Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Richard Steiner on Sin and Shin

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
  • To: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Richard Steiner on Sin and Shin
  • Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:55:37 +0000

On 06/01/2007 04:29, K Randolph wrote:
Peter:

You remember previously I mentioned where the root where the verb #YM
to place is recognizably similar to $M that place, there. ...

If there were a regular pattern of such doublets, this one might be understood as fitting it. But there is no regular pattern, see below. Anyway, this cannot be an example of "several words sometimes written with a sin, sometimes with a shin, but otherwise having the same meaning", as these are different words.

... I have
noticed other words like N$H/N#H to put out of mind, ...

BDB does not mention N&H (by the way, "&" is the proper transliteration for sin, and "#" for unpointed shin). Are you sure it exists? If so it is likely to be a variant of the well known N&) "lift". There is a variant reading with sin of WN#YTY in Jeremiah 23:39 which has been understood e.g. by ancient versions as a form of N&). Is this what you are talking about? But it seems as if the choice here is between WN$YTY "forget" (MT) and WN&YTY "lift" (as understood by ancient versions); no one is understanding WN&YTY as "forget".

... ($Q/(#Q to
defraud, ...

(&Q is a hapax in Genesis 26:20 (Hithpael only; ($Q is Qal and Pual only), which just could mean "defraud", but in the context seems to have the same meaning as RYB "dispute". Or this could be a case of the verb being deliberately repointed to match the (perhaps) well known place name Esek. Anyway, this is an example of "several words sometimes written with a sin, sometimes with a shin, but otherwise having the same meaning" only if you count different stem forms from the same root as the same word, which is debatable.

... $QD/#QD to keep watch ...

&QD is also a hapax, in Lamentations 1:14. Many manuscripts read $QD, as does LXX. Either this is a copyist's error, or else an obscure expression has been corrected to familiar one multiple times. But there is no evidence that there was a recognised verb &QD with the meaning "keep watch"; those who read &QD give a different meaning.

... and other similar pairs. I have not
made a formal study of the phenomenon, just happened to notice it as I
was reading.

I have heard one argument that these represent copyist errors, but
they happen often enough, particularly in words like PR$/PR# to spread
out, used of hands as in getting ready for a hug, as in a cloth, net,
book, entrails of an animal for divination and so forth, dividing the
same action to different roots depending on the object being acted on, ...

PR& means "spread out". One of the meanings of PR$ is "explain". I accept that there could be a semantic link between "spread out" and "explain", but this link is conjectural.

It seems that your "several words sometimes written with a sin, sometimes with a shin, but otherwise having the same meaning" comes down to two or three possibilities in which the semantic link is purely conjectural. You really need to add such qualifications to your remarks.

--
Peter Kirk
E-mail: peter AT qaya.org
Blog: http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page