User:Ubufox/10
or longer duration, were terminated in the past, and hence are finally concluded, viz.:
(a) Corresponding to the perfect proper in Latin and the English perfect definite, in assertions, negations, confirmations, interrogations, &c., e.g. Gn 18 then Sarah denied, saying, I laughed not (לֹא צָחַ֫קְתִּי)......; and he said, Nay, but thou didst laugh (צָחָקְתְּ); Gn 3 מִי הִגִּיד לְךָ who told thee....? Cf. 3. Also pointing to some undefined time in the past, e.g. Is 66 מִֽי־שָׁמַע כָּזֹאת who hath (ever yet) heard such a thing?
c Rem. In opposition to this express use of the perfect to emphasize the completion of an event, the imperfect is not infrequently used to emphasize that which is still future, e.g. Jos 1 as I was (הָיִיתִי) with Moses, so will I be (אֶֽהְיֶה) with thee; Jos 1, Ex 10, Dt 32, 1 K 2, Is 46, Jo 2, Ec 1.
d (b) As a simple tempus historicum (corresponding to the Greek aorist) in narrating past events, e.g. Gn 4 and Abel, he also brought (הֵבִיא), &c.; Gn 7 the waters did prevail (גָּֽבְרוּ), &c.; Jb 1 there was a man (אִישׁ הָיָה) in the land of Uz, &c.; even in relating repeated actions, 1 S 18.
e Rem. As the above examples indicate, the perfect of narration occurs especially at the head of an entire narrative (Jb 1; cf. Dn 2) or an independent sentence (e.g. Gn 7), but in co-ordinate sentences, as a rule, only when the verb is separated from the copulative ו by one or more words (cf. above Gn 4 and 7). In other cases, the narrative is continued in the imperfect consecutive, according to § 111 a. The direct connexion of the narrative perfect with ו copulative (not to be confounded with the perfect consecutive proper, § 112) agrees rather with Aramaic syntax (cf. Kautzsch, Gramm. des Biblisch-Aram., § 71, 1 b). On the examples (which are in many respects doubtful) in the earlier texts, see § 112 pp–uu.
f (c) To represent actions, &c., which were already completed in the past, at the time when other actions or conditions took place (pluperfect),[1] e.g. 1 S 28 now Samuel was (long since) dead[2]... and Saul had put away (הֵסִיר) those that had familiar spirits... out of the land. Both these statements, being as it were in parentheses, merely assign a reason for the narrative beginning at verse 6. Cf. 1 S 9, 25, 2 S 18.—Gn 20 (for the Lord had fast closed up, &c.); 27, 31, Dt 2; and in a negative statement, Gn 2 for the Lord God had not (up to that time) caused it to rain, &c. This is especially frequent, from the nature of the case, in relative, causal, and temporal clauses, when the main clause contains a tense referring to the past, e.g. Gn 2 and he rested... from all his work which he had made (עָשָׂה); Gn 7,
19:27, &c.; 29:10 now when Jacob had seen Rachel (בַּֽאֲשֶׁר רָאָה)..., Jacob went near, &c.; so also in clauses which express the completion or incompleteness of one action, &c., on the occurrence of another, as in Gn 24, 27, &c.; cf. § 164 b, with the note, and c.
g 2. To represent actions, events, or states, which, although completed in the past, nevertheless extend their influence into the present (in English generally rendered by the present):
(a) Expressing facts which were accomplished long before, or conditions and attributes which were acquired long before, but of which the effects still remain in the present (present perfect), e.g. ψ 10 הִסְתִּיר פָּנָיו he hath hidden his face (and still keeps it hidden); ψ 143 פֵּרַ֫שְׂתִּי I have spread forth my hands (and still keep them spread forth). This applies particularly to a large number of perfects (almost exclusively of intransitive[3] verbs, denoting affections or states of the mind) which in English can be rendered only by the present, or, in the case mentioned above under f, by the imperfect.[4] Thus, יָדַ֫עְתִּי I know (prop. I have perceived, have experienced) Jb 9, 10, לֹא יָדַ֫עְתִּי I know not Gn 4, &c.; on the other hand, e.g. in Gn 28, Nu 22, the context requires I knew not; זָכַ֫רְנוּ we remember Nu 11; מֵֽאֲנָה she refuseth Jb 6; עָלַץ it exulteth; שָׂמַ֫חְתִּי I rejoice 1 S 2; בִּקֵּשׁ he requireth Is 1; קִוִּ֫יתִי I wait Gn 49, ψ 130 (parallel with הוֹחָֽ֫לְתִּי); חָפַ֫צְתִּי I delight ψ 40 (mostly negative, Is 1, &c.); אָהַ֫בְתִּי I love Gn 27; שָׂנֵ֫אתִי I hate ψ 31; מָאַ֫סְתִּי I despise Am 5; תִּֽעֲב֫וּנִי they abhor me Jb 30; בָּטַ֫חְתִּי I trust ψ 25; חָסִ֫יתִי I put my trust ψ 31; צָדַ֫קְתִּי I am righteous Jb 34; פָּקַ֫דְתִּי I have decided to requite 1 S 15.—We may further include a number of verbs which express bodily characteristics or states, such as גָּדַ֫לְתָּ thou art great ψ 104; קָטֹ֫נְתִּי I am little Gn 32; גָּֽבְהוּ they are high Is 55; רָֽחֲקוּ they stand aloof Jb 30; טֹ֫בוּ they are goodly Nu 24; נָאווּ they are beautiful Is 52; זָקַ֫נְתִּי I am old Gn 18; יָגַ֫עְתִּי I am weary ψ 6; שָׂבַ֫עְתִּי I am full Is 1, &c.
h Rem. To the same category probably belong also the perfects after עַד־מָתַי Ex 10 how long hast thou already been refusing (and refusest still...? which really amounts to how long wilt thou refuse?), ψ 80, Pr 1 (co-ordinate with the imperf.), and after עַד־אָ֫נָה Ex 16, Hb 1.
i (b) In direct narration to express actions which, although really only in process of accomplishment, are nevertheless meant to be repre- sented as already accomplished in the conception of the speaker, e.g. הֲרִמֹ֫תִי I lift up (my hand in ratifying an oath) Gn 14; נִשְׁבַּ֫עְתִּי I swear Jer 22; הַֽעִדֹ֫תִי I testify Dt 8; יָעַ֫צְתִּי I counsel 2 S 17 (but in a different context in ver. 15, I have counselled); אָמַ֫רְתִּי (prop. I say) I decide (I consider as hereby settled) 2 S 19; I declare Jb 9, 32.
k (c) To express facts which have formerly taken place, and are still of constant recurrence, and hence are matters of common experience (the Greek gnomic aorist), e.g. ψ 9 for thou, Lord, hast not forsaken (לֹא־עָזַ֫בְתָּ) them that seek thee. Cf. ver. 13, also ψ 10, 119 and Gn 49 (כִּבֵּס).
l Rem. In almost all the cases discussed in No. 2 (included under the English present) the imperfect can be used instead of the perfect, wherever the action or state in question is regarded, not as already completed, but as still continuing or just taking place (see § 107 a). Thus, לֹא יָכֹ֫לְתִּי I am not able ψ 40 and לֹא אוּכַל Gn 31 have practically the same meaning. Hence also it very frequently happens that the imperfect corresponds to such perfects in poetic or prophetic parallelism, e.g. Is 5, ψ 2 f., Pr 1, Jb 3.
m 3. To express future actions, when the speaker intends by an express assurance to represent them as finished, or as equivalent to accomplished facts:
(a) In contracts or other express stipulations (again corresponding to the English present, and therefore closely related to the instances noted under i), e.g. Gn 23 the field I give (נָתַ֫תִּי) thee; cf.ver. 13 and 48, 2 S 14, 24, Jer 40; in a threat, 1 S 2, 2 S 5 (unless, with Wellhausen, יְסִירֻ֫ךָ is to be read).—Especially in promises made by God, Gn 1, 15, 17, Ju 1.
n (b) To express facts which are undoubtedly imminent, and, therefore, in the imagination of the speaker, already accomplished (perfectum confidentiae), e.g. Nu 17 הֵן גָּוַ֫עְנוּ אָבַ֫דְנוּ כֻּלָּ֫נוּ אָבָֽ֫דְנוּ behold, we perish, we are undone, we are all undone. Gn 30, Is 6 (נִדְמֵ֫יתִי I am undone[5]), Pr 4. Even in interrogative sentences, Gn 18, Nu 17, 23, Ju 9, Zc 4 (?), Pr 22.[6] This use of the perfect occurs most frequently in prophetic language (perfectum propheticum). The prophet so trans- ports himself in imagination into the future that he describes the future event as if it had been already seen or heard by him, e.g. Is 5 therefore my people are gone into captivity (גָּלָה); 9 ff., 10, 11 (after כִּי, as frequently elsewhere); 19, Jb 5, 2 Ch 20. Not infrequently the imperfect interchanges with such perfects either in the parallel member or further on in the narrative.
o (c) To express actions or facts, which are meant to be indicated as existing in the future in a completed state (futurum exactum), e.g. Is 4 אִם רָחַץ when he has washed away=when he shall have washed away (an imperfect follows in the co-ordinate sentence; cf. the conditional sentences in § 107 x); Is 6 (after עַד אֲשֶׁר אִם, as in Gn 28, Nu 32; also 2 S 17 after עַד אֲשֶׁד, Gn 24 after עַד אִם and elsewhere frequently after temporal conjunctions); Mi 5 (יָלָ֑דָה); Gn 43 וַֽאֲנִי כַּֽאֲשֶׁר שָׁכֹ֫לְתִּי שָׁכָֽלְתִּי and I—if I am bereaved (orbus fuero), I am bereaved, an expression of despairing resignation. Cf. Pr 23, Est 4.
p 4. To express actions and facts, whose accomplishment in the past is to be represented, not as actual, but only as possible (generally corresponding to the Latin imperfect or pluperfect subjunctive), e.g. Gn 31 except the God of my father... had been with me, surely now hadst thou sent me away empty (שִׁלַּחְתָּ֑נִי); Gn 43, Ex 9 (שָׁלַ֫חְתִּי I had almost put forth, &c.); Nu 22, Ju 13, 14, 1 S 13 (הֵכִּין); 2 K 13; so frequently after כִּמְעַט easily, almost, Gn 26, Is 1 (where כִּמְעַט is probably to be connected with the word after it), ψ 73, 94, 119, Pr 5. Cf. also Jb 3, 23 (בְּחָנַ֫נִי), Ru 1 (if I should think, &c.; cf. 2 K 7); in the apodosis of a conditional sentence, 1 S 25.—So also to express an unfulfilled desire, Nu 14 לוּ מַ֫תְנוּ would that we had died...! (לוּ with the imperfect would mean would that we might die! 1 S 14). Finally, also in a question indicating astonishment, Gn 21 מִי מִלֵּל who would have said...? quis dixerit? ψ 73.
a The imperfect, as opposed to the perfect, represents actions, events, or states which are regarded by the speaker at any moment as still continuing, or in process of accomplishment, or even as just taking place. In the last case, its occurrence may be represented as certainly imminent, or merely as conceived in the mind of the speaker, or simply as desired, and therefore only contingent (the modal use of the imperfect). Knudtzon (see above, Rem. on § 106 a), comparing the Ass.-Bab. usage, would prefer the term present rather than imperfect, on the ground that the tense expresses what is either actually or mentally present. In any case, the essential difference between the perfect and imperfect consists, he argues, in this, that the perfect simply indicates what is actually complete, while the imperfect places the action, &c., in a more direct relation to the judgement or feeling of the speaker.
More precisely the imperfect serves—
1. In the sphere of past time:
b (a) To express actions, &c., which continued throughout a longer or shorter period,[8] e.g. Gn 2 a mist went up continually (יַֽעֲלֶה), 2:25, 37:7, 48:10, Ex 1, 8, 13, 15, 12, 14, 15, Nu 9 f. 20 f., 23 7, Ju 2, 5, 1 S 3, 13 f., 2 S 2, 23, 1 K 3, 21, Is 1, 6 (יִמָּלֵא), 17:10 f., 51:2 x, Jer 13, 36, ψ 18, 14, 17 ff.38 ff., 24:2, 32:4, 5 (אוֹדִֽיעֲךָ), 47:5, 68:10, 12, 104:6 ff., 106:19, 107:18, 29, 139:13, Jb 3, 4, 15 f., 10:10 f., 15:7 f.—very frequently alternating with a perfect (especially with a frequentative perfect; cf. Nu 9–23 and § 112 e), or when the narration is continued by means of an imperfect consecutive.[9]
c Rem. 1. The imperfect is frequently used in this way after the particles אָז then, טֶ֫רֶם not yet, בְּטֶ֫רֶם before, עַד־ until, e.g. Ex 15 אָז יָשִֽׁיר־משֶׁה then sang Moses, &c.; Nu 21, Dt 4, Jos 10, 1 K 3, 8, ψ 126, Jb 38. (The perfect is used after אָז when stress is to be laid on the fact that the action has really taken place, and not upon its gradual accomplishment or duration in the past, e.g. Gn 4 אָז הוּחַל then began, &c.; Gn 49, Ex 15, Jos 22, Ju 5, ψ 89.)[10] After טֶ֫רֶם e.g. Gn 19 טֶ֫רֶם יִשְׁכָּ֫בוּ before they lay down; Gn 2, 24, 1 S 3, 7, always in the sense of our pluperfect. (In Gn 24 instead of the perf. כִּלָּה, the imperf. should be read, as in verse 45; so also in 1 S 3 [יִגָּלֶה] an imperf. is co-ordinated with ידע). After בְּטֶ֫רֶם (sometimes also simply טֶ֫רֶם Ex 12, Jos 3), e.g. Jer 1 בְּטֶ֫רֶם תֵּצֵא before thou camest forth; Gn 27, 37, 41, Ru 3 (perhaps also in ψ 90 an imperf. was intended instead of יֻלָּ֫דוּ; cf. Wellhausen on 2 S 3; but note also Pr 8, in a similar context, before the mountains were settled, הָטְכָּ֑עוּ, the predicate being separated from בְּטֶ֫רֶם, by הָרִים, as in ψ 90). After עַד־ Jos 10, ψ 73 (until I went), 2 Ch 29; on the other hand, with the perf., e.g. Jos 2. As after אָז, so also after טֶ֫רֶם, בְּטֶ֫רֶם, and עַד־ the imperf. may be used, according to the context, in the sense of our future, e.g. 2 K 2, Is 65, Jb 10; after עַד־ e.g. Is 22. The imperf. is used in the sense of our present after טֶ֫רֶם in Ex 9, 10.
d 2. Driver (Tenses3, p. 35 f.) rightly lays stress upon the inherent distinction between the participle as expressing mere duration, and the imperfect as expressing progressive duration (in the present, past, or future). Thus the words וְנָהָר יׂצֵא Gn 2 represent the river of Paradise as going out of Eden in a continuous, uninterrupted stream, but יִפָּרֵד, which immediately follows, describes how the parting of its waters is always taking place afresh. In the same way יַֽעֲלֶה Gn 2 represents new mists as constantly arising, and יִמָלֵא Is 6 new clouds of smoke. Also those actions, &c., which might be regarded in themselves as single or even momentary, are, as it were, broken up by the imperfect into their component parts, and so pictured as gradually completing themselves. Hence תִּבְלָעֵ֫מוֹ Ex 15 (after a perf. as in verse 14) represents the Egyptians, in a vivid, poetic description, as being swallowed up one after another, and יַבְחֵ֫נִי Nu 23 the leading on by stages, &c.
e (b) To express actions, &c., which were repeated in the past, either at fixed intervals or occasionally (the modus rei repetitae), e.g. Jb 1 thus did (יַֽעֲשֶׂה) Job continually (after each occasion of his sons’ festivities); 4:3 f., 22:6 f., 23:11, 29:7, 9, 12 f., Gn 6, 29, 30, 42, 39 (I used to bear the loss of it), Ex 1, 19, 33 ff. (יִקַּח used to take every time), 40:36 ff., Nu 9 f. 20 ff., 11:5, 9, Ju 6, 14, 21, 1 S 1, 2, 9, 13, 18, 27, 2 S 1, 12, 13, 1 K 5 (of tribute repeated year by year), 10:5, 13:33, 14:28, 2 K 4, 8, 13, 25, Jer 36, ψ 42, 44, 78, 103, Est 2; even in a negative dependent clause, 1 K 18.
f 2. In the sphere of present time, again
(a) To express actions, events, or states, which are continued for a shorter or longer time,[11] e.g. Gn 37 מַה־תְּבַקֵּשׁ what seekest thou? 19:19 לֹא־אוּכַל I cannot; 24:50, 31:35, Is 1. Other examples are Gn 2, 24, 1 S 1, 11, 1 K 3, ψ 2, and in the prophetic formula יֹאמַר יְהֹוָה saith the Lord, Is 1, &c., cf. 40. So especially to express facts known by experience, which occur at all times, and consequently hold good at any moment, e.g. Pr 15 a wise son maketh a glad father; hence especially frequent in Job and Proverbs. In an interrogative sentence, e.g. Jb 4 is mortal man just before God? In a negative sentence, Jb 4, &c.
g (b) To express actions, &c., which may be repeated at any time, including therefore the present, or are customarily repeated on a given occasion (cf. above, e), e.g. Dt 1 as bees do (are accustomed to do); Gn 6, 32, 43, Ju 11, 1 S 2, 5, 20, 2 S 15, Is 1, 3, ψ 1. So again (see f) especially to express facts known by experience which may at any time come into effect again, e.g. Ex 23 a gift blindeth (יְעַוֵּר), &c.; Gn 2, 22, Is 32, Am 3, Mal 1, Jb 2, &c. Of the same kind also is the imperfect in such relative clauses (see § 155), as Gn 49 Benjamin is זְאֵב יִטְרָף a wolf that ravineth (properly, is accustomed to ravin). Finally, compare also the formulae יֵֽאָמֵר it is (wont to be) said (to introduce proverbial expressions) Gn 10, 22, &c.; לֹא־יֵֽעָשֶׂה כֵן it is not (wont to be) so done (and hence may not, shall not be, see u), Gn 29, 20, 34, 2 S 13.
h (c) To express actions, &c., which although, strictly speaking, they are already finished, are regarded as still lasting on into the present time, or continuing to operate in it, e.g. Gn 32 wherefore is it that thou dost ask (תִּשְׁאַל) after my name? 24, 44, Ex 5, 2 S 16. In such cases, naturally, the perfect is also admissible, and is sometimes found in the same formula as the imperfect, e.g. Jb 1 (2) מֵאַ֫יִן תָּבֹא whence comest thou (just now)? but Gn 16 (cf. 42) אֵֽי־מִזֶּה בָאתְ whence camest thou? The imperfect represents the coming as still in its last stage, whereas the perfect represents it as an accomplished fact.
i 3. In the sphere of future time. To express actions, &c., which are to be represented as about to take place, and as continuing a shorter or longer time in the future, or as being repeated; thus:
(a) From the standpoint of the speaker’s present time, e.g. Ex 4 they will not believe (יַֽאֲמִ֫ינוּ) me, nor hearken (יִשְׁמְעוּ) unto my voice: for they will say (יֹֽאמְרוּ), &c., 6, 9, &c.
k (b) In dependent clauses to represent actions, &c., which from some point of time in the past are to be represented as future, e.g. Gn 43 could we in any wise know that he would say (יֹאמַר)? 2, 43, Ex 2, 2 K 3 אֲשֶׁר־יִמְלֹךְ qui regnaturus erat; 13, Jon 4, Jb 3, Ec 2, ψ 78 that the generation to come might know, בָּנִים יִוָּ֫לֵדוּ the children which should be born (qui nascituri essent; the imperfect here with the collateral idea of the occurrence being repeated in the future).
l (c) To represent a futurum exactum; cf. Is 4, 6 (co-ordinated with a perfect used in the same sense, see § 106 o); so also sometimes after the temporal particles עַד, ψ 132, and עַד אֲשֶׁר until, Gn 29, Nu 20, &c.
m 4. Finally to the sphere of future time belong also those cases in which the (modal) imperfect serves to express actions, events, or states, the occurrence of which is to be represented as willed (or not willed), or as in some way conditional, and consequently only contingent. More particularly such imperfects serve—
n (a) As an expression of will, whether it be a definite intention and arrangement, or a simple desire, viz.:
(1) Sometimes in positive sentences in place of the cohortative (cf. e.g. ψ 59 with verse 18; 2 S 22 with ψ 18; Ju 19, &c.), of the imperative (Is 18), or of the jussive (which, however, in most cases, does not differ from the ordinary form of the imperfect), e.g. תֵּֽרָאֶה let it appear Gn 1, 41, Lv 19, 3, 2 S 10 (and so frequently in verbs ל״ה; cf. § 109 a, note 2); Zc 9 (תָּחִיל); ψ 61 (תּוֹסִיף); Pr 22 (תָּשִׁית); 23, Jb 6 (co-ordinated with the imperative), 10 Keth.; so probably also יָדִין let him judge! ψ 72.—So also in the 1st pers., to express a wish which is asserted subsequently with reference to a fixed point of time in the past, e.g. Jb 10 אֶגְּוַע I ought to [not should as A.V., R.V.] have, (then, immediately after being born) given up the ghost; cf. verse 19 אֶֽהְיֶה and אוּבָֽל Lv 10, Nu 35. Even to express an obligation or necessity according to the judgement of another person, e.g. Jb 9 אֶרְשָׁע I am to be guilty, 12. Cp. Jb 9, 19; in a question, ψ 42, 43.
o (2) To express the definite expectation that something will not happen. The imperfect with לֹא represents a more emphatic form of prohibition than the jussive[12] with אַל־ (cf. § 109 c), and corresponds to our thou shalt not do it! with the strongest expectation of obedience, while אַל־ with the jussive is rather a simple warning, do not that! Thus לֹא with the imperfect is especially used in enforcing the divine commands, e.g. לֹא תִגְּנׄב thou shalt not steal Ex 20; cf. verses 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 ff. So לֹא with the 3rd pers. perhaps in Pr 16.
p Rem. The jussive, which is to be expected after אַל־, does not, as a rule (according to n, and § 109 a, note 2), differ in form from the simple imperfect. That many supposed jussives are intended as simple imperfects is possible from the occurrence after אַל־ of what are undoubtedly imperfect forms, not only from verbs ל״ה (cf. § 109 a, note 2), but also from verbs ע״וּ, to express a prohibition or negative wish, אַל־תַּבִּיט Gn 19, אַל־תָּסוּר Jos 1, אַל־נָא יַשִׂים 1 S 25. Even with the 1st pers. plur. (after an imperative) וְאַל־נָמוּת that we die not, 1 S 12. Also to express the conviction that something cannot happen, אַל־יָנוּם he will not slumber,[13] ψ 121; cf. Jer 46, 2 Ch 14. q (3) In dependent clauses after final conjunctions (§ 165 b), as אֲשֶׁר, Gn 11 (אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִשְׁמְעוּ that they may not understand); בַּֽעֲבוּר Gn 21, 27, 19, Ex 9, &c.; לְמַ֫עַן אֲשֶׁר Nu 17; לְמַ֫עַן Dt 4, ψ 51, 78, and אֲשֶׁר יַעַ֫ן[14] Ez 12, in order that[15]; לְבִלְתִּי that... not, Ex 20, 2 S 14; also after פֶּן־ that not, lest, Gn 3, 11, 19, &c.[16]; cf. also the instances introduced by וְלֹא in § 109 g.—In Lv 9 such an imperfect (or jussive? see the examples in § 109 f) is added to the expression of the command by an asyndeton, and in La 1 to the principal clause simply by וְ: while they sought them food וְיָשִׁ֫יבוּ אֶת־נַפְשָׁם to refresh their souls (cf. also La 3, it is good and let him hope, i.e. that he should hope); so after an interrogative clause, Ex 2. Finally also in a relative clause, ψ 32 בְּדֶ֫רֶךְ־זוּ תֵלֵךְ in the way which thou shouldst go.
r (b) To express actions, &c., which are to be represented as possibly taking place or not taking place (sometimes corresponding to the potential of the classical languages, as also to our periphrases with can, may, should[17]). More particularly such imperfects are used—
s (1) In a permissive sense, e.g. Gn 2 of every tree of the garden (אָכֹל תֹּאכֵל) thou mayest freely eat (the opposite in verse ); 3, 42, Lv 21, 22, Jb 21. In the 1st pers. ψ 5, 22 (I may, or can, tell); in a negative sentence, e.g. ψ 5.
t (2) In interrogative sentences, e.g. Pr 20 מִֽי־יֹאמַר quis dixerit? Cf. Gn 17, 18, 31, 1 S 11, 2 K 5 הֲלֹֽא־אֶרְחַץ בָּהֶם may I not wash in them? Is 33, ψ 15, 24, Ec 5. So especially in a question expressing surprise after אֵיךְ, e.g. Gn 39 how then can I...? 44, Is 19, ψ 137, and even with regard to some point of time in the past, looking forward from which an event might have been expected to take place, e.g. Gn 43 הֲיָדוֹעַ נֵדַע could we in any wise know...? Cf. 2 S 3 (יָמוּת was Abner to die as a fool, i.e. was he destined to die...?), and so probably also Gn 34 (should he deal...?). Very closely connected with this is the use of the imperfect—
u (3) In a consecutive clause depending on an interrogative clause, e.g. Ex 3, who am I (כִּי אֵלֵךְ) that I should (ought, could) go? 16, Nu 11, Ju 9, 1 S 18, 2 K 8, Is 29, Jb 6, 21, similarly after אֲשֶׁר Gn 38, Ex 5. v Rem. In passages like 1 S 11, ψ 8, 114, the context shows that the imperfect corresponds rather to our present. In such sentences the perfect also is naturally used in referring to completed actions, e.g. Gn 20, Ju 18, 2 S 7, Is 22.
w (4) In negative sentences to express actions, &c., which cannot or should not happen, e.g. Gn 32 אֲשֶׁר לֽאֹ־יִסָּפֵד מֵרֹב which cannot be numbered for multitude; 20 deeds (אֲשֶׁד לֹא־יֵֽעשׂוּ) that ought not to be done (cf. above, g); ψ 5.
x (5) In conditional clauses (the modus conditionalis corresponding to the Latin present or imperfect conjunctive) both in the protasis and apodosis, or only in the latter, ψ 23 גַּם כִּֽי־אֵלֵךְ... לֹֽא־אִירָא רָע yea, though I walk (or had to walk)... I fear (or I would fear) no evil; Jb 9 though I be righteous, mine own mouth shall condemn me. After a perfect in the protasis, e.g. Jb 23. Very frequently also in an apodosis, the protasis to which must be supplied from the context, e.g. Jb 5 but as for me, I would seek unto God (were I in thy place); 3, 16, 14, ψ 55, Ru 1. However, some of the imperfects in these examples are probably intended as jussive forms. Cf. § 109 h.
a The cohortative, i.e. according to § 48 c, the 1st pers.[18] sing. or plur. of the imperfect lengthened by the ending ־ָה,[19] represents in general an endeavour directed expressly towards a definite object. While the corresponding forms of the indicative rather express the mere announcement that an action will be undertaken, the cohortative lays stress on the determination underlying the action, and the personal interest in it.
Its uses may be divided into—
b 1. The cohortative standing alone, or co-ordinated with another cohortative, and frequently strengthened by the addition of the particle נָא:
(a) To express self-encouragement, e.g. Ex 3 אָסֻ֫רָה־נָּא וג׳ I will turn aside now, and see...! So especially as the result of inward deliberation (in soliloquies), e.g. Gn 18, 32 (rarely so used after אַל־, Gn 21 let me not look...! Jer 18), and also as a more or less emphatic statement of a fixed determination, e.g. Is 5 I will sing[20]...! 5, 31. Cf. also Gn 46 now let me die (I am willing to die), since I have seen thy face; and ψ 31. In the 1st pers. plur. the cohortative includes a summons to others to help in doing something, e.g. ψ 2 נְנַתְּקָה come! let us break asunder! &c., and Gn 11.
c (b) To express a wish, or a request for permission, that one should be allowed to do something, e.g. Dt 2 אֶעְבְּרָה may I be allowed to pass through (let me pass through)! Nu 20 נַעְבְּרָה־נָּא may we be allowed to pass through! Jer 40 let me go, I pray thee! &c.; 2 S 16; so after לֹא 2 S 18; after אַל־ 2 S 24, Jer 17, ψ 25 (אַל־אֵב֫וֹשָׁה let me not be ashamed; cf. ψ 31, 18, 71:1); 69:15. After אַל־נָא Jon 1.
d 2. The cohortative in dependence on other moods, as well as in conditional sentences: (a) In dependence (with wāw copulative; ψ 9 after לְמַ֫עַן) on an imperative or jussive to express an intention or intended consequence, e.g. Gn 27 bring it to me, וְאֹכֵ֑לָה that I may eat, prop. then will I eat; Gn 19, 23, 24, 27, 29, 30 f., 42:34, 49:1, Dt 32, Ho 6, ψ 2, 39, Jb 10 Qerê; Is 5 and let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come, וְנֵדָֽעָה that we may know (it)! Gn 26, 1 S 27. Also after negative sentences, Gn 18, 32, Ju 6, and after interrogative sentences, 1 K 22, Is 40, 41, Am 8.
e (b) In conditional sentences (with or without אִם) to express a contingent intention, e.g. Jb 16 אִם־אֲדַבְּרָה should I determine to speak, my grief is not assuaged, וְאַחְדְּלָה and should I forbear, what am I eased? without אִם Jb 19, 30 (where, however, וָאיחלה is probably intended); ψ 73 (unless וָֽאֲח׳ should be read), 139:8 f. After the 3rd person, Jb 11 though it be dark, &c. So perhaps also 2 S 22 אֶרְדְּפָה if I determined to pursue, then ..., but cf. ψ 18.
f (c) Likewise in the apodosis of conditional sentences, e.g. Jb 31 f. if my step hath turned out of the way ..., אֶזְרְעָה then let me sow; cf. 16:4 f. I also could speak as ye do, if ...! So even when the condition must be supplied from the context, e.g. ψ 40 else would I declare and speak of them; 51:18 else would I (gladly) give it, i.e. if thou didst require it (cf. the precisely similar וְאֶשָּׂא ψ 55); Jb 6. In the 1st plur. Jer 20. To the same category belong the cohortatives after the formula expressing a wish מִֽי־יִתֵּן, מִֽי־יִתְּנֵ֫נִי, e.g. Jer 9 oh, that I had ..., וְאֶֽעֶזְבָה then (i.e. if I had) should I (or would I) leave my people, &c.; Ju 9; without Wāw Is 27, ψ 55, Jb 23 (cf. also verse 7).
g Rem. 1. The question, whether a resolution formed under compulsion (a necessity) is also expressed by the cohortative (so, according to the prevailing opinion, in Is 38 אֵלֵ֫כָה; Jer 3, 4, 21, 6:10, ψ 55, 18 (?); 57:5, where, however, with Hupfeld, שָֽׁכְבָה should be read; 77:7, 88:16, and in the 1st plur. Is 59), is to be answered in the sense that in these examples the cohortative form is used after its meaning has become entirely lost, merely for the sake of its fuller sound, instead of the ordinary imperfect. This view is strongly supported by the rather numerous examples of cohortative forms after wāw consec. of the imperfect (cf. § 49 e, as also ψ 66 שָׁם נִשְׂמְחָה there did we rejoice[21]; ψ 119 וָֽאֲתַעֵ֑בָה; Pr 7), which can likewise only be explained as forms chosen merely for euphony, and therefore due to considerations of rhythm.
h 2. The cohortative is strange after עַד־ ψ 73 until I went... אָבִ֫ינָה I considered their latter end; possibly a pregnant construction for ‘until I made up my mind, saying, I will consider’, &c. (but אָבִ֫ינָה Pr 7 is still dependent on the preceding וָ); עַד־אַרְגִּ֫יעָה Pr 12 is at any rate to be explained in the same way (in Jer 49, 50 we have כִּי־א׳ with a similar meaning), as long as I (intentionally) wink with the eyelashes (shall wink). On the other hand, in Ex 32 אֲכַפֵּר is to be read, with the Samaritan, instead of אֲכַפְּרָה after אוּלַי.
a As the cohortative is used in the 1st pers., so the jussive is especially found in the 2nd and 3rd pers. sing. and plur. to express a more or less definite desire that something should or should not happen (cf. for its form, which frequently coincides with that of the ordinary imperfect,[22] § 48 f, g). More particularly its uses may be distinguished as follows:
1. The jussive standing alone, or co-ordinated with another jussive:
b (b) In affirmative sentences to express a command, a wish (or a blessing), advice, or a request; in the last case (the optative or precative) it is frequently strengthened by the addition of נָא. Examples: Gn 1 יְהִי אוֹר let there be light! Gn 1, 9, 11, &c. (the creative commands); Nu 6 the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace! cf. verse 25. After particles expressing a wish, Gn 30 לוּ יְהִי I would it might be; ψ 81 אִם־תִּשְׁמַע־לִי if thou wouldest hearken unto me! As a humble request, Gn 44... יֵֽשֶׁב־נָא עַבְדְּךָ... וְהַנַּ֫עַי יַ֫עַל let thy servant, I pray thee, abide, &c., and let the lad go up, &c., Gn 47.
c (b) In negative sentences to express prohibition or dissuasion, warning, a negative wish (or imprecation), and a request. The prohibitive particle used before the jussive (according to § 107 o) is almost always אַל־ (in negative desires and requests frequently אַל־נָא); e.g. Ex 34 אִישׁ אַל־יֵרָא neither let any man be seen! Pr 3 be not (אַל־תְּהִי) wise in thine own eyes! Jb 15 אַל־ יַֽאֲמֵן ne confidat. In the form of a request (prayer), Dt 9 אַל־תַּשְׁחֵת destroy not! 1 K 2, ψ 27, 69.
d Rem. 1. The few examples of לֹא with the jussive could at most have arisen from the attempt to moderate subsequently by means of the jussive (voluntative) form what was at first intended to be a strict command (לֹא with imperf. indic.); probably, however, they are either cases in which the defective writing has been misunderstood (as in 1 K 2, Ez 48), or (as in Gn 24) instances of the purely rhythmical jussive form treated below, under k. Moreover, cf. לֹא יוֹסֵף Jo 2 and from the same verb Gn 4 (unless it is to be referred to h) and Dt 13. The same form, however, appears also to stand three times for the cohortative (see below), and in Nu 22 for the ordinary imperfect (but see below, i). Thus it is doubtful whether an imaginary by-form of the ordinary imperf. is not intended by the Masora in all these cases, and whether consequently יוֹסִף, &c., should not be restored.—On לֹֽא־תָחוֹס עֵֽינְךָ, &c., Dt 7, 13, &c., Ez 5, &c., cf. § 72 r, according to which תָחוּס should probably be read in every case.—The jussive appears in the place of the cohortative after לֹא 1 S 14 (וְלֹֽא־נַשְׁאֵר co-ordinated with two cohortatives), 2 S 17; cf. Is 41 Keth. (ונרא, i.e. וְנֵ֫רֶא, after another cohortative); also (see above) לֹא אֹסֵף Dt 18, Ho 9, and even without לֹא Ez 5.
e 2. אַל־ with the jussive (or imperf., cf. § 107 p) is used sometimes to express the conviction that something cannot or should not happen; cf. Is 2 (where, however, the text is very doubtful) וְאַל־תִּשָּׂא לָהֶם and thou canst not possibly forgive them [R.V. therefore forgive them not]; ψ 34, 41, 50, 121 (אַל־יִתֵּן); Pr 3, Jb 5 אַל־תִּירָא neither needest thou be afraid; 20:17, 40:32.
f 2. The jussive depending on other moods, or in conditional sentences:
(a) Depending[23] (with Wāw) on an imperative or cohortative to express an intention or an assurance of a contingent occurrence, e.g. Gn 24 take her and go, and let her be (וּתְהִי prop. and she will be)...; 30:3, 31:37, 38:24, Ex 8, 9, 10, 14, Jos 4, Ju 6, 1 S 5, 7, 1 K 21, ψ 144, Pr 20, Jb 146. Also after interrogative sentences, which include a demand, Est 7 (say) what is thy desire..., וְתֵעָשׂ and it shall (i.e. in order that it may) be granted! 1 K 22, Is 19, Jb 38f. Depending on a cohortative, e.g. Gn 19 אִמָּֽלְטָה נָּא שָׁ֫פָּה oh, let me escape thither...וּתְחִי נַפְשִׁי that my soul may live; even after a simple imperf. (cf. below, g), 1 K 13 whosoever would, he consecrated him ... וִיהִי that he might be a priest (read כֹּהֵן) of the high places, but probably the LXX reading וַיְהִי is to be preferred. g Rem. In 2 Ch 35 a negative final clause with וְאַל־ is dependent on an imperative, forbear from (meddling with) God... that he destroy thee not. As a rule, however, negative final clauses are attached to the principal sentence by means of וְלֹא and a following imperfect; so after an imperative, Gn 42, 1 K 14, 18; after a jussive, Ex 30, Neh 6; after a perfect consec., Ex 28, 43, 30:12, Nu 18; after לֹא with an imperfect, Lv 10, Nu 18, Dt 17 neither shall he multiply wives unto himself (וְלֹא יָסוּר לְבָבוֹ) that his heart turn not away; 1 S 20, 2 S 21, Jer 11; after אַל־ with jussive, Lv 10, 11, 16, 2 S 13, Jer 25, 37, 38 f.; after the asseverative אִם with the impft., Gn 14; even after a simple imperfect, Jer 10 with nails... they fasten it (וְלֹא יָפִיק) that it move not; after a participle, Jb 9.
h (b) Frequently in conditional sentences (as in Arabic), either in the protasis or in the apodosis, cf. ψ 45 יִתְאַו should he desire... then...; 104:20 תָּ֫שֶׁת... וִיהִי if thou makest darkness, then it is night; so also in the protasis, Ex 22, Lv 15, Is 41, Ez 14 (וְיַ֫עַל), Jb 34; in the apodosis, Ex 7 then will it (not, then shall it) become a serpent; Pr 9 after an imperat. in the protasis; Jb 10, 13, 22. In a negative apodosis, Gn 4 (לֹֽא־תֹסֵף, but see above, d). In 2 K 6 אַל־יֽוֹשִׁעֵךְ (if the Lord do not help thee, &c.) is to be explained as a jussive in a negative protasis.
i Rem. Undoubtedly this use of the jussive (in conditional sentences) is based on its original voluntative meaning; let something be so and so, then this or that must happen as a consequence. Certain other examples of the jussive, however, show that in the consciousness of the language the voluntative has in such cases become weakened almost to a potential mood, and hence the jussive serves to express facts which may happen contingently, or may be expected, e.g. Nu 22 (מַה־יּׄסֵף, but cf. above, d); Jb 9 there is no daysman betwixt us, that might lay (יָשֵׁת, hence plainly a subjunctive=qui ponat; also in Nu 23 נִֽיכַזֵּב that he should lie is probably intended as a jussive); Ec 5; so after interrogative sentences, Jer 9 who is the wise man, וְיָבֵן qui intelligat hoc?; Ho 14.
k Moreover, in not a few cases, the jussive is used, without any collateral sense, for the ordinary imperfect form, and this occurs not alone in forms, which may arise from a misunderstanding of the defective writing, as Dt 28, 36, 32:8, 1 K 8, Is 12, Mi 3, 5, ψ 11, 18, 21 Qerê (מַה־יָּ֫גֶל, Keth. יָגִיל), 25:9, 47:4, 90:3, 91:4, 107:29, Pr 15, Jb 13, 15, 18, 20, 37, 33, 36, 38, Ec 12 (verse 7 יָשֹׁב, but immediately afterwards תָּשׁוּב), Dn 8, —but also in shortened forms, such as יְהִי Gn 49 (Sam; יִהְיֶה), Dt 28, 1 S 10, 2 S 5, Ho 6, 11, Am 5, Mi 1, Zp 2, Zc 9, ψ 72 f. (after other jussives), 104:31, Jb 18, 20, 26, 28, 27:8, 33:21, 34:37, Ru 3. This use of the jussive can hardly be due merely to poetic licence, but is rather to be explained on rhythmical grounds. In all the above-cited examples, in fact, the jussive stands at the beginning of the sentence (and hence removed as far as possible from the principal tone), in others it is immediately before the principal pause (Is 42, 50, ψ 68, Pr 23, Jb 24, 29, 40), or actually in pause (Dt. 32, Jb 23, 11, La 3), and is then a simply rhythmical shortening due to the strong influence of the tone. Moreover, since the jussive in numerous cases is not distinguished in form from the imperfect (§ 48 g), it is frequently doubtful which of the two the writer intended. This especially applies to those cases, in which a subjunctive is to be expressed by one or other of the forms (cf. § 107 k and m–x).
a 1. The imperative,[24] which, according to § 46, is restricted to the 2nd pers. sing. and plur., and to positive commands, &c., may stand either alone, or in simple co-ordination (as in 1 K 18, Is 56, 65) with other imperatives:
(a) To express real commands, e.g. Gn 12 get thee out of thy country; or (like the jussive) mere admonitions (Ho 10) and requests, 2 K 5, Is 5; on the addition of נָא see below, Rem. 1. The imperative is used in the sense of an ironical challenge (often including a threat) in 1 K 2 ask for him the kingdom also; 22:15, Ju 10, Is 47 (with נָא), Jer 7, Ez 20, Am 4, Jb 38f., 40:10ff., La 4. The imperative has a concessive sense in Na 3 (though thou make thyself many, &c.), and in the cases discussed under f, e.g. Is 8 f., 29:9.
b (b) To express permission, e.g. 2 S 18 after previous dissuasion, (then) run (as far as I am concerned)! Is 21, 45.
c (c) To express a distinct assurance (like our expression, thou shalt have it)[25] or promise, e.g. Is 65 but be ye glad, &c. (i.e. ye will have continually occasion to be glad); and Is 37, ψ 110; in a threat, Jer 2. So especially in commands, the fulfilment of which is altogether out of the power of the person addressed, e.g. Is 54 be far from anxiety (meaning, thou needst not fear any more); Gn 1, &c. (for other examples, such as 1 K 22, 2 K 5, see below, f). Most clearly in the case of the imperative Niphʿal with a passive meaning, e.g. Gn 42 וְאַתֶּם הֵאָֽסְרוּ and ye shall be bound; Dt 32, Is 49 (Is 45, see below, f).
d Rem. 1. The particle נָא age! (§ 105) is frequently added to the imperative, as to the jussive, sometimes to soften down a command, or to make a request in a more courteous form (see above, a), Gn 12, 24, sometimes to strengthen an exhortation uttered as a rebuke or threat (Nu 16, 20) or in ridicule (Is 47).
e 2. The imperative after the desiderative particle לוּ Gn 23 (at the end of verses 5 and 14 also read לוּ for לוֹ and join it to the following imperative) is due to an anacoluthon. Instead of the imperfect which would be expected here after לוּ, the more forcible imperative is used in a new sentence.
f 2. The imperative in logical dependence upon a preceding imperative, jussive (or cohortative), or an interrogative sentence, serves to express the distinct assurance or promise that an action or state will ensue as the certain consequence of a previous action. So especially:
(a) The imperative when depending (with wāw copulative) upon another imperative. In this case the first imperative contains, as a rule, a condition, while the second declares the consequence which the fulfilment of the condition will involve. The imperative is used for this declaration, since the consequence is, as a matter of fact, intended or desired by the speaker (cf. divide et impera), e.g. Gn 42 זֹאת עֲשׂוּ וִֽחְיוּ this do, and live, i.e. thus shall ye continue to live. Gn 17, 1 K 22, 2 K 5, Is 36, 45 (וְהִוָּֽשְׁעוּ), Jer 6, Am 5, 6, ψ 37, Pr 3f., 4:4, 7:2, 13:20 Keth., Jb 2, 2 Ch 20; in Jer 25, Jb 22 נָא is added to the first imperative. In other cases, the first imperative contains a mocking concession, the second an irrevocable denunciation, e.g. Is 8 רֹ֫עוּ עַמִּים וָחֹ֫תּוּ (continue to) make an uproar, O ye peoples, and ye shall be broken in pieces; cf. verse 9 b.
g Rem. 1. If a promise or threat dependent on an imperative be expressed in the 3rd pers. then the jussive is naturally used instead of the 2nd imperative Is 8, 55.
h 2. In Pr 20 the second imperative (containing a promise) is attached by asyndeton; elsewhere two imperatives occur side by side without the copula, where the second might be expected to be subordinated to the first, e.g. Dt 2 הָחֵל רָשׁ (where רָשׁ is virtually, as it were, an object to הָחֵל) begin, take in possession for to take in possession (cf., however, Ju 19 הֽוֹאֶל־נָא וְלִין be content, I pray thee, and tarry all night, and on this kind of co-ordination in general, cf. § 120 d). But such imperatives as (לְכוּ) לֵךְ, (ק֫וּמוּ) קוּם, when immediately preceding a second imperative, are for the most part only equivalent to interjections, come! up!
i (b) The imperative, when depending (with wāw copulative) upon a jussive (cohortative), or an interrogative sentence, frequently expresses also a consequence which is to be expected with certainty, and often a consequence which is intended, or in fact an intention; cf. Gn 20 and he shall pray for thee, וֶחְֽיֵה and thou shalt live; cf. Ex 14, 2 K 5, Jb 11, ψ 128 the Lord bless thee ... so that (or in order that) thou seest, &c.; Ru 1, 4; after a cohortative, Gn 12, 45, Ex 3 וְהוֹצֵא that thou mayest bring forth; Ex 18, 1 S 12, 1 K 1; Jer 35 (after imperative and jussive); after an interrogative sentence, 2 S 21 wherewith shall I make atonement, וּבָֽרֲכוּ that ye may bless, &c.—In Nu 5 the imperative without וְ (in 32:23 with וְ) is used after a conditional clause in the sense of a definite promise.
k Rem. The 2nd sing. masc. occurs in addressing feminine persons in Ju 4 (עֲמֹד, according to Qimḥi an infinitive, in which case, however, the infinitive absolute עָמֹד should be read; but probably we should simply read עִמְדִי with Moore), Mi 1 and Zc 13 (after עוּרִי); and in Is 23, the 2nd plur. masc. (On the four forms of the 2nd fem. plur. imperative in Is 32, erroneously explained here in former editions, see now § 48 i). In Na 3 the interchange of masc. and fem. serves to express totality (the nation in all its aspects). Cf., moreover, § 145 p on other noticeable attempts to substitute the corresponding masculine forms for the feminine.
a 1. The imperfect with wāw consecutive (§ 49 a–g) serves to express actions, events, or states, which are to be regarded as the temporal or logical sequel of actions, events, or states mentioned immediately[26] before. The imperfect consecutive is used in this way most frequently as the narrative tense, corresponding to the Greek aorist or the Latin historic perfect. As a rule the narrative is introduced by a perfect, and then continued by means of imperfects with wāw consecutive (on this interchange of tenses cf. § 49 a, and especially § 112 a), e.g. Gn 3 now the serpent was (הָיָה) more subtil... and he said (וַיֹּאמֶר) unto the woman; 4, 6, 10, 15, 11, 14, 15, 16, 21, 24, 25, 36, 37.
b Rem. 1. To this class belong some of the numerous imperfects consec. after various expressions of time, whenever such expressions are equivalent in moaning to a perfect[27] (viz. הָיָה it came to pass), e.g. Is 6 in the year that king Uzziah died, I saw (וָֽאֶרְאֶה), &c.; Gn 22, 27, Ju 11, 1 S 4, 17, 21, Ho 11; on the use of וַיְהִי to connect expressions of time, see below, g.—It is only in late books or passages that we find the simple perfect in a clause following an expression of time, as 1 S 17 (cf. Driver on the passage), 2 Ch 12, 15, &c., Dn 10, 15; the Perfect after וְ and the subject, 2 Ch 7.
c 2. The continuation of the narrative by means of the imperfect consec. may result in a series of any number of such imperfects, e.g. there are forty-nine in Gn. 1[[:he:בראשית א |]]. As soon, however, as the connecting Wāw becomes separated from the verb to which it belongs, by the insertion of any word, the perfect necessarily takes the place of the imperfect, e.g. Gn 1 and God called (וַיִּקְרָא) the light Day, and the darkness he called (וְלַח֫שֶׁךְ קָרָא) Night; verse 10, 2:20, 11:3 and frequently.
d 3. Of two co-ordinate imperfects consecutive the former (as equivalent to a temporal clause) is most frequently subordinate in sense to the latter, e.g. Gn 28 וַיַּרְא עֵשָׂו... וַיֵּ֫לֶךְ when Esau saw that..., he went, &c.; so also, frequently וַיִּשְׁמַע, &c., Gn 37, &c. On the other hand, a second imperfect consecutive is seldom used in an explanatory sense, e.g. Ex 2 (וַתֹּ֫אמֶר for she said); cf. 1 S 7. Other examples of the imperfect consecutive, which apparently represent a progress in the narrative, in reality only refer to the same time, or explain what precedes, see Gn 2 (וַיִּֽהְיוּ they were; but Jos 4, 1 K 8 they are); Gn 36 (וַתֵּ֫לֶד), 36:32 (וַיִּמְלֹךְ), 1 K 1. e 4. The imperfect consecutive sometimes has such a merely external connexion with an immediately preceding perfect, that in reality it represents an antithesis to it, e.g. Gn 32 and (yet) my life is preserved; 2 S 3 and yet thou chargest me; Jb 10, 32; similarly in dependence on noun-clauses, Pr 30
f 2. The introduction of independent narratives, or of a new section of the narrative, by means of an imperfect consecutive, likewise aims at a connexion, though again loose and external, with that which has been narrated previously. Such a connexion is especially often established by means of וַיְהִי (καὶ ἐγένετο) and it came to pass, after which there then follows either (most commonly) an imperfect consecutive (Gn 4, 8, 8:6, 11:2, Ex 12, 13, &c.), or Wāw with the perfect (separated from it), Gn 7, 15, 22, 27, or even a perfect without Wāw (Gn 8, 14f., 40:1, Ex 12, 16, Nu 10, Dt 1, 1 S 18, 2 K 8, &c.), or finally a noun-clause introduced by Wāw, Gn 41.
g Rem. 1. This loose connexion by means of ויתי[28] is especially common, when the narrative or a new section of it begins with any expression of time, see above, b; cf., in addition to the above-mentioned examples (e.g. Gn 22 and it came to pass after these things, that God did prove Abraham), the similar cases in Gn 19, 21, 1 S 11, Ru 1. Elsewhere the statement of time is expressed by בְּ or כְּ with an infinitive (Gn 12, 19, 29 39:13, 15:18f., Ju 16) or by an independent sentence with the perfect (equivalent to a pluperfect, cf. § 106 f), e.g. Gn 15, 24, 27, or by a temporal clause introduced by כִּי when, Gn 26, 27, Ju 16, כַּֽאֲשֶׁר when, Gn 12, 20, מֵאָזּ from the time that, Gn 39; or, finally, by a noun-clause (cf. § 116 u), e.g. 2 K 13 וַיְהִי הֵם קֹֽבְרִים אִישׁ and it came to pass, as they were (just) burying a man (prop. they burying), that...; Gn 42, 2 K 2 (the apodosis in both these cases being introduced by וְהִנֵּה); 1 S 7, 2 S 13, 2 K 6, 26, 19:37 (=Is 37).—In 1 S 10, 11, 2 S 2, 15 a noun standing absolutely follows וַיְהִי (as the equivalent of a complete sentence; see below, h), and then an imperfect consecutive follows.
h 2. Closely related to the cases noticed in g are those in which the imperfect consecutive, even without a preceding ויחי, introduces the apodosis either— (a) to whole sentences, or (b) to what are equivalent to whole sentences, especially to nouns standing absolutely. As in certain cases of the perfect consecutive (see § 112 x), so the imperfect consecutive has here acquired a sort of independent force. Cf. for (a) 1 S 15 because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, וַיִּמְאָֽסְךָ he hath rejected thee (cf. Nu 14, Is 48, where the causal clause precedes in the form of an infinitive with preposition), Ex 9; for (b) Gn 22 וּפִֽילַגְשׁוֹ and (as to) his concubine..., וַתֵּ֫לֶד she bare, &c.; Ex 38, Nu 14f., 1 S 14, 17, 2 S 4, 19 Keth., 21:16, 1 K 9f., 12:17, 2 K 25, Jer 6, 28, 33, 44[29]—In 1 K 15, 2 K 16 the preceding noun, used absolutely, is even regarded as the object of the following imperfect consecutive, and is therefore introduced by אֶת־. i 3. The imperfect consecutive serves, in the cases treated under a–h, to represent either expressly, or at least to a great extent, a chronological succession of actions or events; elsewhere it expresses those actions, &c., which represent the logical consequence of what preceded, or a result arising from it by an inherent necessity. Thus the imperfect consecutive is used—
k (a) As a final summing up of the preceding narrative, e.g. Gn 2, 23 וַיָּ֫קָם הַשָּׂדֶה וג׳ so (in this way) the field became (legally) the property of Abraham, &c.; 1 S 17, 31.
l (b) To express a logical or necessary consequence of that which immediately precedes, e.g. Gn 39, Jb 2 and he still holdeth fast his integrity, וַתְּסִיתֵ֫נִי וג׳ so that thou thus (as it now appears) groundlessly movedst me against him; ψ 65 so that they are afraid ...; even a consequence which happens conditionally, Jer 20 וַתְּהִי so that my mother should have been ... Another instance of the kind perhaps (if the text be correct) is Jer 38 וַיָּ֫מָת so that he dies (must die).
m Rem. Such consecutive clauses frequently occur after interrogative sentences, e.g. Is 51 who art thou (i.e. art thou so helpless), וַהִּֽירְאִי that thou art (must needs be) afraid? ψ 144 (cf. ψ 8, where in a very similar context כִּי that is used with the imperfect); Gn 12 (וָֽאֶקַּח); 31:27 וָֽאֲשַׁלֵּֽחֲךָ so that I might have sent thee away.
4. As regards the range of time it is to be carefully noticed—
n (a) That the imperfect consecutive may represent all varieties in the relations of tense and mood, which, according to § 107 a, follow from the idea of the imperfect;
o (b) That the more precise determination of the range of time to which an imperfect consecutive relates must be inferred in each case from the character of the preceding tense (or tense-equivalent), to which it is attached, in a more or less close relation, as temporal or logical sequence. Thus the imperfect consecutive serves—
p (1) To represent actions, events, or states, which are past (or were repeated in past time), when it is united with tenses, or their equivalents, which refer to an actual past.
q Cf. the examples given above, under a and f, of the imperfect consecutive as an historic tense. The imperfect consecutive also frequently occurs as the continuation of a perfect (preterite) in a subordinate clause; e.g. Gn 27, Nu 11, Dt 4, 1 S 8, 1 K 2, 11, 18, &c.; also in Is 49 וַיִּבְחָרֶ֫ךָּ is the continuation of a preterite, contained, according to the sense, in the preceding נִֽאֱמָן. אֲשֶׁר.—In Jb 31, 34 the imperfect consecutive is joined to an imperfect denoting the past in a conditional sentence. An imperfect consecutive occurs in dependence on a perfect which has the sense of a pluperfect (§ 106 f), e.g. in Gn 26, 28f., 31:19, 34 (now Rachel had taken the teraphim, וַתְּשִׂמֵם and had put them, &c.); Nu 14, 1 S 28, 2 S 2, Is 39. Finally there are the cases in which an infinitival or participial construction representing past time, according to § 113 r, § 116 x, is taken up and continued by an imperfect consecutive.
r (2) To represent present actions, &c., in connexion with tenses, or their equivalents, which describe actions and states as being either present or lasting on into the present (continuing in their effect); so especially,
(α) In connexion with the present perfects, described in § 106 g, e.g. ψ 16 therefore my heart is glad (שָׂמַח) and my glory rejoiceth (וַיָּ֫גֶל); Is 3 (parallel with a simple imperfect). Cf. also such examples as ψ 29 וַיֵּ֫שֶׁב (prop. he sat down, and has been enthroned ever since), ψ 41.
s (β) In connexion with those perfects which represent experiences frequently confirmed (see § 106 k), e.g. Jb 14 he cometh up (יָצָא) like a flower, and is cut down (וַיִּמָּל); he fleeth (וַיִּבְרַח) also as a shadow, וְלֹא יַֽעֲמוֹד and continueth not; Jb 20, 24, 11, Is 40, Pr 11.
t (γ) In connexion with imperfects which, in one of the ways described in § 107. 2, are used in the sense of the present; e.g. Jb 14 but man dieth (יָמוּת) and becometh powerless (וַיֶּחֱֽלָשׁ), &c., i.e. remains powerless; Jb 4, Ho 8, Hb 1f., ψ 55, 90, Jb 5, 7, 11 (when thou mockest), 12:25, 34:24, 37:8 (parallel with a simple imperfect); 39:15. In the apodosis of a conditional sentence, ψ 59, so also after an interrogative imperfect, 1 S 2, ψ 42 (וַתֶּֽהֱמִי for which in verse 12 and in 43:5 we have וּמַה־תֶּֽהֱמִי and why art thou disquieted?).
u (δ) In dependence on participles, which represent what at present continues or is being repeated, e.g. Nu 22, 1 S 2, 2 S 19 behold the king weepeth (בֹּכֶה) and mourneth (וַיִּתְאַבֵּל) for Absalom; Am 5, 9f., Na 1, ψ 34, Pr 20, Jb 12, but cf. e.g. Jb 12 קֹרֵא לֶֽאֱלוֹהַּ who called upon God, וַיַּֽעֲנֵ֫הוּ and he answered him.
v (ε) In dependence on other equivalents of the present, as in Is 51, ψ 144 (see above, m); Jb 10. So especially as the continuation of an infinitive, which is governed by a preposition (cf. § 144 r), Is 30, Jer 10, ψ 92, &c.
w (3) To represent future actions, &c., in dependence on—(α) an imperfect which refers to the future, ψ 49, 94f.;—(β) a perfect consecutive, or those perfects which, according to § 106 n, are intended to represent future events as undoubtedly certain, and therefore as though already accomplished (perf. propheticum); cf. Is 5 (parallel with a simple imperfect separated from ו); 5:16 (cf. 2:11, 17, where the same threat is expressed by the perfect consecutive); 5:25, 9:5, 10f., 1315.17 ff., 22:7 ff., Jo 2, Mi 2, Ez 33, 6, ψ 7, 64 ff.;—(γ) a future participle, Jer 4.[30]
x Rem. An imperfect consecutive in dependence on a perfect or imperfect, which represents an action occurring only conditionally, is likewise used only in a hypothetical sense, e.g. Jb 9 אִם־קָרָ֫אתִי וַיַּֽעֲנֵ֫נִי if I had called, and he had answered me, yet ...; ψ 139 וָֽאֹמַר if I should say (previously, in verse 8 f., hypothetical imperfects are used).—In Is 48f. an imperfect consecutive occurs in dependence on a sentence expressing a wish introduced by לוּא utinam (וַיְהִי and it, or so that it were, equivalent to then should it be). Cf. also the examples mentioned above, under l (Jer 20) and m (Gn 31), where the imperfect consecutive expresses facts occurring contingently.
G. R. Berry, ‘Waw consecutive with the perfect in Hebrew,’ in Bibl. Lit., xxii. (1903), pp. 60–69.
a 1. The perfect, like the imperfect (§ 111), is used with wāw consecutive (cf. § 49 a; on the external differentiation of the perfect consecutive by a change in the position of the tone, see § 49 h) to express actions, events, or states, which are to be attached to what precedes, in a more or less close relation, as its temporal or logical consequence. And as, according to § 111 a, the narrative which begins with a perfect, or its equivalent, is continued in the imperfect consecutive, so, vice versa, the perfect consecutive forms the regular continuation to a preceding imperfect, or its equivalent.
b Rem. 1. This alternation of perfect and imperfect or their equivalents is a striking peculiarity of the consecutio temporum in Hebrew. It not only affords a certain compensation for the lack of forms for tenses and moods, but also gives to Hebrew style the charm of an expressive variety, an action conceived as being still in progress (imperfect, &c.), reaching afterwards in the perfect a calm and settled conclusion, in order to be again exhibited in movement in the imperfect, and vice versa.[31] The strict regularity of this alternation belongs indeed rather to the higher style, and even then it depends upon the view and intention of the speaker, whether he wishes the action, &c., to be regarded as the logical consequence of what has preceded, or as simply co-ordinate with it, and so in the same tense.
c 2. A succession of any number of other perfects consecutive may be co-ordinated with a perfect consecutive (cf. e.g. Ez 14, Am 5, Ru 3, four perfects in each case, Is 8 five, Ex 6f. eight). It is true, however, of the perfect (as conversely of the imperfect, § 112 c), that as soon as the Wāw is separated by any intervening word from the verb to which it belongs, an imperfect necessarily takes the place of the perfect, e.g. Gn 12 when the Egyptians shall see thee, they shall say (וְאָֽמְרוּ), This is his wife: and they will kill me (וְהָֽרְנוּ אֹתִי) but thee they will save alive (וְאֹתָךְ יְהַיּוּ).
d 2. The perfect consecutive, like the imperfect consecutive, always belongs to the period of time expressed by the preceding tense, or its equivalent, with which it is connected as the temporal or logical consequence. The particular cases may be classed under three heads: (a) the perfect consecutive in immediate dependence (see e), (b) in loose connexion (see x) with the preceding, and (c) the perfect consecutive at the beginning of the apodosis to other sentences, or their equivalents (see ff).
e 3. The perfect consecutive in immediate dependence on the preceding tense, or its equivalent, serves
(a) As a frequentative tense to express past actions, &c., i.e. actions repeatedly brought to a conclusion in the past, and follows tenses, or their equivalents, representing actions which have continued or been repeated in the past:
(α) After a simple imperfect, e.g. Gn 2 אֵד יַֽעֲלֶה there went up a mist (again and again) from the earth, וְהִשְׁקָה and watered (as it were, and ever watered afresh), &c. This frequentative use of the perfect consecutive is equally evident after frequentative imperfects, Gn 2 (וְהָיָה and it became again every time; וַיְהִי would mean, and it became so once for all); 29:2f. (four perfects consecutive referring to actions repeated daily); Ex 33–11 יִקַּח he used to take at each new encampment the tent, וְנָטָה and to pitch it again every time without the camp; notice, amongst the numerous frequent. perff. consec., the imperf. in vv. 7, 8, 9, 11, always in a frequentative sense; 34:34f., Nu 9, 21 (among several simple imperfects), 10:17, Ju 2, 1 S 2 תַּֽעֲשֶׂה she used to make... וְהַֽעַלְתָה and brought it to him from year to year; 27 (וְלָקַח), 1 K 14, 2 K 3, 12 (in verses 16f. imperfects occur again). So also in dependent sentences, Gn 6 (וְיָֽלְדוּ as a continuation of יָבֹאוּ), Jb 31.[32]
f (β) After an imperfect consecutive, e.g. Ex 39 (Samaritan וקצצו), 1 S 5 (? see § 112 rr), 7, 2 S 15, 16 and he threw stones at him, וְעִפַּר and east dust continually; 12, 2 K 6, 12, Jer 37, Jb 1.
g Rem. The frequentative perfect consecutive is sometimes joined even with imperfects consecutive which simply express one single action or occurrence in the past; thus Ex 18, 40 f., 1 S 1, 2 S 15 f., 1 K 14 (cf. verse 28); 1 K 18, 2 K 12. For other examples of a loosely connected frequentative perfect consecutive, see below, dd.
h (γ) After a perfect, Gn 37 (וְעָשָׂה לוֹ, i.e. as often as he needed a new garment)[33]; Gn 31, Nu 11, 1 S 16, 2 K 3, ψ 22;[34] in interrogative sentences, 1 S 26 who has ever, &c.; ψ 80, Jb 1, Ru 4.
i (δ) After an infinitive, Am 1 עַל־רָדְפוֹ because he did pursue his brother, וְשִׁחֵת and (on each occasion) did east off all pity (then an imperfect consecutive); after an infinitive absolute, Jos 6, 2 S 13, Jer 23.
k (ε) After a participle, Is 6 (וְקָרָא), &c., frequentative, as a continuation of עֹֽמְדִים, verse 2); 1 S 2, 2 S 17.[35]
l (ζ) After other equivalents of tenses, e.g. Gn 47 the priests had a portion from Pharaoh, וְאָֽכְלוּ and did eat (year by year), &c.; 1 K 4.
m (b) To express present actions, &c., as the temporal or logical consequence of actions or events which continue or are repeated in the present, especially such as have, according to experience, been at all times frequently repeated, and may be repeated at any time:
(α) After a simple imperfect, e.g. Gn 2 therefore a man leaves (יַֽעֲזֹב is accustomed to leave) ... וְדָבַק and cleaves, &c., here, as frequently elsewhere, clearly with the secondary idea of purpose, i.e. in order to cleave; Is 5 (if וְהָיָה is to be taken as a continuation of יַדְלִיקֵם); Is 28, Jer 12, Ho 4, 7, ψ 90, Jb 14; also in dependent clauses, Lv 20, Is 29, Am 5.
n (β) After a participle, as the equivalent of a sentence representing a contingent action, &c., e.g. Ex 21 מַכֵּה אִישׁ וָמֵת (instead of מַכֵּה there is in verse 20, &c. וְכִי יַכֶּה אִישׁ) if one smite a man and (so that) he die, &c., Ex 21, Is 29, Am 6, Hb 2.
o (γ) After an infinitive absolute, Jer 7 f. will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery (simple infinitives absolute; cf. § 113 ee), וּבָאתֶם and then come and stand before me... and say, &c.; cf. below, u.
p (c) To express future actions, &c., as the temporal or logical consequence of tenses, or their equivalents, which announce or require such future actions or events. Thus—
(α) After imperfects in the sense of a simple future, e.g. Am 9 f. מִשָּׁם אֲחַפֵּשׂ וּלְקַחְתִּים I will search and take them out thence, &c.; Gn 4, 40, Ex 7, 1 S 17, 2 K 5, Jb 8 f. (also with a change of subject, Gn 27, Ju 6, &c.); and in interrogative sentences, Gn 39, Ex 2, 2 S 12, 2 K 14, Am 8, ψ 41; cf. also Ru 1; in sentences expressing a wish, 2 S 15; as well as in almost all kinds of dependent clauses. Also in conditional clauses after אִם־ Gn 32, Ex 19, 1 S 1, or כִּי Gn 37, or הֵן Jer 3; in final clauses after לְמַ֫עַן Gn 12, Nu 15, Is 28; after אֲשֶׁר Dt 2, or פֶּן־ Gn 3, 19, 32, Is 6, Am 5; in temporal clauses, Is 32, Jer 13; and in relative clauses, Gn 24, Ju 1, 1 S 17.
q (β) After the jussive (or an imperfect in the sense of a jussive or optative) or cohortative, with the same or a different subject, e.g. Gn 1 f. יְהִי מְאֹרֹת... וְחָיוּ let there be lights... and let them be, &c.; Gn 24, 28, 31, 1 K 1, 22, Ru 2, 1 Ch 22; after a jussive expressing an imprecation, ψ 109.
r (γ) After an imperative, also with the same or a different subject, e.g. 2 S 7 לֵךְ וְאָֽמַרְתָּ go and tell (that thou mayst tell), &c., and often, perf. consec. after לֵךְ (as also the perf. consec. of אָמַר and דִּבֶּר very frequently follows other imperatives); Gn 6, 8, 27 f., 1 S 15, 18, 1 K 2, Jer 48.
s (δ) After perfects which express a definite expectation or assurance (cf. § 106 m and n), e.g. Gn 17 הִנֵּה בֵּרַ֫כְתִּי אֹתוֹ וְהִפְרֵתִי אֹתוֹ behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, &c.; Is 2, 5; on Am 4 see above, note 3 on h; in an interrogative sentence, Ju 9, 11.
t (ε) After a participle, e.g. Gn 7 for yet seven days, אָֽנֹכִי מַמְטִיר and I will cause it to rain... וּמָחִ֫יתִי and I will (i.e. in order to) destroy, &c.; Jer 21; also with a different subject, Gn 24 f. the maiden which cometh forth (הַיֹּצֵאת)... וְאָֽמַרְתִּי אֵלֶ֫יהָ to whom I shall say..., וְאָֽמְרָה and she (then) shall say, &c. This use of the perfect consecutive is especially frequent after a participle introduced by הִנֵּה, e.g. Gn 6 f.; with a different subject 1 K 20, Am 6; after a complete noun-clause introduced by הִנֵּה (cf. § 140), Ex 3 behold, I come (i.e. if I shall come)... וְאָֽמַרְתִּי לָהֶם and shall say unto them..., וְאָֽמְרוּ and they (then) shall say, &c.; 1 S 14 ff., Is 7, 8 f., 39:6.
u (ζ) After an infinitive absolute, whether the infinitive absolute serves to strengthen the finite verb (see § 113 t), e.g. Is 31, or is used as an emphatic substitute for a cohortative or imperfect (§ 113 dd and ee), e.g. Lv 2, Dt 1, Is 5, Ez 23 f.
v (η) After an infinitive construct governed by a preposition (for this change from the infinitive construction to the finite verb, cf. § 114 r), e.g. 1 S 10 עַד־בּוֹאִי אֵלֶ֫יךָ וְהֽוֹדַעְתִּי לְךָ till I come unto thee (prop. until my coming) and show thee, &c.; Gn 18, 27, Ju 6, Ez 39; cf. 1 K 2, 42.
w Rem. To the same class belong 1 S 14, where the idea of time precedes, until it be evening and until I be avenged, &c., and Is 5, where the idea of place precedes, in both cases governed by עַד־.
x 4. The very frequent use of the perfect consecutive in direct dependence upon other tenses (see above, d–v) explains how it finally obtained a kind of independent force—especially for the purpose of announcing future events—and might depend loosely on sentences to which it stood only in a wider sense in the relation of a temporal or logical consequence. Thus the perfect consecutive is used—
(a) To announce future events, &c., in loose connexion with a further announcement, e.g. Gn 41 וְקָמוּ and two co-ordinate perfects consecutive, equivalent to but then shall arise, &c.; frequently so after הִנֵּה with a following substantive (1 S 9), or a participial clause (cf. the analogous instances above, under t), e.g. 1 S 2 behold, the days come, וְנָֽדַעְתִּי that I will cut off, &c.; Is 39, Am 4, 8, 9, and very often in Jeremiah; after an expression of time, Ex 17, Is 10, 29, Jer 51, Ho 1. Further, when joined to a statement concerning present or past facts, especially when these contain the reason for the action, &c., expressed in the perfect consecutive; cf. Is 6 lo, this hath touched thy lips, וְסָר therefore thine iniquity shall be taken away, &c. (not copulative and it is taken away, since it is parallel with a simple imperfect), Gn 20, 26, Ju 13 (here in an adversative sense); Ho 8. In loose connexion with a noun-clause, a long succession of perfects consecutive occurs in Ex 6 ff. Also in Amos 5 וּנְשָׁאתֶם may be an announcement yea, ye shall take up; but cf. below, rr. y Rem. 1. Very frequently the announcement of a future event is attached by means of וְהָיָה[36] and it shall come to pass (cf. the analogous continuation in the past by means of וַיְהִי, § 111, 2), after which the event announced (sometimes after a long parenthesis) follows in one or more (co-ordinate) perfects consecutive, Gn 9, 12 (וְהָיָה כִי=if, as in 46:33, Ex 1, 22 and frequently), 1 K 18, Is 14 f., Am 8; or in the imperfect, Gn 4, Is 2, 3, 4, 7, 21 ff. (cf. 29:8); or in the jussive, Lv 14. It very rarely happens that the verb which is thus loosely added, agrees in gender and number with the following subject, as in Nu 5, Jer 42 וְהָֽיְתָה (before הַחֶ֫רֶב), and in Jer 42 וְיִהְיוּ (before כָּל־הָֽאֲנָשִׁים).
z 2. The jussive form וִיהִי occurs (in the sense described in y) instead of וְהָיָה in 1 S 10, 2 S 5 (1 Ch 14), 1 K 14, Ru 3, although in the first three places a jussive is wholly inadmissible in the context, and even in Ru 3 (where an admonition follows) וְהָיָה would be expected (see below, bb). In 1 K 14 the form is a textual error, and the pointing should simply be וַיְהִי. In the other passages ויהי (always before an infinitive with a preposition) stands at the beginning of the sentence at an unusually long distance from the principal tone, and hence is certainly to be explained according to § 109 k, except that in 1 S 10, &c., the simply rhythmical jussive form takes the place, not of the full imperfect form, but (exceptionally) of the perfect consecutive.
aa (b) To introduce a command or wish: Dt 10 love ye therefore the stranger; 1 S 6, 24, 1 K 2 (in Gn 40 the precative perfect consecutive, as elsewhere the cohortative, jussive, and imperative, is strengthened by means of נָא). So, also, in loose connexion with participial and other noun-clauses (see above, x), Gn 45 f., 1 K 2 f., Ru 3 f., 3:9.—In Gn 17 the perfect consecutive (וּנְמַלְתֶּם and ye shall be circumcised, &c.) is used to explain a preceding command.
bb Rem. As in the cases mentioned above under y, the connexion may be made by means of וְהָיָה. Thus with a following perfect consecutive, e.g. Gn 46, 47, Ju 4. Cf. also Gn 24, where the real wish, at least as regards the sense, is contained in the next sentence.
cc (c) To introduce a question, whether in loose connexion with another interrogative sentence (see above, p), e.g. Gn 29 art thou my brother (equivalent to, Surely thou art), וַֽעֲבַדְתַּ֫נִי and shouldest thou then serve me for naught? or with a positive statement, e.g. Ex 5 (וְהִשְׁבַּתֶּם will ye then make them rest?); Nu 16, 1 S 25, and (if it is Mileraʿ) ψ 50 (וְהֶֽהֱרַשְׁתִּי).
dd (d) To introduce actions frequently repeated hence analogous to the numerous examples of a frequentative perfect consecutive, above, under e), e.g. 1 S 1 (וְעָלָה of annual festival journeys); 13:21 (where, however, the text appears radically corrupt); 27:9 (וְהִכָּה, i.e. every time, therefore continued by means of וְלֹא יְחַיֶּה); 1 K 5 (וְכִלְכְּלוּ, parallel with a simple imperfect); 9:25, Jer 25, Ho 12, Dn 8.—In Jb 1 f. a series of frequentative perfects consecutive is interrupted by an imperfect consecutive, while a simple imperfect (as the modus rei repetitae) forms the conclusion. In Jer 6 a similar perfect is expressly marked, by placing the tone on the final syllable (according to § 49 h), as parallel with the real perfects consecutive.
ee Rem. The loose connexion of tempora frequentativa by וְהָיָה (cf. the Rem. on y and bb) is also very common in this sense; thus with a following perfect consecutive, Gn 30 f. (but in verse 42a, where the verb is separated from the Wāw by an insertion, we find לֹא יָשִׂים he used not to put them in, according to § 107 e); Gn 38, Ex 17, 33 ff. (see above, e), Nu 21, Ju 6, 19, 1 S 16 (followed by five perfects consecutive); 2 S 15; with a following imperfect (as the modus rei repetitae), Ju 2, 2 S 14.—In Ju 12 f. והיה, contrary to what would be expected, is continued by means of the imperfect consecutive, and in 1 S 13 by וְלֹא with the perfect (instead of the imperfect).
ff 5. Further, the perfect consecutive is very frequently employed with a certain emphasis to introduce the apodosis after sentences (or their equivalents) which contain a condition, a reason, or a statement of time. Such an apodosis, as in the cases already treated, may represent either future events, or commands and wishes, or even events which have been often repeated in the past. Thus—
(a) The perfect consecutive occurs in the apodosis to conditional sentences[37] (§ 159 g, o, s):
(α) After אִם with the imperfect, e.g. 2 K 7b אִם־יְמִיתֻ֫נוּ וָמָֽתְנוּ if they kill us, (well then) we shall but die; here the perfect consecutive is used obviously with greater emphasis than the imperfect (נִחְיֶה) which immediately precedes; Gn 18, 24, 41, 32:9, Nu 30, Ju 4, 1 S 1, 20, 1 K 3, Na 3, Ec 4.
gg (β) After אִם with the perfect (in the sense of a futurum exactum), Nu 5, 2 K 5, 74a, Is 4 f.; as precative apodosis after אִם־נָא with the perf. preteritum, Gn 33; as a frequentative perfect consecutive, to represent past events in the apodosis after אִם with a perfect, Gn 38, Nu 21, Ju 6, Jb 7; after אִם with imperfect, Gn 31.
hh (γ) After כִּי (in case, suppose that) with the imperfect, Gn 12, Ex 18, Ju 13, Is 58, Ez 14.[38] Frequentative with reference to the past, after כִּי with frequentative perfect, Ju 2, Jb 7f. ii (δ) After אֲשֶׁר with the imperfect, Gn 44 אֲשֶׁר יִמָּצֵא אִתּוֹ... וָמֵת with whomsoever... it be found, let him die; with the perfect, Ex 21 and if a man lie not in wait, &c.; Ju 1.
kk (ε) Very frequently after a perfect consecutive (one or more) containing the condition, e.g. Gn 44 וְהֽוֹרַדְתֶּם... וּלְקַחְתֶּם גַּם־אֶת־זֶה and if ye take (or shall have taken) this one also... ye shall bring down, &c.; cf. Gn 33, 42, 44, 22, 47:30, Nu 30, Ru 2, and probably also Ez 39.—Also frequentative in reference to the past, e.g. 1 S 17 f.... וּבָא הָֽאֲרִי וְיָצָ֫אתִי and when there came (as sometimes happened) a lion... I went out, &c.; Ex 33, Nu 10 ff., 1 K 18, Jer 20 (the perfects consecutive being regularly continued in the apodosis by וְלֹא with an imperfect[39]).
ll Rem. The perfect consecutive may be used also in the protasis to express a condition when the employment of the perfect consecutive in the apodosis has become impossible, owing to an emphatic word having to stand before it; thus in Ez 14 on account of הֵ֫מָּה; 33:4 on account of דָּמוֹ.—In 1 S 14 the imperfect consecutive, contrary to what might be expected, stands in the apodosis, and when Saul saw any... valiant man, he took him unto him, where וַיַּֽאַסְפֵ֫הוּ suggests the special case, rather than a repeated occurrence; cf. 2 S 15. Conversely, in 1 S 2 (וַיֹּאמֶֹר perhaps a mere mistake for וְאָמַר), 17:35 b an imperfect consecutive stands in the protasis.
mm (ζ) After various equivalents of sentences, which contain a condition; thus, after a substantive standing absolutely, or a participle (a casus pendens), Gn 17 וְעָרֵל זָכָר... וְנִכְרְתָה וג׳ and the uncircumcised male (in case such an one be found), he shall be cut off, &c.; cf. Gn 30, Ex 12, 2 S 14, Is 6, and (after an infinitive with a preposition) 2 S 7; in a wider sense also Ex 4, 9, 12, Is 9, 56.
nn (b) The perfect consecutive serves as the apodosis to causal clauses; thus e.g. after יַ֫עַן כִּי with the perfect, Is 3 f.; after יַ֫עַן אֲשֶׁר with perfect, 1 K 20; after עֵ֫קֶב with perfect, Nu 14; also after what are equivalent to causal clauses, e.g. ψ 25 (לְמַ֫עַן שִׁמְךָ... וְסָֽלַחְתָּ for thy name’s sake... pardon...); Is 37 after יַ֫עַן with an infinitive.
oo (c) The perfect consecutive occurs as the apodosis to temporal clauses or their equivalents, e.g. 1 S 2 בְּטֶ֫רֶם יַקְטִרוּן אֶת־הַחֵ֫לֶב נַ֫עַר הַכֹּהֵן... וּבָא before they burnt the fat, the priest’s servant came (used to come), &c., hence a frequentative perfect consecutive relating to the past, as in Ex 1; also after participial clauses (§ 116 w), e.g. 1 S 2 f. כָּל־אִישׁ זֹבֵחַ זֶ֫בַח... וּבָא when(ever) any man offered sacrifice, then came, &c. (so Ju 19, 2 S 20), with a frequentative perfect consecutive. The perfect consecutive is very frequently used to announce future actions or events after simple expressions of time of any kind; thus Gn 3, Ex 32 (after בְּיוֹם with the infinitive), cf. also such examples as Gn 44, Ju 16, Jos 6, 1 S 1, 16 (numerous frequentative perfects consecutive after the infinitive with a preposition; so 2 S 15, see above, ee); 1 S 20, 2 S 14, 15, Is 18; moreover, Ex 17, Is 10, 29, 37; even after single disconnected words, e.g. Ex 16 עֶ֫רֶב וִֽידַעְתֶּם at even (when it becomes evening) then ye shall know; cf. verse 7, Lv 7, 1 K 13, Pr 24.
pp 6. Finally there still remains a number of passages which cannot be classed with any of those hitherto mentioned. Of these, some are due to the influence of Aramaic modes of expression, while in others the text is evidently corrupt.[40] In a few instances we can do no more than merely call attention to the incorrectness of the expression. (We are not of course concerned here with the cases—usually occurring in dependent clauses—in which a 2nd pers. perf. with Wāw copulative is simply co-ordinate with what precedes, as in Gn 28, and probably Nu 21, Dt 33.)
(a) The influence of the Aramaic construction of the perfect with וְ as the narrative tense, instead of the Hebrew imperfect consecutive (cf. Kautzsch, Gramm. des Bibl.-Aram., § 71 b), is certainly to be traced in Qoheleth, and sporadically in other very late books,[41] perhaps also in a few passages in the hooks of Kings, which are open to the suspicion of being due to later interpolation; so probably 1 K 12 וְהֶֽעֱמִידִ; 2 K 11 Keth. וראתה; 14:14 וְלָקַח (in the parallel passage, 2 Ch 25, the word is wanting); 2 K 23 וְנַשָׂא, &c.; verse 10 וְטִמֵּא, &c.; verse 12 וְהִשְׁלִיךְ, &c.; verse 15 וְשָׂרַף, &c.[42] Cf. also Ez 37, 7, 10.
qq (b) The text is certainly corrupt in Is 40 (read with the LXX and Vulgate וָאֹֽמַר); Jer 38, where the narrative breaks off in the middle of the sentence; 40:3 (וְהָיָה, &c., wanting in the LXX); also in Ju 7 וְנָפַל הָאֹהֶל is altogether redundant; in 1 S 3 read, with Klostermann, the 2nd sing. masc. instead of והגדתי; in 1 K 21 וְהשִׁ֫יבוּ is, no doubt, incorrectly repeated from verse 9, where it is an imperative.
rr Of other questionable instances, (α) the following, at any rate, may also be explained as frequentatives, Gn 21, 49, Ex 36, 38, 39, 1 S 5, 17, 24 (but even so וְאָֽמְרוּ would be expected); 2 K 23, Is 28 (parallel with an imperfect); Am 5 (unless it is rather, yea, ye shall take up; see above, x); ψ 26, Ezr 8.
ss (β) A longer or constant continuance in a past state is perhaps represented by the perfect with וְ (as a variety of the frequentative perfect with וְ), in Gn 15, 34, Nu 21, Jos 9, 22b, Is 22, Jer 3. But the unusual perfects consec. in Jos 15–11, 16:2–8 (ultimately parallel with an imperf. as in 17:9, 18:20), 18:12–21, 19:11–14.22.26–29.34, are without doubt rightly explained by Bennett (SBOT., Joshua, p. 23) as originally containing the directions either of God to Joshua or of Joshua to the people; cf. the evident trace of this in 15:4b. A redactor transformed the directions into a description but left the perfects consec., which are to be explained as in aa. In the same way וְהָיוּ Ex 36 is most simply explained as repeated from 26:25.
tt (γ) The following are due to errors in the text, or to incorrect modes of expression: Ex 36 f., Ju 3,[43] 16:18 (read וַיַּֽעֲלוּ), 1 S 4, 17, 2 S 16, 19 f. (read צָֽלְחוּ and וַיַּֽעַבְרוּ), 1 K 3 (where ושאלת is, no doubt intentionally, assimilated to the four other perfects); 13:3, 20:21; 2 K 14 (where, with Stade, וְאֶת־הַסֶּ֫לַע תּפַשׁ should be read); 14:14, 18:4 (where, at any rate, וְשִׁבַּר might be taken as a frequentative, but not וכרת, &c.; evidently the perfects are co-ordinated only in form with הוּא הֵסִיר); 18:36, 21:15, 24:14, Jer 37 (where וְהִכּוּ, but not וְנָֽתְנוּ, might be frequentative); Ez 9 (omit וְיָֽצְאוּ with Stade, and read וְהַכּוּ); 20:22 (והשבתי Milʿêl before an imperfect consecutive); Am 7 (וְאָכְלָה after an imperfect consecutive); Jb 16.
uu Finally, in 1 S 1, 10, 17, 25, 2 S 6, 2 K 3, Jer 37, Am 7 וַיְהִי is to be read throughout instead of וְהָיָה, but in Gn 38 וְהִיא with the LXX.
B. The Infinitive and Participle.
Cf. the dissertation of J. Kahan, and, especially, the thorough investigation by E. Sellin, both entitled, Ueber die verbal-nominals Doppelnatur der hebräischen Participien und Infinitive, &c., Lpz. 1889; F. Prätorius, ‘Ueber die sogen. Infin. absol. des Hebr.’ in ZDMG. 1902, pp. 546 ff.
a 1. The infinitive absolute is employed according to § 45 to emphasize the idea of the verb in the abstract, i.e. it speaks of an action (or state) without any regard to the agent or to the circumstances of time and mood under which it takes place. As the name of an action the infinitive absolute, like other nouns in the stricter sense, may form part of certain combinations (as a subject, predicate, or object, or even as a genitive,[44] see below); but such a use of the infinitive absolute (instead of the infinitive construct with or without a preposition) is, on the whole, rare, and, moreover, open to question on critical grounds. On the other hand, the infinitive absolute frequently exhibits its character as an expression of the verbal idea by taking an object, either in the accusative or even with a preposition.
b Examples of the use of the infinitive absolute:—
(a) As subject, Pr 25 אָכֹל דְּבַשׁ הַרְבּוֹת לֹא טוֹב it is not good to eat much honey; Jer 10, Jb 6, Ec 4; epexegetically, after a demonstrative pronoun, Is 58 f., Zc 14.
c (b) As predicate, Is 32 and the effect of righteousness (is) הַשְׁקֵט וָבֶ֫טַח quietness (prop. to find rest) and confidence.
d (c) As object, Is 1 לִמְדוּ הֵיטֵב learn to do well; Is 7, Pr 15, Jb 9; according to the sense also Jer 9 23:14, as well as Is 5 (הָסֵר and פָּרֹץ virtually depend on the idea of the wish contained in עֹשֶׂה); Is 22, where a long series of infinitives absolute is governed by הִנֵּה, and 59:13 (six infinitives governed by יְדַֽעֲנוּם in verse 12); Dt 28 is strange since the object precedes the infinitive absolute which governs it,[45] also Is 42, where the statement of place precedes the infinitive absolute.—In Jer 9, Jb 13 the infinitive absolute as the object of the verb is placed before it for the sake of emphasis (with the verb negatived by לֹא in Is 57, Jer 49), so also in La 3 where it is the remoter object and co-ordinated with a substantive.
e (d) As genitive, Is 14 בְּמַטְאֲטֵא הַשְׁמֵד with the besom of destruction; so perhaps also 4:4 בְּרוּחַ בָּעֵר; cf. further, Pr 1, 21. The infinitive absolute is never used in immediate connexion with prepositions[46] (which as being originally substantives govern the genitive), but always the infinitive construct; but if a second infinitive is co-ordinated by וְ with such an infinitive construct, it has the form of the infinitive absolute (since it is released from the immediate government of the preposition), e.g. 1 S 22 ... בְּתִתְּךָ לוֹ לֶחֶם וְשָׁאוֹל לוֹ בֵּֽאלֹהִים in that thou hast given him bread ... and hast enquired of God for him; Ez 36; 1 S 25, 33 (after מִן); after לְ Ex 32, Jer 7, 44.
f (e) Governing an accusative of the object, e.g. Is 22 הָרֹג בָּקָר וְשָׁחֹם צאֹן slaying oxen and killing sheep; cf. Ex 20, 23, Dt 5, Is 37, Ez 23, and of the examples in a–d, Dt 28 Is 5, 58 f., Pr 25, &c.; followed by a preposition, e.g. Is 7 מָאוֹס בָּרָע וּבָחוֹר בַּטּוֹב to refuse the evil and choose the good; Pr 15 (הוֹכֵחַ לוֹ).
g If the object be a personal pronoun, then, since the infinitive absolute can never be united with a suffix (see the note on a), it is affixed by means of the accusative-sign אֵת (אֹת), e.g. Jer 9 וְיָדוֹעַ אֹתִי and knoweth me; Ez 36. h 2. Analogous to the use of the infinitive absolute as the accusative of the object, mentioned in d, is its employment as a casus adverbialis[47] in connexion with some form of the finite verb, to describe more particularly the manner or attendant circumstances (especially those of time and place) under which an action or state has taken place, or is taking place, or will take place; e.g. Jer 22 he shall be buried with the burial of an ass, סָחוֹב וְהַשְׁלֵךְ a drawing and casting forth, i.e. being drawn and cast forth, &c.; Gn 21 (הַרְחֵק a removing, i.e. distant; cf. Ex 33, Jos 3); Gn 30, Ex 30, Nu 6, 23, 15:35 (where a subject is added subsequently; see below, gg); Jos 3, 1 S 3 (הָחֵל וְכַלֵּה a beginning and ending, i.e. from beginning to end); 2 S 8, Is 7 (הַֽעֲמֵק and הַגְבֵּהַּ, prop. a making deep ..., and a making high, i.e. whether thy request extend to the world below or to the height above); 57:17 (הַסְתֵּר in hiding, sc. my face); Jer 3 (דֵּעָה וְהַשְׁכֵּיל with knowledge and understanding); Hb 3 (עָרוֹת, for the form cf. § 75 aa); Zc 7, ψ 35 (חָרֹק, to define more precisely קָֽרְעוּ verse 15); Jb 15.[48]
i Rem. 1. To an adverbial infinitive absolute of this kind, there may further be added a casus adverbialis (the accusative of state or circumstance), or even a circumstantial clause, to define more exactly the manner in which the action is performed, e.g. Is 20 and he did so הָלֹךְ עָרוֹם וְיָחֵף walking naked and barefoot, prop. in the condition of one naked, &c.; Is 30 a breaking in pieces (acc. to the reading כָּתוֹת; the Masora requires כָּתוּת) without sparing.
k 2. A few infinitives of this kind, all of which are in Hipheîl, have, through frequent use, come to be treated by the language as simple adverbs; so especially הַרְבֵּה (cf. § 75 ff) multum faciendo, i.e. multum, very frequently strengthened by מְאֹד very and even used without connexion with a finite verb (see the Lexicon); also הֵיטֵב bene faciendo, i.e. bene, used especially to express the careful and thorough performance of an action (e.g. Dt 13); in Dt 9, 27 it is added epexegetically to another adverbial infinitive absolute, in Jon 4 it twice precedes the verb for the sake of emphasis. Finally, הַשְׁכֵּם mane faciendo, i.e. early in the morning, then in general early with the additional idea of earnestness; in 1 S 17 joined with the infinitive absolute וְהַֽעֲרֵב a denominative from עֶ֫רֶב evening (morning and evening, i.e. early and late), elsewhere (with the exception of Pr 27) always joined with the infinitive absolute of the governing verb, e.g. Jer 11 for I earnestly protested (הַֽעִדֹ֫תִי) unto your fathers ... הַשֵׁכֵּם וְהָעֵד rising early and protesting, i.e. with earnest protestation; Jer 25, 26 (where וְ should be omitted before ה׳); Jer 29, 32, 2 Ch 16. l 3. The infinitive absolute occurs most frequently in immediate connexion with the finite verb of the same stem, in order in various ways to define more accurately or to strengthen the idea of the verb.[49]
m These infinitives absolute joined immediately to the finite verb belong in a sense to the schema etymologicum treated in § 117 p, i.e. they are objects of the finite verb in question, except that the infinitive absolute (as a nomen abstractum) lays stress rather on the actual occurrence or the energy of the action (see the examples below), while the noun proper emphasizes the result or extent of the action; cf. e.g. Ex 22 אִם־צָעֹק יִצְעַק אֵלַי if it actually happens that he cries to me, with Gn 27 (as it were, he cried, so that a great cry was heard).
We must further distinguish—
n (a) The infinitive absolute used before the verb to strengthen the verbal idea, i.e. to emphasize in this way either the certainty (especially in the case of threats) or the forcibleness and completeness of an occurrence. In English, such an infinitive is mostly expressed by a corresponding adverb, but sometimes merely by putting greater stress on the verb; e.g. Gn 2 מוֹת תָּמוּת thou shalt surely die, cf. 18:10, 18, 22:17, 28:22, 1 S 9 (cometh surely to pass); 24:21, Am 5, 7, Hb 2, Zc 11; with the infinitive strengthened by אַךְ Gn 44 (but 27:30 and Jacob was yet scarce gone out, &c.); Gn 43 הָעֵד הֵעִד בָּ֫נוּ he did solemnly protest unto us; 1 S 20 נִשְׁאֹל נִשְׁאַל David earnestly asked leave of me; Jos 17, Ju 1 וְהוֹרֵישׁ לֹא הֽוֹרִישׁוֹ and did not utterly drive them out; especially typical instances are Am 9 I will destroy it from off the face of the earth אֶ֫פֶס כִּי לֹא הַשְׁמֵיד אַשְׁמִיד וג׳ saving that I will not utterly destroy, &c.; Jer 30 and will in no wise leave thee unpunished; cf. further Gn 20, 1 K 3, Jo 1, Jb 13.
o The infinitive absolute is used before the verb with less emphasis:
(1) Frequently at the beginning of the statement; cf. Driver on 1 S 20. However, in these cases a special emphasis on the following verb is sometimes intended; cf. above, n, on Gn 43, 1 S 20; also Gn 3, 26, 32, 1 S 14, 20. Elsewhere the infinitive absolute is evidently used only as possessing a certain fullness of sound (hence for rhythmical reasons, like some uses of the separate pronoun, § 135 a), as in Gn 15, 43, 20, Ju 9, 1 S 10, 23, 2 S 1, 20.
(2) Very frequently in conditional sentences after אִם, &c. The infinitive absolute in this case emphasizes the importance of the con-
- ↑ Cf. P. Haupt in the Notes on Esther, 9:2.
- ↑ Incorrectly, e.g. in the Vulgate, Samuel autem mortuus est... et Saul abstulit magos, &c.
- ↑ With regard to the great but very natural preponderance of intransitive verbs (expressing an existing state), cf. the lists in Knudtzon (see above, p. 309, note 2), pp. 117 and 122 in the Danish text.
- ↑ Cf. novi, odi, memini; οἶδα, μέμνημαι, ἔοικα, δέδορκα, κέκραγα; in the New Testament, ἤλπικα, ἡγαπηκα.
- ↑ Cf. the similar use of ὄλωλα (διέφθορας, Il. 15. 128) and perii! On the kindred use of the perfect in conditional sentences, cf. below, p.
- ↑ In Gn 40 a perf. confidentiae (after כִּי אִם; but cf. § 163 d) appears to be used in the expression of an earnest desire that something may happen (but have me in thy remembrance, &c.). Neither this passage, however, nor the use of the perfect in Arabic to express a wish or imprecation, justifies us in assuming the existence of a precative perfect in Hebrew. In Jb 21, 22, also, translate the counsel of the wicked is far from me. Cf. Driver, Tenses3, p. 25 f. In Is 43 either נִקְבְּצוּ is imperative (see § 51 o) or we must read יִקָּֽבְצוּ, corresponding to יֵאָֽסְפוּ which follows.
- ↑ Cf. the literature cited above, p. 309, note 2.
- ↑ Cf. the Mêšaʿ inscription, l. 5, כי יאנף כמש בארצה for Chemosh was angry with his land. As Driver, Tenses, 3rd ed., § 27, 1 a, remarks, this vivid realization of the accomplishment of the action is especially frequent in poetic and prophetic style.
- ↑ According to the Masora such imperfects occur in Is 1013 bis (where, however, וְאָסִיר might also mean I am wont to remove, &c.), Is 48, 57, ψ 18a, also (according to § 49 c) in 2 S 1 and Ez 16. In some other cases וְ is no doubt a dogmatic emendation for וָ (imperf. consec.) in order to represent historical statements as promises; cf. Is 42, 43 [contrasted with 42], 51, 63 and the note on § 53 p.
- ↑ After אָז then (to announce future events) the imperf. is naturally used in the sense of a future, Gn 24, Ex 12, Mi 3, Zp 3, ψ 51.
- ↑ It is not always possible to carry out with certainty the distinction between continued and repeated actions. Some of the examples given under f might equally be referred to g.
- ↑ As stated in § 46 a, a prohibition cannot be expressed by אַל־ and the imperative.
- ↑ To regard this as an optative (so Hupfeld) is from the context impossible. It is more probably a strong pregnant construction, or fusion of two sentences (such as, do not think he will slumber!). Verse 4 contains the objective confirmation, by means of לֹא with the imperf., of that which was previously only a subjective conviction.
- ↑ But יַעַ֫ן אֲשֶׁר in a causal sense (because, since), e.g. Ju 2 (as אֲשֶׁר Gn 34) is followed by the perfect. On Jos 4 see above, § 74 g.
- ↑ R.V. because he shall not see..]
- ↑ In 2 K 2 פֶּן־ occurs with the perf. in a vivid presentment of the time when the fear is realized and the remedy comes too late. (In 2 S 20, since a perfect consec. follows, read with Driver יִמְצָא.)
- ↑ By this, of course, is not meant that these finer distinctions were consciously present to the Hebrew mind. They are rather mere expedients for making intelligible to ourselves the full significance of the Semitic imperfect.
- ↑ For the few examples of cohortatives in the 3rd sing., see § 48 d.
- ↑ But verbs ל״ה, according to § 75 l, even in the cohortative, almost always have the ending ־ֶה; cf. e.g. in Dt 32 אֶרְאֶה after אַסְתִּ֫ירָה.
- ↑ R.V. let me sing.]
- ↑ Analogous to this cohortative (as equivalent to the imperfect) after שָׁם is the use of the historic imperf. after אָז, § 107 c.
- ↑ With regard to verbs ל״ה, it is true that the full form of the imperfect is frequently used with the meaning of the jussive (as also for the cohortative, see § 108 a, note 2), e.g. אַל־יִרְאֶה Jb 3 (but previously יְקַו let it look for!):especially in (Neh 2) and immediately before the principal pause, Gn 1 תֵּֽרָאֶה; Ju 6 יִהְֽיֶה, but previously יְהִי־נָא; Is 47 תֵּֽרָאֶה, previously תִּגָּל; ψ 109. On the attempt to distinguish such jussives from the imperfect by means of a special meaning ־ֵה, see § 75 hh.
- ↑ This does not include the cases in which the jussive is not logically dependent on a preceding imperat., but is merely co-ordinated, e.g. Gn 20, ψ 27, &c.
- ↑ On the close relation between the imperative and jussive (both in meaning and form), cf. § 46 and § 48 i.
- ↑ Like the threatening formulae in the Latin comic writers, e.g. vapula, Ter. Phorm. v. 6, 10=vapulare te iubeo, Plaut. Curc. vi. 4, 12.
- ↑ On an apparent exception (the imperf. consec. at the beginning of whole books) see § 49 b note.
- ↑ Cf. Is 45, where the imperf. consec. is joined to an abrupt statement of the cause, and Jb 36, where it is joined to an abrupt statement of the place.
- ↑ Exhaustive statistics of the use of ויהי in its many and various connexions are given by König in ZAW. 1899, p. 260 ff.
- ↑ Cf. the Mêšaʿ inscription, l. 5 (Omri) the king of Israel, ויענו he oppressed Moab, &c.—The peculiar imperfect consecutive in Gn 30 b (in the earlier editions explained as equivalent to an object-clause) arises rather from a pregnant brevity of expression: I have observed and have come to the conclusion, the Lord hath blessed me, &c.—In Gn 27 read, with LXX, וַיְהִי before כִּשְׁמֹעַ.
- ↑ Also in Jer 51 the imperfects consecutive are attached to the threat virtually contained in the preceding imperatives. On the other hand וַיָּחֵ֫לּוּ Ho 8 would be very remarkable as expressing a future; the text is, however, certainly corrupt, and hence the Cod. Babyl. and the Erfurt MS. 3 endeavour to remedy it by וְיח׳, and Ewald reads וְיָחִלוּ—In Ez 28 (cf. Jer 15f.) וָֽאֲחַלֶּלְךָ appears to announce an action irrevocably determined upon, and therefore represented as already accomplished; cf. the prophetic perfects in verse 17 ff.
- ↑ It is difficult to give a proper explanation of this phenomenon (according to § 49 a, note, to be found only in the Canaanitish group of languages), when we have given up the theory of a special wāw conversivum in the unscientific sense mentioned in § 49 b, note, at the end, and if we accept the fact that the perfect and imperfect consecutive cannot possibly be used in a way which contradicts their fundamental character as described in §§ 106 and 107. In other words, even the perfect consecutive originally represents a finally completed action, &c., just as the imperfect consecutive represents an action whichis only beginning, becoming or still continuing, and hence in any case incomplete. The simplest view is to suppose, that the use of the perfect consecutive originated from those cases, in which it had to express the conclusion (or final consequence) of an action which was continued (or repeated) in past time (see the examples above), and that this use was afterwards extended to other cases, in which it had to represent the temporal or logical consequence of actions, &c., still in progress, and thus in the end a regular interchange of the two tenses became recognized.
- ↑ Also in Ez 44 (where Stade, ZAW. v. 293, would read שֵֽׁרְתוּ and וַיִּֽהְיוּ) the unusual tenses may have been intentionally chosen: because they continually ministered and so always became afresh...
- ↑ Driver, on this passage, rightly refers to 1 S 2.
- ↑ Am 4 would also come under this head, if וְהִמְטַרְתִּ֫י is really intended, and the statement refers to the past; מָנַ֫עְתִּי might, however, also be a perfect expressing positive assurance (§ 106 m), and the passage would then come under s.
- ↑ That וְהָֽלְכָה, &c., are frequentatives (the maidservant used to go repeatedly and tell them) may be seen from יֵֽלֵכוּ (necessarily an imperfect, since it is separated from וְ by הֵם) and יֽוּכְלוּ; on the other hand in verse 18 וַיַּרְא and וַיֵּֽלְכוּ of actions which happened only once.
- ↑ On the various combinations with וָהָיָה see König’s statistics in ZAW. xix. 272 ff.
- ↑ In a number of the examples of this kind the protasis is already loosely connected by means of והיה, and hence some of them had to be already mentioned above, under y, bb, ee.
- ↑ In 1 S 24 a question appears to be expressed by the perfect consecutive, for if a man find his enemy, will he let him go well away? Probably, however, with Klostermann, וּמִי should be read for וְכִי.
- ↑ In all these examples (not only in the frequentative perfects consecutive) the original idea of the perfect, which also underlies the perfect consecutive, comes out very distinctly. Gn 44 (see above) implies in the mind of the speaker, If it ever shall have come to this, that ye have taken this one also, then ye have thereby brought me down to Sheol.
- ↑ Mayer Lambert, REJ. xxvi. 55, is probably right in pointing some of these forms as infin. abs. instead of perfects.
- ↑ In the whole of Qoheleth the imperfect consecutive occurs only in 1 and 4. Several of the perfects with וְ can no doubt be explained as frequentatives, e.g. 1, 2, 5:18, compared with 6; but this is impossible in such passages as 9 ff. In Ezra, Driver reckons only six examples of the historical perfect with וְ, in Nehemiah only six, and in Esther six or seven.
- ↑ Stade in ZAW. v. 291 ff. and in Ausgeäwhlte akad. Reden, Giessen, 1899, p. 194 ff. and appendix p. 199, discusses, in connexion with 2 K 12, a number of critically questionable perfects with וְ. He considers that the whole section, 2 K 23 from וְנָשָׂא to verse 5 inclusive, is to be regarded as a gloss, since the continuation of an imperfect consecutive by means of a perfect with וְ never occurs in pre-exilic documents, except in places where it is due to corruption of the original text. The theory of frequentative perfects consecutive (even immediately after imperfects consecutive), which has been supported above, under f and g, by a large number of examples, is quite inconsistent with the character of the action in 2 K 23 וְהִשְׁבִּית, verse 8 וְנָתָץ, and verse 14 וְשִׁבַּר.
- ↑ Or does ונעל, as a frequentative, imply fastening with several bolts? It is, at all events, to be noticed, that in 2 S 13 also ונעל follows an imperfect consecutive.
- ↑ The infinitive absolute can never be joined with a genitive or a pronominal suffix.
- ↑ Perhaps הַצֵּג according to § 53 k should be explained as an infinitive construct, or should be written הַצִּג.
- ↑ ואחרי שָׁתֹה 1 S 1 is impossible Hebrew, and as the LXX shows, a late addition.
- ↑ That this casus adverbialis also was originally regarded as an accusative, may be seen from classical Arabic, where an infinitive of this kind expressly retains the accusative ending. In Latin the ablative of the gerund corresponds in many ways to this use of the infinitive absolute.
- ↑ Also in 2 K 21 for מָחָה וְהָפַךְ read with Stade and Klostermann מָחֹה וְהָפֹךְ; similarly, with Stade, וְקָשֹׁה in Ju 4; וְחָזוֹק in Jer 23, and on Is 31 cf. t.
- ↑ Cf. A. Rieder, Die Verbindung des Inf. abs. mit dem Verb. fin ... im Hebr., Lpz., 1872; also his Quae ad syntaxin Hebraicam ... planiorem faciendam ex lingua Graeca et Latina afferantur, Gumbinnen (Programm des Gymnasiums), 1884. G. R. Hauschild, Die Verbindung finiter und infiniter Verbalformen desselben Stammes in einigen Bibelsprachen, Frankfurt a. M., 1893, discussing especially the rendering of such constructions in the Greek and Latin versions.