59 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2017
  2. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. In most cases, variations from the standard word order are for literary reasons or to add some emphasis (usually on the word moved to the beginning of the sentence), but this does not fundamentally change the meaning.

      I think this sentence is somewhat confusing. I know the word "emphasis" gets used a lot, but I don't think it is a very helpful term that can lead to misunderstanding. My opinion is that we should only deal with word order that affects chunking and leave the rest of it alone.

  3. Aug 2017
  4. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. Include more examples of special cases of gender disagreement? GEN 7:13, 1SA 10:3, and JOB 1:4

  5. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. גַּם The word גַּם can take on a wide variety of meanings, but often it is not necessary to represent this word in a translation. Addition גַּם can mean "also" GEN 3:6 וַתִּתֵּ֧ן גַּם־לְאִישָׁ֛הּ עִמָּ֖הּ וַיֹּאכַֽל׃ wattitten gam-le'ishah 'immah wayyokhal And-she-gave also to-her-husband with-her and-he-ate. Then she gave some to her husband, and he ate it. Here the smooth translation does not represent the word גַּם. גַּם ... גַּם can mean "both... and" GEN 44:16 גַּם־אֲנַ֕חְנוּ גַּ֛ם אֲשֶׁר־נִמְצָ֥א הַגָּבִ֖יעַ בְּיָדֽוֹ׃ gam-'anahnu gam 'asher-nimtsa haggavia' beyado both_we and who it-was-found the-cup in-his-hand both we and the one in whose sack the cup was found. Emphatic גַּם can mean "even" EXO 4:9 וְהָיָ֡ה אִם־לֹ֣א יַאֲמִ֡ינוּ גַּם֩ לִשְׁנֵ֨י הָאֹת֜וֹת הָאֵ֗לֶּה וְלֹ֤א יִשְׁמְעוּן֙ wehayah 'im-lo ya'aminu gam lishne ha'othoth ha'elleh welo yishme'un And-it-is if_not they-believe even in-two-of the-signs the-these and-not they-listen But if they do not believe you or listen to what you say even after you show them these two miracles Here the smooth translation does not represent the word גַּם. Rhetorical GEN 27:33 וָאֲבָרֲכֵ֑הוּ גַּם־בָּר֖וּךְ יִהְיֶֽה׃ wa'avarakhehu gam-barukh yihyeh And-I-will-bless-him indeed being-blessed he-will-be. I cannot take back that blessing. Here the smooth translation does not represent the word גַּם. Correlative גַּם can mean "on one's part" 2SA 12:13 גַּם־יְהוָ֛ה הֶעֱבִ֥יר חַטָּאתְךָ֖ gam-yehwah he'evir hattathekha on his part Yahweh has-passed-over your-sin Yahweh has overlooked your sin. Here the smooth translation does not represent the word גַּם. Concessive גַּם can show contrast ISA 1:15 גַּ֛ם כִּֽי־תַרְבּ֥וּ תְפִלָּ֖ה אֵינֶ֣נִּי שֹׁמֵ֑עַ gam ki-tharbu thefillah 'enenni shomea' Even though_you-make-many prayer not-I I-will-listen Even though you offer many prayers, I will not listen.

      It seems like these should be listed under "affirmation particle" instead of adverbs (as with אַף).

    2. Adverb of negation לֹא לֹא is for general negation, especially in a verbal clause. EXO 6:9 וְלֹ֤א שָֽׁמְעוּ֙ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֔ה welo shame'u 'el-mosheh and-not they-listened to_Moses but they did not believe what Moses said PRO 1:29 וְיִרְאַ֥ת יְ֝הֹוָ֗ה לֹ֣א בָחָֽרוּ weyir'ath yehowah lo vaharu and-fear Yahweh not they-chose and did not choose the fear of Yahweh אַל אַל is used for negative imperatives. GEN 35:17 וַתֹּ֨אמֶר לָ֤הּ הַמְיַלֶּ֙דֶת֙ אַל־תִּ֣ירְאִ֔י wattomer lah hamyalledeth 'al-tire'i and-she-said to-her the midwife not you-will-fear the midwife said to Rachel, "Do not be afraid" NEH 4:5 (NEH 3:37 in Hebrew) וְאַל־תְּכַס֙ עַל־עֲוֺנָ֔ם we'al-tekhas 'al-'awonam And-not_you-will-cover over_their-iniquity Do not take away their guilt אֵין/אַיִן אֵין/אַיִן for "there is not". DEU 28:29 וְאֵ֥ין מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃ we'en moshia' and-not to-save-you and there will not be anyone to help you. JOS 6:1 אֵ֥ין יוֹצֵ֖א וְאֵ֥ין בָּֽא׃ 'en yotse we'en ba No-one going-out and-no-one coming-in. No one could go enter or leave the city. בַּל בַּל is a negative adverb used in poetry. PSA 10:6 אָמַ֣ר בְּ֭לִבּוֹ בַּל־אֶמּ֑וֹט 'amar belibbo bal-'emmot He-says in-his-heart not I-will-fail" In his mind he thinks, "Nothing bad can happen to me!" בְּלִי֙ בְּלִי֙ is a negative adverb usually used in poetry. PSA 19:3 (PSA 19:4 in Hebrew) בְּ֝לִ֗י נִשְׁמָ֥ע קוֹלָֽם׃ beli nishma' qolam not it-is-heard their-voice. There is no sound from them for anyone to hear. בִּלְתִּ֣י בִּלְתִּ֣י can mean "not," "except," or "unless" GEN 43:3 לֹֽא־תִרְא֣וּ פָנַ֔י בִּלְתִּ֖י אֲחִיכֶ֥ם אִתְּכֶֽם׃ lo-thir'u fanay bilti 'ahikhem 'ittekhem Not_you-will-see my-face unless your-brother with-you. I will not let you see me again if you come and your younger brother is not with you. emphasis In Hebrew, adverbs of negation can combine with another negative word to add emphasis. 2KI 1:3 הַֽמִבְּלִ֤י אֵין־אֱלֹהִים֙ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל hamibbeli 'en-'elohim beyisra'el Because there-is-no_God in-Israel Is it because there is no God in Israel?

      It seems like these should be listed under "negative particle" instead of adverbs.

    3. Interrogative adverbs Interrogative adverbs are used for questions and sometimes for exclamations. איך and איכה איך and איכה = how? why? how! PSA 137:4 אֵ֗יךְ נָשִׁ֥יר 'ekh nashir How will-we-sing How could we sing? אי and איה אי and איה = where? where is? GEN 4:9 אֵ֖י הֶ֣בֶל 'e hevel Where Abel Where is Abel? מָתַי The major temporal adverb is מָתַי "when?" It is often in the combination עַד־מָתַי "how long?" JOB 7:4 מָתַ֣י אָ֭קוּם mathay 'aqum When will-I-get-up How long will it be until I get up? PSA 74:10 עַד־מָתַ֣י אֱ֭לֹהִים יְחָ֣רֶף צָ֑ר 'ad-mathay 'elohim yeharef tsar How_long God will-throw-insults enemy God, how long will our enemies make fun of you? לָמָ֪ה and לָֽמָּה‮‬ לָמָ֪ה and לָֽמָּה‮‬ "why?" PSA 42:9 (PSA 42:10 in Hebrew) לָמָ֪ה שְׁכַ֫חְתָּ֥נִי לָֽמָּה־קֹדֵ֥ר אֵלֵ֗ךְ בְּלַ֣חַץ אוֹיֵֽב׃ lamah shekhahtani lammah-qoder 'elekh belahats 'oyev Why have-you-forgotten-me why mourning I-will-go because-of-oppression-of enemy Why have you forgotten me? You know the hardships that my enemies bring on me. מַדּ֖וּעַ מַדּ֖וּעַ why? 2KI 8:12 מַדּ֖וּעַ אֲדֹנִ֣י בֹכֶ֑ה maddua' 'adoni vokheh Why my-master is-weeping Sir, why are you crying? אָנָה אָנָה whereto? ZEC 2:2 (ZEC 2:6 in Hebrew) אָ֖נָה אַתָּ֣ה‮‬ הֹלֵ֑ךְ 'anah 'attah‮‬ holekh Where you going Where are you going? עַד־אָן עַד־אָן how long? JOB 8:2 עַד־אָ֥ן תְּמַלֶּל־אֵ֑לֶּה 'ad-'an temallel-'elleh How_long will-you-say_these-things How much longer will you talk like this? אֵ֥י מִזֶּ֖ה אֵ֥י מִזֶּ֖ה from where? 1SA 25:11 לַֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים אֲשֶׁר֙ לֹ֣א יָדַ֔עְתִּי אֵ֥י מִזֶּ֖ה הֵֽמָּה׃ la'anashim 'asher lo yada'ti 'e mizzeh hemmah to-men who not I-know where from this they. to men who come from I do not know where?

      It seems like these should be listed under "interrogative particle" instead of adverbs.

  6. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. Circumstantial This connects clauses/phrases that happen at the same time; it is usually translated as “while” or “when” in English. GEN 45:14 וַיִּפֹּ֛ל עַל־צַוְּארֵ֥י בִנְיָמִֽן־אָחִ֖יו וַיֵּ֑בְךְּ וּבִנְיָמִ֔ן בָּכָ֖ה עַל־צַוָּארָֽיו׃ wayyippol 'al-tsawwere vinyamin-'ahiw wayyevk uvinyamin bakhah 'al-tsawwarayw And-he-fell on_neck-of Benjamin_his-brother and-he-wept and-Benjamin wept on_his-neck. He hugged his brother Benjamin's neck and wept, while Benjamin wept on his neck.

      It seems like the "circumstantial" use is a subset of the "copulative" and therefore both redundant and potentially confusing. I suggest eliminating it.

  7. Jun 2017
  8. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. "and," "but," "or."

      Should stipulate that these are conjunctions "in English." Should we also list the more common Hebrew conjunctions in the glossary?

  9. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. stressed

      This seems somewhat confusing, because "stressed" can be taken to mean the same as "emphasized." Perhaps we should stipulate the kind of stress intended, or simply identify the variant form as an alternate spelling?

  10. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. The interrogative particle is a ה-prefix

      There are other interrogatives, such as מָה and מִי and לָמָה. These should probably be included also.

  11. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. for exhortation or encouragement

      Should we include the notion of emphasis here?

  12. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. Hebrew only has a few demonstrative particles, the two most common ones are הִנֵּה and הֵ֣ן. This particle can be preceded by a conjunction.

      I think we need to describe what the demonstrative particle does, i.e. it draws attention to what comes immediately after the particle. Also, perhaps we should discuss whether to translate or not, because often demonstrative particles are not translated and could be confusing.

  13. git.door43.org git.door43.org
    1. Since the users of the translationCore will be chunking text, it seems to me that we should have a section in this article on discourse particles (i.e. particles that occur prior to the verb that link chunks of text together, such as וְעַתָּה). Maybe have a conversation with the parsing team whether discourse particles are being labeled as such in the parsing information?

  14. May 2017
  15. Apr 2017
    1. I think we should have something on this page about how Hebrew can take a double object. So even if there is a D.O. that is marked, there could also be an unmarked indirect object. And although it might seem unnecessary, maybe include a sentence saying that it should not be translated unless the target language also has a similar functioning grammatical entity?

    2. Take note: the direct object marker is easily confused with the preposition אֶת (with) which has an identical form.

      Although when taking a suffix, the preposition usually has a "i" vowel and the D.O. marker has an "o" vowel (it's not an absolute rule, but is true generally from my experience). Might be worth including?

    1. Function

      It seems to me that each of these headings should include a one or two sentence description/explanation. The naked headings could be understood in several different ways when the grammar is being translated into other languages. Being more specific is better, I think, especially concerning a particle is frequently used as the definite article.

    1. It makes more intuitive sense to me to list לא and אל here as negation particles rather than as adverbs of negation, but I don't feel strongly about it. My suggestion would be to have a note in the adverb article linking here. This fits with the general philosophy of classifying particles according to the particle itself rather than molding them to fit a broader functional schema. But this issue is pretty subjective, I think.

    2. It is used in verbless clauses and is sometimes classified as a common noun

      Is it just used to negate verbless clauses? Does it not also function as a negated copula with an impersonal subject, "There is no..." or "There is not..."?

    3. When Hebrew has two negatives, they add emphasis.

      Is this really accurate? This is new to me. The example given doesn't seem to indicate emphasis but is rather part of the actual sense of the sentence. Maybe we need to look into this...any other thoughts here?!?

    1. ה can be an interrogative particle when it is a prefix.

      I think we need to explain the difference between the interrogative particle and the definite article. Also, we should describe what the interrogative particle does, i.e. it makes the clause a question. Also, we should probably include other interrogative particles such as מִי and מָה, for example.

    1. Function

      I like the structure of this section fine, although I recommend changing the headings. I think the headings should describe the operation of the word in Hebrew rather than simply listing the English translation value. In the end, I think we're better off that way, because I think it will translate into other languages easier rather than using "the way English works" as a means of explaining "the way Hebrew works." I hope that makes sense. But I'm fine with the categories suggested, only using description-based headings rather than translation-based headings.

    1. This particle can be preceded by a conjunction.

      I think we should also add that it takes pronominal suffixes which can function as grammatical entities (usually as the subject of a verbal participle). Also include an example where this happens.

      Also, I think we should include that these two particles ALWAYS "point" to what comes immediately after them in the text.

    2. at the beginning of a clause

      This is true, but it also occurs in the middle of a clause sometimes (usually with the conjunction) and serves a similar function of inviting the reader (or a person being spoken to) to see and/or understand what is to come.

    1. affirmation

      I think we should add a note recommending to consult the lexicon for particles. Also, should we include that אף tends to have a limiting function, whereas גּם tends to have a adding function?

  16. Mar 2017
    1. However, the perfect form is also used to describe other kinds of actions (see below), as determined by the context.

      I think it is important to keep this sentence in the article. The perfect form need not always convey a completed action in Hebrew; without this sentence, this sense of flexibility is lost to the reader.

    1. root

      Should the term "root" be defined here? I'm afraid that it might be confusing.

    2. Pual has many possible meanings.

      Perhaps we should explain that Pual is the passive of the Piel, and that it shares a similar relationship to the Qal as does the Piel (simple action, intensive, resultative, causative), only with passive meaning? Also, I'm wondering if we should include a note encouraging the reader to consult the lexicon for Pual verbs, because the semantics of the Pual in each instance is often dependent on its distribution among the various stems. [That is, a verb that appears only in the Piel/Pual (but not other stems) in Biblical Hebrew could be simple action. Similarly, if there is no Hiphil form, the Piel/Pual can function as causative in place of the Hiphil. And so on.]