Masc proper noun with Fem verb

[Chris Watts]

Malachi 1:4 : כִּי־תֹאמַר אֱדוֹם
Isaiah 49:14 : וַתֹּאמֶר צִיּוֹן

Is there a reason why masculine proper nouns have the feminine verb?

Chris watts

[kwrandolph]

Malachi 1:4 : כִּי־תֹאמַר אֱדוֹם
Isaiah 49:14 : וַתֹּאמֶר צִיּוֹן

Is there a reason why masculine proper nouns have the feminine verb?

Chris watts

What makes you think those are feminine verbs? Why not second person verbs?

Karl W. Randolph.

[Jason Hare]

Malachi 1:4 : כִּי־תֹאמַר אֱדוֹם
Isaiah 49:14 : וַתֹּאמֶר צִיּוֹן

Is there a reason why masculine proper nouns have the feminine verb?

Chris watts

It’s common in Hebrew to refer to countries and cities in the feminine.

[Chris Watts]

Hallo Karl,

<<<What makes you think those are feminine verbs? Why not second person verbs?>>> Because the Names of places are not spoken to as "You" but as "it". Unless you have something magical up your sleeve.


Hallo Jason,

<<<It’s common in Hebrew to refer to countries and cities in the feminine.>>> Yes I know, sorry, I should have worded this differently by instead asking, why then, if countries are always spoken to as Feminine, are the nouns still considered masculine? Surely if something is referred to in a particular grammatical gender, that has to be its substance. I know this is quibbling and if you say, well just accept that that is the way things are, fine. I am just wondering if there is some answer that's all.

EDIT: Why, for example, do we have :הֵיטִיבָה יְהוָה לַטּוֹבִים וְלִישָׁרִים בְּלִבּוֹתָם Here we read a third fem singular (focus is on Feminine) with a bunch of masculines. "Do Good" is in Feminine and I would have expected the "to those who are good" to be feminine as well. But actually I would have expected the "Do good" to be masculine, not feminine.

Chris watts

[talmid56]

Hi Chris,

What Bible passage does the Hebrew quote in your latest reply come from?

"Names of places...spoken as 'it'": not in Hebrew, they aren't. Hebrew has no neuter. Also, the cities and countries are personified, a figure of speech where they are thought of as people, Thus, from the Hebrew grammar standpoint, it makes sense to address a city or country as "you". Think, for example, of the common expression "daughter of Zion", which amounts to "(my/your) daughter, Zion". Also, second person verbs would imply "you" anyway. If an "it" from the English standpoint is meant, probably 3rd person verbs would be used.

Edit: the verbs do have pointing indicating 3rd fem.sg. (Qal yiqtol). However, the 2nd msg is pointed the same way. And, they are identical unpointed. Taking the forms as 3rd fem.sg., you have the implied pronoun "she". Here is a good example of how context can determine usage and meaning. In this case, we look to the wider context (not just the individual passages) of general Hebrew Bible usage. Since cities and countries are personified, and treated as feminine, the 3rd fem. sg. would make sense. I could see a case for understanding it as 2 msg, since the nouns are masc., though. But, given how common the personification thing is, I'm figuring the answer is 3rd. sg.

Each language has its own way of expressing things, not only in idioms and figures of speech, but also grammatically. It is best not to assume that Hebrew is going to do things the way it is done in English. Often it is not that way.

[talmid56]

You also have a similar oddity with the Hebrew cardinal numbers (used for counting). For the numbers 3 to 10 feminine forms of the numbers are used with masculine nouns, and masculine forms are used with feminine nouns. Perhaps there is a reason for this, but I don't know what it is. Nevertheless, that's how it's done in Biblical Hebrew.

[kwrandolph]

Hi Chris,

What Bible passage does the Hebrew quote in your latest reply come from?

Psalm 125:4

There is something similar in Psalm 51:20.

Edit: the verbs do have pointing indicating 3rd fem.sg. (Qal yiqtol). However, the 2nd msg is pointed the same way. And, they are identical unpointed. Taking the forms as 3rd fem.sg., you have the implied pronoun "she". Here is a good example of how context can determine usage and meaning. In this case, we look to the wider context (not just the individual passages) of general Hebrew Bible usage. Since cities and countries are personified, and treated as

feminine, the 3rd fem. sg. would make sense. I could see a case for understanding it as 2 msg, since the nouns are masc., though. But, given how common the personification thing is, I'm figuring the answer is 3rd. sg.

From the context I read it as second person masculine.

Each language has its own way of expressing things, not only in idioms and figures of speech, but also grammatically. It is best not to assume that Hebrew is going to do things the way it is done in English. Often it is not that way.

True.

Karl W. Randolph.

[Chris Watts]

Hallo Karl, psalm 51:20 using the same word. Ah well just accept it I suppose. But Karl, why do you believe it should be 2 p masculine?

Delaney, yes I read a little while ago that Hebrew exists only within concepts of masc and fem. Unfortunately I made that mistake of answering Karl to quickly in terms of an English mindset.

Chris watts

[kwrandolph]

Hallo Karl, psalm 51:20 using the same word. Ah well just accept it I suppose. But Karl, why do you believe it should be 2 p masculine?

Chris watts

Chris, I was at first confused at this question. But then I realized you meant the examples that opened this thread, in Isaiah and Malachi.

In Isaiah 49:14, I see Zion being addressed directly, second person.

Again in Malachi 1:4, this is in a context where there are several references to Israel in the second person.

Karl W. Randolph.

[ducky]

Malachi 1:4 : כִּי־תֹאמַר אֱדוֹם
Isaiah 49:14 : וַתֹּאמֶר צִיּוֹן

Is there a reason why masculine proper nouns have the feminine verb?

If your question is about the "masculine" form that gets a feminine gender, then a lot of "masculine" forms comes with feminine gender, like אבן=stone, or אם=a mother.

As for names of places/cities - they can be addressed as feminine and as masculine.
Some make the distinction and say that when the reference is to the place, it is feminine, and when the reference is to the people of the place, it is masculine.

Both of the ותאמר here are 3pf.

Why, for example, do we have :הֵיטִיבָה ה לַטּוֹבִים וְלִישָׁרִים בְּלִבּוֹתָם Here we read a third fem singular (focus is on Feminine) with a bunch of masculines. "Do Good" is in Feminine and I would have expected the "to those who are good" to be feminine as well. But actually I would have expected the "Do good" to be masculine, not feminine.

I don't know if I understand you right?
היטיבה is not feminine.
And even if it was, it wouldn't be a problem if the object would be masculine.
The verb (a predicate) should fit the subject (not the object).