Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar/130. Wider Use of the Construct State

by Wilhelm Gesenius, edited and enlarged by Emil Kautzsch

Layout 2

§130. Wider Use of the Construct State.

a The construct state, which, according to § 89 a, primarily represents only the immediate government by one substantive of the following word (or combination of words), is frequently employed in rapid narrative as a connecting form, even apart from the genitive relation; so especially—

(1) Before prepositions,^[1] particularly in elevated (prophetic or poetic) style, especially when the nomen regens is a participle. Thus before בְּ, שִׂמְחַת בַּקָּצִיר the joy in the harvest, Is 9², 2 S 1²¹, ψ 136⁸f.; in participles, Is 5¹¹, 9¹, 19⁸, ψ 84⁷, and especially often when בְּ with a suffix follows the participle, e.g. ψ 2¹² כָּל־חוֹסֵי בוֹ; cf. Na 1⁷, Jer 8¹⁶ (ψ 24¹); ψ 64⁹ (unless רֹאֶה should be read); 98:7.^[2]—Before לְ, Ho 9⁶ (but read probably מַתֲמַדֵּי כַסְפָּם); ψ 58⁵ (before לָמוֹ); Pr 24⁹, Jb 18², La 2¹⁸ (before לָךְ); 1 Ch 6⁵⁵, 23²⁸; in participles, Ez 38¹¹, Jb 24⁵; before לְ with an infinitive, Is 56¹⁰, and again before לְ with a suffix, Gn 24²¹, Is 30¹⁸, 64³;^[3]—before אֶל־, Is 14¹⁹, Ez 21¹⁷; —before אֶת־ (with), Is 8⁶; —before מִן, Gn 3²², Is 28⁹ (a participle); Jer 23²³, Ez 13², Ho 7⁵; —before עַל־, Ju 5¹⁰; —before בִּלְתִּי, Is 14⁶; —before the nota accus. את, Jer 33²²; —before a locative (which in such cases also serves as a genitive), Ex 27¹³, Jer 1¹⁵.

b (2) Before wāw; copulative, e.g. Ez 26¹⁰; but חָכְמַת Is 33⁶, גִּילַת 35:2, and שְׁכֻרַת 51:21 may be cases of an intentional reversion to the old feminine ending ath, in order to avoid the hiatus (וָ)־ָה וְ.

c (3) When it governs the (originally demonstrative) pronoun אֲשֶׁר; so especially in the combination מְקוֹם אֲשֶׁר, Gn 39²⁰, 40³, the place where (prop. of that in which) Joseph was bound; cf. § 138 g; or בִּמְקוֹם אֲשֶׁר Lv 4²⁴, 33, 2 S 15²¹, 1 K 21¹⁹, Jer 22¹², Ez 21³⁵, Ho 2¹. We should expect הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר, בַּמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר, as in Gn 35¹³, &c., at the place which..., cf. § 138; but אֲשֶׁר is treated as a nomen rectum instead of as an attribute. Cf. also מִיּוֹם א׳ followed by a perfect in 1 S 29⁸, and יְמֵי א׳ Lv 13⁴⁶, Nu 9¹⁸.^[4]

d (4) When it governs independent sentences (cf. § 155), which virtually stand to the construct state (as nomen regens) in a sort of genitive relation, e.g. Ex 4¹³ בְּיַד־תְּשְׁלָח prop. by the hand of him whom thou wilt send; Nu 23³ דְּבַר מַה־יַּרְאֵ֫נִי the matter of that which he shall show me, i.e. whatever he shall; Is 29¹ קִרְיַת חָנָה דָוִד the city where David encamped; Jer 48³⁶, ψ 16³ (if the text be right), 65:5 (Pr 8³²), ψ 81⁶, Jb 18²¹ the place of him that knoweth not God; Jb 29¹⁶, La 1¹⁴ (if the text be right) into the hands of those against whom I cannot stand.^[5] In Gn 39⁴ (כָּל־יֶשׁ־לוֹ) the כָּל־ takes after it a noun-clause, and in Ex 9⁴, still more boldly, a subst. with לְ.—Very often a time-determination governs the following sentence in this way; thus אַֽחֲרֵי followed by a perfect, Lv 25⁴⁸, 1 S 5⁹; בְּיוֹם ψ 102³ (before a noun-clause), Ex 6²⁸, Nu 3¹, Dt 4¹⁵, 2 S 22¹, ψ 18¹, 59¹⁷, 138³ (in every case before a following perfect), ψ 56¹⁰ (before an imperfect); מִיּוֹם followed by the perfect, Jer 36²; כָּל־יְמֵי Lv 14⁴⁶, 1 S 25¹⁵, Jb 29² (כִּימֵי as in the days when...^[6]; cf. כִּימוֹת and שְׁנוֹת before a perfect, ψ 90¹⁵); בְּעֵת before a perfect, Jer 6¹⁵ (cf. 49:8, 50:31); before an imperfect, Jb 6¹⁷; תְּחִלַּת before a perfect Ho 1².

e (5) Connected with a following word in apposition; certainly so in such cases as בְּתוּלַת בַּת־צִיּוֹן the virgin, the daughter of Zion, Is 37²²; cf. 23:12, Jer 14¹⁷; also 1 S 28⁷ אֵ֫שֶׁת בַּֽעֲלַת־אוֹב a woman, possessor of a soothsaying spirit; cf. Dt 21¹¹.—Gn 14¹⁰, Ju 19²² (but read probably אֲנָשִׁים with Moore, as in Dt 13¹⁴, Ju 20¹³, 1 K 21¹⁰); 2 K 10⁶, 17¹³ Q^erê; Jer 46⁹, ψ 35¹⁶ (?), 78:9, Jb 20¹⁷ b (unless נַֽהֲרֵי or נַֽהֲלֵי be a gloss).

f Rem. Some of the above passages may also be explained by supposing that there exists a real genitive relation towards the preceding construct state, which has been, as it were, provisionally left in suspenso, in consequence of the insertion of some interrupting word, e.g. Is 37²², &c.; Jb 20¹⁷ a. Elsewhere (Dt 33¹⁹, ψ 68³⁴) the nomen regens probably governs the following construct state directly.^[7] g (6) The numeral אַחַד one for אֶחָד in close connexion, and even with small disjunctives, e.g. Gn 3²², 48²², 1 S 9³, 2 S 17²², Is 27¹², Zc 11⁷.

The character of these passages shows that the numeral here cannot be in the construct state, but is merely a rhythmical shortening of the usual (tone-lengthened) form.

1. Cf. König, ‘Die Ueberwucherung des St.-constr.-Gebrauchs im Semit.,’ ZDMG. 53, 521 ff.
2. In Ju 8¹¹ the article is even used before a construct state followed by בְּ, in order to determine the whole combination שְׁכוּנֵי בָֽאֳהָלִים tent-dwellers, taken as one word; cf., however, the remarks in § 127 f–i on similar grammatical solecisms.
3. These are to be distinguished from the cases where לְ follows a construct state, which in conjunction with מִן (and the following לְ) has become a sort of preposition or adverb of place; thus, we have מִבֵּית־לְ Ex 26³³ (for which in Ez 1²⁷ merely בֵּית לְ) meaning simply within; מִימִין לְ (2 K 23¹³, Ez 10³) on the right hand (i.e. south) of; מִצְּפוֹן לְ (Jos 8¹¹, 13, &c., Ju 2⁹) on the north of; cf. also Jos 15²¹ and לִפְנֵי מִן Neh 13⁴.
4. In Dt 23⁵ the construct state governs a sentence introduced by the conjunction אֲשֶׁר (עַל־דְּבַר אֲשֶׁר by reason of the fact that, i.e. because); so also in 1 S 3¹³.
5. Probably Gn 22¹⁴ is also to be so explained (contrary to the accents), and certainly (contrary to the very unnatural division of the verses) 2 Ch 30¹⁸, which should read on thus: יְהֹוָה הַמּוֹב יְכַפֵּר בְּעַד כָּל־לְבָבוֹ הֵכִין the good Lord pardon every one that setteth his heart to seek God. [See Wickes’ Accontuation of the Twenty-one Prose Books of the Old Testament, p. 140.]
6. Cf. Na 2⁹ מִימֵי הִיא, usually explained to mean from the days that she hath been, but the text is evidently very corrupt.
7. So also Is 28¹⁶ a corner stone of the preciousness (יִקְרַת is a substantive not an adjective) of a fixed foundation, i.e. a precious corner stone of surest foundation.—In 2 S 20¹⁹ the text is wholly corrupt; in ψ 119¹²⁸ read כָּל־פִּקּוּדֶ֫יךָ.