[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: FOrm of Khayah

---------------Original Message---------------
>From PWEGNER@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU  Sun Apr 14 23:29:45 1996
Received: from brownvm.brown.edu by pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il (AIX 3.2/UCB 
          id AA37918; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 23:29:45 +0300
Message-Id: <9604142029.AA37918@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il>
Received: from BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU by BROWNVM.brown.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 4704; Sun, 14 Apr 96 15:06:36 EDT
(LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2728; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 15:06:36 -0400
Date:         Sun, 14 Apr 96 15:00:22 EDT
From: PWEGNER@BROWNVM.brown.edu
Subject:      Re: Form of Khayah
To: orion@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il
In-Reply-To:  Message of Fri, 12 Apr 96 10:16:36 PDT from

>Thanks for the very informative and helpful information.  I agree with
assessment.  Still, confirmation from the scroll itself would help put the
question [of how to point yXyh] to rest.<

Hardly, since the text is presumably unvocalized.  What puts the question
to rest is simply the facts of Hebrew grammar.  In the Qal, X-y-h means
"to live"; in the pi'el, it has a transitive meaning which varies from
context to context:  to revive, to infuse with life, to bring to life, to
resurrec, etc. --always depending on context.  In the sentence you cited,

Please get your facts straight.  I didn't cite the sentence.  I asked for 
clarification regarding a sentence someone else cited.

the verb has to be transitive or the sentence is meaningless and 
untranslatable -- regardless of which translation best fits its context. 
More than this you don't need here!
JRW, Providence

I'm aware of the grammar considerations of the piy'eyl.  I haven't argued 
with that.  I wonder if you, perhaps, often argue one side of an argument 
against a non-existent opponent?  As for what I need to convince me, where 
do you find the khutzpah to *assume* you even understand the question and 
tell me what I need?  The person who originally cited the sentence spelled 
the word in a way that wasn't clear in conveying the Hebrew.  To jog your 
memory, that wasn't me.  Apparently, in your eagerness to nail me you've 
attributed the entire quotation to me.  You've nailed me regarding my 
erroneous use of Y'hudiyah when I should have used Y'hudah.  So you've 
nailed me.

You acknowledged that you were *assuming* what the original writer *meant.*  
I suspect you're correct.  I've not been arguing with you.  On the other 
hand, I'm not as quick to *assume* as you are.  You also *assume* I'm 
questioning the vowelization.  You've assumed wrong.  Maybe there's a 
pattern here.  I wanted clarification from someone who *wasn't assuming* 
what the original writer *meant* whether the term is related to "to be" or 
"to enliven."  I fully expected that the original writer would tell me which 
and that would be the end of it.  It was a simple question.  How did it 
evolve into a feeding frenzy?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Yirmiyahu Ben-David, Pakiyd 16
K'hiylat Ha-N'tzarim
(World-wide Congregation of Nazarene Jews)

N'tzarim Virtual Community Center in
Ra'anana, Israel at
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *