Mark 6 : 36

Greek and Latin use a final conjunction (ἵνα / ut) introducing the purpose clause as a separate particle, whereas the Peshitta fuses the conjunction prefix into the verb ܕܢܐܙܠܘܢ ('that they may go'); functionally equivalent but morphologically synthetic in Syriac.

Greek ἀπελθόντες and Latin euntes are aorist/present participles of motion, while the Peshitta renders the action with a finite subjunctive verb ܕܢܐܙܠܘܢ embedded in the purpose clause; this is a construction difference (participle vs. finite verb) rather than a semantic one.

Greek τοὺς κύκλῳ ἀγρούς ('the surrounding fields/regions') uses an adverb κύκλῳ attributively; the Peshitta ܠܐܓܘܪܣܐ ܕܚܕܪܝܢ employs a Greek loanword (ἀγρός > ܐܓܘܪܣܐ) with a relative clause 'that are around', while the Vulgate proximas villas substitutes the adjective 'nearby' for the encircling sense, a mild lexical and constructional divergence.

Greek and Latin specify ἄρτους / cibos as the explicit object ('loaves' / 'food') governed by the buying verb, while the Peshitta places ܠܚܡܐ ('bread') after its own verb; minor word-order and lexical nuance (ἄρτος 'bread/loaves' vs. Vulgate's generalising cibos 'foodstuffs').

The Greek τί ... γὰρ ... οὐκ ἔχουσιν and the Peshitta ܠܝܬ ܠܗܘܢ ܓܝܪ ܡܕܡ both preserve an explanatory causal clause ('for they have nothing [to eat]'), whereas the Vulgate omits this entire motivational clause and reduces it to a bare relative pronoun quos; the Latin thus drops the γάρ/ܓܝܪ rationale and the negative possession statement.

Greek φάγωσιν and Vulgate manducent are finite subjunctives ('that they may eat'), while the Peshitta ܠܡܐܟܠ uses an infinitive of purpose ('to eat'); the Latin attaches it to the relative quos ... manducent, a construction shift from the indefinite τί of the Greek.