Three major English translations, NRSV, ESV, and NASB, render וְאֵיךְ נֹאמַר אֵלָיו מֵת הַיֶּלֶד וְעָשָׂה רָעָה׃ as “How then can we tell him the child is dead? He may do himself some harm.” These translations insert the reflexive pronoun “himself” as the object of עשׂה. While such a reading is possible, it is not at all probable when we take into account how reflexives are expressed in Biblical Hebrew, as well as the syntax and semantics of עשׂה. This article contributes to our understanding of 2 Sam 12.18 not by offering a new translation of וְעָשָׂה רָעָה, but by providing a linguistic explanation for why translators should reject the reflexive “harm himself” and instead render the phrase as “he may do harm” (so MEV).
ÁgelVilmosFischerKlaus. 2010. “Dependency Grammar and Valency Theory.” Pages 223–55 in The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. Edited by HeineB.NarrogH. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.
AnghelescuNadia. 2012. “From Lexical to Grammatical: NAFS and Other Identifiers.” Pages 71–100 in In The Shadow of Arabic: The Centrality of Language to Arabic Culture. Edited by OrfaliB. Leiden: Brill.
3.
BoydSteven. 2017. “The Binyanim (Verbal Stems).” Pages 85–126 in Where Shall Wisdom Be Found? A Grammatical Tribute to Professor Stephen A. Kaufman. Edited by DallaireH.NoonanB.NoonanJ. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
4.
ChomskyNoam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
5.
ChomskyNoam. 1986. Knowledge of Language. New York: Praeger.
6.
ClinesDavid J. A. 1993–2011. The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. 8 vols. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic and Sheffield Phoenix.
7.
CookJohn A. 2019a. “Explorations in Hebrew Verbal Valency: The Case of the Missing Objects.” Paper presented at the Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew: New Perspectives in Philology and Linguistics Conference, University of Cambridge, July 9.
8.
CookJohn A. 2019b. “Finding Missing Objects in Biblical Hebrew: With an Appendix on Missing Subjects.” Forthcoming.
9.
CreasonStuart. 1991. “Discourse Constraints on Null Complements in Biblical Hebrew.” University of Chicago Working Papers in Linguistics7: 18–47.
10.
FirthDavid. 2009. 1 & 2 Samuel. Apollos Old Testament Commentary. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
11.
FrançosiAlexandre. 2008. “Semantic Maps and the Typology Colexification: Intertwining Polysemous Networks across Languages.” Pages 163–215 in From Polysemous to Semantic Change. Edited by VanhoveM.Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
12.
HaegemanLiliane. 1994. Introduction to Government & Binding Theory. 2nd ed.Oxford: Blackwell.
13.
HaimanJohn. 1983. “Iconic and Economic Motivation.” Language59: 781–819.
14.
HaimanJohn. 1985. Natural Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
HaimanJohn.1995. “Grammatical Signs of the Divided Self: A Study of Language and Culture.” Pages 213–34 in Discourse Grammar and Typology. Edited by AbrahamWernerGivónTalmyThompsonSandra A. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
16.
HaspelmathMartin. 2008. “A Frequentist Explanation of Some Universals of Reflexive Marking.” Linguistic Discovery6: 40–63.
17.
HeineBernd. 2005. “On Reflexive Forms in Creoles.” Lingua115: 201–57.
18.
HeineBernd. 2011. “Areas of Grammaticalization and Geographical Typology.” Pages 41–90 in Geographical Typology and Linguistic Areas: With Special Reference to Africa. Edited by NakagawaH.KönigC.HiedaO. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
19.
HertzbergHans. 1965. 1 & II Samuel: A Commentary. Old Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox.
20.
HolmstedtRobert. 2016. The Relative Clause in Biblical Hebrew. Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitics. University Park, PA: Eisenbrauns.
21.
HolmstedtRobert. 2019. “Anaphora in Biblical Hebrew: A Generative Perspective.” Journal for Semitics28: 1–15.
22.
JenniErnst. 2012. “Nif‘al und Hitpa‘el im Biblisch-Hebräischen.” Pages 131–204 in Studien zur Sprachwelt des Alten Testaments III. Edited by JenniH.MathysH.-P.SarasinS. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
23.
JonesEthan. 2017a. “Direct Reflexivity in Biblical Hebrew: A Note on נפשׁ.” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft129: 423–24.
24.
JonesEthan. 2017b. Valency of the Hithpael: The Contribution of Valency to Lexicography. Arbeiten zur Text und Sprache im Alten Testament. St. Ottilien: EOS.
25.
JonesEthan. 2020a. “The Middle and Passive Voice: Semantic Distinctions of the Niphal in Biblical Hebrew.” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft. Forthcoming.
26.
JonesEthan. 2020b. “Hearing the ‘Voice’ of the Niphal: A Response to Ellen van Wolde.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Forthcoming.
27.
JoüonPaulMuraokaTakamitsu. 2006. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press.
28.
KönigEkkehardVezzosiLetizia. 2004. “The Role of Predicate Meaning in the Development of Reflexivity.” Pages 213–44 in What Makes Grammaticalization? A Look from Its Fringes and Its Components. Edited by W. Bisang, N. Himmelmann, and B. Wiemer. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
29.
KönigEkkehardSiemundPeter. 2000. “Intensifiers and Reflexives: A Typological Perspective.” Pages 41–74 in Reflexives: Forms and Functions. Edited by FrajzyngierZ.CurlT. Typological Studies in Language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
30.
Miller-NaudéCynthiaNaudéJacobus. 2019. “Theoretical Approaches to Anaphora and Pronouns in Biblical Hebrew.” Journal of Semitics28: 1–22.
MüllerKatrin. 2018. Lobe den Herrn, meine “Seele”: Eine kognitiv-linguistische Studie zur nefeš des Menschen im Alten Testament. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
33.
NaudéJacobus A. 1997. “The Syntactic Status of the Ethical Dative in Biblical Hebrew.” Journal for Semitics9: 129–65.
PeitsaraKirsti. 1997. “The Development of Reflexive Strategies in English.” Pages 277–370 in Grammaticalization at Work. Edited by RissanenM.KytöM.HeikkonenK. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
38.
RubinAaron. 2005. Studies in Semitic Grammaticalization. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
39.
SpathasGiorgosAlexiadouArtemisSchäferFlorian. 2015. “Middle Voice and Reflexive Interpretations: Afto-prefixation in Greek.” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory33: 1293–1350.
40.
StapsCamil. 2018. “A Case Study of Reciprocal Middles in Biblical Hebrew: The Niphal of לחם.” Orientalia87.2: 159–83.
41.
Van der MerweChristoJacobusH. J.NaudéA.KroezeH Jan. 2017. A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar. 2nd edition.London: Bloomsbury.
42.
WaltkeBruce K.O’ConnorMichael Patrick. 1990. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
43.
WoldeEllen van. 2019. “The Niphal as Middle and Its Consequence for Meaning.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament43(3): 453–78.
