JussiveF, M, & B in Instant Details? What do these mean?

[Enoch]

In the Instant Details for Hebrew text one finds the terms JussiveB, JussiveF, & JussiveM, explained in the Accordance help table as Both, Form, & Meaning.

Could you please explain in more detail what these 3 variations on Jussive mean?

 

My guess would be that

JussiveF Form would mean it had a form distinct from the imperfect,

JussiveM  Meaning would mean that it looks the same as imperfect but is interpreted in context as      Jussive --  but what

JussiveB Both would mean eludes my imagination at the moment.

Or do I have it all wrong?

Thanks in advance.

[bpkantor]

You have it essentially correct.

 

JussiveF

JussiveF means that the form is distinctly jussive BUT it is NOT interpreted as a jussive form syntactically in the particular verse. This can only occur in certain verbs that demonstrate a distinct jussive form: e.g., in II-w/y verbs, III-y verbs, and hif'il, the jussive form is distinct from the imperfect/yiqtol form:

 

יָקוּם || יָקֹם

 

יִבְנֶה || יִבֶן

 

יַשְׁלִיךְ || יַשְׁלֵךְ

 

A very clear example of this is in Genesis 4.12:

 

 

‏כִּ֤י תַֽעֲבֹד֙ אֶת־הָ֣אֲדָמָ֔ה לֹֽא־תֹסֵ֥ף תֵּת־כֹּחָ֖הּ

 

Because the form follows לא, it cannot be a jussive form. However, the form תֹסֵף appears to be a short jussive form of the hif'il תוֹסִיף. Incidentally, this interpretation is actually probably incorrect, since this is actually an amazing example, in my opinion, of the Masoretes preserving a very archaic qal form from the root w-s-p. It would have developed as follows: *yawsup > (contraction of diphthongs) > *yōsup > (dissimilation of vowels) > *yōsip > יוֹסֵף with a feminine form תּוֹסֵף. This form happens to be identical with the shortened/jussive form of the hif'il. However, because it follows לא here, it is better interpreted as a qal.

 

This does show you, however, that interpretation can be a factor with these tags.

 

JussiveM

JussiveM is as you claim. This is fairly common after a vav וְ.

 

JussiveB

JussiveB is just like JussiveF except in terms of the interpretation of its syntactic function. For example, when the same verb form follows אל (the jussive negator), it is interpreted as being jussive not only in form but also in meaning. Accordingly, it is marked as both:

 

 

‏רַ֗ק אַל־יֹסֵ֤ף פַּרְעֹה֙ הָתֵ֔ל לְבִלְתִּי֙ שַׁלַּ֣ח אֶת־הָעָ֔ם

[Enoch]

Thanks a lot BP.  If it is not too much trouble, would you mind telling me what the antecedent of the pronoun this is in the 3rd line of your excellent explanation where you say, " This can only occur . . . ."

 

BTW, I have a particular interest in the possibilities of interpreting imperfect forms as jussive in prophecy, where what might seem

 

to be a straight forward prediction might be reduced to a possibility if an imperfect were interpreted as jussive.

Edited March 2, 2018 by Enoch

[bpkantor]

You're welcome.

 

What I mean by this in "This can only occur..." is the jussive having a different form than the regular yiqtol form. Otherwise, the jussive form is identical to the yiqtol form. For example, apart from a context, יִכְתֹּב could either be 'he will write' or 'let him write'. However, a form like יָקֹם can only be jussive.

 

Hope that helps.

 

Jussive in prophecy I am sure is an interesting topic. What I might suggest is comparing similar phrases elsewhere with the same syntax but with verbs that could unambiguously show a jussive form.