ralph wrote:Like זַרְעוֹ (Gen. 1:12). his seed. That's "seed of him". So is construct.
Mira de Vries wrote:
This is what I meant in my previous message about how you are confused when you translate to English. זרעו does not mean "seed of him." It means simply "his seed." Possession is expressed differently in Hebrew than in English. In English nobody says "seed of him." It sounds convoluted, stilted, unnatural. זרעו is not convoluted, stilted or unnatural.
Nobody is claiming that "seed of him" is what people say in English.
I speak English very fluently.
And by the way, on a related note, an English teacher once told me that people used to say "bus his wheels" prior to the use of the apostrophe bus's wheels. So if one were to say "bus his wheels" it's not valid in modern English, but is a valid explanation of the meaning of bus's wheels. Or wheels of the bus. "seed of him" is a bit redundant in English.. but does perhaps explain why zaroh is listed as construct.. Though if construct means a connection (between noun and suffix, noun and noun, noun and V of VSO, noun and sometimes ordinal), and doesn't require a particle or small connecting word in between, then even 'his seed' could justify a construct.
ralph wrote:
But there are some other cases of construct..
Yom HaShishi יוֹם הַשִּׁשִּֽׁי (Gen 1:31)
But Yom is listed as construct.
Mira de Vries wrote:
By whom?
Why would this be construct, anymore than without the definite article ה? I don't see a construct here.
ralph wrote: groves wheeler morphological index. That is used by bibleworks. (and I have asked/questioned what exactly is the construct.)
Mira wrote:The meaning is obvious, so does it matter what grammatical form it is?
to those that are interested in the grammar, yes.