Grammar:Number/0

Number

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Nonconformity Between Number and Verb

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 ShadalBereshit 1:14About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto 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), Yeshayahu 23:18 (וְהָיָה סַחְרָהּ וְאֶתְנַנָּהּ)
• Other roots – With other verbs, as well, number and verb might not match.  In many of these cases, however, some 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:⁶
• Bereshit 4:10 (קוֹל דְּמֵי אָחִיךָ צֹעֲקִים) – Though the word "קוֹל" is singular, the verb "צֹעֲקִים" is plural.⁷ Many commentators⁸ explain away the nonconformity by suggesting that really the referent of "צֹעֲקִים" is not the singular "קוֹל" but the plural "דמי אחיך".‎⁹
• 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.‎¹⁰ 
• Shofetim 5:26 (יָדָהּ לַיָּתֵד תִּשְׁלַחְנָה וִימִינָהּ לְהַלְמוּת עֲמֵלִים) – Though the plural "תִּשְׁלַחְנָה" does not conform to the singular "hand", Radak cites his father that perhaps the subject of the verb is both "יָדָהּ" and "וִימִינָהּ".
• 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 Ezra¹¹  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.
• Tehillim 124:5 ("עָבַר עַל נַפְשֵׁנוּ הַמַּיִם הַזֵּידוֹנִים") – Though "הַמַּיִם" is plural, the verb "עָבַר" is singular.  See Ibn Ezra Tehillim Second Commentary 124:5About R. Avraham ibn Ezraand RadakTehillim 124:5About R. David Kimchi that the word "נחל" of the previous verse applies here as well, so the clause would read " עָבַר נחל הַמַּיִם הַזֵּידוֹנִים".
• 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.¹²
• 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".¹³
• Other examples – Other verses have been explained in a similar manner. See: Yehoshua 2:4, (ותִּקַּח הָאִשָּׁה אֶת שְׁנֵי הָאֲנָשִׁים וַתִּצְפְּנוֹ),¹⁴ Shemuel I 4:15 ("וְעֵינָיו קָמָה"),¹⁵ Yeshayahu 2:11 ("עֵינֵי גַּבְהוּת אָדָם שָׁפֵל"),¹⁶ Yeshayahu 5:23 (וְצִדְקַת צַדִּיקִים יָסִירוּ מִמֶּנּוּ),¹⁷ Yeshayahu 45:8 (וְיִפְרוּ יֶשַׁע וּצְדָקָה תַצְמִיחַ יַחַד אֲנִי י״י בְּרָאתִיו),¹⁸ Yeshayahu 56:5 (וְנָתַתִּי לָהֶם... אֶתֶּן לוֹ ),¹⁹  Yeshayahu 59:12 ("וְחַטֹּאותֵינוּ עָנְתָה בָּנוּ"), Yirmeyahu 31:14 ("מֵאֲנָה לְהִנָּחֵם עַל בָּנֶיהָ כִּי אֵינֶנּוּ"),²⁰ Yirmeyahu 46:15 ("מַדּוּעַ נִסְחַף אַבִּירֶיךָ"), Yirmeyahu 51:29 ("כִּי קָמָה עַל בָּבֶל מַחְשְׁבוֹת י"י"), Tehillim 37:31 (לֹא תִמְעַד אֲשֻׁרָיו)²¹
• Miscellaneous
• Bemidbar 19:20 (מֵי נִדָּה לֹא זֹרַק עָלָיו ), Bemidbar 26:19 ("וַיָּמׇת עֵר וְאוֹנָן"), Devarim 30:10 ("מִצְוֺתָיו וְחֻקֹּתָיו הַכְּתוּבָה"),²² Yirmeyahu 2:34 ("נִמְצְאוּ דַּם נַפְשׁוֹת"),²³ Yirmeyahu 48:41 (נִלְכְּדָה הַקְּרִיּוֹת),²⁴ Yechezkel 14:1 (וַיָּבוֹא אֵלַי אֲנָשִׁים),²⁵

Number and Noun

• The sons of" – In several verses, though only one son or daughter is mentioned, the verse speaks of them in the plural.  Some suggest that this is "simply the way of the text" or "the way of men",²⁶ while other give local explanations to each occurrence (see below).
• Bereshit 46:7 (בְּנֹתָיו וּבְנוֹת בָּנָיו) and 46:15 ("כׇּל נֶפֶשׁ בָּנָיו וּבְנוֹתָיו שְׁלֹשִׁים וְשָׁלֹשׁ") – Though only one daughter and one granddaughter is listed among those who descend to Egypt, the verse mentions "daughters" in the plural. See Bavli Bava Batra 123a-b that perhaps Dinah had a twin sister or that Yocheved is included in the count. Ibn Ezra similarly suggests that maybe Dinah had maidservants who are referred to as "daughters". Cf. R"Y Bekhor Shor, Radak, and Ramban that this might be "the way of the text".
• Bereshit 46:23 ("וּבְנֵי דָן חֻשִׁים")  – Chizkuni suggests that maybe Dan had two sons, one of which died.
• Bemidbar 26:8 ("וּבְנֵי פַלּוּא אֱלִיאָב")
• Shemuel I 23:32 ("בְּנֵי יָשֵׁן יְהוֹנָתָן")
• Divrei HaYamim I 2:8 (" וּבְנֵי אֵיתָן עֲזַרְיָה")

Divine Plurals

A subsection of cases of nonconformity relates specifically to plural language surrounding God.  As one would have thought that the text would want to emphasize the singularity of God and dispel polytheistic notions, such cases are particularly troubling:

Hashem as a "We"

I. Examples – At times, Hashem seems to render Himself in plural form, speaking as a "we".

• In Bereshit 1:26,  before creating Adam, Hashem says, "נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ"
• In Bereshit 3:22, after Adam and Chavvah sin by eating from the tree, Hashem says, " הֵן הָאָדָם הָיָה כְּאַחַד מִמֶּנּוּ לָדַעַת טוֹב וָרָע"
• In Bereshit 11:7, after the people build the tower of Bavel, Hashem says, "הָבָה נֵרְדָה וְנָבְלָה שָׁם שְׂפָתָם".

II. Explanations – Such cases have been explained in several ways:

• Way of the World – The plural language might be the way of human speech, where kings and other honored people sometimes speaks of themselves using the "royal we" or majestic plural (R. Saadia Gaon, R. Hirsch). Alternatively, people might speak in the plural when exhorting themselves into action (Cassuto)
• Way of the Text – According to some commentators, these examples are no different than other examples of nonconformity discussed above, which are simply "the way of the text" (i.e. in Biblical Hebrew noun and number need not always conform).
• Partnership – Others suggest that God was speaking not just of Himself, but  including others in His speech - the angels.
• See Divine Plurals for elaboration.

God Referred to in the Plural

When the narrative voice speaks of God, it, too, sometimes uses the plural form.  Thus, the word אלוהים, even when used to refer to Hashem, sometimes takes a plural modifier or verb despite it referring to a singular entity. Other verses, too, which speak of Hashem without naming Him might use the plural. Some examples follow:

• Bereshit 20:13 (כַּאֲשֶׁר הִתְעוּ אֹתִי אֱלֹהִים) – See RashiBereshit 20:13Bereshit 35:7Shemot 17:12Shemuel II 7:23About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki that this need not be troubling, for often in Tanakh, the word "Elohim" or other terms referring to masters and figures of authority take  a plural form. Cf. Radak Bereshit 1:14Bereshit 4:10Bereshit 20:13Shemuel I 2:4About R. David Kimchithat Avraham chooses the plural formulation knowing that he is speaking to a polytheist
• Bereshit 35:7 (כִּי שָׁם נִגְלוּ אֵלָיו הָאֱלֹהִים) –  See RashiBereshit 20:13Bereshit 35:7Shemot 17:12Shemuel II 7:23About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, as above, that the plural form is not a unique phenomenon.  Cf. Ibn EzraBereshit Lexical Commentary 1:14Bereshit First Commentary 1:14Bereshit First Commentary 4:10Bereshit First Commentary 35:7Shemot First Commentary 17:12About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor ShorBereshit 35:7About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and others that here the word "אֱלֹהִים" might not refer to God but rather to the angels.
• Shemuel II 7:23 (אֲשֶׁר הָלְכוּ אֱלֹהִים לִפְדּוֹת לוֹ לְעָם) – Contrast R"Y KaraShemuel II 7:23About R. Yosef Kara who suggests that this is but an example of the general phenomenon of using plural language with the word "אֱלֹהִים" with others, like Rashi Bereshit 20:13Bereshit 35:7Shemot 17:12Shemuel II 7:23About R. Shelomo Yitzchakiand Hoil MosheShemuel I 2:4Shemuel II 7:23About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi, who suggest that the word here takes a secular sense and refers either to Moshe and Aharon or to idols.
• Other examples include: Devarim 4:7 (אֱלֹהִים קְרֹבִים אֵלָיו), Yehoshua 24:19 (כִּי אֱלֹהִים קְדֹשִׁים הוּא) Yeshayahu 42:5 (בּוֹרֵא הַשָּׁמַיִם וְנוֹטֵיהֶם), Yeshayahu 54:5 (כִּי בֹעֲלַיִךְ עֹשַׂיִךְ), Tehillim 149:2 ("יִשְׂמַח יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּעֹשָׂיו") and Iyyov 35:10 ("אַיֵּה אֱלוֹהַּ עֹשָׂי")

Plural = One of Many

• Sometimes a plural is used when a verse really means "one of ---" .  For example:
• Bereshit 8:4 ("עַל הָרֵי אֲרָרָט") - See ShadalBereshit 1:14Bereshit 4:10Bereshit 8:4About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto and R. D"Z HoffmannBereshit 1:14Bereshit 4:10Bereshit 8:4Shemot 17:12About R. David Zvi 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 Shofetim 12:7Shemuel II 7:23About R. Yosef Karaand RadakBereshit 1:14Bereshit 4:10Bereshit 20:13Shofetim 12:7Shemuel I 1:1Shemuel I 2:4About R. David Kimchi 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 RadakBereshit 1:14Bereshit 4:10Bereshit 20:13Shofetim 12:7Shemuel I 1:1Shemuel I 2:4About R. David Kimchi that the verse might mean "there was a man from one of the Ramot"
• Shemuel I 18:21 ("בִּשְׁתַּיִם תִּתְחַתֵּן בִּי הַיּוֹם") – See RadakBereshit 1:14Bereshit 4:10Bereshit 20:13Shofetim 12:7Shemuel I 1:1Shemuel I 2:4About R. David Kimchi that Shaul means, "You shall marry one of my daughters"
• Other examples include: Shemuel II 12:11 ("וְנָתַתִּי לְרֵעֶיךָ"),²⁷ Zekharyah 9:9 ("עַיִר בֶּן אֲתֹנוֹת"),²⁸

Shortened Plural Form

The normal suffix to portray the plural form is "ים". Several commentators note that sometimes the plural ending has just a "י" and no final "‎ם".‎²⁹  In many of these cases, not all agree and sometimes the unusual form is explained in other ways (see below).  Several examples follow

• Shemot 40:16:  "שְׁלֹשָׁה סַלֵּי חֹרִי" – See Radak that "חֹרִי" is equivalent to "חרים".
• Shofetim 5:15: "וְשָׂרַי בְּיִשָּׂשכָר"  – See Rashi, R"Y Kara and others that this means "ושרים שביששכר".
• Tehillim 144:2: "הָרוֹדֵד עַמִּי תַחְתָּי" – See Meiri and Hoil Moshe that "עמי" is short for "עמים".
• Eikhah 3:14 "הָיִיתִי שְּׂחֹק לְכׇל עַמִּי" – See Hoil Moshe that this is like "‏‎‎‎‎‏לכל עמים".‎³⁰  Cf. Ibn Ezra who maintains the simple sense of "my people".³¹ Alternatively, Ibn Ezra suggest that perhaps the "י" is extraneous and the verse should read as if written: "לכל עם".
• Divrei HaYamim II 33:19 "עַל דִּבְרֵי חוֹזָי" – See Radak that this is short for "חוזים" but cf. Metzudat Zion that this is the proper name of a certain prophet.
• Other examples – Shofetim 19:22 (אַנְשֵׁי בְנֵי בְלִיַּעַל),³² Shemuel II 23:8 ("רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁלִשִׁי),³³ Melakhim I 6:4 (חַלּוֹנֵי שְׁקֻפִים),³⁴ Melakhim I 10:15 (מֵאַנְשֵׁי הַתָּרִים),³⁵  Yirmeyahu 22:14 (וְקָרַע לוֹ חַלּוֹנָי),³⁶ Yeshayahu 17:10 (תִּטְּעִי נִטְעֵי נַעֲמָנִים),³⁷ Yeshayahu 20:4 (וַחֲשׂוּפַי שֵׁת),³⁸ Yechezkel 13:18 (אַצִּילֵי יָדַי),³⁹

Combined Forms

• Tehillim 132: (וְעֵדֹתִי זוֹ אֲלַמְּדֵם) – See Ibn Ezra that this word combines the plural "עדות" with a singular ending "תִי".  [One would have expected "עֵדֹתַי".] Cf. Radak that the cholam is not part of the plural marker, but is simply replacing the shuruk of עֵדוּת.
• Devarim 29:59 (וְהִפְלָא י״י אֶת מַכֹּתְךָ) – One would have expected either "מַכָּתְךָ" or "מַכֹּתֶךָ". Here, too, Ibn Ezra suggests that this might be a combined form, "לשון יחיד עם רבים מורכבת".

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, RadakBereshit 1:14About 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" (The term "היה" in many place does not conform to singular and plural or masculine and feminine).  See the body of the article for examples of nonconformity between the verb and number. For examples where the verb "היה" does not conform with gender, see: Gender.

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 This often happens when an adjective follows two nouns which are in the construct state (סמיכות) and it is unclear which of the two the adjective modifies.

⁷ See R. D"Z Hoffmann that the Samaritan version of Torah therefore emends the text to read "קול דמי אחיך צועק", producing conformity.

⁸ See Ibn Ezra, Radak, HaKetav VeHaKabbalah, Shadal, R. D" Z Hoffmann.

⁹ See R. D"Z Hoffmann, that the word "קוֹל" might simply mean, "Listen", comparing our verse to Yeshayahu 52:8, "קול צפיך נשאו קול".

¹⁰ 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.

¹¹ Ibn Ezra also raises the possibility that this is simply the way of the text.

¹² 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)

¹³ Alternatively, he suggests that the verse refers to just the head messenger.

¹⁴ See Radak and Ralbag that Rachav hid each one of the spies individually.  Cf. Rashi that since she hid them in a narrow place it was as if they were one.

¹⁵ See Radak there.

¹⁶ See Radak that "each" eye is brought low.

¹⁷ See Radak there that the verse means that the wicked remove justice from each one of the righteous.

¹⁸ See Radak that the verse means "I created each of salvation and righteousness".

¹⁹ In this case, the issue is nonconformity between various parts of the verse, with the opening speaking of "them" and the end of "him".  See Radak that the singular formulation at the end simply expresses: "each one of them".

²⁰ See Ibn Ezra on Shemot 17:12. Cf. Radak who explains that the word "איננו" is singular since it speaks of the missing nation.  Compare also Abarbanel.

²¹ See Radak that the connotation is that each of the feet do not stumble.

²² See Chizkuni and R. D"Z Hoffmann.

²³ 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.

²⁴ See Radak that the singular verb implies that all the cities will be destroyed as one.

²⁵ See Radak that the singular form of the verb implies that all the people came as one, in agreement.

²⁶ See R"Y Kara (Shemuel I 23:32) that it is the way of people who have only one child to nonetheless speak about their descendants in the plural, as if to say "all of my children are only so and so".

²⁷ See Radak that the phrase "וְנָתַתִּי לְרֵעֶיךָ" might means "one of your fellows".

²⁸ See Radak that the verse means, "a colt born to one of the female donkeys".

²⁹ Hoil Moshe on Tehillim 144:2 raises the possibility that these were originally written with an apostrophe after the "י" as one would do today to express that a word is being shortened but that the apostrophes got lost.

³⁰ If one assumes that the speaker is the nation of Israel, then she would not be complaining about being a laughing stock among her own people.

³¹ This would make sense if the speaker is Yirmeyahu himself or any individual among the nation.

³² See Radak on Melakhim I 10:15.

³³ See Radak.

³⁴ See Radak.

³⁵ See Radak "מלת מאנשי – אינה לסמיכות, אלא בא ביו״ד הרבים לבד, ונגרעה המ״ם."

³⁶ See Radak and Metzudat Zion.

³⁷ See Radak on Melakhim I 6:4.

³⁸ See Radak and Shadal. Cf. Rashi that the "י" is extraneous and the phrase should be understood as if written: "חשוף שת"

³⁹ See R"E of Beaugency that this is equivalent to "אצילי ידיים"