Song of Solomon 1:4 -- Clarification
Maurice A. O'Sullivan
mauros at iol.ie
Fri May 17 11:33:06 EDT 2002
At 15:49 17/05/02, I wrote:
>So, I wonder where the NKJV note derives from --- eisegesis, perhaps? it
>wouldn't be the first time <g>
I was a bit heavy-handed about the NKJV in that remark <g> I now realise it
was the work of someone with a less than full understanding of Biblical
Hebrew. Let me explain.
Looking quickly at the text in question, one sees < bak > -- which very
early on in a standard Hebrew grammar will appear in a table of
prepositions + personal suffixes, and will be given the meaning " in you (
f. sg. ) " and the form <baka > for "in you (m.sg.)". However, _much_ later
in these grammars, the matter of "pausal forms" will be covered.
Simplifying horribly, this means that certain marks are placed in the
middle ( roughly ) and the end of verses to mark a halt in the recitation.
These marks are hard to miss, since they are usually in the form of a < ^ >
under the final syllable; however, whenever each of these subdivisions is
longer than normal, supplementary marks ( accents ) are employed to make
further breaks within the already broken segments. Song 1:4 is quite a long
verse, and the < bak > in question has two vertical dots above the < b >.
These dots are named "zakef qaton" and are the tip-off that this is a
shortened form of < baka >.
So, rather than accusing the NKJV note-makers of eisegesis I should, I
suppose, suggest that they hadn't got to the end of the grammar; I'm not
sure that that's any kinder <g>
Maurice A. O'Sullivan [ Bray, Ireland ]
mauros at iol.ie
More information about the b-hebrew