Biblical Hebrew Forum

[jimstinehart AT aol.com]

Uri Hurwitz:

Everyone knows that, as stated in “Biblical Hebrew Grammar for Beginners”:  
“nouns of the feminine gender at times take the ending ים in the plural”.  
But what relevance is that to the question of whether Y(L means “male ibex”, 
as opposed to meaning “[male or female] ibex”?  At Proverbs 5: 19, we have a 
grammatical form that is unique to feminine construct singular:  Y(LT.  That 
means that the regular feminine singular is:  Y(LH.  Every lexicon I have 
looked at says that “female ibex” is Y(LH, whereas “male ibex” is, by 
contrast, Y(L.  HALOT and Gesenius and BDB cannot all be wrong about a basic 
issue of Biblical Hebrew like that, can they?  The fact that both Y(LH and 
Y(L may have the same regular plural form, the masculine-looking Y(LYM, is of 
little or no consequence, for per “Biblical Hebrew Grammar for Beginners” as 
just quoted, everyone knows that “nouns of the feminine gender at times take 
the ending ים in the plural”.

The question on this thread is whether Y(L is or is not an appropriate name 
for the heroine wife of Heber.  If Y(L means “Male Ibex”, and cannot mean 
“[Male or Female] Ibex”, then Y(L does not make sense as being a west Semitic 
name of Heber’s wife, who is neither male nor ibex-like nor of west Semitic 
origin.  That traditional view is wrong on every possible count.  Rather, 
Heber’s wife, being a Kenite and a heroine, should have a non-west Semitic 
name that means “Grand Lady” or something like that.  A-a-li, as an attested 
non-Semitic name from a people who had originated in Late Bronze Age eastern 
Syria, with such name meaning “Grand Lady”, works perfectly in all regards.  
By sharp contrast, a west Semitic name meaning “Male Ibex” does not work at 
all.  Pre-exilic Biblical authors could effortlessly come up with bona fide 
non-Semitic names like that, because there was a small but prominent ethnic 
minority in Jerusalem until the Exile that always gave its children 
non-Semitic names of that type.  We know that because (i) Joshua 15: 63 tells 
us so, and because (ii) there is no other way that pre-exilic Biblical 
authors could come up with non-Semitic names like Uriah and Araunah and Caleb 
and Jael, etc., etc., etc. at will.

XT-Y/Xu-ti-ya and QYN-Y/Qa-a-ni-ya and QN-Z-Y/Qa-ni-zi-ya and 
YBWS-Y/I-bu-us-ya at truly ancient Genesis 15: 19-21 are all non-west Semitic 
names, and all of them are attested names at Late Bronze Age eastern Syria.  
The new news is that pre-exilic Biblical authors were quite savvy, and when 
coming up with personal names to pair with any of those four non-west Semitic 
names of peoples, in  a-l-l  cases, 18 of 18 and counting, they always 
managed to come up with a bona fide non-Semitic personal name.  Why are 
Biblical analysts so insistent upon giving inappropriate west Semitic 
meanings to bona fide non-Semitic names in the Bible?  The pre-exilic 
Biblical authors were Biblical Hebrew native speakers, and so they could tell 
at a glance that XT-Y and QYN-Y and QN-Z-Y and YBWS-Y at truly ancient 
Genesis 15: 19-21 are all non-west Semitic names.  And since a small, but 
prominent, minority group of people who continued to give their children 
names of that type remained in Jerusalem until the Exile, it was not 
difficult for savvy pre-exilic Biblical authors to come up with non-Semitic 
personal names to match with those four non-west Semitic names of peoples.  
That’s the exciting new idea in this thread.

What do you think?

Y(L as the name of Heber’s heroine wife is an attested non-Semitic name 
[A-a-li] meaning “Grand Lady”, befitting her Qa-a-ni-ya non-west Semitic 
ethnicity and heroine status, not an inappropriate on all counts west Semitic 
name meaning “Male Ibex”.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois