Noun – 3rd Declension -ψ

ObjectivesLearning objectives

• The morphology of 3rd declension nouns ending in -ψ
• How neuter nouns in the accusative can be used adverbially

VocabularyVocabulary

MorphologyMorphology: Noun – 3rd declension -ψ

• Only 7 nouns in the NT fall into this pattern, and two of them are names (Αἰθίοψ ‘Ethiopian’ and Ἄραψ ‘Arab’)
• The stem of these nouns end in -π or -β (only λίψ and Ἄραψ are -β)
• Contraction with σ is found in nom sg and dat pl as expected

SyntaxSyntax-semantics: Accusative (3 – Adverbial use of neut acc adjective)

Noun – Accusative: all 3 parts on one page →Also in Lesson 1.3, Lesson 20.1

When a noun in accusative case is used as an object, it is selected by the verb (see 1.3.2 and 20.1.3.2). In the temporal use of the accusative, it is not selected by the verb, and the same is true for the adverbial use of the neuter accusative. To be used adverbially means to modify the eventuality itself rather than to modify or refer to a participant in the eventuality. Neuter adjectives in accusative case are used for this function:

There are three neuter adjectives in Luke 7:47. In the clause ἠγάπησεν πολύ, the neut acc adjective πολύ cannot be referring to a participant nor modifying a participant in the eventuality. It is not as if the woman loved ‘many’ people or a particular individual who was ‘much.’ Rather, πολύ modifies the degree to which she loved, i.e. it modifies how the sinful woman loved.

The next neuter adjective is ὀλίγον, which is morphologically ambiguous between nominative and accusative case. There are semantic, syntactic, and contextual reasons why this is not an adverbial accusative. Semantically, the event of forgiving requires both someone to be forgiven and something to be forgiven. The person forgiven is referred to by ᾧ. Because the verb is a medio-passive, the one who is doing the forgiving is implicit, but what is being forgiven is still missing. The only option for this is ὀλίγον. This suggests that ὀλίγον is not referring to how something is forgiven (i.e. it is not about doing a small amount of forgiveness), but to what is being forgiven. The neuter is used because it refers to a generic “thing,” so it is referring to a participant in the event. This is confirmed by the syntax as well. Whenever the medio-passive of ἀφίημι is used, the subject, when expressed, is in nominative case and refers to whatever is forgiven. Therefore, ὀλίγον must be nominative and the subject of the sentence. Finally, the previous sentence speaks of sins being forgiven. This allows us to easily supply what kind of thing would be forgiven, namely a sinful thing.

Finally, the last neuter adjective ὀλἰγον must also be taken adverbially for all the reasons we gave for πολύ. It modifies the degree to which someone loves and cannot be modifying or referring to an eventuality participant. Despite ὀλίγον appearing identical in the last two clauses, it is functioning very differently in each clause, both syntactically and semantically. Identifying the adverbial accusative, then, involves not just the form of the word but also the syntax and semantics of the verb in the clause where the neuter adjective is found.