Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] 22nd Psalm & 40th Psalm - Verb Object

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: "David Kimbrough (CLWA)" <dkimbrough AT clwa.org>
  • Cc: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] 22nd Psalm & 40th Psalm - Verb Object
  • Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 10:14:36 -0800

On 02/12/2003 09:52, David Kimbrough (CLWA) wrote:

A different way to look at it is to determine the object of the verbs. Of
the six times that the English word "pierce" occurs in the KJV, the
corresponding verbs are once "daqar", twice "makhats", three times "naqab"
(Ignoring the 22nd Psalm for the moment which would be number seven). In
Strong's these three verbs have listed translations as "pierce", "wound",
"smite", "strike", "run-through", "pierce-through", "shatter", "bore",
"thrust", and "thrust-through". In each case, the object of the verb is a
part of the human body.

Of the 15 times that "karah" derived verbs are used (again ignoring the 22nd
Psalm) , the object is "pit" 9 times, "well" 2 times, "land" 1 time, "grave"
or "sepulcher" 1 time, "ear" 1 time (Psalm 40:6, where "opening the ear"
could also mean "digging out the earwax"), and "evil" 1 time (Proverbs 16:27
"diggeth up evil"). As can be seen, the object of this verb, even when it is
not translated as "dig", is something one could easily "dig". However one
would never "pierce" a well, land, a grave, or a pit (or earwax).

So even if one were to reject the "like a lion" reading, emending the text
to read "karu" would only result in an equally untenable reading, "they dig
my hands and my feet". It would seem to me that if the author wanted to
covey the idea that hands and feet had something sharp thrust through them,
producing a wound, the author had available several verbs that would do so
(daqar, makhats, and naqab).
dkimbrough AT clwa.org

Your logic is faulty. It depends on the premise that this cannot be a unique collocation of verb and noun (or noun and noun). But we already know that this is a unique collocation which occurs nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible - otherwise there would be no problem. And it is easily demonstrated that there are very many unique collocations in the Bible, i.e. individually unique but collectively quite common.

You mention several of these unique collocations in your posting: KRH with "land"; KRH with "grave"; KRH with "ear"; KRH with "evil". In fact, from your statistics, 4 of the 15 occurrences of KRH are with unique objects. Therefore it is quite common to find KRH with a unique object, which is rather a good argument that the questionable word in Psalm 22 IS a form of KRH.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page