![]() ![]() The remaining verse contains the verb שׁאל 'ask' which, itself, implies interrogation. It is suggested that this is an idiom that itself was understood to imply interrogation. Three of the remaining four exhibited a similar structure, each beginning with שָׁלֹם 'peace, wholeness', with שָׁלֹם being the content of the question. My findings were that forty of the forty five verses suggested as examples were rhetorical questions. This is relevant to some interpretations of Gen 3:1. Included in this dissertation is an assessment of the claim made by some Hebrew grammarians that a clause may be interrogative in Hebrew even though it lacks any interrogative marker. The particle כִּי marks information that qualifies the meaning of a clause by reference to time, place, manner, cause or condition. כִּי is considered to be a circumstantial adjunct, and operates at a lower level than אַף. It functions in marking the overall logical structure of the discourse. אַף is determined to be a discourse adjunct, indicating that the following information proceeds from and adds to the preceding discourse. This study concludes that אַף and כִּי act as separate particles, each having its own function in the discourse. The functional analysis also aids in interpretation of four other verses which have been problematic. Once a pattern has been established, it is finally applied to Gen 3:1 where the translation of אַף כִּי has been a problem for hundreds of years, in an effort to arrive at a translation that is consistent with the use of these particles elsewhere in the MT. Each occurrence is examined using Functional Grammar techniques to see if a consistent functional interpretation can be made. The above notation is also used in a few cases such as John 8 where NA and WH agree and SBL does not include the text.This dissertation is an examination of all occurrences of אַף כִּי in the Hebrew Bible. ** Major variant * Minor or spelling variant Where both the NA and SBL agree on a variant word or spelling, it replaces the Nestle along with the following notation: TR and RP are included for major variants not contained in the critical texts. The Nestle text itself has been marked if not contained in either NA or SBL texts. Only the last version from left to right to contain a given variant is noted. Words not contained in the Nestle text have been included with the following notation: Paragraph formatting has been adapted from Westcott and Hort, 1881. Scrivener, The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text followed in the Authorised Version (Cambridge: University Press, 1894).īase text and orthography is the Nestle 1904 Greek New testament, courtesy of: site/nestle1904/. Pierpont, The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform, 2005. 2: Introduction Appendix (Cambridge: Macmillan, 1881). Stuttgart: (Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993).īrooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek, vol. Holmes, Greek New Testament: SBL Edition. (British and Foreign Bible Society, 1904). Morphology in partnership with Helps BibleĮberhard Nestle, Η ΚΑΙΝΗ ΔΙΑΘΗΚΗ. ![]() Strong's Tagging via Open Scriptures, David Troidl and Christopher Kimball Westminster Leningrad Codex text courtesy of Hebrew Transliteration Via Lockman Foundation for use of the NASB Exhaustive Concordance (Strong's).ĭavid Troidl and Christopher Kimball for use of the WLC with Strong's Tagging. ![]() We are grateful to those who have made this project possible:Ĭharles Van der Pool for use of the Apostolic Bible Polyglot Interlinear. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |