GrayPilgrim
Wielder of the Flame of Arnor
1013, here is some more grammar stuff
1013, here is some more grammar stuff
Now to the Syntactical arguments--[Actually I am about to take German so that I can read the Grammar I talked about way back when--
As one looks at the yiqtol [generally called imperfect] prefixed with a simple w (as opposed to the wayyiqtol or waw consecutive) we see that it is generally located in direct speech, quotations. So at this point we are dealing with a simple grammatical construction, regardless of what verb we are talking about. In the other 30 times the translators refer to it as a jussive all but 11 of those times. Those 11 are translated at as simple verbs continuing the speech, such as 14:4: "Give us a leader and we will return to Egypt." (italics added to indicated the wyiqtol). So the remaining 20 wyitols, including our pesky hithpael wyiqtol in 23:19 that is a bone of contention. Let us again look at HALOT and our grammar to see which of us is correct.
The idea of change mind is absent in:
Deuteronomy 32:36 "For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants,"
Psalm 135:14 "For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants."
Therefore the author of this entry gave the gloss based upon this verse. Which is based on the reflexive nature of hithpael and as an attempt to make sense of this verse. As it is the only use of the Hithpael in the sense of change mind, I would have problems even if we were dealing with say a neutral verb [i.e. not theologically loaded verb] as akl (eat) used in an odd way in one verse. So as of right now we need to look for more support either way. As my Theology prof. said:
Even if it means that he changes his mind [preferable] to he should/would change his mind, it is a negation of God doing that. It states that once the Lord has spoken it is a fixed purpose.
More Later
1013, here is some more grammar stuff
Now to the Syntactical arguments--[Actually I am about to take German so that I can read the Grammar I talked about way back when--
As one looks at the yiqtol [generally called imperfect] prefixed with a simple w (as opposed to the wayyiqtol or waw consecutive) we see that it is generally located in direct speech, quotations. So at this point we are dealing with a simple grammatical construction, regardless of what verb we are talking about. In the other 30 times the translators refer to it as a jussive all but 11 of those times. Those 11 are translated at as simple verbs continuing the speech, such as 14:4: "Give us a leader and we will return to Egypt." (italics added to indicated the wyiqtol). So the remaining 20 wyitols, including our pesky hithpael wyiqtol in 23:19 that is a bone of contention. Let us again look at HALOT and our grammar to see which of us is correct.
The idea of change mind is absent in:
Deuteronomy 32:36 "For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants,"
Psalm 135:14 "For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants."
Therefore the author of this entry gave the gloss based upon this verse. Which is based on the reflexive nature of hithpael and as an attempt to make sense of this verse. As it is the only use of the Hithpael in the sense of change mind, I would have problems even if we were dealing with say a neutral verb [i.e. not theologically loaded verb] as akl (eat) used in an odd way in one verse. So as of right now we need to look for more support either way. As my Theology prof. said:
Even if it means that he changes his mind [preferable] to he should/would change his mind, it is a negation of God doing that. It states that once the Lord has spoken it is a fixed purpose.
More Later
