Page:Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (1910 Kautzsch-Cowley edition).djvu/433

 the sixth; but, );   (not before  and  is  used instead of it). On the other hand, the article is always found after , hence , &c., although it is possible that the original reading in these cases was , and that the article is only due to the Masora. In  the text is evidently corrupt (see verse 26).—Especially also in certain frequently recurring combinations as in particularizing the gates in , , &c., , and courts in , 12, &c., ; and very often when the attribute consists of a participle, e.g. , , , ,   (?); ,   (the impenetrable forest?) ,.

Of the other examples, (where, however, the Samaritan reads ), 41:26 (but cf. verse 4),, ,  may at any rate be explained on the ground that the preceding cardinal number is equivalent to a determinant; in , , 10, &c., the substantive is already determined by , and in   by .—In , ,  (where, however,  might also be understood as a subsequent explanation of ) and , the omission of the article after the preposition is certainly due merely to the Masora. In (unless  is to be read twice),  (where however  is probably meant),  (where a  precedes, hence probably a case of haplography), the omission of the article before ,  (?) and  may be due to a regard for euphony (see z below). On the other hand, in (read ), 17:12 ( is a later addition), 19:22 (cf. the LXX),, ,  ,  (read  or omit  with Cornill), , , either the text is corrupt, or the expression incorrect. But in, , acc. to D. H. Müller (Anzeiger der Wiener Akad., phil-hist. Kl. 1902, no. x) is the genitive of a substantive, aromatic oil, sweet cane (in  read ), like spiced wine. In read  and in.

(b) No article with the attribute, while the substantive is determined either by the article, or a suffix, or a following genitive. Thus the article is sometimes omitted with demonstratives, since they are already to a certain extent determined by their meaning (cf. also the Mêšaʿ inscription, l. 3, ); as with  (evidently for euphony, and so probably often); 30:16, 32:23, ; with  ; with   (according to the Masora  is a relative pronoun here, as always elsewhere); with , according to the present corrupt text (the original reading  became , and  was then corrupted to ); so, almost without exception, when the substantive is determined only by a suffix, e.g. , , ,  and 8:8 f., where , as in , has arisen by contraction from , or we should simply read  (in all these passages with );  (with ); , ,  (with ).

The article is sometimes omitted also with the attributes referring to proper names, as, ,. Other examples are, 5, 18:13, (but in ,  with the article). In, &c., is also a case of this kind,  being used (almost always without the article) as a sort of proper name; cf. also