Amlodhi

Hi spin,

I don't disagree with you here, but I was actually trying to make a more subtle distinction. That is, that there was nothing especially significant about either the conception or the physical child himself. The timetable was part of Isaiah's explanation of what the sign pointed to. The sign itself was simply that the male child was born and was assigned a predictive title, much as if Isaiah, upon the child's birth, had hung a sandwich board around his neck that said "See? I told you it was going to happen."

I knew when I inserted that "side note" in my post, that it confused the issue, but I was to tired to change it. The "side note" concerned a completely different issue than the comparison it interrupted. When I was comparing the structure between Isaiah 7:14 and Isaiah 38:7-8, I was comparing only the verbal aspects in the syntax and intended no comparison as to the nature of the signs. Sorry for the confusion.

Namaste'

Amlodhi

Amlodhi

I do understand what you're saying and have observed that transliteration structures vary quite a bit depending on what book you're reading or who you're listening to. Although I wasn't aware that this involved one definitive approach or another.

In your example above, for instance, you transliterate this term as "wayyiqtol", which, to me, properly expresses a "patach" or a "qamats" under the "vav/waw", as should be for a vav consecutive. The transliteration oldstudent used, however, was "wiyyiqitol" which would indicate a different form.

Regarding terms, I have seen this referred to as vav consecutive, vav conversive, vav of reversal . . . yada yada . .

Which, really, only tends to support the point that oldstudent and I mentioned; that transliterations and different preferences of terms can be confusing.

Namaste'

Amlodhi

oldstudent

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Amlodhi
[B]Hello oldstudent,



Welcome to the forum, hope you stick around and give us the benefit of your knowledge.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you, I hope to be able to spend some time on the db but with a family, a job and school full time, my time is limited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree that individual preferences regarding terminology and transliteration can be confusing. I really don't know an easy solution. Your transliteration: "wiyyiqitol" for instance; it took me a moment to realize that you intended what I would transliterate as "vayiqtol".
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have heard/seen many different terms used in discussions on Biblical Hebrew and was puzzled for a few moments when I saw the use of "1st stem". It took my a few to realize what stem was being discussed. I have been taught by the terms Qal, Hophal,etc. It is just funny how we sometimes come to the same discussions with differing 'languages' to explain the same language.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nevertheless, it is interesting to me that you bring up this consideration. Are you seeking to discuss verbal aspect in general terms, or in the context of Isaiah 7:14?

I would very much welcome any input you may have on this because I don't actually see a vav consecutive construction in Isaiah 7:14. Am I missing something?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No sir I was just making a comment that was meant to be somewhat funny. I just joined the db and came upon this string and found the discusion stimulating. It isn't often that one can find a discussion about the finer points of Biblical Hebrew.
And no, you areen't missing anything that I know of. Besides, I haven't broken out my BHS to look at the passage again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Jim