&c.) and לֵךְ (לְכָה, לְכִי, &c.) are exceedingly common with the sense of interjections, before verbs which express a movement or other action, e.g. קוּם הִתְהַלֵּךְ arise, walk, Gn 13, 19, 27; in the plural, Gn 19; Ex 19 לֶךְ־רֵד go, get thee down; 1 S 3; with a following cohortative, 1 S 9 לְכָה נֵלֵכָ֑ה come, let us go; Gn 31 and frequently.—Also with שׁוּב (a periphrasis for again) in the perfect, Zc 8; in the imperfect, Mi 7, ψ 7, 59, 71; in the jussive, Jb 10; in the cohortative, Gn 30; in the imperative, Jos 5, 1 S 3 lie down again; הוֹאִיל (sometimes to express the idea of willingly or gladly) in the perfect, Dt 1, Ho 5; in the imperative, Jb 6; הִרְבָּה=much, 1 S 2 אַל־תַּרְבּוּ תְדַבְּרוּ גְּבֹהָה do not multiply and talk, i.e. talk not so much arrogancy; in the imperative, ψ 51; הֵחֵל, Dt 2 הָחֵל דְשׁ begin, possess; יָכֹל, La 4 בְּלֹא יֽוּכְלוּ יִגְּעוּ, without men’s being able to touch, &c.; מִהַר=quickly, in the perfect, ψ 106; in the imperative, Gn 19, Ju 9, Est 6.—Other examples are: Ho 9 הֶֽעֱמִיק=deeply, radically; Zp 3 הִשְׁכִּים=early (even in the participle, Ho 6, 13); Is 29 שָׁפֵל=low, cf. Jer 13; Jos 3 תָּמַם=wholly; ψ 112 פִּוַּר=plentifully.
[h] Rem. This co-ordination without the copula belongs (as being more vigorous and bolder) rather to poetic or otherwise elevated style (cf. e.g. Is 52, Ho 1, 9 with Gn 25, &c.). Asyndeton, however, is not wanting even in prose; besides the above examples (especially the imperatives of קוּם and הָלַךְ Gn 30, Dt 1, 2, Jos 3, 1 S 3) cf. also Neh 3, 1 Ch 13. For special reasons the verb representing the principal idea may even come first; thus Is 53 יִרְאֶה יִשְׂבָּע he shall see, he shall be satisfied (sc. with the sight), for the satisfaction does not come until after the enjoyment of the sight; Jer 4 קִרְאוּ מַּלְאוּ cry, fill, i.e. cry with a full (loud) voice.
[a] 1. Verbs which in the active take one accusative (either of the proper object, or of the internal object, or of some other nearer definition; cf. § 117 a, p, u) may in the passive, according to our mode of expression, be construed personally, the object of the active sentence now becoming the subject, e.g. Gn 35 וַתָּ֫מָת רְחֵל וַתִּקָּבֵר and Rachel died, and was buried, &c. The passive, however, is also used impersonally (in the 3rd sing. masc.), either absolutely, as Dt 21f., Is 16, Ez 16 (with a dative added, 2 S 17, Is 53, La 5), or, more frequently, with the object of the active construction still subordinated in the accusative,[1] e.g. Gn 27 וַיֻּגַּד לְרִבְקָה אֶת־דִּבְרֵי עֵשָׂו and there were told (i.e. one told) to Rebekah the words of Esau; 2 S 21, 1 K 18.
- ↑ When this is not recognizable either by the nota accusativi, or by its disagreement with the passive form in gender, number, and person, it naturally cannot be determined whether the construction is really impersonal. The construction itself can only be explained by supposing that while using the passive form the speaker at the same time thinks of some author or authors of the action in question, just as on the theory of the Arab grammarians a concealed agent is included in every passive. This accounts for the possibility (cf. § 144 g) of using the active without a specified subject as a periphrasis for the passive.
