b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
- To: Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr>
- Cc: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect
- Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 19:41:24 -0800
Arnaud:
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Arnaud Fournet
<fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr>wrote:
> From: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
>
>>
>> Genesis 1:3 “and there was light (light came into existence)” yiqtol.
>> Unless
>> one subscribes to the theological position that God is continuously
>> creating
>> light, this is a one-time, finished event. This is a completed action, yet
>> yiqtol.
>>
> ***
> Anyway translation into another language blurs whatever original meaning it
> had.
>
> The act of creation is one-time but light came into existence for ever.
> Hence Yiqtol: a stable state.
>
> A.
***
Repeatedly in these first three chapters of Genesis, the verb HYH in its
contexts in qatal and yiqtol indicates the transition from non-being to
being, in other words, becoming and/or being created. That transition
happened once, and is completed action. This is one of those examples.
>
>
>> Exodus 3:7 “I surely see the humiliation of my people in Egypt and I hear
>> their outcry because of those who treat them harshly and I know their
>> pain.”
>> three qatals referring to incomplete, durative, continuing action at the
>> time the statement was made.
>>
> ***
> Then maybe the translation again is an issue.
> Maybe I did see, I did hear and I do know would convey the meaning better.
>
To me, this response looks like grasping at straws—you still admit that
knowing is incomplete, durative, continuing action, so why not the other two
actions as well? Look also at verse 9.
>
> Arnaud Fournet
> ***
>
Unless otherwise indicated, every translation I post on this list is my own
translation, indicating my understanding of the Hebrew text.
Karl W. Randolph.
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect
, (continued)
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Isaac Fried, 02/03/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect, fred burlingame, 02/03/2011
-
[b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Randall Buth, 02/04/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Bryant J. Williams III, 02/04/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Randall Buth, 02/05/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Rolf Furuli, 02/05/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect, Isaac Fried, 02/05/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Rolf Furuli, 02/05/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Randall Buth, 02/05/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect, Isaac Fried, 02/04/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect, Rolf Furuli, 02/05/2011
-
Message not available
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
K Randolph, 02/05/2011
-
Message not available
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
K Randolph, 02/06/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect, Isaac Fried, 02/06/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
K Randolph, 02/06/2011
-
Message not available
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Rolf Furuli, 02/07/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect, Isaac Fried, 02/07/2011
-
Message not available
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
K Randolph, 02/07/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect, Rolf Furuli, 02/08/2011
-
Message not available
- Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect, K Randolph, 02/09/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
K Randolph, 02/07/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
K Randolph, 02/05/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Bryant J. Williams III, 02/04/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Isaac Fried, 02/03/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
K Randolph, 02/07/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Randall Buth, 02/08/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect, Isaac Fried, 02/08/2011
-
Re: [b-hebrew] no to aspect,
Randall Buth, 02/08/2011
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.