Job 4:2 | KD | STEP | If one attempts a word with thee, will it grieve thee? And still to restrain himself from words, who is able? 3 Behold, thou hast instructed many, And the weak hands thou hast strengthened. 4 The stumbling turned to thy words, And the sinking knees thou hast strengthened. 5 But now it cometh to thee, thou art grieved; Now it toucheth thee, thou despondest. The question with which Eliphaz beings, is certainly one of those in which the tone of interrogation falls on the second of the paratactically connected sentences: Wilt thou, if we speak to thee, feel it unbearable? Similar examples are ; Num 16:22; ; and with interrogative Wherefore? ; : comp. the similar paratactic union of sentences, ; . The question arises here, whether נסּה is an Aramaic form of writing for נשּׂא (as the Masora in distinction from takes it), and also either future, Wilt thou, if we raise, i.e., utter, etc.; or passive, as Ewald formerly, If a word is raised, i.e., uttered, דּבר נשׂא, like משׁל נשׂא, ; or whether it is third pers. Piel, with the signification, attempt, tentare , Ecc 7:23. The last is to be preferred, because more admissible and also more expressive. נסּה followed by the fut. is a hypothetic praet., Supposing that, etc., wilt thou, etc., as e.g., Job 23:10. מלּין is the Aramaic plur . of מלּה, which is more frequent in the book of Job than the Hebrew plur . מלּים. The futt., Job 4:3., because following the perf., are like imperfects in the western languages: the expression is like Isa 35:3. In עתּה כּי, , כּי has a temporal signification, Now when, Ges. §155, 1, e , ( b ).

‏ Job 4:2

Job 4:2-5 2 If one attempts a word with thee, will it grieve thee?

And still to restrain himself from words, who is able? 3 Behold, thou hast instructed many,

And the weak hands thou hast strengthened. 4 The stumbling turned to thy words,

And the sinking knees thou hast strengthened. 5 But now it cometh to thee, thou art grieved;

Now it toucheth thee, thou despondest.

The question with which Eliphaz beings, is certainly one of those in which the tone of interrogation falls on the second of the paratactically connected sentences: Wilt thou, if we speak to thee, feel it unbearable? Similar examples are Job 4:21; Num 16:22; Jer 8:4; and with interrogative Wherefore? Isa 5:4; Isa 50:2 : comp. the similar paratactic union of sentences, Job 2:10; Job 3:11. The question arises here, whether נסּה is an Aramaic form of writing for נשּׂא (as the Masora in distinction from Deu 4:34 takes it), and also either future, Wilt thou, if we raise, i.e., utter, etc.; or passive, as Ewald formerly, ^{▼▼In the second edition, comp. Jahrb. ix. 37, he explains it otherwise: “If we attempt a word with thee, will it be grievous to thee quod aegre feras?” But that, however, must be נסּה; the form נסּה can only be third pers. Piel: If any one attempts, etc., which, according to Ewald’s construction, gives no suitable rendering.}

If a word is raised, i.e., uttered, דּבר נשׂא, like משׁל נשׂא, Job 27:1; or whether it is third pers. Piel, with the signification, attempt, tentare, Ecc 7:23. The last is to be preferred, because more admissible and also more expressive. נסּה followed by the fut. is a hypothetic praet., Supposing that, etc., wilt thou, etc., as e.g., Job 23:10. מלּין is the Aramaic plur. of מלּה, which is more frequent in the book of Job than the Hebrew plur. מלּים. The futt., Job 4:3., because following the perf., are like imperfects in the western languages: the expression is like Isa 35:3. In עתּה כּי, Job 4:5, כּי has a temporal signification, Now when, Ges. §155, 1, e, (b).