[f] 2. The rare cases in which a simple question is introduced by אִם (as sometimes in Latin by an? is it?) are really due to the suppression of the first member of a double question; thus 1 K 1, Is 29, Jb 6, 39.
[g] (b) Disjunctive questions are, as a rule, introduced by אִם—הֲ (utrum—an?) or sometimes by וְאִם[1]—הֲ, e.g. Jo 1, Jb 21 (even with הֲ repeated after וְאִם in a question which implies disbelief, Gn 17). In Jb 34, 40 f. special emphasis is given to the first member by הַאַף prop. is it even? The second member is introduced by אוֹ or in 2 K 6, Jb 16, 38, 31 (Mal 1 אוֹ הֲ), in each case before מ, and hence no doubt for euphonic reasons, to avoid the combination אִם מ׳; cf. also Ju 18, Ec 2.
[h] Double questions with (וְאִם) אִם—הֲ need not always be mutually exclusive; frequently the disjunctive form serves (especially in poetic parallelism; but cf. also e.g. Gn 37) merely to repeat the same question in different words, and thus to express it more emphatically. So Jb 4 shall mortal man be just before God? or (אִם) shall a man be pure before his Maker? Jb 6 f., 8:3, 10:4 f., 11:2, 7, 22:3, Is 10, Jer 5. The second member may, therefore, just as well be connected by a simple וְ, e.g. Jb 13, 15 f., 38:16 f.22, 32, 39; cf. also ψ 8 after מָה; Jb 21 f. after כַּמָּה; or even without a conjunction, Jb 8, 22; after מָה ψ 144.
[i] (c) With regard to indirect questions[2] after verbs of inquiring, doubting, examining,[3] &c., simple questions of this kind take either הֲ whether, Gn 8,[4] or אִם Gn 15, 2 K 1, Ct 7; even before a noun-clause, Jer 5; in 1 S 20 the indirect question is introduced by אוֹ, i.e. probably if perchance. In disjunctives (whether—or) אִם—הֲ Nu 13 at the end (or אִם־לֹא—הֲ Gn 24, 27, 37, Ex 16), and הֲ—הֲ Nu 13, which is followed by אִם—הֲ; also אוֹ—הֲ Ec 2. The formula מִי יוֹדֵעַ אִם has an affirmative force, who knows whether... not, like the Latin nescio an, Est 4.
[k] In Jon 1, 8 the relative pronouns שֶׁ· and אֲשֶׁר owing to the following לְמִי have become also interrogative, for whose cause?
[l] (d) זֶה and הוּא (cf. § 136 c) immediately after the interrogative serve to give vividness to the question; so also אֵפוֹא (for which אֵפוֹ five times in Job) then, now, Gn 27 מִֽי־אֵפוֹא הוּא who then is he? Ju 9, Is 19, Jb 17; אַיֵּה אֵפוֹ
- ↑ וְאִם occurs in Pr 27 after a negative statement; we should, however, with Dyserinck read וְאֵין. Not less irregular is הֲלֹא instead of אִם לֹא in the second clause of Ju 14, but the text can hardly be correct (cf. Moore, Judges, New York, 1895, p. 337); in 1 S 23 the second הֲ introduces a fresh question which is only loosely connected with the first.—In Nu 17 and in the third clause of Jb 6, הַאִם is best taken with Ewald in the sense of הֲלֹא, since אִם from its use in oaths (see above, § 149 b) may simply mean verily not.
- ↑ It should here be remarked that the distinction between direct and indirect questions cannot have been recognized by the Hebrew mind to the same extent as it is in Latin or English. In Hebrew there is no difference between the two kinds of sentence, either as regards mood (as in Latin) or in tense and position of the words (as in English). Cf. also § 137 c.
- ↑ In Gn 43 the הַ after לְהַגִּיד is explained from the fact that the latter, according to the context, implies to give information upon a question.
- ↑ Also in Ec 3 we should read הַֽעֹלָה and הֲיׄרֶ֫דֶת (whether—whether) instead of the article which is assumed by the Masora.
