b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

[b-hebrew] The root (LM

From: Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>
To: Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>
Cc: b-hebrew Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: [b-hebrew] The root (LM
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:09:29 -0400

B-Listim

From the animated discussion here it looks as though the root (LM is one of the touchiest of the Hebrew bible. Yet there is nothing beyond the ordinary about it. Like any other Hebrew root it is part of an ever expanding family of slowly mutating roots of slightly adjusted meanings and shades of sense.
The root (LM is a variant of the roots:
1. (LP, 'cover, hide, envelop', as in Genesis 38:14, VA-TKAS BA-CA(IP VA-TI-T-(ALAP, "and she covered herself with a vail, and hid herself under it". I think that (ULPEH of Ezekiel 31:15 is 'towered over'. 'and all the trees of the field fainted for him' of KJV appears to me patently nonsense, and 'the land drooped on his account' of NAB is not much better. I see (LP of Isaiah 51:20, Amos 8:13, and Jonah 4:8, as 'overcome, overpower, befog'.
2. (LT, 'cover, hide, conceal, blanket', from which (ALATAH, 'darkness', is formed. Another word for (ALATAH is )APELAH from the root )PL, related to the roots (PL and NPL. From (PL Hebrew generates the word (OPEL, 'tower'.
3. (LL, 'mount, ascend, linger', from which (ALILAH', 'long story, mounting and thickening plot', is formed.
The equivalence of (LM = AL-AM, (LT = AL-AT, (LP = AL-AT and (LL = AL- AL, proves the equivalence of of the Hebrew existence markers, or fundamental concepts, AL-LA, AM-MA, AP-PA and AT-TA.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

From JCR128 AT student.anglia.ac.uk Sun Jul 29 06:41:24 2007

[193.63.55.26])
by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0574C017
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sun, 29 Jul 2007 06:41:10 -0400
(EDT)
Received: from smtp1.cam.anglia.ac.uk ([193.63.55.9]:42521)
by mailhub3.anglia.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <JCR128 AT student.anglia.ac.uk>) id 1IF6Cx-0007CU-QD
for b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:41:07 +0100
Received: from cam-netmail.netware.anglia.ac.uk ([194.83.45.141]:3723
helo=student.anglia.ac.uk)
by boswell.cam.anglia.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
id 1IF6Cs-0003Jx-I4
for b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:41:02 +0100
Received: from JCR128 [82.207.50.107] by student.anglia.ac.uk
with NetMail ModWeb Module; Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:39:44 +0100
From: "JAMES CHRISTIAN READ" <JCR128 AT student.anglia.ac.uk>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 11:39:44 +0100
X-Mailer: NetMail ModWeb Module
X-Sender: JCR128
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <1185705584.8d2a0fe0JCR128 AT student.anglia.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-ARU-MailFilter: message scanned
X-ARU-HELO: smtp1.cam.anglia.ac.uk
X-ARU-sender-host: smtp1.cam.anglia.ac.uk [193.63.55.9]:42521
X-ARU-MailScanner-Info: see http://www.anglia.ac.uk/mail-problems
X-ARU-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-ARU-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-5.3, required 6,
autolearn=not spam, ARU_FROM_AC_UK -4.00, AWL -1.30)
X-ARU-MailScanner-From: jcr128 AT student.anglia.ac.uk
X-Spam-Flag: No
Subject: [b-hebrew] Definite Article 7:14 vs.13:5
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: JCR128 AT student.anglia.ac.uk
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 10:41:24 -0000

Dear Joe,

There really is no comparison worth considering for your=20
argument. The style in Judges 13:5 gives clear introduction=20
to who is being addressed:

NWT Judges 13:3
In time Jehovah=E2=80=99s angel appeared to the woman and said to her:

Secondly, the context of Judges 13:5 clearly indicates=20
a prediction of the future (the exact opposite of what=20
you were arguing)

Finally, your argument of a 2fs form in Isaiah 7:14 is=20
extremely shallow because as already already noted the=20
same form can equally be a 3fs and, in fact, this is=20
exactly what the context indicates.

Your argument based on HNH is also baseless. Prophectic=20
language regularly uses such a construct when there is=20
no clear immediate physically present point of reference.
Translation such as 'Behold' can be considered, at best,=20
throwbacks from old english traditions of translation=20
but make little sense in the language I was brought up=20
to communicate in. The more modern 'Look!' can equally=20
be used with such fragile connotations e.g.:

Look! I'll do it tomorrow it alright!(future reference)
Look! I've already told you a thousand times (past=20
reference)
Look! I've had enough of this (present consequence with=20
no physical manifestation to actually look at)

The same can be said of equivalent expressions in a=20
variety of modern languages.

CONCLUSION!

Maybe the girl was present, maybe she wasn't! It really=20
doesn't make a difference to most people's faith either=20
way because they see the greater context of Isaiah's=20
prophecies which clearly extend beyond his own lifetime.
But the bottom line is that your arguments are far from=20
conclusive and all of your 'proofs' have solid counter=20
examples.=20
It seems that up till now the discussion has only=20
considered two possibilities:

1: The language used clearly indicates the girl was present
2: The language used clearly indicates the girl was not=20
present and was unknown to Ahaz

But please allow me to introduce a third possibility:

3: The language used is clearly ambiguous as with many prophecies to allow for multiple fulfillments of greater and lesser significance.

Any thoughts?aid of equivalent expressions in a variety of modern languages.

CONCLUSION!

Maybe the girl was present, maybe she wasn't! It really doesn't make a difference to most people's faith either way because they see the greater context of Isaiah's prophecies which clearly extend beyond his own lifetime.
But the bottom line is that your arguments are far from conclusive and all of your 'proofs' have solid counter examples. It seems that up till now the discussion has

[b-hebrew] The root (LM, Isaac Fried, 07/28/2007