An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

826 Pages·2007·3.72 MB·English

An Introduction to
Biblical Hebrew Syntax

Bruce K. Waltke
and
M. O’Connor
Eisenbrauns
Winona Lake, Indiana
1990
© 1990 by Eisenbrauns.
All rights reserved.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Waltke, Bruce K.
An introduction to biblical Hebrew syntax.
Includes bibliographical references.
1. Hebrew language—Syntax. 2. Hebrew language—Grammar—1950– . 3. Bible. O.T.—
Language, style. I. O’Connor, Michael Patrick. II. Title.
PJ4707.W35 1989 492.4’82421 89-17006
ISBN 0-931464-31-5
in memory of
W.J. Martin

25 May 1904 ~ 21 March 1980
Broughshane, Co. Cambridge

Antrim
Abbreviations and Sigla
Grammatical Terms

abs. absolute
bis twice
C consonant
C construct term
c. common
coll. collective
cstr. construct
ENWS Early Northwest Semitic
f(em). feminine
Foc focus marker
G genitive term
impfv. imperfective
inf. abs. infinitive absolute
inf. cstr. infinitive construct
m(asc). masculine
non-pfv. non-perfective
pf. perfect
pfv. perfective
pl. plural
pleo pleonastic pronoun
Pred predicate
S subject
s(ing). singular
V vowel
V verb
* unattested form
** impossible form
~ approximately equal to
Versions and Translations

AV Authorized Version (1611)
LXX Septaugint
MT Masoretic Text
NAB New American Bible (1970)
NIV New International Version (1973)
NJPS New Jewish Publication Society Version (1982)
RSV Revised Standard Version (1952)
Sam Samaritan Pentateuch
Bibliography

BL Hans Bauer and Pontus Leander. 1922. Historische Grammatik der hebräischen
Sprache des Alten Testamentes.
GAGH Wolfgang Richter. 1978–80. Grundlagen einer althebräischen Grammatik.
GB [Wilhem Gesenius-]Gotthelf Bergsträsser. 1918–29. Hebräische Grammatik.
GKC [Wilhelm Gesenius-]Emil Kautzch, trans. A. E. Cowley. 1910. Gesenius’
Hebrew Grammar.
Joüon Paul Joüon. 1923. Grammaire de l’hébreu biblique.
LHS Ernst Jenni. 1981. Lehrbuch der hebräischen Sprache des Alten Testaments.
MPD P. Swiggers and W. Van Hoecke. 1986. Mots et Parties du Discours.
SA/THAT Statistischer Anhang to Ernst Jenni and Claus Westermann. 1971–76.
Theologisches Handwörterbuch zum Alten Testament.
UT Cyrus H. Gordon. 1965. Ugaritic Textbook.
Preface

The Scope and Purpose of This Book

An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax is in two senses an intermediary grammar
of the language of the Hebrew Bible. It is, first of all, a grammar designed for study
by those who have mastered the fundamentals of the language and possess a good
grasp of its phonology and morphology as well as a working vocabulary. Second, it is
an intermediary between basic study and the vast array of research literature, a tool to
prepare readers to take up that body of writing as they take up the great and difficult
corpus of ancient Hebrew scriptures. This volume is presented both as a textbook and
as a work of reference and study. There exists in English no up-to-date intermediate
or advanced grammar of Biblical Hebrew and the lack has long been recognized. We
have attempted to present both a body of knowledge (providing, as it were, the “right
answers”) and a sample of analytical and descriptive approaches (suggesting the
“right questions”). Introductory Hebrew grammar is largely a matter of morphology,
and the word-class or part-of-speech approach we have taken up should follow from
such an introductory program. Word-class theory has a respectable antiquity and, as a
result of recent research on the organization of the lexicon, a brightening future. The
framework is, we hope, conservative enough to be broadly accessible but serious
enough to allow us to escape some of the confusions of earlier grammars of Hebrew.
New terminology has been introduced cautiously.
Reference grammars are available; every advanced student of the Hebrew text
needs to have at hand the grammar of Gesenius, Kautzsch, and Cowley to check a
variety of details in an ample and well-informed framework. This volume does not
seek to replace GKC or comparable works available in other languages. We do not
take account of every exception and anomaly. The book rather seeks to be used both
before and alongside such works, pointing to the explorations of more recent
generations of scholars, both in detail and in the structure of the overall framework
and reconsidering the views of the older works in light of those explorations.
As a teaching grammar, this volume seeks not merely to describe the syntax of
Biblical Hebrew, but to provide some explanatory depth to the description. Students
emerge from an introductory course in Hebrew ready to begin to confront the text,
and this volume stands among the books that can help them. Among these books, it
will have, we hope, a distinctive place. Reference grammars and advanced lexicons, if
consulted on the fly, tend to fragment a reader’s view of problems, while
commentaries tend to narrow the focus too closely. Specialized grammatical studies
are sometimes forced to argue a thesis too closely or to cover all the data too briskly.
As a tool in reading and exegesis, this volume seeks to encourage attention to the
difficulties of a text in a written language from the ancient world of a different
culture. Too brief a program of study in Hebrew can be misleading or even
dangerous; facile mastery can make students believe that they grasp a text when all
they hold is a memory of a received translation. The distortions of using the Hebrew
language as the key to an alien mindset are not part of our program; current
scholarship has outgrown such views. But Hebrew remains a foreign language to
native speakers of English and other European languages. This grammar seeks to help
them realize the character of that foreignness, primarily with regard to the interaction
of syntax and semantics. We are concerned with what the forms of Hebrew mean,
how those meanings can be appropriated, and, incidentally, and chiefly by example,
how those meanings can be rendered in English.
The great native-speaker tradition of Hebrew grammar associated with medieval
Jewry is the first basis of this study. This tradition has been passed on for centuries,
and it fed into the modern European tradition canonized by Wilhelm Gesenius in the
first quarter of the nineteenth century. The second basis is modern linguistic study, its
roots contemporary with Gesenius and its first flowers contemporary with the edition
of Gesenius’s grammar currently in print in English (1910). On these two bases this
grammar stands, leaning now more on one, now more on the other. The aim of this
volume is not novelty; indeed, too much novelty would not be appropriate. Yet the
enormous body of scholars concerned with the Hebrew Bible has produced much that
is new, and each new view or concept repositions and reshapes all other facets of the
grammar, however slightly. It is safe to say, then, that any reader will find something
new here, and safer to say that each reader will find something to disagree with.
Although this is not a comprehensive syntax of the Hebrew Bible, it provides a
full overview of the topic and draws on a rich and diverse body of scholarship.
Important studies by, for example, F. I. Andersen, Ernst Jenni, and Dennis Pardee, are
here for the first time brought into a survey of Hebrew grammar; other studies are
evaluated, still others cited only in passing. Like David Qimḥi, we are often gleaners
following reapers. Some of the distortions to be found in the literature are criticized.
The bibliography will direct students not only to the works we have used here, but
also to reference works and to studies on Hebrew phonology and morphology, topics
not treated here. We have provided a basic bibliography of Biblical Hebrew studies
because no such tool is currently available.
Though we aim to help students in evaluating and appraising the secondary
literature, we are not directly concerned with such appraisals. We have not been able
to use and cite as wide a range of materials as we would like, but the range is
considerable. Much new literature has appeared during the years we have been at
work. In cases where only details of our exposition were affected, we were better able
to incorporate new findings and views. On larger issues we were often unable to
revise and reshape as much as we would have liked, in response to a variety of recent
introductory grammars as well as major scholarly contributions, for example,
Shelomo Morag’s paper on Qumran Hebrew, Jaakov Levi’s essay on Die Inkongruenz
im biblischen Hebräisch, and John Huehnergard’s monograph on Ugaritic. Issues of
Hans-Peter Müller’s new journal Zeitschrift für Althebraistik only reached us in the
last stages of our work.
Some other bases of the volume need notice. Comparative Semitic data has been
drawn on to illuminate and provide perspectives, though we presuppose no knowledge
of the other languages. Given our two primary bases, this use is inevitable. The
earliest Hebrew grammarians spoke Arabic as well as Hebrew, so the tradition begins
with a comparative bias. The decipherment of cuneiform and the development of
modern grammars of Akkadian has affected the interpretation of every facet of the
Hebrew verb. Alongside Arabic and Akkadian, the great languages originally spoken
south and east of Hebrew, are the other languages of the ancient Levant, Hebrew’s
closest relatives—Moabite, Ammonite, and Phoenician-Punic as well as the older
language of Ugarit and the more distantly related Aramaic languages. Citation of
comparative Semitic data is restrained, but is always in our judgment crucial to the
argument at hand. Similarly crucial is comparative data from English and other
European languages. Contrastive analysis of languages is now commonplace in
modern language teaching. Such information serves to remind students how their own
and related languages work. Not all students have a broad and firm grounding in
linguistics—this book presupposes no acquaintance with that subject—and English
may be taken as a fixed and engaging point of reference. The use of English-language
data serves, at least in part, to expose the pre-understandings of English readers.
Indeed, in the light of an “exotic” language like Hebrew, English turns out to be an
“exotic” language, too. In the labor of reading or translation, the target language is no
more “natural” or “correct” than the source language.
The shape of the book is irregular—we have not sought to balance exactly the
various aspects of Hebrew or to divide up the materials into equal portions. A proper
grasp of the Piel stem or the prefix conjugation requires the use of concepts and
notions that may seem overly theoretical. The chapter on the preposition, in contrast,
may seem too largely lexical. Certain topics are not treated fully: the adverbs,
especially the negative particles, do not receive the focused attention they might,
though there are relevant references throughout. The labor of the writing of each book
must be limited or at least called to a halt.
The Use of This Book

The structure of this volume is largely topical and logical rather than pedagogical.
Teachers and students are free to approach the material as they like and make
adaptations appropriate to their own program and circumstances. After the opening
section, any of the four remaining sections can be taken up; the various tables of
contents and the topical index should facilitate cross-checking. In each of those
sections, certain chapters require conceptual exposition, while others demand review
and consideration of the examples in context. We have provided many, many
examples in full or extended citation, with glosses (not translations). The examples
are all from the Bible, with three or four exceptions, where it is clear that a modern
imitation of Biblical Hebrew is being given. Students are urged to read the examples
quoted here and eventually to check them (and the other examples cited in the notes)
in the biblical context. Because examples are sometimes excerpted and abridged, they
do not necessarily reflect the actual text. The renderings given here tend to present a
dynamic equivalent, sometimes complemented by a more literal gloss reflecting the
grammatical point at issue—though the term lit. is sometimes used loosely. A few
Hebrew words are left unglossed, and renderings of a biblical excerpt may vary from
section to section of the book. The English versions are not strictly a help or a trot—
readers should try to explain (or improve on) our suggestions, often drawn from
modern versions, and should consider possible alternatives. Interpretive additions are
given in brackets, while other additions, including grammatical information, appear in
parentheses. Final ellipses are generally not used in Hebrew text. Verse is set off in
lines where such an arrangement would require no extra space. Single quotation
marks (‘ / ‘) are used for glosses and renderings, double marks (“ / “) for quotations
and technical terms.
A one-year-long approach to teaching the work would involve devoting
approximately one week to each of twenty-eight chapters or pairs of chapters, leaving
for cursory review or study outside classes Chapters 1–3, 5, 15–19 and combining 11
and 12, 24 and 25, and 27 and 28. Some teachers may prefer to skip individual
sections and reshape the material in other ways. We anticipate preparing a shorter
version of this grammar, perhaps equipped with exercises and key and more suitable
for a brief course’ and invite comments from users of this volume. Experienced
teachers know that grammar becomes significant to students only as they are led to
use it. In any format, intermediate or advanced grammatical study should accompany
the reading of the masterpieces of biblical prose, such as the Joseph and Ruth stories,
as well as some of the major biblical poems such as Psalm 100 and the Song of
Hannah. During such reading students should apply the principles outlined here and
begin to use the grammar both for reference and for extended study. The brief
glossary covers chiefly grammatical terms, chiefly those liable to confusion and those
unlikely to be found in other reference works; in no sense is it intended to compete
with the text of the book.
The indexes cover four fields: topics, modern authorities cited, Hebrew words,
and biblical passages. Used with the chapter tables of contents the topical index
should direct students to any relevant discussion here.
The biblical text is generally quoted from Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (1977),
though in some cases we have preferred the evidence of the Masoretic margins (Qere)
or other Masoretic manuscripts, or the Samaritan Pentateuch, or we have cited a text
reflected in the ancient versions or an emendation. For the perpetual Qere readings,
we use the long form of Jerusalem and the feminine third-singular pronoun where
appropriate; we leave the Tetragrammaton unpointed. Cases in which we vary from
BHS are rare: this volume is no substitute for an introduction to text-critical problems.
In quoting the Hebrew text some of the more anomalous readings of the Leningrad
Codex are retained (e.g., 1 Sam 9:21 and Ruth 3:9, with BHS against the text of the
earlier Biblia Hebraica of 1937 [BH3]; Gen 32:18, with BHS and BH3 against other
editions), though some are silently replaced by a standard text (e.g., a sop pasuq
missing from Leningrad but reported for other texts by BHS, as in Exod 20:3). (On the
basis of his autopsy of the 1971 Makor facsimile edition of Leningrad, J. Alan
Groves, of Westminster Theological Seminary, informs us that the Gen 32:18 variant
is probably a typographical error in both BH3 and BHS.) The Masoretic accents are
given in some cases, and the stress, where it is not final, is marked. Athnach and sop
pasuq (but not silluq), major verse dividers, are given from the text, and stress is
shown with the mark ◌֫ . The verse dividers give a sense of a verse’s overall shape and
are given even where the stress mark is also found; this redundancy reflects the mixed
phonological and syntactic bases of Masoretic accentuation. Stress is shown only as a
feature of the word; only main stress is shown; and stress groups covering several
words are thus not set off. In citing single items attested forms are usually given,
rather than dictionary forms; in a few cases in lists athnach instead of sop pasuq is
used to show that a form is pausal. Once or twice the verse divider of the MT is
retained even though the gloss shows that we believe a transposition is necessary.
Methegh is given either from BHS or as needed, though not all possible cases are
supplied. Transliterations follow the now widely accepted systems of the major
scholarly journals, except in two features: turned e (ə) is used for shewa and e with
breve (ĕ) for hateph seghol; and the matres lectionis of plene short vowels are not
written with parentheses. This standard system, based as it is on a dubious
reconstruction of Hebrew phonology, is not perfect but it is workable and should be
familiar to every student. In general, Hebrew is given in characters in the text and in
transliteration in the notes, but some variation is to be found in both directions. We
have been spare in using the single asterisk (to mark unattested or primitive linguistic
forms; *yaqtul) and the double asterisk (to mark forms that would be impossible in
Hebrew; **yaqtal). Diacritics are, as often as possible while still preserving clarity,
omitted from pattern words (Piel, not Pi˓ēl).
Acknowledgments

Both authors wish to take this opportunity to thank their teachers: Waltke was trained
by T. O. Lambdin, F. M. Cross, and the late G. Ernest Wright of Harvard; and
O’Connor by C. R. Krahmalkov, D. N. Freedman, and G. E. Mendenhall of Michigan.
All graduate study is a collaborative endeavor, and we want to take this opportunity to
thank our fellow students, often now colleagues and advisers. Our publishers have
been involved closely with the project for over eight years, and James E. Eisenbraun
has worked on every aspect of the book, in the great tradition of scholar-publishers.
Both authors take full responsibility for the work.
Philadelphia
Ann Arbor
Note to the Third, Corrected Printing

Typographical errors have been corrected and some garbled or badly written passages
rectified as a result of the vigilance of reviewers and other colleagues, including
David W. Baker (Ashland, Ohio), Adele Berlin (College Park, Maryland), Walter R.
Bodine (Dallas), C. John Collins (Spokane), Edward L. Greenstein (New York City),
Frederic C. Putnam (Hatfield, Pennsylvania), Leona Glidden Running (Berrien
Springs, Michigan), and Mark F. Willson (Juázeiro do Norte, Ceará, Brazil). Our
thanks to them.
1 DECEMBER 1990
Note to the Fourth, Corrected Printing

We continue to be gratified by the generous reception accorded this book. Once again,
we are happy to correct errors and amend infelicities pointed out by students at
Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia) and Regent College (Vancouver),
by reviewers, and by other colleagues and friends, including Ralph L. Bogle (Ann
Arbor), James H. Charlesworth (Princeton), Terence Collins (Manchester), Peter T.
Daniels (Chicago), John Huehnergard (Cambridge, Massachusetts), and W. G. E.
Watson (Edinburgh).
Vancouver
St. Paul
7 APRIL 1993
Note to the Seventh, Corrected Printing

Opportunity to revise this volume has not arisen, and thus the bibliographical material
especially remains dated. A second edition would and, we hope, will soon profit from
much scholarly study that has been presented and published in the last decade. We
have continued to make small adjustments throughout the grammar, and we are happy
to thank colleagues and students for their continued attention.
Vancouver and Orlando
Washington, D.C.
24 JUNE 1999
Note to the Ninth, Corrected Printing

Dr. John H. Dobson (Norwich, England) has provided us with corrections
incorporated into this printing.
Orlando, Florida
Silver Spring, Maryland
2 JUNE 2004
Introductory
[Page 1] [Page 2]
1 Language and Text
2 History of the Study of Hebrew Grammar
3 Basic Concepts
4 Grammatical Units
1 Language and Text
[Page 3]
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Hebrew as a Semitic Language
1.3 History of Hebrew
1.3.1 Prehistory
1.3.2 Biblical Hebrew and Congeners
1.3.3 Later History of Hebrew
1.4 Synchronic/Diachronic
1.4.1 Literary Studies and Grammar
1.4.2 Recent Research
1.5 History of the Biblical Text
1.5.1 Introduction
1.5.2 Earliest Period (to 400 b.c.e.)
1.5.3 From 400 b.c.e. to 100 c.e.
1.5.4 From 100 to 1000 c.e.
1.6 Masoretic Text
1.6.1 Character
1.6.2 Consonants
1.6.3 Vocalization
1.6.4 Accentuation
1.1 Introduction
a The Hebrew language has been in use from the time of Moses (the archeological
era known as the Late Bronze Age II, 1400–1200 B.C.E.) to the present. The topic
of this grammar, Biblical Hebrew—we use the term for the Hebrew used in the
composition of scripture as well as in the Masoretic Text (abbreviated MT)—was
in use from that time through the exilic, post-exilic, and Second Temple periods, a
span corresponding in large part to the Imperial Age (Neo-Babylonian Empire,
625–540; Persian Empire, 540–330; Hellenistic, 330–60; Roman, 60 B.C.E. 330
C.E.). Over the course of more than three millennia the Hebrew language has
experienced many changes; indeed, even over a period of several generations a
language undergoes modification. The English we speak is not the language of
Shakespeare or even Thomas Jefferson. The Middle English language of Chaucer
and, even more so, the Old English of King Alfred the Great[Page 4] (9th century
C.E.) are to us virtually foreign languages. The interval between the earliest
biblical literature, such as the Song of Moses (Exodus 15) or the Song of Deborah
(Judges 5), and the latest books of the Bible, such as Esther or Chronicles, is as
long as the interval between Alfred the Great and us. In contrast to the history of
most languages, the Hebrew language has exhibited a remarkable uniformity over
time. A well educated Hebrew speaker can read and understand Hebrew literature

MT Masoretic Text