Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>]

Harold,

The grammatical issue with instances such as Genesis 18:7 hinges on  
the fact that HA-NA(AR, 'the servant' is not mentioned earlier. But  
an earlier mention does not amount to a definition. I see it as all  
starting with English grammarians inventing the "definite" article,  
with this "definiteness" growing in time to assume a life of its own,  
as is often the case with suggestive terminology. Often an "a/the"  
choice is not for a 0/1 situation of all or nothing, for a sharp  
indefinite/definite cut, but for a gradual scale of intermediate  
degrees of some narrow sense category nested within a wider sense  
category.
The Hebrew author [we consider the question now in the intra sense of  
Joseph Wallack] could have avoided the HA- of HA-NA(AR by referring  
to the servant as NA(AR )EXAD, or NA(AR MI-N(ARAW, but this would  
improperly imply that he gave it randomly and in a disorganized  
manner to a servant that just haphazardly happened to pass by. The  
HA- is meaningful in indicating that Abraham gave it deliberately and  
thoughtfully to a servant specifically summoned, or whose duty it  
specifically was [the cook?], to dress the calf. Hence it appears to  
me that the proper translation of HA-NA(AR is "the appointed  
servant", raising thereby the servant to a greater degree of  
certainty and determination, and not an insignificant and arbitrary  
"a servant" within Abraham's household  as most of them do.
I notice that Luther translates )EL HA-NA(AR as "dem Knechte" [dem =  
to him?] using the dative form of their definite article.
I see that Martin Ehrensvaerd proposes [relying, I understand, on  
some Arabic usage] to regard HA-NA(AR as "his servant", which still  
does not raise the specificity of the identification by one small  
degree over "a servant".

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Jun 26, 2007, at 8:12 PM, Harold Holmyard wrote:

> Dear Isaac,
> > Just a brief remark. HA-RA(EB of Isaiah 29:8 is "he who is famished".
> > Notice that this translation does not contain one single "the".
>
> Thanks. This example is not in Ehrensvärd's article, but the author
> would probably treat it as a generic use of the definite article.
> David's point would be that the person here is a generalized person, a
> hypothetical person, while the person in Isa 7:14 seems to be a  
> specific
> person, as is the person in Gen 14:13. So in my thinking, these last
> cases appear to be a special use of the generic article where the
> quality of the person is emphasized and the person is unidentified,  
> even
> though it is in fact a specific individual or thing.
>
> I would have to study the rest of Ehrensärd's article more carefully,
> but he still came across examples he could not really account for. He
> also had to discount some as misprints or "non-functional" uses of the
> article or put them in  categories different than English usage or in
> usages unlike English.
>
> Yours,
> Harold Holmyard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew