interwoven with it, as before the reigning of a king; ; a לִפְנֵי מְלֹךְ מֶלֶךְ לֹא טוֹב חֲיוֹת הָאָדָם ; in the day of (God's) making the earth בִיּוֹם עֲשׂוֹת TTT not good is the man's being alone. This is doubtless the primitive, as it is the most frequent form of the Infinitive, and it follows the analogy of nouns so closely as not only to assume the feminine form, tions prefixed precisely in the manner of nouns, as 77 in speaking, -but also to appear with preposi יְבֹשֶׁת יְכֹלֶת שִׁנְאָה קָטְלָה קִטְלָה as in .from expiating מִכַּפֶּר ,for serving לַעֲבֹד 3. Another form of the Infinitive (ip) is called the Infinitive absolute. This is never used in the state of close construction which characterises the other, but always in a more independent manner, with the full power and energy of the verb, of which it is only a more abrupt and emphatic expression, either standing alone, as to go! or, as is very common, followed and explained by its own dying thou shalt מוֹת תָּמוּת ; going thou shalt go הָלֹךְ תֵּלֵךְ finite verb, as die. As a specimen of the distinctive usage of the two forms, 4. The Imperative. This mode has for the most part the letters § 34. TENSES. 1. The Hebrew has but two distinct forms of tense, usually denominated the Preterite, or Preter, and the Future. But as the various distinctions of time cannot be denoted by simply the past and the future, it is obvious that these two tenses must have been used in Hebrew with far greater latitude of import than they are in Latin or Greek, or any of the European languages. But reserving for the Syntax a fuller exposition of the laws which govern the use of the tenses, we merely give at present the mode of formation in Kål, according to the analogy of which all the rest of the conjugations proceed. This is by adding to the ground-form of each certain pronominal appendages in order to designate number, person and gender. THE PRETERITE. 1. The distinguishing peculiarity in the formation of the Preterite is, that the abbreviated pronouns employed are added at the end of the root, which may be considered as having in itself a participial קָטָל־אַתָּה thou killest is equivalent to (קָטַלְתָּ) קָטַלְתָּ import. Thus ge יְרֵא אַתֶּם ye fear to (יְרֵאתֶם) יְרֵאתֶם ; thou art killing, or a killer are fearing, &c. Indeed in Eccl. 4. 2. an instance occurs of the .I praised שַׁבַּחְתִּי for שַׁבֵּחַ אֲנִי ,entire pronoun following a verb 1. The origin of the several appended pronouns is for the most part obvious on inspection. The only doubtful ones are the first person singular (") and the third person plural (). As to the first, the theory of Gesenius is that it is derived from the obsolete form for . Ewald, on the other hand, after remark. ing that the abbreviation of would properly give ", says that the weak was gradually lost, leaving only ., and that by way of com. pensation the was assumed from the many forms of the second person in which it occurs, giving us the regular termination, without the tone. This form serves also to distinguish the preformative or personal pronoun from the objective suffix, as otherwise it might have been doubtful whether meant I have killed, or he killed me. All ambiguity is now precluded by the use of for the former. Some traces, however, are still to be discerned of the purely analogical form, as Job 9. 27, for 5. But in 1 Kings 8. 48, Job 42. 2, Ps. 140. 13, Ezek. 16. 59, the is omitted in the Ketib, though supplied in the Qeri. In like manner Ps. 16. 2, ought perhaps to be pointed . In explanation of the plural termination, it may be remarked that the primitive form of this person is in all probability D, of which some examples still remain, as Dizi Is. 35. 1, and perhaps D Is. 15. 7, Day Am. 2. 4. This again was changed into 1 to distinguish it from the suffix of the accusative of the third pers. plur. which is also, and by rejecting the final from this we have alone as the usual char acteristic of the third pers. plur. of verbs. In a few cases, how ever, the is retained, as Is. 26. 16,777 Deut. 8. 16, and oc7 casionally an otiant is added, as 10. 5, Is. 28. 12. Josh. 10. 24, D Jer. THE FUTURE. 1. The formation of the Future differs from that of the Preterite in having its fragmentary pronouns both prefixed and suffixed to the ground-form, which is usually considered as the Infinitive construct. These prefixes consist of one vowelless consonant, which is the first or the strongest and most characteristic letter in the pronoun from which it is derived (,,,). But while the person is thus denoted at the beginning by its firm sound, the more accurate distinction of number and gender follows in the suffixes at the end. At the same time the Future shows a formation less abridged perhaps on the whole than the Preterite, as the of the terminations 11, 1., which 1 is almost entirely lost in the Preter, is often preserved in the Future, as Gen. 18. 28-32, Is. 8. 12. The final vowel of the Future is either Holem, Pattah, or Tseri, as 5,, . These are technically termed Fut. O, A, and E; of which in regular verbs the first is most frequent. REMARKS. 1. Third Person. The preformative in the masc. sing. is derived from the principal letter (1) of he. This is analogically prefixed with Sheva, 5, but according to § 27. 8. the Sheva gives place to the vowel (.), thus yielding the normal form 5p by § 23. II. 1, 2. The of the fem. comes from its hardened cognate (from "), as the affinity between h ( and ) and s and t both at the beginning and end of words is somewhat remarkable throughout the language. Illustrations will be given as we proceed. The of the plural originates as in the Preterite. 2. Second Person. Here the derivation of the prefix ♬ from the pronoun is obvious, while the affirmative at the end is the characteristic vowel of the feminine, § 30. 2. b. In the plur. the syllabic addition is from the pron. 7, denoting both gender and number. 3. First Person. The prefixed in the sing. is evidently from ; the of the plur. from Theof is taken for the sing. to prevent its being confounded with the third pers. sing. (“), or the first pers. plur. (3). Instead of Sheva, which it would analogi. cally take (*), it assumes e (..) from the repugnance which all the Gutturals have to the i-sound, § 25. 6. § 35. PECULIAR affections of the tenses, 1. By way of compensation in part for the comparative deficiency of modes and tenses in Hebrew, the Future especially is subject to certain affections of form which carry with them peculiar modifications of the sense. These consist in what are termed Paragogic and Apocopated forms, of which the former, with a few trifling exceptions occurs only in the first, the latter only in the second and third persons. These peculiarities, however, are not usually carried through all the conjugations, but appear for the most part only in particular conjugations and classes of verbs. What these are will be more evident as we proceed; at present we shall consider the nature and purport of these forms. I. Paragogic Future. 2. The distinguishing characteristic of this form of the Future is the annexing of the syllable n, to the ordinary termination. The effect is to express more emphatically the effort or desire of the mind, T the direction of the will, towards a special object. This is involved in the nature of the affix itself, which in nouns denotes direction to a place, and in connection with a verb expresses an earnest going forth of the mind in a wish or purpose towards an action. The force of the form can in many cases only be indicated in English by employing those optative, potential, hortatory or imperative modes of speech which give us such facility in expressing the various shades of thought. Thus Spy I will kill, I will surely kill, or oh, that I may kill; I will guard, I will assiduously guard. As it refers to an emotion or volition originating in the mind of the speaker, it is for the most part confined to the first person singular or plural. Consequently the idea of self-excitation is almost always let us גְנַשְׁלִיכָה ; let me sing אֲזַמְרָה,I will sing אֲזַמֵר prominent, as אָסְרָה־נא ; I will surely divide אֲחַלְקָה !let us cast away לְנַתְּקָה ! break TT:: I will surely turn aside now and see. So with an accompany. ing Imperative to strengthen the exhortation, as come, let us sing; come, let us worship and bow down. In a very few instances we find a paragogic third person, as oh, that he may hasten! let it come! very seldom do we find the punctuation .. instead of , as Ps. 20. 4. T But T 1 Sam. 28. 15, 7 2. The paragogic |as an added external termination is generally but loosely attached to the word, by no means so strongly and closely as the terminations of the persons, yet the original preceding vowels are too short to remain, and as a, e, o thus disappear, the The o, however, sometimes maintains itself in a Hateph vowel, as 1 Kings 19. 20, and in some other cases, particularly where a very long firm vowel resists a change, in which case the paragogic ter אֶשְׁקוֹטָה אָשִׁימָה אָקוּמָה אָקִימָה mination becomes toneless, as TIT THIS T 3. The " verbs never attach this, to their vocalic termination ... because two vowels so similar are not compatible in close connection, and the is too weak to expel the radical ¡ ̧.· The unique Ps. 77. 4, is a peculiar poetic form, and only in Is. 41. 23. do we find my Hith,, being attached without the tone In the " class, in like manner, the hortatory sense has no external form; only as an exception we have is because an immutable vowel precedes. .10 .v נִשְׁתַּע to |