שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא in Exod 21:29

Discussion must focus on the Hebrew text (including text criticism) and its ancient translations, not on archaeology, modern language translations, or theological controversies.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Post Reply
David M. Miller
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 6:11 pm

שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא in Exod 21:29

Post by David M. Miller »

The phrase שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא in Exod 21:29 appears consistently to be understood as a predicate verbless clause of classification, with the form Noun + Noun + Pronoun (Subject + Predicate + Pronoun or Nominative Absolute + Predicate + Subject). Based on their discussion, Waltke-O'Connor would presumably translate this as "As for the ox, it is a gorer." (See Waltke-O'Connor 8.4.2b; 16.3.3d.) For other examples of this pattern see Num 1:4; Lev 11:41.

However, since נַגָּח is an adjective, would it be possible to take נַגָּח as an attributive instead of a predicate adjective, and translate "it is a goring ox" (on the analogy of Exod 34:14)?

Thanks for your help!

David
Last edited by David M. Miller on Fri Jan 13, 2017 4:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
kwrandolph
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא in Exod 21:29

Post by kwrandolph »

I take this as a typical example of grammarians making a reading more complex than is necessary.

In languages that allow for verbless sentences with an understood “to be” as the verb, Biblical Hebrew being one of those languages, this comes out as a simple “If it is a goring ox from before…”, or as almost word for word, “If a goring ox is he from before…”.

All that extra labeling becomes superfluous.

Just my 2¢.

Karl W. Randolph.
David M. Miller
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 6:11 pm

Re: שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא in Exod 21:29

Post by David M. Miller »

But "goring" can function as an adjective or substantivally as a noun. You are taking it adjectivally. It is also possible to take it substantivally: "If the ox is a gorer." As I browse through examples, it looks like the adjectival pattern is more common. But Neh 8:9 seems to be a parallel: ‎ הַיּ֤וֹם קָדֹֽשׁ־הוּא--not "It is a holy day", but "the day is holy." In Neh 8:9, unlike Exod 21:29 the first noun has the article.
kwrandolph
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא in Exod 21:29

Post by kwrandolph »

David M. Miller wrote:But "goring" can function as an adjective or substantivally as a noun. You are taking it adjectivally. It is also possible to take it substantivally: "If the ox is a gorer." As I browse through examples, it looks like the adjectival pattern is more common.
This is an example of how English and Hebrew are different. A good translator will translate the sentence more along the lines as you have done, because that’s the way the idea comes out better in English.

My translation that I gave in my previous message is how the Hebrew reads it.
David M. Miller wrote:But Neh 8:9 seems to be a parallel: ‎ הַיּ֤וֹם קָדֹֽשׁ־הוּא--not "It is a holy day", but "the day is holy." In Neh 8:9, unlike Exod 21:29 the first noun has the article.
Did you forget something? Is not היום the ancient Biblical Hebrew way of saying “today”? So a wooden translation probably would come out as “Today it is set apart (holy)”?

The whole phrase comes out as היום קדש הוא ליהוה אלהיכם “Today, it is set apart to יהוה your God,…”

Just my 2¢.

Karl W. Randolph.
Post Reply