[b-hebrew] Ex Pu'ah

Peter Kirk peterkirk at qaya.org
Thu Aug 26 16:50:38 EDT 2004


On 26/08/2004 20:32, MarianneLuban at aol.com wrote:

> ...
>
>
>I am not tossing any missiles.  I just gave views.  The Bible dictionary in 
>which I looked up "Pu'ah" was compiled by James P. Boyd, hopefully an expert.  
>He treats the Pu'ah of Exodus and the Puah of Judges as the same name. ...
>

This is sufficient to prove that he is not an expert, indeed that he 
hasn't even looked at the Hebrew text. You don't get scholarship for 
$3.99 (which I found it offered for); that's the price of a reprint of a 
second rate 19th century work (although I wasn't actually able to 
confirm that this is the original date of this work).

>... What 
>his rationale for this is and why he gives the meaning as "mouth", he does not 
>say.  I am as puzzled at this as anyone.  But I can read Hebrew quite well and 
>can contribute.  Ask "Noam".  About a month ago he posed a question on a 
>Hebrew term and I gave him a private answer.  The only reason I answered privately 
>is because I was brand new to the list and had not yet figured out that to 
>respond to a post, one needs to hit "reply all" instead of just "reply" as with 
>the Yahoo groups.  If "Noam" remembers, perhaps he can attest that my answer 
>was the same as that of the majority he received onlist.  I studied Hebrew 
>before I ever cracked open an Egyptian grammar.  It is not a language I am "in no 
>position" to comment on.  However, at this point my expertise in Egyptian is 
>far greater than in Biblical Hebrew--that is true.  But you don't know me well 
>enough to be able to make any judgments on what I am fit to comment upon--or 
>not. ...
>

Fair enough. I would just suggest that if you were a true Hebrew expert 
you would not have confused two quite different Hebrew names just 
because they have the same English transliteration - although we can all 
make mistakes of course. I will accept this as a mistake, and that your 
Hebrew is in fact reasonably good. And I don't claim too much of mine.

>... If my sources are not good enough for you, perhaps it is you who has a 
>source that explains the meaning of Pu'ah and gives a rationale that is 
>unempeachable.
>  
>

No, I don't. There are no unimpeachable sources for the meanings of 
Hebrew names as a lot must be speculative. One thing that is necessary, 
however, is to work from the Hebrew spelling, and not from the English 
as Boyd seems to.

-- 
Peter Kirk
peter at qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/





More information about the b-hebrew mailing list