Biblical Hebrew Forum

[furuli AT online.no]

Dear Vadin,

I translate Isaiah 53:9 this way: "He will make his grave with the 
the wicked ones". It is a misunderstanding that WAYYIQTOL signals 
past tense (or the perfective aspect) I have a list of 998 examples 
of WAYYIQTOL with non-past reference. Many of these are found in 
Isaiah.


Best regards

Rolf


Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo





> Dear Rolf,
>
> You are certainly right. Unfortunately, almost every translator invariably
> falls into exegesis. In the example of Isaiah 53, the verbs are usually
> twisted beyond measure.
>
> How do you like common, "he was given [tomb with the rich]" when it is
> clearly written, "he gave" - and, of course, one cannot give his death.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Vadim
>
>
>
> Dear Vadim,
>
> What is "Hebrew past tense"? I view translation as interpretation,
> one cannot convey a message to an audience if one has not already
> interpreted the meaning of the original. But what you probably mean
> is that we should distinguish between translation and theological
> exegesis; in this I agree. Applied to Isaiah 53 and other prophetic
> passages, a translator should try to rid his mind from Christian
> views, because it would be wrong to translate the OT in light of the
> NT. And further, we need not take any standpoint whether chapter 53
> was written by a prophet with the name Isaiah or ascribed to one with
> the name of Isaiah by another. The temporal reference would in both
> instances be the same. What we need to look for when we translate a
> message which has the label "prophetic," is whether the message
> really refers to the future and not to a previous historical event.
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Rolf
>
> Rolf Furuli
> University of Oslo
>
>
>
>
>  >Dear Rolf,
> > May I suggest to distinguish between translation and interpretation? The
> > translation should be grammatically correct: in case of the chapter 53,
> > translating Hebrew past tense as English PT, and where standard Hebrew
> > allows certain latitude, like betwee past and conjunctive, both should be
> > mentioned. How one makes sense of this - is quite another matter, but
> > biblical translation should be precise, unless one prefers to treat the
> > book as saga.
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Vadim Cherny
>  >
> >