Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Paul Summer" <pauljsummer AT googlemail.com>]

On 12/12/08, b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org
<b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org> wrote:
> Send b-hebrew mailing list submissions to
>       b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>       http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>       b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>       b-hebrew-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of b-hebrew digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Meteg and Shva Na/Nah (David Hamuel)
>    2. "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew (JimStinehart AT aol.com)
>    3. "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew (JimStinehart AT aol.com)
>    4. Re: the Jim vs Karl debate (David Kolinsky)
>    5. Re: Meteg and Shva Na/Nah (Yitzhak Sapir)
>    6.  Not ABle to Send/Receive Messages (brak AT neo.rr.com)
>    7. Re: the Jim vs Karl debate (Oun Kwon)
>    8.  Not ABle to Send/Recieve Messages (Brak)
>    9.  Not ABle to Send/Recieve Messages (Brak)
>   10.  Not ABle to Send/Recieve Messages (Brak)
>   11.  Need Help With Trope Identification (Brak)
>   12.  Need Help With Trope Identification (Brak)
>   13.  Need Help With Trope Identification (Brak)
>   14.  Need Help With Trope Identification (Brak)
>   15. Re: the Jim vs Karl debate (dwashbur AT nyx.net)
>   16. Re: Need Help With Trope Identification (Yitzhak Sapir)
>   17. Re: Need Help With Trope Identification (Yigal Levin)
>   18. Re: "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew (K Randolph)
>   19. Re: "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew (Mary Thompson)
>   20. Re: "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew (K Randolph)
>   21. "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew (JimStinehart AT aol.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 11:21:32 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Hamuel <davidhamuel AT sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Meteg and Shva Na/Nah
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <580344.25727.qm AT web82003.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Yitzhak,
>
> Just quick note(s) (later on I'll post more).
>
>> He quotes from Diqduqe Hateamim:
>
> It is important to read & study the work by Baer & Strack
> Diqduqe Hateamim, but also to be a little bit careful.
> For some reason Baer was sometimes
> too creative. Let's see for example page 20, section 19
> and the corrections by Strack :
> "These are the 'kings', [qamats], [patah], [sere],
> [seghol], [holam], [shurek],[hirik], [hataf and qamats],
> [hataf and patah], and so too the schewa
> if it comes at the beginning of a word will be counted
> as a 'king' but if it comes at the middle or its
> end, shall not."
>
>  Nachtr?ge/Supplement by Strack: Der Abschnitt lautet in D.../The section
> reads in D:
> These are the 'kings', qamats, patah, sere, seghol, holam, hirik.
> And so too the schewa if it comes at the beginning of a word will
> be counted as a 'king' but if it comes at the middle or its
> end will be counted as a 'servant' [mesharet]
>
>
>> the specific case of vayomru...
>
> ...and other words is also a matter of tradition. We have different
> traditions. For example see Deut 1:27 (the first word);
> some editions -- there's a gaya under the letter resh; under the gimmel
>  ?  sheva na. Based on the Yemenite tradition the gaya is under the letter
> tav; under the gimmel ? sheva nach!
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> David Hamuel
>
> Type Designer
> Biblical Hebrew, Grammar & Cantillation Expert
>
> Los Angeles, CA ? USA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:45:40 EST
> From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
> Subject: [b-hebrew] "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <bd5.3e9fb8dd.3672c7e4 AT aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>
> Isaac:
>
> You wrote:  ?The root YTR is in my opinion a variant of the roots (TR, ($R,
>  'replete, plenty'.  I hold it a basic tenet of Hebrew etymology that every
> root
>  containing the letter L, such as XBL, refers to a state of elevation or
> extension, and that every root that contains the letter R, such as XBR,
> refers to
> a state of aggregation or dispersion.?
>
> (TR means ?to be abundant?, and ($R means ?to make rich?.  Originally,
> those were good, positive words.  (The fact that (TR is used at Proverbs 27:
> 6 to
> excoriate an enemy?s ?abundant? kisses as being deceitful does not override
> the fact that (TR/?abundant? is basically a positive, good word.)
>
> How did one create ?abundance?/(TR and get ?rich?/($R, while living in a
> tent in rural Canaan in the Patriarchal Age?  Why, by using a ?rope?/YTR,
> naturally, to rig one?s tent, to deal with one?s animals, for all manner of
> agricultural activities, and at times even to ?rope? off the boundaries of
> one?s
> space against others.  The greatest technological innovation enjoyed by the
> first Hebrews, living in tents in rural Canaan, was manufactured, twisted
> ?rope?,
> made from local flax.  The specific word for that type of ?rope? is XBL,
> which we have yet to examine in detail.  But a second word for rope-like
> items,
> including real ?rope?/XBL, but also including a ?cord? that may have simply
> been a vine, and a ?bowstring? that may have been fashioned from an animal?s
> tendon, was YTR.
>
> I am trying to show that the positive ?rope imagery? eternally embedded in
> the very language of Biblical Hebrew is really quite stunning.  We have seen
> this first at Genesis 49: 3, where ?rope?/YTR is equated with ?natural
> superiority, excellence?/YTR.  When we get to ?rope?/XBL, we will see
> manufactured,
> twisted real ?rope?/XBL being equated with land and divinely-approved
> inheritances of large regions of land.
>
> My point is that the rural Bronze Age Canaan beginnings of Biblical Hebrew
> are right there, eternally on display, if we will just take seriously this
> magnificent, positive ?rope imagery? embedded in the very language of
> Biblical
> Hebrew.  There?s not much in Biblical Hebrew from urban Mesopotamia, and
> amazingly little from the colorful culture of neighboring Egypt.  No,
> Biblical Hebrew
> is by its very nature proudly rural Canaan all the way, a virgin pure west
> Semitic language.  And very enamored of ?rope?.
>
> You may well be right that ?rope?/YTR is related to (TR/?abundant? and ($R/?
> rich?.  What I?m saying is that all those fine concepts were linked to
> ?rope?
>  by the early tent-dwelling Hebrews in rural Canaan.
>
> Jim Stinehart
> Evanston, Illinois
>
> **************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
> favorite sites in one place.  Try it now.
> (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:47:18 EST
> From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
> Subject: [b-hebrew] "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <c8e.2f560bd4.3672c846 AT aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>
> Karl:
>
> 1.  I do not see how your translation of Genesis 49: 3 makes sense.  You
> translate it as follows:
>
> ?Reuben, my firstborn, you are my power and the first of my potency, an
>  excess (abundance leading to having more than enough) of lifting up
> (there?s
>  no exact equivalent to this in English, here referring to what he lifts up)
>  and an excess of strength,
>  spineless as water, you will not exceed, for ...?
>
> You then comment:  ?Notice that in the context that ?excess? does not mean
> the same as ?excellency?.?
>
> In a sense I agree with your comment.  But it?s ?excellency? that makes
> sense here, not ?excess?!  ?Natural superiority? is even better than
> ?excellency?
> .
>
> 2.  It is notable that using most of your wording, but substituting ?natural
> superiority?, would result in the verse making perfect sense:
>
> ?Reuben, my firstborn, you are my power and the first of my potency, [you as
> my firstborn have] a natural superiority of lifting up and a natural
> superiority of strength; [but] spineless as water, you will not be superior
> [as to your
> brothers], for ...?
>
> 3.  Reuben as the firstborn does not have an ?excess? of lifting up.
>
> Reuben as the firstborn does not have ?more than enough? of lifting up.
>
> Reuben as the firstborn does not have an ?excess? of strength.
>
> Nor do Reuben?s sins cause poor Reuben to ?not exceed?.
>
> 4.  Rather, Reuben as the firstborn has a ?natural superiority? of lifting
> up.
>
> And Reuben as the firstborn has a ?natural superiority? of strength,
> vis-?-vis his many younger brothers.
>
> But Reuben?s sins cause poor Reuben to ?not be superior? to his younger
> brothers after all, as his father Jacob lays a terrible final curse upon
> Reuben.
>
> 5.  In response to my statement that ?You seem to agree that on several
> occasions in the Bible, YTR means ?cord? or ?rope?,? you oddly wrote:
>
> ?No, it is listed that way only a few times.?
>
> That?s what I said.  I think we in fact agree that on several occasions, but
> not too many, YTR means ?rope? or ?cord? in the Bible.
>
> 6.  You wrote:  ?You could bring 100 translations. What you need to do is to
> show me from the language itself, not translations.?
>
> That?s exactly what I?m doing.  My whole point regarding YTR is that the
> first Hebrews equated ?rope? with ?natural superiority? and ?excellence?.
> That
> ?s why YTR is used in precisely that sense at Genesis 49: 3 in the
> Patriarchal narratives.
>
> You and I agree on so many aspects of Biblical Hebrew.  I certainly agree
> with you that not every Hebrew word has a 3-consonant root.  I also fully
> agree
> with your statement that:  ?Just because a word may have the same letters as
> a
> root does not automatically
>  mean that the word comes from that root.?  Indeed, I think you and I agree
> that there are two separate Hebrew words involved here, though both are
> spelled
> YTR.  I think we may agree that when YTR means ?rope?, that?s a different
> word than when YTR means ?abundance leading to having more than enough?.
> What
> we?re arguing about is which word YTR is present at Genesis 49: 3.  In
> context, ?abundance leading to having more than enough? just won?t fit
> Genesis 49:
> 3.  Reuben does not have ?more than enough? dignity or strength.  No, as the
> firstborn son, what Reuben has is a ?natural superiority? of dignity and
> strength, so that Reuben?s dignity and strength as the firstborn are like
> ?rope?:
> naturally superior and excellent.  Genesis 49: 3 is saying good things about
> Reuben, not bad things.  It is only when we get to Genesis 49: 4 that Jacob
> announces that Reuben has ignominiously forfeited all of his natural
> superiority
> as the firstborn.
>
> The only way to understand Genesis 49: 3, in my opinion, is to realize that
> the tent-dwelling early Hebrews equated ?rope?/YTR with ?natural
> superiority,
> excellence?/YTR.  A totally different Hebrew word (having nothing to do with
> either ?rope? or ?excellence?), reflecting a completely different ancient
> Semitic root (seen in a different Assyrian word), is the YTR that has the
> meaning
> of ?abundance leading to having more than enough?.
>
> I just don?t see how your translation of Genesis 49: 3 makes sense.  Reuben
> does not have an ?excess?, or an ?abundance leading to having more than
> enough?
> , of anything.  Rather, Reuben has a natural superiority as the firstborn,
> which Reuben unfortunately squanders by his improper actions.
>
> It all makes sense, once one realizes that Biblical Hebrew is the language
> of
> Bronze Age rural Canaan, where ?rope? was a wondrous technological
> innovation that was synonymous with ?natural superiority? and ?excellence?.
>
> Jim Stinehart
> Evanston, Illinois
>
> **************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
> favorite sites in one place.  Try it now.
> (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:12:03 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Kolinsky <yishalom AT sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the Jim vs Karl debate
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <45305.19515.qm AT web82605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Chaverim,
> I wonder if we could get some?additional opinions on this debate.?
> ?
> I agree with Karl that Jim's postings are annoyingly pedantic and that if he
> has a comprehensive thesis on Hebrew etymology and how it applies to the
> patriarchal narrative then he should seriously consider writing a book or
> starting a web site.
> ?
> However, I think Karl is behaving as much as a bully as?Jim is being
> pedantic.? Furthermore, it is not only in the context of Jim's rantings that
> he has done so.??Rather, he?seems to consistently do so when anyone presents
> and/or disagrees with him regarding Hebrew Etymology.? There is no doubt
> that there is no consensus on the relationship between Hebrew verbal roots
> and other words with seemingly similar "root" letters.? This holds true as
> well when it comes to making the same comparisons between semitic languages
> (cognates).? But the fact that there is no consensus does not mean that
> people who profess these ideas are idiots (as Karl seems to regularly
> suggest).? Nor does it make it a subject not worth exploring.? Those of us
> who have our theories of Hebrew etymolgy could create another B-Hebrew list,
> but that would deprive us of the opinions of people who disagree with us
> (Karl's included).? My complaint is that Karl seems much less
>  interested in scholarly debate and exploration and much more interested in
> shutting the rest of us down.? Which, by the way, he seems to have done
> rather successfully.?
> ?
> Is that the intent of this list?
> ?
> Sincerely,
> david kolinsky
> ?
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:33:32 +0000
> From: "Yitzhak Sapir" <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Meteg and Shva Na/Nah
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID:
>       <e6ea6c000812111333s2f95c14dt8f7a98a89b46623b AT mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 7:21 PM, David Hamuel wrote:
>
>>> the specific case of vayomru...
>>
>> ...and other words is also a matter of tradition. We have different
>> traditions. For example
>> see Deut 1:27 (the first word); some editions -- there's a gaya under the
>> letter resh; under
>> the gimmel ?  sheva na. Based on the Yemenite tradition the gaya is under
>> the letter tav;
>> under the gimmel ? sheva nach!
>
> Dear David,
>
> No.  The difference in pronunciations from the Tiberian standpoint is:
> under resh: [vat-te:-,r??g-'nuu]
> under taw: [vat-,te:e-r?g-'nuu]
>
> The difference is only which syllable is lengthened (and probably
> split).  Not the schewa nach.
> Said another way, in this case, the different traditions do point out
> difference in vowel length
> (as against the ridiculous claim that the presence of a yod or waw
> modifies the length of a
> hirik or shurek/qibbuts).  However, vowel length was not phonemic in
> the Tiberian tradition
> except in very rare and special cases, and this is not one of them.
> You are suggesting that
> the difference in tradition implies a difference in syllabification.
> This is much more unlikely,
> and actually requires a lot of proof on your part.
>
> (your claim for under resh: [vat-te:-,r??-ga'nuu])
>
> Your claim that it modifies whether the schewa is na or nach is
> inconsistent with the modern
> scholarly view as successfully shown by Geoffrey Khan since the late
> 80s.  I would not mind
> if you show me which quotes support your point of view, but if you
> actually do adduce some
> (I asked you and you have still not provided any) I'd probably point
> out how the quotes should
> be interpreted in light of Khan's extensive studies.  But then, again,
> you still have not provided
> any.  The difference pointed out by you in Diqduqe Hateamim, of which
> at this point I'm only
> relying on the articles I have at hand, is not substantial.  In the
> Tiberian thought, a 'servant' is
> not a 'king.'  It means the same thing and the main point of the
> statement is that a schewa
> in the middle of the word is equivalent to that at the end of a word,
> rather than that at the
> beginning; namely, it is quiescent.  Of course, this is a general
> statement and doesn't deal
> with two consecutive schewas and other exceptions, but it defines the
> general rule.
>
> Best,
> Yitzhak Sapir
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:50:50 -0500
> From: <brak AT neo.rr.com>
> Subject: [b-hebrew]  Not ABle to Send/Receive Messages
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Cc: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <20081211215050.L32P2.250551.root@cdptpa-web05-z01>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> For some reason I'm not sending or receiving messages.
> This is a test email for me to try to figure what is going on.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:52:43 -0500
> From: "Oun Kwon" <kwonbbl AT gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the Jim vs Karl debate
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID:
>       <5f1984b20812111352i1ca44bb2k5a04eec1b653615e AT mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 3:12 PM, David Kolinsky <yishalom AT sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>> Chaverim,
>> I wonder if we could get some additional opinions on this debate.
>>
>> I agree with Karl that Jim's postings are annoyingly pedantic and that if
>> he has a comprehensive thesis on Hebrew etymology and how it applies to
>> the patriarchal narrative then he should seriously consider writing a book
>> or starting a web site.
>>
>
> <clipped>
>
>> david kolinsky
>>
>
> It may be a good idea if Jim creates a web blog for his writings and
> comments/answers to them from those interested in. Cost would be zero.
>
> Oun.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:03:58 -0500
> From: Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
> Subject: [b-hebrew]  Not ABle to Send/Recieve Messages
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>,
>       b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <49418E4E.7040807 AT neo.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> this is another test, as I see the last one got through.
> But I still never received it in my inbox, nor the message that was
> posted after wards.
>
> --
>
> B"H
> John
>
> "He who makes a mistake is still our friend; he who adds to or shortens
> a melody is still our friend; but he who violates a rhythm unawares can
> no longer be our friend."
> -Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim 767-850 CE.
>
> "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you
> behave."
> -Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
>
> "The difference between the intelligent man and the simpleton is not the
> correctness of their decisions, but rather the cunning sinner can more
> skillfully defend and justify his iniquity."
> - Rabbi Tovia Singer
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:09:06 -0500
> From: Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
> Subject: [b-hebrew]  Not ABle to Send/Recieve Messages
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <49418F82.4090101 AT neo.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> The previous two messages were sent to both of the following addresses:
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org (an address I just noticed in the
> email header)
>
> This one is just being set to:
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
>
> --
>
> B"H
> John
>
> "He who makes a mistake is still our friend; he who adds to or shortens
> a melody is still our friend; but he who violates a rhythm unawares can
> no longer be our friend."
> -Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim 767-850 CE.
>
> "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you
> behave."
> -Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
>
> "The difference between the intelligent man and the simpleton is not the
> correctness of their decisions, but rather the cunning sinner can more
> skillfully defend and justify his iniquity."
> - Rabbi Tovia Singer
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:14:36 -0500
> From: Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
> Subject: [b-hebrew]  Not ABle to Send/Recieve Messages
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <494190CC.8030203 AT neo.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Ok, just the b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org address is worked.
>
> But I still haven't received ANY of these messages.
> So the issue of SENDING messages have been resolved - but not that of
> receiving.
>
> So why can't I receive any messages?
>
> --
>
> B"H
> John Steven
>
> "He who makes a mistake is still our friend; he who adds to or shortens
> a melody is still our friend; but he who violates a rhythm unawares can
> no longer be our friend."
> -Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim 767-850 CE.
>
> "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you
> behave."
> -Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
>
> "The difference between the intelligent man and the simpleton is not the
> correctness of their decisions, but rather the cunning sinner can more
> skillfully defend and justify his iniquity."
> - Rabbi Tovia Singer
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:17:19 -0500
> From: Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
> Subject: [b-hebrew]  Need Help With Trope Identification
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <4941916F.9050204 AT neo.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> I am working with a text from the 1500s. The typeset that is use has a
> glyph for a trope that I can not identify.
> Hopefully someone on the forum her can identify it for me. I have
> included two scanned images with the glyphs in questioned circled.
>
>
>
>
>
> As you can see it is frequently used.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> --
>
> B"H
> John Steven
>
> "He who makes a mistake is still our friend; he who adds to or shortens
> a melody is still our friend; but he who violates a rhythm unawares can
> no longer be our friend."
> -Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim 767-850 CE.
>
> "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you
> behave."
> -Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
>
> "The difference between the intelligent man and the simpleton is not the
> correctness of their decisions, but rather the cunning sinner can more
> skillfully defend and justify his iniquity."
> - Rabbi Tovia Singer
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:19:31 -0500
> From: Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
> Subject: [b-hebrew]  Need Help With Trope Identification
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <494191F3.1000809 AT neo.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> How can I send image attachments, as I need to do so for my question to
> be answered.
> Or do I need to upload them onto a server and insert the link to it in
> my message?
>
>
> --
>
> B"H
> John
>
> "He who makes a mistake is still our friend; he who adds to or shortens
> a melody is still our friend; but he who violates a rhythm unawares can
> no longer be our friend."
> -Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim 767-850 CE.
>
> "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you
> behave."
> -Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
>
> "The difference between the intelligent man and the simpleton is not the
> correctness of their decisions, but rather the cunning sinner can more
> skillfully defend and justify his iniquity."
> - Rabbi Tovia Singer
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:59:12 -0500
> From: Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
> Subject: [b-hebrew]  Need Help With Trope Identification
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <4941B760.4060600 AT neo.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Heres the images:
> http://home.roadrunner.com/~pgj_k/example_1.jpg
> <cid:part1.04050702.02010002 AT neo.rr.com>http://home.roadrunner.com/~pgj_k/example_1.jpg
>
>
> --
>
> B"H
> John Steven
>
> "He who makes a mistake is still our friend; he who adds to or shortens
> a melody is still our friend; but he who violates a rhythm unawares can
> no longer be our friend."
> -Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim 767-850 CE.
>
> "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you
> behave."
> -Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
>
> "The difference between the intelligent man and the simpleton is not the
> correctness of their decisions, but rather the cunning sinner can more
> skillfully defend and justify his iniquity."
> - Rabbi Tovia Singer
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:01:36 -0500
> From: Brak <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
> Subject: [b-hebrew]  Need Help With Trope Identification
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <4941B7F0.5090005 AT neo.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Opps... that didn't quite work right.
> Here are the two images:
>
> http://home.roadrunner.com/~pgj_k/example_1.jpg
> http://home.roadrunner.com/~pgj_k/example_2.jpg
>
> --
>
> B"H
> John Steven
>
> "He who makes a mistake is still our friend; he who adds to or shortens
> a melody is still our friend; but he who violates a rhythm unawares can
> no longer be our friend."
> -Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim 767-850 CE.
>
> "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you
> behave."
> -Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
>
> "The difference between the intelligent man and the simpleton is not the
> correctness of their decisions, but rather the cunning sinner can more
> skillfully defend and justify his iniquity."
> - Rabbi Tovia Singer
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:10:23 -0800
> From: dwashbur AT nyx.net
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the Jim vs Karl debate
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <4941578F.21357.A6E0D9D AT dwashbur.nyx.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>
>
> On 11 Dec 2008 at 12:12, David Kolinsky wrote:
>
>> Chaverim, I wonder if we could get some?additional opinions on this
>> debate.? ? I agree with Karl that Jim's postings are annoyingly
>> pedantic and that if he has a comprehensive thesis on Hebrew etymology
>> and how it applies to the patriarchal narrative then he should
>> seriously consider writing a book or starting a web site. ? However, I
>> think Karl is behaving as much as a bully as?Jim is being pedantic.?
>
> I have to disagree.  Karl is presenting his view and addressing the flagrant
> errors in Jim's
> material.  He has been a lot more civil than I would have been; that was a
> big reason why I
> very quickly stopped reading Jim's stuff.  Well, that and the fact that life
> is too short to waste
> inordinate amounts of time reading all that verbosity.
>
>> Furthermore, it is not only in the context of Jim's rantings that he
>> has done so.??Rather, he?seems to consistently do so when anyone
>> presents and/or disagrees with him regarding Hebrew Etymology.? There
>> is no doubt that there is no consensus on the relationship between
>> Hebrew verbal roots and other words with seemingly similar "root"
>> letters.? This holds true as well when it comes to making the same
>> comparisons between semitic languages (cognates).? But the fact that
>> there is no consensus does not mean that people who profess these
>> ideas are idiots (as Karl seems to regularly suggest).? Nor does it
>> make it a subject not worth exploring.? Those of us who have our
>> theories of Hebrew etymolgy could create another B-Hebrew list, but
>> that would deprive us of the opinions of people who disagree with us
>> (Karl's included).? My complaint is that Karl seems much less
>> interested in scholarly debate and exploration and much more
>> interested in shutting the rest of us down.? Which, by the way, he
>> seems to have done rather successfully.? ? Is that the intent of this
>> list? ? Sincerely, david kolinsky ?
>
> Karl and I have had our clashes in the past, but I really don't see it this
> way.  In addressing
> my somewhat unique views, he has never made me feel he was calling me an
> idiot or
> anything else.  Disagreement can be healthy for all concerned, and I am
> definitely not one
> who could be called "non-confrontational."  But I have probably come closer
> to insulting him
> than he has to insulting me, because he works hard to do a couple of things:
> 1) stick to the
> issues, and 2) operate from a consistent view of the text and the language.
> This second is a
> big part of his beef with Jim, because Jim's worldview seems to be about as
> stable as
> nitroglycerin.  He believes this except when he doesn't, sees this timeline
> except when he
> doesn't, and so on.  While I can and do sometimes disagree with Karl's
> conclusions, he is at
> least consistent in things like his view of the age, composition and
> historicity of the text.  He is
> also not shy about sharing his own background, telling anyone who wants to
> know what his
> credentials are and such.  By contrast, he has asked Jim several times what
> his background
> in Hebrew and biblical studies is, what his credentials are, and Jim flatly
> refuses even to
> acknowledge that the question was asked.  I have to echo Karl's query here:
> what is Jim
> hiding?
>
> I'd  like to see you define some of the terms you're throwing around.
> Specifically, what
> constitutes being a "bully"?  And what to you is "scholarly debate?"  The
> only way that Karl
> has ever "shut me down" is when I didn't have an answer to his arguments.
> That makes me
> go back to the material and see where either I'm wrong, or I need to find
> out something else
> to show what's wrong with his comments.  As far as I know, that's what
> "scholarly debate" is.
>
> That's my view.
>
> Dave Washburn
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 02:54:41 +0000
> From: "Yitzhak Sapir" <yitzhaksapir AT gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Need Help With Trope Identification
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID:
>       <e6ea6c000812111854t675285cfi5da765d5ca1de802 AT mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Dear John,
>
> I suggest that this text is not in the Tiberian cantillation system, but
> rather in the Nazarene cantillation system.  In the Tiberian system,
> the sign you refer to would be the conjunctive merkha.  However, is
> not the regular servant of atnax, that is munax.   Rather, the author
> of this Hebrew text of Matthew copied from the Biblical cantillation
> marks in Gen 25, without knowing what he is doing.  Thus, in Gen
> 25:19, the last part of the verse reads avraham (tipxa) holid
> (merkha) et-yitzhak (silluq).  Merkha is the conjunctive servant of
> disjunctive silluq, and disjunctive tipxa can divide the clause before
> silluq.  However, before atnax, the only conjunctive servant is munax.
> The author did not realize this and in moving the clause to before
> atnax, did not modify his original.  Furthermore, he did not identify
> the difference between tipxa (a small vertical line sloping to the right)
> and merkha (a small vertical line sloping to the left, which in
> manuscripts might slope to the right like tipxa, but not the other
> way around!).  For him they were two sloped vertical lines.  Thus,
> we get the artificial merkha merkha atnax.  Perhaps some sense can
> be made of it by identifying where he copied his source, as it is
> possible to do in this case.  But it all depends what your hopes are
> in getting out of the analysis of the cantillation.   It will not give you
> insight into a grammatical division of the verses, as the Tiberian
> system does, in any case.  For more, read Yeivin's "Introduction to
> the Tiberian Masora", sections 192 and onwards (p. 165-).
>
> Yitzhak Sapir
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:55:10 +0200
> From: Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Need Help With Trope Identification
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <006901c95c0d$6e660600$66a314ac@xp>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1;
>       reply-type=original
>
> Dear John,
>
> Is this from a Hebrew translation of Matthew. Because if it is, than these
> are not properly "trope marks" at all. Remember, the Masoretes never
> cantilized the New Testament, which is not part of the Hebrew Bible. The
> writer/copiest/printer/whoever used Etnah marks to show the main stop in
> each verse, and the marks that you are circled seem to simply have been
> inserted in order to show where the accent is, to insure proper reading.
>
> Yigal Levin
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brak" <Brak AT neo.rr.com>
> To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 3:01 AM
> Subject: [b-hebrew] Need Help With Trope Identification
>
>
>>
>> Opps... that didn't quite work right.
>> Here are the two images:
>>
>> http://home.roadrunner.com/~pgj_k/example_1.jpg
>> http://home.roadrunner.com/~pgj_k/example_2.jpg
>>
>> --
>>
>> B"H
>> John Steven
>>
>> "He who makes a mistake is still our friend; he who adds to or shortens
>> a melody is still our friend; but he who violates a rhythm unawares can
>> no longer be our friend."
>> -Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim 767-850 CE.
>>
>> "If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you
>> behave."
>> -Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
>>
>> "The difference between the intelligent man and the simpleton is not the
>> correctness of their decisions, but rather the cunning sinner can more
>> skillfully defend and justify his iniquity."
>> - Rabbi Tovia Singer
>> _______________________________________________
>> b-hebrew mailing list
>> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.15/1834 - Release Date: 06/12/2008
> 16:55
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 07:39:04 -0800
> From: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID:
>       <acd782170812120739k324088eexfbd667ee9e20e16f AT mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Mary:
> When I started out, I had Davidson's analytical lexicon, Gesenius' lexicon
> translated into English with access to BDB, and Lisowski's concordance. Each
> gave glosses indicating the meanings of the words. Often the glosses are
> different depending on which dictionary is used.
>
> Davidson listed all words according to their supposed roots. Many times the
> roots are speculated roots because they are never found used.
>
> Gesenius and BDB made heavy use of cognate languages, hence would often give
> multiple, contradictory meanings for the same word. An extreme case was one
> word (I don't remember which) has five distinct meanings given in Gesenius
> and BDB, but when I looked up in Lisowski, has only four times used in the
> Hebrew Bible.
>
> Lisowski's definitions I found the most accurate, giving meanings in German,
> English and Latin. But sometimes he gave an accurate meaning in German, but
> when he looked up in a dictionary to find an English gloss, chose the wrong
> one. Another thing I considered a fault is that he followed the Masoritic
> points, which I have found not always to be accurate.
>
> As with any human effort, no dictionary will be perfect, without error. For
> example, none of them considered that some of the uses of words in the Bible
> could be idiomatic, e.g. sometimes the word "lost" used as an euphemism for
>  "death". But they are for the most part good enough, especially for a
> beginner who knows even less.
>
> Translations are even more problematic. They vary in quality. Sometimes the
> way phrases are used will require very different words in English than are
> actually used in Hebrew, and that is of translations that don't try to push
> an agenda. Those that push an agenda will sometimes deliberately
> mistranslate to advance their ideology. That's why a good theologian is
> asked to be able to refer to texts in their original languages and not rely
> on translations.
>
> Use what you have. Recognize that the first time through, there will be
> plenty of times that you misunderstand the text, but the second and third
> times will be better. Even after more than 20 times reading the text, I am
> still correcting myself from earlier misunderstandings. So relax, don't
> expect perfection the first time through. You have started on a journey that
> will take the rest of your life.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Mary Thompson
> <maryethomp2005 AT mac.com>wrote:
>
>> Hey Karl -
>>
>> If a person cannot go by previous translations (presumably done by
>> those who have already studied the language), or by what appears to
>> be a root word based on the letters, then what hope is there to
>> arrive at an understanding of the word?  You say that we should look
>> at the language itself, do our own investigation, but how is that to
>> be done?  Isn't that what the dictionary writers did?
>>
>> If the answer to this question is too long or detailed, you could
>> refer me to a book that explains how an ordinary person is supposed
>> to accomplish this.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mary.
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:55:34 -0500
> From: Mary Thompson <maryethomp2005 AT mac.com>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <38649D17-3844-487B-8C2E-278C992704F8 AT mac.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> Yeah, I learned this the hard way.
>
> Thanks, Karl, for the explanations.
>
> Mary.
>
>
>
> On Dec 12, 2008, at 10:39 AM, K Randolph wrote:
>
>> Translations are even more problematic. They vary in quality. ...
>> Those that push an agenda will sometimes deliberately
>> mistranslate to advance their ideology.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:55:56 -0800
> From: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew
> To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID:
>       <acd782170812120855n4c886cccn8536b787757860af AT mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Jim:
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 11:47 AM, <JimStinehart AT aol.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Karl:
>>
>> 1.  I do not see how your translation of Genesis 49: 3 makes sense.
>
>
> There are two words that are questioned as to their meaning.
>
> YTR which in every other use has the concept of excess, and
>
> %)T which in the majority of its uses indicates a "lifting up" of the skin,
> i.e. swelling.
>
> If this is used idiomatically in this verse, as is a synonym in Habakkuk 2:4
> for what we call in English as "a swollen head", the possibility is even
> more damaging to your latest theorie-du-jour. To catch the flavor of what
> Jacob said, an accurate yet free and idiomatic translation could be "Your
> head is too swollen and you are too pushy."
>
> You have shown no indication that you know Biblical Hebrew, therefore when
> you push a certain reading simply because it fits your extra-Biblical
> theory, it raises all sorts of red flags among scholars.
>
> It all makes sense, once one realizes that Biblical Hebrew is the language
>> of
>> Bronze Age rural Canaan, where "rope" was a wondrous technological
>> innovation that was synonymous with "natural superiority" and
>> "excellence".
>>
>> Do you really think that Abraham was the first to use ropes to hold up his
> tents? That idea is so far out there I'm having trouble wrapping my mind
> around it.
>
>
>> Jim Stinehart
>> Evanston, Illinois
>>
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:36:58 EST
> From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
> Subject: [b-hebrew] "Rope Imagery" in Biblical Hebrew
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <d5d.2bd6c7c3.3673fb3a AT aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>
> Karl:
>
> You wrote:  ?To catch the flavor of what Jacob said, an accurate yet free
> and
> idiomatic translation [of Genesis 49: 3] could be ?Your head is too swollen
> and you are too pushy?."
>
> Karl, that is a brilliant interpretation of Genesis 49: 3.  It is totally
> different than any translation I have ever seen, yet it could fit the
> literal
> wording, and it could fit the context as well.
>
> Perhaps the author of the Patriarchal narratives deliberately is using a
> double meaning here.  On one level, the meaning could be how this verse is
> usually
> translated.  Yet on another level, the meaning could be what you have set
> forth.  And maybe your meaning is what the author was primarily meaning.
> After
> all, every single firstborn son in the Patriarchal narratives gets the
> shaft,
> and rightly so in the peculiar view of the author of the Patriarchal
> narratives.  So in many ways your new reading of Genesis 49: 3 fits my
> overall view of
> the Patriarchal narratives better than my traditional reading had.
>
> Thank you for your insight.
>
> The more I think about it, the more I think you may be right here.  Your
> interpretation fits the context perfectly.
>
> Nifty!  Thanks much.  Much appreciated.
>
> Jim Stinehart
> Evanston, Illinois
>
> **************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
> favorite sites in one place.  Try it now.
> (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> End of b-hebrew Digest, Vol 72, Issue 11
> ****************************************
>