Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: tc-list Ex 3.14

Expand Messages
  • Rolf Furuli
    Burke Gerstenschlager writes ... Dear Burke, You may want to consult Botterweck/Ringgren, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, III:369- about hyh.
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 22, 1998
      Burke Gerstenschlager writes

      >I am currently engaged in a philological and hermeneutical discussion
      >concerning
      >Ex. 3.14. Can anyone tell me or guide me to some good resources on how to
      >translate "I am who/what I am". I've got the LXX, Vulgate, and a variety of
      >English translations, but sadly I don't know Hebrew yet. HELP!!!
      >

      Dear Burke,

      You may want to consult Botterweck/Ringgren, "Theological Dictionary of the
      Old Testament, III:369- about hyh.

      Three notes on translation:

      (1) The verb hyh in the imperfect (as in Ex 3:14) almost always has future
      meaning. I am aware of only three passages with a possible present
      meaning: Ruth 2:13, Job 12.4 and 17:6. The usual present tense used in
      English versions is, from a philological point of view, very strange.

      (2) The verb hyh is for the most part not used as copula (linking verb) as
      is the Greek EIMI. Illuminating this is the fact that apart from
      consecutive forms, hyh occurs 493 times in the OT while EIMI occurs 6469
      times in the LXX.

      (3) There is no Greek verb corresponding to hyh, and that may be the reason
      why hO WN is used in the LXX. When a "dramatic" effect is connected with a
      word in the source language but there is no such word in the target
      language, modern translators often try to express the effect by another
      word in the neigborhood. This may have been the reason why the LXX
      translator chose hO WN, because happening and becoming is connected with
      hyh rather than just being. A present participle can cover both the present
      time and the future, a future participle would just cover the future. The
      LXX translator did not manage to convey the right *time* of the verb,
      (translation is often compromise) but he chose the best fit, which in his
      eyes was hO WN. If this is true, the rendition hO WN can be viewed as a
      translation of *both* occurrences of hyh - the "dramatic" effect caused by
      both occurrences of the verb is sought conveyed through the present
      participle, and EIMI in the LXX clause is just grammatical filling (copula).


      Regards
      Rolf

      Rolf Furuli
      Lecturer in Semitic languges
      University of Oslo
    • Pedro Goncalves
      ... Try Tryggve Mettinger, (Swedish titl Namnet och Närvaron ; has been translated to English but I don t know under what title. Pedro
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 22, 1998
        >I am currently engaged in a philological and hermeneutical discussion
        >concerning
        >Ex. 3.14. Can anyone tell me or guide me to some good resources on how to
        >translate "I am who/what I am". I've got the LXX, Vulgate, and a variety of
        >English translations, but sadly I don't know Hebrew yet. HELP!!!


        Try Tryggve Mettinger, (Swedish titl ''Namnet och Närvaron''; has been
        translated to English but I don't know under what title.

        Pedro
      • Dierk Vandenberg
        ... Von: Mark Gipe An: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Datum: Mittwoch, 22. April 1998 19:48 Betreff:
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 26, 1998
          -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
          Von: Mark Gipe <gipe@...>
          An: tc-list@... <tc-list@...>
          Datum: Mittwoch, 22. April 1998 19:48
          Betreff: Re: tc-list Ex 3.14


          >Dear Burke
          >
          >On the Hebrew verb "ehyeh" at Ex 3:14 it is the first person future tense
          >form of the verb "Hayah" , meaning "to be" so it means "I will be".
          [snip]
          ( only
          >(only in Ex 3:14 do translators tranlate it "I am" )

          >Mark Gipe


          ----------------------------

          Well done Mark,
          (Greetings, Rolf!)


          And it goes like this:

          I WILL BECOME, WHO I WILL BECOME

          That's future orientated eternal presence of the deity!
          But since Jerome scholars (have to) understand it as God's BEING FROM
          HIMSELF
          though the Torah knows no verb "to be" in the sense of an inactive
          existence, a perception first of Greek philosophy.

          "Who is the greater fool? The fool? or the fool who follows?"

          Regards,
          Dierk

          __________________________________
          Dr. rer. nat. Dierk Vandenberg
          H. Heine University Duesseldorf

          Homepage http://privat.schlund.de/haGalil
          Mailbox : haGalil@...
          Mailing Lists: q-sayings-l@...
          __________________________________
          I'm afraid of no scholarly ghost
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.