Page:Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (1910 Kautzsch-Cowley edition).djvu/496

, , , &c., as well as after imprecations, see below), and also simple asseverations, e.g. , ,  after , but mostly without any introductory formula.

Rem. No certain explanation of these particles has yet been given. According to the usual view, phrases expressing an oath depend on the suppression of an imprecation upon oneself, e.g. the Lord do so unto me, if I do it equivalent to I certainly will not do it; then naturally properly if I do it not equivalent to I certainly will do it. It is indeed difficult to understand such self-imprecations, put into the mouth of God, as in f.,, , , , ,. Possibly, however, the consciousness of the real meaning of the formula was lost at an early period, and simply came to express verily, .—In, where, instead of a self-imprecation, a curse is pronounced upon others, read  with the Lxx for.

Examples:—

(a) The particles and  used after the utterance of an oath and after formulae of swearing, e.g.  (see note on a) ;,  (after ; in  and 29:6  is followed by a simple ); ,  (after ); cf. also, , ; spoken by God, f., , ; similarly   f.; spoken by God, , where  occurs first with the perfect in the sense of a prophetic perfect, , but in the parallel clause with the imperfect; Jer 226; in  the negative oath introduced by ,  is immediately afterwards continued by  with the imperfect.—In  the threat introduced in verse 8 by  is, after a long parenthesis, resumed with.

(b) and  after formulae of cursing, e.g. , &c.; cf. . On the other hand, follows the curse, in,  (here with a perfect), and in  ; in  the preceding  is repeated before ; in  the purport of the asseveration is repeated (after the insertion of a conditional sentence) in the perfect consecutive.

(c) and  as simple particles of asseveration, e.g. , &c., ,  (in the middle of the sentence); after , ;  with the imperf. , with the perfect,.