The Akk noun has two genders (masculine and feminine), three num-bers (singular, plural, and dual) and three cases (nominative, accusative, and genitive). Masculine nouns have no special identifying sign, but femi-nine nouns, other than being naturally female (e.g., uumum “mother” = Heb. )eem), often possess a -t or -at ending (awatum “word”; daltum
“door” [= Heb. delet ]; issaatum “fire” [= Heb. )eess ]). Akkadian does not indi-cate definiteness in its nouns (this is a West Semitic feature only attested after 1200 B.C.E.) so that a word such as beelum “lord” (= Heb. ba(al ) can mean “a lord” or “the lord.” In Old Babylonian ([OB] our paradigm dialect) the singular noun (and both the singular and plural feminine) is charac-terized by mimation, an m occurring after the case vowel. This mimation will drop out in later dialects (e.g., OB ssarrum, Neo-Assyrian ssarru). The plural of a noun is indicated by a lengthening of the ultimate vowel in mas-culine nouns and of penultimate vowels in feminine nouns: beelum “lord,”
beeluu “lords”; beeltum “lady,” beeleetum “ladies.” The dual number is far more widespread in Akk than in Hebrew and is morphologically distinguished from the plural, as seen, for example, with ıinum “an eye” (= Heb. (ayin), ıinuu “eyes,” ıinaa “two eyes.” Duals are used for nouns such as rıissaa “two heads,” originally referring to the tops of the two towers in a fortress or city gate (Ps 24:7), and kissaadaa “two necks,” originally referring to two necks or two banks of a river.
Akkadian has retained the three classical Semitic case endings, rem-nants of which have survived in Hebrew.6There are three distinctive case endings in the singular (nominative u, accusative a, and genitive i). The nominative is used when the noun is the subject of a sentence, and the accusative is used when the noun is the object of a verb, as in the phrase
“if a man accuses (another) man” (CH §1) ssumma awıilum awıilam ubbir.
The genitive is used when the noun is preceded by a preposition, such as ina bıitim (“in the house”), and in the construct state (see below). In the plural there are only two case endings. One is used for the nominative (uu for masculine nouns [ssarruu “kings”] and aatum for feminine nouns [ssarraatum
“queens”]) and one for the accusative and genitive (ıi for masculine nouns [ssarrıi ] and aatim for fem nouns [ssarraatim]).
When a noun precedes another one in the genitive case (e.g., “hand of the king”), it is in the construct state and may have a genitive ending
6Bruce K. Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990), §8.2.
(qaati ssarrim). At times, it may lose its case endings and form a special con-struct form, as in qaat ssarrim (cf. Hebrew yad hammelek). In this construction the two words make up a compound idea “the king’s hand.” Some nouns regularly drop their case endings in the construct (e.g., beel “lord of,” dıin
“case of ”). Others, especially plurals, regularly use the genitive (e.g., abi
“father of,” ssarrıi “kings of ”), and some nouns have special forms for the construct (e.g., ssar “king of,” arad “slave of,” and uzun “ear of ”).
The adjective normally follows the noun and agrees with it in num-ber, gender, and case, such as ssarrum dannum “a strong king,” ssarraatim dannaatim “strong queens.” The formation of the adjective is similar to that of the noun except that in the masculine plural the forms are not like the noun uu and ıi, but rather uutum and uutim. Consequently, the phrase “strong kings” is ssarruu dannuutum in the nominative and ssarrıi dannuutim in the accusative/genitive.
Most Akk nouns are formed from verbal roots according to established patterns. For example, the classical nomen agentis forms (those denoting a profession) are represented by participle formations (naadinum “a seller”
[Heb. nôteen], mupparisum, and mussaprisum) and by the characteristic qat-taalum form (dayyaanum “a judge” [= Heb. dayyaan ]). Abstract nouns are formed by the addition of the ending uutum (Hebrew -ût) to a noun, such as ssarrum “king” (= Heb. melek), ssarruutum “kingship” (= Heb. maalkût).
7
The form of the Akk independent pronoun depends on its case in the sentence. Thus the pronoun “I” has three forms: nominative anaaku; genitive/
accusative yâti; and dative yâssi. Pronominal suffixes may be attached to nouns, verbs, and prepositions. A striking difference between Akk and Hebrew is the fact that Akk uses forms with ss for the third person (ssû “he,”
ssî “she,” ssunu “they”), whereas Hebrew uses forms with hê (hû) “he,” hî)
“she,” heem “they”). There is a correlation between these third-person pro-nouns and the initial consonant of the causative conjugations in both languages.8The pronoun ssa (= Hebrew sse) is used as a relative pronoun or as a genitive indicator expressing “the one of ” or “that of,” such as in ssa eekallim “of the palace.” In some dialects ssa is declined and has a plural (ssût). When used as a relative pronoun ssa must be followed by a verb with a special “subjunctive” ending u (see below).
The Akk demonstrative “this” is annûm (= Heb. hinneeh) and is declined as an adjective (masculine annûm [plural annûtum], feminine annıitum [plural annâtum]). The interrogative pronouns are: mannum
“who” (= Heb. mî ), mıinum “what” (= Heb. mah), ayyûm “which” (= Heb.
7Paul Joüon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (trans. and rev. T. Muraoka; 2 vols.;
SubBi 14/1–2; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1991), 88Mj.
8Ibid., 93cN.
)ayyeeh). The indefinites are mammam, manama “whoever,” mimma
“whatever,” and ayyumma “whichever.”
Traditionally, Akk grammarians have used the paradigm form of the root prs “to cut” to describe the Akk verb, and it is customary in Akk dic-tionaries to list verbs by their infinitive forms, so prs is listed under paraasum. Akkadian has two prefix forms (iprus and iparras) and one suf-fix form ( paris). In general, iprus represents past time and corresponds to a preterite; iparras represents the present/future, though it can also express incomplete or habitual action in past time. The suffix form paris is often called a stative because it represents a state of being (e.g., kabit “it/he is/was heavy” [cf. Heb. kaabeed ]). The genesis of the Hebrew suffix conjuga-tion is clearly recognizable in the Akk stative,9which has been thought by some to help elucidate the origin of the Hebrew waw-consecutive.10 The paradigm of the verb in the I-conjugation (= Heb qal ) is as follows.
Akkadian has four conjugations, which are designated either by Roman numerals (I, II, III, IV) or by their essential characteristics, G (= Grund
“basic”), D (= Doppel “double”), SS, and N (the letters ss and n being their characteristic features). The I-conjugation expresses the basic meaning of the verb and corresponds with the Hebrew qal. The II-conjugation modi-fies the meanings of the I-conjugation in a variety of ways and corresponds with the Hebrew pi(el. The main function of the II-conjugation is to make verbs factitive (< Latin factitare “to do often, to practice, to declare [some-one] to be”). For example, lamaadum in the I-conjugation means “to learn,”
in the II-conjugation (lummudum) “to teach”; massaalum in the I-conjugation
9Ibid., 42aN.
10Waltke and O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, §29.4.
Singular
means to “to be equal,” in the II-conjugation (mussssulum) “to make equal.”
11
The III-conjugation is mostly causative and corresponds with the Hebrew hip(il (e.g., maqaatum “to fall,” ssumqutum “to cause to fall”). The IV-conju-gation corresponds with the Hebrew nip(al and serves as a passive for the I-conjugation (e.g., dâkum “to kill,” iddâk “he shall be executed”).
Akkadian also modifies its verb by means of infixes (t-infix and tan-infix). The t-infix has reflexive or reciprocal (expressing mutual relation) meaning, such as issriq “he stole,” isstariq “he stole for himself.” In some dialects the t-infix expresses the past tense. The tan-infix gives the root an iterative (frequentative) or habitual connotation, such as kassaadum “to arrive,” iktassssad “he used to arrive”; ssakaanum “to put,” isstanakkan “he will continually put.” Relics of these infixes have been shown to occur in bib-lical Hebrew.12 For example, the iterative aspect of the tan-infix is found in forms such as mithalleek “walking around” (Gen 3:8) and misstaa)eeh “gaz-ing fixedly” (Gen 24:21) so that a case can be made that some hitpa(el forms should be treated as if they were infixed tan forms.
Akkadian uses a verbal suffix am, called the ventive, which gives verbs a dative or special lexical meaning (issruk “he gave,” issrukam “he gave to me”; illik “he went,” illikam “he came” [lit. “he went here”]). Much more common is use of a u vowel added to a verb in a subordinate clause (“the king who came” ssarrum ssa illiku). This u vowel is traditionally termed the “subjunctive,” though its function is completely unlike that found in Indo-European languages, where the subjunctive expresses a thought or wish. There are no parallels to these usages of the ventive or subjunctive in Hebrew.
Unlike Hebrew, which has an infinitive absolute and an infinitive con-struct, Akk has only one infinitive form (paraasum in the I-conjugation).
The infinitive can be declined like a noun (paraasum, paraasam, paraasim), so, for instance, after a preposition the infinitive will appear in the genitive case (ana kassaadim “to arrive”). As in Hebrew, the infinitive with a prepo-sition serves as a temporal clause. For example, the prepoprepo-sition ina (“in”) with the infinitive kassaadum “to arrive” and the suffix ssu “he/him” (ina kassaadıissu) has the meaning “when he arrived.”
The precative (or jussive) expresses a wish or desire and is formed by the particle luu followed by the iprus form (e.g., luu taprus “may you cut”).
In some cases (first-person singular and third-person singular and plural), luu is joined to the iprus form, as in luprus “let me cut,” liprus “may he cut.”
Its parallel in Hebrew is the conditional particle lû.13
11For the Hebrew parallels to these forms see ibid., §§21.2.2; 24.2.
12Ibid., §26.1.2b.
13Ibid., §§38.2e; 40.2.2d.
In common with other Semitic languages, Akk uses a verb with a cog-nate accusative, that is, a noun derived from the same root, such as in dıinam idıin (cf. Heb zaabah˙ zebah˙ “he made a sacrifice”). A noticeable syn-tactic difference between Akk and Hebrew (and other West Semitic languages) is the placement of the verb in a sentence. Whereas in Hebrew the verb precedes the object, in Akk (under Sumerian influence) the object precedes the verb (ssumma awıilum awıilam ubbir “if a man accuses [another] man”). Thus, when occasionally a verb occurs at the end of a sen-tence in Hebrew, it may represent influence of Akk legal style.14 We see an example of this in Lev 19:8: wé)ookélaayw (aÅwoonô yisgsgaa) “and he who eats of it shall bear his guilt.”