Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Rolf Furuli" <furuli AT online.no>]

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