Grace
Theological Journal 6.1 (1985) 3-27.
[Copyright © 1985 Grace
Theological Seminary; cited with permission;
digitally prepared for use at
THE CLASSIFICATION
OF INFINITIVES
A STATISTICAL STUDY
JAMES L. BOYER
Detailed information is provided here regarding the
various
functional classifications of the infinitive, much of it never before
generally available. Special attention is given to the listing and
classifi-
cation of governing words; the semantic interrelationship between
concepts which use the infinitive, even when they occur in differing
structural patterns; the long-debated question of the
"subject" of the
infinitive with an attempt to state clearly what actual usage
indicates,
and a brief, rather negative discussion of the use and non-use
of the
article with infinitives.
* *
*
INTRODUCTION
STARTING
with a listing generated by a GRAMCORD1 computerized
search of all infinitives occurring in the UBS Greek
NT, a detailed
study was made. Each infinitive was analyzed for
classification, the
“subject" of the infinitive, the use or non-use of the
article, tense,
voice, and the word governing the infinitive. This information
was
then sorted and counted in many pertinent combinations
by the com-
puter to provide the material basis and statistical
data for this study.
Three
major areas are explored in this article the functional classifica-
tion of infinitives, the problem of the "subject
of the infinitive, and
the use or non-use of the article with infinitives.
1 A preliminary report on
this program of computer-assisted analysis of the Greek
NT
may be seen in my article, "Project Gramcord: A Report," GTJ I (1980) 97-99.
GRAMCORD
is presently being directed by Paul A, Miller,
wood, IL, 60030, Phone: 312-223-3242.
4
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
A CLASSIFICATION OF
USAGES
Subject Infinitives
An infinitive may function as the subject
of a sentence or clause,
i.e.,
the doer of the action or that to which the state or condition of
the verb is predicated. The abstract character of
the infinitive as a
verbal noun gives an impersonal character to the verb
of such sen-
tences. This use of the infinitive is also common in
English, although
usually in English the pronoun 'it' is used to
signal a delayed subject
and the infinitive subject follows the verb;
"it is necessary to go" is
more natural to the English ear than "to go is
necessary," although
the infinitive functions as subject in either case.
Subject
of Impersonal Verbs
Luke
Kai<sari fo<ron dou?nai h} ou@; / 'Is it lawful for us to pay taxes to
Caesar?’2 The subject infinitive
most frequently occurs with certain
verbs which are either always or predominantly
impersonal. The verbs
actually found with an infinitive subject in the
NT are dei?3 (120
times),4 gi<nomai when it means 'it came
to pass that' (36 times),5
e@cestin (29 times), doke<w when it is impersonal
(5 times),6 sumfe<rei
and w]felei? (2 times each), and
eight others (1 time each).7 One
examples shows an infinitive without a governing
verb expressed; the
sense suggests that dei? be
supplied. The infinitive in this usage is
almost always anarthrous. Only once9 is an
article used, the genitive
tou?. The infinitive follows
its verb 95% of the time.
Subject
of a Predicative Verb
The subject infinitive also appears
with the copula ei]mi< which
predicates some quality or condition to the
infinitive subject. This,
too, is an impersonal construction, but differs
from the previous one
in that the impersonal verbs contain their own
predication (it is lawful,
2 Unless otherwise
stated, translations of the Greek text of the NT are from the
New
American Standard version (NASB).
3 The actual forms used
are dei?
(92), e@dei
(22), de<^ (2), and dei?n (4).
4 The number of
occurrences listed in parentheses here and throughout this article
counts the number of infinitives occurring with each
verb, not the occurrences of the
verb. Frequently one verb governs a series of
infinitives.
5
gi<netai (1),
e]ge<neto (32), ge<nhtai
(2), ge<noito (1).
6 dokei? (1), e@doce (4).
7 a]ne<bh, a]po<keitai, a]polei<petai, e]nde<ketai,
e@prepen, ka<qhken, sune<bh, xrh<.
8
9 Acts 10:25.
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES
5
it is necessary)
whereas these state the predication as a predicate
complement, either adjective, noun, or otherwise.
An example is found
in Mark 9:5: [Rabbi<, kalo<n e]stin h[ma?j w$de
ei#nai /
'Rabbi, it is good
for us to be here'. In addition to the 57 instances
where the predica-
tive verb is present,10 there are 31
instances where it is not expressed
but clearly must be supplied.
The predicate complement may be an
adjective (71 times),11 a
noun (7 times),12 a participle (7 times),13
or the genitive personal
pronoun, u[mw?n (1 time). In two
instances14 infinitives seem to re-
quire e@stin to be supplied in the
sense 'it exists', with no predica-
tion being stated. The infinitive is anarthrous 75
times; it has the
nominative article (to<) 10 times, the genitive
(tou?)
twice, and the
accusative (to<) once. The frequencies
for word order when the predic-
ative verb is present are Predicate/Verb/Infinitive
(46 times), Verb/
Predicate/Infinitive (7 times), and Infinitive/Verb/Predicate
(4 times).
When
no predicative verb is expressed, the infinitive usually follows
the predicate complement (25 of the 31 total).
Subject
of Passive Verbs
Infinitives which would have been
the object of a verb in the
active voice may become the subject of its passive
transform (22
instances). For example, Matt
musth<ria/ 'To you it has been
granted to know the mysteries'. The
verbs found in this construction are di<dwmi (9), xrhmate<zw (4), e]pi-
tre<pw (3), gra<fw (3), xari<zomai (2), and sumfwne<w (1). The infinitive
is anarthrous 20 times; the other two have the
nominative to<.
Subject
of Other Verbs
In light of the fact that the
infinitive is a verbal noun and can
function as a subject, it is rather surprising
that, apart from the three
categories previously listed, there are only three
other instances of a
subject infinitive in the NT. They are Matt
xersi>n
fagei?n ou] koinoi? to>n a@nqrwpon / 'to eat with unwashed
hands does not defile a man') and twice in Rom
10 The forms used are e@stin,
h#n, ^#, and ei@en.
11 kalo<n (24), eu]kopw<teron (8), krei?tton (5), ai]sxro<n (4), di<kaion
(4),
a]nagkai?on (4), a]qe<miton (4), dunato<n (3), maka<rion
(2), perisso<teron (2), emo<n (2),
(2),
and the following with one each: a]ne<ndekton,
a]nagkaio<teron, a]resto<n, a@cion,
du<skolon,
o]knhro<n, perisso<n, sklhro<n and fobero<n.
12 a]na<gkh (2), e@qoj (2), and one each of a[rpagmo<n,
Xristo<j, and
ke<rdoj.
13 e@con (3), de<on
(2), and pre<pon (2). These
participles may be predicate adjectives
or perhaps periphrastic; note that each is a
participle of an impersonal verb.
14 2
Cor
6
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
para<keitai<
moi, to> de> katerga<zesqai to> kalo>n ou@ / 'to will is present
with me, but to perform the good is not [present]').15
All three have
the nominative article to<.
Subject
Infinitives
By far the most frequent usage of
the infinitive is in the predicate
of a sentence--either as a complement of the verb,
part of an object
clause, or as the direct object itself. Here the basis
for classification
centers in the character of the verb which
governs the infinitive.
The
Complementary Infinitive
Many verbs take an infinitive as a
complement to their meaning;
in a sense, the infinitive functions as the direct
object of the verb. The
interdependence of the verb and the
infinitive is often so close that it
forms a verb phrase or "chain." Verbs of
this type are sometimes
called catenative. The chain may be composed of two,
three, or more
links; the last one is always an infinitive or
participle and the preced-
ing ones must all be catenative.
At least 72 verbs are followed by
892 complementary infinitives
in the NT. Most of these verbs have a
corresponding verb in English
which also takes an infinitive complement. There is
little agreement
among grammarians in classifying these verbs, so the
attempt made
here must be a tentative and rather hesitating one.
This study classi-
fies six categories of verbs that take complementary
infinitives.
1. Verbs Expressing Will or Desire,
and their Opposites. The
complementary infinitive is found
with verbs meaning 'to will, to
wish, to desire' (qe<lw [130], bou<lomai [39], e]piqume<w [9], and e]pi-
poqe<w [4]) and the closely
associated idea 'to choose, to prefer, to be
pleased',
expressed by eu]doke<w (9), suneudoke<w (2), ai]re<w (2), file<w
(2),
and fronti<zw (1). An opposite sense, 'to be ashamed' (e]paisxu<n-
omai [2] and ai]sxu<nomai [1]) also takes the complementary infinitive.
2.
Verbs Expressing an Activity to the End
that Something Shall
or Shall Not be Done. This rather cumbrous heading is taken from
Smyth16
and includes a great number and variety of verbs which take
a complementary infinitive. Some express
'attempt, effort, force'
(zhte<w [35], sumbouleu<w [2], and once each: a]gwni<zw, a]namimnh<skw,
a]napei<qw,
a]ske<w, e]pizhte<w, filotime<omai, peira<omai, and zhlo<w).
15 This is a literal
translation. NASB uses the gerunds
"the wishing" and "the
doing" to translate the Greek infinitives.
16 Herbert W. Smyth, A Greek Grammar (New York: American Book
Co., 1916)
304.
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF
INFINITIVES 7
Some
express the concept of 'undertaking' or 'accomplishing' (me<llw
[93],
a@rxomai [92], tolma<w [13], poie<w [12], kinduneu<w [4], pros-
ti<qhmi [3], e]nerge<w [2], promeleta<w [2], and one each: e[toima<zw,
parrhsia<zw,
prolamba<nw, proena<rxomai, and prospoie<omai). Other
verbs express the opposite idea, 'to thwart, to
hinder, to delay' (o]kne<w
[12],
fobe<omai [4], e]gko<ptw [3], u[poste<llw [3], and one each: e]ca-
pore<w, e]nedreu<w,
kate<xw, and
xroni<zw).
3. Verbs of Permitting and Allowing, and their Opposites. These
include
e]pitre<pw (16), a]fi<hmi (15), e]a<w (4), lagxa<nw (1) and the
opposite sense of 'refusing, forbidding,
preventing': kwlu<w (10), par-
ai]te>w (2), a]parne<omai (1), and a]rne<omai (1).
4.
Verbs Denoting Ability and Know-How.
'Ability' is expressed
most frequently by du<namai (213); other verbs
related to this concept
are
i]sxu<w (17), e]cisxu<w (2), and katisxu<w (2). Also related are di<dwmi
in the sense 'give [the ability] to' (11), e@xw in the sense 'have [the
ability]
to' (23), eu]kaire<w 'have time to' (3), eu]odo<omai 'to succeed, to
get along well' (1), and eu[ri<skw 'to find [by study]'
(1). 'Know-how' is
represented by oi#da (13), ginw<skw (2), manqa<nw 'to learn how to' (9),
and mue<omai (4).
5. Verbs denoting Fitness, Propriety, Custom. Verbs used in
this sense are a]cio<w 'to consider worthy'
(3), the passive of katacio<w
in the sense 'be counted worthy' (2), and ei@wqa 'be accustomed to'.
Di<dwmi in the sense 'to give
[the privilege] to' (5) also belongs here.
6. Verbs Denoting Need or
Obligation. This class is composed
of o]fei<lw 'to be obligated to, to
owe' (25), along with di<dwmi in the
sense 'to give [the need] to' (2).
Less then 2% of the complementary
infinitives have the article.
Eight
are found with the genitive article and eight with the accusative,
compared to 878 anarthrous complementary infinitives
in the NT.
Infinitive
in Indirect Discourse
When an infinitive stands as the
object of a verb of mental
perception or communication and expresses the
content or the sub-
stance of the thought or of the communication it is
classified as being
in indirect discourse.17 Compared with
the previous category, the list
17 The term
"indirect discourse" is used in various ways by grammarians, from a
very
broad sense (such as A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the
Light of Historical
Research
[
(sense of only indirectly quoted words (as in H. P. V. Nunn, A Short Syntax of New
Testament Greek [
8
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
of verbs found with this usage of the infinitive
is a little larger (82
versus 72) but the number of infinitives involved is
much smaller (362
versus 892). I offer here an attempt to classify these
verbs.
1.
Verbs of Mental Perception: Recognizing, Knowing, Under-
standing.
An example of this usage is found in Heb 11:3: Pi<stei
noou?men
kathrti<sqai tou>j ai]w?naj r[h<mati qeou? / 'By
faith we under-
stand that the worlds were prepared by the word of
God '. The infini-
tive kathrti<sqai expresses the content
of the mental perception--what
was understood. Verbs found with this usage of the
infinitive are
a]kou<w (2), katalamba<nw (1), noe<w (1), oi#da (1), and qewre<w (1).
2. Verbs of Mental Perception: Thinking, Believing, Feeling,
Deciding. For this usage see,
e.g., Luke 2:44: nomi<santej de> au]to>n
ei#nai
e]n t^? sunodi<% / 'His parents supposed Him to be in the cara-
van '. The infinitive ei#nai tells what they thought--that
he was in
the caravan. The following verbs are used in this
category: doke<w
(29),
kri<nw (12), nomi<zw (10), logi<zomai (6),
the sense 'to make up one's mind, to resolve' (4), dokima<zw (2),
e]pilanqa<nomai (2), oi@omai (2), pisteu<w (2), sunti<qemai (2), u[ponoe<w
(2),
h[ge<omai, and one each: o[ri<zw,
proori<zw, proti<qemai, sthri<zw
and u[pokri<nomai.
3. Verbs of Mental Perception: Hoping, Expecting. 1 Tim 3:14
provides
an example of this category: e]lpi<zwn
e]lqei?n pro>j se> e]n
ta<xei / 'hoping to come to
you before long'. The infinitive e]lqei?n
expresses the substance of this hope--the thing he
hoped for. Verbs
used are e]lpi<zw (13), prosdoka<w (2), and prose<xw (2).
4. Verbs
of Communication: Indirect Statement. For an example
see 1 John 2:6: o[ le<gwn e]n
au]t&? me<nein / 'the one who says he abides
in Him'. The infinitive expresses the content of
what was said; in
direct. discourse it would be
a statement, "I abide in Him." The
following verbs are classified in this category: le<gw (42), marture<w
(4),
a]naqemati<zw (3), a]pagge<lw (3), a]pokri<nomai (3), fa<skw (3),
e]pagge<llw (2), o]mnu<w (2), o[mologe<w in the sense 'to
promise, to
agree
to' (2); and once each: boa<w, diisxuri<zw, e]pidei<knumi, e]rw?,
fhmi<,
katakri<nw, proaitia<omai, shmai<nw, and suni<sthmi.
5. Verbs
of Communication: Indirect Question. Acts 10:48 has
an
example of this classification: to<te h]rw<thsan au]to>n e]pimei?nai
h[me<raj
tina<j /
'then they asked him to stay on for a few days'. The
be two-fold: (a) mental activity and perception
when it states the content or substance
of the thought, and (b) indirect communication,
whether as statement, question, or
command.
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 9
direct quote would be a question, "Will you stay
on . . . ?" Verbs used"
with an infinitive in indirect discourse are e]rwta<w (10), aite<w (6),
eu@xomai (6), de<omai (4), proseu<xomai (3), paraite<w (2); and once
each:
e]perwta<w, e]pikale<omai,
kataneu<w, and
katasei<w.
6. Verbs
of Communication: Indirect Command or Entreaty.
Luke
a]xqh?nai
pro>j au]to<n /
'Jesus commanded that he be brought to Him'.
The
direct quotation would have been a command or exhortation,
"bring him to Me." Several verbs fall in this category: paragge<llw
(32),
parakale<w (30), keleu<w (26), ei#pon (11), gra<fw (7), diata<ssw
(7),
e]nte<llomai (4), e]pita<ssw (4), dida<skw (3), neu<w (2), sumbouleu<w,
(2),
ta<ssw (2), u[podei<knumi
(2); and
once each: a]peile<w,
dei<knumi, diamarture<w, e]norki<zw, e]pikri<nw, e]piste<llw, eu]ageli<zw,
dei<knumi, diamarture<w, e]norki<zw, e]pikri<nw, e]piste<llw,
eu]aggeli<zw.
in the sense 'to proclaim that', khru<ssw,
paideu<w, paraine<omai,
prosta<ssw, and sumfroni<zw. In one passage the governing
verb is
unexpressed; some form of dida<skw probably should be
supplied
(1
Tim 4:3; cf. v 1).
Object
Infinitive with Other Verbs
It may be surprising, but there are only two (or
perhaps three)
other instances where an infinitive stands as the
true object of a verb.
2
Cor
doing it also'; the infinitive seems to be a true
object rather than a
complement to e]pitele<w. In Phil
u[pe>r
e]mou? fronei?n / 'that now at last you have revived your
concern
for me'), fronei?n seems to be functioning
as a simple noun object.
One
other passage that perhaps belongs here is
maxair^ a]poktanqh?nai,
au]to>n e]n maxair^ a]poktanqh?nai / 'If anyone
is to be killed with the sword, with the sword he
will be killed’.18 The
first a]poktanqh?nai is clearly the
predicate of a verb which needs to be
supplied (perhaps "is destined" as the NASB supplies in the first half
of the couplet, or perhaps simply the copula as
the NIV does in both
halves of the couplet; in the latter case the
infinitive would not strictly
be object,
but rather a subjective complement).
It might well be argued that some of the
infinitives which I have
classed as complementary might be considered
simply as noun objects
of the verb. In such cases I have tried to follow
the lead of other
18 The translation given in this instance
is from the NIV which follows Codex
A.
NASB follows a different
text and translates, "if anyone kills with the sword." The
whole passage is greatly compressed and difficult to
interpret.
10
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
grammarians19 who list the governing
verb as one which elsewhere
takes an infinitive to complete its meaning.
Adverbial Infinitives
In many instances the infinitive is used, in
effect, as a subordinate
adverbial clause which usually expresses time but
may also express
cause, purpose or result.
Infinitive of Purpose or
Result
The most natural adverbial use of the
infinitive, either articular
or anarthrous, is to express the end or direction
of an action, whether
intentional (purpose) or consequential (result).
Grammarians who
have studied the historical development of the Greek
language point
out that the Greek infinitive originated as a verbal
substantive with a
fixed dative or locative case form.20
Thus, as Robertson says, "This
notion of purpose is the direct meaning of the dative
case which is
retained. It is the usual meaning of the inf. in
Homer, that of pur-
pose”21 and "This dative inf. was probably
a survival of the old and
once common dative of purpose.”22 In
later Greek, especially in
Hellenistic
Greek, the infinitive in this and all other uses gave way
increasingly to the i!na-clause until it
disappeared entirely in modern
Greek
where it is replaced with na< (i.e., i!na)
+ subjunctive. In the NT
it is still very common as an expression of
purpose, along with i!na.
The relation between purpose and result is a
close one and often
difficult, sometimes impossible, to distinguish.
Intended result is pur-
pose; accomplished or realized purpose is result,
and it is not clear in
every instance which is in the mind of the author.23
For example, in
Rev
5:5 e]ni<khsan o[ le<wn . . .
a]noi?zai
is an accomplished fact, but the
speaker might be pointing to the reason for the
action. Another factor
contributing to this confusion
between purpose and result in the NT
may be the theological context which presents a
sovereign God whose
purposes always become results and results always
arise out of his
purposes.
In this classification I label each example as
either infinitive of
purpose or of result where it seems reasonably
clear to do so, and I
put in another category those which might
reasonably be either.
19 See particularly BDF, 201-5.
20 For a discussion of the origin and
development of the infinitive in the Greek
language see Robertson, Grammar, 1051-56.
21 Ibid.,1087.
22 Ibid., 1053.
23 For a rather thorough discussion of this
problem see Robertson, Grammar,
1089-91.
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 11
1. Infinitive
of Purpose. Two clear examples of infinitives of
purpose are Matt 2:2: h@lqomen
proskunh?sai au]t&?
/ 'we have come
to
worship Him' and Luke
au]tou?
ba<skein xoi<rouj / 'he sent him into his fields to feed
swine'.
Verbs
found with an infinitive of purpose are (a) 'to send': a]poste<llw
(19),
e]caposte<llw (2), pe<mpw (4); (b) 'to give': di<dwmi (17), para-
di<dwmi (3); (c) 'to choose': e]kle<gomai (4), proxeiri<zomai (3); (d) more
than 40 others with three or less infinitives
involved; and (e) a special
category of intransitive verbs of motion: 'to go'
or 'to come'; com-
pounds of bai<nw (13), e@rxomai and its compounds (79),
poreu<omai
and its compounds (12), compounds of a@gw (5); verbs meaning 'to
be
present, to have come', h!kw (2), paragi<nomai (2), pa<reimi (1); and
miscellaneous intransitive verbs of
motion (19).
2.
Infinitives of Result. Sometimes a particle indicates that an
infinitive is an infinitive of result. !Wste is a combination of the
comparative particle w[j 'as' with the enclitic te 'and' (note the accent:
not w$ste as it would have to be
if it were one word) and means 'and
so' or 'so as'. The Blass-Debrunner grammar says,
"The introductory
particle for the infinitive of result is w!ste as in classical.”24
There are 64 infinitives in the NT introduced by
w!ste or w[j. Of
these, all but 8 are infinitives of result, the
result being either an
actual occurrence (51), a fictional occurrence as part
of a parable (3)
(Matt
if some condition were met (Matt 24:24; 1 Cor
13:2). Of the remaining
eight, five may perhaps be explained away. In Matt
may be understood as the co-ordinate of tosou?tai: "so many loaves
as it would take to actually feed so great a
crowd." In Matt 10:1 (two
occurrences), 27:1, and Acts 20:24 the results
intended were actually
realized later; this was known at the time when
the record was written
and may be reflected in the choice to use w!ste
or w[j. But the three
remaining passages are different. In Luke
whether the intended result was actually
realized. If w[j
e[toima<sai
au]t&?
means to prepare the people
of
not realized, as the following verse shows. But
probably these words
should be understood to mean "to make arrangement
for Him"
(NASB); if so it is clearly actual
result. In Luke
Jesus
was actually delivered over to the rulers, but it did not come
about by the tactics reported in this verse, that is,
by listening to
Jesus' teaching in order to trap him by his
speech.
Thus, the purpose
24 BDF, 197. They go on to explain
that there is uncertainty whether the simple w[j
is used, just as there is about its use in
customary Attic. In the UBS3 text w[j appears
with the infinitive twice (Luke
ing w!ste and both with the
meaning of intended result (i.e., purpose).
12
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
in this context failed. There seems to be no
doubt, however, that in
Luke
which, obviously, was in no sense realized. Jesus was
not thrown
down from the hill, as is explicitly stated in the next
verse. Apparently
the confusion over purpose and result, between
intended and actual
result, must sometimes be recognized even when w!ste occurs.
The other five infinitives identified in this
study as infinitives of
result do not use w!ste or w[j. In Matt
infinitive piste?sai, was not the purpose
for repentance but the result
of it. So also in Rom 7:3 the wife's freedom from
the law of her dead
husband is not "in order that she may not
be an adultress," but it
results in her not being so. In Heb 11:8 Abraham
obeyed "with the
result that" he went out, not "in order
to" go out. And in
(twice) it is preferable to understand the immorality and
eating of
idol-sacrifices as the result rather
than the purpose of Jezebel's false
teaching.
3. Infinitives
either Purpose or Result. The fact that the infini-
tive may express either purpose or result requires
the interpreter to
make a subjective decision or admit uncertainty as
to the precise
significance of the infinitive. The
preceding sections include those
instances where this writer has made that
decision. The present cate-
gory includes 19 places25 where there was
uncertainty regarding classifi-
cation. The reader is called upon to use his own
judgment in these
cases.
Perhaps this whole issue should prompt us to
look again at our
own language. Is it always possible to make
distinctions between
purpose and result in the English use of the
infinitive? And, do we
need to do so?
Articular
Infinitives with Prepositions
Of all the many uses of the Greek infinitives,
this one is the most
foreign to English speakers. English uses
infinitives in all the ways
that Greek does as subjects of verbs, as objects
(both complementary
and in indirect discourse), as adverbs expressing
purpose or result,
and in apposition to nouns, adjectives, and
pronouns. But there is
nothing in English to prepare the beginning
Greek student for the use
of the infinitive when it stands as object of a
preposition and func-
tions as an adverbial clause.
It is impossible to translate these
constructions literally into
any understandable English. They most naturally are
translated by
25 Mark 7:4; Luke 1:25; 24: 16, 45; Acts 7:
19; 10:47; 15:10; 20:30; Rom 1:24, 28; 11:8
(twice), 10; 2 Cor 10:16 (twice); Gal 3:10; I Thess 3:3; Rev
16:9, 19.
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 13
TABLE 1
Articular Infinitives
with Prepositions
Tense of
Prepo-
Infinitive:
sit ion Article
Number
Pres. Aor. Perf Meaning
ei]j to< 71
32 37
2 Purpose:
"in order to"
e]n
t&? 56 44 12
Temporal: "while,
as, when"
dia< to< 32
24 1 7 Causal:
"because"
meta< to< 15
14
1 Temporal:
"after
pro<j to< 11
3 8 Purpose: "in order to"
pro< tou?
9 1 8
Temporal:
"before"
a]nti<
tou? 1 1 Substitution:
"instead of"
e!neken tou? 1 1
Causal:
"because, for the sake of"
e!wj tou?
1 1 Temporal:
"until"
pri<n - 8 8 Temporal: "before"
pri>n
h@ - 3 3
Temporal:
"before"
converting them into subordinate clauses, choosing
the conjunction
according to the meaning of the preposition and
changing the infini-
tive into a finite verb. For example, Luke
tau?ta) may be translated
"while he was saying these things." A literal
translation would be, "in the him to say these
things," and, less literal,
"in the process of his saying these things." Table 1
sets forth the basic
information regarding these constructions.
Only those prepositions listed in Table 1 are
used in this con-
struction. There are two examples which conform
completely to this
pattern but which clearly do not belong to this
category: 2 Cor 8:11;
e]k
tou? e@xein
/ 'by your ability' (NASB), and Heb
tou?
zh?n / 'through [their] whole life' or 'all their lives' (NASB). These
will be considered later under the category Infinitives as Simple
Nouns.
A characteristic of this construction is the use
of the article with
the infinitive; the only exception is with pri<n. Robertson explains,
"The
use of pri<n with the inf. was common in Homer before the
article was used with the inf. The usage became
fixed and the article
never intervened.”26 He points out that
the case used with pri<n is
Ablative (Genitive).
The tense of the infinitive signifies, of
course, not time, but aspect.
The
present is used for a durative aspect and the aorist for simple
occurrence or indefinite. This produces a subtle
distinction especially
in the case of e]n t&? with
the infinitive. When the present is used the
26 Robertson, Grammar, 1075.
14
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
sense is durative; it is continuing action going on
at the same time as
the main clause. When the tense is aorist it is
simple occurrence,
simultaneous but not emphasizing the
continuing action. Usually
NASB translates e]n t&? with the aorist infinitive by
"when" (9 of the
12
times it occurs). They use "while" or ''as'' 31 times and
"when"
only 7 times with the present infinitive.
Six of the prepositions used with infinitives
are temporal in sig-
nificance and express time relative to the main
sentence as either
antecedent (pro<, pri<n,
pri>n h@, e!wj),
contemporary (e]n), or subsequent
(me<ta>). Two express purpose
or end (ei]j, pro<j); two express cause
(dia<, e!neken); and one, substitution
(a]nti<). The meanings given in
Table 1 are the more common ones, but they are not
exhaustive.
With
e]n the sense is sometimes instrumental
(Acts
The
ei]j to< + infinitive
construction seems sometimes to be the same
as the simple infinitive of purpose or result; in
two instances it seems
exactly equivalent to the simple epexegetical
infinitive of an adjective
(Jas
1:19, twice).
Causal
Infinitive
The one passage which alone shows the infinitive
without a pre-
position functioning in the adverbial sense of
cause is 2 Cor 2:13: t&?
mh>
eu[rei?n me Ti<ton
/ 'because I did not find Titus'. The case of the
infinitive is instrumental-dative (with t&?), which is appropriate
to the
causal sense. The construction is structurally
parallel to the purpose
and result categories already discussed.
Absolute Infinitives
The
Infinitive Absolute
The classical infinitive absolute is described
by Goodwin in his
grammar of classical Greek: "The infinitive
may stand absolutely in
parenthetic phrases, generally with w[j or o!son. . . . The most com-
mon of these expressions is w[j
e@poj ei]
word or if one may say so, used to soften a
statement.”27 This con-
struction occurs only once in the NT and is in
fact the very example
Goodwin
quoted--Heb 7:9: kai> w[j
e@poj ei]
The
Imperatival Infinitive
In grammatical terminology absolute is often used to refer to some-
thing which appears alone, without object or
grammatical connection.
27 W. W. Goodwin, Greek Grammar, revised by C. B. Gulick (
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 15
Robertson
uses the term to describe an infinitive construction other
than the infinitive absolute already described (he
deals with the
category under a different heading). He applies this
term to those
instances where an infinitive seems to stand as
the main verb of a
sentence in a context of imperatival sentences,
functioning as if it
were an imperative. The infinitive is absolute in
the sense that there is
no "main verb on which it depends." It
is true that in classical Greek
there was such an imperatival infinitive. Goodwin
describes it, "The
infinitive with a subject nominative is sometimes
used like the second
person of the imperative" (emphasis added). He
says of a similar
construction (infinitive with a
subject accusative):
This construction has been explained by
supplying a verb like do<j or
do<te grant. . . or ge<noito may it be. . . . In laws, treaties, and procla-
mations, the infinitive often depends on e@doce
or de<doktai
be it enacted,
or keke<leustai it is
commanded;
which may be expressed in a previous
sentence or understood.28
A few infinitives in the NT have been accounted
for as impera-
tival, and in order to present as complete a picture
as possible I have
identified eleven examples.29 However,
it should be noted that there is
no instance in the NT of a subject in the
nominative case as required
in the classical pattern. Also, as Goodwin pointed
out, even the
classical construction could be explained by
supplying a governing
verb expressed or understood in the context. Blass
says, "a governing
verb (of 'saying', xrh<,
dei?) can
readily be supplied everywhere in the
New
Testament passages (which was not the case with the old impera-
tival
inf.)"30 He would limit the NT examples
to Rom 12:14 and Phil
3:16.
It is my judgment that all these so-called imperatival infinitives
should be considered elliptical and assigned to the
complementary or
indirect discourse categories already presented.31
Limiting Infinitives
An infinitive often is used with nouns,
adjectives, and pronouns
to limit, describe, or explain them by adding some
qualifying or
restrictive factor. An example is found in Rev 5:9,
12: @Acioj ei#
labei?n to>
bibli<on kai> a]noi?zai ta>j sfragi?daj au]tou?, . . . @Acioj . .
28 Ibid., p. 324.
29 Acts
30 BDF, 196.
31 Compare a similar problem and solution
of the so-called imperatival participle
discussed in my previous article, "The
Classification of Participles: A Statistical Study,"
GTJ 5 (1984) 163-79.
16
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
TABLE 2
Comparison of Words
Which Govern or Are Limited by Infinitives
Nouns Adjectives
Verbs Periphrastic
Verb Phrases
a]na<gkh (7) a]nagkai?on (4) a]nagka<zw (10) e@xein a]na<gkhn
a@cioj (11) a]coio<w (3)
a]rxh<
(1) a@rxomai (92) a]rxh>n labei?n
boulh< (1) bou<lomai (39) e@qenta boulh<n
gnw<mh
(1) ginw<skw (2)
dei? (120) de<on e]sti<n
du<namij
(1) dunato<j (10) du<namai (213)
e]lpi<j
(3) e]lpi<zw (13)
e]ne<dra (1) e]nedreu<w (1) e]ne<dran
poiou?ntej
e]ne<rgeia
(1) e]nerge<w (2)
e]ntolh< (1) e]nte<llomai (4) e]ntolh>n e@xein
e]cousi<a
(25) e@cestin (29) e]cousi<an
e@xein or di<donai,
e@con
e]sti<n, e@con [ e]sti<n]
e]paggeli<a
(2) e]pagge<llw (2)
e]pipoqi<a
(1) e]pipoqe<w (4) e]pipoqi<an
e@xein
e@toimoj (8) e[toima<zw (I) e[toi<mwj
e@xein, e]n e[toi<m& e@xein
eu]kairi<a (1) eu]kaire<w (3)
qe<lhma (1) qe<lw (130)
o]knhro<n (1) o]kne<w (1)
o]feile<thj (2) o]fei<lw (27)
parrhsi<a (1) parrhsia<zw (1) parrhsi<an
e@xein
pi<stij
(1) pisteu<w (2)
pre<
proqumi<a (1) pro<qumon
(I)
spoudh<
(1) spouda<zw (1) spoudh>n
poiou<menoj
xa<rij (2) xari<zomai (3)
xrei<a
(9) xrei<an
e@xein
xro<noj (1) xroni<zw (1)
labei?n
th>n du<namin kai> . . . k.t.l. / '(the Lamb) is worthy to take the
book and to open its seals. . . worthy to receive
power, etc.' The
infinitives explain in what respect worthiness is
ascribed. Some
grammarians use the term 'epexegetic' for this
usage.
The nouns or adjectives used in this
construction are very com-
monly those which are in the semantic range of verbs
which cus-
tomarily take the complementary infinitive (those
which denote ability,
fitness, readiness, need, desire, etc.). Table 2
gives a comparative
listing of words which govern or are limited by
infinitives.
Infinitives
Limiting Nouns
The largest category of these limiting
infinitives occurs with
nouns (88 instances). An example is found in 1 Cor
9:4: mh> ou]k
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 17
e@xomen e]cousi<an
fagei?n kai>
and drink?' The noun e]cousi<an is explained by referring it to eating
and drinking. Nouns limited thus by infinitives
express either (1)
'power, ability, authority' (e]cousi<a [25], du<namij [1]); (2) 'desire'
(qe<lhma [1], e]pipoqi<a [1], proqumi<a [1]); (3) 'need,
obligation' (xrei?a
[9],
a]na<gkh [5], o]feile<thj [2]); (4) 'time' (kairo<j [6], h[me<ra [3], w!ra
[1],
eu]kairi<a [1], xro<noj [1]); and (5) a
miscellaneous list of 31 others.
The
infinitive has the genitive article 14 times, the accusative once;
the article is absent 73 times.
Infinitives
Limiting Adjectives
The infinitive limits an adjective 43 times. An
example is in
2
Tim 2:2: oi!tinej i[kanoi> e@sontai kai>
e[te<rouj dida<cai
/ 'who will be
able to teach others also'. Applying the
classifications used before for
nouns, these adjectives express (1) 'power, ability,
authority' (dunato<j
[8],
i[
pro<qumon [1]); (3) 'need,
obligation' (a]nagkai?on [1]); (4) 'time' (bradu<j
[2],
o]cu<j [1], taxu<j [1]); (5) miscellaneous
(a]diko<j [1], dusermh<neutoj
[1],
e]leu<qeroj [1]); and a new
category, (6) 'fitness' (a@cioj [11]). Two
of the infinitives have the genitive article, two
the accusative, and 39
are anarthrous.
Infinitives
Limiting Pronouns
The limiting or describing function of the
infinitive is seen when
it stands in apposition to a pronoun. Jas 1:27 has
two examples of
this:
qrhskei<a kaqara> . . . au!th
e]sti<n, e]piske<ptesqai . . threi?n /
'This
is . . . pure religion, to visit, . . . and to keep'.
The pronoun
explained by this construction is usually the
demonstrative ou$toj (15
times).32 The interrogative o!j is predicate after an
infinitive subject
eight times, although six of the examples are found
in one statement
reported in three parallel passages.33
Twice an infinitive stands in
apposition to the relative pronoun o!j or, perhaps more
precisely, to
the understood antecedent of the relative. The two
passages are Acts
'the things which God announced beforehand, . . . that His
Christ
should suffer' (in a more direct sentence the
infinitive would be the
object in direct discourse) and Titus 2:2: Su> de>
la<lei a{ pre<
u[giainou<s^
didaskali<%. presbu<taj nhfali<ouj ei#nai, k. t. l. / 'Speak
32 Acts
(twice); Heb 9:8; Jas 1:27 (twice); 1 Pet 2:15.
33 Matt 9:5 (twice); Mark 2:9 (twice); Luke
5:23 (twice). The other two are Mark
18
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
the things which are fitting for sound doctrine,
older men are to be
temperate, etc.' (the infinitive clause expresses
that which is pre<
more direct structure this could be stated, "it
is fitting to be temper-
ate, etc.").
Other
Appositional Infinitives
A few other infinitives have been classified as
appositional. In
Acts
24:15, a]na<stasin me<llein e@sesqai
stands in
apposition to e]lpi<da:
'hope. . . that there is going to be a resurrection'.
In I Cor
.
. . pisto>j
ei#nai /
'as . . . one who is trustworthy' stands in apposition
to the subject of the main verb di<dwmi, as w[j would indicate. In Rev
with ska<ndalon, explaining its
constituent parts. Rev 12:7 is a diffi-
cult sentence, but the infinitive is most easily
explained as being in
apposition to po<lemoj: "there was war in
heaven, Michael. . . waging
war with. . . “
The
Infinitive as a Simple Noun
In two passages an articular infinitive stands
as the object of a
preposition in a structure exactly like those
already described (articu-
lar infinitives with a preposition), but in neither
case can these be
considered such. Rather, the infinitive seems to be
functioning as a
simple noun. In 2 Cor
which is not used elsewhere in that construction. ]Ek tou? e@xein states
the source from which the completion of the act
should come, 'by
your ability' (NASB),
'according to your means' (NIV), or
'out of that
which you have' (KJV--probably
clearest; certainly the most literal).
In
Heb
is used in the adverbial construction in the sense
of 'because' (with
an accusative), it never is so used in the sense
of 'through' (with
a genitive). In this passage another factor needs
to be considered.
This
infinitive zh?n is the only one in the entire NT which
has an
adjectival modifier, panto<j. There is evidence that
this particular
infinitive became in actual use a virtual noun
(like zwh<) to the extent
that in Ignatius frequently it was modified by an
adjective and even a
genitive.34
THE "SUBJECT" OF THE INFINITIVE
The quotation marks in this heading indicate
that the term
"subject" is being used in a way which needs an
explanation. It is
34 A. Buttman, A Grammar of the New Testament Greek (
Draper, 1891) 262.
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 19
customary for elementary grammars to say that the
subject of an
infinitive is in the accusative case. This gross
oversimplification of
the matter may be a helpful, generalized first step
for beginners, but
it soon demands qualification and even correction.
One of the major
goals for this study has been a clarification of this
rather confusing
problem.
A thorough discussion of the question may be
found in Robert-
son.35 He insists that
"the inf. is not finite, and, like the participle, has
no subject.”36 With regard to the
so-called accusative subject, he
considers "the true nature of the acc. with
the inf. as being merely
that of general reference.”37 To the
present writer this seems to be
technically correct. The infinitive is a verbal
noun, a noun expressing
the abstract notion of the verb, a name given to
the action or condi-
tion expressed by the verb. As such it does not need
to identify a doer
of the action or a possessor of the condition; if
it is desired to indicate
such, it appears as a limiting adjunct rather than a
subject. The
accusative of general reference, if used, limits
the abstract notion to
its particular application.
But this is not the whole picture. In most
occurrences the infini-
tive is referred by the context to a particular doer
or possessor of that
abstract verbal notion, and most frequently it is
not accusative. In
almost one-half of the NT infinitives (48.8%), it is
referred to the
subject of the governing verb which is in the
nominative case. The
noun to which an infinitive refers is accusative in
33.1 % of the cases,
dative in 8.9%, genitive in 3.0%, and vocative in 0.2%
of the cases. In
2.5%
of the cases, the doer is not explicitly mentioned in
the sentence
and cannot be identified by case. Those which are
truly general or
abstract account for 3.6%.
Furthermore, a distinction needs to be made between the "gram-
matical subject" and the "logical,
subject" of the infinitive, that is, the
doer or possessor of the verbal idea expressed by an
infinitive. Tech-
nically, with Robertson, there is no
"grammatical subject." Those
who speak of the accusative as subject probably
have in mind that
most commonly, if an explicit "subject" is
stated within the infinitive
clause, it is accusative.
In translating infinitives it is common to
convert them into
clauses; in many instances they cannot be
translated into English in
any other way. That necessitates changing the
infinitive into a finite
verb and giving a subject to that verb. In the
remainder of this discus-
sion I will be using the term "subject" in
the sense of the logical
35 Robertson. Grammar. 1082-85.
36 Ibid., 1082.
37 Ibid., 1083.
20
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
subject, the doer of the action of the possessor
of the condition
expressed by the infinitive. How this subject
relates to the rest of the
sentence is the basis of the analysis given here.
Same
as Subject of the Governing Verb
This is the situation with more than half of the
infinitives in the
NT.
It is most frequently in the nominative case (1115 times), whether
expressed as a noun, pronoun, other substantive,
or simply by the as
personal ending of the verb. However, if the
governing verb is a
participle (which like the infinitive is not finite
and has no grammatical
subject), the grammatical case of the doer of
the action of the parti-
ciple is determined by the word with which the
participle agrees and
therefore may be any case. An example of a
genitive is in Luke 21:28:
a]rxome<nwn
de> tou<twn gi<nesqai / 'when these things begin to come to
pass'. The subject of gi<nesqai is the same as that of
its governing verb
a]rxome<nwn; the subject of a]rxome<nwn is the substantive it
modifies,
tou<twn, which is genitive
because it is in a genitive absolute construc-
tion (this is the situation in 23 examples). The
participle may be a
genitive as object of a preposition (7 times), as
a possessive genitive a
(5),
or as the genitive object of a]kou<w (1). Another passage
involving a
two infinitives is elliptical so that it is difficult
to account for the
genitive case.38 There are 13
instances of the participle being dative
because it is an indirect object (7), a predicate
dative of possession (in
doxologies) (4), an object of a verb taking the
dative (1), or a dative l
of reference (1). For example, I Pet 4:5 has oi{ a]podw<sousin lo<gon
t&?
e[toi<mwj e@xonti kri?nai / 'they shall give
account to Him who is
ready to judge'. The subject of kri?nai
is the same as its governing
verb e@xonti which is in the dative
as indirect object of a]podw<sousin.
There
are 40 infinitives whose subject is accusative, the same as its
governing verb (17 are participles and 23 are
other infinitives).
Same
as Direct Object of Main Verb
A large number (79) of infinitives have as their
subjects an accusa-
tive direct object of the main verb. An example is
found in Matt
28:20:
dida<skontej au]tou>j threi?n
pa<nta o!sa /
'teaching them to
observe all that'. Au]tou<j may be considered to be the direct object of
dida<skontej, "teaching
them" (cf. Matt 5:2), or as the subject of the
verbal idea in threi?n, "teaching that
they should keep. . . ." It is not
always easy to decide which is intended, but it
probably is of little
significance either way. In two
other instances, where the finite verb
takes a genitive object, the subject of the
infinitive is genitive.
38 1 Tim 4:3 (twice).
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 21
Same
as Indirect Object of Main Verb
More frequent (171 times) is a similar
co-functioning of a noun
as a dative of indirect object or dative of
reference and as the subject
of an infinitive. For example, Matt 3:7 reads, ti<j
u[pe<deicen u[mi?n
fugei?n a]po>
th?j mellou?shj o]rgh?j
/ 'who warned you to flee from the
wrath to come?' The dative pronoun u[mi?n functions in the main
clause
as indirect object of the verb. It is also
subject, the doer of the action,
of the infinitive fugei?n.39
There are many indicators, however, which warn
against putting
the dative on a par with the accusative as subject
of the infinitive.
First,
there are many places where this co-functioning dative occurs
where other elements of the infinitive clause show
that the writer
thinks of the subject as accusative. For example, in
Matt 18:8 is
found,
kalo<n soi< e]stin
ei]selqei?n ei]j th>n zwh>n kullo>n h} xwlo<n, h}
du<o
xei?raj h} du<o po<daj e@xonta / 'it is better for you (dative) to enter
life crippled or lame (accusative), than having
(acc.) two hands'. While
soi< is properly dative in
the main clause, in the infinitive clause
adjectives and participles referring to the same
person are accusative,
as if to agree with se<. Apparently there was
an underlying sense that
called for the accusative, but the abbreviated actual
statement per-
mitted the co-functioning. Note that the same
structure is used again
in v 9, and cf. the parallel passages, Mark 9:43,
45, 47 where se< is
used in place of soi<. The difference, if
any, seems to be between "it is
good for you to . . ." and "it is good
that you should. . . ." This co-
functioning dative with participial modifiers in the
accusative is found
also in Luke 5:7, Acts
e]pe<tacen
au]toi?j a]naklhi?nai pa<ntaj / 'And he commanded them
all to recline'. The indirect object au]toi?j
is immediately adjacent
to the accusative subject pa<ntaj ('them [dative] all
[accusative]');
Acts
the infinitive is accusative even though the
subject referred to is
present in a co-functioning dative. Gal 2:6 (cf.
v 9) is similar, except
that a co-functioning genitive is used.
Second, this co-functioning is not limited to
the dative. It has
already been seen with the accusative direct
object. It occurs also with
the genitive.40 Even the nominative
could be labelled as co-functioning,
39 This construction has been studied by E.
J. Lovelady, "Infinitive Clause Syntax
in the Gospels" (Th.M. thesis, Grace
Theological Seminary, 1976) 134-40. One quota-
tion will express the thrust of his conclusion:
"The dative word or construction in
question is serving en portmanteau, for it co-functions, for practical purposes, both
on
the main finite clause level, and on the more
restricted infinitive clause level" (p. 137).
40 E.g., Acts
genitive object of a preposition (kat
] au]t]w?n).
22
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
for half of all infinitives show the subject of the
main verb co-
functioning as the subject of the infinitive. Here
also there are indica-
tions that an understood subject accusative is in the
background.
Usually
(34 times) when the infinitive is a predicative verb followed
by a subjective complement, that complement is put
in the nominative
case if the subject, as subject of the governing
verb, is nominative.
But
there are two instances where the accusative is used.41 When the
nominative subject is explicitly repeated as
reflexive object of the
governing verb (Heb 5:5) it is put in the
accusative case.
Third, occasionally when the subject of the
infinitive is the same
as some other part of the sentence it is repeated
explicitly as an
accusative adjunct of the infinitive. An example of
this is found in
2
Cor 2:13: ou]k e@sxhka a@nesin t&? pneu<mati< mou t&? mh>
eu[rei?n me
Ti<ton / 'I still had no peace of mind, because
I did not find my
brother Titus there' (NIV). The subject of both the main verb and the
infinitive is Paul, nominative as subject of e@sxhka, but repeated as an
accusative me in the infinitive
clause.
Fourth, even where the subject is abstract or
general (see below)
and is not mentioned anywhere in the text, it may
be modified by a
participle in the accusative case.42
Same
as Some Other Part of the Sentence
A few times (21) the subject of the infinitive
is referred to in
other parts of the sentence. There are four instances
where those
addressed directly in the vocative case are the
doers of the action of
the infinitive. Once a nominative substantival
participle and once a
substantive clause introduced by o!ti and functioning as
subject of the
sentence (hence, the clause is nominative) are
subject of the infinitive.
The
subject of the infinitive is genitive 30 times (genitive of possession
[23
times], genitive object of a preposition [6 times], and a partitive
genitive [1 time]). In 20 instances it is
expressed by a word in a dative
relation to the sentence, (predicate dative of
possession [9 times],
dative of reference [9 times], dative of advantage [1
time], and dative
object of a preposition [1 time]). There are five
examples where the
subject is accusative as the object of a
preposition.
Subject
Explicitly Expressed in the Infinitive Clause
A very large number (608) of infinitives have
their subject ex-
plicitly stated within the infinitive clause,
either as a noun (228 times)
41 Luke 11:8, Acts 18:3. Both are articular
infinitives after a preposition.
42 E.g., I Pet
in the infinitive clause by an accusative
adverbial participle a]gaqopoiou?ntej.
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 23
or pronoun (380 times) or some other substantival
expression (7 times).
The
case is always accusative.43 Apparently
this is the basis for the
prevalent notion that the infinitive takes an
accusative subject. It
seems to be true when the subject is specifically
included as part of
the infinitive clause.
Subject
Unexpressed; to be Supplied from Context
In 58 instances there is no mention anywhere in
the sentence of
the doer of the action of the infinitive, but from
the general context
this subject can be understood. Since it is not part
of the sentence its
case is undetermined.
Subject
is Abstract, General or Indefinite
In 82 instances the subject of the infinitive is
best considered to
be abstract, general, or indefinite. It applies to
any or all; there is no
specific doer or possessor involved. Matt 9:5
offers an example: ti<
ga<r e]stin
eu]kopw<teron, ei]
to say. . . or to say'. The one doing the saying
is not in mind,
it is true whoever says it. Matt
kalw?j
poiei?n /
'it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath'. Compare
also Mark 12:33, Jas 1:27.
Indeed, Robertson insists (as has already been
pointed out) that
this is true of all infinitives by their nature as
abstract nouns and this
abstract quality is referenced to particular
cases by the accusative of
general reference. But this seems to ignore the
majority of instances
where a particular "subject" is present to
the minds of the readers in
other parts of the sentence. It is not true that all
infinitives which do
not have an accusative of reference are to be
considered abstract and
general.
Summary
The following statements will summarize the
conclusions of this
study regarding the subject of the infinitive. Most
frequently the sub-
ject is the same as that of the governing verb;
hence, in the nominative
case except when the governing verb is a participle--then
it may be in
any case. Very often the subject of the infinitive
co-functions in a
grammatical relation to some other part of the
sentence, such as
direct or indirect object, object of preposition, a
substantive participle
43
tion,
expressed it is always in the accusative
case."
24
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL.
TABLE 3
Cases Used as “Subject”
of Infinitives
Easily General
Under- or
stood Indefinite Nom. Gen. Dat. Acc. Voc. Total
Subject
Same as Governing
Verb
1115
38 13
40 1206
Same
as Direct Object 2
79 81
Same
as Indirect Object 171
171
Same
as Some Other Part
of Sentence 2
30 20 5 4 61
Explicit
in Infinitive Clause 632
632
Not
Expressed 58 82 140
Total
58
82 1117 70 204 756
4 2291
2.5% 3.6% 48.8%
3.0% 8.9%
33.0% 0.2%
or adjective, a possessive construction, etc. This co-functioning results
in the subject being in any of the cases. When the
subject is expressly
stated as an adjunct of the infinitive it is always in
the accusative case.
The
accusative also must be understood to be present to the mind
even when the subject co-functions with some other
non-accusative
element of the sentence. These conclusions are
summarized statisti-
cally in Table 3.
ANARTHROUS VERSUS ARTICULAR INFINITIVES
In the NT the infinitive is anarthrous 1977
times (86.3%). The
article appears with it 314 times (13.7%). The
reasons for this and the
significance of it have been the
subject of discussion among gram-
marians (with most of the discussion long in
theory and short in
substance). This presentation will attempt to
summarize the situation
in three negative observations and a positive but
general suggestion.
Not
for Case Identification
The use of the article does not seem to be for
the purpose of
identifying the case of the non-declinable abstract
infinitive, although
it does that incidentally at least part of the
time. In the vast majority
of instances there is no article, and no reason is
apparent why these
are not just as much in need of case identification
as those where
it is present. Even when the article is present it
does not distinguish
between the nominative and accusative (to< serves for both). But
this
is particularly demonstrated by the genitive
article (tou?)
with the
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 25
infinitive, which is. used
for every case function; with subject infini-
tives which are nominative, with purpose infinitives
which are closest
to the original dative-instrumental case, and with
the accusative infini-
tive as object of verbs, as well as with some which
stand in a properly
genitive relationship. J. H. Moulton speaks of
the tou?
as ". . . retain-
ing its genitive force almost as little as the
genitive absolute.”44
Not for Function
Indicators
The case of the article does not seem to be
related to the classi-
fication of infinitive functions.45
Every classification except one shows
both articular and anarthrous constructions. The one
exception, the
adverbial use of the infinitive with prepositions,
does seem to be
characterized by demanding the
article, although even one of these is
anarthrous.46 The article does
identify which meaning of the preposi-
tion is intended when the preposition can use more
than one case.
For
example, dia> to< indicates that dia< means 'on account of'
rather
than 'through'. But apparently this is not the
reason for its use, since
it is used even where the preposition has only one
case.
Not for Case
Relationships
We have already seen that the genitive article
is used with some
subject infinitives. Object infinitives have an
article only 27 times; 11
are accusative as would be expected, but 16 are
genitive, not one of
which goes with a verb which normally takes the
genitive.47 With
purpose and result infinitives 41 genitive and
one accusative articles
are found; none of them use the dative which might
be expected.
Even
with the limiting or epexegetic infinitive the article does not
indicate the case relation which exists between
the noun or adjective
and the infinitive construed with it. The vast
majority are anarthrous,
and when the article is used it is usually the
ambiguous tou?.
The same
44 James Hope Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, vol. I, Prole-
gomena (Edinburgh:
T. & T. Clark, 1908) 216.
45 A. T. Robertson (Grammar, 1063) says, "The articular inf. has all the main uses
of the anarthrous inf."
46 pri<n is not strictly a
preposition; it is a temporal adverb which takes the infini-
tive in this construction. It is used only twice elsewhere
in the NT with finite verbs
when the sentence is negative. This does not,
however, explain the absence of the
article; cf. e!wj, which also is a
temporal adverb, and uses the article with the infinitive
in this construction. See above and n. 26.
47 In Rom
which seems a natural case for this meaning although
there are no other examples of its
use with this verb. In 2 Cor 1:8 a genitive
infinitive follows the verb e]capore<w as it
does elsewhere, although not in the NT.
26
GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
adjective may be followed by tou? (Luke 24:25: bradei?j . . . tou?
pisteu<ein) and to< (Jas
e]cousi<a is explained by an
infinitive 25 times; only once does the
infinitive have the article tou?, but there is no clear
difference in sense.
Nouns
expressing time have the epexegetic infinitive 12 times, five
with tou? and
seven anarthrous, apparently with no discernible case
distinction.
Perhaps
the Same as with Nouns
The significance of the article with infinitives,
if there is any,
apparently must be sought in other directions.
Robertson says that
"The
article has just the effect that the Greek Article has with any
abstract substantive, that of distinction and
contrast.”48 He explains
varied uses of tou? as
stylistic, "It is only in Luke (Gospels 24, Acts 24)
and Paul (13) that tou? with the inf.
(without preposition) is common.
They
have five-sixths of the examples and Luke himself has two-thirds
of the total in the New Testament.”49
Blass-Debrunner says; "The
article with the infinitive, strictly speaking,
has the same (anaphoric)
significance as it has with nouns. .
. . In general the anaphoric signifi-
cance of the article, i.e., its reference to
something previously men-
tioned or otherwise well known, is more or less
evident."50 Such
statements are general enough to sound impressive
but vague enough
to provide little help in particular instances.
For practical purposes
the situation may be summarized in a couple
suggestions. In the vast
majority of cases no question need be asked; the
86% of the anar-
throus infinitives clearly are the normal situation.
The 14% with the
article seem to be very like those without;
perhaps it is worthwhile
exploring a general indication of contrast or
specific references. But
perhaps, as Robertson comments, it is a matter
of style or personal
whim. Or, may I suggest, it may be simply a
grammatical idiom-
almost half of the infinitives with the article belong
to a grammatical
construction (object of a
preposition) which apparently required it.
The
use of the article with infinitives is summarized in Table 4.
A FURTHER STUDY PROPOSED
This article may fittingly close with a
suggestion for another very
interesting and it is believed very instructive
field of study related to
the NT usage of the infinitive--a statistical study
of word order pat-
terns. Someone familiar with the techniques of
tagmemic grammar
48 Robertson, Grammar, 1065.
49 Ibid., 1067.
50 BDF,205.
BOYER: CLASSIFICATION OF INFINITIVES 27
TABLE 4
Use of Article with
Infinitives
Anarthrous Nom. Gen. Dat. Acc. Total
I.
Subject Infinitives
Impersonal Verbs 202
1 203
Predicative
Verbs 75 10
2 1
88
Other
Verbs 3 3
Passive
Verbs 20 2 22
2.
Object Infinitives
Complementary
876 8 8 892
Indirect
Discourse 353 8 1 362
Other
1 2
3
3.
Adverbial Infinitives
Purpose
or Result 291 41 1 333
With
Prepositions 11 12
56 131 210
Causal
1 1
4.
Absolute Infinitives
Infinitive
Absolute 1 1
Imperatival (?) 11 11
5.
Limiting Infinitives
With
Nouns 73 14
1 88
With
Adjectives 40 2 42
With
Pronouns 18 1
5 24
Apposition
5 1 6
6.
Simple Nouns 2 2
Totals
1977
16 91
57 150 2291
could explore the whole problem of word order within
the infinitive
clause--of such elements as subject, object, predicate
complement,
adverbial modifiers, and other adjuncts along with
the infinitive itself,
and of the whole infinitive clause within the
sentence framework.
Perhaps
insights of exegetical significance may be discovered; certainly
more confidence regarding the language patterns of
NT Greek would
be the product. An important beginning in this
direction has already
been made by Dr. Lovelady, "Infinitive Clause
Syntax in the Gospels"
(Th.M. thesis, Grace Theological Seminary,
1976).
It needs to be
completed with the assistance now available from
the computer.
The use of a i!na-clause as a substitute
for the infinitive will be
dealt with in this writer's next proposed article:
"A Statistical Study
of the Subjunctive."
This material is cited with gracious permission from:
Grace
Theological Seminary
www.grace.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at:
thildebrandt@gordon.edu