I tried searching the archives and Funk's grammar and Smyth's grammar but I am still not clear how adverbs function with other words.
I noticed a few examples of "μονον" where it seems to unambiguously modify a noun clause:
[Matt 5] [47] και εαν ασπασησθε τους φιλους υμων μονον τι περισσον ποιειτε ουχι και οι τελωναι ουτως ποιουσιν
It certainly does not mean "only greet your friends" (and do nothing else) but "greet only your friends" (and greet no one else).
[Matt 21] [19] και ιδων συκην μιαν επι της οδου ηλθεν επ αυτην και ουδεν ευρεν εν αυτη ει μη φυλλα μονον και λεγει αυτη μηκετι εκ σου καρπος γενηται εις τον αιωνα και εξηρανθη παραχρημα η συκη
"μονον" must modify "φυλλα" because there is nothing else for it to modify; "only leaves" (and nothing else).
[Mark 6] [8] και παρηγγειλεν αυτοις ινα μηδεν αιρωσιν εις οδον ει μη ραβδον μονον μη πηραν μη αρτον μη εις την ζωνην χαλκον
Likewise, "μονον" must modify "ραβδον"; "only [a] staff".
[John 13] [9] λεγει αυτω σιμων πετρος κυριε μη τους ποδας μου μονον αλλα και τας χειρας και την κεφαλην
From the next part of the sentence it is clear that Peter says: "lord, not only my feet but also the hands and the head!".
But there are also clear instances where it modifies a verb:
[Mark 5] [36] ο δε ιησους ευθεως ακουσας τον λογον λαλουμενον λεγει τω αρχισυναγωγω μη φοβου μονον πιστευε
"μονον" surely modifies "πιστευε" and not "φοβου"; "just believe".
[Acts 8] [16] ουπω γαρ ην επ ουδενι αυτων επιπεπτωκος μονον δε βεβαπτισμενοι υπηρχον εις το ονομα του χριστου ιησου
From the context "μονον" modifies "βεβαπτισμενοι υπηρχον ...". By the way, why is such a periphrastic used instead of "βεβαπτισμενοι ησαν"?
And some where it modifies an adverbial clause:
[John 11] [52] και ουχ υπερ του εθνους μονον αλλ ινα και τα τεκνα του θεου τα διεσκορπισμενα συναγαγη εις εν
I should think "μονον" modifies the adverbial clause "υπερ του εθνους"; "{ not { only ( for the nation ) } } but { [also] so that ... }".
[John 12] [9] εγνω ουν οχλος πολυς εκ των ιουδαιων οτι εκει εστιν και ηλθον ου δια τον ιησουν μονον αλλ ινα και τον λαζαρον ιδωσιν ον ηγειρεν εκ νεκρων
Likewise "μονον" modifies "δια τον ιησουν"; "they came not only because of Jesus but [also] so that they might see Lazarus whom [he] raised out of [the] dead"
[John 17] [20] ου περι τουτων δε ερωτω μονον αλλα και περι των πιστευοντων δια του λογου αυτων εις εμε
I take "περι τουτων μονον" to be in contrast to "περι των πιστευοντων ..." and therefore "μονον" should modify "περι τουτων".
So my question is, is there any typical usage patterns that help to determine what "μονον" modifies? It seems that it must precede the verb and usually succeeds the adverbial clause or noun clause. Here are some examples:
[Matt 8] [8] και αποκριθεις ο εκατονταρχος εφη κυριε ουκ ειμι ικανος ινα μου υπο την στεγην εισελθης αλλα μονον ειπε λογω και ιαθησεται ο παις μου
Both the order and the context suggest "but only say [by] [a] word" instead of "but say [by] only [a] word".
[Matt 9] [21] ελεγεν γαρ εν εαυτη εαν μονον αψωμαι του ιματιου αυτου σωθησομαι
I think it means "if only I touch his garment" (if I can just touch his garment) and not "if I touch only his garment" (if I can touch even his garment).
[Matt 10] [42] και ος εαν ποτιση ενα των μικρων τουτων ποτηριον ψυχρου μονον εις ονομα μαθητου αμην λεγω υμιν ου μη απολεση τον μισθον αυτου
Which does it mean? I think the first, based on its position as well as the context.
(1) "whoever gives one of these little [ones] to drink only [a] cup of cold water in regard to [the] name of [a] disciple" (nothing but a cup of cold water)
(2) "whoever gives one of these little [ones] to drink [a] cup of only cold water in regard to [the] name of [a] disciple" (a cup of nothing but cold water)
(3) "whoever gives only one of these little [ones] to drink [a] cup of cold water in regard to [the] name of [a] disciple" (gives a drink to only one of these little ones)
(4) "whoever only gives one of these little [ones] to drink [a] cup of cold water in regard to [the] name of [a] disciple" (does nothing else other than this)
[Acts 18] [25] ουτος ην κατηχημενος την οδον του κυριου και ζεων τω πνευματι ελαλει και εδιδασκεν ακριβως τα περι του κυριου επισταμενος μονον το βαπτισμα ιωαννου
"μονον" should modify "το βαπτισμα ιωαννου" rather than "επισταμενος", right?
[1 Cor 7] [39] γυνη δεδεται νομω εφ οσον χρονον ζη ο ανηρ αυτης εαν δε και κοιμηθη ο ανηρ ελευθερα εστιν ω θελει γαμηθηναι μονον εν κυριω
Likewise; "μονον εν κυριω".
[1 Cor 15] [19] ει εν τη ζωη ταυτη ηλπικοτες εσμεν εν χριστω μονον ελεεινοτεροι παντων ανθρωπων εσμεν
I do not intend to re-ignite previous discussions but it does seem that the context must be consulted for this, implying that "μονον" modifies "εν τη ζωη ταυτη", meaning "only with respect to this life".
I have excluded occurrences of the phrases "ου μονον" and "μη μονον" because they function as conjunctions. Anyway this is just my personal attempt to understand how this adverb functions grammatically and not just what it means, as the context usually makes it very clear, so I would appreciate all your comments on my analysis.
And one more insignificant question:
[Matt 17] [8] επαραντες δε τους οφθαλμους αυτων ουδενα ειδον ει μη τον ιησουν μονον
Is "μονον" a "neuter" adverb as in "except only Jesus" or an accusative masculine determiner as in "except Jesus alone"? Or is there actually no discernible difference in meaning between a determiner and its corresponding adverb if used to modify a noun?
μονον - as an adverb
Re: μονον - as an adverb
Δαυίδ:
I enjoyed reading your reflections on the placement and meaning of μόνον. You are clearly paying close attention to both syntax and context.
Here are a few comments on Matthew 10:42 and 1 Corinthians 15:19.
Your preferred reading of Matthew 10:42 fits well with both the context and the usual placement of μόνον adjacent to the phrase it modifies.
Here’s the text as you quoted it:
This is relevant for our discussion of μόνον only in that it clearly highlights that ἐν Χριστῷ modifies ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν. The two phrases form a syntactic unit (constituent).
While μόνον is separated from the phrase it directly modifies (ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ), as you point out, the context makes it clear that μόνον modifies ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ (“only in this life”). I would argue that it is more than the context, though, that makes this clear. The syntax does as well.
The prepositional phrase ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ is used adverbially to modify ἐν Χριστῷ ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν OR ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν ἐν Χριστῷ (depending on which variant reading you choose): “In this life we hope in Christ.”
The prepositional phrase (ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ) and its modifier (μόνον) function as an adverbial unit ("only in this life"). Together they bracket the constituent that they as an adverbial unit modify. I do not believe this is unusual. While it may be somewhat less common in the New Testament, such discontinuous adverbial phrases are not at all uncommon in the wider Hellenistic literature. If my memory were better, I would cite you a few examples from outside the New Testament cannon. Perhaps I’ll think of a few and post them here later.
I enjoyed reading your reflections on the placement and meaning of μόνον. You are clearly paying close attention to both syntax and context.
Here are a few comments on Matthew 10:42 and 1 Corinthians 15:19.
Your preferred reading of Matthew 10:42 fits well with both the context and the usual placement of μόνον adjacent to the phrase it modifies.
καὶ ὃς ἂν ποτίσῃ ἕνα τῶν μικρῶν τούτων ποτήριον ψυχροῦ μόνον εἰς ὄνομα μαθητοῦ, ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐ μὴ ἀπολέσῃ τὸν μισθὸν αὐτοῦ.
Your third option would require reading μόνον as modifying ἕνα τῶν μικρῶν τούτων, and while μόνον is sometimes disjoined from the phrase it modifies, there is usually some indication in the context for why this is done. Here there is no apparent motivation."whoever gives one of these little [ones] to drink only [a] cup of cold water in regard to [the] name of [a] disciple" (nothing but a cup of cold water)
This brings us to 1 Corinthians 15:19, where μόνον clearly does appear to be disjoined from the phrase it directly modifies (ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ). This verse is particularly interesting because it involves a minor textual variant that may help clarify the reading of μόνον.(3) "whoever gives only one of these little [ones] to drink [a] cup of cold water in regard to [the] name of [a] disciple" (gives a drink to only one of these little ones)
Here’s the text as you quoted it:
Here’s the same text in NA27 and UBS4:ει εν τη ζωη ταυτη ηλπικοτες εσμεν εν χριστω μονον ελεεινοτεροι παντων ανθρωπων εσμεν
Notice that the only difference is the placement of ἐν Χριστῷ. In your version, it comes at the end of ηλπικοτες εσμεν, while in NA27 and USB4 it comes at the beginning of the same unit. This placement does not seriously impact the way we would translate the verse, of course, though it may well impact notions of salience or topicality for the phrase ἐν Χριστῷ. In either location ἐν Χριστῷ is adjacent to ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν: “We hope in Christ,” “In Christ we hope.”εἰ ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ ἐν Χριστῷ ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν μόνον, ἐλεεινότεροι πάντων ἀνθρώπων ἐσμέν.
This is relevant for our discussion of μόνον only in that it clearly highlights that ἐν Χριστῷ modifies ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν. The two phrases form a syntactic unit (constituent).
While μόνον is separated from the phrase it directly modifies (ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ), as you point out, the context makes it clear that μόνον modifies ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ (“only in this life”). I would argue that it is more than the context, though, that makes this clear. The syntax does as well.
The prepositional phrase ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ is used adverbially to modify ἐν Χριστῷ ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν OR ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν ἐν Χριστῷ (depending on which variant reading you choose): “In this life we hope in Christ.”
The prepositional phrase (ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ) and its modifier (μόνον) function as an adverbial unit ("only in this life"). Together they bracket the constituent that they as an adverbial unit modify. I do not believe this is unusual. While it may be somewhat less common in the New Testament, such discontinuous adverbial phrases are not at all uncommon in the wider Hellenistic literature. If my memory were better, I would cite you a few examples from outside the New Testament cannon. Perhaps I’ll think of a few and post them here later.
Micheal W. Palmer