b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

[b-hebrew] Why not ")ULBAN"?

From: Pere Porta <pporta7 AT gmail.com>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] Why not ")ULBAN"?
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:28:42 +0200

At considering Ps 51:9 I wonder about the last word in the verse.
)LBYN, a typical Hiph'il, imperfect, first person singular: *I will cause to
be white* (in a literal translation)

Now, the real sense is: I will be caused to be/become white.
And so, Vulgate has "dealbabor" (a passive) and LXX has "leukanthésomai" (a
passive).

To my eyes it would seem more logical here the use of the Hoph'al: )ULBAN.

Why Hiph'il and not Huph'al?
Of course, I'm not intending to change the text; I just look for a more or
less convincing explanation.

--
Pere Porta
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain)

[b-hebrew] Why not ")ULBAN"?, Pere Porta, 04/19/2011
- [b-hebrew] DIBBER & ELALESEN in Dt 1:1, Philip, 04/19/2011
  - Re: [b-hebrew] DIBBER & ELALESEN in Dt 1:1, George Athas, 04/19/2011
- Re: [b-hebrew] Why not ")ULBAN"?, K Randolph, 04/19/2011
  - Re: [b-hebrew] Why not ")ULBAN"?, Pere Porta, 04/20/2011
    - Re: [b-hebrew] Why not ")ULBAN"?, K Randolph, 04/20/2011
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- [b-hebrew] Why not ")ULBAN"?, Randall Buth, 04/19/2011
- [b-hebrew] Why not ")ULBAN"?, Randall Buth, 04/20/2011