whitley, some functions of the hebrew particles beth and lamedh, 1972.pdf

8/14/2019 Whitley, Some functions of the Hebrew particles beth and lamedh, 1972.pdf

1/8

SOME FUNCTIONS OF THEHEBREW PARTICLES BETH AND LAMEDH

By REV. DR. C. F. WHITLEY, U. Collegeof North WalesI

THE INTERCHANGEABILITYF CERTAINHEBREW PARTICLEShas long been recognised by Jewish grammarians. As earlyas the tenth century A.D. Saadia Ben Joseph commentedon the interchange between : and 7z, and this principle ofbiblical exegesis was subsequently adopted by such scholarsas Jonah Ibn Janah (tith cen.) and Abraham Ibn Ezra(i2th cen.).' David Kimhi (II60-I235 A.D.) againi pointedto instances in which : is used for 7 with the force of 'to';for example, Hosea xii 7 =Vrn v,*x 'return to thy God',and Psalm xxxiii Irmm ir nn 'Sing praises to Yahweh,Oye righteous'.2 It is accordinglyour purpose here to pointto further instances in which = and t interchange, and alsoto note some other respects in which their functions areidentical.As examples of phrases in which n and b interchange wemay cite the following: Genesis xxviii 2i z t3ft":= 'and I will return in peace to my father's house', andGeniesis xliv I7 't 'and you will goup in peace to your father' (so Pesh. re-=I=; and LXX pvr0ka&'r-pxOCqn both passages); Deuteronomy xii x5 Tfl. 'only with all the desire of your soul', and I Samuelxxiii o a ns 'anid now with all the desire ofyour soul.' 3 Jeremiah x 24 M ?2 'correct me ...

I N. M. Sarna, 'The interchange of the Prepositions BETH andMIN in Biblical Hebrew', J.B.L., 78 (1959), p. 311.2 William Chomsky, 'The Ambiguity of the Prefixed Prepositions7, 7, z in the Bible,' J.Q.R., 6i (1970), p. 88.3 Benjamin Kennicott, Vetus TestamentumHebraicum: Cum VariisLectioibus (Oxford 1776), vol. i, ad loc., notes the variant 5=

This content downloaded from 146.232.129.75 on Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:08:49 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


2/8

200 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

in judgment,' and Jeremiah xxx iI (and xlvi 28) 181.U%t73' I corrected you in judgment (so Pesh. re.x-n); Jere-miah v 24 T:-t7 1"It'17 'and they do not consider in theirheart', and Hosea vii 2 n 'n1 'and they do notsay in their heart (so LXX rn xoapaqMcu'r&cv,esh. _a>SnSimilarly n parallels '7 in Isaiah xlvi 13 n:t1f31 P11rhfl"rW1? 'and I will place in Zion salvation, in Israelmyglory' (so Vul. 'in Sion . .. in Israel.' 4

In the light of this usage it is unnecessary to suspect theHebrew text in other passages where ' is similarly used.Thus in Numbers xv 29 we have ;7n t 'for him whoacts in error,' and in verse 24 TT rT V 'it is done inerror', but many MSS read Iwt as nz=.5 In Genesisxxiii Io we read il"yT-it 1 i7nn-.1::te 'in the hearingof the sons of Heth, before all those entering the gate ofthe city,' and in verse I8 we read -n=715" 5= nn-1231:ill:; however, BH3 proposes to read t of verse IO as t::,and many MSS and Targum J read tnt for 3nzin versei8.1 Again, in Job xxi 30 we have zTi" I n " zni"+ 2*=' Anil=pthat the wicked man is spared in the day ofcalamity, that he is rescued in the day of wrath,' 7 but BH3would read Z18: in both instances. Similarly in Jeremiahii 37 we find ;11 'and you will not prosper inthem,' but one MS and the Peshitta read Iinz. On the basisof this and other conflicting textual evidence, Volz thoughtthat =,* was here 'superfluous,' while B.D.B. referred toit as 'peculiar.'9But in view of the functonal interchangebe-tween 7 and2 thereis no reasonto questionthe Massoretic ext.

4 Kennicott, op. cit., vol. 2 (I780) ad loc., notes the variant 75 Kennicott, vol. i, ad loc.; J. B. de Rossi, Variae Lectiones VeterisTestamenti, vol. 2 (Parmae 1785) ad loc.6 Noted in BH3.7 Translated as R.S.V., but for the text of 9*i' MVI=n BH3suggests (al 721) 7"38 Paul Volz, Studien zum Text des Jeremia (Leipzig I920), p. I5.Dr. Ezra Shereshevesky draws my attention to Kimhi's rendering ofM1I7by 1 (in respect of them).9 P. 5I4b.



3/8

BETH AND LAMEDH-WHITLEY 20I

The meaning 'in' for b is again to be discerned in suchpassages as the following: Isaiah xxxii i JWr1 773277t7T 3V Vttt7 1ntV 'behold a king will reign in righteousness,and indeed rulers will rule in judgment' '0 (so Pesh. re n-av=

.); Psalm vii 6 'mt57 "ti=1 'and lay my soulin the dust' (so Pesh. - Job vii "zt 9:'for now I shall lie in the dust' (so Pesh. reiz. A=..); saiah, 1 IIT=)MI ' n sorrow you will lie down (so LXX zvXunB Pesh c .i:);EcclesiastesIo O131 ..l . T T

' 'alreadyit was in the age which was before us'(so LXX iv oxqoatW6m,ul. 'in seculis').Moreover, it would seem that the interchange of theparticles M and 5 is not confined to the meaning 'in'. It isnow recognised that, as in other Semitic languages, theHebrew particle b has an emphatic force. For example:Kings xix 25 ;n I2 1Mn.7. ',. Tn i nT*7 T * -TIm9nk"n' 'surely thou hast heard, yea from the remotepast I did it, yea from the days of old I planned it, now Ibring it to pass'; Psalm lxxxix i9 18Pb1 nl;9n8,7 R 'for indeed Yahweh is our shield, and indeedthe Holy One of Israel our king'; Ecclesiastes ix 4 7non .-1n 3il 'n, 'for indeed a living dog is better thana dead lion.' 11But it is probable that we are also to recognisean emphatic element in the particle 1. This would explainthe Z before n17'1,and the aetiological name nrinn itself, inI Chronicles vii 23 ir in& n,-rm'and he called his name Beriah, for indeed evil had befallenhis house.' Similarly in the passage VT55 5 t3i"-":fl=P= (I Chron. x 33) 1 prefixed to flmg% seemsto emphasisethat word: 12 'for day and night service was indeed (laid)

10 The 7 before 1'"')Ws probably to be regarded as Emphatic; seebelow ibid.11 See further, I. Eitan, 'La Particle emphatique ,,La" dans laBible,' R.E.J., 74 (I922), pp. i-i6; F. N6tscher, 'Zum emphatischenLamed,' V.T., 3 (I953), pp. 372-380; C. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook(Rome I965), p. 76 (sec. 9:I6).12 BH3 would read the article fl instead of :1.



4/8


5/8

BETH AND LAMEDH-WHITLEY 203need not hesitate to translate' it 'as "is".'16 But to translatethis Beth as 'is' would in many cases be pleonastic, since theverb 'to be' is already supplied. Mauross mentions Psalmlv I9, "In 'l . but here the phrase already hasthe verb TIM,nd therefore the 2 prefixed to trin must beregarded as stressing that word: 'for indeed they are manyagainst me.' So in Jephtah's words n61ilr r""M Xl in Judgesxi 35 we have not only a verb but a personal pronoun: 17'and thou art indeed my trouble.' The extent of Jephtah'strouble may be seen from his previous remarkVIP.D11 ;77T".3528 'Ah, my daughter, thou hast indeed brought melow.' '1 Again, in Exodusxxxii 22, =6il1s77 e l-R8n, we have the verb XIt as well as the M prefixedto 5rn:'You know the people that it is indeed evil.' This emphasisby Aaron on the evil of the people is an appropriate answerto Moses'question, 'What did this people do to you that youhave brought a great sin upon them?' (vs. 2I). We mayfurther mention Nahum iii 9, lt tat wherethe n prefixed to Innt5 is immediately preceded by lt;1:'Put and the Libyans were indeed thy help.' 19The verb;117imilarly precedes 2 in Proverbs iii 26,JIP? Thl'for Yahweh is indeedthy confidence.'But even where this prefixed = appears in passages whichhave not an explicitly expressed verb, it has moresignificancethan that of a mere predicate. Thus in Exodus xviii 4 the

16 ,BETH ESSENTIAE,' J.B.L., 73 (I954), pp. 238-239.17 A personal pronoun may, of course, be used with a verb in anemphatic capacity, but it can also constitute the subject of a nominalclause in which there is no copula; e.g., 7#1:) 1; (Gen. xiv i8), :2t=tl 1In (Is. XXXi 2). Compare Gesenius '. . . the syntactical relationexisting between the subject and predicate of a noun-clause is as arule expressed by simple juxtaposition, without a copula of anykind,' op. cit., sec. I4I f (p. 453).18 The question of whether we should read the verb '= for V::here (see, e.g., G. F. Moore, Judges, I.C.C., Edinburgh I903, p. 303,and C. F. Burney, The Book of Judges, London 1920, p. 322) is imma-terial to our discussion.19 Cf. BH3 for the reading ;l?n7n (her help) instead of 11lt52.



6/8

204 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

name Eliezer is explained in terms of the divine interventionagainst Pharaoh: Mtlt) n 3 " 'forthe God of my father was my help, and he deliveredme fromthe sword of Pharaoh.' In Hosea xiii 9 we similarly findIT= 'It. 12'M. Some doubt attaches to the textof the line,20but there is no reason to question the authen-ticity of the term 1rTY7y which the prophetemphasizesthat Yahweh alone is the source of Israel's help: 'I havedestroyed thee, 0 Israel, though in me is your help.' Like-wise in Psalm cxviii 7 we read 1X&4MWINIp' It " I,Existence is here implicit in the term ',?, but it is the wishof the Psalmist to stress that, because Yahweh is his help,he can defy his enemies; hence we may translate, 'Yahwehis indeed my help, and I shall triumphantly look on thosewho hate me.' Another instance of a prefixed : is to be foundin Psalm cxlvi 5 I"ViT8 VVT?2 i'l.t illy=: "V?BH3, probably on grounds of dittography, suggests that wedelete the : beforeInt5, and the word would then correspondto rlntuin the second half the line. Yet we may retain theMassoretictext if we recognise that it is in a context whichcontrasts the divine help with that of man ;#x79tn I"ew'in whom there is no help' (vs. 3). Accordingly we wouldrender, 'Happy is the man whose help is indeed the God ofJacob, whose hope is in Yahweh his God.' Manross wouldagain translate it7 ;6Tnof Psalm lxviii 5, *bi ... X5 t1142... T-:.l :b as 'Yahweh is his name.21How-ever, i 11 (Jer. xxxiii 2) is translated by 'Yahwehis his name,' i ntfl (Is. xlviii 2) by 'Yahweh Sebaoth

20 On the basis of the Greek and Syriac BH3 reconstructs as'18-17X7Inl'ltW, but while lJIWttVI destroyed thee) should plobablybe read for the Massoretic 111t, the rest of the line is quite intelli-gible.

21 Loc. cit., p. 239. Cf. too N.E.B., note, 'In the Lord is his name.'M. Dahood comments that WntLT'1Z makes no sense as it stands,'and would read the MT 1?ntas ?emn, Qal masculine plural imperativeof a root ysm which is found in Ugaritic. He renders as 'Delight,'but even so regards it as 'a doubtful translation,' Psalms II (TheAnchor Bible), New York I968, p. 136.



7/8

BETH AND LAMEDH-WHITLEY 205is his name,' and i1Tt.? iZ (I Sam. i 1) by 'his name wasElkanah.' 22 That is to say, the copula is not expressed, butis implied in the juxtaposition of the terms concerned. Sohere in Psalm lxviii 5 I is not necessary as a copula, and israther to be taken in an emphatic sense: 'Sing to God...extol him who rides over the clouds,23yea, Yahweh is hisname.. .'. In Isaiah xxvi 4 we likewise find mV6flt1tr?ir7 h18 1; r " 7-7, and Manross would translatethe second stich by 'For Yahweh is the Lord, an eternalrock.' 24 BH3 suggests that ;r= should be deleted. But mmltrwould then appear in both parts of the line. It is thereforelikely that br=is original to the second part, and that mml1;was inserted after it by an editor wishing to identify Yahwehwith Yah. What was then probably the original Hebrewline may be translated: 'Trust in Yahweh for ever, forindeedYah is an eternal rock.'

IIIThe functions of = and ' further coincide in that bothparticles can mean 'from.'That : has this meaning in biblicalHebrew is clearly attested. For example :201 (pointing

WISP= =61T 'and Jeroboam returned from Egypt'(I Kgs. xii 2); compare the parallel passage (2 Chron. x 2)trspnx =i ~ ` *?=f ltt 1M 'and nothing..* T; ITT T T- ; I .7 *.. T+p -_ I- T. 8 n ohnwill he take from his work which he may carry in his hand'(Eccles. v 14)25 But b too has this meaning 'from'in Ugaritic,Proto-Sinaitic and Hebrew. As Ugaritic examples, we maycite rd Imlkamlkldrktkatbnn, 'descend from the sovereignty22 Cf. too I= IT'this is my name' (Exod. iii I5); I= 'myname is Yahweh' (Jer. xvi 2i); 5W'V WVj 1J8O 'thy redeemer isthe Holy One of Israel' (Is. xli 14).23 The Hebrew V:s17:2 1: is probably to be equated with Uga-ritic rkb 'rpt (rider of the clouds) which often appears as an epithetof Baal; see C. H. Gordon Ugaritic Textbook, p. 46ib, and Dahood,ibid., who refers to the many instances of non-phonemic interchangebetween b and p in Northwest Semitic.24 Ibid.25 See further S. M. Sarna, loc. cit., who also notes that b is simi-larly used in other Semitic languages.



8/8

2o6 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWthat I may rule, from thy dominion that I may sit thereon',and l.tpn l dpid yrd Iksi ytb lhdmwi hdmytb lars, 'Ltpn, godof mercy, descends from his throne, sits on the footstool,and from the footstool sits on the ground.'26 Similarly inProto-Sinaitic we find mtt' Itt lb['t(m), 'Thou who didst save(me)from two lio [nesses . .1" 7 and 'nt Tin dk-ml-'bb....'Thou, 0 Shapan, collect from 'Ababa...' 28 So in Hebrewwe have lRtx lrtn 'from morning to morning' (I Chron.ix 27); t"nnT':1 niv-mvl 9; 'He will not withhold goodfrom (so Pesh. ; those who walk in perfection' (Ps. lxxxivI2); compare Proverbs iii 27 i i 'Do notwithhold good from those who produce it'; 29 flj Q 1V ,

n17I 4IN.. x 'The silver which was taken from you ...I took it' (Jud. xvii 2); compare 2 Kings ii io M1R.1-IIn n ?-Mif you see me taken from you'; IXV W18+DMt3il7 'and their camels shall be taken away from them'(Jer. xlix 29); j - 'of a truth women arekept from (LXX &oi yuva Lxoq)us' (I Sam. xxi 6). In thislast instance we note that the rendering 'from' agrees with

,7Sun.M"TVN7tntsl-W 'if the young men are kept fromwomen' in the previous verse, and we may compare tooItt l -112S7detained from before Saul' in I Chroniclesxii I, where he preposition ?zs used with T 326 Gordon, op. cit., pp. g8f., sec. io:ii.27 W. F. Albright, The Proto-Sinaitic Inscriptions and TheirDevelopment (Harvard Theological Studies, XXII, I966), p. 2I, textNo. 352.28 Albright, op. cit., p. 23, text No. 357. We may note that inPhoenician 7 has also the force of 'from' when used in conjunctionwith the preposition D (tl-t) or with the combination ?n+ ZSee Johannes Friedrich, PhInizisch-Punische Grammatik (Rome I95I),sec. 253 (pp. ii6 f.).29 Taking 5Vl in the sense of 'to work' as in Ugaritic (Gordon, op.cit., No. 494, p. 375) and pointing T7.30 E. F. Sutcliffe ('A Note on 'YL, Le, and FROM,' V.T., V, I955,pp. 436-439) has expressed the opinion that 7 does not mean 'from'(p. 439). In the instances he mentiones (e.g., Gen. i 6, 2 Sam. xi 7)7 may possibly be rendered by 'in relation to' or 'concerning,' but thisrendering would not adequately express the force of the particle7 in the passages discussed above.

This content downloaded from 146 232 129 75 on Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:08:49 PM
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

whitley, some functions of the hebrew particles beth and lamedh, 1972.pdf

Documents