Père: What makes you think that there should have been an “asher” there in the first place?
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Pere Porta <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear listers, > > In Ps 51.10 ---------> must we understand the pronoun "asher" as having > been > (deliberately or not) forgotten/omitted before the last word "dikita"? > > Or maybe not? Namely, is there a good reason for the lacking of "asher"? > > > Pere Porta > (Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain) > > In looking at words that end with a yod tau, I notice that apparently they are the way that some nouns and adjectives are made of verbs usually with a final heh, though also of some with a doubled ayin. This will need to be studied more deeply, but on first blush it appears that this half of the verse should be translated as “crushed bones should be cheerful”. In other words, DKYT is an adjective, not a verb, and is connected to (CMWT. Hence there is no reason for )$R to be in the sentence. Karl W. Randolph. _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
