Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Proverbs 5:16 - a declaration or a question ?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Proverbs 5:16 - a declaration or a question ?
  • Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:50:34 +0000

On 30/12/2004 23:38, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:

...

That would make the translation "Be dispersed away from your eyes outwards into the broad streets (broad areas?) the channels of water", in other words a poetic way of saying not to look at other sources, so within the context not to be looking at other women?


HH: This does not work for me. Perhaps some other list members can approve it for you, but the water is not a symbol of other women but of the man's own possession. Nor does the translation work, for it does not function on a literal level. Nobody disperses channels of water away from someone's eyes. So it cannot work on the figurative level. You have tried to combine the literal with the figurative. ...


Harold, I really don't know whether Karl's suggestion is any better than the common translation. But your objection that the verb doesn't make sense as a passive holds no water at all (sorry about the pun). As you recognised in your earlier rephrasing, the subject of the verb on Karl's interpretation is "channels of water", and the verb is Qal, so there is no question of anyone's activity in dispersing the channels.

How about this rendering of Karl's version: "May channels of water spread from your eyes outwards into the streets". This seems to me to fit the grammar and to function at a suitable figurative language. The trouble is, it doesn't fit the context, which is not of lamentation and abundance of tears, but a strongly sexual one.

... The common translation, which you have spurned, although it makes perfectly good sense and is grammatically possible, works on both a literal level and a figurative level.


In the context, it works only if it is turned into a question, for which there is no grammatical justification. Nevertheless, this is probably the best interpretation.

Or could the verb have a meaning in this context something like "dry up" or "depart from"? If so, there is a reasonable non-interrogative interpretation.

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



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.6 - Release Date: 28/12/2004





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page