Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JoeWallack AT aol.com]

Harold Holmyard
"My argument was not that the generic use of the article was exactly the  
same as the usage of it in Gen 14:13, but they are similar. The one  
could lead to the other. I wrote to Joseph:

See the word "famine" in  Isa 29:8. See how it is used with "silver" in 
Gen 13:2, or with "crimson" in  Isa 1:18, or with "blindness" in Gen 
19:11. In all these English would use  "a/an" or nothing, not "the."

Or look at these cases below, all of which  take the definite article in 
Hebrew, but an indefinite article in  English:

like the heart of a lion (2 Sam 17:10)

as a dog laps  (Judges 7:5)

as one hunts a partridge (1 Sam 26:20)

as one rends a  kid (Judges 14:6)

If Hebrew could consider all these cases, which are  clearly indefinite 
in English, as worthy of a definite article in a generic  sense,"
 
 
JW:
None of the above are clearly indefinite in English. I've seen English  
translations with "the" for all but 
Judges 14:6. More importantly, none even sound awkward with "the". You do  
seem here to accept though that there is a reason for use of the Hebrew 
definite 
 article? I accept that use of the Hebrew definite article may be used to  
emphasize a definite quality that would not be emphasized in English and  
hence 
the indefinite in English would be appropriate. 
 
 
 
Harold Holmyard

" then it 
is consistent to suppose that in Gen 14:13, where the  idea can at first 
be a generic concept of one who escaped, that the author  might use a 
definite article:

Gen. 14:13 ¶ One who had escaped came  and reported this to Abram the 
Hebrew. Now Abram was living near the great  trees of Mamre the Amorite, 
a brother of Eshcol and Aner, all of whom were  allied with Abram."
 
JW:
I've seen the English "the" for this but this one does sound awkward and I  
think the English indefinite is preferred here. 
 
 
Harold Holmyard
"In Gen 16:7 there can be a generic concept of a spring presented first,  
which receives further specification:

Gen. 16:7  The angel of  the LORD found Hagar near a spring in the 
desert; it was the spring that is  beside the road to Shur.

I am not saying that it is exactly the same as  the generic usage, but it 
is so close that I can imagine a smooth transition  from one to the other 
in Hebrew thinking. It is the generic put for the  specific, which yields 
a somewhat indefinite idea. The problem, again, is in  assuming that 
Hebrew uses the definite article just as English does. That  was Joseph 
Wallack's basic contention. But it does not, and it is a mistake  to 
assume that it does."
 
JW:
I do not think that Hebrew uses the definite article exactly the same as  
English does. I do think that Hebrew either always has a purpose of 
indicating a  
definite quality when using the definite article or almost always does. I  
think the main difference here is usage between the two may have a  different 
emphasis.  
 
 
Harold Holmyard
"Here is an interesting case:

Gen. 41:42 Then Pharaoh took his  signet ring from his finger and put it 
on Joseph’s finger. He dressed him in  robes of fine linen and put a gold 
chain around his neck.

In Hebrew  it is literally "the gold chain." It is not the whole genera 
that was put  around his neck, and it seems to be begging the question to 
assume that  there was a well-known gold necklace that was bestowed on a 
person in  Joseph's position. We don't know that or know that Joseph's 
position was  even a regular position. Did every king take off his signet 
ring and put it  on the finger of a subordinate? The text speaks of robes 
of fine linen, but  not particular ones. So this may be a specific use of 
the definite article,  as Waltke says, to refer to measured units. [cf. 
Cant 1:13 (bag); Ex 16:36  (omer)]. This, again, would be similar to the 
usage in Gen 16:7 and 14:13,  where a specific thing is present in the 
speaker's or writer's mind, but it  is an otherwise unidentified specific 
thing (the one who escaped that I have  in mind -- the one who escaped 
who figures in this story). Such a usage does  not betray the basic 
concept of the definite article, so the effort to  undermine an 
established grammatical category is unnecessary. Of course this  is a 
much smaller category of usage than the regular definite article, for  
there are only a limited number of instances where the usage would be  
suitable. But a limited number of occurrences of a usage does not  
invalidate a usage."
 
JW:
I have to confess again that here "the" gold chain sounds awkward. I accept  
that USAGE of the definite article is more prevalent in Biblical Hebrew than 
in  English but I think that is primarily due to the religious context, where 
there  is a preference for the definite due to objectives of certainty and 
authority.  Almost all of these uses of the definite article in Hebrew should 
or 
at least  can be translated "the" in English. The instances of a preferred 
translation of  "a" in English are relatively rare. By context we seem to 
lack an 
example where  randomness is clearly defined, such as Moses saying to 
Pharoah, 
"Behold, I will  now pull A Rabbi out of a Ha", with the Hebrew definite 
article used. 
 
"Normally" is almost as good as "always" in establishing the Likely  
translation of a word. I think it's clear by now that the Hebrew definite  
article is 
normally translated as "the" in English. Therefore, by itself,  without 
considering the surrounding context yet, the use of the definite article  at 
7:14 
means a translation of "the" is likely. Agree or disagree?
 
 
 
Joseph Wallack







************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.