Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] the meaning of paqad in Numbers 31 (was elusive pa-kad)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Paul Zellmer" <pzellmer AT sc.rr.com>
  • To: "'fred burlingame'" <tensorpath AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: 'B-Hebrew' <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the meaning of paqad in Numbers 31 (was elusive pa-kad)
  • Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 20:34:49 -0500

Assuming this is an honest question, I refer you to TWOT entry 1802, which
discusses both the difficulties and the rationale used by Speiser in BASOR
149:21 to support a basic meaning of "'attend to with care' or 'take note.'
... [T]he fact that at least half of the occurrences involve positive action
by a superior in relation to his subordinates strongly suggests that such
action is a vital part of the meaning of the word."

A possibility of the use of the passive in verse 48 is that the focus is on
the fact that the officers' command position was an assignment given to them,
not an action taken by them. I.e., try a concept "having been placed over"
or "having been given the responsibility of the care of."

Take the military concept of "muster" in verse 49 and its attendant concept
of someone being mustered has not yet actually reported yet, and you might
understand the idiom literally "and not was mustered from us a man." In
current U.S. military idiom, "all present and accounted for."

Hope this helps,

Paul Zellmer

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of fred burlingame
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 7:29 PM
To: B-Hebrew
Subject: [b-hebrew] elusive pa-kad

Hello all;

פקד seems a bit resistant to a single & consistent, root translation or
definition.

We have

Numbers 31:48

ויקרבו אל משה הפקדים אשר לאלפי הצבא שרי האלפים ושרי המשות

and Numbers 31:49

ויאמרו אל משה עבדיך נשאו את ראש אנשי המלחמה אשר בידנו ולא נפקד ממנו איש

In the first verse, פקד appears in the passive participle tense, qal form,
masculine plural. But the army officers don't appear to "be overseen;" but
rather "overseeing."

In the second verse, פקד manifests in the perfect tense, niphal form, third
person, singular. But "and not he is overseen from us, man," does not
readily mean "and not a man is missing from us," as the common translation
expresses.

Is there agreement on a single root or base meaning of פקד ; a meaning that
would become susceptible to the usage in these two verses?

regards,

fred burlingame
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page