Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Dana Densmore <verdelion AT yahoo.com>]

Dear Pere Porta,

Thank you for your reply to my query.  On the first question, you gave me 
examples of masculine nouns not ending in --AH taking an WT plural form by 
just adding WT after the third consonant.  That does answer my question.  No 
doubt I have seen such words, but somehow I had got it in my head that the 
masculine nouns were pluralized with the feminine-form plural because they 
had ended in --AH, thus sounding feminine and creating a pull toward the WT.  
Thanks; it's interesting that the pull to WT can be independent of the form 
of the singular.  Or perhaps it's just that the gender form is lightly held 
in the living language.

On the second question, you say that you don't think the past tense in 
English is a good understanding of the Hebrew here for the infinitives BPR( 
and BHTNDB.  The interpretation I am putting our for consideration is to take 
the B as "when" or "in [doing this thing]".   "When unbinding" [was 
happening] and "when offering themselves" [was happening], then they blessed. 
 I agree that the way we go on the last two words is going to affect how 
those infinitives are translated.  

Other than the fact that the whole thrust of the song is to bless YHWH and to 
exhort others to do so (a strong argument for taking these words as 
imperative), is there anything in the language or grammar itself that would 
prevent the interpretation that when the people did these things they blessed 
YHWH?

Dana Densmore



________________________________
From: "pporta AT oham.net" <pporta AT oham.net>
To: Dana Densmore <verdelion AT yahoo.com>; b-hebrew posts 
<b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 2:29:57 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Judges 5:2, two questions

[DD]
> 1.  re the verb root PR( and its associated noun.  Whether we are taking 
> it to be related to leading/leaders or to the unbinding of hair, we have 
> the masculine singular noun in the same form PERA( appearing in what I 
> (and BDB) take to be a plural noun PR(WT.
>
> My question is whether there are other singular nouns of a similar form 
> whose plural looks like this.  Is it common for an --A( patach ayin ending 
> to be pluralized like a --AH ending?  Did it sound to the ear like an --AH 
> feminine form and thus get a feminine form plural? (I'm not bothered by 
> the fact that the noun is masculine, that's not my question.)  When it's 
> an --AH singular it just goes to --WT replacing the AH; here it maintains 
> the ayin and adds the WT.  Where else, if anywhere, does this happen?

[PP]

This happens in MANY places!  A masculine noun having -WT as its plural 
absolute form. Even if the usual plural form of a masculine is in -YM, there 
are MANY masculine nouns that have it in -WT:

1. QEBER, grave (Gn 23:4) ------- L/QBRWT, (to) graves (Jb 21:32)
2. Q:RFB, battle (Zc 14:3) -------- Q:RFBWT, battles (Ps 68:31)
3. L"BFB, heart (Dt 28:28) -------- L:BBWT, hearts (1Ch 28:9)
and so on...

It is not something unusual but quite usual.

[DD]
> 2.  The last two words of the verse certainly could be an imperative, [you 
> pl] Bless YHVH.  And given the context of the Song, that seems probably 
> most likely.  But is there any internal evidence that would prevent the 
> sense of the verse from being "when men were unbinding their hair in 
> Israel [or the leaders leading], and when the people were offering 
> themselves, they blessed YHVH."  That is, that their coming out for the 
> war at Deborah's/YHVH's call was an act of blessing.

[PP]

To my mind the verse meaning is: "Both when leaders arise in Israel and 
(thus) people volunteers, (in both cases) bless the Lord! (or in passive: 
"be the Lord blessed!"), ie let us praise/thank God.

I do not think the past tense in English (*) to be a good understanding of 
the Hebrew here.

(*) ... were (unbinding)...; ...were (offering)...

Pere Porta
Barcelona (Catalonia, Spain)


> Dana Densmore
> University of Wales
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> 


      
>From verdelion AT yahoo.com  Fri Oct 31 12:32:17 2008
Return-Path: <verdelion AT yahoo.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id BB7114C01D; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:32:17 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SARE_UNSUB18
        autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from web58508.mail.re3.yahoo.com (web58508.mail.re3.yahoo.com
        [68.142.236.191])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ED0104C01C
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:32:16 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: (qmail 57045 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Oct 2008 16:32:16 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: 
9YWZJHIVM1nkpCJnSvmXl1a38lOIzCZ0_QFyEFns2WjcH8WyyUtxPNWgLUVVZagTixvJGVIv3en4Qy.DTaT5Mjgl9Ae3n_Nwv9GOxRsEzK84GYBzRu5grrgPWyReOGDl3KkYW7Cgbm8.bt3tUyGfAYYg3uNlotZL74PM9vfss2H8lkqvA5aUD_I.3ExWS6n79ingOfdzWcrlxVU-
Received: from [65.19.39.63] by web58508.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP;
        Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:32:16 PDT
X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/1155.20 YahooMailWebService/0.7.247.3
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:32:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dana Densmore <verdelion AT yahoo.com>
To: b-hebrew posts <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <27456.56991.qm AT web58508.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Judges 5:2, two questions
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:32:17 -0000

Dear Karl Randolph,

Thank you for your reply.  I find your understanding of PR( and PR(WT 
plausible and I like it; I want to ponder it some more in the context of the 
whole narrative, which I agree does support the idea (people afraid to leave 
their villages and so on).   

I'm not sure about your suggestion of  placing the people offering themselves 
so tightly with  BRKW YHWH.  I know you don't set store by the Masoretic 
markings, but I am influenced to consider that the atnach on (M groups both 
actions of the infinitives together and  makes the BKRW YHWH some sort of 
response or conclusion to both.  Still, I hear your way of reading it and am 
giving it some thought.

Dana Densmore 



________________________________
From: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
To: b-hebrew posts <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 4:54:01 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Judges 5:2, two questions

Dana:
Thanks for an interesting question.

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Dana Densmore <verdelion AT yahoo.com> wrote:

> B-hebrew listmembers, I have two questions about this verse in the song of
> Deborah to offer for your expertise and insights.  Judges 5:2.
>
> 1.  re the verb root PR( and its associated noun.  Whether we are taking it
> to be related to leading/leaders or to the unbinding of hair, we have the
> masculine singular noun in the same form PERA( appearing in what I (and BDB)
> take to be a plural noun PR(WT.
>
> The verb means "to set loose, as free from restraint" and the noun
feminine refers to a troop that acts in an unrestrained manner. Later in the
context, verses 6 and following, we see that the people were afraid to leave
walled villages because of the danger they faced.


>
> 2.  The last two words of the verse certainly could be an imperative, [you
> pl] Bless YHVH.  And given the context of the Song, that seems probably most
> likely.  But is there any internal evidence that would prevent the sense of
> the verse from being "when men were unbinding their hair in Israel [or the
> leaders leading], and when the people were offering themselves, they blessed
> YHVH."  That is, that their coming out for the war at Deborah's/YHVH's call
> was an act of blessing.
>
> This is the equivalent to the English phrase "Praise the Lord!"


> Thanks for your thoughts on this.
>
> Dana Densmore
> University of Wales
>
> This first verse of the song sets up the theme. "While the troops without
restraint were set loose in Israel, praise the Lord that the people
volunteered."

Karl W. Randolph.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew



      
>From bjwvmw AT com-pair.net  Fri Oct 31 22:52:08 2008
Return-Path: <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 65B204C01D; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 22:52:08 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled
        version=3.2.3
Received: from mail.com-pair.net (mail.com-pair.net [208.74.104.248])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F7C4C01C
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 22:52:07 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from oemcomputer (66-81-52-137.nocal.dialup.o1.com [66.81.52.137])
        by mail.com-pair.net
        (Rockliffe SMTPRA 8.0.4) with ESMTP id 
<B0011012736 AT mail.com-pair.net>; 
        Fri, 31 Oct 2008 19:52:06 -0700
Message-ID: <011801c93bd5$2a9ee8e0$89345142@oemcomputer>
From: "Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>
To: <dwashbur AT nyx.net>, <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
References: <017601c93b25$f67289a0$33355142@oemcomputer>
        <490ABEC7.7699.642363C AT dwashbur.nyx.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 19:51:41 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] New Inscription of Hebrew?
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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: Sat, 01 Nov 2008 02:52:08 -0000

Dear Dave and Karl,

Thanks for your responses.

What really bothers me about the article is that it immediately thinks that
Hebrew developed from a "proto-Canaanite" language (no such language as ever
been produced as far as is known other than through supposition; like "Q" in
Synoptic Studies). This indicates at least three presuppositions.

The first presupposition is that if it is a theological text, it is therefore
not historical nor scientific. The second presupposition is that the Hebrew 
text
is not historical about the early history of the Israelites. The third
presupposition is that since the Israelites arose from the hill country of
Canaan, then the Hebrew alphabet is taken from there. Dever and others promote
this. Yet it is quite evident from the Hebrew text itself that the Hebrew
alphabet was well advanced by the time they got to the Transjordan since they
had spent 430 years in Egypt pretty much isolated in Goshen with some contact
with the Egyptians until they were enslaved; another 40 years in the 
Wilderness
Wandering of Exodus through Deuteronomy; and another 7 years during the 
Conquest
of Joshua. That is a minimum of 477 years in which their language and alphabet
developed. This does not include the loan words from Egypt, Canaan, Aramaic,
etc. did not enter into the language (just look at the number of loan words in
English; maybe not as great in the number of loan words). It is also obvious
that the acceptance of the Aramaic script from the Hebrew script occurred 
during
the Babylonian Captivity.

I do agree that those who report these inscriptional finds would serve the
scholarly community much better if they published very clear photos of the
finds. Furthermore, there must be a better way to make sure that the FINAL
REPORT IS PUBLISHED BEFORE the archaeologist is allowed to do another dig!
Basically, No Report, No Dig.

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 7:16 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] New Inscription of Hebrew?


> I have to agree with Karl.  At least a transcription would be nice.  As it 
> is,
all we're getting is a
> "X said/Y said" while we sit here and say "Could I check for myself?"
>
> On 30 Oct 2008 at 22:57, Bryant J. Williams III wrote:
>
> > Dear List,
> >
> > The following URL http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,445132,00.html
indicates
> > that an inscription on a pottery shard is Hebrew. Whether or not it is the
> > dating does place it about 1000-975 BC.
>
> Dave Washburn
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.549 / Virus Database: 270.8.5/1757 - Release Date: 10/30/08 
> 2:35
PM
>
>