| 28. Linguistic Exegesis The sentence opens with ekousate {ἠκούσατε | ēkoúsate} ‘you heard’, presenting the saying as already received speech. The first hoti {ὅτι | hóti} introduces the content of what was heard, and egō {ἐγώ | egṓ} places the speaker in explicit focus before eipon {εἶπον | eîpon} ‘said’. The quoted material then pairs hypago {Ὑπάγω | hypágō} ‘I am going away’ with erchomai {ἔρχομαι | érkhomai} ‘I am coming’, joined by kai {καί | kaí} and directed by pros {πρός | prós} with the accusative, so the movement is intentionally two-way: away from the disciples and toward them. The conditional clause ei egapate me {εἰ ἠγαπᾶτέ με | ei ēgapâte me} introduces a contrary-to-fact situation, and the apodosis echarēte an {ἐχάρητε ἄν | echárēte án} shows an unreal result, indicating that genuine love would have produced joy. The first causal hoti {ὅτι | hóti} gives the reason for that joy: Jesus is going pros ton patera {πρὸς τὸν πατέρα | pros tòn patéra}. The final hoti {ὅτι | hóti} intensifies the argument by stating the deeper ground, ho patēr meizōn mou estin {ὁ πατὴρ μείζων μού ἐστιν | ho patḗr meízōn moú estin}, where meizōn {μείζων | meízōn} keeps the comparison stark and the genitive mou {μού | moú} marks the comparison with Jesus Himself. English is best served by preserving the repeated causal chain with “because” and leaving the comparative force unsoftened. |