[u] 4. We must mention as a special class those noun-clauses which occur at the beginning of a period, and are intended to lay stress upon the fact that the first action still continues on the occurrence of the second (always introduced by וְ); e.g. Jb 1 f. עוֹד זֶה מְדַבֵּר וְזֶה בָא he was yet speaking, and (=when) another came, &c.[1]; cf. Gn 29, 1 S 9, 20, 1 K 14 she was entering the threshold of the house, when the child died; 2 K 2, 4, Dn 9 f.; also in Ju 19, 1 S 9, 17, 1 K 1, Jb 1 f., in all which passages the apodosis is introduced by וְהִנֵּה.—On the other hand, in 1 K 1 the noun-clause itself is introduced by הִנֵּה (as in verse 22 by וְהִנֵּה), and denotes an action only just impending.[2] Finally, when the whole sentence is introduced by means of וַיְהִי (cf. § 111 g), and the apodosis by וְהִנֵּה, Gn 42, 2 K 2, 13; without הִנֵּה in the apodosis, 1 S 7, 2 K 19 (Is 37).
[v] Participles active, which are used in the sense of the perfect participle, and also participles passive, in accordance with their meaning, express in such noun-clauses a state still continuing on the occurrence of the principal action, e.g. Gn 38 הִוא מוּצֵאת וְהִיא שָֽׁלְחָה she was being brought forth, when she sent, &c.; cf. Gn 50. [See further in Driver, Tenses, §§ 166–169.]
[w] 5. Different from the examples treated in u and v are the instances in which a participle (either alone or as the attribute of a noun) stands at the beginning of the sentence as a casus pendens (or as the subject of a compound noun-clause, see § 143 c) to indicate a condition, the contingent occurrence of which involves a further consequence; e.g. Gn 9 שֹׁפֵךְ דַּם הָֽאָדָם בָּֽאָדָם דָּמוֹ יִשָּׁפֵךְ shedding man’s blood, i.e. if any one sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed; Ex 21, ψ 75, Pr 17, Jb 41; so especially if כָּל־ every precedes the participle, Gn 4, 1 S 3 (2 K 21), 2 S 5 (whosoever smiteth), 1 Ch 11. The apodosis is very often introduced by וְ (wāw apodosis), e.g. Ex 12 (with a following perfect consecutive), Nu 35; 1 S 2 הַכֹּהֵן כָּל־אִישׁ זֹבֵחַ זֶ֫בַה וּבָא נַ֫עַר when any man offered sacrifice, the priest’s servant came, &c.; 2 S 14 (participle with article); 22:41 (where, however, the text is to be emended in accordance with ψ 18); 2 S 23 f., Pr 23 Keth.; 29:9.—As in the instances discussed under u, such sentences are sometimes preceded by וַיְהִי, cf. 1 S 10, 11, 2 S 2 וַיְהִי כָּל־הַבָּא and it came to pass, that as many as came, &c. [or by וְהָיְה, frequentative, Ju 19].—On the other hand, וְהַנִּשְׁבֶּ֫רֶת Dn 8 is a mere catchword (equivalent to and as for that which was broken) to call to mind the contents of verse 8.
6. On the use of the participle after the infinitive absolute הָלוֹךְ cf. § 113 u.
[x] 7. Almost as a rule the participial construction beginning a sentence (like the infinitival constructions according to § 114 r) is continued by means of a finite verb with or without וְ, before which the English construction requires us to supply the relative pronoun implied in the participle; thus,
- ↑ The independent noun-clause here lays stress upon the simultaneous occurrence (and consequently the overlapping) of the events far more forcibly than could be done by a subordinate expression of time (as e.g. וַיְהִי בְדַבְּרוֹ). In English it may be represented by scarcely had he finished speaking when. ... As the above examples show, the apodosis also frequently consists of a noun-clause.
- ↑ At the same time the preceding עוֹד still shows that what is announced is not merely a future event, but a future event contemporaneous with something else; the case thus entirely differs from the examples given in § 112 t, where הִנֵּה refers to the following participle, while here it belongs properlyto the apodosis, before which it is therefore generally placed; see the examples.
