Is יְעוֹפֵף a command, or an adjective?

Summary: Two girsaot in Onkelos, reflecting a machlokes Chazal. Plus, the trup appears to indicate one way over another.

Post: In the first perek of Bereishit, we turn to consider the following pasuk and Targum:

א,כ וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים--יִשְׁרְצוּ הַמַּיִם, שֶׁרֶץ נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה; וְעוֹף יְעוֹפֵף עַל-הָאָרֶץ, עַל-פְּנֵי רְקִיעַ הַשָּׁמָיִם.

וַאֲמַר יְיָ--יִרְחֲשׁוּן מַיָּא, רְחֵישׁ נַפְשָׁא חַיְתָא; וְעוֹפָא יְפָרַח עַל אַרְעָא, עַל אַפֵּי רְקִיעַ שְׁמַיָּא.

A straightforward rendition of יְעוֹפֵף  would indeed be יְפָרַח. However, switch the leading yud for a daled and you have what appears in certain other texts of Onkelos. In Ohev Ger, Shadal writes:

"וְעוֹף יְעוֹפֵף עַל-הָאָרֶץ as וְעוֹפָא יְפָרַח, with a yud (so a bunch of Onkelos texts). And so does Mendelsohnn translate it as future tense {imperfect}, and so seems the opinion of the author of the trup (see Netivot HaShalom = Mendelsohnn). But in Gimel Targumim and Chumash Gadol, דפרח with a daled. And so does Ramban explain שיעופף {'that fly', rather than 'should fly'}. And our Sages argued about this in the Talmud, and the former seems to me to be primary."


It seems that we should turn to Nesivos HaShalom, to get a better picture of this and to see what this has to do with trup. Here is what Nesivos HaShalom writes. Realize that this pasuk appears at the very start of the fifth day of Creation:

"Our Rabbis dispute this. Some say that birds were created from the water, and therefore their creation was mentioned on the fifth, since on this day is the statement of creation with water. And Rabbi Eliezer HaGadol, in his perakim, says that on the fifth was השריץ {crept, swarmed} from the water all winged birds, and afterwards, in his opinion, it explains ועוף יעופף על הארץ, drawn out as if it said ישרצו המים with נפש חיה as well as the עוף שיעופף, such that the word שרץ also falls upon the winged birds. And the pasuk {in perek 2 pasuk 19, when Adam is in the Garden and Hashem brings him various animals} which states ויצר ה אלקים מן האדמה כל חית השדה ואת כל עוף השמים is as if it said 'and Hashem Elokim created all the beasts of the field from the ground, and all the birds of heaven', and there are many like it. But in the gemara, they argue about it, and some say that the birds were created from both of them {water and earth}, that is to say it was created from the mud. And if so, since the mud is in the earth of the sea, and from them was their generation, because of this the statement appeared on the fifth day.


And the author of the trup, it seems that he agrees with this position. Therefore, he placed the word חיה with the trup of etnachta, and the intent is as if he placed two separate statements -- the water should swam with the sheretz nefesh chaya, and the of should yeofef upon the earth. and if the words ישרצו המים applied as well to the עוף יעופף, he would have needed to establish upon the word המים a disjunctive, separating trup, greater than that of the word חיה."

Here is the pasuk in question, with its trup:

Thus, the first statement is up to the word חיה, and עוף יעופף means that birds should be יעופף, as a verb, rather that יעופף being an adjective.

Tzarich iyun, perhaps. For some reason, I have reservations about this trup insight. Look, we need to place the etnachta someplace. Where should we pace it? On המים, separating the first item on the list from the verb? Could we place it later? That seems difficult. We are faced with a list of items (as per the second, דפריש interpretation). And we see in Wickes that there are sometimes exceptions to the purely logical division within certain lists. I could not fit this example into his categories, but I still wonder if one could, such that this is not the most compelling proof.

If it is indeed the case that the trup is in accordance with one parse, then what shall we make of Ramban deciding the other way (assuming of course that he realized this)? And how could it be a machlokes in the Chazal, if we wanted to say that the trup is halacha leMoshe miSinai? Which way does the trup indicate? Unless you say (suddenly) that there was a machlokes in the trup as well.