Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Charles Grebe <animatedhebrew AT gmail.com>]

Yes, I agree. The fact that the "poor and needy" in verse 6(heb) is expressed in the masculine plural and then likely as "him" at the end of the verse and that these parallel the 3mp and 3ms suffixes in verse 8 is compelling evidence that the antecedents of the suffixes in verse 8 are found in verse 6.

I just noticed that the Young's Literal Translation translated the "ennu" in verse 8 as 1cp "us". I have to wonder if they are translating the "ambiguous" form as plural or following one of the later manuscripts or the LXX. And why would the KJV translated it as 3mp?? I guess we'll never know what was in the minds of some of these translators, but if they regarded the "ennu" suffix as ambiguous, this would be one of the only examples.

Charles Grebe

Maniwaki, QC, Canada

On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Van Parunak <van AT parunak.com> wrote:

As Jerry points out, reading the suffix as 1cpl would be unparalleled.
But it may not be necessary to suggest that the 3ms "refer[s] to a
plural entity." In v. 6, David has already used, first the plural (עניים
and אביונים), then the singular (לו, and depending on one's
interpretation of the verb, יפיח) to refer to the righteous poor (the
same object of discussion as in v. 8). Is the psalmist clumsily ignoring
the number of the suffix (he could, after all, have written תצרם or the
like), or is he making a deliberate rhetorical move, in both cases
reminding the reader that the general principle of God's care for the
righteous poor as a class (first colon in each verse) manifests itself
in his specific provision for the individual (second colon)?