Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: Literal translation of Dan 11:32

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Lewis Reich" <LBR AT sprynet.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: RE: Literal translation of Dan 11:32
  • Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 08:44:21 -0400


On 25 Sep 98, at 15:17, Paul Zellmer wrote:

> Lewis,
>
> I'm not sure you're understanding the question. I'm absolutely certain
> that Lee realizes that (aM is normally a collective noun. I know I
> realized that with my response to the original question. But, if it is a
> collective, why is it only *grammatically* treated as a collective in the
> 3ms pronominal suffix. All the other referents are 3mp (i.e., the
> participle and the two yiqtols). How do you propose we explain the
> plurals?

You're quite right - Lee kindly wrote me off-list, and I
realized that I missed that difficulty in the verse.

Interestingly, this is not the only verse where (aM is
treated both as plural and as singular. A cursory search
turned up the following examples in Exodus:

Ex. 4:31 - WaYYa):aM"N Hf(fM WaYYi$:M:(W.

Ex. 12:27 - WaYiQoD Hf(fM WaYiY$:TaX:aWW.

Ex. 16:4 - W:YfCf) Hf(fM W:LfQ:+W.

Ex. 17:2 - WaYYfReB Ha(aM (iM Mo$eH WaYYo(M:RW.

(and similarly Ex. 20:15; Ex. 33:4; Ex. 33:10; Lev. 11:32;
Num. 20:3; Num. 21:7; Num. 25:2; Josh. 6:20; Josh 24:16;
Josh. 24:21; Judges 9:42; Judges 20:22; Judges 21:2;
1 Samuel 4:3; 1 Samuel 4:4; 1 Samuel 14:32. I did not
continue my search past this point, having satisfied
myself that this was not a rare occurrence.)

Does the relative frequency of this interesting phenomenon
suggest the possibility that Biblical Hebrew may have
regarded this collective noun as having a dual character as
both a singular assembly and a plural collective that did
not necessarily require consistent treatment within a
verse?

Lewis Reich
LBR AT sprynet.com




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page