[b-hebrew] Judges 16:30 - Verb with no use, MY PROBLEM!

kgraham0938 at comcast.net kgraham0938 at comcast.net
Thu Oct 5 12:57:34 EDT 2006


Hey Karl, I hope I am not being stubborn or bothering you all but when you say: "This is not a case of nakedness vs. clothed, rather between being and non-being."

Response: But I think the word 'came' as in 'They came into being naked."sounds like something has changed.  Sort of like if I said "and I became ill."  Signals that at one time I was not ill but something changed and now I am ill.  Or even in the biblical text when the word of God 'hayah' someone.  It comes to them meaning that it at one time was not there and now is.  It just seems to me that the author of Genesis is simply making a statement about the two.  "They were naked."

You go on to say:What is the subject of YHYW? I read it as YMYM $LW$H three days. There  was so much booty that "it became three days" they were plundering the  booty. 

Response: But it seems like you have 'hayah' doing double duty.  Three days is the subject but in your translation you use a null subject 'it.'  'It' is the subject of your translation, and then you have 'became' as the verb which I assume is 'hayah' but then you have 'they were plundering.'  Which seems like you linked hayah to the participle as well.

In my opinion, it seems best to take the participle as a predicate to hayah.  For three days they were plundering.

--
Kelton Graham 
KGRAHAM0938 at comcast.net

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph at gmail.com> 

> Kelton: 
> 
> On 10/5/06, kgraham0938 at comcast.net wrote: 
> > 
> > So that is how I have always seen it, not to be say this is a trump card or 
> anything but just my understanding of it and where it came from. And with 
> regards to Gen 2:25 when you said "they came into a state of being naked." 
> Were'nt they already naked? It does not seems to me that they were becoming 
> nake but already naked. 
> 
> This is not a case of nakedness vs. clothed, rather between being and non-being. 
> 
> > ... Another example I'd like to get your opinion on is 2 Chr 20:25. 
> > 
> > vayih:yw yamiym $:lo$h boz:ziym , it looks to me that the verb is functioning 
> more like a past progressive 'were plundering.' What are your thoughts? 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Kelton Graham 
> > KGRAHAM0938 at comcast.net 
> 
> What is the subject of YHYW? I read it as YMYM $LW$H three days. There 
> was so much booty that "it became three days" they were plundering the 
> booty. 
> 
> Karl W. Randolph. 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list