[b-greek] Re: EPISTREFW Zech 10:9-10

From: c stirling bartholomew (cc.constantine@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Mon Apr 15 2002 - 13:14:26 EDT


Thanks Randall,

I have follow-up question about your understanding of words and roots.

on 4/15/02 1:06 AM, Randall Buth wrote:

> There are times when I move students around class with
> epistrepsai / epistrepsasthai eis thn kathedran
> 'return to your chair' and I've often felt that incongruity.
>
> As for the Hebrew, following up your comments last week,
> rather than say that both Greek words translate "shuv"
> one may phrase this as follows:
> epistrepsasthai translates
> hu shav 'he returned' (intr.)
> and
> hu heshiv 'he returned (something)
> Two different Hebrew words, etymologically related to the same root.
>
 
Do you think this is the way the LXX translator understood this issue? I
suspect that the use of EPISTREFW in Zech 10:9-10 may be a minor example of
what are called stereotyped translation equivalents. And if this is so, it
would seem that the stereotyping was being done on the basis of root "shuv."
The translator seems to have been thinking something like, "I just used
EPISTREFW to translate "shuv" so I will use it again.

What do you think about this. There is a lot of this stereotyping in the
LXX. Does it demonstrate that Qal and Hifil forms were considered different
words?

greetings,

Clay


--
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062



---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:24 EDT