How might beraishit be absolute, given the shwa on the bet?
Posted: Thu Oct 31, 2019 8:33 pm
How might beraishit(Gen 1:1), be absolute, given the shwa on the bet?
I've heard it argued that beraishit is construct, because we know the translation is "in **the** beginning..........." i.e. THE beginning not A beginning. And if it were absolute, then the vowel on the bet would have to be a patah. And only a construct noun can have a bet prefix with shwa, and still mean/be translated, "in THE".
I notice though that groves wheeler, as I see in bibleworks, considers raishit in beraishit, to be absolute- @ncfsa - noun, common, feminine, singular, absolute), and the text-fabric biblical hebrew database also considers raishit in beraishit, to be absolute https://bibleol.3bmoodle.dk/text/show_t ... /Genesis/1 (clicking reishit shows state-absolute).
So how might they justify considering it absolute, given the combination of
A) The Shwa on the Bet
and
B) The translation everybody gives it as "In THE,,,", not "in A..."?
I suppose one answer could be that there's an implied noun(like 'story'), just like some other examples where there's an implied noun of fruit. So in a sense it is construct, but they classify those instances of reishit as absolute. But grammatically it behaves like a construct in that it has the bet with shva, despite meaning "The".
Note- i'm going to avoid the term "definite article" here 'cos it's ambiguous, as some on the forum say "definite article" without being clear whether they mean "written with" the definite article, or translated with but not written with. So i'm just stating what hebrew letter and vowel I am referring to e.g. Bet with shwa, or Bet with patah, and i'm stating the word "THE" when that's what I mean,and when I say "The" I always mean "The" in translation.
I've heard it argued that beraishit is construct, because we know the translation is "in **the** beginning..........." i.e. THE beginning not A beginning. And if it were absolute, then the vowel on the bet would have to be a patah. And only a construct noun can have a bet prefix with shwa, and still mean/be translated, "in THE".
I notice though that groves wheeler, as I see in bibleworks, considers raishit in beraishit, to be absolute- @ncfsa - noun, common, feminine, singular, absolute), and the text-fabric biblical hebrew database also considers raishit in beraishit, to be absolute https://bibleol.3bmoodle.dk/text/show_t ... /Genesis/1 (clicking reishit shows state-absolute).
So how might they justify considering it absolute, given the combination of
A) The Shwa on the Bet
and
B) The translation everybody gives it as "In THE,,,", not "in A..."?
I suppose one answer could be that there's an implied noun(like 'story'), just like some other examples where there's an implied noun of fruit. So in a sense it is construct, but they classify those instances of reishit as absolute. But grammatically it behaves like a construct in that it has the bet with shva, despite meaning "The".
Note- i'm going to avoid the term "definite article" here 'cos it's ambiguous, as some on the forum say "definite article" without being clear whether they mean "written with" the definite article, or translated with but not written with. So i'm just stating what hebrew letter and vowel I am referring to e.g. Bet with shwa, or Bet with patah, and i'm stating the word "THE" when that's what I mean,and when I say "The" I always mean "The" in translation.