Lamentations 3:28-30 - Let him sit, put, give?

[Chris Watts]

I read these exactly as the KJV, I had no problem with that....until I decided to check something unelated to the grammar. I was shocked, yes mummified to read that practically every single English translation (that will be about 30 of them), turned these three starting verbs into Jussives. Cohortatives they can not be since they are in third person. So how on earth turning these verbs into "Let him", is beyond me. Here is a case where the majority clearly do not fit into my plans. But seriously, the plain straightforward third person imperfect sounds far more appropriate in my head, than a subtle piece of advice. Plus it all really sounds so religious and upmarket. For me, these statements sound more powerful taken as a result of the previous verses rather than as a soft command. The flow from having just read verses 26 and 27 is broken by inserting the words : "Let him". The sense is more appropriate by leaving the statement as saying what the suffering man is doing. Ironically one feels the command of a "Let him do this" by translating these verbs as normal imperfects.

יֵשֵׁ֤ב בָּדָד֙ וְיִדֹּ֔ם כִּ֥י נָטַ֖ל עָלָֽיו׃ יִתֵּ֤ן בֶּֽעָפָר֙ פִּ֔יהוּ אוּלַ֖י יֵ֥שׁ תִּקְוָֽה׃ יִתֵּ֧ן לְמַכֵּ֛הוּ לֶ֖חִי יִשְׂבַּ֥ע בְּחֶרְפָּֽה׃

Ok so yes, this is a question...

Chris watts

[Jason Hare]

One clear indicator that we are looking mostly likely at the jussive is the use of veyiqtol rather than veqatal, which is normally used for the future in a consecutive chain. For example, look at וְיִדֹּם veyiddōm instead of, say, וַיִּדֹּם vayyiddōm for the past tense (cp. Lev. 10:3) or וְדַם vedam / וְדָמַם vedāmam (two options for the future tense, which is not found in text of the Bible). The previous one is vayyiqtol, and the two other options for the future are veqatal. The fact that the veyiqtol is used indicates that this is most likely jussive. Not only that, but the fronting of the verb to first position in the other clauses (in both of the יִתֵּן clauses as well as in the יִשְׂבַּע one) is a second indication of the jussive.

Jussive is generally indicated by three keys:
(1) The short form if possible (יִ֫בֶן vs. יִבְנֶה, for example) or accent shift (יֵ֫רֶד yḗreḏ vs. יֵרֵד yērēḏ).
(2) The veyiqtol if it is prefixed with vav (rather than the vayyiqtol or veqatal).
(3) The fronting of the verb.

Since the jussive is often the same as the yiqtol in form, it is useful to watch out for these other keys.

[Chris Watts]

One clear indicator that we are looking mostly likely at the jussive is the use of veyiqtol rather than veqatal, which is normally used for the future in a consecutive chain. For example, look at וְיִדֹּם veyiddōm instead of, say, וַיִּדֹּם vayyiddōm for the past tense (cp. Lev. 10:3) or וְדַם vedam / וְדָמַם vedāmam (two options for the future tense, which is not found in text of the Bible). The previous one is vayyiqtol, and the two other options for the future are veqatal. The fact that the veyiqtol is used indicates that this is most likely jussive. Not only that, but the fronting of the verb to first position in the other clauses (in both of the יִתֵּן clauses as well as in the יִשְׂבַּע one) is a second indication of the jussive.

Jussive is generally indicated by three keys:
(1) The short form if possible (יִ֫בֶן vs. יִבְנֶה, for example) or accent shift (יֵ֫רֶד yḗreḏ vs. יֵרֵד yērēḏ).
(2) The veyiqtol if it is prefixed with vav (rather than the vayyiqtol or veqatal).
(3) The fronting of the verb.

Since the jussive is often the same as the yiqtol in form, it is useful to watch out for these other keys.

Hi Jason,,

If only grammar books would be as straight forward as your explanation. Having read what you said it is rather annoying that none of the grammars I have describe the Jussive as this, straight-forward and practical. Thank you.

Having said that, and not wanting to disappoint you I do have an issue still. Taking the following two examples:

Genesis 1:14

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֗ים יְהִ֤י מְאֹרֹת֙ בִּרְקִ֣יעַ הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם לְהַבְדִּ֕יל בֵּ֥ין הַיּ֖וֹם וּבֵ֣ין הַלָּ֑יְלָה וְהָי֤וּ לְאֹתֹת֙ וּלְמ֣וֹעֲדִ֔ים וּלְיָמִ֖ים

Quite clearly two jussives here in the sense of God's desire being expressed instead of a command, though obviously commanding things is inherent in the gentler, "I wish there to be..." - (The descriptive words Jussive and cohortative are meaningless to me despite knowing their definitions, which is why I prefer to use practical meaningful language that actually conveys the true imagery of a situation). Anyway, no problem here. The imperfects are shortened.

Now we see Genesis 28:3

וְאֵ֤ל שַׁדַּי֙ יְבָרֵ֣ךְ אֹֽתְךָ֔ וְיַפְרְךָ֖ וְיַרְבֶּ֑ךָ וְהָיִ֖יתָ לִקְהַ֥ל עַמִּֽים

Translated as 'May God bless you and may God multiply...I find it awkward to read Jussive here, Within this context all I read is Religious language. I feel like the translators needed to apply a politeness in order to convey that customary mannerism for the benefit of a socially ingrained sensitivity that requires some sort of faux reverence when calling upon God to do something.

I see not a hint, not a smidget of a problem by translating this as: God will bless you, God will multiply you". The grammar clearly allows for it. And I feel that this is all the more important because this is a prophetic statement from Isaac who is encouraging Jacob in a situation where probably, leaving the security of protective environment for the first time, he needed more than just wishful thinking from his father . The prophetic always happens, so a "I hope the Lord will bless you" is really out of context here anyway. despite my subjective input.

Chris watts

[Jason Hare]

If it were straightforward futures, it would be written differently, thus:

וְאֵ֤ל שַׁדַּי֙ יְבָרֵ֣ךְ אֹֽתְךָ֔  וְיַפְרְךָ֖  וְהִפְרְךָ֖  וְיַרְבֶּ֑ךָ  וְהִרְבֶּ֑ךָ וְהָיִ֖יתָ לִקְהַ֥ל עַמִּֽים
And as for El Shadai, he will bless you and make you fruitful and multiply you, and you will become an assembly of peoples.

The future would be simply written with the veqatal, just as וְהִ֫ייתָ is in the final clause, which is NOT jussive. In this case, וְהִפְרְךָ is the veqatal future, meaning “and he will make you fruitful,” as if it were וְהִפְרֶה אֹתְךָ, from the root פר״י. The same is the case with וְהִרְבֶּ֫ךָ, which is pausal of וְהִרְבְּךָ “he will multiply you, increase you, make you numerous” from the root רב״ה. The use of veyiqtol instead of veqatal is an indication of the jussive.

As the text appears in the Bible, it should be understood with jussives, thus:

And as for El Shadai, may he bless you and make you fruitful and multiply you, and you will become an assembly of peoples.

[Jason Hare]

Here is a drill from Weingreen’s A Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew, Exercise 36:

10. וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָֽאָרוֹן וַיֹּ֫אמֶר מֹשֶׁה ק֫וּמָה יהוה וְיָנ֫וּסוּ אֹיְבֶ֫יךָ מִפָּנֶ֫יךָ׃

What do you make of the verb in red, and how would you translate this sentence? Also, how would you deal with the verbs in blue?

[Chris Watts]

Here is a drill from Weingreen’s A Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew, Exercise 36:

10. וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָֽאָרוֹן וַיֹּ֫אמֶר מֹשֶׁה ק֫וּמָה יהוה וְיָנ֫וּסוּ אֹיְבֶ֫יךָ מִפָּנֶ֫יךָ׃

What do you make of the verb in red, and how would you translate this sentence? Also, how would you deal with the verbs in blue?

First of all I am going to be honest and say that only about 15% of the time am I able to translate hebrew without looking at the English. The other 85% I translate words but then need to look at the English for the sense.
As a personal challenge I read this straight away without searching for it and came up with: "Let/May the ark be lifted up. Then Moshe said: Rise Lord and may we chase your enemy away from before your face/presence"

The first blue verb is 3 Person Shortened imperfect therefore recognised as jussive straight away.
The second blue verb is your very common 'then or and he said", a normal imperfect used in narrative.
I recognised the Red verb as being an imperfect and indicative (since I believe Moses to be asking politely something he is convinced is true)?? and the 3 sing prefix with 3 Plural suffix.

Ok to be honest grammatically wobbling around here, so let's see.

========================================================================

Genesis 22:17 :

כִּֽי־בָרֵ֣ךְ אֲבָרֶכְךָ֗ וְהַרְבָּ֨ה אַרְבֶּ֤ה אֶֽת־זַרְעֲךָ֙ כְּכוֹכְבֵ֣י הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם וְכַח֕וֹל אֲשֶׁ֖ר עַל־שְׂפַ֣ת הַיָּ֑ם וְיִרַ֣שׁ זַרְעֲךָ֔ אֵ֖ת שַׁ֥עַר אֹיְבָֽיו

So why do we not read in English: "MAY your offspring inherit the gate of his enemies"? וְיִרַ֣שׁ



Chris watts

EDIT: After all these years I have just learned what 'Jussive' actually means, and I put the blame firmly at the feet of the Authors of grammar books. Apparently it means much more than simply a wish or mild command translated as May or Let, which is how I have always understood it from grammar books, and from reading English Bibles. I read this : "Jussive is one of the variants of hortatory mood. Or, even it is similar to the cohortative mood, in that is expresses insistence, imploring, self-encouragement, wish, desire, command, purpose or consequence" In other words it is a MOOD that URGES or IMPLORES. Why have I never read this before? It is extremely annoying to have read a simple quick paragraph with about 5 examples of the Jussive from practically all the Grammar books that the Jussive is simply a third/second person wish or desire expressed by 'Let or May', and they treat it as a by-product asif there is nothing more to be said. This is precisely why I paid very little attention to it, because the books pay very little attention to it, and precisely why I have misunderstood its importance in Biblical hebrew!!! Just venting!

I have come to realise over the last few days of scouring through so much is that the English words "Let" and "May" do not correspond well to the Hebrew Cohortative or the Jussive. Hence my understanding has been influenced by a combination of insufficient understanding of the very precise definitions of these two concepts (grammar books take most of the blame here) and the fact the English translates May and Let more as 'possible requests' and 'asking for permissions', more of a 'polite request in the hope of'.... which is not what the Hebrew means.

[talmid56]

Chris, if you haven't already seen it, you may want to check out the new online Unfolding Word Hebrew grammar. It does a good job of explaining concepts without so much jargon, and has plenty of examples from sentences in the Hebrew Bible.

They have a helpful page on the jussive. After an overview of the jussive, they give some verb tables with the forms, then a good set of examples under the various types of usage. Here is the link for the relevant page:

https://uhg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/verb_jussive.html

The grammar is a work in progress. I really like what I've seen of it so far. It interacts with modern linguistics, which is a plus. However, it does not appear to assume the user is familiar with linguistic terminology, which is good.

The jussive is one of those areas of grammar I need more review and understanding of. So, thanks for bringing up the topic and your questions.

[Chris Watts]

Chris, if you haven't already seen it, you may want to check out the new online Unfolding Word Hebrew grammar.

https://uhg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/verb_jussive.html

The jussive is one of those areas of grammar I need more review and understanding of. So, thanks for bringing up the topic and your questions.

Hallo Dewaye, I thank you for your input, I appreciate it. However I have used this site before but find it less than useful to be honest. Their explanation of the Jussive is at best - useless. Apart from Jason's clear and succinct explanations, I found this video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rAg6Ov6Alo. This is a good description of the meaning of the Jussive. I only found it because I have one of Mark Futato's books on the Hebrew accents - an excellent book even for those without any knowledge of these accents and yet detailed enough for those of us who want more meat so to speak, his explanations are very good and very clear. Anyway I searched for Futato to see whether or not he had anything to say and found this video tutorial. Hope it is useful.

The trouble with this grammar site is that it titles the Jussive with the Paradigms by calling it the 'Qal Jussive Paradigm' when all that is is he imperfect one learns in the first week; plus it gives no clear explanations as how to recognise this mood. As for the grammar books, treating the jussive like a darn footnote in your BH grammar book, not a single book explains it properly, So yes if I sound heaved it is because I treated the jussive as just another fancy way of Hebrew being polite, respectful, or just plain religiously sensitive. This is how it is perceived when you read the less than useful explanations about it.

Seriously though I did appreciate the offer of help.

Chris watts

[Jason Hare]

I don’t have the time right now to give a complete response to your post, but the fact that you would read וַיְהִי as a jussive indicates a major problem in how you approach verbs. This is probably the single most common verb form in the entire Bible, and if you read it as a jussive, then you misunderstand it. It is a marker of the narrative past. This means that the very basis of how you approach verbs in Hebrew would need to be reworked to reformulate how they work. The free form יְהִי is a jussive. The connected form וִיהִי (that is, וְ + יְהִי ← *וְיְהִי ← *וִיְהִי ← וִיהִי) is a jussive. The form וַיְהִי is NOT a jussive. You must be able to identify the differences. The latter is normally translated “and it was, and there was, and it happened, and it came to pass.” It regularly sets up a narrative past chain.

[Chris Watts]

but the fact that you would read וַיְהִי as a jussive indicates a major problem in how you approach verbs.

1. Well hold on there for a minute Jason, so much for my honesty, I could have looked at Num 10:35 you know. Anyway I am so fixated on Jussives these last four days that I actually failed to pay attention to that Patach underneath that Vav, darn it! But I do not think my approach to verbs can be surmised from this humongously humiliating error. When you stare at the same issue for long enough, occasionally the finer details become a blur, an excuse I know, but it is true. Anyway, just saw the actual translation.

2. Having scoured many references and scriptures, there really is quite a lot of divergent opinions on what constitutes a Jussive WHEN the grammatical cues are missing. I hit one example after another, but here is an interesting one: Job 20:23 :

יְהִ֤י ׀ לְמַלֵּ֬א בִטְנ֗וֹ יְֽשַׁלַּח־בּ֭וֹ חֲר֣וֹן אַפּ֑וֹ וְיַמְטֵ֥ר עָ֝לֵ֗ימוֹ בִּלְחוּמֽוֹ׃

Some English translators make this into a Jussive, including Robert Chisholm, the Vav is absent here I actually noticed - but I feel that the normal Qal imperfect with the KJV translation sounds absolutely perfect. So who is closer to the original writer's thought in this one? It is not always easy. On top of that, I notice that the Jussive does not always have to be "Let or "May, as grammars tend to emphasize, but it can be translated as Subjunctive, 'should like to would like to'. Am I wrong here?

3. I am just going to throw this one in because it is related to the original question, it does actually appear that there is an equal divide between this verse from Lamentations being in the Jussive or just a normal imperfect. For example, A.W Streane says it is a Hortative (I like that don't you) a jussive in other words, just like many others agree with you Jason. On the other hand the well known Naegelsbach comments that this should be translated as in verse 28 to 29; "...that He sits alone...that he puts his mouth...". So my issue is not with your interpretation at all for I accept everything you say, especially grammatically, but it is with the ambiguity of such verses that allow for both interpretations that are absolutely equally applicable?

So my question is, can you offset the equally balanced interpretations towards it being a Jussive? Though I think I like the word Hortative, my choice for this from now on methinks.

Chris watts