Latin futurum exactum, § 106 o), the imperfect denotes actions occurring contingently in the future. On טֶ֫רֶם, בְּטֶ֫רֶם, and עַד with the imperfect as a tempus historicum, cf. § 107 c.
[f] 2. Clauses introduced by עַד, עַד־כִּי or עַד־אֲשֶׁר, sometimes express a limit which is not absolute (terminating the preceding action), but only relative, beyond which the action or state described in the principal clause still continues; thus, עַד with the imperfect, ψ 110; עַד־כִּי with the perfect, Gn 26, with impf. 49:10; עַד־אֲשֶׁר with the perfect, Gn 28; with the imperfect, ψ 112.—Like the Arab. حَتَّى, עַד may even introduce a main clause; e.g. Ex 15 עַד־יַֽעֲבֹר prop. no doubt=thus it came to this—they passed through, i.e. so they passed through.
[g] 3. The infinitive construct governed by a preposition (§ 114 d, e) is very frequently used as the equivalent of a temporal clause; the infinitive with בְּ may usually be rendered by when, as, or whilst; the infinitive with כְּ by when, as soon as (in Pr 10 followed by a noun-clause introduced by wāw apodosis), or, when referring to the future, by if; the infinitive after מִן by since. According to § 111 g such statements of time are generally preceded by וַיְהִי and the apodosis follows in the imperfect consecutive; hence in 1 S 17 (cf. Driver on the passage) וְכִרְאוֹת with a simple perfect following, is unusual. On the continuation of these infinitival constructions by means of the perfect consecutive, cf. § 112 v, and in general, § 114 r.—With the participle, כְּ appears to be used as the equivalent of a conjunction in כְּמֵשִׁיב as he drew back, Gn 38 (unless we should read כְּהָשִׁיב [or כְּמוֹ הֵשִׁיב, cf. Gn 19]), and in כְפֹרַ֫חַת when it budded, 40.
[a] 1. Like most of the dependent clauses hitherto treated, the final clause may also be joined by a simple wāw copulative to the main clause, unless the final clause is directly subordinated to the governing verb.
Examples of the connexion: (α) of a final imperfect (or jussive?) with a perfect by means of וְ, La 1, see § 107 q; with an interrogative sentence, 2 S 9, 3, Jb 38; with an optative, ψ 51; with an imperative, 1 K 11; (β) of a cohortative with an imperative by וְ, Gn 29, 1 S 15, or a jussive, Neh 2 (§ 108 d); (γ) of a jussive with an imperative by וְ, Ex 9, 2 S 16, 1 K 5, ψ 59, 86; with a jussive, Jb 21, or cohortative, § 109 f, g (cf. also 2 S 24 the infinitive with לְ, Jon 1 מָה with the 1st plur. imperf., and 2 Ch 29 עִם־לְבָבִי, which are equivalent to cohortatives); (δ) of an imperative with a jussive, cohortative, or interrogative sentence by וְ, § 110 i; (ε) of a perfect consecutive after another perfect consecutive, Lv 14; after an imperfect, § 112 m and p; similarly after a jussive, § 112 q; after an imperative, § 112 r.—On negative final clauses joined by וְלֹא to the imperfect (so Ex 28, 30; and 2 S 13 after אַל־נָא with a jussive in the main clause) see the Rem. on § 109 g. In Ex 28, 39 the negative final clause is simply connected by לֹא.—On the use of an historical statement after verbs of command-
- ↑ Cf. H. G. T. Mitchell, Final Constructions of Biblical Hebrew, Leipzig, 1879.
