Steve, I'm not sure your reasoning works for this, though I see what you're getting at. As a common noun, בעל may have the article or not. It all depends on its usage (definite or indefinite) within the relevant clause, just like any other common noun. It happens to be a common noun that is used as a title, in which case, again it may take the article or not, depending on usage. It's technically not a Proper Noun, though as a title it often functions as one. So the analogy with the article on toponyms doesn't quite match the issue here. The distinction between the common noun בעל and the derived title is not really grammatical as such—it's a distinction of function within clause. In other words, you need to combine semantics, syntax, and meaning to determine the use.
GEORGE ATHAS Dean of Research, Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au) Sydney, Australia From: Steve Miller <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Monday, 6 August 2012 10:49 AM To: 'Philip Hardy' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: B-Hebrew <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] יהוה vs הבעל Philip, If I understand you right, your proposed meaning of ha-baal is the exact opposite of the way the definite article is used on a proper noun in Biblical Hebrew. It seems you are saying that when "baal" has the definite article, it is not a name, but "the husband". In English that would be true, but in Hebrew it is the opposite. Baal can be a word or a proper name. To refer to the name, Baal, rather than the word baal, in Hebrew you put the definite article on it. So Ha-Baal means Baal the idol (unless the context might refer to a previously-mentioned husband). Baal without the definite article is usually the word baal, meaning husband, etc. […] _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
