It's questions like these that prompted me to ask about syntax theory underlying the syntax charts the other week. How does one go from a language feature like the 'attendant circumstance' participle to a syntax construction. I have not got very far yet since that question was posed though I am doing the reading. In any case I looked up the attendant circumstance participle in Wallace GGBB and found some interesting things. He defines it as having, in perhaps 90% of cases, the following characteristics :
• The tense of the participle is usually aorist.
• The tense of the main verb is usually aorist.69
• The mood of the main verb is usually imperative or indicative.70
• The participle will precede the main verb—both in word order and time of event (though usually there is a very close proximity).
• Attendant circumstance participles occur frequently in narrative literature, infrequently elsewhere.71
Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: an Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Accordance electronic ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 642.
Now, having read the text accompanying this I am wondering whether attendant circumstance (AC) is truly a syntactic definition or not. The clausal structure as it relates to AC is not discussed in Wallace so far as I can see. Wallace describes the category as overused by some and denied by others. The way he describes its identification leads me to think that a syntax search will still leave you with a bunch of weeding to do. Undeterred by all the above I pressed on.
The way I normally approach something like this is to open the syntax diagram at a few examples and see how it is presented and then derive the search from it. I suspect this is not the best approach and it's why I am trying to understand the theory. What I found was that the participle is a predicate in an adjunct clause under an overarching predicate phrase. I tried a few things and came up with this :
Due to point 5 above and simply to quicken things up a bit I constrained my range to the Gospels. I then set the scope to Chapter which is more or less required. I would like to have used Sentence or rather top level independent clause but neither are supported. I still got 1017 hits which seems an awful lot. It does contain some key examples from Wallace, and the one you are looking at, so it's not hopeless.
I hope this is of some help to you. It was very interesting to do and educational for me so I'm glad you asked about.
Sola lingua bona est lingua mortua
ἡ μόνη ἀγαθὴ γλῶσσα γλῶσσα νεκρὰ ἐστιν
lišanu ēdēnitu damqitu lišanu mītu
Accordance Configurations :
Mac : 2009 27" iMac Windows : HP 4540s laptop
Intel Core Duo Intel i5 Ivy Bridge
12GB RAM 8GB RAM
Accordance 11.0.4 Accordance 11.0.4
OSX 10.10.2 (Yosemite) Win 7 Professional x64 SP1