Page:Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (1910 Kautzsch-Cowley edition).djvu/526

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
This page needs to be proofread.


and when thou dost overtake them (as soon as thou shalt have overtaken), thou shalt say unto them. Naturally, examples of this kind are very closely related to conditional sentences; see, therefore, the examples in §112kk and §159g. On the connexion of an imperfect consecutive or a perfect with detached expressions of time (as equivalent to complete clauses), cf. §111b; on the imperfect consecutive after וַיְהִי and a statement of time, cf. §111g; on the perfect consecutive following a detached statement of time, as in Ex 166, cf. §112oo.—In 1 S 2910 an imperative with וְ follows the perfect consecutive.

 [164c]  (5) The fact that one action or event has not yet taken place on the occurrence of another, is expressed by טֶ֫רֶם (an adverb, not a conjunction) with the imperfect (according to §107c). The apodosis, which may consist of a subject and perfect or even of a noun-clause (Gn 2415),[1] is then connected by וְ (or וְהִנֵּה) as in the examples above, under no. 3, e.g. Gn 194 (cf. Jos 28) טֶ֫רֶם יִשְׁכָּ֫בוּ וְאַנְשֵׁי הָעִיר ... נָסַ֫בּוּ וג׳ they had not yet lain down, and (=when) the men of the city ... compassed, &c.; Gn 2425.

 [164d2. Conjunctions used to introduce temporal clauses are כִּי (with perfect, e.g. Gn 61, Ju 128, 1616, 1 S 112; with imperfect, Gn 412, 1212, 2441, Ex 321, Lv 219, Dt 3121, Is 112, 819) and אֲשֶׁר[2] when (כִּי with the imperfect also=as often as, ψ 84; with perfect Jb 15); less frequently אִם[3] (joined with a perfect), e.g. Gn 389, Nu 219, Ju 63, ψ 417, 9418, cf. also Is 2413=quotiescunque; also in the same sense with an imperfect, Nu 364; with a perfect, equivalent to the futurum exactum, Is 44. Other conjunctions of time are the compounds כְּמוֹ when, Gn 1915; כַּֽאֲשֶׁר when, after that; עַד־אֲשֶׁר, עַד־כִּי until (also the simple עַד־, e.g. Gn 3811, Jos 222, 1 S 122 [with the imperfect=only when, as in 2 S 105]); 2:5, &c.; especially in the formula עַד־בִּלְתִּי הִשְׁאִיר לוֹ until there was none left remaining to him (where indeed it would be very natural to read הַשְׁאִיר the infin. constr., as elsewhere after בִּלְתִּי, §114s) Nu 2135, Dt 33, Jos 822, 118 (but 1 S 1419 while, as long as); עַד אֲשֶׁר לֹא before that, Ec 121, 2, 6 with an imperfect, as in Pr 826 עַד with a perfect; עַד־אִם, עַר־אֲשֶׁר אִם until the time when; אַֽחֲרֵֽי־אֲשֶׁר (for which in Ez 401 אַחַר־אֲשֶׁר; Lv 2548, 1 S 59 simply אַֽחֲרֵי; Lv 1443, Jer 4116, Jb 427 simply אַחַר) after that; מֵאָז (prop. since that time; the dependent clause is attached to it in the same way as the attributive clause to the demonstrative אֲשֶׁר §138e) since, Gn 395; בְּטֶ֫רֶם (and simply טֶ֫רֶם §107c) before; קַדְמַת (for קַדְמַת אֲשֶׁר) before, ψ 1296.

 [164e]  Rem. 1. With regard to the tenses used with the above conjunctions, the rules are practically the same as those given in §158d for causal clauses. The perfect indicates actions completed in the past or future (in the former case corresponding to the Latin pluperfect, §106f, and in the latter to the

  1. On the perfect in the protasis, which is critically doubtful, cf. §107c.
  2. On אֲשֶׁר as an original demonstrative, cf. §138a; hence עַד־אֲשֶׁר נָשׁוּב is properly up to that (moment)—we shall return.
  3. Cf. the frequent use of wenn [prop. if] for wann [=when] in German.