Why Feminine? Jeremiah 49:19

[Chris Watts]

Just from a plain reading of the text, I would take the feminine as a reference to the land of Edom. That begins in verse 14 with the first use of the feminine (הִֽתְקַבְּצוּ֙ וּבֹ֣אוּ עָלֶ֔יהָ וְק֖וּמוּ לַמִּלְחָמָֽה) just after mentioning Edom as an object of God’s punishment. I would imagine that verse 19 is continuing that declaration.

1. I recognise my own non-scholarly position, but find a problem with the above: "The Lion (Masculine) comes up from the Jordan" (Feminine); God makes Him, The Lion, Run Away from the Jordan, because the Jordan is Feminine and The Lion is masculine?

2. If the feminine refers to Edom, then God causes the Lion to run away (Hifil Masculine) from Edom. I do have to admit that I am really confused in a way I have not been when it comes to masc and fem pointers.

I really hope I am not having one of those blank brain-less moments.

An interesting but mind boggling reference from Lange (1887 I think) says this: "In a twinkling I will drive him (Edom) from thence", then he gives two scriptural refernces to the word 'Thence' Zephaniah 3:7 coll and Proverbs 12:19. I have to admit he has completely lost me with regard to these two references. Obviously preferring a 3rd person masculine (Neuter) rather than a feminine. He then goes on to say that מֵעָלֶיהָ is to be certainly referred to נְוֵה although this word is elsewhere used as masculine since the idea of country lies at its basis. Isa 27:10 and 33:20.

Keil and Delitzsch agree with Lange above. They say that: "Edom will run from IT" And add the latin Ad Sensum. Meaning, thank goodness I looked this up: "A grammatical construction in which a word’s inflexion is determined by the semantics of the word or words with which it associates, in contravention of what is required by grammar".


chris watts

[Jason Hare]

Shalom, Chris.

1. I recognise my own non-scholarly position, but find a problem with the above: "The Lion (Masculine) comes up from the Jordan" (Feminine); God makes Him, The Lion, Run Away from the Jordan, because the Jordan is Feminine and The Lion is masculine?

Why would the Jordan be feminine? Both נָהָר “river” and הַיַּרְדֵּן “the Jordan” are masculine. Why would make either feminine in a given text? I don’t think you should continue the metaphor of the lion beyond its own phrase. There is nothing there about chasing off a lion.

2. If the feminine refers to Edom, then God causes the Lion to run away (Hifil Masculine) from Edom. I do have to admit that I am really confused in a way I have not been when it comes to masc and fem pointers.

It says that Edom emerges like a lion from the Jordan, but it doesn’t say that he is a lion. It’s not a good idea to imagine a lion throughout the verse. The text does, though, treat Edom as feminine in verse 17, where the subject of the feminine וְהָיְתָה is Edom explicitly, and it also uses עָלֶ֫יהָ in reference to Edom. It should be remembered that this is agreement with אֶ֫רֶץ אֱדוֹם “the land of Edom.” The word אֶ֫רֶץ is always feminine.

I really hope I am not having one of those blank brain-less moments.

Interpreting Hebrew poetry isn’t exactly simple—even for the experienced.

An interesting but mind boggling reference from Lange (1887 I think) says this: "In a twinkling I will drive him (Edom) from thence", then he gives two scriptural refernces to the word 'Thence' Zephaniah 3:7 coll and Proverbs 12:19. I have to admit he has completely lost me with regard to these two references. Obviously preferring a 3rd person masculine (Neuter) rather than a feminine. He then goes on to say that מֵעָלֶיהָ is to be certainly referred to נְוֵה although this word is elsewhere used as masculine since the idea of country lies at its basis. Isa 27:10 and 33:20.

Keil and Delitzsch agree with Lange above. They say that: "Edom will run from IT" And add the latin Ad Sensum. Meaning, thank goodness I looked this up: "A grammatical construction in which a word’s inflexion is determined by the semantics of the word or words with which it associates, in contravention of what is required by grammar".

Why do you think that he is “preferring a 3rd person masculine (Neuter) rather than a feminine”? What does that mean? I don’t have access to the commentaries that you’re referring to, so I cannot comment on them with as little as you’ve provided.

[Chris Watts]

Shalom Jason,

Shalom, Chris.

1. I recognise my own non-scholarly position, but find a problem with the above: "The Lion (Masculine) comes up from the Jordan" (Feminine); God makes Him, The Lion, Run Away from the Jordan, because the Jordan is Feminine and The Lion is masculine?

Why would the Jordan be feminine? Both נָהָר “river” and הַיַּרְדֵּן “the Jordan” are masculine. Why would make either feminine in a given text? I don’t think you should continue the metaphor of the lion beyond its own phrase. There is nothing there about chasing off a lion.

2. If the feminine refers to Edom, then God causes the Lion to run away (Hifil Masculine) from Edom. I do have to admit that I am really confused in a way I have not been when it comes to masc and fem pointers.

It says that Edom emerges like a lion from the Jordan, but it doesn’t say that he is a lion. It’s not a good idea to imagine a lion throughout the verse. The text does, though, treat Edom as feminine in verse 17, where the subject of the feminine וְהָיְתָה is Edom explicitly, and it also uses עָלֶ֫יהָ in reference to Edom. It should be remembered that this is agreement with אֶ֫רֶץ אֱדוֹם “the land of Edom.” The word אֶ֫רֶץ is always feminine.

Ok as for the Jordan being feminine, my mistake. Also, Thank you for pointing me back to verse 17.

Regarding your comment about Edom being represented as the Lion.

I decided to list a representative portion of English translations: There are so many I gave up on reading all of them
1. God as a Lion = 7
2. Edom as the Lion = 0
3. Unidentified = 9

AND

The following differences:
1. I will suddenly make him run away from her
2. I will make her run away from him
3. I will make them run away from it

If the English translators can not agree on how this should be translated, let alone interpreted, then....?? Therefore I need to clear things up without the hebrew, this verse is so utterly vague it is driving me nuts. So keeping it simple just for me:

God will cause Him to be chased away from her: Who is the 'Him'? And who on earth is the 'Her'?

If I can at least establish subjects and objects here that would be a miracle! Then, I might be able to understand why that hebrew conjunction in this sentence is here at all.כִּֽי־אַרְגִּ֤יעָה אֲרִיצֶ֨נּוּ֙ Because it certainly does not make sense in English 'cause and effect'. IE "As a lion he comes up from the splendour of the Jordan to the habitation of the "whatever" BECAUSE I will suddenly chase him away from her...." Where is the logic?

Chris Watts

[Jason Hare]

I don’t see anyone being a lion in this passage. To say that someone does something like a lion doesn’t mean that you are carrying forward the metaphor of that person (or country) being a lion throughout the passage. It says that lions regularly come up from the grassy area and approach a watering area in search of prey—and that the person here is doing the same. He is seeking out pray. But, it says that God will chase him away from the land. It is probably the leader (king?) of the country of Edom that is preying on his own people, and God would set up over the land the person that he chooses.

הִ֠נֵּה כְּאַרְיֵ֞ה — Behold, like a lion
יַֽעֲלֶ֨ה מִגְּא֣וֹן הַיַּרְדֵּן֮ אֶל־נְוֵ֣ה אֵיתָן֒ — he will come up from the thicket (“from the midst”?) of the Jordan to the watering pasture,
כִּֽי־אַרְגִּ֤יעָה אֲרִיצֶ֨נּוּ֙ מֵֽעָלֶ֔יהָ — yet I will quickly chase him away from upon it (the land).
וּמִ֥י בָח֖וּר אֵלֶ֣יהָ אֶפְקֹ֑ד — And who is chosen, [him] shall I appoint for it (the land).
כִּ֣י מִ֤י כָמ֨וֹנִי֙ וּמִ֣י יֹֽעִידֶ֔נִּי — For who is like me, and who will summon me?
וּמִי־זֶ֣ה רֹעֶ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר יַֽעֲמֹ֖ד לְפָנָֽי׃ — And who is a shepherd who can stand before me?

The whole argument is that God is able to set the leader over the nation and get rid of a leader who is preying on his people. He would get rid of the current king in the same way that someone chases off a lion that has come down to a watering hole in search of prey.

[Chris Watts]

Shalom Jason,

Your expertise with Hebrew is such that I have no idea how to formulate a response. I respect your translation capabilities and it does appear on the surface to be so nicely solved. However, in order to continue to question this translation I would have to revert to other prophecies about Edom and the previous verse and the whole context of this chapter and the fact tha God said that no matter how much Edom tries to re-build He will never ever allow them to build. So I can not see how scripture would contradict what has gone before, nor what comes after in verse 20, nor see how God would be protecting the Edomites from themselves or a wicked ruler, and since this is strictly a language category I may say no more.

I thinkit best to abandon all hope of a successful interpretation on this one and move on. It is one of the most ambiguous verses I have ever read; Isaiah 18 is easier to understand than this one verse.

Toda and Kindest Regards Jason.

[ducky]

Hi,

I think that the אריצנו refer to the people of Edom, and מעליה is from the land.
the enemy of Edom is the lion, that with chase away its people from the land.

[kwrandolph]

The difference between ארי and אריה was not as my quick and thoughtless answer said, for which I was quickly swatted down. After some research, and looking at how words are used in Biblical Hebrew, ארי refers to a singular male lion, the plural אריים is found in Tanakh. אריה refers to a group or pride of lions. The addition of the ה grammatically changes the meaning from a singular to a group or set. There are other nouns for which we can see the same pattern.

That doesn’t answer the why of the feminine, the subject of this thread. But it answers one question incidental to it.

[Jason Hare]

That doesn’t answer the why of the feminine, the subject of this thread. But it answers one question incidental to it.

It’s feminine because it’s talking about the land. That’s already been established.

[Jonathan Beck]

The difference between ארי and אריה was not as my quick and thoughtless answer said, for which I was quickly swatted down. After some research, and looking at how words are used in Biblical Hebrew, ארי refers to a singular male lion, the plural אריים is found in Tanakh. אריה refers to a group or pride of lions. The addition of the ה grammatically changes the meaning from a singular to a group or set. There are other nouns for which we can see the same pattern.

That doesn’t answer the why of the feminine, the subject of this thread. But it answers one question incidental to it.

Sorry Karl. Where are you doing this research? From what textbook, commentary or journal article are you drawing? Because this is absolutely pure and utter nonsense.

Jonathan

[kwrandolph]

Sorry Karl. Where are you doing this research?

By looking up all the uses of the terms in Tanakh, complete verses and often verses around to establish context. This is comparing and contrasting uses of terms in question.

From what textbook, commentary or journal article are you drawing? Because this is absolutely pure and utter nonsense.

Jonathan

Well, Tanakh is open source. You are welcome to check Tanakh yourself to show where I have made a mistake.

Karl W. Randolph.