Based on my past experiences, Blogger doesn't like Hebrew text, but I'm going to try anyway. Okay, I had to put the Hebrew characters last, then type everything else above them. But the point I want to make in this entry is that Wilhelm Gesenius (the notable lexicographer) seemed to think Gen. 21:25 could be frequentative, but I want to post his words here in order to present his exact understanding of the verse:
(b) The text is certainly corrupt in Is 406 (read with the LXX and Vulgate וָאֹֽמַר); Jer 3828, where the narrative breaks off in the middle of the sentence; 40:3 (וְהָיָה, &c., wanting in the LXX); also in Ju 713 וְנָפַל הָאֹהֶל is altogether redundant; in 1 S 313 read, with Klostermann, the 2nd sing. masc. instead of והגדתי; in 1 K 2112 וְהשִׁ֫יבוּ is, no doubt, incorrectly repeated from verse 9, where it is an imperative.
rr
Of other questionable instances, (α) the following, at any rate, may also be explained as frequentatives, Gn 2125, 4923, Ex 3638, 3828, 393, 1 S 57, 1720, 2411 (but even so וְאָֽמְרוּ would be expected); 2 K 2312, Is 2826 (parallel with an imperfect); Am 526 (unless it is rather, yea, ye shall take up; see above, x); ψ 263, Ezr 836.
NABRE: Abraham, however, reproached Abimelech about a well that Abimelech’s servants had seized by force.
בְּאֵר הַמַּיִם, אֲשֶׁר גָּזְלוּ עַבְדֵי אֲבִימֶלֶךְ. כה וְהוֹכִחַ אַבְרָהָם, אֶת-אֲבִימֶלֶךְ, עַל-אֹדוֹת
10 comments:
https://jbtsonline.org/how-targum-onqelos-can-help-discern-between-the-biblical-hebrew-frequentative-and-preterital-imperfects-by-richard-mcdonald/
https://juchre.org/targums/comp/gen21.htm
https://www.sefaria.org/Onkelos_Genesis.21.24?lang=bi
Claus Westermann (Continental Commentary on Genesis 12-36, page 346):
25a Sam n':J"1 [Hebrew characters]; the perf. "to describe a situation which... perseveres up to the present," P. Neuenzeit, lit. above, 226 n. 7; but perhaps the narrative form is to be read, BHK, Ges-K §112tt. b Gk reads plural.
The verbs in Genesis 21:25-26 are best rendered as frequentatives = “as often as Abraham complained to Abimelech, Abimelech used to reply he was entirely ignorant.” Gesen. Hebr. Gr. § 112 rr.
(https://biblehub.com/commentaries/cambridge/genesis/21.htm)
If I'm looking at the correct verb in the sept it is actaully aorist.
Thanks Anaonymous. In my post, please see the exact quote from Gesenius' grammar, where he makes a truly modest claim about Gen. 21:25 and whether it contains frequentatives or not. He actually seems doubtful about the whole thing, but allows for the fact that it's possible.
As for Gen. 21:25 in the LXX, the verbs are aorist, which usually means that the writer is describing action as a whole. I.e., the aorist is the default "tense" in Greek.
for transparency that first bit is from a commentary as per the link and not my own words - I do not know enough Hebrew to argue anything near convincing.. My "expertise" remains in Greek..
Aorist, I have heard it called any things I like "snapshot tense" the best
I've seen the aorist called that too, and it's an apt description since the aorist captures the whole action.
question: is it possible to replicate it in English? I notice most aorist is rendered past tense.
Is this because in English we have to provide a tense? otherwise the action makes no sense.
It's complicated, but to put it simply, the aorist is the default tense and it's often past-referring but not always. In fact, the aorist has numerous uses. See https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-greek-aorist-and-its-diverse-uses.html
I've written various posts about this matter. However, the link above discusses various uses for the aorist. There is also some controversy about the difference between aspect and Aktionsart, but that adds even more complexity.
Post a Comment