68 Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer primarily by the appearance in the following verse 15 of a 3 m. pl. verb warq the subject of which must be a group of people distinct from the priests and the prophets. It receives further support from the imagery in verse 18, which alludes to a situation where the speakers cannot walk in the street for fear of persecutors (7). In contrast to this, the possessive suffix in µhyçblb refers most naturally to the priests, the main subject of the preceding 14a. In view of this, I suggest translating 14b as “without [the people of Jerusalem] being able to touch (8) the [priests’] clothes”. b) Exegetical concerns Next, we need to define the precise interpretation of the phrase µdb wlUa}gno“, used to describe the priests and the prophets in 14a. While the general meaning of the verb lag is not disputed, stemming from the root lag II and having connotations of “defilement”, its exact form and its precise semantic meaning in Lam 4,14 are unclear. With regard to its form, the consonantal form clearly denotes a Perfect Niphal, but the vocalization fits a Perfect Pual. Thus, this is probably a mixed form, where the punctuation intended to combine the two optional readings Niphal and Pual (9). In any case, the meaning is passive and, as such, denotes that the priests and the prophets are “defiled” by blood. With regard to its meaning, the question here is whether the phrase µdb wlUa}gno“ is a matter of physical dirtiness or whether it is a ritual matter. In order to answer this question, I shall define the meaning of the root lag II where it occurs elsewhere, and, based on the result, I shall argue for the same to be true also in the case of Lam 4,14. The exact same phrase is found elsewhere in Isa 59,3 (with the same mixed pointing) (10). In this verse, the expression is used figuratively to indicate the extent of the sins of the persons involved. Zeph 3,1 contains a clear Niphal form of lag II where it is again used figuratively, as indicated by (6) Most major Biblical translations, e.g. BBE, KJV, JPS, NAB, TNK, adhere to this reading, as do grammar books, e.g. GKC §120g, and the majority of critical scholars, e.g. A. BERLIN, Lamentations (OTL; Louisville, Kentucky 2002) 101-102. The alternative, i.e. to regard the priests as the subject throughout the passage, has also been advocated. For example, W. RUDOLPH, Das Buch Ruth. Das Hohe Lied. Die Klagelieder (KAT 17; Gütersloh 1962) 246, renders the phrase as “besudelten sich mit was sie nicht durften, berührten sie mit ihren Kleidern”, but he also acknowledges that the phrase can equally well be translated as “so daß man ihre Kleider nicht berüren konnte”. He is followed by, among others, B. ALBREKTSON, Studies in the Text and theology of the Book of Lamentations (Studia Theologica Lundensia; Lund 1963) 187, who translates the phrase as “what they were not allowed, they touched with their clothes”. Thus, Albrektson regards the phrase as meaning that the priests cannot avoid contact with unclean things. While grammatically possible, it makes little sense exegetically, given the context. The priests are unclean (v. 15), not their surroundings. (7) PROVAN, Lamentations, 118, 121-122. (8) In the grammatical construction in which two verbs in the same mood follow each other without a copula, the second verb carries the main idea. See further GKC §120g. (9) Following GK §51h. See also D.R. HILLERS, Lamentations (AB7a; Garden City – New York 1972) 90, I. PROVAN, Lamentations (NCBC; London 1991) 82. (10) For a short discussion of the form and the comparative value of 1QIsaª, see P. WERNBERG-MØLLER, “Studies in the Defective Spelling in the Isaiah-Scroll of St Mark’s Monastery”, JSS 3 (1958) 249.