Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Pere:

On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Pere Porta <pporta7 AT gmail.com> wrote:

>
>>>>>
>>>> (Karl)
>
>>  Is it a ayin yod verb, or is it that the noun is derived from a hiphil
>> rendering of the root? It is not listed as a verb in the concordance.
>>
>> So what do you think it is, in a way that fits the context and syntax? The
>> adjective “very” does not fit.
>>
>>>
>>>
>> In this discussion, I start with context and syntax, then ask “What is
>> it?” The message I understand from your posting is that you start, and end,
>> with the form as it appears with its Masoretic points. You look at grammar,
>> while I look at meaning.
>> …
>>
>> (Pere)
>>
> I think, Karl, that it is the adverb, with meaning "much", (not the
> adjective "very" as you write). And I would guess that all scholars would
> agree.
>

You know that all scholars can be mistaken, which is why that is called a
logical fallacy, namely the bandwagon logical fallacy.

The context and syntax indicate that it is not an adverb meaning “much”
either.


>  Indeed, at giving my answer I centered on the grammar of the word M)D and
> not on the meaning of the whole verse.
>
> These are two quite different issues:
> --one is the analyzing or parsing of a given word (within a verse)
> --one is trying to get the true meaning of the verse where a given word
> (analyzed or not)  is placed.
> Though related, these are two quite different issues.
>

To me these appear to be two different approaches to solving the same
question, the question being which is superior, gives better results? I
think the second option you list above should be worded as follows:
• one analyzes the context and syntax of a verse where a given word
(analyzed or not) is placed. This analysis will often indicate the type of
word (noun, verb, adjective, adverb, etc.) that we should parse.

>
> I'm aware you're trying to get a "rational" translation of this verse,
> Karl. I'm not sure of my capabilities of helping you in this respect.
> But..... I realize that in the Psalms there are many verses that are quite
> difficult to us, to our minds...
>
> Let us take Ps 38:6:
> *My wounds fester and stink because of my foolish sins.*
>
> Do you feel this text, this translation is understable to our XXI century
> minds?
>

In the context of the previous and following verses (in discussions on this
list, I have sometimes read complete chapters in order to get the context of
a single verse in question) the Hebrew makes good sense.

As far as the translation, well … not bad, but I think it can be improved.

>
> Now, how could we translate this verse so that it could be understood by
> today readers?  This is a big problem!
>
> May your work as a lexicographer provide some help to solve it!!
>

In my reading the text, my interest was in getting inside the mind of the
ancient Hebrew writer as far as that is possible. That is what got me into
lexicography, as the dictionaries I bought did not seem to be accurate. My
friends and family have called me an anachronism as they say I don’t fit in
to modern society.

>From my interactions with others, I have found that many are shallow, not
doing the homework needed really to know. For example, I think a person
should read the complete Tanakh through cover to cover at least five to ten
times before he can say that he understands the Hebrew language used in
Tanakh. How many scholars have done that?

>
>
> Hearty,
>
> Pere Porta
> (Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)
>

Karl W. Randolph.