Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Placeholders: )$R w/o antecedent

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: "C. Stirling Bartholomew" <jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>
  • Cc: hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Placeholders: )$R w/o antecedent
  • Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:45:02 +0100

On 21/10/2004 16:55, C. Stirling Bartholomew wrote:

...

Peter,
I am not sure we are talking about exactly the same thing.

Take a look at:
Ezek. 23:28 ky kh )mr )dny yhwh hnny ntnK byd )$r &n)t byd )$r-nq(h np$K mhM

The antecedent of )$r in the expression byd )$r &n)t is not explicit, it is
inferred or, if you prefer, it is exophoric rather than anaphoric. To supply
a place holder % to mark the position of this antecedent byd-% )$r &n)t
implies that there is something defective about the syntax, that it is
missing something. But the expression byd )$r &n)t is well formed. There is
nothing missing. A relative with an exophoric antecedent is perfectly
acceptable.

OK, this is syntactically normal, just semantically anomalous.

I would agree that semantically the exophoric antecedent is present in the
text but syntactically it is not. So if we are talking syntax I would say
leave the place holder out. If you are talking semantics then the place
holder serves a purpose.


Well, I think I would consider this a figure of speech. This is a well-formed sentence "... into the hand which hates you, into the hand which your NEPE$ was estranged(?) from (them)." But here the hand is a metonymy or synecdoche for the person who owns the hand. But there is no placeholder here.

Note the "from them" which is the resumptive pronoun I was referring to.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page