Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Aaron & the Ark

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: <tladatsi AT charter.net>
  • To: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Aaron & the Ark
  • Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:35:53 -0400

Thank you for your email. You are of course correct.
However, what I was wondering about is if the definite
aritcle prefix Ha is added, it is pretty close to being an
anagram, especially if it is unpointed. Sorry, I was just
reading Numbers 10:35 late at night and I thought it said *
* When Aaron set out Moses said.. * but did not seem right.
Then I realized I had inverted Aleph and the He.


> From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
> Date: 2005/08/20 Sat AM 07:03:39 EDT
> To: tladatsi AT charter.net
> CC: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Aaron & the Ark
>
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 2:06:30 -0400 <tladatsi AT charter.net>
writes:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Is there some connection between *the ark* (Ha A Ro N)
and
> > *Aaron* (A Ha Ro N). They are anagrams.
> >
> > I have seen no clear derivation of Aaron.
> >
> > The derivation of ark I have read ARAH - *to gather *,
then
> > an ark is place to gather things together. What rule
makes
> > a noun with an -ON ending from a weak root? Or is this
not
> > a real derivation?
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > Jack Tladatsi
> _______________________________________________
>
> In Hebrew Aaron is )H:aRoN and ark is ):aRoWN. In other
words, the
> Hebrew word for "ark" lacks the Heh which appears as the
second radical
> of Aaron. It is therefore not an anagram.
>
> george
> gfsomsel
> ___________
>

Jack Tladatsi




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page