Grace
Theological Journal 5.2 (1984) 163-179.
[Copyright © 1984 Grace
Theological Seminary; cited with permission;
digitally prepared for use at
THE CLASSIFICATION
OF
PARTICIPLES:
A STATISTICAL STUDY
JAMES L. BOYER
Understanding participles is a major requisite for the NT
scholar.
This study surveys the
many ways participles are used in the Greek
NT and the frequency of
occurrence of each functional type. Attention
is given to the structural patterns involved and the
significance of
these classifications. Eighteen categories are distinguished,
nine of
adjectival uses and nine of verbal uses. The special feature of this
study is the statistical information provided, which points out
the
relative importance of the various types; more detailed discussion
of
the adverbial, the genitive absolute, the periphrastic, and the
impera-
tival categories is provided.
* * *
INTRODUCTION
THIS
article does not present a new and different approach to
participles in the NT. It is, rather, an attempt to
use a new
avenue of study via computer analysis to supply
information pre-
viously not easily available.
This information concerns the relative
frequencies of the various uses of participles in
the NT, and some of
the patterns these uses take. The first step in
this process was to
prepare an in-order list of all participles
occurring in the Greek NT,
together with a grammatical identification of
each. Next, an in-context
study was made in order to determine the usage classification
of
each. Finally, a class-by-class study of these
occurrences was con-
ducted in order to note any special features or
peculiarities which
might be helpful to the NT Greek student. The
classification system
used is for the most part the traditional one,
though the purpose is
not to defend this manner of treatment. In fact, in
some cases a very
different treatment is advocated.
The definition of a participle as a
verbal adjective sets a pattern
for the classification of its uses. As an adjective
it stands in gender,
164
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
number and case agreement with a noun or other
substantive (ex-
pressed or unexpressed), and in some way
modifies, describes, or
limits that substantive. As a verbal, while still
attached by agreement
to a substantive, it affects also the action or
predication of the
sentence.
ADJECTIVAL USES
Just as the position of the adjective in
relation to the article gives
the clue to its adjectival function (attributive or
predicate), it is also
important to understand whether the same is true
of the participle.
Thus
the position of the adjectival participle in relation to its
govern-
ing noun's article was made
the basis for the classification. The first
four categories show the article in
"attributive position," that is, im-
mediately following the article.
The fifth category shows the participle
in "predicate position," that is, not
following the article. The last four
categories are ambiguous since the governing noun
(if there is one)
does not have the article and this positional
distinction is thus not
present.
A
P N (Article
+ Participle + Noun)
A glance at the statistical table will show that
the placing of the
participle before the noun (APN and PN) is
relatively rare. Most
frequently it occurs when the participle has no
modifiers; sometimes
the participle has become almost an adverb, such as
"existing," "near-
by," "coming," "present."
Often the participle's own modifiers are
very brief, consisting of an adverb, a short
prepositional phrase, or a
direct or indirect object; when the modifiers are more
extended they
often are separated from it and stand after the noun.
In all the in-
stances the participle seems to be purely
attributive and usually can
best be translated as a relative clause.
A
N A
P (Article + Noun + Article + Participle)
This so-called "second attributive
position" is far more frequent
with participles.l Characteristically it is used where
the participial
modifiers are extensive (although certainly not
all instances are such;
e.g.,
o[ path>r
o[ zw?n which occurs frequently), or where more than
one participle is so used coordinately. Like the
preceding category
the function is purely attributive, best translated
as a relative clause.
1 Of the participles identifiable by
position as attributive the ratio of first to second
attributive position is 1:2.7. Among adjectives the
ratio is 1:0.7
BOYER:
THE CLASSIFICATION OF PARTICIPLES 165
N A P (Noun
+ Article + Participle)
In sharp contrast with adjectives2
this pattern is quite frequent
with participles. By far the majority of instances
occur when the
noun is a proper name (68 times), which is then
identified as "the one
called (lego<menoj, kalou<menoj, e]pilego<menoj, e]pikalou<menoj)"
by
another proper name (23 times), or by a
characteristic or customary
action or condition when the participle is present
tense (21 times) or
perfect tense (4 times), or by a particular past
action when the parti-
ciple is aorist (20 times).
This pattern occurs less frequently with
common nouns (23 times), usually indefinite or general
in nature,
which the participle identifies more precisely by
stating some specific
act or condition.
It is noteworthy that one idiom belonging
prominently to this
category, the "proper name + o[
lego<menoj + proper name"
also
occurs with the first proper name showing an article,
the A N
A P
category, and with both names anarthrous,
the N P category. Many
of the examples classified in this category also
might well be listed
with the A P
category, as a substantival participle in apposition
to
the noun it follows. Such a situation will serve to
warn against press-
ing these differing
patterns as rigid categories. Rather, they serve
merely as convenient methods of systematizing
patterns. All these are
simply attributive.
A
P (Article + Participle)
By far the most frequently used3
pattern of attributive participles
is the article and the participle standing alone
without a noun ex-
pressed, the "substantive use" of the
participle. A person or thing is
sufficiently identified as "the
one who. . ." or "that which. . . ," where
the generic term is identified by a participle
which states its character,
its condition, or its action. Again the participle
functions purely as an
attributive adjective. Usually, it is translated as
a relative clause, but
in many cases it is the full equivalent of a noun;
o[ pisteu<wn
is simply
"the believer."
While it is beyond the scope of this article to
deal with the
significance of tense in
participles, it is worthwhile to note that these
substantival participles demonstrate
rather dramatically a characteris-
tic difference. Present participles identify by
some characteristic or
customary action or condition, and frequently are
equivalent to a
2 In comparison with the 97 instances
found in participles there are only 18 ex-
amples with adjectives. All
but five of these are with nouns which are proper names,
like babulw?n
h[ mega<lh.
3 1467 examples; see the statistical
chart.
166
GRACE
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
name or title. So o[
stei<rwn "a sower," o[ kle<ptwn is "a thief," o[
daimonizo<menoj is "the
demon-possessed person" (cf. Mk
is used after
the demon was cast out, a title which identified the man,
not a description of his present state), o[
bapti<zwn is "the
baptizer"
(or "the Baptist"), o[ kr<nwn is "the
judge," o[ a]kou<wn
"a hearer,"
o[
paradidou<j is "the betrayer," the infamous title
of Judas most fre-
quently used, before (Matt
26:48), during (John 18:2), and after (Matt
27:3)
the act itself. Some of these seem actually to have become
nouns, listed as such in the lexicons; e.g., o[
a@rxwn is "the ruler." The
matter is different, however, with the substantival participle in the
aorist and future tenses. Here the identification
seems always to be
specific, not general. An aorist participle
identifies by referring to
some specific act in past time; the future by a
specific future act: so
to>
r[hqen< "that which was spoken by the prophet
Isaiah, etc." (very
many times); ta>
geno<mena, "the things which
had happened"; o[ kri<saj,
"the One who created them male and female," not
"the Creator";
o[
paradou<j, "the one who betrayed him" (John
apparently from the viewpoint of the author's
time); o[ paradw<swn,
"the one who will betray him" (John 6:64).
A
N P (Article
+ Noun + Participle)
This pattern is the only one which places the
participle in a
clearly "predicate position. " This,
along with its extreme rarity,4 raises
the question whether this distinction is valid for
participles. Or, to
put it differently, are we justified in looking for
a different meaning
in these few instances solely on the basis of the
analogy of the
adjective? Some examples seem similar to those
adjectives which are
found in predicate position but are found with a
sentence which
already has its predication, and hence become in
effect a secondary
or parenthetic predication.5 So in Mark
6:2 at ai[
duna<meij . . . gino<menai
the sense is not merely an identification or
description of the miracles,
but rather an added admission that they really were
happening. Often,
however, it is difficult to see any distinction.
4 Only 20 were so catalogued in this
study; 17 are certain (Matt
27:37;
Mark 6:2; Luke 11:21, 12:28 twice, 16:14; John 2:9, 8:9,14:10; Acts 13:32; 1 Cor
hesitation (John
followed an articular
noun, but they were adjudged to be verbal rather than adjectival,
functioning as an adverb or as a supplement to the
verb.
5 For example, 2 Pet
require the attributive position), but rather
"we have the prophetic word, which is more
sure."
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF PARTICIPLES 167
N
P (Participle
following Noun; no article with either)
P
N (Participle
preceding Noun; no article with either)
Like adjectives, when a participle stands in
agreement with an
anarthrous noun it is not possible
to tell by position whether it is
attributive or predicate. This does not mean that
such functions are
not present; it only means that they cannot be
determined by posi-
tion. No attempt is made in
this study to ascertain the function of
these participles. The statistical chart will show
that the N P pattern
is more common; the P N pattern is extremely rare.
P
(Participle alone, functioning
substantively)
Usually a participle standing alone is verbal
(see below), but a
considerable number of instances
show that it can also be adjectival
or substantival, even
without the article. Most of these function as
anarthrous nouns. Some stand in
agreement with some other sub-
stantive word in the sentence,
such as a pronoun, a numerical adjec-
tive, or with the subject
implied in the person and number inflection
of the verb. Anarthrous
participles are placed in this category only if
the sense of the sentence demands it--only if it is
difficult to make
sense by considering it a verbal usage.
P: Pred.
Adj. (Participle alone, as a predicate adjective)
This is a normal and proper use for a
participle, although it is
not often singled out as a separate category. It is
clearly the predicate
use and as such does not use the article. The
predicating verb is either
ei]mi< or gi<nomai, or is left unexpressed.
It most often is in the nomina-
tive case, although when the
predicative verb is an infinitive the parti-
ciple agrees in case with the
accusative subject. Also, verbs which
take an accusative object and a predicate complement
(kale<w, poie<w)
have the predicate complement in agreement with the
object.
It sometimes is a problem to decide whether a
participle belongs
to this category, or to another to be discussed
below, the periphrastic
participle. There are obvious similarities; both
agree in gender, num-
ber and case with the
subject of the verb, the same verbs are involved
(ei]mi<, perhaps gi<nomai), and the sense is
similar. Two considerations
have been used to help decide. First, those places
where the verbal
sense seemed to be primarily in the participle, where
the connecting
verb was "semantically empty,"6
were classified as periphrastic. Those
in which the copulative verb seemed to be
predicating to the subject
6 A term taken from R. W. Funk, A Beginning-Intermediate Grammar of Hellenis-
tic Greek, vol. 3 (Missoula: Scholar's Press, 1973) 430.
168 GRACE THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL
some quality, act or state expressed by the
participle were classified as
predicate adjectives. This factor also explains
why the periphrastic
construction is made a part of the
"verbal" uses of the participle, for
in such instances the participle does in fact
express "the verb" of the
clause. Second, where the participle appears in a list
of predications
along with predicate adjectives or predicate
complements, its parallel-
ism with the other predicates was taken to indicate
its own predicate
nature, even when it could well have been taken as
periphrastic if it
had stood alone.
VERBAL USES
This second general category is more frequent
than the first,7 and
it is here that the versatility of the Greek
participle is especially
demonstrated. Here, too, the exegete
faces the more puzzling alterna-
tives. These participles
never have the article; they stand in gender-
number-case agreement with some noun or other
substantive in the
sentence, yet not as a "modifier" but
as a connecting point for some
element in some subordinating relation to the
verb of the sentence.
Whereas
the adjectival participle is the equivalent of a relative clause,
the verbal participle is the equivalent of an
adverbial clause or is
involved as an integral part of the principal
"verb phrase."
Adverbial Participles
There are two main categories of verbal
participles, the first and
most frequent being the adverbial, which includes
the first three cate-
gories in my tabulation. The
first of these is a general one and properly
should include those listed here in the second and
third category. For
convenience these subclasses are listed separately
because of some
special considerations.
Adverbial (General)
Adverbial participles "modify the
verb," hence the term. They
describe the circumstances,8 or
"set the stage," under which the action
7 61.2% of the total.
8 There is some confusion over the use of
the term circumstantial by the gram-
marians. W. W. Goodwin, Greek Grammar, rev. by C. B. Gulick (Boston: Ginn, 1930)
329-33,
and most of the classical grammars as well as some NT grammars, use the
term for the entire category which I have called
Adverbial, and indeed it makes a very
appropriate name for it. E. D. Burton, Syntax of Moods and Tenses in New Testament
Greek (Chicago: University of
Chicago, 1897) 169, 173, followed by Dana and Mantey,
A Manual Grammar of the
Greek New Testament
(New York: Macmillan, 1927) 226,
and many others, use this term to designate one
sub-division of this group (the one
called by Goodwin Any
attendant circumstance) and the term Adverbial
for the entire
group. To avoid this confusion, I have chosen to used Adverbial as
the general title.
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF PARTICIPLES 169
of the verb takes place. These circumstances may
be practically any
which may be expressed by true adverbs, answering to
such questions
as when? where? in what way? by what means? why? under what
circumstances? Grammarians have
usually summed up these adverbial
uses as time, cause, manner, means or instrument,
purpose, condi-
tion, concession, and
attendant circumstances.
The present study has made no attempt to
sub-classify these
adverbial participles under these headings, for
several reasons. The
size of the task (almost 3,500 instances), the
subjectivity of the task
(each one must be decided on the implications of the context
alone,
and frequently several choices seem equally
plausible), and the limita-
tions of publication (a mere
listing would probably fill a whole issue
of this Journal)
have, at least for the present, made it impractical, in
spite of the conviction that such a study would be
very useful.
Only rarely is it possible to translate a Greek
adverbial participle
into an English participle. When it is not possible
to do so, then the
alternative becomes the use of a subordinate
adverbial clause. To
make this translation it is necessary (1) to decide
what adverbial idea
is being expressed (time, cause, manner,
condition, etc.), (2) to choose
the proper conjunction to express that idea (when,
while, since, if,
etc.),
(3) to make the substantive with which the participle agrees the
subject of the clause, and (4) to select the
proper English tense to use.
These
are not always easy choices, and they demand a hermeneutical
sensitivity as well as a rather sophisticated
understanding of the Greek
tense system.
Adverbial participles use the aorist tense
slightly more frequently
than the present (52% compared with 44%; this is the
only category of
participles where the present is not more frequent
than the aorist).
The
case used is most commonly the nominative (85%), but the other
cases (except vocative) are all used. The case, of
course, is determined
not by its adverbial character but by its agreement
with its governing
substantive, which may stand in any case
relationship to the sentence.
Genitive
Absolute
A genitive absolute is simply an adverbial
participle, and all that
has been said about adverbial participles in the
preceding section is
applicable here. Although usually temporal, they
may express any of
the adverbial ideas already described and their
meaning must be ap-
proached in the same manner. A
separate category has been made
only because of a peculiar explanation for the
choice of the case used.
Normally
the participle relates the adverbial quality it expresses to
some noun or other substantive in the sentence. Its
agreement with
that noun determines its case. When, however, the
adverbial quality is
related to some substantive which is not a part
of the main sentence,
170
GRACE
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
and thus has no "case relation" to it
(such a structure is called "abso-
lute" in the grammars), the Greek idiom
arbitrarily uses the genitive
case for such a disconnected noun and the participle
agreeing with it.9
In
the classical period it would be used only when this was the situa-
tion. But in later Greek,
including the New Testament, this limitation
was not always observed, and there are instances
where a genitive
absolute is used when the reference is to a word
which is present in
the sentence and has a case of its own. In most
instances this occurs
where the genitive absolute precedes the main clause,
thus the word
to which the participle refers would not yet be
obvious to the hearer
or reader.10
Not all adverbial participles in the genitive
case are "absolute,"
however; they may simply be related to a word
which has a proper
genitive relationship to the sentence.11
This special class of adverbial participles
occurs frequently in the
Gospels,
Acts, and Revelation and is commonly agreed to reflect
Semitic influence. As the term is used in
this paper, it applies only to
the participles le<gwn
and a]pokriqei<j when they are used with
verbs
which in themselves also express in some way the concept
of speech,
such as "he taught saying," "he cried
out saying," and "he answered
saying." Le<gwn
occurs with a great variety of such words expressing
speech, including a]pokri<nomai and even le<gw.
]Apokriqei<j occurs
only with ei#pon. The two occur often
together, even combined.12
Not all occurrences of le<gwn
are pleonastic, only those which
actually repeat an expression of speech. To
illustrate, in Luke 1:67
e]profh<teusen le<gwn is classified as
pleonastic because le<gwn repeats
the idea of speech involved in the verb profhteu<w. But in the preced-
ing verse le<gontej is classified simply as adverbial, because its use
with e@qento does not involve any
redundancy.
Redundancy or pleonastic are terms which speak
of style rather
than grammar. When these participles are so
classified, it simply
means that they reflect a style of speaking which was
probably quite
native to the early Christians with Semitic
background, whose first
language was probably Hebrew. But such Greek
style would probably
have sounded strange to most Greek-speakers of that
time, much the
9 Compare the ablative absolute in Latin,
the nominative absolute in English.
10 For a fuller discussion, with examples,
cf. A. Buttman, A
Grammar of the New
Testament Greek (Andover: Warren F.
Draper, 1891) 315-16.
11 Examples found are 13: Matt 26:7; Luke
2:13 (twice); Acts
8:10;
2 Cor 7:15; 2 Thes 1:8; Heb
11:12; 1 Pet 1:7; 2 Pet 2:4; Rev 1:15, 17:8.
12 Cf. Luke 14:3, a]pokriqei>j o[ ]Ihsou?j ei#pen . . . le<gwn . . .
. Such expression un-
doubtedly reflects Hebrew: rmxyv. . . Nfyv or
some similar construction.
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF PARTICIPLES 171
same as Elizabethean
English occasionally sounds strange to present-
day speakers of English. There is nothing in this
idiom that is "ungram-
matical," but it is
unidiomatic and simply embodies a literalistic formal
translation style from Hebrew to Greek. As it stands
it is an adverbial
participle, probably of manner.
Supplementary
Participles
The second type of verbal participle is involved
directly with the
main verb and in effect with it forms a verb-chain.
Robertson says,
"the term supplementary or complementary is used to describe
the
participle that forms so close a connection with
the principle verb
that the idea of the speaker is incomplete without
it. . . . It fills out
the verbal notion.”13 Turner compares it
with the adverbial or cir-
cumstantial use: "The
circumstantial ptc. differs
from a supplemen-
tary ptc.
in that the latter cannot without impairing the sense
be
detached from the main verbal idea, whereas the
circumstantial is
equivalent to a separate participial clause.”14
They occur in conjunc-
tion with specific verbs and
types of verbs; frequently they are the
same verbal ideas as use the participle in English,
although certainly
not always. For convenience I shall use the
categories listed by
Robertson.15
Periphrastic
Participle
Construction of tenses and moods by using a
participle with an
"auxiliary" verb, thus producing a periphrastic or
"round-about" ex-
pression, was always a part of
the Greek verb system, but by classical
standards it became much more common in
Hellenistic Greek. The
tendency seems to be a natural one, occurring in
other languages as
well (compare English). In fact, to an English-speaking
student of NT
Greek,
h#n
dida<skwn seems much more natural
for "he was teaching"
than the inflected form, e]di<dasken. Mark and Luke use this
peri-
phrastic construction much more
commonly than the other NT
writers.16 It may be another
reflection of Hebrew grammar formally
translated into Greek since hyh plus the participle is common in second
13 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of
Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934) 1119.
14 Nigel Turner, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, vol. 3: Syntax (
T. & T. Clark, 1963) 153.
15 Robertson, Grammar, 1119-24.
16 The rate per 1000 words of text is:
Luke, 3.49; Acts, 3.14; Mark, 2.48; John,
2.04; Matt, 1.31, Heb, 1.21; Paul, 1.19; General
epistles, 1.05; Rev, 1.01.
172
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
The auxiliary verb is almost always the present
or imperfect of
ei]mi<. Some grammarians
tentatively list gi<nomai and u[pa<rxw
as also
involved, but to the present writer a participle
occurring with these
verbs seems more probably to be understood as
supplementary (see
below).
Participles used in this construction are the
present (153 times)
and perfect (115 times), perhaps also the aorist
(two very doubtful
instances).17 The case used is almost
always the nominative, since the
participle is in a sense a subjective complement of
the copulative verb,
requiring that the case be the same as that of the
subject. The two
instances where the periphrastic participle is
accusative18 are actually
following that rule; in one case the auxiliary is
an infinitive, which
has its "subject" in the accusative; in
the other the auxiliary is itself a
participle which modifies (and therefore has as its
"subject") an ac-
cusative pronoun.
Usually the participle follows the auxiliary; it
precedes in only 28
instances. In a few cases a participle has been
identified as periphrastic
when an auxiliary is not present but seems to be
implied by the sense
of the context or by parallels where the same
construction has the
auxiliary.19
There is necessarily some ambivalence between
the periphrastic
participle and a participle functioning as a
predicative adjective, al-
ready discussed above. Indeed, N. Turner says,
"In the same way as
the ordinary adj. the ptc.
may fulfill the role of a predicate and
answers either to the subject or the direct
complement of the preposi-
tion. In this way, with ei#nai and gi<nesqai the ptc.
forms a peri-
phrastic tense.”20 It
is hard to see how h#n
a]sqenw?n (John 11:1) would
be different if it were h#n
a]sqenh<j; or i!na
h[ xar> h[mw?n ^# peplhrw-
me<nh (I Jn 1:4) if it were ^#
plh<rhj. Especially is this
true when the
participle occurs in a list of parallel
predications alongside an adjective
or other descriptive phrase.21
In meaning, the periphrastic tenses seem in many
instances to be
no different from their inflected counterparts.
Perhaps the most that
can be said is that, while the simple present
tense, for example, is
17 Luke
underscored by the textual variants which occur; one
changing the form to perfect,
beblhme<noj, the other omitting the
participle altogether. The other example is com-
plicated by differing
interpretations of the first two participles (are they periphrastic or
circumstantial?) and
the parallelism in sense between this clause and the final clause of
the preceding verse.
18 Luke 9:18,
19 Cf. e]co>n
h#n (Matt 12:4) with e]co<n (Acts
such as de<on, paro<n, pre<pon, sumfe<ron.
20 Turner, Grammar, 158.
21 Cf. Luke 1:7, Rom 15:4, Eph 2:12, Rev 1:18, etc.
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF PARTICIPLES 173
capable of a variety of meanings, the
periphrastic seems always to
require or to emphasize the continuing action
sense.
"Imperatival"
Participles
Some grammarians distinguish another use of the
participle in
which it seems to stand as the main verb of the
sentence in a context
which requires that it be understood as imperative;
others strongly
disagree.22 The instances cited may
easily be explained as depending
on some other verb present, or by understanding an
ellipsis of an
imperative copula. The present writer would in
every case adopt the
latter alternative, leaving no examples to present as
imperatival parti-
ciples. However, in
recognition of this situation, I have chosen to list it
some of the most likely examples in this special
category for compari-
son and study.
The most notable examples are found in the list
of admonitions
in Romans 12:9-19. Beginning three verses earlier
(v 6), this series
proceeds without a governing verb expressed. The first eight admoni-
tions seem to require a verb
to be supplied with the sense, "Let us do
it . . . " ("If it is a prophecy which
has been given to us, [let us
prophesy] according to . . ."), a simple ellipsis
of a verb easily supplied
from the context. The pattern changes in v 9a, where
the verb to be
supplied is the imperative of the copulative
verb, e@stw. In vv 9b-13
the series continues with fourteen more exhortations,
twelve of which
have a participle and two have an adjective
expressing the content of
the exhortation. It would seem most logical that
these also be con-
sidered elliptical, either as
periphrastic imperative verbs or as predi-
cate adjectives, in either
case with the imperative copulative verb23 to
be supplied. The series ends (vv 19b-21) with
seventeen more admo-
nitions, seven of which are
again participles, interspersed with nine
regular imperative verbs and one infinitive
which probably should
supplied with a governing verb such as parakalw? (cf. v 1). This
cluster of participles seem most naturally to be
understood as depend-
ing on an imperative
supplied from the context, rather than an ex-
ample of a distinct class of participles.
This situation is similar in the other examples
listed. In 2 Cor
22 Supporting this "main verb"
use of the participle is J. H. Moulton, A Grammar
of New Testament Greek, vol. I: Prolegomena (Edinburgh: T. & T.
Clark, 1908) 180-
84.
Opposing it is Buttman, Grammar, 290-94. Robertson, Grammar,
1132-35, takes a
mediating position; he shows that these uses can
be understood as anacoluthon or
ellipsis, but awkwardly. In practice he
recognizes them.
23 The plural nominative participle and the
pattern of speech in vv 14, 16, 19-21
point to the second person plural imperative e@ste (or perhaps gi<nesqe).
e@ste (impera-
tive) is never found in the
NT.
174
GRACE
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
supplying a main verb (one which is not very
obvious) and the copula-
tive verb twice; v 24 seems
most naturally to require the imperative
e@stwsan with the participle e]ndeiknu<menoi. In 1 Pet 2:18, 3:1, 7
three
participles seem to be in parallel structure, all
depending on a main
verb in
continues throughout the section and includes
three specific groups;
each is introduced by a participle agreeing in
number and case with
the subject of that governing verb. Thus they are
not standing apart
as separate finite verbs (i.e., imperatival
participles), but are simply
amplifications applying the main verb
to three groups. English idiom
finds it much easier to make three distinct
sentences.
Complementary
Participle
Robertson uses this narrower designation to
include a variety of
verbs which sometimes take a supplementary
participle,24 but he does
so without assigning a descriptive name to the
type of verb involved.
Blass-Debrunner labels them "verbs denoting a modified sense
of 'to
be' or 'to do’.”25 They are verbs which
in classical Greek used the
supplementary participle mostly in
the nominative case, but this use is
greatly diminished in NT Greek. Here this group
includes such verbs
as (a) u[pa<rxw
(twice) = to be, exist; prou*pa<rxw
(3 times) = to be
first; to be continually; diatele<w (once), e]pime<nw (twice) and me<nw
(once); (b) to stop, to cease, to finish, to grow weary; pau<omai (12
times),
dialei<pw
(once), tele<w (once), e]gkake<w (twice): (c) to be
hidden, to be manifest = lanqa<nw
(once), fai<nw
(twice); (d) to come
before, anticipate = profqa<nw
(once); (e) a modified sense of "to
do" = kalw?j
poie<w (4 times), ti<
poi<eite (twice).
Verbs
of Emotion
Extremely rare in the NT, this study has listed
only two examples,
one each with a]gallia<zw (Acts
instances with xai<rw
are sometimes cited as examples, but they seem
more probably to be adverbial (for example, John
joiced when they saw the
Lord" rather than "rejoiced at seeing" or
"rejoiced to see" or "saw him gladly").
Verbs
of Perception and Cognition
This most frequently occurring type of
supplemental participle is
sub-divided into (a) verbs of physical perception
(seeing, hearing) and
24 Robertson, Grammar, 1120-21.
25 F. Blass and A. DeBrunner,
A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and
Other
Early Christian
Literature,
trans. and rev. by Robert Funk (
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF PARTICIPLES 175
(b)
verbs of mental perception or cognition (knowing,
recognizing,
finding, confessing, etc.). The verbs showing
this construction in the
NT,
with the number of occurrences, are: ble<pw (15), ei#don (89),
qea<omai
(5), qewre<w (22), o[ra<w (and o]p-) (12), a]kou<w (34), parakou<w
(1),
eu[ri<skw
(51), dei<knumi (2), dokima<zw
(1), h[ge<omai (1), and e@xw
when it means "to consider" (2).
Since the participle in this construction goes
with the object of
the main verb, it is usually in the accusative case.
The genitives here
are all with the verb a]kou<w, which takes the genitive when it speaks
of physical perception. The few instances where
this participle is in
the nominative case are due to the passive voice of
the governing
verb, where the object of the action has become the
subject in the
nominative and the participle agrees.26
Participle
in Indirect Discourse
Closely related to the last group, but worthy of
separate con-
sideration, is the use of the
participle in indirect discourse. It is rare in
the NT, being replaced largely by the infinitive
and the o!ti clause.
The
participle is so used with a]kou<w (6 times), ei#don (once), and
o[ra<w (once) from those
listed in the last category, plus other verbs of
mental
perception, ginw<skw
(3), e]piginw<skw
(1), e]pi<stamai (1), kata-
noe<w (1), and o[mologe<w (2). The contrast in meaning between a]kou<w
used with a supplementary participle and a]kou<w with a participle in
indirect discourse will serve to illustrate the
distinction. h@kousan . . .
au]tou? lalou?ntoj (John
physical perception; it says nothing about the
content of what was
heard. But a]kou<saj . . . o@nta siti<a ei]j Ai@gupton (Acts
physical perception, he did not hear the grain being
there. Rather, he
heard "that there was grain. . . ." The
latter is clearly indirect dis-
course; the direct would be "There is grain. . . ."
The participle modifies the object of the verb
of perception and
as such is in the accusative case.
Appended to this discussion are three
statistical tables. Tables 1
and 2 give the total number of occurrences for each
of the eighteen
patterns or functions described, as well as a
breakdown count by
tense and case for each. This information may be
useful to the NT
Greek
student in pursuing these studies further, for purposes of com-
parison and evaluation of their
magnitude and relative importance.
Table
3 gives additional statistical information relating to one cate-
gory, the periphrastic participle.
26 Matt
makes it difficult to account for the case.
176
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
The fact that about one word in every twenty in
the Greek NT is
a participle, together with the oft-heard comment
from students that
participles are one of the most difficult parts of
the language to
master, underscores the importance and need for any
help available.
If
this study meets any part of that need its purpose will be realized.
BOYER: THE CLASSIFICATION OF PARTICIPLES 177
178
GRACE
THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
TABLE
3
Composition
of Periphrastic Tenses
with Present with
Perfect with
Aorist
Auxiliary
Verb Participle Participle
Participle
Present
Indicative:
ei]mi< 1
2
e]sti<(n) 12 18
[ e]sti<(n)] 3
e]sme<n 3
[e]sme<n]
1
e]ste< 6
ei]si<(n) 1 7
[ ei]si<(n)]
1 1
___ ___
19 Periphrastic 37
Periphrastic
Present Present
Subjunctive:
^# 7
[ ^#] 1
w#men 1
h#te 2
w#si(n) 2
____ ____
1 Periphrastic 12 Periphrastic
Present Subj. Perfect Subj.
Present
Infinitive:
ei#nai 1
Periphrastic
Present Inf.
Present
Participle:
w#n 2 Periphrastic
Perfect Part.
Imperfect
Indicative:
h@mhn 8 1
h#n 67 36 2
(?)
[h#n]
2 1
h#men 1 l
h#meqa l
[h#men]
3
h#te 1
h#san 34
15
[h#san]
2 1
___ ___
118 Periphrastic 56 Periphrastic 2 Periphrastic
Imperfects Pluperfects Aorists
Future
Indicative:
e@somai 1
e@s^ 3
e@stai 2
4
e@sesqe 5
e#sontai 3
1
13 Periphrastic 6 Periphrastic
Futures Future Perfects
* Bracketed
forms indicate probable examples of ellipsis, the bracketed word to be
supplied to complete the sense.
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