LXX 1Kings 8:11

MISS DIANA N SHAW BLFR64A at prodigy.com
Mon Jun 15 03:27:49 EDT 1998


Regarding whether the LXX rendering from the Hebrew (as imperfect) 
was perfect,

I don't know much Hebrew either, just enough to know you need expert 
help on the verb & particular form they were rendering.  Only 
indicative in the clause is "they were (not) able" or "(not) being 
able," which is Hebrew yaklu .  The triliteral root of this verb is 
ykl, and I guess it's probably "pe waw," since real pe yodhs are rare,
 and get a double y at the front in forms like these.  (Doesn't seem 
totally certain here, since the dictionary I'm using (old-fashioned 
Gesenius) gives one citation of a form yhukal, which would make it pe 
he ---  He he!  This language is horrible!!!  The way Hebrew works, 
that's bad news, since, if there is any doubt about the root, it 
could be in more than one conjugation, shedding even more darkness on 
the tense form.  Hopefully, there's not a lot of doubt.

Anyway, the point is that Benjamin Davidson's Hebrew & Chaldee 
Analytical Lexicon gives this form (WITH pointing) as Kal future (= 
imperfect here for Greek); but a couple of lines down, it gives an 
almost identical form as Kal preterite (= aorist here in Greek).  The 
only differences between these forms are in the vowel points (& 
accents?), which, of course, were added later.  So, IMVVHO, that 
means it would be hard to tell for sure what the original, unpointed 
Hebrew text really said -- or really meant.   

I'd tell you what BDB says, but I'm still trying to figure it out.  
I'm always still trying to figure THEM out!  "lo ukal lah," it says 
here, "it is high,...'I cannot (reach) to it.'"  


(BTW, i hate to post this, because i know the list is going to shout 
my name.  I've got to find out how to stop those capitals.)



____
Diana N. Shaw, BLFR64A at prodigy.com
Home:  http://pages.prodigy.com/BLFR64A



More information about the B-Greek mailing list