§ 90. Real and Supposed Remains of Early Case-endings. h¤' local, W in compound proper names, y¤i and A in the Construct State.

K. U.Nylander, Om Kasusändelserna i Hebräiskan, Upsala, 1882; J. Barth, 'Die Casusreste im Hebr.,' ZDMG. liii. 593 ff.

b

In Assyrian the rule is that u marks the nominative, i the genitive, and a the accusative;¹ ' in spite of the many and various exceptions to this rule which occur' (Delitzsch, Assyrische Gramm., § 66). Similarly, the Arabic case-endings in the fully declined nouns (Triptotes) are: –u for the nominative, –i for the genitive, and –a for the accusative; in the Diptotes the ending –a, represents the genitive also. In modern Arabic these endings have almost entirely disappeared, and if they are now and then used, as among the Beduin, it is done without regularity, and one is interchanged with another (Wallin, in ZDMG. v, p. 9, xii, p. 874; Wetzstein, ibid., xxii, p. 113 f., and especially Spitta, Gramm. des arab. Vulgärdialekts von Ägypten, Lpz. 1880, p.147 ff.). Even as early as the Sinaitic inscriptions, their regular use is not maintained (Beer, Studia Asiatica, iii. 1840, p. xviii; Tuch, ZDMG. iii. 139 f.). Ethiopic has preserved only the –a (in proper names –haÖ), which is, however, still used for the whole range of the aceusative, and also (the distinction of case being lost) as a termination of the constr. st. to connect it with a following genitive.

(a) Most commonly to express direction towards an object, or motion to a place,² e. g. hM'y"Ð seaward, westward, hm'd>qeñ eastward, hn"Apñc' northward, hr'WVña; to Assyria, hl'b,ñB' to Babylon, hr'h,ñ (from rh;) to the mountain, Gn 14:10, hc'r>a;ñ to the earth, ht'y>B;ñ to the house, ht'c'Ðr>Ti to Tirzah (hc'r>Ti) 1 K 14:17, &c., ht'Z"ñ[; to Gaza (hZ"[;) Ju 16:1; with the article hr'h'ñh' to the mountain, ht'y>B;ñh; into the house, hr'd>x;ñh; into the chamber, 1 K 1:15; hl'h/aoñh'³ into the tend, Gn 18:6, &c.; similarly with adverbs, as hM'v'ñ thither, hn"a'ñ whither ?; even with the constr. st. before a genitive ht'yBeñ @seAy into Joseph's house, Gn 43:17, 24; bg<N<Ðh; hc'r>a;ñ toward the land of the south, Gn 20:1; ~yIr;ñc.mi hc'r>a;ñ to the land of Egypt, Ex 4:20; qf,M,ñd; hr'B;ñd>mi to the wilderness of Damascus, 1 K 19:15; fm,v,ñ hx'ñr>z>mi toward the sunrising, Dt 4:41; and even with the plural hmyDIñf.K; into Chaldea, Ez 11:24; hm'yIm;ñV'h; towards the heavens.

Rem. The above examples are mostly rendered definite by the article, or by a following genitive of definition, or are proper names. But cases like hM'y"Ð; hr'h,ñ; ht'y>B;ñ show that the locative form of itself possessed a defining power.

f

Rem. Old locative forms (or original accusatives) are, according to the Masora, still to be found in

(a) hl'y>l;ñ, in pause hl'y>l'ñ, the usual word in prose for night, which is always construed as masculine. The nominative of this supposed old accusative⁴ appeared to be preserved in the form lyIl;ñ, only used in poetry, Is 16:3, constr. st. lyle (even used for the absol. st. in pause Is 21:11). Most probably, however, hl'y>l; is to be referred, with Nöldeke and others, to a reduplicated form ylyl; cf. especially the western Aramaic ay"l.yle, Syr. lilya, &c.— Another instance is hm'Wañm. something, probably from ~Wam.; ~Wm spot, point, generally with a negative =nothing. Similarly hc'r>a;ñ Is 8:23 and (in pause) Jb 34:13, ht'p'ñWs Ho 8:7, and the place-name hc'h.y:Ð 1 Ch 6:63, might be explained as accusatives. Elsewhere, however, the toneless h¤' can be regarded only as a meaningless appendage, or at the most as expressing poetic emphasis; thus hc'r>a'ñ (in pause) Jb 37:12; ht'w>M'ñh; death, y Ps 116:15; aN"-hD'g>n< y Ps 116:14, 18; hl'x.n:Ð stream, y Ps 124:4; hl'm;ñv.x;h; amber, Ez 8:2 [in 1:4 lm;v.x;h;, cf. § 80 k], &c. In Jos 15:12 hM'Y"Ðh; is probably only a scribal error (dittography). In Ju 14:18 instead of the quite unsuitable poetic word hs'r>x;ñh; (towards the sun ??) read as in 15:1 hr'd>x;ñh; to the bride-chamber.

g

(b) In the termination ht'¤'ñ often used in poetry with feminines, viz. ht'm'ñyae terror (= hm'yae), Ex 15:16; ht'r'ñz>[, help (=hr'z>[,), y Ps 44:27, 63:8, 94:17; ht'['ñWvy> salvation (= h['Wvy>), y Ps 3:8, 80:3, Jon 2:10; ht'l'ñw>[; unrighteousness ( = hl'w>[;), Ez 28:15, Ho 10:13, y Ps 125:3; ht'l'ñ[o y Ps 92:16 K^eth. Jb 5:16; ht'r'ñc' y Ps 120:1; ht'p'ñy[e darkness, Jb 10:22; ht'M'ñzIm.h; Jer 11:15 is corrupt, see the LXX and Commentaries. These cases are not to be taken as double feminine endings, since the loss of the tone on the final syllable could then hardly be explained, but they are further instances of an old accusative of direction or intention. In examples like ht'r'ñz>[, for help (y Ps 44:27) this is still quite apparent, but elsewhere it has become meaningless and is used merely for the sake of poetical emphasis.⁵

i

As the termination h¤' is almost always toneless (except in hx'r>z>mi constr. st. Dt 4:41; hT'GI and hT'[i Jos 19:13) it generally, as the above examples show, exercises no influence whatever upon the vowels of the word; in the constr. st. hr'B;ñd>mi Jos 18:12, 1 K 19:15, and in the proper names ht'G:ò 1 K 2:40, hn"D;ñ 2 S 24:6 (so Baer; ed. Mant. and Ginsb. hn"D'ñ), ht'p;ñc. 2 Ch 14:9, ht'p;ñr>c)' 1 K 17:9, hn"t;ñr>c)' 1 K 4:12, an aç is retained even in an open tone-syllable (cf., however, hr'h,ñ Gn 14:10, hn"D,ñP; Gn 28:2 from !D;P;, with modification of the a to eÊ; also hl'm,ñr>K; 1 S 25:5 from lm,r>K;. In segholate forms, as a general rule, the h¤' local is joined to the already developed form of the absol. st., except that the helping-vowel before h¤' naturally becomes Sè^ewaÖ, e. g. ht'y>B;ñàhl'h/aoñh' Gn 18:6, &c.; hr'[]Y);òh; Jos 17:15, hr'[]F†;ñh;⁷ Ju 20:16, &c., but also hl'x.n:ò Nu 34:5 (constr.st.; likewise to be read in the absolute in Ez 47:19, 48:28) and hr'[.v†' Is 28:6 (with Silluq); cf. hB'g>n<ò Ez 47:19 and hn"r>GOò (Baer, incorrectly, hn"òr>G*o) Mi 4:12 (both in pause).—In the case of feminines ending in h¤' the h¤' local is added to the original feminine ending t¤; (§ 80 b), the aç of which (since it then stands in an open tone-syllable) is lengthened to aÒ, e. g. ht'c'òr>Ti.—Moreover the termination h¤' is even weakened to h¤, in hb,nOò to Nob, 1 S 21:2, 22:9; hn<a'ñ whither, 1 K 2:36, 42 and hn<d'ñD> to Dedan, Ez 25:13.

In view of the analogies in other languages (see b) there is nothing impossible in the view formerly taken here that the litterae campaginis and y¤i and A are obsolete (and hence no longer understood) case-endings, ià being the old genitive and oÖ for the nominative sign u. Barth objects that the iÖ and oÖ almost invariably have the tone, whereas the accusative h¤' is toneless, and that they are long, where the Arab. iç and uç are short. Both these objections, however, lose their force if we consider the special laws of the tone and syllable in Hebrew. The language does not admit a final iç or uç, and the necessarily lengthened vowel might easily attract the tone to itself. On the other hand a strong argument for Barth's theory is the fact that these litterae campaginis are almost exclusively used to emphasize the close connexion of one noun with another, hence especially in the constr. st. Consequently it seems in the highest degree probable that all these uses are based upon forms in which the constr. st. is expressly emphasized by a special termination, i. e. the constr. st. of terms of relationship, ybia]àyxia]àymix] from ba' father, xa' brother, ~x' father-in-law (cf. § 96). The instances given under l and m followed this analogy.

Like iÖ, A is also used only to emphasize the constr. st. (see o), and must therefore have a similar origin, but its exact explanation is difficult. According to Barth, this A corresponds to a primitive Semitic aÖ (cf. § 9 q) and is traceable to ’abaÖ, ’ahÌaÖ, the accusatives of terms of relationship in the constr. st., which have aÖ only before a genitive. Against this explanation it may be objected that there is no trace of the supposed Hebrew accusatives Aba]àAxa]àAmx], and only of the analogous AnB.. It is also remarkable that so archaic a form should have been preserved (except in AnB.) only in two words and those in quite late passages. However we have no better explanation to offer in place of Barth's.

Finally we cannot deny the possibility, in some cases, of Barth's explanation of the W in compound proper names like laeWtB., &c. (see above), as due to the analogy of terms of relationship with nominative in W. But this in no way militates against the view expressed above, that in some very old names, like laeWnP'àlaeWtB., &c., the original common nominative sign has simply been preserved.

The instances found are:

Further, the HÍireq compaginis is found with certain particles which are really also nouns in the constr. st., as ytil'Wz) (= tl'Wz) except, yNImi (poetical for !mi) from, yTil.Bi not, ysip.a; not (thrice in the formula ynIa] dA[ ysip.a;w> I am, and there is none else beside me; but many take the y¤i as a suffix here), Is 47:8, 10, Zp 2:15. [The above are all the cases in which this y¤i is attached to independent words in the O.T.; it occurs, however, besides ] in compound proper names (again attached to the constr. st.), as qd,c,ò-yKil.m; (king of righteousness), laeyrIb.G: (man of God), laeyNIx; (favour of God), and others (cf. also the Punic name Hannibal, i. e. l[;b;ñyNI%; favour of BaÇal).

n

In K^ethibh the termination iÖ also occurs four times in ytbXwy, i. e. yTib.v;Ay*, Jer 10:17, 22:23 (before B.), Ez 27:3 (before -l[;), La 4:21 (before B.). The Q^ere always requires for it tb,v,ñAy (or  ävy), except in Jer 22:23 T.b.v;y; cf. ibid. ytnnqm K^eth., T.n>N:qum. Q^ere, and finally Jer 51:13 ytnkv K^eth., T.n>k;vo Q^ere. Perhaps yTib.v;y and yTin>k;vo are formae mixetae, combining the readings tb,v,ñy, &c. and T.b.v;y" (2nd fem. perf.), &c., but yTin>N:qum. may be merely assimilated to yTib.v;y which immediately precedes it.

The following are simply textual errors: 2 K 4:23 ytklhh K^eth., due to the preceding yta, and to be read tk,l,ñhoh†; as in the Q^ere; y Ps 30:8 (read yrer]h†;), 113:8 (read AbyviAh)l.), 116:1 (read  äxt lAq, as in five other places). On ytiyrIB., thrice, in Lv 26:42, cf. § 128 d.

Footnotes:

¹[1] This rule is almost always observed in the Tell-el-Amarna letters (see § 2 f); cf. the instances cited by Barth, 1.c., p.595, from Winckler's edition.

²[2] On this meaning of the accusative see the Syntax, § 118 d, and cf. the Latin accusative of motion to a place, as in Romam profectus est, domum reverti, rus ire.

³[3] hl'ñh/a)oh' in Baer's text, Gn 18:6, is an error, according to his preface to Isaiah, p.v.

⁴[1] Brockelmann, sem. Sprachwiss., p. 113, also takes it. as such, laylaÒ being properly at night, then night simply. Barth, however (Sprachwiss. Abhandlungen, p. 16, note 1), refers it to an original hl,y>l;, like hn"a' from hn<Ða'.

⁵[][1 The form clings also to a few place-names, as hd'GOòd>GU Dt 10:7; hv'liñv' 1 S 9:4, 2 K 4:42; ht'l'ñheq. Nu 33:22 f.; ht'B'ñj.y" verse 33 f.; ht'n"òm.Ti Jos 19:43, &c.; ht'r'ñp.a, Mi 5:1, &c.]

⁶[2] Cf. Sarauw, 'Der hebr. Lokativ,' ZA. 1907, p. 183 ff. He derives the h¤' from the adverbs hM'v'ñàhn"a'ñ and holds that it has nothing whatever to do with the old accusative.

⁷[3] So QimhÌi, and the Mant. ed. (Baer hr'[.F;ñh;), i. e. locative from r[;f;ñ (Is 7:20). The reading hr'[]F†;h; (Opit., Ginsb.) implies a feminine in h¤'.

⁸[1] Cf. the list in L. Kaila, Zur Syntax des in verbaler Abhängigkeit stehenden Nomens im alttest. Hebr., Helsingfors, 1906, p. 54.

⁹[2] The name laeWmv. formerly regarded as a compound of Wmv. = ~ve name and lae, is better explained with Pr&lauml;torius, ZDMG. 1903, p. 777, as a name of affection, for lae [;Wmv. = la[em'v.yI [but see Driver on 1 S 1:20]; similarly, according to Prätorius, laeWtP. = lae x;WtP. and many others.

¹⁰[1] Cf. Kaila, l.c., p. 59 ff.