Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament ......3. Post-classical Greek (c. 300 BC – AD 600) 4. Byzantine-Mediaeval Greek (AD 600 – 1500) 5. The Neohellenic Period (AD

ZONDERVAN

Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament Copyright © 2012 by Murray J. Harris

Requests for information should be addressed to:

Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Harris, Murray J. Prepositions and theology in the Greek New Testament / Murray J. Harris. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references (p. 17–23) and indexes. ISBN 978-0-310-49392-1 (hardcover) 1. Greek language, Biblical — Prepositions. 2. Bible. N.T. — Language, style. I. Title. PA849.H37 2011 487'.4 — dc23 2011046973

All Scripture translations in the book, unless otherwise noted, are the author’s own, based on the Greek New Testament text or the Septuagint.

Any Internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means — electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other — except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Cover design: Tammy Johnson Interior design: Matthew Van Zomeren

Printed in the United States of America

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 /DCI/ 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

0310493927 preposition and theology in NT greek.indd 4 8/8/12 6:17 PM

Contents

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Select Bibliography and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A. The Phases of the Greek Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 B. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 C. Prepositions and Adverbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 D. Prepositions and Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 E. The Basic Meaning of Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 F. Principles of Choice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 G. Exegeting Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

2. Distinctive Features of Prepositional Usage in New Testament Greek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

A. Characteristics in Keeping with the General Tendencies of Hellenistic Greek (in Comparison with Classical Greek) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

B. Possible Semitic Influence on New Testament Prepositional Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

3. Dangers to Be Avoided in Any Examination of New Testament Prepositional Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

A. Insistence on Classical Greek Distinctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 B. Failure to Make Allowance for a Writer’s

Stylistic Variation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 C. Disregard of Probable Distinctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 D. Denial of Double Entendre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 E. Neglect of the Possible Significance of Items

with Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43


4. Ĳ��Ɠ�and�Ĳ�Ǝ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 A.� Ĳ��Ɠ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 B. Ĳ�Ǝ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 C. Ĳ�Ǝ��:�� %��# . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

5. Ĳ��Ɠ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 A. Basic Idea and New Testament Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 B. Equivalence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 C. Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 D. Substitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 E. Important New Testament Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 F. Ĳ��Ɠ�in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

6. Ĳ�ƕ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 A. Relation of Ĳ�ƕ�to�ŀ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 B. Ĳ�Ɣ��Ǹ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 C. Ellipses with (Pregnant) Ĳ�ƕ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 D. Ĳ�ƕ�in Paul’s Epistolary Salutations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 E. Other Notable Instances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 F. Ĳ�ƕ�in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

7. S�Ǝ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 A. Origin and Basic Idea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 B. Notable Instances of Main Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 C. S�Ǝ�in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

8. <Ŗ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 A. Origin and New Testament Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 B. Its Relation to W�ƕ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 C. Its Relation to ŀ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 D. Telic <Ŗ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 E. Consecutive /Ecbatic <Ŗ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 F. Causal <Ŗ�? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 G. Significant Phrases Using <Ŗ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 H. Significant Successive Instances of <Ŗ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 I. Ambiguity of Meaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 J. <Ŗ��in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

9.� ŀ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 A. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 B. Basic Signification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 C. Range of Figurative Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103


D. Important Constructions Using ŀ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 E. Other Significant Instances of�ŀ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 F. ŀ��in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

10.� ŀ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 A. Extended New Testament Use and Ultimate

Disappearance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 B. Versatility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 C. Encroachment on Other Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 D. Main Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 E. Key Phrases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 F. ŀ��in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

11.� ŀ�Ɠ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 A. Basic Meaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 B. Versatility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 C. Important Constructions Using ŀ�Ɠ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 D. Other Notable Uses of ŀ�Ɠ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 E. ŀ�Ɠ�in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

12. J��Ǝ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 A. Basic Meaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 B. Phrases Involving J��Ǝ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 C. J��Ǝ�Denoting Correspondence or Conformity . . . . . . . . . . . 152 D. J��Ǝ�Denoting Opposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 E. Distributive J��Ǝ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 F. Some Ambiguous Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 G. J��Ǝ�in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160

13. H��Ǝ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 A. Original Meaning and New Testament Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 B.� H��Ǝ�with Accusative (“after”) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 C. H��Ǝ�with Genitive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 D. <Ŝ��Ǝ�Denoting “Presence With” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 E. H��Ǝ�in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

14. W��Ǝ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 A. Basic Sense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 B. Transferred Meanings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 C. W��ƍ�¿�ȄÀ��Ȅ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 D. W��Ǝ�and Christology in the Fourth Gospel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 E. W��Ǝ�in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176


15. W��Ɠ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 A. Basic and Derived Meanings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 B. W��ī��Ɠ��ïī��ȃ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 C. W��Ɠ�in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

16.� W�� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 A. New Testament Use and Basic Meaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 B. Notable Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 C. W�ƕ�in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

17. W�ƕ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 A. New Testament Use and Basic Meaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 B. Notable Instances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 C. W�ƕ��in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

18. ]Ɨ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 A. Original Meaning and New Testament Incidence . . . . . . . . . . 199 B. Two Basic Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 C. Relation to H��Ǝ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 D. ]Ɩ��V��Ȅ and Equivalents in Paul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 E. ]Ɨ� in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204

19. Ź�Ɛ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 A. Original Meaning and New Testament Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 B.� Ź�Ɛ� with the Accusative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 C. Ź�Ɛ��with the Genitive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 D. Ź�Ɛ� and W��Ɠ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 E. Ź�Ɛ��meaning “in the place of” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 F. Ź�Ɛ��as Expressing Both Representation/Advantage

and Substitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 G. Ź�Ɛ� in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

20. Ź�ƕ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 A. Original Meaning and New Testament Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 B. Ź�ƕ�with the Accusative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 C. Ź�ƕ with the Genitive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 D. Ź�Ɣ��ƕ�� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 E. Ź�ƕ�and Other Prepositions Expressing Agency . . . . . . . . . . . 221 F. Ź�ƕ in Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223

21. Prepositions with M��Ɠ�� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 A. Ź�Ɛ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225


B. Ź�ƕ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 C. <Ŗ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 D. ŀ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 E. ŀ��ïĺ��Ȅ�Ŧ�ƕ�� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232

22. Prepositions with W��Ɨ� and WƓ�� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 A. Nonprepositional Constructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 B. Prepositional Constructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 C. Concluding Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237

23. “Improper” Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 A. Nomenclature and Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 B. “Improper” Prepositions in Hellenistic Greek . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 C. An Annotated Alphabetical List of All 42 New Testament

“Improper” Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242

24. Notable Uses of Selected “Improper” Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 A. Ķ��ó��Matthew 10:29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 B. ŀ��ƕ��ó��1 Co rin thi ans 6:18 and 2 Co rin thi ans 12:2 . . . . . . . . 255 C. ń��ó��John 1:15 (cf. 1:30) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 D. ŀ��ƕ��ó��Luke 17:21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 E. Ņ��Ÿ�ó��Matthew 1:25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262 F. V��Ɠ��ó��Hebrews 9:28 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263

Index of Biblical References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267Index of Greek Words and Expressions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287Index of Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291


Chapter 1

Introduction

A. The Phases of the Greek LanguageThe following stages may be identified:

1. Ancient Greek, a category that here includes both pre-Classical (espe-cially Homer) and Classical Greek.

2. Classical Greek, c. 450 BC – c. 330 BC, chiefly the Attic form. 3. Hellenistic /Koine Greek, c. 330 BC – AD 330, Ň��Ƒ��Ǝ��(“the

common language”), in its literary and vernacular forms, is marked by a virtual absence of dialectal forms except for local differences in pronunciation, and what Bortone (239 n.3) calls “slight regional variations.”1 The six main sources for our knowledge of Hellenistic Greek are: literary texts by writers such as Polybius and Epictetus; the Septuagint; the New Testament and other early Chris tian literature; the Ptolemaic papyri; the inscriptions; and the observations of gram-marians such as Moeris and Phrynichus. The expression “Biblical Greek” is a convenient and traditional way of referring to the Greek of the LXX and the NT, without suggesting it forms a defined dialect of Hellenistic /Koine Greek.

4. Medieval Greek /Byzantine Greek, AD 330 (the removal of the seat of government from Rome to Constantinople) – 1453 (the conquest of Constantinople by the Turks).

5. Modern Greek, AD 1453 – the present; but specifically, in the present work, the Greek written or spoken at the present day, “contemporary stan-dard Greek” (Bortone 238 n.1), in which two strands are interwoven — a

1. Recognizing that Koine Greek was not a static entity and the probability that changes in usage occurred during the 900 or so years (on his view) of Koine Greek, J. A. L. Lee proposes a division of Koine Greek into Early (III – I BC), Middle (I – III AD) and Late (IV – VI AD), “<TQW@]B<KKY” in Voces Biblicae: Septuagint Greek and Its Significance for the New Testament, ed. J. Joosten and P. J. Tomson (Leuven: Peeters, 2007), 113 n.31.


popular, vernacular strand (Demotic) and an archaizing or Atticizing “purist” strand (Katharevousa).

The five stages isolated by Caragounis (in 2004) (XIII; and for more detail XX, 1 – 63) are (after the Mycenaean or Linear B stage [15th – 12th century BC]):

1. Archaic or Epic Greek (800 – 500 BC) 2. The Classical (Attic) Period (500 – 300 BC) 3. Post-classical Greek (c. 300 BC – AD 600) 4. Byzantine-Mediaeval Greek (AD 600 – 1500) 5. The Neohellenic Period (AD 1500 – 2000)

“Neohellenic at present (i.e., the language spoken and written today) is very broad, since it encompasses (simple) Katharevousa, moderate Demoticism and extreme Demoticism” (Caragounis 56 – 57). “A more cultivated Demotic is in effect a simple Katharevousa, and conversely, a simple Katharevousa, is a more cultivated Demotic” (58).

At an earlier time (1897) Jannaris (xv, xxii) delineated five periods:

1. Attic (500 – 300 BC) 2. Hellenistic (300 – 150 BC) 3. Greco-Roman (150 BC – 300 AD) 4. Transitional (300 – 600 AD) 5. Neohellenic (600 – 1900 AD)

However we divide up the stages of the Greek language, all agree “that greater changes took place during the 600 years separating Polybios from Homeros than during the 2,100 years between Polybios and our time” (Caragounis 68). This shows that “in the development of Greek time-length and change do not go hand in hand: contrary to what might be expected, greater changes may take place in a briefer period, while a more protracted period may be attended by slower change” (Caragounis 89).

B. Terminology1. “Preposition”The term “preposition” ultimately comes from ��ƕ��, “a placing before, a fore-placement” (a term used by the Greek grammarian Dionysius Thrax), via the Latin prae-positio, also meaning “a placing before.” In Greek grammar it denotes an indeclinable word that is placed before a substantive or pronoun or prefixed to a verb. But originally “prepositions” followed the substantive (as


still done in the NT with Ŀ�� and �Ǝ��) and therefore were “postpositions”! Etymology apart, a preposition is basically a word that denotes a relationship between other words — hence the German term for preposition, Verhältniswort, “word of relationship.” In each Greek preposition, it seems, there is an inherent, foundational meaning that is further defined by a particular context.2

2. “Proper” and “Improper” PrepositionsThose prepositions (such as ĺ�) that can also serve as prefixes in compound words have been called “proper” prepositions (17 in the NT), and prepositions (such as ĺ��ƕ�) that cannot be used this way have been called “improper” prepositions (42 in the NT). This classification is unfortunate, for most “improper” preposi-tions are equally “pre-positions” and they are functionally equivalent to “proper” prepositions. Moreover it seems arbitrary to base a classification on an external relation, that is, a word’s ability to be used as a prefix to another word. Although “improper” prepositions are in no sense improper with regard to the Greek lan-guage, it has become customary (see, e.g., Smyth §§1647, 1699 – 702) to use this convenient grammatical classification, no doubt partly because “improper” prepositions usually “govern” a single case — the genitive. Robertson, however, also uses the expression “adverbial prepositions” or “prepositional adverbs” (554, 557, 636 – 37) to describe “improper” prepositions. See further ch. 23.

C. Prepositions and AdverbsIn the parent Indo-European language, cases probably stood alone, but later some adverbs came to be used as prepositions. Originally prepositions were loc-atival adverbs (Bortone xv, 140; cf. Robertson 553 – 54; 636 – 37); indeed, in Homer words like ��Ɠ�(“round about”) and ��Ɠ�(“on both sides”) are still used as adverbs. Also at the outset, prepositions were “post-positive” adverbs; that is, they were placed after the word they qualified, a usage reflected in �Ɠ��Ŀ��, “on account of what” = “why” (Ac 19:32; cf. Lk 4:18). So the term “preposition” reflects a later development when these adverbs preceded the word they qualified. Certainly, no precise distinction can be drawn between adverbs and prepositions. Words like ĺ��Ɨ��and ľ��are used either as adverbs or as prepositions; and in Hellenistic Greek (including both the NT and the papyri) a preposition and an adverb are often combined (e.g., ĺ��Ǝ��and many “improper” prepositions such as ĺ�Ǝ��[Mayser 538 – 42]), as also in Modern Greek (Thumb §158).

2. “Most linguists appear to endorse a conception of prepositional meaning as a combination of an inherent meaning with a specification supplied by the context; in the terminology diffused by [R.] Jakobson [“Beitrag zur allgemeinen Kasuslehre: Gesamtbedeutungen der russischen Kasus,” Travaux du cercle linguistique de Prague 6 (1936): 240 – 88]: different Sonderbedeutungen in each particular context, but related through an overall Gesamtbe-deutung in abstract, or an underlying Grundbedeutung at the origin” (Bortone 42).


D. Prepositions and Cases“Both in time and at first in order” case came before prepositions (Robert-son 567). From the point of view of historical development, prepositions did not “govern” the case of a noun but rather helped to define more precisely the distinctions indicated by the case forms or were added to recapture original meanings; the accusative basically denoted direction (“Whither?”); the geni-tive, separation (“Whence?”); and the dative, location (“Where?”). That is, cases found in prepositions a convenient means of sharpening their significance. But, in ever- increasing measure, the case ending itself came to be divested of spe-cial significance because inflection expressed such diversified relations, and the accompanying preposition, with its fixed case form, assumed part of the mean-ing of the case and potentially added new meanings.3

So it is somewhat artificial to analyze the case of a noun or pronoun in Clas-sical or Hellenistic Greek apart from the “meaning” of the adjoining preposi-tion; the writers themselves probably regarded prepositions as “governing” or determining the case of the noun or pronoun. Originally, then, it was the case that showed the meaning of the preposition, but ultimately the preposition was regarded as giving a particular meaning to the case. To express the point another way, at the outset cases “governed” prepositions, but in the end prepositions were thought to “govern” cases in the sense of determining the case of a noun or pronoun that would produce a specific meaning.

Since a plain case is often capable of various senses, an added preposition or prepositional phrase can clarify and reinforce the intended meaning or actually remove ambiguity. For example, a phrase such as Ň��Ǝ��Ǹ�V��Ǹ�(2Co 5:14) could mean “the love shown by Christ” (subjective genitive) or “love for Christ” (objective genitive), but Ň��Ǝ��Ň�ų�Ɣ��Ǹ�V��Ǹ�would express the former meaning unequivocally.

E. The Basic Meaning of PrepositionsIn his comprehensive and authoritative treatment of Greek Prepositions from Antiquity to the Present (2010), P. Bortone has successfully defended his central thesis that “the history of Greek prepositions, if analysed in its entirety, is largely congruent with the ‘localistic hypothesis’ that concrete spatial meanings are the earliest ones, and entirely congruent with the ‘unidirectionality hypothesis’ that spatial meanings evolve into non-spatial ones but not vice-versa” (xii; cf. 52, 189, 302 – 3). “Spatial and non-spatial meanings seem to appear in a sequence” (170) so that “new [prepositional] items attest that spatial senses were the first

3. Philologists suggest that the endings of prepositions may originally have been case inflec-tions, e.g., ��Ɠ,�ĺ�Ɠ,�ĺ�Ɠ,��Ɠ��and��ƕ�, old locatives, and į��,��Ǝ,��Ǝ,��Ǝ��and ��Ǝ, old instrumentals (Bortone 141 n.57, citing earlier studies; cf. 96 – 97).


to appear, while the old items show that non-spatial senses were the last to be shed” (xvi), and “once prepositions become exclusively abstract in meaning, they never (re)acquire spatial meanings” (168). In stage 1 a preposition has only spa-tial meanings, in stage 2 both spatial and nonspatial senses, and in stage 3 only nonspatial meanings (see the charts in Bortone 168 and 283). On the history of the “localistic hypothesis,” see Bortone 47 – 53.

Many prepositions can denote three relations (local /spatial, temporal, figu-rative /metaphorical /abstract), which apparently developed in that order but, it seems, the primary representation is always local:4

4. This primary local sense in usage was not necessarily the original local sense; e.g., ��ƕ� may originally have meant “near,” and ��Ǝ “between.” See the introductory remarks for each preposition.

��Ɠ�+ Aaround

ų�Ɛ��+ Aabove

ĺ�Ɠ�+ Gupon

��Ǝ�+ Dthrough

�Ŗ��+ Ainto

ĺ�in

ų�ƕ�+ Aunder

��Ǝ�+ Aup

��Ǝ�+ Gdown

ĺ��+ Gout of

��ƕ��+ Atowards

��ƕ�+ Gaway from

��Ǝ�+ G�Ɨ��+ D

with

��ƕ�+ Gin front of

��Ɠ�+ Gopposite

�� + Dbeside

Diagram of the Spatial Meanings of the Seventeen New Testament “Proper” Prepositions

In this diagram A, D, and G indicate the case after the preposition that gives the spatial meaning indicated.


1. motion to: �Ŗ��(into), ��ƕ��(to[wards]) 2. motion from: ��Ǝ�(up), ��ƕ�(away from), ��Ǝ�(through), ĺ��(out of),

��Ǝ�(down) 3. rest: ��Ɠ�(opposite), ĺ��(in), ĺ�Ɠ�(upon), ų�Ɛ��(above), ų�ƕ�(under),

��Ǝ�(with), ��Ǝ (beside), ��Ɠ�(around), ��ƕ�(in front of), �Ɨ��(with)

While the basic sense (the “root meaning”) of a preposition is sometimes traceable when it is prefixed to another word, prepositions often gain additional meanings when they are prefixed. Bortone illustrates this vividly by the versatile meanings of ��Ǝ (basically meaning “up” as a preposition) when it is used in Classical Greek as a prefix (120).

��Ǝ��: “gulp down”��Ǝ�: “bore through”��Ɨ��: “shrink back”��Ǝ�: “beget anew”��Ɛ��: “have fever recurrently”��Ɛ��: “begin to play”��Ɨ��: “un-cover”��Ɛ�: “paint completely”��Ɠ��: “examine closely”��Ǝ��: “teach otherwise”

Also, it is not always possible to trace a basic sense when prepositions are used figuratively. With regard to the main figurative relations, the prepositions may be grouped as follows (reflecting principal usage):

1. origin: ��ƕ,�ĺ�,��Ǝ 2. cause or occasion: ��Ǝ,�ĺ�Ɠ,�ĺ�,��ƕ 3. purpose or object: �Ŗ�,��ƕ�,�ĺ�Ɠ,�ų�Ɛ� 4. result: �Ŗ�,��ƕ� 5. association or identification: �Ɨ�,��Ǝ,�ĺ�,��Ǝ 6. relation: ��Ɠ��ų�Ɛ��ƕ��Ŗ� 7. agency: ų�ƕ, sometimes ��ƕ, ��Ǝ,��Ǝ, or ĺ� 8. instrumentality or means: ��Ǝ,�ĺ�,�ĺ� 9. correspondence: ��Ǝ,��ƕ� 10. opposition: ��Ǝ,��Ǝ,��ƕ�

F. Principles of ChoiceWith over 10,000 NT uses of the 17 “proper” prepositions — not to speak of occurrences of the 42 “improper” prepositions — there is clearly need for some limiting criteria to determine which uses seem worthy of special examination after the introductory observations about each preposition.


Documents

Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament ......3. Post-classical Greek (c. 300 BC – AD 600) 4. Byzantine-Mediaeval Greek (AD 600 – 1500) 5. The Neohellenic Period (AD