|« Prev||Case||Next »|
50. Nominative for Vocative. a. The use of the nominative for the vocative was a colloquialism in classical Greek. It occurs in Plato, and is common in Aristophanes and Lucian. When so employed, the nominative usually has the article. As in Hebrew the vocative is regularly expressed by the nominative with the article, it is not surprising that the LXX translators should often avail themselves of this turn of speech.
For an instance of the nominative without the article standing for the vocative take -
Baruch 4:5 θαρσεῖτε, λαός μου.
The nominative, when thus employed, is often put in apposition with a vocative, as -
3 K. [2 Kings} 17:20 Κύριε, ὁ μάρτυς τῆς χήρας, 17:21 Κύριε, ὁ Θεός μου.
b. In the N.T. also the nominative with the article is often put for the vocative.
Mt. 11:26 ναί, ὁ πατήρ. Lk. 8:54 ἡ παῖς, ἐγείρου. Mk. 9:25 τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἄλαλον . . . ἔξελθε. Lk. 6:25 οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, οἱ ἐμπεπλησμένοι νῦν. Col. 3:18 αἱ γυναῖκες, ὑποτάσσεσθε. Eph. 6:1, Col. 3:20 τὰ τέκνα, ὑπακούετε.
The use of the nominative without the article for the vocative is rare in the N.T., as it is also in the LXX. In Lk. 12:20 and 1 Cor. 15:36 we find ἄφρων put for ἄφρον, and in Acts 7:42 οἶκος Ἰσραήλ does duty as vocative.
As instances of apposition of nominative with vocative we may take --
In Rev. 18:20 we have vocative and nominative conjoined --
οὐρανέ, καὶ οἱ ἅγιοι.
51. Nominative Absolute. Occasionally we
get a construction in the LXX, which can be described only by this name.
Nb. 22:24 καὶ ἔστη ὁ ἄγγελος τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐν ταῖς αὔλαξιν τῶν ἀμπέλων, φραγμὸς ἐντεῦθεν καὶ φραγμὸς ἐντεῦθεν.
Nb. 24:4 ὅστις ὅρασιν θεοῦ εἶδεν, ἐν ὕπνῳ, ἀποκεκαλυμμένοι οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ αὐτοῦ.
As this construction arises out of a literal following of the Hebrew, it would be superfluous to adduce Greek parallels. Like effects might be found, but the cause would be different.
52. Nominative of Reference. What is meant by this term will be best understood from the examples -
Job 28:7 τρίβος, οὐκ ἔγνω αὐτὴν πετεινόν.
Ps. 102:15 ἄνθρωπος, ὥσει χόρτος αἱ ἡμέραι αὐτοῦ.
To throw out the subject of discourse first, and then proceed to speak about it, is a Hebraism, but at the same time it is a common resource of language generally.
So in N.T. --
Acts. 7:40 ὁ γὰρ Μωσῆς οὗτος . . . οὐκ οἴδαμεν τί ἐγένετο αὐτῷ.
Rev. 3:12 ὁ νικῶν, ποιήσω αὐτὸν στῦλον ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ Θεοῦ μου.
53. Nominativus Pendens. The nominative
which is left without a verb owing to a sudden change of construction is a
familiar feature in classical Greek, especially if this be at all colloquial.
It is not however very common in the LXX.
Dan. Ο´ 7:15 καὶ ἀκηδιάσας ἐγὼ . . . ἐτάρασσόν με.
Such cases can generally be explained on the principle of construction according to the sense.
It is seldom that we meet with so violent an anacoluthon as the following in the N.T. --
Mk. 9:20 καὶ ἰδὼν αὐτόν, τὸ πνεῦμα εὐθὺς συνεσπάραξεν αὐτόν.
54. Accusative for Vocative. The accusative
for vocative might seem an impossibility, yet here is an instance of it.
Ps. 51:6 ἠγάπησας πάντα τὰ ῥήματα καταποντίσμου, γλῶσσαν δολίαν.
55. Accusative of Time When. In connexion
with classical Greek we think of Time When as being expressed by the genitive
or dative, rather than by the accusative, though the latter also is used. The
employment of the accusative became more frequent after the classical period,
and alone survives in the modern language.
Gen. 43:16 μετ’ ἐμοῦ γὰρ φάγονται οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἄρτους τὴν μεσημβρίαν.
Ex. 9:18 ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ὕω ταύτην τὴν ὥραν αὔριον χάλαζαν.
Dan. Θ 9:21 ὡσεὶ ὥραν θυσίας ἑσπερινῆς (Ο´ has ἐν ὥρᾳ).
So also sometimes in N.T. --
Jn. 4:52 χθὲς ὥραν ἑβδόμην ἀφῆκεν αὐτὸν ὁ πυρετός.
Rev. 3:3 καὶ οὐ μὴ γνῷς ποίαν ὥραν ἥξω ἐπί σε.
56. Cognate Accusative. a. By a Cognate
Accusative is here meant that particular form of the Figura Etymologica in
which a verb is followed by an accusative of kindred derivation with itself,
irrespective of the question whether it be an accusative of the external or of
the internal object. We have both kinds of accusative together in the
following verse, where θήραν =
Gen. 27:3 ἐξέστη δὲ Ἰσαὰκ ἔκστασιν μεγάλην σφόδρα καὶ εἶπεν “Τίς οὖν ὁ θηρεύσας μοι θήραν;”
b. The great frequency of the cognate accusative in the LXX is due to the fact that here the genius of the Hebrew and of the Greek language coincides. Besides being a legitimate Greek usage, this construction is also one of the means employed for translating a constantly recurring Hebrew formula. Sometimes the appended accusative merely supplies an object to the verb, as in such phrases as δάνιον δανείζειν, διαθέσθαι διαθήκην, διηγεῖσθαι διήγηα, ἐνύπνιον ἐνυπνιάζεσθαι, ἐπιθυμεῖν ἐπιθυμίαν, θύειν θυσίαν, νηστεύειν νηστείαν, ὁρισμὸν ὁρίζεσθαι, πλημμελεῖν πλημμέλησιν or πλημμελίν, προφασίζεσθαι προφάσεις.
At other times it is accompanied by some specification, as -
Nb. 18:6 λειτουργεῖν τὰς λειτουργίας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου.
Dan. 11:2 πλουτήσει πλοῦτον μέγαν.
1 Mac. 2:58 ἐν τῷ ζηλῶσαι ζῆλον νόμου.
c. Sometimes the cognate accusative is conveyed in a relative clause, as -
Ex. 3:9 τὸν θλιμμὸν ὃν οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι θλίβουσιν αὐτούς.
Nb. 1:44 ἡ ἐπίσκεψις ἣν ἐπεσκέψαντο.
1 K. [1 Sam.] 2:23 ἡ ἀκοὴ ἣν ἐγὼ ἀκούω.
d. By other changes of construction we have still the figura etymologica, but no longer a cognate accusative. Thus, starting from the common phrase δοῦναι δόμα, we have δεδομένοι δόμα (Nb. 3:9) and δόμα δεδομένον (Nb. 18:6).
e. In one instance the cognate accusative is reinforced by a still further application of the etymological figure -
Gen. 47:22 ἐν δόσει γὰρ ἔδωκεν δόμα τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν.
This is not due to the Hebrew.
f. In a wider sense the term ‘cognate accusative’ includes an accusative of kindred meaning, though not of kindred derivation, as -
Jdg. 15:8 ἐπάταξεν . . . πληγὴν μεγάλην.
g. Instances of cognate accusative are common enough in the N.T., e.g. -
1 Jn. 5:16 ἁμαρτάνοντα ἁμαρτίαν μὴ πρὸς θάνατον.
Mt. 2:10 ἐχάρησαν χαρὰν μεγάλην σφόδρα.
Jn. 7:24 τὴν δικαίαν κρίσιν κρίνατε.
There also it occurs sometimes in a relative clause -
Mk. 10:38 τὸ βάπτισμα ὃ ἐγὼ βαπτίζομαι.
Jn. 17:26 ἡ ἀγάπη ἣν ἠγάπηκάς με.
Eph. 4:1 τῆς κλήσεως ἧς ἐκλήθητε.
h. We have a triple use of the etymological figure in -
Lk. 8:5 ἐξῆλθεν ὁ σπείρων τοῦ σπεῖραι τὸν σπόρον αὐτοῦ.
i. That the playing with paronymous terms is in accordance with the spirit of the Greek language may be seen from the frequent employment of the device by Plato, e.g. -
Prot. 326 D ὥσπερ οἱ γραμματισταὶ τοῖς μήπω δεινοῖς γράφειν τῶν παίδων ὐπογράψαντες γραμμὰς τῇ γραφίδι οὕτω τὸ γραμματεῖον διδόασι.
Hip. Maj. 296 C Ἄλλα μέντοι δυνάμει γε δύνανται οἱ δυνάμενοι· οὐ γάρ που ἀδυναμίᾳ γε.
57. Accusative in Apposition to Indeclinable
Noun. In the LXX an indeclinable noun is sometimes followed by an
accusative in apposition to it, even though by the rules of grammar it is
itself in some other case, e.g.-
Is. 37:38 ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ Νασαρὰχ τὸν πάτραρχον αὐτοῦ.
4 K. [2 Kings] 1:2 ἐν τῷ Βάαλ μυῖαν θεὸνἈκκαρών.
Perhaps it would be more satisfactory if this and § 54 were thrown together under a head of Bad Grammar, a category which the reader might be inclined to enlarge.
58. Genitive Absolute. Strictly speaking, a Genitive Absolute is a clause in the genitive which does not affect the general construction. It ought not therefore to refer either to the subject or the object of the sentence. Even in classical authors however the so-called genitive absolute is sometimes not employed with the precision which grammarians might desire, e.g. -
Plat. Rep. 547 B βιαζομένων δὲ καὶ ἀντιτεινόντων ἀλλήλοις . . . ὡμολόγησαν.
Xen. Cyrop. 1.4.2 καὶ γὰρ ἀσθενήσαντος αὐτοῦ οὐδέποτε ἀπέλειπε τὸν πάππον.
Xen. Anab. 1.2.17 θᾶσσον προϊόντων . . . δρόμος ἐγένετο τοῖς στρατιώταις.
The genitive absolute is often employed in the same loose way in the LXX.
Tob. 4:1 ὅτε ἤμην ἐν τῇ χώρᾳ μου . . . νεωτέρυο μου ὄντος.
Dt. 15:10 οὐ λυπηθήσῃ τῇ καρδίᾳ σου διδόντος σου αὐτῷ.
Ex. 2:10 ἁδρυνθέντος δὲ τοῦ παιδίου, εἰσήγαγεν αὐτό.
Ex. 5:20 συνήντησαν δὲ . . . ἐρχομένοις . . . ἐκπορευομένων αὐτῶν.
So in N.T. --
Mt. 1:18 μνηστευθείσης τῆς μητωὸς . . . εὐρέθη.
Acts. 21:17 γενομένων δὲ ἡμῶν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἀσμένως ἀπεδέξαντο ἡμᾶς οἱ ἀδελφοί.
2 Cor. 4:18 κατεργάζεται ἡμῖν, μὴ σκοπούντων ἡμῶν.
59. The Genitive Infinitive of Purpose. The genitive of the verbal noun formed by prefixing the article to the infinitive, which we may call for convenience the Genitive Infinitive, is one of the regular ways of expressing purpose in Biblical Greek, corresponding to our use of ‘to.’ The construction is not entirely unknown to classical authors (e.g. Plat. Gorg. 457 E τοῦ καταφανὲς γενέσθαι) and is especially favoured by Thucydides. There is nothing in the Hebrew to suggest it. The following will serve as examples -
Jdg. 16:5 καὶ δήσομεν αὐτὸν τοῦ ταπεινῶσαι αὐτόν.
Ps. 9:30 ἐνεδρεύει τοῦ ἁρπάσαι πτωχόν.
Job 1:19 ἦλθον τοῦ ἀπαγγεῖλαί σοι.
So also frequently in N.T., e.g. -
Mt. 13:3 ἐξῆλθεν ὁ σπείρων τοῦ σπείρειν.
James 5:17 προσηύξατο τοῦ μὴ βρέξαι.
60. Other Uses of the Genitive Infinitive. a. The genitive infinitive of purpose is only one use out of many to which this syntactical device is applied. Take for instance -
Ex. 14:5 Τί τοῦτο ἐποιήσαμεν τοῦ ἐξαποστεῖλαι τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ μὴ δουλεύειν ἡμῖν (= ὡστε μὴ δουλεύειν);
Purpose is not expressed in either of these cases. In the former we have what may be called the Explanatory Use of the Genitive Infinitive; in the latter we have something which represents ‘from serving us’ in the orginal, but which we shall nevertheless class as a Genitive Infinitive of Consequence, since it is only thus that the Greek can be explained.
b. The Explanatory Use of the Genitive Infinitive is common in the LXX, e.g. -
Gen. 3:22 Ἀδὰμ γέγονεν ὡς εἶς ἐξ ἡμῶν, τοῦ γιγνώσκειν καλὸν καὶ πονηρόν.
Ex. 8:29 μὴ προσθῇς ἔτι, Φαραώ, ἐξαπατῆσαι τοῦ μὴ ἐξαποστεῖλαι τὸν λαόν.
Ps. 26:4 ταύτην (§ 47) ἐκζητήσω· τοῦ κατοικεῖν με κτλ.
So in N.T. --
Acts 7:19 ἐκάκωσε τοὺς πατέρας ἡμῶν, τοῦ ποιεῖν ἔκθετα τὰ βρέφη αὐτῶν.
Gal. 3:10 ὃ οὐκ ἐμμένει ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς γεγραμμένοις . . . τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά.
c. As an instance of the Genitive Infinitive of Consequence we may take -
Ex. 7:14 βεβάρηται ἡ καρδία Φαραὼ τοῦ μὴ ἐξαποστεῖλαι τὸν λαόν.
So in N.T. --
Hb. 11:5 Ἐνὼχ μετετέθη τοῦ μὴ ἰδεῖν θάνατον.
d. What is called in Latin Grammar the ‘prolative infinitive’ after ‘extensible’ verbs, or more simply, the latter of two verbs, is also commonly expressed in the LXX by the genitive infinitive, e.g. -
Ps. 39:13 οὐκ ἠδυνάσθην τοῦ βλέπειν.
2 Chr. 3:1 ἤρξατο τοῦ οἰκοδομεῖν.
Gen. 18:7 ἐτάχυνεν τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτό.
So in N.T. --
Acts 3:12 ὡς . . . πεποιηκόσι τοῦ περιπατεῖν αὐτόν, 15:20 ἐπιστεῖλαι . . . τοῦ ἀπέχεσθαι, 27:1 ἐκρίθη τοῦ ἀποπλεῖν.
61. Cognate Dative. a. Another form of
the figura etymologica which abounds in the LXX may be called Cognate
Dative. As in the case of the cognate accusative its frequency is in great
measure due to the coincidence of idiom in this particular between Greek and
Hebrew. Let us first show by a few examples from Plato that this construction
is in accordance with the genius of the Greek language.
Crat. 385 B λόγῳ λέγειν. Phdr. 265 C παιδίᾳ πεπαῖσθαι. Symp. 195 B φεύγων φυγε῀ι τὸ γῆρας. Crat. 383 A φύσει . . . πεφυκυῖαν. Cp. 389 C, D. Phileb. 14 C φύσει . . . πεφυκότα.
b. But while we have to search for this idiom in classical Greek, it thrusts itself upon us at every turn in the Greek of the LXX, owing to its aptness for rendering a mode of expression familiar in the original.
c. Corresponding to the cognate dative in Greek, we find in Latin also a cognate ablative as a rare phenomenon, e.g. -
curriculo percurre Ter. Heaut. 733. Cp. Plaut. Most. 349
qui non curro curriculo domum.
occidione occisum Cic. Fam. 15.4.7. Cp. Liv. 2.51.9.
d. The instances of cognate dative of most frequent occurrence in the LXX are ἀκοῇ ἀκούειν, ζωῇ ζῆν, θανάτῳ ἀποθανεῖ, θανάτῳ θανατοῦσθαι, σάλπιγγι σαλπίζειν. But besides these there are many others, as -
ἀγαπήσει ἀγαπᾶσθαι κακίᾳ κακοποιεῖν
ἀλαλαγμῷ ἀλαλάζειν κακίᾳ κακοῦν
ἀλοιφῇ ἐξαλείφειν κατάραις καταρᾶσθαι
ἀπωλίᾳ ἀπολλύναι κλαυθμῷ κλαίειν
ἀφανισμῷ ἀφανίζειν λήθῃ λαθεῖν
βδελύγματι βδελύσσειν λίθοις λιθοβολεῖν
δεσμῷ δεῖν λύτροις λυτροῦν
διαλύσει διαλύειν μνείᾳ μνησθῆναι
διαμαρτυρίᾳ διαμαρτυρεῖν οἰωνισμῷ οἰωνίζεσθαι
διαφθείρειν φθορᾷ ὀργίζεσθαι ὀργῇ
δίκῃ ἐκδικεῖν ὅρκῳ ὁρκίζειν
ἐκβάλλειν ἐκβολῇ παραδόσει παραδοθῆναι
ἐκθλίβειν ἐκθλιβῇ περιπίπτειν περιπτώματι
ἐκλείψει ἐκλείπειν πλημμελίᾳ πλημμελεῖν
ἐκτριβῇ ἐκτριβῆναι προνομῇ προνομευθῆναι
ἐτρίψει ἐκτριβῆναι προσοχθίσματι προσοχθίζειν
ἐξεπαυνᾶν ἐξεραυνήσει πτώσει πίπτειν
ἐξουδενώσει ἐξουδενοῦν ταλαιπωρίᾳ ταλειπωρεῖν
ἐπιθυμίᾳ ἐπιθυμεῖν ταραχῇ ταράσσειν
ἐπισκοπῇ ἐπισκέπτεσθαι ὑπεροράσει ὑπεριδεῖν
θελήσει θέλειν φερνῇ φερνίζειν
καθαιρέσει καθαίρειν φθορᾷ φθαρῆναι
καθαρισμῷ καθαρίζειν χαίρειν χαρᾷ
e. From the foregoing
instances it is an easy step to others in which the substantive is of kindred
meaning, though not of kindred derivation with the verb.
Gen. 1:16 βρώσει φαγῇ, 31:15 κατέφαγεν καταβρώσει.
Ex. 22:20 θανάτῳ ὀλεθρευθήσεται.
Nb. 11:15 ἀπόκτεινόν με ἀναίρεσει, 35:26 ἐξόδῳ ἐξέλθῃ.
Ezk. 33:27 θανάτῳ ἀποκτενῶ.
f. Instances of the cognate dative are to be found also in the N.T., though not with anything like the frequency with which they occur in the LXX.
Jn. 3:29 χαρᾷ χαίρει. Lk. 22:15 ἐπιθυμίᾳ ἐπεθύμησα. Acts 4:17 ἀπειλῇ (μαργιν) ἀπειλησώμεθα, 5:28 παραγγελίᾳ παρηγγείλαμεν, 23:14 ἀναθέματι ἀναθεματίσαμεν. James 5:17 προσευχῇ προσηύξατο. Gal. 5:1 τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσε.
g. The expression in 2 Pet. 3:3 ἐν ἐμπαιγμονῇ ἐμπαῖκται, while not exactly parallel with the foregoing, belongs to the same range of idiom; so also Rev. 2:23 ἀποκτενῶ ἐν θανάτῳ.
|« Prev||Case||Next »|
►Proofing disabled for this book
► Printer-friendly version