SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map : Christian Books : PRONOUNS, 66-71

A Grammar Of Septuagint Greek by Frederick Cornwallis Conybeare


66. Superfluous Use of Pronoun. A pronoun is sometimes employed superfluously after the object, direct or indirect, has been already expressed, e.g. --

Ex.12:44 kai pan (sich) oiketen e arguroneton peritemeis auton.

Nb.26:37 kai to Salpaad huio Opher ouk egenonto auto huioi.

The above may be considered as deflexions of the Nominative of Reference (§ 52) into an oblique case by Attraction.

So in N.T. --

2 Cor.12:17 me tina o -- n apestalka pros humas, di' autou epleonektesa humas;

Mt.25:29 tou de me echontos, kai ho echei arthesetai ap' autou.

Rev.2:7, 17 to nikonti doso auto. Cp.6:4.

In Josh.24:22 -

humeis exelexasthe Kurio latreuein auto -

Kurio should be ton Kurion (which A has). Then latreuein auto would be an explanatory clause added after the usual manner.

67. Frequent Use of Pronouns. Apart from any Semitic influence there is also a tendency in later Greek to a much more lavish use of pronouns than was thought necessary by classical authors. We have seen already (§ 13) that the missing pronoun of the 3d person was supplied. The possessive use of the article moreover was no longer thought sufficient, and a possessive genitive was added, e.g. -

Gen.38:27 kai tede en diduma en te koilia autes.

So in N.T. --

Mt.19:9 hos an apoluse ten gunaika autou.

1 Pet.2:24 autos anenenken en to somati autou.

68. Adelphos as a Reciprocal Pronoun. The use of adelphos as a reciprocal pronoun is a sheer Hebraism, e.g. -

Ex.10:23 kai ouk eiden oudeis ton adelphon autou = they saw not one another.

69. Hebrew Syntax of the Relative. a. One of the most salient characteristics of LXX Greek is the repetition of the pronoun after the relative, as though in English, instead of saying the land which they possessed,' we were to say habitually the land which they possessed it,' and so in all similar cases. This anomaly is due to the literal following of the Hebrew text. Now in Hebrew the relative is indeclinable. Its meaning therefore is not complete until a pronoun has been added to determine it. But the relative in Greek being declinable, the translator was forced to assign to it gender, number, and case, which rendered the addition of the pronoun after it unnecessary. Nevertheless the pronoun was retained out of regard for the sacred text. As instances of the simplest kind we may take the following -

Nb.35:25 hon echrisan auton, 13:33 tes ges hen kateskepsanto auten.

Is.62:2 ho o kurios onomasei auto.

Gen.1:11 hou to sperma autou en auto.

Dt.4:7 ho estin auto.

Ps.18:4 hon ouchi akouontai hai phonai auton.

Ex.6:26 hois eipen autois.

b. Where the relative is followed by ean the same construction is employed, e.g. -

Nb.17:5 ho anthropos o§n ean eklexomai auton, 19:22 pantos hou ean hapsetai autou ho akathartos.

c. Sometimes a demonstrative takes the place of the personal pronoun -

Gen.3:11 hou eneteilamen soi toutou monou me phagein.

d. In all the foregoing instances the appended pronoun is in the same case as the relative, but this is not necessary.

Nb.3:3 ohu eteleiosen tas cheiras auton hierateuein.

The construction here, though determined by the Hebrew, happens to agree with the Greek Accusative of the Part Affected.

e. Very often there is the same preposition both before the relative and before the appended pronoun -

Ex.34:12 eis e§n eisporeue eis auten.

Nb.11:21 en hois eimi en autois.

Gen.28:13 he ge eph' hes su katheudeis ep' autes.

f. Occasionally the preposition is the same, but the case it governs is different, e.g. -

Jdg.16:26 eph' hois ho oikos stekei ep' autous.

Josh.24:13 gen eph' hen ouk ekopiasate ep' autes.

g. Sometimes the preposition is confined to the appended pronoun. Then the problem arises, Into what case is the relative to be put? -

a problem which is solved differently in different passages. In some the case chosen coincides with that of the pronoun following, e.g. -

Gen.24:42 ten hodon mou, e§n nun ego poreuomai ep' auten.

Ex.25:28 tous kuathous, hois speiseis en autois.

Gen.21:23 te ge he su parokesas en aute.

In others it does not -

Nb.14:31 ten gen e§n humeis apestete ap' autes, 19:2 he ouk epeblethe ep' auten zugos.

3 K. [2 Kings} 17:1 ho paresten enopion autou.

h. Sometimes the relative has a different preposition from the pronoun following -

Nb.13:20 tis he ge eis hen houtoi enkathentai ep' autes . . . tines hai poleis eis ha houtoi katoikousin en autais.

For other instances see Ex.6:4: Nb.15:39: Dt.1:22, 1:33, 28:49.

i. Sometimes the preposition is the same, but instead of a mere pronoun we have a phrase, e.g. -

Gen.24:38 en hois ego paroiko en te ge auton.

j. The construction of which we have been speaking is not confined to the simple relative, e.g. -

Gen.41:19 hoias ouk eidon toiautas.

Ex.9:18, 11:6 hetis toiaute ou gegonen.

k. The habitual repetition of the pronoun in the LXX is a mere Hebraism, though a search among Greek writers might reveal traces of a somewhat similar usage arising independently. Here are a few instances -

Plat. Tim.28 A hotou men oun an ho demiourgos . . . ten idean kai dunamin autou apergazetai, Parm.130 E hon tade ta alla metalambanonta tas eponumias auton ischein. Artist. Cat.5.38 hoion epi men ton allon ouk an echoi tis to toiouto proenenkein.

l. In the N.T. this Hebrew syntax of the relative occurs not infrequently.

Philemon 12 o§n anepempsa soi auton.

Gal.2:10 ho kai espoudasa auto touto poiesai.

Acts 15:17 eph' ohu epikekletai ton onoma mou ep' autous.

Mk.7:25 hes eiche to thugatrion autes pneuma akatharton.

Cp. Mk.1:7: Lk.3:16: also Mk.13:19, 9:3.

Instances are most frequent in the very Hebraistic book of Revelation. See Rev.3:8; 7:3, 9; 13:8; 20:8. Cp.1 Clem.21:9 hou he pnoe autou en hemin estin.

70. aner = hekastos. The use of aner as a distributive pronoun is a pure Hebraism.

4 K. [2 Kings] 18:31 pietai aner ten ampelon autou, kai aner ten suken autou phagetai.

Jdg.16:5 hemeis dosomen soi aner chilious kai hekaton arguriou.

71. hostis for hos. Except in the neuter singular ho ti, as in Josh.24:27, and in the expression heos hotou, as in 1 K. [1 Sam.] 22:3, or mechri hotou, which is found only in the Codex Sinaiticus version of Tob.5:7, hostis occurs in Swete's text only in the nominative, singular or plural. In meaning it is often indistinguishable from hos.

Ex.20:2 Ego eimi Kurios . . . hostis exegagon se. Cp. Dan. Th 6:27.

Ps.89:4 he hemera he echthes hetis dielthen. Cp. Nb.14:8.

1 K. [1 Sam.] 30:10 diakosioi andres hoitines ekathisan peran tou cheimarrou. Cp. Ex.32:4, 9: Nb.1:5: 1 Mac.13:48.

Jdg.21:12 tetrakosias neanidas parthenous, haitines ouk egnosan andra.

Hoitines = hoi occurs several times in Aristeas -

§§ 102, 121, 138, 200, 308.

The same use of hostis for the simple relative is found in the N.T., e.g. -

Col.3:5 ten pleonezian, hetis estin eidololatreia.

Acts 8:15 ton Petron kai Ioannen; hoitines katabantes ktl.

1 Tim.6:9 epithumias . . . haitines buthizousi tous anthropous.

Gal.4:24 hatina estin allegoroumena.

<<  Contents  >>

Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy