Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Maurice A. O'Sullivan" <mauros AT iol.ie>]

At 15:49 17/05/02, I wrote:

> So, I wonder where the NKJV note derives from --- eisegesis, perhaps?  it 
> wouldn't be the first time <g>

Steve:
I was a bit heavy-handed about the NKJV in that remark <g> I now realise it 
was the work of someone with a less than full understanding of Biblical 
Hebrew. Let me explain.

Looking quickly at the text in question, one sees < bak > -- which very 
early on in a standard Hebrew grammar will appear in a table of 
prepositions + personal suffixes, and will be given the meaning " in you ( 
f. sg. ) " and the form <baka > for "in you (m.sg.)". However, _much_ later 
in these grammars, the matter of "pausal forms" will be covered. 
Simplifying horribly, this means that certain marks are placed in the 
middle ( roughly ) and the end of verses to mark a halt in the recitation. 
These marks are hard to miss, since they are usually in the form of a < ^ > 
under the final syllable; however, whenever each of these subdivisions is 
longer than normal, supplementary marks ( accents ) are employed to make 
further breaks within the already broken segments. Song 1:4 is quite a long 
verse, and the < bak > in question has two vertical dots above the < b >. 
These dots are named "zakef qaton" and are the tip-off that this is a 
shortened form of < baka >.

So, rather than accusing the NKJV note-makers of eisegesis I should, I 
suppose, suggest that they hadn't got to the end of the grammar; I'm not 
sure that that's any kinder <g>

Regards
Maurice


Maurice A. O'Sullivan  [ Bray, Ireland ]
mauros AT iol.ie