The Development of the Syntax of Post-Biblical Hebrew 9004114335, 9789004114333

This volume is concerned with a historical development of the syntax of Hebrew in the post-biblical periods, more specif

195 3 11MB

English Pages 205 [224] Year 1999

Report DMCA / Copyright


Table of contents :
Title Page
Copyright Page
Table of Contents
1. Biblical and Mishnaic Hebrew
2. The Early Liturgy
3. The Piyyūṭ
4. The Midrash
5. Prose-literature in North-Western Europe
6. The Karaites
7. The Revival of Biblical Hebrew Prose
8. Spanish Hebrew Poetry
9. The First Period of Provençal Hebrew Literature
10. The Translators
11. Maimonides
12. The Second Period of Spanish-Provençal Literature
13. The Third Period of Spanish Literature
14. Later Developments of the Hebrew Language
I. General Syntax of the Noun
1. The Article
2. Concord with Regard to the Article
3. The Article with Numerals
4. Gender of Nouns
5. Concord with Regard to Number
6. The Construct State
7. Circumlocution Genitive
II. The Pronouns
8. Personal Pronouns
9. Demonstrative Pronouns
10. Sentence-anaphorics
11. Indefinite Pronouns
III. The Nominal Clause
12. The Copula
13. The Temporal Copula
14. The Verb of Existence
15. Modal Copulae
IV. The Verbal Clause
16. The Indefinite Subject
17. The Agent of the Passive Verb
18. Some Remarks on the Tenses
V. The Object
19. The Direct Object
20. The Indirect Object
21. The Cognate Object
22. The Double Accusative
VI. The Particles
23. Some Remarks on Adverbs
24. The Prepositions
25. Negation
26. Exceptive Particles
27. Some Coordinating Conjunctions
VII. Word Order
28. The Verbal Clause with Object
29. Adverb and Predicative
VIII. The Compound Sentence
30. Extraposition
IX. The Verbal Nouns
31. The Le-Infinitive
32. The Subject of the Infinitive Clause
33. Gerund and Nomen Verbi
X. Substantive Clauses
34. Substantivization of clauses
35. Clauses as Subjects
36. Clauses in other Positions
XI. Adjective Clauses
37. Asyndetic Relative Clauses
38. Syndetic Relative Clauses
39. Substantivized Relative Clauses
XII. Conditional Clauses
40. Conditional Clauses
Synoptic Table
Index of Passages: Classical Sources
Recommend Papers

The Development of the Syntax of Post-Biblical Hebrew
 9004114335, 9789004114333

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview






~iml:J.i translated Bal:J.ya b. Pa~udah's Duties if the heart. His work was, however, not exact enough, and was soon superseded by the more literal rendering of Judah b. Tibbon. 10 Joseph's translation of the Selection if Pearls attributed to GabiroP 1 was even less literal. It was rather a new work based upon the Arabic original. Systematic and scientific translation was inaugurated by Judah b. Tibbon (1120-90) "the Father of Translators" and his son Samuel (1150-1230), who between them translated some 15 larger works, both of Moslem and Jewish origin. They laid a firm foundation for the introduction of Arabic:Jewish science and philosophy into the Provence. Both specialised almost entirely in translation. Judah's only original Hebrew composition were his admonitions to his son 0i~1~), and of Samuel we have two short works of a partly philosophical, partly exegetical, character (C1'Qi1 11p' iQ~Q, n'?i1p tD1i'~). To these must be added the short prefaces which they prefixed to some of their translations. In their Hebrew writings, both Tibbonids used the current Proveniml:J.i. But in their translations they employed a style that follows slavishly every turn of the Arabic phrase~and attempts to imitate the very etymologi8 cr. Steinschneider op. cit., pp. 286, 572, 857, 916. "Ibn Ezra was the first real translator from Arabic" (ibid., p. 502). 9 By a strange slip, Renan (Histoire, p. 164) makes out that the translations were made for the Spanish refugees, who were forgetting their Arabic. 10 Suler, Enc. Jud., ix 1243. The fragments still extant of Joseph's work were edited by Jellinek as an appendix to Benjacob's edition of the Tibbonid translation of the ni:::l:::l'?i1 ni:::l1n, Leipzig, 1846. Suler seems to be wrong, cr. Steinschneider, Hebraische Uebersetzungen, 373, who quotes Tibbon's own preface, by which ISimchi started only after Tibbon had done the first tractate, but Tibbon did the rest of the work after Kimhi had finished. I1 iDipi1 SpiD,·ed. H. Gollancz, Oxford, 1919.



cal similarities of the Arabic words. There resulted a Hebrew which is only intelligible to the uninitiated by the process of mental retranslation into Arabic. The idiomatic and syntactical features of the Hebrew language (in any of its forms) are constantly violated and often constructions result which in any other Hebrew would bear a meaning quite different from that intended by the translator. This is quite in keeping with the ancient and mediaeval ideas of translation. The task of the translator, especially of religious or philosophical and scientific books, was not to produce a readable text, but to render as closely as possible the wording of the original. 12 Translations were revised, not in order to improve their style, but to make them more similar to the original, even if this meant diminishing their intelligibility. The instances of the Aquila translation, or of the successive revisions of the Syriac Bible, are well known. The unidiomatic character of the Tibbonid translations is fully equalled by the Syriac and subsequent Arabic translations of Greek works. True, some of the masters of the Hebrew language raised their voice against this barbaric procedure. Maimonides wrote to Ibn Tibbon the following lines, which are a classical statement of a translator's duties: 13 If anyone, in translating from one language into another, undertakes to render each word in the one by one single word in the other, and at the same time to keep to the original order of words and sentenceconstruction, he will find this most difficult, and his translation will in the end be ambigious and clumsy.'4 A translator must first of all understand the meaning of a passage, and then relate it clearly in such a manner that this meaning becomes intelligible in the second language. It is impossible for him to avoid altering the order of elements l5 or rendering one word by several. ... This is the method I:Iunain B. IsJ:1aq applied in translating the works of Galen, and likewise his son, IsJ:1aq, in translating Aristotle, and thus it comes that all their translations are very clear.

In the programmatic preface to his first translation, Ibn Pa~udah's, m:l1n states his intention of translating more literally than his predecessors. 13 !lobe;:;, ii 27. 14 niD~1iDr.n np~10r.:l. The words could also be translated "doubtful and faulty", but they obviously refer to the intelligibility of the Hebrew text, not its relation to the original. 15 'n~'1 Cl1ip" i.e., the Arabic technical phrase taqtfim wa-ta'kkir "irregular wordorder". 12

m~~"i1, Judah



This, and similar admonitions,16 however, were of no avail. The mediaeval mind did not see in the translation a work of art in its own language, but demanded only one thing of it: faithfulness; and there is little doubt that by sacrificing the idiomatic character of the second language greater faithfulness could be achievedY Nor was the stylistic taste of the Proven?? I:ln'?17 "cursed be those who join them by walking in their evil ways" (B. 'Abbas, f. 7b).

4 A similar use is sometimes made in English of abstract nouns, e.g.: "her face was very pale, a greyish pallor" (cf. Jespersen, Ana!Jtic Syntax, 20.4). 5 It is impossible to consider the infinitive in this and the following quotations an attribute, and the whole as a case of infinitive in nominal function. If the infinitive were replaced by a noun, the construction would be quite different; at least a 'J'~, would have to be inserted.




1. Infinitive as attribute to a noun: CiDil ntl: ::l'iltl:? 1'::lQ? nnEl 'il'iD ',J "that they might be a help for the intelligent to love God" (Maim., resode ha- Tora, ii 2); 1::l'? iD"Pil 'iDJtI: Ji1JQ i1JJ "thus is the custom of holy men to speak" (B. Ezra, Saphah Berurah, f. 9a). Perhaps also: mil '?,niT tl:El1? nlJ ,? In1j "he gives him strength to overcome this illness" (B. Hiyya, Hegyon, f. 11), but in this last instance the infinitive may be taken as final. The nominal force of the infinitive is not sufficient for it to be governed by prepositions. That is the special function of the nomen verbi. The only exception to this in MH is the infinitive with min after verbs of preventing, e.g. tI:'::lil?Q ltljQj "they refrained from bringing" (I:Iallah i 7, cf. Segal, 346), corresponding to BH inf. constr. as in n,?Q 'il 'j'~ll "the Lord has restrained me from bearing" (Gen. xvi 2). This feature of MH penetrated into Saadianic prose, e.g., "Jt?Q niDC!lj "thou hast omitted to mention" (lfiwi Polemic, st. 19) and "?tI: ll'iD?Q C::l? "ntl: j'Oj tI:? "their heart did not shrink from appealing to Him" (ibid. st. 48). It was also preserved in Spanish ornate-prose style: ,ElO?Q C'll.:l' 'n::liD' "ElO?Q C',::lJ '" "my hands are too clumsy to count, and my praises too weak to tell" in a letter of Judah ha-Levi (Diwan, ed. Brody, i 209).


n. It is also frequently used in SH, e.g. ,n'J'il?Q 'ilrlQ ilntl: "you are warned against reproaching him" (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 13a); ' l ' C'jil::l nJ?QQ ,? nI'il?Q COtl:QiD "so that He despised them too much for letting them be His theocracy" (Abr. Maim., (lobe;:, f. iii 17b); lC!liDElJ Inn'QtI: nm?Q '? il?'?n "God forbid that their real meaning should be the literal one" (ibid., f. 19b). But some difficulty seems to have been experienced with this idiomatic construction, and there was a tendency to replace the infinitive in it by the BH gerund: mil '::l'il ?tI: ll'jilQ iD?m, iDiD,n cn" "their spirit is too limp and weak to attain this purpose" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 13); POllnilQ 'i1IlljQ tI:? nlQJn::l "he was not prevented from occupying himself with the sciences" (S. Tibbon, Eccl.-Comm., f. 16a).

32. The Subject if the lrifinitive Clause a. In the majority of cases in BH and throughout in MH, the subject or agent of the action expressed by the infinitive is not expressly indicated, but it is left to the hearer to discover which part of the



main clause is subject of the infinitive. Thus in m?tv? i'tv iTtv.t1 ~? Cli~ Clitv? "he did not compose a poem to send it to anyone"

(J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 9), the subject of the principal clause is also subject of the infinitive. In rm~i? 'JDD .t1JiD n"iT "you did not let me see" (ibid.), the subject of the infinitive is equivalent to the pronoun included in the adverbial phrase.

h. In BH already, there existed also the possibility to indicate the subject of the infinitive, if it was different from any item of the principal clause, within the infinitive clause itself. In the case of the infinitive construct without le-, this was mosdy done by attaching the subject as a nomen rectum. With the le- infinitive, which was not a noun, this was not possible, and the subject was therefore placed after it like the subject of a finite verb, a construction which we may call infinitivus cum nominativo. E.g., iJ? ?~ l?DiT Clitv? "for the king to take it to heart" (2 Sam. xix 20); n~iiT iTDtv OJ? "for the murderer to flee thereto" (Num. xxxv 6). By analogy, the construction may have been transferred also to infinitives without le-, which are in the Massoretic text pointed according to the absolute form. I The same construction is quite current in Assyrian (Brock., 87f) and probably proto-Semitic (Noldeke, Zur Grammatik, p. 74, note 3). c. In MH this construction did not exist; the need for it was avoided by employing dependent clauses with final verbs. It is also not found in the liturgical style of MH. Its revival seems to date from Saadianic prose style,2 e.g., "therefore the tree of life was withheld from him Cl'?'O~ ?~? iOiD im'iT? I Cr. Ges., ll5g; Brock., 87d; SeJlin, Verbal-nominate Doppelnatur, p. 81. The view here proposed differs from that of the above authors in connecting each syntactic construction with a definite morphological form. The cases in which the vocalization or position of the infinitive construct without le- points to the subject being in the nominative may also be explained otherwise. Konig, 230f, doubts the correctness of the Massoretic vocalization in these words; Ges. loco cit., suggests that they may be constructs, the absolute form having been preserved for phonetic or semantic reasons. 2 Its resumption may partly have been due to Aramaic influence, since the construction occurs in Syriac (Noldeke, Syr. Grammar, p. 226), Babylonian Talmudic Aramaic (cr. Schlesinger, p. 202), and, which is perhaps here of special importance, in late Targumic Aramaic, e.g. 'O.ll~ c;)''?iLl 1i1'~ '1i1D? i1D'?iLl ~:I'?D'? i1~1~J~ 'D~n~ rC;)~iLl "it was predicted to King Solomon that he would be ruler over the ten tribes" (T. Cant. viii 12). The use of the infinitive here is remarkable, since in general Targumic Aramaic replaces BB infinitive clauses by dependent di- clauses (cf. Stevenson, Grammar, p. 53).



"for it to be a warning to all fools" (lfiwi Polemic, st. 1); 1'~nn ':J :"j~1 '?1~n:11 i1~0:J nEl 1'0.ll'? "and you still want him to stay here in trouble and distress?" (ibid., st. 12). Its use was continued in N.W.-European Hebrew, beginning with Yosippon: "therefore Sanballat asked Alexander for permission to build a temple on the mount of Gerizim" 1Jnn I:lID 1n:J m'n'? "for his sonin-law to be priest there". It is quite common in Rashi, e.g., r~ 1'El:J i1:l1D 1:l'01D I:lID m'n'? 11D.lI 1i' "it is not Esau's manner for the name of God to be current on his lips" (Gen. xxvii 21); n1:J 1:J nn'? .lI01D:J1 i':J:lO 1'?1p nm'? "to give him strength for his voice to be strongly audible" (Ex. xix 19).

d. In SH, the infinitivus cum nominativo was employed with much greater frequency than in either SH or N.W.-European Hebrew as an alternative to the dependent clause whenever the subject of the secondary action was not referred to in the principal clause. E.g., n'?1D001 n:J'?oo 1'? m'n'?.. I:l'~n n:Jr "man was granted that kingship and rule should be his portion" (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 1); ni1~n nm~ i':JO :"j1:li1 '1D1no 'n~ m'n'? .. n'?1:J' m'~ "it is not possible for abstract form that any of the five senses should perceive it ... " (ibid., f. 2); ni1n I:ln'? 1mn'? 1:l"1~i 1:l'?1.l1n ':J:J m ~'? "the denizens of the world were not worthy for the Law to be given to them" (id., Megillah, p. 24); ':llDn '?,l) n1,l),n ':lIDO 'n~ n~:l'? .. n1:J 1:li1:l r~ "there is no power in them for one of the two opinions to prevail over the other" (ibid., p. 113); 1:J'?:J niiEl:J n":lpn m~'~o n1'n'? 1:J:li nlDo IDP':J ':J 1:l'~~o:Jn i~IDO "for Moses wished for the existence of God to be a distinct factor in his mind from that of other beings" (Maim., Yesode ha- Torah, i 10). ri~n i1:J~0 n~oo 1:l:J'?no nm'? n1ii11 lD~n 1i' "the nature of fire and air is for their movement to be upwards, away from the centre of the earth (ibid., iv 2); mro n1'n'? 10~.lI '?':Ji' ~'? I:lno "let him not accustom himself for his food to be of them" (id., De'oth, iv 9); i:J1D n1p1:J'nn ,o'?o np''? m',on :lmo n'n "if it is the custom of the land for the elementary teacher to receive wages ... " (id., Talmud Torah, i 7); m1:J01~ 1nim nm'? n~ilD '0 "whoever wished for his learning to be his livelihood" (B. Daud, fCabbalah, p. 72); 1nm I:l'm~no I:l.lln m'n'?.. 1:l':J'0'? mpo "when he made concessions to heretics ... so that the people should be afflicted" (al-Fakhir, fCobez, iii 2a); 1~IDEl:J 1nn'0~ m'n'?o ,'? n'?''?n "God forbid that their true meaning should be the same as their literal sense" (Abr. Maim., fCobez, iii 19b); mlDn C1i~n I:lnilD'n:J :l'lDn'? ~'n ... ni1nn m'm n''?:Jn



"the purpose of the giving of the laws is for man to grasp by their guidance the nature of God (B. 'Abbas f. 3b); C1'i'i1rrJ C1'rJ~ni1 i1'PJ mJrJ~ C1i~ iirJ'?'? "the sages advise that one should learn a clean craft" (Falaq., Meba~~esh, ( 12b); C1'rJi1 nnn i1'p'?n nm'? ri~i1 .ll:lCl "the nature of the earth is for parts of it to be under water" (B. {:aq:ah, Mikhlol, f. 23a). ~ii:li1

e. The popularity of this construction went so far that for its sake elements were taken into the infinitive clause which did not really belong to it, e.g. piiiD:l C1:'rJi1 m'i1'? :liD piiiiD:l i"i'i1 ni:li1 ii:l.ll:l "because of the Yod being pronounced with a shuru~ it comes to the Mem also being pronounced with a Shuru~ (J. ~mi:li, S. haGaluy, p. 12). Here the original subject of :liD is C1"rJi1, but in order to bring a subject into the infinitive clause, the verb is construed impersonally. A similar case is the Falaquera quotation in the preceding section (last instance but one). f. In early SH, the infinitivus cum nominativ0 3 construction can also be applied when the subject of the infinitive clause is already mentioned in the principal clause, and therefore need only be referred to by a pronoun. This is not found in BH, Saadianic prose,4 or N.W.-European Hebrew. Examples: C1m'i1'? n.llii1 '?iP'iD '?.ll C1i1 C1"i~i C1'ii:m C1'ir:JJ C1iiprJ "they are seen, on closer investigation, to have originally been scattered and isolated" (B. J-:Iiyya, Hegyon, ( 2); C1iiJ i1rJiPrJ n~ nEl'?nrJ i1nm'? t']iJi1 '?~ np:liJi1 i1ii~i1 '?.ll "it causes the form inherent in the body to change its place" (ibid., ( 4); miDi-lnJ ~'? on~'i::J::J '?'.lliO ini'ii'? O'?i.ll::J i::Ji'? "He did not permit anything in the world to assist in their creation" (id. Megillah, p. 51); .ll'Ji1 ~'? lnJ'l' n:ln~ im'i1'? in'?.llrJ "his rank was not high enough for him to be like his friend J onathan" (B. Ezra, Saphah Berurah, ( 1Ob); niiDrJ t']"'?~i1 3 Exception might be taken to the application of the term nominative to the suffix-pronouns employed in these constructions. As it is, however, quite out of the question to construe the subjects in the earlier instances as being syntactically in the genitive, and the identity of the two constructions cannot be doubted, we must admit the possibility of the suffix-pronouns expressing a virtual nominative in SH. Furthermore, the le- infinitive in SH is non-nominal, and can therefore not be considered regens of a construct unless one wishes to deprive these terms of any syntactical reality. In any event, it must be kept in mind that terms like nominative, genitive, etc., in a language devoid of nominal fiexion are merely convenient shorthand expressions of strictly limited value. 4 The quotation from the Ijiwi Polemic stanza 14 (above under c) is not a case in point. The pronoun there refers to a word in a preceding sentence, not to any term of the principal clause.



i~r iJ1rJ 1'n' lrJ'o 1rWi1'? Cl'rJ,l]El'? "the Aleph serves sometimes to be the prefix of the first sing. masc." (ibid., f. 17b) m1'i1'? 1"m Ji1JrJ pi'nJ "the normal thing for the Taw is for it to be vocalized with a l:Iire~"; D'niiDrJ orWi1'? ~~1rJJ D''?Pi1 i1nJ'? 11~Ji1 "it is proper to

select the easily articulated consonants for them to be grammatical elements" (id., Yesod Mora, 17). 5 g. In writers of the second period, this construction is rare. I have no instances of it from Maimonides, Ibn 'Abbas, or Falaquera, who are so fond of the infinitivus cum nominativo in general. Strangely enough, it turns up again, though sporadically, at the very end of the second period, e.g., mnEl 1rWi1'? 01~'rJi1 1~ '?,l] n"'iDi1 1i1Jrl]'iD ~'? mJJ1 "not that God would leave him, out of contempt, to become lowly and despicable" (Gers., De'oth f. 9b); 1m~ii1'? ~o~ iD1prJi1 ~iPJ 1J i1'?,l]iD 'rJ D~1,l] '?,l] "the Temple is called a throne to indicate the might of Him who dwells on it" (B. ~ar?:ah, Mikhlol, f. 8b).

h. In Arabic, the nominative subject with the infinitive exists in grammatical theory, but hardly ever in actual usage (cf. Reck., 101; Brock., 87a). It seems never to occur in Arabic prose at all. On the other hand, a very similar usage occurs in all earlier Western Romance dialects, and is still quite current in modem Spanish and Portuguese, e.g., "mas liviano trabajo es pasar un mamello por el ojo de una aguja que entrat unrico en el reino de Dios" (cf. Lerch, Hist. ftanz. !iYntax, ii 152ff'), The further development mentioned in section (f) does not seem to occur in Romance. 6

i. The history of this construction offers various problems. It certainly came in from N.W.-European Hebrew, and maintains itself at


I cannot account for the pronoun attached to the infinitive in the sentence:

~1tDj ~tD1jil 1nl'il? i:Jiil l:liln' l1tD'?:J "in actual usage it is the other way round, the subject becoming predicate" (E. Ezra, S. ha-Shem, f. 8b). The subject of the infinitive

clause is ~tD1jil. Unless the pronoun is an attempt to reproduce the Arabic contextpronoun (tjamfT ashsha'n, which, however, would hardly be applicable in that sentence) it is strongly suspect of being a textual error. 6 Professor W J. Entwistle was kind enough to give me the following information: "The infinitive with personal pronoun occurs in Spanish and Catalan only when there is need to call attention to another subject. The strictly logical subject may remain the same, as 'Las dificultades, al verlas yo par primera vez, me parecian insuperables'. In Portuguese the same effect is obtained by the personal conjugation of the infinitive. Ptg. vermos = Sp. ver nosotros. In Brazilian Portuguese the correct use of the personal infinitive is not always maintained, and there I believe one might find a personal infinitive without change of subject."



first against the influence of Arabic. It is possible, though not necessary, that the existence of the parallel construction in Romance increased its popularity with the older authors. If, however, the Romance factor had been dominant, we should have expected its use to grow during the second period. Instead, the frequency of its occurrence diminished, a fact which we must ascribe to the influence of Arabic through the translations. 7 We find thus the paradoxical situation that Romance influence was greater during the "Arabicspeaking" period, but Arabic influence during the "Romance-speaking" period. The truth is, of course, that neither "period" had any reality as such, at least as far as the Hebrew language was concerned. The real situation was a good deal more complicated.

k. The origin of the extension of our construction to the case under (f) is unexplained. Even if it was invented by B. J:Iiyya, no reason seems to exist for it, especially in view of the general linguistic conservatism of that author (c( above p. 51). Also, it would in this case have to be assumed that B. Ezra took over this feature from him, while in general no direct linguistic influence of the former on the latter can be discovered. There are two possible explanations, both rather uncertain: (1) That the construction had been thus developed in the Hebrew of the Provence and Catalonia at the time of B. J:Iiyya, without, however, having penetrated into the Northern-French Hebrew used by Rashi. (2) That the extension had taken place in the Catalan colloquial of the eleventh century and was introduced into Hebrew by both authors indepedently. 1. A particularly interesting extension of the infinitivus cum nominativo is its transference to the impersonal construction. As we find in BH an impersonal passive with accusative object (Ges., 121ab) so we find an impersonal passive infinitive with an accusative object in ii"m n~ ,J 1n:Jii? "~, ii'ii iirii O"ii "this day was fit for the Torah to be given on it" (B. J:Iiyya Megillah, p. 24), literally "ut detur in eo legem". Similarly p n1iD.I.lii? ii1~ l?r:lii "the king commanded for this to be done" (B. Daud, flabbalah, p. 51). 7 It occurs, however, also in translations, e.g., in the "O'?r1il ~'::lO wrongly ascribed to Samuel ha-Nagid (c£ above p. 43): r10',PO il::l'?il ilr1m'? ilO'P'?, il::l'?ilil prn'? "to strengthen and establish the halakhah so that it becomes an established halakhah". It is not clear what Arabic construction ilr11'il'? translates: hardly an infinitival one.



33. Gerund and Nomen Verbi a. SH uses both the BH gerund (i.e. infinitive construct without le-) and the MH nomen verbi, without any semantic or functional differentiation. As the functions of the old gerund were wider than those of the nomen verbi, it was inevitable that the latter should in SH be applied in constructions in which it could never have stood in MH, simply because these did not exist in normal MH. This cannot be considered an extension of the functions of the nomen verbi as such, since the whole syntactical category did not exist in SH except as an alternative morphological form to the gerund. The gerund, on the other hand, is not identical with the BH infinitive construct, many of the functions of the latter having been taken over by the le- infinitive. h. The nomen verbi has also functions to itself: (1) the purely nominal function in which it is really nothing but an abstract noun derived from a verb, and often turns into a more or less concrete term, such as 1i~'~ "comment", n1tD'n "guidance", nl1~nnn "conjunction of heavenly bodies" etc.; (2) its use as cognate object described above, par. 22a, the nominal character of which is proved by the fact that in it the nomen verbi is able to take an attribute. In either case it is not a morphological but an etymological category. c. The gerund or nomen verbi is very rarely employed as subject or object. In these positions the old construct infinitive is displaced normally either by the le- infinitive or by the MH dependent she(ki-) clause, and the use of gerunds appears to be a conscious archaism, perhaps due to the influence of ornate style. It occurs thus as subject: n"on 10 Ion r"'J'~ 10'0 1'wn" pn' ~" it is impossible for the imperfect-prefixes to be missing in this word" (B. Ezra, Za~oth, f. 3a); As object: n'~~ 'o~n ~' 'JtD~ n'JtDn i1JitD~1n nI'n" no'., "he imagined the former to be with respect to the latter 'like two young roes that are twins' (Cant. iv 5)" (al-Fakhir, flobe(:., iii 2a). A second object: ... ni1~nnn nm ~'n i'''.li n.,'.lion nI~n i~~O "they found the sign bearing witness to it to be the co~unction (of Saturn and Jupiter in one section of the Zodiac)" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 116). d. While in these few instances the gerund or nomen verbi appeared as an alternative for the le- infinitive, there are cases in which it could not be replaced by the latter: ... ~10~ nr ".li nprnn ~n'~li



"their strongest proof for this is that they say ... " (S. Tibbon, Eccl. Comm. f. lSb); lJ:J n~ n?1i'J ... i1:li "remember that she brought up your son" (]. Tibbon, Testament, p. 11); n~:ln 'n~ lr11'n iD1ii "seek that you become a brother of wisdom" (ibid., 13). So already in Saadiah: 1n:l'?n 1n':liDn ~? "he did not let him forget that he had gone" (ljiwi Polemic, stanza 3). This is a normal construction in Arabic, and indeed the third quotation seems to be a translation from that language, while Di~~ in the first is but an imitation of the Arabic qauluhum. It is again a proof of the resistance of the SH sYM-tactical structure (as distinct from idiomatic detail) to Arabic influence that SH managed to develop its own distinctive categories. e. The most frequent function of the gerund in SH is after prepositions. The BH infinitive construct in this position l had been replaced in MH by dependent clauses, introduced by the same or equivalent prepositions plus she- (cf. Segal, 344). It is still almost non-existent in the early liturgy (cf. above p. 19, note 6). In Piyyut it became again a regular linguistic feature. E.g., n5:l' p5:liD n~?~:J "when the prosperity (?) of the beautiful one became full"; n:J1iDn l:l ?:l lr11'n p" "because you are so noble" (both from the I:Iinah n~?~:J i~ by I>.alir, Brody and Winer, p. 44, cf. also the instances from Yosi b. Yosi, collected by Szneider, Leshonenu, iii 27). From there it was taken into the possible liturgical pieces of the Gaonic period, e.g. Dn~~:J D'n~iD D~1:J:J D'iDiD1 "they rejoice while they go forth and are glad when they return" in 11i~ ?~ (Singer, p. 129); 1i~,l):J nm 1iD~i:J m~5:ln ?'?:l 'J'O in ?,l) TJ5:l? "a diadem of glory didst Thou place upon his head, when he stood before Thee on Mount Sinai" in niD~ n~iD' (Singer, p. 138). It is also common in Saadiah's prose in the paytanic prose of Al).imaa~, in the biblicizing historical style, and in metrical poetry and the ornate prose derived from the latter.

1 The use of the gerund instead of a dependent clause is characteristic of late Biblical Hebrew. The Chronicles replaces almost throughout the dependent clauses of its sources by gerunds (cf. Kropat, fiyntax, p. 73, examples ibid., pp. 68-70). This is perhaps an instance of over-correctness: because the colloquial of the author of Chronicles did not possess the construction, it was considered a hall-mark of literary elegance, and applied wherever possible. For this reason, too, the gerund and the consecutive tenses were chosen to give the historical piece (b. ~dd. 66a) literary respectability, cf. above p. 11. In Babylonian Talmudic Aramaic, too, infinitive clauses are used in preference to dependent clauses wherever there is no danger of ambiguity (cf. Schlesinger, p. 196).



f. On the other hand it does not seem to have penetrated to any appreciable extent into late Midrashic Hebrew and its N.W.-European offshoot. Its use in SH from the very beginnings of that idiom must therefore be due to the influence of the ornate prose style, perhaps reinforced by the frequency of the same construction in Arabic. g. In using the gerund proper with prepositions SH continues BH usage, though the prepositions employed are often post-Biblical: I:lJ'~ i11D.!i~ 'i''? in~~ in~ ~'?~ iJi l:l'i':J~ "they do not perceive a thing except after it has come into being" (B. !:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 114); i1~'?1D in.!iiJn nI'i1 iiJ.!iJ I:l'?in ~iPJ "it is called !:Iolam because its sound is full" (B. Ezra, Za~oth, f. la); i1ii'?n inl'?.!ii1~ '?:JIDi1 nli~ilD "they guard the mind from getting rusty" (B. 'Abbas, f. 6a); C'JiJi1 ip.!ii1 I:li~'? I:lit!l ... "who build ... before they have learnt the essentials" (ibid., f. 8a); I:l'Jit!li1 l:l'ID.!i~i1 I:lnllD.!iJ l:l'n~1D 1:li1 "they are pleased because they do good deeds" (Falaq., MebaMesh, f. l8b); 1:l1Di1 nJID nI'?i.!iEli1 i'?~ i~:J nllD.!i~ "God ceased from doing the like of these actions" (Gers., DeCoth, f. 9b); i1'?JJi1 nJi:J n''?:Jn'? i.!i'Ji1:J "when he arrives at knowing the final intention of that which is revealed" (M. Tibbon, Cant. Comm., p. 5); ri~i1 ni,?~i} in~'? i~iJJ C':J~'?~i1 "the angels were created after the draining of the earth" (B. Z:aq;ah, Mikhlol, f. 5b); 1:l':JElIDJi1 1:l'~i1 t!lIDElm:J i1''?.!i it!lIDElm ~'? "it did not spread on it like water poured out" (ibid., f. 23a); nr.:l~ i1~iPi1i1 n~r nI'i1 in~ "since this promise is true" (Zeral:tiah, He-lfalu?:" vii 96). h. This is specially frequent with the causative le-. Though causative use of that preposition is common in MH (cf. Giesebrecht, Priipos. Lamed, p. 85), it does not occur there with infinitive. Its frequent use in SH, both with nouns and with gerunds, is probably due to the influence of the Arabic liim at-taCITI (Wright, ii l50D):2 m iiJ.!iJ in:Ji.!i~ i~:J iniJn~ nI'i1'? '.!i~~~ I:l'JIDi1 iElO~ i1'i1 "therefore the number two is the middle, because its double is equal to its square" (B. Ezra, S. ha-Shem, f. 9b); iOi~i1 pp I:l'J'JPi1 inJ~ ':J 'n.!ii'? "because I know that the choicest of possessions is the possession of worldly wisdom" (Falaq., Musar, p. 47); cmr.!i i.!iIDJ r~ ':J iJlDn'? I:lElii" 1:l''?ElIDi1 m"1D '~ "he who cheats and oppresses the poor, because he thinks that they have no assistance from the law" (Gers., De'oth, f. 9a). 2 The causative function seems to have been considered, by some Spanish grammarians at least, the essential function (a~l) of ie-. Thus B. Ezra says (Yesod Mora, p. 17): "The name of the letter Lamed is derived from the root 1i.l" "to learn" because its essential function is to indicate why a thing exists (i~1i1 i1'i1 i1i.l")".



i. We find the nomen verbi used in the same manner already in the early Baraitha b. :&idd. 66a: 1mrn:::l "when he came back". SH, in making the nomen verbi the equivalent of the gerund in this function, hardly followed an older tradition, however. The same situation, i.e., the existence of three verbal nouns where only two categories could be utilized, produced the same results. Examples: ~'? mm :::l1i'p:::l C'01nO C'i:::l1i1 1'i1' "when the time is brought near, these things will not be ambiguous any more" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 2); C'n:::lniDO m10 '?1I cm'Oll:::l "they boast of having discovered its secret" (B. I:Iiyya, Schwarz-Festschr., p. 29); rE)",?~ ':liD nn:::lnm i1:::l1l:::l miDOi1 ion "the short vowel is elided because the two Alephs meet" (B. Ezra, Saphah Berurah, f. 3a); i1i':::lll n'iDlIO 10~1I 1I:l10i1 "if one refrains from committing a sin" (id., Yesod Mora, p. 11); 1n~':::l ':JE)'? "before he comes" (Maim., (lobe;::., ii 26); m:J c:Jn'? 1:::l m'~o'? 'mom 'nnOiD "I was very pleased and gratified3 that such a learned man should have a son" (ibid., f. 27); C'?1~':::l'? '?~:::l' ~'? "He does not cease to exist because they cease to exist" (id., Yesode ha-Torah, i 2); 1m~ 1I1n Ci1'? l110''?:::l "by studying them you will know Him" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 12); m~'~Oi1 n:JiDOi1'? 'ni:Ji1i1 li1~i1 "the essential necessity to maintain the existence of the world" (Abr. Maim., (lobe;::., iii l8b); C'i:::l1 i1n'~o n1'?:Jn0i11 nm1:::lm 'n'?:::lO i1'?1I0 'E)'?:J "(they) utter blasphemy without considering and thinking" (B. 'Abbas, f. lla); 1m'pn m~ 1'? ipn m''?:JiDi1 m'?1I0:::l C:Jni1 nn'?~i1 "before investigating the happiness of the wise, he investigated the intellectual virtues" (Falaq., Meba~~esh, f. lla); "the Torah tells us the relationship of God to the creation of the world" 1:::l ~1i1iD 1E)1~i1 m ?1I 1'on 1n1~ 1n"'POiD ~'i11 "namely, that he preserves it forever in the state in which it is" (Gers., De'oth, f. 9b); C'?111i1 1iD11'n nll:::l ?lIE)iD m?111E)i1 "the deeds He accomplished when He created the world" (ibid.); i'1~:::l 1m:JE)i1m:::l r1~':Ji1 n1l1m "the movement of the spark while it revolves in the air" (Zeral).iah, He-lfalu;::., vii 97).

j. The equivalence of gerund and nomen verbi is proved by the instances in which they are used in parallelism to each other, e.g. Cnll'piD1 C':::l:J1:Ji1 m'?lI:::l cn:J~'?O:::l 10':JiD nm'o:J "experiences they have

made in their craft with regard to the rising and setting of the planets" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 114); '?:Ji1 m'fllO :::l1~ ~1I10i1 nnp "taking a little is better than giving up all" (Falaq., Meba~~esh, f. 19b).


iTr:lr1 takes this meaning "to be pleased with" from its Arabic synonym 'ajaba.



k. Owing to the use of the nomen verbi as abstract noun some confusion results with non-verbal abstract nouns, and these can be employed instead of the gerund (as already in BH, cf. Ges. 45c-e). E.g., ?1D~~i1 iOi1 1n~1~::J i1::J11Dm lii i1~i~ 'JIDi1 ::J1n~i1 "the next verse shows the meaning of repentance by commanding: remove the obstacle ... " (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 8). Thus even abstracts, the full nominal character of which is established by their syntactical function within the sentence, govern as if they were infinitives: ?1iJ mJi~~ m i1?lln' n1::J~::J "this is a complete denial of His glory" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 10); m j'Jll::J 'm~ Tm?pi1~ i~O~ i1~ "what shall I tell of the times you treated me with contempt 4 in this matter" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 9); 1m~ 1Jn::Ji1~ ?i1J? "because we love Him so gready" (J. Nai).mias, Aboth Comm. f. 3a).

1. It seems that the opposite case could also occur, the gerund being employed in positions where one would expect an abstract noun, or a nomen verbi functioning as such: 1'm1~~ i1~tq::J1 ?~i1 n~i'::J p::JinlD "that you may cling to the fear of God and to the keeping of His commandments" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 9). It is, however, possible to take the word i1~1D as nomen verbi of the Pieel, and thus to remove the difficulty. As occasionally in BH5 and always in Arabic (which possesses no passive infinitive), the verbal nouns of the passive conjugations are sometimes replaced by the active ones: ?~ilD'? i1i1n i1Jn'J mi1 ~1'::J ~i1'?ll i1i'~i1 ~i1? i1nJ'nJ::J1... "on that day the Law was given to Israel ... and in being given to them it shone upon them" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 27); i11D~ i'::J i1i1m nn 'J:l? "before the Law was given to Moses" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 8). Perhaps these should be treated as impersonal constructions parallel to the impersonal use of the passive le- infinitive (above par. 33 1). This construction was by no means the only one in use. The passive verbal nouns occur quite frequendy, e.g. ~'i1?~ m?i1 m ?ll ::Jn~i1::J "when the name of God is inscribed upon this tablet" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 16). Dl.

4 It seems that this is an imitation of the Arabic verbal noun with feminine ending to indicate a single event (ism al-marrah, Wright, i 122D). 5 cr. a list of instances in Koch, Der semitische lrifinitiv, p. 67. Koch argues that this is the original Semitic construction, the passive infinitives being a late innovation.



34. Substantivization if Clauses a. Asyndetic substantive clauses are very rare already in BR (Brock., 332; 339.a), and apart from oratio recta do not exist in MR (Segal, DiMu~, 422). In SR, too, only oratio recta is construed asyndetically. This is, however, an exceptional syntactical process, as really the structure of the sentence is broken, and the speech part is no more dependent on the principal clause than a parenthesis. h. Real asyndetic substantive clauses occur, however, when a dependent clause is coordinated with an infinitive clause: n~r ?::l 'Ill 'J~ ?i::l' Cli1::l ipini Cli11.:lll ~~itD1.:l i1'i1~i Cl':lii1 Clll niJ1.:li1? "nevertheless I can count myself among the many, and wander about with them and investigate as they do" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 2); Cli~ ?::l? 'i~ii1 '::l '~iiJ r1.:l~'i lli'i ?~i11.:l i1~i' i? ni'i1? i1?'nnJ "the befitting thing for every man is first of all for him to have fear of God and that he should know and believe with certainty" (B. 'Abbas, f. 9a). These clauses are constructed as if the first clauses, to which they are coordinated, were a dependent finite clause. In such a case there would be no need to repeat the conjunction. We have here merely cases of anacoluth. Its occurrence in two writers as different as B. I:Iiyya and B. 'Abbas shows, however, that there was a definite tendency towards it in SR. 1

1 A similar situation produced the same effects in bab. Talmudic Aramaic, where asyndetic dependent clauses, though otherwise non-existent, appear occasionally in coordination with infinitive clauses (cf. Schlesinger, p. 20 I); e.g., '~ 1i1"i~J "1Jn~:::l 1n~i iD 1i1"i~J" lit;lJ1 p~i "by letting their husbands study in the house of study and that they wait up for their husbands until they come home" (bab. Berakhoth 17a). Such cases occur already in BH (Is. xiii 9, Amos viii 6) and Biblical Aramaic (Ezra iv 21). Cr. also the ;::,adokite fragment p. 2 line 21: ~"1 I:m~n n~ ~n1tDD~ ~i1'tDD n1~r.l n~ 1ir.ltD "because they did their own will and kept not the commandments of their creator". The Zadokite fragment is altogether fond of this construction, which also occurs 3.11, 6.16, 7.1, 7.3, etc.



c. Asyndetic, as in the older dialects, are also the dependent questions: "pn'? "to investigate whether it has an end" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 10); ~'i1 i1"~ 1r'~ O'J~'~i1 n'~'?i1Ci m'~ '?l) "Cil)'? "to discover the shape of the courses of the planets-what shape it is (ibid., p. 113); O'~~'?Cii1 '~'JJ 'm'~ '?"r, nl)1 'mn~ 'J~ "I have already indicated the opinion of the Rabbis as to when the angels were created" (B. ~af?;ah, Mildzlol, ( 7b).

i1'?~n ,,? tzl'i1

d. Syndetic substantive clauses are introduced either by the MH sheor by the BH ki, rarely by the BH asher. These three are entirely equivalent, and even in compound adverbial conjunctions can be substituted for each other. No examples need be given here, as there will be ample illustration in the following paragraphs. e. The revival of ki as a conjunction for introducing dependent clauses dates from the early liturgy. This uses side by side she-, e.g. 'i1 ~'i1 i1n~iV 1'? 'Jm~ 0'1'Ci "we acknowledge unto Thee that Thou are the Lord" (Singer, p. 51) and ki, e.g. O'iVl)Ci ,JJ r~ '~ 'Jl)1' "we know that we have no good works of our own" in o,n, ~'i11 (Singer, p. 59). Kz in the sense of "that" is, however, rather rare, especially if compared with the innumerable instances of the same word with the meaning "because". In SH, too, Kz is probably rarer than she-. Some authors, like Ibn Ezra, prefer the first, others, such as Maimonides in the Mishneh Torah, use exclusively the latter. f. Infinitive clauses are fully equivalent to dependent clauses. It is quite impossible to give any reasons for the choice of the one or the other construction in a given case. To what extent they were felt to be the same is proved by the phenomenon treated under (b) above. In the following the two are in some cases for convenience considered together. g. A favourite device of SH is the extraposition of some member of a subordinate clause into the principal clause, where it stands in the syntactical position which would have been occupied by the clause. The reason for using this construction seems to have been a tendency, visible throughout SH, to avoid clauses as subjects or objects. The same tendency produced the extraposition of a cognate object discussed above, par. 22c, which is really nothing but a special case of the feature illustrated here. An added advantage in the case of dependent questions was that the extraposed word could be governed by a



preposition, which would have been impossible with the clause. E.g. O'JniJ O~ ,'nEm '?,I] -npn'? 'J'~i mn "we now think best to investigate whether its symptoms give true indications" (Crescas, Or Adonai, f. 4a).


h. Other examples: ,::J ~~911iD nn~ n::J'c:!::J o'~n 'iiD~' ~'? "one does not praise a man happy because one good quality is found in him"2 (D. J>iml:li on Psalm i 1); n'?,n n'n'iD ~mi ,QJ niD'::J' nm r~ 'J "nothing is as disgraceful and embarrassing as that a doctor should fall ill" (B. Tibbon, Testament, p. 10); ~~QJ ~'n !::J~ iDEl:Ji1 nii~iDn pt1Q i'pm "we shall inquire as to whether the survival of the soul is something real" (Gers., Mil~amoth, f. 4a); n"'iD'? niQ,n'? 'piDn' ... 'i'~'iDJ on 'J ",1]' "furthermore, when they realise. . . they long to become similar to God" (id., DeCoth, f. 9b). In the last instance, the extraposition of on (a word that is quite unnecessary within the subordinate clause) helps to avoid heaping of conjunctions.

i. This has, of course, nothing to do with the cases in which a member of the subordinate clause is extraposed, but remains dependent on the conjunction introducing it. E.g., ".:JniD 0',1],,' ,'n ,,?~ on 'J ,'OJJ "::J~' "if they had known that the gentile~his fortune would be lost" (B. I:Iiyya, Schwarz-Festschr., p. 29);3 n,l]'r::J 'n~n 'J iQ~" 'n~'~i n'nn "he said that the one~his cure would be by perspiration" (Falaq., Meba#esh, f. l3a). These offer no special syntactical problems beyond those of extraposition in general. k. The same tendency to have a word rather than a clause as member of the principal clause has also led to phenomena corresponding to the "lesser subject" of European languages (e.g. "it is nice that you have come"). A pronoun representing the whole clause is employed, and the clause placed in apposition to it. zeh can be used as such a "pseudo-substantive", e.g. m~'Q ~'? o~ O'JiD nQJ ni::J'iDm 'in~miD nrl ''?,nn i::J,Q "that the replies are a few years late is, if not because of my worries, then through my illness" (Maim., Teshuboth, ed. Freimann, p. Ix); ,::J'?::J r,l]n n'~iQ'? n'?Jm r.llJ 1ni~ O'~'i 'J~iD nrl ~'n "that we see the sky as something blue is merely an optical illusion" (id. Yesode ha- Torah, iii 3).

2 This cannot be translated "for one good quality that is found in him", for then the verb should be n~~r.ll 3 This sentence contains both kinds of extraposition treated here.



1. ~'i1 is also employed for this purpose: n~p rJ'tD ?':JtDO? ~'i1 J'~' C1i1'iJi "it is good for the educated person that he understands some of their statements" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 1); ':J ~'i1 ?p iJi ~? C1'o:Jn 'iJi i~OJ 'D~O:l "it is not a small matter that the words of the Rabbis have lost all their authority" (Letter of the Yemenites to Samuel b. Eli, ZFHB ii 126); J'~ ~'i1 ':J i1~.ll 1ii C1'm C1i1? C1'~iO n10tD?, 1'00 ~PD~? "they suggest to them by way of advice that it is good to gather wealth and enjoy life" (D. ~m}:li on Psalm i 1); i1i? n1~~0:li1 i~tDJ ~'?tD i1'i1~tD "~i ~'i1 "therefore it is befitting that I should be lord over the other existent things" (Gers., Pent. Comm., f. 5 7b); i1~?::l:l ,J i1n:ltDi1i1 i1'i1ntD "~i ~'i1tD i~'JO ~'i1 ':Jii i1itD i10, "if anything is one of this nature, it is clear that it is befitting that it should enjoy special providence"4 (id., De'oth f. 9b). This ~'i1 can, of course, be explained as copula, but in view of the existence of the parallel i1i, and its unusual position in front of the predicate, it seems at least probable that it should be considered a true pronoun. It would be a special case of the sentence-anaphoric (above, par. lOc). Its emergence in SH may be due to the influence of the Romance languages, where such pseudo-substantives were employed from early times. Modern colloquial Hebrew, under the pressure of European speech-habits, is developing i1i again as a lesser subject, e.g. n~::JiD ::J'~ i1i "it is good that you have come". Dl.

n. It is rare to find subordinate clauses of a complex structure. The range of subordinating devices was, as in Arabic, too simple to maintain periods. This may be the reason why occasionally in such subordinated periods the subordinating conjunction is repeated before the major dependent clause if the minor one (i.e., the one subordinated to the dependent clause) intervenes. E.g.: i1'i1 C1~ ':J i':Jri1? 1i'~ r~ i1'i1' ?'iJ fOPi1 5':J C1?.ll:l n:l ~'OJ ~"i1i1 "it is superfluous to point out that if the He at the end is quiescent and vocalic, that then the ~me~ is a long vowel" (B. Ezra, Za~oth, f. I b); ':J ipi10i1 'o:Jn 'iO~ p' ,? iJnni1? ?intD'tD Ti~~ C1i~i1 'n1~ ~~O'tD:J "likewise the philosophers have said that when a man finds such a one, that he must needs endeavour to become attached to him" (Falaq., Meba~~esh, f. 21a). 4 The second tli1il may either be a lesser subject as well as the first, or it may be an anaphoric pronoun referring to the implied antecedent of the relative clause. 5 The ed. has Cltli 'J the second time, too. This is obviously wrong.



35. Clauses as Subject a. Clauses as subject in ordinary sentences are rather infrequent, e.g. i1:Jii:J ~i:JO m'~ •.. l:l'i1:JO I:li~ 'J:J iiZ.l~1 "and if people think ... that is not a legitimate opinion" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 23); Ti':J i1t;.lI' I:li~ t;:J i'i1ri1t; :::J'n i1n~ ':J mo "the conclusion is that you are obliged to warn everybody" (id., Hegyon, f. l7b). The use of iiZ.l~ to introduce a subject clause in the first quotation is in accordance with the late Biblical usage (Brock., 397), and indicates that the author felt the construction to be an archaism. Normally it is avoided in SH by the devices discussed in par. 22c and 35 k-l.

h. Subject-clauses are, however, very frequent in SH with a special class of predicates, which, for want of a better term, we may here refer to as clause-predicates. The words serving as predicates in this construction were originally adjectives, verbs in the third sing. masc., or adverbs, and are often still employed as such in SH apart from their impersonal use as clause-predicates. c. These predicates always precede their subject-clauses, and are inflexible. Semantically, the complex is very close to an ordinary sentence with the clause-predicate as adverb. In translation it will often be of advantage to change the construction in this way. The subject-clause is either finite and introduced by she-, ki, or asher, or an infinitive clause. The latter has no subject when an indefinite subject is implied, otherwise the infinitivus cum nominativo is employed. d. This construction occurs already in BH, especially with :::J1t;l "it is good, it is better", e.g., l:l:Jn~ ipn' ':J :::J1t;li1 "is it better that He should search you out?" (Job xiii 9); 1i:::Jt; 1:li~i1 nm :::J1t;l-~t; "it is not good for man to be alone" (Gen. ii 18), also Gen. xxix 19, 2 Sam. xviii 3, Ruth ii 22. :J1t;l has already the typical feature of being accompanied by an ethical dative; I:l'i;m-n~ i:J.lI 1Jt; :::J1t;l "it would have been better for us to serve the Egyptians" (Ex. xiv 12). Similarly with 11:J~ "it is right": p miZ.l.llt; 11:JJ ~t; "it is not right to do thus" (Ex. viii 22). An indication that these were felt to be in some way different from ordinary predicative adjectives may be found in the peculiar method of negation by means of ~t;. e. In MH, the construction was also applied to a small number of words, such as .lI1i'[:J] "it is common knowledge", Ti~ "it is necessary",



but was still far from becoming a general syntactical category. The wide extension of this construction seems to belong to late Midrashic Hebrew, and took perhaps place under the influence of Arabic and Aramaic, in both of which it is much more frequently used than in MH.! In N.W.-European Hebrew and in SH, many words that in the earlier dialects could only be used in personal constructions became clause-predicates. The exact lexicographical range of the construction is still unknown. It will be difficult to discover, because of the wide variations in range between different authors.

f. Although the subject-clause construction was used by Saadiah, its use seems to have gone back in poetry and ornate prose. This may explain the reluctance to employ the impersonal constructions we sometimes notice with Abraham bar J:Iiyya. This construction, once firmly established in the language by SH usage, remained widely used in all later forms of Hebrew. It is full alive and still extending in Modern Hebrew, both in its literary and colloquial forms. g. The gradual development of the category is illustrated by the history of the most frequent of all clause-predicates, "~i, a term of a vague meaning expressing most connotations of the English "should" or "might". This is a purely MH word, 2 occurring in the Bible only once: i1'? nn'? n;'~iiJ n1i.!iJi1 "the maidens which were meet to be I In Talmudic Aramaic, the infinitive (with or without le-) appears as subject after t"j'i., "it is better", ~"i~ ni1~ "it is customary", Ti~, '.,:::1'0 "it is necessary", etc. (cf. Schlesinger, p. 196). In Arabic syndetic subordinate clauses are used after words like khairun "it is better", kha/igun, jadfrun "it is meet", sawa'un "it is immaterial", la ba'sa "it does not matter" (cf. examples in Brock., 395a, Reck., 194, where, however, these are not differentiated from the~comparatively rare~clauses as subject of regular sentences). 2 In Jewish Aramaic, n!IJ is used in the same manner (Dan. iii 19, Targ. Lev. v 10, Targ. Job xv 11, in the Palestinian Targum 'on; not in Syriac), cf. also the Palmyrenian 'rnn~ "it seemed good" (Cook, Glossary, p. 51). The meaning of the root "to consider good, worthy, etc." seems to be common Semitic, cf. also the Arabic ra'a "to think fit", and huwa ar'a bi- "he is more apt to ... ". The word re'uyyoth is hardly a passive participle of n~i, as it would then be the only instance in BH of such a participle with short u (cf. Ges., 75v). It is probably a qatul-adjective (Ges., 84h; Brock., i 120). Perhaps the Aramaic forms are loan-translations from Hebrew, dating from a time when '1~i had come to be considered a participle passive. But cf. the analogous double sense of the Syriac Paqba, paqqab 1. "suitable", 2. "better" for esp. paqqab wa leh l-gavra haw ellu /ii eliled. (Mark 14.21 Pesh.), an exact translation of the Mishnah phrase. Altogether these forms, both nouns, are the nearest thing to '1~i I know.



given her" (Est. ii 9, cf. Kcmig, 236b).3 In MH it is employed very frequently, with the meanings 1. "Fit, legally fit" (Yeb. vii 6, BB viii 5, Hor. i 1, etc.), 2. "Able to, apt to" (Zeb. xi 3, Ter. vi 6, 'Orlah iii 7, etc.), 3. "Likely to" (Bekh. v 4, Pe'ah v 1, Sot. iv 3, etc.), 4. "Suitable for" (Zeb. ix 1, Shab. xv 2, Yeb. xi 7, etc.), 5. "Proper for" (Ned. xi 4, B~. i 4, San. iv 5, etc.), 6. "Sufficiently good for, worthy of" (Pes. vi 5, San. viii 4). It is never used in impersonal construction, except once in our Mishnah text in a passage that is almost certainly corrupted. 4 h. The impersonal construction appears in the Gaonic Midrash Pir~e R. Eliezer. iitv~ rmp'? "~i 1'?' "and you it is meet to call woman" (ch. xii). It is also employed thus by Saadiah (IJiwi Polemic, stanza 64): tvi~'? "~i 'j'i~" m'?''?.l1 '?:J p "thus it is meet to explain all the deeds of our Creator". In Mishnaic, these would have been ii"~i n~ iitv~ 1'? nnp'? and tvi~'? m"~i. Perhaps Saadiah merely imitated the usage of the corresponding word in Arabic, khalfq, which is frequently employed as clause predicate by Saadiah's older contemporary, I:Junain b. Is}:laq (d. 910) to render the Greek isiis.

i. B. I:Jiyya knew the impersonal construction of the word, and occasionally employs it so: ... D1'~ ,'tv.l10 '?'nn'tv t::Ji~'? ,,? "~i r~ "it is not right for a man to begin his business on the day when ... " (Megillah, p. 23). Yet he appears to have been rather reluctant to employ it, and often produces awkward constructions in order to construe "~i personally: m:Jo '?:JO iiitii'? t::J"'~i n.l1i 'tvj~ '?:J "and all sensible men ought to beware of any danger" (Schwarz-Festschr., p. 24); ii~ p'rnii'?, iim~ i'O'?'? ii"~i t::J'~:J':Jii nO:Jn "one ought to study astrology and pay attention to it" (ibid., p. 28). The meaning of the word in these two quotations is quite un-Mishnaic, and does not fit the construction. There are cases where the struggle of the author to avoid impersonal "~i leads to even stranger results: t::J"'~i '?~~ 3 Ibn Ezra's only comment on the passage is: .,"ri 'i::l;::l .Il1;' j1iD"il "this expression is well known from rabbinic literature". 4 l:Iagigah ii I, our Mishnah text has O"1.1l" ~::l ~., 1"~:l 1" '1~i (second time: ~::l ~"iD). 1"~:l makes no sense, and should probably be 1"~. The passage then translates smoothly: "it were better for him if he had not come into the world". The Bab. Talmud has, however, '1r1; instead of '1~i. Levi explains '1r1i = '1::'i "it would have been more desirable"; Rashi derives from ilr1'i "he was lenient", and translates: "it would be a mercy for him if". The very difficulty of explaining the hapaxlegomenon '1ni proves it to be the original word. '1~i was substituted in violation of Mishnaic usage.



nlili1'?1 r QtI;i1'? "one should believe and acknowledge" (Hegyon, f. 5) with the indefinite person, or: '?J Cli1:J '?'nm'? ClJI~'?iD 'Q' tl;1i1 'ItI;i i1iD.liQ "it is fit for the days of their dominance to begin on them all

kinds of business" (Megillah, p. 23). Here the-to the author~nat­ ural construction obtruded itself so far as to substitute the singular of 'ItI;i for the plural one would have expected. Often the construction is balanced in such a way that it is impossible to decide whether the 'ItI;i is personal or impersonal, e.g.: nlJr i1:JiQ I:J n~I:Ji1 i1Iin tI;'?Q I:J'? nI'i1'? 'ItI;il i1I~QI "he who trusts in Him acquires much merit and grace, and is worthy (or it is meet) that his heart should be filled with joy" (Megillah, p. 1).

j. A similar tendency to avoid the impersonal construction appears to exist in the style of B. 'Abbas, more than a hundred years later: '?tI;i1Q i1t1;i' I'? rWi1'? i1'?'nn:J Clitl; '?J'? 'ItI;ii1 "the proper thing for every man is first of all for him to have fear of God" (f. 9b); nlJIJ iD'tI; '?J r QtI;i1'? nI'ltI;ii1 nmJJi1 i1ilm "the true meanings of the Law, which are fit for every man to believe" (f. 11 a).

k. In all other writers, the impersonal construction is used almost exclusively: CliDi1 I'? lnJiD i1Q '5JJ In'iD 'ItI;iiD "the reason is that he should give in proportion to that which God has given him" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 17); '?J '?.Ii I:J i:Ji'? 'ItI;iiD tl;iPQi1 i1J'i~ tI;"n':J tI;"5J,?tI; "the Bible requires a systematic dictionary, in which one should speak of the whole Alphabet" (B. Parl:lOn, ~rukh, p. xxii); IJn'tI;'? Cl'i1 i'rni1'? 'ItI;i "it would be right to restore the sea to its primordial state" (Maim., Teshuboth, ed. Freimann, p. lix); ClJii tI;'i1 Ir i1:J l'?''? 'ItI;iiD Cl'QJn 'i'Q'?n '?iD "this is the way of the learned in which one should walk" (id., Talmud Torah, vii 17); IJ:JI'iD 'ItI;i lJ Cl'tI;':JJi1 'i:Ji "thus the words of the prophets should be understood" (Abr. Maim., {lobe?:, iii 19a); Cl'p'?n 'J'? i1ri1 iQtI;Qi1 p'?miD 'ItI;i "we must divide this statement into three parts" (Crescas, Or Adonai, f. 4a); '.Ii:J~i1 iiOi1 '5J'? nI'i1'? 'ItI;i P "this should be so according to the system of nature" (B. ~ar~ah, Mikhlol, f. 23a).

1. While in all the above examples 'ItI;i has the connotation of "must, should", it was by some authors also used in the more Mishnaic sense of "able". In this sense it occurs in one and the same text both in the MH personal construction: r:Ji1'? 'ItI;i i1'i1'iD Cli1:J P'Q.lii1 Cl'QJni1 nlilO "to study them deeply until he is able to understand the hidden meanings of the Rabbis" (S. Tibbon, Eccl. Comm., f. l6a);



and with the SH impersonal construction: "to collect in it a great deal of wisdom" 1iO~'? o~n Oi~'? '1~i il'il ~'?tD... lii::l "so much so that one wise man would not have been able to compose it" (ibid., f. 15b). Instead of introducing the subject of the dependent verb into the dependent clause (whether as subject of a finite verb or by the infinitivus cum nominativo device), it can also be attached to the clause predicate by means of an ethical dative, and, if necessary, be taken up within the dependent clause. This we have already with the BH ::l1~: ptD!ln '~ l'? :n~il "it is better for thee that thou shouldst oppress?" (Job x 3, and cf. the quotation above under d). It is frequent in MH. In SH it occurs very frequently with "~i and similar words, e.g. 11tD'? '?~ 1'tD'?o p'n!lil'? 1'Ji11 '1~i '~i1::l l'? "you are surely a fit and suitable person to translate from one language into another" (Maim., (lobe?, ii 26); '?'nn'tD Oi~'? ,,? '1~i r~ "it is not right for man to begin ... " (B. J:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 23); 1'?~~'? ~'?iD Oi~'? '1~i "one should not eat them" (Maim., De'oth, iv 9); i'pn'? Oi~'? ,,? :n~ 1''?!I "man should inquire into it" (B. J:Iiyya, Megillah, p. I). Dl.

n. The negative used with clause-predicates is in BH ~'? (cf. above under d), in MH r~ e.g., 1'iD~i no i1r'~ !In' r~ "it is not known which one died first" (Yeb. vii 4); iO''? Ti~ r~ "it is needless to say" (Bab. Ber 14a), and the frequent iiDEl~ '~ "it is not possible" (c£ Segal, Di~du~, p. 79 note 2). Similarly in N.W.-European Hebrew: ~'::l1::li!l::l O'iDOiDO 'WiD liD,n'?, i'~'? il~J r~ "it is not right that light and darkness should be mixed" (Rashi on Gen. i 4). SH follows the tradition of MH:5 n!li '?iD O'i::li n':Jil'? Oi~'? "~i r~ "one should not ignore sensible opinions" (Maim., (lobe?, ii 26); r~ O'?tDil Oi~il om~ iliD!I'iD Ti~ "the perfect man must not do these" (Falaq., MebaMesh, f. 20a); ~ipOil no~no P'i ,nm'? '?'~iDO'? 1'~:J r~ "it is not right for an educated person to be devoid of Bible knowledge" (B. Ezra, resod Mora, p. 2); ~i'niD '1~i r~ "you must not be afraid" (Gers., Pent. Comm., f. 47b). o. Most clause-predicates are original adjectives. Adverbs are comparatively rare. Thus !I'i'::l "it is well known" is Mishnaic, e.g. !I'i'::l

5 Modem colloquial Hebrew has gone back to ~., while literary Hebrew avoids ~., (the use of which with adjectives is considered a colloquialism) and rather awk-

wardly helps itself with the inflected form




"it is well known that both of them are wont to kill on the same day" (J:lul. v 3), also Bab. RH 20b, Bab. Sukkah 49b. It is employed in this form only by B. J:liyya: ~~QJ 'niiitl .!I'li'::J "it is clear that living things exist" (Megillah, p. 9). Later writers prefer the MH alternative .!I'li' (Dem. vi 11, Ter. iii 1) as more in keeping with the general trend, e.g.; itli'lPii nn::J iiQ'?itI ::Jitln ii'?':lQiiitl .!I'li' "it is well known that Solomon composed the scroll under divine inspiration" (M. Tibbon, Cant. Comm., p. 6).

in~ Cl'l'::J r~mitl Clii'JitIitI

p. The only verb appearing in this role is pn' "it is possible". In BH this is an ordinary verb form, meaning "to be straight" (4 times in Ezekiel). It does not occur in MH, and seems to have received its new syntactical function and new meaning somewhere in late Midrashic. It is quite current in N.W.-European Hebrew, e.g., T~ iQ~' i::J.!Iiiitl pn' "how is it possible that a worshipper should say" (Sepher IJasidim, par. 547). Its first appearance in SH is with Ibn Ezra: Cl'?.!I;) m 'l'in~ nm'? pn' "it is possible for it to be followed by a vocalic quiescent" (Saphah Berurah, f. 1b). The negative of this is, of course, ~'?, e.g., n'l'n'l~ 'nitlQ 1~P Clitl n'l'ii'? pn' ~'? "it is not possible for a noun to be shorter than two letters" (S. ha-Shem, f. la).

q. It is at present impossible to aim at an exhaustive list of the words that can be used as clause-predicates. Almost every author has his own favourites. It is interesting to observe, however, that those words are sometimes strengthened by adding a synonym to a clause-predicate in common use and that these additions tend then to be used instead of the original words. Thus we find in the 13th century in B. 'Abbas: Cl'Q:Jn ':Jii i'lQ'?'? ''l~i'l ::J'nQ "it is obligatory and proper to learn the ways of wise men" (f. 7b). In the middle of the 14th century, B. Z,aqah can already say: nnn ri~ii 'iinitl Cl'Qiii ri~ii .!I::J~ '::J:J ::J''lnQ Cl'Qii "according to the nature of earth and water it would be proper that the earth should be underneath the water" (Mikhlol, f. 23a). r. Of some interest, though by no means an innovation, is the use of the verb of existence as clause predicate in the sense of "must". Thus itI' is used in BH: 1'? i::Ji'? itI'ii "is there any need to speak for thee?" (2 Kings iv 13); r~ appears more frequendy in this construction, mosdy in post-exilic texts: Psalm Ix 6, Est. iv 2, viii 8, 2 Chr. v 11 (cf. Ges., 114 1).6 Possibly the origin of this usage is an 6

Ges. mentions a similar use of

t6 with the ininitive (Amos vi 10, I Chr. xv



ellipsis, starting from phrases like ~'~ii? r~ iii1iDr1 ':J "for there is no gift to bring" (1 Sam. ix 7).7 It appears in Ben Sira (x 23; xxxix 21). Perhaps by accident it does not occur in the Mishnah, though it is employed in Tannaitic Midrash, e.g.... 'i~' ?J) ~'iDii? r~ "one cannot reply to Him ... " (Mekhilta, Beshallal). ii 6) .... ? iD' seems to occur only in Gaonic Midrashim, however, e.g., Deut. Rabba ii, in the sense of "to be able" (cf. Ben-Yehudah, p. 2170). They are common in N.W.-European Hebrew, e.g. l:I'J)01iD 1:J"ii 1?~ rO~ii? r~ "if we had heard it, it would not have been possible to believe" (Rashi on Is. liii I); 'ir1iD ~?~ 1? r~ "there is nothing for you except to go down" (id., 1 Sam. xxi 12). SH examples: 1? iD' r1J)'? "you must know" (B. Zaq;ah, Mikhlol, f. 5b); 'in~ iiiiii? r~ riDJ)O~ P"~ii "one must not doubt Him Who is just in His deeds" (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 13b); ... iD iD'~ ~? ?J) r11?J)ii? r~ "it should not be allowed to enter anyone's mind that ... " (B. Zaq:ah, Mikhlol, f. 5b).

s. The past tense of this construction, ii'ii with the ethical dative (instead of the BH ?J) ii'ii) occurs once in the Mishnah: 'r1"ii 1?~ ii'iDii r1~ '? r1i:JOiD:J l?iD r1~ J)iElii? 1? ii'ii 1? ~'n "if I had owed you anything, you should have collected your money when you sold me the field" (Ketubh. xiii 8).8 It is frequent in texts of the Arnoraic period, both in the meaning "must", e.g. 1i'~ ?"Elnii? 1" ii'ii "you should have prayed on the way" (B. Ber. 3a); and "could": ii'ii iir iDiEl? 1? "this he could explain" (B. BB 71 a). In Rashi it is very frequent, cf. the examples in Avineri, p. 229. It occurs in Saadiah's Hebrew: iO~? 1? ii'ii "you should have said" (lfiwi Polemic, stanza 7), and is current in N.W.-Europe, e.g., ::J1m? 1? ii'ii "he should have written" (Rashi on Gen. i 5); 1i::J? 1:I:J? ii'ii ?10r1~O ~?ii "should you not have said the benediction yesterday?" (Sepher lfasidim, par. 548). In SH: i':Jrii? 1? ii'ii "he should have mentioned" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 4); r11iDJ)? 1? ii'ii "you should have done it" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 11). 2), but the instances quoted are negatived jussive infinitives, the ~'? being employed in its ordinary adverbial function (cr. K6nig, 399z). 7 Or it may be proto-Semitic, cr. the Arabic lii an "it must not be that ... ", which in its contraction fan became the negation of the future tense (cr. Brock., 395b). 8 Perhaps in this passage the phrase has still its literal sense "you had (the means) to make yourself paid". The construction is also employed in bab. Talmudic Aramaic in the frequent idiom ir:l'r:l'? ii''? '1ii "he might have argued". Since it is not found in Syriac it is impossible to say whether this new meaning of the phrase arose first in Jewish Aramaic or in the MH of the Amoraic period.



36. Clauses in Other Positions a. Clauses as predicates of nominal clauses are rare in Arabic and Syriac (Brock., 400) and do not seem to occur at all in BH.l In MH it only stands in the rather difficult adversative construction with ~ii11 iV (Segal, Di~du~, 436), e.g., i~iVJiV ~ii11 no i~ iO~ "he answered 'it is dead', whereas it was lamed" (Sheb. viii 2). In SH, they occur, though infreqently, and are introduced in the same way as subjectclauses: iinniV'i Cl'~i 1iiV~~ iiO~iV ,.lli11 "and the proof is that one says in the plural iinniV'i" (B. Ezra, .iml).i, Zikkaron, p. 4), but also one with ki: i~'n l~nn' 11iD?~ 'J i1~ll~ "because in actual usage the situation is reversed" (S. ha-Shem, f. 8b). The BH iiD~ 1llrJ? is supplemented by a ki form: nrJJn OiD 'J 1llrJ? ... ?ll irJ~J "because the term wisdom is applied to ... " (Falaq., MebaMesh, f. lla). To iiD~ 'J~rJ is added a 'J 'J~rJ: 11'Jn~ pOll ~? ~'n i11rJ i1J'~1 n'rJ 'J 'J~rJ "he did not occupy himself with logic, because it is a doubtful accomplishment" (J. J>.iml).i, S. ha-Galuy, p. 2). In this respect SH merely continues a tendency already existent in BH (Brock., 416), and it may well be pure accident that our Bible text does not provide instances of the above prepositions introducing ki- clauses. iiD~ i1~ll~

4 Neither Rashi nor B. Ezra comments on the verse. Mqudath :?:iyyon renders the phrase by iD 101 .,~ "as long as".



k. From this adverbial use of conjunctional clauses governed by prepositions must be distinguished the cases in which a syndetic clause is indirectly governed by a verb, or by a preposition in its proper function. E.g.: 1:l'.!I,i1 1:l''?:J~QJ m'?pi1 'iD~Q 1i1 T''?n '?:J "all your illnesses derive from the fact that you were careless about harmful food" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. lO); l:liDiniD '?~ I:lm"Q .!I'm ~'? i1piiDni1 n~r I:li1J "their perfection does not go so far that this desire should be instilled into them" (Gers., De'oth, f. Bb). 1:l1~' 'iD~J '?'nm 1:li1'? 'JJnQ "he begins with the fact that their lusts get the better of them" (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 14a).

1. As, however, in the adverbial constructions the substantival character of the clause was no longer felt, and the she-, etc., was a mere appendage to the conjunction similar to the French que, a need seems to have existed to differentiate the more properly substantival clauses after cojunctions. A means for that was found in the substantivized relative clauses (see below, par. 40). Substantival and relative clauses being rather similar in construction, there was no great difficulty in substituting the one for the other. Of course, the process was not as conscious as it is described here, but must be imagined to have arisen from a subconscious identification, or in other words, false analogy. Possibly the Arabic mii ma~darryya as equivalent of an (Reck., 192.2), played some role in favouring this development. Examples: lm'?:JOQ m TJ'.!IJ l:l:Jn n"i1iD i1QQi "this comes from your foolishness and from the fact that you were clever in your own eyes" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 9); 1:l'~iOi'?'~i1 i~'?nni1 'J:JiD i1Q'? "owing to the fact that the philosophers differed" (Gers., Mil~amot, f. 4a); m'iO' l:li1iD i1QJ nniO'i1 n'?ir "except the elements in so far as they are elements" (Zeral).iah, HeHaluf:;., vii 96). :m. Once established in such cases, the i1Q also penetrated into the

adverbial constructions, and can be, though rarely, inserted into any composite conjunction whatsoever. E.g.: ... OiQ'Ji1 mJ iJ'iD'iD i1Q ,~o "because by this set of rules they achieve ... " (Gers., De'oth, f. 9b); l:l'?i.!lJ i1iD'~ i1.!1'i1iD i1~'iD i1Q 'J~Q "because he saw that evil spread in the world" (id., Mil~amoth, f. 57b). It is not quite clear, on this scanty evidence, whether there was really a tendency for confusing the constructions, or whether the more substantial construction was chosen by Gersonides in order to import some specific shade of meaning to the sentence.



n. Although not strictly a substantive clause, the /fal-clause may be mentioned here with the other adverbial clauses. While in BH (Brock., 321) and MH (Segal, Di~du~, 419) asyndetic /fa I-clauses still occur, though less frequently than those introduced by we-, the syndetic type is the only one in use in SH. The circumstantial clause had been preserved in N.W.-European Hebrew, e.g., Cl~tD'? 1'r~ ~'~~~ nim~ e'po'lJ cm i:JtDtD' "he provides food for the tribe of 1ssachar, while the latter occupy themselves with the Law" (Rashi on Gen. xlix 13), and it is possibly there that the we- type was generalized. o. Examples: 'n~ ~~,~~ cm m~ in~ m~ i~''? ,'~'?nn '?lJ ntDp "it is difficult for the pupil to pronounce two sounds after each other when they are articulated in the same place" (B. Ezra, Saphah Berurah, f. 43b); 'm~ e'J':JnD eJ'~' li,n '?lJ l'?n'? e'~~n '?:J "all those who come to adopt a way of life without fully intending to do so" (B. I:Jiyya, Hegyon, f. l4b); ~lJi ~'m ,,~''?n ptD '?:J, r",~n n'Jp e,~'? ~'? en'?'? "it is impossible for a man to acquire virtues, let alone to study, while he is hungry for bread" (B. 'Abbas, f. 4b); itD~~ '~ n'?,n ~'m i~' r~'tD "he cannot possibly understand anything while he is ill" (Maim., De'oth, iv 1); r~n ~'? ~'m 'm~n ,'~'?nn i~~' ~'? "the pupil must not say 'I have understood' when in fact he has not understood it" (id., Talmud Torah, iv 4); ~'m ~in ni'~ '?~P' ~'? i~~n i~~ "wool will not take the shape of a sword as long as it remains wool" (Zeral:tiah, He-/falur:;, vii 96).



37. A.ryndetic Relative Clauses a. Already in BH, asyndetic relative clauses occur almost without exception after indeterminate antecedent (Ges., l55d; Baumann, Hebr. Relativsiitze, p. 6; Strauss, Ben Sira, p. 70). In MH, where asyndetic clauses are very rare, they also seem to occur only after indeterminate antecedents (cf. Segal, 477). As this agreed also with the rules of Arabic grammar, I asyndetic clauses are in SH found only after indeterminate and generically determinate nouns. h. Examples with indeterminate antecedents: ~~ C1'1Ji i1Q~nJ tD' C1tD11':l 1.IJi' "there are matters in the Talmud of which they do not know the meaning" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 2); n'-'1Qj m'~1 F.lJiT iT~1Q 1i1iT 'tDJ~ '1Ji 1tD'nJ' "theoretical consideration provides decisive argu-

ments which disprove the statement of the people of India" (id., S. ha-Shem, f. l2a); iT'c:l1:l ~.IJ n'jtDiTQ 11~p C1'J1tD C1'J1iJ iTtD11':lJ 1J~iT "they adopted various methods for explaining it, which fell short of accounting for points of detail" (M. Tibbon, Cant. Comm., p. 5); iT01JQ ~:l11 iTJ iT'iT iT~1ij iTJ'iQ "a great city in which there was an expert physician" (Falaq., Meba#esh, f. 12b); 1QiPQ:J riT' n1J:Ji C1'J:J i'~i' "begets sons and daughters that will take his place" (id., Wikkuab, p. 82); .. C1iTJ C1'1P' n1~~QJiT .IJ:Jc:lQ n1:J1 n1J.lJc:l 1~~9' 1:JJ "there are many arguments from the nature of the existing world by which one may confirm ... " (Gers., Milbamoth, f. 48b); 11JJ iT'iT iT.lJ1Q C1~'~' ~~ C1iT'~.IJ ~1J~ "it will not save them from an evil that was about to befall them" (id., De'oth, f. 8a). c. As in BH (Baumann, op. cit., p. 16) and in Arabic (Reck., 200.2; Brock., 255b), an antecedent with generic article may also be followed by an asyndetic relative clause. This is frequent in the second period: iT'J~iT 'J1~ ~J 1pn' ~J1niT J1J ~1iT "he is like a captain who looks after the needs of a ship" (Falaq., Meba~~esh, f. l3b); i~Q


There the rule is not always observed in practice, cf. Reek., 200.3.



C'!]'O 1~tD" C'1il P11:l' prnil m1il "by the strong wind that crumbles mountains and splinters rocks" (Gers., De'oth, f. 6b); C:I il~T 1~:J ••• Ci1~ '~.l' C'Pi'~il mQ"nil rJ!]Q P "this is also seen from the true

dreams in which one sees ... " (ibid., f. 8a). d. I have found no cases of asyndetic relative clauses with determinate antecedent. Although these occur in BH (K6nig, 380cd, Driver, Tenses, p. 537 note 30), it appears that Arabic grammatical theory has exercised a decisive influence on this point. 2 e. For asyndetic clauses with participles see below par. 38c.

38. Syndetic Relative Clauses a. Of the two particles, she- and asher, introducing relative clauses with finite verbs, SH prefers she-, but in contrast to MH uses also asher. In this respect, it follows the liturgical language (cf. Segal, 77). As asher is hardly to be found in N.W.-European Hebrew, we may assume that it came into SH from Spanish ornate prose. It occurs in all writers from Bar J:Iiyya onwards. h. There are no cases with ha- as relative particle in verbal relative clauses (Ges., I 38ik). On the other hand, ha- is employed regularly before nominal and participial clauses of which the subject is identical with the antecedent. I The fact that it can be employed after indeterminate antecedent, as in MH (Segal, 376a) proves that it is different from the attributive use of the participle: ,~ np~iJil il1'~ '!] C1':1 ... ilm'il' :"J':Iil "it is the cause for a form which is inherent in a body to be ... " (B. J:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 4); nn:J1n CilQ in~ ,:J n':J'il' " il"~1il "to accord to every one of them an admonition that is proper

2 It remains to be investigated whether the inverse case: syndetic clause after indeterminate antecedent, occurs in SH. It was frequent in BH (cf. Baumann, op. cit., pp. l4f) and virtually the rule in MH. 1 The existence of a relative ha- is admitted by most grammarians (Ges., l38i; Brock., 366d; Konig 52 and 61 is not quite clear on this point) only where such clauses contain finite verbs. The ha- with the participle is considered an ordinary article (cf. also Sellin, Doppelnatur, p. 30). This mayor may not be true for BH. It is hardly true for Arabic, where the al- in phrases like al-maqtiilu abiihu "whose father has been killed" cannot be anything but a relative pronoun (cf., Reek., !iJnt. Verh., pp. 596f). In MH this ha- is already in important respects different from the article (cf. Segal, 376, who describes it as "virtually equivalent to a relative clause"; Strauss, Ben Sira, p. 70).



for him" (ibid., f. l4a). An interesting illustration for the need that was felt for this introductory particle is in D. ~ml).i on Psalm i 3, where the Cl'r.PJ?El ?.lJ ?1ntD f.lJ:J "like a tree that is planted on rivers of water" of the text is rendered in the commentary by ... ?.lJ ?1ntDiT f.lJ:J. 2 c. We find, however, rare instances of such participles without ha-. It is doubtful whether these were intended to be attributive participles or asyndetic relative clauses. E.g. Cl'?J?JiT Cl'JtDiT mi:JnQ m'1pJ 'ntD? fQi "a symbol for two points connecting the two spheres" (B. Ezra, S. ha-Shem, f. 2a); iT?1'J n?.lJ1n 1J? iT~':JQ iTQ'PiT ~':J~ "I shall give an introduction which teaches us an important point" (Zeral).iah, HeIjatui:" vii 96). Cf. also below par 39d.

d. There seems to be an incipient tendency to construct she- clauses on the pattern of those introduced by ha-, as in: itD~ mi1~iT?:J mQQ m:J1~n "all the shapes that are derived from it" (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 3). It does not appear to have spread much. e. In the majority of cases the retrospective subject-pronoun IS Inserted, as in ~iPQiT l1tD?? iTQ1' ~1iTtD iTQ ?:J1 "and everything that resembles the language of the Bible" (B. Parl).on, 'Aruldz, p. xxii); Cl:J? n:JtDnQ iT.lJi? ~'iTtD "the thought of their heart, which is for evil" (D. ~ml).i on Ps. v 10); 'Q1i l1tD?:J tD~ ~1iTtD l1i~~Q "Me!a!ron, which means fire in Latin" (Gers., on Prov., i 8).3 SH is in this respect more conservative than N.W.-European Hebrew, where the retrospective pronoun can be inserted or omitted at will, e.g. 1? P1':J ~1iTtD Cl'~ "a man who is trusted by him" (s. Ijasidim, 1099); liT? 1"1~itD lm~ "those who are suitable for them" (ibid., 1109). Nor was it influenced in this respect by contemporary Arabic prose, in which the omission of the restrospective subject pronoun is extremely frequent (cf. Reck., Synt. Verh., p. 528).

f. The relative clause always follows immediately upon its antecedent, even where a lengthy clause breaks the continuity of the major sentence. E.g.: 1:J?iT iTQiT 1mn ':J 1?'~' ~?1 1?'.lJ1' ~? itD~ 1mm 'in~1 "and 2 An imitation of Arabic constructions with an impersonal passive participle of the type al-maghrfftbu 'alaihi (Reek., 206), is found in m.:lr:l pnllir:lil jiiD'?il "the language from which a translation is made"; i''?~ pnllir:lil jiiD'?il "the language into which a translation is made" (Samuel Tibbon, in his preface to the Moreh translation). It seems, however, not to have been currently employed. 3 Contrary to Arabic usage, relative clauses in SH can be not only qualifYing but also descriptive, as in this case, which in Arabic would have to be rendered by means of a f:lal-clause.



after the vain theories that do not help or save, because they are idle, they have gone" (Maim., -!lobe?, ii 25); ilQli t-l;'iliD miil nt-l;i nt-l;~JI Oit-l;il mo' it-l; il'IJil 10 i'It-l;'? "and when there goes out this spirit, which resembles a whiff of air, from the body, then man dies" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 11). g. The relative particle is placed only before the first of two coordinated relative clauses. This is done not only when the two clauses have the same rection with regard to the retrospective pronoun (as in the first quotation of the preceding section), but also when the retrospective pronoun has a different function in each: milOI il'l~ I'? iD'iD 'It-l;il O'?I.l1 ':JJ'? "the light, in which a form is inherent and which benefits the inhabitants of the world" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 16); O"5:l0il On'?li n':Jm OilJ p0.l1nniD "the books with which you occupy yourself, and others than which you leave alone" (Maim., -!lobe?, ii 27).

39. Substantivized Relative Clauses a. As in BH (Ges., 138e; Brock., 368d) and in contrast to MH (Segal, 422) relative clauses can in SH be substantivized without any change in construction: Oil''?.l1 O'5:lil.l1 O'O:ln O:J't-l;iD "those who are not clever are more numerous than they" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 2); .l1ilJ nJ:lJ iiU~ il'il ~" i1iU.l1r.li1 '''I'? "but for its emerging into reality, that which existed potentially would not have been known" (ibid., p. 9); I:JOO '?~:Jm'? nJ:l I'? rt-l; 'iDt-l;1 ':J.l1i1 IPiD.l1J "by oppressing the poor man and him who has no power to save himself from him" (D. ~ml:J.i on Ps. xl).

h. These may be dependent on prepositions: 'JIJ r:::n~' 'iU~r.l int-l; rt-l; ... 'It-l;, Oil''?.l1 "no one of those whose passions rule them is worthy ... " (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 14a); iD' 'iDt-l;'? iliD.l1n t-l;'? ml~OJ nil~ rt-l; rJil'? J'? I'? "there is no trouble involved in the negative commandments for him who has sense to understand" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 10); 1':J5:l'? 'iDt-l;'? iDl,'5:l i1iil PI05:lil "this verse is an explanation to that which (or: the one which) precedes it" (D. J5..iml:J.i on Ps. i 6); m.l1'ilO Oil'? t-l;IJ'iDJ Ci1'iD.l10 '?.l1 Oip5:l'iD t-l;'? "not that He punishes them for their deeds by the evils that befall them" (Gers., De'oth, f. 8a; cf. below under rn). c. Ha-clauses: OilJ 'i1i:Jil O'nJiDO Oil "they praise him who is careful about them" (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 16b); O':J.l1:J O:J't-l;iDl O'O'?iD O':J.l1:Jil



~'?~:l "those who respond are hale, and those who do not respond perish" (id., Megillah, p. 115); ~~" ~'ntD :ltD,nn nl'~ p ?l' "therefore

he who thinks it transitive is mistaken" (B. Ezra, Saphah Berurah, f. 24a); ]i10 in~? nO'i ':J'~ rll':li~O i:l,nOn ~~9' "thus that which is combined from the four of them does not resemble any of them" (Maim., Yesode ha-Torah, iv 2).

d. It appears that the asyndetic relative participles described above (par. 38c) could also be substantivized. One might, however, prefer to take the participles in the following quotations as substantivized attributive participles: 'rm~p:l ni,n iO'? tD'tD ':J~O "for there are some who learn the Law in their youth" (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 17a, equivalent to ... iO'? ~'ntD '0 tD'); ... niO?O ~'n itD~ n:l ro~o, ni,m iO'? "one who studies the Law and believes in it, and who teaches it ... " (ibid.). e. When a substantivized relative clause is employed as a participle, the subject may be the sentence-anaphoric ~'n (which in SH can be employed only in this construction): ':J'n1:li no~ itD~ ~'n "this is what our Rabbis said" (B. I:Iiyya, Megillah, p. 20); iO'~ ~':l:JntD ~'n "that is what the Prophet means by saying" (Maim., Yesode ha- Torah, i 4); 'niO~tD no ~'m "and that is what I meant by saying" (Gers., on Job xxi 34), the last with pseudo-antecedent, cf. below under g). This construction occurs in N.W.-European Hebrew, e.g. iO~tD ~'n' ntDo "and that is what Moses meant by saying" (Rashi on Gen. xlix 13) and must have been taken over from there. It may, however, be found in older types of MH, though it does not appear in the Mishnah.!

f. A further development of this is the employment of ~'n as subject to a predicative substantive clause: no,o, "i~ ~i~ ':J:l ,:JOO ,np' ,ni,n ,:JOO nO?'tD ~'m "people take his fruit and good example, i.e., they learn from him his knowledge of the Law" (D. ~ml:ti on Ps. i 3). This looks like a rendering of the Arabic dhiilika anna or huwa anna (Reck., 195). Possibly the extension of the construction to This construction is certainly not connected with the Talmudic Aramaic use of as copula before a substantivized relative clause employed as predicate as in: ,., 'lJ:::l'~i ~1i1 ~ii1 "that is just what is doubtful to me". Such sentences have in every case a subject preceding the ~1i1 (cf. Schlesinger, p. 221). The same idiom as in SH occurs in Arabic in phrases of the type huwa 'lladhf gala "that is what he said". I




conjunctional clauses took place under the influence of the similarity between Arabic huwa lladhl and huwa anna. g. Much more frequendy, MH usage (Segal, 422) is followed and the substantivized clause given a pseudo-antecedent ("correlative", Brock., 377ft'). This may be, as normally in MH, the interrogative pronoun: 2 ~1l1 1'; tD'tD 'rJ tDP~'; "to search for one who had a fowl" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 6); i1~ 1'rJ~rJ 1j'~tD 'rJ'; i11rJ';rJ "he teaches it to one who does not believe in it" (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. l7a); 1n1~ n1~r ~~'; 'jj'1'tD 'rJ n1~r ~~'; 1'1' "may our Rock be forbearing to him who is forbearing towards me" (J. ~ml:ti, s. ha-Galuy, p. 2); 1n~i1~~ nt;)~ntD 'rJ~ ••• fll'ni1 "take counsel with one in whose affection you have confidence" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 6). With plural predicate by constructio ad sensum: ';t;)~'; 1';1ntD'tD 'rJ~ i1~'i1 i1'P' m~ n"'tDi1 n'rJ "the like of this often happens to those who endeavour to frustrate the decisions of God" (Gers., De'oth, f. 9b).

h. With non-personal subject implied, the neutric interrogative is, of course, employed: n1tD, ~1i1tD i1rJ n11~rJ~ 10'j~i1tD tD' "some include among commandments things that are merely permitted" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 6); i1tDlItD i1rJ ';~ i1tDlI 1'1i1 1rJ ')usdy he did all he has done" (B. Parl:ton, 'Arukh, p. xxii); 1'j'tDrJ 1l111' ~'; 1mrJ lI11' ~';tD i1rJ "a thing of which the nature is unknown-its accidental features are perforce unknown" (Gers., Mil~amoth, f. 4a); i1rJ~ n'i1'?~i1 i1J1~i1 cr'?tDi1'? 1'1~lI~ Cl~'~tD "to achieve the divine intention concerning the purpose for which He created them" (id., De'oth, f. 9b); i11prJ~tD i1rJ 1np'; Cl~lI~tD i1rJ Cl1prJ~ "they took the features of the accident for the features of the essence" (Zeral:tiah, He-ljaluz, p. 96). A rather unusual constructio ad sensum, giving the substantivized clause the function of a plural because it represents a plural noun, is found in: 1mlljrJ ~'; Cl':I1jllm1 Cl'lI1:1l1:1i1 Clm mrJ CllljrJ'; Cl'~';rJ 'j~ l'1tD i1rJ n1rJ~nJ pOllmrJ

"there did not prevent him from studying the sciences those things which usually prevent princes therefrom, namely lusts and pleasures" (S. Tibbon, Eccl.-Comm., f. 16a). For relative clauses of this type employed as substantive clauses, see above par. 36, n. 1.

2 It occurs already in BH, though rarely, e.g., Ex. xxxii 33, 2 Sam xx 11, and twice in Ecc!. (cf. Brock., 377a). It is found in all Aramaic dialects.



i. Already in MH, a certain confusion is to be noticed between these substantivized relative clauses preceded by an interrogative pronoun and the dependent questions (cf. Segal, DiMu/c, 425). Indeed it is found even among the few cases where the construction is employed as a Mishnaism in Eccl. 1'1n~ i1'i1'1D i10:l m~1~ "to see what shall be after him" (Eccl. iii 22). The confusion continues in N.W.-European Hebrew: 11'JIDi11D i1J1r 1r'~ Cl'~'1E)i1 ,~ Cl'1'JO "the debauchees tell me which courtesan they have hired" (S. /fasidim, 80). It is remarkable that such relative clauses standing for dependent questions are so rare in SH. E.g., l~ i11plD i10 n'~1 "you have seen what happened to you" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 9); 'n~:lOID i10 nJ)1' "you know what I suffered" (ibid., p. 10). k. As in the Aramaic dialects (Brock., 378bc) the interrogative pronouns as pseudo-antecedents became weakened with time and were replaced by demonstratives. zeh is used in this way in MH: i11Dl7' i10 ~~O ~~ID i1r "what should he do that did not find" (Sanh. iii 8), and rarely also in N.W.-European Hebrew: :l1~ 1n1' ~1i11D i1r~ In:l 1n "give your daughter to the one that is better" (S. /fasidim, 1142). It is not very frequent in SH: i1'1:l1D plD1ni1 i1rO :l1~ ~~ 11D' n:l np1~i1 "he who marries a Jewess is better than the one who falls in love with a captive woman" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 6); 'J~E) ~l7 ~1i11D i1r1 ~1:l' ~~ Cl'O "and the one that stands on rivers of water shall not wither" (D. ~m}:li on Ps. i 3).3

1. As the pronoun for the nearer object, so that for the farther object can serve as pseudo-antecedent from MH onwards. In its only occurrence in the Mishnah it has still the full demonstrative meaning: i11rl7i1 nnE) ~l71D 1m~~ Cli1~ r~:l "they come to those that are at the gate of the courtyard" (Sanh. xi 2). In a Tosephta-passage it is already used as pure pseudo-antecedent: 11J1J 1m~ r11p ~~i1 n':l 1'i11D 1rI1~~ •.. ~11P i1'i1 i111i1' '1 "him whom the Hillelites call a glutton, R. Judah used to call ... " (Tosephtah, ed. Zuckermandel, Niddah, ix 19), and it is frequent in Midrashic literature of the Amoraic period (cf. Ben-Yehudah, p. 441). In N.W.-European Hebrew: 1:J~1D 1m~J "like those we have" (Rashi on Shabbath 84a); Fn:l:l 1'i11D Cln1~ "those who were in their houses" :3 In Modern Colloquial Hebrew, i1t is mostly employed as pseudo-antecedent, probably under the influence of European languages (German "deIjenige welcher", Yiddish "der was").



(Solomon b. Simon in Kreuzziige, p. 2); l'1i1 n~ '~'iD Dn1~ "people who will give false judgment" (s. /fasidim, 1379); 11jJ~iD i1r "the one opposite you" (ibid., 1142). It is, in fact, the most frequent word for this purpose in that dialect. In SH, it is comparatively rare, and seems to be lacking completely in some authors: '?~l'rJiD' n1~1~J "i1iD Dn1~ "people who were in Moslem countries" (J. J>iml;i, S. ha-Galuy, p. 3); D'10nmiD Dn1~ 'rJ~ 1rJ''? "like those who try to appear pious by saying" (Gerondi, Sennons, ( 23b). The peculiar Arabic man . .. min or mii ... min construction replacing attributive relative clauses (Reek., 211) seems to have been introduced into Hebrew first by the translators, and is frequent in authors of the second period. It was adapted to Hebrew idiom by substituting iD i1rJ for the Arabic relative mii.4 E.g. ,JJ l"ji1iD i1rJ ... n'tI;1 1J~ i1'?'"Di1 1rJ P Dj ,'1ntl; "you have seen what honour fell to our lot after that" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 4); ~1'Ji1 lJ'niD i1rJJ ... 11"JiDrJ 'J~ '1'J~rJ "I adjure you by the respect for me that God had commanded you" (ibid., p. 10); D'1J1i1rJ mi1 1~0i1 ''?'?~iD i1rJ m'nnJ ... p1~ D"J".lii1 "Chapter ... completing the theoretical matters contained in this book" (Gers., Milbamoth, ( 48b); 'J'rJ~i1'? ,'?'ni11 ,''?.li ,'?1jiD i1rJ i11'pm n~rJ m~i1 nl'ji1rJ "the fact that they were brought up in the habit to believe that the truth can be discovered by this type of inquiry" (ibid. 4a). Ill.

4 Besides SH, only Nabataean has this construction, no doubt also by borrowing from the Arabic. Just as in SH, a pseudo-antecedent is employed: i'?'n' 'i na j'iJi la nJi 1El'?n'? "all male children that will be born to this Khalaf" (Brock., 378a).



40. Conditional Clauses a. Asyndetic conditional clauses (Ges., 159b Segal, 484) are rare in SH, except in the more Mishnaic style of Maimondes' Mishneh Torah. Even in that book they are much less common than in MH, e.g. 1'? ''?mQi!l 1lJ C1i!lQ rr 1J'~ i1J1i!ln i1i!llJ1 ni:J i1J r~i!l i1i!llJ n1~Q '?lJ C11~ 1JlJ

"If a man transgresses a positive commandment which is not punishable by extirpation and repents, then his sin is forgiven even before he moves from his place" (Teshubah, i 4). h. The only type of asyndetic construction which is common in SH is the one in which the protasis is a substantivized relative clause, as in MH (Segal, 442) and Arabic (Reek., 257.2). As in MH, the subject of the apodosis need in such cases not be identical with that of the protasis: 1i11m ~'i1 J'? 1'? ill' C1~ 'i1 ni1nJ 1'Qn m1i1i1 "if one always ponders over the Law, it will show him the way, if he has any sense" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 13); i1'i11 ... C1'Q'i1 1~i!lJ 1i!l5)J mlJQi1 '?Ji1 '1J1 '?:JQ 1J1i!l'?1 1'5) 1Qi!l ~1i1i!l ..• 1n'JlJn "if one fasts on other days, then let his fast consist in refraining from idle talk" (B. I:Iiyya, Hegyon, f. 15a); l'?Qi1 1JJ:J C1'1J1 1J1Qi!l 'Q 1Q:J n'QQ 11J1i1 IQ ill' "some talk is deadly, as when one speaks against the king" (Falaq., MebaMesh f. 19a); C1i1''?lJ 01lJ:J' ~'? C1'1'Q'?m 1J'Ji1 ~'?1 1Q'?i!l J1i1 "if a teacher teaches something, and the pupils do not understand, let him not be angry with them" (Maim., Talmud Torah, iv 4). c. The conjunction introducing the protasis of syndetic relative clauses is C1~ for real conditions, as in all other types of Hebrew. For hypothetical conditions, either the BH 1'? (Ges., 159 1) or the MH 1'?~ (Segal, 490, also Eccl. vi 6, Esth. vii 4). Very frequently, however, C1~ is used in hypothetical conditions as well as in real ones. This was common in BH (list of cases K6nig, 390t), I but in MH the two kinds of clause were sharply distinguished, and C1~ employed only


Similarly in Talm. Aramaic (Schlesinger, p. 270), in Syriac, and always in



for real conditions (cf. Nodel, Der ;::usammengeset;::te Sat;::, 43d). The BH confusion was reintroduced in the European writings of the Gaonic period, e.g. r1~iJ'; ';1:1' i1'i1 1i1J ~i1P ~1i11D '~ ';:1 i'Oi1 ';17 1Jn'J C~ C';117 "if they were given in their proper order, anyone who read them could create a world" (Midrash Tehillim on Ps. iii 1, ed. Buber 1891; the print Warsaw 1865 has '';~';~). It is frequent in N.W.European Hebrew, especially in Rashi (cf. Avinery, p. 204), and was taken over into SH from there.

d. Examples: ';e!)J m';r~i1 m:1 i1'i1 ~'; C~ C';117'; ~J ';1J~i1 i1'i1 ~'; "the Flood would not have come into the world if the power of the constellations had not been annulled first" (B. I:Iiyya, Schwarz-Festschr., p. 28); rp'rJ i'O'; C':1'i~ 1'i1 ~'; C'P"~ ';~ilD' ';:1 1'i1 C~ "if all Jews were righteous, they would not require the penal and civil laws" (B. Ezra, Yesod Mora, p. 3); P 1~1D i1'i1 ~'; 'iJ17 i1'i1 C~ "if he had been a Hebrew, he would not have been called by that name" (J. ~mI:ti, Zikkaron, p. 4); Ci':1~ r1"i1 ~'; C'in~ ,'J cm~ i1~1i r1"i1 C~ "if you had seen them in other people's hands, you would not have recognized them" (J. Tibbon, Testament, p. 4); i1i1r1i1 i1';'171i1 i1~ P iJ'i1 i1'i1 C~ 1D'~i1 m'; . .. "if it were so, what good would the Law ... be to that man?" (Maim., flobe?, ii 26); i'10~1 ';J:l1~ Ci1i1 C'iJ'i1 r117:1i1 i1'i1 ~'; C~ C~1J Cie!) i117','i1 Ci1J i1'i1r11D Pr1' ~'; "if the emergence of those things were not orderly and according to a plan, it would not be possible for them to be known before they happen" (Gers., De'oth, f. 8a). e. The negative of 1'; is, as in MH (Segal, DiMu~, 454), employed mainly with a single noun following in the meaning of "were it not for".2 The particle used is, however, not the MH 1';1';~ or '';~';~, but the BH '';1';, which has this construction only once in the Bible: 'r~ . .. 1J'; i1'i11D 'i1 '';1'; "had it not been for the Lord who was on our side" (Ps. cxxiv 1, 2) in a passage that betrays strong Mishnaic influence. 3

Mandaic (Brock., 428b). The hypothetical character is in these, as in SH (below under 2), expressed by the tense. In colloquial Arabic lau can, on the contrary, be employed with real conditions (Brock., 426b). 2 ,.".,~ is not followed by a nominal clause, as Segal states, but the ~., contained in the conjunction together with the following noun constitutes an existential onemember sentence (Brock., 434a), in which the noun stands in the nominative, as in the Arabic laula with the nominative, e.g. laulii anta "were it not for thee" (cf. Reek., 264.2). 3 Further instances may exist in Is. i 9, Ps. cvi 23, cxix 92. In each of these the



Examples: Cl'pnr.:l "W1n n'n ~, ni'~n "" "Were it not for form, the hyle would not continue its existence" (B. J:liyya, Hegyon, f. 2); n':lpn "" ... i1r Cl'l1'" ':J"n ~, "we would not have known this ... were it not for the tradition" (B. Ezra, imJ:Ii, Hosea Comm., p. 17).

1060 1070 1080 1090

1020 1030 1040 1050

940 950 960 970 980 990 1000 1010


Samuel Nagid B. Gabirol

I:Iai Gaon

oB. Chiquitilla oB. Abitur

Mena}:lem b. Saru~ Dunash b. Labrat

Saadiah Gaon

The East

Isaac b. Reuben Isaac Albalia

B. Ghayyath


°Mena}:lem I:Ielbo

°Moses Darshan


Gershom b. Judah


o A\:limaa~



b. Pal tiel

(The dates indicated are those of death. Many of these are only approximate. Dates of particular uncertainty are marked by a ° before the name of the person.)






~ Cl





1210 1220



1100 1110 1120 1120 1130 1140 1150 1160 1170 1180


Abraham Maimon


The East

(Table cont.)

Meir Abulafia

Josef b. '~nin °Ibn Zabara al-I:Iarizi °Isaac of Catalonia Samuel Tibbon David ~mJ:!i

Abraham b. Ezra Joseph ~mJ:!i

'judah Hadassi

Abraham b. Da'ud °Benjamin of Tudela Moses ~mJ:!i J udah Tibbon

Abraham b. I:Iiyya


Moses b. Ezra Solomon b. S~bel


Eleazar Worms

J udah I:Iasid


Jacob Tarn; Rashbam

Crusade Chroniclers



°Solomon Parhon

JeraJ:!meel MenaJ:!em b. Solomon

Nathan b. YeJ:!iel (111,1))














1280 1290

Aaron b. Jos.

°Isaac Israeli Asher b. JeJ:!iel

°Todros Abulafia Josef b. Chiquitilla Moses de Leon Solomon Adret (Rashba) °Isaac Aboab °Ibn Sahula

Isaac b. La!:if Abraham Abulafia °Shemtob Falaguera

'judah b. 'Abbas Nal)manides

Tanl:mm Jerush.

1260 1270


oB. Shabbethai °Abraham b. I:Iisdai

The East



(Table cont.)

°Moses Tako


°Abba Mari J>.alonymos b. J>.alon

Levi b. Abraham °Estori ha-ParJ:!i

°Gershom b. Sol.

Moses Tibbon

°Abraham Bedershi 'joseph Ezobi



MenaJ:!em Recanati Benjamin b. Judah °Immanuel Romi

°ZeraJ:!iah Ben Hillel of Verona

'jeJ:!iel b.

'jacob Anatoli °Moses of Salerno


~ ..., 0

(Xl (Jl








1430 1440

1390 1400 1410 1420

1360 1370 1380

Aaron b. Elijah

Joseph Albo Simon Duran

I:Iisdai Crescas ZeraJ:!iah Halevi °Solomon Alammi °Prophiat Duran Moses Botarel

Nissim Gerondi °Samuel Zaqah MenaJ:!em b. ZeraJ:!

':Joseph NaJ:!mias °Isaac Pulqar °Moses b. Judah



Isaac I:Ialawa

The East



(Table cont.)

':Jacob Zarphati

°Isaac de Lates

Moses N arboni

Joseph Kaspi °Isaac I:Ielo Jedaiah Bedershi Gersonides


Yomtob Miihlhausen

N.W.-Europe Italy





::l ()






1510 1520

1460 1470 1480 1490 1500


The East

(Table cont.)

Messer Leon


Shemtob b. Shemtob Saadiah b. Danon Isaac Abarbanel Abraham Zaccuto °Solomon b. Verga

N.W.-Europe Moses da Rieti


°I:Iayyim b. Musa







o ::J 8

BIBLIOGRAPHY (a) Sources Abraham Maimonides, Letter on the Moreh Nebukhim, in the Jlobe;;. Teshuboth ha-Rambam, ed. Lichtenberg, Leipzig 1859, part iii, fols. 15a-2Ia. B. 'Abbas (Judah b. Samuel), Ya'ir Nethib, Bodleian MS., Neubauer 1280. i\I:limaa~, The Chronicle if Ahimaaz, ed. M. Salzman. Columbia University Oriental Studies, no. xviii. New York 1924. B. Da'ud (Abraham), Sepher ha-Jlabbalah, ed. A Neubauer in Mediaeval Jewish Chronicles i (Oxford 1887), pp. 47-84. B. Ezra (Abraham), Saphah Berurah, ed. G.H. Lippmann, Fiirth 1839. Sepher ?,aI,loth, ed. G.H. Lippmann, Fiirth 1827. Sepher ha-Shem, ed. G.H. Lippmann, Fiirth 1834. Yesod Mora, ed. S. Waxman, Jerusalem 1938. , Commentaries on the Bible, quoted from the Warsaw Mif:rra'oth Gedoloth. B. I:Iiyya (Abraham), Megillath ha-megalleh, ed. A Poznanski and M. Guttmann, Berlin 1924. Hegyon ha-nephesh, ed. B. Freimann, Leipzig 1860. Ijibbur ha-meshi~ah weha-tishboreth, ed. M. Guttmann, Berlin 1912-13. Sepher ha-'ibbur, ed. H. Filipowski, London 1851. , Letter on astrology, ed. AZ. Schwarz in the Festschrift fUr Adolf Schwarz, Berlin 1917, pp. 23-36. B. Parl).on, MaI,lbereth he-'aiukh, ed. S.G. Stern, Pressburg 1844. B. Verga (Solomon b. Judah), iii1ii' O~iD, ed. M. Wiener, Hanover 1855-6. B. Z:ar~ah (Samuel), Mikhlol Yophi, Bodleian MS., Neubauer 1296. Crescas (I:Iisdai), Or Adonai, Vienna 1859. David l}.iml).i, Hosea-Commentary, ed. H. Cohen, Columbia University Oriental Studies, no. xx., New York, 1929. - - , Commentary on Psalms r-xli, ed. S.M. Schiller-Szinessy, Cambridge 1883. - - , Mikhlol, ed. I. Rittenberg, Lyck 1842. al-Fakhir (or al-Fakhkhar, Judah b. Joseph), Letter in Jlobe;;. Teshuboth ha-Rambam, 111 Ib-5b. Falaq. (Shemtob b. Falaquera or Palquiera), Sepher ha-Meba#esh, ed. M. Tama, The Hague 1779. - - , Iggereth ha-wikkual,l asher ben ha-torah weha-~okhmah, Prague 1610. - - , Iggereth ha-musar, ed. AM. Habermann, Jlobe;;. tal yad no. xi., Jerusalem 1936. Gerondi (Nissim b. Reuben), Sermons, Venice 1596. Gersonides (Levi b. Gershom), Mil~amoth Adonai, Riva di Trento 1560. , Sepher ha-de'oth weha-middoth, ed. S. Mahariah, Warsaw 1865. - - , Pentateuch-Commentary, Venice 1547. - - , Commentary on Prav. and Job, in Mi~ra'oth Gedoloth, Warsaw. I:Iayyim b. Musa, Letter to his son, ed. D. Kaufmann, Beth Talmud ii (1882) 117-25. Joseph l}.iml).i, Sepher Zikkaron, ed. W. Bacher, Berlin 1888. - - , Sepher ha-Galuy, ed. HJ. Mathews, Berlin 1887. Joseph Nal).mias, Commentary on Aboth, ed. M.L. Bamberger, Berlin 1907. Judah b. Tibbon, Testament, ed. M. Steinschneider, Berlin 1852. Kreuzziige, Hebriiische Berichte uber die Judenveifolgungen wiihrend der Kreu;::zuge, ed. A. Neubauer and M. Stern, Berlin 1892.



Maimonides (Moses b. Maimon), Mishneh Torah, Berlin 1880 (quoted by title of section, chapter and paragraph, without title of work). ~-, Letters, in Jlobe;;. etc., Leipzig 1859, pt. ii. ~-, Responsa, ed. AH. Freimann, Jerusalem 1934. Moses b. Tibbon, Commentary on Canticles, Lyck 1874. Rashi (Solomon b. Isaac) Commentary on the Pentateuch, ed. A Berliner, Frankfurt a.M. 1905. ~-, Commentaries on Bible and Bab. Talmud quoted from Avinery, Hekhal Rashi (cf. bibliography "b"). Saadiah (b. Joseph, Gaon), Fragments from the Egron and the Sepher ha-Galuy, ed. A Harkavy, Studien und Mittheilungen v., St. Petersburg 1891. ~-, Fragments from Sepher ha-Galuy, ed. S. Schechter, "Saadyana", JQR (O.S.) xiv (1901) 37-63. ~-, Fragments inedits du Sifer Haggaloui, ed. B. Chapira, RE] Ixviii (1914) 1-14. ~-, Polemic against f:liwi al-Balkhi, ed. j. Davidson, New York 1915. Saadiah Danon (or Danan), Treatises, Bodleian MS, Neubauer 2233. Samuel b. Tibbon, Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Bodlcian MS., Neubauer 132. ~-, Preface to the translation of Maimonides' Guide qf the Perplexed, quoted from the print Berlin 1875. Sepher f:lasidim (by Judah b. Samuel l:Iasid), ed. by j. Wistinetzki, Berlin 1891-3. Singer, S., Authorised dairy prqyer book, annotated edition by j. Abrahams, London 1914.

(b) Special Bibliography Works dealing with the history and grammar qf post-Mishnaic Hebrew. Albrecht, K., Zum Lexikon und zur Grammatik des Neuhebraischen. ZA W xix (1899) 135-55, 310-28). (A fairly complete list of deviations from Biblical Hebrew in vocabulary and grammar found in the Tarshish, a collection of poetry by Moses Ibn Ezra. The provenience of these features is not investigated, and no distinction made between Mishnaic or Paytanic material and innovations of the Spanish poets or Ibn Ezra himself.) Avinery, j., '''iDi '?:J'i1. Encyclopaedia in five volumes, containing alphabetically all that Rashi created in the field of language and exegesis. Vo!. i: New words and expressions. Tel-Aviv 1940. (The "dictionary of usages", pp. 197-350, contains a large number of remarks on prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs, and pronouns, with careful documentations from Biblical and Talmudic literature.) Bacher, W., Ueber den sprachlichen Charakter des Maimuni'schen Mischne-Tora. In: Aus dem Wiirterbuche Tauchum Jeruschalmi's, Strassburg 1903. ~-, Zum sprachlichen Charakter des Mischne Thora. In: Moses ben Maimon, ed. Bacher, etc., Leipzig 1914, ii 280 ff. (Deal mainly with vocabulary and idiom, without distinguishing between the innovations of Maimonides' predecessors and those of his own.) Bergstrasser, G., Eirifiihrung in die semitischen Sprachen, Munich 1928. (Short note on pp. 46 and 47 states that mediaeval Hebrew, which was one of the most slovenly of all languages, was much improved by the efforts of the Spanish period.) Cassuto, U., Article "Epoca postbiblica (Neoebraica)" in the Enciclopedia Italiana xiii (1932) 357-8. Goldenthal, j., Grundziige und Beitrage zu einem sprachvergleichenden rabbinisehphilosophise hen Worterbuche, in: Denkschriften der kais. Akad. der Wiss. in Wien, i (1850) 419-53.



Kenaani, j., i''?Pi1 '?iD miD'? i~1~O, Leshonenu x (1938) 21-29. - - , iiElO 'ii1iDO '?ll Cl'Oi1Pi1 Cl'jt!l'E1i1 '?iD n'j1iD'?i1 ClnllEliDi1, Leshonenu x (1938) 173-82.

- - , t!l1'E1'? 'j1'~jii1pj1P ]1'?0, Prospectus, Tel-Aviv 1930.

Kroner, H., Zur Terminologie der arabischen Medizin und zu ihrem zeitgeniissischen hebraischen Ausdrucke, Berlin 1921. Landau, j., Geist und Sprache der Hebraer nach dem zweyten T empelbau, Prague 1822. (A very superficial account of Mishnaic Hebrew.) Levias, D., Article "Hebrew language" in the Jewish Encyclopaedia vi (1904) 306-10. (On mediaeval Hebrew pp. 308-309.) Lipschiitz, E.M., l1iD'?i1 m'?~iD", in Sephathenu i (Odessa 1917) 17--42. (pp. 17-25 on the influence of Aramaic on mediaeval Hebrew.) - - , Vom lebendigen Hebraisch. Berlin 1920. Luzzatto, S.D., Prolegomeni ad una grammatica regionata della lingua ebraica, Padova 1836. (p. 103: "Mediaeval Hebrew ... does not belong to the province of the study of the Hebrew language, but to the critical study of rabbinical writings". Divides Rabbinical Hebrew into six distinct styles that all coexisted in time. No mention of any historical development.) Metmann, L., Die hebraische Sprache. Ihre geschichtliche und lexikalische Entwicklung seit Abschluss des Kanons. Berne Diss. , Jerusalem (1904). (Grammatical and syntactical matters are hardly touched upon, except for Modern Hebrew. On mediaeval Hebrew pp. 40-63, of which pp. 50-63 a list of words from Piyyur, Poetry, Original Hebrew literature of all types and periods, and translations, with many inexactitudes. Metmann claims that the generally employed popular style (in which works?) was that of the historical books of the Bible, which however approached more closely the style of the Mishnah than that of the Bible. The exegetes (Ibn Ezra, Simeon ~ara and B. Helbo!) used a pure Biblical style which avoids every Mishnaic expression. The third style was that of the translators and philosophers, distinguished by idioms that were neither Biblical nor Mishnaic, but Arabic.) Rabin, C., Saadya Gaon's Hebrew prose style, in Essays on Saa4Jia, ed. E. Rosenthal, Manchester 1943. (A list of post-Biblical usages in the /jiwi Polemic, the Egron and the Sepher haGaluy, with parallels from Spanish-Proven~al Hebrew.) Renan, E., Histoire generate des langues semitiques, 5th ed., Paris 1878. On mediaeval Hebrew pp. 164-7. A number of pertinent remarks on the character of the language. Renan objects to the creation of new words in the Spanish period. Nevertheless, he hardly deserved the bitter attack of M. Griinbaum, "Renan iiber die spateren Formen der hebraischen Sprache", in: Semitic Studies in Memory qf A. Kohut, Berlin 1897, pp. 226-34.) Schwarz, A., Der Mischneh Thorah, Karlsruhe 1905. (On pp. 74-94 the language of Maimonides is considered, mainly from an aesthetic point of view.) Sideman A.I., Cl":JOi'? i1i1n nJiDO j1jjO, Sinai VI. 428-38 VII. 96-101. Schirmann, j., Die hebraische Uebersetzung der Maqamen des Hariri. Schriflen der Geschichte for die Wissenschrift des Judentums, no. 37, Frankfurt a/M. 1930. (Deals with Arabisms and post-Biblical elements in al-Harizi's style.) Steinschneider, M., Die hebraischen Uebersetzungen des Mittelalters, Berlin 1893. (Many remarks on linguistic matters, and valuable lexicographical collections in the index of Hebrew words, pp. 1036-45.) Szneider, M., n'miElOi1 n'i:Jlli1 l1iD'?i1, Leshonenu vi (1934) 1933-5, 301-26, vii (1935) 52-73. (Advances the theory that the liturgical language was a direct development of Late Biblical Hebrew, and that Piyyiit. N.W.-European Hebrew, Spanish-Proven~al Hebrew, and the Karaite idiom all derived from it.)



- - , ilr11nnElr1i1:J rilhil n1ln, vo!. i, Wilna 1923, vo!. ii, Tel-Aviv 1939. (See above in preface, p. vii). - - , (O'OPOlQ) lliD?il iDli.JiD n1ln ;:JiD '?p ,ilr11nnElr1i1:J lliD'?il n-lln, 1939 il:J'?'l. The ~1:Ji.J, pp. 1-38, deals with history, particularly with the origins of MH (MH was brought in by immigrants from Edom during the first exile; the il'?l,j nOl:J 'iDl~ wrote in BH the post-exilic books-which were for the 1:J''?':JiDi.J-and in MH the oral law for the people. Reaffirms theory of n'r11'ElO lliD'?, fights against the 1'?i1i.J iD,n (pp. 33-5) (for preferring MH). The syntax deals with the supposed J1iD'? n'r11'ElO, not with modern Hebrew, no examples from modern authors. Torczyner, H., Article "Hebraische Sprache" in the Encyclopaedia Judaica, vii 1031-66. (Devotes to mediaeval Hebrew columns 1061-2, only a few general remarks.) Yellin, D., lO'El 'In:J '?,,':JJ 1:J i1i.J'?iD, Leshonenu vii (1935) 219-45. (Some additional material on the paytanic language.) Wijnkoop, J.D., The Neo-Hebraic language and its literature, JQ.R O.S. xv (1902) 23-55. (Points out the importance of the study of post-Biblical Hebrew for the understanding of the Bible. Stresses mainly similarities between Biblical, Mishnaic, and mediaeval Hebrew, and gives a short sketch of Mishnaic Hebrew from this point of view. Post-Mishnaic features are mentioned only in passing.) Zulay, M., l:J'lO'Elil J1iD'? '?iD ilr11i.J''?, Melila, Manchester, 1944, pp. 69-80. , "j' 'Ol'El:J lliD'? 'll'~: Mitteilungen des Instituts for EifOrschung hebriiischer Dichlung vi. - - , in J1iD'? 'l'lll, ed. H. Yalon, vols. J"iDn-YiDn. Zunz, L., Die synagogale Poesie der Juden des Mittelalters, Berlin 1855-59. (Cr. above p. 11, note 2)

(c) General Bibliography This bibliography includes all works from which one or more quotations occur in the preceding. It does not include books or articles that are only named as titles, or articles in the Jewish Encyclopedia and the Encyclopaedia Judaica. See also Special Bibliography (b).* Aaron b. Joseph, 1:J"iD' ,n:Ji.J, Eupatoria 1834. Abraham Gavison, i1n:JiDi1 'i.Jll, Livorno 1748. Adlerblum, N.H., A stu4J if Gersonides in his proper perspective, New York 1926. Albrecht, K., Die Wortstellung im hebraischem Nominalsatz, ZAW vii (1887) 218-23, viii (1888) 248-63. Assaf, S., Gaonica, Jerusalem 1936. - - , '?"1 'iJ1i'j Cl'Ol " n~i.J 1:J':Jn:Ji.J illl:J'~, Horeb iii (1936) 93-100. Avinery, I., n":Jllil '?ll n'i.J'~il nllEliDil, Leshonenu iii (1931) 273-90. Bacher, W., Die Bibelexegese Moses Maimuni's, Strassburg 1897. - - , Der "PrUfstein" des Menachem b. Salomo, in the Graetz-Jubelschrifl, Breslau 1887, pp. 94-115. Baron, S., Social and religious history cif the Jews, 3 vols., New York 1937. Baumann, F.V., Hebriiische Relativsiitze, Diss. Leipzig 1894. Bauer, H. and Leander, P.*, Historische Grammatik der hebriiischen Sprache des Alten Testamentes, vo!. i, Halle 1918-22. Ben-Yehudah, E., Thesaurus totius hebraitatis, vo!. i-ix, Jerusalem 1910-30. - - , Prolegomena, Jerusalem 1940. Bergstrasser, G., Das hebraische Prafix iD, ZAW xxix (1909) 40-56. Bernstein, S., 'l"n'?~ ililil' ",? r11iDin "r11i.J~pi.J", Horeb i (1934) 179-87.

* Note: Books marked * are quoted by paragraphs.




, n~'j '1 pn~' !:l'iV,n !:l't:l1'El, Tarbiz xi (1939/40) 295-325. Boneh, A., n':l':ln1 r,~n, Tel-Aviv 1938. Brockelmann, C.*, Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen, 2 vols., Berlin 1898-1908. (All quotations without volume-number refer to volume ii.) Brody, H. and Wiener, M., Anthologia Hebraica, Leipzig 1922. Budie, O.R.M., Die hebriiische Priiposition 'ai, Halle 1882. Charles, R.H., "The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, 2 vols., Oxford 1913. ---, A critical and exegetical commentary on the book of Daniel, Oxford 1929. Coplas de Yoc,:ef, ed. j. Gonzalez Ilubera, Cambridge 1935. Cowley, A.E., A concise catalogue of the Hebrew printed books in the Bodleian Library, Oxford 1929. Cowley, E., 'jEln p '~1aiV '1a,n ,~ ,,~ ,j,a ,~, in Harkavy-Festschrift, St. Petersburg 1908, pp. 160-3. Dalman, G., Grammatik des jiidisch-paliistinischen Aramiiisch, 2nd ed., Leipzig 1905. Davidson, j., Saadia's Polemic against Ijiwi al-Balkhi, New York 1915. , nn::Jna ,Eloa ",iV, A.Z. Rabbinowitz Anniversary volume, Tel-Aviv 1924, pp. 83-101. - - , !:l't:l1'Eln nmn" Madda'e ha-Yahaduth i (Jerusalem 1926) 187-95. Delitzsch, F., Zur Geschichte der jiidischen Poiisie vom Abschluss der heiligen SchriJten alten Bundes bis auj die neueste Zeit, Leipzig 1836. Dhorme, P., L'ancien hebreu dans la vie courante, Revue Biblique xxxix (1930) 62-73. Dotan, A., ?,~,p n'n 'iV~-p !:lja~n, Sinai 20 (1957) 280-312, 350-62. Dozy, R., Supplement aux dictionnaires arabes, Leiden 1881. Driver, G.R., Problems of the Hebrew verbal system, Edinburgh 1936. Driver, S.R., Introduction to the literature of the Old Testament, 8th ed., Edinburgh 1909. - - , A treatise on the use of the tenses in Hebrew, 3rd ed., Oxford 1892. Dubnow, S.M., Weltgeschichte des jiidischen Volkes, German translation, 10 vols., Berlin 1927. Dukes, L., Ehrensiiulen und Denksteine zu einem kiirifiigen Pantheon hebriiischer Dichter und Dichtungen, Vienna 1837. Duval, R., La litterature syriaque. [Anciennes litteratures chretiennes ii], Paris 1900. Elbogen, j., Der jiidische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung, Leipzig 1913. - - , Abraham b. Daud als Geschichtschreiber, in j. Guttmann-Festschrift, Leipzig 1915, pp. 186-205. Epstein, A., ,::J::J m::J'iV'1 !:l'j1~jn m,1p' m,1pa, in Harkavy-Festschrift, St. Petersburg 1908, pp. 164-74. - - , !:l"1n'n m'j1a'pa, vo!. i, Vienna 1887. Ewald, H., Ausfiihrliches Lehrbuch der hebriiischen Sprache, 8th ed., Gottingen 1870. Frankl, P., Karaische Studien, neue Folge, MonatsschriJt der Geschichte}iir die WissenschaJt des Judentums xxxi (1882) 1-13, 72-85, 268-75. - - , Article "Karaer" in Ersch und Gruber's Realencyclopaedie, Leipzig 1818-40, Section ii, vo!. xxxiii. Friedlander, j., Der Sprachgebrauch des Maimonides, ein lexikalischer und grammatischer Beitrag zur Kenntniss des Mittelarabischen, pt. i, Frankfurt a.M. 1902. - - , Die arabische Sprache des Maimonides, in Moses ben Maimon i, Leipzig 1908, pp. 421-38. Gardiner, A.H.*, Egyptian grammar, Oxford 1927. Geiger, A., Lehr- und Lesebuch zur Sprache der Mishhna, Breslau 1845. Gesenius' Hebrew grammar as edited by E. Kautzsch*, second English edition by A.E. Cowley, Oxford 1910. Gesenius, W., Hebriiisches und Aramiiisches Handwiirterbuch, bearbeitet von F. Buhl, 16th ed., Leipzig 1915. Giesebrecht, F., Die hebriiische Priiposition Lamed, Halle 1876.




Ginsburger, M., L'exegese biblique des juifs d'Allemagne au moyen age, HUCA vii (1930) 439-56. Goldziher,J., Bemerkungen zur neuhebraischen Poesie,JQR (O.S.) xiv (1902) 719-36. Gross, S., Menahem ben Saruq, ein Beitrag zur Geschichte tier hebrdischen GrammatiJc, Breslau 1872. Hadassi (Judah), i5:l::lil '?::liD~, Eupatoria 1836. Harkavy, A., Studien und Mittheilungen aus der Kaiserlichen offentlichen Bibliothek zu St. Petersburg v. I: Leben und Werke des Saa4Jah Gaon, St. Petersburg 189 I. - - , Fragment einer Apologie des Maimonidischen Cl'11ail 11'n11 ia~a, Zeitschrififiir hebrtiische Bibliographie ii (I897) 125-8. Harris, Z.S., A grammar if the Phoenician language. American Oriental Series, no. 8, New Haven 1936. Horowitz, C., Halachische Schriften der Geonim, pt. 2, Frankfurt a.M. 1881. Jastrow, M., Dictionary if the Targumim, etc., Authorized ed., New York 1925. Jespersen, 0.*, Ana!J!tic 5iJntax, London 1937. Josippon, Ad fidem Mantuae editionis ed. denuo D. Giinzburg, Berdischev 1896- I 9 I 3. Judah b. Bolat, i;;p '?'?::l, Constantinople (1530). Kahan, J., Ueber die verbal-nominale Doppelnatur der hebraischen Participien und Infinitive, Diss. Leipzig 1889. Karpeles, G., Geschichte der jiidischen Literatur, 2 vols., Berlin 1886. Kautzsch, E., Aramaismen im Alten Testament, i. Lexikalischer Teil, Halle 1902. Klatzkin, J., 11'i:::lJ)il il'5:l101'?'5:lil '?iD il'J1'?1m~, Berlin 1926. Klausner, J., iliDinil mi5:l0:::l miDail pJO '?iD 1m'?iD'?11iDil'?, Madda'e ha-Yahaduth i (1926) 163-78. - - , iliDinil 11'i:::lJ)il mi5:l0il '?iD il'i1~Oil, vo!. i, Jerusalem 1930. Koch, A., Der semitische lrifinitiv, eine sprachwissenschojiliche Untersuchung, Stuttgart 1874. Koenig, E., Historisch-comparative hebrdische 5iJntax, Leipzig 1897. Kosovsky, HJ., miDail ]liD'? i;;1~, 2 vols., Jerusalem 1914-27. Krauss, S., Griechische und lateinische Lehnwiirter im Talmud, Midrasch und Targum, Berlin 1898-9. Kropat, E., Die 5iJntax des Autors der Chronik mit der seiner Qy.ellen verglichen. Beihefte zur ZAW no. 16, Giessen 1909. Lerch, E., Historische jranZiisiche 5iJntax. Leipzig 1925-34. Levy, L., Reconstruction des Commentars Ibn Ezra's zu den ersten-Propheten, Diss. Heidelberg 1903. Lichtenstein, Z., ii5:l0 iD1iJ iJ) :)iJ)a:::J 11nil'il 'T::lia 11n'a;;a '?~iiD' 'a' 'i:::Ji:::J Cl'i1J)iD, Tel-Aviv, 1939. Liebermann, S., ed., ~:::li Cl'i:::li iDiia, Jerusalem 1940. Malter, H., Saadia Studies, JQR iii (1913) 487-509. - - , Saadia Gaon, his lift and works, Philadelphia 192 I. Mann, J., TIe Jews in Egypt and Palestine under the Fatimid Caliphs, 2 vols., Oxford 1920-22. - - , TIe Bible as read and preached in the old 5iJnagogue, vo!. i, Cincinnati 1940. Mannes, S., Ueber den Einfluss des Aramaischen auf den Wortschatz der Misnah, pt. i, ~-a, Diss. Erlangen 1897. Margolis, M.L., A manual if the Aramaic language if the Babylonian Talmud. Clavis linguarum semiticarum pars iii, Munich 19 I O. Marmorstein, A., The place of Maimonides' Mishneh Torah in the history and development of the Halachah, in Moses Maimonides: Anglo-Jewish papers, ed. J. Epstein London 1935, pp. 159-74. Matmon-Cohen, J., '?:::l:::l m'?J imli 11'i:::lJ)il, Leshonenu vi (1934) 172-88, vii (I 935) 136-44, 257-65, 349-55, viii (1936) 15-22, 123-30, ix (1937) 65-75. Molin, C., On prepositionen min i bibelhebraiskan, Diss. Upsala 1893. Moses b. Ezra, Kitab al-mudhakara wal-mu\:iaqara, ch. i-iv, ed. by P.K. Kokovtsov in Vostochnrya Zametki, St. Petersburg 1895, pp. 193-200.



, ?~iiD' ni'iD, trans!' by B.-Z. Halpern, Leipzig 1924. Moses b. Maimon, i11~r:li1 i~O, ed. M. Bloch, Paris 1888. Moses b. Maimon, Das Buch der Gesetze ... nebst der hebraischen Uebersetzung des Schelomoh benJoseph ibn Ajub (sic.), ed. M. Peritz, pt. i, Diss. Leipzig 1881. Neubauer, A, Catalogue qf the Hebrew manuscripts in the Bodleian Library, Oxford 1886. - - , Documents in edits xviii: Nouvelles collections de consultations casuistiques, RE] xii (1886) 80-94. Nbldeke, T., Die semitischen Sprachen, 2nd ed., Leipzig 1899. --*, Compendious .'iYriac Grammar, London 1904. - - , Grammatik der neusyrischen Sprache am Urmia-See und in Kurdistan, Leipzig 1868. - - , Zur Grammatik des classischen Arabisch. Denkschriften der K. Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien, Phi!.-hist. C!. Vo!. xlv, Abh. 2, Vienna 1897. Nodel, j.*, Der ;;.usammengesetzte Sat;;. im Neuhebraischen, Frankfurt a.M. 1928. Pinsker, S., i11'J1r:l'P 'Cl1P?, Vienna 1860. Pir~e R. Eliezer, ed. j.E. Stand, Lemberg 1870. Poznanski, SA., 1~1i'p 'iDJ~, in Harkavy Festschrift, St. Petersburg 1908, pp. 175-220. Reckendorf, H.*, Die syntaktischen Verhaltnisse des Arabischen, Leiden 1895-8. - - , Arabische .'iYntax, Heidelberg 1921. - - , Ueber Paronomasie in den semitischen Sprachen, Giessen 1909. Renan, H. and Neubauer, A, Les rabbins fran-;ais du 14me siecle. Histoire litteraire de la France, vols. xxvii (Paris 1877) and xxxi (1893). Rosenmann, M., Das Lehrhaus des R. Nissim Gerondi in Barcelona, SchwarzFestschrift, Berlin 1917, pp. 489-98. Roth, C., A short history qf the Jewish people, London 1936. Rowley, H.H., The Aramaic qf the Old Testament, Oxford 1929. Sachs, H., Die Partikeln der Mischna, Diss. Giessen 1897. Sachs, M., Die religiose Poesie der Juden in Spanien, Berlin 1845. Schechter, S., Geniza Specimens. The oldest collection of Bible difficulties by aJew, J(LR (O.S.) xiii (1901) 345-74. Schirmann, j., Die hebraische Uebersetzung der Maqamen des Hariri. Schri.ften der Geschichte flir die Wissenschafl des Judentums, no. 37, Frankfurt a.M. 1930. Schlesinger, M., .'iYntax der aramaischen Sprache des babylonischen Talmuds. Verbffentlichungen der A Kohut-Stiftung, vo!. I, Leipzig 1928. Segal, M., Misnaic Hebrew and its relation to Biblical Hebrew and to Aramaic, J(LR (O.S.) xx (1909) 647-737. - - , Hebrew in the period of the Second Temple, International Journal qf Apocrypha, 1910, 79-82. - - , i1'nn?1i11 i1~~1r:l miDr:li1 riD?, Madda'e ha-Yahaduth i (1926) 30-44. --*, A grammar qf Mishnaic Hebrew, Oxford 1927. --*, i1JiDr:li1 PiD? pnp', Tel-Aviv 1936. - - , ~i'O P ?iD miD?, Leshonenu vii (1935) 100-120. Sellin, E., Die verbal-nominale Doppelnatur der hebraischen Participien und Infinitive, Diss. Leipzig 1889. Sepher ha-ca~amim (wrongly ascribed to Abraham ibn Ezra), ed., M. Grossberg, London 1901. Steinschneider, M., Catalogus librorum hebraeorum in bibliotheca bodleiana, Berlin 1852-60. - - , Die arabische Literatur der Juden, Frankfurt a.M. 1902. Stern, S.G., '1~1 11i~p '1 i1"i1 p1iO '1 ::lp'" P C1nJr:l '1'r:l?n i11::l1iDn i~O, Vienna 1870. Stevenson, W.B., A grammar qf Palestinian Jewish Aramaic, Oxford 1924. Strack, H.L., Einleitung in Talmud und Midraf, 5th ed., Munich, 1930. Strauss, D., Sprachliche Studien in den hebraischen Sirachfragmenten, Diss. Zurich 1900. Strauss, L., The literary character of the Guide for the Perplexed, in Essays on Maimonides, ed. S.W. Baron, New York 1941, pp. 37-91.


Szneider, M., '~iPDil plipi'? 'nliDDil plipiil on" Leshonenu iii (1931) 15-28. - - , ?t1i~liD ]liD'? n'~ipDil ]liD'?il i1r1'i1il, Leshonenu viii (1936) 112-22.


Targum on Canticles, ed. R.H. Melamed, JQR x (N.S.) 377-410, xi 1-20, Xli 57-Ill. Taylor, C., Sqyings rif the }ewish Fathers, Cambridge 1877-1900. Tobia b. Eliezer, ~l0 np'? iDiiD, ed. S. Buber, vo!. i, Wilna 1880. Tosephta, ed. M.S. Zuckermandel, Trier 1882. Waxman, M., A history rif Jewish literature, vo!. i, New York 1930. Wilson, A.M., The particle n~ in Hebrew, Hebraica vi (1890) 139-150, 212-224. Wright, W., A grammar rif the Arabic language, 3rd ed., 2 vols., Cambridge 1896-8. Zadokite Fragment, ed. S. Schechter, Documents ofJewish Sectaries, vo!. i, Cambridge 1910. ZarJ:ii, J., C1'Ell,"il iil, novel, Jerusalem 1940. Zucker, M., ?''''?iDD ~iD~" 0l'Elil n~ ll~j il'i.110 ~i ~n:::l 'D ijJ Tarbiz 27 (1958) 61-82. Zunz, L., Die gottesdienstlichen Vortriige der Juden, Berlin 1832. - - , Zur Geschichte und Literatur der Juden, vo!. i, Berlin 1845.




Deuteronomy Joshua

I Samuel 2 Samuel

I Kings

2 Kings Isaiah


2.18 6.16 16.2 29.19 30.18 41.27 46.26 47.14 49.13 8.22 12.39 14.12 28.10 30.34 32.33 5.23 16.35 22.18 35.6 22.8 27.9 32.39 4.4 7.5 9.7 17.40 20.8 5.24 18.3 19.20 20.11 4.13 8.8 11.30 15.13 18.32 5.3 1.9 9.1 13.9 16.10 23.12 28.10

159 III 144 159 132 166 130 109 135 159 121 159 88 38 (65) 176 133 88 (I) 181 145 113 110 135 88 (I) 61 (25) 17, 165 94 (30) 135 124 (5) 159 145 176 164 181 121 62 (27) 121 124 (5) 180 93 155 (I) 113 (I) 135 126 (3)


Amos Micha Habakkuk Psalms

Proverbs Job

Canticles Ruth

Numbers (enclosed) in brackets refers to footnotes.

29.17 32.4 32.10 39.2 42.3 42.24 43.13 20.6 32.5 48.36 49.8 49.20 50.31 6.10 8.6 1.10 1.6 7.6 37.23 37.25 50.4 58.9 60.6 68.36 94.17 106.11 106.23 119.92 124.1 124.2 7.25 6.17 7.11 10.3 11.17 13.9 16.4 19.23 24.1 27.3 31.26 4.5 2.22

110 29 (7) 126 (3) 17 (36) 142 (2) 135 135 135 135 135 167 94 (3) 167 164 (6) 155 (I) 135 10 131 114 (I) 132 166 37 (56) 164 10 181 8 (4) 180 180 180 180 91 (4) 167 132 (I) 163 17 159 36 (52) 135 114 (I) 168 16 (23) 150 159

198 Lamentations Ecclesiastes



2.5 2.22 3.15 3.22 6.6 7.12 7.26 9.67 12.11 2.9 4.2 7.4

17 (36) 109 123 (3) 178 179 166 107 (2) 123 114 (I) 160 164 179

Daniel Ezra Nehemiah I Chronicles 2 Chronicles

8.8 1.2 2.42 3.19 4.15 4.21 6.6 7.70 15.2 5.11 20.6 20.22

164 104 (5) 104 (5) 160 22 (10) 155 (I) 109 104 (5) 164 (6) 164 135 167



7.4 7.6 11. 7 16.7 4.4 8.4 13.8 1.3 1.4 4.1 2.3 10.3 11.9 8.6 11.4 5.7 7.2 4.3 9.6 3.7 l.l 2.1 2.2 3.8 4.5 7.10 8.4 11.2 2.10 2.5 4.3 8.5

163 160 160 II (20) 123 (2) 114 (2) 165 101 (I) 128 (2) 129 (3) 103 (4) 101 (I) 124 (4) 132 (I) 160 124 (4) 98 (2) 160 132 (2) 132 (I) 93 86 86 177 160 101 (I) 160 177 120 (I) 132 (I) 123 142

Ben Sira 10.23 I !.I 9

165 167

Mishnah Aboth

Baba Batrah

Baba Mqi'a Baba J>.ama Bekhoroth Berakhoth Ginin


Horayoth Zebal,Iim J:Iagigah J:Iullin J:Iallah Yebamoth

1.3 1.6 2.1 2.12 5.9 5.18 5.2 5.9 8.1 8.2 8.5 10.2 1.4 5.4 !.I 1.2 4.5 7.2 9.5 9.8 3.5 6.11 6.12 7.1 1.1 9.1 11.3 2.1 5.3


2.5 5.1

129 (3) 132 (I) 135 I 90 (3) 90 (3) 124 (4) 101 (I) 103 (4) IQ] (I) 160 124 (4) 160 160 93 142 123 124 (4) 124 (4) 121 129 164 85 129 160 160 160 161 164 144 132 (I) 126 (4)

Yadayim Kil'aim Ketubboth Megillah Makkoth Menal,Ioth Nega'im Nedarim Nazir So!ah Sukkah Sanhedrin

'U4in 'Erubin



'Arakhin 'Orlah Pe'ah

8.7 3.7 5.1 8.4 Pesal).im 6.1 6.5 Parah 3.10 3.13 ~ddushin 4.14 Rosh Hashanah 2.8 Shebi'ith 2.2

123 (3) 160 160 142 98 (2) 160 118 I11 12 132 (2) 132 (I)

Shabbath Temurah Tamid Ta'anith Terumoth

4.2 4.10 8.10 1.4 15.2 5.3 3.7 3.6 3.8 3.1 6.6

132 142 132 lOO 160 101 114 132 101 164 160

(I) (2) (I) (2) (I)

Talmud Babli Baba Batra Berakoth

I:Iullin Yebamoth

71a 3a 14a 17a 59b 27b 137b 12b

165 165 163 155 9 (9) 142 (2) 8 (I), 18 (43) 135 (I)

Mo'ed IS-a!an Middah Sukkah 'Aboda Zarah Pesal).im ~ddushin

Rosh Hashnah Ta'anith

25b 43b 49b 58b 42a 66a 66a 20b 6b

9 (6) 103 (2) 164 8 (I) 22 (12) 98 (2) 11, 153 164 9 (9)

6.1 1.1

22 (10) 22 (10)

1.4 1.5 1.6 5.10

134 139 174 173

Targumim Deuteronomy Jeremiah

23.24 40.5

Canticles Lamentations

22 (10) 22 (10)

Commentators B. Ezra Abraham

Commentary on the Bible: Psalms 167 127.3 Ecclesiastes 5.1 18 (43) Rashi

Gersonides (Levi b. Gershom)


Job "im~i

1.1 1.8 1.18 17.12 21.34

124 173 124 167 175


Commentary on Psalms: Psalms 1.1 1.3

136, 139, 143, 157, 158 105, 173, 175,177

Commentary on the Bible: Genesis 1.4 1.5 1.14 1.20 8.5 15.15 27.21 49.13 19.19 Exodus 5.2 Joshua 1 Samuel 19.19 21.12 53.1 Isaiah

163 165 143 90 (3) 117 (2) 100 (6) 146 170, 175 146 90 (3) 85 165 165



Psalms Proverbs

69.32 5.19



109 (2) 26 (2); 27 (11) 16 (23)

Commentary on Talmud Babli: Baba Batra 12b 91 (6) Baba Mqi'a 47a 104 (5)


Yoma Niddah 'Aboda Zara 'Arakhin Shabbath

99b lOb 13a 7b 40b 8b 84a

98 91 (6) 91 (6) 91 (6) 98 91 (6) 177

Medieval Texts 70 71 72


(The chronicle of Al:Iimaa~)

Botarallo Moses, Commentary on the Sepher Yqirah B. 'Abbas (B. Samuel Judah), Ya'ir Nethib

3 5 6 8

98, 117 133 17 (28) 98 151

2 3 4 5 6

77 (6)

3b 4a 4b 5a 5b 6a 7b 8a 9a 9b lOa Ila 12a

102, 143 103, 170 136 125 119, 143, 167 152 131, 162, 118, 136, 162 103


Rokhlim B. Da'ud Abraham, Sepher





152 164, 155 167 168 153,


22 51 59 63



B. Baruch Isaac Albalia,


B. E:;.ra Abraham, Yesod Mora

99 115, 149 87 86, 119

13 16 17

Saphah Berurah

18 20 Ib 2b 3a 4b 5a 5b 7a 9a lOb 17b 18a 24a 43b

88 132 97, 130, 140, 146 106, 126, 143, 158 88,163,171 104, 180 91, 127 143 97, 102, 142, 176, 177 124, 125, 154 96, 125, 181, 182 128, 139 125, 153, 174 124, 179 94, 130, 154 148, 152, 162 86,88 132 164 88 153 113, 130, 167 97 142 102, 182 122, 144 147 148 88 174 170



Sepher ha-'A+amim Sepher ha-?:ai:loth

Sepher ha-Shem

B. E::.ra Moses, Shirat Israel

B. Falaquera Shemtob, Sepher ha-Mebai,cl,.odesh B. Tibbon Judah, Tibbonid translation of the f.lobot ha-Lebabot Testament

77 (1), 78

58 (11)

I 3 4 6 7 8 9

58, 59 (12) 138 166, 167 94, 108, 122, 178, 180 176 89,114,140 128 103, 131, 142, 145, 154, 169, 177





B. Tibbon Moses, Canticles Commentary

12 5

B. Tibbon Samuel, Ecclesiastes Commentary 15b


16a 16b


ha-Maim Perush Kohelet B. Verga Solomon, She be! Yehudah B. Zar;:.ah, Mikhlol Yophi B. Zerah Mena~em, ~edah Laderekh Crescas (f:lisdai), 'Or 'Adonai 4a

Gavison Abraham, 'Omer ha-ShikheJ:ia Gerondi (B. Reuben Nissim), Sermons

Gersonides (B. Gershom Levi), De'oth

102, 123, 143, 157, 169, 177, 178, 181 92, 107, 151, 165 103, 153

lOO, 112, 163 162, 176 168 58 58

71 114, 121, 157, 162

6b 7a 7b 8a

8b 9a

178 90, lOO 90, 102 136 87, 103, 104, 114, 124,172 140, 165 124 85, 91, 167 (3), 171, 172, 173, 180 114,169, 182 114,152


90, 139, 157, 169, 176, 178 94, 104 103, 140 90 90, 108 91, 102 90 97, 140, 171, 178 169 73

57b Pentateuch Commentary

78 71, 76 (37)

90, 148, 152, 153, 157, 158, 169, 176

4b 8b 26a 28b 42b 46b 48b

117,122, 171


23b 30b 47b 61a

MilJ:iamoth 'Adonai


12b 47b 48b 80b

f:lay Gaon, Kitab al bai' washira Isaac if Catalonia, 'Ezrath Nashim Josippon, Zeh ha-Mil,