Biblical Hebrew Forum

[kgraham0938 AT comcast.net]

that is very interesting what Joshua Fox studies revealed, I was thinking 
maybe the yod there was a vowel.  Not trying to contridict what Fox's studies 
show but just pointing out something I found interesting in H.A.L.O.T (hebrew 
and aramaic lexicon of the old testament) p 40, has listed 'ayil and right 
next to it 'awl which I believe is suggesting the yod is a vowel. And then 
goes on to list a ugaritic form il, and an akkadian form (y)alu AHw.  It also 
list Eg. which I believe is Egyptian has lw.yyr =irr = 'el.  (I don't know 
either language but it seems relevant to etomology.)

But relative to our passage, it list 'eley as the construct of 'ayil and list 
'ayley as a variant.  



--
Kelton Graham 
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Yitzhak Sapir" <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com> 

> On 9/27/06, kgraham0938 AT comcast.net wrote: 
> > 
> > @Yitzhak: 
> > 
> > Thanks alot I appreciate it, the only problem I have is that the 
> > apparatus 
> > of BHS says many manuscripts have 'ayil' here as opposed to 'el. And it 
> > seems to me that 'el going into 'eley is not impossible but pretty rare 
> > if 
> > in the Hebrew bible. I have not found one other example of 'el going into 
> > plural construct, but that is not to say it is impossible and I have not 
> > checked other outside sources but it seems that 'ayil would be the better 
> > rendering. 
> 
> You are right, it doesn't occur anywhere else. 
> 
> However, there are various reasons to think that it is the plural of 'el 
> and not 
> 'ayil. 
> 
> Joshua Fox, a linguist, reconstructs the word )ayil from PS *)ayyal, "ibex, 
> mountain goat." I guess )ayil derives *)ayyal > *)ayyl > *)ayil, where the 
> last 
> vowel first drops and the geminated yy takes it place first as )ay-yl and 
> later 
> it degrades into a vowel. The significance of all this is that the -y- in 
> )ayil 
> is a geminated root letter in its origin. I doubt it would be lost. 
> 
> It's true that )eley never appears as a construct of )el. But neither does 
> it 
> appear as the plural of )ayil. The plural of )ayil is generally (this 
> example 
> excluded) )eyley. Take for example Ex 15:15. Here )eyley is parallel with 
> )aluwfey, which is very fitting. Both )ayil and )alp refer to strong beasts 
> that in turn are used to denote the leaders of a community. In this text, 
> the -y- of )eyley appears, even though this text generally uses spellings 
> that are defective such as )elim in Ex 15:10. This underscores the 
> point about the -y- being a consonantal root letter made earlier. 
> 
> The word )el is a very unique word. It is the only two-root letter PS word 
> that 
> Fox reconstructs as a masculine and yet its vowel is not reconstructed 
> as dropped in construct cases (compare ben "son", bni "my son", $em 
> "name", $mi "my name"). It is also used, besides for "god" as a general 
> term for "power" or "strength" as in Genesis 31:29. Furthermore, this is 
> a special case, speaking of the ")el"s that will speak out from Sheol. It 
> is 
> by its very nature a supernatural scenario. This would suggest that the 
> word with a more supernatural meaning - )el - may be the one intended 
> here. 
> 
> More interesting than that comment in the apparatus of BHS is the 
> comment I see in the HUB that in the Greek, verse 19 is displaced and 
> placed immediately after Sheol in this verse. The HUB refers to two 
> Medieval manuscripts (of the five it normally examines for possible 
> differences) that have )yly, one of them as an initial spelling that was 
> later corrected (to ")ly" I suppose). I don't think that is sufficient 
> reason to correct the MT's spelling. The Septuagint, apparently reads 
> ")lh" and not ")ly". But it doesn't read a middle -y-: 
> http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/gopher/text/religion/biblical/parallel/44.Ezekiel.par
>  
> 
> Yitzhak Sapir 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
>From kgraham0938 AT comcast.net  Wed Sep 27 23:51:05 2006
Return-Path: <kgraham0938 AT comcast.net>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from rwcrmhc15.comcast.net (rwcrmhc15.comcast.net [204.127.192.85])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 830E44C00C
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:51:05 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from rmailcenter80.comcast.net ([204.127.197.180])
        by comcast.net (rwcrmhc15) with SMTP
        id <20060928035104m1500lcnfke>; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 03:51:05 +0000
Received: from [69.246.10.143] by rmailcenter80.comcast.net;
        Thu, 28 Sep 2006 03:51:03 +0000
From: kgraham0938 AT comcast.net
To: "Yitzhak Sapir" <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>,
        b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 03:51:03 +0000
Message-Id: 
<092820060351.21959.451B46A6000E6B06000055C72200760180C8CCC7CF030E080E9D0905 AT comcast.net>
X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Apr 11 2006)
X-Authenticated-Sender: a2dyYWhhbTA5MzhAY29tY2FzdC5uZXQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.8
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] help with Ezekiel 32:21 LXX portion
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 03:51:05 -0000

Sorry I forgot to mention the stuff you said about the LXX.  It looks like 
according to  HALOT has 'lh is linked to 'yl.  It reads under 'lh

"ailat, unitary noun from 'yl.  If I am reading this correctly.  Then it 
reads Low 1:19 1f unitary noun from 'lym > 'yl;.... massive tree.

--
Kelton Graham 
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: kgraham0938 AT comcast.net 

> that is very interesting what Joshua Fox studies revealed, I was thinking 
> maybe 
> the yod there was a vowel. Not trying to contridict what Fox's studies show 
> but 
> just pointing out something I found interesting in H.A.L.O.T (hebrew and 
> aramaic 
> lexicon of the old testament) p 40, has listed 'ayil and right next to it 
> 'awl 
> which I believe is suggesting the yod is a vowel. And then goes on to list 
> a 
> ugaritic form il, and an akkadian form (y)alu AHw. It also list Eg. which I 
> believe is Egyptian has lw.yyr =irr = 'el. (I don't know either language 
> but it 
> seems relevant to etomology.) 
> 
> But relative to our passage, it list 'eley as the construct of 'ayil and 
> list 
> 'ayley as a variant. 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Kelton Graham 
> KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net 
> 
> -------------- Original message -------------- 
> From: "Yitzhak Sapir" 
> 
> > On 9/27/06, kgraham0938 AT comcast.net wrote: 
> > > 
> > > @Yitzhak: 
> > > 
> > > Thanks alot I appreciate it, the only problem I have is that the 
> > > apparatus 
> > > of BHS says many manuscripts have 'ayil' here as opposed to 'el. And it 
> > > seems to me that 'el going into 'eley is not impossible but pretty rare 
> > > if 
> > > in the Hebrew bible. I have not found one other example of 'el going 
> > > into 
> > > plural construct, but that is not to say it is impossible and I have 
> > > not 
> > > checked other outside sources but it seems that 'ayil would be the 
> > > better 
> > > rendering. 
> > 
> > You are right, it doesn't occur anywhere else. 
> > 
> > However, there are various reasons to think that it is the plural of 'el 
> > and 
> not 
> > 'ayil. 
> > 
> > Joshua Fox, a linguist, reconstructs the word )ayil from PS *)ayyal, 
> > "ibex, 
> > mountain goat." I guess )ayil derives *)ayyal > *)ayyl > *)ayil, where 
> > the 
> last 
> > vowel first drops and the geminated yy takes it place first as )ay-yl and 
> later 
> > it degrades into a vowel. The significance of all this is that the -y- in 
> )ayil 
> > is a geminated root letter in its origin. I doubt it would be lost. 
> > 
> > It's true that )eley never appears as a construct of )el. But neither 
> > does it 
> > appear as the plural of )ayil. The plural of )ayil is generally (this 
> > example 
> > excluded) )eyley. Take for example Ex 15:15. Here )eyley is parallel with 
> > )aluwfey, which is very fitting. Both )ayil and )alp refer to strong 
> > beasts 
> > that in turn are used to denote the leaders of a community. In this text, 
> > the -y- of )eyley appears, even though this text generally uses spellings 
> > that are defective such as )elim in Ex 15:10. This underscores the 
> > point about the -y- being a consonantal root letter made earlier. 
> > 
> > The word )el is a very unique word. It is the only two-root letter PS 
> > word 
> that 
> > Fox reconstructs as a masculine and yet its vowel is not reconstructed 
> > as dropped in construct cases (compare ben "son", bni "my son", $em 
> > "name", $mi "my name"). It is also used, besides for "god" as a general 
> > term for "power" or "strength" as in Genesis 31:29. Furthermore, this is 
> > a special case, speaking of the ")el"s that will speak out from Sheol. It 
> > is 
> > by its very nature a supernatural scenario. This would suggest that the 
> > word with a more supernatural meaning - )el - may be the one intended 
> > here. 
> > 
> > More interesting than that comment in the apparatus of BHS is the 
> > comment I see in the HUB that in the Greek, verse 19 is displaced and 
> > placed immediately after Sheol in this verse. The HUB refers to two 
> > Medieval manuscripts (of the five it normally examines for possible 
> > differences) that have )yly, one of them as an initial spelling that was 
> > later corrected (to ")ly" I suppose). I don't think that is sufficient 
> > reason to correct the MT's spelling. The Septuagint, apparently reads 
> > ")lh" and not ")ly". But it doesn't read a middle -y-: 
> > 
> http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/gopher/text/religion/biblical/parallel/44.Ezekiel.par
>  
> > 
> > Yitzhak Sapir 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > b-hebrew mailing list 
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
>From VadimCherny AT mail.ru  Thu Sep 28 01:36:38 2006
Return-Path: <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mx1.mail.ru (mx1.mail.ru [194.67.23.121])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B00E74C00C
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:36:38 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from [83.143.234.110] (port=3518 helo=SRVVAD)
        by mx1.mail.ru with asmtp 
        id 1GSoZZ-0001Vb-00; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 09:36:37 +0400
Message-ID: <008601c6e2c0$10de7350$0300000a@SRVVAD>
From: "Vadim Cherny" <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>
To: "Yonah Mishael" <yonahmishael AT gmail.com>,
        "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
References: 
<000301c6df3f$a55e9250$aeda869f@chris696dabb06><004901c6e001$2570b3d0$0300000a@SRVVAD><4b24a3090609241142h7e2f941w44740b1520659791 AT mail.gmail.com><005801c6e0be$bca55e00$0300000a@SRVVAD>
        <4b24a3090609251629i5bcc14e9g21716576273ef55a AT mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:36:35 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Gesenius on Femininity
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 05:36:38 -0000

> > I'm of course aware of the orthodox etymology. It doesn't make much
sense;
> > why the tav-form? Presumably, tav-nouns are frozen 2ms future tense
verbs,
> > the least likely form for "to teach."
> > Derivation from tor - tur is plain; see Prov12:26, etc; admonition.
> >
> > Vadim Cherny
>
> So, I guess feminine noun forms with a T prefix just do not fit
> regularly into your system?

No such implication at all. When a verb is commonly employed as 2ms FT or
imperative, it may be frozen as a tav-noun, and eventually acquire suffix
hey, either fem or of result, or destinative. The particulaw word, torah, is
semantically unrelated to the 2ms.

> An even more analogous form is תודה TWDH, which comes from YDH / YDY.
> Are you going to suggest that "thanks" comes from a different root,
> perhaps TWD? If the form TWRH does not come from YRH because of its
> form, then you should perhaps also argue that TWDH does not come from
> YDH. The cases are the same.

You might consider tuz, twz (Aramaic ntz), to get off. Hebrew todah is
straightforwardly semantically related.
Anyway, Occam's Razor isn't unambiguous. In my opinion, tur - torah is the
simplest derivation both semantically and morphologically. There is no way
to formally prove either point of view.

Vadim Cherny