B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

בתכם
within context this means: 'in amongst them'; but am I correct in assuming that it could also have meant: 'in their deception/oppression?

אי מזה
Likewise within context this means "from where have you come"; but could it also mean: "island of fear' and 'not from here'

This is not an academic exercise, I do have reasons for asking this, since I decided to start reading hebrew now without vowels, but also within sensible limits, I begin to see ambiguity that seems to add to the force of a verse rather than lead to confusion.

Kind regards
Chris Watts

Chris:

Galena wrote:… This is not an academic exercise, I do have reasons for asking this, since I decided to start reading hebrew now without vowels, but also within sensible limits, I begin to see ambiguity that seems to add to the force of a verse rather than lead to confusion.

Kind regards
Chris Watts

What follows is how I deal with the ambiguity. But there are times when the lack of points clears up ambiguity, where the points are wrong even for meaning.

Karl W. Randolph.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

How to read a Hebrew sentence:

First, I look through a sentence with the goal of identifying the verb, subject and other forms of speech. Most of the time, the verses are simple, so there is no question and they can be recognized on the fly. However, particularly in poetry, sentence structure may be rearranged for poetic effect, rare words may be used and it is difficult to recognize what is what. In these cases, I look for the form that only fits a verb, or only fits a noun, then work back and forth until I identify the different parts of speech.

For example, Proverbs 13:1 “בן חכם מוסר אב” we see that “חכם” can be a noun, adjective or verb, “מוסר אב” are two nouns in construct formation, “בן” can be a noun or verb. “בן חכם” is found in Proverbs twice elsewhere as a noun with an adjective, (10:1, 15:20) so most readers automatically assume that this is the same construct. If so, where is the verb? The verb could be either “בן” or “חכם”, but the reading I find making the most sense and smoothest reading is to understand “בן” as the verb, making the sentence read, “A wise person has insight to his father’s correction.”

Another example, Proverbs 1:19 “כן ארחות כל בצע בצע את נפש בעליו יקח”. This can be divided up into two sentences, starting with the second “את נפש בעליו יקח”: here we have the sign of the accusative “את” followed by two nouns in the construct, followed by a singular verb. Where is the subject? “בצע בצע” is usually taken to be a compound verb doubled for emphasis, but is it? But if we take the second “בצע” as a noun, then we have a complete sentence “An (unjust) cut (of the gain) takes the life of its master.” Does that fit the first sentence? “כן” often has an implicit “to be” included in the use, so it could serve as both the subject and verb of a sentence. The words “ארחות כל” indicate that the following word should be a noun, not a verb. “ בצע” can be a verb, actor noun indicating the one who does the action with the same form as a participle verb, an action noun with the same form as a participle verb indicating the action being done, or a noun of an object acted upon. Context indicates an actor noun, making this a sentence “כן ארחות כל בצע” “Such are the roads of all who take a(n unjust) cut (of the gain)” making the whole verse read “Such are the roads of all who take a cut, a cut the life of its master takes.” following the poetic construction of the verse.
The vast majority of sentences are much easier to understand than these two examples.

kwrandolph wrote:

For example, Proverbs 13:1 “בן חכם מוסר אב” we see that “חכם” can be a noun, adjective or verb, “מוסר אב” are two nouns in construct formation, “בן” can be a noun or verb. “בן חכם” is found in Proverbs twice elsewhere as a noun with an adjective, (10:1, 15:20) so most readers automatically assume that this is the same construct. If so, where is the verb? The verb could be either “בן” or “חכם”, but the reading I find making the most sense and smoothest reading is to understand “בן” as the verb, making the sentence read, “A wise person has insight to his father’s correction.”

Karl I have three questions:
1. Your translation really is quite powerful when one considers the often veiled workings of God's discipline, a wise son will slowly realise its purpose, however I can only see a huge problem from the hebrew point of view. 1 kings 5:21 (heb bible) 2 chronicles 2:11 and Hosea 13:13 also have this construct noun implicating " wise son". No where is the bet-nun used to mean build or perceive or understand that I can find , please show me where if you know?
2. The verb BaNaH (bet-nun-heh) would have to be in the construct, infinitive or absolute in order to mean "insight' within this context, surely? The Bet-nun word can not be a construct, infinitive or absolute verb. Because of this I can not see that it can be anything else other than 'son' though I am happy to prefer your translation if this is possible. (Verb or noun chet-kaf-mem this I understand).
3. Please though confirm whether or not my original post above is sound translation, thankyou.

Kind regards
Chris

Chris:

Galena wrote:

kwrandolph wrote: For example, Proverbs 13:1 “בן חכם מוסר אב” we see that “חכם” can be a noun, adjective or verb, “מוסר אב” are two nouns in construct formation, “בן” can be a noun or verb. “בן חכם” is found in Proverbs twice elsewhere as a noun with an adjective, (10:1, 15:20) so most readers automatically assume that this is the same construct. If so, where is the verb? The verb could be either “בן” or “חכם”, but the reading I find making the most sense and smoothest reading is to understand “בן” as the verb, making the sentence read, “A wise person has insight to his father’s correction.”

Karl I have three questions:

1. Your translation really is quite powerful when one considers the often veiled workings of God's discipline, a wise son will slowly realise its purpose, however I can only see a huge problem from the hebrew point of view. 1 kings 5:21 (heb bible) 2 chronicles 2:11 and Hosea 13:13 also have this construct noun implicating " wise son". No where is the bet-nun used to mean build or perceive or understand that I can find , please show me where if you know?

The root is not בנה but בין which at times is spelled without the medial yod. Examples include 1 Samuel 3:8, 2 Samuel 12:19, Psalm 139:2, Daniel 8:16–17 (just did a quick check in a concordance), so why not also here?

Galena wrote: 3. Please though confirm whether or not my original post above is sound translation, thankyou.

Kind regards
Chris

Your first one is possible, given the right context. But given that תך is listed in a concordance as occurring only three times in Tanakh, not once in the form you give it, … not likely.

I don’t see how you come to your second example. Can you give one example where מזה has the meaning that you propose?

Karl W. Randolph.

Hallo Karl,

Re: bet-yod-nun - That was a boo-boo, and one I should not have made - no idea what I was thinking at the time, so just sent myself to the corner!

Karl wrote: <<<I don’t see how you come to your second example. Can you give one example where מזה has the meaning that you propose?>>>>

1. In a list of proper names in Genesis 36:13 and 17 Gesenius lists these as meaning 'fear' or 'trepidation' and from the root mem-zayin-zayin, although in Even-Shoshan concordance there is no listing at all for the root mem-zayin-zayin.
ואלה בני רעואל נחת וזרח שמה ומזה and ואלה בני רעואל בן עשו אלוף נחת אלוף זרח אלוף שמה אלוף מזה

I samuel 4:21 ותקרא לנער אי כבוד confirms 'not' (just the nun missing - shortened obviously)

3. In the majority of instances מזה has the meaning of "from where", but I also noticed that since זה by itself means "here or this" or preceded by a 'bet' for example has the meaning of "from this place. ie, from here, since the author intended the meaning of this particular clause as: from where have you come"? I thought judging by the context that there might? have been a play on words, with an intended pun of "you don't belong here". So from the above I found it reasonable also to see the possibility of this phrase meaning "not from here" or "Island of fear" .

kind regards
chris

Galena wrote:Karl wrote: <<<I don’t see how you come to your second example. Can you give one example where מזה has the meaning that you propose?>>>>

1. In a list of proper names in Genesis 36:13 and 17 Gesenius…

That’s what I thought. Many names don’t have obvious meanings.

Gesenius took a definition from somewhere, not from Tanakh, and applied it. That’s not the only place where he took definitions from somewhere and entered them in his dictionary. Because of that practice, I found that his definitions don’t follow the pattern I had learned from studying modern languages, and started writing corrections in the margins after checking the words in a concordance and seeing how they are actually used. Unfortunately, most dictionaries still follow Gesenius.

Unfortunately, Tanakh contains only a subset of the language that was spoken, and even the meanings of some of the words within Tanakh have been forgotten and cannot be teased out by analyzing the contexts. So, that leaves us with a lot of questions. Biblical Hebrew is not as well known as some experts would want us to believe. Yet we understand it well enough that we can be confident that we have its message, except for a few minor details.

Galena wrote:3. In the majority of instances מזה has the meaning of "from where", …
kind regards
chris

All the instances. “From where…” or “from this…”

Karl W. Randolph.

אי is a mark of interrogation, "who what when"

מזה You are right I know, but I was so convinced of something so I went searching further and found Exodus 4:2
ויאמר אליו יהוה מזה בידך ויאמר מטה now I realise this is the written and the read is מה זה; but when it comes to the consonantal text I simply do not accept careless mistakes

my perceptions here allow for that fact that there could have been a 'returned insult' with the play on words when God said: what? what is this? when also it means "from where have you come". I think now I should say that all this began with comparing Job 1:7 with 2:2

My feelings are that since the satan has not approached God with respect, even that he does not belong to this community of heavenly angels, and since his first argument against God fell flat on its face, satan returns rather annoyed and God has responded to the satan with the same contempt that he first showed the Lord. Hence for me no co-incidence that also in Job 1:7 the satan comes 'among them' but in Job 2:2 the satan thrusts himself in front of God's presence without being invited, and this is why I also saw that word change in spelling from בתוכם to בתכם another subtle deviation indicating the writer's desire to convey more than just what the actual words mean on the surface, but introduce ambiguity whereby a secondary insight may be allowed.

This is what I feel when I am reading, I hasten to add so that there is no misunderstanding, I do not look for this, but when it jumps out of the page, I think I need to take a breath and question on the basis that the author did something for a reason.

Kind regards
Chris

Galena wrote:אי is a mark of interrogation, "who what when"

מזה You are right I know, but I was so convinced of something so I went searching further and found Exodus 4:2
ויאמר אליו יהוה מזה בידך ויאמר מטה now I realise this is the written and the read is מה זה; but when it comes to the consonantal text I simply do not accept careless mistakes

Who says that it is a careless mistake? I agree with you on that, but there are examples of honest mistakes in spite of being careful.

But this brings up an interesting question, in this verse, did God ask a question, or make a statement? In verse #1 Moses is asking a question, on how he could convince people that God spoke to him. God then says, “With that in your hand.” Moses, somewhat incredulous, says, “A staff?!?” God commanded “Throw it on the ground.” This is how it reads without the Qere or points. But until you asked the question, I hadn’t thought about it, just read it as I had been taught.

Galena wrote:My feelings are that since the satan has not approached God with respect, even that he does not belong to this community of heavenly angels, and since his first argument against God fell flat on its face, satan returns rather annoyed and God has responded to the satan with the same contempt that he first showed the Lord. Hence for me no co-incidence that also in Job 1:7 the satan comes 'among them' but in Job 2:2 the satan thrusts himself in front of God's presence without being invited, and this is why I also saw that word change in spelling from בתוכם to בתכם another subtle deviation indicating the writer's desire to convey more than just what the actual words mean on the surface, but introduce ambiguity whereby a secondary insight may be allowed.

This is what I feel when I am reading, I hasten to add so that there is no misunderstanding, I do not look for this, but when it jumps out of the page, I think I need to take a breath and question on the basis that the author did something for a reason.

Kind regards
Chris

But the meaning doesn’t fit. Allowing that this is a typo that later people feared to correct makes sense.

Karl W. Randolph.

Interesting about Moses. It's rather difficult, isn't it, to separate oneself from the liturgical/religious subconscious flavour with which we read.
Regards
Chris