a future active participle usually with an 
 auxiliary. This method of making the future by an auxiliary and 
 participle or infinitive has persisted till now. In the Germanic 
 tongues the auxiliary and the infinitive is the only way of forming 
 this tense. English has no future by the use of suffix. In the 
 modern Greek the commonest way of forming the future is by 
 means of deXu) and the infinitive (like English). Jebb thinks that 
 Herodotus shows that the vernacular early began this usage. Here 
 the origin of the idiom is seen in the purpose expressed by the aux- 
 iliary verb. But in the New Testament we must insist on the full 
 force of 6eXw as in John 7:17. Perhaps the original method was to 
 have neither special form nor auxiliary, but to leave it to the im- 
 agination to tell when to project a verb into the future. Thus we 
 still stay: "I go home next week." So Jesus said epxofML koL 
 ■jrapakrjfjixpofjuaL (John 14:3). Some verbs never formed a future tense 
 at all as et/Ai, though Iktwopxii is made from epxofjuit. Elfxt, as future 
 is not in the New Testament. Another device used to express time 
 is /AcAXw with the infinitive (aorist or present and oiice the future 
 in the New Testament, as in earlier Greek) as in Matt. 11:14; Acts 
 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 o- is much more common, though in 
 Homer little distinction exists between the aorist subjunctive 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 ojDinion of Delbrueck. 
 The modern Greek has no future form at all and, when not using 
 6e\a) and infinitive, has Od and the subjunctive (cf. Homer). 
 Forms like -n-LOfmL (Luke 17:'S), (fxiyo/MiL (iJ)i(l.) give color to the 
 
38 A SHOIJT GIIAMMAR OF TIIK OHEKK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 aoristic origin of the I'utuiL; form. It may l)u that some verl).s make 
 tlie future from the aorist and some from the present. In the New 
 Testament we have c^x^oi, however, as in Acts 2:17. 'EXmovaLv 
 (Matt. 12:21) and similar verbs drop the a, like the Attic future, 
 but jSaTTTtVw retains it (Matt. 3:11). KaAeo-o), reXeo-o) retain the o-, 
 while both a-rroXeaoi (]\Iatt. 21:41) and a-n-oXS) (1 Cor. 1:19) occur. 
 The form (Doric) Trca-ovfuii (made from o-e^/e) is in the New Testa- 
 ment, but ^eviofjuiL. In Rev. 22:19 we have d^eXw (so Septuagint) 
 from dcfiaipiw. The usual future of lii^uid verbs («°/0 like Kpivw is 
 common. So also aTroOavovimi. The Doric future seems like a coni])i- 
 nation of o- and e (liquid verbs), or is it that a-e°/f is an original end- 
 ing? This latter is entirely i)ossible and the fact that the old Doric 
 and Homer both have cre°/€ (cf. Sanskrit syo) lends color to the 
 idea that the Indo-germanic had such a suffix. Cf. Kuehner- 
 Blass, Laut-und Formenlehre, II, S. 105 f. I may add that Dr. 
 W. 0. Carver, of this Seminary, strongly inclines to this view. 
 Hirt (Handbuch, etc., S. 403 1), however, considers o-£°/c to be a 
 union of a- and the liquid e. The future appears in tlie New Tes- 
 tament only in the indicative mode and in the verbal nouns (in- 
 finitives and participles). 
 
 (d) The perfect system. This tense presents some special diffi- 
 culties both as to formation and signification. VCe are concerned 
 only with the formation, though it may be remarked tliat in the 
 Sanskrit, as the aorist disappears, the i)erfect increases in use with 
 apparent loss of precise distinctions. Both Greek an.l Sanskrit 
 preserve reduplication, probably originating from the iterative and 
 reduplicated present like yiyvwcrKU). The perfect then is in form a 
 variation from the present. However, we are utterly at sea as to 
 the origin of ku which is usually added to tlie perfect active stem 
 before the personal ending. The k may be due to some redupli- 
 cated K stems in the present, which set the style. Some color is 
 lent to this idea by the presence of some older perfect forms with- 
 out the K as oT8a, ylyova, XtAoiTra, and the aspirati'd forms like 
 yeypu(f>u. In fact a form without k or a ap]>ears in some verl)s like 
 e-o-Ta-mt (Acts 12:14). Besides ^kw, though present in form, lias 
 
 the inclining of the jx-rfect. Note i$y\6ov ^cal rjKto (Jo. 8:42). All 
 
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 39 
 
 this seems to sliow tliat the conniion ku for tlio active was a gradual 
 development. This Ka was used also witli a few aorists (eSowca, 
 eOrjKa^ rjKa) . Compare modern Greek iXv6i]Ka for iXvOrjv. In the Latin 
 a similar phenomenon occm's in the ending vi as in uma-vi, wliich 
 has not been exjjlained. 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 (Ijoth aorist and per- 
 fect). The modern Greek has wholly dropped the perfect form 
 save in the passive participle. Instead l^w with the aorist infini- 
 tive (a, not ai) is used as £x« Awei much like the English. In the 
 Attic we have sometimes ex^ and the aorist participle. The past 
 perfect in modern Greek is expressed by elxov Xva-u. 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 lara- fitv in the active. 
 In the New Testament olSa is conjugated regularly in singular and 
 plural of the indicative. Future perfect is etSi^o-w. In Acts 26:4 
 we have to-ao-iv. Outside of the indicative the form is eiSci, lo-re, 
 eiStVat, etScis. The opt. d^urjv is not in the N. T. It is not only in 
 Rev. (19:3) that forms like dp-qKov apj^ear; they are in the rest of 
 the New Testament (John 17:7, reryprjKav) and in the papyri. Av<rt, 
 originally avn, by analogy of aorist is av. KcKOTrtaKes Rev. 2:3 is 
 like the aorist d^^xes (Rev. 3:4) and such forms occur in the pap3rri 
 among the ignorant scribes (Moulton). 'AijbeWrat (Luke 5:20) is a 
 Doric form for d^eivrat, though similar forms occur in Ionic and 
 Arcadian. The past perfect like the imperfect, is confined to the 
 indicative, and like it also usually has an augment besides the 
 secondary personal endings. However, we have only kuv forms in 
 the active. The Sanskrit had no future perfect nor has the modern 
 Greek. In the ancient Greek are only two such active forms, co-tt^^o) 
 and Tcdvri^d). The rest are in the middle voice. In the New Testament 
 we have only clSrja-w and that is from the Septuagint (Heb. 8:11). 
 In Luke 19:40 some manuscripts read Ka<paiovaLv. In Heb. 2:18 
 we have the periphrastic form t(ropja.i ircTroiOm. Such forms occur 
 
40 A SIIOKT GRAMMAR OF TIIK GRKEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 for the present perfect iiiul tlic jMst jjerfect also. Tliis analytic use 
 of the verb forms is more common in all the tenses in the New 
 Testament idiom (like kowtj 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 ku does not belong to 
 all the verbs of the active and occurs no where else. Reduplication 
 is found Avith the aorist, the present, the perfect as in Sanskrit. How- 
 ever, in the modern Greek reduplication has vanished save in the 
 perfect passive j^articiple. 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 in the formation of the reduplicated 
 stem as yiypairTai (Acts 15:15), cyvwKav (John 17:7), fiefivrja-Oe (1 Cor. 
 11:2), iiXijcjicv (Rev. 5:7), TyXTriKare (.John 5:45), oKrjKoa (1 John 1:1), 
 eoipaKas (John 8:57), iopaxa (1 Co. 9:1). 'Akt/jkou is an example of 
 Attic reduplication. 
 
 (f) Augment. The Sanskrit augment is a. It has been sug- 
 gested that this is the instrumental case of a demonstrative pro- 
 noun and means ' 'there. " It was a sign of jjast time and was used 
 only with the past tenses of the indicative (aorist, imperfect, past 
 jierfect), but it was not always so used cs])ecially in the earlier 
 language (Whitney). Augment, in fact, is found only in Sanskrit, 
 Zend, Armenian, and Greek (Giles). In Greek it is found only 
 in the jiast tenses of the indicative, but Homer is very irregular in 
 his use of augment, half of his past tenses not having it (Monro, 
 Homeric Grammar, p. 44). The iterative verbs in Homer do not 
 take the augment at all. It would seem then that the augment as 
 the sign of jxist time was at first only used when it was necessary 
 to make j)lain that the form was a past tense. In Homer we find 
 l)<)th the syllal)ie augment (e) and the temporal augment, the 
 lengthening of the initial vowel, though the syllabic augment is 
 
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 41 
 
 sometimes used Avitli a vowel also. Augment is preserved in the 
 modem Greek. In the New Testament it is not found with some 
 words like irpoopwfxrjv (Acts 2:25), atjiWrjaav (Rom. 4:7), OLKohofiriOri 
 (John 2:20), dTTwo-uTo (Rom. 11.1). MeAAw, 8wa/Aai, fiovXoimx., as in 
 ancient Greek, sometimes have the temporal augment in addition 
 to (not instead of as Winer) the syllabic as rihw-qOriv (Mark 9:28). 
 With compound words the usage varies. The augment may l)e 
 after the preposition as TrapwKrjcrev (Heb. 11:9) or before as iirpocjiriTev 
 aav (Matt. 11:13). Some words have double augment as dTreKare- 
 (TTadr] (Matt. 12:13) or even treble augment as yvet^x^V^"-^ (INIatt. 
 9:30). 'Epyct^o/xat has vpyatraro (Matt. 25:16) regularly. The past 
 perfect does not always use the augment as Te^e/McXiWo (Matt. 7:25), 
 yet see iJSifiXrjTo (Luke 16:20). 
 4. The modes. 
 
 (a) The indicative. There is no mode suffix for the indicative. 
 It is, of course, the normal mode for all the Indo-germanic lan- 
 guages, and is always used by them unless there is special reason 
 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 
 perfect, of course, belong to the indicative only. Hence in Sanskrit 
 it is only the aorist and the present that use modes other than the 
 indicative. This is interesting as showing the gradual growth of 
 the modes. In modern English we have nearly come round again 
 to the position of the Sanskrit in our almost exclusive use of the 
 indicative. The sul)junctive, optative, and imperative are varia- 
 tions from the indicative and the old injunctive mode. 
 
 (b) The subjunctive. In the early Sanskrit the subjunctive is 
 very common with the aorist and the present and has a special 
 mode sign a. But the later Sanskrit nearly loses this mode as we 
 have in Enghsh nearly ceased to use it. The first person survives 
 as a practical imperative. In Greek the earliest form of the sub- 
 junctive with non-thematic stems is not different from the indica- 
 tive with thematic stems and uses °/e, not "/i, just like the indica- 
 
42 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 tive thematic stems, 80 lo/xeviH sul)jinK'tive in Homer, while Ifiev 
 is iiulicative. In the early Ionic the non-thematic stems do in 
 some cases use "/n, but not always. It would seem therefore that 
 the subjunctive mode sign was first the varialde vowel °/t already 
 in use. This sign was gradually lengthened into "/>». Even in the 
 fifth century B. C. the Ionic has aorist subjunctives like tolt^o-o.. 
 Hence, ' 'the distinction between indicative and subjunctive cannot 
 always be easily drawn" (Giles). It is also probable that the 
 Attic futures eSo/xat, TTLOfMit, and the New Testiiment ^ayo^im (Jas. 
 5:3) were originally aorist subjunctives. The mode suffix was 
 first added to the stem as in the fu forms (So-y^So)) and in the 
 aorist passive forms (Xv-6i-(a—Xvdiii) . In Mark 8:37 Sot is subjunc- 
 tive (as in papyri), 6ri=oi: as often. But with thematic stems the 
 variable vowel °/e was merel}" changed to '"/■n and the o- aorist makes 
 the subjunctive '^"/<r-n. In SvVw/xai, Sun^rat we either have irregular 
 accent and contraction (so to-r^Tcu, arj—rj instead of a) or the mode 
 sign "/tj displaces a of the stem. So the oi)tative StVairo has irregu- 
 lar accent (compare lo-TaiTo). Homer frequently uses /xi with the 
 subjunctive of verbs, iOeXw/u, tSw/u. The subjunctive used only 
 primary personal endings in both Sanskrit and Greek. In Greek 
 tlie sul)junctive has increased in the frequency with which it is 
 used, and in the modern Greek has displaced both the optative and 
 the infinitive (save with auxiliary yerbs). The Greek used a per- 
 fect subjunctive also, though it was never very common in the 
 nature of the case. In the New Testament besides ctSw (1 Cor. 
 2:12) we only have examples of the perijihrastic pa'fcd subjunctive 
 like y ireTTOLyKws (Jas. 5:15), g KCKXrjfxivos (Luke 14:8). 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 manuscripts of the 
 New Testament give such forms in some verbs as KepSrjOyawvTai (1 
 Pet. 3:1), and in Luke 13:28 Westcott and Hort print oiprjaOe in 
 the text and oipcaOt in the margin. This may, however, be a late 
 first aorist form. Cf. mg. ap^rjadt (Lu. 13:26) with text ap^eaOe. 
 
 (c) The ojAatirc. The Greek is the only language that preserved 
 both subjunctive and optative in its nourishing period. In the 
 
THE CONJUGATION OP THE VERB. 43 
 
 Sanskrit the optatiyo displaced tlie subjunctive save in a few special 
 uses, while in the Latin the sul)junctive was extended in its scope 
 to partial future time as well as i)resent, like the indicative, and 
 the optative was not used. As a matter of fact both sul)J. and 
 imperative are future in idea. The Gothic has only one such mode 
 whether sulijunctive or optative is not clear. In Homer the sul»- 
 junctive and optative struggle together, the optative gains a firm 
 place, especially in the literary style, and then loses it gradually 
 till in the modern Greek it does not exist. In the New Testament it 
 occurs only sixty-seven times, Luke using it twenty-eight and Paul 
 thirty-two times, John, Matthew and James do not have it at all, 
 and jNIark, Hebrews and Jude only once each, Peter using it four 
 times. It seems never to have been common in the vernacular and is 
 correspondingly scarce in the papyri. The Sanskrit had two mode 
 signs for the optative either ya or i. So the Greek has two mode 
 signs for the oj)tative either t or L-q. The latter is used with non- 
 thematic tense stems like ho-t-q-v^ the former with thematic stems 
 like Xt7r-o-t-/u.t, Xv-aa-L-fxi. The subjunctive and the optatiye mode 
 sufHxes are an addition to the tense stem and hence seem to sliow 
 that these modes grew after the origin of tenses. The personal 
 endings of the optative are chiefly secondary, though jxi is primary. 
 The mode doubtless was meant to be secondary and the suljjunc- 
 tive primary, but in actual usage this is not always true. In the 
 Sanskrit the optative is used in all sorts of ways as the subjunc- 
 tive is in Latin save that it has no future, but its use to express a 
 wish is really future and ^ in the Greek suggests connection with 
 primary ideas as well as secondary. The subjunctive in Latin, 
 and often also in Greek, is used after secondary tenses. The Greek, 
 moreover, developed a future optative which was used only in in- 
 direct discourse after secondary- tenses. This tense does not appear 
 in the New Testament. The aorist and present optative are the 
 tenses commonly used. The ancient Greek had a perfect optative, 
 but in the New Testament we have no perfect. Indeed in all late 
 Greek the perfect subj. , opt. , and imperative are very rare. Cf. 
 J. E. Harry in The Classical Review for 1905-1906. The Attic 
 eia («e) instead of ai in the first aorist is found in the Textus Re- 
 
44 A SIK^UT GUAMMAU OP TIIK OKKKK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Ce}>tllS ;is TTOU/frtiai' ([jUke 0:11), Imt in W II and Nestle TroLya-auv. 
 
 But in Afts 17:27 the critical text lias \pr]Xa<]>rj<T€uiv. 
 
 (d) 2Vie mvperalive. The imperative is in a way a makeshift and 
 seems a development from the indicative and injunctive. Some 
 of the forms are just like the indicative as Acyere 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 haye been employed as ov ^ovewreis (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 be used for exhortations 
 also, l)ut in Sanskrit and Greek the aorist subjunctive was early 
 used with ma, ix-rj in prohibitions, probably before there was an 
 aorist imperative. In Sanskrit the imi3erative is little used outside 
 of the present tense. With this late mode the present comes be- 
 fore the aorist in time and the aorist imperative is nearly confined 
 to positive commands. However in the New Testament we have 
 for the third person /x,^ KaTa(3dT<i> (Mk. 13:15) and similar aorist 
 negative imperatives. Other imperative forms use merely the stem 
 like the original vocative (Giles) as io-tt). Other imperatives again 
 use the variable vowel like Xe'ye, XafSe, XtVe, probably interjectional 
 forms if e is part of the root (Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 171). Brug- 
 mann considers that the accent of XajSe, tl-n-i, iXOi, evpt, iSe, is that 
 of all imperatives originally when at the beginning of a sentence. 
 But in the N. T. we have tSe, Xafte. Some imperative forms are 
 possi])lc substantives as /JaTrno-ov, (SanrTia-ai, (Acts 22:1 G). See use 
 of o-Totxeii' (Phil. 3:16) and the common xa'petv (James 1:1) like 
 papyri. Again other imperative forms use 2)ersonal endings like 
 (rr^-6i, with which compare the Sanskrit dhi, or like tw (Sanskrit 
 tu, originally tod the ablative of the demonstrative pronoun). Tlie 
 plural in vtwv is like the Sanskrit nlu with v added. But the Doric 
 makes the ])lural vtw. But this Attic form is displaced in the later 
 Kotny (New Testament and papyri) by rot-aav (compare o-av in plural 
 of secondary tense). Thus also o-(?u)v Ix'came adtaaav. It remains 
 
THE CONJUGATION OF THE VERB. 45 
 
 to speak of Bk, h, 80s, o-^e's which seem kin to tlie uiiaugmented 
 aorist indicative (injunctive hke \v9rjTe). In the modern Greek 
 the first and third persons are expressed by as (a<^€s) and the 
 subjunctive much like the English "let" and the infini- 
 tive. In the New Testament we already see a<^£s eV/SaXw (Luke 
 6:42), In the use of (fxiyoL (^lark 11:14) the optative clearly ap- 
 proaches the imperative. There, is, of course, no future impera- 
 tive, for all imperatives are future in idea. The perfect is some- 
 times used in Greek as Tre^t/Awcro (Mark 4:39) as in the earlier San- 
 skrit. But it is not used in the modern Greek. In Lu. 12:35 we 
 find €<TTw<ravTr€pi€^w<Tfi€vai. Forms like avd^a (Rev. 4:1) merely use 
 the stem. "Hrw {io-ro)) appears in the New Testament and the 
 papyri (possibly Doric) as in 1 Cor. 16:22. Sometimes the imper- 
 ative form is used with either number and is practically interjec- 
 tional as aye (Jas. 4:13) as in the older Greek. Compare dyeVo) in 
 Greek and agito in Latin. The periphrastic imperative occurs also 
 as in l(t6l ewowv (Matt. 5:25). Cf. ytVeo-^e Irepo^vyoiii/Tts (2 Cor. 
 6:14). Note two persons in Mk. 14:42. 
 5. The voices. 
 
 (a) The active. It is probable, though by no means certain, 
 that the active is the original voice. The personal endings of 
 the active are evidently kin to the pronouns. Compare /u.t and 
 /A£v (/tes) witli the oblique forms of eyw, crt and re with orv, n and vn 
 (vert) with the demonstrative tos (os). In a wonderful Avay these 
 pronominal suffixes express person, number, and voice. The sec- 
 ondary endings differ from the primary in being shorter and in 
 having a few special forms like aav and in the fact that v re- 
 ])laces /A (/*i). There is in Greek a certain tendency towards abbre- 
 viation of these suffixes. So fiL continually drops off, en in full 
 form appears only in cV-o-t and n only in eo--Tt. We have the same 
 situation in the English verbal suffixes, retaining them only in the 
 second and third person singular. 
 
 (b) The middle. The middle is the only other voice that ap- 
 pears in the Sanskrit where every active ending has a correspond- 
 ing middle. However, not all verbs have both voices, some having 
 only the active, some only the middle, and some tenses using only 
 
46 A .SHORT f;RAMMAK OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 one voice. In Homer the middle is more conmion (Monro, Homeric 
 Gnnniiiar, ]). 7) tlian in any otlier period of the Greek language. 
 In the modern Greek it is well nigh displaced by the passive, and 
 the distinctively passive forms (aorist) are used, though the ver- 
 nacular uses aori.st middle imjierative Xvcrov rather than XvOtjtl. In 
 the New Testament the middle is disappearing before tlu; passive. 
 In Latin the passive has wholly supplanted the middle though 
 some verlis retain a middle sense. It is sui)posed by some (Don- 
 aldson, A^eiv Cratylus,') that the middle endings are formed 1)y doub- 
 ling the suffix for the active. So then fuu is from /m/u, the second 
 fi having dropped out. This is in entire accord with the idea of the 
 middle voice, though it is wholly conjectural. Still it is just as 
 possible (IMoulton, Prolegomena, p. 152) that tlie active Ti$T]fiL may 
 be a weakening of /mil to /ai in rtOefxai with a corresponding length- 
 ening of c to t; (cf. TL$(.ixtv in plural). Some middle forms occur, 
 however, in the later Greek that are not common in the older Greek 
 like rjfjjrjv (Matt. 25:35). In the modern Greek et/xc is always mid- 
 dle save in the form uve. (c'vai), etc., which takes the place of co-Tt 
 (cvTt). The contraction in the second person singular of the in- 
 dicative of taai into £1 is rare in the later Greek. It is usually rj. 
 So even with oi/'j; (Matt. 27:4), though uncontracted forms like 
 oSwaorai (Luke 16:25) occur. So also (fxiyea-ai, TrUauL (I.uke 17:8). 
 But ySovXet is found in Luke 22:42. 
 
 (c) The 2>(issive. In the Sanskrit, as in the Coptic, there is no 
 passive voice. However the Sanskrit shows the beginning of a 
 passive formation. In the present tense verbs of the ya class form 
 a virtual passive by accenting it as ya. Such verbs use the middle 
 endings and are conjugated in the same way excei)t the accent. 
 But in the Greek more i)rogress has been made. Two tenses in the 
 Greek have distinctive passive conjugation, the aorist and the 
 future. But here again the aorist passive uses the active endings 
 and tlie future passive the middle endings. The Greek i)assive 
 tlitn lias no endings of its own. In most tcnsi's it merely borrows 
 the entire middle inflection, while in the two tenses above it draws 
 on tlie active ami middle both. Tlie so-called second aorist pjis- 
 sive like l-aToX-r^-v is really the second aori.st active (root aorL^t) 
 
THE ('ONJUGATION OF TIIK VERB. 47 
 
 like i-l3r]-v, e-(f>r]-v. And the special suffix Be (6r]) which the passive 
 uses for the first aorist stem is sometimes used as an active form 
 (Giles, ComjMratire Philology, p. 411). The future passive is 
 merely the addition of o-°/e to Orj. But even here some future mid- 
 dle forms like dSiKiyo-o/wxt 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 
 iyevrjOrjv (Matt. 6:10) not common in the earlier Greek. So i<fivr]v 
 in Luke 8:6, rjyyiXiqv (Luke 8:20), huToy-qv (Gal. 3:19). The future 
 passive is also common SiQ Koifi-qO-qaofxtOa {1 Cor. 15:51), and the 
 second future passive as aXXjayrja-oixtOa {ibid). For all three voices 
 of yivw(TK(o see 1 Cor. 13:12. 
 
CHAPTER Vlir. 
 
 PRINCIPAL PARTS OF SOME IMPORTANT VERBS. 
 
 The perfectly regular verbs like Xvw, (fnXiw^ ^om'^w, etc., call for 
 no comment. The rare verbs are not given with fulness. All that 
 is here attempted is a summary of the most important verbs in the 
 New Testament that haye anything specially noteworthy about any 
 of the tenses. It will be a handy list for the student. Only the 
 forms that occur in the N. T. are given. Few things are more 
 essential in Greek than a ready knowledge of the verb. 
 
 'AyycAAw (comp. av-, air-, 8i-, e^-, iir-, Trpo-cir-, Kar-, Trpo-Kar-, Trup-), 
 ^yyeAAov, ayyeXw, ^yyetXa, -T/yyeX/xai, -rjyyiXrjv. 
 
 "Ayo) (comp. av-, CTT-av-, avr-, crw-a7r-, Sc-, £t<r-, Trap-ua-, e$-, ctt-, Kar-, 
 p-f-T-, Trap-, Trept-, tt/do-, irpiXT-, crw-, liri-crvv-, vir-), ^yov, a^w, 
 ^yayoi' and r)^a, r])(Or]i', a)(Brj<jopua.L. 
 
 Aivcw (com]). CTT-, Trap-), -ryvouv, -uti/co'(o. -rfvcaa. 
 
 Aiptio (comp. av-, d<}}-, Sl-, ii-, KaO-, irtpt-, Trpo-), -cXui and aipr/o-o/iat, 
 
 -£tAov and etAu, rjpW-qv. 
 
 Alpoi (com}), dir-, i^-, iir-, p.tT-, aw-, v'Trep-), dpw, "^jpa, ypKa, ^pfirn^ 
 
 rjpOrjv, dpOrjO-ofmi. Imper. apov and inf. apai. 
 *Akovw (comp. Sl-, £1(7-, CTT-, Trap-, Trpo-, vtt-), ^kovov, oKOvcroi and 
 
 aKOvaofuiL, TjKOvaa, okt/Jkou, ■^KovaOrjv. 
 AWd(T<TW (comp. aTT-, Sl-, kut-, (itto-kut-, fter-, crw-), dXXd^w, 7;AAa^tt, 
 
 -rjWaypjai, -yjWdyyp', dXXayycropaL. 
 AfjuipTavu) (^irpo-^, dpLupTi'/ao), rjpuapTov and rjpApTrjda, yp.dpTijKu. 
 Ava-j3aivo) (only ni comp., dva-, TrpwT-ava-, avv-ava-, diro-, 8ui-, ex-, 
 ip.-, KdTa-, p,eTu-, TTUpa-, Trpo-, (Tvp.-^ , -i/Saivov, -/3t'nTopiu, -tf3r]V^ 
 
 -(3t/3i]Ku. Short forms dvd/3n, did/3aTc in imj)or. 
 'Av-aXio-Kw (only in cDiiip., dy-, Trpon-av-, kut-ui'-). (^tbcr fonii.s' from 
 
 dvaXoM, dvaXiinXdi, ip'aXii)(Ta aild dvdXuma, dyyXwuyv. 
 
PRINCIPAL PARTS OF SOME IMPORTANT VERBS. 49 
 
 'Av-ot'yw (only ill COmi). , dv-, Bi-av-) , dvottw, di/ew^a, ^^i/ot^a, and 
 
 T^vt'w^a, dve'wya, dvewy/xe'vos and ^vewy/AtVos, yvocyrjv, dvoiy>/o-o/xut, 
 
 di/€a);(^7;v, r]voi)(Or]V^ iUld riv^w^Orjv, a.V0L)(^9r](X0fJuiL. 
 *A7ravTaa) (only ill colli})., aTT-, crvi'), -ai/T7;crw, -T^vTiyo-u. 
 'ATTOKretVo) (only ill COmp. ), diroKTcvd, dTTCKTeiva, a.Tr€KTa.v9r]V. Pi'eS. 
 
 inf. also dTroKTcVi/eo-^tti. 
 'AttoAAv/xi and dTroAAuw (only in conip^ ott-, o-w-aTr-), dTroXeCTco and 
 
 d;roAa)j dTTwAcCTa, airoXwXias ; niidd. a.ir6XX.VfJUii, a.Tr<DXkvixr]v, diroX- 
 
 ovfjuai, dTTwAo/XTyv. 
 'Atttw (dv-, /ca^-, TTCpt-), ■^TTTOfx.rjv, T}^a.j Tjxpdfxrjv^ rj<fi6r]v. 
 'ATr-w^t'o) (only COmp. , dTr-, e^-), -wcra, -oxTdixrjv. 
 ApecTKd), rjpi.(TKov^ dpiaoi^ ^pccra. 
 ApKiu) (cTT-), ripKtda^ dpK€crdrj(TOfJuaL, 
 
 'ApveofJuuL (^dir-^^ dpuycropxii^ -rjpvrjcrdfirjVy TjpvrjfuiL, -apvrjBijaojxui. 
 'Apira^u) (St-, (Tw-), dpirdau), rjp-rraaa^ ■^ptrdyrjv^ rjpTrddd-qv^ dptrayrjcTOfuu. 
 "Ap^ix) (ev-, TT/DO-er-, irpo-vir-) , VRX*^^) dp^opxii^ rjp^dfjirp'. 
 Av$dv<o ((TVi'-, virep-), T^uto-i'oi', av^i^crw, rjvirjaa, rjvirjdrjv. 
 'A<^-iKi/€0/xai (only Comp. , d<^-, Si-, c^-), d(}}tx6p.r]V. 
 BtttVw, See dva/3aLV(xi. 
 BdAAtu (d/x<^t-, dva-, dvrt-, aTTO-, Sta-, ck-, eyu.-, 7rap-€/A-, ctti-, Kara-, /tera-, 
 
 Tra/xt-, TTCpi-, "Jrpo-y crvp.-, xnrep-, vtto-), )8aXoi, e^aXov and once 
 
 IjSaAa, -c/3u\6fjirjVj fiif^XrjKa, -y8e/3X7^/<eiv, (H^Xripxii^ i(3t(3Xy]firjVy 
 
 l^Xrjdriv^ ^Xr]6i^crofxai. 
 BttTTTt^w, ifidTTTL^ov^ i/SaTTTL^ofJLrjv, ^ttTTTt'o-w, i/^dTTTLCTa^ (-crd/nyi/), fiefiair- 
 
 Titr/tai, i/^aTTTLcrOrjVy f^airTiadtjcrofuit. 
 Biob), ijSLiDcra. 
 BXttTTTw, ySAdi/'Cj, efiXaxJ/a. 
 BXtTTo) (dva-j aTTO-, Sia-, cyx-, ctti-, 7re/3t-, jrpo-^^ I^SXcttov, /SXc'^o), 
 
 l)8Xei/'a. 
 BovXo/UMU, ifiovXofxrjv, ifiovXrjdrjV. Note ^ov'Xei (Lu. 22:42). 
 ra/A£w, iydfxovv, cyi^/xa and iyd/xtjaa, yeyd/xi^Kaj iyaixrjOrjV. Ta/udKui Only 
 
 in present. 
 
 PeXacj (Kara-), -eyeXoJV, yeXacrw, 
 
 TivofJuaL (dTTO-, Sia-, ctti-, irapa-, avfj.-iTapa-, irpo-'), yevi/ao/tai, lytvofjuqv^ 
 
 and iycvrjOrjVj yeyova, cycyovav, ycyevrjfuu. Never yiyvofuu as 
 
 in Attic. 
 
 4 
 
50 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 TivunTKu) (di/u-, oia-j €7ri-j Kara-, TTpo-), cyiVoxjKOVj yvoWo/Aai, eyi/ajv, 
 lyvojKa, cyvcwceiv, lyvoxr/xai, iyvoiaOrjv, yvwa-O-Qcrofxai. Sul)j. yrw 
 and T^'oi, imper. yvoiOi^ inf. yvoivai, part, yvovs. Never yiy- 
 
 VW(TK(0. 
 
 Tpd<f><i> (aTTO-, 6y-, €7rt-, Kara-, tt/jo-), typatpov, ypdipo}, typwpa^ yc'ypai^, 
 
 •^typap-fJuiiLj -eyeypdfxfjirjv^ lypd^rjv. 
 Aeucwfu and Stucjnjw (ava-, utto-, ei'-, cttc-, VTro-), Stt'^Wj eSei^a, tSet^- 
 
 Aeo/juat (-Trpocr-), i8e.6p.rjv, iSerjOyv. In Lll. 8:38 AV II read tSeiro. 
 Ini])ers()nal 8a and ISei. 
 
 Aepb), €0€Lpu, oupy'icropxiL. 
 
 At^ofuiL (^avu-, aTTO-, Sia-, eto"-, €K-^ aTT-CK-j cv-, €7ri-, wapa-, trpoa-, tiTro-), 
 
 Ihe-^op-qv, iSe$a.p.r]V, SeSey/Aui, -i.hi)(6r]V. 
 Ac'cu (xura-, ttc/di-, 0"vv-, vtto-), 8ryo"w, eBrjcra, -€Br}adp.rjv, SeSoca^ 3c3e/uu, 
 
 -cScSt/xi^v, IhiOrjv. 
 AuiKovfo) (only thus), 8n^/covouv, 8taKov»/crw, BirjKovrja-u. BiijKovt'iOrjv. 
 AiSocTKco, cSi'SacTKOV, StStt^w, iStSo^a, iSiBd^Orjv. 
 AiSwpL and occasionally StSow (ui'a-, dTro-, uir-aTro-, 8ta-, €K-, CTTi-, 
 
 /u,£Ta-, napa-j Trpo-), cSt'Sovv, Swo-w, IScoku and sometimes tSujo-a, 
 
 oe'owKa, otSwKctv and cSeSuJKeiv, BeSopaL, i866y]v, SoOrjaopui. '2 
 
 aorist ind. i)lural iSwKap.tv, sulg. Sw, Sot, and Swy, ojit. BiSrj 
 
 in Eph. 1:17 (W H text) instead of SoCrj. Imperf. ind. 
 
 midd. occasionally cStScro and 2 aor. ind. midd. sometimes 
 
 tSero. 
 Aii/zttoj, Bnl/r'jau), i8iij/r]<Ta. In Jo. 7:37 Sti/'a. 
 Aio'jKw («-, Kara-), duo^io, iBtw^a, StStwy/xut, Siw^Orjcropxii. 
 AoKc'to (tv-, aw-£v-), eSoKow, tSo^a, €L'8oK7;o"a, rjvBoKijaa. 
 AvvapxiL, iSvvdp.r)V and rjBvvdp-rjv, Suvj/tro/iuii, ySvvjjOyjv and i)8vvdp.r)v. 
 
 lioth Sumtrai and 5uny. 
 Auw and f^ww («k-, dTr-cK-, in midd., «, ctt-cv-, Tra/j-cto--, tTTi-), £'W 
 
 and l'JD(ra (-£'5vcrci/xi;>/), -v'^vqv. 
 Edo) (Trpoo"-), £10)1/, ldxT<a, ciaca. 
 
 Eyyt'^o) (TTpoo"-), T^yyi^oi/, eyytVw, 7;yyi(ra, 7/yyiKa. 
 Ey£(.'/ja» (')i-, £^-, £V-j <rw-), eyt/><«J, lyyfipx, iyijyeppxiL, yytpdip', iytpOy- 
 
 (Topja.1. 
 Eiooi'. See bpdd). 
 
PRINCIPAL PARTS OF SOME IMPORTANT VERBS. 51 
 
 Ei'Sw is obsolete in present, but perfect is common. OlSa (in both 
 numbers, taaatu once in Acts 26:4 and lo-re), subj. ciSw, opt. 
 absent, imper. ta-rc (Jas. 1:19), inf. ctSeVai, part. ciSws. 
 
 *E^a> is obsolete, but eiw^a and dwduv occur. 
 
 *EotKa is from obsolete present eiVw. 
 
 Ei/u,t' (ttTT-, ev-. Trap-, avix-irdp-, (tuV-), ^v and ^/xt^v, ttrofiai. "EcrTw and 
 
 Et/xt (only comp., oltt-, ua--, 1^-, Itt-, o-w-), -r/ctv. Present always in 
 future sense. 
 
 "Ettw obsolete present. EIttov (avr-, d-n--, Trpo-) and eiTra, c'/DO), €i/3r/Ka, 
 ct/37/K£tv, ctptjiJUL, ippWrjV and ipp-q9r]V (Attic). Both dpy'jKua-LV 
 and €'ip7]Kav, eiTTOV and etTre, etTTwv and ctTras, ftTres and ctTras, 
 but only etTrarw, eiTrarc, ctTraTwo-av. 
 
 'Ek-tciVo) (only comp., ck-, ctt-ck-, VTrep-e/c-), -tVeivov, -revw, 
 -€T€tva. 
 
 'EK-Tp€7ra> (only comp., €K-, €v-, etti-), -CTp€Tr6p.rjV, -€Tpei/'u, -€Tpa.Trr)V, 
 IrpaTrrjaofjuii. 
 
 'EK-;^e'(o and £/<-;(w(v)w (onlycomp. , ck-, cTrt-, o-vy-, VTTtp-eK-), -c;(uvrov, 
 
 -p(ea), -e'xea, -K.i)(yimi^ -exyOrjv, x^^W'^l^'- Uncontracted forms 
 
 iK^i€T€ and c^£;(eev. 
 EAaww (aTT-, crw-), rj\.avvop.r]v, -r/Aacra, eXr/Aoxa. 
 'EAey^w (e^-, 8ta-Kar-), -rjXi.y^op.yjv ^ cAey^w, ^Aey^u (^-d/xrjv^ . 
 EATTt'^o) (aTT-, Trpo-), ^Atti^op', iXiriWj ^ATricra, ^ATTUca. 
 'Ev-reAAo/xat (only COmp. and midd.), -TeAor/iai, -eTu\dp.r]V, -TCTttA- 
 
 ftat. 
 'Epya^o/xai (/car-, Trepi-, Trpocr-) , €Lpyat,6fJi.rjV (some MSS) and ^/sya- 
 
 t,6p.r]V (so WH), rjpyaadfXTjv^ eLpyaa-jjuiL (paSSlVe). 
 "Eip^ofjuiL (av-, CTT-av-, (xtt-, 8t-, eicr-, ctt-ckt-, Trap-etcr-, crw-ua-, e^-, ot-c?-, 
 CTT-, KttT-, Trap-, dvT-7ra/3-, Trept-, Trpo-, Trpocr-, <tdv-), i)p)(Ofxr]V, 
 eAewo/xat, ^A^ov and ^A^a, eAi/Av^a. 
 Epwrdw (8i-, fTT-), rjpwTwv and rjpwTovv, ipwTijaw^ ypMTrjaa. 
 Ecr^t'o) and ecr^w (kut-, (tw-), rjcrOiov, (fxiyo/jxii^ e(f)ayov. 
 EvayycAt'^oj (Tr/ao-), cvT/yyeAt^d/Ar/v, £U7/yy€At<ra (^-(rdfirjv^ , evr]yye\i(Tfxac, 
 
 evrfyyeXLcrOrjv. 
 EvSoKt'co. See BoK€W. 
 
52 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 EuKut/jt'd), el'KULpovv (also lyvK-), (.vKouprjcra. 
 
 EvXoyio) goes regularly with cv (not rji) in most MSS. 
 
 Evpio-Ko) (av-), cvpicTKOV and T/vp-, evp-qau), cvpov (tvpa/xcv, (-'tc), and 
 
 €vpr)(Ta (some MSS.), tvp-qKa^ evpWrjv, tvpiOijcropxii. 
 Ev;(o/Aat (Trpocr-), rjvy^ofJirjv, evid/jirjv. 
 *E;(tu (dv-, Trpoa-av-, dvT-, aTr-, cv-, ctt-, Kar-, /xcT-, irap-j nepL-^ '^'P^'j 
 
 Trpocr-, (Tvv-, VTrep-, vtto-), ei;^ov (et;(a/i£V, Ctc. ), c^w, «fX°''> 
 
 e(T)(rjKa. Ei;)(0O-av aS Well aS tt;)(av and ci^oi/. 
 Zdo> (dva-, OD-), l^cov, ^t^cto) (j-rjo-opjox) ^ et,r](Ta. Ind. ^35, inf. ^^i'. 
 Zoii'vu/xt and ^wwvu) (dva-, (5ta-, Tre/ai-, vtto-), c^wjtt^ov, ^wctoj, i^u)crdp.r]V, 
 
 -e^tutr/Lutt. 
 
 IIko) (dv-), ^Kor, -7^0), ^^tt, ^Ka (some MSS. in Mk. 8:3). Some MSS. 
 
 TJKacnv instead of ^Kovaiv. 
 (doLTTTo) (oTJv-), eOaxj/a^ irdfly-qv. 
 ®avpAX^(o (cK-), idavpju^oVy Oavfxda-oi, c^av/wwra, IdavpAadrjv^ davpuacrdrf 
 
 cro/Atti. 
 ©eXw (not cde'Xo)), ^^eAov, ^eXi^cro), rjdiXrjaa. 
 ©tyydvoj, iOiyov. 
 
 ©Xi/So) (dTTO-, (Tuv-) , WXtfiov, riOXipp-aL. 
 QhnjdKtj} (dTTO-, (Tuv-ttTro-), -^avov/iai, -c'^avov, rWvrjKa. Both Tcdvdvai 
 
 and TtdvTjKevai.^ but only tc^vt/kws. 
 'IXcuTKO/xai, IXddO-qTL (Lu. 18:13). 
 "larrjp.Lj la-rdvoi, lo-Tao), (dv-, CTr-av-, e^-av-, d<^-, St-, €v-, c^-, ctt- 
 
 (cTTt'cTTa/lyUlt) , f<^-, KUT-e</>-, 0"W-£<^-, KU^-, dl'Tt-KU^-, (XTTO-Kad-y 
 
 p-t-d-y Tra/}-, TTcpt-, TTpo-, (TDV-), o-Ti^(7w (-7;cro/jiai) , €crT7;v, tOTT/cra, 
 eaTTjKa (intr. ) and ccrroKa (tr. ), €t(i)(rTTjK€iv, icTTdOrjv, crTuOy]- 
 o-opuL. Both CCTTOJS and laTrjKws, hut always eordr'at. 
 
 Kudut'pfa) (Sw--, **<"), -OidOapa^ Kixddappm. 
 
 KuOapit^u) (8ia-), Kadapib), €Ka9dpL(7u^ K€Ku$dpi(Tpxii^ iKadaptduijv^ Imiut- 
 
 piaSrj (Matt. 8:3). 
 K.dBr]pjaL (cvy-), KaOit^opxxi (Trupa-), Kadi^o) (^dva-^ Ittl-^ Trupa-, Trept-, cuy-); 
 
 iKa6rjp.r)Vj Kadrj<Topjai. KdOov (^KaOtjcro^; iKuOe^op-qVj Ka6i<ni> (^icro- 
 
 put), CKa^tau, iKa6i(Tdpr]Vy KiKdOiKu. 
 Kai'w (*'<", KuTu-), Kuvtroj, -tKuvcru, KCKaup-ui, -Oidr]Vy -iKavdrjV^ -Kay- 
 
 o-op-ai, Kav^»/o-opui. In 1 Cor. 13:3 some MSS. havf kuu^»/- 
 
 (Tiupai. 
 
PRINCIPAL PARTS OF SOMK IMPORTANT VERRS. 53 
 
 KaXc'w (dvTi-, €1/-, da- (-/xxtt), ctti-, (jlctu.-^ vrapa-, avv-irapa-^ ""po-, irpcxT-^ 
 (Tuy-)j t/coXouv, KaXi(T(o^ eKoXccra^ KecXiy/ca, Ka<Xr]fJuiLj iK\-^9r]V, kXtj- 
 
 6rj(T0jMl.L. 
 yia.flV(ii, iKUfJiOVj KiKfXrjKa. 
 
 Kepavvv/tt (o-uy-) and Kepaww, c/ccpao-a, KeK€pa(rfJuu. 
 
 KepSatVw, KepBrjaw, iKepBrjo-a (^KepBdvw some MSS. in 1 Cor. 9:21), 
 
 KcporjOyaoiJuii. 
 KXat'o), cKXatov, KXauo-w, €KXav<ra. 
 KXao) (cK-, Kara-), €KXacraj eKXdaOrjv. 
 
 KXec'o) (aTTO-, €K-, Kara-, (Tuy-), kXcio-w, ocXeio-a, KCKXeicrytAat, iKXeia-drjv. 
 KXi'vw (dva-, CK-, Kara-, irpocr-^ , kXivw, ecXtva, KocXiKa, €KXl.dy]v. 
 
 1^0p.Lt,Ui (CK-, (TVy-), KOfJilCTOfJUll ancl KOfJiLOVpUlLy iKOfJUad/XrjV. 
 
 KoTTTO) (dva-, CK-j CV-, KttTa-j TTyOO-, TrpOO"-), eKOTTTOV, KO^pO/MXl^ -€/COl/'a, 
 
 Kpd^w (dva-), eKpa^oVj Kpdio), mpa^a and €»C€K/3a^a, KCKpaya. Some 
 
 MSS. Ki.KpdiofW.L. 
 
 J^pifiafiaL («*<-), KpifJuawviM^ Kpefxa^M^ andKpe/Aao), e^-eKpe/ACTO (Lu. 19:48), 
 
 iKpifjuacrUj iKpefidaO-qv. 
 KptVw (dva-, aTTO-, dvT-aTro-, ota-, ev-, €7rt-, /cara-, (tw-, VTro-, ctuv-utto-), 
 
 iKpiVOfXrjV^ KpivS)^ €KptVa, KCKptKUj KCKptKClVj K€KpLfJUlt^ iKpldr]V, 
 KpL6rj(T0/XaL. 
 
 KpvTTTo) (dTTO-, €V-, TTtpt-) , £Kpui/'a, KGCpv/x/xat, eKpv^rjv. 
 
 KvXt'ct) (dva-, dTTO-, Trpocr-), KvXtcrw, -CKvXicra, -KCKvXccryLiat. • 
 
 Aay^avo), eXa^^ov. • 
 
 Aap.^dvo) (dva-, dvTt-, crw-avTt-, dTro-, cm-, Kara-, fiera-^ Trapa-, o"w- 
 Trapa-, Trpo-, Trpocr-, cw-, cw-Trept-, viro^^ eXd/a/Savov, Xr^p.i/'O/xai, 
 eXa/Sov (cXd/Jarc 1 Jo. 2:27), iXa/36iJ.r]v. Adftc, not Xa^Se. 
 EiXr^^es in Rev. 11:17. 
 
 Aav^dvo) («*<-, CTTt-), eXa^ov, eXaOofxrjv^ -XiX-qapuai. 
 
 Ae'yw (dvTt-, eVi-, Kara-, Trapa-, Trpo-) to Say, Only pres. and imperf. 
 in N. T. Some MSS. e^Xeyav in Jo. 11:56. Cf. efTrov. 
 
 Ae'ycu to collect (only COmp. Sta-, €/<-, o-vX-), -cXeyo/XT^v, -Xc'^w, -eXeia 
 
 (^-dfxrjv}, -XeXey/xat, -eXe^OrjV. 
 AetVw (dTTO-, 8ta-, eK-, CTrt-, Kara-, ev-Karu-, Trepi-, vtto-), iXetTTOv, -Xcti^w, 
 
 iXiTTov, -X€Xetp.p/i6, - iXu^Oyjv. 
 Mav^dvo) (Kara-), e/xa^ov, /xefxdOrjKa. 
 
54 A SHOUT (IKAMMAK OK THK GKKKK NEW TKSTAMKNT. 
 
 Me\a), only fieXu impersonal. 'Eiri-fiiXofuu and (Tn-ixeXiOfjjiu, -/u,eA.i;- 
 aofjuai^ -tfj.t\r}9rjv. ]\l£Tu-/xe'A,o/Aut, -CfjicXoixrjV^ -tjXiXrjdr]v^ -fjLcXtOrj- 
 
 CTOfJJtlL. 
 
 McAAw, «/LtcAAov and ^^/xeXAov, /AtAAiycrw. 
 
 MtVw (di^-, Sta-, ev-, £7rt-, Kara-, irapa-^ crv'v-Trapa-, ircpi-^ vpoa-. {itto-), 
 
 fl€Viiij l/i£lVa, -fJi€fJ.€Vr]Kaj fX€fJ-€V1]KUl'. 
 
 MiywfJii and fJ-Layta (crvi/-ava-), l/Aita, /xifxiyfJuiL. 
 
 MifivT^CTKOi (dwi-, €7r-ava-, uiro-) , /aj/t/ctw, ixifxvqjjuai.^ ifiin]a6r]V, /xvrjcrOr]- 
 
 (TOfjuat. 
 OiKo8o/xew (d''-, CTT-, (Tin'-), wkoSo/mow, otKo8o/X7;croj, wKoSofj-yjcra (also 
 
 01K08-), (^KoBofJLrj/JuUj ioKo8o/xijfxrjV^ wKoSofxyOrjv^ OLKoSo/JirjOyjcrofuu. 
 
 'Opdu) (d<^-, Ktt^-, "Tpo-}, ewpiDv (some MSS. in Jo. 6:2), -<apap.rj» 
 
 (^-opwfirjv) , oipopxiLj uixpajxr^v (Lu. 13:28), Itapaxa. and lopouca, 
 
 ewpoLKuv, (x)<f)67]v, d<f)0i'](TOfjuiL. EiSoi/ (eiSu, etSa/u.ei') is from ob- 
 solete stem i8 (Latin video). Subj. iSw, inipcr. iSc (nottSc), 
 inf. iSeiv, part. iSwv. 
 
 Ilat^w (€V-) , -eVat^ov, Trat^co, -eTrai^a, -eTrai^Orjv^ -Trai)(j9r](To/xxu. 
 
 lld(r)(<a {irpo-^ cv/x-), liraOov, TriirovOa. 
 
 Ilaua) is regular save drnTruT/o-o/itai. 
 
 Ilet'^a) (dva-), tirtidov^ Trct'cro), iTretca, imroidaj lirtTroLOuv^ Trevcur/uUy 
 iweiadrjv, TrucrOrjcropxiL. 
 
 Ilcivda), TTCivdcrw, CTrei'vao-a. Inf. ircivav. 
 
 Ilept-Te/u.i'a) (only conip. ), -irefjLov, -Tir/ji-qfuii, -cT/ji.i^dr]V. 
 
 Hi^ywfu (Trpoo"-), lirrjqa. 
 
 Ilwi^u) and iru^oi (uTTO-), iiTLaaa, 7r€7rt£<T/Aat, evida-O-qv. 
 
 TlifxirX-qfU ( £/«•-) and iix-irifXTrXdu), IttXt^u, lirXrjdOrjv. 
 
 JlilMTrprjpx and TTifiTTpdo} (cyu,-), -virprjda. 
 
 IliVw (xara-, crw-), cttivov, irtofuiLy cttiov, ireTTtoKa. Uoth ttcii' (MSS. 
 even TTiv) and tticiv, but only ttic. Cf. Trt'co-ai. 
 
 riiTrpouTKaj, liriTrpacTKOv^ ireTT/ooKa, TrCTT/sa/iai, lirpdQrjv. 
 
 ntTTTo) (dra-, dvTt-, ttTTO-, «-, CV-, 67ri-, KUTu-, TTupa-, irtpi-, Trpoa-, (rx'p.-)^ 
 CTTiTTTOv, ircaovfjuUj iirtaov and CTreaa, TrtTTTtoKa. Cf. 7re;rT(i>Kes 
 
 (Rev. 2:5) and 7rc7rTa>Kuv (Rev. 18:3). 
 
 TlAco) (diro-, 8ia-, ««-, Kara-,' wapa-, utto-), -CTrXtor, -cVAeixra. 
 nXTjcraw («-, «Ti-), -eirXrjaaofjirjv, -tVAi^^a, lirXi'jyrjV (^-cirXdyr]v). 
 llviw («»<-, «»'-, UTTO-), tTTveucra. 
 
PRINCIPAL PARTS OK SOMK IMPOltTANT VKKBS. 55 
 
 Ilj'tya) ((XTTO-, eVt-, o-v/i.-), Ivri'iyoi', tirviia^ -tTTVLyrjv. 
 
 n/3ao"cra), irpd^u), tirpa^a^ TrtTrptt^^u, Tri.irpayfxn.L. 
 
 Wwdavofjuiu.^ iTTVvdavofxrjVj iTrvdopirjv. 
 
 'PaiTt'^to, ipdvTLaa (sonie MSS. ippdvT-) pcpavTiapMi (some MSS. 
 
 Pew (TTttpa-) , peww, -eppvrjv, 
 
 'Plttto) (ttTTO-, CTTt-) ailcl ptTTTeo), c/jtt/'a (and tpp-), eppifj-fjiai (and «p-). 
 '^fiivvvp.L and o-^ewud), o-j3ivvvfULL, a(3iaa)j ecrySeo-a, (rfiecrO-qa-ofxai. 
 Sij/AaiVto, iar'jfjiaLVOV, iarj/juava. 
 2:raa) (di/a-, ciTro-, Sta-, ctti-, Trepi-), -tcrirmfx-qv^ aira.(T(t)j iaTraadfxrjv, 
 
 -eaTrdaOrjV, 
 ^TTCipo) (Sta-, eTTt-), ecTTretpa, tairapfjuii, iairaprjv. 
 StcAAw (ciTro-, e^-ttTTO-, OTJV-aTro-, Sta-, €7rt-, Kara-, <rw- or (Tu-, iitto-), 
 
 -ecTTcAXo/xi^v, (TTeAw, -ecTreiXa (-a/XT/v), -eo-raAxa, -i(TTaXp.aL^ -ccrTotA- 
 
 T^v. Cf. ciTreo-TaAKav in Acts 16:36. 
 Sti^ko) (cf. mod. Gk. ariKw) pros, from ecrryKa (cf. yp-qyopiia from 
 
 eypr/yopa), imperf. cctti^kov in Jo. 8:44 and Rev. 12:4 ace. to 
 
 AV H. 
 
 "SiT-qpi^ui (eTTi-), arrjptio) and (TTrjpCcria in SOme MSS. (cf. ar-qpiCi in 
 LXX), iar-Qptia and l(TTrjpL(Ta^ iaT^piyfun^ idTrjpLxOrjv. 
 
 '2,Tp€(f)(o (^dva-, aTTO-, Sta-, ck-, ctti-, Kara-, /xera-, crvv- or av-, vtto-), 
 -cTT/ae'i/'a), eoTpei/'a, -e(rTpa/x/xat, iarpacjjrjv. 
 
 "^Tpwwvoi and (TTp(iiVVVfjiL (Kara-, vtto-), ecrTpajn/uov, eorpwo-a, eo-T/jw/xai, 
 
 2u-^eiryvu/xi (only comp. ), o-wt^ev^tt. 
 
 2uv-T€ju,va) (only comp.), o-wtct/aij/acVos in some MSS. (Rom. 
 
 9:28). 
 ^<f>d^(j} (Kara-) , cr(/)atw, ea^a^a, eo-^ay/xat, iacjydyiji'. 
 Sw^o (Sta-, €K-), ia(i)^6fJi.r]V, cra)(ra), ecrcocra, (TeVwKa, atauxTpMij i(Tw6r]Vj 
 
 crwOrjcrofuu. 
 Tdaao) (dva-, d;/Tt-, aTro-, Sta-, €7rt-Sta-, €7rt-, irpo-j Trpocr-, frw-, vtto-), 
 
 Ira^a (jdp.-qv)^ TtVa^a, TeVayfiat, -crdyr/v, -(.Td^Orjv. 
 TtXc'o) (aTTO-, Std-, CK-, £7rt-, (tui'-), reXeo-co, ereXeora, rereXeKa, TcrcXeo-zxai, 
 
 creXt'o-^Tjv, TtXtcrOrjaopML. 
 TtKTO), riqapjOLL^ triKov^ iri^drfv. 
 Tpe(jiu} (dva-, ck-, cv-), lOpvpu.^ -eOpeipd/x-qv^ TiOpap-puai^ -€Tpd(f>r]V. 
 
50 A SHOUT (iKAMMAR oF TMK (iUKKK NKW TKSTAMKNT. 
 
 Tpi)^(i) i^iicr-^ KUTu-, TrepL-j frpo-^ irpocr-^ (tw-, eVt-cruK-, vtto-), iTpt)(ov, 
 
 t.Opap.ov. 
 Tvy)^di'(D {iv-, VTrep-€v-, €7ri-, irapa-^ <7vv-), €TV)^ov, T£Tv;^a and T€T£u;^a 
 
 (or even TCTv)(r]Ka in MSS. in IIe]).S:G). 
 TvTrro) lias only i)resent stem in N. T. See vardaau) and 7rA>;yvv/xt. 
 
 <I>ati'w (di«-), (fiavovpMij -e<^ava, l^dvqv^ (f>avr]aofjuiL. 
 
 ^€pu) (di'a-, aTTO-, 8ia-, eiV-, €»c-, €7rt-, Kara-, irapa-^ '"^^P'-') ""po-, irpcxj-^ 
 
 (Tvv-^ wo-), icfitpov (^-6fir]v\ olcTw^ -yveyKOv and ^vey/ca, r]vt\6r]v. 
 4>€uya> (aTTO-, oiu-, ck-, Kara-), <^ev^o/uit, -■7rtcj>tvya, €cf)vyov. 
 ^ddvo) (Trpo-), tfjiOaaa^ i(f}6aKa. 
 
 ^dtipoi (Sui-, KttTtt-), (fiOtpC)^ (cfyOtipa, -€<}>dappAj.L, i(f>ddpr]V, <^6ap^(Topja.i. 
 ^ofHopxiL (£»«-), i4>ol3ovfxr]v, i<l)oft-Q6r]v, <f>o/ir]6TJ(TOfJua.i.. 
 ^pdcraw^ l^pa^u, i(f>pdyy]Vj <f>payyj(roiMu. 
 
 4>lt(U («K-, Crv/X-), £</)V7/l'. 
 
 Xatpoj ((Tvi'-), £;((xt/30v, i)(dpr]V, •)(ap^(TOiuxL (some IMSS. X^P*^ ^'^ ReV. 
 11:10). 
 
 Xapt^o/uii, •^fapicropui^ i)(apL(Tdfjir]v, Ke^dpLapxiij i)(api(rOr]Vj ^apLad-qaopuai. 
 Xpdo/xai (kutu-), i^wp.r]v^ i^pr/adfxrjv^ Kt^ijpxiL. 
 
 Xprj (impersonal) only once, Jas. 3:10. 
 
 ^VX<»>, i/'vyi^cro/xat. 
 
 £2i/eo/[iai, b)vrjadp.-qv ^ not iirpwLfxrjV. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE FORMATION OF WORDS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 1. The history of .Greek ivords. The usage of the New Testament 
 is in harmony with the history of the language. Each word has 
 its own history as truly as each individual man. Take a-KavBaXov, 
 for instance. It occurs first in the Septuagint, a noose, a snare, 
 as in Ps. 69:23. It was the trapstick, the trap, then any impedi- 
 ment, then a stumbling block, then any person who is an occasion 
 of stumbling as in Joshua 23:13. So Peter became a stumbling 
 block to Jesus (o-KavSaXov et i/xov. Matt. 16:23). Christ crucified 
 became a a-KavSdXrjOpov, trap-stick. The root crxavS is seen in the 
 Sanskrit ska'ndami, to dart, to leaji, and in the Latin scando, de- 
 scendo. This is a very simple illustration and is chosen for that 
 reason. One does not fully know a Greek word till he knows its 
 history. The resultant meaning of a word in any given instance 
 will be determined by the etymology, the development, and the 
 immediate context. These three things are to be carefully noted 
 before a final conclusion can be safely reached. Roots are either 
 primitive or denominative. Wherever possible, find the root of a 
 Greek word. This is a fascinating subject that can here be merely 
 sketched. See Curtius, Greek Etymology (1886). 
 
 2. The kinship of Greek words with each other. There are smaller 
 families of Greek words which are all kin to the common stock 
 and to each other. Acikw/m is a good illustration in point. The 
 root is 8iK and so appears in Soc-i/. The Sanskrit dic-ci-mi means to 
 show, to point out, and died is Judgment whether of men or gods. 
 The root is strengthened in the Greek verb, and SeiKWfxi is to 
 show, to point out. Aikt; is the way pointed out, right or justice. 
 AiKrjv is the adverbial accusative and means ''after the way of" or 
 like. Aetlis is a showing, Sety/xa something pointed out, while 
 
58 A SIIOIfT GRAMMAR OF THE GREKK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 SiKfuos is a man who seeks to go the right way, a righteous man. 
 Atxaioo) is to make righteous and then usually to show or declare 
 righteous, while StxatWis is the act of declaring righteous, AtKai'w/xa 
 is what has been declared righteous whether deed or law, while 
 Stxouxrwj; is the quality of being righteous whether actual right- 
 eousness or attributed righteousness. Awcatojs is a righteous method 
 or manner, while 8i*caiwT7ys or hiKaa-rys is one who decides right- 
 eously. AiKaoTTi/piov, finally, is the place where things or persons 
 are shown to be righteous. Each of these many words from one 
 common root occurs in the New Testament save one (SiKaiwriys) . 
 The difference in meaning lies here not so much in the clianges 
 due to the lapse of time and new connections, for tliis wr)rd has 
 shown itself to be very persistent in its root idea. The cliange in 
 idea is here due chiefly to the difference in the suffixes. One 
 cannot thus rightly comprehend the significance of New Testament 
 words till he understands the import of the Greek suffixes and pre- 
 fixes. The ideas of action, agent, result, instrument, quality, 
 place, person, etc., are differentiated in sul)stantives (and adjectives 
 to some extent) in this manner. Avrpov, for instance, in Matt. 
 20:28 is Xv-w plus -rpov which means the instrument. The offered 
 life of Jesus is the means of loosing us from the penalty of our sins. 
 So airo-\v-Tpo)-(TLi (Rom. 3:24) is the act of loosing us from the pen- 
 alty of sin by means of the death of Christ and consequent recon- 
 ciliation. We are restored to the favor of God. Here again a great 
 theme can be only outlined. See the Greek grammars for the sig- 
 nificance of the prefixes and suffixes. 
 
 3. The contrasts in Greek ivcrrds. Different words are used to ex- 
 press varying shades of the same general idea. With StKuto?, for 
 instance, it is profitaljle to compare koXos, aya^o's, ayios, ocrios, KaOapos, 
 wh<'re goodness is looked upon not so nnich as right, but as l)eau- 
 tiful, admirable, consecrated, undefiled, purified. Gonqjare vcos 
 and Koivos, the one young and not yet old, the other recent and not 
 ancient. So ripas is a wonder or i)ortent, fn^/ietov a sign or i)roof, 
 Sum/xts a power or mighty work. Clear perception of sucli dis- 
 tinctions is essential to correct exegesis of the New Testament. We 
 see Jesus himself insisting on the use of aya^os for the idea of abso- 
 
THE FORMATION OF WORDS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 59 
 
 lute goodness wlien he said: OvSeis a.ya$6s d firj tis 6 6e6<: (Mark 
 10:18). Botli ayaOos and StWtos occur together in Luke 23:50. In 
 Luke 8:15 KapSia dyaOrj Kol KoXrj ai^proaches Socrates' frequent use of 
 these two adjectives together. Compare our 'Hhe beautiful and 
 the good." See Trench, Synonyms of the Neiv Testament (1890); 
 Heine, Synonomik des Neutestamentlichen Griechisch (1898). 
 
 4. 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 
 meaningless. 'AAAorpt-eTrio-KOTros (1 Peter 4:15) is a good example, 
 for we have o-kotto?, cttl, aAAorpios, each with its own history, and 
 each contributing to the resultant idea of one who takes the sujDer- 
 vision of other men's matters which in no wise concern him. 
 Another good illustration is auTo-Kara-K/atTos (Titus 3:11). See also 
 
 ■7rpo(ro}Tro-XrjfJiTrTr]<; (Acts 10:34), SnrXovs (1 Tim. 5:17), d(j)0a\ixo3ov\ia 
 
 (Eph. 6:6), Xoyofjuaxta (1 Tim. 6:4) which does not occur in the 
 older Greek, /xov6<f)9a\[j.o'; (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 iOeXoOprjaKia (Col. 2:23), Paul is fond of piling up 
 words together to express his emotion as vwepeKTrepuTo-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 SciKwfu 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 tciho a messenger, the Gennan has zeigcn to 
 show, the English uses indicate, indict, contradict, judge, etc. 
 Take (TKiirTofjiaL. The Sanskrit root is spac look, spacas a spy. The 
 Zend has cpac look at, spy. In Latin we have specio, con-spicio, 
 spec-vlum, spec-to. In the Greek root metathesis has taken place 
 and (TircK has become a-Ken. Hence o-KeVro/xai is to spy out, crKOTryj 
 is a watching, aKoina. is a watchtower, (tkottos is a spy and then aim 
 or goal, o-Kwi/' is owl. In Phil. 3:14 Paul says Kara (tkottov Sici/cco. 
 See Curtius, Greek Etymology (1886). 
 
60 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GRP:EK NKW TESTAMENT. 
 
 6. Xew Testament develapinents. There are no '*Bil)lical" suffixes 
 or terminations. The new words in the New Testament are formed 
 in luirmony with the Greek idiom Suy/cotvwvds (ilom. 11:17), for 
 instance, is after the analogy of o-vvt/3o<^os. 'H/jwStavos (Matt. 22:16) 
 and ;(pio-Tiavos (Acts 11:26) are Latin formations like Romanus, 
 Africanus. The proper names in the New Testament are Hke those 
 in current vernacular use at the time often in abbreviated form as 
 'AttoAAo)? and also 'AttoAAwvios. 'Ayiacr^ios is similar in formation to 
 ff£t/3a(r/xos. There is an increasing number of verbs in -ow and -t'^w 
 like (^aiTTL^o), pavTi^to. Compound words are always to be noticed 
 carefully and each element in the composition given due signifi- 
 cance, as, for example, dvTLTrap^XOev in Luke 10:31. The priest 
 went along on the opposite side of the road. A number of words 
 once held to be Biblical or peculiar to the Septuagint are now 
 known to be common in the vernacular Koivrj as shown by the 
 papyri as, for instance, yoyyu^w, Trpccr/iure/aos in the official sense. 
 On the whole there is little of a special nature in the formation of 
 New Testament words, but much can be learned from the use of 
 comi^arative j3hilological principles. The most astonishing thing 
 about the New Testament words is not the number of new forma- 
 tions, but the scarcity of such words. There are, we now know, 
 only about "50 new formations among the round 5,000 words of 
 the New Testament" (Deissmann, Philology of the Greek Bible), just 
 one i^er cent. And this "fifty" may become "ten" before we are 
 done with the i:)apyri. This volume of Deissmann' s is the best 
 single handbook of the new knowledge from the papyri and the 
 Septuagint. 
 
PART III. 
 
 SYNTAX. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 THE SENTENCE. 
 
 The Sentence itself calls for some comment. In a larger treatise 
 much more space would be needed. But here a few words must 
 suffice. 
 
 1. The sentence is the expression of an idea and is complex. 
 The subject and predicate are essential to the complete expression 
 of a sentence, which may be very brief. Indeed one word may 
 have both as dTrex" (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 ov;^t (Lu. 1:60), 
 vai', Kvpie (Jo. 11:27). 
 
 2. The subject may be itself the center of a group of words 
 (substantives, adjectives, ad verbs, prepositions, etc.). Cf. Rom. 
 
 7:10 ly ivToXr] •^ eis ^<»t^v. 
 
 3. The predicate may also be the center of a group of words as 
 roiovTovs t,rfvi Tors TrpocrKwowras avTov (Jo. 4:23). Subject and 
 predicate are thus the two foci of the sentence. 
 
 4. The predicate is either a verb or a substantive, adjective, 
 etc., with a copula (ei/Ai', KaXovfiai, etc.) expressed or implied. 
 Thus 6 dypo's ia-Tiv 6 koct/aos (Matt. 13:38): Cf. Jo. 4:11; Rom. 
 1:7. 
 
 5. Apposition is found both with the subject as dvrjp irpo^i^Tiys 
 (Lu. 24:19) or the predicate as ov irpoeOtTo 6 6co^ IXaa-r-^piov (Rom. 
 3:25). As a rule the verb agrees with the subject in person. The 
 first person prevails when two or more are used as iyot kol 6 iraTrjp 
 hi<Tfieu (Jo. 10:30). 
 
 6. The subject and the predicate agree in number except that 
 construction according to sense often prevails over mere grammat- 
 ical number as 6 ©xXos lo-Tpwcrav (Matt. 21:8). The neuter plural 
 
64 A SHORT ORAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 may take a singular (Tai. 4:41) or a plural vorli (ihid.). Paul 
 sometimes uses the literary plural as in 2 Cor. 10:13. 
 
 7. Substantives and adjectives as a rule agree in gender. Some 
 adjectives have no distinctive feminine form as c^" ^^^ aiwi/ioi' (Jo. 
 G:47). Often gender is according to s=.'nse as e$v7. iaKOTLcr/xevoi (Eph. 
 4:171). Words vary in gender also. The "whole question of 
 grammatical gender is unsatisfactory to us modems. 
 
 8. Adjectives, jjarticiples, and substantives in apposition agree 
 usually in case. But anacoluthon is common in all Greek in this 
 matter, especially colloquial Greek or impassioned argument. 
 Note Ka$apL^(ov in Mk. 7:19; Trpccr^Srrrcpois, cKXe^a/ievous, ypai/'avres 
 (Acts 15:22 1). The book of Revelation is full of such anacolu- 
 tha with participles or words in apposition. Sometimes as in 
 oLtto 6 wv (Rev. 1:4) it is intentional anacoluthon. 
 
 9. Sentences are either simple or compound. Compound sen- 
 tences are either paratactic or hypotactic (co-ordinate or subordi- 
 nate) . Co-ordinate sentences may have connectives as is usual (Kat, 
 Sc, etc.) or not (asyndeton as 1 Cor. 13:7). Even subordinate 
 sentences may have asyndeton of the conjunction as 0e\«s uirwfiev 
 (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 XL 
 
 SUBSTANTIVE, ADJECTIVE, ADVEEB. 
 
 1. The parts of speech are connected with each other more or 
 less. It is simply mechanical to think of anything else. Adverbs 
 bulk largely in furnishing various parts of speech in the develop- 
 ment of language, such as prepositions, conjunctions, particles, 
 etc. The higher organization of speech calls for fine distinctions 
 which are made possible by new uses of adverbs. Adverbs them- 
 selves have various origins as verl>, substantive, adjective, pro- 
 nouns. As a rule the adverb is the fixed case-form like x*P"^ 
 (freely), which also is used as preposition with genitive. In itself 
 it is merely the accusative of x'^P^^- ^^^ cf. ofwXoyovfxevoyi and 
 even vowex^^- 
 
 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 is an afterthought. 
 
 3. The adjective is merely a variation of the substantive, both 
 of which are nouns (ovo/wtTa). No separate treatment is given 
 to the Sanskrit adjective in Whitney's Sanskrit Grammar. 
 Most of the Sanskrit adjectives have only one or two endings 
 though some have all three genders. Some substantives came to 
 be employed in a descriptive sense like brother man, dSeA^os avOpw- 
 TTos. Out of this descriptive usage the adjective (liridtrov) grew. 
 The adjective is then strictly an evolution from the substantive and 
 
66 A SHOUT GRAMMAR OF TUE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 is often itself used sultstantiyoly as to ayadov (Rom. 12:9). The sub- 
 stantive itself continues also to be employed in a descrijitive sense. 
 Therefore no hard and fast line of distinction can })e drawn be- 
 tween substantive and adjective. Tliey are inflected alike and 
 often are used alike, though for practical purposes a line of cleav- 
 age can be noted. Observe ev tw 'lo/aSavT; Trora/xw (Matt. 3:6). See 
 chapter on Declension of Adjectives for further remarks on this 
 line. 
 
 4. The adjective is more develoj^ed in Homer than in the San- 
 skrit and the Greek has its own genius in the use of the adjective. 
 It uses the adjective where other languages might not. So Sevre- 
 paloL rjXOofxev (Acts 28:13). A distinction is to be observed between 
 TrpwTos (Rom. 10:19) and irpu>Tov (Jo. 1:41). Cf. Trpwros in Jo. 
 20:4,8. So also fi6vo<s (Lu. 24:18) is different from the adverb 
 /x6vov (2 Tim. 4:8). Cf. English ''feel bad" and "feel Inully." 
 
 5. The adjective is either predicate or attributive. Take airapd- 
 fiarov (Heb. 7:24) as an example of the predicate adjective and 
 alwviov (Jo. 6:47) as an example of the attributive adjective. 
 
 6. The adjective is rarely used in the superlative form in the 
 N. T. and even then it is usually elative in the sense of "very" 
 as /xc'yto-Ta (2 Pet. 1:4). A few examples of the true superlative 
 survive as ajipi/^eaTdTrjv (Acts 26:5). The comparative is often, as 
 in modem Greek, used like the superlative. So /nci^cov in 1 Cor. 
 13:13. 
 
 7. The adjective is used frequently as an adverb. So iroXv, t6 
 TrpoiTov (Jo. 12:16), TO XoiTTov, etc. This is probably the earliest 
 and simplest adverb. 
 
 8. Adjectives are frequently used without substantives as irvev- 
 IJUiTixoL<; irvtv/MiTuid (1 Cor. 2:13), rf iTriovarj (ActS 16:11). Some- 
 tinu'H only the context can decide what is the gender of the adjec- 
 tive. So airo Tov irovTjpov (Matt. 6 :1.')). 
 
 9. Adjectives may be used with the infinitive as Uavb^ ^ao-Taom 
 (Matt. 3:11), with im as apKcrov "va yivrjTuL (^latt. 10:2.")), with the 
 associative-instrumental as o/ioios dvOpuiTni) (Matt. 20:1)^ with the 
 accusative as o/xoiov vlov dvOptitirov (Rev. 14:1 1), with the ablative :us 
 
 fu.C(ii>i/ TOW 7raT/jo9 (.To. 8:r).'*>)j with the dnlivo as tu dpecrra urru) (.To. 
 
SUBSTANTIVE, ADJECTIVE, ADVERB. 67 
 
 8:29), €voxos TYj KpicTu (Matt. 5:21), with the genitive as irXrjprj'; 
 XdptTOi (Jo. 1:14), etc. 
 
 10. Adverbs are either the neuter accusative of an adjective Hke 
 voXv, KoAAiov, fiaXtaTa; the accusative of a substantive like X"P"'j' 
 the article with an adjectiye as to irpwrov, or with a substantive as 
 Trjv dpx^v (Jo. 8:25) as an adverbial phrase; or the ablative case 
 of an adjective like KaAw? or pronoun as owtws; or some other case 
 of noun or pronoun as Travrj; (instrumental), ckci (locative), etc. 
 Cf. TTotas in Lu. 5:19, and cKetvi^s in Lu. 19:4 as examples of the 
 genitive. Space does not permit a full list of adverbs in the N. T. 
 Cf. TO Kaff Tip.ipav (Lu. 19:47) and TovvavrCov (Gal. 2:7). 
 
 11. For the use of adverbs as prepositions see chapter on Prep- 
 ositions. The so-called "imj^roper" prepositions like l^w are ad- 
 verbs as indeed all prepositions are as irtpC^ for instance. 
 
 12. Adverbs may be used with the article and thus as the 
 equivalent of substantive (tws toS vvv, Matt. 24:21), or adjective 
 (cv TO) vw Kat/3a», Rom. 8:26). 
 
 13. ]\lany prepositional phrases have an adverbial sense like 
 OTTO fxepovi (2 Cor. 1:14), eh TO TravTeAc's (Heb. 7:25). 
 
 14. Participles often have an adverbial idea as irpoaOtU cl-n-ev 
 (Lu. 19:11). 
 
 15. Adverbs may be compared like dvoire/aov, p-dXia-ra and com- 
 pounded like V7repeKTrcpL(r<Tov. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 THE ARTICLE. 
 
 1. The indefinite article in Greek. The Sanskrit and Latin had 
 no article, as the Greek has no indefinite article. Not even in the 
 modern Greek has the indefinite article of the Teutonic and Roman 
 tongues developed, though occasionally cTs or tIs is used with little 
 more force than the English a (an). Even in the New Testament 
 we see traces of this use of els as in ]\Iatt. 8:19 where cTs ypa/i/xaTcvs 
 is practically equivalent to our "a." In fact, the English one, 
 Scotch ane, French un, German ein is simply the cardinal "one" 
 adapted to this very usage. Children often say: "That was one 
 funny man." So likewise tI? is used where "certain" is rather 
 too emphatic in English as ro/i-tKos ns in Luke 10:25. 
 
 2. The origin of the definite article. The Sanskrit and Latin did 
 not develop any article at all, and the Greek never developed the 
 indefinite usage to any extent. Moreover, the Greek was slow in 
 creating the definite article, though in Homer we do have the he- 
 ginning of the article. The forms 5, ^, to are occasionally used in 
 Homer with the force of "the," chiefly with adjectives, proper 
 names, or for contrast. It is just in Homer that we see the evolu- 
 tion of the article, for this same form 6, ^, t6 is very common here 
 as a demonstrative and appears also as a relative. Hence 6 is 
 originally a demonstrative that was gradually weakened to the 
 article or heightened to the relative. This threefold usage of t)ne 
 form is seen in the Ionic, for Herodotus uses the t forms as dem- 
 onstrative and relative as well as for the article. And even in the 
 Attic 6 is preserved occasionally as demonstrative. So in the poets 
 and Plato the demonstrative 6 ai)pears hefore relative pronouns 
 (cf. Justin Martyr). The nuxU-rn Grei'k often has 6 ottoios as tlio 
 relative like old English "llu! which." In the poetical (piotation 
 
THE ARTICLE. 69 
 
 in Acts 17;2S rod yap Koi yeVos iafiiv we have the demonstrative toS. 
 Snch uses as 6 Se are common, when the demonstrative is in con- 
 trast with a noun usually in an oblique case. So 6 (^l uircv (Matt. 
 14:18). So also in the contrasted expressions ol fxtv, oi ^c (Acts 
 14:4). In Acts 5:41 ol fxlv is used absolutely. We even have 6 as 
 a relative in the expression 6 ^v (Rev. 1:4,8) in harmony with 
 Homeric usage. The Greek relatiye os ^, o which is common in 
 Homer and in the later Greek is demonstrative in origin also 
 though Giles does not think so. So in John 5:11 we read os Se 
 a-jrocpidrj auTois, and in Rom. 14:2 OS /lev TTio-Teuet. Compare os //.eV, 
 OS 8e (Rom. 14:5). The contrasted expressions are found in oblique 
 cases as ov /acV, ov S« (T^ike 23:33). This demonstrative in both 
 forms is the same word as the Sanskrit demonstrative sa, sa , tad, 
 where in the masculine and feminine nominative singular the t has 
 been softened to s. So in Greek this s becomes often a rough 
 breathing, {T)b, (t)^, to, and this form then loses the accent. 
 We see it in the Latin is-te, is-ta, is-tud, the Gothic sa, so, thata, 
 German der, die, das, the Anglo-Saxon se, seo, thaet, and modern 
 English this, that. In the German and the English we have also 
 the threefold use of the same form as demonstrative, article, rela- 
 tive. In English "the" is a weakened form of ''this." But in 
 the New Testament as in the earlier Attic 6, 17, to is usually the 
 article and the demonstrative and relative ideas are generally ex- 
 pressed by other words. But the demonstrative use of 6 continues 
 in the modern Greek as to koI to, this and that. The modern 
 Romance languages obtain their articles from the Latin demon- 
 stratives ille, iste. 
 
 3. The meaning of the article. The Greek grammarians call it 
 TO opLo-TiKov apOpov. Thc Engllsh word article comes from the same 
 root as apOpov, viz. , dpapta-KO), to Join. 'Ap is the root form. This 
 etymology is not very distinctive for many other words join words 
 together. But opia-Tixov is more to the purpose, for the article does 
 define, limit, point out. It is a pointer, not like the demonstra- 
 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 not tell why a 
 
70 A SHORT GKAMMAll OF THE GUEEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 certain thing is ]>ointed out, l)Ut it always j)oints at sometliing. 
 The Greek article points out in one of three ways (Broadus): 
 
 (a) Individual objects from other individual objects. 
 
 'I8wv §€ T0U9 6x^ov<i avt/3rj cis to opos (Matt. 5:1). Then the multi- 
 tudes in question were those that had come to hear him and the 
 mountain is the one right before him in which he had spent the 
 whole night in prayer (Lu. 6:12), down which he had just come 
 (Lu. 6:17) and up which he now again ascended where he sat 
 down. The Greek article is never used when it has no meaning. 
 "W'e may not be able to see it in the English idiom, but it had its 
 usual force in the Greek. The King James Version does not treat 
 the Greek article i:)roperly here and in a great many other passages. 
 The translators were under the influence of the Latin Vulgate. In 
 Luke 4:20 we read koL Trrvia? to /SifiXtov dTroSows tw VTrr^pir-Q iKadiaaf, 
 Here the roll is the one that Jesus had just read and the attendant 
 is the one who had given it to him. In Luke 18:13 even the 
 Revised Version has translated tw d/xa/DTcoXw by "a sinner" and put 
 "the sinner" in the margin. But a large part of the point lies in 
 TO). He seemed to himself to be the great sinner of the world as 
 did Paul later (1 Tim. 1:15). In English we also use the article 
 to distinguish individuals from other individuals. 
 
 (b) Classes from other classes. Take Matt. 8:20 as an example: 
 Ai dAwTrcKes <^<dX£ous t\ov(nv KaX to. Trerciva tov ovpavov KaTacr/CT/vwcra?, o 
 8c vios TOV avOpwTTOV ovK e)(ei irov T^v Ke<paXr]v kXivtj. Here dAtoTrcKes, 
 ircTeivoL, avdpu>Trov are all classes that are by the article distinguished 
 from other classes. In the case of tov avOpwwov it is the singular 
 that is so used in the collective general sense of man or mankind. 
 The singular is also used with tlie article in the representative 
 sense as in Luke 10:7 d^io? yap 6 ipyarr}^ tov pxuOov avrov. Here 
 6 epyaTT^s is the representative of the whole class of laborers. For 
 ol avdponroi in the plural as a class see. Matt. 12:36. We use the 
 article in English sometimes to distinguish a class from a oLuss. 
 But even in the CJreek tlie article is not always necessary for this 
 
 Jiurpose, as iirl irovTjpoix; koI ayaOov^ (Matt. 5:45). 
 
 (c) Qualities from other (pialities. Tlie article is not necessary 
 with abstract (jualities, liut is often S() usi'd to shariten the ]trouii- 
 
THE AKTICLE. 71 
 
 nence of tlio qiialit}- or to d(\scri])e it as previously mentioned. 
 Tliis usage is common in German and French, l)ut is unknoAvn to 
 English save as the quality can he treated as an individual matter 
 already mentioned. So in CJerman die Weisheit, in French la 
 sagesse, l>ut in English wisdom. In 1 John 4:18 we have good 
 exam])les of this use of the Greek article. $o/?os is first without the 
 article and then is repeated with the article, while dydirr] as the 
 important matter in hand has the article each time. Sometimes 
 this article should he retained in English as in Rev. 4:11 rrjv Soiav 
 Koi T^v TL/xrjv Kal TYjv 8vva/xLv meaning the glory and the honor and 
 the power Avhich God possesses. In Rom. 13:7 we have an inter- 
 esting study in the use of the article. 
 
 4. What the article is used with. The article can point out any-- 
 thing that needs further definition. The article will, of course, 
 have the gender of the substantive with which it is used, though 
 any substantive may have the natural, not the grammatical gender 
 6 dfjiijv (Rev. 3:14). But see the neuter in Gal. 4;25 where t6 Se 
 "Ayap jjurposely treats the feminine name as a neuter word. The 
 neuter article is alone used with the infinitive as to Se KadCcrai (]Mk. 
 10:40). So the article is used with adjectives w^ith or without sub- 
 stantives as 6 TToifjLrjv 6 KaXos (John 10:11), 6 ayios Tov 6€ov (Jo.6:69). 
 The article is used also Avith adverbs without a substantive. In 
 the New Testament to vvv is very common as in diro tov vvv (Luke 
 5:10) and even to. vvv (Acts 27:22). In fact the article can be used 
 with any part of speech as the verb in to Se 'Ave'/??/ (Eph. 4:9), a 
 clause as in to Et Swrj (Mark 9:23), a quotation as in to ov <fiov- 
 evo-eis, ov fj.oix'^vacL': (Matt. 19:18), or a sentence as in to ttcos avTois 
 TrapaSw awTo'v (Luke 22:4). This use of the article with sentences 
 is very common in Luke and is frequent in modern Greek. The 
 article occurs often with the participle as with other adjectives 
 when a substantive is also used as rrj ipxafj-evrj ^fxipa (Acts 21:26) 
 and especially where no substantive appears as in Luke 22:27 
 where four examples occur, 6 dvoKet'ju.o'os (twice), 6 SlokovCjv (twice). 
 The article with the participle is a connnon practical equivalent to 
 a relative clause as in tois Tna-Tcvova-iv (John 1:12) and hence has a 
 larger signification than a mere adjective since the j^articiple has 
 
72 A SlIOliT (iKA.MMAU OF TIIH GKKIOK NKW TK.STAMKNT. 
 
 tense. The article is common with the infinitive as in Mk. 5:4; 
 ^latt. 2G:2. Often the article is used by itself when the context is 
 clear as in to. KatWpo? (^lark 12:17), 6 tov ZefieSaiov (Matt. 10:2). 
 Cf. T^ T^s (TVK^s (Matt. 21:21). 
 
 T). When the article is not used. The article is not, of course, used 
 Avhcn the idea is indefinite as in fxera ywawcos iXaXei (John 4:27). 
 Here the King James Version misses the point Ijy saying "tlie 
 w^oman." But a word may be definite without the article, for the 
 article is not the only way of making a thing definite. Proper 
 names, for instance, are definite in the nature of tlie case and do 
 not require the article to make them so as in ir/oos Bapva/3av IXaCXos 
 (Acts 15:3G). So when a substantive is used with a genitive it 
 may be sufficiently definite without the article as in irvXaL aSov 
 (]Matt. 16:18). This usage is not unknown .to earlier Greek and 
 is in the papyri. ' The Hebrew construct is like it also. But such 
 a word may not be definite as in 6eov ulos (]\latt. 27:54). More- 
 over, some words are definite from the nature of the case as oc 
 
 vofiov (Rom. 4:14), iirb Kvpiov (Matt. 1:22), £K ■jrvevfxxiTO'i dyiov 
 
 (Matt. 1:21), though these terms for the Deity may have the 
 article like proper names. So also such words as ^\i.o<i (Matt. 13:6), 
 y^ (Luke 2:14), ^oXao-era (Luke 21:25), KoVyuo? (Gal. 6:14), can be 
 definite without tlie article in English as well as in Greek. See 
 1 Cor. 8:4f. for ev Koafxo), iv ovpav<S, im y^s. Besides, a number of 
 words like vo/aos (Rom. 2:12), ypa<f}rj ( 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 (ev oiKO) or ot*coi), in town (iv ttoXci), in eliureh iv ckkXt^o-ici, 
 (1 Cor. 14:35), where it is not necessary to say that the article is 
 omitted. It is simply not used because the idea is definite enough 
 without it. So then the Greek article is not used at all unless the 
 word is definite and only then when it is not di'finite enough to 
 suit the speaker or writer. It is not strictly in accord with the 
 genius of the(ireek language to speak of tlie "omission" of the 
 article, but ratlier of the non-use of it. S(>e I Cor. 3:22 f. for a 
 louii; list of (lefinit<! words without (he article. 
 
THE ARTICLE. 73 
 
 6. Some special uses of the article. 
 
 (a) The correlation of the article. If a genitive is used with a 
 noun and l)oth have the article, each is unmistakalily definite. So 
 Nathanael said to Jesus (.John 1:4*)) 2i) d 6 vlos tov deov and like- 
 wise Peter (Matt. 16:16). A proper name in such a case does not 
 always have the article as/iera ttjv /xeToi/ceo-t'av Ba^uAwos (Matt. 1:12). 
 But where one of the words is without the article it is 
 indefinite as in e? vlbs a tov 6eov (Matt. 4:3) where Satan assumes 
 that Jesus is a son of God. But in a case like Oeov vlb^ (Matt. 
 27:54), both words may be indefinite or both definite and only 
 the context or nature of the Avords can decide. Compare vi6s 
 rov dtov (Matt. 27:40) and O^ov rlo's (Matt. 27:43). In John 
 10:36, when meeting a criticism of his enemies, Jesus calls 
 himself vlos tov deov, though elsewhere he says 6 vlos tov Otov (.lohn 
 5:25). 
 
 (b) The article with attributives. There are three kinds of 
 attributive expressions with which the article has to do. 
 
 (1) Adjectives. The attributive adjective is preceded by the 
 article, though the adjective itself may precede the sulxstantive, if 
 one is used, as in to i/xov 6vo^ (Matt. 18:20), or follow the sub- 
 stantive as in 6 iroLijJqv 6 KaXos (.John 10:11). But in 6 6)(Xo<; ttoXvs 
 (John 12:9,12) ttoAvs appears to be attributive in idea like the 
 French use of the adjective without the article as .la re'publique 
 Francaise. But in j\Iark 12:37 we have 6 ttoXi^s o)(\o^ (compare 
 o;)(Xos Tro\v<s in Mark 5:21). Perhaps this usage grew l)y analogy 
 out of the common construction of ttSs, oAos, ovtos, oSe, tKetvos. If 
 no article is used with an adjective, it may still be attributive as 
 fUKpa ^vfj.r] (1 Cor. 5:Q). 
 
 (2) \\'itli genitives. From the nature of the case genitives are 
 generally attributive whether the article is used or not, though the 
 genitive is predicate after elfxi, yi'vo/xat, etc. So oikoSo/at; Oeov (1 Cor. 
 3:9), Kara t^v X'^P"' ^^'^ ^'^^ (^ Cor. 3:10), to Ky'jpvyfxd /xov (1 Cor. 
 2:4). This is true whatever tlie position of tlie genitive, whether 
 as al:)ove or preceded 1)y the article as in fidpTv; twv tov xp'-f^'^'ov TraO- 
 tjfmTwv (1 Pet. 5;1), and in Trj avTov ■^(apLTi (Rom. 3:24). The 
 article may be added for the sake of distinction as in Mapt'a rj tov 
 
74 A SHORT (JHAMMAU OF THE (illEEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 KA<.)7ra (John 19:25) or repeated for emphasis as in o Aoyos 6 tov 
 (TTavpov{l Cor. 1:18). 
 
 (3) With adjuncts. When the adjunct has the article before 
 it, the phrase is, of course, attril)utive, as in roh iv Xpia-rw ^Irjaov 
 (Rom. 8:1), 8ia t^s aTroXurpwo-ews t^S iv XpifTTtS ^Irjaov (Rom. 3:24). 
 But if no article is used, then the adjunct may be either predicate 
 as iv Trj crapKL (Rom. 8:3) which goes with Karoipivt (not rrjv a/JuipTiav, 
 
 for Christ has no sin in his flesh) or attributive as eis tov ddvarov 
 (Rom. 6:4) where this phrase goes with Bta tov fiaTTTia-pxiTos (see 
 preceding verse). Often the tone of voice will show that a phrase 
 is attributive as oi vocpoi iv XpLO-rw avacrr^a-ovTai TrpCtTov (1 Thess. 
 4:16), 6 TTio-Tos iv iXaxLo-Tti) (Luke 16:10). The one article can be 
 used with any number of attributives (2 Pet. 1:4). 
 
 (c) The repetition of the article. It is not necessary for the 
 article to be used only once when there are a number of predicates, 
 though this is a neat Greek idiom, as in 2 Peter 3:15 where we have 
 
 r^v TOV KvpLOV rjp.wv fjuucpodvfxcav aoiTYjptav rjyda-de.. Sometimes the 
 article is repeated in such examples (cf. Attic) as in to t^s So^t/s 
 Ktti TO TOV dcov TTvevfjui (1 Pct. 4:14). Somctimcs the article is used 
 with the attributive and not with the substantive as in iv aydirr) rrj 
 cv X/310-TU 'Iijo-ov (2 Tim. 1:13). It is very common to have the 
 double article thus 6 xatpos 6 e/ios (John 7:6), o vlos 6 dyaTn/Tos 
 (Matt. 3:17). The article can be repeated with each attributive as 
 Trjv pofxcfiaiav ttjv Blo-toixov tt/v o^eiav (Rev. 2:12). But the article is 
 not repeated quite indiscriminately. "When seyeral connected 
 nouns relating to different objects differ in gender, they take sepa- 
 rate articles even if they have the same case and number, as in 
 drro tov v6fj.ov r^s afjuapTia<; kol tov 6ava.Tov (Rom. 8:2), unless indeed 
 the ideas are close akin as in iv irda-ais rats cKroXaTs koI StKaiw/xao-i 
 TOV Kvptov (Tjuke 1:6) where one article suffices. Two substantives 
 that agree in number, gender, and case, and that refer to different 
 ol)jects may be grouped under one article and so viewed as one, 
 though not in reality, as in ol (Vupin-uToL kuI ^aSSovKiuot (^Fatt. 1 '»:!), 
 whereas we usually have ol 'l^apLo-aioL kuI ol ypaixpAiTtU (Mark 7:5), 
 the one a party and the other a profession, thougli most of the 
 scribes were Pharisees. So Jesus says 6 inrcLpoiy kuI o dtpi^wy (.Kilm 
 
THE ARTICLE, 75 
 
 4:36) to emphasize the distinctness of the two persons. But when 
 two substantives relate to the same person, it is not usual to repeat 
 the article, as 'Eycj 'Io}dvr]<;, o d8eX<^os ifxwv Kal avvKOiV(j)vo<i (Rcv. 1:9). 
 Cf. Rev. 3:17. So in 2 Pet. 1:11 (and also 2:20; 3:18) we have 
 TOW Kvpiov yix<i)v Koi (TWTrjpo? 'It/ctou XpicTToO. Here the one article 
 definitely shows Jesus Christ to he both our Lord and Sayior. 
 Hence in 2 Pet. 1:1 rov 6eov y/xwv koi aoynjpo^ '1t](Tov XptcTTou the 
 article likewise means that Christ is our God and Savior. Winer de- 
 parts from his usual rectitude in not insisting on strict grammar for 
 2 Pet. 1:1. So also on doctrinal grounds he denies the force of 
 the one article in Titus 2:13 liri^avevav t^5 8o|r;s rov jxeyaXov dtov koI 
 awTTjpo's yip.u)v Xpi(rTov'lr](Tov. But Paul's doctrinal system in Phil. 
 2:9 and Col. 1:15-19; 2:9, not to mention Rom. 9:5 and Acts 20:28, 
 does not forbid the natural import of the one article here. 
 
 (d) The article with predicates. When the noun has the 
 article and the adjective does not, it is generally predicate. So in 
 /u,£yaXj7 T17 ^wi/^( Acts 26:24) Luke means that he spoke with the 
 voice loud and elevated. In Heb. 7:24 a-n-apd/SaTov ^x^l ttjv Uptacrvvrjv 
 does not mean that he has the unchangeable priesthood, but he 
 has the priesthood unchangeable. As a rule the article is not used 
 with the predicate noun even when the subject is definite. Cf . Mk. 
 3:1. 1 John 4:16 'O ^eos dydin] iartv God is love, but love is not 
 God. Thus we can tell subject from predicate. Hence in John 
 1 :1 6eos r]v 6 Xo'yos we translate the Word was God, not God was the 
 Word, for subject and predicate are not here co-extensive. But if 
 the predicate is previously well known or is identical with the sub- 
 ject (W. F. Moulton in note to translation of Winer), the article 
 is used. So in Acts 21 :38 ovk dpa cru et 6 AtyvTrrto?. Here 6 refers 
 to the well-known leader of the four thousand insurrectionists. In 
 1 John 3:4 ly afrnprta iarlv ^ avo/xca has the article twice because sub- 
 ject and predicate are interchangeable. So in John 3:10 Su et 6 
 StSao-KoAos shows Nicodemus to be the well-known teacher. 
 
 (e) The article with proper names. This peculiarity of C4reek 
 persists to the present day. The article is not always used with 
 proper names and no wholly satisfactory remark can l^e made 
 about it. Thus in Acts 19:1 we have tov'AttoXAo) tivu iv KoptvOm 
 
76 A SHORT GRAMMAR OK THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 IlavAoi/. Often -vve can do nothing with this article in the Enghsli 
 idiom, but in an example like that in Acts 19:13 we can see the 
 point as 'O/dki^w v/xas rov 'Itjcrovv ov IlauXo? Krjpvcraei. Here the exor- 
 cist seeks to identify Jesus to the demon 1)V the article, "the Jesus 
 whom Paul preaches." The article will often be used with the 
 noun in apposition to the proper name, but not with the proper 
 name as 'IwdvT)<; 6 BaTrrto-T^s (^latt. 3:1). 
 
 (f) The article with pronouns. The genitive of personal pro- 
 nouns may or may not have the article as ©ei /xov (Matt. 27:46), 
 rov iraripa fxjov (Matt. 26:53). The pronoun, again, may rarely 
 come after the article as t^ avrov xapin (Rom. 3:24). Or the article 
 may not appear at all as <^tAoi /aou (.To. 15:14), Sov'Aovs lavTov (Lu. 
 19:13). The article is sometimes used with the possessive pronoun 
 as €v T<u crw ovofxaTL (Matt. 7:22). But the article never means pos- 
 session. Where it is said of Pilate that dwevLif/aTo ras x^^P"-"*) ^^ ^^ the 
 hands, which were, of course, his own. "Exao-Tos never uses the 
 article in the New Testament (1 Cor. 3:8). We have tov Seiw once 
 (Matt. 26:18). *l8ios outside of tSt'a and kut* iSt'av has the article 
 uniformly as oi IBioi (John 1:11). ToioOtos is used with the article, 
 though not always, as ol toiovtol (Rom. 16:18). Once we have al 
 Swa/Acis TOMVTaL (^fark 6:2). Once also the article occurs with 
 TocrovTos as 6 TocrovTos ttAoDtos (Rev. 18:17). The New Testament 
 follows the Greek custom in using the article with ovtos, oSc, ckcivos, 
 though to us it is an anomaly. Perhaps the demonstrative was 
 felt to be so definite that the very atmosphere called iov the article. 
 The article, moreover, is generally used with the noun and not 
 with the demonstrative, though the force of the demonstrative 
 seems to l)e attributive, not predicate. So ovtos 6 dv6pwiTo<i (Luke 
 14:30). Even with proper names ovtos is generally used with the 
 article as ovTos o 'It^o-ous (Acts 1:11). So wlion ovtos is not used 
 with tlie article it is predicate, not attrilnitivo, as Twirra<: ^/Ac/aas 
 (Acts 1:5), days these (hence). Cf. Acts 24:21. Thus in Tolin 
 2:11 TavTTjv iTroir](T€v apxiji' Twv (T7;/u.£tW means that he did this as a 
 beginning of miracles. 
 
 (g) The article with ttus. Without the article in the singular 
 ffSs is "every" as navTu irupaafiov (Luke 4:13). Rut in the case of 
 
THE ARTICLE. 77 
 
 abstract nouns ''every" is tantamount to all as Trao-av xap^" (Jas. 
 1:2). So also if it is a proper name and hence a single object as 
 TTtto-a 'Upoa-oXvfjux (Matt. 2:3). Since ypae^i; was sometimes regarded 
 as definite without the article iraxra ypa^i^ in 2 Tim. 3:16 may be 
 "all Scripture, " though it may also be "every Scripture," since 
 the point is not clear. There is a diflference between TrSo-a ^ ttoXis 
 (Matt. 8:34) and v iraa-a tto'Ais, though this latter construction is 
 found only twice (Green) in the New Testament (Acts 20:18 rbv 
 
 TravTa )(p6vov, and 1 Tim. 1:16 t^v a-rraa-av fjuaxpoOvixCav) . In Matt. 7:26 
 TTus 6 aKovixiv is equivalent to ttSs oo-tis Akovu (Matt. 7:24). The 
 plural TravTcs preserves the distinction this far that the article before 
 
 {61 Travres) groupS the SUni total as ra TravTa (Col. 1:16). "OXos is 
 used generally with the article as oAos 6 koo-/xos (Rom. 1:8). In 
 John 9:34 we have oXos in the predicate without the article, h 
 a/mpTiaLs crv iy€WTi]dr]s oAos, you were begotten in sins the whole of 
 you. But in general the article in the New Testament is true to 
 the genius of the Greek tongue and it is not possible to appreciate 
 the Greek article save as one is in sympathy with the Greek as a 
 living idiom. 
 
 (h) The article with /aeVos. In the New Testament we have 
 commonly to fxia-ov, ets fxtcroVy iv fi€0-a>, Kara /acVov, aS iv fjLifrw Xvkwv 
 (Matt. 10:16). But we have also the old construction ftecn^s wktos, 
 in the middle of the night (Matt. 25:6). "Axpos is not- used in this 
 way, though we have to oKpov 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 vai 6 iraTrjp (Matt. 
 11:26); ifi(3d 6 irar-qp (Mk. 14:36); t^ Kopaaiov (Mk. 5:41). The 
 form is nominative, but the case is really vocative. 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 
 PEONOUNS. 
 
 1. What is the pronoun (-n-pb ovo/mTo?, pro nomine ) f The pro- 
 noun is a device to prevent the constant repetition of the noun. In 
 modern Enghsh we much dishke the repetition of the same word 
 whether verh or noun. Macaulay is criticized for using the suh- 
 stantive too much. But the noun should always he used where 
 necessary to ayoid ambiguity. In English we even dislike too fre- 
 quent use of the pronoun. 
 
 2. Persistence of pronouns. As already noticed, the pronominal 
 roots are, many of them, very old, perhaps as old as the oldest 
 verbal roots. The pronouns have been the most persistent parts 
 of speech as to retention of case-forms. We see this in the English 
 he, his, him, etc. But a complete set of pronouns in all respects 
 was not developed. In the vernacular new pronouns continually 
 arose from time to time. 
 
 3. Emphasis. In Greek the pronoun is not so common as in 
 the modern European tongues. The Greek verb itself contains the 
 personal subject, and even the ol clique case of the pronoun was not 
 always used. When, therefore, the nominative case of the pro- 
 noun is used, there is emphasis. Cf. cyw (^latt. 5:22), av (John 
 1:42), vfjLf.l'i (Matt. 27:24). In the New Testament the i)ronoun, 
 as in the Kotviy and the Hebrew, occurs much more frequently thsm 
 in earlier Greek. But there is still some emphasis, except in the 
 redundant pronoun as in Rev. 7:2 (aurots). It may be very slight, 
 however, merely a change of tone. See Mark 1 :8 (avTos) ; Matt. 
 1 :21 (avTos) ; 8:24 (uvtos) ; Acts 20:35 (avros). In avros the empliasis 
 is occasionally very shght, if at all, but we must always look for 
 it. SeeLu. 1:22; G:S; 15:14; 24:25,31. The literary plural ap- 
 jK'ars also as in ypdcfiofxev (1 Jo. 1:4). Cf. ypdcjyo} in 1 Jo. 2:12. 
 
PRONOUNS. 79 
 
 4. Autos hi predicate. In Luke we find a very common idiom 
 that is reprodu(M3d in modern Greek. It is the use of airos in the 
 predicate position and translated by "that very." See Lu. 13:31, 
 iv avTr} rrj wpa. Strictly it is (in this example) "the hour itself," 
 but there is a shading to the demonstrative force as in modern 
 Greek. But this is not true of Matt. 3 :4, which the King James 
 Version mistranslated airo^ 8k 6 'Iwanjs. 
 
 5. Position. Sometimes the pronoun occupies an emphatic 
 position like (tv ti's (Rom. 14:4), ah ttio-tiv ^v c;(eis (Rom. 14:22). 
 Note the contrast in cyw o-c (Jo. 17:4), fx.c av (Jo. 17:5), etc. But 
 sometimes the unusual position is for euphony, not emphasis, as 
 M'ith ai'Tov (.John 9:6). Cf. fxov and aov in Jo. 9:10,11,17, etc. Cf. 
 avTo's f^ov dSeA^o's (Matt. 12:50). See also Matt. 8:8. 
 
 6. Omission. Hadley and Allen speak of the "omission" of the 
 pronoun when there is no emphasis. This is to speak from the 
 standpoint of the English. It is proper to say the pronoun is 
 simply not used in Greek when it is not needed. Each writer, to 
 be sure, decides for himself whether he will use the pronoun in a 
 given instance. It only confuses things to say that he ' 'omitted' ' 
 a pronoun when he simply did not need it for his idea. 
 
 7. Third personal pronoun. The New Testament has a very 
 simple usage for the third personal pronoun in the obhque cases. 
 AvTos (Lu. 4:20) is the word, never ov, the old reflexive form, and 
 usually in the oblique cases. This is, of course, just one of the 
 early uses of airos. Sometimes, as in Lu. 19:2 (/cat avTo's) the 
 nominative form has this sense of emphatic he. But for the other 
 use see Matt. 1:21 (avros). 'O avros is still frequent as "the 
 same" (Matt. 5:46). Cf. to avrh Trvevfw. (2 Cor. 4:13) and avro 
 TO TTvevfUL (Rom. 8:26). The intensive use of avros, though not 
 very common, survives as auTos yap AavelS (Lu. 20:42). Cf. also 
 avTos iyw (Rom. 7:25), avTot v^aets (1 Th. 4:9). 
 
 8. The reflexive. This pronoun holds its own in all three persons 
 in the singular and to some extent in the plural as ipuavrov (Jo. 
 5:30), o-£arToV (Matt. 4;6), eavr^s (Matt. 12:25). In the plural 
 kavTUiv occurs indiscriminately for either j)erson, the first (Rom. 
 8:23), the second (Rom. 6:11), the third (Rom. 5:8). But iijmv 
 
80 A SnORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 avrw appears in 1 Cor 7:35 and vfuv avrots in 1 Cor. 11:13. Avtov 
 is not common, though necessary occasionally as in Jo. 2:24, a 
 good example (auros, airov, aJroTs). 'EauTov may be with the article 
 (Lu. 11:21) or without (Lu. 13:19). The position may even be 
 cavTwv Ta Ifmrui (Matt. 21:8). But instead of the reflexive we have 
 the personal form as ifxlv (Matt. 6:10). "iStos (cf. 'Snir-qs, Acts 
 4:13) is common in the N. T. as in the koivtJ. So tov tottov tov iSiov 
 (Acts 1:25). 
 
 9. Possessive. 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 (twv). The possessive pronoun without the article 
 is less distinctive than with it. See John 4:34 (ifwv) ; 13135 (e/^O- 
 For the possessive pronoun with the article see John 7:8 (6 c/aos); 
 Lu. 22:19 (t^v it^r]v). The possessive is not used in the third per- 
 son in the New Testament, but the genitive of auVo's (Matt. 1:2). 
 In the first and second person the genitive thus used may be either 
 emi)hatic or unemphatic according to the form (enclitic) and the 
 presence or absence of the article. See Matt. 7:3-5 (aov and o-ov); 
 John 14:2 (ftov). In Matt. 7;3 note also tw o-a» 6<j>6aXfx<3. In gen- 
 eral the possessive pronoun is rare in the N. T. save c/xos in John's 
 Gospel (as above, but see Phil. 3:9). The possessive i)ronoun 
 may have a genitive in apposition with it as rrj ifx-rj ;(€ipt IlavXou 
 (1 Cor. 16:21). 
 
 10. Demonstrative. The usual demonstratives are found in tlie 
 New Testament though outos and ckcTvos are the only ones that have 
 much frequency. The customary distinction between these two 
 obtains. In the case of ovtos the absence of the article means the 
 predicate idea as in Jo. 2:11; Acts 1:5. But in Trepi iua<i Tavrry: 
 (^cji^s (Acts 24:21) we come close to the attributive usage though 
 the article is absent. The ei)exegetic use of tovto (koI tovto) is seen 
 in 1 Cor. 6:8. The demonstrative rarely appears as the direct an- 
 tecedent of the relative as outos S? (Lu. 5:21). The contemi)tuous 
 idea is conveyed l>y oItos in Acts 17:18; 19:26. Interc.«!ting is Uie 
 
PRONOUNS. 81 
 
 resumptive use of ouTos as in Matt. 10:22. "OSe is nearly confined 
 to the form raSe (Rev. 2:1), Init note Jas. 4:13. The peculiar 
 Seim occurs only once (Matt. 26:18). 'Ekcij/os is sometimes an em- 
 phatic subject (he) as in Jo. 5:35,46; 19:35; Matt. 15:18. For 
 distinction between oStos and exetvos see Lu. 18:14. For the dem. 
 OS see Ss Se (Jo. 5:11), Ss /xeV, Ss Se (1 Cor. 11:21). For 5 Se see 
 Rom. 14:2; Eph. 4:11. 
 
 11. Relative. The relative pronoun is not well named, since all 
 pronouns as many other words express relation. However the 
 usual agreement in number and gender between the relative and 
 its antecedent justifies the name. The bond is thus very close. 
 The occasional union of case by attraction is a still closer bond in 
 the same direction, as ots in Lu. 2:20. But attraction is not nec- 
 essary as we see in rjv (Heb. 8:2). oo-rts, besides the usual indefi- 
 nite sense as in Matt. 13:12 and Lu. 12:1, often assumes a strongly 
 definite idea (compare two ideas in rts). So Lu. 2:4; Acts 
 10:47. For the 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 <5 in Lu. 7 :47. Cf . even awots (Matt. 8:4) 
 with no substantive in the context. Sometimes indeed the ante- 
 cedent IS incorporated into the relative clause and both are in the 
 same case as in ets ov TrapthoOiqTc tvttov ScSa^^^s (Rom. 6:17). Cf. Lu. 
 1:20 and Mk. 6:16. Note rt's eo-nv ovtos os in Luke 5:21, but cf. 
 Rom. 7:15. The attraction of the relative to the case of the ante- 
 cedent is specially common in Luke (cf. Sv in 5:9) which is not 
 surprising as it is one oi the finer and subtler points of syntax. It 
 occurs twice only in Matt. (18:19; 24:50) and once in Mark (7:13). 
 Cf. Plummer on Luke, p. li. Usually this attraction is from the 
 ace. to some other oblique case, but sometimes other cases than 
 the ace. experience it. Cf. cws t^s ^/xepas ^s (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 
 aprov ov (1 Cor. 10:16) and iravTl a» (Lu. 12:48). The relative 
 usually agrees with its antecedent in gender and number, but this 
 bond is often broken if the sense justifies it. In Mk. 15:16 o agrees 
 
82 A SHOUT GRAMMAR OF THK GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 in gender with tlic predicate TrpatTwptov rather tnan with the ante- 
 cedent T^s avXtj-i. In Phil. 2:15 oU differs in number and gender 
 from ycvcSs. See also o in Eph. 5 :5, and os in Eph. 1:14 (mg. 5 
 text of W H), and 1 Tim. 3:16. There is a real agreement in 
 sense, however, which is more important than mere formal gram- 
 matical structure. But outos (Matt. 7:12) is strictly grammatical. 
 In 1 Cor. 15:10 Paul purposely says clfu 6 dfu, not os. 'Oo-ns like 
 OS is very common in the N. T. , but it is nearly confined to the 
 nominative, but see ace. neuter on in Lu. 10:35. Cf. also €u)<;otov. 
 "Oo-os is frequent as in Matt. 7:12, but olos (1 Thess. 1:5) is rare, 
 and -^XiKos appears only four times (cf. James 3:5). For roaovrtf — • 
 oora» see Heb. 1:4. Cf. KaO' oo-ov (Heb. 7:20) and oaov oa-ov (Heb. 
 10:37). In Rom. 9:6 we have the old classic idiom ovx olov on 
 where olo^ almost equals Swards. The repetition of the relative is 
 well shown in Phil. 4:8 (5o-a). Cf. 1 Cor. 15:lf. As in Latin 
 sometimes the relative occurs at the beginning of sentences as dvd* 
 wv (Lu. 12:3), €v ots (Lu. 12:1), ov xa/otv (Lu. 7:47). This classical 
 idiom is more frequent in Luke. In Rev. 1:4 6 ^v occurs where 6 
 is relative. 
 
 12. Correlative 'pronouns. They are not very common in the 
 N. T. Toios does not ajjpear at all and roido-Sc once (2 Pet. 1:17). 
 ToiovTos (neuter toiovto) occurs about sixty times either with the 
 article as 61 toiovtol (Rom. 16:18) or without as toiovto (Matt. 
 18:5). In Rev. 16:18 we even find oIos om iyevcro tt^Xucovtos ctcict/aos 
 ovTo) /Acyas where the same idea occurs twice. Cf. ^Ati/'ts out ov ycyo- 
 vcv TouivTY] (Mk. 13:19). In Acts 26:29 note rouivrov^ oirolo^. And 
 in 1 Cor. 5:1 observe Toiavrj; ^ns. Too-ovros (cf. Lu. 7:9) is less 
 common and always without the article save once 6 too-ovtos ttXovtos 
 (Rev. 18:16). 
 
 13. The indefinite 'proiiomi. In Greek the indefinite is the same 
 form as the interrogative save the accent. Tls is very common in 
 the New Testament with a substantive as Uptis tl<; ( IjU. 1 :5) or 
 without as a ns ^x'^i (Mk. I :'23). It may occur at the l)eginning 
 of a sentence as in tlvU Be (Acts 17:18). It can be used also for 
 the emphatic i<l(':i of somebody or something as ti yap Boku rts «!»«» 
 Ti, firj^lv wi', (f>ptvuTraT(.l ((ial. (>:3) where both senses occur. Cf.; 
 
PRONOUNS. 83 
 
 Acts 5:36. In INIk. 10:17 cts seems to be the equivalent of rts. We 
 even have ets ns together (Mark 14:47; John 11 :49). Tis at times 
 is almost equal to "a kind of" as ets to etvai Ty/xas airapxi^v nva (Jas. 
 1:18), and -with numbers tis generalizes the expression as Svo nvas 
 Tw ixa$rjTu)v (Lu. 7:19). In dva els (KacTTos (Rcv. 21:21) we have 
 a distributive idiom and the adverbial use of dva. 
 
 14. The interrogative 2'>ronouns. Tts is, of course, the usual inter- 
 rogative pronoun in the New Testament, as n's vTre'Sei^cv v/xlv (Matt. 
 3:7). For the double interrogative rt's rt see Mk. 15:24. It is 
 used in alternative questions instead of Trorepos as rt's « twv, etc., 
 (Matt. 21:31), TtW O^Xerc aTroXuo-o) vfuv, rbv Bapa/S/Sav ^ 'Irjcrovv top 
 Xeyo'/xevov XpcaTov] (Matt. 27:17). Sort's . . . . ^ (Matt. 23:17). 
 In Tt TovTo axovo) Trepl (Tov; (Luke 16:12) we have rather a predicate 
 use of TOVTO than any i^eculiar use of rt. Tt oTt occurs by itself as 
 Ti oTi i^rjTetTi. (Lu.2:50), but the copula eo-TtV or yeyovei/may be mere- 
 ly dropped out for see Tt yiyovev on -^fuv /ieAAets ip.(f)avL^eLV aeavrbv kol 
 oixi Tw Koa-fiw; (John 14:22). The same thing is true of tva Tt (tva 
 Tt in quotations from the Old Testament as Acts 4;25) as tva tL 
 kvOvpLUfrOi. TTovrjpd; (Matt. 9:4). Tt is used with any of the preposi- 
 tions as 8ta Tt (Matt. 9:11), and sometimes Tt by itself is in the 
 accusative, as to what, and so why, as Tt Be /JXeVeis to Kdp<f>os; 
 (Matt. 7:3). Sometimes this adverbial use of Tt borders close on 
 to our "how" as in Luke 2:49 above and in Acts 5 :4 ti oti Wov 
 and in Acts 5:9 Tt oTt o-wc^wio?^?;. In Luke 12:49 we have a more 
 difficult passage, Trvp rjXdov ySoAetv ctti t^v y^v, KoX Tt OfX<a el ^87 
 av7jc}>6r]; Here ' 'how I wish' ' makes far better sense, though it is a 
 very unusual use of the interrogative form as an exclamation. In 
 Acts 13:25 the neuter Tt is used rather than TtVa (attested by some 
 manuscripts) like the modem Greek idiom, Tt ifxe virovoeire etrat; 
 There is nothing peculiar in the common use of Tts (rt ) apa, or ovv, 
 or yap. See Paul's Tt ovv by itself (Rom. 6:15). Tts has no effect 
 on the construction of the sentence and in Acts 17:18 tC av OiXoi 6 
 <nrep[wX6yo<; outos Xt'yctv; we have merely the conclusion of a fourth 
 class condition. noVe/aos is not used in direct questions in the Xew 
 Testament. It is urged by some writers that in iSIatt. 7:14, Mark 
 9:11,28, and possibly also John 8:25 we have oti used as a direct 
 
84 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GRKKK NKW TESTAMENT. 
 
 interrogative. This is more than doulitful. It is more likely that 
 the i)hrase rl on has been here condensed into on and the elHpse 
 is carried still further as sometimes iva is used with no preceding 
 verb. It is even suggested that in ]\Iatt. 26:50 c^' o irapet is a case 
 of o as a direct interrogative, but here again it is better to under- 
 stand an ellipse. Cf. the prolepsis o-e n's (Mk. 1:24) where the 
 interr. is almost equivalent to the relative. IItjXocos is not used as 
 a direct interrogative, nolos is like the Latin qualis and is used in 
 direct question fairly often in the New Testament, as ev ttoCo. e^ovo-ta 
 Tavra ttoicTs; (Mark 11:28). So ttoVo? is still the word for quantita- 
 tive questions as irocrov-i Ix^re aprors; (Mark 6:38). In indirect 
 questions the New Testament does not so well follow the usage 
 of the earlier Greek so far as the pronouns are concerned. 
 'Oo-Tis is so used only once, viz., in Acts 9:6, Kat XaXrjOrja-cTai a-oi on 
 trt Set TToidv. IIoTepov, not TroTcpo?, occurs once only, disappearing 
 like the English whether (Simcox), viz., irorepov Ik toG dtov ia-rlv 
 ^ cycj (John 7:17). XIj^Aikos appears twice (Gal. 6:11; Ilcb. 7:4), 
 and one (Gal. 6:11) is not certain, iSere rrrjXiKoi^ vplv ypdix/mmv 
 
 lyparpa. IIoo-os is SO employed a few times, as i'Se TroVa o-ou Kar-qyopov- 
 
 aiv (Mark 15:4). Ilotos is also in use in indirect questions, as ovk 
 (nSaTe ttolo. rjixipa 6 Kuptos v/awv ep)(CTaL (Matt. 24:42) 'Ottoios four 
 times occurs in tliis construction, but once (Acts 26:29) as usual 
 relative, rotovrovs ottoios (Blass in error here). As example of in- 
 direct question see Jas. 1:24, evOeois lirfXaOtTo ottoios ^v. But in the 
 New Testament the great majority of indirect questions that use a 
 pronoun have rt's, contrary to the usual earlier usage (Alexandrian, 
 says Blass. So in papyri), as ovk oiSare ri alrdcrOc (]\Iatt. 20:22). 
 Cf. Matt. 15:32. Sometimes the relative and the indirect interrog- 
 ative are used side liy side, but there is a difiference, as in 1 Tim. 
 1 :7, fir] voowTcs fJt-rj re a Xeyovcriv p-rj re ttc/ji TLvoiv Siafie/SaiovvTai. Some- 
 times Tt is used whore it verges close on to the relative idea, yet not 
 quite, as Bodi^acTai yap vp.iv iv iKeivt) Trj uypo. tl Xu\i](Tr]Te (Matt. 10:19). 
 
 This is really an indirect question which is, however, the subject 
 of Sodrja-cTai. Winer is doubtless correct in saying that Latin would 
 hcr»' have quod (not quid) dicatiSy but the Greek fc^Uows its own 
 genius. So also in a case like Mark 1 :2 1, olBd o-e rt's d, the indirect 
 
PRONOUNS. 85 
 
 question is in the accusative, a sort of apposition to o-e the oljject of 
 ol8a. Thus we explain also tSetv rbv ^Irjaovv Tc's eo-Tiv (Luke 19:3). 
 The doulile interrogative pro])erly occurs also in indirect questions 
 as Tt's T6 api] (Mark 15:24). But the relative and the interrogative 
 at times are almost interchangeable in the kolvt]. 
 
 15. Reciiprocal pronouns. The familiar aXXos aWo is also found 
 as Acts 19:32. The distinction between erepos and oAXos is observed 
 to some extent in the New Testament. See Gal. 1:61; 2 Cor. 
 11:4. But in cts hipav kw/xtjv (Lu. 9:56) we have eTepos in the 
 sense only of a second, not of a different kind. And in Lu. 19:20 
 6 cT£/3os is used after 6 Scvrcpo? (19:18) as the next (a third). Com- 
 pare 6 eis, 6 €T€/3os (Matt. 6:24). In Rom. 2:1 o cVepos is practically 
 neighbor. The reciprocal idea is also set forth by els (1 Cor. 4:6) 
 and iavTwv (1 Cor. 6:7), as well as by the usual dX\r]\wv (Matt. 
 24:10; Lu. 2:15). 
 
 16. In alternative expressions we have rts . . . . rts as nvh /xev 
 .... Tives Se (Phil. 1:15); ns . . » . oAAos as viro rtvcov .... aXXinv 
 (Luke 9:7 f.); ns . . . . trepo^ (1 Cor. 3:4); ds . . . . ets (Mark 
 10:37); fts fiev .... 6 Se as [xm pxv . ... TO 81 (Gal. 4:24); 6 cU (or 
 ets . . . . 6 cT£/30s (Matt. 6:24). The negative forms ovtls, /aiJtis do 
 not occur in the New Testament save that pltjtl is used in questions 
 as firJTi iyw clfu, Kvpu] (Matt. 26:22). Westcott and Hort print /xi/ 
 Tis as in John 15:6. OwSet's is very common either alone as ovSets 
 SvvaraL (Matt. 6:24) or with a substantive as oiBcU olKeT-t]-; Swarat 
 (Lu. 16:13). M7;8ets is not so frequent, but is used as formerly; 
 
 so /AiySets ytvw(rK€Tw (Matt. 9:30); a.va/3oXr}v /j.r]8efji.Lav (Acts 25:17). 
 
 Sometimes the negative is separated from the pronoun like the 
 Hebrew as ev i$ avrStv ov TrecretTat (Matt. 10:29), but the resultant 
 idea is the same. So sometimes ov . . . . ttSs as ov Swcatoj^T^o-eTat 
 Trao-a (rdp^ (Rom. 3:20) and rarely firj . . . . ttSs (1 Cor. 1:29). 
 lias o . . . ov (1 Jo. 1:21) and ttSs . . . . p-rj (John 3:16) do not 
 depart from the usual idiom. So ov ttSs 6 X^ywu (Matt. 7:21) is in 
 full accord with the usual idiom. 
 
CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 THE CASES. 
 
 1. Cases in the Indo-gennanic tongues. 
 
 (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, sejDarate 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. 2G9) suggests that the dift'erence 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). 
 
 (b) 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 
 ablative, instrumental and locative appearing under one termina- 
 tion, i CY e in the singular, is or ibus in the plural. The Gothic 
 has only four separate case-forms, dative, locative, ablative, and 
 instrumental all being alike and the vocative now like nominative 
 and now like accusative. The German still has five case-forms 
 (nominative, vocative, genitive, accusative, dative). The Anglo- 
 Saxon preserved six distinct case-forms and in some words all 
 eight. A few Anglo-Saxon words have the locative and ablative 
 endings, though in general tlicse cases have been blended with the 
 dative and the instrumental (March, Ch'ammar of the Anglo-Saxon 
 Language, p. 148). In mo Jem English, outside of the personal 
 j)ronuuns, the eight case-forms have all disap^ieared sa\"e the geni- 
 tive s and that is ^Jonu'tiiiu's n']>n'sciitr(l l»y the :i|><>st(>|ihe and is 
 
THE CASES. 87 
 
 often displaced by the preposition of. In French, outside of the 
 pronouns, there is no case-form at all. In the Greek the eight 
 cases appear under five case-forms, the genitive and the ablative 
 having the same endings, while the locative, instrumental, and 
 dative have the same terminations. In the modern Greek vernac- 
 ular even the locative; instrumental, dative cases disappear, eh and 
 the accusative being used instead. So modern Greek vernac- 
 ular has only three case-forms, nominative, accusative, and geni- 
 tive. 
 
 (c) The kinship between the chief Indo-germanic tongues in 
 the cases will be readily seen from the table of Sanskrit case-end- 
 ings (omitting the dual): 
 
 SINGULAR. PLURAL. 
 
 m. f. n. m. f. n. 
 
 N. s or — as or i 
 
 V. — — 
 
 Ace. am or — as or ■i 
 
 G. as am 
 
 Ab. as bhyas 
 
 D. e{ai) bhyas 
 
 I. a or bhi bhis(^ois) 
 
 li. i su ■ 
 
 The similarity of these endings to Greek and Latin case endings 
 is at once apparent. The identity of the genitive and ablative 
 singular ending as (like the Greek os) is at once noticeable and is 
 imitated by the Greek in the plural also. Again the identity of 
 the ablative and dative plural bhyas is like the Latin bus in dative, 
 ablative, locative, and the instrumental (sometimes is like su or 
 instrumental ois) , an identity observable in the Latin singular also 
 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 all the Indo-germanic tongues, the voca- 
 tive has no case-endings. Like Latin and Greek neuters, the nom- 
 
88 A SHOUT GRAMMAR OF THI5 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 inativc, accusalivt", and vocative in Sanskrit are alike. The Greek, 
 unlike llie Sanskrit and the Latin, makes the accusative plural in 
 most cases (masculine ai^d feminine) different from the nomina- 
 tive. In neuter nouns in Greek there are, therefore, only three 
 distinct case-forms. Remnants of distinctive ablative, locative, 
 and instrumental endings are preserved in Greek. 
 
 2. The origin and use of the cases. 
 
 (a) The word case {casus, tttwo-cs) means falling. It is the in- 
 flection of the noun by case endings, though some nouns are inde- 
 clinable. 
 
 (h) The object of cases is to express the relation of words in 
 a sentence. In the isolating languages (like the Chinese) this 
 relation is shown by the order of the words and the tone in pro- 
 nunciation. In the old Sanskrit this relation was expressed by 
 means of [the eight cases and no prepositions were used till very 
 late. In modern English and French jorepositions have practically 
 displaced the cases and the Chinese plan of relying on the position 
 of the words is largely used. The Greek and the Latin come in 
 half way between and exhibit all these tendencies. 
 
 (c) The burden upon the cases was felt to l)e too great even in 
 the later Sanskrit and a number of set case-forms (adverbs) came 
 to be used with most of the cases to make clearer the relation of 
 words to words. Thus a few prepositions gradually arose even in 
 Sanskrit In the Greek 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 are no case-forms, but only particles and prep- 
 ositions. "These adverbs, which we now call i)repositions, in time 
 become the constant concomitants of some cases; and when this 
 has happened, there is an ever-increasing tendency to find the im- 
 portant ]iart of the meaning in the preposition and not in the case 
 ending" (CJiles, Conyparalive P/iiloIug}/, p. 2721). Tlie rise of prep- 
 ositions, therefore, marks the beginning of the decline of the case 
 system. 
 
 (d) There is thus a constant tendency in all the Indo-genuanic 
 languages to blend various cases into one case-form and so to lessen 
 the number of case-forms. The increasing use of prepositions is in 
 
THE CASES. 89 
 
 harmony with the analytical process in language growth. But for 
 the increasing use of prepositions this would have resulted in 
 greater confusion than ever. Prof. J. H. ]\Ioulton seems to go too 
 far when he says; "In other words, the j)urely local cases, in which 
 the meaning could be brought out by a place adverb (for this pur- 
 pose called a preposition), sacrificed their distinct forms and 
 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 
 historically they are different cases and express different ideas. So 
 it is with the locative, instrumental and dative. The Sanskrit had 
 practically distinct endings and clearly distinct ideas for each case. 
 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 
 progress as is seen in the practical equivalence of ds and accusative 
 and €v (the locative) with verbs of rest and motion. The practical 
 absence of cases in the Hebrew would accentuate this tendency to 
 some extent. 
 
 (g) Winer is clearly correct ( G-rammar of the Idiom of the iV. T. , 
 
90 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 \\'iner-TlKiyer, ]>. 180,) when he says: "No case is ever in reality 
 put for another (enallage camum). Sometimes, however, two 
 cases can be used with equal correctness in one and the same connec- 
 tion when the relation to be expressed may be viewed in two dif- 
 ferent ways. ' ' That is true and important. 
 3. The nominative. 
 
 (a) The ending s is thought to be demonstrative like Sanskrit 
 sas. This case is treated first (called prathama, first, by the 
 Hindu grammarians), though it is not the first in order of time. 
 
 (b) It has come to be the case of the subject, but it was not 
 originally that, for the old subject was i)art of the verb as <i>-r]-fj^, I 
 say. The addition of a noun or pronoun in apposition with this 
 verbal subject, as cyw, 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- 
 stance, by Hadley and Allen (Greek Grammar, p. 203). Even the 
 so-called "imjiersonal" verb has a subject in the verb itself as vet, 
 
 (c) In Greek, then, the nominative, the naming case (Trruio-ts 
 ovo/jjaaTLKT]) is properly appositional both when subject of a verb 
 and when in the predicate as a-v cT ncVpos (Matt. 16:18). Here 
 the verb has become copula merely and H^rpos is predicate, but 
 that is not always true as iyu> elfu (John 8:58). But instead of 
 the predicate nominative we often have eis and the accusative as in 
 the Attic Greek. So iyevero eis r/ata fiiprj (Rev. 16:19). This is very 
 common in the Septuagint. English likewise can say: It is me, 
 and French c' est moi. Compare Latin, dedecori est. This ap- 
 positional force of the nominative is often clearly seen in such 
 examples as Avtos Se iy^o IlavAos Tra/xiKaAai (2 Cor. 10:1). 
 
 (d) The nominative is thus sometimes retained even when in 
 apposition with other cases, as in John 13:13, ^wmTc'/Ac 6 SiSuotkoXos 
 Kal Kvpios, where it is practically a quotation. So in Rev. 1:4 the 
 nominative is retained even after the jn'eposition aTrb as if to em- 
 phasize the unchangeable nature of God, a-rrb 6 wv kuI 6 Jjv kuI 6 ipxo- 
 /icvos. In the Revelation of John indeed this retention of the nom- 
 inative in apposition with an obliciue case is so frequent as to 
 
THE CASES. 91 
 
 become noticoaljle, especially participial clauses, as t^s Kaivr]<: *Itpov- 
 (TaX^lfXy -^ Karafiaivovaa (ReV. 3:12). 
 
 (e) Moreover, the nominative is used where it is not connected 
 with the rest of the sentence. In a way the nominative "has a 
 certain tendency to he residuary legatee of case-relations not obvi- 
 ously appropriated by the other cases" (Moulton, Expositor, Au- 
 gust, 1904). So in salutations the nominative is used as a matter 
 of course, as na{iA.os kXi^tos diroo-ToXos (1 Cor. 1:1). Sometimes the 
 structure is changed and the nominative is left suspended as 6 vucwv 
 Swdo) avT<a (Rey. 3:21). Other examples of broken structure with 
 
 the nominative are rySv; -^fiepai rpets (Matt. 15:32), Trpaauu -n-paa-uil 
 (Mark 6:40), ISov cfxuvi] iK Tiof ovpavwv (Matt. 3:17), ovo/xa avT<a 
 
 'Icoav»?s (John 1:6). This "parenthetic nominative" (Moulton) is 
 common in the papyri. As a matter of fact these ' 'nominatives 
 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, o yap 
 Mwuo^9 ovTos. It is used in exclamations as in Matt. 3:17. So in 
 Rom. 7:24, TaXatVwpos eyw avdpoiiro^. The use of the nominative 
 form as vocative is really vocative and is treated under that case. 
 4. The vocative. 
 
 (a) This is the case of address (TTTwo-ts KXrp-LKri) and it is justified 
 in usage, though strictly it is not a case so far as the form goes. 
 In the Sanskrit ' 'the vocative is not considered and named by the 
 native grammarians as a case like the rest" (Whitney, Sanskrit 
 Grammar, p. 89). It is not distinguished from the nominative 
 save in the singular and not always there. When it is so distin- 
 guished in the Sanskrit, it is either the mere stem or the accent is 
 changed. Besides, the vocative is not an inherent part of the sen- 
 tence; and yet, though without case endings, it has to be treated 
 as a case for practical syntactical purposes. 
 
 (b) The vocative is used by itself as TLdrep (John 17:1) or with 
 w as in Rom. 2:1, a> avOpoj-rre. Thus in the plural & ai/8pes IovSolol 
 (Acts 18:14) or avSpes 'A^T^vaiot (Acts 17:22), just as in the older 
 Greek. 
 
 (c) But the distinctive forms (merely the root) iraTep and dvyarep 
 
92 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 are not always used iu the vocative, tlic nominative forms appear- 
 ing also as Jlari'jp (John 17:24) and Ovyar-qp (Mark 5:34). We even 
 have llttTryp StKate in John 17:25. Note w 7rXi]pr]<i, not TrX^pcs, in Acts 
 13:10. The nominative form is used in apposition to the vocative 
 form as in the Sanskrit and Homer. Thus w avOpoywc, ttSs 6 KpCvwv, 
 Rom. 2:1. 
 
 (d) The article with the nominative form, as above, is very 
 common in the New Testament, though it is not unknown to the 
 older Greek. It is the rule in address in the Hebrew and Aramaic 
 (cf. afSfid 6 iraTT^p, Mk. 14:36) and some of the examples are direct 
 translations of the Aramaic as Mark 14:36 (above) and to Kopao-iov 
 (raXcLda) in Mark 5:41. But this is by no means always the case, 
 for see to /xLKpov iroipviov (Luke 12:32), you little flock. In Matt. 
 11:26 6 TraTrjp is the practical equivalent of iraTcp in the preceding 
 verse (Simcox, Language oj the N. T., p. 76). 
 
 (e) These must be called vocatives though they have the form 
 of the nominative. So 6t6s 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 Kvpu 6 ^eo's in Rev. 
 15:3. It is not surprising therefore to find Thomas saying in 
 direct address to Jesus, not exclamation, 'O Kvptos fiov koi 6 6t6<i p.ov 
 (John 20:28). The form is nominative, but the case is vocative. 
 
 5. The accusative. 
 
 (a) The name is not very clear (tttwo-is alTtuTiKi']) . It is more 
 probably derived from ahia in the sense of cause, rather than of 
 accusation. Priscian calls it casus causativus. It is then by name 
 the causative case, though that is again yery vague. "Accuse" in 
 old English meant to betray or show, but the showing case would 
 not distinguish it from the other oblique cases. 
 
 (])) However, it is the oldest case and the other oblique cases 
 are variations or after developments. The accusative is the normal 
 oljli(|ue case for a noun unless there is some reason for it to be used 
 in some other case. The presumption then is in favor of the use 
 of the accusative. Even the oldest form of iyit> is iywv^d. Sanskrit 
 aham). The accusative is used with verbs, substantives, and 
 adjectives. 
 
THE CASES. 93 
 
 (c) The root idea of the accusative is extension whether of 
 thought or the result of verbal action. In a general way it answers 
 the question "How far?" (Giles, Comparative Philologi/, p. 303). 
 The relation of the noun to the verb or other noun as shown by the 
 accusative is very indefinite. The precise nature of the relation ig 
 determined by the character of the yerb and the noun. It is not 
 known what the ending m(v) comes from. Some scholars consider 
 it allied to Sanskrit ma, Greek fie, others think it merely a local 
 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 wfmv IvaT-qv (some ]\ISS. in Acts 10:3), wpav 
 i/S^ofiTjv (John 4:52), irolav u>pav T]i(a (Rev. 3:3). 
 
 (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 GriechischenVulgarsprache, 
 S. 328-333), rather than locative, instrumental, dative, and even 
 genitive and ablative. The same thing is observable in the old 
 poets. Pindar, for example, has "a multiplicity of accusatives" 
 (Giles). In the modern Greek the accusative has regained its old 
 frequency to the corresponding disuse of the other cases. ' '^Mien 
 a fine sense for language is failing, it is natural to use the direct 
 accusative to express any object which verbal action affects, and 
 so to efface the difference between ' transitive ' and ' intransitive ' 
 verbs" (Jebb, in Vincent and Dickson's Handbook to Modern Greek, 
 p. 307). Hence many verbs that were intransitive in the written 
 style are transitive in the vernacular as seen in the New Testament, 
 papyri, and modern Greek. The use of the other oblique cases 
 served to make fine distinctions. When these distinctions were 
 not sharply j^erceived, the use of the cases faded. The accusative 
 then has made a circle. In the beginning it was the only case. 
 It is again the normal case in modern Greek. So in the New Test- 
 ament we have ot ypuifx^voi rbv Koafiou (1 Cor. 7:31) instead of the 
 instrumental tw koct/xw (cf. utor in Latin). The accusative with 
 
94 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREP:K KKW TESTAMENT, 
 
 XprjaOat is found in Cretan inscriptions and in late Greek. In Acts 
 27:22 Luke has Trapaivu} V^5 and not the dative Ifxlv. So in Rev. 
 2:14 we have eStSao-Kcv tw jSaXax (dative) as in some late writers, 
 perhaps partly influenced by Hebrew. 
 
 (f) But in general we can easily see the root idea of the accusa- 
 tive. For convenience we may analyze the examples and explain 
 them in the light of the root idea and the history. 
 
 (g) Extension naturally found first expression with verbs of 
 motion. In Sanskrit "it stands especially as the goal of motion, 
 Avith verbs of going, bringing, sending, and the like" (^^'hitney, 
 Sanskrit Grammar, p. 92). In Homer this use is common with 
 verbs which imply reaching a point and in the poets the idiom con- 
 tinued to be frequent both as to place and persons. In English we 
 say, go home, where home is accusative. This original use of the 
 accusative is not preserved in the New Testament, but in Matt. 
 4:15 68ov ^aXacro-T^s is closely related to it, by way of the sea. 
 
 (h) Extension of space is clearly expressed by the accusative 
 and is a normal development from verbs of motion. So in John 
 6:19 we have the idiom common to all Greek, cAt^Xokotcs ow ws 
 (TTaSiovs ciKoo-i TreVre 17 Tpukovra. This sometimes is in tlie Sanskrit, 
 Latin, Greek, English, etc. 
 
 (i) Duration of time is distinctly conveyed by the root idea of 
 the accusative. This idiom is a common one in the Indo-germanic 
 languages. Tt uiSe ea-TTjKarc okrjv ttjv Tjixipav o.pyoL] (!Matt. 20:6). So 
 in Luke 15:29 we have Too-avra Ir-q SovXevw o-oi. Compare e/c SrjvapLov 
 Tr]v r]p.ipav (Matt. 20:2). But note above the old use of the accusa- 
 tive where duration cannot be accented (John 4:52). 
 
 (j) ^^'ith verbs that are transitive the accusative is the natural 
 case for the expression of the extension of the action of the verb to 
 an externalobject. Not all verbs in Greek are transitive, and the 
 same verb is not always transitive a^ Ip-tvov rjpR<i (Acts 20:5), but 
 c/xcvev Trap'avTois (Acts 18:3). Bt'si<les it is not a question whether 
 the verb is transitive in Sanskrit or in Englisli, but in Greek, as 
 /ij; o/xvvtTC fn/re Toi' ovparov p-i'lT€ TijV yrjv (.TanieS 5:12). So Toi' Trartpa 
 uvTol-i tXtyev (Jolui 8:27). The (ircck could look at ofiwfu as trans- 
 itive in the sense of swearing ]»y and A«ya> in the sense of speaking 
 
THE CASES, * 95 
 
 about. Moreover, when the verb 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 linXavOdvofjucu. is used with the ac- 
 cusative in Phil. 3:13 to. fjiiv oTrtb-w, but with the genitive in Heb. 
 13:2 tf)i\oievLa<:. Sometimes the difference is quite marked as with 
 axovovre's /xkv r^s <^wj^s (Acts 9:7) and t^v Se (fiwvrjv ovK ^Kovaav (Acts 
 22:9). Once more, verbal phrases may be looked at as transitive, 
 when the verb itself is intransitive, as "Ap^fovra tov Xaov aov ovk cpets 
 Koxws (Acts 23:5), and orav kcAws i/xa^ uTTwcnv (Luke 6:26). But 
 the great bulk of the accusatives with transitive verbs call for no 
 remark as cKoXecrev avTovs (Matt. 4:21), iKT-qa-aro x'^p^ov (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 iipo^-^O-qaav 
 <t>6fiov ixiyav (Mark 4:41), fftyXda-o-ovTa (}>v\axd<; (Luke 2:8), the so- 
 called cognate accusative. Here again the idea of extension is 
 obvious and vital. Sometimes the word is not identical in root, 
 but only similar in sense as opKov ov w/xoa-ev (Luke 1:73). In this 
 last example as in others the relative is used thus as ayaTrrj ^v -^yd- 
 7n;o-as fie (Jo. 17:26). The accusative naturally expresses the ob- 
 jective result in the same way as dfrnprdvovTa dfrnprtav (1 John 5:16), 
 o airWavev . . . . o 8e ^g (Rom. 6:10). 
 
 (1) Some verbs, moreover, can be used with two accusatives or, 
 if time or space be considered, with three. This double accusative 
 is very common in the Sanskrit. The second accusative may be 
 simply in apposition with the first as ovKert Xeyw i/xas SovAous, a 
 predicate accusative. But ets is often used with this predicate ac- 
 cusative as ets Trpo(j>r]Trjv avTov clxov (Matt. 21:46). One accusative 
 may be of the person and the other of the thing as iKuvo<i v/xas BiSdia 
 ■jrdvra (John 14:26), ov aiTT^aa 6 vtos avTov dprov (Matt, 7:9), Tt ovv 
 iroiT^crw l-qa-ovv (]\Iatt. 27:22), IpoiTrja-ixi ifias Kayoj Xoyov eva (Matt. 
 21:24), evSiSvcTKOvcrtr arroi' Trop(j>vpav (Mark 15:17), opKL^o) ere tov 6e6v 
 (Mark 5:7), tx/^io-c o-e .... iXaiov (Heb. 1:9), With atrea* the 
 person could be put in the ablative. So Trapa. and ablative in Acts 
 3:2, and d^tpetrat dir ip.ov (Luke 16:3). With cvSiSwo-Kw the gar- 
 ment could be put in the locative or the instrumental. Compare 
 
96 A SHOKT GHAMMAR OK THK GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 TTcpt/SaXeiTai eV i/xaTiois XtvKoh (Rev. 3:5). AVitli xp'^^^^^c instrumental 
 case could be used as in Acts 10:38 (Trvcv/xan ayiw). So the douldo 
 accusative is sometimes optional. The accusative of the thing may 
 be cognate as in Eph. 2:4 above or causative as in ]\Iark 9:41 os 
 yap av ttotiVj; v/xas TTOTiqpLov vSaTos. Sometimes the adjective alone 
 expresses one of the accusatives as v/^Ss ovZlv ox^eXiJo-et (Gal. 5:2). 
 
 (m) Some verbs use the accusative even in the passive. It is 
 a mistake to associate the accusative in one's mind simply with 
 the active voice. 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 is not so frequent as with the other 
 voices. But it is to be remembered that the passive is an after 
 development and may retain some of the force of the early form. 
 Certainly the passive form gradually encroached on the middle 
 and sometimes loses its passive idea (passive deponents). Some 
 of these passive deponents are transitive and are used with the 
 accusative, as fxrj olv <f>ofir]6rjTe avTovs (Matt. 10:26). But in IMatt. 
 10:28 note airb twv aTroKTuvovTwv. The present middle (fto/Seladc is 
 intransitive in Matt. 10:31 and transitive in Matt. 10:28. See also 
 
 IvTpaTrrjdovTai tov vlov fiov (INIatt. 21:37), iav iTrai(r)(yv$rj /xe (Mark 
 
 8:38), \pvxqv tw^^xi (Matt. 16:26). Sanskrit had no proper pas- 
 sive voice, l)ut in Greek, Latin, and English some verbs that had 
 two accusatives retain the accusative of the thing in the passive. 
 This is natural, for the other alternatives would be a predicate 
 nominative (as happens with verbs of calling, naming, making, 
 for example, Heb. 5:10) or another oblique case. With the pas- 
 sive of SiSao-Ko) the accusative is the only recourse in Greek, Latin, 
 and English, as as eSiSax^i^re (2 Thess. 2:15), but with verbs like 
 nepifidXXo) either the accusative is possible (as usually), trt-pi^tfi- 
 
 Xrjpivov; cTToXa.% XcvKas (RcV. 7:9), Or thc locativc, 7r£/)i^£/?A.7;/i.ei'ovs tV 
 IpMTLoi'i Xtt'Kois (Rev. 3:4). See also ScSc/ao/os tovs ttoSus .... koI 
 rj oi/'is avTOV aovSapiio irepuSiBtTO (John 11:44), Sapya-tTaL oXi'yas (TjUkc 
 12:47), o cyw PuTTTi^ofua (Mark 10:38), oiKovofxiav TreTri'trTcu/uat (I Cor. 
 9:17), 8it<}>6apficvoi Tw vovv (1 Tim. (5:5), where there was only one 
 accusative in the active or middle, that of the thing, the person 
 
THE CASES. 97 
 
 being in the dative. The Greek has more Hljcrty than the Latin 
 and can turn this dative into the nominative verbal subject and 
 retain the accusative of the thing as in case of two accusatives. In- 
 deed by analogy the Greek can greatly extend this construction as 
 
 see ireTrXrjpcDfiivoL Kapirov Sucatoo-W7j5 (Phil. 1;11), ttjv avrrjv ciKova fxeTa- 
 fjiop<f>ovfxcda (2 Cor. 3: IS), and even rrjv aXva-iv 7r€piK€t/xai (Acts 28:20) 
 where the passive of the verb TreptriOrjfu is evidently in accord- 
 ance with ancient usage. There is also one example of the 
 accusative with the verbal in reov in Luke 5:38, olvov veW . . . ^A.i;- 
 
 T€OV. 
 
 (n) Then again the accusative as the case of extension may be 
 the case of substantives or adjectives apart from any verb, as ov 
 TpoTTov (Matt. 23:37), toi/ apiOpAv (John 6:10), ra Trpos tov Oeou (Heb. 
 2:17). In the Sanskrit "the neuter accusative of innumerable ad- 
 jectives, simple or compound, is used adverbially" (Whitney, 
 Sanskrit Grammar, p. 93). The adverb is merely a word in a fixed 
 case. The Greek used a multitude of such accusatives as adverbs 
 not only in the neuter (singular and plural), but in the masculine 
 and the feminine singular of substantives, and the feminine singu- 
 lar of adjectives. So ttoXv a-TrovSaiorepov (2 Cor. 8:22), ttoAAo. iKOTTiaa-eu 
 (Rom. 16.6), tV apxw (John 8:25), So^pcdv (Matt. 10:8). This 
 use of the accusative is in perfect harmony with the idea of the 
 casCo 
 
 (o) The accusative is used with the infinitive, not merely as 
 object, but in a general way as the person connected with the 
 action. The infinitive, like the participle, cannot have a subject, 
 but it can indicate the person who has to do with the action, when 
 not otherwise clear, by the accusative. So ttoXiv xp^tav ^x^tc tov 
 SiSda-Kuv v/xas Tiva ra aToi)(eta (Heb. 5:12), iv t(S eto-ayayeiv Tois yoms 
 TO TratSt'oi/ 'Ir](Tovv (Luke 2:27). This use of the accusative is found 
 also in Latin and Anglo-Saxon and is in thorough accord with the 
 idea of the case. The action stated in the infinitive holds good as 
 far as the person mentioned is concerned. 
 
 (p) There remains still the accusative absolute. The grammars 
 generally mean by this a participle and substantive in tlie accusa- 
 tive. But even here the accusative is not out of line with its own 
 
98 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF TIIK GRKEK NKW TESTAMENT. 
 
 idea, though the connection with the sentence is not very close. 
 In 1 Cor. 16:6 tvxov is an example of the neuter accusative parti- 
 ciple so used. There is a still larger connection of thought. An 
 example may probably l)e found in yvwa-rrju ovra o-c (Acts 26:3), 
 unless an anacoluthon is allowed. Even then the fact remains 
 and the accusative is not difficult of explanation. In Rom. 8:3 
 TO dSuvarov tov voixov may be a nominative absolute, but is just as 
 naturally the accusative. In Rom. 12:18 the parenthetic phrase 
 TO i^ vfidv is accusative. 
 
 (•l) The accusative is frequently used with prepositions which 
 merely accent the idea of extension in a more specialized way. 
 The prepositions do not then properly govern the case, but are 
 rather fuller expressions of the precise idea of the case, being them- 
 selves properly adverbs. Thus we have dva /xiaov (Mark 7:31), Sta 
 TOV <f)6l3ov (John 7:13), eis Tr]v itoXlv (^latt. 26:1S), ctti t^v yrjv (Matt. 
 10:35), Kara rov vo/aov (Luke 2:22), fiera r}fi.ipa<; rpth (Luke 2:46), 
 irapa ttjv oSov (Matt. 20:30), TTcpl avTov (Matt. 8:18), irpos avTov (Matt. 
 3:5), virep SoiJXov (Philemon 16), vtto tov /wSlov (^latt. 5:15). 
 
 6. TJlc genitive. 
 
 (a) It is no longer open to dispute that in Greek two cases, the 
 genitive and the ablative, are found with the same ending. ^Moul- 
 ton properly calls "Winer's definition of the genitive as "unques- 
 tionably the whence-case'^ ''an utterly unjustifiable procedure." It 
 is hopeless to try to find the explanation of tlie genitive in tlie ab- 
 lative as Kuehncr and C'rosby did or the ablative in the genitive 
 as Mad^^g attempted. Comparative grammar has settled this 
 matter. The two cases happen in Greek to have the same fonn, but 
 do not have the same idea, though examples occur that can be 
 explained either as genitive or ablative. 
 
 (1)) The genitive has the wrong name. It is not castis gcnitivus 
 or TTTwo-is ycwrfmrj^ but rather Trroio-is ytviKrj as the Stoic gramma- 
 rians called it. It is, then, the case of yevo^, genus, kind, species, 
 in a word the specifying case. It is thus a descriptive case and is 
 in iiiiiclinii ndjcctival, though it is not adjectival in origin. See 
 ^fiipu TrupaiTKf.vi'jt (I. like 23:54). It is a mistake to explain the 
 en<hng o5 or oio :is (1( riv('(l from tlic atljcctivnl s^uflix, though it is 
 
THE CASES. 99 
 
 not known what the origin of the genitive ending is. It may be 
 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 fonn shares with the accusative the result 
 of the loss of the dative. We have such constructions as tov to eiTra, 
 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. 
 
 (d) The resultant idea will naturally greatly vary according as 
 this root conception is applied to different words and different con- 
 texts. It must never be forgotten that the varying resultant idea 
 does not involve a change in the root idea of the case. The error 
 must not be made of mistaking the translation of this resultant 
 idea for the philosophical or historical explanation of the case 
 itself. McToiKco-tav BaySvXwvos (Matt. 1:12) is translated removal to 
 Babylon, but surely the genitive does not mean "to." It is dif- 
 ficult to make a satisfactory grouping of a case wdth so many pos- 
 sible combinations in detail, and the simplest analysis is the best. 
 The true idea of the case will be found everywhere. 
 
 (e) The use of the genitive with substantives is uniform in 
 essence, but varied in application. 
 
 (1) The local use of the genitive is the most objective and 
 probably the earliest as with most of the cases. The local adyerbs 
 avTov, ov, oTTov, irov, 7ravTa;(ov, 6/xou are all probably in the genitive 
 case, though it is possible that they are short forms of the locative 
 form -o6i. In Homer the genitive is thus used freely, especially 
 with negatives as om "Apyeos ^ev. So in the New Testament we 
 have ov [lovov 'E<^€0"ou «iAAa cr^^eSov Tratn^s t^s 'Actmis 6 IlavAos ovtos Treiitras 
 /xeTco-TT^orev Uavov o;(Xov (Acts 19:26). This usage i?urvived in the 
 vernacular and the poets. The poets are often the best source for 
 actual usage of the people. Compare the Latin Romae, humi 
 (really locative forms) and the Greek idiom vov y^s. It is not 
 surprising therefore to find the genitive used with such local prep- 
 
100 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Ositions (adverbs) as eTrt', Trcpt', /actoi, cVtos, ttAt^o-iov, ev€KtVy ivavTtov. 
 
 Homer can say \ovea9aL TroTa/xoto, to bathe in a river, and Luke can 
 
 use ti'a /3d<f>r] TO aKpov Tov SoktvAou avrov v^TO<i (16:24), where vSaTO? 
 
 emphasizes clearly the hind of material in which he was to dip his 
 finger. The genitive is not only used with the idea of rest, but 
 even where the conception of motion is involyed, though the geni- 
 tive does not, like the accusatiye, accent extension, but genus. In 
 Matt. 1:11 and 12 ixeroLKtcria BafivXwvos is thus properly a Babylon 
 removal. In itself it could be a removal to Babylon or from Bal)y- 
 lon and the solution we must seek elsewhere than in this phrase. 
 The same thing holds true in regard to ^ Suxa-n-opa. twv 'EXXt^vwv 
 (John 7:35) and 68os iOvw (INIatt. 10:5). It is in fact the disper- 
 sion of the Jews among the Greeks and the way to the Gentiles. 
 Note also Trot'as eicrcvtyKwcrtv avrov (Luke 5:19), and iKuvufi (Luke 
 19:4). 
 
 (2) The root idea of the genitive is vcr}' plain in expressions of 
 time, the genitive of selection, this rather than some other time. In 
 Luke 18:7 riixipa<; koX wkt6<; do not emphasize the wholeness of cither 
 day or night as in Luke 2:37 (vvKxa koX ■^/xepav), but rather that Ijoth 
 day and night are included. So also ju,€o-r;s wktos (Matt. 25:6). See 
 also TO XoiTTov (Heb. 10:13) and toG Xonrov (Gal. 6:17). In Matt. 
 24:20 the distinction is seen between the genitive x^'-f^'^v^ ^s the 
 case of genus and the locative o-a^ySarw expressing a point of time. 
 It is not strange to see 8U rov o-ayS/Jdrov (Luke 18:12) and aira^ tow 
 ivwLVTov (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 ets voXXa Irrj (Luke 12:19), 8i 
 ■^/xepC>v (Mark 2:1), iv tw Trd(r\a cv ry ^oprrj (John 2:23). 
 
 (3) In the Sanskrit there are hardly any possessive adjectives. 
 Possession is the most oltvious and the most usual use of the geni- 
 tive case, as iraTa^as tov SovXov tov ap)(i.epi(i}<i d<f)tLXov avTou to wtiW 
 
 (Matt. 26:51). It is the high priest's servant, not that of another, 
 and it is the servant's ear, not another's. Sometinies the relation- 
 ship is not clearly defined, l)ut is assumed as plain. So ^lapia 
 *IuKa)/3ou(Luk('21:I0) is .himes'sMary, wbich might be his mother, 
 wife, or daughter. We learn from clscwhire that it is bis mother. 
 
THE CASES. 101 
 
 Often the genitive is used sinii)ly with the article, where the con- 
 text explains, as ol rov Xpiarov (Gal. 5:24), especially the neuter 
 article as ra Kuto-apos (Mark 12:17). 
 
 (4) Indeed the genitive may express identity (apposition) as 
 TToAets SoSo/jtcov Kal To/x6ppa<i (2 Pet. 2:6), 17 OLKta Tov (TKrjvov; (2 Cor. 
 
 5:1). The genitive characterizes the substantive as to awfm t^s 
 dfjua.pTui'i (Rom. 6:6), 6 olKov6fjLo<; T^s dSiKi'as (Luke 16:8), though it 
 must not be regarded as identical with the adjective (see iv KaLvoTryri 
 ^w^s, Rom. 6:4), and even expressions like viol <^a)Tos (1 Thess. 
 5:5) are shown by the papyri not to be mere Hebraisms, but in 
 accord with general Greek idiom. 
 
 (5) It is not alone quality that can be expressed by the geni- 
 tive, but also a partitive sense (possibly ablative), as to Bacarovrrj^ 
 TToAcws (Rev. 11:13), and sometimes such a genitive is found alone 
 with no noun as the subject of the verb as a-wrjXOov Se Kal rdv pMOrjToiv 
 (Acts 21:16). The genitive naturally expresses price as hrjvapiov 
 (Rev. 6:6). 
 
 (6) The genitive may be either subjective as rj yap dydTri] toS 
 XpuTTov avv^x'^i rjiias (2 Cor. 5:14) where it is Christ's love for Paul 
 that constrains him, or objective as ^x^Te irta-Tiv 6eov (Mark 11:22) 
 or cTTt evepyca-Lo. dvOpwTTov dcr^evoSs (Acts 4:9) when the good deed is 
 done to the man, not by him. In y Se tov ttvcv^tos pXa(T<f>r]ixui 
 (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. BaTrno-jMa ficTavotas 
 (Mark 1:4) is therefore repentance baptism; what the precise rela- 
 tion is between the two is not set forth by the case. In ttjv ykwav 
 TOV Trvp6<s (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 'EXA^i/wv iroXv irXtjOos (Acts 14:1) 
 and ^ Tou irvevfJuaTO'i l3Xiaa-(f>r}p.ia (Matt. 12:31). 
 
 (9) Two and even three genitives can be used together, as tou 
 <pwTi(T[Ji6v tou evuyyeXt'ou t^s B6$r]<i Tov XptcrToS (2 Cor. 4:4). 
 
102 A SHORT GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 (f) The uye of the genitive with acljectiv(^'s is naturally more or 
 less parallel to that with substantives. So a^iov t^s /xerai/otas (Matt. 
 3:8), -irX-^prj'i x^pi-To-i (John 1:14) though Latin here has the abla- 
 tive (or is it instrumental?) Avith p/enM6', avfifi6p<f>ov<; t^s cikoVos (Rom. 
 8:29), €VO)(Os aWt'ou afiapTTifJuiTcy; (Mark 3:29). evvo/ios X^to-Tov (1 Cor. 
 
 9:21), and even TaauVaTw TTaOrjfMTwv (1 Pet. 5:9). Occasionally 
 the participle is so used as to dOLcrfxevov tov vofiov (Luke 2:27). 
 
 (g) Adverbs and hence prej^ositions may be used with the geni- 
 tive when the meaning of the adverb is in accord with the idea of 
 the case. So d|tu)s twv dyiW (Rom. 16:2), and prepositions like 
 fjLtTo^v TOV vaov Kul TOV OvauKTTrjpCov (Matt. 23:35), cyyus Trjs AvSSas 
 (Acts 9:38), TrXi^o-tW tov x^p^ov (John 4:5), tau) rjfxuiv (2 Cor. 4:1G), 
 cvTos vfXMv (Luke 17:21), p.^xP'- "^^ <r^p.epov ^p.epa's (Matt. 28:15), £o>s 
 Tou Xpto-Tou (Matt. 1:17), axpi. Tldcfiov (Acts 13:6), evcKCv ifJLOv (]\Iatt. 
 10:18), cTTi T^s y^s (Col. 1:16), fud' 7]fiS>v (Matt. 1:23), kut ipiov 
 (Luke 11:23), Trepl TOV 'Iiyaov (Acts 28:23), dm TToXXSv (Matt. 20:28), 
 Bia TOV TrpocftyTov (Matt. 1:22). 
 
 (h) The genitive is very common with verbs, where the idea of 
 species is accented. With verbs the genitive is this and no other, 
 while the accusative with verbs is this and no more (Broadus). 
 
 (1) What is called the predicate genitive is a very obvious use 
 of the case as TrdvTa vp.wv co-tiv (1 Cor. 3:21). 
 
 (2) Some verbs lend themselves more readily to the idea of the 
 genitive, though very few verbs can be said always to require the 
 genitive rather than the accusative. See previous discussion of 
 the accusative. So some verbs of sensation as -n-avra p.ov p-ip-vijadt 
 (1 Cor. 11:2) like vernacular English "remember of" /u^/iovtvcrc 
 Trj<: yvT/aocos AwT (Lukc 17:32), but p.vr}p.oveveT€Tov<i irhrrf. a.pTov<; (Matt. 
 16:9); iirtXiiOicrOui tov Ipyov vp.wv (Heb. 6:10), but to. piv OTriaw Ittl- 
 Aav^avo'/Acvos (Phil. 3:13);avTov qkovctc (Mark 9:7), but rjKovacv tov 
 dxnru(Tp.6v (TiUke 1:41); y€vo-£Tut p.ov tov SciVvov (Luke 14:24), liut 
 iyxva-uTo to vBwp (John 2:9) ; cyoi aov uvuip.r]v (Philemon 20), c/ATTvtW 
 airtiXrj^ (ActS 9:1); K&v dijptov 6iyr) tov opovs (Heb. 12:20); kuXov 
 ipyov ftnOvp.d (1 Tim. 3:1), but (Tn9vp.rj(TaL avrrjv (Matt. 5:28); 
 iTTLCTKuTnii opeytTai, (1 Tim. 3:1), yip-ovcnv otrTtW (Matt. 23:27), but 
 yip.uVTa uyupjiiTa f3XuiT<f>ifpLu<i (RiV. 17:3). 
 
THE OASES. 103 
 
 (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 i)rcceding hst, as iTrt/xcXyOi] airov (lAike 
 10:34)j/A^ 6\tywp€i TTaiStias KV/otou (Heb. 12;5)jTaJ|/ tStW ou Trpovoc? 
 (1 Tim. 5;8)j rov iBtov vlov ovk iiptLaaTo (Rom. 8:32)) -n-padTJvai 
 TToXXov (Matt. 26:9) J wvi^a-aTo TLixrj<i dpyvpLov (Acts 7:16) J iyKaXiicOai 
 (TTao-cws (Acts 19:40); SittA^s ti/a^s d^iovcr^wcrav (1 Tim. 5:17). 
 
 (4) There is still another group of verbs of a more objective 
 character as oi SoKovvres ap)(tiv twv iOvdv KaTCLKvpLCvovcriv airCiv (Mark 
 10:42); /3a<T(Xevu t^s 'louSatas (Matt. 2:22); t^s vfxwv iiov(TLa<i /tere- 
 Xovatv (1 Cor. 9;12) ; KCKOivwvrjKcv aipuaTos (Heb. 2:14), but fi^ KOLVwi/a 
 a{JuipTLat<s dWoTptais (1 Tim. 5:22); iTreXd/Sero avTov (Matt. 14:31); 
 €KpdTr]a€ T^s X"P05 auriys (Matt. 9:25), but KpaTrjcrwi tov 'l(Davr]V (Matt. 
 
 14:3); Triao-as avTov T^s x"po5 (Acts 3:7)*, TOV evos dv^€^£Tat (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 al(rxvvr]<; Kara^povrj(ja<i (Heb. 12:2), (TOV Karafrnpru- 
 povaiv (Matt. 27:13), KareyeAwv avroS (Matt. 9:24). 
 
 (5) It is not possible to decide positively whether what is called 
 the genitive absolute is genitive or ablative. In Sanskrit the in- 
 strumental (associative) is sometimes so used and the locative 
 often, while in Anglo-Saxon tihe dative is the case for absolute 
 clauses with a participle. This is especially true of Wycliflf, but 
 this dative form is sometimes instrumental. In Latin the case so 
 used is the ablative as generally considered, but here again the 
 instrumental and the ablative have the same form. Mullach 
 ( Grammatik, p. 357) says that in Greek the genitive absolute be- 
 longs to the higher style, and was not used much in the vernac- 
 ular. In the modern Greek vernacular (Jebb) this idiom has 
 practically disappeared and conjunctions and finite verbs are used 
 instead. But in the papyri this construction is used with great 
 frequency and freedom. In the New Testament the usage is hardly 
 so common and occurs chiefly in the historical books. Note ava- 
 XoiprjaavToiv airoiv (Matt. 2:13). Sometimes, as in the earlier Greek, 
 the genitive absolute is used where the participle might have been 
 made to agree with a substantive or pronoun in the sentence, as 
 
104 A SHORT GKAMMAU OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Tuv'Tu St ai'Toi' iv0vfj.if]6^vTo<; ifjjdvr] avrw (Matt. 1:20), Mild OVt'U wheil 
 it is the sul)jcrt of the i)riiicipal vcrlj as ^vi](TT(.v9(.[(Trj<; t^s fjir]Tpb<; 
 avTov Maptas .... eiipeOi] (Matt. 1:18). If this construction is 
 really the genitive, and not ablative, the genitive of the substan- 
 tive or i)ronoun has its usual exjjlanation and the participle is an 
 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 
 in some words, Latin inscriptions like domod, Greek a)s(T), 7rais(T), 
 ovpav69ev, Umbrian tu (out of), Anglo-Saxon id (out of), is held by 
 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 
 clear. It is the case of origin or separation, casus ahlativus as 
 Julius Caesar called it, tttwo-is d<jxiLp€TiKT^. This is the "whence" 
 case of ^^'iner. Like the genitive, the ablative is used possibly 
 with substantives, certainly with adjectives, adverbs, jirepositions, 
 and verbs. 
 
 (a) Homer could say oXtyrj dvaTravcns TToXe/xoLo, short is the rest 
 from war. But, as in Latin the aljlative disaj^pears from use with 
 substantives, so in Greek, unless indeed some examples of the so- 
 called partitive genitive may not more properly be considered 
 ablative, as ev tovtwv (Matt. 6:29). This is rendered more prob- 
 able l)y the fre({uent use of diro or e^ with the ablative in similar 
 examples, as rcva diro tw Bvo (Matt. 27:21), n's c| v/jmv (Luke 12:25). 
 It is possible to think of SiKaioa-vvrj Ocov (Rom. 1:17) as ablative, 
 righteousness from God, but it is more likely the genitive, God's 
 kind of righteousness. 
 
 (b) But certainl}' the ablative occurs in the New Testament 
 with some adjectives. It is common enough in tlie earlier Greek 
 as in Plato cttio-tj^/xt/s kcvos, iX.cv9cpo<i uiSovs. So ^cVoi T(i)v SiaOrjKwv 
 (Ei^h. 2:12), aTretpacTTo? kukwv (Jamcs 1:13), and other verbal ad- 
 jectives like StSoKTot 6eov (John 6:45), ScSuktois Trvcv/uiToi (1 Cor. 
 2:13); yewrjToii yvi'uLKwv (Matt. 11:11), kXijtoI 'Irjcrov XpLCTTov (Rom. 
 
 1:6), and participles also as (v\oyrjfj.ivoi toC ttut/jos (Matt. 25:34). 
 Moreover, the ablative may be used after tlie comparative form of 
 tlie adjective, fiei^iDv tov Kvpiov (John 13:16), ixu<p6Tt.po<: ttui'twi 
 
THE CASES. 105 
 
 (Mark 4:81), and also after the superlative as Trpwro's ixov (John 
 1:15). 
 
 (c) The ablative is very coniinon 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 )(u)pl<i TTapa/SoXrjs (Matt. 13:34), aveu yoyyvcrfLov (1 Peter 4:9), tK- 
 Tos Tov (TwiJUTO'; (1 Cor. 6:18), eio} TTJs o'lKLas (Matt. 10:14), arepo^Xov 
 (Luke 22:6), e^wdcv t^s TroXews (Rev. 14:20), ttXtjv tov ttXoCov (Acts 
 
 27:22) ; possibly also oirio-w ixov (Matt. 3:11), t/xirpoa-Otv twv dvdpwTruyv 
 (Matt. 5:16), -rripav tov 'lopBdvov (Matt. 4:25), viroKaTo} twv ttoSwv 
 
 (Mark 6:11); so also d-n-o a-ov (Matt. 5:29), e/< tov vSaros (Mark 
 1:10), Trap avTSiv (Matt. 2:4), vno Travrwv (Acts 22:12), virlp ttoivtcov 
 (2 Cor. 5:15), Trph tov irda-xa- (John 11:55), Trpbs T^s vp.€T€pa^ (TOiTiqpia'i 
 (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 ovT(ii<i, Trws, avw, etc. 
 
 (d) The ablative occurs rather often with verbs (though not so 
 frequently as the accusative, genitive, or dative), where the idea 
 of separation or origin is dominant. So iStas eTriXvcrews ov yiverai 
 (2 Peter 1:20), wv rtves do-To;>(>/cravT€s (1 Tim. 1:6), e/<wAuo-ev a^Tous 
 Tou (iovXrjfmTO^ (Acts 27:43), ^v yKova-aT€ p,ov (Acts 1:4), CKpaTovvTO 
 TOV p,r] eiriyvwvat (Luke 24:16), vcTTepovvTai riys So^iy? tou Ocov (Rom. 
 3:23), ActVeTat (ro^tas (James 1:5), iB€-t]dr] aiiTov (Luke 5:12), Sajo-w 
 avTiZ TOV pAvva (Rev. 2:17) where the part is contrasted with tlie 
 whole (compare the ablative in ck tov dprov iaOuTo), 1 Cor. 11:28, 
 and iaOUi diro Twv \pi\C(av, Matt. 15:27), ov (Spa8vv€i Kvpioi; Trj<s kiray- 
 yeAtas (2 Peter 3:9); so also witli a number of compound verbs as 
 d^io-TttTO TOU Icpov (Luke 2:37), VTrep/SdWova-av ttjs yvwcrecos (Eph. 
 3:19), aTrrjXXoTpiwfxeuot T^s ^ojtJs (Epll. 4:18), aTroa-TT/jcrovTaL Ttves t^s 
 TTtb-Ttcos (1 Tim. 4:1), dTrecrTeprjfxivwv tjjs dXrjOcLas (1 Tim. 6:5), oui<f>- 
 ipere. avTWV (Matt. 6:26). Cf. also t^s yapiTO<i iietrecraTe (Gal. 5:4). 
 In examples like Heb. 12:11, ov 8oku )(apa.s elvai aXKa XuVi^s, and 
 Acts 20:3, eyei/€To yvwp.rj<;, we probably have the ablative. See 
 cTTiXvo-ews in 2 Peter 1:20. 
 
 8. The locative. In Greek most of the dative and instrumental 
 examples are locative in form. Bopp considered the locative end- 
 
100 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 ing i to be the root of the old demon.strative pronoun. But in 
 aetual Greek usage locative forms are used also as instrumental 
 and dative, while dative forms are used freely as locative and in- 
 strumental (Giles, Comparative Philology, j). 330). The case is very 
 common in the Sanskrit with its distinctive ending, while in Latin 
 these three cases and the ablative have the same form save that in 
 the singular the dative sometimes has a separate ending. In Gothic 
 the three cases have no distinction in form, but in Anglo-Saxon 
 the instrumental and the dative have separate endings and some 
 locatives occur as here, there, ichere. See Skeat and March. The 
 Latin uses the locative case freely as humi, Romae (ai),Corinthi. In 
 Homer the locative is far more common than in the later Greek, 
 while in the modem Greek vernacular the locative along with the 
 datiye disappears save with a few prepositions. The significance 
 of the locative is very simple. In Sanskrit Whitney calls it the in 
 case, and so it is in Greek. It indicates a point within limits and 
 corresponds in idea with the English in, on, among, at, by, the re- 
 sultant conception varying according to the meaning of the words 
 and the context. In every instance it is not hard to see the simple 
 root idea of the case, a point with limits set by the word and con- 
 text. 
 
 (a) The locative is used thus with substantives and verbs to 
 express location in space. In Homer it is very common to have 
 the simple locative with names of towns, countries, crowds, etc. 
 But in the New Testament, as usually in the Attic prose, a preposi- 
 tion is nearly alwa)^s so used with the locative as iv'Adyvais (1 Thess. 
 3:1). However observe XrjaraU TrepieVeo-cv, (Luke 10:30). In Jas. 
 2:25 we have erepa oBS eK^akovaa, and with several verbs expressing 
 the idea of going the locative is used as irop€v€(r6ai rats oSois avrw 
 (Acts 14:16), a-Totxovai Tois ixvtaL (Rom. 4:12). But the old loca- 
 tive with expressions of i)lace is preserved in the adverl) x"A^*' 
 (John 18:6), though oIkoi, avrodi, ttoi no longer appear in the New 
 Testament. But kwcXw (Mark 3:34) occui-s several times. And 
 the locative is still used with outward objects as tuI TrXoio/ji'w yXdov 
 (John 21:8), whereas in Matt. 14:13 we read ivnXoLf^', and in Luke 
 3:1G we have vSan /Suttti^w, while iu Matt. 3:11 the text is fiairri^w 
 
THE CASES. 107 
 
 iv uSart, as in Mark 1:8; Acts 1:5; 11:16 the locative vSan appears 
 without iv. See also the locative in E})!!. 5:26, Ka^apib-as TuJAourpa) 
 Tov vSaTOs] John 19 ;2, iTriOrjKav avrov rfj K€</»aAi7; Acts 14:8, dSwaros 
 Tois TToa-Lv; and 1 Cor. 9:13, t<S dva-iaxTTrjpLti) TrapeBpcvovres. 
 
 (b) The locative without a preposition is freely used with many 
 expressions of time as in Sanskrit, Latin, Anglo-Saxon. Here, of 
 course, the time is viewed as a point, not duration (accusative), 
 nor distinction (genitive). Observe difference between to a-dfi/Sarov 
 and TTJ /ua o-aj8/3aTwv in Luke 24:1. So the locative occurs with 
 expressions like t^ rpLTrj rjixipa (Matt. 20:19), ravrrj Trj wKTc (Luke 
 12:20), avTTJ TY] (bpa (Luke 2:38), TcrdpTr) cfjvXoKrj (Matt. 14:25), toJ 
 o-a/JySaTO) (Luke 6:9), rots a-d^(3aaiv (Matt. 12:1), Trj kopTji (Luke 
 2:41), ir€paL<i yeveais (Ejjh. 3:5), tois yevecrtbis auTov (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 Tripvai (2 Cor. 8:10), dei (2 Cor. 6:10), TroAai (2 
 Cor. 12:19). But Brugmann (Gr. Gr., S. 252) considers irdXai 
 and x<if"*i' 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 irTa>;^ot to) Trvev/wtTi (Matt. 5:3), tois edcaiv irepLTraTclv (Acts 21:21), 
 a^pxiTL €vpi.6u<i (Phil. 2:8), T-fj KOKio. vrjTrid^CTt (1 Cor. 14:20), Tropevo- 
 fievi] Tw (fio/Sio (Acts 9:31), ^aTTTiVei v/^as TrvtvfuiTi dyiw (Mark 1:8), 
 OTav TTCLpacrfWLS ircpnria-qTi. TroiKtAots (James 1-2), )(€ip6ypa<f}ov tois 86y- 
 fuia-iv (Col. 2:14), KaOapol rfj KapBia (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 
 ofic^i, /u.€Ta, VTTO, dvd, TTi.pL uo 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 witli iv, irapd, i-Ki. See examples above. Here as always 
 
lOS A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THK (iRKKK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 the iJivpositious do not govern the locative, Init ".stiiml to it in the 
 relation of adverbial elements strengthening and directing its mean- 
 ing" (Whitney, Sanskrit Grammar, p. 103). A number of prepo- 
 sitions like a/u.</>t, iv («'''0> ^'"'h ""^/^'j '"'P^'* (""po^O) 3,re themselves in 
 the locative case. There are only four prepositions that use the 
 locative in the New Testament. They are iv, iwC, Trapd, Trpos. As 
 examples see iv tw 'lopSavj; (Matt. 3:6), cVt 6vpai.<: (Matt. 2-4:33), 
 Trapa tw (rravpiZ rov 'Iiycroi) (John 19:25), tt/oos tw fJivrjixcLU} (John 
 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 CIS. In the older Greek the cases witliout j^repositions were 
 so used. In such instances either the accusative is used with a 
 verb of rest as very often with cw and Trapd (so 6 ets t6v dypov in 
 Mark 13:16 and oracra oTrtVo Trapa Tovs ttoSus avTov in Luke 7:38) or 
 the locative is used with a verb of motion as 6 ifx^di(/a<i /xer ipiov ttjv 
 Xetpa iv Tw rpv^Xiu) (Matt. 26:23) where Mark (14:20) has as to 
 Tpu/SAiov. It is a difference of conception in harmony with each 
 case. The accusative suggests extension and the locative empha- 
 sizes location. The accusative is so used more frequently than the 
 locative. Eis and ev were originally the same and eis constantly 
 encroaches on iv. 
 
 9. The instrumental case. The history of this case is not as clear 
 as that of the others. It is possible tliat there are here two cases 
 combined, an old associative case with the ending a as in apua, rdxa, 
 and the true instrumental case with the ending bhi for singular and 
 bhis for plural, ^t does occur in Homer for the singular as $€6<t>t 
 and tf}Lv for the plural as ^ed^tv, but in Homer these endings are 
 used not only for the instrumental, but also for the locative, the 
 aljlative, and possibly the dative also (Brugmann, Gricchische 
 Gramniatik, S. 239). Moreover in the Sanskrit singular a is the 
 ending and in the plural bhis. It is possible therefore that we have 
 only the one case, which has developed the instrumental idea from 
 tliat of association. The two conceptions are close kin and it is not 
 hard for association to develop into agent or instrument. Our 
 English ivith is a pertinent example which originally had merely 
 
THE CASES. 109 
 
 the idea of association (by, 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 irepa 68a) iK(3aXova-a (James 2 :25) be so taken (loca- 
 tive most probably). Even oirrj and tt^ are not used in the New 
 Testament. But in Westcott and Hort's text for Acts 21 :28 we do 
 
 have TravTaxrj. 
 
 (a) The instrumental does occur in the N. T. in expressions of 
 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 Tea-a-apoKovTa koL ti erea-LV oiKoBofXT^drj. Cf. 
 also Acts 13;20 where we have ws ereo-tv TCTpoKoatoL"; kuI TrevT^^KOvra, 
 
 for the whole period. See Luke 8:29 ttoXXois xpo'^'ois, Acts 8:11 
 iKavo) xp°^^ (c^- Luks 8:27), Rom. 16:25 ^6vol<; atwi/t'ots. 
 
 (b) The idea of association or accompaniment occurs in a num- 
 ber of examples, as w/AtAet awo) (Acts 24:26), erepo^tiyowTes dTrtWots 
 (2 Cor. 6:14), fxeixLy/xevrjv 7rv/3t'(Rev. 15:2) , KOtvcoveiTc tois tov XpicrTov 
 TTaOrjpaaiv (1 Peter 4:13), ■^KoXovdrja-av arraJ (Mark 1:18), eKoWrjOr] ivl 
 (Luke 15:15), o-wetVcTO 81 airw (Acts 20:4), fxeroxr] SiKaioa-vvrj Koi 
 
 dvofiLo. (2 Cor. 6:14). Prepositions and other cases are sometimes 
 used with some of these verbs, but these are clear examples of the 
 associative instrumental. Cf. eh viravT-rjaLv ainS (Jo. 12:13). 
 
 (c) Allied to the above usage is the instrumental with words of 
 likeness. The correspondence is a figurative association, as ofxoios 
 avTih (John 9:9), to-ous '^fuv (^latt. 20:12), -rrapofxaid^eTe Ta<j!)ois KtKov- 
 uifievoi^ (Matt. 23:27), to avrb Trj iivprjfiivr] (1 Cor. 11:5), eotKcv k\v- 
 Stovt OaXa.<T(Tr]'i (Janies 1:6). 
 
 (d) This idea of association is very common with expressions 
 of manner, where the idea is going on towards means or instru- 
 ment. So we explain ei cyw x^P'" ixerexoy (1 Cor. 10:30), TravTL 
 TpoTTto, etre irpo^aau e'lVe aX-qdua. (Phil. 1:18), aKaTaXxmrio Trj KecfyaXrj 
 (1 Cor. 11:5), rcKva <j>v(r€i 6pyrj<; (Eph. 2:3), KvTTpios tw yeVei (Acts 
 4:36), and even irpoaev)(^ irpoarjviaTo (James 5:17) and davaro} reX- 
 cvToiTo) (Matt. 15:4) for, though answering to the Hebrew infini- 
 
110 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 tive absolute, this construction is common in Homer. A numlier 
 of adverbs in the instrumental case illustrate this usage as TravoiKu 
 (Acts 16:34), rdxa. (Rom. 5:7), iranrXrjdeL (Luke 23: IS), irdvTr] 
 (Acts 24:3), Kpv(t>rj (Eph. 5:12), iBia (1 Cor. 12:11), 8r]fuxTLa (Acts 
 16:37), dfia. (Acts 24:26), and the preposition furd and the con- 
 junction iva. 
 
 (e) The instrumental case is also used to express the idea of 
 cause or ground. This conception likewise wavers between asso- 
 ciation and means. Thus we have roiavrais yap dv(ruu<: evapco-TctTot 
 
 (Heb. 13:16), ti; ajnaTLo. i^eKXdaOrja-av (Rom. 11:20), /xr] fevt'^co-^e rrj 
 ev ifxiv TTvpoxTU (1 Pet. 4:12), Iva fxr] t<S (rravpw tov X/atoTov SiwKwrrcu 
 (Gal. 6:12). 
 
 (f) Means or instrument can thus be naturally expressed })y 
 this case. Donaldson (Neiv Cratylus, p. 439) calls it the imjile- 
 mentive case. The verb )(pdofmi. obviously, like v.tor in Latin, has 
 the instrumental case as TroXXr} Trapprja-Lo. )^pu)fxe6a (2 Cor. 3:12). 
 Other illustrations are a-vvair-^x'^V '''V ^"^oKpiau (Gal. 2:13), rjXu^tvn^ 
 fivpw (Luke 7:38), dmAev Bk 'laKwjSov .... pja)(aLpYj (ActS 12:2), Se- 
 Sa/xacrrai rrj (fyvaei (JameS 3:7), dAweo-t SeBicrdaL (Mark 5:4), ov 
 <f>dapToZ<i, dpyvpLw rj ^^/avo-t'w, iXvrpotOrjTe^ .... dAAa TLfJiitt) aifuiTi (1 Pet. 
 l:l<Sf. ), TTCTrAiypw/AtVovs Trdarj dBiKia (Rom. 1:29), )(dpLTt iart (rtauxr- 
 
 fx-evoi (Eph. 2:S), u) Tis ijTTrjTUL (2 Peter 2:19); and probably also 
 Trj yap cATrt'St ItroiOi^jxtv (Rom. 8 :24) and KaraKawrei ttv/ji d(rjii(jTiii 
 (Matt. 3 :12) though these could also be locative. The agent with 
 passive verbs may also be exi:)ressed in the instrumental case as 
 ovSkv d^iov Oavdrov ioTlv Trcirpayixivov avnZ (Luke 23 :15), and probably 
 Kayla tvpedoj v/xiv (2 Cor. 12 :20), though this may possibly be a true 
 dative (IJrugraann, Griechische Grammatik, S. 400). 
 
 (g) The instrumental case is used to express measure in com- 
 parative phrases. In English the is in the instrumental case in 
 phrases like the more, the less, as is shown by the Anglo-Saxon 
 thy (thv). The accusative gradually displaces the instrumental in 
 Greek for this idea, yet it appears several times in Hebrews as in 
 10:25, ToaovTw fxaWov u<r<i> (SKiTrtTi. See also TroW(S (jLoXXov (Mark 
 10:4.S). 
 
 (li) Only Iwo ]>r('j»usitions use tlit: instrumental ii\ Cin-ek, d/ia 
 
THE CASES. Ill 
 
 and (Tvv. In Latin cum is used witli the instrumental and in San- 
 skrit smii (o-w). See a/ia avToi? (Matt. 13:20) and o-w t(2 dyycA.a> 
 ttXiJ^os (Luke 2 :13). Verbs compounded with o-w take the instru- 
 mental very often as crwrjyepOrjTC tw Xpia-Tw (Col. 3:1), tva fwi arvv- 
 avTiXd(3r]Tcu (Luke 10:40), a-vvxa^p^re /Aot (Phil.2:18). There are other 
 ways of expressing many of the above ideas in Greek than by the 
 instrumental case as prepositions grew into common use. For 
 instance, cause or ground can be clearly conveyed by 8ta and the 
 accusative, manner by iv and the locative, and even means or 
 instrument by iv and the locative as aTroKTelvaL iv pofji.<f>aia (Rev. 6:8). 
 This last construction is like the Hebrew idiom, it is true, but it is 
 also occasionally present in the older Greek and survives in the 
 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 they 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 (i, to-i), partly dative (at), and partly 
 instrumental (a in adverbs and dialects, (}>l 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 (otKot, oUw). In Latin the dative singular 
 is often separate from locative, instrumental, and ablative. But in 
 both Greek and Latin the function of these cases remains distinct 
 after the forms are blended. In the modern Greek vernacular this 
 form for all three vanishes. For the dative it was cis and the accusa- 
 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 
 (tttwo-is SoTiKr/, 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 A SHOUT r.RAMMAIi OF TIIK GRKKK NKW TESTAMENT. 
 
 or things personified. It is thus a purely grammatical case (rein 
 grammatisch) like the nominative and vocative, and therefore is 
 not i>roperly used with prepositions. So also it is not often used 
 with expressions of i^lace, for even ipxo/juat a-oi raxv (Rev. 2:16) is 
 not place, but person, though the verb is a verb of motion. In 
 Hel). 12:18,22 place occurs with the dative. Cf. also Acts 9:3. 
 The dative, like the other cases, has a variety of applications for 
 its fundamental idea. 
 
 (a) It is thus naturally the indirect oljject of verbs as irpoal^tpov 
 a^Tw TraiSto. (Mark 10:13), 6 8e e<^T/ avTois (Mark 9:12), yu.^ Swtc to 
 ayiov Toi<; kv(Tl (Matt. 7:6), ot^e? rjixiv to. 6^f.tXrifJua.Ta rijx^v (Matt. 6:12), 
 though the dative is not necessary in such examples as ^veyKov a vtov 
 TT/aos avTov (^Nlark 9:20), cTttcv tt/jos tov '2,L[X(j)va (Luke 5:10). 
 
 (li) But the dative may be also the direct object of transitive 
 verbs where tlie personal interest of the subject is emphasized. So 
 we have T^Trct^i/o-aTc tw 6€w (Rom. 11:30), iirudovTo avTcp (Acts 5:36), 
 ■^TTLO-Tovv avTOL'i (Luko 24:11), ^eto apiaai (Rom. 8:<S), SovXevo) croi 
 (Luke 15:2!)), irpoaeKvveL avT<S (Matt. 18:26), eTrto-TCixrare avTw (Mark 
 11:31), vTroKovovaiv avrio (Luke 8:25), ^oi]$a fj.oi (Matt. 15:25), Birj- 
 Kovovv avTw (]\Iatt. 4:11), Xarpevctv auVw (Luke 1:74). 
 
 (c) The dative is also common with intransitive verlis which 
 yet have personal relations. Some of these are examples of "ad- 
 vantage or disadvantage." Note TLVfxiv Zoku (Matt. 18:12), irpiiru 
 
 ayt'ots (Eph. 5:3), fxrj p.tpiixva.Tf. Trj xf/vyij (Matt. 6:25), a.TreOa.vop.€v rrj 
 apxipTLo. (Rom. 6:2), IpprjOr] Tois ap)(atoi<; (^latt. 5:21), i<}>dvr] avrtS 
 
 (Matt. 1:20), iyevero avraJ (Acts 7:40), ^j7 TO) dew (Rom. 6:10), toJ 
 ihcwKvpLw aTrjKu (Rom. 14:4), iveixev avT<a (Mark 6:19), and even ]>y 
 itself as'^eJ; (2 Cor. 5:13). Cf. Luke 18:31. Some of these datives 
 are in the predicate and are called predicate datives, but the ex- 
 planation is the same, personal interest. Cf. further ^latt. 23:31; 
 Jo. 16:7; Matt. 17:4; 2 Cor. 2:13,15. 
 
 (d) Indeed the dative may be used to express possession, when 
 the predicate noun is in that case, as ovk yvavTols tottos (Luke 2:7), 
 
 vpXv idTLV y iTrayycXia (Acts 2:3*.)), iav yti'ijTtit tlvc dyOpwiru) (kutov irpo- 
 /Sara (Mall. 1S:12). 
 
 (r) What is called tln' ethical dative di^cs not dilTei in essence 
 
THE CASES. 113 
 
 from the fundamental dative idea. It is in reality the dative of 
 advantage or disadvantage. In fact it is little else in resultant 
 meaning than the pure dative conception. Compare the English 
 "hear me this," "look you," etc. So possibly Rev. 2:16, epxofmi 
 <Toi. See also Mark 1:24, tC rjixiv koL a-oi As for do-Tetos rw ^ew (Acts 
 7:20), Bwara rw Occo (2 Cor. 10:4), and rors TTTw^^ous Tw Koa-fxu) (Jas. 
 2:5), there may be a Hebraism (Blass), but that is not necessary, 
 and certainly it is not straining the dative to use it thus. 
 
 (f) It is not possible to reach a final decision as to whether it is 
 the dative or the instrumental that is sometimes used with the 
 perfect passive. The Sanskrit had the passiye so little developed 
 that we can get little help, but the Latin seems to use the dative 
 though we cannot be sure. The New Testament has no example 
 of the dative with the verbal adjective in reos, but in Luke 23:15 we 
 read ovScv a^iov Oavdrov ia-rlv 7r€Tr pay fievov avT<S. If we have here the da- 
 tive, it is with the idea of having a thing done for one. See also 
 TT/oos TO Oea$rjvaL avTOL<: (Matt. 6:1), avrw evpeOrjvat (2 Peter 3:14) where 
 either the dative or the instrumental is possible. 
 
 (g) The dative can be used with substantives indeed, esiDCcially 
 verbal substantives, that have the idea of personal interest. So 
 fvyapurrCai tw ^ew (2 Cor. 9:12), rw Se ^ew x^P'-'^ (^ ^^r. 2:14). With 
 adjectives therefore the dative is very common, such adjectives as 
 )U.ovoy€i^s Trj firjTpi (Luke 7:12), KaXov croc icmv (Matt. 18:8), ttictt'^v 
 Tw Kvpiio (Acts 16:15), ttTrei^^s T77 ovpavt'w OTrrao-ta (Acts 26:19), tKavov 
 Tw TOioirro) (2 Cor. 2:6), dpcara avT<2 (John 8:29), apKerov t<u pxidrfTfj 
 
 (Matt. 10:25), o-wTT/pto? Trao-tv (Titus 2:11), <S . . . . {nrrJKooi (Acts 
 
 7:39), u)(j>€Xi[Jui Tots dvOpwirois (TitUS 3:8), cfiavcpov cyevcTO tw ^apadi 
 
 (Acts 7:13), eVavTtos auTots (Mark 6:48). 
 
 (h) Most of the Greek infinitives are in the dative case, aU 
 those ending in -at. This is plain in the Sanskrit and in Homer, 
 where the true dative idea is preserved usually in the infinitive. 
 Compare the old English, ' 'What went ye out for to see ?' ' The 
 infinitives in -at are all dative in form though the dative idea is 
 only preserved where design is contemplated as ^XOofxev irpoa-Kwrja-ai 
 avTtS (Matt. 2:2). 
 
 (i) Sometimes it is not possible to decide whether a form is 
 
Hi A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 locative, instrumental, or dative, as vif/ovv rfj Se^ta (Acts 2:33) which 
 may be to lift up at the right hand, or by the right hand, or to the 
 right hand. 
 
CHAPTER XV. 
 
 PREPOSITIONS. 
 
 1. The reason for the use of prepositions. Originally in the 
 Indo-germanic tongues there were no prepositions at all. 
 
 The Sanskrit has no proper class of prepositions. The cases at 
 first do all the work of expressing word relations. In modern 
 French and English (save genitive and pronouns) the prepositions 
 do it all except what is done by the order of words. There is thus a 
 striking development in the Indo-germanic tongues. In a word, 
 then, prepositions are used to bring out more sharply the idea of 
 case. The various relations between words came to be too com- 
 plicated for the cases by themselves. 
 
 2. What are prepositions? They are in themselves merely 
 adverbs. But these adverbs are themselves in cases. All prepo- 
 sitions then are adverbial. In Homer the adverb and the prepo- 
 sition go hand in hand. Instead of its being exceptional for adverbs 
 to be used as prepositions, that is the normal history of each one. 
 The Sanskrit began to use set case-forms of nouns as adverbial 
 prepositions, chiefly with the genitive and accusative, and a few 
 with locative, instrumental, and ablative. None were used with 
 the dative, and naturally so. They were originally local in mean- 
 ing (I)e\h.,Grund., IV., S. 134) and the same root idea is always 
 carried from the local usage to other applications such as time and 
 metaphors. All prepositions were originally case-forms of nouns 
 or pronouns and in some the case is still plain, as the locative in 
 cTTi, dvTi, the accusative in x^P'-^ (still found as substantive also). 
 The so-called adverbial prepositions mark a stage in the progress 
 from noun to preposition, from local adverbs to adverbs used with 
 cases and then to fixed prepositions. It is not at all clear that the 
 preposition was used first in composition with verbs, as the mean- 
 
116 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. ' 
 
 ing of tlie word miglit imply. The free position of tlic preposition 
 in Homer argues against it. The preposition was always allowed 
 freedom with verbs, sometimes separate, sometimes with the verb, 
 and then again repeated after the verb. The case used after a 
 compound verb is not necessarily the case common with the prep- 
 osition, but rather the resultant of the preposition and the verb. 
 Strictly speaking, prepositions do not ' 'govern' ' cases. Rather the 
 cases called in the aid of prepositions to help express more clearly 
 case relations. Examples of the adverbial use of prepositions with 
 no effect on the case survive in the New Testament. So avd, Rev. 
 21:21; Mark 14:19; Kord, Rom. 12:5. 
 
 3. The so-called "improper" prepositions are therefore very 
 proper, as proper, in fact, as any others. Every preposition is a 
 prepositive (or, as sometimes, postpositive) adverb. The New 
 Testament shows a considerable list, as does the kolvtj (and all Greek 
 indeed), of prepositions that are still used also as adverbs and 
 which are not used in composition with verbs. But composition 
 with verbs is merely a matter of development after the adverb or 
 preposition has been formed. Here are those that meet us in the 
 N. T.: 
 
 dfUL with the associative instrumental (Matt. 13:29); 
 
 oEv£v with the ablative (Matt. 10:29); 
 
 avTCKpvi with genitive (Acts 20:15) ; 
 
 d-TrevavTL with genitive (Matt. 27:61); 
 
 drep with ablative (Luke 22:6); 
 
 dxpi. with the genitive (Luke 4:13) ; 
 
 iyyrk with genitive (Jo. 3:23) or dative (Acts 9:38); 
 
 £\tos with ablative (2 Cor. 12:2); 
 
 llxtrpocrOfv with ablative (Matt. 5:16); 
 
 IvavTLov with genitive (Luke 1:6); 
 
 a>tKa with genitive (Luke 6:22); 
 
 IvtKtv (Matt. 5:10), ccvckcv (Luke 4:18); 
 
 Ivt6% with genitive (Luke 17:21); 
 
 cVwTriov with genitive (Lu. 1:15); 
 
 €^w with ablative (Matt. 10:14); 
 
 l^wOtv with ablative ( Rev. 1 4 :20) ; 
 
PREPOSITIONS. 117 
 
 «7ravw with genitive (Matt. 5:14); 
 
 cTreWra with ahlative (Acts 7:43); 
 
 eo-o) with genitive (Mark 15:16); 
 
 ca>s with genitive (Luke 10:15); 
 
 KarivavTi with genitive (Matt.21:2); 
 
 Cf. IvavTt with genitive (Luke 1:8); 
 
 KarevcoTTtov with genitive (Eph. 1 :4) ; 
 
 ku'kAw with genitive (Rev. 4:6); 
 
 /Li£<Tov with genitive (Phil. 2:15); 
 
 fi€Taiv with genitive (Luke 16 :26) ; 
 
 fi^XP'' with genitiye (Matt. 11:23) ; 
 
 oTTto-o) with ablative (Matt. 4:19); 
 
 oTTLfrdiv with ablative (Matt. 15:23); 
 
 oi/'c possibly ablative (Matt. 28:1); 
 
 TTtt/aeKTos with ablative (Matt. 5:32); 
 
 Tra/aaTrAT^o-iov with genitive (Phil. 2:27); 
 
 Tripav with ablative (Mark 3:8); 
 
 irXriv with ablative (Acts 8:1); 
 
 TrAi^o-tbv with genitive (John 4 : 5) ; 
 
 wrepeKTrepto-o-oO with ablative (Eph. 3:20); 
 
 virtpiKuva with ablative (2 Cor. 10:16); 
 
 wepavw with ablative (Eph. 1:21); 
 
 viroKa.T<a with ablative (Mark 6:11) ; 
 
 Xaptv with genitive (Eph. 3:1); 
 
 X^/ats with ablative (Matt. 13:34). 
 
 dvTtVepa with abl. or gen. (Lu. 8:26). Cf. aivivavTi. 
 
 KVKXodtv with genitive (Rev. 4 :3). 
 This list of adverbs used sometimes as prepositions will repay 
 study. See Luke 5:19 as a study in prepositions. Cf. dm fie'crov, 
 8ia fiicrov, CK fiecrov, iv )u.e<ra), Kara fiicrov which are practically com- 
 pound ijrepositions. 
 
 4. The cases with which prepositions are used. Let it be re- 
 marked over again that the prepositions do not govern cases in the 
 strict sense of that term. They are used to help out the cases, not 
 to regulate them. The dative is not used with any of the prepositions 
 in the N. T. except cyyvs. The cases used with Greek prepositions 
 
118 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 are the accusative, locative, instrumental, ablative, and genitive. 
 In the older Greek (Homer) the most of the prepositions were 
 employed with two or more cases, but the tendency was constantly 
 towards a narrower usage. There was also constant change in the 
 application of each preposition, especially in the spoken language. 
 In the modern Greek vernacular airo actually occurs with the 
 accusative. 
 
 5. The proper method for studying a Greek preposition. It is 
 often true that the etjTnological idea is best preserved in prepo- 
 sitions in composition. So look at the meaning in composition 
 as given by Hadley and Allen, as the first step, in connection with 
 the opening definition. Hold on to the etymological meaning, seek 
 the root idea of the case, observe the connection, and then see what 
 the resultant conception of the whole is. Thus it will be perceived 
 that it is not the preposition itself that changes so much as the 
 variety of connections in which it appears. Notice, also, the meta- 
 phorical uses as really the same in principle as the original local 
 meaning. Observe changes in case construction between Homer, 
 Attic, and New Testament Greek. See in general Harrison on 
 Greek Prepositions, Adams on Greek Prepositions, Curtius' Greek 
 Etymology, Bopp, Pott, Dell^rueck, Helbing, Krebs, etc. 
 
 6. afi<f>L. In locative case. See Sanskrit abhi, Zend aibi, Latin 
 ambo, old German umpi, English about. It does not occur in the New 
 Testament save in composition. So d/x</>i)8aAA,a) Mark 1:16; a/x-cfu- 
 evwfu Matt. 6:30. afjL<f>6Tepo<i occurs fourteen times according to 
 Moulton and Geden's Concordance. See Matt. 15:14. 
 
 7. dm. Its case not known, possibly instrumental. Compare 
 avw. Compare our analogy. Compare also av. See Sanskrit ana. 
 See Zend ana (with accusative). Compare Gothic ana (up), Ger- 
 man an, English on. It occurs in New Testament only thirteen 
 times, and chiefly in the distributive use and only with the accusa- 
 tive. See John 2:6; Luke 10:1; 1 Cor. 14:27. But it is very com- 
 mon in composition. Moulton and Geden give over ten })ages of 
 such examples. See Matt. 5:1; Acts 24:22; Acts 8:30; Mark 10:51 ; 
 Matt. 11:28; John 6:39. 
 
 8. avTL. Locative case of Sanskrit aiitd. Compare Latin ante, 
 
PREPOSITIONS. 1 19 
 
 Gothic and, German ant-(ent-), Anglo-Saxon andlang {along), and- 
 siverian {answer). So ante-roonv, antagonist. Used slightly over 
 twenty times in New Testament and always with genitive. It is 
 not so common in composition as dvd although frequently used. 
 It is an interesting ijrejiosition because of its bearing on the doc- 
 trine of the substitution theory of Christ's death. Here as always 
 the original meaning (face to face, before) is the idea to appeal to 
 in the explanation of every usage. See Luke 10:31f. ; 19:44; 
 24:17; Heb. 12:2; Matt. 5:38; 20:28; John 1:16; 19:12. 
 
 9. diro. Compare d^, Sanskrit apa (instrumental), Gothic af, 
 Latin ab, German ah, English of, off. Old Greek sometimes d-Trai. 
 Delbrueck says in Arcadian and Cyprian dialects dirv occurs and 
 with locative. In the New Testament it is used only with the 
 ablative, and is very common indeed. It is also extremely frequent 
 in composition. The meaning (from, off) is generally very simple. 
 See Matt. 3:16; 5:29; 6;13; 10:28; John 11:18; Rom. 8:23; Mark 
 3:14; Luke 24:41. 
 
 10. 8ia. Possibly instrumental although sometimes Siai (Aes- 
 chylus), locative case. Same word as 8vo. So Simkoo-lol. Cf. Latin 
 duo, bis, German zwei, Enghsh tivo, Hween, from Sanskrit dva^ dvi. 
 The original local idea of ' 'interval between' ' is always present. This 
 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 
 cases used in the New Testament are the genitive and the accusa- 
 tive. There are hundreds of examples in the New Testament and 
 in composition also it is very frequent. See Mark 5:4 f.; Matt. 
 26:61; Gal. 2:1; Rom. 11:36; Heb. 2:10; Luke 17:11; 24:51; 
 Mark 13:20. 
 
 11. €v. Older form ivi, dvi, locative case. Same word as Latin 
 in, German in, ein, English in, from Sanskrit pronominal stem and 
 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 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 occur ill (Ireck dialec^lical forms as Arcadian, Cypriote, etc. Indeed 
 the Boeotian dialect does not have eis at all, hut 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 iwaegnans of the Greek. It is the most common of all 
 jirepositions in the New Testament and abundant in composition. 
 It is always true to its original concejDtion, although the Hebrew 
 conception sometimes makes unusual applications. The j^repo- 
 sition is therefore variously translated in English idiom, but in 
 itself only means in. One common vice in the study of Greek 
 prepositions is to read the resultant idea of prejiosition, case, and 
 context into the preposition, and then explain the preposition by 
 the English translation of this resultant idea. Translation into 
 English is one thing, and study of Greek sj^ntax is quite another 
 thing. The context of the word with which h is used needs special 
 attention as marking the boundary and thus gi'^^ng color to the 
 resultant idea. Even the instrumental use of ev is good Greek, 
 though rare in the older tongue. See John 2:23; 4:20; 8:20; 
 Matt. 2:G; 3:G,11; 26:23; 12:24; Rev. 6:8; Matt. 9:4; 1 Cor. 
 9:15; Luke 22:49. 
 
 12. cts. A specialized form of ev, as cvs, es, eis. Doric and Aeolic 
 inscriptions sometimes use eis with locative and ev with accusative. 
 So the original meaning of ev and tU is the same. However, the 
 two forms gradually became associated with different cases (as in 
 and into in English) . But in Latin in held on to both locative and 
 accusative. Still in Greek ev and cts frequently merge in usage with 
 verbs of motion, constructio 'praegnans. ets of itself means only in. 
 The idea of into (if present) comes from the accusative case (ex- 
 tension) and the verb of motion and the connection. Often eis is 
 used where the accusative alone would be clear. Compare ev. The 
 preposition is very common in New Testament Greek, both singly 
 and in composition. Fierce polemical l)attles have been waged 
 over its usage, but the theological bearing of the preposition can 
 come only from the context. In modem G reek cis d isplaces ev. See 
 Jo.21:2;5; :\ratt.5:l; Mk. 1 :9; Acts 8:3Sf.; Mk. 13:16; Matt. 12:41; 
 Rom. 11:36,- Luke 12:10; Mark 1 :4; Acts 2 :38; Matt. 21:4L 
 
PREPOSITIONS. 121 
 
 13. CK. In Greek as in Ivatin lliis preposition is used simply 
 with tlie 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 iv and ets, 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 
 composition. See Matt. 8:28; Luke 11 :16; 6:421; Mark 1:10; 
 John 20:24; Rom. 12:18. For e'/c, Sid, «'s see Rom. 11 :36. 
 
 14. iiri. Compare Sanskrit adverb and prefix dpi, locative case. 
 Compare Latin ob. Curtius says that it is allied to Sanskrit dpa 
 (aTTo) in spite of difference of meaning. Compare English vp, Ger- 
 man aicf. i-TTL means over, upon, but less sharply than avd and 
 virep. 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. Karat (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. ixerd. Instrumental case. Compare /Meo-os. Sanskrit mithas 
 (genitive), Gothic mith, Latin viedius, 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 
 
122 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 tlif notions of "extension" (accusative) and "midst" coml)ined 
 explain tlie resultant idea of "after," with possibly the idea of 
 "succession" suggested by the context. Bee Mark 1:13; 10:.'>0; 
 Matt. 3:2; 21:30; Jo. 3:25; Acts 1:5; 10:5; 2 Cor. 3:18; Lu. 22:52 f. 
 
 17. Tra/jtt. Epic irapai is locativc or possibly dative and Trapd 
 instrumental (Curtius) as Sanskrit has param (accusative), 
 pard (instrumental), and pare (locative). Compare Latin jjer, 
 German ver, English for — in forswear, forbid, etc. Skeat makes 
 English /ar same as Sanskrit paras (beyond). So "alongside" is 
 the root idea and can be seen in every example with 2)roper oIj- 
 servation of case idea and context. It is used with the locative, 
 accusative, and al)lative in the New Testament, and is particularly 
 conmion in composition. Compare parallel, jjarable, paradox, etc. 
 See 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. irepi. Compare Greek irepi^, ■n-epLo-a-o's and particle irep (Har- 
 tung) . TTcpi is locative case. Compare Sanskrit pari, round about, 
 and Zend pairi. So Latin per before adjectives (Curtius). Har- 
 rison says that rrepi as compared with dix<f>L (on both sides) is rather 
 placing round about, alongside of round about. The root is the 
 same as that of Trapd (see Sanskrit). It is used in Homer and even 
 Attic with the locative, but not so in the New Testament. Here it 
 is used only with the genitive, accusative, and possibly with the 
 ablative (Delbrueck). The ablative certainly occurs with it in 
 Homer. It is found with considerable frequency in composition 
 and alone. See Acts 18:25; 1 Jo. 2:2; Mark 9:42; Luke 10:40; 
 Acts 1:3; Luke 17:2; 2 Cor. 3:10; 1 Thess. 5:10; John 18:19. 
 
 19. TT/ad. Compare irportpo^, TT/owTos (Doric Trparos), TTpdcrw, etc. 
 
 So Sanskrit pra as prefix and Zend fra (instrumental case) , Latin 
 prod (ablative), pro, prae (prai, locative), German vor, English 
 fro, for, fore. The case of np6 is uncertain. Compare Latin abla- 
 tive and also ciTrd. There are some signs in Homer that vp6 was 
 once used with the locative, but it is in later Greek seen only with 
 the ablative (I)ell)rueck). The idea is really comparison and so 
 ablative as with iirip. It is used in the New Testament more fre- 
 quently than dfx4>i, ai'u, and dvri, but not so often as many other 
 
PREPOSITIONS. 123 
 
 prepositions. In composition it is common. The root idea is 
 always j^resent even when the resultant idea is substitution as in 
 ancient Greek and Latin, but it is not used in this sense in the 
 New Testament. See Acts 12 :6,- Luke 11 :38; James 5 :12; 2 Cor. 
 12:2; Gal. 3:1. 
 
 20. TT/aos. A longer form of -n-po as cis is of iv and i$ of «, occurs 
 also as TrpoTi (Doric), locative, and in nine (Curtius) other forms 
 all akin to Sanskrit prati (locative) which is used with accusative 
 and ablative. The meaning is the same as irp6, before. It is used 
 with three cases (locative, accusative, ablative) according to Del- 
 brueck. But Monro insists that it is genitive and not ablative. In 
 the New Testament only one ablative (genitive) occurs, Acts 27:34. 
 There are only six locative examples and all the rest are in the 
 accusative. It is one of the commonest prepositions in the New 
 Testament and abounds in compound words. Many of the exam- 
 ples are of great interest. Examine according to preceding prin- 
 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. aw. Older form Iw. loniclwos (koivos) according to Curtius. 
 Compare Latin ami, con, co (v in Greek as in accusative ending). 
 Compare Sanskrit sain and Greek afm. Mommsen says that avv is 
 used with the instrumental in both of its ideas, proper instrument 
 or help, and the associative instrumental (together with). But 
 the associative idea (Delbrueck, Harrison) is doubtless the root 
 idea in <tvv. It is used very little in the New Testament, save by 
 Luke and Paul, but in composition it is exceedingly common. 
 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. virep. vTTipa (upper rope). Compare Sanskrit upari (loca- 
 tive case of upara) with locative, accusative, and genitive. Zend 
 upairi (locative) with accusative and instrumental. Latin sup&r^ 
 Gothic itfar, German ueber, Anglo-Saxon ofer, English ove)'. These 
 are all comparative forms, Sanskrit positive upa, Greek vtto. 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. 
 
 See Monro's Homeric Grammar, }>. 117. It is used rather frequently 
 in the New Testament^ Init si)aringly in composition. ^luch interest 
 centers around this preposition hecause of its use by Paul concern- 
 ing the death of Christ, whereas Jesus used dvTi twice. It is in- 
 sisted that avTi is necessar}'' to express the doctrine of substitution, 
 and that in using vnip Paul avoided that doctrine. But neither 
 avTi nor vnep of itself expresses substitution. One means in itself 
 ' 'face to face' ' and the other ' 'over. ' ' Both, however, in the proper 
 connection are used freely when that is the resultant idea. In fact, 
 in Alcestis (Euripides) inrep is used more frequently than dvTt and 
 irpo with this idea. All three prepositions yield themselves naturally 
 to the idea of substitution where the connection calls for it. Here, 
 as always, the root idea of the preposition, the root idea of the 
 case, and tlie context must all be considered. See Acts 1 :13; Mark 
 9 :40 ; :\Iatt. 10 :24 ; Lu. 16 :8 ; Heb. 7 :27 ; Philemon 13 ; John 
 11 :50 ; 2 Cor. 5 :14 ; Gal. 3 :13 ; 1 Tim. 2 :6. 
 
 23. vTTo. Also vTTat' (dative or locative). AeolicvTra. Sanskrit wjja 
 (near, on, under) with locative, accusative, and instrumental. Zend 
 vpa with accusative and locative. Latin sub, Gothic uf. Compare 
 English ab-ove. The ideas "on" or "under" both depend on 
 standi)oint and do not differ much after all. Monro suggests that 
 the ^original sense is "upwards" (compare vipi, aloft, and wtio?, 
 facing upwards). At any rate wo is not, like Kara, used of motion 
 downwards. Hence the comparative (see iirep) and the superlative 
 (Sanskrit iipamas, Greek v-rraros, Latin summus, English oft) are 
 perfectly natural. It is freely used in the New Testament and 
 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 vn6 is the direct agent whereas Sia is the 
 intermediate agent. Other prepositions are also used to express 
 agent as ex, diro, Trapd, irp6<i. It is used onlv twice in the Gospel of 
 John, once in the Epistles of John, and twice in the Revelation, 
 and is thus an incidental argument for identity of authorship. It 
 is specially common in the writings of Luke and Paul. See Luke 
 11 :33 ; Gal. 3 :25 ; :^latt. 5 :13 ; John 1 :48 ; Matt. 1 :22 ; 4 :1 ; Mark 
 5:4: Matt. 6:2; Acts 6:11. 
 
CHAPTER XVI. 
 GENEEAL EEMAEKS ABOUT THE VEEB. 
 
 1. The name is not distinctive. In a sense all the rest of Greek 
 syntax centers around the verb (the word 'par excellence of the sen- 
 tence) save intensive particles and figures of speech. The verb is 
 the bone of the sentence. Indeed the Greek verb may be a sen- 
 tence in itself containing both subject and predicate as aTridavev. 
 There is therefore an appropriateness in calling this part of speech 
 the word (pyjfJM.) . 
 
 2. The function of the verb. The verb contains two ideas, 
 action (including ''state") and affirmation. Action maybe also 
 expressed by substantives and adjectives, but not affirmation. 
 Verbs make affirmation by limiting the action to certain persons. 
 This limitation is made by personal endings which also distinguish 
 the voices. These personal endings are probably oblique cases of 
 pronouns. 
 
 3. The two types of verbs. As we know, in the Greek verb we 
 see what are called the fit verbs and the o) verbs with some differ- 
 ences of inflections in several tenses. But originally there was 
 only one inflection, the fii, whereas in modern Greek the w forms 
 have displaced all the fu forms save in ci/mi. The w verbs arose 
 from the dropping of fu and other endings and the addition of the 
 variable vowel. The New Testament, like the rest of the Kotvi/, 
 represents the transition period of the language in this matter, but 
 further on towards the w victory than the earlier Attic. 
 
 4. The infinitive and the participle are not verbs in the strict 
 sense, as will be readily seen. They have no personal endings, 
 and so cannot make affirmation. In modern languages the per- 
 sonal ending is dropping off, and the verb depends on the separate 
 expression of the personal pronoun for its limitation. Infinitives 
 
12G A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 and participles are quasi verbs, verbal 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 are not now verb, now noun, but both at the same time. 
 
 5. How the verb is made. It 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 is a growth and a very complex growth at that. ' 'The verb- 
 expresses action (or state) and affirms it of a subject. It therefore 
 has tense, mode, voice, person and number; expressed by stem, con- 
 necting vowel, ending.''^ — H. H. Harris. 
 
 6. To understand the verb then is to understand each of these 
 processes. Mode, voice, tense, person, number, all have a specific 
 idea. The total result is the idea of the verb in a given instance. 
 Tlie alphabet of the verb is to know the forms by the fonn itself, 
 not by the English translation. It is useless to attempt explana- 
 tion before this elementary stage is reached. Voice pertains to the 
 action of the verb as regards the subject of the action. Tense has 
 to do with the action of the verb as regards the state of the action, 
 and in the indicative expresses time also. !Mode pertains to the 
 manner of affirmation, how it is made. 
 
 7. There is one other matter of importance to note also. It is 
 the meaning of the word itself, the root, apart from any or all of 
 the processes just named. The same tense of "blink the eye" and 
 ' 'live a life' ' do not convey exactly the same idea. The difference 
 is due to the thing which is mentioned in each instance, the nature 
 of the case. The Germans call this " Aktionsart, " kind of action. 
 It plays an important part, especially in the study of the tenses. 
 The late recognition of this common sense matter is not a great 
 compliment to grammarians. 
 
 8. The development of mode, voice, tense was necessarily more 
 or less simultaneous. There is no essential order for the discussion 
 of them therefore. In the beginning there was probal^ly only one 
 mode, one voice, one tense. The rest were built up around them 
 witli more or less completeness. In the Greek the system was never 
 carried out logically eitlier in mode, voice or tense. The English 
 
GENERAL REMARKS ABOUT THE VERB. 127 
 
 verb has, however, far greater hmitations 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 j^retty 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 flom'ished. Others barely 
 existed or perished. There was a sur\dval 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 
 modcc The actiye is probably the oldest voice, but the middle may 
 be. 
 
CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 THE MODES. 
 
 1. The use of av with the modes. There is much difficuUy in 
 understanding av. It is used with all the modes, save the impera- 
 tive. It is freely used in Homer with the future indicative and 
 the suhjunctive. So Tatian (pp. 80, 94) has av vriih the future 
 indicative. It is, however, chiefly found in dependent clauses. In 
 the New Testament it is thus found with the indicative as well as 
 the suhjunctive. In independent clauses av in the New Testament 
 occurs with the indicative and the optative. It is not true that 
 relative and conditional suhjunctive clauses ' 'must also have av. ' ' 
 It is usually present, hut is not necessary. Leo Meyer argues that 
 Greek av is kin to Gothic an and Latin an, and originally had two 
 meanings, one "else," the other "in that case rather, " Latin and 
 Gothic preserving the first and Greek the second. Cf. also old 
 English "an" = if. Monro argues that the primary use of av and 
 Ke in Homer is with definite and particular examples, and that the 
 indefinite and general use is secondary. In the New Testament 
 hoth exist, although the general usage is more common. See !Mark 
 11:19; 6:56. Sometimes av is spelt idv (Matt. 5:19). i\Iore in 
 detail in conditional and relative sentences. 
 
 2. What is mode? Mode is manner and pertains to aflirma- 
 tion, and not to action as do voice and tense. The personal endings 
 limit the affirmation; mode is in a sense the dress of the affirma- 
 tion. As to the manner of affirming, there are three possihle kinds 
 of statement: definite, doubting, commanding. But they are not 
 of equal age nor frequency. The four modes really represent throe 
 points of view since the suhjunctive and oi)tativeare so much alike 
 in idea. They and the imperative ultimately grow out of the 
 indicative and the old injunctivu. 
 
THE MODES. 129 
 
 3. Positive statement. Tlie Greek lias one mode of definite 
 assertion. It is called the indicative; not a very good name since 
 all the modes indicate. With this mode one affirms positively, 
 definitely, absolutely, undoubtingly. One may or may not tell 
 what he knows to be true, but he states it as real. Mode has noth- 
 ing per se to do with the actual facts, but only with the statement 
 of them. Most untruths are expressed in the indicative mode. 
 The indicative is the normal manner of affirmation unless there is 
 reason to be doubtful or to make a command. It is thus the one 
 most used and has the most complete set of tenses as to the time 
 element. The indicative always stands for itself. The modes, 
 like the tenses, are not interchanged. The indicative is so much 
 the usual mode that some grammarians do not consider it a mode 
 at all. It does not indeed have a distinctive mode-sign like the 
 subjunctive and optative, but neither does the imperative. The 
 indicative is the natural manner of expressing a thing unless there 
 is special reason for one of the other modes. It is indeed the 
 mode par excellence instead of being no mode at all. The Greeks 
 used the indicative according to the genius of their own language. 
 One must see to it that he does not read English into the Greek 
 indicative, though, as a matter of fact, the English indicative has 
 jjractically supplanted the old subjunctive. The application of the 
 general principle of the indicative will tide one over every instance 
 if he gives due weight to the context. Some striking examples are 
 given in lieu of extended discussion. See the point in the 
 indicative mode in Trotovfxev (Jo. 11:47),- c8et (Jo. 4:4; Matt. 
 23:23; and Matt. 25:27); £/3ovAo>7/v (Acts 25:22); €>awaT€ (.Jo. 
 5:39); dyaTr^aei^ (Matt. 5:43); diXcx) (1 Cor. 7:7) and p^Xov (Gal. 
 4:20); r]vxoiJ.r}v (Rom. 9:3); rrapa^rjXovixev (1 Cor. 10:22); oif/ca-dc 
 
 (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 Avill answer at any 
 rate. They are really different forms of the same mode, the mode 
 
130 A SHOUT GRAMMAR OF THE fJREKK NKW TESTAMENT. 
 
 of hesitating allirmation. Compare the Latin which has no optative, 
 Init a past sul »junctive. In Greek the subjunctive is chiefly primary 
 and the optative chiefly secondary, hut the distinction is not ahvays 
 observed. The Greek love of vivid statement made the subjunc- 
 tive more popular than the optative and kept it increasingly after 
 past tenses of the indicative. Tliere is thus no sequence of tenses 
 in Greek, but a sequence of modes. But this sequence of modes 
 is not necessary. In fact in the New Testament it is exceptional, 
 for the optative had nearly disappeared from use. In modem 
 Greek it no longer exists. In the ancient vernacular the optative 
 was not used so much as in the books. 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 o<^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 are expressed by 6(l>eXov 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 tlie 
 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 deliberation. The future indicative is doulitful 1 because 
 the action is future, and so it is not strange that Homer uses both 
 the subjunctive and the future indicative for future statements. 
 Compare tva and idv in the New Testament with either subjunctive 
 or future indicative. The negative of tlie sul)junotive is fxy, of tlie 
 optative oi or fitj. It needs to be remarked that the modes have 
 j^recisely the same force in independent and dependent clauses. 
 The ])articular construction of tlie sulgunctive and optative with 
 various dependent clauses comes up later. Here the root idea is 
 insisted on which lies behind it all. As a matter of fact only the 
 most general iilea of doubtful statement will hold, for l)oth the 
 
THE MODES. 131 
 
 subjunctive and optative are difficult of scientific analysis. The 
 subjunctive glides into the realm of the future indicative on the 
 one hand, if indeed it is not a variation of it (see Homer), and 
 into the sphere of the imperative on the other where in fact it is 
 supreme in the first person. The optative is not alone wish or 
 will. The potential idea exists also and the doctors much disagree 
 as to which is the original and how to relate the two conceptions. 
 In the Latin the optative vanished utterly before the subjunctive, 
 while in the Sanskrit the subjunctive largely succumbed before the 
 optative. The Greek indeed developed both side by side though 
 the optative was chiefly confined to books as remarked above. 
 The subjunctive is more common in Homer than in later Greek. 
 Some examples of the subjunctive and optative in the New Testa- 
 ment worth considering are here given. "^x^P-^^ (Rom. 5:1); 
 ytvoiTo (Gal. 6:14); ^vyrjre (Matt. 23:33); cHatfxrjv Kv (Acts 26:29); 
 
 av dfXoi (Acts 17:18); fir] d(rcv€yKr]<; (Matt. 6:13); TTOirjaoifxtv (Luke 
 3 :10) ; TO Tt's av drj (Luke 9 :46) ; yevrjrai (Luke 23 :31) ; iToi/xda-oyfitv 
 (Luke 22:9); elr] (Luke 22:23); TrapaSo) (Luke 22:4); (^ay<o (Luke 
 22 :16) ; aTrtu/tev (Luke 9 :54. Cf. ttoit^o-t;?, IMark 10 :35. See infini- 
 tive with OeXcL in verse 43). For a^e? tSw/xev see (Matt. 27:49). As 
 examples of o^tAov take Rev. 3:15; Gal. 5:12; 1 Cor. 4:8. 
 
 5. Commanding statement. The imperative is the mode for 
 commands, the assertion of one's will on another's. This mode is 
 somewhat allied in form to the indicative and is a development in 
 meaning of an emphatic indicative in some of its forms which are 
 identical with the indicative. Compare our ''you shall." The 
 indicative in that vigorous sense is often found in Greek, as oij/eaOc 
 (Matt. 27:24). Here one's duty is stated as a prediction. Often 
 it is hard to decide between the imperative and the indicative when 
 the forms are identical, but the connection will generally decide, 
 as in lo-re (Jas, 1:19; Eph. 5:5). Other forms of the imperative 
 are inter jectional (cf. Scvre, Matt. 11:28) or allied to the subjunc- 
 tive or the old injunctive like XvOrjTc and similar forms. 
 Still others have special endings. So the imperative is on the 
 whole a makeshift and an afterthought in the modes. The aorist 
 subjunctive held its own in prohibitions of the second person and 
 
132 A SHORT GKAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 usually of the tliird as the suhj. did completely for all commands 
 of the first person. In the imperative as with all the modes the 
 meaning of the word itseK and of the context has to be considered. 
 Hence one can see how the imperative is used in opyi^caOe (Eph. 
 4:25). Cf. also ttoUl koI ^ya-rj (Lu. 10:28). Instead of the impera- 
 tive we sometimes have iva (Eph. 5:33). The negative of the 
 imperative naturally is always fi^ as with the subjunctive after 
 Homer. The indicative and optative use either ov or fj-rj according 
 to the idea involved. Observe 8ds (Matt. 5:42), a^cs ck/SoXw (Matt. 
 7:4), Xva-are (Jo. 2:19), KaraSiKa^eTc and d-TToXvtTC (Lu. 0:37), ta-Ot 
 l;((uv (Lu. 19:17), oparc ixrjBtls yivwcrKiTU) (Matt. 9:31), icrre yivwa-KovTCi 
 (Eph. 5:5), Kara^aTO) (Mk. 13:15), fiaiTTKTai (Acts 22:16). In 1 Pet. 
 5:12 observe ets ^v aTrjTt. 
 
CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 THE VOICES. 
 
 1. What is voice in the verb? Voice is vox, the speaking part 
 of the verb, and this is not a bad name for the function. Voice 
 has to do with the subject of the action, the one of whom the 
 affirmation is made by the mode. 
 
 2. The names of the voices are not specially felicitous. All verbs 
 express action or state in all the voices, and verbs that express 
 only state like elfit have the active voice. The middle means 
 nothing in particular. If the idea is that it comes in between 
 active and passive, that is not true and hence a misnomer. If it 
 refers to the fact that there is a reflex action in this voice, this is 
 true, but a poor way of expressing it. Reflexive voice would 
 conyey that idea much better. The term passive is not so bad in 
 the original sense of that word. We have to use the terms simply 
 because they are in vogue. 
 
 3. The voices have nothing per se to do with the question whether 
 the verb is transitive or intransitive. That matter belongs to the 
 individual verb and is in reality a question of "Aktionsart," not 
 of the voice at all. The active voice, for instance, may be either 
 transitive or intransitive and often the same verb will be used now 
 one way, now the other. The same remark applies to the middle 
 voice. Some verbs indeed in both these voices will have more 
 than one object. The verb in the passive voice again is sometimes 
 transitive also, though in the nature of the case it is more usually 
 intransitive. The point is that voice must be considered entirely 
 apart from the question of transitiveness. That is another matter 
 to be raised on other grounds, 
 
 4. The active voice represents the subject merely as acting. 
 That is all. It is therefore the commonest and most natural voice to 
 
134 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 use. It is also })rol)al )ly the oldest. Some verl)s never liad any othel 
 voice. Some verljs have one voice in one tense, and another voice 
 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, fu becoming fmfu=fW4.. This explanation 
 is not certain, some scholars even putting the middle as the oldest 
 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. How the subject 
 acts with reference to himself, the middle voice does not tell. That 
 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- 
 self, on himself, for himself, etc. The precise shade of emphasis 
 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 
 the only way that the middle idea can be expressed. 
 
 6. The passive represents the subject as acted upon. The pas- 
 sive is later than the active and the middle and did not develop 
 distinctive personal endings. In most cases, like a parasite, it used 
 the middle endings as in Latin throughout. In the future passive 
 there was a special suffix 0c (c) as in the aorist passive when the 
 active endings were employed. It is a curious perversion of facts 
 and irony of fate that the grammars have so long regarded the 
 middle as the interloper. Some languages indeed have never de- 
 veloped a passive, the Coptic, for instance. The Sanskrit has the 
 barest beginning of the passive in one conjugation while the active 
 and middle are in full swing. English can only express the pas- 
 sive by the auxiliary verb to be and the participle. 
 
 7. The history of the middle and passive has been one of the 
 most interesting in the Greek language. Originally there was no pas- 
 sive. The Boeotian dialect uses tlie i)assive very seldom. In modern 
 Greek there are few distinctive middles, so completely has the 
 
THE VOICES. 135 
 
 passive captured tlie middle. In the NeAV Testament tlie middle 
 is already disappearing before the passive. In fii] (}>ofir)6r]T€ airoxk 
 (Matt. 10:26) the passive form is used, l)ut not tlic passive idea. 
 So also the common airoKpi6(.i<i (Matt. 3:15). In Homer there is 
 no future passive and the second aorist passive is rare. Indeed the 
 aorist middle and the aorist passive are not always distinct in 
 Homer as '/S\^to (he was struck). Cf. Sterrett, Homer's Iliad, 
 The Dialect of Hovier, p. 27. All this is in harmony with the de- 
 velopment of the passive from the middle and active. 
 
 8. The term deponent as applied to the middle and passive is 
 largely a misnomer. INIany of the tenses were defective and did 
 not develop forms in all the voices. Hence it is not proper to say 
 that they laid aside (^depono) what they had never assumed. How- 
 ever, as between the middle and the passive, as shown above, the 
 middle gradually disappeared as the passive usurped both form 
 and function. But the term deponent is not usually applied to 
 this particular matter. The following examples will illustrate the 
 voices in the New Testament : 
 
 1 Cor. 5:11 (ey/Mn/'a, (Twava/xtywadai, ovo/ui^OjU.evos) J 6:7 (dSiKctcr^e) ; 
 6:11 (aTreXowao-^e, •^yiacr^y^Te) ; 13:12 (yivwo-KO), CTTtyvcio-o/xai, eireyvwcr- 
 6rjv); Lu. 20:11 {-npoaridtTo) ; 20:13 (evT/aain^'o-ovTai) ; Matt. 27:5 
 (dTTi^ylaTo); Matt. 27:24 (ciTrmi/'aTo) ; Mk. 14:47 (o-7rao-d/A€vos) ; 14:65 
 (jjp^avTo)) Luke 2 :5 (dTToypdi/'ao-^tu) ; Acts 22 :16 (ySaTTTto-at); Acts 
 12:8 (^u»(rai KoX VTr6hri(TaC) \ Gal. 2:7 (7rem(rT£Ufuxi) J 2 Thess. 2:15 
 (eStSdxVO; Matt. 9:38 (Sei^Ve); Matt. 10:9 {KTricr-qfrB^} ; 10:28 
 (<^o^jj^Te)5 Titus 2:7 (crtavrov 7ra/3e;^of(,€vos). 
 
CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 THE TENSES. 
 
 1. The name tense (French temps) is a mistake. Time is not 
 the basal idea. This name does not represent the original and 
 essential matter. Time belongs only to the indicative mode in 
 Greek save by indirection, and is not the main idea in the indica- 
 tive. In the other modes time is not expressed, and is only sug- 
 gested by the relation to other parts of tlie sentence or context. In 
 Latin time appears in the subjunctive also. Time is distinctly 
 a secondary development in tense grafted on the main idea. Cf. 
 Del])rueck, Grundlagen, p. 80. 
 
 2. But what is the fundamental idea in tense ? The state of 
 the action is the main idea of tense, and not merely an additional 
 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 all the modes, viz. , incompletion, completion, or indeti- 
 niteness. These three conceptions cover all the kinds of action 
 there are as to duration. In the indicative, where time is also ex- 
 pressed, there might have been each of these three conceptions in 
 distinct forms in past, present, and future. As a matter of fact, 
 the conceptions exist, but only in the past is there distinct expres- 
 sion with three tenses. The ideas are used, however, in the pres- 
 ent and future, l)ut not with separate tenses. The tense in the New 
 Testament is used in accordance with the true Greek idiom, save 
 that the Hel^rew conception has sometimes in translation Greek 
 detennined the point of view. But in New Testament Greek one 
 tense is not used "for" anotlier. That is an aV)omination of gram- 
 mar. W'e must beware of explaining Greek tenses from the Eng- 
 lish translation. 
 
THE TENSES. 137 
 
 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 
 standjjoint. 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 
 because it is normally the oldest form of the Greek verb. The 
 aorist and present in many verbs had the same stem like ^rj-fu, for 
 instance. Cf. I-^t^-v with I-o-ttj-v. The so-called second aorist is 
 older than the first aorist. The root of a verb is found in the second 
 aorist, if it has this tense. The Greek tenses seem to have been 
 built up around the second aorist. The aorist is the simplest in 
 idea. It is unlimited action, do'/Dio-Tos, both as to duration and as 
 to time. The augment (an example of pre-flection) in the indica- 
 tive shows past time, but the tense as a tense has no time. It is 
 simple action without representing it either as incompleted or com- 
 pleted. It may in fact be either, but the aorist does not say so. 
 The Greek is an ''aorist loving language" (Broadus). A statement 
 in the indicative would naturally be in the aorist unless there is 
 reason to put it in some other tense, and so of the other modes. If 
 the action is not to be described as completed or incompleted, put 
 it in the aorist. General statements or illustrations are often put 
 in the aorist and you are left to draw the inference. This is really 
 a representative aorist. Some verbs of special meanings will have 
 different shades of meaning in different tenses, and this is only 
 
138 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 natural. It is the tense idea plus tlie verl» meaning. In the indica- 
 tive the aorist is past time because of the augment; in the j)arti- 
 cli)lc it is contemporaneous or by suggestion past or future; it is l^y 
 suggestion present or future in the sul)junctivc, optative, impera- 
 tive, and infinitive. The infinitive in indirect discourse has past 
 time only by suggestion. But in all this diversity as to time, the 
 idea of simple action is always present. The aorist is not used 
 ' 'for' ' the present perfect, the past perfect, or the present. Hadley 
 and Allen are here explaining Greek by the English. See the exact 
 force of the Greek aorist in every instance. That force is well rep- 
 resented by ISIoulton (^Prolegomena, p. 109) as punctiliar or point 
 action. The thing to bear in mind is that the aorist represents the 
 action as a point. In itself it may have continued a long time. 
 It is precisely the idea of the aorist (undefined action) that it does 
 not distinguish between complete or incomplete action. It may be 
 used of either. Take olKo8ofj.rj9r] (Jo. 2:20), for instance, which 
 covers the space of forty-six years as the "point." Just here 
 ' 'Aktlonsart^ ' comes in also. The particular meaning of the word 
 itself may stress the beginning, the end, or the action as a whole. 
 The German grammarians have giyen special names to the resultant 
 ideas, that is, the aorist plus the meaning of the word. For the 
 beginning ingressive as vocrija-ai (to fall sick), for the end effective as 
 TfXiaax (to Complete) or TrXiy/owo-at (Matt. 5:17), for the act as a 
 whole constative (not a very good term) as ^rjaai (to live). Some- 
 times indeed the same word can be used for each of these ideas as 
 /SoXcTv may be "let fly," "hit," or merely "throw" (Moulton, 
 Frolegomeiia, p. 130). So then in the aorist the tense idea is to be 
 combined with the word idea. It may be added that in the past 
 indicative, in the subjunctive, the optative, the positive impera- 
 tive, the aorist is the tense used as a matter of course unless stress 
 is to be laid on the ideas either of incomijletion or completion. 
 The Greek tenses are not always made from the same stem. These 
 examples will illustrate tlie New Testament aorist. Matt. 3:17 
 (cvSoKi^o-a) ; Matt. 25:5 (tVwTa^av) ; Matt. i):18 (eVeAcuTi^o-ev; observe 
 &pTi); Matt. 12:28 (c^^aacv); Mark 11:24 (iXd/Sire); Matt. 23:2 
 (cKa^io-av) ; Jo. 10:38 (yvwrt, Init ef. yivwa-KijTc) , Luke 1:30 (evpes); 
 
THE TENSES. 139 
 
 2:48 (cVotV"?); 16:4 (^yvwv, fieTa(TTa6w) ; 23:19 (Tjv /SXrjeeU) ; 24 :\7 
 (i(TTd6r]<rav) ; Jamesl:ll (dvcVeiXev) ; 1:24 (cTreAa^tTo) ; Rom. 3:23 
 (ijlJuipTOv) ; 15:15 (lypai/'a); Mark 5:39 (dTrt^avcv) ; 5:42 {aviar-q^ but 
 
 note iTtpuiT<xTu) ; 1 Cor. 7:28 (^/Liapres) . In Luke 23:19 {rjv (SXrjOus) 
 we have the aorist jiarticiple with rjv. 
 
 6. Incompleted action — (present, imperfect, and future). Pres- 
 ent and future tenses are named from the point of view of time, 
 while the imperfect is named from the standpoint of state of dura- 
 tion. It would have been better to have had all the names con- 
 sistent. The imperfect in Greek is a past imperfect, and the pres- 
 ent is a present imperfect, and the future is a future imperfect. 
 But it should be noted that the present indicative is also often 
 aoristic and the future is usually so. In the indicative no clear 
 distinction between indefinite and incomplete action is made in 
 present and future time. In the other modes the present tense 
 is more free from this complication. The idea of incompletion or 
 linear action runs through all the modes and is a variation from 
 the aorist conception. See formation of the present from aorist 
 root stems. The idea of time concerning the incompleted action 
 appears properly only in the indicative where all three points of 
 time occur. The subjunctive has no time of its own, and only the 
 present tense for incompletion. The so-called future subjunctive 
 is a later development. The optative is similarly situated, save 
 that there is a future optative, which, however, is only used in 
 indirect discourse where in the direct form the future indicative 
 was used. The same thing is true of the infinitive, the future 
 infinitive representing the future indicative, save with fieXXw, when 
 there is a future idea in the word (but /ieXAw uses also present and 
 aorist infinitives). The future participle corresponds to the future 
 indicative by suggestion, especially with the idea of purpose in the 
 context. But this is a very rare construction in the New Testa- 
 ment. There is no future imperative. So, then, the imperfect or 
 past incompletion is confined to the indicative, the future or future 
 incompletion is nearly so if indirect discourse is borne in mind. 
 The present is the normal tense for incompletion in all the modes. 
 The stem of the imperfect is the same as that of the present. 
 
140 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 (a) Tlie present. 
 
 So, then, the i)rcsent tense expresses incompleted action, which 
 action in any given case ma}^ be momentary, prolonged, simulta- 
 neous, descriptive, repeated, customary, attempted, interrupted, or 
 begun, according to the nature of the case or the meaning of the 
 verb itself. In vivid narration past or future incompleted action 
 can be conceived of and stated in the present indicative. This is 
 not a peculiarity of language at all. It is simply a lively imagina- 
 tion that changes its point of view. No distinctive effort is made 
 to present the aorist idea in the present time (indicative). That 
 idea is merged with the present tense without distinction. Some- 
 times the idea of incompletion is intensified by the use of the verb 
 cZ/xt and the participle as in English and Hebrew. The so-called 
 historical present in the midst of aorists and imperfects is just the 
 lively imagination of the narrator drawing the picture closer. It is 
 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 eiftt. Indeed some future tenses like c'/m, 
 TTio/xat are thus merely lively presents. In Homer, as is well known, 
 the present and imi3erfect stems 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 
 perfective is applied by the new grammarians to this effect of some 
 prepositions in composition. It has nothing to do with the perfect 
 tense, and it is necessarily confusing to some extent. If ipyd^cadai 
 is to Avork, KaTepyd^ca-OuL (Phil. 2 :12) is to work down. So yivwa-Kuv 
 is to know, i-n-LyivuxTKeLv is to know thoroughly. The list can l)e 
 easily extended. Sometimes the simple verl) rei)resents the incom- 
 plete idea like 6vycrK€iv (to be dying), while the compound aorist 
 sums up the whole like diroOavdv (to die). See KuroAwat (Matt. 
 /) :17). The following examples of the present will set forth fairly 
 well New TestJiment usage: Matt. 2:4 (yewarai); 3:1 (Tra/jayiVcTui) ; 
 3:10 (KcTrai) ; 3:15 (^•npiirov cortV) ; 5 :25 (Ivdi cwowv, cl); 6:2 (Troiovcriv, 
 diri^ovinv^; 25:8 (a^cWwrui); 2G:18 (Trotoi); 27:33 (tn-Tiv Atyo/uvos); 
 
THE TENSES. 141 
 
 Mk. 11:23 (ytWai); Lu. 17:6 (Ix^tc); 18:12 (KTw/tat); 19:S (StBwfu); 
 19:17 (10-^6 ex<ov); 22:23 (£17;); 22:24 (8«c«); Jo. 3:15 (ex??); 10:32 
 (XiOd^tTe); 10:38 (fl-io-TevT^Tc, yivwcrKrjTe) ; 14:3 (Ipx^/^O/ Heb. 3:12 
 ^A€7r£Te); Rev. 1:18 (^w £t>0; Mk. 4:38 (dTroAAv/Ac^a). 
 
 (b) The imperfect. 
 
 The imperfect likewise expresses incompleted action which in 
 any given case may be either momentary, simultaneous, prolonged, 
 descriptive, repeated, customary, interrupted, attempted, or begun, 
 according to the context or the meaning of the verb. Too much 
 has been read into the Greek tenses and not enough allowance is 
 always made for the meaning of the verb itself. To wink the eye, 
 for instance, is obviously different as to length of duration from 
 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 its root idea. The participle with clfiL is very common in 
 the New Testament, 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 eXeyev jjerhaps do not differ 
 in stem from an old second aorist (cf. iXafScv). 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 aTrWavcv, KaBevSct, KareyeXoiv. The meaning 
 of the word (Aktionsart) is to be observed in the imperfect tense 
 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 : ISIatt. 3 :6 
 (e/JaTTTi^oi/To); 8:14 (SiekwAuev); 26:55 (eKa^E^o/AT^v); 27:30 (Itvtttov); 
 Mk. 12:41 (Wtwpu); 14;61 (ecnwTra); 14:72 (£/cAai£v); 15:6 (airiXvcv); 
 15:23 (eSt'Sow); Mk. 5:13 (eVvtyovTo); Lu. 1:21 (^r tt/doo-Sokw; cf. 
 1:22, ^v 8iav£ijwv); 1:59 {eKoXow); 17:10 (w^ec Ao/a£v) ; 17:27 {ya-diov, 
 etc.); 23:12 {-TrpovTrrjpxov ovT£s); Jo. 21:18 (i^(owv€<;, etc.); Acts 18:4 
 (67r£i^£v); 27:18 (eVoiowTo); Eph. 5 :4 (dvJJKcv); Acts 22:22 (ra^Ev); 
 Matt. 23:23 (tSft); Lu. 24:26 (IStt); IMatt. 25:5 (iKddevBov). 
 (c) The future. 
 
 The future likewise presents incompleted action which in any 
 
142 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 case may be either inomentary, instantaneous, prolonged, descrip- 
 tive, reiDeated, customary, interrui;)ted, attempted, or begun, ac- 
 cording to the nature of the case or the meaning of the verb. The 
 future with el/xL 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. 
 Compare our shall and will. The only way to emphasize the idea 
 of incompleteness in the future tense is by the use of ctV'' ar^d the 
 participle as in the present tense. There is this difference, how- 
 ever. In the future the idea is usually aoristic (dopiorro?, 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^ eic.,p. 
 446 f¥. ) . But Giles suggests also that the Aryan and Letto-Slav- 
 onic future in -syo (cf. "go" in English and na in Coptic) may be 
 discernible also. But the result is that the future indicative and 
 aorist subjunctive do not differ greatly in actual usage. Hence in 
 the New Testament with idv, tva, firj ttotc, etc. , both appear. There 
 is a difference though slight. The sulijunctive 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. ci/a6 and ipxafmi), due to the vivid realization 
 of a future event in present time. See Delbrueck. The peripliras- 
 tic future is common in the Sanskrit. In the modern Greek OeXu) 
 and the infinitive (cf. English) is the most frequent method. In 
 the New Testament OtXoy has not yet weakened to a mere future 
 like our "will" and "sliall. " In a passage like Jo. 7:17 the full 
 force of diXoi is to be insisted on. Cf. OiXtTt dTroXvaw (Matt. 27:17) 
 with modern Greek. Mc'AAw appears in the New Testament chiefly 
 witli the aorist or i)resent infinitivr, (Matt. 11 :14; Rom. 8:1S) and 
 with future infinitive also (Acts 11:2S). Forms like iriofmi (Luke 
 17:8) give color to the aoristic origin of i\\v futuiv. A case like 
 
THE TENSES. 143 
 
 ayioi taeaOc (1 Pct. 1:16) has au imperative force. But various as 
 the sources of the future are, it is certain that it is a later develop- 
 ment in the tenses. The future with a negative may amount to a 
 prohibition. The future participle is not common in the New 
 Testament (Matt. 27:49). Here are further examples of the New 
 Testament usage : Matt. 1:21 (xaXcWs) ; 3:11 (/SaTTTtW); 6:5(ovk 
 taeaOe); 10:22 {IcrecrOc fiicrovfJievoL) ; 12:21 (eXTriovcrtv); 16:22 (eorai); 
 21:41 (dTToAeW, cf.dTroXw 1 Cor. 1:19); 27:24 (oi/^eo-^e); Lu. 1:20 
 
 (eo-j; cTKOTTcov) ; 12:8 (6/xoAoy7;cr€t) I 16:3 (ttoit^cto)) | Phil. 1:18 (j(a.pri(ro- 
 /xai); Lu. 21:19 (/cTT/creo-^e) ; Heb. 11:32 (cTrtXet'i/'et). 
 
 7. Completed action — (present perfect, past perfect, and future 
 perfect). The perfect tense is found in all the modes, although 
 naturally it would not occur often in the subjunctive, optative, and 
 imperative. Indeed in the New Testament the perfect optative is 
 absent and in the subjunctive is found only in the periphrastic 
 form. The perfect imperative is almost obsolete in the New Testa- 
 ment. The Kotvi^' corresponds to this situation. But the perfect 
 infinitive and participle are quite common. It always conveys the 
 same sense, completed action. Variations in the resultant idea 
 will occur in this tense also, owing to the meaning of the verb and 
 the context. The action may have been completed a moment ago 
 or a thousand years ago. The action may be represented as just 
 finished or as standing finished. The tense yields itself naturally 
 to these different applications. The resultant idea may be state or 
 condition. The reduplication is the effort to express the idea of 
 completion in the verb form and exists in all the modes. It de- 
 pends on the speaker or writer as to how he will present an action, 
 whether as incompleted, completed, or indefinite. He chooses the 
 tense that will present his idea. No sensible man uses one tense 
 when he means another tense. That would be jargon. But in the 
 subjunctive, optative, and imperative the choice is practically one 
 Ijctween the aorist and the present. Different writers vary greatly 
 in the use of the aorist and the present. It is true indeed that in 
 Sanskrit, as the aorist disappears, the perfect is used with increas- 
 ing frequency. In Latin the distinction in form between the aorist 
 and the perfect vanished completely, but the idea of the aorist was 
 
144 A SHOUT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 presented in the perfect form (aorist) as is shown l>y tlie sequence 
 of tenses in a dependent clause. One cannot infer, hecause Greek 
 uses presents, aorists, imperfects, and i)erfects in parallel clauses, 
 that these tenses are equivalent. The Greek loves variety. The 
 writer or speaker has perfect freedom to change his standpoint and 
 he expects the hearer or reader to do likewise. Uniformity helongs 
 to the professional grammarian, not to the living language. What- 
 ever may be true of the Byzantine Greek under the influence of 
 the Latin blending of aorist and perfect forms (not of tense mean- 
 ing), that cannot Ijc justly said to be true of tlie New Testament 
 Greek. There is a threefold history of redujDlication in Greek. 
 With the aorist reduj^lication is intensive as ^yayov, with the pres- 
 ent continuous as SiSw/ai, with the perfect completed in idea as 
 
 BeSwKa. 
 
 (a) The present perfect. 
 
 This is the standard tense for completed action and is in 
 all the modes. In the New Testament the perfect optative 
 does not occur, but some examples of the periphrastic sub- 
 junctive are found besides eiSw (1 Tim. 3:15). The perfect 
 imperative is rare, though the perfect infinitive and the per- 
 fect participle are common. The present perfect is not used for 
 the past perfect, the aorist, the present or the future. For vivid- 
 ness a writer will sometimes use it in the midst of other tenses, but 
 he makes the change on purpose in order to produce vividness. 
 He does not wish the jjrcsent perfect understood as aorist. The 
 use of €1/11 with the perfect participle is rather common in the New 
 Testament. The present perfect with reduplication is probably 
 derived from the iterative present. We do not know the origin of 
 the -Ka stems. The existence of oi8a, \e\onra, etc., may indicate 
 that some reduplicated stems in -Ka set tlie fashion for most per- 
 fects. The modern Greek has wholly dropped the reduplicated 
 perfect save in the passive participle. Instead €x<" ♦'^"^^ the aorist 
 infinitive («, not ai) is used as t^w \iWt niucli like the English. 
 The older Greek has already licgun to use l^.^ Xvtra<i. This analytic 
 process is characteristic of the Koivij and so of the New Testament 
 (especially Luke). The present perfect in Greek does not say tliat 
 
THE TENSES. 145 
 
 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 its own point of view. These examples will 
 illustrate New Testament usage: Matt. 3:2 {rjyyiKtv); Matt. 25:24 
 (d\y](f>m, contrast with Xafidiv verse 20); 4:7 (yeypaTTTai); 13:46 
 (7re7r/3aK€v, cf. cix^v); Mk.4:39 (ir€<f)Lix<a<To) ; 15:44 (reOvTjKev); Lukel:22 
 (ewpaxev); 4:6 (TrapaSeSorai); 5:23 (a<^€0)VTai); 5:32 (eXijAv^a); 14:8 
 (jj KixXrj/Jievo^) ', 14 :18 (Ix^ ju,e TraprjTrjfXivov) ; 16 :26 (^icTTrjpiKTai) ; 20 :6 
 TTCTTCtcr/xeVos ecTTtV); Jo. 5:36 (aTreo-TaXxe) ; 5:45 (i7A.7riKaTe) ; 16:28 
 (i\-qXv6a and note i$rj\dov); 17:6 (reTT^prjKav) ; 19:22 (ycypac^a); 
 1 Cor. 15:4 (cyi^ycprat) ; Heb. 5;12 (ycyomre tx9VT€<;) •, 7:23 (cto-if 
 yeyovoTcs) ; Jas. 1 :24 ((XTreAT^Xv^ev); 2 Cor. 1:9 (TTCTTOi^oTes w/Aev) ; Rev. 
 
 5:7 (^€'i\r}<fi€v); Mk. 5:4 (SeScV^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 
 so common as the aorist indicative because it was not so often de- 
 sired to emphasize completed action in past time. This tense, as 
 all idea of past time, is confined to the indicative. It was never 
 very common in Greek, in simple truth, just as the perfect sub- 
 junctive, optative, and imperative never enjoyed a wide vogue. 
 The Boeotian dialect has no past perfect. Still in the Koivrj the 
 past perfect indicative is far more in evidence than the perfects in 
 the other modes. For practical purposes outside of the indicative 
 the Greek used the aorist or the present and only occasionally the 
 perfect. In the indicative, future time was almost wholly indicated 
 
 10 
 
146 A SHOUT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 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 
 course, unless there was a special desire to lay stress on the incom- 
 plction or the completion of the action. "When therefore the past 
 perfect is used, the completion in past time is distinctly emi:)ha- 
 sized. 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 (re^e/xeXtWo) ; 26:43 (^aav (SiPaprjfjiivoi) ; Mark 
 14:44 (SeSwKet); 16:9 (cK/Se^Ai^Ket); Luke 4:29 (wkoScJ/xt^to); 5:17 
 (^orav cXt^Xu^o'tcs) ; 8:29 (<xvv7]pTra.Ku) ] 15:24 (^v aTroA-wXcis) ; 16:20 
 (e/JcjSXijTo); Jo. 6:17 (cycyo'm, and note great variety of tenses in 
 verses 16-21); 11:44 (TrepuStSeTo) ; 18:5 (larriKci); Acts 14:28 (ttc- 
 
 Trto-Tcmeicrav); 20:16 (KCKptKei); 21:29 (^crav irpoewpaKOTe^, and note 
 
 eio-r/yayev and K€KOLvo)Keu in jjreceding verse) . 
 
 (c) The future perfect. This was always a rare tense and is 
 nearly extinct in the New Testament. It is not often necessary to 
 express completed action in future time. The few examples in the 
 New Testament are confined to the indicative. One (kck/do^ouo-iv) 
 in Lu. 19:40 is not supported by Aleph B L, and is not in "West- 
 cott and Hort's text. The other examples are periphrastic futures 
 with ciV save eiSi^o-o) in Heb. 8:11, and this is from the LXX. The 
 two ancient Greek future perfects active (ccm/lw and reOmj^u)) do 
 not appear in the New Testament. As examples of the periphras- 
 tic conjugation ol)serve the following; Matt. 16:19 (Icrrai SeSe/ttVoi') ; 
 
 Lu. 12:52 (laoi/rut Sta/xe/i,€yoi(T/A€Voi) J Heb. 2:13 (lo-o/iat TTtTTOi^ws). . 
 
CHAPTER XX. 
 OO-ORDINATE AND SUBOEDINATE CLAUSES. CONJUNCTIONS. 
 
 1. What is a sentence? The answer in grammatical terms is not 
 so easy as it appears at first. The word sententia is, of course, a 
 thought, an opinion expressed. The object of language is supposed 
 to be to convey thought — or to conceal it. Any word or phrase 
 that conveys a clear and complete idea is a sentence. Is the verb 
 essential to a sentence? Some grammarians think so, but that is 
 not always true. The verb is the main word in a sentence and is 
 usually expressed, but not always. It is not alone the copula co-rtv 
 that is sometimes absent. Any verb may be absent if the sense is 
 clear without it. "WTien sailors shout "A sail! A sail!" it is a dis- 
 tinct idea. 
 
 2. The simple sentence grew up around the verb. Subject and 
 predicate became the foci of the sentence. Each of these 
 might or might not be further amplified by the various parts of 
 speech or by adjuncts. The child is making progress when he 
 puts words together. The clause may be long or short. 
 
 3. Co-ordination of clauses is the next step in language. Two 
 clauses are either placed side by side with connecting links (true 
 conjunctions) or contrasted with each other (disjunctive particles). 
 Co-ordination (paratactic conjunctions) was the first and always 
 the most frequent method of uniting clauses. In the New Testa- 
 ment the Koivrj usage is perhaps heightened in this particular by the 
 use of Kttt much like Hebrew vav, though not to the extent of the 
 LXX. Kai is as frequent as re is uncommon in the New Testa- 
 ment. Te is used chiefly in Luke (especially Acts) as Luke 2 :16 
 (t€ — Kttt'), 21:11, etc. Besides re — Kai it is found alone (Acts 1:15), 
 with Se (Acts 19:2), and with another re (Acts 2:46). But Kai in 
 the New Testament is the most frequent of all conjunctions. Turn 
 
148 A SHORT CRAMMAR OF THK GREKK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 to the Gospel of John, for instance, and it meets you at every turn 
 as a mere connective between words (Jo. 3:22), at the beginning 
 of clauses (9:39), equal to and yet (3:19), in the sense of also 
 (10:16). For ouT€ . . . . KatsceJo. 4:11. Another use equivalent 
 to even is found elsewhere (Lu. 10:17). The koI iyevero so common 
 in Luke (over fifty times) does look like the Hebrew, but the 
 papyri have it also. The N. T. has four constructions with Kal iyevtro, 
 one is koI iyevcro Kai (Lu. 5:17), another is koX iyevcro and the verb 
 (1:23) another in Kai lyevero Kai iBov (24:4), and the last is the 
 infinitive (Mk. 2:23). So also eyeVcToSe (Lu. 6:1). In Kal iyivero Kat, 
 the second Kat' is almost like on. Ae (Jo. 11 :4) and dAAa (2 Cor. 
 7:11) are both in themselves co-ordinating conjunctions. For 
 K€u . . . . Kat see Jo. 6:36. For Kat yap see Jo. 4:23. In INIatt. 
 26:15 Kat (Kayw .... Tra/aaSwo-o)) almost has the force of Xva. Kat 
 can be used any number of times. See IMatt. 18:25. The para- 
 tactic conjunctions are not always used. Cf. 2 Tim. 3:2 f. (Asyn- 
 deton). Cf. 1 Cor. 15:42-44. 
 
 4. Contrast is expressed by several conjunctions in frequent use. 
 ^ is used fairly often both singly and doubly (^ — rj) as Matt. 5:17; 
 6:24. So also arc, only in Paul's Epistles (common) and twice in 
 1 Peter. See 1 Cor. 3:22. 8e is not so frequent as a transitional 
 conjunction between sentences as it was in the earlier Greek. This 
 is due to the wide use of Kat and to the frequent absence of trans- 
 itional conjunctions in the New Testament. Still Se occurs very 
 often and both as a slight mark of transition and as a rather strong 
 adversative conjunction, depending altogether on the context. See 
 1 Cor. 15:12, 20. Cf. cyw Se (Matt. 5:28). For Kal hi sec Jo.6:51. 
 dXXa docs not in itself mean contrast any more than Se, but is so 
 used in appropriate contexts (Jo. 6:32). For use in mere pro- 
 gres.sivc statement see 2 Cor. 7:11. For aXKa in conclusion of a 
 condition see Rom. 6:5. For dA\' ^ see 2 Cor. 1:13. fx.i]v occurs 
 only once (Ilcb. 6:14) and that in a quotation from the Septua- 
 gint. o/xws occurs only three times (John 12:42). 
 
 5. Disjunctive conjunctions are ^ and citc. In Matt. 12:33 we 
 have ri . . . . rj^ but in Lu. 20 :1 only one rj. For tJtoi . . . . ^ see 
 (Rom. 6:16). Green (Handbook of N. T. Greek Grammar, p. 345) 
 
CLAUSES. CONJUNCTIONS. 149 
 
 cites Kttt in INIatt. 21:23 as practically disjunctive. Cf. Heb. vav. 
 For r) Kai see Rom. 4 :9. For cire .... tire see Rom. 12 :6-8. Neg- 
 ative disjunctives are frequent. 80 ovk .... ovM (Acts 8:21) 
 ovSe .... ovSe (Rev. 9:4), ovtc .... ovre (Rom. 8:38), ovBe . . . . 
 oire (Gal. 1:12), /xrj . . . . ixrjSe (Jo. 4:15), fi-qBi. . . . ,i7;8e (Matt. 
 10:10). We even have ovre .... Kac' (Jo. 4:11). 
 
 6. Inferential conjunctions serve also to mark the transition 
 from sentence to sentence as well as from clause to clause. The 
 Greeks carried the idea of inner relation often to all the sentences. 
 So close did they feel the bond of connected thought to be. apa (from 
 apapt<TK<a) is uscd fairly often and is usually prejiositive in the New 
 Testament, especially with oZv (Matt. 12:28; Eph. 2:19). ovv is 
 very common in the GosjdcI of John (not Epistles and Revelation) 
 and moderately so elsewhere. It is used in both the transitional 
 and illative senses (John 2:18; Matt. 3:10). apa ovv is common in 
 Paul as Rom. 8:12. yap (ye+apa) is very common indeed in 
 various resultant senses (explanation, argument, etc.) due to its 
 compound etymology, and the various connections in which it 
 occurs. See Acts 8:31; Matt. 1:21; Rom. 2:1; 16:19. Cf. roiyapovv 
 (Heb. 12:1), and TotVw (Lu. 20:25). The Greek like the Latin 
 uses the relative like a conjunction and begins a sentence thus. 
 So ^vff £v (Lu. 12:3), Sio (Rom. 1:24), etc. Cf. wore Matt. 19:6. 
 
 7. But the Greek is particularly rich in subordinating conjunc- 
 tions which introduce dependent clauses. Thus a number of 
 dependent clauses may he grouped around one independent clause, 
 the whole being a highly organized method of speech. The Sans- 
 krit and the Hebrew are both poor in these subordinating con- 
 junctions. But Greek is like Latin and English in this respect. 
 These conjunctions will be discussed in detail in connection with 
 the special forms of sentence that they give rise to. Here a few 
 only are mentioned en bloc, on is freely used both in direct quo- 
 tations (Matt. 4:6), indirect quotations (Matt. 2:16), and in causal 
 sentences (Lu. 6:20). So with m in comparative clauses, temporal 
 clauses, indirect discourse (how, not "that"). See Lu. 24:6; 
 Rom. 15:24 (ws av). ore and orav are used hundreds of times, 
 67roT€ not at all (WH.), eTret (Heb. 9:26; 10:2; Rom. 3:6) and 
 
150 A SHORT GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 cttciSj; seldom, i^vtKa twicc, eo-Tc not at all, tots often, fiixP'- '-^^^^ °^XP* 
 seldom, ovov common, ov fairly so, odtv moderately often. But the 
 time would fail to tell of all the Greek conjunctions in this space. 
 This list added to those already discussed in subordinate clauses, 
 will give some idea of New Testament usage. 
 
 8. Modes, tenses, and voices mean the same thing in both sub- 
 ordinate and independent clauses. The root idea of mode and 
 tense is always discernible. Each will be colored by the meaning 
 of the verb itself and the context, but here again the resultant idea 
 of all these must not be jjut upon the mode. The Greek is a 
 highly organized language with a rich collection of conjunctions, 
 both co-ordinating and subordinating. It is thus possil )le in Greek, 
 by means of the sharp distinction in tense, mode, and conjunction 
 to make yery exact distinctions in the expression of Greek thought. 
 The imperative is naturally used seldom in subordinate clauses, 
 and in the New Testament very seldom. Note <5 avricrT-qTf. (1 Pet. 
 5:9), £is Tjv a-TTJTc in 1 Pet. 5:12, and i va . . . . Kavxd(T$<a (1 Cor. 1:31). 
 The point to insist on is that the subordinating conjunctions do 
 not change the root ideas in mode, voice, and tense. In Matt. 
 9:31 (6paT€ fir]8eU yivwo-KCTw) two imperatives come together. In 
 1 Cor. 1:31 Kavxdcrdu} after ha is due to the quotation. 
 
 9. The two kinds of statement natural to subordinate clauses 
 are positive assertion and doubting assertion. The indicative, of 
 course, is used for the one, and the subjunctive . and the optative 
 for the other. In the New Testament the subjunctive is nearly 
 always used for the second idea. The infinitive and participle are 
 also freely used in subordinate clauses, not with conjunctions, 
 however, as they are not really modes. Often an idea in Greek 
 can be expressed with substantial identity either by a conjunction 
 and a finite mode, or by the infinitive with or without a prei)Osi- 
 tion, or by the participle. Individual style and taste will often 
 determine between them as well as between several conjunctions of 
 similar import. All subordinate clauses maintain a case relation 
 to tlie principal part of the sentence, and so are either substantive, 
 adjective, or adverbial. See Matt. 9:28 where the clause with on 
 is in the accusative case and is substantive. The relative clause is 
 
CLAUSES. CONJUNCTIONS. 151 
 
 an adjective clause (Lii. 1:26) as the temjioral clause is an adverbial 
 clause (Lu. 1:23). 
 
 10. So close did the Greeks feel the connection of thought to be 
 that independent sentences were often, almost usually in the more 
 careful writers, joined together by some of the co-ordinating con- 
 junctions or intensive jDarticles. In Plato or Demosthenes such 
 sentences and even paragraphs are thrown into relief or relation to 
 
 each other by 8e, /cai, oAAa, re, ovSe, yap, ovv, apa, y, S77, etc. As 
 
 mentioned above even relative jjronouns (cf. 66ev Heb. 8:3) with 
 prepositions were so used as iv oU, ov x^pi-v (Lu. 7:47), Si ^v airtav 
 (2 Tim. 1:12), etc. But in the New Testament this inner bond is 
 not so constantly preserved. In Romans, for instance, where the 
 line of thought is close, Paul constantly follows the ancient idiom. 
 But in the Gospels frequent breaks occur as in Jo. 13:21,22,23,24, 
 25, but in 26 we find ow. Kat is perhaps rather more frequently 
 used at the beginning of sentences than in the earlier Greek. Cf. 
 Jo. 13:27. 
 
CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 FINAL CLAUSES. 
 
 1. Pure final clauses are adverbial, and are in fact in the accus- 
 ative case (general reference). Compare the adverb Swpcav. Here 
 there is design, something aimed at, finis, end, aim. 
 
 2. In the New Testament the i:>ure final particles are Tva, otto?, 
 firj. 0)5 occurs once (Acts 20 :24) according to some documents. 
 So Westcott and Hort. im is far the most common particle of 
 design and is used chiefly with the subjunctive, but often with the 
 future indicative, and even a few times with the present indicative. 
 Seek the force of mode, voice, and tense in each instance. As 
 illustrations of these particles take ]\Ik. 9:9 (tva fxySevl SLrjyT^a-wvToi) ; 
 Lu. 6:34 (tva dn-oXa/3woriv); 20:10 (tva Swa-Qvaiv); 1 Jo. 5:20 (Tva 
 yivwo-Ko/i-ev) . In the case of ottw? only the subjunctive is used in the 
 text of WH except once (Rom. ?>'A with av), and usually without 
 av as in Matt. 6:2 (oirws 8o|ucr^a»o-tv) , negative ftij (Matt. 6:18, oTrtus 
 fir] (JHLvrj^), but occasionally with av as in Luke 2:35 (ottojs dv 
 tt7roKaA.v<^^a»o-iv). The old classic construction of ottws and the future 
 indicative Avith verbs of effort has disappeared in the New Testa- 
 ment. In Rom. 3 :4 ottcos vucrja-ci's is from the LXX. "Ottws in Lu. 
 24 :20 (oTTws Tra/jcSwKav) is relative merely and not final, fiy, nrjTroTe^ 
 and /xi^TTws are used for pure design and so adverbial. The sub- 
 junctive or future indicative can be used. So Mk. 13-36 (/xiy ivpy); 
 14:2 (^fLrJTTOTe €o-Tai); 1 Cor. 9:27 (/xt^ttws yevwfjuai). firJTTws is also used 
 witli the aorist indicative to express a design about a past event. 
 So Gal. 2:2 (/niyTTws fSpafjiov) and 1 Thess. 3:5 (/xi/ttods cTrtt/aao-cv). 
 In 2 Tim. 2 :25 W H have in the text /mt/ttotc Sw)/ (opt.) after ]»rim- 
 ary tense. 
 
 3. iva is not always strictly final. It is in tlie New Testament 
 very often non-final, not rcsidt, but not yrt 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 /xiy. The possible 
 optative in Eph. 1:17 (Sw??) is not pure design. Both here and in 
 2 Tim. 2:25 the optative in text of WH is after primary tense. It 
 may seem strange that this non-final or sub-final use of Tm 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. "Ottw? is 
 also sometimes employed in the non-final and substantive sense. 
 The same thing is also true of /u-i;, ix-rjirore, /t^Trw?, especially after 
 verbs of beseeching, striving, fearing, etc. , and in the accusative. 
 /U.1; in the best documents is found only with the subjunctive in 
 New Testament, as Acts 27:17 (/u,^ eKTreVwo-iv) . fxyjiroTc is little used 
 in this sense, but is found with subjunctive and future indicative 
 as in Heb. 4:1 (^/xrJTroTe SoKrj) ; 3:12 (jinyTroTe eo-rat). ttotI has lost 
 its temporal idea and means "perchance." /jt-rj-n-m is used with the 
 subjunctive as 1 Cor. 8:9 (/at^ttws ytn/rai). If the fear or caution 
 is about a present or past event, the indicative is used with /u-i^ttws. 
 So Gal. 4:11 (/Ai^TTtos K^KoiriaKa) . With the infinitive ^o;8ov/xat means 
 to hesitate (Matt. 2 :22, i<f>o^yer) d-rreXedv). In Lu. 19 :21 we have 
 oTt . . . . et after l^ofiovix-qv (T€, Here are further examples of iva 
 with the non-final idea: Mk. 8:22 (iva d\pr}Tai after TrapaKaXoCo-iv) ; 
 Matt. 18:6 {avix^ipu Iva Kpcfiaadrj) ] Mk. 9:30 (^ovK rjOtktv Iva Tts yvdi) ) 
 Jo. 15:12 f. (i'm dyaTrare in apposition with IvtoXtj^ Iva Ofj in apposi- 
 tion with TavTY]^). A peculiar use of iva with the imperative in 
 1 Cor. 1 :31 (tva Kav)(a(T$w) is due to the direct quotation without 
 change of form. John's Gospel has tva 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 
 Testament besides conjunctions. The infinitive is very commonly 
 used for this purpose and never expresses mere result, not even 
 Rom. 7:3 (tou ft^ eimi); either by itself as accusative of general 
 reference, INIark 2:17 (/caXeWi) ; or with the very common tov (geni- 
 tive of the article, and not our English to) as Matt. 2:13 {tov drro- 
 
154 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 \iaai) ; or 'with d<; to (often in Pniil), as Rom. 1:11 (eis to (TTrjpixdyj- 
 vai); or Avitli tt/sos to (common in Luke and Paul), as Malt. 23:5 
 Trpos TO 6(.a6rjvai) ; or with a)<7T£ as Matt. 21:24; (wo-Tt TrXavocr^ai) ; or 
 
 with ws (twice only), as Heb. 7:9 (ws tiros ctTreTv). Moreover, the 
 relative with the future indicative, INIark 1:2 (os KaTua-Kcvdaa) or 
 the subjunctive, Heb. 8:3 (o irpoacviyKrj) , can be used to indicate 
 design. A few examples of the future participle also occur, as 
 
 Acts 8:27 (^Trpoa-Kwrjawv^ . 
 
 5. Sometimes the principal verb is not expressed and the con- 
 text must supply the leading idea as only the dependent clause is 
 given. This is natural in abrupt speech. So Mk. 5:23 (tm eVi^s); 
 Matt. 20:32 (tm avotywaiv); Eph. 4:29 (iva SuJ). 
 
 6. Then again Iva itself is not used in what is like a non-final 
 clause. However these examples can be otherwise and more 
 properly explained than by the ellipsis of iva. Each verb may be 
 independent and the subjunctive merely the hortatory subjunctive 
 or a question of doubt. So Lu. 6:42 (acjbes iK/SdXuy; compare the 
 modern Greek as and subjunctive regularly) ; Jo. 18 :39 (fiovXtaOc 
 awoXva-o)) 'y Mk. 14:12 (6eA.cis kTOLfidcroiixtv) . 
 
CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 CLAUSES OF EESULT. 
 
 1. Consecutive clauses had a meager development in Greek as 
 compared with Latin and modern English. After all result was 
 once design and design may be contemplated result. So ut in 
 Latin serves both purposes. Blass (Grammar of N. T. Greek, p. 
 272) thinks that Iva came to be so used in the New Testament. 
 But to this we demur. 
 
 2. In the ancient Greek the consecutive idea was expressed by 
 wcTTc and the indicative when it was regarded as actually accom- 
 plished. There are only two examples of this use of wo-tc in the 
 New Testament, John 3:16 (wo-tc ISwkcv), and Gal. 2:13 (<S<tt€ o-wa- 
 TT-qx^fi)' The indicative suits these two cases exactly. 
 
 3. But in the New Testament the infinitive with Sya-re. is very 
 common, not merely in the sense of design, the old usage (Luke 
 4:29, miTf. KaTaKprjixvia-ai) , but also of actual result (Mark 4:37 wo-tc 
 yefxi^eaOai) . Cf. Matt. 13:32 (wo-re ikOelv). This latter is indeed 
 the usual construction of wo-tc in the New Testament, some forty- 
 five examples in all. 
 
 4. The word wore is also used at the beginning of sentences with 
 the indicative, the subjunctive, or even the imperative. But here 
 it has no effect on the construction at all and is not a consecutive 
 particle, but an inferential conjunction. See Mk. 2 :28 (oJo-tc eo-TiV) ; 
 1 Cor. 5:8 (wo-tc iopTa4(j}fX€v) ; 1 Cor. 10:12 (wo-tc /SAeircTw). 
 
 5. The origin of wo-tc is very simple, m and re. m was originally 
 a demonstrative (ws in Homer) and then a relative. It is not 
 always easy to decide which wo-re is with the infinitive, demonstra- 
 tive, or relative, nor does it greatly matter in actual usage. 
 
 6. Perhaps a word more is needed to observe that not only is 
 tva not used in the strict consecutive sense, but the infinitive is not 
 
156 A SHORT GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 SO used except witli wore. No true example of rov and the infini- 
 tive in this sense exists in the New Testament, nor of tU to and 
 infinitive, not to mention tt/jos to and the infinitive. See on the 
 other side Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 157. 
 
 7. 'E<^' <St£ (on condition tliat) does not appear in the New Tes- 
 tament at all nor ws tc after rj. Blass (Gr. of N. T. GL, p. 224) 
 thinks that Iva in Gal. 2:9 is practically equal to c<^' tore. 
 
 8. In Heb. 3:11; 4:3 is is considered consecutive by some 
 scholars (so), but ''as" is probably correct. 
 
 9. In Matt. 8:27 oti is practically a resultant conjunction after 
 ovTOs. Cf. qui in Latin. IXoraTrds eo-Ttv ovros oti /cat ol avt/xot kol ^ 
 6dXa(T(Ta auTo) vTraKovovmv] cf. also Lu. 8:25. This is much like 
 
 OVTtOS U)CrT€. 
 
 10. Burton (iV. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 124) 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 
 Rpm. 8 : 32 OS ye with e^ao-aTo 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 (cjSovXi/^i; for deliberate choice) and Matt. 2:18 (^^eXev 
 for inclination). It is how the New Testament Greek expresses a 
 wish that we have to consider. 
 
 2. The old Greek usage of dOt and d yap has vanished. Instead 
 is found 6<f>t\ov (w^cAov without augment) used as a particle like 
 utinam in Latin. Cf. already a<^€s with subjunctive above. 
 
 3. So then a wish about the past is put in the aorist indicative 
 
 with o^cAov as in 1 Cor. 4 :8 (o<j>eXov ifiaa-iXcva-aTe). 
 
 4. A wish about the present is expressed by the imperfect 
 indicative and 6<f>eXov. So Rev. 3:15 (o(}icXov ^s). Cf. also 2 Cor. 
 11 :1. In Rev. 3 :15 some MSS. actually have o^eAov ei?;?. 
 
 5. A wish about the future may also be expressed by o^eXov and 
 the future indicative as we have it once in Gal. 5:12 (ocft^Xov (xtto- 
 Koif/ovTai). 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 (itrj), usually the aorist as in 1 Thess. 5:28 (dytacrai). The 
 commonest wish of this kind is firj yevoLTo (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 {fxr}K€Tt <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 (dva^e/m taroi). 
 
 7. In Acts 26:29 (eiiaifx-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 
 polite and courteous way of saying a difficult thing. It is just the 
 
158 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 imperfect without av with no suggestion of a condition at all. The 
 present indicative would be too blunt. So ifiovXofx-qv (Acts 25:22), 
 rjdtXov (Gal. 4:20), rjvxofirjv (Rom. 9:3). As examples of ^tXwtake 
 Matt. 20:14; Rom. 1 :13, and of jSovXofuu 1 Tim. 2:8. 
 
CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 CAUSAL SENTENCES. 
 
 1. The common particle yap is used in co-ordinate, not subor- 
 dinate, clauses. In sense it is often causal, but it is not considered 
 a causal conjunction in the formal usage. 
 
 2. The usual causal conjunction is on and in some writers 
 (James, 1 Pet., Heb.) Sion. The subjunctive mode is not used 
 nor the optative. The indicative has its usual force. The nega- 
 tive is always ov as in 1 Jo. 5 :10 (on oi TreirLo-TtvKev) except in one 
 instance (Jo. 3 :18) where the construction is closely parallel to the 
 above (on fxij TrcTn'o-TevKev). The distinction is exactly that between 
 ov and firj and it is a real one. Sometimes the causal connection is 
 not very close and not very different from yap. Cf. 1 Cor. 10:17 
 (both on and yap) and Rom. 1:21 (Sto'n). For a closer link see 
 1 Cor. 11 :2 (5n) and Lu. 1:13 (Ston). 
 
 3. 'Eird, cTretST;, and e7reiS?;7r€p are all found in the New Testa- 
 ment. But cTreiSi^Trep appears only in Luke' s classical introduction 
 to his Gospel (1 :1), while iiraBy is found some nine times in this 
 sense (1 Cor. 1 :22, iTruBrj alrovatv). 'E-rruis still more frequent in 
 the usual causal sense (as Heb. 5:2, ciret ireptKcirat) . The classical 
 usage of an ellipsis with i-n-eC persists in the New Testament also 
 where €7ret=since if that were true. So Heb. 9 :26 (cTret cSei); 10:2 
 (cTret ovK av i-n-avcravTo) . Once the negative with iiretis ix.rj as in Heb. 
 
 9 :17 (cTTCt fir] TOT€ icr;^m). 
 
 4. In Matt. 25:40,45 i(f>' oa-ov is causal, e^' ocroi' iiron^a-aTe. Note 
 also Ktt^' ocTov in Heb. 7 :20. 
 
 5. Ka^o'n, tliough a comparative particle as in Acts 4:35 (xa^on 
 av ttx^v), is yet in Luke used also as a causal conjunction. So Lu. 
 19:9 (/ca^o'n ia-TLv). In Heb. (as odev uxjiuXev, 3:1) 69cv occurs 
 some half dozen times. 
 
160 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 6. The infinitive witli Sta is often used in the New Testament to 
 express a reason. See Luke 2:4 (8ta to c'voi). Cf. Mk. 5:4. In 
 Jo. 2 :24 we have Sta to and oti in verse 25. 
 
 7. The jDarticiple likewise is used where the causal idea is im- 
 plied. So ]\Iatt. 1:19 (StWos wv). Usually in such cases the par- 
 ticle is is added to give the alleged reason, which may or may 
 not be the true one. So Lu. 16:1 (ws Stao-Ko/jTn'^wv); Acts 27:30 
 
 (d)s /u.eXXovT(ov) . So also wa-TTcp in Acts 2 :2 (Sicnrtp (^tpofievrfi) . 
 
 8. The relative pronoun may imply a cause. So Heb. 12:6 
 
 (ov TTapahi^erai) . So often oo-Tis aS in Matt. 7:15 (omves tp)(pvTaJL)'j 
 Rom. 6:2 (omves). 
 
 9. 'Av^'wv (Lu. 1:20) and Std (Heb. 3:10) ahiiost amount to 
 causal conjunctions. Cf. also ov x^-P'-^} ^t V^ airtav, etc. In Heb. 
 2 :18 €v w is practically causal. 
 
CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 
 
 1. Some general remarks. The Greek conditional sentence is 
 one of the crowning triumphs of syntax. No language has sur- 
 passed it in accuracy of expression. In the modern Greek the loss 
 of the optative is felt, and the system generally has suffered col- 
 lapse, as is the case in modern English. The important things to 
 understand in a Greek condition are the mode and tense. Historical 
 syntax does not justify the modern distinction into general and 
 particular conditions. There are four separate forms for Greek 
 conditions (Winer, Broadus, Blass). They are the condition 
 determined as fulfilled, the condition determined as unfulfilled, 
 the condition undetermined but with prospect of fulfilment, the 
 condition undetermined and with remote prospect of fulfilment. 
 Let us first see the standard forms. Then we can study the varia- 
 tions. 
 
 2. The condition determined as fulfilled. Here any tense of the 
 
 indicative is used in the condition, and any tense of the indicative 
 
 in the conclusion. The indicative states the condition as a fact. 
 
 It may or may not be true in fact. The condition has nothing to 
 
 do with that, l^ut only with the statement. It is here that Hadley 
 
 and Allen chiefly err. This condition does assume the reality of 
 
 the condition. Take Matt. 12:27. Christ did not cast out demons 
 
 by Beelzebub, but in argument he assumes it. The indicative 
 
 mode determines the condition as fulfilled, so far as the statement 
 
 is concerned. « is used in the condition clause as a rule, though 
 
 sometimes idv occurs with the present indicative and often with the 
 
 future. In Homer idv (or et kc) 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 
 11 
 
162 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 subjunctive. But this variation is so slight as not to change the 
 essential nature of the condition. This is far the most common 
 condition. It is the natural one to use, unless there is a special 
 reason to .use another. It is the condition taken at its face value 
 without any insinuations or implications. The context, of course, 
 must determine the actual situation. The protasis often comes 
 first. Some representative examples are here given : ^latt. 12 :27 
 (ei iK/3dXXo), cK/SoAAoucrtv) ; 12:28 (ei cK/3aA.\<j, t<^6a(T(.v) ; 26:33 (ct 
 <TKavhaXi(TBi](TOVTai^ aKavSuXLaOrjaofJUXt.^ ; Lu. 4:3 (ei ct, tiTre); 19:40 (eav 
 aioiTn^aovaiv, Kpo^^oucriv) ; Jo. 15",20 (ei eStto^av, Stci^ovcrtv); 18:23 (ci 
 cAoAi^cra, /juupTvpTjaov^ ; Acts 11:17 (ei ISoiKfv, ti's ^fxrjv); 1 Thess. 3:8 
 
 (^oi/i,£v iav urrjKtTt); 1 Cor. 15:16 (ci ovk iytipovrai, lyriytpTai) . These 
 
 examples will exhibit the freedom and variety shown in this most 
 common condition usually termed the condition of the first class. 
 3. The condition determined as unfulfilled. Here only past 
 tenses of the indicative are used with « in the condition and gen- 
 erally av in the conclusion. This condition states the condition as 
 untrue, as contrary to fact. It may be fact, but it is here treated 
 as not fact. Here again it is the statement only that is contrary to 
 reality. Take Luke 7:39 where the Pharisee assumes that Jesus 
 is not a prophet and hence does not know. The indicative mode 
 determines the condition, and as unfulfilled by suggestion. A 
 present matter is looked at from the standpoint of the past (im- 
 perfect indicative) , while a past event is looked at from a remoter 
 standpoint (aorist or past perfect indicative). Sometimes this 
 point of view, together with the context, is sufficient to make clear 
 this condition without av in the conclusion. So Jo. 15 :22 (« pUj 
 riXBov, OVK f.L)(oaav). Note vvv Se following by way of contrast. Cf. 
 also the same construction in verse 24. In j^articular, verbs of 
 fitness, propriety, possibility, and obligation do not need av (not 
 omitted, simply not needed). So Matt. 26:24 (koAov yv ei ovk 
 iyewydrj) ; Acts 26:32 (cSumro ei p-r] cttckocXt^to) . So also the apodosis 
 eSci in Matt. 23:23 and ov KadiJKcv in Acts 22 :22. Usually, however, 
 av is expressed in the conclusion to niake more clear tlie idea of 
 unreality (the definite use of av). Indicative conditions would nat- 
 urally be taken as being of the first class, unless there is something 
 
CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 163 
 
 in the context to show otherwise. The presence of dv in the apo- 
 dosis came to be accepted as hint enough. But, as seen above, 
 this hint was not always considered necessary. The context and 
 common sense were often rehed on as sufficient. It is only in past 
 time, however, that any question arises between conditions of the 
 first and second classes. Both, according to the genius of the 
 indicative, make positive assumptions, one as true, the other as 
 untrue. Neither goes into the actual facts of the case. That, to 
 be sure, has to be left to the nature of the case. Modern Greek 
 has lost this idiom. Cf. English ambiguity. The dv in the apo- 
 dosis cannot begin the clause. The New Testament has a number 
 of clear examples of this form of the condition, that of the second 
 class: Matt. 11:21 (et cyeVovro, TroXat av [xerevorjcrav) ; 23:30 (ei ^[X.e9a, 
 ovK av ^fj.eda); 24 'AS (ci rj8a, iypr]y6pr}(Tev av Kal ovk av ctacrev; observe 
 repetition of dv as in Lu. 17:6); Lu. 7:39 (a ^v, iycvwaKcv dv); 12:39 
 (ct ^Sei, iyprjyoprjcrcv av Kal ovk dcfirJKev; margin in WH. has ovk dv like 
 Matt. 24:43); Jo. 14:28 (et -^yairaTt, ixdprjTC dv); 18:30 (et /xtj rjv 
 TTOiwv, OVK av ■7rapeS(i)Kafxev) ; 19:11 (^ovk etx^s, el /xr] 7]v ScBoixevov); ActS 
 18 :14 (et fxlv Tjv, Kara Xoyov av dveaxofjirjv; and contrast with the next 
 verse, ct Se ia-nv, oij/eaOe); Heb. 11:15 (et ifxvrjixovcvov, €t)(ov dv, this 
 about past time); 1 Jo. 2:19 (et rjcrav, ixf-fxev-qKucrav dv). 
 
 4. The condition undetermined with some expectation that it 
 will be determined. Here the subjunctive is naturally. used in the 
 condition as the more vivid of the two modes of doubtful assertion. 
 eav is used in the condition and sometimes dv or d. The conclu- 
 sion most naturally has the future indicative, but that is not nec- 
 essary. There is considerable variety in the form of the conclu- 
 sion. In point of fact any tense of the indicative, subjunctive, or 
 imperative may be here employed. The use of the optative would 
 make a mixed condition which will be discussed later. It all 
 depends on the idea in the speaker's mind and his point of view. 
 The so-called present general condition really belongs here. The 
 subjunctive mode (undetermined) thus clearly marks it off from 
 the two conditions with the indicative (determined). As can be 
 readily seen, the line of cleavage between this condition and the 
 first condition when it has tlie future indicative is not very sharply 
 
164 A SHOUT (iHAMMAK oF THE OUKEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 drawn. Goodwin indeed rubs it out entirely. But it is best not 
 to do that. The difference, as already remarked, between the 
 subjunctive and the future indicative is not great, though it is real. 
 Sometimes, though not often, idv is contracted into dv after the 
 fashion of the older Greek. So in Jo. 16:23 (dv n ulTrja-qTt, Swau). 
 Further examples follow of the third class condition: Matt. 5:13 
 (eav [loipavOfj^ aKi(T9rj(TtTai) ; 18:13 (eav yevrjrai, Xcyw); 18:15 (cov 
 oKova-rj^ iK€pSr]a-a<i) ; Mk. 3:24 (iav ficpLa&rj, ov SvvaTtu); Lu. 9:13 (owe 
 ci<n'v, £1 fj.-^ Ti ayopdawfxtv) ; Jo. 7:17 (tav OiXr], yvdxTiTai) ; 7:37 (eav 
 Sm/'u, ip^^eaOui); 8:51 (eav Trjp-qarjj ov p.Tj Ocdiprjcrr]^ j 12:32 (dv vtpo)6<a, 
 €\KV(rw); 13:17 (ci TttOra otSare, fJuuKapioi icrre idvTroLrJTcavTdj note both 
 
 conditions and the distinction); Acts 5:38 (eav rj, KaraXvOrjatTax; 
 contrast with el iariv, ov Svvrja-caOe in the next verse); 1 Cor. 7 :28 
 
 (cav yi?/u.>7S, ov)( rjpxipTi<i); 2 Cor. 5:1 (idv KaTokvOrj^ l^'^p.ev). So also 
 
 compare et rts kuAci (1 Cor. 10:27) with Idv ns cittj; (1 Cor. 10:28); 
 Phil. 3:12 (d KUTttXaySo)). In Mk. 10:30 Idv fir] Xd/3rj is unusual 
 after ovBeU os. See Jo. 5 :19 for two uses of dv. 
 
 5. The condition is undetermined and with no indication as to 
 determination. Naturally the optative is here used as the least 
 viyid of the two modes of doubtful statement. Note also the op- 
 tative in both condition and conclusion. Both of the undeter- 
 mined conditions are thus marked off by mode (subjunctive and 
 optative) from the two determined conditions (indicative mode). 
 et is used in the condition and av in the conclusion (less definite 
 use of dv). In English translation it is difficult to distinguish this 
 form of condition from the second class condition as described 
 above (under 3). But the two conditions differ radically in Greek 
 after Homer's time. In the New Testament no whole example of 
 this class of conditions occurs. We have the condition or the con- 
 clusion, but not both at the same time. Already, then, this con- 
 dition was beginning to break down. In modern Greek it is gone. 
 The so-called past general supposition belonged here with a mixed 
 conclusion. But this construction is not in the New Testament. 
 All that we have left then in the New Testament are some })rotases 
 by themselves and some apodoses by themselves. The optative is 
 also found in a mixed condition like Acts 8:31 (ttw? ydp dv Svvaifirp> 
 
CONDITIONAL PKNTENCES. 165 
 
 iav fi-q Ti9 bhr)yi](Tu fxe) . This condition was even quite common in 
 literary Greek, as it lent itself readily to polite expression. But it 
 never had a firm hold on the popular tongue. The other three 
 conditions really answer for ordinary use, though without this 
 precise shade of thought. Here are a few New Testament speci- 
 mens of the fourth class condition: Acts 24:19 is a mixed con- 
 dition like Acts 8:31, but not of the same kind (ous eSei iirl a-ov 
 irapuvai Koi Kar-qyoptiv^ et Ti (.\oifV irpos fie). In Acts 27:39 (ci SwaivTo) 
 there is a touch of indirect discourse like Acts 17:27 (ei apa ye i(/r]- 
 Xa^iyo-eiav) . See also Acts 17:18 (rt av deXoi) an apodosis of the 
 fourth class with which compare Lu. 9 :46 (to tl<s av eitj) which is 
 not due to indirect discourse. In Acts 26:29 {f.v^aip.rjv av) the 
 usual apodosis appears. The protasis is found in 1 Pet. 3:14 (et koX 
 7ra(TxoiTc), 3:17 (« OiXoi), and 1 Cor. 15:37 (eiri^ot). 
 
 6. Mixed conditions. In a language as flexible as the Greek 
 it could not be expected that everything should remain hard and 
 fast. The variations in the structure of conditional sentences are 
 not even all of them peculiar to the Greek genius. Many of them 
 belong to the play of the human mind. It is obviously natural 
 for one point of view to be occupied in the condition and another 
 in the conclusion (1 Cor. 7:28, eav yi^V;?', ov;;^ ^youxpres) . This leads 
 to what are called mixed conditions. The grammatical construc- 
 tion is merely accommodated, as always, to the mental conception. 
 All that is involved in a mixed condition is that one form is used 
 in the protasis and another in the conclusion. In the development 
 of the four normal classes of conditions, it would be strange if some 
 interplay 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 (ct 1(tt(.^ iiroulTc). A clear case of this is found 
 in Lu. 17:6 (ei ^X^re, eXeyere av). 
 
 7. The participle may be used instead of a fully expressed con- 
 
166 A SHOUT (UlAMMAR OF THE GREEK KEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 dition. Tlic i-)articiple docs noi in itself mean condition, l>\it it 
 
 may SUg2;CSt it. So Lu. 19 :23 (Kuyw iXOiov avv tokw uv avrb eirpa^a). 
 
 Here a conclusion of the second class is expressed and the parti- 
 ciple conceals or implies the condition. So also \a/xfiav6iJ.cvov (1 Tim. 
 4:4) suggests a condition of either the first or the third class. 
 
 8. Elliptical conditions. An incomplete condition is really a 
 species of ellipsis, or even aposiopesis, and is common to all lan- 
 guages. So Acts 26:29 (eviaifx-qv av, only apodosis) ; 23:9 (d iXdXr]- 
 a-ev, only protasis). Thus is to be explained also the abrupt use 
 of et (comjiare Hebrew 'tm) in solemn oaths or other strong ex- 
 pressions and questions. So Mk. 8:12 (ei So^T^o-erat) ; Heb. 3:11 
 (ct eXewovrai) . Here et does not mean "not" though that is the 
 resultant idea. It is an ellii^se also when ei is used in direct ques- 
 tions as in Lu. 13:23 (a oAt'yot ol crco^o/nei/oi) . Cf. also Lulce 22:49. 
 The omission of the verb is a common ellipsis as in Rom. 8:17 
 (ci Sc TtKva). So also the New Testament uses various expressions 
 without the verb as ct firj (Matt. 5:13); el Se fii^ (^ixrjye.) . as Mark 
 2:22; d ix-q rt av (1 Cor. 7:5); even eVros d i4 (1 Tim. 5:19) ; wo-et 
 (Matt. 3 :16) ; once wo-Trepet (1 Cor. 15 :8) ; and once etTrep (Rom. 3:30). 
 Here of course the verb of the condition is not expressed; but 
 even when it is a set phrase, it is still a condition. See John 14:2, 
 where the conclusion occurs {Cnrov av). "With lird there is some- 
 times a suppressed condition, the apodosis being expressed. So 
 I8ci in Heb. 9:26 and om av eTravVavro (10:2). 
 
 9. A kind of condition worth noticing is one where the influ- 
 ence of indirect discourse is felt. So Rom. 1 :10 (et ttws evoSw^j/o-- 
 ofwx)] Acts 20:16 (et d-t])- 27:39 (et Swaivro). With verbs of wonder 
 as in Mark 15:44 {d TtOvrjKev) we meet the same phenomenon. In 
 the same passage in ]\Iark observe also et a-rrWavev (difference in 
 tense) . 
 
 10. Concessive clauses are nothing but conditional sentences. 
 Kai before et or idv has the force of even, and the condition would 
 be ''even if." This construction is not common in the New Testa- 
 ment. See John 8:16 (kui iav k/jiVcd). In et Kut' or eav Kat' tlie koi 
 seems more nearly to have the idea of ' 'also;" ' 'if also' ' then would 
 be a concession not so extreme as "even if." So 2 Cor. 7:8 (d kuI 
 
CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 167 
 
 iXvTnjaa). Kaiirtp occurs oiiiy five times in the New Testament and 
 with the participle each time. But Justin Martyr has KatVtp o^et'- 
 Xere in the First Apology. In Luke 12 :38 we find kov . . . . kSv. 
 So Heb. 5:8 (/caiVe/a wv). The correct text of Rev. 17:8 (jrapivrax) 
 removes the old KatVc/o and the indicative. 
 
 11. The negative of the condition clause with the subjunctive is 
 always fnq (Lu. 13:3). With the indicative, however, either /u-iy or 
 ov is used, but not in the same sense, /xi; negatives rather the 
 condition itself and in the New Testament the conclusion is nearly 
 always negative also. So John 18:30 (et /a^ rjv). "When ov is used 
 in the condition, the negative is quite emijhatic or there is antithesis 
 or a single word is negatived. So Lu. 18:4 (ei ov <fio(3oviJuit) ; Jo. 1:25 
 (et ovK el); 5:47 (ei ov TricTTeueTe) ; 10:37 (et ov Trotoi, with which com- 
 pare €1 TToiw just below and kolv /xij ina-Tcvrft) . In Matt. 26 :42 both 
 ov and fjii] occur in the same sentence (et ov Swarai tovto TrapeXOdv 
 iav fir] TTLw). In 1 Cor. 9:2 et ov does not mean precisely what et /iiy 
 would. 
 
CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 RELATIVE CLAUSES. 
 
 1 . The relative i^ronoun relates two clauses by connecting a word 
 in one clause with one in another. CompareChai)tcrXIII,l IJor 
 brief discussion of the function of the relative pronoun. The rela- 
 tive pronoun not only obviates the repetition of the noun, but 
 binds together two clauses into one sentence. 
 
 2. There are two kinds of relative clauses, the aajectival and the 
 adverbial, Just as there are two kinds of relative pronouns. Compare 
 OS and ws. Every relative clause is therefore either an adjective or 
 an adverb. But like other adjectives the relative clause may be 
 used as a substantive. Cf. Jo. 11:3. 
 
 3. The relative adverbs may be either local as onov, comparative 
 like ws, temporal as ore, final as ottw^, causal or objective as on. 
 Just as adjectives are sometimes used as substantives like to dya^oV, 
 so oTi in indirect discourse introduces an object clause. Compare 
 quod in Latin and even quia in late Latin like the Vulgate. It is 
 therefore by means of the relative that Greek and Latin become so 
 rich in subordinate clauses as compared with the Sanskrit, for 
 instance. 
 
 4. The mode in the relative clause has just the same force that 
 it has in the independent clause. As a matter of fact in the ad- 
 jectival relative clauses only the indicative and subjunctive are used 
 in the New Testament. Take as illustrations os ovk aKoXovOd -tjixtv 
 (Mk. 9:38) and St* T;s XaTpcvwfiev (Heb. 12:28). It is not the rela- 
 tive clause that rc'(}uires in itself either the indicative or subjunc- 
 tive. 
 
 5. The relative jjronoun may l)e either definite or indefinite as 
 is well illustrated by octtis freely used in the New Testament in the 
 nominative either as more dclinitc than os (yns ovk d<f>aip€.6i](TcTai 
 
RELATIVE CLAUSES 169 
 
 avTrj<;, Lu. 10:42) or less definite than os (oo-rts a-l pa7rt^«, Matt. 
 5:39). So then the indicative, the mode of clear cut statement, 
 may be used eitlier with the definite or tlie indefinite relative. So 
 likewise with the subjunctive the mode of doubtful assertion. 
 Instance SC ^s AaTpevw/xev (Heb. 12 :28) and oo-tk yap oXov tov vo/xop 
 rrjprjar} (JameS 2:10). Cf. OTTOV . . . . <^aya> (Lu. 22:11). With 
 o -rrpoaeveyKr] (Heb. 8:3) Compare o irpocT^ipu (Heb. 9:7). This sub- 
 junctive is in a clause of design. 
 
 6. The grammars commonly speak of the conditional relative 
 sentence, but I doul)t the justice of this expression. It is true 
 indeed that oo-rts and ems do not differ greatly in idea. Cf. varia- 
 tions in MSS. on Mk. 8:34 between oo-n? and etrts. But after all there 
 is a subtle difference in structure just as between the English "if 
 any one" and "whoever." Technically one is conditional and the 
 other is relative. It is syntactical confusion to blend them just as 
 it would be to call 6 Xapfidvwv (John 13:20) the same thing as os 
 XapfSdveL. Hence av TLva Tr€p\l/(o (.Jo. 13:20) is a conditional clause, 
 but OS 8' av diroXiau (^Ik. 8 :3o) is a relative clause. The indefinite 
 relative clause whether with indicative or subjunctive is much kin. 
 in idea to the conditional sentence, but formally it is still the rela- 
 tive sentence. There is no ' 'if ' in the Greek clause any more than 
 in the English. The use of av with os and the future indicative 
 (cf. Lu. 12:8) is indeed like lav and the future indicative. 
 
 7. The use of av in the relative clause does not make it a condi- 
 tion. The use of dv indeed is much like that of the relative oo-ns. 
 It has the effect of making the clause more definite as (cf. orav 
 TjvoL^ev, Rev. 8:1) oo-ot av ^ipavTo (Mk. 6:56), or the clause is ren- 
 dered more indefinite as os av e'lTrr} (Matt. 5:22), So ^ns av p.r] dKovar) 
 (Acts 3:23). The form cav or av is immaterial as os yap cav Oikrj 
 and os S* av dTroXicrrj (^Ik. 8:35). But av is not necessary with the 
 subjunctive in such relative clauses as is seen in James 2:10 (oo-ns 
 rrjprja-rj). Cf. also oorts dpv^a-rjTai (Matt. 10:33). Besides av is very 
 common with the indicative, especially tlie future as os S' av dTroAtVei 
 (]Mk. 8:35), and the past indicative as ottou av da-eTropevero (Mk. 
 6:56) and even the present indicative as ottov av virdyu (Rev. 14:4). 
 Cf. also Lu. 17:33. In Jo. 14:13 see on av, but eav n in 14:14. 
 
.]70 A SHOUT GRAMMAR OF THK GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 8. The negative of the relative clause is [xri with the sul)junctive 
 as OS av fXT] €XV (Lu. 8:18) and usually oi with the indicative as os 
 yap ovK tcTTt KaG" vfiihv (Lu. 9:50). But when the relative is indefi- 
 nite /U.77 may be found as o /x,^ o/xoAoyet (1 Jo. 4:3) and a fx-rj Set 
 (Titus 1:11). In 2 Pet. 1:9 the relative is definite, but the sub- 
 jective negative suits well, cS /j.r} Trapcortv ravra. 
 
 9. Sometimes the relative is nearly equivalent to the Latin qui 
 with the subjunctive (design or result). So a^ids ia-nv <S Trapiiy tovto 
 (Lu. 7:4) is practically result with which Blass (Grammar of K. T. 
 Greek, p. 218) compares a^tos TmAvo-w (Jo. 1 :27). See alsoosKara- 
 o-Ktvacret (Lu. 7:27) as a clause of purpose. Blass also cites (Mk. 
 
 14:14) OTTOV (fidyoi and ovk c^w o irapaOrjcroi (Lu. 11:6) and ovheva t)(0} 
 
 00-Tis ix€pip,vri(Tu (Phil. 2 :20). The classic idiom ovSas eo-rtv os (Mk. 
 10 :29) has no effect on the mode. The subjunctive is used also 
 with such clauses of design as hi ^s AaT/aevw/xev (Heb. 12:28). 
 
 10. "Oo-os, like OS and oorcs, uses either tav (as oaa iav dikrjfrt^ 
 Matt. 7;12) or av (as ova av aiTrjarjrc, Matt. 21 :22). 
 
CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 TEMPORAL CLAUSES. 
 
 1. The New Testament has quite a number of temporal con- 
 junctions such as axpi, iireL, iirdv, eTreiS?;, ea>s, ^vUa, fJ.^XP'-} ottotc, ore, 
 oTttv, TrptV, ws. These will need to be discussed separately for the 
 most part, but they can be grouped for convenience. 
 
 2. One group can be made of axpt, Iw?, ix^xpi, and n-pt'v in the 
 sense of "until," though even here a distinction has to be made 
 and the words can best be treated separately. 
 
 (a) "AxpL (so always in New Testament save twice axP'^, Gal. 
 3:19 and Heb. 3:13) is both a preposition as in axpi Kaipov (Lu. 
 4:13) and less often a conjunction as in axpt TiXea-Orj (Rev. 20:3). 
 The simple conjunction is not so common as is axP'- V^ VH-^P'^'* (^latt. 
 24:38) and axpt ov (Lu. 21 :24). When an actual historical event 
 is recorded, a past tense of the indicative is used as axpt ^s rj^iipa^ 
 il<7^xeev Nw€ (Lu. 17:27) and axpi ol dvc'o-TT; (Acts 7:18). The 
 present indicative can also be used of a present situation as in axpts 
 ov TO a-rjfiepov KoAeiTai (Heb. 3:13). If the matter is still in the 
 future the subjunctive aorist commonly occurs as in a^pt ov 6r} 
 (1 Cor. 15:25) and once with av as in axpLs av eXOrj (Gal. 3:19). 
 But the future indicative can be employed (axpi TeXcaOi^a-ovTai, Rev. 
 17 :17) and once with av (axpt ov av ^^w, Rev. 2:25). 
 
 (b) "Ecos likewise is more common as a preposition (ews tov Xpur- 
 Tov, Matt. 1:17) than as a conjunction. As a conjunction we have 
 €0)s (Matt. 2 :9), ews ov (Matt. 14:22), and Iws otou (5:25). They are 
 all used in substantially the same sense. A past event is expressed 
 by the past indicative as Iws rjXOev (Matt. 24:39), cws ov i^vixwOrj 
 (Matt. 13:33), and €ws otou i<f>(I)vr](rav (Jo. 9:18). Where used 
 about present time Iws has the sense of "while" and not "until." 
 So Itus avTos diroXvti tov o;(Xoj/(Mk. 6 :45) after -^vdyKao-cv with which 
 
172 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 compare tlie Latin dum. This is in truth the meaning of lo)s in 
 ?(DS ipxoiujx (Jo. 21:22f. and 1 Tim. 4:13) where the future is viv- 
 idly drawn into the present or the speaker mentally leaps into the 
 future. Even Iws otov occurs once in this sense, Iws otov d fitravrov 
 iv Trj oSu) (Matt. 5:25). Blass indeed contends for the sense of 
 "until" here also (Grammar of N. T. Greek, p. 219) and even in 
 iv <5 tpxofjun (Lu. 19:13), a rather severe strain on the Greek idiom. 
 For events in the future only the aorist subjunctive seems to be 
 found though in Iws otov aKayf/o) (Lu. 13:8) and Iws ov dmTrt/ii/'w 
 (Acts 25:21) the form is the same in the future indicative. "Av is 
 not used with Iws ov and ew? otov, but is very common with to)^ (as 
 Icos avi8(i}(nv, Lu. 9:27), but not always (ews irpoa-eviwfmi, Mk. 14:32). 
 In Rev. 20 -.oaxpLTeXcaOr} is still future though preceded by €^rj<mv. 
 
 (c) Mcj(/3i is less used both as a preposition (fi^xpi t^s a-q/iepovy 
 Matt. 11:23) and as a conjunction (only three times in reality, 
 Mk. 13:30, Gal. 4:19, Eph. 4:13). Once QEph. 4:13) the form is 
 fi£Xpi and in the other passages we have /Ae^pi? ov. In all three the 
 aorist subjunctive is the construction and without dv. 
 
 (d) UpLv (five times irplv rj as Acts 25:16) appears thirteen times 
 and always with the infinitive save twice in negative sentences. 
 One of these has the su])junctive with av referring to a future event, 
 fi7) Ihtlv OavaTov irplv ^ uv i8y tov H-pLcrrov Kvpiov (Lu. 2:26). The 
 other has the optative with the same idea, but in indirect discourse, 
 irplv ^ . . . . cxoi (Acts 25:16). Both of these idiomatic construc- 
 tions are in the writings of Luke. The rest are like vplv yevto-ftu 
 (Jo. 14:29). 
 
 (e) Akin to irpiv is the use of vpo tov and the infinitive of which 
 there are eight examples in the New Testament. See vpo tov vfxa^ 
 alr^aai aiirov (Matt. 6:8). 
 
 (f) 'Ev <2 comes to be used much like a temporal conjunction 
 with one sense of ews (while). So in ^Ik. 2:19, iv w 6 rv/i^t'o? ficr 
 avTO)v i(TTiv. Cf. also John 5:7 (cv aJ tpxofjmu). 'Ev w may also be 
 local (Itom. 2:1), causal (Rom. vS:3), or instrumental (Rom. 14:21). 
 Cf. Tliay<T. W"\[]\ tliis use of iv «S may be comj)ariMl the very fre- 
 quent use of iv Tw with the infinitive in temporal relations as eV tw 
 iXavveiv (Mk. 6:48). 
 
TEMPORAL CLAUSES. 173 
 
 (g) *A<^* ov calls also for a word of comment. In Lu. 13:7 d(f ov 
 tpxofmt presents no diflficulty, Vnit in 13:25 d</>* ov av iytpOrj reminds 
 one at once of cws and indeed d</>' ov here has the resultant sense of 
 ''when once" (cf. until) and so the construction of Iws when used 
 of future events. 
 
 3. The other constructions may be treated together somewhat 
 loosely. 
 
 (a) 'HviKa is only found twice, both times about the future, once 
 with aj' and the present subjunctive and once with idv and the aorist 
 subjunctive. Both examples appear also in 2 Cor. 3, one in 15 
 
 (^jvoca av avayivwcTKrjTaL) , the other in 16 (lyi/t'/ca cav iTria-Tpcij/r]) . 
 
 (b) "Eirei of itself has nearly vanished as a temporal conjunc- 
 tion in the New Testament ; only once as a marginal reading in 
 WH. (Lu. 7:1). But eVav with the subjunctive is found three 
 times (Matt. 2 :8; Lu. 11 :22,34). So iirhv tip-qrt (Matt. 2:8). The 
 only temporal use of IrrvZri is the text of Lu. 7:1 (cttciS^ lirX-qpoiafv) . 
 
 (c) "WH do not read hiroTi. at all, but some MSS. have it in- 
 stead of oT£ in Lu. 6 :3. 
 
 (d) But oTc and orav are the commonest temporal conjunctions 
 in the New Testament. Perhaps little trouble will be found with 
 OTC which is freely used with any tense of the indicative as ort 
 cTeX«o-£v (Matt. 7:28). 'Orav on the other hand is equally frequent 
 with the subjunctive (usually aorist). So orav rSr;Te (Matt. 24:33) 
 and occasionally the present as orav tlacfiepwcriv (Lu. 12 :11). Occa- 
 sionally also the future indicative is found as orav Swa-ova-iv (Rev. 
 4:9), the aorist indicative as orav oij/e iyevero (Mk. 11:19), the im- 
 perfect indicative as orav avrov idtwpow (Mk, 3:11), and even the 
 present indicative as orav o-tj/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 
 temporal clause (orav ^voiitv). 
 
 (e) 'fis deserves a word also. As a temporal conjunction is 
 commonly has the indicative as ws iTrXrjaOrjaav (Lu. 1:23) and with 
 av as is av ^y€(7^€ (1 Cor. 12:2). But it sometimes appears with 
 the subjunctive as in ws Kaipov l^onixv (Gal. 6:10) where the state- 
 
174 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 nicnt is iiidctinitr, and a few tim<s witli av also as «us av iropevw/jMi 
 (Rom. ir):24j. 
 
 (f) In Matt. 9:15 we have €</>' wrov, in Mk. 2:19 o<tov xp^^^^i i'^ 
 Rom. 7:1 «<^' oa-ov xpovov in the temporal sense, and several other 
 times also. In Heb. 10 :37 oaov oaov is a Hebraism (LXX) though 
 not unlike the papyri examples. 
 
 (g) McTci TO and the infinitive is found a few times with the sense 
 of ''after." So fxcra t6 irapa^drjvai (Mk. 1 :14). 
 
 4. Participles very often occur with the temporal resultant idea. 
 The participle in itself does not express cause, condition, or time, 
 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 airo6vri<TKuiv (Heb. 11 :21). The aorist participle may suggest 
 antecedent action as flirtkduiv (Mk. 1 :21) or simultaneous action as 
 do-Trao-a/xevoi (Acts 25:13). But more of this when we come to the 
 participle. 
 
CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 COMPARATIVE CLAUSES. 
 
 1. These clauses are not always given adequate treatment in the 
 grammars, but the number of conjunctions that are used call for 
 separate discussion. They are chiefly modifications of a few basal 
 forms. 
 
 2. The relative pronoun occurs with Kara as Ka66, Ka6d, KaOa-rrcp. 
 Ka^o is found only four times and with the indicative as KaOo Set 
 (Rom. 8 :26) save once with the subjunctive and eav as KaOo lav 
 iXO (2 Cor. 8 :12). Ka6d we have only once and that with the in- 
 dicative, KaBa (Tuvira^ev (Matt. 27:10). Ka^ctTrep is more frequent, 
 but always with the indicative as KaOdirep yeypaTrrat (Rom. 3 :4). 
 
 3. KaOoTL is a comparative conjunction twice only in the New 
 Testament (Acts 2:45; 4:35) and both times with the same con- 
 struction, av and the indicative; Kadon dv ns ypuav d^fv. Cf. oirav 
 dv €l<T€irop€V€To (Mk. 6:56). 
 
 4. Four times in Hebrews we find the classic idiom of the com- 
 parative with ocros. It is significant that here only does it occur. 
 Hebrews aims to set forth the superiority of Christianity to Juda- 
 ism. In Heb. 1 :4 we read oo-o) Siatftopwrepov -n-ap' aurov? K€K\r]pov6fXT]Kev 
 ovopxi; in 8:6 ocrw kol KpeiTTovos icTLv BLaOrJKr]^ /xtcrLTrj^; in 10:25 toctovto) 
 IxaXXov oo-o) /QXeVeTe. The fourth example is in 3:3 KaO' oa-ov irXuova 
 TLfXTjv €X'^L Tov oLKov. Thc corrclativc too-ovto^ occurs only once in this 
 connection. In Heb, 7:20ff. (/ca^' oa-ov. . . , Kara too-ovto) the 
 comparative is not in the relative clause. 
 
 5. The various forms of ws are far the most common in compara- 
 tive sentences. Ka^ws is very frequent indeed with the indicative. 
 So Ka6oi<i rjydirrjo-a vp-d^ (,Jo. 13 :34). It is usual in the idiom ku^ws 
 yeypaTTTai (Rom. 1 :17). The correlative outws (2 Cor. 8:6) is rarely 
 used with Ka$m. See also Lu. 24:24. Ka9w<; is a late word, but 
 
170 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 is frequent in the papyri as in the New Testament. KuOtoairep 
 appears only once (Ilel). 5:4 KaOuxnTtp kuI 'Aapoiv) save in 2 Cor. 
 3:1.S wliere ^\'H give it in the margin, text KaOdirep. Bonietinies 
 Ka6u)<: shades off towards a reason (causal sentence) as in Rom. 1 :2S. 
 *12s is so common as to require httle comment, hut its uses are very 
 numerous. Its use as a temporal and final conjunction has already 
 been discussed. It is as a comparative conjunction, however, that 
 it has its widest range. Usually ws is used with the indicative 
 expressed (m 6iXa<:, Matt. 15:28) or implied (ovk ia-eaOe ws ol viroKpi- 
 Tai, Matt. 6:5). But occasionally the subjunctive occurs (is av- 
 
 dpuyn-o^ (SaX-p, IVIk. 4:26) and also with av or cav (is eav Tpo(f)o<; ddX-Trr) 
 
 TO. lauT^s TCKva, 1 Thess. 2:7). See Rom. 5:15 for ws . . . . ovtws. 
 The instances of ws with adverbs (ds raxiora, Acts 17:15), with 
 adjectives (is wpaloL, Rom. 10:15), are like Latin quam. This last 
 is exclamation like our "how." 'fls with the participle gives the 
 alleged reason (ws fxiWiDv, Acts 23:20). In Lu. 9:52 we have is 
 kroLpAa-ai, (inf.) according to WH. 'Oo-et (ws, ei) appears without a 
 verb in the New Testament. Take Matt. 3:16 as an examj^le, eiScv 
 irviiifw. deov KarafiaZvov wcret irepLo-Tepdv. "Cla-jrep is USed either with the 
 indicative {wairep ot viroKpiTul TToioixTLv, ]\Iatt. 6:2), with a participle 
 (^wawep (f>epop.€vr]^ irvorj^, Acts2 :2), or without a Verb (wcTTrep oi idviKOt, 
 
 Matt. 6:7). 'dairepu is found once only (1 Cor. 15:8) and without 
 
 the verb, ojinrepu Tw iKTpwfuiTi. 
 
CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES. 
 
 1. The Greek originally used no mark of interrogation and it is 
 sometimes doubtful whether a sentence is a question or not. In- 
 terrogatory particles were not always used. Take as an example 
 1 Cor. 1:13. WH punctuate /xeynepio-rai 6 Xpto-rds. The margin 
 reads X/aio-ros; But as a rule the context makes it clear even if no 
 interrogative particle nor pronoun is used. But apa, cl, oi, and fi^ 
 all appear in direct questions. 
 
 2. The mode in direct questions calls for little comment. The 
 indicative (any tense) is, of course, the most frequent as av rt's « ; 
 (Jo. 1 :19). The delibrative subjunctive is common in questions 
 of doubt as 8aj/x,ev 17 fir] Sw/LAcv (Mk. 12:15). The optative with av 
 appears in a direct question as the apodosis of a fourth class con- 
 dition (potential optative). So Tt au OiXoi b a-TrepfxoXoyos ouTos Xe'yeiv; 
 (Acts 17:18). The mode in the indirect question is usually the 
 same as it was in the direct either the indicative as tl^v (Jo. 2:25), 
 the subjunctive as tC ^aywo-tv (Mk. 6:36), or the optative as ti av 
 ^c'Xot (Lu. 1 :62). Sometimes the indicative becomes oj^tative 
 according to classic idiom in indirect questions as t6s ei'i; (Acts 
 21:33), but it is here followed by rt eVriv TreTrotrjKws. See further in 
 chapter on Indirect Discourse. 
 
 3. The kind of answer that is expected is sometimes, though not 
 always, indicated. The inquiry may be colorless in form as Swt^k- 
 are. ravra Travra; (Matt. 13:51), even when the particle apa is used 
 as 'Apa y€ yivwa-KUi a dvayivwcTKCLS ; (Acts 8:30). But if ou OCCUrs, 
 the affirmative answer is indicated as Ovk el/xL iXev9€po<; ; (1 Cor. 
 9:1). When juiy is used, the negative answer is expected as M^ 
 a-TTwaaTo 6 6eb<i Tov Xaov avrov; (Rom. 11:1). Sometimes a great 
 deal of feeling is suggested, of scorn (Jo. 7 :47, /a^ koI v/LtcTs TreTrXa- 
 
 12 
 
178 A SHORT GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 vrjade;), of sympathy (Jo. 6:67, /u.^ koX vfieh OiXtre virdyuv;), of sup- 
 pressed excitement (Jo. 4:29, firj n outo's ia-TLv 6 Xpco-To's ; ) . For 
 furtlier examples see chapter on Negative Particles. 
 
 4. The interrogative pronoun usually found in the New Testa- 
 ment is Tt's. We have it by itself as ns vTrtSei^cv vfxtv ; (Matt. 3:7), 
 hut it is common also with apa (as Matt. 24:45), with yap (Matt 
 9:5), with ot>v (Lu. 3:10). For Iva ri see Matt. 9:4. In Mk. 
 15:24 we have the double interrogative n's ti apr). In Lu. 16:2 
 toOto is used predicatively with rl (ji tovto oKovm irepl (tov;). In 
 1 Pet. 1:11 we find both rt's and ttoios. IIoTaTros like ti's and ttoios 
 occurs both in direct and in indirect questions. In Lu. 7:39 it is 
 used Avith ns. Tt is frequently an adverb in the sense of "why" 
 (cf. SioL Ti, Matt. 9:11 and eis n', Mk. 14:4) asrt'/xc Xc'yas dya^ov ; 
 (Mk. 10:18) or "how" (ti'5ti, Lu. 2:49). For ttoVos (Mk. 6:38) 
 and the other interrogative pronouns see chapter on Pronouns. 
 But note rt ifxi iirovoiiTe ctvai (Acts 13 :25). 
 
 5. There is a certain amount of confusion between the interrog- 
 ative and the relative pronouns in the New Testament as in the 
 older Greek and in most languages. Cf . Blass, Grammar of K T. 
 Ch'eck, p. 175. See also Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 93. So rt's ap- 
 pears where the relative would be more usual as in Jas. 3:13 xi's 
 (T0<}>6<; Kal iTrL(TTrjp.(i)v iv vfxlv, Sci^aro). In Mk. 1 ;24 we have olSa ere Ti's 
 et which may be so explained or as the prolepsis of a-v and change 
 to accusative. Compare Jo. 8:25 aii ns ci; In the New Testament 
 the direct interrogative pronoun is usually present in indirect 
 ({Uestions. But in 1 Tim. 1 :7 wc have a Xeyova-iv and -n-epl nVov Sia/Je- 
 /JutoCvTtti. On Tt and rt cf. 1 Cor. 14:35 and Acts 13:25. Once (Acts 
 9:6) we have on so used and several times ottoio? (1 Cor. 3:13). Once 
 also oTTws occurs in an indirect question (Lu. 24:20). On the otlicr 
 hand ^^'II admit on (from oo-ns) as a direct interrogative in ^lark 
 2:16; 9 :11,28. It may fairly be questioned, however, if this is not 
 an al)breviation of n on. But on in Jo. 8:25 is more diHicult still. 
 In INlatt. 2i> :■'>() (cTaipt ((}>' o irdpa) we meet a hard i)n)l)lem also. 
 Here we may oith(^r like Chrysostom supply an im})erative and 
 have the usual relative, or treat o as a demonstrative (Noah K. 
 Davis), or treat the relative o as interrogative (incredible according 
 
INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES. 179 
 
 to Blass) . Certainly the relative is used in indirect questions a few 
 
 times as aTrdyyeiXov auTOis ocra 6 Kvpto's crot irtTroL-qKcv (Mk. 5 :19). The 
 difference between interrogative and relative comes out well in Jo. 
 13:24 (ciTTC Tt's ecTTiv TTCpl ov Acyei) . Cf. also 2 Tim. 1:12 (wTrcTrt'crTCVKa). 
 
 6. The interrogative conjunctions are freely used in the New 
 Testament. So ttotc (Matt. 25:38), Iws irorc (Matt. 17:17), ttoS 
 (Lu. 8:25), ttws (Lu. 10:26). They are common also in indirect 
 questions (Matt. 24:3; Mk. 15:47; Matt. 6:28). "Ottws appears in 
 indirect questions alone in Lu. 24:20. 
 
 7. Elliptical phrases are frequent also. So tva tl (Matt. 9 :4) 
 where yhnfrai has dropped out (cf. Sia rt', cts rt') ; tl on (Lu. 2:49) 
 with which compare rt ycyovev on in Jo. 14 :22. A similar conden- 
 sation is observed in ri apa XleVpos iyevcro (Acts 12:18). Cf. also 
 Acts 5:24; Lu. 1 :66; Jo. 21:21. The use of d in direct questions 
 
 as « e^eo-Tiv Tots a-ajS/Sacnv Of-pairtvcraL (!Matt. 12:10) is parallel to d in 
 indirect questions like Stw/cw d KaraXd^o) (Phil. 3:12). Cf. also Acts 
 17 :27 where aim and expectation enter in. One may compare also 
 the use of d as in Heb. 3:11 in a negative sense (strong oath) 
 where there is really an ellipse. The same thing (ellipse) is true 
 with the use of d in direct questions which is rather common in 
 the New Testament. 
 
 8. Alternative questions are not very frequent in the New Testa- 
 ment. In fact we have only one example of irorepov . . . . ^ (Jo. 
 7:17), and that in an indirect question. Often rj is used in the 
 second member of the question without the interrogative pronoun 
 as in 1 Cor. 9 :8. Sometimes we have rt's . . . . ^ as in Matt. 9:5. 
 Sometimes ^ precedes rt's and refers to the preceding sentence 
 (Matt. 7:9). 
 
 9. Exclamations are usually expressed in the older Greek by the 
 pronouns otos, oiroios, oo-os, but occasionally the interrogative forms 
 are so used. So Troo-a in Mk. 15 :4 and ttt^Xikos in Gal. 6:11. Cf. 
 also TtOikw d ■^8r) dvi]<fiOr] (Lu. 12:49). Cf. also ws wpatot in Rom. 
 10:15. 
 
 10. Interjections are frequently used in exclamations. Those 
 in the New Testament are Strre, ea, I'Se, IBov, ovd, ovat, w, etc. For 
 8€VTc as an interjection see Matt. 21:38 (SetTc, dTroKTctVw/Aev). In Lu. 
 
180 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 4:34 we have an example of ea as ta, n' rj/xlv koL aoi; In Jo. 1:29 
 (i8c 6 a/Ai/os Tov deov) iSc, as often, is found with the nominative. 
 "With the accusative it is the verb. 'iSou is used al)Sohitely (Matt. 
 11 :10) or with the nominative (Matt. 17:5, iSou vt<t>^\r]). It is very 
 common. In Mk. 15:29 (ova. 6 KaraXvwv) oid occurs with the nom- 
 inative. Omi is used commonly with the dative as oval aoC (Matt. 
 11:21). But it twice occurs with the accusative (Rev. 8 :13, rows 
 KaroiKowTas ; 12 :12, T^v yrjv). It is also used absolutely as in Rev. 
 18:10). Once it is repeated three times (Rev. 8:13). 'fi is not 
 often used. The vocative is usually alone as avOpume (Lu. 22:58), 
 but sometimes & is added as o> ywai (iNIatt. 15 :28). 
 
CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 INDIEECT DISCOUKSE. 
 
 1. Direct discourse is far more frequent than indirect in the 
 New Testament. This is true also of the Old Testament and of 
 most popular writers. Prolonged indirect discourse as in Thucy- 
 dides or Livy is labored and artificial. The Greeks had no quota- 
 tion marks, but on often served this purpose. This use of on is 
 called recitative on and is very abundant in the New Testament as 
 in the Septuagint. So Mk. 8:28 on 'loidvrjv tov ftaTrria-T-qv, Jo. 10:36 
 on fiXacr(j>r]iJ.e'i^. But this pictorial use of oratio recta rather than 
 the long oratio ohliqua of the Greek historians is not dependent on 
 oTi. Often the direct quotation appears alone : ©eAw, KaOapta-dryrL 
 (Matt. 8 :3). Note also 6 StSao-KaXo? and 6 KvpLo<i in Jo. 13 :13). 
 
 2. The tense as a rule remains unchanged in the Greek indirect 
 discourse. In Latin and English we find sequence of tenses in 
 this class of sentences. But in Greek this is seldom the case. 
 Some examples occur in the New Testament as in the older Greek 
 where the imperfect in the indirect seems to represent a present in 
 
 the direct. So Jo. 2 :25, avros yap eytWo-Kev tC r^v iv TuJ dvOpwirw. 
 Commonly the tense is preserved as in Jo. 11:13, iKeivoL hk e8o$av 
 on Trepl t^s KotjU.r/o-£ws Toi) virvov Ae'yet. In a Case like on elSov (Jo. 
 1 :50) the tense was aorist in the direct discourse. So as to yv in 
 Jo. 9 :18. The future infinitive in indirect discourse as x^p^^cretv in 
 Jo. 21:25 stands for tlie future indicative of the direct. So the 
 perfect infinitive likewise as rtOv-qKevai in Acts 14:19. 
 
 3. The person of the verb may or may not be changed accord- 
 ing to circumstances. Take Matt. 6:31, for instance, where Tt 
 <^dy(o/xev is the direct question. In the indirect question (Matt. 
 6:25) this becomes rt (jidyr]T€. So in ]\Ik. 9:6 ov yap ijBei tl diroKpiOtj 
 was TL d-n-oKpiOu) in the direct. In Acts 1:4 the person of the direct 
 
182 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 address is retained after the infinitive : irtpi^ivuv t/;v cTrayytXuiv tow 
 ■7raTpo<i 'qv rjKovaaTi fxov. But more of this mixture now directly. 
 
 4. The mode in indirect discourse may be changed. This 
 change of indicative to optative or sul)junctive to optative after a 
 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 
 Testament. Even so it is only in indirect questions that we find 
 it with one exception. This exception (Burton, N. T. Moods and 
 Tenses, p. 133) is in Acts 25 :16 and is after irplvrj. But curiously 
 enough in the same sentence ovk eo-rtv is retained. The sequence 
 of the verbs in the sentence is therefore aneKpid-qv on ovk €o-tiv .... 
 TTplv t) . . . . €xoi .... T€ ... . Xa^Soi. So also in Lu. 22:23 we 
 have TO Tt's apa elrj, but in 22:24 to ti? avroiv 8oK€l. The presence of 
 the subjunctive in an indirect question simply means that the sub- 
 junctive was used in the direct. So Lu. 22:4 to ttuxj avroU irapa8<2 
 avTov. If av is found with the ojitative in an indirect question, that 
 shows that it was there in the direct. There is a distinct differ- 
 ence therefore between Tt's cii; (Acts 21:33), where the optative is 
 due to indirect discourse, and ti av elrj (Acts 10:17) where the op- 
 tative with av was so used in the direct. Cf. Acts 17:18 where ri 
 av deXoi occurs in the direct question as the potential optative 
 (apodosis of fourth class condition). Cf. Lu. 15:26 (ti av tit] 
 
 TavTu) . 
 
 5. There are three kinds of indirect discourse : indirect asser- 
 tion, indirect (juestion, and indirect command. An example of the 
 first is 6f.<jipo) oTL 7rpo<}irJTr)<i ci av (Jo. 4:19), of the second is xnroSii^ta 
 vpXv TiVa <f>o/3r]6r]T€ (Lu. 12;5), of the third is cittov aur?; LIU /xoi crvv- 
 avTiXafirjTaL (Lu. 10:40). These represent the normal classes. They 
 re<iuire separate tretttment. 
 
 6. Indirect assertions once more fall into three classes according 
 to the construction that is used. 
 
 (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 jiractice. The tense, of course, is the same as tlie direct 
 discourse. It is usual io sav that this inlinitive has the accusative 
 
INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 183 
 
 as the subject, but this is an inadequate exjilanation. The accusa- 
 tive is by no means always used and when it is we cannot call it 
 the subject from the Greek point of view. The infinitive, like the 
 participle, is not a finite verb, has no personal endings. The idiom 
 does in a general way correspond to a on clause in Greek or a 
 ''that" clause in English, but it is not in fact a on clause. The 
 infinitive in indirect discourse still has to be considered an infini- 
 tive and explained syntactically as an infinitive. If the pronoun 
 or adjective used with the infinitive refers to the subject of the 
 principal verb, it may be in the nominative by apposition as 
 </)a(rK0VT£s cTvac ao(f>ol i/j-wpdvOrja-av (Rom. 1:22, cf. Matt. 19:21 Te\«05 
 civat); or it may be miexpressed as rjXOav Xeyova-ai koI oTTTaacav 
 
 ayyiXuiv iwpoKevai (Lu. 24 :23) ; or it may be in the accusative of 
 general reference as ireirotOa^ a-eavrov 68rjyov eW Tv(f}Xo}v (Rom. 2:19). 
 Cf. also Phil. 3:13; Lu. 24;23 (Xeyovmv avrov ^rjv). 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 
 explanation of this accusative. It is ridiculous to think of a "sub- 
 ject' ' with such an infinitive with the article as iyoy iv to! iTravipxca-Oai /le 
 aTToSwo-w o-ot (Lu. 10:35). Note //.e, not the reflexive. When the refer- 
 ence is not to the subject of the principal verb, the noun or pronoun is 
 noniially in the accusative of general reference as ot Xiyovaiv avroi/ 
 ^rjv (Lu. 24:23), The same explanation applies to two accusatives 
 
 like Tr£7reto-/xci/os yap icrriv 'Itadvrjv ■irpo<f>i^Tr]v eivat (Lu. 20:6) where one 
 is in apposition to the other. In a case like Bid ye to Trapi^ecv fx.ot 
 KOTTov Tr]v XVP"^^ Tavrrjv (Lu. 18:5) One accusative is the object of the 
 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) : rov SiBda-Keiv v/xas rtva TCI (TTOLxeia. Here 
 Tiva is accusative of general reference and the other accusatives the 
 ol3Jects of StSao-Kciv. The negative of this accusative is firj as ohives 
 
 XiyovcTLV avdcTTacTLV p-rj etvat (Mk. 12:18). 
 
 (b) "Oti and the indicative is in the New Testament the com- 
 mon way of expressing indirect assertions. The optative is not so 
 used save in the case of irplv ^ once (Acts 25 :16) which is depend- 
 ent on a.iT€Kpid-qv oTi. 'fis does not so appear though in Acts 10 :28 
 
184 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 {initTTaaOi. ws dOe/jiLTov iariv) it approaches the ancient usage. Cf. 
 also Lii. 24:6. "On is used with ahnost every variety of verbs of 
 thinking and saying. Blass {Gh'ammar of N. T. Greek, p. 230 ff.) 
 has a careful discussion of the construction of each verb and phrase 
 in the New Testament. As to verbs of thinking most of them take 
 eitlicr construction (infinitive or on) and some the third also (the 
 participle). So with KaraXa/t/Savw we have the infinitive in Acts 
 
 25 :25 (eyi) Se KareXa/So/xi^v [JLrjSev a^iov avrov Oavdrov irt-KpayevaC) , l)Ut in 
 Acts 10:34 on (KaTaXafx^dvo/iuL on ovk Icrnv). On the whole the use 
 of the infinitive in indirect discourse is much more common in 
 Luke and Paul (and Hebrews) than elsewhere in the New Testa- 
 ment though not frequent even there. This applies to verbs of 
 saying also. 'ATroKpivofmi, for instance, is used with the infinitive 
 in indirect assertion only in Luke as Acts 25 :4, d-jrtKpid-q Trjpdirdai 
 Tov ITavXov. For on see Acts 25:16. In 1 Cor. 10:19 on is used 
 after <}>r)fu as is occasionally true in the older Greek. A good 
 example of the use of the tense is found in Gal. 2 :14 (ore elSov on 
 
 OVK opdoTTohovcTiv) . So also Uotc ivofiLCTav on TrXeiov XrjfixpovTai (Matt. 
 20:10. \\\ Jo. 9:32 we have rfKovadrj on yve<a$€v, but the tense is 
 that of the direct. Only the context can tell whether on is declara- 
 tive or causal as i-7riyvov<: on 'Pw/mios ianv koI on avrbv rjv SfScKui? 
 (Acts 22:29). Blass (Ch-ammar of N. T. Greek, p, 231) calls o>s5n 
 (2 Cor. 11:21) "unclassical. " In 1 Cor. 15:27 S^Xov on is used 
 almost like an adverb as in ancient Greek. 
 
 (e) The participle is sometimes used according to the ancient 
 idiom with verbs of knowing, perceiving, showing, etc. This con- 
 struction is generally found in Luke and Paul. Take Lu. 8:46, 
 
 (yvoiv Syvu/xiv i$€Xr]\v6vtav air' e/xoS, aS an examjlle. Cf. also UKOvaa^ 8k 
 
 'loKth/B ovTa ain'a (Acts 7 :12), opw ore ovra (Acts8:23). 'Akou<i> is thus 
 used with the participle, the infinitive, or with on. Likewise 
 yivwo-Kw and oiStt may be used with either construction, ©cwpt'w 
 occurs with on or the participle. 
 
 (d) The construction with kuI iyivero calls for a word of com- 
 ment. We have koI lyivtTo .... tXa^^f. (Lu. 1:8) without any con- 
 junction. So 1:41; 2:1, etc. In Matt. 9:10 koX follows kuX tycVtro 
 almost in the sense of on (like Iloltn'w rav'), koX tyo-tro . . . . koX 
 
INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 185 
 
 iSov .... (Tvvav€KavTo) . Cf. Lu. 21:1. Ill jNIk. 2:15 the infinitive 
 is used with yLverai, kul ytVcrai KaraKtlaOaL avTOV. Cf. Lu. 3:21 J 6:1, 
 
 etc. In Luke kuI eyeVero with the infinitive is common. Cf. Jo. 
 14:22, Tt' ytyovev on yfjuv fxeWcis. 
 
 7. Indirect questions do not present so many complications. 
 
 (a) The tense, as already explained, remains unchanged as a 
 
 rule. So Mk. 15:44 we have 6 8e IleiXaTos iOavfMia-cv el ^8r] tWvtjkcv. 
 
 This is the ancient use of ei after 6avp.a.t,<j). In the same verse the 
 
 aorist follows : iTrrjpwTrja-cv airov cl ^Brj dirWavev. The point licS in 
 
 the difference between the two tenses. However, the imperfect 
 indicative is sometimes used where the jjresent was the direct 
 (sequence of tenses like Latin and Enghsh). So Jo. 2 :24 (rt'^v) 
 and 6:6 (^Sec rt e/AcAAev TTOLeZv). Thus also in Acts 19:32 rtvos htKa 
 (TW€\r]\v6aaav after ovk rjSei(Tav. 
 
 (b) The indicative may be retained in an indirect question as 
 yXdov iSeTv Tt icrriv to yeyovos (Mk. 5 :14). But in Luke the optative 
 is found as iirvvOdvcTo Tt etr] tovto (Lu. 18:36). The indicative is 
 never changed into the subjunctive in such a sentence as in Latin. 
 
 (c) AVhenever the subjunctive appears, as it often does, in an 
 indirect question, it was there in the direct question. It is usually 
 retained in the New Testament as ov yap ySu rl aTroKpiOfj (Mk. 9:6), 
 but in Luke a few times the optative occurs instead of the sub- 
 junctive as Cl apayc ipr]Xacf>i^(Teiav olvtov koI evpouv (ActS 17:27). In 
 Matt. 6:25 Tt (j>dyr]T€ occurs in an indirect question. In Matt. 6:31 
 Ti <f}dy(ap.€v ; is the direct question. The mood is the same in both 
 cases and for the same reason, a deliberative question. 
 
 (d) Sometimes the optative is found in the indirect question 
 because it was in the direct (cf. indicative and subjunctive). This 
 is true of all the examples with av and the optative like to ns av iirj 
 ixut,(av avThiv (Lu. 9:46). Cf. Lu. 6:11. Cf. also Tt av ^eXot (Acts 
 17:18) in a direct question with to Tt av ^eA.ot (Lu. 1:62) in the 
 indirect. 
 
 (e) The indirect deliberative question may be dependent on a 
 verb like t^<a which does not often have a question as object (Bur- 
 ton, Moods and Tenses, p. 135). So ovk !;(« ■n-ov t^v kc^uX^v kXivy) 
 (Lu. 9:58). Cf. o-^co ti ypai/'w (Acts 25:26). So too ottou is found 
 
186 A SHORT GRAMMAR OP THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 (Mk. 11:1-1) with the suljunctive (owov .... <j)dyw). In Lu. 3:15 
 fji-j TTOTc auTos eir] is indirect question, 
 
 (f) T.ukc is rather fond of the article with the indirect question. 
 So TO TTCos .... irapaSfS (Lu. 22:4), TO Tt's tir/ (22:23), to tis .... 
 
 8oK€i (22:24). 
 
 (g) Once indeed Nestle (1 Pet. 5:8) has the infinitive in this 
 construction (^j/twv tiVu KaTaTrietv), hut ^^'H properly omit Ttm and 
 have Tiva in margin (not tlvu) . 
 
 8. Indirect commands are exj^ressed in three ways. 
 
 (a) The infinitive is common with the same tense as the direct 
 command. The negative is ixtj. Po eXeyov 8ia toC Trvev/xaTo? firj 
 firi^aivetv (Acts 21 :4), Xe'ycov [mtj Tre/DiTc/ivetv (ActS 21 :21), aTn'jyytXXov 
 fieravoclv (Acts 26:20), fiowvre^ fxrj Seiv auTov ^yv (Acis 25:24, note 
 two infinitives). 
 
 (1)) Conjunctions ("va and ottws) are also used with a finite verb. 
 So TraprjyyeLkev avTois iva firj8kv oLpwaLv (Mk. 6:8). Oljscrve retention 
 of the subjunctive after secondary tense. So also ottws fieTaTre/n/'T/Tai 
 (Acts 25:3). 
 
 (c) Sometimes an indirect deliberative question with the sub- 
 junctive represents a command or prohibition. In Luke 12:5 
 vTroSeiio) TLva <f}o(3r]9r}T€ was originally (see very next verse) ^o^j/^t/tc. 
 
 9. There is not infrequently mixture of the direct and the 
 indirect discourse in the same sentence. The change may be from 
 
 the indirect to the direct as in irapayyetka^ fx-QSevl iKXaXrjcrai oTt Tavra 
 cve<^avi<7us irpos ifie (Acts 23:22), or from the direct to the indirect 
 as in eiTTCV 'Eroi/xao-aTe .... KT-qvr) T€ TrapaaTrjaai (ActS 23:23). In 
 Acts 14 :22 we have oti . . . . Set jtarallcl with ifx/xiveiv. And in 
 Acts 27:10 oTi is even used with fiiXXuv, a mixture of the infinitive, 
 and the oti constructions. 
 
 10. The subordinate clause retains as a rule the tense and mode 
 both of the direct. So oo-a (x^l in !Matt. 18:25 (iKtXeva-tv uvrbv 6 
 
 KvpiOi irpaOrjvai. kuX tijv yvvaiKa kuX to. TiKva Kal ocru «X'')- ^^ ^^1 Matt. 
 14:22 wo have r/vdyKavtv .... Trpudyuv .... tw<; ov aTToXv<Tr). 
 
CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 THE INFINITIVE. 
 
 1. The origin of the infinitive is clear from the analogy of the 
 Sanskrit which had a great number of pure verbal substantives in 
 various cases with no voice and no tense. The Greek Sopevai 
 (SoOvtti) is in the same case as the Sanskrit devane, for instance. 
 The infinitive in -at, -a-Oai, -vat are in the dative case while the form 
 in -uv (-cvi) is possibly in the locative. So originally this verbal 
 substantive was used chiefly with the dative idea. In Homer the 
 dative idea is still the more usual one, although already the form 
 is no longer regarded as datiye, but merely a set form that is inde- 
 clinable, and the infinitive is beginning to be used as the object 
 and subject of verbs. In Matt. 11:7 this original dative idea is 
 preserved, as is true wherever the infinitive has the idea of pur- 
 pose : Ti H^kOaTe els Ttiv iprjixov dtdcraa-Oai ; In Sanskrit the noun 
 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- 
 stantive with emphasis on both terms. It is ovo/xa p^fmTo<i, but is 
 still ovo/xa. The infinitive is non-finite, not limited, and so ex- 
 presses undefined action. The infinitive has no manner of affirma- 
 tion and is not a mode, but is always both verb and substantive. 
 It is the most general and indefinite form of the verb. The point is 
 that the Greek infinitive has to be looked at each time both as a sub- 
 stantive and as a verb. It no longer has inflection as most sub- 
 stantives have and so is an indeclinable substantive. It never de- 
 veloped personal endings like the modes and so has no subject in 
 the strict sense of the term. 
 
 3. The history of the infinitive is very interesting. Burton 
 (iV. T. Moods and Tenses, p. 143 f . ) has an excellent sketch of this 
 
188 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 matter. He marks four stages which I here enlarge and change 
 to five : 
 
 (1) When the infinitive was used only in the sense of the dative 
 (or locative) case. This was in prehistoric times (cf. .Sanskrit). 
 
 (2) The infinitive begins to be 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. 
 
 (4) In the kolvt] the infinitive begins to disappear before Tm 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. 
 
 (5) In the modern Greek the infinitive has vanished save that 
 after auxiliary verbs it exists in a mutilated form as 9(Xci Xvaa. In 
 the Pontic dialect the infinitive continues to flourish. 
 
 4. The use of the article witli the infinitive has given rise to a 
 deal of misapprehension. Even Winer {Wincr-Thayer, p. 323) 
 speaks of the article "making" the infinitive a substantive. The 
 infinitive is always a substantive and like other substantives may 
 or may not use the article according to circumstances. What the 
 article does do with the infinitive is to make clear that it is defi- 
 nite. Homer does not use tlie article with the infinitive, although 
 Pindar does. The article does not make the infinitive a substan- 
 tive. It is always a substantive and in a case whether it has the 
 article or not. In Homer the article is not used much with any- 
 thing. In general the infinitive uses the article much as any other 
 abstract neuter substantive that occurs only in the singular. So 
 TO yap 6i\tLv (Rom. 7:18). In Heb. 2:15 ttSs is used with the 
 infinitive, Sia ttuvtos tov ^jJv. 
 
 5. Cases of the infinitive. As an indeclinable substantive, the 
 infinitive may Ijc in any case, though the vocative naturally is not 
 used. When the article occurs with the infinitive, the inflection 
 of the article makes the case i»lain. Thus in koXov croi (<ttiv ila-fXdtiv 
 (Matt. 18:8) the infinitive is in the nominative case as i)lainly as 
 
THE INFINITIVE. 189 
 
 in TO 6e\eiv irapaKeiraL fioi (Roill. 7:18). In Xc'yco vfuv fii] o/LAoVat 
 
 (Matt. 5 :34) the infinitive is just as truly in the accusative as in 
 
 ov)( dpirayfJLov ■^yqa-aTO to ctvai tcra Otw (Phil. 2 :6). So the infinitive 
 
 may be in the genitive as in lAa^^ '''o'^ Ov/xLaaac (Lu. 1 :9), the abla- 
 tive as in fir] KwXvcTC aira ikOcLV fic (]Matt. 19 :14) and KaTcixov avTov 
 
 Tov fir] TTopeveaOaL (Lu. 4 :42), the instrumental as in tw /a^ evpuv fxe 
 TiTov (2 Cor. 2:13), the dative as in otSare .... StSoVat (Matt. 7:11) 
 and 7]X0ofi€v Trpoa-Kvvrja-ai (Matt. 2:2). The infinitive, like the sub- 
 stantive, may be used in apposition. So tovVwv twv i-n-dvayKe^, 
 dTTfx^adat (Acts 15:28), the ablative. 
 
 6. The common use of rov and the infinitive in the New Testa- 
 ment (as in the LXX) calls for special remark. It may be in the 
 ablative as in iKparovvro tov fxrj iwLyvwvaL (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 
 use in the New Testament, as in ^t/tciv tov diroXea-aL (Matt. 2:13). 
 See Lu. 1 :76 where eToifida-ai and tov Sowat both express purpose. 
 It is even held by some writers that toB with the infinitive occa- 
 sionally expresses result in the New Testament. But this may be 
 doubted. All the examples given (Matt. 21:32; Acts 7:19; 18:10; 
 Rom. 7 :3) betray purpose if the article is closely observed as it 
 must be. Tov and the infinitive may be used with nouns (geni- 
 tive) as iXwU tov (rw^€(T$ai (Acts 27:20), adjectives as ySpaSets to3 
 TTKTTcvcrat (Lu. 24 :25) and verbs as fieTCfieXi^drfTe tov Tria-Teva-ai (Matt. 
 21 :32). But strangest of all is it to see tov and the infinitive as the 
 subject of a verb as in dvevScKTov ia-TLv tov . ... fir] iXOeiv (Lu. 17:1). 
 Cf. Acts 10 :25. Just as the dative and locative endings lost their 
 force with the infinitive, so toC sometimes comes to be regarded as 
 a fixed idiom. 
 
 7. The infinitive can be used with verbs as SwaTai .... SovXevav 
 (Matt. 6:24), with substantives as opfxrj l^picrai (Acts 14:5), with 
 adjectives as ikwos Xwai (Mk. 1 :7), and with prepositions as Iv tcS 
 eTvat (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 
 
190 A SnORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 use of the infinitive to show that the i)reposition is not in compos- 
 ition with the infinitive. The cases of the infinitive are those com- 
 mon in the New Testament with prepositions. The prepositions 
 thus found with the infinitive are mainly avri, tls, cv, cvckcv, ii, ews, 
 Sia, /ACTa, TT/ods, irpo. Take an illustration of each : avrl tov Xiyuv 
 (Jas. 4:15), CIS TO etvai (Rom. 1:20), cv t<Z c'vat (Lu. 9:18, very 
 common in Luke), hcKcv tov ^avepwdrjvai (2 Cor. 7:12), « rovt^"" 
 (2 Cor. 8:11), £0)5 ToO IXBtiv (Acts 8 :40), Zih. to Tvaplx^iv (Lu. 18:5), 
 fxcra. TO huirvqaai (Lu. 22:20), tt/sos to Setv (Lu. 18 :1), irpo tov /xc naduv 
 
 (Lu. 22:15). The infinitive with prepositions is used just like 
 indirect discourse. So /actoi to eyep$rjvai p-c TrpoaJtoi (Mk. 14:28). 
 
 9. The infinitive in indirect discourse was sufficiently treated in 
 that chapter. But the confusion on the subject will justify a few 
 further remarks. It is not strictly correct to say that the infinitive 
 has a subject in indirect discourse. That is to put the idiom of 
 the English finite clause into the Greek infinitive clause. The 
 Greek infinitive clause is not a finite clause at? all, and is not so 
 conceived in Greek. The infinitive itself is the object of the verb 
 of saying or thinking, and not the substantive, as Hadley and 
 Allen argue in sec. 943. The infinitive in indirect discourse is 
 thus simply the direct object of the principal verb. The subject 
 of the verb in the direct discourse is then treated variously. If it 
 is the same as the subject of the principal verb, it is simply re- 
 tained in the nominative. If the subject is different, it is put in 
 the accusative, the case of extension ( ' 'accusative of definition, ' ' 
 Green), or is in apposition with another word in the sentence; the 
 action of the infinitive is true as far as so and so (whatever the 
 substantive may be). So also if the pronoun refers to the subject, 
 it may be in the accusative as in Lu. 24:30 (avToV). 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 
 clauses, but it is truer and simpler to treat the Greek idiom accord- 
 ing to the Greek genius. The infinitive in indirect discourse is still 
 a verbal substantive, and not really different from the infinitive 
 elsewhere. The participle, being a verbal adjective, can have no 
 
THE INFINITIVE. 191 
 
 subject. The infinitive, being a vcrl)al substantive, can have no 
 subject. The use of an accusative of general reference with tlie 
 infinitive does not cliange it into a finite mode. Nestle against 
 WH reads ^rp-wv nVa Karaindv in 1 Pet. 5 ;8. See chapter on Indirect 
 Discourse for examples. But Matt. 17:4 is a good one, koKov ia-rtv 
 ■^fias w8c chat.. Sometimes the dative is found with the infinitive 
 (due to the verb, not the infinitive) as in cTreVa^ev awois dvaKXidrjvaL 
 (Mk. 6 :39). The predicate adjective in such a case may be either 
 the dative 'Pw/iacbts ova-iv (Acts 16:21) or in the accusative as cxXel- 
 afievovs (Acts 15:22), but note -ots in 15:25 (text of WH). 
 
 10. The infinitive was limited as an object clause on the one 
 hand by on and on the other as an expression of purpose by Tva. 
 The infinitive carries both ideas and more too. But it was gradu- 
 ally squeezed out between these two conjunctions. Signs of the 
 non-final use of tVa are abundant in the New Testament as iav 
 6eXr]T€ tva iromai (Matt. 7:12). It is not strange that the infinitive 
 gradually gave up the fight. 
 
 11. The infinitive is common for the expression of purpose as 
 Karakva-ai. (Matt. 5:17). It may be questioned if the infinitive by 
 itself was ever used to express clear result. 
 
 12. But wcTTc with the infinitive, which once was used for pur- 
 pose, came to be used in the New Testament chiefly for result. 
 So o)(Trt fir] xp^Mv ex^Lv (1 Thcss. 1 :8). But design is also expressed 
 by o!)(TTe (Lu. 4:29). 'Os is only used twice with the infinitive in 
 the New Testament, ws eroLfxaa-ai (Lu. 9:52), ws ^iro^ cittciv (Heb. 
 7 :9). Once also is av cK<^o;8erv (2 Cor. 10:9) 
 
 13. The infinitive may be used absolutely in strict harmony 
 with its origin as a non-finite verbal substantive. Thus in greet- 
 ings as xp-i^puv (Jas. 1:1). As an imperative the infinitive presents 
 the idea as an absolute idea. The connection suggests the duty or 
 the command. So KXaUw (Rom. 12:15), (ttolx^Xv (Phil. 3:16). 
 
 14. The negative of the infinitive is always fjurf in the New Tes- 
 tament even in indirect assertions (Mk. 12:18). Sometimes ov is 
 found with the infinitive, Init it really goes with a single phrase 
 rather than with the infinitive. So koX ov Kara t^v rdiiv 'Aapoiv 
 Xiy^aOaL (Heb. 7:11). 
 
102 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 15. The infinitive may sometimes be periphrastic hke other 
 
 forms of the verb as in iv tw elvai avrov 7r/}00-eu;^o/xevov (Lu. 9:18). 
 
 16. The voices of the infinitive. Originally as in the Sanskrit, 
 the infinitive had no voices. Voice in the infinitive was a later 
 development of the language. But all three voices come to be 
 used freely with the infinitive and with the usual significance. 
 But voice is a distinct addition to the original infinitive. Note 
 
 ctTTCv Sod^vai avTrj (jtaydv (Mk. 5:43). 
 
 17. The same remark aj^plies to the tenses of the infinitive. 
 Tense in the infinitive has no time except in indirect discourse. 
 The infinitive has the aorist as a matter of course and when the 
 present tense occurs it is to accent the idea of incomj^letion. Note 
 both in the same gentence : yvdyKaa-e tovs /mOrjTa? ififi^vai . . . . koI 
 irpoayuv (Matt. 14:22). The perfect does not often occur and 
 always to exj^ress completion. Cf. aTn^XAax^ai (Lu. 12 :5S) and 
 aTToXiXxxrOcn cSuvaro 6 dvOpwTro^ ovtos (Acts 26 :32). Cf. alsoMk. 5:4. 
 Me'AAo), however, generally has the present infinitive as /xtAAet ^rjTdv 
 (Matt. 2:13), sometimes the future infinitive due to the future idea 
 in fx.(W(x) as fxeWeiv ea-eaOaL (Acts 11;28; 27:10), and only seldom 
 the aorist as ^/teAAev -n-poa-ayayuv (Acts 12:6). Burton remarks 
 (Moods and Tenses, i>. 53) that no instance of the aorist infinitive 
 representing an aorist indicative appears in the New Testament. 
 The aorist infinitive in its usual timeless sense does occur, how- 
 ever, as in yiy paTTTUL iraBdv tov XpwrTov (Lu. 24:46). The future 
 infinitive in indirect discourse also appears as in oiS' avrov o'/xat t6v 
 KocrfMov x'^pv'^^'-v (Jo. 21:25). So also the perfect infinitive, vofii- 
 ^ovTcs avTov TtOvrjKfvai (Acts 14:19). *Av with the infinitive is not 
 found in the New Testament. 
 
 18. The idiom irpoatOero Trefjupai (Lu. 20;llf.) while explicable 
 as Greek, is probably due to the common Hebrew construction. 
 
CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 THE PAKTICIPLE. 
 
 1. The participle has its most jDerfect development in the Greek 
 language. Already in the Sanskrit the participle had developed 
 voice (active and middle) and tense (aorist, present, perfect, and 
 even the future). But the aorist participle did not survive in San- 
 skrit (cf. its absence in Latin). The Greek, however, revived the 
 aorist participle and made it nourish. Already in Homer the 
 aorist participle is abundant. In modem Greek the particij^le is 
 little used, conjunctions displacing it. The English participle is 
 much like the Greek in its freedom and adaptability. The Greek 
 is a ''participle loving language" (Broadus) and thus has a great 
 advantage in flexibility over the Latin. 
 
 2. The participle is a verbal adjective. The participle (^pars, 
 capio) takes part, participates, shares in both verb and adjective, 
 as the infinitive shares in both verb and substantive: It is always 
 both verb and adjective. Like the infinitive the participle is also 
 non-finite, undefined action. The particijjle makes no affirmation 
 and is not a mode. It is a verl) in exactly the same respects that 
 the infinitive is. It has voice, tense, and governs the cases that 
 the verb takes. 
 
 3. There are other verbal adjectives, as there were many verbal 
 substantives (cf. the Sanskrit), which are not called participles. 
 The verbals in -tos and -rio^, for instance, are verbal adjectives. 
 They do not have voice and tense as the participle does. The 
 verbal in -tos partakes more of the adjective idea and that in -reos 
 more of the verbal. The fonn in -tos is very common (in both the 
 active and passive sense) in the New Testament as 6 ayanrjTo^ (Matt. 
 3 :17). There is only one example of the verbal in -tcos which is 
 impersonal and governs the case (accusative) of the verb, ohov vlov 
 
 13 
 
104 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THK GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 cts acTKoixs Koivovs ftXrjreov (Lu. 5:38). The Verbal in -tcos is not found 
 in Ilomcr. 
 
 4. The difference between the participle and the infinitive is to 
 be sharply noticed. The difference between infinitive and parti- 
 ciple lies Avholly in the fact that one is a substantive and the other 
 an adjective. VCe 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 freely with or without the 
 article. The infinitive as an object or subject verbal substantive is 
 connected immediately with the verb while the i')articiple is related 
 to a substantive. So in Lu. 16 :3 see what a different idea iirairwv 
 would present. i-rraiTwv would describe the man as a beggar who 
 is ashamed of it; i-n-aLTelv presents one who is ashamed to beg and 
 does not become a beggar. So likewise explain participle with 
 <f>aivofmi in Matt. 6:16. Compare infinitive with oTSa (Matt. 7:11) 
 and participle with tlSov (Acts 3:9). See also Lu. 5:4 (eVawraTo 
 XaXwv) and Acts 14:18 (mTcVaro-av Tou [xrj Ovuv). The infinitive in 
 indirect discourse is the direct object or subject of the verb. The 
 participle in indirect discourse is merely an adjective agreeing with 
 the substantiv.e. Like the infinitive the participle can have no sub- 
 ject. See Hel). 13:23 (ytvcio-KeTC Tl/jloOcov airoXtXvfxivov) 1 Jo. 4:2 
 (ojLtoXoyei 'Irjaovv iXrjXvOoTu). See difference between John 12:18 and 
 2 Thess. 3:11 (one infinitive and one participle with okovw). 
 
 5. The participle like other adjectives may l)e used witli or with- 
 out the article, may be definite or indefinite. So we have vSwp ^Cjv 
 (Jo. 4:10), but TO v8(op to ^wv (Jo. 4:11). In ti ia-Tiv to yeyovo? 
 (Mk. 5:14) we haye a good examide of the attributive participle. 
 If the article is used, we know, as with other adjectives, that the 
 participle is attributive. The article sometimes appears with the 
 partici]»le when it is not used with the substantive. So cro<j)iav . . . . 
 t^v aTroKeKpv/xixevrjv (1 CoY. 2:7). Often the i)articiplc, like other 
 adjectives again, occurs without any substantive as o KXivTwy (Eph. 
 4 :2S). This use is ))ractically cciuivalcnt to a relative clause. We 
 even liml ttus 6 o/jyi^o/xeros (Matt. 5:22). lUit if the article is not 
 
THE PARTICIPLE. 195 
 
 used, tlie participle may be either predicate or attributive. The 
 case of v8wp (Qtv (Jo. 4:10) is attributive, but the predicate use is 
 well shown in /SXcVctc cyyi'^ovo-av Tr]v rjiiipav (Heb. 10:25). Cf. also 
 idtwpovv Tov ^aravav TrecrovTa (Lu. 10 :18) and note tense. 
 
 6. The predicate participle is more complicated and calls for 
 more discussion than the attributive which has more of the adjec- 
 tive and less of the verbal conception than the predicate. The 
 predicate participle is more common in proportion than other pred- 
 icate adjectives because of the verbal force of the participle. Both 
 the predicate uses of the participle (circumstantial and supple- 
 mentary) are very common, as frequent indeed as the attributive 
 participle. 
 
 7. The supplementary participle. The supplementary partici- 
 ple is freely used in the New Testament and with dixC more com- 
 monly than in the earlier Greek, periphrastic construction. So 
 Luke in particular (Lu. 13:10f. ^v SiSao-zcwv, r}v a-wKvirTovaa) . In 
 Lu. 23:12 we find TrpoiJTnjpxov -n-oTe. apxofJML is not used with the 
 participle in the New Testament, but only with the infinitive, as 
 Matt. 4:17, or absolutely, as Lu. 24:27. For the participle with 
 cx<D see Lu. 14:18 f. (^^x'^ /u,e iraprjTrjfxivov^ . Travopxti is uscd only with 
 the participle or absolutely (Acts 5:42; 1 Cor. 13:8). For TcXew 
 with the participle see Matt. 11:1 (creXeo-ev Siarao-o-wv) . In Matt. 
 6:16 iva <}}avS)(Tiv vrj<7T€vovT€^ is a good illustration of the supple- 
 mentary participle, rvyxa^^^ in the New Testament is not used 
 with the infinitive or the participle, nor is (fiOdvo) (special sense of 
 come or come before, Phil. 3:16). However, Trpo^OavM in Matt. 
 17:25 (vpo€(f>9a(Tcv Xc'ywv) is used with the participle according to 
 ancient usage. Xavddvo} is once (Heb. 13 :2, eXaOov ^tviVavres) used 
 with participle according to the ancient idiom. No example of dv 
 with the participle appears in the New Testament. 
 
 8. The circumstantial participle is practically an additional 
 clause added more or less loosely. It is not essential to the lead- 
 ing clause. By means of the circumstantial participle a sentence 
 can be strung out indefinitely. Cf. 2 Pet. 2 : 12-15 ((3Xa(T<f>r]fiovvT€^, 
 ahiKovficvoi, yyovfjLtvoi, ivTpv(f)o)VTe<:, etc.). The circumstantial parti- 
 ciple does not of itself define its relation to the principal or sub- 
 
196 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 ordinate clause in "which it occurs. The connection is, of course, 
 with some noun or pronoun. The context may be one that sug- 
 gests time as okovwv 6 'Avavtas Treo-wv i^aj/v^ev (Acts 5:5), occasion as 
 
 OKOuovTcs (Lu. 4:28), means as ipyaaiav TroXXrjv Trapei^ev fW-vrtvoiJilvrj 
 
 (Acts 16:16), manner as ainiXOev Xvn-ovjuevos (Matt. 19:22), cause 
 
 as tv^apLCTTOvixtv aKovcravres (C'ol. 1 :4), purpose aS IXriXvOu 7rpo<rKWTi](T<jiV 
 
 (Acts 8:27), condition as Kptvei 77 aKpoj^va-TLa rekova-a (Rom. 2:27), 
 concession as kul ye ov pjoKpav arro cvos cKaoTOu rifiMV VTrdp)(OVTa (Acts 
 17:27). It is not proper to say that tlie participle means cause, 
 condition, etc., but the context implies such an idea and the par- 
 ticiple admits it. 
 
 9. The so-called genitive absolute is merely a circumstantial 
 participle agreeing with the substantive in its case. In Latin the 
 so-called Latin ablative absolute is either ablative, locative, or in- 
 strumental, according to circumstances. The Sanskrit uses the 
 locative thus. Modern Greek uses the nominative. The ancient 
 Greek is either genitive or ablative, or possibly now one and now 
 the other. Usually the substantive is one that does not have close 
 connect;ion with the principal sentence, but this is not always so. 
 See Mk, 8:1 (iroWou oxXou wtos) . The so-called accusative abso- 
 lute does not occur in the New Testament, unless Acts 26:3 (yvtlxrrqv 
 ovra) be an example. Cf. also tvxov (1 Cor. 16:6). In Acts 2:20 
 iariv is probably to be supplied with i$6v. Cf. €$bv rjv in Matt. 
 12:4 and Siov co-rtv 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 ravra 81 avrov iv0vixr]0evTO<: iSov ayycAo? Kvpiov Kar ovap 
 i<i>dvri aiTuI (Matt. 1 :20). See also ^[att. 21:23. Cf. the nomina- 
 tive absolute in Rev. 2 :26, 6 vixwv kol 6 rrjpCjv Swo-o) avraJ. The par- 
 ticiple sometimes carries on the sentence loosely without a verb as 
 inroTaa-aop^voi (Eph. 5:21). In Mk. 7:19 KaOapi^wv is due to ana- 
 coluthon. Cf. Rev. Sometimes the genitive absolute is used 
 without a noun or pronoun as i\66vTo<; koI K/jowravros (Lu. 12:36). 
 
 10. The Scptuagint uses the particij)le as one translation of the 
 Hebrew infinitive absolute as an intonsivo expression. This reap- 
 pears in the New Testament as cvAoywr ci'Xoyi/o-w o-« (Ileb. 6:14). 
 Cf. ^avaru) TtXtvTaTw (M:iti. 15:4), ain)ther ini'thod used to translate; 
 
THE PARTICIPLE. 197 
 
 the same Hebrew idiom. So also TrapayytAt'a Trap-^yyuXaixtv (Acts 
 5:28). 
 
 11. As to adjuncts with the circumstantial i)artici])le, they do 
 not alter the true force of the participle at all, Init merely sharpen 
 and make clear the idea. So dcrtkOovaa tvdm (Mk. 6:25); a/wi 
 eX-TTL^oiv (Acts 24:26); Kaiirep wv (Heb. 5:8); m (giving the alleged 
 reason which may or may not be true), as Lu. 16:1 (ws ^laa-Kopwc- 
 
 ^a)v); 2 Cor. 5:20 (ws Tra/oaKaXowros) ; Acts 27:30 (<J)S ixeXXovTwv) ] 
 axnrep (f>epofJLev7]S (Acts 2:2). Cf. cru ttotc eTrto-T/ae'i/'a? (Lu. 22 :32). 
 
 12. The participle in indirect discourse was sufficiently treated 
 in the chapter on that subject. One example may suffice here, 
 ocra ^Kovcrafxev yerojiteTO (Lu. 4:23). In Eph. 5:5 (lO-re yivwo-KovTes) 
 the participle has an intensive force and is hardly in indirect dis- 
 course. Note both verbs for knowing here used (o'Sa, yivwo-KO)), 
 
 13. The voice in the participle calls for nothing distinctive. 
 The voice as in the infinitive merely follows the routine verbal 
 function. Moulton (Prolegomena, p. 203) even says that the 
 infinitive has ''no voice distinction." That was true originally, 
 but the Greek infinitive and the participle did come to have both 
 voice and tense. Take ia-ea-Oe ixiaovfifvoi (Matt. 10:22) as an example 
 of the periphrastic future passive. Note io-ca-Oe XaXowres (1 Cor. 
 14 :9) where middle and active combine in the periphrastic future. 
 
 14. The tense in the participle, however, calls for some discus- 
 sion. Like the infinitive the participle has no time in itself. It 
 gets its time from the verb with which it is used. Thus an aorist 
 participle may be used with a future verb as 6 viroixetva<; awd^a-crat 
 (Matt. 10;22), a future particij^le with a past tense of the indica- 
 tive as iXrjXvdet -n-poaKwi^a-wv (Acts 8:27). Time with the participle 
 is purely relative. The aorist participle is very common and is 
 either simultaneous as KaT-qvTr](rav do-Trao-a/Acvot (Acts 25:13) or an- 
 tecedent as 7rw\rj(ra<; ^veyKcv (Acts 4 :37). The aorist participle does 
 not express subsequent action. The present participle gets its 
 time from the principal verb and expresses incompleted action. So 
 TTwXorvTcs €<l>epov (Acts 4:34). In Jo. 9:25 (tv<^Aos &v aprt, /SActtw) 
 by the use of aprt with the verb the present participle is made to 
 have the force of an ''imperfect" participle. The present parti- 
 
198 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 cijilc likewise may Ijc used with the future tense as tacaOi (XLaovfttvoL 
 (Matt. 10 :22). In Acts 25 :10 we have co-tw? tl/u as a periphrastic 
 present, not perfect in idea tliougli so in form. The perfect i)ar- 
 ticiple accents the idea of completion as KocoTriaKux; (Jo. 4:G), ciXt/^ws 
 (Matt. 25:24, of. XaySwv in verse 20). The future participle, it 
 should be added, is very rare in the New Testament and almost 
 entirely in Luke. The article is occasionally found with the future 
 participle as to co-o/xcvov (Lu. 22:49). The future tense of the 
 particij)le was more developed in the Boeotian dialect. In Eph. 
 4:18 we have a periphrastic perfect jjarticiple, ia-KOTurixeyot ovtcs. 
 
 15. The negative of the participle in the New Testament is firj, 
 unless a very emphatic negative is desired, when oi is used. In 
 the older Greek oi was the common negative with participles, and 
 (jltIj only in special cases when condition or concession was suggest- 
 ed. In the modern Greek /jlt^ is alone used with participles. The 
 New Testament usag^shows the progress in that direction. Thus 
 in Acts 17 :6 /ii7 cvpovres is in accord with the common usage of the 
 later Greek. The papyri give some examples of ov as we have in 
 the New Testament. Perhaps Luke and Paul respond to the old 
 Greek feeling for oi to some extent. In general oi is only found 
 with the participle when a distinct and strong negative is desired. 
 So in Lu. 6:42 oi fiXe-n-wv. In 1 Pet. 1:8 we have ovk iSoktcs and fn^ 
 opwvTcs and the distinction can be seen. 
 
 16. Sometimes the participle like other adjectives, becomes a 
 substantive (cf. to dyaOov, for instance). In Matt. 19:21 the pos- 
 sessive genitive is used with it, irwXrjaov aov to vrrdpxpvra. Cf. the 
 belongings in English. In Heb. 8 :9 the participle is almost like 
 the infinitive, but here it is to be taken as agreeing with fwv after 
 all, iv yjlt-ipa. iiriXa^ofievov fiov t^s x^ipoi airoiv. Cf. Heb. 11:32, 
 iiriXtlypti fi€ yap Siijyovixtvov 6 ^ovos. 
 
CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 NEGATIVE PAETICLES. 
 
 1. Greek has two negatives that are used either simply (ov, fxy]) 
 or in various compounds (oiSe, oiJTe, ovBeLs, ovdu'i, ovkcti, oinrore, etc., 
 and so for compounds of ixy, firjSi, etc.)- Latin has three negatives 
 (non, nej haud). The Sanslcrit has na and ma. Greek did not 
 use na (ne) and Latin did not use /ai; (ina) . Haud and ov are 
 jDrobably the same word (cf. Zend ava). In the Boeotian dialect 
 ov never was employed. In Homer indeed fj-rj was freely used with 
 the indicative and ou sometimes with the subjunctive. The history 
 of ov and fiij has been the constant increase of the use of /xij. In 
 the modern Greek Bev (for olBev) is only used with the indicative. 
 Perhaps the earliest use of /at; was to express prohibition. For the 
 form ovOev see 1 Cor. 13:2; Acts 19:27. 
 
 2. In general the New Testament uses the negative ov and fj-y in 
 accordance with the idiom of the earlier Greek. The distinction is 
 well obseryed between the outright negation by ov and the subtle 
 and subjective ixrj. In the Sanskrit the same distinction existed 
 between na and ma. In English we have to depend on the tone 
 of voice for the difference, but we all know the difference between 
 "no" and "no." Ov is direct, positive, categorical, definite; firj is 
 doubtful, indirect, indefinite, hypothetical. Miy is a negative with 
 a "string tied to it." If a girl should say ov to a j^roposal of mar- 
 riage (especially ov^t ) , there would be little hope. But fti; would 
 leave room for another trial. The bluntness of ov in its strength- 
 ened form ovx' is well shown in Luke 1 : GO. On the other hand 
 /tT/Tt in Jo. 4:29 (/at/tc ovtos eo-rtv o Xpto-ros;) V)ut dimly conceals the 
 woman's real conviction about Jesus. 
 
 3. With the imperative therefore ixt^ is the logical, even the nec- 
 essary, negative as fiy /j.ol kottovs irdpt^ff. (Lu. 11 :7). This is uniform 
 
200 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 except where parenthetic clauses or sharp contrast is brought out 
 (cf. infinitive). In 1 Pet. 3:3 after to-rw ou'x i« set over against 
 oAA,*. So also in 1 Pet. 2 :18 we have oJ /xovov .... aXXa Kai. But 
 in Jas. 1: 22 (as elsewhere) /x^ fxovov is read. In 1 Cor. 5:10 ov wav- 
 TOD? is a parenthetical expansion of firj (rwam/xt'ywcr^at. So in 2 Tim. 
 2 :14 as to iir* ovBlv )(pr]cniJjov and /x^ Xoyofui^^eiv. In Matt. 5 :37 ov ov 
 is the i^redicate of co-tw and with the accented form instead of ov. 
 In Rev. 22 :9 (opa /it;) fxrj is a conjunction used without the verb. 
 Cf. our "lookout." 
 
 4. "\^^ith the subjunctive /niy is also naturally the negative. But 
 in Homer, before the subjmictive was sharply differentiated from 
 the future indicative ou was sometimes employed with the subjunc- 
 tive. The truth seems to be that yxij displaced ov with the subjunc- 
 tive, just as it did finally with the participle. Let fir] 8a»/Acv (Mk. 
 12:14) serve as an example. Cf. Jo. 11:50. Ov, however, is used 
 with the subjunctive, when /u.i; is a conjunction, for the sake of 
 distinction. So ^o^oS/aqi /xt^ ttws i\6wv ov)^ otovs 6i\<t) evpoi vfia<i (2 Cor. 
 12 :20). So also the marginal reading of WH in Matt. 25:9 (ixrJTrore 
 ovK dpKia-Y]), but the text has ix-qirore. ov /iiy. 
 
 5. With the optative both ov and firj appear in the older Greek, 
 ov in the conclusion of the fourth class condition, elsewhere jxtq. 
 As a matter of fact the optative in the New Testament has no neg- 
 ative save in the case of wishes where it is always /xi;. So ix.^ yevoiio 
 (Ptom. 3:4). 
 
 6. The negative of the infinitive in the New Testament is /«/, 
 even in indirect discourse (Mk. 12:18, firj e'mt), save in fixed 
 phrases, repeated negatives, or when single words are negatived. 
 In Mk. 7: 24 ov is used much like ancient idiom in indirect dis- 
 course, ouSem ^OtXev yvcovai. But in Lu. 20:40 the compound neg- 
 ative of the infinitive is repeated like that of the principal verb, 
 ovKCTi yap CToX/xwv iireporrav avrbv ovSev. In Rom. 15 :20 ov)(^ oirov 
 wvopAaOtj Xpio-Tos is a parenthetic clause with cvayycXt'^eo-^ai. So koi 
 ov after SovXtvuv (Rom. 7:6). Usually we have ov fiovov with the 
 infinitive as in Jo. 11:52 with aTroBvrja-Keiv. For the peculiar 
 position of ov p-ovov see Rom. 4:12,1(5. The New Testament does 
 not use fir] ov with the infinitive, but simply firj. So with a verb 
 
NEGATIVE PARTICLES. 201 
 
 of hindering, ^oAts KareTrava-uv Tous o;(Aows Tov fxr] Ovuv auVois (ActS 
 
 14 :18). But ju.17 (redundant fjirj) is not necessary in this use of the 
 infinitive as €V£K07rTo/x7;v Ta ttoAAo. tov iXOuv (Rom. 15:22), When 
 the principal vcrli of hindering is negative, the simple infinitive is 
 used as in firj KcuXvere avTOL iXOdv (Matt. 19 :14) or fj-y may be employed 
 
 as fJLy TL TO v8wp Svvarai KiaXvcraL Tts tov /xri (^airTKrdrjpaL (ActS 10:47). 
 
 Note TOV sometimes. In 1 Cor. 14:39 observe to XaXeTv fir] kwXvctc. 
 In Acts 4: 20 both negatives retain their value, ov SwdfieOa yap . . . ■ 
 /XT] XoXetv. 
 
 7. With participles firj is commonly used contrary to ancient 
 custom, but not contrary to the undefined action of the participle; 
 for instance, ISIatthew has /x^ with the participle 18 times and ov 2, 
 Luke has /xrj 28 times and ou 2, John has p-rj li and ov 1. See the 
 difference, between ov with the participle and ju,^ with the parti- 
 ciple in 1 Pet. 1:8, ovk i86vT€^ and fir] opoivTes, one a definite case, 
 the other a general statement. With the article and the participle 
 fiT^ is also the usual construction as Ta firj SiwKovra (Rom. 9:30), but 
 ov appears for a strong negative as in t^v ovk ■^ya-rrrjfxevrjv (Rom. 
 9 :25). Cf. TOV ou Xaov in the same verse. Cf. 6 ovk wv (Jo. 10:12). 
 In the modern Greek /i.17 alone is used with the participle. 
 
 8. With the indicative the matter is much more complicated. 
 In the modern Greek hev is confined to the indicative, and fi-q is 
 used elsewhere. But the New Testament still uses fir] a good deal 
 witli the indicative, though less than in the older Greek. A study 
 of the various aspects of the indicative must therefore be made. 
 
 (a) In ordinary declarative sentences (simple or compound) 
 the negative of the indicative is ov. This is in direct harmony 
 with the idea of the mode. So 5 Trco-TcrW ei9 avTov ov /cpi'vcTat (Jo. 
 3:18). 
 
 (b) In causal sentences likevsdse ov is always found unless the 
 reason is subjective or regarded as specially speculative. The only 
 example of oti fir] in the New Testament is in Jo. 3:18, 6 fir] incrTvuwv 
 T]8r] KiKpiTaL oTL fxr] 7r£7rto-T£VKev. With this compare 1 Jo. 5:10 where 
 oTt ou 7re7rto-T£UK£v is read, the usual idiom. Cf . also Heb. 9 : 17 
 cTrei fi^ ToTe icrxuet, which may, however, be a question. 
 
 (c) Conditional sentences usually had et n-r] and d ov rarely in 
 
202 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE CREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 the older Greek. In conditions of tlie second class (determined as 
 unfulfilled) «' /xi; is uniform even in the New Testament (as ct /jirj 
 ^v, etc., Jo. 9:33) except in Mk. 14:21 (Matt. 2G:24) where we 
 find ci ov. Here ci ovk lytwrid-q ]) rings out strongly the force of ov. 
 But in first class conditions (fulfilled), leaving out the elliiDtical 
 use of ei firi (Mk. 9 :9) and d fxr] Se, el ov is much more frequent in 
 the New Testament than ct /xr}. In the older Greek ei ov was used 
 when a single word was negatived or there was sharp contrast. 
 Such examples occur in the New Testament as e? rts ttvcS/ui XpLo-rov 
 OVK €x^L (Rom. 8:9), d yap 6 Ocos .... ovk iffiucraTO (Rom. 11:21). 
 So el KOL Tov Oehv ov ^0)8ov/xat ov^\ avOpwirov cvT/jcVo/Aat (Lu. 18:4). Cf. 
 
 Jas. 1:23 (kuI ov iroLr]Ti^s) , 1 Cor. 9 :2 (et ovk ti/xt). Cf. Jo. 1 :25. 
 
 (d) In relative sentences with the indicative ov is the usual 
 negative as os ov Xafj./3dvu (Matt. 10:38). But a few examples of fir} 
 appear in indefinite relative sentences as a firj Set (Tit. 1:11), <^ p-rj 
 
 ■rrdpea-TLV ravra (2 Pet. 1 :9). So also text of 1 Jo. 4:3 (WH), o p.r] 
 
 ofioXoyu (mar. o \m). Cf. OS OVK coTiv (1 Jo. 4:6). 
 
 (e) AMth expressions of purpose p.-^ is the usual negative as Tm 
 pLT] cf)vaL0V(T6e (1 Cor. 4:6), o-KOTrei p-rj ia-Tiv (Lu. 11:35), ^XtVcTe p.ij 
 
 TTOTc lo-Tui (Heb. 3:12). 
 
 (f) With verbs of fearing ov is the negative after p.i], but no 
 example occurs in the New Testament save 2 Cor. 12 :20 wliere p.rj 
 .... ou is found with the subjunctive. In Greek as in Latin p-rj 
 (as ne) follows the verb of fearing for the positive idea. 
 
 (g) In questions p.y expects the answer ''no" as Mk. 14:19 
 (ftj; Ti cydJ;), while ov requires the answer "yes" as Lu. 17:17 (ov^ 
 ol StKa iKadapLaOrjaav;). In 1 Cor. 9:8 we have both in different 
 
 parts of the same question, p-rj Kara avdp(i>7rov ravra XoAo), y Kal o v6p.o<i 
 ravra ov \eyci; cf. also /x^ dirtixraro (Rom. 11:1) and ovk dviiia-aro 
 (Rom. 11 :2). Sometimes ov p.r] is found in questions as ov p.r] irLni 
 avro; (Jo. 18:11) where the answer is in accordance with ov. The 
 negatives do not, of course, express the wide range of feeling and 
 emotion in different situations. In a question like p.r] o'k tx°t^^> 
 (1 Cor. 9:4) p.ri is the negative of the question and ovk of i\opti'. 
 
 (h) When the indicative is used in prohibitions ov occurs as in 
 OVK iirLopKyiTu^ (Matt. 5:33) or ov p-rj as in ov p.r) ccTTttt (Matt. 16:22). 
 
NEGATIVE PARTICLES. 203 
 
 (i) In indirect discourse, where the indicative is used, the neg- 
 ative of the direct is retained as ttojs ov voetre on ov irtpi apTwv cTttov 
 v/jXv (Matt. 16:11). Burton (Moods and Tenses, p. 181) properly 
 notes the redundant ov after the verb "deny," 6 apvovfxevos on 
 'Irjaovs ovK lo-nv (1 Jo. 2 :22). Cf. French ne. 
 
 (j) The succession of negatives in Greek merely strengthens the 
 first negative if the second is a compound form like ovSe, /ii^Sets, etc. 
 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 t<fxiyev ovBev (Lu. 4:2), fiTjSevl firjSlv 6<f>€L\eTe (Rom. 13:8). 
 Even three or more negatives may be found as ov ovk ^v ovSd<i ov-n-ai 
 Ktifieyo's (Lu. 23:53), ovkctl ov fxr] ttloi (Mk. 14:25). But some- 
 times ns follows ov as ov^ dpTrda-cL TL<s (Jo. 10:28). Cf. 1 Thess. 
 1:8. 
 
 (k) But when the second negative is a single negative, it 
 retains its force. So ou Trapa tovto ovk ta-ri ck tov awfJMTOs (1 Cor. 
 12 :15) J OVK (^op.ev i$ovcrLav /xrj ipyaatav (1 Cor. 9 :6) J /xrj ovk ^Kovcrav 
 (Rom. 10 :18) ) 6 p-rj TnartvoiV ^8r] KOipLTai on pr] TreTri'crTevKev (Jo. 3:18). 
 Cf. ovSev yap iartv KiKa\vpp,ivov o ovk diroKa\vcf}$-qaeTaL (^Nlatt. 10:26), 
 and ov p.r} dcfieOfj oiSe . . . . os ou KaTaXvOrjaerai (Matt. 24:2). See 
 1 Cor. 6:9 (ou .... ou), Cf. also /x^' ttotc ov prj (or p.ri ttotc ou, mg. ) 
 
 in Matt. 25:9. In Matt. 13:29 ou, prf ttotc .... iKpi^warjre each 
 negative has its full force. Cf, /xiy, p-ij ttotc (Mk, 14:2), Cf, Mk. 
 12 :24 for ou p.i^ in question and /xi; with participle. 
 
 (1) The use of ou p.T^ calls for a sj^ecial note. The usual con- 
 struction is with the subjunctive as in ou p.ri d<^c6y above (Matt. 
 24 :2). The future indicative is read in ou /x^ lo-rai o-ot touto (Matt. 
 16:22) and is doubtless the correct text in ou p.yj Tip-qdu (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 ou p.ri has been found. 
 They do not neutralize each other, but each retains its force 
 as in p.ri ov in questions (Rom. 10:18). Cf. ov p.y in questions 
 (Lu. 18:7, ov p.r] TToirjar] ;) . 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 (c/c/aarouvTo tou prj eVtyvcovai) after a verb of hindering (a 
 
204 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 negative conception) appears stranger to us now than it would 
 have done some generations ago before wc dropped the repeated 
 and doul)le negatives in Enghsh. Compare Shakespeare on this 
 point. Compare this vulgar sentence ''Hain't noljody seen noth- 
 ing of never a hat nowhere about here?" Cf. oi /xrj o-e dvw oi^ oi 
 
 fxiq ere eyKaTaXtTTO) (Heb. 13:5). 
 
 (n) The form ov^t adds fresh point to the negative ov, especially 
 when contrasted with aXSA as in Luke 1 :60. The position of the 
 negative may also give new emphasis as /x.^ ttoXKoX SiSao-KuXot yivta^dt 
 (Jas. 3:1). In Rora. 3:9 ov TravTws means ''by no means," but 
 in 1 Cor. 15:51 (Travrcs oi Kot/j-rjOrjaofxeOa) ov goes with the verb. In 
 Heb. 11 :3 fiy goes with the participle, not the infinitive. Litotes 
 is not infrequent in the New Testament as oi fiera woXXas (Acts 
 l:5)=(5X6yas. Cf. Lu. 15:13. 
 
 (o) For ovx oTc . . . . dXXd see Jo. 7 :22. For oix Tva . . . . dWd 
 see Jo. 6 :38. For aXX ovk in the apodosis of a condition see Mk. 
 14:29, For oi fiovov .... dXXa koI see Rom. 5:3. See Jo. 4:11 
 ovTc .... Kai. For ouSe .... ovrf. see Rev. 5 :3, and ovStt's .... 
 ovTc (Rev. 5:4). For ovSc .... ouSc see Rev. 9:4. For fir]^ .... 
 /A7;Sc see Matt. 10:9. For /u-t/tc . . . . p.^t see Acts 27:20. For 
 ovrc .... OVTC see Matt. 12 :32. For /mt/Sc .... dAAa see 1 Pet. 5:2. 
 
 As is usual in ancient Greek, koI ov (Col. 2:9,19), not oiSt, fol- 
 lows affirmative clauses. 
 
CHAPTER XXXrV. 
 
 INTENSIVE PAETICLES. 
 
 1. The term particle, as "Winer well observes (Thayer's edition, 
 p. 356), has never been satisfactorily delimited. In one sense all 
 adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, interjections are particles. 
 They are nearly all originally adverbs. They belong to the de- 
 velopment of the sentence from simple to complex. 
 
 2. Intensive particles have usually a very obscure origin. The 
 etymology of most of them is unknown, but they are as a rule very 
 old. Indeed the New Testament writers do not use them with 
 anything like the frequency of the older Greek writers. But when 
 the intensive particles are used in the New Testament they deserve 
 notice. 
 
 3. The Greeks not simply had fine shades of thought and emo- 
 tion, but they preferred to express them in the sentence by the 
 particle. In modern languages such distinction and emphasis 
 depend upon the voice and manner. Compare a German's use of 
 his hands in speaking and a Frenchman shrugging his shoulders, 
 etc. The New Testament Greek is more like the English and 
 leaves most of this emotion to be brought out by the reader him- 
 self. 
 
 4. Te (enclitic) is of very doubful etyniplogy (cf. Doric ya, 
 Sanskrit gha, and ayav). It is used thirty-three times in the New 
 Testament. It usually occurs with some other particle like aXKa. 
 ye (1 Cor. 9 :2), S.pa ye (Matt. 7:20), ap6. ye (Acts 8 :30), et ye (Gal. 
 3:4), ei Se /X77 ye (Matt. G:l), Kat'ye (Acts 17:27), KatVoi ye (Jo. 4:2), 
 /xevowye (Kom. 10:18), /a/riye (1 Cor. 6:3). In Phil. 3:8 notedAXa 
 fjxv olv ye Kai In itself ye adds nothing to the sense save by way 
 of intensifying the idea of the word or clause. This may be to 
 minify as in Jo. 4 :2 or to magnify as in Rom. 8:32. 
 
206 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 5. Hip (enclitic) is probably a shortening up of vepL (ci. perfect) 
 and so would have the idea of thoroughly. But others get it from 
 TTcpav. In the New Testament we find it with os in the Text. Rec. 
 of Mk. 15 :6, but WH have dropped it. Elsewhere it only occurs 
 with the particles StoVep (1 Cor, 8:13), iavTrtp (Heb. 3:14), ei-n-ep 
 (Rom. 8:9), cVaSiyVep (Lu. 1:1), T^nep (Jo. 12:43, text of AVII, 
 mg. virip), KadaTTcp (Rom. 3:4), KoiVe/j (Heb. 12:17), SxnT(.p (Matt. 
 6 :2). The idea is uniformly the same. 
 
 6. A17 (surely, therefore, possibly shortened form of r}hrj) is used 
 sparingly in the New Testament but in harmony with the ancient 
 idiom. The simple form appears five (possibly six, Acts G :3 mg. ) 
 times and with the same idea each time. See 1 Cor. 6:20, So^ao-arc 
 Zrj Tov 6tov iv T<3 <ro)fuxTi ifiutv. Once we have Siy ttov (Heb. 2:16). 
 The passage with 87/ ttotc (Jo. 5:4), has dropped out of the critical 
 text. 
 
 7. Tot is of uncertain origin; either the locative of the demon- 
 strative Tos (on this ground) or the ethical epic dative rot (o-ot). 
 In the New Testament it does not occur alone, but is found in 
 composition. So ^toi once (Rom. 6:16) KatVoi twice (Acts 14:17; 
 Heb. 4:3), /tieWoi eight times (as Jo. 4 :27), Toiyapow twice (1 Thess. 
 4:8; Heb. 12 :1), tolvw three times (Lu. 20:25; 1 Cor. 9 :26; Heb. 
 13:13). 
 
 8. Mcv is from epic p-rjv, older epic and Doric pAv. 'H p.ijv 
 became ^ ficV, and then p.ev. It means surely, of a truth. Mo' 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 
 degrees of emphasis are presented by this particle, from the slightest 
 emphasis (Acts 17:12) to sharp contrast (Matt. 3:11). The con- 
 trast even with 8e' is often very slight and not to be translated. 
 The original use by itself still survives in the New Testament as in 
 2 Cor. 11:4 («' p.€v ydp) where is no thought of a corresponding 8« 
 or oAAa. So Acts 5:41 (ot pxv ovv irropcvovTo) . Merovr is found once 
 (Lu. 11:28), pi€voZ'yy€ three times (Rum. 9:20; 10:18; Rhil. 3:S), 
 fihrroi eight times (see altovf)- 
 
 9. The aflirinative i)artiek' val is found t)Ver thirty times, sini])ly 
 as yes (Matt. 13:51), or meaning verily or yea (Matt. 11:9) in 
 
INTENSIVE TARTICLES. 207 
 
 contrast with ov (Matt. 5:37), with the article as subject (2 Cor. 
 1:1T). 
 
 10. v^ as a strong affirmation with the accusative is found only 
 once, Kad' yjiLipav aTToOvtjaKO) vrj rrjv VfiiTcpav Kav;(iya«/ (1 Cor. 15:31)o 
 
 Ma does not occur at all. 
 
CHAPTER XXXV. 
 
 FIGUBES OF SPEECH. 
 
 1. These are not as a rule peculiarities of Greek idiom, but be- 
 long to the nature of speech and so occur in the New Testament 
 as a matter of course. The mind does not work like a machine. 
 Speech is merely the expression of thought. Hence it is not strange 
 that the lapses, interruptions, and sudden changes in mental pro- 
 cesses should be enbalmed in language. They are especially fre- 
 quent in popular speech and the language of passion. On both 
 grounds the New Testament furnishes numerous examples of 
 broken structure. Paul shows much emotion and especially in 
 2 Corinthians does his language struggle for expression. One can 
 almost hear his heart beat there. 
 
 2. In Revelation there are grammatical lapses due to various 
 reasons. Some are on purpose as in the case of anb 6 wv (Rev. 
 1:4) to accent the unchangeableness of God. Note also in the 
 same sentence 6 ^v. Others are due to the vividness of conception 
 in the l)Ook as koI rjXOcv kol elXirjcfieu (Rev. 5:7). Cf. also Rev. 10 :S-10. 
 This mixing of tenses is common also in Mark. The use of cases 
 without regular accord is found elsewhere, but is more common in 
 Revelation. So t^s Kaiv^s 'Ie/jovctoXj/ju,, ^ KarajSatvovaa (Rev. 3:12). 
 The visions add to the excitement and confusion. Cf. nominative 
 and accusative in Rev. 4:1,4. It is possible that the book may have 
 been dictated and proba1)ly like 2 Peter lacked careful critical 
 revision. But these non-literary traits, some of which appear in 
 the non-literary papyri, do not prove the author an ignoramus. 
 
 3. Some examples of the leading figures of speeeh may be given. 
 Ellipsis of the copula ehriif is seen in Matt. !">:?> (^ixuxdpioi ol irrio^oi^ 
 iiud (if Tivc's before twi/ fuidr^Tdv (.\ets 21 .IG). lirachylogy is shown 
 
 in X'V'5 '^'i ^'*t* ''^' ^^' SorAot Tij% afxapTLa<i VTnjKOwaTC oi (RoiU. G:i7). 
 
FIGURES OF SPEECH. 209 
 
 Zeugma is well illustrated by ydXa v/tSs eVoVio-a, ov /Spwfia (1 Cor. 
 
 3:2). Aposiopesis is found in el cyvws iv rrj yiyt-epa Tavrrj Koi (TV TO. 
 
 7r/3os elprjvrjv (Lu. 19:42). A good example of anacoluthon appears 
 
 1 Cor. 9:15 (Ouk lypa^a Se ravra tva ovrcus yevrjTai. iv ifiOL, koXov yap 
 JXOL fmXXov airodaveiv rj- to Kav^qy^a. p.ov ovSeis Kfvwati) . Paranomasia 
 is used in IpxxOev d^' w l-rraOtv (Heb. 5:8). Annominatio is found 
 in fiT/Scv €pya^op.€vovs, dXXa. Trepupya^ofievov; (2 Thess. 3:11). Pleo- 
 nasm is exhibited in ^s cix^ to Ovydrptov avr^? (Mk. 7:25). Hy- 
 perbaton we see in Heb. 7: 4 (©ewpetre ttt^Xixos ovtos w). There are 
 a few poetical quotations in the New Testament as Acts 17:28; 
 
 1 Cor. 15:33; Titus 1 :12, and in Heb. (12:13) a hexameter line is 
 found in some MSS. but WH read ttolcItc instead of Troi^a-arc and 
 we lose the hexameter. In Matt. 6 :28 prolepsis of the subject is 
 found as very often in the New Testament, KaTafmOtTc to. Kpiva tov 
 ay pov TTois av$dvov(nv. 
 
 4. Rhythm meant much to the Greek, but it is difficult for us 
 always to appreciate (see position of airov, a-ov^ and fiov in John 
 9 :7, 10, 11), It has been denied that there was any rhythm in the 
 New Testament writers. It is not probably to be found according 
 to Attic standards, but the later Greek writers in general except the 
 Atticists had different tastes in such matters. The New Testament 
 writers are not artificial. "What rhythm they have is chiefly due 
 to passion and exaltation of spirit. So especially in Paul, Hebrews, 
 and John. 
 
 5. The New Testament writers do not use the stately periods of 
 the Attic orators and historians with their long rolling sentences. 
 But sometimes shorter sentences in the New Testament deserve 
 the name of period. See Lu. 1:1-4, Heb. 1:1-4, Acts 1:1-3, 
 
 2 Thess. 1 :3-10, Eph. 1 :3-14. 
 
 6. The words in a Greek sentence were arranged for rhetorical 
 effect rather than according to stiff rules (not like Latin). In the 
 Greek sentence the most emphatic position was the beginning or 
 end of the clause. Cf. ij^ . . . KeTrat (Matt. 3 :10) and ov in 1 Cor. 
 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 
 
 14 
 
210 A SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 revelation in liuniau speech. The Greek Testament remains the 
 treasure of the ages, and should he the vade mecinn of the preacher 
 
 that he may come cU CTrtyvaxrtv tov fivcrrrjpLov Tov deoVj Xpiorov, ev al 
 tiaiv Travres oi Orjcravpol T^s cro<f>ia<i Koi yvwcrewi airoKpvi^oi. 
 
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 (Books in order of Westcott and Hort. ) 
 
 MATTHEW. 
 
 PAGE PAGE 
 
 1:3 80 3:11 ....38, 105, 106, 120, 143, 206 
 
 1:11 100 3:12 110 
 
 1:12 73, 99, 100 3:14 14, 141 
 
 1:16 18 3:15 135, 140, 176 
 
 1:17 102, 171 3:16 119, 166 
 
 1:18 104 3:17 74, 91, 138, 193 
 
 1:19 157, 160 3:34 106 
 
 1:20 104, 112, 196 4:1 124 
 
 1:21 78, 143, 149 4:2 28 
 
 1:22 72, 102, 124 4:3 73 
 
 1:23 102 4:6 149 
 
 1:27 79 4:7 145 
 
 2:2 113, 189 4:11 112 
 
 2.3 20, 24, 77 4:15 94 
 
 2:4 105, 140 4:17 195 
 
 2:6 120 4:18 122 
 
 2:8 173 4:19 117 
 
 2:9 171 4:21 95 
 
 2:13 103, 153, 189, 192 4:25 105 
 
 2:16 149 5:1 70, 118, 120 
 
 2:18 157 5:3 107, 208 
 
 2:20 24 5:8 107 
 
 2:22 103, 153 5:13 124, 164, 166 
 
 3:1 76, 140 5:14 117 
 
 3:2 122, 143 5:15 11, 98 
 
 3:4 79 5:16 105, 116 
 
 3:5 98 5:17 138, 140, 148, 191 
 
 3:6 25, 66, 108, 120, 141 5:19 128 
 
 3:7 121, 178 5:21 41, 67, 112 
 
 3:8 102 5:22 78. 101, 117, 169, 194 
 
 3:10 140, 149, 209 5:25 45, 140, 171, 172 
 
212 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 5:28 102, 118 7:25 .41, US 
 
 5:29 105, 119 7:26 77 
 
 5:33 203 7:28 173 
 
 5:34 189 8:1 196 
 
 5:36 36 8:3 52, 181 
 
 5:37 200, 207 8:4 81 
 
 5:38 119 8:8 . 79 
 
 5:39 169 8:12 27 
 
 5:42 132 8:13 18 
 
 5:43 129 8:18 98 
 
 5:45 70 8:19 68 
 
 5:46 79 8:20 70 
 
 6:1 113, 205 8:24 78 
 
 6:2 124, 140, 152, 176, 206 8:27 156 
 
 6:5 143, 176 8:28 121 
 
 6:7 176 8:32 121 
 
 6:8 172 8:34 77 
 
 6:10 47, 121 8:35 169 
 
 6:12 112 9:4 83, 120, 178, 179 
 
 6:13 66, 119, 131 9:5 178, 179 
 
 6:16 194, 195 9:10 184 
 
 6:18 152 9:11 83, 178 
 
 6:19 80 9:15 174 
 
 6:24 85, 148, 189 9:18 138 
 
 6:25 112,181,185 9:22 21 
 
 6:26 105 9:24 103, 141 
 
 6:28 179, 209 9:25 103 
 
 6:29 104 9:28 150 
 
 6:30 118 9:30 41, 85 
 
 6:31 181, 185 9:31 132, 150 
 
 7:3f 80, 83 9:38 135 
 
 7:4 132 10:2 72 
 
 7:6 112 10:5 100 
 
 7:9 95, 179 10:8 97 
 
 7:11 189, 194 10:9 135, 204 
 
 7:12 82, 170, 191 10:10 149 
 
 7:14 83 10:14 105, 116 
 
 7:15 26, 160 10:16 » 77 
 
 7:20 205 10:18 102 
 
 7:21 85 10:19 84 
 
 7:22 76 10:22 81, 143, 197, 198 
 
 7:24 77, 121 10:24 124 
 
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 213 
 
 10:25 66, 113 13:38 63 
 
 10:26 96, 135, 203 13:46 145 
 
 10:28 119, 135 13:51 177, 206 
 
 10:29 85, 116 13:55 18 
 
 10:33 169 14:3 103 
 
 10:38 202 14:13 106 
 
 11:1 195 14:17 22 
 
 11:3 123 14:18 69 
 
 11:7 187 14:22 171, 186, 192 
 
 11:9 206 14:25 107 
 
 11:10 180 14:31 103 
 
 11:11 27, 104 15:4 109, 196 
 
 11:13 41 15:6 203 
 
 11:14 37, 142 15:14 118 
 
 31:21 163, 180 15:18 81 
 
 11:23 117, 172 15:23 36, 117 
 
 11:26 77, 92 15:25 112 
 
 11:28 84, 96, 118, 131 15:27 105 
 
 12:1 17, 107 15:28 176, 180 
 
 12:4 196 15:32 84, 91 
 
 12:10 179 16:1 74 
 
 12:13 41 16:9 22, 102 
 
 12:21 38, 143 16:11 203 
 
 12:24 120 16:16 73 
 
 12:25 . 79 16:18 72, 90 
 
 12:27 161, 162 16:19 146 
 
 12:28 138, 149, 162 16:22 26, 143, 203 
 
 12:31 101 16:23 57 
 
 12:32 204 16:26 96 
 
 12:33 148 17:4 112, 191 
 
 12:36 70 17:5 180 
 
 12:41 120 17:12 11 
 
 12:42 22 17:17 178 
 
 12:45 28 17:25 195 
 
 13:6 72 18:1 27 
 
 13:12 81 18:4 82 
 
 13:13 37 18:6 153 
 
 13:29 Ill, 116, 203 18:8 113, 188 
 
 13:32 155 18:12 112 
 
 13:33 171 18:13 164 
 
 13:34 105, 117 18:15 164 
 
 13:35 98 18:19 81 
 
214 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 18:20 73 23:31 110 
 
 18:25 148, 186 23:33 131 
 
 18:26 112 23:34 22 
 
 19:6 149 23:35 102 
 
 19:14 189, 201 23:37 97 
 
 19:18 71 24:2 203 
 
 19:21 183,198 24:3 179 
 
 19:22 196 24:10 85 
 
 19:34 189 24:20 100 
 
 20:1 66 24:21 67 
 
 20:2 94 24:24 154 
 
 20:6 94 24:33 108, 173 
 
 20:10 184 24:38 171 
 
 20:12 109 24:39 171 
 
 20:14 158 24:42 84 
 
 20:19 107 24:43 163 
 
 20:22 84 24:45 178 
 
 20:28 58, 102, 119 24:50 81 
 
 20:30 98 25:5 138, 141 
 
 20:32 154 25:6 77, 100 
 
 21:1 24 25:8 140 
 
 21:2 117 25:9 200, 203 
 
 21:8 24, 63, 80 25:16 41 
 
 21:21 72 25:20 145, 198 
 
 21:22 170 25:24 145, 198 
 
 21:23 149, 189 25:27 129 
 
 21:24 95 25:34 104 
 
 21:30 122 25:35 46 
 
 21:31 83 25:38 179 
 
 21:32 189 25:40 159 
 
 21:33 196 26:2 72 
 
 21:37 96 26:9 103 
 
 21:38 179 26:15 148 
 
 21:41 38, 120, 143 26:18 76, 81, 98, 140 
 
 21:46 95 26:22 85 
 
 22:16 60 26:23 108, 120 
 
 23:2 138 26:24 162, 202 
 
 23:5 154 26:33 162 
 
 23:17 83 26:35 203 
 
 23:23 129, 141, 162 26:42 167 
 
 83:27 20, 102, 109 26:43 146 
 
 23:30 103 26:50 84. 178 
 
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 215 
 
 26:51 100 27:30 141 
 
 26:5.'5 . 76 27:33 140 
 
 26:55 121, 141 27:40 73 
 
 26:61 119 27:43 73 
 
 27 :4 46 27 :44 123 
 
 27:5 135 27:46 20, 76, 92 
 
 27:10 175 27:49 131, 143 
 
 27:13 103 27:54 72, 73 
 
 27:17 83, 142 27:61 116 
 
 27:21 104 28:1 28, 117 
 
 27:22 95 28:15 102 
 
 27:24 78, 129, 131, 135, 143 
 
 MARK. 
 
 1:2 154 3:29 102 
 
 1:4 101, 120 4:23 82 
 
 1:7 189 4:26 176 
 
 1:8,, 78,107 4:31 105 
 
 1:9. 120 4:37 155 
 
 1:10 105, 121 4:38 141 
 
 1:13 122 4:39 45, 145 
 
 1:14 174 5:4. .72, 110, 119, 124, 145, 160, 192 
 
 1:15 Ill 5:5 119 
 
 1:16 118 5:13 141 
 
 1:18 109 5:14 185, 194 
 
 1:21 174 5:19 145, 179 
 
 1:24 84, 113, 178 5:21 73, 81 
 
 1:29 18 5:22 123 
 
 1:34 36 5:23 154 
 
 2:1 100 5:34 21,92 
 
 2:15 185 5:39 139 
 
 2:16 178 5:41 77, 92 
 
 2:17 153 5:42 139 
 
 2:19 172, 174 5:43 192 
 
 2:22 166 6:2 76 
 
 2:23 148 6:4 26 
 
 2:28 155 6:8 186 
 
 3:1 75 6:11 105,117 
 
 3:8 117 6:16 81 
 
 3:11 173 6:19 110 
 
 3:14 119 6:21 107 
 
 3:24 164 6:23 26 
 
216 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 6:25 107 10:29 170 
 
 C:36 177 10:30 122, 164 
 
 6:38 84, 178 10:35 . . .' 131 
 
 6:39 191 10:37 85 
 
 6:40 91 10:38 96 
 
 6:45 171 10:40 71 
 
 6:48 113, 172 10 :42 103 
 
 6:51 123 10:43 131 
 
 6:56 128, 169, 175 10:48 110 
 
 7:5 74 10:51 118 
 
 7:19 64, 196 11:14 45, 157 
 
 7:24 200 11:19 128 
 
 7:25 209 11:21 14 
 
 7:31 98 11:22 101 
 
 7:36 27 11:23 141 
 
 8:7 36 11:24 138 
 
 8:12 166 11:25 121, 173 
 
 8:22 153 11:28 84 
 
 8:28 181 11:31 . 112 
 
 8:34 169 12:1 35 
 
 8:35 169 12:14 200 
 
 8:37 42 12:15 177 
 
 8:38 96 12:17 72, 101 
 
 9:6 181, 185 12:18 183, 191, 200 
 
 9:7 102 12:24 203 
 
 9:9 152, 202 12:37 73 
 
 9:11 83, 178 12:41 141 
 
 9:12 112 13:15 44, 132 
 
 9:20 112 13:16 108, 120 
 
 9:22 36 13:19 82 
 
 9:23 71 13:20 119 
 
 9:28 41, 178 13:30 172 
 
 9:29 83 13:36 152 
 
 9:30 153 14:2 152, 203 
 
 9:38 168 14:4 178 
 
 9:40 124 14:9 202 
 
 9:41 96 14:12 154 
 
 9 :42 122 14 : 14 170, 186 
 
 9:47 59 14:19 28, 116, 202 
 
 10:13 112 14:20 108 
 
 10:17 83 14:21 202 
 
 10:18 59, 178 14:25 203 
 
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 217 
 
 14:28 190 14:72 141 
 
 14:29 204 15:4 84, 179 
 
 14:31 203 15:6 141, 206 
 
 14:32 172 15:16 81, 117 
 
 14:36 77, 92 15:17 95 
 
 14:41 63 15:23 141 
 
 14:43 122 15:24 83, 85, 178 
 
 14:44 14B 15:29 ISO 
 
 14:47 83, 135 15:44 145, 166 
 
 14:61 141 15:47 179 
 
 14:65 135 16:9 28, 146 
 
 LUKE. 
 
 1:1 159 2:14 72 
 
 1:3 12 2:15 85 
 
 1:5 82 2:16 147 
 
 1:6 74, 116 2:20 81 
 
 1:8 Ill, 184 2:22 98 
 
 1:9 189 2:27 97,102 
 
 1:13 159 2:35 100, 105 
 
 1:15 116 2:38 107 
 
 1:20 81, 143, 160 2:41 107 
 
 1:21 141 2:46 98 
 
 1:22 78, 141, 145 2:48 12, 139 
 
 1:23 148, 151, 173 2:49 83, 178, 179 
 
 1:26 . 151 2:50 83 
 
 1:30 138 3:2 121 
 
 1:36 26, 27 3:10 131, 178 
 
 1:41 102, 184 3:15 186 
 
 1:59 141 3:16 106 
 
 1:60 63, 199, 204 3:21 185 
 
 1:62 177, 185 4:2 203 
 
 1:66 179 4:3 162 
 
 1:73 95 4:6 145 
 
 1:74 112 4:13 76, 116, 171 
 
 1:76 189 4:14 121 
 
 2:1 184 4:18 116 
 
 2:4 81, 160 4:20 70, 79 
 
 2:5 135 4:23 197 
 
 2:7 112 4:28 196 
 
 2:8 95 4:29 146, 155, 191 
 
 8:13 Ill 4:34 179f 
 
218 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 4:41 63 8:25 112, 156, 178, 179 
 
 4:42 189 8:26 117 
 
 5:4 194 8:27 109 
 
 5:9 81 8:29 24, 109, 146 
 
 5:10 71, 112 8:38 50 
 
 5:12 105 8:39 121 
 
 5:17 146, 148 8:46 184 
 
 5:19 67, 100, 117 9:7f 85 
 
 5:20 39 9:13 164 
 
 5:21 80 9:18 189, 190, 192 
 
 5:23 145 9:27 172 
 
 5:32 145 9:46 131, 165, 185 
 
 5:38 97, 194 9:50 170 
 
 6:1 148, 185 9:52 176, 191 
 
 6:3 173 9:54 64, 131 
 
 6:8 78 9:56 85 
 
 6:9 107 10:1 118 
 
 6:11 44, 185 10:7 70 
 
 6:12 70 10:15 117 
 
 6:17 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 45, 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 
 
 7:47 81, 82, 151 11:23 102 
 
 8:1 121 11:28 206 
 
 8:6 47 11:33 124 
 
 8:15 59 11:34 173 
 
 8:18 170 11:35 202 
 
 8:20 47 11:38 122 
 
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 219 
 
 11:52 21 15:15 109 
 
 12:1 81, 82 15:17 30 
 
 12:3 82, 149 15:24 146 
 
 12:5 182, 186 15:26 . 182 
 
 12:8 143, 169 15:29 94, 112 
 
 12:10 120 16:1 160, 197 
 
 12:11 173 16:2 178 
 
 12:19 100 16:3 95, 143, 194 
 
 12:20 107, 190 16:4 139 
 
 12:25 104 16:8 28, 101, 124 
 
 12:32 92 16:10 27, 74 
 
 12:35 45, 145 16:12 83 
 
 12:36 196 16:13 23, 85, 102 
 
 12:38 167 16:20 41, 146 
 
 12:39 163 16:24 77, 100 
 
 12:47 96 16:25 46 
 
 12:48 81 16:26 117, 145 
 
 12:49 83, 179 17:1 189 
 
 12:50 . 79 17:2 122 
 
 12:52 146 17:6 141, 163, 165 
 
 12:58 192 17:8 37,46,142 
 
 13:3 167 17:10 141 
 
 13:7 173 17:11 119 
 
 13:8 172 17:17 202 
 
 13:10 195 17:21 102, 116 
 
 13:16 24 17:27 141, 171 
 
 13:19 80 17:32 102 
 
 13:23 166 17:33 169 
 
 13:25 173 18:1 190 
 
 13:26 42 18:4 167, 202 
 
 13:28 42, 54 18:5 183 
 
 13:29 18 18:7 107, 204 
 
 13:31 79 18:9 122 
 
 14:1 17 18:11 123 
 
 14:8 42, 145 18:12 100, 141 
 
 14:18 145, 195 18:13 70 
 
 14:19 195 18:14 81 
 
 14:24 102 18:31 112 
 
 14:30 76 18:36 185 
 
 15:7 27 19:2 79 
 
 15:13 204 19:3 85 
 
 15:14 78 19:4 . 07, 100 
 
220 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 19:7 
 
 19:8 
 
 122 
 
 141 
 
 19:9 
 
 19:11 
 
 159 
 
 67 
 
 19:12 
 
 26. 79 
 
 19:13 
 
 76, 172 
 
 19:17 
 
 132, 141 
 
 19:18 
 
 85 
 
 19:20 
 
 85 
 
 19:21 
 
 153 
 
 19:23 
 
 166 
 
 19:40 
 
 19:42 
 
 39, 146, 162 
 
 209 
 
 19:44 
 
 119 
 
 19:47 
 
 67 
 
 19:48 
 
 53 
 
 20:4 
 
 148 
 
 20:6 
 
 145, 183 
 
 20:10 
 
 152 
 
 20:11 
 
 135, 192 
 
 20:12 
 
 7 
 
 20 : 13 
 
 135 
 
 20:28 
 
 26 
 
 20:40 
 
 200 
 
 20:42 
 
 79 
 
 21:11 
 
 , 147 
 
 21:19 
 
 , 143 
 
 21:24 
 
 171 
 
 21:25 
 
 72, 206 
 
 22:4 
 
 22:6 
 
 71, 131, 182, 186 
 
 105, 116 
 
 22:9 
 
 131 
 
 22:11 
 
 169 
 
 22:15 
 
 , 190 
 
 22:16 
 
 131 
 
 22:19 
 
 80 
 
 22:24 141, 182, 186 
 
 22:27 71 
 
 22:42. • 46, 49 
 
 22:49 120, 166, 198 
 
 22:52 122 
 
 22:54 34 
 
 22:58 180 
 
 23:12 141, 195 
 
 23:15 110, 113 
 
 23:18 110 
 
 23:19 139 
 
 23:31 131 
 
 23:33 69 
 
 23:50 59 
 
 23:53 203 
 
 23:54 98 
 
 24:1 26, 107 
 
 24:4 148, 185 
 
 24:6 149, 184 
 
 24:10 100 
 
 24:11 112 
 
 24:16 105, 189 
 
 24:17 119, 139 
 
 24:18 66 
 
 24:19 63 
 
 24:20 152, 178, 179 
 
 24:23 183 
 
 24:24 175 
 
 24:25 78 
 
 24:26 141 
 
 24:30 190 
 
 24:31 78 
 
 24:39 20 
 
 24:41 119 
 
 24:40 192 
 
 24:51 119 
 
 22:23 131, 141, 182, 186 
 
 JOHN. 
 
 1:1 75, 123 1:11 76 
 
 1:3 10 1:12 71 
 
 1:0 91 1:14 13,67,102 
 
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 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 8:20 120 11:50 124, 200 
 
 8:25 67, 83, 97 llf52 201 
 
 8:27 94 11:50 124 
 
 8:29 66,113 11:55 105 
 
 8:39 165 11:56 53 
 
 8:42 38 12:9, 73 
 
 8:44 ...55 12:12 73 
 
 8:51 164 12:16 66 
 
 8:53 66 12:32 164 
 
 8:57 40 12:42 148 
 
 9:6 79 12:43 206 
 
 9:7 209 13:13 90, 181 
 
 9:9 109 13:14 175 
 
 9:10 79, 209 13:16 104 
 
 9:11 79, 209 13:17 164 
 
 9:17 79 13:20 169 
 
 9:18 31, 171, 181 13:21 151 
 
 9:25 197 13:22 151 
 
 9:32 184 13:23 151 
 
 9:33 202 13:24 151, 179 
 
 9:34 77 13:25 151 
 
 9:39 148 13:27 151 
 
 10 
 10 
 10 
 10 
 10 
 10 
 10 
 10 
 10 
 10 
 11 
 11 
 11 
 11 
 11 
 11 
 11 
 11 
 11 
 11 
 
 11 71, 73 13:35 80 
 
 12 201 14:1 44 
 
 16 148 14:2 80, 166 
 
 25 24 14:3 37, 141 
 
 28 203 14:6 85 
 
 30 63 14:13 169 
 
 32 141 14:14 169 
 
 36 73, 181 14:22 83, 179, 185 
 
 37 167 14:26 95 
 
 38 138, 141 14:28 .26, 163 
 
 1 18 14:29 172 
 
 3 168 15:12f 153 
 
 4 148 15:14 76 
 
 15:20 162 
 
 15:22 36, 162 
 
 15:24 36, 162 
 
 16:7 112. 
 
 16:23 ir.4 
 
 16:28 145 
 
 17:1 21, 01 
 
 13 
 
 181 
 
 17 
 
 28 
 
 18 
 
 119 
 
 27 
 
 63 
 
 44 
 
 96, 146 
 
 47 
 
 129 
 
 49 
 
 83 
 
INDEX TO NE^V TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 223 
 
 17:4 79 19:19 121 
 
 17:5 79 19:22 145 
 
 17:6 145 19:25 74,108,122 
 
 17:7 39, 40 19:35 81 
 
 17:21 21 19:36 20 
 
 17:24 92 20:4 27, 66 
 
 17:25 21, 92 20:8 66 
 
 18:5 146 20:11 108, 123 
 
 18:6 106 20:24 121 
 
 18:11 202 20:25 13 
 
 18:19 122 20:28 20, 92 
 
 18:23 162 21:8 106 
 
 18:30 163, 167 21:18 141 
 
 18:39 154 21:21 179 
 
 19:2 107 21:22 171 
 
 19:3 36 21:23 120, 172 
 
 19:11 163 21:25 181, 192 
 
 19:12 . 119 
 
 ACTS. 
 
 l:lff 122 3:11 22 
 
 1:3 122 3:23 169 
 
 1:4 105, 181 4:4 35 
 
 1:5 76, 80, 107, 122, 204 4:9 101 
 
 1:11 76 4:13 80 
 
 1:13 124 4:20 201 
 
 1:15 146 4:25 83 
 
 1:22 81 4:33 36 
 
 1:25 80 4:34 197 
 
 2:2 160, 176, 197 4:35 159, 175 
 
 2:17 38 4:36 109 
 
 2:25 41 4:37 197 
 
 2:29 196 5:2 18 
 
 2:29 190 5:5 196 
 
 2:33 114 5:24 179 
 
 2:38 120 5:28 197 
 
 2:45 175 5:36 14, 83, 112 
 
 2:46 147 5:38 164 
 
 3:2 36, 95 5:41 69, 206 
 
 3:3 37 5:42 195 
 
 3:7 103 6:3 206 
 
 3:9 194 6:11 124 
 
224 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 7:12 184 12:8 135 
 
 7:13 113 12:14 38 
 
 7:16 103 12:18 12, 179 
 
 7:18 171 13:6 102 
 
 7:19 189 13:10 92 
 
 7:20 113 13:20 109 
 
 7:23 28 13:25 83, 178 
 
 7:39 113 14:1 101 
 
 7:40 91, 112 14:4 69 
 
 7:43 117 14:5 189 
 
 8:1 117 14:6 18 
 
 8:11 109 14:8 18, 107 
 
 8:20 157 14:16 106 
 
 8:21 149 14:17 206 
 
 8.23 184 14:18 194, 201 
 
 8:27 154, 196, 197 14:19 181, 192 
 
 8:30 118, 177, 205 14:22 186 
 
 8:31 149, 165 14:23 146 
 
 8:38f 120 15:15 40, 123 
 
 8:40 190 15:21 191 
 
 9:1 102 lo:22f 64, 191 
 
 9:3 112 15:25 191 
 
 9:6 84, 178 15:28 189 
 
 9:7 95 15:26 72 
 
 9:31 107 16:10 123 
 
 9:38 102, 116 16:11 66 
 
 10:1 18 16:15 113 
 
 10:3 93 16:16 196 
 
 10:5 122 16:21 191 
 
 10:17 182 16:29 82 
 
 10:18 206 16:34 110 
 
 10:28 183 16:36 55 
 
 10:34 59, 184 16:37 110 
 
 10:38 96 17:6 18, 198 
 
 10:47 81, 201 17:12 . ...; 206 
 
 11:16 107 17:15 176 
 
 11:17 162 17:18 . ..80, 82, 83, 131, 165, 177, 
 
 11:19 121 182, 185 
 
 11:26 60 17:22 91 
 
 11:28 37, 142, 192 17:27 44, 165, 179, 185, 196, 205 
 
 12:2 110 17:28 69, 209 
 
 12:6 123, 192 18:3 94 
 
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 225 
 
 18:4 141 23:22 186 
 
 18:10 189 23:23 186 
 
 18:14 91, 163 24:3 110 
 
 18:25 122 24:19 165 
 
 19:2 147 24:21 35, 76, 80 
 
 19:13 76 2ir22 118 
 
 19:16 23 24:26 109, 110, 197 
 
 19:26 80, 99 24:27 22 
 
 19:27 199 25:3 186 
 
 19:32 85, 185 25:4 184 
 
 19:^36 196 25:10 198 
 
 19:40 103 25:13 174, 197 
 
 20:4 109 25;16 172, 182, 183, 184 
 
 20:5 94 25:17 85 
 
 20:15 116 25:21 172 
 
 20:16 146, 166 25:22 129, 158 
 
 20:18 77 25:24 186 
 
 20:24 152 25:25 184 
 
 20:25 189 25:26 185 
 
 20:28 75 26:3 98, 121, 196 
 
 20:35 78 26:4 39, 51 
 
 21:1 20 26:5 27, 66 
 
 21:4 186 26:19 113 
 
 21:9 28 26:20 186 
 
 21:16 101, 208 26:24 75 
 
 21:21 107, 186 26:29 84, 131, 157, 165, 166 
 
 21:26 71 26:32 162, 192 
 
 21:28 109, 146 27:10 .186, 192 
 
 21:29 146 27:17 153 
 
 21:33 177, 182 27:18 141 
 
 21:38 75 27:20 189, 204 
 
 22:8 14 27:22 71, 94, 105 
 
 22:9 95 27:30 160, 197 
 
 22:12 105 21:34 105 
 
 22:16 , 14, 44, 132, 135 27:39 165, 166 
 
 22:22 141, 162 27:43 105 
 
 22:25 18 28:13 66 
 
 22:29 184 28:20 97 
 
 23:5 95 28:23 102 
 
 23:9 166 28:26 35 
 
 23:20 123, 176 
 
 15 
 
226 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 JAMES. 
 
 1:1 44, 191 2:10 169 
 
 1:2 77, 107 2:25 106, 109 
 
 1:5 105 3:1 204 
 
 1:6 109 3:7 110 
 
 1:11 139 3:10 56 
 
 1 : 13 104 3 : 13 178 
 
 1:18 83 4:13 45, 81 
 
 1:19 51, 131 4:14 74 
 
 1:22 200 4:15 190 
 
 1:23 202 5:12 94, 123 
 
 1:24 84, 139, 145 5:13 42 
 
 2:5 113 5:17 109 
 
 I. PETER. 
 
 1:8 198, 201 4:9 105 
 
 1:11 178 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 5:8 186, 191 
 
 3:14 165 5:9 102, 150 
 
 3:17 165 5:12 132, 150 
 
 II. PETER. 
 
 1:1 75 2:12 15, 195 
 
 1:4 27, 66, 74 2:19 110 
 
 1:9 170, 202 2:20 75 
 
 1:11 75 3:9 105 
 
 1:17 82 3:14 113 
 
 1:20 105 3:15 74 
 
 2:6 101 2:18 75 
 
 I. JOHN. 
 
 1:1 40 2:27 53 
 
 1:4 78 3:4 75 
 
 1:21 85 3:5 82 
 
 2:2 122 4:3 170, 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 
 
 III. JOHN. 
 4 27 
 
 JUHE. 
 4 22 20 27 
 
 EOMANS. 
 
 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 72 6:15 83 
 
 2:13 122 6:16 148, 206 
 
 2:19 183 6:17 81, 208 
 
 2:27 196 7:1 174 
 
 3:2 209 7:3 153, 189 
 
 3:4 152, 175, 200, 206 7:6 201 
 
 3:6 149 7:10 63 
 
 3:9 204 7:15 81 
 
 3:13 36 7:18 188, 189 
 
 3:20 85 7:24 91 
 
 3:23 105, 139 7:25 79 
 
 3:24 58, 73, 74, 76 8:1 74 
 
 3:25 63 8:2 74 
 
 3:26 67 8:3 74, 98, 172 
 
 3:30 34, 166 8:8 112 
 
 4:7 41 8:9 202, 206 
 
 4:9 149 8:12 149 
 
228 INDEX TO NfiW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 8:17 166 11:30 112 
 
 8:18 1(2 11:36 119, 120, 121 
 
 8:20 12 12:5 116 
 
 8:23 79, 119 12:6ff 149 
 
 8:24 110 12:9 66 
 
 8:26 79, 175 12:15 191 
 
 8:29 101 12:16 201 
 
 8:32 103, 132, 156, 205 12:18 98, 121 
 
 8:38 149 13:7 71 
 
 9:3 129, 158 13:8 203 
 
 9:5 75 14:2 69,81 
 
 9:6 82 14:4 79 
 
 9:20 206 14:5 69 
 
 9:25 .^ 201 14:14 112 
 
 9:28 55 14:21 172 
 
 9:30 201 14:22 79 
 
 10:14 81 15:15 139 
 
 10:15 . 176, 179 15:20 200 
 
 10:18 203, 205 15:22 201 
 
 10:19 66 15:24 149, 174 
 
 11:1 41, 177, 202 16:2 102 
 
 11:2 202 16:6 97 
 
 11:4 24 16:11 26 
 
 11:17 60 16:18 76, 82 
 
 11:20 110 16:19 149 
 
 11:21 202 16:25 109 
 
 11:22 14 
 
 I. CORINTHIANS. 
 
 1:1 91 3:4 20,85 
 
 1:13 177 3:8 76 
 
 1:17 209 3:9 73 
 
 1:18 74 3:10 73 
 
 1:19 38, 143 3:13 178 
 
 1:22 159 3:21 103 
 
 1:29 85 3:22f 72, 148 
 
 1:31 150, 153 4:6 85, 202 
 
 2:4 73 4:8 131, 157 
 
 2:7 194 5:1 82 
 
 2:12 42 5:6 73 
 
 2:13 66 5:8 155 
 
 2:16 20 5:10 202 
 
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 229 
 
 5:11 135 11:2 40, 102, 159 
 
 C:3 205 11:5 109 
 
 6:7 85, 135 11:13 80 
 
 6:9 203 11:21 81 
 
 6:8 80 11:28 105 
 
 6:11 135 12:2 173 
 
 6:18 105 12:11 110 
 
 6:20 206 12:15 203 
 
 7:5 166 13:2 199 
 
 7:7 129 13:3 52 
 
 7:28 35, 139, 164, 165 13:7 64 
 
 7:31 93 13:8 195 
 
 7:35 30, 80 13:12 47, 135 
 
 8:7 123 13:13 66 
 
 8:9 153 14:9 197 
 
 8:13 206 14:20 107 
 
 9:1 40, 177 14:27 118 
 
 9:2 167, 202, 205 14:35 72, 178 
 
 9:4 203 14:39 201 
 
 9:6 203 15:1 82 
 
 9:8 179, 202 15:4 145 
 
 9:12 103 15:8 14, 166, 176 
 
 9:13 107 15:10 82 
 
 9:15 209 15:12 , 148 
 
 9:17 96 15:16 162 
 
 9:21 53, 101 15:20 148 
 
 9:26 206 15:27 184 
 
 9:27 152 15:31 207 
 
 10:12 155 15:33 209 
 
 10:16 81 15:37 165 
 
 10:17 159 15:42 44, 148 
 
 10:19 184 15:51 47, 204 
 
 10:22 129 15:55 18 
 
 10:27 164 16:6 98, 196 
 
 10:28 164 16:21 80 
 
 10:30 109 16:22 45 
 
 II. COEINTHIANS. 
 
 1:4 81 1:17 207 
 
 1:9 145 1:22 11 
 
 1:13 148 2:6 113 
 
 1:14 67. 113 2:13 112 
 
230 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 2:15 112 8:6 175 
 
 3:12 110 8:10 107 
 
 3 : 15 173 8:11 190 
 
 3:16 122, 173 8:12 175 
 
 3:18 97, 122, 176 8:22 97 
 
 4:4 101 9:9 26 
 
 4:13 79 9:12 113 
 
 4:16 102 10:1 90 
 
 5:1 101, 164 10:4 113 
 
 5:13 110 10:9 191 
 
 5:14 101, 123, 124 10:13 63 
 
 5:15 105 11:1 157 
 
 5:20 197 11:4 85,206 
 
 6:14 45, 109 11:21 184 
 
 7:8 166 12:2 116, 123 
 
 7:11 148 12:19 lOr 
 
 7:12 190 12:20 110, 200, 202 
 
 GALATIAXS. 
 
 l:6f 85 4:19 172 
 
 1:9 157 4:20 12, 129, 158 
 
 1:12 149 4:24 85 
 
 2:1 119 4:25 71 
 
 2:2 152 4:27 26 
 
 2:7 67, 135 5:2 96 
 
 2:8 110 5:4 105 
 
 2:9 156 5:12 131, 157 
 
 2:13 110, 155 5:24 101 
 
 2:14 184 6:3 82 
 
 3:1 123 6:10 173 
 
 3:4 205 6:11 84, 179 
 
 3:13 124 6:12 110 
 
 3:19 47, 171 6:14 72, 131, 157 
 
 3:25 124 6:17 100 
 
 4:11 153 
 
 EPHESTANS. 
 
 l:3ff 209 1:18 17 
 
 1:4 117 2:3 109 
 
 1:8 18 2:4 95, 96 
 
 1:14 82 2:12 104 
 
 1:17 50, 153 3:1 117 
 
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 231 
 
 3:5 107 4:25 24, 132 
 
 3:16 44 4:28 19-1 
 
 3:19 105 4:29 154 
 
 3:20 59, 117 5:3 112 
 
 4:3 172 5:4 141 
 
 4:9 71 5:5 82, 131, 132, 197 
 
 4:11 81 5:12 110 
 
 4:17f 64 5:21 196 
 
 4:18 105, 198 5:26 107 
 
 4:22 27 5:33 132 
 
 4:23 20 6:6 59 
 
 PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 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 
 
 COLOSSIANS. 
 
 1:4 196 2:14 107 
 
 1:15 75 2:23 59 
 
 1:16 77, 102 3:1 Ill 
 
 2:9 75 
 
 I. THESSALONIANS, 
 
 1:5 82 
 
 1:8 203 
 
 2:7 176 
 
 3:1 106 
 
 3:5 152 
 
 3:8 162 
 
 4:2 35 
 
 4:8 
 
 206 
 
 4:9 
 
 79 
 
 4:16 
 
 74 
 
 5:5 
 
 5:8 
 
 5:10 
 
 101 
 
 191 
 
 122 
 
 5:23 
 
 157 
 
232 INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 
 
 11. THESSALONIANS. 
 
 l:3ff 209 3:6 35 
 
 1:4 30 3:11 194, 209 
 
 2:15 96, 135 
 
 HEBREWS. 
 
 l:lff 209 7:25 67 
 
 1:4 82, 122, 175 7:27 124 
 
 1:9 95 8:2 81 
 
 2:2 122 8:3 151, 154, 169 
 
 2:10 119 8:6 56,175 
 
 2:13 39, 146 8:9 198 
 
 2:14 103 8:11 39 
 
 2:15 188 9:7 100, 169 
 
 2:16 206 9:17 159, 202 
 
 2:17 97 9:23 28 
 
 2:18 160 9:26 149, 159, 166 
 
 3:1 159 10:2 149, 159, 166 
 
 3:10 160 10:13 100 
 
 3:11 156, 166, 179 10:25 110, 195 
 
 3:12 141, 153, 202 10:25 ..110 
 
 3:13 171 10:35 175 
 
 3:14 206 10:37 82, 174 
 
 4:1 153 10:25 195 
 
 4:3 156 11:3 204 
 
 4:12 27 11:9 41 
 
 4:16 22 11:15 163 
 
 5:2 159 11:21 174 
 
 5:4 176 11:32 198 
 
 5:8 176, 197. 209 11:33 143 
 
 5:99 26 12:1 149, 206 
 
 5:10 96 12:2 103, 119 
 
 5:12 97, 145, 183 12:5 103 
 
 5:14 123 12:6 160 
 
 6:10 102 12:11 105 
 
 6:14 196 12:13 209 
 
 7:4 84, 209 12:17 206 
 
 7:9 154, 191 12:18 112 
 
 7:11 191 12:20 102 
 
 7:20 82, 159, 175 12:22 25. 112 
 
 7:2.3 145 12:28 168, 169. 170 
 
 7:24 6G, 75 13:2 95, 195 
 
INDEX TO NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES. 233 
 
 13:5 204 13:16 110 
 
 13:13 206 13:23 194 
 
 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. 
 
 1:12 151, 179 3:2£ 148 
 
 1:16 77 3:16 77 
 
 2:11 123 4:8 66 
 
 2:14 200 4:13 172 
 
 2:25 152, 153 4:15£ 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 
 
 REVELATION. 
 
 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. 
 
 3:9 34 11:10 56 
 
 3:12 20, 91, 208 11:13 101 
 
 3:14 71 11:17 53 
 
 3:15 131, 157 12:4 55 
 
 3:17 75 12:12 180 
 
 3:21 91 14:4 169 
 
 4:1 45, 204 14:14 66 
 
 4:6 28, 117 14:20 105, 116 
 
 4:9 173 15:2 109 
 
 4:11 71 15:3 92 
 
 5:3 204 16:18 82 
 
 5:4 204 16:19 90 
 
 5:6 22 17:3 102 
 
 5:7 40, 145, 208 17:8 167 
 
 6:6 101 17:17 171 
 
 6:8 Ill, 120 18:3 54 
 
 6:15 . 22 18:10 180 
 
 6:16, 12 16:18 82 
 
 7:1 121 18:17 76 
 
 7:2 78 19:3 39 
 
 7:9 96 20:3 171 
 
 8:1 169, 173 20:5 172 
 
 8:13 180 21:21 28, 83, 116 
 
 9:4 149 22:9 200 
 
 10:8-10 208 22:19 38 
 
 11:9 34. 37 
 
INDEX OF SOME IMPORTANT GREEK WORDS. 
 
 (For alphabetical list of verbs see chapter on Principal Parts of 
 Verbs. For alphabetical list of prepositions see chapter on Prepo- 
 sitions. The minute Table of Contents at the beginning of the 
 volume will enable one to find easily the subjects treated as well 
 as the various Greek words in their proper place and order. It 
 remains only to give here various isolated Greek words that de- 
 serve special compilation. ) 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Wd 92 
 
 dya^os 58, 59 
 
 "Ayap 24 
 
 aye 45 
 
 dytaa/ios 60 
 
 aytos 58 
 
 dyt<i)TaTOS 27 
 
 alwv 23 
 
 aiwvto; 26 
 
 aK-qKoa 40 
 
 aKpi/Sc'cTTaTos 27, 66 
 
 aX\Tl]X(DV 31 
 
 aX\oTpuvL<TK07ro<i 59 
 
 5/xa 19, 108, 110 
 
 d/xc^iV 19 
 
 d/K^drepoc 23 
 
 a/x^to 23 
 
 S,v 13, 128, 162ff, 169 
 
 ivalSa 45 
 
 'AvSpcou 18 
 
 PAGE 
 
 dvTnraprjXOev 60 
 
 aTr€KaT€(TTa.6rj 41 
 
 OLTTedTaXKav 55 
 
 diro6avovfw.L 38 
 
 'AttoXAw 20, 60 
 
 ATToAAcivios 60 
 
 airoAwj aTToXiao) 38 
 
 aTToAvT^coo"!?. 58 
 
 apa 149 
 
 apa 177 
 
 apTrai 26 
 
 dppafiijiv 11 
 
 dp-)(riV' 67 
 
 a.Ti.Kvo<i 26 
 
 aVTOKaTd.KpLTO<i 59 
 
 avTos 30, 78, 79 
 
 d<f>i6r]<Tav 41 
 
 a4>ci<; 36 
 
 dc^eXTTi^w 12 
 
 d</>£Xco 38 
 
236 
 
 INDEX TO SOME IMPORTANT GREEK WORDS. 
 
 a<^£S ^^ 
 
 a<j>(u)VTaL 39 
 
 d</)^K£S 35, 30 
 
 d<f>iB<ji 12 
 
 d<f>Lov(Tiv 34, 37 
 
 a-xpt 171 
 
 f^daX 24 
 
 ftaOew^ 26 
 
 (SaTTTi^oi 60 
 
 fiaTTTLcrcu 14 
 
 /SuTTTtcraj 38 
 
 /3aai\€v^ 22, 23 
 
 pr]B<^Yq 24 
 
 ^i'77<^i 19 
 
 fioppai 18 
 
 ^ovXei •• 46 
 
 ydp 149, 159 
 
 ye 205 
 
 yiyova 38 
 
 yiypaffia 38, 40 
 
 yeVos 22, 23 
 
 y€pu>v ^ 23 
 
 y^ 72 
 
 yivopai 3G 
 
 yivwa-KOi 36 
 
 yvoT and yvw 50 
 
 yoyyi;^a> 60 
 
 ypap.fjuiTev'i 22 
 
 oui/xwv 21 
 
 B€LKWp.t 57 
 
 Stiypja. 57 
 
 Stt^ts 57 
 
 Strvu(6) 31, 81 
 
 8c(r/ixos, -pd 24 
 
 ScCtc 179 
 
 St) ?r06 
 
 BrjpofTLo. 110 
 
 SiSu) 34 
 
 oiKaios 58, 59 
 
 BiKaiocvyr] 58 
 
 ducaidci) 58 
 
 OLKaLOipM, 58 
 
 StKaiws 58 
 
 Sucatoxris 58 
 
 oiKaiwTiJs 58 
 
 OlKaCTTT^S 58 
 
 hlKT] 57 
 
 8io 149 
 
 StoTt 159 
 
 StTrXovs 59 
 
 Soi 42 
 
 80s 45 
 
 Svva/Ats 58 
 
 Svvopxit, 34 
 
 ovo 23 
 
 So)'?; and Sot?; 50 
 
 3b)peav 152 
 
 la 179f 
 
 idv 13, 128, 161, 169 
 
 i/iefiXrjTo 41 
 
 iy€VT]dr]v 35, 47 
 
 lyvwKa 40 
 
 cyvwv 34 
 
 iy^ 29f., 45, 78 
 
 iSoXiovcrav 36 
 
 iBwKapev 35 
 
 iOeXoOprjCKia 59 
 
 el 161, 162ff, 177 
 
 eiS^cru) • 39 
 
 f iSo) 39, 42 
 
INDEX TO SOME IMPORTANT GREEK WORDS. 
 
 237 
 
 ciKova '^•^ 
 
 a\r]<f)a ^^ 
 
 £t/i.i 37 
 
 els 68 
 
 ctTTa "^"J 
 
 ciirov "'-• 
 
 elre 149 
 
 ci^av 36 
 
 tt^ocrav 36 
 
 EKaroKrap;)(r7S 1^ 
 
 CKaTovTapyo^ 18 
 
 «K£lVOS 30 
 
 iK€Kpaia 35 
 
 €KK\r](rwi 72 
 
 €>C^£U) 38 
 
 cXa^iCTTo? 27 
 
 cAa;^ccrToTcpos 27 
 
 cA7rtov(7iv 38 
 
 JAtti's 12 
 
 ifi^dXXtt) 11 
 
 ivKpivdi 11 
 
 c^eScTo 35 
 
 c^wTcpos 27 
 
 ^TrpO(jiTqT€V(TeV 41 
 
 €pr]iJ.os 26 
 
 ipidia 11 
 
 CTrav 173 
 
 eW 159, 173 
 
 CTTClSl^ 159 
 
 tTrciSi^Trep 159 
 
 h 45 
 
 (.(TTovai ' 38 
 
 evyei'7/s 26 
 
 ewpaKa^ iopaKa 40, 54 
 
 2<os 171 
 
 ^ 148 
 
 riBvvi]6r]V 41 
 
 r]K<a .38, 52 
 
 ^X^av 35 
 
 ^Xtos 72 
 
 ■f] ixaprrjcra 35 
 
 yfX.€T€pOS 30 
 
 flfX.L(TOV<i 26 
 
 Tjfioiv avTwv 30 
 
 rjviKa 173 
 
 7iv€<jO)(6r](Tav 41 
 
 rjpyaaaTO 41 
 
 Hpojotavos 60 
 
 rjpwTovv 36 
 
 Tjcjiie 37 
 
 ddXacraa 72 
 
 ei\u> 12 
 
 ^€S 45 
 
 dvyaT-qp 21 
 
 ?§£ 14, 44, 179 
 
 jSta 110 
 
 1 8tos 31 
 
 l8ov 179 
 
 'lepoa-oXvfJua 20, 24 
 
 lepovaaXrjfj, 20 
 
 'Irjcrov 20 
 
 rXcws 26 
 
 Tva •.... 152ff. 
 
 LCTacrLv 39 
 
 Icrrdvoi 34 
 
 t ( £t) (TTrJK€LV 52 
 
 i^^vs 22 
 
 Kadd 175 
 
 KaOdrrep 175 
 
 KaOapo^ 58 
 
2oS 
 
 INDEX TO SOME IMPORTANT GREEK WORDS. 
 
 Ka66 1 ' ^ 
 
 KaOoTL loy, \io- 
 
 Ka^oSs 1 ' 5 
 
 KaOwcnrep 1 ' 6 
 
 Kuc 147 
 
 Kaivos • ^° 
 
 KatVep 167 
 
 KoXtcrto 38 
 
 KoAo-otScto'KaXos 7 
 
 KoAos 5^7 ^^ 
 
 KaTrepvaov/i 11 
 
 Kar^7;cra)iTai 52 
 
 KtXOTTtOKCS 39 
 
 Kfxpd^ovaiv 39 
 
 Kcpas 22, 23 
 
 KepSr]9T^(r(DVTai 42 
 
 KC<f>aXrjcjiLv 19 
 
 KTjpv^ 21 
 
 kXcTs 21 
 
 koivt; 5, 6 
 
 Kocr/xo^ 72 
 
 Kpv(f)rf 110 
 
 kvkXo) 106 
 
 Kw 20 
 
 Xiifie 44 
 
 Xoyia 11 
 
 Xoyofia)(^La 59 
 
 AvcTTpav 18 
 
 AlXTT/DOlS 18 
 
 XvTpov 58 
 
 fxdXi(TTa 27 
 
 /xuXXov 2 / 
 
 Mapdw; IS 
 
 Mapitt T' 
 
 Mu/}ia/x IS 
 
 /laratos 26 
 
 /AcyiCTTOs 27 
 
 /X£l^OT«/DOS 27 
 
 ixet^oiv 26, 27 
 
 ix€v 206 
 
 ^teXAo) 37, 139 
 
 H-^XP'' • 1"2 
 
 fx-^ ..152, 167, 170, 177, 198, 199ff. 
 
 fitjSi and other compounds • I99ff. 
 
 p-lKpOTCpO^ 27 
 
 lxovo<l)6aXp.o'i 59 
 
 Mwucr^s 18 
 
 mt 206 
 
 vav<i 22 
 
 vtos • 58 
 
 vrj 207 
 
 viKrj 18 
 
 vtkos 18 
 
 vovv€^!i)<i 65 
 
 vovs 20 
 
 vvKTav 20 
 
 6, ^, TO 68ff, 
 
 oSe 30 
 
 oSos 20 
 
 68w3.(Tai 46 
 
 oiBap.€v 39 
 
 oiKohoixTqO-q 41 
 
 o!ko9 72 
 
 oTo? 30, 179 
 
 oXi'yo^ 12 
 
 bfioXoyovficvoy; 65 
 
 oiroio? 31, 179 
 
 OTTtO? -l-'- 
 
 > ' oo 
 
 opiwv --' 
 
 5s 31, 168f. 
 
INDEX TO SOME IMPORTANT GREEK WORDS. 
 
 239 
 
 oo-ios 26, 58 
 
 oaov 17^ 
 
 ocros ^1> ■'• ' ^ 
 
 ocTTta 20 
 
 oo-Tis 31, 169f . 
 
 oTav 173 
 
 ore 173 
 
 oTi 149, 156, 181, 183 
 
 oi 177, 198, 199ff. 
 
 oid 179f. 
 
 ovat 179f. 
 
 ovSe and other compounds • •199ff. 
 ow 149 
 
 oipavo'i 72 
 
 oiJTe 149 
 
 OVTOS 30 
 
 oi/'r; 46 
 
 o\p-q(r6(. 42 
 
 o<^£Xov 130, 157 
 
 6<f>6aXfio8ov\ia 59 
 
 7ravotX€L 110 
 
 Travn-XrjOet 110 
 
 TrdvTa. 19 
 
 irdvTrj 110 
 
 •rravTa')(rj 109 
 
 TraTras 17 
 
 TrapeXdjiocrav 35 
 
 TrapioKr)(T€v 41 
 
 TTttTT/p 21 
 
 Tret/aao'/i.os 60 
 
 TTCiv 33, 54 
 
 Tr€vr]<i 26 
 
 TTCTTTtOKaV . 54 
 
 TrCTTTWKes 54 
 
 7re<^t/x(i)(ro 45 
 
 irepicrcroTepov 27 
 
 nip 206 
 
 TrecrovfJML 38 
 
 Trr}XiKO<i 179 
 
 irUcrai 46 
 
 voipxiL 37 
 
 ■7rXrjp-q<i 27 
 
 TrXrjpovv ' 33 
 
 ttXovtos 17f ., 24 
 
 iroifxrjv 21 
 
 TToTo? 30 
 
 TToAis 21, 22 
 
 iroXiTap^as 1^ 
 
 7roo"os ...... .i 31, 179 
 
 TTOTC 179 
 
 TTorepov ' 179 
 
 7rpe<7/?i^cpos 60 
 
 irpiv 172 
 
 TrpoaTidrjfxt ire)u,i/'at ' 
 
 Trpoopwfirjv 41 
 
 TrpocrctyTroXrjp.TrTrj'i ^9 
 
 TrpoTcpos 27 
 
 TrpwTos 28, 66 
 
 TTois 179 
 
 pavTi^o} 60 
 
 (rdPftaTOV 17 
 
 (TeavTov 30 
 
 (TT/ju-etov 58 
 
 o"KavSa\ov ^7 
 
 (TKiTTTOfiaL 59 
 
 aKOirrj 59 
 
 (TKOTTLd 59 
 
 (TKOTTOS 59 
 
 CTKlLlj/ 59 
 
 2oXo/xaJvTos 22 
 
240 
 
 INDEX TO SOME IMPORTANT GREEK WORDS. 
 
 aiTtCpri<i 18 
 
 (TTrjKUi 36 
 
 (TV 29f., 45, 78 
 
 (TuyyevT^s 11> 26 
 
 flrvyyevt's 26 
 
 orvyKOivwvos 60 
 
 (TwtiZvCrj'i 18 
 
 awionxTW 37 
 
 (TWTrao^o) 11 
 
 cr^ts ^^ 
 
 utaiM, •• 23 
 
 ri^ 108, 110 
 
 Ta-)(iov(f.iov) 27 
 
 T€ 147 
 
 Tt^e/AcXtWo 41 
 
 Tcpas •. ^8 
 
 Teaaapes ^8 
 
 Tccro'cpa 13j 28 
 
 T(.(T(T(.pa.KOVTa 28 
 
 Tccrcre/xiKovTaeTi^S 28 
 
 rcnfip-qnav 39 
 
 Tis 31 
 
 Ti'5 31, 178, 185 
 
 rol 206 
 
 Toiyapovv 149 
 
 TOiwv 149 
 
 TOtOViTOS 30 
 
 TO/AWTC/JOS 27 
 
 To(ros 30 
 
 TOCOVTOS 31 
 
 Tv^ov 98 
 
 vo<iip 23 
 
 VfX€TfpOS 30 
 
 v/XMv avrSiv 30 
 
 VTrepiKTrepiacrov 117 
 
 <jid,y€a-ai 46 
 
 (fidyopjai 37 
 
 )(afjuiL 19 
 
 Xapts 22, 65 
 
 ;j(£t\€a)v 22 
 
 \cipav 20, 22 
 
 Xpto-Ttavos 60 
 
 XpioTTos 14 
 
 )(pv(Tav 26 
 
 Zi 179f. 
 
 is 152, 155, 156, 160, 173, 175 
 
 SxTTi 155 
 
GENERAL LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA— BERKELEY 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the 
 
 date to which renewed. 
 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 27Jan55 JLJ 
 
 1 1 i'%OV J»^ " ^ 
 
 N0V2 919B5W11) 
 
 ,^.x^'' 
 
 ..# ' 
 
 REC D l-P 
 
 JAN2V64-12M. 
 
 FEB 2 2 1969 6 3' 
 
 RECEIVED 
 
 ue end of 5P1?1MG Oa«f^ 
 
 fiEC'D LD MW 1 
 
 DEC 2 fi 1985 
 
 fi£a iJJ^ NOV 2 7 1985 
 
 -JULzb'i g &z 
 
 TIXT 
 
 871 
 
 W^ 
 
 LD 21-100m-l,'54(1887sl6)476 
 
i~ i^ t vv. 
 
 /j^ 
 
 ^ JixM 
 
 • ^yt\ 
 
 i 
 
 GENERAL LIBRARY - U.C. BERKELEY 
 
 B00mM3t.DD 
 
 '" ^M 
 
 91342