Category Archives: grammar

Definite Article as Possessive Pronoun

In ancient Greek, the definite article could serve as a possessive pronoun if the context so indicated. A very common variant in the Greek manuscripts underlying the New Testament is places where some manuscripts have a possessive pronoun and some have only the definite article. And usually, the early translations translating the passage would supply a possessive pronoun in their target language, even when their Greek manuscript source text did not have one.

John 19:26

ESV: When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!”
NKJV: When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!”

txt τη μητρι𝔓⁶⁶ 𝔓¹²¹vid ℵ B L W it-b,e SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ τη μητρι αυτου A DS E N 054 𝔐 lat syr TR RP ‖ lac 𝔓⁶⁰ C D 065.  Here is the entire verse 26 from the Robinson-Pierpont majority text:  Ἰησοῦς οὖν ἰδὼν τὴν μητέρα, καὶ τὸν μαθητὴν παρεστῶτα ὃν ἠγάπα, λέγει τῇ μητρὶ αὐτοῦ, Γύναι, ἰδοὺ ὁ υἱός σου.  In ancient Greek the definite article, in this case τη, could serve as a possessive pronoun if the context so indicated.  The addition of the possessive pronoun αυτου, “his,” was not necessary.  All you need to do is look at the beginning of this same verse, where all Greek manuscripts have only την μητερα, the definite article with “mother” and no possessive pronoun present, yet ALL English translations supply the word “his” there.  It is a very common textual variant in the Greek New Testament for Greek manuscripts to add a possessive pronoun like this.  But this need not even be footnoted, as the presence or absence of the possessive pronoun makes no difference in how you would translate it.

Here are some other instances where the Greek texts vary on the presence or absence of the possessive pronoun.  And observe that the English translations all supply an English possessive pronoun no matter which Greek text they translate from:

John 6:52
NKJV: The Jews therefore quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?”

txt omit 𝔓⁷⁵vid ℵ C D E G H K L M S U W Y Γ Δ Θ Λ Π Ψ Ω 047 0141 0211 ƒ¹ ƒ¹³ 2 28 33 157 180 205 397 565 579 700 1006 1010 1071 1241 1292 1342 1505 l844 l2211 𝔐 Lect it-d,ff² goth Orgr Cyr½ TR RP TH ‖ αυτου 𝔓⁶⁶ B T 597 892 1243 1424 l253 (l1016) it-a,aur,b,c,e,f,j,q,r¹ vg syr-c,s,p,h,pal cop-sa,pbo,bo,ach² arm eth geo slav Or-lat Macarius/Symeon Chrys Cyr½ SBL [NA28] {C} ‖ lac A F N P Q V X 091 0233

John 18:11
ESV: So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?”
EMTV: So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?”

txt την μαχαιραν 𝔓⁶⁰ 𝔓⁶⁶ ℵ A B C D E L N W 047 054 𝔐 lat syr RP SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ την μαχαιραν σου vg-cl Cyr Or TR ‖ lac 𝔓⁷⁵ 𝔓¹⁰⁸.  Almost all the English translations which translate the RP / NA28 text read “your sword.”  (Not ASV, NASB)

John 5:10b
NKJV: The Jews therefore said to him who was cured, “It is the Sabbath; it is not lawful for you to carry your bed.”

txt σου 𝔓⁶⁶ 𝔓⁷⁵ ℵ C* D L N Ws Θ Λ Π Ψ 0211 0233 ƒ¹³ 69 579 892 1071 1241 lat syr cop arm SBL NA28 {/} ‖ omit A B C³ E F G H K M S U V Xsupp Y Γ Δ Ω 047 063 0141 ƒ¹ 2 28 124 157 397 565 700 1424 𝔐 it-e,δ TR RP TH ‖ lac 𝔓⁴⁵ P Q T Xtxt 070 078 33 346 788

Matthew 15:2a χειρας αυτων C D E L N P W Σ Φ 𝔐 lat syr TR RP SBL ΤH NA28 [αυτων] {\} ‖ χειρας ℵ B 073 it-f,g¹ arm Or Cyr Chr ‖ lac A Z 0233 0281.

Matthew 23:5b txt τα κρασπεδα ℵ B D cop-sa,mae¹ eth? SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ τα κρασπεδα αυτων itb vgmss copsa? eth ‖ τα κρασπεδα των ιματιων L ‖ τα κρασπεδα των ιματιων αυτων E O W Σ 0102 0107 it-f,ff²*,h,q syr arm Bas TR RP ‖ lac A C N P Z Φ 0233 0281.

Luke 23:2 txt το εθνος ημων 𝔓⁷⁵ ℵ B D L N T lat syr SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ το εθνος A E W 𝔐 it-a,r¹ MarcionE TR RP ‖ lac 𝔓⁴⁵ C P Q.

Mark 3:5a txt την χειρα B E Φ SBL NA28 {\} ‖ την χειρα σου ℵ A C D L P W Σ TR RP TH ‖ lac 𝔓⁴⁵ N 064 072.

Mark 14:46 txt τας χειρας αυτω ℵ² B D L it-(a,k),q syr SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ τας χειρας αυτων ℵ* C W 0233 ‖ αυτω τας χειρας αυτων N Σ ‖ επ αυτον τας χειρας αυτων E Φ 𝔐 (lat) TR RP ‖ τας χειρας αυτων επ αυτον A ‖ lac 𝔓⁴⁵ P 083.

1 Peter 3:10b txt αυτου L P 049 0142 307 lat-s,v,t cop-sa,bo syr-p arm eth TR AN BG RP ‖ omit 𝔓⁷² 𝔓⁸¹vid ℵ A B C K Ψ 33 623 1175 1243 1735 1739 2464 2805 syr-h geo SBL TH NA28 ‖ lac 𝔓⁷⁴ 048 093 0206 0247 0285 ℓ1575.

2 Peter 2:20 f- κυρίου καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ B K 049 307 2423 ps-oec it-z lat-v-mss TR AN BG RP SBL ECM2 TH NA28 ‖ a- κυρίου ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 𝔓⁷² ℵ A C P Ψ 048vid 0142 5 33 623 1175 1243 1448 1735 1739 1852 2298 2464 lat-v,t syr-h arm (eth) geo slav pelag aug ECM1 ‖ b- κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος (ἡμῶν) cop-sa syr-ph-mss ‖ c- κυρίου καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 94 104 syr-ph-mss ‖ d- κυρίου καὶ σωτῆρος ὑμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 1241 ‖ e- κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ L 459 anast-s copbo ‖ g- κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 6 2805 ‖ a/c copv ‖ e/g syrphmss ‖ lac 𝔓⁷⁴ 048 0156 0209 0247 665. 

1 John 3:21a txt ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν ℵ C K L 049 056 0142 18 81 88 104 181 326 330 424* 451 614 629 630 1175 1243 1292 1505c 1611 1844 1852 1877 1881 2138 2298 2412 2464 2492 𝔐 Lect it-ar,q,r,t,w,z vg-cl,ww syr-p,h Cllat Orpt Did TR AN BG RP NA28 {C} ‖ ἡ καρδία A B Ψ 33 322 323 424c 436 945 1067 1241 1409 1735 1739 2344 vg-st Orgr⅓,lat2/4 (Methodius); Aug½ SBL TH ‖ ἡ καρδία ὑμῶν 1505* pc ‖ lac 𝔓⁹ 𝔓⁷⁴ P 048 0245 0296.

Hoskier and Ligatures

EDIT: My next post updates this one, as I was mistaken in this post. But I will leave it for the images and information / illustration of the difficulties of reading New Testament Greek Ligatures.

As I posted before, I am currently busy updating and improving the footnotes to my translation of the Revelation of John, “The Apocalypse of John.” One of the ways I am expanding the footnotes, is specifying which Vulgate manuscripts (not just editions) support what reading. Also, where the Textus Receptus is divided, specifying which editions read what.

In this process, I have found several places in which I disagree with H. C. Hoskier’s collation of the TR editions. I do not know if he was relying on someone else’s collations, or if he looked at the original documents themselves. But the problem lies in understanding the ligatures for letter combinations that are used in Greek cursive manuscripts, including the Greek New Testament editions made by Erasmus, Beza, Elzevir, and Stephens. Now, I possess PDF copies of the original cursive manuscripts of the following “Textus Receptus” editions. All 5 Erasmus editions, the 1550 Stephanus edition, the 1598 Beza edition, the 1624 Elzevir edition, plus the Complutensian Polyglot (1514).

Revelation 17:8 variant- καιπερ εστιν

There is a famous textual variant in Revelation chapter 17 verse 8 where the Textus Receptus disagrees with all Greek manuscripts and reads καιπερ εστιν. However, I found that I disagree with Hoskier regarding the readings of Erasmus’ editions 1, 3 and 4, as follows.

First, a snip showing what Hoskier says:

Erasmus Ed. 1 (1516): Hoskier says και περ is two words, I say one:

Erasmus Ed. 3 (1522) very clearly reads καί παρ, not καί περ:

Erasmus Ed. 4 (1527) very clearly reads καί παρ, not καί περ:

See here the difference- Erasmus Ed. 5 (1535) shows the ligature for περ:

I still offer my chart of Greek cursive ligatures for free (also thanks go to Vernon Eugene Kooy, PhD for his font). These above images and data are now included in my Revelation pdf, downloadable for free.

Neuter Plurals Singular Verb

This post discusses a textual variant in Matthew’s gospel, chapter 26, verse 31, as follows:

διασκορπισθησεται 𝔓³⁷ 𝔓⁴⁵ D E F K U V W Γ Δ Θ Π Φ ƒ¹ 2 28 565 579 1424 pm Eus Chrys Or-pt TR RP ‖ διασκορπισθησονται 𝔓⁵³ ℵ A B C G H L M S Σ 067 0281 ƒ¹³ 33 157 700 892 1071 1241 pm Or-pt SBL TH ΝΑ28 {\} ‖ lac 𝔓⁶⁴ N P Q Ζ 0233 346

The nominative substantive, the subject of our sentence here, is τα προβατα, “the sheep,” a neuter plural subject. But the BYZ text couples with it a singular verb, διασκορπισθησεται, while the NA28 text uses a plural verb, διασκορπισθησονται.

Classical, Attic, Greek had a grammar rule that broke the grammar rules.  Usually, verbs must agree in gender, number and case with the subject noun.  This is called concord.  But there was a rule that neuter plural subjects usually took a singular verb.

BDF §133: “This is because neuter plurals were originally in part feminine singular collectives: Schwyzer ɪ 581 f.). The rule appears to have been most strictly followed in the Attic dialect (Schwyzer ɪɪ 607); Homer and Koine are less consistent, while the plural is used exclusively in MGr.  In the NT (as in the LXX and pap.: Mayser ɪɪ 3, 28 ff.) there is marked diversity, and often in individual instances the MSS diverge.  The plural is used for the most part in Herm. (1) The plural is used especially with neuters designating persons (also class., K.-G. ɪ 65), most frequently with ἔθνη, less often wth τέκνα and δαιμόνια. (2) The singular, on the contrary, preponderates with words having non-personal meaning (even when a numeral is inserted: ἐὰν γένηται…ἑκατὸν πρόβατα Mt 18:12), (3) and even more so with abstracts and pronouns (ταῦτα, ἅ etc.).—For stereotyped ἴδε, ἰδού, ἄγε used in spite of a plural subject, s. §144.”

Smyth §958: “A neuter plural subject is regarded as a collective (996), and has its verb in the singular: καλὰ ἦν τὰ σφάγια the sacrifices were propitious X.A.4.3.19.  Here, sheep are a herd, a collective, so take a singular verb, the herd is scattered.  But Smyth then says in §959, “A plural verb may be used when stress is laid on the fact that the neuter plural subject is composed of persons or of several parts: τὰ τέλη τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων αὐτὸν ἐξέπεμψαν the Lacedaemonian magistrates despatched him (Thuc. 4.88), φανερὰ ἦσαν καὶ ἵππων καὶ ἀνθρώπων ἴχνη πολλά many traces both of horses and of men were plain X.A.1.7.17. (a.) With the above exception Attic regularly uses the singular verb.  Homer uses the singular three times as often as the plural, and the plural less frequently with neuter adjectives and pronouns than with substantives.  In some cases (B 135) the metre decides the choice.” 

Here in Mt 26:31 the sheep are persons, so one cannot declare with absolute certainly which reading in this variant is grammatically correct for classical Greek.  Now, there are many other examples of this category of variant in Matthew, but I am showing this one because so many papyri are extant.  The testimony is equally early for both readings.  Each has a III century papyrus in support, 𝔓⁴⁵ and 𝔓⁵³.  The Greek Old Testament, the Septuagint, does not pertain here, as Zech 13:7 in the LXX does not have the same sentence structure, that is, there is no neuter plural subject.  Rather it says, “Strike the shepherds, and remove the sheep…”  I should also mention that neither the Byzantine majority text nor the “critical text” consistently follow this Attic rule. There are variants where the Byz breaks the rule and the critical text follows it.

Now a question for us is, was Matthew (or his translator, if he wrote his gospel in Hebrew or Aramaic) bound to follow Attic rules, or even familiar with Attic rules?  Possibly editors or copyists of Matthew corrected what they thought was incorrect grammar, to follow the Attic rule.  But in this variant we probably have a legitimate exception to the Attic rule since the sheep are persons.  This explanatory note, and many like it, can be read in my translation of the gospel of Matthew, downloadable here.

Definite Article Variant

In Matthew 13 verse 2, there is a Greek textual variant involving the Greek definite article, in this case the neuter singular accusative, with the word for boat, so το πλοιον.

The pre-9th century witnesses are as follows:

πλοιον ℵ B C L W Z Σ SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ το πλοιον D E Φ 𝔐 TR RP ‖ lac A N P 0233 0281

Note that the Textus Receptus contains the definite article with “boat,” but the English translations based on the TR do not say “the boat” but rather “a boat / a ship.”  See the Geneva Bible, Tyndale, Bishops’ Bible, the KJV, and the NKJV, which all say “a” not “the.”  This is because the definite article in Greek does not necessarily mean “the” in English.  The article here is not anaphoric, as it cannot be referring back to a known boat, since there is no boat mentioned previously in the context.  The article cannot be referring to “the only” boat, because there were several boats owned by the disciples, besides the fact that other people could have had boats on hand.

To download my translation of Matthew containing this footnote, click here.

Acts 21 verse 40

Acts 21:40, 22:2
⁴⁰And after he gave him permission, Paul stood on the steps, and motioned to the people downward with his hand.  And when it was largely quiet, he addressed them in the Hebrew language, and said…
²And when they heard him addressing them in the Hebrew language, they offered greater silence.

Here I am focusing on the progression from “when it was largely quiet” in 21:40 to “they offered greater silence” in 22:2.

πολλῆς δὲ σιγῆς γενομένης προσεφώνησεν τῇ Ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ λέγων
largely and quiet became, he addresed in the Hebrew language, saying

Ἀκούσαντες δὲ ὅτι τῇ Ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ προσεφώνει αὐτοῖς μᾶλλον παρέσχον ἡσυχίαν.
when they heard and that in the Hebrew language he addressed them greater they offered a silence.

Starting with Wycliffe and Tyndale, they interpreted πολλῆς as an adjective rather than the adverb it is in this context.  And most all of the translations tells us that the mob became very silent merely because Paul motioned with his hand. Really, the mob that was just trying to kill him?

Wycliffe
Poul stood in the grees, and bikenede with the hoond to the puple. And whanne a greet silence was maad, he spak in Ebrew tunge, and seide,
And whanne sum herden that in Ebrew tunge he spak to hem, thei yauen the more silence.

Tyndale
Paul stode on ye steppes and beckned with the honde vuto the people and ther was made a greate silence.
Whe they hearde that he spake in ye Ebrue tonge to them they kept the moore silence.

Some translations do not even translate the word πολλῆς:

God’s Word
So Paul stood on the stairs of the barracks and motioned with his hand for the people to be quiet. When the mob was silent, Paul spoke to them in the Hebrew language.
When the mob heard him speak to them in Hebrew, they became even more quiet.

Good News Bible
so Paul stood on the steps and motioned with his hand for the people to be silent. When they were quiet, Paul spoke to them in Hebrew:
When they heard him speaking to them in Hebrew, they became even quieter;

CEV
so Paul stood on the steps and motioned to the people. When they were quiet, he spoke to them in Aramaic:
When the crowd heard Paul speak to them in Aramaic, they became even quieter.

Many translations that do translate πολλῆς end up contradicting themselves, such as the NLT.  Verse 31 says there was “a deep silence” but then in v. 2 it says “the silence was even greater.”
How can you have a silence greater than “a deep silence”?  And there is no word for “even” in the Greek.

New Living Translation

so Paul stood on the stairs and motioned to the people to be quiet. Soon a deep silence enveloped the crowd, and he addressed them in their own language, Aramaic.
When they heard him speaking in their own language, the silence was even greater.

Now I will focus on the word παρέσχον in 22:2, which is 3rd person plural, they, they were offering.  The NLT does not correctly render that “they” part, see above.  But most translations do not correctly render the verb as “offered, afforded, gave” to someone.  Instead, they say something like “became” or “were”:

KJV
Paul stood on the stairs, and beckoned with the hand unto the people. And when there was made a great silence, he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying,
And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence:

NKJV
Paul stood on the stairs and motioned with his hand to the people. And when there was a great silence, he spoke to them in the Hebrew language, saying,
And when they heard that he spoke to them in the Hebrew language, they kept all the more silent.

TNIV
Paul stood on the steps and motioned to the crowd. When they were all silent, he said to them in Aramaic
When they heard him speak to them in Aramaic, they became very quiet.

CSB

Paul stood on the steps and motioned with his hand to the people. When there was a great hush, he addressed them in Aramaic:
When they heard that he was addressing them in Aramaic, they became even quieter

ESV
Paul, standing on the steps, motioned with his hand to the people. And when there was a great hush, he addressed them in the Hebrew language, saying:
And when they heard that he was addressing them in the Hebrew language, they became even more quiet.

NABRE
Paul stood on the steps and motioned with his hand to the people; and when all was quiet he addressed them in Hebrew.
When they heard him addressing them in Hebrew they became all the more quiet.

NASB
Paul, standing on the stairs, motioned to the people with his hand; and when there was a great hush, he spoke to them in the Hebrew dialect, saying,
And when they heard that he was addressing them in the Hebrew dialect, they became even more quiet; and he *said,

NET
Paul stood on the steps and gestured to the people with his hand. When they had become silent, he addressed them in Aramaic,
(When they heard that he was addressing them in Aramaic, they became even quieter.)

NRSV
Paul stood on the steps and motioned to the people for silence; and when there was a great hush, he addressed them in the Hebrew language, saying:
When they heard him addressing them in Hebrew, they became even more quiet.

Here is how it should be translated:

DRP
Paul stood on the steps, and he motioned to the people downward with his hand.  And when it was largely quiet, he addressed them in the Hebrew language, and said,
And when they heard him addressing them in the Hebrew language, they offered greater silence. You can download the DRP translation here .

Effectual Prayer James 5:16

“The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.”  KJV

Is all prayer “effectual”?

πολὺ-ἰσχύει-δέησις –δικαίου-ἐνεργουμένη.

much-is able to do-the prayer-of the righteous-actuated, fully operating

Wycl:     For the contynuel preyer of a iust man is myche worth.

Tynd:     The prayer of a ryghteous man avayleth moche yf it be fervet.

Gen:      for the prayer of a righteous man auaileth much, if it be feruent.

KJV:       The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

ASV:      The supplication of a righteous man availeth much in its working.

ESV: The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working.

DRP: The fully operating prayer of a righteous person is able to accomplish much.

We can see that the effectiveness of the prayer of the righteous person is conditional on something.  It only works if it is “actuated, fully working.”

Tyndale introduced the idea of fervency, “if it be fervent.” I don’t know where he got that from, since that is not in the Greek.  The ASV and ESV say “as it is working,” etc.  This implies, correctly, that there is a possibility that one’s prayer does not work.  What makes prayer effectual, or “working”?

There are quite a few scriptures which tell us some things that cause our prayer not to work.

The Psalmist of Psalm 66 was a righteous man, but he knew that his prayers did not always work.  In Psalm 66:18 he says “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me.”

If the person praying is “doubting at all,” the prayer is not effective, James 1:6

If the one praying has unconfessed sin, he is not in fellowship with God, and is in darkness, as it says in many scripture passages such as Psalm 66:18; and in the First Epistle of John.

A married man’s prayers may be hindered if he is not treating his wife like it is layed out in 1 Peter 3:7. 

Matthew 5:23,24 says “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there you remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar, and first go be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.”  This does not mention prayer specifically, but I think it applies, as God is not interested in what you are bringing to him if you are not resolving what you brother has against you.

This is not a complete list, but are some examples of what might cause prayer to not be “fully operating.”

You can download the DRP translation of James here, with footnotes.

Dative Case Marker Words

Modern Greek differs from New Testament Greek in many ways, and one of the biggest differences is that there are no longer any Dative Case inflections or suffixes on words like there were in Koine Greek. Instead, marker words or helper words came to be used.

See for example Luke 21:23 txt τω λαω ℵ A B C D K L M N Π Ψ ƒ¹ ƒ¹³ 33 157 579 892 1241 2542 lat SBL TH ΝΑ28 {\} ‖ εν τω λαω E G H S U W Y Γ Δ Θ Λ Ω 2 124 346 565 700 1071 𝔐 syr-h TR RP ‖ επι τω λαω 1424 vg: ira populo huic (KJV) ‖ lac 𝔓⁴⁵ 𝔓⁷⁵ F P Q T 28.

Some recent translations of the Majority text render this “wrath among this people.” I disagree with that, and I render both the NA28 and Majority texts the same way.

So also, where the same construction is found in Romans 16:7, ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις, it should be rendered “who are well known to the apostles, and were in Christ before me.”

Acts 21:38; Did the Roman commander assume an Egyptian would know Greek?

Acts 21:38 οὐκ ἄρα σὺ εἶ ὁ Αἰγύπτιος

Did the Chiliarch assume an Egyptian would know Greek?
Or assume an Egyptian would not know Greek?

Many translations appear to believe that the Chiliarch assumed an Egyptian would not know Greek.
But some, like the Complete Jewish Bible, appear to believe the Chiliarch thought an Egyptian would know Greek.
Some are ambiguious or slightly implying affirmative, saying “Are you not that Egyptian?”
This is quite different from some, which say “Then you are not that Egyptian.” (See all the translations listed with their renderings, at the bottom of this post.)

But what are the rules of Greek grammar here?
The BDF grammar §440 says “οὐ is employed to suggest an affirmative answer, μή (μήτι) a negative reply; in the latter, μή with the indicative is an external indication that it is a question, since independent μή can be used in no other way than interrogatively”
So according to BDF, the correct translation here, employing οὐ, would be “Then you are that Egyptian, aren’t you.”
Combined with ἄρα DeBrunner says in §440(2) “Οὐκ ἄρα denotes astonishment in Ac. 21:38 (‘why, are you not…’), elsewhere it corresponds to ‘well’ or ‘then’. “
Hmm, why different only here, DeBrunner? I do not agree. I think the Chiliarch is saying, “Then aren’t you that Egyptian?” and assuming an affirmative answer, since that is the grammar.
BDAG says it means “are you not, then…” With ἄρα being inferential or consequential. (With οὐ suggesting an affirmative answer of course.)

I conclude that those translations which render it “then you are not that Egyptian” or, “I thought you were that Egyptian” are incorrect. And it is apparent to me, that the Roman commander assumed an Egyptian would know Greek. To read my translation of this verse, you can download my translation.

KJ21 Art not thou that Egyptian…?
ASV Art thou not then the Egyptian…?
AMP Then you are not [as I assumed] the Egyptian…?
AMPC Are you not then [as I supposed] the Egyptian…?
BRG Art not thou that Egyptian…?
CBW Are you not the Egyptian…?
CSB Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
CEB Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
CJB Say, aren’t you that Egyptian…?
CEV Aren’t you that Egyptian…?
DARBY Thou art not then that Egyptian?
DLNT Then are you not the Egyptian…?
DRA Art not thou that Egyptian…?
ERV Then you are not the man I thought you were. I thought you were the Egyptian.
EHV Are you not the Egyptian…?
EMTV Are you not then the Egyptian…?
ESV Are you not the Egyptian, then…?
ESVUK Are you not the Egyptian, then…?
EXB I thought you were [L Are you not…?] the Egyptian.
GNV Art not thou the Egyptian…?
GW Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
GNT Then you are not that Egyptian…?
HCSB Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
ICB I thought you were the Egyptian.
ISV You’re not the Egyptian…are you?
PHILLIPS Aren’t you that Egyptian…?
JUB Art not thou that Egyptian…?
KJV Art not thou that Egyptian…?
AKJV Art not thou that Egyptian…?
LAMSA Are you not that Egyptian…?
LEB Then you are not the Egyptian…?
TLB Aren’t you that Egyptian…?
MSG I thought you were the Egyptian.
MEV Are you not the Egyptian…?
MOUNCE Then you are not the Egyptian…?
MURD Art not thou that Egyptian…?
NOG Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
NABRE So then you are not the Egyptian…?
NASB Then you are not the Egyptian…?
NCV I thought you were the Egyptian.
NET Then you’re not that Egyptian…?
NIRV Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
NIV Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
NKJV Are you not the Egyptian…?
NLV Are you not the man from the country of Egypt…?
NLT Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
NMB Are you not that Egyptian…?
NRSV Then you are not the Egyptian…?
NTE Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
OJB Then you are not the Egyptian…?
TPT Aren’t you that Egyptian…?
Recov You are not then the Egyptian…?
RSV Are you not the Egyptian, then…?
TLV Then you’re not the Egyptian…?
VOICE We thought you were that Egyptian.
WEB Aren’t you then the Egyptian…?
WE I thought you were the man from the country of Egypt.
WYC Whether thou art not the Egyptian…?
YLT art not thou, then, the Egyptian…?