Mark 4 : 30

Greek imperfect ἔλεγεν ('he was saying') and Latin imperfect dicebat preserve the durative aspect of habitual teaching; the Peshitta fuses the conjunction and verb into the single form ܘܐܡܪ ('and he said'), a simple perfect that flattens the iterative nuance. The Latin colon and the Greek raised point both mark the transition to direct speech.

Greek πῶς ('how') is a manner interrogative, whereas the Vulgate Cui and the Peshitta ܠܡܢܐ ('to what') render a dative/allative interrogative ('to what shall we liken it'). The shift from manner to recipient reflects the natural complement of the verb 'to liken' in Latin and Syriac idiom.

Greek uses the prepositional phrase ἐν τίνι ('in what') and the Vulgate the bare interrogative dative cui; the Peshitta ܘܒܐܝܢܐ combines conjunction, preposition ܒ ('in') and interrogative ('which') into a single token. The constructions are semantically equivalent locative interrogatives despite differing surface morphology.

Greek θῶμεν (from τίθημι, 'shall we set/present') is a comparatively neutral verb of placement, while the Peshitta repeats the cognate root m-th-l in ܢܡܬܠܝܗ ('shall we set it in a parable'), creating a figura etymologica with ܡܬܠܐ; the Vulgate comparabimus ('shall we compare') selects an overtly comparative lexeme. The variations are stylistic rather than semantic.

The pronominal object 'it' is expressed in Greek by the independent accusative αὐτήν and in the Vulgate by the independent illud, but in the Peshitta it is encoded as the enclitic suffix -ܗ on the verb ܢܡܬܠܝܗ. This reflects the Syriac preference for pronominal object suffixes over free pronouns.

The Vulgate closes the second rhetorical question with a final question mark; the Greek marks the whole verse with a single closing interrogative on θῶμεν;, while the Peshitta supplies no terminal punctuation in the consonantal text.