[b-hebrew] Definite Article 7:14
if at math.bu.edu
Wed Jul 11 01:22:05 EDT 2007
I admire your tenacity on being so completely and wholeheartedly on
the the-ists side, defending this doctrine so valiantly and
persistently against the repeated onslaught of the a-ists. But to me
this the/a argument is vain. It is crystal clear that HA-(ALMAH is in
reference to a well known [very well known, absolutely well known?]
notable person in Jerusalem at the time Isaiah spoke these words, and
therefore should be translated as the-(ALMAH. Those who want to
translate it, for whatever reason, as an-(ALMAH have the right to do
so. It is their choice.
I am uneasy about lofty terminology and am not sure about this
business of the "partial determinant of pronouns". In my opinion the
entire Hebrew language consists of roots [compounds themselves of
simpler single-literal roots] and personal pronouns, or identity
markers. Thus HA- is HI-, 'she'. I see the issue of the "definite
article" is an example of terminology assuming a life of its own---of
the golem "definite" turning against its own creator.
I find it noteworthy that the English personal pronoun 'she' is
considered a descendent of the ancients words 'so' and 'he', so
similar to the Hebrew ZEH and HA- or HI. Also in Hebrew the personal
pronoun HI is apparently but a variant of XI or XAYI, 'alive'.
As to (ALMAH, I hold it possible that it evolved from a connotation
for a young woman to an honorary title, the same way the English word
queen evolved from the base word gune---wife. After all (ALMAH
contains an L for elevation and an M for massivity, two letters that
form also the awe inspiring word (OLAM.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
On Jul 10, 2007, at 8:55 PM, JoeWallack at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 7/8/2007 7:53:32 PM Central Daylight Time,
> if at math.bu.edu writes:
> I am afraid that the discussion is vague and aimless because of the
> lack for a clear criterion for what is meant by "definite". Is
> there a test for definiteness? and what does "indefinite" mean? One
> may argue that definiteness is knowledge, but knowledge comes by
> degrees, and is often imperfect.
> Isaac Fried, Boston University
> You and I probably wouldn't get anywhere trying to discuss the use
> of the Hebrew definite article in 7:14 because we don't agree on
> what the Hebrew definite article is. If I understand you correctly
> (which I may very well not) what everyone else here is calling the
> Hebrew definite article you are calling a partial determinant of
> pronouns. If my understanding is correct I do find your position
> Joseph Wallack
> See what's free at AOL.com.
More information about the b-hebrew