God and אֱלֹהִים חַי the living God. In Ju 115 גֻּלּתֹ עִלִּית and גּ׳ תַּחְתִּית are strange; Jos 1519 has גּ׳ עִלִּיּוֹת and גּ׳ תַּחְתִּיּוֹת.
[z] Of the remaining examples Is 119 explains itself; the direct connexion of the attribute with its substantive is broken by the insertion of לַיָּם. In Ez 3412, Hag. 1:4 (as Wellhausen says, a good instance of a Hebrew adjective in the stative form = וְהֵם סְפוּנִים), ψ 14310, Ct 612 (?) the substantive is also (see above) determined by a suffix, and consequently the attribute is less closely attached; the same applies to Gn 372, 4219, 4314, ψ 1818, except that in these passages the omission of the article before ר, א, ע may at the same time be due to considerations of euphony (as also in Jos 161 before ע, Nu 1437 before ר, 28:4, Ez 109 before א, 21:19 before ח).[1] In 1 S 1317 f. (אֶחָד) and 2 K 2516 (שְׁנַ֫יִם after a determinate substantive), the attribute again, being a numeral, is determinate in itself (see above, x); in Is 652 the לֹא prevents the use of the article; finally, in 2 Ch 2615 בְּחִצִּים and בַּֽאֲבָנִים are to be read, as in Jer 221 גֶּ֫פֶן for הַגֶּ֫פֶן, in 22:26 אֶ֫רֶץ for הָאָ׳; in 2 S 63 omit חֲדָשָׁה, and in Ez 3927 omit רַבִּים. Without any apparent reason the article is omitted in Dn 813 and 11:31.
[aa] 2. When, as in Mi 712 (יוֹם הוּא in that day?), the article is omitted from both substantive and demonstrative, and in Ezr 312, the demonstrative even precedes (זֶה חַבַּ֫יִת=הַבַּ֫יִת הַזֶּה), this is obviously due in both cases to a radical corruption of the text (not only in the words quoted). In Jos 912 לַחְמֵ֫נוּ is either in apposition to the independent demonstrative זֶה (= this our bread, &c.), as in verse 13 נֹאדוֹת is to אֵ֫לֶּה, or they are complete sentences, this is our bread, &c. So also in Ex 321 משֶׁה (= that [iste] Moses, &c.), and in ψ 4815 אֱלֹהִים are to be taken in apposition to זֶה. On ψ 688 and Is 2313 cf. § 136 d.
[a] When a genitive, determined in any way, follows a nomen regens, it also determines the nomen regens, which, according to § 89 a, is always in the construct state. Moreover, every pronominal suffix attached to a substantive is, according to § 33 c, to be considered as a genitive determinate by nature. An independent genitive may be determinate—
(a) By its character as a proper name (according to § 125 a), e.g. דְּבַר יְהֹוָה the word of the Lord.
(b) By having the article, e.g. אִישׁ הַמִּלְחָמָה (prop. the man of the war) the soldier (but אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה Jos 171, a soldier); אַנְשֵׁי הַמִּלְחָמָה
