Isaiah 54:6

Classical Hebrew morphology and syntax, aspect, linguistics, discourse analysis, and related topics
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Chris Watts
Posts: 277
Joined: Thu May 13, 2021 8:00 am

Isaiah 54:6

Post by Chris Watts »

כִּי־כְאִשָּׁה עֲזוּבָה וַעֲצוּבַת רוּחַ קְרָאָךְ יְהוָה וְאֵשֶׁת נְעוּרִים כִּי תִמָּאֵס אָמַר אֱלֹהָיִךְ

Ok, firstlly, I can understand both from context and the fact that the second person Feminine singular has been used throughout ch 54. But the English translation of this word תִמָּאֵס as "Rejected You" (2nd Pers Fem Sing) is clearly wrong. Logic dictates a feminine 'you' from context .....at First sight. But, upon careful reflection of this word I believe that Second Person Masculine Singular is appropriate for Two reasons, make that Three:

1. Grammatically it can be 2 Per Masc Sing according to the pointing - no question;
2. The Second Pers Fem sing has been used throughout ch 54, Why then the sudden switch here - no point, unless Isaiah wanted to say something subtle, that since Jerusalem and Zion are referred to throughout this chapter because they are Feminine by nature, Israel is masculine.
3. Or, we could read: "...because She was rejected says your God" - this makes perfect sense following the previous clause within the same verse.

But whatever the opinion, the grammar is clear, one can not translate this into English as 'You-Feminine'.

Am I wrong to think like this?
Chris watts
ducky
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Isaiah 54:6

Post by ducky »

The form תמאס fits to two:
1. 2person m/s.
2. 3person f/s.

In this case it is 3person f/s.
ואשת נעורים כי תמאס.
The word תמאס is linked to אשת נעורים (she).

*
If it was 2person f/s it would be תמאסי.

***
David Hunter
Chris Watts
Posts: 277
Joined: Thu May 13, 2021 8:00 am

Re: Isaiah 54:6

Post by Chris Watts »

The reason I mentioned this in the first place was because one trusts the lexicons, but in two lexicons this was labelled as second person feminine. That was a surprise and some of the English translations are wrong too - but me thinks - how can I? Me? know more than they?
Chris watts
ducky
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Isaiah 54:6

Post by ducky »

Just for my interest...
Can you please tell me what translation translated this as "rejected you"?
I tried to find and couldn't.
Maybe this translation is not a literal word by word one.
And I am interested to see it.

Also, can you tell me what lexicon you talked about?
David Hunter
Chris Watts
Posts: 277
Joined: Thu May 13, 2021 8:00 am

Re: Isaiah 54:6

Post by Chris Watts »

ducky wrote: Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:10 pm Just for my interest...
Can you please tell me what translation translated this as "rejected you"?
I tried to find and couldn't.
Maybe this translation is not a literal word by word one.
And I am interested to see it.

Also, can you tell me what lexicon you talked about?
Hi Ducky, firstly, In the Gesenius - Davidson dictionary I have it lists the primary meaning as "To Reject". As for bibles, the following prefer to translate it as 'Reject':
JPS Tanach 1917 version
NIV
Berean Standard
NET Bible
I can understand that 'cast off' and 'despised' and 'refused' all amount to the same thing, though I would not accept that word 'despised' as being a suitable alternative.

As for the lexicons I use the Analytical Hebrew Lexicon by Benjamin Davidson (first printed 1848 - Latest edition 2017), and I also reference the Lexicon on the BibleHub website. Both listed that word we referred to earlier as 2nd P Fem.

Chris Watts
ducky
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Isaiah 54:6

Post by ducky »

I see that every source you mentioned does write it as 3person s/f (including biblhub).
So I think I didn't understand you.

If you are talking about the word "reject", I agree with you. I also don't see it fits here.
David Hunter
Chris Watts
Posts: 277
Joined: Thu May 13, 2021 8:00 am

Re: Isaiah 54:6

Post by Chris Watts »

ducky wrote: Thu Mar 28, 2024 2:32 pm I see that every source you mentioned does write it as 3person s/f (including biblhub).
So I think I didn't understand you.

If you are talking about the word "reject", I agree with you. I also don't see it fits here.
I am referring to the change from when throughout Ch 54 the 2nd Pers Sing Fem is used, it is clearly seen to be such. But, in the case of this word, there is ambiguity, is it 2PS Masculine OR 3 P S Feminine. The English translation says 'YOU', but we do not have masc and fem pointers in our grammar, therefore there is ambiguity. However since this particular word deviates from the classical 2nd Pers Singular feminine, as is used throughout ch 54, I think that the Third person feminine should be used, IE, the English translation should not read "You" but indicate "She".

I admit I made a serious blunder along the way because the Qal 2nd Pers sing Masc is listed right underneath the 3rd Fem, a difference between the tsere and the patach under the aleph, that's all, it's small printed and I missed it, hence I actually looked at the wrong word a couple of times. So I wrongly accused my lexicon of getting it wrong. Sorry about that.
ducky
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Isaiah 54:6

Post by ducky »

It's not so important, but I still don't see any translation that reads it as "you".
I checked the translations you mentioned, and I didn't see it.
So, I don't know exactly what you mean.

AS I said, it is not so important, so if you want, you can also ignore this.
David Hunter
kwrandolph
Posts: 1563
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Isaiah 54:6

Post by kwrandolph »

Without points, תמאס can be third person feminine singular Niphal, Pual or Hophal. All passive, which fits the context.

Karl W. Randolph.
Chris Watts
Posts: 277
Joined: Thu May 13, 2021 8:00 am

Re: Isaiah 54:6

Post by Chris Watts »

Hi Ducky, if you look here :https://biblehub.com/text/isaiah/54-6.htm - go to the bottom of the page you will see "you were refused and next to it Third Fem Singular, also the KJV and Websters translates it as 'You". However I should have looked at all the other translations as well, unfortunately I use the KJV all the time and rarely bother with other English translations except referencing BibleHub, hence this post. So I should perhaps reference another english version as well now and again. My fault.

Hallo Karl, hope all is well, thanks for your input, yes naturally without the pointing I know. I notice, looking, at the other English translations that they employ a passive interpretation. But all is well, the result stays the same.

Chris watts
Post Reply