| 26. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with the construction ho de apokritheis {ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς | ho dè apokri-theís} “but having answered,” where the article plus participle functions substantivally, referring back to Jesus as the implied subject. This participial clause serves as a discourse marker introducing direct speech, which in natural English is rendered as “But He answered and said.” The core assertion is framed by the clause Ouk estin kalon {Οὐκ ἔστιν καλὸν | Ouk éstin kalón}, where the predicate adjective kalon stands in the nominative neuter singular with the verb “to be,” presenting a general evaluative statement, “it is not good/right.” The infinitives labein {λαβεῖν | labeîn} “to take” and balein {βαλεῖν | baleîn} “to throw” are complementary infinitives functioning as the conceptual subjects of estin, joined by kai {καὶ | kaí} to describe a two-step action that is judged improper. The accusative phrase ton arton {τὸν ἄρτον | tón árton} “the bread” is further defined by the genitive tōn teknōn {τῶν τέκνων | tôn téknōn} “of the children,” a possessive genitive that frames the benefits of the covenant as belonging to the household “children.” The dative phrase tois kynariois {τοῖς κυναρίοις | toîs kynaríois} “to the little dogs” marks the indirect recipients of the hypothetical action; the diminutive form emphasizes domestic pets rather than wild scavengers, softening the metaphor while still marking an order of priority. In translation, the infinitival structure is reshaped into finite verbal clauses (“to take… and to throw/give”) so that English idiom is preserved while maintaining the logical sequence, the ethical evaluation, and the contrast between “children” and “little dogs.” |