Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Yitzhak Sapir" <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>]

On 12/29/06, K Randolph wrote:

> > ...  A clear example is Jer 10:11, but there are more:
> >
> This verse is in Aramaic, so its relevance in this discussion is very
> limited, at best. Further, this is an interchange of ayin and qoph,
> tsada not an issue here.

This is indeed not an interchange of Sade and Quf, but Ayin and Quf.
However, the Ayin here in Aramaic represents the exact same phoneme
discussed as the Sade in Hebrew.  That is, just like one can make a
comparison between th in the roots of various Semitic languages and
Shin in Hebrew and Tav in Aramaic, so too one can make a comparison
between Dad in Arabic, Sade in Hebrew, and Ayin in Aramaic.  In this
verse, as in the other verses, and in the suggested root I gave for cav,
we always have Dad in the Arabic cognate, Ayin in the Aramaic,
and Quf in the Hebrew.  Richard Steiner, who has been discussed here
previously in the context of ghayin, suggests that before this phoneme
merged with ghayin in Aramaic, it was an affricate whose shift can be
reconstructed from PS [tɬ'] > [qɬ'] > [qχ'] or [tɬ'] > [kɬ'] > [kχ'].  While 
it
had a [q] or [k] component it was spelled in Old Aramaic as Quf, and
then it shifted to ghayin and was spelled with an Ayin.  I think the
double use of an Ayin and Quf can most plausibly be explained as the
author of this verse using the Hebrew pronunciation of Sade for the
Aramaic word even as he spelt it with an Ayin.  This is in part because I 
don't
see how someone who recognized both an voiceless velar (quf, het), and
a voiced velar (gimel, ayin) would have repesented a particular phoneme
as both voiced and voiceless.  However, the idea of a Hebrew pronunciation
for this phoneme with Ayin being understood by the author of Jeremiah as
an Aramaic equivalent of Sade for this phoneme makes more sense.  If
so, this is simply another example of Sade/Quf interchange but in Aramaic
garb.

> > Judges 5:26 has mxch followed by mxqh.
>
> This is in poetry where it was not uncommon to use a similar sounding
> word with a complimentary meaning to fill out the poem. In this case
> it is a happax legomai where we are not sure of its meaning, possibly
> to smash in.

I would very much appreciate it if you could give other examples of similar
sounding words with a complimentary/equivalent meaning in poetry.

> > 1 Kings 6:34 has cl(ym followed by ql(ym.
>
> Look back at the context.

The context indicates that these are the same word.  The Hebrew
syntax indicates this very clearly.  It was pointed out on ANE list that
BHS notes variants containing cl(ym instead of the word ql(ym.
However, I believe that the textually hard reading ql(ym is to be preferred
here.

> > Isaiah 28:10 and 28:13 have cw lcw followed by qw lqw.
>
> Again distinct meanings, CW from the same root as MCWH commandment,
> means a command.

This is very dubious.  Besides the uses of this word in Biblical Hebrew, this
word is not in Jastrow.  The word "command, order" is cw)h in Jastrow.  While
I dislike Jastrow for its relatively old scholarship and also at many times
dubious etymologies, I think that the simple absence of this word from
Jastrow, indicating that it is not used in Rabbinic Hebrew at all, and the
word cw)h instead, indicates that cw is not the word for "order" or
"command".  Your further interpretation of this verse has very much a 
Christian
theological/polemical tone to it.  That Paul does not use this interpretation 
of
this verse, as suggested by Peter Kirk, is evidence that this was not the
meaning of the verse.

> QW is a (measuring) line, often used to make a QWH
> measurement. Again, this is poetic with similar sounding yet
> complimentary meanings,

How is Q and C similar sounding (except in the above described
development of PS *Dad)?

> saying that the" word of God has become to
> them a command to a command, a command to a command, a measuring line
> to a measuring line, a measuring line to a measuring line, a little
> here, a little there" in other words, concentrating on picayune rules
> and regulations, how far one can walk a sabbath, etc.

This is again dubious methodology.  It is unlikely that "how far one can walk
on the Sabbath" was an issue prior to the 1st century CE or, say, the 2nd
century BCE at most.  You seem to be using Christian theology/polemics
to explain Biblical Hebrew words from the First Temple period.  This type of
methodology is extremely dubious and has been labeled problematic by
moderators before.

> (Actually, CW is the imperative form of the verb CWH which the author
> may have used here for its poetic effect, though it is also a
> legitimate noun derivation from CWH.)

The root XWH has the noun XY, not XW.  Can you give other examples of
how this noun is derived from similar roots?

Yitzhak Sapir