Psalm 16/Notes/Grammar.v. 6.941461

The form נַחֲלָת could be a by-form of the more common form נַחֲלָה, meaning "inheritance."^[1] Alternatively, נַחֲלָת could be revocalized to נַחֲלָתִ, "my inheritance."^[2] This would be similar to אָמַרְתִּ in v. 2 (see notes on v. 2).^[3] and it would make sense in the context: "my inheritance (not "an inheritance") is beautiful to me."^[4]

↑ For feminine nouns with this ending, see GKC §80g and JM §89m. An example is the noun זִמְרָה, which occasionally appears as זִמְרָת (Exod 15:2; Isa 12:2; Ps 118:14). See also Rendsburg 2003, 13–14, who notes several examples of "feminine singular nominal ending -at (pointed with either patah or qamets), as in Phoenician, Moabite, and Aramaic." See e.g., פֹּרָת in Gen 49:22; שִׁפְעַת in 2 Kgs 9:17; חֲמַת in Hos 7:5; etc. Given the northern/Israelite association of some of these texts and the parallels in languages of the northern Levant, like Phoenician and Aramaic, it is plausible, as Rendsburg argues, that the feminine ending -at is a feature of northern, or Israelian, Hebrew. On the endings of feminine singular nouns in Phoenician (-ot, -t, -it), see Krahmalkov 2001, 120–121.
↑ Cf. the Septuagint: ἡ κληρονομία μου. It is possible that the Septuagint translator added the pronoun into his translation for the sake of clarity and naturalness. It is also plausible that he interpreted the form as defective in spelling, as he did with אָמַרְתִּ in v. 2. Still another possibility is that the translator's exemplar read נחלתי. Pietersma suspects the difference between Greek and Hebrew here is "textual rather than interpretational" (10).
↑ In Phoenician, nouns with a first-person singular suffix can be written defectively. See Krahmalkov 2001, 51.
↑ Cf. Ibn Ezra, who quotes another Rabbi as claiming that נחלת is "like נחלתי."

[1] For feminine nouns with this ending, see GKC §80g and JM §89m. An example is the noun זִמְרָה, which occasionally appears as זִמְרָת (Exod 15:2; Isa 12:2; Ps 118:14). See also Rendsburg 2003, 13–14, who notes several examples of "feminine singular nominal ending -at (pointed with either patah or qamets), as in Phoenician, Moabite, and Aramaic." See e.g., פֹּרָת in Gen 49:22; שִׁפְעַת in 2 Kgs 9:17; חֲמַת in Hos 7:5; etc. Given the northern/Israelite association of some of these texts and the parallels in languages of the northern Levant, like Phoenician and Aramaic, it is plausible, as Rendsburg argues, that the feminine ending -at is a feature of northern, or Israelian, Hebrew. On the endings of feminine singular nouns in Phoenician (-ot, -t, -it), see Krahmalkov 2001, 120–121.

[2] Cf. the Septuagint: ἡ κληρονομία μου. It is possible that the Septuagint translator added the pronoun into his translation for the sake of clarity and naturalness. It is also plausible that he interpreted the form as defective in spelling, as he did with אָמַרְתִּ in v. 2. Still another possibility is that the translator's exemplar read נחלתי. Pietersma suspects the difference between Greek and Hebrew here is "textual rather than interpretational" (10).

[3] In Phoenician, nouns with a first-person singular suffix can be written defectively. See Krahmalkov 2001, 51.

[4] Cf. Ibn Ezra, who quotes another Rabbi as claiming that נחלת is "like נחלתי."

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]