"־הם" versus "־מו"

Question

Usually, the suffix "־הם" is used to mean "them" as an object, as is "להם" or "אליהם". Or it is used to mean "their" in possessive form, as in "כליהם" or "אבותיהם".

But sometimes, the very same usage is applied to the suffix "־מו". A famous instance: "וְזָרַח מִשֵּׂעִיר לָמוֹ" (Devarim 33:2). I recently encountered it used in Tehillim (2:3-5):

נְנַתְּקָה אֶת מוֹסְרוֹתֵימוֹ וְנַשְׁלִיכָה מִמֶּנּוּ עֲבֹתֵימוֹ. יוֹשֵׁב בַּשָּׁמַיִם יִשְׂחָק אֲדֹנָי יִלְעַג לָמוֹ. אָז יְדַבֵּר אֵלֵימוֹ בְאַפּוֹ וּבַחֲרוֹנוֹ יְבַהֲלֵמוֹ

My question is simple: What is the difference (if any) between the two grammatical forms? When would I use the former over the latter and vice versa?

Answer 1

I've done a bit of research on this in the last couple of months and it seems that most everyone is in agreement that the "מו" form is used in poetic contexts to denote the third person. It may very well be a form of archaism only found in Biblical poetry. This is why it is found only in places like Tehillim or Iyov, and in the Torah only within poetic portions like "Az Yashir", "Haazinu", or "V'zos Habracha".

Although it most often comes to denote the third person plural, it can be found occasionally being used as the singular, as in Tehillim 11:7. (See Radak's Michlol.) [I've also seen it claimed (by the author of the Anchor Bible's Psalms) to be occasionally used as the first person plural, but I have found no Jewish sources that agree.]

I have been wondering what someone like Malbim would say about this, given his general approach. However, I have been unable to find anywhere where the Malbim discusses this outright. (I would be grateful if anyone can find if/where he does.)

I have found, though, that R' Yaakov Tzvi Meklenburg, whose purpose in writing his commentary Hak'sav V'hakabbala was similar to that of Malbim, does discuss this phenomenon briefly (along with another common phenomenon we find in poetic contexts of "י"s being added to second person objects or possessives). He writes (Shemos 15:7) that the "מו" form is actually a contraction of the plural (with "מ") and singular (with "ו") third persons. It is then used when we want to imply that many people or things are separate entities in reality but that there is an element of unity (אחדות) among them. He compares this to using the singular pronoun to refer to a plural subject (as in the famous "ויחן שם ישראל") and the קרי וכתיב we often find where a plural noun (like "ידיו") is written as if it were singular ("ידו").

Answer 2

It is equivalent script for "them" and is unique for poetry. source: השירה המקראית

Answer 3

If you check the trop, the "הם-" suffix gets the trop mark and emphasis, but with the "מו-" suffix, it's the previous syllable that is emphasized. E.g. In Shemos 14:29, "וְהַמַּ֤יִם לָהֶם֙ חֹמָ֔ה מִֽימִינָ֖ם וּמִשְּׂמֹאלָֽם׃" -- the trop is on the "-hem" of "laHEM". But a few pesuqim later, "תְּשַׁלַּח֙ חֲרֹ֣נְךָ֔ יֹאכְלֵ֖מוֹ כַּקַּֽשׁ׃" -- with the trop on the "-lei-" of "yokhLEImo".

The "מו-" suffix is used for poetry when it helps the word fit the meter.

Given the difference in meter, there is no reason to posit that it was about making poetry sound more archaic. And there is no proof "מו-" is indeed older. (See Linguistic evidence in dating early Hebrew poetry, David Robertson 1972, pp 65-66, 69.)