128 The Indication of the Genitive Relation by means of the Construct State

§ 128. The Indication of the Genitive Relation by means of the Construct State.

Cf. especially Philippi's work cited at the head of § 89.

a

1. The genitive relation is regularly expressed (see § 89) by the close connexion of the nomen regens (in the construct state) with the nomen rectum (in the genitive). Since only one nomen regens can be immediately connected with a nomen rectum, it follows that the same genitive cannot depend on two or more co-ordinate nouns, but a second (sometimes even a third, &c.) regens must be added with a suffix referring to the nomen rectum, e. g. wyt'nOb.W dwId' ynEB. the sons of David and his daughters (not dwID' tAnb.W ynEB.); cf. 1 K 8:28.¹. The language also prefers to avoid a series of several co-ordinate² genitives depending upon one and the same nomen regens (such as occur in Gn 14:19, Nu 20:5, 31:54 [1 Ch 13:1], 1 S 23:7, 2 S 19:6, Is 22:5, y Ps 5:7, 8:3),³ and rather tends to repeat the nomen regens, e. g. Gn 24:3 ~yIm;ñV;h; yHel{a/ #r,a'ñh' yhel{a†wE the God of heaven and the God of the earth (so in Jer 8:1 the regens is five times repeated). A lengthened series of genitives may, however, be formed by a nomen rectum serving at the same time as regens to a genitive depending on it (cf. § 127 a [d]); e. g. Gn 47:9 yt;boa] yYEx; ynEv. ymey> the days of the years of the life of my fathers; cf. Jb 12:24, where there are three genitives, Is 10:12 four, and 21:17 five (unless the last three are in apposition). As a rule, indeed, such an inconvenient accumulation of genitives is avoided by means of a circumlocution in the case of one of them (see § 129 d).

b
Rem. As the fundamental rules stated above are the necessary consequence not merely of logical but more especially of rhythmical relations (see § 89 a), we must feel the more hesitation in admitting examples in which genitives are supposed to be loosely attached to forms other than the construct state. Some of these examples (the supposed genitives following a regens which is determined by the article) have been already discussed in § 127 f–h. Compare, moreover:

c
(a) Genitives after the absolute state, e. g. Is 28:1 !yIy:ò ymeWlh] ~ynIm'v.-ayN)e the fat valley of them that are overcome with wine. The usual explanation that synIm'v.-ayN)e forms one single idea (in German Fettigkeitstal), on which the genitive !yIY:ò ymeWlh] then depends, in reality explains nothing; the text is almost certainly corrupt. In Dt 15:18 hnEv.mi would be expected; in Jos 3:11 tyrIB.h; is a later addition; in Is 32:13 (fAvm'), and y Ps 68:22 (r['fe), the absolute for the construct state probably rests only on the authority of the Masoretes. In Ju 6:25 ff. the text is obviously in confusion. In Ju 8:32 (cf. 6:24) hr'p.['B. should come either after rbeQ'YIw: or at the end of the verse, unless, with Moore, we omit ä[h†' ybia] as a gloss (from 6:24); in Is 63:11 hv,m is probably a gloss on ~l'A[-ymey> which has crept into the text; in 2 S 4:2 tv,Bñ-vyail., according to the LXX, has dropped out before !B,; in Ez 6:11 tA[r' is to be omitted with the LXX; if originally in the text, it could only be genitive ( = all abominations of evils), not an adjective; Pr 21:6 the text is altogether uncertain (the LXX read yveq.Am† for yveq.b;m.); in 1 Ch 9:13 the preposition l. (after a l) has dropped out before tk,al,m. (cf. 12:25(26)). Elsewhere (Dt 3:5, 1 K 4:13, 2 Ch 8:5) the supposed genitives are to be taken rather as words of nearer definition standing in apposition, i. e. with high walls, gates, and bars. In Jer 8:5 ~ylXwry is either in apposition to hzh ~[h or is better (since not in the LXX) omitted as a gloss.

d
(b) Genitives after a noun with a suffix (where the suffix prevents the direct government by the nomen regens). Thus in Lv 27:3, 5, 6, where rk'Z"h; after ^K.r>[,⁴ might be taken, contrary to the accents, as subject of the following clause; in Lv 5:15, 25 the suffix may refer to Moses. In Lv 6:3 db; ADmi his garment, namely the garment of linen, unless simply in apposition, cf. § 131 d (or read yDemi?); Lv 26:42, where äwgw bqo[]y); ytiyrIB. could at most be explained as an ellipse for bqo[]y); tyrIb. ytiyrIB., cf. § 125 h (probably, however, it is a case of dittography of the y, which was repeated also before ~hrba; so Valeton, ZAW. xii. 3); equally strange is ~AYh; ytiyrIB. Jer 33:20, &c. On the other hand, hy<h.y)i ~ai hA'hy> ~k,a]yb†in> Nu 12:6 could not possibly mean if your prophet be a prophet of the the Lord; the text is manifestly corrupt (probably hw<h.Y:mi ^a]yb†in> is to be read, with Marti). In y Ps 45:7 ~yhil{a/ ^a]s.Ki (usually explained as thy divine throne), ~yhla is most probably a later addition [another suggestion is to read ~yhil{ake like God(‘ s throne): cf. § 141 d, note]. In Jer 52:20 two readings are probably combined, ~T'v.xun>li without any addition, and ~yliKeh;-lK' tv,xñn>li. In Nu 25:12 ~Alv' is in apposition to ytiyrIB.. On hM'zI %Ker>D; Ez 16:27, cf. § 131 r.

e
(c) The interposition of a word is assumed between -lK' (the whole cf. § 127 b) and the genitive governed by it in 2 S 1:9, Jb 27:3 (dA[), and, if the text is correct, in Hos 14:3 (aF'Ti). In reality, however, in all three places the genitive relation is destroyed by the transposition of the words (instead of -lK' dA[, &c.), and -lK' is rather to be taken adverbially (equivalent to wholly), e. g. 2 S 1:9 because my life is yet wholly in me, i. e. my whole life; cf. Philippi, Stat. Constr., p. 10.—On the instances in which the original construct state !yae non-existence is used without a following genitive, see the negative sentences, § 152 o.

f

2. The dependence of the nomen rectum on the nomen regens by no means represents merely what is, properly speaking, the genitive relation (see the examples under g–i). Very frequently the nomen rectum only adds a nearer definition of the nomen regens, whether by giving the name, the genus or species, the measure, the material, or finally an attribute of it (genit. epexegeticus or appositionis,⁵ see the examples under k–q).

Examples. The nomen rectum represents —

g
(a) A subjective genitive, specifying the possessor, author, &c., e. g. %l,M,ñh;-tyBe the king's house; hA'hy> rb;D> the word of the Lord.

h
(b) An objective genitive, e. g. Ob¹⁰ ^yxia' sm;x]m†e for the violence done to thy brother⁶ (but in Ez 12:19 sm;x]m†e is followed by a subjective genitive); Pr 20:2 %l,m,ñ tm;yae the terror of a king; Gn 18:20 ~dos. tq;[]z†; the cry concerning Sodom; Is 23:5 rco [m;ve the report of (about) Tyre, cf. 2 S 4:4; Am 8:10 dyxiy" lb,aeñ the mourning Jor an only son; Dt 20:14 ^yb,y>a†o ll;v. praeda hostibus tuis ererpta: cf. Is 3:14. In a wider sense this includes such examples as~yYIx;h†; #[e %r,D,ñ the way of (i. e. to) the tree of life, Gn 3:24; cf. Pr 7:27, Jb 38:20; ~Y"h; %r,D,ñ the way of (by) the sea, Is 8:23; yxeb.zI ~yhil{a/ the sacrifices of (i. e. pleasing to) God, y Ps 51:19; hA'hy> t[;buv. the oath of (i. e. sworn before) the Lord, 1 K 2:46; laeWml. yreb.DI the words of (i. e. addressed to) L., Pr 31:1.

i
(c) A partitive genitive; this includes especially the cases in which an adjective in the construct state is followed by a general term, e. g. h'yt,Arf†' tAmk.x; the wisest of her ladies, Ju 5:29; cf. for this way of expressing the superlative, § 133 h, and also r below.

k
Merely formal genitives (genit. explicativusor epexegeticus, genit. appositionis) are those added to the construct state as nearer definitions —

(d) Of the name, e. g. tr'P. rh;n> the river Euphrates; ![;n:òB. #r,a,ñ the land of Canaan; laer'f.yI tl;WtB. the virgin Israel (not of Israel), Am 5:2.

l
s(e) Of the genus, e. g Pr 15:20(21:20) ~d'a' lysiK. a fool ofa man (= a foolish man); cf. Gn 16:12, Is 1:4, 29:19, Ho 13:2, Mi 5:4, &c.

m
(f) Of the species, e. g. rb,q,ñ tW:xua] a possession of a burying-place, i. e. hereditary sepulchre, Gn 23:4, &c.; tArKuBuh; ynEaeT. the early figs, Jer 24:2; ytiyBe lh,aoñ the tabernacle of my house, i. e. my dwelling-place, y Ps 132:3.

n
s(g) Of the measure, weight, extent, number, e. g. rP's.mi ytem. people of number, i. e. few in number, Gn 34:30, Dt 26:5; cf. also Ez 47:3–5 waters of the ankles, waters of the loins, waters of swimming, i. e. which reached up to the ankles, or loins, or necessitated swimming; but in verse 4 in apposition (?) ~yIK;ñr>Bi ~yIm;ñ.

o
(h) Of the material⁷ of which something consists, e. g. fr,x+' yliK. a vessel of earthenware, Nu 5:17; @s,k,ñ yleK. vessels of silver (cf. the French des vases d‘or); #[e !Ara] an ark of wood, lz<r>B; jb,veñ a rod of iron, y Ps 2:9; cf. Gn 3:21, 6:14, Ju 7:13, &c.

p
(i) Of the attribute of a person or thing, e. g. Gn 17:8 ~l'A[ tZxua] an everlasting possession; Pr 17:8 a precious stone; cf. Nu 28:6, Is 13:8, 28:4, y Ps 23:2, 31:8, Pr 5:19, 14:5, Jb 41:19, and the examples of the genitive with a suffix given in § 135 n. Such a periphrasis for the expression of attributes frequently occurs, even when the corresponding adjectives are in use. Thus especially vd,qoñ holiness very frequently serves as a periphrasis for the adjective vAdq' (e. g. vd,Qoñh; ydeg>Bi the holy garments, Ex 29:29), since vAdq' is used almost exclusively in reference to persons (hence also with ~[; and yAG people, and with ~ve the name of a person); the only exceptions are vAdq' ~Aqm' holy place, Ex 29:31, &c.; ~yIm;ñ ~yvidq. holy water, Nu 5:17; vAdq' as the predicate of ~Ay day, Neh 8:10 f., and of hn<x]m†; camp, Dt 23:15. So also the use of qyDIc; righteous is always confined to persons, except in Dt 4:8; elsewhere the periphrasis with qd,c,ò or hq'd'c. is always used, e. g. qd,c,ò ynEz>aom† just balances, Lv 19:36.

q
In a wider sense this use of the genitive also includes statements of the purpose for which something is intended, e. g. hx'b.ji !aoc sheep for the slaughter, y Ps 44:23; WnmeñAlv. rs;Wm the chastisement designed for our peace, Is 53:5; cf. 51:17 (the cup which causes staggering), y Ps 116:13; finally, also, the description of the material, with which something is laden or filled, e. g. 1 S 16:20 !yIy:ò daonw> ~x,l,ñ rmox] an ass laden with bread and a bottle of wine (but probably hr'f'[] is to be read for rmox]); cf. Gn 21:14, Pr 7:20, &c.

r
Rem. I. Certain substantives are used to convey an attributive idea in the construct state before a partitive genitive; thus rx'b.mi choice, selection, as in Gn 23:6 Wnyr>ñb'q. rx;b.mi the choice of our sepulchres, i. e. our choicest sepulchres; Ex 15:4, Is 22:7, 37:24; other examples are, Is 1:16 the evil of your doings, emphatically, for your evil doings; Is 17:4, 37:24 (=the tall cedars thereof), y Ps 139:22, Jb 15:26.—This is the more common construction with the substantive lBo entirety, for all, the whole, every, see § 127 b; it is also frequent with j[;m. a little, for few, 1 S 17:28, &c.

s
2. To the periphrases expressing attributive ideas (see p above) by means of a genitive construction may be added the very numerous combinations of the construct states vyai a man, l[;B; master, possessor, -!B, son, and their feminines and plurals (including ytem. men, used only in the plural), with some appellative noun, in order to represent a person (poetically even a thing) as possessing some object or quality, or being in some condition. In English, such combinations are sometimes rendered by single substantives, sometimes by circumlocution.

Examples: —

t
(a) Of vyai, &c.: ~yrIb'D> vyai an eloquent man, Ex 4:10 (but ~yIt;ñp'f. vyai Jb 11:2 a man of lips, i. e. a boaster); !Avl' vyai = a slanderer, y Ps 140:12; t[;D;ñ vyai a man of knowledge, Pr 24:5; hm'xe vyai a wrathful man, Pr 15:18; ~ymiD' vyai a man of blood, 2 S 16:7, y Ps 5:7; cf. further, 1 S 16:18, 1 K 2:26, Is 53:3, Pr 19:6, 26:21, 29:1, Ezr 8:18; also ~ynIy"d>mi tv,aeñ a contentious woman, Pr 27:15; in the plural, e. g. Gn 6:4 ~Veh; yven>a; the men of renown, famous; cf. Gn 47:6, Is 41:11, Jb 34:8, 10 (bb'le yven>a; men of understanding); with ytem., e. g. Is 5:13 (b['r' ytem. famished men; but read probably b['r' ywEm. weak with hunger); y Ps 26:4 Jb 11:11, 22:15.

u
(b) Of l[;B;ñ, &c.: r['fe l[;B;ñ hairy, 2 K 1:8; tAml{x]h†; l[;B;ñ the dreamer, Gn 37:19; cf. Na 1:2, Pr 1:17, 18:9 (a destroyer), 22:24, 23:2 (disposed to eat, greedy), 24:8; feminine bAa-tl;[]B†; a woman that hath a soothsaying spirit, 1 S 28:7; cf. Na 3:4; in the plural, e. g. ~yCixi yle[]B†; archers, Gn 49:23, tyrIb. yle[]B†; confederates, Gn 14:13; yle[]B†; h['Wbv. sworn supporters, Neh 6:18.

v
(c) Of -!B,, &c.: lyIx;ñ-!B, a hero, warrior, 1 K 1:52; qv,m,ñ-!B, heir, Gn 15:2; hn"v'-!B, yearling, Ex 12:5, &c.; hn"v' ta;m.-!B, centum annos natus, Gn 21:5; tw<m'ñ-!B, worthy to die, 1 S 20:31 (Luther, 2 S 12:5 ein Kind des Todes); cf. Dt 25:2 tAKh;-!Bi worthy to be beaten. Feminine, e. g. l[;Y:òliB.-tB; a wicked woman, 1 S 1:16; frequently also l[;Y:òliB. vyaiÃ äb ynEB.Ã äb yven>a;, and even simply l[;Y:òliB., like the Latin scelus for scelesiissimus, 2 S 23:6, Jb 34:18. Plural masculine, e. g. yrIm+, ynEB. children of rebellion, Nu 17:25. -!B, is used poetically of things without life, e. g. Is 5:1 !m,v'ñ-!B, a fat; i. e. a fruitful (hill); Jon 4:10 hl'y>l;ñ-!Bi i. e. grown in a night; Jb 41:20 son of the bow (i. e. an arrow); so also @v,r, ynEB.=sparks, Jb 5:7; La 3:13; tAnB. Ec 12:4 the daughters of song, probably meaning the individual notes.

There is another use of -!B, or ynEB. to denote membership of a guild or society (or of a tribe, or any definite class). Thus ~yhil{a/ ynEB. or ~yhil{a/h†' ynEB. Gn 6:2, 4, Jb 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 (cf. also ~yliae ynEB. y Ps 29:1, 89:7) properly means not sons of god(s), but beings of the class of ~yhil{a/ or ~yliaeÈ ~yaiybiN>h;-y†nEB. 1 K 20:35 (singular in Am 7:14) persons belonging to the guild of prophets; ~yxiQ'r;h'-!B, Neh 3:8 one of the guild of apothecaries, cf. 3:31 where ~ypir>C)oh;-!B, is to be read. Similarly ~yviLevi ynEB. Gn 50:23 are most probably not great-grandsons but grandsons, i. e. those belonging to the third generation. Cf. also yNIvur>G)eh; ynEB. Nu 4:27 f. Gershonites, ~ytih'Q.h; ynEB. 2 Ch 20:19, &c., Kohathites; ~d,q,ñ ynEB. dwellers in the East.

w
3. Special mention must be made of the not infrequent idiom by which adjectives (sometimes also ordinals, see § 134 o) are added in the genitive, like substantives, rather than as attributes in the same state. gender, and number as the noun which they qualify; thus, Is 28:4 lbenO tc;yci the flower of that which fades, for which verse I has lbenO #yci the fading flower; cf. further, Is 22:24, Jer 22:17 (?), 52:13, y Ps 73:10, 74:15 (but !t'yae may be a substantive), 78:49; also the use of [r; as a substantive, e. g. in Pr 2:14b, 6:24 ([r; tv,aeñ), &c., analogous to the New Testament phrase o` oivkono,moj th/j avdiki,aj, Luke 16:8, and the French un homme de bien.⁸—Finally, an adverb (treated as a substantive) may likewise be used as an epexegetical genitive; cf. ~N"xi ymeD> blood shed without cause, 1 K 2:31; Pr 24:28, 26:2; Ez 30:16 (~m'Ay).

x

3. The epexegetical genitives include finally the numerous nearer definitions which follow the construct state of adjectives (and of active and passive participles, or verbal adjectives, cr. § 116 f–l). For, while the word of neaver definition is added to the verb in the accusative (e. g. wyl'g>r;-ta, hl'x' he was diseased in his feet, 1 K 15:23), it may, with participles and verbal adjectives, be either in the accusative (§ 116 f and k) or in the genitive, the case of a word depending on a noun. Such a genitive relation is usually termed an improper annexion. The nearer definition contains a statement either of the material, e. g. Ex 3:8, &c., vb;d>W bl'x' tb;z" #r,a,ñ a land flowing with milk and honey; or of the means, e. g. br,x,ñ-ylel.x; slain with the sword, Is 22:2; or the cause, Ct 2:5 sick of love; or of the scope of the attribute,⁹ e. g. Gn 39:6 ra;toñ-hpey> fair of form; cf. Gn 41:2, 4, Ex 34:6, Is 1:4, Jer 32:19, Na 1:3, y Ps 119:1, Jb 37:16; or of the manner, e. g. y Ps 59:6 !w<a'ñ ydeg>B†o faithless ones of wickedness (wickedly faithless).

y

Especially frequent is the use of this genitive to name the part of the body described as being affected by some physical or mental condition, e. g. y Ps 24:4 ~yIP;ñk; yqin> clean as regards hands, &c.; 2 S 9:3, Is 6:5, Jb 17:9; Is 19:10 vp,n"ò-ymeg>a; grieved in soul; 1 S 1:10, Jb 3:20. Also such examples as Am 2:16, Pr 19:1, where a suffix is attached to the substantive, must be regarded as instances of the genitive construction, on the analogy of Pr 14:2, see § 116 k.

Footnotes:

¹[1] Very rare, and only possible in very rapid utterance, are such exceptions as Ez 31:6 (!Anb'l.-bAj†w> rx;b.mi); Pr 16:11.—In Is 11:2 the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord, t[;ñD; may lit any rate also be taken as an absolute genitive, so also rp,señ Dn 1:4

²[2] In y Ps 114:1 a second genitive is added even without the copula, but the parallelism of the members renders any misunderstanding impossible.

³[3] In almost all these instances the two (or three) genitives form one closely connected whole, as heaven and earth, sons and daughters.

⁴[1] HaleÃvy, J. A. xiv. 548, removes the difficulty by pointing %Kor>[;.

⁵[1] The latter term is preferred especially by König, Theol. Stud. und Krit., 1898, p. 528 ff.

⁶[2] Cf. in Latin a similar use of the genitive after iniuria (Caes. B. G. 1, 30), metus (hostium, Pompeii, &c.), spes, and other words. In Greek, cf. eu;.noia tw/n fi,lwn( pi,stis tou/ qeou/( o` lo,gos u` tou/ stanrou/, 1 Cor. 1:18.

⁷[3] In the almost entire absence of corresponding adjectives (zWra' made of cedar, a denominative from zr,a,ñ, and vWxn" brazen are the only examples), the language regularly has recourse to the above periphrasis. On the form qaÒtÌuÖl, as expressing an inherent property, cf. § 50 f; cf. also the proper name, yL;zIr>B; ferreus.

⁸[1] On the other hand, in such passages as Is 36:2 (2 K 18:17), Zc 14:4, Ec 8:10, &c., there is no apparent reason why the Masora requires the construct state instead of the absolute; hence lyxe Is 36:2 and ayGE Zc 14:4 must be intended as forms of the absolute state, shortened in consequence of their close connexion.

⁹[1] Cf. the Latin integer vitae scelerisque purus; tristes animi, &c.