| 20. Linguistic Exegesis The verse begins with the narrative verb eipen {εἶπεν | eî-pen} ‘said’, which introduces reported speech through the conjunction hoti {ὅτι | hó-ti} ‘that’. The subject phrase hoi Ioudaioi {Οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι | Hoí I-ou-daî-oi} ‘the Jews’ stands before the verb synethento {συνέθεντο | sy-né-then-to} ‘agreed together, conspired’, marking them as the grammatical and logical agents of the plot. The genitive articular infinitive construction tou erotesai {τοῦ ἐρωτῆσαί | toû e-ro-tê-sai} links closely with synethento, indicating the content and purpose of their agreement: they have “conspired for the asking.” This purpose is then expanded by the conjunction of purpose hopos {ὅπως | hó-pos} ‘so that’, which introduces the subordinate clause containing the aorist subjunctive katagages {καταγάγῃς | ka-ta-gá-gēs} ‘you might bring down’. The adverb aurion {αὔριον | aú-ri-on} ‘tomorrow’ locates the intended action temporally, while the object phrase ton Paulon {τὸν Παῦλον | ton Paû-lon} and the prepositional phrase eis to synedrion {εἰς τὸ συνέδριον | eis to sy-né-dri-on} specify who is to be moved and to what institutional setting.
The comparative clause begins with hos {ὡς | hōs} ‘as, as if’, signaling that what follows represents the supposed or outward reason for the request rather than the real motive. The participial phrase mellon ti akribesteron pynthanesthai peri autou {μέλλον τι ἀκριβέστερον πυνθάνεσθαι περὶ αὐτοῦ | mél-lon ti a-kri-bés-te-ron pyn-thá-nes-thai pe-rì au-toû} literally means ‘being about to inquire something more accurately about him’. Here mellon, a present participle, functions with the complementary infinitive pynthanesthai to express intended future action, and akribesteron, an accusative neuter singular comparative, is used adverbially to describe the manner of the inquiry. Syntactically, the structure creates a clear hierarchy: main reporting verb (eipen), main conspiratorial clause (hoi Ioudaioi synethento), articulated purpose for the addressee (hopos … katagages), and a comparative clause that frames their stated aim as a pretext. The translations preserve this layering by keeping the conspiratorial agreement, the requested action, and the deceptive “as though” inquiry distinct but closely coordinated. |