A STUDY OF THE VERBS IN JOEL 2:4-9: THE AUTHOR'S STYLE OR ARAMAIC INFLUENCE?

Takako NOGUCHI*

Preface

The 2:4-9 exhibits an unusually thick presence of the verbs with [-u:n] ending, which is identical with the Aramaic form. What does the presence of these verbs in Joel, a post-exilic writing(1), reveal? Is the form due to Aramaic influence which is said to be strong in the post-exilic period, or the survival of the archaic form? The purpose of this paper is to examine the verbs in 2:4-9 where both the shorter [-u:] and the longer [-u:n] endings are juxtaposed as the imperfect form for the third person masculine plural, thereby shedding light on the author's intention of choosing the longer ending.

1 Verbs in 2:4-9

1.1 The subject of the verbs: $ (people)

In vv4-9 there are 15 verbs indicating imperfect form for the third person masculine plural. Eight out of the 15 verbs have the longer [-u:n] ending; the rest, the shorter [-u:] ending. Before examining their endings, let us take a close look at the subject of the verbs. Their subject, regardless of the forms of their endings, is $ (a numerous mighty people) in v.2. Although the usage of $ can be both singularas well as plural, the 15 plural verb forms in vv4-9 show that it is treated as a collective noun expressing a plural concept. Such plural usage of $, i.e.,regularly construing collectives as plural, is characteristic of Late (LBH=post-exilic).(2) On the other hand, the singularusage of $ as a common noun is seen in

* Formerly, a student of the Department of Semitic Studies, University of Sydney.

Vol. XXXIII 1998 103 v.3a where the subjects are 'fire' (v3aα) and 'flame" (v3aβ); although it is not clear enough to what the third person singular suffixes in v.3a, $ (before it) and $ (after it) refer, it might be appropriate to understand it as referring to "a numerous mighty people" in v.2b.(3) The singular suffix in $ (v4: its appearance), $ (v6: after it) and $ (v10: before it) can be likewise regarded as referring to $. $ in v6 is not the plural form of $ in v2 and v5. The former is the one who suffers, that is, inhabitants of or nations; the latter, the one who gives suffering to the former, namely their "enemy". This is clear from the context.

1.2 The longer ending

The eight verbs with [-u:n] endings in 2:4-9 are divided into five groups.

1) [a] $ [b] $:$ (Qal: run, rush) $ appears 80 times in the . Seventy-two out of 80 are Qal and denote "to run, rush". The form [a] appears only twice (Joel 2:4,; 6:12). The occurrence of the variant form [b] is three times (Joel 2:7,9; Ps. 59:5). The [-u:] ending $ appears seven times. Its distribution is Josh. 7:22, 8:19; I Sam. 10:23; Is. 40:31, 55:5, 59:7; Prov. 1:16. This distribution shows that the [-u:] ending is used during pre-exilic as well as post-exilic periods.

2) $:$ (Pi: dance, leap) The Old Testament records only 9 occurrences of $. In all instances it is used as a verb. The lack of derivatives as nouns might indicate that this root is not well developed in the Hebrew language. $ appears twice, in Joel 2:5 and Job 21:11, while $ occurs only in Isaiah 13:21. What is noteworthy is that the Hiphel form of $ occurs in Ps. 29:6 where enclitic mem, a feature of ancient Hebrew, appears.(4)

3 $:$ (Qal: go, march) Its Standard Biblical Hebrew equivalent $ is distributed widely throughout the Old Testament, but the form $ appears only three times: Joel 2:7, 8; Ps. 89:31. In Aramaic, the imperfect third person masculine plural form of $ is

104 ORIENT A STUDY OF THE VERBS IN JOEL 2:4-9 THE AUTHOR'S STYLE OR ARAMAIC INFLUENCE? not $, but $.

4) $:$ (Pi:entangle) Six instancesof $, all used as a verb, have a different meaningin context. In Deut. 24:10 it denotes "to seize (his) pledge", whereas its meaning is either "to lend" or "to borrow" in Deut. 15:6, 8. What is striking is that no other passages except Joel 2:7 record the form $ and that its meaning differs largely from those in Deuteronomy. The Piel form of $ in Joel 2:7 is almost synonymous with $ (to distort,make crooked). Its usage seems to show a parallel development to Syriac $ (was dense) whose Piel form $ means "be entangled, confused". There is no occurrence of the form $in the Old Testament. $ denoting "entangle" is a hapax legomenon in Hebrew.

5) $:$ (Qal: thrust, oppress) The Old Testament sees $ only twice: Jud. 2:18, Joel 2:8. In both passages it is used to denote $ (to push) or $ (to force, oppress). $ appears only in Joel. There is no occurrence of $ in the Old Testament. The Etymology Dictionary says $ is Jewish-Palestinian Aramaic.

As clarified by the above examinations, the eight verbs with [-u:n] ending in Joel 2:4-9 appear rarely in other writings of the Old Testament. From their limited use, it is difficult to determine if the [-u:n] endings in 2:4-9 are due to Aramaic influence or not, although the above close scrutiny of 4) and 5) might suggest their [-u:n] ending could be owing to Aramaic influence. It would be more appropriate, however, to regard theses longer endings as a re-emergence of an archaic form for the following reasons. Firstly, there is no instance where the corresponding shorter form is used as jussive form. Secondly, with the exception of $, theses verbs are scarcely used in the Old Testament. Moreover, the distribution of the verbs with [-u:n] ending shows that they are used in the pre-exilic writings as well (Amos 6:12, Ps. 59:5(5) Ps. 89:31(6), Job 21:11(7)). Thirdly, $ is used with enclitic mem. Both $ and $ are hapax legomenon. Moreover, $ in Joel has a significantly different meaning from those in Deuteronomy. These features are characteristics of archaic vocabulary.(8) Vol.XXXIII 1998 105 It is noteworthy that the longer ending [-u:n] appears in no other passages in Joel except in 2:4-9 and 3:1. Even in vv4-9, the other 7 verbs whose subject is also $ have the [-u:]ending. Moreover, the author seems to have chosen the longer ending even when options are available as is the case in 1) and 3).

1.3. Archaic Biblical Hebrew and the avoidance of "Aramaic"

It is known that there was a large and varied number of influences from other Semitic languages-possibly Akkadian, Ugaritic, Phoenician and others -on the language of the Israelites, and that Biblical Hebrew was a continuation of the pre-Israelite literary prestige language of -Palestine which was a compromise dialect necessary for communication among the various ethnic and linguistic groups in pre-Israelite Canaan.(9) The prestige language of the region was first Phoenician, and then Aramaic. The literary language of the pre-classical (=pre-monarchic) period, i.e., Archaic Biblical Hebrew (ABH), was thus more open to archaic and dialectal features held in common with Aramaic. A heavily "Aramaizing" element exhibited in ABH is evidence of an Aramaic stratum in Hebrew itself.(10) The longer [-u:n] ending can be regarded as one of the Aramaic-type elements in ABH. During the monarchy period, a conscious effort was made to avoid these "Aramaic" elements in writing, because of the political and administrative needs of the unified nation. The Israelites preferred to ally with the culturally prestigious Phoenicians rather than with Aramaic speaking countries, i.e., - Damascus or .(11) Moreover, although ABH had a strong Aramaic flavour, it was basically of the Phoenician type. The Avoidance of Aramaic emphasized the nationhood of as against enemies whose own national language was Aramaic. This lead to the disappearance of the archaic form ending with [-u:n], viz. the third person masculine plural imperfect in LBH. In Chronicles, the[-u:] ending sometimes appears where the parallel text in Kings has [-u:n]; e.g., $ in 1 Kings 8:38, but $ in 2 Chronicles 6:29. Kutscher says that such an example seems to indicate that in Later Biblical Hebrew the longer ending has already disappeared.(12) How, then, can the appearance of the longer ending in Joel 2:4-9 be explained? In the next section its reasons will be examined. 106 ORIENT A STUDY OF THE VERBS IN JOEL 2:4-9 THE AUTHOR'S STYLE OR ARAMAIC INFLUENCE?

2 The style of the author

The "Aramaic" elements in ABH did not die out even during the monarchy and the exilic periods. In spite of the conscious effort to avoid them in writing, they survived in a spoken language. Moreover, the actual Aramaic spread on the popular level. Young notes that "The 'Aramaic' element in the popular dialects would have blurred the distinction of popular Aramaic (with its Canaanite substratum) as a foreign language and led to the increasing fusion of Aramaic and Hebrew on this lower (=non-literary) level."(13) The Aramaic-looking [-u:n] ending in post-exilic writings is a re-emergence of the archaic form, which survived in non-literary language. The mixed presentation of the shorter and longer ending in vv4-9 might be understood as a slipping of colloquialisms into literary language. However, these passages show no confusion of gender and number which is often the case when a non-literary oral composition was used in literary language(14). Rather, the passages reflect a fine stylistic device. The author's dealing with OY shows his stylistic considerations well. He gives a vivid description of the scene of an attack by an apocalyptic "enemy army", as if a film director were using a camera with zoom lens. At first OY as a vast, enormous horde is on the "screen"; then, with the introduction of the term WX (each one) in v7, the author "zooms in" focusing on one of the horde, and "zooms out" again. This repetition of "zooming in and out", namely, the alternating use of singular and plural in vv7-8 shows the author's consummate styling. It is interesting to note that the "camera" catches OY, first in the city, next on the wall, then the houses, and lastly the windows: its focus moves from a larger to a smaller area. The juxtaposition of the shorter and the longer endings in vv4-9 lies, likewise, in the author's special interest in using both forms as his style. Psalm 104 also utilizes the "Aramaizing" dialectal form (the longer ending) alongside the standard (shorter) form. Some poems (e.g. Ex. 15, Deut. 32; Gen. 49) demonstrate a mixture of two different types of suffixes; one is archaic and the other, standard. Viewed in this light, the authors seem to play rather intentionally on standard and dialectal linguistic features for artistic effect as their style.

Vol.XXXIII 1998 107 2.1 The avoidance of a monotonous tone

The Book of Joel contains a fairly large number of imperative and imperfect forms ending with [-u:] sound. It appears, therefore, that the efforts to break a monotonous tone resulted in the use of another [-u:n] ending. Since even the Old Testament writings were designed to be read aloud, this supposition seems to me to be quite plausible, especially in the prophetic writings. The proclaimed their messages, for the most part, orally. Joel 1:2 opens with an appeal to listen, to give ear and to pay heed to what will be revealed. This twofold appeal-both to listen and to remember what a is about to proclaim-was a stylistic device of common usage(15) and shows that his speeches were obviously spoken and heard. Moreover, v3 "Tell your children about it (=what will be proclaimed), and let your children tell theirs, and their children to the next generation!" evidences Joel's prophecies were meant to be handed down by word of mouth. Due to this oral nature of prophecies, the prophets imitated various song types such as hymns and lamentations which show rhythmical concerns.(16) Viewed in this light, we should not hesitate in presuming that Joel, who is said to have been attached to the temple as a temple prophet and closely associated with the cult(17), had an especially keen sense of the acoustic effect of his prophecies.(18)

2.2 Visual presentation of the confusion in the invaded city

V7b and 8a describe the very orderly attack by the apocalyptic "enemy army" commanded by Yahweh. The description is inspired by the locusts that had already arrived. Wolff explains the initial $ in the above passages "betont die ausnahmlose Ordnung des feindlichen Angriffs; Wie naturliche Heuschrecken nicht durch Geshosse aufzuhalten sind, so erst recht nicht dieses apokalyptische Herr. (8b)"(19) Although the author's focus is not the invaded city, but the attack by an "army", there is no doubt that the latter will bring a great confusion to the former. The occurrence of a mixture of two different endings in vv4-9 seems to reflect the author's concern of expressing the confusion of the attacked city visually by means of different spellings. In these passages, the orderly attack by the "army" presents a striking contrast to the city in confusion which is not directly mentioned. The "confused" occurrence of the 108 ORIENT A STUDY OF THE VERBS IN JOEL 2:4-9 THE AUTHOR'S STYLE OR ARAMAIC INFLUENCE?

different endings appears to be a stylistic device to express the disorder in the city.

2.3 The emphasis on the message in the core passages-Despair and Hope-

The biblical writings are divided into sections according to the meaning. A Dis written before the larger sections, and a O before the smaller. It may well be said that O is a small paragraph marker within a larger paragraph marked by D. The origin of the use of these markers is uncertain. However, Qumran texts containing a division of the text into sections show that the practice might be traced back as early as the third century B.C. or even earlier(20), although their way of marking the sections was not identical with the ones in the Masoretic text, i.e., D and O.(21) Eissfeldt suggests that at least some of the works were divided into such sections immediately on their composition.(22) Although it might not make sense to assume that Joel himself had the divisions of his prophecies in mind, it does not follow that total negligence of the section markers is justified. If the section markers D and O in the Book of Joel are followed faithfully, the book is divided into the following three paragraphs:

In my opinion, each paragraph has a core passage or passages. In paragraph one, it is 1:15 (the theme, the coming of "The Day of Yahweh" is introduced); in paragraph two, 2:4-9 (the attack of an apocalyptic "army" symbolizing "The Day of Yahweh"); in paragraph three, 3:1 (the establishment of new, vigorous life for all people through the pouring out of the spirit).(23) Each core passage marks the time before (1:15), in the midst of (2:4-9), and after The Day of Yahweh (3:1). It is noteworthy that these core passages are located in the middle of each paragraph, if not exactly in the centre. If it is the case that 4:4-8 is a later literary Vol. XXXIII 1998 109 addition as Wolff maintains(24), the core passage in paragraph three is also close to its centre. The author emphasizes the central messages in each paragraph through linguistic devices. In 1:15 there is a play on words: $ (The divine name, "Shadday") and $ (devastation, destruction); in 2:4-9 and 3:1, the use of the longer endings is regarded as such a device. It should be noted that the [-u:n] ending in 3:1 appears also in the middle of these synonymous, parallel statements. More important is that 2:4-9 forms a sharp contrast to 3:1 in terms of its content. In the former, people are in a desperate situation faced with the "enemy army", while in the latter there is a promise of the fulfillment of Moses' wish in Nu. 11:29.(25) In other words, there is a change from despair to hope and the author, by the use of the longer ending, makes readers pay attention to the important message. H.W. Wolff points out that "Die in $ zuerst begegnende and sich dann bis 2:8 haufig widerholende, betonte, archaische Endung will wohl die Wucht des Geshehens unterstreichen".(26) We could understand this as referring to the emphasis on the desperate situation. The juxtaposition of the two different endings is, thus, one of the stylistic devices to make the core passage prominent.

Conclusion

The longer ending in Joel 2:4-9 is seemingly Aramaic. However, the lack of the corresponding shorter form used as a jussive form indicates that the longer ending in the text is not an Aramaic, but an archaic form which survived to the post-exilic period. As a stylistic device, it was utilized with a standard form in the post-exilic writings. As we have seen above, a mixed presentation of two different forms in one text is not rare in the Old Testament writings, especially in poetry. The authors of the texts utilized both forms intentionally, playing on their linguistic features, for a specific purpose. The unusually rich presence of the archaic [-u:n] ending in Joel 2:4-9 reveals that the author's special concern was the dreadful incidents accompanying "the Day of Yahweh"; the other appearance of the longer ending in 3:1 indicates that his message pointed also to hope after "The Day of Yahweh". The author of the Book of Joel intentionally chose the archaic longer ending to emphasize this central message, juxtaposing it with its standard form as his style. 110 ORIENT A STUDY OF THE VERBS IN JOEL 2:4-9 THE AUTHOR'S STYLE OR ARAMAIC INFLUENCE? Postscript

The passage of Joel (2:4-9) dealt with in this paper has not been found at Qumran. The Book of Joel forms a part of the Minor Prophets Scroll discovered at Murabba'at.[(2)Mur. XII=Mur.88]. However, the chapters of Joel in the manuscript are not complete; only 2:20, 26-27; 3:1-5; 4:1-16 are present. Although the date of the Scroll is uncertain, the text is almost identical to the MT (Masoretic Text). The manuscript from Cave 4 at Qumran (4QXIIc) includes Joel 1:11-20; 2:1, 8-23; 4:6-21. The manuscript whose orthography is plene (full) is dated ca. 76 B.C.. 4QXIIg, perhaps most poorly preserved Minor Prophets Scroll from Cave 4, contains parts of Joel, but its contents have not yet been published. See The and Modern Translations of the Old Testament by H. Scanlin, Illinois, 1993, pp. 74-75, 166.

Verbs in Joel 2:4-9

* The numeral in () shows the occurrence in Joel.

* My special thanks are due to Dr. Ian Young, Department of Semitic Studies, University of Sydney, for reading earlier drafts of this article and making a number of valuable suggestions and comments for its improvement. Any faults which still remain are entirely my own responsibility.

Vol. XXXIII 1998 111 Notes

(1) Joel, whose superscription (1:1) offers no temporal references, had long been the subject of controversy. In the fifties and sixties, a considerable number of studies were made on its date of origin. Although Kapelrud claimed its pre-exilic origin in 1948, nowadays it is generally agreed that Joel originated in the post-exilic period, probably between the fifth and the fourth century B.C. See Myers, Stephenson, Treves, etc. (2) Compare the following parallel passages: 2 Sam. 23:11 $ $ (singular verb) "and the people fled" 1 Chr. 11:13 $ $ (plural verb)

2 Kgs. 23:30 $ $ $ (singular verb) "Then the people of the land took Jehoahaz" 2 Chr. 36:1 $ (plural verb)

In later writings (e.g., Ezekiel, Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah), collective nouns such as $ were almost always construed as plural. This is a generally accepted feature of Late Biblical Hebrew. See Rooker, Biblical Hebrew in Transition, Sheffield, 1990, pp. 75-77, 94-96. He points out a pluralizing tendency exhibited in LBH. (3) Wolff, Joel/Amos, Neukirchener Verlag, 1969, p.53. (4) Young, Diversity in Pre-Exilic Hebrew Tubingen, 1993, p.129. (5) Although it is hard to locate a precise date for Ps. 59, it is reasonable to regard the Psalm as of pre-exilic origin. For details, see Word Biblical Commentary: Psalms 51-100 (vol. 20) by Marvin E. Tate, Dallas, 1990, p.95. (6) The dating of Ps. 89 is controversial. Some scholars have dated the psalm to the exilic period. I support, however, the pre-exilic origin, because of the reference to the King. For detailed discussion of Ps. 89, see Tate, ibid. pp.413-418. (7) The date of the Book of Job has been much debated. Although some scholars date it to the exilic or early post-exilic period, modern scholarship (Driver, Hurvitz, Young) supports the pre-exilic origin, especially for the poetic section of the book. Robertson claims that Job would probably have to be dated to the eleventh to tenth centuries B.C.. Robertson, Linguistic Evidence in Dating Early Hebrew Poetry, Society of Biblical Literature, 1972, p.155. The complete absence of any quotations from scripture is worth considering in dating the book. For details, see Young, op. cit. pp. 132-137. (8) Young, ibid., p.129 (9) Ibid., p.11 (10) Ibid., p.60: One of the major characteristics of ABH is its free use of archaic, and dialectal Aramaic, linguistic elements. In many cases these are the same thing, the Aramaism reflecting the earlier common heritage of Canaanite and Aramaic...... Further evidence of Aramaic features beneath the surface of Hebrew are found in Aramaic-type formations in personal and place names. (Bauer, H. "Die Hebraischen Eigennamen als Sprachliche Erkenntnisquelle" ZAW N.S.7, p.76f) For details of characteristics of ABH, see ibid., pp. 125- 130. (11) Ibid., p.61 See also, Rabin, C. A Short History of the Hebrew Language, Jerusalem, 1973, p.29. (12) Kutscher, A History of the Hebrew Language, Jerusalem, 1982, p.40. Kutscher says also that in spite of the strong Aramaic influence upon LBH and MH (Mishnaic Hebrew), the longer ending did not survive, despite its identity with the Aramaic form. In MH only the

112 ORIENT A STUDY OF THE VERBS IN JOEL 2:4-9 THE AUTHOR'S STYLE OR ARAMAIC INFLUENCE? shorter form, i.e., [-u:] ending, survives. See ibid., p.40, 125. (13) Young, op. cit., p.88. (14) Rendsburg, Evidence for a Spoken Hebrew in Biblical Times, N.Y. 1980, p.37ff. (15) See Isa. 1:2, 10; 28:23; 32:9; Hos. 5:1; Mica 1:2; etc. (16) Carmi, The Penguin Book of Hebrew Verse, Penguin Books, 1981, p.77f. (17) Kapelrud, Joel Studies, Uppsala, 1948, p.177. (18) Although it was not Joel himself who committed the prophecies to writing, "the act of transmission entailed only minor changes in Joel's prophecies. The firm structure on the basis of ancient cultic ritual patterns has allowed little space for variation, and was simultaneously of great help during the process of transmission." Kapelrud, ibid., p.192. (19) Wolff, op. cit., p.55. (20) Eissfeldt, op. cit., p.692. lQIsaa (Isaiah Scroll discovered at Qumran Cave 1) clearly shows the division of the text into sections-larger as well as smaller ones. The dating of the Scroll varies from the middle of the fourth century B.C. to the early second century B.C.; the paleographically assigned date is between 335-327 B.C., while the new AMS (accelerator mass spectrometry) testing suggests a date between 202-107 B.C.; internal allusions in the manuscript indicate it was written between 125-100 B.C.. See The Dead Sea Scrolls Today by J.C. Vanderkam, Michigan, 1994, pp. 16-20. (21) Eissfeldt, op. cit., p.692. (22) Ibid., p.692. (23) Wolff, op. cit., p.78. (24) Ibid., p.7. Wolff maintains that 4:4-8 is the clear case of such an addition by a secondary hand; while 4:18-21 can be also recognized as a later addition, it may well have been added later by Joel himself. (25) Ibid., p.80. (26) Ibid., p.53.

References Carmi, T. The Penguin Book of Hebrew Verse, Penguin Books, 1981. Driver, S.R. "Joel," Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, Edinburgh, 1913. Eissfeldt, O. "Joel," The Old Testament: An Introduction, trans. P.R. Ackroyd, Oxford, Blackwell, 1965. Even-Shoshan, A. A New Concordance of the Old Testament (using the Hebrew and Aramaic Text), Jerusalem, 1990. Kapelrud, A.S. Joel Studies, Uppsala, Leipzig, 1948. Klein, E. A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English, N.Y., 1987. Kutscher, E.Y. A History of the Hebrew Language, Jerusalem, 1982. Myers, J.M. "Some Considerations Bearing on the Date of Joel," Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, vol. 74, 1962. Oesterlay, W.O.E. "The Book of Joel," An Introduction to the books of the Old Testament, London, S.P.C.K., 1961. Rabin, C. A Short History of the Hebrew Language, Jerusalem, 1973. Rabin, C. "Hebrew and Aramaic in the First Century," in S. Safrai and M. Stern, The Jewish People in the First Century: Historical Geography, Political History, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Institutions, Fortress, Philadelphia, vol. 2, 1987. Rendsburg, G.A. Evidence for a Spoken Hebrew in Biblical Times, N.Y., 1980. Robertson, D.A. Linguistic Evidence in Dating Early Hebrew Poetry, Society of Biblical

Vol. XXXIII 1998 113 Literature, 1972. Rooker, M.F. Biblical Hebrew in Transition, Sheffield, 1990. Scanlin, H. The Dead Sea Scrolls and Modern Translations of the Old Testament, Illinois, 1993. Stephenson, F.R. "The Date of the Book of Joel", Vetus Testamentum, vol. 19, 1969. Tate, M.E. Word Biblical Commentary: Psalms 51-100, vol. 20, Dallas, 1990. Treves, M. "The Date of Joel," Vetus Testamentum, vol. 7, 1957. Vanderkam, J.C. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today, Michigan, 1994. Wolff, H.W. Joel/Amos (Biblischer Kommentar), Neukirchener Verlag, 1969. Young, I. Diversity in Pre-Exilic Hebrew, Tubingen, 1993.

114 ORIENT