Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] XBR vs. ubburu: Hebron

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
  • To: pbekins AT fuse.net, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] XBR vs. ubburu: Hebron
  • Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 15:22:12 EST


Peter Bekins:

You wrote: “Hebrew BXR 'to choose' = Akk bêru 'to choose'.”

1. BXR

HALOT gives 5 cognates for Hebrew BXR, 4 of which have heth. The Akkadian
beru that you mention is the only cognate without a heth. So the heth/X in
Hebrew BXR is an integral part of the root.

But XBR and XBRN seem different, as we’ll now see.

2. XBR

As to XBR as a verb, HALOT reports that Aramaic had the same word, but beyond
that, there’s mainly only XBR in Ugaritic. But that’s a noun, “companion,
associate”, in Ugaritic. So the only verb cognate for Hebrew XBR as a verb
per
HALOT seems to be limited to Aramaic. Yet we have previously noted Aramaic
as having both XQR) and )QR) for “citadel”. So an initial heth/X in Aramaic
can be a mere prefix, and may at times be interchangeable with an initial
prosthetic aleph/), not being part of the root.

3. XBRN

Now for the smoking gun.

As to XBRWN/“Hebron”, HALOT reports that the Samaritan Pentateuch M23 has
)ibron. That’s not a heth! It’s an aleph. Is the initial heth/X in “Hebron”
/XBRN a mere prefix, rather than being an integral part of the root, as I
have
argued? If not, and the root of XBRN is XBR (with a heth/X), then why does
the Samaritan Pentateuch leave off the heth/X and have an aleph/)? That
looks
like XQR) vs. )QR) in Aramaic, where the initial letter in Aramaic or Hebrew
(not Akkadian) may be either heth/X or aleph/), and in any event is n-o-t
part of the root.

Once we see “Hebron” being spelled with an initial aleph/), rather than a
heth/X, in the Samaritan Pentateuch, we must ask whether the initial heth/X
in
the normal spelling of XBRN/XBRWN/“Hebron” may be a mere prefix, something in
the nature of a prosthetic aleph, rather than being an integral part of the
root.

Conclusion

The initial heth/X in XBRN/“Hebron” may possibly be a mere prefix. The
linguistic support for XBR as the 3-letter root of XBRN, with heth/X being an
integral part of the root, is much thinner than one might have expected.

XBRN/“Hebron” may be X + BR + N.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois

**************Need a job? Find an employment agency near you.
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000003)




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page