Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Olivier Randrianjaka <rev_oli AT hotmail.com>]

Hi Chavoux Luyt,
Thanks for your comments. It is true that some feminine nouns may take 
masculine ending, but it is still not possible in our case here since אִשָּׁה 
(Hos 1.2) is singular not plural. I mean if your argument is right, then 
אִשָּׁה  must be in plural since in Hebrew both noun and its defining 
adjective accord in genre and number. The point is that זנונים does not play 
an adjective role here but may be a stand alone noun, as someone has argued 
earlier, but then how could we translate it?
Regards,
Olivier Randrianjaka   

> Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 10:41:06 +0200
> Subject: Re: how to translate Hosea 1:2 (Olivier Randrianjaka)
> From: chavoux AT gmail.com
> To: rev_oli AT hotmail.com
> CC: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> 
> Hi Olivier
> 
> > My comments:
> > The problem is that the translation "a prostitute woman or wife" is not 
> > linguistically appropriate since the adjective following the
> > feminine noun אִשָּׁה in construct state is actually in masculine plural 
> > זנונים which makes the above translation impossible.
> I am not too sure of this, because there are some feminine nouns
> taking the "masculine" plural (e.g. Beitzah -> Beitzim) and the other
> way round (Ab -> Abot). So it is at least  _possible_ that zonah takes
> the masculine plural in this case.
> 
> >I would prefer the translation "woman of prostitution" or "woman 
> >practicing a sacred prostitution" than the common "prostitute
> >woman" which is not fitting linguistically and theologically.
> And I would agree with you here.
> 
> Regards
> Chavoux Luyt
                                          
>From randallbuth AT gmail.com  Tue Mar  8 04:48:57 2011
Return-Path: <randallbuth AT gmail.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 228054C020; Tue,  8 Mar 2011 04:48:57 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on malecky
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
        DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
        RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
Received: from mail-ww0-f49.google.com (mail-ww0-f49.google.com 
[74.125.82.49])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C1684C00C
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Tue,  8 Mar 2011 04:48:54 -0500 
(EST)
Received: by wwc33 with SMTP id 33so671306wwc.6
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Tue, 08 Mar 2011 01:48:53 -0800 
(PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
        :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type
        :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=M5tjpTrVhY7W2k5bCKZWtjFsi9c2eHjaiVqf6Uwizjk=;
        b=apvHP5txE8t+WeT7jqrt0Cz1E71Y3+XyYoRypjNy3Xu6eHhC1+ML9S7+fVA0Vf/ns4
        MhM7MqnyLuBojo+nI9dgXsmhPk4UEeIqaEGfGSnOR2cRkUrxCbESL5RWeB0etEGNqpRV
        9dvSBX1U6KxHND4J97VqtfVE6mG8VPWnzRkmE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
        :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=sYCD00nswM7DNqvUJP9s4Ptjk0h3zGHaDsc5esgt+YgwgUkfSDllFW54B+p9/+bW3w
        IOMdvWqkGzNjtYOJn2msEQuKl6cm1xj5kNw86FeIfuubtLtCqFAxNxRB+28KTYBDU+Qy
        BUP+Q4dnLlIM3/iU8zFdHRg6chZtX2zGmN6c8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.143.135 with SMTP id l7mr3174495wej.86.1299577733366; Tue,
        08 Mar 2011 01:48:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.255.201 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 01:48:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinErowAnyFabMQbdZL13cO69oayfXGiVW5SuTJm AT mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTi=Lji-xtPcHSu=+nXPU3=yarjbT=LFO6yZA9mx= AT mail.gmail.com>
        <AANLkTinErowAnyFabMQbdZL13cO69oayfXGiVW5SuTJm AT mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 11:48:53 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=5vgBHhGOWP6Bkd98bhu_s0grpdSYBb04ojaup AT mail.gmail.com>
From: Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>
To: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Hiphil?
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 09:48:57 -0000

KR:
> Every time I had seen this transliterated into English, it was =E2=80=9CH=
avenu shalom =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D >  which clearly is not a hiphil.

=D7=94=D7=91=D7=A0=D7=95 havenu, if heard by a BHebrew speaker, might be a =
word. It would mean
"give us (to ...)!" (imperative, but 'us' as the direct object, not an indi=
rect
object as is possible in English), which does not make sense in the sentenc=
e,
nor is such a word attested, ever, as far as I know. (Nor was this even the
suggestion offered, see below.)
With "h(a)venu shalom `alekem", one's ears would interpret or hear "hevenu
shalom `alekem". This happens all the time when people speak in every
language. Alternatively, that is why people invented questions. If a form
doesn't make sense, a person can pitch it back to the speaker, re-phrased,
or else ask, 'what do you mean to say?' Again, this is something that happe=
ns
all day long in every language.

> I thought S=C3=A9bastian had merely made a typo when
> he wrote the transliteration =E2=80=9CHevenu =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D
>
>>> [KR] is that this is
>>> from the irregularly conjugated verb YHB,

So far so good. But you didn't correctly explain that verb either.
"havenu" would have meant 'place us, give us' where "us" would
have been the direct object, which wouldn't fit the sentence, and
certainly didn't and couldn't fit your proposal "let us deliver ..."
The explanation was simply not Hebrew, first-year or otherwise.

KR:
> Concerning this verb, it is used 22 times (according to a concordance) an=
d not
> once does it have the initial yod nor other indication that one should be=
 there.
> So where does the traditional root YHB come from?

Interesting. You were the one who said that the root was Y.H.B. Apparently
you were "correct" without being aware of it. You will notice that imperati=
ves
formed from 'pe-yod' roots drop their first letter, like tse' "go out"
from y.tS.'.,
or lek "go" from y.l.k., or red "go down" from y.r.d., or da` "know"
from y.d.`.
So hab/haba /habi/habu is exactly what is expected for a set of qal imperat=
ives
from y.h.b. and that is exactly what occurs in the HebBible. It only
occurs as an imperative.
y.h.b., of course, had dropped out of normal usage and was idiomatically
restricted to the imperative in Hebrew, it still is to this day. If
you want to find the
cognate verb in unrestricted use you will need to look at other
Semitic languages.
However, the verb in the song was hebenu =D7=94=D7=91=D7=90=D7=A0=D7=95, a =
hifil with a root b.w.'.
(PS: I would get a better concordance. Even-shoshan lists 33 occurrences fo=
r
the imperative from y.h.b. See below.)

KR:
> This is also an example of why one needs to be careful about etymology: t=
here
> is a homograph HBH which has a different meaning, used in Genesis 11 and
> Exodus 1:10. It really should be listed separately from YHB.

Yes, we/you should be careful. Because habah and y.h.b. are the same word
and this has been recognized as such for over three millenia.
Words used for 'give' in Hebrew ('ten' "give!") and other Semitic
languages have a wide application, including contexts that in English
can mean 'place, put' and
in the imperative in various modal idioms, like "allow" (literally
'give [me] to ...).
haba is etymologically/literally 'give' (plus the request marker '-ah'),
with an application "let's" when followed by a first person plural verb,
as in "hava nagila". When followed by a noun (e.g. Gen 30.1),
then it is a simple imperative 'give, place', (like the plural in Josh
18.4, et al.)


[KR
>>> I understand this as possibly a qal imperative first person
>>> plural, which would have the emphasis =E2=80=9CLet us deliver=E2=80=A6=
=E2=80=9D]
...
RB:
>> =C2=A0 Nor can the root y.h.b. explain the form. The imperative
>> of this verb is used in BH as 'hab/hava/havi/habu' "give".
>> (This verb, too, is used in a very well-known modern song,
>> hava nagila "hey-c'mon, let's rejoice!".) And when
>> haba is used in this idiomatic sense in BH it does not use the
>> preposition `al 'on/upon' nor does it add an indirect-object
>> suffix. So the suggestion was without any merit.

The discussion on *habenu =D7=94=D7=91=D7=A0=D7=95* "give us (direct obj)!"=
[sic]
remains without application to the first song but I suppose that it could
be used for teaching correct Hebrew by example of what not to do:
havenu could not have meant "let us deliver ..." in any Hebrew,
it was nonsense, static.

As for hif`il, imperative and suffix conjugation:
havienu =D7=94=D7=91=D7=99=D7=90=D7=A0=D7=95 would mean 'bring us (obj)!' (=
not applicable to context)
(short hif`il forms retain the 'i' vowel when object suffixes are added)
and
hevenu =D7=94=D7=91=D7=90=D7=A0=D7=95 means 'we've brought',
as in
hevenu shalom `alexem =D7=94=D7=91=D7=90=D7=A0=D7=95 =D7=A9=D7=9C=D7=95=D7=
=9D =D7=A2=D7=9C=D7=99=D7=9B=D7=9D.

braxot
Randall Buth

--
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicallanguagecenter.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life