§ 47. The Imperfect and its Inflexion.

In the first pers. ljoq.a,, plur. ljoq.nIàa is probably connected with ynIa], and n with Wnx.n:ò here no indication of gender or number by a special ending was necessary. As regards the vocalization, the Arabic points to the ground-forms ÈaçqtÌuçl and naçqtÌuçl: the iç of the 1st plur. is, therefore, as in the other preformatives, attenuated from a. The S^eghoÖl of the 1st sing. is probably to be explained by the preference of the a for this sound (cf. § 22 o, but also § 51 p); according to QimhÌi, it arises from an endeavour to avoid the similarity of sound between ljoq.ai (which is the Babylonian punctuation) and ljoq.yI, which, according to this view, was likewise pronounced iqtÌoÒl.²

f

Rem. 1. The oÒ of the second syllable (as in the inf. constr. and imperat.), being lengthened from an original uç in the tone-syllable, is only tone-long (§ 9 r). Hence it follows that: (a) it is incorrectly, although somewhat frequently, written plene; (b) before Maqqeph the short vowel appears as QamesÌ hÌatÌuph, e. g. ~V'-bT'k.YIw: and he wrote there, Jos 8:32 (but cf. also Ex 21:37, Jos 18:20); (c) it becomes Sè^ewaÖ before the tone-bearing afformatives y¤i and W (see above, e; but Jerome still heard e. g. iezbuleni for ynIleñB.z>yI cf. ZAW. iv. 83).

g

Quite anomalous are the three examples which, instead of a shortening to Sè^ewaÖ, exhibit a long uÖ: ~h†e WjWPv.yI Ex 18:26, immediately before the principal pause, but according to QimhÌi (ed. Rittenb. p. 18:b), ed. Mant., Ginsb., Kittel against the other editions, with the tone on the ultima; likewise h+W<mi yrIßWb[]t; al{ï Ru 2:8; ~r†eWmv.Ti (in principal pause) Pr 14:3. In the first two cases perhaps WjAPñv.yI and yrIAbñ[]T; (for WjPoñv.yI, &c.) are intended, in virtue of a retrogressive effect of the pause; in Pr 14:3 ~Wrm.v.Ti is to be read, with August Müller.

h

2. The oÒ of the second syllable is to be found almost exclusively with transitive verbs middle a, like lj;q'. Intransitives middle a and eÒ almost always take aç (PathahÌ)⁴ in the impf., e. g. #b;r'à#B;r>yI to couch, bk;v'àbK;v.yI to lie down (dm;l'àdm;l.yI to learn is also originally intransitive = to accustom oneself); ldeG"àlD;g>yI to become great (but cf. !k;v' and !kev' imperf. !Kov.yI to dwell and to inhabit, lben" imperf. lBoyI to wither); also from verbs middle oÒ, as !joq' to be small, the imperf., has the form !j;q.yI.

i

Sometimes both forms occur together; those with oÒ having a transitive, and those with aç an intransitive meaning, e. g. rcoq.yI he cuts off, rc;q.yI he is cut off, i. e. is short; vl;x' impf. oÒ, to overrcome, Ex 17:13; impf. aç, to be overcome, Jb 14:10. More rarely both forms are used without any distinction, e. g. %VoyI and %V;yI he bites, #P;x.y< and #Pox.y: he is inclined (but only the latter with a transitive meaning = he bends, in Jb 40:17). On the a of the impf. of verbs middle and third guttural, cf. § 64 b; § 65 b. In some verbs first guttural (§ 63 n), [¾¾[ (§ 67 p), y¾¾p (§ 69 b), and a¾¾p (§ 68 c), and in !TeyI for yinteÒn from !t;n: to give, instead of aç or oÒ a movable SÍere (originally iç) is found in the second syllable. A trace of these i-imperfects⁵ in the ordinary strong verb is probably to be found in Wnmiñj.Y:w: 2 K 7:8, since !mj otherwise only occurs in Qal. We call these three forms of the imperfect after their characteristic vowel impf. o, impf. a, impf. e.

k

3. For the 3^rd sing. fem. ljoq.Ti (= tiq-tÌoÒl), Baer requires in 1 S 25:20 vgp.Ti (but read with ed. Mant., &c. vGp.Ti). For the 2nd sing. fem. (ylij.q.Ti) the form ljoq.Ti is found in Is 57:8, Jer 3:5, Ez 22:4, 23:32, in every case after the regular form; but cf. also Ez 26:14. In Is 17:10, where the 2nd fem. precedes and follows, probably  äbW !y[ir'z>Ti is to be read with Marti for WN[,ñr'z>Ti.—For the 3^rd plur. fem. hn"l.joñq.Ti we find in Jer 49:11, in pause Wxj'ñb.Ti (for hn"x.j;ñb.Ti), and thrice (as if to distinguish it from the 2nd pers.) the form hn"l[joñq.yI with the preformative y (as always in Western Aram., Arab., Eth., and Assyr.), in Gn 30:38, 1 S 6:12, Dn 8:22. On the other hand, hn"l.joñq.Ti appears in some cases to be incorrectly used even for the fem. of the 3^rd pers. or for the masc. of the 2nd pers. sing. as hn"x.l;ñv.Ti Ju 5:26 (where, however, perhaps hN"x,ñl'v.Ti is to be read), and Ob¹³, for 2nd sing. masc., according to Olshausen a corruption of dy" xl;v.Ti; in Pr 1:20, 8:3 for hN"roñT' read hn<r>Ti as in Jb 39:23; in Ex 1:10 read Wnaeñr'q.Ti with the Samaritan.—In Is 27:11, 28:3, as also in Jb 17:16 (if we read ytib'Aj) with LXX for the 2nd ytwqt), it is equally possible to explain the form as a plural. This small number of examples hardly justifies our finding in the above-mentioned passages the remains of an emphatic form of the Impf., analogous to the Arab. Modus energicus I, with the termination açnnaç.

l

For hn" we frequently find, especially in the Pentateuch and mostly after waÒw consecutive, simply !' naÒ, e. g. Gn 19:33, 36, 37:7, Ex 1:18, 19, 15:20, Nu 25:2, Ez 3:20, 16:55; in Arab. always naç. According to Elias Levita !'v.B;ñl.Ti (2 S 13:18) is the only example of this kind in the strong verb. The form hn"yh,ñB.g>Tiw: (so also QimhÌi and ed. Mant.; but Baer, Ginsb. hn"h,ñB.g>Tiw:) for hn"h.B;ñg>Tiw: they were high, Ez 16:50, is irregular, with y¤, inserted after the manner of verbs [¾¾[ and W¾¾[, § 67 d; § 72 i; according to Olshausen it is an error caused by the following form.

Some of these examples may be partly due to euphonic reasons, e. g. certainly Ex 17:2, Nu 16:29, 32:20, 1 S 9:13, 1 K 9:6, and often, to avoid a hiatus before a or [. It was, however, the pause especially which exerted an influence on the restoration of this older and fuller termination (cf. § 159 c, note), as is manifest from Is 26:11: WvboyEw> Wzx/y< !Wyz"x/y<-lB; they see not; may they see and become ashamed. All this applies also to the corresponding forms in the Imperfect of the derived conjugations.⁷ In Aramaic and Arabic this earlier !W (old Arabic uÖnaç) is the regular termination; but in some dialects of vulgar Arabic it has also become uÖ.

n

With an affixed a we find (in the imperf. Niph‘al) aWfN"yI Jer 10:5, evidently an error for Waf.N)'yI, caused by the preceding aAfn".—In ~Wffuy> Is 35:1, since m follows, the ~ is no doubt only due to dittography.

o

5. Corresponding to the use of !W for W there occurs in the 2nd sing. fem., although much less frequently, the fuller ending !y¤i (as in Aram. and Arab.; old Arab. iÖnaç), also always with the tone, for y¤i, generally again in the principal pause, and almost in all cases with retention of the vowel of the Penultima; thus !yqiB'd>Ti Ru 2:8, 21, cf. 3:4, 18, 1 S 1:14 (!yrIK'T;v.Ti), Jer 31:22, Is 45:10.

p

6. On the reappearance in pause of the oÒ which had become Sè^ewaÖ in the forms ylij.q.Ti, &c., see above, e; similarly, the imperfects with aç restore this vowel in pause and at the same time lengthen it (as a tone-vowel) to aÒ, hence, e. g. yliD'ñg>TiàWlD'ñg>yI. This influence of the pause extends even to the forms without afformatives, e. g. lD;g>YIw:, in pause lD+'g>YIw:. But the fuller forms in uÃn and iÃn have the tone always on the ultima, since the vowels uÖ and iÖ in a closed final syllable never allow of the retraction of the tone.

q

7. On the numerous instances of passive forms in the imperfect, mostly treated as HophÇal, see § 53 u.

Footnotes:

¹[1] On the use of the Semitic Perfect and Imperfect cf. § 106 ff. and the literature cited in § 106. For our present purpose the following account will suffice:— The name Imperfect is here used in direct contrast to the Perfect, and is to be taken in a wider sense than in Latin and Greek grammar. The Hebrew (Semitic) Perf. denotes in general that which is concluded, completed, and past, that which has happened and has come into effect; but at the same time, also that which is represented as accomplished, even though it be continued into present time or even be actually still future. The Imperf. denotes, on the other hand, the beginning, the unfinished, and the continuing, that which is just happening, which is conceived as in process of coming to pass, and hence, also, that which is yet future; likewise also that which occurs repeatedly or in a continuous sequence in the past (Latin Imperf.). It follows from the above that the once common designation of the Imperf. as a Future emphasizes only one side of its meaning. In fact, the use of Indo-Germanic tense-names for the Semitic tenses, which was adopted by the Syrians under the influence of the Greek grammarians, and after their example by the Arabs, and finally by Jewish scholars, has involved many misconceptions. The Indo-Germanic scheme of three periods of time (past, present, and future) is entirely foreign to the Semitic tense-idea, which regards an occurrence only from the point of view of completed or incomplete action.—In the formation of the two tenses the chief distinction is that in the Perfect the verbal stem precedes and the indication of the person is added afterwards for precision, while in the Imperf. the subject, from which the action proceeds or about which a condition is predicated, is expressed by a prefixed pronoun.

²[1] Cf. § 24 e. In favour of the above view of QimhÌi may be urged the phonetic orthography vai (in Pr 18:24 vyai), 2 S 14:19 (unless, with Perles, bvua' is to be read), Mi 6:10, for vyE, and yv;yai 1 Ch 2:13 for yv;yI (as verse 12). Also hK,z>a,h†; Mi 6:11 is probably for  äz>aih†; =  äz>yIh]àdqpa Is 10:12 for dqop.yIÈ $mxna Is 51:19 for %mex]n);y>; and conversely rkXXy is for  äXXa = rk'f' vyai. Similarly, ywXy 1 S 14:49 is probably for Ayv.ai or hy"v.ai; in 2 S 23:8 tbXb bvy is, according to the LXX, an error for tXbXy = tv,Bñv.ai. In Assyrian also the simple corresponds to the Hebrew y as the preformative of the Impf. Qal.

³[2] This is also the proper gender of the plural syllable uç, uçn. In Hebrew, indeed, it is used in the 3^rd plur. Perfect for both genders, but in the kindred languages even there only for the masculine, e. g. in Syriac q^etÌaÃluÖ, q^etÌaÃluÖn, with the feminine form q^etÌaÃleÖn, in Western Aram. q^etÌaÃluÖ, fem. q^etÌaÃlaÒ; in Arab. qaçtaçluÖ, fem. qaçtaÃlnaç, Eth. qaçtaçluÖ, qaçtaçlaÖ.

⁴[1] This aç is, however, by no means restricted to intransitive strong verbs; apart from verbs third guttural (§ 65 b), it is to be found in !¾¾p and [¾¾[, and in many verbs a¾¾p and y¾¾p (§§ 69–71).

⁵[2] Cf. Barth, 'Das iç-Imperfekt im Nordsemitischen,' ZDMG. 1889, p. 177 ff.

⁶[1] [See details in F. Böttcher, Lehrb., § 930; and cf. Driver on 1 S 2:15.]

⁷[1] It is to be observed that the Chronicles often omit the NuÖn, where it is found in the parallel passage in the Books of Kings; cf. 1 K 8:38, 43 with 2 Ch 6:29, 33; 1 K 12:24, 2 K 11:5 with 2 Ch 11:4, 23:4.