[b-hebrew] translations of important quotes using Rolf's ideas

Lisbeth S. Fried lizfried at umich.edu
Mon Apr 9 11:20:51 EDT 2007

How would this passage be translated if there were no presuppositions? If
all the yiqtols and waqatals were translated as future, and all the qatals
as past?
> 52:13 Look! My servant will act with insight (YIQTOL). He will certainly
> high
> (YIQTOL) and elevated (WEQATAL) and exalted (WEQATAL) very much.
> 52:14 Just as many were appalled (QATAL) at him - so disfigured is his
> appearance more than that of any other man, and his form more than that of
> mankind -
> 52:15 likewise he will startle (YIQTOL) many nations. Because of him kings
> will shut (YIQTOL) their mouth.  For what had not been recounted (QATAL)
> them, they saw (QATAL), and to what they had not heard (QATAL)
> they attended (QATAL).
> 53:1 Who believed (QATAL) our message?  And to whom has the arm of JHWH
> be revealed (QATAL)?
> 53:2 He has come up (WAYYIQTOL) before him like a tender shoot, like a
> out of dry ground. He does not have a stately form nor any splendor
> cl.). We will see him (WEYIQTOL), but he will not have an appearance that
> should desire him (WEQATAL).
> 53:3  He is despised (participle) and avoided by men, a man of pain,
> who was familiar (passive participle) with sickness. He was like one from
> whom men hide their faces, a despised one, who we did not esteem (QATAL).
> 53:4 Surely, our sicknesses are what he carried (QATAL) , and our pains
> are what he bore (QATAL).  But as for ourselves, we considered
> (QATAL) him as plagued, stricken by God and afflicted.
> 53:5 Yes, he is being pierced (participle) for our transgressions and is
being crushed
> (participle) for our sins. The punishment meant for our peace is on him
> (nominal cl.). And because of his wounds we were healed (QATAL).
> 53:6 Like sheep we wandered about (QATAL), each of us turned (QATAL) to
> own way. But YHWH himself let our sin strike him (QATAL).
> 53:7 He was oppressed (QATAL) and is afflicted (participle), but he will
> not open (YIQTOL) his mouth. like a sheep to the slaughtering he will be
> (YIQTOL), and like an ewe before her sheares became mute (QATAL), he
> will not open (YIQTOL) his mouth.
> 53:8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away (QATAL). But who will
> consider (YIQTOL) his decendants when he was cut off (QATAL) from the land
> the living?  It is because of the transgression of my people that he is
> the stroke (nominal cl.).
> 53:9 He was assigned (WAYYIQTOL) his grave with the wicked ones, and with
> rich in his death, though he had done (QATAL) no violence, and there was
> deception in his mouth (nominal cl.).
> 53:10 But YHWH himself took delight (QATAL) in crushing him, and
> caused him to suffer (QATAL). When he will give (YIQTOL) his soul as a
> offering, he will see (YIQTOL) his offspring and will prolong (YIQTOL) his
> and the delight of YHWH will prosper (YIQTOL) in his hand.
> 53:11 After the suffering of his soul he will look (YIQTOL) and will be
> (YIQTOL). By his knowledge, the righteous one, my servant, wil justify
> (YIQTOL) many people, and their sins he himself will bear (YIQTOL).
> 53:12 For that reason I will give him a portion (YIQTOL) among the many,
> with the mighty ones he will divide (YIQTOL)  the spoil.  Because he had
> let his soul be poured out (QATAL)  to death, and had let himself be
> counted (QATAL) among transgressors.  He himself carried (QATAL) the sins
> of many people, and he will make intercession (YIQTOL) for the
> transgressors.
I used Rolf's translation, but translated the verbs without any
presuppositions, as if it were normal prose, with yiqtols and waqatols
always future, and qatals always past.
The ONLY reason not to do this, as far as I can see,  is the desire to
equate the subject with Jesus.
Liz Fried
> Because I chose a future setting, most of the verbs have been translated
> future. If the setting is viewed as past, the same verbs would have been
> translated by past, or sometimes by perefect.  This means that according
> my system, the conjugations have very little to tell us about the temporal
> references of the verbs.  The temporal references must be construed on the
> basis of the context.  The traditional way of translation leads the reader
> through a confusing zig-zag journey, QATALs and WAYYIQTOLs are translated
> past or perfect and YIQTOLs and WEQATALs by future. For example, look at
> two last clauses of 53:12, where we find one QATAL and one YIQTOL. Many
> modern translations give these two verbs the same temporal reference
> (perhaps in most cases past reference).  But if a QATAL and a YIQTOL can
> have past reference in these two clauses, why cannot the same be true
> throughout the whole text?
> More important than the conjugations are the lexical meaning/Aktionsart of
> the verbs, the verb stems and the word order. for example, in 53:12 I
> translate a Hiphil QATAL by "he let his soul be poured out"  and a Niphal
> QATAL in a reflexive way (the old meaning of Niphal) by "will let himself
> counted". In 53:6 waw+YHWH occur before the verb, and I take this as
> emphasizing the subject. Therefore I translate "YHWH himself".
> The examples above relates particularly to the choice of tenses in the
> target language, but there are several other choices that can be
> by my conclusions.
> Best regards
> Rolf Furuli
> University of Oslo
> 52:13 "certainly" - sentence initial YIQTOL,
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Miller" <smille10 at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 2:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Verbs
> > Rolf,
> > Along with James Reed, I also would very much like to hear the answer to
> > Hayyim's question. Could you give us 5 example verses? This would be
> > more meaningful to me than the current discussion. Thank you.
> > -Steve Miller
> > Detroit
> >
> > Very interesting indeed.  Can you give us an example of a verse which
> > would
> > be translated differently and thereby change our understanding of what
> > intends to tell us?
> > Hayyim
> >
> > In a message dated 7/25/2005 4:37:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> > furuli at online.no writes:
> >
> > My  conclusions are radical indeed, because they in a way turn  of
> > verb grammar upside down. An acceptance of the conclusions would have a
> > great
> > impact on  Bible translation, because thousands of verbs in modern
> > translations are in
> > need of re-translation.  This relates  particularly to the temporal
> > references
> > of verbs.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:b-hebrew-
> > bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of kenneth greifer
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 1:00 PM
> > To: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> > Subject: [b-hebrew] translations of important quotes using Rolf's ideas
> >
> >
> > A few times in this debate about Rolf's work, I have read that his ideas
> > change how Hebrew is translated, and that this could affect people's
> > religious beliefs. Can anyone give any examples of important quotes that
> > would be translated differently using his ideas, so I can see what the
> > difference is.
> >
> > Kenneth Greifer
> > USA
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Live Search Maps - find all the local information you need, right when
> > need it.
> > http://maps.live.com/?icid=wlmtag2&FOR M=MGAC01
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> _______________________________________________
> 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