Grammar:Person/0
Person
Change of Person
At times Tanakh switches from speaking in second person to third person (or vice versa) when it seems unwarranted, as there does not seem to be a switch in addressee. In many such cases, commentators debate the verse's intent, questioning whether a new person is nonetheless being addressed1 or if it is simply "the way of the text" to switch person mid-verse. Several.of many examples follow:
- Bereshit 27:31– Esav tells his father, "יָקֻם אָבִי וְיֹאכַל מִצֵּיד בְּנוֹ בַּעֲבֻר תְּבָרְכַנִּי נַפְשֶׁךָ", beginning in third person and ending in second. In this case the third person formulation might be a sign of respect.
- Bereshit 49:4 – Yaakov rebukes Reuven, "כִּי עָלִיתָ מִשְׁכְּבֵי אָבִיךָ אָז חִלַּלְתָּ יְצוּעִי עָלָה", starting in second person (עָלִיתָ) but ending in third (עָלָה). According to Targum Onkelos, despite the change in person, both clauses are speaking of Reuven's actions.2 Chizkuni, instead, suggests that Yaakov is addressing the second half of his words not to Reuven but to the rest of the tribes, to explain why Reuven was no longer deserving of the honors of the firstborn.3
- The Decalogue – The first two commandments of the Decalogue ("I am your God", "You shall have no other gods...") are spoken in first person, but the rest of the ten, speak of Hashem in third person.4 Ibn Ezra maintains that the switch in person is insignificant and Hashem spoke directly to the nation throughout the Decalogue, while R"Y Kara suggests that it indicates that only the first two statements were relayed directly by God to the people, while the rest were relayed by Moshe. For full discussion and the implications of the debate, see The Decalogue: Direct From Hashem or Via Moshe?
- Ibn Ezra Rut 4:4 – Boaz tells the potential redeemer of Ruth, ""אִם תִּגְאַל גְּאָל וְאִם לֹא יִגְאַל הַגִּידָה לִּי", beginning in second person, but mid-sentence switching to third person. See Ibn Janach5 that despite the third person formulation, Boaz is speaking to the redeemer throughout and the switch in speaker is simply the way of the text. Alternatively, perhaps in the midst of his speech Boaz turned to the others in attendance and addressed them.
- Malakhi 2:15 – The verse switches from second to third person: וְנִשְׁמַרְתֶּם בְּרוּחֲכֶם וּבְאֵשֶׁת נְעוּרֶיךָ אַל יִבְגֹּד. Compare Radak, that this is simply the way of the text, with Rashi, who suggests that the final clause is truncated and should read as if written "אל יבגוד רוחך" (in which case the entire verse is really in second person).
- Other examples – Bereshit 49:9,6 Yeshayahu 1:29,7 Yeshayahu 38:12,8 Yeshayahu 42:20,9 Yirmeyahu 11:16,10 Yirmeyahu 22:24,11 Yirmeyahu 30:8,12 Yechezkel 5:15,13 Yechezkel 28:22,14 Yechezkel 31:10,15 Tehillim 81:17,16 Iyyov 17:1017
Archaic Form of Second Person
The second person feminine conjugation is normally marked by the "תְּ" ending (as in: "שָׁכָבְתְּ" or "עָבַרְתָּ"). The archaic form of the same conjugation had a "י" at the end ("שָׁכַבְתִּי").18 In several instances this older form is preserved in Tanakh, when a verse has a "קרי וכתיב", a word written one way but read another. See, for example, Yirmeyahu 2:33 (לִמַּ֖דְתְּ / למדתי), Yirmeyahu 3:4 (קָרָ֥את / קראתי), Ruth 3:3 (וְיָרַדְתְּ / וירדתי), or 3:4 (וְשָׁכָבְתְּ / ושכבתי).19 There are also several verses in which commentators debate whether a verse should be understood as preserving this archaic form, or if the first person, perfect conjugation is implied:
- Yirmeyahu 2:20 – The verse reads, "כִּי מֵעוֹלָם שָׁבַרְתִּי עֻלֵּךְ נִתַּקְתִּי מוֹסְרוֹתַיִךְ". This is commonly understood to refer to Hashem speaking in first person, noting how He broke the yoke of bondage laid upon Israel by other nations (and how, nonetheless, Israel rebelled). See, though, the opinion in Shadal, that "שָׁבַרְתִּי" and "נִתַּקְתִּי" should be understood in second person, and Hashem is telling the nations that they have always broken the yoke (of Torah).20
- Shofetim 5:7 – In Devorah's song after her victory over Sisera, she tells of how there was a lack if security in Israel "עַד שַׁקַּמְתִּי דְּבוֹרָה שַׁקַּמְתִּי אֵם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל". Bavli Pesachim 66b criticizes Devorah for praising herself, but M. Tzipor21 has suggested that perhaps the word "שַׁקַּמְתִּי" should be understood as the archaic form of the second person feminine, "שקמת" (you rose). If so, the song is responsive, and contains certain lines said by the audience, who here praise Devorah.
Ambiguous Person
Certain conjugations look identical leading to ambiguity in meaning. For example, the future second person male and the future third person female have the same form, so without context "תלך" can mean either "Go" or "She will go". Similarly, certain forms of the third person singular passive construction might look like a first person future plural. Thus "נברא" can mean either "it was created" or "we will create". Though often a verse will provide enough details to determine which is referred to, in several cases a verse is ambiguous:
Second Person Male vs. Third Person Female
- Shofetim 13:13-14 – As the verbs תִּשָּׁמֵר, תֹאכַל etc. can be either second person male ("do not eat") or third person female ("she shall not eat"), it is unclear from the verse if the angel is telling Manoach what he should do or what he should ensure that his wife does.
- Eikhah 3:17 – The poet says, "וַתִּזְנַח מִשָּׁלוֹם נַפְשִׁי". It is unclear if he is directly addressing Hashem, telling Him, "You have cast off my soul from peace", or if the subject of "וַתִּזְנַח" is the soul: "My soul has abandoned peace" (Ibn Kaspi).
- Eikhah 3:20 – In this verse, too, it is ambiguous whether the poet is directly addressing Hashem in the second person: "Remember well that my soul bows down within me," or if the subject of "זָכוֹר תִּזְכּוֹר" is the soul itself: "My soul remembers well, and it is bowed down within me"
First Person Future Plural vs. Third Person Singular Passive
- Bereshit 29:27 – Lavan tells Yaakov, "מַלֵּא שְׁבֻעַ זֹאת וְנִתְּנָה לְךָ גַּם אֶת זֹאת". See Ibn Ezra and Radak (first opinion) that this might be a third person, feminine, passive construction, meaning "and this one will be given to you as well". Alternatively, it is a first person, plural construction, meaning: "we will give you". If so, Lavan is either arrogantly speaking in the majestic plural (Radak), or referring to both himself and the local people, as per his words in verse 26 (Ramban).
- Bereshit 41:38 – Paroh says of Yosef, "הֲנִמְצָא כָזֶה אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר רוּחַ אֱלֹהִים בּוֹ". This might be translated as "Can a man like this be found", assuming that "הֲנִמְצָא" is a passive construction. Alternatively, it might mean: "can we find", reading "הֲנִמְצָא" as a verb in the future tense, with the "נ" marking the plural, first person speaker. [See Ibn Ezra who notes both possibilities.]
Miscellaneous
- Eikhah 3:22 – The poet expresses hope in Hashem, saying "חַסְדֵי י״י כִּי לֹא תָמְנוּ". The word "תָמְנוּ" might be a variant of the past tense "תַּמּוּ" (with the extra "נ" marking the missing double "מ" of the root, תמם).22 The clause would translate as: "The kindnesses of Hashem have not ceased" (Rashi, first opinion). Alternatively the clause reads: "[It is because of] the kindnesses of Hashem that we have not ceased", reading "תָמְנוּ" as the first person, plural of "תמם" (Rashi, second opinion, Lekach Tov, R"Y Kara).
- –
