B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

When reading through this psalm, I came to the phrase: מרוח סעה מסער.

Is this found among the DSS?

It looks as if the reading should be מרוח נסעה מסער.

Reasons for this question: רוח is a feminine noun, therefore its verb should take a final ה. If סעה is the verbal root, then the feminine conjugation should be סעתה. Looking at the action, the psalmist is asking for protection “from the wind kicked up by a storm” where the verb נסע “to pull up” fits the context. Thus it looks as if this is a scribal error.

When reading this out loud, I lose the rhythm with a missing Nun, but the rhythm is there with it.

What do you all think?

Karl W. Randolph.

Psalm 55 is not in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Check the BHS apparatus, which sees dittography, and proposes מֵרוּחַ סְעָרָה, comparing the Syriac.
ܘܟܬܪܬ ܠܡܢ ܕܡܦܨܐ ܠܝ ܡܢ ܪܘܚܐ ܕܥܠܥܠܐ܂
http://cal1.cn.huc.edu/get_a_chapter?fi ... 055&cset=U
In other words, the Syriac has only one thing, dy ˁalˁālā "of the storm" after רוח.

סועה SOA is a variant of:
דואה, טועה, יואה, יועה, סועה, סואה, צואה, צועה, שואה, שועה, תואה, תועה

Isaac Fried, Boston University

Ah, and also זועה ZOA.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

Hello

just a note: רוח is feminine and masculine


I don't think there is a problem in this text
סעה is indeed a one-time word in the Bible

but we can understand it clearly as an active feminine participle from root סעה
and this root is surely close, as you said, to נסע.
and the basic meaning is about "going"

and so, it says that the wind is "going fast" (blowing) from the storm
or can be understood also as "blowing faster than a storm"

other Semitic languages such as Syrian and Arabic has this root in the sense of "wildness" or "attack" and other close meanings.

ducky wrote:just a note: רוח is feminine and masculine

That's the point that I was going to make. Nothing can be determined by the gender of רוּחַ, which is at times masculine and at other times feminine.

ducky wrote:I don't think there is a problem in this text
סעה is indeed a one-time word in the Bible

"One-time words" have a technical name: ἅπαξ λεγόμενον hapax legomenon (singular) and ἅπαξ λεγόμενα hapax legomena (plural).

Cheers,
Jason

Thanks Jason,

So a singular word would be the term to use?

and one more note:
Also Ugarit has a close root that means to carry away (or wash away) (I need to check it more accurately)

ducky wrote:So a singular word would be the term to use?

Yes. You'd say "this word is a hapax legomenon in the Psalms." You would also say "there are twenty-five hapax legomena in this text." So, the -on ending is singular and the -a ending is plural. It comes from Greek neuter forms.

ducky wrote:and one more note:
Also Ugarit has a close root that means to carry away (or wash away) (I need to check it more accurately)

I've never learned another Semitic language beyond Hebrew and Aramaic. How you spent much time in Ugaritic or other Semitic languages?

Hi Jason

I got confused a little bit.
hapax legomenon is kinda complicated and I'm sure I will write it wrong.
If a word happens only once in the Bible, can I call it a single word (or singular)?

***
As for other Semitic languages...
I know the basic grammar of Arabic.
and as for the other languages, I don't really know their grammar, but only very basic stuff, especially when there is some parallel phenomenon that touches the Hebrew's one.

But as for this case, it was enough to use a dictionary (since the case here is a root).
You can find on the internet the Ugarit's, Akkadian's, Arabic's, Syrian's, and more.