Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>]

Your response made some mistakes that need to be redone:
>The perfectly good Hebrew verb QBL is found twice in Job, both times in
Job 2:10 with a perfectly good nun prefix that fits the context.>

You were able to recognize that the 'l' (lamed) was simply marking
that this q.b.l. was a verb. But "perfectly good Hebrew" missed all of
the dialectical questions involved. Just what dialect does
l.q.b.l belong? (You don't want vowels so its up to you to read this
correctly.)

So I've reattached the original post.

vayyixtov Karl
>> > I would put Job as late pre-Babylonian Exile from the literary
>>> style. Once one recognizes the style, he is only middling difficult to 
>>> read
>>> and well within the mainstream Biblical Hebrew.>
>>
>> Are we reading the same text?
>
> No we’re not. You read it with the Masoretic points, I without.

Great, I'm glad that you can read it without the niqqud, since the
niqqud are not the language, only graphs to help readers. Yet I
wonder which of us is more comfortable reading without niqqud?
The question is primarily irrelevant, of course.

So on Job,
Please explain the verb
l-q-b-l  (not 'lhqbyl')
לקבל    (not להקביל)
in Job 1-2.

Where did l-q-b-l come from? (borrowed from Aramaic?)
What is its Hebrew profile in the Hebrew Bible--
is it clearly attested in First Temple contexts? (no, it's but conspicuous in
SecondTemple)
How was it used in cognate literature of the Second Temple outside of the
Hebrew Bible? (both Aramaic and mishnaic Hebrew, plus Literary Hebrew)
What phrase, word, or idiom, might it supplement or expand from
First Temple Hebrew so as not to be likely to be accidentally missing from
First Temple? (e.g. laqaH)

Hurvitz concluded that l-q-b-l was 'Second Temple'. I agree.

blessings
Randall



-- 
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
randallbuth AT gmail.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life