[b-hebrew] Befuddled by NGD

pporta at oham.net pporta at oham.net
Wed Jul 25 11:30:27 EDT 2007

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Brak 
  To: pporta at oham.net 
  Cc: b-hebrew 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 10:55 AM
  Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Befuddled by NGD

  Still a bit foggy, but not as much as I originally was though - so thanks so far!

  I can understand the idea of something being in front of you, you realize it, and by explaining it you cause them to realize it. But still something seems to be missing. For example: why use this word to express "telling" instead of )MR

  Because "amar" is a quite different thing than "higid". 
  In 'amar' there is the sense of 'utter', 'say words'. While in 'higid' we have the much deeper meaning of 'explain', 'give details', 'tell', 'make every attempt to cause other/s understand what one is saying'...

  One says 'It is raining' and nothing else.  ------- this is "amar"
   And another explains how is rain originated, that there are many types of rain, that rain comes ultimately from sea waters through the heath of sun which causes it to become clouds...... and finally it falls on the earth in the "rain"... That rain is necessary but can be very hamful as well... --- this is 'higid'.

  Semantically these two verbs ('amar' and 'higid') are not the same thing though they have something in common: to achieve both one must usually use  his mouth.

  And then how do you go from "in front" to "opposite".
  Before I thought that the main idea was opposite, and if something is on the opposite side of a table as you are then they are in front of you - so to me that made sense. But just because something is in front of you doesn't mean that its on the opposite side of the table from you - it could be on the same side.

  Yes. But then, Brak, we must realize that  it is "beside (me, us...)" and not 'opposite'. 'Opposite' and 'in front of' are, in some respects, synonimous. 
  Pere Porta

  Thanks for the help so far, but I'm still not quite getting it.

  John Steven

  "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you behave."
  -Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen.

  pporta at oham.net wrote: 
  Yes. But my question is how are these related?
  How does the concept of "opposite" relate to the concept of "to tell"?


  Let us take for preposition NGD the meaning "in front of".
  If you have something in front of you (say a car, a dog or a rose), usually you are seeing it as it really is (though we do not see the intimate nature of things), so that its shape, colour, size and so on are clear for you. 
  So a thing that is in front of someone is conspicuous for him (the seer).

  Now, how do we do to make something to be conspicuous, to be clear (to others)?  Just by explaining, declaring, telling others about it...

  Is this explanation enough?  Do you feel some step, some ring of the chain is lacking here?


  pporta at oham.net wrote: 
I have a question.

Sometimes NGD is translated as "against" or "opposite" or "in front", to
which I can see the relationship between.
But other times it's translated as "tell" or "declare".

I don't see the common link between the idea of "opposite" and "telling".
Can someone please help me understand the relationship between these 

As a preposition, NGD means "against", "opposite", "in front of"...
But as a verb, NGD means "to be conspicuous". Then the Hiph'il form of verb 
NGD, which in its basic form is HGYD (look at Mi 6:8), means "to cause to be 
conspicuous" ie "to declare", "to explain", "to tell".


b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org

b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list