Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] morpho-syntax, was Proverbs 5:16 a declaration or a question?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] morpho-syntax, was Proverbs 5:16 a declaration or a question?
  • Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 07:59:41 -0600

Harold:

I think I see what you claim. In other words, this is a question in the form of a statement, also often done in English, in this case expecting a negative answer. If that is your interpretation, would not the best translation be, “And the people said unto Samuel, ‘Who is he who said, ‘Saul will be king over us?’?’ Allow us that we may cause him to die.”. In this case, that the second half of the question is understood as a question in itself, is not a grammatical feature, but a stylistic use of a statement to carry the idea of a question. Is that what you mean?

HH: No, it is not what I meant. The opponents of Saul originally asked a question:

1Sam. 10:27 But some troublemakers said, "How can this fellow save us?" They despised him and brought him no gifts. But Saul kept silent.

HH: After Saul wins a victory over the Ammonites (1 Sam 11:1-11), the people think back to what these troublemakers said and despise them for saying it. They ask Samuel the identity of these men, quoting the substance or thrust of the original question in a slightly different form, perhaps giving the implication of the original words ("How can this fellow save us?"). So they say to Samuel: "Who is the one who said, 'Should Saul reign over us?' Bring the men so that we may kill them."

It is the words "Should Saul reign over us?" that are an unmarked question in Hebrew. They are to be read as a question. The question "Should Saul reign over us?" was a restatement in slightly different terms of the original question "How can this fellow save us?" We know that biblical narrative is often condensed, and it may be that the troublemakers originally asked both questions. And any rate, the quotation by the people corresponds to the original questioning of the troublemakers.

Even if I understand correctly your meaning for 1 Samuel 11:12, I don’t see the connection between that and Proverbs 5:16. There are other questions that you haven’t addressed.

HH: The example shows that the imperfect verb can be used in unmarked questions in Hebrew. Bryan was saying that the imperfect verb is not clause initial in 1 Sam 11:12 as in Prov 5:16. I realize that but do not know that this distinction disallows the possibility of an unmarked rhetorical question in Prov 5:16. I say this because my observation of unmarked questions is that they are unmarked. It is the context that requires one read them as questions. So I would not expect that any particular marking would have to be present, such as a subject first word order, which is what Bryan seemed to be requiring with use of the imperfect. He is right that a subject-first word order is present in some otherwise unmarked questions.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page