[b-hebrew] Psa 1,1f

David Steinberg david.l.steinberg at rogers.com
Mon Mar 12 08:48:50 EDT 2012


Nb. The preterite can also be used in a past-perfect sense.  See 
Observations on Some Aspects of the Use of Tenses in Psalms 
<http://www.adath-shalom.ca/history_of_hebrew_psalmsTOC.pdf> ( 
http://www.adath-shalom.ca/history_of_hebrew_psalmsTOC.pdf ).

David Steinberg

On 11/03/2012 12:00 PM, b-hebrew-request at lists.ibiblio.org wrote:
> Send b-hebrew mailing list submissions to
> 	b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	b-hebrew-request at lists.ibiblio.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	b-hebrew-owner at lists.ibiblio.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of b-hebrew digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>     1. Re: Psa 1,1f (George Athas)
>     2. Re: The Name "Haran" (rob acosta)
>     3. Re: The Name "Haran" (jimstinehart at aol.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 06:15:00 +0000
> From: George Athas<George.Athas at moore.edu.au>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Psa 1,1f
> To: B-Hebrew<b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID:<CB828A42.19028%george.athas at moore.edu.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>
> A few issues here:
>
> Firstly, Wayyiqtol is not not the only way for referring to the past. Qatal can also be used. However, I would argue that even calling these conjugations as past referring is a misunderstanding of the grammar.
>
> Karl argued that Hebrew is not marked for aspect, but then defined this as an axis of completed/uncompleted action. That, however, is not so much 'aspect' as it is 'Aktionsart'.
>
> Todd did raise the issue of clause initial verbs, which is an important consideration. A negated verb can never be clause initial, because the negation must precede it. So there is a pragmatic consideration here. But even if we had three positive assertions being made in Ps 1.1, we would not get wayyqitol verbs, because they would each produce narrative momentum. This is not what the verse is trying to do, though. The use of Qatal verbs in this clause is for the statement of simple fact: a man who has not walked? stood? or sat? This is just what the Qatal does: state an action as a simple fact.
>
> The use of Yiqtol in 1.2 is simply to indicate the generality of the righteous man's practice. These are actions that occur many times, and are indicative of the past, as well as implying intention for the future.
>
>
> GEORGE ATHAS
> Director of Postgraduate Studies,
> Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)
> Sydney, Australia
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 01:15:07 -0600
> From: rob acosta<robacosta at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] The Name "Haran"
> To:<b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID:<SNT120-W22B53F08D10F6BC076B14BBB5A0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
>
> Mr Stinehart:
>
>      As usual your response to Mr Chavous was filled with misinformation. We've covered this ground many times before, obviously to no avail, but as briefly as possible let me offer this recap of real facts versus your assertions for the benefit of those who are non students of  the Amarna period.
>
>     1.Regarding your many references to Amarna Letter 155 as support for your claim of the Great Syrian War in Year14 and Abimilek's relationship with Abraham one must read the ENTIRE letter, but you focus on only Abimilek's reference to Meritaten and the water crisis faced by Tyre.
>
>      According to Mr K.A. Kitchen ( Whom you've made clear whose conclusions you dismiss) and many others this was Abimilek's FINAL letter to Pharaoh and could NOT have been written LATER than Year 14 but possibly years earlier. At the end Abimilek writes:
> "Behold, I go away with all thy ships and my whole city" after Zimredda's cut off of access to three specific powerful springs still there today (not wells, ) made life on Tyre impossible.
>      He is never heard from again. This wasn't some "over the top" missive but a final desperate message.
>
>      2. Again, according to Mr Kitchen ("Suppiluliumas and the Amarna Pharaohs "page 30) Abimilek's last letter(EA155) was written about TWO YEARS  AFTER the Great Syrian War. As you now claim EA 155 was written in Year 13 (A month ago you said Year 14)and it is your oft stated idea the Great Syrian War  took place in Year 14  (the foundation for your entire theory,) your new estimate of when EA 155 was written now places the Syrian War in Year 11 or 12.
>      You have created a contradiction to your own theory.
>
>     3. You wrote: "There is a split in scholarly opinion as to whether Year 14 or Year 12 is the historical date of that disastrous war, " Please name a scholar, any scholar, who places the Great War in Year 14. I can find no one, but it is possible I missed someone so please enlighten me. Estimates I've read range from as early as Year 5 to Year12 which is the most commonly agreed upon. Again, by the time EA 155 is written , the war is about 2 years in the past and Abimilek has already reported ( as per instruction from Pharaoh)on the Great War and a number of events known to have taken places after the war was over in earlier letters.
>     Are you claiming Mr Kitchen and many others are wrong in stating EA 155 is  Abimilek's last letter?
>
>     4. Mr Kitchen includes Cyril Aldred's 11 Year co regency theory amongst the various theories for the year of the Great Syrian War and concludes, in after offering much detail,  if Mr Aldred's theory is followed, the many events in the Amarna letters makes it impossibe for that war to have taken place either before or after Year 12.
> In other words an 11 Year co regency, which you subscribe to,  leaves only Year 12 as the only possible year for the Great Syrian War. In short, you adhere to a co regency theory that alone completely undermines your theory of the Great Syrian war taking place in Year 14.
>
>     We now have two of of your favorite references, EA 155 and Aldred that actually undermine your theory.
>
>     Any argument you may have is with Mr Kitchen or Mr Aldred, not with me. I am just the messenger and I have read all your arguments before.
>
> Bottom line is there is a great chasm between your assertions and the conclusions of known and respected scholars such as Mr Kitchen.
>
>   No one can go to a library or online and read Kitchen or Redford of Campbell or anyone else and hope to find a single one of their conclusions that lend credence to your assertions regarding Aziru, Abimilek or anyone else. This is unfortunate.
> We should be able to trust SOME of the many things you assert is based on sound research supported by scholars, but this is rarely the case.
>
>
> Rob Acosta
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>    		 	   		
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 08:56:28 -0400 (EDT)
> From: jimstinehart at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] The Name "Haran"
> To: robacosta at hotmail.com, b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID:<8CECD9D824588EE-1AA0-3D3 at webmail-d143.sysops.aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> Rob:
>
> Scholars split between Year 14 and Year 12 as the date of the Great Syrian War in western Syria, with the majority view since 1990 probably being Year 14.  K.A. Kitchen, writing in the early 1960s, tentatively suggested Year 12, but there are good reasons why his dating is often rejected (as is his peculiar 8-year co-regency theory, which no one accepts).  Much of Year 12 at Amarna was spent having a grand durbar, which was a foreign tribute festival, and having elaborate, gorgeous portrayals of that durbar done in two nobles? rock tombs at Amarna.  It?s hard to believe that these triumphalist portrayals of foreign tribute were being done at Amarna precisely when Suppiluliuma was conquering all of northern Syria in Year 12!
>
> One major aspect of Amarna Letter EA 155 that you cite is almost certainly a mistranslation.  "Behold, I go away with all thy ships and my whole city" is said to apply to both Abimelek and Zimredda, but there?s no way that those rival princelings in Lebanon were both fleeing.  Wm. Moran?s later translation is now preferred, which sees this phrase as the princelings preparing boats for Egypt, not as ?going away? with their ships.
>
> The bottom line is that I go with the many scholars who favor a Year 14 date for the Great Syrian War in western Syria, which matches Genesis 14: 5 perfectly, rather than following Kitchen?s old, outdated view from the early 1960s:
>
> (1)  ?[T]he Great Syrian campaign falls at the latest in years 14/15, but conceivably as early as year 12?.?  Wm. J. Murnane, ?The Road to Kadesh? (1990), p. 126.
>
> (2)  ?At some point in the reign, the Hittite King, Suppiluliuma, conducted a major campaign in north Syria, seizing Egyptian vassal states.  This is probably to be dated between years 12 and 14 of Akhenaten?s reign.?  Robert Morkot, ?Historical Dictionary of Ancient Egyptian Warfare? (2003), p. 5.
>
> The following statement of yours is peculiar:  ?Please name a scholar,
> any scholar, who places the Great War in Year 14. I can find no one, but it is
> possible I missed someone so please enlighten me.?  See Murnane and Morkot quoted above.
>
> Jim Stinehart
> Evanston, Illinois
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> End of b-hebrew Digest, Vol 111, Issue 7
> ****************************************
>


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list