Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>]

Yigal Levin <Yigal-Levin AT utc.edu> wrote: inter alia,
. We have very little
"internal" evidence of the difference between Qal and Piel. In fact,
remember that even the consonantal text that we have is the product of
later transmission - we just don't have the "untouched" original text.
However in the case of Hebrew, we do have a tradition of pronunciation
going back 1500 years, much closer to the source than we are. To me, this
is the obvious place to start. Once we learn what the Masoretes had to tell
us about the text, we can then also reasonably question them.


Yigal


    One may add the example of another living Semitic language, Arabic. It  
has of course the equivalent to the Heb . Piel, which is also 
undistiguishable from Qal in normal unvowelled texts in the perfect tense, 
though clearly  -  because of the emphais (shadda) -  different in 
pronounciation.

Uri

>b-hebrew mailing list
>b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>
Dr. Yigal Levin
Dept. of Philosophy and Religion
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
615 McCallie Avenue
Chattanooga TN 37403-2598
U.S.A.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
>From jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net  Thu Jul 24 17:02:41 2003
Return-Path: <jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from puffin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (puffin.mail.pas.earthlink.net
        [207.217.120.139])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 859C020084
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu, 24 Jul 2003 17:02:39 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from dialup-67.75.200.160.dial1.seattle.level3.net ([67.75.200.160])
        by puffin.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
        id 19fnEQ-00055y-00
        for b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:02:35 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:02:20 -0700
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 1:5
From: CS Bartholomew <jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>
To: B Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <BB45976C.23C%jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <20030724181629.76796.qmail AT web41110.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-ELNK-Trace: 
4a003e31c918500651d1d9fd3a13d0e594f5150ab1c16ac027907a4ca0ac1adfa392cf738995e14b0e3b835763d63354350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2
Precedence: list
List-Id: A forum on the Hebrew Bible, its language and interpretation
        <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 21:02:41 -0000

On 7/24/03 11:16 AM, "waldo slusher" <waldoslusher AT yahoo.com> wrote:

> A recent article I read indicates that the phrase at
> the end of this verse, "day one", by virtue of the
> fact that "one" lacks the definite article, makes it a
> Cardinal number. ...
> 
> Is this grammatical point open to dispute ...

Very much open to dispute. U.Cassuto, G.Wenham, G.Bush, J.W. Wevers, KEIL &
DELITZSCH, Waltke &  O'Connor all dispute it.


>From K&D
...  )xd (one ), like EIS and unus,  is used at the commencement of a
numerical series for the ordinal primus  (cf. Gen. 2:11; 4:19; 8:5, 15) ...

J.W. Wevers (Notes on the Greek Text of Genesis, p.3) points out that the
LXX preserves the distinction EIS (cardinal) in Gen. 1:5 and DEUTERA
(ordinal) in Gen. 1:8  but that Aquila read )xd in Gen. 1:5 as PRWTH. Wevers
implies that Aquila got it right.

George Bush suggests that )xd in Gen. 1:5 functions to set apart this day as
somehow distinct from other days. In support for this he cites Daniel (!!)
8:3 )yl )xd "a certain ram, i.e. a ram of peculiar description ... "  This
is suggestion worth consideration but the procedure of using Daniel (and
Ezekiel) as models for an idiom in Genesis might bother some people. Keep in
mind that Bush was published in the mid 19th century.

U.Cassuto cites some rabbinic exegesis which is somewhat too subtle for this
guy from Seattle. Perhaps someone else can comment on it.

Anyway, the grammatical point is open to dispute.


greetings,
Clay Bartholomew