Mark 3 : 27

The Greek opens with the adversative conjunction ἀλλά ('but'), marking a contrast with the preceding logion. Neither the Vulgate (which begins flatly with Nemo) nor the Peshitta (beginning ܠܐ ܐܢܫ) renders this connective particle, smoothing the transition.

Greek expresses the negation analytically with οὐ … οὐδείς ('not … no one'), a double-negative reinforcement. Both Latin Nemo and Syriac ܠܐ ܐܢܫ collapse this into a single negated indefinite pronoun ('no one'), a more economical idiom.

Greek uses the aorist participle εἰσελθών ('having entered'), matched by the Latin participle ingressus; the Peshitta instead employs a finite subordinate verb ܕܢܥܘܠ ('that he may enter'), recasting the participial phrase as a relative/purpose clause typical of Syriac syntax.

Greek and Latin both supply the prepositional phrase 'into the house of the strong man' (εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν τοῦ ἰσχυροῦ / in domum fortis), though the Vulgate fronts vasa fortis and displaces the genitive. The Peshitta compresses 'house of the strong one' into the bound construction ܠܒܝܬ ܚܣܝܢܐ without a separate genitive marker.

Greek τὰ σκεύη αὐτοῦ ('his goods/vessels') carries an explicit possessive pronoun, mirrored by Syriac ܡܐܢܘܗܝ (with pronominal suffix '-his') and prefaced by the conjunction ܘ ('and'). The Vulgate vasa omits the possessive entirely, leaving it implicit.

Greek and Latin render the act of plundering with an infinitive (διαρπάσαι / diripere) dependent on the verb of ability. The Peshitta uses a finite verb ܘܢܚܛܘܦ ('and he should seize'), coordinated rather than subordinated, again converting the Greek infinitive into a paratactic finite clause.

Greek and Latin repeat the same verb of plundering used earlier (διαρπάσει / diripiet, from διαρπάζω). The Peshitta varies its vocabulary, using ܢܒܘܙ (root b-w-z, 'to spoil/despoil') here rather than the ܚܛܦ ('seize') employed for the first instance, introducing lexical variation absent in the Greek and Latin.