b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: "Dave Washburn" <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
- To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
- Subject: Construct + Finite = Relative?
- Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:44:18 -0700
A follow-up on the discussion of this matter:
Peter and Liz both objected to the Gesenius-based rendering "In
the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth" partly
because there is no Hebrew equivalent of "when" in the text. I
pointed out that Gesenius seems to suggest that the combination
of construct plus finite clause produces a relative-clause kind of
sense. Waltke and O'Connor seem to concur. On p.156 they say
"Relative clauses after prepositionally used constructs are found; in
these three [sic] examples the relative clause is asyndetic (or
headless, i.e. lacks a relative pronoun):"
They give the examples of Jer 2:8 and Exod 4:13; the former has a
finite (yiqtol) clause after )AXA:R"Y and the latter after B:YAD.
They continue:
"The relative clause may be used after a construct noun with no
prepositional force;"
They give the example of Isa 29:1, the "city where" example we
have already looked at. Their second example is Gen 39:20 Qere,
which they acknowledge includes a relative pronoun. From there
they go on to illustrate clauses where a construct is used before a
non-relative, giving Lev 25:48 and 1 Sam 25:15 as examples. They
conclude this section with the following:
"It is also possible for a construct of no prepositional force to stand
before a non-relative clause. This construction is extremely rare."
They give the example of Hos 1:2, T:XIL.AT DIB.ER YHWH
B:Ho$"A( which they translate "The beginning *of YHWH-spoke*
through Hosea."
This last one seems rather significant for testing this approach on
Gen 1:1, since it is clearly a construct and involves temporal
indicators (though obviously it doesn't use R"$IYT...). I'm not sure I
agree with their translation, but it does suggest that a construct
before this kind of finite clause in a temporal setting is possible. It
also might have some bearing on the presence of the W at the
beginning of Gen 1:2, since the next clause in Hosea begins with a
wayyiqtol.
Again, I'm not sure I buy this approach to Gen 1:1, but it does
seem to have some material to back it up.
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"Éist le glór Dé."
-
Construct + Finite = Relative?,
Dave Washburn, 09/08/2000
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: Construct + Finite = Relative?, Alviero Niccacci, 09/09/2000
- Re: Construct + Finite = Relative?, Dave Washburn, 09/09/2000
- Re: Construct + Finite = Relative?, Ian Hutchesson, 09/10/2000
- Re: Construct + Finite = Relative?, Alviero Niccacci, 09/11/2000
- Re: Construct + Finite = Relative?, Alviero Niccacci, 09/11/2000
- Re: Construct + Finite = Relative?, clayton stirling bartholomew, 09/11/2000
- Re: Construct + Finite = Relative?, Ian Hutchesson, 09/11/2000
- Re: Construct + Finite = Relative?, Peter Kirk, 09/12/2000
- RE: Construct + Finite = Relative?, Liz Fried, 09/12/2000
- Re: Construct + Finite = Relative?, Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, 09/14/2000
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.