From: "C. Stirling Bartholomew" <jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Re: Re: Ex 20:11 extent of time
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 08:24:37 -0800
On 2/18/05 3:09 AM, "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org> wrote:
> Of course, KIY gives the reason, and needs to be rendered in English by
> something like "for" or "because", with "for" as a conjunction. No one
> is doubting that. The issue is a quite separate one: is the temporal
> phrase to be understood like English "in six days" or more like English
> "for six days"?
I agree that the syntactical and semantic function of ky isn't the issue and
as always, focusing on the English translation befogs the question
concerning the semantic function of $$t-ymyM. The constituent $$t-ymyM
refers to a contiguous period of six days duration and the most lucid means
of bringing this into English is "in six days" but the English preposition
"in" is a necessary periphrastic addition following the LXX en ex hmerais.
> Presumably if C's "for six days" alternative actually means anything
> different from "in six days" ...