| 10. Linguistic Exegesis The subject is presented as a double name in apposition, Simōn Petros {Σίμων Πέτρος | Símōn Pétros}, while oun {οὖν | oûn} ‘so/therefore’ links this action tightly to the preceding arrest scene as an immediate consequence. The participial clause echon machairan {ἔχων μάχαιραν | ékhōn máchairan} ‘having a sword’ is circumstantial, setting up the basis for what follows rather than forming a new main action. John then stacks three coordinated aorist indicatives—heilkusen {εἵλκυσεν | heílkusen} ‘drew’, epaiesen {ἔπαισεν | épaisen} ‘struck’, apekopsen {ἀπέκοψεν | apékopsen} ‘cut off’—to narrate quick, successive events with a staccato rhythm created by repeated kai {καὶ | kaí} ‘and’. The object is specified with a layered genitive, ton tou archiereos doulon {τὸν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως δοῦλον | tón toû archiereōs doûlon}, where the genitive tou archiereos identifies affiliation and heightens the narrative tension by tying the injured man to the temple’s highest office. The phrase to otarion to deksion {τὸ ὠτάριον τὸ δεξιόν | tó ōtárion tó dexiòn} uses repeated articles to single out the exact member affected, giving vivid specificity. The closing naming formula en de onoma toi douloi Malchos {ἦν δὲ ὄνομα τῷ δούλῳ Μάλχος | ên dè ónoma tōi doúlōi Málchos} delays identification until the end, a discourse move that first spotlights the act and then personalizes the victim. |