I. Special Difficulties. See chapter VII (Declensions) for discussion of the origin, formation and history of adverbs. The matter will come up again in chapter XIII (Prepositions) where the so-called "improper" prepositions are treated. Brugmann1 has no syntactical handling of the subject, though Delbruck2 gives an exhaustive presentation of the matter. But even Delbruck gives less than a page to the purely syntactical phases of the adverb (p. 643), whereas Winer3 treats the adverb only under syntax.

(a) NATURE OF THE ADVERB. The first difficulty is in deciding what is an adverb. As shown in chapter VII, the adverb not only has great variety in its origin, but also wide expansion in its use. In simple truth a large portion of the "parts of speech" are adverbs. Brugmann4 pointedly says that it is not possible to draw a sharp line between adverb, particle and preposition. The development of adverb into preposition, conjunction, intensive particle and even interjection was illustrated in chapter VII with perhaps sufficient fulness. To this list may be added the negative particles which are really adverbs. In particular in the Sanskrit is there difficulty in the treatment of preposition and conjunction as distinct from adverb, since the indeclinable words were less distinctly divided.5 But this vagueness applies to other members of the Indo-Germanic group.6 In Greek and Latin no distinct line can be drawn between adverbs and prepositions.7

(b) THE NARROWER SENSE OF ADVERB. These wider and more specialized forms of the adverb must be dropped out of view


before we can do anything with the mere adverb which is not preposition, conjunction, particle nor interjection. There is a good deal that needs to be said concerning the syntax of the mere adverb, for, in spite of its being a fixed case-form, it has a varied and interesting usage in the Greek sentence. The adverb has been treated by the grammars as a sort of printer's devil in the sentence. It has been given the bone that was left for the dog, if it was left.

II. Adverbs with Verbs.

(a) COMMONEST USE. This is indeed the etymology of the word and the most frequent use of the pure adverb. But one cannot say that this was the original use, as the name evpi,rrhma might suggest. The truth is that the adverb has such a varied origin that it is difficult to make a general remark on the subject that will be true. Only this may be said, that some adverbs began to be used with verbs, some with adjectives, some absolutely, etc. At first they were not regarded as strictly adverbs, but were used progressively so (cf. ca,rin) until with most the earlier non-adverbial uses ceased.

(b) N. T. USAGE. Winer8 suspects that the N. T. writers did not understand the finer shades of meaning in the Greek adverbs, but this is true only from the point of view of the Attic literary style and applies to the vernacular koinh, in general. But he is wholly right in insisting on the necessity of adverbs for precise definition in language. The grammarians find offence9 in the adverbs of the koinh, as in other portions of the vocabulary. Some of the "poetic" adverbs in Winer's list are at home in the papyri as in the N. T., like euvare,stwj. A few examples will suffice for the normal usage in the N. T. See the majestic roll of the adverbs in. Heb. 1:1, polumerw/j kai. polutro,pwj pa,lai. Cf. spoudaiote,rwj (Ph. 2:28), perissote,rwj and ta,ceion (Heb. 13:19), peraite,rw (Ac. 19: 39) as examples of comparison.

(c) PREDICATIVE USES WITH gi,nomai AND eivmi,. There is nothing out of the way in the adverb with gi,nomai in 1 Th. 2:10, w`j o`si,wj kai. dikai,wj kai. avme,mptwj u`mi/n toij pisteu,ousin evgenh,qhmen. Here the verb is not a mere copula. Indeed eivmi, appears with the adverb also when it has verbal force. Thus kaqw.j avlhqw/j evsti,n (1 Th. 2: 13) is not equivalent to kaqw/j avlhqe,j evstin. Cf. kaqw.j e;stin avlh,qeia evn tw|/ vIhsou/ (Eph. 4:21). So also h` ge,nesij ou[twj h=n (Mt. 1:18), eiv ou[twj evsti.n h` aivti,a tou/ avnqrw,pou (Mt. 19:10), to. ou[twj ei=nai (1 Cor. 7:26). Cf. 1 Cor. 7:7. The adverb in all these instances is different from the adjective. Cf. ti, me evpoi,hsaj ou[twj (Ro. 9:20) for


a similar predicate use of the adverb. Cf. also ou[twj pesw,n and o;ntwj o` qeo.j evn u`mi/n evsti,n (1 Cor. 14:25) and avlhqw/j in Mt. 14:33. In Ph. 4:5, 6 o` ku,rioj evggu,j the copula evsti,n is to be supplied and here the adverb is not far from the adjective idea. Cf. also po,rrw o;ntoj (Lu. 14:32), makra,n (Mk. 12:34), i;sa (Ph. 2:6).

(d) WITH ;Ecw. It has some idiomatic constructions with the adverb that are difficult from the English point of view. Thus tou.j kakw/j e;contaj (Mt. 14:35), and with the instrumental case in Mk. 1:34. Cf. Lu. 7:2. In English we prefer the predicate adjective with have (He has it bad), whereas the Greek likes the adverb with e;cw) So evsca,twj e;cei (Mk. 5:23) and in Jo. 4:52 komyo,teron e;scen the comparative adverb. One must be willing for the Greek to have his standpoint. Cf. ou[twj e;cei in Ac. 7:1 and po,rrw avpe,cei (Mk. 7:6). Pw/j e;cousin (Ac. 15:36) needs no comment. It is a common enough Greek idiom. Cf. bare,wj e;cousa, P.Br.M. 42 (B.C. 168).

(e) WITH PARTICIPLES. [Ama evli,zwn (Ac. 24:26) belongs to the discussion of participles. But one may note here h;dh teqnhko,ta (Jo. 19:33) and w`j me,llontaj (Ac. 23:15). Cf. also the use of h;dh with parh/lqen (Mt. 14:15), a matter that concerns the aorist tense. But note both nu/n and h;dh with evsti,n in 1 Jo. 4:3.

(f) LOOSE RELATION TO THE VERB or any other part of the sentence. So avkmh,n (cf. e;ti) in Mt. 15:16 and th.n avrch,n in Jo. 8:25, for this accusative is really adverbial. Cf. also to. loipo,n (Ph. 3:1), tou,nati,on (Gal. 2:7).

III. Adverbs Used with Other Adverbs. There is, to be sure, nothing unusual about this either in Greek or any other tongue. So polu, ma/llon (Heb. 12:9), ma/llon krei/sson (Ph. 1:23), ma/llon perisso,teron (Mk. 7:36) are merely normal uses barring the double comparative in the two examples which, however, have their own explanation. The compound adverbs, which are common in the N. T. (as u`perperissw/j, Mk. 7:37; cf. polutro,pwj in Heb. 1:1), call for no more explanation than other compound words. Cf. kaqo,lou (Ac. 4:18). The Greek, like the German, easily makes compound words, and the tendency to long compound words grows with the history of language. See avperispa,stwj in 1 Cor. 7:35. For compound adverbs see chapter VII, (c) . For the comparison of adverbs see ib., (e) .

IV. Adverbs with Adjectives. A typical illustration is found in 1 Tim. 3:16, o`mologoume,nwj me,ga) So ou[tw me,gaj in Rev. 16:18. The instances are not very numerous in the N. T., since indeed, especially in the Gospels, the adjective is not excessively abundant.


In Ac. 24:25, to. nu/n e;con the participle being both verb and adjective, causes no difficulty. In Ac. 23:20, w`j me,llwn ti avkribe, steron punqa,nesqai peri. auvtou/, we have the adverbial use of ti as well as avkribe,steron. Cf. avperispa,stwj with euvpa,redron in 1 Cor. 7:35.

V. Adverbs with Substantives. Here indeed one may recall that the substantive as well as the adjective gives a basis for this idiom (cf. Jordan River). Nu/n is a typical example in the N. T. Thus we find evn tw|/ nu/n kairw|/ (Ro. 3:26), th|/ nu/n vIerousalh,m (Gal. 4:25), zwh/j th/j nu/n (1 Tim. 4:8), to.n nu/n aivw/na (2 Tim. 4:10). Here indeed the adverb has virtually the force of the adjective, just as the substantive in this descriptive sense gave rise to the adjective. The English can use the same idiom as "the now time," though this particular phrase is awkward. The Greek has so much elasticity in the matter because of the article which gives it a great advantage over the Latin.10 Cf. also h` de. o;ntwj ch,ra (1 Tim. 5:5), h` de. a;nw vIerousalh,m (Gal. 4:26), th/j a;nw klh,sewj (Phi 3:14), o` to,te ko,smoj (2 Pet. 3:6).

VI. Adverbs Treated as Substantives.11 The very adverbs named above may be here appealed to. It is especially true of words of place and time. Thus evk tw/n a;nw eivmi, (Jo. 8:23), to. nai, (2 Cor. 1:17), ta. a;nw (Col. 3:1 f.), ta, nu/n (Ac. 5:38), e[wj tou/ nu/n (Mk. 13:19), avpo. tou/ nu/n (Lu. 1:48) and often. Cf. toi/j evkei/, (Mt. 26:71), ta. w-de (Col. 4:9). So plhsi,on always in the N. T. save once as preposition with genitive (Jo. 4:5). It usually has the article (Mt. 5:43), but may be used without it in the nominative case (Lu. 10:29). A striking instance of the adverb treated as substantive appears in cwri.j tw/n parekto,j (2 Cor. 11:28). Other examples of the adverb with the article are a;cri tou/ deu/ro (Ro. 1:13), evk tw/n ka,tw (Jo. 8:23), eivj ta. ovpi,sw (Mk. 13:16), tou.j e;xw (1 Cor. 5:12), to. e;xwqen kai. to. e;swqen (Lu. 11:40), eivj to. e;mprosqen (Lu. 19:4). In toi/j makra,n and toi/j evggu,j (Eph. 2:17) the adverb is rather adjectival in idea. In th|/ e`xh/j (Ac. 21:1) we have to supply, of course, h`me,ra|, though the text of Lu. 7:11 reads evn tw|/ e`xh/j) Here the adverb is treated rather as an adjective, but the point of distinction between the use as substantive and adjective is not always clear. Cf. also h` au;rion (Mt. 6:34), peri. th/j sh,meron (Ac. 19:40). But it is not merely when the adverb has the article that it is treated as a substantive. Prepositions are used with adverbs without any article. Then it is not always clear whether we have two words or one. Thus editors print u`pe.r evkei/na as well as u`pere,keina (2 Cor. 10:16), u`per evk perissou/ as well as u`perek


perissou/ (Eph. 3:20), u`pe.r li,an as well as u`perli,an (2 Cor. 11:5). Cf. e;peita evpa,nw evfa,pax, and e[wj a;rti in 1 Cor. 15:6. Thus avpo. pe,rusi (2 Cor. 9:2), avp v a;nwqen e[wj ka,tw (Mk. 15:38), avp v a;rti (Mt. 23:39), avpo. makro,qen (Mt. 27:55), avpo. prwi, (Ac. 28:23), a[ma prwi, (Mt. 20:1), e[wj a;rti (Mt. 11:12), e[wj tri,j (Lu. 22:34), e[wj e`pta,kij (Mt. 18:21 f.), e[wj e;xw (Ac. 21:5), e[wj e;sw (Mk. 14:54), e[wj po,te (Mt. 17:17), e[wj w-de (Lu. 23:5), etc. For this doubling of adverbs see evkto.j eiv mh, (1 Cor. 14:5) in the realm of conjunctions. Moulton (Prol., p. 99) finds in the papyri evk to,te, O.P. 486 (ii/A.D.), and note avpo. pe,rusi, (Deissmann, B. S., p. 221).

VII. The Pregnant Use of Adverbs. Just as the prepositions evn and eivj are used each with verbs of rest and motion (and para,, with locative or accusative), so adverbs show the same absence of minute uniformity. Poi,, for instance, is absent from both the LXX and the N. T., as is o[poi. Instead we find pou/ u`pa,gei (Jo. 3:8) and o[pou evgw. u`pa,gw (Jo. 13:33), but po,qen e;rcetai (Jo. 3:8) and o;qen evxh/lqon (Mt. 12:44). So also e;rcetai evkei/ (Jo. 18:3) like our "come here." But on the other hand in Ac. 22:5, a;xwn kai. tou.j evkei/se o;ntaj, the usual word would be evkei/. But evkei/se is regular in Ac. 21:3. Winer12 calls this an "abuse" of language, which putting it rather too strongly, since it is found in the best Greek. It is largely a matter of usage, for with w-de and evnqa,de the ideas of hic and huc had long coalesced, while evxwqen e;swqen ka,tw mean both 'without' (Mt. 23:27) and 'from without' (Mk. 7:18), 'within' (Mt. 7:15) and 'from within' (Mk. 7:23), 'below' (Mt. 4:6) and 'from below' (Jo. 8:23). Cf. meta,ba e;nqen evkei/. (Mt. 17:20) and e;nqenevkei/qen (Lu. 16:26). In Mt. 25:24, 26, suna,gwn o;qen ouv diesko,rpisaj, we have evkei/qen ou- merged into o[qen by attraction. In oi` avpo. th/j vItali,aj (Heb. 13:24) it is uncertain what standpoint the writer takes. With evk we have not only the normal idiom like toi/j evk peritomh/j (Ro. 4:12) and oi` evk th/j Kai,saroj oivki,aj (Ph. 4:22), but the pregnant use where Ev could have occurred. Thus a=rai ta. evk th/j oivki,aj (Mt. 24:17) with which compare o` eivj to.n avgro,n (Mk. 13:16, evn in Mt. 24:18). Cf. o` path.r o` evx ouvranou/ in Lu. 11:13, though some MSS.13 do not have the second o`. The correlation of adverbs belongs to the chapter on Pronouns.

VIII. Adverbs as Marks of Style. Thus a;rti is not found in Mark, Luke, James, Jude nor Hebrews, though fairly often in Matthew, John and Paul. Nu/n, on the other hand, is frequent throughout the N. T. as a whole. Abbott14 has an interesting dis-


eussion of kai. nu/n, in John and Luke. Nuni, is found only in Acts, Paul and Hebrews, the most literary portions of the N. T. Then again Mark has abundant use of euvqu,j, but not euvqe,wj, while Matthew employs both. John uses each only three times. Abbott15 notes that wherever Matthew uses euvqu,j it is found in the parallel part of Mark. Euvqe,wj prevails in Luke (Gospel and Acts). Abbott insists on difference in idea in the two words, euvqe,wj ('immediately'), euvqu,j ('straightway'). So in Matthew to,te is exceedingly common, while in 1 Cor. e;peita is rather frequent, though the two words have different ideas. Then again evggu,j is more common in John than all the Synoptists together.16 The context must often decide the exact idea of an adverb, as with evkaqe,zeto ou[twj (Jo. 4:6). Cf. w`j h=n evn tw|/ ploi,w| (Mk. 4:36).

IX. The Adverb Distinguished from the Adjective.

(a) DIFFERENT MEANING. The adjective and the adverb often mean radically different things. Thus in Jo. 8:29, ouvk avfh,ke,n me mo,non, the adjective mo,non means that 'he did not leave me alone.' As an adverb; if the position allowed it, it would be 'not only did he leave, but' etc., just the opposite. In 2 Tim. 4:11 mo,noj means that Luke is alone with Paul. So in Lu. 24:18 su. mo,noj may be contrasted with mo,non pi,steuson, (Lu. 8:50). The point is specially clear with prw/toj and prw/ton. Thus in Ac. 3:26 we have u`mi/n prw/ton avnasth,saj, not u`mi/n prw,toij. It is not 'you as chief,' but 'the thing is done first for you.' So also Ro. 2:9 ( vIoudai,ou te prw/ton kai. [Ellhnoj). But in 1 Jo. 4:19 note h`mei/j avgapw/men o[ti auvto.j prw/toj hvga,phsen h`ma/j. 'God is the first one who loves.' Cf. also h=lqen prw/toj eivj to. mnhmei/on (Jo. 20:4) where John is the first one to come to the tomb. In Jo. 1:41 the MSS. vary between prw/toj and prw/ton (W. H.). One can but wonder here if after all prw/toj is not the correct text with the implication that John also found his brother James. The delicate implication may have been easily overlooked by a scribe. Cf. also the difference between evla,lei ovrqw/j (Mk. 7:35) and avna,sthqi evpi. tou.j po,daj sou ovrqo,j (Ac. 14:10). The English has a similar distinction in "feel bad" and "feel badly," "look bad" and "look badly." We use "well" in both senses. Cf. evdrai/oj in 1 Cor. 7:37.

(b) DIFFERENCE IN GREEK AND ENGLISH IDIOM. But the Greek uses the adjective often where the English has the adverb. That is, the Greek prefers the personal connection of the adjective with the subject to the adverbial connection with the verb. So we have auvtoma,th h` gh/ karpoforei/, (Mk. 4:28) and auvtoma,th hvnoi,gh


(Ac. 12:10). In Lu. 21:34 the same construction is found with evfni,dioj h` h`me,ra evkei,nh. The ancient Greek idiom of the adjective rather than the locative of time appears in Ac. 28:13, deuterai/oi h;lqomen) So ovrqrinai,. (Lu. 24:22). The same use of the adjective rather than the adverb meets us in 1 Cor. 9:17, eiv ga.r e`kw.n tou/to pra,ssw - eiv de. a;kwn, just as we see it in the ancient Greek. Cf. the Latin. nolens volens. See Ro. 8:20. In me,soj the Greek has an adjective that we have to use a phrase for. Thus me,soj u`mw/n sth,kei (Jo. 1:26), there stands in the midst of you.' Cf. a very different idea in h`me,raj me,shj (Ac. 26:13), 'middle of the day.'

X. Adverbial Phrases.

(a) INCIPIENT ADVERBS. Some of these are practically adverbs, though they retain the case-inflection and may even have the article. Thus th.n avrch,n, (Jo. 8:25), to. loipo,n (Ph. 3:1), tounanti,on (Gal. 2:7), to. prw/ton (Jo. 12:16), to. pro,teron (Jo. 6:62), to. plei/ston (1 Cor. 14:27), to. kaq v h`me,ran (Lu. 19:47), tou/ loipou/ (Eph. 6:10), etc. These expressions are not technically adverbs, though adverbial in force. Cf. also the cognate instrumental like cara|. cai,rei (Jo. 3:29). So O.P. 1162, 5 (iv./A.D.).

(b) PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES. These adjuncts have the substantial force of adverbs. Indeed there is little practical difference in structure between avpo. pe,rusi (2 Cor. 9:2) and u`perli,an (2 Cor. 11:5), u`pera,nw (Eph. 4:10) and e[wj ka,tw (Mk. 15:38). Since the uncial MSS. had no division between words, we have to depend on the judgment of the modern editor and on our own for the distinction between an adverb like paracrh/ma (Lu. 1:64) and an adverbial phrase like para. tou/to (1 Cor. 12:15). Cf. also evpe, keina (Ac. 7:43), u`pere,keina (2 Cor. 10:16), kaqo,lou (Ac. 4:18). In Ro. 7:13 kaq v u`perbolh,n is used with an adjective. Other examples are kat v ivdi,an (Mt. 14:13), kata. mo,naj (Mk. 4:10), kata. e`kou,sion (Phil. 1:14), kat v evniauto,n (Heb. 10:1), evk deute,rou (Mk. 14:72), evk yuch/j (Col. 3:23), evx avrch/j (Jo. 6:64), avp v avrch/j (2 Th. 2:13), eivj keno,n, (Ph. 2:16), evn avlhqei,a| (Mt. 22:16), evn prw,toij (1 Cor. 15:3), evn dikaiosu,nh| (Ac. 17:31), evp v avlhqei,aj (Lu. 22:59), kaq v h`me,ran (Mk. 14:49), evn nukti,, (1 Th. 5:2), evn evktenei,a|, (Ac. 26:7), avpo. me,rouj (Ro. 11:25), evk me,rouj (1 Cor. 12:27. Cf. me,roj ti, 11:18), kata. me,roj (Heb. 9:5), avpo. mia/j (Lu. 14:18), eivj to. pantele,j (Heb. 7:25). With me,son we have quite a list, like avna. me,son (Mt. 13:25), evk me,sou (Mt. 13:49), eivj to. me,son (Mk. 6:47), dia. me,sou $Lu. 4:30), dia. me,son (Lu. 17:11), eivj to. me,son (Lu. 5:19), eivj me,son (Mk. 14:60), kata. me,son (Ac. 27:27), me,son, (Ph. 2:15). In Mk. 14:30 adverb and phrase occur together, sh,meron tau,th| th|/ nukti,. This is not a


complete list br any means, but it will suffice to illustrate the point under discussion. A striking example is found in 1 Cor. 12:31, kaq v u`pebolh.n o`do.n u`mi/n dei,knumi, where the adverbial phrase has practically the force of an adjective with o`don. Clearly, then, many of the adverbs grew out of these prepositional phrases like parauti,ka (2 Cori 4:17), e;kpalai (2 Pet. 2:3), etc. Cf. even noun ecw/j (Mk. 12:34).

(c) PARTICIPLES. Some participles come to be used adverbially. This is not merely true of adverbs made from participles, like o;ntwj (Mk. 11:32), o`mologoume,nwj (1 Tim. 3:16), u`perballo,ntwj (2 Cor. 11:23), but it also applies to tw|/ o;nti (Ro. 7:23), to. nu/n e;con (Ac. 24:25), tuco,n (1 Cor. 16:6) and verbals like avnagkastw/j (1 Pet. 5:2). Besides, the intensive use of the participle is adverbial in effect like euvlogw/n euvlogh,sw se (Heb. 6:14). Then again a case like yeudo,menoi (Mt. 5:11) is in point. Cf. qe,lwn in Col. 2:18. See also prosqei.j ei=pen (Lu. 19:11) which Blass (Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 258) compares with prosqei/sa e;teken (Gen. 38:5). See chapter on Verbal Nouns.

(d) THE VERB USED ADVERBIALLY. This is, Of course, not true technically, but only in the result. The old Greek idiom with lanqa,nw and fqa,nw, where the participle expressed the chief idea and the verb was subordinate, occurs twice in the N. T. So e;laqo,n tinej xeni,santej (Heb. 13:2) and proe,fqasen le,gwn (Mt. 17:25). But it must be borne in mind that the Greek idiom is perfectly consistent in this construction, as 'they escaped notice in entertaining,' 'he got the start in saying.' Cf. la,qra| elsewhere in N. T. It is not necessary Ac. 12:16, evpe,menen krou,wn, to take the verb as an adverb in sense. It is simply, 'he continued knocking.' The infinitive may likewise present the chief idea as in proe,laben muri,sai (Mk. 14:8), proseqeto pe,myai (Lu. 20:11 f.), like the Heb. @s,AYr; x;lov.li. But in Mk. 12:4 we have the regular Greek idiom17 pa,lin avpe,steilen. Cf. Ac. 12:3 prose,qeto sullabei/n. This idiom is exceedingly common in the LXX.18 In Lu. 6:48, e;skayen kai. evba,qunen ('he dug and went deep'), we have an idiom somewhat like our English vernacular "he went and dug," " he has gone and done it," etc. Cf. Ro. 10:20 avpotolma|/ kai. le,gei, Mt. 18:3 eva.n mh. stra fh/te kai. ge,nhsqe. But I doubt if qe,lw with the infinitive is to be taken in the N. T. either adverbially or as the mere expletive for the future tense. In Jo. 7:17 qe,lh| poiei/n means 'is willing to do.' So in Jo. 8:44, etc. The text is obscure in Col. 2:18 and


there qe,lwn may have an adverbial force. Blass19 conceives that in Mt. 6:5, filou/sin ) ) ) proseu,cesqai, we may translate 'gladly pray.' But what advantage has this over 'love to pray,' 'are fond of praying'?

1 Griech. Gr., pp. 250-257.

2 Vergl. Synt., I, pp. 535-643.

3 W.-Th., pp. 462-473.

4 Griech. Gr., p. 250. On final s in adv. see Fraser, Cl. Quarterly, 1908, p. 265.

5 Whitney, Sans. Gr., p. 403.

6 Delbruck, Vergl. Synt., I, p. 536.

7 Giles, Man., p. 341.

8 W.-Th., p. 462.

9 Ib., p. 463.

10 Riem. and Goelzer, Synt., p. 798.

11 Cf. K.-G., I, p. 551.

12 W.-Th., p. 472.

13 Blass, Cr. of N. T. Gk., p. 258.

14 Joh. Cr., pp. 22 ff.

15 Ib., p. 20.

16 Ib., p. 19.

17 W.-Th., p. 468.

18 C. and S., Sel. from the LXX, p. 97.

19 Gr. of N. T. Gk., p. 258. Cf. W.-Th., p. 467.