Page:Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (1910 Kautzsch-Cowley edition).djvu/501

, i.e. O that one would shut the doors!

Rem. Sometimes the original sense of is still plainly discernible, e.g.   equivalent to, O that this people were given into my hand! cf. . In these examples, however, is still equivalent to O had I! and in numerous other instances the idea of giving has entirely disappeared,  having become stereotyped as a more desiderative particle (utinam). Its construction is either—

(a) With the accusative (in accordance with its original meaning) of a substantive, would that it were even!... morning!,  (53:7), 55:7; with an accusative and a following infinitive, ; with two accusatives, , ; with the accusative of an infinitive, ,   (for  cf. ); of a participle, ; of a personal pronoun (as a suffix),  (with a following ; but   and  with a following accusative is not simply equivalent to , but is properly who endows me with, &c.; cf. ).—With a still greater weakening of the original meaning  is used with an adjective in  could a clean thing but come out of an unclean! i.e. how can a clean thing come, &c.; similarly in  who can find one that hath not been satisfied!

(b) With a following perfect, (cf. ); with a perfect consecutive,  O that they had such an heart!

(c) With a following imperfect,, , ; in the imperfect is twice added with  (cf. a above, on ).

On the cohortative in the apodosis to such desiderative clauses, cf. .

2. The wish may also be expressed by the particles (,, , , ; always with a following imperfect) and  (for which in  we have ,  , from  and =; both with a following imperfect)''si, o si! utinam''. is followed by the imperfect,, ; by the jussive, (rather concessive, equivalent to let it be so); by the perfect, as the expression of a wish that something might have happened in past time (cf. ),  ; 20:3 and  (both times ); on the other hand,  and 63:19 (both times ) to express a wish that something expected in the future may already have happened.—On  with the imperative (by an anacoluthon)  cf. . On the perfect after, , cf. , note 2.