Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

Plural Construct:  Adam, Adamah, Adami
 
This thread will not examine any geographical place names in the 
Pentateuch, but rather will look at certain geographical place names in 
Joshua [with 
an occasional reference to other books in the Bible, but never to the 
Pentateuch].
 
There are three cities in Canaan whose basic name is some form of Adam:  
Adam, Adamah, Adami.  Although )DM is usually a verb or adjective meaning “to 
be red” or “red”, it occasionally seems to be a masculine noun, perhaps 
meaning “something that is red”.  With a feminine ending, )DMH means “earth”. 
 Only one of these three city names uses plural construct.  The focus of 
this thread is analyzing what construct plural means when a proper name [as 
opposed to a common word] is in construct plural form in a geographical place 
name.
 
1.  Adam:  )DM, at Joshua 3: 16
 
This city is located in the Jordan River Valley, south of the Jezreel 
Valley, near Zaretan.  It is the only city named Adam in Canaan south of 
Galilee. 
 Thus there is no reason to use the construct format for this city, for 
there was no other city named Adam in the neighborhood.
 
2.  Adamah:  )DMH, at Joshua 19: 36
 
In eastern Lower Galilee there was a fairly big city whose name has a 
feminine ending:  Adamah/)DMH.  No construct form is used here, but construct 
is 
used for the town with a somewhat similar name located a few miles south of 
Adamah.  [The common word )DMH has the feminine plural form of )DMWT at 
Psalms 49: 11.]
 
3.  Adami Nekeb:  )DMY H-NQB, at Joshua 19: 33
 
The original name of this small town is not completely clear.  It may have 
originally been just Adam/)DM, and it may have been known by various names 
later.  Here, however, we will focus solely on the name as it appears at 
Joshua 19: 33:  )DMY H-NQB.
 
I see )DMY as being masculine construct plural.  )DM probably means “
something red” and may simply be the masculine form of )DMH, meaning “(red) 
earth”
.  In part because we would not expect to see “earths” as a common word in 
the plural, I see the word/name in construct plural here at Joshua 19: 33 
as being primarily a proper name, whose ultra-literal meaning is “Adams of”. 
 That then raises the issue of Hebrew grammar that I wish to explore on 
this thread.  When a proper name is in construct plural form in a 
geographical 
place name, what does that construct plural form mean?
 
I see )DMY H-NQB as meaning “[concerning the two] Adams [in eastern Lower 
Galilee, the  o-n-e  that is] of the Nekeb”.  The plural aspect of the plural 
construct form means that there are two Adams in the neighborhood.  The 
word/name not in construct form then specifies which  o-n-e  of these two 
Adams 
is being referenced here.
 
I erred previously in thinking that )DMY H-NQB might mean “two Adams, both 
of which are associated with Nekeb”.  No, there are not two Adams associated 
with Nekeb.  Only one Adam is associated with Nekeb.  But the plural aspect 
of the plural construct form here is telling us one additional item of 
information:  there is a second Adam in the neighborhood.
 
An author had the option of referring either to )DM H-NQB or )DMY H-NQB, 
using either singular or plural construct.  In both cases, the same city in 
eastern Lower Galilee was being referenced.  But the difference is that if 
plural construct is used, that is giving us one additional piece of 
information:  there was another city named Adam [or Adamah] in the 
neighborhood.
 
Thus the rule I propose is that if a proper name appears in construct 
plural form in a geographical place name, that means that there are at least 
two 
places with that same basic proper name in the neighborhood, yet only  o-n-e 
 of such two places is being referenced in the particular case, as 
specified by the word/name that is not in construct form.  
 
Different from this are those cases where the word in construct plural form 
is primarily a common word, rather than being primarily a proper name.  
Thus XWT Y)YR at Joshua 13: 30 has a common word in construct plural.  As 
such, 
the reference is to the “towns of Jair”, where “towns of”/XWT is 
primarily a common word, not a proper name, and multiple towns are indeed 
being 
referenced here.  Note also )$DWT H-PCGH at Joshua 12: 3, where Pisgah is a 
well-known proper name, and )$DWT is a common word in the plural meaning 
“slopes”
.  The reference is to the various slopes [in the plural] of Pisgah.  But 
by sharp contrast, when the word/name in construct plural form in a 
geographical place name is a proper name, the construct plural form of such 
proper 
name means that (i) there is another place with a similar name in the 
neighborhood, but that (ii) only  o-n-e  place is being referenced in the 
particular 
instance, as specified by the word not in construct form.  Yes, in some 
cases it will be difficult to distinguish whether the word/name in construct 
form is a common word or a proper name, but note that a great deal is riding 
on such distinction if, as I see it, construct plural format functions 
somewhat differently in these two situations.
 
Exhibit A for my view is )DMY H-NQB at Joshua 19: 33.  )DMY is masculine 
construct plural, yet only  o-n-e  city is being referenced, with the plural 
aspect of the construct plural form of )DM as a proper name meaning that 
there is another city named Adam/Adamah in the neighborhood.
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois