Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Daniel Wagner" <dan.wagner AT netzero.net>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <GregStffrd AT aol.com>
To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 12:40 AM
Subject: Re: _)aSHER_ in Ex. 3:14 (was "I AM")


> In a message dated 05/07/2001 6:11:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
> dwashbur AT nyx.net writes:
> 
> << Excuse me?  Dan isn't taking 'ehyeh as a nominal.  His whole 
>  point is that it's a verb, and hence can't be part of a verbless 
>  clause.  >>
> 
> He said he views the second 'EHYEH as a name, that is a NOMINAL. It may 
> have 
> verbal associations, but it is a nominal. 

No, the name *is* itself a finite verb. We don't have any parallels, but i 
think that the first )EHYEH is used intentionally to show by rhetorical 
parallelism that the 2nd )EHYEH is also a verb. God's name is thus summed up 
in His covenant self-identification / self-revelation to His people as "I-AM" 
(i don't want to transliterate the 2nd verb, i think that is a mistake and 
miscommunicates the intent).

But that is not the only reason why )ANI )EHYEH will not work as a noun 
clause. The other reason is the grotesque ambiguity in such a statement.  

> The same as the example I gave 
> concerning YHWH in Exodus 9:27. Are you reading the entire message? YHWH 
> has 
> verbal associations as a proper name derived from HYH, but it is frequently 
> the subject or predicate of a verbless clause. 

There is a real difference in my mind between a name having verbal 
associations (and i agree that YHWH does) and a finite verb itself being used 
as a name itself. Sorry if i didn't make that clear, but i wasn't thinking 
down the line as you took it, though i can see how you came to that 
conclusion from a couple of my comments about YHWH and HYH / HWH roots. Same 
applies to the rest of your comments below.

Dan Wagner

> 
> 
> << 'ehyeh is more than a word with a "verbal idea attached to 
>  it," it's an actual verb.  >>
> 
> 
> I think you need to pay better attention to what is being discussed. In the 
> first instance Dan is claiming that it means "I am," acting as both the 
> subject and copula (or he gets the copula from somewhere else that is not 
> clear to me). He then views the second 'EHYEH as a ***NAME***. A name is a 
> nominal and, like YHWH, is frequently a part of a verbless clause. YHWH has 
> verbal associations, being derived from a verb, just as we could say of 
> 'EHYEH ***IF*** we accept it as a name. 
> 
> 
> <<< By definition, this precludes 'ani 'ehyeh from 
>  being a verbless clause.  I get the feeling somebody missed Dan's 
>  point here. >>>
> 
> 
> It precludes no such thing when and if you offer 'EHYEH as a proper name; 
> but 
> your feelings about missing the point are correct.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Greg Stafford





NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net