Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Dave Washburn" <dwashbur AT nyx.net>]

> Dear Dave,
> You say that Rashi and Gesenius are faulty and
> outdated. Please tell me what you base that on?

Subsequent grammatical study, publications and so on.  I would
also point to all the diverse views expressed so often here, as well
as textbooks put out by the Bible societies, by the scholarly
presses and other sources.  If Rashi had it all figured out, why are
we even here?  All one has to do is look at the grammar of Waltke
and O'Connor to see many of the flaws in both Rashi and
Gesenius.  And just for the sake of completeness, one need look
no further than numerous reviews published when it came out to
see the flaws in the NRSV.  Citing it merely shows that one group
of translators chose to follow Rashi; it says nothing about whether
he or they were right.

We can sit here and cite "authorities" all day long.  I could just as
easily point to the NASB as my authority for the other reading, and
it would prove just as little.  What we need to figure out is, what
view of the grammar of Hebrew provides the strongest and most
complete explanation of the verb system with the smallest number
of problems?  That's why we're all here, as far as I know.

Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"Éist le glór Dé."