contraction of atem and otam for suffix of 3mp? shmartoom?

[ralph]

contraction of atem and otam for suffix of 3mp? shmartoom?

I undertand that Atem Shmartem, = (you-masculine plural, guarded),

And Ata Shmarta = you-masculine singular, guarded.

And Ata Shmartam = Ata Sharta Otam = you(masculine singular) guarded them.

But what does Atem Shmartem + them contract to? i.e. what does Shmartem Otam contract to?

I'm not sure if there are any examples of a verb 3mp+Suffix of 3mp

A funny thing is that this book..

Kleine hebräische Grammatik, mit Uebungsstücken zum Uebersetzen aus dem Hebräischen ins Deutsche, und aus dem Deutschen ins Hebräische

By Wilhelm Heinrich Doeleke

Page 91

https://books.google.com/books/about/Kl ... 2i7x_U1zIC

i’m not sure it(2mp+3cp) in Tanach.. and the pattern of the conjunction of verbs with otam is biblical..

So i’m not sure where the book gets this from but it has Shmartoom.



To go more particular.. So it looks like Atem with suffixes, are the same as Aten with suffixes.

The square box is all Atem/Aten. And going across we see the suffixes. So the fourth column , where I circled is shmartoom.

[Jason Hare]

There are only three instances of 2mp perfects with pronominal suffixes in the entire Tanach.

Numbers 20:5
וְלָמָ֤ה‬ הֶֽעֱלִיתֻ֨נוּ֙ מִמִּצְרַ֔יִם לְהָבִ֣יא אֹתָ֔נוּ אֶל־הַמָּקֹ֥ום הָרָ֖ע הַזֶּ֑ה לֹ֣א׀ מְקֹ֣ום זֶ֗רַע וּתְאֵנָ֤ה‬ וְגֶ֨פֶן֙ וְרִמֹּ֔ון וּמַ֥יִם אַ֖יִן לִשְׁתֹּֽות׃

Numbers 21:5
וַיְדַבֵּ֣ר הָעָ֗ם בֵּֽאלֹהִים֮ וּבְמֹשֶׁה֒ לָמָ֤ה‬ הֶֽעֱלִיתֻ֨נוּ֙‬ מִמִּצְרַ֔יִם לָמ֨וּת‬ בַּמִּדְבָּ֑ר כִּ֣י אֵ֥ין לֶ֨חֶם֙ וְאֵ֣ין מַ֔יִם וְנַפְשֵׁ֣נוּ קָ֔צָה בַּלֶּ֖חֶם הַקְּלֹקֵֽל׃

Zechariah 7:5
אֱמֹר֙ אֶל־כָּל־עַ֣ם הָאָ֔רֶץ וְאֶל־הַכֹּהֲנִ֖ים לֵאמֹ֑ר כִּֽי־צַמְתֶּ֨ם וְסָפֹ֜וד בַּחֲמִישִׁ֣י וּבַשְּׁבִיעִ֗י וְזֶה֙ שִׁבְעִ֣ים שָׁנָ֔ה הֲצֹ֥ום צַמְתֻּ֖נִי אָֽנִי׃

In each of them, the expected ־תֶ֫ם suffix became ־תֻ֫ before the addition of the suffix. If שְׁמַרְתֶּם אֹתָם had appeared in the Bible combined such that the verb took a suffix, it would indeed be שְׁמַרְתּוּם. It just so happens that the form doesn't exist. It is theoretical. It could have existed, but it just didn't make it into the text of the Tanach.

[ralph]

Thanks, that makes sense