philip, ...
in my recent remarks i suggested that gen 1:1, 2:4 and several other places
might be seen as a structural part ("title") in the text. these remarks are of
a
minor technical nature, as they refer to editing style only and should not be
seen as extending to text interpretation in any way.
as to the more substantial philosophical questions, i leave them out here; but
i think that karl, you and myself (for example) have a similar reading of the
text.
nevertheless i still see gen 1:1 as a "title" of gen 1-2. one reason is the
practical reason of recitation
of oral tradition, which i assume existed prior to the written version and, to
some extent, in later periods.
once the reciter mnemonized the "title", he was able to reproduce the entire
scene and its details.
א וְשָׂרַי אֵשֶׁת אַבְרָם, לֹא יָלְדָה לוֹ; וְלָהּ שִׁפְחָה מִצְרִית,
וּשְׁמָהּ הָגָר. 1 Now Sarai Abram's wife bore him no children; and she had a
handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was Hagar.
although this is not officially a "title" for the ensuing chapter, it
encapsulates an initial situation from which the entire scene can be
reproduced. as i said in a previous remark, the "title" does not necessarily
provide a summary of the scene. but from the point
of view of information theory, it may be the most concise and informative part
of the text.
a "modern" approach for the same text may use a title such as "hagar in the
desert" or "ismael's youth" etc etc.
of course this artifact was not in use in the first millenium BC (and earlier).
again, i undesrand and respect the opposite views which see these phrases as
linear part of the text, or as final summary.
nir cohen
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 16:59:59 -0400, Philip Hardy wrote
>
>
> I believe verse 1:1 of Genesis says "The mighty one made the matter(material)
> and the vast expanse(immaterial) between all matter."
>
> Then a period of time transpires. and in verse two we have continuance
> followed by narrative of processes.
>
> Philip Hardy
> From: Nir cohen - Prof. Mat.
> Sent: 08/29/12 11:25 AM
> To: [email protected], [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] beginning or end?
>
>
steven,
quite a few chapters/paragraphs of genesis may be seen as an "initial
title", or a statement of intent, followed by a more detailed account.
the "title", though, does not always qualify as a true summary
of the events which follow.
1:1, 2:4, 5:1, 6:9, 6:14, 7:1, 9:1, 10:1 (this chapter uses also
"initial and terminal subtitles"), 18:1, 22:1, 36:1 (with subtitles),
37:2, 49:1.
i imagine other books may contain more examples.
as to the vav, it may very well be that what you call
"sounding correct in english" is partly the very contribution
of the king james style...though i admit that "so/and so" is often used
as initial in speech, against the grammarians' recommendations.
the decision to use the yiqtol or qatal form is contextual, and so
it is difficult to make a general statement on how the text should
follow the "title". i think that the principle is that the ensuing
text should remain "BH-correct" if the title is simply deleted.
nir cohen
[Steve Miller:] In v1 God created the heavens and the earth. In the following
verses, the planet earth already existed. So, v1 cannot be a summary, but an
action. In vv9-10 He made the dry land and named that "earth". That is a
different meaning of the word earth: the planet earth in v1, and the dry land
in v10. Similarly in v1, the heavens is the universe, but in v8, God made the
atmosphere around the earth and named that "heavens" also. "Day" has 3
meanings in Gen 1-2:4.
even if you are technically correct, i still see in 1:1 a
title of the whole material of gen 1-2 (most biblical interpreters
see in the "creation story" in gen 1-2 a six day process).
(see especially in this context 2:1). also, ch 2:4-24 overlaps with
ch. 1 and provides more detail.
>
> Genesis Chapter 22 בְּרֵאשִׁית
> א וַיְהִי, אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה,
וְהָאֱלֹהִים, נִסָּה אֶת-אַבְרָהָם;
וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו, אַבְרָהָם וַיֹּאמֶר
> הִנֵּנִי. 1 And it came to pass after these things, that God
did prove
> Abraham,
> and said unto him: 'Abraham'; and he said: 'Here am I.'
>
> here, too, "god proved abraham" is a summary of the entire chapter, while
> "and said to him" is already the starting point of the more detailed
narrative.
[Steve Miller:] This does seem to be a summary followed by "and". I didn't
know such a case existed. Thanks for finding this.
The "and"'s here in both of your examples are vav-consecutives, while in 1:2
it is an "and" attached to a noun, which has a different meaning. The
vav-consecutive, which is much more common, continues the main story line,
while a sentence starting with "and"-noun indicates a break in the story line,
often indicating a chapter break.
>>> An odd thing about this verse is that here we have a summary
followed by
an "and", which should not be allowed in English, yet it sounds fine in
English. Yet, if I were to change the structure to be more like Gen 1:1-2:
And it came to pass after these things that God proved Abraham. And Abraham
was 100 years old. Then it doesn't sound right in English. The "and"
needs to be removed. I don't know why. It just doesn't sound right.
> consider also:
>
> Genesis Chapter 10 בְּרֵאשִׁית
> א וְאֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת בְּנֵי-נֹחַ, שֵׁם
חָם וָיָפֶת; וַיִּוָּלְדוּ לָהֶם בָּנִים,
אַחַר הַמַּבּוּל. 1 Now these
> are
> the generations of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth; and unto
> them were sons born after the flood.
>
> "these are the generations..." is a summary, "and unto them..." is already
> part of the detailed narrative.
[Steve Miller:] Here the whole verse could be taken as the summary. Then it
is not followed by "and".
Here also 10:1 sounds fine in English, even taking 10:1a as the summary and
10:1b as the details. But if you change the structure to be like Gen 1:1-2:
And these are the generations of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham and Japheth. And
Japheth was 60 years old.
Then it doesn't sound right.
>
> etc etc
[Steve Miller:] If you have more examples of opening summaries followed by
"and", I'd like to see them.
> nir cohen
>
> >> karl: There was a very ancient literary style in which the titular
or
> >> summary
> statement was at the end of a chapter or document, not the beginning. I’m
> not the only one, but others, too, have noted that Genesis can be broken up
> into several such chapters, with the summary “This is the bringing
forth…”
> as the closing statement. That makes the summary, titular verse of Genesis
> 1 to be Genesis 2:4.
[Steve Miller:] I agree. Gen 2:4 summarizes Gen 1. It does not summarize the
verses which follow, which are details about the creation of man.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
--
Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
