Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2008 with funding from Microsoft Corporation
https://archive.org/details/grammarofnewtest0Oblasuoft
@ q = ae
_
\MMAR OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK.
ΕΑ:
GRAMMAR OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
BY FRIEDRICH BLASS, Dr.Puit., D.Tu., Hon. Litt.D. DuBLIN
PROFESSOR OF CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF HALLE-WITTENBERG
TRANSLATED BY
HENRY ST. JOHN THACKERAY, M.A.
SECOND, REVISED AND ENLARGED EDITION
MICROFOR RAE EE) ἃ BY
ΔΊ,
MOE 2s AS 5 PRE δεν ATION
SERVICES 5
London MACMILLAN AND CO.,, LIMITED
NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1905
ΠΟ
i First Edition, 1898. Second Edition, 1905. > Ν᾿ se
GLASGOW: PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS BY ROBERT MACLEHOSE AND CO. LTD, ©
PREFACE TO THE ENGLISH EDITION.
ProFressor Buass’s Grammatik des Neutestamentlichen Grriechisch appeared in Germany in October, 1896. The present translation reproduces the whole work with the exception of the Preface, which the author considered unsuitable to the English edition, on account of the somewhat personal character given to it by the dedication which he had combined with it. Some points of the Preface, however, are of sufficient general interest to be repro- duced here in a summary form.
The author maintains that whereas Hellenistic Greek cannot in comparison with Attic Greek be regarded as a very rich language, it is for all that (except where borrowed literary words and phrases intrude themselves) a pure language, which is governed by regular laws of its own. He applies to it the proverb τῶν καλῶν καὶ τὸ μετόπωρον καλόν.
The present work does not profess to give the elements of Greek grammar, but presupposes some knowledge on the part of the reader. Those who desire to read the Greek Testament after a two months’ study of the Greek language are referred to such works as Huddilston’s Essentials of New Testament Greek.
With regard to textual criticism, a distinguishing feature in the grammar is that whereas earlier grammarians quote the editions of the leading N.T. critics, Professor Blass quotes the Mss, leaving the reader to draw his own conclusions as to the true text in each instance. Whilst admitting that we have now reached something like a new “Textus Receptus” based on the oldest Greek tradition, and acknowledging the services rendered to N.T. criticism by such critics as Lachmann, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort, and Tregelles, he has to confess that a definite conclusion on this subject has not yet been arrived at.
The only point in reference to matters of ‘higher criticism’ to
which attention has to be called is that the John who wrote the V
vi PREFACE.
Apocalypse is distinguished from John the author of the Gospel and Epistles. The first and second Epistles of Peter do not present sufliciently well-marked differences to require a distinction to be drawn between them in a grammar of this kind. ‘The Pauline Epistles are all quoted as the work of St. Paul; the Epistle to the Hebrews is naturally not so quoted. The general position taken up by Professor Blass with regard to questions of authorship is shown by the following words: ‘The tradition which has been transmitted to us as to the names of the authors of the N.T. books, in so far as it is unanimous, I hold to be approximately con- temporary with those authors; that is to say, the approximation is as close as we can at present look for; and, without claiming to be a prophet, one may assert that, to whatever nearer approxim- ation we may be brought by fortunate discoveries in the future, Luke will remain Luke, and Mark will continue to be Mark.’
The books to which the author expresses his obligations are the grammars of Winer (including the new edition of P. Schmiedel) and Buttmann, Jos. Viteau, Etude sur le Gree du N.T., Paris, 1893, and Burton, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in N.T. Greek, Chicago, 1893. The first-named of these works having grown to such voluminous proportions, the present grammar, written in a smaller compass, may, the author hopes, find a place beside it for such persons as maintain the opinion μέγα βιβλίον μέγα κακόν.
The isolation of the N.T. from other contemporary or nearly contemporary writings is a hindrance to the proper understanding of it, and should by all means be avoided ; illustrations are there- fore drawn by the writer from the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, the first and the so-called second Epistle of Clement, and the Clementine Homilies.
The translator has merely to add that the references have been to a great extent verified by him, and that the proofs have all passed through the hands of Professor Blass, who has introduced several additions and corrections which are not contained in the original German edition. He has also to express his thanks to the Rev. A. E. Brooke, Fellow of King’s College, Cambridge, for kindly looking over the greater part of the translation in Ms. and removing some of its imperfections, and to two of his own sisters for welcome assistance in the work of transposing the third of the Indices to suit the new pagination.
HOSE ee
May 13, 1898.
NOTE TO THE SECOND ENGLISH EDITION.
In the present edition the various minor alterations and additions introduced by the author into the second German edition (Gottingen, 1892) have been incorporated. Owing to the plates of the first English edition having been stereotyped, it has been found necessary to adhere, except at the end of the volume, to the original pagination. The bulk of the author’s additions have consequently been collected into two appendices. This unavoid- able arrangement may, it is feared, be a little inconvenient to the reader: the references at the foot of the pages, however, indicate in each case where the additional matter is to be found. The indices have been corrected and considerably enlarged.
ΕΞ ΠΣ
April 1, 1905.
CONTENTS.
PART
INTRODUCTION, PHONETICS, AND ACCIDENCE.
. Introduction, - - - -
. Elements of the New Testament language,
. Orthography, - - - -
. Division of words, accents, breathings, punctuation, . Elision, crasis, variable final consonants,
. Sporadic sound-changes,
. First and second declensions, - = -
. Third declension,
. Metaplasmus, - -
. Proper names. Indeclinable nouns, - -
§ 10
§ 11. Adjectives, - - - - - - - 8 12. Numerals, - Ξ Ξ - - -
§ 13. Pronouns, -
§ 14. System of conjugation, - - Ξ -
8 15. Augment and reduplication, - - - - = § 16. Verbs in -w. Tense formation, - - - - § 17. Verbs in -w. New formation of a present tense, -
§ 18. Verbs in -w. On the formation of the future, -
§19. Verbs in -w. First and second aorist, -
§ 20. Verbs in-w. Aorist and future of deponent verbs,
§ 21. Verbs in -w. Terminations,
. Contract verbs,
. Verbs in -μι, - - -
. Table of noteworthy verbs, -
. Adverbs, -
. Particles, - - - - -
. Word-formation by means of terminations and suffixes, - . Word-formation by composition, - - - - . Proper names, - -
ix
65
Sh
ως
ZZ 2 τὸ
D ὥ Sh ὦν ws
“5 ST. 2 WwW & σοὺ
DP Sh ὦὸὁὋὁἜἌὁἔϑ Sr ew ¢ [50]
Sr = Ww co
Tr ὦ ὦ
Tr ἢ Sh
§ 47.
§ 48. § 49. § 50. § 51.
ὧι or or a> >
CO) (> > Lr Gr SR LN
Or ὧι
i)
30. 91.
. The voices of the verb, Ξ : ᾿ 5
or ὧι ᾧς &
. Passive voice, - = Ξ β Ξ . Middle voice, - 2 Ξ 5 5 . The tenses. Present tense, - Ξ : 2 . Imperfect and aorist indicative, 2 Ξ Ε 7 e . Moods of the present and the aorist, - “ - -
CONTENTS.
PART ΤΙ.
SYNTAX.
Subject and predicate, - - - Ξ τ ς: Agreement, - - - - ey : - Ξ
SYNTAX OF THE NOUN.
. Gender and number, - : = - - - . The cases. Nominative and vocative, - - - - . The accusative, - - - - - - - . The genitive, - - - - - - - ἡ. Continuation: genitive with verbs, etc., - - - - . Dative, - - - - - - - - 38. Continuation : instrumental and temporal dative, - - - . The cases with prepositions. Prepositions with the accusative,
Prepositions with the genitive, - - - - -
. Prepositions with the dative, - - : = 5 . Prepositions with two cases, - = - 3 5 . Prepositions with three cases, - - Ξ 2 . Syntax of the adjective, - : : 5 Ξ . Numerals, - - - : = 2 Ξ 4
. The article. I. ὁ, 7, τό as pronoun ; the article with independent
substantives, - - Ξ Ξ i 2
The article. II. The article with adjectives etc.; the article with connected parts of speech, = Ξ - Ξ
SYNTAX OF THE PRONOUNS.
Personal, reflexive, and possessive pronouns, - - - Demonstrative pronouns, - Relative and interrogative pronouns, - - - - Indefinite pronouns; pronominal νου, - - - -
SYNTAX OF THE VERB.
Active voice, - - 3 A
82
84
87
95 100 109 116 12] 124 130 132 136 140 144
145
154
164 170 172 177
180 181 184 185 187 190 194
§ 59. § 60. § 61. § 62. § 63. § 64. ὃ 65.
§ 66. § 67. § 68. § 69. § 70. § 71. § 72.
§ 73.
§ 74.
§ 75. § 76. § 77. § 78. § 79. § 80. § 81. § 82.
CONTENTS.
The perfect,
Pluperfect,
Future,
Periphrastic conjugation,
The moods. Indicative of ΠΕ (and rapatition)
Conjunctive and future (or present) indicative in principal clauses,
Conjunctive and future (or present) indicative in subordinate clauses,
Remains of the Pee e,
Imperative, - - - - - -
Infinitive, - - -
Infinitive and periphrasis with ἵνα, - : :
Infinitive and periphrasis with ὅτι,
Infinitive with the article, - - = = :
Cases with the infinitive. Nominative and accusative with the infinitive, = : - -
Participle. (I.) Participle as attribute—representing a substantive —as predicate, - - - - -
Participle. (11.) As an additional clause in the sentence, -
The negatives, Ξ - Ξ Ε
Other adverbs, - : = : = Ξ Particles (conjunctions), - : : Ξ Particles (continued),- - 2 : 2 : Connecticn of sentences, - - : x Β Position of words (position of clauses), - - Ellipse (Brachylogy), pleonasm, - - - - Arrangement of words ; figures of speech, - - -
APPENDIX.
Appendix to Text, - - - - - = : Ξ Appendix to Notes, - - - : - - Ξ
INDEX.
I. Index of subjects, - - - - Ξ Ξ Ξ II. Index of Greek words, - Ξ Β Ξ : 2 III. Index of New Testament passages, - - : 2 5
ERRATUM. P. 180, line 2. For L. 4. 3 read L. 4. 43.
306 327
334 342 362
PARRY 1. INTRODUCTION: PHONETICS AND ACCIDENCE.
δι. INTRODUCTION.
1. The special study of the grammar of New Testament Greek has been for the most part prompted by purely practical needs. In Greek literature as such the writings brought together in the New Testament can claim but a very modest position ; and the general grammar of the Greek language can take but very limited notice of the special features which they present. Yet, on the other hand, their contents give them so paramount an importance, that in order to understand them fully, and to restore them to their primitive form, the most exact investigation even of their grammatical peculi- arities becomes an absolute necessity.
The New Testament writers represent in general that portion of the population of the Hellenised East, which, while it employed Greek more or less fluently as the language of intercourse and commerce—side by side with the native languages which were by no means superseded—yet remained unfamiliar with the real Hellenic culture and the literature of classical Greek. Luke, whose Hellenic culture is unquestionable, forms an exception. But how far, in this respect, exceptions are also to be admitted in the case of Paul and the author of the epistle to the Hebrews (Barnabas), it is not, especi- ally in the case of the first-named writer, easy to decide: at any rate the traces of classical culture in all three writers are next to nothing, whereas in the next generation a Clement of Rome, with his γυναῖκες Aavaides καὶ Δίρκαι and his story of the pheenix,! at once displays an en- tirely different character. Accordingly. the language employed in the N.T. is, on the whole, such as was spoken in the lower circles of society, not such as was written in works of literature. But between these two forms of speech there existed even at that time a very considerable difference. The literary language had always remained dependent in some measure on the old classical masterpieces ; and though in the first centuries of Hellenistic influence it had followed the develop- ment of the living language, and so had parted some distance from those models, yet since the first century before Christ it had kept struggling back to them again with an ever-increasing determination,
1Clem. ad Corinth. vi. 2: xxv. εΕ Α
= INTRODUCTION. [§ x. 1-2, § 2.1.
If, then, the literature of the Alexandrian period must be called Hellenistic, that of the Roman period must be termed Atticistic. But the popular language had gone its own way, and continued to do so until out of ancient Greek there was gradually developed modern Greek, which, however, in its literature—its prose literature in particular—is still very strongly affected by classic influences. The N.T. then shows us an intermediate stage on the road between ancient and modern Greek; on this ground, too, its language is deserving of a special treatment.
2. It is indeed true that for a knowledge of the popular language of the first century after Christ, as of the immediately preceding and succeeding periods, the N.T. is by no means our only source. In the way of literature not much is to be added, certainly nothing which can diminish the supreme importance of the N.T. Un- doubtedly the Greek translations of the Old Testament show a great affinity of language, but they are translations, and slavishly literal translations ; no one ever spoke so, not even the Jewish translators. Of profane literature, one might perhaps quote the discourses of Epictetus contained in Arrian’s commentary as the work most avail- able for our purpose. But, alongside of its use in literature, the spoken language is found—found, too, in its various gradations, corresponding naturally to the position and education of the speaker —in those private records, the number and importance of which is being perpetually increased by fresh discoveries in Egypt. The language of the N.T. may, therefore, be quite rightly treated in close connection with these. A grammar of the popular language of the period, written on the basis of all these various authori- ties and remains, would be, from the grammarian’s point of view, more satisfactory than one which was limited to the language of the New Testament.! The practical considerations, however, from which we sct out, will be constantly imposing such a limitation; for it cannot be of the same importance to us to know what some chance Egyptian writes in a letter or deed of sale, as it is to know what the men of the N.T. have written, however true it may be that in their own day the cultured world drew no distinction between these last and the lower classes of Egyptians and Syrians, and despised them both alike.
§2. ELEMENTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT LANGUAGE.
1. By far the most predominant element in the language of the New Testament is the Greek of common speech which was dis: seminated in the East by the Macedonian conquest, in the form which it had gradually assumed under the wider development of several centuries. This common speech is in the main a somewhat modified Attic, in which were omitted such Attic peculiarities as ap- peared too strange to the bulk of the remaining Greeks, and thus were at an earlier time not adopted in the language of Tragedy, such as 77 instead of oo in θάλαττα etec., and pp instead of po in ἄρρην
1Cf. G. A. Deissmann, Bibelstudien (Marburg, 1895), p. 57 ff.
-ν---
ὃ 2. 1.] ELEMENTS OF THE N.T. LANGUAGE.
ῳ)
etc. As a matter of course it is the later Attic, not the older, which lies at the base of it, which explains, to take one example, the absence of any trace of a dual in this language. But as the development extended, the remaining distinctions in the language between duality and plurality were also set aside: not only is πότερος abandoned for τίς, ἑκάτερος for ἕκαστος, ae so on, but above all the superlative is abandoned for the comparative: and this is a state of things which we find in the language of the N.T., but by no means in the literary language of a contemporary and later date, which affords no traces of these peculiarities. With this is connected the more limited use of the optative, and many other usages, to be discussed in their place. Another not very con: siderable portion of the alterations concerns the phonetic forms of declension and conjugation, under which may be classed the extension of the inflexion -a, gen. -ys to words in -pa, and the trans- ference of Ist aorist terminations to the 2nd aorist. A third and much larger class embraces the uses and combinations of forms and “‘form-words,” in which a similar striving after simplification is unmistakable. Very many usages disappear ; the use of the infinitive as the complement of “the verb is extended at the ex- pense of that of the participle, the objective accusative at the expense of the genitive and dative; the rules concerning ov or μή are as simple as they are intricate for the classical languz ages. Of quite another order, and concealed by the orthography, which remained the same, are the general changes in the sounds of the language, which even at that time had been carried out in no small measure, though they were still far from attaining their later and modern dimensions. A last class is composed of changes in lexicology—for the most part the substitution of new expression in place of the usual expression for a thing or an idea, or the approach to such a substitution, the new appearing side by side with the old as its equivalent. This, however, does not as a rule come within the province of grammar, unless the expression be a kind of “form-word,” for instance a preposition, or an irregular verb, an instance of this being the present of εἶδον, which in general is no longer ὁρῶ, but βλέπω or θεωρῶ The Hellenistic language as a whole is in its way not less subject to rules nor less systematic than Attic; but it has certainly not received such a literary cultivation as the latter, because the con- tinuous development of culture never allowed it completely to break away from the older form, which was so exclusively regarded as the standard of what the language should be.!
1 Since the κοινή had such a wide diffusion, from Italy and Gaul to Egypt and Syria. it is a priori impossible that it should have been everywhere entirely uniform, and so it is correct to speak also of an Alexandrian dialect (ἡ ᾿Αλεξαν- δρέων διάλεκτος) as a special form of it (W.-Schm. ὃ 3, 1, note 4). Of course we are not in a position to make many distinctions in details in this respect. This is apparent even in the attempt made by Thumb, d. griech. Spr. im Zeitalter des Hellenismus, pp. 162-201. Yet even in the N.T. writers certain differences are well-marked, which have nothing to do with a more or less cultivated style, e.g. some writers, and Luke in particular, confuse εἰς and ἐν, whereas the author of the Apocalypse is able to distinguish between these prepositions.
4 ELEMENTS OF THE N.T. LANGUAGE. [§2. 2-3
One element of the popular languages of that time, and there- fore of the New Testament language, which though not prominent is clearly traceable, is the Latin element. The ruling people of Italy intermingled with the population of all the provinces ; Roman proper names were widely circulated (as the N.T. at once clearly shows in the names of its authors and the persons addressed) ; but appellatives (κουστωδία, δηνάριον, covddprov,! κεντυρίων) also found ad- a and some phrases, particularly of commercial and legal life, were literally translated (as τὸ ἱκανὸν ποιεῖν, λαμβάνειν = satisfacere, aie accipere). In general, however, this influence remains confined to lexicology and phraseolog sy; inaslight degree it affects the forma- tion of words (‘Hpw6 cavot, ae -LOVOL, Ei eo = ties ‘hilippe(u)ses” i} in perhaps a greater degr ee the syntax (ἐκέλευσεν αὐτὸν ἀπαχθῆναι = duct eunt iussil), still it is difficult here to determine what is due to native development of the language and what to foreign influence.
3. The national Hebrew or Aramaic element influenced Greek- writing Jews in a threefold manner. In the first place it is probable that the speaker or writer quite involuntarily and uncon- sciously rendered a phrase from his mother tongue by an accurately corresponding phrase; again, that the reading and hearing of the Old Testament in the Greek version coloured the writer's style, especially if he desired to write in a solemn and dignified manner (just as profane writers borrowed phrases from the Attic writers for a similar object); third and last, a great part of the N.T. writings (the three first Gospels and the first half of the Acts) is in all * probability a direct working over of Hebrew or Aramaic materials. This was not a translation like that executed by the LXX., rendered word for word with the utmost fidelity, and almost without any regard to intelligibility ; but it was convenient to adhere to the originals even in expression instead of looking for a form of expression which was good Greek. The Hebraisms and Aramaisms are, then, for the most part of a lexical kind, 1.6. they consist in the meaning which is attributed to a word (σκάνδαλον is the rendering of 27272 in the ethical sense, hence σκανδαλίζειν), or in phrases literally translated (as πρόσωπον λαμβάνειν DD Nw? ‘to respect the person,’ hence προσωπολήμπτης — Anpiia); these expressions, which moreover are not too numerous, must have been current in Jewish, and subsequently in Christian, communities. In the department of grammar the influence of Hebrew is seen especially in a series of peculiarities in the use of prepositions, consisting partly of circumlocutions such as ἀρέσκειν ἐνώπιόν τινος instead of τινί, πρὸ προσώπου τῆς εἰσόδου αὐτοῦ, ‘before him,’ partly in an extended use of certain prepositions such as ἐν (ἐπί) on the
Again Hermas, undoubtedly a representative ot the unadulterated κοινή, uses often enough the superlative forms in -raros and -ἰστος in elative sense, whereas the forms in -raros are almost entirely absent from the writers of the N.T., and even those in -ἰστος are only very seldom found (see $11, 3). Such cases must, then, go back to /oca/ differences within the κοινή, even if we can no longer rightly assign the range of circulation of individual peculiarities.
ταν App. p. 327.
§ 2. 4.] ELEMENTS OF THE N.T. LANGUAGE. 5
analogy of the corresponding Hebrew word (2); much is also taken
over in the use of the article and the pronouns ; to which must be added the periphrasis for the simple tense by means of ἦν ete. with the participle, beside other examples.
4. The literary language has also furnished its contribution to the language of the N.T., if only in the case of a few more cultured writers, especially Luke, Paul, and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews.!_ A very large number of good classical constructions are indeed found in the N.T., but confined to these particular writers, just as it is only they who occasionally employ a series of words which belonged to the language of literary culture and not to colloquial speech. Persons of some culture had these words and constructions at their disposal when they required them, and would even employ the correct forms of words as alternatives to the vulgar forms of ordinary use. This is shown most distinctly by the speech of Paul before Agrippa (Acts xxvi.), which we may safely regard as reported with comparative accuracy. On this occasion, when Paul had a more distinguished audience than he ever had before, he makes use not only of pure Greek proverbs and modes of speech (πρὸς κέντρον λακτίζειν 14, οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν γωνίᾳ πεπραγμένον τοῦτο 26), but there also appears here—setting aside the Epistle of Jude’— the only superlative in -raros in the whole N.T. (τὴν ἀκριβεστάτ nV αἵρεσιν 5), and here only ἴσασιν for ‘they know’ (4), not οἴδασιν; he must therefore have learnt somewhere (‘at school), that in order to speak correct Attic Greek one must conjugate ἴσμεν ἴστε ἴσασιν. The writer of the Ep. to the Hebrews also once (12. 17) uses ἴστε for
‘ye know,’ although the Vulgate rendering 15 scetote (the imperativ e
never had any other form). But in another place he has οἴδαμεν and not ἴσμεν (10. 30); therefore his employment of ἴστε - not due to Atticism, but apparently to regard for rhythm (ep. ὃ 82, 3).3 For the culture of this writer was of a rhetorical nature, the ae in fact, of the rhetoric and oratory of the time. Luke’s culture, on the other hand, was grammatical, and to that extent Atticistic or classical ; hence he occasionally reproduces the old and classical forms. It is noteworthy that in the artificial reproduction of the ancient language the same phenomenon repeated itself to a certain degree, which had long before occurred in the reproduction of Homeric language by subsequent poets: namely, that the imitator sometimes misunder- stood, and accordingly misused, a phrase. Just as Archilochus on the strength of the Homeric line : τέκνον ἐμόν, γενεῇ μὲν ὑπέρτερός ἐστιν ᾿Αχιλλεύς, πρεσβύτερος δὲ σύ ἐσσι (II. xi. 786, Mencetius to EES employed ὑπέρτερος = νεώτερος (a sense which it never bore)*: so in all probability Luke (with or without precedent) used μετὰ τὴν ἀφιξίν μου in A. 20. 29 as equivalent to ‘after my departure,’ because he had misunderstood pera τὴν ἄπιξιν (correctly ‘arrival oY τῆς γυναικός in Herodotus, 9,77. The same writer has ἀπήεσαν, ἐξ ἤεσαν (from the obsolete ἄπειμι, ἔξειμι) with the force of the aorist, ἐκεῖσε, ὁμόσε, in answer to the question Where ? and many other instances.
Ve pp polis
6 ORTHOGRAPHY. [§ 3.1.
8.3. ORTHOGRAPHY.
1. One portion of the changes in the Greek language that have been alluded to (§ 2, 1) concerned generally the sounds and com- binations of these ; ‘but in general alterations of this kind it is usual for the spelling not to imitate the new sound off-hand, and certainly not without hesitation, in the case of a word which already had a stereotyped and ordinary spelling. So, in Greek, in the time of the composition of the N.T., there was, as we know from manifold evidence of stone and papyrus, no one fixed or thography in existence, but writers fluctuated between the old historical spelling and a new phonetic manner of writing. The sound-changes, at that time not nearly so great as they afterwards became, had es el to do with the so-called « adscript in the diphthongs
, ἢν @ (strictly a, a, wc with ὁ pronounced), which, since about the ἘΠ century before Christ, had become mute, and with the old diphthong «, which from about the same period ceased to be distinguished from long « But the writing of Al, HI, QI, EI did not on that account become obsolete, preserved as they were by their occurrence in all ancient books and literal transcripts of them ; only it was no longer known in which cases 4, @ 6 should be furnished with the symbol for « mute, and in which cases long 7 should be written as EI]. Many persons took the drastic measure of omitting the « mute in all cases, even in the dative, as Strabo! attests, in the same way that we also find I as the prevailing spelling for τ (though still not without exceptions) in manuscripts of the period”; others considered that in EI as against I they had a convenient means of distinguishing between 7 and 7, in the same way that 2 and ¢, 6 and ὅ were distinguished. So κινεῖς is sometimes KINIC, Sometimes keiNeic; and even keinic would be frequently written by any ordinary scribe. It was not until a later date that the historical method of writing was uniformly carried out, and sven then not without occasional errors, by learned grammarians, especially Herodian of Alexandria, who taught in Rome under M. Aurelius. This was in keeping with the prevailing impulse of the time, which made for the revival of the old classical language. Since then, in spite of increasing difficulties, this method of spelling has been continuously taught and inculcated in the schools with the help of numerous artificial rules up till the present day.
2. It is impossible therefore to suppose, after ee has been stated, that even Luke and Paul could have employed the correct historical spelling in the case of « mute and εἰ; for at that time there was nobody in the schools of Antioch and "Tarsus who could teach it them, certainly not in the case of «, though some rules might be formulated at an earlier period with regard to « mute. We are debarred from all knowledge as to how they actually did
1 Strabo, xiv., Ὁ. 648, πολλοὶ yap χωρὶς τοῦ ι γράφουσι Tas δοτικάς, καὶ ἐκβάλλουσι Ξ ᾽ ᾿ ᾿ γαρ χωρ γ ;
δὲ τὸ ἔθος φυσικὴν αἰτίαν οὐκ ἔχον. 2 Papyrus Ms. of the poems of Hero(n)das, London, 189].
§ 3. 2-4.] ORTHOGRAPHY. 7
write, and it is a matter of indifference, provided that one realizes this state of things, and recognizes that e.g. Awcin stood equally well for δῶσιν or δώσειν. The oldest scribes whose work we possess (cent. 4-6) always kept themselves much freer from the influence of the schools than the later, i.e. they frequently wrote phonetically or according to the rule «=< (so the scribe of B), and indeed « mute finds no place in Mss. before the seventh century. In our case there can be no question that we should follow the Byzantine school, and consistently employ the historical spelling in the N.T., as well as in the case of all profane writers, and remove all half measures, such as those, for instance, still remaining in Tischendorf and in the Stutt- gart N.T., without any regard to the Ms. evidence. The recording and weighing of evidence of this kind in the case of individual words, e.g. words in -eva, -va, is the most unprofitable of tasks.
3. The « mute should therefore be supplied, as the correct his- torical spelling, in the following words, as well as in the well-known cases: μιμνήσκειν, θνήσκειν (for -η-ἴσκειν), πανταχῇ, πάντῃ, εἰκῇ, κρυφῇ, λάθρᾳ, πεζῇ, (ἀντι) πέρᾳ! (old dative forms) ; ἀθῷος, @ov, πατρῷος, ὑπερῷον, ov, Tpwds, Ἡρῴδης (for ‘Hpwidys, from ἥρως), πρῷρα, σῴζειν (for σω- en) In the case of σῴζειν, it is not yet satisfactorily ascertained how far the tenses partook of the 1, since σαόω interposes itself and supplies ἐσώθην (for ἐσαώθην), σωτήρ ete. ; in the active we may write σῴσω, ἔσῳσα, σέσῳκα : in the perf. pass. σέσῳσμαι appears to be correct, like νενόμισμαι, but σέσωται (A. 4. 9) on the model of ἐσώθην. It is also doubtful whether an ὁ was ever present in the forms first found in Hellenistic Greek, δώην, γνώην (optat.), πατρολώας, μητρολώας (Attic δοίην, γνοίην, -Aoias); but since « is essential to the optative, we may insert it in those instances. As yet there is not sufficient evidence to decide between πρᾶος — πρᾷος, Tpactns -- πρᾳότης. For εἰ in place of ye vide infra 5.
4, ἘΠῚ for τ is established in Mss. and editions, being found most persistently in Semitic words, especially proper names, where it would never once be without use as an indication of the length of the 1, provided only that it be correctly understood to have this meaning, and not to represent a diphthong, which is fundamentally wrong. We can, if we please, in these cases assist the pronunciation by means of the symbol for a long vowel (τ): thus Δαυΐδ, “Addr, "Ayip, Βενιαμῖν, ᾿Βλιακῖμ, ᾿Ἔλισαβετ," ᾿Ἰάτρος, Kis, Λευτίς), ΝΕ ΔῸΣ Σάπῴφιρα," Ταρβῖθα, XepovPiv; T εθσημανῖ, ay Tepixw® 5 HAL, paB Bi, ταλῖθα,
1 Certainly in later times the α in (κατ)αντίπερα appears to be short, since it is elided in verse, Maneth. iv. 188.
2 BAe. always in B, generally &, occasionally CD, see Tisch. on L. 1. 5.
3 The mss. (A. 5. 1) vary between εἰ, ἐφ uv: there is no doubt of the identity of the name with the Aram. xy2¥ (pulchra), still it has been Grecised (gen. -ns like μάχαιρα, -ρης. ὃ 7, 1) no doubt in connection with cam¢(e)ipos, in which the εἰ is quite unjustifiable (Ap. 21. 19, -tpos BP).
4See Kautzsch in W.-Schm. § 5, 13 a (Hebr. 328 πὰ for oy-).4* The spelling with 7 at the end as against -e, -c has only the very slenderest attestation ;
even the ἡ of the second syllable must perhaps give way to the a of the western tradition (many authorities in Mt. 26. 36: ep. “Me. 14. 32). Ἐν. App. p. 327.
° With e Mt. 20. 29 BCLZ; so always B, frequently s(D).
8 ORTHOGRAPHY. [8 3. 4-6.
caBayGavi, The proper names in -ias have in most cases 7, and therefore no εἰ (so δίαριαμ, Μαρία), but rightly ᾿Ηλείας, Ἠλίας
PEQN, Ιωσείας, -σίας WWN, "Oleias, -tas TINY, Οὐρείας PVN}
Ἐλισαῖος L. 4. 27 TN has undoubtedly τ, and is also spelt with ει in B (only), just as B has Papewato. (Mc. 7. 1, 3, 5, A. 5. 34 ete.), Γαλειλαία, -αἴος (Me. 1. 14, τό, Jo. 7. 1, A. 5. 37 ete.), Deva (ἃ. 4. 24 f.), Σειών (Rh. 9. 33 etc.). Σαμάρεια follows the analogy of ᾿Αντιόχεια, ᾿Αλεξάνδρεια etc., and must therefore retain εἰ in our spelling of it,? although the inhabitant is called Sapapirys, as the inhabitant of Μαρώνεια is Mapwvirns.
5. With regard to Greek words and names, the following must be noted for the correct discrimination between εἰ and ε: οἰκτίρω, not -eipw (cp. οἰκτιρμός, -(pywv, which in B certainly also have εἰ ὃ 4, 2). Ἰκόνιον, not Kcx, (i according to Etym. M. sub verbo, which, however, does not agree with the coins, which give « and εἰ; the Mss. in A. 13, 51, 14. 1 also read t). μείγνυμι, ἔμειξα etc., μεῖγμα. Tv, τείσω, ἔτεισα. φιλόνικος, -νικία (from νίκη). πανοικεί A. 16. 34 (Σὰ ΒΙΟ), παμπληθεί L. 23. 18, see ὃ 28,7. There is considerable fluctuation in the language from the earliest times between -ειᾶ (proparoxyt.) and -ia; κακοπαθία Ja. 5. το (B'P) is the form attested also for Attic Greek; ὠφέλεια, however (R. 3. 1, Jude 16), already existed in Attic beside ὠφέλεια. Λογία ‘a collection’ 1 C. 16. 1 f. is, as Deissmann has shown from the papyri, radically wrong, and should be λογεία, from the verb λογεύω, the existence of which we have also learnt from the papyri.° The spelling στρατείας (B) 2 Ο 10. 4 cannot be invalidated on the ground that in Attic στρατεία ‘campaign’ and στρατιά ‘army’ are interchanged, and the one form stands for the other; ἐπαρχία ‘province’ A. 25. 1 has for a variant in the MSS. not ἐπαρχεία but 7 ἐπάρχειος (A, cp. κ᾿), but inscriptional evidence now proves -eta to be the correct form.* Ez is produced from ἡ: according to the later Attic usage (which converted every 7 into «) in the words λειτουργός, -ta, -εῖν (orig. ληΐτ., then Ayz.), which were taken over from Attic, and in βούλει (L. 22. 42, the literary word =the colloquial θέλεις § 21, 7), whereas, in other cases ἢ in roots and in terminations (dat. Ist. decl., conjunct., 2 sing. pass.) remained as 7, and the use of the future for aor. conj. (§ 65, 2, 5) can on no account be explained by this Attic intermixture of the diphthongs.
6. H in the language of the N.T., and also in the standard Mss., is in general far from being interchanged with +. Χρηστιανοί (and Χρηστός) rests on a popular interpretation of the word, for in place of the unintelligible Χριστός the heathen (from whom the designation of the new sect as Χρηστ. proceeded) substituted the familiar Χρηστός, which had a similar sound ; the spelling of the word with ἡ (in the N.T. preserved in every passage by x! A. 11. 26, 26. 28, 1 P. 4. 16) was not completely rejected even by the Christians, and
τ ραν App: Ρ᾽ 2.9.1.
ὺ
§ 3. 6-8.] ORTHOGRAPHY. 9
maintained its position for a very long time.) Κυρήνιος for Quirinius L. 2. 2 may be explained in a similar way (by a connec- tion of it with Κυρήνη), but B and the Latin mss. have Kup(e)ivov Cyrino.2 In L. 14. 13, 21 ἀνάπειρος for ἀνάπηρος is attested by quite preponderating evidence (SABD al.), and is moreover men- tioned by Phrynichus* the Atticist as a vulgar form.” εἶ μήν for ἢ μήν H. 6. 14 (RABD!) is attested also in the LXX. and in papyri‘; besides, all this class of variations belongs strictly to the province of correct pronunciation [orthoepy], and not to that of orthography. It is the same with the doubtful γυμνήτης or γυμνίτης (γυμνιτεύομεν 1 Ο. 4. 11, with ἡ L al., which, according to Dindorf in Steph. Thes., is the correct spelling), and σιμικίνθιον semicinctium A. 19. 12 (all MSS.), with which one might compare the comparatively early occur- rence of δινάρια denarii? (N.T., however, always has δην.). All uncials have σιρικοῦ sericum® Ap. 18. 12. The distinction made between κάμηλος ‘camel’ and κάμιλος ‘rope’ (Mt. 19. 24 ete., Suidas), appears to be a later artificiality.
7. At amuch earlier time than the interchange of ἡ - ἰ begins that of ac—e (η), appearing in passive verbal terminations already in the Hellenistic period, in the middle of a word before a vowel (and soon after universally) in the first and second centuries A.D., 80 that little confidence can be placed in our Mss. as a whole in this respect, though the oldest (D perhaps excepted) are still far more correct in this than in the case of «.—+. The question, therefore, whether, in obedience to these witnesses, xepéa is to be written for κεραία, ἐξέφνης and the like, should not be raised ; the following may be specially noticed : Αἰλαμῖται A. 2. 9 (B correctly)’ ; ἀνάγαιον Me. 14. 15, L. 22. 12 (on quite overwhelming evidence) ; paid raeda Ap. 18. 13 (all uncials fed); φαιλόνης paenula (the Greek form: strictly it should be φαινόλης) 2 Tim. 4. 13 (ε all uncials except L); but συκομορέα (A al. -aia) L. 19. 4 (from συκόμορον, formation like μηλέα from μῆλον).
8. The diphthong w is already from early times limited to the case where it is followed by another vowel, and even then it is contracted in Attic Greek from the fifth century onwards into v; it reappears, however, in Hellenistic Greek, being frequently indeed
1 See Hermes xxx. 465 ff.
“Cp. Dittenberger, Herm. vi. 149. In Joseph. also the majority of the mss. have -ἡνίος : to which add Μᾶρκος ἹΚυρήνιος C. I. A. iii. 599.
*Phryn. in Bk. Anecd. i. 9, 22, ἀναπηρία διὰ τοῦ ἡ τὴν πρωτήν, οὐ διὰ THs εἰ διφθόγγου, ὡς οἱ ἀμαθεῖς (Tisch. ad loc.).
1 Blass, Ausspr. d. Gr. 33°, 77 (Aegypt. Urk. des Berl. Mus. 545).
> Thid. 37, 94.
8 Cp. (W.-Schm. § 5, 14) σιρικοποιώς (so for -ds) Neapolitan inscription, Inser. Gr. It. et Sic. 785, to which siricarium and holosiricum are given as parallel forms in Latin Inser. (Mommsen).
7¥From Αἰλάμ ἘΝ; see Euseb. Onomast. ed. Larsow-Parthey, p. 22. Yet according to Konneke (vide infra 13) the LX X. have Αἰλάμ and ’E\auira side by side. αν App. p. 306.
10 ORTHOGRAPHY. [ὃ 3. 8-10.
written (in inscriptions and papyri) ve, 2.e. ‘i-1, whereas on the other hand the inflexion -via, -vins (δ 7, 1) seems to imply that the « is not pronounced. The uncial mss. of the N.T. write it throughout ; it sometimes occurs in the word-division in B that the first scribe divides υἱόν}; A has occasionally what comes to the same thing, ὕζος, and so Din L. 1. 18 zpoB_eByx«via.2—The diphthong wv is non-existent (as also in Attic it may be said not to occur); Μωυσῆς is a trisyllable, and consequently to be written Μωυσῆς. Hv (δ 15, 4) also in Mss. such as Βα regularly has the marks of diaeresis.
9. Consonants. Z-—o.—The spelling ᾧβ, ἔμ in place of cf, op* is widely disseminated in the Hellenistic and Roman period, in order to indicate the soft sound which o has in this position only. This ¢ however, is found far more rarely in the middle than at the beginning of a word. In the N.T. the mss. have Ζμύρνα Ap. 1. 11, 2. 8 (δ, Latt. partly ; but ᾧμύρνα has little support, as D Mt. 2. 11, σζμύρνης sx Jo. 19. 39); (Bevvivar 1 Th. 5. 19 (BID!IFG).
10. Single and double consonant.—With regard to the writing of a single or double consonant much obscurity prevails in the Roman period. The observance of the old-Greek rule, that p, if it passes from the beginning to the middle of a word (through inflexion or composition), preserves the stronger pronunciation of the initial letter by becoming doubled,‘ is even in Attic Greek not quite without exceptions ; in the later period the pronunciation itself must have changed, and the stronger initial p approximated to the weaker medial p, so that even a reduplication with p was now tolerated (ῥεραντισμένος ὃ 15, 6). The Syriac vss., however, still represent p by rh: yaw Ῥώμη. The reduplication cannot be universally adopted in the N.T. without great violence to the oldest Mss., al- though in these also there are still sufficient remnants of the ancient practice to be found: thus all mss. have ἔρρηξεν L. 9. 42, ἐρρέθη Mt. 5. 21, 27 etc. (always in these words, § 16, 1), see Gregory Tisch. 111. 121; ἄρρωστος always, ἄρρητος 2 C. 12. 4, χειμάρρους Jo. 18. τ ete.; on the other hand, ἄραφος Jo. 19. 23 (pp B), ἐπιράπτει Me. 2. 21 (pp B7KMUDL), ἀπορίψαντες A. 27. 43 ΒΟ etc. But while this matter too belongs to orthography, the spelling pp recommends itself as a general principle. παρησία is wrong, since it is assimilated from παν-ρησία (παρησ. B! Me. 8. 32,and passim; also SDL sometimes, see Tisch.)® ; ἀρραβών (a borrowed Semitic word) has the metrical prosody — ~ — guaranteed and the doubling of the consonant estab- lished in its Semitic form (dpaB. 2 C. 1. 22 8AFGL, 5. 5 sDE, E. 1. 14 FG), ep. also Lat. arrha."
In the case of the other liquids and all the mutes there are only isolated instances. βαλλάντιον, not βαλάντιον, is shown on quite
'Tischendorf, N.T. Vat., p. xxviii. 4. There seem to have been people who thought themselves bound. for correctness’ sake, to pronounce hii-i-os, mii-i-a, in three syllables ; ep. Cramer, Anecd. Oxon. III. 251.
*(Herodian) Cram. An. Ox. III. 251 objects to the trisyllabic μύϊα, ὑϊός.
* Her. ibid. 250. 2 ISM Apps Ρ: 528:
§ 3. 10-12.] ORTHOGRAPHY. II
preponderating MS. evidence to be correct, and the orthography is also vouched for on metrical grounds. Φύγελος 2 Tim. 1. 15 ΟἿ etc., τελλος A: the single letter appears to be the better spelling.} In papovas 827272 the duplication of the μ has very slender attest- ation. ἐννενήκοντα, ἔννατος are wrong; γέννημα for living creatures is correct (γεννᾶν, γεννᾶσθαι), for products of the field incorrect, since these are termed γένημα trom γίνεσθαι Mt. 26. 29, Me. 14. 25, L. 12. 18 ete. This rests on quite preponderant evidence, which is confirmed by the papyri.? On χύ(ν)νω, κτέννω see § 17. In ᾿Ιωάνης the single v is attested by the almost universal evidence of B, often by that of D*; it belongs to the series of Hellenised names (§ 10, 2), which treat the an of the Hebrew termination as a variable inflection (the Lxx. have “Iwavay and ᾿Ιωανου as var. lect., § 10, 2), whereas the interpretation of ᾿Ιωάννης as from ‘lwavav-ns (W.-Schm. § 5, 26 ὁ) affords no explanation whatever for the -ης. On the other hand, “Avva 27T is correct, and Ἰωάννα (Aram. JO, ep. POW Σουσάννα, Mapray.= Μαριάμμη of Josephus) is also explicable (L. 8. 3 with v BD: 24. 10 with v only DL); the masc. “Avvas (for 724 Hebr., “Avavos Joseph.) might be influenced by the analogy of “Avva.—Mutes: κράβατος appears to be commended by Lat. gribatus, and the duplication of the £ (introduced by the corrector in 5) is accordingly incorrect in any case ; but for the 77 there is the greatest MS. authority (for which δὲ has x7; the single τ in B! only at Me. 2. 4).° Cp. W.-Schm. ὃ 5, note 52. ’Iozzn is the orthography of the N.T. (1 Macce.); elsewhere ᾿Ιόπη preponderates (W.-Schm. § 5, note 54).
11. Doubling of the aspirate.—The aspirate, consisting of Tenuis + Aspiration, in correct writing naturally doubles only the first element, xy, 79, 7; but at all times, in incorrect writing, the two are doubled, xx, 96, ¢¢. So N.T. ᾿Αφφία for ᾿Απφία (§ 6, 7) Philem. 2 D!; Σάφφιρα A. 5. τ DE (but σάπφ(ε)ιρος Ap. 21. 19 in all MSS.) ; εφφαθα or -εθα Me. 7. 34 nearly all: especially widely extended is Ma@@aios (in the title to the Gospel sBD); Μαθθίας A. 1. 23, 26 BID; Μαθθάν Mt. 1. 15 B(D); Ma66a@ (-ααθ, -ar) L. 3. 29 8'BL
12. Assimilation.—Much diversity in writing is occasioned in Greek (as also in Latin) at all periods by the adoption or omissicn of the assimilation of consonants, which clash with each other by reason of their juxtaposition within a word. In the classical period the assimilation is often further extended to independent contiguous words, and many instances of this are still preserved in the oldest Mss. of the Alexandrian period; at a later date there are a few remnants of it, and so we find the following in the mss. of the
' Φυγέλιος (Gentile noun Ὁ) C. 1. Gr. 11. 3027 cited by W.-Schm. ibid. ἃ.
, Ibid. a; Deissmann, Bibelstudien, 105 f. [=Bible Studies 109f.]; Neue Bibelst. 12 [=do. 184]. Phrynichus, p. 286 Bk. censures the use of γέννημα (to be emended to γένημα) -- καρποί as vulgar.
πον, App. p: 328.
12 ORTHOGRAPHY. [8 3. 12-13. ΝΟ ex peop Ap. 1.13, 2. 1 ete: AC, ἘΠ ὃ τῷ AI 80. L. 18. 20 LA οὐἱο.:σὺμ Μαριάμ L. 2. 5 AE al.; σὺμ πᾶσιν 24, 21 EG al.; ἐγ γαστρί L. 21. 23 A. The later period, on the other hand, in accordance with its character in other matters (ep. δὲ 5, 1; 28, 8), was rather inclined to isolate words and even the elements of words ; hence in the later papyri the prepositions ev and ovv remain without assimilation even in composition, and so also in the old Mss. of the N.T., but this more often happens with σύν than with ἐν, sec W.H. App. 149 f., W.-Schm. ὃ 5, 25! Ἔξ is everywhere assimilated to the extent that it loses the o before consonants, both in composi- tion and as a separately-written word; but the Attic and Alexandrian writers went further, and assimilated the guttural, so that ey was written before mediae and liquids, ἐχ before 6and ¢. But the Mss. of the N.T. are scarcely acquainted with more than ἐξ and ex; for ἔκγονα | Tim. 5. 4 D1 has NFM ee 6. eggona, not engona, Blass, Ausspr. 1233), ἀπεγδύσει ΒΥ Col. 2. 11; ἀνέγλιπτος D L. 12. 33. We naturally carry out our rule consistently.
13. Transcription of Semitic words.—In the reproduction of adopted Semitic words (proper names in the main) the MSs. occa- sionally show an extraordinary amount of divergence, which is partly due to the ignorance of the scribes, partly also, as must be admitted, to corrections on the part of persons who thought themselves better informed. Thus the words on the cross in Mt. 27. 46 run as follows in the different witnesses: Ae. — anAr (ἀΐλι) — ἐλω(ελι(μ). λεμα -- Ana —X(e)iya — Aapa, σαβαχθαν(ε)Ρι -- σαβακτανει —(apbaver (σαφθ.}: in Me. 15. 34 eAw(e)e — ελωὴ — ηλ(ε)ι, λεμα — λαμ(μ)α — λ(έ)εμα, σα Ὁ ἢ - σαβακτ. τ θῶ θανει-- (α(βαγῴθανει. Grammar, however, is not con- cerned with individual words, but only with the rules for the tran- scription of foreign sounds, which are the same for the N.T. as for the LXX.2. The following are not expressed: δὼ 55, ΓΙ» 3, with some exceptions, where m™ is represented by x, as Ῥαχήλ 2, ᾿Αχάς WIN, Χαρράν TIT, πάσχα NOSD, 3) varies between “Paya Mt. 1. 5, ‘Pad® H. 11. 31, Ja. 2. 25; and Σ᾽ by y, as Γόμορρα i 772y,
bed
Page UY; ᾿Ακελδεμάχ A. 1. 19 15 strange ἘΣ N27 ΣΤ (cp. Σιραχ NTP).2—s and Ἴ-ι δη v; the latter (a half: concn our w, not our v) blends with the preceding vowel to form a Aiphthong : Δαυίδ, Εὔα, Λευίς, Νινευῖται L. 11. 324; ep. with this Σκευᾶς A. 19. 14 if this = Lat. Scaeva. 35, 3, n= x, φ, 9 thus with aspiration, except when two aspirates would stand in adjacent syllables, in which case the Greeks differentiate also in native words; so πάσχα (Joseph. has v. 1. φασκα: cp. LXX. MDD = ΠΙασχώρ and Φασσούρ), Καφαρναούμ Om WD (sBD Mt. 4. 13, 11. 23 etc. later Mss. Καπερν., see
1 παλινγενεσία Mt. 19. 28 SBICDE etc., Tit. 3. 5 SACDEFG. 2 Cp. C. Konneke in Progr. von Stargard, 1885. * Reproduction of the guttural by prefixing a is seen in ἀῆλι Mt. 27. 46 (see above) L (Euseb.), Ναθαναήλ Dy3n3, LXX. *Acpudy fon, “Aevdwp 785 Py. 4 Another reading Νινευή (male -evt). aby, App. p. 306.
§ 3. 13-14, § 4. 1.] DIVISION OF WORDS. 13
Tisch. on Mt. 4. 13), Κηφᾶς. But m is also represented by 7, as in σάββατον ὨΞῸ ; cp. ᾿Αστάρτη, likewise admitted into the language at an early date*; ND7S becomes, in L. 4. 26, Σάρεπτα in RABICD al., Σαρεφθα B°KLM; there is fluctuation also between Na(aped, -pet, -pa(@), where the corresponding Semitic form is uncertain. Τεννησαρεθ, -per in Mt. 14. 34, Me. 6. 53, L. 5. τ, is incorrect, D in Mt., Me. correctly, Tevvycap ; in “EAwased, -Ber the + corresponds to Semitic 9, Y2W"2N. On the other hand 5, © are rendered by the tenues x, 7,1 while z is almost entirely absent from Semitic words. Sibilants: 5% w=¢, 1=¢ (with the value of French 2), but ἸΣΞ Mt. 1. 5 Boes 8B, Boos C, Boof EKLM al.; SUN tocwros.’ On "ACwros TITUN see § 6, 7.
14. In Latin words it must be noted that qui is rendered by κυ: aquilo ἀκύλων (ὃ 28, 3); Κυρίνιος Quirinius sup. 6; likewise qué by xo: quadrans κοδράντης.Σ U is ov: κουστωδία Mt. 27. 65, Ῥοῦφος ; but also v: κεντυρίων Me. 15. 39.2 Oni=e see § 6, ὃ.
84. DIVISION OF WORDS, ACCENTS, BREATHINGS, PUNCTUATION.
1. In the time of the composition of the N.T. and for long after- wards the division of words was not generally practised, although grammarians had much discussion on the subject of the position of accents and breathings, as to what might be regarded as ἕν μέρος τοῦ λόγου and what might not. It is absent from the old Mss., and moreover continues to be imperfect in the later Mss. down to the 15th century. Of course it is the case with Greek as with other languages—the controversy of the grammarians shows it-—that the individuality of separate words was not in all cases quite strictly established: words that were originally separate were by degrees blended together in such a way that it is not always perceptible at what point in the development the separation came absolutely toanend. One indication of the fact that the blending has been completed is when the constituent parts can no longer be separated by another word: ὅταν δέ, not ὅτε δ᾽ ἄν is the correct expression, whereas ὅς δ᾽ ἄν is employed ; in the N.T. we also have ὡσαύτως de Me. 14. 31, L. 20. 31, R. 8. 26 (on the other hand Homer has ὡς δ᾽ αὔτως, which is still met with in Herodotus and Attic writers)* ; τὸ δ᾽ αὐτό, τῷ γὰρ αὐτῷ are still retained in the N.T. On the same principle the following e.g. form one word : ὅστις (still separable in Attic), καίπερ, τοίνυν, μέντοι, οὐδέ, οὔτε, οὐδέποτε, οὔπω (the two last separable in Att.), μήτι and μήτιγε, ὡσεί, ὥσπερ, ὡσπερεί, in the N.T.
1 Exception: σαβαχθανί (see above) unpav, in which case, however, there is a reyerse change by assimilation to -κτανι.
2Cp. Eckinger, d. Orthogr. lat. W. in griech. Inschr., (Zurich) Miinchen, 1893, p. 121 ff. 3 Dittenberger, Hermes vi. 296. Eckinger, p. 58 ff.
4Even as late as Philodem, ῥητορ. ii. 97, Sudhaus. abv. App. p. 306.
14 DIVISION OF WORDS—ACCENTS. [ὃ 4. 1-2.
also indisputably οὐδείς, μηδείς, where οὐδ᾽ ὑφ᾽ ἑνύς can no longer, as in Att., take the place of ὑπ᾽ οὐδενός etc. A second criterion is afforded by the new accent for the combined words: ἐπέκεινα (ὑπερέκεινα) from ἐπ᾽ ἐκεῖνα, οὐδείς from οὐδ᾽ εἷς, ἔκπαλαι (ἔκτοτε) from ἐκ πάλαι (ἐκ Tore); a third by the new signification of the com- pound : παραχρῆμα is no longer identical with παρὰ χρῆμα, καθόλου is different from καθ᾽ ὅλου, the origin of ἐξαυτῆς in ἐξ αὐτῆς τῆς ὥρας" and of ἱνατί in ἵνα τὶ γένηται is obscured. All this, however, by no means affords a universally binding rule, not even the absence of the first indication of blending; for in that case one would have to write e.g. ds τις in Attic. So also in the N.T. τουτέστι ‘that is’ is not proved to be oe by the occurrence of a single instance of τοῦτο δέ ἐστι (R. 1. 12), but it certainly does prove that it is not the necessary form. In most cases it looks strange for preposi- tions before adverbs to appear as separate words, because the independent notion of the preposition is lost: therefore we have ἐπάνω, ὑποκάτω, ἐπαύριον ‘to-morrow,’ ἀπέναντι, καθάπαξ, ὑπερλίαν, παρα Ga aaa τς still az’ ἄρτι ‘from henceforth’ appears to be correct, also ἐφ᾽ ἅπαξ ‘once for all,’ ‘at once,’ ef. ext τρίς. On kal? eis, κατὰ εἷς see § 51, 5; ὑπερεγώ (Lachm. 2 Οὐ. 11. 23) is clearly an impossibility, as the sense is, I (subject) am so more than they eae ys . The system of symbols for reading purposes (accents, breathings,
etic.) developed by the Alexandrian grammarians, was in the first instance only employed for the text of poetry written in dialect, and was not carried out in ordinary prose till the times of minuscule writing. With regard to accents, we have to apply the traditional rules of the old grammarians to the N.T. as to other literature, except in so far as an accentuation is expressly stated to be Attic as opposed to the Hellenistic method, or where we notice in the later form of the language a prosody different from that of the earlier language, which necessitates a different accent. Peculiar to Attic is “the accentuation διέτης etc., in N.T. accordingly διετής ; also μῶρος for μωρός, ἄχρειος for ἀχρεῖος (whereas ἐρῆμος, ἑτοῖμος, ὁμοῖος were the ancient forms, and foreign to the κοινή"), ἱμᾶντος for ἱμάντος with a different prosody, saponin for -ἄάδων, imperat. ἰδέ λαβέ for ἴδε λάβε. On the other hand we are informed by Herodian that ἰχθῦς -tv, ὀσφῦς -tv were the ordinary, not a peculiarly Attic accentuation. One characteristic of the later language is the shortening of the stem-vowel in words in -pa, as θέμα, πόμα (ὃ 27, 2), therefore κλίμα, κρίμα also are paroxytone,
1 Also ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ EK. 3. 20, 1 Th. 3. το (5. 13, ν.]. -σῶς) always presents a single idea, and is completely held together by ὑπερ. Cp. § 28, 2.
2Tt is true that Euthalius already used those symbols in his edition of the N.T. writings (W.-Schm. 6, 1, note 1), and they are ats. found in individual uncials dating from the 7th century (Gregory Tisch. iii. 99 f.); in B they ae from a corrector of the 10th or 11th century.
3 According to Herodian’s words (περὶ μονήρους λέξεως, 938 L.) one would have concluded that ἔρημος, ἕτοιμος were peculiar to late Attic; however, modern Greek also has ἔρημος (romance lang. ermo etc., Dietz, Etymol. Worterb. d. rom. Spr. I. sub verb.) ἕτοιμος, ὅμοιος, but ἀχρεῖος. Vv. App. p- 306.
§ 4. 2-3.] ACCENTS—BREATHINGS. I not κλῖμα, κρῖμα ; but χρῖσμα is not analogous to these (cp, χριστός), and is even written X pero pa. me BLL Jo. 2. 20, 27). Also zviyos for πνῖγος, ῥίγος for piyos are attested as vulgar forms (Lobeck, Phryn. 107), but there is no reason to infer from these that ψύχος is the N.T. form of ψῦχος. Herodian informs us that the shortening of « and v before € was the general rule, hence we get Φῆλιξ, κῆρυξ, κηρῦξαι: but we have no ground whatever for extending this rule to « and v before ψ, and B has θλειψις, hence accent θλῆψιες ; similarly ῥῖψαν (ρειψαν B) from pirtw, whereas the prosody of κύπτω is not established, and the accent of κῦψαι is therefore eae uncertain. Κράζω, Kpafov ; τρίβω, ἔτρεψα etc. (with εἰ before Y in B and the Herculanean rolls), therefore συντετρῖφθαι Me. 5. 4 (συντετρειῴφθαι B). In σπίλος ‘spot’ the quantity of the « is unattested, except indirectly by B, which throughout has σπιλος, acm tos, een v ; this proves that it is not παίλνος In οἰκτίρμων, οἰκτιρμός, In W hich B has « in almost all cases (contrary to all analogy: the words occur in the old dialects), the accent does not enter into the question. Ταζοφυλάκιον, not -eov, is the constant form in B, and is also made probable by the analogy of such words as τελώνιον, μυροπώλιον ; εἰδώλιον (ὃ 27, 3) has also better attestation in the N.T. (RAB etc.) than -eov. In Latin proper names the quantity of the vowel in Latin is the standard for determining the accent. This is definitely fixed for Marcus, Priscus, quartus ; hence Mapxos, Kpiozos,! Kovapros; but Σεκούνδος or Lexovvdos. In spite of everything there remains considerable doubt in the accentuation, since the accents of the Mss. are not altogether decisive ; everything connected with the Hebrew proper names is completely uncertain, but there is also much uncer- tainty in the Greek and Grecised names.
3. The same principle must be followed for determining the breathing, yet with somewhat greater deference to the MSS., not so much to the actual symbols employed by them, as to the ‘writing with aspirate or tenuis in the case of the elision of a vowel or in the case of οὐκ, οὐχ. It is established from other sources as well that the rough breathing in the Hellenistic language did not in all cases belong ‘to the same words as in Attic ; the mss. of the N.T. have a place among the witnesses, although to be sure some of these, such
as D of the Gospels and Acts, are “ generally untrustworthy in the matter of tenuis or aspirate, and they are never agreed in the doubt- ful cases. Smooth for rough breathing is very strongly attested in Jo.8. 44 οὐκ ἔστηκεν (RB'DLX al.), which might be a newly-formed per- fect of ἔστην στήκω, and not an equivalent for ἔστηκεν ‘stands,’ or impf. of στήκω, see §23, 6. The rough breathing is abundantly vouched for in certain words that originally began with a digamma: ἑλπίς, Amite (ἐφ᾽ ἑλπίδι) A. 2. 26 NCD, R. 8. 20 xBIDIFG, 1 C. 9. το in the first. occasion only FG, in the ere only A. R. 4. 18 C1D'FG, 5. 2 D'FG, Tit. 1. 2 Dl (ev FG), 3. 7 ka? FG (κατα D), A. 26. 6 no attestation. ἀφελπίζοντες yp L. 6. 35 (ἀφελπικώς
1B has Κρεισπος, also in some places the equally correct forms Πρείσκα, Πρείσκιλλα.
16 BREATHINGS. [$ 4. 3-5.
Herm. Vis. iii. 12. 28); there is also one example of this from Attic Greek, another from Hellenistic, the Greek O.T. supplies several.! —iSeiv: adido Ph. 2. 23 sABIDIFG, efide A. 4. 29 ADE, ἐφεῖδεν ΠῚ DWiAC X), οὐχ toot A. 2. 7 SDE, οὐχ ἱδόντες 1 P. 1. 8 ΒΙ which also has οὐχ εἶδον G. 1. 19; many examples of ἀφ, ἐφ-, καθ- in ΟἿ. The form ἴδιος often attested in inscriptions* exists in καθ᾿ ἰδίαν Mt. 14. 23 D (ibid. 13 all have xa7v), 17. 19 BD, 205 17) B24. 3) NBL SMe. 4-37) BDA, 6. 31 BU (ποῦ 52): {πὶ BI again in 9. 28, 13. 3 (elsewhere B also κατ). ᾿Εφιορκήσεις Mt. 5. 338 (widely extended, Phryn. p. 308 Lob., from excopx.*) ; but ἔτος (κατ᾽ ἔτος L. 2. 41, Hellenistic often ἕτος) does not appear in the N.T. with the rough breathing.“ Sporadic instances like οὐκ εὗρον, οὐκ ἕνεκεν, οὐχ ὄψεσθε (Gregory Tisch. ii. 90) must be regarded as clerical errors; οὐχ odvyos, however (where there is no former digamma in question), is not only a good variant reading in nearly all the passages in the N.T. (A. 12. 18 nA, 14. 288, 17. 4 B*, 19, 22 8AD; 19. 24 δὲ 27. 20 A; elsewhere only 15: 2; I 12). but is found also in the LXX, and the papyri.?
4. A difficult, indeed insoluble, question is that concerning the use of rough or smooth breathing in Semitic words, especially proper names. The principle carried out by Westcott and Hort appears to be rational, namely, of representing καὶ and » by the smooth breath- ing, τ and 5 ; by the rough, a practice which gives us many strange results : “AGEN (a Ἀν τος (π), Hva (πὶ), “Ryve: (m), and “Avavias (π), ἁλληλουια (5), but ’EBpaios ().° The ms. evidence, on the other hand, is deserving of little confidence in itself, and these witnesses are anything but agreed among themselves (° Hoeiesitl! Bs “A Bpadp — ᾿Αβρ.. HiNvas —HX. ete: ye Tnitial - must, when repre- sented by «, receive the smooth breathing, except where Hellenisation connects the Hebrew with a Greek word with a rough breathing : “Ιεροσόλυμα (but ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ, ᾿Ιεριχώ, in accordance with the rule). Ησαΐας has dropped the " (so also Aram. ΝΣ ΣΝ).
Of the remaining symbols, the familiar signs for long and short in unfamiliar words might in many cases be employed with advan- tage, so tin Semitic words as an equivalent for the εἰ of the Mss. (ξ 3, 4). The marks of diaeresis, which from a very early time were made use of to indicate a vowel which began a syllable, especially « or v, are necessary or useful in cases where the « or v might be combined with a preceding vowel to form a diphthong :
᾿Αχαΐα, ’ Α χαϊκός, ᾽᾿Ε βραϊστί, Πτολεμαΐς, Vaios (the last name was still
1Gregory, p. 91; W.-Schm. 8 5, 10 a; A. Thumb, Spir. asper (Strassburg, 1889), p. 65, 71.
* Gregory, ibid., Thumb 71. 2 Thumb, ibid. 4Tbid. 72. σον, App. p. 306.
5 Berl. Aeg. Urk. No. 72; W.-H. 143. Elsewhere however, as in No. 2, οὐκ ὁλ. and N.T. ἐπ’ ὀλίγα D Mt. 25. 21, 23.
° Cp. Gregory, 106 f. Jerome in his explanation of Biblical names avowedly brings 8m y under one head, and never writes h for any of these letters.
§ 4. 5-6.] BREATHINGS, PUNCTUATION. 17 a trisyllable in Latin when the literature was at its prime).! In Semitic names, moreover, it is often a question what is a diphthong and what is not; the use of the marks of diaeresis in ancient MSS. (as in D Xopo(aiv, Βηθσαϊδά) and the Latin translation can guide us here, thus ᾿Ἴεσσαι Jessae (-e), ᾿φραίμ Ephraem (-em, also 8L in Jo. 11. 54 -eu),? but Kaiv, Naiv, Hoatas, Βηθσαϊδά(ν), although in the case of Kady, in spite of the Latin ai and of Kaivay in 1), according to the primary Semitic form (j2"P) αὐ appears to be more correct.* ᾿
On Και(αγῴας Caiphas it is difficult to make any assertion ;+ on Μωϊσῆς see ὃ ὃ, 8. The hypodiastole may be employed in 6, re for distinction, though 6 τὰ may likewise be written (but ὅστις).
6. As regards punctuation, it is certain that the writers of the N.T. were acquainted with it, inasmuch as other writers of that time made use of it, not only in Mss., but frequently also in letters and documents ; but whether they practised it, no one knows, and certainly not how and where they employed it, since no authentic information has come down to us on the subject. The oldest witnesses ( and B) have some punctuation as early as the first hand ;° in B the higher point on the line (στιγμή) is, as a rule, employed for the conclusion of an idea, the lower point (ὑποστιγμή viz. AYTON.) where the idea is still left in suspense. One very practical contrivance for reading purposes, which (although often imperfectly executed) meets us e.g. in D of the Gospels and Acts, and in D (Claromont.) of the letters of St. Paul, and which Euthalius about the middle of the 5th century“employed in his editions of New Testament writings, is the writing in sense-lines (στίχοι), the line being broken off at every, even the smallest, section in the train of ideas, which required a pause in reading.® Later editors are compelled to give their own punctuation, and therewith often enough their own interpretation : this they do very decidedly when they put signs of interrogation (which in the Mss. are not earlier than the 9th century) in place of full stops. Economy in the use of punctuation is not to be commended: the most correct principle appears to be to punctuate wherever a pause is necessary for reading correctly.
1 As proved by Fr. Allen, Harvard Studies in Class. Phil. ii. (Boston, 1891), 71 ff.
* yoy3 L. 4. 27 is Ναιμαν (-as) in SABCDKL, hence X Νέμαν, Latt. (some) Neman; but Neeuavy EFM al. and other Latt.; the remaining Latt. Naaman.
5 Kawau or -ναν without the marks of diaer. both B and 8; B always Βηθσαιδα(ν), & partly (in three instances) -caida(v), partly -ca:da(v) (three instances also); Hoaas B mostly (except R. 9. 22, 29, 10. 16, 20), δὲ nine times Hoaas, ten times Ἡσαΐας ; but Naivy, Καὶν 8B constantly.
4For Καιαῴφας D and most Latt. have Καιῴας (Kaed., Κηφ.) ; Καϊάφας is also found in Josephus. The Semitic spelling is x=p, so that there is a clear distinction between this name and Κηφᾶς which is N22. Lagarde, Ubersicht lib. ἃ. Bildung ἃ. Nomina, 97. Mitt. 4. 18. Schiirer, Gesch. ἃ. jiid. Volkes 2, 156. 159 (Nestle). OSS ἈΡΡ: Ρ- 998, αγ. App. p. 306.
B
18 ELISION. [8 5. 1-2.
$5. ELISION, CRASIS, VARIABLE FINAL CONSONANTS.
1. It is in keeping with the tendency to a greater isolating of individual words, which we have mentioned above (§ 3, 12) as characteristic of the language of the period, that only a very moderate use is made in the N.T., according to the Ms. evidence which may here be relied on, of the combination of words by means of the ousting (elision) or blending (crasis) of the concluding vowel (or diphthong) of a word. This tendency was carried so far, that even in compound words the final vowel of the first component part was not elided (τετρα-άρχης in the N.T., in later Greek ὁμο-ούσιος ; § 28, 8).1 In no case does elision take place in noun or verb forms ; even in the verse of Menander, 1 C. 15. 33; there is no necessity whatever to write χρήσθ᾽ ὁμιλίαι for χρηστὰ op. for the sake of the verse, since the writing with elision or in full (plene, the regular Latin usage) was always, even in verse, quite a matter for individual opinion with the ancients. The only case where a pronoun suffers elision is τοῦτ᾽ ἔστι or τουτέστι (ὃ 4, 1)*; so that it is particles alone which are still coupled together with comparative frequency with other words, though here also the elision might be much more abundant than it 15.525 ’AAAd, according to Gregory, out of 345 cases where a vowel follows, undergoes elision in 215 (in these statistics it must, however, be remembered that the standard Mss. are far trom being always in agreement) ; before articles, pronouns, and particles it shows a greater tendency to combine than before nouns and verbs. Ae: δ᾽ ἄν frequently, otherwise combination hardly ever takes place (Ph. 2. 18 δὲ αὐτό ΒΡ, δ᾽ αὐτό ACDE al.). Οὐδ᾽ av H. 8. 4, ovo ov Mt. 24. 21, H. 13. 5, οὐδ' otrws 1 (Ὁ, 14. 21, οὐδὲ om R. 9. 7; in οὐδ᾽ ἵνα H. 9. 25, C deviates from the rest with οὐδέ ; the scriptio plena is more widely attested in οὐδ᾽ εἰ A. 19. 2, οὐδ᾽ ἡ H. 9. 18; elsewhere the final vowel remains. ‘Te, οὔτε, μήτε, ἅμα, apa, dpa ete. are not subject to elision. In prepositions, elision very seldom takes place where a proper name follows; even on inscriptions of an earlier time there was a preference for preserving the names independent and recognisable by writing the preposition in full. On the other hand, there was a tendency to elision in the case of current phrases, and where a pronoun followed : ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, ἀπ’ ἄρτι, ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ, ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ, ἐπ’ αὐτῷ, κατ᾽ ἐμέ, κατ᾽ (καθ) ἰδίαν, κατ᾽ οἶκον, μετ’ ἐμοῦ, παρ᾽ ὧν, ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν (ὑμῶν), vm οὐδενός (1 C. 2. 15). ᾿Αντί undergoes elision only i in ἀνθ᾽ ὧν; elision is most frequent with διά (because there were already two vow els adjacent to each other), thus δ ὑπομονῆς R. 8. 25, δι᾽ ἐσόπτρου 1-C. 15. τῷἮ “but: wath proper names διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ R. 16. 27, dua Ἠσαΐου Mt. 8. 17 (before ᾿Αβραάμ H. 7. 9 διὰ and δι᾿ are both attested).
2. The use of crasis is quite limited in the N.T. In the case of the article, which affords so many instances in Attic Greek, there
1 See Gregory, 113 ff. ay. App. p. 306. * Gregory, 93 ff. Zimmer, Zeitschr. f. wiss. Th., 1881, 487 ff.; 1882, 340 ff.
§5.2-4] CRASIS, VARIABLE FINAL CONSONANTS το
occur only the following in the N.T.: τοὐναντίον 2 C. 2. 7, G. 2. 7, 1 P. 3. 9 (stereotyped as a single word, hence τούὖν. δέ) ; τοὔνομα ‘by name’ Mt. 27. 57 (D τὸ ὄνομα) ; κατὰ ταὐτὰ (γάρ) L. 6. 23, 26, 17. 30, but even in this phrase (which is aval to a single word) there is not wanting strong attestation for τὰ αὐτά. W ith καὶ the erasis is constant in κἀν = “if it be but,’ fairly constant in κἂν =‘ even if’ (but κἂν for καὶ ἐάν ‘and if’ is only sporadically found) ; in in most places there i 1S preponderating ev idence for ka γώ, κἀμοί, κάμε, KOKELY OS, kaxet(Gev).2 Thus καί is only blended with the following word, if it be a pronoun or a particle ; of κἄλεγεν and the like there appears to be hardly a thought.®
3. The variable v after ὁ and ε at the end of a word became more and more firmly established in Attic Greek in the course of time, as the inscriptions show, and so passed over into the Hellenistic language as the favourite termination, though modern Greek shows us that it subsequently disappeared again. In the standard Mss. of the N.T. it is but seldom wanting, whether a consonant or a vowel follow it, or the word stands at the end of a sentence ; the rule that the v should always be inserted before a vowel and always omitted before a consonant is indeed not without a certain 7afio, and receives a certain amount of early support from the usage of the papyri, but as far as we know the rule was only for mulated in the Byzantine era, and the instances where it is broken are quite innumerable.* The v is wanting® occasionally after -ε (L. 1. 3 ἔδοξε RBCD etc., -v AEKSA), and in ἐστίν, somewhat more often after the -ov of the plural (χαλῶσι most Mss. Me. 2. 4, ἔχουσι L. 16. 29, τιμῶσι twice Jo. 5. 23), most frequently, comparatively speaking, after -ov dat. plur.; wépvor® 2 C. 8. το, 9. 2 (D*FG πέρσυ, 1)" πέρισυ which is else- where attested),’ and εἴκοσι (12 exx. in N.T.)® remain free from it.
4. The o of οὕτως is also established, for the most part, in the N.T. before consonants as well as before vowels; οὕτω is only strongly attested in A. 23. 11 (SAB before σε), Ph. 3. 17 (RABD*FG
Τὴ Acts 15. 27 there is for τὰ αὐτά a ν.]. in D ταυτα (as τοῦτο is sometimes read for τὸ αὐτό). 1 Th. 2. 14 A ταὐτα (with coronis). Ph. 3. 1 8*FGP raura. 1 P. 5. 9 all Mss. τὰ αὐτά. With conjunction, τὰ yap αὐτά, τὸ δὲ αὐτό
° The statistics are given in Gregory, 96 f.; Zimmer, l.c., 1881, 482. Kai ἐάν a Mss. in Mt. 5. 47, 10. 13 etc.; κἂν ‘and if’ ‘Me.’ 16. 18, L. 13. 9 (D καὶ ἐάν),
6. 34 D, Ja. 5. 15; more often ‘even if,’ as Mt. 26. 35, Jo. 8. 14 (but in 16 only δὲ has κἄν).
® Nor yet of ἀδελφοί, ἁπεσταλμένοι, Which Holwerda conjectures in A. 28. 15, Jo. 1. 24, whereas his proposals in A, 22. 5 κἂν (for καὶ) ... ἐμαρτύρει (B), Mt. 12. 21 κἀν (for καὶ, -- καὶ ἐν), L. 18. 7 κἂν μακροθυμῇ (for καὶ μ -- εἴ) are more probable. But D* has κἀπεθύμει in Τ,. 15. τό.
4 Kiihner-Blass, i. 3, i. 292.
ὅν. H. 146 ff.; Gregory, 97 ff.
6 Lex. rhet. in Reitzenstein Ind. lect. Rostoch. 1892/3, p. 6: πέρυσιν οἱ *Arrixol μετὰ τοῦ ν, φωνήεντος CIS EATON
7 Hermas, Vis. iii. 10. 3 περσυνῇ SN, περισυνῇ as, = περυσινῇ, but ii. 1. 1 πέρυσι twice (once περσι 8*). Dieterich, Unters. z. Gesch. d. gr. Spr. 87. W. Cronert, Zeitschr. f. Gymn.-W. lii. 580.
ὃν. App. p. 328.
πὸ SPORADIC SOUND-CHANGES. [85.4.86 1.
before περιπατ.), H. 12. 21 (w*A before φοβερόν), Ap. 16. 18 (SAB before μέγας). “Aypurand pexpe generally stand, as in Attic, even before a vowel without o, according to the majority of the Mss., but μέχρις αἵματος H. 12. 4 (-pe D*), and more frequently μέχρις (ἄχρις) οὗ Mc. 13. 30 (s-pt, D ews), G. 3. τὸ 4. 19, H. 3. 13 (ἄχρι M), while in 1 C. 11. 26, 15. 25 etc., the witnesses are divided. ᾿Αντικρὺς Χίου a. 20. 15 ‘over against’ (a late usage), Att. (κατ)αντικρύ (ἄντικρυς in Attic = ‘dow nright’ δ"
δ 6. SPORADIC SOUND-CHANGES.
1. General sound-changes in the language of the N.T. as opposed to Attic Greek do not openly present themselves, or at least are no longer apparent, being concealed by the older orthography, which either remained unaltered or was restored by the scribes (ep. § 3, 1). Of sporadic alterations which influenced the spelling as well as the pronunciation of words, the following are noteworthy : --
A-E (a-7, αὖ-- εὑ). For. ap we have ep in τεσσεράκοντα (lon., mod. Gk., also papyri) in all cases according to the earliest evidence ; also τέσσερα ΠΟ 25 ΝΑΤΜ, Ap. 4. 6, A. 4. 9 SA οἵο.; but τέσσαρες, -άρων, -αρσι : τέσσερας Never, but in place of it ie = accusative (see § 8, 2), so that we must give the regular inflection τέσσαρες, -apa ete., to the N.T. writers (=Ionic and mod. Gk. “Epes, -ερα ney) Kadapigev also frequently has ερ i” the MSS. (καθαρός never; cp. also μυσερός Clem. ad Cor. 1. 14. τ, 30. 1 A): Μί. ὃ. 9 alain B*EL al. (ibid. καθαρίσθητι, 2 ee all Mss.), Me. 1. 42 ἐκαθερίσθη AB*CG al. (41 καθαρίσθητι, 40 καθαρίσαι, 44 καθαρισμοῦ all MSsS.); elsewhere more often with -ep-, especially in A;° no possible paradigm results from this, -ap- must be written throughout. Cp. further Ildarepa for -apa AC A. 21. 1.—Variation between wa—ve (va —ve): φιάλη, ὕαλος, as in Attic (Lonic and Hellenistic φιέλη, veAos Phryn. Lob. 309), Χλιερός Ap. 3. 16 only ins; vice versa, ἀμφιάζει B nia Th 12. 28 for -έζει, -έννυσιν see ὃ 17, The vulgar term πιάζω ‘seize’ (ὃ 24, λῃστο-
πιαστής Papyr. Berl. Aeg. Mus. 325, 2) comes from the Dorie πιάζω = FO press,“ but has become differentiated from it (πεπιε- σμένος ‘pressed down’ L. 6. 38).—a and ev at the close of a word: ἕνεκεν (εἵν.) is Ionic and Hellenistic; the Attic ἕνεκα (§ 40, 6) cannot be tolerated except in A, 26. 21, where all the witnesses have it (speech of Paul before Agrippa, ep. § 1, 4; on the other hand in 19. 32 -κα is only in RAB).* The Tonic and Hellenistic εἶτεν for εἶτα is only found in Me. 4. 28 8B*L; ἔπειτεν nowhere (according to Phrynichus 124, Lob., both words are ἐσχάτως βάρβαρα). For ἀγγαρεύω (a word borrowed from Persian: so spelt in mod. Gk.),
1 Apoc. Petr. 21, 26 (κατ)αντικρὺς ἐκείνου, αὐτῶν, 29 καταντικρὺ τούτων.
* Gregory, 80. Buresch, Rh. Mus. xlvi. 217 f.
° Gregory, 82. Buresch, 219.
4 Bivexa Hermas, Vis. iii. 1. 9 δὲ, but 2. 1 εἵνεκεν &, ἕνεκα as, 5. 2 ἕνεκεν δὲ, ἕνεκα Ws, “vy, App. p. 306.
§ 6. 1-3.] SPORADIC SOUND-CHANGES. 21 ἐγγαρ. Mt. 5. 418, Mc. 15. 21 x*B*.t For Δαλματίαν 2 Tim. 4. 10, A Δερμ., C Acdp.; in Latin also we have Deli. side by side with Dalm.\—A-H: ὁδαγός ὁδαγῶ (Doric, but also in the κοινή) D Mt. 15. 14, L. 6. 39 (but in Jo. 16. 13, A. 8. 31 D also reads 7), cp. Lobeck, Phryn. 429.—AY for EY: ἐραυνᾶν for ἐρευνᾶν Jo. 5. 39 Ν Β΄, 7. 52 NB*T etc. (NB*¥ in general, AC occasionally), an Alexandrianism according to Buresch, Rh. Mus. xlvi. 213 (LxXx. yA generally, not BC: frequent in papyri).” ὲ
ἢ. A-O, E-O. []ατρολώας, μητρολώας (ὃ 3, 3) were written instead of -αλοίας, from ἀλο(ι)ᾶν 1 Tim. 1. 9 according to SADFGL, on the analogy of πατρο-ικτόνος etc., when the formation of the words had been forgotten. Μεσανύκτιον Me. 13. 35 only B*, L. 11. 5 only De. im Α. 16. 25 and 20. 7 all Mss. μέσον- : Cp. μεσαστύλιον Lob. Phryn. 195. Κολοσσαί C. 1. 2 is read by nearly all Mss., but the title is πρὸς Κολασσαεῖς in AB*K(s). The editor would bring the text and the title, which certainly did not originate with the author, into agreement; in favour of o we have the coins and nearly all the evidence of profane writers (-α- 1s ἃ ν.]. in Xenophon, Anab. i. 2. 6).—E-0O: ἐξολοθρεύειν A. 3. 23 ἘΒΡῈΡ al. {--- AB*CD), ὀλοθρεύειν H. 11. 28 (-ε- only ADE), ὀλοθρευτής 1 C. 10. το (-ε- D*(FG]). Thus the evidence is overwhelming for the second o, which has arisen from assimilation with the first o (as in ὀβολός for ὀβελός), this is also the popular spelling (mod. Gk. ξολοθρεύω); side by side with it ὄλεθρος remains constant in N.T. Buresch 3 is in favour of ε in the N.T. and the Lxx.; in the latter, where the word is extraordinarily frequent, we should write with ε according to 8A*B*(Be -o-).—In ᾿Απελλῆς A. 18. 24, 19. τ ΝΥ for ᾿Απολλῶς (Ἀπολλώνιος D) it must be remembered that the names are originally identical: ᾿Απέλλων being Dorie for ᾿Απόλλων. [Ὁ appears in fact that in the Acts we should read ᾿Απελλῆς (in the a text), whereas ᾿Απολλῶς is an interpolation from 1 C. 1. 12 ete.; the scholia also (Cramer, Caten., p. 309) seem to assume a difference with regard to the name between Acts and 1 Corinthians.
3. E-I,1I-Y. The Latin 7 in the majority of cases where the vowel was no pure i, but inclining to ¢ was represented by the older Greek writers not by « but by «: Τέβερις, TeBepios, Δομέτιος, Καπετώλιον and others (but Τίτος always with 1), see Dittenberger, Herm. vi. 130 ff. In the N.T. Τιβερίου L. 3. 1 is the traditional spelling, but λέντιον lintewm Jo. 13. 4 f.,° Aeyewv legio the majority of uncials in Mt. 26. 53 (---»*B*DL), Me. 5. 9 (- x*B*CDLA), 15 {τ 8*BLA, hiat D), L. 8. 30 (-i-8*B*D*L). In the N.T. the dest authority thus supports -ιών ; both forms occur in inscriptions.”
1De Vit. Onomasticon tot. lat. s.v. ἢ
*Gregory, 81. W. Schmid, Gtg. Gel. Anz., 1895, 40.
3 Op. cit. 216 f., ep. also H. Anz. Subsidia ad cognosec. Graecorum serm. vulg. e Pentat. vers. repetita (Diss. phil. Hal. xii.), p. 363. ᾿Ολοθρεύονται stands side by side with ὄλεθρος also in Clem. Hom. xi. 9,
4 Hermas, however, has Τίβεριν Vis. i. 1. 2.
δ. Ditt. 144 (Hesych.; λεντιάριος, inser.).
5 1014. 142 (λεγιών also in Plut. Kom. 13, Otho 12: -εὧν in Pap. Oxyrh. ii. p. 265). tv. App. p. 328. 1¥ vy. App. p. 328. αν App. p. 306.
22 SPORADIC SOUND-CHANGES. [ὃ 6. 3-5.
The opposite change is seen in IoztoAo. Puteoli (A. 28. 13), the ordinary Greek spelling! (similar is the termination of λέντιον ; the form λέντεον would have looked unnatural to a Greek). In the Greek word ἁλιεύς it appears that if the termination contains
(ιεῖ, -e’s), the preceding « becomes ε from dissimilation: ἁλεεῖς Mt. 4. 18 f. 8*B*C, Mc. ko 16 ΑΒ ΤΣ τ SABsCI Agee s*ACLQ“—I —- Y¥: Μυτιλήνη is the older spelling, Μιτυλ. A. 20. 14 that of the later writers; for Τρωγίλιον or -ία (Strab., Stephan. Byzant., Plin.) the Mss. in A. 20. 15 have -vAia, UN(A)uov (-vAtov, -os MSS. of Ptolem. v. 2. 8).
4. Interchange of short and long vowel (or diphthong).—<A — . ἀνάγαιον, ἀνώγαιον (cp. on αἱ --ε, ὃ 3, 7): the spelling with a has overwhelming authority in Me. 14. 15, L. 22. 12 (from ἀνά γῆ ; ἀνώγαιον With v.l. ἀνόκαιον in Xenoph. Anab. v. 4. 29).—EI before a vowel easily loses its « from early times, especially in derivatives (Ἄρειος πάγος, but ᾿Αρεοπαγίτης as in N.T.); hence may be explained ἠχρεώθησαν R. 3. 12 O.T. (8AB*D*G, in Lxx. whereas ἀχρεῖος does not vary. But there are instances in the simple word as well: τέλεος (and τελεοῦν) often in Attic, τέλειος (and τελει- ovv, but τελεῶσαι 1)" in H. 10. 1) N.T.; πλέον also in N.T. occa- sionally, L. ὃ. 13 (-etov C), A. 15. 28 (D -eiov), elsewhere wAcivr, and always πλείων, πλείονος ete. (Attic also has z πλέονος); in the derivatives alw: ays Plea -exteiv.—N.T. always ἔσω (Homer and tragedians have εἴσω ΕΠ dV on the other hand, εἵνεκεν with lengthened vowel (Ionic; εἵνεκα is found in Attic Gk. as well, even in prose) is an alternative for ἕνεκεν in L. 4. 18, O.T. (also LXx. Is. 61. 1; supra p. 20, note 4), A. 28. 20 x*A, 2 C. 3. το (most MSS. ).— Ο--ῶ: πρώιμος (from πρωΐ) and πρόϊμος Ja. 5. 7 (o sAB*P) are comparable with zAwmos (Att.) and πλόϊμος (late writers). For χρεοφειλέτης L. 7. 41, 16. 5 we should not write χρεωῴ. (which has less authority );* nor should we replace the correct Στωικός A. 17. 18 by Στοῖκός of RAD ἃ]. [Υ̓ - ΟΥ̓ : κολλύριον Ap. 3. 18 SBC, -ούριον AP does not belong here, on account of the long v; the latter form, which is found elsewhere, i is certainly of Latin ‘origin. | A peculiar word is ὁμείρομαι or Ope, which is equivalent to ἱμείρομαι (ἐπιθυμῶ) in sense, 1 Th. 2. ὃ (in O.T. sporadically),® but cannot easily be connected with ἱμείρ. (from ἵμερος) ; but μείρομαι appears to exist in this sense (Nicand. Theriac. 403), cp. (ὀ)γδύρομαι, (ὀγκέλλω, and the like, ee [esse eso:
Contraction and loss of vowel.—In contraction the Hellenistic nae age, as appears from its inflections, does not go quite so far as the. Attic. Still νεομηνία for Att. νουμηνία in Col. 2. ΤΟΙ is only attested by BFG (Lxx. occasionally): while ἀγαθοεργεῖν (πῆ 0 τὸ" ἀγαθουργῶν De lee 17; vale ᾿ἀγαθοποιῶν) arises from the endeavour to keep the two halves of the compound word recognisable, § 28, 8
1 Ditt. 145.
* Herodian, ii. 606 L., has ὦ and 0; the word is certainly not Attic (the oldest form is χρήστης, then χρεώστης) ; χρεω-φυλάκιον and the like come from Attic χρέως = χρέος. See further Lobeck, Phryn. 691; W.-Schm. § 16, 5, n. 28.
3 See W.-H. 152 a, W.-Schm. § 16, 6. “vy. App. p. 307.
δ
§ 6. 5-7.] SPORADIC SOUND-CHANGES. 23 (always κακοῦργος, ἱερουργεῖν etc.).1 An entirely new kind of con- traction is that of ver =i into τ: ταμεῖον from ταμιεῖον, πεῖν (pin) from πιεῖν, see ὃ 24, ἐπείκεια B* Acts 24. 4? * (80 also ὑγεῖα for ὑ ὑγίεια, no instances in N. a): In νεοσσός, νεοσσία, νεοσσίον contraction never took place, but the e dropped out in (Ionic and) Hellenistic Gk.: so in N.T. vooods L. 2. 24 8BE al., νοσσιά with v.l. νοσσία 13. 34, Mt. 23. 37 (condemned by Phryn. 206, Lob.). In ἐλεινός (Att.) for ἐλεεινός it must be remembered that ‘the spelling eAevvos (Ap. 3. 17 AP, 1 C. 15. 19 FG) may also represent ελεῖνος, and moreover, contraction in the N.T. is improbable. The reflexives in Hellenistic Gk. are σεαυτοῦ, ἑαυτοῦ (and ἐμαυτοῦ), § 13, 1; the con- junction ‘if’ is ἐάν, ὃ 26, 4, a form which is also very largely introduced to express the potential particle (ibid. )
6. Prothetic vowels.—The only points to note under this head are that θέλω always stands for ἐθέλω; on the other hand κεῖνος never stands for ἐκεῖνος : similarly χθές is not found, but only ἐχθές (also the prevalent Attic form) Jo. 4. 52 8AB*CD al., A. 7. 28 xB*CD, Η. 18. 8 sAC*D*M. On ομείρομαι vide supra 4.
7. Interchange of consonants.—The main point under this head is that the Hellenistic language did not adopt the Attic substitution of 77 for oo or of pp for po, though isolated instances of this were continually intruding into it from the literary language, especially as Atticising writers naturally imitated this peculiarity as well as others. In the N.T. for σσ we have: θάλασσα, πράσσω, ταράσσω, ἐκπλήσσομαι (77 A. 13. 12 B) περισσός ; also κρείσσων Pauline epp. on preponderant evidence (1 C. 7. 38, 11. 17, Ph. 1. 23, only 1C. 7. 9 -77- SBDE), but κρείττων Hebrews (77 1. 4, 7. 7, 19, 22, 8. 6 [twice], 9. 23, 11. 16, 35, 40, 12. 24, there is diversity only in 6. 9, where 77 is read Dye D*K, and 10. 34 oo A) and Petrine epp. (i P. 3. 17; doubtful 2 P. 2. 21). To this corresponds ἥσσων, ἡσσοῦσθαι in St. Paul (1 C. 11. 17, 2 C. 12. 13, 15), but the literary words ἡττᾶσθαι, ripest are read with zz even in his letters, Pee tof, RK. 11. 1 Meee ioe ASST OVA Oa, Be, R. 9. 12 0.1;
ἐλάττων H. 7. 7, 1 Tim. 5. 9 (all mss.; cp. ὃ 2, 4); literary words, ἐλαττονεῖν 2 C. 8. 15 O.T.; ἐλαττοῦν H. 2. 7 ) Ὁ. ΠΟ. 9. 30. (zz is also occasionally found in Hermas: γι 111. 7. 6 ἔλαττον :
Sim. ix. 27. 4 ἐλάττους : 9. 6 ἐλάττωμα). Similarly ee always takes the place of Att. tepov.—With regard to Att. pp for po the usage is more evenly divided. “Apony Gospels, Ap. 12. 5 (but ap(p)eva 8B, clearly a correction for ἔθ οι): R. 1. 27 [twice] (pp 8*[C]), G. 3. 28 (pp 8), 1 C. 6. 9, 1 Tim. 1. τοῦ; but along with ἄρσος, θάρσει, θαρσεῖτε, which are constant, we find (in Paul. epp. and Hebr.), θαρρεῖν 2 C. 5. 6, ὃ, 7. 16, 10. 15, H. 13. 6 (also mod. Gk. θαρρῶ ; but Apoc. Petr. 5 Gapaneayres παραθαρσύνειν); for
1 Also in R. 13. 3 for τῷ ἀγαθῷ ἔργῳ there is a conjectural reading τῷ dyaéo- epy@, but the antithetical clause ἀλλὰ τῴ κακῷ will not suit this.
? Elsewhere always ἐπιεικής, -ἰείκεια. In ἐσθίω, ἐσθίεις the analogy of the other parts of the verb prevented the fusion from taking place; on ἀφεῖς from ἀφίημι see § 23, 7. The vulgar forms πεῖν and ὑγεῖα are discussed by [Herodian] Cram. An, Oxon. iii. 261, 251. αν App. p. 307.
24 SPORADIC SOUND-CHANGES [8 6. 7-8.
the vulgar μακράν, μακρόθεν Le. and Hebr. give πόρρω(θεν) L. 14. 32, 17. 12, 24. 28, H. 11.13 (Mt.15.8=Mce. 7. 6 O.T.; μακρὰν καὶ πόρρω Barn, 20. 2).—Apart from these, there is hardly anything worthy of note. Fluctuation in the aspiration of consonants: σπ -- σῴ (also fluctuate in Attic) in σπυρίς, σφυρίς Mt. 15. 37 (σφ- D),7 16. 10 (σφ- BD), Me. 8. 8 (σφ- ΒΑ), 8. 20 (σφ- D), A. 9. 25 (σφ- κα, hiat D); σφόγγος D Me. 15. 36 (not Mt. 27. 48; o¢- is also Attic) ; στ--σθ: μαστός Ap. 1. 13 BCP, -σθός ἢ, cae A (€ orig. =06, so still in N.T.”Awrtos A. 8. 40 TON, so L. 11. 27 μαστοί most MSS., -σθοί DFG 23. 29 (D*), but C pagot (usage also fluctuates in Attic writers, Kiihner 15. 1. 157). Φόβηθρα is read L. 21. 11 BD for φόβητρα ; this suffix takes the form sometimes of -6pov, sometimes of -rpov, Kiihner, ibid. 11. 271. 27. The π in ’Ardia (Addia, see § 3, 11), Philem. 2, is aspirated, as in inscriptions of the regions (Phryszia, Caria) to which Appia belonged, where the name is fre- quent.’ The Attic πανδοκεῖον, πανδοκεύς for -χεῖον, -χεύς (Lob. Phryn. 307) occurs in L. 10. 34f. ing*orx*D*. In οὐθείς, μηθείς the ὃ of ov6(e), #9 6(€) has united, contrary to rule, with the aspirate of εἷς to form 6 (else- where 6=7-+ aspirate) ; these forms occur from the latter part of the Attic period onwards, in writers (Aristot.), on inscriptions, and on papyri, and so, too, in the a Aad) ΠΧ Χο ΘΟΕ μηθέν ᾿ς, ile 63 SAB; seen ID, 35 ABQT all, 2 ΟΠ Seabees οὐθέν L. 23. 14 SBT, A. 15. 5 BALD, 19 27 ABH, 26. 26 xB, 1 C. 13. 2 SABCD*L (thus this spelling i is by no means universal). Still ἐξουθενεῖν is the prevalent form (as also in LXxX.; only in Mc. 9. 12 BD have -devn 67). W. Schm. § 5, 27, n. 62 (Herm. Mand. iv. 2. 1 οὐθέν ἘΣ Sim. ix. 4. 6; Clem. Cor. i. 33. 1, 45. 7 pnOapos, 1.6. μηδὲ ἁμῶς).
8. Insertion and omission of consonants.—AapPdvw in Hellenistic Gk. retains in all forms and derivatives with the stem ληβ the μ of the present tense: ἐλήμφθην, λῆμψις, προσωπολήμπτης ete; S24 W.-Schm. ὃ 5, 30,° The addition of p in ἐμπί(μ)πλημι, Ἐπ ἤτοι οι is as variable in Attic as in Hellenistic Gk. (W.-Schm. ibid.) ; N.T. ἐμπιπλῶν A. 14. 17 (with » DEP), ἐμπιπρᾶσθαι 28. 6 8* for πιμπρᾶσθαι (imp. A; elsewhere uncertainty about the » only exists in the case of these compounds with ¢-).—Insertion of cons. for euphony (av-6-pds, μεσημ-β-ρία) takes place in many Semitic names ("Eo-6-pas, Μαμ-β-ρῆ), in the N.T. Σαμψών, i.e. Σαμ-π-σών, Η. 11. 32 (Ἰστραήλ D L. 2. 32, etc.).—odvdpov for σφυρόν A. 3. 7 8*AB*C* is unexplained. poyy:Addos Me. 7. 32 has no authority (μογιλάλος Ξε ὁ μόγις λαλῶν, and so with one y in SAB*DGK al.: also LXX. Is. 35. 6: B™ is the first to write yy). The excision of a consonant (accompanied by lengthening of a vowel) appears in γίνομαι, γινώσκω (Lonic and Hellenistic) ; also noticeable is ἄρκος =apxtos Ap. 13. 2 (all uncials), found also in the LXx. and elsewhere in the late language (W.-Schm. § 5, 31).
δον App. p. 307.
§7.1-5.] FIRST AND SECOND DECLENSIONS.
to
σι
$7. FIRST AND SECOND DECLENSIONS.
1. Words in -pa and those in -via, i.e. -ῦα (§ 3, 8) follow the pattern of those in -coa, -λλα ete., 1.6. they take in G.D. ἧς, ἢ instead of Att. as, ᾳ. (On the other hand those in -ρᾶ [ἡμέρα], and in true -ἰα [ἀλήθεια, pia] retain a throughout the sing.) Σπεῖρα, -ys (A. 10. 1 etc.), μαχαίρῃ a 2). πλημμύρ: ys (L. 6. 48), πρῴρης (A. 27. 30), Σάπφειρα, -n (5. 1), συνειδυῖα, -ns (5. 2). Similarly the LXx. and the papyri.! Exception: στεῖρα (adj.), στείρᾳ L. 1. 36 all MSS.
The inflection ἃ, G. ds, etc. in proper names is not confined to eh where a definite sound ( ι, p) precedes, any more than it is in Attic. Μάρθα, παῖς 0. lil δος -ας ( )) ἌΝ Ὁ. 38 (ep. ὃ 10, 5). To this corresponds the Ἐπ of masc. names, N. as, G. ἃ (as in Doric etc.), D. g, A. av, V. a: Ἰούδας, -α (Me. 6. 3); ᾿Αγρίππας, -ἃ (A. 25. 23). Cp. § 10, 1. (On the other hand, “ἴας, -fov: so Ζαχαρίας, -ov L. 1. 40, 3. 2, beside “Avva and Καϊάφα; Ἠλώου, 1. 17 [-a 8B], 4. 25, like Att. Καλλίας, -ov.)
3. Peculiarities—Oca A. 19. 27 occurs in tke formula ἡ μεγάλη θεὰ “Apres (as in inscriptions); but ibid. 37 ἡ θεός, which is the usual Att. form.—Qec0s, voc. θεέ, Mt. 27. 46 is unclassical, occasion- ally in Lxx.; cp. Synt. § 33, 4.
4, Gontracted words in Decl. I. and II.—Boppas, G. a, L.
Ap. 21. 13 (Att. and later writers have βορέας and opel). The use of contracted words of Decl. II. is very limited: νοῦς and πλοῦς are transferred to Decl. III. (δ 9, 3); χειμάρρου Jo. 18. 1 is no doubt from -ppos; ὀστοῦν Jo. 19. 36 O.T., but uncontracted ὀστέα 1,. 24. 39 (D oora) ; -ἔων Mt. 23. 27, Eph. 5. 30 T.R., H. 11. 22,3 like χρυσέων Ap. 2. 1 AG, -éovs 4. 4 8, -eas 5. 8 καὶ (cp. Clem. Hom. x. 8 χρυσέους, ἀργυρέους, χρύσεα, ἀργύρεα, χάλκεα ; XV. 3 χάλκεα, χρύσεα); but this uncontracted form is in no passage read by all Mss., and alternates with much more numerous examples of contraction in this adj. (and in the adjectives ἁπλοῦς, διπλοῦς) in Ap. and elsewhere. Cp. W. Schmidt de Joseph. eloc. 491 f. Χρυσᾶν Ap. 1. 13 8*AC is a gross blunder, wrongly formed on the model of χρυσᾶς 1. 12 (ἢ).
5. The so-called Attic second declension is wanting, with the exception of the formula ἵλεώς σοι (ν.]. ἵλεος) Mt. 16. 22; ep. ἵλεως v.l. -εος Η. 8. 12 (Hermas, Sim. ix. 23. 4; ἵλεων [-eos A] Clem. Cor. 1. 2. 3). ᾿Ανώγεων Me. 14. 15 (γαιον, -ὦγαιον are the best attested readings), ΠῚ 22. 12 (-άγαιον, -ώγαιον, = COU: -ὠγεον) is an incorrect form ; ἡ ἕως 15 non- -existent, αὐγή taking its place; λαός, ναός stand for aes νεώς ; ἡ ἅλων, -wvos for ἡ ἅλως. “H Kos A. 21. τ, ace. Ko for Κῶν (like late Attic), is declined in this case after the manner of
αἰδώς Decl. IIT.
1E.g. ἀρούρης Berlin Pap. 328, ii. 32; 349, 8. ᾿Ιδυίης 327, 15. Τεγονυίης 578, 17. Εἰδυείης (§ 3, 8) 405, 24.* 1*2y. App. p. 328.
26 THIRD DECLENSION. [87 6. § 8. 1-3.
6. Gender in Decl. II.—'O and ἡ ἀλάβαστρος, also τὸ -ον, are recorded in Me. 14. 3 (according to Att. it should be ἡ, but ὁ ἀλάβαστος Aristoph., τὸ -rov Menander). Ὁ ἄψινθος for ἡ Ap. 8. 11 (2) ( omits ὁ). Ὃ βάτος in Me. 12. 26 has overwhelming authority ; ἡ is read in L. 20. 37, A. 7. 35 (Hellenistic, according to Moeris). Ἢ Anvos Ap. 14. 19 f. as commonly, but, according to ABCP, τὴν Anvov... τὸν μέγαν (ep. LXX., Gen. 30. 38). Ὃ λίθος in all cases, even of the specially precious species of stones (where Attic has ἡ). Ἢ λιμός (as in old dialects, LXx.), L. 15. 14, A. 11. 28 (6 L. 4. 25). “H oropyvos H. 9. 4 (Attic: ὁ Doric and Lxx.). ‘O tados for 7 Ap. 21. 18 (ep. λίθος ; 6 ὕελος Theophrast. de lapid. 49).
ὃ 8. THIRD DECLENSION.
|. Accusative singular in « and v.—The late-Greek forms in -av for a (inscriptions, papyri: found quite early in dialects), on the analogy of Decl. I. are frequently found in Mss., Mt. 2. το ἀστέραν 8*C, Jo. 20. 25 χεῖραν AB, A. 14. 12 Δίαν DEH al., ἄρσεναν Ap. 12. 3 A, εἰκόναν 13. 14 A, μῆναν 22. 2 (Tisch. on H. 6. 19); they do not deserve to be adopted. In words in -ys the accus. in -ν is not unknown to Attic (τριήρην, Δημοσθένην), but occurs only in barytone words [paroxyt. or oe in the N.T. the following are incredible: ἀσῴφαλὴην (Zaccent) H. 6. 19 ACD, ovyyevny R. 16. τι AB*D*, ἀσεβὴν R. 4. 5 8D*FG, Sony Jo. 5. τι 8*.—In barytones in τὰς with τ ὃ in the stem, the regular Attic accus. is -ἰν, and so too in the N.T. χάριν ete. are the usual forms: but χάριτα A. 24. 27 (ιν Sai 25. g A, Jd. 4 AB, Hellenistic according to Moeris (papyri)." Cp. κλεῖδα L. 11. 52 (XX. ; Attic has κλεῖν and so Ap. 3. 7, 20. 1, and also D in Luke, but according to Justin we should read in Ap. tas κλεῖς, infra 2).
2. Accusative plural (assimilation to the nominative plural).— The old termination (v)s in vowel stems (τοὺς βότρυς, τοὺς βοῦς) has disappeared in Hellenistic Gk., and these words are inflected with as: Mt. 14. τη ἰχθύας, Jo. 2. 14 Boas. But κλεῖς -- κλεῖν — τὰς κλεῖς, Ap. 1. 18 (κλεῖδας B)*—For -as we have -es in the MSS. (accus. = nom.: old dialects and late Gk.*) in the case of τέσσαρες (ὃ 6, 1), A. 27. 29 8, Jo. 11. 17 8A, Ap. (4. 4), 7. 1 A twice, P once, 9. 148 (so still more often in LXx.). So also we have by assimilation (like ai and τὰς πόλεις, τριήρεις) οἱ and τοὺς βασιλεῖς in Hellenistic Gk., and this accus. plur. is regular in N.T. for all words in -εύς.
3. Relation of the nominative to the cases (inflection with or without consonant).—The inflection -as, -aos = ws, as γῆρας, τως, κέρας, τως, has almost disappeared. I ῆρας, dat. γήρει in L. 1. 36 (as in Tonic: so ey a LXX., where also the gen. γήρους occurs, as in Clem. Cor. i. 63. 3; ibid. 1007 γήρει, v.l. -a). Kepas, τέρας take τ (as in Attic and always in Hellenistic Gk. τέρατα, τεράτων ace. to Moeris): κέρατα Ap. 13. τ, τέρατα Mt. 24. 24. We have only κρέας and plur. κρέα R. 14. 21, 1 C. 8. 13 (other cases wanting).
125. App-ip. 320: @v. App. p. 307.
§ 3. 3-6.] THIRD DECLENSION. 27 There is most attestation for the consonantal inflection with v for all cases of the comp. in -wv: exceptions are almost confined to the Acts (wAciovs nom. or acc. A. 13. 31, 19. 32, 21. 10, 23. 13, 21, 24, 11, 25. 6, 14: but -ves, -vas 27. 12, 20, 28. 23) and John (μείζω, ἐς -ova 1. 51, ἐλάσσω 2. το, μείζω ABE al. -wv, D -ova 5. 36, ἐλάσσω 2. το, a few MSS. -σσων or -σσον, πλείους 4. 41, elsewhere Mt. 26. 53 πλείω or -ovs).—On the other hand the 6 is omitted not only in νήστεις Mt. 15. 22, Mc. 8. 3, wrongly written vijorus—the vulgar nom. was νήστης, [Herodian] Cramer, An. Ox. iii. 248, hence νήστεις like ἀληθεῖς (although the so-called Herodian speaks of declining like the Ist declension)—but also in ἔρεις (acc.) Tit. 3. 9 AD al. (ἔριν 8*DE al., but in the middle of words that are clearly plurals), G. 5. 20 (nom. with v.l. <pis sing.), 2 C. 12. 20 (ditto), ep. v.l. in 1 C. 3.3, 1 Tim. 6. 4; side by side with ἔριδες 1 (Ὁ 1. 11 all MSS. (ἔρεις ace. in Clem. Cor. i. 35. 5).—Assimilation of the nom. to the oblique cases takes place in Hellenistic Gk. in words in -is, -ivos when τν is substituted for is (piv, Σαλαμίν), and so in N.T., ἡ ὠδίν 1 Th. 5. 95. (ἀκτίν Apoc. Petr. 7).
4. Open and contracted forms.—Opewy Ap. 6. 15 (Hermas, Sim. ix. 4. 4 etc.; Clem. Cor. i. 10, 7), and χευλέων H. 13. 15 (from LXx. Hos. 14. 3) show the widespread tendency, which is apparently not wholly foreign to Attic, to leave this case uncon- tracted in words in os. (But ἐτῶν A. 4. 22, 7. 30 ete.) On the other hand we have πῆχυς, πηχῶν for πήχεων Jo. 21. ὃ (-ewv A), Ap. 21. 1731 ἥμισυς (a barytone adj. in vs: βαθύς ete. are never so inflected) has ἡμίσους for -eos Mc. 6. 23 (Apoc. Petr. 27), ἡμίση L. 19. 8 FIL (D?), with the var. lect. ἡμίσ(ελια 8BLQ, τὰ ἥμισυ ARA(D*). Ἡμίσεια would be a not impossible assimilation to ἡ ἡμίσεια ; ἡμίσους and -ση are attested as Hellenistic.? “Yycijs, ὑγιῆ Jo. 5. 11, 15 ete. are Hellenistic (Attic has ὑγιᾶ as well)
5. Genitive -cos and -ews. βαθέως L. 24. τ (on preponderant evidence), and zpaews 8BKL 1 P. 3. 4 are mistakes of the popular language (see Lobeck, Phr. 247) for -€os (otherwise there is no instance of the gen. of the adj. in ~’s).
6. Peculiarities.—‘Salt’ in Attic is οἱ ἅλες, in N.T. τὸ ἅλας, Mt. 5. 13 twice (ἅλα [ep. τὸ yada] twice, D once), Me. 9. 50 twice (ἅλα once &*, twice LA), L. 14. 34 (ἅλα 8*D), no doubt derived from τοὺς ἅλας, and inflected like τέρας : ἅλατι Col. 4.6. This form is also characteristic of the common language, according to Herodian ii. 716, Lentz. (In Me. 9. 49 D has ἁλί in a clause from Levit. 2. 13 which is wanting in 8BLA; ibid. 50, ace. ἅλα 8*A*BDLA, ἅλας x°A2CN al.)—Naits only occurs in A. 27. 41 τὴν ναῦν (literary word = vulgar τὸ zAotov).—’Opvié ‘a hen’ nom. sing. L. 13. 34 (ep. Doric gen. ὄρνιχος) ;5 for ‘bird’ N.T. has ὄρνεον Ap. 18. 2 ete. (also Barn. 10. 4, Clem. 1 Cor. 25. 2, Herm. Sim. ix. 1, 8).— Συγγενύς, -cis, dat. plur. -εῦσι (like γονεῖς, -εῦσι) Mc. 6. 4 (σιν δ" fom. s*]AB2CD* al.), L. 2. 44 B*LXAA; according to [Herodian]
Cram. An. Ox. iii. 246 others even said -νεῖσι.
το ν᾿ App. p. 328.
28 METAPLASMUS. [$ 9. 1-3.
$9. METAPLASMUS.
1. Fluctuation between neuter and masculine in Declension II.— Δεῖπνος for -ov is only ἃ v.l. in L. 14. τό, Ap. 19. 9 (B), 17. Δεσμός has plural δεσμά (old) L. 8. 29, A. 16. 26, 20. 23, and δεσμοί (old) Ph. 1. 13 (without distinction). Zvyés ‘yoke’ (in use since Polyb.) never ζυγόν. Θεμέλιον, plur. -a A. 16. 23 (Hom. LXx.; Herm. Sim. ix. 14. 6; Attie, according to Moeris), elsewhere ὁ θεμέλιος 1 C. 3. 11 f., 2 Tim. 2. 19, Clem. Cor. 1. 33. 3 etc. (strictly se. AvBos ; Attic). Ὃ νῶτος R. 11. το O.T. quot. (class. τὸ νῶτον). Σῖτος, plur. σῖτα A. 7. 12 HP (Att. and LXX.; σιτία read by 8AB etc. does not suit the sense). Στάδιον has plur. στάδια Jo. 6. 19 8*D, and σταδίους xABL al.: the latter also occurs in L. 24. 13 and Ap. 21. 16 AB al. with v.1. -/wv (both plurs. are Attic).
2. Fluctuation between Declensions I. and II.—Compound sub- stantives with ἄρχειν in their second half are formed with “αρχος in Attic, in (dialectic and) Hellenistic Gk. more often with -dpxns (Decl: 1); Kiihner, i. 3; 1.502: So im ΝΣ ἐθνάρχης, πατριάρχης, πολιτάρχης, τετραάρχης (Ασιαρχῶν Acts 19. 31) also ἑκατοντάρχης centurio Mt. 8. 13 (χῳ 8”UA), and in the majority of places in the Acts; but χιλίαρχος tribunus always, ἑκατόνταρχος A, 22. 25 and often (with much variety of reading about the vowel); στρατοπέ- dapxos or -ης 28 τό, an addition of the # text (om. sAB).! ϑυσεντέριον A. 28. 8 according to Moeris is Hellenistic for pie Lob. Phryn. 518. *Hyos, ὁ (in L. 21. 25 τὸ; see 3), L. 4. 37, A. 2. 2, H. 12. το, similarly stands for ἠχή (Moeris).
3. Fluctuation between Declensions II. (I.) and III.—The exx. of interchange of -os masc., Decl. IL., and -os neut., Decl. IIL, have somewhat increased in number, in comparison with those in the classical language. The Attic ὁ ἔλεος becomes τὸ ἔλεος in LXX. and ΝΎ. always (exc. Mt. 9. 13 ἔλεον Οὐ etce.: 12. 7 ἔλεον EG ete., 23. 23 τὸν ἔλεον CAAII: H. 4. 16 ἔλεον C°D*EL: Tit. 3. 5 τὸν ἔλεον D°KL), with gen. ἐλέους, dat. ἐλέει (the original forms, if we may judge from the old derivative ἐλεεινός, cp. φαεινός from φάος, and the compound νηλεής). “O ζῆλος is the class. and also the usual N.T. form; τὸ ¢ (nom. or ace.) 2 C292 Sib he i, 6 8*ABD*FG, with gen. Annes AS τῇ only be (Clem. Cor: 1 Ὁ: τ 2,0 τ ΟΣ τὸ : ὅ. 2, 4, 5 etc. 6). ἜἬχους L. 21. 25 for ἤχου (see 2). Ὃ θάμβος (ancient) for τό L. 4. 26 D (0. μέγας), ep. A. 3. το θάμβου C. Τὸ πλοῦτος (nom. or acc. sing.) 2. C. 8. 2 s*BCP, E. 1. 7, 2. 7, 3. 8, 16, Ph. 4. το, Col. 1. 27 (also ὁ 7A. 8), 2. 2 (neut. 8*A BC), is attested on preponderant or very good evidence; elsewhere (even E. 1. 18) ὁ wA., and always gen. πλούτου. Td σκότος (cp. σκοτεινός) 15 universally found (earlier 6 and τὸ) : in H. 12. 18 σκότῳ is a wrong reading for (6d. Fluctuation between -os neut. and -a, -7 Decl. I. is rarer: τὸ δίψος (Attic, which has also ἡ δίψα) 2 Οὐ. 11. 27 δίψει (δίψη B*); τὸ vixos? 1 C. 15: τὸ Ὁ O-T. quot., 57, Mt. 127 20, 0e:
1On the usage of Josephus ep. W. Schmidt, Jos. elocut. 485 ff. * The usual Lxx. form: Lob. Phryn. 647.
§ 9.3. § 10.1-2.] PROPER NAMES. INDECLINABLE 29
quot., Herm. Mand. xii. 2. 5; ἡ νίκη 1 Jo. 5. 4. Νοῦς and πλοῦς (the latter A. 27. 9) are declined like Bots: gen. vods, dat. voi, as also in Herm. Sim. ix. 17. 2 (cp. ὃ 7, 4). Ἢ ἅλων, -wvos Mt. 3. 12, L. 3. 17, for ἡ ἅλως, ὦ (cp. § 7, 5). The dat. is formed from Decl. ILL. in words that in their other cases are neuters of Deel. IL: δάκρυον (Ap. 7. 17, 21. 4) -- δάκρυα -- δάκρυσιν L. 7. 38, 44 (also in Attic occasionally ; δάκρυ is an old form occurring in poetry) : σάββατον -- σάββατα -- σάββασιν always Mt. 12. 1 οἴο., except Mt. 12. 12 where B has σαββάτοις (Lachm.).—Consonantal stem of Decl. III. for -o- stem of Decl. Il. : κατήγωρ (on the model of ῥήτωρ) Ap. 12. to only in A for κατήγορος (BCP as elsewhere in N.T.).2
$10. PROPER NAMES. INDECLINABLE NOUNS.
1. The Hebrew personal names of the O.T., when quoted as such, remain with few exceptions unaltered and indeclinable: ᾿Αδάμ, ᾿Αβραάμ, ᾿Ιακώβ, Φαραώ, Δαυΐδ ete. The exceptions are mainly nominatives in _, which are represented by the termination -as and declined according to Decl. I. (gen. -a and -ov, see ὃ 7, 2): ᾿Ιούδας Mt. 1. 2 f; Οὐρίας, gen. -ov ibid. 6; ᾿Εζεκίας, ᾿Ησαΐας ete. (but ᾿Αβιά [as Lxx.] ibid. 7 nom. acc., L. 1.5 gen.). Other exceptions are: Μανασσῆ Mt. 1. το ace., Μανασσῆς nom., ep. inf. 3 (ΔΙανασσῆ nom. N°B); ᾿Ιαννῆς and Ἰαμβρῆς 2 Tim. 3. 8; Aes, -εἰς nom. H. 7. 9 x°BC*, the remaining MSS. -. (ev): cp. inf. 3. Σολομὼν is declined either with gen. -ovos (therefore nom. -μών), so Mt. 1. 6 -μῶνα (but n* -μών indecl.), 12. 42, and elsewhere: or -ῶντος (like Ξενοφῶν, therefore nom. -μῶν): A. 3. 11 -μῶντος (DE -μῶνος), 5. 12 (-povos BDEP) ; so also Lxx., unless, as usually happens, the word remains indeclinable. Τησοῦς Josuw H. 4. 8. Μωῦύσῆς (so, according to the best evidence, with Lxx. and Josephus, instead of Moc. of the ordinary MSS.), gen. always -éws as if from -evs, dat. -ec Mt. 17. 4 xBD al. (others -7), Me. 9. 4 AB*DE etc., ibid. 5 SABCDE ete. (nearly all), and so elsewhere with constant variation in the MSs. between -e and -7: ace. -<4 only in L. 16. 29, elsewhere -ἣν (AS 6) 17, ἢ 35, 1 C. 10. 2, ΕἸ. 3. 3). The latter inflection: -ἢς, -ἢ» τῇ, τῆν (cp. inf. 3) is that prevalent in the LXx.*
2. The same old Hebrew names, if employed as proper names of other persons of the N.T. period, are far more susceptible to Hellenisation and declension. The Hellenising is carried out: (@) by appending -os ; ᾿Ιάκωβος always, "Ayafs-os A. 11. 28, 21. 10: (6) in words that in their Greek pronunciation would end in a vowel, by appending -s to the nom., -v to the acc.: so ᾿Ιησοῦς, ᾿Ιησοῦν (ep. 1), Aevis (also written -εἰς ; therefore t) Mc. 2. 14 (ace. -ἰν, indecl. 8*A
1 30 also ῥοῦς, gen. pods, in later Greek: cp. W.-Schm. § 8, 11, note 7 (Cramer, An. Ox. iii. 248).
2Tbid. § 8, 13: it looks as if the original nom. was taken for a gen.: the late form διάκων for διάκονος is parallel. τ 3In Josephus Niese and Naber write -éos (hardly a possible inflection ; in the Mss. τέως is a strongly attested variant), -e?, -jv in their text; -éws (with v.L -é€os) is found as early as Diodor. Sic. 34. 1. 3. W.-Schm. § 10, 5.
30 PROPER NAMES, INDECLINABLES. [ὃ το. 2.
al.), L. 5. 27 (ace. -ἰν, indecl. D), 29 (nom. -ts, indecl. D); to which must be added the nom. in -as, see 1 ; for the inflection vide inf. 3
(c) in names in -an, by the substitution of s for v in the nom., so that the inflection follows that of Ἰούδας: “Avvas L. ὃ. 4, ik 4. 6, Jo. 18. 13, 24 ἼΞΠ (Joseph. “Avav-os): ᾿Ιωνάθας A. 4. 6 D,! a name which in Joseph. is still further Hellenised to ᾿Ιωνάθης : so N.T. ᾿Ιωάνης (§ 3, 10) J25% or ‘Iwavav (L. 3. 27 in the genealogy of Christ), gen. -ov,? dat. -y (-e. L. 7. 18, 22 SAB or B*[L], Mt. 11. 4 DA, Ap. 1. 1 8*, cp. Movoet), ace. -yv. Josephus also makes Kawvas out of Καινάν and Ναθὰς out of Nadav, The common name ᾿Ιωάνης is also abbreviated into Ἴωνα (Syr. ΝΘ) LXx. 2 (4) Kings 25. 23, and so Mt 10. 17 ΤΑῚ Βαριωνᾶ -- Σ, (ὁ υἱὸς) ᾿Ιωάνου Jo. 1. 42 (Ἰωνᾶ AB? al., Syr.), 15 ff. (lwva AC™™ al., Syr. Sin. yn, 8 form which also stands a the prophet Jonah L. 11. 29 ete.); “lovdy or “ἀμ (SBI, Syr.) is found in L. 3. 30 (in the genealogy of Christ). ὧν a similar abbreviation S}=1 became D0 Ἰωσῆς, gen. -ῆτος (inf. 3) Me. 6. 3 BDLA (Ἰωσήφ 8, Ἰωσῆ AC), 15. 40, 47 (with similar v.1.): cp. the var. lect. to Mt. 13. 55, 27. 56, A. 1. 23, 4. 36; in this name the evidence preponderates for the full Hebrew form without alteration, vide inf. (d) The Hellenisation is carried furthest in Σίμων, -wvos = Συμεών (this form occurs for Peter in A. 15. 14 in James’ speech, 2 P. 1. 1 [Σίμων B]: for others in A. 13. 1, L. 2. 2
etc.): the pure Greek name with a similar sound is substituted for the Hebrew name, after a fashion not unknown to the Jews of the present day, just as ᾿Ιάσων (A. 17. 5 etc.) is substituted for Jesus, and perhaps Κυδίας for Χουζᾶς (L. 8. 3 according to the Latin cod. /). On the other hand, the following, though employ ved in this way, remain unaltered and indeclinable : Tosti generally (vide sup.), Ναθαναήλ (also the names of the angels Μιχαήλ [ Mey. B] and Γαβριήλ), Μαναήν A. 13.1. Similarly the woman’s name ᾿Ῥλισαβέτ: whereas 5°72 sometimes remains as Μαριάμ, esp. for the mother of
Christ, and sometimes is Hellenised to Μαρία (Λ]αριάμμη in Joseph.), with great diversity of reading in the Mss. (gen. Μαρίας Mt. 1. τό, 18, 2. 11 ete.; acc. Μαριάμ 1. 20 [-tav BL]: in chaps. 27 and 28 the form -ία for the nom. has most support in the case of the other Με ries; in L Μαριάμ 1. 27, 30, 34, 37, 39 etc., but τῆς Μαρίας 41, ἡ Mapa 2. 19 SBD [D has also frequently elsewhere nom. -a, dat. -a 1.6. τᾷ, acc. αν]; Paul in R. 16. 9 has Μαριάμ, an unknown lady, i in ABCP -iav).3 The followi ing are declinable without further addition : ee mim (nom. L. 2. 36) and Μάρθα Syr. NEWS (gen. -as, see 2); the following are Hellenised by the addition of ἃ (ἃ 1): ee Syr. 7m, ΣΝ Syr. 19 (L. 8. 3, 24. 10), and there
is a similar addition of 7 in Σαλώμη Syr. ow Me. 15. 40, 1651.
1 Ιωνάθας appears already on an Egyptian papyrus of the 3rd cent. B.c., Flinders Petrie Pap. ii., p. 23: ᾿Απολλώνιον.... [παρεπ]ίδημον, ὃς καὶ συριστὶ ᾿Τωνάθας [καλεῖται].
2᾽Ἰωάνου (v.1. Ἰωαναν) in Lxx. 2 Chr. 28.12. 90. W.-Schm. 810,1, note 1.
———————————eeeEEeEeEeeE—————EEI
ὃ 10.3-5.] PROPER NAMES, INDECLINABLES. 31
3. The declension of Hebrew masc. proper names whose stem
ends in a long vowel (with the exception of those in -‘as), and of the similar Greek or Graeco-Roman names which are formed by abbreviation (§ 29), follows the same pattern on the whole for all vowels, and is consequently known as the ‘‘mixed” declension. Three cases (G.D.V.) exhibit the pure stem (the datives in a, ἡ, ὦ being in our spelling extended by an « mute); the nom. in all cases has s, the acc. generally v, but this is often wanting in LXx. and ΝΎ. with the 7(c) and ὦ stems: Μανασσῆς, acc. -ἢ, vide sup. 1 (so LXX., e.g. 2 (4) Kings 20. 21, 21. 1, 2 Chron. chap. 33): Aews, vide sup. 1, 2: ᾿Απολλῶς, ace. ᾿Απολλῶ A. 19. τ (ὧν ΑἹ, ᾿Απελλῆν δ , 8 6, 2), cp. Ko acc. § 7, 5, 1 C. 4. 6 (ὧν ΚΝ. AB), Tit. 3. 12 (ων Ξ Ἢ, -ova FG). Exx. (a) Βαραββᾶς, Βαρνάβας, ᾿Ιούδας, Ζηνᾶς (from Ζηνό- Swpos), Σιλᾶς (= Σειλουανός). (0) (Mavacons, vide sup.) ᾿Απελλῆς R. 16. το, ace. -ἣν (as in A. 19. 1 8, vide sup.). The gen. of Greek names of this class, in classical Greek -ot, is unrepresented in N.T. (c) Aevis, vide sup. 2. (ὦ) Inoois, -οὔ, -οὔ, -οῦν, -od. (e) ᾿Απολλῶς (from ᾿Απολλώνιος). In extra-Biblical Greek besides this declension of such names there is found a second, in which there is a similar nom. in -s, but the stem for the remaining cases is extended by the addition of a consonant (usually 6, in Egypt and in the Cyrenaica 7), e.g. ᾿Αππᾶς, -ados, “Ἑρμῆς, -ἢδος (Inscr. of Arsinoe in C. I. G. 5321 "Ingots -σοῦτος, ep. Ptolemais 5289): the single N.T. example of this declension is ᾿Ιωσῆς, -ῆτος, sup. 2. : 4. Roman proper names.—There need only be noticed Ayrippu Aypirmas, -a: Aquila ᾿Ακύλας : Cleméns, Crescéns, Pudéns, gen. -’ntis = (Κλήμης) -εντος Ph. 4. 3, Κρήσκης 2 Tim. 4. το, Πούδης (-evros) 21. The x of the nom., which was hardly pronounced, is often absent from Latin inscriptions.
5. Names of places, mountains, rivers.—In this category it is the usual practice in by far the majority of cases for non-Greek names to remain un-Hellenised and undeclined, with the exception, of course, of prominent place-names, which were already known to the Greeks at an earlier period, such as Τύρος ; Σιδών, -Gvos ; "A¢wros Asdod (cp. ὃ 6, 7) A. 8. 40; Δαμασκός ete. and (river-name) ᾿Ιορδάνης, -ov. The Hellenisation is well marked, a new etymology (ἱερός, Σόλυμοι) being given, in the case of Ἱεροσόλυμα, -wv, a form which is employed in the N.T. alongside of ᾿ερουσαλήμ (in the latter there is no good reason for writing the rough breathing, § 4, 4; Me. and John (Gosp.) always have ‘Iepoo., and so Mt. exc. in 23. 37: Ἴερουσ. is always the form in Ap., Hebr., and in Paul, except in the narrative of G. 1. 17 ἔ, 2. 1: L. gives both forms, but Ἴερουσ. rarely in his Gospel.!_ Other exceptions are: Bravia, gen. -as, ace. αν Jo. 11. 1, Me. 11. 12, Jo. 12. 1, Me. 11. 11 ete. (but Mt. 21. 17, Mc. 11. 1 B* εἰς ByOavia, L. 19. 29 8*BD* εἰς Βηθφαγῆ καὶ ByOavia): Todryoba, Me. 15. 22 τὸν Γολγοθᾶν τόπον (Γολγοθα ACDE al.): Τόμορρα, -ων Mt. 10. 15 (ας CDLMP), -as 2 P. 2. 6, cp. inf. 6 (ἡ Τομόρρα): Λύδδα, gen. Avddns A. 9, 38 BeEHLP, -as x*B*C, -a indecl. ΝΑ (which is harsh in the con-
*LXx. Ἴερουσ., except in 2, 3, 4 Macc. and Job. See W.-Schm. § 10, 3.
2 PROPER NAMES, INDECLINABLES. [ὃ το. 5-8.
Los)
nection ἐγγὺς οὔσης A. τῇ ᾿Ιύππῃ) ; elsewhere the acc. is Λύδδα, ibid. 32, 35 (αν CEHLP), either as neut. plur. or as indecl. (?):! Σάρεπτα. ace. L. 4. 26 (-ν gen. LXX, Obad. 20): τὸν Zapwva (’Acoap.) ‘The plain’? J99%; Decl. III. or (with Aramaic -a) indecl. (Ὁ): Σόδομα D17D (therefore Hellenised), -ων Mt.10.15, 11. 24, L. 17. 29, 2 P. 2. 6; οἷς Mt. 11. 23 (Mc. 6. τῇ Text. Rec., an insertion from Mt.), L. 10. 12 (so earlier in LXx.). On the other hand the following e.g. are unaltered and indecl.: Βηθλεέμ, βΒηθφαγῆ, Καφαρναούμ, Aivév Jo. 3. 23, Σαλίμ ibid., Σιών ; (mountain) Σινᾶ, (brook) Kedpav Jo. 18. 1 (τοῦ χειμάρρου τοῦ Κα. correctly AS; other Mss. are corrupt with τῶν Κέδρων, τοῦ Kedpov; Josephus declines τοῦ Kedpavos). ᾿λαιών, Mount of Olives, as a Greek rendering cannot be indecl.; therefore, as we elsewhere have τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν, we must also read ὄρος (ace.) τὸ καλούμενον ἐλαιῶν (not ’"EAawv) L. 19. 29, 21. 37: all MSS. give a wrong inflection in A. 1. 12 τοῦ καλουμένου ᾿λαιῶνος for ἐλαιῶν : ep. ὃ 33, 1.?
6. On the declension of place-names.—Double declension as in class. Greek is seen in Νέαν πόλιν A. 16. 11; therefore also read ‘lepa πόλει Col. 4. 13. Instances of metaplasmus: Decl. I. fem. sing., Decl. II. neut. plur.—Avorpa, acc. -av A. 14. 6, 21, 16. 1, but dat. -o1s 14. 8, 16. 2: Θυάτειρα acc. Ap. 1. 11 8, -av ABC, gen. των A, 16. 14, dat. -οιἰς Ap. 2. τὸ (B -py, ὃ 7, 1), 24 (8° -ρῃ, B -pats), ep. Avéda, supra ὅ. Decl. III. and Decl. I. confused.—2adapiv, dat. -ive A. 13.5, but -ίνῃ sAEL, ep. (W.-Schm. § 10, 5) gen. Σαλαμίνης in Suid. ’“Exidarvios (cod. A), Salamina(m) Latt. ap. Acts ibid. like Justin 11. 7. 7, Salaminae insulae xliv. 3. 2, Salaminam (ep. the new formations in romance languages, Tarragona, Cartagena, Narbonne).
7. Gender.—In place-names the fem. is so much the rule that we have not only ἡ ᾿Ιερουσαλήμ (A. 5. 28 etc.), but even πᾶσα “lepooo- Lupa Mt. 2. 3 (on A. 16. 12 Φιλίππους, ἥτις ἐστὶ ... πόλις, see § 31, 2). The mase. ὁ Σιλωάμ (the spring and the pool) in L. 13. 4, Jo. 9. 7, 11 is explained by the interpretation added in Jo. 9. 7 ἀπεσταλμένος."
8. Of indeclinable appellatives there are only a few: (τὸν κορβαν Mt. 27. 6 ΒΥ, correctly τὸν kopBavev; indecl. in another sense Me. 7. 11, where it is introduced as a Hebr. word): μάννα, τὸ (Ap. 2. 17 Tov p.): πάσχα, τὸ (L. 2. 41 τοῦ 7.): (catav gen. for -va 2 C. 12. 7 8° al.; more a proper name than an appellative): σίκερα ace. L. 1. 15 (indecl. in LxXx.): ἡ ovaé Ap. 9. 12, 11. 14 (like ἡ θλῖψις etc.: also used as a subst. elsewhere, LXx. and 1 Ὁ. 9. τό, see W.-Gr.).
§ sr. ADJECTIVES.
1. Adjectives in -os, -y (-a), -ov and -os, -ov.—(a) Compound adj. ἡ ἀργή (ἀργός -- ἀτεργός) 1 Tim. 5. 13, Tit. 1. 12 (Epimenides), Ja.
! There is a similar fluctuation in Josephus, W.-Schm. ibid. *v. App. p. 329. * Josephus has ἡ Σ.; sc. πηγή, B. J. v. 12. 2, vi. 8. 5, but μέχρι τοῦ Σ. 11. 16.
-
2, δ 7, 72:
§ 11. 1-3.] ADYECTIVES. 33 2. 20 BC* (ν.1. νεκρά) ; Att. ἀργὸς γυνή Phryn. Lob. 104 f. ‘H αὐτο- μάτη Me. 4. 28 (not unclass.). “H παραθαλασσία Mt. 4. 13 (τὴν παραθαλάσσιον 1), παρὰ θάλασσαν 8*), but ἡ παράλιος L, 6. τ; these compounds in -ἰος admit of both forms. (ὦ) Uncompounded adj. Ἢ ἔρημος always (Att. -wos and -y7). “H ἕτοιμος Mt. 25. 10 (A -μαι), -μη 2 Ὁ. 9. 5, 1 P. 1. 5 (Att. -μος and -μη)ὴ. ‘H αἰώνιος is the usual form as it is in Att.; -ία 2 Th. 2. τό (-ιον FG), H. 9. 12, often as a v.l. Ἢ βεβαία always (Att. -α and -os). Ἢ κέσμιος (Att. -ia) 1 Tim. 2. 9 8*AD@™ al.; v.l. -iws. Ἢ μάταιος and -ία (as in Att.). Ἢ ὅμοιος 1 Ap. 4. 3. “H ὅσιος 1 Tim. 2. 8 (-ἰα Att. and Lxx.), ‘H οὐράνιος L. 2. 13 (v.l. οὐρανοῦ), A. 26. 19 (Att. -ia). In other cases the N.T. is in agreement with the ordinary grammar.
2. To συγγενής L. 1. 36 has the fem. ἡ cvyyevis for Att. -ἧς (Clem. Hom. xii. 8: Phryn. Lob. 451: Cramer, An. Ox. iii. 247; ep. evyevi- dwv γυναικῶν Clem. Rom. Epit. ii. 144), whereas strictly this fem. only belonged to words in -rys, -rov, and to those in -e’s (BactAis).
3. Comparison.—The absorption of the category of duality into that of plurality (cp. §§ 2, 1, and 13, 5), occasioned also the dis- appearance from the vulgar language of one of the two degrees of comparison, which in the great majority of cases (ep. inf. 5) was the superlative, the functions of which were taken over by the comparative.! The only instances of ἃ superl. in -raros in the N.T. are ἀκριβέστατος A. 26. 5 (in literary language, the speech of Paul before Agrippa, ὃ 2, 4) and ἁγιώτατος Jd. 20, the latter being used in an elative sense. The remaining superlatives are in -ιστος, and are generally employed in intensive [elative] sense, and in some cases have quite lost their force: ἐλάχιστος perexiguus passim? (as a true superl., either due to the literary language or corrupt reading inl] C, 15.9: for which ἐλαχιστότερος occurs in E. 3. ἃ, inf. 4): ἥδιστα 2 C. 12. 9, 15, A. 18. 3 Ὁ (‘gladly,’ ‘very gladly’): κράτιστε in an address L. 1. 1 ete.: μέγιστος permagnus 2 P. 1. 4: πλεῖστος Mt. 11. 20, 21. 8, cp. ὃ 44, 4: 1 C. 14. 27 (τὸ πλεῖστον ‘at most’): os τάχιστα A. 17. 15 (literary language, a true superl.): ὕψιστος passim: ἔγγιστα D Me. 6. 36 (Joseph. passim: Clem. Cor. i. 5. 1). The most frequent superlative which still remains is (μᾶλλον —) μάλιστα (Acts, Pauline epp., 2 Peter: still there are no more than twelve instances in all). Cp. Synt. § 44, 3.
1 The usage of the Ep. of Barnabas agrees with that of the N.T. On the other hand in Hermas, although his Greek is the unadulterated language of ordinary speech, superlatives in -raros and -ἰστος are quite common with intensive [elative] sense, while he also uses the comparative for the superlative proper. This (Roman) form of the κοινή thus held the same position in this respect as the Italian of to-day, which does not distinguish between comp. and superl., but has preserved the forms in -issimo, etc., in intensive sense.
2 Hermas, Mand. v. 1. 5 τοῦ ἐλαχίστου ἀψινθίου ‘the little bit of wormwood,’ in a preceding passage (ibid.) ἀψινθίου μικρὸν λίαν. A similar use occurs as early as Aeschin. iii. 104.
3 Herm. Sim. viii. 5. 6, 10. 1, ix. 7. 4 τὸ πλεῖστον μέρος, but viii. 1. 6 τὸ πλεῖον μ.
+A popular substitute for μᾶλλον, μάλιστα as also for πλείων and πλεῖστος is supplied by the adjective περισσός (‘superabundant,’ ‘ample’) together with its adverb and comparative. τὸ περισσὸν τούτων Mt. 5. 7=7d πλέον τ. (cp-
σ
4 ADFECTIVES. [8 τι. 4-5.
Oo
4. Special forms of the comparative.—For comp. of ἀγαθός we never have ἀμείνων, βέλτιον as an adv. only in 2 Tim. 1. 18 (-ίων Herm. Vis. iii. 4. 3, 7. 1); κρείσσων {-ττων, § 6, 7) only in Pauline epp., Hebrews, and Pet. (‘more excellent’ or ‘mightier,’ ‘of higher standing,’ opp. to ἐλάττων H. 7. 7); the vulgar ἀγαθώτερος (Herm. Mand. viii. 9. 1) is never found in the N.T.! For comp. of κακός, χείρων ‘worse’ is frequent; τὸ ἧσσον is opp. to τὸ κρεῖσσον 1 (Ὁ. 11. 173 ἧσσον adv. ‘less’ (of degree) 2 C. 12. 15. ’EAdoowy deterior is the opposite to κρείσσων Jo. 2. το, H. 7. 7, vide supra: or, as in Attic, to μείζων R. ὃ. 12 O.T. quot.; adv. ἔλαττον ‘less’ (of number) 1 Tim. 5. 9 (μικρότερος is ‘smaller’ as in Attic). Τάχιον (Hellenistic, B rayevov) is the constant form, not θᾶττον (Att.) or -σσον, unless the latter is to be read for ὦσσον in A. 27. 13 (a literary word, cp. in Clem. Cor. i. 65. 1 the juxtaposition of the cultured phrase ὅπως θᾶττον with conj., and the vulgar εἰς τὸ τάχιον with inf.). ᾿Ἐλαχιστότερος ‘the lowest of all’ (see 3) is correctly formed according to the rules of the common language ; μειζότερος 3 Jo. 4*shows an obscured sense of the idea of the comp. in μείζων, but is not without analogies in the older language (6... ἀμεινό- tepos). Διπλότερον Mt. 23. 15=duplo magis (Appian also has διπλότερα τούτων -- διπλάσια τ. Proem. 10), whereas ἁπλούστερος shows the Attic formation of such comparatives.
δ. Adjectival comparative (and superlative) of adverbs.—The superl. πρῶτος has been retained where the comp. πρότερος in the sense of ‘the first of two’ has disappeared, so Jo. 1. 15, 30 πρῶτός μου, A. 1. 1 τὸν πρῶτον λόγον (but πρότερος -- “ former,’ ‘hitherto’ survives in E. 4. 22 τὴν προτέραν ἀναστροφήν, cp. Herm. Mand. iv. 3. I, 3 etc.); the corresponding adv. πρότερον = ‘formerly’ H. 10. 32, 1 PB. 1. 14 τὸ πρότ: (Ὁ 34, 7) in Jo: 6. 62, 9.8 (16. ἡ τῷ 51 asia wrong reading), G. 4. 13, 1 Tim. 1. 13, whereas the first of two actions is here also denoted by πρῶτον (Mt. 7. 5, 8. 21, L. 14. 28, 31 etc.), except in H. 4. 6, 7. 27 (literary style; in 2 C. 1.15 πρότερον should apparently be erased with x*). The opposite word ἔσχατος is like- wise also used in comp. sense (Mt. 27. 64); while ὕστερος is super. 1 Tim. 4. 1 (a wrong reading in Mt. 21. 31); the adv. ὕστερον is
§ 44, note 3), L. 12. 4 περισσότερόν (περισσόν AD al.) τι = πλέον τι ; 12. 48 περισ- σότερον, 1) πλέον ; cp. Mt. 11. 9=L. 7. 26, Me. 12. go=L. 20. 47, Me. 12. 33 vIl. περισσότερον and πλεῖον, Clem. Cor.i.61. 3. The adv. περισσῶς Mt. 27.23, on which Chrysost. vii. 813 B says περισσῶς τουτέστι μᾶλλον, Me. 10. 26, 15. 14 (-σσοτέρως ENP al.). (In conjunction μᾶλλον περισσότερον [-έρως D] Me. 7. 36, -épws μ. 2 ©. 7. 13, vide inf., ep. § 44, 5 and pleonasms like εὐθέως παραχρῆμα.) So also the Berlin papyri, 326, ii. 9 εἰ δ᾽ ἔτι περισσὰ γράμματα καταλίπω (‘further’), and mod, Greek περισσότερος, adv. -pov ‘more.’ In St. Paul, however, περισσοτέρως appears occasionally to have a still stronger force = ὑπερβαλλόντως 2 C. 7. 15, 12. 5, G. 1. 14, ep. A. 26. 11 (περ. μᾶλλον 2 C. 7. 13 (2) = ‘still much more,’ cp. sup.), while in other passages of his writings it may be replaced by μᾶλλον or μάλιστα, as περισσότερος by πλείων : Ph. 1. 14, 2 C. 1. 12, 1 C. 12. 23 f., 2C. 10. Sete. Soalso H. 7. 15 περισσότερον (= μᾶλλον) ἔτι κατάδηλον, 2. 1, 13. 19 -pws, Herm. Mand. iv. 4. 2, Sim. v. 3. 3.
1 Kiihner, i. 3, 1. 565. ἀγαθώτατος is also found in Herm. Vis. i. 2. 3 (‘ excel- lent’; as a proper superl. in Diod. Sic. xvi. 85); Herm. Sim. viii. 9 has ἡδύτερος, Kiihner, ibid. 555. αν, App. p. 307.
§12. §13.1-2.] . NUMERALS. PRONOUNS. 35
common (also in superl. sense, as in Mt. 22. 27, L. 20. 32). Further exx. of comp. of adverbs: ἐξώτερος Mt. 8. 12 ete. (Herm. Sim. ix. 7. 5), ἐσώτερος ἊΝ 10: 2: Εἰ: ἢ: IQ, κατώτερος E. 4. 9 (of course also in superl. sense); these adjectives are not found in Attic, which however has the corresponding adverbs: ἀνώτερον L. 14. το, H. 10. 8 (Att. more often -pw),) κατωτέρω Mt. 2. τό (κάτω perhaps more correctly D), πορρωτέρω (-pov AB) L. 24. 28, ἐγγύτερον R. 13. 11.
$12. NUMERALS.
1. Avo has gen. δύο, dat. δυσίν (plural inflection) : similarly Lxx.:? δυσίν for δυοῖν is condemned by Phrynichus (Lob. 210).
2. In compounds of δέκα with units, at least from thirteen up- wards, δέκα occupies the first place (this practice is more frequent in the later language than in the older: in mod. Gk., except in the ease of eleven and twelve, it is universal): (δεκαδύο [Polyb.] A. 19. 7 HLP, 24. 11 same evidence; δεκατέσσαρες Mt. 1. 17, 9. ΟἹ 12. 2, G. 2. 1: δεκαπέντε Jo. 11. 18, A. 27. 28, G. 1. 18 (δέκα καὶ πέντε Herm. Vis. ii. 2.1 8): δεκαοκτώ L. 13. 4 (δέκα καὶ ὁ. ΒΑ al.), τα (6. x. 6, ALal.). The ordinals, however, take the reverse order: τεσσαρεσκαιδέκατος A. 27. 27, πεντεκαιδέκατος L. 3. x (Ionie and later language: Attic usually τέταρτος καὶ déx.). With larger numbers there is a similar order of words, with or (usually) without καί : εἴκοσι τρεῖς 1 C. 10. 8, τεσσεράκοντα καὶ ἕξ Jo. 2. 20.
§ 13. PRONOUNS.
1. Personal_—The 3rd pers. is represented by αὐτοῦ: the same form is used for the 3rd pers. possessive. Reflexives: Ist pers. sing. ἐμαυτοῦ, 2nd sing. σεαυτοῦ (not σαυτοῦ), 3rd sing. ἑαυτοῦ (not avrov):* plural 150, 2nd, and 3rd pers. ἑαυτῶν (so in Hellenistic Gk., not ἡμῶν α., ὑμῶν a, σφῶν α.: On ὑμῶν αὐτῶν in 1 C. 5. 13 from Deut. 17. 7, see § 48, 10).
2. Demonstratives.—Otros, ἐκεῖνος as usually; the intensive ¢ (ovroc-t) is unknown, but is employed by Luke (in the Acts) and Paul (Hebrews) in the adv. vuvi=viv. “δε is rare and almost con- fined to the phrase τάδε λέγει: Acts 21. 11, Ap. 2. 1, 8, 12, 18,
1 Peculiar are ἔτι ἄνω, ἔτι κάτω for ἀνώτερον, κατώτερον in the apocryphal addi- tion to Mt. 20. 28 in D, with which cp. Xen. Anab. 7, 5. 9 ἔτι ἄνω στρατεύεσθαι (and Dindorf’s note). *W.-Schm. 89, 1].
3 Even in the inscriptions of this period the trisyllabic forms, ἑαυτοῦ ete. sup- plant the dissyllabic, which in classical times were used alongside of them, In the old edd. of the N.T. the latter still appear pretty frequently, but are now rightly replaced by ἑαυτοῦ or αὐτοῦ (see Synt. § 48, 6), so even in R. 14. 14 δι᾽ ἑαυτοῦ RAB, A. 20. 30 ὀπίσω ἑαυτῶν RAB. The long a results from the con- traction (ἕο αὐτοῦ) ; in the Hellenistic and Roman period it has occasioned the loss of the v in pronunciation, whence the spelling ἐματοῦ, ἑατοῦ (just as the « in a, ᾳ was unpronounced). See Wackernagel in Kuhn’s Zeitschr. xxxiii.
(N. F. xiii.), p. 2 if.
36 SYSTEM OF CONFUGATION. [8 13.2-5. § 14.
3. 1, 7, 14; elsewhere τάδε A. 15. 23 D; τῇδε L. 10. 393; τήνδε Ja. 4. 13 (Clem. Cor. 11. 12. καὶ ἥδε is only a conjecture). Cp. Synt. S = 1, and inf. 4.
Relatives. — Os, ἥ, ὅ: ὅστις, ἥτις, ὅ,τι ; the latter, however, ΠΝ in the xom. sing. and plur., except that ὅ,τι also appears as acc.: In meaning it becomes confused with ὦ ds, see Synt. ὃ 50,1. We have the stereotyped phrase ἕως ὅτου in Luke and John {also i in Mt. 5. 25; af’ orovin D L. 13. 25); otherwise there is no instance of these old forms (so we never find ἅσσα, ἅττα for ἅτινα), in the same way that the forms τοῦ, του (= Tivos, anes τῷ, τῳ (=Tive, τινί) ete. from τίς, τις have become obsolete. “Oovep is only found in Me. 15. 6 xBC al. ὅνπερ ἠτοῦντο (male ὃν παρῃτ. S*AB* ; the right reading in DG ὃν ἂν ἠἡτοῦντο ὃ 63, 7), and according to Marcion in L. 10. 21 ἅπερ ἔκρυψας. On the use of ὅς for a demonstrative pron. see Synt. § 46, 2.
4. Correlative pronouns. —Ilotos — τοιοῦτος (τοιόσδε only 2 Pre τοιᾶσδε, ep. 3) -- οἷος -- ὁποῖος, Τ]|όσος — τοσοῦτος -- ὅσος. Tee (G. 6. ταῦ BH. ἢ 1 τηλικοῦτος (2 Cl 1. τὸ ἘΠ aoe Ap. 16. 18) -- ἡλίκος (Col. 2. 1, Ja. 8. 5). Τὸ these must be added ποταπός (with similar meaning to ποῖος), Synt. ὃ 50, 6. On the correlative adverbs, see ὃ 25. Τοιοῦτος and τοσοῦτος (τηλικοῦτος) have neut. in -ov and -o (both forms are also found in Att., though the first is more frequent): with var. lect. Mt. 18. 5, A. 21. 2 B text, H. 7. 22: with -ov only H. 12. 1; on the other hand τηλικοῦτο Herm. Vis. iv. 1. 10 (2. 3 with v.1.).*
5. With pronouns and pronominal forms it has also happened that words indicating duality as distinct from plurality have become obsolete (πότερος — τίς ; ἑκάτερος — ἕκαστος), with the exception of ἀμφότεροι (the N.T. form, never ἄμφω) and ἕτερος, which, however, already becomes confused with ἄλλος. Cp. Synt. § 51, 6.
$14. SYSTEM OF CONJUGATION.
1. The system of the conjugation of the verb is apparently not much altered from its earlier state, since nearly all the classical forms are found in the N.T., the dual, of course, excepted. The voices remain as before: and the tenses are the same, except that in all voices only one future exists: ἔχω, ἕξω (the fut. σχήσω, which is derived from the aorist and related to it in meaning, never occurs); μιμνήσκομαι, μνησθήσομαι (not μεμνήσομαι fut. perf., of which the name ‘ Attic future’ is sufficient indication that it was absent from the Hellenistic language); ἔστην, στήσομαι; ἐστάθην, σταθήσομαι, but not ἑστήξω! fut. perf.; φαίνομαι, φανήσομαι, but the form φανοῦμαι, which in Attic was allied to the present as distinguished from φανήσ. which belonged to ἐφάνην, no longer appears (1 P. 4. 18 is a quotation from LXX. Prov. 11. 31). This certainly destroys the harmonious structure of the system of the tenses, viz. continuous
1For κεκράξονται L. 19. 40 the better attested reading is κράξουσιν RBL (κράξονται D: κεκράξομαι passim in Lxx.). But cp. the aor. ἐκέκραξα A. 24, 21, inf. § 24. αν. App. p. 307.
§ 14. 1-2. §15.1-3] SYSTEM OF CONFUGATION. 37 action in present, past, and future time = pres. impf. and fut. of the present (έξω, τιμήσομαι pass.): completed action in past and future time = aorist and fut. of the aorist (σχήσω, τιμηθήσομαι) : continuity of completed action in present, past, and future time = perf., plupf., and fut. of the perfect (ἑστήξω, βεβλήσομαι pass.). Of the moods, moreover, the optative is clearly on its way to becoming obsolete, being only found in Luke’s writings with any frequency, where its presence is due to the influence of the literary language which retained it. Of the future opt. there is no trace, and this tense is, generally speaking, almost confined to the indic., since the use of the fut. infin. is, with few exceptions, limited to the Acts (11. 28, 23. 30, 24. 15, 27. το: cp. Synt. ὃ 61, 3), and the fut. part. outside the writings of the same author (Gosp. 22. 49, Acts 8. 27, 20. 22, 22. 5, 24. 17) is of quite rare occurrence (Mt. 27. 41 σώσων, but σῶσαι x*, kat cwoe D Jo. 6. 6241] 1 C. 15. 37, H. 3. 5, 13. 17, 1 P. 3.23, 2 P. 2. 13 with v.l.), ep. Synt. § 61, 4. Finally, the verbal adjective has practically disappeared, with the exception of forms like δυνατός which have become stereotyped as adjectives; the only exx. are παθητός ‘liable to suffering’ A. 26. 23, and βλητέον L. 5. 38 (ΑΝ βάλλουσιν: as a ν.]. also in the parallel passage Me. 2. 22) ‘one must put into,’ as in Att.: ep. Herm. Vis. iv. 2. 6 αἱρετώτερον.“
2. Periphrastic forms.—The perf. and pluperf. indic., act. and pass., are not unfrequently represented by a periphrasis (as is also the case in Att.), while for the perf. conjunctive (passive) a periphrasis is a necessity (as in Att. for the most part); the perf. imperat. is expressed periphrastically in L. 12. 35 ἔστωσαν περιεζωσμέναι ; on the other hand we have πεφίμωσο Me. 4. 39. By means of periphrasis the place of the fut. perf. may also be supplied (L. 12. 52, Mt. 16. 19, 18. 18, H. 2. 13); periphrasis has, on the whole, a very wide range in the N.T., see Synt. § 62.
§ 15. AUGMENT AND REDUPLICATION.
1. The syllabic augment is wanting as a rule in the pluperf. (as also in other Hellenistic writings, but not in Att.)’; exceptions are chiefly in the passive (W. Schmidt de Josephi elocut. 438): ἐβέβλητο L. 16. 20, ἐπεγέγραπτο A. 17. 23 (ἦν γεγραμμένον D), συνετέθειντο J. 9. 22, περιεδέδετο 11. 44 (περιδέδ, D*), ἐπεποίθει L. 11. 22 (πέποιθεν D), ἐγεγόνει Jo. 6. 17 v.1., and many others.
2. The syllabic augment, in places where in Attic it holds an excep- tional position instead of (or in addition to) the temporal, has been ill maintained: ὠνοῦμαι, ὠνοῦμην (Att. ἐων. ; Pap. Oxyrh. ii. p. 205 ἐωνημένος, 253 ὠνημένην), 000, dra (ἀπώσα(ν᾽το A. 7. 27 ete., ἐξῶσεν 45, ἐξέωσεν only in 8*E: ὥθουν Ev. Petr. 6): in ἀνοίγω, κατάγνυμι it has in- deed survived, but through being misunderstood has intruded into the other moods and the fut. (see irreg. verbs, ἃ 24) ; προορώμην (-wp- BSP) A. 2. 25 O.T. quot.: ἑώρων Jo. 6. 2 ἘΠ Δ al. 15 πὸ doubt a wrong reading for ἐθεώρουν (cp. ibid.). On the reduplication in épaxa, vide. inf. 6.
3. The augment ἡ- instead of ἐ- (less frequent in Att. than in later writers) is always used with θέλω (Att. ἐθέλω, ἤθελον), never with
avy. App. p. 307.
38 AUGMENT AND REDUPLICATION. [S 15. 3-6.
βούλομαι (a word adopted from the literary language: but ἠβούλετο Herm. Sim. y. 6. 5); in δύναμαι and μέλλω there is much variation in the Mss. between ἤδυν., 7-, and eduv., eu- (ep. W.-Schm. ὃ 12, 3).
4. Loss of the temporal augment.—The addition of the temporal augment was not without exceptions even in Attic Gk. in the case of an initial diphthong of which the first letter was « or 0. The N.T. has εἶξα G. 2. 5 (as in Att.), οἰκοδομῶ, οἰκοδομήθη 8B* Jo. 2. 20, οἰκοδόμησεν B¥D A. 7. 47, ἐποικοδόμησεν 1 C. ὃ. 14 (ἔπωκ. BPC): on the other hand φὠκοδόμησεν Mt. 21. 33 all MSS., @xoddunTo L. 4. 29 (οἰκοδόμηται D), ep. ἐνῴκησεν 2 Tim. 1. 5 (-o% only D*), κατῴκησεν (-wwev) Ja. 4. 5 O.T., παρῴκησεν H. 11. 9 ete. W. H. App. 161. Since the original documents of the time show several instances of unaugmented οἱ, and the practice is proscribed as Ionic by the grammarians (Phrynich. 153 Lob., Cramer, An. Ox. iii. 260), it may safely be attributed to the writers ; besides 6 (for a) no longer bore much resemblance to οὐ (which in ordinary pronunciation inclined to Ὁ). Cp. W.-Schm.§12, 5. Ev in older Attic when augmented always became 7», in the later Attic (which also used 7, εἰ interchangeably) not always ;! in the N.T. ev preponderates, but 7v- also occurs not unfrequently : ηὑρίσκετο H. 11. 5 acc. to SADE, προσηύξαντο A. 8. 15 (-ev- only B), 20. 36 (-ev- ΒΥ), ηὐχόμην R. 9. 3 (εὐχ. DEKL).? For unaugmented a: the only ex. is 2 Tim. 1. 16 ἐπαισχύνθη (-η- 8*K ; interchange of ac=é and ἡ ?).—The augment is wanting in the case of a single short vowel in ἐληλύθειν (as in Att.: Attic reduplic.): in ἀνέθη for -e(On A. 16. 26, ἀφέθησαν R. 4. 7 O.T. (€ arose from the moods instead of e.=i: similarly LXx.): in ὄφελον as a particle introducing a wish, cp. § 63, 5; other cases appear to be clerical errors: διερμήνευ(σ)εν L. 24. 27 (-η- EHKM al.), διεγείρετο Jo. 6. 18 B al., προορώμην A. 2. 25 O.T.,vide supra 2, ἀνορθώθη L. 13. 13 (-ὦ- nE al.) ete.
5. Temporal augment ἡ or «.—In general the N.T. agrees with Attic ; thus it has ἐργάζομαι, ἠργαζόμην A. 18. 3 8*AB*DE, ἠργασάμην Mt. 25. τὸ 8*B*DL, 26. 10 s*B*D, Mc. 14. 6 ΒΥ Doers 8*A B*DE* al, ἘΠῚ 11. 33 ΣΌΣ (see also WN. 7. δ. 15. τὸ 9 τὴν 12. 12; B* reads εἰς only in R. 15. 18, δα in all these four passages, DE never) as in Attic, and in the Berlin Egyptian Records 530. 15 συνηργάσαντο (but perf. -e-, augm. and redupl. being distinguished, see 6).
6. Reduplication.—Initial ῥ᾽ loses its peculiarity in ῥεραντισ- μένος H. 10. 22 8*ACD*P for ἐρρ.: περιρεραμμένος Ap. 19. 13 only N* (περιρεραντισμ. 8°), cp. ῥεριμμένοι Mt. 9. 36 D*. (Similar forms in Ionian and late writers,7W.-Schm. § 12, 8: Kiihner, 1.5 11. 23). On p for pp, vide supra ὃ 3, 10. μνηστεύω, μεμνηστευμένη (on the model of μέμνημαι) L. 1. 27, 2. 5 only as a v.l. (Clem. Hom. xiii. 16:
1In the later Atticism this is purely phonetic, as is shown by the fact that this ev was also introduced as the augment for av: εὔξησα from αὐξάνω. The same ev appears in inscriptions of the Roman period ; but in the N.T. the only
example is D edéave A. 12. 24.* 1*¥y, App. p. 329. -W.-Schm. 812, 5b. ey. App. p. 307.
§ 15. 6-7.] AUGMENT AND REDUPLICATION. 39
Kuhner, ibid. 34). εἴργασμαι (from FeFepy.) as in Att. (augm. ἡ, see Ὁ) Jo. 3. 21, 1 P. 4. 2. Similarly we have ἑόρακα beside éwpwv: in this case, however, the spelling ἑώρακα is very widely spread both in Att. and in the N.T. (1 C. 9. 1 -ο- xsB*D°EFGP, -w- AB* al.: Jo. 1. 18 -o- BFEFGHKX, -w- sAB*CLM al. ete.). εἱλκωμένος is read by nearly all Mss. in L. 16. 20 (as if from ἕλκω).
7. Augment and reduplication in compound verbs and verbs derived from compounds.—Where the simple verb (with initial vowel) has been forgotten, the augment precedes the prepos. (so usu. in Att., but always in N.T.): καθεύδω, ἐκάθευδον ; καθίζω, ἐκάθισα, ἐκαθεζόμην, exabrjpnv'; ἠμφιεσμένος. In addition to these N.T. has adia (-- ἀφίημι) ἤφιεν Me. 1. 34, 11. 16 (attested also in Att., but hardly correctly, as an alternative for ἀφίει, ἠφίει), and ἀνοίγω, ἤνοιξα side by side with ἀνέῳξα, ἠνέῳξα, with inf. ἀνεῳχθῆναι L. 3. 21 (ἀνοιχθ. only in D): impf. only (6c)jvorye L. 24. 32, perf. act. in nearly all cases ἀνέῳγα Jo. 1. 52 (ἠνεωγότα 8), 1 C. 16. 9, 2 C. 6. τι. See irreg. verbs, § 24. Thus whereas in this instance the double augm. appears as against the Att. usage, ἀνέχομαι has only the single augm.: ἀνεσχόμην A. 18. 4 (qv. DEHLP), ἀνείχεσθε 2 C. 11. 1 (ibid. 4, but BD* ἀνεχ.), ep. Moeris’s dictum ἠνέσχετο ᾿Αττικοί, av. “Ἕλληνες ; elsewhere, too, in the N.T. there i: no instance of doubly augmented forms of this kind.
Verbs derived from compounds (παρασύνθετα) are in general treated like compound verbs in Attic Gk., if the first component part is a prepos.: the same is always the rule in N T.. except in the case of προφητεύειν : ἐπροφητεύσαμεν Mt. 7. 22 xB*CLZ, zpoed. B2EGM al., 11. 13 ἐπροφήτευσαν RB*CDG, zpoed. B**EFG al., (with similar division of Mss.) 15. 7, Mc. 7. 6, L. 1. 67, A. 19. 6 (Ν᾽ always exp. except in Jd. 14 προεπροφητευσεν: B* ἐπροφ., Β΄ expoed., all others zpoep.).2 So also διακονῶ makes διηκόνουν (from διάκονος : does διά form part of the word 1), but in Att. ἐδιακόνουν (we even have περιίσσευω, περιέσσευον in E Acts 16. 5, a form proscribed by Phrynichus and Cramer, An. Ox. iii. 257). Verbs formed from com- pounds of εὖ, when the adverb is followed by a short vowel, have a tendency in the late language to augment this vowel : εὐαγγελίζομαι, εὐηγγελιζόμην (so always): εὐαρεστῶ, εὐηρεστηκέναι H. 11. 5 RDEP (evap. AKL).2 Verbs compounded of two prepositions tend to a double augmentation : ἀπεκατέστη (ἀποκ. B) Me. 8. 25, ἀπεκατεστάθη (ἀποκ. DK) Mt. 12. 13: similarly Me. ὃ. 5 (ἀποκ. D), L. 6. 10 (parallel forms occur in inscriptions and the papyri) ; but in H. 12. 4 ἀντεκατέστητε is hardly attested.*
1 Ἑκάμμυσαν Mt. 13. 15 0.T., A. 28. 27 O.T., explains itself. Καμμύω from κατ(α)μύω: the verb is proscribed by Phryn. Lob. 339.
5 This verb is treated at length in Kévros κριτικαὶ καὶ ypaum. παρατηρήσεις (1895), p- 70 ff.: see also W. Schmidt, Joseph. eloc. 442. ἹΠαρρησιάζομαι érapp. does not come under this head (πᾶν not παρά is imbedded in it).
3 Hermas, Vis. iii. 1. 9 εὐαρεστηκότων δὲ, εὐηρ. as: εὐηρέστησαν Sim. viii. 36 5. tv. App. p. 329.
40 VERBS IN ©. TENSE FORMATION. [3 16.1-3. § 17.
δ τό, VERBS IN -2. TENSE FORMATION.
1. Verbs with pure stem.—Popéw keeps a short vowel in the formation of the tenses (Att. -7-), ἐφορέσαμεν, φορέσομεν 1 C. 15. 49 (φορέσαι Herm. Sim. ix. 10. 3, but perf. Pea ties ibid τὴς inversely (ἐπι)ποθέω makes ἐπεπόθησα 1 P .2. 2 (LXX.; in old ga Attic Gk. -era preponderates). Cp. ἐρρέθην from stem pe- Mt. 5 NLM al., 27 ΚΙ, al., 31 8LM al., and so elsewhere interchain with ἐρρήθην (cp. 1ΧΧ. and other late writings), but the short vowel is limited in N.T. and other writings to the indic.: where there is no augment the form is always ἘΠ: ete. (but in Pap. Oxy ERs ΠΡ 161, we even find ῥεθέντων). Levav makes πεινάσω, ἐπείνασα (nO doubt with a, not a4) L. 6. 25 etc. (so also LXX.); but διψᾶν, διψήσω. With o we have λελουσμένοι H. 10. 23 sD*P, the other Mss. have λελουμ. as in Att. and so Jo. 13. το (-op- only 1: κέκλεισμαι always (L. 11. 7 ete.), as against Att. -εἰμαι (-ῃμαι): segs as Att.: ep. irreg. verbs Canes κεράννυμι, σῴζω.
Verbs with mute stem.—Of verbs in -ζω the following have a ear character : νυστάζω, ἐνύσταξαν Mt. 25. 8 (Hellen.: Att. -ασα): alien fut. ἐμπαίξω, aor. pass. ἐνεπαίχθην Me. 10. 34, Mt. 2.16 ete. (Doric and Hellen.: ἔπαισα etc. Att.); the following is dental: σαλπίζω, σαλπίσω, ἐσάλπισα (1 C. 15. 52, Mt. 6. 2 al.), Hellenistic for -(y)éa; the following fluctuate: ἁρπάζω, -άσω, ἥρπασα, -άσθην (=Att.), but -άγην Hellenist. 2 C. 12. 2, 4, ep. ἅρπαξ (Att.), ἁρπαγή (old and Att.), ἁρπαγμός (ἁρπάξω loner fut.): στηρίζω, -icw, -ισὰ hy esi ΡΟΝ al. (~£a 8AD al.), 22. 32 (-ξ- Ὁ al. Ὶ Ap. 3. 2 ACP (-€- 8B), 2 Th. 3. 3 B, A. 15. 32 CE, ‘elsewhere -€- (and ἐστήριγμαι, Sone which was the old inflection: ep. ane “Αρμόζω (ἡρμοσάμην), σφάζω (ἔσφαξα) are unrepresented in present and imperfect.
3. Verbs with liquid stem.—Verbs in -αίνω, -aipw take only -ava, -apa in the lst aor. act., without regard to the preceding sound: thus ἐξήρανα (p precedes) as in Att., but also ἐλεύκανα (ἐκέρδανα), 3 ἐβάσκᾶνα, ἐσήμανα for Att. -ηνα : ἐπιφᾶναι from -φαίνω L. 1. 79, ἀναφάναντες (male -pavevres AB*CE al.) A. 21. 3, pavy Ap. 18. 23: ἐξεκάθαρα 1 C. 5. 7, 2 Tim. 2. 21 (ἐκάθαρα is also sporadically found in 4th century Attic). *Apat (contracted from ἀεῖραι) agrees with Att. Perf. pass. ἐξηραμμένος Me. 11. 20 (Att. -ασμαι, though -αμμαι is also attested), μεμιαμμένος Tit. 1. 15 (Att. ope ), Cp. μεμαραμ- μένος Herm. Vis, ill. 11. 2 8 (-ασμ- as), κατῃσχυμμένος Mand. xii. 5. 2 (we even have κατασεσημημμένα in Pap, Ox. i. p. 183).
817. VERBS IN ὦ. NEW FORMATION OF A PRESENT TENSE.
A new present tense is formed out of the perf. (instances of which are forthcoming also at an earlier period: yeywvew from γέγωνα) : γρηγορεῖν (Phryn. 118) from ἐγρήγορα (the latter never in N.T.:
1 The ε in φορέω is never found elsewhere except in the aorist and future active.
516. 9. 21 8ABal., but 87DEKL κερδήσω the regular form elsewhere, cp. Irreg. Verbs, § 24.
S17. 818. NEW PRESENT TENSE. 41
ypny. LXX., never in good writers, N.T. with aor. ἐγρηγόρησα): στήκω ‘stand’ from ἕστηκα (used along with the latter word), Me. 11. 25 στήκετε (-ητε; o777ER), ὃ. 31 στήκοντες BC* (ν.]. στάντες, ἑστηκότες, ἑστῶτες), 1 C. 16. 13 (imperat. στήκετε), G. 5. 1 (id.), Ph. 4. x (id.), 1 Th. 3. 8 (id.), the only additional forms elsewhere are στήκει R. 14. 4, and στήκετε indic. Ph. 1. 27: thus it is almost confined to Pauline writings, and is mainly found in the imperat. (for which ἕστατε is the old form, ἑστήκετε is unexampled).? The word (mod. Gk. στέκω: στήκω, Epigr. Kaibel, 970) is thoroughly plebeian. Other exx. of new present forms are: ἀμφιάζω for -έννυμι (Hellenist., also LXx.) L. 12. 28, ἀμφιάζει B, -ἐξει DL (the latter form, elsewhere unattested, is cited by Cramer, An. Ox. 2. 338, as κοινόν, and -άζω as δωρικόν), -έννυσι SA ete. as all MSS. read in Mt. 6. 30 :--ἐνδιδύσκω ‘put on’ Me. 15. 17 RBC (D ἐνδυδισκ.) for evdtw: ἐνδιδύσκομαι ‘put on oneself’ L. 8. 27 8“A (Ὁ -δυδί)" al. (v.L aor.), 16. το (LXX., Herm. Sim. ix. 13. 5) :—xptBw (Hellenist., see Phryn. Lob. 317: formed from the Hellenist. aor. ἐκρύβην, like ἐγράφην from γράφω: see ὃ 19, 2), L. 1. 24 περιέκρυβεν impf., not 2nd aor.: elsewhere no instances of pres. or impf. in N.T., Ev. Petr. τό ἐκρυβόμεθα :-- (ἀπο)κτέν(ν)ω for -κτείνω, with extremely un- certain spelling: Mt. 10. 28 -κτεννόντων (-ενόντων Τὰ al., -εινόντων B): Me. 12. 5 -κτέννοντες, FG al. -evovres, B -εννύντες, 8° -ιννύντες, MS -aivovtes: L. 12. 4 -evvovtwv, -ενόντων DG al., -αιν- M, -ev- B: 2 Ὁ. 3. 6 -evve, ACDE al. -ένει, B -είνει: Ap. 6. 11 -έννεσθαι, BP -είνεσθαι : 13. 10 -ένει, -ever BCP, -etver 8; here Lachm. writes -aivec (as he does in 2 C. 3. 6), Tischend. -eve?.! The ordinary -eivw has most support in Mt. 23. 37 (-ενν- CGK, -εν- δ), L. 13. 34 (ἐνν- AK al.). For the spelling with -νν- or -v- see on χύν(ν)ω :—vinrw (appar- ently not earlier than Hellenistic Gk., from vito, ἔνιψα) for νίζω :— χύν(ν)ω for xew (Hellenist., mod. Gk.: ep. κέχυμαι, ἐχύθην with erAvOnv from πλύνω) everywhere except in Mt. 9. 17 ἐκχεῖται (probably due to interpolation’); in Ap. 16. 1 we should write exxéare aor. with B instead of -έετε 3 The best Mss. write the word with vy: A. 9. 22 8B*C, 21. 31 8*AB*D, 22. 20 8AB*, Mt. 26. 28 SABCD al., similarly 23. 35, Mc. 14. 24, L. 11. 50, 22. 20; in other writings, however (Lob. Phryn. 726), χύνω is the only recognised form, and this also has analogy in its favour. Cp. further in the table of verbs, ὃ 24, βλαστῶν, γαμίζειν, ὀπτάνεσθαι (under ὁρᾶν).
§ 18. VERBS IN -2. ON THE FORMATION OF THE FUTURE.
1. The so-called Attic future of verbs in -έω, -ἀζω etc. disappears, almost entirely, as the name implies, from Hellenistic Greek, and entirely from the N.T.; therefore -έσω, -άσω, not -6 -eis, -ὦ -ἀς in N.T.
1Tn Acts 3. 1 for ἀνέβαινον A has ἀναίβεννον, C ἀνέβεννον, in L. 10. 31 A καταί- Bevvev, The spelling -κταίνω has, however, little probability in view of the con- sistent forms of the fut. -ενῶ and aor. -ewa ; with -évw one might compare μένω. (ἀποκτέννω also occurs occasionally in Lxx., W.-Schm. § 15 note.)
*Herm. Vis. v. 5 συγχύννου &; in Sim. viii. 2. 7 mapaxéew of as should
perhaps be emended παραχέαι. abedy, App. p. 307.
42 VERBS IN -. FORMATION OF THE FUTURE. [§ 18. 1-3.
Greek are correct (whilst the LXX. retains e.g. ἐργᾶται, dprq). So in particular καλῶ καλέσω, τελῶ τελέσω (ἀπόλλυμι, ἀπολέσω, ἀπολοῦμαι, δ 24). On the other hand, verbs in -ἰζω to a great extent form their fut., as in Att., with 0, particularly (W. H. 11. App., p. 163) in the 3rd pers. plur. act., where the following syllable also begins with a o: ἐλπιοῦσιν L. 1. 48, ἐδαφιοῦσιν 19. 44 etc. (only in Col. 4. 9 γνωρίσουσιν 8°BFGP, -ἰοῦσιν 8*ACD* al., whereas ibid. 7 all Mss. have γνωρίσει, cp. Εἰ. 6. 21, Jo. 17. 26). In the Lxx. the formation in -ιῶ prevails, and this is accordingly found in O.T. quotations, παροργιῶ R. 10. 19, μετοικιῶ A. 7. 43. Additional exx.: Mt. 25. 32 ἀφορίσει 8*LA, -ἰεῦ ΚΑΒ) al. (-codow 13. 49 all MsS.): βαπτίσει always: Ja. 4. ὃ ἐγγιεῖ (-ioes A): ἐμφανίσω, θερίσω, καθίσω are constant: διακαθαριεῖ Mt. 8. 12, item (L. 3. 17) Η. 9. 14 (καθ.): κομιεῖσθε 1 P. 5, 4, κομιεῖται Col. 3. 25 8*ACD* (σεται x°BD* al.), E. 6. 8 x°D° al. (σεται 8*ABD* al.), κομιούμενοι 2 P. 2. 13 (v1. ἀδικούμενοι) : στηρίζω, -ίσω or -ίξω, § 16, 2: φωτιεῖ Ap. 22. 5 ΒΒ, τίσει AP: χαρίσεται R. 8. 32: χρονιεῖ H. 10. 37 O.T. s°AD* al., ἴστε 8*D* (οὐ μὴ χρονίσῃ LXX.%): χωρίσω. Since in O.T. quotations the -ιῶ of the LXx. has not been corrupted by scribes into τίσω, it appears that in original passages of the N.T. the reading -icw should in general be preferred.
2. Future without the characteristic form of the future tense.— IIfouar agrees with the Att. form: for ἔδομαι N.T. has φάγομαι, E14. 15, 1%. 8, Jo. 2: 17 ΟἾ Janos 2, ΔΡ 1 τῶν (exes ἔδομαι passim: φάγομαι, ἔφαγον correspond to πίομαι, ἔπιον: Phryn. 327, pay. βάρβαρον). In place of the fut. χέω the LXx. and N.T. have χεῶ, χεεῖς etc.; ἐκχεεῖτε Deut. 12. 16, 24 (Clem. Cor. il. 7. 5 παθεῖται for πείσεται from πάσχω, cp. Ka esoopony.
3. Whereas in Att. many active verbs form a future middle, in N.T. the active form is in most cases employed throughout. ᾿Ακούσομαι occurs in the Acts (exc. in 28. 26 O.T. quot. -ere) and R. 10. 14 a wrong reading of 8*DE al. for -σωσιν 8°B; but ἀκούσω," Jo. 5. 25 [Ὡς AD al.), 28 (item), 10. 16 al. (where there is diversity of reading -cw is preferable, since -copae has not ὁ: corrupted in the Kets). “Αμαρτήσω Mt. 18. 21 (Herm. Mand.
1. τ, 2): ἀπαντήσω Me. 14. 13: ἁρπάσω Jo. 10. 28 (RDLX οὐ a ἁρπάσῃ): βλέψω Acts 28. 26 O.T.: γελάσω L. 6. 21: Siete: as ordinarily): διώξω Mt. 25. 34 al.:! (ἐσθίω, φάγομαι, see 2): Chow Jo. 5. 25 8BDL (-ovra: A al.), 6. 51 SDL (eras BC al.), 57 ABC? (ται TA al., G C*D), with diversity of reading ibid. 58 ae 80 passim, ζήσομαι all Mss. in Jo. 11. 25, RB. 8. 13, Geo (i The 5
see § 65, 2) 2 Tim. 2. 11 (συνζήσομεν : -wpev CLP is only a cor- ruption): both forms also occur in Att.: (ἀποθανοῦμαι as usual) : θαυμάσονται Ap. 17. 8 8B, correctly for N.T. θαυμασθήσονται AP (from θαυμάζομαι -- -ω, cp. 13. 3): κλαύσω L. 6. 25, Jo. 16. 20, Ap. 18. 9 (wrongly -ovros sA, though so read in Herm. Vis. iii. 3. 2):
l’Emupkjcw Mt. 5. 33 is also the Att. form: κατεπιορκησόμενος Demosth. 54. 40 is passive. av. App. p. 307.
ὃ 19. 1-3.] VERBS IN ἢ. FIRST AND SECOND AORIST. 43
κράξω L. 19. 40 NBL, κεκράξονται AR al. as in Att. and Lxx., κράξονται D: (λή(μ)γψομαι, ὄψομαι as usual): παίξω Mc. 10. 34: (πεσοῦμαι, πίομαι as usual): ῥεύσω Jo. 7. 38: σπουδάσω 2 P. 1. ae (-a(@ 8): συναντήσω (cp. ἀπαντ.: no Attic instance of fut. from cuv- αντῶ) L. 22. το, A. 20. 22: (τέξομαι, φεύξομαι, χαρήσομαι as usual).!
$19. VERBS IN -. FIRST AND SECOND AORIST.
1. 1st aorist act. in -ca instead of 2nd aorist.—(*Héa) beside ἤγαγον is seen in ἐπάξας 2 P. 2. 5, ἐπισυνάξαι L. 13. 34, συνάξαντες A. 14. 27 Ὁ (found at the least in dialects, LXxX., and late writers): ἡμάρτησα side by side with ἥμαρτον R. 5. 14, 16,*Mt. 18. 15 Herm. Mand. iv. 3. 6, vi. 2. 7 etc. (Empedocl., Lxx., Lob. Phryn. 732): ἐβίωσα 1 P. 4. 2 (the better Att. form is ἐβίων), ἔζησα often takes the place of the last word (lonic and late, not Att.) A. 26. 5 ete.: ἐβλάστησα Miz 19 26, H. 9. 4, causative Ja. 5. 18 as In LXX. Gen. 1. 11 (Empedocl., late writers), never ἔβλαστον : ἔδυσα intrans. for ἔδυν Me. 1. 32 BD (ἔδυ 8 A etc.), L. 4. 40 δύσαντος 1), δύναντος a few MSS., δύνοντος most MSS.: ἔκραξα as in late writers (the Attic ἀνέκραγον in L. 23. 18 SBLT and Herm. Vis. 111. 8. 9 ἀνέκραγεν ; A. 24. 21 ἐκέκραξα ΝΑ ΒΟ as LXX.): ἔλειψα (late) Δ. 6.2 (κατέλ.), L.5.11 D (id.), Me.12. 198 καταλείψῃ for -λ(ε)ίπῃ, elsewhere ἔλιπον." The assimilation to the fut. is everywhere well marked.—A new 2nd aor. ἀνέθαλον is formed from ἀναθάλλω Ph. 4. 10 (LXX.), apparently in causative sense (ἀνεθάλετε τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ φρονεῖν), unless τοῦ should be read with FG ; ep. §§ 24: 71, 2.
2. 2nd aorist passive for 2nd aorist active.—Eqinyv for ἔφυν, φυέν (συμφυεῖσαι) L. 8. 6 Εἰ, expuy Mt. 24. 32=Me. 13. 28 (like ἐρρύην ; late). So also παρεισεδύησαν for -voav is read by B in Jd. 4.
3. 1st and 2nd aorist (and future) passive.—In the passive voice the substitution of the 2nd aor. for the 150 is a very favourite idiom. ἠγγέλην L. 8. 20 ἀπ.“ (ΧΧ., and as early as Att.): ἠνοίγην Me. 7. 35 (-ofx@. A al.), A. 12. το (χθη EHLP), Ap. 11. 19 (χθη B), 15. 5 side by side with -xOyv (Att. has Ist aor.): fut. -γήσομαι Mt. 7. 7, L. 11. 10 sAC al., ἀνοίγεται BD (as also B in Mt. loc. cit.), but -χθήσομαι L. 11. 9 f. (A)(D)EF al.: ἡρπάγην 2 C. 12. 2, 4 (late) for Att. ἡρπάσθην (so Ap. 12. 5 ACP, but -ayy 8, -άχθη B), with fut. -γήσομαι 1 Th. 4. 17: ἐκάην (Hom., Ionic, late writers) Ap. 8. 7, 1 C. 3. 15 (2 P. 3. ro), elsewhere, as in Att., we have the Ist aor. and the fut. formed from it: ἐκρύβην Mt. 5. 14, etc. In these new 2nd aorist forms there was a preference for the medial letters as the final sound of the stem, even though as in the last instance (κρυφ-) the stem strictly had another termination (-f6yv Att., τ-φην poet.) : ep. pres. κρύβω $17: κατενύγην Acts 2. 37: διορυγῆναι v.l. -χθῆναι Mt. 24. 48 (Herm. Sim. ix. 6. 7): διετάγην G. ὁ. 19 ὑπετάγην
1 Χαρήσομαι is also to be regarded as Att. fut. of the aorist, as compared with χαιρήσω fut. of the present.
2 Herm. Sim. viii. 3. 5 has κατέλειψεν along with -erev. Clem. Cor. 11. ὃ κατα- λείψαντας, 10 -λείψωμεν. Deissmann N. B. 18 [= Bible St. 190] (the simple form ἔλειψα is frequent in the Anthology). abcdy. App. p. 308.
44 VERBS IN ἢ. DEPONENT VERBS. [§19.3-4. §20.
R. 8. 20, 10. 3 al., προσετάγη Herm. Mand. iv. 1. το, ὑποταγήσομαι 1 C. 15. 28, H. 12. 9 (Barn. 19. 7), but L. 17. 9 f. Suara Oevra as in. Attic. Wvyo makes ψυγήσεται Mt. 24. 12 (-χήσεται K ; late writers even say ψύγω, Lob. on Soph. Ajax, p. 373°: cp. ἐκρύβην — κρύβω). New Ist aorists (for what in Attic is expressed by a different verb) are ἐτέχθην L. 2. 11, Mt. 2. 2 (Att. ἐγενόμην) : ἀπεκτάνθην passim (Att. ἀπέθανον). A substitute for 2nd aor. is ἐκλίθην (poet.), the regular form (also κλιθήσομαι) for Att. ἐκλίνην.
4. On the intermixture of terminations of the lst and 2nd aor. act. and mid. see ὃ 21, 1.
$20. VERBS IN -2.. AORIST AND FUTURE OF DEPONENT VERBS.
1. Aorist passive for aorist middle. —’Eyevy$nv (Hellenist., Phryn. 108, LXX.) in addition to ἐγενόμην : Mt. 6. το, 9. 29, 15. 28, 26. 42 imperat. γενηθήτω, in O.T. quot. ἐγενήθη 21. 42; elsewhere only 11. 23 -νήθησαν SBCD, 28. 4 8BC*DL; Me. and Jo. (including Epp. and Apoc.) never have this form except in O.T. quotations, so also L. Gosp., but 10. 13 (=Mt. 11. 23) -νήθησαν SBDLE, 18. 23 -νήθη NBL: in Acts the only instance is 4. 4 all Mss. -νήθη, but D also has it in 7. 13, 20. 3, τό; it is frequent, however, in the epistles of Paul and Peter, and in Hebrews. Cp. the perfect γεγένημαι (found in Att.) in addition to γέγονα. ᾿Απεκρίθην (Hellenist., Phryn. 108) is universal, Luke alone uses the Attic form ἀπεκρινάμην as well, 3. 16 (23. 9, L correctly -vero), A. 3. 12 (D is different), and always in the indic.; otherwise the latter form is only found with var. lect.: Mt. 27. 12 (Ὁ correctly -ero), Mc. 14. 61 (-(θη D; -vero?), Jo. 5. 17, 19, 12. 23. The corresponding fut. is ἀποκριθήσομαι. So also ὑποκρινομαι ‘dissemble,’ συνυπεκρίθησαν G. 2. 13 (ὑπεκρίθην Herm. Sim. ix. 19. 3, as Polyb.), διακρίνομαι ‘doubt,’ διεκρίθην. ᾿Απε- λογήθην (an old form, but not good Attic) L. 21. 14, ἀπελογήσησθε 12. τι, but Clem. Alex. ii. 357 Dind. cites here too -ηθῆτε." Again, ἐγείρομαι only makes ἠγέρθην (found in Attic), never ἠγρόμην :" ἀναπαύομαι, (ἐπ)αναπαήσομαι L. 10. 6 ΝΒ (-αύσεται rell.), Ap. 14. 13 SAC (ibid. 6. 11 -αύσονται or -wvrat all MSs., and so elsewhere; but Herm. Vis. 1. 3. 3 8, Π|. 9. 1 καὶ ἐπάην, and καταπαήσεται Pap. Londin. p. 118, line 916; ἔκαυσα, ἐκάην corresponds to ἔπαυσα, ἐπάην). ‘To verbs expressive of emotion, which also in Att. take a passive aorist, belong ἀγαλλιῶμαι (found along with -ἰῶ, § 24), ἠγαλλιάθην (σθὴην BL) Jo. 5. 35 (but 8. 56 -ασάμην, and so elsewhere): (θαυμάζομαι, late form) ἐθαυμάσθην Ap. 13. 3 A (-atpacev SBP, -αυμαστώθη C), -σθήσομαι 17. ὃ, ep. § 18, 3 (the act. -άξω occurs in Ap. 17. 7 and regularly elsewhere ; ἐθαυμάσθην in pass. sense 2 Th. 1. 10): θαμβεῖσθαι Me. 1. 27 ἐθαμβήθησαν (-βησαν D), θαμβηθέντες ἊΣ 3: ΤΊ 1D). cp. impf. Me. 10. 24, 32, but θαμβῶν A. 9. 6 D as in Hom. ete.—Acedéfaro A. 17. 2 sAB (ἐχθη DE), 18. 19 SAB (έχθη EHLP) is a wrong reading for διελέγετο ; the Attic διελέχθην stands in Me. 9. 34. ᾿Αρνεῖσθαι and
abevy, App. p. 308.
§ 20. 1-2. 821] VERBS IN -.. TERMINATIONS. 45
ἀπ- have only the aor. mid. (Att. more often aor. pass.; a corrupt active form ἀπαρνῆσαι occurs in Herm. Sim. i. 5).
2. The future passive (i.e. strictly the aoristic fut., see § 14, 1) is found with other verbs similar to those mentioned : (εὐφρανθήσομα: only B for pres. Ap. 11. 16) κοιμηθήσομαι 1 C. 15. 51, μεταμεληθήσομαι H. 7. 21 O.T. quot., φανήσομαι (φανοῦμαι 1 P. 4. 18 O.T. quot.), φοβηθήσομαι H. 13.6 O.T. On the other hand: γενήσομαι, δυνήσομαι, ἔπιμελήσομαι 1 Tim. 3. 5: πορεύσομαι (L. 11. 5 etc.).
ὃ 21. VERBS IN -2. TERMINATIONS.
1. As early as Attic Greek there is not wanting an intermediate form between the Ist and 2nd aor. act. mid., with the terminations of the lst aor. but without its 7: εἶπα beside εἶπον, ἤνεγκα beside ἤνεγκον. The Hellenistic language had a tendency to extend this type to numerous aorists which in classical Greek had the termin- ations of the 2nd aor. throughout: εἷλα, -άμην, εὗρα, -άμην ete. (Kiihner 1.5 ii. 104). Still this process, by means of which the second aorist was eventually quite superseded, is in the N.T. far from complete. Etna (W. H. App. 164) keeps a unchanged in the forms with 7 (as also in Att.): εἴπατε, -άτω, -άτωσαν ; also fairly often before μ: ἀπειπάμεθα 2 Ὁ. 4. 2, προείπαμεν 1 Th. 4. 6 (-o- AKL al.) ; εἶπας Mt. bis, L. semel, Mc. 12. 32 with ν.]. -es 8*DEF al., Jo. 4. 17 -es 8B*; -av has preponderant evidence; rarely εἶπα as in*A. 26. 15; imperat. εἰπέ and εἶπον (for accent, Lob. Phr. 348) interchangeably ; the part εἴπας is rare (A. 22. 29 τών HLP), εἴπασα hardly occurs (in Jo. 11. 28 all Mss. have εἰποῦσα in the first place, BC* have -aca in the second ; -aca Herm. Vis. iii. 2. 3 δὲ, iv. 3. 7 δ); εἰπόντος etc. and εἰπεῖν are constant. “Hveyxa has a except in the infin. (only 1 P. 2. 5 has ἀνενέγκαι, always -εῖν in Joseph., W. Schm. de Joseph. elocut. 457) ; imp. Mt. 8. 4 προσένεγκε (-ov BC), παρ- Me. 14. 36, L. 22. 42 (male vv. 1]. -αι L. al., -εἶν AQ al.). Other verbs never have inf. in -αὐ nor part. -as, nor yet imperat. 2 sing. in -ov; on the other hand these forms occur: ἔβαλαν A. 16. 37 BD, 21. 27 8*A (ἐπ), Me. 14. 46 8B (é-), (ἐξέβαλαν Me. 12. 8 B, ep. Mt. 13. 48 D, 21. 39 D, Ap. 18. 19 ©); εἶδαν Mt. 13. 17 8B, L. 10. 24 8BC al., Mc. 6. 33 D etc.: εἰδαμεν Mt. 25. 37 B*I, Me. 2. 12 CD, 9. 38 DN: εἴδατε L. 7. 22 A, Jo. 6. 26 C: εἶδα Ap. 17. 3 A, 6 8A; in these instances -ov has far the most support from the Mss. It is otherwise with εἶλον, -Aa: εἵλατο 2 Th. 2. 13 (-ero K), Herm. Sim. v. 6. 6: ἀνείλατε A. 2. 23, -ato 7. 21 (-ero P), -av 10. 39 (ον HLP): ἐξείλατο 7. 10 (-ero H), 12. 11 (-ero P), -άμην 23. 27 (-ὀἀμὴην HLP), but -ἔσθαι 7. 34 O.T. quot.’ Eipa has only slender attesta- tion: εὑράμενος H. 9. 12 (-d- D*), -av L. 8. 35 B*, Mt. 22. τὸ D, A. 5. το AE, 13. 6 A: -apev L, 23. 2 B*L al. Again there is preponderant evidence for ἔπεσα, -av, -ατε (G. 5. 4): Imp. -ate L. 23. 30 (τε 8* ABD al.), Ap. 6. 16 (-ere SBC). Ἦλθα Ap. 10.9 A (ον SBOP), -apev A. 27. 5 SAG 98. τό Α. 21. 8 B, Mt. 25. 39 D: -av is often interchanged with -ov: but the imp. ἔλθατε, ἐλθάτω 15
abv, App. p. 308.
46 VERBS IN ἢ. TERMINATIONS. [8 21. 1-6.
attested by the mass of the mss. All other instances are quite isolated : ἀπέθαναν Mt. 8. 32 n°, L. 20. 31 B*, Jo. δ. 53 D* : ἔλαβαν, -~apev, -ατε JO. 1. 12 and 1 Jo. 2. 27 B*, L. 5. 5 A: ἔπιαν 1 C. 10. 4 D* etc.
2. The (mod. Gk.) extension of the terminations -a, -as etc. to the imperfect is rare, and in no case unanimously attested. Εἶχαν Me. 8. 7 8BDA, A. 28. 2 8AB, 8 108, Ap. 9. 8 8A (9 -ov omn.), L. 4. 40 D, Jo. 15. 22, 24 D* (rell. -ov or -οσαν) : -apev 2 Jo. 5 8A: ἔλεγαν Jo. 11. 56 8D, 9. το, 11. 368%, A. 28. 6 B. According to Buresch, Rh. Mus. 46, 224, these forms should not be recognised in the N.T., since the Mss. supporting them are quite thrown into the shade by the enormous mass of those which support -ov, -es ete.
3. The (aoristic) termination -av for -ασιὶ in the 3rd pers. plur. perf. (Alexandrian according to Sext. Emp. adv. gramm. 213) is not frequent either in the Lxx. or in the N.T., and in the latter is nowhere unanimously attested, so that its originality is subject to the same doubt with the last exx. (Buresch, p. 205 ff). The instances are: ἑώρακαν L. 9. 36 BC2LX, Col. 2. 1 n*ABCD*P: τετήρηκαν BDL Jo. 17. 6: ἔγνωκαν ABCD al., ibid. 7 (ἐτήρησαν — ἔγνων 8): ἀπέσταλκαν RAB A. 16. 36: εἰσελήλυθαν BP Ja. 5. 4: yeyovay R. 16. 7 SAB, Ap. 21. 6 κα (-a 8*BP, Buresch) : πέπ(τ)ωκαν 18. 3 AC: εὔἴρηκαν 19. 3 ΒΑΡ,
4. The termination -cay for -v in the 3rd pers. plur. in Hellenistic and N.T. Greek is constant in the imper. (also in the pass. and mid. as προσευξάσθωσαν Ja. 5. 14); in the impf. (Hellenist., Kn, I: 11-255) it is found in ἐδολιοῦσαν R. 3. 13 O.T. quot.: also εἴχοσαν Jo. 15. 22, 24 8B al. (εἶχαν D*, εἶχον AD? which makes a very serious ambiguity), παρελάβοσαν 2 Th. 3. 6 8*AD* (-ere BEG, -ov 8°D°"E al., somewhat ambiguous).” The forms are apparently authentic, since it is difficult to suppose that they were very familiar to the scribes, except in contract verbs, where these forms are also found in mod. Gk.; ep. ἐθορυβοῦσαν D A. 17. 5 (κατοικουσαν 2 D 2. 46; D also has ψηλαφήσαισαν, εὕροισαν in 17. 27, see 5; Herm. Sim. vi. 2. 7 εὐστα- θοῦσαν, ix. 9. 5 ἐδοκοῦσαν). Cp. Buresch, 195 ἢ.
5. The termination -es for -as (in perf. and aor.)! is not only quite unclassical, but is also only slenderly attested in the N.T.: Ap. 2. 3 κεκοπίακες AC, 4 ἀφῆκες RC: ἐλήλυθες A. 21. 22 B, ἑώρακες Jo. 8. 57 ΒΥ ἔδωκες 17. 7 ΑΒ, ὃ B, εὔληφες Ap. 11: Τὴ C ete. (W.-Schm. § 13, 16; Buresch, 219 ff.; εἴωθες Papyr. of Hyperides ce. Philipp. col. 4. 20).
6. The rare optative has 3rd sing. of the 1st aor. in αὐ (also Clem. Cor. i. 33. 1 ἐάσαι), not the better Att. -eve; and a corresponding 3rd plur. in av: ποιήσαιεν L. 6. 11 BL (τειεν 8A, -ειαν Att. EKM al.: D has quite a different reading): A. 17. 27 ψηλαφήσειαν B al., -ειεν BE, -αισαν and ibid. εὕροισαν D, which may be correct (cp.
1 Apollonius, Synt. i. 10, p. 37: 37, p. 71, attests εἴρηκες, ἔγραψες, ypayérw for τας, -άτω as forms about which grammarians were in conflict. ᾿Αφήκετε B* Mt. 23. 23. ay. App. p. 308.
§ 21. 6-8. § 22. 1-2.] CONTRACT VERBS. 47 LXX. αἰνέσαισαν Gen. 49. 8, ἔλθοισαν Deut. 33. 16, W.-Schm. § 13, 14, note 14; even yevowav, Kleinasiat. Inschr. Bull. de corresp. helleén. ii. 600), since the scribes of D and of its ancestors certainly did not find the optative in the living language.
7. The plupf. of course keeps εἰ (not ε) in the plur.: πεποιήκεισαν Me. 15. 7 ete.
8. The 2nd pers. sing. of the pres. and fut. pass. and mid. regularly ends (as also in the older Attic) in -ἢ ; the later Attic εἰ (ne and εὐ interchangeable, § 3, 5) is found only in the word βούλει, borrowed by Luke from the literary language (L. 22. 42 -Ay FGR al.; ep. Herm. Sim. ix. 11. 9 βούλῃ, v. 5. 5 apparently βούλει), = θέλεις of the popular language. Along with -y, the termination -σαι, esp. frequent in contract verbs in -aw, corresponding to the forms -μαι, -ται as in the perf., is a new formation of the popular language which coincides with the primitive ending, and in mod. Greek has affected verbs of all classes.1 ᾿Οδυνᾶσαι L. 16. 25: καυχᾶσαι 1 C. 4. 7, R. 2. 17, 23, 11. 18: also φάγεσαι, πίεσαι L. 17. 8. (Herm. Vis. ii. 4. τ πλανᾶσαι : Sim. i. 3 χρᾶσαι [Vis. ili. 6. 7 the same form, but corrupt], ix. 2. 6 ἐπισπᾶσαι.) These should be regarded as the regular forms in the N.T., since oduvg, φάγῃ, πίῃ are not represented.
ὃ 22. CONTRACT VERBS.
1. Verbs in -éo.—Z7jv takes ἡ as in Att., but πεινᾶν, διψᾶν take a for ἡ as in other Hellenist. writings (cp. ἐπείνασα, ὃ 16,1). (From Gv 1 sing. impf. ἔζην R. 7. 9 B for ἔζων.) From χρῶμαι we have χρῆται in 1 Tim. 1. 8 SD al., χρήσηται AP, otherwise there is no apposite example ; χρᾶσθαι is Hellenistic, ep. Clem. Cor. ii. 6.5 A, ὃ 21, τ, W.-Schm. § 13, 24.—Confusion of -dw and -έω: ἠρώτουν Mt. 15. 23 sABCD, Me. 4. το 8C, Jo. 4. 31 C (no MS. in 4. 40 [9. 15 X], 12. 21), A. 16. 39 A; no other form of this vb. with ov. [ἐνεβριμοῦντο Me. 14. 5 8C*, -μούμενος Jo. 11.38 8AU ; βριμοῦσθαι, ‘to be angry,’ occurs in Xenoph. Cyrop. 4. 5. 9, -ὥσθαι in Aristoph. and Lucian, § 20, 1; the case therefore resembles ἡσσᾶσθαι — ἡσσοῦσθαι]. Korwovow Mt. 6. 28 B:—vicowr, Ap. 2. 17 AC, 2. 7 A (οντι B), 15. 2 Ο :- -κατελέγουν L. 8. 53 D*KX ete. Cp. mod. Greek; W.-Schm. ὃ 13, 26.—On -doa, 2 pers. sing. pass., see ἢ
2. Verbs in -é«.—Uncontracted contrary to the rule is ἐδέετο L. 8. 38 (-e’7o 8*BC2LX, -ee’ro AP formed out of -eero with correc- tion εἰ written over it), cp. Clem. Hom. iii. 63; πνέει Jo. 3. 8 according to L and Chrys.; xatéppee Apoc. Petr. 26, Phryn. 220. It is conceivable that the conjugation was pneo pne -is -i -omen -ete, and not pnis -2 -ite.—Confusion of -ew and -άω : ἐλεῶντος R. 9. τό (-ovvTos BK), ἐλεᾶτε Jd. 22 8BC?, 23 8B (there is much variety of reading in this verse) ; but R. 9. 18 ἐλεεῖ RA2BD‘L al., ἐλεᾷ only in D*(E)FG (otherwise no exx. of such forms from ἐλεῶ: both forms found in
123y, App. p. 329.
48 VERBS IN -MI. [ὃ 22. 28. § 23. 155
LXxX.:! the tenses have ἡ, though eaw has ἐάσω) :---ἐλλόγα Philem. 18, -εἰ 8°D°"™EKL, -ὅἄται R. 5. 13 only &* (and ἐλλογᾶτο A); the Hellenistic vb. elsewhere employs -εῖν."
3. Verbs in -éw.—Infin. -otv (= όειν) for -οῦν : κατασκηνοῖν Mt. 19: B*D, Me. 4. 32 B*: HE GO ἘΠῚ ἢ ΒΝ τ φῦ ΜΕ ΘῈ 15 ge but πληροῦν all uncials in L. 9. 31; and it is the constant form in LXX., so that the termination τοῖν is hardly established for the N.T. Cp. W.-Schm. § 13, 25: Hatzidakis Einl. in ἃ. neugr. Gramm. 193.—The conataee is regular in εὐοδῶται 1 C. 16. 2 (-δωθῇ x°ACT al.): on the other hand it takes the indic. form in G. 4. 17 ζηλοῦτε, 1 C. 4. 6 φυσιοῦσθε (just as the sing. of the conj. act. is identical with the indic., and in vbs. in -άω the whole conjunctive).
§ 23. VERBS IN -MI.
1. The conjugation in -~, which from the beginning of the Greek language gradually gives way to the other conjugation in -w, and which has eventually entirely disappeared in modern Greek, in spite of many signs of decay is not yet obsolete in the N.T. In vbs. in -νυμι (and in ὄλλυμι), which in Attic and other early writers have already a very strong rival in the forms in -(ν)ύω, the older method of formation has not yet disappeared in the N.T., and is especially the prevalent form (as in Att.) in the passive: Mt. 8. 25 ἀπολλύμεθα, 9. 17 ἀπόλλυται, etc. Active fornis: δείκνυμι 1 C. 12. 31 (never -vw in this form), δεικνύεις Jo. 2. 18 (never -vs), δείκνυσιν Mt. 4. ὃ (δ -νύει), Jo. 5. 20 (-νύει D, but ibid. D -vvorv for δείξει), cp. ἀμφιέννυσιν ὃ 34: but ἀπολλύει Jo. 12. 25 (1. -ἔσει), ὀμνύει Mt. 23. 20 fi. Gon this verb there is no certain form in -μι), ὀμνύουσιν H. 6. 16. Imperf. only in -w form: ἐζώννυες Jo. 21. 8, (ὑπ)εστρώννυον Mt. 21. 8 (v.1. ἔστρωσαν), Me. 11.73 ΠΟ ΟΣ Imperat. ἀπ όλλυε R. 14. 15, ὀμνύετε Ja. 5. 12, σβέννυτε 1 Theo ΤῸ: Infin. ὀμνύειν Mt. 26. 74, Me. 14. 71 (ὐὑναι BEHL al. ) δεικνύειν 10. 21 (ὕναι B). Partie. ἀπολλύων Ap. 9. 11, δεικνύοντος 22. ὃ (-ύντος δ): ον ὑποζωννύντες A, 27. 17, ἀπ ποὺ ον ἤγτα Ὁ In. 2. 4 (ύοντα AFG).
In verbs in -άναι, -έναι, -όναι there are ae transitions to the Pant Συνίστημι R. 16. 1, συνίστησι 3. 5, 5. 8,2 Ο 10. 8 are a few certain relics of the active of these forms in -ἄναι (undoubtedly from the literary language); elsewhere this verb takes the form of ἱστάνειν (Hellenist.), for which ἱστᾶν (more often than -άνειν in LXx.) is a frequent v.l., occasionally also the plebeian στάνειν (ἀποκαταστάνεις A. 1. 6 D, 17. 15 καταστάνοντες D*, Me. 9. 12 ἀποκαταστάνει 8*D, -τιστάνει B*). Thus: συνιστάνειν 2 C. 3. τ, FG -avat, BD* -av: 4. 2 συνιστάντες 8CD*FG, -ὦντες DPEKL, -άνοντες ABP, a similar division of the MSS. in 6. 4 (-Gvres is also read b n°): 1 C. 13. 2 μεθιστάνειν ACKL, -ἄναι SBDEFG (this is the only instance where a μὲ form is strongly supported as a v.1.): μεθιστάνει
1W.-Schm. § 13, 26, note 26. 2 On this confusion of -dw and -éw see Hatzidakis, Einl. in d. neugr. Gr. 128.
§ 23. 2-4.] VERBS IN -MI 49
Herm. Vis. i. 3. 4. Πιμπλᾶν stands for πιμπλάναι in A. 14. 17 ἐμπι(μ)πλῶν (LXX.). The passive remains unaffected by this change (cp. 1): περιίστασο 2 Tim. 2. τό, Tit. 3. 9, καθίσταται H. 5. 1 ete, ([ἐμ]πίμπρασθαι A. 28, 6, Tisch. -ἄσθαι), κρέμαται Mt. 22. 40, κρεμά- μενος A, 28. 4, G. 3. 13 O.T. quot.: so also δύναμαι, ἐπίσταμαι as usual, except that δύνομαι, -όμεθα, -όμενος are read by B or B* in Mt. 19. 12, 26. 53, Mc. 10. 39, A. 4. 20, 27. 15 (also in the papyri), ep. ἐξεκρέμετο L. 19. 48 RB: and δύνῃ stands for δύνασαι in Me. 9. 22 f. 8 (or 8°) BD al., 1. 4o B, L. 16. 2 sBDP (v.l. -ὕση), Ap. 2. 2, but -ασαι is read by all mss. in Mt. 5. 36, L. 5. 12, 6. 42, Jo. 13. 36 (Phryn. 359: still δύνῃ or -¢ is already found in Attic poets). Cp. W.-Schm. § 14, 17; both forms are found in Hermas, e.g. δύνῃ Vis. ii. 1. 3, ll. 10, 8, -ασαι 111. 8. 5.—On ἔστην vide infra 4.
3. Τίθημι, S(Sop1.—The pres. indic. as in Att.; παραδίδως is found L. 22. 4; διδῶ only in Ap. 3. 9 AC! (-pe BP, δέδωκα &); τιθι, 1.6. τίθει, for -yow occurs in L. ὃ. 16 D. But in the impf. the forms ἐτίθει, ἐδίδου are already found in Att. and so in N.T.; 3rd plur, ἐτίθουν A. 3. 2, 4. 35 (cp. for Attic, Bekk. Anecd. i. 90), also 8. 17 according to D*EHLP (-ecav ΚΑ 1)", -οσαν B, -εισαν C), Me. 6. 56 ADN al. (-εσαν NBLA): ἐδίδουν A. 4. 33, 27. τ, Me. 15. 23, but A. 16. 4 -οσαν (-ουν HLP), Jo. 19. 3 8B; the forms in -ovy are to be preferred. Imperat. τίθει, δίδου as in Att. But δίδωμι in the passive goes over to the w conjugation, the analogy between the two forms being very close : διεδίδετο A. 4. 35 (-οτο B®P), παρεδίδετο 1 C. 11. 23 (-οτο B*LP), and so 2nd aor. mid. ἀπέδετο H. 12. 16 AC, cp. Mt. 21. 33 x*B*CL, Mc. 12. 1 8SAB*CKL, L. 20. 9 8*AB*CL; but ἀπέδοσθε A. 5. 8 all Mss.— For pres. conj. see 4.
4. 2nd aorist active and middle.—’Eo7nv is found as an alternative for ἐστάθην, see 6; τίθημι, δίδωμι employ the 2nd aor. only in the mid., while ἐθήκαμεν, -ατε, -av, ἐδώκαμεν 3 ete. are the aor. act. forms in use (only L. 1. 2 has Attic 2nd aor. act. παρέδοσαν, literary language in the preface). From other verbs ἔβην, ἔγνων may be added. The indic. is regular (for the mid. cp. 3). The conj. to ἔδωκα (and δίδωμι) ἔγνων shows great fluctuation (2 sing. δῷς Mt. 5. 25): in the 3rd sing., which through the loss of the « in pronunciation had become identical with the Ist sing., beside δῷ (διδῷ) and γνῷ we also have the forms δοῖ (διδοῖ), yvoi*or δώῃ (identical with the optat.). This last form, however, is almost confined to the Pauline Epistles, where the scribes often met with the optat., which was not cur- rent in their own day, and therefore introduced it occasionally for the conj. (vide infra): E. 1. 17 δώῃ most Mss. (δῷ B), 3. 16 δώῃ only DEK al., 2 Tim. 2. 25 δώῃ x*ACD*P (Jo. 15. 16 δώῃ
1 Δίδω Tisch., others διδῶ, cp. ἀποδιδοῦν for -6v A Ap. 22. 2 (there is a similar doubt about the accent in παραδιδων ἐξ Mt. 26. 46, D Me. 14. 42, J. 18. 2, 21. 20). In Hermas 7:86 occurs Vis. i. 1. 3, ii. 1. 2; Clem. Cor. i. 23 ἀποδιδοῖ. Examples from the papyri in W. Schmidt, Gtg. Gel. Anz. 1895, 45.
2 No inference for an aor. ἔδωσα can be drawn from iva... δώσῃ Jo. 17. 2 8°AC al. (v.1. -σω, -σει, δῶ etc.) : nor yet from Me. 6. 37 ἀγοράσωμεν ... δώσωμεν (NBD, v.]. -couev and δῶμεν), see ὃ 65, 2. αν, App. p. 308.
D
το VERBS IN -MI. [ὃ 23. 4-6. EGH al.; ἀποδοίη D* 1 Th. 5. 15). It is more difficult to decide between δῷ, γνῷ and δοῖ, γνοῖ (the latter like ᾧγλοῖ) : still γνῷ has the greater attestation (Jo. 7. 51, 11. 57 [yvot D*], 14. 31, A. 22. 24: Whereas yvoc has equal or greater authority in its favour in Me. 5. 43, 9. 30, L. 19. 15); also (ἀπο)δῷ all Mss. in Mt. 18. 30, the same form or δώῃ all Mss. in E. 1. 17, ὃ. τό, 2 Tim. 2. 25, Jo. 15, 16 (& δώσει), ep. 13. 29 (dot D).—The optat. δῴη is Hellenistic (Phryn. 345 f., Moeris)! and in Paul. Epp. R. 15. 5 etc.—Imperat. ἀνάστηθι and ἀνάστα A, 12. 7, E. 5. 14 O.T. quot. (=)7o, -τε are con- stant), avapa Ap. 4. 1 (ηθι A), μετάβα Mt. 17. 20 along with μετάβηθι Jo. 7. 3, κατάβηθι Mt. 27. 40 etec., προσανάβηθι L. 14. 10; this verb also has -βάτω, -βᾶτε Mt. 24. τη, 27. 42, Ap. 11. 12 (-y7e B) like τίμα, -ἄτε.3
5. Perfect active.—Of the perfects formed after a partial analogy to verbs in -μι, ἕστηκα limits these shorter forms to the infin. “Eoravac L. 13. 25, A. 12. 14, 1 C. 10. 12 (no other form: also usu. in the LXx.), and partic. ἑστώς (in most cases: ἑστηκώς is also found), fem. ἑστῶσα 1 C. 7. 26, 2 P. 3. 5, neut. ἑστὸς Mt. 24. 15 (Ὁ: -ws),*7 Ap. 14. 1 (B -ὡς), but ἑστηκός (ss -ds) 5.6. But the indic. remains ἑστήκαμεν ete. (ep. ἐδώκαμεν). On στήκω see $17. From τέθνηκα we have inf. τεθνάναι A. 14. 19 DEHLP; τεθνηκώς always. Οἶδα, -as, -ε, -αμεν ete. (lonic and Hellenist.); only in A. 26. 4 (speech of Paul before Agrippa) ἴσασιν (literary language); tore H. 12. 17 (unless it be imperat.; ep. ὃ 2, 4); plupf. ηδειν, -εἰς, ete.; moods as in Att.: εἰδῶ, impt. ἔστε ΕἸ. 12. 17? Ja. 1. 19? (v.L. ὥστε) Εἰ 5.5? (vl. ore); infin. εἰδέναι, part. εἰδώς.
6. Remaining tenses of the ordinary verbs in -p1.—Icrdve in transitive sense has fut. στήσω, aor. ἔστησα, perf. ἕστᾶκα (differ- entiated from -ηκα ; first found in Hyperides) A. 8.11. Intransitive are ἵσταμαι, fut. στήσομαι and σταθήσομαι, aor. ἔστην and ἐστάθην ; both forms in the simple vb. are identical in meaning, as in Jonic and Hellenist.* (in Att. ἐστάθην, σταθήσ. have a passive sense). Com- pounds of ἵσταμαι, e.g. ἀνθίσταμαι, av-, ἀφ-, δι-, eEav-, ἐξ-, ep- ete. take τὴν, -ήσομαι in aor. and fut. in intransitive senses ; on the other hand the following also take aor. in -@yv in passive senses: καθίσταμαι (R. 5. 19), ἀποκαῦ. (Mt. 12. 13, Me. 3. 5 στὴ ὦ, Me. 8. 25 τῇ xBCLA, L. 6. 10 -στῇ δὲ", ΕἸ. 13. 19), pe. (L. 16. 4).4 The perf. ἕστηκα has present meaning; but in Jo. 8. 44 οὐκ (RB*DLX al.) ἔστηκεν (ὃ 4, 3) it has true perfect sense ‘has stood,’ a new formation related to ἔστην (?).-—From φημί, except for -μί, -σί, ἔφη (which is at once impf. and aor., as in Att.), no forms are represented in N.T.
1 This -ῴην is found in other Hellenistic writings in all optatives in τοίην : Philodem. Rhet. ed. Sudhaus, ii. 52, 144, 169, 285, εὐπορῴη, ποιῴη, ὁμολογῴη, φρονῴη.
2 Attic poets also have ἀνάστα, κατάβα, but other forms with 9; ΤΙΧΧ. only has -ora side by side with -στηθι.
3 There is not sufficient ground for attributing a passive sense to the simple verb σταθῆναι in passages like L, 21. 36 (D ibid. στήσεται).
4 But also without passive sense ἐπεστάθην D L. 4. 39, 10. 40, Clem. Cor. i. 12. 4; ἀντεστάθην Herm. Mand. xii. 2. 3, mapeor. Sim. viii. 4. 1, and so D ia L. 4. 39, 10. 40 ἐπισταθείς. aby, App. p. 308.
§ 23. 6-8.] VERBS IN -ML SI
-- Τίθημι has, as generally in the Hellenist. language, perf. act. τέθεικα (Jo. 11. 34: Att. -ηκα), perf. mid. τέθειμαι (συντ.) Jo. 9. 22 (pass. in ἣν τεθειμένος Jo. 19. 41 8B for ἐτέθη; in the parallel passage L. 23. 53 ἣν κείμενος according to the Att. usage, which is adhered to else- where in N.T. in the substitution of κεῖσθαι for τεθεῖσθαι).
7. “Inat.—Only found in composition with av-, dd-, (παρ-), Kué-, συν-, and in the case of ἀφ-, συν-ίημι (the only compounds in use in the popular language) with the alternative form in -‘w : in -ίετε, -ίεται the two conjugations coincide. ᾿Αφίημι (so Jo. 14. 27), -ίησι (Mt. 3. 15), -vevac (Mc. 2. 7 ete.); on the other hand -‘opev (so s*ABCDE) in L. 11. 4 (Mt. 6. 12 Ὁ al., but x*B ἀφήκαμεν) ;* 2nd sing. pres. ἀφεῖς (i.e. -ίεις, -tis, cp. § 6, 5, note 2), though in this case there appears in Att. also -vers (and τιθεις) ; impf. ἤφιεν Me. 1. 34, 11. 16; in the passive there is fluctuation between -ίενται, -ίονται, -ewvrat (vide infra). Cp. in Hermas ἀφίησιν Mand. x. 3. 3, τ-ίενται Vis. 11. 2. 4, τίουσιν iii. 7.1. In the case of συνίημι there is only one undisputed instance of the conjugation in -μι: A. 7. 25 συνιέναι: elsewhere Mt. 13. 19 συνιέντος, DF -iovros: L. 24. 45 συνιέναι, B* συνεῖναι ; also cvviw, except in quotations, is never without var. lect.: Mt. 13. 13 συνίουσι (language influenced by O.T.: -ἰωσὶν B** ep. D), (2 C. 10. 12 συνιουσιν [-ιἰᾶσιν x*B, -ἰσασὶν x*]),” R. 3.11 συνίων, O.T. quot. (Barn. 12. το συνίων, but 4. 6, 10. 12 -vevac: Herm. Mand. iv. 2. 1, x. 1. 3 συνίω, iv. 2. 2 συνίει, x 1. 6 συνίουσιν, Sim. ix. 12. 1 σύνιε; in the LXX. the forms from ἀφίω and συνίω are more estab- lished and fairly frequent, W.-Schm. ὃ 14, 10). ᾿Ανίημι, ἀνιέντες HK. 6. 9; καθιέμενος A. 10. 11, 11. 5.—Tenses: N.T. has ἀφῆκαν ete. like ἔθηκαν (4 supra), the perf. -efka never occurs, while συνήκατε Mt. 13. 51, ἀφήκαμεν καὶ ἠκολουθήκαμεν (BCD, al. -ἠσαμεν) Me. 10. 28 may indeed give the impression of being perfects, but are still to be taken as aorists (cp. Mt. 19. 27, L. 18. 28, and with συνήκατε Aristoph. Ach. 101 ξυνήκαθ᾽ ὃ λέγει). The Doric (and Ionic) perf. was ἕωκα, pass. ἕωμαι, and the latter also appears in N.T.: the form ἀφέωνται is to be preferred in Jo. 20. 23 (wrong variants -ίενται, -(ελίονται : δ apeOnoerat), 1 Jo. 2. 12, L. 7. 47f., 5. 20, 23 (also in Mt. 9. 2, 5 against -ίονται D [ς Dx*], -ίενται 8[5 8°]B, Me. 2. 5 [-ἰενται B], 9 [-ce- 8B]). On ἀνέθην, ἀφέθην see § 15, 4.
8. Eipé.—The transition to the inflection of a deponent vb. (seen in ἔσομαι : in mod. Gk. universally carried out) appears in ἤμην Ist pers. (differentiated from ἣν 3rd pers. Lob. Phryn. 152), from which ἥμεθα is also formed Mt. 23. 30, A. 27. 37, E. 2. 3 8B; in 6. 4. 3 ἦμεν in the first instance (all Mss.) with ἤμεθα (8D*FG) following ; elsewhere 7jev.—The 2nd sing. impf. ἦσθα only occurs in Mt. 26. 60, Me. 14. 67 (Euseb. quotes the verse with ἧς), elsewhere it is ἧς (the ter- mination -σιθα occurs nowhere else) as in Hellenistic Gk. (Phryn. 149). The imperat. has beside ἔστω, ἔστωσαν the vulgar form ἤτω Ja. 5. 12, 1 C. 16. 22 (Herm. Vis. iii. 3. 4, Clem. Cor. 1. 48. 5), cp. W.-Schm. § 14, 1.° "Ev (ie. strictly ἔνεστι, evi=ev: ep. πάρα -- πάρεστι) occurs
1 Herm. Sim. ix. 15. 4 has τεθειμένοι in pass. sense, similarly περιτεθειμένα, Clem. Cor. i. 20. 4. abey, App. p. 308.
52 TABLE OF NOTEWORTHY VERBS. [§ 23. 8-10. § 24.
in 1 C. 6. 5, G. 3. 28, Col. 3. 11, Ja. 1. 17, already in the sense of ἐστίν ‘there is,’ which together with εἰσί has been supplanted by this word, now written εἶναι, in modern Greek. W. Schmidt, Atticism. Tiss 21
9. Eip.—In the popular language the verb occurs neither in its simple form nor in composition, ἔρχομαι taking its place, ὃ 24; the compounds only are employed by L. and Hebr. (from the literary language) and not always correctly. Εἰσίασιν H. 9. 6 for Att. εἰσέρ- χονται (εἰσίασιν is fut. in Att.): εἰσιθι B Acts 9. 6 (the other Mss. -ελθε): εἰσιέναι 3. 3, 20. 7, 4 D, 27. 43: partic. L. 8. 4 ( :ελθόντος) D), Acts 13. 42, in aoristic sense 21. 17 in the B text, so aoristic εἰσήει 21. 18, 26, -εσαν 17. 10, 15. (Clem. Cor. i. 24. 3 ἄπεισι ‘departs’ [Att. ‘will depart’], ep. 54. 2: Clem. Hom. 11. 1, 111. 63, (ἐπ)εισιών -- -ελθών.)
10. μαι, κεῖμαι.---Κάθημαι, κάθῃ A. 23. 3 (ep. δύνῃ, supra 3; so already in Hyperides for -σαι), imperat. «aov (already in late Att.) Ja. 2. 3, Mt. 22. 44 etc, and O.T. for σοι Impertf. always ἐκαθήμην ὃ 15,7; fut. καθήσομαι Mt. 19. 28 (ἰσεσθε CD* al.), L. 22. 30 SAB al. Cp. ὃ 24.—Ketyae is regular: also used as perf. pass. of τίθημι as in Att., supra 6.
§ 24. TABLE OF NOTEWORTHY VERBS.
(The prefixing of * indicates that the paradigm embraces several stems.)
᾿Αγαλλιᾶν active L. 1. 47 (Ap. 19. 7, prob. more correctly -ώμεθα Β ; 1 P. 1. 8 -dre only BC*) ; elsewhere deponent with aor. (mid. ? and) pass., § 20. The verb is absent from profane Greek (which has ἀγάλλομαι instead).
᾿Αγγέλλειν, ἠγγέλην constant, § 19, 3.
Αγειν, aor. ἤγαγον and rarely ἦξα, ὃ 19, 1; perf. act. unattested.
(A-yvivat) only in composition καταγν. (as in Att.), pres. impf. unattested : aor. κατέαξαν (Att.) Jo. 19. 32 f., but the use of the augm. is incorrectly extended (§ 15, 2) to the fut. κατεάξει Mt. 12. 20, O.T., and aor. conj. pass. κατεαγῶσιν HGS USE 2h
* Atpetv, aor. εἷλον and -λα, § 21,1: fut. ἑλῶ (late writers, Lxx.) L. 12. 18, 2 Th. 2. 8 (v.1. ἀναλοῖ, vide inf.), Ap. 22. 19 (but mid. αἱρήσομαι, = Att. Ph. 1. 22).
᾿Ακούειν, fut. ἀκούσω and Attic -σομαι, ὃ 18, 3.
᾿Αλήθειν for ἀλεῖν (Phryn. p. 151): only pres. attested (aor. ἤλεσα in LXX.: no other form of the aor. is likely to have existed). Cp. νήθειν.
“Αλλεσθαι, with compounds ἀν-, €£,- ἐῴ-, almost confined to Acts: (Jo. 4. 14, 21. 7 D), Ist aor. ἡλάμην (Lxx.) A. 14. 10 (Jo. 21. 7 D): 2nd aor. ἐφαλόμενος 19. 16 (also 3. 8 ἐξαλόμ. is better than -λὰ- of the Mss.): both forms occur in Att.
“Αμαρτάνειν, fut. ἁμαρτήσω, § 18, 3: Ist aor. ἡμάρτησα along with 2nd aor. ἥμαρτον, ὃ 19, 1.
᾿Αμφιάζειν, -ιέζειν, -εννύναι : see ὃ 17.
᾿Ανᾶλοῦν -- ἀναλίσκειν (both Att., -οῦν also in Lxx., W.-Schm. 8 15): ἀναλοῖ 2 Th. 2. 8 8* Origen (v.1. ἀναλώσει, ἀνελεῖ. Tenses regular: L. 9. 54, G. 5. 15.
(Avray): fut. ἀπαντήσω, συν-, ὃ 18, 3.
᾿Απειλεῖσθαι deponent A. 4. 17, 21 for Att. ἀπειλεῖν (1 P. 2. 23); διαπειλεῖσθαι as depon. is also Att.
᾿Απολογεῖσθαι deponent with pass. (mid.) aor., ὃ 20, 1.
Aprateyv: fut. -άσω, § 18, 3: 2nd aor. pass. -ynv (and Ist aor. -σθὴν Ὁ as in Att.), § 19, 3. ἂν. App. p. 308.
8. 24.] TABLE OF NOTEWORTHY VERBS. 53 Aittev, αὐξάνειν, both forms Att., but in transit. sense ‘increase,’ whereas ‘grow’ is -ομαι. N.T. has -άνω trans. only in 1 C, 3. 6 f., 2C. 9. 10 (Herm. Vis. ili. 4, I αὔξω, i. 1. 6 avijoas). Elsewhere -άνω (and αὔξω : only EK. 2. 21 Col. 2. 19) is used= Att. -oua A. 6. 7 al.: along with -dvouac Mt. 13. 32 (R°D -ἡσῃ), Me. 4. 8 v.1., Epp. Paul. passim, 1 P. 2. 2. Baivew: aor. ἔβην, avaBa, -Bare, ὃ 23, 4.
Βαρεῖν : βεβαρημένος old (βεβ. ηὗδεν Plat. Sympos. 2038) Mt. 26. 43, L. 9. 32 (Mc. 14. 40 var. lect. βεβ., καταβεβ., καταβαρούμενοι, καταβαρυνό- μενοι. Βαρύνω is the ordinary Att. word, but in N.T. besides this passage it only occurs as a ν.]. in L. 21. 34 DH, 2 C. 5. 4 D*FG). Elsewhere in the pass.: 2 C. 1. 8, 5. 4, 1 Tim. 5. 16, L. 21. 34. Also the compounds ἐπιβαρεῖν, καταβ. in St. Paul (καταβ. Herm. Sim. ix. 28. 6, βαροῦντα Clem. Hom. xi. 16). W. Schmidt, Atticism. iii. 187.
Backatvew : aor. -ava,§ 16, 3.
[Βιοῦν] : βιῶσαι 1 P. 4. 2, for Att. -vac (the only form in which this verb occurs: elsewhere ζῆν, cp. inf.).
Βλαστάνειν : pres. conj. -vy Mc. 4. 27 ΒΑΘ al., but BC*DLA Sacra from βλαστᾶν, as Herm. Sim. iv. 1 βλαστῶντα (W.-Schm. ὃ 15): a new Ist aor. -ησα occurs, § 19, 1.
Βλέπειν, ‘to look,’ primarily and in old Greek only of the function of the eye, with no signification of perception: aor. ἔβλεψα (Acts 3. 4) as in Att. (Jo. 9. 39 βλέπωσιν v.1. βλέψωσιν i.e. become possessed of sight, somewhat like ἀναβλέψ., which is so used in Att. as well as in N.T.; cp. βλέψετε A. 28. 26 O.T., also without an object): περιεβλεψάμην Me. 3. 5, ete. With the Hellenistic mean- ing ‘to see’ of perception (for ὁρᾶν, vide inf.) only in pres. and impf. (Προβλέψασθαι -- προϊδέσθαι H. 11. 40, see § 55, 1.)
Βούλεσθαι, ὃ 15, 3: § 21, 7.
Tapetv: also used of the wife (for Att. -εἶσθαι) Mc. 10. 12 (-ηθῇ v.1.), 1 Tim. 5. 11, 14 etc.; elsewhere for the wife N.T. uses -ifec@ac (but aor. -ἤθην 1 C. 7. 39 Ξ ἐγημάμην Att.), for which γαμίσκονται is read Me. 12. 25 E al., L. 20. 34 RBL (ἐκγαμίσκ. E al., ἐκγαμίζ. A al., γαμοῦνται D), 35 B (γαμίξ. XD al., éxyamiGtA al.). The act. γαμίζειν (éxy.) ‘to give to wife’: Mt. 24. 38 (yau. 8D, rell. éxy.), 1 C. 7..38.—Aor. act. éydunoa Mt. 5. 32 al., Herm. Mand. iv. 4 (so τήθην, vide supra), for which the Att. form occurs as a v.1., γήμας Mt. 22. 35 NBL, L. 14. 20 (ἔλαβον D), 1 C. 7. 28 yaunons ... γήμῃ (D*FG γαμῇ).
Γελᾶν, fut. -άσω, ὃ 18, 3.
Τίνεσθαι (never γίγν. as in Att.), aor. ἐγενόμην and -νήθην, ὃ 20.
Τινώσκειν (never yiyv. as in Att.), 2nd aor. conj. yvot and γνῷ, ὃ 23, 4.
Τρηγορεῖν, 8 17 ; cp. ἐγείρειν. Δεῖσθαι, ἐδέετο, ὃ 22, 2. Διακονεῖν, διηκόνουν, ὃ 15, 6. Διδόναι, see ὃ 23, 3 and 4. Διψᾶν, -ᾷς, § 22, 1; διψήσω, § 16, 1. Διώκειν, fut. -Fw, § 18, 3.
Δύνασθαι pres., § 23, 2; augm. 7- or é-, § 15, 3; fut. δυνήσομαι, ὃ 20, 2; aor. ἠδυνήθην (and ἠδυνάσθην Mt. 17. 16 B, Me. 7. 24 8B, Epic and Tonic).
Avew intrans. ‘to set’ E. 4. 26 (Homeric: Att. δύομαι), for which δύνω (Xenoph. and others) occurs in L. 4. 40 (δύσαντος D): aor. ἔδυν, ἔδυσα, § 19, 1 (ἐδύησαν, ὃ 19, 2); ἐνδύνοντες ‘creeping in’ 2 Tim. 3. 6 (ep. Barn. 4. 10). *Evdte trans. ‘to put on’ pres. only in Me. 15. 17 AN, correct reading -διδύσκειν, see ὃ 17: 50 mid. ἐνδιδύσκεσθαι, see ibid.: but tenses as in Att. -éduca, -dunv ete.: similarly ἐκδῦσαι (pres. and impf. unattested).
*Eye(pev ‘raise up’ (‘awake’ is rather διεγείρειν) : intrans. ἔγειρε (not -αι aor. mid.), sc. σεαυτόν Me. 5. 41 etc. (Eurip. Iph. Aul. 624); intrans. -oua ‘rise’ (διεγείρομαι ‘awake’ intrans.), aor. ἠγέρθην, ὃ 20; perf. ἐγήγερται ‘is risen’ Me. 6. 14 8BDL, 1 C. 15. 4 (late writers ; Att. ἐγρήγορα ‘I am awake’ has become γρηγορῶ, § 17).
-BIA -- olSa, § 23, 5: fut. εἰδήσω H. 8. 11 O.T. quot. (Ionic and late=Att. εἴσομαι).
Ἑϊπεῖν, εἴρηκα etc. see λέγειν.
54 TABLE OF NOTEWORTAY VERBS. [8 24.
“ExXeav — ἐλεεῖν, § 22, 2.
ἽἝλκειν, aor. εἵλκῦσα as in Att., fat. ἑλκύσω Jo. 12. 32 (Att. ἕλξω).
“EAkotv : εἱλκωμένος, ὃ 15, 6. Ἔμβριμᾶσθαι -οὖσθαι, § 22,1; aor. 8. 20, 1.
“EpyaterOar: ἠργαζόμην, ἠργασάμην, εἴργασμαι, ὃ 15, 5 and 6.
*"Epxeo8at. In Att. for ‘to come’ ἔρχομαι is used only in the indic., conj. iw, inf. ἐέναι ete., impf. 7a, yew : ‘will come’=eiu. When εἶμι fell out of use (§ 23, 9), ἔρχομαι was employed throughout: ἔρχωμαι, ἠρχόμην etc., fut. ἐλεύσομαι (Epic and Ionic: Phryn. 37). Aor. ἦλθον and perf. ἐλήλυθα as in Att.
* Eo@lev and ἔσθειν (-few as early as Hom., Doric and late writers). The former predominates (as also in LXx.), so without var. lect. Mt. 9. 11, 11. 18 f., 12. rete., R. 14. 2f., 6, 20etc.; but ἔσθητε L. 22. 30 BD*T, ἔσθων Mc. 1.6 8BL*A, 12. 40 B, L. 7. 33 BD, 34 D, 10. 7 BD (elsewhere even Me. and L. have ἐσθίειν in all the mss.). Fut. φάγομαι from aor. ἔφαγον, ὃ 18, 2: 2nd sing. -εσαι, ὃ 21, 7. Pf. βέβρωκα (from the obsolete βιβρώσκω) Jo. 6. 13, aor. pass. βρωθῇ L. 22. 16 D (fut. perf. βρωθήσομαι LXX.); the verb ‘to eat’ thus completed. (The pres. in the popular language was τρώγω, so always in S. John, elsewhere only Mt. 24. 38; see also Herm. Sim. v. 3. 7, Barn. 7. 8, 10. 2, 3.)
"Exe, fut. only ἕξω, ὃ 14, 1; similarly ἀνέχεσθαι has only ἀνέξομαι : impf. and aor. averx., avecx., ὃ 15, 7.
Ζῆν, fut. ζήσω and -oua, ὃ 18, 3: aor. ἔζησα A. 26. 5, Herm. Sim. viii. 9. 1, for which in Att. ἐβίων was introduced as a supplementary form (ep. sup. βιοῦν) : perf. unattested. (Impf. Ist sing. ἔζην, των, § 22, 1.)
Zovvivat, perf. pass. and mid. περιεζωσμένος (Att. without σὴ) L.12. 35 al.
Hew: 3rd. plur. ἥκασιν Me. 8. 3 RADN (al. ἥκουσιν, B εἰσίν), ep. Clem. Cor. i. 12. 2. The transition of this verb of perfect meaning to the inflection of the perfect tense is found also in Lxx. and other late writings, W.-Schm. §$ 13,2: Kiihner I. ii.° 488 : W. Schmidt, Jos. elocut. 470.
‘“Hocotcba, 2 C. 12. 13 ΣΣ ΒΒ ἡσσώθητε (Ionic ἑσσοῦσθαι), with v.1. ἡττήθητε (the Attic form [literary lang.] as in 2 P. 2. 19 f. ἥττηται, ἡττῶνται, and even ἥττημα in ὃ. Paul), FG in 2 Ὁ. Joe. cit. ἠλαττώθητε, ep. Jo. 3. 30 (literary lang.).
(Θάλλειν), aor. ἀνέθαλον, § 19, 1 (no other form attested) ; ἀναθάλλω (intrans. ) Clem. Cor. i. 36. 2.
Θαυμάζειν (-εσθαι depon.), aor. ἐθαύμασα and -άσθην, fut. (θαυμάσομαι), -ασθή- σομαι, ὃ 18, 3: 8 20, 1.
Θεᾶσθαι, see θεωρεῖν.
Θέλειν not (as in Att.) ἐθέλειν, the ordinary word of the popular language for ‘will’ (so mod. Gk.): beside it is found βούλεσθαι (literary lang.) without distinction of meaning, rare in the Gospels, and not often in the Epistles, frequent only in the Acts.—Augm. always 7-, § 15, 3 (perfect unattested).
*@Ocwpeiv, generally defective, only pres. and impf. being used, but fut. Jo. 7. 3, aor. Mt. 28. 1, L. 8, 35 D, 23. 48 SBCD al., Jo. 8. 51 (-cec 8), Ap. 11. 12; elsewhere the tenses of θεᾶσθαι (pres. impf. wanting) are used : aor. -ασάμην, perf. τεθέαμαι, aor. pass. ἐθεάθην.
‘TAdoeoOar, mid. (Att.) H. 2. 17; ἱλάσθητι ‘be merciful’ L. 18. 13, ep. ἐξιλασθέν ‘expiated’ Plat. Legg. 862 C.
Ioravew (ἱστᾶν), ἴστασθαι, § 23, 2, 4, 5, 6.
ΚΚαθαρίζειν ‘to cleanse,’ vulgar form for Att. καθαίρειν (Jo. 15. 2 D correctly καθαριεῖ, cp. H. 10. 2; κεκαθαρμένων is found in Herm. Sim. ix. 18. 3). In compounds the simpler form is more attested : διακαθᾶραι L. 3. 17 8*B (for καὶ διακαθαριεῖ), ἐκκαθάρατε 1 C. 5. 7, ἐκκαθάρῃ 2 Tim. 2. 21.
Καθέζεσθαι, καθίζειν, καθῆσθαι. In Attic ἐκαθεζόμην aor. = ‘I seated myself,” καθίζω “1 seat’ trans. and also intrans. “1 seat myself,’ which is elsewhere ex- pressed by -ifowar: κάθημαι “1 sit’ (in perfect sense). In the N.T. ‘I set’ or ‘seat’ is καθίζω, aor. -ἰσα (as in Att.): ‘I seated myself’ = ἐκάθισα (not mid.), so that the sense of Jo. 19. 13 is extremely doubtful: there is also a perf. κεκάθικεν (intrans.) H. 12. 2 (the present only appears in trans. sense: for fut. vide inf.) ; aor. ἐκαθέσθην from καθέζομαι (Phryn. 269) only in L. 10. 39 RABC*
§ 24. ] TABLE OF NOTEWORTHY VERBS. 55
al., -icaca C®DP etc.; ‘sit’ is κάθημαι (in the majority of cases) and καθέζομαι (vare): ἐκαθέζετο impf. ‘sat’ (‘had seated himself’) Jo. 4. 6, 11. 20, for which ἐκάθητο occurs elsewhere, as in Mt. 13. 1; καθεζόμενος = καθήμ. A. 6. 15 (Ὁ -ἡμενοι) ete.; fut. καθήσομαι Mt. 19. 28 (-ἰσεσθε ΟἹ)" al.), L. 22. 30 RAB? al. (-ἰσεσθε EF, but B* κάθησθε conj., D καθέζησθε) for Attic καθεδοῦμαι. The 2nd pers. of κάθημαι is κάθῃ, ὃ 23, 10: imperat. κάθου ibid. (‘sit’= ‘seat thyself’ Mt. 22. 44 O.T., Ja. 2. 3).
Katey: aor. and fut. pass. § 19, 3. Καλεῖν : fut. καλέσω, 8 18, 1.
(Κεραννύναι), perf. pass. κεκέρασμαι (late; Att. κέκρᾶμαι) H. 4. 2 (RABCD*), Ap. 14. το.
KepSatvey (pres. and impf. unattested), aor. ἐκέρδησα as if from κερδέω (Ionic and late writers) Mt. 16. 26 and passim ; but κερδάνω (§ 16, 3) 1 C. 9. 21 R* ABC al. (R°DE al. κερδήσω, as also four times in the same chap. ver. 19, 20, 22); a corresponding fut. pass. κερδηθήσονται occurs 1 P. 3. 1. There is fluctuation also in Josephus between the Attic and the vulgar forms, W. Schmidt, de Jos. elocut. 451, 459.
Καλαίειν, fut. κλαύσω, ὃ 18, 3.
Κλείειν, perf. pass. κέκλεισμαι for -euar, § 16, 1.
Κλίνειν, aor. and fut. pass. ἐκλίθην, κλιθήσομαι, ὃ 19, 3.
Kpatew, the pres. rare in Att. (which uses xéxpaya instead) is often in N.T., on the other hand xéxpaya is only used in Jo. 1. 15 (see ὃ ὅθ, 5): fut. κράξω (κεκράξομαι), § 18, 3: aor. ἐκέκραξα (LXX., from xéxpaya) only A. 24. 21 SABC.
Kolvew : ἀποκρίνομαι, ὑποκρίνομαι, aor. and fut. § 20, 1.
ἹΚρύβειν, aor. pass. ἐκρύβην, ὃ 19, 3.
(Κ τείνειν) : only in compound ἀποκτείνω and -é(v)w, § 17; aor. pass. ἀπε- κτάνθην (late) Mc. 9. 31 al. = Att. ἀπέθανον.
(Kvetv, κύειν) ἀποκυεῖ (- κύει) Ja. 1. 15, -ὕησεν 1. 18 (from κύω we have ἐκύομεν in Lxx., W.-Schm. 8 15).
ἸΚυλΐειν (already in Att.; older form -ἰνδω) Me. 9. 20, fut. -tow Me. 16. 3, aor. act. ἐκύλισα, perf. pass. κεκύλισμαι as in Att.
Λακεῖν ‘to burst’: ἐλάκησεν A. 1. 18 (ep. Acts of Thomas, ὃ 33) as in Aristoph. Nub. 410 διαλακήσασα : elsewhere unknown: to be distinguished from Adoxw ‘sound’ (aor. ἔλακον).
“Λαμβάνειν, fut. λήμψομαι, aor. pass. ἐλήμφθην (λῆμψις Ph. 4. 15, ἀνάλημψις L. 9. 51: προσωπολήμπτηΞ) as in other Hellenistic writings, ὃ 6, 8. (The later Mss. restore the Attic form by omitting the μ, and even in the N.T. Apocryphal writings practically no trace of these forms remains: Reinhold, de graecit. patr. apost. etc., p. 46f.)
(Aéyew ‘to collect’): only in συλλέγω, -ξα, ἐκλελεγμένος (Att. usually ἐξειλεγμ.) L. 9. 35.
*Aéyev ‘to say’: Att. λέξω, ἔλεξα etc.; but in N.T. defective (the be- ginning of this defective state reaches back into Attic times, Miller, Amer. Journ. of Philol. xvi. 162) with only pres. and impf.; the remaining tenses being aor. εἶπον, -a (§ 21, 1), fut. ἐρῶ, perf. εἴρηκα, aor. pass. ἐρρέθην, ῥηθῆναι, § 16, 1, perf. εἴρημαι. (Still λέγειν and εἰπεῖν were felt to be separate verbs, otherwise we should not find these combinations: τοῦτο εἰπὼν λέγει Jo. 21. 19, εἶπεν λέγων L, 12. 25, 20. 2.) But διαλέγομαι, διελέχθην as in Att. (Me. 9. 34), see § 20, 1.
Actray: (class.) with alternative form λιμπάνειν, διελίμπανεν Acts 8. 24 D, 17. 13 D, ὑπολιμπάνειν 1 P. 2. 21, ἐγκαταλιμπανόμενοι FG Euseb. Chrys. in
2 Ὁ. 4. 9 (also Lxx.); Ist aor. ἔλειψα occurs occasionally instead of ἔλιπον, § 19, 1.
Aovew, λέλουμαι, § 16, 1.
(Μέλειν) ἐπιμελοῦμαι (LXX.) or -ouac (both Attic forms) not represented : fut. -jooua, § 20, 2: μεταμέλομαι (the only Att. form) 2 C. 7. 8, aor. -ἤθην (not attested in Att.) Mt. 21. 29 etc., fut. -ηθήσομαι H. 7. 21 O.T. quot.
Μέάλλειν : ἔμελλον and ἤμελλον, § 15, 3. Μιαίνειν : μεμίαμμαι, ὃ 16, 3.
56 TABLE OF NOTEWORTHY VERBS, [8 24.
Μνηστεύειν : perf. pass. μεμνήστευμαι V1, § 15, 6.
Νήθειν ‘to spin’ for νῆν (Ionic and late), the constant N.T. form, ep. ἀλήθειν.
Νίπτειν for νίζειν, ὃ 17.
(Ξυρεῖν), pres. unattested: aor. mid. ξύρασθαι as if from ξύρειν (not ξυρᾶσθαι pres.) 1 C. 11. 6 and ξυρήσασθαι A. 21. 24 (both forms unattested in Att.), but in Acts D* has ξύρωνται, NB*D°EP ξυρήσονται : perf. ἐξύρημαι (Att.) 1 C. 11. 5.
(Οἴγειν) ἀνοίγειν (never -γνύναι) : the augment is always in the α in the comp. διανοίγειν, διηνοίχθησαν L. 24. 31, διήνοιγεν 32 etc.; also in the simple vb. con- stantly in the 2nd aor. pass. ἠνοίγην A. 12. τὸ (-χθη E al.), which is a new formation ; in the other forms (the impf. is only attested for diay.) the old syllabic augm. is still strongly represented: Ist aor. act. ἀνέῳξα Jo. 9. 14 (ἠνέῳξεν LX, ἤνοιξεν D), 17 ἤνοίξεν RAD al., BX ἠνέῳξ., KL avéwé., similarly ver. 32: in verses 21, 26, 30 B also has ἤνοιξεν, and this form deserves prefer- ence (cp. A. 5. 19, 9. 40, 12. 14, 14. 27, Ap. 6. 1, 3 etc.) ;—perf. (intrans. as in late writers) dvéwya Jo. 1. 52 (ἠνεῳγότα 8), 1 C. 16. 9, 2 C. 6. 11, elsewhere ἀνέῳγμαι as in Att. R. 3. 13 O.T. quot., 2 C. 2. 12 (ἠνεῳγμ. DEP), A. 10. 11 (jve. E), 16. 27: Ap. 4. 1 B, but RAP 7jve., similarly 10. 1, 8, 19. 11 (3. 8 ἀν. ABC) ;—Ist aor. pass. ἀνεῴχθην Mt. 3. 16 (jve. B), 9. 30 (ἦνε. BD), 27. 52, L. 1. 64 ete.: ἠνεῷχθ. Jo. 9. 10 with preponderant evidence (ἀν. AK al.): Acts 16. 26 ἠνοίχθ. SAE, ἠνεῴχθ. BCD, ave. HLP: there is diversity of reading also in Ap. 20. 12. Infin. ἀνεῳχθῆναι L. 3. 21 (-νοι- only D), ep. supra ἀγνύναι, § 15,2. On Ist and 2nd aor. (ἠνοίγην) and fut. -γήσομαι (-χθήσ-) see ἃ 19, 3.
Οἰκτίρειν (so to be spelt for -είρειν), fut. οἰκτιρήσω R. 9. 15 O.T. quot. (late).
(Ὀλλύναι) ἀπολλ., § 23, 1: fut. ἀπολέσω as also in Herm. Sim. viii. 7. 5 (=Att. ἀπολῶ 1 C. 1. 19 O.T. quot., so nearly always in Lxx.): but fut. pass. ἀπολοῦμαι L. 13. 3 ete.
**Opay is still more defective than in Attic, since even the pres. and impf. are rare (being confined to the literary language): the popular language replaced them by means of βλέπειν and θεωρεῖν. (Kxceptions: ὅρα, ὁρᾶτε, cave, -ete Mt. 8. 4 etc. [but βλέπετε is also used in this sense A. 13. 40 etc.]: also L. 16: 23, 23: 49, A: 8. 23?, ΕἸ 11. 27, 1}. 1 δ. Ja. 2) 245 ΓΆΡ. Sires “0. 6 5 Me. 8. 24]: in composition H. 12. 2, A. 2. 25 O.T., R. 1. 20; pres. and impf. are rare also in Hermas: Vis. iii. 2. 4, 8. 9, Mand. vi. 2. 4: Barn. ὁρᾶτε 15. 8). The perf. is still always ἑόρακα (ἑώρ.), § 15, 6: aor. εἶδον (-a, § 21, 1): fut. ὄψομαι : aor. pass. ὥφθην apparui, fut. ὀφθήσομαι (perf. ὦπται Herm. Vis. iii. 1. 28). In addition a new present form is created ὀπτάνομαι A. 1. (Lxx.; Papyr. Louvre notices et extr. de Mss. xviii. 2, no. 49 according to the facsimile).
Ὀρύσσειν aor. pass. § 19, 3.
Παίζειν, παίξω etc., § 16, 2; 8 18, 3. Tlavew, ἀναπαήσομαι, § 20, 1.
Πείθειν, aor. pass. ἐπείσθην, fut. πεισθήσομαι L. 16. 31 (πιστεύσουσιν ΤΠ).
Tlewav, -as etc., ὃ 22, 1: aor. ἐπείνασα, ὃ 16, 1.
Πειράζειν ‘to tempt’ or ‘try any one’ (Hom., and late writers) always for Att. πειρᾶν ; also for ‘to attempt anything ’= Att. πειρᾶσθαι A. 24. 6 al. (πειρᾶσθαι A. 26. 21 speech of Paul before Agrippa).
Πιάζειν, Πιέζειν. The latter=‘to press’ as in Att. L. 6. 38 (but in Lxx. the a form is used even in this sense, ἐξεπίασεν ‘ pressed out’ Jd. 6. 38); the former is confined to the common language = ‘ to lay hands on’ (mod. Gk. πιάνω), aor. érlaca, ἐπιάσθην (John, Acts, once even in St. Paul, Apoc.).
Πιμπλᾶν for -άναι, § 23, 2.
IItvew, fut. πίομαι, πίεσαι, § 21, 7; aor. ἔπιον, imper. mie L. 12. 19 (Att. also πῖθι), infin. contracted to πεῖν, wiv (§ 6, 5) Mt. 27. 34 8*D, Me. 10. 38 D, 15. 23 D, Jo. 4. 7 8*B*C*DL, cp. ibid. 9, 10 etc. (Anthol. Pal. xi. 140 in verse: papyri in W. Schmidt, Gtg. Gel. Anz. 1895, 40.)
*Tlurpdokeww, in Hellenistic Gk. conjugated in full with the exception of fut. and aor. act. (so impf. act. ἐπίπρασκον A. 2. 45). In Attic it is only in the pass. that the conjugation is fairly complete: the act. has perf. πέπρακα (Mt. 13. 46: Ὁ ἐπώλησεν), but in the other tenses πωλεῖν and ἀποδίδοσθαι
§ 24.] TABLE OF NOTEWORTHY VERBS. 57 are used. The N.T. employs the aorist of the latter of these two verbs (A. 5. 8, 7. 9, H. 12. 16), from the former we have πωλῶ, ἐπώλουν, ἐπώλησα, πωλοῦμαι pass. (all used in Att. as well): in addition to these πέπραμαι R. 7. 14, ἐπράθην Mt. 18. 25 ete.
Tltrreav, ἔπεσον, and more frequently ἔπεσα, ὃ 21, 1.
ἸΠοθεῖν, aor. ἐπόθησα, ὃ 16, 1.
Ῥαίνειν, pavritev. For reduplication, § 15, 6.
ἹῬεῖν, fut. pevow, § 18, 3 (Attic has pres. fut. pevicouat, aoristic fut. ῥυήσομαι).
“Pnyvivar in the pass. Mt. 9. 17, L. 5. 6 A al.: for which ῥήσσειν (-rrew, late writers) appears in Mt. 9. 17 D, L. 5. 6 SBL, Me. 2. 22 AT al., ν.]. ῥήξει ; aor. ἔρρηξα ; the old epic word ῥήσσειν -- τύπτειν, cp. the Attic (and LXx.) ῥάττειν ‘to dash down’ Demosth. 54. 8 is found with the latter meaning in Me. 9. 18 (ῥάσσει D), L. 9. 42, Lxx. Sap. 4. 19: Hermas, Mand. xi. 2 patac as). To this word also belongs προσέρηξεν = προσέβαλε L. 6. 48.
“Ῥίπτειν and ῥιπτεῖν, Att., in the N.T. the present stem only occurs in A. 22. 23, -ούντων (-όντων DEHL) cp. ép(p)irrow Herm. Vis. iii. 5. 5: perf. ῥέριμμαι, ἃ 15, 6.
“Ῥύεσθαι ‘to save’ (Epic, Ionic, and late writers) with aor. mid. ἐρ(ρ)υσάμην and aor, pass. ἐρ(ρ)ύσθην (late) L. 1. 74 ete.
Σαλπίζειν, σαλπίσω etc., ὃ 16, 2.
Σημαίνειν, ἐσήμανα, § 16, 3.
*Zoreiv, σκέψασθαι in Attic form one verb, since only pres. and impf. of σκοπεῖν are found, and from oxéy. the forms -πτομαι, ἐσκεπτόμην are absent. In N.T. σκοπεῖν is used as in Att., σκέψ. never: while ἐπισκέπτεσθαι is found in the pres. = ‘ to visit’ (H. 2. 6, Ja. 1. 27); ἐπισκοπεῖν Ξ- to take care’ H. 12. 15 (ἐπι- σκέπτεσθαι ‘to inspect’ Clem. Cor. i. 25. 5; συνεσκέπτοντο Ey. Petr. 43).
Σπουδάζειν, fut. -cw, ὃ 18, 35.
Στηρίζειν, tenses, ὃ 16, 2.
Urpevvvey (not cropevy., which appears first in late scholiasts), § 23, 1.
Σῴζειν (c adscript, 8 3, 3): like ἐσώθην (ἐσαώθην, cadw) the perf. σέσωται is still found Acts 4. 9 8A (v.1. -σται), but σεσωσμένοι E. 2. 5 all Mss., and in v. 8 only P has the Att. form -ωμένοι.
Taocew, ἐτάγην, together with ἐτάχθην, § 19, 3.
Τελεῖν, fut. τελέσω, ὃ 18, 1.
Tikrew, ἐτέχθην, ὃ 19, 3.
Tvyxdavew: the Hellenistic perf. is rérevya for Att. τετύχηκα, Phryn. 395: so H. 8. 6 τέτευχεν 8°BD‘E (v.1. τετύχηκεν P, τέτυχε male R*AD* KL, a form which