Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>]

Dear David,
> Note:
>
> 1. Ehrensvärd's article deals with the entire REMAINDER of so-called 
> indefinite used not treated by Müller. Thus, together, they treat all 
> the examples commonly adduced.
>   

I have not yet come to the place in the article where Ehrensvärd says 
this. In fact he claims to cover all 67 examples in his article:

However, as I have stated elsewhere8, the
proposed fact that the definite article can be used with nouns that are
not determined seems contra-intuitive, and in the following I intend
to take a closer look at the 67 examples given to substantiate the
existence of the proposed category.9 I will argue that it in all
likelihood does not exist and show that most of the examples, when
carefully analysed, are examples of regular article usage.

> 2. Their argument cannot be so simplistically reduced to disagreement 
> with one example: it is the totality of their argument which should be 
> convincing, not a quibble with one example. Thus if the argument is 
> overall convincing, this would then inform isolated examples such as Gen 
> 14:10. Nevertheless, even if one disagrees with ALL of their examples, 
> the fact remains that there still is a possible argument for treating 
> them otherwise as Müller and Ehrensvärd have done.
>   

David, if a number of his examples are unsustainable, it weakens his 
argument. I simply responded to the first two. To his credit, some of 
the 67 texts do have flaws in them that he notes. This is good but does 
not affect verses where his arguments don't seem to work. His article is 
based on refuting the 67 examples.

He gives the following argument:

(5) Now Moabite raiders [GDWDY MW)B] used to enter the country each
spring. Once while some Israelites were burying a man, suddenly
they saw the band of raiders [HGDWD] (2 kgs 13,20-21)
Possibly, though perhaps not very likely, there came only one band
of raiders every year, hence the band.

He himself admits that his argument is unlikely, namely that every year 
it was the same group of raiders. But that unlikely argument is built on 
some ambivalence, for he gives the Hebrew word the meaning of "raiders" 
in verse 20, but "the band of raiders" in verse 21. So he switches from 
a possibly individualizing meaning for the word to a singular collective 
meaning. HAL does not give an individualizing meaning for the word. It 
gives two meanings: "1. band, raid . . . —2. troop of warriors." The NIV 
translates the singular as a collective in all cases and often takes the 
plural to mean "bands," though sometimes translates with "raiders." 
Ehrensvärd's argument seems to require that the first occurrence of the 
word refers to various individual raiders who comprise the "the band of 
raiders" in the next verse.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard