Gen 4:7

[Jason Hare]

In your presentation you have made two logical fallacies—you closed here with a straw man fallacy after begging the question.

My only faulty logic was assuming that you had grown in any sense since our last interaction.

[kwrandolph]

In your presentation you have made two logical fallacies—you closed here with a straw man fallacy after begging the question.

My only faulty logic was assuming that you had grown in any sense since our last interaction.

LOL!

That’s all your response deserves. Yes, I did actually laugh out loud when I read it. Grown compared to you? Hah!

This discussion is closed.

Karl W. Randolph.

[Jason Hare]

This discussion is closed.

It looks like it’s still open.

[Jason Hare]

Being a Ph.D. student, @Jonathan Beck might have better access to current resources. I use teaching grammars, since my hope with Hebrew is to bring people into knowledge of the language. As far as reference grammars go, you might look at A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar (2nd ed.) by Christo H.J. van der Merwe, Jacobus A. Naudé, and Jan H. Kroeze (Bloomsbury, 2017) and A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew by Paul Joüon and T. Muraoka (Roma: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006). I think Jonathan (or someone else here) might be able to make reference to other resources that I don’t know about.

Jonathan,

Anything you might add here to this closed discussion?

[Jonathan Beck]

The only other standard grammar is Waltke and O'Connor's Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax.

I don't care to comment on the previous "closed" discussion.

[Max S-R]

It felt silly to make a new thread about this little question, so I'm adding it here. Forgive me if that's not what I should do.

Gen. 34 ends with the sententious response of Jacob's sons:
וַיּאֹמְרוּ הַכְזוֹנָה יַעֲשֶׂה אֶת־אֲחוֹתֵנוּ

My question is whether this יַעֲשֶׂה has as its implied subject the prince Shechem, or whether the 3rd person sg. (masc.) can be used generally (for this is the way the Septuagint seems to translate), as in:
[Is a man] to deal with our sister as with a whore?

Many thanks in advance.

Max S-R

[kwrandolph]

וַיּאֹמְרוּ הַכְזוֹנָה יַעֲשֶׂה אֶת־אֲחוֹתֵנוּ

I read it as follows:

And they said (Wayyiqtol indicating continuation of narrative)

Question mark ה

As a prostitute

should do/make (referring to the action, hence masculine) (not referring to a specific individual)

our sister.

Or in more colloquial English, “And they said, ‘Should anyone treat our sister as a prostitute?’”

Karl W. Randolph.

[Jason Hare]

It felt silly to make a new thread about this little question, so I'm adding it here. Forgive me if that's not what I should do.

Gen. 34 ends with the sententious response of Jacob's sons:
וַיּאֹמְרוּ הַכְזוֹנָה יַעֲשֶׂה אֶת־אֲחוֹתֵנוּ

My question is whether this יַעֲשֶׂה has as its implied subject the prince Shechem, or whether the 3rd person sg. (masc.) can be used generally (for this is the way the Septuagint seems to translate), as in:
[Is a man] to deal with our sister as with a whore?

Many thanks in advance.

Max S-R

The Septuagint renders it with the aorist subjunctive middle χρήσωνται in a deliberative sense, “should they (people at large) use...?” The יעשה of this verse could be read either as qal 3cs “he will do” (יַעֲשֶׂה, as it is in the MT) or as niphal 3cs “it will be done” (יֵעָשֶׂה). If as the latter, we should understand the את as “with” rather than as the definite direct object marker (DDOM). Either is possible, if we disregard the pointing, and both would refer to an impersonal subject.

Notice that הכזונה comes from הֲ + כְזוֹנָה in which the he would close up on the preposition, producing a theoretical הֲכְזוֹנָה that resolves as הַכְזוֹנָה, since you cannot have two vocal shevas up against each other.

[Max S-R]

Many thanks!

- Max

[Carlos Torrenegra]

Yes. It is implied that the "he" in the verb 3ms is שכם.