[b-hebrew] Isaiah 53:8 lamo
George F Somsel
gfsomsel at juno.com
Mon Dec 20 08:55:32 EST 2004
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:31:07 +0200 "Vadim Cherny"
<vadim_lv at center-tv.net> writes:
> > > To find out the
> > >meaning, we need to establish the etymology. ...
> > No, no, NO!!! Meaning is not established by etymology. Meaning is
> > established by usage in context.
> Everywhere but in Hebrew and to some extent in Chinese. Of course,
> languages, for one, deviated from etymological meaning, and for
> accumulated huge contexts. This does not work with Tanakh, where we
> have a
> handful of lamo, and where, as in isaiah 53:8, it is the context
> depends on the meaning of lamo. Again, we have so little of the
> context that the relation is the opposite: etymological meaning of
> the word
> allows us to clarify the context. In this case, etymological meaning
> of lamo
> as lhemo shows that nega is to people, not to the character.
> > >
> > Agreed. Even if we agree that etymologically lamo and lmo form an
> > absolute/construct pair, that is a poor guide to meaning because
> > meanings of the absolute and construct could have shifted apart.
> btw, camoha besides cmo might help your smihut argument
> Vadim Cherny
The use of etymology to determine the meaning of words also does not work
in Greek so it's not just in Hebrew and Chinese that this fails to work.
I suggest that you read James Barr _The Semanitcs of Biblical Language_.
More information about the b-hebrew