60 John Makujina tors, this article will argue that a preoccupation with the exact meanings of γαμέω and γαμίζω forces an unnatural cleavage in the pair and fails to appreciate its combined, idiomatic value. Included in the discussion will be a positive case for a maximal reading of γαμέω and γαμίζω as connoting the entire institution of marriage and the family—rooted in OT vocabulary and thought—instead of functioning as a mere reference to the initiation of marriage. 1. The Vocabulary of Marriage in the OT As routinely recognized, the OT reserves separate verbs for males and females who enter into a marriage relationship, thereby also disclosing differing gender roles in society. The most common expression for mar- riage, from the masculine perspective, has men “taking” (jql) wives for themselves or fathers “taking” wives or daughters for their sons, as in the following example:9 Gen 4,19, “And Lamech took for himself (wl-jqyw) two wives”. Women on the other hand were typically “given” (/tn, once bhy) by their fathers to another man, as exampled in Gen 29,28, “and he gave [/tyw] his daughter, Rachel, to him as (his) wife [hval]”10. Occa- sional variations in the pattern also occur. For instance, authority figures can give another man’s daughter in marriage (Gen 38,14.26; 41,45; Exod 21,4; Judg 21,14; 1 Kgs 2,17; 11,19). Alternatively, a mother can “take” a woman for her son (Gen 21,21), or a matriarch can “give” another woman to her husband (Gen 16,3; 30,9). Additionally, a father can “take away” a wife and “give” her to another man (Judg 15,6; 1 Sam 25,44 [/tn expressed, jql implied]). Finally, a number of auxiliary expressions for marrying/betrothal were available in the OT (