Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 15/12/2004 17:53, Karl Randolph wrote:

> ...
>
> Now to the interpretations: is this a myth that is not true intended to serve 
> as a metaphore to explain later events (e.g. Israel's invasion and 
> subjugation of Canaan) as many people believe, or is it a record of actual 
> historical events involving the individuals named, as I believe? Does it make 
> a difference as far as analysing the linguistic form of the story itself? I 
> don't think differing interpretations of the meaning of the story should 
> affect a grammatical and linguistic analysis of the story itself. What do you 
> say?
>
>  
Even if it is a fictional account written to explain later events, 
within the fictional world of the story the author's intention is surely 
a curse on the singular person Canaan. To interpret this as a plural or 
collective is to impose an anachronism, because within the world of the 
story Canaan is singular.

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