Patrick A. Tiller, «Reflexive Pronouns in the New Testament», Vol. 14 (2001) 43-63
The purpose of this study is to answer two basic
questions concerning reflexive and reciprocal pronouns in the New
Testament: (1) What are the syntactic constraints on reflexives, that
determine when they may be used? (2) What are the semantic constraints
that determine when in fact they are used? In answering the first question
the author considers both reflexives and reciprocals and discuss the whole
NT; for the second, the author attempts to suggest answers for third
person reflexives and based only on the Pauline Epistles commonly
recognized as authentic.
Reflexive Pronouns in New Testament 51
text at all. Again the trigger is more semantically than syntactically
determined. The trigger is a combination of the underlying subject mev
and the clause-mate uJmi`n (‘you’). Presumably the fact that there is no real
trigger explains the strange addition of uJmw'n te kai; ejmou` at the end of
the sentence. It seems to be an attempt to clarify the meaning of a gar-
bled sentence.
We may therefore conclude that, apart from the main class of excep-
tions that will be discussed below, reflexives have clause-mate triggers even
if those triggers are not expressed. There is normally no distinction
between reflexives in matrix clauses and reflexives in embedded clauses.
Definition 1 A direct reflexive has a co-referent trigger in its own
clause.
Indirect Reflexives
In the NT when the subject of an infinitive is co-referent with the
subject of the matrix clause, is may either be expressed or not
expressed. If expressed it will be in the accusative case; if not, its mod-
ifiers will be in the nominative case. According to Blass, «The con-
struction [with the accusative subject] is more striking in the case of an
articular infinitive, where it is not the reflexive, but the simple person-
al pronoun that is inserted 13.» In other words, when the infinitive has
an article, its subject is a personal pronoun and otherwise it is a reflex-
ive pronoun. This is almost true as far as it goes, but there is a better,
more general explanation.
A pronoun in an embedded clause may be reflexive when it is co-ref-
erent with the subject of the matrix clause even if it is not co-referent with
the subject of its own clause. This includes reflexives that are themselves
the accusative subject of an infinitive and whose antecedents are in a
matrix clause 14. This will be dealt with explicitly in doubtful cases. This
is especially true of the accusative subject of an infinitive but is also true
of other kinds of pronouns within an embedded clause. It also occurs
once in a participial clause (Phil 2:3, see p. 53, below).
Definition 2 An indirect reflexive occurs in an embedded clause
and does not have a co-referent trigger in its own
clause, but in a matrix clause.
13
F. Blass and A. Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature (translated and revised from the ninth-tenth German edition by
Robert W. Funk; Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1961) 209.
14
The problem with this definition is that it is sometimes difficult to know whether
an accusative is the subject of the infinitive or the direct object of the matrix verb.