God and אֱלֹהִים חַי the living God. In Ju 1 גֻּלּתֹ עִלִּית and גּ׳ תַּחְתִּית are strange; Jos 15 has גּ׳ עִלִּיּוֹת and גּ׳ תַּחְתִּיּוֹת.
[z] Of the remaining examples Is 11 explains itself; the direct connexion of the attribute with its substantive is broken by the insertion of לַיָּם. In Ez 34, Hag. 1:4 (as Wellhausen says, a good instance of a Hebrew adjective in the stative form = וְהֵם סְפוּנִים), ψ 143, Ct 6 (?) the substantive is also (see above) determined by a suffix, and consequently the attribute is less closely attached; the same applies to Gn 37, 42, 43, ψ 18, except that in these passages the omission of the article before ר, א, ע may at the same time be due to considerations of euphony (as also in Jos 16 before ע, Nu 14 before ר, 28:4, Ez 10 before א, 21:19 before ח).[1] In 1 S 13 f. (אֶחָד) and 2 K 25 (שְׁנַ֫יִם after a determinate substantive), the attribute again, being a numeral, is determinate in itself (see above, x); in Is 65 the לֹא prevents the use of the article; finally, in 2 Ch 26 בְּחִצִּים and בַּֽאֲבָנִים are to be read, as in Jer 2 גֶּ֫פֶן for הַגֶּ֫פֶן, in 22:26 אֶ֫רֶץ for הָאָ׳; in 2 S 6 omit חֲדָשָׁה, and in Ez 39 omit רַבִּים. Without any apparent reason the article is omitted in Dn 8 and 11:31.
[aa] 2. When, as in Mi 7 (יוֹם הוּא in that day?), the article is omitted from both substantive and demonstrative, and in Ezr 3, the demonstrative even precedes (זֶה חַבַּ֫יִת=הַבַּ֫יִת הַזֶּה), this is obviously due in both cases to a radical corruption of the text (not only in the words quoted). In Jos 9 לַחְמֵ֫נוּ is either in apposition to the independent demonstrative זֶה (= this our bread, &c.), as in verse 13 נֹאדוֹת is to אֵ֫לֶּה, or they are complete sentences, this is our bread, &c. So also in Ex 32 משֶׁה (= that [iste] Moses, &c.), and in ψ 48 אֱלֹהִים are to be taken in apposition to זֶה. On ψ 68 and Is 23 cf. § 136 d.
[a] When a genitive, determined in any way, follows a nomen regens, it also determines the nomen regens, which, according to § 89 a, is always in the construct state. Moreover, every pronominal suffix attached to a substantive is, according to § 33 c, to be considered as a genitive determinate by nature. An independent genitive may be determinate—
(a) By its character as a proper name (according to § 125 a), e.g. דְּבַר יְהֹוָה the word of the Lord.
(b) By having the article, e.g. אִישׁ הַמִּלְחָמָה (prop. the man of the war) the soldier (but אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה Jos 17, a soldier); אַנְשֵׁי הַמִּלְחָמָה
