Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] Re: Lexicography - (was Gen. 1:26--Connotation of the beth preposition)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
  • To: "Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] Re: Lexicography - (was Gen. 1:26--Connotation of the beth preposition)
  • Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 03:46:13 -0500


----- Original Message -----
From: Polycarp66 AT aol.com

> In a message dated 1/14/2004 5:15:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> kwrandolph AT email.com writes:
>
> >
> > Every time I studied a foreign language, I studied it with the goal of
> > thinking in that language. I have the same goal while reading Tanakh in
> > B-Hebrew.
> >
> > For example, does the B-prefix mean “with”? I can’t think of one time
> > except in the very narrow context where “with” is used as a sign of
> > instrumentality. As a sign of instrumentality, “with” is occasionally the
> > short, easy way
> > to give an English translation than to give a more awkward but accurate
> > meaning of the Hebrew: but here we are talking English style and not
> > Hebrew
> > meaning.
> >
> ____
>
> There are two points here which interest me. I will mention one and deal
> more with the other. I can't imagine why anyone would ever attempt to
> claim that
> they "think" in an ancient language. I think it patently false since there
> is really no way to carry on a meaningful conversation in the language.
> Modern
> Hebrew isn't Biblical Hebrew.

But I do think in Biblical Hebrew.

No, it is not modern Hebrew. I don’t understand modern Hebrew. As a cognate
language to Biblical Hebrew, I recognize many lexemes, but the grammar and
many uses of lexemes don’t make sense. It’s a foreign language.

Biblical Hebrew, on the other hand, I can read without translating. Often,
when thinking about concepts I read in Tanakh, the thoughts come to my mind
in Hebrew, sometimes only a phrase, sometimes two or three sentences at a
time. It is not carrying on a conversation, it is not even fluent, but it is
thoughts coming to my mind in Hebrew without translating from another
language. If that isn’t “thinking in Hebrew” what is it?

> In regard to lexicography the current trend seems to be toward a fuller
> explication of the word than is evidenced by the use of a gloss. Certainly
> BDB is
> a "translator's dictionary", why shouldn't it be?

If all one wants to do is to make translations, then a translator’s
dictionary is what one wants. If one wants to get a feel for Biblical Hebrew,
a translator’s dictionary can actually be a hindrance. It is better to get a
dictionary that gives the closest equivelant in English, or a short sentence
but not a dissertation, then do what your following paragraph recommends.

> In getting a feel for the
> language (probably what is meant by the phrase "think in the language")
> large
> quantities of text must be consumed. It is only thus that one can come to
> an
> appreaciation of the differences in nuance presented by the use of the same
> words by different authors in different contexts. The rule of truly
> learning a
> language is "Read, READ, then READ SOME MORE."
>
> gfsomsel
>
As for the B-prefix, there are three meanings that I know of:

in, with a broad meaning, including in, among, into
as a sign of instrumentality, “by means of” (even in many places where one
does not so use English, e.g. Deuteronomy 21:14 where silver is used as the
instrument by which the sale is made)
grammatical use, such as XPC (maybe some other verbs as well) has its object
designated by a B-prefix.

(Even this meaning in this posting is a lot longer than I normally would look
for)

Karl W. Randolph.
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page