SPECIMEN OF WINER'S GRAMMAR OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 1. Two peculiarities distinguish the style of the N. T. from Greek prose, or, in fact, from the diction of early Greek authors in general, in regard to the use of pronouns. a. The N. T. writers, for the sake of force or emphasis, employ personal and demonstrative pronouns more frequently than the early Greek authors (§ 22.). b. Like the later native Greeks themselves, they dispensed with many formsὅστις, ὁπόσος, ὁποῖος, πηλίκος, in indirect discourse, for instance-which contributed rather to mere elegancy of language than to clearness and strength of expression, and which, in the composition of Orientals, were not felt to be necessary. Of such Greek idioms as serve to condense discourse (attraction, for instance), the N. T. writers made even very frequent use (§ 24.). It has been erroneously asserted that aurós in the N. T. is merely equivalent to unemphatic he. It should, further, be observed that the Hebraistic use of où Tas for oudeis occurs almost exclusively in sentential quotations, or set forms of expression. 2. Pronouns, whether personal, demonstrative, or relative, not unfrequently take a different gender from the nouns to which they refer. This is called constructio ad sensum, the meaning, and not the grammatical gender of the word, being mainly considered. It is used particularly when some animate object is denoted by a Neuter or an abstract Feminine noun. The pronoun is then made to agree grammatically with the object in question, as: Mt. xxviii. 19. μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, βαπτίζοντες αὐτούς (comp. Ex. xxiii. 27. Dt. iv. 27. xviii. 14. etc.), Rom. ii. 14. Acts xv. 17. xxvi. 17. Gal. iv. 19. τεκνία μου, οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω, 2 Jo. 1. (similar in Eurip. Suppl. 12. iπrà yevvaiwv réxvwv, oüs, Aristoph. Plut, xxiii. 3. ἀνέστη ̓Αβραὰμ ἀπὸ τοῦ νεκροῦ αὐτοῦ - - 4. θάψω τὸν vexρóv μov (v. 15.), though Sarah is meant ; nor in the story of Susann. 61. ἐποίησαν αὐτοῖς ὃν τρόπον ἐπονηρεύσαντο τῷ πλησίον, though the reference is to Susanna. Similar in Soph. Antig. 830. φθιμένῳ (vulg. φθιμένα) τοῖς ἰσοθεοῖς ἔγκληρα λαχεῖν μέγα. In Greek a corpse is always o vɛzpós, and never in the Feminine. See, further, Hm. Soph. Antig. p. 114. 176. Note 1. In Rom. xi. 4. containing a quotation from the Old Test. (1 Kings xix. 18.) we find Baάλ (Hos. ii. 8. Zeph. i. 4.) probably with no secondary contemptuous meaning, as the Feminine names of false gods are said to be used in Arabic and in the Talmud (?). See Gesen. in Rosenm. Repertor. and Tholuck in loc., and, on the other hand, Fr. Rom. II. 442. But Paul, quoting from memory, might easily write Baά, as he had occasionally found it in the Sept. (yet the Codd. vary), though in this very passage the Sept. has T Baan. Rückert in loc. is, as often elsewhere, mistaken. Besides, it was matter of indifference whether Baal was regarded as a male or a female false deity. Theile tries to explain from the usage of the Sept. poranides in the general address in Jas. iv. 4.; but see, on the other hand, de Wette. The omission of the words. porxo xai has no decisive authority in its favour; and it would be carrying reverence for the (other) principal Codd. too far, never to admit an error of a transcriber in the concurrence of similar words. Note 2. A noun of any gender, taken merely as a word, is used, as all know, with the Neut. Article, as: Gal. iv. 25. To "Ayap, the (word) Agar. On the other hand, the Fem. may appear to be used for the Neut. in ovaí Rev. ix. 12. xi. 14. Probably, however, the writer had in his mind some such word as θλίψις or ταλαιπωρία. Note 3. As to the adverbial use of a Fem. adjective, as: idia, xar' idiar etc., see § 54. SECTION XXVIII. OF THE CASES IN GENERAL. 1. Foreigners found no difficulty in comprehending, generally, the respective import of the Greek cases (Hm. de emend. rat. I. 137 sqq. Bhdy p. 74 ff.). Even the Jews were able, without inflexions, 1 A monographia was published at Erlang. 1831. 8. by J. A. Hartung on the Cases, their formation and import, in the Greek and Latin languages. (See also Rumpel on the Greek Cases. Halle 1845. 8.) SPECIMEN OF WINER'S GRAMMAR OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. T. & T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET, EDINBURGH. SECT. XXIX.] NOMINATIVE AND VOCATIVE. 197 (mutari) in aliq. (Acts v. 36. Jo. xvi. 20. Rev. viii. 11.), is good Greek (Georgi Vind. 337. Schwarz Comment. 285.), and is used, by the later authors at least, even in reference to persons (Geo. Pachymer. I. 345. eis ovμμáxous autois VívovTαI). Besides, in the Hebrew expression equivalent to siva siç r, the does not properly express the Nom., but corresponds to the German zu etwas (dienen, gereichen), for something (serve), see Heb. viii. 10. 1 Cor. xiv. 22., comp. Wisd. ii. 14. Acta apocr. 169. In 1 Cor. iv. 3. suoi sis λáxiσTÓ ÉσTV signifies, to me (for me) is the least, the most unimportant (I count it a very small matter). Eis ouder Roy1odñvai Acts xix. 27. is similar: set at nought (Wisd. ix. 6.). In Luke ii. 34. ZEITαι Eis TTo the preposition indicates the destination, and is used in accordance with Greek analogy, see Ph. i. 17. (16.) 1 Th. iii. 3., comp. Aesop. 24, 2. εἰς μείζονά σοι ὠφέλειαν ἔσομαι, and the Latin auxilio esse (Zumpt Gr. p. 549.). See, further, § 32, 4. b. In the same way, the phrases with in the following passages are imitations of the Hebrew Beth essentiae (Gesen. Lgb. 838.): Mr. v. 25. γυνή τις οὖσα ἐν ῥύσει αἵματος, Rev. i. 10. ἐγενόμην ἐν πνεύματι ἐν τῇ κυριακῇ ἡμέρᾳ (Glass. I. 31.), Eph. v. 9. ὁ καρπὸς τοῦ φωτὸς ἐν πάση αγαθωσύνη (Hartmann linguist. Einl. 384.), and Jo. ix. 30. È TOUTY DavμασTÓν 07 (Schleusner under ¿). But, in the first passage, siva v p. is to be in the state of, etc. In the second, γίνεσθαι ἐν πνεύματι is to be anywhere in the spirit. In the third, sivas v means contineri, positum esse in (see the Expositors). The last passage may be appropriately rendered: Herein that (this) is marvellous, etc. Gesenius has even attributed this Hebraistic construction to Greek and Latin writers, but unwarrantably; for εivas v σopois, in magnis viris (habendum) esse, contains nothing anomalous, but is quite a natural combination, and to be rendered, be among, belong to the number of. There could be no Beth essentiae in the use of and in, unless the meaning were, v oop, in sapienti viro, for oopós, sapiens. But this will not be maintained by any reasonable man. In fact, the Hebraistic Beth essentiae construction is a pure grammatical figment. See Winer's edition of Simon. p. 109. and Fr. p. 291 sq. The examples adduced by Haab (p. 337.) are so palpably preposterous, that any attempt to prove their absurdity would be a mere waste of time. 1 Quite different from the expression χρήματα εἰς ἀργύριον λογίζεσθαι Xen. C. 3, 1, 33. 2 With the entirely misunderstood, Exod. xxxii. 22. comp. Ael. 10, 11. ἀποθανεῖν ἐν καλῷ ἐστιν. Should this too be taken for καλόν ἐστιν ? * [Probably the true reading is, ἓν γὰρ τοῦτο θαυμαστόν ἐστιν, ὅτι etc. = this one thing is marvellous. At the date of the earliest MSS. in existence, Touro and iv TOUT were, except as regards the accent, pronounced exactly alike, as is the case in Greece at the present day. Transcribers, writing to dictation, might easily have taken the one for the other. Comp. in Jo. ix. 25. Ph. iii. 13. 2 Pet, iii. 8.-TR.] Whether the phrase εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ is to be taken for the Subjective Genitive (the Gospel made known by Christ), or the Objective (the Gospel regarding Christ), may be doubted. For my part, I prefer the latter acceptation, as in various passages we find the entire expression εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ (e.g. Rom. i. 3.), of which the other is but an abridgment. Comp. also εὐαγγέλιον τῆς χάριτος τοῦ θεοῦ Acts xx. 24. and εὐαγγέλιον τῆς Bacinelas Tou Deo Mt. iv. 23. ix. 35. Mey. on Mr. i. 1. but half explains his view. Likewise on Col. ii. 18. expositors are not agreed about the Subjective or the Objective meaning of the Genitive. The latter is the preferable: worship paid to angels. Comp. Euseb. H. Ε. 6, 41. θρησκεία τῶν δαιμόνων (Var.), Philo J. 259. πρ. θεῶν (ἡ TOU DEOD λarpeía Plat. Apol. 23 c.). In 1 Tim. iv. 1. dapovíav is undoubtedly a Subjective Genitive. But in βαπτισμῶν διδαχῆς Heb. vi. 2., if the latter be considered the principal noun (see below 3. note 4.), BaTTIOμ. can only be the object of the didaxn. In Rom. viii. 23. άTOKUTρWσis Tou σwatos, according to Paul's teaching, appears rather to signify liberation of the body (from that δουλεία τῆς φθορᾶς v. 21.) than liberation from the body. Likewise in Heb. i. 3. 2 Pet. i. 9. καθαρισμὸς τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν might denote purification from sins (removal of sins, comp. Dt. xix. 3.), as we say xadapiLovraι ai ἁμαρτίαι (comp. καθαίρειν αἷμα to remove by purification, Iliad 16, 667.); but it is simpler to take rav άaprav as an Objective Genitive. In Rom. ii. 7. ὑπομονὴ ἔργου ἀγαθοῦ, 1 Th. i. 3. ὑποporn Tñç iλídos, is simply: perseverance in well-doing, perseverance in hope. In Jas. ii. 4. there is clearly a question indicating indignation: would ye not in this be judges of evil thoughts (your own)? 2. The Genitive is employed likewise to denote still more remote relations of dependence. Comp. Jacob. Lucian. Alex. p. 108 sq. Stallb. Plat. Tim. p. 241 sq. Bhdy 160. a. The Genitive expresses relations entirely external-of place or time, as: Mt. x. 5. óòòs Dvav the way to the heathen (Heb. ix. 8. comp. Gen. iii. 24. ý odds Tou žúλou rns Sans, Jer. ii. 18. Judith v. 14.'), Jo. x. 7. Dúρα тãν πроßάтwν door to the sheep (Mey.), Mt. i. 11. 12. peroinecía Baßuhavos carrying away (emigration) to Babylon (Orph. 200. éπì πλóov Ažeívoso ad expeditionem in Axinum, 144. VOOTOS Oïxolo domum reditus, Eurip. Iph. T. 1066. comp. Schaef. Melet. p. 90. Seidler Eurip. Electr. 161. Spohn Isocr. Paneg. p. 2. Bttm. Soph. Philoct. p. 67.), Jo. vii. 35. † diaoπopà Tv 'EXλvwv the dispersion (the dispersed) among the Greeks, Mr. viii. 27. xãμas Karoapeías rñs Piníoν the towns (villages) about 1 But Mt. iv. 15. odos anάoons undoubtedly way by the sea (of Tiberias). 2 Vice versa Plat. Apol. 40 c. μετοίκησις τῆς ψυχῆς τοῦ τόπου τοῦ ἐνθένδε (from this place). 37 |