Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Steve Miller" <smille10 AT sbcglobal.net>]

> From: K Randolph Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 9:52 PM
> 
> Steve:
> 
> I find myself asking a few questions:
> 
> 1) Is there a DSS for this verse, and if so, what is its spelling?
> What is the earliest surviving attestation for this verse?

[Steve Miller] There is no DSS for the part of the verse being considered.
LXX and Aramaic translate it as plural.
> 
> 2) While the Great Isaiah Scroll is important because of its
> completeness, how good is it for textual criticism?

 [Steve Miller] It is very close to the MT. Isa 7:14 in DSS exactly matches
Matthew's quote of it, whereas the MT (and LXX, which matches the MT
exactly), doesn't make sense. (they shall call his name (DSS & Matthew) vs
you (2fs) shall call his name (MT & LXX)). Also Isa 53:9 makes more sense in
DSS. (his death (DSS & LXX) vs his deaths (MT)).

> 
> 3) How does the plural verb immediately preceding the XMDT affect
> whether or not it is plural or singular? How would you repoint it so
> that it is not a plural verb?

[Steve Miller] With the waw on the end, the verb looks unambiguously plural
to me just from the consonants alone.
> 
> 4) Is there a corresponding waw in all the DSS for a holem, or only in
> some of them?

[Steve Miller] In every case (17/17) where the waw under the holem was
missing in MT Isa in the imperfect form of "come", it is present in DSS. I
think that is a random sampling. If you propose another test I with about 10
instances, I will try it. 
> 
> On 12/23/06, Steve Miller <smille10 AT sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > HH: The Masoretic pointing records an oral reading tradition that may
> go
> > > back to the second or first century. However, it is possible that
> errors
> > > crept into the tradition, and the Masoretes themselves were not
> > > infallible (though very careful). So there may be errors in the
> > > pointing, but they are rare in my view. The word "desire" in Hag 2:7
> can
> > > be plural if it is repointed.
> > >
> >
> > [Steve Miller] Some are saying that it is OK to add the vowel Holem to
> > chemdath in Hag. 2:7 in the MT to change it from singular to plural, and
> > that the vowels go back to the 1st or 2nd century AD.
> >
> > It appears to me that whenever there is a Holem without the waw under it
> in
> > MT, there is a corresponding waw in DSS.
> >
> > I did a little study on this: The imperfect form of the verb "come" BW)
> can
> > have a waw with a holem above it between the beth and aleph, or it can
> be
> > abbreviated to just a holem with no waw between the beth and aleph. (If
> we
> > ignore the holem, then we can't tell the difference between hiphil and
> qal
> > forms of "come".)
> 
> Not true, context gives us a strong clue.
> 
> > I searched for all occurances in Isaiah of imperfect BW) that do not
> have
> > the waw between the beth and aleph. (I chose Isa because of the
> available
> > DSS manuscript.) I found 18 such occurrances in Isaiah: 1:12; 13:2;
> 26:2;
> > 36:22; 37:1,5; 39:3; 41:25; 44:7; 47:9,11,13; 48:3; 49:12; 52:1; 60:4-6.
> > (Most in Isaiah have the internal waw, while most in the Pentateuch do
> not.)
> > Then I looked up all these in the DSS Great Isaiah Scroll which is
> available
> > online. 100% of these verses have the waw there in place of just the
> holem
> > in MT (excluding Isa 1:12, which was unreadable).
> >
> > Therefore, I conclude that the holem goes back to at least 100 B.C. (the
> > time of the DSS), and is authoritative. Therefore I do not believe that
> you
> > have the freedom to add a holem to chemdath in Hag. 2:7 to change it
> from
> > singular to plural.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Steve Miller
> > Detroit
> > www.voiceInWilderness.info
> 
> Another source to check is Chronicles: it is full of waws and yods
> that don't appear nearly as often in earlier books, even earlier
> post-Exile books. Do all plural feminine nouns have a waw, or are
> there some that don't? What about other similar holems? (I have not
> made a study, it would be interesting to see the results.)
> 
> What affect does the fact that XMDT is feminine have on your
> considerations?
> 
> Karl W. Randolph.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew