A question about syntax

[markofcain]

Ben, I think you are correct in the greatest number of cases regarding the immediate placement of לֹא before the word it negates. Personally, I tend to couch rules in tentative statements knowing that the one constant in linguistics is the list of exceptions!

The following is Gesenius Hebrew Grammar § 152.1.a.3
As a rule לֹא stands immediately before the verb, but sometimes is separated from it (frequently to bring into special prominence another word which follows it); thus Jb 22:7, Ec 10:10 before the object and verb; Nu 16:29 before the subject and verb; Dt 8:9, 2 S 3:34, y Ps 49:18, 103:10, Jb 13:16, 34:23 before a complementary adjunct. In Dt 32:5 לֹא according to the accentuation even stands at the end of the clause (they offend him not); but undoubtedly לֹא בָּנָיו are to be taken together.—On the position of לֹא with the infinitive absolute, see § 113.v

[SteveMiller]

I did a BibleWorks search for a negative particle immediately following a verb. In all 337 of these cases, the negative particle negated a word which followed it and not the preceding verb.
I also searched for any verses that end with a negative particle, and there were none.

Put that together with Gesenius' lone counter-example of Deut 32:5, which, as Mark says, is clearly not a counter-example, and it seems pretty clear to me that in Biblical Hebrew a negative particle must precede what it negates.

This was a good question. The result surprised me because it seems to me, subjectively, that Hebrew gives more freedom in word order than English.

[MGWB]

I don't think יעקב בלא יכזב would work for what you want to say.

With לא I may very well be wrong here, but I think it has to immediately precede the word and cannot be placed after it.

Why wouldn't יעקב בלא יכזב work?

And why would you change בלוא to בלא?

(i.e. Why did you drop the vav?)

[MGWB]

I don't think יעקב בלא יכזב would work for what you want to say.

With לא I may very well be wrong here, but I think it has to immediately precede the word and cannot be placed after it.

Why did you drop the vav?

And why wouldn't יעקב בלא יכזב work?

[kwrandolph]

I don't think יעקב בלא יכזב would work for what you want to say.

With לא I may very well be wrong here, but I think it has to immediately precede the word and cannot be placed after it.

Why did you drop the vav?

And why wouldn't יעקב בלא יכזב work?

Why do you want to keep adding the bet? That changes the meaning from a simple negation.

Most of the time, the negation is used without a waw, which makes the relatively few times the negation is found with a waw possible examples of an insertion of the waw during the second temple period.

Karl W. Randolph.

[MGWB]

I don't think יעקב בלא יכזב would work for what you want to say.

With לא I may very well be wrong here, but I think it has to immediately precede the word and cannot be placed after it.

Why did you drop the vav?

And why wouldn't יעקב בלא יכזב work?

Why do you want to keep adding the bet? That changes the meaning from a simple negation.

Most of the time, the negation is used without a waw, which makes the relatively few times the negation is found with a waw possible examples of an insertion of the waw during the second temple period.

Karl W. Randolph.

It "changes the meaning from a simple negation" to what?

I want to find out exactly what the addition or ommission of a bet here does.

[kwrandolph]

It "changes the meaning from a simple negation" to what?

I want to find out exactly what the addition or ommission of a bet here does.

Adding a bet prefix to not makes it “without” Numbers 35:22, Proverbs 13:23, 16:8, etc.

Another meaning is “not in” as in not in the time, Leviticus 15:26, Kohelet 7:17.

If you want to say “Jacob should not lie” then it’s יעקב לא יכזב.

Karl W. Randolph.

[MGWB]

It "changes the meaning from a simple negation" to what?

I want to find out exactly what the addition or ommission of a bet here does.

Adding a bet prefix to not makes it “without” Numbers 35:22, Proverbs 13:23, 16:8, etc.

Another meaning is “not in” as in not in the time, Leviticus 15:26, Kohelet 7:17.

If you want to say “Jacob should not lie” then it’s יעקב לא יכזב.

Karl W. Randolph.

What about Ecclesiastes 10:11?

־לחש ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון׃בלואאם־ישך הנחש

[kwrandolph]

Adding a bet prefix to not makes it “without” Numbers 35:22, Proverbs 13:23, 16:8, etc.

Another meaning is “not in” as in not in the time, Leviticus 15:26, Kohelet 7:17.

If you want to say “Jacob should not lie” then it’s יעקב לא יכזב.

Karl W. Randolph.

What about Ecclesiastes 10:11?

־לחש ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון׃בלואאם־ישך הנחש

First a quick note about quoting Hebrew in this forum—please put the text between Hebrew markup so that is comes out correctly. The words came out mixed up without the Hebrew markup. There’s a bug with the software that messes up the order of Hebrew in the writing box after adding the bold markup, so add that last. Even though it’s mixed up in the writing box, it comes out correctly when posted.

אם ישך הנחש בלוא לחש ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון

“If the snake bites without hissing…” follows the patterns that I mentioned above.

“Hissing” is the English way of expressing the snake’s “whispering” sound that it makes.

Karl W. Randolph.