In the transcriptions of the INTF I found: 1: Mark 3:8, ms 949 firsthand: υπερ τυρον < οι περι τυρον 2: Mark 3»:21, ms L211 ακουσαντες υπερ αυτου < ακουσαντες οι περι αυτον 3:Rev 7:13, ms 2429: ουτοι υπερβεβλημενοι < ουτοι οι περιβεβλημρνοι 4: John 11:4 ms 892: αλλ’ οιπερ της δοξης < αλλ’ υπερ της δ...
Since εις means „one, single, unity“ and not „separate“ (at least that‘s what my dictionaries tell me), I wouldn‘t interpret it here as „separate“, which i suppose would point to a greek construction with something like εκαστος or ιδιος.
I would read : του συλλαβεσθαι : Articular Infinitive, final ελθοντας : Acc.subj. of the Articular Infinitive; referring to μετοχοις, and after they had come to help …. I didn‘t find immediately other participles as acc.subj. of an AcI, but Kühner-Gert gave Thucydides 4:84 ακουσαντας βουλευσασθαι, t...
A bit late, but here ( is a collection of all NT-Transcriptions of the INTF with εδυνατο/ηδυνατο. As you can see, in all NT-Verses there aremss with ε- and mss with η.
In general it seems to be: verbal root + μος = activity of the verb (αρδεω > αρδμος), but - language not like mathematics - sometimes these nouns mean the result of an activity or some concrete object: ερυω > ρυμος, πλεκω > πλοκαμος, πλοχμος
Could the reason be that φως in fact is φαος, belogning to a group of Neutra on -ος: δε(ι)ος, κλε(ι)ος, χρε(ι)ος, σπε(ι)ος, that doesn’t need the -τ- in the Declension?
You are right: In German and Dutch we have strong verbs (vowel-change in stems in different tenses) and weak verbs (using tense-suffixes) and even some verbs with a mix of weak and strong tenses.
Languages are not mathematical constructs, so “irregularities” are the spices of the linguistic-fun!