Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>]

Phil,
>   
> > BDB calls the form an imperfect.
> >     
>
> The jussive isn't always morphological observable. This is only the case in 
> certain verb groups, such as hiphiels, III he verbs, and II -ayin/ 
> II -yod/waw verbs.
>   

HH: Right, and why should BDB mark the jussive if it is the same as the 
imperfect? Good point.


> It could be a jussive because it is clause initial and because the syntax is 
> otherwise unusual.
>
> As for Bibleworks, that is just one interepretation. A-F and Westminster 
> Morphology, both on Logos, often disagree with each other.
>   


HH: True, but it is also the opinion of all the major translations, as 
you have noted. They count a lot more than a stray interpreter or two. 
In fact, translations are sometimes ahead of commentaries (more insightful).


>   
> > Psalm 15 shows that you don't need a complete sentence when answering a 
> > question.
> >     
>
> I think v. 2 is a complete sentence. Unlike in English, Hebrew doesn't need 
> a verb to make it complete. The NET translation you give does just that.
>   


HH: The NET translation in English does not provide a verb. You seem to 
be referring to verbless Hebrew sentences where there is an understood 
"to be" verb. Hebrew is not the only language where that can happen, and 
you're right that it is standard. But there is no understood "to be" 
verb in the NET translation of verse 2 below:

NET Psalm 15:1 A psalm of David. LORD, who may be a guest in your home? 
Who may live on your holy hill? 2 Whoever lives a blameless life, does 
what is right, and speaks honestly. 3 He does not slander, or do harm to 
others, or insult his neighbor. 4 He despises a reprobate, but honors 
the LORD's loyal followers. He makes firm commitments and does not 
renege on his promise. 5 He does not charge interest when he lends his 
money. He does not take bribes to testify against the innocent. The one 
who lives like this will never be upended.

HH: What the NET gives shows that we have the same phenomenon in English 
as in Hebrew. In both, one does not always need to give a complete 
sentence after questions because the grammar from the preceding question 
can establish the framework for an abbreviated answer:

"Where are you going for dinner?"
"Chico's."

There is no need to repeat the whole grammatical framework ("I am going 
for dinner to Chico's"). It is understood.


>   
> >  I don't see an ounce of difference in meaning
> >     
>
> If yissa' starts a new clause, it could be interpreted as a promise, like 
> yimot in Ps 15:5b (as you note). If it is the predicate of v. 4, it is part 
> of the answer to the question in v. 3. But in that case, it seems to be it 
> would be an odd answer, a kind of indirect answer.
>   


HH: Could you give me an example of the translation you have in mind, 
please? I still don't understand.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard