Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Lewis Reich" <lbr AT sprynet.com>]

Ms. Chan suggested that "'People untrammeled by earthly authority generally
end up in conflict with others' is one such bias."

As the writer of the quoted observation, I'm not sure I perceive any bias in
what seems to me a reasonably supportable sociological observation.  People
who do not accept authority (and the rule of law that goes with it)
generally do end up in conflict with others. Against whom does the
observation express any bias?

Lewis Reich

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of B Chan
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 3:31 AM
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Gen 16:12 Hand Against?


Karl: could you share with me the occurrences of yd b- with me, please? I
would like to look at the verbal constructs. I know one occurrence in Ruth,
but I'm not aware of the others.
 
Everybody: I guess what I want to arrive at is what would be a fair
translation if we were to do this "ex nihilo" as it were, relying on
previous translations as a guide but not slavishly tending to negative
connotations that have been the hallmark of extant English translations.
 
 
The issues for us are:
 
1. He will be a (wild ass? wild stallion? free-ranging horse? "free
spirit"?) of a man
2. His hand will be (against? in co-operation? in trade?) with all and all
with him.
 
 
What, really, are the arguments for and against each of the choices? Harsh
as it may sound, I suspect that extant translations have some biases at
play. "People untrammeled by earthly authority generally end up in conflict
with others" is one such bias I think is inconclusive. Would the angel be
describing "warlike Bedouin tribes" or "powerful Arab traders"?
 
May I state the issue for discussion this way: if we were Hagar, listening
to this encouragement/prophecy/pontification without explanantion, without
hindsight, what would we have understood as the literal meaning of all this?
 
 
I am enjoying this discussion, and I look forward to many more of your
erudite comments.
 
 
Betty Chan
 
 

 


Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 06:19:54 -0800
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Gen 16:12 Hand Against?
From: kwrandolph AT gmail.com
To: bh-chan AT hotmail.com
CC: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

B Chan:


On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:29 PM, B Chan <bh-chan AT hotmail.com> wrote:


The entry for "Yado bakol" at
http://www.learnhebrew.org.il/print/2010/july5.htm is strangely ironic.

It claims that the etymology comes from Genesis 16:12 which (it asserts) was
a "definitely negative" meaning.

Then it goes on to say that "in recent years it has turned semi-positive".

Alas, what did the Genesis original communicate to Hagar!





The promise starts in verse 10: she will have many descendants, a blessing
especially in those days. Then in verse 11: she will have a son. In many
societies, having a son is preferable to having a daughter, even today. Both
of these promises are very positive, especially in those days.


But when I look at the phrase YD B-, it is found over 20 times, and it
refers to attacking and warfare, and often, though not always, victory over
the enemies. So in the total context, we have a person who will be very
fruitful, multiple descendants, untamable, involved in warfare with all
around him. Yet there is indication that personal relations between him and
Isaac remained amicable.


So it looks as if the traditional interpretation is correct after all.


Karl W. Randolph.                                         
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew