Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Joseph,

1. The word HINEH = HI-NA-HI consists of the two personal pronouns,  
or identity markers, HI-HI for the thing referred to, and the Hebrew  
existence marker N = AN-NA, corresponding to the English substantives  
on-in. Thus HINEH declares that a thing exists, or is soon to  
materialize [and therefore for the moment is just imagined]. It is  
not 'behold' nor 'here is' in the locative sense, but only in the  
existential sense. The related word HENAH means 'to me'.
2. The function of the hebrew HA- [which is in my opinion the  
personal pronoun HI = HU] is to reference a significant, non- 
arbitrary or non-random person. It is so with HA-PALIT, HA-MELIC, HA- 
NA(AR. This non-randomness can circumstantially or contextually rise  
to the top level of an absolute and categorically certain  
identification. Here and now HA-NASI) is none other than George  
Walker Bush.
3. HARAH is a state.
4. You agree that HINEH HA-MALKAH HARAH would have been obvious, but  
of course people can always be found who believe that HA-MALKAH is  
the moon.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Jul 21, 2007, at 11:46 AM, JoeWallack AT aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 7/18/2007 5:46:05 PM Central Daylight Time,
> if AT math.bu.edu writes:
>
> Joseph,
>
>
> 1. I agree  with Harold that HINEH does not require physical   
> presence.
>
> JW:
> I agree too.
>
>
> 2. The  Hebrew "definite article" does not require the defined to be
> mentioned earlier  in the discourse if he is known otherwise.
>
> JW:
> Agreed. The DA can create reasonable grounds all by itself. It's  
> what it
> does.
>
>
> 3. Virgin  is a theological code word that has no correspondence in  
> the
> Hebrew bible, and  hence the discussion (ALMAH/virgin is vain.
>
> JW:
> I have purposely avoided ThAlmah and BetaLouise here as it just  
> distracts
> from the Definite Article issue.
>
>
> IF:
> 4. Things would look and sound  much better if you replace  
> "definite article"
> by "non-arbitrary  article".
>
> JW:
> Your point is that arbitrary/random is the more common usage and  
> therefore
> should be the standard for definitions?
>
>
> IF:
> 5. The fact that the prophet  said HA-(ALMAH [like saying HA- 
> MALKAH] implies
> that he was referring to a known  person. The rest is theology.
>
> JW:
> While I agree and am interested in your opinion I'm not  that  
> interested in
> unsupported assertions and I have Faith that those on the  other  
> side here are
> even less interested in unsupported assertions. On the other  hand,  
> I have to
> confess that until relatively recently, translation issues with   
> polemical
> context like this one, have traditionally been determined by how  
> many  hold a
> certain position and how loudly they do so, as opposed to solely   
> intellectual
> considerations.
>
>
>
> Joseph Wallack
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all- 
> new AOL at
> http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew