Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter_Kirk AT SIL.ORG]

My point was to show that the reading was doubtful. I will leave the 
choice of emendation (or not) to others. I was not going along with 
the major change proposed in BHS, merely with the evidence quoted, 
which as far as I can understand it is for ("BER rather than (FBAR. (I 
am translating "prb dl et postea l" in the BHS footnote as "probably 
delete and afterwards read" and taking the text in the footnote as an 
alternative to the following three Hebrew words - this agrees with 
LXX.) I think I would lean towards the consonantal text of BHS with 
this one change of pointing, and like you explain the )EL- as a later 
addition. But I don't claim to be an expert on this.

Peter Kirk


______________________________ Reply Separator 
_________________________________
Subject: Re[3]: X-Qatal & Storyline
Author:  dwashbur AT nyx.net at internet
Date:    09/02/1999 16:01


Peter wrote:
> Maybe this is X-qatal, and maybe this explanation is correct. Dave 
> Washburn's suggestion is also interesting.
>
> But also there is textual doubt here (see BHS footnotes): apparently
> one Hebrew MS with support from LXX reads ("BER "region beyond" rather 
> than (FBAR "passed on" (qatal). Several MSS and ancient versions add
> )EL- "to". So we could read "he passed through Mizpeh of Gilead, and 
> from Mizpeh of Gilead to the other side of (the camp of) the sons of 
> Ammon." This actually makes more sense than the MT; but one can see 
> why (in a later period when X-qatal was the simple past tense) the
> consonants (BR were read as (FBAR to match the verb used twice already 
> in the verse.

Thanks for bringing this up.  I intended to, but I'm at home with a 
sick child and my attention is somewhat divided...so which reading 
do you go with?  I'm inclined toward the MT myself (and not just 
because of my analysis of the clause!), partly because I can see 
later scribes inserting )EL to clear up an odd reading.  Of course,
it's also possible that the particle fell out from a lapsus calami, but 
I've seen relatively few instances of this that can be detected with 
real certainty.  Also, I should probably point out that the ("BER 
reading is actually part of a humongous conjecture by BHS in
which they would replace the entire phrase )ET MICP"H GIL:(FD 
with MMCPFH GIL(AD L:("BER, "from Mizpah of Gilead to the
other side."  This variant doesn't seem to be connected to the word 
(FBAR later in the verse.

Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
A Bible that's falling apart means a life that isn't.

---
You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: Peter_Kirk AT sil.org 
To unsubscribe, forward this message to 
$subst('Email.Unsub')
To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.