\heb אנף \strong 00599 \pos v \gloss to be angry \freq 14 \sub אַף \intro The only distinction in meaning is between God being angry with someone, Meaning 1a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1b. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist The Qal and Hithpael are used without obvious difference in meaning. The former, normally, and the latter, consistently, express the target with בְּ. \comp 1 Focus: response; response: anger a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human \dfnotes See notes for other synonyms \level2 1 \meaning To experience the emotion of anger \frame Anger \stem Qal and Hithpael \gram Where the Stimulus event is explicit, it is either consecutive or related syntactically by עַל ,בִּגְלַל or כִּי). \eventfr Experiencer: God (or once the Davidic king) Target: human = individual or the nation of Israel \level3 a \context Of God, to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement \eventfrc Experiencer = subject: God Target = בְּ or implicit: human = individual or the nation of Israel \keyref +!+!)!" \keyverse KTBH - Yahweh |bwas angry |b*with Solomon because his heart had turned away from Yahweh, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice \eval Any of the expressions 'be/become angry with Solomon' used by most translations would be a good model. CEV departs from this by leaving 'Solomon' out of the anger clause, 'this made the Lord very angry' and thereby losing the interpersonal aspect of the anger. This should be avoided. \ref %!!!E"!|na|n* %!$!5"!|na|n* %!)!($! %!)!4"! +!(!N(! +!+!)!! ,!1!2!! .!&!D(! /!)!.)! 3!\!#$! 3!o!%#! 3!u!&"! 7!,!!'! \paradigc Similar \colc קצף \pgloss to make angry \refsc %!)!($" \paradigc Similar \colc בער \pgloss [jealousy] to burn \refsc 3!o!%#! \paradigc Similar \colc קִנְאָה \pgloss jealousy \refsc 3!o!%#! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc 3!u!&"! 7!,!!'! \paradigc Similar \colc זנח \pgloss to reject \refsc 3!\!#$! \paradigc Similar \colc פרץ \pgloss to break out upon \refsc 3!\!#$! \paradigc Opposite \colc נחם \pgloss to comfort \refsc 7!,!!'! \level3 b \context Of humans, to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Kingship, Rebellion \eventfrc Experiencer = subject: human = Davidic king Target = implicit: human = rebellious nations \keyref 3!"!,"" \keyverse KTBH - Pay homage to the kingly son, lest |bhe be angry|b*... \eval Most (RSV, NRS, REB, NJB, NJPS) accept one or other of the alternative emendations|nb|n*, though all appear to read יאנף and render it something like 'lest he be angry' (NIV, RSV, NJB). NIV (also ESV, NAS) capitalises 'Son' indicating a Messianic interpretation. TEV and CEV appear to accept the same interpretation as KTBH, as does NLT is also a good model translation, 'Submit to God's royal son, or he will become angry'. This makes explicit the king's role as God's adopted son. \ref 3!"!,"!|nb|n* \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc 3!"!,"" \paradigc Similar \colc בער \pgloss [anger] to burn \refsc 3!"!,"" \not (a) In almost all cases, the Target of the anger is the Agent of the stimulus event which provokes the anger. Unusually, in Deu 1:37 and 4:21, Moses is the target, but the people of Israel are the agents of the stimulus event. \notfr (a) Unusually, the target and the agent of the stimulus are different. \notsp (a) Unusually, the target and the agent of the stimulus are different. \notpt (a) Unusually, the target and the agent of the stimulus are different. \notxx (a) Unusually, the target and the agent of the stimulus are different. \not (b) Text critical, exegetical and hermeneutical questions abound in this verse. KTBH takes the view that בַּר, although apparently Aramaic rather than Hebrew, does mean 'son' and is coreferential with 'my son' of v. 7. The psalm is taken to be a coronation hymn, in which David or the Davidic king is presented as being adopted by Yahweh (v. 7). The surrounding nations are envisaged as being in the rebellion against the king and refusing to kiss him, that is to pay homage to him. Alternative suggestions are based on change of vowels, change of consonants or redivision of vv. 11-12. For a discussion see Bratcher and Reyburn, who reject the interpretation given here (HBK), and Craigie (WBC 1983) who defends it, noting that 'the use of בר here avoids the dissonance of בן פן'. A further question is whether the son in view is the Messiah, and thus whether 'Son' should be capitalised. In the original context of the psalm, the referent was probably the then King of Israel or Judah, and the psalm was not overtly prophetic, so the Experiencer was human and 'son' should probably not be capitalised. \notfr (b) Text critical, exegetical and hermeneutical questions abound in this verse. KTBH takes the view that |hבַּר|h*, although apparently Aramaic rather than Hebrew, does mean 'son' and is coreferential with 'my son' of v. 7. The psalm is taken to be a coronation hymn, in which David or the Davidic king is presented as being adopted by Yahweh (v. 7). The surrounding nations are envisaged as being in the rebellion against the king and refusing to kiss him, that is to pay homage to him. Alternative suggestions are based on change of vowels, change of consonants or redivision of vv. 11-12. For a discussion see Bratcher and Reyburn (HBK 1991), who reject the interpretation given here, and Craigie (WBC 1983) who defends it, noting that 'the use of |hבר|h* here avoids the dissonance of |hבן פן|h*'. A further question is whether the son in view is the Messiah, and thus whether 'Son' should be capitalised. In the original context of the psalm, the referent was probably the then King of Israel or Judah, and the psalm was not overtly prophetic, so the Experiencer was human and 'son' should probably not be capitalised. \notsp (b) Text critical, exegetical and hermeneutical questions abound in this verse. KTBH takes the view that |hבַּר|h*, although apparently Aramaic rather than Hebrew, does mean 'son' and is coreferential with 'my son' of v. 7. The psalm is taken to be a coronation hymn, in which David or the Davidic king is presented as being adopted by Yahweh (v. 7). The surrounding nations are envisaged as being in the rebellion against the king and refusing to kiss him, that is to pay homage to him. Alternative suggestions are based on change of vowels, change of consonants or redivision of vv. 11-12. For a discussion see Bratcher and Reyburn (HBK 1991), who reject the interpretation given here, and Craigie (WBC 1983) who defends it, noting that 'the use of |hבר|h* here avoids the dissonance of |hבן פן|h*'. A further question is whether the son in view is the Messiah, and thus whether 'Son' should be capitalised. In the original context of the psalm, the referent was probably the then King of Israel or Judah, and the psalm was not overtly prophetic, so the Experiencer was human and 'son' should probably not be capitalised. \notpt (b) Text critical, exegetical and hermeneutical questions abound in this verse. KTBH takes the view that |hבַּר|h*, although apparently Aramaic rather than Hebrew, does mean 'son' and is coreferential with 'my son' of v. 7. The psalm is taken to be a coronation hymn, in which David or the Davidic king is presented as being adopted by Yahweh (v. 7). The surrounding nations are envisaged as being in the rebellion against the king and refusing to kiss him, that is to pay homage to him. Alternative suggestions are based on change of vowels, change of consonants or redivision of vv. 11-12. For a discussion see Bratcher and Reyburn (HBK 1991), who reject the interpretation given here, and Craigie (WBC 1983) who defends it, noting that 'the use of |hבר|h* here avoids the dissonance of |hבן פן|h*'. A further question is whether the son in view is the Messiah, and thus whether 'Son' should be capitalised. In the original context of the psalm, the referent was probably the then King of Israel or Judah, and the psalm was not overtly prophetic, so the Experiencer was human and 'son' should probably not be capitalised. \notxx (b) Text critical, exegetical and hermeneutical questions abound in this verse. KTBH takes the view that |hבַּר|h*, although apparently Aramaic rather than Hebrew, does mean 'son' and is coreferential with 'my son' of v. 7. The psalm is taken to be a coronation hymn, in which David or the Davidic king is presented as being adopted by Yahweh (v. 7). The surrounding nations are envisaged as being in the rebellion against the king and refusing to kiss him, that is to pay homage to him. Alternative suggestions are based on change of vowels, change of consonants or redivision of vv. 11-12. For a discussion see Bratcher and Reyburn (HBK 1991), who reject the interpretation given here, and Craigie (WBC 1983) who defends it, noting that 'the use of |hבר|h* here avoids the dissonance of |hבן פן|h*'. A further question is whether the son in view is the Messiah, and thus whether 'Son' should be capitalised. In the original context of the psalm, the referent was probably the then King of Israel or Judah, and the psalm was not overtly prophetic, so the Experiencer was human and 'son' should probably not be capitalised. \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-21 16:07:43 cjs \heb אַף \strong 00639 \pos Pc \pos ncm \gloss anger, nose, nostril, also \freq 410 \sub אנף \intro 1. There are two Hebrew words with the same form. One of them is a noun meaning either ‘anger’ or ‘nose, nostril, face’. The other is a particle meaning ‘also, even, indeed’. 2. When the word means ‘anger’, there is a further distinction in meaning between God being angry with someone, Meaning 1a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1b. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist There is unanimous agreement that the particle אַף and the noun are homonyms (BDB, HALOT, DCH, TDOT, NIDOTTE, TWOT). Equally there is agreement that the two meanings of the noun, 'nose, nostril' and 'anger', are related. The original meaning of the root אנף and the precise nature of the relationship between the meanings of אַף, however, are less certain. In some cases, the connection becomes explicit where other Hebrew words for 'anger' collocate with אַף used in the sense 'nose'. TDOT cites Ezk 38:18 and Psa 18:8-9, noting that 'in the OT the nose plays a certain role in the description of anger' (1.351). Similarly in Isa 65:5, 'these people are smoke in my nose' implying that they are a source of irritation and anger. One suggestion is that אנף may originally have meant 'to snort' and thus form a link between 'nose' and 'anger' but this is not universally accepted (TDOT 1.351). \comp 1 Focus: response; response: anger a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human 2 Other meanings a nose, nostril or face b also, even, indeed \dfnotes For notes see other synonyms. In addition: It may be helpful to distinguish positive and negative frames for divine anger: For the positive frame, the domain related to the stimulus event is apostasy, and that related to the consequence frame is judgement. For the negative frame 'turning from anger' the domain related to the stimulus event is repentance, and that related to the consequence frame is mercy. The negative frame is often expressed by a construction with |hשׁוב|h*, either with the verb in the Qal and |hאַף|h* as subject, often with a |hמִן|h* phrase of the former target, (x18), or with the verb in the Hiphil and God as subject (x5). Alternatively, it may be expressed by the Hiphil of |hנוח|h* with |hחֵמָה|h* as object, 'God gave rest to his anger'. \level2 1 \meaning The emotion of anger \frame Anger \eventfr Experiencer: God or humans Target: human \level3 a \context Of God, the emotion of anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement, Repentance and Restoration, Opposition to Israel, Eschatological judgement \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive: God Target = עַל or בְּ or implicit: human = an individual or a nation, Israel or another \keyref 3!"!%$! \keyverse KTBH - Then he speaks to them in his |banger|b*, and in his fury he terrifies them \eval Most translations use two of the available English synonyms for the two Hebrew synonyms in the parallelism - 'anger, wrath' (NIV), 'anger, fury' (TEV), 'anger, rage' (NJB, NJPS) or 'wrath, fury' (RSV, NRS). These are all good models, though, perhaps, since |hאַף|h* is the most common of the Hebrew synonyms, and 'anger' is the most common in English, 'anger' might be the best choice. REB renders the prepositional phrase 'in his anger' by the adverb 'angrily' which may also be followed. CEV renders the verse rather freely, 'The Lord becomes furious and threatens them'. \ref "!$!.!! "!6!7"! "!@!*$! "!@!+*! "!@!,0! "!B!&+! $!+!!*! $!+!*)! $!+!A'! $!,!)"! $!.!2#! $!6!6!! $!9!#$! $!9!$.! $!@!*!! $!@!-!! $!@!.,! %!&!/(! %!'!$(! %!)!3$! %!+!1"! %!-!2)! %!=!3(! %!=!65! %!=!7+! %!=!:!! %!=!;%! %!?!1"! %!@!6#! &!'!!-!|na|n* &!'!:+! &!7!0/! '!"!.!! '!"!4!! '!#!(!! '!&!G%! '!*!'!! )!!(2! /!(!61! /!*!.4! 0!)!13! 2!)!%'!|nb|n* 2!)!-#! 2!.!-'! 2!0!)!! 2!3!+#! 2!4!7&! 2!4!<&! 2!5!1)! 2!C!/$! 2!D!A%!|nc|n* 2!J!'-! 3!"!%$! 3!&!""! 3!'!'#! 3!5!*'! 3!;!)$! 3!>!&#! 3!X!(#! 3!e!9$! 3!j!!(! 3!l!('! 3!m!*%! 3!n!5(! 3!n!?!! 3!n!F(! 3!n!Q#! 3!n!R#! 3!u!$%! 3!u!&$! 3!v!/&! 3!z!'"! 3!z!+#! 3"%!+"! 3"-!(%! 3"0!H!! 3"4!%$! 3"W!(%! 4!8!2'! 7!%!9#! 7!%!92! 7!)!+*! 7!)!02! 7!)!4*! 7!*!$*! 7!*!%$! 7!*!9&! 7!,!!*! 7!-!#'! 7!-!)'! 7!-!-,! 7!>!;&! 7!>!>)! 7!J!9$! 7!P!)$! 7!_!#(! 7!_!&#! 7!b!/)! 8!"!C&! 8!$!()! 8!$!:+! 8!'!4&! 8!*!8$! 8!,!-+! 8!/!.(! 8!/!/*! 8!1!$.! 8!2!71! 8!5!%(! 8!7!4#! 8!9!E&! 8!9!F,! 8!>!8$! 8!@!?"! 8!@!E'! 8!A!%(! 8!D!'+! 8!J!2*! 8!L!&#! 8!Q!E,! 8!S!M(! 8!T!#"! 9!!!,2! 9!"!!#! 9!"!!.! 9!"!#"! 9!"!&,! 9!"!5,! 9!"!6)! 9!#!K"! 9!#!b"! 9!$!+&! :!%!-"! :!%!/,! :!'!#%! :!'!('! :!-!-+! :!4!(4! :!4!56! :!6!4.! :!9!.)! :!F!2.! :!K!(2! ;!)!0$! !(2! /!*!.4! 2!4!7&! 3!"!%$! 3!e!9$! 3!n!Q#! 3!u!$%! 7!-!)'! 7!-!-,! 8!$!()! 8!$!:+! 8!,!-+! 8!9!E&! 8!9!F,!|nd|n* 8!>!8$! 8!Q!E,! 8!S!M(! 9!!!,2! 9!$!+&! !>)! 7!_!#(! 7!_!&#! 7!b!/)! 8!'!4&! 8!5!%(! 8!@!?"! 8!@!E'! 8!A!%(! 8!D!'+! 8!J!2*! 8!L!&#! 9!$!+&! :!%!-"! :!%!/,! :!'!('! :!-!-+! :!4!(4! :!4!56! :!6!4.! :!9!.)! :!F!2.! ;!)!0$! A!%!."! B!!!&(! \paradigc Similar \colc קצף \pgloss to be angry \refsc %!)!3$! \paradigc Similar \colc קֶצֶף \pgloss anger \refsc %!=!;%! 8!5!%(! 8!@!E'! \paradigc Similar \colc זַעַם \pgloss anger \refsc 3!e!9$! 3!n!Q#! 7!*!%$! 7!*!9&! 7!>!;&! 9!"!&,! B!!!&(! C!#!,#! D!#!(2! \paradigc Similar \colc זַעַף \pgloss anger \refsc 7!>!>)! \paradigc Similar \colc עבר \pgloss to be angry \refsc 3!n!5(! \paradigc Similar \colc עֶבְרָה \pgloss anger \refsc 3!n!Q#! 3!u!$%! 3!z!+#! 7!-!)'! 7!-!-,! !;&! 8!L!&#! \paradigc Similar \colc עשׁן \pgloss to smoke \refsc %!=!3(! 3!j!!(! \paradigc Similar \colc קִנְאָה \pgloss jealousy \refsc %!=!3(! D!#!(2! \paradigc Similar \colc חרק שִׁנַּיִם \pgloss to gnash teeth|ne|n* \refsc 2!0!)!! \paradigc Similar \colc תעב \pgloss to abhor \refsc 3"0!H!! \paradigc Similar \colc נאץ \pgloss to spurn \refsc 9!"!&,! \paradigc Similar \colc גְּעָרָה \pgloss rebuke \refsc 7!b!/)! \paradigc Similar \colc תֹּוכַחַת \pgloss rebuke \refsc :!%!/,! \paradigc Similar \colc סתר פָּנִים \pgloss to hide ... face \refsc 8!A!%(! \paradigc Similar \colc נְקָמָה \pgloss vengeance \refsc :!9!.)! \paradigc Similar \colc נחם \pgloss to ease oneself [by taking vengeance] \refsc :!%!-"! \paradigc Opposite \colc חנן \pgloss to be gracious \refsc 3!m!*%! \paradigc Opposite \colc חַנוּן \pgloss gracious \refsc "!B!&+! 0!)!13! 3!v!/&! 3"-!(%! 3"W!(%! =!"!-+! @!$!"5! \paradigc Opposite \colc רחם \pgloss to have compassion \refsc %!-!2)! \paradigc Opposite \colc רַחוּם \pgloss compassionate \refsc "!B!&+! 0!)!13! 3!v!/&! 3"-!(%! 3"W!(%! =!"!-+! @!$!"5! \paradigc Opposite \colc רַחֲמִים \pgloss compassion \refsc %!-!2)! 3!m!*%! \paradigc Opposite \colc חֶסֶד \pgloss covenant loyalty \refsc "!B!&+! $!.!2#! 0!)!13! 3!v!/&! 3"-!(%! 3"W!(%! =!"!-+! @!$!"5! A!'!2+! \paradigc Opposite \colc אֱמֶת \pgloss faithfulness \refsc "!B!&+! 3!v!/&! \paradigc Opposite \colc סלח \pgloss to forgive \refsc %!=!3(! \paradigc Opposite \colc סְלִיחָה \pgloss forgiving \refsc 0!)!13! \paradigc Opposite \colc רָצֹון \pgloss favour \refsc 3!>!&#! \paradigc Opposite \colc נחם \pgloss to comfort \refsc 7!,!!*! \paradigc Opposite \colc אהב \pgloss to love \refsc !"!! !!G!30! !!L!2-! !!Q!&(! !!Q!'"! "!+!(/! "!@!3(! "!@!6$! $!6!;(! $!8!*!! '!)!>(! '!.!32! )!+!&)! )!1!<'! )!4!>!! )!4!B%! *!,!%!! .!9!**! .!9!*/! 2!2!$#! 2!@!""! 2!@!"*! 2!@!#$! 2!@!%*! 2!D!-#! 2!H!+#! 3!"!,'! 3!E!("! 3!W!$)! 3"B!#%! 3"P!'&! 4!.!1!! 4!.!="! 4!/!!%! 4!/!2&! 4!0!@#! 4!3!+$! 4!5!.#! 4!6!8#! 4!9!/"! 4!;!$$! 4!=!('! 4!=!6!! 4!>!A*! 7!'!$-! 7!.!&(! :!C!+'! ;!+!4+! >!!!+1! \paradigc Similar \colc חרה Qal \pgloss to burn \refsc !!>!"!! !!G!30! !!L!2-! $!6!;(! $!8!*!! '!)!>(! '!.!32! )!+!&)! )!1!<'! )!4!>!! *!,!%!! .!9!**! 2!@!""! 2!@!"*! 2!@!#$! 2!@!%*! 3"B!#%! \paradigc Similar \colc חרה Hithpael \pgloss to fret \refsc 3!E!("! \paradigc Similar \colc חְָרִי \pgloss burning \refsc "!+!(/! )!4!B%! .!9!*/! 7!'!$-! \paradigc Similar \colc עֶבְרָה \pgloss anger \refsc !!Q!'"! 2!H!+#! 7!.!&(! >!!!+1! \paradigc Similar \colc אנף \pgloss to be angry \refsc 3!"!,'! \paradigc Similar \colc חֵמָה \pgloss anger \refsc 3!E!("! 4!/!!%! 4!/!2&! 4!5!.#! 4!6!8#! 4!;!$$! 4!=!6!! \paradigc Similar \colc בער \pgloss to burn \refsc 3!"!,'! \paradigc Similar \colc קִנְאָה \pgloss jealousy \refsc 4!;!$$! :!C!+'! \paradigc Similar \colc שִׂנְאָה \pgloss hatred \refsc :!C!+'! \paradigc Similar \colc עצב \pgloss to be grieved \refsc )!4!B%! \paradigc Opposite \colc רָצֹון \pgloss pleasure \refsc !!Q!&(! \paradigc Opposite \colc רַחֲמִים \pgloss compassion \refsc >!!!+1! \level2 2 \meaning Other meanings \level3 a \context Nose, nostril or face (literal, metaphorical and anthropomorphic) \ref !!"!'(! !!#!3"! !!'!6%! !!3!!-! !!8!O.! !!J!&-! !!P!,'! "!/!("!|nf|n* $!+!4&! $!6!?/! %!A!*(! )!!!%%!|ng|n* )!4!I(! )!8!)1! )!9!7)! )!9!I#! )!!A&! 6!'!%)! 6!'!)+! 7!"!6&! 7!#!5#! 7!E!=)! 7!Q!7&! 7!a!%)! 9!$!4"! :!(!14! :!0!,#! :!7!9'! >!$!*/! \paradigc \level3 b \context Focus particle: also, even, indeed \ref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a!.'! 3!d!)#! 3!d!1)! 3!d!3(! 3!j!0#! 3!m!1'! 3!m!2'! 3!y!&%! 3!y!,#! 3!y!6%! 3!y!!"!+&! C!"!%!! C!"!/&! \paradigc \not (a) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus, suggesting corporate culpability. \notfr (a) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus, suggesting corporate culpability. \notsp (a) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus, suggesting corporate culpability. \notpt (a) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus, suggesting corporate culpability. \notxx (a) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus, suggesting corporate culpability. \not (b) Most consider this to refer to God's anger, but Reyburn notes that the phrase 'in his anger' or 'by his nostril' may suggest the picture of a hot blast of breath through the nostril (HBK). \notfr (b) Most consider this to refer to God's anger, but Reyburn notes that the phrase 'in his anger' or 'by his nostril' may suggest the picture of a hot blast of breath through the nostril (HBK 1992). \notsp (b) Most consider this to refer to God's anger, but Reyburn notes that the phrase 'in his anger' or 'by his nostril' may suggest the picture of a hot blast of breath through the nostril (HBK 1992). \notpt (b) Most consider this to refer to God's anger, but Reyburn notes that the phrase 'in his anger' or 'by his nostril' may suggest the picture of a hot blast of breath through the nostril (HBK 1992). \notxx (b) Most consider this to refer to God's anger, but Reyburn notes that the phrase 'in his anger' or 'by his nostril' may suggest the picture of a hot blast of breath through the nostril (HBK 1992). \not (c) If מִקְנֶה with the sense 'cattle' is retained, then אַף is probably the particle rather than the noun. However, the Targum appears to have understood מִקְנֶה as derived from the verb קנא 'to be jealous', so a translation 'the wrath of indignation' is possible (Hartley, NICOT 1988, 477 n.17). Both HALOT and BDB recommend repointing as the Hiphil participle מַקְנֶה. For other possible emendations of this difficult verse, see Pope (AB 1965, 238). \notfr (c) If |hמִקְנֶה|h* with the sense 'cattle' is retained, then |hאַף|h* is probably the particle rather than the noun. However, the Targum appears to have understood |hמִקְנֶה|h* as derived from the verb |hקנא|h* 'to be jealous', so a translation 'the wrath of indignation' is possible (Hartley, NICOT 1988, 477 n.17). Both HALOT and BDB recommend repointing as the Hiphil participle |hמַקְנֶה|h*. For other possible emendations of this difficult verse, see Pope (AB 1965, 238). \notsp (c) If |hמִקְנֶה|h* with the sense 'cattle' is retained, then |hאַף|h* is probably the particle rather than the noun. However, the Targum appears to have understood |hמִקְנֶה|h* as derived from the verb |hקנא|h* 'to be jealous', so a translation 'the wrath of indignation' is possible (Hartley, NICOT 1988, 477 n.17). Both HALOT and BDB recommend repointing as the Hiphil participle |hמַקְנֶה|h*. For other possible emendations of this difficult verse, see Pope (AB 1965, 238). \notpt (c) If |hמִקְנֶה|h* with the sense 'cattle' is retained, then |hאַף|h* is probably the particle rather than the noun. However, the Targum appears to have understood |hמִקְנֶה|h* as derived from the verb |hקנא|h* 'to be jealous', so a translation 'the wrath of indignation' is possible (Hartley, NICOT 1988, 477 n.17). Both HALOT and BDB recommend repointing as the Hiphil participle |hמַקְנֶה|h*. For other possible emendations of this difficult verse, see Pope (AB 1965, 238). \notxx (c) If |hמִקְנֶה|h* with the sense 'cattle' is retained, then |hאַף|h* is probably the particle rather than the noun. However, the Targum appears to have understood |hמִקְנֶה|h* as derived from the verb |hקנא|h* 'to be jealous', so a translation 'the wrath of indignation' is possible (Hartley, NICOT 1988, 477 n.17). Both HALOT and BDB recommend repointing as the Hiphil participle |hמַקְנֶה|h*. For other possible emendations of this difficult verse, see Pope (AB 1965, 238). \not (d) Several Hebrew mss, supported by LXX and Tg, read |hחֶרֶב|h* 'sword' for |hחָרֹון|h* 'burning [anger]', in which case there is no collocating synonym. See |hחָרֹון|h*. \notfr (d) Several Hebrew mss, supported by LXX and Tg, read |hחֶרֶב|h* 'sword' for |hחָרֹון|h* 'burning [anger]', in which case there is no collocating synonym. See |hחָרֹון|h*. \notsp (d) Several Hebrew mss, supported by LXX and Tg, read |hחֶרֶב|h* 'sword' for |hחָרֹון|h* 'burning [anger]', in which case there is no collocating synonym. See |hחָרֹון|h*. \notpt (d) Several Hebrew mss, supported by LXX and Tg, read |hחֶרֶב|h* 'sword' for |hחָרֹון|h* 'burning [anger]', in which case there is no collocating synonym. See |hחָרֹון|h*. \notxx (d) Several Hebrew mss, supported by LXX and Tg, read |hחֶרֶב|h* 'sword' for |hחָרֹון|h* 'burning [anger]', in which case there is no collocating synonym. See |hחָרֹון|h*. \not (e) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \notfr (e) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \notsp (e) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \notpt (e) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \notxx (e) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \not (f) רוּחַ אַפֹּו should probably be understood as an anthropomorphism, 'the breath of his nose/nostrils' even though God's anger is also in the background. \notfr (f) |hרוּחַ אַפֹּו|h* should probably be translated as an anthropomorphism, 'the breath of his nose/nostrils' even though God's anger is also in the background. \notsp (f) |hרוּחַ אַפֹּו|h* should probably be translated as an anthropomorphism, 'the breath of his nose/nostrils' even though God's anger is also in the background. \notpt (f) |hרוּחַ אַפֹּו|h* should probably be translated as an anthropomorphism, 'the breath of his nose/nostrils' even though God's anger is also in the background. \notxx (f) |hרוּחַ אַפֹּו|h* should probably be translated as an anthropomorphism, 'the breath of his nose/nostrils' even though God's anger is also in the background. \not (g) The idiom here, if indeed the text is correct, is unclear. LXX appears to have read |hאפס|h* for |hאפים|h*, '... although he loved Hannah ...'. Klein follows this reading (WBC, 1983). The Peshitta understood the phrase |hמָנָה אַחַת אפַּיִם|h* to mean 'a double portion', perhaps on the basis of the dual form. This understanding has been defended by KD on the grounds of a shift from |hאַף|h* to 'face' to 'person' and since it is dual, one portion for two persons. This has been followed by NIV and NRS. Other emendations have been proposed, see AB and HBK. Whatever reading is accepted, anger is not in view. \notfr (g) The idiom here, if indeed the text is correct, is unclear. LXX appears to have read |hאפס|h* for |hאפים|h*, '... although he loved Hannah ...'. Klein follows this reading (WBC, 1983). The Peshitta understood the phrase |hמָנָה אַחַת אפַּיִם|h* to mean 'a double portion', perhaps on the basis of the dual form. This understanding has been defended by KD on the grounds of a shift from |hאַף|h* to 'face' to 'person' and since it is dual, one portion for two persons. This has been followed by NIV and NRS. Other emendations have been proposed, see AB and HBK. Whatever reading is accepted, anger is not in view. \notsp (g) The idiom here, if indeed the text is correct, is unclear. LXX appears to have read |hאפס|h* for |hאפים|h*, '... although he loved Hannah ...'. Klein follows this reading (WBC, 1983). The Peshitta understood the phrase |hמָנָה אַחַת אפַּיִם|h* to mean 'a double portion', perhaps on the basis of the dual form. This understanding has been defended by KD on the grounds of a shift from |hאַף|h* to 'face' to 'person' and since it is dual, one portion for two persons. This has been followed by NIV and NRS. Other emendations have been proposed, see AB and HBK. Whatever reading is accepted, anger is not in view. \notpt (g) The idiom here, if indeed the text is correct, is unclear. LXX appears to have read |hאפס|h* for |hאפים|h*, '... although he loved Hannah ...'. Klein follows this reading (WBC, 1983). The Peshitta understood the phrase |hמָנָה אַחַת אפַּיִם|h* to mean 'a double portion', perhaps on the basis of the dual form. This understanding has been defended by KD on the grounds of a shift from |hאַף|h* to 'face' to 'person' and since it is dual, one portion for two persons. This has been followed by NIV and NRS. Other emendations have been proposed, see AB and HBK. Whatever reading is accepted, anger is not in view. \notxx (g) The idiom here, if indeed the text is correct, is unclear. LXX appears to have read |hאפס|h* for |hאפים|h*, '... although he loved Hannah ...'. Klein follows this reading (WBC, 1983). The Peshitta understood the phrase |hמָנָה אַחַת אפַּיִם|h* to mean 'a double portion', perhaps on the basis of the dual form. This understanding has been defended by KD on the grounds of a shift from |hאַף|h* to 'face' to 'person' and since it is dual, one portion for two persons. This has been followed by NIV and NRS. Other emendations have been proposed, see AB and HBK. Whatever reading is accepted, anger is not in view. \not (h) The sense here is of smoke in (or 'from' see Anderson, WBC on 2Sa 22:9) God's nose, though his anger is also in view, as the preceding verse shows. \notfr (h) The sense here is of smoke in (or 'from' see Anderson, WBC on 2Sa 22:9) God's nose, though his anger is also in view, as the preceding verse shows. \notsp (h) The sense here is of smoke in (or 'from' see Anderson, WBC on 2Sa 22:9) God's nose, though his anger is also in view, as the preceding verse shows. \notpt (h) The sense here is of smoke in (or 'from' see Anderson, WBC on 2Sa 22:9) God's nose, though his anger is also in view, as the preceding verse shows. \notxx (h) The sense here is of smoke in (or 'from' see Anderson, WBC on 2Sa 22:9) God's nose, though his anger is also in view, as the preceding verse shows. \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-27 10:50:37 cjs \heb זַלְעָפָה \strong 02152 \pos ncf \gloss burning heat \freq 3 \sub זעף \hebraist This apparent quadriliteral is derived by insertion of |hל|h* into |hזעף|h* (Klein, "Etymological Dictionary Language" MacMillan New York, 1992, 199). Insertion of |hל|h* or |hר|h* between the first and the second letters of a triliteral root is rare but not unknown (GKC 30.q). \level2 1 \meaning Burning heat \level3 a \context Burning heat [of wind] \ref 3!+!&'! \paradigc Similar \colc אֵשׁ \pgloss fire \refsc 3!+!&'! \paradigc Similar \colc גָּפְרִית \pgloss brimstone \refsc 3!+!&'! \paradigc Similar \colc פֶּחָם|na|n* \pgloss coal \refsc 3!+!&'! \level3 b \context Burning heat of indignation \framec Anger \domainc Apostasy \eventfrc Experiencer = implicit: human Target = implicit: human Stimulus = |hמִן|h*: human \ref 3"=!U!! \paradigc \level3 c \context Burning heat of famine (fever?) \syntagcc Reynolds summarises discussion of this phrase. '"The burning heat of famine" is taken by most translators to mean fever brought on by hunger. NEB, however, takes it as a figurative expression and translates more generally "the ravages of starvation."' (HBK). \ref 9!%!*%! \paradigc Similar \colc כמר \pgloss to become hot \refsc 9!%!*%! \paradigc Similar \colc תַּנּוּר \pgloss oven \refsc 9!%!*%! \not (a) This assumes an emendation, supported by LXX, of |hפחים|h* to |hפחם|h* or |hפחםי|h*, since |hפַּחִים|h* 'bird-traps' hardly fits the context. \notfr (a) This assumes an emendation, supported by LXX, of |hפחים|h* to |hפחם|h* or |hפחםי|h*, since |hפַּחִים|h* 'bird-traps' hardly fits the context. \notsp (a) This assumes an emendation, supported by LXX, of |hפחים|h* to |hפחם|h* or |hפחםי|h*, since |hפַּחִים|h* 'bird-traps' hardly fits the context. \notpt (a) This assumes an emendation, supported by LXX, of |hפחים|h* to |hפחם|h* or |hפחםי|h*, since |hפַּחִים|h* 'bird-traps' hardly fits the context. \notxx (a) This assumes an emendation, supported by LXX, of |hפחים|h* to |hפחם|h* or |hפחםי|h*, since |hפַּחִים|h* 'bird-traps' hardly fits the context. \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-12 11:12:22 cjs \heb זעם \strong 02194 \pos v \gloss to curse, to be angry \freq 12 \sub זַעַם \intro 1. The main distinction in meaning for the verb is between ‘to curse’ or ‘to be angry’. Note that the noun from the same root refers only to anger. 2. For the Meaning 'to curse', there is a further distinction in meaning between God cursing someone, Meaning 1a, and someone cursing someone else, Meaning 1b. 3. For the Meaning 'to be angry', there is a further distinction in meaning between God being angry at someone, Meaning 2a, and someone being angry at someone else, Meaning 2b. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist The relationship between this noun and its cognate verb requires specific comment. The noun collocates frequently with words for 'anger', whereas the verb does not. In Num 23:7-8 and Pro 24:24, the verb collocates instead with words meaning 'to curse'. The relationship then may be that, for the verb, the meaning shifts from 'to be angry' > 'to speak in anger' > 'to curse', whereas for the noun, the meaning 'anger' dominates. \comp 1 Participants: Speaker and Target a Speaker: God b Speaker: human 2 Participants: Experiencer and Target a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human \level2 1 \meaning To pronounce a curse on someone \frame Cursing \stem Qal \eventfr Speaker: God or human Target: human \level3 a \context Of God, to pronounce a curse on someone \domainc Apostasy; Opposition to Israel \eventfrc Speaker = subject or genitive or implicit: God Target = object or implicit: human \keyref $!7!()! \keyverse How can I curse those whom God has not cursed or how can I denounce those whom Yahweh has not |bdenounced|b* (KTBH) \eval The problem here is the parallelism between קבב and זעם (cf v 7, Meaning 1b). Except for NJPS 'damn', all render the former well by 'curse' and are left with a problem for the latter. The most common is 'denounce' (NIV, RSV, NRS, REB, NJB)‏, which is not quite right but may be the best solution. \ref $!7!()! 4!6!.%! A!&!*)!|na|n* \paradigc Similar \colc קבב \pgloss to curse \refsc $!7!()! \level3 b \context Of humans, to pronounce a curse on someone \domainc Opposition to Israel; Wickedness \eventfrc Speaker = subject: human Target = object: human \keyref $!7!'-! \keyverse ... come, curse Jacob for me and come, |bdenounce |b*Israel (KTBH). \eval The problem here is the parallelism between ארר and זעם (cf v 8, Meaning 1a). Except for TEV 'speak', all render the former well by 'curse' and are left with a problem for the latter. The most common is 'denounce' (NIV, RSV, NRS, REB, NJB), which is not quite right but may be the best solution. \ref $!7!'-! $!7!('! 4!8!8'! \paradigc Similar \colc ארר \pgloss to curse \refsc $!7!'-! \paradigc Similar \colc קבב \pgloss to curse \refsc $!7!('! 4!8!8'! \level2 2 \meaning To experience the emotion of anger \frame Anger \stem Qal, and Niphal (once) \eventfr Experiencer: God or human Target: human \level3 a \context Of God, to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Apostasy; Wickedness; Opposition to Israel \eventfrc Experiencer = subject: God Target = object or implicit: human \keyref F!!!,.! \keyverse NRS - Then the angel of the Lord said, “O Lord of hosts, how long will you withhold mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with which |byou have been angry |b*these seventy years?” \eval Most translations render by 'anger' or 'angry' or a synonym such as 'indignation' or 'wrath'. Any of these may be followed. \ref 3!'!,%! 7!b!.*" F!!!,.! G!!!$4" \paradigc Similar \colc שׂנא \pgloss to hate \refsc G!!!$4" \paradigc Opposite \colc רחם \pgloss to have compassion \refsc F!!!,.! \paradigc Opposite \colc נִחֻמִים \pgloss comfort \refsc F!!!,.! \level3 b \context Of humans, to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Gossip; Opposition to Israel \eventfrc Experiencer = subject or implicit: human Target = עַל or implicit: human \keyref 4!9!7&! \keyverse NIV - As a north wind brings rain, so a sly tongue brings |bangry |b*looks. \eval The participle of זעם modifies 'faces' which is rightly understood by most translations to refer to 'looks'. זעם itself is rendered angry by several translations and this is a good model to follow. TEV and CEV render the whole phrase 'angry looks' by 'anger' and this may also be followed. \ref 4!9!7&! ;!+!>'"|nb|n* \paradigc Opposite \colc בין \pgloss to pay attention to \refsc ;!+!>'" \not (a) The apparent target of the cursing is the 'short measure' and thus inanimate, but that is used metonymically for those who sell short measure cf v. 11. \notfr (a) The apparent target of the angry cursing is the 'short measure' and thus inanimate, but that is used metonymically for those who sell short measure cf v. 11. \notsp (a) The apparent target of the angry cursing is the 'short measure' and thus inanimate, but that is used metonymically for those who sell short measure cf v. 11. \notpt (a) The apparent target of the angry cursing is the 'short measure' and thus inanimate, but that is used metonymically for those who sell short measure cf v. 11. \notxx (a) The apparent target of the angry cursing is the 'short measure' and thus inanimate, but that is used metonymically for those who sell short measure cf v. 11. \not (b) Specifically, the target is 'the holy covenant' but by metonymy for either the God who initiated that covenant or the people as the other party. Compare v. 30b, 'those who forsake the holy covenant'. \notfr (b) Specifically, the target is 'the holy covenant' but by metonymy for either the God who initiated that covenant or the people as the other party. Compare v. 30b, 'those who forsake the holy covenant'. \notsp (b) Specifically, the target is 'the holy covenant' but by metonymy for either the God who initiated that covenant or the people as the other party. Compare v. 30b, 'those who forsake the holy covenant'. \notpt (b) Specifically, the target is 'the holy covenant' but by metonymy for either the God who initiated that covenant or the people as the other party. Compare v. 30b, 'those who forsake the holy covenant'. \notxx (b) Specifically, the target is 'the holy covenant' but by metonymy for either the God who initiated that covenant or the people as the other party. Compare v. 30b, 'those who forsake the holy covenant'. \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-27 10:51:26 cjs \heb זַעַם \strong 02195 \pos ncm \gloss anger \freq 22 \sub זעם \intro The only distinction in meaning is between God being angry with someone, Meaning 1a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1b. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist The relationship between this noun and its cognate verb requires specific comment. The noun collocates frequently with words for 'anger', whereas the verb does not. In Num 23:7-8 and Pro 24:24, the verb collocates instead with words meaning 'to curse'. The relationship then may be that, for the verb, the meaning shifts from 'to be angry' > 'to speak in anger' > 'to curse', whereas for the noun, the meaning 'anger' dominates. \comp 1 Focus: response; response: anger a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human \level2 1 \meaning The emotion of anger \frame Anger \eventfr : Experiencer: God or humans Target: human \level3 a \context Of God, the emotion of anger \domainc Enmity \eventfrc : Experiencer = genitive or implicit: God Target = implicit: human \keyref 3!e!9"! \keyverse KTBH - Pour out your |bwrath |b*on them and let your burning anger overtake them \eval Most translations use 'anger' for the |hאַף|h* in the second colon, and one of the available English synonyms for |hזַעַם|h* in the first: 'indignation' (RSV, NRS, REB), 'wrath' (NIV, NJPS), 'fury' (NJB). This seems a better model to follow than TEV which reverses this 'anger, indignation' (CEV is similar), because it seems better to match the more common and more general words in the translation. \ref 3!F!$$! 3!e!9"! 3!n!Q%! 3",!+!! 7!*!%'! 7!*!9%! 7!-!%(! 7!:!4,! 7!>!;+!|na|n* 8!*!*-! 8!R!9&! 9!"!&,! :!5!D#! :!6!8+! :!6!?#! ;!(!3'! ;!+!D.! B!!!&"! C!#!,!! D!#!(/! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc 3!e!9"! 3!n!Q%! 7!*!%'! 7!*!9%! 7!>!;+! 9!"!&,! B!!!&"! C!#!,!! D!#!(/! \paradigc Similar \colc חָרֹון \pgloss burning [of anger] \refsc 3!e!9"! 3!n!Q%! B!!!&"! D!#!(/! \paradigc Similar \colc קֶצֶף \pgloss anger \refsc 3!F!$$! 3",!+!! 8!*!*-! \paradigc Similar \colc עֶבְרָה \pgloss anger \refsc 3!n!Q%! :!5!D#! :!6!?#! \paradigc Similar \colc חֵמָה \pgloss anger \refsc 3!F!$$! B!!!&"! \paradigc Similar \colc קִנְאָה \pgloss jealousy \refsc D!#!(/! \paradigc Similar \colc צָרָה \pgloss trouble \refsc 3!n!Q%! \paradigc Similar \colc נאץ \pgloss to spurn \refsc 9!"!&,! \level3 b \context Of humans, the emotion of anger \domainc Prophet, Apostasy \eventfrc : Experiencer = implicit: human Target = implicit: human = Judah|nb|n* \keyref 8!/!1(! \keyverse KTBH - I sat alone because you had filled me with |banger|b* \eval Most translations render |hזַעַם|h* by 'indignation' (NIV, RSV, NRS, REB, NJB), perhaps to distinguish it from other words for anger, whereas TEV and CEV use the more general English word 'anger'. Either would be fully acceptable. NJPS 'gloom' fits the context well, but seems harder to justify otherwise and should not be followed. \ref 8!/!1(! 'blame someone' > 'get angry with that someone'. This shift may be necessary if the 'blame' step is not obvious. \ref .!:!3!! .!:!3&! 4!3!#&! \paradigc \level2 2 \meaning To act violently, of the sea or a storm \frame Meteorology \stem Qal \eventfr Force: Sea \level3 a \context To act violently, of the sea \domainc Sea \eventfrc Force = genitive subject: Sea \keyref @!!!/'! \keyverse KTBH - They picked up Jonah and they threw him into the sea and the sea ceased its |braging|b* \eval Some translations follow the structure of the Hebrew closely: 'and the sea ceased from its raging' (RSV, NRS), 'and the sea stopped raging' (NJB, NJPS). Others recognise that the raging is a property of the sea and translate 'the raging sea' (NIV), the raging of the sea' (REB). 'Rage' is a good rendering because the English and Hebrew match, though this may not be possible in other languages. TEV conveys the meaning without the word 'rage': '[the sea] calmed down' (CEV similar). Depending on translation style, any of these would be a good model to follow. \ref @!!!/'! \paradigc Opposite \colc עמד \pgloss to stand still \refsc @!!!/'! \level2 3 \meaning To be physically unwell or emotionally upset and to show it \frame Health \stem Qal \eventfr Patient: human \syntagc The term זעף expresses a response to an incomprehensible dream in one case, and a change of diet in the other. In neither case is anger appropriate to the context. The fact that Joseph saw that something was wrong suggests that the word refers to something visible. Joseph's reference to the men's faces being רָעִים 'sad' also supports the element 'and to show it' in the definition. In a similar way, Nebuchadnezzar would have observed a problem. \level3 a \context To be physically unwell or emotionally upset and to show it \domainc Food, Dreams \eventfrc Patient = subject: human \keyref !!H!&(! \keyverse KTBH - Joseph came to them in the morning and he saw them; they |bwere dejected|b* \eval The precise nuance of this meaning of the term is hard to establish and eight translations render in six different ways, 'dejected' (NIV), 'troubled' (RSV, NRS), 'dispirited' (REB), 'upset' (TEV, CEV), 'gloomy' (NJB), 'distraught' (NJPS). All fit the context well and all are consistent with the evidence for meaning. It would probably be best, however, to choose a translation equivalent which indicates that whatever was wrong was visible. \ref !!H!&(! ;!!!*1! \paradigc Similar \colc פָּנִים רָעִים \pgloss faces [are] dejected \refsc !!H!&(! \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-21 16:14:57 cjs \heb זַעַף \strong 02197 \pos ncm \gloss anger \freq 5 \sub זעף \intro The only distinction in meaning is between God being angry with someone, Meaning 1a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1b. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist The noun seems to be related to homonym I of the verb, not homonym II. See the discussion under |hזעף|h*. \comp 1 Focus: response; response: anger a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human \level2 1 \meaning The emotion of anger \frame Anger \eventfr Experiencer: God or human Target: human \level3 a \context Of God, the emotion of anger \domainc Judgement \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive or implicit: God Target = implicit: human \keyref A!'!)!! \keyverse KTBH - I will bear Yahweh's |banger |b*since I have sinned against him ... \eval Most use 'anger' (REB, TEV, CEV, NJB, NJPS). This neutral term is a good model to follow. NIV 'wrath' is equally acceptable for divine anger. RSV and NRS use 'indignation' which seems too mild. \ref 7!>!>(! A!'!)!! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc 7!>!>(! \level3 b \context Of humans, the emotion of anger \domainc Kingship, Disfavour, Warfare \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive or implicit: human = king Target = עִם or implicit: human \keyref 4!3!,#! \keyverse KTBH - A king's |brage |b*is like a lion's roar, but his favour is like dew on the grass \eval Most use 'rage' (NIV, REB, NJPS) or 'anger' (NRS, TEV, NJB). Either would be a good model to follow. RSV 'wrath' sounds old-fashioned for human anger. \ref .!0!*'! .!!7$! 8!@!?#! 8!@!E(! 8!A!%)! 8!D!',! 8!J!2+! 8!J!20! 8!L!&"! 9!"!$.! 9!$!+#! :!%!-$! :!%!--! :!%!/-! :!%!//! :!&!,,! :!'!($! :!(!2#! :!)!(2! :!-!-(! :!-!-/! :!-!/"! :!.!3'! :!0!F(! :!0!J"! :!3!,"! :!4!(1! :!4!-3! :!4!53! :!4!A*! :!4!B.! :!5!6&! :!6!4/! :!6!6,! :!8!("! :!8!-+! :!9!.*! :!9!1&! :!>!/"! :!D!&/! :!D!2"! :!F!2-! ;!)!0%! A!%!.#! B!!!"(! B!!!&)! F!(!")! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc %!)!3%! %!=!66! %!=!;&! 3!&!"$! 3!n!F*! 3!z!'#! 7!J!9#! 7!_!#*! 7!_!&%! 7!b!/(! 8!'!4'! 8!5!%)! 8!@!E(! 8!A!%)! 8!D!',! 8!L!&"! 9!$!+#! :!%!-$! :!'!($! :!-!-(! :!4!53! :!6!4/! :!9!.*! :!F!2-! ;!)!0%! A!%!.#! B!!!&)! \paradigc Similar \colc חָרֹון \pgloss anger \refsc 9!$!+#! B!!!&)! \paradigc Similar \colc קצף \pgloss to be angry \refsc %!)!3%! \paradigc Similar \colc קֶצֶף \pgloss anger \refsc %!=!;&! 3!F!"$! 7!B!"%! 8!5!%)! 8!@!?#! 8!@!E(! \paradigc Similar \colc כעס \pgloss (Qal) to be angry \refsc :!0!J"! \paradigc Similar \colc כעס \pgloss (Hiphil) to make angry \refsc ,!6!1-! .!B!9.! \paradigc Similar \colc זַעַף \pgloss anger \refsc .!#! !!2!@#! "!$!.!! "!6!7!! "!@!*$! "!@!+)! $!+!!)! $!+!*)! $!+!A)! $!,!)!! $!6!6!! $!9!#$! $!@!*!! $!@!-!! %!&!/'! %!'!$'! %!+!1!! %!=!:!! %!?!1!! &!'!!-!|nf|n* &!7!0.! '!"!.!! '!"!4!! '!#!(!! '!&!G$! '!*!'!! *!&!'!! *!6!()! *!8!!#! ,!-!#!! ,!7!:'! -!-!*!! .!9!/!! 2!3!+!!|nd|n* 2!J!',! 3!2!((! 3"0!H!! 7!%!9"! !"!! !!?!C#! !!?!D!! !!B!'(! !!G!3/! !!L!2,! !!M!%#!|nh|n* "!@!3(! "!@!6#! $!0!/!! $!6!;(! $!8!*!! '!)!>'! '!.!31! )!+!&(! )!/!+*! )!1!<'! )!2!(!! )!4!'&! )!4!''! )!4!>!! *!#!(!! *!&!(!! *!,!%!! *!-!5'! *!3!K+! -!-!+!! .!9!*)! 0!#!A(! 0!$!!0! 0!%!&!! 2!@!"!! 2!@!")! 2!@!##! 2!@!%)! 3"B!#$! 6!!!&(!|nc|n* 7!I!+%!|nc|n* 7!M!8+!|nc|n* @!$!!%! @!$!$$! @!$!)%!|ni|n* @!$!))! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc !!>!"!! !!G!3/! !!L!2,! "!@!3(! "!@!6#! $!6!;(! $!8!*!! '!)!>'! '!.!31! )!+!&(! )!1!<'! )!4!>!! *!,!%!! .!9!*)! 2!@!"!! 2!@!")! 2!@!##! 2!@!%)! 3"B!#$! \paradigc Similar \colc כעס \pgloss to be angry \refsc 0!#!A(! \paradigc Similar \colc נפל פָּנִים \pgloss [someone's] face to fall \refsc !!$!%%! !!$!&%! \paradigc Similar \colc עצב \pgloss to feel hurt \refsc !!B!'(! !!M!%#! \paradigc Similar \colc נחם \pgloss to regret \refsc )!/!+*! \paradigc Similar \colc רִיב \pgloss strife \refsc 7!I!+%! \paradigc Similar \colc מַצּוּת \pgloss strife \refsc 7!I!+%! \paradigc Similar \colc מִלְחָמָה \pgloss warfare \refsc 7!I!+%! \level2 2 \meaning Other meanings \level3 a \context To be worried or distressed \syntagcc Hithpael \ref 3!E!!"! 3!E!'%! 3!E!(%! 4!8!3!! \paradigc Similar \colc קנא \pgloss to envy \refsc 3!E!!"! \paradigc Opposite \colc דמם \pgloss to be still, quiet \refsc 3!E!'%! \paradigc Opposite \colc חיל \pgloss to wait longingly|nj|n* \refsc 3!E!'%! \paradigc Opposite \colc רפה מֵאַף \pgloss to refrain from anger \refsc 3!E!(%! \paradigc Opposite \colc עזב חֵמָה \pgloss to forsake anger \refsc 3!E!(%! \level3 b \context To compete \syntagcc Hithpael \ref 8!,!%&! 8!6!/$! \paradigc Similar \colc רוץ \pgloss to run \refsc 8!,!%&! \level3 c \context Zealously \syntagcc Hiphil \ref 0!#!4"!|nk|n* \paradigc \not (a) A third construction with בְּעֵינֵי also occurs, but only twice, both times in Genesis (31:35; 45:5) and both negated. \notfr (a) A third construction with |hבְּעֵינֵי|h* also occurs, but only twice, both times in Genesis (31:35; 45:5) and both negated. \notsp (a) A third construction with |hבְּעֵינֵי|h* also occurs, but only twice, both times in Genesis (31:35; 45:5) and both negated. \notpt (a) A third construction with |hבְּעֵינֵי|h* also occurs, but only twice, both times in Genesis (31:35; 45:5) and both negated. \notxx (a) A third construction with |hבְּעֵינֵי|h* also occurs, but only twice, both times in Genesis (31:35; 45:5) and both negated. \not (b) Joüon and Muraoka note that impersonal constructions with לְ occur with a 3ms verb, especially when they express an emotion. חָרָה לֹו 'he is angry', חַם לֹו 'he is hot', צַר לֹו 'he is distressed', מַר לֹו 'he is unhappy' and others (§152.d). See also GKC §144.b and IBHS §22.7.b. \notfr (b) Joüon and Muraoka note that impersonal constructions with |hל|h* occur with a 3ms verb, especially when they express an emotion. |hחָרָה לֹו|h* 'he is angry', |hחַם לֹו|h* 'he is hot', |hצַר לֹו|h* 'he is distressed', |hמַר לֹו|h* 'he is unhappy' and others (§152.d). See also gkc §144.b and ibhs §22.7.b. \notsp (b) Joüon and Muraoka note that impersonal constructions with |hל|h* occur with a 3ms verb, especially when they express an emotion. |hחָרָה לֹו|h* 'he is angry', |hחַם לֹו|h* 'he is hot', |hצַר לֹו|h* 'he is distressed', |hמַר לֹו|h* 'he is unhappy' and others (§152.d). See also gkc §144.b and ibhs §22.7.b. \notpt (b) Joüon and Muraoka note that impersonal constructions with |hל|h* occur with a 3ms verb, especially when they express an emotion. |hחָרָה לֹו|h* 'he is angry', |hחַם לֹו|h* 'he is hot', |hצַר לֹו|h* 'he is distressed', |hמַר לֹו|h* 'he is unhappy' and others (§152.d). See also gkc §144.b and ibhs §22.7.b. \notxx (b) Joüon and Muraoka note that impersonal constructions with |hל|h* occur with a 3ms verb, especially when they express an emotion. |hחָרָה לֹו|h* 'he is angry', |hחַם לֹו|h* 'he is hot', |hצַר לֹו|h* 'he is distressed', |hמַר לֹו|h* 'he is unhappy' and others (§152.d). See also gkc §144.b and ibhs §22.7.b. \not (c) There are only three instances of the Niphal of |hחרה|h*. They show a different syntax in that the Experiencer is subject, but the target is still introduced by בְּ. Some commentators attribute reflexive significance to the Niphal form: thus KD renders it by 'burn inwardly' at Sng 1:6 and TOTC by 'keep themselves incensed' at Isa 45:24, but there is insufficient evidence to support a distinct meaning. Thus KTBH includes the Niphal with the more common Qal. BHS proposes repointing both instances of the Niphal in Isaiah as a form of |hנחר|h* 'snort [with indignation]' but this is 'unnecessary here, since MT is neither impossible nor improbable' (NICOT on Isa 41:11). \notfr (c) There are only three instances of the Niphal of |hחרה|h*. They show a different syntax in that the Experiencer is subject, but the target is still introduced by |hבּ|h*. Some commentators attribute reflexive significance to the Niphal form: thus KD renders it by 'burn inwardly' at Sng 1:6 and TOTC by 'keep themselves incensed' at Isa 45:24, but there is insufficient evidence to support a distinct meaning. Thus KTBH includes the Niphal with the more common Qal. BHS proposes repointing both instances of the Niphal in Isaiah as a form of |hנחר|h* 'snort [with indignation]' but this is 'unnecessary here, since MT is neither impossible nor improbable' (NICOT on 41:11). \notsp (c) There are only three instances of the Niphal of |hחרה|h*. They show a different syntax in that the Experiencer is subject, but the target is still introduced by |hבּ|h*. Some commentators attribute reflexive significance to the Niphal form: thus KD renders it by 'burn inwardly' at Sng 1:6 and TOTC by 'keep themselves incensed' at Isa 45:24, but there is insufficient evidence to support a distinct meaning. Thus KTBH includes the Niphal with the more common Qal. BHS proposes repointing both instances of the Niphal in Isaiah as a form of |hנחר|h* 'snort [with indignation]' but this is 'unnecessary here, since MT is neither impossible nor improbable' (NICOT on 41:11). \notpt (c) There are only three instances of the Niphal of |hחרה|h*. They show a different syntax in that the Experiencer is subject, but the target is still introduced by |hבּ|h*. Some commentators attribute reflexive significance to the Niphal form: thus KD renders it by 'burn inwardly' at Sng 1:6 and TOTC by 'keep themselves incensed' at Isa 45:24, but there is insufficient evidence to support a distinct meaning. Thus KTBH includes the Niphal with the more common Qal. BHS proposes repointing both instances of the Niphal in Isaiah as a form of |hנחר|h* 'snort [with indignation]' but this is 'unnecessary here, since MT is neither impossible nor improbable' (NICOT on 41:11). \notxx (c) There are only three instances of the Niphal of |hחרה|h*. They show a different syntax in that the Experiencer is subject, but the target is still introduced by |hבּ|h*. Some commentators attribute reflexive significance to the Niphal form: thus KD renders it by 'burn inwardly' at Sng 1:6 and TOTC by 'keep themselves incensed' at Isa 45:24, but there is insufficient evidence to support a distinct meaning. Thus KTBH includes the Niphal with the more common Qal. BHS proposes repointing both instances of the Niphal in Isaiah as a form of |hנחר|h* 'snort [with indignation]' but this is 'unnecessary here, since MT is neither impossible nor improbable' (NICOT on 41:11). \not (d) In Job 19:11, MT points as the Hiphil, but BHS and HALOT recommend repointing as the Qal. If MT is retained, the construction with the Hiphil may either be the same as the impersonal construction with the Qal, with |hאַפֹּו|h* as subject 'his anger burned', or there may be a causative nuance, 'he has kindled his anger', with |hאַפֹּו|h* as object. \notfr (d) In Job 19:11, MT points as the Hiphil, but BHS and HALOT recommend repointing as the Qal. If MT is retained, the construction with the Hiphil may either be the same as the impersonal construction with the Qal, with |hאַפֹּו|h* as subject 'his anger burned', or there may be a causative nuance, 'he has kindled his anger', with |hאַפֹּו|h* as object. \notsp (d) In Job 19:11, MT points as the Hiphil, but BHS and HALOT recommend repointing as the Qal. If MT is retained, the construction with the Hiphil may either be the same as the impersonal construction with the Qal, with |hאַפֹּו|h* as subject 'his anger burned', or there may be a causative nuance, 'he has kindled his anger', with |hאַפֹּו|h* as object. \notpt (d) In Job 19:11, MT points as the Hiphil, but BHS and HALOT recommend repointing as the Qal. If MT is retained, the construction with the Hiphil may either be the same as the impersonal construction with the Qal, with |hאַפֹּו|h* as subject 'his anger burned', or there may be a causative nuance, 'he has kindled his anger', with |hאַפֹּו|h* as object. \notxx (d) In Job 19:11, MT points as the Hiphil, but BHS and HALOT recommend repointing as the Qal. If MT is retained, the construction with the Hiphil may either be the same as the impersonal construction with the Qal, with |hאַפֹּו|h* as subject 'his anger burned', or there may be a causative nuance, 'he has kindled his anger', with |hאַפֹּו|h* as object. \not (e) At Deu 29:26, the target is 'that land' but by metonymy it refers to the people of the land, the Egyptians \notfr (e) At Deu 29:26, the target is 'that land' but by metonymy it refers to the people of the land, the Egyptians \notsp (e) At Deu 29:26, the target is 'that land' but by metonymy it refers to the people of the land, the Egyptians \notpt (e) At Deu 29:26, the target is 'that land' but by metonymy it refers to the people of the land, the Egyptians \notxx (e) At Deu 29:26, the target is 'that land' but by metonymy it refers to the people of the land, the Egyptians \not (f) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \notfr (f) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \notsp (f) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \notpt (f) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \notxx (f) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \not (g) The syntax of Hab 3:8 seems to be unique. If MT is accepted, then |hיהוה|h* must be either the personal subject of |hחרה|h* or a vocative with elision of the |hלְךָ|h* normally expected with |hחרה|h*. Most commentaries and translations assume the latter, except for Robertson (NICOT 1990, 229) who appears to assume the former without comment. For detailed discussion, including defence of MT, see Andersen (AB 2001, 316-17). \notfr (g) The syntax of Hab 3:8 seems to be unique. If MT is accepted, then |hיהוה|h* must be either the personal subject of |hחרה|h* or a vocative with elision of the |hלְךָ|h* normally expected with |hחרה|h*. Most commentaries and translations assume the latter, except for Robertson (NICOT 1990, 229) who appears to assume the former without comment. For detailed discussion, including defence of MT, see Andersen (AB 2001, 316-17). \notsp (g) The syntax of Hab 3:8 seems to be unique. If MT is accepted, then |hיהוה|h* must be either the personal subject of |hחרה|h* or a vocative with elision of the |hלְךָ|h* normally expected with |hחרה|h*. Most commentaries and translations assume the latter, except for Robertson (NICOT 1990, 229) who appears to assume the former without comment. For detailed discussion, including defence of MT, see Andersen (AB 2001, 316-17). \notpt (g) The syntax of Hab 3:8 seems to be unique. If MT is accepted, then |hיהוה|h* must be either the personal subject of |hחרה|h* or a vocative with elision of the |hלְךָ|h* normally expected with |hחרה|h*. Most commentaries and translations assume the latter, except for Robertson (NICOT 1990, 229) who appears to assume the former without comment. For detailed discussion, including defence of MT, see Andersen (AB 2001, 316-17). \notxx (g) The syntax of Hab 3:8 seems to be unique. If MT is accepted, then |hיהוה|h* must be either the personal subject of |hחרה|h* or a vocative with elision of the |hלְךָ|h* normally expected with |hחרה|h*. Most commentaries and translations assume the latter, except for Robertson (NICOT 1990, 229) who appears to assume the former without comment. For detailed discussion, including defence of MT, see Andersen (AB 2001, 316-17). \not (h) In this instance, self-anger is probably implied, which is rare in the Hebrew Bible. The same construction, with בְּעֵנֵי, occurs at Gen 31:35 but there Experiencer and Target are distinct. \notfr (h) In this instance, self-anger is probably implied, which is rare in HB. The same construction, with |hבְּעֵנֵי|h*, occurs at Gen 31:35 but there Experiencer and Target are distinct. \notsp (h) In this instance, self-anger is probably implied, which is rare in HB. The same construction, with |hבְּעֵנֵי|h*, occurs at Gen 31:35 but there Experiencer and Target are distinct. \notpt (h) In this instance, self-anger is probably implied, which is rare in HB. The same construction, with |hבְּעֵנֵי|h*, occurs at Gen 31:35 but there Experiencer and Target are distinct. \notxx (h) In this instance, self-anger is probably implied, which is rare in HB. The same construction, with |hבְּעֵנֵי|h*, occurs at Gen 31:35 but there Experiencer and Target are distinct. \not (i) This may be an unusual instance of an inanimate target, but it is more likely that עַל expresses the stimulus, 'about the plant', as the translations all agree and Price and Nida make explicit, 'It is important not to imply that Jonah was angry at the plant itself but because the plant had withered and died' (HBK). \notfr (i) This may be an unusual instance of an inanimate target, but it is more likely that |hעַל|h* expresses the stimulus, 'about the plant', as the translations all agree and Price and Nida make explicit, 'It is important not to imply that Jonah was angry at the plant itself but because the plant had withered and died' (HBK). \notsp (i) This may be an unusual instance of an inanimate target, but it is more likely that |hעַל|h* expresses the stimulus, 'about the plant', as the translations all agree and Price and Nida make explicit, 'It is important not to imply that Jonah was angry at the plant itself but because the plant had withered and died' (HBK). \notpt (i) This may be an unusual instance of an inanimate target, but it is more likely that |hעַל|h* expresses the stimulus, 'about the plant', as the translations all agree and Price and Nida make explicit, 'It is important not to imply that Jonah was angry at the plant itself but because the plant had withered and died' (HBK). \notxx (i) This may be an unusual instance of an inanimate target, but it is more likely that |hעַל|h* expresses the stimulus, 'about the plant', as the translations all agree and Price and Nida make explicit, 'It is important not to imply that Jonah was angry at the plant itself but because the plant had withered and died' (HBK). \not (j) This gloss is taken from BDB. HALOT and BHS both recommend emendation to some form of |hיחל|h* 'to wait'. The normal meaning of the Hithpolel of |hחיל|h* hardly fits the context: 'to writhe with fear (HALOT) or 'to whirl, writhe' (BDB). \notfr (j) This gloss is taken from BDB. HALOT and BHS both recommend emendation to some form of |hיחל|h* 'to wait'. The normal meaning of the Hithpolel of |hחיל|h* hardly fits the context: 'to writhe with fear (HALOT) or 'to whirl, writhe' (BDB). \notsp (j) This gloss is taken from BDB. HALOT and BHS both recommend emendation to some form of |hיחל|h* 'to wait'. The normal meaning of the Hithpolel of |hחיל|h* hardly fits the context: 'to writhe with fear (HALOT) or 'to whirl, writhe' (BDB). \notpt (j) This gloss is taken from BDB. HALOT and BHS both recommend emendation to some form of |hיחל|h* 'to wait'. The normal meaning of the Hithpolel of |hחיל|h* hardly fits the context: 'to writhe with fear (HALOT) or 'to whirl, writhe' (BDB). \notxx (j) This gloss is taken from BDB. HALOT and BHS both recommend emendation to some form of |hיחל|h* 'to wait'. The normal meaning of the Hithpolel of |hחיל|h* hardly fits the context: 'to writhe with fear (HALOT) or 'to whirl, writhe' (BDB). \not (k) This word appears to be a Hiphil form from |hחרה|h*, but it is difficult to assign a meaning to such a form in this context. The word is absent from LXX, probably either because it was missing from their |iVorlage |i*or because they did not understand it either. Those who retain MT generally translate 'eagerly, zealously' or the like, but, as Williamson notes, 'this is not a legitimate meaning of this word' (WBC). NICOT translates in brackets and WBC and AB omit. In the context of the present work in KTBH, the sense 'anger' is absent. \notfr (k) This word appears to be a Hiphil form from |hחרה|h*, but it is difficult to assign a meaning to such a form in this context. The word is absent from LXX, probably either because it was missing from their |iVorlage |i*or because they did not understand it either. Those who retain MT generally translate 'eagerly, zealously' or the like, but, as Williamson notes, 'this is not a legitimate meaning of this word' (WBC). NICOT translates in brackets and WBC and AB omit. In the context of the present work in KTBH, the sense 'anger' is absent. \notsp (k) This word appears to be a Hiphil form from |hחרה|h*, but it is difficult to assign a meaning to such a form in this context. The word is absent from LXX, probably either because it was missing from their |iVorlage |i*or because they did not understand it either. Those who retain MT generally translate 'eagerly, zealously' or the like, but, as Williamson notes, 'this is not a legitimate meaning of this word' (WBC). NICOT translates in brackets and WBC and AB omit. In the context of the present work in KTBH, the sense 'anger' is absent. \notpt (k) This word appears to be a Hiphil form from |hחרה|h*, but it is difficult to assign a meaning to such a form in this context. The word is absent from LXX, probably either because it was missing from their |iVorlage |i*or because they did not understand it either. Those who retain MT generally translate 'eagerly, zealously' or the like, but, as Williamson notes, 'this is not a legitimate meaning of this word' (WBC). NICOT translates in brackets and WBC and AB omit. In the context of the present work in KTBH, the sense 'anger' is absent. \notxx (k) This word appears to be a Hiphil form from |hחרה|h*, but it is difficult to assign a meaning to such a form in this context. The word is absent from LXX, probably either because it was missing from their |iVorlage |i*or because they did not understand it either. Those who retain MT generally translate 'eagerly, zealously' or the like, but, as Williamson notes, 'this is not a legitimate meaning of this word' (WBC). NICOT translates in brackets and WBC and AB omit. In the context of the present work in KTBH, the sense 'anger' is absent. \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-27 10:53:40 cjs \heb חָרוֹן \strong 02740 \pos ncm \gloss burning [of anger] \freq 41 \sub חרה \intro 1. All but one instance of the word refers to the burning of anger, Meaning 1. 2. When the word refers to ‘anger’, there is a further distinction in meaning between God being angry with someone, Meaning 1a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1b. 3. In Psa 58:10, the meaning is very uncertain, Meaning 2. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist For discussion of the likely original sense 'burning' of the root see the cognate verb |hחרה|h*. Although the term is never used of literal burning,|na|n* it is used in contexts in which literal burning is a consequence of God's anger (eg Lam 4:11). In a similar manner to the verb, there are two constructions, the more common in which |hאַף|h* 'anger' is explicit, God's |hחֲרֹון אַף|h*, and the less common in which it is implicit, God's |hחָרֹון|h*. There appears to be little or no difference in meaning between the two constructions. \comp 1 Focus: response; response: anger a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human 2 Meaning uncertain a Meaning uncertain \dfnotes The domain, Apostasy / repentance, includes many sub-domains: Disobedience / obedience, Injustice, Law-breaking, The ban (|hחֶרֶם|h*). For further comments see other synonyms. \level2 1 \meaning The emotion of anger \frame Anger \gram In a similar manner to the verb, there are two constructions, the more common in which the word for anger is explicit, and the less common in which it is implicit. There appears to be little or no difference in meaning between the two constructions and they may be translated in the same way. \eventfr Experiencer: God Target: human \syntagc This meaning appears to be used only with God as Experiencer.|nb|n* \level3 a \context Of God. the emotion of anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement, Repentance and Restoration, Opposition to Israel, Eschatological judgement \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive or implicit: God Target = בְּ or עַל or implicit: human = individual or a nation, Israel or another \keyref 3!e!9#! \keyverse KTBH - Pour out your wrath on them and let your |bburning |b*anger overtake them \eval Most retain the 'burning' imagery and understand the construct pair |hחֲרֹון אַף|h* as an intensifying construction, 'burning anger' (RSV, NRS, REB, NJB) or 'blazing anger' (NJPS). This works well in English and could be followed in other languages where it is natural. NIV mutes the imagery, but is otherwise similar, 'fierce anger'. It may be appropriate to use an intensifying adjective with a basic word for 'anger' in this way. Others simplify the expression to 'indignation' (TEV) or 'be furious' (CEV). \ref "!/!'&! "!@!,/! $!9!$-! $!@!.+! %!-!2(! &!'!:*! )!!(1! /!*!.3! 0!-!20! 2!4!7%! 3!"!%%! 3!e!9#! 3!n!Q"! 3!u!$$! 3!x!1#!|nc|n* 7!-!)&! 7!-!-+! 8!$!((! 8!$!:*! 8!,!-*! 8!9!E%! 8!9!F+!|nd|n* 8!>!8#! 8!Q!E+! 8!S!M'! 9!!!,1! 9!$!+%! :!'!,*!|ne|n* :!'!.)! !(1! /!*!.3! 2!4!7%! 3!"!%%! 3!e!9#! 3!n!Q"! 3!u!$$! 7!-!)&! 7!-!-+! 8!$!((! 8!$!:*! 8!,!-*! 8!9!E%! 8!9!F+! 8!>!8#! 8!Q!E+! 8!S!M'! 9!!!,1! 9!$!+%! *! +!0!"0" +!0!'." +!0!-," +!0!:*" +!0!A'" +!5!6+! +!6!V%" ,!1!+*" ,!1!1-" ,!5!&." ,!5!/'! ,!6!1(! ,!7!3+" ,!7!:-! .!-! 8!@!@(" 8!L!#%" 8!L!(!" :!(!10" :!0!:(" *! +!5!6+! ,!7!:-! \paradigc Similar \colc חרה \pgloss to be angry \refsc ,!7!:-! \paradigc Similar \colc חָרֹון \pgloss anger \refsc ,!7!:-! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc ,!7!:-! \paradigc Similar \colc עבר \pgloss to become angry \refsc 3!n!Z!" \paradigc Similar \colc קנא \pgloss to make jealous \refsc %!@!0$! %!@!5$! 3!n!Z!" \paradigc Similar \colc מאס \pgloss to reject \refsc 3!n!Z!" \paradigc Similar_Term \colc עזב \pgloss to forsake \refsc '!"!,3" ,!6!1(! .!B!9)! \level3 b \context To cause humans to experience the emotion of anger \framec Anger \domainc Judgement, Rivalry, Childlessness \eventfrc Agent = subject: God or human Experiencer = object: human \keyref %!@!5+! \keyverse KTBH - ... I will make them jealous by a non-people; I will |bmake |b*them |bangry |b*by a foolish nation \eval Some (NIV, TEV, CEV) make the anger explicit. Others (RSV, NRS, REB) translate as 'provoke' without specifying the nature of the response provoked, but anger would be readily understood. \ref %!@!5+! )!!!&!" )!!!'*!|nd|n* 0!#!E'!|ne|n* \paradigl 1 \paradigc Similar \colc קנא \pgloss to make jealous \refsc %!@!5+! \paradigc Similar \colc רעם \pgloss (?) to irritate, humiliate \refsc )!!!&!" \level3 c \context To cause humans to experience fear or horror \framec Fear|nf|n* \domainc Judgement \eventfrc Agent = subject: God Experiencer = object: human \keyref :!@!)!" \keyverse KTBH - |bI will disturb |b*the heart of many nations when I bring about your destruction among the nations in lands which you have not known \eval It is important to distinguish the response from anger. Most translations appropriately use a generic translation, eg 'I will trouble' (NIV, RSV, NRS, TEV) or 'I shall cause disquiet' (REB). CEV's 'nations will be shocked' may capture more precisely the nature of the response which God provokes, as indicated in v. 10. However, its use of a passive, perhaps for stylistic reasons, reduces the force of nineteen first person singular verbs in twelve verses in the Hebrew, which emphasise what Yahweh will do. NJPS's use of ‘vex’ (its normal equivalent for |hכעס|h*) implies anger, which is out of place here. Similarly, 'grieve' (NJB) slightly misreads the response. \ref :!@!)!" \paradigl 1 \paradigc Similar \colc שׁמם \pgloss to appal \refsc :!@!)!" \paradigl 2 \paradigc Similar \colc שׂער \pgloss to shudder \refsc :!@!)!" \paradigl 3 \paradigc Similar \colc שַׂעַר \pgloss shuddering \refsc :!@!)!" \paradigl 4 \paradigc Similar \colc חרד \pgloss to tremble \refsc :!@!)!" \not (a) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \notfr (a) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \notsp (a) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \notpt (a) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \notxx (a) Presumably an expression of anger or other emotion. \not (b) The ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) appear to have read the noun וְכַעַס for the verb וְכָעַס of the MT, from which it differs by only one vowel. If this is accepted and the בְּ prefixed to חֹשֶׁךְ is taken to govern the whole string of coordinated nouns, the verse reads more smoothly, ‘All his days he eats in darkness, with great frustration, affliction and anger.’ (NIV). This emendation is widely adopted by modern versions and is accepted by WBC, NICOT, AB and HBK. If this emendation of the verb to the noun is adopted, this instance should be seen as an example of כַּעַס, Meaning 1d, and rendered ‘frustration’. A second emendation, which should also be considered, is adopted by NIV, above, and most others, based on the ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) which appear to have read וְחָלְיוֹ as וָחְָלִי without the pronominal suffix. The ו-suffix may have arisen by dittography. \notfr (b) The ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) appear to have read the noun |hוְכַעַס|h* for the verb |hוְכָעַס|h* of the MT, from which it differs by only one vowel. If this is accepted and the |hבְּ|h* prefixed to |hחֹשֶׁךְ|h* is taken to govern the whole string of coordinated nouns, the verse reads more smoothly, ‘All his days he eats in darkness, with great frustration, affliction and anger.’ (NIV). This emendation is widely adopted by modern versions and is accepted by Murphy (WBC), Longman (NICOT), Seow (AB) and Ogden and Zogbo (HBK). If this emendation of the verb to the noun is adopted, this instance, in its context in Ecclesiastes, should be seen as an example of |hכַּעַס|h*, Use 1d, and rendered ‘frustration’. A second emendation, which should also be considered, is adopted by NIV, above, and most others, based on the ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) which appear to have read |hוְחָלְיוֹ|h* as |hוָחְָלִי|h* without the pronominal suffix. The |hו|h*-suffix may have arisen by dittography. RSV and some others, but not NRS, adopt a third emendation, based on LXX, alone, which appears to have read |hוָאֵבֶל|h* ‘and grief’ for |hיֹאכֵל|h* ‘he eats’. This is a plausible emendation, but MT is the harder reading and makes good sense. Furthermore, ‘eating and drinking’ (as in v. 17) are among Qoheleth’s highest hopes. Few modern versions adopt this emendation and, among commentators surveyed, only Ogden and Zogbo (HBK) accept it. \notsp (b) The ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) appear to have read the noun |hוְכַעַס|h* for the verb |hוְכָעַס|h* of the MT, from which it differs by only one vowel. If this is accepted and the |hבְּ|h* prefixed to |hחֹשֶׁךְ|h* is taken to govern the whole string of coordinated nouns, the verse reads more smoothly, ‘All his days he eats in darkness, with great frustration, affliction and anger.’ (NIV). This emendation is widely adopted by modern versions and is accepted by Murphy (WBC), Longman (NICOT), Seow (AB) and Ogden and Zogbo (HBK). If this emendation of the verb to the noun is adopted, this instance, in its context in Ecclesiastes, should be seen as an example of |hכַּעַס|h*, Use 1d, and rendered ‘frustration’. A second emendation, which should also be considered, is adopted by NIV, above, and most others, based on the ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) which appear to have read |hוְחָלְיוֹ|h* as |hוָחְָלִי|h* without the pronominal suffix. The |hו|h*-suffix may have arisen by dittography. RSV and some others, but not NRS, adopt a third emendation, based on LXX, alone, which appears to have read |hוָאֵבֶל|h* ‘and grief’ for |hיֹאכֵל|h* ‘he eats’. This is a plausible emendation, but MT is the harder reading and makes good sense. Furthermore, ‘eating and drinking’ (as in v. 17) are among Qoheleth’s highest hopes. Few modern versions adopt this emendation and, among commentators surveyed, only Ogden and Zogbo (HBK) accept it. \notpt (b) The ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) appear to have read the noun |hוְכַעַס|h* for the verb |hוְכָעַס|h* of the MT, from which it differs by only one vowel. If this is accepted and the |hבְּ|h* prefixed to |hחֹשֶׁךְ|h* is taken to govern the whole string of coordinated nouns, the verse reads more smoothly, ‘All his days he eats in darkness, with great frustration, affliction and anger.’ (NIV). This emendation is widely adopted by modern versions and is accepted by Murphy (WBC), Longman (NICOT), Seow (AB) and Ogden and Zogbo (HBK). If this emendation of the verb to the noun is adopted, this instance, in its context in Ecclesiastes, should be seen as an example of |hכַּעַס|h*, Use 1d, and rendered ‘frustration’. A second emendation, which should also be considered, is adopted by NIV, above, and most others, based on the ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) which appear to have read |hוְחָלְיוֹ|h* as |hוָחְָלִי|h* without the pronominal suffix. The |hו|h*-suffix may have arisen by dittography. RSV and some others, but not NRS, adopt a third emendation, based on LXX, alone, which appears to have read |hוָאֵבֶל|h* ‘and grief’ for |hיֹאכֵל|h* ‘he eats’. This is a plausible emendation, but MT is the harder reading and makes good sense. Furthermore, ‘eating and drinking’ (as in v. 17) are among Qoheleth’s highest hopes. Few modern versions adopt this emendation and, among commentators surveyed, only Ogden and Zogbo (HBK) accept it. \notxx (b) The ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) appear to have read the noun |hוְכַעַס|h* for the verb |hוְכָעַס|h* of the MT, from which it differs by only one vowel. If this is accepted and the |hבְּ|h* prefixed to |hחֹשֶׁךְ|h* is taken to govern the whole string of coordinated nouns, the verse reads more smoothly, ‘All his days he eats in darkness, with great frustration, affliction and anger.’ (NIV). This emendation is widely adopted by modern versions and is accepted by Murphy (WBC), Longman (NICOT), Seow (AB) and Ogden and Zogbo (HBK). If this emendation of the verb to the noun is adopted, this instance, in its context in Ecclesiastes, should be seen as an example of |hכַּעַס|h*, Use 1d, and rendered ‘frustration’. A second emendation, which should also be considered, is adopted by NIV, above, and most others, based on the ancient versions (LXX, Syr, Tg, Vul) which appear to have read |hוְחָלְיוֹ|h* as |hוָחְָלִי|h* without the pronominal suffix. The |hו|h*-suffix may have arisen by dittography. RSV and some others, but not NRS, adopt a third emendation, based on LXX, alone, which appears to have read |hוָאֵבֶל|h* ‘and grief’ for |hיֹאכֵל|h* ‘he eats’. This is a plausible emendation, but MT is the harder reading and makes good sense. Furthermore, ‘eating and drinking’ (as in v. 17) are among Qoheleth’s highest hopes. Few modern versions adopt this emendation and, among commentators surveyed, only Ogden and Zogbo (HBK) accept it. \not (c) Probably. Following Williamson (WBC, 1985:214, 217) and some modern translations (eg NLT, ESV, RSV), KTBH assigns Nehemiah 3:37 to Meaning 2a and recommends making God the explicit Experiencer whose anger is being provoked. Fensham (NICOT), TDOT and other modern translations (eg NIV, NRS, NJPS, NJB, NAB and REB), however, interpret the preposition in ְנֶגֶד הַבּוֹנִים 'in front of the builders' as signalling the people provoked rather than the witnesses of the provocation. Although TDOT favours God as the implied Experiencer for each of five other instances listed below, it rejects this interpretation in the case of Nehemiah 3:37. Evidence for this view includes Sanballat's ridicule of the Jews (v. 33), which may point to the 'builders' as the Experiencers (Use 2b). Arguments against this position include: 1. It would involve a unique use of this preposition and Williamson (WBC, 1985:214) sees this as 'an insuperable difficulty'. 2. In five other instances God is the implied, but unexpressed, Experiencer of the Hiphil of כעס (1Ki 21:22; 2Ki 21:6; 2Ki 23:19; Hos 12:15; Psa 106:29). 3. Nehemiah's request earlier in the same verse 'do not cover up their guilt or blot out their sins from before you' may imply some offence against God, which would provoke His anger. A third possibility (not followed in any translation) may be indicated by the context of the previous few verses (33-36), where it was Nehemiah and his associates who were being provoked (in the hearing of the builders). \notfr (c) Probably. Following Williamson (WBC, 1985:214, 217) and some modern translations (eg NLT, ESV, RSV), KTBH assigns Nehemiah 3:37 to Use 2a and recommends making God the explicit Experiencer whose anger is being provoked. Fensham (NICOT), TDOT and other modern translations (eg NIV, NRS, NJPS, NJB, NAB and REB), however, interpret the preposition in |hלְנֶגֶד הַבּוֹנִים |h*'in front of the builders' as signalling the people provoked rather than the witnesses of the provocation. Although TDOT favours God as the implied Experiencer for each of five other instances listed below, it rejects this interpretation in the case of Nehemiah 3:37. Evidence for this view includes Sanballat's ridicule of the Jews (v. 33), which may point to the 'builders' as the Experiencers (Use 2b). Arguments against this position include: 1. It would involve a unique use of this preposition and Williamson (WBC, 1985:214) sees this as 'an insuperable difficulty'. 2. In five other instances God is the implied, but unexpressed, Experiencer of the Hiphil of |hכעס|h* (1Ki 21:22; 2Ki 21:6; 2Ki 23:19; Hos 12:15; Psa 106:29). 3. Nehemiah's request earlier in the same verse 'do not cover up their guilt or blot out their sins from before you' may imply some offence against God, which would provoke His anger. A third possibility (not followed in any translation) may be indicated by the context of the previous few verses (33-36), where it was Nehemiah and his associates who were being provoked (in the hearing of the builders). \notsp (c) Probably. Following Williamson (WBC, 1985:214, 217) and some modern translations (eg NLT, ESV, RSV), KTBH assigns Nehemiah 3:37 to Use 2a and recommends making God the explicit Experiencer whose anger is being provoked. Fensham (NICOT), TDOT and other modern translations (eg NIV, NRS, NJPS, NJB, NAB and REB), however, interpret the preposition in |hלְנֶגֶד הַבּוֹנִים |h*'in front of the builders' as signalling the people provoked rather than the witnesses of the provocation. Although TDOT favours God as the implied Experiencer for each of five other instances listed below, it rejects this interpretation in the case of Nehemiah 3:37. Evidence for this view includes Sanballat's ridicule of the Jews (v. 33), which may point to the 'builders' as the Experiencers (Use 2b). Arguments against this position include: 1. It would involve a unique use of this preposition and Williamson (WBC, 1985:214) sees this as 'an insuperable difficulty'. 2. In five other instances God is the implied, but unexpressed, Experiencer of the Hiphil of |hכעס|h* (1Ki 21:22; 2Ki 21:6; 2Ki 23:19; Hos 12:15; Psa 106:29). 3. Nehemiah's request earlier in the same verse 'do not cover up their guilt or blot out their sins from before you' may imply some offence against God, which would provoke His anger. A third possibility (not followed in any translation) may be indicated by the context of the previous few verses (33-36), where it was Nehemiah and his associates who were being provoked (in the hearing of the builders). \notpt (c) Probably. Following Williamson (WBC, 1985:214, 217) and some modern translations (eg NLT, ESV, RSV), KTBH assigns Nehemiah 3:37 to Use 2a and recommends making God the explicit Experiencer whose anger is being provoked. Fensham (NICOT), TDOT and other modern translations (eg NIV, NRS, NJPS, NJB, NAB and REB), however, interpret the preposition in |hלְנֶגֶד הַבּוֹנִים |h*'in front of the builders' as signalling the people provoked rather than the witnesses of the provocation. Although TDOT favours God as the implied Experiencer for each of five other instances listed below, it rejects this interpretation in the case of Nehemiah 3:37. Evidence for this view includes Sanballat's ridicule of the Jews (v. 33), which may point to the 'builders' as the Experiencers (Use 2b). Arguments against this position include: 1. It would involve a unique use of this preposition and Williamson (WBC, 1985:214) sees this as 'an insuperable difficulty'. 2. In five other instances God is the implied, but unexpressed, Experiencer of the Hiphil of |hכעס|h* (1Ki 21:22; 2Ki 21:6; 2Ki 23:19; Hos 12:15; Psa 106:29). 3. Nehemiah's request earlier in the same verse 'do not cover up their guilt or blot out their sins from before you' may imply some offence against God, which would provoke His anger. A third possibility (not followed in any translation) may be indicated by the context of the previous few verses (33-36), where it was Nehemiah and his associates who were being provoked (in the hearing of the builders). \notxx (c) Probably. Following Williamson (WBC, 1985:214, 217) and some modern translations (eg NLT, ESV, RSV), KTBH assigns Nehemiah 3:37 to Use 2a and recommends making God the explicit Experiencer whose anger is being provoked. Fensham (NICOT), TDOT and other modern translations (eg NIV, NRS, NJPS, NJB, NAB and REB), however, interpret the preposition in |hלְנֶגֶד הַבּוֹנִים |h*'in front of the builders' as signalling the people provoked rather than the witnesses of the provocation. Although TDOT favours God as the implied Experiencer for each of five other instances listed below, it rejects this interpretation in the case of Nehemiah 3:37. Evidence for this view includes Sanballat's ridicule of the Jews (v. 33), which may point to the 'builders' as the Experiencers (Use 2b). Arguments against this position include: 1. It would involve a unique use of this preposition and Williamson (WBC, 1985:214) sees this as 'an insuperable difficulty'. 2. In five other instances God is the implied, but unexpressed, Experiencer of the Hiphil of |hכעס|h* (1Ki 21:22; 2Ki 21:6; 2Ki 23:19; Hos 12:15; Psa 106:29). 3. Nehemiah's request earlier in the same verse 'do not cover up their guilt or blot out their sins from before you' may imply some offence against God, which would provoke His anger. A third possibility (not followed in any translation) may be indicated by the context of the previous few verses (33-36), where it was Nehemiah and his associates who were being provoked (in the hearing of the builders). \not (d) In the relationship between Hannah and Peninnah, Hannah’s emotional response would have been complex and mixed, but is likely to have included both anger and grief. Even without Penninnah’s malicious provocation, Hannah would have been experiencing grief, shame and jealousy, simply because of her childlessness and the constant presence of a rival wife. That provocation must have introduced something new to the mixture of negative emotions. As a response to provocation, probably in the form of taunting as several versions suggest, it may best be described as anger. \notfr (d) In the relationship between Hannah and Peninnah, Hannah’s emotional response would have been complex and mixed, but is likely to have included both anger and grief. There would have been grief and sadness because of her childlessness, but the story at this point is emphasising the antagonism between Elkanah’s two wives, so anger would be prominent. Either, or a mixture of both, would account for the weeping of v. 7. KTBH has classified this as ‘anger’ but if there is a non-committal translation equivalent, such as the English ‘provoke’, it may be wise to use it. \notsp (d) In the relationship between Hannah and Peninnah, Hannah’s emotional response would have been complex and mixed, but is likely to have included both anger and grief. There would have been grief and sadness because of her childlessness, but the story at this point is emphasising the antagonism between Elkanah’s two wives, so anger would be prominent. Either, or a mixture of both, would account for the weeping of v. 7. KTBH has classified this as ‘anger’ but if there is a non-committal translation equivalent, such as the English ‘provoke’, it may be wise to use it. \notpt (d) In the relationship between Hannah and Peninnah, Hannah’s emotional response would have been complex and mixed, but is likely to have included both anger and grief. There would have been grief and sadness because of her childlessness, but the story at this point is emphasising the antagonism between Elkanah’s two wives, so anger would be prominent. Either, or a mixture of both, would account for the weeping of v. 7. KTBH has classified this as ‘anger’ but if there is a non-committal translation equivalent, such as the English ‘provoke’, it may be wise to use it. \notxx (d) In the relationship between Hannah and Peninnah, Hannah’s emotional response would have been complex and mixed, but is likely to have included both anger and grief. There would have been grief and sadness because of her childlessness, but the story at this point is emphasising the antagonism between Elkanah’s two wives, so anger would be prominent. Either, or a mixture of both, would account for the weeping of v. 7. KTBH has classified this as ‘anger’ but if there is a non-committal translation equivalent, such as the English ‘provoke’, it may be wise to use it. \not (e) Possibly. \notfr (e) Possibly. \notsp (e) Possibly. \notpt (e) Possibly. \notxx (e) Possibly. \not (f) Ezk 32:9 the 'anger' frame is precluded by the context. The parallel use of the verbs in v. 10 (see Similar Terms) signals a different meaning such as 'to disturb' (HALOT) or 'to agitate'. TDOT similarly distinguishes Ezk 32:9 by noting its association with trembling. BDB, however, does not make this distinction and gives the gloss 'vex, provoke to anger'. \notfr (f) NOTE \notsp (f) NOTE \notpt (f) NOTE \notxx (f) NOTE \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-27 11:09:47 cjs \heb כַּעַס \strong 03708 \level1 1 \alt כַּעַשׂ \pos n \gloss anger, grief, frustration, provocation to anger \freq 25 \sub כעס \intro 1. The key meaning distinction is between the anger, grief etc which someone experiences, Meaning 1, and what causes someone to experience the anger etc, Meaning 2. 2. Another distinction which requires care in translation is the nature of the response. The noun has a wider range of meaning than some other anger terms. It is used for responses which include grief, Meaning 1c, and frustration, Meaning 1d, as well as anger, Meanings 1a and 1b. Sometimes it may be wise to translate with a neutral word like the English ‘provocation’. 3. There is a further distinction in meaning between God being angry with someone, Meanings 1a, 2a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meanings 1b, 2b. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist 1. The cognate verb (see |hכעס|h*) collocates with the noun, either in a simple cognate accusative construction (1Sa 1:6) or in a more complex relative construction e.g.|hבְּכַעְסוֹ אֲשֶׁר הִכְעִיס אֶת־יְהוָה|h* ‘with the provocation with which he provoked Yahweh’ (1Ki 15:30 cf. 1Ki 21:22, 2Ki 23:26). 2. The majority of instances of the root are spelled with a |hס|h*, but in the book of Job, the spelling is consistently with |hשׂ|h*. There appears to be no difference in meaning, so KTBH treats the two forms in the same entry as alternative spellings. It is suggested that the spelling with |hשׂ|h* may indicate a relationship to an Arabic cognate (TDOT, NIDOTTE) or that it is a dialectal variation (BDB, TWOT). 3. Unlike the cognate verb (see |hכעס|h*), the participants are, for the most part, not closely linked syntactically to the head word. Some are vague, especially in the Wisdom literature (see below), but generally they can be recovered from the wider context and a knowledge of the frame involved. \comp 1 Focus: response a Experiencer: God; response: anger; target: human b Experiencer: human; response: anger; target: human c Experiencer: human; response: grief; target: none d Experiencer: human; response: frustration; target: futility 2 Focus: provocation a Experiencer: God; response: anger b Experiencer: human; response: anger \dfnotes For notes on the ‘anger’ frame, see this section in the entry for the cognate verb. The Contextual Uses of Meaning 1 are closely related since anger, grief and frustration are closely related experiences. The Specific Frame listed is, in each case, a sub-frame of the more generic 'stimulus - negative response' frame. The main points of distinction between the sub-frames concern the nature of the emotions and the reactions they cause, but they may also be distinguished on the basis of differences in participant roles. The ‘grief’ frame is distinguished from the ‘anger’ frame by the absence of a target. Otherwise, the corresponding elements are present: the grief event itself an experiencer of the grief an event which is the stimulus for the grief an agent who may instigate that event a consequence event - weeping etc The ‘frustration’ frame is distinguished from the ‘anger’ frame by an impersonal instrument causing the frustration and absence of an agent the frustration event itself an experiencer of the frustration an event which is the target for the frustration - in Ecclesiastes it is the futility of life and toil. In the causing event, this is an abstract instrument rather than a personal agent. \addinfo The Wisdom writings sometimes leave participants unexpressed and very general (eg the target in Ecc 7:9 and the experiencer in Pro 27:3). It is the knowledge of the 'anger' frame that enables the reader to recognise that there must be an experiencer and a target in each case. \level2 1 \meaning Negative emotional response to an event or object \frame Stimulus - Negative Response \eventfr Experiencer: God or humans Target: human = individual(s) or the nation of Israel, or none \level3 a \context Of God, the emotion of anger \framec Anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement, Repentance and Restoration \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive: God Target = עִם: human = an individual or the nation of Israel \keyref 3!u!%%! \keyverse KTBH - Restore us, O God of our salvation, and annul your |banger |b*with us \eval Most translation use a weaker synonym of ‘anger’: 'displeasure' (NIV, REB, TEV, NJPS) or 'indignation' (RSV, NRS, NJB). It seems undesirable to weaken the force expressed by ‘anger’ in this way. CEV 'don't be angry’ transforms the noun to a verb, but retains a strong word from the 'anger' group which gives adequate expression to the strength of the response. \ref 2!*!1%! 3!u!%%! \paradigc Similar \colc אנף \pgloss to be angry \refsc 3!u!%%! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc 3!u!%%! \level3 b \context Of humans, the emotion of anger \framec Anger \domainc Folly, Honour, Marriage \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive or implicit: human Target: = implicit: human \keyref 4!,!0$! \keyverse KTBH - A fool makes his |banger |b*known at the time, but a prudent person conceals dishonour \eval Most translations use 'anger' (NRS, NJB) or a similar noun, 'annoyance' (NIV, REB) or 'vexation' (RSV, NJPS). \ref 2!%!""" 4!,!0$! 4!5!3'" 5!'!)%! \paradigc Similar \colc קִנְאָה \pgloss envy \refsc 2!%!""" \paradigc Similar \colc מָדֹון \pgloss strife, quarrelling, scolding \refsc 4!5!3'" \paradigc Similar \colc קָלֹון \pgloss dishonour \refsc 4!,!0$! \level3 c \context Of humans, the emotion of sorrow in response to loss \framec Grief \domainc Barrenness, Suffering, Mourning \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive or implicit: human Target: none \keyref 3!&!("" \keyverse KTBH - My eye has wasted away from |bgrief|b*; it has grown weak because of all my foes \eval Most translate by 'grief' (RSV, NRS, REB) or 'sorrow' (NIV, CEV). This seems appropriate because the effect on the psalmist's eyes is likely to be from weeping. The use of 'vexation' by NJPS and NJB points to anger rather than grief, so should be avoided. TEV ‘I can hardly see; my eyes are so swollen from the weeping caused by my enemies’ makes the weeping explicit and points unambiguously to grief, though it does not have a direct equivalent to |hכַּעַס|h*. \ref )!!!0'" 2!&!"$! 2!1!'"" 3!&!("" 3!?!*&" 5!'!#"! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc שִׂיחַ \pgloss complaint \refsc )!!!0'" \paradigc Similar_Term \colc הַוָּה \pgloss disaster \refsc 2!&!"$! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc יָגֹון \pgloss agony, grief \refsc 3!?!*&" \paradigc Similar_Term \colc אָבֶל \pgloss mourning \refsc 5!'!#"! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc מִשְׁתֶּה \pgloss feasting \refsc 5!'!#"! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc שְׂחֹוק \pgloss laughter \refsc 5!'!#"! \level3 d \context Of humans, a state of frustration in response to the futility of life and work|na|n* \framec Frustration \domainc Work, Futility \eventfrc Experiencer = implicit: human Target = implicit: the frustration of meaningless work and futility \keyref 5!!!2$" \keyverse KTBH - Much wisdom leads to much |bfrustration|b*; whoever increases in knowledge will increase in pain \eval The translations do not communicate well the sense of Qoheleth's frustration with life. The nearest is 'vexation' (RSV, NRS, REB, NJPS), but even this covers a wide semantic range and permits other senses. Others, such as 'sorrow' (NIV), 'worries' (TEV) and 'grief' (NJB) seem further from the point. \ref 5!!!2$" 5!"!7$" 5!+!*"! \paradigc Similar \colc מַכְאֹוב \pgloss pain \refsc 5!!!2$" 5!"!7$" \paradigc Similar \colc עִנְיָן \pgloss occupation, task \refsc 5!"!7$" \paradigc Similar \colc עָמָל \pgloss care, anxiety \refsc 5!"!7$" \paradigc Similar \colc עמל \pgloss to exert oneself \refsc 5!"!7$" \paradigc Similar \colc רַעְיֹון \pgloss striving \refsc 5!"!7$" \paradigc Similar \colc רָעָה \pgloss trouble \refsc 5!+!*"! \paradigc Opposite \colc שׁכב \pgloss to rest \refsc 5!"!7$" \level2 2 \meaning An event or object which causes a negative emotional response \frame Stimulus - Negative Response \eventfr Agent: Human Experiencer: God or human \level3 a \context An event or object which causes God to experience the emotion of anger \framec Anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement \eventfrc Agent = genitive or implicit: human Experiencer = implicit: God \keyref %!@!3$" \keyverse KTBH - Yahweh saw this and he rejected them because of the |bprovocation |b*of his sons and his daughters \eval RSV 'because of the provocation of his sons' retains a noun 'provocation' which in English generally implies provocation to anger and thus is satisfactory. A subjective genitive ‘provocation by his sons' would be readily understood. Other translations transform the noun into a verb and thereby convey the same meaning eg 'because he was angered by his sons and daughters' (NIV). Several translations reconstruct the verse to achieve a smoother reading eg NRS, 'The LORD saw it, and was jealous; he spurned his sons and daughters.' It is not clear, however, whether this is a decision to follow the emendation proposed in BHS or whether it is a matter of translation technique. \ref %!@!3$" %!@!;"!|nb|n* +!/!>(" +!5!6)# ,!7!:+#|nc|n* :!4!<1! \paradigc Cognate \colc כעס \pgloss to anger \refsc +!/!>(" +!5!6)# ,!7!:+# \paradigc Similar \colc נאץ \pgloss to spurn \refsc %!@!3$" \level3 b \context An event or object which causes humans to experience the emotion of anger \framec Anger \domainc Barrenness; Suffering, Wickedness, Family, Folly \eventfrc Agent = genitive or implicit: human Experiencer = לְ or implicit: human \keyref 4!;!#$" \keyverse KTBH - A stone is heavy and sand is a burden, but |bthe anger provoked by|b* a fool is heavier than both \eval Most translations imply that the fool is the agent of the כַּעַס rather than the experiencer.|nd|n* For example, NIV 'but provocation by a fool is heavier than both' makes this explicit. RSV 'but a fool's provocation is heavier than both' is less clear but still points in the same direction. Both CEV and TEV make the causative nuance explicit by translating freely. NJB 'a grudge borne by a fool' makes the fool the experiencer and should probably not be followed. \ref )!!!&#" 3!*!.$"|ne|n* 4!1!9!! 4!;!#$" \paradigc Cognate \colc כעס \pgloss to anger \refsc )!!!&#" \paradigc Similar \colc רעם \pgloss to irritate, humiliate \refsc )!!!&#" \paradigc Similar \colc עָמָל \pgloss mischief, trouble \refsc 3!*!.$" \paradigc Similar \colc מֶמֶר \pgloss bitterness \refsc 4!1!9!! \not (a) This usage is unique to Ecclesiastes (1:18; 2:23; 11:10 and also 5:16, if the emendation of the verb to the noun is accepted - see כעס note b). Neither BDB nor HALOT distinguishes this sense, but both list these instances under the same sense as others outside Ecclesiastes which have the sense of ‘grief’. The context, however, does not permit the sense ‘anger’ and, while ‘grief’ is close, it is not quite right. The collocation with עָמָל and עִנְיָן, other key terms in Ecclesiastes, indicates a more specific sense for the word. A major, if not the major, theme of the book is the futility of life, wisdom and work; everything is meaningless (for further discussion see הֶבֶל). The English ‘frustration’ seems to express this and is proposed both as a gloss and as a frame label. The other two occurrences of כַּעַס in Ecclesiastes (7:3, 9) appear, from their contexts, to have the senses ‘grief’ and ‘anger’ respectively. \notfr (a) This usage is unique to Ecclesiastes (1:18; 2:23; 11:10 and also 5:16, if the emendation of the verb to the noun is accepted - see |hכעס|h* note b). Neither BDB nor HALOT distinguishes this sense, but both list these instances under the same sense as others outside Ecclesiastes which have the sense of ‘grief’. The context, however, does not permit the sense ‘anger’ and, while ‘grief’ is close, it is not quite right. The collocation with |hעָמָל|h* and |hעִנְיָן|h*, other key terms in Ecclesiastes, indicates a more specific sense for the word. A major, if not the major, theme of the book is the futility of life, wisdom and work; everything is meaningless (for further discussion see |hהֶבֶל|h*). The English ‘frustration’ seems to express this and is proposed both as a gloss and as a frame label. The other two occurrences of |hכַּעַס|h* in Ecclesiastes (7:3, 9) appear, from their contexts, to have the senses ‘grief’ and ‘anger’ respectively. \notsp (a) This usage is unique to Ecclesiastes (1:18; 2:23; 11:10 and also 5:16, if the emendation of the verb to the noun is accepted - see |hכעס|h* note b). Neither BDB nor HALOT distinguishes this sense, but both list these instances under the same sense as others outside Ecclesiastes which have the sense of ‘grief’. The context, however, does not permit the sense ‘anger’ and, while ‘grief’ is close, it is not quite right. The collocation with |hעָמָל|h* and |hעִנְיָן|h*, other key terms in Ecclesiastes, indicates a more specific sense for the word. A major, if not the major, theme of the book is the futility of life, wisdom and work; everything is meaningless (for further discussion see |hהֶבֶל|h*). The English ‘frustration’ seems to express this and is proposed both as a gloss and as a frame label. The other two occurrences of |hכַּעַס|h* in Ecclesiastes (7:3, 9) appear, from their contexts, to have the senses ‘grief’ and ‘anger’ respectively. \notpt (a) This usage is unique to Ecclesiastes (1:18; 2:23; 11:10 and also 5:16, if the emendation of the verb to the noun is accepted - see |hכעס|h* note b). Neither BDB nor HALOT distinguishes this sense, but both list these instances under the same sense as others outside Ecclesiastes which have the sense of ‘grief’. The context, however, does not permit the sense ‘anger’ and, while ‘grief’ is close, it is not quite right. The collocation with |hעָמָל|h* and |hעִנְיָן|h*, other key terms in Ecclesiastes, indicates a more specific sense for the word. A major, if not the major, theme of the book is the futility of life, wisdom and work; everything is meaningless (for further discussion see |hהֶבֶל|h*). The English ‘frustration’ seems to express this and is proposed both as a gloss and as a frame label. The other two occurrences of |hכַּעַס|h* in Ecclesiastes (7:3, 9) appear, from their contexts, to have the senses ‘grief’ and ‘anger’ respectively. \notxx (a) This usage is unique to Ecclesiastes (1:18; 2:23; 11:10 and also 5:16, if the emendation of the verb to the noun is accepted - see |hכעס|h* note b). Neither BDB nor HALOT distinguishes this sense, but both list these instances under the same sense as others outside Ecclesiastes which have the sense of ‘grief’. The context, however, does not permit the sense ‘anger’ and, while ‘grief’ is close, it is not quite right. The collocation with |hעָמָל|h* and |hעִנְיָן|h*, other key terms in Ecclesiastes, indicates a more specific sense for the word. A major, if not the major, theme of the book is the futility of life, wisdom and work; everything is meaningless (for further discussion see |hהֶבֶל|h*). The English ‘frustration’ seems to express this and is proposed both as a gloss and as a frame label. The other two occurrences of |hכַּעַס|h* in Ecclesiastes (7:3, 9) appear, from their contexts, to have the senses ‘grief’ and ‘anger’ respectively. \not (b) In the phrase כַּעַס אוֹיֵב ‘the provocation of an enemy’, the 'enemy' could be either a subjective or an objective genitive. A subjective genitive would imply that the enemy was the Experiencer. However, the enemy’s misunderstanding and false claim that it was they who had defeated Israel (v. 27b) would constitute provocation to Yahweh (cf Craigie, NICOT). In this respect, the construction is similar to several instances of the Hiphil of the cognate verb כעס where Yahweh is the unexpressed Experiencer. Thus KTBH takes the Experiencer to be Yahweh and the enemy to be the Agent and assigns this instance to Use 2a. \notfr (b) In the phrase |hכַּעַס אוֹיֵב|h* ‘the provocation of an enemy’, the 'enemy' could be either a subjective or an objective genitive. A subjective genitive would imply that the enemy was the Experiencer. However, the enemy’s misunderstanding and false claim that it was they who had defeated Israel (v. 27b) would constitute provocation to Yahweh (cf Craigie, NICOT). In this respect, the construction is similar to several instances of the Hiphil of the cognate verb |hכעס|h* where Yahweh is the unexpressed Experiencer. Thus KTBH takes the Experiencer to be Yahweh and the enemy to be the agent and assigns this instance to Use 2a. \notsp (b) In the phrase |hכַּעַס אוֹיֵב|h* ‘the provocation of an enemy’, the 'enemy' could be either a subjective or an objective genitive. A subjective genitive would imply that the enemy was the Experiencer. However, the enemy’s misunderstanding and false claim that it was they who had defeated Israel (v. 27b) would constitute provocation to Yahweh (cf Craigie, NICOT). In this respect, the construction is similar to several instances of the Hiphil of the cognate verb |hכעס|h* where Yahweh is the unexpressed Experiencer. Thus KTBH takes the Experiencer to be Yahweh and the enemy to be the agent and assigns this instance to Use 2a. \notpt (b) In the phrase |hכַּעַס אוֹיֵב|h* ‘the provocation of an enemy’, the 'enemy' could be either a subjective or an objective genitive. A subjective genitive would imply that the enemy was the Experiencer. However, the enemy’s misunderstanding and false claim that it was they who had defeated Israel (v. 27b) would constitute provocation to Yahweh (cf Craigie, NICOT). In this respect, the construction is similar to several instances of the Hiphil of the cognate verb |hכעס|h* where Yahweh is the unexpressed Experiencer. Thus KTBH takes the Experiencer to be Yahweh and the enemy to be the agent and assigns this instance to Use 2a. \notxx (b) In the phrase |hכַּעַס אוֹיֵב|h* ‘the provocation of an enemy’, the 'enemy' could be either a subjective or an objective genitive. A subjective genitive would imply that the enemy was the Experiencer. However, the enemy’s misunderstanding and false claim that it was they who had defeated Israel (v. 27b) would constitute provocation to Yahweh (cf Craigie, NICOT). In this respect, the construction is similar to several instances of the Hiphil of the cognate verb |hכעס|h* where Yahweh is the unexpressed Experiencer. Thus KTBH takes the Experiencer to be Yahweh and the enemy to be the agent and assigns this instance to Use 2a. \not (c) This is the only use of the plural. There appears to be little or no difference in meaning from the singular in the almost identical constructions in 1Ki 15:30 and 21:22. The plural may signal intensity, 'great provocation' (cf Jouon and Muraoka §136.f) or 'a repeated series of actions or a habit' (VDM). \notfr (c) This is the only use of the plural. There appears to be little or no difference in meaning from the singular in the almost identical constructions in 1Ki 15:30 and 21:22. The plural may signal intensity, 'great provocation' (cf jm §136.f) or 'a repeated series of actions or a habit' (vdm, 1999:185). \notsp (c) This is the only use of the plural. There appears to be little or no difference in meaning from the singular in the almost identical constructions in 1Ki 15:30 and 21:22. The plural may signal intensity, 'great provocation' (cf jm §136.f) or 'a repeated series of actions or a habit' (vdm, 1999:185). \notpt (c) This is the only use of the plural. There appears to be little or no difference in meaning from the singular in the almost identical constructions in 1Ki 15:30 and 21:22. The plural may signal intensity, 'great provocation' (cf jm §136.f) or 'a repeated series of actions or a habit' (vdm, 1999:185). \notxx (c) This is the only use of the plural. There appears to be little or no difference in meaning from the singular in the almost identical constructions in 1Ki 15:30 and 21:22. The plural may signal intensity, 'great provocation' (cf jm §136.f) or 'a repeated series of actions or a habit' (vdm, 1999:185). \not (d) This understanding is also supported by commentaries (WBC, NCBC, EBC) and by TDOT. \notfr (d) This understanding is supported by commentaries (WBC, NCBC, EBC) and by TDOT. \notsp (d) This understanding is supported by commentaries (WBC, NCBC, EBC) and by TDOT. \notpt (d) This understanding is supported by commentaries (WBC, NCBC, EBC) and by TDOT. \notxx (d) This understanding is supported by commentaries (WBC, NCBC, EBC) and by TDOT. \not (e) English translations differ in their treatment of this instance of |hכַּעַס|h*. NIV, NRS and REB translate ‘grief’ (cf KTBH Use 1c); CEV and TEV are similar. RSV, NJPS, NJB and also WBC translate ‘vexation’ (cf KTBH Use 2b). The difference appears to be whether |hעָמָל וְכַעַס|h* are seen as cause and effect ‘trouble [which causes] grief’ or as synonyms ‘mischief and provocation [which together provoke anger]’. Since the Psalm focuses on the activity of the wicked, it seems better to take both |hעָמָל|h* and |hכַּעַס|h* as describing that activity, rather than the response of the victim. KTBH thus classifies this instance as Use 2b, ‘something which provokes anger’. \notfr (e) English translations differ in their treatment of this instance of |hכַּעַס|h*. NIV, NRS and REB translate ‘grief’ (cf KTBH Use 1c); CEV and TEV are similar. RSV, NJPS, NJB and also WBC translate ‘vexation’ (cf KTBH Use 2b). The difference appears to be whether |hעָמָל וְכַעַס|h* are seen as cause and effect ‘trouble [which causes] grief’ or as synonyms ‘mischief and provocation [which together provoke anger]’. Since the Psalm focuses on the activity of the wicked, it seems better to take both |hעָמָל|h* and |hכַּעַס|h* as describing that activity, rather than the response of the victim. KTBH thus classifies this instance as Use 2b, ‘something which provokes anger’. \notsp (e) English translations differ in their treatment of this instance of |hכַּעַס|h*. NIV, NRS and REB translate ‘grief’ (cf KTBH Use 1c); CEV and TEV are similar. RSV, NJPS, NJB and also WBC translate ‘vexation’ (cf KTBH Use 2b). The difference appears to be whether |hעָמָל וְכַעַס|h* are seen as cause and effect ‘trouble [which causes] grief’ or as synonyms ‘mischief and provocation [which together provoke anger]’. Since the Psalm focuses on the activity of the wicked, it seems better to take both |hעָמָל|h* and |hכַּעַס|h* as describing that activity, rather than the response of the victim. KTBH thus classifies this instance as Use 2b, ‘something which provokes anger’. \notpt (e) English translations differ in their treatment of this instance of |hכַּעַס|h*. NIV, NRS and REB translate ‘grief’ (cf KTBH Use 1c); CEV and TEV are similar. RSV, NJPS, NJB and also WBC translate ‘vexation’ (cf KTBH Use 2b). The difference appears to be whether |hעָמָל וְכַעַס|h* are seen as cause and effect ‘trouble [which causes] grief’ or as synonyms ‘mischief and provocation [which together provoke anger]’. Since the Psalm focuses on the activity of the wicked, it seems better to take both |hעָמָל|h* and |hכַּעַס|h* as describing that activity, rather than the response of the victim. KTBH thus classifies this instance as Use 2b, ‘something which provokes anger’. \notxx (e) English translations differ in their treatment of this instance of |hכַּעַס|h*. NIV, NRS and REB translate ‘grief’ (cf KTBH Use 1c); CEV and TEV are similar. RSV, NJPS, NJB and also WBC translate ‘vexation’ (cf KTBH Use 2b). The difference appears to be whether |hעָמָל וְכַעַס|h* are seen as cause and effect ‘trouble [which causes] grief’ or as synonyms ‘mischief and provocation [which together provoke anger]’. Since the Psalm focuses on the activity of the wicked, it seems better to take both |hעָמָל|h* and |hכַּעַס|h* as describing that activity, rather than the response of the victim. KTBH thus classifies this instance as Use 2b, ‘something which provokes anger’. \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-27 11:10:58 cjs \heb עבר \strong 05674 \pos v \gloss to pass over, to be angry \freq 562 \sub מַעְבָּר, מַעְבָּרָה, עֲבוּר, עֵבֶר, עֶבְרָה, עֲבָרָה \intro 1. This is a very common word, often meaning ‘to pass over, to pass by, to pass through‘ in a literal sense. Instances of this meaning are listed briefly without analysis as ‘Other meanings’, Meaning 4. 2. Certain instances of the term, marked by the Hebrew verb form, have a different meaning and mostly refer to anger. 3. When the meaning is anger, the key meaning distinction is between someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1, and someone making someone else angry, Meaning 2. 2. There is a further distinction in meaning between God being angry with someone, Meaning 1a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meanings 1b, 2a. 3. Meaning 3 is distinguished in Pro 14:16, where the word refers to arrogance. Compare Meaning 2 of the cognate noun. Elsewhere it refers to anger. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist Most authorities recognise two homonyms for עבר (BDB, HALOT, TDOT, NIDOTTE, TWOT), but express some uncertainty about their relationship to one another and to the noun עֶבְרָה. BDB seems to imply an etymological link from עבר I (mostly Qal and Hiphil) 'to pass over' to עֶבְרָה '[overflowing of] anger, arrogance' to עבר II (Hithpael only) 'to be arrogant, furious'. HALOT proposes a link to an Arabic root meaning 'to be nasty' and TDOT appears to refer to the same Arabic root 'be malicious, malice, rancour, resentment'. Only the Hithpael, assumed to be from homonym II is treated here as a key term. \comp 1 Stem: Hithpael; agent: none; experiencer: subject; target: human; focus: response; response: anger a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human 2 Stem: Hithpael; agent: subject; experiencer: object; target: = agent; focus: provocation; response: anger a Agent: human; experiencer: human 3 Stem: Hithpael; agent: none; experiencer: subject; target: none; focus: attitude; attitude: arrogance a Experiencer: human 4 Stem: not Hithpael 4a Meanings: other \level2 1 \meaning To experience the emotion of anger \frame Anger \stem Hithpael \eventfr Experiencer: God or human Target: human \level3 a \context Of God, to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement \eventfrc Experiencer = subject: God Target = בְּ or עִם or implicit: human = Israel or an individual \keyref 3!n![#! \keyverse KTBH - God heard and |bhe was angry |b*and he utterly rejected Israel \eval Apart from TEV 'God was angry', most translations express some intensified form of anger. Thus, 'very angry' (NIV), 'full of wrath' (RSV, NRS), 'enraged' (REB, NJPS), 'furious' (CEV). These are all acceptable models, but it is hard to justify intensifying the anger, unless the Hithpael form is taken to imply, in itself, intensification. \ref %!#!:!!|na|n* 3!n!5$! 3!n![#! 3!n!^%! 3!y!G$! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc 3!n!5$! \paradigc Similar \colc מאס \pgloss to reject \refsc 3!n![#! 3!y!G$! \paradigc Similar \colc זנח \pgloss to reject \refsc 3!y!G$! \level3 b \context Of humans, to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Quarrel \eventfrc Experiencer = substantive participle: human Target = implicit: human \keyref 4!:!1$! \keyverse KTBH - Like someone who seizes a dog by the ears is a passer-by |bwho gets angry |b*over a quarrel not his own \eval All the standard translations appear to assume metathesis and emend to |hמִתְעָרֵב|h* and to translate 'meddle' or the like. This is acceptable, though MT is intelligible. \ref 4!:!1$!|nb|n* \paradigc \level2 2 \meaning To cause someone to experience the emotion of anger \frame Anger \stem Hithpael \eventfr Agent: human Experiencer: human \syntagc This is the only transitive use of the Hithpael and the context seems to require a causative sense. \level3 a \context To cause humans to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Kingship \eventfrc Agent = subject: human Experiencer = object: human \keyref 4!4!"%! \keyverse KTBH - Whoever |bangers |b*him forfeits his life \eval The translations all agree that anger is in view and that it is being caused. Any of the models may be followed, 'he who angers him' (NIV), 'anyone provokes him to anger' (NRS cf RSV), 'making him angry' (TEV cf CEV). NJB 'whoever provokes him' also implies anger. \ref 4!4!"%! \paradigc Similar \colc אֵימָה \pgloss terror \refsc 4!4!"%! \level2 3 \meaning To think of oneself as having higher status than others \frame Pride \stem Hithpael \eventfr Experiencer: human \level3 a \context To think of oneself as having higher status than others \domainc Folly \eventfrc Experiencer = subject: human \keyref 4!.!0&! \keyverse KTBH - ... but a fool is |barrogant |b*and self-confident \eval There is considerable variation, reflecting the difficulty of determining the precise meaning.|nc|n* Thus 'hothead' (NIV), 'throws off restraint' (RSV, NRS), 'careless' (TEV), 'insolent' (NJB) are all acceptable and may be followed, as may NJPS, which assumes hendiadys and renders the pair of verbs 'rushes in confidently'. \ref 4!.!0&!|nc|n* \paradigc Similar \colc בטח \pgloss to be confident|nd|n* \refsc 4!.!0&! \paradigc Opposite \colc ירא \pgloss to fear \refsc 4!.!0&! \level2 4 \meaning Other meanings \stem Stems other than Hithpael \level3 a \context Other meanings \ref !!(!!*! !!,!&!! !!/!1,! !!2!#(! !!2!%&! !!2!%(! !!7!00! !!>!@!! !!?!5%! !!?!T'! !!?!T,! !!@!+*! !!@!1(! !!@!6!! !!@!7,! !!@!8"! !!@!8$! !!@!@$! !!A!#"! !!A!.!! !!E!!-#! "!>!."! "!@!;*! "!A!3#! "!A!6"! "!A!6*! "!B!&!! "!D!&#! "!F!:(! #!2!5#! #!9!)!! #!9!)*! #!:!&,! #!;!@%! $!%!.!! $!%!.(! $!%!>$! $!&!%%! $!(!'(! $!-!@,! $!.!''! $!.!I&! $!4!1!! $!4!1$! $!4!13! $!4!2%! $!4!3/! $!4!4#! $!4!5%! $!5!6!! $!5!6/! $!5!7$! $!6!2.! $!6!:#! $!8!-)! $!;!'-! $!;!(*! $!?!7$! $!?!7/! $!@!%*! $!@!''! $!@!5!! $!@!;"! $!@!=$! $!@!>"! $!@!@"! $!A!($! $!A!S(! $!B!$'! $!B!$0! $!C!*(! %!"!$%! %!"!(!! %!"!(-! %!"!-#! %!"!-'! %!"!.%! %!"!2"! %!"!8#! %!"!;!! %!"!<*! %!"!=+! %!"!>&! %!#!2.! %!#!55! %!#!9!! %!#!;-! %!#!<&! %!$!./! %!$!5&! %!$!6'! %!$!6*! %!$!:-! %!&!!/! %!)!!$! %!)!#&! %!+!(.! %!+!+$! %!+!?#! %!,!*!! %!1!"0! %!2!*#! %!8!%(! %!:!-1! %!;!"$! %!;!#&! %!;!$"! %!;!,'! %!=!+!! %!=!/(! %!=!/,! %!>!-&! %!>!2,! %!?!"0! %!?!#$! %!?!#-! %!?!-0! %!@!O/! %!B!$2! &!!!"&! &!!!+!! &!!!+/! &!!!.-! &!"!7&! &!#!!.! &!#!"%! &!#!$3! &!#!&(! &!#!+&! &!#!.%! &!#!07! &!#!1+! &!#!10! &!$!!$! &!$!#.! &!$!%$! &!$!'*! &!$!(2! &!$!*5! &!$!+$! &!$!+%! &!$!,!! &!$!-%! &!$!6%! &!$!7'! &!$!7/! &!%!!4! &!%!!5! &!&!'$! &!&!'(! &!&!(-! &!'!''! &!'!'(! &!'!+$! &!'!/)! &!*!=!! &!*!?!! &!*!B!! &!/!#%! &!/!#*! &!/!$!! &!/!&$! &!/!'/! &!/!*'! &!/!*/! &!/!+)! &!0!"$! &!0!&*! &!2!)#! &!2!-!! &!2!2!! &!2!3!! &!3!-"! &!6!3%! &!7!0!! &!8!+!! &!8!1:! '!"!4'! '!#!:&! '!#!<2! '!&!A&! '!(!$$! '!)!9+! '!)!:%! '!*!)!! '!+!1'! '!+!3+! '!+!4$! '!+!=%! '!+!=(! '!+!=-! '!+!@!! '!,!!$! '!,!!)! '!,!#'! '!,!%+! '!2!-!! '!3!,,! '!3!.!! '!3!2#! (!"!(-! (!$!!(! )!"!8)! )!)!$!! )!)!$#! )!)!$'! )!)!$*! )!)!;*! )!)!;,! )!-!'"! )!.!!*! )!.!$&! )!.!&'! )!.!(%! )!.!7'! )!/!,0! )!/!8%! )!0!($! )!0!)!! )!0!*!! )!4!D.! )!9!3#! )!:!-!! )!:!6(! )!;!"#! )!=!"#! )!=!"(! )!>!*+! *!"!()! *!"!/"! *!"!=(! *!#!*!! *!*!1&! *!+!;!! *!,!-+! *!,!?*! *!/!2"! *!/!2,! *!/!6%! *!/!6&! *!/!7&! *!/!7(! *!/!7,! *!/!80! *!/!A%! *!0!!"! *!0!),! *!1!0,! *!1!0-! *!1!4-! *!1!5-! *!1!6&! *!1!6.! *!1!8%! *!2!)9! *!2!7*! *!3!0+! *!3!3!! *!3!3#! *!3!3/! *!3!@%! *!3!B%! *!3!E"! *!3!F,! *!3!G$! *!3!H!! *!3!H%! *!3!I!! *!3!I%! *!3!I)! *!3!I*! *!3!J-! *!4!-$! *!4!.!! *!8!%!! *!8!*1! *!8!4&! +!"!E$! +!&!5'! +!)!(%! +!-!9#! +!/!,!! +!2!&$! +!2!="! +!3!+)! +!3!3.! +!4!G#! +!6!8)! +!6!D!! ,!"!(*! ,!"!)"! ,!"!.3! ,!$!(#! ,!$!(-! ,!$!)*! ,!$!?"! ,!&!)(! ,!&!:$! ,!&!>)! ,!(!5!! ,!,!%*! ,!.!)2! ,!0!#'! ,!1!1!! ,!2!,'! ,!5!&!! ,!7!*'! -!,!0$! -!3!1%! -!5!(+! -!=!>&! .!'!5&! .!/!()! .!2!7+! .!5!)!! .!8!41! .!9!22! .!>!%#! .!>!*#! .!A!&"! .!C!7(! .!C!8!! .!D!6/! /!!!!/! /!*!'!! 0!"!'+! 0!"!.!! 0!"!.(! 0!(!/#! 0!)!+$! 1!!!3*! 1!#!#)! 1!$!1!! 1!(!"%! 1!(!#+! 1!)!;+! 1!)!<1! 2!&!/&! 2!'!5$! 2!)!+"! 2!+!0%! 2!-!-$! 2!.!%*! 2!/!3%! 2!1!+"! 2!3!($! 2!5!*"! 2!5!=#! 2!>!/(! 2!A!2%! 2!A!<$! 2!B!4'! 2!D!,$! 2!E!5)! 3!(!)%! 3!1!#(! 3!2!-$! 3!E!D!! 3!F!%#! 3!J!%'! 3!J!((! 3!P!%$! 3!Y!"+! 3!b!&%! 3!i!'$! 3!n!-#! 3!p!-%! 3!q!'&! 3!t!'!! 3!x!1"! 3!y!J"! 3!z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paradigc \not (a) Unusually, the target and the agent of the stimulus are different. \notfr (a) Unusually, the target and the agent of the stimulus are different. \notsp (a) Unusually, the target and the agent of the stimulus are different. \notpt (a) Unusually, the target and the agent of the stimulus are different. \notxx (a) Unusually, the target and the agent of the stimulus are different. \not (b) Vul appears to have read מתערב (cf 14:16) and this appears to be accepted by NIV and REB. MT does, however, make sense, if understood as '[a passer-by] who gets angry over ...' (cf BDB, ICC) and can be retained (cf NICOT). \notfr (b) Vul appears to have read |hמתערב|h* (cf 14:16) and this appears to be accepted by NIV and REB. MT does, however, make sense, if understood as '[a passer-by] who gets angry over ...' (cf BDB, ICC) and can be retained (cf NICOT). Similarly, HBK notes that 'the Hebrew text ... is literally “enraging himself” or “is furious.”' \notsp (b) Vul appears to have read |hמתערב|h* (cf 14:16) and this appears to be accepted by NIV and REB. MT does, however, make sense, if understood as '[a passer-by] who gets angry over ...' (cf BDB, ICC) and can be retained (cf NICOT). Similarly, HBK notes that 'the Hebrew text ... is literally “enraging himself” or “is furious.”' \notpt (b) Vul appears to have read |hמתערב|h* (cf 14:16) and this appears to be accepted by NIV and REB. MT does, however, make sense, if understood as '[a passer-by] who gets angry over ...' (cf BDB, ICC) and can be retained (cf NICOT). Similarly, HBK notes that 'the Hebrew text ... is literally “enraging himself” or “is furious.”' \notxx (b) Vul appears to have read |hמתערב|h* (cf 14:16) and this appears to be accepted by NIV and REB. MT does, however, make sense, if understood as '[a passer-by] who gets angry over ...' (cf BDB, ICC) and can be retained (cf NICOT). Similarly, HBK notes that 'the Hebrew text ... is literally “enraging himself” or “is furious.”' \not (c) The precise meaning is hard to establish. Options are: 1. The coordination of בטח suggests the meaning 'to be arrogant' as found for the cognate noun עֶבְרָה. This is appropriately predicated of a fool. BDB and ICC suggest this, and similarly Reyburn and Fry suggest that the word 'may mean to “be arrogant or excited,” that is, to “lose control.”' (HBK). 2. Waltke maintains a sense 'anger' with Yahweh as the unexpressed object of both cola in this verse, ''fears [Yahweh]' and 'gets angry [with Yahweh]' (NICOT). 3. HALOT also maintains a sense 'anger' but differently - 'brings anger upon himself'. 4. LXX (cf Syr and Tg) translates by μίγνυμι 'to meddle', presumably having read מתערב, and this also fits the context. KTBH considers that option 1 fits the context best. \notfr (c) The precise meaning is hard to establish. Options are: 1. The coordination of |hבטח|h* suggests the meaning 'to be arrogant' as found for the cognate noun |hעֶבְרָה|h*. This is appropriately predicated of a fool. BDB and ICC suggest this, and similarly Reyburn and Fry suggest that the word 'may mean to “be arrogant or excited,” that is, to “lose control.”' (HBK). 2. Waltke maintains a sense 'anger' with Yahweh as the unexpressed object of both cola in this verse, ''fears [Yahweh]' and 'gets angry [with Yahweh]' (NICOT). 3. HALOT also maintains a sense 'anger' but differently - 'brings anger upon himself'. 4. LXX (cf Syr and Tg) translates |gμίγνυμι|g* 'to meddle', presumably having read |hמתערב|h*, and this also fits the context. KTBH considers that option 1 fits the context best. \notsp (c) The precise meaning is hard to establish. Options are: 1. The coordination of |hבטח|h* suggests the meaning 'to be arrogant' as found for the cognate noun |hעֶבְרָה|h*. This is appropriately predicated of a fool. BDB and ICC suggest this, and similarly Reyburn and Fry suggest that the word 'may mean to “be arrogant or excited,” that is, to “lose control.”' (HBK). 2. Waltke maintains a sense 'anger' with Yahweh as the unexpressed object of both cola in this verse, ''fears [Yahweh]' and 'gets angry [with Yahweh]' (NICOT). 3. HALOT also maintains a sense 'anger' but differently - 'brings anger upon himself'. 4. LXX (cf Syr and Tg) translates |gμίγνυμι|g* 'to meddle', presumably having read |hמתערב|h*, and this also fits the context. KTBH considers that option 1 fits the context best. \notpt (c) The precise meaning is hard to establish. Options are: 1. The coordination of |hבטח|h* suggests the meaning 'to be arrogant' as found for the cognate noun |hעֶבְרָה|h*. This is appropriately predicated of a fool. BDB and ICC suggest this, and similarly Reyburn and Fry suggest that the word 'may mean to “be arrogant or excited,” that is, to “lose control.”' (HBK). 2. Waltke maintains a sense 'anger' with Yahweh as the unexpressed object of both cola in this verse, ''fears [Yahweh]' and 'gets angry [with Yahweh]' (NICOT). 3. HALOT also maintains a sense 'anger' but differently - 'brings anger upon himself'. 4. LXX (cf Syr and Tg) translates |gμίγνυμι|g* 'to meddle', presumably having read |hמתערב|h*, and this also fits the context. KTBH considers that option 1 fits the context best. \notxx (c) The precise meaning is hard to establish. Options are: 1. The coordination of |hבטח|h* suggests the meaning 'to be arrogant' as found for the cognate noun |hעֶבְרָה|h*. This is appropriately predicated of a fool. BDB and ICC suggest this, and similarly Reyburn and Fry suggest that the word 'may mean to “be arrogant or excited,” that is, to “lose control.”' (HBK). 2. Waltke maintains a sense 'anger' with Yahweh as the unexpressed object of both cola in this verse, ''fears [Yahweh]' and 'gets angry [with Yahweh]' (NICOT). 3. HALOT also maintains a sense 'anger' but differently - 'brings anger upon himself'. 4. LXX (cf Syr and Tg) translates |gμίγνυμι|g* 'to meddle', presumably having read |hמתערב|h*, and this also fits the context. KTBH considers that option 1 fits the context best. \not (d) This gloss is derived from BDB. HALOT proposes a homonym |hבטח|h* II, 'to fall on the ground'. \notfr (d) This gloss is derived from BDB. HALOT proposes a homonym |hבטח|h* II, 'to fall on the ground'. \notsp (d) This gloss is derived from BDB. HALOT proposes a homonym |hבטח|h* II, 'to fall on the ground'. \notpt (d) This gloss is derived from BDB. HALOT proposes a homonym |hבטח|h* II, 'to fall on the ground'. \notxx (d) This gloss is derived from BDB. HALOT proposes a homonym |hבטח|h* II, 'to fall on the ground'. \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-27 11:15:21 cjs \heb עֶבְרָה \strong 05678 \pos ncf \gloss anger, arrogance \freq 34 \sub עבר \intro 1. The key meaning distinction is between the majority of instances of this word which refer to anger, Meaning 1, and a small number which refer to arrogance, Meaning 2. 2. When the meaning is anger, there is a further distinction in meaning between God being angry with someone, Meaning 1a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1b. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \comp 1 Focus: response; response: anger a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human 2 Focus: attitude; attitude: arrogance a Experiencer: human \level2 1 \meaning The emotion of anger \frame Anger \gram The plural occurs three times (Job 21:30; 40:11; Psa 7:7) without obvious difference in meaning. It may be a plural of intensity (cf Jouon and Muraoka 136.f, GKC 124.e) or, at least at Job 40:11 and Psa 7:7, it could indicate a repeated series of actions or a habitual behaviour 'outbursts of anger' (HALOT, cf IBHS 7.4.2.c, VDM 24.3.3.v). \eventfr Experiencer: God or human Target: human, an individual or an nation, or (once) the sea \level3 a \context Of God, the emotion of anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive or implicit: God Target = in construct or implicit: human, an individual or an nation, or (once) the sea \keyref '!|na|n* 3!n!Q$! 3!u!$"! 3!z!)$! 3!z!+%! 4!+!$$!|nb|n* 4!+!7&!|nc|n* 7!)!2!! 7!*!&%! 7!-!)%! 7!-!-'! 8!'!=,! 9!"!"*! 9!#!!&! :!'!3,! :!5!D%! :!6!5&! :!6!?%! :!F!3"! !!!+2! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc !!Q!'%! 2!H!+"! 3!'!'%! >!!!+2! \paradigc Opposite \colc רָצֹון \pgloss favour \refsc 4!.!C$! \paradigc Opposite \colc רַחֲמִים \pgloss compassion \refsc >!!!+2! \level2 2 \meaning Thinking of oneself as having higher status than others \frame Arrogance \eventfr Experiencer: human \syntagc All three instances of this meaning are used in contexts where other words for pride occur. \level3 a \context Thinking of oneself as having higher status than others \domainc Judgement, Mockery \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive or implicit: human \keyref 4!5!8&! \keyverse NRS - The proud, haughty person, named "Scoffer," acts with |barrogant |b*pride \eval 'Arrogant' (RSV, NRS, TEV) is probably best. 'Overweening' (NIV, REB, NJB) conveys exactly the right sense but is such a rare word as to be unsuitable. TEV and, even more, CEV render so freely they have no clear equivalent. \ref 4!5!8&! 7!0!&'! 8!P!>$! \paradigc Similar \colc זֵד \pgloss presumptuous \refsc 4!5!8&! \paradigc Similar \colc זָדֹון \pgloss presumption \refsc 4!5!8&! \paradigc Similar \colc יָהִיר \pgloss presumptuous \refsc 4!5!8&! \paradigc Similar \colc ליץ \pgloss to scoff \refsc 4!5!8&! \paradigc Similar \colc גָּאֹון \pgloss arrogance \refsc 7!0!&'! \paradigc Similar \colc גֵּא \pgloss arrogant \refsc 7!0!&'! \paradigc Similar \colc גַּאֲוָה \pgloss presumption \refsc 7!0!&'! \paradigc Similar \colc בַּד \pgloss boasting \refsc 7!0!&'! 8!P!>$! \paradigc Opposite \colc כֵּן \pgloss correct, right, accurate, honest \refsc 8!P!>$! \not (a) The experiencer of the anger is not certain, but the phrases 'day of disaster' and 'day of wrath' point to Yahweh. \notfr (a) The experiencer of the anger is not certain, but the phrases 'day of disaster' and 'day of wrath' point to Yahweh. \notsp (a) The experiencer of the anger is not certain, but the phrases 'day of disaster' and 'day of wrath' point to Yahweh. \notpt (a) The experiencer of the anger is not certain, but the phrases 'day of disaster' and 'day of wrath' point to Yahweh. \notxx (a) The experiencer of the anger is not certain, but the phrases 'day of disaster' and 'day of wrath' point to Yahweh. \not (b) The parallel between death and the day of wrath, over which only Yahweh has power, strongly suggests that this refers to the day of Yahweh's anger (cf NICOT). \notfr (b) The parallel between death and the day of wrath, over which only Yahweh has power, strongly suggests that this refers to the day of Yahweh's anger. \notsp (b) The parallel between death and the day of wrath, over which only Yahweh has power, strongly suggests that this refers to the day of Yahweh's anger. \notpt (b) The parallel between death and the day of wrath, over which only Yahweh has power, strongly suggests that this refers to the day of Yahweh's anger. \notxx (b) The parallel between death and the day of wrath, over which only Yahweh has power, strongly suggests that this refers to the day of Yahweh's anger. \not (c) LXX appears to have read |hאבדה|h* (cf 10:28), but MT is the harder reading and should be accepted. Furthermore, there is better parallelism between 'good' and 'wrath' (WBC). Waltke notes that the anger may be the anger of the wicked against others or the anger of God against the wicked, and suggests that both are in view and a pun is intended (NICOT). As ICC points out, however, the book focuses on consequences (Toy 1899, 234), so KTBH concludes that the anger in view is that of God against the wicked. \notfr (c) LXX appears to have read |hאבדה|h* (cf 10:28), but MT is the harder reading and should be accepted. Furthermore, there is better parallelism between 'good' and 'wrath' (WBC). Waltke notes that the anger may be the anger of the wicked against others or the anger of God against the wicked, and suggests that both are in view and a pun is intended (NICOT). As ICC points out, however, the book focuses on consequences (Toy 1899, 234), so KTBH concludes that the anger in view is that of God against the wicked. \notsp (c) LXX appears to have read |hאבדה|h* (cf 10:28), but MT is the harder reading and should be accepted. Furthermore, there is better parallelism between 'good' and 'wrath' (WBC). Waltke notes that the anger may be the anger of the wicked against others or the anger of God against the wicked, and suggests that both are in view and a pun is intended (NICOT). As ICC points out, however, the book focuses on consequences (Toy 1899, 234), so KTBH concludes that the anger in view is that of God against the wicked. \notpt (c) LXX appears to have read |hאבדה|h* (cf 10:28), but MT is the harder reading and should be accepted. Furthermore, there is better parallelism between 'good' and 'wrath' (WBC). Waltke notes that the anger may be the anger of the wicked against others or the anger of God against the wicked, and suggests that both are in view and a pun is intended (NICOT). As ICC points out, however, the book focuses on consequences (Toy 1899, 234), so KTBH concludes that the anger in view is that of God against the wicked. \notxx (c) LXX appears to have read |hאבדה|h* (cf 10:28), but MT is the harder reading and should be accepted. Furthermore, there is better parallelism between 'good' and 'wrath' (WBC). Waltke notes that the anger may be the anger of the wicked against others or the anger of God against the wicked, and suggests that both are in view and a pun is intended (NICOT). As ICC points out, however, the book focuses on consequences (Toy 1899, 234), so KTBH concludes that the anger in view is that of God against the wicked. \not (d) This instance is noteworthy because it is one of the few examples where the target is inanimate. \notfr (d) This instance is noteworthy because it is one of the few examples where the target is inanimate. \notsp (d) This instance is noteworthy because it is one of the few examples where the target is inanimate. \notpt (d) This instance is noteworthy because it is one of the few examples where the target is inanimate. \notxx (d) This instance is noteworthy because it is one of the few examples where the target is inanimate. \not (e) LXX appears to have read עבדתו 'his works', which, if understood as 'tilling' provides a good parallel to the first colon. However, since MT makes sense, it should be retained (cf HOTTP, B rating). Although Toy accepts the reading of LXX, he summarises clearly the options for understanding MT 'the rod of his wrath'. Either it is the 'tyranny of a bad and powerful man' or the wrath that falls on him (ICC 1899). In this case, the 3ms suffix must thus refer either to God as experiencer, or to the wicked person as target. Although God is presupposed throughout the Bible, the one who sows wickedness provides a more active antecedent. KTBH thus concludes that the anger in view is that of the wicked as they oppress others. Murphy notes the difficulties of the verse and translates v. 8b 'and the rod of his pride will fail' but he appears to be a lone voice in taking עֶבְרָה to have Meaning 2 here (WBC 1998). \notfr (e) LXX appears to have read |hעבדתו|h* 'his works', which, if understood as 'tilling' provides a good parallel to the first colon. However, since MT makes sense, it should be retained (cf hottp, B rating). Although Toy accepts the reading of LXX, he summarises clearly the options for understanding MT 'the rod of his wrath'. Either it is the 'tyranny of a bad and powerful man' or the wrath that falls on him (ICC 1899). In this case, the 3ms suffix must thus refer either to God as experiencer, or to the wicked person as target. Although God is presupposed throughout the Bible, the one who sows wickedness provides a more active antecedent. KTBH thus concludes that the anger in view is that of the wicked as they oppress others. Murphy notes the difficulties of the verse and translates v. 8b 'and the rod of his pride will fail' but he appears to be a lone voice in taking |hעֶבְרָה|h* to have meaning (2) here (WBC 1998). \notsp (e) LXX appears to have read |hעבדתו|h* 'his works', which, if understood as 'tilling' provides a good parallel to the first colon. However, since MT makes sense, it should be retained (cf hottp, B rating). Although Toy accepts the reading of LXX, he summarises clearly the options for understanding MT 'the rod of his wrath'. Either it is the 'tyranny of a bad and powerful man' or the wrath that falls on him (ICC 1899). In this case, the 3ms suffix must thus refer either to God as experiencer, or to the wicked person as target. Although God is presupposed throughout the Bible, the one who sows wickedness provides a more active antecedent. KTBH thus concludes that the anger in view is that of the wicked as they oppress others. Murphy notes the difficulties of the verse and translates v. 8b 'and the rod of his pride will fail' but he appears to be a lone voice in taking |hעֶבְרָה|h* to have meaning (2) here (WBC 1998). \notpt (e) LXX appears to have read |hעבדתו|h* 'his works', which, if understood as 'tilling' provides a good parallel to the first colon. However, since MT makes sense, it should be retained (cf hottp, B rating). Although Toy accepts the reading of LXX, he summarises clearly the options for understanding MT 'the rod of his wrath'. Either it is the 'tyranny of a bad and powerful man' or the wrath that falls on him (ICC 1899). In this case, the 3ms suffix must thus refer either to God as experiencer, or to the wicked person as target. Although God is presupposed throughout the Bible, the one who sows wickedness provides a more active antecedent. KTBH thus concludes that the anger in view is that of the wicked as they oppress others. Murphy notes the difficulties of the verse and translates v. 8b 'and the rod of his pride will fail' but he appears to be a lone voice in taking |hעֶבְרָה|h* to have meaning (2) here (WBC 1998). \notxx (e) LXX appears to have read |hעבדתו|h* 'his works', which, if understood as 'tilling' provides a good parallel to the first colon. However, since MT makes sense, it should be retained (cf hottp, B rating). Although Toy accepts the reading of LXX, he summarises clearly the options for understanding MT 'the rod of his wrath'. Either it is the 'tyranny of a bad and powerful man' or the wrath that falls on him (ICC 1899). In this case, the 3ms suffix must thus refer either to God as experiencer, or to the wicked person as target. Although God is presupposed throughout the Bible, the one who sows wickedness provides a more active antecedent. KTBH thus concludes that the anger in view is that of the wicked as they oppress others. Murphy notes the difficulties of the verse and translates v. 8b 'and the rod of his pride will fail' but he appears to be a lone voice in taking |hעֶבְרָה|h* to have meaning (2) here (WBC 1998). \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-27 11:16:15 cjs \heb קצף \strong 7107 \pos v \gloss to be angry, to make angry \freq 34 \sub קֶצֶף \intro 1. The key meaning distinction is between someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1, and someone making someone else angry, Meaning 2. 2. There is a further distinction in meaning between God being angry with someone, Meanings 1a, 2a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1b. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist In this analysis, the Qal expresses a state ‘be angry’ or a process ‘become angry’ while the Hiphil expresses a causative ‘make angry’ in accord with the prototypical senses of the respective stems. Traditional Hebrew lexicography reached the same conclusion, distinguishing a stative Qal (BDB: ‘be wroth’ and HALOT: ‘be angry’) from a causative Hiphil (BDB: ‘provoke to wrath’ and HALOT: ‘to rouse to anger’), though their glosses may have relied too much on the morphology. \comp 1 Stem: Qal or Hithpael; experiencer: subject; target: human or God; focus: response; response: anger a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human 2 Stem: Hiphil; agent: subject; experiencer: object; target = agent; focus: provocation; response: anger a Agent: human; experiencer: God \level2 1 \meaning To experience the emotion of anger \frame Anger \stem Qal and (once) Hithpael|na|n* \eventfr Experiencer: God or humans Target: human: individual(s) or nation(s) or god(s) \level3 a \context Of God, to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement, Repentance and Restoration, Eschatological judgement \eventfrc Experiencer = subject: God Target = עַל|nb|n* or implicit: human: individual(s)‏ or nation(s)‏ \keyref %!!!B%! \keyverse KTBH - Yahweh heard your words and |bhe was angry |b*and he swore an oath \eval Most translations use some variation on the word 'anger': 'was angry (NIV, REB, NJPS), 'became angry' (TEV), 'was angered' (RSV). Any of these is a good model to follow. NRS uses 'wrathful' which is acceptable for divine anger. CEV assumes a causal relationship between the first two clauses of the verse and combines them, 'You had made the Lord angry'. This loses too much of the Hebrew and should not be followed. NJB combines the second and third clauses, making the second into a prepositional phrase, 'in his anger swore ...'. This may be followed if it is more natural in the receptor language. \ref #!*!&/!|nc|n* $!0!6-! %!!!B%! %!)!3'! &!6!2.!|nc|n*|nd|n* 5!%!%,! 7!O!&!! 7!V!)-! 7!Y!0'! 7!Y!1#! 7!Y!1&! 7!`!$(! 7!`!(!! 9!%!6$! F!!!"!! F!!!/$! F!!!/)! \paradigc Cognate \colc קֶצֶף \pgloss anger \refsc F!!!"!! F!!!/$! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc %!)!3'! \paradigc Similar \colc חֵמָה \pgloss anger \refsc %!)!3'! \paradigc Similar \colc מאס \pgloss to reject \refsc 9!%!6$! \paradigc Similar \colc גער \pgloss to rebuke \refsc 7!V!)-! \paradigc Similar \colc ריב \pgloss to contend \refsc 7!Y!0'! \paradigc Opposite \colc פגע \pgloss to meet with \refsc 7!`!$(! \level3 b \context Of humans, to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Various, including: Kingship, Apostasy, Distrust, Pride, Enmity \eventfrc Experiencer = subject: human Target = עַל|nb|n* or implicit: human: individual(s)‏ or nation(s)‏, or god(s)‏ (x1)‏ \keyref !!H!"!! \keyverse KTBH - Pharaoh |bwas angry |b*with two of his officials, the chief of the cupbearers and the chief of the bakers \eval Most of the standard translations render קצף as ‘[Pharaoh] was angry’ (NIV, RSV, NRS, TEV, NJB, NJPS). This is a good model. REB softens the wording, ‘Pharaoh was displeased.’ This is hard to justify; see the frame-level entry for discussion of intensities of anger. CEV combines חטא in v. 1 and קצף in v. 2 and renders both together, '... made the king angry'. \ref !!H!"!! !!I!*"! "!0!4*! #!*!0)! $!?!.!! )!=!$!! ,!%!+!! ,!-!3!! 1!!!,*! 1!"!5&! 7!(!5'! 8!E!/!! \paradigc Similar \colc חֵמָה \pgloss anger \refsc 1!!!,*! \paradigc Similar \colc קלל \pgloss to curse \refsc 7!(!5'! \level2 2 \meaning To cause someone to experience the emotion of anger \frame Anger \stem Hiphil \eventfr Agent: human Experiencer: God \level3 a \context To cause God to experience the emotion of anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement \eventfrc Agent = subject: human Experiencer = object: God \keyref %!)!("! \keyverse KTBH - At Horeb you |bprovoked |b*Yahweh's |bwrath |b*and he was angry enough with you to destroy you \eval It is necessary to express the causation in the first clause. Translations do this in various ways, 'you aroused the Lord's wrath' (NIV), 'you provoked the Lord to wrath (RSV, NRS), 'you roused the Lord's anger' (REB), 'you made the Lord angry' (TEV). These are all good models. NJB and NJPS leave the anger implicit, 'you provoked', and this may also be followed, since the anger is explicit in the next clause. CEV combines the first two clauses, both of which refer to anger, into one, 'you made the Lord so angry that ...' but conveys the causation adequately. There is also the issue of the presence of a synonym in the second clause, typical of similar issues discussed elsewhere. \ref %!)!'$! %!)!("! %!)!6$! 3"0!@!!|ne|n* F!(!.*! \paradigc Similar \colc אנף \pgloss to be angry \refsc %!)!("! \paradigc Similar \colc מרה \pgloss to rebel \refsc %!)!'$! \paradigc Opposite \colc נחם \pgloss to relent \refsc F!(!.*! \not (a) The Hithpael occurs only once (Isa 8:21) and there are insufficient grounds to distinguish its meaning from that of the Qal. \notfr (a) The Hithpael occurs only once (Isa 8:21) and there are insufficient grounds to distinguish its lexical meaning from that of the Qal. BDB may be overinfluenced by the morphology in giving an explicitly reflexive gloss ‘put oneself in a rage’ and Young goes even further, ‘The people will work themselves into a frenzy, exciting themselves to anger‘ (1965:321). If the prototypical reflexive nuance of the Hithpael is present, it may make the people responsible for their own state, ‘they work themselves into a state,’ but HALOT 'fallen into a rage' lacks a reflexive nuance. The Hithpael does, however, also differ slightly in its event frame from the Qal, in that it is a force, distress and hunger, which causes the anger and the target of the anger is the king and their god(s). This different event frame might imply a slightly different nuance. The prototypical link between what causes the anger and its target is broken, so both the anger and its experiencers are less rational. [Note for future research, to be confirmed or rejected: in the ancient Hebrew worldview, if there are no uncaused events, then anger at king and god may be the natural response to distress and hunger.] There is an additional problem here in establishing the Target. In the next clause the phrase 'the king and their god(s)' is governed by |hבְּ|h*. This is unusual with |hקלל|h*, which normally expresses the Target of the curse with an accusative, and the rare instances of |hבְּ|h* (1Sa 17:43) or |hבְּשֵׁם|h* (2Kg 2:24) point to the God or gods invoked to enforce the curse (cf BDB, HALOT). For this reason, most commentators understand the cursers to invoke their king and their gods (WBC, Young, TOTC, KD, but not NICOT). By contrast, most translations take 'the king and their God/gods' to be the Target of the curse and therefore also the anger (NIV, RSV, NRS, TEV, CEV, NJB). To do otherwise would leave both cursing and anger without any Target, so KTBH recommends following the majority of translations. The final problem is whether or not the God/god(s) who is cursed is Yahweh. Translations and commentaries are divided on the issue, but the occult involvement in v. 19 suggests that ‘their god(s)’ is no longer Yahweh and the translation should not have an upper case G. \notsp (a) The Hithpael occurs only once (Isa 8:21) and there are insufficient grounds to distinguish its lexical meaning from that of the Qal. BDB may be overinfluenced by the morphology in giving an explicitly reflexive gloss ‘put oneself in a rage’ and Young goes even further, ‘The people will work themselves into a frenzy, exciting themselves to anger‘ (1965:321). If the prototypical reflexive nuance of the Hithpael is present, it may make the people responsible for their own state, ‘they work themselves into a state,’ but HALOT 'fallen into a rage' lacks a reflexive nuance. The Hithpael does, however, also differ slightly in its event frame from the Qal, in that it is a force, distress and hunger, which causes the anger and the target of the anger is the king and their god(s). This different event frame might imply a slightly different nuance. The prototypical link between what causes the anger and its target is broken, so both the anger and its experiencers are less rational. [Note for future research, to be confirmed or rejected: in the ancient Hebrew worldview, if there are no uncaused events, then anger at king and god may be the natural response to distress and hunger.] There is an additional problem here in establishing the Target. In the next clause the phrase 'the king and their god(s)' is governed by |hבְּ|h*. This is unusual with |hקלל|h*, which normally expresses the Target of the curse with an accusative, and the rare instances of |hבְּ|h* (1Sa 17:43) or |hבְּשֵׁם|h* (2Kg 2:24) point to the God or gods invoked to enforce the curse (cf BDB, HALOT). For this reason, most commentators understand the cursers to invoke their king and their gods (WBC, Young, TOTC, KD, but not NICOT). By contrast, most translations take 'the king and their God/gods' to be the Target of the curse and therefore also the anger (NIV, RSV, NRS, TEV, CEV, NJB). To do otherwise would leave both cursing and anger without any Target, so KTBH recommends following the majority of translations. The final problem is whether or not the God/god(s) who is cursed is Yahweh. Translations and commentaries are divided on the issue, but the occult involvement in v. 19 suggests that ‘their god(s)’ is no longer Yahweh and the translation should not have an upper case G. \notpt (a) The Hithpael occurs only once (Isa 8:21) and there are insufficient grounds to distinguish its lexical meaning from that of the Qal. BDB may be overinfluenced by the morphology in giving an explicitly reflexive gloss ‘put oneself in a rage’ and Young goes even further, ‘The people will work themselves into a frenzy, exciting themselves to anger‘ (1965:321). If the prototypical reflexive nuance of the Hithpael is present, it may make the people responsible for their own state, ‘they work themselves into a state,’ but HALOT 'fallen into a rage' lacks a reflexive nuance. The Hithpael does, however, also differ slightly in its event frame from the Qal, in that it is a force, distress and hunger, which causes the anger and the target of the anger is the king and their god(s). This different event frame might imply a slightly different nuance. The prototypical link between what causes the anger and its target is broken, so both the anger and its experiencers are less rational. [Note for future research, to be confirmed or rejected: in the ancient Hebrew worldview, if there are no uncaused events, then anger at king and god may be the natural response to distress and hunger.] There is an additional problem here in establishing the Target. In the next clause the phrase 'the king and their god(s)' is governed by |hבְּ|h*. This is unusual with |hקלל|h*, which normally expresses the Target of the curse with an accusative, and the rare instances of |hבְּ|h* (1Sa 17:43) or |hבְּשֵׁם|h* (2Kg 2:24) point to the God or gods invoked to enforce the curse (cf BDB, HALOT). For this reason, most commentators understand the cursers to invoke their king and their gods (WBC, Young, TOTC, KD, but not NICOT). By contrast, most translations take 'the king and their God/gods' to be the Target of the curse and therefore also the anger (NIV, RSV, NRS, TEV, CEV, NJB). To do otherwise would leave both cursing and anger without any Target, so KTBH recommends following the majority of translations. The final problem is whether or not the God/god(s) who is cursed is Yahweh. Translations and commentaries are divided on the issue, but the occult involvement in v. 19 suggests that ‘their god(s)’ is no longer Yahweh and the translation should not have an upper case G. \notxx (a) The Hithpael occurs only once (Isa 8:21) and there are insufficient grounds to distinguish its lexical meaning from that of the Qal. BDB may be overinfluenced by the morphology in giving an explicitly reflexive gloss ‘put oneself in a rage’ and Young goes even further, ‘The people will work themselves into a frenzy, exciting themselves to anger‘ (1965:321). If the prototypical reflexive nuance of the Hithpael is present, it may make the people responsible for their own state, ‘they work themselves into a state,’ but HALOT 'fallen into a rage' lacks a reflexive nuance. The Hithpael does, however, also differ slightly in its event frame from the Qal, in that it is a force, distress and hunger, which causes the anger and the target of the anger is the king and their god(s). This different event frame might imply a slightly different nuance. The prototypical link between what causes the anger and its target is broken, so both the anger and its experiencers are less rational. [Note for future research, to be confirmed or rejected: in the ancient Hebrew worldview, if there are no uncaused events, then anger at king and god may be the natural response to distress and hunger.] There is an additional problem here in establishing the Target. In the next clause the phrase 'the king and their god(s)' is governed by |hבְּ|h*. This is unusual with |hקלל|h*, which normally expresses the Target of the curse with an accusative, and the rare instances of |hבְּ|h* (1Sa 17:43) or |hבְּשֵׁם|h* (2Kg 2:24) point to the God or gods invoked to enforce the curse (cf BDB, HALOT). For this reason, most commentators understand the cursers to invoke their king and their gods (WBC, Young, TOTC, KD, but not NICOT). By contrast, most translations take 'the king and their God/gods' to be the Target of the curse and therefore also the anger (NIV, RSV, NRS, TEV, CEV, NJB). To do otherwise would leave both cursing and anger without any Target, so KTBH recommends following the majority of translations. The final problem is whether or not the God/god(s) who is cursed is Yahweh. Translations and commentaries are divided on the issue, but the occult involvement in v. 19 suggests that ‘their god(s)’ is no longer Yahweh and the translation should not have an upper case G. \not (b) It might be possible to take the |hעַל |h*normally associated with the Qal of |hקצף|h* as causal and see it as introducing the agent which caused the anger, leading to a gloss, ‘the experiencer was made angry by/because of the agent.’ This passive causative sense, however, would not be prototypical for a verb in the Qal stem. Num16:22b is significant in this connection |hהָאִ֤ישׁ אֶחָד֙ יֶחֱטָ֔א וְעַ֥ל כָּל־הָעֵדָ֖ה תִּקְצֹֽף|h* ‘will one man sin and you be angry with the whole congregation?’ Whether the initial |hה |h*of |hהָאִ֤ישׁ |h*is read as the article, with MT, or repointed as the interrogative (cf. BHS margin), this is a rhetorical question expecting the answer, ‘no.’ Moses and Aaron are proposing a separation of the two participant roles under discussion, that of target, here the whole congregation, and that of the agent which caused the anger, here ‘one man,’ Korah, and reject the proposal. For our purposes, two points are significant. Firstly, at least conceptually, it is possible to separate the two roles, and secondly, it is the role of target that is expressed by the |hעַל|h*-phrase. This conclusion forms the basis of the analysis above. \notfr (b) It might be possible to take the |hעַל |h*normally associated with the Qal of |hקצף|h* as causal and see it as introducing the agent which caused the anger, leading to a gloss, ‘the experiencer was made angry by/because of the agent.’ This passive causative sense, however, would not be prototypical for a verb in the Qal stem. Num16:22b is significant in this connection |hהָאִ֤ישׁ אֶחָד֙ יֶחֱטָ֔א וְעַ֥ל כָּל־הָעֵדָ֖ה תִּקְצֹֽף|h* ‘will one man sin and you be angry with the whole congregation?’ Whether the initial |hה |h*of |hהָאִ֤ישׁ |h*is read as the article, with MT, or repointed as the interrogative (cf. BHS margin), this is a rhetorical question expecting the answer, ‘no.’ Moses and Aaron are proposing a separation of the two participant roles under discussion, that of target, here the whole congregation, and that of the agent which caused the anger, here ‘one man,’ Korah, and reject the proposal. For our purposes, two points are significant. Firstly, at least conceptually, it is possible to separate the two roles, and secondly, it is the role of target that is expressed by the |hעַל|h*-phrase. This conclusion forms the basis of the analysis above. \notsp (b) It might be possible to take the |hעַל |h*normally associated with the Qal of |hקצף|h* as causal and see it as introducing the agent which caused the anger, leading to a gloss, ‘the experiencer was made angry by/because of the agent.’ This passive causative sense, however, would not be prototypical for a verb in the Qal stem. Num16:22b is significant in this connection |hהָאִ֤ישׁ אֶחָד֙ יֶחֱטָ֔א וְעַ֥ל כָּל־הָעֵדָ֖ה תִּקְצֹֽף|h* ‘will one man sin and you be angry with the whole congregation?’ Whether the initial |hה |h*of |hהָאִ֤ישׁ |h*is read as the article, with MT, or repointed as the interrogative (cf. BHS margin), this is a rhetorical question expecting the answer, ‘no.’ Moses and Aaron are proposing a separation of the two participant roles under discussion, that of target, here the whole congregation, and that of the agent which caused the anger, here ‘one man,’ Korah, and reject the proposal. For our purposes, two points are significant. Firstly, at least conceptually, it is possible to separate the two roles, and secondly, it is the role of target that is expressed by the |hעַל|h*-phrase. This conclusion forms the basis of the analysis above. \notpt (b) It might be possible to take the |hעַל |h*normally associated with the Qal of |hקצף|h* as causal and see it as introducing the agent which caused the anger, leading to a gloss, ‘the experiencer was made angry by/because of the agent.’ This passive causative sense, however, would not be prototypical for a verb in the Qal stem. Num16:22b is significant in this connection |hהָאִ֤ישׁ אֶחָד֙ יֶחֱטָ֔א וְעַ֥ל כָּל־הָעֵדָ֖ה תִּקְצֹֽף|h* ‘will one man sin and you be angry with the whole congregation?’ Whether the initial |hה |h*of |hהָאִ֤ישׁ |h*is read as the article, with MT, or repointed as the interrogative (cf. BHS margin), this is a rhetorical question expecting the answer, ‘no.’ Moses and Aaron are proposing a separation of the two participant roles under discussion, that of target, here the whole congregation, and that of the agent which caused the anger, here ‘one man,’ Korah, and reject the proposal. For our purposes, two points are significant. Firstly, at least conceptually, it is possible to separate the two roles, and secondly, it is the role of target that is expressed by the |hעַל|h*-phrase. This conclusion forms the basis of the analysis above. \notxx (b) It might be possible to take the |hעַל |h*normally associated with the Qal of |hקצף|h* as causal and see it as introducing the agent which caused the anger, leading to a gloss, ‘the experiencer was made angry by/because of the agent.’ This passive causative sense, however, would not be prototypical for a verb in the Qal stem. Num16:22b is significant in this connection |hהָאִ֤ישׁ אֶחָד֙ יֶחֱטָ֔א וְעַ֥ל כָּל־הָעֵדָ֖ה תִּקְצֹֽף|h* ‘will one man sin and you be angry with the whole congregation?’ Whether the initial |hה |h*of |hהָאִ֤ישׁ |h*is read as the article, with MT, or repointed as the interrogative (cf. BHS margin), this is a rhetorical question expecting the answer, ‘no.’ Moses and Aaron are proposing a separation of the two participant roles under discussion, that of target, here the whole congregation, and that of the agent which caused the anger, here ‘one man,’ Korah, and reject the proposal. For our purposes, two points are significant. Firstly, at least conceptually, it is possible to separate the two roles, and secondly, it is the role of target that is expressed by the |hעַל|h*-phrase. This conclusion forms the basis of the analysis above. \not (c) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \notfr (c) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \notsp (c) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \notpt (c) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \notxx (c) Unusually, the target is more extensive than the agent of the stimulus. \not (d) The target is expressed with אֶל which BHS proposes to emend to the more usual עַל. This is plausible, since these prepositions are easily confused (Jouon and Muraoka §133.b) and some of their senses overlap (IBHS §11.2.13b), but it is unsupported in the manuscript tradition and is probably unnecessary. \notfr (d) The target is expressed with |hאֶל|h* which BHS proposes to emend to the more usual |hעַל|h*. This is plausible, since these prepositions are easily confused (jm §133.b) and some of their senses overlap (ibhs §11.2.13b), but it is unsupported in the MS tradition and is probably unnecessary. \notsp (d) The target is expressed with |hאֶל|h* which BHS proposes to emend to the more usual |hעַל|h*. This is plausible, since these prepositions are easily confused (jm §133.b) and some of their senses overlap (ibhs §11.2.13b), but it is unsupported in the MS tradition and is probably unnecessary. \notpt (d) The target is expressed with |hאֶל|h* which BHS proposes to emend to the more usual |hעַל|h*. This is plausible, since these prepositions are easily confused (jm §133.b) and some of their senses overlap (ibhs §11.2.13b), but it is unsupported in the MS tradition and is probably unnecessary. \notxx (d) The target is expressed with |hאֶל|h* which BHS proposes to emend to the more usual |hעַל|h*. This is plausible, since these prepositions are easily confused (jm §133.b) and some of their senses overlap (ibhs §11.2.13b), but it is unsupported in the MS tradition and is probably unnecessary. \not (e) Elsewhere, the Hiphil of |hקצף|h* has an object, but MT has none in this case. A pronominal object is, however, present in LXX and Syr. This may reflect a variant text in the |iVorlage|i* or may have resulted from making implicit information explicit. Whatever the original text, the allusion to Exo 17:1-7, where Yahweh is the Experiencer, makes it clear that Yahweh is the Experiencer here too. \notfr (e) Elsewhere, the Hiphil of |hקצף|h* has an object, but MT has none in this case. A pronominal object is, however, present in LXX and Syr. This may reflect a variant text in the |iVorlage|i* or may have resulted from making implicit information explicit. Whatever the original text, the allusion to Exo 17:1-7, where Yahweh is the Experiencer, makes it clear that Yahweh is the Experiencer here too. \notsp (e) Elsewhere, the Hiphil of |hקצף|h* has an object, but MT has none in this case. A pronominal object is, however, present in LXX and Syr. This may reflect a variant text in the |iVorlage|i* or may have resulted from making implicit information explicit. Whatever the original text, the allusion to Exo 17:1-7, where Yahweh is the Experiencer, makes it clear that Yahweh is the Experiencer here too. \notpt (e) Elsewhere, the Hiphil of |hקצף|h* has an object, but MT has none in this case. A pronominal object is, however, present in LXX and Syr. This may reflect a variant text in the |iVorlage|i* or may have resulted from making implicit information explicit. Whatever the original text, the allusion to Exo 17:1-7, where Yahweh is the Experiencer, makes it clear that Yahweh is the Experiencer here too. \notxx (e) Elsewhere, the Hiphil of |hקצף|h* has an object, but MT has none in this case. A pronominal object is, however, present in LXX and Syr. This may reflect a variant text in the |iVorlage|i* or may have resulted from making implicit information explicit. Whatever the original text, the allusion to Exo 17:1-7, where Yahweh is the Experiencer, makes it clear that Yahweh is the Experiencer here too. \ver 0 \dat 2007-12-27 11:17:10 cjs \heb קֶצֶף \strong 07110 \level1 1 \pos n \gloss anger \freq 29 \sub קצף \intro 1. The main distinction in meaning is between God being angry with someone, Meaning 1a, and someone being angry with someone else, Meaning 1b. 2. In Hos 10:7, an etymologically unrelated word of the same form is used in the sense ‘something of little value or significance’, Meaning 2. \tnotes God’s anger is always righteous. It is directed against a person or people who are wrong. It may be translated by the same terms as human anger, unless those terms can only mean sinful anger. \hebraist 1. The general view is that Meaning 2 is taken from a homonymous root found in the HB only as nouns. The masculine form |hקֶצֶף|h* occurs only at Hos 10:7 (see below), and the feminine form |hקְצָפָה|h* only at Jol 1:7, where it has an abstract sense 'snapping, splintering' (BDB) or 'literally snapped, in particular of damage from breaking off twigs or branches' (HALOT). 2. The noun in Meaning 1 is used with the verb twice in a cognate accusative construction (Zec 1:2, 15). \comp 1 Focus: response; response: anger a Experiencer: God b Experiencer: human 2 Other meanings a Something of little value or significance \level2 1 \meaning The emotion of anger \frame Anger \eventfr Experiencer: God Target: human = individual or a nation Stimulus: event \level3 a \context Of God, the emotion of anger \domainc Apostasy and Judgement, Repentance and Restoration, Opposition to Israel, Eschatological judgement \eventfrc Experiencer = genitive or implicit: God Target = |hעַל|h* or implicit: human = individual or a nation Stimulus = |hעַל|h* or |hבָּזֹּאת|h* (twice) or implicit: event \keyref 7!\!*'! \keyverse KTBH - Foreigners will rebuild your walls, and their kings will serve you. In my |banger |b*I struck you, but in my favour I have had compassion on you \eval The translations all use either 'anger' or 'wrath' for |hקֶצֶף|h*. Either of these or a synonym is appropriate. \ref $!!!U'! $!1!+2! $!2!%*! %!=!;'! &!)!4(! &!6!4*!|na|n* ,!#!;*!|nb|n* -!;!8)!|na|n* .!3!"0! .!3!*2! .!8!2)! .!=!("! .!@!9*! .!@!:*! 3!F!""! 3",!+"! 7!B!""! 7!V!("! 7!\!*'! 8!*!*(!|nc|n* 8!5!%*! 8!@!E)! 8!R!-!! F!!!"$! F!!!/!! F!'!,0! \paradigc Cognate \colc קצף \pgloss to be angry \refsc F!!!"$! F!!!/!! \paradigc Similar \colc אַף \pgloss anger \refsc %!=!;'! 8!5!%*! 8!@!E)! \paradigc Similar \colc חֵמָה \pgloss anger \refsc %!=!;'! 3!F!""! 7!B!""! 8!5!%*! 8!@!E)! \paradigc Similar \colc זַעַם \pgloss anger \refsc 3",!+"! 8!*!*(! \paradigc Opposite \colc חֶסֶד \pgloss covenant loyalty \refsc 7!V!("! \paradigc Opposite \colc רחם \pgloss to have compassion \refsc 7!V!("! \paradigc Opposite \colc רָצֹון \pgloss favour, acceptance \refsc 7!\!*'! \level3 b \context Of humans, the emotion of anger \domainc Warfare, Futility, Marriage \eventfrc Experiencer = implicit: human Target = |hעַל|h* or implicit: human = individual or a nation Stimulus = implicit: event \keyref 1!!!2/! \keyverse KTBH - ... and there will be contempt and |banger |b*in plenty \eval The Hebrew is cryptic, but the meaning is clear. Most translations use either the word 'anger' itself (NJB), 'wrath' (RSV, NRS) or an equivalent verb (CEV, TEV). NIV and REB generalise somewhat by translating as 'discord'. NJPS takes |hקֶצֶף |h*to refer to 'provocation', implying 'to anger', rather than to the anger itself and should not be followed.|nd|n* \ref ,!#!;*!|ne|n* 1!!!2/!|nd|n* 5!%!0(! \paradigc Similar \colc כעס \pgloss to be angry \refsc 1!!!2/! \paradigc Similar \colc בִּזָּיֹון \pgloss contempt \refsc 1!!!2/! \level2 2 \meaning Something of little value, weight or significance, which can be carried away easily by a stream \frame Flowing stream \domain Value \level3 a \context Something of little value, weight or significance, which can be carried away easily by a stream \keyref !(!(#" A!'!1&!|nb|n* C!#!'&!|nc|n* C!#!0"" C!#!0+!|nd|n* \paradigc Similar \colc חִיל \pgloss writhing, anguish \refsc "!/!.#! \paradigc Similar \colc נוט \pgloss to shake \refsc 3")!!#! \paradigc Similar \colc רַעַד \pgloss trembling \refsc "!/!.#! \paradigc Similar \colc חרד \pgloss to tremble with fear \refsc 7!@!+#! \paradigc Similar \colc צלל \pgloss to quiver in terror \refsc C!#!0"" \paradigc Similar \colc בהל \pgloss to be terrified \refsc "!/!.#! \paradigc Similar \colc אֵימָה \pgloss terror \refsc "!/!.#! \paradigc Similar \colc פחד \pgloss to fear \refsc 8!A!)2" A!'!1&! \paradigc Similar \colc פַּחַד \pgloss fear \refsc "!/!.#! \paradigc Similar \colc ירא \pgloss to fear \refsc A!'!1&! \level3 b \context Of people or the (personified) earth, to experience fear, typically associated with involuntary trembling, as a result of an unnerving experience \framec Fear \domainc Oppression, Wickedness \eventfrc Experiencer = subject: human = Israel, individuals \keyref *!'!*)! \keyverse KTBH - I will appoint a place for my people Israel ... so that they will no longer |btremble with fear |b*and violent people will no longer oppress them as before \eval Only CEV and NJPS render |hרגז|h* by 'tremble' and only CEV makes the fear explicit. If the receptor language can convey the idea, this model should be followed. Most English translations use 'be disturbed' (NIV, RSV, NRS, REB, NJB). This is adequate, but is weaker than the original. \ref %!"!9." *!'!*)! -!1!))! 4!>!5#!|ne|n* \paradigc Similar \colc חיל \pgloss to writhe, to be in anguish \refsc %!"!9." \paradigc Similar \colc יִרְאָה \pgloss fear \refsc %!"!9." \paradigc Similar \colc פַּחַד \pgloss fear \refsc %!"!9." \level3 c \context Of God, to experience the emotion of anger, typically associated with involuntary trembling \framec Anger \domainc Judgement \eventfrc Experiencer = subject: God Target = implicit: Israel \keyref 7!!"!("! \level1 2 \paradigc Similar \colc נהג \pgloss to lead \refsc 2!8!#$! \paradigc Similar \colc ערב \pgloss to pledge \refsc 4!4!0'! 4!;!-&! \paradigc Opposite \colc שׁוב \pgloss to return \refsc "!6!9!" \level2 2 \meaning Other meanings \stem Qal \level3 a \context To act wickedly \ref 0!!!'!! 0!!!'"! 2!B!?%! \level1 3 \paradigc \level2 3 \meaning Other meanings \stem Niphal; Piel; Pual \level3 a \context To destroy \ref 4!-!-#! 5!%!%/" 6!"!/%! 7!*!;+" 7!-!%)" 7!@!''" 7!V!0/" A!"!*(!|na|n* \paradigc \level2 4 \meaning Other meanings \stem Pual \level3 a \context To be discouraged (metaphorical extension of Meaning 3) \ref 2!1!!"! \level1 4 \paradigc \level2 5 \meaning Other meanings \frame Childbirth \domain Childbirth; \stem Piel \level3 a \context To labour as a woman in child-birth \ref 3!'!/"! 6!(!%+! 6!(!%.! \level1 5 \paradigc \not (a) There are several textual problems in this verse that affect the translation and interpretation of |hחבל|h*. \notfr (a) NOTE \notsp (a) NOTE \notpt (a) NOTE \notxx (a) NOTE \ver 4 \dat 2007-06-26 10:21:05 Wade \heb לוה \level1 1 \strong 3867 \pos v \gloss to borrow \freq 26 \sub לִוְיָה, לִוְיָתָן, לֹיָה \intro 1. The verb |hלוה|h* 'to borrow' is used to refer to the event of borrowing something from someone. 2. A second Meaning, 'to lend', views the same event from the perspective of the person from whom the item is borrowed. 3. In addition, the root may refer to an event of joining one thing or person to another or the event of accompanying something. In standard lexicons these two meanings are generally listed as being from a separate root. \comp Meaning 1. Stem: Qal Perspective: borrower Recipient (Borrower): human Frame: commercial transaction: loan Meaning 2. Stem: Hiphil Perspective: lender Recipient (Borrower): human, nation, God Frame: commercial translation: loan Meaning 3. Stem: Niphal Frame: Other: the event of joining one thing or person to another in a type of association Meaning 4. Stem: Qal Frame: Other: the event of accompanying \level2 1 \meaning To borrow something from someone; To temporarily acquire an item from another person with the intent of returning the item. \frame Commercial Transaction: loan \stem Qal \eventfr Agent (Borrower): human Patient (Item): money or other valued item \level3 a \context To borrow something from someone; To temporarily acquire an item from another person with the intent of returning the item. \domainc Various (according to the item borrowed) \eventfrc Agent (Borrower) = subject: human Patient = object: money or other valued item \keyref 0!%!$$! \keyverse And there were those who said, “|bWe are having to borrow |b*money on our fields and vineyards to pay the king's tax. (NRS) \eval The NRS is an acceptable translation. All versions consulted used a form of 'borrow'. \ref %!!"!&*! \paradigc Cognate_Term \colc מִמְכָּר \pgloss sale \refsc #!9!R$! \paradigc Cognate_Term \colc מִמְכֶּרֶת \pgloss sale \refsc #!9!J(! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc נתן \pgloss to give \refsc =!$!#(! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc גאל \pgloss to redeem \refsc #!9!P"! #!;!<,! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc גְּאֻלָּה \pgloss right of redemption \refsc #!9!P"! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc יצא \pgloss to go out \refsc "!5!'!! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc פדה \pgloss to ransom \refsc "!5!(+! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc קנה \pgloss to buy \refsc #!9!R$! %!!,$! =!$!(!! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc נתן \pgloss to give (into the hand of) \refsc '!"!.(! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc שׁמם \pgloss to cause to be desolated \refsc :!>!,$! \level3 b \context To cause to be exiled; To transfer ownership of a community to foreign enemies for deportation into foreign lands (for the purpose of punishment) \domainc Captivity, Deportation, Exile \eventfrc Agent = subject: God Patient = object: human Recipient = |hלְ|h* : human \keyref 7!R!!3! \keyverse . . . Or to which of my creditors did I |bsell |b*you? Because of your sins you were |bsold|b*; because of your transgressions your mother was sent away. (NIV) \eval NIV is an acceptable literal translation. If, however, the metaphorical nature of this usage is not understood, it would be better to follow the style of TEV ' . . . No, you |bwent away captive|b* because of your sins; . . . .' \ref %!@!>*! 3!L!-!! 7!R!!.! 7!R!!3! 7!T!#%! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc סגר \pgloss to cause to be delivered \refsc %!@!>*! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc שׁלח \pgloss to send \refsc 7!R!!3! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc גאל \pgloss to redeem \refsc 7!T!#%! \level2 3 \meaning To give oneself over (to sin); To transfer control of oneself to the control of (something morally wrong) \frame Control: submit \domain Pagan Religion, Evil, Sin \stem Hithpael \eventfr Agent: humans Patient: (same) humans \level3 a \context To give oneself over (to sin); To transfer control of oneself to the control of (something morally wrong) \domainc Pagan Religion, Evil, Sin \eventfrc Agent = subject: humans Patient = object: (same) human \syntagcc All examples with this meaning occur with the phrase 'to do evil in the eyes of YHWH'. \keyref ,!1!1(! \keyverse They used magic and witchcraft and even sacrificed their own children. The Israelites |bwillingly chose|b* to do whatever the LORD hated. (KTBH) \eval 'They made their sons and their daughters pass through fire; they used divination and augury; and they |bsold themselves |b*to do evil in the sight of the LORD, provoking him to anger.' (NRS) The NRS, NIV, REB, and RSV translate this phrase literally. If the metaphorical nature of the phrase 'sell oneself' is not understood, then a translation such as CEV, ' . . . The Israelites were |bdetermined to do |b*whatever the LORD hated' or the KTBH suggestion would be a better option. \ref +!5!4)! +!5!9%! ,!1!1(! \paradigc \level2 4 \meaning To reject (a moral value); To transfer ownership of an abstract quality to another entity \frame Ownership: disown \domain Wisdom/Folly \stem Qal \eventfr Agent: human Patient: abstract quality (truth) \level3 a \context To reject (a moral value); To transfer ownership of an abstract quality to another entity \domainc Wisdom/Folly \eventfrc Agent = subject: human Patient = object: abstract quality (truth) \keyref 4!7!7#! \keyverse Invest in truth and wisdom, discipline and good sense, and don't |bpart with |b*them. (CEV) \eval The CEV is a good example of a non-literal translation. If the metaphorical nature of a literal translation will be understood properly, then a literal translation such as NRS 'Buy truth, and do not |bsell |b*it; . . . .' may be used. \ref 4!7!7#! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc קנה \pgloss to buy \refsc 4!7!7#! \level2 5 \meaning To exploit; To cause others to be in a submissive relationship; To enslave another \frame Control: submit \domain Exploitation, Slavery, Evil \stem Qal participle \eventfr Agent: city Patient: humans \level3 a \context To exploit; To cause others to be in a submissive relationship; To enslave another \domainc Exploitation, Slavery, Evil \eventfrc Agent = subject: city Patient = object: humans \keyref B!#!$(! \keyverse Because of the countless debaucheries of the prostitute, gracefully alluring, mistress of sorcery, who |benslaves |b*nations through her debaucheries, and peoples through her sorcery, (NRS) \eval NRS is an acceptable translation of a verse whose specific meaning is uncertain. Versions vary widely in their translation of this verse, but none of the 8 translations consulted translated מכר ‘to sell’ literally. The main grammatical difficulty in translating this verse is determining the semantic functions of בִּזְנוּנֶיהָ ‘through her debaucheries’ and בִּכְשָׁפֶיהָ ‘through her sorcery’. In most verses with מכר ‘to sell’ the preposition בּ ‘with’ is used to refer to the instrument for which an item is sold, e.g., ‘for twenty pieces of silver’ (Gen 37:28). In at least one verse, the preposition בּ ‘with’ indicates the reason the sale was made, i.e., ‘for your sins’ (Isa 50:1). If the first interpretation is chosen, then she was selling the nations so that she would be able to commit adultery and magic as a result of the sale. If the second interpretation is chosen, then she was selling the nations because of her adultery and magic. Most translations follow neither of these interpretations. Instead, the phrases are interpreted as the means by which the nations are enslaved or trapped, as in CEV and other versions -- ‘You were nothing more than a prostitute using your magical charms and witchcraft to attract and trap nations’. \ref B!#!$(! \paradigc Agent_focus \pgloss one who enslaves; exploiter \refsc B!#!$(! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc בַּעֲלָה \pgloss mistress \refsc B!#!$(! \ver 2 \dat 2007-06-26 10:30:11 Wade \heb מִקְנָה \strong 4736 \level1 1 \pos ncf \gloss purchase \freq 15 \sub קנה \intro 1. The noun |hמִקְנָה|h* ‘purchase’ is used most frequently to refer to an item (including humans) that has been acquired and is under the ownership of another human as a result of an exchange of money or other items considered to be equal in value. 2. When there is a transfer of ownership, the noun |hמִקְנָה|h* ‘purchase’ can be used to refer to the money given in exchange for the item. 3. In addition, the completed event can also be referred to by the same term, |hמִקְנָה|h* ‘purchase’. \comp Meaning 1 refers to the completed event. Meaning 2 refers to the patient of the event of acquisition. Meaning 3 refers to the instrument (money) of the event of acquisition. \level2 1 \meaning The completed process of acquiring the ownership of an item from another human in exchange for money or other items considered to be equal in value \frame Commercial Transaction \eventfr |b |b*Agent (Buyer): human Patient (Item): land Source (Seller): human Instrument (Price): silver, gold, or other valued item \level3 a \context The completed process of acquiring the ownership of an item from another human in exchange for money or other items considered to be equal in value \domainc Trading \eventfrc |b |b*Agent (Buyer) = implict: human Patient (Item) = genitive: land Source (Seller) = implicit: human Instrument (Price) = implicit: silver, gold, or other valued item \keyref 8!@!+#! \keyverse I took the deed of |bpurchase|b*--the sealed copy containing the terms and conditions, as well as the unsealed copy-- (NIV) \eval 'I had two copies of the bill of |bsale |b*written out, each containing all the details of our agreement. Some witnesses and I signed the official copy, which was folded and tied, before being sealed shut with hot wax.' (CEV) English translations refer to הַמִּקְנָה אֶת־סֵפֶר ‘the book of the purchase’ using either the phrase 'deed of purchase' (NRS, NIV, RSV, REB, TEV, NJB, NJPS) or the phrase ‘bill of sale’ (CEV). Both of these are acceptable translations. \ref 8!@!+#! 8!@!,#! 8!@!,.! 8!@!.+! 8!@!0&! \paradigc \level2 2 \meaning An item that has been acquired and is under the ownership of another human as a result of an exchange of money or other items considered to be equal in value \frame Commercial Transaction \eventfr Agent (Buyer): human Patient (Item): human, thing Source (Seller): human Instrument (Price): silver, gold, or other valued item \level3 a \context A piece of land that has been acquired and is under the ownership of another human as a result of an exchange of money or other items considered to be equal in value \domainc Trading \eventfrc |b |b*Agent (Buyer) = genitive: human Patient (Item) = object: land Source (Seller) = implicit: human Instrument (Price) = implicit: silver, gold, or other valued item \keyref !!7!2"! \keyverse to Abraham as his |bproperty |b*in the presence of all the Hittites who had come to the gate of the city. (NIV) \eval '|blegal possession |b*of Abraham, in the presence of all the Hittites who had assembled at the city gate.' (REB) Most English translations use either 'possession' or 'property'. Both are acceptable choices, but property is probably the more commonly used term for land. REB uses the phrase ‘legal possession,’ which is probably more a translation of the context than of the word |hמִקְנָה|h* ‘purchase’. \ref !!7!2"! #!;!6#! \paradigc Opposite \colc אֲחֻזָּה \pgloss inherited possession \refsc #!;!6#! \level3 b \context A human that has been acquired and is under the ownership of another human as a result of an exchange of money or other items considered to be equal in value; a slave \domainc Slavery \eventfrc Agent (Buyer) = genitive: human Patient (Item) = implicit: human Source (Seller) = |hמִן|h*: human Instrument (Price) = genitive: silver, gold, or other valued items. \keyref !!1!7)! \keyverse Then Abraham took his son Ishmael and all the slaves born in his house or |bbought |b*with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins that very day, as God had said to him. (NRS) \eval Most English translations use a verbal phrase ('he had bought') with or without a literal translation of the word 'its silver'. CEV's translation 'and so were all other men and boys in his household, including his servants and slaves' seems to equate 'servants' with ones born in his household and 'slaves' as ones bought with his money. These would not, however, be the naturally understood equivalents for these terms. Because of this it would be best not to follow CEV's example. \ref !!1!,)! !!1!-%! !!1!7)! !!1!;%! "!,!L#! \paradigc Opposite \colc יָלִיד \pgloss born \refsc !!1!,)! !!1!-%! !!1!7)! !!1!;%! \level2 3 \meaning The amount of money given in order to acquire ownership of an item \frame Commercial Transaction \eventfr Agent (Buyer): human Patient (Item): human, thing Source (Seller): human Instrument (Price): silver, gold, or other valued item |b |b* \level3 a \context The amount of money given in order to acquire ownership of an item \domainc Payment \eventfrc Agent (Buyer) = implicit: human Patient (Item) = genitive: human, thing Source (Seller)= implicit: human Instrument (Price) = object: silver, gold, or other valued item |b |b* \keyref #!9!S(! \keyverse If many years remain, he must pay for his redemption a larger share of the |bprice |b*paid for him. (NIV) \eval 'The longer the time until then, the more you will have to pay.' (CEV) English translations generally use the term 'price' to translate this meaning of the term. The difference between this meaning and Meaning 1b, may be seen in a comparison of the meaning and the translation of the construct chain מִקְנַת כַּסְפֶּךָ 'purchase of your silver' in Gen 17.12 and the construct chain כֶּסֶף מִקְנָתוֹ 'silver of his purchase' in Lev 25:51. In the first, the focus is on the fact that the slave (Item) was purchased with money. In the second, the focus is on the amount of money (Price) involved in the purchase. In Lev 25:51 the term מִקְנָה ‘purchase’ is translated by terms such as ‘(price) paid for him,’ (NIV, RSV) ‘pay’ (CEV), ‘purchase (price)’ (NRS, TEV, NJPS) ‘sale-price’ (NJB), ‘(sum) for which he sold himself’ (REB). All of these translations are basically adequate. \ref #!9!0%! #!9!0*! #!9!S(! \paradigc \ver 2 \dat 2007-06-26 10:38:33 Wade \heb נשׁא \strong 5377, 5378, 5383 \level1 1 \pos v \gloss to deceive; to loan something for the purpose of collecting interest \freq 20 \sub מַשָּׁא, מַשָּׁאוֹן, מַשּׁוּאוֹת, נְשִׁי \intro 1. One meaning of the verb |hנשׁא |h*is 'to loan something for the purpose of collecting interest'. This meaning only occurs 3 times. In addition to these occurrences, 12 occurrences of |hנשׁה |h*Meaning 2 'to loan something for the purpose of collecting interest' are also included here because of the fact that the two verbs were often used interchangeably due to the nature of their final consonants. 2. The most frequent meaning of the verb is 'to deceive'. 3. Another infrequent meaning of the verb is 'to compel'. 4. In one occurrence, most translations seemed to be based on a textual variant that is translated 'to lift up', rather than a meaning related to this verb root. 5. All occurrences of the verb seem to contain an element of 'compulsion', i.e. being forced, compelled, or persuaded to do something that the patient would not otherwise have done. \comp Meaning 1 refers to an event that is a type of commercial transaction. Meanings 2-4 refer to other domains and have not been thoroughly analyzed. Meaning 2 refers to the event of forcing something upon someone or compelling someone to do something. Meaning 3 refers to the event of deceiving someone or causing someone to have an inaccurate view of the truth. Meaning 4 includes one reference, the meaning of which is uncertain due to textual variants and other problems of interpretation. \level2 1 \meaning To loan something to another person for the purpose of collecting interest \frame Commercial Transaction: loan \stem Qal, Hiphil \eventfr Agent (Lender): human Recipient (Borrower): human Patient (Item): money or other valued item \syntagc Interest is specifically mentioned in Neh 5:7 and this may be the factor that distinguishes |hנשׁא|h* from |hלוה |h*in Isa 24:2. \level3 a \context To loan something to another person for the purpose of collecting interest \domainc Interest \eventfrc Agent (Lender) = subject: human Object (Loan) = object: loan, money or other valued item Recipient (Borrower) = |hבְּ |h*: human \keyref 7!8!".! \keyverse And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest; as with the slave, so with his master; as with the maid, so with her mistress; as with the buyer, so with the seller; as with the lender, so with the borrower; as with the |bcreditor|b*, so with the |bdebtor|b*. (NRS) \eval NRS is a good translation. \ref "!6!8(" %!/!")! %!8!*!" %!8!+&! )!6!"'! ,!$!!2# 0!%!',! 0!%!*$! 0!%!+0! 3"3!+"! 7!8!",# 7!8!".! 7!R!!-" 8!/!**" 8!/!*+# \level1 3 \paradigc Agent_focus \pgloss creditor \refsc "!6!8(" )!6!"'! ,!$!!2# 3"3!+"! 7!8!",# 7!8!".! 7!R!!-" \paradigc Similar_Term \colc נגשׂ \pgloss to exact tribute \refsc %!/!")! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc עבט \pgloss to take as a pledge \refsc %!8!*!" \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc לוה \pgloss to borrow \refsc 7!8!",# 7!8!".! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc מכר \pgloss to sell \refsc 7!R!!-" \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc שׁמט \pgloss to remit \refsc %!/!")! \level2 2 \meaning Other meanings \stem Qal \level3 a \context To force (something upon someone); To compel (someone to do something) \ref +!(!?&" .!&!6$" \paradigc \level2 3 \meaning Other meanings \stem Hiphil \level3 a \context To deceive; To cause someone to have an inaccurate view of the truth \ref !!#!-*! ,!2!=$" ,!3!*&" .!@!/"" 7!3!-$! 7!D!.$" 7!E!*&" 8!$!*&! 8!$!*'! 8!=!((" 8!E!)$" 8!Q!0"! ?!!!##! ?!!!'&! \level1 2 \paradigc \level2 4 \meaning Other meanings \stem Qal \level3 a \context Uncertain due to textual variants \ref 8!7!G%! \paradigc \ver 4 \dat 2007-06-25 07:57:36 Wade \heb נשׁך \level1 1 \strong 5391 \pos v \gloss to pay interest \freq 16 \sub נֶשֶׁךְ \intro 1. The verb |hנשׁךְ|h* 'to pay interest' is used five times to refer to the paying or charging of interest (causative form of the verb). 2. Meaning 2 refers to the act of biting, the most frequent usage of this root. 3. Meaning 3 refers to causing pain, an extension of Meaning 2. \comp Meaning 1. The basic economic event: To pay interest Meaning 2. The basic event: To bite Meaning 3. To cause pain (Extension of Meaning 2) \level2 1 \meaning To pay interest; To earn interest \frame Commercial Transaction: loan \stem Qal, Hiphil \eventfr Agent (Lender): human Recipient (Borrower): human Patient (Item): money or other things \level3 a \context To pay interest; to earn interest \domainc Oppression; Prosperity \eventfrc Agent (Lender) = subject or genitive: human Recipient (Borrower) = |hלְ|h* or subject: human Patient (Item) = object: money or other things \keyref %!7!4*! \keyverse You must not lend on interest to your brother, whether the loan be of money, of food, or of anything else that may|b earn interest|b*. (NJB) \eval This is an acceptable translation. The agent that pays the interest is unspecified. Because of that, many translations use a passive ('anything else on which interest can be charged' [REB]) or another wording that changes the focus back to the person who collects the interest ('anything that is lent for interest' [RSV]). \ref %!7!4!" %!7!4*! %!7!5"! %!7!5%! C!"!'$!|na|n* \paradigc Causative \pgloss to charge interest = to cause to pay interest \refsc %!7!4!" %!7!5"! %!7!5%! \level2 2 \meaning Other meanings \level3 a \context To bite \ref !!Q!1&" $!5!&'" $!5!(+# $!5!)(" 5!*!('! 5!*!+!" 8!(!1*" >!%!3-" >!)!#/" A!#!%'" \paradigc \level2 3 \meaning Other meanings \level3 a \context To cause pain or harm that is comparable to the bite of a snake (metaphoric extension of Meaning 1) \ref 4!7!@#! \paradigc \not (a) In light of the contrasts seen in Hab 2:6, this verse has been interpreted as referring to the debtors rising up against the creditors, ie the Qal form of Meaning 1 'to pay interest'. This interpretation is followed by REB, NIV, RSV. See Clark and Hatton 1989:98-99 for a discussion of the choice between translating נֹשְׁכֶיךָ as 'debtors' versus 'creditors'. Translations interpretנֹשְׁכֶיךָ as a reference to 'creditors' include NRS, NJPS, NJB, and CEV. \notfr (a) NOTE \notsp (a) NOTE \notpt (a) NOTE \notxx (a) NOTE \ver 4 \dat 2007-06-26 10:43:24 Wade \heb נֶשֶׁךְ \level1 1 \strong 5392 \pos ncm \gloss interest \freq 12 \sub נשׁךְ \intro 1. Interest for a loan could be charged on a variety of items. 2. Interest was not supposed to be charged to a fellow-Israelite. \comp There is only one meaning of |hנֶשֶׁךְ |h* 'interest.' \level2 1 \meaning Interest; Money or profit gained from loaning money or provisions or other items to another person \frame Commercial Transaction: loan \level3 a \context Interest; Money or profit gained from loaning money or provisions or other items to another person \domainc Oppression; Prosperity \keyref %!7!4#! \keyverse You are not to exact |binterest |b*on anything you lend to a fellow-countryman, whether money or food or anything else on which interest can be charged. (REB) \eval This is an acceptable translation. All translations examined use the term "interest" in the translation of this verse. \ref "!6!8+! #!9!D#! #!9!E$" %!7!4#! %!7!4%! %!7!4'! 3!/!%#" 4!!5-! \paradigc \level2 5 \meaning To trade; To exchange one item for another \frame Commercial Transaction \stem Qal \eventfr Agent: human Patient1: animal, thing, or attribute Patient2: animal, thing, or attribute \syntagc Due to the limited number of occurrences of this meaning of the verb, there are no references in which all participant roles are explicitly stated. \level3 a \context To trade; To exchange one item for another \domainc Various (according to the nature of the item being traded) \eventfrc Agent = subject: human Patient1 = implicit: animal, thing, or attribute Patient2 = object or genitive: animal, thing, or attribute \keyref :!;!)-" \keyverse Veteran craftsmen of Gebal were on board as shipwrights to caulk your seams. All the ships of the sea and their sailors came alongside|b to trade |b*for your wares. (NIV) \eval This is an acceptable translation. Other versions use terms such as 'to barter for your wares' or 'to guarantee your trade.' Because of the infrequent usage of this meaning of the term it is difficult to distinguish how this differs from other terms for trade. Possibly there is a component of putting up security for a trade that makes this term distinct with respect to other terms for trade. \ref :!;!)-" :!;!;(" \paradigc Cognate_Term \colc מַעֲרָב \pgloss merchandise \refsc :!;!)-" :!;!;(" \level2 6 \meaning Other meanings \frame Verbal Commitment \stem Hithpael \level3 a \context To make a wager \keyref ,!2!7"! \keyverse Come now, |bmake a wager|b* with my master the king of Assyria: I will give you two thousand horses, if you are able on your part to set riders on them. (NRS) \eval This is an acceptable translation. Other acceptable translations are 'make a bet' (CEV) and 'make a deal' (REB). The translation 'make a bargain' (NIV) may not carry the proper connotations of a wager/bet, but due to the lack of occurrences of this verb with this meaning, it is hard to clearly define the meaning. \ref ,!2!7"! 7!D!("! \paradigc \level2 7 \meaning Other meanings \stem Hithpael \level3 a \context To mix with; To interact with \ref /!)!"%" 3"0!C!" 4!4!3'! 4!8!5%" \paradigc \level2 8 \meaning Other meanings \stem Hithpael \level3 a \context To share (Extension of meaning 7) \ref 4!.!*&" \paradigc \level2 9 \meaning Other meanings \stem Qal \level3 a \context To be pleasing (to someone) \ref 3".!B!! 4!#!8$" 4!-!3#! 8!&!4." 8!?!:%! :!0!E&! !>&" "!?!**" "!C!3+" "!G!I+" "!H!-*" "!H!/&" #!'!C+" #!0!@(" $!#!#)" $!#!$0" %!*!&+" -!%!D&! -!8!")" :!L!-#" \paradigc Similar \colc קרב \pgloss to approach \refsc "!!>&" "!H!-*" \paradigc Associated \colc משׁח \pgloss to anoint \refsc "!!>&" "!H!-*" "!H!/&" #!0!@(" $!#!#)" \paradigc Associated \colc מלא יָד \pgloss to ordain \refsc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e/! /!"!f"" /!#!"%" /!#!(0" /!#!*&" /!#!,"# /!&!)/!|na|n* /!&!0#!|na|n* /!&!2"!|na|n* /!&!4#" /!&!4-" /!'!'#$ /!'!-)!|na|n* /!'!0,!|na|n* /!'!8$!|na|n* /!(!/+$ /!(!8#" /!(!=&" /!(!>"" /!)!!*# /!)!'-! /!*!%%" /!*!2#" 0!"!0*$ 0!#!!&" 0!#!6#" 0!#!<%" 0!%!,,# 0!'!G!" 0!'!_!$ 0!'!a*" 0!'!e/! 0!'!g-! 0!'!h"" 0!(!-'" 0!)!@1# 0!)!B#! 0!*!!*! 0!*!)%" 0!*!=#" 0!*!C%" 0!*!E,# 0!*!F)# 0!*!G"" 0!*!H.# 0!+!#." 0!+!*!# 0!+!4#" 0!,!!"" 0!,!''" 0!,!,$! 0!,!6*# 0!,!>"" 0!,!C"" 0!,!I!# 0!,!L0# 0!,!L5# 0!-!%5" 0!-!-$" 0!-!>%# 3!n!`!! 3"J!)!! 3"J!0!" 7!(!"'" 7!8!"## 7!(# :!L!>-# :!L!?'" :!M!$$# :!M!3"" :!N!"+" :!N!3(# :!N!4'" :!P!*$# :!P!+!# :!P!-$" =!!!)'" =!!!-#" =!"!1%" A!#!+$" D!!!$.#|nb|n* D!#!$%! E!"!+&# E!"!,/" E!"!-(" F!'!#"# F!'!%$$ G!!!&2" G!"!!%" G!"!'"! \paradigc Qualifying \colc שַׂר \pgloss leader \refsc .!D!.#" /!(!8#" /!(!=&" /!*!%%" \paradigc Qualifying \colc מִשְׁנֶה \pgloss second \refsc ,!7!$&# \paradigc Qualifying \colc לֵוִי \pgloss of the tribe of Levi \refsc %!1!)"# %!1!2-" %!2!!"# %!5!%"" %!8!()" %!;!)## %!?!)&# &!#!#)# &!(!A*" -!)!"'" .!%!%+" .!7!2'" .!>!;"" /!*!%%" 0!*!C%" 0!+!4#" 8!A!2!$ 8!A!5*" :!K!3"# :!L!/!# \paradigc Similar \colc לֵוִי \pgloss Levite \refsc +!(!$," -!-!"2" -!/!."" -!7!"$# -!8!?.# -!!/'# .!>!50# .!>!9$# .!?!"$" .!?!"*# .!?!$'" .!?!)## .!?!1#" .!B!>(# .!C!($# .!C!*$" .!C!+$" .!C!2.# /!!!%&# /!"!f"" /!#!(0" /!#!*&" /!#!,"# /!&!0#! /!&!2"! /!&!4#" /!'!'#$ /!'!-)! /!'!8$! /!(!=&" /!(!>"" /!)!!*# 0!'!h"" 0!(!-'" 0!*!!*! 0!*!=#" 0!*!G"" 0!+!#." 0!,!!"" 0!,!6*# 0!,!>"" 0!,!L0# 0!,!L5# 0!-!>%# :!P!-$" \paradigc Similar \colc נָתִין \pgloss Temple servant \refsc -!)!"'" /!"!f"" /!'!'#$ /!'!8$! 0!'!h"" 0!*!=#" 0!+!#." \paradigc Similar \colc כֹּמֶר \pgloss idol-priest \refsc D!!!$.# \paradigc Associated \colc כהן \pgloss to serve as priest \refsc $!#!#%" \paradigc Associated \colc שׁרת \pgloss to serve \refsc %!1!,&# %!5!%"" +!(!+"" .!%!."" .!-!*&" .!7!&$# .!?!"*# 0!*!E,# 0!*!H.# :!L!/!# :!M!$$# =!!!)'" =!!!-#" =!"!1%" \paradigc Associated \colc שׁמר \pgloss to keep \refsc ,!,!*3" :!H!M)# :!H!N&# :!L!/!# :!P!+!# G!"!'"! \paradigc Associated \colc מִשְׁמֶרֶת \pgloss duties \refsc .!'!&!# .!C!""" 0!-!>%# :!H!M)# :!H!N&# :!L!/!# :!P!+!# \paradigc Associated \colc עֲבֹודָה \pgloss service \refsc -!!0'" .!?!"$" .!C!""" .!C!*$" /!"!_*! /!#!*&" 0!'!a*" 0!,!L5# 0!-!>%# :!L!/!# \paradigc Associated \colc עֹמֶד \pgloss standing place \refsc .!>!0'" .!C!*$" \paradigc Associated \colc קדשׁ \pgloss to sanctify \refsc -!/!."" .!%!+&# .!:!2+# .!=!B0" .!=!B6# .!>!#(" .!>!/'# .!>!85! :!P!+!# \paradigc Associated \colc קֹדֶשׁ \pgloss holiness \refsc .!7!&$# \paradigc Associated \colc קרב \pgloss to approach \refsc #!!!%)" #!!!-&" #!!!/"" #!%!(## #!'!(!# #!'!()# #!'!)(# #!.!,"" $!%!0#" $!%!9"" $!&!0"" :!J!."" :!L!/!# \paradigc Associated \colc קָרֵב \pgloss approaching \refsc :!H!N&# :!M!$$# \paradigc Associated \colc קָרוֹב \pgloss near \refsc :!J!-/" :!K!3"# \paradigc Associated \colc נגשׁ \pgloss to approach \refsc #!"!((# %!4!"%" %!5!%"" \paradigc Associated \colc קטר \pgloss to burn (sacrifice) \refsc #!!!)&" #!!!-&" #!!!/"" #!!!1(" #!"!"." #!"!)"" #!"!0"" #!#!+"" #!#!0"" #!$!:)" #!$!?*" #!$!C)" #!%!,$" #!&!%(" #!'!%#" #!'!?"" #!1!&"" $!%!:"" .!:!2+# 8!A!2!$ \paradigc Associated \colc כפר \pgloss to atone \refsc #!$!:)" #!$!?1" #!$!C1" #!%!&0" #!%!*'" #!%!-#" #!%!0,# #!%!2*" #!%!:#" #!'!'&" #!,!(2" #!.!2+" #!.!3"" #!.!4(" #!.!=%" #!.!?*" #!/!/*" #!/!>)" #!3!6#" $!&!+"" $!/!9"" $!/!<"" .!=!8"" \paradigc Associated \colc ירה \pgloss to instruct \refsc %!8!()" .!/!#(! A!#!+$" \paradigc Associated \colc תֹּורָה \pgloss instruction, law|nd|n* \refsc $!%!>0" %!1!2-" %!?!)&# .!/!#(! .!?!$'" 8!"!(!" 8!2!2)" :!'!:," E!"!+&# G!"!'"! \paradigc Associated \colc בְּרִית \pgloss covenant \refsc 8!A!5*" \paradigc Associated \colc אוּרִים \pgloss Urim \refsc /!"!_*! 0!'!a*" \paradigc Associated \colc תֻּמִּים \pgloss Thummim \refsc /!"!_*! 0!'!a*" \level3 b \context The High Priest (generic), the hereditary head of the priests of the order of Aaron, the only priest permitted to offer certain sacrifices to God in the Tabernacle or Temple \domainc Tabernacle; Temple; High Priest \eventfrc Event = mostly implicit or in wider context: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human = Aaron or most senior descendant Recipient = mostly implicit or in wider context: God Beneficiary = mostly implicit or in wider context: human = Israelite \keyref #!0!@"" \keyverse ... the |bpriest |b*duly anointed and ordained to serve in succession to his father ... (REB) \eval TEV and CEV render 'high priest' here. This is an acceptable alternative which clarifies the unique status of this priest, although technically the title 'high priest' was not used until a much later period. \ref "!=!>$" #!$!#"" #!$!%"" #!$!&"" #!$!'"" #!$!*'" #!$!0"" #!$!1"" #!$!4+" #!&!/!# #!0!@"" #!5!*!# $!C!91" $!C!<&" $!C!<*" $!C!@*" &!4!&)" )!"!<&" ,!,!+)# .!8!+0! \paradigc Qualifying \colc מָשִׁיחַ \pgloss anointed|ne|n* \refsc #!$!#"" #!$!%"" #!$!0"" #!&!/!# \paradigc Qualifying \colc גָּדֹול \pgloss great|ne|n* \refsc #!5!*!# $!C!91" $!C!<&" $!C!<*" &!4!&)" ,!,!+)# \paradigc Qualifying \colc רֹאשׁ \pgloss head|ne|n* \refsc .!8!+0! \paradigc Associated \colc משׁח \pgloss anoint \refsc #!0!@"" $!C!91" \paradigc Associated \colc מִשְׁחָה \pgloss anointing \refsc #!5!*!# \paradigc Associated \colc מלא יָד \pgloss to ordain \refsc #!0!@"" #!5!*!# \paradigc Associated \colc כהן \pgloss to serve as priest \refsc #!0!@"" \paradigc Associated \colc קרב \pgloss to approach \refsc #!$!#"" \paradigc Associated \colc קטר \pgloss to burn (sacrifice) \refsc #!$!*'" )!"!<&" \paradigc Associated \colc כפר \pgloss to atone \refsc #!$!4+" #!0!@"" \level3 c \context Named senior priests of the order of Aaron, excluding those identified as High Priest|nf|n* \domainc Tabernacle; Temple; Instruction \eventfrc Event = mostly implicit or in wider context: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human = Aaron or descendant, named Recipient = mostly implicit or in wider context: God Beneficiary = mostly implicit or in wider context: human = Israelite \keyref ,!9!2'! \keyverse In addition, Nebuzaradan, the commanding officer, took away as prisoners Seraiah the High Priest, Zephaniah the |bpriest |b*next in rank, and the three other important Temple officials. (TEV) \eval CEV calls Zephaniah merely Seraiah's 'assistant', which is too weak, especially considering his important role described in the book of Jeremiah. REB does better in calling him 'deputy chief priest'. All the other translations consulted use 'priest' here, with various suitable qualifications. \ref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|na|n* /!'!50!|na|n* /!(!A," /!*!*#" /!*!0&" 0!(!"#" 0!(!)&" 0!,!:*" 8!4!!$" 8!5!!." 8!=!92" 8!=!:#! 8!=!:&" 8!=!=#" 8!E!#(" 8!T!8'! :!!!#&" \paradigc Qualifying \colc מִשְׁנֶה \pgloss second \refsc ,!9!2'! 8!T!8'! \paradigc Associated \colc עמד \pgloss to stand \refsc .!8!4&" \paradigc Associated \colc קטר \pgloss to burn (sacrifce) \refsc ,!0!/%" \paradigc Associated \colc ירה \pgloss to instruct \refsc ,!,!#*" \paradigc Associated \colc תֹּורָה \pgloss instruction, law|nd|n* \refsc 0!(!"#" \paradigc Associated \colc סֹופֵר \pgloss scribe|ng|n* \refsc /!'!+)" /!'!,%! /!'!50! 0!(!)&" 0!,!:*" \level3 d \context Named High Priests of the order of Aaron|nh|n* \domainc Tabernacle; Temple; High Priest \eventfrc Event = mostly implicit or in wider context: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human = Aaron or descendant, named Recipient = mostly implicit or in wider context: God Beneficiary = mostly implicit or in wider context: human = Israelite \keyref ,!9!2$! \keyverse In addition, Nebuzaradan, the commanding officer, took away as prisoners Seraiah the High |bPriest|b*, Zephaniah the priest next in rank, and the three other important Temple officials. (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted apart from TEV use 'chief priest' for Seraiah here. But there is no need to make a translation distinction between 'chief priest' and 'high priest'. \ref "!?!*'" "!C!3(" "!F!5/" "!G!I(" #!!!'$" #!'!B/" #!-!"." #!5!5&" $!#!&(" $!2!<2" $!:!!'" $!:!#$" $!:!_%" $!:!`'" $!;!"&" $!;!3%" $!;!5#" $!;!6," $!?!,$" $!?!-$" $!?!5#" $!?!:*" $!?!=%" $!?!?$" $!?!I'" $!?!S$" $!?!V$" $!@!"(" $!@!<&" $!A!F#" $!B!1(" &!.!!*" &!1!$$" &!3!S&" &!5!!&" &!5!$(" &!5!-#" ,!6!$#" ,!6!(#" ,!6!**" ,!6!,$" ,!6!.#" ,!7!$$" ,!7!88" .!3!+#! .!:!1$" .!:!4$! .!?!*$" .!B!)#" .!B!.(" .!B!2*" /!'!%%" 0!#!!#" 0!#!4-" 0!-!$$" 0!-!<$" 8!T!8$! E!!!!4" E!!!,&" E!!!.+" E!"!"(" E!"!$(" F!#!!#" F!#!(#" F!&!+)" \paradigc Qualifying \colc גָּדֹול \pgloss great|ne|n* \refsc ,!6!$#" ,!6!(#" ,!7!$$" .!B!)#" 0!#!!#" 0!#!4-" 0!-!<$" E!!!!4" E!!!,&" E!!!.+" E!"!"(" E!"!$(" F!#!!#" F!#!(#" F!&!+)" \paradigc Qualifying \colc רֹאשׁ \pgloss head|ne|n* \refsc ,!9!2$! .!3!+#! .!:!4$! .!?!*$" /!'!%%" 8!T!8$! \paradigc Associated \colc כהן \pgloss to serve as priest \refsc "!?!*'" "!C!3(" "!G!I(" \paradigc Associated \colc שׁרת \pgloss to serve \refsc "!C!3(" "!G!I(" \paradigc Associated \colc עמד \pgloss to stand \refsc .!:!1$" F!#!!#" \paradigc Associated \colc תֹּורָה \pgloss instruction, law|nd|n* \refsc ,!6!(#" ,!7!88" .!B!.(" \paradigc Associated \colc אוּרִים \pgloss Urim \refsc $!;!5#" \level3 e \context Non-Aaronic Israelite priest, one who offers sacrifices to God outside the official Tabernacle and Temple system as an intermediary between Israelite people and God \domainc Local shrines; Northern kingdom of Israel \eventfrc Event = mostly implicit: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human = Israelite Recipient = mostly implicit: God Beneficiary = mostly implicit: human = Israelite \keyref +!,!?%! \keyverse Jeroboam ... chose |bpriests |b*from families who were not of the tribe of Levi. (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'priest' here. \ref "!3!6""|ni|n* "!3!8)#|ni|n* '!1!%." '!1!*(# '!1!,'" '!1!-+" '!2!$*" '!2!&#" '!2!1.# '!2!2," '!2!3*# '!2!3-! '!2!33! '!2!4#" '!2!8%$ '!2!;&$ '!2!>+! *!(!2'!|nj|n* *!4!:%!|nj|n* +!$!%&!|nj|n* +!,!?%! +!,!@6" +!-!"2" +!-!A,! +!-!A2! ,!1!;'# ,!1!<## ,!1!@'! ,!7!("$ ,!7!()" ,!7!)$! ,!7!4"# .!+!/"! .!-!)*! .!-!)5! .!B!%"! 2!,!3"! 3")!&#"|ni|n* !'!*#! \paradigc Similar \colc לֵוִי \pgloss Levite \refsc '!1!-+" +!,!?%! \paradigc Similar \colc קרא שֵׁם \pgloss to call on the name \refsc 3")!&#" \paradigc Associated \colc מלא יָד \pgloss to ordain \refsc '!1!,'" \paradigc Associated \colc עמד \pgloss to stand \refsc +!,!@6" .!+!/"! \paradigc Associated \colc קדשׁ \pgloss to sanctify \refsc "!3!6"" \paradigc Associated \colc נגשׁ \pgloss to approach \refsc "!3!6"" \paradigc Associated \colc קטר \pgloss to burn (sacrifce) \refsc +!-!"2" ,!7!()" \paradigc Associated \colc ירה \pgloss to instruct \refsc ,!1!;'# ,!1!<## \level3 f \context Non-Israelite priest of God, one who offers sacrifices to God as an intermediary between non-Israelite people and God \domainc Non-Israelite people \eventfrc Event = implicit: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human = non-Israelite Recipient = |hלְ|h* or implicit: God Beneficiary = mostly implicit: human = non-Israelite \syntagcc This contextual use is used only with reference to Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18; Psalm 110:4) and Jethro (Exodus 2:16; 3:1; 18:1). \keyref !!.!2(! \keyverse And Melchizedek, who was king of Salem and also a |bpriest |b*of the Most High God, brought bread and wine to Abram, (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'priest' here. \ref !!.!2(! "!"!0!# "!#!!'! "!2!!#! 3"4!$%" \paradigc \level3 g \context Promised future priest \domainc Prophetic promise \eventfrc Event = implicit: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human Recipient = |hלְ|h* or implicit: God Beneficiary = implicit: human = Israelite \keyref )!"!C#! \keyverse I will choose a |bpriest |b*who will be faithful to me and do everything I want him to. ... (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'priest' here. \ref )!"!C#! F!&!-+! \paradigc \level2 2 \meaning Priest of pagan gods, one who offers sacrifices to pagan gods as an intermediary between people and pagan gods \frame Priesthood \domain Sacrifice; Worship of pagan gods \eventfr Event: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human = priest Recipient: pagan god Beneficiary: human = worshipper \level3 a \context Priest of Baal (in the land of Israel), one who offers sacrifices to Baal as an intermediary between Israelite people and Baal \domainc Israelites \eventfrc Event = implicit: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human = priest Recipient = genitive or in wider context: pagan god = Baal Beneficiary = in context or in wider context: human = Israelite \keyref ,!+!2-! \keyverse Then the people went to the temple of Baal and tore it down; they smashed the altars and the idols, and killed Mattan, the |bpriest |b*of Baal, in front of the altars. ... (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'priest' here. \ref ,!*!+)"|nl|n* ,!*!3%# ,!+!2-! .!7!1*! \paradigc \level3 b \context Priest of pagan gods, one who offers sacrifices to pagan gods as an intermediary between non-Israelite people and their gods \domainc Non-Israelite people \eventfrc Event = implicit: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human = priest Recipient = genitive or in context or implicit: pagan god Beneficiary = in wider context or in context: human = non-Israelite \keyref 8!P!',! \keyverse ... your god Chemosh will go into exile, along with his princes and |bpriests|b*. (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'priest' here. \ref !!I!M(! !!I!R-! !!N!4)! !!O!6#" !!O!6(# !!O!:-" )!%!%#! )!&!"## 8!P!',! 8!Q!#1! \paradigc Associated \colc קסם \pgloss to divine \refsc )!&!"## \level2 3 \meaning One with a special relationship with God like that of a priest (Metaphorical extension of Meaning 1) \frame Relationship with God \eventfr Event: to relate Agent: God Patient: human (sometimes collective) \syntagc This meaning may include the idea of acting as an intermediary between people and God, but without the sacrificial functions. \level3 a \context Israelite as having a special relationship with God \domainc Prophetic promise; Israelites \eventfrc Event = implicit: to relate Agent = genitive or |hלְ|h*: God Patient = headword: human = Israelite \keyref "!3!&$! \keyverse (5) Now therefore, if you will obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my own possession among all peoples; for all the earth is mine, (6) and you shall be to me a kingdom of |bpriests |b*and a holy nation. ... (RSV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'priest' here, except for NRSV 'priestly'. TEV and CEV lose an important thought by failing to translate 'kingdom'. \ref "!3!&$! 7!]!&"! \paradigc Similar \colc סְגֻלָּה \pgloss special possession \refsc "!3!&$! \paradigc Similar \colc גֹּוי קָדֹושׁ \pgloss holy people \refsc "!3!&$! \paradigc Associated \colc שׁרת \pgloss to serve \refsc 7!]!&"! \level3 b \context Non-Israelite promised a special relationship with God \domainc Prophetic promise; Non-Israelite people \eventfrc Event = implicit: to relate Agent = in context: God Patient = headword: human = non-Israelite \keyref 7!b!5## \keyverse I will make some of them |bpriests |b*and Levites. (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'priest' here. \ref 7!b!5## \paradigc Similar \colc לֵוִי \pgloss Levite \refsc 7!b!5## \not (a) Aramaic references. \not (b) In this verse |hכֹּהֵן|h* is used in parallel with |hכֹּמֶר|h*, in a way suggesting that two different groups are referred to. The latter word surely refers to the priests of Baal, as in 2 Kings 23:5, and so it seems likely that the former refers to apostate priests of the Temple of God, cf. 3:4. Therefore this occurrence of |hכֹּהֵן|h* is listed under this contextual use. \not (c) Aramaic |hעֲבִידָה|h*. \not (d) The references listed here are only those in which the priests relate to the instruction or law as guardians or instructors. \not (e) The High Priest is only sometimes distinguished by the qualifying terms |hמָשִׁיחַ, גָּדֹול, רֹאשׁ|h*. More often he is distinguished from other priests by longer expressions or from the context. Hilkiah seems to have been the first priest given the title |hהַכֹּהֵן הַגָּדֹול|h*, but some earlier priests were known as |hכֹּהֵן הָרֹאשׁ|h*. \not (f) These named priests are not specifically called High Priest, although some of them seem to have served as such. In the early monarchy period there does not seem to have been a single High Priest; during David's reign Zadok and Abiathar seem to have shared the leading role. Included here are the following references to priests by name: |hאֶלְעָזָר |h*Eleazar (before the death of Aaron): NUM 3:32; 4:16; 17:2,4; 19:3,4 |hאִיתָמָר |h*Ithamar: EXO 38:21; NUM 4:28,33; 7:8 |hפִּינְחָס |h*Phinehas, son of Eleazar: NUM 25:7,11; 31:6; JOS 22:13,30,31,32 |hעֵלִי |h*Eli: 1SA 1:9; 2:11; 14:3 |hחָפְנִי |h*Hophni and |hפִּינְחָס |h*Phinehas: 1SA 1:3 |hאֲחִימֶלֶךְ |h*Ahimelech: 1SA 21:2,3; 22:11; 2SA 8:17; 1CH 18:16 |hאֶבְיָתָר |h*Abiathar: 1SA 23:9; 30:7; 2SA 15:35,35; 17:15; 19:12; 20:25; 1KI 1:7,19,25,42; 2:22,26,27; 4:4; 1CH 15:11 |hצָדֹוק |h*Zadok: 2SA 8:17; 15:27,35,35; 17:15; 19:12; 20:25; 1KI 1:8,26,32,34,38,39,44,45; 2:35; 4:4; 1CH 15:11; 16:39; 18:16; 24:6; 29:22 |hעֲזַרְיָהוּ |h*Azariah: 1KI 4:2 |hיְהֹויָדָע |h*Jehoiada: 2KI 11:9,9,15; 12:3,8,10; 2CH 22:11; 23:8,8,9,14; 24:2,20,25; and an earlier Jehoiada: 1CH 27:5; and a later Jehoiada: JER 21:26 |hאוּרִיָּה |h*Uriah: 2KI 16:10,11,11,15,16 |hפַּשְׁחוּר |h*Pashhur: JER 20:1 |hצְפַנְיָהוּ |h*Zephaniah: 2KI 25:18; JER 21:1,25,29; 37:3; 52:24 |hיְהֶזְקֵאל|h* Ezekiel: EZK 1:3 |hעֶזְרָא |h*Ezra: EZR 7:11,12,21; 10:10,16; NEH 8:2,9; 12:26 |hמְרֵמֹות |h*Meremoth: EZR 8:33 \not (g) |hכֹּהֵן|h* and |hסֹופֵר|h* are used in parallel only of Ezra. In the Aramaic references Ezra 7:12,21 the parallel is between |hכָּהֵן|h* and |hסָפֵר|h*. \not (h) Included here are the following references to High Priests by name: |hאַהֲרֹן |h*Aaron: EXO 31:10; 35:19; 39:41; LEV 1:7; 7:34; 13:2; 21:21; NUM 3:6; 18:28; 26:64; 33:38; JOS 21:4,13; EZR 7:5 |hאֶלְעָזָר |h*Eleazar (after the death of Aaron): 26:1,3,63; 27:2,19,21,22; 31:12,13,21,26,29,31,41,51,54; 32:2,28; 34:17; JOS 14:1; 17:4; 19:51; 21:1 |hאֲמַרְיָהוּ |h*Amariah: 2CH 19:11 |hעֲזַרְיָהוּ |h*Azariah: 2CH 26:17,20; and another Azariah: 2CH 31:10 |hחִלְקִיָּהוּ, חִלְקִיָּה |h*Hilkiah: 2KI 22:4,8,10,12,14; 23:4,24; 2CH 34:9,14,18 |hשְׂרָיָה |h*Seraiah: 2KI 25:18; JER 52:24 |hאֶלְיָשִׁיב |h*Eliashib: NEH 3:1,20; 13:4,28 |hיְהֹושֻׁעַ |h*Joshua: HAG 1:1,12,14; 2:2,4; ZEC 3:1,8; 6:11 \not (i) These references seem to be to a priesthood in Israel predating and separate from the order of Aaron - including in Psalm 99:6 where Moses as well as Aaron is named as a priest. \not (j) 2 Samuel 8:18 seems to state clearly that David's sons were priests; compare also 2 Samuel 20:26 and 1 Kings 4:5. But this contradicts the law of Moses which allows only descendants of Aaron to be priests. The Levitical priests Zadok and Ahimelech are listed in verse 17. So it is often suggested that here |hכֹּהֵן|h* means not 'priest' but 'royal adviser', as in NIV; compare LXX |gαὐλάρχης |g*'chief of the court'. However, the law of Moses was not obeyed in every detail during the time of David, and the text should not be adjusted to make it appear that it was. In the parallel passage, 1 Chronicles 18:17, the text reads, in place of 'priests', literally 'first to the hand of the king'. It seems probable that the text of 2 Samuel was changed in 1 Chronicles as part of its presentation of David as an ideal king who observed the law of Moses. The LXX translator may have had similar reasons for adjusting the text. In the light of Psalm 110:4, it is possible that David appointed his sons to the priesthood of God Most High who was worshipped in pre-Israelite Jerusalem, i.e. as successors of Melchizedek. (In the light of the New Testament, these sons of David would also be precursors of the greater Son of David who was also called a priest of the order of Melchizedek, Hebrews 6:20.) \not (k) The text of Hosea 4:4 is commonly emended e.g. to 'for with you is my contention, O priest' (RSV), which implies that the addressee Israel is here being referred to as a priest. But the text as written makes sense, and is accurately translated 'for your people are like those who bring charges against a priest' (NIV). The meaning of this in context is obscure, but the priest referred to here, as elsewhere in Hosea (cf. Amos 7:10 where this is clear), is presumably one of the non-Aaronic priests of the northern kingdom of Israel. \not (l) In view of v.18 and 1 Kings 16:31, 32, it is assumed that the priests mentioned in 2 Kings 10:11 are priests of Baal, not non-Aaronic priests of God. But it is possible that priests of God are also being referred to here. \ver 0 \dat 2004-04-06 peterk \not (a) Aramaic references. \not (b) In this verse |hכֹּהֵן|h* is used in parallel with |hכֹּמֶר|h*, in a way suggesting that two different groups are referred to. The latter word surely refers to the priests of Baal, as in 2 Kings 23:5, and so it seems likely that the former refers to apostate priests of the Temple of God, cf. 3:4. Therefore this occurrence of |hכֹּהֵן|h* is listed under this contextual use. \not (c) Aramaic |hעֲבִידָה|h*. \not (d) The references listed here are only those in which the priests relate to the instruction or law as guardians or instructors. \not (e) The High Priest is only sometimes distinguished by the qualifying terms |hמָשִׁיחַ, גָּדֹול, רֹאשׁ|h*. More often he is distinguished from other priests by longer expressions or from the context. Hilkiah seems to have been the first priest given the title |hהַכֹּהֵן הַגָּדֹול|h*, but some earlier priests were known as |hכֹּהֵן הָרֹאשׁ|h*. \not (f) These named priests are not specifically called High Priest, although some of them seem to have served as such. In the early monarchy period there does not seem to have been a single High Priest; during David's reign Zadok and Abiathar seem to have shared the leading role. Included here are the following references to priests by name: |hאֶלְעָזָר |h*Eleazar (before the death of Aaron): NUM 3:32; 4:16; 17:2,4; 19:3,4 |hאִיתָמָר |h*Ithamar: EXO 38:21; NUM 4:28,33; 7:8 |hפִּינְחָס |h*Phinehas, son of Eleazar: NUM 25:7,11; 31:6; JOS 22:13,30,31,32 |hעֵלִי |h*Eli: 1SA 1:9; 2:11; 14:3 |hחָפְנִי |h*Hophni and |hפִּינְחָס |h*Phinehas: 1SA 1:3 |hאֲחִימֶלֶךְ |h*Ahimelech: 1SA 21:2,3; 22:11; 2SA 8:17; 1CH 18:16 |hאֶבְיָתָר |h*Abiathar: 1SA 23:9; 30:7; 2SA 15:35,35; 17:15; 19:12; 20:25; 1KI 1:7,19,25,42; 2:22,26,27; 4:4; 1CH 15:11 |hצָדֹוק |h*Zadok: 2SA 8:17; 15:27,35,35; 17:15; 19:12; 20:25; 1KI 1:8,26,32,34,38,39,44,45; 2:35; 4:4; 1CH 15:11; 16:39; 18:16; 24:6; 29:22 |hעֲזַרְיָהוּ |h*Azariah: 1KI 4:2 |hיְהֹויָדָע |h*Jehoiada: 2KI 11:9,9,15; 12:3,8,10; 2CH 22:11; 23:8,8,9,14; 24:2,20,25; and an earlier Jehoiada: 1CH 27:5; and a later Jehoiada: JER 21:26 |hאוּרִיָּה |h*Uriah: 2KI 16:10,11,11,15,16 |hפַּשְׁחוּר |h*Pashhur: JER 20:1 |hצְפַנְיָהוּ |h*Zephaniah: 2KI 25:18; JER 21:1,25,29; 37:3; 52:24 |hיְהֶזְקֵאל|h* Ezekiel: EZK 1:3 |hעֶזְרָא |h*Ezra: EZR 7:11,12,21; 10:10,16; NEH 8:2,9; 12:26 |hמְרֵמֹות |h*Meremoth: EZR 8:33 \not (g) |hכֹּהֵן|h* and |hסֹופֵר|h* are used in parallel only of Ezra. In the Aramaic references Ezra 7:12,21 the parallel is between |hכָּהֵן|h* and |hסָפֵר|h*. \not (h) Included here are the following references to High Priests by name: |hאַהֲרֹן |h*Aaron: EXO 31:10; 35:19; 39:41; LEV 1:7; 7:34; 13:2; 21:21; NUM 3:6; 18:28; 26:64; 33:38; JOS 21:4,13; EZR 7:5 |hאֶלְעָזָר |h*Eleazar (after the death of Aaron): 26:1,3,63; 27:2,19,21,22; 31:12,13,21,26,29,31,41,51,54; 32:2,28; 34:17; JOS 14:1; 17:4; 19:51; 21:1 |hאֲמַרְיָהוּ |h*Amariah: 2CH 19:11 |hעֲזַרְיָהוּ |h*Azariah: 2CH 26:17,20; and another Azariah: 2CH 31:10 |hחִלְקִיָּהוּ, חִלְקִיָּה |h*Hilkiah: 2KI 22:4,8,10,12,14; 23:4,24; 2CH 34:9,14,18 |hשְׂרָיָה |h*Seraiah: 2KI 25:18; JER 52:24 |hאֶלְיָשִׁיב |h*Eliashib: NEH 3:1,20; 13:4,28 |hיְהֹושֻׁעַ |h*Joshua: HAG 1:1,12,14; 2:2,4; ZEC 3:1,8; 6:11 \not (i) These references seem to be to a priesthood in Israel predating and separate from the order of Aaron - including in Psalm 99:6 where Moses as well as Aaron is named as a priest. \not (j) 2 Samuel 8:18 seems to state clearly that David's sons were priests; compare also 2 Samuel 20:26 and 1 Kings 4:5. But this contradicts the law of Moses which allows only descendants of Aaron to be priests. The Levitical priests Zadok and Ahimelech are listed in verse 17. So it is often suggested that here |hכֹּהֵן|h* means not 'priest' but 'royal adviser', as in NIV; compare LXX |gαὐλάρχης |g*'chief of the court'. However, the law of Moses was not obeyed in every detail during the time of David, and the text should not be adjusted to make it appear that it was. In the parallel passage, 1 Chronicles 18:17, the text reads, in place of 'priests', literally 'first to the hand of the king'. It seems probable that the text of 2 Samuel was changed in 1 Chronicles as part of its presentation of David as an ideal king who observed the law of Moses. The LXX translator may have had similar reasons for adjusting the text. In the light of Psalm 110:4, it is possible that David appointed his sons to the priesthood of God Most High who was worshipped in pre-Israelite Jerusalem, i.e. as successors of Melchizedek. (In the light of the New Testament, these sons of David would also be precursors of the greater Son of David who was also called a priest of the order of Melchizedek, Hebrews 6:20.) \not (k) The text of Hosea 4:4 is commonly emended e.g. to 'for with you is my contention, O priest' (RSV), which implies that the addressee Israel is here being referred to as a priest. But the text as written makes sense, and is accurately translated 'for your people are like those who bring charges against a priest' (NIV). The meaning of this in context is obscure, but the priest referred to here, as elsewhere in Hosea (cf. Amos 7:10 where this is clear), is presumably one of the non-Aaronic priests of the northern kingdom of Israel. \not (l) In view of v.18 and 1 Kings 16:31, 32, it is assumed that the priests mentioned in 2 Kings 10:11 are priests of Baal, not non-Aaronic priests of God. But it is possible that priests of God are also being referred to here. \heb כְּהֻנָּה \strong 3550 \level1 1 \pos ncf \gloss priesthood \freq 14 \sub כהן \intro 1. This word refers to the status and duties of the priests serving in the Tabernacle and the Temple. 2. Once the focus is on priesthood as a source of income. 3. Once the word is used as a collective term for "priests". 4. Once it refers to the service of the Levites. \comp 1 Frame: Priesthood; Agent: human 1a Domains: Tabernacle; Temple 1b Domain: Employment 2 Frame: Priesthood; Agent: human (collective) 3 Metaphorical extension of Meaning 1; Frame: Service of God; Agent: human \dfnotes See the notes under |hכֹּהֵן|h*. Almost all the uses of |hכְּהֻנָּה|h* refer to worship in the Tabernacle and the Temple. In 1 Samuel 2:36 the focus is on the priestly office as employment and a source of income. \level2 1 \meaning Status and duties of priest, as one who offers sacrifices to God as an intermediary between people and God \frame Priesthood \domain Sacrifice; Service of God; Hereditary role \eventfr Event: to sacrifice Agent: human Recipient: God Beneficiary: human \level3 a \context Status and duties as priest of the order of Aaron \domainc Tabernacle; Temple \eventfrc Event = in wider context or implicit: to sacrifice Agent = genitive or in context (or |hלְ|h*): human = Aaron or descendant Recipient = in wider context or in context (or implicit): God Beneficiary = in wider context or implicit (or in context): human = Israelite \keyref "!=!)+! \keyverse ... they and their descendants will always be |bpriests|b*. (CEV) \eval Most translations read 'the priesthood will be theirs' or similar, but the underlying thought is clarified by CEV's 'be priests'. The focus here is on status rather than responsibilities, and so TEV 'serve me as priests' is misleading. Some translations might be misunderstood as saying that these individuals will be priests for ever; TEV and CEV clarify that this is not the intention by adding 'and their descendants'. \ref "!=!)+! "!H!/,! $!#!*%! $!0!*'!|na|n* $!2!!0! $!2!'%! $!2!'.! $!9!-&! /!"!^(# 0!'!`(# 0!-!=&! \paradigc Associated \colc מלא יָד \pgloss to ordain \refsc "!=!)+! \paradigc Associated \colc מָשְׁחָה \pgloss anointing \refsc "!H!/,! \paradigc Associated \colc פקד \pgloss to appoint \refsc $!#!*%" \paradigc Associated \colc קרב \pgloss to approach \refsc $!#!*%! $!2!'." \paradigc Associated \colc מִקְדָּשׁ \pgloss sanctuary \refsc $!2!!0! \paradigc Associated \colc שׁמר \pgloss to keep \refsc $!#!*%" $!2!'%" \level3 b \context Duties as priest as a source of income \domainc Employment \eventfrc Event = implicit: to sacrifice Agent + Beneficiary = in context: human = one with status of priest Recipient = in wider context: God \syntagcc Only in this use is |hכְּהֻנָּה|h* used in the plural. \keyref )!"!D.! \keyverse ... Please give me some |bpriestly work|b*, so that I can have a scrap of bread to eat. (NJB) \eval The reference here is to people who as descendants of Aaron had the status of priests, but had no specific duties or income from them. CEV 'be a priest' and TEV 'help the priests' are confusing because these people were already priests. RSV and NRSV 'in one of the priest's places' (|isic|i*, with the odd placing of the apostrophe) could be misunderstood as suggesting this person wants to replace another priest. NIV, REB and Tanakh reflect possible more specific understandings, but NJB 'some priestly work' is suitably generic. \ref )!"!D.! \paradigl 1 \paradigc Associated \colc ספח \pgloss to join \refsc )!"!D.! \level2 2 \meaning Priests of God (collective), those who offer sacrifices to God as intermediaries between people and God \frame Priesthood \domain Sacrifice; Service of God; Hereditary role \eventfr Event: to sacrifice Agent: human (collective) Recipient: God Beneficiary: human \level3 a \context Priests of the order of Aaron, those who offer sacrifices to God in the Tabernacle or Temple as intermediaries between Israelite people and God \domainc Tabernacle; Temple \eventfrc Event = implicit: to sacrifice Agent = headword: human (collective) = descendants of Aaron Recipient = in context: God Beneficiary = implicit: human = Israelite \keyref 0!-!=(! \keyverse ... the covenant you made with the |bpriests |b*and the Levites. (TEV) \eval This use refers to the second occurrence of the word in this verse, in conjunction with 'Levites'. Many ancient and modern translations, but not all, correctly understand this as indicating that the word is being used here as a collective noun meaning 'priests'. CEV misses the point of this verse. \ref 0!-!=(! \paradigl 1 \paradigc Similar \colc לֵוִי \pgloss Levite \refsc 0!-!=(! \paradigc Associated \colc בְּרִית \pgloss covenant \refsc 0!-!=(! \level2 3 \meaning Status and duties of those who serve God (Metaphorical extension of Meaning 1) \frame Service of God \domain Hereditary role \eventfr Event: to serve Agent: human Beneficiary: God \level3 a \context Status and duties as Levite \domainc Local shrines \eventfrc Event = headword: to serve Agent = in context: human = descendant of Levi Beneficiary = genitive: God \keyref &!2!'%! \keyverse The Levites do not get a portion among you, because their inheritance is |bspecial service|b* to the LORD. ... (KTBH) \eval All of the translations consulted use the word 'priesthood' or similar here, but this is misleading because the reference is apparently to the service of all of the Levites, which took place throughout the land (as specified in Joshua 21), and distinct from the service of the priests of the the order of Aaron, which was restricted to the central sanctuary. \ref &!2!'%! \paradigc Similar \colc לֵוִי \pgloss Levite \refsc &!2!'%! \not (a) Exceptionally, in this reference the agents are not descended from Aaron and the causing agent is not God, because here Korah and his associates were attempting to appoint themselves as priests although they were not entitled to it by descent. \ver 0 \dat 2004-04-06 peterk \not (a) Exceptionally, in this reference the agents are not descended from Aaron and the causing agent is not God, because here Korah and his associates were attempting to appoint themselves as priests although they were not entitled to it by descent. \heb מִזְבֵּחַ \strong 4196 \pos ncm \gloss altar \freq 403 \sub זבח \intro 1. This word refers to an elevated physical structure dedicated to the worship of a deity. 2. The elevated structure was a platform made of packed earth, piled stones, cut stones, wood overlaid or plated with a metal such as bronze or gold. The Israelites were not permitted to build an altar of cut stones (Exo 20:25). 3. The structure was normally used as a stand for burning animal sacrifices or cereal offerings. An altar could also serve as a memorial marker, or as a place of refuge. The word also referred to a stand for burning incense. 4. The structure was high enough to allow the officiator to work on it while standing at its base. In some cases, the structure was built in stages that required the officiator to mount steps to be able to work on it. The people of Israel were forbidden to build such altars (Exo 20:26). 5. In the Old Testament, the word most frequently refers to the altar of burnt offering which stood in the tabernacle or temple just before the entrance to the sanctuary. This altar was eventually promoted as the only legitimate place to offer animal sacrifice and cereal offerings to the God of Israel. In the tabernacle, this altar was made of acacia wood overlaid by bronze. The temple altar is referred to as the bronze altar, but it is not clear whether it was made entirely of bronze or of wood overlaid with bronze. 6. The word, especially when used in the plural, can refer to altars for pagan worship, such as for the worship of Baal. 7. The word can also refer to the altar of incense which stood in the sanctuary of the tabernacle or the temple and served as a brazier for burning incense. In the tabernacle this was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold. In the temple, it is sometimes referred to as the gold altar. 8. In certain contexts, an altar was built as a memorial marker, not as a platform for burning sacrifices or incense. In addition to serving as a platform for burning sacrifice or incense, it also served the function of a place of refuge from vengeance killing in cases of manslaughter. \tnotes Care needs to taken when translating 'altar' in Tazi contexts. Any large animal killed for food is ritually 'sacrificed' and it is done on a floor set apart for that purpose. So a substantive referring to 'place of sacrifice' usually refers to a floor where a butcher works. It bears no resemblance to the physical structure of Old Testament altars and does not suggest an object used for worship. In traditional Christian contexts, churches of liturgical background may include a raised structure that is called an 'altar'. But care must be taken in these cases, as well. There are valid metaphorical comparisons between a Christian altar and the kinds of altar that were used in Israelite worship. But in terms of actual form and function there are very significant differences. It would be helpful to the translator to look for pictures or diagrams of Old Testament altars in Bible dictionaries or handbooks before they decide on the proper description or designation of an altar in their translation. \hebraist |hמִזְבֵּחַ|h* is a noun derived from the verb |hזבח|h* 'to slaughter, to sacrifice' using a |hם |h*preformitive . Such nouns 'are mainly abstract nouns, nouns of place and nouns of instrument' (Joüon and Muraoka 1993; §88Ld). In the vast majority of occurrences, |hמִזְבֵּח|h* is not abstract, but is referring to a concrete structure. However, an altar is a place of sacrifice. \comp All occurrences of |hמִזְבֵּחַ|h* make reference to a physical structure. The primary function of the structure was to provide a platform for burning sacrifices and offerings. This primary function is clear in the first three meanings. Meaning 1 refers to altars that were built by the patriarchs in a variety of places, in a practice that was continued well after the development of the official cult centered around the altars in the Tabernacle and the Temple, especially in the Northern Kingdom. A contextual use distinction was made for the altar that was built on Mount Ebal at the time the Israelites entered the land. It functions as both a place of sacrifice and as a memorial to the covenant law that had been established between God and the people while they were in the desert. Meaning 2 refers to the bronze altar that was a focus of official worship when the Tabernacle and later the Temple were established and the priesthood was instituted. Contextual uses were distinguished for the different altars in the Tabernacle and the various versions of the Temple. In addition, these altars could serve as a point of refuge and become references for expressions that refer to the activities of priesthood or congregational worship. Meaning 3 refers to altars that were dedicated to pagan gods. One contextual use is distinguished where the altar in Bethel is personified as the focus of guilt for northern kingdom's apostacy and as a result is punished. Meaning 4 refers to the altar that was built by the eastern tribes following the conquest. The western tribes interpreted its function as that of sacrifice. The eastern tribes insisted that it was built only as a reminder. The western tribes accepted that explanation which indicates that 'memorial' was an understood secondary function of a patriarchal style altar. Meaning 5 refers to the incense burner that was built for the Tabarnacle and the Temple. It did not function as a place of sacrifice, but the burning of incense was probably viewed as analagous to the burning of the animal sacrifices and cereal offerings, allowing the term 'altar' to be extended to refer to 'the altar of incense'. \dfnotes The word 'altar' evokes the frame of Sacrifice and that frame unites all of the meanings even if only by analogy in the case of Meaning 5. Though the frame is the same throughout, domains of patriarchal religion, priesthood, pagan religion, memorial, and purification rituals distinguish the various meanings of the word. \level2 1 \meaning Altar, an elevated structure for offering sacrifices, built where significant interaction with God takes place \frame Sacrifice \domain Patriarchal Religion \eventfr Event: to sacrifice Agent: human Beneficiary: God Patient: sacrifice or offering Location: headword \syntagc The patriarchal altar was built for the purpose of offering sacrifices. Patriarchs and prophets built altars in response to interaction with God. The altars were built on the site where God appeared or revealed himself to them. These altars may have had a memorial function in addition to being altars for sacrifice. \level3 a \context Altar built by an Israelite patriarch, leader, or prophet, for sacrifice and/or as a monument in response to interaction with God \eventfrc Agent: human = patriarch or prophet \keyref !!(!4#! \keyverse "Then Noah built an|b altar|b* to the Lord, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar" (RSV). \eval All translations consulted use "altar" here. \ref !!(!4#! !!(!4.# !!,!'+! !!,!(-! !!-!$"" !!-!2*! !!6!))# !!6!)1# !!:!9#! !!A!4"! !!C!!)! !!C!#%! !!C!'#! "!1!/#! "!4!8!! "!4!9!# "!4!:#! "!8!$)! "!8!&*# '!&!8$! '!&!:"! '!&!<0# '!-!4%" '!-!4*" '!5!$&! )!'!1)! )!.!C#! )!.!C(! *!8!2*! *!8!5-! *!8!9$! +!2!>*" +!2!@#! +!2!@,# +!2!C$# +!3!*+"|na|n* +!3!.+"|na|n* -!5!2+! -!5!6(! -!5!:$! -!5!:/! -!6!!(# 7!3!3$!|nb|n* \paradigc Associated \colc בנה [שָׁם]‏ \pgloss he built [there] (an altar) \refsc !!(!4#! !!,!'+! !!,!(-! !!-!2*! !!6!))# !!:!9#! !!C!'#! "!1!/#! "!8!$)! '!&!8$! '!&!:"! '!5!$&! )!'!1)! )!.!C#! )!.!C(! *!8!5-! *!8!9$! -!5!6(! -!5!:$! -!6!!(# \paradigc Associated \colc בנה אֶת־הָאֲבָנִים \pgloss to build the stones (of the altar) \refsc +!2!@#! \paradigc Associated \colc עשׂה [שָׁם]‏ \pgloss to make [there] (an altar) \refsc !!-!$"" !!C!!)! !!C!#%! "!4!8!! "!4!9!# \paradigc Associated \colc קום |e(hiphil)|e* \pgloss to erect (an altar) \refsc *!8!2*! -!5!2+! \paradigc Associated \colc הרס \pgloss tear down (an altar) \refsc +!2!>*" +!3!*+" +!3!.+" \paradigc Identifying \colc לַיהוָה \pgloss (an altar) to Yahweh \refsc !!(!4#! !!,!'+! !!,!(-! !!-!2*! '!&!8$! '!&!:"! )!'!1)! )!.!C#! )!.!C(! *!8!2*! *!8!5-! *!8!9$! -!5!2+! -!5!6(! 7!3!3$! \paradigc Identifying \colc יְהוָה \pgloss (the altar) of Yahweh \refsc +!2!>*" \paradigc Identifying \colc מִזְבְּחֹתֶיךָ \pgloss your altar (referring to Yahweh) \refsc +!3!*+" +!3!.+" \paradigc Identifying \colc לָאֵל \pgloss (an altar) to God \refsc !!C!!)! !!C!#%! \paradigc Associated \colc קרא בְּשֵׁם יְהוָה \pgloss he called on the name of Yahweh \refsc !!,!(-! !!-!$"" !!:!9#! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc מַצֵּבָה \pgloss pillar, stone set up for worship or memorial \refsc "!8!$)! 7!3!3$! \paradigc Associated \colc עלה עֹלוֹת [בּ־]‏ \pgloss to offer up burnt offerings on (the altar) \refsc !!(!4.# "!8!$)! \paradigc Associated \colc עלה עֹלוֹת וּשְׁלָמִים \pgloss to offer up burnt offerings and peace offerings \refsc *!8!9$! -!5!:$! \paradigc Identifying \colc הָעֹלָה \pgloss (the altar) of burnt offering \refsc -!5!:/! \paradigc Identifying \colc לְעֹלָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל \pgloss (the altar) for burnt offering for Israel \refsc -!6!!(# \paradigc Associated \colc זבח זְבָחִים \pgloss to sacrifice sacrifices \refsc "!4!8!! "!8!$)! \paradigc Associated \colc נָבִיא, בְּרִית \pgloss prophet, covenant \refsc +!3!*+"|nc|n* +!3!.+"|nc|n* \level3 b \context The altar commanded by Moses and built by Joshua on Mount Ebal in the promised land for sacrifice and to commemorate the law which makes the Israelites a people \domainc Covenant memorial \eventfrc Agent: human = Joshua as representative of people \syntagcc The function of commemorating the law by writing it on the altar (see Deuteronomy 27:8, Joshua 8:32) is similar to using an altar as a memorial marker, see Meaning 6. \keyref %!;!%#! \keyverse |u4|u* "When you have passed over the Jordan, you shall set up these stones, concerning which I command you this day, on Mount Ebal... |u5|u* And there you shall build an |baltar|b* to the Lord your God, an |baltar|b* of stones; you shall lift up no iron tool upon them." RSV \eval All of the translation consulted use 'altar' here. \ref %!;!%#! %!;!%&! %!;!&$" &!(!>$! &!(!?+! \paradigc Associated \colc בנה \pgloss to build (an altar) \refsc %!;!%#! %!;!&$" &!(!>$! \paradigc Associated \colc עלה עֹלוֹת עַל־ \pgloss to offer up burnt offerings on (the altar) \refsc %!;!&$" &!(!?+! \paradigc Associated \colc זבח שְׁלָמִים \pgloss to sacrifice peace offerings \refsc &!(!?+! \paradigc Identifying \colc לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ \pgloss (an altar) to Yahweh your God \refsc %!;!%#! \paradigc Identifying \colc לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל \pgloss (an altar) to Yahweh God of Israel \refsc &!(!>$! \paradigc Identifying \colc יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ \pgloss (the altar) of Yahweh your God \refsc %!;!&$" \paradigc Identifying \colc אֲבָנִים לֹא־תָנִיף עֲלֵיהֶם בַּרְזֶל \pgloss (an altar) of stones, you shall not use iron (tool) on them \refsc %!;!%&! &!(!?+! \paradigc Identifying \colc אֲבָנִים שְׁלֵמֹות \pgloss (an altar) of uncut stones \refsc %!;!&$" &!(!?+! \level2 2 \meaning Altar of burnt offering built for priest-led worship of God in the Israelite tabernacle or the temple \frame Sacrifice \domain Tabernacle, Temple, Priesthood \eventfr Event: to sacrifice Agent: human = priests Beneficiary: God Patient: sacrifice or offering Location: headword \level3 a \context The portable altar, built of acacia wood overlaid with bronze, used as the altar of burnt offering in the tabernacle \domainc Tabernacle worship \eventfrc Location: headword = altar in the Tabernacle \keyref "!H!&#! \keyverse You shall place the |baltar|b* of burnt offering before the entrance of the Tabernacle of the Tent of Meeting. (NJPS) \eval All translations consulted use 'altar' here. \ref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t#" $!'!x1" $!1!#+# $!1!$,# $!1!+)" $!2!#($ $!2!1-# &!6!38! &!6!<*! &!6!=0! +!#!$/"|nd|n* -!&!B$" -!0!H$" -!5!=&" .!!!%!"|nd|n* .!!!&$" \paradigc Associated \colc עשׂה אֶת־ \pgloss to make (the altar) \refsc "!;!!"# "!F!!"" .!!!%!" \paradigc Associated \colc משׁח \pgloss to anoint (the altar) \refsc "!=!D'# "!>!!'! #!$!B(! #!(!/'" #!)!)+" #!0!2." \paradigc Associated \colc אֵת כָּל־הַדָּם שׁפך אֶל־יְסֹוד \pgloss pour out all the blood at the base (of the altar) \refsc "!=!,+" #!$!'2! #!$!2/! #!$!9-! #!$!>," #!$!B-" \paradigc Associated \colc אֶת־הַדָּם יצק אֶל־יְסֹוד \pgloss the blood he poured out at the base of (the altar) \refsc #!(!//" #!)!)/" \paradigc Associated \colc זרק [אֶת־הַדָּם] עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ סָבִיב \pgloss splash [the blood] on the altar all sides \refsc "!=!0&# "!=!45# #!!!%-# #!!!+.# #!#!".# #!#!(.# #!#!--# #!'!")# #!(!3%# #!(!83# #!)!,)# #!)!2.# $!2!1-# \paradigc Identifying \colc הָעֹלָה \pgloss (the altar of) burnt offering \refsc "!>!'! #!$!B(! -!&!B$" -!0!H$" -!5!=&" \paradigc Identifying \colc לִפְנֵי פֶּתַח מִשְׁכַּן אֹהֶל־מֹועֵד \pgloss before the opening of the dwelling of the tent of meeting \refsc "!H!&#! "!H!="! #!$!2/! \paradigc Identifying \colc הַנְּחֹשֶׁת \pgloss (the altar of) bronze \refsc "!F!>(! "!G!G"! .!!!%!" .!!!&$" \level3 b \context The altar of the LORD your God in the place that the LORD will choose \domainc Tabernacle or Temple worship \eventfrc Location: headword = altar in the place YHWH will choose \syntagcc The altar in the place that the LORD will choose foresees the time when the temple is built and the worship of God is centralised. \keyref %!,!;%" \keyverse |u26|u* ...you shall go to the place which the Lord will choose, |u27|u* and offer your burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood, on the |baltar|b* of the Lord your God; the blood of your sacrifices shall be poured out on the |baltar|b* of the Lord your God, but the flesh you may eat. (RSV) \eval All of the translations consulted used 'altar' here. \ref %!,!;%" %!,!;*" %!0!5&! %!:!$'! \paradigc Identifying \colc יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ \pgloss (the altar) of Yahweh your God \refsc %!,!;%" %!,!;*" %!0!5&! %!:!$'! \paradigc Associated \colc עשׂה עֹלֹת עַל־ \pgloss to make burnt offerings on (the altar) \refsc %!,!;%" \paradigc Similar_Term \colc אֲשֵׁרָה \pgloss Asherah, sacred pole \refsc %!0!5&! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc מַצֵּבָה \pgloss sacred pillar \refsc %!0!5&! \level3 c \context The altar made of bronze used for burnt offering in the temple built by Solomon \domainc Temple worship \eventfrc Location: headword = altar in Solomon's Temple \keyref +!)!9(# \keyverse Three times a year, Solomon burned incense and offered sacrifices to the LORD on the |baltar|b* he had built. Solomon had now finished building the LORD's temple. (CEV) \eval All translations consulted used 'altar' here. \ref +!(!6$!|ne|n* +!(!?,! +!(!V,! +!(!`1" +!)!9(# ,!+!+,! ,!,!*,! ,!0!."! ,!0!/!"!(%"|ng|n* \paradigc Associated \colc עלה עַל־ \pgloss to offer burnt offering on (the altar) \refsc 3!S!5(" 7!\!'*! \level3 h \context The altar of burnt offering in the tabernacle (and presumably the temple) functioned as a site of refuge from vengeance in cases of manslaughter \domainc Refuge, Justice \syntagcc A man could not be killed while he grasped the altar. If the man was innocent of premeditated murder he could be protected against vengeance slaying. If he was guilty of premeditated murder he would be taken away from the altar and executed. Exodus 21:14 sets down the law and presumably refers to any altar. 1 Kings 1:50,51,53;2:28,29 provides examples of specific instances where the altar of burnt offering in the Tabernacle was used as a place of refuge. In the case of Adonijah the altar is not specifically named. In the case of Joab, it is the altar in the Tabernacle (the tent of the LORD). So, it seems likely that Adonijah also fled to the altar in the tabernacle. \keyref "!5!.'! \keyverse But when someone gets angry and deliberately kills someone else, he is to be put to death, even if he has run to my |baltar|b* for safety. (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'altar' here. \ref "!5!.'! +!!!R)" +!!!S," +!!!U&" +!"!<3" +!"!=+" \paradigc Associated \colc חזק/אחז בְּקַרְנֹות |e(hiphil)|e* \pgloss to take hold of/seize the horns of (the altar) \refsc +!!!R)" +!!!S," +!"!<3" \level2 3 \meaning Pagan altar, a platform for sacrifice and offering dedicated to the worship of a god other than the God of Israel \frame Sacrifice \domain Apostacy, Idolatry \gram In most of the cases, when 'altar' is in the plural, pagan altars are referred to. On a few occasions 'altars' can refer to the two altars in the tabernacle or temple. \eventfr Event: to sacrifice Agent: human Beneficiary: pagan gods Patient: sacrifice or offering Location: headword \level3 a \context Altars used for worship of Canaanite or Aramaen deities \keyref %!,!#"" \keyverse |u2|u* In the land that you are taking, destroy all the places where the people worship their gods on high mountains, on hills, and under green trees. |u3|u* Tear down their |baltars|b* and smash their sacred stone pillars to pieces. Burn their symbols of the goddess Asherah and chop down their idols, so that they will never again be worshiped at those places. (TEV) \eval All the translation consulted use 'altar' here. \ref "!@!%$!|nh|n* "!B!-"" $!7!!'!|ni|n* $!7!"+# $!7!$'" $!7!$,# $!7!.(! $!7!.,# $!7!='! $!7!>)# %!'!%$! %!,!#"" '!"!"'!|nj|n* '!&!90" '!&!<'! '!&!>*" '!&!?7" '!&!@*" +!,!@-#|nk|n* +!,!A"# +!,!A3# +!-!!+#|nk|n* +!-!#," +!-!$." +!-!%!# +!-!%%# +!0!@"! +!2!:2# ,!+!2&" ,!+!2'! ,!+!21" ,!0!*)! ,!0!*2! ,!0!+$! ,!0!,&! ,!0!,)! ,!0!-)! ,!0!.,! ,!0!.3! ,!0!/(! ,!2!6+!|nl|n* ,!5!#)!|nl|n* ,!5!$"! ,!5!%"! ,!7!,!$ ,!7!,)$ ,!7!/"# ,!7!/.# ,!7!0,# ,!7!16" ,!7!4%# .!.!""" .!7!1%# .!7!1." .!!.## .!?!!.$ .!@!,%#|nl|n* .!A!#)! .!A!$"! .!A!%"! .!A!/'$ .!B!$$! .!B!%$" .!B!%%! .!B!'"# 7!1!(## 7!;!)+! 7!D!'+#|nl|n* 8!+!-+! 8!+!--! 8!1!!,! 8!1!"#! :!&!$"! :!&!%*! :!&!&*! :!&!-)! !#!.+" >!)!!$#|nm|n* \paradigc Associated \colc בנה \pgloss to build (an altar) \refsc "!@!%$! $!7!!'! $!7!.(! $!7!='! ,!0!+$! ,!5!$"! ,!5!%"! .!A!$"! .!A!%"! .!A!/'$ \paradigc Associated \colc עשׂה \pgloss to make (an altar) \refsc +!,!A"# +!2!:2# ,!7!,)! .!*" '!&!?7" '!&!@*" ,!+!2&! .!?!!.$ .!B!$$! .!B!'"# \paradigc Associated \colc הרס \pgloss to tear down (the altar) \refsc '!&!90" \paradigc Associated \colc סור |e(hiphil)|e* \pgloss to remove (their altars) \refsc ,!2!6+! .!.!""" .!>!.## .!@!,%# .!A!/'$ 7!D!'+# \paradigc Identifying \colc הַבַּעַל \pgloss of Baal \refsc '!&!90" '!&!<'! '!&!>*" '!&!@*" \paradigc Identifying \colc הַבְּעָלִים \pgloss of the Baals \refsc .!B!$$! \paradigc Identifying \colc לַבַּעַל \pgloss for Baal \refsc +!0!@"! ,!5!#)! \paradigc Identifying \colc לַבְּעָלִים \pgloss for the Baals \refsc .!A!#)! \paradigc Identifying \colc לְקַטֵּר לַבַּעַל \pgloss to make smoke to Baal \refsc 8!+!--! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc מַצֵּבָה \pgloss sacred pillar, memorial stone \refsc "!B!-"" %!'!%$! %!,!#"" .!.!""" .!?!!.$ \paradigc Similar_Term \colc אֲשֵׁרָה \pgloss sacred pole, Asherah \refsc "!B!-"" %!'!%$! %!,!#"" '!&!90" '!&!<'! '!&!>*" +!0!@"! ,!5!#)! .!.!""" .!?!!.$ .!A!#)! .!B!$$! .!B!'"# 7!1!(## 7!;!)+! 8!1!"#! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc בָּמָה \pgloss high place, shrine \refsc +!,!@-# ,!2!6+! ,!5!#)! ,!7!/"# ,!7!/.# ,!7!4%# .!.!""" .!?!!.$ .!@!,%# .!A!#)! 7!D!'+# :!&!$"!|nn|n* :!&!&*! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc חַמָּן \pgloss incense altar|no|n* \refsc .!.!"""|np|n* .!B!$$! .!B!'"# 7!1!(## 7!;!)+! :!&!$"! :!&!&*! \paradigc Identifying \colc בְּבֵית־אֵל \pgloss in Bethel \refsc +!,!@-# +!,!A"# +!-!$(# ,!7!/.# \paradigc Identifying \colc בֵּית־אֵל \pgloss (the altar) of Bethel \refsc ,!7!16" \paradigc Identifying \colc הַמִּזְבֵּחַ הַגָּדֹול \pgloss the great altar \refsc ,!0!/(! \paradigc Associated \colc עלה...פָּר וָאַיִל \pgloss to offer up...bull and ram \refsc $!7!"+# $!7!$,# $!7!.,# $!7!>)# \paradigc Associated \colc עלה עַל־ \pgloss to go to / to offer burnt offerings on \refsc +!,!@-# +!,!A"# +!,!A3# ,!0!,)! \paradigc Associated \colc ‏ \pgloss to burn a whole offering on- \refsc +!,!A3# +!-!!+# ,!0!-)! ,!0!/(! \paradigc Associated \colc קטר מִנחָה |e(hiphil)|e* \pgloss to burn a cereal offering \refsc ,!0!-)! ,!0!/(! \paradigc Associated \colc זרק הָדַּם עַל־ \pgloss to splash the blood on (the altar) \refsc ,!0!-)! ,!0!/(! \level3 b \context Figurative use: The altar at Bethel is personified as an agent of apostasy and worthy of judgment. \domainc Pagan ritual \keyref +!-!""# \keyverse Suddenly one of God's prophets arrived from Judah and shouted: The Lord sent me with a message about this |baltar|b*. A child named Josiah will be born into David's family. He will sacrifice on this altar the priests who make offerings here, and human bones will be burned on it. (CEV) \eval In the Hebrew the prophet adresses the altar: 'Altar! Altar!' and the rest of prophecy refers to the altar in the second person. Most of the translations translate the personification literally. However, in a language where the personification is unnatural or misunderstood, it would be possible to follow the CEV. It removes the personification and changes the reference from 2nd person to 3rd person. \ref +!-!""# +!-!"&! +!-!"'! +!-!$(# +!-!@)# >!#!.'" \paradigc \paradigc Associated \colc רבה ל־ |e(hiphil)|e* \pgloss to multiply (altars) \refsc !#!.'" \paradigc Identifying \colc בֵּית־אֵל \pgloss (the altar) of Bethel \refsc >!#!.'" \paradigc Similar_Term \colc בָּמָה \pgloss high place/shrine \refsc +!-!""# +!-!@)# \level2 4 \meaning Altar built as a memorial marker to the God of Israel, not as a platform for offering sacrifice. \frame Sacrifice \domain Memorial \syntagc An altar is prototypically understood as a place of sacrifice. But it could also serve as a memorial marker. Such a function is implicit in many of the contexts for Meaning 1. The altars are built on locations of significant interaction with God, often there is no mention of sacrifice being made, and one of the functions may be to remind those who follow of what happened. Exodus 20:24 refers to the altar as a "place where I cause my name to be remembered" (RSV). But the only place where an altar's function as a memorial marker is asserted and distinguished from its function as a place of sacrifice is in Joshua 22. In this passage, it is clear that the function as a place of sacrifice is what comes to mind when the western tribes hear that the eastern tribes are building their own altar. But they accept the eastern tribes assertion that the altar is only to serve as a memorial. \level3 a \context The Altar of Witness, built by the tribes east of the Jordan river (Rueben, Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh) to remind the other tribes of they are a part of God's family \keyref &!6!<*! \keyverse |u26|u* ‘So we said to each other, “Let us build this |baltar|b*, not for burnt offerings or other sacrifices |u27|u* but as a witness between us and you ...” (NJB) \eval All the translations consulted use 'altar' here. \ref &!6!*.! &!6!*0! &!6!++# &!6!02! &!6!36! &!6!7#! &!6!:%# &!6!=+! &!6!B$# \paradigc Associated \colc בנה \pgloss to build (an altar) \refsc &!6!*.! &!6!++# &!6!02! &!6!36! &!6!7#! &!6!:%# &!6!=+! \paradigc Associated \colc מרד בַּיהוָה \pgloss to rebel against Yahweh|nq|n* \refsc &!6!02! &!6!36! &!6!7#! &!6!=+! \paradigc Associated \colc שׁוב מֵאַחֲרֵי יְהוָה \pgloss to turn away from Yahweh|nq|n* \refsc &!6!02! &!6!7#! &!6!=+! \paradigc Identifying \colc לְעֹלָה \pgloss for burnt offering \refsc &!6!7#! &!6!:%# &!6!=+! \paradigc Identifying \colc לְמִנְחָה \pgloss for cereal offering \refsc &!6!7#! &!6!=+! \paradigc Identifying \colc לְזָבַח \pgloss for sacrifices \refsc &!6!:%# &!6!=+! \paradigc Identifying \colc לַעֲשֹׂות זִבְחֵי שְׁלָמִים \pgloss for making sacrifices of peacemaking \refsc &!6!7#! \level2 5 \meaning Incense burner, or altar of incense, a raised structure used by the High Priest for burning incense to establish holiness within the sanctuary \frame Sacrifice \domain Ritual Purification, Tabernacle, Temple, Holiness \eventfr Event =to burn incense Agent =High Priest Patient =incense Beneficiary =High Priest Location =headword \syntagc No sacrifice is done on the altar of incense. It is probably referred to as an altar because the burning of incense and the going up of its smoke is comparable to the burning of a sacrifice and the going up of its smoke. In addition it is comparable in shape, being square in its cross-section with upturned corners, called horns. It is likely that the burning of incense was viewed as analogous to the burning of a sacrifice. The actual function of the incense burned on the altar is not clearly described. In Exodus 30:7,8, the high priest is to offer incense on the altar when he goes into the sanctuary every morning and evening to take care of the lamps. In Leviticus 16:12-13, when the high priest enters the sanctuary to sprinkle blood on the covenant box, he is to bring in coals and incense, and burn the incense on the fire (the word 'altar' is not actually used in this instance). 'The smoke of the incense will conceal the atonement cover above the Testimony, so that he will not die' (Lev 16:13, NIV). Nielsen comments 'This incense cloud provides the high priest with cover against the divine wrath or the divine “radiation.” The incense smoke gives protection.'|nr|n* Another way to put this is to say that the incense smoke establishes holiness. \level3 a \context The portable incense burner, or altar of incense, made of acacia wood overlaid with gold, located in the sanctuary, or holy place, of the tabernacle, before the Ark of the Covenant \domainc Tabernacle, Sanctuary, High Priesthood \eventfrc Location: headword = altar in the Tabernacle \keyref "!E!9"" \keyverse He made an |baltar|b* out of acacia wood, for burning incense. It was square, 18 inches long and 18 inches wide, and it was 36 inches high. Its projections at the four corners formed one piece with it. (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'altar' here. They vary slightly in whether they modify it as an 'incense altar' (NJV), an 'altar of incense' (RSV, NIV, REB), or an 'altar...for burning incense' (TEV, CEV). \ref "!!!"! "!>!;&! "!?!('! "!C!/!# "!E!9"" "!G!F"! "!H!%"" "!H!:"" #!$!'%! #!$!2$" $!$!+"! -!&!B&# \paradigc Associated \colc עשׂה \pgloss to make (an altar) \refsc "!>!!"! "!C!/!#|nt|n* "!E!9"" \paradigc Identifying \colc מִקְטַר קְטֹרֶת \pgloss a burning place of incense \refsc "!>!!"! \paradigc Identifying \colc הַקְּטֹרֶת \pgloss (the altar) of incense \refsc "!>!;&! "!?!('! "!C!/!# "!E!9"" -!&!B&# \paradigc Identifying \colc לִקְטֹרֶת \pgloss (altar) for incense \refsc "!H!%"" \paradigc Identifying \colc קְטֹרֶת הַסַּמִּים \pgloss (the altar) of incense of perfumes \refsc #!$!'%! \paradigc Identifying \colc הַזָּהָב \pgloss (the altar) of gold \refsc "!G!F"! "!H!%"" "!H!:"" $!$!+"! \paradigc Identifying \colc בְּאֹהֶל מֹועֵד \pgloss in the tent of meeting \refsc "!H!:"" #!$!'%! #!$!2$" \paradigc Identifying \colc לִפְנֵי אֲרֹון הָעֵדֻת \pgloss before the Ark of the Testimony \refsc "!H!%"" \paradigc Identifying \colc לִפְנֵי יְהוָה \pgloss before Yahweh \refsc #!$!'%! #!$!2$" \level3 b \context The incense burner, or altar of incense, in the temple, made for Solomon of cedar wood overlaid with gold \domainc Temple, Sanctuary, High Priesthood \eventfrc Location: headword = altar of incense in Solomon's temple \keyref +!&!6&$ \keyverse The whole interior of the Temple was covered with gold, as well as the |baltar|b* in the Most Holy Place. (TEV) \eval All the translations consulted use 'altar' here. However, it is clearly the incense burner that is being referred to. To avoid confusion it would not be inaccurate to designate this altar as 'the altar of incense'. \trans The French |iBible du Semeur|i* translates simply 'altar', but has a footnote: This is the altar of incense (7.48; Ex 30.1,6; 37.25–28; He 9.3–4). \ref +!&!40! +!&!6&$ +!'!P)! -!!(!" 3!.!!$! 3!G!)$! 3!U!""! 3!j!2&! 3!j!6'" 4!1!'"" 4!1!5'! 4!>!6$" 7!@!%#" 7!@!&"! 8!1!+/! :!-!#'" \paradigc Similar_Term \colc כְּסִיל \pgloss (complacent) fool \refsc 4!1!5'! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc חָכָם \pgloss wise \refsc %!@!&$! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc נָדִיב \pgloss noble \refsc 4!1!'"" 7!@!%#" \level2 2 \meaning Personal name of a man, 'Nabal' \frame Names \domain Shame \syntagc Nabal's farm is located in Carmel, in the south-east of Judah, and his name probably reflects influence of Arabic dialects in the border regions of Judah. Nabil is a popular name in Arabic to this day. It goes without saying that Nabil doesn't mean 'boor' in Arabic, and that no father would dream of calling his son Boor. But to the Israelite audience the association of Nabal with 'boor' cannot be missed. \level3 a \context Personal name of a man, 'Nabal' \syntagcc The exaggeration that Nabal's conduct is designated by the extreme term |hנְבָלָה|h* (see that entry) may be deliberate, serving to placate David’s anger, which is Abigail’s main purpose. Her wordplay on Nabal’s name also serves to appease David by making him feel that his anger is justified. \keyref )!9!9,! \keyverse Please, my lord, pay no attention to that wretched fellow |bNabal|b*. For he is just what his name says: His name means |bboor|b* and he is a boor. \eval All English versions transliterate the name as Nabal. But this is a clear case where the author plays on the meaning of the Hebrew word |hנָבָל|h*. Nabal in fact embodies the boor in optima forma; notions of honour / shame, ingratitude, provocation are eminently present. It thus does not comes as a surprise that verse 25 makes this connection explicit. It would be very nice when a language has the possibility to imitate this wordplay. European languages do not offer this possibility. \ref )!9!##! )!9!$%! )!9!%+" )!9!)%" )!9!*"! )!9!.#! )!9!3)! )!9!9(" )!9!9,! )!9!:/" )!9!B1" )!9!D#" )!9!D*! )!9!E%" )!9!F&" )!9!G%! )!9!G.! )!9!G4! )!;!#/" )!>!%(! *!"!"+! *!#!#&! \paradigc \ver 0 \dat 2008-01-10 13:23:44 tvdl \heb נְבָלָה \strong 05039 \pos ncf \gloss scandalous crime \freq 13 \sub נבל \intro 1. The term נְבָלָה indicates a flagrant violation of the most revered standards of morality. 2. It can be defined as a wanton brutish act towards someone or a wanton brutish disregard of something. 3. The doer of נְבָלָה lacks any sense of honour and shame. 4. An important element in the meaning is: extremity, i.e. the enormity of the crime, its extreme offensiveness. 5. It provokes public outrage and God’s indignation, resulting in extreme responses and actions. \evalev BDB defines this noun as ‘disgraceful folly (wanton deed)’. HALOT also gives two meanings: ‘stupidity, folly’ (1Sa 25:25; Job 42:8) and ‘wilful sin, sacrilege’. HALOT’s analysis of this word is a significant improvement on BDB’s, but it still retains the idea of folly in two instances. Yet there is nothing in the context of these two instances that would necessarily prevent the scandal frame from being evoked, albeit with some elements behaving as weaker implicatures. Despite the weaker implicatures, the offences referred to by this expression are far more damaging and shocking than mere ‘disorderly conduct’ or ‘folly’. Nevertheless, in Deu 32:6 the related noun נָבָל is contrasted to חָכָם, which signals that the Wisom/Folly frame is certainly present. \comp 1; Frame: Crime; agent: human; target: human 2; Frame: Communication; agent: human; target: human 3; Frame: Judgement; agent: God; target: human \dfnotes This word belongs, together with others, in the overachring Sin frame. There are two main differences from the usages of most other evaluative terms for sin. The standards violated are worthy of greater respect and the effects are more extreme. 1. Synonyms Our focus term (|hנְבָלָה|h* ‘scandalous crime’) is related to Hebrew words for sin, horror, disgrace, and outrage. For instance, HALOT defines |hשַׁמָּה|h* as ‘horrific, atrocious event (always referring to destruction following judgement)’. Both |hנְבָלָה|h* ‘scandalous crime' and |hשַׁמָּה|h* ‘atrocious destruction’ refer to events that cause horror. But, while |hנְבָלָה|h* refers to horrific criminal acts, |hשַׁמָּה|h* ‘atrocious destruction’ refers to horrific acts of desolation, often as punishment for criminal acts. While |hנְבָלָה|h* ‘scandalous crime' refers to the kinds of events that call for swift judgment, |hשַׁמָּה|h* ‘atrocious destruction’ refers to the acts of judgment themselves that are called for by serious crimes. The causative relationships may be shown like this: |hנְבָלָה|h* ‘scandalous crime’ > horror > judgement > |hשַׁמָּה|h* ‘atrocious destruction’ > more horror 2. Contrasting Focus of Synonyms |hנְבָלָה|h* ‘scandalous crime’ perspectivises the extreme reaction of outrage to the sinful event. Compare the perspectives called in by neighbouring terms: |bTerm Focus |b*|hחֵטְא|h* none |hפֶּשַׁע|h* intention of agent: deliberate (therefore, culpable) |hעָוֹן|h* consequence for agent: culpability and punishment |hעָוֶל|h* agent: unexpected act by formerly righteous agent |hאָשָׁם|h* effect on agent: guilt |hחנף|h* effect on agent: moral impurity |hתּוֹעֵבָה|h* effect on others: disgust |hנְבָלָה|h* effect on others: outrage etc. \level2 1 \meaning Shameless act that violates the most sacred standards of morality and causes an extreme response from others \frame Crime \domain Folly; Shame \eventfr Agent: human Targets: human \level3 a \context Shameless act that violates one of the most sacred standards of morality and causes an extreme response from others \distc This is an act, as opposed to speech (cf. Lexical Meaning 2) Scandalous crime: the sin event is an act, the victim is human, and a consequence is public outrage. \domainc Rape; Marriage; Virginity; Ban; Hospitality; Homosexuality; Prophecy; Retribution \eventfrc Agent: human Target: human \syntagcc The fixed expression ‘to commit a scandalous crime in Israel’ emphasises two things about such crimes: (1) they offend the public conscience of the nation as a whole, causing a nation-wide outcry and (2) the whole nation is implicated in the crime and must be purged by getting rid of the perpetrators from among them (cf. Deu 22:21; Jos 7; Jdg 19-20). \keyref %!6!5,! \keyverse KTBH - Then the elders are to bring the girl out to the entrance of her father's house and the men of her town must stone her to death. You must purge this evil from among you. After all, by prostituting herself while under her father's authority, her |boffence has caused a scandal|b* among the people of Israel! \eval Translators should find a strongly-worded expression that emphasises both the enormity of the offence (to God and to the entire community) and the serious consequences it brings (to the doer and to the community as a whole). CEV renders the fixed expression as ‘brought evil into your community’. This conveys part of the significance of the fixed expression. But since this aspect is already represented elsewhere in the verse, it is better at this point to emphasise the extreme offensiveness of the crime - one that should cause an outrage throughout all Israel. Unlike other modern translations, however, the CEV unambiguously shows that the fixed expression properly refers to the people of Israel, not to the land of Israel. REB renders the fixed expression as ‘committed an outrage in Israel’ (cf. ESV). This accurately portrays the idea of scandal, as does a noun like ‘infamy’ (NJB and TOB). GW’s ‘godless act’ may not always evoke the idea of public scandal for all English speakers, but it is better than the following. Several other translations are only a little astray by employing adjectives such as ‘disgraceful’ (NIV, NRSV, NLT, NCV, EIN) or ‘shameful’ (TEV, NJPS). Those that use ‘folly’ (LXX, RSV, NASB) are far from signifying the horrific enormity of the offence. The tentative KTBH rendering offered here redistributes semantic features. Where it says literally 'she did נְבָלָה among Israel', the notion of offence is made more explicit in: 'her offence caused a scandal among the people of Israel.' \ref !!B!'+" %!6!5,! &!'!/-! '!3!71# '!3!82" '!4!&+" '!4!*3$ )!9!9." *!-!,*# 8!=!7$! \paradigl 1 Scandalous crime: offensive and abhorrent conduct that violates one of the most sacred standards of morality, appals and outrages the public conscience, disgraces those associated with it, angers God, and normally calls for the immediate death of the perpetrator \paradigc Similar_Term \colc זִמָּה \pgloss act of depravity \refsc '!4!&+! \level3 b \context Shameless speech that violates one of the most sacred standards of morality and causes an extreme response from others \distc Some aspects of Job 42:8 (see Lexical meaning 2) are included here, because the penalty is caused by a scandalous sin of the same sort as this use. Sacrilegious speech against God: the sin event is a speech, the victim is God, and a consequence is divine outrage. \framec Communication \domainc Prophecy \eventfrc Agent: human Target: human \syntagcc The term |hנְבָלָה|h* occurs as an object of |hדבר|h* ‘to speak’ where no action is involved, only scandalous speech (Isa 9:17; 32:6), as an object of |hעשׂה|h* ‘to do’ in Jer 29:23, even though offensive speech is entailed, because there is scandalous action (adultery) as well. \keyref 7!)!0/! \keyverse KTBH -This is why YHWH shows no partiality to the young men, and no mercy even to the orphans and widows: because everyone is immoral and evil, and every mouth speaks |bshocking lies |b*about God. \eval Many English translations still use terms like ‘folly’ (KJV, NRSV, NAB), ‘foolishness’ (NASB, GW), ‘foolishly’ (CEV) and ‘madness’ (NJB). Exceptions include ‘impiety’ (REB, NJPS), ‘evil’ (TEV) and ‘lies’ (NLT and NCV). But the guilt of the Israelites in Isaiah’s time was far greater than foolish lies would cause. Their scandalous words were no mere slips of the tongue or insignificant blunders, made because they were ignorant and foolish. Such meanings might be signalled when English words like ‘folly’ are used. Translators might consider explicitly stating the nature of the crime and the identity of the victim, such as ‘shocking lies about God’. \paradigl 1 \ref 7!)!0/! 7!@!&#! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc תּוֹעָה \pgloss lie, disloyalty \refsc 7!@!&#! \level2 2 \meaning Extreme response called up by a shameless and scandalous act \distl The penalty for 1.2 (probably death): the outcome of the sin event. \frame Judgement \domain Folly; Shame \eventfr Agent: God Patient: human \syntagc |hנְבָלָה |h*is here the object of |hעשׂה |h*‘to do’. But this time the Agent of the verb is not the same as the Agent of the scandalous crime. Rather the Agent of the verb is |ipunishing|i* the Agent of the scandalous crime. But there are scholars who hold that YHWH is here the Agent of the |hנְבָלָה|h*, but in a metaphorical way: "I would do to you such an outrageous thing that would be called |hנְבָלָה|h* among humans." \level3 a \context Extreme response called up by a shameful and scandalous act \domainc Speech; Falsehood; Atonement \eventfrc Agent (punisher): God Patient: human \keyref 2!J!(6! \keyverse NJPS - for I have shown him favor and not |btreat you vilely|b* since you have not spoken the truth about Me as did My servant Job. \eval The set of ideas prompted by the use of this noun will often require an expansive translation. Some elements may be omitted by simply conveying that God is not going to punish them as harshly as they deserve, as some modern versions do. A word like ‘folly’ does not render this noun’s meaning forcefully enough, despite CEV, NRSV, NCV, NIV and NASB. It could be an idea to make the connection between the offence and the punishment more explicit so that the notion of |hנְבָלָה|h* is clearly dissociated from YHWH: 'And then I will accept his prayer not to punish you as severely|i as your sacrilegious talk about me deserves.'|i* But the NJPS translation is also acceptable, although it presupposes that YHWH is the Agent (which brings it under Meaning 1.). \ref 2!J!(6! \paradigl 1 \paradigc \ver 0 \dat 2004-02-04 peterk; 2008-01-10 13:23:15 tvdl \heb ערם \level1 1 \strong 6191 \pos v \gloss to be cunning / astute; to pile up \freq 7 \sub עָרוּם, עָרְמָה, עֲרֵמָה \level1 2 \intro 1. One meaning of this verb is 'to be cunning / astute'. 2. It can be used in both a positive and a negative sense (see also עָרְמָה). 3. In the Hiphil, it means 'to devise a cunning plan'. 4. A homonym of this verb, meaning 'to pile up', occurs only once. \hebraist The root |hערם|h* is a homonym, i.e. a word with two different meanings that cannot be related to one another: 1. to be astute; 2. to pile up. For further reading: See Fox, M.V. 1993 "Words for Wisdom." |iZeitschrift für Althebraistik |i*6: 149-169. \comp 1. Frame: Cunning; Stem: qal, hiphil; Experiencer: human 2. Frame: Planning; Stem: hiphil; Agent: human; Content: plan 3. Frame: Heaping up; Stem: niphal; Agent: God; Patient: inanimate \addinfo In Sirach 6:32, being shrewd can be learned, and it is a question of will. The verse reads:|h אִם תַּחְפֹּץ, בְּנִי, תִּתְחַכָּם, וְאִם תָּשִׂים לִבְּךָ תַּעְרִם |h*'If you desire, my son, you can become wise, and if you apply your wits, you will become shrewd.' \level2 1 \meaning To be able to manipulate difficult circumstances in such a way that the outcome is favourable to you \frame Cunning \domain Competition \stem Qal, Hiphil \eventfr Experiencer: human \level3 a \context To be able to manipulate difficult circumstances in such a way that the outcome is favourable to you \domainc Instruction; Warfare; Punishment \eventfrc Experiencer: human \keyref )!7!60! \keyverse CEVUK - for I've been told that he|b's|b* very |bcunning|b*. \eval An acceptable rendering. Other renderings include 'crafty', 'listig' (German). A pejorative rendering may be justified by the fact that David's enemy, Saul, is speaking here. Otherwise a more neutral rendering, such as 'shrewd', might be preferred. \ref )!7!60! )!7!61! 2!%!-#" 4!/!%'! 4!3!9$! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc אֱוִיל \pgloss fool \refsc 4!/!%'! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc פֶּתִי \pgloss simpleton \refsc 4!3!9$! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc בין דַּעַת \pgloss to understand knowledge \refsc 4!3!9$! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc מַחְשָׁבָה \pgloss plan \refsc 2!%!-#" \paradigc Similar_Term \colc עֵצָה \pgloss counsel \refsc 2!%!-#" \paradigc \level2 2 \meaning To devise a plan to manipulate difficult circumstances in such a way that the outcome is favourable to you \frame Planning \domain Competition \stem Hiphil \eventfr Agent: human Content: plan \syntagc This Meaning is different from (1) because it is transitive. \level3 a \context To devise a plan to manipulate difficult circumstances in such a way that the outcome is favourable to you \domainc Conspiracy; Hostility \eventfrc Experiencer: human Content: plan \keyref 3!s!$"! \keyverse REB89 - They |bdevise a|b* |bcunning |b*plot against your people \eval Other translations have e.g.: TEVUK - They are |bmaking|b* secret |bplans |b*against your people; NJPS - They plot |bcraftily|b* against Your people All three translations are good, as they highlight different aspects of |hסוֹד|h*. \ref 3!s!$"! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc יעץ \pgloss to conspire (Hithpael) \refsc 3!s!$"! \level2 3 \meaning To arrange or collect a substance (or items) with a heap or pile as a result \frame Heaping up \stem Niphal \eventfr Agent = implicit: Divine Patient: inanimate \level3 a \context To arrange or collect a substance (or items) with a heap or pile as a result \domainc Water \eventfrc Agent = implicit: Divine Patient: inanimate \keyref "!/!(#! \keyverse REB89 - At the blast of your nostrils the waters |bpiled up|b*, / the floods stood up in a heap; / the deeps congealed in the heart of the sea. \eval This rendering is good, and most English versions have something similar. If the synonymy becomes a problem, it is worthwile to render the third verb in its literal sense (if the target audience has cattle), as CEV does, of all versions (!): '... and the ocean depths curdled like cheese'. \ref "!/!(#! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc נצב \pgloss to stand up (Niphal) \refsc "!/!(#! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc קפא \pgloss to congeal (lit. to curdle) \refsc "!/!(#! \ver 0 \dat 2007-08-24 10:52:23 tvdl; 2007-11-02 08:27:20 cjs; 2008-01-10 11:03:40 tvdl \heb עָרְמָה \strong 6195 \pos ncf \gloss cunning, astuteness \freq 5 \sub ערם \intro The noun |hעָרְמָה|h* does not necessarily have a pejorative meaning. In several cases, notably in Proverbs, it can better be translated as 'astuteness' or 'shrewdness' than as 'cunning', which has stronger negative associations. \hebraist See See Fox, M.V. 1993 "Words for Wisdom." |iZeitschrift für Althebraistik |i*6: 149-169. \dfnotes As TWAT VI,388 notes, both |hעָרְמָה|h* and |hמְזִמָּה|h* hold the border line with the pejoratives (cunning, craftiness). This is related to the fact that in ancient Israel, wisdom education concentrated on intellectual attitudes rather than on morality. W. McKane rightly stresses in his |iProverbs|i* commentary (London 1970, 265): 'Wisdom did not educate men to change the world, but to make their way successfully in the world as it was.' Or in Fox's words: 'This [i.e. that Wisdom boasts proximity to |hעָרְמָה|h*, Pro 8:12] does not make |hעָרְמָה|h* an inherently virtuous ability; rather it is a practical faculty that wisdom promises its adherents.' \level2 1 \meaning The ability to manipulate difficult circumstances in such a way that the outcome is favourable to you \frame Mental activity \domain Competition \eventfr Experiencer: human \level3 a \context The ability to manipulate difficult circumstances in such a way that the outcome is favourable to you \domainc Murder; Deceit; Disguise; Instruction \eventfrc Experiencer: human \keyref 4!(!,#! \keyverse REB89 - I am wisdom, I bestow |bshrewdness|b* and show the way to knowledge and discretion. \eval 'Prudence' (NRS) is a colourless rendering. 'Shrewdness' is more fitting, because it approaches the border line with the pejorative connotation. But the choice also depends on how you render the other synonyms of wisdom found in this context (and in Pro 1:1-5). \ref "!5!.%" &!)!$#" 4!!!$#! 4!(!%#! 4!(!,#! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc דַּעַת \pgloss knowledge \refsc 4!!!$#! 4!(!,#! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc חָכְמָה \pgloss wisdom \refsc 4!(!,#! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc לֵב \pgloss prudence \refsc 4!(!%#! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc מְזִמָּה \pgloss resourcefulness \refsc 4!!!$#! 4!(!,#! \ver 0 \dat 2008-01-10 14:53:49 tvdl \heb פֶּתִי \strong 6612 \pos ncm \gloss simpleton; naïve person \freq 19 \sub פתה \intro The term |hפֶּתִי|h* refers to a person who runs certain risks due to lack of intelligence and experience. Such a person believes everything and is easily seduced. He is not wise but is not beyond the possibility of improvement. A simpleton can and must be taught in order to become intelligent and gain experience. \hebraist Reference: Fox M.V. 1997 "Words for Folly" |iZeitschrift für Althebraistik |i*10:4-15. \level2 1 \meaning A person who runs certain risks due to a lack of intelligence and experience but who can still acquire these qualities. \frame Folly \eventfr Experiencer: human \level3 a \context A person who runs certain risks because he lacks intelligence and experience but who can still acquire these qualities. \domainc Instruction; Providence; Punishment; Seduction; Atonement \eventfrc Experiencer: human \keyref 4!!!@#! \keyverse NIV84 - For the waywardness of the |bsimple|b* will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them; \eval In general, most English versions translate |hפֶּתִי|h* with 'simple(ton)', 'ignorant', and even 'naive', while 'inexperienced' ('unerfahren') can be found in the Gute Nachricht. These do not seem unacceptable renderings on the whole. 'Stupid fools', on the other hand (CEV in Pro 19:25), is far too strong and misses the point. It is interesting that 'gullible' (Fox' proposal) is not found in English versions. \ref 3!3!(*! 3":!&"! 3"="H%! 4!!!$"" 4!!!6"! 4!!!@#! 4!'!'"# 4!(!%"! 4!)!$!" 4!)!0!" 4!.!/!! 4!.!2"! 4!3!9#" 4!5!+"" 4!6!#&" 4!;!,%! :!M!4'# \paradigc Similar_Term \colc אִישׁ שֹׁגֶה \pgloss inadvertent man \refsc :!M!4'# \paradigc Similar_Term \colc בֵּן \pgloss young man \refsc 4!'!'"# \paradigc Similar_Term \colc דלל \pgloss to be needy, helpless \refsc 3":!&"! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc חֲסַר לֵב \pgloss lacking heart (brains) \refsc 4!'!'"# 4!)!$!" 4!)!0!" \paradigc Similar_Term \colc כְּסִיל \pgloss complacent fool \refsc 4!!!6"! 4!!!@#! 4!(!%"! \paradigc Similar_Term \colc נַעַר \pgloss young man \refsc 4!!!$"" \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc חָכָם \pgloss wise \refsc 4!5!+"" \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc בִּין \pgloss discerning (Niphal) \refsc 4!3!9#" \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc עָרוּם \pgloss astute \refsc 4!.!/!! 4!.!2"! 4!6!#&" 4!;!,%! \level2 2 \meaning Risky lack of intelligence and experience, but with a possibility to acquire these qualities. \frame Folly \eventfr Experiencer: human \level3 a \context Risky lack of intelligence and experience, but with a possibility to acquire these qualities. \domainc Instruction; Reward \eventfrc Experiencer: human \keyref 4!!!6"! \keyverse RSV52 - How long, O simple ones, will you love |bbeing simple|b*? How long will scoffers delight in their scoffing and fools hate knowledge? \eval Interestingly, English versions offer a variety of renderings here. 'Being simple' and 'simplicity' (REB, NJPS) are not bad renderings, but they are less adequate than 'being simpleminded' (NLT) because they have positive connotations. 'Naiveté' would be a good option. \ref 4!!!6$! 4!)!&"!|na|n* \paradigc Similar_Term \colc דַּעַת \pgloss knowledge \refsc 4!!!6$! \paradigc Opposite_Term \colc דֶּרֶךְ בִּינָה \pgloss the way of understanding \refsc 4!)!&"! \not (a) There is no unanimity if in Pro 9:6 פֶּתִי refers to a person (so REB) or an abstract notion 'simplicity, naiveté' (most versions). In KTBH, we have chosen for the second option (hence Meaning 2), because the parallel term points to an abstract term. \notfr (a) |s4!!!6$! 4!)!&"!|s* \notsp (a) |s4!!!6$! 4!)!&"!|s* \notpt (a) |s4!!!6$! 4!)!&"!|s* \notxx (a) |s4!!!6$! 4!)!&"!|s* \ver 0 \dat 2008-01-10 14:59:18 tvdl