Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Chris and Nel" <wattswestmaas AT eircom.net>]

Ok Karl,

That is logical, but how can anyone arrive at that in the hiphil? "I ask" 
should then have been in the qal imperfect with Vav consecutive (I'm doing 
my best here) or by a totally other construction, (if she was addressing Eli 
directly with this question/statement then this would be clear) so obviously 
this can not be the writer's intention.

I'm still lost then to the hiphil here.

regards, chris


> Chris:
>
> Look again at the context. Especially verse 11. "Lent" is an incorrect
> translation. A more correct yet not too rigidly Hebraic translation,
> "I ask that he be for the Lord all his days, he was asked to be for
> the Lord." In other words, she was asking Eli to take her son to be
> with him in God's service.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
>
> On 10/27/06, Chris and Nel <wattswestmaas AT eircom.net> wrote:
> > 1 Samuel 1:28 -- "I have lent him to the Lord ....  He is lent to the 
> > Lord"
> >
> > The first verb Perfect-Hiphil and the second verb Qal-Participle;  I sat 
> > and
> > I read and I thought and I looked up and I thought and I read again!  I 
> > even
> > read a complex synopsis of Hiphil and was left entirely in the dark about
> > this. It beats me how we arrive at Lent from Asked/begged.  What more can 
> > I
> > say?  The REAL issue for me is why not 'NaTaN'.  A simple 'give' and be 
> > done
> > with it.
> >
> > And besides all this how can Gesenius and others say 'Lent'. This would
> > imply that Hannah, at some stage, expects him back, but this was NOT the 
> > vow
> > she prayed.
> >
> > Am I not learning things correctly or what?  I have just began an
> > intermediate Hebrew book by Ehud Ben Zvi and he does not even mention 
> > this
> > anomaly.
> >
> > Regards
> > Chris.