An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

elements also found in demonstratives and in the article *ha(n?)- (13.3, 17.2). The
first-person singular alone has two distinct forms, a short form (˒ănî) and a long form
(˒ānōkî); there is no functional difference between them, though it is the long form
that eventually disappears, leaving ˒ănî only in late Biblical Hebrew, as well as in
Mishnaic and later forms of the language. 12 The third-person singular forms 13 seem to
be simplified in the monosyllabic MT forms hū˒-hî˒; bisyllabic forms 14 are implicit in
the Qumran writings האוה, האיה. 15 It is possible that mono- and bisyllabic forms
alternated in Classical Hebrew (cf. English ‘them’ and ‘’em’) and that the Masoretes
have preferred consistency on this point. 16
16.3.1 Uses
a The independent personal pronouns serve as surrogates for an antecedent or implicit
noun, usually referring to a person; they may serve in a variety of linguistic
contexts.[Page 293]
Their use is, first of all, a feature of the language’s economy (3.2.3). As simple
surrogates they relieve the tedious monotony of the same noun being repeated again
and again. Such is their normal function, for example, in these verbless clauses.
1. הנוֹז ֑ ָ֫
ה ָשּׁ א־ן ִ ֶבּ אוּהו ְ He was the son of a prostitute [‘he’ for ‘Jephthah’].
* unattested form
12
Ugaritic and Phoenician also have the two forms; UT §6.2. Arabic has only the short
form, ˒ănă; Akkadian, only the long form, anăku.
In Hebrew there are no occurrences of ˒nky in Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, Canticles,
Lamentations, Esther, Qoheleth, and Ezra; it is rare in Ezekiel, Daniel, Nehemiah, and
Chronicles. On these facts and the Mishnaic usage, see M. H. Segal, A Grammar of
Mishnaic Hebrew (Oxford: Clarendon, 1927) 39. For an argument that ˒ny is the
marked member of the pair and is non-predicative in use, while ˒nky is often
predicative (viz.,’It is I who…’), see H. B. Rosén, “˒nky et ˒ny,” in his East and West:
Selected Writings in Linguistics. 2. Hebrew and Semitic Linguistics (Munich: Fink,
1984) 262–81.
13
In the consonantal text of the Pentateuch, there is only one third-person singular
form, hw˒, pointed to agree with the rest of the MT; this may reflect a form of Hebrew
in which hû˒ was epicene (cf. 6.5.2). There are many other explanations available; see,
e.g., Joüon §39c / p. 91.
MT Masoretic Text
14
Cf. Arabic hūwa, hīya and probably Ugaritic hw, hy.
15
See E. Qimron, The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986)
57, who reports equal use of the long and short forms (hw˒h 45 times, hw˒ 65 times;
hy˒h 19 times, hy˒ 21 times).
16
Similarly, Qumran (and Samaritan) ˒tmh suggests that there was a trisyllabic as well
as a bisyllabic form of the second-person masculine plural form, as there seems to
have been of the rare corresponding feminine; see Qimron, Hebrew of the Dead Sea
Scrolls, 58.