retraction of the tone before a following tone-syllable, but read certainly שָׁמַר לָנֶ֫צַח.—The forms ־֫מוֹ, ־ָ֫ מוֹ, ־ֵ֫ מוֹ occur 23 times, all in poetry[1] (except Ex 2331) [viz. with the perfect Ex 1510, 2331, ψ 736; with the imperfect Ex 155 (מוּ for מוֹ), 157.9.9.12.15.17.17, ψ 25, 2110.13, 225, 4517, 806, 14010; with the imperative ψ 511, 5912.12, 8312]. On the age of these forms, see § 91 l 3; on ־ַן and ־ָן as suffixes of the 3rd fem. plur. of the imperfect, § 60 d.—In Gn 489 קָֽחֶם־נָא (cf. וַיַּכֶּם־שָׁם 1 Ch 1411 according to Baer), ־ֵם has lost the tone before Maqqeph and so is shortened to ־ֶם.—In Ez 448 וַתְּשִׂימוּן is probably only an error for וַתְּשִׂימוּם.
[h] 2. From a comparison of these verbal suffixes with the noun-suffixes (§ 91) we find that (a) there is a greater variety of forms amongst the verbal than amongst the noun-suffixes, the forms and relations of the verb itself being more various;—(b) the verbal suffix, where it differs from that of the noun, is longer; cf. e.g. ־֫נִי, ־ַ֫ נִי, ־ֵ֫ נִי (me) with ־ִי (my). The reason is that the pronominal object is less closely connected with the verb than the possessive pronoun (the genitive) is with the noun; consequently the former can also be expressed by a separate word (את in אֹתִי, &c.).
[i] 4. A verbal form with a suffix gains additional strength, and sometimes intentional emphasis, when, instead of the mere connecting vowel, a special connecting-syllable[2] (ăn)[3] is inserted between the suffix and the verbal stem. Since, however, this syllable always has the tone, the ă is invariably (except in the 1st pers. sing.) modified to tone-bearing Seghôl. This is called the Nûn energicum[4] (less suitably demonstrativum or epentheticum), and occurs principally (see, however, Dt 3210 bis) in pausal forms of the imperfect, e.g. יְבָֽרֲכֶֽנְהוּ he will bless him (ψ 7215, cf. Jer 522), אֶתְּקֶ֫נְךָּ Jer 2224; יְכַ֫בְּדָ֥נְנִי he will honour me (ψ 5023) is unusual; rarely in the perfect, Dt 2413 בֵּֽרְכֶךָּ. On examples like דָּנַ֫נִּי Gn 306, cf. § 26 g, § 59 f. In far the greatest number of cases, however, this Nûn is assimilated to the following consonant (נ, כ), or the latter is lost in pronunciation (so ה), and the Nûn consequently sharpened. Hence we get the following series of suffix-forms:—
- ↑ Thus in Ps 2 ־מוֹ occurs five times [four times attached to a noun or preposition, §§ 91 f, 103c], and ־ֵם only twice.
- ↑ It is, however, a question whether, instead of a connecting syllable, we should not assume a special verbal form, analogous to the Arabic energetic mood (see l, at the end) and probably also appearing in the Hebrew cohortative (see the footnote on § 48 c).—As M. Lambert has shown in REJ. 1903, p. 178 ff. (‘De l’emploi des suffixes pronominaux...’), the suffixes of the 3rd pers. with the impf. without waw in prose are ־ֶ֫ נּוּ and ־ֶ֫ נָּה, but with waw consec. ־ֵ֫ הוּ and ־ֶ֫ הָ or ־ָהּ; with the jussive in the 2nd and 3rd pers. always ־ֵ֫ הוּ, ־ֶ֫ ההָ, the 1st pers. more often ־ֶ֫ נּוּ than ־ֵ֫ הוּ, and always ־ֶ֫ נָּה.
- ↑ According to Barth ‘n-haltige Suffixe’ in Sprachwiss. Untersuchungen, Lpz. 1907, p. 1 ff., the connecting element, as in Aramaic, was originally in, which in Hebrew became en in a closed tone-syllable.
- ↑ So König, Lehrgeb., i. p. 226.
