bereshit and mereshit.
mc2499 at mclink.it
Sun Mar 17 08:06:54 EST 2002
This is the part of Rashi's comment as cited by
Liz that I think you must be referring to:
>>Rashi points out that when clauses begin
>>with a noun, and are SVO, then they should be translated as in
>>the pluperfect. They express an action that occurs at that time or
>>before that time.
And I basically agree with this.
>I trust you can see the difference between what Liz reports of Rashi's
>position here and what you have been suggesting as possibilities. Rashi
>does state, as have you, that the first action of creation reported here is
>in v. 3. Most, if not all, would agree with that. This makes vv 1-2
>introduction, setting the stage as it were.
And this has been my position.
>But treating the SVO clauses in
>v. 2 as pluperfects is a significant degree different from making them
>dependent clauses, all tied together in one lump with BARA 'LHYM in verse 1,
>and subordinant to the action of verse 3.
As I have said, there are at least two approaches to the
subordination by br'$yt. I see vv 1-2 as an introduction,
though I have subordinated it to the first recorded act
mentioned in the text. If I haven't put across the idea
that we are dealing with an introduction, then it's a
problem of my communicative skills on the matter.
More information about the b-hebrew