[b-hebrew] Joshua 2:1 and 17, Questions

Isaac Fried if at math.bu.edu
Thu May 31 21:50:38 EDT 2007


I admit that  HAZEH is irregular and we would have expected HAZO  
instead. So what? It is contextually crystal clear what it is all  
about. I merely used this opportunity, as I routinely do, to express  
my adamant opinion that reference to a "binyan" is often devoid of  
sense. To say that HILBI$ is is 'hiphil' is like saying that a circle  
is round. The structure of HILBI$ is the root LB$ augmented by the  
two personal pronouns HI, HI, one for the initiator of the act LB$  
and the other for the its beneficiary. This makes sense. How obvious  
everything becomes when you see  HI$BA(TANU as being the composition  
(can it be otherwise?) HI-$BA(-AT-ANU.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On May 31, 2007, at 10:14 AM, Jason Hare wrote:

> Isaac,
> (1) I do not think it "redundant" to mention the binyan of a specific
> form. However, no one mentioned it at all. The question was entirely
> other.
> (2) The question was about the form, which is MASCULINE!
>>>>> Additionally... Is it normal to use a direct object like this
> with להשביע? Should it not employ a lamed-prefix for the  
> indirect
> object? I don't know what's standard in BH.
> Regards,
> Jason
> On 5/31/07, Isaac Fried <if at math.bu.edu> wrote:
>> B-Hebrew LISTIM,
>> HI$BA(TANU consists of the root SB(, 'swear', and the three attached
>> personal pronouns HI, AT, ANU for the contextually obvious actors.
>> Every Hebrew word is but a root plus personal pronouns. Using the
>> term 'hiphil' is a redundancy.
>> Isaac Fried, Boston University
>> On May 30, 2007, at 1:04 PM, Jason Hare wrote:
>>> Dear B-Hebrew,
>>> Last night I read a couple of chapters of Joshua for leisure, and
>>> there are a couple of things that I noticed that I wanted to ask
>>> about:
>>> (1) Although $BW(H /shevu'ah/ [שבועה] is feminine, it is
>>> modified with
>>> the masculine ZH /zeh/ [זה] in 2:17:
>>> נְקִיִּם אֲנַחְנוּ מִשְּׁבֻעָתֵךְ
>>> הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר הִשְׁבַּעְתָּנוּ
>>> Come to think of it, why is H$B(TNW masculine, when it is talking
>>> about Rahab?
>>> (2) Is there any reason why the NIV footnote says that the word ZWNH
>>> /zonah/ [זונה] can be translated as "innkeeper"?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jason
>>> Joplin, MO > Ra'anana (Israel)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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