Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Liz,
> > Liz,
> > > Last night I found a relevant section in Gesenius
> > > on this topic. There it said that in these cases the
> > > whole rest of the sentence (or maybe he meant the clause
> > > which began with the finite verb) was in a dependent
> > > genitive relationship to the noun in construct.
> > > There was no elaboration and I'm not sure how to undersand
> > > what is being said. What does that mean exactly?
> > > Does that mean we translate it as if it were a verbal noun?
> > > Is that what Rashi meant? Rather than emend it
> > > you read these as if they were verbal nouns?
> >
> > What section of Gesenius are you looking at?  The only one I could
> > find is 130d (p. 422 in GKC) where he says that the construct can
> > govern independent sentences and gives the example of Exod 4:13
> > and others.  He also refers there to section 155, where he says
> > much the same thing.  It is interesting that he doesn't mention Gen
> > 1:1 in either of these sections, though he spends about half the
> > paragraph talking about this construction with time indicators.
> > Considering the examples he gives, such as Isa 29:1 QIR:YAT
> > XFNF DVWID which he renders "the city where David encamped," I
> > doubt that he has a verbal noun sense in mind here;
> But there is no "where" there. That's interpolated.
> This is what Milgrom does in the Levitcus quote Byran cites.
> Is it not literally "in the city of the encamping of David"?

So we ARE looking at the same section of Gesenius then?
I'll respond in more detail later, but I want to be sure we're on the
same page of that book so we're both looking at the same thing.


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