Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

David:

Do you know where I can access that article, commentary and essay? I do not 
live where such are easily available.

As for the immediate question, the uses in Isaiah 7 and Proverbs 30 are 
different. The context of one refers to a person, the second to an 
abstract concept.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Kummerow" <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>
> 
> 
> Karl,
> 
> I again suggest that you take a look at the article, commentary, 
> and essay I previously mentioned. This may indeed point you away 
> from "the unknown" to an actual referent. Indeed, someone or 
> something "unknown" to Isaiah and Ahaz would really be no 'ot at 
> all. Also, why would this curious word which can mean "young woman" 
> and also "the unknown" be used when an indefinite pronoun could 
> have been used which would have unambiguously signalled someone 
> unknown? In the absense of the indefinite pronoun and since the 
> word seems to always point to a referent, I think a referent needs 
> to be determined from the context. I think Webb's proposal fits the 
> best.
> 
> David Kummerow.
> 
> 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
> > >
> > > On 14/04/2005 08:22, Karl Randolph wrote:
> > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > I prefer Pshat to Drash. This is Drash based on the insistance
> > > > that the term must refer to an object, in particular a female of
> > > > the human persuasion. But a feminine noun can also indicate that
> > > > it refers to an abstract concept, such as in this case “the
> > > > unknown”.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > If you prefer the more literal Pshat to speculative Drash, why do
> > > you reject an obvious sense based on a well established meaning of
> > > the word (and a well established translation and interpretation
> > > tradition) in favour of a speculative completely new sense of the
> > > word?
> > >
> > > -- Peter Kirk
> > > peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> > > peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> > > http://www.qaya.org/
> >
> > 1) Context
> > 2) This is not a completely new sense of the word, as it fits 
> > into the root meaning of being unknown as well as being a 
> > grammatically
> > consistant construct.
> >
> > I’ve already expanded on point #1. As a lexicographer, I am 
> > willing to state that the traditional definitions (now that 
> > Gesenius and BDB
> > are “tradition”) can sometimes be wrong, though generally I try 
> > to avoid that. By acknowledging a definition of “unknown”, we 
> > have a
> > unanimity of action for the context, as well as a clear Pshat 
> > reading that needs no interpretation or explanation, Drash, to 
> > try to make
> > sense out of it.
> >
> > Karl W. Randolph.
-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm