Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Maurice A. O'Sullivan" <mauros AT iol.ie>]

At 07:43 27/12/2004, Heard, Christopher wrote:

> Well ... maybe, if we knew what the reasons were, but not simply by
> invocation of authority.

Well, perhaps they were ready to invoke the authority of Gesenius ( as 
already noted in George F Somsel's posting of Dec. 26 ):

>>>
H. G. Mitchell, 'The omission of the interrogative particle,' in Old Test. 
and Sem. Studies in memory of W. R. Harper, Chicago, 1907, i, 113 ff.

1. A question need not necessarily be introduced by a special interrogative 
pronoun or adverb. Frequently 1 the natural emphasis upon the words is of 
itself sufficient to indicate an interrogative sentence as such; 
........................................ Pr 5:16.
1 1 Mitchell (op. cit.) restricts the number of instances to 39, of which 
he attributes 12 (or 17) to corruption of the text. Thus in Gn 27:24 he 
would road, with the Samaritan, as in verso 21, in 1 S 16:4 , in 2 S 18:29 
as in verse 32; similarly he would read the interrogative particle in 2 K 
5:26, Ez 11:3, Jb 40:25, 41:1; 1 S 30:8, 2 K 9:19, Ez 11:13, 17:9.
Gesenius, F. W. (2003). Gesenius' Hebrew grammar (E. Kautzsch & S. A. E. 
Cowley, Ed.) (2d English ed.) (Page 473). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research 
Systems, Inc.
<<<


Maurice A. O'Sullivan
[Bray, Ireland]
mauros AT iol.ie

"Mere description is impossible. Language forces you to an implicit
comment." C.S. Lewis