Jun 16 2006
Genesis 20:4-7
וַאֲבִימֶ֕לֶךְ לֹ֥א קָרַ֖ב אֵלֶ֑יהָ וַיֹּאמַ֕ר אֲדֹנָ֕י הֲג֥וֹי גַּם־צַדִּ֖יק תַּהֲרֹֽג׃ 5 הֲלֹ֨א ה֤וּא אָֽמַר־לִי֙ אֲחֹ֣תִי הִ֔וא וְהִֽיא־גַם־הִ֥וא אָֽמְרָ֖ה אָחִ֣י ה֑וּא בְּתָם־לְבָבִ֛י וּבְנִקְיֹ֥ן כַּפַּ֖י עָשִׂ֥יתִי זֹֽאת׃ 6 וַיֹּאמֶר֩ אֵלָ֨יו הָֽאֱלֹהִ֜ים בַּחֲלֹ֗ם גַּ֣ם אָנֹכִ֤י יָדַ֙עְתִּי֙ כִּ֤י בְתָם־לְבָבְךָ֙ עָשִׂ֣יתָ זֹּ֔את וָאֶחְשֹׂ֧ךְ גַּם־אָנֹכִ֛י אֽוֹתְךָ֖ מֵחֲטוֹ־לִ֑י עַל־כֵּ֥ן לֹא־נְתַתִּ֖יךָ לִנְגֹּ֥עַ אֵלֶֽיהָ׃ 7 וְעַתָּ֗ה הָשֵׁ֤ב אֵֽשֶׁת־הָאִישׁ֙ כִּֽי־נָבִ֣יא ה֔וּא וְיִתְפַּלֵּ֥ל בַּֽעַדְךָ֖ וֶֽחְיֵ֑ה וְאִם־אֵֽינְךָ֣ מֵשִׁ֗יב דַּ֚ע כִּי־מ֣וֹת תָּמ֔וּת אַתָּ֖ה וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר־לָֽךְ׃
Vocabulary
Verse 4
אבימלך name: “Abimelech”
הרג verb (Qal imperfect 2ms): “kill”
Verse 5
תם “integrity” (BDB, 1070)
נקיון “innocency” (BDB, 667)
כף noun: “hand”
Verse 6
חלום noun: “dream”
תם “integrity” (BDB, 1070)
חשֹך verb (Qal imperfect 1cs): “withhold” (BDB, 362)
חטא verb (Qal infinitive construct with מִן preposition): “sin”
על־כן “therefore”
נגע verb: “touch”
Verse 7
פלל verb (Hithpael waw-consecutive imperfect 3ms): “pray”
בעד preposition: “for, on behalf of”
Syntax & Misc.
Verse 4
- Sentence Typology 1 (וַאֲבִימֶ֕לֶךְ לֹ֥א קָרַ֖ב אֵלֶ֑יהָ): S-V-O
- The waw + nonverb construction marks a disjunctive.
- The Qal perfect verb functions as a pluperfect קָרַב “had come” (GKC 142a).
- Sentence Typology 2 (וַיֹּאמַ֕ר אֲדֹנָ֕י הֲג֥וֹי גַּם־צַדִּ֖יק תַּהֲרֹֽג): V-S-O
- The object is direct speech.
- Embedded Typology 1 (הֲג֥וֹי גַּם־צַדִּ֖יק תַּהֲרֹֽג): O-M-V
- The initial prefixed הֲ is an interrogative he.
Verse 5
- Sentence Typology 1 (הֲלֹ֨א ה֤וּא אָֽמַר־לִי֙ אֲחֹ֣תִי הִ֔וא): S-V-IO-O
- The initial prefixed הֲ is an interrogative he.
- The object is direct speech.
- Embedded Typology 1 (אֲחֹ֣תִי הִ֔וא): P-S
- The Kethib Qere perpetuum is read as הִיא (GKC 32l).
- Sentence Typology 2 (וְהִֽיא־גַם־הִ֥וא אָֽמְרָ֖ה אָחִ֣י ה֑וּא): S-V-O
- The closeness of הִיא and הִיא (cf. Genesis 38:25; Numbers 5:13, 14) should be noted (GKC 32l).
- The repetition is used as a reflexive—“herself.”
- This report of her speech was not relayed in the previous account.
- Embedded Typology 1 (אָחִ֣י ה֑וּא): P-S
- This phrase is distinguished consonantally from the last embedded clause only by the addition of a ת (אחתי vs. אחי), because of the plene spelling of אחות “sister.”
- Sentence Typology 3 (בְּתָם־לְבָבִ֛י וּבְנִקְיֹ֥ן כַּפַּ֖י עָשִׂ֥יתִי זֹֽאת): M-V-O
- The modifying phrase is compound.
Verse 6
- Sentence Typology 1 (וַיֹּאמֶר֩ אֵלָ֨יו הָֽאֱלֹהִ֜ים בַּחֲלֹ֗ם גַּ֣ם אָנֹכִ֤י יָדַ֙עְתִּי֙ כִּ֤י בְתָם־לְבָבְךָ֙ עָשִׂ֣יתָ זֹּ֔את וָאֶחְשֹׂ֧ךְ גַּם־אָנֹכִ֛י אֽוֹתְךָ֖ מֵחֲטוֹ־לִ֑י עַל־כֵּ֥ן לֹא־נְתַתִּ֖יךָ לִנְגֹּ֥עַ אֵלֶֽיהָ): V-IO-S-M-O
- The designation of הָֽאֱלֹהִ֜ים (not merely אלהים) is interesting as God is speaking to a foreigner.
- The prepositional phrase, בַּחֲלֹ֗ם, elicits the instrument through which God used to speak to Abimelech.
- The object is direct speech.
- Embedded Typology 1 (גַּ֣ם אָנֹכִ֤י יָדַ֙עְתִּי֙): M-S-V
- Embedded Typology 2 (כִּ֤י בְתָם־לְבָבְךָ֙ עָשִׂ֣יתָ זֹּ֔את): M-V-O
- Embedded Typology 3 (וָאֶחְשֹׂ֧ךְ גַּם־אָנֹכִ֛י אֽוֹתְךָ֖ מֵחֲטוֹ־לִ֑י): V-S-O-M
- The infinitive construct is functioning as a participle, “from sinning.”
- See GKC 75qq (note n) for an explanation of the final waw of the infinitive מחטו.
- The lamed preposition is adversative “against.”
- Embedded Typology 5 (עַל־כֵּ֥ן לֹא־נְתַתִּ֖יךָ לִנְגֹּ֥עַ אֵלֶֽיהָ): V-O-M
- נתן with an accusative of person means to permit or allow someone to do something (GKC 114m).
- The modifier is an infinitival clause.
- Embedded Typology 6 (לִנְגֹּ֥עַ אֵלֶֽיהָ): V-O
Verse 7
- Sentence Typology 1 (וְעַתָּ֗ה הָשֵׁ֤ב אֵֽשֶׁת־הָאִישׁ֙): V-O
- The verb השׁב is a Hiphil imperative from the root, שׁוב.
- Sentence Typology 2 (כִּֽי־נָבִ֣יא ה֔וּא): P-S
- This clause connects with the following clause to understand the כִּי.
- Sentence Typology 3 (וְיִתְפַּלֵּ֥ל בַּֽעַדְךָ֖): V-M
- Sentence Typology 4 (וֶֽחְיֵ֑ה): V
- For more on the form of חיה with prefixed syllables see GKC 63q.
- The function of the imperative, וֶֽחְיֵ֑ה, is describing certainty or intention (GKC 110i).
- Sentence Typology 5 (וְאִם־אֵֽינְךָ֣ מֵשִׁ֗יב): V-S
- The circumstantial clause begins with the particle אין functioning periphrastically with the Hiphil participle (GKC 159v).
- The 2ms suffix functions as the subject.
- Sentence Typology 6 (דַּ֚ע כִּי־מ֣וֹת תָּמ֔וּת אַתָּ֖ה וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר־לָֽךְ): V-O
- The apodosis is asyndetic (not marked by waw).
- The particle, כִּי, is functioning as a relative “that.”
- Sentence Typology 1 (כִּי־מ֣וֹת תָּמ֔וּת אַתָּ֖ה וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר־לָֽךְ): M-V-S
- The sequencing of an infinitive absolute and finite verb with the same root is used to heighten or emphasis the verbal idea—“surely you will die.”
???????? – Why does the peh have a dagesh? I know this also happens with some other words that have peh in the middle, but not sure why.
????????? – The parsing should be 2ms (rather than 3ms) (verse 5).
?Tim, Thanks for the correction.
???? is not a true bi-radical monosyllabic word, but is referred to as doubly closed (check GKC 20 or another more recent grammar; unfortunately I am moving and most of my tools are boxed up right now). This means that it was originally ?????? (with a “mobile shewa”) however later the final pe was dropped in the absolute form. Nonetheless, the original double ? appears in certain forms particularly when suffixes are attached. BDB demonstrates several of these forms: ??????? Judges 12:3; ???????? Job 13:31; ????????? Isaiah 49:16; construct ??????? Exodus 29:24; plural ??????? Numbers 4:7; etc. Hope this helps!