6

a thing to be necessary; while an adverb only qualifies the affirmation, negation, doubtful or positive declaration itself, etc.;' a distinction tenuous enough, inasmuch as we can usually know a person's mind only by the nature of the declarations which he makes. More to the purpose is what he says on p. 171, viz. that proper adverbs will make a complete sense when taken alone; e. g. xahs, 3, etc., while conjunctions must have some complement.' But even this does not suffice; for who will not acknowledge, that adverbs resemble adjectives more than they do any other part of speech? And do not adjectives need a complement?

NOTE 2. Let the student note well, that disjunction as well as conjunction, i. e. conjunction or its opposite, comes within the scope of the particles called conjunctions. Better had it been, if the name conjunctives and disjunctives had been given to the two species of particles now ranged under the same general head.

NOTE 3. It is not the simple adding of one word or phrase to another, or the mere separation of one from another, which limits the boundaries of conjunctives and disjunctives, i. e. of conjunctions. All the various kinds of connection in the way of ratiocination, deduction, dependent sentences, etc., are designated by conjunctions.

(2.) Conjunctions connect simple thoughts or declarations which are in the like predicament, and are connected together by the mind.

E. g. God is wise, and loves goodness; where two different assertions are in the like predicament; i. e. both are simple declarations of opinion. The reason why such declarations are connected, may lie in the mind of the writer only, or it may appear in the

context.

(3.) Conjunctions sometimes connect anti

thetic sentences.

In this case we render xai (for example) but; as ηὐλήσαμεν ὑμῖν, καὶ οὐκ ὠρχήσασθε, we have piped to you, but ye have not danced, Matt xi. 17; vii. 26; x. 39; xii. 35, al. saepe. Examples like these may be found in ancient Greek writers; but the frequency of this antithetic usage in the New Testament, appears to be derived from the common use of in He

:

brew in such a sense. Hence Matthew and Peter employ it oftener than Luke, Paul, etc., in this manner; for the latter had more of a Greek education. Kaí, simply considered, does not mean but; but the connection in which it stands in some cases, authorizes us to express the sense of a whole sentence by rendering it in this way.

NOTE 1. Kai has often the sense of also, even, and even, i. e. it is explicative, intensive, etc. See Passow's Lex. xai, where the reader will find a striking exhibition of the powers of this particle.

(4.) Co-ordinate phrases or sentences may be joined or disjoined with more than one par

first and the The same is

E. g. και...καὶ may be put before the second phrase ; and so τε...καί, τε...τε. true of the disjunctives ..., ore...OUTE, etc.

NOTE 1. To the present hour grammarians and lexicographers are not agreed respecting the comparative limits and use of rs and xaí see Herm. ad Vig. p. 835. Bernhardy, Synt. p. 482, seq. Nor can this difference be definitely made out in all cases, by any distinctions, however nice. In general, xaí stands between sentences or words in the same predicament, while connects something adjectitious to the main idea. Yet this distinction is not always apparent; see Winer, Gramm. p. 369, seq.

(5.) The connection of phrases or sentences with one another is very various, and each has its appropriate conjunctions.

(a) Antithetic sentences; between which stand δὲ, ἀλλά. A (but) is disjunctive or antithetic as to sense, but at the same time it marks the connection or consecution of sentences, and so holds a double office. 'Aλλà is more forcibly antithetic than dè, and has merely an antithetic or disjunctive power, (not a connective one.) Hence dλλà is more generally prefixed to a sentence which breaks off the course of thought, or to a question, or an urgent hortatory sentiment, and often to an apodosis; while de is often employed merely as a connective, in the same way and with the same sense as xaí.

(b) Concessive sentences, where the coniunction

μέντοι οι ὅμως is employed. Μέντοι, yet, however, although, still, then, etc., of course concedes what had been said, while it prefaces something in the way of explanation or answer. "Opws, although, notwithstanding, still, nevertheless, is a particle plainly of the same nature. "Oμws μévros (John xii. 42) gives strong intensity to the meaning of ouws.

(c) Conclusive sentences, i. e. sentences which exhibit the formula of conclusion; where ouv, aga, Toivuv, διὸ, τοιγαροῦν, etc., are employed. Of these οὖν often means simply then, etc., as a mere continuative, interchanged with xai and dè employed in the like sense, both in the New Testament and in the classics. "Aga (in a conclusive sense, then, therefore) is of the like meaning with ou, but is more commonly employed when a conclusion is drawn from what another person has been saying. "Aga oʊv makes the meaning intense. Toívov, then, thence, according to that, therefore ; and τοιγαροῦν, a mere intensive form of ταγάρ, which differs not in sense from roívov are seldom used in the New Testament.

(d) Casual sentences; in which öri, dióti, yàg, sometimes as, xadas xaðóri, are employed. Of these yag is by far the most multiplex and difficult in its uses; which have, at last, become the subject of special notice in the lexicons.

(e) Conditional sentences take si, siπeg, ¿àv, etc.; see § 41, 3. c.

etc.

(f) Objective sentences, take ori, üç (that,) iva, ws,

REMARK. The almost boundless exchanges of conjunctions for each other, e. g. ἀλλὰ for γὰρ, εἰ μὴ, etc. etc., which is frequently assumed in many of the commentators and most of the lexicons, is to be carefully avoided. The true solution in most cases of difficulty, is, that the same thought for substance may be announced in a variety of ways, or with various shades of relation, conditionality, etc. Winer has done much in his Grammar (pp. 376, seq.) towards correcting this abuse; but the detail of such examples properly belongs to the lexicons.

PARTICLES OF NEGATION.

§ 63. NATURE AND VARIOUS Uses.

(1.) The Greek has two classes of negative particles, οὔ, οὔτε, οὐκέτι, etc., and μὴ, μήτε, μηκέτι, etc.; the former used in positive and direct declarations; the latter in negations that are simply mental or ideal; the former may be called objective, the latter subjective.

One might almost call un the conditional negative, because it stands so frequently in conditional sentences; e. g. John iii. 18, He who believeth on him ou κρίνεται, ὁ δὲ μὴ πιστεύων ἤδη κέκριται, where οὐ κρίνεται is absolute, but ò de uǹ TIOTEúWv is a supposed state or condition, which applies to any individual whatever who may be an unbeliever, while o où TOTEUw would mean some particular individual unbeliever. In gene