+- Peshitta Forum (http://peshitta.org/for)
+-- Forum: New Testament (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Aramaic Primacy Forum (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Inmanuel: Question for Paul (/showthread.php?tid=606)
Pages:
1
2
Inmanuel: Question for Paul - Vsanzcm - 11-14-2003
Shlama Akhi Paul:
I have a doubt in this text...
NB. If this matter has been already treated, please let me know which link I should address to (in the ???old forum??? perhaps?) so you can save your time... Otherwise I???ll appreciate your wise answer.
It???s about Mt 1:23 which is a quote of Is 7:14 (There???re some other curious issues in this, especially that of the ???Virgin???. I???ll post it soon). Let??? see the texts:
HOT
l' wnmv wmH t'rqw ??b tdlyw hrh hmlvh hnh
POT
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Ly0wnm9 hm4 0rqtnw 0rb 0dlyw 0n=b Flwtb 0h [/font]
Targ Jonathan:
l'wnmv hytw rb dyltw 'ydvm 'tmylwv 'h
Idou j parqenov en gastri exei kai texetai uion
kai kalesousin to onoma autou Emmanoujl
o estin meqermjneuomenon Meq' jmwn o qeov
???Which is translated [as] ???God with us??????
PNT
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Ly0wnm9 hm4 Jwrqnw 0rb dl0tw N=bt Flwtb 0hd
Jhl0 Nm9 Mgrttmd [/font]
NB. [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)] Mgrttm [/font]: participle etpalpal of [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Mgrt [/font]= to be interpreted; translated (This is according the dictionary I have).
My question(s) is (are): Why this [unnecessary?] addition in PNT? Weren???t the addressees of the Aramaic text of PNT ???unlike the Greeks??? well acquainted to the Hebrew so this ???translation??? would be superfluous? Couldn???t Zorbafiloi use this as an argument to ???prove??? the Greek originalism?
I would suggest two solutions (you tell me!):
1. This is a TRANSLATION from a HEBREW COMPOSED NAME to Aramaic.
2. The verb also means ???to mean???... I mean (oops!): significance, to get serious, (as in English you say ???I mean it???) so the sense could be ???INMANUEL, which MEANS (i.e. = ???is to be correctly interpreted???; ???has the real significance???, rather than merely ???translated???), ???OUR ([font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Jhl0 [/font]) God with us??????.
What do you think?
desperately waiting your answer...
Ab. Valentin
- Paul Younan - 11-14-2003
Shlama Qashisha (elder) Valetin!
At the time, the common people no longer understood Hebrew, only Aramaic. Hebrew was the language of the priests and religious elite, and even then it was used as a liturgical language (like Latin is today) - not the vulgar of the common folks.
If the people readily understood Hebrew without the need for "targumming", then Mattai could have just written the entire thing (and not just "Emmanuel") in the Hebrew language. <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s --> In the case of this name, it is constructed of the roots "Am" ("with") and "El" ("God"). Sandwiched in-between these two roots is a pronominal suffix.
In the case of Hebrew, that suffix is "anu" to make "Amanu" ("With us".) But in Aramaic, the name has to be interpreted: because in Aramaic the pronominal suffix is "an" to make "Aman".
Because the two languages differed in their approach to the 1st-person plural pronominal suffix, the word had to be "interpreted" so that Aramaic-speakers could understand the significance of the name. <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->
- Rob Vanhoff - 11-14-2003
Shlama, Akhi Ab. Valentin!
My two cents...
I can't imagine this being an "etpalpal" - CAL calls this a 'reflexive quadriliteral' .
I like both possiblities that you suggested, but the first works on its own. The first name given in the Peshitta Matti verse is Hebrew, not Aramaic (the yud simply serving as a vowel). If it were Aramaic, there of course would be no 'waw' after the nun. So, for me, your first suggestion is right on and the second is nice but not essential.
Thanks for sharing!
Rob
- Rob Vanhoff - 11-15-2003
Wow, Akhi Paul! We were both responding at the same time!
BTW, I'm planning on visiting St. Thomas Church in Seattle this Sunday. Rev. Michael Birnie emailed that he would be out of town, however.
Shlama,
Rob
- Paul Younan - 11-15-2003
Man! I wish I would have known earlier....I would have made a flight out there to meet up with you!
Qashisha Birnie is a fantastic Aramaic scholar - translating all of our liturgical books into English. Do you know who will be officiating in his absence?
- Rob Vanhoff - 11-15-2003
No, but the info on the COE link says that the Assistant to the Pastor is Reverend Father Richard Holberg, so maybe it will be him. I honestly don't know what to expect. Rev. Birnie said I was welcome to visit and that the service begins at 9.
Shlama,
Rob
- Paul Younan - 11-15-2003
I think St. Thomas is one of our "English-speaking" churches. I think you will hear 90% English with a little bit of Aramaic thrown in here and there. I might be wrong, though. Let me know how it goes!
Thanks for response, Akhi Paul - Vsanzcm - 11-15-2003
Shlama Akhay Paul and Rob:
I'm really impressed for your fastness! Incredible! Thanks for your illuminating answer.
And you too, Akhi Rob.
About the Etpalpal... I found that in the Dictionary I have (Joan Ferrer and M. A. Nogueras, Breve diccionario siriaco -brief Syriac dictionary, Barcelona, 1999). I suppose the participle because of the initial M. Right?
Remember I'm just a "naif" in Aramaic. I keep learning!
Thousand Thanks to both of you!
Ab. Valentin
. - drmlanc - 11-15-2003
Why is He not named Immanuel in the NT?
- Paul Younan - 11-15-2003
Shlama Akhi Chris,
He is called "God with us" by us today - a fulfillment of the prophecy. <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->
- Vsanzcm - 11-15-2003
Shlama Akhi ROb
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Mgrttm[/font]
"I can't imagine this being an "etpalpal" - CAL calls this a 'reflexive quadriliteral' . "
Well, in the other dictionary I have (Brun, Dictionarium Syriaco-Latinum) says that it is ETPALAL (not Etpalpal), and of course, a Participle...
Ab. Valentin
. - drmlanc - 11-16-2003
She shall call his name "God with us"... Did she ever do that?
Re: . - Paul Younan - 11-16-2003
drmlanc Wrote:She shall call his name "God with us"... Did she ever do that?
Shlama Akhi Chris,
That's the Greek reading. The Aramaic reading in Mattai is:
... The virgin will conceive and she will bear and THEY will (= impersonal) call his name...
. - drmlanc - 11-16-2003
But HOT and POT say she right? Isaiah 7:14
14 Therefore the LORD himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
And actually the KJV NT says "they" also in Matthew 1:23
Re: . - Paul Younan - 11-16-2003
drmlanc Wrote:But HOT and POT say she right? Isaiah 7:14
14 Therefore the LORD himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
And actually the KJV NT says "they" also in Matthew 1:23
No, Peshitta O.T. says "and he will be called Immanuel." (see http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=412)
The Hebrew text says "she" - but it's obviously not the text Mattai used to begin with. He most likely was using an Aramaic Targum. (Or Targumming himself - his quote matches no known version.)
So I trust the POT, LXX, and PNT here. <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->