§ 157. Object-Clauses (Oratio Obliqua).

a

Clauses which depend on a transitive verb, especially on what are called verba cordis, i. e. verbs denoting any mental act, such as to see, to hear, to know, to perceive, to believe, to remember, to forget, to say, to think, &c., may be subordinated to the governing verb without the help of a conjunction by simple juxtaposition (§ 120 a), or they may be co-ordinated with it either with or without waÒw copulative (§ 120 d–h). As a rule, however, the objective clause is introduced by the conjunction yKi that, less frequently by rv,a] that.1

Examples:—

(a) Object-clauses without a conjunction. Besides the passages mentioned in § 120 (especially under e) there are a number of examples, in which a clause depending on a verbum dicendi or sentiendi (the oratio obliqua of the Latin and English Grammar) is added in the form of an independent noun- clause or verbal-clause; e. g. Gn 12:13 T.a+' ytixoña] an"-yrIm.ai say, I pray thee, thou art my sister; y Ps 10:13, Jb 25:8a, 14, Neh 6:6; Zc 8:23(after [m;v' ); y Ps 9:21 (after [d;y"); verbal-clauses, e. g. y Ps 50:2l thou thoughtest ^Amñk' hy<h.a,-tAy*h/ I was surely like thyself [but read Ayh' for tAyh/]; Gn 41:15, Ju 9:48 what ye have seen me do; Is 48:8, Ho 7:2.

b

(b) Object-clauses introduced by yKi, e. g. Gn 6:5 ~d'a'h†' t[;r' hB'r; yKi hA'hy> ar>Y:w: and the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great, &c. — Direct narration also is very frequently introduced by yKi (analogous to the o[ti recitativum; frequently, indeed, with the secondary idea of a particle of asseveration, as in Gn 26:9, 27:20), e. g. Gn 21:30, 22:16 f., 26:22, 29:32, 37:35, Jos 2:24, &c., even when the direct narration is not expressly indicated, Gn 4:25, 32:31, 41:51 f., Ex 18:4. — On the expression of a second object by means of a clause introduced by yKi, see § 117 h.2

c

(c) Object-clauses introduced by rv,a], e. g. Est 3:4 aWh-rv,a] ~h,l' dtGIhi-yK†i ydIWhy> for he had told them that he was a Jew; 1 S 18:15, Ez 20:26, Ec 8:12, 3 even before direct narration, 1 S 15:20, 2 S 1:4 Somewhat frequently rv.a] is preceded by the nota accusativi -ta, (equivalent to the circumstance, the fact, that), e. g. Jos 2:10, 1 S 24:11, 19, 2 S 11:20, Is 38:3, but in Gn 30:29, Dt 29:15 equivalent to the way in which.

Footnotes:

1[1] On these clauses with yKi and rv,a] and generally on clauses which we should render as subordinate, cf. P. Dö;rwald ' Zur hebr. Syntax ' in Neue Jahrbb. für Philol. und Pädag. 1890, p. 115 ff.

2[2] Instead of a complete objective clause we sometimes find a kind of accusative and infinitive construction, especially after !t;n" (prop. to give up) in the sense of to allow, e.g. Nu 21:23 Albug>Bi rbo[] laer'f.yI-ta, !xoysi !t'n"-aol)w> and Sihon did not suffer Israel to pass through his border; 20:21; followed by an infinitive with l., e. g. Gn 20:6, 31:7, Ex 3:19.— Cf. also the analogous examples in Dt 28:56 (after hS'nI to venture; see § 113 d); Ju 11:20 (after !ymia/h†, to trust); 1 K 19:4 (after la;v' to request).

3[3] In Jer 28:9 a subject-clause is thus introduced by rv,a] instead of the usual yKi.