Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Liz Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>]

Interesting!
People said I should have said bmiqom.
I don't see how I was offering any fewer textual
cues than the sentence you quoted.
Actually, the sentence you quote uses taHat in the
same way as the biblical usage when one king replaced 
another. It refers to actions that have taken place in the past,
or have been decided in the past.
Is that correct, does the word require this type of usage?
Thanks for your post.
Liz

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randall Buth [mailto:ButhFam AT compuserve.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 1:08 AM
> To: Liz Fried
> Cc: Biblical Hebrew
> Subject: RE: cafe taHat soda
> 
> 
> shalom Liz, 
> 
> While reading today's paper I remembered your note on "taHat".
> (LF:)
> >Once tho I told
> >the waiter that I wanted tay Ham taHat ha Soda (that I had
> >originally ordered). He brought me both the tea and the soda. I
> >learned only later that taHat does not mean "instead of" in
> >Modern Hebrew.
> 
> Actually, "taHat" needs contextual clues for it to be understood "not
> literally" 
> but in its metaphorical extensions. Modern Hebrew shares other common 
> relator-words in this semantic domain, like "bimqom", "temurat", "Helef",
> "biglal". 
> 
> Anyway, in today's paper:
> 
> "[hem] omrim sheheHliTu levatter `al ezraHutam ha-tsarfatit 
> velidrosh ezraHut yisraelit taHteha."
> they were saying that they decided to give up their French citizenship 
> and to seek Israeli citizenship in its place.
> 
> shabbat shalom,
> 
> Randall Buth
>