Mark 14:67 participles

[Mitch Tulloch]

66 Καὶ ὄντος τοῦ Πέτρου κάτω ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ ἔρχεται μία τῶν παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως 67 καὶ ἰδοῦσα τὸν Πέτρον θερμαινόμενον ἐμβλέψασα αὐτῷ λέγει· καὶ σὺ μετὰ τοῦ Ναζαρηνοῦ ἦσθα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ.

Would one consider ἰδοῦσα τὸν Πέτρον θερμαινόμενον ἐμβλέψασα αὐτῷ to be noun phrase (with η παιδισκης as the implicit head) having two attributive participle modifiers ἰδοῦσα τὸν Πέτρον θερμαινόμενον and ἐμβλέψασα αὐτῷ? Or is it rather that the two participles are both heads fo noun phrases, and that what we have here is two noun phrases in apposition serving as a single constituent (the subject) of the sentence?

Thanks!
--Mitch

[Jason Hare]

The subject of both ἔρχεται and λέγει must be μία τῶν παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως. The two participles are contingent on the verb λέγει. It is odd that the two participles are not joined with any conjunction, but it is not unheard-of. The normal process of substantivization would require the use of an article (ἡ ἰδοῦσα, for example), and it would only really make sense if that verb had been previously mentioned as well. Why? There was no mention of her seeing Peter in the previous verse, but only of her coming to the place where he was. The passage doesn’t allow that these are substantivized participles functioning as the subject of the verb. They are circumstantial.

[Mitch Tulloch]

Ah, thank you Jason, now I think I understand circumstantial participles better. If I understand this correctly, the subject of the participles ἰδοῦσα and ἐμβλέψασα is the identical to a constituent (μία τῶν παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως) of the matrix clause (Καὶ ὄντος τοῦ Πέτρου κάτω ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ ἔρχεται μία τῶν παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως). So the participles are connected to that constituent (i.e. "connected participles") which means they must agree with it in case (Nom.) number (sg.) and gender (fem.). I'm using here the terminology found in chapter 52 of CGCG (Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek) which I've been working through. Have I got this right? I think I was misled by CGCG 52:47 which says that occasionally attributive/substantive participles can occur without an article...

Thanks!
--Mitch

[Jason Hare]

Ah, thank you Jason, now I think I understand circumstantial participles better. If I understand this correctly, the subject of the participles ἰδοῦσα and ἐμβλέψασα is the identical to a constituent (μία τῶν παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως) of the matrix clause (Καὶ ὄντος τοῦ Πέτρου κάτω ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ ἔρχεται μία τῶν παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως). So the participles are connected to that constituent (i.e. "connected participles") which means they must agree with it in case (Nom.) number (sg.) and gender (fem.). I'm using here the terminology found in chapter 52 of CGCG (Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek) which I've been working through. Have I got this right? I think I was misled by CGCG 52:47 which says that occasionally attributive/substantive participles can occur without an article...

Thanks!
--Mitch

Hi, Mitch.

I’m sure that participles can be substantives without the article, but it would have to be clear when that’s done. Essentially, the idea is that there is a group of παιδίσκαι who serve the high priest, and the woman in question is one of them. The participles ἰδοῦσα and ἐμβλέψασα, as well as the numeral μία, are feminine singular because they agree with παιδίσκη (one of those servant women). The structure of the sentence revolves around the two finite verbs ἔρχεται and λέγει.

καὶ — narrative progression
  ὄντος τοῦ Πέτρου κάτω ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ — genitive absolute
 ἔρχεται — main verb 1
  μία τῶν παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως — sentence subject
καὶ, — coordinating conjunction
   ἰδοῦσα τὸν Πέτρον θερμαινόμενον, — circumstantial participial phrase
  ἐμβλέψασα αὐτῷ — circumstantial participial phrase
 λέγει· — main verb 2
  καὶ σὺ μετὰ τοῦ Ναζαρηνοῦ ἦσθα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ. — speech instance

And,
  Peter being down in the courtyard,
 she-comes (historical present)
  one of the servant girls of the high priest
and,
   having seen Peter warming himself,
  having looked at him,
 she-says: (historical present)
  Also you with the Nazarene were Jesus.

And, Peter being down in the courtyard, one of the servant girls of the high priest came and, having seen Peter warming himself, she looked at him and said: “You were also with the Nazarene, Jesus.”

When a circumstantial participle is butted up against a verb, it is common to translate it with the verb in the same tense or with the same force. The commonly cited example is from Matt 28.19a: πορευθέντες οὖν μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. Although it technically uses a participle (“having journeyed, gone”), the common translation, since it is joined to the first aorist imperative μαθητεύσατε, is to translate it also as an imperative: “Go, therefore, and make disciples...” This is better English than the stilted “having gone, make disciples.” The same principle is at work here, where we should say “she looked at him and said” instead of “having looked at him, she said.”

I hope this helps.

[Mitch Tulloch]

Very nice, thanks Jason! I like the way you broke the sentence down into its constituents, that's very helpful. I actually had no trouble understanding the sentence upon first reading i.e. I recognized the Genitive Absolute and what the participle phrases implied. I'm just struggling to learn the grammatical concepts and terminology in CGCG so I can understand the text I'm reading at a deeper level (and understand more difficult passages as I encounter them).

Thanks also for pointing out that "When a circumstantial participle is butted up against a verb, it is common to translate it with the verb in the same tense or with the same force." I see that CGCG says something similar about "coincident aorist participles" in sec 52.5 so now I need to study and absorb that concept more. I tell you, reading thru CGCG has been like a relevation to me, best choice IMO for an intermediate-level Gk grammar. But challenging at times!!

Cheers,
Mitch