of the New Testament, of which the Purists could find no parallel in Greek classic authors, are passed over in silence by them, and kept entirely out of view. No wonder, therefore, that their opponents, the Hebraists, gained a victory in the end, which seemed to be complete. All, however, that was contended for, and that was supposed to be won by the Hebraists, could not afterwards be retained.

NOTE. The best works on the true dialect of the New Testament, are Salmasius, De Lingua Hellenistica: Sturtz, De Dialecto Alexandrina (1809); and Planck, De vera Natura et Indole Orat. Graec. N. Test. [Biblical Cabinet, vol. II.] Almost all the introductions to the New Testament contain more or less in relation to this subject; but none of them can be fully confided in, which were written before the essay by Planck, just mentioned, made its appearance.

(2.) Ground-element of the New Testament Greek. When all Greece was united under one dominion, during the time of Alexander the Great and his successors, both the written and spoken language underwent some change. The first, taking the Attic for its stock, grafted upon it many words that were common and general Greek, and even some provincialisms ; this is ἡ κοινή διάλεκτος. The second, i. e. the language of intercourse, taking

the same basis, adopted and intermixed more or less words from all the different dialects; among which the Macedonian dialect was especially the predominant one. It was by the speaking of Greek, that the Hebrews in Alexandria and elsewhere became acquainted with this language; and of course the Greek which they wrote, would partake of the character of the Greek spoken in the times succeeding those of Alexander.

NOTE. That the Jews of Alexandria learned Greek by intercourse with those who spoke it there, is manifest from the nature of the case, and from the fact that the Jews, almost without exception, were averse to the learned study of the Greek language. Philo and Josephus are among the exceptions. The style of the latter, when compared with that of the LXX. in those parts of his works (for example) which relate to the Old Testament History, shews that he had cultivated the classical Greek of the times; while the Septuagint exhibits a kind of Greek quite discrepant from that of Philo or of Josephus. Subsequently to the period when the Septuagint version was made, the Greek style of the Jews was of course affected more or less by this version. Hence the apocryphal Greek writings of the Jews, and the New Testament, partake more or less of the style of the Septuagint. Still, as the Septuagint is a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, we might naturally expect it would abound more in Hebraisms than the

writings last named, which were original productions; and such is the fact. The New Testament writings are more free from peculiarities as to words or phrases, than the Alexandrine version.

The ground element, then, of the New Testament diction, is the later Greek as modified at Alexandria ; i. e. the Attic dialect, modified by the intermixture of words used in other dialects, especially in the dialect of the Macedonians, and as employed in the language of intercourse. In other words, its predominant ingredient is the Attic dialect; while its subordinate consti-tuents are principally the Macedonic dialect, mixed with the peculiarities of those to whom Hebrew was vernacular.

NOTE 2. The xown diáλexro5, then, i. e. the later Greek, as modified by the times which succeeded the period of Alexander's reign, is nearest of all the profane Greek writings to the diction of the New Testament. Hence the study and comparison of the later Greek authors is peculiarly important to the interpreter of the New Testament. The difference between their diction and that of the New Testament, arises principally from two sources; viz., first, the Hebrews wrote from their acquaintance with the conversation-Greek, which naturally allowed more latitude than the written Greek to departure from the Attic style, and more frequently indulged in the

с

use of words not classical, in constructions not agreeable to the strict rules of syntax, and in assigning to words new meanings; and secondly, every Jew, in speaking or writing a foreign language, would necessarily introduce many of the idioms of his own vernacular language.

(3.) The peculiarities of the New Testament diction may be classed under two heads, viz. lexical and grammatical.

1. The lexical relates to the choice of words: the forms of them; the frequency with which they were employed; the new and different meanings assigned to them; and the new formation of them.

(a) Words were chosen from all the dialects; (1) The Attic ; e. g. ὕαλος, ὁ σκότος (masc), ἀετὸς, φιάλη, ἀλήθειν, πρύμνα, ἱλεώς. (2) The Doric; e. g. πιάζω, κλίβανος, ἡ λιμὸς, ποία. (3) Ionic; e. g. joyzółw, ξήσσω, πρηνής, βαθμός, σκορπίζειν, φύω (intrans.) Macedonic; e. g. #ageμßoλn camp, góun street. (5) Cyrenaic; e. g. Bavòs hill. (6) Syracusan; e. g. εἰποί (Imper.)

(4)

(b) New forms (mostly prolonged ones) were given to words; e. g. ἀνάθεμα (ἀνάθημα), ἔκπαλαι (πάλαι), ἐξαπίνα (ἐξαπίνης), καύχησις (καύχημα), ἀποστασία (ἀπόστασις), πετάομαι (πέτομαι), βιβλιαρίδιον (βιβλίδιον), ὀμνύω (όμνυμι), μοιχαλίς (μοιχάς), etc. etc.

(c) Uncommon or poetic words are used in com

mon style ; e. g. αὐθέντειν, μεσονύκτιον, ἀλάλητος, ἔσθη σις, ἀλέκτως, βρέχειν to irrigate, κοράσιον.

(d) New and different meanings, e. g. magazah.iiv to beg, παιδεύειν to chastise, ἀνακλίνειν to recline at table, ἀποκριθῆναι to answer, ξύλον living tree, νέκρωσις, in a passive sense, ↓úviov wages, πrãμа corpse, etc. etc. The New Testament has many such words.

(e) Words were formed de novo; e. g. by composition, as ἀλλοτριοεπίσκοπος, ανθρωπάρεσκος, μονόφθαλ μας, ἀγαθουργεῖν, οἰκοδεσποτεῖν, etc. Nouns in -a are frequently formed ; as κατάλυμα, γέννημα, βάπτισμα; nouns with συν, as συμμαθητής, συμπολίτης ; adjectives, inos, as ggrvos, orvos, #gwïvos; verbs in -ów, as ἀνακαινόω, δολιόω, σθενέω ; also in -ίζω, as δειγματίζω, ὀρθρίζω; also new forms of adverbs, as πάντοτε, παιδιόθεν, Tavoixí, etc. etc.

2. The grammatical peculiarities are limited mostly to the forms of nouns and verbs. Some of these in the Hebrew-Greek are new; or not classically used in certain words; or are foreign to the Attic book-language. The use of the dual is superseded. In a syntactical respect, the Hellenistic dialect has little that is peculiar. There are a few examples of verbs constructed with cases different from those that are usual in classic Greek; conjunctions that elsewhere are joined with the Optative and Subjunctive modes, are here sometimes connected with the Indica