Page:Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (1910 Kautzsch-Cowley edition).djvu/462

 a trace of popular language), e.g. (?),, and (like other indications of the very late origin of the book) very frequently in Ecclesiastes, e.g. 1:16, 2:1, 11, 15, 3:17f. and thirteen other places; in Aramaic,.

2. Substantival subjects also are somewhat frequently resumed, and thus expressly emphasized, by the insertion of the corresponding separate pronoun of the 3rd person before the predicate is stated, e.g. the woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she  gave me, &c.; 14:24 ; 15:4, 24:7, &c.; but  in  after the predicate and subject is equivalent to he himself.

2. Not infrequently the separate pronoun serves to give strong emphasis to a suffix of the same person which precedes (or sometimes even to one which follows), whether the suffix be attached to a verb (as accusative) or to a noun or preposition (as genitive). In English such an emphasis on the pronoun can generally be rendered only by laying greater stress upon it, or sometimes by repeating it; cf., on the contrary, the French mon livre à moi. The separate pronoun in such instances is not to be regarded as casus obliquus (accusative or genitive), but as the subject of an independent sentence, the predicate of which must in each case be supplied according to the context.

Examples of emphasis:—

(a) On a suffix by means of     (prop. bless me, I also would be blessed); ; cf. also, , 20 ; by   (but the text is most probably corrupt).—The separate pronoun precedes in  ; 49:8 (, not Judah, thou art he whom, but Judah thee, thee thy brethren shall praise!), and.

(b) On a noun-suffix with a substantive, by means of, ; by   ; by  , , ; by  , after , but without special stress;  (?); by  ; by   (without special stress),  .—The separate pronoun precedes in  ; , ,  ;  ;  ;  .—In , where  might be taken as strengthening  (equivalent in sense to ), we should read  for , as in verse 51.

(c) On a suffix united with a preposition, ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  .—The separate pronoun precedes in  ;  ; , and.

The same principle also explains  (not ); cf. 10:21, and,.