Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

A forum for the discussion of teaching methods and class objectives for teaching Classical Hebrew.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Pere
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by Pere »

OK.
Now, should the last word in your text not be לָנו as, for instance, we find it in Gn 26:20?
Pere Porta
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Northeastern Spain)
kwrandolph
Posts: 1338
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by kwrandolph »

Pere:

I think you mean a different verse, as the Hebrew versions of Tanakh that I have have עמו as the last word, and לנו is used to indicate possession.

Karl W. Randolph.
Pere
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by Pere »

Karl,
I meant that maybe the last word in your text should be לנו instead of ממנו?

Heartly,

Pere Porta
Pere Porta
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Northeastern Spain)
kwrandolph
Posts: 1338
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by kwrandolph »

Pere:
Pere wrote:Karl,
I meant that maybe the last word in your text should be לנו instead of ממנו?
Why? what would that impart to the sentence? What are you thinking?

Maybe you should translate it as it is written, and how it would read as you mention, and compare the two. We may be thinking completely differently.
Pere wrote:Heartly,

Pere Porta
Karl W. Randolph.
Pere
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by Pere »

Karl,
I understand your text as follows:

"I have a little question.
Do you know what you will ask us? Today indeed [people/we] do not speak Hebrew since childhood and [people/we] will hear from them so that [they/we] know it well.
If you ask us to write books, we will not be able (to do so) because we will not learn well.
Who can teach us if [yes/things are this way] and not?
If you only question us about issues we are dealing with, then this will be easy for us"
Is this what you intended to say?

Friendly,
Pere Porta
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Northeastern Spain)
kwrandolph
Posts: 1338
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by kwrandolph »

Pere:

It looks as if your understanding of Hebrew is more modern than Biblical.

To make it easier, here is the original attempt at Hebrew again.

לי שאלה קטנה

הידעת את אשר תשאל ממנו . כי לא היום דברים יהודית מנעורהם ונשמע מהם לדעת היטיב . אם תשאל ממנו לכתב ספרים, לא נוכלו, כי לא נלמד היטיב . מי זה היוכל ללמדנו אם כן ולא . אם רק תשאל מה לפנינו, הלא זה קל ממנו .
Pere wrote:Karl,
I understand your text as follows:

"I have a little question.
Understood correctly.
Pere wrote:Do you know what you will ask us?
There is no future tense here. As secondary verb in the sentence, “to ask” takes the Yiqtol conjugation. Both verbs are present tense — “Do you know what you ask of us?”
Pere wrote: Today indeed [people/we] do not speak Hebrew since childhood and [people/we] will hear from them so that [they/we] know it well.
Where does “indeed” come from?

Today there aren’t people who speak “Jewish” (Hebrew) from their youth (childhood) that we may listen to them to know (it) well.

Remember, the waw in the middle of a sentence sometimes is best translated as “that”, not “and”. A well known example is the last phrase of Isaiah 53:2.
Pere wrote:If you ask us to write books, we will not be able (to do so) because we will not learn well.
If you should ask us to write documents, we won’t be able to, for (because) we have not learned well.

The first verb is a Yiqtol because it’s subjunctive mood, the second and third verbs because they are continuations, secondary. Remember, Biblical Hebrew has no tense.

A ספר is not only a book, but any document, even a letter (see Esther).
Pere wrote:Who can teach us if [yes/things are this way] and not?
Who can teach us if it is so or not?
Pere wrote:If you only question us about issues we are dealing with, then this will be easy for us"
If you ask us only about what is before us, then is it not too easy for us?

The ממנו indicates the superlative.
Pere wrote:Is this what you intended to say?

Friendly,
I would expect that if a native speaker of Biblical Hebrew were to read my few sentences, he would say that I wrote incorrectly. But as there are no native speakers of Biblical Hebrew, we can only guess, educated guesses for sure, but guess that we have written correctly.

Karl W. Randolph.
Pere
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by Pere »

Are you ready, Karl, to read about some mistakes you made in your text?

Friendly,
Pere Porta
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Northeastern Spain)
kwrandolph
Posts: 1338
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by kwrandolph »

Pere wrote:Are you ready, Karl, to read about some mistakes you made in your text?
Of course I am. But you’d better be ready to show why those are mistakes.

But are you ready for a vigorous but friendly debate should I disagree with you?

Others may join in if they wish.

Karl W. Randolph.
Pere
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by Pere »

Mistake number 1.
You wrote נעורהם with a mem before it.
Now, this is a word that, being a plural, keeps the yod in its inflected forms: מנעוריהם. Look at Ez 23:3.

Friendly
Pere Porta
(Barcelona, Catalonia, Northeastern Spain)
kwrandolph
Posts: 1338
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Some Fun with Biblical Hebrew for Real Communication

Post by kwrandolph »

Pere wrote:Mistake number 1.
You wrote נעורהם with a mem before it.
Now, this is a word that, being a plural, keeps the yod in its inflected forms: מנעוריהם. Look at Ez 23:3.
Is it always plural? See Proverbs 5:18. The consonantal text there is singular.

I read Proverbs so often that I’m more familiar with this example than others.

Of the remaining 36 times the word is found, 10 could be either singular or plural, and the rest plural.

It’s usually safest to go with the majority examples, which would treat it as plural, as in Psalms 144:12.

Karl W. Randolph.
Post Reply