OLD TESTAMENT PARSING GUIDE by TODD S. BEALL WILLIAM A. BANKS & COLIN SMITH

Author:TODD S. BEALL, WILLIAM A. BANKS & COLIN SMITH
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: B&H Publishing Group
Published: 2009-12-29T16:00:00+00:00

It is recognized that there is a great deal of subjectivity involved in the determination of some of the waw consecutive perfect forms, and many of the jussive and cohortative forms (especially those designated with jusf, jusm, cohf, and cohm), since in many cases the context, not form alone, is the determining factor. Hence, the parsing guide should not be regarded as the “last word” in these cases. However, it was thought that the benefits of designating the waw consecutive perfects, cohortatives, and jussives in the parsing guide outweighed the increased subjectivity involved.

Other Difficult Forms

Aside from the problems with waw consecutive perfects, cohortatives, and jussives mentioned above, there are other forms which present particular difficulties in parsing.

Often it is difficult to decide whether a form is a verb or an adjective (for example, ). Similarly, for some weak verbs the forms for perfect 3ms and for participle are the same, and it is often difficult to decide between the two (especially troublesome are and ). In such cases we have normally followed BDB, if it made reference to the specific form. We have also made abundant use of S. Mandelkern's Veteris Testamenti Concordantiae Hebraicae atque Chaldaicae (Tel Aviv: Schocken) and A. Even-Shoshan's A New Concordance of the Old Testament (Baker) for help in disputed forms. Throughout the work, we have striven for consistency as much as possible in such matters.

Because the Masoretes did not recognize qal passive forms, they pointed such forms as pual perfects or hophal imperfects, and the forms are so listed in BDB. In the parsing guide, however, we have noted numerous qal passive forms, in accordance with Gesenius (Hebrew Grammar, § 52e, 53u) and Joüon (Grammaire de l'hébreu biblique, § 58).

In the case of one particular verb, , the root indicated in the parsing guide does not match the BDB page number given. BDB regarded such forms as (Gen 37:10) as a hithpalel from the root , but in reality the form should be parsed as a hishtaphel from the root . The BDB page number for all references to this root is given as page 1005, where the forms are discussed under the (incorrect) root .

Finally, some forms seem nearly impossible to parse as pointed (for example, in Gen 16:11: its pointing is a hybrid of qal participle and qal perfect). Such forms have been marked with a “?” after the BDB page number to indicate that the parsing of this form is uncertain. We have tried to keep the number of forms marked with a “?” to a minimum.

Revision Highlights

This work represents a revision of the original two-volume Old Testament Parsing Guide published by Moody Press (vol. 1, Genesis-Esther, in 1986; vol. 2, Job-Malachi, in 1990). In addition to a small number of corrections, the revision gives the pointed form (with prefixes) of the verb in question, to make it easier to identify the form (the original work contained only consonants, and no prefixes). Furthermore, the page number for the new 5-volume English translation

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.