[b-hebrew] Proverbs 5:16 - a declaration or a question ?

Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Fri Dec 31 07:25:13 EST 2004

Dear Peter,

>>HH: There is no problem with the verb meaning "be dispersed." It is 
>>a metonymy. ...
>I agree that there is a metonymy or extended sense of the verb.

HH: I meant that there was a metonymy with the noun "springs." The 
springs themselves are not dispersed. it is the water from the 
springs that is. So "springs" are put for what they produce, water.

>>Should your springs overflow in the streets,
>Correct, maybe, but not they don't necessarily recognise a metonymy. 
>In BDB there are two different roots PWC, one glossed as "be 
>dispersed, scattered", and the other as "flow, overflow", with this 
>verse and Zec 1:17 given as examples. But then this is more likely 
>an extended sense than a separate root.

HH: Right, it does look like an extended sense, even though BDB lists 
it as a separate root. If water is dispersed, it normally flows. If 
blessings "are scattered abroad" ( a meaning for PWC 1), we can say 
that they flow.

>>The HCSB has:
>>Should your springs flow in the streets.
>The same applies here. Presumably the question mark has been dropped.

HH: That's my mistake. The HCSB sentence ends in a question mark. I 
should have used a comma, as I did with the NIV line above.

					Harold Holmyard

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list