The first phenomenon to be considered here is that of Mark's ‘duplicate expressions’. Although the results of the analysis will be largely inconclusive, they will nevertheless have some importance, since some have argued that the phenomenon is not easily explicable on the 2DH, whereas it does receive an easy explanation on the GH. However, it must first be made clear precisely what is being discussed.

The phenomenon of pleonasm in Mark has long been recognised as a feature of Mark's style, although this is usually investigated on the initial assumption of Markan priority. With the contemporary revival of the GH, the possibility is raised that the duplicate expressions are the result of Mark's conflating his sources. However, the two issues, of whether Mark's text is pleonastic, and whether it can be viewed as the result of conflating sources, should not be confused. The possibility of conflation arises where Mark has an expression A + B, where Matthew has A and Luke has B. The possibility of pleonasm arises where Mark has A + B, and where A and B are virtually synonymous. What requires investigation is how far these two areas overlap, i.e. how far examples of Mark's pleonastic text could be explained as a result of Mark's conflating two sources, Matthew and Luke. (This, however, does not preclude the possibility of there being non-pleonastic examples of apparent conflation, i.e. cases where Matthew has A, Luke has B, Mark has A + B, but where A and B are not synonymous.)