Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Pastor Mark Eddy" <markeddy AT adams.net>]

What is the subject of the verbs AMaR and YHaWeH (yod-chet-waw-heh) in Psalm 
19:3? Is one YOM telling something to another YOM, and one LaYLaH revealing 
something to another (as in NASB)? Or is HaRaQiYa' of verse 2 the subject of 
the verbs in verse 3, with the time references being adverbial (as the NIV 
seems to read it)? And how do we know? All the nouns are masculine singular, 
so they agree with the masculine singular verbs.

Mark Eddy
>From pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca  Mon Sep 22 11:10:41 2003
Return-Path: <pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca>
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from smtp.teksavvy.com (ns2.teksavvy.com [65.39.196.215])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A45C20013
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:10:41 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from desktop ([216.209.129.137] unverified) by smtp.teksavvy.com
        with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713);
        Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:15:14 -0400
From: "Ken Penner" <pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca>
To: "'Karl Randolph'" <kwrandolph AT email.com>,
        "'Hebrew'" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] Re: Elohiym has a Hireq Yod in the M.T.
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:10:37 -0400
Organization: McMaster University
Message-ID: <001a01c3811b$aea820e0$0d81d1d8@desktop>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510
In-Reply-To: <20030919213335.18655.qmail AT email.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2727.1300
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Sep 2003 15:15:15.0246 (UTC)
        FILETIME=[5342CCE0:01C3811C]
Cc:
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2
Precedence: list
Reply-To: pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca
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: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 15:10:41 -0000

Karl wrote:

> You claim that the three words ending with an alep are names. 
> Those are not Hebrew names, possibly Aramaic.
...
> All in all, I find this a puzzling document. It is NOT good 
> Biblical Hebrew. 

I agree that this document is not Hebrew; Moabite seems the best bet.

> The second letter in the fourth 
> word you read as a samekh, I as a gimmel. The hole in the 
> papyrus there makes it difficult for me to be certain.

You are not alone; I too read it as a gimel at first, and so did FMCross ("A
Papyrus Recording a Divine Legal Decision and the Root RXQ in Biblical and
Near Eastern Legal Usage," pages 311-320 in _Texts, Temples, and
Traditions_; Winona Lake, 1996) and S. Ahituv, "A Divine Verdict: A Judicial
Papyrus of the 7th Century BCE," in _EI_ 26 (Frank Cross volume, 1999):1-4
(in Hebrew). But the 2000 Semitica article shows it to be a samek from
around 600 BCE.

> This papyrus has the correct usage to read 
> it as "unto them".

I can't think how we could make sense of two prepositional phrases in this
context. What would your complete translation be?

Ken Penner, Ph.D. (cand.), McMaster University
Vocabulary Memorization software:
http://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/westerholm/flash or
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flash_pro/join