μή

mhv mhv, the Septuagint for la', @yIa', @yae, a particle of negation, which differs from
ouj (which is always an adverb) in that
ouj denies the thing itself (or to speak technically, denies simply, absolutely, categorically, directly, objectively), but
mhv denies the thought of the thing, or the thing according to the judgment, opinion, will, purpose, preference, of someone (hence, as we say technically, indirectly, hypothetically, subjectively). This distinction holds also of the compounds
oujdeiv",
mhdeiv",
oujkevti,
mhkevti, etc. But
mhv is either an adverb of negation, not (Latin non, ne); or a conjunction, that ... not, lest (Latin ne); or an interrogative particle (Latin num) (i. e. (generally) implying a neg. ans.; in indirect question, whether not (suggesting apprehension)). Cf. Herm. ad Vig. sec. 267, p. 802ff; Matthiae, sec. 608; Alexander Buttmann (1873) Gram. sec. 148 (cf. Alex. Alexander Buttmann (1873) N. T. Gr., p. 344 (296ff)); K?hner, ii. sec. 512f, p. 739ff; (Jelf, sec. 738ff); Rost sec. 135; Winer's sec. 55, 56; F. Franke, De particulis negantibus (two commentaries) Rintel. 1832f; G. F. Gayler, Particularum Graeci sermonis negativarum accurata disputatio, etc. Tub. 1836; E. Pr?fer, De
mhv et
ouj particulis epitome. Vratisl. 1836; (Gildersleeve in American Jour. of Philol. vol. i. no. i., p. 45ff; Jebb in Vincent and Dickson's Handbook to Modern Greek, 2nd edition, Appendix, sec. 82ff).I. As a negative adverb;1. universally:
w|/
mhv
pavresti
tau'ta, where
mhv is used because reference is made merely to the thought that there are those who lack these things, ;
a{
mhv
eJwvraken, which (in my opinion) he hath not seen (because they are not visible), (but here G T Tr WH omit; L brackets
mhv; cf. Lightfoot at the passage; Winer's Grammar, 480f (448));
h[dh
kevkritai,
o{ti
mhv
pepivsteuken, because he hath not believed, represented by the writer as the thought
tou'
krivnanto", (differently in , where the faith denied is considered as something positive and actual);
a{
mhv
dei', in the judgment of the writer, .2. in deliberative questions with the subjunctive:
dw'men
h[
mhv
dw'men, (
povteron
bivan
fwmen
h[
mhv
fwmen
ei\nai, Xenophon, mem. 1, 2, 45);
mhv
poihvswmen
tav
kakav (for so it would have run had there been no anacoluthon; but Paul by the statement which he interposes is drawn away from the construction with which he began, and proceeds
o{ti
poihvswmen
ktl., so that these words depend on
levgein in the intervening statement (Winer's Grammar, 628 (583); Buttmann, sec. 141, 3)), .3. in conditional and final sentences (cf. Winer's Grammar, sec. 55, 2; (Buttmann, 344ff (296ff)):
ejavn
mhv, unless, if not, see examples in
ejavn, I. 3 c.
ejavn etc.
kaiv
mhv, ;
ejavn etc.
dev
mhv, ;
ejavn
tiv"
i[dh/ ...
mhv
prov"
qavnaton, ;
eij
mhv,
eij
dev
mhv,
eij
dev
mhvge, etc., see
eij, III., p. 171f. To this head belong the formulae that have
a[n or
ejavn as a modifier (Winer's Grammar, sec. 55, 3 e.; (Buttmann, sec. 148, 4)),
o{",
o{sti",
o{soi
a[n or
ejavn
mhv: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
o{"
a[n etc.
kaiv
mhv, ; <<ref:BHS/GNT_Luk 10:10$$Luke 10:1