B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

For those who might be interested in continuing with the compositions:
Feel free to translate it below with the [​hide-he] tag.

Here's mine:

Hidden Hebrew Text

ילדה שׂרה אשׁת אברהם לו בן וקראה שׁמו יצחק כדבר אשׁר המלאך דבר אל־אברהם אישׁה

Glenn Dean wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 10:58 am Here's mine:

Hidden Hebrew Text

ילדה שׂרה אשׁת אברהם לו בן וקראה שׁמו יצחק כדבר אשׁר המלאך דבר אל־אברהם אישׁה

Do you want feedback on it, Glenn?

Yes, thanxs!

The natural word order is subject-object when there is no marking. So, we would expect שָׂרָה יָֽלְדָה "Sarah bore" rather than יָֽלְדָה שָׂרָה. The verb comes first in the following situations:

1. When vav-consecutive (vayyiqtol) is used.
2. When the verb follows a subordinating particle like כִּי or אֲשֶׁר.
3. When the verb is a volitional (non-indicative).
4. When anything is specifically called into focus.

If these are not the case, then the verb naturally follows the subject. There's nothing in this sentence to indicate that any of these are the case, so it should be שָׂרָה יָֽלְדָה.

The indirect object should be right up against the verb if it simply has a suffix ending (like לוֹ, as opposed to something like לַמֶּ֫לֶךְ). So, we certainly expect יָֽלְדָה לוֹ בֵּן without any interference. These are almost restrictions in the phrase.

Taking these into account, the word order for the first sentence is subject, appositive, verb, indirect object, direct object. In other words:

Sarah (subject) Abraham's wife (appositive) bore (verb) to him (indirect object) a son (direct object).

שָׂרָה אֵשֶׁת אַבְרָהָם יָֽלְדָה לוֹ בֵּן

So far, so good?

I think I'm following - it seems that the subject always follows the verb (but that's probably just because there's the "vav" starting the clause). So I do see in our case that there isn't a vav (so the subject should come first).

I put the indirect object ("to him") first, then the direct object ("son") only because of how the sentence was worded (so, if the sentence was worded 'she bore a son to him' I would of put the d.o. first then the i.o. next). Are you saying that this is "normal Hebrew" (that is ind. obj first, then dir. obj).

A good example is what happens in Spanish. Consider the following:
"To him" prefers to become an enclitic, by which it simply attaches itself to the verb. Le di "I gave him."

The same thing happens in Hebrew. That לוֹ attaches itself to the verb and doesn't want to be separated from it. So, you must say נָתַ֫תִּי לוֹ אֶת־כֶּ֫סֶף "I gave him the money" and the situations in which you would break it apart are few and far between. You might say נָתַ֫תִּי אֶת־הַכֶּ֫סֶף לוֹ "I gave the money to him" if are stressing that you didn't give it to someone else, but that's about it.

When you go from "to him" to "to Joseph," it is no longer enclitic and will be separated off. נָתַ֫תִּי אֶת־הַכֶּ֫סֶף לְיוֹסֵף is the normal word order, but it's fine to place the indirect object first, too (נָתַ֫תִּי לְיוֹסֵף אֶת־הַכֶּ֫סֶף).

(To draw a complete picture, in Spanish you would use both the enclitic and the actual indirect object: Le di el dinero a Juan.)

Does this make sense?

וקראה שׁמו יצחק

So, once we've established that we're using the past tense, it is most natural to continue the past tense with the vayyiqtol form. This means getting the IMPERFECT form and adding וַ ּ.

"She will call" is תִּקְרָא, to which we add the prefix and get וַתִּקְרָא. This is our vav-consecutive ("past narrative") form. If you use וְקָֽרְאָה, this would most frequently indicate future or irreal mood (think subjunctive or optative). It is "that she might/could/would/should/will call." It's not the past tense normally.

Apart from that, the above is spot-on.

כדבר אשׁר המלאך דבר אל־אברהם אישׁה

As far as word order is concerned, אֲשֶׁר is one of those words that causes the verb to jump up before the subject (subject-verb inversion). So, we should see דִּבֶּר before the subject here. Apart from that, it's great.

Just to be clear, normally דָּבָר is elided in this construction, and we simply see כַּאֲשֶׁר instead of כַּדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר. I also went with the latter, since it seems that this is what Weingreen was expecting from us.

וַתִּקְרָא אֶת־שְׁמוֹ יִצְחָק כַּדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר הַמַּלְאָךְ אֶל־אַבְרָהָם אִישָׁהּ

Jason Hare wrote: ↑Wed Oct 06, 2021 6:19 am Does this make sense?

That does make sense. The I.O. tending to 'attach' to the verb is only when we don't have something like a vav in front? For example, Jonah 2:1 (2:2) we see: וַיִּתְפַּלֵּ֣ל יוֹנָ֔ה אֶל־יְהוָ֖ה (so the I.O. didn't move next to the verb but is separated by the subject 'Jonah' (but this example differs from our example in that there is the vav consecutive, and the subject is explicit).