As a previous step, I think it is important to make an agreement concerning the caesurae. How are you cutting the different parts of this verse, Karl? I think the right cutting has to be this way: (I'm putting some vowels between so that it becomes easier to read)
1. 'm ra'ah b'eney adonyha // 2. asher lw y'adah // 3. w-hepdah // 4. l'am nkry lo ym$ol l'mokrah // 5. b'bigdw bah . For the last two parts -4 and 5-, I think the cutting between them is not strictly required (though I think it is better to cut for analysis purposes). Namely: 4. l'am nkry lo ym$ol l'mokrah b'bigdw bah Do you agree with the cutting I propose for this five (or four) pieces? Or have you another opinion on it? Friendly, Pere Porta (Barcelona, Catalonia, Northeastern Spain) 2013/5/1 K Randolph <[email protected]> > Dear List Members: > > I am finding this verse to be a little difficult to understand, and have > puzzled over it many a time. > > The second half seems to say, “he (the master) should not rule to sell her > to a foreign people in his treating her underhandedly.” > > But the first half — “But if she is displeasing in her master’s eyes…” > which is clear, but the next ?? “which he had not had a (sexual ??) meeting > nor did he cause her to be redeemed,” > > Are we dealing with a misreading, what do the DSS say? > > Is there and ancient custom of which I am ignorant? > > Any thoughts? > > Karl W. Randolph. > > > > _______________________________________________ > b-hebrew mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew > > -- Pere Porta
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
