§ 3. The article is generally used very much as in Attic: its
omission before βασιλεὺς Ἀσσυρίων, vii. 20, xxxvi. 15, c. might seem
anaIOgous to that of βασιλεὺς alone for the Persian king, in Herodotus
(v. 1, ἃς.) and Thucydides (1. 18, c.): but it is also omitted in the
case e.g. of Ahab and Benhadad in 1 Kings xxi. The tendency seems
to be decidedly towards omission; before nominatives used as voca-
tives, as i. to, and occasionally with the subject, as i. 21, though this is
more generally retained, as ix. 7, xi. 10, cf. xiv. 26; and particularly
before participles, as, apparently, in viii. 14, xxvi. 2, 3, xxx. 17
xxxiii. 15 : sometimes these participles have ἄνθρωπος in sing. or plur.,
as viii. 15, xxv. 3; contrast xxxii. 2. On its use with οὗτος and ὅδε see
below, 5. Other loosenesses may be noticed at v. 21, xxix. 20. The
article is often repeated in such arrangements as τὰ βδελύγματα αὐτοῦ
τὰ ἀργυρᾶ καὶ τὰ χρυσᾶ, ii. 20, cf. iii. 22, ν. 15, 16, xxviii. 1, 4, c.; but
on the other hand, phrases like ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ οἶκος, oi ἐν Σαμαρείᾳ ἐγκαθή-
μενοι, are rarely found (though see ix. 14, lix. 21); cf. ii. 2, ix. 9, but
almost any page will show instances. § 4. Nouns need cause little difficulty, apart from forms, spellings,
and vocabulary. The neuter plural is constantly used with a plural
verb, as well as with the singular, with seeming indifference: the MSS.
very often vary. On the other hand, xviii. 2, 3 contains what may be
suspected to be a case of the Schema ’ndarz’cum, and, if so, a very
strong one: cf. Moulton, Grammar of N.T. Greek, p. 58. Here we
may note the accusative of respect, still in force, as in xi. 15, xxxvi. 22
and the accus. with a passive verb, xxxvii. 2. We may wonder whether

 
the accusative can possibly be used instead of a genitive, x. 32, and in
apposition to a genitive (indeclinable) in xxxvii. 38! Both passages
can be construed as they stand, but still the doubt occurs. On ὃν
τρόπον, used commonly as a conjunction, see on vii. 2. τοῦτον τρόπον
is found in Attic, but less commonly than the dative. Adjectives, being relatively scarce in Heb., are not very common in
the LXX.'s somewhat literal rendering. The indeclinable πλήρης
most probably to be found in lxiii. 2, where see note. § 5. Pronouns decidedly show some blunting of the classical
usage. Ἀὐτὸς in oblique cases is excessively frequent as 3rd pers.
pronoun, and this, corresponding to mere suffixes in Heb., has often
been noticed as a disfigurement of the LXX.'s style. Even in the
nominative, the emphatic force is sometimes hard to perceive, e.g. i. 2
xxxiv. 17, xlii. 17; xxxi. 2 seems more pointed, and lxiii. 9, 10 difficult
to determine. Ὅδε and its compounds have nearly retired in favour of
οὗτος, and the distinction between them is blurred: the phrase τάδε
λέγει... is common, and not to be distinguished from οὕτως λέγει (or
εἶπεν) in meaning, though Mr H. St J. Thackeray detects by its use a
different ’s hand in Jeremiah (journal of Theol. Studies,
Jan. 1903). A few instances of ὅδε occur in the Pentateuch, as
Numb. xvi. 42, Gen. xliii. 21, where it is used with the article, as οὗτος
is, e.g. in xxv. 7, xxvi. 1. The article is also regularly used with ἐκεῖνος·
in the phrase ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, ii. 20, ἃς. The demonstrative usually
stands last in these cases, contrast ix. 14, 15, xiv. 26. Ὅδε occurs in
Isaiah at any rate once, lx. 8; also Jerem. xlviii. Xlviii. 33, xxv. 3c
(xxxii. 16). Τοιοῦτος occurs, lviii. 6, lxvi. 8: probably it was not often
needed. § 6. The verbs show many non-Attic forms. The 3rd pers. pl. in
σαν meets us frequently in second aorists, and sometimes in optatives,
such as ἐνέγκαισαν, lxvi. 20, already mentioned (cf. Moulton, Ν.Τ.
Grammar, p. 33): also an occasional perfect 3rd pl. in καν, as v. 29 B.
Εἶπα is common (εἶπαν in Ii. 23); ἐλθάτω in v. 19B, xxvi. 2 NA. The
second perfect πέποιθα has imperat. 2nd pl. in ατε, l. 10; cf. Jerem. ix. 4
Ps. cxlvi. 3, and Josh. x. 19 ἑστήκατε ( Cannaris).