b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: "John Gray" <jgray AT lfmp.com.au>
- To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: [b-hebrew] Re: b-hebrew Digest, Vol 30, Issue 15
- Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 09:12:22 +1000
Thankyou - John Gray
----- Original Message ----- From: <b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 2:00 AM
Subject: b-hebrew Digest, Vol 30, Issue 15
Send b-hebrew mailing list submissions to
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
b-hebrew-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of b-hebrew digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Re:plurality & divinity (Bearpecs AT aol.com)
2. Re: Help for visually impaired (christopher kimball)
3. shewa in imperative (Bearpecs AT aol.com)
4. Zech 13:5 (Steve Miller)
5. Re: Zech 13:5 (George F Somsel)
6. Re: Zech 13:5 (Bearpecs AT aol.com)
7. Re: Zech 13:5 (Yigal Levin)
8. Re: Zech 13:5 (George F Somsel)
9. Re: Zech 13:5 (Peter Kirk)
10. Re: Zech 13:5 (George F Somsel)
11. b-hebrew (ROY THOMAS)
12. Re: b-hebrew (Jim West)
13. Re: b-hebrew (George F Somsel)
14. FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity (YODAN)
15. Re: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity (George F Somsel)
16. Re: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity (Peter Kirk)
17. Re: Zech 13:5 (George F Somsel)
18. RE: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity (Stoney Breyer)
19. Re: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity (Bearpecs AT aol.com)
20. Re: Zech 13:5 (Karl Randolph)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 12:15:28 EDT
From: Bearpecs AT aol.com
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <29.75a4ca55.2fe99720 AT aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 6/21/2005 2:25:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
jgray AT lfmp.com.au writes:
Is this something which stikes others, as well as
myself, a very novice scholar?
It is striking, and there has been extensive discussion on the topic.
As always, start with the standard grammars (e.g. Gesenius, section 124) and
then go on to the standard references and commentaries, (e.g. Anchor Bible
Dictionary, "Names of Gd in the OT", vol IV, esp. p.1006).
Anyone have a citation for an article reviewing the literature?
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 11:37:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: christopher kimball <mail AT cvkimball.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Help for visually impaired
To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20050621183708.99121.qmail AT web303.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
The Unicode/XML Tanach at
http://www.cvkimball.com/Tanach/Tanach.xml
allows very large font sizes (up to 64 pt) to be displayed. This may be of help to the visually impaired.
George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com> wrote:
The question was raised recently regarding tools to help a visually
impaired student use computer study tools such as Bible Works, Logos,
etc. I just heard about a program which is supposed to be excellent for
this purpose.
http://www.nextup.com/TextAloud/
george
gfsomsel
___________
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:37:52 EDT
From: Bearpecs AT aol.com
Subject: [b-hebrew] shewa in imperative
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <19b.36579a2a.2fe9d4a0 AT aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Gesenius (section 46d) says that "the first syllable of the sing. fem. and
plur. masc. are usually to be pronounced with shewa mobile" (and then gives
exceptions).
Juoun (section 49c [note 1]), however, says "The shewa is 'medium,'" which
would mean that the first syllable is closed even though it makes a following
bgdkft rafe.
I don't see any discussion in Waltke & O'Connor.
Can someone tell me what the latest credible scholarly opionion is?
Thanks!
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 22:35:47 -0400
From: "Steve Miller" <smille10 AT sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
To: "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.Ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <01e901c576d3$195b0660$6900a8c0@Dad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Zech 13:5 but he will say, â?~I am not a prophet; I am a tiller of the ground,
for a man sold me as a slave in my youth.â?T (NASB)
The phrase "a man sold me as a slave" is ×Ö¸×"Ö¸× ×"Ö´×§Ö°× Ö·× Ö´×T.
The verb is causitive, literally "caused me to buy", which I don't think is
reflected in "sold me as a slave". To sell someone as a slave is not to
cause them to buy.
The only translation that retains the causitive meaning is KJV, which says,
"man taught me to keep cattle", but I don't think that is a causitive
meaning of "buy", although it is causitive.
Does "man" have to be the subject? Can it be the object? Could it be
translated:
for mankind He has made Me to purchase from My youth.
or
for mankind, they have caused Me to purchase from My youth. (treating the
3rd masculine singular as the indefinate pronoun as in 13:9.)
or
for mankind I have been made to purchase from My youth. (replacing
indefinate pronoun with passive)
thanks,
-Steve Miller
Detroit
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 23:24:59 -0400
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
To: smille10 AT sbcglobal.net
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.Ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20050621.232459.-620487.1.gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 22:35:47 -0400 "Steve Miller"
<smille10 AT sbcglobal.net> writes:
Zech 13:5 but he will say, 'I am not a prophet; I am a tiller of_______________________________________________
the ground,
for a man sold me as a slave in my youth.' (NASB)
The phrase "a man sold me as a slave" is ?????
?????????.
The verb is causitive, literally "caused me to buy", which I don't
think is
reflected in "sold me as a slave". To sell someone as a slave is
not to
cause them to buy.
The only translation that retains the causitive meaning is KJV,
which says,
"man taught me to keep cattle", but I don't think that is a
causitive
meaning of "buy", although it is causitive.
Does "man" have to be the subject? Can it be the object? Could it be
translated:
for mankind He has made Me to purchase from My youth.
or
for mankind, they have caused Me to purchase from My youth.
(treating the
3rd masculine singular as the indefinate pronoun as in 13:9.)
or
for mankind I have been made to purchase from My youth. (replacing
indefinate pronoun with passive)
thanks,
-Steve Miller
Detroit
TEXT:
W:)fMaR Lo) NfBiY) )fNoKiY )iY$_(oB"D )a:DfMfH )fNoKiY K.iY )fDfM
HiQ:N"NiY MiN.:(W.RfY
HALOT notes that the text is uncertain here and gives a conjectural
reading of )fDfM HiQ:NaNiY, but I don't think that solves your problem.
I think your problem is more in trying to import concepts from English
into Hebrew. Perhaps changing the English equivalent slightly will
clarify the matter. QNH does not simply mean "buy" but "acquire" and
thus the hiphil would be "cause to acquire." BDB gives "caused (one) to
purchase me ."
george
gfsomsel
___________
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:15:17 EDT
From: Bearpecs AT aol.com
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <1e0.3ec329e4.2fea3fd5 AT aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
In a message dated 6/21/2005 10:28:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
smille10 AT sbcglobal.net writes:
Zech 13:5 but he will say, â?~I am not a prophet; I am a tiller of the ground,
for a man sold me as a slave in my youth.â?T (NASB)
NJPS translates: "and he will declare, 'I am not a "prophet"; I am a tiller
of the soil; you see, I was plied with the red stuff from my youth on.' "
In the footnotes, it clarifies that by saying "tiller of the soil", the
self-denying prophet refers to Noah, who became drunk (Gen 9:20-12). NJPS
understands 'adam as 'adom, red, and so the phrase is "caused me to acquire red
[wine]", meaning that he was a drunkard. In other words, although he appeared
to prophesy, it was just the ranting of drunkeness. In the next verse he
explains that the welts on his back were not received from flagellation in order
to stimulate ecstatic prophesy but rather beatings he received when he was
drunk and rowdy at parties.
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:12:12 +0200
From: "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <005a01c57705$f0417290$6f664684@xp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
The verb QNH often means "to make" or "to create" (cf. Gen. 14:22). Might it
not mean, "I am no prophet, for I was made a man from my youth", or "for
[God] created me a man from youth".
Yigal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Miller" <smille10 AT sbcglobal.net>
To: "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 4:35 AM
Subject: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
Zech 13:5 but he will say, â?~I am not a prophet; I am a tiller of theground,
for a man sold me as a slave in my youth.â?T (NASB)is
The phrase "a man sold me as a slave" is ×Ö¸×"Ö¸× ×"Ö´×§Ö°× Ö·× Ö´×T.
The verb is causitive, literally "caused me to buy", which I don't think
reflected in "sold me as a slave". To sell someone as a slave is not tosays,
cause them to buy.
The only translation that retains the causitive meaning is KJV, which
"man taught me to keep cattle", but I don't think that is a causitive
meaning of "buy", although it is causitive.
Does "man" have to be the subject? Can it be the object? Could it be
translated:
for mankind He has made Me to purchase from My youth.
or
for mankind, they have caused Me to purchase from My youth. (treating the
3rd masculine singular as the indefinate pronoun as in 13:9.)
or
for mankind I have been made to purchase from My youth. (replacing
indefinate pronoun with passive)
thanks,
-Steve Miller
Detroit
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:53:31 -0400
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
To: leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20050622.075331.-868427.0.gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:12:12 +0200 "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
writes:
The verb QNH often means "to make" or "to create" (cf. Gen. 14:22).___________________
Might it
not mean, "I am no prophet, for I was made a man from my youth", or
"for
[God] created me a man from youth".
Yigal
What would that mean? It would seem that KiY is a causal particle. Is
see no connection between "I am a farmer" and "for God created me a man
from my youth."
george
gfsomsel
___________
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:23:38 +0100
From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <42B9584A.7070803 AT qaya.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
On 22/06/2005 12:53, George F Somsel wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:12:12 +0200 "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>Coul 'adam be used here in the sense of "common person", as (according
writes:
The verb QNH often means "to make" or "to create" (cf. Gen. 14:22).___________________
Might it
not mean, "I am no prophet, for I was made a man from my youth", or
"for
[God] created me a man from youth".
Yigal
What would that mean? It would seem that KiY is a causal particle. Is
see no connection between "I am a farmer" and "for God created me a man
from my youth."
to many) in Psalm 49:3, 62:10? In this case the speaker could be
claiming that he is a common peasant who never had the chance to become
someone special like a prophet.
But this still doesn't explain the hiphil of QNH, otherwise unattested.
I did wonder if this could be a denominative from QNH = cane, so meaning
that "a man had me beaten with canes", leading into verse 6.
--
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: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.10/25 - Release Date: 21/06/2005
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 08:43:13 -0400
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
To: peterkirk AT qaya.org
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20050622.084313.-558179.2.gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:23:38 +0100 Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
writes:
On 22/06/2005 12:53, George F Somsel wrote:________________
>On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:12:12 +0200 "Yigal Levin"
<leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
>writes:
>
>
>>The verb QNH often means "to make" or "to create" (cf. Gen.
14:22).
>>Might it
>>not mean, "I am no prophet, for I was made a man from my youth",
or
>>"for
>>[God] created me a man from youth".
>>
>>Yigal
>>
>>
>___________________
>
>What would that mean? It would seem that KiY is a causal particle.
Is
>see no connection between "I am a farmer" and "for God created me a
man
>from my youth."
>
>
>
Coul 'adam be used here in the sense of "common person", as
(according
to many) in Psalm 49:3, 62:10? In this case the speaker could be
claiming that he is a common peasant who never had the chance to
become
someone special like a prophet.
But this still doesn't explain the hiphil of QNH, otherwise
unattested.
I did wonder if this could be a denominative from QNH = cane, so
meaning
that "a man had me beaten with canes", leading into verse 6.
--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/
In that case it would anticipate the next verse and would seem somewhat
out of place.
george
gfsomsel
___________
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:03:17 -0500
From: ROY THOMAS <roythomas AT cwjamaica.com>
Subject: [b-hebrew] b-hebrew
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <42B02715.9090905 AT cwjamaica.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Dear Hebrew scholars,
I am just a beginner. I want to know and learn hebrew.
what would be the best translation of " midbar"?
Thanks.
Roy Thomas.
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 09:18:31 -0400
From: Jim West <jwest AT highland.net>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] b-hebrew
To: ROY THOMAS <roythomas AT cwjamaica.com>, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <42B96527.9000804 AT highland.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=UTF-8
Wilderness, wasteland, desert, steppe, pasturage The choice of words
used to translate depends completely on the context. Words have usage,
not meaning. Apart from some specific context a word means nothing.
Take, for example, the word "light". What does it mean? Well, it can
be used to describe something "not heavy" or it can be used to describe
"illumination" or "the absence of darkness". Only context will tell you
which it is.
Best
Jim
ROY THOMAS wrote:
Dear Hebrew scholars,
I am just a beginner. I want to know and learn hebrew.
what would be the best translation of " midbar"?
Thanks.
Roy Thomas.
--
D. Jim West
Biblical Studies Resources - http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
Biblical Theology Weblog - http://biblical-studies.blogspot.com
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 09:55:42 -0400
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] b-hebrew
To: roythomas AT cwjamaica.com
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20050622.095543.-558179.0.gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:03:17 -0500 ROY THOMAS <roythomas AT cwjamaica.com>
writes:
_______________________________________________
Dear Hebrew scholars,
I am just a beginner. I want to know and learn hebrew.
what would be the best translation of " midbar"?
Thanks.
Roy Thomas.
That would depend upon the context in which it is used as is almost
always the case with any word. No word is used in the same way in all
circumstances. It frequently is translated as "desert", but our concept
of desert as a dry, sandy, barren place may not be correct in all
instances. Sometimes it is simply "wilderness" or "pasture land."
george
gfsomsel
___________
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:04:49 -0700
From: "YODAN" <yodan AT yodanco.com>
Subject: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <20050622140510.D23794C006 AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Quick response (which I sent to John Gray, who asked the question, but
realized that it was not sent to the group - others may find this of
interest):
Referring to God in plural does not necessarily reflect a concept of a
plurality of God, but rather a sign of respect. Similarly to the use of the
plural "you" in French when addressing someone to whom one wishes to show
respect (even someone one is not well acquainted with). Some to think of
it, I wonder if "you" in English used to have two different forms - a
singular and a plural - that became one. Does anyone know? The use of
plural when referring to God can also be viewed as similar to the way some
people use the "we" language (The Royal "We") when they actually refer to
themselves.
"Comparing" God to other gods ("Who is like You among the gods...", i.e.,
there is no god like You) does not reflect an "admission" or acceptance that
there are other gods, but rather an acknowledgment that other people believe
in other gods, but those who believe in the Scriptures believe that the God
of the Scriptures is the only God and no other god in whom other people
believe is comparable to the God of the Scriptures.
Hope this helps.
Rivka
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:24:27 -0400
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Subject: Re: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity
To: yodan AT yodanco.com
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20050622.102427.-558179.1.gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:04:49 -0700 "YODAN" <yodan AT yodanco.com> writes:
________________
Quick response (which I sent to John Gray, who asked the question,
but
realized that it was not sent to the group - others may find this
of
interest):
Referring to God in plural does not necessarily reflect a concept of
a
plurality of God, but rather a sign of respect. Similarly to the
use of the
plural "you" in French when addressing someone to whom one wishes to
show
respect (even someone one is not well acquainted with). Some to
think of
it, I wonder if "you" in English used to have two different forms -
a
singular and a plural - that became one. Does anyone know? The use
of
plural when referring to God can also be viewed as similar to the
way some
people use the "we" language (The Royal "We") when they actually
refer to
themselves.
Yes, there was a singular form of the 2nd person pronoun in Middle
English which is no longer used. It appears in the AV translation as
"thou."
george
gfsomsel
___________
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:28:00 +0100
From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
Subject: Re: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity
To: yodan AT yodanco.com
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <42B97570.8090507 AT qaya.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
On 22/06/2005 15:04, YODAN wrote:
... I wonder if "you" in English used to have two different forms - a
singular and a plural - that became one. Does anyone know? ...
English had a singular "thou" and a plural "you", but as in French etc
it became customary to use "you" also for the singular, to the extent
that singular "thou" has almost died out, remaining only in some
dialects and used by some for addressing God - in an ironic reversal,
"thou" which originally was the less polite form being used as a term of
respect for God.
But the Hebrew usage is independent of this modern (i.e. post-mediaeval)
rejection of the singular "thou" etc found in most European languages.
--
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: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.10/25 - Release Date: 21/06/2005
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:08:34 -0400
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
To: peterkirk AT qaya.org
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20050622.110834.-558179.1.gfsomsel AT juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:23:38 +0100 Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
writes:
__________________
But this still doesn't explain the hiphil of QNH, otherwise
unattested.
I did wonder if this could be a denominative from QNH = cane, so
meaning
that "a man had me beaten with canes", leading into verse 6.
--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/
HALOT gives QNN as meaning "to nest." Would it be possible that this
could be a hiphil from this verb meaning in the context that he had
occupied the position of a farmer from his youth? It would need to be
3ms with 1cs suff.
george
gfsomsel
___________
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:20:30 -0500
From: "Stoney Breyer" <stoneyb AT touchwood.net>
Subject: RE: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <007101c5773d$ed8b0ab0$0a00a8c0@stoney>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Actually, 'you' was originally (eow) the objective plural case of the
pronoun which in the nominative plural was 'ye' (ge).
I don't remember enough OE/ME to say what was used honorifically before
the 16th Century, but by Elizabethan times, 'ye', too, was the familiar
or contemptuous form; a superior would have been addressed as 'you'
(which was, however, already, crowding out the other forms).
Stoney Breyer
Writer/Touchwood
-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Peter Kirk
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 9:28 AM
To: yodan AT yodanco.com
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity
On 22/06/2005 15:04, YODAN wrote:
... I wonder if "you" in English used to have two different forms - a
singular and a plural - that became one. Does anyone know? ...
English had a singular "thou" and a plural "you", but as in French etc
it became customary to use "you" also for the singular, to the extent
that singular "thou" has almost died out, remaining only in some
dialects and used by some for addressing God - in an ironic reversal,
"thou" which originally was the less polite form being used as a term of
respect for God.
But the Hebrew usage is independent of this modern (i.e. post-mediaeval)
rejection of the singular "thou" etc found in most European languages.
--
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: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.10/25 - Release Date:
21/06/2005
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:30:59 EDT
From: Bearpecs AT aol.com
Subject: Re: FW: [b-hebrew] Re:plurality & divinity
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <ea.6bdc1fae.2feade33 AT aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 6/22/2005 10:05:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
yodan AT yodanco.com writes:
I wonder if "you" in English used to have two different forms - a
singular and a plural - that became one.
"You" was originally plural, and "thou" ("thee" in objective case) was
singular, corresponding to German "du".
As in German ("Sie") and French ("vous"), "you" was used not only as plural
but as the formal singular. "Thou" was used in informal context, with
friends, etc. But it was also used in intimate context, with family; and for this
reason was also used to address Gd. It is because of this sense of intimacy
that the title of Martin Buber's book was translated "I and Thou" rather
than "I and You".
One sometimes sees "ye" in place of "you" and I am not familiar with the
history of that variant. (I've often seen it in old translations of the plural
imperative: e.g. "praise ye the L-rd".) It is not to be confused, however,
with the word in archaizing usage like "Ye Olde Widget Shoppe", in which the
"y" in "ye" stands for an orthographic variant of the old letter "eth" which
normally looked like a curved small "d" with a line through the stem and
represented the "th" sound in "the".
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:58:03 -0500
From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Zech 13:5
To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.Ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <20050622155803.8D63A1CE303 AT ws1-6.us4.outblaze.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Steve:
Looking at the context might help. Previous to the phrase in question, the person in question claims that he is a slave of the soil, grammatically a possessive where the soil owns the person. Often a feminine noun denotes a generalized subject, while a masculine of the same refers to a specific subject, so in context this could be translated as â?othis soilâ? refeerring to a particular plot of land. Is this the only example in Tanakh for )DMH / )DM ××"×z×" / ××"× ?
The verb QNH means to acquire and hold possession of (something) where the acquiring part of the action can be by purchase or manufacture. There is no equivelant in English, making any translation of this verb defective.
Putting the two together, we get â?oI am a man who is a slave of the soil, this soil has possessed me since I was young.â?
Karl W. Randolph.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Miller" <smille10 AT sbcglobal.net>
Zech 13:5 but he will say, â?~I am not a prophet; I am a tiller of the ground,
for a man sold me as a slave in my youth.â?T (NASB)
The phrase "a man sold me as a slave" is ×Ö¸×"Ö¸× ×"Ö´×§Ö°× Ö·× Ö´×T.
The verb is causitive, literally "caused me to buy", which I don't think is
reflected in "sold me as a slave". To sell someone as a slave is not to
cause them to buy.
The only translation that retains the causitive meaning is KJV, which says,
"man taught me to keep cattle", but I don't think that is a causitive
meaning of "buy", although it is causitive.
Does "man" have to be the subject? Can it be the object? Could it be
translated:
for mankind He has made Me to purchase from My youth.
or
for mankind, they have caused Me to purchase from My youth. (treating the
3rd masculine singular as the indefinate pronoun as in 13:9.)
or
for mankind I have been made to purchase from My youth. (replacing
indefinate pronoun with passive)
thanks,
-Steve Miller
Detroit
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
--
___________________________________________________________
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
End of b-hebrew Digest, Vol 30, Issue 15
****************************************
- [b-hebrew] Re: b-hebrew Digest, Vol 30, Issue 15, John Gray, 06/22/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.