Page:Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (1910 Kautzsch-Cowley edition).djvu/465

 [but see Kittel; so 13:2, 6, 11; 10:26, but LXX ],,  (if the text is correct), 39:15 (read  in v. 14), and to the plurals of names of animals, ,. Conversely, plural suffixes refer to collective singulars, e.g. in, , , [but read ]; and to a verbal idea contained in the preceding clause, in ,  , ,. But the suffix in  refers to the collective idea contained in ; in   refers to the sailors included in sense under the term. In read ; in , 38:16,   the text is most probably corrupt.

3. In a few examples the force of the noun-suffix or possessive pronoun has become so weak that the language appears to be almost entirely unconscious of it. Thus in, usually explained as being from the pluralis maiestatis  with the suffix of the 1st singular (always with  to distinguish it from , ; but see note below), used exclusively of God, not only in addressing him , but ultimately (see, however, the note below), without any regard to the pronoun, as equivalent to the Lord. On as a Qerê perpetuum of the Masoretes for  see  and.

A similar loss of vitality in the suffix is generally assumed in prop. in his unitedness, i.e. he &c. together, e.g. ; then, without regard to the suffix, even after the 1st person   in reference to two women;, , , 7; after the 2nd person, , &c. But the supposed pronominal suffix is perhaps rather to be explained, with Brockelmann, xiv. 344 f., as an old adverbial ending, which survives in the Arabic adverbs in u and in Assyrian.—Cf. further prop. their entirety, but also after the 2nd person equivalent to all together,, (hear, ye peoples, all of you; cf. ), and even before the 2nd person,  (in  read  with the LXX).—On the redundant suffix in  , cf. .