Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Re:morpho-syntax, was Proverbs 5:16 - a declaration or a question ?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Schmuel <schmuel AT escape.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Re:morpho-syntax, was Proverbs 5:16 - a declaration or a question ?
  • Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:54:10 -0500

Hi b-hebrew,

Proverbs 5:16 (KJB)
Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets.

>HH: I accept Gesenius. I cannot search for unmarked questions, but they
>occur now and then, based on context for the most part.

Schmuel
Would it be an interesting exercise to find one to three of those unmarked
questions, and then look up how such phrases are considered by Rashi, Ibn
Ezra and Radaq (in particular) ? And it would also be interesting to know if
David Kimchi (Radaq) discusses Proverbs 5:16.

We know that Rashi and Ibn Ezra (and the Targum) did not consider Proverbs
5:16 an interrogatory. Perhaps we will find that the other unmarked
question verses are also interpreted differently by the rabbinics than it is
by some of the modern translators, and that the interrogatory usage is very
debatable -- even if unlikely, this is definitely possible, we would only
know by looking..

And if they were clear unmarked questions, and the rabbinics also considered
the other verses as interrogatory, their unwillingness to do so on Proverbs
5:16 would still stand out.

Either way, I value their understanding highly, and I believe the King James
Bible
translators did the same. My understanding is that the 17th century
semiticists
were most attuned to Kimchi, and were generally well-read in the rabbinics.
This
partly came out of the 16th century Hebraic revival of which Sebastian
Munster was
one of the major figures, as discussed by Pinchas Lapide in "Hebrew in the
Church".

It is amazing how many people are not really aware of this history, and try
to assign
semitic ignorance to the Cambridge and Oxford scholars. I have seen a
variety of
folks who thought that the King James Bible wasn't really translated from the
Masoretic
Text, but from the Greek OT or the Vulgate. We had a little of that type of
dissing here
on this thread, which I had let pass by without comment. To any such folks,
I recommend
reading about the scholarly background of Lancelot Andrews and the other
translators.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Queens, NY
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page