[b-hebrew] NXM

K Randolph kwrandolph at gmail.com
Thu Apr 10 08:39:40 EDT 2008


Bryan:

On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 7:55 PM, B. M. Rocine <brocine at twcny.rr.com> wrote:

>
> Hi Karl,
>
> Maybe some of your inventive lexicography has struck at the heart of
> Hebrew semantics. But I like the philosophy of the mainstream lexicons
> better, which shun imagining reductions that make perfect sense.   It's
> the "imagining" I don't like.  Sometimes even the "perfect sense" part
> is a little suspicious.
>
> Regards,
> Bryan
>
> --
> B.M. Rocine
>

> Living Word Church
> 6101 Court St. Rd.
> Syracuse, NY 13206
> W:  (315) 437-6744
>


In the case of the Greek parakaleo, "call to one's side" is exactly what it
means. From the context it is clear that it is not the action of calling to
one's side that is important, rather it is the actions taken during when one
is called to another's side that are important. I don't think there is an
example like that in English.

>
What I question is if NXM may have a similar action as does parakaleo?

I have already expressed my disagreement with traditional Indo-European
lexicography, namely that it defines according to form. The Hebrew as
expressed in Tanakh I understand as defining according to action. Even so,
there's so much cross-over between the two that I'd be surprised if as many
as 10% of the lexemes have a significantly different definition depending on
whether defined by action or form.

Then there is the question of translation, which is a different ball of wax.
I am not dealing with that.

What I am asking, what is the action that is referenced by a lexeme? I am
trying to go beyond the best way to translate to an analysis of the thinking
of an ancient Hebrew, or the closest we can get to it. Is this an action of
turning back, expressed in different contexts as repenting, consoling,
turning back from an action, and so forth? Or is there some other basic
understanding that ties them all together?

Karl W. Randolph.


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list