Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JoeWallack AT aol.com]

In a message dated 6/24/2007 5:37:51 PM Central Daylight Time,  
hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net writes:

> 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".

HH: Sorry, but they do sound  somewhat awkward to me because English does 
not usually use the generic  definite article this way, preferring an 
indefinite  article.

JW:
Here I think there is something of a Usage vs. Translation issue. If the  
emphasis is on the specific type of animal than "the" should be used for  
English. If the emphasis is on the indefinite animal within a type, than "a"  
should 
be used for English. Maybe the Hebrew is emphasizing the type here where  
English would not. If so, a more literal translation would use "the" and a  
"dynamic equivalent" translation would use "a", trying to present as if it 
was  
composed in English. It seems to me that the "proper" translation would be 
more  
dependent on the objective of the Translator (relative) rather than "right 
and  
wrong" (absolute). 
 
 

> JW: 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.

HH: Right, but that is exactly what this category of  usage in the 
grammars that you don't like does. It stresses that the  person or thing 
is clear in the mind of the person who uses the article  (i.e., there is 
a definite quality to the person or thing in the miond of  the writer), 
but since his subject is otherwise unknown or unidentified,  one can 
legitimately translate it with the indefinite article in  English.

JW:
Whoa Nelliphim! The general example above of Hebrew having a different  
emphasis is an INTER language issue. Theoretically all Hebrew Bible  speakers 
would 
be on the same page, so to speak. Your example in the preceding  paragraph is 
an INTRA language issue. The subject is definite to the Hebrew  Bible speaker 
and indefinite to the Hebrew Bible hearer. The default position is  that what 
is definite to the Hebrew Bible speaker would be definite to the  Hebrew 
Bible hearer. What specific examples of this do you claim (other than  7:14 
of 
course)?
 
 
>HH:
>If one is honest with the context in Isaiah 7, there is no  real reason 
>to assume that there was any particular woman that the term  in question 
>pointed to. There is no other woman mentioned in the context  except 
>Isaiah's wife, who was not a virgin and seems to have had grown  sons (so 
>was not a young woman either). Good writers don't use totally  obscure 
>references, and I believe God inspired the biblical  writers.


JW:
As far as using the observation that there is no other woman mentioned in  
the context, if your meaning above is that this by itself forces a conclusion 
of 
 indefinite, that is proof-texting. If I, in return, pointed out one  
consideration as proof of definite I have Faith that you would likewise be  
unimpressed.
 
 
Joseph Wallack
 







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