Greek I; lesson 15

John 1:32

Καὶ ἐμαρτύρησεν Ἰωάννης λέγων


Be able to identify and explain all these parts of μαρτυρησεν ε μαρτυρ σε ν



What case is Ιωαννης?


ὅτι τεθέαμαι τὸ πνεῦμα καταβαῖνον ὡς περιστερὰν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ἔμεινεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν.

οτι often introduces direct discourse in which case it is translated with quotation marks (know the difference between direct and indirect discourse).


τεθεαμαι is deponent.  Notice the reduplication.  Why the tau?



καταβαινον is a participle modifying πνευμα. It is anarthrous but still adjectival. Here it is an attributive participle which means you will translate it with a relative clause.  Here is the evolution (BBG 27.3):

βαιν-            stem
καταβαιν-         compound verb stem
καταβαινo         add the connecting vowel
καταβαινοντ          add the participle morpheme
καταβαινoν             the τ drops off (as per noun rule #8)
καταβαινον              add the case ending (there isn’t one in this case)



ἔμεινεν is a liquid verb.  Here is the evolution:

μεν-         present stem
μειν-         aorist stem (see MBG p. 266, footnote #12)
εμειν-         add the augment
εμεινε          add the tense formative.
εμιενε           add the verb ending.
εμεινεν           add a movable nu.


John 1:33

κἀγὼ οὐκ ᾔδειν αὐτόν, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ πέμψας με βαπτίζειν ἐν ὕδατι ἐκεῖνός μοι εἶπεν·

ηδειν is from οιδα.  αλλα is always a strong adversative conjunction.



πεμψας is articular; and therefore, adjectival. Here it is clearly a substantival participle.  What happened to the sigma of the tense formative?



What usage of the infinitive do we see in βαπτιζειν?

With what (or in what) were they baptized? ἐν ὕδατι   υδατι is dative; cf. MBG 199; n-3c(6b).

εκεινος is in apposition to ο πεμπψας με βαπτιζειν εν υδατι. Notice the agreement in case between πεμψας and εκεινος (principle 38).  εκεινος is the subject of ειπεν.


ἐφ᾽ ὃν ἂν ἴδῃς τὸ πνεῦμα καταβαῖνον καὶ μένον ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ βαπτίζων ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ.

This line is the DO of the verb ειπεν. It is direct discourse, so use quotation marks.

εφ is from επι.  Why the changed spelling?

The αν causes our translation of ον to change from “whom” to “whomever”.



The lexical form is οραω.  Why no augment?  What would the verb ending be if it were not subjunctive?  You should be able to determine the person, number, and voice from the verb ending.  What is the subject?  object?


καταβαινον and μενον

καταβαινον and μενον are two attributive participles (even though they are anarthrous).  Translate them using -ing words:  “…descending and remaining…”.

Note that εστιν is a linking verb. The entire phrase that follows is the PN.  βαπτιζων is articular and a substantival participle.  Since it is a substantive, we expect it to be performing one of the noun functions.  The evolution of καταβαινον is given above; here is μενον (BBG 27.3):

μεν-          stem
μενο          add the connecting vowel
μενοντ        add the participle morpheme
μενον            the τ drops off (as per noun rule #8)
μενον                add the case ending (there isn’t one in this case)



John 1:34

κἀγὼ ἑώρακα καὶ μεμαρτύρηκα ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ.

εωρακα is an unusual form but do note the more obvious parsing clues. The most obvious is the tense formative.   What does it indicate?

μεμαρτυρηκα is much more regular.

μαρτυρε-           stem
μεμαρτυρε            reduplication
μεμαρτυρεκα           add the tense formative
μεμαρτυρηκα             principle 12
μεμαρτυρηκα               add the verb ending (there isn’t one in this case)

What is the DO of εωρακα and μεμαρτυρηκα?



Print Friendly, PDF & Email