A Quantitative Study of the Vocalization of the Inseparable Prepositions in the Hebrew Bible

by

JengZen Huang

A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Wycliffe College

and the Biblical Department of the Toronto School of Theology In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Theology awarded by

Wycliffe College and the University of Toronto

© Copyright by Jengzen Huang 2015

ii

A Quantitative Study of the Vocalization of the Inseparable

Prepositions in the Hebrew Bible

Jengzen Huang

Doctor of Theology

Wycliffe College and the University of Toronto

2015

Abstract

This dissertation presents a quantitative study of the vocalization of the Hebrew inseparable

prepositions (beth, kaf, and lamed). Both synchronic and diachronic dimensions are addressed.

After a synchronic survey and analysis, a few regularities of the vowels of the inseparable

prepositions in the Tiberian text are discovered. These regularities are mostly syntactically,

rather than semantically, based. The vowels of the inseparable prepositions tend to be heavy, and

light vowels are employed only in a certain syntactical constructions. The observation that these

syntactical constructions usually prescribe a lack of definite article indicates a connection

between the audio feature of the light vowel and the textual feature of the absence of definite

article. This in turn argues for an early dating of the vowels of the inseparable prepositions. The

diachronic survey covers the vocalization in the Babylonian and Palestinian traditions, the Greek

transliteration in the second column of Origen’s Hexapla, and the Greek translation in Aquila’s

recension. The vocalization of the inseparable prepositions in the Babylonian, and Palestinian

texts is found to adhere closely to that of the Tiberian text. The transliteration in the Hexapla also

indicates that a substantial portion of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions in the

Masoretic Text has an origin as early as the date of the Greek transliteration. In the survey of

Aquila’s translation, although a correspondence cannot be unquestionably affirmed between the

iii

vocalization of the inseparable prepositions in the Masoretic text and the use of Greek definite

articles, the finding that Aquila’s employment of the Greek definite articles depends heavily on

the grammatical function of the Hebrew inseparable prepositions suggests the plausibility that

some of the ancient perspectives about the Hebrew inseparable prepositions had exercised

considerable influence on the fixation of the vocalization. As a whole this study affirms the

credibility of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions as preserved in the Masoretic text.

iv

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... iv

List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................ vii

Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 2 Regularities in the Vocalization of the Inseparable Prepositions ................................. 16

1 The concept of definiteness and the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions .................... 16

2 The light-vowel approach .......................................................................................................... 19

3 The regularities of the light vowels ........................................................................................... 22

3.1 Nouns/adjectives conventionally prefixed by inseparable prepositions exclusively with a light vowel ...................................................................................................................... 23

3.2 Idiomatic employment of light vowels for distributive reference ...................................... 24

3.3 The light vowels in the syntax of the “transitional lamed” ................................................ 26

3.4 The light vowels in the conjunctive syntax ........................................................................ 29

3.4.1 The light vowels in the conjunctive syntax involving a modifying adjective or participle ............................................................................................................... 30

3.4.2 The light vowels in the conjunctive syntax involving a prepositional phrase ......... 35

3.4.3 The light vowels in the conjunctive syntax involving an infinitive construct ......... 39

3.4.4 The light vowels in the conjunctive syntax involving an implicit relative clause ... 39

3.4.5 The light vowels in the conjunctive syntax involving a short phrase of negation ... 41

3.4.6 The regularity in the conjunctive syntax involving an explicit relative clause (with a relative particle) ........................................................................................ 42

3.4.7 The regularity in the conjunctive syntax involving a noun ...................................... 43

3.5 The light vowels in series and parallel constructions ......................................................... 46

3.6 The light vowels for a properly indefinite reference .......................................................... 51

3.7 The light vowels that cannot be confined in the regularities ............................................. 52

4 Syntactical correspondence beyond the sphere of the inseparable prepositions ........................ 56

v

5 Summary .................................................................................................................................... 59

Chapter 3 Consistency of the Vocalization of the Inseparable Prepositions within the Masoretic traditions .................................................................................................................. 61

1 The vocalization of the inseparable prepositions in the Babylonian tradition ........................... 62

1.1 Available texts of Babylonian vocalization ....................................................................... 62

1.2 Preliminary observations on the inseparable prepositions in the Babylonian tradition ..... 66

1.3 Variants and analysis .......................................................................................................... 68

1.3.1 The inseparable prepositions prefixing a construct noun deliver the least amount of variants .............................................................................................................. 69

1.3.2 No prominent Babylonian feature can be attested by the observed variants concerning the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions ................................ 70

1.3.3 Several variants are incoherent within the Babylonian texts ................................... 72

1.3.4 A survey of the coherence of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions within the Babylonian text as presented in the modern printing .......................... 77

1.3.5 A survey of the distribution of variants among the Babylonian manuscripts .......... 80

1.4 Regularities of the lightly vocalized inseparable prepositions in the Babylonian texts ..... 83

2 The vocalization of the inseparable prepositions in the Palestinian tradition ............................ 85

2.1 Available texts of Palestinian vocalization ........................................................................ 85

2.2 Variants and analysis .......................................................................................................... 87

3 The commonality of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions within the Masoretic tradition as a whole .................................................................................................................. 90

4 The vocalization of the inseparable prepositions in the reading tradition of the Samaritan Pentateuch ................................................................................................................................ 91

Chapter 4 Witnesses of the Pronunciation of the Inseparable Prepositions in Ancient Greek Transliteration and Translations ............................................................................................... 94

1 The pronunciation of the inseparable prepositions witnessed in the second column of the Hexapla .................................................................................................................................... 94

1.1 The general characteristics of the Greek transliterations in comparison with the Tiberian vocalization ........................................................................................................ 97

vi

1.1.1 The generally high level of coherence of sounds between the Greek transliterations and the Tiberian vocalization ....................................................... 98

1.1.2 The more diversified correspondences in the Greek transliterations to the sound prescribed by the Tiberian shĕwa ....................................................................... 101

1.2 The sound of the Hebrew inseparable prepositions in the Greek transliterations ............ 103

1.3 Conclusion of the survey of the Greek transliteration ..................................................... 107

2 A survey of the distinction between a heavy and a light pronunciation of the inseparable prepositions in the Ancient Greek translations ...................................................................... 109

2.1 Methodological considerations ........................................................................................ 110

2.2 The assessment of the correspondence between the Greek definite article in Aquila’s recension and the Hebrew definite article in the Tiberian text ....................................... 112

2.3 The assessment of the correspondence between the Greek definite article in Aquila’s recension and the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions in the Tiberian text ...... 118

2.3.1 The correspondence of the inseparable preposition kaf in Aquila ......................... 120

2.3.2 The correspondence of the inseparable preposition beth in Aquila ....................... 121

2.3.3 The correspondence of the inseparable preposition lamed in Aquila .................... 126

2.4 The result of a similar survey with the Septuagint ........................................................... 130

2.5 Conclusion of the survey of the Greek definite article in both Aquila’s recension and the Septuagint .................................................................................................................. 134

Chapter 5 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 136

Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 141

vii

List of Appendices

Appendix A: Distribution of the Definite Article and of the Vocalization of Inseparable Prepositions with Hebrew Nouns/Adjectives Occurring More Than 30 Times in the Hebrew Bible ......................................................................................................................... 149

Appendix B: Reference List of Nouns/Adjectives Prefixed by an Inseparable Preposition with a Light Vowel in the Hebrew Bible ....................................................................................... 170

B.1 List of nouns/adjectives conventionally prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel (806 instances) ............................................................................................. 170

B.2 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel to deliver a distributive sense (120 instances) .................................................................... 177

B.3 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel in the syntactical construction of transitional lamed (636 instances) ................................. 178

B.4 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel due to the influence of an immediately following adjective (210 instances) ........................ 184

B.5 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel due to the influence of an immediately following participle (72 instances) .......................... 186

B.6 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel due to the influence of an immediately following prepositional phrase (56 instances) ........ 187

B.7 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel due to the influence of an immediately following infinitive (59 instances) .......................... 188

B.8 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel due to the influence of an implicit relative clause (45 instances) .......................................... 189

B.9 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel due to the influence of a short phrase of negation (16 instances) .......................................... 189

B.10 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel followed by an explicit relative clause (18 instances) .................................................... 189

B.11 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel due to the influence of an immediately following noun (58 instances) .......................... 190

B.12 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel in the syntactical construction of series/parallelism (238 instances) .................................. 191

B.13 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel to convey a properly indefinite sense (135 instances) ........................................................ 193

viii

B.14 List of nouns/adjectives prefixed by an inseparable preposition with a light vowel not conforming to the presented regularities (278 instances) ......................................... 194

Appendix C: Verses in the Hebrew Bible Where Nouns/Adjectives Prefixed by an Inseparable Preposition with a Heavy Vowel Are Followed by an Adjective or Participle Perfixed by the Definite Article (119 instances) .................................................................... 197

Appendix D: Verses in the Hebrew Bible Where Nouns/Adjectives Prefixed by a Heavily Vocalized Inseparable Preposition Are Followed by a Relative Particle .............................. 198

Appendix E: Verses in the Hebrew Bible Where Nouns/Adjectives Prefixed by an Inseparable Preposition Are Involved in a Series/Parallelism Construction ......................... 200

E.1 Verses containing series/parallelism of inseparable prepositions with a heavy vowel (403 instances) ................................................................................................................ 200

E.2 Verses containing series/parallelism of inseparable prepositions with a light vowel (363 instances) ................................................................................................................ 202

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

The three inseparable prepositions in Biblical Hebrew, namely ְב (beth), ְכ (kaf), and ְל (lamed),

are a feature shared with other Northwest Semitic languages. They are so called because they

have never stood properly alone without prefixing another word.1 The inseparable nature of these

prepositions makes them adhere to the prefixed word, and allows nothing to come between.2 As

a result, when these inseparable prepositions are prefixed to nouns, they compete with another

inseparable particle operating with nouns, the definite article ַה (he) and almost always make it

disappear.3 This philological phenomenon is also observed in the Canaanite branch of the

Northwest Semitic languages (for example Phoenician4 and Moabite5).

In the vocalized text of the Hebrew Bible as preserved in the Tiberian tradition, the vocalization

of the three inseparable prepositions is not uniform. Rather, a clear distinction has been

recognized between two different ways of vocalization: a group of heavy vowels

Such a distinction between a .(ְלֶמֶל�/ְכֶמֶל�/ְבֶמֶל�) and a group of light vowels (ַלֶּמֶל�/ַכֶּמֶל�/ַבֶּמֶל�)

heavy and a light vowel of the inseparable prepositions has long been recorded and preserved in

the Masoretic tradition, in which the heavy vowel is denoted as מלעיל (“from above”) and the

1 The preposition ִמן also often appears as a prefix, but is not “inseparable.” 2 Except for very few cases in which the preposition ִמן stands in between (- ְִלמ or - ְִכמ), such as 2) ְלֵמָרחֹוק Sam .Lev 26:37), etc) ְּכִמְּפֵני־ֶחֶרב ,(Gen 38:24) ְּכִמְׁש�ׁש ֳחָדִׁשים ,(Isa 7:17) ְלִמּיֹום ,(7:193 Except for very few cases in which the definite article ַה remains between the preposition and the noun, such as ְּבַהָּׁשַמִים ,(Neh 9:19) ְּבַהֶּדֶר� ,( ;Gen 39:11; Deut 6:24; 1 Sam 9:13; Ezra 9:7, 15; Neh 5:11; 9:10; Jer 44:22) ְּכַהּיֹום(Ps 36:1), ִיםְלַהַּקְרֻּדּמ (2 Sam 13:21), 2) ְלַהְּגדּוד Chr 25:10), etc. 4 Thomas O. Lambdin, “The Junctural Origin of the West Semitic Definite Article,” in Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright (ed. Hans Goedicke; Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1971), 326-30. 5 Randall Garr, Dialect Geography of Syria-Palestine, 1000-586 B.C.E (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1985), 54-7.

2

light vowel מלרע (“from below”).6 The seriousness with which such a distinction has been

maintained can be recognized in some of the carefully compiled lists, such as can be found in

Sefer ʹOklah wĕ-ʹOklah, where pairs of the same noun prefixed by the same inseparable

preposition are provided comprehensively so as to highlight that one in the pair has a light vowel

for the preposition, while the other has a heavy vowel.7

It is widely considered that the distinction between a heavy and a light vowel of the inseparable

preposition in the Tiberian text is intended to indicate the presence or absence of the definite

article. Thus the definite article in the presence of these inseparable prepositions, does not

actually “disappear,” but is “hidden” in the heavy vowel. The mechanism of syncopation is

operating: the loss of the Hebrew letter he is compensated by a heavy vowel attached to the

prefixed preposition, in contrast to the otherwise light pronunciation of the preposition. This

view was attested already in the late twelfth century by David Kimhi: “after the prefixes ל ,כ ,ב,

the article is regularly elided, and its vowel is shifted back under the prefix,”8 and is openly

subscribed in almost all modern grammars of Biblical Hebrew.

6 Aron Dotan, “The Beginnings of Masoretic Vowel Notation,” in 1972 and 1973 Proceedings IOMS (ed. Harry M. Orlinsky; Missoula, Montana: University of Montana, 1974), 23. Elias Levita, The Massoreth ha-Massoret of Elias Levita, Being an Exposition of the Masoretic Notes on the Hebrew Bible, or the Ancient Critical Apparatus of the Old Testament (trans. Christian Ginsburg; London: Longmans, Green, Reader & Dyer, 1867), 204-7.

7 Fernando Díaz-Esteban, Sefer ʹOklah wĕ-ʹOklah: colección de listas de palabras destinadas a conservar la integridad del texto hebreo de la Biblia entre los judios de la Edad Media (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1975), 31-2, 70-4, 90-1.

8 William Chomsky, David Ḳimḥi’s Hebrew Grammar (Mikhlol) (New York: Bloch Publishing Company, 1952), 49.

Also a 10th century grammarian once recognized that “the form ְלָהָעם (in 2 Chr 10:7) and ָלָעם are equivalent”; see Geoffrey Khan, The Early Karaite Tradition of Hebrew Grammatical Thought: Including a Critical Edition, Translation and Analysis of the Diqduq of ↃAbū YaСqūb Yūsuf ibn Nūḥ on the Hagiographa (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 182. Another Karaite grammarian living in the 11th century, however, says nothing of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions. See Geoffrey Khan, María Ángeles Gallego, and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger, The Early Karaite Tradition of Hebrew Grammatical Thought in Its Classical Form: A Critical Edition and English

3

The conviction that the heavy vowel attached to the inseparable prepositions in the Tiberian text

indicates a syncopated definite article finds support from several other features of the

vocalization. (1) The doubling of the non-laryngeal letter immediately following the inseparable

preposition almost always accompanies a heavy vowel of the preposition, as it does the explicit

definite article. In the Masora, the terms דׁשג (dagesh) and רפה (rafe) are used to specify the

presence and absence of doubling, respectively.9 The consistent association of the doubling with

a heavily vocalized inseparable preposition in the Tiberian text seems to endorse the

correspondence between the heavy vowel of the inseparable preposition and the definite article.10

(2) The variations of the heavy vowel of the inseparable preposition preceding the laryngeals are

the same as the variations of the vowel of the explicit definite article. Thus, as we have

ֶרב/ָהָאֶרץ ֶרב/ָבָאֶרץ so we have ,ֶהָחֽ (This again attests to the mechanism of syncopation. (3 .ֶלָחֽ

With nouns in construct state, the vocalization of the inseparable preposition is always a light

one, corresponding to the fact that no definite article is employed in front of a noun in construct

state.11 (4) With some proper nouns that are almost always designated with an explicit definite

article, the inseparable prepositions are also heavily vocalized (ַּבְּלָבנֹון vs. ַהְּלָבנֹון). All these

Translation of al-Kitāb, al-Kāfī fī al-Luġa al-СIbrāniyya by ↃAbū al-Faraj Hārūn ibn akl-Faraj (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 98-109, 240-87.

9 Israel Yeivin, Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah (trans. E. J. Revell. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1980), 116-7. Elias Levita, Massoreth ha-Massoret, 199-202.

10 The doubling of the letter after the heavily vocalized inseparable preposition is not obvious in the Babylonian and Palestinian vocalization systems, and is only sporadically attested in the Greek transliteration preserved in the second column of Origen’s Hexapla. For a proposition concerning the late appearance of the doubling of the first radical of the noun prefixed by a definite article, see Sperber, HUCA (1937), 137. The argument is based on the lack of evidence in the Hexapla. A different argument, however, can be found in William E. Staples, “The Second Column of Origen's Hexapla,” JAOS 59 (1939): 79.

11 Exceptional cases are extremely rare: ַּמֲעֵנהּו .(Isa 24:2) ַּכְּגִבְרָּתּה ,(Prov 16:4) ַלֽ

4

features argue strongly for reading the heavy vowel of the inseparable preposition as a

syncopated definite article in the Tiberian text.

However, the complete dependency of this syncopated definite article on the vowel, and nothing

else, also makes it as “vulnerable” as other audio features of the vocalized Hebrew Scripture. It

has to suffer all the suspicion and criticism thrown upon the credibility of the Masoretic

vocalization system since the day of Elias Levita.12 Perhaps this is why the heavy vocalization of

the inseparable preposition has not received the same level of recognition as the explicit definite

article, as far as the grammatical function of the definite article is concerned. In fact, insisting on

reading a heavy vowel of the inseparable preposition as a definite article proper might result in

complicating the understanding of the function of the definite article. In many of the scholarly

discussions focusing on the grammatical meanings and values of the Hebrew definite article, the

heavy vowel of the inseparable preposition has not been taken into consideration in a

comprehensive manner.13 Scholars who insist upon a framework of grammatical categories of

determination/definiteness for explaining the meaning of the Hebrew definite article in the text

are often occupied by struggling with ambiguous cases of the explicit definite article, but leave

many heavily vocalized inseparable prepositions unexplained, which would not easily fit into the

12 To name but a few: Charles Wilson, Elements of Hebrew Grammar: To Which is Prefixed, A Dissertation on the Modes of Reading with or without the Vowel-Points (London: printed for Ogles, Duncan, and Cochran, 1818), 48, remarks that “the vowel-marks are no indications to us of the ancient sounds of the language. The sounds have vanished, like the breath of those who uttered them; and no tradition could either arrest or transmit them.” And Shelomo Morag, “On the Historical Validity of the Vocalization of the Hebrew Bible,” JAOS 94 (1974): 307, says that “for a long time, a strong tendency prevailed in biblical scholarship to regard the vocalization of the Bible superfluous.”

13 For example, in Bruce K. Waltke, and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2004), 241-9, only occasionally are heavily vocalized inseparable prepositions discussed except under the category of “generic article with material.” Similarly, in E. Kautzsch, ed. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1909), §126, far fewer examples are related to heavily vocalized inseparable prepositions than explicit definite articles, except in §126 n & o.

5

existing categories.14 Had the equivalence of the heavy vowel of an inseparable preposition to

the definite article been taken seriously, the discussion of the definite article and definiteness

would be considerably different in many grammarians’ works.

Another observation that calls for a caution against unconditionally seeing a hidden definite

article in a heavily vocalized inseparable preposition comes from the much higher ratio of the

heavy vowels in comparison to the ratio of the definite article. Take, for example, the Hebrew

noun ֶאֶרץ, and refer to the following table for the distribution of both explicit definite articles

and heavily vocalized inseparable prepositions.

Hebrew noun ֶאֶרץ in absolute state Noun entries not prefixed by any

preposition Noun entries prefixed by an inseparable

preposition Prefixed by a definite

article Not prefixed by a definite article

With an heavy vowel

With a light vowel

664 311 261 21 975 282

Definite article ratio = 664/975 = 68.1% Heavy vowel ratio = 261/282 = 92.6%

Of the 975 instances of ֶאֶרץ not prefixed by an inseparable preposition, 664 (68%) have explicit

definite articles. But among the 282 instances where the same noun is prefixed by an inseparable

preposition, 262 (92.6%) have a heavy vowel under the preposition. This incompatibility

between the ratios of heavy vowels and the explicit definite articles immediately suggests a

reconsideration of full equivalency between these two.

14 Martin Ehrensvärd, “Determination of the Noun in Biblical Hebrew,” SJOT 14 (2000): 301-14, for example, in striving to affirm the validity of the “generally accepted categories of article use” (302), looks into 67 instances that other grammarians render as undetermined and argues for the feasibility to place them back into known categories of definiteness. The problem of this approach is that for the affirmation to be persuasive, a much wider range of survey is required.

6

The case of the Hebrew noun ֶאֶרץ as illustrated above is by no means exceptional. Similar

calculations with a few other nouns result in the following table, listed in descending order of the

ratio of explicit definite articles.

Not prefixed by any preposition

Prefixed by an inseparable preposition

Hebrew Noun

Total

Occurrences15

With a definite article

Without a definite

article

Heavy vowel

Light vowel

Definite article ratio

Heavy vowel ratio

100% 90.5% 0 11 2 19 202 ֲארֹון

91.9% 78.1% 6 68 28 100 321 ָׂשֶדה

100% 68.6% 0 46 87 190 421 ָׁשַמי

94.4% 58.6% 1 17 48 68 240 ַנַער

79.8% 49.3% 25 99 172 167 560 ּגֹוי

40.0% 40.9% 6 4 39 27 120 ֶרֶכב

98.1% 25.3% 1 52 56 19 193 ֶׁשֶמן

94.1% 15.9% 1 16 53 10 153 ָמֶות

81.3% 4.2% 3 13 159 7 297 ֶלֶחם

In all of the nouns listed, we have a higher heavy vowel ratio. Even with nouns that are

considerably resistant to an explicit definite article (as in the case of ָמֶות and ֶלֶחם, given in the

two entries at the bottom of the table above), the heavy vowels still dominate substantially when

the nouns are prefixed by an inseparable preposition.

The high ratio of the heavily vocalized inseparable prepositions might not be something very

unusual. After all, a high ratio of definite articles can also be observed with nouns after the

prepositions ַעלand ֶאל. In the Masoretic text, 72% of absolute nouns after the preposition ַעל are

15 The total occurrences include both absolute and construct groups.

7

prefixed by a definite article. The ratio for 80% ,ֶאל, is even higher.16 It seems that the presence

of these two prepositions predefines a context which prompts the use of a definite article. The

same explanation might apply to the typically high heavy-vowel ratios of the inseparable

prepositions.

What is really unusual about the inseparable prepositions is that the high ratio of heavy vowels

extends into the poetry. The ratio of definite articles is typically much less in poetry than in

prose.17 This is so even with nouns after the prepositions ַעל and 18.ֶאל In contrast, the difference

between the heavy vowel ratios in those books popularly grouped under the title Deuteronomistic

History (Joshua – 2 Kings) and in the poetic books,19 respectively, is not as significant. This is

illustrated in the table below with a few typical examples.

Definite article ratio Heavy vowel ratio

Joshua-2 Kings Poetic Joshua-2 Kings Poetic

44.4% 69.0% 18.2% 92.5% ֶמֶל� 92.7% 100.0% 38.2% 71.9% ֶאֶרץ 35.7% 86.7% 8.6% 69.6% ֶּדֶר� 40.0% 87.5% 0.0% 30.0% ִמְׁשָּפט

16 The number of absolute nouns immediately following the preposition ַעל is 1,129 in the whole Hebrew Bible, of which 808 (72%) are prefixed by the definite article. For the preposition ֶאל, there are 973 instances, of which 775 (80%) have a definite article.

17 This generally known observation has been confirmed specifically by a few quantitative studies such as Y. T. Radday and H. Shore, “The Definite Article: A Type- and/or Author-Specifying Discriminant in the Hebrew Bible,” JALLC 4 (1976): 23-31; David Noel Freedman, “Prose Particles in the Poetry of the Primary History,” in Biblical and Related Studies Presented to Samuel Iwry (ed. Ann Kort and Scott Morschauser; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1985), 49-62; Francis I. Andersen and A. D. Forbes, “ʻProse Particles’ Count of the Hebrew Bible,” in The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Sixtieth Birthday (ed. Carol L. Meyers and M. O’Connor; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 165-183.

18 The ratio of definite articles for the preposition ַעל in poetry is much lower (17%), and that for ֶאל is 20%. 19 Included in this calculation are Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Canticles, and Lamentations.

8

As can be seen in the table, the gap between the ratios of definite articles in the narratives and in

the poetry is usually dramatic. In comparison, although the ratio of heavy vowels in the poetry is

lower than in the narratives, the gap in between is much smaller. Even in the case of a more

abstract noun such as ִמְׁשָּפט, we still see 40% of heavy vowels, though none of definite articles,

in the poetry.

It is this extensive imbalance between the ratios of definite articles and of heavy vowels that

causes some scholars to question the grammatical value of the vocalization of the inseparable

preposition.20 James Barr, in a study of the use of the article in the poetic literature, observes this

imbalance and uses it as the basis of his argument against a mechanical imposition of a sense of

determination.21 Barr’s conclusion displays an intriguing hesitation between two opposite

attitudes. On the one hand, he recognizes the possibility that “the reading tradition later inserted

‘articles’ into many of these short phrases beginning with the preposition b, k, and l,” and

accordingly this would imply that “the article cannot be properly described on the basis of the

Masoretic text.” On the other hand he warns against treating the reading tradition simply as “a

sack of unintelligibility into which we thrust things that we cannot explain.”22 The questions

invoked are many. What has actually been intended by the vocalization of the inseparable

prepositions? In addition to the obvious link to the definite article as shown in the Tiberian

vocalization, is there anything else that can further confirm the relationship between the vowels

20 E. Kautzsch, ed. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1909), §126 footnote 6; Mayer Lambert, Traitié de Grammaire Hébraïque (Paris: Leroux, 1931-38), 96; Paul Joüon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (trans. T. Muraoka; Roma: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblio, 1991), 509; Bruce K. Waltke, and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2004), 250; Andersen and, “ʻProse Particles’ Count of the Hebrew Bible,” 165.

21 James Barr, “Determination and Definite Article in Biblical Hebrew,” JSS 37 (1989): 325-7.

22 Ibid., 328-30.

9

of the inseparable prepositions and the definite articles? To what extent can the vocalization of

the inseparable prepositions as preserved in the Tiberian tradition be credited along the

diachronic axis? It is the interest of this current study to provide a more comprehensive and solid

basis for answering these questions.

Relying on any oral tradition alone to maintain the fidelity of transmission of all the markings of

the pronunciation of the inseparable prepositions is extremely challenging. Without vowel points,

the process of reading the Hebrew Scriptures involves a continual decision among several

options of meaning allowed by the same consonant form, depending critically on the context.23

For the inseparable prepositions, occasionally the context provides a clear hint of definiteness, as

in ָלָעם ַהֶּזה ,ַּבּיֹום ַההּוא, or ַלֶּמֶל� ָּדִוד, but for the majority, ambiguity prevails. Considering that

there are an extraordinarily large number of inseparable prepositions in the Masoretic Text

(10,387 instances of nominal entries, including nouns, numerics, adjectives, and participles, in

absolute state which are prefixed by an inseparable preposition, and 6,219 of them are vocalized

by a heavy vowel),24 and that these vowels have been taken very seriously within the tradition,

one wonders how any oral tradition could manage to ensure the fidelity during the transmission

23 For a discussion of how the ancient Greek translators read and interpret the non-vocalized text, see James Barr, “Vocalization and the Analysis of Hebrew among the Ancient Translators,” in Hebräische Wortforschung: Festschrift zum 80. Geburtstag von Walter Baumgartner (ed. Benedikt Hartmann et al. Leiden: Brill, 1967), 2-3; and also Stefan Schorch, “The Septuagint and the Vocalization of the Hebrew Text of Torah,” in XII Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies Leiden, 2004 (ed. Melvin K. H. Peters; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004), 43-52.

24 All the counting of cases in this study are based on the morphological database provided by BibleWorks (Version 7.0), which is in turn based upon the Westminster Hebrew OT Morphology database. The distribution of nominal entries in absolute states prefixed by an inseparable preposition is given below.

Lamed Beth Kaf Total Vocalized with a heavy vowel 1,804 3,821 594 6,219 Vocalized with a light vowel 2,128 1,554 486 4,168 Total 3,932 5,375 1,080 10,387

10

process. Did they rely on sheer memory, or did they make use of some aid of pronunciation?25

Or much easier, might there be a certain set of rules that enable a reliable and consistent handling

of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions?

For a preliminary assessment of the feasibility, let us come back to the Hebrew noun ֶאֶרץ. This

noun, in absolute state, is prefixed by the inseparable preposition beth 223 times in the Tiberian

text, in which 204 have a heavy vowel ( ֶרץאָ בָ ). The merely 19 instances of light vowels ( ֶאֶרץבְ )

are listed here.

Book Chap Verse Text Accent

Gen 15 13 ֨ץ֙ ְּבֶאֶר ֹ֣ םא ָלהֶ֔ ל Disjunctive Pashta Exod 2 22 ֶ֖רץ ָנְכִרָּיֽהְּבֶא Disjunctive Tiphcha Exod 18 3 ֶ֖רץ ָנְכִרָּיֽהְּבֶא Disjunctive Tiphcha Deut 32 10 ֣רֶרץ ִמְדּבָ֔ ְּבֶא Conjunctive Munach Neh 9 35 ֶ֨הֶרץ ָהְרָחבָ֧ ּוְבא Conjunctive Azla Job 28 13 ֣יםְּבֶא ַחִּיֽ ֶרץ ַהֽ Conjunctive Munach Ps 142 6 ֣יםְּבֶא ַחִּיֽ ֶרץ ַהֽ Conjunctive Munach Isa 26 10 ֥לֹות ְיַעּוֵ֑ ֶרץ ְנֹכח֖ ְּבֶא Conjunctive Mereka Isa 32 2 ֥הְּבֶא ֶרץ ֲעֵיָפֽ Conjunctive Mereka Isa 38 11 ֣יםֶרץ ַהַחּיִ֑ ְּבֶא Conjunctive Munach Jer 2 2 ְּ֖בֶא ֹ֥ הֶרץ ל א ְזרּוָעֽ Disjunctive Tiphcha Jer 2 6 ֶ֗א־עָ֤ ְּבא ֹֽ יׁשאִ֔ ַבר ָּבּה֙ ֶרץ ל Disjunctive Rebia Jer 5 19 ְּ֖בֶא ֹ֥ םֶרץ ל א ָלֶכֽ Disjunctive Tiphcha Jer 15 14 ְּ֖בֶא ֹ֣ ְעּתָ א ָיָד֑ ֶרץ ל Disjunctive Tiphcha

Ezek 26 20 ֶֹ֨ותֶרץ ַּתְחִּתּי֜ ְּבא Conjunctive Azla Ezek 30 13 ִ֥יםְּבֶא ֶרץ ִמְצָרֽ Conjunctive Mereka Ezek 31 16 ַּ֤תְחִּתית֙ ֶרץ ְּבֶא Conjunctive Maphak Dan 11 40 ָֹ֥ותא ַבֲאָרצ֖ ּוב Disjunctive Tiphcha Dan 11 42 ַֹ֥ותֹו ַּבֲאָרצ֑ ח ָי֖ד ְוִיְׁשל Disjunctive Athnach

25 J. A. Emerton, “The Purpose of the Second Column,” JTS 7 (1956): 85, argues that transliterations, specifically those represented by the second column of Origen’s Hexapla, were used together with consonantal Hebrew texts as a reading aid, which then became the basis for the later development of vowel points.

11

A quick survey of the list gives an impression that in this specific form, בארץ, a light vowel

under the inseparable preposition beth is almost always (except for the last two cases of plural

form) accompanied by an immediately following modifier. The prefixed noun most often has a

conjunctive accent when the modifier is a single word, but a disjunctive accent when the

modifier is longer.26 In a strong sense, the light vowel of the preposition beth appears to correlate

with an intimate relationship of the word ֶאֶרץ to what follows immediately. Such a strong

correlation suggests a high feasibility of searching and finding a consistent regularity. In the

grammatical tradition of the early Karaites in the 10th century the heavy vocalization of the

preposition is understood to be a mark of “disjoining.”27 Thus, a heavy vowel of the preposition

“disconnects” the prefixed noun from what follows it and places a “pause” to the information

collection process concerning the meaning of the noun. In contrast, a light vowel allows the

semantic field of the prefixed noun to extend as the reading proceeds. Such an understanding of

the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions seems impressively compatible with what has

been observed in the form בארץ above. While not necessarily militating against the syncopated

definite article, it provides an option, and a far more operational one, for the apprehension of the

practice of the Masoretic tradition regarding the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions. The

example of בארץ given here is, of course, only a small part of the whole story and not at all

representative. It however encourages a dig-in and points to a feasible path.

26 Similarly, Barr, “Determination,” 326, finds that “where the noun [prefixed by b, k, or l] has an adjective with it, no article is found . . . in other words where it is not a one-word prepositional phrase but a longer one.”

27 Khan, The Early Karaite Tradition, 102-3, 113.

12

The current study is driven by the issues of the pronunciation of the inseparable prepositions, as

presented above, and the questions they have invoked. The prescribed inquiries are two-fold.

Synchronically, this study involves a comprehensive search and a quantitative analysis of the

vocalization of the inseparable prepositions as preserved in the vocalized Masoretic text. This

part of the effort undertaken in this study aims at finding regularities. The concern here is not so

much grammatical as operational. The key question to address first in this search is not about the

grammatical significance of the regularities, but the utilization that such regularities would bring

about for the maintenance of a consistent and reliable system regarding the vocalization of the

inseparable prepositions. This is not to suppose that linguistic regularities can be dissociated

entirely from grammatical functions. The attempt here is to keep the search and analysis, as

much as possible, from the bias of any presupposition. The assumption and approach of this part

of study, the data collected and categorized, the regularities found, and their implications, are

presented in Chapter 2.

Diachronically, this study endeavours to assess the temporal consistency of the vocalization of

the inseparable prepositions. The inquiry here concerns the connection or correlation that the

vocalization of the inseparable prepositions as presented in the Tiberian text might have with

other early sources that also provide indication of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions.

In the first place, the consistency within the Tiberian tradition will be surveyed. With existing

manuscripts such as Codex Aleppo and Codex Reuchlinianus, a full comparison is plausible.

Beyond the Tiberian system, the other two Masoretic traditions, namely the Babylonian and

Palestinian, will then be included in the survey. The fragmentary nature of the available

manuscripts within these two traditions limits the survey. Still, the amount of data collected from

the available sources is reasonably representative and allows a statistically significant proposition

13

to be drawn. This part of the survey, including the manuscripts and the instances available for

comparison, the estimate of consistency, and the analysis of the variations are all presented in

Chapter 3.

Outside the Masoretic traditions, there are no other sources that facilitate a direct comparison of

the Hebrew vowels. Several transliterations, however, provide the opportunity for an indirect

assessment. Transcriptions of the Samaritan Pentateuch in Latin letters have been published by

several scholars, allowing a comparison of the sounds attached to the inseparable prepositions.

The antiquity of the transliterated sounds in the Samaritan Pentateuch can hardly be confirmed,

and cannot be evaluated as an ancient reference.28 A brief survey of the sounds of the inseparable

prepositions in the Book of Genesis in the Samaritan Pentateuch is still conducted for a reference.

The result of comparison is presented at the end of Chapter 3.

Moving backward along the diachronic axis, we find Origen’s Hexapla. In the second column

Origen provides a version of Greek transliteration of the Hebrew text. Currently this great work

is only extant in fragments, and the available part of the second column contains merely a few

chapters. These transliterations, being a snapshot of the ancient pronunciation of the Hebrew text,

are indispensable data to the current study. Many scholars have studied these transliterations and

28 Transliteration of the Samaritan Pentateuch of a few chapters of the Book of Genesis is provided in Appendix II of Paul Kahle, Cairo Geniza (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1959), 318-335. According to Kahle, this transcribed text was dictated by the then Samaritan High Priest in around 1920. An earlier version of transliteration of the whole Genesis can be found in J. Heinrich Petermann, Versuch einer hebräischen Formenlehre nach der Aussprache der heutigen Samaritaner, nebst einer darnach gebildeten Transcription der Genesis und einer Beilage enthaltend die von dem recipirten Texte des Pentateuchs abweichenden Lesarten der Samaritaner (Leipzig, 1868), 161-218. A full transliteration of the whole Pentateuch can be found in Zeev ben Ḥayyim, The Literary and Oral Tradition of Hebrew and Aramaic amongst the Samaritans (vol. 1; Jerusalem: Mosad Byalik, 1967).

14

made valuable contributions.29 Some of them have paid attention to the sounds of the inseparable

prepositions,30 but do not directly address the inquiry of this current study, which as a

quantitative one is on the level of correlation between the transliterated sounds of the inseparable

prepositions and the corresponding vowels in the Tiberian text. The sources, method, data

collection, analysis, and results are presented in the first half of Chapter 4.

There is no other direct witness to the pronunciation of the inseparable prepositions earlier than

Origen’s Hexapla. An inquiry of whether ancient translators recognized a hidden definite article

in association with the Hebrew inseparable prepositions might still be made. A preliminary

survey of the Greek translation in the Septuagint confirms that the explicit definite articles in the

Hebrew text has been taken very seriously in the Septuagint. This is more so in Aquila’s

recension. If the translators of these Greek versions did endeavour to employ Greek definite

articles in correspondence to Hebrew definite articles, how often did they provide a Greek

definite article in the translation of the Hebrew inseparable prepositions? An estimate of the

frequency of Greek definite articles associated with the inseparable prepositions, in comparison

with the frequency of Greek definite articles associated with explicit Hebrew definite articles,

would be informative. Naturally such an evaluation is tenuous. The link is relatively obscure and

many other factors are involved. The effort is still worthy because this is an approach that allows

29 More prominently are O. Pretzl, “Die Aussprache des Hebräischen nach der zweiten Kolumne der Hexapla des Origenes,” Biblische Zeitschrift 20 (1932): 4-22; E. A. Speiser, “The Pronunciation of Hebrew According to the Transliterations in the Hexapla,” JQR 16 (1926): 343-82; 23 (1933): 233-65; 24 (1933): 9-46; Alexander Sperber, “Hebrew Based upon Greek and Latin Transliterations,” HUCA 12 (1937) 103-274; Einar Brønno, Studien über hebräische Morphologie und Vokalismus auf Grundlage der mercatischen Fragmente der zweiten Kolumne der Hexapla des Origenes (Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1943); Gerard Jansses, Studies in Hebrew Historical Linguistics Based on Origen’s Secunda (Leuven: Peeters, 1982).

30 Alexander Sperber, “Hebrew Based upon Greek and Latin Transliterations,” 194-6; Brønno, Studien über hebräische Morphologie und Vokalismus, 214-27; Gerard Jansses, Studies in Hebrew Historical Linguistics Based on Origen’s Secunda (Leuven: Peeters, 1982), 85-7.

15

some comments on whether the readers before the Common Era might have sensed a

linguistically significant feature hidden in some of the inseparable prepositions. The second part

of Chapter 4 presents such a survey in details.

A quantitative study naturally involves a lot of counting. The numbers of instances of more than

400 nouns in absolute state, under various constructed forms, are counted. The results are given

in a series of tables that constitute the appendices. The amount of data is indeed substantial, but

this is deemed necessary for the verification and validation of those most important arguments in

this thesis. For such a quantitative study statistical methods are unavoidable. The fundamental

principles of statistical inferences are implied almost everywhere in this thesis. The author has

been paying attention to avoid “statistical fallacies.” The considerable size of data, though not

entirely a guarantee of freedom from bias, should be quite ensuring. It is the conviction of the

thesis that sound judgments based on the statistical analysis are able to lead to a significant

recognition of patterns and regularities, which in turn invite new perspectives and interpretations.

It is hoped that, although the value and validity of the theories proposed in this thesis are

debatable, the presented data and observed patterns can contribute to understanding the

vocalization of the inseparable prepositions in the Hebrew Bible.

16

Chapter 2 Regularities in the Vocalization of the Inseparable Prepositions

In this chapter the result of a survey of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions in the

Tiberian text is presented. The intention behind this survey is to find discernible rules behind the

two kinds of vocalization of the inseparable prepositions: the heavy vowels (those represented

mostly by a pataḥ, and sometimes by a qāmeṣ, or a sĕqôl) and the light vowels (those

represented mainly by a shěwa, and sometimes by an assimilated pataḥ before the laryngeal, or

by a hireq before a shěwa).31 The scope of this survey covers all nominal entries which are in

absolute state and are prefixed by an inseparable preposition, and whose roots have more than 30

occurrences in the Hebrew Bible. These amount to 454 roots of nouns and adjectives. The result

of the survey suggests a mostly positive answer to our question: there are indeed rules governing

the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions.

1 The concept of definiteness and the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions

In almost every situation in which a definite article is expected, in the context, of a noun which is

prefixed by an inseparable preposition, a heavy vowel is found under the preposition. These are

the cases where either a definite modifier, including the demonstratives, is present (such as ַּבּיֹום

ַהְּׁשִביִעי ַלֹחֶדׁש ,ַּכְּדָבִרים ָהֵאֶּלה ,ַההּוא etc.), or an anaphoric reference is to be made in ,ַלַּנַער ַהּיּוָּלד ,

the context (such as ֹ֙וםי֔ ָלאֹור יםא ֱא�ִה֤ ַוִּיְקָר֨ in Gen 1:5, referring to “the light” just mentioned in

the previous verse). The reverse, however, cannot be blindly confirmed without hesitation. One

31 In a few cases a qāmeṣ under an inseparable preposition is also considered a light vowel. Specific examples are those instances of nouns prefixed by the inseparable preposition lamed with a qāmeṣ, but rafe (that is, without a

dagesh) on the first letter of the noun, such as ָלֶבַטח ,ָלַמס, and ָלֶנַצח.

17

cannot say that when there is a heavy vowel under an inseparable preposition, a definite article is

always required by the context. In the Hebrew Bible there are a remarkable number of instances

of inseparable prepositions in which the heavy or light vowel cannot be related to a semantic

sense of determination in any obvious way. Note the following two verses containing the noun

.ֹּכחַ

יְנI֥ ְיהוָ֖ ה ִּתְרעַ֥ ץ אֹוֵיֽב יְנI֣ ְיהוָ֔ ה ֶנְאָּדִר֖ י ַּבּכֹ֑ חַ ְיִמֽ Exod 15:6 ְיִמֽ

ֹ֣ אֶמר ִׁשְמׁ֗ש ֹון ָּתמ֣ ֹות ַנְפִׁשי֘ ִעם־ְּפִלְׁשִּתים֒ ַוֵּי֣ט ְּבכֹ֔ חַ ַוִּיּפֹ֤ ל ַהַּביִ֨ ת֙ ַעל־ַהְּסָרנִ֔ ים Judg 16:30 ַוּי

It is apparently difficult to associate the vocalization (one heavy and the other light) of the beth

in these two verses with the idea of definiteness or determination. Many similar examples can be

listed.32

(Exod 21:18) ְוִהָּכה־ִאיׁש֙ ֶאת־ֵרעֵ֔ הּו ּבְ ֶא֖ ֶבן ֣א ֹו ְבֶאְגֹר֑ ף ֶאֶבן vs. ּבָ ֶא֛ ֶבן ִיְרְּגמ֥ ּו ֹאָת֖ ם (Lev 20:27) (Amos 4:13) ּוַמּגִ֤ יד ְלָאָדם֙ ַמה־ֵּׂשח֔ ֹו ָאָדם

vs. ַוֲהֵצֹר֣ ִתי ָלָאדָ֗ ם (Zeph 1:17) (Job 13:7) ַה֭ ְלֵאל ְּתַדְּב֣ר ּו ַעְולָ֑ ה ֵאל

vs. ִאם־ָלֵא֥ ל ְּתִריֽבּון (Job 13:8) ֲאַיֲחלָ֥ ה לְ֜ א֗ ֹור אֹור (Job 30:26) ַוֽ

vs. ְ֙נַקּוֶ֤ ה ָלאֹור (Isa 59:9) יהָוה֙ ִּבְבֵהמָ֔ ה ְּבֵהָמה (Lev 27:26) ּבְ כ֞ ֹור ֲאֶׁשר־ְיֻבּכַ֤ ר ַלֽ vs. ַל֭ ִיׁש ִּגּב֣ ֹור ַּבְּבֵהמָ֑ ה (Prov 30:30)  ִין ִּגּבֹור (Ps 78:65) ֲאֹדנָ֑ י ּכְ֜ ִגּב֗ ֹור ִמְתרֹוֵנ֥ ן ִמָּיֽ

vs. ְיהָוה֙ ַּכִּגּב֣ ֹור ֵיצֵ֔ א (Isa 42:13) (Josh 19:51) ִנֲחל֣ ּו ֶאְלָעָז֣ ר ַהֹּכהֵ֣ ן. . . . . . ְּבגֹוָר֤ ל ּגֹוָרל vs. ל (Josh 21:8) ּכֲאֶׁש֨ ר ִצּוָ֧ ה ְיהוָ֛ ה ְּבַיד־ֹמֶׁש֖ ה ַּבּגֹוָרְֽמחַ֥ ץ ַרְגְלI֗ ּבְ֫ דָ֥ ם ָּדם (Ps 68:24) ִּתֽ

vs. 2) ַוֲעָמָׂש֛ א ִמְתֹּגלֵ֥ ל ַּבּדָ֖ ם Sam 20:12) ֶר�־ז֥ ּו ֵתלֵ֑ � ֶּדֶר� אֹוְרI֗ ְּבֶדֽ (Ps 32:8) ְוֽ

32 This is simply a more detailed statement of what Lambert, Barr, and Joüon have said, in opposition to the claim of Ehrensvard Martin.

18

vs. ְָכּת ֹ֣ א ָתׁ֔ש ּוב ַּבּדֶ֖ ֶר� ֲאֶׁש֥ ר ָהָלֽ (Kgs 13:9 1) ול (Ps 104:24) ֻּכ֭ ָּלם ְּבָחְכמָ֣ ה ָעִׂש֑ יתָ ָחְכָמה

vs. ָחְכמָ֑ ה (Qoh 7:23) ִנִּס֣ יִתי ַבֽ (Kgs 2:37 1) ְוָהָי֣ ה ְּבי֣ ֹום ֵצאְתI֗ יֹום vs. י־ַהּמֶ֖ ֶל� (Sam 19:20 2) ַּבּי֕ ֹום ֲאֶׁשר־יָ֗ צָ֥֗ א֗ ֲאֹדִנֽ (Sam 15:21 1) ִאם־ְלָמוֶ֨ ת֙ ִאם־ְלַחּיִ֔ ים ָמֶות

vs. ֻכָּלם֩ ִנְּתנּו֨ ַלּמָ֜ ֶות (Ezek 31:14) א־ֻרחַ֖ ְצּתְ ַמִים ֹֽ (Ezek 16:4) ּוְבמַ֥ ִים ל

vs. ָ֙רחַ֤ ץ ַּבַּמיִ֨ ם (Lev 14:8) (Kgs 20:18 1) ְוִא֧ ם ְלִמְלָחמָ֛ ה ָיצָ֖ אּו ִמְלָחָמה vs. 1) ַוַּי֣ ַעל ֲאפֵ֔ ָקה ַלִּמְלָחמָ֖ ה Kgs 20:26) Metals ְּבכֶ֨ ֶסף ּוְבָזהָ֜ ב ּוִבְנחֹ֧ ֶׁשת (Josh 22:8)

vs. 2) ַּבָּזהָ֨ ב ּוַבּכֶ֜ ֶסף ּוַבְּנחֹ֣ ֶׁשת Chr 2:6) (Hab 3:8) הֲ ִבְנָהִרים֙ ָחָר֣ ה ְיהוָ֔ ה ָנָהר

vs. I ִֶ֔א֤ ם ַּבְּנָהִרים֙ ַאּפ (Hab 3:8) א־ִיַּטּמָ֖ א ֶנֶפׁש ֹֽ (Lev 21:1) ְלנֶ֥ ֶפׁש ל

vs. ֙א ִתְּתנּו ֹ֤ (Lev 19:18) ְוֶׂש֣ ֶרט ָלנֶ֗ ֶפׁש לל ָקָהל (Prov 26:26) ִּתָּגלֶ֖ ה ָרָע֣ת ֹו ְבָקָהֽ

vs. ַע (Job 30:28) ַק֖ ְמִּתי ַבָּקהָ֣ ל ֲאַׁשֵּוֽ (Kgs 21:21 1) וְ ִהְכַרִּת֤ י ְלַאְחָאב֙ ַמְׁשִּת֣ ין ְּבקִ֔ יר ִקיר vs. ּבַ ִּק֥ יר ַיְחְּת֖ר ּו (Ezek 12:12) אׁש רֹאׁש ֹֽ (Chr 26:10 1) ַוְיִׂשימֵ֥ הּו ָאִב֖ יהּו ְלר vs. ֙אׁש ְרַחְבעָ֛ ם ֶאת־ֲאִבָּי֥ ה ֹ֧ (Chr 11:22 2) ַוַּיֲֽעמֵ֨ ד ָלרְהי֣ ּו ְלר֔ ּוחַ רּוחַ (Jer 5:13) ְוַהְּנִביִאים֙ ִיֽ

vs. ְַוַהְּׁשִלִׁשית֙ ִּתְזֶר֣ ה ָלר֔ ּוח (Ezek 5:2) ְדI֣ ִמּמָ֑ ֶות ָרָעב (Job 5:20) ְּב֭ ָרָעב ָּפֽ

vs. ב (Jer 11:22) ְימֻ֖ תּו ָּבָרָעְֽללָ֣ ה ֵׁשם־ֱא�ִה֣ ים ְּבִׁש֑ יר ִׁשיר (Ps 69:31) ֲאַהֽ vs. א ִיְׁשּתּו־ָי֑ ִין ֹ֣ (Isa 24:9) ַּבִּׁש֖ יר ל (Jer 29:9) ְבֶׁש֔ ֶקר הֵ֛ ם ִנְּבִא֥ ים ֶׁשֶקר

vs ֶקר (Jer 20:6) ִנּבֵ֥ אָת ָלהֶ֖ ם ַּבָּׁשֽ

In all of the above instances, the concept of a definite reference is either vague or irrelevant. For

these entries, and many others similar to them, the reason for a heavy or a light vowel must be

sought beyond the category of definiteness.

19

2 The light-vowel approach

The 454 nouns/adjectives, all having at least 30 occurrences in the Hebrew Bible, surveyed in

this study have in total 48,376 occurrences of entry in absolute state.33 Of these 48,376 entries,

7,728 are prefixed by an inseparable preposition, and the remaining 40,648 are not. Of the

40,648 entries, 15,158 have a definite article, giving a ratio of 37.3%. And of the 7,728 entries,

4,979 are assigned a heavy vowel; the ratio is 64.4%. Contributing to such a significantly high

ratio of the heavy vowels of the inseparable prepositions are many frequently occurring

nouns/adjectives, which have extremely high ratios of heavy vowels for the prefixing inseparable

prepositions. Some of these are listed in the table below.

No inseparable

preposition

Inseparable Prepositions

together

Hebrew Noun HB Count

Absolute State DA n-DA heavy light

Heavy vowel

ratio

100% 0 38 152 158 348 ָים

100% 0 55 74 162 291 ַהר

100% 0 46 110 250 406 ָׁשַמי

100% 0 47 28 107 182 ִראׁשֹון

99% 1 133 43 37 214 ֹּבֶקר

99% 1 126 35 48 210 ִמְדָּבר

98% 1 52 63 29 145 ֶׁשֶמן

98% 4 161 59 21 245 ֹחֶדׁש

98% 1 40 30 65 136 ֶעֶרב

ֶנהַמחֲ 140 77 6 55 2 96%

33 Nouns in construct state are excluded from this part of study.

20

96% 2 43 190 11 246 ַאָּמה

95% 6 107 112 73 298 ִמְלָחָמה

94% 7 109 178 29 323 ֶחֶרב

93% 21 261 380 1022 1684 ֶאֶרץ

92% 4 49 114 59 226 ַלְיָלה

92% 11 132 163 47 353 ׁשאֵ

92% 6 68 29 132 235 ָׂשֶדה

An analysis of the vowels of the inseparable prepositions prefixing these nouns provides clues to

our search for regularity. Take the noun ֵׁשא for example. This noun is frequently prefixed by an

explicit definite article (it has 47 entries that are with an explicit definite article, in contrast to the

163 instances that are not). But when prefixed by inseparable prepositions, it has 132 heavy

vowels, far out-numbering the 11 instances of light vowels. The 132 heavy vowels consist of 121

beths, seven (7) kafs, and four (4) lameds. All these heavy vowels, though many in number,

display very limited and relatively simple syntactic constructions, in which the noun does not

interact with any other part of the verse, but is exclusively under the command of the inseparable

preposition, resulting in the most basic form of prepositional phrase (“[burn] by/with fire,”

“[give] into fire,” and “like fire”). The fact that all these 132 instances have a disjunctive accent

enforces the sense. The 11 cases of light vowels, on the other hand, show a greater variety of

syntactic constructions.

One of the types is demonstrated in the following two verses (and together with five other verses:

Exod 24:17; Prov 16:27; Isa 30:27; Jer 20:9; Mal 3:2).

Ps 83:15 ְּכֵא֥ ׁש ִּתְבַער־ָי֑ ַער Isa 54:16 ֹנִכי֙ ָּבָר֣ אִתי ָחָר֔ ׁש ֹנֵפחַ֙֨ ְּבֵא֣ ׁש ֶּפחָ֔ ם ָאֽ

21

The light vowels of the inseparable prepositions (a kaf and a beth respectively) seem to allow the

noun to be affected by the words immediately following it. And the conjunctive accents assigned

to the nouns strengthen the sense of forward connection. As the category of

definiteness/determination does not inform the difference between the heavy and the light vowels

in an obvious way, in this illustration the close syntactic relationship between the noun and the

following word(s) accounts more satisfactorily for the decision to employ a light vowel on the

inseparable prepositions. This is especially so when we consider the sharp and neat contrast

between the two sets of concepts: (disjunctive accent / disconnection / heavy vowel) and

(conjunctive accent / connection / light vowel).

Another type is caught in the following two verses, demonstrating a different syntactical

construction.

Isa 10:17 וְ ָהָי֤ ה ֽאֹור־ִיְׂשָרֵאל֙ ְלאֵ֔ ׁש ּוְקדֹוׁ֖ש ֹו ְלֶלָהבָ֑ ה

Jer 5:14 ַתם ִהְננִ֣ י ֹנֵתן֩ ְּדָבַר֨ י ְּבפִ֜ יI ְלאֵ֗ ׁש ְוָהעָ֥ ם ַהּזֶ֛ ה ֵעִצ֖ ים ַוֲאָכָלֽ

Here the inseparable preposition lamed with a light vowel bears a semantic sense of change or

transition (“being/becoming as”). The entry outside the lamed starts to assume the role and

function characterized by the noun prefixed by the lightly vocalized lamed.

Still another type can be illustrated by another verse containing a lamed with a light vowel.

Prov 26:21 יב ֶּפחָ֣ ם לְ֭ ֶגָחִלים ְוֵעִצ֣ ים ְלאֵ֑ ׁש ְוִא֥ יׁש מִ֜ ְדָינִ֗ ים ְלַחְרַחר־ִרֽ

Here the noun ֵׁשא has nothing to do with the following words. Nor does the lamed signify a

transition of role or function, as in the previous two cases. The syntax of this prepositional phrase

is in fact similar to that of a heavily vocalized lamed. What seems to inform the use of a light

vowel is the influence of parallelism. The two phrases ְלֵאׁש and ְלֶגָחִלים parallel each other, and

22

the force of the parallelism extends to the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions. That this

is indeed highly probably the case will be elaborated later in this chapter.

The discussion of the noun ֵׁשא above points to the direction of the survey in this study. It

highlights the fact that the light vowels, though a minority in quantity, are probably more

important in the study of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions. It also demonstrates the

feasibility of considering the syntactical variety embodied by the light vowels as a door to the

regularity of the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions, especially when the concept of

definiteness becomes less instructive.

An attempted proposition behind this is that the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions

tends to be heavy, and the light vocalization occurs in a more restricted manner, under some

conditions that can be discerned in relation to a few regularities.

The survey in this study therefore emphasizes the analysis of the light vowels of the inseparable

prepositions. Of the 454 nouns/adjectives surveyed there are 2,745 entries which have a light

vowel in the preposition. Each of these entries is surveyed and classified into a type of

syntactical construction. Those which cannot be clearly classified are left over and will be

discussed later.

3 The regularities of the light vowels

In the following sections the following six types of regularities behind the light vocalization of

inseparable prepositions are presented.

� 806 (29.1%) cases come from those nouns which have inseparable prepositions bearing a

light vowel almost exclusively.

23

� 120 (4.3%) cases come from short adverbial phrases which are idiomatically employed for

distributive references.

� 636 (23.0%) cases come from a specific syntactical construction of lamed denoting a

transition of status.

� 535 (19.3%) cases occur due to the influence of the following word(s).

� 238 (8.6%) cases occur due to the influence of parallelism.

� 135 (4.9%) cases indicate a properly indefinite reference.

Those which are not covered by above regularities amount to 278 (10.0%).

3.1 Nouns/adjectives conventionally prefixed by inseparable prepositions exclusively with a light vowel

Most nouns in this group have inseparable prepositions with exclusively light vowels. Prominent

examples are 32) ָלֶבַטחx), 31) ָלֶנַצחx), 182) ְלֹעָלםx), and ְּבָׁשלֹום or 66) ְלָׁשלֹוםx).34

Also included in this group are cardinal numbers, and the idiomatic usage of a few nouns such as

the noun ִקיר, which is always vocalized heavily (15 instances) except when it is used in the

following idiom (6 instances).

יר ִקיר (Sam 25:34 1) ִּכי ִאם־נֹוַת֧ ר ְלָנבָ֛ ל ַעד־֥א ֹור ַהּבֹ֖ ֶקר ַמְׁשִּת֥ ין ְּבִקֽ

In the scope of this study there are 806 instances belonging to this group, involving 63

nouns/adjectives. The numbers of cases contributed by each of the nouns/adjectives in this group

34 The vocalization of forms such as ָלֶבַטח and ָלֶנַצח is commonly considered to be “light,” in the sense that qāmeṣ does not result from the mechanism of syncopation and has nothing to do with a hidden article. In all these cases, the

first radical of the noun is not doubled. Also included in this group are ָלֹרב ,ָלַעד ,ָלַמס, and ָלַבז. Joüon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, 338, categorizes these as “specially stressed monosyllabic words,” and concludes that the strong vocalization of the preposition lamed is “of a rhythmic nature.”

24

are given in the table below. A reference list giving the location of each of these entries in the

Hebrew Bible can be found in Appendix B.1.

Nouns/adjectives almost always with inseparable prepositions in a light vowel Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun Count ִּכּנֹור 182 עֹוָלם

17 ָרצֹון

6 ְּגבּוָרה

4 ָׂשָפה

2

ְמַעט 66 ָׁשלֹום16

ָאחֹור 6

ֶרֶגל 4

ַצָּואר 2

2 ֵריחַ 4 ֱאנֹוׁש 6 ִקיר 14 ֶעֶׂשר 60 ֱא�ִהים

ֶדקצֶ 32 ֶּבַטח 1 ֵחְטא 3 ֶאֶלף 5 ֵמָאה 13

1 ֵּפָאה 3 ֶחְרָּפה 5 ּתֹוָדה 12 ְׁשאֹול 31 ֵנַצח

1 ִיְרָאה 3 ָאח 5 ְמָלאָכה 11 ֱאמּוָנה 26 ַאְרַּבע

ְּתרּוָעה 26 ִׂשְמָחה10

ִמְרָמה 5

ָּגאֹון 2

ֶעְבָרה 1

לעֹ 2 ַאּלּוף 5 ְּתבּוָנה 10 ְׁשֹמֶנה 26 ָחֵמׁש 1

1 ֶנֶדר 2 מֹוָׁשב 5 ֶעְזָרה 10 ִמְׁשֶמֶרת 24 ָׁש�ׁש

ִמְסָפר 21 ֱאֶמת9

ָמָחר 5

ַצד 2

ֵעֶזר 1

1 ֶאֶפס 2 ְמאּוָמה 5 ֵׁשׁש 7 ִמָּלה 19 ֶׁשַבע

1 ָאחֹות 2 ֶּפה 4 ָּתִמים 7 ִרָּנה 19 ֵׁשם

ַּדַעת 17 ְצָדָקה7

ַעְוָלה 4

Apparently this category cannot be considered as a regularity. It is for the purpose of clearing the

ground that these 806 instances (which, like all the construct nouns, tell us nothing of the

regularity) are listed in the beginning.

3.2 Idiomatic employment of light vowels for distributive reference

A few syntactical constructions reinforce the distributive sense (such as “every,” “between . . .

and . . .,” “from . . . to . . .,” “one for/by one”). When a noun/adjective is involved in these

syntactical constructions with an inseparable preposition, the preposition has a light vowel, as

illustrated by the following examples.

ֶחְברֹונִ֥ י ְלֹתְלֹדָת֖ יו ְלָאב֑ ֹות ָאב ֹ֔ אׁש ַלֽ (Chr 26:31 1) ְיִרָּי֣ ה ָהר

25

ים ֵמָאה / ֶאֶלף (Sam 18:4 2) ְוָכל־ָהָעם֙ ָיְצא֔ ּו ְלֵמ֖א ֹות וְ ַלֲאָלִפֽ (Isa 5:8) ה֗ ֹוי ַמִּגיעֵ֥ י ַביִ֨ ת֙ ְּבבַ֔ ִית ָׂשדֶ֥ ה ְבָׂשדֶ֖ ה ַיְקִר֑ יבּו ָׂשֶדה / ַּבִיתר ּדֹור (Ps 90:1) ָמע֣ ֹון ַא֭ ָּתה ָהיִ֥ יָת ּלָ֗ נּו ְּבֹד֣ ר ָוֹדֽר ּדֹור (Ps 102:13) ְוַאָּת֣ ה יְ֭ הָוה ְלעֹולָ֣ ם ֵּתֵׁש֑ ב וְ֜ ִזְכְרI֗ ְלֹד֣ ר ָוֹדַֽעת ַלְיָלה / יֹום (Ps 19:3) יֹום לְ֭ יֹום ַיִּב֣ יַעֽ ֹא֑ ֶמר וְ לַ֥ ְיָלה ּלְ֜ לַ֗ ְיָלה ְיַחֶּוה־ָּדֽ (Neh 8:18) ַוִּיְקָרא ְּבסֵ֨ ֶפר ּתֹוַר֤ ת ָהֱא�ִהים֙ י֣ ֹום ְּבי֔ ֹום יֹוםב יֹום ַאְספּו־כֶ֖ ֶסף ָלֹרֽ (Chr 24:11 2) ֹּכה ָעׂשּו֙ ְלי֣ ֹום ְּבי֔ ֹום וַּיֽ (Chr 21:19 2) ַוְיִה֣ י ְלָיִמ֣ ים ִמּיָ֩ ִמים ּוְכֵע֨ת צֵ □את ַהּקֵ֜ ץ יֹוםֶדר ֶחֶדר ֹ֥ א ֶאל־ָהִע֖ יר חֶ֥ ֶדר ְּבָחֽ (Kgs 20:30 1) ֶבן־ֲהדַ֣ ד נָ֔ ס ַוָּיבַאֲעִמ֤ יד ֶאת־ָהָעם֙ ְלִמְׁשָּפח֔ ֹות ִעם־ַחְרֹבֵתיהֶ֛ ם ִמְׁשָּפָחה Neh 4:7)35) ָוֽ (Isa 52:8) ִּכי עַ֤ ִין ּבְ ַעיִ֨ ן֙ ִיְרא֔ ּו ְּבׁ֥ש ּוב ְיהוָ֖ ה ִצּֽיֹון ַעִיןַעם־ְּבפַ֖ ַעם ִלְקַר֣ את ְנָחִׁש֑ ים ַּפַעם (Num 24:1) ְולֹא־ָהלַ֥ � ְּכַפֽ

But also note that very rarely some nouns can be involved in similar constructions for

distributive reference, but have inseparable prepositions with heavy vowels. The most prominent

examples are the nouns ֹּבֶקר and ֶעֶרב, as shown in the examples given below.

ָּנה ֹּבֶקר (Exod 30:7) ַּבּבֹ֣ ֶקר ַּבּבֹ֗ ֶקר ְּבֵהיִטיב֛ ֹו ֶאת־ַהֵּנֹר֖ ת ַיְקִטיֶרֶֽרב ֶעֶרב/ֹּבֶקר (Ezra 3:3) ַוַּיֲעלּו֨ ָעלָ֤ יו ֹעלֹות֙ ַליהוָ֔ ה ֹעל֖ ֹות ַלּבֹ֥ ֶקר ְוָלָעֽI ֹּבֶקר (Lam 3:23) ֲחָדִׁשים֙ ַלְּבָקִר֔ ים ַרּבָ֖ ה ֱאמּוָנֶתֽ

This last instance is to be compared with the following case. ּנּו ֹּבֶקר (Job 7:18) ְוִּתְפְקדֶ֥ ּנּו ִלְבָקִר֑ ים לִ֜ ְרָגעִ֗ ים ִּתְבָחֶנֽ

In the scope of this study there are 120 instances belonging to this group, involving 38

nouns/adjectives. The number of cases contributed by each of the nouns/adjectives in this group

are given in the table below. A reference list giving the location of each of these entries in the

Hebrew Bible can be found in Appendix B.2.

Nouns/adjectives involved in a syntax of distributive references Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun Count 1 ֶרֶגל 1 ָׂשֶדה 2 ָטהֹור 3 ָּדם 21 ּדֹור

ָיד 16 יֹום3

ֹחֶדׁש 2

ַעֹבָדה 1

ַּבְרֶזל 1

35 This is to be compared with Josh 7:14, in which a heavy vowel is given for the same word with the same usage:

.ְוָהיָ֡ ה ַהֵּׁשֶבט אֶׁשר־ִיְלְּכדֶ֨ ּנּו ְיהוָ֜ ה ִיְקַר֣ ב ַלִּמְׁשָּפח֗ ֹות

26

1 ֵחֶלק 1 ַמְמָלָכה 2 ִאיׁש 3 ִעיר 13 ָׁשָנה

ֶאֶלף 12 ַּפַעם2

ֵׁשן 1

ְיָלהלַ 1 ִּגּבֹור 1

ָאב 4 ַׁשַער2

ָרָׁשע 1

ְּבֵהָמה 1

ַּבִית 1

1 ֶנֶפׁש 1 ִמְׁשָּפָחה 1 ַמִים 2 ֵמָאה 4 ֶחֶדר

ֶׂשה 3 ַעִין2

טֹוב 1

ְמַעט 1

ּגֹוי 1

ֶּפה 3 ַרע2

ֵלב 1

3.3 The light vowels in the syntax of the “transitional lamed”

This category of syntactical construction turns out to be the biggest group of the light vowels of

the inseparable preposition lamed. According to the survey, there are 636 instances having such a

syntactical construction, contributing to 23.2% of the light vowels of all the inseparable

prepositions (2,736), and 43.3% of the light vowels of lamed (1,469). Typical usage of such a

syntactical construction is illustrated by the following examples.

ים אֹוֵיב (Lam 1:2) ָּכל־ֵרֶעיָ֨ ה֙ ּבָ֣ ְגדּובָ֔ ּה הָ֥ יּו לָ֖ ּה ְלֹאְיִבֶֽון ָאֶון ית־ֵא֖ ל ִיְהֶי֥ ה ְלָאֽ (Amos 5:5) ּוֵבֽ (Isa 5:20) ָׂשמִ֨ ים חֹ֤ ֶׁש� ְלאֹור֙ ְוא֣ ֹור ְלחֹ֔ ֶׁש� אֹוריהוָ֥ ה ֵעד / אֹות (Isa 19:20) ְוָהיָ֨ ה ְל֥א ֹות ּוְלעֵ֛ ד ַלֽים ִאיׁש ֵמעַ֔ י ְוָהי֥ ּו ָלכֶ֖ ם ַלֲאָנִׁשֽ (Ruth 1:11) ַהעֽ ֹוד־לִ֤ י ָבִנים֙ ְּבֽ (Num 5:21) ִיֵּת֨ ן ְיהוָ֥ ה אֹוָת֛ � ְלָאלָ֥ ה וְ ִלְׁשֻבעָ֖ ה ְּב֣ת ֹו� ַעּמֵ֑ � ְׁשבּוָעה / ָאָלה (Jer 5:14) ִה֠ ְננִ֣ י ֹנֵתן֩ ְּדָבַר֨ י ְּבפִ֜ יI ְלאֵ֗ ׁש ֵאׁש (Lev 14:12) ְוָלקַ֨ ח ַהֹּכהֵ֜ ן אֶ ת־ַהּכֶ֣ ֶבׂש ָהֶאחָ֗ ד ְוִהְקִר֥ יב ֹא֛ת ֹו ְלָאָׁש֖ ם ָאָׁשםב ָאב / ֵּבן ְהֶיה־ּל֥ ֹו ְלָאֽ (Chr 28:6 1) ִּכי־ָבחַ֨ ְרִּתי ב֥ ֹו ִלי֙ ְלבֵ֔ ן ַוֲאנִ֖ י ֶאֽה ְּבָרָכה (Neh 13:2) ְוַּיֲהפֹ֧ � ֱא�הֵ֛ ינּו ַהְּקָללָ֖ ה ִלְבָרָכֽאּו ּגֹוי (Gen 17:6) ּוְנַתִּת֖ יI ְלגֹויִ֑ ם ּוְמָלִכ֖ ים ִמְּמI֥ ֵיֵצֽ (Ezek 17:6) ַוְּתִה֣ י ְלגֶ֔ ֶפן ַוַּת֣ ַעׂש ַּבּדִ֔ ים ַוְּתַׁשּלַ֖ ח ּפֹאֽרֹות ֶּגֶפן (Ezek 5:14) ְוֶאְּתֵנ�֙ ְלָחְרּבָ֣ ה ּוְלֶחְרּפָ֔ ה ַּבּגֹויִ֖ ם ֶחְרָּפה / ָחְרָּבה (Joel 3:4) ַהֶּׁשמֶ֨ ׁש֙ ֵיָהפֵ֣ � ְלחֹ֔ ׁשֶ � ְוַהָּיֵר֖ ַח ְלָד֑ ם ָּדם / ֹחֶׁש� (Job 17:12) ַל֭ ְיָלה ְלי֣ ֹום ָיִׂש֑ ימּו יֹוםה ְיׁשּוָעה יׁשּוָעֽ  ְיִהי־לִ֖ י ִלֽ (Isa 12:2) ִּכֽ י־ָעּזִ֤ י ְוִזְמָרת֙ ָי֣ ּה ְיהוָ֔ ה ַוּֽה ָּכבֹוד ְהֶי֥ ה ְבתֹוָכֽ (Zech 2:9) ּוְלָכב֖ ֹוד ֶאֽן ֹּכֵהן (Judg 17:5) ַוְיִהי־ל֖ ֹו ְלֹכֵהֽ (Ezek 4:9) ְוָעִׂש֧ יָת אֹוָת֛ ם ְלI֖ ְללָ֑ ֶחם ֶלֶחםִים ַמִים (Josh 7:5) ַוִּיַּמ֥ ס ְלַבב־ָהעָ֖ ם ַוְיִה֥ י ְלָמֽ (Sam 15:1 1) ֹאִת֨ י ָׁשלַ֤ ח ְיהָוה֙ ִלְמָׁשֳחI֣ ְלמֶ֔ ֶל� ַעל־ַעּמ֖ ֹו ַעל־ִיְׂשָרֵא֑ ל ֶמֶל�ְהיֶ֨ ה ַעְבְּדI֥ עֹוד֙ ְלַמָּׂש֔ א ֶאל־ֲאֹדנִ֖ י ַמָּׂשא (Sam 19:36 2) ְוָלָּמה֩ ִיֽ

27

ים ָמָׁשל (Kgs 9:7 1) ֠ ְוָהָי֧ ה ִיְׂשָרֵא֛ ל ְלָמָׁש֥ ל ְוִלְׁשִניָנ֖ה ְּבָכל־ָהַעִּמֽה ָנִביא (Sam 3:20 1) ִּכי ֶנֱאמָ֣ ן ְׁשמּואֵ֔ ל ְלָנִב֖ יא ַליהָוֽל ָנִגיד (Sam 25:30 1) ְוִצְּוI֥ ְלָנגִ֖ יד ַעל־ִיְׂשָרֵאֽ (Ps 33:12) ָהעָ֓ ם ָּבחַ֖ ר ְלַנֲחלָ֣ ה ֽלֹו ַנֲחָלהף ֶעֶבד (Ps 105:17) ְל֜ עֶ֗ ֶבד ִנְמּכַ֥ ר יֹוֵסְֽהֶיה־ּלִ֣ י ְלֵעדָ֔ ה ֵעָדה (Gen 21:30) ַּבֲעבּור֙ ִּתֽא�ִה֑ ים ֱא�ִהים / ַעם (Exod 6:7) ְוָלַקְחִּת֨ י ֶאְתכֶ֥ ם ִלי֙ ְלעָ֔ ם ְוָהיִ֥ יִתי ָלכֶ֖ ם ֵלֽ (Kgs 23:6 2) וַ֠ ִּיְׂשֹר֥ ף ֹאָת֛ ּה ְּבנַ֥ ַחל ִקְד֖ר ֹון ַוָּי֣ ֶדק ְלָעפָ֑ ר ָעָפרֹ֖ אׁש ּוְלָׂש֑ ר ַׂשר / ראׁש (Chr 11:6 1) ָּכ֠ ל־ַמּכֵ֤ ה ְיבּוִסי֙ ָּבִר֣ אׁשֹונָ֔ ה ִיְהֶי֥ ה ְלר (Deut 29:20) ְוִהְבִּדיל֤ ֹו ְיהָוה֙ ְלָרעָ֔ ה ִמּכֹ֖ ל ִׁשְבטֵ֣ י ִיְׂשָרֵא֑ ל ָרָעההִׁשְפחָ נּו֙ ֹות ִנְמַּכְר֨ ים ְוִלְׁשָפח֤ ִאּלּו ַלֲעָבדִ֨ וְ֠ (Esth 7:4)

ד־ַהָּזִרים֙ ָלבַ֔ ז ּוְלִרְׁשעֵ֥ י ָהָא֖ ֶרץ ְלָׁשלָ֑ ל ָׁשָלל (Ezek 7:21) ֠ ּוְנַתִּת֤ יו ְּבַיְֽהי֥ ֹות ִלי֙ ְלעָ֔ ם ּוְלֵׁש֥ ם ְוִלְתִהּלָ֖ ה ּוְלִתְפָא֑ ֶרת ֵׁשם (Jer 13:11) ִלֽה ְקָללָ ה / ַׁשָּמה (Jer 44:12) ְוָהיּו֙ ְלָאלָ֣ ה ְלַׁשּמָ֔ ה וִלְקָללָ֖ ה ּוְלֶחְרָּפֽ (Zeph 1:13) ְוָהָי֤ ה ֵחיָלם֙ ִלְמִׁשּסָ֔ ה ּוָבֵּתיהֶ֖ ם ִלְׁשָממָ֑ ה ְמִׁשָּסה / ְׁשָמָמהה ּתֹוֵעָבה (Jer 2:7) וַנֲחָלִת֥ י ׂשְמֶּת֖ ם ְלתֹוֵעָבֽ

The features of such a syntactical construction are clear. There is a strong sense of transition to

the status or position designated by the noun governed by the inseparable preposition lamed,

with the semantic meaning in the range of “assignment,” “appointing,” “turning into,” or

“functioning as.”36 In most cases the noun has no modifier or qualifier following it, and very

often is given a disjunctive accent. Such a syntactical construction frequently employs verbs such

as ִיםׂש etc.. This survey has found 91 nouns/adjectives involved in a total of 636 ,ָהַפ� ,ָהָיה ,ָנַתן ,

instances of this type of construction. The numbers of cases contributed by each of the nouns in

this group are given in the table below. And a list of all the verses in which such a syntactical

construction is employed can be found in Appendix B.3.

Hebrew nouns/adjectives with a transitional lamed

Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun

Count Hebrew Noun Count

36 Roughly speaking, this category is equivalent to the type of “lamed of product” in Ronald J. Williams, Williams’ Hebrew Syntax (Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2007), 110.

28

1 ֵאֹפד 2 ּתֹוֵעָבה 4 ַמָּׂשא 8 ְׁשָמָמה 67 ִאָּׁשה

1 ִרְׁשָעה 2 ְּבָרָכה 4 אֹור 8 ִׁשְפָחה 38 ַחָּטאת

ֲאֻחָּזה 33 ֱא�ִהים8

ַּבת 4

ֹזָנה 2

ַמֶּטה 1

1 ָאָמה 2 ִמְׁשָּפט 4 מֹוֵפת 7 ֵעד 33 ַׁשָּמה

הָחְכמָ 2 ֹאֶהל 4 ִאיׁש 7 ְיׁשּוָעה 32 ֶמֶל� 1

ָׁשָלל 31 ֹעָלה7

ּגֹוי 4

ׁשֹוֵער 2

ִמְׁשֶנה 1

1 ֶּפה 2 ַמֲח�ֶקת 3 ַרע 7 ָמָׁשל 26 ַעם

1 ְּגבּוָרה 2 ֵאׁש 3 ֶׁשֶלם 7 ִּתְפֶאֶרת 26 ַנֲחָלה

ָּדם 23 ֶעֶבד6

ָנִביא 3

ָנָחׁש 2

ְמַעט 1

1 ׁשפט 2 רּוחַ 3 ֵעָדה 6 אֹוֵיב 15 ָרָעה

ָחהִמנְ 1 ֵצל 2 ָמעֹוז 3 ַמר 5 ֵּבן 15

ָאָׁשם 14 ֶחְרָּפה5

ָעָפר 3

ֶאֶבן 1

ַיַער 1

1 ִמְדָּבר 1 ָאֶון 2 ֶּגֶפן 5 ֵׁשם 14 אֹות

1 ָּבָׂשר 1 ַעִין 2 ֹחֶׁש� 5 ַרֲחִמים 13 רֹאׁש

ָּכבֹוד 9 ָאב5

ֶלֶחם 2

ָמרֹום 1

ָזר 1

1 ִמְקָּדׁש 1 יֹום 2 טֹוב 5 ָאָלה 9 ָנִגיד

1 ֶנֶפׁש 1 ַמִים 2 ְׁשבּוָעה 5 ֹחק 9 ָחְרָּבה

ַׂשר 9 ְקָלָלה5

ְּתׁשּוָעה 2

ֶּבֶגד 1

ִמְגָרׁש 1

8 ֹּכֵהן

Exceptions to this regularity are very few. So far only 12 cases (in 10 verses), mostly in the book

of Isaiah, have been found to have a heavy vowel in the same syntactical construction. These are

listed below also.

(Exod 14:21) ַוָּי֥ ֶׂשם ֶאת־ַהָּי֖ ם ֶלָחָרבָ֑ ה ן־ַמֲעכָ֖ ה ְלָנגִ֣ יד ְּבֶאחָ֑ יו ֹ֧ אׁש ְרַחְבעָ֛ ם ֶאת־ֲאִבָּי֥ ה ֶבֽ (Chr 11:22 2) ַוַּיֲֽעמֵ֨ ד ָלר

(We have here a paralleling pair, both referring to the same person, who is appointed as chief [ָלרֹאׁש] and prince [ְלָנִגיד] among his brothers. The first lamed has a heavy vowel, and the second a light one.)

(Isa 25:2) ִּכ֣ י ַׂש֤ ְמָּת ֵמִעיר֙ ַלּגָ֔ ל ִקְר ָי֥ ה ְבצּוָר֖ ה לְ ַמֵּפלָ֑ ה

29

(Note that in this verse there are paralleling parts, in similar syntactical constructions.37 The first lamed has a heavy vowel, while the second a light one.)

ב (Isa 29:17) ְוָׁש֥ ב ְלָבנ֖ ֹון ַלַּכְרמֶ֑ ל ְוַהַּכְרֶמ֖ ל ַלַּי֥ ַער יֵ ָחֵׁשֽב (Isa 32:15) ְוָהָי֤ ה ִמְדָּבר֙ ַלַּכְרמֶ֔ ל ְוַהַּכְרֶמ֖ ל ַלַּי֥ ַער ֵיָחֵׁשֽיׁש ִאּיִ֔ ים ַוֲאַגִּמ֖ ים אֹוִבֽ (Isa 42:15) ְוַׂשְמִּת֤ י ְנָהרֹות֙ ָלֲֽעַקִּׁשים֙ לְ ִמיׁ֔ש ֹור (Isa 42:16) ָאִׂשים֩ ַמְחָׁש֨ � ִלְפֵניהֶ֜ ם ָלא֗ ֹור ּוַמֽ

(Note again the two paralleling parts in this verse, one having a heavy vowel, and the second a light one.)

(Isa 49:11) ְוַׂשְמִּת֥ י ָכל־ָהַר֖ י ַלּדָ֑ ֶר� ְהֶי֣ ה ָלאֶ֔ ֶלף (Isa 60:22) ַהָּקֹטן֙ ִיֽ (Amos 5:8) ֹעֵׂש֨ ה ִכימָ֜ ה ּוְכסִ֗ יל ְוֹהפֵ֤ � ַלּבֹ֨ ֶקר֙ ַצְלמָ֔ וֶ ת

The concept of definiteness does not play a critical role in the understanding of the meaning of

such a kind of syntax. Although it is still possible to associate this syntax with the sense of

indefiniteness by arguing that the text means to say “the Lord made him a king” rather than “the

Lord made him the king,” or “he took her to be a wife” rather than “he took her to be the wife”

in nuance, it makes much less sense for the text to say “I will be for you a God.” The sense of

(in)definiteness depends more on the context and the semantic functions of the noun employed

than on the syntax. Whenever such a syntactical construction is encountered, the vowel of the

lamed is almost always light, regardless of the attributes and characteristics of the noun. This

syntactical construction is easily recognized, and consolidates an extremely reliable regularity in

the vocalization of the inseparable prepositions.

3.4 The light vowels in the conjunctive syntax

This survey has encountered much evidence that strongly indicates that the vocalization of the

inseparable prepositions is influenced by the relationship between the prefixed noun and the

word(s) immediately following the noun prefixed by the inseparable preposition. When the

37 Strickly speaking the construction of the clause ַׂשְמָּת ֵמִעיר ַלָּגל is not exactly the same as what we are discussing here. The function of the mem before the noun ִעיר is questionable.

30

following word(s) are syntactically disconnected from the entitled noun, and this is often (though

not