On the other hand, there is ἃ considerable number of words which occur only in Mark and the LXX. They amount to about 40, and most of them are words which are replaced by others in the parallel passages in Matthew and Luke. To the Jast-mentioned class belong such terms as ἀγρεύειν, ἀμφιβάλλειν, δύσκολος, ἐκθαμβεῖσθαι, ἐνειλεῖν, καταβαρύνειν, προσάββατον, στίλβειν, τρυμαλιά, etc. There are also some 38 words of various kinds (omitting proper names) which occur only in Mark, and neither in the other NT writers nor in the LXX. Among these are such terms as ἀλεκτορο- φωνία, ἀλλαχοῦ, avaxvAlew, dvados, ἀπόδημος, ἀποστε- γάζειν, ἀφρίζειν, ἐκπερισσῶς, ἔννυχα, ἐσχάτως, κωμό- TOAS, νουνεχῶς, παρόμοιος, προαύλιον, προμεριμνᾷν, πυγμῇ, στασιαστής, στιβάς, τηλαυγῶς, τρίζειν, ὑπερ- περισσῶς. The number of words of all kinds peculiar to Mark among the NT writers amounts to somewhat less than a seventeenth of his entire vocabulary. Discounting proper names and trans- literations like Boavnpyés, ἐφφαθά,. κορϑάν, ταλειθά, κούμ, ῥαββουνεί, the proportion will be about 79 to 1270. The strictly distinctive element in Mark’s vocabulary, though of great interest, is not particu- larly large. It is much smaller than is the case with Luke, who has about 250 ἅπαξ λεγόμενα, and also many words peculiar to himself and St. Paul.
There are certain words and phrases for which Mark has a peculiar fondness, and which are used much more frequently by him than by the other Synoptists. Of this class are these: ἐπερωτᾷν, διαστέλλεσθαι, εἰσπορεύεσθαι, παραπορεύεσθαι, περιβλέ- πεσθαι, εὐαγγέλιον, πρωΐ, φέρειν, ἐξέρχεσθαι ἐξ. Where Matthew and Luke have προσέχειν ἀπό, Mark has βλέπειν ἀπό; where these have Ἡρώδης ὁ τετράρχης, he has ὁ βασιλεὺς Ἡρῴδης; where Matthew has συμβούλιον λαμβάνειν, Mark has συμβούλιον ποιεῖν.
Mark has also a predilection for diminutives, such
MARK, GOSPEL OF 25\
aS θυγάτριον, κοράσιον, κυνάριον, ὠτάριον, πλοιάριον, παιδίον, ἰχθύδιον ; and for accumulated negatives, e.g. οὐκέτι οὐ μή (1455), μηδενὶ μηδέν (133), οὐκ οὐδείς (93), μηκέτι μηδέ (27), οὐκέτι οὐδείς (5% ete.), μηκέτι μηδείς (1113), μὴ μηδέ (3329), etc. Latinisms, such as δηνάριον, κῆνσος, κεντυρίων, κοδράντης, κράβαττος, λεγίων, ξέστης, σπεκουλάτωρ, ἱκανὸν ποιεῖν, Occur in larger measure in his than in the companion Gospels, Old dialectic forms, such as εἶτεν, παιδιό- θεν, occasionally reappear in Mark. He has a particular liking for the use of εὐθύς (εὐθέως) in transitions. He has a disposition also to use full or pleonastic forms, especially in statements of time and place, and in the case of prepositions in composition, e.g. τότε ἐν ἐκείνῃ ἡμέρᾳ (2?) ete.), ἐκ παιδιόθεν (931), ἀπὸ μακρόθεν (5° 83 οἴο.), ἐξάγειν ἔξω, ἐκπορεύεσθαι ἔξω, ἐξέρχεσθαι ἔξω.
Further, Mark often adds to the force of his statements by the use of repeated, explanatory, or balanced expressions (e.g. 142 3% 5!). In construc- tion he has a preference for the use of εἶναι and ἐλθεῖν with the participle ; e.g. ἣν ἐνδεδυμένος. . kal ἔσθων (1°) ; ἦσαν καθήμενοι kal διαλογιζόμενοι (2°); ἦν κράζων καὶ κατακόπτων (5°). He is accustomed to heap participles together (as in 151. 41 55 1457 etc.), and to use ἄν with the indicative (ὅταν αὐτὸν. . ἐθεώρουν, 345; ὅταν ἐγένετο, 1115 ete.). He has a liking also for the use of the article with the infinitive (e.g. διὰ τὸ αὐτὸν. . δεδέσθαι καὶ διεσ- πάσθαι, 5¢ εἴο.). The ‘ historic present’ is frequent (Hawkins, 113 ff.). Broken and irregular con- structions are by no means unusual (οἵ. 222 316-18 82 920 1314: & etc.).
The connexion of the sentences, again, is of the simplest, one being attacbed to the other usually by a καί or a de. There is a marked absence of such particles as οὖν. But there is considerable freedom in the use of prepositions, and there is more in the use of the tenses. The latter vary, often within the same sentence, so as to express changes in circumstance, position, or point of view (6... ἐγήγερται... . ἠγέρθη, 64; ἐλύθη. . . ἐλάλει... διεστείλατο. . . διεστέλλετο, 135. ; ἐξεθαμβήθησαν. .. ἠσπάζοντο, 915 ; cf. 5) etc. 9% etc. 1553 etc.).
The style has the constant qualities of life and force. When elaboration or repetition is needed in order to make his narrative distinct and vivid, Mark employs a copious phraseology, and adds word to word, e.g. ‘he went out and began to publish it much and to blaze abroad the matter’ (1%) ; ‘I know not neither understand I what thou sayest’ (14°) ; ‘that sprang up and increased; and brought forth’ (48), ete. But usually Mark’s style is terse. It abounds in passages which are remark- able for the large amount of matter compressed within the narrowest limits. Examples of con- densed yet singularly distinct narrative are found everywhere. ‘They are particularly frequent in the earlier chapters (cf. 118 127 27 etc.), but are by no means strange to the later (cf. 839. 124° etc.).
In much Mark’s Greek is like that of the LXY, at once in vocabulary and in style. It differs bota from that of Matthew and from that of Luke. It has a Hebraistic colouring. But it has less of that than Matthew, though more than Luke. It lacks the flow and the literary quality of the Greek of the third Gospel. It is the Greek of one to whom Greek is not his mother tongue, and who knows the language in its biblical, popular, and colloquial forms, not in its literary usage. The command of words is moderate, and the grasp of idiomatic expression is limited. But there is enough for the purpose—enough for simple, truthful narrative ; not enough for a literary composition, but enough for the construction of a collection of notes and reminiscences,