Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] David or Elhanan?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>
  • To: Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>, b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Cc:
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] David or Elhanan?
  • Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:21:49 -0800 (PST)

The names are similar, though differently pointed which may well reflect
different original pronounciations, as against that of David, where already
in the consistent plene spelling in Chronicles, with a Yud, the pointing of
the Dalet is attested.
Assuming however that all have a common origin, it still is not possible
to determine with certainty their original meaning. Since, if each had been
theophoric name, and appears now as a hypocoristicon they could as well have
been shortened froms of the so called Amorite names, where a close family
person stands for the deity, such as ABRM , )MRM etc., in this case the full
name would hypothetically have been * DWDRM --Dodram -- exalted uncle. And
not at all related to the beloved from Songs and elsewhere.
The example from 2 Chr. 20 reflects defficient scribal transmission.

Thus, I conclude, as I started on this matter: one simply does not know,
just as one does not know the etymology of Yehudah!

Uri

Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il> wrote:
In addition to David, there are several other people with similar names,
which do seem to preserve some theophoric element: DWDW (Dodo - Judg. 10:1);
DDY or DWDW in 2 Sam. 23:9, 1 Chr. 11:12 and 27:4; DWDWHW (Dodavahu) in 2
Chr. 20:37, and our own Elhanan's father, DWDW, in 2 Sam. 23:24 and 1 Chr.
11:26.

Yigal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kirk"

To: "Uri Hurwitz"
Cc:
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 6:26 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] David or Elhanan?


> On 28/01/2005 16:00, Uri Hurwitz wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > */Peter Kirk
/* wrote:
> >
> > ...
> > Doesn't it make sense to derive the name DWD (sometimes DWYD) from
> > the
> > well-attested root DWD/YDD "love", so that it is effectively a
> > doublet
> > of the common noun DWD (pronounced dod) "beloved, uncle"? I agree
> > that
> > this derivation is not certain, but it does seem to make sense.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----In that case one would expect some a theophoric PN such as
> > either * DWD)L or
> >
> > *)LDWD or the attested Yedidyah. ...
> >
>
> Well, maybe, but there are other attested cases of what were presumably
> originally theophoric names of this kind which have lost their
> theophoric elements. I can think immediately of Nathan, presumably an
> abbreviation of Nathan'el or Nathanyahu. There are many others. So why
> not David?
>
> --
> 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: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.6 - Release Date: 27/01/2005
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>


_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
>From yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com Mon Jan 31 18:13:59 2005
Return-Path: <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.203])
by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B30A94C005
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:13:59 -0500
(EST)
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so713013wra
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:13:59 -0800
(PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;

h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;

b=sMlotqy0ADXyr14HfCSsEqLC5BzmpABwmUZ3PBHtMnzrtEU0cqbG+E2BGEeJpPoT9XHaoy4B60YB8OahN6cEtvRT8qTB8QcC+QSYq7ys5qjjIHU91uCOSEWzBLg/kSM+pSGi2K5xEWxbSYoXWVyXWKdIFvy+JA/zwWMHAmZuo/M=
Received: by 10.54.49.37 with SMTP id w37mr337175wrw;
Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:13:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.54.44.35 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:13:58 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <e6ea6c0005013115136e36f0e1 AT mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 01:13:58 +0200
From: Yitzhak Sapir <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>
To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [b-hebrew] "Shaf`el" in Hebrew?
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Yitzhak Sapir <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:13:59 -0000

In Semitic Languages: An Introduction (Hebrew), by Chaim Rabin, 1991,
Biblical Encyclopedia Library, Chaim Rabin makes the following statement (p.
55): "[In the period of the First Temple,] the `Shafel` causative binyan
disappears (although there is enough evidence to show it existed) and the
`Haf`el` that became `Hiph`il` becomes the only causative binyan." This is
all
very nice, but it seems to me that two points may be made:

1) Canaanite tongues already had Haphel turn to Hiphil previously, based on
Amarna. (From Encyclopedia Judaica I found in "Hebrew Language",
16:1566): "The Hebrew causative prefix ha- appears in Amarna as
h_i- (attenuation). The example is from EA 256:7, h_i-ih_-bi-e; it is
clearly a
hebrew form which is impossible in Akkadian. The scribe used the Hebrew
hh.by) ("hekhbi" - hid) for the common Akkadian verb of the same meaning,
puzzuru."

2) I am not sure that any other Semitic language has both Haphel and Hiphil.
Rather, it seems to me that Haphel and Hiphil have an H where the Semitic
language has a H for the third person pronouns and an $ where the language
has an $ for the third person pronouns.

So why is he saying that there is enough evidence to show it existed? Have I
missed something?

Thanks :)
Yitzhak Sapir




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page