In linguistic terms, a quantifier is an item that appears with a noun to specify the number or amount of referents indicated by the noun. In English, various kinds of quantification are lexically differentiated—universal quantification (all), distributive quantification (each), and universal-distributive (every). In Greek, however, quantification is conveyed syntactically using primarily one lexical item, namely πᾶς. In this article, we examine the syntactic patterns of πᾶς as a quantifier from a linguistic point of view with attention to the determination of the noun (articular versus anarthrous), the number of the noun (singular versus plural) and the phrasal word order. We also examine the phenomenon of ‘floating’ quantification in which the quantifier moves to a new position in the noun phrase. Finally, we compare the patterns found in New Testament Greek with those of the quantifier כל in the Hebrew Bible in order to determine the extent and type of Semitic interference with respect to quantification in New Testament Greek grammar.
The syntactic patterns of πᾶς as a quantifier are identified and the semantic import of each pattern is described. The relationship of πᾶς to the quantifier כל in the Hebrew Bible shows evidence of Semitic interference in New Testament Greek grammar.
In linguistic terms, a quantifier is an item that appears with a noun to specify the number or amount of referents indicated by the noun. In English, various kinds of quantification are lexically differentiated—universal quantification (
In this article, we examine the syntactic patterns of πᾶς as a quantifier from a linguistic point of view with attention to the number of the noun (singular versus plural), the determination of the noun (articular versus anarthrous) and the phrasal word order.
The article is organised as follows: In Section 2, we provide a brief description of the linguistic features of quantification from the perspective of linguistic typology. In Section 3, we summarise the previous research on πᾶς by considering the historical development of grammatical knowledge of πᾶς from both philological and linguistic viewpoints.
We begin with a brief description of the relevant linguistic terms and concepts that will be used in the following analysis of πᾶς as a quantifier.
There is substantial cross-linguistic evidence (see Gil
Semantically, the universal quantifier may have either a universal or distributive meaning, whereas the distributive quantifier specifies distributivity and cannot be used as a universal quantifier. Gil (
(1) (a) All the men carried three suitcases.
(b) Every man carried three suitcases.
In (1)(a), the sentence has two interpretations: either the men acted individually with each man carrying a suitcase (the distributive reading) or collectively with the three men jointly carrying three suitcases (the universal reading). In (1)(b), however, the sentence can only have the distributive reading—the men individually carried three suitcases each.
Syntactically, the universal quantifier is also more basic cross-linguistically (Gil
A final significant feature of quantifiers involves the fact that, in some languages, quantifiers can ‘float’ to outside of its normal position with respect to the noun or noun phrase that it modifies. In some cases, it may move to a position where it is not contiguous with the noun or noun phrase that it modifies. When a quantifier moves in this way, it is described as a ‘floated quantifier’. The following English sentences illustrate the floating of the English quantifier
(2) (a) All the students should have been studying.
(b) The students should all have been studying.
(c) The students should have all been studying.
Sentences (2)(b) and (2)(c) illustrate that
In describing the distribution of πᾶς in Koine Greek, the sixth edition of the grammar of George Benedict Winer (1789–1858) in 1866 provides the first information (Winer
(3) | (a) singular indefinite | πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ‘every man’ (Jn 2:10) |
(b) singular definite | πᾶς ὁ κόσμος ‘the whole cosmos’ (Rm 3:19) |
|
(c) plural indefinite | πρὸς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ‘to all men’ (Ac 22:15) |
|
(d) plural definite | πάντας τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς ‘all (acc.) the chief priests’ (Mt 2:4) |
Winer (
(4) πᾶσα Ἱ εροσόλυμα ‘the whole Jerusalem’ (Mt 2:3)
Secondly, an abstract noun denotes a whole. When modified by πᾶς, the phrase must be interpreted/translated as ‘all’ or ‘full’ not ‘every’ (see also Wallace
(5) Πᾶσαν χαράν ‘All (full) joy’ (Ja 1:2)
The use of πᾶς with the participle is also treated by Winer (
(6) (a) πᾶς ὀργιζόμενος ‘everyone that is angry (when, if, while, he is angry)’ (no reference)
(b) πᾶς ὁ ὀργιζόμενος ‘every enraged person (everyone who is angry)’ = πᾶς ὁστις ὀργίζεται (Mt 5:22).
According to Winer, the four Koine Greek constructions as in (3) show the evidence of Hebraic influence. Winer’s argument is strengthened by his observations concerning the collocation of the negative with πᾶς (Winer
(7) διότι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται πᾶσα σὰρξ ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ ‘therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh/human being be justified in his sight/presence’ (Romans 3:20)
Instead of meaning ‘every flesh will not be justified’, there is negative polarity, meaning ‘no flesh will be justified’.
Another argument advanced by Winer (
(8) (a) ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν ‘over the whole earth’ (Mt 27:45)
(b) וְנָ֤תַן לְךָ֙ אֶת־כָּל־הָאָ֔רֶץ ‘he will give to you the whole land’ (Dt 19:8)
(c) πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν ‘the whole land’ (Dt 19:8 LXX)
We agree with Winer that these Hellenistic Greek constructions provide good evidence for Hebraic influence and that the Septuagint and New Testament data are coherent. Other scholars of Greek, however, have viewed the constructions identified by Winer as ‘unclear’ or ‘blurred’, for example Turner (Moulton & Turner
In 1882, William Fiddian Moulton (1835–1898) published a third revised edition and translation of Winer (1855) (Winer & Moulton
(9) (a) πάντα τὰ μέλη τοῦ σώματος ‘all the members of the body’ (1 Cor 12:12)
(b) οἱ πατέρες ἡμῶν πάντες ‘all our ancestors’ (1 Cor 10:1)
(c) τὴν ἐξουσίαν ταύτην ἅπασαν ‘all this domain’ (Lk 4:6)
The second and third constructions (examples [9b] and [9c]) add a special nuance.
In his exposition of πᾶς in 1919, Archibald Thomas Robertson (1863–1934) added two additional constructions to the paradigm, indicated in example (10), resulting in eight constructions (Robertson
(10) (a) ὁ πᾶς νόμος ‘the whole law’ (Gl 5:14).
(b) οἱ πάντες ἄνδρες ‘the sum total of the men’ (Ac 19:7)
Both the constructions occur rarely in Biblical Greek and emphasise the sum total of the entities.
Robertson (
(11) (a) ὅτι ἐν παντὶ ἐπλουτίσθητε ἐν αὐτῷ, ἐν παντὶ λόγῳ καὶ πάσῃ γνώσει ‘for in all you are enriched by him, in every word and all knowledge’ (1 Cor 1:5)
(b) καὶ ἐὰν ἔχω προφητείαν καὶ εἰδῶ τὰ μυστήρια πάντα καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γνῶσιν καὶ ἐὰν ἔχω πᾶσαν τὴν πίστιν ὥστε ὄρη μεθιστάναι, ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω, οὐθέν εἰμι ‘And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all the mysteries and all the knowledge, and if I have all the faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing’ (1 Cor 13:2)
However, he acknowledged that there may indeed occasionally be a difference between a specific instance like πάσῃ τῇ θλίψει ἡμῶν and a general situation like πάσῃ θλίψει in 2 Corinthians 1:4 (Robertson
(12) ὁ παρακαλῶν ἡμᾶς ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ θλίψει ἡμῶν, εἰς τὸ δύνασθαι ἡμᾶς παρακαλεῖν τοὺς ἐν πάσῃ θλίψει ‘who comforts us in all our afflictions so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction’ (2 Cor 1:4)
Similarly, Moule (
This grammar
(13) (a) πάντα ταῦτα τὰ πονηρὰ ἔσωθεν ἐκπορεύεται ‘All these evil things come from inside’ (Mk 7:23)
(b) σοὶ δώσω τὴν ἐξουσίαν ταύτην ἅπασαν καὶ τὴν δόξαν αὐτῶν ‘To you I will give all this authority and their glory’ (Lk 4:6)
(c) καὶ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ ὀρεινῇ τῆς Ἰουδαίας διελαλεῖτο πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ‘and through all the hill country of Judea, they talked about all these things’ (Lk 1:65)
No new construction of πᾶς is suggested. The same pertains to the Moulton–Turner tradition, which is discussed in the next section.
Although some aspects of πᾶς are treated in other parts of the syntax, Turner provides a dedicated section on the syntax of πᾶς (Moulton & Turner
Turner remarks that ‘if πᾶς is placed after a noun with the article, special stress is laid upon the noun, e.g. 1 Cor 15:7’ (Moulton & Turner
(14) ἔπειτα ὤφθη Ἰακώβῳ εἶτα τοῖς ἀποστόλοις πᾶσιν· ‘Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles’ (1 Cor 15:7)
The claim is that ‘the Koine has developed the emphatic form … which incidentally is extremely popular in Biblical Greek (LXX NT)’ (Moulton & Turner
Turner claims that ‘the distinction of an anarthrous and articular noun with πᾶς is not very clear in NT, even to the extent that πᾶς with an articular noun can approach the meaning of
In 1996, Daniel Wallace published
In 2011, the linguist Lindsey Whaley published an article ‘The Semantic Effect of Floating Quantifiers in New Testament Greek’ (Whaley
The focus of Whaley’s study is on ‘floated quantifiers’ in Koine Greek. He defines ‘floated quantifiers’ as quantifiers that have moved out of their normal position so that they are syntactically disassociated from the noun phrase that they modify. (We will provide a somewhat different description of floated πᾶς below.) Whaley proposes that floated quantifiers do not move randomly but rather always move to a position that immediately precedes the verb phrase (i.e. the verb and its complements). For example, in (15), the quantifier πάντα is moved away from the noun phrase it modifies (τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα) to a position before the finite verb (συνετήρει)
(15) ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα συμβάλλουσα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς ‘But Mary treasured all these words, pondering them in her heart’ (Lk 2:19)
In (16), the quantifier πάντων is disassociated from its genitive pronoun to a position before a participial predicate
(16) πάντων τε καταπεσόντων ἡμῶν εἰς τὴν γῆν ἤκουσα φωνὴν λέγουσαν πρός με τῇ Ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ· ‘All of us having fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language…’ (Ac 26:14).
However, several examples in the New Testament do not fit Whaley’s characterisation of movement of the floated quantifier to a position before the verb phrase, as illustrated in example (17)
(17) Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐπὶ πάντας φόβος τοὺς περιοικοῦντας αὐτούς ‘And fear came upon all those living around them’ (Lk 1:65)
In this example, the quantifier πάντας is disassociated from the noun phrase that it modifies (τοὺς περιοικοῦντας αὐτούς), but it does not appear before a verb phrase. Furthermore, the quantifier appears within a prepositional phrase, which means that it cannot occur before the verb phrase. Another unusual aspect is the fact that the subject (φόβος) of the verb (ἐγένετο) is also within the prepositional phrase.
A recent analysis of the syntax of floated πᾶς in the Septuagint also indicates that some, but not all, examples can be explained by movement to preverbal position (Naudé & Miller-Naudé forthcoming).
Whaley also provides an argument concerning the semantics of floated πᾶς. He argues that floated πᾶς always indicates focus in the sense of ‘unpredictable, and usually new, information that is being introduced into discourse’ and that ‘includes information being given in contrast to other details of the text’ and ‘fills in a gap that exists in the readers’ presuppositions’ (Whaley
We will provide a somewhat different, more comprehensive, description of the syntax of floated πᾶς as well as different explanations of the meaning of floated πᾶς constructions below.
The grammatical descriptions as summarised above demonstrate the identification of eight syntactic constructions of πᾶς as part of a noun phrase. In this section, we propose the framework for a new analysis of πᾶς in the New Testament. We first propose two additional constructions to complete the various syntactic configurations of πᾶς. Then, we differentiate the resulting 10 constructions with respect to pragmatically unmarked word order as opposed to marked word order and differentiate their various meanings. Finally, we differentiate constructions with floated πᾶς and their meanings, resulting in a total of 11 constructions with πᾶς in the New Testament.
We propose two additional constructions in which πᾶς occurs after an anarthrous noun. An example of πᾶς with a singular, anarthrous noun is illustrated in (18):
(18) κατὰ πόλιν πᾶσαν ‘in every city (lit. according to city every, i.e. city by city)’ (Ac 15:36)
The singular construction occurs seven times in the New Testament, but is very rare in the Septuagint, where it is certainly a calque of the Aramaic source text.
(19) λαοὶ πάντες ‘all people (lit. people all)’ (Ps 66:4 LXX = Ps 67:4 Heb)
(20) καὶ συλλήμψεται αὐτοὺς πάντας ἐν νυκτὶ μιᾷ ‘and he will apprehend them all in one night’ (1 Mac 9:58)
In considering the 10 constructions of πᾶς, we first confirm the observations of a variety of scholars that the most common and pragmatically unmarked word order involves the quantifier in initial position before the noun (or noun phrase) that it modifies, whether the noun phrase is articular or anarthrous. Not coincidentally, these four constructions are the first constructions with πᾶς that were identified by Winer (see examples [3] above) and are the most numerous (see the statistics in
(21) quantifier ± article noun (singular/plural)
Constructions of πᾶς and their syntactic, pragmatic and semantic features.
Predicative | Quantifier | Article | Plural noun | Unmarked | 221 |
|
Predicative | Article | Plural noun | Quantifier (floated) | Focus on noun | 29 | |
Attributive | Article | Quantifier (floated) | Plural noun | Focus on total sum | 5 | |
Predicative | Quantifier | - | Singular noun | Unmarked | 256 | |
Predicative | - | Singular noun | Quantifier (floated) | Focus on noun | 7 | |
Predicative | Quantifier | - | Plural noun | Unmarked | 32 | |
Predicative | - | Plural noun | Quantifier (floated) | Focus on noun | 0 [LXX] | |
Predicative | Quantifier | Article | Singular noun | Unmarked | 143 | |
Predicative | Article | Singular noun | Quantifier (floated) | Focus on noun | 5 | |
Attributive | Article | Quantifier (floated) | Singular noun | Focus on total sum | 2 |
, The statistics in this column are taken from Moulton and Turner (
The quantifier πᾶς in the four unmarked constructions has a different meaning or nuance depending upon the noun phrase that it modifies and specifically whether the noun is singular or plural and whether the noun is articular or anarthrous. When πᾶς modifies a definite plural noun, the quantified noun phrase refers to the totality of the (specific/inclusive) group:
(22) Καὶ ἀπῆλθεν ἡ ἀκοὴ αὐτοῦ εἰς ὅλην τὴν Συρίαν· καὶ προσήνεγκαν αὐτῷ πάντας τοὺς κακῶς ἔχοντας ποικίλαις νόσοις καὶ βασάνοις συνεχομένους [καὶ] δαιμονιζομένους καὶ σεληνιαζομένους καὶ παραλυτικούς, καὶ ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτούς ‘And his fame spread throughout all Syria, and they brought to him all the sick having various diseases and pains, demoniacs, epileptics, paralytics, and he cured them’ (Mt 4:24).
When πᾶς modifies an indefinite singular noun, the quantifier adds the nuance of individualisation (each and every), as in example (23), or the whole (in terms of single entities or mass nouns), as in example (24):
(23) Καὶ περιῆγεν ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ Γαλιλαίᾳ διδάσκων ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς αὐτῶν καὶ κηρύσσων τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας καὶ θεραπεύων πᾶσαν νόσον καὶ πᾶσαν μαλακίαν ἐν τῷ λαῷ ‘Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the good news of the kingdom and curing every disease and every sickness among the people’ (Mt 4:23).
(24) ἀκούσας δὲ ὁ βασιλεὺς Ἡρῴδης ἐταράχθη καὶ πᾶσα Ἱεροσόλυμα μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ‘When King Herod heard this, he was frightened, and all Jerusalem with him’ (Mt 2:3).
When πᾶς modifies an indefinite singular noun, the quantified noun phrase refers to each and every individual:
(25) ἤδη δὲ ἡ ἀξίνη πρὸς τὴν ῥίζαν τῶν δένδρων κεῖται· πᾶν οὖν δένδρον μὴ ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν ἐκκόπτεται καὶ εἰς πῦρ βάλλεται ‘Even now the axe is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire’ (Mt 3:10).
When πᾶς modifies an indefinite plural noun (a relatively less frequent construction), the semantic nuance conveyed by the quantified noun phrase is very similar to a definite plural noun with πᾶς. They differ only with respect to specificity:
(26) καὶ ἐρεῖ λέγων ὑμῖν· οὐκ οἶδα [ὑμᾶς] πόθεν ἐστέ· ἀπόστητε ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ πάντες ἐργάται ἀδικίας. ‘And he will say to you, “I do not know where you come from; go away from me, all evildoers!”’ (Lk 13:27).
These four unmarked constructions are the pragmatically neutral ones. The same constructions with the same semantic nuances are also attested in the Septuagint. The Greek of both the Septuagint and the New Testament thus bears striking similarities to the structurally identical constructions in Biblical Hebrew and Qumran Hebrew, as described above.
We turn now to the three groups of constructions involving a ‘floated’ quantifier. Each construction will have a different semantic nuance, depending upon the position of the quantifier.
When the quantifier follows rather than precedes the noun that it modifies, the quantifier has ‘floated’ to a post-nominal position. This group can be schematised as follows:
(27) ± article noun (singular/plural) ‘floated’ quantifier
The position of the quantifier after the noun (or noun phrase) focuses or highlights the noun phrase that precedes. An example of the definite plural noun with quantifier floated to the end of the noun phrase is shown below:
(28) Οὐ θέλω γὰρ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι οἱ πατέρες ἡμῶν πάντες ὑπὸ τὴν νεφέλην ἦσαν καὶ πάντες διὰ τῆς θαλάσσης διῆλθον ‘I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers all were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea’ (1 Cor 10:1).
When the noun (or noun phrase) is determined with the article, the quantifier may also ‘float’ to a position that is between the article and the noun. This group can be schematised as follows:
(29) article quantifier noun (singular/plural)
In this construction, the floated quantifier focuses on the total sum of the quantified entity:
(30) τοὺς γὰρ πάντας ἡμᾶς φανερωθῆναι δεῖ ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ βήματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἵνα κομίσηται ἕκαστος τὰ διὰ τοῦ σώματος πρὸς ἃ ἔπραξεν, εἴτε ἀγαθὸν εἴτε φαῦλον. ‘For all we must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may receive recompense for what has been done in the body, whether good or evil’ (2 Cor 5:10).
In contrast to previous scholars, we therefore identify these two kinds of floating that occur when the quantifier is
When the quantifier ‘floats’ to a position that is
We agree with Whaley’s (
We summarise the syntactic configurations and meanings of the 10 constructions in
In summary, the uses of the quantifier πᾶς can be divided into the following general types on the basis of the number of entities over which it has scope and their definiteness. The difference between the distributive quantifier ‘every’ and collective quantifier ‘all’ is that the distributive ‘every’ occurs with indefinite nouns, is non-specific and implicitly inclusive, while the collective ‘all’ is specific and inclusive. The difference between the plural and the singular is motivated by individualisation. In the plural, the focus is not on individualisation. The singular focuses on individualisation/individuation.
When the quantifier floats to a position at the end of the quantified noun phrase, the pragmatic focus is on the noun phrase itself. When the quantifier floats to a position inside the quantified noun phrase, namely between the article and the noun (or noun phrase), the pragmatic focus is on the total sum. When the quantifier floats to a discontinuous position that precedes the verb phrase, its scope extends to the predication itself.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated that careful attention to the syntactic distribution of the quantifier πᾶς allows us to understand more precisely which constructions are unmarked or neutral and which constructions carry additional semantic and pragmatic nuances. Furthermore, we have demonstrated that understanding the Koine Greek constructions depends upon recognising the Hebraic constructions which seem to have influenced the Greek expression of quantification, at least in the Septuagint and the New Testament.
However, there are still outstanding matters concerning πᾶς in the New Testament, which remain to be investigated. These are as follows: (1) πᾶς with the negative and the issue of negative polarity; (2) substantival uses of πᾶς; (3) πᾶς with the participle; and (4) a comparison of the meanings and uses of πᾶς with similar words such as ὅλος and ἅπας. Perhaps, most important is the expansion of the analysis beyond biblical Greek of the Septuagint and New Testament to other varieties of Hellenistic Greek.
An earlier version of this article was presented in the Hellenistic Greek Language and Linguistics Section of the Society of Biblical Literature International Meeting 2019, Rome, Italy, 1–5 July. We would like to acknowledge Prof. Jan Barkhuisen, emeritus professor at the University of Pretoria, who also worked with us on the early stages of this project. The research questions arose during the translation of the new Afrikaans Bible and are related to our research on quantifiers in Hebrew and the interaction between Hebrew and Greek in the Hellenistic world.
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
J.A.N. and C.L.M-N. contributed equally to this research article.
This article followed all ethical standards for research without direct contact with human or animal subjects.
This work is based on the research supported in part by the National Research Foundation of South Africa (Cynthia L. Miller-Naudé UID 95926 and Jacobus A. Naudé UID 85902). The grant holders acknowledge that the opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in any publication generated by the NRF-supported research are those of the authors and that the NRF accepts no liability whatsoever in this regard. The Research Committee of the Faculty of the Humanities, University of the Free State, provided funding for the second author to attend the conference where the paper was originally presented.
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the authors.
The Greek text used for citations from the New Testament is the 28th edition of Nestle-Aland (Aland et al.
In Naudé & Miller-Naudé forthcoming we analyse the syntactic patterns of πᾶς in the Greek of the Septuagint.
The linguistic discussion in this section summarises previous research on quantification in linguistics and in pre-modern Hebrew (see Miller-Naudé & Naudé
Robertson (
Winer’s example πᾶσα πόλις ‘every city’ is not attested in the NT. An example in the NT that is not cited by Winer is πᾶσα γραφή ‘every writing’ (2 Tim 3:16), not ‘the whole writing’ or ‘whatever is Scripture’ (Moulton & Turner
Winer (
Winer (
Winer (
See also πᾶς οἶκος Ἰσραήλ ‘the whole house of Israel’ (Ac 2:36, cf LXX 1 Sm 7:2) and the Hebraism πάσῃ σοφίᾳ Αἰγυπτίων ‘in the whole wisdom of Egypt’ (Ac 7:22) (Winer
Wallace (
Winer (
οὐ πᾶς (μή πᾶς) without an intervening word denotes
See also Matthew 24:22 (καὶ εἰ μὴ ἐκολοβώθησαν αἱ ἡμέραι ἐκεῖναι, οὐκ ἂν ἐσώθη πᾶσα σάρξ ‘If that time were not shortened, nobody/no flesh would be rescued’); Luke 1:37 (ὅτι οὐκ ἀδυνατήσει παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ πᾶν ῥῆμα ‘For nothing is impossible for God’); Acts 10:14 (ὅτι οὐδέποτε ἔφαγον πᾶν κοινὸν καὶ ἀκάθαρτον ‘for I have never eaten anything impure or unclean’); 1 Corinthians 1:29 (ὅπως μὴ καυχήσηται πᾶσα σὰρξ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ ‘So no human being can boast in God’s presence’); and Revelation 21:27 (καὶ οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτὴν πᾶν κοινὸν καὶ [ὁ] ποιῶν βδέλυγμα καὶ ψεῦδος ‘And nothing unclean will ever enter it, nor anyone who does what is vile and deceitful’). In the Septuagint, πᾶς occurs frequently as a translation οὐ (μή), for example, in Judges 13:4 (καὶ νῦν φύλαξαι δὴ καὶ μὴ πίῃς οἶνον καὶ μέθυσμα καὶ μὴ φάγῃς πᾶν ἀκάθαρτον ‘Now therefore, be careful not to drink wine or strong drink, nor eat any unclean thing’). Other cases are Exodus 12:16, 44; 20:10; Deuteronomy 5:14; 20:16; 2; Samuel 15:11; Psalm 33:11; 142:2; Ezechiel 30:14; and Tobit 4:7, 19; 12:11; but not Exodus 10:15; Deuteronomy 8:9; Josua 10:8; and Proverbs 6:85; 12:21, which have οὐ —οὐδείς or only οὐδείς as in Josua 23:9.
See Naudé (
See also Romans 10:18 (εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν ‘into the whole/entire earth’).
In 1870, William Fiddian Moulton published a translation and enlarged first edition of Winer (1855), followed by a second edition (‘in the main a reprint of the first’) in 1876 and a third revised edition in 1882 (Winer & Moulton To supplement the author’s statements and bring them into accordance with the present state of our knowledge. To show under the different heads of the subject how much may be regarded as settled and how much is still disputed borderland. By means of continuous references to English writers on Greek grammar and on New Testament Greek, to place the English reader in the position occupied by one who uses the original. To call further attention to the many striking coincidences between Modern Greek and the language in which the New Testament is written (Winer & Moulton
Moulton gives the opinion that the zealous and accurate study of the Greek of the New Testament of the 10 or 20 years before 1880 yielded fruit (Winer & Moulton
The label of this tradition is suggested by Debrunner (Blass et al.
Archibald Thomas Robertson and his father-in-law, John Albert Broadus (1827–1895), decided in 1888 to revise Winer’s grammar. However, Robertson became convinced that it was impossible to revise Winer’s grammar because of the progress which had been made in ‘comparative philology and historical grammar’ since Winer wrote it (Robertson
Other examples include Acts 20:18; 27:37; Romans 16:15; 2 Corinthians 5:10; and Galatians 1:2.
Robertson (
Robertson (
Friedrich Blass, Professor of Classical Philology at the University of Halle-Wittenberg, published the first edition of his
For 35 years, the Winer–Moulton grammar was dominant, before a new version was published by James Hope Moulton, son of W. F. Moulton. On the title page of the first volume of the first edition of the grammar of James Hope Moulton (
Whaley’s identification of possessive pronouns as belonging to the grammatical category ‘adjective’ is also problematic (1996:348–350).
Devine and Stephens (
Whaley (
An additional example of πᾶς moving before a verb phrase with a participial predicate is found in Titus 3:2.
Additional examples of floated πᾶς that are not before a verb phrase include Matthew 4:9 and Mark 13:4. See also the floated uses of the similar quantifier phrase τούτων ἁπάντων in Matthew 6:32. An example that could be analysed either as movement of the quantifier to preverbal position or as movement of the quantifier to the end of the noun phrase is found in Matthew 13:34.
Precisely how to understand the syntax of this verse is not clear. One possibility is that the phrase τοὺς περιοικοῦντας αὐτούς is right dislocated outside of the sentence with its antecedent (πάντας) within the sentence.
Muraoka (2020:458) incorrectly states that the construction does not occur in the Septuagint, but see LXX Ezra 5:7 εἰρήνη πᾶσα ‘all peace!’ for the Aramaic שְׁלָמָ֥א כֹֽלָּא.
See also Psalm 66:6 (LXX) = Psalm 67:6 (Hebrew); Isaiah 57:13 (LXX) = 57:13 (Hebrew); and Ezekiel 38:4. In the Septuagint translation of Psalm 81:6, the phrase with the quantifier may belong with the following verse.
See also 2 Maccabees 9:15 and Judith 2:23.
Whaley (
The Septuagint data are analysed in Naudé & Miller-Naudé forthcoming.