Nymphas or Nympha?]
The singular, whether αὐτοῦ or αὐτῆς, is the reading of the old Latin and Vulgate, which have ejus, and of the Armenian. The pronoun is also singular in the Peshito and Harclean Syriac. In this language the same consonants express masculine and feminine alike, the difference lying in the pointing and vocalisation. And here the copies are inconsistent with themselves. |The Syriac versions.|In the Peshito (both the editio princeps and Schaaf) the proper name is vocalised as a feminine Numphē (= Νύμφη), and yet ܒܒܝܬܗ
is treated as having a masculine affix κατ’ οἶκον αὐτοῦ. In the text of the Harclean ܕܝܠܗܿ
is pointed thus, as a feminine αὐτῆς; while the margin gives the alternative reading ܕܝܠܗ
(without the point) = αὐτοῦ. The name itself is written Nympha, which according to the transliteration of this version might stand either for a masculine (as Barnaba, Luka, in the context, for Βαρναβας, Λουκᾶς) or for a feminine (since Demas, Epaphras, are written with an s)[[539]]. |The Latin authorities.|The Latin ejus leaving the gender undetermined, the Latin commentators were free to take either Nymphas or Nympha; and, as Nympha was common Latin form of Νύμφη, they would naturally adopt the female name. So the commentator Hilary distinctly.
It should be added that the word is accentuated as a masculine νυμφᾶν in Dc L P, and as a feminine νύμφαν in Bc and Euthalius (Tischendorf’s MS.).