Trent Rogers, «A Syntactical Analysis of 'oun' in Papyrus 66.», Vol. 25 (2012) 75-99
Greek particles are often overlooked in the interpretation and translation of ancient texts, but a better understanding of their syntactical functions aids in understanding the relationships among clauses and results in a better understanding of the texts’ meanings. This article examines the use of oun in Papyrus 66, provides examples and explanations of the different uses, and categorizes every occurrence in the Gospel of John. It clarifies established uses and paves new ground by locating the comparative use. Moreover, it notices a dialogical pattern wherein lego + oun serves as an alternative to apokrinomai (kai lego), and in this pattern, asyndeton with lego may convey increased markedness.
94 Trent A. Rogers
emphatic use is far more common in the rest of the New Testament
and occurs in as many as 65 places80.
20:30: πολλα μεν ουν και αλλα σημεια εποιησεν ο ις 81. What is
unique about this use is that οὖν is not functioning as a conjunction.
Rather than connecting this clause to the previous, it intensifies the
clause of which it is a part.
(4) Adversative: (however, on the contrary) While some would limit the
adversative use of οὖν in John to 9:18, Dana and Mantey propose
nine more occurrences: 2:22; 4:45; 6:19; 8:38; 9:18; 11:6; 12:29; 18:11,
2782. Their analysis is admirable as it offers a fresh investigation into
an overlooked use of οὖν; I, however, can only agree to adversative
use in 4:45, 9:10, 18, 11:6, and 12:29. The adversative does not occur
in direct speech but occurs in the narrative frame of dialogue.
9:17,18: λεγουσιν ουν τω τυφλω παλιν τι συ λεγεις περι αυτου
οτι ηνοιξεν σου τους οφθαλμους ο δε ειπεν οτι προφητης εστιν
ουκ επιστευσαν ουν οι ϊουδαιοι περι αυτου οτι ην τυφλος και
ανεβλεψεν εως οτου εφωνησαν τους γονεις αυτου83. The unbelief
of the “Jews” is contrasted to the belief that the formerly blind man
has just demonstrated. A simple continuative explanation would not
convey the contrasting relationship between the clauses84.
II. Examples of Οὖν with Other Particles
A number of the uses and patterns of οὖν coupled with other particles
can be observed by analyzing the syntactical relationships among clauses
in John 13:21-31. In response to Jesus’ prediction of betrayal in v. 21, the
disciples begin to look among themselves for the culprit. P66 indicates
how the disciples’ looks logically proceed from Jesus’ prediction through
80
He is mistaken in a couple of verses such as 9:10 and 16:22. Mantey, “Meaning”, 47,
lists these NT texts as emphatic uses of οὖν: Matt 3:8, 10; 5:48; 10:32; 12:12; 17:10; 18:4;
Luke 3:8, 9; 14:33; 21:7; 22:70; Acts 2:33; 10:33; 13:40; 25:11; 26:9; Rom 2:26; 4:10; 5:9; 6:21;
11:5; 1 Cor 15:11; Gal 4:15; Eph 5:1, 7, 15; 6:14; Phil 2:29; Col 3:5, 12; 1 Tim 2:8; 2 Tim 1:8;
2:21; Phlm 17; Heb 2:14; 10:35; Jas 4:7; 5:7.
81
“To be sure Jesus performed many other signs”.
82
See the fuller description in Mantey, “Use”, 21-29.
83
“Then they said again to the blind man, ‘What do you say about him since he opened
your eyes’? And he said, ‘He is a prophet’. The Jews, however, did not believe that he had
been blind and now he saw until they called his parents”. A marginal insertion extends the
final phrase to “the parents of the one seeing”.
84
The adversative use of οὖν also helps explain one of the most peculiar actions of Jesus.
John 11:5,6 relates the news about Lazarus’ death. “And Jesus loved Martha, her sister, and
Lazarus. He, however, remained in that place for two days when he heard that he was sick”.
Recall, that οὖν relates the main clauses, so that the Gospel alerts the reader to the seeming
contrast between Jesus’ love for Lazarus and his delay in coming to Lazarus.