[b-hebrew] Definite Article 7:14 - HNH
if at math.bu.edu
Wed Jul 25 00:20:14 EDT 2007
1. The word HINEH = HI-NA-HI consists of the two personal pronouns,
or identity markers, HI-HI for the thing referred to, and the Hebrew
existence marker N = AN-NA, corresponding to the English substantives
on-in. Thus HINEH declares that a thing exists, or is soon to
materialize [and therefore for the moment is just imagined]. It is
not 'behold' nor 'here is' in the locative sense, but only in the
existential sense. The related word HENAH means 'to me'.
2. The function of the hebrew HA- [which is in my opinion the
personal pronoun HI = HU] is to reference a significant, non-
arbitrary or non-random person. It is so with HA-PALIT, HA-MELIC, HA-
NA(AR. This non-randomness can circumstantially or contextually rise
to the top level of an absolute and categorically certain
identification. Here and now HA-NASI) is none other than George
3. HARAH is a state.
4. You agree that HINEH HA-MALKAH HARAH would have been obvious, but
of course people can always be found who believe that HA-MALKAH is
Isaac Fried, Boston University
On Jul 21, 2007, at 11:46 AM, JoeWallack at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 7/18/2007 5:46:05 PM Central Daylight Time,
> if at math.bu.edu writes:
> 1. I agree with Harold that HINEH does not require physical
> I agree too.
> 2. The Hebrew "definite article" does not require the defined to be
> mentioned earlier in the discourse if he is known otherwise.
> Agreed. The DA can create reasonable grounds all by itself. It's
> what it
> 3. Virgin is a theological code word that has no correspondence in
> Hebrew bible, and hence the discussion (ALMAH/virgin is vain.
> I have purposely avoided ThAlmah and BetaLouise here as it just
> from the Definite Article issue.
> 4. Things would look and sound much better if you replace
> "definite article"
> by "non-arbitrary article".
> Your point is that arbitrary/random is the more common usage and
> should be the standard for definitions?
> 5. The fact that the prophet said HA-(ALMAH [like saying HA-
> MALKAH] implies
> that he was referring to a known person. The rest is theology.
> While I agree and am interested in your opinion I'm not that
> interested in
> unsupported assertions and I have Faith that those on the other
> side here are
> even less interested in unsupported assertions. On the other hand,
> I have to
> confess that until relatively recently, translation issues with
> context like this one, have traditionally been determined by how
> many hold a
> certain position and how loudly they do so, as opposed to solely
> Joseph Wallack
> ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-
> new AOL at
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the b-hebrew