Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Søren Holst <sh AT teol.ku.dk>]

Karl,

By all means the LXX rendered 'almah as parthenos (which in most cases DOES 
mean virgin) in the pre-christian period, and thus chose a word with a 
narrower semantic field for its translation. I see no reason to doubt it. I'm 
not out to say christians were in bad faith when interpreting Isaiah or 
anything like that.

But I'm afraid I don't see why 'almah should mean "unknown one" just beacuse 
the verb lehe'elim means "to ignore". There are plenty of cases, where words 
have identical triliteral roots without being semantically related.

Nor do I see why "unknown one" should mean virgin, just because Gen 4:1 (and 
plenty of other passages) have the verb yada' in the sense of "have 
intercourse". This is very interesting speculative interpretation, but it's 
certainly not linguistics.

As I pointed out previously, a woman referred to as an 'almah, would 
certainly be expected to be a virgin if not yet married. So virgins are 
included in the category of 'almah, and therefore the biblical passges with 
'almah are not rendered nonsensical if we follow the LXX in narrowing the 
semantic field of the word. But if I check all occurrences of 'almah and 
betulah, I find no instance where 'almah must be translated as "virgin" in 
order for the text to make sense -- the situation is quite different for 
betulah, as may be seen from Gen 24,16.

sincerely,
Soren 

> -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra:  b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> [SMTP:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] på vegne af Karl Randolph
> Sendt:        1. april 2005 19:55
> Til:  Hebrew
> Emne: Re: [b-hebrew] "virgin" vs. "young woman"in Isaiah 7:14
> 
> Søren:
> 
> (LMH (also (LM in 1 Samuel 17, 20) when referring to a person indicates 
> that the person is unknown. The root (LM has the meaning of being unknown, 
> in hiphil the causitive meaning, i.e. to hide.
> 
> When taken in the context of Genesis 4:1 (in American English that same 
> wording was still used when I was young), the > "> unknown one> ">  is by 
> necessity a virgin, making (LMH the technical term for > "> virgin> "> . 
> Either that, or the term refers to a stranger.
> 
> (I think the term> '> s use in Proverbs 30:10 refers to > "> the unknown> 
> "> , not a person. The only arguments presented that I have seen that it 
> refers to a person are not linguistic, but tradition. Hence I find them 
> unconvincing.)
> 
> If the present copies of the LXX are accurate copies of the original, then 
> the LXX translated Isaiah 7:14 as > "> virgin> "> , i.e. before the NT 
> interpretation.
> 
> I am not going to argue the theological implications of this verse (e.g. 
> some say that the virgin to whom Isaiah referred, was one standing near to 
> Isaiah at the time he made the statement, with no expectation that she 
> remained a virgin until after the birth of the child), but as a linguist, I 
> see no good argument that (LMH was not the technical term for > "> virgin> 
> "> , more so than BTWLH.
> 
> Karl W. Randolph.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Søren Holst" <sh AT teol.ku.dk>
> 
> > 
> > Eugene,
> > 
> > Sorry if this sounds arrogant, but as far as I can see, there isn't 
> > really any "issue" as far as the text is concerned: Hebrew "'almah" 
> > means a young woman, and since young women may be virgins (if 
> > unmarried, they ought to, in traditional society like that 
> > reflected in the Bible), it may easily be used of a virgin, but it 
> > does not "mean" virgin (as opposed to a young woman who has had 
> > sexual intercourse), and there's an end of the issue.
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > sincerely
> > Soren, Copenhagen
> -- 
> ___________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
> http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew