Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: [b-hebrew] Dahood on `ecah, derek, mow$ab

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Trevor Peterson <06PETERSON AT cua.edu>
  • To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] Dahood on `ecah, derek, mow$ab
  • Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 07:18:32 -0400

>===== Original Message From "B. M. Rocine" <brocine AT twcny.rr.com> =====
>"Barely snuck" is over-stating the case. Thanks for calling me on that.
>HALOT does cite Dahood on gloss #7 ? derek meaning "strength, power." It
>does not mention Ps. 1:1 or admit the possibility "seat of power."

Well, like I said, I think there's good reason to doubt his reading, and even
he admits that the meaning of "seat of power" is not often acknowledged by
Ugaritic scholars. Unlike the Sheffield dictionary, HALOT is trying to
balance
inclusion of proposals with a critical eye toward their validity. I think
it's
bad practice to assume that every use of a word will be cited in the
dictionary wherever it could possibly fit. Generally, lexicographers have to
be selective, and they're going to present their best scholarly judgment
(along with reasonable representation of other viable opinions). If someone
is
dissatisfied with their recommendation for what this particular instance
means, the #7 entry is there to prompt further study. At this point, the
bibliographic value of a good lexicon becomes apparent, because it ought to
(and in this case does) point the user to other resources that have addressed
a particular issue.
>
[snipped]
>>
>> Is it having a political nuance if it happens to be a seat of someone in
>> a political position? I don't quite get where this argument is supposed
>> to take us.
>>
>
>Job 29:7 implies (albeit tenuously) a technical meaning for mow$ab, for
>example. The idea is that in Ps 1:1 council || assembly || session is a
>tighter parallelism than counsel || way || seat.

But is the use in Job 29:7 political because of moshav or because this moshav
is in the city gate? My point is that, just because it's possible to refer to
the chair of the Senate Finance Committee, doesn't have any effect on what I
mean when I refer to my wife's chair in the living room. It's still a chair,
and it requires context to specify that it is a position of authority rather
than a physical object. If the contextual support is significantly weakened
by
rejecting Dahood's proposed meaning for DRK, then it seems like anyone who's
not convinced by his argument on that point would have good reason to use
more
neutral terms for the rest.

Trevor Peterson
CUA/Semitics





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page