| 10. Linguistic Exegesis The verse begins with the temporal conjunction hotan {ὅταν | hótan} 'whenever/when', which, together with the aorist subjunctive elthe {ἔλθῃ | élthē} 'comes', forms a temporal protasis that looks to a future but indefinite event. The particle de {δὲ | dé} adds a mild contrast to the preceding description of the present, partial state. The nominative neuter singular phrase to teleion {τὸ τέλειον | tò téleion} 'the perfect/complete' functions as the subject of the main clause and is substantival, referring not merely to a quality but to a state or reality of completeness. The following phrase to ek merous {τὸ ἐκ μέρους | tò ek mérous} literally 'the {thing} from part' is also substantival, with the article to {τὸ | tò} + preposition ek {ἐκ | ek} + genitive merous {μέρους | mérous} forming a fixed idiom meaning 'that which is partial'. This serves as a second nominative subject or, more precisely, the element that will undergo the verbal action. The future passive indicative katargethesetai {καταργηθήσεται | katargēthḗsetai} 'will be abolished, rendered inoperative' marks a decisive eschatological transition: once the complete state arrives, the partial is not merely improved but brought to an end. The word order places to teleion early for emphasis on the coming completeness, and then to ek merous just before the verb, highlighting the destiny of the partial. In translation, the temporal structure 'when ... comes, ... will be abolished' preserves the Greek protasis–apodosis relationship, while substantival renderings 'the perfect' and 'the partial' or 'what is complete' and 'what is partial' maintain the contrast between the two states. |