The problem only exists in English linguistic mentality. In Russian, the verb is perfectly reflexive, "pereglyaduvatsya," to keep looking at one another.
hitpael is always reflexive. Now, a reflexion can aim at oneself (hitlabesh) or at each other (your examples).
Vadim Cherny
Isaac Fried wrote:
It appears to me so too, that HITPAEL is reserved for an act done by an actor upon himself, but then there is the example of TIT-RA)- U of Genesis 42:1, brought by Jason, and also WA-YI-TRA)-U PANIM, 'faced each other, looked one another in the face', of 2 Kings 14:11. Is, in light of this supposed nature of HITPAEL, the literal translation of WA-YI-TRA)-U, 'each showed his own face (to the other)'? Is there a case in the Hebrew bible where HITPAEL, in the singular, can be construed as a mutual (HADADI) action? Is HIT- XATEN such an example?
As I said, spoken Hebrew has HIT-XABEK, 'he was engaged in hugging someone who hugged him back', which is by now fully entrenched and even condoned.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
On Mar 31, 2009, at 7:40 PM, Vadim Cherny wrote:
IMO, all instances of hitpael in Hebrew are reflexive: doing something to someone or, more specifically, to cause someone to cause something. That is the only plausible interpretation of the suffix ht = hh, two casuatives (double hiphil, so to say).
That sense of reflective action is obfuscated in translation because equivalent English words lack the sense of reflexion, but I venture that careful examination shows such sense for every hitpael.
Vadim Cherny
Isaac Fried wrote:
In present day Hebrew the BINYAN of HITPAEL is often used for mutual action, for example, HIT-XABQ-U, 'they embraced, XBQ, each other'. Is there an instance of similar usage in the Hebrew bible?
Isaac Fried, Boston University
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.