[b-hebrew] Isaiah 53:8
Harold R. Holmyard III
hholmyard at ont.com
Fri May 28 12:55:02 EDT 2004
>With this attitude, how can you disagree with Rolf?
HH: It's not an attitude. It's an awareness of the subtlety of
meanings that words carry and a need to reflect these accurately in
> He is saying essentially
the same thing: that there are waw's, which do not reverse the tense.
HH: I'm talking about MiN. He's talking about waw and the imperfect.
Let's not confuse things. It's not the same issue. Rolf's issue has
to do with the development of the verb historically and whether what
we see in the text actually reflects two different verbal
developments which now exhibit the same form. It is a detailed matter
involving the use of verbs in Ugaritic and elsewhere, it is found in
the grammars under treatment of the imperfect verb, and it is not
closely related to what I am talking about.
HH: What I'm talking about is that prepositions developed numerous
functions in the Hebrew language. Even if all those functions could
be attributed to a single lexeme in Hebrew, when a transfer of the
functions is made into English, a single lexeme does not suffice to
express them all accurately. You are not a native English speaker,
but I assume the same would be the case with the Slavic languages.
>At least, you may agree that my translation is statistically more probable
>than yours, since it relies on the much more common meaning. And I would
>agree that your translation better conforms to the Christian doctrine.
HH: It has little or nothing to do with the Christian doctrine.
Translation of Hebrew prepositions does not proceed on the basis of
favoring a particular rendering. It proceeds by finding the word that
best expresses the idea conveyed by the Hebrew word. So if the word
that does that best is "by," then that is fine. As I have said
before, the lexicon shows many places where immediate or efficient
cause is the idea of MiN.
More information about the b-hebrew