[b-hebrew] ex 22:8
kwrandolph at gmail.com
Mon Feb 11 13:52:31 EST 2013
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. <nir at ccet.ufrn.br>wrote:
> אֲשֶׁר יַרְשִׁיעֻן אֱלֹהִים, יְשַׁלֵּם שְׁנַיִם לְרֵעֵהוּ. 8
> the problem with the literal text is that the paragogic N in YR$Y(N
> refers to )LHYM in the plural, whereas the singular is used as a rule
> (Ex 20:1,15, 21:13, 23:25 etc etc etc).
The comma isn’t in the original, are you sure it’s in the right place? I
think it isn’t, rather it should precede the )$R.
For some reason )LHYM is a plural noun that often takes a singular verb.
Some say it’s the plural of honor, others the plural of Trinity, I’m not
going to argue that point here, just to note that this plural noun is
understood as a singular and takes the singular verb.
> a non-literal minimal-pair alternative would be to replace
> YR$Y(N ("will condemn (v, 3p, plural)") by YR$Y(W ("will
> condemn (v, 3p, sing) him"), given that the letters N and W
> are similar (in the later hebrew alphabet, and to some degree,
> in the old too). this requires a tiny change in the text but is
> more consistent with the singular tensing for )LHYM. and the
> paragogic N disappears.
This is the Hiphil use, used in the meaning “to account as wicked” as found
also in Deuteronomy 25:1, 1 Kings 8:32, Psalm 37:33, Proverbs 17:15, etc.
The Hiphil is also used in the sense of “to cause to do wickedly” so you
need to watch the contexts, e.g. 1 Samuel 14:47, 2 Chronicles 20:35, etc.
As for the paragogic nun, I’m not sure what to make of it, and I see others
who’ve studied it more aren’t sure either. But given the context, I don’t
see a reason to replace it with a Waw.
> without having the statistics, i would add that the non-literal
> hypothesis would benefit if the paragogic N is mostly preceded by
> a W (as in Ex 20:11, 18:20,26).
> nir cohen
> Karl W. Randolph.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the b-hebrew