1. Food for thought: Does not the translation implicitly see this HU
as a verb?
2. If the "first person" may speak for himself as a "third person",
can not the first את AT or ET of Gen. 14:9 stand for הוא HU or
זה ZEH,
or even הם HEM, as in 1Sam. 17:34, and Neh. 9:34?
Isaac Fried, Boston University
On Nov 9, 2012, at 10:05 AM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. wrote:
isaac,
an excellent example. please consult the english translation (MM):
I am HE THAT blotteth out...
כה אָנֹכִי אָנֹכִי הוּא מֹחֶה
פְשָׁעֶיךָ, לְמַעֲנִי:
וְחַטֹּאתֶיךָ, לֹא אֶזְכֹּר. 25 I, even I,
am He that blotteth out thy transgressions for Mine own sake; and
thy sins I will not remember.
the essential grammatical structure of this phrase is: "i am he
who..."
I=subject
am=(aux.) verb (which in hebrew is absent but implicit)
he=object
who...=connective pronoun followed by a clause (which defines the
object).
cognitively, an identification is made here between two a priori
distinct entities: "I" and "He who boltteth out thy
transgressions". a priori, they are distinct, but after the
identification, they become one and the same. as you
see, this works out equally well in english and indeed most languages:
I AM (verb in first person) he who BLOTTETH OUT (verb in third
person).
chomsky would say that this construction is universal.
nir cohen
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 19:56:20 -0500, Isaac Fried wrote
> Who is the "third" person הוא HU, in Is. 43:25?
>
> אנכי אנכי הוא מחה פשעיך למעני
>
> Isaac Fried, Boston University
>
> On Nov 5, 2012, at 11:04 AM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. wrote:
> third person
--
Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
