Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Re[2]: Jerusalem, neuter plural

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Joe A. Friberg" <JoeFriberg AT email.msn.com>
  • To: "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Re[2]: Jerusalem, neuter plural
  • Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 15:27:32 -0500


Good data. I have not reviewed all in detail, but note one correction at
Gen 15.20.

With all the toponyms that you pulled up that follow this pattern, I wonder
whether these are dual at all. This could be simply a 'toponymic'
denominative suffix (cf. the 'gentilic' ending /-I/), homophonous w/ the
dual, but bearing no semantic relation to it (except what folk-etymolygies
have attributed to it ex post facto).

(Note that the most common 'duals' (excepting undisputed duals of body parts
and numbers) are MAYIM 'waters' and $AMAYIM 'heavens', which are also
'tracts of space'.)

For this 'toponymic' ending could be shown to be related to the dual, there
would have to be historical evidence to that end, such as in each case
showing how the place is associated w/ two of something/all sorts of things.
I will toss out what is probably a feable hypothesis: could this be
functioning like our English use of 'New X': New Haven, New York...? I have
no evidence nor the resources, but it might be another lead to try out.
This hypothesis does in some way dovetail w/ the folk etymology of
Jerushalayim relating to two Jerusalems, the New Jerusalem being the
heavenly, but how Jewish (Masoretic) is this idea?

Reviewing Gibson _Davidson's Syntax_ (p.18-20: sec. 20(a), sec. 21, Rem. 1)
and Waltke O'Connor (p. 118, 7.3d) produces comments that many duals have no
explanation, citing toponymic examples in particular.

Joe Friberg

----- Original Message -----
From: <peter_kirk AT sil.org>
To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>


> I have done a quick look at LXX renderings of other Hebrew names which
> appear to be dual in form. I have only included case where the LXX is
> a recognisable transliteration of the Hebrew, in a verse which my
> software recognises as parallel (it became confused in Jeremiah).
>
> Reference RSV LXX
>
> GEN 14:5 Ashterothkarnaim Astarwq Karnain
> GEN 15:20 ++ Rephaim Rafain
This is not dual form due to presence of 'aleph between /a/ and /i/:
REPF)IM.
> GEN 38:14 + Enaim Ainan
> GEN 41:52 ++ Ephraim Efraim
> NUM 32:37 ++ Kiriathaim Kariaqaim
> NUM 33:46 + Almondiblathaim Gelmwn Deblaqaim
> JOS 13:6 Misrephothmaim Maserefwqmaim
> JOS 13:26 + Mahanaim Maanain
> JOS 13:30 + Mahanaim Maanaim
> JOS 15:36 Shaaraim Sakarim
> JOS 21:22 Kibzaim Kabsaim
> JDG 3:8 ++ Cushanrishathaim Cousarsaqwm
> 2SA 2:8 ++ Mahanaim Manaem
> 2SA 4:3 Gittaim Geqqaim
> 2SA 13:34 Horonaim Wrwnhn
> 2SA 17:24 ++ Mahanaim Manaim
> 2KI 17:24 ++ Sepharvaim Sepfarouain
> 1CH 2:30 + Appaim Affaim
> 1CH 4:23 Netaim Nataim
> 1CH 8:8 Shaharaim Saarhm
> 2CH 3:6 Parvaim Farouaim
> 2CH 11:9 Adoraim Adwraim
> 2CH 16:4 Abelmaim Abelmain
> EZR 2:57 Pocherethhazzebaim Faceraq-asebwin
> NEH 7:59 Pocherethhazzebaim Facaraq uioi Sabaim
> ISA 15:5 Horonaim Arwniim
> ISA 15:8 Eglaim Agallim
> ISA 36:19 + Sepharvaim Sepfarim
> EZK 47:10 Eneglaim Ainagalim
> EZK 47:16 Sibraim Sebraim
> HOS 1:3 Diblaim Debhlaim
>
> Summary: The majority of Hebrew dual form names are rendered as -aim
> or -ain in LXX. There is some inconsistency, especially in the
> renderings of "Mahanaim" (which is also often translated as
> "Parembolai") Some have shortened endings such as -an. Only once is
> there an ending -hm (cf. Greek Yerusalhm). There are no cases of an
> upsilon corrseponding to the Hebrew -AYI-, and there are no cases of a
> suffixed -a or any other declinable Greek ending. This suggests that
> it is very unlikely that the Greek form HIEROSOLUMA is derived from a
> Hebrew dual ending.
>
> Peter Kirk







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page