On 12/22/04 6:38 AM, "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com> wrote:
What makes me
sympathetic with Doug's idea is that a man obviously deposits seed.
Since ancients could see that, whether they understood anything about
an egg would not be so important. They would have seen that the man
planted seed in the woman. So the Hiphil of ZR( may have been a term
to indicate that this seed germinated.
Yet our ideas about what "ancients ... would have seen" is not a solid basis
on which to make philological claims.
Are there any _attested_ uses of the
verb ZR( taking a masculine subject and meaning "to impregnate"? I can't
find any in the Tanakh. Am I missing them?
Chris
--
R. Christopher Heard
Assistant Professor of Religion
Armstrong Fellow in Religion
Pepperdine University
http://faculty.pepperdine.edu/cheard
http://www.iTanakh.org
http://www.semioticsandexegesis.info
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.