A couple of words, does this make sense?

For discussions which focus upon specific words, their origin, meaning, relationship to other ANE languages.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
kwrandolph
Posts: 1541
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by kwrandolph »

In Job 16:11 I came across a word ירטני and of course, what does it mean? It looks like it’s related to the noun רטט in Jeremiah 49:24. I get the impression that paralysis and making paralyzed are the actions, with each of these being a happax legomenon.

Now, what makes it more interesting, there appears to be another word, ירט in Numbers 22:32, which appears to be related to the adjective מורט in Isaiah 18:2, 7. I get the impression that going away, making distant is the action here.

Do these interpretations make sense?

What do you all say?

Karl W. Randolph.
S_Walch
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:41 pm

Re: A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by S_Walch »

HALOT has the following:

ירט
Arabic waraṭa II to throw down.
qal: pf. יָרַט; impf. יִֽרְטֵנִי: —1. with עַל־יְדֵי to cast into someone’s hands (parallel with הִסְגִּיר) Job 16:11; —2.? intrans to be a slippery (a slope דֶּרֶךְ) Nu 22:32 (text ?).

1. רטט
Masoretic Hebrew pi. to hop, skip;
Jewish Aramaic pa. to cause to tremble.

מרט
Jewish Aramaic to pull out hair, depilate
Egyptian Aramaic, etp. to be ripped out (Jean-H. Dictionnaire 168);
Syriac Arabic to tear out one’s hair, mariṭa to be without hair, bald,
Tigre/Tigrinia (Littmann-H. Wb. 117a) mrṣ to be bare
Akkadian marāṭu to shave (AHw. 610b),
Harari to scrape off (Leslau 31);
qal: impf. אֶמְרְטָה, אֶמְרְטֵם inf. מָרְטָה (Bauer-L. Heb. 316c); pt. מֹרְטִים, מְרוּטָה: —1. to pull out hair Ezr 9:3 Neh 13:25; —2. to wipe, sharpen a sword, Ezk 21:14.16.33 and cj. 21:20 (for מְעֻטָּה 1 מְרוּטָה :: Zimmerli 472: for מְרוּטָה rd. ‍(מְ‍)מֹרָטָה → pu.); —3 pt. to be rubbed raw (shoulder), overworked Ezk 29:18; —Is 50:6 → טלל hif.
nif: impf. יִמָּרֵט to become bald Lv 13:40f.
pu: pf. (or pass. qal, Bauer-L. Heb. 286n, 357) מֹרָֽטָּה; pt. מְמֹרָט 1K 7:45 > מוֹרָט Is 18:7 (1QIsa ממרט): —1. to be wiped clean: נְחֹשֶׁת 1K 7:45, sword Ezk 21:15f, cj. 14; —2. smooth or bare (skin) Is 18:2.7.

LXX in Job 16:11 has ῥίπτω (to throw down to the ground); Jer 49:24 (30:13 LXX) has τρόμος (shaking/trembling); Num 22:32 has οὐκ ἀστεία (not pretty/charming); ...and it's probably best to ignore Isaiah 18:2 in the LXX; 18:7 has τίλλω (to be plucked).

All of which, I know, isn't really helpful.

The only thing that makes any sort of sense is ירט possibly meaning "to be cast down" in Job 16:11. However, "being paralysed due to fear/panic" would make sense in both Job 16:11 and Jer 49:24.
Last edited by S_Walch on Thu Oct 30, 2014 3:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ste Walch
kwrandolph
Posts: 1541
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by kwrandolph »

S_Walch wrote:HALOT has the following:

ירט
Arabic waraṭa II to throw down.
qal: pf. יָרַט; impf. יִֽרְטֵנִי: —1. with עַל־יְדֵי to cast into someone’s hands (parallel with הִסְגִּיר) Job 16:11; —2.? intrans to be a slippery (a slope דֶּרֶךְ) Nu 22:32 (text ?).

1. רטט
Masoretic Hebrew pi. to hop, skip;
Jewish Aramaic pa. to cause to tremble.
You’re right, it appears as if HALOT hasn’t a clue.
S_Walch wrote:מרט
Jewish Aramaic to pull out hair, depilate
Egyptian Aramaic, etp. to be ripped out (Jean-H. Dictionnaire 168);
Syriac Arabic to tear out one’s hair, mariṭa to be without hair, bald,
Tigre/Tigrinia (Littmann-H. Wb. 117a) mrṣ to be bare
Akkadian marāṭu to shave (AHw. 610b),
Harari to scrape off (Leslau 31);
qal: impf. אֶמְרְטָה, אֶמְרְטֵם inf. מָרְטָה (Bauer-L. Heb. 316c); pt. מֹרְטִים, מְרוּטָה: —1. to pull out hair Ezr 9:3 Neh 13:25; —2. to wipe, sharpen a sword, Ezk 21:14.16.33 and cj. 21:20 (for מְעֻטָּה 1 מְרוּטָה :: Zimmerli 472: for מְרוּטָה rd. ‍(מְ‍)מֹרָטָה → pu.); —3 pt. to be rubbed raw (shoulder), overworked Ezk 29:18; —Is 50:6 → טלל hif.
nif: impf. יִמָּרֵט to become bald Lv 13:40f.
pu: pf. (or pass. qal, Bauer-L. Heb. 286n, 357) מֹרָֽטָּה; pt. מְמֹרָט 1K 7:45 > מוֹרָט Is 18:7 (1QIsa ממרט): —1. to be wiped clean: נְחֹשֶׁת 1K 7:45, sword Ezk 21:15f, cj. 14; —2. smooth or bare (skin) Is 18:2.7.
I didn’t include מרט because its meaning is pretty clear. From my dictionary below:

‎מרט to make smooth ⇒ to polish 1K 7:45, Ez 21:14, to shave, cut off or pull out hair Ezr 9:3, Ne 13:25, become bald Lv 13:40–1 → מרט one who pulls out hair Is 50:6, מרטה polished, as in polishing a weapon making it ready for war Ez 21:15–6 (10–1)

However, מורט in Isaiah 18:2, 7 appears to be a piel or pual participle from the verb ירט and not connected with מרט in either meaning nor form. Hence I didn’t even think of it.
S_Walch wrote:LXX in Job 16:11 has ῥίπτω (to throw down to the ground); Jer 49:24 (30:30 LXX) has τρόμος (shaking/trembling); Num 22:32 has οὐκ ἀστεία (not pretty/charming); ...and it's probably best to ignore Isaiah 18:2 in the LXX; 18:7 has τίλλω (to be plucked).

All of which, I know, isn't really helpful.

The only thing that makes any sort of sense is ירט possibly meaning "to be cast down" in Job 16:11. However, "being paralysed due to fear/panic" would make sense in both Job 16:11 and Jer 49:24.
HALOT in this case mirrors the meanings found in Gesenius and BDB that induced me to start writing my dictionary (though at the time I thought it was merely a few corrections in the margins). I can see why the confusion indicated by HALOT and the LXX, as each word is used so seldom in Bible that there would be a strong temptation to conflate them into one entry. In fact, in the past, I tried to conflate as many words into common entries based on form, but now I find myself analyzing context, syntax, a lot more and finding that I was not always correct in that previous practice.

I wonder if “to set apart” is a more accurate definition for ירט ? This is not the same of the setting apart of קדש where it’s set apart to honor it, rather more that it’s not part of the group, away.

Thanks again for the HALOT.

Karl W. Randolph.
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by Isaac Fried »

The root ירט is a variant of
ירד ירט ירש
of the common meaning 'deviate deflect, divert, veer.'

The root רטט is a variant of
רעד רדד רטט רסס רצד רצץ רשש רתת
of the common meaning 'particulate, spread, free to move, shake, quiver, tremble.' Related to it are
רבב רכך רפף רקק

The root מרט is a variant of
מרד מרט מרס* מרץ
of the common meaning 'abrade, rub, bruise, separate.' Used also for the tearing, or plucking of hair (or feathers.) Related to it are
מרג מרח מרך מרק

Isaac Fried, Boston University
S_Walch
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:41 pm

Re: A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by S_Walch »

kwrandolph wrote:I wonder if “to set apart” is a more accurate definition for ירט ? This is not the same of the setting apart of קדש where it’s set apart to honor it, rather more that it’s not part of the group, away.
As in segregation/isolation/detachment?

"And he has isolated me in the hands of the wicked." - Job 16:11
"She has turned away to flight and isolation." - Jer 49:24
"Go, swift messengers, to a tall and isolated nation." - Isa 18:2
"At that time, a gift with be brought to Yahweh Tsaba'ot, from a tall and isolated people." - Isa 18:7

Well I'll be damned if that doesn't make a heck of a lot more sense than what we currently have in translation!
Ste Walch
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by Isaac Fried »

Here is Jer. 49:24
רפתה דמשק הפנתה לנוס ורטט החזיקה צרה וחבלים אחזתה כיולדה
NIV: "Damascus has become feeble,
she has turned to flee
and panic has gripped her;
anguish and pain have seized her,
pain like that of a woman in labor"

Isaac Fried, Boston University
kwrandolph
Posts: 1541
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by kwrandolph »

Ste:

When looking at conjugational patterns, I noticed that these were two different word groupings, not one. However, some of the conjugations can lead to homographs (thanks to no vowels being written).

The verb ירטני can come from either ירט or רטט, both of which are found in Tanakh.

The form מורט can come from either מרט or ירט, but not רטט. Context seems to rule out מרט.

Now looking at your response:
S_Walch wrote:
kwrandolph wrote:I wonder if “to set apart” is a more accurate definition for ירט ? This is not the same of the setting apart of קדש where it’s set apart to honor it, rather more that it’s not part of the group, away.
As in segregation/isolation/detachment?

"And he has isolated me in the hands of the wicked." - Job 16:11
"She has turned away to flight and isolation." - Jer 49:24
"Go, swift messengers, to a tall and isolated nation." - Isa 18:2
"At that time, a gift with be brought to Yahweh Tsaba'ot, from a tall and isolated people." - Isa 18:7

Well I'll be damned if that doesn't make a heck of a lot more sense than what we currently have in translation!
Well, I haven’t checked English translations.

Jeremiah 49:24 has רטט which in context seems to indicate paralysis, immobilization, either from fear or indecisiveness, or a combination of the two.

Isaiah 18:2, 7 has מורט which from the context indicates a people separated, distant, detached. I like your mention of “detachment”.

The forms say that the words found in Jeremiah 49:24 and Isaiah 18:2, 7 are from different roots.

The use in Numbers 22:32 doesn’t fit the paralysis theme, but does indicate that the Angel of the Lord considered Balaam’s road to be detached from God, which it was. Plus the context can use the Qatal conjugation, thus this appears to be what traditionally has been counted as the root form.

The final use is Job 16:11 with ירטני which from the form can come from either detachment or immobilization. The context with the parallelism to “locked up” makes me favor the immobilization theme at the present. A good argument can make me change my mind.

These are the considerations that were behind my original question.

Karl W. Randolph.
S_Walch
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:41 pm

Re: A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by S_Walch »

(Prepare for a lot of just simple "thinking out loud" comments, rather than straight out statements of fact :))
kwrandolph wrote:Jeremiah 49:24 has רטט which in context seems to indicate paralysis, immobilization, either from fear or indecisiveness, or a combination of the two.
Seeing as though Jer 49:24 has the mention of נוס/to flee, I personally would not think that paralysis/immobilization would fit in with this.

People would usually flee in terror or be paralyzed because of fear: not both at the same time ("crowd mentality" playing at part here - if you see people running, you usually run as well. You see people standing still, you do the same as well. People don't usually do the opposite).

Fleeing to hide oneself ("isolation/detachment") from an oncoming disaster is also very human, and wouldn't be too amiss in the Jer 49 context.

Either that, or רטט really does mean panic/terror in general.
Isaiah 18:2, 7 has מורט which from the context indicates a people separated, distant, detached. I like your mention of “detachment”.

The forms say that the words found in Jeremiah 49:24 and Isaiah 18:2, 7 are from different roots.

The use in Numbers 22:32 doesn’t fit the paralysis theme, but does indicate that the Angel of the Lord considered Balaam’s road to be detached from God, which it was. Plus the context can use the Qatal conjugation, thus this appears to be what traditionally has been counted as the root form.

The final use is Job 16:11 with ירטני which from the form can come from either detachment or immobilization. The context with the parallelism to “locked up” makes me favor the immobilization theme at the present. A good argument can make me change my mind.
So essentially, Num 22:32 and Isa 18:2, 7 would have the same root indicating "detached/detachment/separated/isolated"; Jer 49:24 would have a different root indicating panic induced immobilisation; and the question is whether Job 16:11 agrees with Jer 49, or with the Num/Isa verses, and so whether it comes from רטט or ירט / immobilisation or detachment.

I personally am sold on Num/Isa being from ירט, with the idea behind the word being detached/isolated/detachment. This would therefore rule out my comments above regarding רטט meaning isolation/detachment (which I am more than happy with).
I then see nothing particular that would take away רטט meaning something other than terror/panic in Jer 49.

We then get back to the actual question asked: what's being used in Job 16:11? ירט or רטט?

If רטט truly means panic/terror, I would conclude that this would rule out this being what's seen in Job 16:11. Leaving it therefore being from ירט/"he has detached/isolated me". Isolated/being locked up are also quite parallel in meaning.

Just throwing out my thoughts. I'm fine with speculation from time to time :)
Ste Walch
kwrandolph
Posts: 1541
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by kwrandolph »

Ste:

I see part of what we’ll have to discuss is the understanding of Jeremiah 49:24 and why I think it refers to paralysis.

“Damascus is slackened / disheartened” רפתה דמשק
“she turned to flee” “she” refers to Damascus, it doesn’t say that the flight was accomplished הפנתה לנוס
“but ??? caused her to firm up” as in not moving ורטט החזיקה
“distress and knotting up hold her as one giving birth” I don’t think a woman in labor is able to hit the road in flight צרה וחבלים אחזתה כיולדה

This is why I think that ??? refers to paralysis. The cause of the paralysis might be panic, but I don’t think that’s what the word itself means.

Did I miss something?

I’ll get back to Job 16.

Karl W. Randolph.
S_Walch
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:41 pm

Re: A couple of words, does this make sense?

Post by S_Walch »

I think what I've not made clear is how I'm reading the verse.

I read as follows:
Damascus is disheartened - רפתה דמשק
She has turned away to flee and panic - הפנתה לנוס ורטט
Distress has seized her - החזיקה צרה
And labour pains have grasped her like one giving birth - וחבלים אחזתה כיולדה

That I'm taking רטט with הפנתה לנוס is why I believe רטט is referring to panic/terror. I'm combining it with Damascus fleeing.

As you're taking רטט with החזיקה, I can see why רטט could certainly mean immobilisation.

What then has to be decided, I think, is how the words in the verse are to be read.
Ste Walch
Post Reply