תחביר

נושא זה עדיין לא עבר ביקורת עורך

מקרא מסורס

One normally expects a clause to modify the words that immediately precede or follow it. However, in Tanakh this might not always be true, and sometimes to properly understand a verse, one must invert the word order. Commentators refer to this phenomenon as a "מקרא מסורס",‎1 literally: "a castrated text", as one must "cut" a certain clause from its written place and move it to a different place in the verse for the verse to make sense. [Today, one might refer to this as a dangling or misplaced modifier.] In many cases, there might be ambiguity, with some commentators suggesting that the verse be best understood by rearranging the word order and others leaving it as is.

Examples

  • Bereshit 15:13 ("כִּי גֵר יִהְיֶה זַרְעֲךָ בְּאֶרֶץ לֹא לָהֶם וַעֲבָדוּם וְעִנּוּ אֹתָם אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה") – As several verses imply that the nation was not enslaved for 400 years, see Ramban Bereshit 15:13About R. Moshe b. Nachmanthat the words "400 years" in our verse modiify the phrase "גֵר יִהְיֶה זַרְעֲךָ" rather than "וַעֲבָדוּם וְעִנּוּ אֹתָם".  The verse foretells that the nation was to wander in exile for 400 years but does not specify the duration of the actual enslavement.  For further discussion of the length of the Egyptian bondage, see Duration of the Egyptian Exile.
  • Bereshit 39:17 (בָּא אֵלַי הָעֶבֶד הָעִבְרִי אֲשֶׁר הֵבֵאתָ לָּנוּ לְצַחֶק בִּי) – See RashiBereshit 39:17About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki and R. WesselyBereshit 39:17About R. Naftali Herz Wessely that the words "לְצַחֶק בִּי" modify "בָּא אֵלַי" and not "אֲשֶׁר הֵבֵאתָ לָּנוּ".  Mrs. Potiphar is not saying that her husband brought them a slave in order that he mock her,  but that the slave he brought them came upon her to mock her.
  •  Bereshit 41:57 (וְכׇל הָאָרֶץ בָּאוּ מִצְרַיְמָה לִשְׁבֹּר אֶל יוֹסֵף) – See Rashi Bereshit 41:57About R. Shelomo Yitzchakiand RashbamBereshit 41:57About R. Shemuel b. Meir that the words of the verse should be rearranged to read "וְכׇל הָאָרֶץ בָּאוּ מִצְרַיְמָה  אֶל יוֹסֵף לִשְׁבֹּר".   Cf. Chizkuni Bereshit 41:57Bereshit 41:57About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoachthat, here, the word "אל" means "from", pointing to similar usage in Bereshit 30:39.
  • Shemot 12:15 (כׇּל אֹכֵל חָמֵץ וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל מִיּוֹם הָרִאשֹׁן עַד יוֹם הַשְּׁבִעִי) – See Ibn Ezra that the verse should read as if written "כׇּל אֹכֵל חָמֵץ מִיּוֹם הָרִאשֹׁן עַד יוֹם הַשְּׁבִעִי וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל ".
  • Shemot 15:10 (צָלְלוּ כַּעוֹפֶרֶת בְּמַיִם אַדִּירִים) – It is unclear if the word "אַדִּירִים" has narrow scope and serves as an adjective describing the mighty waters in which the Egyptians sunk like lead (RashbamShemot 15:10Esther 6:8About R. Shemuel b. Meir), or if it has broad scope and is a noun, the subject of the verb "צללו".  If so, the clause would read: צָלְלוּ אַדִּירִים כַּעוֹפֶרֶת בְּמַיִם, "the mighty ones sank like lead in water" (SfornoShemot 15:10About R. Ovadyah Sforno).
  • Shemot 15:19 (כִּי בָא סוּס פַּרְעֹה בְּרִכְבּוֹ וּבְפָרָשָׁיו בַּיָּם) – According to some exegetes, even though these words are found in verse 19, they really modify verse 1 (אז ישיר משה), and come to explain either when or why the song was sung (R. Avraham b. HaRambam and Ramban). Alternatively, the phrase might not be "misplaced" but actually modifies what immediately precedes it, describing the double miracle that is the reason that Hashem will "reign forever".2 A final opinion also connects the words to their immediate context, but assumes that they introduce the next verse, describing when Miriam sang her song.
  • Bemidbar 17:5 (לֹא יִקְרַב אִישׁ זָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא מִזֶּרַע אַהֲרֹן הוּא... וְלֹא יִהְיֶה כְקֹרַח וְכַעֲדָתוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר י״י בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה לוֹ) – This verse contains both a lexical ambiguity (whether "לו" means "to him" or "regarding him") and two syntactic ambiguities (to which clause does the entire phrase כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר י״י בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה לוֹ refer3 and who is the referent of the word לו). According to Rashi's first and third opinion, the clause connects to the immediately preceding words "and he shall not be like Korach" with the word לו either referring back to Korach and meaning "regarding Korach" or referring to Aharon (who was told4 that only He and his descendants can bring incense). Cf. Rashbam and Ramban that there is broad scope and the phrase "כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר י״י בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה לוֹ" refers back to Elazar mentioned in the previous verse; he took the censers and beat them as Hashem commanded him via Moshe.
  • Devarim 16:1 (עָשִׂיתָ פֶּסַח..  כִּי... הוֹצִיאֲךָ יְ־הֹוָה אֱ־לֹהֶיךָ מִמִּצְרַיִם לָיְלָה)  – Most readers assume that the word "לילה" modifies the words which come right before it, with the verse statingthat the exodus took place night.  This, however, would appear to contradict Bemidbar 33:3 which states that the nation left "on the morrow of the Pesach", i.e. during the day. Chizkuni, thus, suggests that the words "at night" refer back not to the exodus but to the offering of the Pesach sacrifice. [See, though, R. D"Z Hoffmann's objections to this reading.] 
  • Yeshayahu 2:20 (יַשְׁלִיךְ הָאָדָם אֵת אֱלִילֵי כַסְפּוֹ וְאֵת אֱלִילֵי זְהָבוֹ אֲשֶׁר עָשׂוּ לוֹ לְהִשְׁתַּחֲוֺת לַחְפֹּר פֵּרוֹת וְלָעֲטַלֵּפִים) – See R"Y KaraYeshayahu 2:20About R. Yosef Kara, R"E of BeaugencyYeshayahu 2:20About R. Eliezer of Beaugency, and others that the words "לַחְפֹּר פֵּרוֹת וְלָעֲטַלֵּפִים" modify the word "יַשְׁלִיךְ" (in the future people will throw their idols to the bats and moles). Cf.RashiYeshayahu 2:20About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki that the phrase modifies "לְהִשְׁתַּחֲוֺת", with the implication being that the person will throw away the idols he had made to worship in the image of moles and bats.
  • Malakhi 3:17 ("וְהָיוּ לִי אָמַר י״י צְבָאוֹת לַיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי עֹשֶׂה סְגֻלָּה") – See Ibn EzraMalakhi First Commentary 3:17About R. Avraham ibn Ezra that the verse should read as if written "וְהָיוּ לִי סְגֻלָּה אָמַר י״י צְבָאוֹת לַיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי עֹשֶׂה", with "סְגֻלָּה" connected to "וְהָיוּ לִי". Those who fear Hashem will be for Him a treasure.  Cf. RashiMalakhi 3:17About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki that the verse should be read as written; the day of judgment is a day that Hashem had stored away for each person reaps his due.

Scope ambiguity in noun chains

A similar phenomenon to the above are the many verses in which, despite the fact that the word order of the verse should be maintained, there is nonetheless ambiguity regarding the scope of a certain modifier or phrase (i.e. it unclear if it modifies the immediately preceding word/phrase or an earlier one).  This often happens when there is a chain of nouns, as when two nouns are in the construct state (סמיכות),5 and it is unclear which of the nouns is being modified.

Examples

Conditional Statements

Conditional (if...then...) statements consist of two parts: the condition (the "if" clause), also known as the protasis, and the consequence of the condition (the "then" clause), also known as the apodosis.  Sometimes, as when there are multiple conditions and multiple consequences, it is ambiguous where the protasis ends and the apodosis begins. Several examples follow:

  • Yaakov's vow in Bereshit 28:20-22 – Yaakov vows that if Hashem watches over him, he will do something in return but commentators debate where in the verses Yaakov's obligations begin. Are the words "וְהָיָה יְ־הֹוָה לִי לֵא־לֹהִים" what Yaakov is hoping Hashem will do (Rashi, Rashbam)11 or what he takes upon himself to do afterwards (R"Y Bekhor Shor and Ramban)?12
  • Shemot 23:5 – The verse mandates that if one sees an enemy's animal fallen under its load "חָדַלְתָּ מֵעֲזֹב לוֹ עָזֹב תַּעֲזֹב עִמּוֹ.".  Commentators debate if the clause "חָדַלְתָּ מֵעֲזֹב לוֹ" is part of the scenario or what the person is obligated to do.  See Ibn Ezra that it begins the apodosis, with the verse saying "If you see the donkey lying.... then you should refrain from leaving it to him; rather release it together with him". Alternatively, the clause "וְחָדַלְתָּ מֵעֲזֹב לוֹ" is a rhetorical question, "Shall you leave it to him?" (Hoil Moshe), or part of the condition: "if you see... and would refrain from releasing it, [do not] but surely release it..." (R. D"Z Hoffmann).
  • Devarim 4:25-25 – Moshe tells the people: "כִּי תוֹלִיד בָּנִים וּבְנֵי בָנִים וְנוֹשַׁנְתֶּם בָּאָרֶץ וְהִשְׁחַתֶּם וַעֲשִׂיתֶם פֶּסֶל...  הַעִידֹתִי בָכֶם הַיּוֹם אֶת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֶת הָאָרֶץ כִּי אָבֹד תֹּאבֵדוּן". It is unclear whether the words "וְהִשְׁחַתֶּם וַעֲשִׂיתֶם פֶּסֶל." are part of the condition or result. Moshe might  be saying, "when you are long on the land, should you corrupt yourselves and make an idol, then I testify that you shall surely perish"  (with only verse 25 constituting the result).  Alternatively, the apodosis begins already with the words "הִשְׁחַתֶּם" with Moshe prophesying that when the people are long in the land, then they will corrupt themselves.... [See Ramban for both possibilities.]
  • Devarim 18:6-7 – The verses read: " וְכִי יָבֹא הַלֵּוִי מֵאַחַד שְׁעָרֶיךָ מִכׇּל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הוּא גָּר שָׁם וּבָא בְּכׇל אַוַּת נַפְשׁוֹ אֶל הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר יְ־הֹוָה. (ז) וְשֵׁרֵת בְּשֵׁם יְ־הֹוָה אֱ־לֹהָיו".  According to R. Saadia, the apodisis (the "then" clause) begins with the word "ובא", and the verse would translate as: "If the Levite should come from one of your gates, from all of Israel in which he sojourns, then he may come whenever his soul desires to the place that Hashem will choose." Cf. Ibn Janach and R. D"Z Hoffmann who understand the word "ובא" to be a resumptive repetition of the first appearance of the word, mentioned again only due to the parenthetical elaboration "from one of your gates...".  The apodisis, thus, begins only with verse 7. Accordingly, the verse reads: "if the Levite from one of your gates, from all of Israel in which he sojourns, shall come whenever his soul desires, then he shall serve...."
  • Devarim 24:1-4 – Commentators dispute if the focus of these verses are the laws of premarriage (i.e. the prohibition to remarry a wife after she has had relations with another) or if it presents two sets of laws, those of divorce and those of possible remarriage.13 According to the former,14 all of verses 1-3 comprise the protasis (laying out the conditions), with verse 4 beginning the apodosis (the "then" clause). According to the latter, verse 1 lays out the laws of divorce, with the word "וכתב" beginning the "then" statement - if the husband finds something objectionable in his wife, then he shall write her a writ of divorce. Verse 2 begins a new scenario, "If/when she leaves...."
×