| Suffixes of Plulral Nouns. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Singular. | Plural. | ||
| 1. c. my. | ־ַי, pause ־ָי | 1. c. our. | ־ֵ֫ ינוּ |
| 2. m. thy. | ־ֶ֫ יךָ | 2. m. your. | ־ֵיכֶם |
| f. | ־ַ֫ יִךְ pause ־ָ֫ יִךְ | f. | ־ֵיכֶן |
| 3. m. his. | ־ָיו, poet. ־ֵ֫ יהוּ | 3. m. their. | ־ֵיהֶם, poet. ־ֵ֫ ימוֹ |
| f. her. | ־ֶ֫ יהָ | f. | ־ֵיהֶן |
[i] Thus the original ־ַי is (a) contracted in the 3rd sing. masc. ־ֵ֫ יהוּ and throughout the plural, as סוּסֵ֫יהוּ, סוּסֵ֫ינוּ, &c.; (b) retained unchanged in the 1st sing. סוּסַי, the real suffix-ending י (see b) being united with the final Yôdh of the ending ־ַי; and in the 2nd fem. sing. סוּסַ֫יִךְ, with a helping-Ḥireq after the Yôdh. On the other hand (c) the Yôdh of ־ַי is lost in pronunciation and the ă lengthened to ā in the 3rd masc. sing. סוּסָיו, i.e. sûsāw (pronounced susā-u).[1] The 2nd masc. sing. סוּםֶ֫יךָ and the 3rd fem. sing. סוּסֶ֫יהָ were formerly also explained here as having really lost the י, and modified the a of sûsakā, sûsahā to Seghôl; but cf. the view now given in g and k.
[k] Rem. 1. As סוּסֵ֫ינוּ represents sûsai-nû, so סוּסֶ֫יךָ and סוּסֶ֫יהָ represent sûsai-kā, sûsai-hā, and the use of Seghôl instead of the more regular Ṣere is to be explained from the character of the following syllable,—so P. Haupt who points to יִקְטְלֶ֫הָ as compared with יִקְטְלֵ֫הוּ. In support of the view formerly adopted by us that the י is only orthographically retained, too much stress must not be laid on the fact that it is sometimes omitted,[2] thereby causing confusion in an unpointed text with the singular noun. A number of the examples which follow may be due to an erroneous assumption that the noun is a plural, where in reality it is a singular, and others may be incorrect readings. Cf. דְרָכֶ֫ךָ thy ways (probably דַּרְכְּךָ is intended), Ex 33, Jos 1, ψ 119; for other examples, see Jos 21 ff. (מִגְרָשֶׁ֫הָ; but in 1 Ch 6 ff. always ־ֶ֫ יהָ), Ju 19, 1 K 8, Is 58, ψ 119 (probably, however, in all these cases the sing. is intended); אֱסָרֶ֫הָ Nu 30 (cf. v. 5); מַכֹּתֶ֫הָ Jer 19, 49; מְבִיאֶ֫ה Dn 11. For the orthographic omission of י before suffixes cf. רֵעִ֫הוּ for רֵעֵ֫יהוּ his friends 1 S 30, Pr 29; Jb 42 (but it is possible to explain it here as a collective singular); עֲוֹנֵ֫נוּ our iniquities, Is 64, Jer 14; Ex 10, Neh 10 (לְוִיֵּ֫נוּ from לְוִיִּם which is always written defectively); נִסְכֵּכֶם Nu 29; רָעֹֽתֵכֶם Jer 44; יְדֵכֶם ψ 134; לְמִֽינֵהֶם after their kinds, Gn 1 (but see c), cf. 4 and Na 2. The
- ↑ In the papyrus of the decalogue from the Fayyûm, line 16, ויקדשיו occurs for ויקדשהו Ex 20. Gall, ZAW. 1903, p. 349, takes this as an indication that the traditional forms of the noun-suffix יו or ו represent aiŭ or eŭ. P. Haupt aptly compares the Greek use of the iota subscript (ᾷ).
- ↑ So in the Mêša‛ inscription, l. 22 מגדלתה its towers (along with שעריה its gates). Can it have been the rule to omit י after the termination ôth? Cf. below, n.
