Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Ken Litwak <kdlitwak AT concentric.net>]

I think I missed something.  We went from noting some occurences of
hyh with constructs, and then tis seemd to demonstrate someow the way
Gen 1:1-2 should be understood.  There was a leap in there somplace I
didn't get.  If it is shown that in every place where similar synxtax
appears,  some simultaneous activity is listed next, or this occurence
indicates the circumstances of what follows, then there _may_ be a basis
for making an argument upon this syntax.  I haven't seen that yet, and
at the moment don't have timie to research it.  I would note, however,
that the OG translator use EN ARCH EPOIHSEN.  Given the general
literalness of the OG in the Pentateuch, one may draw from this
translation that hte translator understood Gen 1:1 to begin with the
statement, "In'at the begining God created...."  Had this been a
continuous action or circumstantial staement, the transaltor shold ahve
used an articular infinitive with En or a Present Participle, like
POIWN, or better still made all of Gen 1;1 a Genitie absolute.  As it
stands, it cannot really be understood to be the circumstances taht
adhered during 1:2.  

  In any case, I urge against jumping from "something is used a cerain
way in these palces", skipping the part about what this someting has to
mean in those palces to "terefore this proves that something means thus
and such here".  I own't go further onthis until I've had a chance to
check a few works.  

Ken Litwak
Universiy of Bristol
Bristol, England