Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

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.
Jason Hare
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by Jason Hare »

It's common enough, though, to have a heh written on 3ms forms without it being a personal suffix.

רָאִ֫יתָ = רָאִ֫יתָה just like תִּרְאֶ֫יןָ = תִּרְאֶ֫ינָה.

It is possible, though, that we could read it as רְאִיתָהּ (that is, רָאִ֫יתָ אֹתָהּ). But, again, we would need to see a reason to have a feminine object. Do you see such a justification for it?
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian
Kenneth Greifer
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 3:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by Kenneth Greifer »

Jason,
I can't tell from the translations if they see ראתה as having "her" (it) at the end or not because they might just assume it is there like you said it is understood and doesn't have to be written out. I thought they were reading the hay at the end as "her", but there is no way to know. Even in Ruth 3:6, you don't know if the hay at the end is "her" or if it is just understood like you said it might be in Hebrew. The "you" form ראיתה in Psalm 35:22 has the letter hay at the end, but sometimes the "you" form has the extra hay anyway, so you can't tell if it is the "her" ending or not, I guess.
Kenneth Greifer
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1691
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by Isaac Fried »

The verse seems to be about false witnesses claiming to have seen something with their own eye. In verses 35:22-24 the poet pleads with his all-seeing God to save him from this travesty and judge him rightly.

Isaac Fried, Boston University
www.hebrewetymology.com
ducky
Posts: 518
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by ducky »

I think ראיתה is just as ראית with no need to search for a complicated reason.
the H after a verb is not rare
and just the verb ראית is written 5 times as ראיתה
and other verbs as well.

Even in the Epigraphics, there are כתבתה and ידעתה
and also nouns as פניכה and קברכה

So I don't think we should look for some special reason for that.

***
The same goes for ראתה - no need to read it as if it comes with a suffix.

****
As for the translation,
The translation can never be 100% literal
And sometimes the text is written in a not full way.

And ראיתה could be in the meaning as ראיתה כל אלה=you saw all this (or something like that)
or just with an emphasis as if the ראיתה is like אתה ראית - as a tough statement of "you saw" (and now we expect you to do something, as in verse 17 he asks God כמה תראה for how long will you see (it, and don't act).
David Hunter
kwrandolph
Posts: 1172
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by kwrandolph »

Kenneth Greifer wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 4:04 pm Psalms 35:21 - 22 תהלים
35:21 וַיַּרְחִ֥יבוּ עָלַ֗י פִּ֫יהֶ֥ם אָ֭מְרוּ הֶאָ֣ח ׀ הֶאָ֑ח רָאֲתָ֥ה עֵינֵֽינוּ׃
35:22 רָאִ֣יתָה יְ֭הוָה אַֽל־תֶּחֱרַ֑שׁ אֲ֝דֹנָ֗י אֲל־תִּרְחַ֥ק מִמֶּֽנִּי׃

21Yea, they open their mouth wide against me;
They say: ‘Aha, aha, our eye hath seen it.’
22Thou hast seen, O LORD; keep not silence;
O Lord, be not far from me.
JPS 1917

Does Psalm 35:21 really say "our eye has seen it" or "has seen"
and does Psalm 35:22 say "You saw it" or "You saw"?
The Qatal verb is used for future, present and past events. In fact, the most common verb form used in conversation preserved in Tanakh for events happening at the time being spoken about is subject, verb in Qatal, possible object. Therefore, in this case, the verbs refer to events happening at the time spoken about, or in English translate as present tense.

Here’s a textual variation—I usually read an electronic transcription of the Aleppo text without points. ראתה is the usual form for Qatal, feminine singular, third person III-he verb. עין is feminine. In the Aleppo codex the noun עין is singular “…our eye sees”. In this case it appears that the Aleppo codex is correct, and the WLC wrong.

As I understand it, if you want to say “our eye sees it” with the action being masculine, I suspect that should be ראתהו which is nowhere found in Tanakh.

Karl W. Randolph.
ducky
Posts: 518
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by ducky »

When it comes to a masculine object there can be two forms:
ראתהו=ra'athu - as you wrote (like גמלתהו)
or
ראתו=ra'attu - as הטתו בעתתו יסרתו

***
When it comes to a feminine object, then Jason already showed them:
1 Sam 1:6 וְכִֽעֲסַ֤תָּה
Isa 34:17 חִלְּקַ֥תָּה
Jer 49:24 אֲחָזַ֖תָּה
Eze 14:15 וְשִׁכְּלָ֑תָּה (kamats because of pause)
Rut 3:6 צִוַּ֖תָּה
which also has the Dagesh in the T.

Just like בעתתו is an evolved form from בעתתהו (like גמלתהו) and the H was swallowed inside the T (therefore, the Dagesh in it).
So is the feminine - the first H also was swallowed inside the T (and it got a dagesh) and the second H stayed to close the word.
David Hunter
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1691
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by Isaac Fried »

ducky writes
Just like בעתתו is an evolved form from בעתתהו (like גמלתהו) and the H was swallowed inside the T (therefore, the Dagesh in it).
So is the feminine - the first H also was swallowed inside the T (and it got a dagesh) and the second H stayed to close the word.
In גְּמָלַתְהוּ = גמל-ת-הוּ the ת stands for the performer of the act גמל, namely the faithful wife, while the הוּ marks the beneficiary of the act גמל, namely the lucky husband.
No Hebrew letter ever gets "swallowed inside" another letter and no Hebrew letter ever "stays to close" a word, and there is certainly no need for any dagesh to remind posterity of this "swallowing".

Isaac Fried, Boston University
www.hebrewetymology.com
ducky
Posts: 518
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by ducky »

Hi Isaac,

If you repeat the same thing over and over again, it won't make it true.
Especially when your all words are general words.
If you have a new grammatical thing to say about the verbs and how they act and so on, then say it. But if you just talk in a general way, then it is like you said nothing.

***
And when did I say that there is a swallowed letter in the form of גמלתהו?

I was talking about the forms of יסרתו for example, where the H does not appear.
You explained the H in גמלתהו.
Where is that H in גמלתו or יסרתו or הטתו or בעתתו?

a similar thing was written also in the matter of תתצב when I wrote about the reflexive form of Hiphil. The H was also swallowed inside its previous letter.
David Hunter
Jemoh66
Posts: 296
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:03 pm

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by Jemoh66 »

Kenneth Greifer wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 9:09 pm Jason,
I can't tell from the translations if they see ראתה as having "her" (it) at the end or not because they might just assume it is there like you said it is understood and doesn't have to be written out. I thought they were reading the hay at the end as "her", but there is no way to know. Even in Ruth 3:6, you don't know if the hay at the end is "her" or if it is just understood like you said it might be in Hebrew. The "you" form ראיתה in Psalm 35:22 has the letter hay at the end, but sometimes the "you" form has the extra hay anyway, so you can't tell if it is the "her" ending or not, I guess.
Here’s how the NET guys handle this:
A6DF0BC2-1DC0-4D26-8BBA-2EFE57E8BFAA.jpeg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Jonathan E Mohler
Studying for a MA in Intercultural Studies
Baptist Bible Theological Seminary
Jason Hare
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Psalm 35:21 and 22 saw it ?

Post by Jason Hare »

kwrandolph wrote: Wed Nov 18, 2020 4:26 pm Here’s a textual variation—I usually read an electronic transcription of the Aleppo text without points. ראתה is the usual form for Qatal, feminine singular, third person III-he verb. עין is feminine. In the Aleppo codex the noun עין is singular “…our eye sees”. In this case it appears that the Aleppo codex is correct, and the WLC wrong.
Yes, the Aleppo Codex does have the easier reading, that's for sure. How do we deal with the Leningrad Codex, though, or with the Septuagint and Vulgate, which both have plural readings?
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
www.thehebrewcafe.com
Nihil est peius iis, qui paulum aliquid ultra primas litteras
progressi falsam sibi scientiæ persusionem induerunt.

— Quintilian
Post Reply