Nir:

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. 
<[email protected]>wrote:

> karl,
>
> טוב מראה עינים מהלך־נפשׁ גם־זה הבל ורעות רוח
>
> 1. i think you should include with your questions an explanation
> why you reject the usual interpretations, which remains an enigma
> for most of us. i personally see nothing wrong with them here, that
> would require a total grammatical reshuffle of the clause.
>

I’m not rejecting it as much as saying it has problems, problems also
recognized by others. For example, the ESV has a very different translation
than the LXX.

By the way, what grammatical reshuffle of the clause do you think is
required?

>
> 2. the formula TOV (noun1) M-(noun2) is the usual comparative in
> hebrew, especially late BH and talmudic. in my opinion it fits
> perfectly the available timing evidence for a late qohelet.
> also note that HLK occurs here as a noun in smixut.
>

TWB as a comparative is used also in early BH, so it’s not a time indicator
for when it was written. And in all times the Mem prefix is appended to
that which it is compared. Yes, I noticed from the context, that HLK is a
noun. A noun referring to the action of going about.

>
> 3. also GM-ZH in versicle b indicates reference to a noun, not a verb.
> but, oddly, it refers to a SINGLE noun, though TWO are mentioned.
>

In this verse, the “noun” is the comparison that makes up the first half of
the verse.


> perhaps this was the background for your rejection in item 1. but
> this is solved if e.g. you put versicle a in quotation marks!
> as to versicle a, i suggest two possible readings:
>
>    "eye evidence (objective) is better than mental cogitation (subjective)"
>
> but this would perhaps put it in the 17th century AD! or:
>
>    "one should prefer the senses to being absorbed with thoughts":
>
> this sounds more suitable to an early post-exilic book. but the important
> element in both is the quotation mark around them. thus, ZH refers not to
> any
> of the two nouns, but to versicle a as a unit.
>

Exactly, so we’re agreed on the second half of the verse.

But how do you get “being absorbed with thoughts” from HLK NP$?

>
> nir cohen
>

Karl W. Randolph.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

Reply via email to