Morphology, Syntax, and the Wonder of Language

Morphemes are minimal units of meaning,  but what a difference they make. The Greek morpheme δελφύς/Δελφός means "womb." However, if one prefixes an alpha to it, the word refers to a brother. Conversely, ἄτομος contains an alpha-privative so that the prefix negates the morpheme to produce the meaning, "uncuttable" or "indivisible," etc. The same phenomenon occurs in Latin with the morpheme utilis. By simply adding in to this adnominal, a "useful" tool becomes a "useless" one. These shifts in morphological signification take place due to the derivational feature of morphology.

On the other hand, syntax refers to word order or the architecture of linguistic signs. Cambridge Dictionary defines syntax as "the grammatical arrangement of words in a sentence." The importance of syntax depends on the extent of lingual inflection that a language possesses, yet this does not mean that syntax goes out the window when languages are less inflected with respect to morphology: syntax is still important whether one speaks English, German, French or Spanish.

For example, English, Greek, Latin and other languages distinguish between grammatical subjects and objects (e.g., "The dog bit the man") but the latter tongues indicate which word is the subject or object by means of morphological inflections. For example, in the Latin sentence canis mordet hominem, one knows which word is subject primarily through recognizing morphemic inflections such that canis is the subject and hominem is the direct object of mordet. Furthermore, Latin and Greek display syntactic patterns that are recurrent (subject--verb-object), so syntax is important even in highly inflected languages.

Language is a fascinating wonder that is unique to human beings: it is "one of the skills that separates humans from the rest of the animal kingdom" (Pat Kuhl qtd. in Restak 230). The human ability to utter meaningful sentences is another indication that we are made in a wonderful and awe-inspiring way (Psalm 139:14).

Further Reading:

Fasold, Ralph W., and Jeff Connor-Linton, eds. 2006. An Introduction to Language and Linguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Restak, Richard. The Mind. New York: Bantam, 1988.

https://petaa.edu.au/litportal/litportal/Resources-for-Curriculum/Upper-primary/Spelling/Morphemic-awareness-upper.aspx

More Pertaining to Greek Gender (Morphology)

 

A friend once asked me about grammatical gender in Ancient Greek, so I'll make a few remarks here.

Cities in Greek are normally feminine gender if I remember correctly. Granted, some nouns in the language have masculine and feminine forms, but the differentiation of gender in these instances is normally marked by the article employed with the noun (e.g., ὁ λόγος is masculine, whereas ἡ νῆσος is feminine).

Louw-Nida Greek and English Lexicon points out that Βαβυλὼν is a feminine noun and so does BDAG. The article used in Revelation along with "Babylon" also points to the noun being feminine with respect to its grammatical gender: even when a nominal declines, unless the article indicates otherwise, we can conclude that its gender remains the same: λόγος is nom. sing. masc., but λόγοι is nom. pl. masc.

See https://pressbooks.pub/ancientgreek/chapter/20/

1 Peter 5:8 (Morphology and Syntax)

Greek (SBLGNT): νήψατε, γρηγορήσατε. ὁ ἀντίδικος ὑμῶν διάβολος ὡς λέων ὠρυόμενος περιπατεῖ ζητῶν ^[a]τινα ^[b]καταπιεῖν·

1. ΠΕΤΡΟΥ Α΄ 5:8 τινα NIV] τίνα RP; – WH Treg
2. ΠΕΤΡΟΥ Α΄ 5:8 καταπιεῖν WH Treg NIV] καταπίῃ RP

Morphology: Peter initiates his counsel in this verse with two aorist imperatives, which is where one would expect present imperatives instead (Andreas J. Köstenberger, ‎Benjamin L Merkle, ‎Robert L. Plummer, Going Deeper with New Testament Greek, Rev. Edition). But the apostle evidently has a proclivity for aorist imperatives even when imparting general counsel. See 1 Peter 4:7.

Syntax: ὠρυόμενος and ζητῶν are "adverbial participles of manner modifying the main verb περιπατεῖ" (Going Deeper with New Testament Greek).

The aorist infinitive καταπιεῖν "is probably an infinitive communicating purpose ('in order to devour') or perhaps an epexegetical infinitive explaining the seeking ('that is, to devour')."

See op. cit., supra.

The Following is from 1 Peter: A Handbook on the Greek Text by Mark Dubis, page 168:

ὁ ἀντίδικος ὑμῶν διάβολος. The subject ὁ ἀντίδικος ὑμῶν along with its appositive διάβολος is fronted to mark the topical shift from “you” to “the devil.”

ὁ ἀντίδικος. Nominative subject of περιπατεῖ. BDAG (88) notes that this term can mean (a) more specifically, “accuser” or “plaintiff” in a legal context (see Job 1:6-11), or (b) more generally, “enemy.” Michaels (299) rightly concludes that the context is “not judicial” but rather one of worldwide antagonism (v. 10), in favor of option (b).

ὑμῶν. Objective genitive.

διάβολος. Nominative in apposition to ἀντίδικος. This substantival adjective (lit. “slanderer”) functions as a title in the NT and refers to the devil. In the NT, it almost always appears, unlike here, with the article. Nevertheless, Wallace (248–49) argues that this singular noun is monadic, i.e., a “one-of-a-kind noun” and, thus, is definite even when anarthrous. Of course, it is also definite by virtue of standing in apposition to a definite noun.

How to Tell The Grammatical Gender of Greek Nouns

Let's presume that you're working on Greek or never really learned how to identify the gender of Greek nouns as to whether they're grammatically masculine, feminine or neuter. If you're reading a Greek text, then how can you tell which gender the noun is?

If you have not begun to recognize the endings of nouns yet, maybe you could try this suggestion. First, I will post a well-known favorite (John 1:1):

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

The first noun is part of a prepositional phrase, so let's skip it for now. However, what is the gender of ὁ λόγος? One way you can tell is by the article that accompanies the noun: if you know the gender of the article, then you can easily discern the noun's gender.

The same principle applies to πρὸς τὸν θεόν, but that might be tricky for beginners since the noun form is accusative and singular and it's part of a prepositional phrase as well.

Regarding John 1:1c, θεὸς is anarthrous in this case, so you can't rely on the article to determine the noun's gender. However, notice that John 1:1 ends with ὁ λόγος, so I hope this tip comes in handy. Moreover, depending on the Greek article works with noun phrases like ἡ σοφία or τὸ πνεῦμα. Try this tip when reading Greek, but in the long term, I would recommend mastering noun endings to some degree along with verbal suffixes.

How the Genitive Case Works in Greek

The genitive case delimits or describes things. As William D. Chamberlain explains: "The genitive case, hH GENNHTIKH PTWSIS (Lat. CASUS GENITIVUS), is primarily the 'describing' case. Its function is adjectival. In fact, comparative grammar shows that this usage is older than the adjective" (An Exegetical Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 29).

Daniel B. Wallace (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, pp. 78-88) relates that in the case of the attributive genitive, "The genitive substantive specifies an attribute or innate quality of the head substantive. It is similar to a simple adjective in its semantic force, though more emphatic: it 'expresses quality like an adjective indeed, but with more sharpness and distinctness.' "

The last part of that quote is taken from A.T. Robertson's "big grammar."

As Wallace points out, the genitive itself (whether possessive or descriptive, etc.) is grammatically substantival, but semantically adjectival; that is, the genitive functions like an adjective, although it is formally a substantive (i.e., a noun case).

See https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/goodell/genitive

Compare J.H. Greenlees, "The Genitive Case in the New Testament." The Asbury Seminarian: Vol. 5: No. 3, p. 108-109.

https://place.asburyseminary.edu/asburyjournal/vol5/iss3/10/

Morphosyntax of Revelation 1:5

Greek (NA28): καὶ ἀπὸ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὁ μάρτυς, ὁ πιστός, ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς. Τῷ ἀγαπῶντι ἡμᾶς καὶ λύσαντι ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ

The more I study so-called solecisms (anomalies), I find that the issue becomes increasingly complex: one should be careful before accusing a writer of using "bad grammar." Revelation 1:5 begins with another ostensible solecism: καὶ ἀπὸ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Scholars [point out] that this preposition usually takes the genitive case, which we see at the beginning of the verse, but then appear ὁ μάρτυς, ὁ πιστός, ὁ πρωτότοκος--all of which are nominatives and they're appositional with Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Compare Rev. 1:4 for another supposed solecism. In the final analysis, a number of writers attribute the grammar here to Hebraic conventions or Semitic "interference."

ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς-Compare Colossians 1:18. Buist Fanning (Revelation, page 81) calls attention to the nominatives in apposition to genitive nouns here, which scholars commonly identify as solecisms. Fanning points out that τῶν νεκρῶν could be rendered "of the dead" but it's probably a partitive genitive, so should be translated "from the dead." Numerous MSS reflect this understanding of matters by adding the preposition ek ("from").

Fanning (Revelation, page 82) prefers "the ruler over the kings of the earth" rendering for ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς. That seems like he favors a genitive of subordination for this construction although it is not the only translational choice that one could make. This latter expression, ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς elucidates ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν since καὶ is likely epexegetical--see Brian K. Blount, Revelation (NTL Series), page 33. Blount thinks John "skews the grammar" here in order to make a theological point.

Τῷ ἀγαπῶντι ἡμᾶς καὶ λύσαντι ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ-John begins this portion of Rev. 1:5 with a dative phrase that includes a present participle functioning substantivally which is then followed by an aorist participle that functions substantivally: the Lamb loves "us," but he loosed (past tense) "us." See Fanning, Revelation, page 82.

λύσαντι is the preferred reading; it's an aorist active participle from λυω. Some MSS read λούσαντι instead, but λύσαντι seems better. Vincent's Word Studies relates this explanation:

Read λύσαντι loosed. Trench remarks on the variation of readings as having grown out of a play on the words λουτρόν, a bathing, and λύτρον a ransom, both of which express the central benefits which redound to us through the sacrifice and death of Christ. He refers to this play upon words as involved in the etymology of the name Apollo as given by Plato; viz., the washer (ὁ ἀπολούων) and the absolver (ὁ ἀπολύων) from all impurities. Either reading falls in with a beautiful circle of imagery.

ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ appears to be an instrumental use of the preposition. Compare Romans 3:25; 5:9; 1 Corinthians 11:25; Hebrews 10:19; 1 John 5:6; Revelation 5:9; 7:14.

Cambridge Bible: The balance of evidence is in favour of the reading “loosed us:” the preposition “in” might easily, in a Hebraistic book like this, be used of an instrument, where we should say “by,” or “with.” So we should probably render “redeemed us from our sins by His own Blood”—the Blood of Christ being conceived as the price of our redemption, as in 1 Peter 1:18-19—not, as in Revelation 7:14, Revelation 22:14 (according to the preferable reading), and perhaps in St John’s 1 John 1:7, as the cleansing fountain foretold in Zechariah 13:1.

Hebrews 4:16: Morphology, Discourse, and Syntax

Hebrews 4:16 (WH): προσερχώμεθα οὖν μετὰ παρρησίας τῷ θρόνῳ τῆς χάριτος, ἵνα λάβωμεν ἔλεος καὶ χάριν εὕρωμεν εἰς εὔκαιρον βοήθειαν.

οὖν-conjunctive particle; here implies causal sequence. David L. Mathewson remarks on the "cluster of subjunctives" in this verse (Voice and Mood); he calls οὖν in this case, a "high-level marker" that occurs with hortatory subjunctives and other supporting material to produce "a discourse peak within Hebrews."

προσερχώμεθα (present middle subjunctive 1st person plural of προσέρχομαι)-B.F. Westcott (Hebrews, 108) relates that this verb appears for the first time in Hebrews here: it occurs seven times in the letter. See 7:25; 10:1, 22; 11:6; 12:18, 22. For LXX uses, see Leviticus 21:17, 21; 22:3, which deal with the priestly approach to God (cf. Ezekiel 44:16). Compare 1 Timothy 6:3; Hebrews 6:19. The writer of Hebrews always employs προσέρχομαι to describe worshipers approaching God, whether in ancient Israel or in the Christian congregation (Ellingworth, Hebrews, 269), and it is only the letter to the Hebrews that utilizes προσέρχομαι to delineate the cultus. Translate "approach, draw near." Yet the approach referenced in Hebrews 4:16 is not to the antitypical most holy in the heavens (literally), but it means to come before God here on earth in prayer or worship.

μετὰ παρρησίας-a preposition + the genitive case: the noun is genitive singular feminine of παρρησία (boldness, freedom of speech, frankness, directness, confidence). See Acts 2:29; 4:29, 31; 28:31; Hebrews 3:6; 10:19-22; 10:35; 1 John 3:21; 4:17; 5:14. R.T. France provides another gloss: "lack of inhibition." See Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland (eds.). The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Hebrews-Revelation. Revised Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009.

τῷ θρόνῳ τῆς χάριτος-"to the throne of undeserved kindness (unmerited favor or grace)." τῆς χάριτος might be a "Genitive of characteristic quality" (Charles J. Vaughn, The Epistle to the Hebrews, page 88). Philip Church (Hebrews and the Temple, 378ff) has a rich discussion of these words and other components of Hebrews 4:16. He articulates that the throne is likely God's throne with Jesus seated at his right hand. This expression is apparently not found in ancient Judaism even though writers speak of two thrones for God, "one of judgment and one of mercy." See also David Allen, Hebrews (New American Commentary).

Paul Ellingworth (The Epistle to the Hebrews) likewise insists that the throne of grace is God's based on Hebrews 8:1: it is not Christ's throne despite the words of Hebrews 1:8; only indirectly does this throne allude to the mercy seat of Jerusalem's ancient temple (contra earlier interpreters).

ἵνα λάβωμεν ἔλεος καὶ χάριν εὕρωμεν-Compare Isaiah 16:5; Hosea 6:6 in the LXX. Ellingworth points to the chiasmus here, a construction that indicates λάβωμεν is semantically similar to εὕρωμεν and ἔλεος to χάριν (Hebrews, 270). Moreover, the neuter ἔλεος is connected with χάρις in Wisdom 3:9; 4:15; 1 Timothy 1:2; 2 Timothy 1:2; Titus 1:4.

εἰς εὔκαιρον βοήθειαν-The accusative singular feminine of εὔκαιρος appears here: the only other NT occurrence is Mark 6:21. Bill Mounce provides the definitions, "timely, opportune, seasonable, convenient" for this Greek adjective; βοήθειαν is accusative singular feminine of βοήθεια. Louw-Nida supply the definitions, "help" and "support." The preposition εἰς "often indicates purpose, or even result" (Dana M. Harris) and the object of the preposition is βοήθειαν: this object is modified by εὔκαιρον.

Sources for Further Reading:

Church, Philip. Hebrews and the Temple: Attitudes to the Temple in Second Temple Judaism and in Hebrews. (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 171). Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2017.

Ellingworth, Paul. The Epistle to the Hebrews. The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000.

Harris, Dana M. Hebrews. Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament. Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2019.

Vaughn, Charles J. The Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Macmillan, 1890.

Westcott, B.F. The Epistle to the Hebrews. The Greek Text with Notes and Essays. Second Edition. London; New York: Macmillan and Co., 1892.

My Greek Word of the Day: Topos

Greek (SBLGNT): καὶ συνήγαγεν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸν τόπον τὸν καλούμενον Ἑβραϊστὶ Ἁρμαγεδών.

Although I will discuss other part this verse, the main focus will be the noun phrase τὸν τόπον in Revelation 16:16.

καὶ-the use here is likely resumptive/connective. Translate "then."

συνήγαγεν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸν τόπον -Note the construction, συναγαγεῖν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸν πόλεμον in Rev. 16:14.

Beckwith: "the subj. of the vb. is the spirits of v. 13."

αὐτοὺς in 16:16 refers to τοὺς βασιλεῖς in 16:14 (that is the antecedent of αὐτοὺς).

εἰς τὸν τόπον-a prepositional phrase with its singular accusatival and articular object ("to the place").

Sterphen S. Smalley (The Revelation to John): "The subject and object of the gathering together in verse 16 are not specified; but the context makes it clear that on this occasion the evil ‘spirits’ (πνεύματα, pneumata, verse 14) ‘assembled’ (συνήγαγεν, synegagen, aorist singular verb with the neuter plural noun) the kings of the whole world, representatives of the worldly powers, for battle at Armageddon. For the spelling of this place name, which is found only here, see the textual note on verse 16. The use of Hebrew, and the absence of its interpretation, are typical of apocalyptic style (Jeremias, ‘Armageddon’)."

What about the significance of the articular noun phrase τὸν τόπον?

τόπος appears in Rev. 12:6: καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἔφυγεν εἰς τὴν ἔρημον, ὅπου ἔχει ἐκεῖ τόπον ἡτοιμασμένον ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ

Rev. 12:8: καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσεν οὐδὲ τόπος εὑρέθη αὐτῶν ἔτι ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ. Compare Rev. 20:11.

Revelation 12:14: καὶ ἐδόθησαν τῇ γυναικὶ αἱ δύο πτέρυγες τοῦ ἀετοῦ τοῦ μεγάλου, ἵνα πέτηται εἰς τὴν ἔρημον εἰς τὸν τόπον αὐτῆς

BDAG on τόπος: 1ⓒ a portion of a larger area: place, location (Diod S 2, 7, 5 τόπος τῆς πόλεως=the place on which the city stands; Just., D. 40, 2 ὁ τ. τῆς Ἰερουσαλήμ) ἔρημος τόπος (ἔρημος 1a) Mt 14:13; cp. vs. 15; Mk 1:35; 6:31f, 35; Lk 4:42; 9:12; GJs 17:3. Pl. Mk 1:45. πεδινός Lk 6:17. κρημνώδης Hv 1, 1, 3; Hs 6, 2, 6. καλός v 3, 1, 3b. τόπος τοῦ ἀγροῦ a place in the country 2, 1, 4; 3, 1, 3a; τοῦ σπηλαίου GJs 19:2 (cp. Just., D. 70, 1; 78, 6). Cp. Hv 2, 1, 1; Hs 6, 2, 4. On τόπος διθάλασσος Ac 27:41 s. διθάλασσος. Cp. τραχεῖς τόποι rocky places vs. 29. ὁ τόπος ὅπου (TestAbr B 10 p. 114, 13 [Stone p. 76]; ParJer 7:32; ApcMos 33; Just., D. 78, 8) the place where Mt 28:6; Mk 16:6; J 4:20; 6:23; 10:40; 11:30; 19:20, 41. ὁ τόπος ἔνθα GPt 13:56 (Just., A I, 19, 8; Mel., HE 4, 26, 14). ὁ τόπος ἐφ’ ᾧ ἕστηκας Ac 7:33 (cp. Ex 3:5). The dat. for εἰς w. acc. (B-D-F §199) ποίῳ τόπῳ ἀπῆλθεν Hv 4, 3, 7. ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ in every place (in Jerusalem) 1 Cl 41:2. Combined w. a name εἰς τόπον λεγόμενον Γολγοθᾶ Mt 27:33a. ἐπὶ τὸν Γολγοθᾶν τόπον Mk 15:22a.—Lk 23:33; J 19:13; Ac 27:8; Rv 16:16. W. gen.: κρανίου τόπος Mt 27:33b; Mk 15:22b; J 19:17 (s. κρανίον). τόπος τῆς καταπαύσεως Ac 7:49; B 16:2 (both Is 66:1; s. κατάπαυσις 1).—Pleonastic ἐν τόπῳ χωρίου Ῥωμαίων IRo insc. (s. τύπος 6c, end).—(Definite) place, (particular) spot, scene Lk 10:32; 19:5; 22:40; J 5:13; 6:10. ἐκεῖνον τὸν τόπον Papias (3:3) (Just., D. 3, 1 ἐκείνου τοῦ τόπου).

A question that arises for Revelation 16:16 is whether "place" is literal or metaphorical. Could the usage here be a case of extended meaning for τόπος?