Jump to content

Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar/130. Wider Use of the Construct State

From Wikisource
Wilhelm GeseniusEmil Kautzsch600927Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar — Wider Use of the Construct State1909Arthur Ernest Cowley

§130. Wider Use of the Construct State.

a The construct state, which, according to § 89 a, primarily represents only the immediate government by one substantive of the following word (or combination of words), is frequently employed in rapid narrative as a connecting form, even apart from the genitive relation; so especially—

(1) Before prepositions,[1] particularly in elevated (prophetic or poetic) style, especially when the nomen regens is a participle. Thus before בְּ, שִׂמְחַת בַּקָּצִיר the joy in the harvest, Is 9, 2 S 1, ψ 136f.; in participles, Is 5, 9, 19, ψ 84, and especially often when בְּ with a suffix follows the participle, e.g. ψ 2 כָּל־חוֹסֵי בוֹ; cf. Na 1, Jer 8 (ψ 24); ψ 64 (unless רֹאֶה should be read); 98:7.[2]—Before לְ, Ho 9 (but read probably מַתֲמַדֵּי כַסְפָּם); ψ 58 (before לָמוֹ); Pr 24, Jb 18, La 2 (before לָךְ); 1 Ch 6, 23; in participles, Ez 38, Jb 24; before לְ with an infinitive, Is 56, and again before לְ with a suffix, Gn 24, Is 30, 64;[3]—before אֶל־, Is 14, Ez 21; —before אֶת־ (with), Is 8; —before מִן, Gn 3, Is 28 (a participle); Jer 23, Ez 13, Ho 7; —before עַל־, Ju 5; —before בִּלְתִּי, Is 14; —before the nota accus. את, Jer 33; —before a locative (which in such cases also serves as a genitive), Ex 27, Jer 1.

b (2) Before wāw; copulative, e.g. Ez 26; but חָכְמַת Is 33, גִּילַת 35:2, and שְׁכֻרַת 51:21 may be cases of an intentional reversion to the old feminine ending ath, in order to avoid the hiatus (וָ)־ָה וְ.

c (3) When it governs the (originally demonstrative) pronoun אֲשֶׁר; so especially in the combination מְקוֹם אֲשֶׁר, Gn 39, 40, the place where (prop. of that in which) Joseph was bound; cf. § 138 g; or בִּמְקוֹם אֲשֶׁר Lv 4, 33, 2 S 15, 1 K 21, Jer 22, Ez 21, Ho 2. We should expect הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר, בַּמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר, as in Gn 35, &c., at the place which..., cf. § 138; but אֲשֶׁר is treated as a nomen rectum instead of as an attribute. Cf. also מִיּוֹם א׳ followed by a perfect in 1 S 29, and יְמֵי א׳ Lv 13, Nu 9.[4]

d (4) When it governs independent sentences (cf. § 155), which virtually stand to the construct state (as nomen regens) in a sort of genitive relation, e.g. Ex 4 בְּיַד־תְּשְׁלָח prop. by the hand of him whom thou wilt send; Nu 23 דְּבַר מַה־יַּרְאֵ֫נִי the matter of that which he shall show me, i.e. whatever he shall; Is 29 קִרְיַת חָנָה דָוִד the city where David encamped; Jer 48, ψ 16 (if the text be right), 65:5 (Pr 8), ψ 81, Jb 18 the place of him that knoweth not God; Jb 29, La 1 (if the text be right) into the hands of those against whom I cannot stand.[5] In Gn 39 (כָּל־יֶשׁ־לוֹ) the כָּל־ takes after it a noun-clause, and in Ex 9, still more boldly, a subst. with לְ.—Very often a time-determination governs the following sentence in this way; thus אַֽחֲרֵי followed by a perfect, Lv 25, 1 S 5; בְּיוֹם ψ 102 (before a noun-clause), Ex 6, Nu 3, Dt 4, 2 S 22, ψ 18, 59, 138 (in every case before a following perfect), ψ 56 (before an imperfect); מִיּוֹם followed by the perfect, Jer 36; כָּל־יְמֵי Lv 14, 1 S 25, Jb 29 (כִּימֵי as in the days when...[6]; cf. כִּימוֹת and שְׁנוֹת before a perfect, ψ 90); בְּעֵת before a perfect, Jer 6 (cf. 49:8, 50:31); before an imperfect, Jb 6; תְּחִלַּת before a perfect Ho 1.

e (5) Connected with a following word in apposition; certainly so in such cases as בְּתוּלַת בַּת־צִיּוֹן the virgin, the daughter of Zion, Is 37; cf. 23:12, Jer 14; also 1 S 28 אֵ֫שֶׁת בַּֽעֲלַת־אוֹב a woman, possessor of a soothsaying spirit; cf. Dt 21.—Gn 14, Ju 19 (but read probably אֲנָשִׁים with Moore, as in Dt 13, Ju 20, 1 K 21); 2 K 10, 17 Qe; Jer 46, ψ 35 (?), 78:9, Jb 20 b (unless נַֽהֲרֵי or נַֽהֲלֵי be a gloss).

f Rem. Some of the above passages may also be explained by supposing that there exists a real genitive relation towards the preceding construct state, which has been, as it were, provisionally left in suspenso, in consequence of the insertion of some interrupting word, e.g. Is 37, &c.; Jb 20 a. Elsewhere (Dt 33, ψ 68) the nomen regens probably governs the following construct state directly.[7] g (6) The numeral אַחַד one for אֶחָד in close connexion, and even with small disjunctives, e.g. Gn 3, 48, 1 S 9, 2 S 17, Is 27, Zc 11.

The character of these passages shows that the numeral here cannot be in the construct state, but is merely a rhythmical shortening of the usual (tone-lengthened) form.

  1. Cf. König, ‘Die Ueberwucherung des St.-constr.-Gebrauchs im Semit.,’ ZDMG. 53, 521 ff.
  2. In Ju 8 the article is even used before a construct state followed by בְּ, in order to determine the whole combination שְׁכוּנֵי בָֽאֳהָלִים tent-dwellers, taken as one word; cf., however, the remarks in § 127 f–i on similar grammatical solecisms.
  3. These are to be distinguished from the cases where לְ follows a construct state, which in conjunction with מִן (and the following לְ) has become a sort of preposition or adverb of place; thus, we have מִבֵּית־לְ Ex 26 (for which in Ez 1 merely בֵּית לְ) meaning simply within; מִימִין לְ (2 K 23, Ez 10) on the right hand (i.e. south) of; מִצְּפוֹן לְ (Jos 8, 13, &c., Ju 2) on the north of; cf. also Jos 15 and לִפְנֵי מִן Neh 13.
  4. In Dt 23 the construct state governs a sentence introduced by the conjunction אֲשֶׁר (עַל־דְּבַר אֲשֶׁר by reason of the fact that, i.e. because); so also in 1 S 3.
  5. Probably Gn 22 is also to be so explained (contrary to the accents), and certainly (contrary to the very unnatural division of the verses) 2 Ch 30, which should read on thus: יְהֹוָה הַמּוֹב יְכַפֵּר בְּעַד כָּל־לְבָבוֹ הֵכִין the good Lord pardon every one that setteth his heart to seek God. [See Wickes’ Accontuation of the Twenty-one Prose Books of the Old Testament, p. 140.]
  6. Cf. Na 2 מִימֵי הִיא, usually explained to mean from the days that she hath been, but the text is evidently very corrupt.
  7. So also Is 28 a corner stone of the preciousness (יִקְרַת is a substantive not an adjective) of a fixed foundation, i.e. a precious corner stone of surest foundation.—In 2 S 20 the text is wholly corrupt; in ψ 119 read כָּל־פִּקּוּדֶ֫יךָ.