I seem to have misplaced the transliteration scheme that we use here on the
list. Can anyone send it to me again? I hope I can make myself clear
without it.
I am reading Is 25:4 and have come to the expression "baccar l-" about the
person in need: when he is in distress. HALOT says this baccar is a form
of the intransitive nuance of the verb crr (tsade resh resh): to be
cramped. Is it thinking inf. cstr.? As it appears the Groves-Wheeler
Westminster Morphology and Lemma Database (WTM) (Copyright (c) 1991-1992
(Release 1), 1994 (Release 2), 1996-2000 (Release 3), and 2001 (release
3.5)) tags it? My question is then, why does it appear to have the
definite article? I know there are exceptions to just about every rule, is
this supposed to be an exception to the rule that inf.cstr. does not take a
def.art.? Isn't it easier to interpret this as the noun 'car' (need) as we
find it in Is 26:16 according to HALOT itself?
When it comes right down to it: Does HALOT treat one baccar (Is 25:4) as a
verb, even though it violates an article rule, because it is followed by l-
and the other baccar (26:16) as a noun because it doesn't? Is that a good
enough reason?
Andrew
--
Stud.Theol. Andrew Wergeland
Fakultetslærar (vik.) - Det gamle testamentet (Hebraisk) /
Faculty Teacher (temp.) - Old Testament (Hebrew)
Det teologiske Menighetsfakultet /
The Nowegian Lutheran School of Theology
Postboks 5144, Majorstua
N-0302 OSLO