Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 360

DISSERTATION ABSTRACT

Doctor of Philosophy
Adventist International Institute
of Advanced Studies
Theological Seminary
TITLE: A DIVINE CALL TO RELATIONSHIP AND A COVENANTAL
RENEWAL IN DEUTERONOMY 28:69-30:20: A SYNTAGMATIC
SYNTACTIC AND TEXT-LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS
Researcher: Emmer Chacon
Research advisor: David Tasker, PhD
Date completed: October 2010
This study uses a linguistic approach and applies syntagmatics, syntax and
textlinguistics procedures to the Hebrew text of Deut 28:69-30:20 in order to assess what
the linguistic information thus obtained might contribute for the understanding of the
literary, structural and theological aspects portrayed in this passage.
Chapter 1 surveys the methodology that is applied to the text in Chapters 2 and 3
generating structural and theological information that Chapters 4 and 5 analyze. Finally,
Chapter 6 provides a general summary, methodological evaluation, conclusions, and
recommendations
This investigation has demonstrated that in Deut 28:69-30:20 vocabulary,
grammar, micro and macrosyntax, rhetoric and pragmalinguistic are highly crafted with
literary cohesion and coherence to convey the theology of the text. Textlinguistics
allowed identifying rhetorical strategies in Deut 28:69-30:20. These strategies seek to
provide a speech that combines a high level of organization and art while conveying a
message. These strategies enhance persuasion and memory. Repetition carries on motifs
through the speech and portrays more than one aspect of the issue or even return to the
topic after a digression. The changes in personal pronouns display harmonic patterns that
allow the speaker to argue with the individual while addressing the multitude. Temporal
patterns provide the presentation of a comprehensive covenantal programmatic offer for
the future of the audience. This offer implies a program and a history of the conditional
program of what the Lord intends to fulfill in behalf of the audience and their
descendants and the certain prophetic portrayal of what the near and future history of the
people will be. The audience has the key, the final answer that the text does not register.
Although the prophetic portrayal of the text shows us what their answer in the future will
be. Therefore, textlinguistics has proved to be efficient in elucidating the way rhetoric,
structure and theology function in the text.





Adventist International Institute
of Advanced Studies
Theological Seminary


A DIVINE CALL TO RELATIONSHIP AND A COVENANTAL
RENEWAL IN DEUTERONOMY 28:69-30:20:
A SYNTAGMATIC, SYNTACTIC AND TEXT-
LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS







A dissertation
presented in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY




by
Emmer Chacon
October 2010















































Copyright 2010
by Emmer Chacn
All rights reserved






A DIVINE CALL TO RELATIONSHIP AND A COVENANTAL RENEWAL
IN DEUTERONOMY 28:69-30:20: A SYNTAGMATIC, SYNTACTIC
AND TEXT-LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS




A dissertation
presented in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
Doctor of Philosophy

by
Emmer Chacn

APPROVAL BY THE COMMITTEE:


_________________________________ ___________________________________
David Tasker, PhD, Chairman Carlos Mora, ThD, Member
Associate Professor of Old Testament Associate Professor of Old Testament
Exegesis and theology Biblical Languages



_________________________________ ___________________________________
Aecio Cairus, PhD, Member Kim Papaioannou, PhD, Internal Examiner
Professor of Systematic Theology Assistant Professor of New Testament


_________________________________ ___________________________________
Grenville Kent, PhD, External Examiner David Tasker, PhD, Dean
Wesley Institute, Sydney, Australia AIIAS Theological Seminary


___________________________________
Date Approved























Dedicated to Consuelo, my wife
:-- s -s :s
And to Maria, my mother
:s :: :






v




TABLE OF CONTENTS



LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................. x

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................. xii

CHAPTER

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

Statement of the Problem ................................................................................ 4
Purpose and Significance of the Research ...................................................... 5
Justification of the Research ............................................................................ 7
Delimitation of the Research ........................................................................... 8
Methodology ................................................................................................... 9
Linguistic Analysis..................................................................................11
Microsyntactical Analysis .................................................................11
Word Order ...................................................................................... 12
Macrosyntactical Analysis ............................................................... 13
Verbal Distribution in the Text ......................................................... 14
Theological Analysis .............................................................................. 15
Literature Review .......................................................................................... 15
Recent Methodologies ........................................................................... 16
Historical and Literary Critical ........................................................ 16
Narrative Methodology .................................................................... 18
Synchronic-Canonical ...................................................................... 20
Rhetorical Critical ............................................................................ 22
Text-Linguistics ............................................................................... 27
Summary ................................................................................................ 29

2. TEXTLINGUISTIC ANALYSIS (PART I) ........................................................ 31

Syntagmatical and Syntactical Analysis of Deut 28:96-29:28 ...................... 32
Deuteronomy 28:69 ............................................................................... 33
Hebrew Text of Deut 28:69 .............................................................. 34
Analysis of Textual Critical Notes ................................................... 34
Summary .......................................................................................... 35
Clause Division of Deut 28:69 ......................................................... 35
Syntax and Syntagmatics ................................................................. 36
vi
Summary .......................................................................................... 41
Deuteronomy 29:1-8 .............................................................................. 42
Hebrew Text of Deut 29:1-8 ............................................................ 42
Analysis of Textual Critical Notes ................................................... 42
Summary .......................................................................................... 47
Clause Division of Deut 29:1-8 ....................................................... 47
Syntax and Syntagmatics ................................................................. 49
Summary .......................................................................................... 61
Deuteronomy 29:9-20 ............................................................................ 64
Hebrew ext of Deut 29:9-20 ............................................................ 64
Analysis of Textual Critical Notes ................................................... 65
Summary .......................................................................................... 73
Clause Division of Deut 29:9-20 ..................................................... 73
Syntax and Syntagmatics ................................................................. 75
Summary ........................................................................................ 103
Deuteronomy 29:21-28 ........................................................................ 105
Hebrew Text of Deut 29:21-28 ...................................................... 105
Analysis of Textual Critical Notes ................................................. 106
Summary ........................................................................................ 109
Clause Division of Deut 29:21-28 ................................................. 109
Syntax and Syntagmatics ................................................................110
Summary ........................................................................................ 123
Summary ..................................................................................................... 125

3. TEXTLINGUISTIC ANALYSIS (PART II) ..................................................... 126

Syntagmatical and Syntactical Analysis of Deut 30:1-20 ........................... 126
Deuteronomy 30:1-10 .......................................................................... 126
Hebrew Text of Deut 30:1-10 ........................................................ 126
Analysis of Textual Critical Notes ................................................. 127
Summary ........................................................................................ 131
Clause Division of Deut 30:1-10 ................................................... 131
Syntax and Syntagmatics ............................................................... 133
Summary ........................................................................................ 149
Deuteronomy 30:11-14 ........................................................................ 151
Hebrew Text of Deut 30:11-14 ...................................................... 151
Analysis of Textual Critical Notes ................................................. 151
Summary ........................................................................................ 153
Clause Division of Deut 30:11-14 ................................................. 153
Syntax and Syntagmatics ............................................................... 154
Summary ........................................................................................ 160
Deuteronomy 30:15-20. ....................................................................... 161
Hebrew Text of Deut 30:15-20 ...................................................... 161
Analysis of Textual Critical Notes ................................................. 162
Summary ........................................................................................ 169
Clause Division of Deut 30:15-20 ................................................. 170
Syntax and Syntagmatics ............................................................... 171
Summary ........................................................................................ 185
vii
Summary ..................................................................................................... 187
Textual Issues ....................................................................................... 187
Syntactic and Syntagmatic Analysis .................................................... 188
Structural Information .......................................................................... 188
Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel ............................................... 190

4. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF DEUT 28:69-30:20 ........................................ 192

The Structure of Deuteronomy .................................................................... 193
Covenant Form..................................................................................... 194
Concentric Literary Pattern .................................................................. 196
Collection of Speeches ......................................................................... 198
Summary .............................................................................................. 205
The Structure of Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 ............................................... 206
Deuteronomy 28:69-29:8 ..................................................................... 207
Deuteronomy 29:9-20 .......................................................................... 212
Deuteronomy 29:21-28 ........................................................................ 216
Deuteronomy 30:1-10 .......................................................................... 219
Deuteronomy 30:11-14 ........................................................................ 223
Deuteronomy 30:15-20 ........................................................................ 225
Summary .............................................................................................. 228

5. COVENANT THEOLOGY AND DEUTERONOMY 28:69-30:20 .................. 232

Covenant Theology in the Pentateuch ......................................................... 232
Covenant Theology in Deut 28:69-30:20 .................................................... 238
Deuteronomy 28:69-29:8 ..................................................................... 239
Deuteronomy 29:9-20 .......................................................................... 244
Deuteronomy 29:21-28 ........................................................................ 247
Deuteronomy 30:1-10 .......................................................................... 250
Deuteronomy 30:11-14 ........................................................................ 253
Deuteronomy 30:15-20 ........................................................................ 255
Summary ..................................................................................................... 260
Gods Initiative..................................................................................... 261
Love of God and the Love for God ...................................................... 261
Order Is Important................................................................................ 262
Danger of Idolatry and Apostasy ......................................................... 262
Choices ................................................................................................. 263
Covenant Elements .............................................................................. 263

6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................. 267

Summary ..................................................................................................... 267
Textual Critical Analysis ...................................................................... 267
Syntagmatic and Syntactical Analysis ................................................. 268
Structural Analysis ............................................................................... 269
Theological Analysis ............................................................................ 269
Conclusions ................................................................................................. 273
viii
Resumptive Repetition ......................................................................... 273
Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel ............................................... 274
Location and Function of Deut 28:69 ................................................. 275
Covenant Features of the Text ............................................................. 275
Methodological Evaluation ......................................................................... 277
Recommendations for Further Study .......................................................... 279
Final Conclusion .......................................................................................... 281

APPENDIXES

A. VERBAL DISTRIBUTION IN DEUT 28:69-30:20 .......................................... 283

B. ANALYSIS OF SYNTAGMS AND CLAUSE IDENTIFICATION ................. 293

BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 325



ix



LIST OF TABLES



1. Clause Division and Translation of Deut 28:69 .................................................... 36
2. Clause Division and Translation of Deut 29:1-8 .................................................. 48
3. Clause Division and Translation of Deut 29:9-20 ................................................ 74
4. Clause Division and Translation of Deut 29:21-28 ............................................ 109
5. Clause Division and Translation of Deut 30:1-10 .............................................. 132
6. Clause Division and Translation of Deut 30:11-14 ............................................. 153
7. Clause Division and Translation of Deut 30:15-20 ............................................ 170
8. Parallels Between Deut 1:1-5, 4:44-49 and 28:69-29:8 ...................................... 208
9. Deut 29:1a-8d Internal Structure Flow ............................................................... 210
10. Literary Structure of Deut 30:11-14 ................................................................... 224
11. Literary Structure of Deut 30:15-20 ................................................................... 226
12. Literary Links Between Deut 4:25-31 and 30:1-20 ............................................ 227
13. General Structure of Deut 28:69-30:20 .............................................................. 229






x




LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS



Asyndeton
1p First person plural
2mp Second person masculine plural
2ms Second person masculine singular
3p Third person
3ms Third person masculine singular
3mp Third person masculine plural
acc accusative
Adv Adverb/adverbial
ANE Ancient Near Eastern
BDB Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon
DO Direct object
DOTP Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch
IO Indirect object
LXX Septuagint
mo Modifier
MT Masoretic Text
NC Nominal clause
NIDB New Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible
NIDOTTE New International Dictionary of the Old Testament Theology and Exegesis
xi
nP Nominal predicate
OT Old Testament
P Predicate
Prep Preposition
TDOT Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament
WBC Word Biblical Commentary
xii





ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS



A PhD dissertation is always the result of many peoples labor. The education of
a PhD candidate does not start the moment he or she registers for the coursework. It
commences years back when academic discipline and critical thinking are planted and
then nurtured through time. Professor Eduardo Gmez hammered the ideal of academic
excellence in my mind back in 1983 during my first year in College.
Dr Laren Kurtz deposited the seed of this research back in 2003 during his class
on Pentateuch in Venezuela when he suggested literary methods as a promising exegetical
tool. Dr Clinton Whalen and Dr Gerald Klingbeil, my professors at AIIAS Theological
Seminary, took care in training me in Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic and exegesis providing
wide opportunity for me to explore diverse methodologies while writing several
academic papers that they carefully read and criticized. Wise feedback characterized this
process. Dr Joel Musvosvi and Dr Aecio Cairus, my PhD program directors, often went
the extra mile so that I could enjoy a research-oriented environment during all my
doctoral training. Dr Grenville Kent provided critical advice in the right moment. Dr
David Tasker, my main adviser, Dr Carlos Mora and Dr Kim Papaioannou have provided
guidance and advice.
Doctoral education demands enormous amounts of resources and implies heavy
stress. My sponsor institutions, the Seventh-day Theological Seminary of Venezuela, the
Seventh-day Adventist Venezuelan-Antillean Union and the Inter American Division
xiii
provided the needed material and moral support for my training so that I could focus on
advanced research with the basic needs of my family covered.
My friends and relatives have supported my family with their prayers and even
their resources during these years. Dr Micah Andrews has taken special attention during
all these years in providing me advice, guidance, academic resources and much more so
that my education might be balanced in the global and contemporary perspective. The
Leslie Hardinge Library has gone the extra mile helping me to find the much-needed
resources, books and articles in three continents across the sea and the ether.
My wife has been by my side for long years nurturing my scholarly dream,
pushing me ahead and unconditionally supporting me at an ineffable personal cost. Her
prayers, her character, her piety and her warm constant love have supported us through
fire and storms.
My Lord in heavens gave me a vision early in my faith journey and He has carried
me through. Glory be to Him in Heavens forever and ever. I pray that His grace might
empower me to bring glory to His Name.

1
Escuchad, cielos, y hablar;
Y oiga la tierra los dichos de mi boca.

2
Gotear como la lluvia mi enseanza;
Destilar como el roco mi razonamiento;
Como la llovizna sobre la grama,
Y como las gotas sobre la hierba;

3
Porque el nombre de Jehov proclamar.
Engrandeced a nuestro Dios.

4
l es la Roca, cuya obra es perfecta,
Porque todos sus caminos son rectitud;
Dios de verdad, y sin ninguna iniquidad en l;
Es justo y recto. Deut 32:1-4



1





CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION



Deuteronomy has inspired and perplexed its readers for more than two millennia.
The overall covenantal form and theology coupled with its peculiar literary style both
amazes and bewilders the student of Deuteronomy. The style needs to be addressed in
order to unpack the former. The abundance of repetition and the presence of exceptions,
the often confusing flow of pronouns, the abundance of literary figures, and often unusual
vocabulary, grammar and/or syntax shroud the message of Deuteronomy. Textlinguistics
promises to provide a way to see through this fog. This methodology offers to the
interpreter an array of linguistic tools to assess the fabric of the text and reach its
message.
A review of recent scholarly publications reveals the literature on Deuteronomy as
massive and even overwhelming.
1
Some of the most representative methodological
approaches applied to the academic study of Deuteronomy and particularly to Deut
28:69-30:20 include perspectives such as historical-critical methodologies,
2
narrative

1
Duane Christensen, ed., A Song of Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the
Book of Deuteronomy, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3 (Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1993), ix. See a comprehensive inventory of this bibliography up to 2000 in
Duane L. Christensen, Deuteronomy 1-21:9, Word Biblical Commentary 6A (Dallas,
TX: Word Books, 2002), xxxv- liv.
2
Samuel Rolles Driver, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Deuteronomy
(Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1978), 320-328. Alexander Rof, The Covenant in the Land
of Moab (Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20): Historico-Literary, Comparative, and Formcritical
Considerations, in A Song of Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of
2
criticism,
3
synchronic-canonical,
4
rhetorical-critical,
5
and text-linguistic.
6
However,
scholarly literature evidences that the textlinguistic approach has not been applied to Deut
28:69-30:20 to the best of my knowledge. These methodologies have contributed a rich
mine of scholarship and have brought to light a number of issues in Deuteronomy and in
the chosen text. These issues remain as a matter of study. A review of the scholarly
literature reveals that they remain either unsolved or partially solved. Some of these
subjects are pertinent to the study of Deut 28:69-30:20 and deal with areas such as the
literary structure of the passage. There is research needed in reference to the function of
Deut 28:69 as it is marked by the Masoretes as the ending of Deut 27:1-28:68 but its
vocabulary seems to be more related to 29:1-30:20.
7
The syntax and syntagmatics of the
passage need analysis in reference to the resumptive repetition (Wiederaufnahme)
8
that

Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3
(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993), 269-279.
3
John H. Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1992), 471-473.
4
J. Gordon McConville, Deuteronomy, Apollos Old Testament Commentary 5
(Leicester, England: Apollos, 2002), 410-420. Duane L. Christensen, Deuteronomy
21:10-34:12, Word Biblical Commentary 6B (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2002),
706-733.
5
Timothy A. Lenchak, Choose Life! A Rhetorical-Critical Investigation of
Deuteronomy 28,69-30,20, Analecta Biblica 129 (Roma: Editrice Pontificio Istituto
Biblico, 1993).
6
Eep Talstra, Deuteronomy 9 and 10 Synchronic and Diachronic Observations,
in Synchronic or Diachronic? A Debate on Method in Old Testament Exegesis, ed.
Johannes C. De Moor (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1995), 187-210. Jason Shane DeRouchie, A
Call to Covenant Love: Text Grammar and Literary Structure in Deuteronomy 5-11,
(PhD diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY: 2005).
7
This verse is marked with a petuah. Rof, The Covenant in the Land of
Moab, 269-270.
8
Wiederaufnahme or resumptive repetition is a discourse feature used to resume
a previous topic, story line or theme line that has been interrupted by a span of
information that is related to but diverges for a short or long gap before being resumed.
See Phil Quick, Resumptive RepetitionIntroduction to a Universal Discourse
Feature, Linguistika 14, no. 26 (2007): 1.
3
has been interpreted synchronically as literary device
9
and diachronically as evidence of
the editorial history of the text.
10
Another issue is the Numeruswechsel, which implies
changes in the morphological number of the addresses, and has been seen as evidence of
multiple editorial sources and as a rhetorical and even theological device.
11
The presence
and function of covenant forms in Deuteronomy are still a matter of study and Deut
28:69-30:20 shares those forms and theology.
12

In OT studies, recent scholarship has seen text-oriented methodologies taking
advantage of the state of the art in linguistic studies in general
13
and particularly in
biblical Hebrew linguistics.
14
These methodologies allow the interpreter to gain access to

9
See Denis T. Olson, Deuteronomy and the Death of Moses: A Theological
Reading (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1994), 129.
10
See Rof, The Covenant in the Land of Moab, 274-275.
11
See J. Gordon McConville, Singular Address in the Deuteronomic Law and
the Politics of Legal Administration, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 97
(2002): 19, 29-36.
12
See the discussion in James K. Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel in Sinai: The
Evidence for the Authenticity of the Wilderness Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2005), 193-192. John Charles Hutchison, The Relationship of the Abrahamic,
Mosaic, and Palestinian Covenants in Deuteronomy 29-30 (ThD diss., Dallas
Theological Seminary, 1981).
13
Grard Fernndez Smith, Fundamentos tericos, desarrollo y proyecciones
actuales de la lingstica del texto (PhD diss., Universidad de Cdiz, Cdiz, Espaa,
2003). This research in general linguistics shows several techniques and methodologies
currently used in reference to Hebrew linguistics.
14
Examples of the application of these text-oriented methodologies are found in
dissertations such as Rolf A. Jacobson, Many Are Saying: The Function of Direct
Discourse in the Hebrew Psalter (PhD diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, NJ, 2000).
Robert D. Holmstedt, The Relative Clause in Biblical Hebrew: A Linguistic Analysis
(PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2002). David O. Moomo, The Meaning
of the Biblical Hebrew Verbal Conjugation From a Crosslinguistic Perspective (PhD
diss., University of Stellenbosch, South Africa, 2004). Michael A. Lyons, From Law to
Prophecy: Ezekiels Use of the Holiness Code (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin,
Madison, 2005). Steven Edward Runge, A Discourse-Functional Description of
Participant Reference in Biblical Hebrew Narrative (PhD diss., University of
Stellenbosch, South Africa, 2006). Anne E. Garber Kompaor, Discourse Analysis of
Directive Text: The Case of Biblical Law (MA thesis, Associated Mennonite Biblical
4
a wealth of textual information that was not accessible before and might contribute to
solve issues related to the text, its structure and its theology. In addition these
methodologies offer to provide for the researcher interpretative controls because of its
linguistic foundation. It is in this context that textlinguistics
15
might contribute to the
solution of current issues related to the study of Deuteronomy and particularly Deut
28:69-30:20.

Statement of the Problem
This research aims to put the textlinguistic methodology to the test in a text where
it has not been applied so far, namely Deut 28:69-30:20. This research seeks to find what
textlinguistics might contribute to the solution of these issues in the selected text. These
issues include

Seminary, Elkhart, IN, 2004). Silvu Tatu, Ancient Hebrew and Ugaritic Poetry and
Modern Linguistic Tools: An Interdisciplinary Study, Journal for the Study of Religions
and Ideologies 17 (Summer, 2007): 47-68. Gernot Kopa, Divine Discourse and Biblical
Scholarship: A Limited Critical Assessment of Nicholas Wolterstorffs Speech-Act
Theory Approach and Its Implications for Biblical Hermeneutics and Exegetical
Methodology (MA thesis, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, 2008).
15
See an introduction to textlinguistics in David Allan Dawson, Text-Linguistics
and Biblical Hebrew (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 11-219. Christo van
der Merwe, A Critical Analysis of Narrative Syntactic Approaches, With Special
Attention to Their Relationship to Discourse Analysis, in Narrative Syntax and the
Hebrew Bible: Papers of the Tilburg Conference 1996, ed. Ellen van Wolde, Biblical
Interpretation Series 29 (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 133, 134, 156. Susan Anne Groom,
Linguistic Analysis of Biblical Hebrew (Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2003), 131-160.
Some examples of recent research in OT studies using this methodology might be seen in
Baek Sung Choi, The Unity and the Symmetry of the Book of Job (PhD diss.,
University of Texas, Arlington, TX, 2000). Hwi Cho, Ezekiels Use of the Term sc:
With Reference to the Davidic Figure in His Restoration Oracles (PhD diss., Trinity
Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, IL, 2002). Renata C. Furst, Prophecy as
Narrative World: A Study of the World-Constructing Conventions and Narrative
Techniques in Hosea 1-3 (PhD diss., Universit de Montral, Canada, 2004). Otto
Snchez M., A Textlinguistic Analysis of Exodus 15:22-17:7 (PhD diss., Westminster
Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, PA, 2004). DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love.
Timothy Lee Walton, Experimenting With Qohelet: A Text-Linguistic Approach to
Reading Qohelet as Discourse (PhD diss., Vrije University, Amsterdam, 2006).
5
1. The nature, function and textual significance of resumptive repetition
(Wiederaufnahme).
2. The nature, function and textual significance of the repetitive changes in the
morphological number of the addresses (Numeruswechsel).
3. The identification and location of structural textual markers that have been
used to delimitate the speeches in Deuteronomy. This is important for the
purposes of the study as although Deut 28:69-30:20 is Moses last speech in
Deuteronomy it seems to begin with a text (28:69) which was marked by the
Masoretes with a petuHah as the ending of the previous speech. Therefore
there is an issue associated with the location and function of Deut 28:69 in
relation to the flow of the preceding (Deut 27:1-28:68) and the following text
(Deut 29:1-30:20). Does Deut 28:69 end Deut 27:1-28:68 or does it
introduce Deut 29:1-30:20 or does it fulfill both functions?
4. The nature and function of the covenant features of the text, both literary and
theological.

Purpose and Significance of the Research
Recent scholarship has applied linguistic advances
16
from general linguistics in
the study of biblical Hebrew linguistics in order to discover the kind of literary and
theological structures revealed by the syntax and text linguistic of the text itself.
17
In

16
Christo H. J. van der Merwe, Some Recent Trends in Biblical Hebrew
Linguistics: A Few Pointers Towards a More Comprehensive Model of Language Use,
Hebrew Studies 44 (2003): 7-24. This article samples contributions from structuralism,
pragmatics, cognitive linguistics and socio linguistics.
17
See Christo H. J. van der Merwe and Eep Talstra, Biblical Hebrew: The
Interface of Information Structure and Formal Features, Zeitschrift fur Althebraistik 15-
16 (2002-2003): 68-107.
6
harmony with this, the purpose of this study is to explore the syntax of Deut 28:69-30:20
at both the clause and the supra clause level.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the syntax, text-linguistic and structural
elements of the selected text in order to arrive at possible solutions to the issues in Deut
28:69-30:20 using its own language. This approach attempts to avoid the usage of
categories that might result external to the text. Instead of using classical Greek, Latin or
contemporary categories,
18
it will look inside the text in order to identify its own
linguistic elements. In other words, this study seeks to analyze the data from the
perspective of the semantic, syntactic, syntagmatic and pragmalinguistic features of the
text
19
so that this information might illuminate the understanding of the text. This
approach seeks to keep the locus of the interpretative authority on the text seeking to
limit the subjectivity of the interpreter in the search for objectivity. Then this study
moves from the linguistic data derived from the analysis of the text to its rhetoric,
structure and theology.

18
Timothy A. Lenchak applied Greek rhetoric to the study of Deut 28:69-30:20.
This approach has received criticism. See Lenchak, Choose Life! Steve McKenzie,
review of Choose Life! A Rhetorical-Critical Investigation of Deuteronomy 28,69-
30,20, by Timothy A. Lenchak, Journal of Biblical Literature 114, no. 2 (Summer
1995): 301.
19
This study differentiates syntax and syntagmatics as the first being the analysis
of the functional relations between words in a text in order to form phrases, clauses and
sentences. Syntagmatics analyzes the functional relations between words that combine
to form a linear linguistic sequence called syntagm. See Groom, Linguistic Analysis of
Biblical Hebrew, 105-106. It is important to recognize that textlinguistics is a
methodological trend still in process of development and eclectic therefore some
concepts might still require further delimitation or clarification.
Pragmalinguistics (as used in this research) refers to the conventions according
to which speakers belonging to a particular culture do various things in particular ways
with language. Christo H. J. van der Merwe, Jackie A. Naud, and Jan H. Kroeze, A
Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar. Biblical Languages: Hebrew 3 (Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), 52. Ida Zatelli, Pragmalinguistics and Speech-Act
Theory as Applied to Classical Hebrew, Zeitschrift fr Althebraistik 6 (1993): 60.
7
Justification of the Research
Scholars that apply literary methods to the study of the Hebrew biblical text have
recently been using linguistic tools to their exegetical endeavor.
20
This methodological
tendency provides an opportunity for a fresh reading of the text and a better evaluation of
its literary aspects and its theology. This reading from a fresh perspective promises
access to a wealth of linguistic data that might enrich our understanding of the biblical
text, as recent research shows.
21
The study of Deuteronomy has also begun to benefit
from this linguistic approach.
22
This research seeks to take advantage of this situation
and use textlinguistic tools to study the text of Deut 28:69-30:20 and then find how this
methodology might help to solve its textual, structural and theological issues.

20
See examples in Hans Rechenmacher and Christo H. J. van der Merwe, The
Contribution of Wolfgang Richter to Current Developments in the Study of Biblical
Hebrew, Journal of Semitic Studies 50, no. 1 (2005): 80. See additionally Christo van
der Merwe, Discourse Linguistic and Biblical Hebrew Grammar in Biblical Hebrew
and Discourse Linguistics, ed. Robert D. Bergen (Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of
Linguistics, 1994), 13-49; Robert E. Longacre, Weqatal Forms in Biblical Hebrew
Prose, in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, ed. Robert D. Bergen (Dallas,
TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994), 50-98; Francis I. Andersen, Salience,
Implicature, Ambiguity, and Redundancy in Clause-Clause Relationships in Biblical
Hebrew, in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, ed. Robert D. Bergen (Dallas,
TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994), 99-116; Alviero Niccacci, On the Hebrew
Verbal System, in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, ed. Robert D. Bergen
(Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994), 117-137.
21
See some linguistic approaches applied in Old Testament studies in Kent Aaron
Reynolds, Psalm 119: Promoting Torah, Portraying an Ideal Student of the Torah (PhD
diss., University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2007), 19-65. Kent Aaron Reynolds discusses
the relationship between form and function in poetry. A more technical example is found
in Keith Andrew Massey, The Concord of Collective Nouns and Verbs in Biblical
Hebrew: A Controlled Study (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1998).
Michael A. Lyons used linguistic tools to provide evidence of Ezekiel as a reader and
user of an earlier text as scripture. See Lyons, From Law to Prophecy, 194. See
another linguistic approach in Martin Prbstle, Truth and Terror: A Text-Oriented
Analysis of Daniel 8:9-14 (PhD diss., Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI, 2006).
22
Talstra, Deuteronomy 9 and 10, 187-210. DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant
Love.
8
Delimitation of the Research
This study deals with a large section of the Hebrew text, namely, Deut 28:69-
30:20. Therefore, issues such as the literary provenance, date of composition and other
isagogic issues of Deuteronomy are not addressed.
23
Textual and morphological issues
are analyzed only as required by the study itself. This study will not address instances of
intertextuality. At the same time, structural aspects will come into focus only as required
by the syntactical and linguistic data provided by the text itself in the context of the
structural approach that will be selected in the literature review. The theological analysis
will be limited to the covenant-related data provided by the text.

23
The issue related to the unity and authorship of the book of Deuteronomy and
the whole Pentateuch is still under discussion and probably far from solution. We may
see in some scholars a tendency to approach the Pentateuch both as a unity and as a
collection. Some examples in this approach are U. Cassuto, The Documentary
Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch (Jerusalem: Hebrew University,
1961), 98-105, especially page 103, where he speaks of the unity of the Torah and the
variety of its materials. M. H. Segal, The Pentateuch: Its Composition and Its
Authorship and Other Biblical Studies (Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 1967), 1-21.
M. H. Segal arrives to the conclusion that the Pentateuch must be the work or final
work of an author or compiler who worked on a definite plan with a fixed purpose on
view, 21. Thomas W. Mann, The Book of the Torah: The Narrative Integrity of the
Pentateuch (Atlanta: John Knox, 1988), 1-9, 143-147. Tomas W. Mann stresses this
twofold approach to the literary unity and the multiplicity of sources and traditions.
McConville, Deuteronomy, 38-51, see especially page 51 where J. Gordon McConville
briefly delineates his methodology and page 39 where he emphasizes evidence of
similarities between Deuteronomy and the Hittite treaty form, echoes in treaties and law
codes and even in its language as reflecting the world of the second millennium BC. Jan
Ridderbos, Deuteronomy, Bible Students Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Regency,
1984), 6-24, see especially pages 19-22 for a Mosaic approach. See Sailhamer, The
Pentateuch as Narrative, 1-80 where Sailhamer addresses the whole Pentateuch as a
narrative unity and stresses the literary devices that evidences this unity. See Olson,
Deuteronomy and the Death of Moses, 1-5; in these pages Denis T. Olson explains his
methodology as literary and theological reading and in pages 6-22 he introduces both the
literary and theological devices he will use in his reading of Deuteronomy. Olson accepts
a long editorial history for the book but he approaches it as a whole. For a brief
evaluation of the vocabulary comparison between Ugarit and Deuteronomy, see Peter C.
Craigie, Deuteronomy and the Ugaritic Studies, in A Song of Power and the Power of
Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen, Sources for
Biblical and Theological Study 3 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993), 115-121.
9
Methodology
The study will analyze the text of Deut 28:69-30:20 focusing upon two aspects:
Text linguistics and theology. It is expected that the textlinguistic analysis will provide
information with structural implications in order to clarify issues such as the structural
function of Deut 28:69, the nature and function of resumptive repetition,
Numeruswechsel and the covenantal elements in the text. These aspects of the study will
be performed with the intention of always allowing the text to be the locus of authority
for its interpretation. This in an effort to use it as a hermeneutical control in the search of
the elusive objectivity.
In the stage of the syntactic and syntagmatic analysis this study adopts the present
form of the Hebrew text of Deut 28:69-30:20 in its Masoretic textual tradition.
24
In
addition to this textual witness, it will make use of the pertinent available textual data
25


24
In the textual critical field, this study is benefited from the recent publication of
Carmel McCarthy, ed., Biblia Hebraica Quinta, Fascicle 5: Deuteronomy (Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007). This publication contains two books in one. One
section contains the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy and the critical apparatus (pages I-
XXXII, 1-104). The other section of the book provides a general introduction and the
discussion of both the Masorah Parva and Magna and the analysis of the main textual
issues (pages 1*-190*). It considers and analyzes the evidence from all the available
resources in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Syriac and Aramaic, see pages 5*-9*. For a review of
the textual methodology of the Biblia Hebraica Quinta, see Gerald Klingbeil, review of
Biblia Hebraica Quinta. Fascicle 18: General Introduction and Megilloth, by Adrian
Shenker, J. De Waard, P. B. Dirksen, Y. A. P. Goldman, R. Shfer, and M. Sb,
Journal of Asia Adventist Seminary 10, no. 2 (2007): 216-219. Some other publications
that will provide useful information in textual issues related to the text of Deuteronomy
are Sidnie White Crawford, Textual Criticism of the Book of Deuteronomy and the
Oxford Hebrew Bible Project, in Seeking out the Wisdom of the Ancients: Essays in
Honor of Michael V. Fox on Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. Ronald L. Troxel,
Kelvin G. Friebel, and Dennis R. Magary (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2005), 315-
326. Robert G. Bratcher and Howard Hatton, A Handbook on Deuteronomy, UBS
Handbook series (New York: United Bible Societies, 2000).
25
In reference to protocols and procedures for textual criticism in the Old
Testament, see Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 2
nd
ed.
(Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001), 287-312, 351-370.
10
from the Septuagint,
26
Qumran,
27
the Samaritan Pentateuch
28
and the Vulgate
29
as it
might be relevant for the study. Some of these textual variants does not necesarilly
reflect or suggest a different reading in the Hebrew text behind the manuscripts and
translations but might reflect translation strategies
30
or even scribal habits.
31
It is
important to recognize here that this textual critical discussion departs from the linguistic
methodology intended by this study. However, it is followed as even those differences
probably due to translation strategies or scribe improvement provide information about
the way the text might have been understood by ancient scribes and translators. Ancient

26
John William Wevers has published a wealth of scholarly reference works
related to the study of the Greek text of Deuteronomy. See John William Wevers,
Deuteronomium, Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum
Gottingensis editum 3, 2
nd
ed. (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 2006), 315-332.
John William Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, Society of Bible
Literature Septuagint and Cognates Studies Series (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1995),
461-489. John William Wevers, The LXX Translator of Deuteronomy, in IX Congress
of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Cambridge 1995,
ed. Bernard A. Taylor (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1997), 57-89. John William
Wevers, Text History of the Greek of Deuteronomy (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck and
Ruprecht, 1978).
27
Although Carmel McCarthy has dealt with the Qumran textual data related to
Deuteronomy, the analysis will consult Ryan N. Roberts, Textual Variants in the
Deuteronomy Dead Sea Scrolls: A Case for Standardization (MA thesis, Trinity Western
University, Langley, Canada, 2005).
28
See in reference to this aspect August Freiherrn von Gall, ed., Der Hebrische
Pentateuch der Samaritaner (1914-1918; repr. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1993), 423-
426.
29
R. Weber, B. Fischer, J. Gribomont, H. F. D. Sparks, and W. Thiele, ed.,
Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1983),
30
In reference to the translation strategies of the LXX in Deuteronomy see Anneli
Aejmelaeus, On the Trial of the Septuagint Translators: Collected Essays (Kampen:
Netherlands: Kok Pharos, 1993), 65-115. Wevers, The LXX Translator of
Deuteronomy, 59-89. Karen H. Jobes and Moiss Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2000), 151-158. McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 6*-9*.
Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea Scrolls, 112.
31
In reference to the scribal habits reflected in the Hebrew manuscripts of
Deuteronomy in Qumran, see Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea
Scrolls, 112.
11
scribes and translators had to understad the text in order to copy and translate it. The
syntagmatic and syntactical analysis might take advantage of this information.

Linguistic Analysis
Microsyntactical analysis. Due to the linguistic nature of this study, the
methodology is eclectic as will become evident. The following are the steps of the
linguistic analysis.
In this step of the analysis, the text will be broken down into clauses consisting of
the smallest syntactical unit with a complete sense. Once this has been achieved, the
study will proceed first to the syntactical and syntagmatic analysis of every single
syntagm inside every clause, from the very first to the last in the Hebrew text of Deut
28:69-30:20. The syntagmatic analysis at this level will provide the necessary
information in order to identify and confirm the boundaries of every clause as well as the
internal word order and the verbal distribution. L. J. Regt elaborated a syntactic
inventory of the text of Deut 1-30 that might be useful for the purposes of this study.
Regt does not provide the linguistic database he used in his dissertation and therefore his
methodology is difficult to follow and to evaluate.
32

The microsyntactical analysis will also identify the verbal and nominal clauses as
well as clarify and exhaust elements related to the coordination and subordination of the
clauses. This initial clause classification will lead to the adequate procedures for clause
analysis.
33
This information will be used to inform the flow of the utterances and, as a

32
See L. J. Regt, A Parametric Model for Syntactic Studies of a Textual Corpus:
Demonstrated on the Hebrew of Deuteronomy 1-30 (Maastricht, Netherlands: Van
Gorcum, 1988), 9-112.
33
Duane A. Garrett and Jason S. DeRoouchie A Modern Grammar for Classical
Hebrew, 2
nd
ed. (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2009), 1-14; Bill T. Arnold and
12
result, the rhetoric intention of the text as well as its structure. This information will
allow the identification of the main line of the text or foreground and the background or
supportive textual material.
34
This information will make it possible to identify
discourse types according to the way in which the agent and the verbal temporal
succession interact. This expression refers to small sections in the text that can be
distinguished from its immediate context due to the way in which agent and verbal
aspects interact.
35
The temporal succession will be determined from the analysis of
verbal temporal aspects and verbal distribution. This microsyntactical analysis will
provide data that will inform the structural analysis in Chapter 4 and theological analysis
in Chapter 5.
Word order. The information derived from the syntactic and syntagmatic
analysis of the clauses will bring into focus the word order. This aspect has to do with
the presence (or absence) and the position of the verb and other syntagms in the clause.
36

Additionally, the analysis of the presence, position and usage of prepositions and special
particles is important.
37
Prepositions and special particles will be used in identifying the
limits of the clauses and their flow and recognizing rhetorical nuances.
38
Information so

John H. Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2003), 162-170; Cynthia L. Miller, ed. The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew:
Linguistic Approaches (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999), 79-248, 297-336.
34
Groom, Linguistic Analysis of Biblical Hebrew, 146-151.
35
See van der Merwe, A Critical Analysis of Narrative Syntactical Approaches,
133-156; Luis Vegas Montaner, Sintaxis del verbo Hebreo bblico, in Jewish Studies at
the Turn of the Twentieth Century: Proceedings of the 6th EAJS Congress Toledo, July
1988, ed. Judit Targarona Borrs and Angel Senz-Badillos, Biblical, Rabbinical, and
Medieval Studies 1 (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 221-231.
36
Katsuomi Shimasaki, Focus Structure in Biblical Hebrew: A Study of Word
Order and Information Structure (Bethesda, MD: CDL Press, 2002).
37
Garrett and DeRoouchie, A Modern Grammar, 19-26.
38
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 95-161.
13
obtained in the biblical text, may provide a link between the syntagmatic and syntactical
form and the theology portrayed by the text.
The unmarked word order of the Hebrew verbal clause is VSO (Verb-Subject-
Object) or even VSX (Verb-Subject-any other part of the speech).
39
The unmarked order
in the case of nominal clauses is subject plus predicate (Subject-Predicate). Any variation
of these patterns that is not required by syntax provides a window to identify nuances in
the clause. Whenever any other syntagm is located ahead of the the slot reserved for the
verb (the pre-verbal slot), it is said that this syntagm is fronted.
40
This fronted syntagm
might be the focus of the clause or it might have been brought in frontal position for
emphasis, comparison or even contrast.
41

Macrosyntactical analysis. As the micro syntactical analysis is exhausted, then
the study moves upwards to the inter clause syntax
42
in the subsections of the passage and
finally to the syntax of the whole passage. This assessment will make evident the
position of every clause in reference to the flow of the text.
43
The information thus
provided leads to the identification of internal sections in the text according to different
discourse types as already mentioned. These discourse sections of the text will be
analyzed internally and in their relationship with the preceding and subsequent text
44
as
well as with the whole passage. This will provide information for the structural analysis
of the passage.

39
See van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference
Grammar, 63.
40
Ibid., 333-344.
41
For further details, see van der Merwe and Talstra, Biblical Hebrew, 68-107.
42
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 171-192.
43
Ibid., 171-192.
44
Garrett and DeRoouchie, A Modern Grammar, 9-11.
14
As the syntactical analysis advances from the syntagm to the clause and from the
clause to the supra-clause-level syntax, this study will benefit from the information thus
obtained. Supra-clause-level syntax will provide the information needed to move the
study to the syntactical analysis of the whole passage.
Once the identification of the clauses is done, they are given letters according to
their order (
a
) and their limits are indicated (/). This procedure, once applied to the text,
provides the nomenclature used in this study to facilitate the localization of the
syntactical elements and other features in the text.
45
This will facilitate the task for the
reader. This approach to the structure of the text departs from Christensens approach
that focuses on the counting of the accents and mora
46
in a search for musical indicators
in the text. Christensens approach has been the object of criticism from a text linguistic
perspective.
47

Verbal distribution in the text. Syntactical analysis will include the analysis of
the verbal distribution and their flow.
48
The verbal distribution has to do with the
presence and position of the verbs inside the clauses and their relation to subjects and
objects. The verbal flow has to do with their temporal-succession aspect.
49
This analysis
will provide linguistic and textual evidence to identify and verify the nature of individual

45
Deut 29:1a, meaning Deuteronomy chapter 29, verse one and clause one.
46
Mora, plural morae or moras, is a phonetic unit for the determination and
counting of the syllable weight.
47
See Jason S. DeRouchie, Deuteronomy as Didactic Poetry? A Critique of D.
L. Christensens View, Journal of Asia Adventist Seminary 10, no. 1 (2007): 1-13.
48
Vegas Montaner, Sintaxis del verbo Hebreo bblico, 221-231; Bruce K.
Waltke and M. OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1990), 455-631; Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 83-
94. R. E. Longacre, Discourse Perspective on the Hebrew Verb: Affirmation and
Restatement, in Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew, ed. Walter Ray Bodine (Winona Lake,
IN: Eisenbrauns, 1992), 177-190.
49
Garrett and DeRoouchie, A Modern Grammar, 15-18.
15
sub-units of the discourse inside the text. Recent scholarship provides tools for this kind
of analysis of verbal distribution and flow.

Theological Analysis
This study focuses on the information that the linguistic data may provide for the
understanding of the covenantal theology of Deut 28:69-30:20. The previous stages of
the study will inform the theological analysis, which will be limited to those covenant
topics or aspects reflected in the vocabulary and the rhetorical intention of the text as
exhibited by textlinguistic analysis. The application of linguistic pragmatics to the study
of biblical Hebrew language in reference to the word order might prove useful in this
endeavor. It provides, from a text-linguistic perspective procedures to determine theme,
topic and focus of a text.
50

Finally, after the theological analysis is concluded, the study will elaborate
appropriate summary and conclusions on the different stages of the study. Special
attention will be given to methodological aspects. The theology of the text will also be in
focus. These conclusions will be drawn from partial summaries and conclusions
elaborated at the end of each chapter.

Literature Review
This section surveys the literature related to relevant topics that are critical for the
objectives of this study. First, this review will evaluate a sample of the methodologies
recently applied to the study of Deuteronomy and specifically to Deut 28:69-30:20, with

50
van der Merwe and Talstra, Biblical Hebrew, 68-107; Vegas Montaner,
Sintaxis del verbo Hebreo bblico, 221-231. For an extensive treatment of pragmatics
as applied to biblical Hebrew syntax see Sebastiaan Jonathan Floor, From Information
Structure, Topic and Focus, to Theme in Biblical Hebrew Narrative (PhD diss.,
University of Stellenbosch, South Africa, 2004).
16
the purpose of identifying their contributions and challenges that might be pertinent to the
study of Deut 28:69-30:20. Second, the review will evaluate a sample of different
approaches to the study of the literary structure of Deuteronomy in order to choose one of
them as structural framework for this study. This assessment will provide a context to
evaluate the linguistic data provided by this study that might have structural implications.
Third, as OT covenant literature is vast and the concept is complex, this review will
evaluate a selection of topics that might be relevant to the study of the covenant theology
as portrayed in Deut 28:69-30:20. These topics, once reviewed, will provide a sample of
the state of the contemporary issues related to the scope of the study and a background
against which might be evaluated the data obtained from the syntactic and syntagmatic
analysis in this study.

Recent Methodologies
This section surveys and evaluates some of the methodologies that have been
applied for the study of the book of Deuteronomy. The methodologies to be sampled are
historical and literary critical, narrative, synchronical-canonical and text-linguistics.
These methodologies have been selected as the most representative in the available
literature.
Historical and literary critical. Historical critical and literary critical
methodologies assume that the current Hebrew text of Deuteronomy has a long editorial
history behind it. In harmony with this perspective, the book of Deuteronomy represents
a strategy to reinforce a politico-religious situation.
51
These methodologies insists in
considering the textual and literary peculiarities of the text as evidence of this suggested

51
Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School (Winona Lake,
IN: Eisenbrauns, 1992), 1-9, 158-171.
17
long editorial history. That is the case of the repetitions
52
and particularly resumptive
repetitions or Wiederaufnahme,
53
as in Deut 29:19b-20.
Changes in the morphology of the pronouns, Numeruswechsel, where the object
of the addressees change from third masculine plural to second masculine singular, are
part of the data interpreted as evidence of the editorial history. In Deut 28:69-30:20, Deut
29 addresses the people mainly in plural but there are singular forms in texts as 29:2
(:r s :s) and particularly verse 4 where the people are addressed in plural (:::r:
::-::c ::s:) and the text moves into singular (:. :r: -::s: :r:). Finally,
Deut 29:10 addresses the people in second masculine plural (:::: ::e:) and then shifts
(:: :s: r sr ::~: : ~ : : : :s .) to second masculine singular up to
the end of the verse. Deuteronomy 30:1-10 addresses the whole people in second
masculine singular. This morphological peculiarity in the book of Deuteronomy has been
interpreted as representing evidence of the styles of diverse sources underlying the book
of Deuteronomy.
54

Another aspect emphasized by critical methods on Deut 28:69-30:20 deals with
the presence of the covenant form in this chapter and its context. Literary dependence on
the first millennium Neo-Assyrian treaty literature is seen in the vocabulary and forms of
this chapter as parallels are traced between them.
55


52
On repetition as literary technique in biblical narrative, see Robert Alter, The
Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981), 88-113. Robert Alter, The
World of Biblical Literature (New York: Basic Books, 1992), 35-40, 72-75.
53
See an example of the arguments in Rof, The Covenant in the Land of
Moab, 274-275.
54
McConville, Singular Address in the Deuteronomic Law, 19.
55
Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School, 114-146, contrary to
this, Rof sees the Hittite vassal treatises of the second millennium as the literary
18
Historical and literary critical methods face some problems as a result of their
analysis of Deut 28:69-30:20. Both have difficulties, first to delineate with precision the
boundaries of the different sources in the text, and second to identify the Sitz im Leben of
each source.
56
However, these critical methods have identified some strategies in the text
that provide a picture of the theology of this chapter. From this perspective, Deut 29 first
makes a review of YHWHs historical actions on behalf of the people (verses 1-8), and
then makes clear to the people that they are assembled to enter in a covenant with YHWH
(verses 9-14). They are further warned about the consequences of falling into idolatry,
including the final ruin and the exile (Deut 29:9-28 and 30:1-10).
57

Narrative methodology. Narrative methodology prefers to approach the text in
its final form and then analyzes Deut 28:69-30:20 in the light of an overall literary
structure running through the Pentateuch. In this sense, the Pentateuch is seen as a book
in five volumes. According to this approach, the Pentateuch is organized in such a way
that after a major narrative there is a poetic section and then a historic epilogue.
58
In this
way at the end of the patriarchal narrative, there is a poetic section (Gen 49:1-27). The

background of the treatise form in Deut 29-30. Rof, The Covenant in the Land of
Moab, 279. See also C. Brekelmans, Wisdom Influence in Deuteronomy, in A Song
of Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L.
Christensen, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3 (Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1993), 127-131.
56
Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School, 8. This work
approaches literary strategies from a diachronical perspective.
57
Driver, Deuteronomy, 320.
58
Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 1-3, 35-37, 423-479. Martin G.
Klingbeil, Poemas en medio de la prosa: Poesa insertada en el Pentateuco, in Inicios,
paradigmas y fundamentos: Estudios teolgicos y exegticos en el Pentateuco, River
Plate Adventist University Monograph Series in Biblical and Theological Studies 1, ed.
Gerald A. Klingbeil (Entre Ros, Argentina: Editorial Universidad Adventista del Plata,
2004), 61-85.

19
other poetic sections are after the Exodus narrative (Exod 15:1-21), at the middle of the
wilderness narrative (Num 23:7-10, 18-24; 24:3-9, 16-24) and at the end of it (Deut 32:1-
43; 33:2-29). Each one of these poetic sections in turn is followed by their respective
historic epilogue (Gen 50; Exod 15:22-27; Num 25 and Deut 34). In this plot, there is a
call with an imperative verb (Deut 31:28, :, see Gen 49:1; Num 24:14). There is a
proclamation with a cohortative verb (Deut 31:28, rs, see Gen 49:1; Num 24:14) and
then a prediction about what will happen to the people at the end of the days (Deut
31:29, :: -~s:, see Gen 49:1; Num 24:14) featuring the presence of the king figure
(::, Deut 33:5a, see Gen 49:20; Exod 15:18; Num 24:7).
59
The expression ::
-~s: gives an eschatological dimension to these poems.
60
This literary structure of the
text serves the theological purpose of setting a future program for the people. The text
looks backward to the previous history of the people and highlights Gods guidance,
protection and provisions on their behalf. The text also looks forward to what is
portrayed as the ideal future of the people living in harmonious fidelity to YHWH. At the
same time, the real future History of infidelity, apostasy and idolatry is revealed.
61

Additionally, the stories of the past serve as a type of the future events and even model
them.
62

The narrative approach sees the text in reference to three historical contexts: The
context of the portrayed event, the context of the writer, and the context of the intended

59
Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 35-37.
60
See Richard M. Davidson, The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old
Testament, in Creation, Life and Hope: Essays in Honor of Jacques Doukhan, ed. J.
Moskala (Berrien Springs, MI: Old Testament Department, Seventh-day Adventist
Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 2000), 351.
61
Ibid., 472.
62
Ibid., 37-44.
20
reader.
63
It may be said that narrative methods answers to the critical fractioning of the
text by giving evidence of unified literary micro and macrostructures in the whole
Pentateuch and, in our specific case, in Deuteronomy. In addition, this methodology has
enunciated and revealed the theological function and the programmatic nature of these
literary structures. The application of the narrative methodology has produced fruitful
results in its approach to the Pentateuch and Deuteronomy although issues such as the
Wiederaufnahme and the Numeruswechsel have not been specifically addressed to the
best of my knowledge.
Synchronic-canonical. The synchronic-canonical approach to Deut 28:69-30:20
deals with the theology of the text as well as with its syntax and literary strategies. In this
regard, the methodology and format of the Word Biblical Commentary have exerted an
influence. This format includes a careful and comprehensive review of the available
primary and secondary literature. It relies upon a direct translation of the Hebrew text
with attention to textual, formal, structural, syntactical and literary issues of the passage.
It then follows a verse-by-verse commentary of what the text meant and finally provides
a brief explanation of the contemporary meaning of the text.
The issue of the Wiederaufnahme
64
has been answered with the identification of
the presence of a synoptic/resumptive-expansive literary technique. Accordingly, this
technique allows the biblical writer to tell the story twice. In the second account, he
expands on it and may even use another point of view.
65


63
Ibid., 1-11.
64
See William Robert Higgs, A Stylistic Analysis of the Numeruswechsel
Sections of Deuteronomy (PhD diss., The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary,
Louisville, KY, 1982), 2-9.
65
Joe M. Sprinkle, The Book of the Covenant: A Literary Approach, Journal
for the Study of the Old Testament Supplemental Series 174 (Sheffield: JSOT Press,
21
An alternative explanation of the Numeruswechsel has been proposed by
identifying a legal and rhetorical strategy. According to J. Gordon McConville, this
strategy lays the responsibility of the administration of law on the people (plural) and
then on the individual (singular) rather than on the king.
66
Additionally, these changes of
number in the morphology of Deut 28:69-30:20, that are not limited to the second person
in Deut 29 but also include the first person, are seen as a literary and rhetorical strategy.
As an example, Christensen uses these shifts in number as one of his tools to identify
literary structures in the text.
67

The synchronic-canonical approach to Deuteronomy in addressing the issue of the
presence of the treaty form in Deut 28:69-30:20 (and in the book as a whole), has found
more consistent parallels with the second millennium Hittite vassal treaties rather than
with the first millennium neo-Assyrian treaty literature.
68

Synchronic canonical methods seek to answer to critical claims by uncovering
deep, detailed and extensive literary structures in the book of Deuteronomy and by
refining the arguments related to the parallelisms with the Ancient Near Eastern (ANE)
treaty literature. Additionally, theological and strategic functions for these structures
have been suggested. This approach has tried to be comprehensive in its treatment of the
text, its contexts and the primary and secondary available literature dealing with it.
However, textlinguistic approach may contribute to the understanding of these issues
with a more detailed analysis of the text.

1994), 19; Burke O. Long detects and describes literary and spatiotemporal structures
related to resumptive repetition. See Burke O. Long, Framing Repetitions in Biblical
Historiography, Journal of Biblical Literature 106, no. 3 (September 1987): 385-389.
66
McConville, Singular Address in the Deuteronomic Law, 29-36.
67
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 709.
68
McConville, Deuteronomy, 23, 24, 37, 39-40.
22
Rhetorical critical. Recent rhetorical critical studies show mixed results.
Timothy A. Lenchack applies Greek-Latin, rhetorical criteria and categories to the
analysis of Deut 28:69-30:20.
69
This study has found that the audience is the whole
nation of Israel and the speech is based upon the character, ethos, of Moses and contains
emotional, pathos, and rational, logos, elements. It aims to demonstrate that idol worship
is incompatible with the worship of YHWH and that infidelity to this covenant will bring
punishment while its observance will bring reward; the people must choose between
YHWH and other gods. It is important to recognize that Lenchack pays careful attention
to the micro and macro syntactical structures in the text
70
but doubts may remain about
the extent to which the features of classical rhetoric are actually inherent in biblical
material.
71

We find some early attempts where attention is directed to rhetorical studies in
Deuteronomy that are more oriented to the text. In the sixties, some studies focused on
literary strategies as locating in the text key-words, motifs, speaker distribution, and
concentric inclusions.
72
In his literary study of Deut 1-28 Jack R. Lundbom found
framing literary devices, which he identifies through textual markers.
73
These are
keywords, which are repeated in such a way that form literary structures. He also found
that these literary structures fulfill rhetorical purposes.

69
See Lenchak, Choose Life!
70
Ibid., 173-179, 221-232.
71
S. McKenzie, review of Choose Life! 301.
72
See Jack R. Lundbom, The Inclusio and Other Framing Devices in
Deuteronomy I-XXVIII, Vetus Testamentum 46, no. 3 (July 1996): 298. This study does
not share Lundboms conclusions about Deut 29-34 as a latter addendum to a first edition
of the book of Deuteronomy. As already noted, narrative studies have made evident the
presence of literary macro structures in the Pentateuch and in Deuteronomy that suggest
the literary integrity of the book of Deuteronomy.
73
Ibid., 296-315.
23
Lundbom identifies Deut 1:1-5 as an inverted inclusio in itself that also introduces
the following section, which runs from 1:6 to 4:49, while 4:44-49 is an inverted inclusio
with Deut 1:1-5. He identifies Deut 1:6-3:29 as a summary of the wilderness wandering
while he sees 4:1-40 as a sermon on what lies ahead for Israel.
74
This finding supports
the location of Deut 4:44-49 in the structure of the text and not just as an appendix to it.
In this way the literary and the rhetorical function of Deut 4:44-49 is made evident. Next,
Lundbom proceeds to identify similar framing structures in Deut 5-11. First, he finds an
inclusio consisting of Deut 5:1 and 11:32
75
since both of them use the terms the statutes
and ordinances, be careful to do and today. The second inclusio includes Deut 6:6-9
and 11:18-20 and a third one consists of 6:3 and 11:22.
Lundbom identifies several other framing structures in Deut 12-26.
76
One of
these structures dealing with Deut 12 are verses 1 and 32 which form an inclusio with the
usage of -cr: ::- in Deut 12:1 and -cr: ::- in 13:1. Inside this speech, there is
a section on tithes and offerings (verses 4-14) and another on clean and unclean foods
(15-28). Lundbom identifies both as being dealt with once again in Deut 14:1-21 and
Deut 14:22 to 15:23 respectively. The last one deals with these themes in inverse order.
77

What is interesting in Lundboms methodology is the way he relies upon the
textual evidence for the identification of these inclusio structures and the internal
structures of the texts he addresses. It would be interesting to analyze these passages by
using a text linguistic methodology as DeRouchie
78
did with Deut 5-11 in order to

74
Ibid., 302-304.
75
Ibid., 304-306.
76
Ibid., 306ss
77
Ibid., 306.
78
DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love.
24
appraise their literary structures, rhetoric, and theology in a deeper way. It is clear also
that Lundboms study is focused on framing structures as literary and rhetorical devices
in a long section of Deuteronomy, namely chapters 1-28. Because of the extensive
textual data, the theology of these texts is not studied in a deeper way.
Another author who has recently used a rhetorical approach with emphasis on the
textual evidence is Robert H. OConnell. OConnells studies scrutiny deal with shorter
passages than Lundboms study. These shorter texts allow OConnell to pay detailed
attention to the text and its theology. This is evident even in the way in which he deals
with the text; not only tracking keywords but also analyzing, as far as possible according
to his method, the literary and rhetorical function of every single clause thus addressing
the overall literary strategy of the passage.
OConnells first study under consideration deals with Deut 8:1-20,
79
analyzing its
internal rhetorical structure and its rhetorical function in the context of Deut 4-11. In this
study, he departs from only seeking textual markers in verbatim correspondence as
Lundbom did. OConnell looks for the position and rhetorical function of the vocabulary
under focus including semantic correspondence.
80
He finds a concentric asymmetric
parallelism running all through the text of Deut 8:1-20 with its axis in Deut 8:7b-9.
OConnell thinks that the asymmetries are due to rhetorical antithetical purposes which
he suggests are located in the correspondences between A and 1/a, and B and 1/b
respectively.
81
This procedure shows that OConnell is not only after keywords; he maps

79
See Robert H. OConnell, Deuteronomy VIII 1-20: Asymmetrical
Concentricity and the Rhetoric of Providence, Vetus Testamentum 40, no. 4 (October
1990): 437-452.
80
Ibid., 441.
81
A(8:1a)B(1bab)C(1bg)D(2a)E(2ba)F(2bb)G(3a)H(3b)I(4)J(5)
K(6)L(7a)AXIS(7b-9)L(10)K(11)J(1214aba)I(14bb15b)G(16a)E(16ab)
25
out the whole text of Deut 8:1-20 in its immediate context. This way he discloses the
rhetorical features that carry out the argument and then explains the possible cause for the
asymmetry of the text.
Once OConnell has analyzed the position and distribution of the whole
vocabulary of the text, he moves toward the rhetoric of the passage. OConnells analysis
generally moves from vocabulary distribution to rhetoric back and forth until he
discovers the theology portrayed through the rhetorical devices present in the text. Once
the rhetoric and the theology of Deut 8:1-20 have been identified and exposed the
rhetoric of the text is seen against the larger context of Deut 4-11.
82
In this process he
deals with the syntactic and literary peculiarities of the text.
OConnells second and third studies, dealing with Deut 7:1-26 and Deut 9:7-
10:7, 11-12 respectively, follow the same methodology of mapping the text. In these
studies, he unveils the internal rhetoric devices and the structure of the passage as shown
in the literary arrangement of its vocabulary. He next proceeds to the analysis of the
rhetoric of the passage, which he explains based on the rhetoric already revealed and the
irregularities in the literary arrangement. As a result, the theology and the intention of the
passage are worked out in the context of Deut 4-11, and correlated with the previous
analysis of Deut 8:1-20 that he has made in his previous study.
83


H(16bg)F(17)D(18a)C(18b)Virtual Warning (19):1/A(19a)1/B(19b)Virtual
Warning (20): 1B(20a)/1A(20b), this distribution shows the asymmetry alluded. Ibid.,
441-445.
82
Ibid., 451-452.
83
See Robert H. OConnell, Deuteronomy VII 1-26: Asymmetrical
Concentricity and the Rhetoric of Conquest, Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 2 (October
1992): 248-265 and Robert H. OConnell, Deuteronomy IX 7-X 7, 10-11: Panelled
Structure, Double Rehearsal and the Rhetoric of Covenant Rebuke, Vetus Testamentum
42, no. 4 (October 1992): 492-509. These articles analyze the passages in the
perspective of the overall structure and rhetorical strategy of their contexts.
26
So far, we have seen that Lundboms article tracks the key words of the text under
study (Deut 1-28) and identifies its literary-rhetorical framing devices. OConnells
studies address shorter passages (Deut 8:1-20, 7:1-27 and 9:7-10:7, 10-11). OConnell
seeks to reveal the internal distribution of the vocabulary and clauses in the text. This
procedure makes it possible for him to recognize the rhetorical structures and strategies
that might be present.
OConnell then, having identified the rhetorical strategies, proceeds to identify the
setting of the theology in its immediate and larger literary context; this context is, in this
case, Deut 4-11. Therefore, OConnells methodology moves from vocabulary and clause
distribution to rhetoric, using the rhetoric to explain the possible structural irregularities
and then moving from rhetoric to theology. These two procedures, Lundboms and
OConnells, could be used in a complementary way in order to identify in the text, the
framing and other literary devices as well as the internal rhetoric of the passages. This
way also the literary peculiarities or apparent irregularities may also be addressed.
Probably a deeper text-oriented
84
analysis might provide wider perspectives about the
rationale for the possible literary irregularities Lundbom and OConnell have found in the
literary-rhetorical structures of the texts that they have analyzed.
OConnells methodology moving from vocabulary and clause distribution to
rhetoric and then from rhetoric to theology might be refined. Maybe the concept of this
approach might be modified so as to move the analysis of the text from microsyntax to
macrosyntax and then from macrosyntax to theology. In this way, the theological
analysis of a text could be better grounded in the text itself and structural and literary
peculiarities addressed in more detail.

84
For a brief rationale, exploration and example of the text-oriented approach in
exegesis, see Prbstle, Truth and Terror, 8-29, 30-89.
27
Text-linguistics. This section briefly reviews one study that applies a text-
linguistic approach to Deut 5-11. In a long textual sample, Jason DeRouchie studies text
grammar, structure and theology. DeRouchies dissertation
85
reviews over 30 years of
scholarly studies in Deuteronomy from Lohfink
86
to Talstra.
87
This period is part of what
Christensen calls the fourth phase in the history of the studies in Deuteronomy. This
phase began with Lohfink's study, which inaugurated the stylistic analysis in the text of
Deuteronomy.
88
From this review, DeRouchie concludes that these studies have counted,
charted, and evaluated the whole vocabulary and clauses; none, however, has performed
a full text-linguistic analysis of the entire corpus.
89
The purpose of this research
endeavor is to contribute to fill this gap in the current knowledge in the field and thus test
this methodology.
DeRouchie takes advantage of the recent linguistic advances in the study of
biblical Hebrew, as becomes evident even from a cursory review of his study and its
bibliography. Next, he moves from form to meaning and then to function. This he does,
assuming that discourse function is determined by the meaning of certain forms in given
contexts.
90
From this aspect, he recognizes that probably text-type and/or context

85
DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love, 6-25. The studies that DeRouchie
reviews provide examples of different stages in the process of the methodological shift
from diachronical (critical) approaches that concentrated in the editorial history of the
texts toward literary (synchronical) studies concentrating in the final form of the text and
its literary features.
86
Norbert Lohfink, Das hauptgebot: Eine untersuchung literarischer
einleitungsfragen zu Dtn 5-11, Analecta Biblica 20 (Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto
Biblico, 1963).
87
Talstra, Deuteronomy 9 and 10 Synchronic and Diachronic Observations,
187-210.
88
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, xxxii, xxxv-xxxvii.
89
DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love, 25.
90
Ibid., 26-27.
28
influence meaning and similar forms may bear nuanced meanings and distinct
functions in various contexts.
91

DeRouchie proceeds in his study to define, classify and analyze the clauses in the
passage.
92
Once syntactical issues are clarified, he analyzes text logic, then
foregrounding, and then identifies text types.
93
Based on this information, DeRouchie
traces the argument of the whole text of Deut 5-11. In order to trace the argument, he
relies upon the location of the Hebrew discourse markers in the text.
94
DeRouchie then,
based on the information already obtained, proceeds to the structural analysis and
interpretation of the passage.
95
His methodology moves from text linguistics to the flow
of thought, which provides him the structure of the passage, and from the flow of thought
to the theology of the text. DeRouchie seeks to keep his study grounded in the textual
evidence. In this way, he attempts to make it evident that text grammar works hand-in-
hand with semantic meaning and discourse function to establish the message of a text.
96

This approach allows the locus of authority to be grounded in the text during the
interpretative endeavor. Hans Rechenmacher and Christo H. J. van der Merwe have
suggested that in this way the literary arguments of the researcher, which might be based
on the understanding of his or her own mother language, could be better controlled as a
way to gain a better understanding of the structure of Biblical Hebrew.
97
In this sense

91
Ibid., 27.
92
Ibid., 54-76.
93
Ibid., 76-85, 96-202.
94
Ibid., 202-217.
95
Ibid., 218-273.
96
Ibid., 272.
97
Rechenmacher and van der Merwe, The Contribution of Wolfgang Richter,
70.
29
Rechenmacher and van der Merwe provide an example taken from Num 27:11b. The text
says: -~e::: :s : s::. They observe that
two preposition word groups are dependent on a single adjective. In English the
attributive word group has to be translated as a relative clause. One may argue
that this type of investigation may lead to the rebuttal of literary critical arguments
that often regard these types of constructions as unusually long or clumsy and
hence later additions.
98

Therefore this construction in Num 27:11b may be identified as an addition as
well as a syntactical structure not previously noted. Additionally, this approach functions
as a tool to better understand the so-called irregularities in the text on the grounds of
linguistic data.

Summary
The previous review surveys some of the most representative and recent
methodological approaches to the scholarly study of the book of Deuteronomy with
emphasis on Deut 28:69-30:20. This review has included perspectives such as historical-
critical, narrative, synchronic-canonical rhetorical-critical and text linguistic. Their
contributions to the understanding of the text and its theology have been highlighted. In
the same way some limitations have been also brought into attention, including issues
such as the nature, function and textual significance of resumptive repetition
(Wiederaufnahme), the repetitive changes in the morphological number of the addresses
(Numeruswechsel) and covenant features, both literary and theological. The location and
identification of textual markers seem to be also an issue that requires more analysis as
well as the location and function of Deut 28:69 in relation to the flow of the previous
(Deut 27:1-28:68) and the posterior text (Deut 29:1-30:20). The fact that these issues still
are under discussion tells us that they require a fresh analysis. Additionally, this review

98
Ibid., 70.
30
has shown according to the available literature that Deut 28:69-30:20 has not been yet the
object of a textlinguistic analysis. Thus, this study will try the textlinguistic
methodological approach to this passage.

31





CHAPTER 2
TEXTLINGUISTIC ANALYSIS (PART I)



This chapter and the next pay attention to some linguistic aspects of Deut 28:69-
30:20 in order to assess its internal flow and structure as a basis of assessing its theology.
Chapter 2 will work with Deut 28:69-29:28 and Chapter 3 with Deut 30:1-20. This
division is made based on mechanical considerations and for the sake of the reader.
These linguistic aspects, as stated in the methodology, deal with micro
1
and macro
syntax
2
so the syntax of the paragraph and then of the whole speech is studied. In this
way, this chapter will provide information to be used in the next chapter that deals with
structural aspects of the passage and then the information provided by the syntactical and
structural analysis will inform the theological analysis.
This text linguistic analysis aims to explain the nature and function of the
different textual aspects of this passage as outlined in the statement of the problem.
These textual aspects in Deut 28:69-30:20 deal with the resumptive repetition or
Wiederaufnahme, the shift in the grammatical person and number of the audience
(Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel) and those clauses that seem to function as

1
The microsyntactical analysis deals with the regular grammar and syntax of the
clause plus other aspects such as the amount and order of words as well as verbal
position.
2
The macrosyntactical analysis deals with supra clause syntax. The focus is on
aspects such as clause coordination, subordination and verbal distribution. The clauses
are identified and tagged in reference to their flow in the text as main line (foreground)
and off-line (background) clauses. It is also analyzed the presence and distribution of the
Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel.
32
headings in the text. The location and function of Deut 28:69 will be object of analysis.
The verbal distribution is assessed in search of the flow and the form of the text. Word
order analysis aims to identify the focus of the text. This verbal distribution is shown in
one single section in table format in Appendix A. The analysis of the usage of certain
prepositions and particles may complement the previous aspects making evident the
internal flow of the text. Finally, the linguistic analysis of these textual features aims to
identify literary strategies that might help to inform the structure and then the theology of
the text expressed in the covenant vocabulary and forms present in the text.
In harmony with what has been expressed, the whole text of Deut 28:69-30:20 has
been divided into clauses and each one of them has been syntagmatically and
syntactically analyzed and provisionally translated into English. Textual critical issues
are analyzed when they might be pertinent and as a way to ascertain how the ancient
scribes and translators dealt with the text as they tried to understand it. The syntactical
and syntagmatical analysis implies first, the internal syntactical structure of the clause
paying attention to the function and order of each word and then the type of the clause
that has been identified. Second, the syntactical relationship of the clause with the
previous and following clauses has been established. Third, the composition and nature
of the predicate is identified and then, according to the predicate analysis, it is established
if the clause belongs to the foreground (main line) or the background (off-line) of the
text. The database of this syntactical and syntagmatical analysis can be found in
Appendix B.

Syntagmatical and Syntactical Analysis of Deut 28:96-29:28
The text has been provisionally subdivided into subsections following the major
Masoretic paragraph markersthe petuHah (e) and the setumah (:). Once the
33
syntagmatic and textlinguistic analysis is done, a better structural perception of the text
will be obtained and analyzed as part of the discussion in Chapter 4 which deals with the
internal structure of Deut 28:69-30:20 and its relationship with the overall structure of the
book.
In this chapter the reader will find first the Hebrew text of the section to be
analyzed and already divided into sintagms (\) and into clauses (/), then the same text in a
table presentation by clauses with its notation and English translation and this is followed
by the discussion of the pertinent critical notes and versional information. The location
of the textual variants in the Hebrew text is marked after the implicated word or
expression by using italic superscript letters (
a
). This is to avoid confusion with the
clause notation, which is indicated by regular superscript letters (
a
), located before the
first word of the new clause. Once the critical notes are analyzed, there follows a
discussion of the rationale for the clause identification together with the relevant
syntactical, semantic and literary features. This linguistic discussion will be done clause
by clause so duplicity of information might be avoided as much as possible. Finally, a
summary follows before embracing the analysis of the next section of the passage. This
summary will include the textual, syntactical, structural and semantic information derived
from the discussion.

Deuteronomy 28:69
This section provides the Hebrew text of Deut 28:69 and the relevant textual
critical issues and versional data are evaluated. The working translation of the Hebrew
text is provided. Then the clause division is provided prior to the syntagmatic and
syntactical discussion of the clauses. Finally, a summary of the linguistic discussion is
provided.
34
Hebrew text of Deut 28:69. \ ::-s \ \ s:s
b
/\ -: :
a
s
a 69

e /\:~: :-s \ -::s


d
/\ -: ::
c
\ :s: s: \ :sc ::-s \ -::
Analysis of textual critical notes. As mentioned in the methodological section
of the previous chapter, this section on the textual critical issues of Deut 28:69 as well as
those dealing with the rest of the text of Deut 28:69-30:20 will analyze diverse textual
issues found in the latest critical apparatus of the Hebrew text,
4
the apparatus of the
critical edition of the Septuagint
5
and the available information from Qumran.
6


a
s. This word in Deut 28:69 is preceeded by the conjunction in the Syriac
and Targum as well as in the Samaritan text but not in the Masoretic text. The textual
apparatus of BHQ
7
sees this variation as the assimilation of a common feature. The
plural pronoun s is used extensively in the OT (746 times, 106 times with the
conjunction [14.21%]) with 51 usages in Deuteronomy with only two of those usages
(Deut 22:17 and 27:13) in Deuteronomy having the conjunction (3.92%). Therefore,
statistics does not show the word s with the conjunction as a common feature either in
the OT as a whole or in the book of Deuteronomy.
Deuteronomy 22:17 portrays the word s with the conjunction and two
coordinating clauses in a reported speech (-: :-: s ::-: -:: -ss:s:).
Deuteronomy 27:13 has the word s with the conjunction and at the front of a sentence
that continues a list that have begun at Deut 27:12. This suggests that 27:13 as a clause is

3
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 83.
4
Ibid., 83-88, 128*-134*.
5
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 315-332. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 461-489.
6
See Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea scrolls, 50-112.
7
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 83.

35
coordinated with 27:12. Deuteronomy 28:69 either as a conclusion of Deut 27:1-28:68 or
as a heading for Deut 29:1-30:20 does not seem to qualify for a syntactical coordination
with 28:68.
This same kind of textual variant is also seen in Deut 1:1
8
where the Codex
Alexandrinus of the LXX and the text of the Syriac add the conjunction before the
opening word s. In the case of Deut 1:1 the variation may be explained in a better way
through the argument of assimilation as this is the very first clause of the whole book and
from Exodus to Numbers these books begin with the conjunction. In this case, the book
of Deuteronomy seems to stand in contrast with Exodus-Numbers and in similarity to
Genesis in the asyndetic way the book begins. This variant appears also in Deut 12:1
where the word s is used heading the verse
9
and the LXX in its minuscule manuscripts
adds the conjunction.
10

Summary. The variant reading related to the conjunction added to the word s
in Deut 28:69a seems to have risen as an assimilation of forms commonly used elsewhere
in the Pentateuch. The textual and versional evidence suggest adopting the asyndetic
form.
Clause division of Deut 28:69. Table 1 provides both the Hebrew text divided
into clauses and the working English translation of Deut 28:69. The database for the
syntagmatic analysis is found in Appendix B and the verbal distribution is found in
Appendix A.
11


8
Ibid., 3, 49*.
9
Ibid., 39.
10
See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 206.
11
See the information related to the syntagmatic analysis in Appendix B, Table
B2 and verbal distribution of Deut 28:69 in Appendix A, Table A1.
36
Table 1
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 28:69
Hebrew Text Working Translation
\ -: : s
a

69a These are the words of the covenant
\ -:: \ ::-s \ s:s
/\ :s: s: \ :sc ::-s

69b which the Lord commanded Moses to
make with the sons of Israel in the land
of Moab
/\ -: :: /
69c in addition to the covenant
e /:~: \ :-s \ -::s
69d which he made with them in Horeb
Total of clauses in the section: 4



Syntax and syntagmatics. The process of clause identification in the text of
Deut 28:69 might be a matter of discussion. Lnart J. Regt
12
divides this verse into four
clauses and Christensen divides it into two.
13
Andersen and Forbes
14
see the whole verse
as a compound and complex sentence with :~: :-s -::s -: :: as an
adverbial phrase which functions as an adverbial modifier of accompaniment to the main
subject (-: : s). However, Andersen and Forbes identify two clauses starting
with : s and -: :: respectively while marking the sections starting with
s:s and -::s as relative clauses what would suggests four clauses for the text of
Deut 28:69.
It is important to note that different methodologies and approaches will render a
different syntactical analysis whithout this necesarily meaning that one is correct and the
other one is not. Christensens methodology, as already noticed in the presentation of the

12
Regt, A Parametric Model, 24.
13
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 703.
14
Francis I. Andersen and A. Dean Forbes, The Hebrew Bible: Andersen-Forbes
Phrase Marker Analysis (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2006).
37
methodology for this research, is more focused in the search for a rhythm in the text
therefore his syntactical and structural analysis is affected by this presupposition. He
seeks this rhythm by counting the morae, relying heavily on the distribution of the
Masoretic accents.
15
Regt, Andersen and Forbes are working on micro and macro syntax
with the help of computer software and using mathematical procedures.
16
Regt is
interested in the clause structure and distribution while Andersen and Forbes look for
every detail in the structure of the text in all its levels without a special interest in clause
division. This situation exemplifies that the search for total objectivity is elusive. This
research provides the clause division for each passage and the database for the syntactical
analysis is in Appendix B.
For the purpose of this study, as stated in the methodology the identification of
each clause, its limits and the way it relates to the previous and the next clause is
important in addition to several other linguistic aspects of the text. This is a strategy to
search for the flow of the text and its internal structure as derived from the analysis of its
syntax.
According to the present study, Deut 28:69 is still seen as a single sentence
composed of four clauses. According to this analysis the particle :s marks the

15
See Duane L. Christensen, Deuteronomy 1-11, Word Biblical Commentary 6A
(Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1998), lxxx-lxxxviii.
16
See L. J. Regt, Word Order in Different Clause Types in Deuteronomy 1-30
in Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic Syntax: Presented to Professor J. Hoftijzer on the
Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. Jongeling K., H. L. Murre-Van den Berg and
Lucas Van Rompay, Studies in Semitic Languages 16, (Leiden: Brill, 1991), 152-153 and
footnote 1. The fact that Regt does not provide the database used in his study, makes
difficult to asses his methodology. See an example of the methodology and a brief
exposition of the underlying mathematical procedures followed by Andersen and Forbes
in A. Dean Forbes, Syntactic Sequences in the Hebrew Bible, in Perspectives in
Language and Text: Essays and Poems in Honor of Francis I. Andersens Sixtieth
Birthday, ed. Edgar W. Conrad and Edward Newing (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns,
1987), 59-70.
38
transition for the second and fourth clauses. Each of these have an attached subordinated
relative clauses both of them qualifying the word -: (Clauses 69a and 69c).
Clause 28:69a. /\ -: :
a
s
a
. Deuteronomy 28:69a is a clause without an
expressed verb and starts without conjunction. These features allow marking this clause
as an off-line asyndetic nominal clause that provides background information for the
speech. The clause in Deut 28:69a -: : s, is recognized as of a kind that
starts some major sections or new paragraphs in the book
17
even though the verse has
been marked by the Masoretes with a petuHah (e)
18
as the ending of the previous section
(Deut 27:1-28:68). Here in Deut 28:69a the plural demonstrative s heads both the
clause and the verse as in Deut 1:1, 4:45 and 12:1; accompanying an articulated plural
noun where the verbal cupola is implicit. Although this verse is located as 28:69 in the
Hebrew text and in Ralphs edition of the Septuagint, in the critical edition of the
Septuagint
19
as well as in the Latin Vulgate is labeled as 29:1. This feature of the
sentence will be matter of analysis in Chapter 4, which deals with the structural issues in
Deut 28:69-30:20 as provided by the linguistic discussion in Chapters 2 and 3.
Clause 28:69b. \ :s: s: \ :sc ::-s \ -:: \ ::-s \ \ s:s
b
.
As noticed before, this is an asyndetic relative clause subordinated to 28:69a. As
expected, it opens with the particle and follows with the main verb a perfect one. This
perfective verb sets the clause as off-line and therefore provides background information
for the noun -: in 28:69a.

17
Lnart J. de Regt, Macrosyntactic Functions of Nominal Clauses Referring to
Participants, in The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches, ed.
Cynthia L. Miller (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999), 286.
18
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 461.
19
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 314-315.
39
Now, there is a question regarding the infinitive construct -:: found in clause
28:69b (the place where Regt inserts the break for his third clause). It could be argued
that as part of the direct object 28:69b has a purpose clause subordinated to it.
20

According to the present analysis the verb -:: is seen as part of the direct object of the
main verb, which is a verb of command s, and may take an infinitive for the direct
object which could either be preceded by the particle -s or the preposition :,
21
which is
the case here. The indirect object (:sc ::) is preceded here with the preposition -s.
Clause 28:69c. /\ -: ::
c
. These words presuppose elliptically the phrase
-: :

s conforming a complete clause. In this case, the atnaH that precedes this
nominal clause fits with the syntactical analysis that suggests -: :: as a main
clause in parallelism with 28:69a. Indeed, the key vocabulary (-:) is in parallelism in
both clauses, 28:69a and 28:69c. This confirms that the covenant is the focus of this
verse as the articulated word -: is used twice and the explicative material of 28:69b
and 28:69d expands each usage. The first usage of -: (28:69a) refers to the covenant at
Moab and the expanding material in 28:69b is clearly more extensive in circumstantial
adverbial components than in 28:69d, which refers to the covenant at Horeb (Sinai). This
reference to the Sinai Covenant might prove useful for the structural analysis in Chapter 4

20
See John C. Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 3
rd
ed. (Toronto, Canada:
University of Toronto Press, 2007), 184 520. Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical
Hebrew Syntax, 174 5.2.3. Friedrich Wilhelm Gesenius, Gesenius Hebrew Grammar,
ed. E. Kautzsch and Arthur Ernest Cowley, 2
nd
ed. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990), 503
165. Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 604-608
36.2.2-3.2.3.
21
See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 600-
610, particularly 607 and examples # 13a, b. Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical
Hebrew Syntax, 68-69. Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 81-82 193. Paul Joon and
Takamitsu Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, Subsidia Biblica 14 (Rome:
Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2003), 2:433.
40
and indeed for the theological analysis further ahead in Chapter 5. However, the
intertextuality of this reference is beyond the scope of the present study.
22

The word -: was last used in Deut 17:2 but now is used two times in Deut
28:69 and again in Deut 29:8, 11, 13, 20, 24.
23
Particularly important is 29:8a where the
phrase -: :: is identical with the one in 28:69a, this will prove to be important for
the structural analysis of this subsection. These lexical links suggest connections
between Deut 28:69 and the second speech in the book (Deut 12:1-26:20) and
particularly with the legal corpus (Deut 13:1-25:19) while it suggests lexical links with
the fourth speech (Deut 29:1-30:20) and possible allusions to the Bundesbuch narrative of
Exod 19:1-24:11 as recognized by Christensen.
24
These macro structural literary
elements might suggest literary links between these speeches in Deuteronomy and the
Bundesbuch. These elements will be analyzed in Chapter 4.
Clause 28:69d. e /\:~: :-s \ -::s
d
. Clauses 28:69b and 28:69d maintain
the parallelism as the verb -: is present in both clauses with the same subject ::. It is
clear that in 28:69d :: is not mentioned but the 3ms verb -: fits with :: in the

22
For intertextuality issues and methods see Willem S. Vorster, Intertextuality
and Redaktionsgesenchichte, in Intertextuality in Biblical Writings, ed. Sipke Draisma
(Uitgeversmaatschappij: Kampen, 1989), 15-26. Patricia Tull, Intertextuality in the
Hebrew Scriptures, Currents in Research: Biblical Studies 8 (2000): 59-90. Tracy
McKenzie, An Analysis of the Intertextuality Between Exod 32:7-20 and Deut 9:12-21,
(PhD diss., Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, NC, 2006).
23
-: is used three times in Deut 1:5-4:49 (4:13, 23, 31), eleven times in Deut 5-
26 (5:2, 3; 7:2, 9, 12; 8:18; 9:9, 11, 15; 10:8; 17:2), is not used verbatim in Deut 27:1-
28:68, seven times used in Deut 28:69-30:20 (28:69 x2; 29:8, 11, 13, 20, 24) and finally
six times in Deut 31-34 (31:9, 16, 20, 25, 26 and 33:9). All the textual statistical
information related to words frecuency and distribution was elaborated with BibleWorks
7 and double checked with the tools of Libronix Digital Library Systems. BibleWorks,
Biblical Database Software for Microsoft Windows, Version 7.0.020e.6 (BibleWorks,
L.L.C. Hermeneutika Computer Bible Research Software Bigfork, MT, 2008). Libronix
Digital Library Systems 3.0 (Logos Bible Software, Bellingham WA, 2007).
24
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 706.
41
parallel construction as 28:69d also replaces the indirect object (IO) of -:: in 28:69b
(:sc ::) by alluding to it with the personal pronoun :-s as the IO of -:. There is
also a location in both clauses, :s: s: and :~:. As we describe 28:69d, its
structure suggests that the author intended it to be clearly shorter than 28:69b while
providing more or less the same level of information then highlighting the covenantal
ceremony at Moab over the one at Horeb without circumventing Horeb.
Summary. Deuteronomy 28:69 opens with a verbless clause
25
(28:69a), while
the next (28:69b) contains a perfective verb s, and an infinitive construct verb -::,
28:69c is also a verbless clause (28:69c) and the final (28:69d) has a perfect verb -:.
The absence of wayiqtol verbs leaves this sentence without temporal sequence emphasis,
which tells us that the sentence belongs to the background of the speech. The sentence
provides background information to what proceeds and follows it. This is confirmed with
the two relative clauses (:s +) providing circumstantial explicative material.
Deuteronomy 28:69 proves to be a sentence loaded with several syntactical
components, structural and textual issues and theology. Closing the previous speech
(Deut 27:1-28:68, as recognized by the Masoretes) and heading the next (Deut 29:1-
30:20, as suggested by the vocabulary and thematic connections) its vocabulary provides
connections with these two speeches providing a literary bridge between them while it
alludes to Exod 19:1-24:11. This sentence belongs to the background of the speech. It
provides a summary for what precedes, and backdrop information for what unfolds
afterwards the covenant at Moab. This suggests that this verse should be considered

25
About the verbless clause there is an issue related to the implicitness of the
linking verb, the copula, see Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 165.
See also Cameron Sinclair, Are Nominal Clauses a Distinct Clausal Type? in Cynthia
L. Miller ed. The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches (Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999), 51-75.
42
and analyzed in connection with Deut 29:1-8 due to the vocabulary, thematic and
structural connections so this subunit in the text may be identified as 28:69-29:8.

Deuteronomy 29:1-8
This section provides the Hebrew text of Deut 29:1-8 and the relevant textual
critical issues and versional data are evaluated. The clause division is provided prior to
the syntagmatic and syntactical discussion of the clauses. A summary is provided.
Hebrew text of Deut 29:1-8. /\ ::s :s
b
/\
a
:sc:::s \ :: s
a 29:1

\ re:\ :s: s: \ :::r: \ cr :s
d
/\:: -s \ :-s :-s
c

\ :-e: --s \
a
:r s :s \ -:. -::
a 2
/\ ss::: \ :r:::
\ r::: ::s \ -s: ::r \ -r: :: \::: \ -:s:
a 3
/\ : ::.
/\ ::: :: :r:s \ ::-s
a
:s
a 4
/\ : r

/\
f
:. :r: \
e
-::
d
s:
c
:r:
c
/\ :::r:
b
::-::c \ ::s:
b

/\:::s :s :
d
/\ r- r::
c
/\ :--: s: \ ::
b
/\ :-::s s: :~:
a 5
/\ ::~:: ~: ss
b
/\ :::s \ s:-
a 6

/\::.
d
/\:~::: :-s: \ :::: .r
c

/\ ::: ::: s~: \ .: \ ::s: :~:: \ :-.
b
/\ :ss-s ~.
a 7

/\ :-s :-cr
b
/\ -s -: ::-s \ :-::
a 8
e /\ cr- :s:: -s \ ::c- r::
c
Analysis of textual critical notes. This section analyses the textual variants in
the MT as well as the versional data in Deut 29:1-8. This analysis will inform the
syntactical analysis.
Verse 29:1.
a
:sc::. The shorter reading found in the MT is shared by the
Samaritan Pentateuch as well as by the Vulgate but the LXX reads :aia, eu, uteu,
43
Ica. Writing about this variant McCarthy
26
suggests that the LXX might have
asimilated the phrase eu, uteu, from texts such as Exod 10:23; 11:7; 14:42, 50 and Num
17:24; 27:21 although the reading :sc :::: does not occur in Deuteronomy.
27
The
Greek manuscripts B, 848 and 963 omit the word :aia,.
28
These considerations form
the textual and versional witnesses suggest the selection of the shorter reading :sc::
as attested in the MT.
Verse 29:2.
a
:r. Here the MT reads a second masculine singular suffix which
is supported by the Samaritan Pentateuch, the LXX, the Vulgate and the Targum Onqelos
while the Syriac and the Targum Jonathan have a second plural suffix.
29
It is important to
notice that in reference to the book of Deuteronomy, the Targums tend to render almost
all the second singular suffixes with second plural forms.
30
In the case of the LXX, the
translator seems to have taken a certain level of license in a theological-exegetical
direction when translating some expressions and adapting some expressions into a kind of
Greek dress.
31

Verse 29:4.
a
:s. The MT here has a first person singular for this verb and the
Samaritan Pentateuch, the Vulgate, the Syriac and the Targums support that reading while
the LXX and some manuscripts of the Vulgate and the Syriac have a third singular verbal
form. McCarthy suggests that the LXX reading might be explained as an interpretative

26
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 128*.
27
The phrase :sc :::: occurs eighteen times in the whole OT in the
following texts: Exod 10:23; 11:7; 12:42, 50; 16:6; 34:32; Lev 17:2; 21:24; 22:18; Num
14:2, 10, 39; 17:24, 27:21; Josh 7:23; Judg 2:4; 10:8; 20:1, 26; 1 Sam 15:6; 1 Kgs 20:15;
2 Chr 31:1.
28
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 316.
29
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 83.
30
Ibid., 7*.
31
Ibid., 9*.
44
reading to prevent readers assuming that the speaker of verse 4 is Moses.
32
Wevers
suggests that as the flow of the persons and numbers in verses 4 to 5 is mixed and not
smooth, the translator decided to level it.
33


b
::-::c. This reading from the MT is supported by the Aleppo codex.
34
The
root in Deut 29:4 is ::c occurs seventeen times in the whole OT with two usages in
Deut 24:13 and 29:4 while the Samaritan Pentateuch replaces it with ::c
35
in both
instances. The word ::c has basically the same meaning and is used around 29 times in
the OT with six usages in Deuteronomy, including 8:4 which is thought to be used by the
Samaritan Pentateuch to assimilate it into 29:4.
36
In this same text of Deut 8:4 the
Samaritan Pentateuch and 4QDeut
e
have ::c but 4QDeut
c
have ::c assimilating Deut
29:4 into it.
37
In addition, as the variant only implies the transposition of two contiguous
consonants, this could be a case of metathesis.
38


c
:r:. The reading found in the MT is shared by the Vulgate as well as by
1QDeut
l 39
and the Targum Onqelos. The Samaritan Pentateuch, the LXX, the Syriac and
Targums Jonathan and Neophyti contain a second plural pronoun. As already noticed, the

32
Ibid.,128*. On the change in number in the Qumran witnesses for
Deuteronomy, see Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea scrolls, 39-
42 where the author provides evidence of how the scribes at Qumran also struggled with
the issue of the morphological number.
33
Wevers, The LXX Translator of Deuteronomy, 67.
34
See The Aleppo Codex Online, http://www.aleppocodex.org/newsite
/index.html (accessed 4 May 2010).
35
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 423.
36
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 83.
37
Ibid., 28.
38
Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea scrolls, 42.
39
See Julie Ann Duncan, 4QDeut
l
, in Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to
Kings. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore Cross
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 111.
45
LXX tends to level the pronominal apparent inconsistency found in the MT
40
while the
Targums Pseudo-Jonathan, Neophyti and Fragmentary tend to translate all the second
singular pronouns as second plural.
41
So having this evidence in account, from now on,
the textual issues dealing with the pronouns will be settled with the Masoretic evidence
unless the evidence from the Greek, Latin or Syriac versions proves to be sufficient as to
go in the other direction. The pronominal evidence is related the issue of the
Numeruswechsel and the Personswechsel in Deuteronomy, which is analyzed in the
syntactical analysis of each sub-section of the text and evaluated in Chapter 4 against the
overall syntactical and structural evidence obtained from the analysis in Chapter 2 and
Chapter 3.


d
s:. In this instance we find an issue of orthography.
42
1QDeut
l
reads : in
disagreement with the MT.
43



e
-::. This variant and the next (:.) are explained as a consequence of the
way the scribe dealt with the previous word

:r:. The words used to translate the verb
:: and the pronoun applied to :. have to be in grammatical harmony with the way

:r: is translated. Once the copyist or translator modifies one word, the other words
that are syntactically related have to be modified as well.
f
:.. The MT reads here the word :. in singular with the suffix 2ms but the
Vulgate reads it in plural and with a plural pronoun (pedum tuorum) as well as the LXX

40
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 7*.
41
Ibid., 9*.
42
Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea scrolls, 14-15.
Roberts (in page 112) suggests from the evidence in Qumran that the scribes had a clear
boundary of what they would (style, grammar, readability) and would not (theology,
shortening/lengthening the text to affect meaning) change in a text.
43
See Duncan, 4Qdeut
l
, 111.
46
(.i :ee.i u.i)
44
and the Samaritan Pentateuch.
45
The Syriac text and the Targum
Jonathan follow the plural form also but we have already seen that the Targums have the
tendency to level the 2ms into 2mp. The Aleppo Codex agrees with the MT providing a
singular noun plus a 2ms suffix.
46
McCarthy after the evaluation of the evidence
suggests that the plural form is a case of harmonization with the context.
47
The MT reads
clauses 29:4a-b in 2mp, 29:4c in 2ms and 29:5a in 2mp therefore is understandable that
the LXX changed clause 29:4c into 2mp to level the flow of number and personal
pronouns inside verse 4.
48

Verse 29:5.
a
:s. In this instance the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Vulgate, the
Syriac Peshitta and the Targums do agree in their readings with the text of the MT. The
LXX again shifts the first person to a third person translating it as eue,. This is a
consequence of the way the translator dealt with the word :s, in verse 4. The LXX
apparently translated that verb as a third person singular to avoid the risk that the reader
could understand the words in verses 4 and 5 as being Moses words and not Gods
words.
49


44
See Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 275 and
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 317.
45
See von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 423. This text
reads :::..
46
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
47
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 83, 9*.
48
See the discussion of the evidence in Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 463. Here Wevers suggests that it should be noted, however, that MTs
intent with :s was to indicate Yahweh as speaker, as the last clause in the next verse
shows. The way in which LXX dealt with this assured this understanding. See also
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 708. This information has structural importance
for the analysis of the passage.
49
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 84, 128*. Wevers, The LXX Translator of
Deuteronomy, 67.
47
Verse 29:7.
a
:-.. Only the LXX modifies this first plural verb into a first
singular. McCarthy in agreement with Wevers
50
suggests that this is to harmonize it with
Deut 3:12-13 where is Moses alone who distributes the land.
51
b
:~::. The usual structure in which the book of Deuteronomy uses the verb -:
in combination with the noun :~: is without preposition and then the LXX seeks to
harmonize this unusual form while the Masorah Parva emphasizes this peculiarity.
52

Verse 29:8.
a
::. Deuteronomy 29:8a reads -s -: ::-s :-::

Then keep the words of this covenant but the LXX renders it as sat |ua.c. :et.ti
:aia, eu, e,eu, , etas, au, adding the word :aia,. Wevers and McCarthy
suggest that this may be seeking harmony with the phrase -s - ::::-s that
Deuteronomy uses in places such as 17:19; 27:3, 8; 28:58; 29:28; 31:12 and 32:46 and in
harmony with the style of the translator (being influenced by similar contexts inside the
book) in this instance.
53

Summary. The evidence derived from the analysis of the textual variants and the
versional testimony related to Deut 29:1-8 suggests that these variants occurred as the
scribes and translators struggled to harmonize the text with parallel styles and or passages
in and out the book of Deuteronomy. They were trying to understand characteristics
proper to the book of Deuteronomy or seeking to smooth the text.
Clause division of Deut 29:1-8. Table 2 provides the Hebrew text of Deut 29:1-8
divided in clauses plus the English translation. The following analysis uses it.

50
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 464-465. Wevers, The LXX
Translator of Deuteronomy, 75.
51
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 84, 128*.
52
Ibid., 84, 129*.
53
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 465. McCarthy,
Deuteronomy, 84, 129*.
48
Table 2
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 29:1-8
Hebrew Text Working Translation
/\ :sc:::s \ :: s


1a Then Moses called the whole people of
Israel
/\ ::s :s
1b and he said to them:
:: -s \ :-s :-s /
1c You yourself have seen all
\ :::r: \ cr :s
:s: s:
/\ ss::: \ :r::: \ re: \
1d what the Lord has done before your eyes
in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh and all
his servants and all his land.
\ -:. -::
2

\ :r s :s

/: ::. \ :-e: --s
2a the great trials
that have seen your eyes, these great
signs and wonders.
-:s:
3

\ -r: :: \ ::: \
\ -s: ::r
/\ : r \ r::: ::s
3a but the Lord has not given you heart to
know
or eyes to see
or ears to listen until this day.
/\ ::: \ :: :r:s \ ::-s
:s
4a I have led you forty years in the dessert
/\ :::r: ::-::c \ ::s:
4b your mantles have not worn out from
upon you
/\:. :r: \ -::s: :r:
4c nor have your sandals worn out on your
feet.
/\ :-::s s: :~:
5a You have not eaten bread,
/\ :--: s: \ ::
5b wine or intoxicating drink you have not
drunk,
/\ r- r::
5c so that you may know
/\:::s :s :
5d that I am the Lord your God.
/\ :::s \ s:-
6a And you camped in this place
/\ ::~:: ~: ss
6b and came out Sihon king of Heshbon
/\:~::: :-s: \ :::: .r
6c And Og king of Bashan to meet us for
the battle
/\::.
6d but we smote them.
/\ :ss-s ~.
7a and we took their land
:~:: \ :-.
/::: ::: s~: \ .: \ ::s:
7b And we gave it as inheritance to the
Rubenites and to the half tribe of
Manasseh
/\ -s -: ::-s \ :-::
8a Then keep the words of this covenant
/\ :-s :-cr
8b Now, do them
:: -s \ ::c- r::
8c so you might prosper in all
/cr- :s
8d that you do.
Total of clauses in the section: 23
49
Syntax and syntagmatics. Deuteronomy 29:1-8 portrays a historical review of
Gods acts of deliverance in behalf of the people back in Egypt (29:1c-29:3a), in the
dessert (29:4a-29:5b) and at the gates of the promised land (29:6a-29:7b). Based on that
experience they should know who the Lord is (29:5c-d) and have a rationale to be faithful
to His covenant (29:8a-b). The speech provides all these elements as the basis and
condition of the peoples future prosperity (29:8c-d).
This sub-section bears the account of a narrative discourse oriented to the people
and to action.
54
The syntactic analysis provides the elements to establish this
evaluation.
55
The main line of the discourse is built upon wayiqtol verbs
56
(six wayiqtol
57

verbs with successive aspect plus two in summary aspect in clauses 29:4a and 29:6d)
always at the beginning of the clause. The secondary line of information is elaborated
with off-line clauses with perfect verbs (seven of them). These verbs do not come at the
beginning of the clause and they review past events, not necessarily in chronological or
successive order, as support for an exhortation in Deut 29:8 (with two weqatal and two
imperfect verbs) which draw upon these past events and project them into the future
(8b-d).
Clause 29:1a. \
a
:sc:::s \ :: s
a
. Deuteronomy 29:1a opens with a
wayiqtol verb that heads the clause and starts the verbal flow and the sequence of the
sub-section. These elements mark this clause as part of the main line (foreground) of the

54
See the database for the syntactic analysis of Deut 29:1-8 in Appendix B, Table
B3.
55
See Vegas Montaner, Sintaxis del verbo Hebreo bblico, 221-231.
56
See the verbal distribution of Deut 29:1-8 in Appendix A, Table A2.
57
Clauses 29:1a, 1b, 6a, 6d, 7a and 7b. For the semantic and pragmatics of verb
chains and sequences (wayiqtol and weqatal verbs), see Waltke and OConnor, An
Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 547-554. van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A
Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, 163-173.
50
text. Still the audience is not addressed but it is assembled (s) and mentioned
(
a
:sc::).
Clause 29:1b. /\ ::s :s
b
. Clause 29:1b keeps the flow of the speech still in
main line with the same structure as 1a, namely a wayiqtol verb heading the clause in
sequence with 1a. This clause completes the introduction to the speech that has been
announced in 28:69 and now in 29:1a. This is a single-verb framed citation that does not
reveal whether what follows is a word-by-word quotation or a summary of the
utterance.
58

Clause 29:1c. /\:: -s \ :-s :-s
c
. This clause moves into off-line as the
subject is fronted and the main verb is a perfect that breaks the sequence brought by the
wayiqtol verbs in 29:1a-b. This fronting of the subject sets the focus of the speech on the
audience. Now Moses addresses the audience and he does it in 2mp. This starts the flow
of the Numeruswechsel in Deut 28:69-29:8.
As already seen, Deut 28:69 has not addressed the people directly and then the
speech addresses the people, initially in third plural (29:1b), 29:1c uses second plural and
shifts to 2ms (:r) in 29:2a, to 2mp (:::, 29:3a-29:4b), then to 2ms in 29:4c (:.),
then to 2mp in 29:5a-29:6a (:-::s). The clauses in 29:6c-29:7b use first plural pronouns
and verbs (:-s:) thus including Moses and the people. Clauses 29:8b-c close the

58
For the syntax and syntagmatics of quotation markers and discourse
introduction in biblical Hebrew, see Garret and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for
Classical Hebrew, 327. Here they provide a working summary of Cynthia L. Miller,
Discourse Functions in Qoutative Frames in Biblical Narrative, in Discourse Analysis
of Biblical Literature: What It Is and What It Offers, ed. Walter R. Bodine (Atlanta, GA:
Scholars, 1995), 155-182. Cynthia L. Miller, Introducing Direct Discourse in Biblical
Hebrew Narrative, in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, edit. Robert D.
Bergen (Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994), 199-241. See also Cynthia
L. Miller, Reported Speech in Biblical and Epigraphic Hebrew: A Linguistic Analysis
(PhD diss., The University of Chicago, IL, 1992).
51
section using second plural (:-cr). This brief inventory shows a complex flow in the
grammatical number and the pronominal suffixes and the way in which this section of the
speech addresses the people. It must be noticed that the Numeruswechsel in
Deuteronomy does not deal only with the shifts from 2ms to 2mp and vice versa but it
implies a more complex situation that includes verbal forms, pronominal suffixes and
pronouns and variations in both person (Personenwechsel) and in number
(Numeruswechsel).
59

Christensen, dealing with both the structure of Deut 28:69-29:8 and the
Numeruswechsel, suggests that the Numeruswechsel is marking the boundaries of five
prosodic subunits in 29:1-8.
60
These, according to him are A. 28:69, B. 29:1-3, X.
29:4-5, B.29:6-7 and A.29:8. As Christensen is looking for rhythmic elements departing
from the syntax of the text, and this research is seeking literary devices based on
morpho-syntactical elements, it is worthy to verify Christensens proposal with the
syntactical data taking into account not only the shifts between 2ms and 2mp but also
other shifts that might imply either number or person.
Once 29:1c sets the focus on the audience by fronting them at the head of the
clause (:-s), the main verb (s) draws their attention to Gods mighty acts. The verb
s is used three times in Deut 29:1-8 (in clauses 1c, 2a, 3a) and six times in the whole
speech, as it happens also in Deut 29:16a, 29:21d and 30:15a. This clause emphasizes
how the people have indeed seen what the Lord has done in their past history and will do

59
See a diachronical analysis of the variations in both person (Personenwechsel)
and in number (Numeruswechsel) in the text of Deuteronomy in Yoshihide Suzuki, The
'Numeruswechsel' in Deuteronomy (PhD diss., The Claremont Graduate University,
Claremont, CA, 1982), 28-132. Yoshihide Suzuki analyses the evidence stylistically in
pages 28-137, literary critically in 138-340 and form-critically in pages 341-386.
60
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 709.
52
in their behalf. Clause 29:2a will once more feature Gods mighty acts providing
emphasis and part of an structural arrangement that will be further analyzed in Chapter 4.
Clause 29:1d. \ :r::: \ re:\ :s: s: \ :::r: \ cr :s
d
ss:::. The identification of clause 29:1d requires some analysis. It could be argued
that the phrase :::r: \ cr :s:: might be considered as the direct object of
the phrase :-s :-s in 1c as it is preceded by the direct object (DO) marker -s. For
the purpose of this study, the phrase \ :::r: \ cr :s is considered as a clause
in itself as it has verb and subject. The DO of 29:1c is :: and the rest of the verse is a
relative clause that further describes ::. This description abounds in details as the clause
adds an adverbial modifier of place (:s: s:) and the IO of the main verb (cr)
includes three elements: ss::: \ :r::: \ re:. In fact the land of Egypt is
featured twice in the phrases :s: s: and ss:::.
Clause 29:2a. : ::. \ :-e: --s \:r s :s \ -:. -::.
Verse 2 opens with an asyndetic, off-line clause and with the direct object in the preverbal
slot -:. -:: heading the clause. Then follows the relative particle, a perfect verb
and the subject :r s :s. What follows next is the juxtaposition of the phrase :
::. :-e: --s that works as a repetition of the direct object. It could be argued
that this last phrase is the direct object and -:. -:: at the beginning of the clause is
a nominative pendant but there is not a resumptive pronoun for -:. -:: in the
subsequent sentence.
61
Therefore, according to this analysis there is only one clause in
verse 29:2. In all these three phrases, all the nouns and adjectives are articulated so they

61
See Paul Joon and Takamitsu Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, 2
nd

ed., Subsidia Biblica 27 (Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006), 551-552,
156.
53
are attributive. This confirms the emphasis on Gods mighty acts as they are highlighted
by the speech before the audience through these three phrases that feature them in
differentiated vocabulary. Additionally, this clause addresses the audience in second
masculine singular (:r).
Clause 29:3a. /\r::: ::s \-s: ::r \-r: :: \::: \-:s:
: r. This is a main clause coordinated to 29:2a. In verse 3 we find a chain of
three phrases compounded with a noun plus an infinitive construct as the direct object of
-:s:. The structure of the predicate in this clause ( + s: + perfect) marks it as off-
line providing background information. Main clauses are negated with s:.
62
These
phrases are not clauses because if they are removed the verb will be lacking its object. In
clause 29:3a there is not a noun (::) as in 1c that groups the DO and it is further
explained by a relative clause. At the end of clause 29:3a after r::: is the phrase
: r as a temporal adverbial modifier. As the demonstrative pronoun is after the
noun and both are articulated, it qualifies for an attributive function but does not qualify
as nominative.
63
The usage of the preposition r confirms the temporal nature of the
phrase.
64
These considerations suggest that the whole of verse 29:3 is a single clause.
This clause addresses the audience in second masculine plural (:::). This analysis
discloses then that Deut 29:1-3 features a 2mp-2ms-2mp pattern in the way as it
addresses the audience. It is necessary to evaluate the rest of Deut 29:1-8 and Deut
28:69-30:20 as a whole to reveal if there are other patterns in this respect. Clause 29:4a

62
See Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, 479 152. Waltke and OConnor, An
Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 660 39.3.3a.
63
See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 308.
Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 49-50.
64
See Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 120.
54
will introduce a shift in the speaker that is enough as to indicate a structural shift in
reference to 1a-3a.
This clause (29:3a) features Gods mighty acts in behalf of the people during their
time in the desert. Clauses 29:1c and 29:2a have made clear how the people have seen
Gods acts in their behalf and now 29:3a says that the Lord has not given them heart, eyes
or ears to understand, see or listen. What is the strategy of the speech here? Which is the
rhetorical function of these clauses here? In Chapter 5, the theological analysis will return
to this issue.
Clause 29:4a. ::: \ :: :r:s \ ::-s :s. Clause 29:4a opens with a
wayiqtol so it breaks the off-line pattern present from 1c up to 29:3a. This clause features
a shift in the speaker as it introduces a brief speech of God. There is no quotation frame
and only the shift in the subject is what differentiates it from the surrounding text. Clause
29:5d will make clear that God is the speaker in Deut 29:4a-29:5d. This sets a structural
shift inside the sub-section of Deut 28:69-29:8. Additionally this clause addresses the
audience in second masculine plural. Clause 4a continues the focus on the audience and
on the review of Gods mighty acts in behalf of the people during their wilderness
(:::) experience.
In Deut 29:1-8, a literary strategy becomes evident. Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20
contains a main speech (29:1b-30:20) which as a matrix includes several other embedded
discourses as Gods speech (29:4-5), the monologue of the sinner (29:18d-e), the speech
of the next generation plus the foreigners and the nations (29:23a-c; 24a-27b) and finally
the two short lines of the people (30:12; 30:13b-f). These embedded discourses are
preceded and introduced by background information. These embedded speeches work
for the agenda of the overall main discourse and they share literary patterns and
55
vocabulary that work as textual markers within the main speech. Here in -this section of
Deut 29:1-8 we have the first of those embedded speeches in verses 29:4-5.
Clause 29:4b. \ :::r: ::-::c \ ::s:. This is an asyndetic main clause.
The structure of the predicate of this clause ( + s: + perfect) sets it in off-line pattern
since the main verb (::) is negated. This clause keeps addressing the audience in second
masculine plural (:::r: ::-::c) as 29:4a did. There is a chain of negative clauses
from 29:4b up to 29:5b, all of them off-line and with slight changes in the structure of
their predicates.
Clause 29:4c. \:. :r: \ -::s: :r:. The structure of this predicate is +
DO + s: + perfect. There is a sequence (), namely the clause is coordinated to 29:4b but
the DO is fronted heading the clause and the verb is in perfect so the clause is off-line.
The two personal pronouns attached to the nouns are in second masculine singular. These
clauses 29:4b-c, feature miraculous events in behalf of the people; they wander the
wilderness under Gods guidance for 40 years and their mantles and sandals did not wear
out.
Clause 29:5a. \ :-::s s: :~:. The structure of the predicate of this clause is
+ DO + s: + perfect. Once again, the DO is heading the clause and there is asyndeton
but this clause is subordinated to 29:4c. The asyndeton runs from 29:5a up to 29:5d. The
pronominal suffix in the verb is a second masculine plural.
Clause 29:5b. \ :--: s: \ :: . The predicate in this clause is the same as
that of 5a, + DO + s: + perfect, the clause is off-line and subordinated to 29:5a while
featuring asyndeton. The personal pronoun remains as second masculine plural.
What do these clauses (29:5a-b) mean in their context? Maybe is it that even
though God did not make Israel to be a knowledgeable people (29:3a), they were able to
56
see Gods mighty acts (29:2a; 29:6a-29:7b), back in Egypt as well as in the desert and
the promised land when they arrived. In fact they have been warned not to forget what
their eyes have seen (Deut 4:9). They were able to recognize the meaning of these
wonders (29:5c) as a rationale for their observance of the covenant (29:8a). Bread
[gluttony?], wine and strong drink were not given to Israel so they might know that I
am the Lord your God, (29:5c-29:5d). Gods self-revelation, its perception and
understanding by the people is shown as key for the peoples observance of and the
permanence of the covenant.
Clause 29:5c. r- r::. This is an off-line result clause subordinated to 5b and
its predicate is + x + yiqtol. The personal pronoun suffix of the verb is a second
masculine plural. This is the expected result of the review made in the previous clauses
of Gods actions in behalf of the people. God does expect that the people might be able
to recognize the meaning of His mighty acts in their behalf as well as His relationship
with them (29:5d).
Clause 29:5d. \:::s :s :. This is an off-line nominal clause with a
+ : + nominal predicate. Here it is clear from the structure of the clause that the copula
verb is intended. This clause clarifies the previous one so it is subordinated to 29:5c.
65

The personal pronoun that addresses the audience is a second masculine plural.
Therefore, clauses 29:4a-29:5d display a pattern 2mp-2ms-2mp in their pronominal
suffixes following the pattern shown in 29:1a-29:3a. Additionally with clause 29:5d,
ends the off-line chain that began at 29:4b.
Clause 29:6a. \ :::s \ s:-. This clause goes into main line as it
features a wayiqtol verb heading the clause and the verse. This clause also shifts the

65
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 150.
57
speaker, as 29:6c will make evident that Moses is once again the speaker in these clauses.
These features suggest that 6a introduces a shift in the literary structure of the subunit.
The embedded speech of God has covered Deut 29:4a-29:5d. This clause (29:6a)
addresses the audience in 2mp. The setting is not Egypt (Deut 29:1c-29:2a), or the desert
(Deut 29:4a-29:5b) but the promised land.
Clause 29:6b. \ ::~:: ~: ss. Clause 29:6b follows the main-line
initiated by 29:6a as it reviews the events that surrounded the arrival of the children of
Israel to the promised land. The predicate structure of both 29:6a and 29:6b has a
wayiqtol verb heading the clause. This clause is coordinated to 29:6a. The main verb of
this clause (ss) suggests here a military movement, and this is a summary of the more
detailed narrative previously provided in Deut 2:26-37 about King Sihon and Deut 3:1-22
about King Og. These military encounters are also mentioned at Deut 1:4; 4:46 and in
31:4.
Clause 29:6c. \:~::: :-s: \ :::: .r. The predicate structure in
29:6c is quite different from previous clauses as it has a + S + Infinitive. This is a
purpose clause in off-line and coordinated to 29:6b. Clause 29:6c features a verb
omission by ellipsis, as the verb is clear from the context.
66
The infinitive construct
verb in 29:6c allows identifying this clause as a purpose clause, which therefore does not
qualify as a verbless clause.
Clause 29:6d. \::.. This short clause, coordinated to 29:6c, goes back to the
main-line of the speech as it is a wayiqtol, this main line (foreground) will be continued

66
See Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 209; and van der Merwe, Naud and
Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, 241 33.1 note 42, where they say,
The complement of a verb may be omitted, but then only when it can be inferred from
the context of the sentence. This phenomenon is referred to as ellipsis. This is the case in
Deut 29:6c.
58
until clause 29:7b. This clause features a shift into the first plural person that is persistent
until 29:7b. There are some other passages in first plural later on in this speech in
29:14a-29:15c, 28a-29:8c and 29:12d-29:13e.
67

Clause 29:7a. \ :ss-s ~.. With a wayiqtol heading the clause and holding
the first person plural this main-line clause is coordinated to 29:6d.
Clause 29:7b. ::: ::: s~: \ .: \ ::s: :~:: \ :-.. Clause 29:7b
holds the main-line and the first person plural. This clause ends the historical review of
the past events related to Gods guidance and special protection in behalf of the children
of Israel. Clauses 29:7a and 29:7b feature in brief words the beginning of the fulfillment
of one of the most powerful promises of God for His people: The land.
68
Under Gods
guidance and Moses leadership, the people faced kings Sihon and Og and their armies;
overcame them and took their land and gave it to the Rubenites and to Manasseh as
inheritance.
There seems to be a progression in the way the word s is used in Deut 28:69-
30:20. Clause 28:69b mentions :s: s where the covenant is renewed and 29:1d
mentions twice the :s: s where God did great wonders and delivered His people.
Now 29:7a-29:7b mentions the s of Sihon and Og that was taken by Moses and the
people and given as inheritance to the tribes of Ruben and Manasseh. Clause 29:15b
goes back and remembers the peoples dwelling time in :s: s. Now, 29:21c will
mention the nations that will come from ~ s and see what the Lord will have done

67
There are other first person texts in Deut 2:1a and 3:1a-b. See Christensen,
Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 712.
68
The word s occurs fourteen times in Deut 28:69-30:20 and around 197 times
in the book of Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy is fourth in the frequency after Genesis (311),
Jeremiah (272) and Ezekiel (198).
59
in the future to the s (29:21d) because of the peoples disobedience, destruction and
curses falling upon the s (29:22a). These nations will wonder why the Lord will have
done these things to the s (23b). They will answer that it is because the people forgot
the Lord who delivered them from :s: s, thats why the anger of the Lord burned
against the s (29:26a) and He uprooted them from the s (29:27a) in anger. The next
time the word s is used is to speak about God restoring the people to the s after their
future dispersion (30:5a). Then the Lord promises His blessings for the people in the s
if they love the Lord and are faithful to the covenant (30:16g). Finally the s is called
as one of the witnesses against the people (30:19a) as the Lord offers to them the
opportunity to choose between life and death. This progression provides emphasis on the
topic of the s showing it as one of the prominent topics of the speech in the context of
the covenant. We will come again to those instances as we reach them and the
theological analysis will deal with this progression but now it is sufficient to merely
recognize it.
Clause 29:8a. \ -s -: ::-s \ :-::. With a weqatal in its predicate
this clause goes back into off-line or the background of the speech that will be sustained
until 8d. This main clause initiates a new shift in the internal literary structure of the
subunit concluding it. This weqatal verb has a consequential nuance as it expresses the
logical result
69
of what has been elaborated in verses 29:1c-29:7b. Clauses 28:69a-29:7b
have sustained a focus on past events and now 29:8a-d moves into the future. All the
previous historical review is set as the basis and rationale for the people to keep the
words of this covenant. Here is once again the phrase -: :: in parallelism with the

69
See Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 88. See Longacre,
Weqatal Forms in Biblical Hebrew Prose, 50-98.
60
phrase -: : in 28:69a. This clause addresses the audience in 2mp shifting form
the first plural present in 29:6c-29:7d and the 2mp line is hold up to 29:8d. Therefore,
there is a pattern 2mp-1p-2mp in clauses 29:6a-29:8d with a change in person and not in
number.
Clause 29:8b. \ :-s :-cr. Clause 29:8b is coordinated to 29:8a and follows
the same predicate pattern as 29:8a with a 2mp weqatal fronted. This clause adds
emphasis to the previous one with the sequence in the verbs :: and cr. Deuteronomy
uses these two verbs in connection with the commandments and the statutes of the Lord
and the covenant and Gods instructions to the people in general as a quick search might
reveal. These two verbs are together in texts like Deut 5:1, 32 and in sequence in texts
like Deut 6:1-3. The root :: is used in Deuteronomy around 73 times. This is a
frequency superior to that in Psalms, with Proverbs following from afar with just over 30
usages.
70

Clause 29:8c. /\ :: -s \ ::c- r::. In 8c is a result clause subordinated to
29:8b and has a predicate + x + Yiqtol. The DO (:: -s) of the main verb (2mp,
::c-) is further amplified by a relative clause 29:8d, cr- :s. The main verb of this
clause is used over 60 times in the OT but only two times in Deuteronomy (29:8; 32:29).
It is recognized that the meaning of this verb is difficult to classify.
71
Joshua 1:7-8 seems

70
The root :: occurs 73 times in Deuteronomy and 71 in Psalms. In
Deuteronomy it occurs eight times in chapters 2-4, 29 times in 5-11, 23 times in chapters
12-26, seven in chapters 27-28, three in chapters 29-30, one time in chapter 31 and two
times in chapters 32-33. These frequency numbers show clearly that the emphasis is in
chapters 5-11.
71
In both Deut 29:8 and 32:29 the verbal root ::c occurs in hiphil including the
nuances of considering something (Deut 32:29), and to cause to prosper (Deut 29:8). See
Francis Brown, Samel Rolles Driver, and Charles Briggs, Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew
and English Lexicon (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1996), 968.
61
to allude to this clause. The result of carefully observing and doing -: :: is
prosperity.
Clause 29:8d. e /\ cr- :s. Clause 29:8d is an asyndetic relative clause
subordinated to 29:8c. The structure of its predicate is + x + Yiqtol and the verb is a
2mp.
Summary. It is important to notice that out of 27 clauses in Deut 28:69-29:8,
only eight are main line clauses and the rest are off-line. This evidences that the
emphasis of the sub-section is on the background information that provides the meaning
of the passage, namely, the rationale for the events and their implications. The off-line
clauses in the discourse provide background information, match multiple aspects of same
topic either identical or in contrast, provide interruptions (prominent material) or
transitions (turning points in the discourse) and finally they might negate something.
Therefore, in Hebrew biblical text, the most important material might be in off-line.
72

The analysis of Deut 28:69-29:8 shows a literary envelope dealing with the
Covenant in 28:69a-d and 29:8a-d. These clauses enclose two sections dealing with what
has been called the Magnalia Dei
73
in the Exodus narrative (29:1a-29:3a) and in the early
conquest (29:6a-29:7b) that surround an embedded speech of God in 29:4a-29:5d that
deals with mighty acts during the wilderness experience. These sections form a
concentric literary arrangement and display morphological and syntactical patterns in the
way as the audience (the people) is addressed as well as the themes they deal with.
The signs and wonders performed by the Lord in Egypt (29:1a-29:3a), the desert
(29:4a-29:5b) and in the promised land (29:6a-29:7b), are one of the main topics of Deut

72
See Garret and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 288-
291.
73
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 706.
62
28:69-29:8 together with the covenant (28:69a, 29:8a) with which the people are faced.
The people are addressed in an emphatic way as the audience is syntactically fronted in
1c and all the evidence is addressed to them and then they are emplaced to choose and
take action (29:5c-d, 29:8a-d) because of what has been made evident. The audience has
been addressed in plural as a whole, in singular maybe to stress their responsibility as
individuals and in first person in order to emphasize their participation in some of the
events (29:6c-29:7b).
The structural information obtained for Deut 28:69-29:8 reveals a concentric
arrangement in which two covenant-related sections (28:69a-c/29:8:a-d) frame two
sections dealing with the Magnalia Dei focused in the Exodus (29:1a-29:3a) and the early
conquest (29:6a-29:7b) framing a section dealing with the Magnalia Dei focused in the
wilderness (29:4a-29:5d).
In reference to the Numeruswechsel and the Personenwechsel in Deut 28:69-29:8,
Deut 28:69 does not address the people but only mentions :sc :: and acts as the
heading of the speech and as a bridge with the previous speech. In Deut 29:1-3, 29:1c
opens with a 2mp (:-s), which is shifted into a 2ms in 29:2a (:r) and back to 2mp in
29:3a (:::). Therefore, Deut 29:1-3 has a 2mp-2ms-2mp flow. In Deut 29:4-5, 29:4a
opens with a 2mp (::-s) that is held in 29:4b (:::r:) and then shifted into 2ms in 29:4c
(:.). Clauses 29:5a-29:5d use all of them the 2mp. This shows also a 2mp-2ms-2mp
flow in Deut 29:4-5. In Deut 29:6-7, 29:6a opens with 2mp that moves into first plural in
clauses 29:6c up to 29:7b. This flow results to be only plural, the shift here is not in
number but in person. In Deut 29:8, 29:8a opens with 2mp (:-::) and the 2mp is held
up to 29:8d. Therefore, there is a sustained plural flow from 29:6a up to 29:8d including
a shift into the first plural in 29:6c-29:7b, resulting in a 2mp-1p-2mp flow in Deut 29:6-8.
63
Then in the text of Deut 28:69-29:8, the flow of the Numeruswechsel and the
Personenwechsel follows a pattern 2mp-2ms-2mp / 2mp-2ms-2mp / 2mp-1p-2mp
distributed in three sections.
29:1c-d 2mp
29:2a 2ms
29:3a 2mp
29:4a-b 2mp
29:4c 2ms
29:5a-d 2mp
29:6a-b 2mp
29:6c-29:7b 1p
29:8a-d 2mp
It remains to see if there is any other pattern in reference to the Numeruswechsel
and the Personenwechsel in the rest of the speech in order to verify whether this is a
morphological accident, or is indeed used as a literary device in the speech. The evidence
examined so far seems to suggest that the morphological and syntactical information that
Christensen used to seek rhythm in the text might be used in the literary analysis; that the
Numeruswechsel might indeed fulfill a literary function.
William Robert Higgs has found correlation between verbal styles and the
preference for the singular or plural form of address. In his study, he concludes that the
Numeruswechsel is a valid criterion for literary study in Deuteronomy. Higgs analyzes
Deut 1:1-28:69 but he does not analyze beyond this passage nor he deals with the issue of
the Personenwechsel in his research. The the Numeruswechsel and the Personenwechsel
will be a matter of further analysis later on in this study in Chapter 4 with the structural
analysis of the text.
74


74
See Higgs, A Stylistic Analysis of the Numeruswechsel Sections. See also
Duane L. Christensen, The Numeruswechsel in Deuteronomy 12, in A Song of Power
and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen,
Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993),
64
Deuteronomy 29:9-20
This section provides the Hebrew text of Deut 29:9-20 and the relevant textual
critical issues and versional data are evaluated. The clause division is provided prior to
the syntagmatic and syntactical discussion of the clauses. Finally a summary is provided
that covers textual, syntactical, structural and semantic information.
Hebrew text of Deut 29:9-20. /\ :::s :e: \ ::: \ : ::s: :-s
a 9

/\:sc :s :: \ :::: \
b
::: :::::
a
:::s
b

/\
f
:: :s:
e
r \
d
sr ::~:
c
/\
c
:~: :: :s
b
/\
b
.
a
:::: \ ::e:
a

10

/\ : :r \ -: :s :s
b
/\ -:s: \ :s -:: \
a
:r:
a 11
/\ ::: :s:
c
/\ ::s: s
b
/\ :r: : \ : \ -s: r::
a 12

/\:r: \ ~s: ::s: \ -:s: r::: :s:
d

/\-s :s-s \ -s -:-s \ -: ::s /\ ::::: ::-s s:
a

13

/\
b
::s :e: \:
a
:r ::r \e :: :s-s :
a 14
/\:
c
::r \e .:s :s -s
b

/\ ::r:s -s
b
/\:s: s: \::::s -s \ :-r :-s:
a

15

/\ :-:r :s
c
\ :. ::
/\ ::r :s
b
/\ : :: \ :s r \ ::. -s\ :s:-s \ s-
a 16

/\
a
: :e ::: :s
b
/\ :::s \ ~e:: s \ :ss \ :s ::: :e
a 17

:e
d
/\ : :. \ :s-s \ :r: -:::
c
/\ ::s :r:
/\ :r: \ :s e :: \ :::
/\ :::
e
/\ :s:
d
/\:::: \ :-
c
/\ -s :s ::-s \ r:::
b
/\
a 18


394-401. Christensen finds that the text of Deut 12:1-13:1 is divided into a plural section
(12:1-12) with singular incrustations (12:1, 5, 7, 9) and a singular section (12:13-13:1)
with plural incrustations (12:16; 13:1).
65
/\
a
s:s-s \ -e: r::
g
/\ :s \ :: -:: :
f

/\ s :s: \ -s: s \
a
:r s :
b
/\: ~:: \ :ss:
a 19

/\::: -~-: \::-s \ ~:
e
/\
d
e:: :-:
d
/\
c
:s:: \ :
b
s:
c

/\ :sc
a
::: ::: r: \ :::
a 20

75
/\
c
- e::
b
:-: \ -: -:s :::
b
Analysis of textual critical notes. This section analyses the textual variants
reflected in the MT as well as the relevant versional data related to the text of Deut 29:9-
20. This analysis will inform the syntactic and syntagmatic analysis.
Verse 29:9.
a
:::s. The evidence related to this variant in the LXX, the
Vulgate, Syriac and the Targum Pseudo Jonathan as well as parallel texts in Joshua
provides a complicated situation.
76

The MT provides a list of four anarthrous nouns, masculine plural in construct
state surrounded by two collective phrases (:::, :sc :s ::). These elements are, in
order: :::: ::: ::::: :: :s (Your chiefs, your tribes, your elders and your
officials). The Samaritan Pentateuch reads the same way as the MT,
77
and the Vulgate has
an equivalent reading: vestro principes vestri ac tribus et maiores natu atque
doctores.
78
As we move to the LXX, this reads et a,t|uet u.i sat ,.eucta
u.i sat et stat u.i sat et ,aae.tca,.,.t, u.i.
79
The issue is that the
LXX seems to either translate the Hebrew phrase ::::: :::s as a construct chain
(::::: :s) as it happens in Deut 1:15 or the LXX omits it and adds et stat, which

75
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 84-85.
76
Ibid., 84.
77
See von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 423.
78
Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 275.
79
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 318.
66
has no equivalent in the MT. McCarthy
80
sees Deut 1:15 as one possible explanation for
the translation in the LXX. Wevers hesitates between a possible variant here in the
Vorlage of Deuteronomy or a harmonization with parallel passages inside and out of
Deuteronomy as seen before.
81
Christensen opts for emendation and harmonizes his
translation with the LXX over the MT. The character of the evidence does not require
emendation and the academic rigor suggests sticking to the MT reading.
b
:::. The MT reads :::: ::: but the LXX reads ,.eucta u.i sat
et stat u.i sat et ,aae.tca,.,.t, u.i. In this sense, as Wevers notes, first
the LXX has this list with a pattern a+b+c+d while the MT has a pattern abc+d. Second,
the LXX inserts the word stat that has not equivalent in the MT unless the LXX is
reading :::: as :::e: as in Josh 23:2 and 24:1.
82
As the translator of Deuteronomy
in the LXX is known for the tendency to harmonize unusual forms with more standard
forms from inside and outside Deuteronomy, this evidence suggests retaining the reading
from the MT.
Verse 29:10.
a
:::: \ ::e:. The LXX reverses this phrase and inserts the
conjunction reading at ,uiats., u.i sat a .s,eia u.i.
83
It is interesting that
Wevers clarifies that the Hexapla follows the order of the MT in this phrase.
84
The
Targum Onqelos follows the MT reading while the Samaritan text, the Vulgate, Targum
Jonathan and 1QDeut
b
have :::: ::e:, inserting the conjunction. This variant might be

80
See more details of the discussion in McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 129*.
81
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 466.
82
Ibid., see also McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 129*.
83
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 318. The textual critical apparatus here portrays
several other variants among the Greek witnesses.
84
See more details of the discussion in Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 466.
67
explained as the LXX harmonizing Deut 29:10 with the text of Deut 3:19 where the same
phrase occurs reversed and syndetic.
85
This suggests retaining the reading from the MT.

b
.. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Targum Onqelos follow the Masoretic
reading that has 2ms pronouns starting with this word in 29:10a up to 29:12d while the
LXX has 2mp in the whole verse before changing in 29:11a. The LXX, by keeping the
same pronoun at least to the end of the verse seeks easing the grammar to smooth the
text.
86
This explains the variations related not only to
c
. but also to
d
:~:,
e
sr ::~:
and the phrase
f
:: :s:.
87


e
r. The reading from the MT, is supported by some of the Targums like Onqelos
and Jonathan while the Samaritan Pentateuch adds the conjunction and reads r. The
LXX follows this reading as sat .., although the most of the Alexandrinus manuscripts
omit the conjunction and Bohairic manuscripts omit ..,.
88

Verse 29:11.
a
:r:. The Masoretic reading -:: :r: is not only unique but
unusual as the usual usage of these two lemmas together have a negative connotation of
transgression of Gods covenant, even in Deuteronomy.
89
The usual structure for this
phrase is with the verb s: and -: with the preposition :.
90
This difficult reading has
caused a series of textual variants. The LXX and the Vulgate follow the MT but the

85
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 84.
86
See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 466-467.
87
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 129*-130*.
88
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 318. See also Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 466-467.
89
See texts as Num 14:41; Josh 7:11; 7:15; Deut 17:2; 26:13; Josh 23:16; Judg
2:20; 1 Sam 15:24; Hos 6:7; 8:1; 2 K 18:12; Jer 34:18; Isa 24:5; Ps 148:6; 2 Chr 24:20;
Dan 9:11. See Brown, BDB, s.v. :r.
90
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 130*. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 467.
68
Samaritan Pentateuch uses a hifil and the Targums use afel forms to avoid the difficulty.
The fact that the Masoretic reading is unique and difficult suggests that it is original, as
any scribal emendation will tend to smooth the text and not the other way around.
Interestingly enough the LXX, the Vulgate and the Aleppo Codex
91
follow the Masoretic
reading and the Samaritan texts modifies the mode of the verb in order to smooth the text.
The textual evidence shows that the variants originated as an effort to smooth the
vocabulary of the text. In this perspective, academic rigor suggests following the
Masoretic reading with its difficulties. The syntagmatic analysis will come back to this
issue in this verse.
Verse 29:14.
a
:r ::r. The twofold usage of ::r in the MT might be one of
the reasons for the several readings in other textual witnesses. In Deut 29:14a the MT
reads : :r ::r and 1QDeut
b
reads : :::r[::r], with the participle in plural.
92

Roberts agrees with McCarthy that one of the answers to the variation in 1QDeut
b
might
be a conflation of the two words :r ::r.
93
The Samaritan Pentateuch supports the
reading in the MT.
94
In the LXX, both Ralph and the critical edition have the participle in
plural: et, .e. euct .` .i.
95
The Vulgate is too brief and concise here as to be
textually useful. It reads sed cunctis praesentibus et absentibus. There is not enough
evidence to explain the rationale of the variant beyond doubt but it seems certain that the
variant is secondary.

91
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
92
See D. Barthlemy, Deutrenome (Second exemplaire), in Discoveries in the
Judaean Desert-1: Qumran Cave I, ed. D. Barthlemy and J. T. Milik (New York:
Oxford, 1955), 59.
93
Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea scrolls, 63.
94
See von Gall, ed., Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 424.
95
Wevers, Deuterenomium, 319.
69
b
::s. The MT has a first plural pronominal suffix as well as 1QDeut
b
,
96
the
Samaritan Pentateuch and the LXX in its critical edition
97
but not in Ralphs edition of
the Septuagint. This suggests that most probably the Greek variant here has a secondary
origin.
c
::r. Once again there is an issue of number here. The MT has a first plural
shared by the Samaritan Pentateuch and the LXX in its critical edition,
98
1QDeut
b
lacks
Deut 29:14b. This variant is linked to the two previous variants in this verse so the
versions that choose a second plural in the two previous instances are tied to do the same
here against the MT.
Verse 29:17.
a
:. The Samaritan Pentateuch,
99
the Aleppo Codex
100
the
Vulgate
101
and 1QDeut
b102
support this reading from the MT but the LXX omits it in both
Ralphs and the critical edition.
103
Wevers suggests explaining the omission of : in the
LXX by the fact that the LXX understood and translated the previous word (the qal
participle :e) as aorist (..sti.i) and with the resulting construction the word :
would not make sense.
104


96
Barthlemy, Deutrenome (Second Exemplaire), 59.
97
Wevers, Deuterenomium, 320. Here Wevers quotes Alexandrinus Codex as
well as some other manuscripts as having the 2mp pronoun.
98
Ibid. The critical apparatus of the LXX shows here how diverse Greek
manuscripts opted by several different readings for the Hebrew ::r, like the Vaticanus
that uses 2mp and the minuscule 799 that uses first singular.
99
von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 424.
100
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
101
Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 276.
102
Barthlemy, Deutrenome (Second Exemplaire), 59.
103
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 320.
104
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 471.
70
Verse 29:18.
a
s:s-s -e: r::. This statement is already difficult
and ambiguous in the text of the MT as it is. This situation is seen as a possible rationale
for the different readings in the different versions,
105
not to mention in translations into
modern languages. 1QDeut
b106
lacks it as it has a lacuna after [. . . ]r:: and the
Samaritan Pentateuch follows the Masoretic reading.
107
The Vulgate, the LXX and the
Targums provide two optional interpretational readings. The LXX reads tia
cuia:e.c e aa.e, ei aiaaei.
108
The Vulgate reads et adsumat ebria
sitientem.
109
The most difficult reading (the Hebrew text), is to be adopted here and
therefore the issue is basically not textual but grammatical, syntactical and semantic or
even pragmatic.
Verse 29:19.
a
:r. The MT reads here :r (it will smoke) but the Samaritan
Pentateuch reads ~ (it will burn). McCarthy sees this variant as an assimilation of the
common usage elsewhere in the Pentateuch and even in Deuteronomy.
110
The LXX uses
.ssat. that Wevers sees as following the Samaritan texts while McCarthy does not share
this opinion.
111
McCarthy sees .ssat. as an anomaly because LXX uses it usually to
translate r: and not :r. McCarthy quotes examples taken from Exod 22:5; Num 11:1,
3 and 1 Kgs 21:21 although she also quotes Ps 74:1 and 80:4 where the LXX uses the

105
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 130*-131*.
106
Barthlemy, Deutrenome (Second Exemplaire), 59.
107
von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 424.
108
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 321. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 471.
109
See Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 276.
110
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 131*. See Exod 4:14; Num 11:10; 12:9; 25:3-4;
32:10, 13-14; Deut 6:15; 7:14; 11:17 and 29:26. All these passages use ~ instead of
:r.
111
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 472.
71
word e,t,. to translate :r which is used usually to translate ~.
112
In this case the
most difficult reading (that implies an unusual usage of the vocabulary) is accepted, the
:r in the Masoretic text.

b
s:. The MT reads here the verb : and it is supported by the Samaritan
Pentateuch and the Vulgate but other sources read : as 4QDeut
c
,
113
Targum Onqelos
and the LXX.
114
The other issue is that the MT and Samaritan Pentateuch understand
:s as singular noun but the LXX, the Vulgate and Targum Onqelos understood it as a
collective singular requiring a plural translation and a plural verb.
115
The most difficult
reading, which is the Masoretic reading, implies a metaphor, and is preferred here as the
other variants might be explained as trying to interpret or smooth the text in MT.
116


c
:s::. The LXX reads here :acat at aat , etas, au,.
117
This
reading suggests that the noun :s is understood as collective singular and translated
with the plural noun at aat and the phrase , etas, au, is inserted which does
not have equivalent in the MT. McCarthy quotes the case of 1QS 2:16 having here the
plural -:s.
118


112
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 131*.
113
Sidnie White Crawford, 4QDeut
c
, in Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to
Kings. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore
Cross (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 32.
114
The LXX reads seceiat .i au. :acat at aat , etas,
au,. Wevers, Deuteronomium, 321. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 472.
115
See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 472.
116
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 131*.
117
The Hexapla has marked :acat at aat , etas, au, with obelus. See
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 472. Wevers, Deuteronomium, 321-
322.
118
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 131*.
72

d
e::. The Samaritan Pentateuch,
119
the Vulgate
120
and the Syriac share this
Masoretic reading. The LXX reads .i . tt. eu ieeu eueu adding eu ieeu.
121

Verse 29:20.
a
:::. The LXX reads here ut.i Ica instead of tribes of
Israel. Wevers sees this variant as an example of the translator being careless because
in Deut 33:5 the phrase is correctly rendered |uat, Ica.
122
The phrase :sc :::
happens only twice in Deut 29:20 and 33:5. McCarthy suggests it could be a case of
assimilation because :sc :: is the common way that the expression is found in
Deuteronomy.
123

b
:-:. The MT has this participle in singular referring to -:. The
Samaritan Pentateuch has a plural participle referring to -:s.
124
The LXX has also a
plural participle ,.,a.iat.
125
Wevers suggests that the LXX leveled the text of verse
29:20 with the participle :-: in verse 29:19 and quotes singular variants in Codex
Alexandrinus.
126

c
- e::. This phrase with minor variants occurs in Deut 28:61; 29:20;
30:10; 31:26 and Joshua 1:8. All the instances but Deut 28:61 read - e::, in
this book of the law as here in Deut 29:20. In this case, demonstrative pronoun ()

119
von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 424.
120
Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 276.
121
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 85. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 472.
122
See this and another example in Deut 20:14 in Wevers, The LXX Translator
of Deuteronomy, 59.
123
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 131*-132*.
124
von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 424.
125
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 322.
126
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 473.
73
goes with the noun e:. The reading found in the MT in Deut 29:20 is supported by the
Samaritan Pentateuch and the LXX which reads .i . tt. eu ieeu eueu.
127

Even the text of the Aleppo Codex
128
supports the reading from the MT. These are the
instances:
Deut 28:61, -s - e::, in the book of this law.
Deut 29:20, - e::, in this book of the law.
Deut 30:10, - e::, in this book of the law.
Deut 31:26, - e:, in this book of the law.
Joshua 1:8, - e:, in this book of the law.
Summary. The textual critical analysis of the Hebrew text of Deut 29:9-20
provides some challenging instances related to the exceptional use of vocabulary, syntax
and pragmatics. The ancient scribes and translators struggled with these peculiarities as
the textual critical review has shown. The scribes and translators tried to smooth the
syntax, the vocabulary and the style of the text. The MT has been retained in these
instances due to the textual support provided by the textual and versional data. Thus
these textual peculiarities remain and so the syntactical, syntagmatic and pragmatic
analysis must deal with them.
Clause division of Deut 29:9-20. Table 3 provides the Hebrew text of Deut 29:9-
20 divided in clauses and with the respective notation that will facilitate the location of
the clauses. The English translation of the text is provided for reference although the
analysis is based on the Hebrew text.

127
Wever, Deuteronomium, 322. See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 132*. McCarthy
quotes some variants in the Syriac and in Targum Onqelos.
128
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
74
Table 3
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 29:9-20
Hebrew Text Working Translation
::s: :-s


/\ :::s :e: \ ::: \ :
9a You stand today, all of you, in the
presence of the Lord your God
\ :::: \ ::: :::::
a
:::s
/\ :sc :s ::
9a your chiefs, your tribes, your elders and
your officials, all the men of Israel
/\ . :::: \ ::e:


10a your children and your wives and your
alien
/\ :~: :: :s
10b who is in the middle of your camp
\ sr ::~:
/\:: :s: r
10c from the one who chops your wood
to the one who draws your water.
/\-:s: \ :s -:: \ :r:
11a So that you pass over into the covenant
of the LORD your God and into His oath
/\: :r \ -: :s :s
11b which the LORD your God is making
with you today.
/\ -s: r::
12a So that He might establish you today as
His people
/\::s: s
12b and He should become your God
/\::: :s:
12c as He spoke to you
r::: :s:
/\:r: \ ~s: ::s: \ -:s:
12d and as He swore to your forefathers: To
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
/\ ::::: ::-s s:
13a And it is not only with you
-: ::s
/\-s :s-s \ -s -:-s \
13b that I am establishing this covenant and
this oath
\ : :r ::r \ e :: :s-s :


/\ ::s :e:
14a but with the one who is standing here
with us today in the presence of the Lord
our God
/\ : ::r \ e .:s :s -s
14b and with the one who is not here with us
today.
\ :-r :-s:
/\ :s: s: \ ::::s -s
15a For you know how we dwelt in the land
of Egypt
/\ :. :: \ ::r:s -s

15b and how we came through the midst of
the nations
/\ :-:r :s
15c that you passed by.
\ ::. -s\ :s:-s \ s-
/\ : :: \ :s r
16a And you have seen their abominations
and their idols
of wood and stone, gold and silver
/\ ::r :s
16b which they had with them



(table continues)

75
Table 3 (continued)
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 29:9-20
Hebrew Text Working Translation
::: :e
/\ :::s \ ~e:: s \ :ss \ :s
17a Make sure there is not among you a man
or a woman or a family or a tribe
\ : :e ::: :s
/\ ::s :r:
17b whose heart might turn away today from
the LORD your God
/\ : :. \ :s-s \ :r: -:::
17c to walk, to serve the gods of those
nations
/\:r: \ :s e :: \ ::: :e
17d Make sure there is not among you a root
bearing fruit and wormwood.
18a And it will be
/\ -s :s ::-s \ r:::
18b when he hears the words of this oath
:::: \ :-
18c He will bless himself in his heart
/\ :s:
18d saying:
/\ :::
18e I will have peace
/\ :s \ :: -:: :
18f although in the stubbornness of my heart
I will walk
/\ s:s-s \ -e: r:: /
18g In order to sweep away the watered and
the dry
/\: ~:: \ :ss:
19a Then the LORD will not be willing to
forgive him
\ -s: s \ :r s :
/\ s :s:
19b For at that time the nose of the LORD
will smoke and His zeal against this man
/\ :s:: \ : s:

19c And every curse will lie down against
him
/\ e:: :-:
19d that is written in this book
/\ ::: -~-: \::-s \ ~:
19e And the LORD will wipe out his name
from underneath the heavens.
r: \ :::
/\ :sc ::: :::
20a Then the LORD will separate the evil
from all the tribes of Israel
\ -: -:s :::
/\ - e:: :-:
20b according to all the curses of the
covenant that are writen in this book of
the law.
Total of clauses in the section: 38



Syntax and syntagmatics. This subsection has its conclusion in verse 29:20 but
there is unity with Deut 29:21-28. Some printed editions of the Hebrew text show a ziah
76
at the end of 29:20.
129
Verses 29:21-28 expand the topic of the future apostasy elaborated
in 29:9-20, and more specifically in Deut 29:17a-20b. The first feature that is evident in
this subsection is the absence of finite verbs in verses nine to ten. The syntactical flow of
the sentences in these verses has its support in four participles
130
and an infinitive
construct (:r:, 29:11a). There is another participle in Deut 29:11b followed by an
infinitive construct in 29:12a. Clause 29:12b displays an imperfect and two perfect verbs
in 29:12c and 29:12d. There are two more participles in 29:13b and 29:14a, then four
perfect verbs in verse 15 and finally a wayiqtol in first position in 29:16a. This provides
21 clauses in verses 29:9-16 with only five finite verbs plus seven participles and two
infinitive construct verbs. Therefore, the whole section is in off-line with the exception
of clause 29:16a.
This brief review reveals a text providing textual and syntactical challenges and a
detailed description of the peoples covenantal gathering spotted with short historical
reviews and a key declaration of the purpose of this gathering. The syntagmatic analysis

129
This indentation called Ziah is seen in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia after
Deut 29:20, see the text in K. Elliger and W. Rudolph, ed. Biblia Hebraica
Stuttgartensia, 5
th
ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997), 340. However the
Ziah is absent in McCarthys edition. See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 85. The Aleppo
Codex does not show any kind of indentation or special space after Deut 29:20. See The
Aleppo Codex Online. The von Gall edition of the Samaritan Pentateuch shows a
paragraph transition after Deut 29:20. See von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der
Samaritaner, 424. The critical text of the LXX does not show any paragraph transition or
special mark after Deut 29:21. See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 323.
In a personal e-mail communication with Dr Carmel McCarthy, concerning the
indentation (Ziah) after Deut 29:20 she answers, I checked this reference in the
Leningrad Ms, and find that it does not have any space there. Likewise, I checked the
manuscript of the Aleppo Codex, and also that of the Damascus Pentateuch and neither of
them have a space. In fact not only does Aleppo have no space, the sof pasuq is missing
also. Carmel McCarthy, personal communication to the author, 16 March 2010.
130
There are thirteen participles in the whole chapter; their analysis may provide
important hints into the understanding of the passage. See the distribution of participles
in Deut 28:69-30:20 in Appendix A, Table A8.
77
will provide a clearer perspective of the flow of this sub-section in order to ascertain its
structural organization and semantics.
Verses 29:17-19 provide sixteen clauses
131
with only four finite verbs
132
from
29:17a up to 29:18g; none of them is a wayiqtol. There are two weqatal verbs in 29:18a
and 29:18c, both of them in first position. Then in clauses 29:19a-e there are four finite
verbs. There are four infinitive constructs and one participle in Deut 29:17a-18g. This
difference in the verbal distribution is due to the presence of a monologue and its
introduction in Deut 29:18a-29:18g and Gods reaction to that monologue in clauses
29:19a-e. Once again, all the sixteen clauses are off-line. Finally, verse 20 provides two
clauses, 29:20a with a weqatal and 29:20b with a participle. The discourse unfolds based
on the account of Gods acts in past events (perfect verbs) in order to exhort (infinitive
verbs) the audience (described with participles) to enter in the covenant relationship and
remain in it.
In reference to the Numeruswechsel, there is a 2mp in 29:9a-29:10a but the last
word of 29:10a has a 2ms pronominal suffix and is kept until 29:12d. Clause 29:13a uses
2mp and 29:14a-b have first plural. Clause 29:15a shifts to 2mp and 29:15b-c use first
plural shifting 29:15d-29:17a into 2mp, 29:17b uses first plural and 29:17d 2mp.
Verses 29:14a, 29:15a and 29:17a feature : clauses where this preposition is
functioning as a subordinating conjunction that introduces grounding for the
argumentation and additionally links the stages of the argumentation.
133


131
See the database for the syntagmatic analysis of Deut 29:9-20 in Appendix B,
Table B4.
132
See the summary of the verbal distribution of Deut 29:9-20 in Appendix A,
Table A3.
133
See van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference
Grammar, 301.
78
Verses nine to seventeen feature six perfect verbs that are not in first position.
There is only one wayyiqtol in 29:16a; there are nine participles and there are three
infinitive verbs portraying purpose nuance (29:11a, 29:12a and 29:17a). This marks a
departure in the syntactical flow and structure in comparison with Deut 29:1-8.
In verses 29:17-20, the speech pictures an undesired situation (::: :e, 29:17a;
29:17b) which is first portrayed in summary in verse 29:17. It is then detailed in verses
29:18-20 thru a monologue (introduced with :s:, 29:18a-b. See also Deut 30:12b and
13b) between a theoretical apostate man and God, who answers the apostates monologue
(29:19-20). The actual content of this dialogue, which is in verses 29:18 to 29:20, shows
a heavy concentration of thirteen verbs. This represents 54.2% of the total verbal content
of verses 9-20. This verbal concentration evidences an emphasis on the content, the
meaning and the implications of this monologue and Gods answer to it. Covenant
vocabulary will be present in the section.
In reference to the flow of the text, the 38 clauses that build Deut 29:9-20 reveal
that nine are main-line clauses while 29 are off-line. This provides a distribution of
23.7% main-line versus 76.3% off-line. This emphasis on the off-line will become
evident in the syntagmatic analysis. These preliminary considerations allow one to
recognize that Deut 29:9-20 starts as a historical speech with a probable shift into an
anticipatory speech from either clause 29:17a or clause 29:18a. The syntagmatic analysis
will provide a more accurate perception of this textual feature and if this is so, then the
text will be addressed accordingly. The predicate patterns have different implications
according to the text type.
134


134
See Garrett and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 291-
293 and 312-18. Here the authors provide a working summary of the relation between
the predicate patterns and the verbal distribution with the determination of text types.
79
Clause 29:9a.
a
:::s
b
/\ :::s :e: \ ::: \ : ::s: :-s
a 9

/\:sc :s :: \ :::: \
b
::: :::::. This clause opens the sub-section in off-
line with asyndeton, the subject fronted and a predicative participle following, an
adverbial modifier of time, the direct object, an adverbial modifier of place and then the
direct object expanded in a list of five elements. This participle acts as a verbal
adjective
135
and takes the place of the predicate providing the clause with a present
temporal perspective emphasized by the articulated usage of :.
136
The fronting of the
subject (in the pre-verbal slot
137
) suggests that the audience is the focus of the clause
while the two adverbial modifiers suggest that the event is the theme of this clause. This
clause addresses the audience with a 2mp that is hold up to 29:10a.
Clause 29:10a. . \ :::: \ ::e:. The Masoretes separated this clause from
verse 9 with a sillq. Clause 29:10a seems to expand even further the direct object of
29:9a as it continues the list of those attending the gathering. In this case, it is a matter of
respecting the intention of the text. Maybe the idea is to distinguish in this clause those
who belong directly to the household (children, wife and the hired foreign worker) as the
previous clause enlisted wider circles. This is a nominal clause where the verb might
have been omitted because it is clear from the context,
138
as in 29:6c; that verb then

135
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 77-78. See Waltke and
OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 612-631.
136
The word : is used over 2300 times in the OT with over 160 in Deuteronomy
and Genesis with over 150. The articulated form occurs over 450 times in the OT with
Deuteronomy heading the list with 74. In Deut 28:69-30:20 the articulated form occurs
fourteen times. In this subsection of Deut 29:9-20, : occurs six times in Deut 9a; 11b;
12a; 14a, b and 17b.
137
See van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference
Grammar, 337-338 46.1-2.
138
Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 209 589. See van der Merwe, Naud
and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, 241 33.1 note 42.
80
would be ::s:. The last element of this clause shifts the pronominal pronoun and
addresses the audience in 2ms, .. The next two clauses will expand and qualify this
noun. That, from the perspective of the amount of text devoted to the element (content
analysis), discloses an emphasis on the . that is not devoted to any other of the elements
in the list. As a nominal clause, this clause is off-line.
Clause 29:10b. \ :~: :: :s. This relative nominal clause, as an adjective,
qualifies the last element in 10a, .. The structure of the clause suggests the presence
of a cupola verb. This clause holds the 2ms pronominal suffix and is off-line. The . is
listed together with the children and the wife and now is qualified as dwelling in the
camp of the individual audience (2ms), the father of this children and the husband of this
wife.
Clause 29:10c. /\:: :s: r \ sr ::~:. This asyndetic nominal clause is
subordinated to 10b and has a participle in the verbal slot. It is off-line and holds the 2ms
pronominal suffix. The clause contains a list of two elements that seem to be the
extremes of a longer list instead of the only two elements of it. The prepositions that
were chosen are: r . . . :. This combination of prepositions was long ago recognized
with an inclusive nuance that when : is followed by r or the directional , and used
with two extremes or prominent members, the construction may imply that everything in
between is included.
139
The basic structure is r() . . . : with some variants and is
called merismus or merism. In the concrete case of Deut 29:10c the expression would
imply all the range of menial workers. The duties that are mentioned here are regarded as

139
Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 124. See A. M. Honeyman, Merismus
in Biblical Hebrew, Journal of Biblical Literature 71, no. 1 (March 1952): 13 and Joe
Kraovec, Merism: Polar Expression in Biblical Hebrew, Biblica 64, no. 2 (1983):
231-239.
81
womens duties
140
therefore the pragmatics of the clause implies that even those servants
or hired workers that carry out the most humble duties of the household are invited and
included into the covenantal offer.
The vocabulary of Deut 29:10c provides a hint to look into a literary link with the
Gibeonite narrative in Josh 9:1-27.
141
The analysis of this case of intertextuality here is
beyond the objectives of this study, but deserves further research. However, we might
identify here a case of what Sailhamer have called narrative typology. This is a literary
strategy used in the Pentateuch with a theological purpose. This strategy consists in that
earlier events foreshadow and anticipate later events or later events are written to
remind the reader of past narratives. With these structures the author develops central
themes and continually draws them to the readers attention.
142
The identification of
these literary strategies in the text may result productive in literary analysis.
Clause 29:11a. -:s: \ :s -:: \ :r:. This asyndetic final
clause
143
subordinated to 29:10c has an infinitive construct verb in the verbal slot
followed by a compound direct object. The compound direct object, -: and :s is
qualified with an adverbial modifier as the covenant of :s . The pronominal
suffixes used in reference to the audience are still 2ms. This clause states the purpose of
the gathering described so far from 29:9a to 29:10b. Therefore, the text still sustains a

140
Joshua 9:21-27 tells us that these tasks were later assigned to the Gibeonites,
see Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 718.
141
For a analysis of the literary and theological parallels between Deuteronomy
and Josh 9:1-27 from a critical and diachronical perspective, see Peter J. Kearney, The
Role of the Gibeonites in the Deuteronomic History, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 35,
no. 1 (January 1973): 1-19.
142
Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 37-44.

143
Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 606-607,
see examples #12a-b.
82
present tense perspective and it is off-line. The covenantal event is the focus, the theme
in this clause as it is fronted, and three out of five words are related to it.
As already noticed in the textual analysis of this clause, the construction used here
with the verbal root :r with -: is not only unique but also unusual as this verbal root
when used with -: has negative connotations even in Deuteronomy
144
(the trespassing
or transgression of the covenant). Perhaps the best way of understanding this clause
might be to translate it as passing over into the covenant of the Lord your God and into
His oath. The old versions struggled to understand and to smooth the text, not to
mention the modern translations, so the clause evidence textual variants.
145

Clause 29:11b. : :r \ -: :s :s. This asyndetic relative clause
is subordinated to 29:11a. The relative particle and the subject in the pre-verbal slot are
followed by a predicative participle in the verbal slot before two adverbial modifiers.
The clause is off-line and it addresses the audience in 2ms. The adverbial modifier of
time :, provides a present tense temporal perspective to the clause. The Lord is the
focus of this clause as the subject is fronted in the clause. The covenant is the theme as
the whole clause is qualifying the theme of 29:11a.
In reference to the vocabulary of clauses 29:11a-b, Lenchak
146
has identified an
inclusio with the vocabulary of clause 29:13a. Here in clause 29:11a-b the words -: /
-:s: / -:: are present while in 29:13a the words :s / -: /-: are present.

144
The verbal root :r occurs some 61 times in Deuteronomy only second to
Joshua with 84. Deuteronomy uses :r with -: in a negative context in Deut 17:2 and
26:13.
145
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 84, 130*. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 467.
146
Lenchak, Choose Life! 175 note 17. Here Lenchack surveys the discussion
about the terminology to qualify the structure of this passage. Lenchack opts to call it an
ABBA (or ABA) pattern.
83
Although the word order is different, the roots are the same. This inclusio will be useful
for structural purposes.
Clause 29:12a. \ :r: : \ : \ -s: r::. This is a result clause
subordinated to 29:11b. This result nuance is provided in the first place by the particle
r:: that opens the clause in the pre-verbal slot. The word r:: is a compound word
consisting of the preposition : and the noun r:
:+:
and might be used either as a
subordinating conjunction
148
or as a preposition
149
but expresses purpose here. The
verbal slot is occupied by an infinitive construct that reinforces the purpose aspect of the
clause.
150
The focus and theme of this clause is what God is proposing to do with the
audience establishing them as His people. The clause addresses the audience in 2ms.
The clause portrays a present tense temporal perspective with the usage of : as
adverbial modifier of time.
Clause 29:12b. \ ::s: s. This clause is coordinated to 29:12a;
it has the subject in the pre-verbal slot so it is off-line and the subject is the focus of the
clause. This clause has one of the few finite verbs of the sub-section as it displays a
yiqtol of the verb . This clause reinforces the topic of the previous clause as the two
of them portray the desired relationship between God and His people from the two
perspectives: Gods and the peoples. These aspects suggest a relational, personal

147
See Brown, s.v. r:. James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages With
Semantic Domains: Hebrew (Old Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems,
1997), 4347.
148
van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar,
305. Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 134-135.
149
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 115. van der Merwe,
Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, 288.
150
van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar,
71, 115.
84
dimension of the covenant. This nuance will be addressed later in Chapter 5. The clause
still addresses the audience in 2ms. The temporal perspective is not clear here in 29:12b
as it is in 29:12a, which has a present tense perspective. Clause 29:12b is coordinated
with 29:12a but 29:12b has no temporal indicators. The imperfect verb might not be
temporal but might be portraying a desirability aspect
151
reflected in the following
translation: And He should become your God.
Clause 29:12c. ::: :s:. The predicate pattern of this clause has a
preposition and the relative particle in the pre-verbal slot then a perfect verb and the
indirect object with a 2ms pronominal suffix. This reveals that the clause is subordinated
to 29:12b, is off-line and its temporal perspective shifts to the past. Clauses 29:12c and
29:12d shift to the past to provide historical support for the covenantal offer God is doing
here. The first historical reference here is to previous times when God has spoken to the
people. The audience is still addressed in 2ms (:). The clauses in Deut 29:9a-29:12d
addresses God in third person. This suggests Moses is the one speaking here to the
people as Gods representative. In this clause, we meet one of the socalled formulaic
expressions peculiar to the book of Deuteronomy.
152
This is :s: or :s: that is used
around 55 times in Deuteronomy with Genesis following with around 47 usages. This
expression here is providing events in the past that might be used to verify what God is
saying to His people. The expression will be used once again in Deut 30:9c in a similar
context of verification.
153


151
Ibid., 150.
152
Wevers, Text History of the Greek Deuteronomy, 88. Wevers, Notes on the
Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 467-468.
153
Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 640-641.
See Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 102-103 260, 262b.
85
Clause 29:12d. :r: \ ~s: ::s: \ -:s: r::: :s:. The predicate
pattern of this clause displays a conjunction plus a preposition and the relative particle in
the pre-verbal slot followed by a perfect verb and finally a compound indirect object.
This provides that the clause is coordinated to 29:12c, it is off-line and the temporal
perspective of the clause is past.
The mention of the forefathers here has echoes in previous passages of
Deuteronomy and out of it in the Pentateuch and this construction with the verb r:: is at
least present in Deut 1:8, 6:10, 9:5, 29:12, 30:20 and 34:4. External references are
present in Gen 50:24, Exod 6:8, 33:1 and Num 32:11. This construction in connected
directly and verbatim to the promise of the land in all these texts except in Deut 9:27 and
29:12. Deuteronomy 9:27 is connected to a petition of mercy in view of the peoples
sinfulness and in 29:12 is an historical review of Gods promises to the ancestors that are
now being fulfilled in their children as they near the entrance of the promised land.
These elements will be addressed once again in the theological analysis.
Clause 29:13a. \ ::::: ::-s s:. This main negative clause is coordinated to
12d and all the force of the clause is carried forward by the tacit verbal copula. The
negation marks this clause as off-line. With this clause, the text shifts into a present
temporal perspective. This clause addresses the audience with 2mp.
Who is the speaker in Deut 29:13a-29:13b? Clause 29:14a, which is coordinated
to 29:13b, clearly addresses the people in first plural and uses a first person plural
possessive pronominal suffix in reference to God. This suggests Moses is speaking there
in 14a and including himself with the people. The first singular pronoun used with the
participle -: is not enough to ascribe this utterance to God, as Deut 28:69b says that the
Lord commanded Moses to establish the covenant with His people. The same lexemes
86
are used there: -:, -::, :sc ::-s. In Deut 29:4a-29:5d we have an embedded
speech where God is the speaker and 5d makes it clear that the first person singular from
4a is God. Here in 29:13a-b we have a first person singular that is replaced by a first
person plural in 29:14a. This suggests is Moses the one speaking in 29:13a-b.
Clause 29:13b. -s :s-s \ -s -:-s \ -: ::s. The predicate of
this verbless off-line clause is elaborated with an active participle in predicative function
that derives its present temporal perspective from the tacit verbal copula of clause 29:13a.
This clause fronts the subject in the pre-verbal slot providing emphasis for it. The use of
the verb -: with the articulated nouns -: and :s, and with demonstratives and the
subject fronted provides this clause with a heavy emphasis in the identity of the subject
(::s), the predicate (-:) and the direct object (-s :s-s \-s -:-s). Moses
wants to be sure that the people understand they are not the only beneficiaries of the
covenant. This inclusive perspective goes against exclusivist perspectives to the
covenant. The theological analysis will come back to this issue reflected here.
Clause 29:14a. \ ::s :e: \ : :r ::r \ e :: :s-s :. This
adversative off-line nominal clause is coordinated to 29:13b and the predicate is
elaborated with the particle of existence :
154
that in this case has a 3ms pronominal
suffix plus a predicative participle of the root :r. The word :r has semantic
implications in this context specially with the usage of :e:, as will be elaborated in the
theological section. This clause addresses the audience in first plural as the pronominal
suffixes indicate. The texts temporal perspective is still in the present tense as the use of
the arthrous noun : as adverbial modifier of time reveals. This clause provides a good

154
See Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 157. Joon and
Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (2006), 102k.
87
amount of information with its five phrases as adverbial modifiers, of place or location
(e), of company (::r), of mode (:r), time (:) and finally another adverbial modifier
of location (::s :e:). The author is providing all this information so the reader
can perceive the details of the scene. The pronominal suffix in ::r reveals that is Moses
the one speaking to the people in this clause. Robert G. Bratcher and Howard Hatton
recognize the difficulty and provide two options as recommendations for the translators,
one translation with Moses as the speaker and other one with God as speaker. The
second option modifies the word order and even the wording of verses 29:13-14.
155
We
think it is not necessary to modify the wording or the word order of this clause but follow
the natural grammar and syntax of the text and then deal with it in a syntactic and
syntagmatic way.
Clause 29:14b. \ : ::r \ e .:s :s -s. This verbless off-line clause is
coordinated to 29:14a and the predicate is elaborated with the nonexistence particle s
:-

plus a 3ms pronominal suffix that requires here a tacit verbal copula. The syntax of this
clause is elaborated as a negative mirror of 29:14a but with less information. Clause
29:14a has five phrases as adverbial modifiers providing information while 29:14b has
only three adverbial modifiers. This strategy recalls Deut 28:69d, which is syntactically
similar to 28:69b but clearly shorter. Clearly, the emphasis is in 29:14a and the content of
29:14b is portrayed clearly but without overshadowing 29:14a. This clause addresses the
audience in the first person plural.

155
The second option reads, You who are standing here in my presence today are
not the only ones with whom I am making this agreement with all its conditions. I, the
Lord your God, am also making it with your descendants. Bratcher and Hatton, A
Handbook on Deuteronomy, 489. See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy,
468-469.
156
See Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 146 407a. Joon and Muraoka, A
Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (2006), 154k.
88
Lenchak points to the arrangement of Deut 29:14a-b that exhibits repetition and
parallelism.
157
The words e and : are used twice in the verse and there are two
almost identical constructions around the phrase \ ::s :e:.
: :r ::r e :: : s-s
: ::r e .:s : s -s
Clause 29:15a. \ :s: s: \ ::::s -s \ :-r :-s:. This is an off-line
evidential
158
clause. The subject (2mp) is fronted in the pre-verbal slot in a : + S pattern
and the predicate is provided with a perfect verb. The verb here is r in perfect 2mp that
here takes a second verb as direct object in a relative clause to complete the idea. The
verb is :: as a perfect first person plural. Therefore, this clause provides a brief shift
from clause 29:14b that addressed the audience in first plural, with a present tense textual
perspective to 2mp here in the main verb of 29:15a (r) still with a present tense textual
perspective.
159
The second verb in the direct object is :: in first person plural and in
perfect but from a past tense textual perspective. Then this second verb (::) shifts the
clause back to first plural but takes it into a past tense textual perspective. This clause
starts a brief historical review that covers 29:15a-16b related to the time in Egypt
(29:15a) and the pilgrimage in the desert (29:15b-16b).

157
Lenchack, Choose Life! 186.
158
For the syntax see Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 149.
See further analysis of this aspect in Aejmelaeus, On the Trial of the Septuagint
Translators, 203.
159
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 55. Speaking about
semantic categories of the Hebrew perfect verb, they mention the experience category
that applies specially to perception and attitude verbs like r in this case. This category
requires the perfect verb to be translated as a present tense in modern languages. This
category is similar to the gnomic present mentioned by Waltke and OConnor, An
Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 488. Joon and Muraoka, A Grammar of
Biblical Hebrew (2006), 112f.
89
There is a question in reference to the flow of this clause. Is Deut 29:15a an
independent clause or is it either subordinated or coordinated to 29:14b? Both
Christensen (on structural grounds) and McConville (on thematic grounds dealing with
the covenant structure) agree on seeing a transition after verse 29:14 without providing
the rationale other than thematic aspects.
160
Driver suggests a transition after verse
29:12, apparently on thematic grounds also.
161
Christensens proposal might be affected
by his wish to see a seven-fold and concentric structure in every level or even sub-section
of the text (Menorah style).
162
Andersen and Forbes on macro syntactical-rhetorical
grounds see a transition after verse 29:12 and another after verse 29:15. Although they
recognize that 29:13a is coordinated to 29:12 as well as 29:16 to 29:15 due to the
conjunctions that head 29:13a and 29:16a and provide sequence with the previous
clauses. Therefore this seems to be also a transition proposal on thematic grounds. They
also reflect the function as conjunction of the : that heads 29:15a.
163
The content of
29:15a shifts from the description of the audience (29:9a-29:10c, 29:13a-29:14b) to a
brief historical review (29:15a-29:16b). Clause 29:15a shifts a present tense (29:13a-
29:14a) and future (29:14b) to past tense in the texts temporal perspective. These
observations could be a rationale to recognize a shift in the textual flow and then seeing
the conjunction : at the beginning as not coordinating but as sequential.

160
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 716-717. McConville,
Deuteronomy, 413-414.
161
Driver, Deuteronomy, 323.
162
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 716. See another example in
Casper J. Labuschagne, Divine Speech in Deuteronomy, in A Song of Power and the
Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen, Sources
for Biblical and Theological Study 3 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993), 375-393.
163
Andersen and Forbes, The Hebrew Bible: Andersen-Forbes Phrase Marker
Analysis.
90
Lenchak identifies an inclusio with the wording of 29:9a and 29:14a. This
inclusio implies the words ::s /:::s :e: : :r /::s: that are present in
these two clauses at the beginning and end of the section.
164
Therefore, the temporal and
thematic shifts, plus the presence of this inclusio might be the rationale to identify the
internal structure of Deut 29:9-20. In addition, this structural approach might be used to
probe the distribution of the Numeruswechsel in this sub-section of the text. The section
of this research dealing with the structural analysis will return to this issue.
Clause 29:15b. \ :. :: \ ::r:s -s. This clause is coordinated to
29:15a and displays several elements (:s -s) in the pre-verbal slot that marks the
clause as off-line. The predicate has a perfect verb that addresses the audience with a
first plural pronominal suffix. Moses still includes himself with the people and the
temporal textual perspective is in past tense as the clause reviews the desert pilgrimage.
The review is done in a summary style since no further details are provided but Gods
care is tacit as the people passed by (Deut 29:15c) successfully.
Clause 29:15c. :-:r :s. This relative off-line clause is subordinated to
29:15b and addresses the people in 2mp. The perfect verb is preceded by the relative
particle in the pre-verbal slot. This clause keeps the past tense in the textual perspective.
Clause 29:16a. \ : :: \ :s r\ ::. -s\ :s:-s \s-. This
clause is headed by a sequential wayiqtol verb what marks the clause as main line and as
an independent or main clause. The audience is addressed in 2mp and the texts temporal
perspective of the clause is past. The predicate is followed by the direct object with the

164
Lenchak, Choose Life! 174-175. See Norbert Lohfink, Der Bundesschlu
im Land Moab: Redaktionnsgeschichtliches zu Dt 28,69-32,47, chap. in Studien zum
Deuteronomium und zur deuteronomistischen Literatur I. Stuttgarter Biblische
Aufsatzbnde 8 (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1990), 53-82. (Orig. pub. in
Biblische Zeitschrift 6 [1962], 32-56).
91
phrase ::. -s\ :s:-s and the adjectival modifiers : :: \ :s r. The
verb s is used here again with the audience, the people as the subject. The last time it
was used in the discourse, had as direct object Gods :-e: --s (29:1c-2a) in behalf
of His people. Now the direct object has to do with the : and the :. of the nations
(:.) that the people saw in their way during their pilgrimage in the desert. As Gods
mighty acts account for His power, the nations abominations and idols account for their
depravation. These elements are irreconcilable.
165
The people must remember the
idolatry of the nations around them as a warning against idolatry. God will provide the
rationale for this warning in the clauses found in Deut 29:17a-29:19e. The direct object
accounts for most of the material in clause 29:16a (::. -s\ :s:-s), and that
feature reveals the direct object as the topic or theme of this clause. The allusion to the
audience in the main verb (located in the first slot of the clause) reveals them as the focus
of the clause.
Clause 29:16b. \ ::r :s. This relative clause stresses and qualifies the direct
object of 29:16a and this feature identifies this clause as adjectival. This confirms the
emphasis in the identification of the ::. -s\ :s:-s as the topic of clause
29:16a.
Clause 29:17a. \ :::s \ ~e:: s \ :ss \ :s \ ::: :e. This clause and
29:17d have the same heading (::: :e) and structure. They are negative nominal
purpose clauses coordinated to the preceding clause. As this clause is both nominal and
negative, these two features mark it as off-line. The absence of an explicit verb in the
clause and the presence of a nuance of negation of the action marks the clause as such.

165
Lenchak, Choose Life! 188. See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12,
720-422.
92
This clause addresses the audience in 2mp. The conjunction that heads this clause
implies aversion and deprecation.
166
It expresses some apprehension or worry of a
possible future event when it heads the clause.
167
Four elements are included in the
direct object. This clause warns against the possible enemies from inside, namely
individuals or groups inside the people itself who could plot against the community and
their relationship with the Lord God (17b).
Clause 29:17b. \ ::s :r: \ : :e ::: :s. This relative clause is
subordinated to clause 29:17a and has the relative particle and the subject in the pre-
verbal slot proceeding before a participle (:e) which is followed by an adverbial
modifier of time (:) and the indirect object (::s ). The subject is the focus of
the clause and the topic is expressed by the participle that is then qualified by the rest of
the clause. The textual temporal perspective of this clause is located in a conditional
future that is mainly held up to verse 29:27. This conditional future deals with events
that are meant not to happen (Deut 29:17a, d: :e) but will indeed happen as Deut 30:1-
10 will look beyond the time these events would have taken place. This reveals that
Deuteronomy holds two perspectives of the future. One perspective that shows what God
wishes the future history of His people to be (program) and the other one that shows what
God foresees the future history of His people will indeed be. This feature in the book of
Deuteronomy is a matter of debate as critical approaches see it as evidence of a long
editorial history of the text.
168
This discussion will have to wait for the theological

166
See Brown, BDB, s.v. e. van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical
Hebrew Reference Grammar, 306.
167
Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 7153. Joon and Muraoka, A
Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (2006), 635 168g.
168
See as an example Rof, The Covenant in the Land of Moab, 269-280.
93
analysis of the speech where issues dealing with the speechs portrayal of the covenant
will be matter of analysis.
Clause 29:17c. \ : :. \ :s-s \ :r: -:::. This is an asyndetic purpose
clause subordinated to 29:17b. The predicate is elaborated with two consecutive
infinitive construct verbs. The selection of infinitive constructs to convey the predicate in
this clause reveals the focus and the theme of this clause. The infinitive focuses on the
action and these infinitive constructs here have purpose nuance. The clause is off-line
and holds the texts temporal perspective initiated in the previous clause. The verbal root
: has a wide semantic range and the nuances of following, behaving and life style
might be in present here.
169
And the root :r here may have here religious and even
ritual nuances as the object of this service is : :. :s-s.
170

This clause picks up the vocabulary of Deut 29:15b and Deut 29:16a as now
mentions : :. :s-s. What clauses 29:15b-29:16b mentioned as a warning is
now portrayed in 29:17c as a future undesired possibility. The theological analysis will
return to these issues.
Clause 29:17d. :r: \ :s e :: \ ::: :e. This clause is shaped in the
same vocabulary and syntactic structure as clause 29:17a. This is a negative nominal
purpose clause coordinated to 29:17c. It is off-line and holds a conditional future textual
perspective. This clause addresses the audience in 2mp. In reference to the vocabulary
of the direct object (:r: :s e ::), the MT does not report variations in the
Hebrew witnesses. It is evident that the LXX translator struggled with the vocabulary,

169
Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 2143.
170
See Brown, BDB, s.v. :r. Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages,
6268.
94
the grammar and the syntax of this clause as the translation reveals: t,a ai. |ueuca .i
,e sat :tsta.
171
The word :r: is used elsewhere in contexts in which justice is
perverted and the results of idolatry are implied.
172

There seems to be a chiastic A-B-B-A arrangement in verse 29:17 implying a
descriptive repetition in the A-A sections and maybe a synonymous parallelism in the B-
B sections:
173
The structural analysis in Chapter 4 will return to this feature in this text.
::: :e A
\::s :r: \: :e ::: :s B
\ : :. \ :s-s \ :r: -::: B
::: :e A
Clause 29:18a. . This independent clause is a weqatal with a future temporal
aspect. This construction occurs around 43 times in Deuteronomy and in 25 of those
occurrences it is heading conditional clauses as it does here. The LXX translates the first
words as sat .cat .ai aseuc.
174
This is an .ai plus aorist subjunctive structure that
implies a third class conditional clause, which implies contingency in the future
uncertain of fulfillment but still likely.
175
Similar conditional structures will be found
in Deut 30:1c and 30:4a. The protasis of this conditional structure is located in 29:18b-g

171
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 470, and Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 321.
172
Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 4360 suggests that :r: may
have been a very unpleasant substance to consume, which may make one sick, either a
root herb, leafy plant oil, or liver-bile; wormwood, i.e., a dark green bitter oil used in
absinthe Artemisia absinthium (Dt 29:17[EB 18]; Pr 5:4; Jer 9:14[EB 15]; 23:15; La 3:15,
19; Am 5:7; 6:12).
173
See Lenchack, Choose Life! 189, note 35.
174
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 321.
175
See Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids,
MI: Zondervan, 1996), 696-697. A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of Greek New Testament
in the Light of Historical Research (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1947), 1016-1020.
95
and the apodosis in 29:19a-29:20b. This structure confirms the conditional future texts
temporal aspect of this section and particularly of the content of clauses 29:18a-g. This
confirms the textual importance of this clause as syntactical marker with structural
implications.
This weqatal copula marks a shift in the text type starting an anticipatory
discourse that might contain either predictions or promises. From this point onwards, the
main line of the discourse is not elaborated based on yiqtol verbs in first position in the
clause. Anticipatory discourse in Biblical Hebrew use weqatal verbs in first position to
carry on the flow or main line of the text.
176
This kind of flow implies a sequence that
might be more logical than temporal.
177
Therefore, clause 29:18a is a main line clause as
it opens and marks the starting point of the anticipatory discourse found in Deut 29:18a-
29:20b.
Clause 29:18b. -s :s ::-s \ r:::. This temporal clause, the first
clause of the protasis (29:18b-g) of the conditional construction, is subordinated to 18a
and the predicate is elaborated in a x + infinitive construct verb. This predicate structure
provides an emphasis on the action and marks the clause as off-line. Lenchak calls the
attention to the fact that in this clause, the author used :s instead of -:.
178
In this
context, the two roots are synonymous especially if the construction of the whole phrase
is taken into account: -s :s ::-s.
179
The noun :s is marked as attributive
because it is articulated and accompanied by the articulated demonstrative. It is also

176
See Longacre, Weqatal Forms in Biblical Hebrew Prose, 51-52.

177
Garrett and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 287, 291-
293.
178
Lenchak, Choose Life! 190.
179
Brown, s.v. :s. Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 457.
96
interesting that the main verb that has been chosen is r::. The theological analysis will
return to this clause.
Clause 29:18c. \ :::: \ :-. This clause is coordinated to 29:18b and with
a weqatal fronted; it is a main line clause. The pragmatics of this clause is interesting as
it tags the coming discourse as an act of self-blessing. This hypothetical speaker will
bless himself with a rebellious and insolent speech. Even though the content of
Deut 29:18e-g is an internal speech/monologue, its content reveals an open rebellion
against the covenant. The kind of discourse that portrays the inner thoughts of the
speaker is called internal speech and the prepositional phrase :::: in clause 29:18c,
introduces and marks the speech as such.
180
The internal speech together with semi direct
speech is one of the two kinds of direct speech that recreates, in a sense, the context of
speaker and addressee.
181

Clause 29:18d. :s:. This brief clause is the quotation frame of what follows in
29:18e-29:18g. This type of quotation framing reveals what follows as a direct speech.
182

Clause 29:18e. \ :::. The predicate of this clause is a + x + yiqtol. It
is asyndetic and there are elements in the pre-verbal slot. The presence of the yiqtol
marks the clause as a prediction but the pre-verbal elements mark the clause as off-line.
This clause opens an embedded discourse that covers Deut 29:18e-g and is provided in
the context of the covenant ceremony and particularly in the context of Deut 29:15a-
29:16b and the warnings provided in Deut 29:17a-29:17d. This hypothetical rebellious
subject blesses himself in the privacy of his heart but his thoughts do not go unnoticed,

180
See Miller, Introducing Direct Discourse in Biblical Hebrew Narrative,160.
181
Ibid., 156-157.
182
Garret and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 327.
Lenchak, Choose Life! 190.
97
especially by God. This sinner expects a future of ::: for himself but the outcome will
be different.
Clause 29:18f. \ :s \ :: -:: :. This is a concessive : off-line clause
183

coordinated with Deut 29:18e. Regt identifies the two only concessive clauses found in
the Hebrew text of Deut 1-30 and they are located at Deut 28:62b and Deut 29:18f
respectively.
184
It is interesting that every element in clause 29:18f is before the verb
(:). This sets the focus on the adverbial modifiers and emphasizes the stubbornness
(:: -::) of the speaker. This highlights once again the nature and the level of the
rebellion. Additionally, to clarify, the verb : could not be more appropriated in this
clause as it often reflects behavioral and life-style connotations in a context like this.
185

Clause 29:18g. s:s-s \ -e: r::. This is a result clause
subordinated to 29:18f in off-line aspect. The predicate is elaborated with an asyndetic
infinitive construct in result nuance and it is the last line of the direct inner discourse
introduced in 29:18d. Once this is clarified, the semantic of the vocabulary comes into
focus and the function of the clause according to its immediate context. The textual
analysis made evident that the issue with this clause is not textual but syntactical and
semantic or even pragmatic. This clause features the preposition r:: in purpose
nuance
186
in the pre-verbal slot and in this case it is followed by a Qal infinitive construct

183
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 152-153. Beckman,
Williams Hebrew Syntax, 158 448. Joon and Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical
Hebrew (2006), 171a-c.
184
See Regt, Word Order in Different Clause Types in Deuteronomy 1-30,
156-157.
185
Se the evidence in Brown, BDB, s.v. :. See Swanson, Dictionary of
Biblical Languages, 2143.
186
Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 135 367.
98
(e:) in the verbal slot and then follows the direct object with two feminine singular
adjectives in a construction x + -s + x, (, s:s).
187

The verb as well as the adjectives has low frequency in the OT although the
semantic seems to be clear and their syntax here seems to be clear as well. The words of
this clause have a low frequency but the occurrences are enough as to provide a semantic
range. The verbal root e: is found around nineteen times in the OT. It is used in
contexts of annihilation,
188
utter destruction
189
and punishment
190
bringing to an end to
something, to sweep away indiscriminately, good and bad.
191
Other option sees it as to
cause the destruction of an object, person, or state, as a figurative extension of taking an
object away assumedly from a sweeping motion which raises dust.
192
Some of these
passages imply contexts of judicial execution especially when God is the subject of the
verbal root.
193

The adjective s:s is used around 36 times in the OT and is applied to that which
is dry and thirsty.
194
The adjective is used around seventeen times in the Hebrew

187
Ibid., 83 197 and 185 520.
188
Such is the case in passages like Gen 18:23-24; 19:15, 17; Num 16:26; 1 Sam
12:25; 26:10.
189
See examples in Deut 32:23; 1 Chr 21:12; Ps 40:12; Prov 13:23; Isa 7:20;
13:15; Jer 12:4.
190
See Jeffrey H. Tigay, Deuteronomy, The JPS Torah Commentary 5
(Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Committee, 1996), 279-280.
191
Brown, BDB, s.v. e:. Rof looks for the semantic in Ugaritic sources and
opts for the root s.p.. which appears in Ugaritic with the meaning to eat . . . and in
Rabbinic Hebrew as s.p.y = feed then translating the clause as the sated, irrigated land
will feed the thirsty, dry-land. See Rof, The Covenant in the Land of Moab, 273.
Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 6200.
192
Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 6200, #1.
193
See as an example the context in Gen 18:23-24; 19:15, 17.
194
Brown, BDB, s.v. s:s. Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 7532.
99
Bible and is applied to something that is watered like a garden.
195
It has been suggested
that its usage paired with s:s might be with the purpose of encompassing everything or
everybody.
196

The previous considerations suggest that Deut 29:18g is a proverbial saying that
encompasses an utterly and indiscriminate destruction of everything without any
consideration or discrimination. As noted, the main verb is used in contexts that imply
judicial penalty even with God as subject, and since the speaker is neither God nor a
judge, the speech displays utter insolence that is added to the open and gross rebellion
displayed in Deut 29:18a-f. These considerations provide the context and the rationale
for the content of Deut 29:19a-29:20b.
The internal speech portrayed in clauses 29:18e-g is provided as part of the
strategy of the general speech. The theological section with the help of the structural
analysis need to disclose the function of this embedded speech; in the perspective of the
general speech.
Clause 29:19a. \ : ~:: \ :ss:. This is a main or independent negative
clause
197
in off-line nuance due to the negation and the position of the verb displaced
from the front of the clause. The predicate has a + s: + yiqtol structure that implies an
unconditional negation. This clause holds the future textual perspective. Clauses 29:19a-
29:20b contains the apodosis of the conditional structure which protasis is in clauses
29:18a-g. Clauses 29:19a-29:20b provides Gods answer to the insolent discourse

195
Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 8116.
196
Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 924.
197
Independent clauses are negated with s:, dependant clauses use other negative
adverbs and structures. See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew
Syntax, 660-661. See note 59 on s:.
100
contained in 29:18a-29:18g. That discourse was given against a covenantal context and
now the answer is in harmony with the tenor of the sinners discourse and with the
covenantal legislation. The vocabulary of clauses 29:19a-29:20b contains words that
belong to the covenant and are related to Levitical and ritual contexts. The main verb
(:s) is in a s: + imperfect negation which is the functional equivalent to a negated
imperative
198
it is an unconditional prohibition. The s: + imperfect phrase negates a fact
and it is used in prohibitions (unconditional negation).
199
The verbal root ~:: is used in
Levitical contexts in reference to the results of sacrificial rituals.
200
The theological
analysis will deal with these elements. The vocabulary seems to have covenant and legal
implications with Levitical and ritual nuances present. These elements need to be
analyzed in the context of the whole speech.
Clause 29:19b. \ s :s: \ -s: s \ :r s :. This is an
adversative clause coordinated to 29:19a. The : heading this clause is considered often
as a : recitative and not translated but what follows is not the beginning of the speech,
the speech began at 29:19a. With a negative clause preceding it, the better way to
understand : is as an adversative conjunction.
201
In reference to the vocabulary of this
clause, it will be better to deal with it in the theological section as to analyze it in the
covenantal context.

198
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 191.
199
Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 143 395-396. See Waltke and
OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 660-661 39.3.3. See Joon and
Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (2006), 343-344 113m.
200
Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 6142. Brown, Driver and
Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 699. This root occurs only 48 times in the OT and
only once in Deuteronomy. See Lev 4:20, 26, 31, 35; 5:10, 13, 16, 18, 26 and 19:22.
201
See Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 157-158 447. Joon and Muraoka,
A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (2006), 603 172c.
101
Clause 29:19c. \ :s:: \ : s:. This main line clause is coordinated to
29:19b and it has a weqatal verb located in the first slot of the clause in future temporal
aspect holding thus the conditional future temporal textual aspect of the section. The
weqatal verb in first position is this clause marks it as a prediction. The main verb of this
clause is used here in a metaphoric way. This metaphoric nuance moved the ancient
versions to tray to smooth the text generating a series of variants.
202
However, by
retaining the verb and the style of the clause, its rhetorical function becomes evident. The
covenant curses will lay down in repose against that man, they will cling to him.
203

Clause 29:19d. \ e:: :-:. This clause is subordinated to Deut 29:19c
qualifying the direct object of clause 29:19c, namely :s::. These elements in these
clauses are articulated, even the participle; so they are attributive and there is emphasis
on the identity of every element.
Clause 29:19e. ::: -~-: \::-s \ ~:. This main line clause is
coordinated to 29:19d. The structure of the predicate features a fronted weqatal verb in
future nuance. This feature marks this clause as a prediction. The verb (~:) is used
around 36 times in the OT and just four times in Deuteronomy.
204
This verbal root
implies total and absolute annihilation.
205
Ironically, it implies to wipe off, . . . remove
impurities from an object by use of water and/or use of wiping motion.
206
The
semantics of the verb might be seen as a clear answer to the semantics of the main verbal

202
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 131*.
203
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 472. Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 321.
204
Deut 9:14; 25:6, 19 and 29:19.
205
Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 5174. See Swanson,
Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 4681.
206
Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 4681, #2
102
root (e:) in Deut 29:18g. The phrase used here ( ::: -~-:) is used often in
connection with annihilation of something or somebody from underneath the heavens.
207

Therefore, both the syntagmatic and the semantic of this clause, marks it with the nuances
of a sentence.
Clause 29:20a. \ :sc ::: ::: r: \ :::. This main line clause is
coordinated to Deut 29:19e and the predicate has a weqatal verb heading the clause
followed by the subject of the clause then the direct and finally the indirect object. This
feature marks syntactically this clause either as a prediction or as a promise. The focus is
the action and the theme is the r that will be separated, set apart from the tribes of
Israel. The verb ::
208
is used around 43 times in the OT with Leviticus as first in the
frequency with eight usages and followed by Ezra with six. In the book of Deuteronomy,
this verb appears five times in reference to the cities of refuge and the separation of the
Levites from the rest of the people. This way a Levitical, ritual dimension for this verb
might be identified here in this context.
Clause 29:20b. \ - e:: :-: \ -: -:s :::. This
comparative clause is coordinated to 29:20a. The several elements in the pre-verbal slot
confirm the off-line nuance of the clause and identify the focus and the theme of it. The
verbal slot is filled with an articulated passive participle in this clause (:-:). Once
again the key elements of this clause are articulated and then in attributive nuance with
emphasis on the identity of these elements. The vocabulary of this clause is all covenant
vocabulary and judicial in this context.

207
See other instances of the vocabulary in Gen 6:17; Exod 17:4; Deut 7:4; 9:14,
25:19; 2 Kgs 14:27.
208
Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 95. See Swanson,
Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 976.
103
Summary. Deuteronomy 29:9-20 has provided challenges since early times as
the ancient scribes and copyists struggled to understand the Hebrew text. They tried to
simplify or to smooth the vocabulary, the grammar and the syntax. We have seen that if
the MT text is retained then those difficulties are transferred to the interpretation
endeavor. We have tried to deal with those challenges first by accepting the Hebrew text
as it is and then dealing with the challenges through the analysis of the semantics, syntax,
word order, verbal distribution and pragmatics of the language. Avoiding emendation of
the text and struggling to keep the analysis true to the textual evidence, this effort has
rendered results as we have found a bulk of textual material that now is transferred to the
structural and theological analysis. This theological analysis, according to our
methodology, will deal with the textual evidence relevant to the covenant.
On structural grounds, we may say that the syntactical and verbal flow allows us
to identify a structure in Deut 29:9-14, that so far implies two descriptions of the
audience of the covenant ceremony. There is one description in clauses 29:9a-29:10c and
the other one in clauses 29:13a-29:14b. These two descriptions are in a present tense
textual perspective. These two descriptions surround the covenantal section that starts in
Deut 29:11a-29:12b in a present textual perspective and follows in 29:12c-d with a past
temporal textual perspective. There is an inclusio structure that encloses clauses 29:9a
and 29:14a with the words ::s /:::s :e: : :r /::s:. Now there is
another inclusio employing the words -: / -:s: / -:: in clauses 29:11a-b and the
words :s / -: /-: in clause 29:13a. This last inclusio does not seem to fit with
the A-B-A structure we have identified until now in Deut 29:9a-29:14b, showing that
more work is necessary on this issue. The chapter on structural analysis will return to
this issue.
104
The flow of the text in Deut 29:9-20 is provided by 37 clauses that are distributed
among 23 clauses in the historical section of the speech and fourteen in the anticipatory
section. The historical section of the discourse has only one main line clause. This
means that only 4.35% of the text in Deut 29:9a-29:17d is sequential while 95.65% is
devoted to off-line text. The anticipatory section of the discourse has six main line
clauses. This represents 16.22% of the material in the sequential backbone of the text and
83.78% in the off-line material. The percentages of the off-line section are high. This
distribution will have impact on the theological analysis, as the off-line text is more
semantically and pragmatically loaded in biblical Hebrew language.
Deuteronomy 29:9-20 reveals a passage subdivided into two sub units: 29:9-14
and 29:15-20. Deuteronomy 29:9-14 has two descriptions of the audience (29:9a-29:10c
/ 29:13a-29:14b) framing the passage portraying the covenant ceremony at 29:11a-
29:12b. Deuteronomy 29:15-20 has first a historical review in clauses 29:15a-29:16b and
then the revelation of an undesired conditional future in clauses 29:17a-29:20b.
On theological grounds, we have identified an abundance of textual evidence in
the whole passage related to the covenant. These aspects deal with vocabulary and
concepts and temporal structures related to the future of the audience in reference to the
covenant. We have found what seems to suggest a temporal structure related to two
future scenarios, one that was intended by God and the other that was to be the
responsibility of the peoples negation to live in accordance to the covenant. The chapter
devoted to the theological analysis will deal with this evidence.
In reference to the Numeruswechsel in Deut 29:9-20, we have found that the
audience is addressed in 2mp in 29:9a-29:10a (::::), 2ms in 29:10a (.)-29:12d
(-:s:), 2mp in 29:13a (::::: ) and first plural in 29:14a-b (::r). This is a 2mp-2ms-
105
2mp-1p (a-b-a-c) flow in clauses 29:9a-29:14b. In clauses 29:15a-29:17d the flow is
different. Clause 29:15a opens in 2mp (:-s), shifts into first plural in 29:15a-29:15b
(::r), 2mp in 29:15c-29:17a (:-:r), first plural in 29:17b (::s) and back to 2mp in
29:17d (:::). This is a 2mp-1p-2mp-1p-2mp flow (a-c-a-c-a) in clauses 29:15a-29:17d.
In clauses 29:18a-29:19e there is a 3s in 29:18b-c (r:::), 1s in 29:18c-f (::::) and
back to 3s in 29:19a-d (:). Clauses 29:20a-b provides the conclusion to the sub-section
so it does not address the audience. This is a flow 3s-1s-3s (d-e-d) in clauses 29:18a-
29:19d. This evidence reveals the shift of number as well as person in these sections in
what seems to be a pattern in every division of Deut 29:9a-29:20b. The flow behaves in
the following pattern:
29:9a-29:10a 2mp
29:10a-29:12d 2ms
29:13a 2mp
29:14a-29:14b 1p

29:15a 2mp
29:15a-29:15b 1p
29:15c-29:17a 2mp
29:17b 1p
29:17d 2mp

29:18a-29:18d 3ms
29:18e-29:18g 1s
29:19a-29:19e 3ms
Deuteronomy 29:21-28
This section provides the Hebrew text of Deut 29:21-28 and the relevant textual
critical issues and versional data are evaluated. The clause division is provided prior to
the syntagmatic and syntactical discussion of the clauses. Finally a summary is provided.
Hebrew text of Deut 29:21-28. : :s
b
/\ :::: \ ~s : \:s
a 21

/\ ~ s: \ s: :s
c
/\ :. \ ::~s:

106
/\ : ~:s
e
/\ s:~--s \ s s -::-s \
a
s
d

/\ :cr:: \ : :rs:
d
/\ ~:s- s:
c
/\ r- s:
b
/\ ss:: ec \ ~:: -e.
a 22

/\ -:~: es: \ e :s
f
/\ _::s
a
(::s, :s \ :r :: -:e::
e

/\ :. \ s ~
a
:
c
/\ -s s: :: \ cr ::r
b
/\ :.:: :s
a 23

/\
b
::r -: :s
c
/\
a
:-:s :s \ -:-s \ :r :s :r
b
/\ :s
a 24

/\ :s: s: \ :-s ss:
d

/\ :: ~-:
c
/\ :~s ::s \ :r
b
/\ ::
a 25

/\ :: :~ s:
e
/\ :rs: :s \
a
::s
d

/\ e:: :-:
c
/\ ::::-s \ :r s::
b
/\ s s: \ s~
a 26

/\ :. s: \ :~: s: \ :-:s :r: \ ::-
a 27

/\ :: \ -~s s:s \ ::::
b

/\ ::rr \ :::: :: -:..
b
/\ ::s \ : --:.
a 28

: /\ -s - ::::-s \ -cr:
c

Analysis of textual critical notes. This section analyses the textual variants in
the MT as well as the versional data in Deut 29:9-20. The resulting data will inform the
syntactic and sytangmatic analysis.
Verse 29:21.
a
s, The LXX, the Vulgate, the Syriac text and the Targums
witness this verb in third plural but the Samaritan Pentateuch has the verb inflected in
third singular.
209
The manuscripts from Qumran do not provide witness for Deut 29:21.

209
The critical apparatus of the Samaritan text does not show any variant for s.
See von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 424. See also McCarthy,
Deuteronomy, 85. The LXX reads: sat .eucti ,.i.a ..a et utet u.i et
aiacceiat .` ua, sat e aete, e, ai . .s ,, ase.i sat eeiat a,
:,a, , ,, .s.ti, sat a, ieceu, au, a, a:.c.t.i sute, .:` aui. See
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 322.
107
Wevers observes that the antecedent of the verb s is not clear enough.
210
The verb
:s as a 3ms includes : as the subject in clause 29:21a. The noun : is expanded
with the clause your sons who will rise after you (clause 29:21b). Clause 29:21b at the
end adds ::. The relative clause 29:21c expands ::, so who are the ones seing?
According to the MT the antecedent seems to be the sons and the foreigner as the new
compound and therefore plural subject. This might be the reason for the 3mp s in
clause 29:21d in the MT but the Samaritan Pentateuch might have chosen to take only
:. as the antecedent. The syntactical analysis will exam this issue and try to clarify
the antecedent of this verb and the syntactical flow of the clause.
Verse 29:22. _::s
a
(::s,, 4QDeut
o
only provides testimony for the last two
words of verse 29:22 as the manuscript is fragmentary.
211
In order to evaluate this
reading we must consider in first place that this is a case of a ketib versus a qere reading.
Second, we must consider that the versional data evidences wide variation in the
orthography of this name;
212
even the Samaritan Pentateuch has a different orthography
for this word.
213
Finally, as this is a proper name, and the textual issue is about
orthography, we may find that none of the ortographic variations implicated in the textual
discussion of this passage affect the meaning of the word nor the syntax of the text. It
does not seem to impact the interpretative endeavor.

210
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 473. See also Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 322-323.
211
Sidnie White Crawford, 4QDeut
o
, in Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to
Kings. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore
Cross (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 129, 133.
212
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 132*, Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12,
724.
213
See von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 424.
108
Verse 29:23.
a
:, The LXX, the Vulgate, the Targums and the Aleppo Codex
214

support the reading from the MT. Some manuscripts of the Samaritan Pentateuch
215
omit
this interrogative particle. McCarthy suggests this is a case where the Samaritan text tries
to smooth the style of the text.
216
The support provided by the Allepo Codex, the LXX,
the Vulgate and the Targums suggests the preservation of the Masoretic reading.
Verse 29:24.
a
:-:s :s, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the LXX, the Syriac text and
the Targums support this reading of the MT. The Vulgate has omitted this phrase seeking
to symplify the syntax of the clause.
217

b
::r, according to the critical apparatus some manuscripts of the Samaritan
Pentateuch provide a different orthography for this preposition.
218
The Syriac text and
the Targums support the reading found in the MT.
219

Verse 29:25.
a
::s, The Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac text, the Targums and
the Aleppo Codex
220
support the MT in reference to this reading.
221
The LXX omits this
second use of the word ::s in this verse, apparently to smooth the syntax of the
verse.
222


214
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
215
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 323. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 475.
216
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 85.
217
Ibid., 132*. See additional evidence in Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 475.
218
See von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 425.
219
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 86, 132*.
220
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
221
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 86.
222
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 323. See also Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 475-476.
109
Summary. We have found, while considering the textual variants and the
versional testimony related to the Hebrew text of Deut 29:21-28 that these variants are
mostly due to the search for smoothness in the syntax and the style of the text. Their
effort went to smooth the vocabulary, the syntax and the style of the text. This situation
provides a window into the earliest attempts of interpreting the text. The analysis of the
Hebrew texts and the ancient versions has suggested that the copyists and the ancient
translators tried to make the text easier to their own understanding and to their readers. Is
for this cause that the MT is retained. Therefore, the following syntactical analysis must
deal with these issues.
Clause division of Deut 29:21-28. After the analysis of the textual critical
issues, this section provides the Hebrew text of Deut 29:21-28 divided into clauses and
translated into English as reflected in Table 4.


Table 4
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 29:21-28
Hebrew Text Working Translation
\ ~s : \:s
21a Now, the coming generation, your sons,
will say,
\ ::~s: : : s \ ::::
21b who will rise after you,
\ ~ s: \ s: :s \ :.
21c and the foreigner who will come from a
distant land
\ s s -::-s \
a
s
/\ s:~--s
21d When they see the wounds of this land
and the diseases
: ~:s 21e With which the LORD will make it sick:
\ ss:: ec \ ~:: -e.
22a brimstone and salt burning all her land
\ r- s:
22b she shall not be sown
\ ~:s- s:
22c and nothing shall grow
/ :cr:: \ : :rs:
22d nothing shall grow in her, not even grass
\ :r :: -:e::
\ _::s (::s, :s
22e as the overthrow of Sodom and
Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim

(table continues)
110
Table 4 (continued)
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 29:21-28
Hebrew Text Working Translation
-:~: es: \ e :s
22f which the LORD overthrew in His anger
and in His rage.
\ :.:: :s
23a and all the nations will say:
\ -s s: :: \ cr ::r
23b Why has the LORD done such a thing to
this land?
:. \ s ~ :
23c Why this great burning anger?
:s 24a And they will say:
:s :r\
\ :-:s :s \ -:-s \ :r
24b because they forsook the covenant of the
LORD, the God of their fathers,
\ ::r -: :s
24c
which He made with them
:s: s: \ :-s ss:
24d when He brought them out of the land of
Egypt.
\ ::
25a Then they went
\ :~s ::s \ :r
25b and they served other gods
:: ~-: 25c and they worshiped them
\ :rs: :s \ ::s
25d gods which they did not know,
:: :~ s: 25e Nor had He allotted to them.
s s: \ s~
26a Therefore the anger of the LORD burned
against this land
::::-s \ :r s::
26b To bring upon it all the curses
e:: :-:\
26c which are written in this book
\ :-:s :r: \ ::-
:. s: \ :~: s:
27a Then the LORD uprooted them from
upon their land in anger in rage and in
great wrath.
:: \ -~s s:s \ ::::
27b And He cast them into another land as it
is this day.
\ ::s \ : --:.
28a The hidden things belong to our God
::rr \ :::: :: -:..
28b But the uncovered ones belong to us and
to our children for ever
-s - ::::-s \ -cr:
28c So we might do all the words of this law.
Total of clauses in the section: 31



Syntax and syntagmatics. Deuteronomy 29:21-28 provides a dynamic text with
several textual features. The frame of the passage is an anticipatory discourse type
(29:21a-29:22f)

while there is an embedded discourse (29:23a-29:27b) that needs to be
111
analyzed as an historical discourse and finally an off-line conclusion (29:28a-c).
223
The
usage of weqatal verbs
224
in first position in their clauses and with future temporal
perspective in clauses 29:21a-29:22f reveals this passage as anticipatory discourse text-
type. These clauses serve as the backbone of the discourse providing the main line of the
discourse containing either predictions or promises. Other predictions or promises are
elaborated with wayiqtol verbs that are not in first position in the clause due to the
presence of other elements in the pre-verbal slot. This kind of off-line prediction works
as a complement to the main line according to the features of off-line material in biblical
Hebrew.
225

Clauses 29:23a-29:27b portrays an embedded discourse that consist in a dialogue
between the peoples descendants, aliens come from far away lands and the nations.
Clause 29:21a announces the speech with a single verbal frame :s and later on clause
29:23a introduces it with :.:: :s. Clauses 29:21a-29:21c describes these
speakers. They see what God will have done against His apostate people (verse 29:21d-
29:22e) and they will question together with all the nations (:s 29:23a-c) the rationale
of Gods judgments against the people. The answer is found in clauses 29:24b-29:27b.
A single verb frame introduces this answer in 29:24a (:s). The ziah after verse 29:20
has made a division between the causes dealing with the future apostasy (clauses 29:17a-
29:20b) and the effects of this apostasy (29:21a-29:27b). Two embedded dialogues have
been used as literary strategy to structure the argument. The first dialogue is between the

223
See Garrett and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 291-
293. See Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 74-80 178-187.
224
For the verbal flow of Deut 29:21-28 see Appendix A, Table A3.
225
See Garrett and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 312
and 288-293. See the syntagmatic database of Deut 29:21-28 in Appendix B, Table B5.
112
apostates monologue (Deut 29:18e-29:18g) and Gods answer to him (Deut 29:19a-
29:20b). The second dialogue develops between the peoples descendants plus their alien
resident and the nations who answer to them (Deut 29:21a-29:27b). In clauses 29:25a-c,
three successive wayiqtol verbs portray the progression of the peoples apostasy. Clauses
29:27a-b contain Gods decision as His answer to this apostasy ( s~, summary
wayiqtol) and Gods actions against the land and the people. This section depicts the loss
of the land as a reversal of what God did in behalf of His people in the Exodus
narrative.
226

Clauses 29:28a-c summarizes the subsection (29:21a-29:27b). Two participles
and one infinitive build the three clauses of this conclusion. The participles make clear
what belongs to God and what is available for the people to obey. The infinitive portrays
the peoples duty in the perspective of what has been elaborated up to here; they must do
all the words of this law.
Clause 29:21a. \ :::: \ ~s : \:s. This main clause opens in main
line with a weqatal verb in future temporal aspect. This clause features the structure of
an anticipatory text-type that contains either a prediction or a promise.
227
This single
verb quotation frame announces the coming dialogue found at 29:23b-29:27b. The
subject is in focus as it is qualified (~s) and then expanded (::::). The clause
addresses the audience in 2mp. Clauses 29:21b-29:21c will provide further details about
the subject of this clause.

226
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 724. Foreign nations, who
would admire Israels wisdom if it obeys Gods laws (4:6), would recognize its folly if it
disobeys, Tigay, Deuteronomy, 281.
227
See Driver, Deuteronomy, 326. In times to come, the people of Israel will
violate the terms of the covenant and bring upon themselves the curses in the form of
devastation and exile from their land. Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 725. See
Lenchack, Choose Life! 192-195.
113
Clause 29:21b. :. \ ::~s: : : s . This off-line asyndetic subordinated
clause has a + yiqtol predicate structure that continues the future textual perspective
initiated by clause 29:21a. This adjectival relative clause qualifies the subject of 29:21a
(:) and expands it by adding another element (:.). The subject of the clause is the
focus and the theme of this clause. The audience is addressed in 2mp in this clause as
part of the Numeruswechsels flow.
Clause 29:21c. \ ~ s: \ s: :s. This off-line asyndetic subordinated
clause has an + x + yiqtol predicate structure that provides a future temporal textual
perspective. This adjectival relative clause qualifies the subject element added at the end
of Deut 29:21b keeping thus the textual focus on the subject and its identity. The ::
will come from a far land. The noun ::
::s
occurs around eight times in the Pentateuch
in the sense of a foreigner, a stranger or outsider that the Pentateuch usually considers in
a differentiated way in reference to the people but this clause seems to portray them
somehow together with the people.
229
This is a perspective that seems to be in contrast
with the usage of the word :: in the rest of the OT, even in the book of Deuteronomy.
Clause 29:21d. /\ s:~--s \ s s -::-s \
a
s. This main line
clause displays a weqatal verb that holds the first slot providing a future and sequential
temporal aspect.
230
This clause contains a prediction. This clause is focused on action
and its topic or theme is the s s -::, the wounds of the land as consequence of
Gods judgments upon His people because of their apostasy. The last time s was

228
See Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 5799. Brown, Driver and
Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 648-649.
229
See Gen 31:15; Exod 2:22; 18:3; 21:8; Deut 14:21; 15:3; 17:15; 23:21 and
29:21.
230
See Regt, Word Order in Different Clause Types in Deuteronomy 1-30, 155.
114
mentioned, was to indicate the prelude of the conquest at Deut 29:7a. This clause now
marks a shift in the way as the noun s is used in the speech in reference to the people.
Chapter 5 will therefore return to the issue of the way as the word s is used in Deut
28:69-30:20.
In reference to the antecedent of the verb s in this clause seems to be that the
subject is a compound one. Clause 29:21a has introduced the coming generation, your
sons, clause 29:21b qualifies this subject and adds the foreigner. Clause 29:21c
qualifies the noun :: and then comes clause 29:21d where the verb s occurs in first
position. The grammar and the syntax suggest adopting sons and foreigner as the
plural subject required by the third plural verb (s).
Clause 29:21e. /\ : ~:s. This adjective relative clause is qualifying
s s -::-s from clause 29:21d. This asyndetic clause has the relative particle
in the pre-verbal slot qualifying this clause as off-line. The perfective verb :~
::
has a
future temporal nuance and sets the focus on the action while the theme of the clause is
what the Lord will do to the land. The verbal root :~ only occurs here in Deuteronomy
and in the piel means, to make sick.
232

Clause 29:22a. \ ss:: ec \ ~:: -e. . This off-line nominal clause is
subordinated to 29:21e and expands the meaning of the verb in Deut 29:21e, therefore
this is an advervial clause. The usage of the roots -e. and ~:: here in Deut 29:22a plus
the pressence of the phrase _::s (::s, :s :r : : at Deut 29:22e provides a
lexical link with the narrative of Sodom and Gomorahs destruction. This link might

231
See Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 2703. Brown, Driver and
Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 318.
232
Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 317.
115
have juditial nuances. The function of this reference in the strategy of the speech will be
approached in the theological analysis.
Clause 29:22b. \ r- s:. This is an off-line asyndetic main negative clause that
starts a series of three negative clauses reaching up to clause 29:22d. These are s: +
imperfect negative clauses that denote the unconditional negation of a fact.
233
These
three negative clauses predict deprivations the land will be submitted to and that will
finally affect the people. Driver sees the content of clauses 29:22b-d in epexegesis with
clause 29:21d, s:~--s \ s s -:: and he points to parallelisms of the
imagery of these clauses in texts as diverse as Gen 19:24 (:s -e.); Job 18:15 (-e.)
and Jer 17:6 (~::).
234
This is the first of three expressed calamities to fall upon the land
as part of Gods judgments upon the people because of their apostasy and rejection of the
covenant.
Clause 29:22c. \ ~:s- s:. This negative off-line clause is coordinated to
29:22b and continues the chain of negative clauses. The main verb is a yiqtol in future
temporal perspective. The negative is a s: plus imperfect, namely an unconditional
negative.
Clause 29:22d. / :cr:: \ : :rs:. Clause 29:22d is coordinated to 29:22c.
As an off-line negative clause, it concludes the series that started at 29:22b and repeats
the idea of Deut 29:22c to which it seems to be either in apposition or in parallelism
adding emphasis to the idea portrayed in Deut 29:22c. The verbs of clauses 29:22c and
29:22d are in synonymous parallelism here as the semantic range of both of them agrees.

233
See Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 143. Independent verbal clauses are
negated with s:, see Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax,
660-661. See also Joon and Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (2006), 567.
234
Driver, Deuteronomy, 327.
116
The verb ~:s in the hiphil means to cause to grow
235
and one of the usages of the verb
:r in qal is to grow up.
236

Clause 29:22e. \ _::s (::s, :s \:r :: -:e::. This off-line
asyndetic comparative clause is coordinated to Deut 29:22d. The vocabulary of this
nominal clause provides a lexical link to Gen 18:16-19:29, to the narrative of Sodom and
Gomorrahs judgment and destruction. The comparison of Gods judgments upon the
land as consequence of the peoples apostasy with Gods executive judgments upon
Sodom and Gomorrah provides a context to understand the seriousness of the issues
involved here with the desecration of the Covenant. The theological analysis will return
to this clause and its function in the general strategy of the speech.
Clause 29:22f, -:~: es: \ e :s. This relative adjectival clause is
subordinated to 29:22e and qualifies it. The perfective verb of this clause (e)
237
has a
past temporal perspective. This past tense is still located in the perspective of the
conditional undesired future that is hold in Deut 29:17-27. Clauses 29:21a-29:22f has
provided the background and context for the dialogue that will be open in clause 29:23a.
The people were addressed in second masculine plural in clauses 29:21a-b and have not
been mentioned since then.
Clause 29:23a, \ :.:: :s. This main clause opens with a wayiqtol verb in
sequential nuance and with a future temporal perspective. The clause announces the
future speech of the nations that is content in clauses 29:23b-29:27b. It is worthy to note

235
See Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 855 2205
236
See Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 50 6590.10 (see Gen 41:22)
237
This verbal root (e) occurs around 97 times in the OT but only two times in
the book of Deuteronomy in Deut 23:6 and here in 29:22f. See Brown, Driver and
Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 245.
117
that the nations (:.) are the ones who identify the rationale for the judgments that have
fallen upon the land and the people. This clause is a single-verb frame unmarked citation
that introduces the speech. Clauses 29:21a-29:22f have provided background
information to frame the embedded speech found in 29:23a-29:27b which is devised in
the form of a question (29:23b-c) and its answer (29:24b-29:27b). Clauses 29:23a and
29:24a are the quotation frames that introduce the question and the answer respectively.
Clause 29:23b. \ -s s: :: \ cr ::r. This clause starts the
embedded discourse that was announced in clause 29:23a. Deut 29:21a-29:23a is an
anticipatory discourse but 29:23a has introduced a future embedded discourse that from
the future looks back into the past. Therefore, Deut 29:23b-27b must be analyzed as
historical discourse.
This asyndetic off-line interrogative main clause asks for the rationale
238
of the
judgment upon the land. The perfective verb has several elements in the pre-verbal slot
and has a past temporal perspective, which is still inside the overall future temporal
perspective of Deut 29:17-27. The adverb :: might be used either pointing to previous
material or summarizing it.
239
Either way, :: is alluding to what was portrayed at
clauses 29:21d-29:22f, the judgments that fell upon the land.
Clause 29:23c. :. \ s ~ :. This nominal off-line interrogative
clause is subordinated to 29:22b and it is asyndetic. It expands the question asked in
29:23b giving emphasis to the issue under focus. The focus and the theme of this clause
is Gods anger displayed against the land as consequence of Gods judgments upon his

238
See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 325,
18.3d. Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 81 193. van der Merwe, Naud and
Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, 157-158 20.2.
239
See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 666-
667, 39.3.4e.
118
people. Clauses 29:23b-29:23c contain the question that clauses 29:24b-29:27b answer
after the quotation frame contained in clause 29:24a.
Clause 29:24a. :s. This main-line clause has a wayiqtol verb in future
temporal perspective. The clause itself is a single verb quotation frame that introduces an
unmarked speech. What follows (clauses 29:24b-29:27b) is the nations answer to their
own question elaborated in clauses 29:23b-c.
Clause 29:24b. \ :-:s :s \ -:-s \ :r :s :r. This is a main causal
clause with a perfective verb in past temporal perspective. This clause has a particle in
the pre-verbal slot that sets it as off-line. The audience is addressed in 3ms. Clauses
29:21a-b was the last to address the people and it was in 2ms. The focus of this clause is
the subject and the theme is the action of the verb, they forsook the covenant of the
LORD, the God of their fathers. The root :r occurs around 216 times in the OT, nine
of them in Deuteronomy. Passages such as Deut 31:6 and 31:8 emphatically state that the
Lord will never forsake His people. These verses use the verb in a s: plus imperfect
construction. This is an unconditional negation. Clause 29:24b is in sharp contrast to
these references in Deut 31:6, 8.
Clause 29:24c. \ ::r -: :s. This asyndetic adjectival relative clause is
subordinated to 29:24b and qualifies the direct object of 29:24b, namely the covenant.
The main verb, a perfective one with a past temporal perspective, is the root -:. The
word -: in 29:24b is definite as part of the construct chain and it is qualified by two
adjectival phrases in 29:24b and another in 29:24c. These features set strong emphasis on
that word in these clauses. This is probably an allusion to the covenant ceremonies at
Moab and Horeb as already pointed at Deut 28:69. This clause is off-line and addresses
the audience in 3mp.
119
Clause 29:24d. :s: s: \ :-s ss:. This is an asyndetic temporal clause
and is subordinated to 29:24c. The main verb is an infinitive construct that is associated
with the object.
240
This off-line clause is still adding circumstantial elements to the direct
object of clause 29:24b. Now this clause alludes to the Exodus narrative (Exod 1:1-
15:27) as a way to further identify the covenant that has been forsaken by the people,
clauses 29:24b-29:24d have accumulated several qualifiers to the covenant.
Clause 29:25a. \ ::. Clauses 29:25a-c open with wayiqtol verbs in initial
position, without elements in the pre-verbal slot. These are main clauses. Clause 29:25a
is coordinated to 29:24d. These three successive wayiqtol verbs provide a progression
describing the peoples apostasy. The focus of these clauses is in the action. The people
walked away from the covenant in open apostasy. Clause 29:25a addresses the people in
3mp. Clauses 29:24b-d provided the background for what is now portrayed in 29:25a.
Clause 29:25b. \ :~s ::s \ :r. This main-line clause is coordinated to
29:25a. Clauses 29:24b-d has used covenantal vocabulary to explain the meaning of
what the people did. This clause uses the root :r that in this context with the phrase
:~s ::s has ritual nuance.
241
The actions of the people were ritual in character and
had impact on their relationship with the covenant and with God. The theological
analysis will return to this aspect.
Clause 29:25c. :: ~-:. Clause 29:25c is coordinated to Deut 29:25b. This
clause completes the progression initiated at 29:25a, the focus in on the peoples actions:

240
Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 610-611
36.3.1a. Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 81 193. Joon and Muraoka, A
Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (2006), 133 49.
241
Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 712. Swanson,
Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 6268.3.
120
The people went, served and worshiped other gods. Clauses 29:25a-c explain how the
people forsook the covenant (Deut 29:24b). The theological analysis will return to this
clause.
Clause 29:25d. \ :rs: :s \ ::s. This asyndetic main negative clause is
off-line. The verb is behind several elements in the pre-verbal slot. The direct object of
the clause (::s) is in the pre-verbal slot revealing that this is the focus of the clause.
The verb is in perfect and has a past temporal perspective. The audience is addressed in
third masculine plural. The s: plus imperfect construction in which the verb r is used
here in Deut 29:25d contrasts with the usage of this verb in the context of clause 29:5c
(:::s :s : r- r::).
Clause 29:25e. :: :~ s:. This negative off-line clause is coordinated to
29:25d. This clause as 29:25d uses a s: plus perfect pattern that implies an
unconditional negation.
242
The audience is still addressed in third masculine plural. The
verbal root :~ used here could be understood in the light of Deut 4:19 where the verb is
used in reference to other gods.
243
The theological analysis will return to the semantic
and pragmatics of this clause.
Clause 29:26a. s s: \ s~. This main clause is coordinated to
29:25e. This clause has a wayiqtol verb in past temporal perspective in the first slot.
There are no other particles in the pre-verbal slot. This clause starts the explanation of
the future exile of Gods people because of their apostasy revealed in idolatry. It is
important to remember that although this clause portrays part of a discourse that
according to the text will be performed in the future, it is dealing with issues that are past

242
Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 143 395.
243
Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 323 3115.
121
events from its perspective. The phrase s~ occurs around seventeen times in
the OT. It will be useful to review the causes and objectives of Gods anger in the OT.
Interestingly the object of Gods anger here is the land although it is because of the
people. The theological analysis will return to this clause in order to analyze it in its
covenantal context.
Clause 29:26b. ::::-s \ :r s::. Clause 29:26b is an off-line
asyndetic result clause that portrays the way Gods anger was revealed against the land.
The covenantal curses
244
(Deut 27:11-26; 28:15-68) are mentioned here as retribution for
the peoples apostasy. The penalty for the disobedience was announced in advance and in
detail so there is no excuse. The implications of this clause require further analysis.
Clause 29:26c. e:: :-:. This off-line nominal clause is subordinated
to 29:26b. This clause qualifies the direct object of 29:26b; therefore, it is an adjectival
clause. This clause seems to confirm that the curses implied here are those found at Deut
27:11-16. The theological analysis will return to this clause.
Clause 29:27a. :. s: \ :~: s: \ :-:s :r: \ ::-. This clause
returns to the main line of the speech, as the verb is a wayiqtol in the first slot and without
other particles in the pre-verbal slot. The focus of this clause is the action and the topic is
Gods ultimate manifestation of His anger against His people. Finally, Gods judgments
upon the land explicitly reach the people. He uproots and casts them out of the land.
Gods anger is emphasized in this clause through the usage of three seemingly
synonymous prepositional phrases, :. s: \ :~: s:. This clause implies the

244
The noun :: occurs around 33 times in the OT with eleven occurrences in
Deuteronomy. Jeremiah follows in frequency with nine times. Deuteronomy 28:69-
30:20 uses the word three times in 29:26; 30:1 and 30:19. See Brown, Driver and Briggs,
Hebrew and English Lexicon, 887 8582. See Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical
Languages, 7839.
122
future exile of the people because of their idolatrous apostasy. This requires further
theological analysis.
Clause 29:27b. :: \ -~s s:s \ ::::. This clause is coordinated to
29:27a and holds the main line and the sequence that clause 29:27a started. The predicate
is constructed with a wayiqtol in succession nuance and without particles in the pre-
verbal slot. The previous clause portrayed the people as uprooted from their land and
now 29:27b shows them as thrown into another land. The temporal perspective of this
clause belongs to the embedded speech of the nations and not to the temporal perspective
of the main speech. This speech is delivered in the perspective of an undefined future
and from there it looks backward in time. The temporal aspects, the semantics and
pragmatics of this clause will be matter of analysis in the theological section in Chapter 5.
Clause 29:28a. \ ::s \ : --:.. Clauses 29:28a-29:28c go back to the
off-line of the speech and serve as summary or epilogue of Deut 29:21a-29:27b.
245

Clause 29:28a is an asyndetic main nominal clause where the predicate is a prepositional
phrase.
246
The focus and the topic are Gods secret things. It is important to point out
that clauses 29:28a-29:28c address the audience in first person plural.
247

Clause 29:28b. ::rr \ :::: :: -:... This nominal off-line clause is
coordinated to 29:28a. This syndetic clause has a sustantival
248
participle in the second
slot and a prepositional phrase as predicate plus a prepositional phrase as adverbial

245
See Tigay, Deuteronomy, 283.
246
See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 135
8.4.2f. See also Sinclair, Are Nominal Clauses a Distinct Clausal Type? 69.
247
Christensen suggests a series of concentric structures in reference to the
position and function of Deut 29:28. See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 728-
729.
248
See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 614
37.2a.
123
modifier of duration apparently modifying clauses 29:28a and 29:28b.
249
The focus of
this clause is what God has revealed for His people so that the people might be able to
obey the law.
Clause 29:28c. -s - ::::-s \ -cr:. This asyndetic off-line
nominal clause opens with an infinitive construct providing the clause with a result
nuance. The focus of the clause is the action and the topic is -s - ::::.
Clause 29:28a portrayed the hidden things that belong to the Lord while clauses 29:28b
and 29:28c deal both of them with the revealed things providing this verse with an
emphasis on the revelation and its purpose. Deuteronomy 29:28 devotes one clause to
further elaborate what is secret and two clauses to what has been revealed. Deut 30:2,
11-14 will return to this concept. Clauses 29:28a-29:28c addresses the audience in first
plural.
Summary. The syntagmatic analysis of Deut 29:21-28 shows that out of the 31
clauses in Deut 29:21-28, 21 of them are off-line versus ten clauses in main line. This is
47.62% and 52.38% respectively. Taking into account that clauses 29:21a-29:22f are
anticipatory discourse and clauses 29:23a-29:28c are historical embedded discourse a
more detailed analysis is needed. The anticipatory section in 29:21a-29:22f has eight
clauses with one of them being main line. This provides 12.5% of main line versus
87.5% in off-line. The embedded historical discourse accounts for 23 of the 31 clauses
and eight clauses are in main line. The percentages are then 34.78% of the clauses in
main line and 65.22% of the clauses in off-line. Main line clauses are those that carry on
the speech and portray some internal sequence. The off-line clauses provide the
background information that deals with the rationale, the meaning and the implications of

249
Sinclair, Are Nominal Clauses a Distinct Clausal Type? 69.
124
the events, might provide more than one approach to the topic and provide transitions and
negations.
250

This sub-section is structured around an embedded speech in 29:23a-29:27b.
Clauses 29:21a-29:22e provide introductory and background material for this speech and
clauses 29:28a-c provide the summary and conclusion for the whole sub-section. Clauses
29:23a-29:27b argue the conditions of the land and the people and find the rationale for
this condition in the apostasy and the consequences portrayed in Gods judgments first
upon the land and finally upon the people.
Deut 29:20-28 contains legal, covenant and ritually loaded vocabulary. This sub-
section looks forward to a feasible future history of the people. The passage
contemplates the people submerged in apostasy tinted by idolatry and the consequences
as Gods judgments fall first upon the land, then upon the people themselves driving them
out of the land, and casting them into another land in exile. Therefore, this passage looks
forward to a future negative perspective of the people in the possibility that they would
not be faithful to God and the covenant. Maybe this is what Deut 30:15 alludes to as
r-s -:-s. The further structural analysis will inform the theological
examination so these elements might be seen in the perspective of the rhetoric of the
whole speech.
The structural information related to Deut 29:21-28 shows this text featuring an
embedded speech in Deut 29:23a-29:27b dealing with a remote future. Two other
sections frame this future speech. Deuteronomy 29:21a-29:22f provides background
information for the speech and Deut 29:28a-29:28c provides the summary and
conclusions to Deut 29:21-28.

250
See Garret and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 288-
291.
125
In reference to the Numeruswechsel, this sub-section addresses the audience in
second masculine plural as it opens at clauses 29:21a-29:21b. Clauses 29:21c-29:24a do
not address the audience because they provide background information (29:21c-29:22f)
and clauses 29:23a-29:24a are introducing an embedded speech. Once this embedded
speech is introduced, it addresses the audience in third masculine plural in clauses
29:24b-29:27b. The sub-sections conclusion addresses the audience in first plural in
clauses 29:28a-c. On this occasion, the first plural address to the people at the end of
Deut 29:21-28 fits Christensens suggestion of being present in the conclusion as a
structural transition.
251
This provides a 2mp-3mp-1p pattern for Deut 29:21-28. It is
important to emphasize that it is Moses who addresses the audience in 2mp at the
beginning of the sub-section and in first plural at the end at 29:28a-c, while the embedded
speech (29:23a-29:27b) addresses the audience in third masculine plural. The flow is
2mp-x-3mp-1p, therefore is a shift only in person since the address is always in plural.
29:21a-29:21b 2mp
29:21c-29:24a -
29:24b-29:27b 3mp
29:28a-29:28c 1p

Summary
This chapter has analyzed Deut 28:69-29:28 and the next chapter will proceed to
the syntagmatic and syntactical analysis of Deut 30:1-20. The detailed summary will be
provided at the end of Chapter 3 once all the evidence has been provided.

251
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 712.

126





CHAPTER 3
TEXTLINGUISTIC ANALYSIS (PART II)



This chapter is a continuation of Chapter 2. Chapter 2 analyzed Deut 28:69-29:28
and the present chapter analyzes Deut 30:1-20.

Syntagmatical and Syntactical Analysis of Deut 30:1-20
This section provides the textual, syntagmatic and syntactical analysis of Deut
30:1-20. This information will be used in structural and theological discussion.

Deuteronomy 30:1-10
Hebrew text of Deut 30:1-10. :: \s ::::: \:r \s::
a

1

b
:s
a
~: :s
d
/\ :.::: ::::s -::
c
/\ :e: \--: :s
b
/\::
\: \s: \::s\:s :::
c
/\:: \-r::
b
/\:s r \-::
a 2
/\::
c
/\-::-s
b
\:s
a
\::
a 3
/\:e:::: \::::::
a
\:: -s
/\::
d
\:s \se :s
d
/\::r::: \s: ::
c
/\:~
b


/\~ \:::
c
/\:s \s: \:::
b
/\::: s: \~:: :s
a 4

/\-:
c
/\-:s \::s
b
/\s:s \:s \s:
a 5
/\r :::-s \:::-s
a
\:s \::
a 6
/\-:s: \:
a
/\::
d

/\~ r::
c
/\:e:::: :::::: \:s -s \:s:
b

/\e :s
b
/\s:c:r :s:r \s -:s
b
:: -s \:s \-:
a 7

/\: \s: \::s :s
d
/\-s:::-s \-cr
c

a
/\ :: \-r::
b
/\::- \-s
a 8


127
\-:: e: \::: e:
a
\ cr: ::: \:s \-
a 9

/\-:s:r \cc:s:
c
/\::: \:r \cc: \ \:: :
b
/\:::
b
\-:s e:
a
/\-~ -s: \:::
b
/\:s \:: \r::- \:
a 10

e /\:e:::: :::::: \:s :s \::- \:
d

c
/\ - \e::
b
\:-:
c

Analysis of textual critical notes. This section analyses the textual variants in
the MT as well as the versional data related to Deut 29:9-20.
Verse 30:1.
a
~:. This perfect verb is supported by the Aleppo Codex
1
while
the Samaritan Pentateuch has it in imperfect.
2
The LXX translated this verb with an
aorist subjunctive. McCarthy advises that there is not enough evidence as to ascertain
this variant.
3
Wevers does not deal with the variant itself but with the position of the
expression c. etacse:tc in the Greek manuscripts
4
and its morphological variations in
the textual witnesses.
5

b
:s. Wevers observes that the MT reads :s eight times in Deut 30:1-
6 and four of those (verses 1, 3x2, 6) are not attested by the LXX. He suggests that
probably the LXXs Vorlage had in these instances and points to the tendency of
adding :s to the Tetragrammaton.
6
McCarthy endorses Wevers position and suggests
following the LXX in this reading against the MT.
7
These observations apply to the
issue of the presence of :s in clauses Deut 30:1d; 30:3a; 30:3d and 30:6a in the MT

1
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
2
Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 425.
3
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 132*.
4
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 478.
5
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 325.
6
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 478. Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 325.
7
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 132*.

128
while they are absent in the LXX. The Aleppo Codex
8
and the Samaritan Pentateuch
9

read :s in clauses Deut 30:1d; 30:3a; 30:3d and 30:6a. The rigor of the evidence
suggests retaining the reading found in the MT.
Verse 30:2.
a
:: -s, The reading from the MT is supported by the Samaritan
text, the Syriac text, the Targums and the Aleppo Codex.
10
Only the LXX omits this
phrase. Wevers sees the omission of :: -s as evidence of the translators tendency to
compress the text and omit words or phrases seen as redundant.
11

Verse 30:3.
a
::. This reading is supported by the Samaritan Pentateuch
12
and
the Aleppo Codex
13
while the LXX does not translate it but interprets it by translating this
verb as sat tac.at
14
more in agreement with the context than the root ::.
c
/\-::-s. This reading from the MT (a feminine noun plus 2ms suffix) is
supported by both the Samaritan Pentateuch
15
and attested by the Aleppo Codex.
16
The
LXX exegetically
17
interprets the expression and translates it as a, aata, ceu.
18
In
addition to the textual aspect of this expression in Deut 30:3, there is also discussion in

8
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
9
Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 425.
10
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
11
Wevers, The LXX Translator of Deuteronomy, 65. See also McCarthy,
Deuteronomy, 132*. Wevers, Deuteronomium, 325. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 478-479.
12
Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 425.
13
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
14
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 325.
15
Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 425.
16
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
17
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 86.
18
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 325. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 479.

129
reference to the orthography of this root (either -:: or -::) and its semantics
19
the
syntactical analysis will return to these aspects.
Verse 30:5.
a
/\::. This reading is supported by the LXX, the Vulgate, the
Syriac, the Targums and the Aleppo Codex.
20
However it is omitted by the Samaritan
Pentateuch due to homoeoteleuton.
21

Verse 30:7.
b
::. This reading is supported by ttexts as variated as Samaritan
Pentateuch, 4QDeut
b
, the Vulgate, the Syriac text, the Targum Onqelos and the Codex
Aleppo.
22
At the same time it is omitted by the LXX
23
and the Targum Jonathan.
24

Verse 30:8.
a
/\. In this case the MT reads only without :s but the
Samaritan Pentateuch, the LXX, the Vulgate, the Syriac text and the Targum Neophyti
read :s . McCarthy and Wevers
25
suggest that these texts have assimilated the
usual construction of the phrase by adding :s as found in Deut 8:20; 13:19; 15:5;
26:14; 27:10; 28:1, 2, 15, 45, 62 and 30:10.
Verse 30:9.
a
\. The Codex Aleppo
26
and the Targum Onqelos support the
singular of . According to McCarthy the Samaritan Pentateuch, the LXX
27
and the

19
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 132*-133*.
20
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
21
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 86.
22
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
23
Some Greek manuscripts add either :a, or :aca, under asterisk. See Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 326. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 481.
24
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 86.
25
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 481. Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 326.
26
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
27
See evidence available in Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy,
482.

130
Targum Jonathan have assimilated a more usual form as has happen in Deut 2:7 where
the same variant occurs.
28

b
-:s e: -:: e:. The textual issue with this phrase here in Deut 30:9
is the word order according to the different textual traditions. The MT and the Aleppo
Codex read womb, cattle and land. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the LXX read womb,
land and cattle. The spatial reconstruction of 4QDeut
b29
would suggest a reading
supporting the LXX. The MT contain the same list at Deut 28:4, 11 and 51 but at 28:4
the MT orders it as womb, land and cattle as the other texts do here in Deut 30:9.
30

Verse 30:10.
a
/\-~. The Samaritan Pentateuch, the Vulgate and 4QDeut
b
,
supports this reading from the MT.
31
The LXX has modified the word order and added
:aca, and a phrase (sat a, stc.t, aueu) reading |uacc.cat sat :et.ti :aca, a,
.iea, aueu sat a etsat.aa aueu sat a, stc.t, aueu.
32
McCarthy suggests
this is an assimilation of more common structures.
33
Wevers observes that stct, usually
translates the word :e:: that does not occur in the Hebrew text of Deut 30:10. Wevers
suggests retaining the shorter text as original.
34


28
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 87.
29
Julie Ann Duncan recognizes that although homoioteleuton is a possibility,
spatial reconstruction indicates that this MS contained the complete phrase in harmony
with @ and . Julie Ann Duncan, 4QDeut
b
, in Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to
Kings. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore
Cross (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 10-11.
30
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 87, 133*.
31
See Duncan, 4QDeut
b
, 10. McCarthy, Deutronomy, 87.
32
See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 482-483. Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 327-328.
33
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 87.
34
See further discussion in Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy,
482-483.

131
b
\:-:. The Samaritan Pentateuch, the Targum Neophyti and the Aleppo
Codex
35
support the reading of the singular as attested in the MT. The LXX
36
, 4QDeut
b
,
the Vulgate and the Targums Onqelos and Jonathan read this participle in plural. This is a
reading that McCarthy attributes to an effort to smooth the syntax of the clause.
37
Wevers
suggests that the singular in the MT might be understood as a collective singular that
would explain the plural in the other textual witnesses.
38

c
/\ - \e::. The MT reads in this book of the law, a reading supported
by the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Aleppo Codex,
39
the Targums Onqelos and Jonathan
while the LXX reads .i . tt. eu ieeu eueu supported by the Targum Neophyti.
McCarthy suggests that this modification tries to smooth the style of the clause.
40

Summary. The evaluation of the textual variants provided by the Hebrew
witnesses and the versional testimony related to Deut 30:1-10 suggests that the ancient
scribes and copyists consistently work to smooth the syntax, the style of the text and to
assimilate the exceptions to more common syntactical or stylistic forms in the book of
Deuteronomy.
Clause division of Deut 30:1-10. Once discussed the textual issues and the
versional data of the passage, this section provides the Hebrew text of Deut 30:1-10
divided into clauses and translated into English as reflected in Table 5. The database for

35
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
36
See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 482-483. Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 328.
37
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 87.
38
See further discussion in Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy,
482-483.
39
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
40
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 87.

132
the syntactical and syntagmatic analysis is found in the appendix B
41
and the verbal
distribution in appendix A.
42



Table 5
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 30:1-10
Hebrew Text Working Translation
s ::::: :r s::
:: ::
1a And it will be when all these things have
happen to you, these blessings and curses
:e: --: :s 1b that I have given in your presence,
:.::: ::::s -:: 1c And you take them into your heart
among all the nations
:: :s ~: : s 1d Where the LORD your God has
dispersed you
:s r -:: 2a and you return to the Lord your God
:: -r:: 2b and you obey His voice
-s : s: ::s:s :::
:e:::: :::::: :: -s
2c According to all that I am commanding
you today, you and your sons with all
your heart and all your soul.
-::-s :s :: 3a Then the LORD will return your
captivity
:~ 3b and He will have compassion on you
::r::: s: :: 3c and He will gather you again from all the
peoples
:: :s se : s 3d Where the LORD your God has scattered
you
::: s: ~:: :s 4a If you happen to be driven away to the
end of the heavens
:s s: ::: 4b from there the LORD your God will
gather you
~ ::: 4c and from there He will take you back
s:s :s s: 5a and the LORD your God Himself will
bring you to the land
-:s ::s 5b that your fathers possessed
-: 5c and you will possess it
:: 5d and He will do good to you
-:s: : 5e and He will make you many, more than
your fathers

(table continues)

41
See Appendix B, Table B6.
42
See Appendix A, Table A4.

133
Table 5 (continued)
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 30:1-10

Hebrew Text Working Translation
:::-s :s ::
r :::-s
6a The LORD your God will circumcise
your heart and the heart of your
descendants
:s -s :s:
:e:::: ::::::
6b so that you will love the LORD your
God with all your heart and all your soul
~ r:: 6c so that you might live
s -:s:: -s :s -:
s:c:r
7a The LORD your God will give to your
enemies all these curses
and upon those who hate you,
e :s 7b who persecute you
::- -s 8a and you yourself will return
:: -r:: 8b and you will obey the voice of the LORD
-s:::-s -cr 8c and you will do all His commandments
: s: ::s :s 8d that I myself command you today
::: :s -
::: e: cr :
::: -:s e: -:: e:
9a Then the LORD your God will make you
abundant in all the work of your hands
and in the fruit of your womb and in the
fruit of your beasts and in the fruit of
your land for good
::: :r cc: :: : 9b because the LORD will once again
rejoice over you for good
-:s:r cc:s: 9c just as He rejoiced over your fathers
:s :: r::- : 10a if you obey the voice of the LORD your
God
-~ -s: ::: 10b to keep His commandments and His
statutes
- e:: :-: 10c that are written in this book of the law
:s :s ::- :
:e:::: ::::::
10d because you will have returned to the
LORD your God with all your heart and
all your soul
Total of clauses in the section: 36



Syntax and syntagmatics. The flow distribution of Deut 30:1-10 is built of 36
clauses, eleven of them are main line clauses and 25 are in off-line. That counts for
30.55% in main line and 69.44% in off-line discourse. The verbal pattern shows a
predominance of weqatal verbs (eighteen out of 34, 52.94%) and half of them in first

134
position have a future temporal perspective. This feature does mark the passage as a
anticipatory discourse.
Jeffrey H. Tigay calls the attention to the twelve times that the phrase :s
is used in Deut 30:1-10.
43
He also points to the seven times the verb ::
44
is used in the
passage in a chiastic pattern. Another phrase he notes is :e:::: :::::: in clauses
30:2c, 30:6b and 30:10d.
45
These lexical elements point to the thematic elements of Deut
30:1-10.
Deuteronomy 30:1-10 displays at least three conditional structures (30:1a-30:3d,
30:4a-30:7b and 30:9a-30:10d) and four :-clauses
46
(30:1a, 30:9b, 30:10a and 30:10d).
Those elements together with the chiastic distribution of the root :: might provide
enough elements for the disclosure of the literary structure of Deut 30:1-10 as well as for
the analysis of its thematic.
Deuteronomy 30:1-10 seems to expand the content of Deut 4:25-31. These two
passages share vocabulary, thematic and structural similarities. The following sections on
structure and theology will deal with these parallels and links.
Clause 30:1a. :: :: s : :::: :r s:: . This is a
main temporal clause in main line as the weqatal verb in first position shows. The clause

43
The expression occurs in clauses Deut 30:1d; 30:3a; 30:3d; 30:4b; 30:5a; 30:6a;
30:6b; 30:7a; 30:8b; 30:9a; 30:10a and 30:10d.
44
See those instances in clauses Deut 30:1c; 30:2a; 30:3a; 30:3c; 30:8a; 30:9b and
30:10d.
45
See Tigay, Deuteronomy, 283-284.
46
On main :-causal clauses see Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, 158 and
Aejmelaeus, On the Trial of the Septuagint Translators, this work has articles on the use
of et as translation of :

in LXX. See especially pages 17-36 on et-causal, pages 49-64
on clauseconnectors and 166-185 on function and interpretation of : in Biblical
Hebrew.

135
has a future temporal textual perspective.
47
The conjuction : occurs here in temporal
nuance
48
although it might be better interpreted as a conditional usage.
49
Clauses 30:1a-
30:2c are the protasis of the conditional statement while clauses 30:3a-d are the apodosis.
The LXX translates the opening of this clause as sat .cat ., ai ..cti. This is an ai
plus aorist subjunctive structure which implies a contingency in the future uncertain of
fulfillment but still likely.
50
This clause addresses the audience in 2ms. This marks a
shift since clauses 29:28a-c addressed the audience in 1p. The weqatal

in Deut
30:1a as well as in clause 29:18a, functions as a macro syntactical maker for the begining
of the anticipatory discourse.
51
The reference to the :: :: provides a lexical
link with Deut 28.
52
This phrase is used in apposition to the direct object of this clause
s :::::. The : plus yiqtol denotes a future textual perspective that looks back
and sees the blessings and the curses as a past historical event.
Clause 30:1b. :e: --: :s. This adjective relative clause qualifies the direct
object (:: :: s) of clause 30:1a. The clause addresses the audience in 2ms.

47
Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 473ss. McConville, Deuteronomy,
423-425. Christopher Wright, Deuteronomy, New International Biblical Commentary
(Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 289ss.
48
See Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 157 445 and 177 497. See also
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 110.
49
See Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 151-152. Here they
point out that the distinction between temporal and conditional is somewhat vague,
especially when dealing with future temporal statements.
50
When the protasis and the apodosis use imperfect and its equivalents, the
clauses express a condition and consequence which are regarded as being capable of
fulfillment in present or future time. See Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, 493-494
159.a-b. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 696-697. Robertson, A
Grammar of Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 1016-1020.
51
See Garrett and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 287,
291-293.
52
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 738.

136
The Lord had provided in advance the knowledge related to the blessings and curses so
that there is no room for the people to excuse themselves. This is in harmony with Deut
29:28 and Deut 30:11-14.
Clause 30:1c. :.::: ::::s -::. This is a main line clause
coordinated to 30:1b. This clause addresses the audience in 2ms. The verb ::
53
occurs
here in hiphil that is transitive but does not have direct object. Wevers suggests to
understand it as an idiom with the meaning of to reflect, consider as the LXX has
translated it, e. .t, i saetai ceu with the idea of taking the issue to the heart and
thinking about it.
54
The verbal root :: is used in Deut 30:1-10 in a chiastic pattern
shifting the subject of the verb between the audience (2ms) and the Lord (3ms): A. 2ms
(-::) 30:1c and (-::) 30:2a, B. 3ms (::) 30:3a, (::) 30:3c, C. 2ms (::-) 30:8a, B.
3ms (::) 30:9b and A. 2ms (::-) 30:10d.
55
This suggests that the theme of this sub-
section (Deut 30:1-10) is the peoples return to the Lord that will cause the Lord to return
to them and reverse the curses that once he laid upon them in punishment because of their
apostasy.
56
According to Wevers, This notion of conversion from an evil, disobedient
way of life to an obedient one over against the divine commands is the underlying motif
of this section.
57
The theological analysis will return to this issue.

53
The verb :: occurs over 1000 times in the OT. Deuteronomy is thirteen in the
order of the frequency usage of this verb. Deuteronomy uses this verbal root around 35
times. Deuteronomy 30 uses this verbal root seven times in verses 1-10. The next
chapters in order of concentration are chapters 20 and 23 with four occurrences of this
word.
54
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 478. Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 325.
55
Tigay, Deuteronomy, 283-284.
56
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 735.
57
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 478.

137
Clause 30:1d. :: :s ~: : s. This off-line adverbial relative
clause is subordinated to clause 30:1c and functions as an adverbial modifier of place as
it expands :.::: in clause 30:1c. This clause looks back into history within the
future context of the sub-section. This clause reminds to the people that the Lord was the
one behind their exile experience.
Clause 30:2a. :s r -::. This is a main line clause coordinated to
30:1d and holding the future textual perspective. The weqatal verb (::) in first position
marks this clause as part of the weqatal anticipatory chain of Deut 30:1-10. This is the
first qatal usage of the verb :: in Deut 30:1-10 with the people as subject and God as
object. The text provides a progression in its usage of the verb ::. The calamities have
fallen upon the people (30:1a), the people reflect on these things (30:1c), in the midst of
their exile (30:1d) then the people return to the Lord (30:2a) in obedience to His voice
(30:2b) and all what He has commanded them (30:2c). The peoples actions and
behavior
58
(protasis 30:1a-30:2c), prompts Gods answer toward them which is then
manifested in restoration (apodosis, 30:3a-d).
Clause 30:2b. :: -r::. This main line clause is coordinated to clause 30:2a
and the weqatal predicate pattern holds the anticipatory textual perspective of 30:2a. The
root r:: occurs nine times in the text of Deut 28:69-30:20.
59
The idea of

58
See Jacob Milgrom, Repentance in the OT, The Interpreters Dictionary of
the Bible, Supplementary Volume, ed. Keith Crim, Victor P. Furnish and Lloyd Bailey
(Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1976), 737. Jacob Milgrom suggests that according to
passages such as Deut 2:29-31 and 30:1-10, repentance can only terminate the
punishment but cannot prevent its onset. See also Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-
34:12, 738-740.
59
The root r:: occurs around 92 times in Deuteronomy, more than any other
book in the Pentateuch. In Deut 28:69-30:20 occurs in verses 29:3, 18; 30:2, 8, 10, 12,
13, 17, 20.

138
listening/obeying the voice of the Lord is present in Deut 28:29-30:20 in clauses 30:2b,
30:8b, 30:10a and 30:20b.
60

Clause 30:2c. :e:::: :::::: :: -s : s: ::s:s :::. This
adverbial prepositional phrase is subordinated to 30:2b modifying it. The verbal slot of
this clause is filled with an active participle while there are several elements in the pre-
verbal slot marking this clause as off-line. The way as the preposition : is used here is
called the : of the norm when the object of this preposition is a norm and therefore is
translated as according to.
61

This clause brings the texts temporal perspective to the present from the
anticipatory perspective that has been hold since clause 30:1a. The focus of the clause is
: s: ::s:s :: as the norm to evaluate the obedience to the voice of the Lord
that clause 30:2b portrays. This clause ends the protasis of the conditional structure that
started at 30:1a.
Clause 30:3a. -::-s :s :: . This main line clause starts the
apodosis of the conditional structure that started at 30:1a. The weqatal verb in the first
slot retakes the anticipatory textual perspective. The usage of the qal of :: (to restore)
instead of using the hiphil (to bring back) together with the root -::,
62
caused the LXX
to provide an exegetical translation as sat tac.at sute, a, aata, ceu. Wevers
suggests understanding the Hebrew as an idiomatic expression and then translate it as

60
See Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 1033 10097.
Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 9048.
61
See Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 102 259. van der Merwe, Naud,
and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, 283 39.10.
62
There is an issue here in reference to the orthography of this root if it should be
-:: instead of -::. However, both the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Aleppo Codex
support the orthography of the MT as already seen in the textual analysis.

139
and He will restore your fortunes, this understanding of clause 30:3a is supported by
the semantic of 30:3b which is coordinated and therefore in apposition.
63
Another option
might be translating it as restore the captivity of.
64
Either way, clause 30:3a portrays
the reversal of the peoples exile.
Clause 30:3b. :~. This off-line clause coordinated to 30:3a provides a
prediction to support or emphasize the content of 30:3a. The root :~ occurs just two
times in Deuteronomy with God as subject and His people as object.
65

Clause 30:3c. ::r::: s: ::. This main line clause is coordinated to 3b
and addresses the audience in 2ms. This is a prediction/promise clause. This is the
fourth time that the root :: is used in Deut 30:1-10. The root :
66
occurs here in
clause 30:3c and 30:4b in the sense of the future gathering of Gods people. These are
the only two times that this root occurs in the Pentateuch with this semantic and with God
as subject and His people as objective.
Clause 30:3d. :: :s se : s. This is an asyndetic off-line clause
with a perfective predicate with elements in the pre-verbal slot. The clause is
subordinated to 30:3c as adverbial modifier and addresses the audience in 2ms. The
usage of the root e with God as subject and His people as object allows identifying a
lexical link with Deut 4:25-31 as that syntactic structure occurs in Deut 30:3d and 4:27.
The following structural (Chapter 4) and theological analysis (Chapter 5) will return to
this feature.

63
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 479.
64
See Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 986 9625.
65
The root :~ occurs around 45 times in the OT with only three times in the
whole Pentateuch in Exo 33:19; Deut 13:18 and 30:3.
66
See Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 867 8399.

140
Clause 30:4a. ::: s: ~:: :s. This asyndetic off-line main clause
starts the second conditional structure in Deut 30:1-10. The protasis is formed by clause
30:4a and the apodosis seems to include clauses 30:4b-30:7b so clauses 30:4a-30:7b
might be included in the conditional structure. In this case, the marker conjunction :s is
present with yiqtol verbs in both the protasis and the apodosis. These features allow
identifying a real conditional clause that portrays what is possible in the future.
67
These x
+ yiqtol predicate patterns in clauses 30:4a-c provide predictions in off-line.
68
The verbal
root ~: occurs around ten times in Deuteronomy and three of those times are in Deut
30:1-10 (verses 30:1d, 30:4a and 30:17c).
69
The semantic range of ~: includes in the
niphal the notion of being scattered
70
this option fits better with the context than to
banish.
71

Clause 30:4b. :s s: :::. This asyndetic off-line clause has an x +
yiqtol predicate that provide another prediction in off-line. This adjectival prepositional
clause is subordinated to 30:4a modifying the nominal phrase ::: s. The verb :
is used here for the second and last time in Deut 30 in its theological nuance since in Deut
13:17 it is used in another nuance.

67
See Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, 493-496 159.n see also Garrett and
DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 305-306. Beckman, Williams
Hebrew Syntax, 182 515 and 160 453.
68
See Garrett and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 312.
Alviero Niccacci, On the Hebrew Verbal System, in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse
Linguistics, ed. Robert D. Bergen (Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994),
119-120.
69
The root ~: occurs around 54 times in the OT with Deuteronomy behind
Jeremiah (eighteen) with ten times in frequency.
70
See Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 5615.1.
71
Wevers and Brown do not consider this option; see Wevers, Notes on the Greek
Text of Deuteronomy, 478 and Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon,
623 5911.

141
Clause 30:4c. ~ :::. This off-line clause is coordinated to 30:4b and
providing another prediction in background and adding emphasis to the topic of 30:4b.
Clauses 30:4a-c elaborate on the theme of the restoration from exile
72
as well as clauses
30:5a-30:7b. These clauses (30:4b-30:7b) portray Gods actions to reverse His judgments
upon His people as consequence of their apostasy. These clauses display Gods actions
and their effects.
Clause 30:5a. s:s :s s:. This off-line clause is coordinated
to 30:4b. Although the verb is in first position, the subject of the clause is expressed.
This feature sets the focus of the clause in the action and in the subject. The noun s
occurs here as part of a pattern in the text of Deut 28:69-30:20. The last time the word
occurred was in Deut 29:27a-b to say that God had uprooted the people from their land
and cast them out into another land. Now the Lord himself brings His people from the
end of the heavens to the land he has promised them. This is the deconstruction of the
peoples punishment.
Clause 30:5b. -:s ::s. This adjectival relative clause is subordinated to
30:5a modifying the noun s. As an off-line clause, this clause breaks the anticipatory
textual perspective hold from clauses 30:4a-30:5a and with a past textual perspective
looks back into the past.
Clause 30:5c. -:. This main line clause is coordinated to 30:5b and its
weqatal verbal pattern provides a prediction/promise. This prediction/promise portrays a
consequence of Gods acts in behalf of His people as depicted in clauses 30:4b-30:5b.
Clause 30:5d. ::. This off-line clause is coordinated to 30:5c. Both clauses
30:5d and 30:5e display a waw + perfect predicate pattern that provides a background

72
See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 480.

142
prediction/promise. In this case, these clauses are promises because they announce future
blessings in sight of the peoples restoration as part of Gods actions in behalf of them.
Clause 30:5e. -:s: :. This syndetic off-line clause is coordinated to
30:5d. The perfective verb is in first position with a future temporal perspective. The
two verbal roots of clauses 30:5d and 30:5e (::, :
73
) occur together in Deut 28:63 in
hiphil with God as subject and His people as object. The difference is in the fact that in
Deut 28:63 these verbs occur in a warning context and here in Deut 30:5d-30:5e they take
place in a promise context.
Clause 30:6a. r :::-s :::-s :s :: . This clause is
coordinated to 30:5e. This clause has a weqatal verbal root in first position setting the
clause as main line in the backbone of the anticipatory discourse. The verb portrays a
future temporal perspective. Therefore, this clause is a prediction/promise in main line.
The idea of circumcising the foreskin of the peoples heart occurs in Deut 10:16 and
what the figure intends is to invite Israel to open their hearts to the Lord, the hardness of
the heart having been removed.
74
The LXX understood the vocabulary as the cleansing
of the heart and translated the Hebrew root :: as :.tsaat,.. The theological analysis
will return to this concept.
Clause 30:6b. :e:::: :::::: :s -s :s:. This result off-line
asyndetic clause is subordinated to 30:6a and expresses the result of Gods actions in
30:6a. The verbal root :s occurs here with the people as subject and God as object, this

73
The root : occurs around 225 times in the OT with Deuteronomy in second
place of the frequency with 20 times behind Genesis with 29. Deuteronomy 29:69-30:20
uses the root two times in 30:5e and 30:16f. Both passages are promises, clauses with
future temporal perspective.
74
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 183. Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 326.

143
structure occurs twelve times in Deuteronomy, three of those in Deut 30:6b; 30:16b;
30:20a.
75
The theological analysis will explore some aspects of this theme.
Clause 30:6c. ~ r::. This result off-line asyndetic nominal clause is
subordinated to 30:6b expressing another result of Gods action in behalf of His people as
reflected in 30:6a. There is a sequence here; once the Lord has circumcised His peoples
heart, the text portrays two results: They will love the Lord and they will live. This
construction of r:: plus ~ occurs also in clause 30:19d. The theological analysis will
return to this concept.
Clause 30:7a. s:c:r :s:r s -:s:: -s :s -:. This
main clause returns to the main line of the discourse with its weqatal verb in first
possition. The focus of the clause is in the action and the identity of the subject while the
topic of the clause is s -:s::. The Lord will not only reverse His peoples curses
but will put these curses upon those who hate His people.
Clause 30:7b. e :s. This asyndetic relative clause is subordinated to
30:7a. The two participles that compound the prepositional indirect object of 30:7a
(s:c:r :s:r) are in substantival
76
nuance so this relative clause is adjectival as it
modifies those two prepositional phrases in clause 30:7a.
Clause 30:8a. ::- -s. Should clauses 30:8a and 30:8b be considered as a
single clause? This option will provide a clause like this: And you will again obey the

75
See Deut 5:10; 6:5; 7:9; 10:12; 11:1, 13, 22; 13:4; 19:9; 30:6, 16, 20. The root
:s occurs around 22 times in Deuteronomy, third in frequency to Psalms (39) and
Proverbs (30).
76
See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 614-
619, see specially 37.3d and examples #33-35 in page 618, participles in substantival
use and with pronominal suffixes in accusative. See Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax,
89 217.

144
voice of the Lord.
77
If on the contrary, they are two clauses the idea would be then:
And you will return/repent and you will obey the voice of the Lord. Clause 30:8a has a
+ Subject + yiqtol predicate pattern while clause 30:8b has a weqatal verb in first
position. As the sub-section (Deut 30:1-10) is an anticipatory discourse and this text type
uses a backbone of weqatal verbs in first position to carry on the main line of the
discourse, this weqatal must be considered as the main verb of clause 30:8b and not as an
adverb.
This syndetic off-line clause has its subject fronted so the subject is the focus of
the clause and the topic is the action portrayed by the yiqtol verb. The predicate pattern
of this clause sets it as a background prediction supporting the main line prediction in
30:7a. This is the fifth time that the verbal root :: occurs in Deut 30:1-10 and the
subject are the people.
In clauses 30:1a-30:2c the second masculine singular predominates as the
audience is either the object (four out of seven) or the subject (three out of seven) of the
predicates. In clauses 30:3a-30:7b the 3ms predominates as the Lord is either the subject
(eleven out of seventeen) or the object (one out of seventeen) of the predicates. In this
section five clauses have the people either as subject (30:4a; 30:5b; 30:5c; 30:6c) or as
object (30:7b) as Gods actions are oriented to reverse the peoples exile. The people are
the subject in three of the four clauses of verse 8 (30:8a-c). Clauses 30:9a-c will have the
Lord as subject and finally in clauses 30:10a-30:10c the people will be the focus once
again. This provides an structural sequence a-b-(a)-b-a. This feature might be useful
for the structural analysis. Christensen points to a seven fold structure in menorah pattern
(as he calls it) with a distribution A 30:1-2, B 30:3, C 30:4-5, X 30:6-7, C 30:8, B 30:9

77
See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 481.

145
and A 30:10. Then he points to a subdivisions in two subunits (verses 1-5 and 6-10) of
five parts each.
78
This approach is more thematic although it takes into account the
syntactical and lexical elements of the text. Additionally, as noted before, Christensen
seems to have a predisposition to look for seven-fold structures in the text. Lenchak
suggests two possible structures for Deut 30:1-10. One of those arrangements is in five
sections and another of seven with distributions different from those suggested by
Christensen and McConville.
79
Lohfink sees a pattern A (30:1-2), B (30:2-3), C (30:7), D
(30:8), C (30:9a), B (30:9b), A (30:10).
80
McConville points to two five-fold concentric
approaches that try to negotiate between the syntax and the vocabulary by one side and
the thematic of the text by the other side.
81
These approaches will require further
evaluation against the textual data in the structural analysis section as the options among
the quoted authors seem rather discordant. The structural analysis will deal with the
information provided by the syntagmatic analysis since the differences among the authors
might have to do with approaches that might give priority to the thematic over the
linguistic.
Clause 30:8b. :: -r::. The main clause 30:8b returns to the main line
as the weqatal verb is in first position. This is a prediction in the foreground of the
speech. As the people come back to the Lord, this will be revealed in obedience to the
voice of the Lord. The theological analysis in Chapter 5 will return to this feature.
Clause 30:8c. -s:::-s -cr. Clause 30:8c holds the main line as the two
clauses 30:8b and 30:8c are main clauses with weqatal verbs in first position. Eight

78
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 736.
79
Lenchack, Choose Life, 178 note 24.
80
Lohfink, Der Bundesschlu im Land Moab, 53-82.
81
See McConville, Deuteronomy, 423-425.

146
off-line clauses (30:8c-30:10d) provide support and further elaboration for the main line
predictions found in clauses 30:8b and 30:8c. Clause 30:8c seems to be in epexegesis in
reference to 30:8b as it seems to clarify what it means to obey the voice of the Lord. This
will require more analysis in the theological section.
Clause 30:8d. : s: ::s :s. This off-line asyndetic relative clause is in
adjectival nuance as it modifies the direct object of 30:8c, -s:::. The subject is in
focus as it is expressed verbatim in addition to the finite verb. From clause 30:8d until
the end of this sub-section at 30:10d, all the clauses are off-line providing background
information related to clause 30:8c.
Clause 30:9a. -:: e: ::: e: cr: :: : :s -
::: -:s e:. This off-line clause is coordinated to clause 30:8d. Clause 30:9a
starts the third and last conditional structure in Deut 30:1-10. This conditional structure
is inverted as the apodosis (30:9a-c) precedes the protasis (30:10a-d). The verbal root
(-) has a wide semantic range even in the hiphil mode as a cursory reading in the
lexicons will show.
82
In this case, the semantic is to cause to abound. The verb has
God as subject and the people as object and four prepositional phrases as indirect object,
this feature adds emphasis to the action of the verb as this is expanded with further
details. This is a background prediction/promise of Gods action in behalf of His people.
Clause 30:9b. ::: :r cc: :: :. This off-line causal
83
clause is
subordinated to 30:9a. It provides the cause of what clause 30:9a mentions so this clause

82
See Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 3855, #4. See also Brown,
Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 451 4285.
83
See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 640-641
38.4a, see also van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference
Grammar, 301 40.9.2.

147
is modifying both the direct and the indirect object of 30:9a. The predicate of clause
30:9b is elaborated with an infinitive construct verb (cc:) working as verbal
complement of the main finite verb (::).
84
This is the sixth time that the verb :: occurs
in Deut 30:1-10, the subject is the Lord and the object is His people.
Clause 30:9c. -:s:r cc:s:. This comparative clause is subordinated to
30:9b. The particles (:s:) in the pre-verbal slot set this clause as off-line and the
perfective verb (cc) has a past temporal perspective. This clause completes the apodosis
of this conditional structure.
Some lexical links between clauses 30:3a-30:7b and 30:9a-c might inform the
understanding of the structure of Deut 30:1-10. The verbal root :: occurs in 30:3a,
30:3c, and 30:9b with God as subject and His people as object. The fathers are
mentioned in 30:5b and 30:9c. Clauses 30:5a (s) and 30:9a (:s) mention the land
although the wording is different. Clauses 30:5d use the verb :: and clauses 30:9a,
30:9b use the nouns :: and :: with the people as object.
Clause 30:10a. :s :: r::- :. Clause 30:10a initiates the protasis
of the conditional structure that began with the apodosis at 30:9a-30:9c. Therefore,
clauses 30:10a-30:10d provides the conditions for the blessings portrayed at 30:9a-30:9c.
From the structural perspective, there are some common elements between clauses 30:2a-
30:2c and 30:10a-d. The verb :: occurs in both 30:2a and 30:10d with the people as
subject and the Lord as object. The verbal root r:: occurs with the people as subject in
both 30:2b and 30:10a. These verbs have :: / :: as object. The words s/
s: occur at 30:2c and 30:10b.

84
See Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 605-606
36.2.2-3.

148
Clause 30:10b. -~ -s: :::. This asyndetic off-line purpose clause is
subordinated to 30:10a. The verbal slot is filled with an infinitive construct verb in
purpose nuance. The focus is on the action and the topic is the -~ -s:. The word
s:
85
occurs four times in Deut 28:69-30:20 at clauses 30:8c; 30:10b; 30:11a; 30:16d
and the word ~
86
occurs two times in the passage at clauses 30:10b and 30:16d. The
theological analysis will approach this emphasis on the obedience to Gods voice,
commandments, statutes and judgments in reference to the covenant.
Clause 30:10c. - e:: :-:. This asyndetic off-line clause is
subordinated to 10b. The verbal slot of this clause is filled with an active participle. The
root :-: occurs four times in the passage and in reference to the e:, (29:19d; 20b; 26c
and 30:10c). The phrase - e:: with some variants, occurs in Deut 28:61;
29:20b; 30:10c; 31:26 and Josh 1:8. This provides and emphasis on the objectivity of
the law.
Clause 30:10d. :e:::: :::::: :s :s ::- :. This off-line
asyndetic causal clause is introduced as a :-clause. This is the seventh time that the root
:: occurs in Deut 30:1-10. The subject of the verb is the audience and the object is the
Lord. The clause addresses the audience in second masculine singular so the 2ms is held
in the whole sub-section. Wevers points to a feature that implies this clause. Clauses
30:9b-30:9c point to the joy of the Lord, which is achieved once the people obey the
voice of the LORD your God to keep His commandments and His statues

85
The word s: occurs around 184 times in the OT with 46 times in
Deuteronomy. Psalms follows with some 26 times.
86
The word ~ occurs some 108 times in the OT and eight of those are in
Deuteronomy (Deut 6:2; 8:11; 10:13; 11:1; 28:15, 45; 30:10 and 16). See Swanson,
Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 2978.

149
(30:10a-30:10b) and you will have returned to the LORD your God with all your heart
and all your soul (30:10d).
87
This clause concludes the protasis of the inverted
conditional structure that started with clause 30:9a.
Summary. The syntagmatic analysis of Deut 30:1-10 provides several features.
The verbal flow displays a main line of weqatal verbs in first position in their clauses and
in future temporal perspective. These verbs mark their clauses as the foreground of the
text. This feature marks the text as an anticipatory discourse elaborated with predictions
and/or promises. Some interpreters agree that Deut 30 looks ahead to the future history
of the people of God even after a time of dispersion to the time of restoration (30:3-5).
88

Accordingly, to this analysis, the text is elaborated with 36 clauses and 25 of them are
off-line clauses. This accounts for 69.44% of the text in background and 30.55% in
foreground. The main line clauses provide predictions/promises that are expanded by
those clauses in off-line.
There are three conditional structures in Deut 30:1-10. They are located in
clauses 30:1a-30:3d; 30:4a-30:7b and 30:9a-30:10c. Interestingly, the first and the
second conditional structures have a regular structure of protasis-apodosis while the third
one has an apodosis-protasis order. These features leave clauses 30:8a-d encapsulated in
conditional structures and marked by the reversed order of 30:9a-30:10c. Additionally,
the verbal root :: occurs seven times in Deut 30:1-10 in a concentric pattern alternating
the subject of the verb between the people and the Lord.
The information provided by the syntagmatic analysis in reference to the structure
of Deut 30:1-10 discloses at least four elements. First, the verb :: occurs seven times in

87
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 482-483.
88
Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 473ss. McConville. Deuteronomy,
423-425. C. Wright, Deuteronomy, 289ss.

150
the text in a concentric chiastic pattern alternating the subject: The people (clauses 30:1c,
30:2a), the Lord (30:3a, 30:3c), the people (30:8a), the Lord (30:9b) and finally the
people (30:10d), a pattern a-b-a-b-a. Second, there are three conditional structures in the
text. These are located at 30:1a-3d; 30:4a-7b and 30:9a-10d. The two first structures
follow a regular order protasisapodosis but the last one is reversed in an apodosis
protasis order. Third, there are lexical common elements between clauses 30:2a-30:2c
and 30:10a-30:10d on the one hand and 30:5a-d and 30:9a-c on the other hand. Fourth,
these structural features seem to enclose verse 30:8 in something like an a-b-x-b-a
pattern. The structural analysis needs to deal with these features and evaluate them in the
light of a deeper assessment of the textual data and the other structural proposals.
The theological information provided by the syntagmatic analysis of Deut 30:1-10
is revealed around the usage of the verb ::. As already reviewed in the structural
summary, this verb occurs seven times in the text concentrically alternating the subject
between the people and God. The text, as an anticipatory discourse, is written in a future
temporal perspective. The texts temporal perspective of Deut 30:1-10 is located in the
far future after the people have fallen into captivity and exile because of a future apostasy
(30:1a). In the far alien land, they would reflect on what they have experienced and its
rationale and they will come back to the Lord (30:2a). Once the people return to God, He
returns to them and reverses all the punitive judgments that He once had cast upon them
because of their apostasy tinted by idolatry (30:3a-7b). This includes restoring them to
the land of their fathers. The peoples return to God implies obedience to the Lords
commandments, statutes and judgments as well as loving Him with the whole heart and
soul (30:2b-c; 30:6b; 30:8b; 30:8c; 30:10a and 30:10b). These features have nuances that
require further analysis that will be done in the theological analysis.

151
The Numeruswechsel in Deut 30:1-10 provides a passage that consistently
addresses the audience in second masculine singular. Even the conclusion of the section
addresses the audience in second masculine singular. It might be possible that pragmatics
could answer and explain the rationale of this feature. Maybe the transcendence of the
theology of the text demands a personal approach to the audience. This possibility has to
be evaluated against the overall perspective of Deut 28:69-30:20.

Deuteronomy 30:11-14
Hebrew text of Deut 30:11-14. /\: \s: \::s :s \-s s: \:
a 11

/\
a
s \~ s:
c
/\:: \s \-s:e:s:
b

/\: \~
d
/\::: \:\:r \:
c
/\:s:
b
/\s \:::: s:
a 12
/\.cr:
f
/\-s \:r::
e

/\: \~
d
/\: \:r:s \::\:r \:
c
/\:s:
b
/\s \:: \:r:s:
a 13
/\.cr:
f
/\-s \:r::
e

: /\-cr:
b
/\
a
:::: e: \s: \:: \:s \:\:
a 14
Analysis of textual critical notes. This section analyses the textual variants in
the MT as well as the versional data in Deut 30:11-14. The data so derived will informe
the syntactic and syntagmatic analysis.
Verse 11.
a
s. This word occurs two times in the text of Deut 30:11 at clauses
30:11b and 30:11c. The Aleppo Codex supports the orthography of this word as
portrayed in the MT
89
but the Samaritan Pentateuch
90
as well as 4QDeut
b 91
has another
orthography reading, namely s. This seems to be the case of two different orthographic

89
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
90
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
91
See Duncan, 4QDeut
b
, 11.

152
acknowledged forms for a word. In passages like Gen 38:25; Lev 20:17 and Num 5:13-
14 the two orthographic forms occur together in the text and with neither notes in the
Hebrew textual apparatus nor annotations of Kethib/Qere although they are considered
Qere perpetuum in the Pentateuch.
92

Verse 14.
a
::::. In verse 14 instead of the expression :::: (and in your
heart) present in the MT, 4QDeut
b93
reads : :::: (in your heart and in your hand) in
harmony with LXX (sat .i saeta ceu sat .i at, ,.cti ceu)
94
and against the
Samaritan Pentateuch,
95
the Targums, the Vulgate, the Syriac text and the Aleppo
Codex.
96
James R. Davila suggests that the Vorlage of LXX differed from MT and this
is not a case of conflation.
97
Wevers suggests this is an addition because of stylistic
reasons but McCarthy quotes 4QDeut
b
against this argument.
98
Dealing with 4QDeut
b
,
Duncan concludes this is a Judean and not Samaritan tradition of Deuteronomy because
the text is nearer to MT. This is a fragment of Hasmonean leather dated by Duncan in
150-100 BC according to the orthography and to the book hand displayed.
99
Roberts
suggests that is not likely that the LXX and 4QDeut
b
could have introduced the variant

92
See explanation and background of this orthography case in Gesenius, Hebrew
Grammar, 107. See a more detailed explanation comparing the current theories about
this variant in Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea scrolls, 36-37.
93
See Duncan, 4QDeut
b
, 11.
94
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 329.
95
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
96
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
97
James R. Davila, review of Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, by John
William Wevers, Society of Bible Literature Septuagint and Cognates Studies Series,
Catholic Biblical Quarterly 59 (1997): 364.
98
Wevers points that the Hexapla reflects the variant but put it under obelus
marking it as dubious, see Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 485.
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 87, 133*.
99
See Duncan, 4QDeut
b
, 9-14.

153
independently so they must have received it form an older witness not accessible
nowadays .
100

Summary. The Hebrew text of Deut 30:11-14 portrays a challenge. Aside of the
orthographic issue between s and s in verse 30:11, the possibility of an independent
origin for the variants in the LXX and in 4QDeut
b
(polygenesis) seems to defy a final
solution.
Clause division of Deut 30:11-14. Once discussed the textual issues and the
versional data of the passage, this section provides the Hebrew text of Deut 30:11-14
divided into clauses and translated into English as reflected in Table 6. The syntactical
discussion refers to the Hebrew text.




Table 6
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 30:11-14
Hebrew Text Working Translation
: s: ::s :s -s s: : 11a For this command which I command to
you today,
:: s -s:e:s: 11b is not too difficult for you
s ~ s: 11c and it is not distant from you
s :::: s: 12a nor it is in the heavens
:s: 12b saying:
::: ::r : 12c Who will go up to the heavens
: ~ 12d and bring it for us
-s :r:: 12e so we might hear it
.cr: 12f and observe it?
s :: :r:s: 13a and it is not beyond the sea,
:s: 13b saying:
: :r:s :::r : 13c who will pass over beyond the sea for us,
: ~ 13d and bring it fo us


(table continues)


100
See Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea scrolls, 56.

154
Table 6 (continued)
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 30:11-14
Hebrew Text Working Translation
-s :r:: 13e so we might hear it
.cr: 13f and observe it?
:::: e: :s: :: :s
::
14a For the word is very near to you, in your
mouth and in your heart,
: -cr: 14b for you to observe it.
Total of clauses in the section: 17



Syntax and syntagmatics. As we look at the flow in the Hebrew text of Deut
30:11-14, some features become evident.
101
The verbal flow is found in appendix A.
102

We see two main :-clauses
103
at clauses 30:11a and 30:14a. After the first :-clause in
clause 30:11a, there are four negative clauses in 30:11c-30:11d; 30:12a and 30:13a.
These phrases imply permanent prohibitions (s: + imperfect phrases).
104
After each one
of the negative sentences in 30:12a and 30:13a, there is a single verb quotation frame
(30:12b, 30:13b) introducing short embedded discourses and then an interrogative (:)
105

sentence (30:12c; 30:13c). Finally, verse 14 is the conclusion of the paragraph. There
are two short embedded speeches in 30:12b-30:12f and 30:13b-30:13f that address the
audience in first plural and with answers in 30:14a-30:14b that address the audience in

101
See the syntactical and syntagmatic analysis of Deut 30:11-14 in Appendix B,
Table B7.
102
See the verbal distribution of Deut 30:11-14 in Appendix A, Table A5.
103
On main : causal clauses see Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, 158 and
Aejmelaeus, On the Trial of the Septuagint Translators, This work has articles on the use
of et as translation of : in the LXX. See especially pages 17-36 on et-causal, pages
49-64 on clause-connectors and 166-185 on function and interpretation of : in biblical
Hebrew.
104
Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, 473 150.
105
Ibid., 443 137.

155
2ms. These elements might be useful when considering the internal structure of this sub-
section and the internal flow of the Numeruswechsel.
Clause 30:11a. -s s: :. This noun nominal clause opens in off-line as it
lacks an expressed verb.
106
This asyndetic clause does not address the audience as it is
devoted to set the focus (s:) of the sentence and the sub-section.
Clause 30:11b. : s: ::s :s. This is an off-line adjectival relative clause
subordinated to 30:11a modifying the subject of clause 30:11a. This is the first of three
negative clauses in Deut 30:11b-30:11d. This clause displays a piel active participle in
the verbal slot with the subject of the clause fronted in the pre-verbal slot. This clause is
in apposition to 30:11a. The words s: and s: stand in assonance between clauses
30:11a and 30:11b. This clause addresses the audience in 2ms and portrays a present
texts temporal perspective.
Clause 30:11c. :: s -s:e:s:. This asyndetic negative off-line main clause
also addresses the audience in second masculine singular and it refers to the subject of
30:11a which 30:11b has already modified. A niphal participle from the root s:e
107
fills
the verbal slot.
Clause 30:11d. s ~ s:. This main negative nominal clause is coordinated
to 30:11c. The adjective ~
108
fills the object of the tacit verbal copula that is indicated

106
Ibid., 487 155.2.
107
The verbal root s:e occurs around 84 times in the OT while occurs three times
in Deuteronomy in verses 17:8; 28:59 and 30:11. Only Deut 17:8 uses it in niphal as
30:11. In the niphal, this root bears the nuances of something being surpassing,
extraordinary, being beyond ones power, something too difficult to do. See Brown,
Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 810 7670. See Swanson, Dictionary of
Biblical Languages, 7098.
108
The adjective ~ occurs around 84 times in the OT with five times in
Deuteronomy 13:8, 20:15, 28:49, 29:21 and 30:11.

156
by the personal pronoun s that also adds emphasis to the adjective. This clause holds
the present temporal textual perspective.
Clause 30:12a. s :::: s:. Clause 30:12a as a s: negative is an independent
or main off-line clause. The commandment is not too difficult, not too distant as the
Heavens. Deut 29:28 has already made emphasis on the availability of the - and
Deut 30:11-14 adds to that emphasis.
109
Therefore, the theme of clauses 30:11a-30:11d is
the s:. Clauses 30:12a and 30:13a contain two possible excuses for the disobedience
of the s: as it might not be available (30:12a) or reachable (30:13a). Respectively
clauses 30:12c-30:12f and 30:13c-30:13f provide the elaboration of these excuses as
30:12b and 30:13b introduce those two embedded discourses. Jewish interpretative
tradition has relied on this phrase in its context to hold that God entrusted the
interpretation of the - into human hands by delivering it on earth and not leaving it at
heavens.
110

Clause 30:12b. :s:. This asyndetic main clause is a single verb quotation
frame introducing the first short embedded discourse found in 30:12c-30:12f. This type
of framing reveals what follows as a secondary citation. The speech is syntactically
independent from the textual matrix that surrounds it as its future temporal perspective
reveals and this could mark it as primary or direct discourse.
111
Even so, some aspects
confirm the secondary or indirect character of this quotation. The subject is corporative,
meaning that more than one individual are speaking and the citation quotes a future

109
See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 483.
110
See Tigay, Deuteronomy, 286. See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:14,
743.
111
See Miller, Discourse Functions in Qoutative Frames in Biblical Narrative,
156-158.

157
speech.
112
As already noticed, this embedded discourse addresses the audience in first
plural including both the audience and Moses.
113

Clause 30:12c. ::: ::r :. This clause starts the first of two questions
in Deut 30:11-14. The verb is a yiqtol with future temporal perspective. This question
implies clauses 30:12c-30:12f. Clauses 30:11c-30:11d have already stated the availability
of the commandment (s:) and clause 30:12a has established that the s: is not in the
heavens so the excuses that follow in clauses 30:12c-30:12d are not needed. Clauses
30:12c-30:12f provide the elements of a discourse oriented to a possible excuse from the
people for their possible disobedience of the s:. Clauses 30:12c and 30:12d address
the audience in first plural.
Clause 30:12d. : ~. Clause 30:12d is a main line clause coordinated to
30:12c addressing the audience in first plural. A sequential wayiqtol in first position
opens the clause in first position.
Clause 30:12e. -s :r::. This is a result off-line clause coordinated to
30:12d.
114
The verb of clause 30:12e is an imperfect in first person plural and in first
position. Clauses 30:12e and 30:12f provide the kernel of the excuse. If the
commandment is still at heavens and nobody is able to bring it down, then the people say
they will not be able to hear it nor to obey it.

112
See Garret and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 325-
327. These observations are also valid for Deut 30:13b.
113
See Bratcher and Hatton, A Handbook on Deuteronomy, 505. Christensen,
Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 743-744.
114
Although result clauses often use the : plus infinitive or even certain
prepositions and particles as markers, they might also be elaborated with a wav
consecutive verb as here in Deut 30:12e (imperfect) and 30:12f (perfect). See Beckman,
Williams Hebrew Syntax, 187 525, see also 178, 179 and 180. See Joon and
Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (2006), 599 169.

158
Clause 30:12f. .cr:. Clause 30:12f is a result main line clause coordinated to
30:12e and its verb is a wayiqtol in first person plural and cohortative. The verbs r::
and cr occur nine times
115
in the text of Deut 28:69-30:20 in different contexts.
Clause 30:13a. s :: :r:s:. This is a main negative nominal clause
coordinated to 30:12f. As negative and verbless clause, it is off-line although the verbal
copula is tacit. This clause contains the second main excuse for the disobedience of the
s:. What follows in clauses 30:13c-30:13f is the unpacking of this excuse.
Clause 30:13b. :s:. Clause 30:13b is a single verb quotation frame that
introduces the embedded speech found in clauses 30:13c-30:13f. This quotation frame
marks this discourse as a secondary citation as the speech portrays a composite subject as
the speaker.
116

Clause 30:13c. : :r:s :::r :. This asyndetic main interrogative
clause starts the second embedded speech in Deut 30:11-14. The interrogative pronoun
: marks the question that embraces clauses 30:13c-13f. The verb in imperfect has a
future temporal perspective.
Clause 30:13d. : ~. Clause 30:13d is an exact copy of 30:12d including
the same verb with exactly the same morphology (~). Clause 30:13d is a main line
clause coordinated to 30:13c addressing the audience in first plural. A sequential
wayiqtol in first position opens the clause in first position.
Clause 30:13e. -s :r::. Clause 13e and 12e are the same in vocabulary,
morphology and syntax. This is an off-line result clause coordinated to 30:13d. This

115
See for the verb r::, Deut 29:3, 18; 30:2, 8, 10, 12, 13, 17 and 20. For the
verb cr see Deut 29:1, 8 x2, 23, 28; 30:8, 12, 13 and 14.
116
Garret and DeRouchie, A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew, 323-327.
Lenchak, Choose Life! 190.

159
suggests internal lexical parallelisms in the text that might be useful for its structural
analysis.
From the structural perspective, Christensen suggests a five-fold literary structure
for this sub-section that seems forced as it is evident from the provided data.
117
Lenchak
suggests a four-fold balanced approach that seems to support scrutiny. Lenchak points to
lexical internal parallels like the way as s: and :: are used as synonymous in
30:11a and 30:14a respectively and the parallelism in the syntactical structures and
wording between verses 30:12 and 30:13. If we set the Hebrew text in parallelism to
highlight the analogies and underline them so they might be more easily seen, this might
be the result:
::: ::r : :s: s :::: s:
.cr: -s :r:: : ~
: :r:s :::r : :s: s :: :r:s:
.cr: -s :r:: : ~
In addition, the negative structure s: plus s occurs four times in clauses 30:11c,
30:11d, 30:12a and 30:13a. This reveals what Lenchak suggests, an inclusio with verses
11 and 14 and a parallelism with verses 30:12 and 30:13.
118
The parallelism goes down
to the use of antonyms words (11d ~ and 30:14a :) and synonyms words (30:11a
s: and 30:14a ::). This provides an A-B-B-A structure. A. The Commandment
is not (v. 11), B. It is not in heavens (v. 12), B. It is not over the sea (v. 13), A. The
word is (v. 14).

117
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 741-742. See a critique to
Christensen micro structural approach in Thomas Rmer, review of Deuteronomy 21:10-
34:12, by Duane L. Christensen, Review of Biblical Literature (September 2003), 1.
118
See Lenchak, Choose Life! 178-179.

160
Clause 30:13f. .cr:. Clause 30:13f and 30:12f are the same in vocabulary,
morphology and syntax. This is a main line result clause coordinated to 30:13e. The
verb of 30:13f is a cohortative wayiqtol in first position and in first person plural.
Clause 30:14a. :::: e: s: :: :s ::. This is an evidential
nominal main clause in off-line. According to Arnold and Choi, this clause might be
translated the same way as the causal clause but in this case, this clause provides the
evidence to support the whole or a specific part of the statement.
119
This clause
addresses the audience in 2ms. This reveals that verses 30:11 and 30:14 address the
audience in 2ms while verses 30:12 and 30:13 do it in first plural. This provides a pattern
2ms-1p-1p-2ms or A-C-C-A for the Numeruswechsel in Deut 30:11-14. This
Numeruswechsel pattern parallels the literary pattern suggested by Lenchak as already
seen and then provides this sub-section a high rhetorical level almost poetic.
120

Clause 30:14b. : -cr:. This is an asyndetic purpose clause subordinated to
30:14a. This clause uses a : plus infinitive construct verb with purpose nuance. As it
uses the verb cr, it is in contrast to 30:13f that works as part of an excuse to avoid the
observance of s: / ::.
Summary. The analysis of Deut 30:11-14 provides first from the textual critical
perspective, two variants (verse 30:11 s versus s and verse 30:14 with :::: versus
: ::::) that although they do not threaten the interpretation they defy final solution.
The syntagmatic analysis reveals a textual flow where the off-line clauses predominate
and the finite verbs are not so much abundant as only eight out of seventeen clauses
contain a finite verb.

119
See Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 149 4.3.4 (b).
120
See Lenchak, Choose Life! 178.

161
The structural information of Deut 30:11-14, reveals a highly elaborated text
which rhetoric is as high as to be almost poetry. First, there is an inclusio involving
clauses 30:11a-30:11d and 30:14a-30:14b dealing with the commandment/word while
clauses 30:12a-30:12f/30:13a-30:13f is in a close synonymous parallelism dealing with
the accessibility of the commandment.
The Numeruswechsel and the Personenwechsel in this section mirrors the literary
structure. The inclusio (A-A) addresses the audience in second masculine singular while
the parallelism (B-B) addresses them in first plural providing a pattern 2ms-1p-1p-2ms.
30:11a-30:11d 2ms
30:12a-30:12f 1p
30:13a-30:13f 1p
30:14a-30:14b 2ms
Theologically, Deut 30:11-14 returns to the topic of the obedience/praxis of the
commandment (30:11a) that Deut 30:8d and 30:10b have already dealt with and to the
topic of the access to the commandment that Deut 29:28 have already elaborated. The
text argues (with a hypothetical dialogue) with the audience in a present temporal
perspective about the foolishness of advancing excuses for not obeying the
commandment. The commandment was provided, is at hand even at their heart and their
mouth and therefore the people must obey it without excuses.

Deuteronomy 30:15-20.
Hebrew text of Deut 30:15-20.
b
:~-s \
a
: \:e: \--:
b
/\s
a 15

/\:s -s \:s:
b
/\: \s:
a
\::s \:s
a 16
/\r-s -:-s \::-s

/\
f
-:
f
/\-~
e
/\:e::
e
-~ -s:
d
\:::
d
/\
c
:: \
b
-:::
c

/\-::
i
/\::\s: \-s\:s
h
/\
g
s: \:s \::
g

/\:-:r
e
/\:~s ::s: \-~-:
d
/\-~::
c
/\r::- s:
b
/\::: \:e\:s
a 17

162
/\:s:r \:: \:s-s:
c
/\:s- :s \:
b
/\: \
a
::: \-.
a 18

/\-::
f
/\:: \
c
s::
e
/\:-s \
b
:r \-s \:s
d

\
a
:e: \--:
b
/\-: :~ \s-s :::-s \: \::: \-r
a 19

/\r \-s \~- r::
d
/\:~: \-~:
c
/\:: ::
/\: s \~ \s \:
d
/\:\
a
::
c
/\:: \r:::
b
/\:s -s \:s:
a
20

e /\
b
:: \--:
g
/\:r: ~s: ::s: -:s: \ \r::: \:s
f
/\:s:r
\-:::
e

Analysis of textual critical notes. This section analyses the textual variants in
the MT as well as the versional data in Deut 30:16-20. The resulting data will inform the
syntactical and syntagmatic analysis.
Verse 30:15.
a
:, This word is ommitted by the Samaritan Pentateuch
121
but it
is present in the Aleppo Codex,
122
in the LXX,
123
in the Vulgate,
124
the Syriac and the
Targums.
125


b
:~-s. The whole section r-s -:-s ::-s :~-s is given in
the LXX (followed by the Syriac text) in pairs and as options,
126
reading: i ,.i sat
ei aiaei, e a,aei sat e sasei.
127
Manuscripts such as diverse as the Aleppo

121
There are no notes in the textual apparatus. See Von Gall, Der Hebrische
Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
122
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
123
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 329.
124
Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 277.
125
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 87.
126
The Hexapla follows MT order, see Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 485.
127
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 329.

163
Codex,
128
the Samaritan Pentateuch
129
and the Vulgate
130
have the same order as the MT.
McCarthy suggests that this variant in the LXX with support from the Syriac text might
mean either a different Vorlage for the LXX as well as the possibility that both the LXX
and the Syriac text took the variant from earlier and different sources, namely
polygenesis.
131

Verse 30:16.
a
\::s :s. Although the Aleppo Codex supports the reading from
the MT
132
Wevers recognizes that the MT starts this clause in an odd way without an
antecedent for :s and suggests that the addition provided by the LXX is an adaptation
taken from Deut 30:10.
133
The LXX reads .ai .tcaseuc, a, .iea, suteu eu .eu
ceu.
134
The evidence from 4QDeut
k3
is too fragmentary to provide textual information in
reference to Deut 30:16.
135
McCarthy suggests that there is an introductory clause
missing here and that the LXX addition attests it in similarity to the construction in Deut
11:27. She suggests that the lack of a translation in the text of the Vulgate
136
for the first
four Hebrew words of this verse (: s: ::s :s) is an attempt to deal with the
difficulty presented by the partially corrupt Masoretic text.
137
Bratcher and Hatton

128
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
129
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
130
Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 277.
131
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 87.
132
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
133
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 486.
134
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 329.
135
Julie Ann Duncan, 4QDeut
k3
, in Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to
Kings, DJD XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore Cross (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1996), 108.
136
Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 277.
137
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 133*.

164
suggest the translator to follow the LXX providing a textual note but they do not provide
textual support for their recommendation.
138
It is interesting that the Syriac text and the
Targums support the MT.
139
In light of the support for the MT in the Samaritan
Pentateuch, the Aleppo Codex, the Syriac text and the Targums on the one hand and the
uncertainty about the LXX reading on the other hand, academic rigor suggests retaining
the Masoretic reading in this case. The syntactical peculiarity of this construction in the
text of Deut 30:16 will be left for the syntactical analysis.

b
-:::. In the Hebrew text of Deut 30:16, there is a command provided with three
infinitive construct verbs. The first and the second infinitive verbs are asyndetic and the
third is syndetic in the MT with textual support in the Aleppo Codex
140
and the Samaritan
Pentateuch.
141
The LXX translates the three infinitives asyndetically
142
and the Vulgate
translates syndetically the three infinitives with finite verbs.
143
Particularly -::: occurs
asyndetic in Deut 8:6, 10:12, 11:22 and 30:16. Deuteronomy 19:9 as well as 26:17
portrays it syndetically. McCarthy suggests that the versions have the tendency to
assimilate the syndetic form, as is the case with the Vulgate, Syriac and the Targum
Jonathan although the Targum Onqelos follows the Masoretic text here.
144
These
observations apply to the variant related to the word
d
:::.

138
See Bratcher and Hatton, A Handbook on Deuteronomy, 507.
139
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 87.
140
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
141
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
142
See Wevers, Deuteronmium, 330. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 486.
143
The Vulgate uses here second singular present subjunctive verbs to translate
the infinitive constructs from the Hebrew. See Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta
Vulgatam Versionem, 277.
144
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 88, 80*.

165

c
::. The critical edition of the LXX,
145
the Samaritan Pentateuch,
146
the
Syriac and the Aleppo Codex
147
support the Masoretic reading while Ralphs edition of
the LXX provides the reading of some Greek manuscripts that add :acat, before at,
eeet,. McCarthy mentions that the same expansion happens in the LXX at Deut 19:9
under the influence of similar constructions in Deut 10:12 and 11:22.
148
Wevers qualifies
this variant as pre-hexaplaric, points to the Greek papyrus 848 that witnesses the
Masoretic reading and suggests that the origin of the gloss might be found in Deut 19:9 in
agreement with McCarthy.
149


e
-~ -s:. Deuteronomy uses the masculine form ~ 21 times versus eight
times for the feminine form ~
150
that is used here in Deut 30:16. The Samaritan
Pentateuch has feminine forms for all these cases but masculine forms in Deut 6:2 and
30:16.
151
The Aleppo Codex agrees here with the feminine form from the MT.
152
The
word -s: is omitted by the Greek manuscripts B and 848 probably due to a
homoioteleuton in the Greek text.
153


f
-:

-~. The MT and Aleppo Codex
154
have these words in second masculine
singular but the LXX has changed them into second plural. Wevers think it might be

145
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 330.
146
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
147
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
148
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 88, 134*.
149
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 486.
150
See Deut 6:2, 8:11, 10:13, 11:1, 28:15, 45; 30:10 and 16.
151
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
152
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
153
Wevers, Deuteronomium, 330.
154
See The Aleppo Codex Online.

166
under the influence of Deut 8:1 where there are similar constructions in second plural
(:-: ~-)
155
but he agrees with McCarthy that this variant has no good textual reason
to exist.
156


g
s:. The Samaritan Pentateuch,
157
the Vulgate,
158
the Syriac and the Targums
agree with the MT here but the LXX reads .i :ac ,
159
this variant is considered as
an assimilation of more common forms.
160
Even the Hexapla has placed the word :ac
under the obelus to indicate the uncertainty of its origin.
161

Verse 30:18.
a
:::. The MT starts this verse addressing the audience in 2mp in
clauses 30:18b and 30:18c but 30:18d shifts into 2ms. The Aleppo Codex
162
supports this
shift but the Samaritan Pentateuch
163
renders the whole verse in 2p as well as the LXX.
164

The Vulgate
165
renders the whole verse in 2ms. These differences in the versions and the
translations point to the struggles of the ancient copyists and translators with the
Numeruswechsel pointing to the feature in the MT as original. These observations apply
also to the variant related to the morphological number of the phrase :r -s in this
same verse. The Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac and the Targums have rendered the

155
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 486.
156
McCarthy, Deuteronmy, 134*.
157
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
158
See Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 277.
159
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 330.
160
The reading .i :ac , is used in the LXX in the Pentateuch in Gen 41:54,
57; 47:13; Exod 9:14, 16; 34:10; Lev 25:9 (x2); Deut 28:52; 30:16.
161
Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 487.
162
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
163
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
164
See Wevers, Deuteronomium, 331.
165
See Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 277.

167
text of Deut 30:18 in plural in order to harmonize it with the context as these texts have
the tendency to opt for the plural forms in these occasions.
166


c
s::. This infinitive construct verbal form is omitted the text of the LXX
167
but
witnessed by the Targums and the Vulgate.
168
The Samaritan Pentateuch,
169
the Aleppo
Codex
170
and the Damascus Pentateuch
171
witness this infinitive in plene writing (s::)
in this verse.
172
The defective form of this word occurs some ten times in the OT and
four times in the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy (9:1; 11:31; 20:19 and 30:18).
Verse 30:19.
a
:e:. The 2ms provided here by the MT is supported by the
Samaritan Pentateuch
173
and the Aleppo Codex,
174
the Syriac and the Targum Onqelos.
The LXX, the Vulgate, some manuscripts of the Syriac text and the Targum Jonathan
render it as second plural probably as assimilation from Deut 11:26.
175
Wevers suggests
that the translator kept the plural in this word to avoid a change in number here and then
make it later in the sentence smoothing so the syntax.
176


166
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 88, 134*.
167
The LXX reads Deut 30:18 aia,,.. cet c.ei et a:..ta a:e.tc.
sat eu :eu.et ,.ic. .:t , ,, , sute, e .e, ceu ete.cti cet .t, i
u.t, etaati.. ei Ieeaii .s.t seiecat aui. See Wevers,
Deuteronomium, 331. See also Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 487.
168
The Latin text reads in terra ad quam Iordane transmisso ingredieris
possidendam. See Weber and others, Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, 277.
169
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
170
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
171
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 88.
172
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
173
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
174
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
175
Deut 11:26 reads :: :: : :: :e: - : : :s s

. See McCarthy,
Deuteronomy, 88.
176
See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 488.

168
Verse 30:20.
a
::. The orthography of this word varies in 1QDeut
b
that has it
as ::.
177
The Samaritan Pentateuch
178
and the Aleppo Codex
179
support the
orthography found in the MT. It is clear that the addressed subject is a corporative
singular and then it is understandable that versions may change it into plural pronouns for
the sake of a smooth translation in the target languages. This usage of the second
masculine singular has rhetorical and theological implications and this feature will be
analyzed later.

b
::. This morphology (3mp) is supported by the Aleppo Codex
180
and 1QDeut
b

but the Samaritan Pentateuch
181
has ::: (2mp) and the Syriac reflects : (2ms).
182
In
this case, the MT makes the ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the object of the last
verb, --:. Those manuscripts that change the suffix into a second plural make the people
the object of the verb as well as those that use the second singular and deal with the
people as a corporative singular. The LXX, Syriac, Targum and Vulgate had problems
dealing with the corporative singular in verse 30:19.
183
Additionally, Deuteronomy uses
the 2ms to address the people and not the 3mp.
184
Therefore, this second singular in the
LXX and Syriac seems more problematic.

177
See Barthlemy, Deutrenome (Second Exemplaire), 59.
178
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
179
See The Aleppo Codex Online.
180
Ibid.
181
See Von Gall, Der Hebrische Pentateuch der Samaritaner, 426.
182
See Barthlemy, Deutrenome (Second Exemplaire), 59.
183
See McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 88. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of
Deuteronomy, 488.
184
The shifts in address, from individuals to the generality, show that the
commands of the covenant lie both upon the whole and its constituent members.
McConville, Singular Address in the Deuteronomic Law, 27.

169
In Deut 1:8 the entire phrase :: --: :r: ~s: ::s: is used verbatim.
In this instance, the pronoun is 3mp as in Deut 30:20. Not only the phrase is present but
also the theme of the land and Gods swearing, r::, about giving it to the forefathers. It
is interesting that in both texts 1:8 and 30:20 this root has the same morphology. Others
texts in Deuteronomy say that God swore the land to the forefathers, always using the
same root r::: 1:35; 6:10, 18, 23; 7:13; 8:1; 9:5; 10:11; 11:9, 21; 19:8; 26:3, 15; 29:13;
31:7; 31:20. Only in Deut 28:9 is the 2ms used referring to the people in connection with
God swearing the land and in 31:21, 23 the direct object is the people of Israel and the
sons of Israel respectively. In 29:8 and 34:4, the forefathers are the direct object and the
sons of Israel are the indirect object. In summary, in Deuteronomy the instances where
the construction where the roots , r::, s, are used with the preposition : as direct
object are 21 in total, not taking in account the text of Deut 30:20. Sixteen of these 21
texts refer to the forefathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; God swore the land to them that
he will give it to their descendants. Two cases have the complete chain: to Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob that the land will be given to their descendants: Deut 28:11 and 34:4.
Finally, three texts say that God swore the land to the sons of Israel: Deut 28:9; 31:21, 23.
This review suggests to leave in Deut 30:20 the pronoun :: as referring that the
ancestors, namely, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, are the object of the verb --:.
185

Summary. The textual and versional information related to the text of Deut
30:15-20 reveals a text with which the scribes and translators struggled. Events of
assimilation to forms that are common, orthography, personal pronouns and suffixes and
word order are among the issues they seem to have dealt with.

185
McCarthy, Deuteronomy, 134*; she suggests that the Masoretic reading is
secondary. See Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 7.

170
Clause division of Deut 30:15-20. Table 7 in this section provides the Hebrew
text of Deut 30:15-20 divided into clauses and translated into English. The syntactic and
syntagmatic analysis will refer to this notation.


Table 7
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 30:15-20
Hebrew Text Working Translation
s 15a See!
::-s :~-s : :e: --:
r-s -:-s
15b I have put before you today life and
goodness,
death and evil.
: s: ::s :s 16a Because I command you today
:s -s :s: 16b to love the LORD your God
:: -::: 16c to walk in His ways
:e:: -~ -s : : :: 16d And to keep His commandments and His
statutes and His judgments
-~ 16e then you shall live
-: 16f and you shall become many
s: :s :: 16g and the LORD your God shall bless you
in the land
::s: -s:s 16h that you are coming in
-:: 16i to possess it
::: :e:s 17a But if you turn your heart
r::- s: 17b and you do not hear
-~:: 17c and you are impelled
:~s ::s: - ~-: 17d and you bow down to other gods
-~ 16e then you shall live
:-:r 17e and you serve them.
: ::: -. 18a I declare to you today,
:s- :s : 18b That you will surely perish
:s:r :: :s-s: 18c you shall not have long days upon the
land
:-s :r -s :s 18d That you are passing over the Jordan
:: s:: 18e to go in
-:: 18f to possess it
:::-s : ::: -r
-: :~ s-s
19a I call today as witness against you the
heavens and the earth, life and death
:: :: : e: --: 19b I have set before you blessing and curse

(table continues)

171
Table 7 (continued)
Clause Division and Translation of Deut 30:15-20

Hebrew Text Working Translation
:~: -~: 19c then choose life
r -s ~- r : : 19d So that you might live, you and your
descendants
:s -s :s: 20a Loving the LORD your God
:: r::: 20b Obeying His voice
::: 20c and holding fast to Him
: s ~ s : 20d for He is your life and the length of your
days
:s:r -::: 20e To dwell upon the land
::s: -:s: r::: :s
:r: ~s:
20f that the LORD swore to your fathers
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
e :: --: 20g to give them
Total of clauses in the section: 34



Syntax and syntagmatics. Deuteronomy 30:15 contains an offer from God to
His people, which implies a condition stated in the form of a commandment in
Deut 30:16a-d. The obedience to this commandment implies a promised blessing that is
stated in Deut 0:16e-i. However, if the people do not obey, do not listen and go away
from God to alien gods (30:17), then there is a curse stated in verse 30:18 that reverses
the blessing contained in verse 30:16. These features point not only to the thematic of the
passage but also to structural elements that are present in the text. The structural analysis
will come back to these features.
In the five clauses in Deut 30:20
186
that contain the structure of : plus an
infinitive construct plus a direct object these infinitive construct verbs
187
may be
translated by using either a gerund form or the imperative form plus a direct object in

186
See the summary of the syntax and syntagmatics of Deut 30:15-20 in
Appendix B, Table B8.
187
See summary of the verbal distribution of Deut 30:15-20 in Appendix A, Table
A6.

172
purpose clauses.
188
There are similar structures in Deut 30:16b, 30:16c, 30:16d and
30:16i as well as in 30:18e and 30:18f.
Clause 30:15a. s. An asyndetic imperative of the verb s opens here not
only the clause but also the sentence, verse 15 and the sub-section of Deut 30:15-20. An
asyndetic imperative of the verb s opening the sentence and the verse occurs in
Deuteronomy in 1:8, 21; 4:5; 11:26 and here in 30:15. In verses 4:5; 11:26 and 30:15, the
imperative is syntactically independent from the previous clause although opening the
flow of what follows thus marking a transition in the textual flow.
189
In Deut 2:24d, 31b;
3:27c and 32:49c the imperative occurs but not in first position in the verse as the
notation shows. In addition to this, Christensen suggests a rhetorical function for the
second masculine singular imperative verb s in Deuteronomy. He tracks these verses
in a progression with the word : in the first four cases, the word s in 1:8, 21; 2:24,
31; 4:5; 32:49 and the word :s in verses 3:27. He includes verses 32:52 with s but
the root s is a yiqtol and verse 34:1 where the root s is a hiphil perfect and the
words :s, s occur.
190
This suggestion requires detailed analysis from the structural
and theological perspectives. So far a progression has been detected which uses the word
s. According to this analysis the imperative verb s seems to function as a rhetorical
marker in verses 4:5, 11:26 and 30:15.
191
Other aspects related to literary devices and
theological structures will be approached in the next chapters of structural and theological
analysis.

188
See Bratcher and Hatton, A Handbook on Deuteronomy, 509
189
See Andersen and Forbes, The Hebrew Bible: Andersen-Forbes Phrase Marker
Analysis.
190
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 1-21:9, 16.
191
See McConville, Deuteronomy, 423.

173
Clause 30:15b. r-s -:-s ::-s :~-s : :e: --:. This
off-line asyndetic main clause addresses the audience in 2ms. The predicate pattern
displays a perfective qatal in first position without elements in the pre-verbal slot. This
verbal form occurs fourteen times in Deuteronomy and in nine of those times God is the
subject (Deut 1:8; 2:5, 9, 24; 3:2; 9:23; 30:1, 15, 19). The adverbial modifier of time is in
an emphatic position, located ahead of the direct object. The noun ~ occurs around 20
times in Deuteronomy, five of those in Deut 30:6-20 (30:6c, 15b, 19a, 19c and 20d) and
four times in Deut 30:15-20. In addition to the usage of the noun, the verb ~ occurs
two times in this sub-section (30:16e, 30:19d) and there are references to a long life (::
:s-s:, 30:18c and : s, 30:20d). References to death (30:15b, 30:19a) and
threats to life are present (30:18b).
192
The phrase : :e: --: might have legal
overtones in this context. The theological analysis will return to this feature.
Clause 30:16a. : s: ::s :s. This asyndetic and off-line causal clause is
subordinated to 15b. The textual analysis has shown how the copyists and translators
struggled with this clause over time as they tried not only to understand it but also to
understand how it relates to the previous and following clauses. The particle :s may
function as a conjunction and one of its functions as such is to introduce causal clauses,
translated as because.
193
The subject is located in the preverbal slot but is not
considered as fronted and emphasized due to the participle that fills the verbal slot.
194

The clause addresses the audience in 2ms.

192
See Lenchak, Choose Life! 179.
193
See Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 83 938.8 Also
called causal :s in Beckman, Williams Hebrew Syntax, 167 468.
194
See van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference
Grammar, 339-340.

174
Clause 30:16b. :s -s :s:. Clauses 30:16b-d express the command
that clause 30:16a has mentioned. Clause 30:16b is an off-line asyndetic purpose clause.
An infinitive construct verb fills the verbal slot. As mentioned in 30:6b, the theological
analysis will deal with the usage of :s with God as object and the people as subject in
Deut 28:69-30:20 (30:6b; 30:16b and 30:20a) in the context of its usage in Deuteronomy.
The vocabulary and structure of this clauses repeats in clause 30:20a.
Clause 30:16c. :: -:::. This is an asyndetic and off-line purpose clause
subordinated to 30:16b. The predicate is elaborated with an infinitive construct verb in
purpose nuance. This verb is in first position and without elements in the pre-verbal slot.
This is the fifth and last time that the verb : occurs in Deut 28:69-30:20. Only in
29:4a the verb : has a subject different to the people. The ethical nuance of its
semantics seems to be in focus here as well as in clauses 30:17c; 30:18f; 30:25a and
30:16c.
195

Clause 30:16d. :e:: -~ -s : : ::. This is a purpose off-line clause
coordinated to 30:16c. This is the third purpose clause that portrays the commandment
announced at clause 30:16a. There is a progression in these clauses: Loving the Lord,
walking in His ways and obeying His commandments, statutes and judgments. This
progression seems to be in harmony with the content of clause 30:6a-b as the roots :s
and ~ occur in 30:6a and also in 30:16b and 30:16e (:s, ~). The theological analysis
will return to this feature.
Clause 30:16e. -~. Clause 30:16e is a result clause coordinated to clause
30:16d. The predicate pattern is a weqatal verb in future temporal perspective without

195
See Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 229ss 2400.
See Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 2142.5

175
elements in the pre-verbal slot. Deuteronomy 30:15-30:16d has had a present tense
temporal perspective up to this clause that shifts into a future temporal perspective that
seems to be hold up to clause 30:16g at least. This shift seems to move the discourse into
anticipatory text type. Clause 30:16e provides for the people a promise conditioned to
what clauses 30:16b-30:16d have already portrayed as the condition for the realization of
clauses 30:16e-30:16i.
Clause 30:16a introduces the commandment that clauses 30:16b-30:16d portray
as purpose clauses and now clauses 30:16e-f portray the promised result of the
implementation of that commandment. Therefore, this structure might be understood as a
conditional structure with clauses 30:16a-d as the protasis and clauses 30:16e-i as the
apodosis of a third class conditional clause. The translator in the LXX understood the
text that way as the .ai plus aorist subjunctive shows it in the addition at the beginning of
verse 30:16.
196
The weqatal verbs in first position (with future temporal perspective) in
clauses 30:16e-30:16f harmonize with this approach.
197

Clause 30:16f. -:. This is a result clause coordinated to 30:16e with future
temporal perspective making this clause a promise from God to His people. The
predicate is a weqatal in first position without elements in the pre-verbal slot. The clause
addresses the audience in second masculine singular. The verb : in Deuteronomy is
often related to Gods promise of making His people numerous.
198


196
The LXX reads .ai .tcaseuc, . . . See See Bratcher and Hatton, A
Handbook on Deuteronomy, 507.
197
See Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, 493-495 159. See also Wallace, Greek
Grammar Beyond the Basics, 696-697. Robertson, A Grammar of Greek New Testament
in the Light of Historical Research, 1016-1020.
198
See Deut 1:10; 6:3; 7:13; 8:1; 11:21; 13:18; 28:63; 30:5, 16. See Christensen,
Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 747-748. See Tigay, Deuteronomy, 288. Driver,
Deuteronomy, 330-332.

176
Clause 30:16g. s: :s ::. This is a result off-line clause
coordinated to clause 30:16f. The predicate pattern is a syndetic perfective verb in first
position without elements in the pre-verbal slot.
Clause 30:16h. ::s: -s:s. This is an off-line asyndetic clause
subordinated to clause 30:16g. The predicate is elaborated with an active participle that
is the cause for the subject to be expressed and in the pre-verbal slot. This is an adjectival
clause qualifying the adverbial modifier of place found at clause 30:16g therefore
reinforcing the promised portrayed by that clause.
Clause 30:16i. -::. This is an asyndetic off-line purpose clause subordinated
to clause 30:16h. The predicate has an infinitive construct verb in purpose nuance.
199

This clause completes the chain of clauses that portray the apodosis (Deut 30:16e-30:16i)
of the conditional structure in Deut 30:16a-i. This apodosis portrays the progression in
Gods blessings for His people if they answer Him in loving Him, walking in His ways
and keeping His commandments, statutes and judgments as clauses 30:16b-30:16d have
delineated it.
Clause 30:17a. ::: :e:s. This is a syndetic main and off-line conditional
clause coordinated to 30:16i. The construction :s plus a yiqtol portrays a future
conditional structure capable of real fulfillment.
200
The protasis is provided in clauses
30:17a-30:17e and the apodosis in clauses 30:18a-f. The predicate is elaborated with a
yiqtol verb (:e) that is considered in first position as the conditional particle is

199
The root : occurs around 231 times in the OT with Deuteronomy in the first
position of the frequency distribution with 71 times followed by Joshua with 29
occurrences. In Deut 28:69-30:20 it occurs four times in clauses 30:5b-c; 30:16i and
30:18f.
200
See Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, 496 159.3.A.2. Williams Hebrew Syntax,
182 515.

177
considered part of the verbal slot
201
. The clause has a conditional future temporal
perspective and it addresses the audience in second masculine singular. In a rhetorical
strategy, the conjunction sets this clause (and the conditional structure that follows) in
contrast with what has already being portrayed in the previous conditional structure in
30:16a-i.
Clause 30:17b. r::- s:. This is the second of five clauses that describe the
peoples sin of apostasy.
202
This is a main negative clause in off-line and coordinated to
30:17a. The predicate is elaborated with a s: plus imperfect construction that portrays an
unconditional negation. Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 addresses apostasy in 29:17a-30:20b
as a warning, in 29:21d-29:27d an anticipatory discourse provides a prediction of the
future apostasy. Deuteronomy 30:1a-30:10d in another anticipatory discourse promises
the future restoration after a future dispersion because of the future apostasy.
The verbal root r:: occurs nine times
203
in Deut 28:69-30:20 and in eight of
those occurrences, the people are the subject. In at least five of those passages, the
concept of obedience is in focus (30:2b; 30:8b; 30:10a; 30:17b and 30:20b). This clause
addresses the audience in second masculine singular.
Clause 30:17c. -~::. This is an off-line clause coordinated to clause 30:17b.
The predicate is elaborated with a perfective niphal of the root ~:.
204
This niphal
suggests the influence of a third party over the people pushing them in their apostasy.

201
The root :e occurs around 134 times in the OT. Deuteronomy is first in the
frequency distribution with sixteen occurrences followed by Ezekiel with 14. In Deut
28:69-30:20 this verb occurs two times, in Deut 29:17b and 30:17a.
202
See Lenchak, Choose Life! 201.
203
See Deut 29:3, 18; 30:2, 8, 10, 12, 13, 17, 20.
204
The verbal root ~: occurs around 153 times in the OT with ten times in
Deuteronomy second to Jeremiah with eighteen times. Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 uses

178
Clause 30:17d. :~s ::s: - ~-: . This is an off-line clause coordinated to
30:17c. The predicate is a perfective of the root ~:.
205
This clause shows the gross
manifestation of the apostasy; namely, idolatry.
Clause 30:17e. :-:r. This is a main off-line clause coordinated to 30:17d.
A weqatal verb in first position without elements in the pre-verbal slot provides the
predicate. The verb :r occurs three times in Deut 28:69-30:20 in clauses 29:17c,
29:25b and 30:17e. These three occurrences deal with religious/ritual service to other
gods. The theological analysis will deal with this feature.
Clause 30:18a. : ::: -.. This main clause introduces the apodosis of the
conditional structure. This asyndetic result clause acts as quotation framing for the
indirect speech in clauses 30:18b-f. The pattern .: plus : with clause 30:18a as
independent and clause 30:18b as subordinated, fills all the requirements for the
quotation frame that introduces an indirect speech.
206
This clause addresses the audience
in 2mp, shifting from the second masculine singular hold up to 30:17e.
Clause 30:18b. :s- :s :. The function of the conjunction : here might be
qualified as of clarification, introducing a subordinated clause that clarifies or explains
the main clause and the best way of translating it is with the conjunction that.
207
The
predicate is elaborated with an infinitive absolute and an imperfect both of the same root:

the niphal in 30:4a (participle) and 30:17c. The semantic nuances of ~: in niphal
include to be impelled, to be banished, and lead one astray to a sinful behavior.
See Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 5615.4
205
The root ~: occurs around 176 times in the OT and eight times in
Deuteronomy (4:19; 5:9; 8:19; 11:16; 17:3; 26:10; 29:25 and 30:17). Only one of these
occasions the root ~: has God as objective (26:10).
206
See Miller, Discourse Functions in Qoutative Frames in Biblical Narrative,
164-165.
207
Arnold and Choi, A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 150 4.3.4 (c).

179
:s. This structure provides an emphatic nuance.
208
If the people move away from the
Lord in apostasy, disobedience and idolatry, the Lord promises them that they shall
surely perish. Clause 30:18b is a reversal of clauses 30:16e and 30:16f. The Lord
promised the people life and that they might be many and now He threats them with the
prediction that they will surely perish thus threatening with the reversal of the promised
blessing.
Clause 30:18c. :s:r :: :s-s:. This is a main negative clause. The
pattern s: plus imperfect, is present here with an unconditional negative. Clause 30:18c
is a reversal of clause 30:16g. As the Lord promised them a blessing upon the land, now
He threats them with the prediction that they will not have long days upon the land. In
relation to the wording of 30:16g, clause 30:18c replaces s with :s. Clause 30:18c
addresses the audience in 2mp.
Clause 30:18d. :-s :r -s :s. Clause 30:18d is an off-line adjective
clause subordinated to 30:18c, it qualifies :s in 30:18c. This clause does not have a
verbatim parallel in 30:16e-i.
Clause 30:18e. :: s::. This is a purpose clause subordinated to 30:18d. This
clause is in parallelism to 30:16h using here the verb s: in infinitive construct instead of
an active participle as 30:16h.
Clause 30:18f . -::. This is a purpose clause subordinated to 30:18e. This
clause is in parallelism to clause 30:16i. The construction is the same, an asyndetic
infinitive construct. This is the fourth and last occurrence of the root : in Deut 28:69-
30:20 (30:5b, 30:5c, 30:16i and 30:18f).

208
Ibid., 74-76 3.4.2 (b). See Aejmelaeus, On the Trail of Septuagint
Translators, 179-180.

180
Deuteronomy 30:16-18 portrays two conditional structures. The first conditional
structure starts with its protasis in clauses 30:16a-d and its apodosis in clauses 30:16e-i.
The second conditional structure has its protasis in clauses 30:17a-30:17e and its
apodosis in clauses 30:18a-f. In addition, these two conditional structures portray
syntactical and semantic parallelisms. The protasis of each one of the two conditional
structures stands in opposition. The first protasis deals with a progressive consecration of
the people while the second portrays a progressive departure in apostasy. The apodosis of
the second conditional structure (30:18b-f) is a curse in reversal of the blessing promised
in clauses 30:16e-i.
From the structural perspective, this reveals two conditional structures (30:16a-
30:16i and 30:17a-30:18f) in contrast and enclosed by the offer from God for the people
to choose between life/goodness and death/evil in clauses 30:15a-30:15b and the final
call to choose life in clauses 30:19a-30:20g. The two conditional structures provide the
conditions and consequences of choosing (30:15b) life and goodness in the Lord (30:16a-
i) or death and evil away from the Lord (30:17a-30:18f). The difference is provided by
the way the people relate to the Lord and the revelation He has provided them. These
parallelisms require further analysis from the structural and theological perspectives.
Clause 30:19a. -: :~ s-s :::-s : ::: -r. This is a
main asyndetic off-line clause. This clause portrays legal content due to its covenantal
vocabulary and format. The indirect object (:::) as well as the adverbial modifier of
time (:) are syntactically highlighted because of their position ahead of the direct
object.
Clause 30:19b. :: :: : e: --:. This is a main off-line clause that
addresses the audience in second masculine singular shifting from the second masculine

181
plural used in clauses 30:18a-30:19a. The Lord is setting blessing and curse before the
people so they might chose rightly.
Lenchak suggests a chiastic structure with verses 30:15, 30:18 and 30:19, which
includes not only word repetition but also pairs of synonymous and antonymous
elements:
r-s -:-s ::-s :~-s . . . :e: --: (15b) A
: ::: -. (18a) B
: ::: -r

(19a) B
:: :: :e: --: -: :~ s-s :::-s (19a-b) A
In the A-A pair, each line provides two opportunities to choose between pairs that
are either synonymous or antonymous (life and good / death and evil, life and death /
blessing and curse), in addition the pair of heavens and earth is present in clause
30:19a.
209
This chiasm might be analyzed together with the envelope provided by the
two conditional structures (30:16a-I; 30:17a-30:18f) and the two offers (30:15a-b;
30:19a-30:20g) in the search for the structure of Deut 30:15-20. Christensens structural
proposal does not seem to represent the textual data. The outline he suggests is: A. 30:15
The choice between life and death, B. 30:16a I command you, X. 30:16b The Lord
will bless you, B. 30:17-18 If you turn aside A. 30:19-20 Choose life. The A-A
sections are clearly balanced and correspond with the text but not so the rest of the
outline which seems to be rather arbitrary. An outline that reflects the prominent
conditional structures seems more text oriented. This structure might be
A. Choosing between life and goodness, death and evil, 30:15a-b
B. The Command, 30:16a-30:16i (First conditional structure)
1. The command, 30:16a-30:16d (Protasis)

209
See Lenchak, Choose Life! 179.

182
2. The result of obedience, 30:16e-30:16i (Apodosis)
B. The warning, 30:17a-30:18f (Second conditional structure)
1. The warning against apostasy 30:17a-30:17d (Protasis)
2. The result of the apostasy, 30:18a-30:18f (Apodosis)
A. Choosing life, 30:19a-30:20g
1. The call to choose, 30:19a-30:19c
2. The result of choosing life, 30:19d-30:20g
This structural proposal recognizes the equivalence between the two calls in
clauses 30:15a-b and 30:19a-30:20g while it also respects the two conditional structures
in clauses 30:16a-i and 30:17a-30:18f. Although the section in clauses 30:19a-30:20g
seems not to be a conditional structure it does seem to be a cause-result structure. This
structural proposal has to be checked against the Numeruswechsel flow and the inclusion
already found in the text. The next chapter on structural analysis will return to these
issues here.
Clause 30:19c. :~: -~:. This syndetic off-line clause addresses the
audience in 2ms. The weqatal verb in first position without elements in the pre-verbal
slot exhorts the audience to choose life.
Clause 30:19d. r -s ~- r: :. This is a result clause subordinated to
30:19c. It provides the result of the implementation of the call presensed in clause
30:19cchoosing life. This clause addresses the audience in 2ms. The address to the
audience is emphasized, the verb has the 2ms pronominal suffix and the second
masculine personal pronoun is present. The construction of r:: plus ~ occurs also in
clause 30:6c.
Clause 30:20a. :s -s :s:. This is an off-line purpose clause
subordinated to clause 30:19d. It addresses the audience in second masculine singular.
Clauses 30:20a-c provides an epexegetical expansion of what does it mean to choose life

183
(30:19a-c) and how it is to be obtained.
210
Bratcher and Hatton suggest that these clauses
might be translated with either infinitive, gerund forms
211
or even imperatives.
212
Clauses
30:16a and 30:20a (:s -s :s:) are identical and they are identically
positioned after the audience receives the offer to choose in clauses 30:15a and 30:19c-
30:19d. The same wording and structure occurs also in clause 30:6b.
Clause 30:20b. :: r:::. This is an off-line purpose clause subordinated to
30:20a. This is the ninth and last time that the verb r:: occurs in Deut 28:69-30:20. The
semantic nuance of obedience is present here. It is interesting the order of the
progression in which the text uses the verb r:: after it has used :s. The Lord wants to
make it clear that loving the Lord precedes obeying Him. The theological analysis will
return to this feature.
Clause 30:20c. :::. This is an off-line purpose clause coordinated to
30:20b. This clause completes a sequence in the expected relation of the people with the
Lord. If the people love the Lord, obey His voice and hold fast to Him, they will live and
have length of days on the land that He promised to their ancestors. The verb :: occurs
around 54 times in the Hebrew OT with seven occurrences in Deuteronomy, four of those
times the people are the subject and the Lord is the object.
213

Clause 30:20d. : s ~ s : . This is an off-line nominal causal clause
coordinated to clause 30:20c. Clauses 30:20a-20c are epexegetical to 30:19c-d. The

210
See Lenchak, Choose Life! 202.
211
Christensen uses genrundive forms, see Christensen, Duteronomy 21:10-34:12,
745. Driver uses infinitive forms, see Driver, Deuteronomy, 332.
212
Bratcher and Hatton, A Handbook on Deuteronomy, 509. See also Wevers,
Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, 488.
213
Deuteronomy is second in the frequency after Psalms where the verb ::
occurs eight times. See Deut 10:20; 11:22; 13:5; 30:20.

184
LXX translates the particle s
214
with eue (neuter singular). Although Bratcher and
Hatton do not suggest translating the clause following the LXX, they use the neuter this
to translate the particle s.
215
Clause 30:20c mentions the Lord by the pronominal suffix
in the particle :. This clause might be translated by holding fast to Him. Therefore,
the particle s in clause 30:20d might be referring to the pronominal suffix in : in
clause 30:20c allowing the translation: For He is your life and the length of your days.
The other option is that the pronoun s refers to the infinitive in 30:20c and therefore it
could be translated for this is your life and the length of your days.
Clause 30:20e. :s:r -:::. Clause 30:20e is an asyndetic off-line purpose
clause subordinated to 30:20d. The predicate is provided by an infinitive construct of the
verb ::. The verb :: occurs two times in the text of Deut 28:69-30:20 in clauses
29:15b and 30:30e. The first reference looks back to Egypt and the second reference
looks forward to the promised land.
216
The word :s occurs four times in the text of
Deut 28:69-30:20. In the speech the word :s occurs alternatively in punitive-related
context (29:27a, 30:18c) and in blessing-related context (30:9a, 30:20e).
Clause 30:20f. :r: ~s: ::s: -:s: r::: :s. This is an
adjectival off-line clause subordinated to 30:20e. This clause is qualifying the noun
:s. The list of the ancestors in this same order and as indirect object in a pattern :

214
The particle s is used to convey the masculine, feminine and the neuter. See
Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, 214 2301. See Swanson,
Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 2085.
215
See Bratcher and Hatton, A Handbook on Deuteronomy, 509.
216
The verb :: occurs around 1080 times in the OT with some 46 times in
Deuteronomy. This verb occurs only two times in the speech of Deut 28:69-30:20, in
clauses 29:15b and 30:20e. The first occasion refers to Egypt in past temporal
perspective and the second occasion refers to the promised land in future temporal
perspective.

185
plus proper name, occurs around eleven times in the Pentateuch with seven times in
Deuteronomy.
217
The list of the forefathers is related to the promise (r::) of the land as
can be seen not only here but also in the other references.
218

Clause 30:20g. e :: --:. This is an off-line purpose clause subordinated to
30:20f. This is the last of twelve infinitive construct verbs with purpose nuance in Deut
30:15-20. The verb -: is present in most of the verses where the list of the forefathers in
present in relation to the promise of the land.
219

Summary. The textual analysis of Deut 30:15-20 shows how the ancient copyists
and translators struggled with the grammar and syntax of this passage. One of the issues
in this passage has to do with the way as verse 30:16 starts (
a
\::s \:s,). The LXX
added a complete clause as it seems that the protasis of the conditional structure is
missing from the text. The Numeruswechsel is also an issue as the ancient versions and
translations show variants in reference to the personal pronouns and suffixes. One of
these variations affects the recipients of the blessing of the land in verse 30:20 (
b
:: ).
Additionally, verse 30:20 shows a case of variation of orthography among the textual
witnesses (
a
::).
The syntagmatic analysis reveals a text predominantly in off-line and therefore
loaded with background and explicative content. A text loaded with exhortation and legal
vocabulary manifested mainly through covenant-related vocabulary. The text is also
loaded with vocabulary that reveals a call to a personal commitment, a call to a
transcendent decision. The syntax reveals rhetorical structures that fulfill this personal

217
See Deut 1:8; 6:10; 9:5, 27; 29:12; 30:20; 34:4.
218
Nine out of the eleven references are related to the promise of the land, see
Gen 50:24; Exod 6:8; 33:1; Num 32:11; Deut 1:8; 6:10; 9:5; 30:20 and 34:4.
219
See Exod 6:8; 33:1; Deut 1:8; 6:10; 30:20 and 34:4.

186
call to the audience to a decision related to their relationship with the Lord and the
consequent transcendent result. The decision that the audience has to make will result in
either life or death.
The structural information revealed by the syntactical and syntagmatic analysis
reveals two conditional structures in contrast that extend through clauses 30:16a-d
/30:16e-i and 30:17a-e/30:18a-f respectively. These two conditional structures are
framed by two calls for the people to choose between life and death in clauses 30:15a-b
and to choose life in clauses 30:19a-30:20g. The second call provides abundance of
information in reference to what will mean for the people this life in the Lord in a cause-
effect format. There is abundance of repetition, pairs and contrasts in the text used with
rhetorical intention that might be useful for the structural and theological analysis.
The theological information derived from the syntactical, syntagmatic and
structural analysis reveals a passage that deals mainly with life. The usage and
distribution of the words ~ and ~ suggest it. Although the text warns about death as
the ultimate consequence of the wrong decisions, the theme of the text is life. The text
portrays the choices that may conduct to life, the way that this life reveals and the
blessings or curses that the audience could harvest from both the right and the wrong
choices. The usage of the verb :s is another topic that is relevant in the text of Deut
30:15-20, specially in the order that is used in reference to the verb r::. The way the
words ~, ~ and :s are used in the text, suggests a call to a personal relationship of the
audience with the Lord. These theological elements of life and death, good and evil, and
the call for the people to love the Lord are elaborated in the text of Deut 30:15-20 in a
covenantal matrix. Therefore, these features will be analyzed in a covenantal context.

187
The flow of the Numeruswechsel in Deut 30:15-20 alternates between the second
masculine singular and the second masculine plural in an a-b-a-b-a pattern: a. 30:15a-
30:17e 2ms, b. 30:18a-c 2mp, a. 30:18d-f 2ms, b. 30:19a 2mp, a. 30:19b-30:20f 2ms.
The structural hints found so far in the analysis of Deut 30:15-20, do not seem to
correlate with the flow of the Numeruswechsel in this text. In order to visualize the larger
picture, additional examination of the structure of this text is required and the behavior of
the Numeruswechsel in the context of the whole speech (28:69-30:20). The flow of this
feature in the clauses follows a pattern 2ms-2mp-2ms-2mp-2ms.
30:15a-30:17e 2ms
30:18a-30:18c 2mp
30:18d-30:18f 2ms
30:19a 2mp
30:19b-30:20f 2ms

Summary
This section provides a brief summary of the findings from the textlinguistic
analysis of Deut 28:69-30:20. The summary will cover textual issues, syntagmatic
analysis, structural information, and the issues related to the Personenwechsel and the
Numeruswechsel.

Textual Issues
The textual analysis of Deut 28:69-30:20 discloses what seems to be the efforts of
the ancient copyists and translators to understand the text. We have dealt with issues
related to orthography, vocabulary, grammar, syntax and style of the text. The constant
shifts in either number (Numeruswechsel) or person (Personenwechsel) in the pronouns
and pronominal suffixes is one of the issues that the ancient copyists and translators
faced. The analysis of most of the variants suggests that the available evidence did not

188
justify abandoning the readings from the MT. Therefore, the textual analysis of the
variants transferred most of the issues to the syntactic and syntagmatic analysis.

Syntactic and Syntagmatic Analysis
The information derived from the syntactical, syntagmatic and structural analysis
discloses several literary devices that work together to convey a message. This message
moves in two spheres, one in the temporal realm and the other in reference to the
audience. In the first aspect, the verbal distribution and temporal text aspect keeps in
perspective past, present and future. The past is brought into attention as Gods past
mighty acts in behalf of the people are set as the basis for the whole exposition and
particularly as part of the rationale for the peoples decisions. The present is in
perspective as the time for the peoples decision. They can decide either in favor or
against a covenantal relationship with the Lord. A positive answer will bring with it
blessing, length of days on the promised land and protection. A negative answer will
bring curse, shortage of days, namely death and exile. The text portrays the future in two
perspectives. One perspective has to do with the future of blessings, life and protection
that God is planning for the people. The other perspective has to do with the ever-
possible apostasy. Particularly idolatry is focused upon. The audience receive warnings
once and again against the pending threat of apostasy. The focus related to the people as
individuals, hammers both the collective and the individual responsibility in both the
covenant and in the peoples relationship with God, which are concomitant.

Structural Information
The structural information provided by the syntactical and syntagmatic analysis
evidences transitions that mainly harmonize with the brakes in the text marked by the

189
Masoretic delimitation markers. The analysis confirms the double nature Deut 28:69 as
the conclusion of the previous section in the book (Deut 27:1-28:68) and the title of the
next section (Deut 29:1-30:20). The structure of Deut 28:69-30:20 still requires further
analysis in diverse details. The next section will take this analysis one-step further as the
structural and thematic flow of the text will be evaluated. The structural information
allows the next outline:
I. Deut 28:69-29:8, The Covenant and the Magnalia Dei
A. Deut 28:69a-d, The Covenant
B. Deut 29:1a-3a, Magnalia Dei (Exodus)
C. Deut 29:4a-5d, Magnalia Dei (Wilderness)
B. Deut 29:6a-7b, Magnalia Dei (Early Conquest)
A. Deut 29:8a-d, The Covenant
II. Deut 29:9-20, The Covenant and the Apostasy
A. Deut 29:9-14, The Covenant Ceremony
a. Deut 29:9a-29:10c, The Audience
b. Deut 29:11a-29:12d, The Covenant Ceremony
a. Deut 29:13a-29:14b, The Audience
B. Deut 29:15-20, Past and Future in Review
a. Deut 29:15a-16b, Historical Review (Idolatry in Egypt and the nations)
b. Deut 29:17a-20b, Conditional Future (The possible future apostasy)
III. Deut 29:21-28, The Future Apostasy: Punishment, Rationale and Exhortation.
A. Deut 29:21a-22f, Future curses and punishment because of Apostasy
B. Deut 29:23a-27b, Causes of the curse and the punishment
C. Deut 29:28a-c, Summary and conclusion: The Revelation is Available.
IV. Deut 30:1-10, Returning to the Lord
A. Deut 30:1a-3d, Returning to the Lord
a. Protasis 30:1a-2c, If you return to the Lord
b. Apodosis 30:3a-d, The Lord will return to you
B. Deut 30:4a-7d, The Promised Future Gathering
a. Protasis 30:4a, If you are driven away
b. Apodosis 30:4b-7d, The Lord will gather you
C. Deut 30:8a-d, You will return
D. Deut 30:9a-10d, The Condition for Gods Blessing
a. Apodosis, 30:9a-c, The Lord will bless you
b. Protasis, 30:10a-d, If you obey
V. 30:11-14, The Commandment is available
A. Deut 30:11a-d, The command is not. . . . I command you (2ms)
B. Deut 30:12a-f, The command is not in Heavens (1
st
plural)
B. Deut 30:13a-f, The command is not beyond the sea (1
st
plural)
A. Deut 30:14a-b, The word is. . . . For you to obey (2ms)

190
VI. 30:15-20, The Call to Choose Life in the Lord
A. Deut 30:15a-b, Call to choose between life and goodness, evil and death
B. Deut 30:16a-i, I command you (Promise)
B. Deut 30:17a-30:18f, If you turn your heart (Warning)
A. Deut 30:19a-30:20g, Call to choose life

Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel
Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel has been approached from several
perspectives depending if the approach is diachronical or synchronical. Critical
methodologies have interpreted the Numeruswechsel
220
in the book of Deuteronomy as
evidence of a suggested redactional history of the text.
221
Synchronic-canonical approach
has advanced two interpretations of this syntactical issue. Christensen on structural
grounds sees it as a device to mark transitions in the literary flow and to provide evidence
of melodic or musical elements for the oral recitation of the text.
222
McConville has
compared literary aspects of Deuteronomy with ANE legal texts and the Bundesbuch
(Exod 20:22-23:19). He has interpreted the Numeruswechsel as a literary device that
serves to the rhetoric of the text and particularly as part of Deuteronomys strategy to
support its theology of the responsibility of the people as such for the keeping of the
Torah.
223
Analyzing the syntax and the verbal distribution, William R. Higgs
224
has
found correlation between verbal styles and the preference for the singular or plural form
of address. In his study, he suggests that the Numeruswechsel is a valid criterion for
literary study in Deuteronomy.

220
For the textual evidence relative to the Numeruswechsel in Deuteronomy in
Qumran, see Roberts, Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea scrolls, 39-42.
221
See Christensen, The Numeruswechsel in Deuteronomy 12, 395. Suzuki,
The 'Numeruswechsel' in Deuteronomy.
222
Christensen, The Numeruswechsel in Deuteronomy 12, 402.
223
McConville, Singular Address in the Deuteronomic Law, 19, 35-36.
224
Higgs, A Stylistic Analysis of the Numeruswechsel Sections.

191
The evidence related to the Numeruswechsel provided by the previous
syntagmatic analysis seems to fit with McConvilles thesis. He has suggested that the
shift 2mp-2ms serves rhetorical purposes related to Deuteronomys emphasis in the
peoples collective and individual responsibility in the covenant and, at the same time,
addressing the individual person while setting him or her in the context of the whole
people. This strategy avoids the option that the individual may hide in the collective and,
at the same time, seeks the integration of the entire community.
225

The evidence seems to fit with Higgs
226
thesis that the Numeruswechsel and
Personenwechsel might be use as a criterion for literary analysis. These features follow
distinct patterns in the text of Deut 28:69-30:20 that seem to fulfill literary, pragmatic and
rhetorical functions intended to enhance the theology of the text. The next chapter of this
study will evaluate the structural information and the function of the Numeruswechsel
and Personenwechsel in the flow of the whole speech. Further studies might address the
flow of this feature in larger sections of Deuteronomy in order to confirm if there is
consistency in these patterns through the book.

225
McConville, Singular Address in the Deuteronomic Law, 26-27.
226
Higgs, A Stylistic Analysis of the Numeruswechsel Sections, 156-158.

192





CHAPTER 4
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF DEUT 28:69-30:20



The syntactical and syntagmatic analysis of Deut 28:69-30:20 have provided
linguistic data that inform the understanding of the internal structure of the passage. The
present chapter assesses the subsections inside the passage and the flow between them.
This chapter performs a preliminary assessment of the diverse current approaches
to the understanding of the structure of the book of Deuteronomy. This in order to show
why this structural study chooses as framework the approach that sees Deuteronomy as a
collection of speeches.
In this research, this chapter will deal with Deut 28:69-30:20 in two directions:
First, assessing the position of the chapter in the structure of the book in reference to
Deuteronomys speeches and establishing the limits of the passage (the boundaries of
these speeches need to be assessed). Second, it analyzes the internal structural flow of
the text so that internal subdivisions may be identified and any literary structure and/or
device may be recognized and analyzed in the perspective of the whole passage.
This structural analysis of Deut 28:69-30:20 pays attention to the traditional
understanding of its structure as reflected in the teamim. Of these markers, attention is
given to the location in the text of the atn ( ), the sp psq ( ) and the sillq ( ).
1

The presence of the petuHah (e), setumah (:) and ziah are also noted. The location of

1
There is no intention in this study of a detailed analysis of the traditional
Masoretic structural markers in the Hebrew text of Deut 28:69-30:20.

193
these Masoretic delimitation markers in the Hebrew text of Deut 28:69-30:20 will be
submitted to test by comparing their location and function with the breaks and transitions
marked by the syntactical flow.
2
The presence of conjunctions, discourse markers and
other syntactical indicators
3
are also taken into account.

The Structure of Deuteronomy
This research has chosen to evaluate the structural approach that see
Deuteronomy organized around a covenant pattern, the approach that sees a concentric
literary structure and the proposal that sees the book as a collection of speeches. Other
structural approaches are briefly mentioned and the reason for their concise analysis is
provided at that point. These approaches are evaluated against the textual evidence
pointing to their weakness (if there are any) and contributions for the study of the
structure of the book of Deuteronomy.

2
The antiquity and function of the Masoretic markers is a matter of study. Waltke
and OConnor quote evidence that suggests that some punctuation signs were added to
the text before vowels signs. Additionally they quote evidence from the second century
BC in early Septuagint text. They add, At the present it is best to consider the accents as
an early relatively reliable witness to a correct interpretation of the text. See Waltke,
and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 28-30; see E. J. Revell,
Pausal Forms in Biblical Hebrew: Their Function, Origin and Significance, Journal of
Semitic Studies 25, no. 2 (1980): 165-179; Bezalel Elan Dresher, The Prosodic Basis of
the Tiberian Hebrew System of Accents, Language 70, no. 1 (March 1994): 1-52. In
this respect, Marjo C. A. Korpel says that it seems logical to suppose that a division of
the text into sense units was part of the original composition at the time it was written
down. Marjo C. A. Korpel, Introduction to the Series Pericope in Delimitation
Criticism, Marjo C. A. Korpel and Josef Oesch, ed., Pericope 1 (Assen, Netherlands:
Van Gorcum, 2000), 10. In reference to their presence in Deuteronomy, as an example,
Paul Sanders has demonstrated that the colometrical distribution of Deut 32 is attested all
the way from Qumran to the medieval codices. See Paul Sanders, The Provenance of
Deuteronomy 32, Oudtestamentische Studien 37 (Leiden: Brill, 1996), 102-132. See a
brief review of the history of chapter and verse division in OT and old versions in Jordan
S. Penkower, Verse Divisions in the Hebrew Bible, Vetus Testamentus 50, no. 3
(2000): 379-388.
3
van der Merwe, Naud and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar,
271-335.

194
Covenant Form
The discoveries of Hittite and neo-Assyrian treaty literature lead to the attempt to
apply the structures of these treatises to Deuteronomy.
4
A cursory reading will show that
there is no agreement about the location of the features of the treaty form in the book and
that a perfect match should not be expected, still less forced. . . . Deuteronomy is
independent and unique, simply drawing on known and available forms for its own
purposes.
5
Additionally, recent research has made it evident that the biblical Hebrew
semantic and theological understanding of the term -:, must be drawn primarily from
its biblical Hebrew textual context and not from the ANE literary context.
6
Chapter 5
will return to the covenant in Deuteronomy and particularly in Deut 28:69-30:20.
Evidently, the covenant form, a useful tool to understand several literary and theological
features of Deuteronomy, requires more research.
Close to the covenant form proposal is the concept that the book is organized
around the law.
7
According to Olson, the book is organized around the Decalogue in

4
Peter C. Craigie sees covenant more as the overall organizational theme in
Deuteronomy rather than as the literary form of the book. His commentary follows the
structure of the speeches, dividing the text as Introduction 1:1-5, [First] address 1:6-4:43,
[second] address 4:44-26:19, [third] address 27:1-28:69, [fourth] address 29:1-30:20 and
the transition to Joshua 31:1-34:12. These divisions are assumed and there is not analysis
of structure or transitions. Peter C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy, The New
International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976),
22-24, 67-69.
5
McConville, Deuteronomy, 24. See C. Wright, Deuteronomy, 2-3. See Tigay,
Deuteronomy, xiv-xv.
6
Gordon J. McConville, -: New International Dictionary of Old Testament
Theology and Exegesis (NIDOTTE), ed. Willem A. VanGemeren (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1997), 1:746-755.
7
See S. Dean McBride Jr. Polity of the Covenant People: The Book of
Deuteronomy, in A Song of Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of
Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3
(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993), 62-77.

195
chapter 5.
8
Georg Braulik provides evidence that suggests that Deut 12-26 may be
organized in function of the Decalogue. However, he suggests that the presence of the
Decalogue in Deut 12-26 is not that clear. Braulik

even says that chapters 12-18
correspondence to the Decalogue is vague and general and the concept is in need of
further investigation.
9
Christopher Wright does not see that the evidence is so convincing
but he acknowledges, it seems broadly convincing that the Decalogue has influenced the
ordering of the legal material in Deuteronomy.
10
Allan M. Harman suggests the whole
book is organized around the exposition of the law in a covenant context. According to
him, Deut 1:1-4:49 provides a historical review, then Deut 5:1-31 provides the foundation
of the covenant relationship while Deut 6:1-26:15 contains the exposition of the ten
commandments.
11
According to this, Deut 27:1-30:20 contains the re-affirmation of the
covenant and finally, Deut 31:1-34:12, the continuation of the covenant. Harman
recognizes there is overlapping as well as transitional material between the passages that
deal with the commandments. He attributes the overlapping and the transitional materials
to the sermonic nature of the text and to the application of the commandments.
12
The

8
See Olson, Deuteronomy and the Death of Moses, 15-17.
9
Georg Braulik, The Sequence of the Laws in Deuteronomy 12-26 and in the
Decalogue, in A Song of Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of
Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3
(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993), 313-335, see particularly pages 321-322 where
details are provided.
10
Christopher Wright, Deuteronomy, New International Biblical Commentary
(Peabody, MA, 1996), 4-5.
11
Harman sees the distribution of the materials in this way: First commandment,
Deut 6:1-11:32; second, Deut 12:1-13:18; third, Deut 14:1-29; fourth, Deut 15:1-16:17;
fifth, Deut 16:18-18:22; sixth, Deut 19:1-22:8; seventh, Deut 22:9-23:14; eighth, Deut
23:14-24:7; ninth, Deut 28:8-25:4; tenth, 25:5-26:15.
12
See Allan Harman, Deuteronomy: The Commands of a Covenant God (Ross-
shire, Scotland, UK: Christian Focus, 2007), 31-294, see the introductory exposition in
pages 9-14.

196
presence of the covenant and the law as form and as message is evident through the text
of Deuteronomy.

Concentric Literary Pattern
Christensen has suggested a concentric literary pattern that almost mirrors the
boundaries of the speeches. Additionally, he sees major sections, internally organized in
five or seven part concentric patterns. Apart from his claims of poetic, musical and even
numerical aspects present in the whole text of Deuteronomy,
13
this study looks at his
proposal for the literary structure of the book:
A THE OUTER FRAME: Part 1A Look Backward (chaps. 13)
B THE INNER FRAME: Part 1The Great Peroration
14
(chaps. 411)
C THE CENTRAL CORE: Covenant Stipulations (chaps. 1226)
B THE INNER FRAME: Part 2The Covenant Ceremony (chaps. 2730)
A THE OUTER FRAME: Part 2A Look Forward (chaps. 3134)
15

Christensens treatment of Deuteronomys structural proposal is scattered
throughout his commentary as he analyzes the form and structure of every single section.
This situation makes necessary the review of the entire work (two volumes) in order to
assess it.
In respect to Deut 29, Christensens translation of the text reflects several such
features such as the division of the text in clauses or cola, the counting of both the clauses

13
Although Eugene H. Merrill recognizes the scholarship and comprehensiveness
of Christensens commentary, he also criticizes Christensens brief and even superficial
treatment of some key texts in behalf of his passion for the form and pattern in the book.
He quotes criticisms to the poetical and musical claims in the text. See Eugene H.
Merrill, review of Deuteronomy 1:1-21:9, by Duane L. Christensen, Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 46, no. 4 (December 2003): 720-722. See also Rmer,
review of Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 1.
14
Speech.
15
Christensen, Deuteronomy 1-11, xli.

197
and the morae
16
and information related to the textual variants.
17
Then the commentary
deals with the form and structure of the passage, giving attention to syntax and going into
vocabulary and thematic parallelisms at different levels in the text. Several other aspects
are analyzed in the text as the Numeruswechsel; there is abundance of interaction with the
secondary literature. Merrill complains that Christensens method could be exegetically
more productive if in addition to the heavy attention to the form, equal attention were
given to the text. This level of productivity is seen often in Christensens work as Merrill
himself recognizes.
18

The concentric approach seems to look at the thematic and theological elements
of the book as portrayed by its literary structures and strategies. Probably this attention to
literary features and to the syntax in the text is the reason why it looks so near to the text
linguistic approach of the speeches as structural strategy. However, Christensens
dependence on morae
19
counting provides room for intuition and makes the usage of
hermeneutical controls difficult. The introduction of numerology (numerical value of
words) in the structural analysis and Christensens heavy dependence on the cycle of
Torah readings introduce distractions from the syntactical and structural attention to the
text.
20
Following more text-oriented approaches other authors have also identified

16
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 36, note 2.
17
Ibid., 706-733.
18
As is recognized in Merrill, Review of Duane L. Christensen Deuteronomy
1:1-21:9, 721-722. See also DeRouchie, Deuteronomy as Didactic Poetry? 1-13. In
this article, DeRouchie debates Christensens poetic approach with evidence taken from
syntax, literary analysis and word classes.
19
Mora, plural morae or moras, is a phonetic unit for the determination and
counting of the syllables weight.
20
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 1:1-21:9, xcii-c, ci-cviii. These two sections
provide Christensens rationale for his use of numerology and his introduction of the
cycle of Torah readings.

198
several literary structures inside Deuteronomy including parallelisms, inclusio, and other
literary framing devices and stylistic peculiarities.
21


Collection of Speeches
Sailhamer sees the Pentateuch as a book in five volumes and he has identified
several literary strategies in it.
22
These literary strategies will prove their value later in
this study. One of these strategies is the pattern of narrativepoetryepilogue. Sailhamer
sees this strategy as a macro-structural organizer of the Pentateuch although it also works
in the small scale as a compositional technique.
23
According to this perspective, Deut 32-
33 is the poetic conclusion to the book of both Deuteronomy and the Pentateuch followed
by the narrative epilogue of Deut 34.
24

Jan Ridderbos suggests understanding the whole book as a succession of two
major discourses, the first in chapters 1-4 and the second in 5-26. In this structure
chapters 27-30 are the concluding words of Moses before the final arrangements and
farewell of chapters 31-34.
25
However, Ridderbos approach, which sees chapters 27-30
outside the speech structure, requires evaluation. David F. Payne sees three speeches in
Deuteronomy (1:6-4:40, 4:44-28:68, 29:1-30:20). He sees 1:1-5 as an introduction and
4:41-43, 31:1-29, 32:44-52 and 34:1-12 as narratives outside of the speeches. Paynes

21
See OConnell, Deuteronomy IX 7-X 7, 10-11, 492-509. OConnell,
Deuteronomy VII 1-26, 248-265. OConnell, Deuteronomy VIII 1-20, 437-452. See
stylistic distinctiveness of Deuteronomy in Driver, Deuteronomy, lxxviii-lxxxviii and in
J. A. Thompson, Deuteronomy: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove, IL:
Intervarsity Press, 1974), 21-26, 30-35. See a careful inventory of the Greek text of
Deuteronomy in Wevers, Text History of the Greek Deuteronomy, 86-144.
22
Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 1-3, 423-479
23
Ibid., 35.
24
Ibid., 35-36.
25
Ridderbos, Deuteronomy, 48, 269-272.

199
commentary deals with the pericopes in the text; he identifies 75 small sections in the
book, and does not deal with literary structure or with the overall structure or transitions
in the text.
26

J. A. Thompson sees three speeches of Moses to Israel. According to him there
is an introduction (Deut 1:1-5), a first (preparatory) speech (Deut 1:6-4:40), an appendix
(Deut 4:41-43), second main speech (Deut 4:44-28:69), third speech (Deut 29-30) and
then the final arrangements and death of Moses (Deut 31-34).
27
This proposal fails to
locate Deut 4:41-43 in the overall structure as it refers to this passage as an appendix.
Pfandl see these boundaries as first speech Deut 1:6-4:43, second speech 4:44-26:19,
third speech 27:1-28:68, fourth speech 29:1-30:20.
28
Pfandls proposal succeeds in
locating Deut 4:41-43 in the overall structure.
Both Olson and Christopher Wright look at the speeches according to the presence
of textual markers or superscriptions.
29
Olson sees the structure of Deuteronomy
according to the usage of superscriptions.
30
The superscriptions they identify are in 1:1,
these are the words, (::: s); 4:44, and this is the law - -s; 6:1, and this
is the commandment (s: -s); 29:1, and Moses spoke (:: s) and 33:1, this
is the blessing (:: -s). Christopher Wright sees fewer superscriptions in 1:1, 4:44

26
David F. Payne, Deuteronomy (Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1985), 3-4;
see pages ix-xi.
27
J. A. Thompson, Deuteronomy: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers
Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1974), 14.
28
See Gerhard Pfandl, The Soteriological Implications of the Cities of Refuge,
in Inicios, paradigmas y fundamentos: Estudios teolgicos y exegticos en el Pentateuco,
Gerald A. Klingbeil ed., River Plate Adventist University Monograph Series in Biblical
and Theological Studies, vol. 1 (Entre Ros, Argentina: Editorial Universidad Adventista
del Plata, 2004), 236.
29
Olson, Deuteronomy and the Death of Moses, 14-17. See C. Wright,
Deuteronomy, 2.
30
Olson, Deuteronomy and the Death of Moses, 14-15.

200
and 29:1 with chapters 31-34 as an historical epilogue.
31
Finally, Sonnet sees the markers
in 1:1, 4:44, 28:69 and 33:1.
32
This situation evidences the need for the evaluation of
these transitions in the text.
Deuteronomy 1:1-5 is clearly an introductory itinerary report that sets the
elements of place, time, circumstances and purpose of the speech that follows from verse
1:6 which is announced in 1:1a and 1:5b in what is part of an inclusio structure in this
section.
33
Ridderbos suggests ruling out the approach that sees Deut 1:1-5 as the
conclusion of Numbers on the basis that Numbers 36:13 fulfills that function.
34
This
confirms the opening of the first speech in 1:6 and then it finishes with the regulations for
the cities of refuge in 4:41-43. McConville sees 4:41-49 as forming an inclusio with 1:1-
5 setting the previous speech in the historical context.
35
However, the inclusio is more
precisely present between 1:1-5 and 4:44-49 as Lundbom has made it clear by pointing to
the close parallelism in vocabulary, word order and structure. In this way, Deut 1:1-5 and
4:44-49 are enclosing the first speech in Deuteronomy. DeRouchie shows from a text-
linguistic perspective the function of Deut 4:44-49 as the textual marker for the beginning
of the next speech. He shows parallels between 4:44-49 and 28:69-29:8 in terms of
vocabulary, word order and structure.
36
Therefore, Deut 4:44-49 has parallelisms in

31
C. Wright, Deuteronomy, 2.
32
Jean-Pierre Sonnet, The Book Within the Book: Writing in Deuteronomy
(Leiden: Brill, 1997), 17-18.
33
See Lundbom, The Inclusio and Other Framing Devices in Deuteronomy I-
XXVIII, 300-304. This study recognizes the value of the literary finding of Lundbom
but his interpretation of these data is not supported by this study as he sees his findings
supporting an original Deuteronomy in chapters 1-28 and an addendum in chapters 29-
34.
34
Ridderbos, Deuteronomy, 51-52.
35
McConville, Deuteronomy, 101-102.
36
DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love, 48-52.

201
vocabulary, word order and structure with both Deut 1:1-5 and Deut 28:69-29:8.
Probably these texts function as bridges having textual connections with both the
preceding and the following sections. This aspect will require further structural study
particularly in reference to Deut 28:69.
The unity of Deut 5:1-11:32 as the first major section of the second speech
running from chapter 5 to 26, has been acknowledged and its limits established by the
presence of an inclusio in Deut 5:1 and 11:32 (: . . . ::e::-s :~-s).
37
In
addition to this, three speeches have been recognized inside this passage. Every one of
them is enclosed by the clause :sc r:: at the beginning (5:1, 6:4, 9:1) and a finite
form of the verb r:: at the end of each address (6:3, 8:20, 11:27, 28).
38

The unity of Deut 12:1-26:19 as the Legal Code
39
or Deuteronomic Code in
Deuteronomy has been recognized. The limits are established by the presence of a
literary strategy that wraps the legal section at its beginning and end in a cultic-ritual
section (12:1-32; 26:1-19), this same structure have been recognized in the Bundesbuch
(Exod 20:22-23:19) and in the Code of Holiness (Lev 17-26).
40


37
See Lundbom, The Inclusio and Other Framing Devices in Deuteronomy I-
XXVIII, 304-305. McConville, Deuteronomy, 216. See a discussion of the syntactical
and structural function of this Hebrew phrase (: . . . ::e::-s :~-s) in the
text of Deuteronomy in DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love, 229 and its note 23.
38
See DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love, 229.
39
See a study of some sections of the Deuteronomic Code from a synchronic-
canonical perspective in J. Gordon McConville, Law and Theology in Deuteronomy,
Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Study Supplemental Series 33 (Sheffield:
JSOT Press, 1994), 21-159. For a critical diachronic approach, see Bernard Levinson,
Deuteronomy and the Hermeneutics of Legal Innovation (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1997). Levinsons review and critic of McConvilles monograph can be found in
Review of McConvilles Law and Theology in Deuteronomy, The Jewish Quarterly
Review 80, no. 3/4 (January-April 1990): 396-404. These two monographs provide a
dialogue between the two approaches concerning Deut 12-26.
40
Sprinkle, 'The Book of the Covenant': A Literary Approach, 37.

202
From Deut 27:1 to 29:1 where Moses and the elders summon the people and
address them, there is another summons. Moses is the one who now addresses the
people. This shows a shift, providing a subdivision in 27:1-28:69.
Deuteronomy 28:69 is clearly marked in the Hebrew text as the concluding verse
of the previous section with the presence of a petuHah (e). Additionally, the vocabulary
of the text (-:, :s:, :~) makes a connection with the Bundesbuch (Exod 20:22-
23:19) as it alludes to the covenant ceremony made at Sinai (:~) and connects it with
the covenantal renewal that has been held in Deuteronomy at Moab.
41
The vocabulary of
this verse is further elaborated in Deut 29:1-28 as the root -: is used five times in
seventeen verses (Deut 29:8, 11, 13, 20, 24) while the last time -: is used in the
previous text is in Deut 17:2 and the expression -: :: from 28:69 is used verbatim
again in 29:8. This data suggests that this verse might be a textual link between
Deuteronomy and the Bundesbuch. The analysis of this textual link is beyond the
objectives of this study. Additionally, and important for the structural aspect of this study,
there is the possibility that this verse functions as a bridge
42
that closes the previous
section (27:1-28:68) and opens the next (29:1-30:20).
Deuteronomy 31:1-29 provides the final aspects of the narrative. This texts has
been qualified as a macrostructural juncture,
43
that makes the transition between the
narrative and the poetic sections. It marks a transition after Deut 30:20. Deut 28:69-
30:20 has ended with a dramatic covenantal call in Deut 30:15-20 and particularly in

41
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 706. Tigay, Deuteronomy, 274. Here
Tigay recognizes the macrostructural and theological function of Deut 28:69.
42
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 705.
43
Davidson, The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old Testament, 351-
352.

203
verses 19-20.
44
Now Deut 31:1-8 deals with diverse aspects related to the transition of
leadership between Moses and Joshua. The last time Joshua was mentioned was in Deut
3:21, 28. These mentions of Joshua near the introductory (Deut 1:5b-4:49) and
concluding section of the book provide a structural balance.
Lundbom has identified an inclusion that frames the Song of Moses. This
inclusio is formed by the concentric usage of the words -/ :::/ : in 31:24-30
and :/ :::/ - in 32:44-47.
45
The concluding section is composed of the poetic
speech focused on the latter days or days to come (:: -~s:) in 32:1-33:29 and the
historical epilogue in 34:1-12. This structure forms the epilogue of Deuteronomy that
Sailhamer
46
sees as the epilogue of the whole Pentateuch after the wilderness narrative,
which stretches from Exod 16 up to Deut 31.
47

Deuteronomy 31-32 is seen as a self-contained sub-section, in which the three
themes of the transition from Moses leadership to Joshuas, the deposition of the Book of
the Law, and the Song of Witness dominate.
48
In the context of Deut 31-34, being aware
of source-critical and redaction critical issues, Brian Britt approaches the text through a
literary methodology and particularly linguistics. He sees Deut 31-34 as a concluding
coherent unit. According to Britt this sub-section harmonizes in an arrangement where
the themes of Moses death and Joshuas appointment are organized around the motif of
the law (-) and the witness (r). He sees these terms (-, r) functioning as

44
McConville, Deuteronomy, 430-433.
45
Lundbom, The Inclusio and Other Framing Devices in Deuteronomy I-
XXVIII, 300.
46
Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 35-37. Is important to remember that
Sailhamer sees an overall literary structure spanning the Pentateuch as a literary unit.
47
Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 3
48
McConville, Deuteronomy, 436.

204
textual organizers.
49
Additionally, Britt identifies lexical and structural connections of
Deut 31-32 not only with Deuteronomy as a whole but also with the rest of the
Pentateuch and even with others books in the Hebrew canon.
50
Sailhamer identified in
the Song of Moses a pattern that is shared by other poems in the Pentateuch that act as
macro structural organizers. Speaking about Jacobs blessings of the tribes (Gen 49),
Balaams poems (Num 24) and the Song of Moses (Deut 31) he says:
In each of the three segments, the central narrative figure (Jacob, Balaam, Moses)
calls an audience together (Imperative: Ge 49:1; Nu 24:14; Dt 31:28) and
proclaims (cohortative: Ge 49:1; Nu 24:14; Det 31:28) what will happen (Ge
49:1; Nu 24:14; Dt 31:29) in the end of days (Ge 49:1; Nu 24:14; Dt 31:29
.51

The arguments that support the approach that sees the organization of the book of
Deuteronomy around a series of speeches deal with lexicon, semantic, morphosyntax and
text linguistic evidence. It looks at the text in its micro and macro structural aspects and
takes into account the literary and the theological function of these structures as well as
the literary strategies.
52
For exegetical purposes, this structural approach provides several
methodological advantages as syntax and linguistics allow dealing directly with the text,
independently of genre concerns, while at the same time respecting genre elements. The
bottom-up syntactical procedure allows that the form, genre and other literary elements to
come out of the text itself as the analysis moves ahead. In this way, the theology of the

49
The word -, is found in Deut 31:9, 11, 12; 32:46; 33:4, 10 and the word r
is found in Deut 31:19, 21, 24, 26, 30; 32:22; 34:1, 2, 3, 6. Brian Britt, Deuteronomy
31-32 as a Textual Memorial, Biblical Interpretation 8, no. 4 (2000): 358-374.
50
Britt, Deuteronomy 31-32 as a Textual Memorial, 371-373.
51
Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 36.
52
See Robert Polzin, Reporting Speech in the Book of Deuteronomy: Toward a
Compositional Analysis of the Deuteronomic History, in A Song of Power and the
Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen, Sources
for Biblical and Theological Study 3 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993) 355-374.
Robert Polzin provides evidence of literary rhetorical strategies with the way as the report
speech is distributed in the text of Deuteronomy.

205
text becomes also evident. This is also a way to control subjectivism and the application
of external criteria to the text.

Summary
Christopher Wright suggests, Deuteronomy is so rich in content and texture that,
like a rich fruitcake, it can be sliced in various ways. No single view of the book can be
said to be the only possible or right approach.
53
This statement requires some
unpacking. As already seen, the covenant approach helps us to understand some literary
and theological peculiarities of the whole book. However, it cannot be seen clearly in the
text because the book seems to have its own innovation in reference to ANE treaty
literary forms. The structural arrangement according to the Decalogue may be useful in
understanding the legal corpus of Deut 12-26.
The concentric model has proved to be visible in the text and useful in its
exegetical analysis particularly due to its sticking to the syntactical, textual and
contextual evidence. This is probably the reason why it looks so similar to the way in
which the speeches approach sees the internal subdivisions of the book. This approach
has been subjected to some level of criticism not because of what it does but because of
what it neglects. It deserves to be the object of more investigation.
The speeches approach looks both externally and internally into the text. By
using the tools of lexical studies, syntax, semantic, morphology and morphosyntax, this
approach is able to analyze the text in a top-to-bottom as well as bottom-up approach.
These tools allow the text to reveal its own structures. In the process, this approach
assists in avoiding the application of external elements and limiting the usage of intuition
on the part of the exegete. In view of these observations and preliminary conclusions

53
C. Wright, Deuteronomy, 1-2.

206
related to the structure of Deuteronomy, for the purpose of this study, the speeches
approach to the structure of Deuteronomy is adopted.
This brief review of the structural issues suggests that through syntax, lexical and
linguistic data, the speeches approach to the structure of Deuteronomy has abundant
support in the text and provides textual advantages for the exegesis. Additionally, this
review has suggested the basis for the delimitation of Deut 28:69-30:20. First, it is
important considering the nature of Deut 28:69 functioning as a textual bridge that
concludes the preceding section (27:1-28:68) and introduces the next section (29:1-
30:30). This double function of Deut 28:69 has already been assessed in the syntactical
and syntagmatic analysis of this study. This assessment evidences that the vocabulary
and structure of Deut 28:69 connects it with both Deut 27:1-28:68 and Deut 29:1-30:20
and particularly with Deut 29:1-8. A closer look might confirm that assessment. Second,
the nature of Deut 31:1-32:52 as a coherent sub-section in the general structure of Deut
31-34 and seen as functioning as the concluding section for both Deuteronomy and the
whole Pentateuch. This concluding section is organized around its own motifs that
reflect the themes that have been elaborated in the whole book and with connections to
the rest of the Pentateuch. These two bases suggest a textual basis to see Deut 28:69-
30:20 as a delimited text. Now the internal structural analysis of Deut 28:69-30:20 may
proceed in view of this background and with the information derived from the syntactical
and syntagmatic analysis.

The Structure of Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20
The evaluation of diverse approaches to the study of the structure of the book of
Deuteronomy (Covenant form, Concentric Literary Pattern and Collection of Speeches)
that has led us to choose the speeches approach serves as background for the structural

207
discussion of Deut 28:69-30:20 in this chapter. The syntactical and syntagmatic analysis
performed in the previous chapters has provided a wealth of structural information that
needs further analysis in order to elucidate certain structural issues and ascertain the
overall structure of Deut 28:69-30:20.

Deuteronomy 28:69-29:8
The function of Deut 28:69 is the first parameter in reference to the structural
discussion of Deut 28:69-29:8. As seen in the syntagmatic analysis and in the evaluation
of the diverse structural approaches, this verse has a dual function concluding the
previous speech in Deut 27:1-28:68 and as the heading of Deut 29:1-30:20. Lunbom
found vocabulary, structural and thematic parallels between Deut 1:1-5 and 4:44-49 and
he suggests that Deut 4:44-49 is a summary of the previous section.
54
DeRouchie found
these parallels between Deut 4:44-49 and 28:69-29:8 and suggests that Deut 4:44-49 is
the introduction to Deut 5:1-11:26.
55

Deuteronomy 1:1-5 is considered as the superscription and the introduction of the
whole book of Deuteronomy. This passage is also implied in literary structures with
other passages in the book as the previous analyses and the scholarly literature makes it
evident.
56
The syntagmatic analysis has shown that the particle s occurs asyndetically
only four times in the book of Deuteronomy heading the clause and the verse. This is in
Deut 1:1; 4:45; 12:1 and 28:69. Table 8 illustrates the parallels in vocabulary between
these three texts, Deut 1:1-5, 4:44-49 and 28:69-29:8.

54
See Lundbom, The Inclusio and Other Framing Devices in Deuteronomy I-
XXVIII, 300-304
55
See DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love, 48-52. Kearney points to
vocabulary, literary and theological parallels between Deut 8:1-6 and Deut 29:1-8, see
Kearney, The Role of the Gibeonites in the Deuteronomic History, 2.
56
Ridderbos, Deuteronomy, 51.

208
Table 8
Parallels Between Deut 1:1-5, 4:44-49 and 28:69-29:8
Deut 1:1-5 Deut 4:44-49 Deut 28:69-29:8
::: s
- -s
:~ -r s
::e::
-: : s
:sc:::s :: :: :s :sc :::s :: :: :s :sc:::s :: s

::s :s

: :r: : :r:
:r: ::: :::
-: ~s
:s :: ~:
::~: :: :s
:s :: ~:
::~: :: :s
::~:: ~:
:: : :s
:: :: .r :::: .r :::: .r
::.
: :r: : :r:
-s - -s -: ::



These clauses (Deut 1:1; 4:45; 12:1 and 28:69) function as the headlines of the
sections that follow them, namely Deut 1:6-4:44, 5:1-11:32, 12:1-26:19 and 29:1-30:20.
However, in Deut 4:44-49, the phrase ::e:: :~ - r s (Deut 4:45) seems not
to be the starting point of the passage. Ridderbos suggests a double introduction here.
The first with Deut 4:44 (:sc :: :e: :: :c:s - -s) introducing Deut 5:1-
11:32 that has to do with the law in its general aspects while ::e:: :~ -r s
in Deut 4:45-49 would be introducing Deut 12:1-26:19 that deals with the law in a more
specific way.
57
In this perspective, Deut 4:45 is seen as an epexegesis of Deut 4:44.

57
Ridderbos, Deuteronomy, 79-80. Christensen, Deuteronomy 1:1-29:10, 101-
103.

209
The Masoretes marked Deut 28:69 with a setumah preceding it and a petuHah
after the verse. The petuHah marks Deut 28:69 as the end of the previous passage. In
addition to this, the structural information shows that Deut 28:69 forms an inclusio
structure together with Deut 29:8 in which two Covenant passages (Deut 28:69a-d, 29:8a-
d) surround three passages dealing with the Magnalia Dei (29:1a-29:3a, 29:4a-29:5d,
29:6a-29:7b).
58
Verses one and eight form an inclusio with the phrases cr :s:: -s
and cr- :s:: -s respectively.
59
Deuteronomy 28:69-29:8 might be entitled: The
Covenant and the Magnalia Dei.
A. Deut 28:69a-d, The Covenant
B. Deut 29:1a-3a, Magnalia Dei (Egypt)
C. Deut 29:4a-5d, Magnalia Dei (Desert)
B. Deut 29:6a-7b, Magnalia Dei (Promised land)
A. Deut 29:8a-d, The Covenant
Deuteronomy 29:1a-29:7b features three sections dealing with the Magnalia Dei
portraying three events in three different places, namely :s:, :: and ::
drawing lessons in behalf of the people from each event in each place.
60
The lesson
derived from the third event is elaborated in clauses 29:8a-d since this portion is the
conclusion of the section and the rationale for all the three events. The central section in
this structure is an embedded speech in which God speaks to the audience. In each
section the speakers addressing the audience are Moses (28:1a-29:3a), God (29:4a-29:5d)
and Moses again in clauses 29:6a-29:8d.
61
Table 9 provides the synopsis of this
information.

58
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 705. See also Christensen,
Deuteronomy 1:1-29:10, cix-cxii.
59
Lenchak, Choose Life! 174.
60
See Lohfink, Der Bundesschlu im Land Moab, 32-56.
61
Tigay, Deuteronomy, 274-277.

210
Table 9
Deut 29:1a-8d Internal Structure Flow
TEXT EVENT PLACE LESSON
Deut 29:1a-29:3a
-:. -::

--s :r s :s


: ::. :-e:
:s: ::: -:s:
Deut 29:4a-29:5d
:r:s ::-s :s


::: ::
::
r- r::
:::s :s :
Deut 29:6a-29:7b (-
29:8d)
::. :~::: :-s: ::
::

-s :-::


-s -:



The syntagmatic analysis provided the flow of the Numeruswechsel and the
Personenwechsel in Deut 28:69-29:8. Deuteronomy 28:69 alludes to the audience in
third masculine plural probably as consequence of its connections with Deut 27:1-28:68.
The passage and its internal sections open and close in 2mp and use either 2ms or 1p in
between. The temporal flow in Deut 28:69-29:8 opens in present in clause 28:69a and
then moves into past temporal perspective in clauses 28:69b-29:7b which are speeches
reviewing past events. Finally, clauses 29:8a-d close the sub-section in present temporal
perspective.
The function of Deut 29:8 as the conclusion of Deut 28:69-29:8, harmonizes with
the Masoretic petuHah (e) that marks a transition there. These observations reveal a
balance in the text between the sections inside the inclusio. This balance is in reference
to aspects such as the content, the speakers, the Numeruswechsel and the
Personenwechsel, the literary structure and the temporal flow. The next outline allows
seeing this and other structures in the textual flow of Deut 28:69-29:8. It is also visible
that the text is arranged around the content in Deut 29:4a-29:5d.

211

A. Deut 28:69a-28:69d, The Covenant
28:69a (a) -: : s


28:69b (b) :s: s: :sc ::-s -:: ::-s s:s
28:69c (a) -: ::
28:69d (b) :~: :-s -::s 3mp
B. Deut 29:1a-29:3a, Magnalia Dei (Egypt, Moses speaks)
29:1a :sc:::s :: s
29:1b ::s :s
29:1c :: -s :-s :-s 2mp
29:1d :::r: cr :s
ss::: :r::: re: :s: s:
29:2a :r s :s -:. -:: 2ms
: ::. :-e: --s
29:3a -r: :: ::: -:s:
r::: ::s -s: ::r 2mp
: r
C. Deut 29:4a-29:5d, Magnalia Dei (Desert, God speaks)
29:4a ::: :: :r:s ::-s :s The covenant
29:4b :::r: ::-::c ::s: 2mp
29:4c :. :r: -::s: :r: 2ms
29:5a :-::s s: :~:
29:5b :--: s: :: 2mp
29:5c r- r::
29:5d :::s :s :
B. Deut 29:6a-29:7b, Magnalia Dei (Promised land, Moses speaks)
29:6a :::s s:- 2mp
29:6b ::~:: ~: ss
29:6c :~::: :-s: :::: .r
29:6d ::. 1p
29:7a :ss-s ~.
29:7b ::: ::: s~: .: ::s: :~:: :-.
A. Deut 29:8a-29:8d, The Covenant
29:8a -s -: ::-s :-::
29:8b :-s :-cr 2mp
29:8c :: -s ::c- r::
29:8d e cr- :s


212
All these elements evidence both coherence
62
and cohesion
63
in the text of Deut
28:69-29:8 and thematic, literary and structural links between the text and other sections
in the book.

Deuteronomy 29:9-20
The structural information derived from the syntagmatic analysis of Deut 29:9-20
portrays a text subdivided into two main sections, Deut 29:9-14 and Deut 29:15-20. The
first section portrays the covenant ceremony (Deut 29:11a-29:12d) framed by two
descriptions of the audience in present temporal perspective (Deut 29:9a-29:10c, Deut
29:13a-29:14b). The first description is portrayed in two lists. The first list in Deut 29:9a
seems to portray the attendants highlighting those out of or above the household (Your
chiefs, your tribes, your elders and your officials, all the men of Israel) while the second
list in Deut 29:10a-c seems to highlight those who belong to the inside of the household
(your children and your wives and your alien).
The temporal flow in Deut 29:9a-29:14b opens with clauses 29:9a-29:12b in
present temporal perspective. Clauses 29:12c-d shift to past and clauses 29:13a-29:14b
returns to the present perspective.
The second section (Deut 29:15a-29:20b) deals with a twofold review of idolatry
and apostasy. Deut 29:15a-29:16b is a historical review of the idolatry in Egypt and the
pagan nations the people met during their stay in Egypt and their wandering in the desert.

62
This has to do with a texts functional connectedness or deep structure: how
components of the textual world, that is, the configuration of concepts and relations
which underline the surface of the text, are mutually accessible and relevant. Concept is
defined as a configuration of knowledge and relations are links between concepts that
appear together in the textual world. Groom, Linguistic Analysis of Biblical Hebrew,
132.
63
This concerns how components of the surface text are mutually connected
with a sequence. Cohesion rests upon grammatical and lexical dependencies. Ibid., 132.

213
Deuteronomy 29:17a-29:20b reviews the possible future apostasy of the people. This
passage is elaborated upon a conditional future perspective. Therefore, Deut 29:9-20
deals with two opposite themes: Covenant (present-past-present) and apostasy (past-
future).
Deut 29:9-20, The Covenant and the Apostasy
A. Deut 29:9-14, The Covenant Ceremony
a. Deut 29:9a-10c, The Audience
b. Deut 29:11a-12d, The Covenant Ceremony
a. Deut 29:13a-14b, The Audience
B. Deut 29:15-20, Past and Future in Review (Idolatry and Apostasy)
a. Deut 29:15a-16b, Historical Review (The idolatry in Egypt and the
nations)
b. Deut 29:17a-20b, Conditional Future (The possible future Peoples
apostasy)
When zooming into the internal structure of Deut 29:9-20, the syntagmatic
analysis provides two inclusio structures in Deut 29:9a-29:14b. The first inclusio
encloses clauses 29:9a and 29:14a with the words ::s /:::s :e: : :r
/::s:. This inclusio fits with the suggested structure a-b-a in Deut 29:9a-29:14b. These
two clauses are located in the A-A sections. Clause 29:9a addresses the audience in
second masculine plural and clause 29:14a in first plural. The second inclusio employs
the words -: / -:s: / -:: in clauses 29:11a-29:11b and the words :s / -: /-:
in clause 29:13a. This inclusio then, employs clauses located in the sections ba in Deut
29:9a-29:14b.
In reference to Deut 29:15a-29:20b, the first section (Deut 29:15a-29:16b)
surveys the idolatry that the people saw back in the time they stayed in Egypt and what
they saw related to the nations (:.) they met in their wandering in the desert. In Deut
29:17a-29:20b, clauses 29:17a-29:17d are off-line and framed by the phrase ::: :e
(29:17a and 29:17d) portraying an undesired possible future situation and providing

214
background for clauses 29:18a-29:20b. Clauses 29:18a-29:20b form a conditional
structure with the protasis in clauses 29:18a-g and the apodosis in clauses 29:19a-29:20b.
The particle in Deut 29:18a marks the shift of the speech into anticipatory text-type.
The protasis portrays an embedded internal speech (a monologue) in clauses 29:18e-g,
while clauses 29:18a-d provides background and the introduction to this speech. In the
apodosis (29:19a-29:20b) God answers the monologue. There seems to be an inclusio
implying clauses 29:19c-d \ e:: :-: \:s:: and clause 29:20b with the
words - e:: :-: \ -: -:s :::. Thus, the text frames the judgment
that the Lord addresses to the insolent speaker with these two allusions to the covenantal
curses.
Alexander Rof has suggested that Deut 29:19a-29:20b is a case of
wiederaufnahme that together with Deut 29:28 is used to frame Deut 29:21-27 which he
sees as an interpolation. According to him, this text must have been inserted in a
different and later editorial stage in reference to the previous text.
64
Critical scholarship
interprets wiederaufnahme as evidence of the hypothetical editorial history of the text.
65

Linguistic and literary studies have found that this feature fulfills literary and rhetorical
roles in both narrative
66
and poetic texts and evidences the intention of the author.
67


64
See Rof, The Covenant in the Land of Moab, 273-276.
65
See Rof, The Covenant in the Land of Moab, 273-276 who sees this device
as one of the criteria to detect an interpolation. Jeffrey H. Tigay, An Empirical Basis
for the Documentary Hypothesis, Journal of Biblical Literature 94, no. 3 (September
1975): 338. Tigay identifies the technique in some of the expansive insertions of the
Samaritan Pentateuch and uses it to exemplify the Documentary Hypothesis.
66
See Sprinkle, The Book of the Covenant: A Literary Approach, 19-20 and B.
Long, Framing Repetitions in Biblical Historiography, 385-389.
67
See David G. Firth, Play It Again, Sam The Poetics of Narrative Repetition
in 1 Samuel 1-7, Tyndale Bulletin 56, no. 2 (1985): 1-17. E. J. Revell, The Battle
With Benjamin (Judges XX 29-48) and Hebrew Narrative Techniques, Vetus

215
Phil Quick has found not only that resumptive repetition is present is several languages
across time but also that it serves for the cohesion of the text. Additionally he has found
that simultaneous events can be communicated linearly with the aid of digressions and
resumptive repetition.
68

The Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel in this text, provides a single structure
for 29:9-14 and two sections for 29:15-20 (29:15a-29:17d and 29:18a-29:19e). Clauses
29:20a-29:20b do not address the audience.
29:9a-29:10a 2mp
29:10a-29:12d 2ms
29:13a 2mp
29:14a-29:14b 1p

29:15a 2mp
29:15a-29:15b 1p
29:15c-29:17a 2mp
29:17b 1p
29:17d 2mp

29:18a-29:18d 3ms
29:18e-29:18g 1s
29:19a-29:19e 3ms
29:20a-29:20b -

Testamentum 35, no. 4 (1985): 417-433. E. J. Revell shows how the repetitions in this
passage serve to provide additional information to the account and form part of a text
with literary and rhetorical unity. Burke O. Long, Framing Repetitions in Biblical
Historiography, 385-399. B. Long provides a synchronical approach to analyze
resumptive repetition and find the function of this feature in a rhetorical and didactic
manipulation of space, time, characters and plot by the author. Ronald Bergey, The
Rhetorical Role of Reiteration in the Suffering Servant Poem (Isa 52:13-53:12), Journal
of the Evangelical Theological Society 40, no. 2 (June 1997): 177-188. Serge Frolov,
Joshuas Double Demise (Josh. xxiv 28-31; Judg. ii 6-9): Making Sense of a
Repetition, Vetus Testamentum 58 (2008): 315-323. Frolov points to textual information
that identifies the double account of Joshuas departure as part of a macro literary strategy
that seems to fulfill several rhetorical objectives in the book of Joshua.
68
Quick, Resumptive RepetitionIntroduction to a Universal Discourse Feature,
12. Quicks article is a meta-analysis of over 30 studies (including some carried out by
himself) published between 1901 to 2005 and dealing with more than 20 languages
including Biblical Hebrew, Koine Greek, Italian, and English among several others.

216
This distribution of the Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel harmonizes with
Deut 29:9a-29:14b providing a single distribution for this sub-section. In reference to
Deut 29:15a-29:20b, as there are two distributions, the second starts in 29:18a providing
a transition here that harmonizes with the conditional structure of which the protasis
covers Deut 29:18a-g and the apodosis is found in Deut 29:19a-29:20b. Interestingly the
Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel harmonize with the literary transitions and
subsections in the flow of Deut 29:9-20 but do not follow the literary arrangement in
every detail. This might be due to pragmatic reasons.
The syntax, structure and semantics of the text evidences cohesion and coherence
inside the two sections (Deut 29:9a-29:14b, 29:15a-29:20b) and between them. The
syntactical unity in Deut 29:18a-29:20b makes it improbable that Deut 29:19a-29:20b
might be a later addition to the text. Linguistic and biblical scholarship recognizes the
resumptive repetition as a literary device that works toward the connectedness of the text
and evidences author intention.

Deuteronomy 29:21-28
There are two issues in Deut 29:21-28. The first has to do with the first
embedded speech that is announced in Deut 29:21a-c. What does belong to the
background introduction in Deut 29:21d-29:22f? What belongs to the speech? The
second issue has to do with the critical claim that Deut 29:21a-29:27b is a latter
interpolation.
The structural information about Deut 29:21-28 provided by the syntagmatic
analysis shows the text subdivided into three sections. The first section (Deut 29:21a-
29:22f) is an anticipatory discourse dealing with the consequences of the future apostasy
of the people. The descendants of the audience and the foreigner that comes from afar

217
(Deut 29:21a-c) will give this discourse. Clauses 29:21d-29:22f describe Gods future
punitive judgments against the land that will be observed as an accomplished event by the
future descendants, the foreigner and the nations. The audience has already received a
warning against apostasy in Deut 29:17a-20b. This warning was given in singular. The
second section (Deut 29:23a-29:27b) portrays a future dialogue of the nations (:.) in
which they review in retrospective the causes of the future punishment. This review
features idolatry. Finally, Deut 29:28a-c provides a conclusion to the section while
dealing with the availability of what has been revealed by God and the peoples
responsibility toward that revelation.
Lenchak suggests that the speech announced in clause 29:21a does not start but
after the second introduction in clause 29:23a. This confirms clauses 29:21d-29:22f as
circumstantial information providing background for the actual embedded speech in
clauses 29:23b-29:27b
69
in harmony with what the syntagmatic analysis already
suggested. Deut 29:23a introduces the speech the second time. Deuteronomy 29:23b-c
contains two questions and then Deut 29:24a-27b answers those questions. Deuteronomy
29:17a-20b warned concerning the possibility of the future apostasy, Deut 29:21a-27b
from a future perspective analyzes the rationale of that apostasy which is contemplated as
already realized.
Deut 29:21-28, The Future Apostasy: Punishment, Rationale and Exhortation.
A. Deut 29:21a-22f, Future curses and punishment because of Apostasy
B. Deut 29:23a-27b, Causes of the curse and the punishment
C. Deut 29:28a-c, Summary and conclusion: The Revelation is Available.
The Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel in Deut 29:21-28 provides a flow in
plural through the text only shifting the person from 2mp to 3mp and then to first plural.

69
See Lenchak, Choose Life! 192-193.

218
The flow then is in 2mp in part (clauses 29:21a-b) of the background section (Deut
29:21a-22f) while the dialogue of the nations (Deut 29:23b-27b) addresses the audience
in 3mp. The end of the background section (clauses 29:21c-22f) and the beginning of the
dialogue of the nations (29:23a-24a) do not address the audience. Finally, the conclusion
addresses the audience in first plural.
29:21a-b 2mp
29:21c-24a -
29:24b-27b 3mp
29:28a-c 1p
In reference to the claim that Deut 29:21a-27b was inserted at a later editorial
stage of the text we may make some observations. There are three arguments to support
this allegation.
70
The first has to do with the resumptive repetition that was already
analyzed in connection to the structural analysis of Deut 29:9-20 and evidence provided
of its function as literary device that reveals textual connectedness and author intention.
The second argument has to do with the sudden shift from the individual perspective in
Deut 29:17a-29:20b to the corporative perspective in Deut 29:21a-27b. The third
argument is the detectable intention on the side of the interpolator which can be shown
to befit the purpose of late scribes.
71

The individual perspective of Deut 29:17a-20b requires some analysis. Clause
29:17a reads :::s\ ~e:: s\ :ss\ :s ::: :e. There is a list here including
four elements: :s, :s, ~e:: and ::: . The first two are individuals and the last two
are corporate. Clause 29:17b uses 2ms pronouns to follow up with the list provided in
29:17a. Clause 29:17d stays in singular as well as clauses 29:18b-g. The introduction in
29:17a has that pattern of two individual ones then two corporative ones. Maybe the text

70
See Rof, The Covenant in the Land of Moab, 274.
71
Ibid.

219
has chosen to provide the example in singular (Deut 29:18a-20b) according to the first
pair (:s, :s) while it elaborates the actual prediction of the apostasy in corporative
perspective in harmony with the second pair (~e::, ::: ) following the pattern
individual-corporative.
The third argument about the detectable intention of the interpolator assumes that
the interpolation is at least a feasible fact and is building upon what he is trying to
demonstrate so it might be categorized as circular argument. This investigation is
working with the final form of the text of Deut 28:69-30:20
72
through a linguistic text-
oriented methodology. In accordance with our methodology, this research does not deal
with isagogic issues.

Deuteronomy 30:1-10
The previous syntactical analysis has provided us a literary structure for the text
of Deut 30:1-10 that is built with three conditional structures (30:1a-3d, 30:4a-7b and
30:9a-10c) around a central core in clauses 30:8a-d. This structure contains four :
clauses (30:1a, 30:9b, 30:10a, 30:10d), two inclusio structures (30:2a-c with 30:10a-d,
30:3a-c and 30:5a-d with 30:9a-c) and the usage of the verb :: in a chiastic pattern
alternating the subject of the verb. It is necessary to analyze how the conditional

72
The text of Deut 28:69-30:20 can be tracked at least up to I BC in Qumran as
the literature quoted in this research evidences. Tigay recognizes that the documentary
approach to the Pentateuch is a presumption that lacks empirical basis. See Tigay, An
Empirical Basis for the Documentary Hypothesis, 342. After reviewing more than 40
years of mainly critical scholarship in Deuteronomy, Gary D. Collier speaks about a
multitude of contradictory conclusions and calls for new perspectives on old
problems. Gary D. Collier, The Problem of Deuteronomy: In Search of a Perspective,
Restoration Quarterly 26, no. 4 (1983): 230. See also G. J. Wenham, Method in
Pentateuchal Source Criticism, Vetus Testamentum 41, no. 1 (1991): 84-109. David M.
Carr, Controversy and Convergence in Recent Studies of the Formation of the
Pentateuch, Religious Studies Review 23, no. 1 (January 1997): 22-31.

220
structures, the :: pattern and the inclusio structures relate to Deut 30:6a-8d. It is
important to unveil how all the features fit together in the literary structure.
The conditional structures are highlighted with the last one (30:9a-10d) in
inverted pattern. A cursory reading of the text reveals the usage of the verb :: in a
chiastic pattern that alternates the subject and the object of the verb. That flow (in terms
of the subject) is the people (clauses 30:1c, 30:2a), the Lord (30:3a, 30:3c), the people
(30:8a), the Lord (30:9b) and finally the people (30:10d), a pattern a-b-a-b-a. In this
literary pattern, clauses 30:8a-d stand in the center of the structure.
Two inclusio structures are visible in Deut 30:1-10. The first implies clauses
30:2a-c in relation to clauses 30:10a-d. In first instance, the verb :: occurs in clauses
30:2a and 30:10d with the people as subject and the Lord as object. The verb r:: occurs
in clauses 30:2b and 30:10b with the people as subject and the expressions :: and
:s :: as objects. These three instances make evident the lexical connections
of these two sets of clauses. The second inclusio implies clauses 30:3a-30:3c and 30:5a-
30:5d in relation to clauses 30:9a-c. Clauses 30:3a and 30:3c feature the verb :: with
God as subject and the audience as the object. Clauses 30:5a and 30:9a feature two
equivalent words: s and :s. The expression -:s occurs in clauses 30:5b and
30:9c. Finally the verb :: occurs in clause 30:5d and the noun :: occurs in clause
30:9a-b. These features make evident the lexical connections between clauses 30:3a-30c,
30:5a-d and 30:9a-c.
The four : clauses (30:1a, 30:9b, 30:10a, 30:10d) are located as part of the first
and third conditional structures in Deut 30:1-10. Three of them are located after clauses
30:8a-30:8d as part of the last conditional structure that is also inverted in reference to the
others in an order apodosis-protasis.

221
The analysis provided above shows Deut 29:21-28 dealing with the future
apostasy and its punishment, rationale and a final exhortation. Deuteronomy 30:1-10
elaborates these concepts further and deals with a remote future when the exile as
consequence of the peoples apostasy is already a reality. In that perspective and with an
anticipatory discourse based on weqatal verbs in first position, Deut 30:1-10 promises
restoration and the reversal of the curse that the people will suffer as consequence of their
apostasy. This restoration is conditional to the circumcision of the peoples heart and
their return to the Lord that will cause Him to return to them forgiveness.
73

The syntagmatic and structural analysis provides evidence of the textual cohesion
and coherence in the text of Deut 30:1-10. The lexical, syntactical and structural features
reviewed provide textual evidence of the internal textual coherence and cohesion in Deut
30:1-10. Most of the information seems to cluster around Deut 30:6a-30:8d and
particularly Deut 30:8a-30:8d thus highlighting these clauses and its content.
Deuteronomy 30:6a-c provides Gods promise regarding the circumcision of the peoples
heart and it is in Deut 30:8a where the center of the chiasm related to the verb :: is
found. The themes of the circumcision of the peoples heart and their returning to God
are found here at the structural center of the passage. Once this information is outlined, it
allows seeing the flow of these literary features.

73
Based on critical presuppositions Rof reads Deut 30:1-10 in a postexilic
context and suggests that the text is misallocated. He suggests moving Deut 30:1-10 after
Deut 28. See Rof, The Covenant in the Land of Moab, 270-272. The verbal
backbone of the text with weqatal verbs in first position in their clauses marks this text as
an anticipatory discourse elaborated with predictions and promises. For the semantic and
pragmatics of verb chains and sequences (wayiqtol and weqatal verbs), see Waltke and
OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 547-554. van der Merwe, Naud
and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, 163-173. Longacre, Weqatal
Forms in Biblical Hebrew Prose, 51-52. Additionally the syntagmatic and structural
analysis already done, suggests coherent and cohesive flow in the text even in reference
with what antecedes it (Deut 29:21-28).

222
A. Deut 30:1a-3d, Returning to the Lord
a. Protasis 30:1a-30:2c, If you return to the Lord
30:1a : clause (Temporal)
30:1b
30:1c . . . . . :: people
30:1d a
30:2a . . . Inclusio :: people
30:2b . . . Inclusio
30:2c . . . Inclusio
b. Apodosis 30:3a-d, The Lord will return to you
30:3a . . Inclusio . :: Lord
30:3b b
30:3c . . Inclusio . :: Lord
B. Deut 30:4a-7b, The Promised Future Gathering
a. Protasis 30:4a, If you are driven away
30:4a
b. Apodosis 30:4b-7b, The Lord will gather you
30:4b
30:4c
30:5a . . Inclusio
30:5b . . Inclusio
30:5c . . Inclusio
30:5d . . Inclusio
30:5e
30:6a
30:6b
30:6c
30:7a
30:7b
C. Deut 30:8a-d, You will return
30:8a . . . . . :: people c
30:8b
30:8c
30:8d
D. Deut 30:9a-10d, The Condition for Gods Blessing
a. Apodosis, 30:9a-c, The Lord will bless you
30:9a Inclusio
30:9b : clause (Cause) Inclusio :: Lord b
30:9c Inclusio
b. Protasis, 30:10a-d, If you obey
30:10a : clause (Condition) Inclusio
30:30:10b Inclusio
30:10c Inclusio
30:10d : clause (Cause) Inclusio :: people a


223
Deuteronomy 30:11-14
Deuteronomy 30:1-10 closes (clauses 30:10a-d) providing the condition for Gods
blessings over the people. This condition is provided with a vocabulary that is further
elaborated in Deut 30:11-14. Roots such as r::, s, cr and s:, are used in both
passages. After the syntagmatic analysis of the text of Deut 30:11-14 we are faced with a
text in which coherence and cohesion are revealed alongside several language figures and
literary devices. The level of literary art in the text almost reaches poetic genre.
74

The text of Deut 30:11-14 is organized through two inclusio structures involving
clauses 30:11a-d and 30:14a-b and two parallelisms involving clauses 30:12a-f / 30:13a-f.
The inclusio provides a contrast between the speakers portrayal of the peoples
perspective on the availability of the command and the speakers actual perspective. In
the vocabulary of clauses 30:11a-d and 30:14a-b we find an inclusio that portrays
synonymous antonymous words, and balance and inversion in the expressions
distribution. The expressions s: and :: occur in parallelism here in clauses 30:11a
and 30:14a. The phrases s ~ s: and s: . . . :s :: not only are
opposite but they are located at the end and at the beginning of their verses respectively.
The synonymous parallelism found in clauses 30:12a-f / 30:13a-f portrays an
almost word by word balance as might be seen in Table 10. The clauses used to build
these two sections follow the same syntactical construction, use almost the same

74
Martin G. Klingbeil has identified textual markers (imperative and cohortative
verbs after the quotation frame) that introduce poems in the Pentateuch and signal their
ending (praising expressions). These markers are not present here so that Deut 30:11-14
could be qualified as poetic prose due to the concentration of literary devices but not as
poetry. See Martin G. Klingbeil, Poemas en medio de la prosa: Poesa insertada en el
Pentateuco, in Inicios, paradigmas y fundamentos: Estudios teolgicos y exegticos en
el Pentateuco, ed. Gerald A. Klingbeil, River Plate Adventist University Monograph
Series in Biblical and Theological Studies 1 (Entre Ros, Argentina: Editorial Universidad
Adventista del Plata, 2004), 72-73.

224
vocabulary and follow the same word order. Clauses 30:12a and 30:13a follow both a
s + preposition pattern and a noun + s: pattern. Clauses 30:12b and 30:13b are
identical: :s:, using an infinitive construct. Clauses 30:12c and 30:13c follow both a
pattern :: + yiqtol 3ms + :. Clauses 30:12d and 30:13d are identical, : ~.
Clauses 30:12e and 30:13e are identical -s :r:: as well as clauses 30:12f and 30:13f
.cr:. Table 10 provides a synoptic illustration of these parallelisms.


Table 10
Literary Structure of Deut 30:11-14
A. Deut 30:11a-d, The command is not . . . I command you (2ms)
30:11a -s s: :
30:11b : s: ::s :s
30:11c :: s -s:e:s:
30:11d s ~ s:
B. Deut 30:12a-f, The command is not
in Heavens (1
st
plural)
30:12a s :::: s:
30:12b :s:
30:12c ::: ::r :
30:12d : ~
30:12e -s :r::
30:12f .cr:
B. Deut 30:13a-f, The command is not
beyond the sea (1
st
plural)
30:13a s :: :r:s:
30:13b :s:
30:13c : :r:s :::r :
30:13d : ~
30:13e -s :r::
30:13f .cr:
A. Deut 30:14a-b, The word is . . . For you to obey (2ms)
30:14a :::: e: s: :: :s ::
30:14b : -cr:








225
The features we have analyzed in the text of Deut 30:11-14 reveal connectedness
in the internal syntax of every clause. They also evidence connectedness in the flow of
the clauses through the inclusio and the synonymous parallelism that the text displays.
The connectedness is seen at the levels of micro and macrosyntax as well as in the
literary balance of the semantic between the parts of the passage and in reference to Deut
30:1-10. These features evidence cohesion and coherence in the text.

Deuteronomy 30:15-20
The text of Deut 30:15-20 closes the speech of Deut 28:69-30:20 with a solemn
call with elements of covenant format like the call to the heavens and earth as witnesses
against the audience. Clauses 30:15a-b and 30:19a-20g are two calls in inclusio that
frame two sets of conditional structures in clauses 30:16a-i and 30:17a-18f. These
conditional structures are in contrast and provide a promise and a warning respectively.
The two protasis (30:16a-d and 30:17a-e) are in themselves progressions, the first
in consecration to the Lord and the second in apostasy moving away from the Lord
toward idolatry. The two apodosis (30:16e-i and 30:18a-f) provide the consequences of
this choice. The vocabulary of the apodosis in the second structure is a reversal of the
promises in the apodosis of the first structure. The word ~ and synonymous and
antonymous expressions occur through the passage with ~ as the semantic concept that
joins the paragraph together.
75
We find the word ~ in 30:15b; 30:16e; 30:19b; 30:19c;
30:19d, and 30:20d. Synonymous words or expressions occur in 30:16f (-:) and
30:20d (: s). Antonymous words or expressions occur in 30:15b (-:) and 30:18b
(:s- :s :). The word s occurs in clause 30:16g and 30:19a and :s in 30:18c

75
See Lenchak, Choose Life! 179.

226
and 30:20e. Table 11 provides a synopsis of the structures and vocabulary patterns in
Deut 30:15-20.


Table 11
Literary Structure of Deut 30:15-20
A. Deut 30:15a-b, Call to choose between life and goodness, evil and death
30:15a s
30:15b r-s -:-s ::-s :~-s : :e: --:
B. Deut 30:16a-i, I command you
(Promise in conditional structure,
protasis 30:16a-30:16d, apodosis
30:16e-30:16i)
B. Deut 30:17a-18f, If you turn your heart
(Warning in conditional structure, protasis
30:17a-30:17e, apodosis 30:18a-30:18f)


Protasis
30:16a : s: ::s :s
30:16b :s -s :s:
30:16c :: -:::
30:16d -~ -s: :::
:e::


Protasis
30:17a ::: :e:s
30:17b r::- s:
30:17c -~::
30:17d :~s ::s: -~-:
30:17e :-:r
Apodosis
30:16e -~
30:16f -:
30:16g :s ::
s:
30:16h ::s: -s:s
30:16i -::
Apodosis
30:18a : ::: -.
30:18b :s- :s :
30:18c :: :s-s:
:s:r
30:18d :-s :r -s :s
30:18e :: s::
30:18f -::
A. Deut 30:19a-20g, Call to choose life
30:19a -: :~ s-s :::-s : ::: -r
30:19b :: :: : e: --:
30:19c :~: -~:
30:19d r -s ~- r : :
30:20a :s -s :s:
30:20b :: r:::
30:20c :::
30:20d : s ~ s :
30:20e :s:r -:::
30:20f :r: ~s: ::s: -:s: r::: :s
30:20g e :: --:


227
The verb :s occurs in 30:16b and 30:20a. The word r:: occurs in clauses
30:17b and 30:20b. The presence of these literary and vocabulary patterns provide
textual evidence of cohesion and coherence in the text. Clauses 30:19a-20e build the
final call with vocabulary that links them with the rest of the paragraph.
In addition, this chapter seems to expand the content of Deut 4:25-31. Table 12
provides a synopsis of these parallels. These two passages share vocabulary, thematic
and structural similarities. The key expressions show a slightly different order in their
arrangement inside their respective passages but in some cases, there are even long
identical phrases. The flow of events is the same although Deut 4:25-31 covers more
events in a shorter text. We have already surveyed this kind of parallels between
Deut 28:69-29:8 and Deut 4:44-49, see Table 8.


Table 12
Literary Links Between Deut 4:25-31 and 30:1-20
Deut 4:25-31 Deut 30:1-20
4:25
: 30:2c
s: 30:16g
(4:25, 29, 30, 31) :s
30:1d, 3a, 3d, 4b, 5a, 6a, 6b, 7a, 9a,
10d, 16g,
4:26
s-s :::-s : ::: -r 30:19a
:s- :s : 30:18b
-:: :: :-s ::r :-s : s s
30:5a-c, 30:16g-i, 30:18c-f
4:27 ::-s e

30:3d
::r: 30:3c
4:29 :e:::: :::::: 30:2c, 10d
4:30 s ::: :: 30:1a
:: -r:: :s r -:: 30:2a-b
4:31 :: r::: :s -:s -: -:s: r::: :s :s
30:20e-f





228
Summary
The structural review of the Hebrew text of Deut 28:69-30:20 provides evidence
of both cohesion and coherence. Every one of the six sections (Deut 28:69-29:8; 29:9-
20; 29:21-28; 30:1-10; 30:11-14 and 30:15-20) displays an array of literary devices
dealing with vocabulary, syntax and rhetoric.
76
The text plays with synonyms and
antonyms. It plays with words that are used as key terms throughout the sections and the
whole speech. Inclusio structures are used liberally as well as parallelisms. Some of
these literary structures are followed by the Numeruswechsel and the Personenwechsel.
The syntagmatic analysis and the structural analysis reveal how the text has been
crafted; how its overall themes are embedded in the text, even to the lowest level. The
text has reviewed the rationale for the peoples answer to the covenant renewal (Deut
28:69-29:8). The gathering for the covenant renewal ceremony is described, and then
follows promises for the faithful and warnings against a possible future apostasy that
features idolatry (Deut 29:9-20). Then in an anticipatory discourse the future apostasy
and specifically its judicial punishment are predicted, analyzed and evaluated (Deut
29:21-28). Regarding the future dispersion in consequence of the future apostasy,
another anticipatory discourse provides promises of restoration that reverse the curses of
the punishment. This speech dwells on the conditions for the fulfillment of these
promises (Deut 30:1-10). Then the speech goes on to emphasize the availability of Gods
revelation that provides everything the audience needs to know in order to have access to
all the blessings of a personal relationship with the Lord (Deut 30:11-14) and avoid the
apostasy. Finally, the speech solemnly calls the audience to choose life, life which is only
available in a personal, loving covenant relationship with the Lord. Once again there are

76
See an inventory of Figures and Tropes in Deut 28:69-30:20 in Lenchak,
Choose Life! 221-232.

229
promises for the faithful and warnings for the one who could go away from the Lord
(Deut 30:15-20).
In Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 grammar, semantics, syntax, pragmatics, rhetoric
and literary structure conjugate to convey a message of covenantal renewal a message
of personal relationship with the Lord as the way to access good and life and avoid evil
and death. Now that the textual, grammatical, syntactical, pragmatic and literary issues
have been dealt with, the next chapter will use this information in the theological
inventory. Table 13 provides a synoptic summary of the structural features that this
chapter has dealt with.


Table 13
General Structure of Deut 28:69-30:20




table continues

Deuteronomy Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 Comments
Deut 27:1-
28:68

Deut 1:1-5.



Deut 4:44-49.
I. Deut 28:69-29:8, The Covenant and the
Magnalia Dei
A. Deut 28:69a-d, The Covenant
B. Deut 29:1a-3a, Magnalia Dei
(Exodus)
C. Deut 29:4a-5d, Magnalia Dei
(Wilderness)
B. Deut 29:6a-7b, Magnalia Dei
(Early Conquest)
A. Deut 29:8a-d, The Covenant
II. Deut 29:9-20, The Covenant and the
Apostasy
A. Deut 29:9-14, The Covenant Ceremony
a. Deut 29:9a-29:10c, The Audience
b. Deut 29:11a-29:12d, The
Covenant Ceremony
a. Deut 29:13a-29:14b, The Audience

Deut 28:69 concludes
Deut 27:1-28:68 and
opens Deut 29:1-30:20

Deut 28:69-29:8 has
vocabulary and structural
links with Deut 1:1-5
and 4:44-49.


230
Table 13 (continues)
General Structure of Deut 28:69-30:20

table continues
Deuteronomy Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 Comments






















Deut 4:25-31.
B. Deut 29:15-20, Past and Future in
Review
a. Deut 29:15a-16b, Historical Review
(Idolatry in Egypt and the nations)
b. Deut 29:17a-20b, Conditional
Future (The possible future
apostasy)
III. Deut 29:21-28, The Future Apostasy:
Punishment, Rationale and Exhortation.
A. Deut 29:21a-22f, Future curses and
punishment because of Apostasy
B. Deut 29:23a-27b, Causes of the curse
and the punishment
C. Deut 29:28a-c, Summary and
conclusion: The Revelation is
Available.
IV. Deut 30:1-10, Returning to the Lord
A. Deut 30:1a-3d, Returning to the Lord
a. Protasis 30:1a-2c, If you return to
the Lord
b. Apodosis 30:3a-d, The Lord will
return to you
B. Deut 30:4a-7d, The Promised Future
Gathering
a. Protasis 30:4a, If you are driven
away
b. Apodosis 30:4b-7d, The Lord will
gather you
C. Deut 30:8a-d, You will return
D. Deut 30:9a-10d, The Condition for
Gods Blessing
a. Apodosis, 30:9a-c, The Lord will
bless you
b. Protasis, 30:10a-d, If you obey
V. 30:11-14, The Commandment is available
A. Deut 30:11a-d, The command is
not. . . . I command you (2ms)
B. Deut 30:12a-f, The
command is not in Heavens (1
st

plural)
B. Deut 30:13a-f, The command is
not beyond the sea (1
st
plural)
A. Deut 30:14a-b, The word is. . . . For
you to obey (2ms)




Deut 28:69-29:8 and
Deut 29:9-14 are tied
together as they directly
deal with the covenant.

Deut 29:15-20 deals with
apostasy in connection
with the covenant.

Deut 29:21-28 expands
the topic of apostasy in
the framework of the
covenant.

Inclusio: Deut 29:28 and
Deut 30:11-14 surround
Deut 30:1-10 with the
topic of the
commandment

Deut 30:1-10 promises
the future restoration in
connection with the
announced apostasy.

Deut 30:1-20 has
structural and vocabulary
links with Deut 4:25-31.


231
Table 13 (continues)
General Structure of Deut 28:69-30:20


Note: Table 13 includes the vocabulary and structural links between Deut 28:69; Deut 27:1-28:68 and Deut
29:1-30:20. The vocabulary and literary links between Deut 28:69-29:8 and Deut 1:1-5, and Deut 4:44-49.
The inclusio formed by Deut 29:28 and Deut 30:11-14 around Deut 30:1-10 is also included as well as the
inclusio formed between Deut 28:69-29:8 and Deut 30:15-20. The structural and vocabulary links between
Deut 4:25-31 and Deut 30:1-20 is incorporated. The syntactical and structural details can be verified in the
pertinent sections of this chapter.
Deuteronomy Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 Comments









Deut 4:25-31.
VI. 30:11-14, The Commandment is available
A. Deut 30:11a-d, The command is
not. . . . I command you (2ms)
B. Deut 30:12a-f, The
command is not in Heavens (1
st

plural)
B. Deut 30:13a-f, The command is
not beyond the sea (1
st
plural)
A. Deut 30:14a-b, The word is. . . . For
you to obey (2ms)
IV. 30:15-20, The Call to Choose Life in the
Lord
A. Deut 30:15a-b, Call to choose between
life and goodness, evil and death
B. Deut 30:16a-i, I command you
(Promise)
B. Deut 30:17a-30:18f, If you turn
your heart (Warning)
A. Deut 30:19a-30:20g, Call to choose
life

Deut 29:28 and Deut
30:11-14: The
availability of the
revelation that makes
disobedience
inexcusable.



Deut 30:15-20 closes
the speech coming back
to the covenant. That in
inclusion with Deut
28:69-29:8.






232






CHAPTER 5
COVENANT THEOLOGY AND DEUTERONOMY 28:69-30:20



This chapter consists of two main sections. The first section briefly reviews some
topics related to the Covenant theology in OT studies with particular attention to the
Pentateuch. The second section analyzes selected aspects of covenant theology in Deut
28:69-30:20 according to the textual information obtained from the syntagmatic and
structural analyses.

Covenant Theology in the Pentateuch
This study has already dealt in Chapter 4 with the covenant as one of the
proposals for the structural plan of Deuteronomy. This section will deal with the
covenant as the predominant theological theme in Deut 28:69-30:20. The presence of the
covenant as theology in the text and its consideration as structural plan provides evidence
of its importance for studies in Deuteronomy.
1
In harmony with this situation, this
chapter will first briefly review some issues related to the covenant in the Pentateuch and
particularly in Deuteronomy that might be relevant for this study. Second, departing

1
Richard J. Bautch, from a documental and diachronic perspective points that
Deuteronomys structure follows the schema of ancient Near Eastern treaties and recasts
them in terms of the Mosaic covenant. See Richard J. Bautch, Abrahams Covenant in
Postexilic Covenants, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 71, no. 1 (January 2009): 61. See
also E. W. Nicholson, Covenant in a Century of Study Since Wellhausen, in A Song of
Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L.
Christensen, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3 (Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1993), 94-108.

233

from the information provided by the syntagmatic (Chapters 2 and 3) and the structural
analysis (Chapter 4), those covenant structures and theological aspects thus highlighted in
the text will be matter of analysis.
The covenant-related vocabulary and particularly the word -: in the MT, has
been the matter of extensive scholarly analysis and discussion.
2
Parallelisms with the
ANE literature have been used in that analysis.
3
Second-millennium Hittite treaties are
useful as they are closer in form to OT covenant than first-millennium Neo-Assyrian
treaties
4
although it has been suggested that the OT form is ultimately unique and that
the covenant in the OT is conceived essentially as relationship.
5
After evaluating

2
M. Weinfeld, -:, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (TDOT), ed.
G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1975),
2:253-279; McConville, -:, NIDOTTE, 1:746-755; Brown, BDB, s.v. -:.
Ludwig Koehler, Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old
Testament, trans. M. E. J. Richardson (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1994), 1:157-159.
3
George E. Mendenhall and Gary A. Herion, Covenant, Anchor Bible
Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (Ann Arbor, MI: Doubleday, 1992), 1: 1180-1183;
Denis T. Olson, The Jagged Cliffs of Mount Sinai: a Theological Reading of the Book
of the Covenant (Exod 20:22-23:19) Interpretation 55, no. 3 (July 1996): 251, 253, 256;
Cleon L. Rogers Jr., The Covenant with Moses and its Historical Setting Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 14, no. 3 (Summer 1971): 141-155. Williamson points
to the historical-critical approaches as seen the covenant as a relatively late innovation
that has been retrojected into Israels earlier traditions he also recognizes that the
canonical text clearly suggests that the concept extended back into the prepatriarchal
era. See Paul R. Williamson, Covenant, Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch
(DOTP), ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity, 2003), 139.
4
See the discussion in Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 193-192.
5
McConville, -:, NIDOTTE, 1:747, 748. This relationship dimension of the
Covenant in the OT has been highlighted in the last decade by the study of the usage of
:s in covenantal texts, particularly in the book of Deuteronomy. See in this respect
Jacqueline E. Lapsley, Feeling Our Way: Love for God in Deuteronomy, The Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 65 (2003): 350-369. See DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love,
263-265, this dissertation surveys the concept in Deut 5-11. See Susan Ackerman, The
Personal Is Political: Covenantal and Affectionate Love (HB, AHB) in the
Hebrew Bible, Vetus Testamentum 52, no. 4 (2002): 437-458. See Enrique Nardoni,

234

evidence from Hittites, Egypt, Syria and Israel, Noel Weeks concludes that it is possible
that in the Ancient Near East the treaty/covenant form accounts for a common
inhChicago
eritance that followed parallel developments and were affected by the peculiarities
of every culture and by their interactions.
6
Quell writes about the difficulties for
assessing the etymology of -: and even the obscurity of those words associated with
it.
7
After a review of the attempts to explain the etymology of -:, McConville suggests
that the final meaning of -: in the OT must be derived from the context and not from
external sources.
8
McConville uses the case of -: to emphasize the weaknesses of the
etymological approach as a tool to convey theological understanding in the Scripture.
9



Another one of these trends in covenant studies sees literary and theological links
between different OT covenants.
10
Some similarities between the diverse OT covenants

Normas de justicia en las leyes de la alianza, Revista Bblica 58, no. 2 (1996): 82-83.
See Hermann Spieckermann, Gods Steadfast Love Towards a New Conception of Old
Testament Theology Biblica 81 (2000): 305-327.
6
See the argument in Noel Weeks, Admonition and Curse: The Ancient Near
Eastern Treaty/Covenant Form as a Problem in Inter-Cultural Relationships, Journal for
the Study of the Old Testament 407 (London: T. & T. Clark International, 2004), 177-
182.
7
Gottfried Quell, etas, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed.
Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1975), 2:107-109.
8
The same opinion is shared by Ellinworth in reference to the Greek word
etas, see Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
1993), 386.
9
McConville, -:, NIDOTTE, 1:747.
10
See Scott Hahn. Covenant in the Old and New Testament: Some Current
Research (1994-2004), Currents in Biblical Research 3, no. 2 (2005): 271-273.
Hutchison, The Relationship of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Palestinian covenants in
Deuteronomy 29-30. See an approach from the post exilic perspective in Eckart Otto,
Old and New Covenant. A Post-Exilic Discourse Between the Pentateuch and the Book

235

have already been noticed as well as differences.
11
The Noahic covenant is seen as
foundational and the model for other covenants covering all humanity and even nature
and the earth as recipients.
12
The Mosaic covenant that is expressed in the Bundesbuch
(Exod 19:3-24:11) is seen as having its most developed expression in Deuteronomy.
13

The covenant of perpetual priesthood
14
with Phinehas (Num 25:6-18) is seen in
connection with the Sinaitic covenant as it has parallels with Exod 32:25-29 and is later
recognized in Deut 33:8-11 and even later in Jer 33:18, 22. In addition, Exod 29:9 (in a
prescriptive ritual text) speaks of God assigning a perpetual priesthood to Aaron and his
sons (::r -~: .:).
15
The text in Exod 40:15 uses again the expression

in the same
kind of context (:-: ::r -.::); a prescriptive ritual text although verses 16-38

of Jeremiah. Also a Study of Quotations and Allusions in the Hebrew Bible, Old
Testament Essays 19, no. 3 (2006): 939-949.
11
Roger T. Beckwith, The Unity and Diversity of Gods Covenant, Tyndale
Bulletin 38 (1987): 93-118. See an argumentation against particular connections between
Jeremiahs new covenant and the Mosaic Covenant in Femi Adeyemi, What Is the New
Covenant Law in Jeremiah 31:33? Bibliotheca Sacra 163 (July-September 2006): 312-
321.
12
Irvin A. Busenitz, Introduction to the Biblical Covenants; The Noahic
Covenant and the Priestly Covenant, The Masters Seminary Journal 10, no. 2 (Fall
1999): 183-186. Williamson declares, Since the Noahic covenant has never been
abrogated (attested by the ongoing validity of its signthe rainbow), subsequent divine-
human covenants must be viewed within the context of its all-encompassing framework.
Paul R. Williamson, Covenant, DOTP, 143. See also John Goldingay, Covenant, OT
and NT, The New Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible (NIDB), ed. Katharine Doob
Sakenfeld (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2006), 768. See also Steven D. Mason, Another
Flood? Genesis 9 and Isaiahs Broken Covenant, Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament 32, no. 2 (2007): 177-198.
13
See Harman, Deuteronomy, 12-14.
14
The Hebrew reads ::r -.: -: and the LXX etas t.a.ta, at.it a.
For the discussion of the parallels with Exod 32:25-29 see Baruch Levine, Numbers 21-
36, The Anchor Yale Commentary (New Haven, London: Yale University Press, 2000),
279-280 and 292-294.
15
LXX: t.a.ta .et .t, ei at.ia.

236

speak about the realization of the ritual. Numbers 25 is still inside the wilderness
narrative (Exod 16-Deut 34),
16
summarizing all of Israels wandering in the wilderness
since their departure from Egypt up to their arrival on the border of the promised land in
the dawn of their conquest of Canaan. The wilderness narrative (Exod 16-Deut 34)
portrays the covenant establishment near its beginning (Exod 19:1-24:11) and a renewal
near its end (Deut 27:1-30:20). Deuteronomy 28:69 mentions both covenantal
ceremonies and therefore links the macrostructure of Deuteronomy and the book of the
covenant in Exodus.
17
The Deuteronomic elaboration of the covenant is present in
historical books such as Joshua and Kings. It is also present in the prophets
18
as in
Hosea, Amos, Micah and Isaiah and particularly in Jeremiah.
19
This re-establishment is
seen as a renewal that is both restorative and transformative.
20
In the Deuterocanonical
literature a reading of Old Testament narrative and wisdom from the perspective of

16
Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel in Sinai, 3.
17
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 706. Tigay, Deuteronomy, 274.
Driver, Deuteronomy, 319.
18
Hahn. Covenant in the Old and New Testament: Some Current Research
(1994-2004), 277-278. See Douglas Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, Word Biblical Commentary
31 (Dallas, TX: Word, 1987), xxxi-xlii. Douglas Stuart reviews the dependence of the
prophets on the blessings and curses from the Pentateuch. Jeffrey Stackert provides
evidence for the elaboration of Exod 21:12-14 in Deut 19:1-13, see Jeffrey Stackert,
Why Does Deuteronomy Legislate Cities of Refuge? Asylum in the Covenant Collection
(Exodus 21:12-14) and Deuteronomy (19:1-13), Journal of Biblical Literature 125, no.
1 (2006): 23-49. Ka Leung Wong provides evidence for the dependence in Ezekiel on the
covenantal blessings and curses of Lev 26, see Ka Leung Wong, The Idea of Retribution
in the Book of Ezekiel, Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 87 (Leiden, Netherlands:
Brill, 2001), 78-119.
19
McConville, -:, NIDOTTE, 1:748-753. Brevard S. Childs, Introduction to
the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1979), 346-348. See a
narrative and reader-response approach in Edgar Conrad, Reading the Latter Prophets,
Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series 373 (London: T. & T.
Clark International, 2003), 111-138.
20
See Hahn. Covenant in the Old and New Testament: Some Current Research
(1994-2004), 273.

237

covenant theology is present, seeing and evaluating biblical history in a covenant
structure.
21

From this perspective, Deuteronomy seems to be an elaboration of the Mosaic or
Sinaitic covenant,
22
Exod 19:3-24:11, while the Sinaitic covenant seems to be an
elaboration of the Abrahamic covenant
23
and the Abrahamic covenant
24
has textual links
with the Noahic covenant.
25
Research has shown that the Noahic covenant has verbal
26


21
Ibid., 278.
22
Deuteronomy renews the Sinaitic covenant with the next generation and goes
even further. It is a reaffirmation of obligation laid out in the covenant of circumcision
(Gen 17; cf. Deut 30:6-10) for all future generations (Deut 29:14-15) and an anticipation
of the new covenant that will guarantee that a divine-human relationship between
Yahweh and Abrahams seed will be maintained forever (cf. Jer 31:31-34).
Williamson, Covenant, DOTP, 153.
23
The covenant in Exod 19 is already a presupposed reality as Exodus recognizes
the already presence of Gods covenant with his people (Exod 2:23-25; 6:2-8). A
covenant God made with their forefathers and now ratifies with them as a people that
comprises the descendants of Abraham (Gen 17:7a) in a vocabulary (Exod 19:3b-6a) that
recalls Gods covenant with Abraham (Gen 15:18-21; 17:1-8). See Christensen,
Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 706. Williamson reviews the textual evidence that reveals the
Sinaitic covenant as the fulfillment of the promises contained in the Abrahamic covenant
and therefore subordinated to it. See Williamson, Covenant, DOTP, 149-150 and
Goldingay, Covenant, OT and NT, NIDB, 769. These elements suggest literary and
theological links between these covenants.
24
The Abrahamic covenant in Gen 12:1-3 is seen as pivotal for the structure of
Genesis as well as the whole Pentateuch. It is seen as a programmatic text providing a
double agenda of Gods promise to Abraham. God promises to bless Abraham and make
of him a great nation under that blessing and promises to bless all the nations through
him, particularly those who might be in good terms with Abraham. See Williamson,
Covenant, DOTP, 143-146.
25
McConville, -:, NIDOTTE, 1:749.
26
Here McConville points to the verbal links between Gen 9:1 and 1:28 where the
whole phrase s-s s:: : e is present verbatim in both texts; 9:2-3 and 1:29;
9:10 and 1:20-25, McConville, -:, NIDOTTE, 1:748. He elaborates on the usage in
Gen 6:18 of the word -: in the phrase -s -:-s -:. Brown Driver and
Briggs recognize the meaning ratify of the verb here in this verse along with Gen 9:9;
9:11 17:19; 17:21 Exod 6:4 , Ezek 16:62; Gen 9:17 17:7, see Brown, BDB, s.v. :.

238

connections and links with the Creation
27
narrative. These links suggests a continual
covenantal renewal process of the covenant in the OT instead of a collection of individual
covenants. These linguistic, literary and theological links will need to be the object of
research in another study devoted to the topic but the concept might prove to be useful as
a background and framework for the understanding of the covenant elements in Deut
28:69-30:20.

Covenant Theology in Deut 28:69-30:20
This section makes an inventory of the covenant elements in Deut 28:69-30:20
from a theological perspective. This section will look into the text taking advantage of
the information provided by the textual, syntagmatic and structural analysis done in the
previous chapters. The word -: occurs seven times in the passage in clauses 28:69a,
28:69c, 29:8a, 29:11a, 29:13b, 29:20b, 29:24b. Therefore out of the six sections of the
speech (Deut 28:69-29:8, 29:9-20, 29:21-28, 30:1-10, 30:1-14 and 30:15-20) three of
them use the word -: while the other three do not contain the actual word but they are
passages loaded with covenant elements. The vocabulary, syntax, literary devices and
structure of Deut 28:69-30:20 are engrained in the text with a strategy: The renewal of the
covenant.

27
McConville, -:, NIDOTTE, 1:748, some studies toward the objective
identification of a primordial Creation or Adamic covenant are done by Katterine J. Dell,
Covenant and Creation in Relationship, in Covenant as Context: Essays in Honour of
E.W. Nicholson, ed. A. D. H. Mayes and R. B. Salters (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2004), 111-134; Hahn. Covenant in the Old and New Testament: Some Current
Research (1994-2004), 273. Williamson does not agree with the perspective of a
covenant with creation although he recognizes several clear echoes of the creation
narrative in the Noahic covenant. See Williamson, Covenant, DOTP, 143. Goldingay
suggests that there is not textual evidence of a creation covenant because creation implied
a natural relationship between God and humanity that did not require to be stated. See
Goldingay, Covenant, OT and NT, NIDB, 1:767-768. See Bautch, Abrahams
Covenant in Postexilic Covenants, 62-63.

239


Deuteronomy 28:69-29:8
The word -: occurs three times in this section in clauses 28:69a, 28:69c and
29:8a. They form an inclusio structure that surrounds three sub-sections dealing with the
mighty acts of God in behalf of his people in the past. Deut 28:69-29:8 provides a
historical review as background and rationale for the covenant renewal.
A. Deut 28:69a-28:69d, The Covenant
B. Deut 29:1a-29:3a, Magnalia Dei (Egypt, Moses speech)
C. Deut 29:4a-29:5d, Magnalia Dei (Desert, Gods speech)
B. Deut 29:6a-29:7b, Magnalia Dei (Promised land, Moses speech)
A. Deut 29:8a-29:8d, The Covenant
The previous analysis has revealed textual connections between Deut 28:69-29:8,
Deut 1:1-5 and 4:44-49 in addition to the link to the Bundesbuch (Exod 20:22-23:19).
Deut 4:44-49 is particularly interesting here. It concludes the speech that started at Deut
1:6, Deut 1:6-4:49 provides a historical review as background for the whole book. In this
way the historical background for the whole collection of speeches (namely the book of
Deuteronomy) and the historical background for the final speech are textually related.
Deuteronomy 28:69a and 28:69c puts side by side and in sequence the two
covenant ceremonies at Horeb (Sinai, Exod 20:22-23:19) and Moab thus highlighting the
renewal character of the event here portrayed and thus it makes clear that there is a
direct continuity between these two covenant ceremonies.
28
Eugene H. Merrill
highlights the renewal nature of the covenant in Deuteronomy; he says,
This is clear from the frequent references to the original Sinai (or Horeb)
covenant setting (1:6; 4:1-2, 5, 10, 15, 23, 33-40; etc.) and the change in language
in Deuteronomy as compared with Exodus due to the changed historical and

28
Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:14, 705-706. See also Ridderbos,
Deuteronomy, 263 and McConville, Deuteronomy, 409.

240

theological circumstances surrounding the respective settings (5:12-15; cf. Exod
20:8-11; 7:1-5; cf. Exod 23:32-33; 12:5; cf. Exod 20:24; 15:12-18; cf. Exod
21:26). Moreover, Deuteronomy is a greatly expanded and more detailed
rendition of the covenant text because of the anticipated changes that would be
brought about by entrance into settlement in the land of promise.
29


The generation that came out of Egypt and made the covenant with the Lord at
Horeb died in the desert during their wandering (Deut 1:34-40, 2:14-15) because of their
rebellion (Num 14:1-38). Now their descendants are before the Lord to renew that
covenant (Deut 29:10-13). The historical review identifies the generation present in
Moab with the previous generation that attended the covenant ceremony at Sinai. In Deut
29:4a-29:5d God himself speaks to the audience and identifies them with the previous
generation He had led in the desert. This historical review at the beginning of the speech
is in harmony with the ANE treaty formats except that the participants in the covenant are
not provided in this section (28:69-29:8) but in the next (29:9-14). It is necessary to
remember that Deuteronomy and particularly Deut 28:69-30:20 are not Hittite or
Assyrian kind of covenant documents. The text uses formal conventions from the
Ancient Near East but evidently makes innovations of its own. Several of these
conventions are present but not necessarily in the same order or even magnitude.
McConville suggests a distribution for the whole book while he himself recognizes that
the match is not exact:
(1) A preamble announcing the treaty and those who are party to it (Deut 1:1-5).
(2) A historical prologue rehearsing the previous relations between the parties

29
Eugene H. Merrill, Deuteronomy, The New American Commentary 4
(Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2001, c1994), 52. Williamson, Covenant,
DOTP, 152-153 3.7.1. Williamson suggests that the covenant in Deuteronomy is more
than a renewal and It is a reaffirmation of obligations laid out in the covenant of
circumcision (Gen 17; cf. Deut 30:6-10) for all future generations (Deut 29:14-15) and
an anticipation of the new covenant that will guarantee that a divine-human relationship
between Yahweh and Abrahams seed will be maintained forever (cf. Jer 31:31-34) by
facilitating the important ethical obligations.

241

(Deut 1:6-4:49); (3) general stipulations (Deut 5-11); (4) specific stipulations
(Deut 12-26); (5) a deposition of the document for the purpose of public reading
(Deut 27:1-10; 31:9-29); (6) witnesses (Deut 32); and blessings and curses (Deut
27:12-26; 28:1-68).
30


The -:. -::, :-e: --s: ::. trials, signs and wonders (Deut
29:2a) performed by the Lord in Egypt (29:1a-29:3a), the desert (29:4a-29:5b) and in the
promised land (29:6a-29:7b) in behalf of the people are provided as rationale for their
commitment to the covenant. Three lessons are derived from these three experiences
(Deut 29:3a, 29:5c-5d, 29:8a-8d).
The first lesson (Deut 29:3a) states, The Lord has not given you heart to know or
eyes to see or ears to listen until this day. What does Deut 29:3 mean in the context of
Deut 28:69-29:8? Michael A. Grisanti, after his analysis of Deut 29:2-4 in its contexts,
suggests that in this passage God is taking over himself the responsibility for the peoples
lack of spiritual perception.
31
However, even though God did not give Israel to be a
knowledgeable people (29:3a), the text also says that they were able to see (29:1c-
29:2a) Gods mighty acts (29:2a-3a, 29:7a-29:7b) back in Egypt as well as in the desert
and the new land when they arrived. They were or they should have been able to
recognize the meaning of these wonders (29:6b) as a rationale for their observance of the
covenant (29:9a). Definitively there is tension in this text between Gods sovereignty and
human accountability. McConville suggests based on textual evidence that according to
the testimony of the book of Deuteronomy, the Lord knew that in the perspective of the

30
See J. Gordon McConville, Deuteronomy, Book of, DOTP, 184-185. See
also George E. Mendenhall, Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition, The Biblical
Archaeologist 17, no. 3 (September, 1954): 49-76. See Silvia Linington, Recent Trends
in the Study of the History of Pre-Monarchic Israelite Religion With Particular Emphasis
on the Concept of the Covenant, Verbum et Ecclesia 25, no. 1 (2004): 135-137.
31
See Michael A. Grisanti, Was Israel Unable to Respond to God? A Study of
Deuteronomy 29:2-4, Bibliotheca Sacra 163, no. 650 (April-June 2006): 176-196.

242

peoples past history of failure (Deut 1:26-46, cf. Num 13-140) and their inability to be
faithful to the covenant (Deut 9-10 recalls Exod 32, Deut 11:26-32 and Deut 28 stress the
concept), the exile was inevitable (Deut 29:22-28, 32:15-25 and 31:16-22) for the
people.
32

The second lesson (29:5c-29:5d) states: So that you may know that I am the Lord
your God. This is the main purpose of Gods mighty acts. He reveals himself to the
people through His actions in their behalf. The people were in the condition of somehow
understanding (r- r::) the message of Gods actions in their behalf enough as to be
able to recognize His personal commitment to them (:::s :s : ). Could it be
that the message of Deut 29:5a-29:5c is that the Lord gave them neither bread nor wine
so these things would not affect their understanding or is that He provided them bread
beyond the usual so that they could perceive His power displayed in their behalf? The
function of this expression deserves further research. However, the word :~: occurs
eight times in Deuteronomy (Deut 8:3, 9; 9:9, 18; 10:18; 16:3; 23:5 and 29:5). In Deut
8:3 the word :~: occurs in a context of forced fasting so that the people might understand
their need of dependence on God. In Deut 8:9 the word :~: refers to the abundance the
people will enjoy in the promised land which could eventually lead them to forget the
Lord, so that they must beware (Deut 8:11). In Deut 9:9 and 9:18 the word :~: occurs in
the context of Moses fasting when God delivered the law to him at Sinai before and after
the Golden Calf event. In Deut 16:3 the word :~: refers to the unleavened bread festival.
In Deut 23:5 the word :~: occurs in the retelling of the occasion when the Moabites and
Ammonites denied to feed the people. The last occurrence of :~: in Deuteronomy is our

32
See J. G. McConville, Grace in the End: A Study in Deuteronomic Theology
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993), 133-135.

243

text, Deut 29:5a. At least in four of these passages the word :~: occurs in contexts that
have to do with Gods revelation and its understanding. The text uses pronouns in plural
therefore the text emphasizes that covenant has a personal dimension portrayed here in a
communal sphere. God is committing himself to be God for the people.
Deuteronomy 28:69-29:8 uses the word s four times. In fact this word occurs
sixteen times in Deut 28:68-30:20 and the similar term :s, two times. In the
syntagmatic analysis of Deut 29:7b we point to a progression in the way that this word
and the synonymous :s are used in Deut 28:69-30:20. The first occurrence of s in
Deut 28:69-29:8 provides the location for the covenantal renewal ceremony (28:69b).
The second and the third (29:1d) occurrences point to the scenario of the Magnalia Dei in
behalf of Gods people when He delivered them from their bondage in Egypt. According
to the text at that time Gods mighty actions where displayed in Egypt and finally against
Egypt. Finally Deut 29:7b mentions the s of Sihon and Og that was taken away from
them and given as inheritance to Ruben and Manasseh. Therefore s in Deut 28:69-
29:8 is the scenario for Gods self revelation, for the deliverance of His people and the
fulfillment of His promises.
The third lesson (29:8a-29:8d) says, Then keep the words of this covenant and
you shall do them so you might prosper in all what you do. There are at least two
consequences in chain of knowing God (29:8a and 29:8c are result clauses): The people
will obey the stipulations of the covenant and this obedience will bring them prosperity.
Gods mighty acts in behalf of his people in and finally against Egypt, the desert
and the promised land in the past were revelations of Himself to them (Deut 29:5c-
29:5d). They were Divine mighty acts to free them, to preserve and defend them because

244

God had chosen them to be His people (Deut 29:12b-29:12b). Therefore the people must
proceed and renew their covenant with the Lord with this past history as rationale and
background (Deut 29:29:8a-29:8d). Gods initiatives and personal care in behalf of the
people in their past and present history, and their accountability and responsibility for
their choices, are highlighted here in Deut 28:69-30:20.

Deuteronomy 29:9-20
Deuteronomy 28:69a-29:8d has provided the introduction and the historical
rationale for the covenant renewal. Deuteronomy 29:9a-29:14b portrays the event in a
present temporal perspective while Deut 29:15a-29:20b provides a dual warning related
to idolatry first in a historical review (Deut 29:15-16) and then in a conditional
anticipatory perspective (Deut 29:17a-29:20b).
The syntagmatic analysis has provided three clues for the theology of Deut
29:9a-20b. The distribution of the off-line material counts for 83.78% of all the clauses.
This suggests an accumulation of semantic load in the passage. In fact, this analysis
identified covenant-related vocabulary. Finally, there is a temporal structure related to
the covenant and the people.
Deuteronomy 29:9a-29:10c opens with a present temporal perspective describing
the attendants to the covenantal ceremony. This ceremony is announced and its terms
described in Deut 29:11a-29:12d although it seems that the actual realization of the event
is not portrayed in Deut 28:69-30:20. Deuteronomy 29:9a fronts the subject (:-s) and
emphasizes the temporal element (:) and the location (:::s :e: :::) these
adverbial modifiers are before the direct object. In addition, the list of the attendants is

245

comprehensive including even the children, women and foreign hired workers (. ::::
::e:).
Clauses 29:11a and 29:12a provide the objectives of the event which are
expanded in clauses 29:11b and 29:12b respectively. Clauses 29:11a-29:11b mention the
-: and the :s.
33
These two words seem to be synonymous because the participle of
-: in 29:11b is singular
34
and the syntagmatic analysis points to this clause modifying
the direct object of 29:11a (-:s: . . . -::). Clauses 29:12c-29:12d move the tense
into the past by recalling the promises God gave to the audience and linking the
ceremony to the previous covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as the text will do
again in Deut 30:20.
Clauses 29:13a-29:14b return to describe the audience in the present tense and
expand them with the ones who are not present there, the future generations. The text of
clause 29:13b repeats the vocabulary of Deut 29:11a-29:11b -s -:-s -: ::s
-s :s-s. The vocabulary of Deut 29:14b (: ::r e .:s :s -s) has been
read in two ways.
35
This clause is seen either as alluding to those who did not attend the

33
Oath of covenant, See Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English
Lexicon, 46 529.2. See Deut 29:11, 13, 18, 19, 20 and 30:7. Since the covenant
between Yahweh and Israel in the OT is understood according to the analogy of a treaty,
this covenant is also said to be ratified by an alah, curse, oath. As a rule this means the
ratification of the curse with which Yahweh threatened the partner who broke the
covenant. Josef Schabert, :s, lh; :s, lh; :s-, ta
a
lh, in Theological
Dictionary of the Old Testament (TDOT), ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer
Ringgren, trans., John T. Willis (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 1:264.
34
A similar syntactical structure occurs in Deut 29:13a where a singular participle
of -: has as object -s :s-s \-s -:-s.
35
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:20, 718. He applies the expressions to
those absent from the ceremony and to the future generations and quotes antecedents in
the ANE literature for the treaties as binding for the descendants on the parties
involved.

246

assembly by personal motives, or as referring to the coming generations.
36
Although both
aspects might be present in the text, the last option fits with the perspective of the passage
that has already linked the present generation with their forefathers and now would be
linking them to their descendants.
Deuteronomy 29:15a-29:16b provides a warning against idolatry by reviewing the
peoples experience back in the land of Egypt. Clauses 29:15a, 29:15b and 29:16a
feature the subject fronted and then the clause moves into first plural as the speaker
identifies himself with the audience (clauses 29:15a-29:15b). Idolatry was there in Egypt
and among the nations that the people met during their wandering in the desert. There is
the danger that the people might have familiarized themselves with the religious practices
of these nations. This experiential knowledge might bear fruit later on in a possible
apostasy featuring idolatry.
Deuteronomy 29:17a shifts the temporal perspective of the text into future. This
perspective seems to be conditional from 29:17a up to 29:17d (::: :e) but in 29:18a-
29:20b the speech moves into anticipatory text-type () with the weqatal verbs in first
position providing the backbone (29:18a, 29:18c, 29:19c, 29:19e and 29:20a).
37
The
syntagmatic analysis has suggested that there is a pattern that departs from this clause
(29:17a) which provides four elements, two are individual (:ss :s) and two
corporative (:::s ~e:: s). Then clauses 29:18a-29:18g provide an individual
example while clauses 29:21a-29:28c expand the concept with a corporative perspective.
This pattern might explain the rather abrupt transition from the individual perspective to

36
See Driver, Deuteronomy, 323. He applies the expression to the future
generations.
37
Ibid., 326.

247

the corporative (national) point of view. Driver points to the abruptness in the text while
Ridderbos sees Deut 29:21ss as related to :::s ~e:: s in Deut 29:17a.
38

This section warns the people concerning idolatry and apostasy (29:17a-29:17d)
even in rebellion (29:18b). Deuteronomy 29:18b-29:18c provides the background to an
internal monologue that acts as an example of the warning in 29:17a-29:17d. The Lord
then answers in strong words loaded with legal and covenant vocabulary. Since the
monologue is an example, then the Lords speech that answers the monologue is
addressed to the audience as a warning even though the pronouns are in 2ms. If the
people depart from the Lord in idolatrous and rebellious apostasy, the Lord will not be
willing to forgive them (29:19a). Gods anger and zeal will rage against them (29:19b).
Every curse (:s::) will recline (s:) against them (29:19c), the curses will stay
against them and finally their name will be washed away from beneath the heavens
(29:19e). This progression in judgment and punishment finally reaches annihilation.
That will be Gods strategy to separate evil (r) from His people (29:20a). The text
mentions twice the curses from the -. (29:19c-29:19d and 29:20b) almost with the
same vocabulary.

Deuteronomy 29:21-28
In Deuteronomy 29:21-28 the theme of the apostasy of the people is elaborated in
the perspective of the covenant and around the word s that occurs eight times in the
passage.
39
This passage evaluates the judgment upon the land because of the peoples

38
See Driver, Deuteronomy, 326. Ridderbos, Deuteronomy, 267. Ridderbos uses
the English numeration for the verses.
39
In reference to the theological usage of s in the OT, see Magnus Ottonsson,
s, TDOT, 1:401-405. James McKeown, Land, Fertility Famine, DOTP, 487-491.

248

idolatrous apostasy. The syntagmatic analysis identified a backbone of weqatal verbs in
first position in their clauses that marks the passage as an anticipatory text-type discourse.
The temporal perspective of the text is set in a far future when the future generations will
dialogue about Gods judgment upon the land and then they will analyze the rationale for
this punishment. Through this analysis, the future generations will further judge the
peoples response to their obligations toward their covenant with God.
Clauses 29:21a-29:22f mentions the -:: and the :s:~- that will have fallen
upon the land. The word :: occurs six times in the Pentateuch referring to the curses
due to disobedience or even in punishment contexts.
40
Texts like Num 11:33 and Deut
25:3 use :: in a context of punishment. The word :s:~- occurs only five times in the
OT associated to diseases, particularly diseases related to famine.
41
The text describes
the condition of the land under this judgment as burned and barren (29:22b-29:22d),
covered with ~:: -e.. (29:22a). These two words are used in the Sodom and
Gomorrah narrative (Gen 19:24 and 26) and Deut 29:22e express the parallel between
Gods judgment upon the land and the judgment upon Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and
Seboiim. This was because of Gods -:~: es.
Deut 29:24b-29:24b seeks the rationale of the lands destruction and finds it in the
peoples apostasy or departure (:r) from the covenant they made with the Lord. The text
refers to the covenant made at Sinai in Deut 29:24b-29:24d. The text has already alluded

Gary M. Burge, Land, NIDB, 3:570-573. Gary Burge points here to the conditionality
of the lands promise in the covenant. The promise is conditional to the peoples
obedience to the covenant. Deut 29:21-28 makes it clear.
40
See the examples in Lev 25:21 and Deut 28:59 (3x). See Brown, BDB, s.v.
::, 6125.1, 4.
41
See Deut 29:21; 2 Chr 21:19; Ps 103:3; Jer 14:8 and 16:4. See also Brown,
BDB, 316 3042. Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages, 9377.

249

to that covenant at Deut 28:69c-28:69d. Deuteronomy has already used :r with the
people as subject and the Lord as object in Deut 28:20 in a context of warning while in
Deut 31:16 the same subject-object structure is used in reference to the future generation
also implying apostasy. In contrast, Deut 31:6, 8 use the verb :r with God as subject
and the people as object and Gods faithfulness is emphasized.
Deuteronomy 29:25a-29:25e describes a downward progression in the peoples
apostasy and links this apostasy as the rationale of Gods judgments upon the land
(29:23a-29:24d). This suggests a rhetorical pattern in the way the evidence is presented.
According to this, clauses 29:21a-29:22f describe the punishment to which the land has
been submitted. Clauses 29:23a-29:24d provide the rationale of that punishmentthe
people have forsaken the covenant of their God. Clauses 29:25a-29:25e describe the
progression of the peoples apostasy into idolatry. Finally, clauses 29:26a-29:27b
describe Gods judgment upon the land
42
as a means to uproot the people and cast them
out of it and into alien land. Gods judgments are then justified twice in Deut 29:23a-
29:24d as the result of the peoples abandonment of the covenant and in Deut 29:26a-
29:27b as Gods response to the peoples gross idolatry and apostasy. Definitively in
Deut 29:21-28 the fulfillment of the promise of the land is conditional upon the peoples
conformity to the covenant in obedience and faithfulness to the Lord. This has to do at
least in reference to its tenure.
Deuteronomy 29:28a-29:28c closes the section making it clear that the revelation
God have provided is available and sufficient so that the people and their descendants

42
The sin of the people affects the land. See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-
34:12, 727. Often this concept is elaborated in the OT under the metaphor of pollution.
See Brown, BDB, s.v. :~. Nilton Dutra Amorin, Desecration and Defilement in the
Old Testament, (PhD diss., Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI, 1986), 240-241,
308-309.

250

might keep the words of the law in faithfulness to the covenant. The emphasis of Deut
29:28a-29:28c is on what is revealed and not on what is hidden because is to what is
revealed that the verse devotes more content. This concept will be further elaborated in
Deut 30:11-14, thus the revelation as well as its availability and sufficiency is repeated
twice surrounding Deut 30:1-10 while Deut 30:2 emphasizes the topic of obedience.
There is no excuse for disobedience or for idolatry, no excuse for the peoples
transgression of the covenant.

Deuteronomy 30:1-10
The syntagmatic and structural analyses have shown that in the passage of Deut
30:1-10 the root :: is arranged in a chiastic pattern alternating the subject and the object
of the verb. The structural analysis shows that this :: chiastic pattern, two inclusio
structures and four conditional structures are organized surrounding clauses 30:8a-30:8d
thus highlighting this verse. The content of Deut 30:6 and its connections with previous
texts in Deuteronomy sets this verse in the theological agenda of Deut 30:1-10. The
entire text of Deut 30:1-10 addresses the audience in 2ms providing a personal tone to its
content.
Deuteronomy 30:1a-30:3c is a conditional structure that opens with the temporal
and conditional construction
43
: that marks a shift in the temporal aspect of the
passage and together with the other nine weqatal verbs
44
in first position in the passage

43
The syntagmatic analysis has shown that the LXX translates this Hebrew
construction with an ai plus aorist subjunctive structure, which implies contingency in
the future, improbable of fulfillment but still likely.
44
There are weqatal verbs in first position in their clauses in 30:1a; 30:2a; 30:2b;
30:3a; 30:3c; 30:5c; 30:6a; 30:7a; 30:8b; 30:8c. These clauses are main lines, the others
are off-line clauses.

251

mark it as an anticipatory text-type discourse elaborated with promises and predictions.
45

The text is rhetorically looking backward from a far future when the exile is seen as a
past historical event. Deuteronomy 30:1a-30:2c is the protasis of the conditional
structure. This protasis uses twice the root :: (30:1c, 30:2a) with the people as subject.
The text states the conditions for the restoration of the exiled people. The content of the
covenant must be taken to their hearts (30:1c) and that must result in the people returning
to the Lord and in obedience to His voice. There is emphasis in what the Lord has
revealed to His people and their responsibility toward that revelation and the function that
revelation will have in their future restoration. The revelation is what has to be taken to
the peoples heart so that they might return to the Lord and obey his voice,
commandments and statutes. This emphasis in Gods revelation to his people harmonizes
with that emphasis already seen in Deut 29:28a-29:28c and Deut 30:11a-30:14b. These
texts enclose Deut 30:1-10.
Deuteronomy 30:3a-30:3d is the apodosis that provides the result of the
fulfillment of the conditions already provided in Deut 30:1a-30:2c. Here the verbal root
:: occurs twice (Deut 30:3a; 30:3c) with God as subject and the people as object. The
Lord promises to restore the people from their captivity and grant them compassion, and
gather (:)
46
them from wherever they might have been scattered. The verbal root :
occurs here in this text in piel form that is recognized as a soteriological technical term
often contrasting Yahwehs previous judgments.
47
The peoples return to the Lord will
not only cause the Lord to return to them but the Lord will reverse the peoples

45
See Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 473ss. McConville,
Deuteronomy, 423-425. C. Wright, Deuteronomy, 289ss.
46
See Brown, s.v. :.
47
Bochum P. Mommer, :, TDOT, 12:490-491.

252

punishments and the covenantal curses that would have fallen upon them because of their
disobedience.
48

Deuteronomy 30:4a-30:7b contains the second conditional structure in this
passage. Deuteronomy 30:4a is the protasis. This section starts with the condition of the
dispersion and assumes the peoples return to the Lord that Deut 30:1a-30:3d has already
provided. The long apodosis expands Gods reversal of the peoples judgments. Clauses
30:4b-30:5a portray God gathering the people back into the land three times in
parallelism. Here is the second usage of : in piel. This structure provides that the
restoration to the land of the fathers is conditioned to the peoples return to the Lord and
to theirs faithfulness to the covenant.
Deuteronomy 30:6a-30:6c is key in this context. The clause is alluding to Deut
10:16 where the people are exhorted to circumcise their heart but here in Deut 30:6a the
subject of the verb is the Lord. Gods circumcision of their heart will make possible for
them to love their God and to obey Him will bring them life. This is a metaphorical use
of the vocabulary meaning the removal in the heart of the cover that blocks the heart;
making it inaccessible to Gods teaching.
49

Deuteroomy 30:8a-30:8d in the context of the peoples return to their Lord (30:8a)
and Gods circumcision of their heart features the peoples obedience to Gods voice and
commandments related to the covenant (30:8d). This is in harmony with the obedience to
the revelation that is featured in 29:28 and 30:1-4 and 30:11-14. These clauses are the

48
See Cornelius and Rogers who agree on the semantic richness of this
occurrence of : in Deut 30:1-4. See I. Cornelius and Cleon L. Rogers Jr. :,
NIDOTTE, 3:863-864.
49
Tigay, Deuteronomy, 107. The rabbis described this process as follows:
When a person seeks to purify himself, he receives help in doing so, Tigay,
Deuteronomy, 285.

253

structural and thematic center of the passage. The root :: occurs here in the center of a
chiasm and surrounded by two inclusio structures (30:2a-c and 30:10a-d; 30:3a,c/30:5a-d
and 30:9a-c) and three conditional structures (30:1a-3c; 30:4a-7b; 30:9a-10d).
Deuteronomy 30:9a-30:10d returns to the conditions for Gods return to his
people. This section is a conditional structure which has been elaborated in reverse order
with the apodosis (30:9a-30:9c) ahead of the protasis (30:10a-30:10d). The apodosis
includes the root :: with God as subject (30:9b). The Lord will abundantly bless the
people materially (30:9a) and spiritually (30:9b-30:9c) if the people obey His voice,
commandments and statutes related to the covenant (30:10a-30:10b). Therefore,
obedience is once more featured. The people return to their God. God circumcises their
heart and this makes possible for them to love the Lord and obey Gods voice,
commandments and statutes as portrayed in the covenantal revelation. All these elements
are critical for the peoples restoration, gathering to the land and access to life and
blessings. That is the sequence: The people return to God, the Lord circumcises their
heart so that they might love and then love him.
50


Deuteronomy 30:11-14
Deuteronomy 30:1-10 has made clear that the obedience to Gods voice and
commandments will be critical for the peoples restoration from their exile. Obedience is
possible thanks to Gods circumcision of the peoples heart. Now Deut 30:11-14 expands
on the availability and sufficiency of the commandment in parallel with the content of

50
Tigay says: The rabbis described this process as follows: When a person
seeks to purify himself, he receives help in doing so. Ibid., 285. On the pairing of love
and obedience in Deuteronomy, see J. W. McKay, Mans Love for God in
Deuteronomy and the Father/TeacherSon/Pupil Relationship, Vetus Testament 22, no. 4
(October 1972): 426-435.

254

Deut 30:28a-30:28c. Deuteronomy 30:11-14 deals with its theme with a whole array of
literary devises as seen in the syntagmatic and structural analysis. The connections
between Deut 30:1-10 and 30:11-14 are confirmed by their common use of roots such as
r::, s, cr and s:.
Deuteronomy 30:11-14 stands as part of a thematic chain running through the
whole speech that includes positive statements regarding obedience in Deut 29:8a-29:8b;
29:28a-29:28c; 30:2b-30:2c; 30:8a-30:8c; 30:10a-30:10c and 30:16a-30:16d.
Deuteronomy 30:6a-30:6c has made clear that this obedience has as foundation an act of
God in the heart of the individual. Deuteronomy 30:6a-30:6c addresses the audience in
2ms. It is also clear that this act of God has a prerequisite in the peoples return to God
(Deut 30:1a-30:2a).
The portrayal of obedience in Deut 28:69-30:20 is not legalistic but based on a
personal and transformational relationship with God. This obedience must be
wholehearted (30:2c and 30:10d, :e:::: ::::::) and requires that the people love
their God (30:16b,:s -s :s:).
51
This obedience includes all the content of
Gods revelation to the people (30:28c, -s - ::::) in harmony with all that the
Lord has commanded them (30:2c, : s: ::s:s :::, see also 30:8c-30:8d). The
obedience that the passage portrays is a lifestyle that includes every aspect of the peoples
life (30:16c, :: -:::).
52
In this context Deut 30:11-14 exhorts the people about the
futility of arguing concerning the availability of the commandment. Moses has already

51
The three times that the verb :s occurs in Deut 28:69-30:20 (30:6b, 30:16b,
30:20a) is a qal infinitive construct paragogic. This verbal form is used with God as
subject in Deut 4:37; 7:13; 10:15, 18; 15:16; 23:6.
52
See F. J. Helfmeyer, :, TDOT, 3:392-403. See also Eugene H. Merrill,
:, NIDOTTE, 1:1032-1035.

255

gone up to the mountain to meet God and received the commandment from Him so that
the people do not have to do so (Deut 30:12a-30:12f).
53


Deuteronomy 30:15-20
Deuteronomy 30:15-20 concludes the speech with a thematic elaborated around
an offer from God to his people. This offer calls to choose r-s -:-s ::-s
:~-s. The call is made in covenantal style as shown by the invocation of heavens and
earth as witness against the audience (s-s :::-s : ::: -r). Words
such as ~, ~, :s and r:: are used in the text as key terms to elaborate the message.
Especially the roots ~, ~ as well as synonyms (Deut 30:16f -:, 30:20d : s
~ s) and antonym words and expressions are employed in this passage to provide
the semantic (Deut 30:15b -:; 30:18b :s- :s; 30:18c :s:r :: :s-s:) as
a review shows.
Deuteronomy uses the root r only five times.
54
This root occurs with the same
morphology and similar syntactical pattern here in 30:19a and in texts such as 4:26 and
31:28 (s-s :::-s x: + (hiphil) r). The parallel with the Hittite covenants is
clear but heavens and earth are here only witnesses and not deities. Ringreen suggests
that the sense of the expression is that as certain as heavens and earth exist, just as
certain will be the blessing in case of obedience or the punishment in case of breaching
the covenant.
55
In addition, r is used in similar contexts in 8:19, 31:28 and 32:46

53
See Christensen, Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, 742-743.
54
Deuteronomy 4:26; 8:19; 30:19; 31:28 and 32:46. All these occurrences are
hiphil forms.
55
See H. Ringreen, r, TDOT, 10:508-509.

256

where the people are placed in scenarios for solemn decisions or face the consequences of
their wrong resolutions. In these contexts, special warnings are issued against future
apostasy and idolatry. These solemn calls are always related to the word of God given to
the people for them to live according to this word and even teach it to their descendants
to do so.
Deuteronomy 30:15 contains a call or offer from God to His people which implies
a condition stated in the form of a commandment found in Deut 30:16a-d. The obedience
to this commandment implies a promised blessing, which is stated in a progression in
30:16e-i. However, if the people do not obey, do not listen and depart from God toward
alien gods (30:17a-e), then there is a curse stated in 30:18a-f that reverses the blessing
contained in clauses 30:16e-i. The second and final call in 30:19a-d forms an inclusio
with the first call. The roots ~ and -: as well as the expression :e: --:
56
are present
in both sections.
Deuteronomy 30:16a-18f contains two conditional structures in sharp opposition.
The two protasis statements found in Deut 30:16a-d and Deut 30:17a-e are two
progressions in opposite directions, in consecration to God and in apostate departure from
God. These are the two options that the call sets before the people (30:15b). Then the
first apodosis statement found in Deut 30:16e-i portrays Gods promise in blessings to the
people in case they answer to the call in consecration. The second apodosis statement
found in Deut 30:18a-f provides a deconstruction of the promised blessing found in Deut
30:16e-i. The syntagmatic and structural analysis have shown the close parallelism in
vocabulary and syntax between the two apodosis statements.

56
:e: --: is also present verbatim in Deut 30:1b.

257

Deuteronomy 30:19a-d devotes two clauses to set the options and then the last
two clauses to the invitation to choose life. The content distribution suggests that the
emphasis is in choosing life. The last call addresses initially the whole assembly and then
goes personal, clause 30:19a opens in 2mp and then 30:19b-20g moves into 2ms. The
decision set in front of the people is an election. The people must choose, ~:, and
should choose the life God is offering to them. This verb, ~:, is used in Deuteronomy
31 other times with God consistently as subject even in the last usage in Deuteronomy in
verse 31:11. Only here in 30:19, the subject of the verb ~: is the people of Israel. The
people must choose life from two duplets: Life and death, blessing and curse. This
election by the people will affect their descendants (30:19d).
Clauses 30:20a-c show what it means to choose life. Deut 30:20a features three
phrases that imply a : plus infinitive construct verb construction. According to Waltke
and OConnor, this kind of construction, must be understood as a gerundive, explanatory
or epexegetical . . . often explains the circumstances or nature of a preceding action.
57

One of his examples, found in Deut 13:19 has similarly two : plus infinitive construct
verbs to explain the circumstances of the main verb. Therefore, these three phrases in
Deut 30:20a explain the way that the promise of life for the people and their descendants
may be fulfilled. This is by loving the Lord their God, by obeying his voice and by
clinging or keeping themselves close to him. The next phrase, a :-clause, gives further
explanation and characterizes these three :-phrases as the essence of the life and length
of days for the people on the land. These three clauses are in progression: :s, r:: and
::, loving, obeying and holding fast.

57
Waltke and OConnor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 608-609.

258

Out of the 22 uses of :s in Deuteronomy, five have the Lord as subject (Deut
4:37, 7:13, 10:15, 23:6), out of these two have Gods people as object (Deut 7:13, 23:6),
one has the alien (Deut 10:18) and two have the peoples forefathers as object (Deut 4:37,
23:6). Thirteen occurrences of the verb :s have Gods people as subject and of these
ten have God as object.
58
In other cases, the subject is more generic and undefined as
part of an apodictic law. Such is the case of a husband (Deut 21:15, 2x; 21:16) or a slave
(Deut 15:16).
Looking at those usages of :s that are before Deut 10, the first situation is Deut
4:37. In this text, God says that he loved the peoples forefathers and therefore for this
reason he choose their descendants and they, as people, were brought out of Egypt as a
fulfillment of Gods promises to their forefathers. This theme will be present again in
Deut 10:15. Deuteronomy 5:10 is part of the second of the Ten Commandments and sets
the tenor of the kind of relationship God expects from those who relate to him. Deut 6:5
is the clear textual root of the theme developed in Deut 10:12 as well as in several other
sections in the book of Deuteronomy and ever in Joshua.
59
Deuteronomy 7:9 is
elaborated in the light of Deut 5:10 and clearly with a covenantal context and
vocabulary.
60
In Deut 7:13 the root :s is used in the context of the covenantal promises
(verses 13-16). In all these passages the root :s portrays a covenantal and deep
personal relationship between the Lord and his people. Therefore, there seems not to be
legalism, nor formalism but there seems to be a flow of love from God toward his people

58
See the evidence in Deut 5:10; 6:5; 7:9; 10:12; 11:1; 11:13; 11:22; 13:4; 19:2;
30:6, 16, 20.
59
As Deut 4:29; 11:1, 13, 22; 13:4; 19:9; 26:16; 30:2, 6, 10, 16, 20; Josh 22:5;
23:11, 14. See McConville, Deuteronomy, 142.
60
McConville, Deuteronomy, 157-159.

259

that is previous to and a precondition for, the people to love the Lord. Gods action on
his peoples heart tells about a transformation that is far away from the peoples
resources.
61
Only God who is the owner of heaven and earth and all that is in them, the
Creator, is able to recreate his peoples heart so they may love, obey and serve their Lord
as he wishes them to do.
In Deuteronomy, the root r:: with the people as subject and God as object, is not
only to be understood as obedience but also has a programmatic character. It sets before
the people the way the blessings or curses will develop in their future history.
62
This is
particularly so in Deut 30:20 where it is connected with thelength of days in the land
that God gives to them as a fulfillment of his promises to their ancestors. There are
elements of conditionality.
The root :: is not common in the OT.
63
Four times in Deuteronomy, it has the
people as subject and God as objective: 10:20; 11:22; 13:5, 30:20. According to Brooke,
this root expresses a state of loyalty, affection, or close proximity.
64
This is the third
:-phrase that in Deut 30:20 explains the way as how to love the Lord God. In Deut 10:20
this root is in constructive parallelism with s, fear; and serve :r the Lord God. In

61
Rebecca Abts Wright, The Impossible Commandment, Anglican Theological
Review 83, no. 3 (Summer 2001): 579-584. For more support to this personal dimension
of love in Deuteronomy, see Lapsley, Feeling Our Way, 350-369. This perspective
sharply contrasts with Ackermans perspective of a politically based concept of love in
Deuteronomy. Moran also shares the political perspective, see William L. Moran, The
Ancient Near Eastern Background of the Love of God in Deuteronomy, The Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 25 (1963): 77-87.
62
Kenneth T. Aitiken, r::, NIDOTTE, 4:179.
63
This root ::, occurs 55 times in the whole OT and seven are in Deuteronomy
in qal, Deut 10:20; 11:22; 13:5, 18, 28:60; 30:20, in hiphil, 28:21; only Psalms has more
with eight occurrences.
64
George J. Brooke, :, NIDOTTE, 1:911.

260

Deut 11:22 is in parallelism with :s, and :. In Deut 13:4 is in conjunction with
several other words as :, s, ::, r::, and :r.
The recall of Gods oath of the land to the fathers is important here (30:20e-
30:20g). This is the last time that the speech mentions the land (:s). In Deuteronomy
the verbal root r::
65
occurs around 25 times in niphal form with God as subject, the land
as direct object and fathers as indirect object. Kottsieper points to the diachronic validity
of the promise and he mentions the irrevocability of the divine oath.
66
The textual data
supports this affirmation but as far as the evidence provided by Deut 28:69-30:20 is
concerned, in this passage the actual realization of the promise for the audience and their
descendants is conditional upon their fidelity to the covenant manifested in their
faithfulness and obedience to God. Deut 28:69-30:20 does not support the irrevocability
of the peoples possession of the land. The text shows an assurance of the future exile
and the conditionality of the restoration. The nature of the evidence and the nuances of
the topic makes evident that this issue requires further research that is beyond the
objectives of this study.

Summary
This section summarizes the main theological themes that have emerged out of
the previous analysis. The topics of Gods initiative, the role of love, what Deut 28:69-
30:20 has to say related to the ordo salutis, the warnings in reference to the idolatry and
future apostasy and its consequences, the relevance of the peoples choices and the

65
r:: occurs around 33 times in Deuteronomy with Genesis as second in the
distribution with nineteen.
66
See I. Kottsieper, r::, TDOT, 15:323-329.

261

covenant elements that have arose aout of the review of Deut 28:69-30:20 are topics to be
reviewed in this summary.

Gods Initiative
God takes the initiative when he chooses the people of Israel. As seen in the
analysis of the text of Deut 28:69-30:20, the text emphasizes that God did everything that
was needed in order to secure his relationship with the people. This included protection,
guidance and care back in Egypt, in the desert and now at the entrance of the promised
land (29:1-7). It is only at the conclusion of the speech, that God faces his people with
the responsibility of taking a decision (30:15-20). This decision has to do with accepting
what God has already provided for them and their descendants. This Divine initiative is
connected with his promises to the forefathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Those
provisions cover, among others, the land. However, the main election, (~:) that God has
made is related with Israel as his people. All the elements in this election are subject to
the relationship that the people needs to have with God. Those elements include even the
land that was promised to the ancestors and now is promised to the people and their
descendants. This relationship is bounded by love as will be highlighted later in this
section.

Love of God and the Love for God
Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 emphasizes the peoples love toward God because of a
previous work of God in their heart, Deut 30:6. This situation displays love in two
directions. God loved his people before the people loved him. This analysis has briefly
argued that love from God for his people and peoples love for God in the book of
Deuteronomy has an important place. It is important that the reader and the exegete may

262

be aware of this feature in the book of Deuteronomy when those texts about obedience
come into scope. This emphasis on the love of God and toward God in Deuteronomy,
with its abundance in the usage of the root :s, suggests that this seems not to be a
legalistic concept although it deals with laws. This feature in Deuteronomy deserves
mmore careful analysis at another time.

Order Is Important
The Place and Time of Obedience. The flow between Deut 30:1-2, 6 and 19-20
has shown that there is an order in Deuteronomy that deals with obedience. This passage
is not asking for a legalistic human effort to obey the word and the commandments of
God. Nothing could be further from what the text says. God says in this conclusive
chapter that he will perform a miraculous transformation of the peoples and their
descendants heart: God will circumcise their heart. This transformation will make it
possible for them to love the Lord their God with all their heart and soul. Then they will
obey the word and the commandments of God. Then the purpose of God for them will be
real: They will live (30:6). This feature deserves a more comprehensive analysis across
the whole book. However, the book seems to display a theology of conversion far
different from legalism or from just a formal loyalty to a suzerain.

Danger of Idolatry and Apostasy
The text warns the audience about the constant danger of idolatry. They were in
contact with those practices back in Egypt and during their wandering in the desert while
they met pagan peoples (Deut 29:15-16). At first, the text warns the audience that this
familiarization might have left a seed that might yield fruit later on in their experience
(29:17-18). If this happens, the Lord will act with all the force of the law (29:19-20)

263

which even implies annihilation. Then the text moves forward and portrays the apostasy
as a future fact. First, the issue is approached (29:21-27) in an assessment of its causes
(idolatry and apostasy) and consequences (exile), and then the speech provides a promise
of restoration (30:1-10) featuring the conditions for its fulfillment: The people must
return to the Lord so that the Lord might circumcise their heart and they might love and
obey him. In this perspective, the future is seen from two perspectives, namely what God
wishes to accomplish through and for the people and what will happen to the people
because of their wrong course of action.

Choices
Human beings have the blessing and the responsibility of decision-making. In
Deuteronomy God takes the initiative and makes the decision first to provide the
essentials, and much more, for his people and to provide an example for them. The kind
of decisions the people of God face in their relationship with God in Deut 28:69-30:20,
and particularly in Deut 30:15-20, have both temporal and transcendent consequences
that will affect future generations. They are held as accountable and charged with the
responsibility of their choices. There is nothing to be afraid of, the election is quite sharp
and clear. It is between death and life, blessing and curse. God is offering the people not
only life and blessing, but also prosperity and wealth, 30:9, in all aspects of life. The
unique condition is total commitment to God expressed in love that results in
wholehearted obedience.

Covenant Elements
Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 is the last speech in Deuteronomy, Gods call through
Moses for the people to enter into a covenant relationship with Him. The covenant event

264

at Horeb is portrayed as an addition (::) to the one established at Sinai (28:69). There
is a sequential relationship between them. In this perspective, the covenant at Moab is a
renewal of the covenant at Sinai but goes further than that to provide the basis for the
new covenant (Jer 31:31-34). The covenants with the forefathers are also seen in
sequence (29:12d, 30:20). This renewal sequence fits with the testimony of the literature
that sees these covenants not as a chain of successive covenants but as a series of
renewals.
This speech features six internal sections in a progression that starts with a
historical review of Gods mighty acts on behalf of the people as a rationale for them to
enter in covenant with Him (28:69-29:8). The text connects the audience with the
previous generation that concerted their covenant with God at Sinai. The next section
features the covenant gathering (29:9-14) although the ceremony itself is not mentioned.
The text clarifies that the covenant is binding even for the future generations, the
descendants of the audience. It is in this moment that the people receive the first warning
concerning idolatry and apostasy (29:15-20; 29:21-27) that will break the covenant and
bring judgment upon them. There is a promise of a future conditional restoration (30:1-
10), an exhortation to obedience (30:11-14 as echo of 29:28) and finally the double call
for the people to choose life and therefore enter into the covenant relationship with the
Lord their God (30:15-20).
The review of literature has already shown that the covenant saturates
Deuteronomy. Covenant has been suggested as the structural organizing theme even
though there is not agreement concerning the distribution and localization of the covenant

265

elements in the book and the uniqueness of the book is recognized.
67
The perspective is
then of a series of speeches for the renewal ceremony of Gods Suzerain-vassal covenant
with his people.
In this perspective, Deut 28:69-30:20 has some elements that fit with the ANE
treaty literature and some elements that do not. There is a preamble with a historical
review that assesses the previous relations between the parties and provides the initial
rationale for the covenant (Deut 28:69-29:8) but does not enlist the parties. Deut 29:9-14
portrays the convocation for the covenantal renewal describing the attendants with
unusual detail (Deut 29:9-11) and making connections with the covenant with the
forefathers (Deut 29:12) and future generations (Deut 29:13-14). Deuteronomy 29:15-27
provides a review of the past (Deut 29:15-16) and future (Deut 29:17-27) of the people
featuring them breaking the covenant and suffering the consequences. This section
features the curses (Deut 29:19-20, 26). Deuteronomy 30:1-10 from a future perspective
provides a promise of restoration once the covenant is broken by the people and their
exile is a historical fact. This restoration is conditional on the restoration of the covenant,
and will be possible thanks to Gods intervention by transforming the peoples heart so
that they might love and then obey Him (Deut 30:6). Deuteronomy 30:11-14 held in
balance with Deut 29:28 provides an exposition of the commandment as accessible,
sufficient and very possible to obey. Finally Deut 30:15-20 provides a final double call
that features the two options, good and evil, life and death. This section once again
features blessings (Deut 30:16e-30:16i) and curses (Deut 30:18). The witness are
featured here (Deut 30:19a) and once again there are connections with the covenant made
with the forefathers (Deut 30:20).

67
See McConville, Deuteronomy, Book of, 184-185 3.1.

A continuation Figure 1 provides a brief graphic
temporal and theological elements
has been analyzed in this chapter.




Figure 1. Flow of theological c



266
Figure 1 provides a brief graphic summary of the flow of the
theological elements portrayed in Deut 28:69-30:20 in accordance
has been analyzed in this chapter.
heological concepts in Deut 28:69-30:20.
flow of the
in accordance to what


267






CHAPTER 6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS



This chapter provides a succinct summary of the previous chapters of this study.
As every major section and every chapter in the previous research has summaries, this
summary will be brief then draws conclusions, which also provide observations related to
the used methodology and recommendations for further study.

Summary

Textual Critical Analysis
The pertinent textual critical literature consulted and the analysis of the textual
critical notes of the Hebrew text of Deut 28:69-30:20 plus the consultation of the ancient
versions became a window into the way ancient copyists and translators might have faced
the text. One of the first elements that arose from this aspect of the study was the
peculiarities of Deuteronomy. As an example, the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy is
repetitive at various levels. Repetition is used with words, phrases and syntactical
patterns. Whenever the copyist or the ancient translator found a departure from these
models the tendency was to harmonize with the common pattern. The sudden changes in
person and number of the pronouns and pronominal suffixes were another issue. In some
cases the ancient copyists and translators seem to have tried to keep consistency at least
inside the verse as is the case in the Septuagint. Some others moved into plural like some

268

of the Aramaic Targums. The unusual orthography or syntactical structures were
smoothed over or even ignored as was observed with the Latin Vulgate. In general, the
ancient copyists and translators seem to have tried to smooth out the grammar, syntax and
style of the text as they struggled to understand it themselves. This data became
important information for the syntactical and syntagmatic analysis.

Syntagmatic and Syntactical Analysis
The syntagmatic and syntactical analyses of Deut 28:69-30:20 were first informed
by the textual discussion. The methodology demanded that the text be analyzed word by
word so that the clauses might be identified. Once the clauses were identified they were
analyzed internally. Word order, verbal presence, morphology and position were
determined. This allowed the clauses to be marked as belonging either to the foreground
or to the background of the speech.
Once the micro-syntax was exhausted, the macro-syntax needed to be used. The
verbal flow was mapped out so that the sections were tagged according to text-types.
Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 is a discourse but some of its internal sections were tagged as
historical discourses or as anticipatory discourses according to their verbal distributions.
In historical discourses the larger part of the semantic is in the clauses identified as
background or off-line clauses. In the anticipatory discourse both the main-line or
foreground clauses and the background clauses are equally loaded with semantic, namely
the message of the passage. The message in this case is theology.
The supra-clausal flow was established. This determined which the independent,
coordinated or subordinated clauses were. This analysis allowed marking the frontiers of

269

the paragraphs, to map out syntactical structures like conditional structures that worked
embracing several clauses.
The syntactical analysis allowed mapping out patterns in the distribution of the
changes in number (Numeruswechsel) and person (Personenwechsel). This analysis
allowed making evident the internal cohesion of the text in every level and section. The
micro-syntax and the macro-syntactical analysis allowed exposing the order in the
internal organization of the text. It allowed revealing the coherence in the text showing
the harmony in the logic of the argument inside every section and between the sections.

Structural Analysis
The syntactical and syntagmatic analysis provided a wealth of information that
allowed describing the structural organization of every section. This structural
description revealed some passages with a high level of organization as is the case of
Deut 30:11-14 and in other passages it allowed to determine the focus of the text as is the
case of Deut 30:1-10 and its focus on Deut 30:8. The structural analysis allowed
confirming the rhetorical strategy in every section and their thematic focus. At this level
the overall textual cohesion and coherence of the discourse that was identified at the
micro and macro-syntactical levels was confirmed. The internal organization of every
section was made visible as well as the connections between them.

Theological Analysis
The syntagmatic and structural analyses provided information that was used in the
theological analysis. In this phase of the study, the theological themes elaborated in
every section were identified and briefly elaborated. These themes were seen in the

270

overall strategy of Deut 28:69-30:20 as the last covenant renewal speech Moses
addressed to the people of Israel at the gates of the promised land.
Several covenant elements are found in the speech. Some of those elements are
found in common with ANE treaty models but in a different location and with a different
emphasis. Deuteronomy is not a Hittite or Assyrian treaty document. Deuteronomy
seems to display formal similarities as well as formal and fundamental differences. Love
in Deut 28:69-30:20 seems to be a personal relationship between God and his people and
not a political formality. God is able to and will work a transformation in the peoples
hearts so that the conditions of the covenant might become a reality. Heavens and earth
are rhetorical witnesses but not deities.
The speech started by providing a historical preamble in which Gods care and
guidance for His people is featured. God cared for them back in Egypt, during their 40
years of wandering in the desert, and as they approached the promised land. This
relational care is portrayed as rational for them to enter in Gods covenant.
The text warns the audience once and again concerning idolatry and consequent
apostasy. First, apostasy is portrayed as a possibility and then as future certainty. The
descendants of the audience will be punished because of idolatry and apostasy. The
punishment will be hard and will include casting them out of the land into an alien land.
Restoration is promised and will be provided on the condition that they return to the Lord
so that he will be able to transform their hearts and make them able to love and obey
Him.
Obedience is highlighted throughout the speech. The commandment is available,
understandable, sufficient and within their capabilities. There is no excuse for
disobedience. The Lord will provide the conditions for obedience by transforming their

271

hearts. Once the people are in a harmonious relationship with God, he will bless them
with long life and abundance in the promised land. If, to the contrary, the people depart
from God in idolatry and apostasy, the Lord will punish them with the curses already
mentioned in the covenant until they are cast out from the land and ultimately
annihilated.
Obedience highlights decisions as the next major theme in the text. God faces the
people with the urgency of deciding. They have to choose between good and evil, life
and death. God provides them with the complete perspective of every one of these paths.
Life is found in a personal relationship with God marked by personal love and ruled by
the covenant. Death will be inexorable once they are away from God. Idolatry, apostasy
and rebellion will break that relationship by breaking the covenant. In this sense Deut
30:15-20 provides the best perspective to see how these two perspectives relate to each
other.
How does Gods program of loving relationship and blessing with his people
harmonize with the texts portrayal of the peoples future history of rebellion, idolatry,
punishment and annihilation? What makes the difference is initially the direction in
which the people make their choices and then the direction in which they move. Deut
30:15a-16i shows a progression of consecration in which the people choose to love and to
obey their God. The consequence is blessing, life and abundance in the land. We already
have seen that once the people moves toward God, he promises to transform their heart
so they may be able to love and obey him and the rest of the progression will be feasible.
By the contrary, Deut 30:17a-e shows the path in case the people choose to depart from
God. These clauses portray a progression in a rebellion that then falls into idolatry and
apostasy. Clauses 30:18a-f portray Gods answer in judgment and punishment.

272

Therefore, there is more than one element here. The people have to choose and should
choose right, so there is free will. In addition, the consequent progression either in
consecration or in rebellion is also considered.
The text has already warned the people about the impending danger of idolatry
and apostasy because they were familiar with these behaviors (Deut 29:15a-16b). There
was the ever-present possibility that the seed of rebellion could arise from within them
(Deut 29:17a-18g). The text in fact predicts the apostasy and even the consequent
punishment (Deut 29:21-27). Finally, the text provides a promise of restoration that will
be available once the people are in dispersion (30:1-10). These elements provide the
perspective of Gods prescience.
The people are free to choose. If they choose in the right direction, God will
transform their hearts (Deut 30:6) so they will be able to love and obey him. Then the
people cannot stop there. They must go forward in a life of progressive consecration to
their God. Then the Lord will indulge them with blessings and prosperity in the land. If
the people choose wrongly (as their past habits may suggest) and progress in rebellion
and into idolatry and apostasy, in the same way God will progress in reversing the
blessings into curses and eventually there will be dispersion and annihilation. It is not a
matter of a casual decision but a decision that brings with it a subsequent course of
action. There is free will to choose in the peoples hands and abundance of spiritual and
material resources in Gods hands. The people are held accountable and God provides
them with a window into the future so they may see what Gods foreknowledge has to say
to them. There is no predestination for doom. Doom is not preordained, doom is
foreseen. What is preordained is the final outcome of every course of action. There is
freedom to choose and to act in accordance to the nature of that decision, and then

273

follows responsibility for the consequences. These elements are overseen by Gods
prescience. In this perspective, blessing, either long life and prosperity as the final
outcome of consecration to God, or annihilation at the end of the path of apostasy, will be
determined by the sole and accountable decision of the individual. God is not to be
blamed.

Conclusions
This research was aimed at testing the text-linguistic approach in the Hebrew text
of Deut 28:69-30:20. The study sought to find what textlinguistics could contribute to
the solution of these issues in the selected text.

Resumptive Repetition
In reference to the nature, function and textual significance of resumptive
repetition (Wiederaufnahme) this study has found that it is a literary device used to
provide more than one perspective of the same subject that might be related to temporal
time spans. The author might use it to return to the topic after a digression to fill a gap.
The state of the art in linguistic research that shows that resumptive repetition is a literary
device used in ancient and modern languages in both poetry and prose. This is a literary
device that reveals authorial intention. Resumptive repetition is used to accomplish
serveral complex literary and rhetorical strategies. Contemporary research shows that
repetition and resumptive repetition are used as literary strategies in both the OT and the
NT in prose and poetry as well.
The texts in Deut 28:69-30:20 that the critical approaches tag as resumptive
repetition and as inserted in later editorial stages of the text (Deut 29:18 and 29:21-27)
are tightly embedded in syntactical and rhetorical structures in the overall text. Deut

274

29:18a-g is the protasis of a conditional structure where clauses 29:19a-29:20b are the
apodosis. The micro and macro-syntax analyses of Deut 29:18a-29:20b evidence internal
organization or cohesion.
Deuteronomy 29:21a-29:27b forms part of a literary structure in which Deut
29:17a-d introduces a possible future undesirable situation related to four possible
subjects, particularly in Deut 29:17a. Two of them are individual (:ss :s) and two
corporate (:::s ~e::). Once the announcement is made, the text proceeds to provide
an individual example of the situation (Deut 29:18a-29:20b) and a prediction in
corporative perspective (29:21a-27b). Then Deut 29:17a-b is included in a literary
strategy even though there is a thematic transition between Deut 29:9a-20b and Deut
29:21a-27b. The micro and macro-syntax and the semantics of the text evidence
cohesion and coherence.

Numeruswechsel and Personenwechsel
The textual analysis found that there are changes not only in number
(Numeruswechsel) but also in person (Personenwechsel) in Deut 28:69-30:20. The
syntagmatic analysis made evident that the clauses that have this feature are immersed
into the syntactical and semantic flow of the text. In Deut 28:69-30:20 there is a
tendency to start and end the textual sections in 2mp playing in between with
combinations of singular and plural. The textlinguistic analysis made evident that in all
instances the micro and macrosyntactical organization of the text and its semantic is
synchronized with the Numeruswechsel and the Personenwechsel flow. The cohesion
and the coherence of the text are not altered neither by the Numeruswechsel nor the

275

Personenwechsel, in Deut 28:69-30:20, but rather both devises fulfill literary and
rhetorical purposes that are in harmony with the theological agenda of the speech.

Location and Function of Deut 28:69
Although the Masoretes marked Deut 28:69 as ending the previous speech (Deut
27:1-28:68), the LXX located it as Deut 29:1, this is evidence that the medieval editors
saw this verse as the starting point of the next speech. This numeration is preserved
nowadays in Ralphs edition as well as in the critical edition. Modern translations tend to
see this verse as the starting point of the next speech and mark it as Deut 29:1.
The syntagmatic and structural analyses have made evident that the text of Deut
28:69 has several peculiarities. The first clause (28:69a) is recognized as a member of
series of clauses that in Deuteronomy function as the starting point of major sections in
the book. Deuteronomy 28:69-29:8 has several textual connections with Deut 1:1-5 and
4:44-49 that are two major starting points in the book of Deuteronomy. In addition, Deut
28:69 forms an inclusio structure with Deut 29:8. This structure relates to the covenant
that frames the syntactical and literary structures in Deut 29:1a-29:7b. These elements
identify Deut 28:69 as a textual bridge sharing this function with Deut 4:44-49. The
scholarly literature has recognized these passages as fulfilling the function of
summarizing and ending the previous speech and introducing the next one.

Covenant Features of the Text
Covenant, both as form and as theme, is critical in the understanding of
Deuteronomy. The literary structure and the theology of the book and its speeches are
affected by the covenant. Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 as the last speech shares these
formal and thematic elements.

276

It is important to remember that Deut 28:69-30:20 is not the version in
Deuteronomy of the Bundesbuch. This text is the last speech in the covenantal renewal
strategy that the book as a whole provides. In addition, it is important to remember that
Deut 28:69-30:20 is not a typical Hittite or Assyrian covenantal document so we may not
judge it by that standard. The text uses covenant forms known to the ANE context but
provides its own innovation.
The form of Deut 28:69-30:20 does not include a preamble but opens with a
historical prologue (28:69-29:8). Deuteronomy 29:9-27 might be tagged as stipulations
since this passage proscribes any relationship with other gods as something that will
break the covenant and bring punishment. The provision for deposit of the document in
the temple is not present as there is no temple perspective in Deuteronomy but there is
abundance of allusions to the words and the law, statutes and commandments and the
imperative to obey them. They must be kept at hand because they are available,
understandable and possible to do. Particularly Deut 29:28 and 30:11-14 deal with these
aspects. The heavens and earth are provided as witnesses toward the end of the speech
(30:15) and finally the curses and blessings are distributed in the text of the speech
(29:18, 21-27, 30:16e-30:20g).
In reference to the peculiarities of Deut 28:69-30:20, it might be remarked that in
the textual perspective the love featured in the text is not a political formality but a
personal and transformational relationship between God and his people. God will make
this love and the resulting relationship possible through the transformation of the peoples
heart. This transformation will allow the people to love and then obey Gods voice and
law.

277

Deuteronomy 29:21-27 and 30:1-10 are written as predictive passages that portray
a perspective of the peoples potential future. God has a program for the people, which
features abundance of spiritual and material blessings in a long life in the promised land.
At the same time the text predicts the negative potential future (confirmed by Israel
history) should the people disobey. Therefore, there are two future potentials in the text.
One is given by what God wishes to accomplish in and through the people, and the other
by what God knows that the people will do. The people will depart from God in
idolatrous apostasy and rebellion and then they will be severely punished with exile.
Even so, there is a promise of restoration (Deut 30:1-10) and the conditions are clearly
provided. This scenario portrays a harmonic balance in which the people possess free
will to choose and act in line with their elections with the assurance they will harvest the
final outcome of their course of action. Apostasy will end in punishment, exile and
annihilation while consecration will finally bring life and prosperity in their land.
Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20 is Gods final call to the audience for them to choose to enter
in a personal relationship with God in the framework of the covenant and regulated by
love.

Methodological Evaluation
One of the main purposes of this research was to evaluate text-linguistics as
methodology. Once the research is finalized, we may mention some of its advantages and
difficulties.
The methodology demands the text to be broken down into clauses in a bottom-up
process, every word and its function must be assessed first. The process of analyzing
every word to delimit every, clause and then to analyze every clause internally and

278

externally takes a toll in time and effort that the interpreter must be willing to pay. And
yet the methodology provides a way to anchor the locus of the interpretative authority in
the text, scrutinizing every step of the process against grammar and syntax. Therefore the
major difficulty due to the demanding nature of the methodology also offers an
advantage.
Among other advantages of the application of text-linguistics to Deut 28:69-
30:20, we found that it allowed mapping out with precision the flow of the changes in
number (Numeruswechsel) and person (Personenwechsel), and seeing their literary
patterns. This mapping included the verbal distribution of the text and permitted the
recognition that Deut 29:18a-20b, 29:21-27 and 30:1-10 are anticipatory text-types built
upon a backbone of weqatal verbs in first position in their clauses and therefore
elaborated with promises and predictions.
The methodology provided evidence that resumptive repetition works as a literary
device, and need not to be explained as vestiges of the editorial history of the text. This
literary technique is used across several ancient and modern languages across continents,
resumptive repetition occurs in poetry as well as in prose, apparently as an indicator of
authorial intention. It allows the author to convey more than one event or aspect of an
event in one text. Deuteronomy 29:18 and 29:21-27 were marked by critical
methodologies as resumptive repetitions but the text-linguistic analysis made evident that
they are integrated in the text by syntactical and literary structures that surpass their
textual limits.
Textlinguistics is a way to assess the cohesion and coherence of the text. These
are objective criteria to establish the literary unity of a text. The application of this
methodology leads to the recognition that the syntactical structure of the whole text is

279

cohesive. Even in those instances when the syntax looks anomalous, the analysis showed
a pragmatic purpose, which suggests a literary intention. At the same time, the
methodology evidences coherence in the semantic of the text on the surface and in its
deep level. The theological analysis of the textual evidence has disclosed a tension
between what God promises to accomplish through and for the people and what the text
predicts for their future.
Finally, the methodology has yielded useful results in dealing with the syntactical
difficulties of the text. The text of Deuteronomy faces the interpreter with serious
difficulties due to the presence of its several literary strategies and peculiarities. These
include abundance of repetition, the presence of patterns in phrases and syntactical
structures that seem to be the rule but sometimes are replaced by exceptions, the constant
changes in person and number of the pronouns and pronominal suffixes and the presence
of unusual orthography for some words. These strategies and peculiarities proved to be a
challenge for ancient copyists and also test the contemporary interpreter. Text-linguistics
provides the interpreter with a wide set of linguistic tools to deal with these issues.
Text-linguistics might seem expensive in the amount of time and effort that the
interpreter must pay for its application, yet this methodology has rewarded this study
with a bulk of textual, literary and theological insight and tools to control the subjectivity
of the researcher although is necessary the recognition that absolute objectivity is beyond
reach.

Recommendations for Further Study
This research found literary patterns related to the distribution and flow of the
changes in number (Numeruswechsel) and person (Personenwechsel) that are sometimes

280

affected by pragmatics such as in Deut 30:1-10. Research to map out these changes in
the whole Hebrew text of Deuteronomy would be very valuable. This study would seek
to confirm or deny the presence of patterns in the distribution and flow of these changes
in person and number. Additionally it is necessary to investigate whether there are other
considerations aside from pragmatics that might affect the flow of these changes. Such a
study would need to divide the whole text of Deuteronomy into clauses. Once this is
done, the literary structure must be clarified and the Numeruswechsel and
Personenwechsel mapped in reference to it. Apparent departures from patterns will need
to be double-checked against pragmalinguistic considerations or any other linguistic or
rhetoric elements.
The presence of intertextuality in Deut 28:69-30:20 is a topic that this research
lacked the space to address. That intertextuality could be tracked back into the rest of the
Pentateuch, and then the way these materials are used in Deut 28:69-30:20 could be
assessed as a start for future researches in reference to the entire book. One instance of
intertextuality that was identified in passing is the link between Deut 28:69 and Exod
20:22-23:19, and therefore the relationship between the covenant at Sinai and the
covenant at Moab. The next case is the vocabulary of Deut 29:10c that suggests a link
between Deut 29:1-21 and the Gibeonites narrative in Josh 9:1-27. In addition to these
two instances such a study would probably identify other intertextual links.
The theology and covenant elements were addressed briefly due to the mainly
linguistic nature of this study. Further research might focus on carefully assessing either
one of these areas in the text of Deut 28:69-30:20. In addition would be appropriated to
assess the dual future perspective of the text. One is the perspective of what God plans to
fulfill for his people in the future, and the other one is what the text portrays as prediction

281

of what will actually be the peoples experience in the future. This second perpective is
found in the predictions of Deut 29:21-27 and 30:1-10. It is also important to analyze the
way these two perspectives relate each one to the other.
Further research is needed in reference to the possible links between the different
covenants registered in the Pentateuch. It is necessary to evaluate the possible
connections between the Noahic, Abrahamic, Sinaitic and Moabs covenant. This
research would need to focus on linguistic, literary and theological possible links.
Diverse theological motifs have been identified in Deut 28:69-30:20. They might
be studied in further detail. They might be studied in further detail. One of those motif is
the one related to :sthe emphasis on the love of God and the love toward God. Our
analysis suggested that the usage of the related vocabulary portrays an emphasis on
personal relationship and not a political legalistic concept. Further analysis might
provide more evidence either to confirm or negate this view.
In reference to the covenant in Deut 28:69-30:20 and in the book in general,
several studies have been done but there is still a wealth of information waiting for the
researcher. Both the covenant form and the covenant theme are present in Deut 28:69-
30:20, and in the book as well and each one of them deserves further research.

Final Conclusion
This study has demonstrated that the vocabulary, grammar, micro and
macrosyntax, rhetoric and pragmalinguistic of Deut 28:69-30:20 are highly crafted with
literary cohesion and coherence to convey the theology of the text. When seen through
textlinguistic tools, certainly literary peculiarities that usually perplex readers are seen as
rhetorical strategies. These strategies seek to provide a speech that combines a high level

282

of organization and art while conveying a message. These strategies also enhance
persuasion and memory. Repetition is a tool to carry on motifs and to portray more than
one aspect of the issue or even return to the topic after a digression, this among other
functions as seen in the research. The previously puzzling and apparently random
changes in personal pronouns now present as harmonious patterns that allow the speaker
to argue with the individual while addressing the multitude. The temporal patterns
provide the presentation of a comprehensive programmatic offer for the future of the
audience, which implies a future history. The conditional program of what the Lord
intends to fulfill in behalf of the audience and their descendants and the certain prophetic
portrayal of what the near and future history of the people will be. The audience has the
hability to choose which of the texts sceneries it will fulfill. The final answer is not
registered in the text. Therefore, textlinguistics has fulfilled its promise and allowed us a
fresh reading of the text.




















APPENDIX A
VERBAL DISTRIBUTION IN DEUT 28:69-30:20


284




DEUTER ONOMY 28:69-30:20 VERBAL DISTRIBUTION



Table A1
Verbal Distribution in Deut 28:69

Verse wayyiqtol
Aspect
wayyiqtol
weqatal Imperfect Perfect Imperative Infinitive
28:69

s


-::
e

-:
3 2 1
66.66% 33.3%





























285

Table A2
Verbal Distribution in Deut 29:1-8

Verse wayyiqtol
Aspect
wayyiqtol
weqatal Imperfect Perfect Imperative Infinitive
29:1 s Succession
:s Succession
:-s
cr
29:2 s
29:3 -:
-r:
-s:
r:::
29:4 :s Summary
::
::
-::
29:5 :-::s
:--:
r-
29:6 s:- Succession
ss Succession
:-s:
::. Summary
29:7 ~. Succession
:-. Succession
29:8 :-::


:-cr


::c-
e


cr-
28
8
(28.57%)

2
(7.14%)
3
(10.71%)
10
(35.71)
0
5
(17.86%)













286

Table A3
Verbal Distribution in Deut 29:9-28

Verse wayyiqtol
Aspect
wayyiqtol
weqatal Imperfect Perfect Imperative Infinitive
29:11 :r:
29:12 :

::
r:::
29:15 :-r
:::
::r
:-:r
29:16 s- Summary
29:17 -:::
29:18
r::
:-
:s:

:s
-e:
29:19 :s
~::
:r
s:
~:
29:20 :::
29:21 :s
:
s:
s
~
29:22 r-
~:s-
:r
29:23 :s
cr
29:24 :s
:r
-:
(table continues)


287

Table A3 (continued)
Verbal Distribution in Deut 29:9-28

Verse wayyiqtol
Aspect
wayyiqtol
weqatal Imperfect Perfect Imperative Infinitive
ss:
29:25 :: Succession
:r Succession
~-: Succession
:r
:~
29:26 ~

Summary
s::
29:27 ::-

Succession
:::: Succession
29:28
:

-cr:
48 7 (14.6%)
9
(18.75%)
10
(20.83%)
12
(25%)
0
10
(20.83%)





























288

Table A4
Verbal Distribution in Deut 30:1-10

Verse wayyiqtol
Aspect
wayyiqtol
weqatal Imperfect Perfect Imperative Infinitive
30:1
s: Succession
30:1 --:
-::
~:
30:2 -::
-r::
30:3 ::
:~
::
s:
se
30:4


s:


~
30:5

s:


:


-:


::


:
30:6

::


:s:
30:7

-:


e
30:8

::-


-r::


-cr

30:9

-


::


cc:


cc
30:10

r::-


:::
e

::-
34
1
(2.94%)

18
(52.94%)
7
(20.59%)
5
(14.71%)
0
3
(8.8%)



289

Table A5
Verbal Distribution in Deut 30:11-14

Verse wayyiqtol
Aspect
wayyiqtol
weqatal Imperfect Perfect Imperative Infinitive
30:12 :s:
:r
~ Succession
:r::
.cr:
30:13 :s:
:r
~

:r:: Succession
:
.cr: Succession
30:14
-cr:
11
4
36.36%

1
9.09%
3
27.27%
0
0
0
0
3
27.27%




























290

Table A6
Verbal Distribution in Deut 30:15-20

Verse wayyiqtol
Aspect
wayyiqtol
weqatal Imperfect Perfect Imperative Infinitive
30:15

s


--:
30:16

:s:


-:::


:::


-~


-:


::


-::
30:17

:e


r::-


-~::


-~-:


:-:r
30:18

-.


:s


:s-


:s-


s::


-::
30:19

-r


--:


-~:


~-
30:20

:s:


r:::


::



-:::


r:::
e

--:
30 0 7(23.33%) 5(16.67%) 5(16.67%) 1(3.33%) 12(40%)










291

Table A7
Deut 28:69-30:20 Verbal Distribution Summary

Verse wayyiqtol
Aspect
wayyiqtol
weqatal Imperfect Perfect Imperative Infinitive
28:69-
29:8 e
28 8 (28.57%)
2
(7.14%)
3 (10.71%)
10
(35.71)
0 5 (17.86%)
29:9-
28 :
48 7 (14.6%)
9
(18.75%)
10
(20.83%)
12 (25%) 0
10
(20.83%)
30:1-
10 e
34
1
(2.94%)
18
(52.94%)
7
(20.59%)
5
(14.71%)
0 3(8.8%)
30:11-
20 e
41
4
(9.76%)
8
(19.51%)
8
(19.51%)
5
(12.20%)
1
(2.44%)
15
(36.59%)
28:69-
30:20
151 20 37 28 32 1 33
100% 16.53% 24.5% 18.54% 21.19% 0.66% 21.85%


















292

Table A8
Participles in Deut 28:69-30:20

Inflected Form Root Parsing Translation Observations
Deut 29:9 ::s: :s: Ni Pa m p Standing
Deut 29:10 ::~ ::~ Q Pa m sing co
[The one] who
chops

Deut 29:10 :s: :s: Q Pa m sing co
[The one] who
draws

Deut 29:11 -: -: Q Pa m sing He is making
Deut 29:13 -: -: Q Pa m sing I am cutting
Deut 29:14 :r :r Q Pa m sing
[The one who] is
standing

Deut 29:17 :e :e Q Pa m sing turns away
Deut 29:17 e e Q Pa m sing bearing fruit
Deut 29:19 :-: :-: Q Pa pass f s That is written
Deut 29:20 :-: :-: Q Pa pass f s That is written
Deut 29:28 --:. -: Ni Pa f pl
The hidden
[things]

Deut 29:28 -:.. :. Ni Pa f pl
The uncovered
ones

Deut 30:2 s: s Pi Pa m s co
[I am]
commanding you

Deut 30:4 ~:: z: Ni Pa m s
You are driven
away

Deut 30:7 :s :s Q Pa m p co
Who are hostile
to you

Deut 30:8 s: s Pi Pa m s co
[I am]
commanding you

Deut 30:10 :-: :-: Q Pa Pass f s That is written
Deut 30:11 s: s Pi Pa m s co
[I am]
commanding you

Deut 30:11 -s:e: s:e Ni Pa f s
[is not] too
difficult

Deut 30:18 :r :r Q Pa m s Passing over













APPENDIX B
ANALYSIS OF SYNTAGMS AND CLAUSE IDENTIFICATION
DEUTERONOMY 28:69-30:20



2
9
4







ANALYSIS OF SINTAGMS AND CLAUSE IDENTIFICATION



Table B1
Model for the Summary of Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis

Brief description of the paragraph or units structure, topic and its macro syntax. Predicate Main Off
Verse
Clause
notation
English translation of the
Hebrew text
Micro syntactical information (Clause internal syntax) Structure of
the predicate
Foreground background Hebrew text
Macro syntactical information (Supra clause syntax)









2
9
5


Table B2
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 28:69

Deuteronomy 28:69 Ending the previous speech, as summary (27:1-28:68) and introducing the next
speech (29:1-30:20) as heading.
Predicate Main Off
69
69a
These are the words of the
covenant

X + S +
Subject
* \ -: : s


(Nominal Clause -NC) Main clause
69b
which the Lord commanded Moses
to make with the sons of Israel
in the land of Moab,
/ DO / S / :s + P + :s
+ perfect
*
\ -:: \ ::-s \ s:s
Relative clause subordinated to 69a/
Adv. Mod of place / IO
/\ :s: s: \ :sc ::-s
Extended clause
69c
in addition to the covenant X + S +
Subject
*
/\ -: :: /
Main clause
69d
which he made with them in
Horeb.
Adv mo place/ IO / :s+ P + :s
+ perfect
*
e /:~: :-s -::s
Relative clause subordinated to 69c /
4
100%





2
9
6


Table B3
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:1-8

Deuteronomy 29:1-8 Historical review: Gods acts of guidance and deliverance in the wilderness (v. 1-
7) in view of the covenant (v. 8). The text includes an embedded discourse in verses 4-5.
Predicate Main Off
1
1a
Then Moses called all Israel DO / S / P Wayiqtol
+ Subject
* /\ :sc:::s \ :: s


Main clause
1b
and he said to them:
[Single-verb frame, unmarked
citation]
IO / P Wayiqtol
+ Subject
* /\ ::s :s
Coordinated clause to 1a
1c
You yourself have seen all / DO /P / S + S +
perfect
* :: -s \ :-s :-s /
/ Main clause
1d
what has done the Lord before
your eyes
in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh
and all his servants and all his land
Adv mod / S / P / DO DO +
qatal

*
/\ :::r: \ cr :s
Relative clause subordinated to 1c
/ IO / Adv Mo place
/\ ss::: \ :r::: \ re: \ :s: s:
Extended clause


(table continues)


2
9
7


Table B3 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:1-8

Predicate Main Off
2 2a
The great trials that have seen your
eyes, the signs and those great
wonders.
/ :s + P + S / DO + DO +
:s +
perfect
*
\ :r s :s \ -:. -::
2

/ Main clause
/ DO /
/\ : ::. \ :-e: --s
/extended main clause (apposition)
3 3a
But the Lord has not given you
heart to know or eyes to see or
ears to listen until this day.
DO / IO /S / P + s: +
perfect +
S
*
\ -r: :: \ ::: \ -:s:
3

Main negative clause coordinated to 2a
Adv mod purpose / DO
/\ r::: ::s \ -s: ::r
Extended clause
Adv mod time
/\ : r

4 4a
I have led you forty years in the
dessert
[Embedded speech 4a-5d]
Adv mod place / Adv Mod time/ DO / P Wayiqtol
+ DO
* \ ::: \ :: :r:s \ ::-s :s
Main clause
(table continues)


2
9
8


Table B3 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:1-8

Predicate Main Off
4
4b
your mantles have not worn out on
you
Adv mod / DO / P + s: +
perfect +
DO
* \ :::r: ::-::c \ ::s:
Main negative clause
4c
nor your sandals have worn out on
your feet.
Adv Mod / P / + DO + DO +
s: +
perfect
* \:. :r: \ -::s: :r:
Main negative clause coordinated to 4b
5
5a
You have not eaten bread, s: + P / DO + DO +
s: +
perfect
* \ :-::s s: :~:


Main negative clause
5b
wine or intoxicating drink you
have not drank,
s: + P / DO + DO +
s: +
perfect
* \ :--: s: \ ::
Main negative clause coordinated to 5a
5c
so that you may know / X + P + x +
yiqtol
* \ r- r::
Result clause subordinated to 5b


(table continues)


2
9
9


Table B3 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:1-8

Predicate Main Off

5d
that I am the Lord your God. / : + S + : +
nP
* \:::s :s :
Clarifying clause subordinated to 5c (Noun Clause)
6
6a
And you camped in this place Adv Mo place / + Pred Wayiqtol
+ Adv mo
* \ :::s \ s:-
Main clause
6b
and came out Sihon king of
Hesbon
Subject /Pred Wayiqtol
+ S
* \ ::~:: ~: ss
Coordinated clause to 6a
6c
And Og king of Bashan to meet us
for the battle
IO / P / S + S +
Infinitive * \:~::: :-s: \ :::: .r
Purpose clause coordinated to clause 6a
6d
but we smote them. / P
Wayiqtol

*


\::.
Coordinated clause to 6c
7
7a
and we took their land DO / P Wayiqtol
+ DO

*


\ :ss-s ~.
Coordinated clause to 6d
7b
And we gave it as inheritance to
the Rubenites and to the half tribe
of Manasseh
IO /Ad mo mode/ P Wayiqtol
+ Adv mo
+ IO
*


::: ::: s~: \ .: \ ::s: :~:: \ :-.
Coordinated clause to 7a

(table continues)


3
0
0


Table B3 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:1-8

Predicate Main Off
8
8a
Then keep the words of this
covenant
DO / P
Weqatal


*
\ -s -: ::-s \ :-::
Result main clause
8b
and you shall do them / S / P Weqatal +
Subject
* \ :-s :-cr
Coordinated clause to 8a
8c
so you might prosper in all DO / X + P + x +
Yiqtol +
DO



*
/\ :: -s \ ::c- r::
Result clause subordinated to 8b
8d
what you do. / X + P + x +
Yiqtol
* e /\ cr- :s
Relative clause subordinated to 8c
23






3
0
1


Table B4
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:9-20

Deuteronomy 29:9-20. The people are summoned for the covenant and warning about the future
challenges (29:18a-20b) and consequences are given. The text includes an embedded speech in 29:18e-
g. Historical discourse 29:9a-17d. Anticipatory discourse 29:18a-20b.
Predicate Main Off
9 9a
You stand today, all of you, in the
presence of the Lord your God;
Your chiefs, your tribes, your
elders and your officials, all the
men of Israel.
/Adv mod place/ DO /adv mo time/ P / S + S +
participle +
x
*
/\ :::s :e: \ ::: \ : \ ::s: :-s

9

Main nominal clause
/ DO
\ :sc :s :: \ :::: \ ::: ::::: :::s
Extended main clause
10
10a
your children and your wives and
your alien
/ S + S
* . \ :::: \ ::e:
10

/ Nominal clause coordinated to 9a
10b
Who is in the middle of your
camp
:s + P NC
* \ :~: :: :s
Relative nominal clause subordinated to 10a
10c
from the one who chops your
wood to the one who draws your
waters.
+ Participle + X +
participle
* /\ :: :s: r \ sr ::~: /
Subordinated clause to 10b
11
11a
So that you pass over into the
covenant of the LORD your God
and into His oath
/ DO /Subj+Pred +
infinitive
const
* -:s: \ :s -:: \ :r:
final clause subordinated to 10c
11b
which the LORD your God is
making with you today.
Adv mo time/ IO / Pred / + :s+ Subj + :s +
S
* : :r \ -: :s :s
Relative clause subordinated to 11a
(table continues)


3
0
2


Table B4 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:9-20

Predicate Main Off
12
12a
So that He might establish you
today as His people
/Adv mo time/ DO /Pred/Conj + x +
infinitive
construct
*
\ :r: : \ : \ -s: r::
Result clause subordinated to 11b
12b
and He might become your God DO /IO/Pred/Subj / + subject
+ yiqtol
* \ ::s: s
Coordinated clause to 12a
12c
as He spoke to you IO + Pred + x + :s:
+ perfect * ::: :s:
Subordinated clause to 12b
12d
and as He swore to your
forefathers: to Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob.
IO / + X + Pred + :s: +
perfect
* :r: \ ~s: ::s: \ -:s: r::: :s:
Coordinated clause to 12c
13
13a
And it is not only with you

Adv mo company / + s: + s: +
IO
* \ ::::: ::-s s:

13

Main negative clause coordinated to 12d
13b
that I myself am establishing this
covenant and this oath
/ DO / P / S + S +
participle +
DO
* -s :s-s \ -s -:-s \ -: ::s
Clause subordinated to 13a
14 14a
but with the one who is standing
here with us today in the presence
of the Lord our God
/Adv mo/Adv mo/Adv mo/ P / :

+ S +
Subject
(NC)
*
\ : :r ::r \ e :: :s-s :
14

\ ::s :e:
Adversative nominal clause coordinated to 13a

(table continues)


3
0
3


Table B4 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:9-20

Predicate Main Off
14b
And with who is not here with us
today.
/Adv mo/Adv mo/Adv mo/P / S +
Subject +
predicate
* \ : ::r \ e .:s :s -s /
(NC) Negative clause coordinated to clause 14a
15
15a
For you know
how we dwelt in the land of
Egypt
Adv mo place/ DO / Pred /:+Subj : +
Subject +
perfect +
DO +
yiqtol
*
\ :s: s: \ ::::s -s \ :-r :-s:

15

Evidential main clause
15b
and how we came through in the
midst of the nations
Adv mo / Predicate (Subj) + x +
perfect * \ :. :: \ ::r:s -s
Coordinated clause to15a
15c
That you passed by. x + P (S) +
perfect
* :-:r :s
Subordinated clause to 15c
16
16a
And you have seen their
abominations and their idols
of wood and stone, gold and
silver
/ DO / Pred Wayiqtol
*
\ ::. -s\ :s:-s \ s-
Main clause
/ DO
\ : :: \ :s r
Extended main clause
16b
which they had with them Adv mo (S) / X + x + S
NC
* \ ::r :s
Subordinated clause to 16a (Relative clause)

(table continues)


3
0
4


Table B4 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:9-20

Predicate Main Off
17
17a
lest not be among you a man or a
woman or a family or a tribe
/ DO /Adv mo (S)/ Pred + Pred
+ Subject
* \ :::s \ ~e:: s \ :ss \ :s ::: :e
Negative nominal purpose clause coordinated to 16b (NC)
17b
whose heart might turn away
today from the LORD our God
IO / Adv mo/ Pred / S+ DO + X +
Subject +
perfect
* \ ::s :r: \ : :e ::: :s
Subordinated clause to 17a
17c
to walk, to serve the gods of those
nations
Adv mo / DO / P +
Infinitive
construct
* \ : :. \ :s-s \ :r: -:::
Purpose clause subordinated to clause to 17b
17d
lest not be among you a root
bearing fruit and wormwood.
/ DO /Adv mo (S)/ P + nP +
Subject
(NC)
* :r: \ :s e :: \ ::: :e
Negative nominal purpose clause coordinated to 16b (NC)
18
18a
And it will be
[Protasis of conditional clause:
18a-g]
Pred weqatal
*
Main clause,
18b
when he hears the words of this
oath
Adv mo / DO / Pred X+
Infinitive
co + DO
* -s :s ::-s \ r:::
Temporal clause subordinated to 18a
18c
He will bless himself in his heart Adv mo / P (S) Weqatal
* \ :::: \ :-
Coordinated clause to 18a



(table continues)


3
0
5


Table B4 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:9-20

Predicate Main Off
18
18d
saying:
[:s: frame, marked citation:
Secondary citation]
/ P +
Infinitive
construct
* :s:
Main clause
18e
I will have peace
[Embedded speech opens]
/ P / DO + x +
yiqtol
* \ :::
Main clause
18f
although in the stubbornness of
my heart I will walk
P / : + Adv mo : + x +
yiqtol
* \ :s \ :: -:: :
Concessive clause coordinated to 18e
18g
In order to swept away the
watered and the dry
/ DO / X + P / +
Infinitive
Construct
* s:s-s \ -e: r:: /
Result clause subordinated to 18f
19
19a
Then the LORD will not be
willing to forgive him
[Apodosis of conditional clause,
19a-20b]
IO / DO / S / Pred + s: +
yiqtol + S
*
\: ~:: \ :ss:
Main negative clause
19b
For at that time will smoke the
nose of the LORD and His zeal
against this man
Adv mo / S / P + : +
yiqtol * \ s :s: \ -s: s \ :r s :
Adversative clause subordinated to 19a
19c
And will lie down against him
every curse
DO / IO / P Weqatal
* \ :s:: \ : s:
Coordinated clause to 19b


(table continues)


3
0
6


Table B4 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:9-20

Predicate Main Off

19d
which is writen in this book IO / P +
participle
+ IO
* \ e:: :-:
Subordinated clause to 19c
19e
And the LORD will wipe his
name out from underneath the
heavens.
Adv mo / DO / S / P Weqatal +
S
* ::: -~-: \::-s \ ~:
Coordinated clause to 19a
20
20a
Then the LORD will separate the
evil from all the tribes of Israel
/ IO / DO / S / P Weqatal +
S + DO
* \ :sc ::: ::: r: \ :::
Coordinated clause to 19e
20b
according to all the curses of the
covenant that is writen in this
book of the law.
/ Adv mo / P / S S +
participle
+ x
* \ - e:: :-: \ -: -:s :::
Comparative clause subordinated to 20a
38
27.3%
72.7
%








3
0
7


Table B5
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:21-28

Deuteronomy 29:21-28. Consequences (29:21d-22e) of the future apostasy (29:24b-27b) are disclosed
in the form of an embedded discourse in verses 29:23a-27b, verses 29:21a-c provides background.
Anticipatory discourse.
Predicate Main Off
21
21a
Now, the coming generation, your
sons, will say
[Single verb frame, unmarked]
/ S / P Weqatal +
S
* \ :::: \ ~s : \:s
Main clause
21b
who will rise after you, and the
foreigner
S / Adv mo time/ X + P + yiqtol
* :. \ ::~s: : :s
Relative clause subordinated to 21a
21c
who will come from the distant
land
Adv mo origin / X + P + x +
yiqtol
* \ ~ s: \ s: :s \
Relative clause subordinated to 21b
21d
When they see the wounds of this
land and the diseases
/ DO / P (S) Weqatal
+ DO
* \ s s -::-s \ s
Sequential main clause
21e
With which the LORD will make
it sick:
Adv mo place/ S / X + P +
perfect

* /\ : ~:s
Relative clause subordinated to 21d
22
22a
Brimstone and salt burning all her
land
DO / nP / S + S +
nominal P
* \ ss:: ec \ ~:: -e.
Subordinated nominal clause to 21e
22b
She shall not be sown / P (S) + s: +
yiqtol * \ r- s:
Main negative clause

(table continues)


3
0
8


Table B5 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:21-28

Predicate Main Off
22
22c
And nothing shall grow / P (S) + s: +
yiqtol * \ ~:s- s:
Main negative clause coordinated to 22b
22d
And nothing shall grow in her, no
grass
DO / S / P (S) + s: +
yiqtol * / :cr:: \ : :rs:
Main negative clause coordinated to 22c
22e
As the overthrow of Sodom and
Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim

/ IO / DO + DO +
IO +

* \ _::s (::s, :s \ :r :: -:e::
Comparative clause subordinated to 22d
22f
Which the LORD overthrew in
His anger and in His rage.
Adv mo / S / X + P + x +
perfect
* -:~: es: \ e :s
Adv mo / S / X + P
23
23a
All the nations will say:
[Single-verb frame, unmarked
citation]
/ S / P Wayiqtol
+ S
* \ :.:: :s
Main clause
23b
Why has the LORD done such a
thing to this land?
/ IO / DO / S / X + P + x +
perfect +
S
* \ -s s: :: \ cr ::r
Main interrogative clause
23c
Why this great burning anger? / S / X + nP + nP +
S
* :. \ s ~ :
Subordinated interrogative clause to 23b


(table continues)


3
0
9


Table B5 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:21-28

Predicate Main Off
24
24a
They will say:
[Single-verb frame, unmarked
citation]
/ P (S) wayiqtol
* :s
Main clause
24b
because they forsook the
covenant of the LORD, the God
of their fathers,
/ DO / X + P X +
perfect
* \ :-:s :s \ -:-s \ :r :s :r\
Main causal clause
24c Which He made with them
Adv mo / X + P +
perfect
* \ ::r -: :s
Subordinated clause to 24b
24d
when He brought them out of the
land of Egypt.
Adv mo origin / DO / P Infinitive
construct
+ DO
* :s: s: \ :-s ss:
Temporal clause subordinated to clause 24b
25


25a
They went / P (S) Wayiqtol
* \ ::
Main clause
25b
and they served other gods IO / P (S) Wayiqtol
* \ :~s ::s \ :r
Coordinated clause to 25a
25c
and they worshiped them; DO / P (S) Wayiqtol
* :: ~-:
Coordinated clause to 25b


(table continues)


3
1
0


Table B5 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:21-28

Predicate Main Off
25
25d
gods which they did not know, X + s:+ P/ DO DO + x +
s:+
perfect
* \ :rs: :s \ ::s
Main negative clause
25e
Nor had He allotted to them. IO / s: +P + s: +
perfect * :: :~ s:
Main negative clause coordinated to 25d
26
26a
Therefore the anger of the LORD
burned against this land
IO / P (S) Wayiqtol
* s s: \ s~
Main clause coordinated to 25e
26b
To bring upon it all the curses DO / IO / P Infinitive
* ::::-s \ :r s::
Result clause subordinated to 26a
26c
which are written in this book IO / nP Participle
* e:: :-:\
Subordinated clause to 26b
27
27a
Then the LORD uprooted them
from upon their land in anger in
rage and in great wrath.
Adv mo mode / IO / S / P Wayiqtol
* :. s: \ :~: s: \ :-:s :r: \ ::-
Extended main clause / Main Clause
27b
And He cast them into another
land as it is this day.
Adv mo / IO / P (S /DO) Wayiqtol
* :: \ -~s s:s \ ::::
Coordinate clause to 27a


(table continues)


3
1
1


Table B5 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 29:21-28

Predicate Main Off
28
28a
The hidden things belong to the
Lord our God
IO / S +
participle
* \ ::s \ : --:.
(NC) Main clause
28b
But the uncovered ones belong to
us and to our children for ever
Adv mo / IO / S +
participle * ::rr \ :::: :: -:..
(NC) Coordinated clause to 28a
28c
So we might do all the words of
this law.
/ DO / P +
Infinitive
construct
* -s - ::::-s \ -cr:
Result clause subordinated to 28c
31 10 21


















3
1
2


Table B6
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 30:1-10

Deuteronomy 30:1-10. Anticipatory Discourse: Restoration promise and its conditions, in the
perspective of the future dispersion.
Predicate Main Off
1
1a
And it will be when all these
things have happen to you, these
blessings and curses
/( Apposition ) / DO / IO /P (MSM) Weqatal +
x + yiqtol
*
:: :: s ::::: :r s::


Conditional structure 1a-3d (Protasis 1a-2c) Main temporal
clause
1b
that I have given in your
presence,
Adv mo / P + X +
perfect
* :e: --: :s
Subordinated clause to 1a
1c
And you take them into your
heart among all the nations
Adv mo / Adv mo / P + perfect
* :.::: ::::s -::
Coordinated clause to 1a
1d
Where the LORD your God has
dispersed you
Adv mo / S / P + X +
perfect
* :: :s ~: :s
Subordinated clause to 1c
2
2a
And you return to the Lord your
God
Adv mo / P Weqatal
* :s r -::
Main clause
2b
And you obey His voice DO / P Weqatal
* :: -r::
Coordinated clause to 2a
2c
According to all that I am
commanding you today,
Avd mo / P (IO)/ S / DO X +
participle
* : s: ::s:s :::
Subordinated clause to 2b

(table continues)


3
1
3


Table B6 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 30:1-10

Predicate Main Off
2 2c
you and your sons with all your
heart and all your soul.
Adv mo / IO
:e:::: :::::: :: -s
Extended clause
3
3a
Then the LORD your God will
return your captivity
DO / S / P Weqatal
*

-::-s :s ::
(Apodosis 3a-d) Main clause
3b
And He will have compassion on
you
P (S + IO) + perfect
* :~
Coordinated clause to 3a
3c
And He will gather you again
from all the peoples
Adv mo origin / P Weqatal +
perfect
* ::r::: s: ::
Coordinated clause to 3a
3d
Where the LORD your God has
scattered you
Adv mo / S / x + P + X +
perfect
* :: :s se :s
Subordinated clause to 3c
4
4a
If you happen to be driven away
to the end of the heavens
Adv mo destiny/ P + X +
yiqtol +
participle
* ::: s: ~:: :s
Conditional structure 4a-7b. (Protasis 4a) Main clause
4b
from there the LORD your God
will gather you
S / P + X +
yiqtol
* :s s: :::
(Apodosis 4b-7b) Subordinated clause to 4a
4c
and from there He will take you
back
(S) / P + X +
yiqtol
* ~ :::
Coordinated clause to 4a
(table continues)


3
1
4


Table B6 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 30:1-10

Predicate Main Off
5
5a
and the LORD your God Himself
will bring you to the land
Adv mod / S / P + perfect
* s:s :s s:
Coordinated clause to 4b
5b
that your fathers possessed S / P / Adv mo + X +
perfect
* -:s ::s
Subordinated clause to 5a
5c
and you will possess it / + P Weqatal
* -:
Coordinated clause to 5b
5d
and He will do good to you / + P + perfect
* ::
Coordinated clause to 5c
5e
and He will make you many,
more than your fathers
Adv mo/ + P + perfect
* -:s: :
Coordinated clause to 5c
6
6a
the LORD your God will
circumcise your heart and the
heart of your descendants
/ DO / S / +P Weqatal
* r :::-s :::-s :s ::
Main clause
6b
so that you will love the LORD
your God with all your heart and
all your soul
Adv mo / DO / P +
Infinitive
construct
* :e:::: :::::: :s -s :s:
Result clause subordinated to clause to 6a



(table continues)


3
1
5


Table B6 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 30:1-10

Predicate Main Off
6 6c
so that you might live / nP + NC
* ~ r::
Result clause subordinated to clause to 6b
7
7a
The LORD your God will give all
these curses to your enemies and
upon those who hate you,
/ DO / S / P Weqatal
*
s:c:r :s:r s -:s:: -s :s -:


Main clause
7b
who persecute you / X + P (S) X +
Weqatal
* e :s
Subordinated clause to 7a
8
8a
and you yourself will return P / + S + S +
yiqtol
* ::- -s
Coordinated clause to 7a
8b
and you will obey the voice of the
LORD
DO / P Weqatal
* :: -r::
Coordinated clause to 8a
8c
and you will do all His
commandments
DO / P Weqatal
* -s:::-s -cr
Coordinated clause to 8a
8d
that I myself command you today Adv mo / P / X + S + X + S
+
participle
* : s: ::s :s
Subordinated clause to 8c



(table continues)


3
1
6


Table B6 (Continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 30:1-10

Predicate Main Off
9
9a
Then the LORD your God will
make you abundant in all the
work of your hands and in the
fruit of your womb
IO / S / P + perfect
*
::: e: cr: ::: :s -
Conditional structure (Apodosis 9a-c) Coordinated clause to 8d

and in the fruit of your beasts and
in the fruit of your land for good.
Adv mo purpose / IO
::: -:s e: -:: e:
Extended clause
9b
because the LORD will once
again rejoice over you for good
Adv mo / IO / DO / S / : + P + : +
yiqtol * ::: :r cc: :: :
Causal clause subordinated to 9a
9c
just as He rejoiced over your
fathers
IO / X + P + X +
perfect
* -:s:r cc:s:
Subordinated clause to 9b
10
10a
if you obey the voice of the
LORD your God
/ DO / : + P + : +
yiqtol * :s :: r::- :
(Protasis 10a-d) Subordinated clause to 9b
10b
to keep His commandments and
His statutes
DO / P +
Infinitive
construct
* -~ -s: :::
Purpose clause subordinated to 10a
10c
that are written in this book of the
law
Adv mo place / P +
participle
* - e:: :-:
Subordinated clause to 10b
10d
because you will have returned to
the LORD your God with all your
heart and all your soul
Adv mo mode / IO / : + P + : +
yiqtol
* :e:::: :::::: :s :s ::- :
Causal clause subordinated to 9b? Or 10b
36 11 25


3
1
7


Table B7
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 30:11-14

Deuteronomy 30:11-14. God has revealed future and has made His word so accessible that there is no
excuse for disobedience. The text includes two short embedded speeches in 30:12c-f and 30:13c-f.
Predicate Main Off
11
11a
For this command / :+ S + : +
S
* -s s: :
Main noun nominal clause
11b
which I command to you today, Adv mo time / P / X x + S +
Participle
* : s: ::s :s
Relative adjectival clause subordinated to 11a
11c
is not too difficult for you IO / S / s: + P + s: +
participle
* :: s -s:e:s:
Main negative clause
11d
Nor it is distant S / s: + nP + s: +
nP * s ~ s:
Main negative clause coordinated to 11b
12
12a
Nor it is in the heavens S / s: + nP + s: +
nP
* s :::: s:
Main negative clause coordinated to 11c
12b
to say:
[:s: frame, marked citation,
secondary citation]
/ P +
Infinitive
construct
* :s:
Main clause
12c
who will go up to the heavens Adv mo? /IO? / P / + yiqtol
* ::: ::r :
Main clause

(table continues)


3
1
8


Table B7 (continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 30:11-14

Predicate Main Off

12d
and bring it for us IO / P wayiqtol
* : ~
Coordinated clause to 12c
12e
so we might hear it DO / + P +
imperfect
* -s :r::
Result clause coordinated to clause 12d
12f
and observe it? (DO) / + P wayiqtol
* .cr:
Result clause coordinated to clause 12e
13
13a
Nor it is beyond the sea, Adv mo place/nP + s: +
nP * s :: :r:s:
Main negative clause coordinated to 12f
13b
To say:
[:s: frame, marked citation as
secondary citation]
/ P +
Infinitive
construct
* :s:
Main clause
13c
who will pass over beyond the
sea for us,
Adv mo? /IO? / P / S + yiqtol
* : :r:s :::r :
Main clause
13d
And bring it for us IO / P Wayiqtol
* : ~
Coordinated clause to 13c
13e
so we might hear it DO / + P +
imperfect
* -s :r::
Purpose clause coordinated to clause 13d
(table continues)


3
1
9


Table B7 (continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy 30:11-14

Predicate Main Off
13f
and observe it? (DO) / P Wayiqtol
* .cr:
Purpose clause coordinated to clause 13d?
14 14a
For the word is very near to you,
in your mouth and in your heart,
Adv mo place / S / IO /: + nP + : +
nP
* :::: e: s: :: :s ::
Main clause
14b
for you to observe it. (DO) / P +
Infinitive
construct
* : -cr:
Purpose clause subordinated to clause 14a
17


















3
2
0


Table B8
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy of Deut 30:15-20

Deuteronomy 30:15-20. Deuteronomy 30:15 contains an offer from God to His people which implies a
condition stated in the form of the commandment in Deut 30:16a-d. The obedience to this
commandment implies a promised blessing, which is stated in 30:16e-i. However, if the people do not
obey, do not listen and go to alien gods 30:17, then there is a curse stated in verse 18 that reverses the
blessing contained in verse 30:16.
Predicate Main Off
15
15a
See! / P +
Imperativ
e
* s
Main clause
15b
I have put before you today life
and goodness, death and evil
DO / Adv mo/ P +
perfect +
x + DO
*
::-s :~-s : :e: --:
Main clause
/ DO
r-s -:-s
Extended main clause
16
16a
Because I command you today Adv mo / P / x + S X + S +
participle
* : s: ::s :s
(Protasis 16a-16d) Causal clause subordinated to 15b
16b
to love the LORD your God DO / P +
Infinitive
construct
* :s -s :s:
Purpose clause subordinated to clause 16a
16c
to walk in His ways Adv mo / P +
Infinitive
construct
* :: -:::
Purpose clause subordinated to clause 16a
16d
And to keep His commandments
and His statutes and His
judgments
DO / P +
Infinitive
construct
* :e:: -~ -s: :::
Purpose clause coordinated to clause 16c
(table continues)


3
2
1


Table B8 (continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy of Deut 30:15-20

Predicate Main Off
16
16e
then you shall live / P Weqatal
* -~
(Apodosis 16e-16i) Result clause coordinated to clause 16d
16f
and you shall become many / P Weqatal
* -:
Result clause coordinated to clause 16e
16g
and the LORD your God shall
bless you in the land
Adv mo place/ S / P + perfect
* s: :s ::
Result clause coordinated to clause 16f
16h
that you are coming in Adv mo place / P / S X + S +
participle
* ::s: -s:s
Subordinated clause to 16g
16i
to posses it / P +
Infinitive
construct
* -::
Purpose clause subordinated to clause 16h
17
17a
But if you turn your heart Adv mo place/ x + P + :s +
yiqtol
*
::: :e:s
Main clause (Conditional clause, real future condition, Protasis
17a-e)
17b
and you do not hear / x + P + s: +
yiqtol * r::- s:
Main negative clause coordinated to 17a
17c
and you are impelled / P + perfect
* -~::
Coordinated clause to 17a
(table continues)


3
2
2


Table B8 (continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy of Deut 30:15-20

Predicate Main Off
17
17d
and you bow down to other gods IO / P + perfect
* :~s ::s: -~-:
Coordinated clause to 17a
17e
and you serve them. / P Weqatal
* :-:r
Coordinated clause to 17a
18
18a
I declare you today, Adv mo time/ IO / P +
perfect
* : ::: -.


Main clause (Conditional clause Apodosis 18a-f)
18b
That you will surely perish / : + P : +
Infinitive
+ yiqtol
* :s- :s :
Result clause, subordinated to clause 18a
18c
you shall not have long days upon
the land
Adv mo place / DO / P + s: +
yiqtol * :s:r :: :s-s:
Main negative clause coordinated to 18b
18d
That you are passing over the
Jordan
DO / P / x + S X + S +
participle
* :-s :r -s :s
Subordinated clause to 18c
18e
to go in Adv mo / P +
Infinitive
construct
* :: s::
Purpose clause subordinated to 18d
18f
to possess it / P +
Infinitive
construct
* -::
Purpose clause subordinated to 18d

(table continues)


3
2
3


Table B8 (continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy of Deut 30:15-20

Predicate Main Off
19
19a
I call as witness against you today
heavens and earth, life and death
DO /Adv mo/ IO / Pred +
perfect
* -: :~ s-s :::-s : ::: -r
Main clause
19b
I have set before you, the blessing
and the curse
DO /Adv mo/ P +
perfect
* :: :: :e: --:
Main clause
19c
Then choose life DO / + Pred Weqatal +
DO
* :~: -~:
Coordinated clause to 19b
19d
So that you might live, you and
your descendants
/ x + P + x +
yiqtol
* r -s ~- r::
Subordinated clause to 19c (Result clause)
20
20a
Loving the LORD your God DO / P +
Infinitive
construct
* :s -s :s:
Purpose clause subordinated to clause 19d
20b
Obeying His voice DO / P +
Infinitive
construct
* :: r:::
Purpose clause subordinated to clause 19d
20c
And holding fast to Him DO / + P +
Infinitive
construct
* :::
Purpose clause coordinated to clause 20b
20d
For He is your life and length of
your days
DO / : + S : + S
(nP)
* : s ~ s :
Causal clause coordinated to 20b
(table continues)


3
2
4


Table B8 (continued)
Syntagmatic and Syntactic Analysis of Deuteronomy of Deut 30:15-20

Predicate Main Off

20e
To dwell upon the earth Adv mo place / P +
Infinitive
construct
* :s:r -:::
Purpose clause subordinated to clause to 20d
20f
That the LORD swore to your
fathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
IO / S / x + P +
perfect
* :r: ~s: ::s: -:s: r::: :s
Subordinated clause to 20e
20g
To give them IO / P +
Infinitive
Construct
* e :: --:
Subordinated to clause 20f
33


325





BIBLIOGRAPHY



Ackerman, Susan. The Personal Is Political: Covenantal and Affectionate Love
(HB, AHB) in the Hebrew Bible. Vetus Testamentum 52, no. 4 (2002):
437-458.
Adeyemi, Femi. What Is the New Covenant Law in Jeremiah 31:33? Bibliotheca
Sacra 163 (July-September 2006): 312-321.
Aejmelaeus, Anneli. On the Trail of Septuagint Translators: Collected Essays. Kampen,
Netherlands: Kok Pharos, 1993.
Aitiken, Kenneth T. r::. New International Dictionary of the Old Testament
Theology and Exegesis. Edited by Willem A. Van Gemeren. Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1997. 4:175-181.
The Aleppo Codex Online. http://www.aleppocodex.org/newsite/index.html
(accessed 4 May 2010).
Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, 1981.
________. The World of Biblical Literature, New York: Basic Books, 1992.
Amorin, Nilton Dutra. Desecration and Defilement in the Old Testament. PhD Diss.,
Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI, 1986.
Andersen, Francis I. Salience, Implicature, Ambiguity, and Redundancy in Clause
Clause Relationships in Biblical Hebrew. In Biblical Hebrew and Discourse
Linguistics, ed., Robert D. Bergen, 99-116. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of
Linguistics, 1994.
Andersen, Francis I., and Forbes, A. Dean. The Hebrew Bible: Andersen-Forbes Phrase
Marker Analysis. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008.
Arnold, Bill T., and John H. Choi. A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Bautch, Richard J. Abrahams Covenant in Postexilic Covenants. The Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 71, no. 1 (January 2009): 42-63.

326

Barthlemy, D. Deutrenome (Second Exemplaire). In Discoveries in the Judaean
Desert-1: Qumran Cave I, ed. D. Barthlemy and J. T. Milik, 57-61. New
York: Oxford, 1955.
Barthlemy D., and J. T. Milik. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert-1: Qumran Cave I.
New York: Oxford, 1955.
Beckman, John C. Williams Hebrew Syntax. 3rd ed. Toronto, Canada: University of
Toronto Press, 2007.
Beckwith, Roger T. The Unity and Diversity of Gods Covenant. Tyndale Bulletin 38
(1987): 93-118.
Bergen, David Abram. Dialogic in the Narrative of Deuteronomy. PhD diss.,
University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 2003.
Bergen, Robert D., ed. Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics. Library of Hebrew
Bible, Old Testament Studies. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994.
Bergey, Ronald. The Rhetorical Role of Reiteration in the Suffering Servant Poem (Isa
52:13-53:12). Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40, no. 2 (June
1997): 177-188.
BibleWorks. Biblical Database Software for Microsoft Windows. Version 6.0.012x.
BibleWorks, L. L. C. Hermeneutika Computer Bible Research Software
Bigfork, MT, 2007.
BibleWorks. Biblical Database Software for Microsoft Windows. Version 7.0.020d.6
BibleWorks, L. L. C. Hermeneutika Computer Bible Research Software
Bigfork, MT, 2008.
Bodine, Walter Ray. ed. Discourse Analysis of Biblical Literature: What It Is and What
It Offers. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1995.
Bratcher, Robert G., and Howard Hatton. A Handbook on Deuteronomy. UBS
Handbook series. New York: United Bible Societies, 2000.
Braulik, Georg. The Sequence of the Laws in Deuteronomy 12-26 and in the
Decalogue. In A Song of Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of
Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen, 313-335. Sources for Biblical and
Theological Study 3. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993.
Brekelmans, C. Wisdom Influence in Deuteronomy. In A Song of Power and the
Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen,
123-136. Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1993.
Britt, Brian. Deuteronomy 31-32 as a Textual Memorial. Biblical Interpretation 8, no.
4 (2000): 358-374.

327

Brooke, George J. :. New International Dictionary of the Old Testament Theology
and Exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1997. 1:910-912.
Brown, Francis, Samel Rolles Driver, and Charles Briggs. Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew
and English Lexicon. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1996.
Burge, Gary M. Land. The New Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by
Katherine Doob Sekenfeld. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2006. 3:570-573.
Busenitz, Irvin A. Introduction to the Biblical Covenants; The Noahic Covenant and the
Priestly Covenant. The Masters Seminary Journal 10, no. 2 (Fall 1999): 183-
186.
Carr, David M. Controversy and Convergence in Recent Studies of the Formation of the
Pentateuch. Religious Studies Review 23, no. 1 (January 1997): 22-31.
Cassuto, U. The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch.
Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 1961.
Childs, Brevard S. Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture. Philadelphia, PA:
Fortress, 1979.
Cho, Hwi. Ezekiels Use of the Term sc: with Reference to the Davidic Figure in His
Restoration Oracles. PhD diss., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield,
IL, 2002.
Choi, Baek Sung. The Unity and the Symmetry of the Book of Job. PhD diss.,
University of Texas, Arlington, TX, 2000.
Christensen, Duane L. Deuteronomy 1-11. Word Biblical Commentary 6A. Dallas, TX:
Word Books, 1998.
________. Deuteronomy 1-21:9. Word Biblical Commentary 6A. Dallas, TX: Word
Books, 2002.
________. Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12. Word Biblical Commentary 6B. Nashville, TN:
Thomas Nelson, 2002.
________. The Numeruswechsel in Deuteronomy 12. In A Song of Power and the
Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen,
394-401. Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1993.
________. ed. A Song of Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of
Deuteronomy. Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1993.
Collier, Gary D. The Problem of Deuteronomy: In Search of a Perspective.
Restoration Quarterly 26, no. 4 (1983): 215-233.

328

Conrad, Edgar. Reading the Latter Prophets. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament,
Supplement Series 373. London: T. & T. Clark International, 2003.
Cornelius, I., and Cleon L. Rogers Jr. :. New International Dictionary of Old
Testament Theology and Exegesis. Edited by Willem A. VanGemeren. Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1997. 3:862-865.
Correa, Segundo Tefilo. Intertextualidad y exgesis intra-bblica: Dos caras de la
misma moneda? Breve anlisis de las presuposiciones metodolgicas.
DavarLogos 5, no. 1 (2006): 1-13
Craigie, Peter C. The Book of Deuteronomy. The New International Commentary on the
Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976.
________. Deuteronomy and the Ugaritic Studies. In A Song of Power and the Power
of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen, 109-
122. Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1993.
Crawford, Sidnie White. 4QDeut
c
. In Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to Kings.
Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore
Cross, 15-34. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
________. 4QDeut
g
. In Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to Kings. Discoveries in
the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore Cross, 55-60.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
________. 4QDeut
o
. In Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to Kings. Discoveries in
the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore Cross, 129-133.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
________. Textual Criticism of the Book of Deuteronomy and the Oxford Hebrew
Bible Project. In Seeking out the Wisdom of the Ancients: Essays in Honor of
Michael V. Fox on Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. Ronald L. Troxel,
Kelvin G. Friebel and Dennis R. Magary, 315-326. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 2005.
Davidson, Richard M. The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old Testament. In
Creation, Life and Hope: Essays in Honor of Jacques Doukhan, J. Moskala ed.,
349-366. Berrien Springs, MI: Old Testament Department, Seventh-day
Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 2000.
Davila, James R. Review of Notes on the Greek Text of Deuteronomy, by John William
Wevers. Society of Bible Literature Septuagint and Cognates Studies Series,
Catholic Biblical Quarterly 59 (1997): 364.
Dawson, David Allan. Text-Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1994.

329

Dell, Katterine J. Covenant and Creation in Relationship. In Covenant as Context:
Essays in Honour of E.W. Nicholson, ed. A. D. H. Mayes and R. B. Salters,
111-133. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
DeRouchie, Jason Shane. A Call to Covenant Love: Text Grammar and Literary
Structure in Deuteronomy 5-11. PhD diss., Southern Baptist Theological
Seminary, Louisville, KY, 2005.
_________. Deuteronomy as Didactic Poetry? A Critique of D. L. Christensens
View. Journal of Asia Adventist Seminary 10, no. 1 (2007): 1-13.
Dresher, Bezalel Elan. The Prosodic Basis of the Tiberian Hebrew System of Accents.
Language 70, no. 1 (March 1994): 1-52.
Driver, Samuel Rolles. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Deuteronomy.
Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1978.
Duncan, Julie Ann. 4QDeut
b
. In Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to Kings.
Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore
Cross, 9-14. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.
________. 4QDeut
k3
. In Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to Kings. Discoveries in
the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore Cross, 107-108.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.
________. 4QDeut
l
. In Qumran Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy to Kings. Discoveries in
the Judaean Desert XIV, ed. Eugene Ulrich and Frank Moore Cross, 109-112.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.
________. A Critical Edition of Deuteronomy Manuscripts from Qumran Cave IV:
4QDt
b
, 4QDt
e
, 4QDt
h
, 4QDt
j
, 4QDt
l
. PhD diss., Harvard, 1989.
Elliger, K., and W. Rudolph, eds. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. 5
th
ed. Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997.
Ellingworth, Paul. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1993.
Fernndez Smith, Grard. Fundamentos tericos, desarrollo y proyecciones actuales de
la lingstica de texto. PhD diss., Universidad de Cdiz, Cdiz, Espaa, 2003.
Firth, David G. Play It Again, Sam The Poetics of Narrative Repetition in 1 Samuel 1-
7. Tyndale Bulletin 56, no. 2 (1985), 1-17.
Fishbane, Michael. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Clarendon, 1988.
Floor, Sebastiaan Jonathan. From Information Structure, Topic and Focus, to Theme in
Biblical Hebrew Narrative. PhD diss., University of Stellenbosch, South Africa,
2004.

330

Forbes, A. Dean. Syntactic Sequences in the Hebrew Bible, in Perspectives in
Language and Text: Essays and Poems in Honor of Francis I. Andersens Sixtieth
Birthday, ed. Edgar W. Conrad and Edward Newing, 59-70. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1987.
Furst, Renata C. Prophecy as Narrative World: A Study of the World-Constructing
Conventions and Narrative Techniques in Hosea 1-3. PhD diss., Universit de
Montral, Canada, 2004.
Frolov, Serge. Joshuas Double Demise (Josh. xxiv 28-31; Judg. ii 6-9): Making Sense
of a Repetition. Vetus Testamentum 58 (2008), 315-323.
Garca Martnez, Florentino and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, ed., The Dead Sea Scrolls Study
Edition, vol. 1 (1Q1-4Q273). Leiden: Brill, 1997.
Garr, W. Randall. The Paragogic nun in Rhetorical Perspective. In Biblical Hebrew in
Its Norwest Semitic Setting Typological and Historical Perspectives. Steven E.
Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz ed., 65-74. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006.
Garrett, Duane A. and Jason S. DeRoouchie A Modern Grammar for Classical Hebrew.
2
nd
ed. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2009.
Gesenius, Friedrich Wilhelm. Gesenius Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautzsch and Arthur
Ernest Cowley. 2
nd
ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1990.
Goldingay, John. Covenant, OT and NT. The New Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible.
Edited by Katharine Doob Sakenfeld. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2006. 1:767-
768.
Grisanti, Michael A. Was Israel Unable to Respond to God? A Study of Deuteronomy
29:2-4. Bibliotheca Sacra 163, no. 650 (April-June 2006), 176-96.
Groom, Susan Anne. Linguistic Analysis of Biblical Hebrew. Waynesboro, GA:
Paternoster, 2003.
Hahn, Scott W. A Broken Covenant and the Curse of Death: A Study of Hebrews 9:15-
22. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 66 (2004): 416-436.
________. Covenant in the Old and New Testament: Some Current Research (1994-
2004). Currents in Biblical Research 3, no. 2 (2005): 271-273.
Harman, Allan. Deuteronomy: The Commands of a Covenant God. Ross-shire, Scotland,
UK: Christian Focus, 2007.
Helfmeyer, F. J. :. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G.
Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 1978. 3:388-403.

331

Higgs, William Robert. A Stylistic Analysis of the Numeruswechsel Sections of
Deuteronomy. PhD diss. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary,
Louisville, KY, 1982.
Hoffmeier, James K. Ancient Israel in Sinai: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the
Wilderness Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Holmstedt, Robert D. The Relative Clause in Biblical Hebrew: A Linguistic Analysis.
PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2002.
Honeyman, A. M. Merismus in Biblical Hebrew. Journal of Biblical Literature 71, no.
1 (March 1952): 11-18.
Hornkohl, Aaron. The Pragmatics of the X+verb Structure in the Hebrew of Genesis:
The Linguistic Functions and Associated Effects and Meanings of Intra-clausal
Fronted Constituents. MA thesis. Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem,
2003.
Hutchison, John Charles. The Relationship of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Palestinian
Covenants in Deuteronomy 29-30. ThD diss., Dallas Theological Seminary,
1981.
Jacobson, Rolf A. Many Are Saying: The Function of Direct Discourse in the Hebrew
Psalter. PhD diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, NJ, 2000.
Jobes, Karen H., and Moiss Silva. Invitation to the Septuagint. Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker Academic, 2000.
Joosten, Jan. The Disappearance of Iterative WEQATAL in the Biblical Hebrew Verbal
System. In Biblical Hebrew in Its Norwest Semitic Setting Typological and
Historical Perspectives. Steven E. Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz ed. Winona Lake,
IN, Eisenbrauns, 2006.
Joon, Paul, and Takamitsu Muraoka. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. 2
nd
ed. Subsidia
Biblica 27. Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006.
________. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Subsidia Biblica 14. 2 vols. Rome:
Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2003.
Kearney, Peter J. The Role of the Gibeonites in the Deuteronomic History. The
Catholic Biblical Quarterly 35, no. 1 (January 1973): 1-19.
Khan, Geoffrey. Some Aspects of the Copula in the North West Semitic. In Biblical
Hebrew in Its Norwest Semitic Setting Typological and Historical Perspectives.
Steven E. Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz ed. Winona Lake, IN, Eisenbrauns, 2006.
Klingbeil, Gerald A., ed., Inicios, paradigmas y fundamentos: Estudios teolgicos y
exegticos en el Pentateuco, River Plate Adventist University Monograph Series
in Biblical and Theological Studies, vol. 1. Entre Ros, Argentina: Editorial
Universidad Adventista del Plata, 2004.

332

Klingbeil, Gerald A. Review of Biblia Hebraica Quinta. Fascicle 18: General
Introduction and Megilloth, by Adrian Shenker, J. De Waard, P. B. Dirksen, Y.
A. P. Goldman, R. Shfer, and M. Sb. Journal of Asia Adventist Seminary
10, no. 2 (2007): 216-219.
Klingbeil, Martin G. Poemas en medio de la prosa: Poesa insertada en el Pentateuco.
In Inicios, paradigmas y fundamentos: Estudios teolgicos y exegticos en el
Pentateuco, ed., Gerald A. Klingbeil, 61-85. River Plate Adventist University
Monograph Series in Biblical and Theological Studies 1. Entre Ros, Argentina,
Editorial Universidad Adventista del Plata, 2004.
Knierim, Rolf P. Text and Concept in Leviticus 1:1-9: A Case in Exegetical Method.
Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1992.
Koehler, Ludwig and Walter Baumgartner. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old
Testament. Translated by M. E. J. Richardson. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill,
1994.
Kompaor, Anne E. Garber. Discourse Analysis of Directive Text: The Case of Biblical
Law. MA thesis, Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminary, Elkhart, IN, 2004.
Kopa, Gernot. Divine Discourse and Biblical Scholarship: A Limited Critical
Assessment of Nicholas Wolterstorffs Speech-Act Theory Approach and Its
Implications for Biblical Hermeneutics and Exegetical Methodology. MA thesis.
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, 2008.
Korpel, Marjo C. A. Introduction to the Series Pericope. In Delimitation Criticism,
ed. Marjo C. A. Korpel and Josef Oesch, 1-50. Pericope 1. Assen, Netherlands:
Van Gorcum, 2000.
Kottsieper, I. r::. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G.
Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 1978, 15:311-336.
Kraovec, Joe. Merism: Polar Expression in Biblical Hebrew, Biblica 64, no. 2
(1983): 231-239.
Labuschagne, Casper J. Divine Speech in Deuteronomy. In A Song of Power and the
Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L. Christensen,
375-393. Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1993.
________. The Pattern of the Divine Speech Formulas in the Pentateuch: The Key to its
Literary Structure, Vetus Testamentum 32, no. 3 (July 1982): 268-296.
Lapsley, Jacqueline E. Feeling Our Way: Love for God in Deuteronomy. Catholic
Biblical Quarterly 65 (2003): 350-369.

333

Lee, Hee Sung. The Inheritance of the Servants in Isaiah 40-66: A Textlinguistic
Analysis. PhD diss., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, IL, USA,
2007.
Lenchak, Timothy A. Choose Life! A Rhetorical-Critical Investigation of
Deuteronomy 28,69-30,20. Analecta Biblica 129. Roma: Editrice Pontificio
Istituto Biblico, 1993.
Levine, Baruch. Numbers 21-36. The Anchor Yale Commentary. New Haven, London:
Yale University Press, 2000.
Levinson, Bernard. Deuteronomy and the Hermeneutics of Legal Innovation. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1997.
________. Review of Law and Theology in Deuteronomy, by J. George McConville.
The Jewish Quarterly Review 80, no. 3/4 (January-April 1990): 396-404.
Libronix Digital Library Systems 3.0. Logos Bible Software, Bellingham WA, 2007.
Linington, Silvia. Recent Trends in the Study of the History of Pre-Monarchic Israelite
Religion With Particular Emphasis on the Concept of the Covenant. Verbum et
Ecclesia 25, no. 1 (2004), 125-151.
Lohfink, Norbert. Das hauptgebot: Eine untersuchung literarischer einleitungsfragen zu
Dtn 5-11. Analecta Biblica 20. Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1963.
________. Der Bundesschlu im Land Moab: Redaktionnsgeschichtliches zu Dt 28,69-
32,47. Chap. in Studien zum Deuteronomium und zur deuteronomistischen
Literatur I. Stuttgarter Biblische Aufsatzbnde 8. Stuttgart: Katholisches
Bibelwerk, 1990. (Orig. Pub. in Biblische Zeitschrift 6 [1962]: 32-56).
Long, Burke O. Framing Repetitions in Biblical Historiography. Journal of Biblical
Literature 106, no. 3 (September 1987): 385-399.
Long, Gary A. Grammatical Concepts 101 for Biblical Hebrew: Learning Biblical
Hebrew Grammatical Concepts through English Grammar. Peabody:
Hendrickson, 2002.
Longacre, Robert E. Discourse Perspective on the Hebrew Verb: Affirmation and
Restatement. In Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew, ed. Walter Ray Bodine, 177-
190. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1992.
________. Weqatal Forms in Biblical Hebrew Prose. In Biblical Hebrew and
Discourse Linguistics, ed. Robert D. Bergen, 50-98. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1994.
Longacre, Robert E., and Shin Ja J. Hwang. A Textlinguistic Approach to the Biblical
Hebrew Narrative of Jonah. In Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics. ed.
Robert D. Bergen, 336-358. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994.

334

Lowther, James R. Pauls Use of Deuteronomy 30:10-14 in Romans 10:5-8 as a Locus
Primus on Pauls Understanding of the Law in Romans. PhD diss.,
Southwestern Baptist Seminary, Forth Worth, TX, 2001.
Lundbom, Jack R. The Inclusio and Other Framing Devices in Deuteronomy I-
XXVIII. Vetus Testamentum 46, no. 3 (July 1996): 296-315.
Lyons, Michael A. From Law to Prophecy: Ezekiels Use of the Holiness Code. PhD
diss., University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2005.
Mann, Thomas W. The Book of the Torah: The Narrative Integrity of the Pentateuch.
Atlanta: John Knox, 1988.
Mason, Steven D. Another Flood? Genesis 9 and Isaiahs Broken Covenant. Journal
for the Study of the Old Testament 32, no. 2 (2007): 177-198.
Massey, Keith Andrew. The Concord of Collective Nouns and Verbs in Biblical
Hebrew: A Controlled Study. PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, Madison,
1998.
McBride, S. Dean, Jr. Polity of the Covenant People: The Book of Deuteronomy. In A
Song of Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed.
Duane L. Christensen, 62-77. Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3.
Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993.
McCarthy, Carmel, ed. Biblia Hebraica Quinta, Fascicle 5: Deuteronomy. Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007.
McConville, J. Gordon. -:. New International Dictionary of Old Testament
Theology and Exegesis. Edited by Willem A. VanGemeren. Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1997, 1:746-755.
________. Deuteronomy. Apollos Old Testament Commentary 5. Leicester, England:
Apollos, 2002.
________. Deuteronomy, Book of. In Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch.
Edited by T. Desmond and David W. Baker, 182-193. Downers Grove, IL:
Intervarsity, 2003.
________. Grace in the End: A Study in Deuteronomic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1993.
________. Law and Theology in Deuteronomy. Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament Study Supplemental Series 33. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994.
________. Singular Address in the Deuteronomic Law and the Politics of Legal
Administration. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 97 (2002): 19-36.
McKay, J. W. Mans Love for God in Deuteronomy and the Father/TeacherSon/Pupil
Relationship. Vetus Testament 22, no. 4 (October 1972): 426-435.

335

McKenzie, Steve. Review of Choose Life! A Rhetorical-Critical Investigation of
Deuteronomy 28,69-30,20, by Timothy A. Lenchak. Journal of Biblical
Literature 114 no. 2 (Summer 1995): 300-301.
McKenzie, Tracy. An Analysis of the Intertextuality Between Exod 32:7-20 and Deut
9:12-21. PhD diss., Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest,
NC, 2006.
McKeown, James. Land, Fertility Famine. Dictionary of the Old Testament:
Pentateuch. Edited by T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker. Downers
Grove, IL, 2003, 487-491.
Mendenhall, George E. Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition. The Biblical
Archaeologist 17, no. 3 (September 1954): 49-76.
Mendenhall, George E. and Gary A. Herion, Covenant. Anchor Bible Dictionary.
Edited by David Noel Freedman. Ann Arbor, MI: Doubleday, 1992. 1: 1180-
1183.
Merrill, Eugene H. Deuteronomy, The New American Commentary 4. Nashville, TN:
Broadman & Holman, 1994.
________, :, New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and
Exegesis. Edited by Willem A. VanGemeren. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan,
1997. 1:1032-1035.
Merrill, Eugene H. Review of Deuteronomy 1:1-21:9, by Duane L. Christensen.
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 46, no. 4 (December 2003): 720-
722.
Milgrom, Jacob. Repentance in the OT. The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible,
Supplementary Volume, ed. Keith Crim, Victor P. Furnish and Lloyd Bailey.
Nashville, TN: Abingdon: 1976.
Miller, Cynthia L. Discourse Functions in Qoutative Frames in Biblical Narrative. In
Discourse Analysis of Biblical Literature: What It Is and What It Offers, ed.
Walter R. Bodine, 155-182. Atlanta, GA: Scholars, 1995.
________. Introducing Direct Discourse in Biblical Hebrew Narrative. In Biblical
Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, ed. Robert D. Bergen, 199-241. Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994.
________. Reported Speech in Biblical and Epigraphic Hebrew: A Linguistic
Analysis. PhD diss., The University of Chicago, IL, 1992.
________. The Representation of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative. Harvard Semitic
Museum Monographs 55. 2
nd
ed. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2000.

336

Miller, Cynthia L. ed. The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches.
Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999.
Mommer, Bochum P. :. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G.
Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 2003. 12:486-491.
Moomo, David O. The Meaning of the Biblical Hebrew Verbal Conjugation From a
Crosslinguistic Perspective. PhD diss., University of Stellenbosch, South Africa,
2004.
Moran, William L. The Ancient Near Eastern Background of the Love of God in
Deuteronomy. The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 25 (1963): 77-87.
Moshavi, Adina. The Discourse Functions of Object/Adverbial-Fronting in Biblical
Hebrew. In Biblical Hebrew in Its Norwest Semitic Setting Typological and
Historical Perspectives, ed. Steven E. Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz, 231-245.
Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006.
Nardoni, Enrique. Normas de justicia en las leyes de la alianza. Revista Bblica 58,
no. 2 (1996): 81-116.
Niccacci, Alviero. Analysis of Biblical Narrative. In Biblical Hebrew and Discourse
Linguistics. In Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, ed. Robert D.
Bergen, 175-198. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994.
Niccacci, Alviero. On the Hebrew Verbal System. In Biblical Hebrew and Discourse
Linguistics. ed. Robert D. Bergen, 117-137. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns,
1994.
Nicholson, E. W. Covenant in a Century of Study Since Wellhausen. In A Song of
Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L.
Christensen, 94-108. Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3. Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993.
OConnell, Robert H. Deuteronomy VII 1-26: Asymmetrical Concentricity and the
Rhetoric of Conquest. Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 2 (October 1992): 248-265.
________. Deuteronomy VIII 1-20: Asymmetrical Concentricity and the Rhetoric of
Providence. Vetus Testamentum 40, no. 4 (October 1990): 437-452.
________. Deuteronomy IX 7-X 7, 10-11: Panelled Structure, Double Rehearsal and
the Rhetoric of Covenant Rebuke. Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 4 (October 1992):
492-509.
Olson, Denis T. Deuteronomy and the Death of Moses: A Theological Reading.
Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1994.

337

Olson, Denis T. The Jagged Cliffs of Mount Sinai: a Theological Reading of the Book
of the Covenant (Exod. 20:22-23:19). Interpretation 55, no. 3 (July 1996):
251-263.
Otto, Eckart. Old and New Covenant. A Post-Exilic Discourse Between the Pentateuch
and the Book of Jeremiah. Also a Study of Quotations and Allusions in the
Hebrew Bible. Old Testament Essays 19, no. 3 (2006): 939-949.
Ottonsson, Magnus. s. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G.
Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren. Translated by John T. Willis. Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974. 1:401-405.
Payne, David F. Deuteronomy. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1985.
Penkower, Jordan S. Verse Divisions in the Hebrew Bible. Vetus Testamentus 50, no.
3 (2000): 379-393.
Pfandl, Gerhard. The Soteriological Implications of the Cities of Refuge. In Inicios,
paradigmas y fundamentos: Estudios teolgicos y exegticos en el Pentateuco.
Gerald A. Klingbeil, Editor; River Plate Adventist University Monograph Series
in Biblical and Theological Studies 1. Editorial Universidad Adventista del Plata,
Entre Ros, Argentina 2004.
Polak, Frank H. Linguistic and Stylistic Aspects of Epic Formulae in Ancient Semitic
Poetry and Biblical Narrative. In Biblical Hebrew in Its Norwest Semitic Setting
Typological and Historical Perspectives, ed. Steven E. Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz,
285-304. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006.
Polzin, Robert. Reporting Speech in the Book of Deuteronomy: Toward a
Compositional Analysis of the Deuteronomic History. In A Song of Power and
the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L.
Christensen, 355-374. Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3. Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993.
Prbstle, Martin. Truth and Terror: A Text-Oriented Analysis of Daniel 8:9-14. PhD
diss. Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI, 2006.
Quell, Gottfried. etas. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by
Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1975.
2:107-109
Quick, Phil. Resumptive RepetitionIntroduction to a Universal Discourse Feature.
Linguistika 14, no. 26 (2007): 1-15.
Rechenmacher, Hans., and Christo H. J. van der Merwe, The Contribution of
Wolfgang Richter to Current Developments in the Study of Biblical Hebrew.
Journal of Semitic Studies 50, no. 1 (2005): 59-82.

338

Regt, Lnart J. de. Discourse Implications of Rhetorical Questions in Job,
Deuteronomy and the Minor Prophets. In Literary Structure and Rhetorical
Strategies in the Hebrew Bible, ed. Lnart J. de Regt, J. D. Waard and J. P.
Fokkelman, 51-78. Van Gorcum, The Netherlands: Brill, 1996.
________. Macrosyntactic Functions of Nominal Clauses Referring to Participants. In
The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches, ed. Cynthia L.
Miller, 273-296. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999.
________. The Order of Participants in Compound Clausal Elements in the Pentateuch
and Early Prophets: Syntax, Convention or Rhetorics? In Literary Structure and
Rhetorical Strategies in the Hebrew Bible, ed. Lnart J. de Regt, J. D. Waard
and J. P. Fokkelman, 79-100. Van Gorcum, The Netherlands: Brill, 1996.
________. A Parametric Model for Syntactic Studies of a Textual Corpus:
Demonstrated on the Hebrew of Deuteronomy 1-30. Maastricht, Netherlands: Van
Gorcum, 1988.
________. Word Order in Different Clause Types in Deuteronomy 1-30. In Studies in
Hebrew and Aramaic Syntax: Presented to Professor J. Hoftijzer on the Occasion
of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. ed. K. Jongeling, H. L. Murre-Van den Berg and
Lucas Van Rompay. Studies in Semitic Languages 16, 152-172. Leiden: Brill,
1991.
Regt, Lnart J. de., J. D. Waard., and J. P. Fokkelman. Ed. Literary Structure and
Rhetorical Strategies in the Hebrew Bible. Van Gorcum, The Netherlands: Brill,
1996.
Revell, E. J. The Battle with Benjamin (Judges XX 29-48) and Hebrew Narrative
Techniques. Vetus Testamentum 35, no. 4 (1985): 417-433.
________. Pausal Forms in Biblical Hebrew: Their Function, Origin and Significance.
Journal of Semitic Studies 25, no. 2 (1980):165-179.
Reynolds, Kent Aaron. Psalm 119: Promoting Torah, Portraying an Ideal Student of the
Torah. PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2007.
Ridderbos, Jan. Deuteronomy. Bible Students Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI:
Regency, 1984.
Ringreen, H. r. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G.
Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry. Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 1986. 10:495-516.
Roberts, Ryan N. Textual Variants in the Deuteronomy Dead Sea Scrolls: A Case for
Standardization. MA thesis, Trinity Western University, Langley, Canada, 2005.
Robertson, A. T. A Grammar of Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical
Research. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1947.

339

Rof, Alexander. The Covenant in the Land of Moab (Deuteronomy 28:69-30:20):
Historico-Literary, Comparative, and Formcritical Considerations. In A Song of
Power and the Power of Song: Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, ed. Duane L.
Christensen, 269-282. Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3. Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993.
Rogers, Cleon L. Jr. The Covenant with Moses and its Historical Setting. Journal of
the Evangelical Theological Society 14, no. 3 (Sumer 1971): 141-155.
Rmer, Thomas. Review of Deuteronomy 21:10-34:12, by Duane L. Christensen.
Review of Biblical Literature (September 2003): 1-2.
Runge, Steven Edward. A Discourse-Functional Description of Participant Reference in
Biblical Hebrew Narrative. PhD diss., University of Stellenbosch, South Africa,
2006.
Sailhamer, John H. The Pentateuch as Narrative. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992.
Snchez M., Otto. A Textlinguistic Analysis of Exodus 15:22-17:7. PhD diss.,
Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, PA, 2004.
Sanders, Paul. The Provenance of Deuteronomy 32. Oudtestamentische Studien 37.
Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Schabert, Josef. :s, lh; :s, lh; :s-, ta
a
lh. Theological Dictionary of the
Old Testament. Edited by G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren.
Translated by John T. Willis. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974. 1:261-266.
Schaper, Joachim. Tora als text im Deuteronomium. In Was ist ein text?, ed. Ludwig
D. Morenz and Stefan Schorch, 49-63. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2007.
Segal, M. H. The Pentateuch: Its Composition and Its Authorship and Other Biblical
Studies. Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 1967.
Shimasaki, Katsuomi. Focus Structure in Biblical Hebrew: A Study of Word Order and
Information Structure. Bethesda, MD: CDL Pr