οὐ

Alphabet Analysis

The word

1. word🔊 οὐ

   oo

   not
2. sentence🔊 ζητήσετέ με καὶ οὐχ εὑρήσετε καὶ ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ὑμεῖς οὐ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν

   dzê-tê-se-TE me KAI ookh heu-RÊ-se-TE KAI HO-poo ei-MI e-GÔ hy-MEIS oo DY-na-STHE el-THEIN

   you will seek me and not you will find and where I am you not are able to come

Exegesis

The second clause, kai hopou eimi egō, hymeis ou dynasthe elthein {καὶ ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ὑμεῖς οὐ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν | kaí hó-pou ei-mí e-gṓ, hy-meîs ou dý-na-sthe el-theîn}, begins with the relative adverb hopou {ὅπου | hó-pou} introducing a locative clause “where I am,” where the finite verb eimi {εἰμὶ | ei-mí} and the emphatic subject egō {ἐγώ | e-gṓ} foreground the speaker’s personal presence.

The following independent clause hymeis ou dynasthe elthein places the plural pronoun hymeis {ὑμεῖς | hy-meîs} in contrast with egō, negated by ou {οὐ | ou} before the modal verb dynasthe {δύνασθε | dý-na-sthe}, with the infinitive elthein {ἐλθεῖν | el-theîn} expressing the action that is rendered impossible. The juxtaposition of future failure to find with present-stated, yet future-oriented, inaccessibility to Jesus’ location creates a rhetorical emphasis on both the futility of the future search and the categorical impossibility of joining Him, which the translations render by maintaining the two-step structure (seek/find; be able/come).

Root and etymology

Ioudaios🔊 Ἰουδαῖοςiota with smooth breathing–omicron–upsilon–delta–alpha–iota with circumflex–omicron–sigma

“Jew, Judean”