Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: I WILL BE

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Dave Washburn" <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
  • To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: I WILL BE
  • Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 15:16:40 -0700


Shoshanna,
> > > On Hebrew Grammar
> > >
> > > On the fact that the same word is used AS a future tense word in other
> > > places in the Torah
> >
> > But not always or only as future. The prefix conjugation serves
> > both purposes.
>
>
> Please, then cite an example from some OTHER place in the Torah, where
> "Ehyeh" is not future

Not in the Torah proper, but in 2 Sam 15:34 it's past. 2 Sam 16:18
appears to be present. See also Isaiah 3:7; Ps 50:21; Ruth 2:13;
Song of Songs 1:7. In addition, nearly all occurrences of the word
are in formulae such as "I will be their God" (ehyeh lahem lelohim)
and such. I wasn't able to find another instance where it's used
absolutely like this. So there are a couple of things wrong with
your question: a) there are no exact parallels, and b) you limit it
only to the Torah when we need to be looking at the whole of the
Tanakh.

> In the very same chapter, Exodus 3:12 Ehyeh is definitely used in the
> future tense. It is not characteristic of the Torah to be careless about
> the words, and combinations of letters used - rather the opposite.

But it's in another formula, 'ehyeh `immak. So that doesn't really
tell us anything about the 'ehyeh asher 'ehyeh phrase.

> > > On the fact that, Biblical Hebrew is still Hebrew, and not some other
> > > language
> >
> > But modern Hebrew is based more on Mishnaic than biblical
> > Hebrew (evidence e.g. the lack of the waw-consecutive form).
> > Mishnaic Hebrew developed into a tensed language, whereas
> > biblical Hebrew seems to be something different.
>
>
> Not to me, when I read it

Then you're reading it anachronistically. Mishnaic Hebrew,
followed by modern Hebrew, created a tensed language that uses
the prefix conjugation for future, the participle for present and the
suffix for past. But a simple glance at the Tanakh shows that
those writers knew of no such system.

> > > If someone would remind me where exactly this pasuk (Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh)
> is,
> > > in the Torah, I will see if I can find if any of the commentaries
> comment on
> > > this.
> >
> > Exodus 3.
>
[snip]
> I really don't see how anyone can claim that they know better than the great
> Torah commentators, which are far more numerous than what I just quoted,
> none of whom, I can assure you, believe that "Ehyeh" means 'I am'

Do we really think that our knowledge of biblical Hebrew grammar
hasn't advanced a bit since medieval times? Those giants did the
best they could with the knowledge they had, but their grasp of
biblical grammar was flawed at best. That doesn't mean their
comments are worthless, of course, but it does mean we need to
check them against what we now know about grammar and
especially the verb system. So citing them uncritically doesn't get
us anywhere, nor does citing them show that I am "simply wrong"
as you said in another post. It means they were operating from an
incorrect premise of grammar. 'ehyeh COULD mean "I will be," but
that doesn't mean it ALWAYS carried that meaning. I've given
several passages where it has to carry present meaning, and even
one that is past. The picture is nowhere near as simple as you
suggest.


Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"You just keep thinking, Butch. That's what you're good at."





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page