186

(jet) I. Untranslated particle.

An untranslated particle in Hebrew often described in grammars (somewhat

superficially) as the sign of the direct object after a transitive verb. Its origin is
unknown. The prevailing view is that >et was originally a noun meaning essence,
substance, self, a significance which it subsequently lost in the historical
development of the language.
When ^et is used to signify an accusative (nota accusative) it is generally, though
not always, in prose and when the object of the verb is determined by the definite
article. More important than indicating an accusative, the function of jet is to
emphasize the word to which it is attached.
For this reason one observes that jet is used not only with the accusative but with
the subject (nota nominatii) of both intransitive and passive verbs. Copious
illustrations could be offered but two will suffice. With jet as subject of an intransitive
verb compare II Kgs 6:5: The axe-head fell into the water (we>et-habbarzel nopal >elhammaytm). With jet as subject of a passive verb compare Gen 17:5; And your
name (j et-simka) shall no more be called Abram.
To summarize, jet was originally a substantive, and was used to emphasize the
noun to which it was prefixed. In the course of time the emphatic meaning was lost
and jet became a particle with no special meaning.
Bibliography: On a similar particle in other Semitic languages and texts: Andersen,
F. I., Moabite Syntax, Orientalia 35:117-18. Leahy, T., Studies in the Syntax of
IQS, Bib 41:152-54.
On Biblical Hebrew jet: Hoftijzer, J., Remarks Concerning the Use of the Particle jt in
Classical Hebrew, Oudtestamentisrhe Studien 14:1-99. MacDonald, J., The
Particle jt in Classical Hebrew, VT 14:263-75. Saydon, P. P., Meanings and Uses
of the Particle jt, VT 14:192-210. Walker, N., Concerning the Function of jet/, VT
5:314-15.
V.P.H.
187

(jet) \\,with, together with.

On occasions there is a different nuance. To illustrate, I have gotten a man

from (jet-) the Lord (Gen 4:1). The Lord ... will fight for you (Idkem), according to all
he did for you (jittekem) in Egypt (Deut 1:30). I have not sinned against you (Idk)
but you are doing evil against me (jittt) to fight against me (bz) (Jud 11:27).
To return to the basic meaning with, this preposition is used frequently in a
particular theological context. This is (a) in the promises of God to man: I am/will be
with you; (b) affirmations from man that God is indeed with them; (c) prayers of
petition that God may be with them. The scripture then is replete with the idea that
God calls his people to fellowship with himself, be it in the garden of Eden, in the

odyssey of an Abraham, in a covenant situation at Sinai, in the tabernacle, in a

wilderness, crossing a Jordan, entering a Canaan, and so forth. At this point we
should observe that the nt is no different. It is Mark (3:13-15) who tells us that
Jesus primary reason for calling the twelve was that they might be with him. The
call to fellowship always precedes the call to service.
A glance, however, at biblical and post-biblical history shows that nothing is more
difficult than walking with God. And we are not the problem God is! Certainly Adam
and Eve couldnt succeed at it long. By Gen 3, they are longing for a past that is
gone forever. Look at the Israelites. By 586 b.c . the song of God had gone and
Ezekiel saw Gods presence leaving first the temple, then the city.
The reason lies in the nature of God, his holy and jealous love, and in the fact
that everywhere God meets man, he places a moral demand on him. It is obedience
and sensitivity to the Holy One that makes God and myself compatible.
Bibliography: Meek, Theophile J., Translating the Hebrew Bible, JB L 79:328-35.
TDOT, I, pp. 449-63.

Harris, R. L., Harris, R. L., Archer, G. L., & Waltke, B. K. (1999, c1980). Theological Wordbook
of the Old Testament
Chicago: Moody Press.