[b-hebrew] Num. 32:42

Vadim Cherny him at vadimcherny.org
Sun Aug 3 07:46:53 EDT 2008


Could it be that hey in lah is similar to hey in Shulamita from the Song 
of Songs?
She's ha-Shulamita, not a proper name but "the one who belongs to 
Shlomo" with hey relating the direction-like (aspiring) possession.

Vadim Cherny

---

Consider the difference between v.v. 41 and 42: ethen vs. lah. To name 
villages, the author uses preposition ethen. IMO, hey in lah is 
destinative suffix (like in baita) rather than feminine. 32:42 goes 
about multiple objects, so single feminine lah is unlikely. IMO, 
bnoteiha refers to built-up area rather than strictly villages, thus 
destinative suffix. Just a guess for the lack of a better explanation.

Vadim Cherny

Yigal Levin wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Does anyone have any idea why there is no mappiq in the last letter of the word LH, third word from last in Num. 32:42? The mappiq is missing in both BHS and in the Aleppo-based Breuer prints. 
>
>
> Yigal Levin
>   







More information about the b-hebrew mailing list