Hi Isaac,
Who said anything about "mechanical translation"? I thought we were
attempting a semantic analysis here with this discussion? If so, BH
melek and malkut equate semantically, or overlap semantically, with
English "king" and "kingdom" respectively. The -ut suffix is joined to
malk-, but crucially not to address the addressee and simultaneously
point out some third-person referent. If anything, I would say that your
own approach is far too "mechanical" in finding personal pronouns in
every nook and cranny. Just because there is a 'u' and a 't' does not
mean that we have to see a morphological makeup of one or two personal
pronouns, only that we have here two phonemes, /t/ and /u/, which,
unsurprisingly due to their phonemic status, are found in some personal
pronouns also many, many other words and morphemes in BH.
Regards,
David Kummerow.
Pere,
The flow chart should go, methinks, this way
----------> MELEK, king
MLK, root
----------> MALKUT, kingdom, kingship
Now, matters become befogged because we jump from one language to
another and think that by mechanical translation we achieve
understanding. To understand the Hebrew you need to explain to yourself
what MELEK and MALKUT mean without using the English equivalents, only
the root MLK.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.