A Syntactical Analysis of oὖν in Papyrus 66 81 Gospel of John, however, the transitional (also called “continuative”) use is more prevalent than the inferential. The particle οὖν is used primarily as a coordinating conjunction in John even though the English transla- tions frequently deploy a subordinating conjunction in translation. The uses in John may be listed in order of commonest occurrence: continua- tive, inferential, adversative, and empahtic. By far, the various types of continuative and inferential uses are more common. The continuative and inferential uses are connected and at times indistinguishable24. In general, the inferential use —sometimes called the illative or consecutive— serves as a deduction, result, summary, or conclusion of the preceding material; whereas, the continuative use describes more of a chronological than a logical connection that moves the narrative or dialogue forward. Because οὖν prefers the second position in the sentence and vari- ous subordinate phrases also frequently occupy this position, several sentences in P66 begin with οὖν in a subordinate clause25. Since οὖν communicates the relationship between two sentences, it is important to determine which parts of two sentences are connected. When οὖν ap- pears in a subordinate clause in a continuative use, discerning to which clause the οὖν relates does not drastically affect meaning. With the infer- ential use, however, there is significant interpretive difference depending on whether οὖν refers to the introductory clause or to the main verb of the sentence. Dana and Mantey correctly state, “When οὖν is inferential, that inference is expressed by the main verb in the sentence and not by a verb in a subordinate clause nor by an infinitive nor a participle”26. So even though οὖν may appear in the second position of an introductory participial clause, the syntactical relationship is between the main verb of the sentence with the preceding sentence. I argue that every occurrence of the inferential οὖν in an introductory, dependent clause in P66 signals a relationship between the main verb of that sentence and a preceding idea. Due to the effect of this assertion on subsequent interpretation, I provide an occurrence and explanation here with more texts given in the analyses to follow. The inferential οὖν can be found in three types of introductory phrases: participial clauses, protases, and relative clauses. 24 Dana - Mantey, Manual Grammar, 253, note this difficulty especially in translation. 25 For helpful definitions of “sentence”, see Poythress, “Use of the Intersentence Con- junctions”, 315. 26 Dana - Mantey, Manual Grammar, 253; cf. Smyth, Grammar, 2956. Mantey, “Mean- ing”, 54, states, “If οὖν is consequential in a sentence that consequence is expressed by the main verb in the sentence and not by participles, unless they have the use of the main verb, nor by verbs in subordinate clauses”.