Χαίρετε!
The NASB and ESV translate ἄγε νῦν as “Come now.” ἄγω means “bring along’ or “lead,” or “carry.” I figure ἄγε is the imperative ἄγω? If that is correct, is ἄγε νῦν an idiom?
αγε νυν indeed is an idiom. In LSJ you can look up αγε and see, that the meaning of αγε/αγετε (the imperatives) is „come“, not „bring, carry“ and that αγε νυν , αγε δη, αγε δευρο are idioms, as old as Homer!
1 Like
φέρε is similar as well.
The LSJ entry for νῦν also mentions the enclitic νυν, used to strengthen a command. The entry lists δεῦρό νυν, ἄγε νυν, σπεῦδέ νυν, etc.
The phrases ἄγε, ἄγε νυν, ἄγε δή (and similar like φέρε δή) can also be used as fixed phrases alongside first person hortative subjunctives: See Smyth 1797a and b.
For a little while I have been wondering if these are transferred from slave-holding language. “Fetch,” and “carry,” are command words. In the literary contexts that we see them, they mean something like “see here,” or “attend,” but that could not have been original.
Both the dictionary meanings of ἄγω/φέρω and the semantic area covered by conversational ἄγε/φέρε are vague enough, aren’t they? English ‘see’ or ‘come on’ don’t really mean that either. And in any case, the literal meaning ‘fetch’ or ‘bear’ (what I am about to say, what I have in mind) is understandable.
Scholars in antiquity (e.g. POxy 3710 ii 22) argued over the functional status of ἄγε etc. Was it a true imperative (προστακτικόν) or just an exhortation (παρακέλευσμα)?
As to νῦν, with circumflex, it means “now” (or sometimes “as things stand”). Enclitic νυν, as in ἄγε νυν or ἄγετέ νυν, is inferential and hortatory, “Come on then.” This rule is not iron-clad, but it generally serves, and is normally respected in editions of classical texts. In NT texts, however, manuscripts tend not to recognize the distinction, and write νῦν regardless.
Maybe it is as a kind of redundancy. ἄγε νυν indicates “I’m encouraging you to do something, perhaps gently but firmly.” It’s a kind of “mood marker,” as it were.
If the main verb is imperative, then ἄγε νυν is potentially redundant (if anyone cares about redundancy).
It reminds me of John McWhorter’s discussion of the English suffix “-ass” which (surprisingly) is becoming more common now and more generalized. It started out as a crude expression, but it appears to be slowly transforming into a productive suffix. According to McWhorter, it means “larger than expected.” A “long-ass movie” means it was longer than the typical or expected runtime.
The similarity is that neither expression is really needed. You don’t need to say “long-ass” movie, you can find some other way to say that. And you don’t really need to say ἄγε νυν: The sentence will work fine without it. But speakers must feel that these expressions somehow add something, perhaps by way of emphasis, maybe just grabbing attention.
McWhorter’s book: Nine Nasty Words: English in the Gutter—Then, Now, and Forever.