The Hebrew composition is also extremely ^Jc/or/o? in its character — not the poetry only, but also the prose. In the history the past is not described, it is painted. It is not the ear that hears, it is rather the eye that sees. The course of events is made to pass before the eye; the transactions are all acted over again. The past is not a fixed landscape, but a moving panorama. The reader of the English Bible must have remarked the constant use of tlie word behold, which indicates that the writer is himself, and wishes to make his read- er also, a spectator of the transactions he describes. The use of the tenses in the Hebrew historical ^mtings is specially remarkable. To the yomig student of He- brew the constant use of the future tense in the descrip- tion of the past appears perhaps the most striking pe-
HEBREW LANGUAGE
134
HEBREW LANGUAGE
culiarity of the language. But the singular phenome- 'loii admits of an easy explanation. It was because the Hebrew viewed and described the transactions of the jiast, not as all past and done, but as in actual process a;ul progress of evolvement, that he makes such fre- quent use of the so-called future. In imagination he quits his own iioint of time, and lives over the past. With his reader he sails down the stream of time, and traces with open eye the winding coiu-se of history. It is impossible always to reproduce exactly m English this peculiarity of the Hebrew Bible.
l-'iu-ther, in writing even of the commonest actions, as that one went, spoke, saw, etc., the Hebrew is not usually satisfied with the simple statement that the thing "was done, he must describe also the process of do- ing. We are so familiar with the style of our English Bibles that we do not at once perceive the pictorial character of such exjiressions as these, recun-ing in ev- ery page: he iiin.<, ,ii„l u; i,t ; In- ojuiml his Ups and sp(t1ce;^lie put fill Ih /n.< IhuhI and A-r,/,-.- he lifted up his ei/es and saw ; /« lijhd up hii coice mid wept. But what we do not consciously perceive we often unconsciously feel ; and doubtless it is this painting of events which is the source of part at least of the charm with which the Scripture narrative is invested to all pure and simple minds.
The same effect is also produced by the symbolical vay of represeutinrj mental states and processes which distinguishes the Hebrew writers. Such expressions as to bend or incline the ear for "to hear attentively," to stiffen the neck for " to be stubborn and rebellious," to vncocer the ear for "to reveal," are in frequent use. Even the acts of the Divine Mind are depicted in a similar way. In the study especially of the Old Testa- ment we must keep this point carefully in view, lest we .should err by giving to a symbolical expression a literal interpretation. Thus, when we read (Exod. xxxiii, 11) that '• tlie Lord spake unto Closes face to face as a man speaketh unto his friend," we must remember that it was a Hebrew who wrote these words, one who was ac- customed to depict to himself and others the spiritual under material symbols, and thus we shall be guarded against irreverently attaching to them a meaning which they were never intended to bear. But, though such modes of expression are open to misapprehension by us wliose minds are formed in so verj' different a mould, nevertheless, when rightly understood, they have the effect of giving us a more clear and vivid impression of the spiritual itleas which they eml)ody than coidd be conveyed to us by any other mode of representation or expression.
The simplicity and naturalness of the language fur- ther fippears in the prominence wliich is constantly given to the word or words embodying the leading idea in a sentence or period. Thus the noun stands iieforc the adjective, tlic predicate stands before the subject, unless the latter lic specially empliatic, in which case it is not only put first, but may stand l)y itself as a nomi- native absolute without any syntactical connection with the rest of the sentence.
The constant use of the oratio directa is also to be si)ecially noted, as an indication of the iirimitivc char- acter of the language. Tlie Hebrew historian does not usually inform us tliat such and such a person said such and such things; lie actually, a.s it were, produces the ])arties and makes them s]ieak for themselves. To this <levice (if it may be so called) the Bible historj' owes much of its freshness and (lower of exciting and sustain- ing the interest of its readers. No other history could be so often read without losing its power to interest and charm.
Lastly, hi a iiriiniliv<' language, formed under the predominating inliuence of imagination and emotion, we may e.xpect to meet with many elliptical expres- sions, and also with many redundancies. Not a little which we think it necessary- formally to exjiress in words, the Hebrew allowed to be gathered from the con-
text ; and, conversely, the Hebrew gave expression to not a little which we omit. Eor example, nothing is more ccmmon ui Hebrew than the omission of the verb to be in its various forms ; and, on the other hand, a very striking characteristic of the Hebrew style is the con^ stant use of the forms "'v'^Il, ^!|'f|!/) <^nd it came to pass^ and it shall come to pass, which, in translating into Eng- lish, may be altogether omitted without any serious loss. In the Hebrew prose, also, we often meet with traces of that echoing of thought and expression which forms one of the principal characteristics of the poetic style; as in Gen. vi, 22, "And Noah did according to all that God commanded him — so did he ;" and similar pas- sages, in which we seem to have two different forms of recording the same liict combined into one, thus : "And Noah dicl according to all that God commanded him ;" "According to all that the Lord commanded him, so did he."