Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

George:

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 10:49 PM, George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au> wrote:

Ah, I see what you're getting at now, Karl. However, I'm not sure your conclusion is necessary. It's certainly possible, but not necessary. On analogy with the optional nu in Greek, sometimes it's used on words in close proximity with other words that could have taken it. It seems a rather random thing. To use an English analogy, it's quite common to find contracted forms, as it is to find uncontracted forms, even within the same sentence, just like this one (note my use if "it's" and "it is"). There need not be a specific reason for it. It may well be purely random.

It doesn’t seem to be merely random, rather seems to follow a pattern.

It is used only for plural 2nd and 3rd person Yiqtol verbs.

There does seem to be some personal preference in its uses, some authors using it more often than others. Some authors didn’t use it even once.

Now it is possible that it’s merely a way of making the flow of speech go more smoothly, or it could be as subtle as my use of the contracted forms in this sentence where I wanted to make a slight emphasis on the verb in its first use, hence the uncontracted form while its second use came in a contracted container. This is a flow of speech that is so natural that I don’t consciously think through its use.

Is this a plural version of the singular -NH suffix on verbs as found in Genesis 24:61, 31:14,19, etc.?

I doubt the explanation that it imparts emphasis because paragogic nun seems limited to vocalic subject suffixes on prefix conjugation verbal forms. In other words, it is an element that seems related to morphological features rather than semantic or syntactic considerations.

Cheers!

GEORGE ATHAS

Dean of Research,

Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)

Karl W. Randolph. 

On 29/10/2012, at 2:34 PM, "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com> wrote:

George:

When I see verses with multiple Yiqtol verbs, and only one of which has a paragogic nun, that indicates to me that there must have been some reason for that paragogic nun. That is not the sort of pattern in which one finds archaisms.

That it’s just a surviving archaism doesn’t make sense.

It may be as little as an emphatic, which often makes little to no difference for a translator.

Karl W. Randolph.

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 7:33 PM, George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au> wrote:

I don't follow your reasoning, Karl, on how the use or spread of the paragogic nun means it must have had an affect on meaning.

GEORGE ATHAS

Dean of Research,

Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)

Sydney, Australia