[b-hebrew] Relevance Theory & Hebrew Semantics

kwrandolph at email.com kwrandolph at email.com
Tue Aug 17 16:15:31 EDT 2004


Exodus 32:4 may not be the best verse to use, as it can be read a few different ways.

For example, is WYCR ויצר from CWR צור, or is this a case where the leading yod of a peh-yod verb  [ YCR יצר ] was swallowed up by the yod indicating the imperfective? The latter happened often enough that one cannot rule it out.

Looking at the tool used in the fashioning of the idol, XR+ חרט, which is an engraving tool used in metal work and in making tooled leather objects. Such a tool would be used for working gold leaf or gold plating onto a base material.

Looking at the finished object, MSKH מסכה, is that from the root SWK סוך meaning pouring out as in casting, or from SKK סכך having the idea of overlaying?

Thus, one possible reading is “And he [Aaron] took it [the gold] from their hand and fashioned it with an engraving tool and he made it a [gold] plated calf, 
” Is there anything difficult about that reading grammatically [other than the Masoretes having a different reading]? It makes sense of verse 20 where it is burned, assuming the base material being wood.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "C. Stirling Bartholomew" <jacksonpollock at earthlink.net>
> Peter,

> My goal is to develop a working model for defining cognitive frames.
> Relevance Theory looks like it might significantly contribute to the
> theoretical structure for a project of this nature, so I am taking a look at
> it. As a test case the verb CWR (Ex. 32:4) provides a problem challenging
> enough to smoke out weakness in the theoretical model.
> My intent wasn't to be negative about RT. I asked pointed questions just to
> get people talking and the responses so far have been very helpful.
> Thanks,
> Clay Bartholomew 
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list