Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

Peter:

I still don’t see the parallelism when [‘almah] “virgin” is used, but at 
least I think I know how you approach this verse. Correct me if I am wrong, I 
think you are looking at it with the focus on the object (heavens, bare rock, 
sea, virgin) while I’m looking at it with the emphasis on the action (flight 
of the eagle, snake crossing bare rock, ship sailing in sea, man going in 
unknown). As long as I understood it as “virgin”, the parallelism based on 
action broke down and I was unsatisfied with every answer I got. But when I 
realized that with different points the word could mean “unknown”, then the 
parallelism throughout the verse fits.

(Incidently, I read a research project a few years ago where scientists found 
out just how does a snake get across a bare rock? Fascinating.)

And I don’t have to use a euphemism.       ;-)

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
> On 30/09/2003 11:53, Karl Randolph wrote:
>
> >Peter:
> >
> >The problem I have with the traditional translation is that I don’t 
> understand it.
> >
> >Oh I understand the lexemes and the sentence structure, but the idea doesn’t 
> make sense. Furthermore, the parallelism gives the actor, then his way in an 
> inanimate milieu for the first three, whereas what is his way in a virgin? ...
> >
> I would have thought any man would know that (even though I admitted I 
> don't!). But certain things are just not spelled out explicitly in a 
> polite text. Probably in each of the sets of ascending clauses in 
> Proverbs 30, the focus is on the last one and the preceding three are 
> compared with it. There is nothing strange about comparing a woman with 
> the sky, the sea, and a rock - especially as no doubt the snake finds 
> its way into a hole in the rock.
>
> >... But “into the unknown” fits the parallelism, makes linguistic, logical 
> and psychological sense, and I understand it.     ;-)
> >  
> >
> Unfortunately that's does not imply that it is correct. You need much 
> better evidence than that.
>
> >Karl W. Randolph.
--
__________________________________________________________
Sign-up for your own personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

CareerBuilder.com has over 400,000 jobs. Be smarter about your job search
http://corp.mail.com/careers