Non-Restrictive Relatives and Their Commas | Hebrew Grammar

English keeps its two kinds of relative clause visibly apart. The translators who were faithful to the original narrows the group down; the translators, who were faithful to the original says something extra about all of them, and English marks the difference with commas and, often, by switching that to which. Hebrew builds both kinds with the same ש־ and switches nothing. The commas carry the entire distinction, which makes Hebrew punctuation load-bearing in a way English punctuation is not.

The rule is codified, and it is asymmetric

Most Hebrew punctuation is advisory, and punctuation in a right-to-left text correctly says that in ordinary writing the comma before ש is optional. This is the corner where it stops being optional. The Academy's כללי הפיסוק devotes a section to the comma in relative-clause sentences, and the two halves are not stated with equal force (Academy site, Wayback snapshot of 1 December 2022):

A clause that is a לוואי לא־מצמצם — one the sentence would be clear without — "ראוי להפרידה משאר המשפט בפסיק או בפסיקים", should be separated off by a comma or a pair of commas, "בייחוד אם מניעתם עשויה לגרום שהפסוקית תתפרש כלוואי מצמצם" — especially where leaving them out would make it read as restrictive.
A clause that is a לוואי מצמצם — one that is necessary, added to narrow the noun down — takes no comma before it, and a comma after it "רק אם הפסוקית ארוכה", only if the clause is long.

So the restrictive half is a directive and the non-restrictive half a strong recommendation. The unambiguous errors are therefore the added commas — before a restrictive clause, before מה ש, after a clause not long enough to earn one. A missing pair around a non-restrictive fails differently: not a broken rule, but a sentence that now says something you did not mean.

The minimal pair

The Academy's own illustration is the cleanest one available, because the two sentences differ by exactly one character.

תופעה זו נמצאת בעיקר בלשון המתרגמים, שגילו נאמנות רבה למקור.

tofa'á zo nimtsét be'ikár bilshón hametargemím, shegilú ne'emanút rabá lamakór

This phenomenon is found mainly in the language of translators, who were highly faithful to the original. (with the comma: all of them were faithful)

תופעה זו נמצאת בעיקר בלשון המתרגמים שגילו נאמנות רבה למקור.

tofa'á zo nimtsét be'ikár bilshón hametargemím shegilú ne'emanút rabá lamakór

This phenomenon is found mainly in the language of those translators who were highly faithful to the original. (no comma: not in the language of the less faithful ones)

The Academy glosses them itself: with the comma, כל המתרגמים גילו נאמנות למקור; without it, לא בלשון אותם מתרגמים שאינם נאמנים מאוד למקור. One comma, two different claims about the world.

💡

An operational test, for when the meaning is too close to call: try dropping דרך אגב — "by the way" — into the clause. אחותי, שדרך אגב גרה בברלין, מגיעה works, so the clause is non-restrictive and takes its pair of commas. Put the same דרך אגב into a clause that is doing the identifying and the sentence falls apart, because you cannot narrow something down parenthetically. Anything you can say by the way belongs between commas.

Set off on both sides, or not at all

A non-restrictive clause inside a sentence is bracketed, and a bracket has two halves. Writers routinely open one and forget to close it, which leaves the sentence with a comma that separates nothing.

אחותי, שגרה בברלין כבר עשור, מגיעה לביקור בחג.

akhotí, shegára beberlín kvar asór, magi'á levikúr bekhág

My sister, who's been living in Berlin for a decade now, is coming to visit over the holiday. (I have one sister)

אחותי שגרה בברלין מגיעה לביקור בחג, והשנייה נשארת בארץ.

akhotí shegára beberlín magi'á levikúr bekhág, vehashniyá nish'éret ba'árets

The sister of mine who lives in Berlin is coming to visit over the holiday; the other one is staying here. (I have at least two)

💡

The closing comma of a non-restrictive pair often lands directly in front of the verb, and that looks like it breaks the rule that Hebrew puts no comma between a subject and its predicate. It does not. That rule forbids a single comma cutting a long subject off from its verb; the second half of a matched pair is not that comma, it is the closing bracket. אחותי, שגרה בברלין, מגיעה is right; אחותי שגרה בברלין, מגיעה is wrong twice over.

The comma after a long restrictive clause

The restrictive clause takes nothing in front of it. Behind it, the Academy allows one comma — but only on grounds of length, to show the reader where the long opening constituent finally ends.

בישיבה שכינסה ההנהלה אחרי פרסום המסקנות של ועדת הבדיקה, לא נמסרו נתונים חדשים.

bayeshivá shekinsá hahanhalá akharéi pirsúm hamaskanót shel va'adát habdiká, lo nimserú netuním khadashím

At the meeting the management convened after the findings of the inquiry commission were published, no new figures were released. (formal — the comma is licensed by the length of the clause, not by its meaning)

Shorten that clause and the comma has to go: בישיבה שכינסה ההנהלה לא נמסרו נתונים חדשים.

Four phrases that never take a comma before them

This is the rule nobody teaches, and it produces a real and very visible error. The Academy's note to the same section: no comma comes before a clause headed by (כל) מי ש־, (כל) מה ש־, זה ש־ or לכך ש־. These are not relative clauses hanging off a noun at all — the ש is bound to a pronoun or to a preposition, and the whole thing is a single constituent. Splitting it with a comma cuts a phrase in half.

בהצעה החדשה אנחנו חוזרים בדיוק אל מה שהיה כאן לפני שלושים שנה.

bahatsa'á hakhadashá anákhnu khozrím bediyúk el ma shehayá kan lifnéi shloshím shaná

Under the new proposal we are going back to exactly what was here thirty years ago.

Their own behaviour is on free relatives.

The continuative relative, and why Hebrew refuses it

Here is the one that separates a good Hebrew writer from a translated one. English uses a non-restrictive relative to carry the story forward: I ran into a friend in the street, who then went on his way. The clause adds a new event that happened after the main one — it does not describe the friend at all.

Hebrew has a name for this, משפט זיקה ממשיך, and Academy decision 4.5ב rules it out: someone reporting events that happened one after another should use coordination (משפט איחוי) rather than subordination, and the Academy's verdict on the relative version is blunt — אין השימוש בה יאה בעברית.

נפגשתי במקרה עם דני ברחוב, שהמשיך אחר כך לעבודה.

nifgáshti bemikré im dáni barekhóv, shehimshíkh akhár kakh la'avodá

I bumped into Dani in the street, who then carried on to work. (a straight calque of the English; ruled out by the Academy)

נפגשתי במקרה עם דני ברחוב, והוא המשיך אחר כך לעבודה.

nifgáshti bemikré im dáni barekhóv, vehú himshíkh akhár kakh la'avodá

I bumped into Dani in the street, and he then carried on to work. (the recast: ו plus a pronoun)

The repair is mechanical and worth automating: whenever the clause after your comma reports the next thing that happened rather than a property of the noun, replace ש with והוא / והיא / והם. Two other constructions live next door and are not this one — a noun phrase renaming the head belongs to apposition, and a whole inserted comment to parentheticals.

Four to punctuate

Decide for each sentence whether commas belong, and where.

	Sentence	Context
1	המנהל שלנו שעובד כאן שלושים שנה יוצא לפנסיה בסוף החודש	the firm has one manager
2	עובדים שהתחילו כאן לפני העדכון זכאים לתנאים הישנים	not everyone is entitled
3	הספרייה העירונית שנסגרה לשיפוצים בקיץ נפתחה מחדש	the town has one library
4	כל מי שנרשם מראש יקבל הנחה של עשרים אחוז	a notice on a website

1 is non-restrictive — there is nothing to narrow down — so it takes a pair of commas. 2 is restrictive and takes none: the whole point is that some employees are not entitled, and a comma here would say that everyone started before the update. 3 works exactly like 1, with commas on both sides of שנסגרה לשיפוצים בקיץ. 4 takes no comma anywhere, by the מי ש rule.

המנהל שלנו, שעובד כאן שלושים שנה, יוצא לפנסיה בסוף החודש.

hamenahél shelánu, she'ovéd kan shloshím shaná, yotsé lefénsya besóf hakhódesh

Our manager, who's worked here for thirty years, is retiring at the end of the month.

כל מי שנרשם מראש יקבל הנחה של עשרים אחוז.

kol mi shenirshám merósh yekabél hanakhá shel esrím akhúz

Anyone who registers in advance will get a twenty per cent discount.

Common Mistakes

1. A comma before לכך ש־ or מה ש־. The pause feels right because the sentence is long, and it splits a phrase down the middle.

❌ התרגלתי כבר לכך, שהוא מאחר לכל פגישה

Incorrect punctuation — the Academy's rule is that no comma precedes a clause headed by לכך ש, מי ש, מה ש or זה ש: התרגלתי כבר לכך שהוא מאחר לכל פגישה.

✅ התרגלתי כבר לכך שהוא מאחר לכל פגישה בעשרים דקות.

hitragálti kvar lekhákh shehú me'akhér lekhól pgishá be'esrím dakót

I've got used to the fact that he's twenty minutes late to every meeting.

2. Opening the pair and not closing it. Half a bracket is not punctuation; it is a comma standing between a subject and its verb.

❌ אחותי, שגרה בברלין כבר עשור מגיעה לביקור בחג

Incorrect punctuation — a non-restrictive clause is enclosed on both sides: אחותי, שגרה בברלין כבר עשור, מגיעה לביקור בחג.

✅ הדוד שלי, שלא ראיתי אותו עשר שנים, הופיע פתאום בדלת.

hadód shelí, sheló ra'íti otó éser shaním, hofía pit'óm badélet

My uncle, who I hadn't seen for ten years, suddenly turned up at the door.

3. A comma after a short restrictive clause. The clause is restrictive, so nothing goes in front of it — and it is short, so nothing goes behind it either. What is left is a comma cutting the subject off from its predicate.

❌ העובדים שהתחילו כאן לפני העדכון, זכאים לתנאים הישנים

Incorrect punctuation — a comma follows a restrictive clause only when the clause is long: העובדים שהתחילו כאן לפני העדכון זכאים לתנאים הישנים.

✅ העובדים שהתחילו כאן לפני העדכון זכאים לתנאים הישנים.

ha'ovdím shehitkhílu kan lifnéi ha'idkún zaka'ím latna'ím hayeshaním

Employees who started here before the update are entitled to the old terms.

4. The English comma-before-which reflex. Neither of these is wrong. They are different statements, and the writer who inserts the comma out of habit ends up making the one they did not mean.

✅ אני מחפש את המסמכים שהגיעו אתמול בדואר.

aní mekhapés et hamismakhím shehigí'u etmól badó'ar

I'm looking for the documents that arrived in yesterday's post. (only those ones — other documents also exist)

✅ אני מחפש את המסמכים, שהגיעו אתמול בדואר.

aní mekhapés et hamismakhím, shehigí'u etmól badó'ar

I'm looking for the documents, which arrived in yesterday's post. (all of them, and by the way they came yesterday)

Key Takeaways

Hebrew builds both kinds of relative with the same ש־, so the commas carry the whole distinction: המתרגמים, שגילו נאמנות (all of them) against המתרגמים שגילו נאמנות (only those).
The rule is asymmetric. A restrictive clause takes no comma before it — that is a directive — and a comma after it only when the clause is long: בישיבה שכינסה ההנהלה … של ועדת הבדיקה, לא נמסרו נתונים.
A non-restrictive clause is enclosed on both sides: אחותי, שגרה בברלין כבר עשור, מגיעה. One comma is worse than none.
No comma before (כל) מי ש, (כל) מה ש, זה ש or לכך ש — the ש is bound to the pronoun, and a comma splits a single constituent: אל מה שהיה כאן, התרגלתי לכך שהוא מאחר.
A relative clause that carries the narrative forward is the משפט זיקה ממשיך, and Academy decision 4.5ב recasts it as coordination: not ...עם דני, שהמשיך but ...עם דני, והוא המשיך.

Now practice Hebrew

Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.

Start learning Hebrew →