Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT ozemail.com.au>]

Ah, George, it makes a change for me to argue for following tradition
and you to argue against! But my point was not that we should follow
older commentators' and translators' wild guesses, but that we should
follow their interpretations when they seem to have made sense of the
text we have.

Peter Kirk
peter.r.kirk AT ntlworld.com
http://web.onetel.net.uk/~peterkirk/
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:b-hebrew-
> bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Polycarp66 AT aol.com
> Sent: 27 January 2003 12:18
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Emendations, was: Deut 32:5 SHiCHeT
> 
<snip>
<snip>
> 
> What one sometimes finds in old commentaries on the text (meaning here
the
> MT) is that the older Jewish commentaries understood it no better than
we
> do
> today.  We also find that the versions, notably the LXX, likewise did
not
> understand it and made their own emendations or, in some cases,
followed a
> differing text of which we find some remnants in the DSS.  Dahood made
an
> attempt to understand the text as it stands based upon Ugaritic
materials
> and
> probably went a bit too far.  When we undertake to translate a
passage, no
> matter whether we are translating for a language group which as yet
has no
> Bible in its tongue or whether we are producing a translation for our
own
> use, we are obliged to make sense out of the text.  It is no sign of
piety
> or
> scholarship to simply repeat what were apparently guesses on the part
of
> some
> scholar simply because his understanding happens to have the patina of
age.
> 
> gfsomsel
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew