EPISTREFW Zech 10:9-10
ButhFam at compuserve.com
Tue Apr 16 08:46:48 EDT 2002
>The question isn't really about Hebrew lexical semantics or syntax. The
>question is, how did the LXX translator understand the distinction between
>Qal and not-Qal of the same root? Granted, the LXX translator may have
>dead wrong, but it is still a question worth asking.
Absolutely a good question. And I always assume that an ancient
translator had a reasonably good grasp of both languages. In this
case it means that the LXX-person would understand the common
words "he shav" and "hu heshiv oto".
>I took a look the verb hlq in Zech. I found all the Qal forms and all the
>not-Qal forms. Then I merged the results of each into a MT/LXX window
>and too a look at the translation equivalents. This little exercise
>results that appear to support your thesis. There seems to be a distinct
>handling of hlq Qal and hlq not-Qal in Zech.
Fine. Though I'm a little uncomfortable with "hlq not-Qal". That would
be a strange bag.
For the record -- the following are independent words in Hebrew
qal pattern verb [in your example, halax 'he went', occurs]
nif`al pattern verb (as when not the passive of a transitive qal verb)
[a word *nehlax occurs once in MT, Ps 109.23
apparently something like "he dragged himself along" and
ANTANAIREQHNAI "cancelled,'off-registered'" by LXX.]
pi`el pattern verb [hillex occurs and means "walk, conduct myself",
intransitive!] [[contrast avad 'he got lost'(qal) and ibbad
'he destroyed something' (pi`el, and very transitive)]]
hitpa`el pattern verb [occurs in Zech 6.7 and means "travel around"]
hif`il pattern verb [holix "he led".]
[[Technically a different root y.l.k.
though that is the same root for the prefix-tense qal yelex 'he will
walk', sort of like ERCOMAI and ELEUSOMAI from two roots
You hit the jackpot with h.l.k. because not so many roots occur in all
five of the above vocabulary patterns.
(Arabic works the same way and has equivalents of the above
patterns, by the way. Except that there are additional vocabulary
patterns which would equate to paa`al, hifta`al, hitpaa`al and
ishtap`al. I mention Arabic because non-Hebrew speakers have
a built-in distrust of spoken Hebrew but are willing to accept
spoken Arabic. Strange world.)
>Take a look at two representative verses in your HMT and
>compare with the LXX and you will see the difference:
>ZECH. 2:6 KAI EIPA PROS AUTON POU SU
>POREUHi KAI EIPEN PROS ME DIAMETRHSAI
>THN IEROUSALHM TOU IDEIN PHLIKON TO
>PLATOS AUTHS ESTIN KAI PHLIKON TO MHKOS
>ZECH. 6:7 KAI hOI YAROI EXEPOREUONTO KAI
>EPEBLEPON TOU POREUESQAI TOU
>PERIODEUSAI THN GHN KAI EIPEN POREUESQE
>KAI PERIODEUSATE THN GHN KAI
>PERIWDEUSAN THN GHN
>In ZECH. 2:6 hlq Qal is rendered POREUHi
The Hebrew word is "ata holex" you are going, walking.
>In ZECH. 6:7 hlq Qal is rendered POREUESQAI,
for "lalexet" 'to go, walk'
>In ZECH. 6:7 hlq not-Qal is rendered PERIODEUSAI,
for "lehithalex" 'to travel around and about'
>This is a tiny sample but it looks like you have a thesis which can be
>supported from the LXX.
>Thanks again for your comments,
Thank you, though I don't consider it a 'thesis'. I'm just trying to talk
about Hebrew in ways that hopefully diminish misunderstandings.
Another note: you have an interesting category
mis-match above between Greek and Hebrew.
POREUESQAI is a 'middle' pattern verb but is used opposite
an 'active' pattern Hebrew verb "lalexet".
On the other hand, PERIODEUSAI is an active pattern
Greek verb and is used opposite a 'middle' pattern Hebrew
Of course, this is no different than when the same kinds of
mis-match occur between Greek and English.
Director, Biblical Language Center
and Lecturer, Biblical Hebrew
Rothberg International School
More information about the B-Greek