Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar/165. Final Clauses

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar  (1909) 
Wilhelm Gesenius
edited and enlarged by Emil Kautzsch
, translated by Arthur Ernest Cowley
Final Clauses

§165. Final Clauses.[1]

165a 1. Like most of the dependent clauses hitherto treated, the final clause may also be joined by a simple wāw copulative to the main clause, unless the final clause is directly subordinated to the governing verb.

Examples of the connexion: (α) of a final imperfect (or jussive?) with a perfect by means of וְ, La 119, see §107q; with an interrogative sentence, 2 S 91, 3, Jb 3824; with an optative, ψ 519; with an imperative, 1 K 1121; (β) of a cohortative with an imperative by וְ, Gn 2921, 1 S 1516, or a jussive, Neh 25 (§108d); (γ) of a jussive with an imperative by וְ, Ex 91, 2 S 1611, 1 K 520, ψ 5914, 8617; with a jussive, Jb 2119, or cohortative, §109f, g (cf. also 2 S 2421 the infinitive with לְ, Jon 111 מָה with the 1st plur. imperf., and 2 Ch 2910 עִם־לְבָבִי, which are equivalent to cohortatives); (δ) of an imperative with a jussive, cohortative, or interrogative sentence by וְ, §110i; (ε) of a perfect consecutive after another perfect consecutive, Lv 1436; after an imperfect, §112m and p; similarly after a jussive, §112q; after an imperative, §112r.—On negative final clauses joined by וְלֹא to the imperfect (so Ex 2843, 3020; and 2 S 1325 after אַל־נָא with a jussive in the main clause) see the Rem. on §109g. In Ex 2832, 3923 the negative final clause is simply connected by לֹא.—On the use of an historical statement after verbs of command- ing, where we should expect a final clause (e.g. Neh 139 then I commanded, and they cleansed, equivalent to that they should cleanse, and they cleansed; in Jb 97 a negative final clause is connected in this way by וְלאֹ), cf. §120f.

For examples of the direct subordination of the final imperfect (without וְ) see §120c.

165b 2. Final conjunctions are לְמַ֫עַן אֲשֶׁר to the end that; also simply לְמַ֫עַן Gn 1213, 2725, Ex 45, ψ 516, &c.; בַּֽעֲבוּר אֲשֶׁר prop. for the purpose that, Gn 2710, and simply בַּֽעֲבוּר Gn 274, Ex 914, 2020; also the simple אֲשֶׁר[2] Dt 410, 40, 6:3, 32:46, Jos 37, Neh 814 f.; negatively, אֲשֶׁר לֹא Gn 117, 243, 1 K 2216; or שֶׁ ּ Ec 314; also negatively, עַל־דִּבְרַת שֶׁלֹּא for the matter (purpose) that ... not, Ec 714; לְבִלְתִּי with imperfect, Ex 2020, 2 S 1414 that ... not.—Quite exceptional is the use of מִן־ (if the text be right) in Dt 3311 מִן־יְקוּמוּן, with the imperfect, equivalent to that ... not [in prose, מִקּוּם].

165c Rem. All the conjunctions here mentioned are naturally always used with the imperfect, see §107q (on the apparent exception in Jos 424, see §74g).—On the negative conjunctions אַל and פֶּן that not, lest, see §152f and w. On the infinitive with לְ[3] (also לְמַ֫עַן Gn 1819, 3722, &c.) as the equivalent of a final clause (Gn 115, 284, &c.), see §114f, h, p. On the continuation of such infinitival constructions by means of the finite verb, see §114r. On the negation of the final infinitive by לְבִלְתִּי, §114s. On the preposition מִן with a substantive or infinitive as the equivalent of a negative final clause (Gn 3129, 1 S 1523, &c.), see §119x and y.

  1. Cf. H. G. T. Mitchell, Final Constructions of Biblical Hebrew, Leipzig, 1879.
  2. In Ez 3627 a final clause is introduced by אֵת אֲשֶׁר, thus at the same time taking the form of an object-clause.
  3. On לְ as a supposed conjunction (equivalent to the Arabic li) 1 K 619, see §66i.