Special Issue IOSOT 2013 - Books and Journals

S. Japhet / Vetus Testamentum IOSOT (2013) 36-76 41
// 34 Chr. xviii ‏;)ויכה–ויך (2 34 2 Chr. xviii 23, 33 // 1 Ki. xxii 24, ‏;)ויתאוה–ויתאו)‏
1 Ki. xxii 35 ‏;)ותעלה–ותעל)‏ 2 Chr. xxi 9 // 2 Ki. viii 21 ‏;)ויכה–ויך)‏ 2 Chr. xxxiv 27 //
‏.(ותבכה–ותבך(‏ 2 Ki. xxii 19
b) If the full form is in the 1 pers. sing. it remains unaltered. This occurs
three times:26 1 Chr. xvii 5, 8 // 2 Sam. vii 6, 9 ‏;)ואהיה)‏ 2 Chr. vi 10 // 1 Ki. viii 20
‏.(ואבנה)‏
Those parts which are not drawn from any known source keep systematically
to the same rule. The short form in the impf. cons. occurs over a hundred
times.27 This pedantic and rigid use is specially prominent where the words
occur only once or are unusual, as for example 2 Chr. ‏,ויזן xxi 11 2 Chr. xxxiii 9
‏.ויקש 2 Chr. xxxvi 13 ‏,ויתע
This consistent procedure, found both in the adaptation of the earlier texts
and in his own independent work, leaves no room for doubt that this is a definite
feature of the Chr.’s language. Moreover, it can be interpreted as a deliberate
effort to retain a certain linguistic norm.
In Ezr.-Neh. on the other hand, as well as in the Samaritan Pentateuch28 and
the Isaiah Scroll29 the main characteristic in this matter is the absence of any
rule or system.30
a) In 1 pers. sing. both the short and full forms occur: 1) full forms: Neh. i 4,
vii 2, xii 31, xiii 25; 2) short forms: Neh. iv 14 (8), i 4, ii 11, 13, 15.31
26) These are the only instances where 1 pers. sing. in the Impf. consec. of ל״ה occur in Chr. Therefore,
nothing further can be said about his own usage.
ויעש ‏,ויעל ‏,ותהר glance. 27) It is unnecessary to quote all the material since it can be seen at a
and many others. There are only two exceptions to the rigid rule in the whole book of ‏,ותבן ‏,ויבן
Chr.: 2 Chr. xxi ‏;ותזנה—‏‎13‎ 2 Chr. xxvi 6 ‏.ויבנה In view of the Chr.’s consistent system it can only be
due to later transmission. Another example is 2 Chr. אסא xvi 12 ‏.ויחלא As it stands this is a partial
analogy of ל״ה to ‏,ל״א finding expression in the consonants only. But the usual tendency of late
and Mishnaic Hebrew is contrary, i.e., the analogy of ל״א to ‏.ל״ה (Cf. Segal, op. cit., § 198, p. 90
stated more clearly in the Hebrew edition of the book, 1936, § 273, p. 150). We prefer to accept
Rudolph’s suggestion ad. loc. to regard this form as a dittography of the ‏.א The original phrase
‏.”ויחל אסא“‏ was accordingly
28) A. Sperber, op. cit., pp. 188-189 cites sixteen instances where the short form of the MT is long
‏.ל״ה in the Sam. Pent. in Verbs of
29) Kutscher, op. cit., pp. 252-253 cites twelve instances of such changes in the Isaiah Scroll
‏.ל״ה against MT, in verbs of
30) Another instance exists only in the Qre. in Ezr. viii 17, Qre ואצוה Kethib ואוצאה which is probably
ואוציאה and belongs to the next paragraph.
31) In the last four instances the form is ‏.ואהי This example demonstrates in a more specific way
the opposition to Chr. There only the form ואהיה is found.