Biblical Hebrew Forum

[David Kolinsky <yishalom AT sbcglobal.net>]

Nir,

You may very well be correct that Samson chose the fox (ShW\L) for its 
similarity to the Arabic word meaning torch (Sh\L).  However, I do not think 
they are etymologically connected in the way that you suggest "that there is 
some similarity between the shape of the torch fire and the fox tail, giving 
an ancient common semitic word,"  Rather I believe the etymological 
connection is as follows:

both words are expansions of the word Sh\(H) (ultimately derived from ShW\)

In Arabic = spread, diffuse, scatter, disperse > radiate, beam > flash up 
             with the word for torch (also set ablaze, ignite, kindle etc) 
coming from "flash up"

In Hebrew = to make smooth, daub, spread over
             with fox (Shu\L), path (MSh\oL), palm / arch of foot (Sh\uLh) 
all meaning smooth

Considering the th --> sh transformation, I suggest that the original 
consonant was Sh, some words remained Sh and others transformed from Sh > Th. 
 

As to which came first, I would venture a guess and say that if there was a 
Hebrew form of Sh\ and Sh\L meaning flash up, set ablaze and torch simply 
unattested in our limited Hebrew source material then it is impossible to say 
which came first.  If however no such forms exist in Hebrew and never have, 
then fox came first and was present in the shared protosemitic language.  
When the different dialects separated later becoming separate languages fox 
was already present in both.  However in this scenario Sh\ and Sh\L meaning 
flash up, set ablaze and torch developed in Arabic after Hebrew had already 
distinquished itself.


Thanks for your time,
David Kolinsky
Monterey CA
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 21:36:25 -0300
From: "Nir cohen - Prof. Mat." <nir AT ccet.ufrn.br>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] a tale of three languages: a case study
Message-ID: <20110106002846.M44812 AT ccet.ufrn.br>
Content-Type: text/plain;    charset=utf-8

>>or to put it another way; what was the language of the gov't; of the >>
priests; of the aristocracy; of the peasants on the street; of the middle >>
class; .... of lord& master to the servant in the home? 

fred would give a kingdom (which?) to find out in what language(s) samson
talked with delilah and bil'am with his mule. here i give just one case 
study. 

samson's story is really about semitic puns, mostly easy ones (was he teaching
the philistines basic applied semitic lessons? no, because 
delilah's name is already semitic!). 

but one of the puns i only uncovered reading my arabic dictionary: the story
of the torched foxes. the question is: why did samson choose foxes and not,
say, wolves for his torches? 

clearly, because of their tails!!!

it happens that torch in arabic is sha'le and fox in hebrew is shu'al. 

then, which etymology came first for the root "$(L": torch or wolf? 

a plausible answer is that there is some similarity between the shape of the
torch fire and the fox tail, giving an ancient common semitic word, on which
samson created his jem. 

interestingly, the arabic word for fox is th(lb, which maybe is more ancient,
or maybe just closer to aramaic, considering the th --> sh transformation.
conclusion: fox came before fire? 

in a very long shot, in indo-european can "fox" and "foco/fogo", "zorro" and
"zoroaster" be related in a similar way ? i wouldnt bet fred's kingdom on it. 

nir cohen