Grammar:Number/0

Number

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Nonconformity Between Number and Verb

In Biblical Hebrew there is not always conformity between number and verb, with a plural subject sometimes taking a single verb form and vice versa.  Some commentators attribute this to "דרך המקרא", the way of the text,¹ and do not attempt to explain the various cases, while others try to explain the nonconformity in each case.

• "היה" – Many commentators² note that the phenomenon is especially prevalent with regards to the root "היה".
• Ibn Ezra Bereshit Lexical Commentary 1:14Bereshit First Commentary 1:14About R. Avraham ibn Ezraexplains that this is "the way of the text" and that the lack of conformity might stem from the word's prevalence.³ ShadaBereshit 1:14About R. Shemuel David Luzzattol compares it to the Italian "impersonale" construction, often used to express a non specific subject ("one", "they" etc) which similarly does not always conform to number.
• Cf. RashbamBereshit 1:14About R. Shemuel b. Meir who agrees that the nonconformity is simply "the way of the text" but adds that if one nonetheless wanted to look for conformity, one might suggest that in all such cases there is an assumed subject which is implied by the text: "מעשה" and it is this which conforms to the verb.  Thus, such verses would read as if written: "and [an event] happened, that..."
• Examples include: Bereshit 1:14 ("יְהִי מְאֹרֹת בִּרְקִיעַ הַשָּׁמַיִם"),‎⁴  Shemot 17:12 ( וַיְהִי יָדָיו אֱמוּנָה),⁵ Bemidbar 9:6 (וַיְהִי אֲנָשִׁים), Devarim 22:23 (כִּי יִהְיֶה נַעֲרָ בְתוּלָה),
• Other cases – With other verbs, as well, number and verb might not match.  In many of these cases, however, commentators are more hesitant to attribute this to "the way of the text" and attempt to explain away the nonconformity:
• Ambiguous subject – When the subject of a verb is ambiguous, it might lead to the conclusion that there is nonconformity while in reality it might be that the verb is simply modifying a different word:
• Bereshit 4:10 (קוֹל דְּמֵי אָחִיךָ צֹעֲקִים) – Though the word "קוֹל" is singular, the verb "צֹעֲקִים" is plural.⁶ Many commentators⁷ explain away the nonconformity by suggesting that really the referent of "צֹעֲקִים" is not the singular "קוֹל" but the plural "דמי אחיך".‎⁸
• Shemuel I 2:4 ("קֶשֶׁת גִּבֹּרִים חַתִּים") – Though the word "קֶשֶׁת" is singular, the word "חַתִּים" is plural.  This leads Radak and Ralbag to suggest that the word "חַתִּים" modifies "גִּבֹּרִים" rather than "קֶשֶׁת" and the verse's intent is that the mighty men, and not just their bows, were broken.‎⁹ 
• Unmentioned / Implied subject – Nonconformity might result from the fact that the subject of the verb is only implied and not mentioned explicitly in the text:
  
• Shemot 1:10 ("כִּי תִקְרֶאנָה מִלְחָמָה") –  Though "מִלְחָמָה" is singular "תִקְרֶאנָה" is plural. While Rashbam notes that this is simply "the way of the text", Ibn Ezra¹⁰  raises the possibility that the verse is truncated and really means "כִּי תִקְרֶאנָה קורות מִלְחָמָה", in which case the plural "תִקְרֶאנָה" matches the plural "קורות".
• Shemot 17:2 ("וַיָּרֶב הָעָם עִם מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמְרוּ תְּנוּ לָנוּ מַיִם") – Though the verse implies that the nation is speaking only with Moshe, the people nonetheless address him in the plural, saying, "תְּנוּ". This leads Ibn Ezra and Radak to suggest that the nation must have been speaking to Aharon as well, even though he is not mentioned.
• Each of many – At times a plural noun will be treated as singular because the verse's intent is to say "each of many --"
  
• Tehillim 66:3 ("מַה נּוֹרָא מַעֲשֶׂיךָ") – See Rashi and Ibn Ezra that the word "נּוֹרָא" is in singular despite the plural "מַעֲשֶׂיךָ" since the verse's intent is "how awesome is each of your deeds".
• Bereshit 49:22 (בָּנוֹת צָעֲדָה עֲלֵי שׁוּר) – See Rashi, Rashbam and Ibn Ezra, who explain the singular " צָעֲדָה" by saying that each of the many boughs climbed.¹¹
• Shemuel I 19:20 (וַיִּשְׁלַח שָׁאוּל מַלְאָכִים... וַיַּרְא) – Though many messengers were sent by Shaul, the verse states in singular that "he saw".  Radak explains that the form implies that "each of the messengers saw".¹²
• Other examples: Other verses have been explained in a similar manner. See: Shemuel i 4:15 ("וְעֵינָיו קָמָה"),¹³ Yeshayahu 59:12 ("וְחַטֹּאותֵינוּ עָנְתָה בָּנוּ"), Yirmeyahu 31:14 ("מֵאֲנָה לְהִנָּחֵם עַל בָּנֶיהָ כִּי אֵינֶנּוּ"),¹⁴ Yirmeyahu 46:15 (מַדּוּעַ נִסְחַף" אַבִּירֶיךָ"), Yirmeyahu 51:29 ("כִּי קָמָה עַל בָּבֶל מַחְשְׁבוֹת י"י")
• Miscellaneous
• Devarim 30:10 ("מִצְוֺתָיו וְחֻקֹּתָיו הַכְּתוּבָה") – See Chizkuni and R. D"Z Hoffmann. 
• Yirmeyahu 2:34 ("נִמְצְאוּ דַּם נַפְשׁוֹת") – The word "דַּם" is singular, yet the verb "נִמְצְאוּ" is plural. See Radak that since the verse is referring to the blood of many souls, it is considered plural.

Plural = One of Many

• Sometimes a plural is used when a verse really means "one of ---" .  For example:
• Bereshit 8:4 - See Shadal and R. D"Z Hoffmann who both explain "עַל הָרֵי אֲרָרָט" to mean "on one of the mountains of Ararat"
• Shofetim 12:7 ("וַיִּקָּבֵר בְּעָרֵי גִלְעָד")– See R"Y Kara and Radak that Yiftach was buried in "one of the cities of Gilad". Cf. the Midrash that he was struck with boils and each of is limbs fell off and was buried in a different city.
• Shemuel I 1:1 ("וַיְהִי אִישׁ אֶחָד מִן הָרָמָתַיִם צוֹפִים").  See Radak that the verse might mean "there was a man from one of the Ramot"
• Shemuel I 18:21 - "בִּשְׁתַּיִם תִּתְחַתֵּן בִּי הַיּוֹם" – see Radak on Shemuel I 1:1 that Shaul means, ""
• Other examples include: Zecharya 9:9 ("עַיִר בֶּן אֲתֹנוֹת"),¹⁵

"Royal We"

¹ See Rashbam on Bereshit 1:14, "דרך המקראות לומר לשון יחיד אצל לשון רבים" and see below that many say this with regards to the root "היה" specifically.

² See Ibn EzraBereshit Lexical Commentary 1:14Bereshit First Commentary 1:14About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, RadakAbout R. David Kimchi, ShadalBereshit 1:14About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto and R. D"Z HoffmannBereshit 1:14About R. David Zvi Hoffmann.  Radak writes, "לשון הויה אינו שומר בהרבה מקומות יחיד ורבים זכר ונקבה".  See the body for examples of nonconformity between the verb and number. For examples where the verb "היה" does not conform with gender, see: Bereshit 24:43 (וְהָיָה הָעַלְמָה הַיֹּצֵאת לִשְׁאֹב), Kohelet 11:2 (מַה יִּהְיֶה רָעָה)

³ He writes: "בעבור שידברו במלה הזאת הרבה".

⁴ Though the word "מְאֹרֹת" is plural, the verb "יְהִי" is singular.  Compare RashbamBereshit 1:14About R. Shemuel b. Meir, Ibn EzraBereshit Lexical Commentary 1:14Bereshit First Commentary 1:14Shemot First Commentary 17:12About R. Avraham ibn Ezra and RadakBereshit 1:14Shemuel I 2:4About R. David Kimchi who note that this is "the way of the text" with Lekach Tov who suggests that the singular form teaches that the luminaries were created from the light of the first day.

⁵ See Ibn EzraBereshit Lexical Commentary 1:14Bereshit First Commentary 1:14Shemot First Commentary 17:12About R. Avraham ibn Ezra and R. D"Z HoffmannBereshit 1:14Shemot 17:12About R. David Zvi Hoffmann, and compare to RashiShemot 17:12About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki who adds in an assumed subject so as to create conformity: "ויהי משה ידיו פרושות השמים באמונה".

⁶ See R. D"Z Hoffmann that the Samaritan version of Torah therefore emends the text to read "קול דמי אחיך צועק", producing conformity.

⁷ See Ibn Ezra, Radak, HaKetav VeHaKabbalah, Shadal, R. D" Z Hoffmann.

⁸ See R. D"Z Hoffmann, that the word "" might simply mean, "Listen" comparing our verse to Yeshayahu 52:8, "קול צפיך נשאו קול".

⁹ Cf. Malbim who suggests that the verb is modifying "קֶשֶׁת", but that since this is "שם המין", the name of a category, it can take a plural verb. Hoil Moshe instead suggests that the verb is in the plural form only due to its juxtaposition to the plural "גִּבֹּרִים". [He points to Tehillim 37:16, " מֵהֲמוֹן רְשָׁעִים רַבִּים", as a similar example, suggesting that "רַבִּים" modifies "הֲמוֹן" and is cast in the plural due to its juxtaposition to the word "רְשָׁעִים".] Hoil Moshe also raises the possibility that in our verse "קֶשֶׁת גִּבֹּרִים" should be understood as "גבורי קשת", in which case there is conformity between verb and noun.

¹⁰ Ibn Ezra also raises the possibility that this is simply the way of the text.

¹¹ Contrast Shadal who suffices to note that it "common" for a plural feminine noun to take a singular verbal form, noting that this is a common phenomenon in Arabic as well. He notes many other examples, including Iyyov 27:20

כמים בלהות (איוב כ״ז:כ׳), ועיניו קמה (שמואל א ד׳:ט״ו) כי קמה על בבל מחשבות ה׳ (ירמיהו נ״א:כ״ט) מפי עליון לא תצא הרעות (איכה ג׳:ל״ח) וחטאותנו ענתה בנו (ישעיהו נ״ט:י״ב) מחשבות בעצה תכון (משלי כ׳:י״ח)

¹² Alternatively, he suggests that the verse refers to just the head messenger.

¹³ See Radak there.

¹⁴ See Ibn Ezra on Shemot 17:12. Cf. Radak who explains that the word "" is singular since it speaks of the missing nation.  Compare also Abarbanel.

¹⁵ See Radak that the verse means, "a colt born to one of the female donkeys".