1 John 2.2 - what's that accusative doing there?

[Sebastian Satkurunath]

I made it through the whole first chapter! One gold star for me!

Now I am in chapter 2 and confused again...

καὶ αὐτὸς ἱλασμός ἐστιν περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, οὐ περὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων δὲ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου.

So I'm trying to work out what μονον applies to, but all the nouns in the sentence are genitive (except he and propiation, which it clearly isn't modifying) , and if it were doing that thing where an adjective becomes a noun then wouldn't it be nominative, as there's no verb for it to be the subject of? I guessed that it meant something like "not only our sins, but those of the whole world", which appears to be correct based on other translations, but I can't figure out why it's in that form. Any brilliant words of wisdom?

[Jason Hare]

I made it through the whole first chapter! One gold star for me!

Now I am in chapter 2 and confused again...

καὶ αὐτὸς ἱλασμός ἐστιν περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, οὐ περὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων δὲ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου.

So I'm trying to work out what μονον applies to, but all the nouns in the sentence are genitive (except he and propiation, which it clearly isn't modifying) , and if it were doing that thing where an adjective becomes a noun then wouldn't it be nominative, as there's no verb for it to be the subject of? I guessed that it meant something like "not only our sins, but those of the whole world", which appears to be correct based on other translations, but I can't figure out why it's in that form. Any brilliant words of wisdom?

Adjectives are often used as adverbs. In this case, the neuter singular of μόνος is μόνον, which is used as an adverb. The phrase οὐ περὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων μόνον means “not only for ours” or “but not for ours alone,” and the insertion of δέ indicates the beginning of a contrast that is brought into full force with ἀλλὰ καί “but also.”

[Sebastian Satkurunath]

Ah, okay. So if an adjective is being used as an adverb is it always the neuter single form? And are there particular circumstances when you'd do that rather than changing the ending to -ως?

[Jason Hare]

Ah, okay. So if an adjective is being used as an adverb is it always the neuter single form? And are there particular circumstances when you'd do that rather than changing the ending to -ως?

Be selective with terms like “always.” For example, the comparative adjective would be used as an adverb in the neuter singular, but the superlative adjective would be used in the neuter plural. For example, σοφώτερον “more wisely” or “quite wisely” versus σοφώτατα “most wisely” or “very wisely.” Apart from comparatives and superlatives, there are some neuter adjectives (most notably, πρῶτον and μόνον) that are used regularly as adverbs. It doesn’t happen like this with most adjectives. For more information, you should consult §1042 of Smyth’s grammar (below). Pay special attention to the note of the section (marked as N.—).

1042. Several adjectives of time, place, order of succession, etc., are used as predicates where English employs an adverb or a preposition with its case: ἀφικνοῦνται τριταῖοι they arrive on the third day X. A. 5. 3. 2, κατέβαινον σκοταῖοι they descended in the dark 4. 1. 10. In such cases the adjective is regarded as a quality of the subject; whereas an adverb would regard the manner of the action.

a. Time, place: χρόνιος late, ὄρθριος in the morning, δευτεραῖος on the second day, ποσταῖος how many days? ὑπαίθριος in the open air.

b. Order of succession: πρῶτος, πρότερος first, ὕστερος later, μέσος in the midst, τελευταῖος last, ὕστατος last.

N.—When one action is opposed to another in order of sequence, the adverbs πρῶτον, πρότερον, ὕστατον, etc., not the adjectives πρῶτος, etc., must be used: πρῶτον μὲν ἐδάκρῡε πολὺν χρόνον … εἶτα δὲ ἔλεξε τοιάδε first he wept for a long time, then he spoke as follows X. A. 1. 3. 2. Hence distinguish

  πρῶτος τῇ πόλει προσέβαλε  he was the first to attack the city.
  πρώτῃ τῇ πόλει προσέβαλε  the city was the first place he attacked.
  πρῶτον τῇ πόλει προσέβαλε  his first act was to attack the city.

The same rule applies in the case of μόνος, μόνον, as μόνην τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ἔγραψα this is the only letter I wrote, μόνον ἔγραψα τὴν ἐπιστολήν I only wrote (but did not send) the letter. But this distinction is not always observed (Aes. 3. 69).

Do you have a copy of Smyth’s grammar? It’s invaluable.

[Sebastian Satkurunath]

I didn't have a copy of Smyth, but there is now a copy in the post. That last bit is helpfully parallel to the distinction between je n'ai que fait.. and je n'ai fait que... which should help it stick.