03-08-2015, 04:37 AM
gregoryfl Wrote:Shlama Paul,
I personally would be very interested to know the answer to that last question you raised, if you don't mind providing it.
Ronen
Hi Ronen,
I will give you the answer, eventually, but as I like to do ... I want to help you (anyone reading) along your own conclusion after giving you more evidence and clues.
The next bit of info, that not many people are aware of. Click on the "Trilinear Targums" link and open Mishlei (Proverbs). This document contains the original Hebrew, the Aramaic Targum and the English translation.
Scroll down to 1:5 and you will notice that, like the Hebrew original - the "shma" (hear) is prefixed in the 3rd-Person Imperfect singular masculine with the original Semitic -y- (y-shma) ... "will hear". The Imperfect is, by definition, not completed action. Original Semitic way, with the -y- prefix, which can be found all over this Targum.
Next scroll down to 9:8 and you will notice that in this one verse...twice, un-like the Hebrew original, the 3rd-Person Imperfect singular masculine verbs for "hate" and "love" are prefixed not with the original Semitic -y-, but with the later -n-. "n-snyk" ("will hate you") and "n-rxmk" ("will love you").
And so forth and so on it goes in this Targum, alternating in the Aramaic between the original Semitic -y- for the Imperfect 3rd-s masc., and the later -n-. A man will find (y-find or n-find, your choice) many examples of both, scattered everywhere.
Why do you suppose that is? Surely, this Targum is not in the "Syriac" dialect. And it definitely wasn't written in Edessa.
+Shamasha
Note: these verses read much different than the Peshitta, which some have argued falsely in the past was the basis for this Targum.
Remember, "Searcher" in his cut-and-paste jihad attack of the forum, claimed (plagiarized) that this "shift" to -n- occurred in "Syriac" after the 3rd-century AD. Which makes it kinda hard to explain why 8-9th century BC inscriptions from Jordan and northern Turkey also had the -n-, doesn't it ?