Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Eccl 1:4 (continued)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Rolf Furuli" <furuli AT online.no>
  • To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Eccl 1:4 (continued)
  • Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:09:05 -0000

Dear Uri,

I think that the word "Welt" (= world) found in KAI illustrates the issue well. I
have not studied how the original "time"-term (WLM came to become a local term
in Phoenician, but I have done so with Aramaic. It seems to me that the word
that originally signified a time period of undisclosed length, came to be
used to refer to more specific periods of time, either to a period of
unending time (eternality) or to a shorter but specific period. The
development continued, and (WLM came to refer not only to the specific
period of time but also to the special arrangements of things among humans that were
characteristic of that time period. I think this is the background for
"Welt".

In Wolf Leslau (1987) "Comparative Dictionary of Ge´ez" we find "(alam; this
world; the secular world; universe, mankind, eternity, lifetime, time."
Ge´ez was influenced by Greek and Syriac, and I guess that "this world" and
"mankind" are due to Greek influence, though in a somewhat distorted way, since KOSMOS and AIWN evidently is confused (but that is the general rule in modern Bible translations as well).

In LXX and the New Testament (WLM is generally rendered by AIWN. In the NT, KOSMOS refers to the human family or something related to the human family, possibly except one instance of "universe". The word AIWN on the other hand does not refer to "the world" in the mentioned sense, but either to "eternal time; eternality" or to a shorter time period characterized by special arrangements of things (the stress being on the arrangments of things).

The points above indicate that one language is a living medium which develops, and other languages develop as well. A word, therefore can basically signal particular sides of the same concept at different times, and even a concept can change and incorporate new meanings. I have never denied that the Hebrew word (WLM can refer to eternality or to eternal time. To the contrary, I think that this is the case in many passages in the Tanakh, including Eccl 1:4. But I also realize that the word in the Tanakh can refer to shorter time periods (but hardly ever with the stress of the arrangments of things of a particular period). So the issue for me was not primarily Hebrew lexical semantics, but rather the principles of literal translation: Should the translator use the broader term "time indefinite," in which we can subsume both eternality and a shorter period of time, or should s/he interpret the reference in behalf of the reader and use "forever" when he or she believed that this was the reference?


Best regards

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo

----- Original Message ----- From: "Uri Hurwitz" <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 3:09 PM
Subject: [b-hebrew] Eccl 1:4 (continued)


As the discussion of (LM - olam - continues, it may be helpful to
check some ancient cognates. KAI translates this word in Phoenician as
"Ewigkeit, Welt", and L(LM "fuer immer". The same meaning of "eternal"
occurs also in Ugaritic.

Uri






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page