§ 152. Negative Sentences.

(a) aol (less frequently aAl), like ouv( ouvk, is used regularly for the objective, unconditional negation, and hence is usually connected with the perfect or imperfect (as indicative); on aol with the imperfect to express an unconditional prohibition, see § 107 o; on its use with the jussive, see § 109 d.—On aol for aolh] nonne, in interrogative sentences, cf. § 150 a. In connexion with lKoà-lK' (= any), aol is used to express an absolute negation, nullus, none whatever (cf. the French ne … personne, ne … rien), usually in the order lKo … aol, e. g. Gn 3:1 !G"h; #[e lKomi Wlk.aot* aol ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden; 9:11, Ex 10:15, 20:10, Lv 7:23, Dt 8:9, Jer 13:7, 32:17 (rb'D'-lK' … aol nothing at all; cf. the same statement in the form of a rhetorical question, Jer 32:27); Pr 12:21, 30:30 lko-ynEP.mi … aol and turneth not away for any; 2 Ch 32:15; but cf. also the inverted order, Ex 12:16 hf,['y)e-aol hk'al'm.-lK' no manner of work shall be done; 12:43, 15:26, 22:21, Lv 16:17, Jb 33:13, Dn 11:37. The meaning is different when lKo by being determinate is used in the sense of whole, e. g. Nu 23:13 ha,r>ti aol ALKu thou shalt not see them all, but only a part.

Analogous to lKo … aol is the use of aol… vyai Gn 23:6, &c., in verbal-clauses in the sense of no one at all, not a single one. On lKo-!yae nothing at all, see under p.

c

Rem. 1. The examples in which aol is used absolutely as a negative answer, equivalent to certainly not ! no ! must be regarded as extremely short verbal-clauses, e. g. Gn 19:2 (aol according to the context for rW~n" aol &c.); 23:11, 42:10, Hag 2:12, Jb 23:6, sometimes with a following yKi but, Gn 19:2 (see above); Jos 5:14, 1 K 3:22.

d

2. The negation of noun-clauses by aol (as opposed to the regular negation by !yae) always includes a certain emphasis, since the force of the negation falls rather upon a particular word (cf. e.g. Ez 36:32), than upon the whole clause. In 2 S 3:34 tArW~a]-aol† ^yd,ñy" thy hands were not bound, a participle is thus specially negatived by aol; cf. y Ps 74:9, where, however, aol is separated from the participle by WnT'ñai, and Jb 12:3. As a rule, noun-clauses with a pronominal subject are thus negatived by aol, Gn 20:12, Nu 35:23 (Dt 4:42, 19:4); 1 S 15:29, 2 S 21:2, Jer 4:22, y Ps 22:7, Jb 28:14, parallel with !yae; generally with aol before a substantival predicate, e. g. Ex 4:10 ykinOòa' ~yrIb'D> vyai aol I am not a man of words; Am 5:18.—Noun-clauses with a substantival subject, Gn 29:7, Nu 23:19, Is 22:2, 44:19, Hag 1:2, y Ps 22:3, Jb 9:32, 18:17, 21:9, 22:16, 36:26 (with w> of the apodosis); 41:2; in Jb 9:33 even vyE aol non est is used instead of !yae.—In Pr 18:5 aol is used before an adjectival predicate; in 1 S 20:26 (where a preceding noun-clause is negatived by yTil.Bi) read rh'jo aol with the LXX, for rAhj' aol. On aol for !yae in circumstantial clauses to express attributive ideas, see u below.

e

3. As a rule aol stands immediately before the verb, but sometimes is separated from it (frequently to bring into special prominence another word which follows it); thus Jb 22:7, Ec 10:10 before the object and verb; Nu 16:29 before the subject and verb; Dt 8:9, 2 S 3:34, y Ps 49:18, 103:10, Jb 13:16, 34:23 before a complementary adjunct. In Dt 32:5 aol according to the accentuation even stands at the end of the clause (they offend him not); but undoubtedly wyn"b' aol are to be taken together.—On the position of aol with the infinitive absolute, see § 113 v.

f

(b) -la; is used like mh, and ne to express a subjective and conditional negation, and hence especially in connexion with the jussive (§ 109 c and e) to introduce prohibitions, warnings, negative desires, and requests. On -la; with the imperfect, see § 107 p; with the cohortative, see § 108 c; on 2 K 6:27, see § 109 h.

g

Rem. 1. -la; (like aol, see note on a above) may be used to form a compound word, as in Pr 12:28 tw<m'-la; not-death (immortality); though all the early versions read tw<m'-la,. The instances in which la; appears to stand absolutely, equivalent to no, certainly not (like mh, for mh. ge,nhtai), e. g. Ru 1:13 yt;nOB. la; nay, my daughters, and Gn 19:18, 33:10 (an"-la;), are also due (see under c) to extreme shortening of a full clause (in 2 S 13:25 such a clause is repeated immediately afterwards); thus in 2 S 1:21, Is 62:2, y Ps 83:2 yhiy> is evidently to be supplied, and in Jo 2:13, Am 5:14, Pr 8:10 the corresponding jussive from the preceding imperatives, in Pr 17:12 from the preceding infinitive absolute.

h

2. -la;, like aol, regularly stands immediately before the verb, but in Is 64:8, Jer 10:24, 15:15, y Ps 6:2, 38:2 before another strongly emphasized member of the sentence.²

i

(c) !yae construct state (unless it be sometimes merely a contracted connective form, cf. ~ynEv. for ~yIn:òv. § 97 d) of !yIa;ñ non-existence (as also the absolute state, see below) is the negative of vyE existence; cf. e. g. Gn 31:29 with Neh 5:5. As vyE (he, she, it is, was, &c.) includes the idea of being in all tenses, so !yIa;ñ, !yae includes the idea of not being in all tenses. Hence—

k

(1) The absolute state !yIa;ñ, with an evident transition to the meaning of a verbal predicate, there does not exist, always follows the word negatived, e. g. Is 37:3 (2 K 19:3) hd'lel. !yIa;ñ x;kow> and strength does not exist to bring forth; Gn 2:5 !yIa;ñ was not present; Ex 17:7 !yIa†'-~ai or is he not ? after vyIh] is he … ? (cf. Nu 13:20); Lv 26:37, Nu 20:5, Ju 4:20 (!yIa†' no). In 1 S 9:4 and 10:14 !yIa;ñ is used in reference to a plural; 1 K 18:10, Is 41:17, 45:21, 59:11, Mi 7:2, Pr 13:4, 25:14, Jb 3:9 !yIa;ñw" and let there be none, let none come ! Ec 3:19.—Cf. finally !yIa;ñ-~ai if it be not so, Gn 30:1, Ex 32:32, Ju 9:15, 2 K 2:10.—Quite anomalous is !yIa;ñ Jb 35:15 before a perfect as an emphatic negation; the text, however, can hardly be correct.

l

(2) The construct state !yae stands in its natural position immediately before the substantive whose non-existence it predicates, or before the subject of the sentence which is to be negatived. To the former class belong also the very numerous instances in which !yae is joined to a participle, e.g. 1 S 26:12 #yqime !yaew> [;deAy !yaew> ha,ro !yaew> and there was not one seeing, &c., i. e. and no man saw it, nor knew it, neither did any awake; so especially !yaew> with a participle in subordinate circumstantial or descriptive clauses, such as Is 5:29 lyCim; !yaew> jylip.y:w> and he shall carry it away, while there is none delivering, i.e. without any one's delivering it; y Ps 7:3, &c.; Lv 26:6 &c., dyrIx]m†; !yaew> without any one's making you afraid; cf. § 141 e. !yae is used as the negation of an entire noun-clause, e. g. in Gn 39:23, Nu 14:42 ~k,B.r>qiB. hA;hy> !yae the Lord is not among you; Gn 37:29 @seAy-!ya†e rABB; Joseph was not in the pit.

m

(3) When the subject which is to be negatived is a personal pronoun, it is joined as a suffix to !yae, according to § 100 o, e. g. yNIn<òyae I am not, was not, shall not be; ^n>ya†e, fem. %nEyae, thou art not, &c.; WNn<òyae, fem. hN"n<òyae he, she is not, &c.; also absolutely, Gn 42:13 he is (5:24 he was) no longer alive; ~n"yae they are not, &c. When the accompanying predicate is a verb, it follows again (see l) in the form of a participle, since !yae always introduces a noun-clause, e. g. Ex 5:10 !tenO yNIn<òyae I will not give; 8:17, Dt 1:32.

n

Rem. In Neh 4:17 ynIa] !yae for yNIn<òyae is due to its being co-ordinate with three other (substantival) subjects; these are again expressly summed up in Wnx.n:a]-!ya†e.—In Hag 2:17 ~k,t.a, !yae the pronominal complement of !yae appears to follow with the sign of the accusative;³ but most probably we should read with the LXX ~k,b.v†u for ~k,t.a,.

o

(4) The fact that !yae (like !yIa;ñ) always includes the idea of a verb (is not, was not, &c.) led finally to such a predominance of the verbal element, that the original character of !yae as a construct state (but cf. i above) was forgotten, and accordingly it is very frequently separated from its noun (substantive or participle); especially so by the insertion of shorter words (of the nature of enclitics), e. g. AB Is 1:6, Al Lv 11:10, 12, Hl' Gn 11:30, ~G: y Ps 14:3, ~v' Ju 18:10, Ex 12:30; but cf. also y Ps 5:10, 6:6, 32:2, and !yae used absolutely in Ex 22:2, 1 K 8:9, Ru 4:4.—Hence, finally, even the transposition of !yae and its noun became possible, e. g. Gn 40:8 and 41:15 Atao !yae rtepoW and an interpreter there is not of it; Gn 47:13, Ju 14:6, 1 S 21:2, Is 1:30, Jer 30:13, Hb 2:19, Pr 5:17 (!yaew> = neve sint; cf. k above, on Jb 3:9); 30:27.—In Gn 19:31, Ex 5:16 !yae is placed between the subject and predicate.

p

Rem. 1. Like lKo … aol or aol … lKo (see b above) so also lKo expresses an absolute negation, e. g. Ec 1:9 vd'x'-lK' !yae there is no new thing, &c.; 2 S 12:3, Dn 1:4 (cf. also hm'Wañm. !yae there is nothing, 1 K 18:43, Ec 5:13); as also !yae … -lK' Hb 2:19; cf. !yae hm'Wañm. Ju 14:6.

q

2. Undoubtedly akin to !yae in origin is the negative syllable yai occurring in the two compounds dAbk' yai (as a proper name, 1 S 4:21; Baer dAbk'-ya†i) and yqin"-ya†i not innocent, Jb 22:30; but the proper name rm't'ya†i is doubtful, and the fem. lb,w<ñyai very doubtful. In Ethiopic this yai is the most common form of negation, prefixed even to verbs.

r

(d) ~r,j,ñ not yet, when referring to past time is used, as a rule (§ 107 c), with the imperfect, Gn 2:5 ~r,j,ñ … lKo none … yet; see b and p above; Gn 19:4, 24:45, Jos 2:8, 1 S 3:3; with the imperfect in the sense of a present, Ex 10:7 [d;Te ~r,j,ñh] knowest thou not yet ? Ex 9:30; but cf. Gn 24:15, and ~r,j,ñB. with the perfect in y Ps 90:2 (but see § 107 c), Pr 8:25.

s

(e) sp,a,ñ (prop. a substantive, cessation) no longer, including the verbal idea of existing, cf. Dt 32:36, Is 45:6, 14, 46:9; used absolutely, Am 6:10; in the question vyai dA[ sp,a,ñx; is there none left ? &c. 2 S 9:3; frequently also in the sense of non nisi; with Hireq compaginis (§ 90 l) ysip.a; Is 47:8, 10, Zp 2:15 dA[ ysip.a;w> ynIa] I am, and there is nonelse.

t

( f ) lB;,⁴ in poetic and prophetic style, and with a certain emphasis, = aol, is used with the imperfect, e. g. Is 26:14, 33:20, 23 (immediately afterwards with a perfect); Ho 7:2, y Ps 49:13, Pr 10:30 (but Is 14:21 before the jussive, = -la;); before an adjective, Pr 24:23; before a preposition, y Ps 16:2, Pr 23:7.

(g) yliB. with a perfect, Gn 31:20, Is 14:6; with an imperfect, Jb 41:18; to negative a participle, Ho 7:8, y Ps 19:4; to negative an adjective, 2 S 1:21.

(h) yTil.Bi to negative an adjective, 1 S 20:26; on yTil.Bi Ez 13:3, see x; on yTil.bil. as the regular negative with the infinitive construct, see § 114 s; on yTil.bil. as a conjunction, see x below.

On ~ai as a negative particle in oaths (verily not), see § 149 c above.

u

Rem. on aolà!yaeàyliB.. To the category of negative sentences belongs also the expression of negative attributes by means of aolàyliB. not (both so used almost exclusively in poetic language) or !yae with a following substantive, mostly in the simplest form of circumstantial clause; e.g. 2 S 23:4 aol rq,Boñ tAb[' a morning when there are not clouds, i.e. a cloudless morning; cf. Jb 12:24, 26:2 b, 38:26 (vyai-aol where no man is, i.e. uninhabited); 1 Ch 2:30, 32 ~ynIb' aol childless; so also yliB. e.g. Jb 24:10 and !yae e.g. y Ps 88:5 I am as a man ly"a/-!ya†e there is not help, i.e. like a helpless man; Is 9:6 #qe-!ya†e endless; 47:1, Ho 7:11; rP's.mi-!ya†e countless, Ct 6:8, &c., but usually (y Ps 104:25, &c.) like a proper circumstantial clause (cf. § 141 e) connected by WaÒw, rP's.mi-!ya†ew>.—Less frequently such periphrases take the form of relative clauses (cf. § 155 e), e.g. Jb 30:13 Aml'ñ rzE[o aol they for whom there is no helper, i.e. the helpless (but probably rzE[o is only an intrusion from 29:12, and we should read rce[o without any one‘s restraining them; in 29:12 translate the fatherless and him that had nons to help him; in y Ps 72:12  ä [-!ya†ew> is used in the same sense); Hb 1:14; with !yae Is 45:9 thy work is that of a man who hath no hands; Zc 9:11 out of the waterless pit.⁵

v

How far such compounds finally came to be regarded by the language simply as negative adjectives, may be seen partly from the fact that they (as also relative clauses analogous to the above) are frequently co-ordinated with real adjectives, Jo 1:6, y Ps 72:12, Jb 29:12; cf. also Is 59:10, where ~yIn:òy[e-!ya†eK. is parallel with ~yrIw>[iK†;; partly from their being introduced by the sign of the dative l., e.g. Is 40:29 (= and to the powerless); Jb 26:2 a, 3, Neh 8:10.

w

(i) -!P, lest, that not, at the beginning of a clause expressing a fear or precaution, hence especially after such ideas as fearing, Gn 32:12, &c. (cf. dei,dw mh,, vereor ne), taking heed, frequently after rm,V'ñhiàWrm.V†'hi Gn 24:6, 31:24, &c., taking care, 2 K 10:23, &c. Not infrequently the idea on which -!P, depends, is only virtually contained in the main clause, e.g. Gn 19:19 I cannot escape to the mountain (because I am afraid), h['r'h†' ynIq;B'd>Ti-!P, lest some evil overtake me; Gn 26:9, 38:11; also in Gn 44:34 from the rhetorical question how shall I … ? We must understand I cannot, governing !P,. This is especially the case after an appeal to do or not to do an action by which something may be prevented (in which case -!P, is simply equivalent to the final ne); cf. e.g. Gn 11:4, 19:15, Nu 20:18 (where -!P, lest is separated from the verb by a strongly emphasized substantive); Ju 15:12 after swear unto me; Pr 24:18.—In Gn 3:22 and now, lest he put forth his hand, &c., -!P, is to be regarded as virtually dependent on a cohortative, which immediately afterwards (verse 23) is changed into an historic tense; cf. also Gn 26:7, 31:31, 42:4 Ex 13:17, 1 S 13:19, 27:11, y Ps 38:17, in every case after yTir>m;ña' yKiàrmia' yKi, &c. = I thought, &c., I must beware lest, &c.

Rem. According to § 107 q, -!P, is naturally followed by the imperfect; for the exceptions, 2 S 20:6, 2 K 2:16, see § 107 q, note 3; cf. moreover, 2 K 10:23 hPo-vy<-!P, War> look lest there be here, &c.

x

(k) yTil.bil. that … not, with the imperfect, Ex 20:20, 2 S 14:14 (in Jer 23:14 read the infinitive bWv for Wbv'ñ, in 27:8 Waobñy" for WaoBñ). In Ez 13:3 War' yTil.Bi is a relative clause governed by l. = according to things which they have not seen.

Footnotes:

¹[1] Especially in compounds, e. g. lae-aol lit. a no-God (Germ. Ungott) who is indeed called a god, but is not really a god, Dt 32:21; H;l{a/ aol verse 17, cf. Jer 5:7, 2 Ch 13:9; ~['-aol lit. a not-people (Germ. Unvolk), Dt 32:21; rb'd' aol a nothing, Am 6:13; #[e aol lit. not-wood, Is 10:15; vyai-aolà~d'a'-aol† lit. not-man, superhuman (of God), Is 31:8; qd,c,ò-aol unrighteousness, Jer 22:13, cf. Ez 22:29; ~yrId's.-aol disorder, Jb 10:22; ~m'x'-aol† not-violence, 16:17; after l. Jb 26:2 f. (x;ko-aolàz[o-aol helplessness, hm'k.x' aol insipientia); cf. also Is 55:2 h['b.f'l. aAlB. for what is unsatisfying; y Ps 44:13, Jb 8:11, 15:32, 1 Ch 12:33(34). In Nu 20:5 a construct state with several genitives is negatived by aol.—Also aol is used with an infinitive, Nu 35:23; with an adjective, ~k'x' aol unwise, Dt 32:6, Ho 13:13; dysix'-aol† impius, y Ps 43:1; z['-aol and ~Wc['-aol† not strong, Pr 30:25f.; !ke-aol unsuitably, 2 K 7:9; bAj-aol not-good, Is 65:2, Ez 20:25, &c.; rAhj' aol not-clean, 2 Ch 30:17; with a participle, e. g. Jer 2:2 (unsown); 6:8, Ez 4:14, 22:24, Zp 2:1, 3:5; the Masora, however, requires hm'x'ñnU in Is 54:11, hb'z"ò[/n), in 62:12, hb'v'An in Jer 6:8, hm'x'ñru in Ho 1:6, i. e. always 3^rd sing. fem. perf. in pause = she was not comforted, &c., and consequently not compounds, but either relative clauses or (Is 54:11, Ho 1:6, and especially 2:25) main clauses instead of proper names.—On the above compounds generally, cf. the dissertation mentioned in § 81 d, note 2; on their use in sentences expressing a state, to convey attributive ideas, see u below.

²[1] In Jer 51:3 the pointing -la, occurs twice instead of -la;, and is thus, in the opinion of the Masoretes, equivalent to against him that bendeth; but undoubtedly we should read -la;.

³[1] According to De Lagarde, Novae psalterii graeci editionis specimen, p. 26, ht'['ñWvy> y Ps 3:3 is also an accusative after !yae.

⁴[2] Evidently from hl'B' to waste away, from which stem also yliB. and tl,B,ñ (whence yTil.Bi § 90 m), originally substantives, are formed.

⁵[1] In Pr 9:13 (perhaps also 14:7; but see Delitzsch on the passage) a verbal-clause is used co-ordinately in this way as a periphrasis for an adjective.

⁶[1] In 1 K 10:21 @s,B,ñ-!yae goes with what precedes and must be emended, with the LXX and Lucian, to @s,K,ñh; yBi.