Matt. v. 38, ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντὶ ὀφθαλμοῦ, κ. τ. λ., one must look for the verb [dwg] in the original connection, Ex. 21, 24.

(3.) The subject of a sentence is omitted, only where from the nature of the case it is spontaneously suggested, or may be easily gathered from the context.

Ε. g. βροντᾷ, it thunders, i. e. ὁ Ζεὺς βροντῷ· ἀναyvárral, let [the scribe] read. So in the New Tes tament; noi, magrugeî, λéyei, etc., in respect to Old Testament quotations; where the meaning is, The Lord saith, or The Scripture saith.

So where the subject is easily supplied from the context ; as συνῆλθον καὶ τῶν μαθητῶν, there came together [rivés certain] of the disciples. So n agiov, n σήμερον, ἡ ἑξῆς, where ἡμέρα is readily supplied; εἰς εὐθεῖαν [ὁδόν], Luke iii. 5. So ἡ δεξιὰ [χείς], ἡ ξηρὰ [γῆ], ψυχρόν [ὕδως], Matt. x. 42; τὸ γλυκὺ [ὕδωρ], James iii. 11; τῇ ἐχομένῃ τῇ ἐπιούσῃ —[ἡμέρᾳ]· ἐν λευκοῖς [ἱματίοις], John xx. 22. John v. 2, προβατικὴ [Túλn], etc. etc.

NOTE 1. Sometimes the case absolute is used in an impersonal way, when ἀνθρώπων or τινῶν may be understood; e. g. Luke viii. 20, ȧτnyyśλn durų, XyóvTwv, it was told him, [some], saying, öri x. r. 2.

(4.) Although the predicate cannot be wholly omitted by ellipsis, yet parts of it may be, when those parts are obviously suggested by the con

E. 5. δαρήσεται πολλάς, he shall suffer many [πληγὰς stripes], Luke xii. 47. 2 Cor. xi. 24. But all such cases we may call breviloquence, rather than ellipsis.

NOTE 1. Before uǹ or unτws, used in the way of breviloquence, ὁρᾶτε or δέδοικα (I fear) may be supplied by the mind; often so in the classics. E. g. If God spared not the natural branches, μήπως οὐδὲ σοῦ peiora, [I fear] he will not spare thee,' Rom. xi. 21.

REMARK. The unbounded license of the older grammarians, in extending ellipsis to all parts of the Greek Testament, such as is developed in Bos's book on ellipsis, and other works of the like kind,1 is now, by general agreement among grammarians, quite abjured. Adjectives and participles which stand in the place of nouns, are now regarded as nouns, without the feeling that any ellipsis exists. Such modes of expression are considered merely as breviloquence. So the neuters of adjectives and participles are taken as nouns, when they are employed as such. So in respect to the use of the cases; they are now regarded as expressing relations of themselves, and not needing prepositions to govern them; for these only render their meaning more explicit. So in respect to cases governed by verbs; the old theory was, e. g. that εivai rivos required to be considered by the mind, as being equivalent to ɛivau viós TIVOS but now the Gen. itself is regarded as indicating

1 Of this book and of Weiske on Pleonasms, Hermann says: Singulari profecto casu accidit, ut L. Bosii liber de Ellipsi maximam partem sit pleonasmus; Weiskii de Pleonasmo, el

psis.

the same relation as viòs in such a case would express. So too in Ἰωσὴφ τοῦ ̔Ηλὶ or Madθ Ματταθίου, Luke iii. 26,) vids need not be regarded as necessary, because the Gen. of itself indicates origin. In a multitude of the like cases, we may consider the modes of expression simply as being breviloquent, not as elliptical. All languages employ a multitude of brevilo quent expressions; which, in general, are by reason of usage or by the aid of context, as intelligible as the more ample expressions.

Specially were the older grammarians prone, almost every where, to introduce prepositions before the Gen. and Dat. cases which follow verbs; e. g. dvrì after verbs of buying and selling; άò after those of feeling, restraining, etc.; did before the Gen. of time; sis before the Inf. of object or design; iz after verbs of abounding; before the Dat. of time, place, instrument, etc.; agà after verbs of hearing; veza after verbs of displeasure, anger, or before the Inf. with τοῦ· ἐπὶ after verbs of ruling, etc., κατὰ before the Acc. of manner, in respect to, etc.; gi after verbs of remembering, forgetting, etc.; in all which cases the most enlightened grammarians of the present day speak no longer of ellipsis.

So also in respect to Conjunctions; before (rather than) they supplied aλλov and so iva before the Subjunctive, in cases like τί θέλετε ποιήσω ὑμῖν· which are more easily solved by simple interpunction, e. g. rí, JéλETE, Tоnow iμñ what (according to your wish) shall I do for you? etc. etc.

One need not deny, that in may cases the sense would, in some respects, be more explicit, had the

writer supplied such words as those that have been mentioned. But if breviloquence is to be excluded from language, the great and effectual means of vivacity and energy of style would be taken away.

APOSIOPESIS.

§ 67. NATURE And use of it.

(1.) Aposiopesis (dodiúnais) consists in the suppression of a part of a sentence, on account of the feelings of the writer, or for the sake of brevity, energy, etc.

E. g. in Luke xix. 42; xiii. 9. Acts xxiii. 9. So after εἰ δὲ μὴ, εἰ δὲ μή γε, a part of a sentence, or even a whole one, is often omitted; e. g. vi. 1; ix. 17. Mark ii. 21, 22. Luke x. 6; xiii. 9. Rev. ii. 5, al.

BREVILOQUENCE.

§ 68. NATURE And use.

(1.) In a multitude of cases, the repetition of a word or words obviously suggested by the context is omitted. Formerly this was put to the account of ellipsis; it is now reckoned as breviloquence.

NOTE 1. The exact metes and bounds of ellipsis and breviloquence can hardly be defined. They run

R

into each other in a certain class of cases. In general, however, the omission of words, where the supply of them is most plain and obvious, and there can be no room for mistake by an intelligent reader, is called breviloquence.

Ε. g οὐ σὺ τὴν ῥίζαν βαστάζεις, ἀλλὰ ἡ ῥίζα σε, i. e. ἡ ῥίζα [βαστάζει] σὲ, Rom. xi. 18; καὶ τίς ἐστι...ἵνα TIOTEVOW Eis aúróv John ix. 36; xv. 25; xiii. 18. Mark xiv. 49. Phil. iii. 13, 14, ἐγὼ ἐμαυτὸν οὐ λογί ζομαι, ἓν δὲ κ. τ. λ, i. e. ἓν δὲ [λογίζομαι] Luke xxiii. 5.

NOTE 2. Under the head of breviloquence or brachylogy (Bęaxvλoyía) may be classed the so called constructio praegnans ; e. g. σώσει εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν, he will save [and bring me] into his kingdom, 2 Tim. iv. 18. Acts xxiii. 11, 24. 1 Pet. iii. 20. 2 Tim. ii. 26. Luke iv. 38. Gal. v. 4. 2 Cor. x. 5. Mark vii. 4.

ZEUGMA.

§ 69. NATURE and use.

(1.) Where a verb is connected with two nouns, and has such a sense that it does not fit them both, but we must supply another verb in order to make an appropriate sense, this is called Zeugma.

Ε. 5, ἀνεῴχθη δὲ τὸ στόμα αὐτοῦ...καὶ ἡ γλῶσσα απ τοῦ, i. e. ἡ γλῶσσα αὐτοῦ [ἐλύθη], Luke i. 64; γάλα ὑμᾶς ἐπότισα, οὐ βρῶμα, I have given you milk to drink, and [have fed you] not with meat, 1 Cor. iii. 2. 1 Tim. iv. 3. This is frequent in the classics.